# Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MissThing

Sorry if this has been discussed before but I alwasy thought the paternity runopoirs around prince harry and Diana's other lovers were just crazy rumours.  Now I'm not so sure.


----------



## Patati

I saw a picture of Harry a while back where he looked sooo much like PC


----------



## ParkAvenuePrincess

I couldn't care less about diana or any of the 'royals' for that matter, but I don't think he's Hewitts. Have you seen a pic of Dianas vulture brother? he looks just like Harry, so I'd say Harry just gets his colourings from the spencer side.


----------



## ayla

Have you guys also now noticed Will getting.. ugh, uglier ? 

Harry is definitely the prince to marry at this point !!


----------



## eyelove

The top picture that you posted of Prince Harry shows a pretty decent resemblance to Prince Charles.


----------



## bluxcape

yeah, he is on the royal side... not a fruit of the affair..


----------



## Rondafaye

I think he is a handsomer version of Prince Charles with Diana's coloring. And I agree with Ayla: William was a gorgeous young man but he's on the decline. Harry is better looking now.


----------



## hellooholly

don't forget how good-looking PC was in some of his early day photos!

the trick when looking at a man's looks is to look at the men in his family and how they've aged..

some good-looking people age soo terribly...
(looks-wise anyway. not debating their less tangible more valuable properties of course.)


----------



## fendigal

At least he doesn't look completely like Charles!  Sorry that was mean!


----------



## NancyDrew01

I think he looks quite a bit like Prince Philip...and that can only be considered a good thing.  He's really, really handsome and he looks like fun.


----------



## momshell

This is just hilarious!


----------



## seahorseinstripes

oh, i've always loved harry more than will.
he's so adorable & seems more like a man than sweet will


----------



## whatzerface

Harry looked a lot like Charles when he was younger. Luckily for him that seems to have changed!


----------



## nextnewface

Wow, he's definitely cuter than Will lately 

Hey Harry! I'm single


----------



## lolo

None of this actually matters; Prince Charles obviously accepts Harry as his and adores him. Diana is not here to defend her reputation. Anything in the press casting aspersions on his parentage must be extremely hurtful to the entire family. The only other person in this scenario is Hewitt, and he_ * really*_ is utterly irrelevant.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chloe-babe

also, you can bet your bottom dollar that they would have taken a paternity test at birth. Remember, this is the family that made Diana "prove" that she was a virgin  

Thanks heavens the monarchy have learnt from the mistakes of 3 of the 4 children divorcing! These boys are going to be allowed to live with their girlfriends before hand and forge proper relationships, unlike C & D were allowed to do


----------



## MissThing

*[FONT=arial,sans-serif]fun[/FONT]* [ f
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





n ]
*[FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]n.[/SIZE][/FONT]*

 A source of enjoyment, amusement, or pleasure.
 Enjoyment; amusement: _have fun at the beach._
 Playful, often noisy, activity.
 *[FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]intr.v.[/SIZE][/FONT]* _Informal_ *[FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]funned[/SIZE][/FONT]*, *[FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]fun·ning[/SIZE][/FONT]*, *[FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1]funs[/SIZE][/FONT]* 

 To behave playfully; joke.


----------



## Prada's Meadow

Prince Harry stumbles spectacularly into the gutter











*Prince* *Harry *was photographed stumbling out the popular celebrity haunt of Boujis in central London tonight after downing several 'Crack Baby' vodka shots.

But only moments earlier, young Harry reportedly lashed out at a paparazzo who was trying to snap his photo.


----------



## Prada's Meadow




----------



## purplekitty

One too many, huh, Prince Harry?


----------



## Virginia




----------



## bagsnbags

oh dear...


----------



## jane_2007

Hope this does not become a habit.


----------



## caitlin1214

This calls for a drinking song. 

Everybody! 


Under the table you must go,
Ee Ei Ee Ei Ee Ei Oh!
If I catch you bending, 
I'll saw your leg right off
Knees up, knees up, never let the breeze up
Knees up, Mother Brown!





("Hi, Ocifer! I am NOT under the alffluence of incohol!" :tispy: )


Easy there, Harry! Put one foot in front of the other! 

You have to give him credit for not attempting to drive himself home!


----------



## Prada's Meadow

jane_2007 said:


> Hope this does not become a habit.


 
  Right


----------



## Lainey




----------



## Moody

lol


----------



## Lisasbags

The Prince seems like a regular Joe who just kind of over did it a bit.


----------



## vbskull




----------



## SwirlyGirly

Well, I think 99% of us had been there a time or two at his age.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PinkPudding

Lol!!


----------



## caitlin1214

That's me after one Cosmo! 
(Oh my GOD! I'm such a lightweight!)


----------



## venetiakim

caitlin1214 said:


> This calls for a drinking song.
> 
> Everybody!
> 
> 
> Under the table you must go,
> Ee Ei Ee Ei Ee Ei Oh!
> If I catch you bending,
> I'll saw your leg right off
> Knees up, knees up, never let the breeze up
> Knees up, Mother Brown!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ("Hi, Ocifer! I am NOT under the alffluence of incohol!" :tispy: )
> 
> 
> Easy there, Harry! Put one foot in front of the other!
> 
> You have to give him credit for not attempting to drive himself home!


LOL!!!


----------



## karo

Wooow, that must have been one hell of a party!
This guy is really cool, he never minds that he's a royal and just gets what he wants. Only his bodyguards have a though work with him.


----------



## BagAngel

He is a real tearaway LOL


----------



## Jayne1

BagAngel said:


> He is a real tearaway LOL


*BagAngel*, being from the UK... what are the papers saying about this, across the pond?


----------



## seahorseinstripes

i LOVE him, i think he's sooo cute


----------



## boxermom

Some hangover the next day.  I thought he was serving in Iraq, or is that coming up?  Or am I mixing up the 2 princes?


----------



## caitlin1214

You're right. It's Harry.

I'm not sure when he's getting shipped off, though. 

My prayers will be with him and his regiment.


----------



## sailorgirl

Nice to know every royals are human!  I always liked him!


----------



## BagAngel

Jayne1 said:


> *BagAngel*, being from the UK... what are the papers saying about this, across the pond?


Papres are always quick to pick up on bad behaviour by the Royals. I think Harry is regarded as the "black sheep" 
Reports are now also saying that Wills may have been trying to be unfaithful to Kate I so hope that he doesn't end up being like his father - ruining the life of a beautiful girl! British Royalty are a bit renowned for this unfortunately!

"
A BLONDE student told yesterday how Prince William took her back to his barracks after they had dirty danced in a nightclub in front of astonished revellers.
Boozed-up William, who was downing pints of Stella Artois and shots of sambuca, spotted pretty Lisa Agar, 19, in the Elements nightclub in Bournemouth, Dorset, early on Friday.
They gyrated hip to hip on the nightclub's podium, "bumping and grinding" before the Prince begged Lisa to return to his barracks at Bovington Camp which was 20 miles away. William's antics will undoubtedly infuriate Kate Middleton, his girlfriend of four years, to whom the Prince is widely expected to become engaged soon.
Just 24 hours later, his brother Harry was seen falling over drunk in a street in London's West End.

But for once, even Harry's behaviour was overshadowed by William's antics in the seaside resort.

He and a group of fellow officers from the Household Cavalry were out drinking in the Walkabout bar in the centre of town before heading to the nightclub.

Reliving her extraordinary night with the heir to the throne, Lisa - who has a pierced lip - told the Sunday Mirror: "He was quite p****d.

"He was very affectionate and touchy-feely. And he definitely wasn't a shy boy. But not once did he talk about Kate. It was as though she didn't exist. I spent almost the whole time at the club with him - we drank, we danced, we went back to his place."

Six-foot Lisa, who is studying to be a sound engineer, was wearing black leggings and a pink figure-hugging top in the club, said the Prince - officially known to the Army as Second Lieutenant Wales - approached her as she stood at the bar.

Lisa, who has a steady boyfriend, said: "We stood next to each other at the bar and he was having shots of sambuca.

"His friend, who I was dancing with earlier, introduced us and he said: 'Nice to meet you.' He was warm and friendly. Not shy as I thought he would be.

"He was wearing a brown and white striped jumper, jeans and shoes and looked like any of the other guys there. After he finished his drinks, Will walked on to the podium with four other blokes and started dancing there." Lisa went on: "Will downed four shots of sambuca and drank at least six pints of Stella. He was laughing the whole time - like drunk people do.

"At one point, when the Baywatch theme tune came on, he posed like a lifeguard with his hand on his chin.

Some of his mates took their shirts off and started doing press-ups, Will just stood on laughing.

"He knew the song though... who would have thought Prince William watched Baywatch! "He was very merry and danced non-stop. Him and his mates were doing silly dances - singing along loudly and doing ridiculous moves."

Explaining how she came to be on the podium with William, she said: "I could see Will was watching me.

He looked down and yelled out: 'Lisa, come up here and let's show them how it's done.'

"So he grabbed my hand and pulled me on to the stage and we started dancing.

"It was a very small podium, only big enough for four people at a push, so we were very close. We were dancing directly opposite each other. I kept nearly falling off the podium, so he would gently hold my arm and steady me. It was really sweet.

"It was boiling hot. Everyone was watching us. People were cheering and filming it on their mobiles. You don't get many royal VIPs turning up in Bournemouth.

"We had enough of dancing on the podium, so jumped off and went to the bar for a few more drinks and just danced on the floor. He was a really good dancer."

She says Will had looked at her and told told her: "You're too good to be in here."

"I was very flattered," she adds. "I thought he was joking, but maybe he wasn't."

At the end of the night, when the club was closing at around 3am, they all left together.

"Everyone was getting a bit tired and drunk," says Lisa. She walked with William and his party to the waiting Royal protection cars, an Audi and a Land Rover. "Will jumped into the front of the Audi and asked: 'Lisa, what are you going to do? You must come back to the officers' mess with us!'

"I got into the Land Rover, but saw that there wasn't enough room for one of his friends, so got out. Will told me: 'Come back, Lisa, come back.' He was keen for me to go back with them all.

"It was all very exciting. I couldn't believe it. Even though he's not my type, he's Prince William, so who's going to turn down a personal invite back to his place?"

In the end, Lisa and a friend Tony followed the Royal convoy in a Ford Mondeo with Tony driving.

"We went back to the officers' mess at Bovington Camp and it was all very fancy," Lisa says.

"Will had arranged for one of his friends to wait at the entrance and swipe us in from inside."

The corridors were carpeted and it was quite posh, she says.

"Will was sitting on a single chair and I sat opposite him. I can't remember whether he had a Guinness or a bottle of Stella. He offered to get me a drink, but I said after a heavy night of drinking. And so was Will. He could barely keep his eyes open. He looked like he kept nodding off. I think he was pretty wasted and he told me he had to be up early the next morning.

"After about 20 minutes, he said he had to go to bed. He was very tired and by this point it was 4.15am.

"I think he was close to passing out and wanted to get upstairs before he was sick or did anything embarrassing in front of me.

"Although I have to say he managed well because I tend to drink quite a lot and he managed to keep up with me!"

At that point, Lisa and her friend Tony were escorted back to their car where they drove home chuckling at her escapade with the future King.

The next morning she recounted the night to her boyfriend James.

She said: "He didn't mind at all.

He just thought I was having a laugh. At the end of the day if you're going to do anything behind your partners back, who better to do it with than Prince William? "Although nothing happened between us in the end..."​


----------



## bagnshoofetish

oh man have I been there.  only difference is, I didn't have a photog snapping my pic.  poor lil harrison.


----------



## PrincessMe

seahorseinstripes said:


> i LOVE him, i think he's sooo cute


ITA  I have never even liked a red haired guy in my life but he is definitely hot


----------



## Prada's Meadow

BagAngel said:


> Papres are always quick to pick up on bad behaviour by the Royals. I think Harry is regarded as the "black sheep"
> Reports are now also saying that Wills may have been trying to be unfaithful to Kate I so hope that he doesn't end up being like his father - ruining the life of a beautiful girl! British Royalty are a bit renowned for this unfortunately!
> 
> "
> A BLONDE student told yesterday how Prince William took her back to his barracks after they had dirty danced in a nightclub in front of astonished revellers.
> Boozed-up William, who was downing pints of Stella Artois and shots of sambuca, spotted pretty Lisa Agar, 19, in the Elements nightclub in Bournemouth, Dorset, early on Friday.
> They gyrated hip to hip on the nightclub's podium, "bumping and grinding" before the Prince begged Lisa to return to his barracks at Bovington Camp which was 20 miles away. William's antics will undoubtedly infuriate Kate Middleton, his girlfriend of four years, to whom the Prince is widely expected to become engaged soon.
> Just 24 hours later, his brother Harry was seen falling over drunk in a street in London's West End.​
> But for once, even Harry's behaviour was overshadowed by William's antics in the seaside resort.​
> He and a group of fellow officers from the Household Cavalry were out drinking in the Walkabout bar in the centre of town before heading to the nightclub.​
> Reliving her extraordinary night with the heir to the throne, Lisa - who has a pierced lip - told the Sunday Mirror: "He was quite p****d.​
> "He was very affectionate and touchy-feely. And he definitely wasn't a shy boy. But not once did he talk about Kate. It was as though she didn't exist. I spent almost the whole time at the club with him - we drank, we danced, we went back to his place."​
> Six-foot Lisa, who is studying to be a sound engineer, was wearing black leggings and a pink figure-hugging top in the club, said the Prince - officially known to the Army as Second Lieutenant Wales - approached her as she stood at the bar.​
> Lisa, who has a steady boyfriend, said: "We stood next to each other at the bar and he was having shots of sambuca.​
> "His friend, who I was dancing with earlier, introduced us and he said: 'Nice to meet you.' He was warm and friendly. Not shy as I thought he would be.​
> "He was wearing a brown and white striped jumper, jeans and shoes and looked like any of the other guys there. After he finished his drinks, Will walked on to the podium with four other blokes and started dancing there." Lisa went on: "Will downed four shots of sambuca and drank at least six pints of Stella. He was laughing the whole time - like drunk people do.​
> "At one point, when the Baywatch theme tune came on, he posed like a lifeguard with his hand on his chin.​
> Some of his mates took their shirts off and started doing press-ups, Will just stood on laughing.​
> "He knew the song though... who would have thought Prince William watched Baywatch! "He was very merry and danced non-stop. Him and his mates were doing silly dances - singing along loudly and doing ridiculous moves."​
> Explaining how she came to be on the podium with William, she said: "I could see Will was watching me.​
> He looked down and yelled out: 'Lisa, come up here and let's show them how it's done.'​
> "So he grabbed my hand and pulled me on to the stage and we started dancing.​
> "It was a very small podium, only big enough for four people at a push, so we were very close. We were dancing directly opposite each other. I kept nearly falling off the podium, so he would gently hold my arm and steady me. It was really sweet.​
> "It was boiling hot. Everyone was watching us. People were cheering and filming it on their mobiles. You don't get many royal VIPs turning up in Bournemouth.​
> "We had enough of dancing on the podium, so jumped off and went to the bar for a few more drinks and just danced on the floor. He was a really good dancer."​
> She says Will had looked at her and told told her: "You're too good to be in here."​
> "I was very flattered," she adds. "I thought he was joking, but maybe he wasn't."​
> At the end of the night, when the club was closing at around 3am, they all left together.​
> "Everyone was getting a bit tired and drunk," says Lisa. She walked with William and his party to the waiting Royal protection cars, an Audi and a Land Rover. "Will jumped into the front of the Audi and asked: 'Lisa, what are you going to do? You must come back to the officers' mess with us!'​
> "I got into the Land Rover, but saw that there wasn't enough room for one of his friends, so got out. Will told me: 'Come back, Lisa, come back.' He was keen for me to go back with them all.​
> "It was all very exciting. I couldn't believe it. Even though he's not my type, he's Prince William, so who's going to turn down a personal invite back to his place?"​
> In the end, Lisa and a friend Tony followed the Royal convoy in a Ford Mondeo with Tony driving.​
> "We went back to the officers' mess at Bovington Camp and it was all very fancy," Lisa says.​
> "Will had arranged for one of his friends to wait at the entrance and swipe us in from inside."​
> The corridors were carpeted and it was quite posh, she says.​
> "Will was sitting on a single chair and I sat opposite him. I can't remember whether he had a Guinness or a bottle of Stella. He offered to get me a drink, but I said after a heavy night of drinking. And so was Will. He could barely keep his eyes open. He looked like he kept nodding off. I think he was pretty wasted and he told me he had to be up early the next morning.​
> "After about 20 minutes, he said he had to go to bed. He was very tired and by this point it was 4.15am.​
> "I think he was close to passing out and wanted to get upstairs before he was sick or did anything embarrassing in front of me.​
> "Although I have to say he managed well because I tend to drink quite a lot and he managed to keep up with me!"​
> At that point, Lisa and her friend Tony were escorted back to their car where they drove home chuckling at her escapade with the future King.​
> The next morning she recounted the night to her boyfriend James.​
> She said: "He didn't mind at all.​
> 
> He just thought I was having a laugh. At the end of the day if you're going to do anything behind your partners back, who better to do it with than Prince William? "Although nothing happened between us in the end..."​


 
 Hahaha.... Thanks for posting this.


----------



## LTV

Haha...sorry, but these are hilarious photos. I'll be embarrassed if I had my pictures taken like this. Poor Prince Harry when he sees these.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## socalgrl86

MK1976 said:


> Well, I think 99% of us had been there a time or two at his age.


----------



## papillon216

Nice to know he hangs loose sometimes!


----------



## caitlin1214

Show me the way to go home,
I'm tired and I want to go to bed!
I had a little drink about an hour ago and 
it's gone right to my head!

No matter where I roam
On land or sea or foam
You will always hear me singing this song.
Show me the way to go home!


----------



## MeriCherie

Omg looks like my drunk soccer coach from highschool!!!


----------



## mj805

he's still young but it sucks to have you're most mortifying moments captured.


----------



## ShimmaPuff

> The soldier prince pours shame on the Royal Family...Link





> A statement from St James's Palace... "Prince Harry fully understands how offensive this term can be, and is extremely sorry for any offence...Link



I'm not having much luck coming up with a venue-appropriate comment for this, and frankly I am not sure whether the story itself is appropriate, so I'm just going to post the quotes and links, and leave the decision of whether it should be here at all or not to Our Serene Management.

(I edited out some of the quote from the story with a link to the video, so that the post itself does not contain any offensive terms)


----------



## Jahpson

Really immature, he even mocked his own grandmother.


----------



## ILoveMyBug

Jahpson said:


> Really immature, he even mocked his own grandmother.



If you believe that she is


I'm not sure why this story is news now though - isn't it from nearly 3 years ago?


----------



## karo

It's 3 years old people! Who cares? He said it about his friend not a stranger on a street, so obviously it was a joke - maybe not an appropriate one but still just a joke.


----------



## Jahpson

ILoveMyBug said:


> _*If you believe that she is*_
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why this story is news now though - isn't it from nearly 3 years ago?


 

she's not?


----------



## ILoveMyBug

Nothing will convince me of it!


----------



## littleblackbag

^^^Come on he so takes after his Grandfather with foot in mouth disease.


----------



## ILoveMyBug

True, but growing up with the Duke of Edinburgh as a granddad you'd definitely not be aware of what was unacceptable to say!

What about the rest of his behaviour though? And his appearance?


----------



## Jahpson

^ he looks like a red version of his paps to me.


----------



## ILoveMyBug

Well it looks like I'm on my own on this one, but I stand by my belief


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jahpson

^ what exactly fuels your disbelief?


----------



## bisousx

I find the commotion behind this silly. He's a 20-something soldier, can he not be allowed to joke around with his friends? I mean, that _was_ his friend he was referring to, not a stranger or a nation of people. Of course, if you videotape yourself then you should be subjected to the opinions that follow, but as for me, I don't find anything offensive about what he said.


----------



## Grace123

bisousx said:


> I find the commotion behind this silly. He's a 20-something soldier, can he not be allowed to joke around with his friends? I mean, that _was_ his friend he was referring to, not a stranger or a nation of people. Of course, if you videotape yourself then you should be subjected to the opinions that follow, but as for me, I don't find anything offensive about what he said.


 

Add to that the stessors of war. I agree.


----------



## ILoveMyBug

Jahpson said:


> ^ what exactly fuels your disbelief?



The fact that they look so similar, the fact that Diana was seeing him before Harry was born, the fact that the DNA test results weren't made public


----------



## Jahpson

^ got any photos of that guy with his face showing?


some folks carry redheads in their DNA


----------



## ILoveMyBug

Jahpson said:


> ^ got any photos of that guy with his face showing?
> 
> some folks carry redheads in their DNA




Nothing from his younger days no, but here's a more recent one. I still think it holds up.


----------



## Jahpson

ok. But Harry's eyes are close together like Charles


they do look similar though.

oh well, at least we know for certain who is mother is. lol


----------



## ILoveMyBug

Jahpson said:


> ok. But Harry's eyes are close together like Charles
> 
> 
> they do look similar though.
> 
> oh well, at least we know for certain who is mother is. lol


 
This is true!

and the plot thickens  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7826701.stm


----------



## Jahpson

^ maybe everyone should just get back to using first names. lol


----------



## littleblackbag

ILoveMyBug said:


> The fact that they look so similar, the fact that Diana was seeing him before Harry was born, the fact that the DNA test results weren't made public



Hmm I see your point!!!!


----------



## Roo

Sad to see he is taking after his notoriously racist grandfather.  Diana would not approve.


----------



## ShimmaPuff

Roo said:


> Sad to see he is taking after his notoriously racist grandfather.  Diana would not approve.


And his great-grandmother. Although in fairness, the Queen Mum's bigotry was pretty inclusive, she looked down on pretty much everybody but a handful of Europeans with titles.

Clicking around, opinion seems pretty split down the middle, basically two camps: 
A) Team I'm not offended but if he had said stuff about a different groups or groups I would be because that would be different
and 
B) Team Please forgive my lack of amazement



ILoveMyBug said:


> ...I'm not sure why this story is news now...isn't it from nearly 3 years ago?


The tape was made 3 years ago, but only recently obtained by News of the World.

(and oh yeah, in case it needs to be stated, I'm totally Team B)


----------



## Label Addict

When are the royal family going to get a clue?? Just because that is his friends nickname (if indeed it is?) doesn't mean it's appropriate to use it and come on your the second in line to the throne you really think videos of you doing something stupid aren't going to be leaked? 

But it's ok because he said he didn't mean any harm  oh and this is the same person who dressed as a Nazi for a fancy dress party


----------



## PrettyInPink

Honestly, I don't see the big deal. I don't think he said anything with malicious intent. He was talking about his friend, and was joking.


----------



## Sweetpea83

^I agree with you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MichelleAntonia

oh harry is DEFINITELY not prince charles' kid! 


about his remarks-- i swear, he's just acting out. i think he doesn't want to be seen as this prince who is always in line with the kind of behavior that is expected of him. even if his own family members (grandpa namely) didn't hold up that kind of proper behavior. i think he's desperate to be seen in some other light. this is a pathetic way of accomplishing that, but hey, it's working, isn't it?

his mother surely would not approve, and she was never one to hold certain standards of what is expected of the royals in high regard. but she never had to resort to being offensive to break out of it.


----------



## Tangerine

Wait.... there were DNA tests!?!?


LOL. I love this piece of trashy, sordid speculation. It will never end...


----------



## MichelleAntonia

^yeah, who REALLY knows. no randoms in the public ever will. but we sure will keep up the gossip! 

i kinda feel bad for the kid either way. if the polo dude is his dad, he's grown up not knowing him, let alone being acknowledged as his kid (which isn't the dad's fault). if he IS charles' kid, well, ppl like us gossiping all these years and putting doubt out there... and the only parent he's sure about he lost when he was barely a teenager. not to mention all the rumors of her "infidelity"...none of it must've been easy on the kid.


----------



## MichelleAntonia

none of that of that is an excuse for his recent asshat-like behavior, but still. poor kid.


----------



## ShimmaPuff

In other Royal Scandal news, TMZ the other day showed some pics of Prince William in which it is very plain that The late Earl Spencer will have departed this earthly plane some time after most or all of his hair had long assumed its spirit form.


----------



## purseinsanity

ILoveMyBug said:


> This is true!
> 
> and the plot thickens  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7826701.stm


 
I totally see your point, but can't help but wonder:  what if something happened to William and Harry were to become king?  Would the royal family tolerate a man going to the throne today knowing he's someone else's illegitimate child?  I know it happened in the past, but I would think they'd have a harder time with it if they knew he wasn't genetically related to them.


----------



## caitlin1214

This is the thread for all things Prince Harry.


----------



## caitlin1214

Harry in Barbados 2010





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy_XvuV_ZdI


----------



## kirsten

^lol he's got some good moves!

When I was a kid I had the biggest crush on William. Now I think Harry is totally the hotter one!


----------



## caitlin1214

Some more pictures of Harry.


----------



## nastasja

harry

thank you for starting this thread!!

my favorite .gif


----------



## caitlin1214

I found some more . . .


----------



## caitlin1214

You're so welcome! 


William and Catherine have their thread, Pippa has hers, so I figured Harry deserved one, too.


----------



## Nat

:greengrin:


----------



## YSoLovely

Thanks for the Harry thread! He's definitely the hotter brother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xikry5talix

LOL! I love all the funny pics!


----------



## caitlin1214

I'm having WAY too much fun with this!


----------



## Nat

May issue of GQ UK







http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/commen...h-the-wounded-interview/north-pole-expedition


In a world exclusive for the May issue, GQ meets Prince Harry and the Walking With The Wounded team as they prepare for their epic unaided trek to the North Pole, in an attempt to raise £2m for charities focusing on the retraining and rehabilitation of injured British service personnel. The team, including four wounded servicemen injured in Afghanistan, have been given a 40 to 60 per cent chance of succeeding by polar experts. With the odds against them, they discuss with GQ the motivation behind the trip.

Prince Harry is patron of Walking With The Wounded, and the team comprises Captain Guy Disney, Private Jaco van Gass, Sergeant Steve Young, Captain Martin Hewitt, founders Edward Parker and Simon Dalglish, Logistics & Training Guide Henry Cookson and Polar Guide Inge Solheim.

Harry and the team were photographed by David Bailey in January 2011. A special-edition front cover [pictured] will feature the prince, with a donation from each issue sold going to the Walking with the Wounded charity.

Founder Edward Parker comments of the wounded servicemen, selected from the 100-plus injured who applied to undertake the challenge, "These four guys knew when they went to Afghanistan that they could get killed or wounded. The political whys and wherefores are not what we're addressing here. These men are soldiers, this is what they do. It is their job. But what happens to these men and women when they can't go back to their job through physical or mental injury? We must not forget about them. They need assistance, support, money. They need help realising that, yes, their options have changed - drastically - but they can still have an impact and they can still very much lead full and prosperous lives. These wounded personnel have immense courage - more so than ever before. The four guys going to the Pole with Walking With The Wounded are just the veneer on the wounded community; it is up to us and this expedition to show there is a future. If by walking 250 miles across a frozen landscape, we can inspire one disabled serviceman to lift himself up off the bed, or out of a wheelchair, or out from the depths of hopelessness, we have done our job."


----------



## NY_Mami

I saw this comin'.... lol........


----------



## White Orchid

Erm, good looking?


----------



## Sloane_Ranger

I personally can't stand him. He comes off as so cocky and arrogant, not only in how he acts but the way he played around on his girlfriend all these years.
I know a lot of people think he's cute, but I'm not a fan. 
The way he looked at Kate at the wedding before saying " wait till you see her" was frankly lecherous.
I though it was inappropriate.


----------



## lara0112

I haven't seen any inappropriate look but I am pretty sure, if so, he was staring at the bridesmaid - not at his bro's future wife .

I think he is quite the cutie.


----------



## angelnyc89

He looks way better than William, and knows how to have fun. Thanks for starting this thread!


----------



## ellacoach

Thanks for starting this thread! Love Prince Harry!!


----------



## Addictista

Hooray!  What a great thread idea - thanks for starting it *caitlin1214*!  

I didn't pay much attention to Harry before but he was so adorable at the wedding!  I hope he ends up with Pippa - what a fairytale that would be - the two brothers married to the two sisters.


----------



## lil_fashionista

I agree!  Harry is way better looking that William.  He seems to be a real person, not some stiff royal.  And from what I know of Chelsea Davy, she's not really worried about her relationship with Harry one bit.


----------



## minababe

I really like him for years. 
He doesn't act always right but I think he is young and has a difficult role in that whole royal system. he is a prince, so he can do what he want, but the press always looking at him for doing mistakes .. he isn't the firstborn child so he hasn't the rights william has, I think that can be good for one but also bad because you are not important than william as future king is. I think he made some mistakes but to find himself.
I hope now he grew up and do some good things and find a lovely woman, who loves him for who he is not for his name. it must be hard to meet a new women and not to know if they just want to be the next princess. because I'm sure there so many woman who wants to be only that.
maybe thats the reason he has such a long relationship with chelsea. because he knows her for ages and can be sure she liked him for who he is. it can be difficult to meet some new guys, especially now..
+ I think the most people underestimate him and thats really sad. he seems like a good guy, funny, lovely and seems to have a good heart. he was really cute at the wedding.


----------



## Blo0ondi

is it wrong to say that i think his more cuter than william and he remids me of diana more but ppl tell me i'm wrong lol

thnx 4 starting this!


----------



## BagOuttaHell

I like him.

I thought he was sizing Kate up as she walked down the aisle. But not in a I want her kind of way. But in a way he could tease his brother because he knew he couldn't turn around to see her first. I thought it was cute when he said wait until you see her.


----------



## White Orchid

I agree with most of what you've said.

And for a Royal to don a Swastika made me think he can't be too bright.

Personally neither float my boat but I still think Wills is the better looking of the two.

I actually don't find any Royals attractive save for Princess Charlotte of Monaco.  Could be all that in-breeding, I don't know...



Sloane_Ranger said:


> I personally can't stand him. He comes off as so cocky and arrogant, not only in how he acts but the way he played around on his girlfriend all these years.
> I know a lot of people think he's cute, but I'm not a fan.
> The way he looked at Kate at the wedding before saying " wait till you see her" was frankly lecherous.
> I though it was inappropriate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rockhollow

I really like Harry. Sure he's done some questionable things as he was growing up - but who didn't. It must be hard to be the 'spare'. 
I think he's matured into a really nice man. I bet he'll be the one to carry on allot of the charitable work of his mother.
William's life is pretty well cut out - there are things he has to do as the 'heir' but Harry will have to find his own way to make a difference- which I think he'll do.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

Harry is so hot, thanks for this thread! He also seems to have more personality than Wills too


----------



## solange

White Orchid said:


> I agree with most of what you've said.
> 
> And for a Royal to don a Swastika made me think he can't be too bright.
> 
> Personally neither float my boat but I still think Wills is the better looking of the two.
> 
> I actually don't find any Royals attractive save for Princess Charlotte of Monaco.  Could be all that in-breeding, I don't know...



Actually, the swastika was brilliant considering the offensive theme of the party he was invited to: colonizers and their colonized. William wore a lion suit, offensive in that it accidently stated that of all cultures to dress as out of Africa, the only worthwhile population was the animal one. The Nazis tried to outdo the British empire in their sweeping control of other nations and cultures. I found it part of Harry's humanitarian perspective to come up with a clearly unpleasant reminder to his insensitive host and fellow partygoers of what the colonizers and their subjects were really like. I really wish the context of the costume had been evaluated before the public jumped on the bandwagon of public condemnation.


----------



## cookie dough

Sloane_Ranger said:


> I personally can't stand him. He comes off as so cocky and arrogant, not only in how he acts but the way he played around on his girlfriend all these years.
> I know a lot of people think he's cute, but I'm not a fan.
> The way he looked at Kate at the wedding before saying " wait till you see her" was frankly lecherous.
> I though it was inappropriate.


 
Love your screen name 

I understand why you think he can come across like that but I actually think for the first time with this wedding, Harry held it together and was triumphant in sorting out his image. He added some humour but held it together in doses.

Both William and Harry looked like they were about to crease into laughter at the altar, perhaps like nervous laughter.


----------



## minababe

Blo0ondi said:


> is it wrong to say that i think his more cuter than william and he remids me of diana more but ppl tell me i'm wrong lol
> 
> thnx 4 starting this!



I agree he is much cuter, he looks young and cheeky, will is more the reserved man. I just thought he is younger than he actually is.

but william is totally like diana. not all in a good way. his attitude as they left the church was really like dianas .. didn't look good. 
and sometimes his glances are totally like hers. he has a lot from her.
harry walked like a confident cowboy yesterday


----------



## cookie dough

minababe said:


> I agree he is much cuter, he looks young and cheeky, will is more the reserved man. I just thought he is younger than he actually is.
> 
> *but william is totally like diana. not all in a good way. his attitude as they left the church was really like dianas .. didn't look good. *
> and sometimes his glances are totally like hers. he has a lot from her.
> harry walked like a confident cowboy yesterday


 
Can you elaborate on that a bit, like what you mean? I'm curious to know.

I actually see a lot of Prince Philip in Harry.


----------



## minababe

cookie dough said:


> Can you elaborate on that a bit, like what you mean? I'm curious to know.
> 
> I actually see a lot of Prince Philip in Harry.



he didn't walk upright. his posture was curved. his blue band wasn't taut because of that. he looked like he is the father of the bride just holding her hand, not her proud husband and prince of wales. he didn't look confident next to her. the whole walk I thought: Will come one. show how proud you are.
I think he was just too nervous to enjoy it so I don't find it that bad but he looks totally like her. like a mouse ^^

normally he is confident and all that of course, the day after the pics are stunning. but at this moment his glance and his posture were totally like dianas. 
it's hard to find pics of it but on tv it was so obvious.


----------



## nillacobain

YSoLovely said:


> Thanks for the Harry thread! *He's definitely the hotter brother.*


 

I agree - he's looking better than William lately.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I don't find William attractive. I agree Harry is definitely the hotter brother. He seems way less uptight as well. And he looked quite nice in his uniform at the wedding...

Great thread!


----------



## cookie dough

minababe said:


> he didn't walk upright. his posture was curved. his blue band wasn't taut because of that. he looked like he is the father of the bride just holding her hand, not her proud husband and prince of wales. he didn't look confident next to her. the whole walk I thought: Will come one. show how proud you are.
> I think he was just too nervous to enjoy it so I don't find it that bad but he looks totally like her. like a mouse ^^
> 
> normally he is confident and all that of course, the day after the pics are stunning. but at this moment his glance and his posture were totally like dianas.
> it's hard to find pics of it but on tv it was so obvious.


 
Interesting perspective -- I actually thought he was really proud and that she looked more nervous than he did.

Great to get different points of view.


----------



## minababe

cookie dough said:


> Can you elaborate on that a bit, like what you mean? I'm curious to know.
> 
> I actually see a lot of Prince Philip in Harry.





minababe said:


> he didn't walk upright. his posture was curved. his blue band wasn't taut because of that. he looked like he is the father of the bride just holding her hand, not her proud husband and prince of wales. he didn't look confident next to her. the whole walk I thought: Will come one. show how proud you are.
> I think he was just too nervous to enjoy it so I don't find it that bad but he looks totally like her. like a mouse ^^
> 
> normally he is confident and all that of course, the day after the pics are stunning. but at this moment his glance and his posture were totally like dianas.
> it's hard to find pics of it but on tv it was so obvious.



I found a pic where you can see what I mean. it's not the best but maybe you understand what I mean.
he has the same nose like her as well


----------



## cookie dough

minababe said:


> I found a pic where you can see what I mean. it's not the best but maybe you understand what I mean.
> he has the same nose like her as well


 
I see where you are coming from, but I think lots of tall people have that kind of 'shy gait' when they walk. Not making excuses for him - I think he is extremely shy though.

He really looks like Diana.

Back to Harry though, he did well that day. Always laughing, smiling and waving. He seems more comfortable with his role, especially since after Afghanistan.


----------



## nastasja

^^yup. he looks JUST like Diana in that pic. same shy/sheepish grin, same posture.


----------



## NoSnowHere

He's cute, but I always thought William was cuter, despite being bald!!

Harry takes after Charles IMO. In fact, Charles said in an interview that he was happy William didn't get his looks.


----------



## chantal1922

TBH I never found William or Harry attractive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ellacoach

There was a period of time when I though William was really really good looking...it might have been his early 20's, but it was short lived...and during that same time I didn't really think Harry was all that attractive. 

I don't think William is unattractive now, but I definately think Harry is hot. There's something about him...


----------



## Laurie8504

I do love redheads....

ok, so I have to ask, has anyone else seen this?





I've always though he never looked anything like Charles.The man on the left is allegedly Diana's ex-lover James Hewitt.  Is this just tabloid fodder?

At any rate, this thread could use some more photos!


----------



## LADC_chick

NoSnowHere said:


> He's cute, but I always thought William was cuter, despite being bald!!
> 
> Harry takes after Charles IMO. In fact, Charles said in an interview that he was happy William didn't get his looks.


Really? I'm thinking that William is looking more and more like Charles now whereas he looked so much like Diana when he was a pre-teen and teen. Harry, on the other hand, looks more like Diana's brother, Charles Spencer.

(Charles is on the right, and the man on the left--James Hewitt--is who people were saying that Diana had an affair with and who possibly fathered Harry. I don't buy it, though.)


----------



## kirsten

There were rumors that Harry was the son of James Hewitt but their affair happened _after_ Harry was born. Red hair is known to run on the Spencer (Di's) side.


----------



## Laurie8504

LADC_chick said:


> Really? I'm thinking that William is looking more and more like Charles now whereas he looked so much like Diana when he was a pre-teen and teen. Harry, on the other hand, looks more like Diana's brother, Charles Spencer.
> 
> (Charles is on the right, and the man on the left--James Hewitt--is who people were saying that Diana had an affair with and who possibly fathered Harry. I don't buy it, though.)



Oh, I can definitely see that!  Thanks for posting.  I was just confused as to where the red hair came from!


----------



## gelbergirl

kirsten said:


> There were rumors that Harry was the son of James Hewitt but their affair happened _after_ Harry was born. Red hair is known to run on the Spencer (Di's) side.



I say the palace had Harry DNA tested, and those results are locked away somewhere.   

I think he is Hewitt's kid, but born under the marriage to Charles so what else was Diana going to say.  There's just enough looks of Diana in Harry to say who knows for sure.

Anyway, he's a fun addition to the royal family so he's a keeper!


----------



## caitlin1214

Didn't Diana have an affair with James Hewitt two years after Harry was born? 


If that's true, then there's no way Harry is James's son.


----------



## Necromancer

I don't believe the Hewitt thing either. There are a lot of Spencer traits in Harry - the complextion, the hair colour etc. He's more Spencer than Windsor. Not all siblings carry the same traits. I know all my brothers and sisters look different from each other, despite us all having the same parents.


----------



## kirsten

Here is one of Diana's older sisters - Lady Sarah Spencer. I can totally see where the red hair on the Spencer side comes from.


----------



## GOMAVS41

cookie dough said:


> Can you elaborate on that a bit, like what you mean? I'm curious to know.
> 
> *I actually see a lot of Prince Philip in Harry*.


 

Especially their personalities. Harry is going to be an absolute trip when he's an old man.


----------



## minababe

I've just read a article where a insider told the magazinethat harry said to chelsea "you're the next" at the party on fridaynight.

I think it's ******** and they just want to write something about harry..

omg charles is his father. it's ridicilous and mean to speculate .. 
it's just because he has red hair and freckles.
I'm so happy harry doesn't look like charles and has full hair haha ^^
he got more from dianas family and that's pretty good though


----------



## Ejm1059

minababe said:


> I've just read a article where a insider told the magazinethat harry said to chelsea *"you're the next" at the party on fridaynight.*
> 
> I think it's ******** and they just want to write something about harry..
> 
> omg charles is his father. it's ridicilous and mean to speculate ..
> it's just because he has red hair and freckles.
> I'm so happy harry doesn't look like charles and has full hair haha ^^
> he got more from dianas family and that's pretty good though



 Mmm, yea I'm calling b.s  What was the source?

And I have seen several pictures where Harry had a brief moment of looking like Charles. Luckily, he doesn't look like his dad


----------



## ellacoach

minababe said:


> I'm so happy harry doesn't look like charles and *has full hair haha* ^^


 
haha! I saw some photos of Harry from the back during the wedding events and it looked like he may also be thinning on top, but definately not like William!!


----------



## minababe

Ejm1059 said:


> Mmm, yea I'm calling b.s  What was the source?
> 
> And I have seen several pictures where Harry had a brief moment of looking like Charles. Luckily, he doesn't look like his dad



bild.de
thats a german boulevard magazin. pretty much the same like the sun in england though


----------



## chantal1922

Harry def takes after the Spencers. I also never believed the Hewitt rumors.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## nastasja

chantal1922 said:


> Harry def takes after the Spencers. I also never believed the Hewitt rumors.


agree.


----------



## pixiesparkle

I think Harry is very fortunate that he has hair!! I must be the most ignorant person on earth because I did not realise that Prince William kinda has a bald patch until he entered Westminster Abbey for the wedding


----------



## michie

Harry could definitely get it. I've always thought he was cute, even way back when ppl acted like he was the ugly duckling of the 2. He reminded me of what I wanted Opie (yes, OPIE) to look like as he got older. LOL.


----------



## HauteMama

It was inevitable that the focus would now fall to Harry, as he will be the next to marry. Now that William is officially out of the running, everyone (and many young women) turns to Harry.


----------



## ellacoach

For some reason i don't see Harry marrying anytime soon...


----------



## caitlin1214

Prince Harry seems like the type of person I'd be talking to and wound find myself slipping up and accidentally calling him "dude."


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I think it is quite possible James is harry's father. Who knows how long him and Di were having an affair and what secrets the royal family keeps hidden behind locked doors. We'll never really know. 

I also agree that I don't see Harry marrying soon.


----------



## Artica

Before the wedding, I thought that Harry was a unattractive. I don't fancy ginger hair on men. 

Now that Will is off the market, Harry has become a sexy beast. I still prefer Wills over Harry though; shame about the hair. At the age of 28 he has less hair than his dad. It's not fair. 

Loved this interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBvix8cJ_zc

They look like a fun bunch.


----------



## Ejm1059

Don't know the credibility but here it is:

*'It's not a life for me: Why Chelsy will NEVER marry Harry*


Chelsy Davy may have been back with Prince Harry for the big day  but there is no Royal Wedding on the horizon for them.

Zimbabwean-born Chelsy, 26, returned to the UK from South Africa for the wedding and is said to be giving her on-off relationship with Harry another chance. But she has told friends: Theres no way we are getting married. Its not a life for me.

Prince Harry invited Chelsy to the wedding as his plus one, and he has told friends he wants to make their five-year relationship work.

But she is putting her job first  she starts work as a trainee solicitor at London law firm Allen & Overy in September. A friend says: Chelsy and Harry are back together and it was very significant that she was his plus one for the day.

Harry adores Chelsy and really wants things to work. He has brought up marriage in the past  usually when hes drunk  but Chelsys the one to quickly play it all down.

She has watched what Kate has gone through and how much she has had to sacrifice, and says its not for her.

Chelsy thought the wedding was wonderful and she had a ball, but theres no way marriage is on the cards for her. She wants her freedom and to start a career. Thats her focus at the moment, she and Harry are going to see how things go.

Chelsy was invited to Fridays wedding reception, wedding breakfast and evening dinner where she was seated at the top table with Prince Harry.

At the all-night disco at Buckingham Palace, she and the Prince spent much of the night dancing together. When they finally left at three in the morning, Chelsy accompanied Harry to the Goring Hotel to continue the party.

They were all over each other and Harry went back to Chelsys flat before sneaking out and going home. They were very much an item, but who knows what will happen now, says a source. They have a very turbulent relationship.

While Chelsy prepares to start work, Prince Harry has another eight months at RAF Wattisham in Suffolk, where he is training to be an Apache helicopter pilot.

Harrys got to get his head down so he completes his training but he is much happier with Chelsy moving back to London, the source said. She wants to make it work  she has missed Haz  but the truth is she really doesnt like the attention that comes with dating a prince.

Source: The Daily Mail


----------



## HauteMama

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think it is quite possible James is harry's father. Who knows how long him and Di were having an affair and what secrets the royal family keeps hidden behind locked doors. We'll never really know.
> 
> I also agree that I don't see Harry marrying soon.


 
People said the same about "Randy Andy" after Charles married. And he may not marry anytime soon, but it is fairly typical that after a royal wedding, attention falls to the next eligible royal bachelor.


----------



## michie

Chelsy "said" no? Famous "Coming To America" line for me then..."If you're really a prince, I'll marry you..."


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I think Chelsy and Harry are quite cute together. Their personalities seem to work well together also.


----------



## lara0112

GOMAVS41 said:


> Especially their personalities. Harry is going to be an absolute trip when he's an old man.



I also totally think he takes after his grandfather - humour-wise and all.

the hewitt story is really terrible, especially because it was discussed when he was rather young - just lost his mother and then all of the 'who is your father' talk. some of the pics seem very close to his father's looks. I also heard that her affair with hewitt happened after she had harry.


----------



## Jayne1

LADC_chick said:


> Really? I'm thinking that William is looking more and more like Charles now whereas he looked so much like Diana when he was a pre-teen and teen.* Harry, on the other hand, looks more like Diana's brother, Charles Spencer.*
> 
> (Charles is on the right, and the man on the left--James Hewitt--is who people were saying that Diana had an affair with and who possibly fathered Harry. I don't buy it, though.)


On the other hand, of course Harry will have some characteristics of the Spencers -- we know who his mother is and she looked like her brother.

James Hewitt gave tons of interviews back in the day and every time I see Harry, I see James. James had a hotness about him too, although people grew to hate him because he talked too much.

Also, lets see if Harry loses his hair like the rest of the royals, or not, like Hewitt.


----------



## kirsten

If it were his child, I don't think James Hewitt would be denying it. He talked too much about Diana, wrote a book and tried to sell her love letters for millions. He wouldn't say that they met two years after Harry was born if it weren't true.

Also at the ceremony I thought I noticed a little thinning of Harrys hair up top.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kirsten

.


----------



## YSoLovely

Optic illusion!  Prince Hot Ginge is not thinning on top!!!


----------



## morgan20

I have always thought Harry is James son! I will do until it is proved otherwise....look at that pic above


----------



## xikry5talix

chantal1922 said:


> Harry def takes after the Spencers. I also never believed the Hewitt rumors.


----------



## Addictista

kirsten said:


> If it were his child, I don't think James Hewitt would be denying it. He talked too much about Diana, wrote a book and tried to sell her love letters for millions. He wouldn't say that they met two years after Harry was born if it weren't true.



Good point - he is too much of an opportunist to pass on claiming fatherhood of a Royal!


----------



## BigBlueSky

Last night i had a dream i married a prince and became a princess and then my brother married a princess and became a prince and i was annoyed that he copied me.


----------



## LADC_chick

Wait. So, Hewitt himself said that he and Diana met two years after Harry was born? SO, how is it still debatable that Harry might possible be Hewitt's son?


----------



## michie

Because men lie and women lie...but, mostly because folks believe what they want.


----------



## aklein

YSoLovely said:


> Optic illusion!  Prince Hot Ginge is not thinning on top!!!



  Love PHG.

So did anyone else see the bit about how Harry left the reception with Pippa


----------



## Loony

The older Harry gets, the more he looks like Charles, imo.


----------



## serene

i think the older he becomes the better looking harry is


----------



## serene

Loony said:


> The older Harry gets, the more he looks like Charles, imo.



and also similarities with prince philip! the eye area is so similar


----------



## Nat

Loony said:


> The older Harry gets, the more he looks like Charles, imo.





serene said:


> i think the older he becomes the better looking harry is



Yep, ITA!!


----------



## Loony

serene said:


> and also similarities with prince philip!



Oh, there's no doubt about _that_.


----------



## Jayne1

Loony said:


> The older Harry gets, the more he looks like Charles, imo.



I'm not disagreeing with you but sometimes I think James and Harry have the same mannerisms.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Loony said:


> Oh, there's no doubt about _that_.



Are you referring to their womanly ways... ?


----------



## ellacoach

Jayne1 said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you but sometimes I think James and Harry have the same mannerisms.


 
He does look like Charles in this picture, but 100 times better looking!


----------



## Loony

Jayne1 said:


> Are you referring to their womanly ways... ?



No, I'm referring to the the stuff that comes out of their mouths and their apparent lack of judgement and inability to keep said mouths shut.


----------



## kirsten

LADC_chick said:


> Wait. So, Hewitt himself said that he and Diana met two years after Harry was born? SO, how is it still debatable that Harry might possible be Hewitt's son?



Yes, Hewitt himself has said he is not the father of Harry and their affair didn't start until 2 years after Harry was born.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-affair-Princess-Diana.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

To this day Hewitt is still talking about Diana. He lives in Spain now in exile. I really don't see any reason why Hewitt would deny Harry as his son if he was certain he wasn't his.

It's debatable because everyone loves a good scandal. Everyone being the media.


----------



## Ejm1059

Loony said:


> The older Harry gets, the more he looks like Charles, imo.



He looks like Charles in this picture.


----------



## serene

_"He (Harry) barely spoke to Chelsy and because he was best man they didn't even sit together. By the end of the night she was sitting at the bar looking sorry for herself."_
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...illiam-and-tables-named-after-key-places.html

and I read that he was all over her cuddling etc.  confusing


----------



## YSoLovely

Serene, the purse in your avi is the definition of heavenly.


----------



## kirsten

serene said:


> _"He (Harry) barely spoke to Chelsy and because he was best man they didn't even sit together. By the end of the night she was sitting at the bar looking sorry for herself."_
> http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...illiam-and-tables-named-after-key-places.html
> 
> and I read that he was all over her cuddling etc.  confusing



Hmmm what to believe. lol. 

I am going with him ignoring Chelsy all night.


----------



## Jahpson

LMFAO @ TPF going in on the last available brother.


----------



## kirsten

So Prince William is off the market. Who cares? He's not the hot one anyway! Prince Harry is one smoking ginger and still up for grabs. And he's got a lot more going for him than just blue blood. Let's take a look at why Harry is a Prince among men:

He's sporty:











He's never a sore loser.






He's good with animals:











He hangs with the Village People cover band.






And Kanye and Diddy. Prince Harry be ballin.


----------



## Nat




----------



## kirsten

He's a gentleman. I'm sure.











Or at least he can look like one. Posh.






Not convinced? For real. Tell me these photos don't make you go "awe."


----------



## kirsten

And in case you have a heart of stone:


----------



## Jahpson

kirsten said:


>


----------



## serene

YSoLovely said:


> Serene, the purse in your avi is the definition of heavenly.



thanks  not mine though, took it here http://weheartit.com/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

LADC_chick said:


> Wait. So, Hewitt himself said that he and Diana met two years after Harry was born? SO, how is it still debatable that Harry might possible be Hewitt's son?


Total speculation on my part...

What would be in it for him? Ruin a boy's life... and for what?

Everyone knows that the royals often marry for convenience and bloodlines, have the obligatory kids and then lead separate lives. Diana, on the other hand, was pissed and not following the old rules.

Diana gave Hewitt permission to talk about their love life, she loved the attention and always wanted her story out, but Hewitt had nothing to gain, nothing at all, from admitting he may be the father.  Hewitt was happy to make a buck by writing books and giving interviews, but he's too smart and knows about the power of the royal family and he would get nothing out of being Harry's father. 

All it would do would ruin Harry's privileged life and why do that?


----------



## serene

Nat said:


>



:lolots: 



Jayne1 said:


> All it would do would ruin Harry's privileged life and why do that?



would the royal family really kick him out?


----------



## serene

there's more


----------



## Jayne1

serene said:


> would the royal family really kick him out?


They may not kick him out, but it would ruin his life if the world knew he was not the son of Prince Charles. Charles was royalty, Diana just married royalty.


----------



## serene




----------



## Belle49

DAMN at those photos. I don't like red heads but he's one ginger I would handle


----------



## YSoLovely

serene said:


> thanks  not mine though, took it here http://weheartit.com/



It's still gorgeous. 

That site is very nice, btw.


----------



## serene

now which one would you choose


----------



## michie

Belle49 said:


> DAMN at those photos. I don't like red heads but he's one ginger I would handle



YES! We could make ginger snaps...


----------



## YSoLovely

serene said:


> now which one would you choose



FMK style?

F - Becks

M - Harry

K - ... Sorry Wills. :cry:


----------



## morgan20

Only F Becks, then M and K both Wills and Harry


----------



## morgan20

Sorry that was suppose to say F and M Becks and K the other two!


----------



## Stephanie***

A harry thread :lolots: 

Well, he's one of those english man who got that x effect. I'd say.


----------



## queennadine

F - Harry 
M - William (Queen Nadine has a great ring to it!)
K - Beckham (sorry )


----------



## Artica

F  All Three of them 
Becks has one hot body. Harry and Wills are princes..nuff said. 
M None of them 
K None of them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Artica

*This is courtesy of the guest of a guest website*

*He's sporty:*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tumblr_leigtdgwrm1qfxd99o1_400.jpg
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince-harry.jpg
*He's never a sore loser.*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/nurhayati_42951_prince_harry.jpg
*He's good with animals:*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tumblr_ldfcr65sjm1qfxd99o1_r1_400.jpg


guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tumblr_lf1jiy6dup1qfxd99o1_5001.jpg
*He hangs with the Village People cover band
*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tumblr_leezt5bk8r1qfxd99o1_400.jpg
*And Kanye and Diddy. Prince Harry be ballin.*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince-harry-kanye-west-diddy.jpg
*He's a gentleman. I'm sure.*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince-harry-grope.jpg
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/0710_harry03.jpg
*Or at least he can look like one. Posh.
*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tumblr_lfco09cvtn1qfxd99o1_500.jpg
*Not convinced? For real. Tell me these photos don't make you go "awe."
*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince_harry5645.jpg
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/08-prince-harry-400a062607.jpg
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/full_wellchild_007_wenn5360762.jpgguestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince-harry-404_737820c-300x190.jpg
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince_harry_abs.jpg
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/prince-harry-walks-with-army-vetrans-to-pole-april-2011.jpg
*And in case you have a heart of stone:*
guestofaguest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/tumblr_lex4yagga51qfxd99o1_500.jpg


----------



## LADC_chick

Jayne1 said:


> Total speculation on my part...
> 
> What would be in it for him? Ruin a boy's life... and for what?
> 
> Everyone knows that the royals often marry for convenience and bloodlines, have the obligatory kids and then lead separate lives. Diana, on the other hand, was pissed and not following the old rules.
> 
> Diana gave Hewitt permission to talk about their love life, she loved the attention and always wanted her story out, but Hewitt had nothing to gain, nothing at all, from admitting he may be the father. Hewitt was happy to make a buck by writing books and giving interviews, but he's too smart and knows about the power of the royal family and he would get nothing out of being Harry's father.
> 
> All it would do would ruin Harry's privileged life and why do that?


I only asked because if they're saying that Hewitt himself said the affair started after Harry was born, I'm not understanding the conspiracy theory. Is the theory that Hewitt is lying about when the affair started? That's what I don't get.


----------



## nastasja

michie said:


> YES! We could make ginger snaps...


----------



## kirsten

F- Beckham
M- Harry
K- William


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

serene said:


> now which one would you choose



Harry all the way!


----------



## kirsten

Has anyone seen this pic? lol

(May not be safe for work! - doesn't show skin or anything just a bulge)

http://www.omgblog.com/images/harry-bulge.jpg


----------



## michie

I think Hewitt is lying. Wasn't there reports that her affair indeed began with him 4 mos after she gave birth to William?


----------



## YSoLovely

kirsten said:


> Has anyone seen this pic? lol
> 
> (May not be safe for work! - doesn't show skin or anything just a bulge)
> 
> http://www.omgblog.com/images/harry-bulge.jpg




Lawdhammercy.


----------



## Artica

kirsten said:


> Has anyone seen this pic? lol
> 
> (May not be safe for work! - doesn't show skin or anything just a bulge)
> 
> http://www.omgblog.com/images/harry-bulge.jpg


 
Horny Harry has got quite a package.


----------



## Artica

michie said:


> I think Hewitt is lying. Wasn't there reports that her affair indeed began with him 4 mos after she gave birth to William?


 
I don't believe that Diana had an affair within 2 years of her marriage. I just don't buy it. Furthermore there is no way she could have hidden her affair from The Firm that long.


----------



## YSoLovely

^^I also don't think Diana was stupid / reckless / rebellious enough to sleep with someone without protection while she was still married.


----------



## Belle49

kirsten said:


> Has anyone seen this pic? lol
> 
> (May not be safe for work! - doesn't show skin or anything just a bulge)
> 
> http://www.omgblog.com/images/harry-bulge.jpg




*speechless*


----------



## serene

kirsten said:


> Has anyone seen this pic? lol
> 
> (May not be safe for work! - doesn't show skin or anything just a bulge)
> 
> http://www.omgblog.com/images/harry-bulge.jpg



 maybe it's just a wrinkled fabric..


----------



## Jayne1

LADC_chick said:


> I only asked because if they're saying that Hewitt himself said the affair started after Harry was born, I'm not understanding the conspiracy theory. Is the theory that Hewitt is lying about when the affair started? That's what I don't get.


Yes...


----------



## Jayne1

Artica said:


> I don't believe that Diana had an affair within 2 years of her marriage. I just don't buy it. Furthermore there is no way she could have hidden her affair from The Firm that long.


It wasn't hidden - the paps knew...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

kirsten said:


> Has anyone seen this pic? lol
> 
> (May not be safe for work! - doesn't show skin or anything just a bulge)
> 
> http://www.omgblog.com/images/harry-bulge.jpg


That's physically impossible, isn't it?


----------



## admat97

Jayne1 said:


> That's physically impossible, isn't it?



A little too long and thin


----------



## Ejm1059

Here is another write up from Lainey's Entertainment:

_I know you read a very suggestive article on People.com this weekend about Pippa leaving the reception at Buckingham Palace with Harry and got all excited. It was misleading. Sorry to kill your boner. 

Hot Harry and Pippa did indeed leave at the same time. But on a bus. With many others. And they were headed to the afterparty at the Goring Hotel. Where he met up with Chelsy Davy. Chelsy travelled by car with Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie. Shes tight with them. She did however sit next to Harry at dinner. And they were seen making out during the evening. And they left together in the morning, at 6am, having raged for hours and hours and hours together, long after Pippa went to bed.

Pippa cant keep up. Pippa also has a boyfriend. A very serious one. They say an engagement announcement could be imminent, although with all the attention on her now, perhaps she wont be putting away her dance card just yet. If not a royal through Harry, than maybe someone else? 

Which is not to say that #harrylovespippa is impossible. But the more I think on it, its not something you want on any girl. Especially with Chelsy hanging around. More on that in a minute. 

Sidebar on Chelsy first: straight up, the way she looked was f-cking busted. Like, that sh-t wont age well. Look at it around the neck already. I mean, I know no one was taking away from Kate that day but youd think a little more effort was in order, non? Jesus shes like a f-cking Lohan. 

Will Harry marry Chelsy? I dont think so. Rather, heres how I think itll go down. 

Hell marry a safe girl. Hell marry someone whos been approved by the people who make those approvals. She will be beautiful and well bredand boring. She will bore him. And that poor girl will suffer. Because Harry will, for the rest of his life, go back to Chelsy again and again and again. Sound familiar? 

Harry is the family f-ck up: never badly intended, but somehow hes always a mess. Which is why hes so endearing. Its like he cant help himself. Also 

Hes really, really cute with the children. Did you see him with the children? 

Please. 

Its too much when Harrys with the children. And the puppies. 

And when hes doing saucy things for his brother. Like decorating the Aston Martin. Remember when Will and Kate drove out of Buck in a JU5T WED convertible with balloons billowing out the back and an L plate at the front? 

Harry put the L plate there. It had a double meaning. Both to tease his brother for being a novice driver, and, ahem, perhaps a novice something else on his wedding night. Get it? Scamp.
_


----------



## aklein

Uh and this hasn't been posted?  Shame on you!


----------



## Jayne1

Ejm1059 said:


> Here is another write up from Lainey's Entertainment:
> 
> _I know you read a very suggestive article on People.com this weekend about Pippa leaving the reception at Buckingham Palace with Harry and got all excited. It was misleading. Sorry to kill your boner.
> 
> Hot Harry and Pippa did indeed leave at the same time. But on a bus. With many others. And they were headed to the afterparty at the Goring Hotel. Where he met up with Chelsy Davy. Chelsy travelled by car with Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie. Shes tight with them. She did however sit next to Harry at dinner. And they were seen making out during the evening. And they left together in the morning, at 6am, having raged for hours and hours and hours together, long after Pippa went to bed.
> 
> Pippa cant keep up. Pippa also has a boyfriend. A very serious one. They say an engagement announcement could be imminent, although with all the attention on her now, perhaps she wont be putting away her dance card just yet. If not a royal through Harry, than maybe someone else?
> 
> Which is not to say that #harrylovespippa is impossible. But the more I think on it, its not something you want on any girl. Especially with Chelsy hanging around. More on that in a minute.
> 
> Sidebar on Chelsy first: straight up, the way she looked was f-cking busted. Like, that sh-t wont age well. Look at it around the neck already. I mean, I know no one was taking away from Kate that day but youd think a little more effort was in order, non? Jesus shes like a f-cking Lohan.
> 
> Will Harry marry Chelsy? I dont think so. Rather, heres how I think itll go down.
> 
> Hell marry a safe girl. Hell marry someone whos been approved by the people who make those approvals. She will be beautiful and well bredand boring. She will bore him. And that poor girl will suffer. Because Harry will, for the rest of his life, go back to Chelsy again and again and again. Sound familiar?
> 
> Harry is the family f-ck up: never badly intended, but somehow hes always a mess. Which is why hes so endearing. Its like he cant help himself. Also
> 
> Hes really, really cute with the children. Did you see him with the children?
> 
> Please.
> 
> Its too much when Harrys with the children. And the puppies.
> 
> And when hes doing saucy things for his brother. Like decorating the Aston Martin. Remember when Will and Kate drove out of Buck in a JU5T WED convertible with balloons billowing out the back and an L plate at the front?
> 
> *Harry put the L plate there. It had a double meaning. Both to tease his brother for being a novice driver, and, ahem, perhaps a novice something else on his wedding night. Get it? Scamp.*
> _


What's the double meaning - anyone know?


----------



## aklein

^The L sticker goes on your car when you are learning to drive. Harry was joking that his brother was a virgin.


----------



## keodi

wow! I wonder what the double meaning is...


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

aklein said:


> Uh and this hasn't been posted?  Shame on you!


----------



## Jayne1

aklein said:


> The L sticker goes on your car when you are learning to drive.
> I think Harry was joking that his brother was a virgin.


Thanks... is an L sticker an European thing?


----------



## aklein

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks... is an L sticker an European thing?



I think it might be a UK thing.  When I lived in St Kitts (which used to be under British rule), the student drivers had the L sticker.  And you knew to pass them as soon as you could.


----------



## fandora

^It's European thing. All cars used for teaching must have L sticker.


----------



## Belle49

I know L for lerner but how about for Laid? lol


----------



## michie

I think double-meaning, as in a novice driver and novice lover...


----------



## CobaltBlu

michie said:


> I think double-meaning, as in a novice driver and novice lover...



novice lover? really? I though...well.....you know.....


----------



## michie

What? That William got a$$ all the time? Maybe I'm in the minority, but William does not give me "put it down" vibes...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## solange

aklein said:


> Uh and this hasn't been posted?  Shame on you!



Lol


----------



## caitlin1214

michie said:


> What? That William got a$$ all the time? Maybe I'm in the minority, but William does not give me "put it down" vibes...


While he doesn't put off an "I get it in" vibe, I kind of assumed he's not a novice. After all, they were living together before the wedding.



Which is a huge departure from the way Diana was portrayed at her wedding, which seems to be this Pure, Virgin Bride.


----------



## michie

That doesn't mean he's experienced...or good.


----------



## CobaltBlu

oh, my. I just think i will go on thinking he has good game and is just discrete.


----------



## caitlin1214

michie said:


> That doesn't mean he's experienced...or good.



Don Juan he's not, but I'm not seeing twin beds and purity rings, either.


----------



## michie

Maybe Harry was implying that William hasn't had as much action as the younger brother...


----------



## solange

aklein said:


> Uh and this hasn't been posted?  Shame on you!



Lol


----------



## michie

You really liking that post, eh? LOL!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

michie said:


> What? That William got a$$ all the time? Maybe I'm in the minority, but William does not give me "put it down" vibes...



 Me neither...


----------



## Lynny0780

He totally looks like Charles in this picture! His eye shape and area where the eyes and nose are is a lot like his dads.

I am sure Harry was just joking about the L thing. We all know they aren't virgins!



Loony said:


> The older Harry gets, the more he looks like Charles, imo.


----------



## kirsten

serene said:


> maybe it's just a wrinkled fabric..



That's my guess to what it really is.  lol


----------



## pixiesparkle

serene said:


> :lolots:
> 
> would the royal family really kick him out?


If Hewitt admitted that Harry is his son then I'm pretty sure the Royal family would do a DNA test first..:wonderingif it turns out that he really isn't Prince Charle's son they might still keep him..after all he's been a part of the family for many years, they're not that cold hearted..


----------



## pixiesparkle

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks... is an L sticker an European thing?


We have that in Australia too..hehe 



Lynny0780 said:


> I am sure Harry was just joking about the L thing. We all know they aren't virgins!



lol..def not! certainly not Prince William and his new bride since they've been living together for the past 10 months before the wedding at his cottage in Wales ..they're 29 afterall!


----------



## CobaltBlu

I am sure they had the dna test done the second the news came out. charles dna is a snap to get, same with the little Harry. I am sure there is no question that he is charles son. The Firm would have sorted this out in two shakes.


----------



## Jayne1

CobaltBlu said:


> I am sure they had the dna test done the second the news came out. charles dna is a snap to get, same with the little Harry. I am sure there is no question that he is charles son. The Firm would have sorted this out in two shakes.


But Diana and Charles were still 'together' at the time, even if both were miserable.  The royal family does not want bad publicity. Everything they do is private and hush hush... all the extra marital affairs, everything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Jayne1 said:


> But Diana and Charles were still 'together' at the time, even if both were miserable.  The royal family does not want bad publicity. Everything they do is private and hush hush... all the extra marital affairs, everything.



I am just saying that the instant Hewitt became public, with the red hair, I am sure Harrys DNA got snapped up and the matter put to rest. I am satisfied that he is charles' there is a lot of resemblance with Philip and Charles, and I am sure the Firm covered themselves with a DNA test that is locked up tight that confirms Harry is Charles' son. I doubt they would have released the results either way, I am just saying I am sure they have satisfied themselves and the matter is, for them, settled.


----------



## xikry5talix

Hahaha, the "L" thing is kinda funny. Harry is such a jokester!


----------



## gelbergirl

pixiesparkle said:


> If Hewitt admitted that Harry is his son then I'm pretty sure the Royal family would do a DNA test first..:wonderingif it turns out that he really isn't Prince Charle's son they might still keep him..after all he's been a part of the family for many years, they're not that cold hearted..



on the other hand, the royals don't exactly take-in or adopt illegitimate children who are the result of male royals visiting other places . . . .


----------



## Artica

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks... is an L sticker an European thing?


 
It's a UK thing. You can buy those L stickers at party shops for stag and hen dos. The 'L' plates are symbolic of the fact that the Hen or Stag is a 'learner' at marriage.



caitlin1214 said:


> While he doesn't put off an "I get it in" vibe, I kind of assumed he's not a novice. After all, they were living together before the wedding.


 
He's had several gfs before Kate, so I'm sure he's not a novice in that department. Plus he was really HOT a few years ago AND he is a prince. The man got laid..no doubt about it. 

What I find hard to believe are the rumours that young Charles was quite the lothario in his day. How that hell is that possible?


----------



## fandora

Artica said:


> What I find hard to believe are the rumours that young Charles was quite the lothario in his day. How that hell is that possible?




Being Prince of Wales certainly helped a lot  


I know that many don't like him but Charles is really cool IMO.


----------



## Artica

fandora said:


> Being Prince of Wales certainly helped a lot
> 
> I know that many don't like him but Charles is really cool IMO.


 
I know...but I still don't get it. There are men and women that aren't physically very attractive, but they ooze charisma. Charlie doesn't seem like one of those people, but then again, he is in his 60s now. Perhaps things were different in those days. He seems pretty cool in this video as do the princes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBvix8cJ_zc


----------



## ms piggy

I thought that video showed a pretty cool Prince Charles. And the princes appeared to be close to him, jibbing in and all.


----------



## mlbags

kirsten said:


> ^lol he's got some good moves!
> 
> When I was a kid I had the biggest crush on William. Now I think Harry is totally the hotter one![/QUOTE]
> My sentiments, exactly! He looks so cheeky, and full of life!
> 
> 
> BTW, I see so much of Lady Diana in him on this pic!


----------



## bisousx

Thank you OP for the Harry thread!!


----------



## ms piggy

Prince Harry and the £1 wiggly worm. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Picture-Eliza-Lopes-Prince-Harrys-gift.html


----------



## Nishi621

CobaltBlu said:


> I am sure they had the dna test done the second the news came out. charles dna is a snap to get, same with the little Harry. I am sure there is no question that he is charles son. The Firm would have sorted this out in two shakes.




ITA! If there was ever a doubt, I am sure it was cleared up privately and quickly years ago. And, if you see Harry sitting next to Charles, he does look like him in certain shots and angles.


----------



## Nishi621

kirsten said:


> Yes, Hewitt himself has said he is not the father of Harry and their affair didn't start until 2 years after Harry was born.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-affair-Princess-Diana.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
> 
> To this day Hewitt is still talking about Diana. He lives in Spain now in exile. I really don't see any reason why Hewitt would deny Harry as his son if he was certain he wasn't his.
> 
> It's debatable because everyone loves a good scandal. Everyone being the media.



this


----------



## Nishi621

I don't get the attraction to Chelsy, she is NOT a pretty girl. Harry could do so much better


----------



## Nishi621

I took the L to mean novice to marriage, not sex. Those two are not virgins and William has been with women other than Kate, come on!


----------



## kirsten

ms piggy said:


> Prince Harry and the £1 wiggly worm.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Picture-Eliza-Lopes-Prince-Harrys-gift.html




LOL so cute!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## aklein

Nishi621 said:


> I took the L to mean novice to marriage, not sex. Those two are not virgins and William has been with women other than Kate, come on!



And that would be the joke.  I don't think anyone actually believed that he was a virgin before his wedding night.
Perhaps, we can ask Harry to come in and clear things up for us?


----------



## kirsten

L Plates are used to signify learner drivers in the UK.

However, the Plates are also frequently associated with wedding celebrations - its a light hearted joke, showing the couple are newly married and so are just "learning" how to live together as man and wife. 

If the couple driving off in a car together is part of the celebration, then it will frequently sport L Plates as a sign of their new marriage and commitment (in addition to other decorations, such as balloons, ribbons and even dragging empty cans attached to strings).

Sometimes, women (brides) on hen nights (bachelorette type party) may also wear L Plates as part of fancy dress, again to signify that they are entering a new phase of their life, one they have no experience of yet and so they are a "learner".


----------



## Nat

ms piggy said:


> Prince Harry and the £1 wiggly worm.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Picture-Eliza-Lopes-Prince-Harrys-gift.html



Haha, too cute!


----------



## serene

I thought that L meant love  simple


----------



## kirsten

> Wattisham: Prince Harry in Suffolk to continue training
> 
> JUST a few days after playing the part of best man at one of the world&#8217;s most watched weddings, Prince Harry has now started the next stage of his military training at a Suffolk air base.
> 
> The Prince, known in the army air corps as Harry Wales, moved to his new home at Wattisham Flying Station yesterday.
> 
> The base, near Stowmarket, is home to the Army Air Corps&#8217; Apache attack helicopters.
> 
> The Prince already has his wings and blue beret, which he received from his father, Prince Charles, last year, but is now undertaking &#8220;conversion to role&#8221; training for the Apache, one of the most lethal aircraft ever created.
> 
> He can fly the attack helicopter, which has been used in Iraq and Afghanistan, but will now learn how to use it in battle.
> 
> Only the most talented trainees &#8211; just two per cent of all military pilots - get the chance to fly Apaches.
> 
> The 26-year-old Captain will be at Wattisham for eight months before spending time in America where he will practice with live rounds.
> 
> And with the world&#8217;s media focusing on the young Prince and his newlywed brother, the Wattisham community has welcomed him with open arms.
> 
> Jan Wise, owner of The Veggie Red Lion pub and restaurant in nearby Great Bricett, said she would be pleased to welcome the Prince and his family in for lunch.
> 
> She said: &#8220;It will put us in the spotlight and hopefully it might bring a few more tourists to the area and they might want a vegetarian lunch.
> 
> &#8220;Prince Charles in particular might like our food &#8211; we do try to be as green as possible in every way and he&#8217;s very much into that on his duchy estate, so hopefully he would be impressed.&#8221;
> 
> Paul MacDonald, parish clerk for Wattisham, said he and his colleagues were &#8220;delighted&#8221; that the Prince had arrived in Suffolk.
> 
> He said: &#8220;Particularly as the Royal wedding went so well and everybody was very proud of being British.
> 
> &#8220;We&#8217;re delighted that he is here. Everybody is extremely positive about it.
> 
> &#8220;It will be interesting to see what they do this year at the open day - whether he will be asked to participate.
> 
> &#8220;The local people will certainly support him, that is for sure, and I don&#8217;t think they will play any part in trying to catch him out and will be very protective of him.&#8221;
> 
> A spokesman for the Prince said he had started his course yesterday while the Ministry of Defence said it could not comment on &#8220;individual movements of service personnel&#8221;.
> 
> An MoD spokesman said: &#8220;Prince Harry will now progress to the Apache &#8216;conversion to role&#8217; course where he will learn to operate the aircraft and its weapons systems in a variety of challenging operational scenarios.
> 
> &#8220;The Prince will be based at Wattisham Airfield in Suffolk and undertake a section of the training in the United States of America.&#8221;



http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/wattisham_prince_harry_in_suffolk_to_continue_training_1_882268


----------



## bisousx

Yum. Thanks kirsten! Now all we need are more pix of Harry in uniform


----------



## bisousx

Nishi621 said:


> I don't get the attraction to Chelsy, she is NOT a pretty girl. Harry could do so much better



I hardly ever see candid photos of celebs/royals genuinely laughing and enjoying each other's company like Chelsy and Harry. Chelsy may not be the prettiest girl, but if he's that happy with her, then how much better could he do?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ Agreed. Looks aren't everything. She is obviously intelligent and independent and makes him happy. And I also think she is very pretty. They always seem to catch her drunk and hungover looking in a lot of pictures, but in other pictures she looks great. I also think she's one of those people that looks better in real life than in photographs as well. She has a nice figure also.


----------



## kirsten

> *Following in Kate's footsteps: Chelsy copies Ms Middleton's style as she shops for black wedges in the Kings Road *
> 
> She's already bagged herself a prince - and now Chelsy Davy seems determined quite literally to follow in the footsteps of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Chelsy, 25, was seen trying on a pair of shoes just like some of Kate's black wedge favourites - and was even shopping in her preferred stomping ground for shopping, London's King's Road.
> 
> The royal formerly known as Kate Middleton, 29, was seen wearing the black patent platform shoes from LK Bennett both before and after the Royal Wedding.
> 
> She also went shopping two days in a row before the celebrated nuptials last Friday in order to get last minute outfits and accessories connected to the big day.
> 
> Kate wore the £129.99 black LK Bennett patent pumps when she arrived at London's Goring Hotel for her last night as a commoner before marrying Prince William. She teamed them with a white cardigan and a black dress with a white print.
> 
> Kate then emerged for her first full day as a member of the Royal Family and with her title Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, wearing the same shoes again, this time teamed with a royal blue dress and black jacket.
> 
> She walked hand in hand from Buckingham Palace with William the day after their wedding to a waiting helicopter where they left for a night at a secret honeymoon location before their honeymoon proper later this month.
> 
> Chelsy, the on-off girlfriend of William's brother Prince Harry, meanwhile had decided to plump for a much cheaper version from Office.
> 
> In suede rather than patent leather and with a higher rattan heel rather than the more modest cork elevation of the LK Bennett pair, the trendy Office pair were on offer for a mere £60.
> 
> Indeed, Chelsy seemed quite keen on the shoes and paraded around the shop in them.
> 
> However, perhaps unlike in Cinderella, the shoe didn't fit for Chelsy, and Prince Harry's on-off girlfriend left the shop wearing the same white plimsolls she started out with on her shopping expedtition - or perhaps she picked them up later...
> 
> Chelsy, who is currently back on as the girlfriend of Prince Harry, was a guest at the Royal Wedding at the weekend.
> 
> She's apparently back in London for the summer to spend time with him and to work for law firm, Allen & Overy.
> 
> But despite a similar love of shoes, there is no sign of her following in Kate's footsteps down the aisle for another Royal Wedding just yet.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...lack-wedges-Kings-Road.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Chelsy looks pretty here and not hungover!


----------



## nastasja

ms piggy said:


> Prince Harry and the £1 wiggly worm.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Picture-Eliza-Lopes-Prince-Harrys-gift.html


 
how cute! and what an adorable child.


----------



## minababe

kirsten said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...lack-wedges-Kings-Road.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
> 
> Chelsy looks pretty here and not hungover!



she looks cute. but not hungover? we can't really see her face though


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She looks so cute in those photos!


----------



## wantabalenciaga

there are some youtube video montages of Chelsy that capture her personality and make her more attractive.  She does have a good body - especially a few years ago - and I think a pretty face, just can make some unphotogenic expressions


----------



## mlbags

ms piggy said:


> Prince Harry and the £1 wiggly worm.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Picture-Eliza-Lopes-Prince-Harrys-gift.html


 

Awww... Prince Harry is such a sweetie!

Somehow, I find this photo of Prince Harry endearing ......


----------



## lisalovesshoes

ms piggy said:


> Prince Harry and the £1 wiggly worm.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Picture-Eliza-Lopes-Prince-Harrys-gift.html



Bless him!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kirsten

More pics of Chelsy.


----------



## chantal1922

^^ Those shoes Chelsy is trying on are cute.


----------



## ms piggy

Seems like she got those wedges.


----------



## nastasja

how did the harry thread turn into a chelsy thread?


----------



## serene

killerlife said:


> how did the harry thread turn into a chelsy thread?



maybe we need to get her a separate one


----------



## kirsten

Some baby Harry pics!


----------



## kirsten




----------



## aklein

Lol at the nose picking picture.  That gif is hilarious.


----------



## kirsten

Older article from December 2010

*Prince Harry's Secret Trysts With DC Housewife, Says Nanny*

Playboy Prince Harry sent a chauffeur driven limousine to pick up Catherine Ommanney, the star of the Real Housewives of D.C., so the pair could enjoy a series of steamy rendezvous.

That's the explosive secret being revealed by one of Ommanney's closest confidantes, the nanny who babysat the reality star's two children while she romped with the young British royal -- 13 years her junior.

"Although she was my boss, when she was really happy she would share things with me, like what happened with Prince Harry," former nanny Monica Herrero told RadarOnline.com in an exclusive interview.

"She would show me messages that he sent her, and she said that he wanted to take her hand and travel around the world."

Herrero was 20-years-old when she acted as a nanny for Ommanney and her two little girls, Ruby and Jade, in 2007, while they lived in London, England.

"While I was living with Catherine a car with a chauffeur came for her twice," Herrero said.

"Her daughters would tell me, 'This is the car that Prince Harry sends for mummy.'"

The single mother-of-two previously confessed details about her affair with the third in line to the throne, revealing he gave her "a long and lovely" kiss.

She said: "He was holding me off the floor, kissing me. I was absolutely speechless. I was against the wall, and he literally lifted me off the floor and gave me a lovely kiss which I was stunned by.

"It was a lovely kiss... Afterwards I didn't say anything. I was genuinely, completely blown away."

The ex-nanny said she took the job because she wanted to move from her native Spain to London so she could improve her English.

Herrero said Ommanney was separated from her husband, who lived in Menorca at the time, and although she had a boyfriend she would regularly brag about flirting and making out with other men, including the Prince.

"Catherine told me that one time that she kissed Prince Harry in a bathroom," Herrero said.

"She told me she met him because she doing interior design for him, even though I never saw her doing any work."

Herrero told RadarOnline.com she never thought much about Ommanney's rendezvous with Prince Harry because "she was my boss, not my friend."

Ommanney moved to the U.S. in the summer of 2008 when she married Charles Ommanney, a prize-winning photojournalist with Newsweek, after a brief romance.

The pair are currently going through a divorce.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...ys-secret-trysts-with-dc-housewife-says-nanny


----------



## Laurie8504

^^I don't know that I buy that...just seems a little far-fetched.  I mean, these women are on this show expressly for publicity.  I would believe that she paid her nanny to "leak" the story though.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Those baby pics are too cute!


----------



## nastasja




----------



## YSoLovely

Baby Harry was soooooo cute!


----------



## chantal1922

killerlife said:


>


----------



## pixiesparkle

I think I may need some biology lessons..but from the baby pics, Harry wasn't always a redhead? Or is that how it goes, blonde while young and slowly turns red? :wondering


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Belle49

^^ usually that's how it goes.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

His hair was sort of strawberry blonde when he was born and got darker I believe. I remember watching a special during the royal wedding that made a comment about him being born with red hair, so I think there had to be a little red when he was young. I think it works that way with a lot of brunettes too. Several of my family members were born with blonde hair that got darker as they got older.


----------



## oonik

He's such a cute baby !


----------



## Artica

Love the baby pics. The boys seem so close to their mummy. It kinda makes me sad looking at them. 

That gif with Harry sticking his tongue out to the press was a good sign of things to come. BTW, has anyone read the GQ interview with Harry?


----------



## nastasja

Artica said:


> Love the baby pics. The boys seem so close to their mummy. *It kinda makes me sad looking at them.*


same. it looks like she must've been a very caring mom. sad that she's gone.


----------



## Belle49

Artica said:


> Love the baby pics. The boys seem so close to their mummy. It kinda makes me sad looking at them.
> 
> That gif with Harry sticking his tongue out to the press was a good sign of things to come. BTW, has anyone read the GQ interview with Harry?



no is it online?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I would like to know also.


----------



## angelnyc89

Here ya go ladies:



> In a world exclusive for the May issue, GQ meets Prince Harry and the Walking With The Wounded team as they prepare for their epic unaided trek to the North Pole, in an attempt to raise £2m for charities focusing on the retraining and rehabilitation of injured British service personnel. The team, including four wounded servicemen injured in Afghanistan, have been given a 40 to 60 per cent chance of succeeding by polar experts. With the odds against them, they discuss with GQ the motivation behind the trip.
> 
> Prince Harry is patron of Walking With The Wounded, and the team comprises Captain Guy Disney, Private Jaco van Gass, Sergeant Steve Young, Captain Martin Hewitt, founders Edward Parker and Simon Dalglish, Logistics & Training Guide Henry Cookson and Polar Guide Inge Solheim.
> 
> Harry and the team were photographed by David Bailey in January 2011. A special-edition front cover [pictured] will feature the prince, with a donation from each issue sold going to the Walking with the Wounded charity.
> 
> Founder Edward Parker comments of the wounded servicemen, selected from the 100-plus injured who applied to undertake the challenge, "These four guys knew when they went to Afghanistan that they could get killed or wounded. The political whys and wherefores are not what we're addressing here. These men are soldiers, this is what they do. It is their job. But what happens to these men and women when they can't go back to their job through physical or mental injury? We must not forget about them. They need assistance, support, money. They need help realising that, yes, their options have changed - drastically - but they can still have an impact and they can still very much lead full and prosperous lives. These wounded personnel have immense courage - more so than ever before. The four guys going to the Pole with Walking With The Wounded are just the veneer on the wounded community; it is up to us and this expedition to show there is a future. If by walking 250 miles across a frozen landscape, we can inspire one disabled serviceman to lift himself up off the bed, or out of a wheelchair, or out from the depths of hopelessness, we have done our job."
> 
> Royal Patron Prince Harry, who is joining the other eight men on the ice for up to a week, said in a message of support: "This extraordinary expedition will raise awareness of the debt that this country owes to those it sends off to fight - only for them to return wounded and scarred, physically and emotionally. The debt extends beyond immediate medical care and short-term rehabilitation. These men and women have given so much. We must recognise their sacrifice, be thankful, so far as we can ever repay them for it."
> 
> During the exclusive photo shoot, examining one of the team's weight vests - used primarily to strengthen upper-body hauling muscles - Prince Harry commented: "Can I do most of my training wearing this thing in bed?" When it comes to having his photograph taken by David Bailey for the cover, his Royal Highness joked: "Well, so long as I can have one for the dartboard at home, I'm happy to oblige."
> 
> Inge Solhiem, the expedition's polar guide, adds, "Harry's training has been going very well: he has the right attitude. I'm sure Harry has healthy concerns about the dangers - as he should. You have no idea how different the pole is from everything else on the planet. The old Norwegian explorers called it the 'devil's dance floor'. It is unpredictable. Deadly. If you're not paying attention it will just slap you... You can walk ten miles in one day, pitch your tent overnight, and the ice will have drifted you back eleven miles in the opposite direction."
> 
> Private Jaco van Gass [pictured above, right, with Captain Guy Disney], who lost his left arm as well as almost two-thirds of his left-leg tissue, is one of the chosen few. He says, "I knew what I was fighting for out there. I wasn't just doing what the army told me to do, I wanted to be there. I loved my job and I still do. That's why I don't regret what happened to me. There's not a day that goes by now when I don't think about Afghanistan and wish I was back out there. My battalion, the Parachute Regiment, is out there now on the front line.  I know that door has closed, but new ones are opening. I am ready for these new challenges. I am ready for the future."
> 
> The number of single, double and triple amputees and severely injured soldiers returning from Afghanistan annually has risen dramatically since the war began in 2001. Figures from Defence Analytical Services and Advice (DASA), part of the Ministry of Defence, mirror the numbers compiled by independent charities for limbless service personnel, and the news is shocking. Look back as far as 2006 and the number of UK servicemen who sustained partial or complete limb amputation that year in Afghanistan as a result of injuries sustained was seven. In 2007 it had reached 12, by 2008 numbers were up to 30, come 2009 and 55 were recorded and by the end of 2010 the annual figure of troops who had suffered "traumatic or surgical amputation" of one or more limbs had reached 76. No one has any doubts this figure will rise again in 2011. From the period 1 January 2006 to 15 January 2011, 1,608 UK military and civilian personnel were admitted to UK field hospitals, categorised as Wounded In Action, as part of operation in Afghanistan, whereas 248 were categorised as Seriously Injured and 235 Very Seriously Injured.
> 
> The full feature appears in the May issue of British GQ, out on 31 March. Proceeds from this issue, with two collector's-edition covers, will be going to Walking With The Wounded. walkingwiththewounded.org.uk



Source: http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/commen...h-the-wounded-interview/north-pole-expedition














I apologize if the pics are too small for your liking


----------



## kirsten

*Was a 3am balcony leap the reason Prince Harry looked a tad under par at the Abbey?
*
As he stood at his brother's side in Westminster Abbey waiting for the bride to arrive, Prince Harry drew more than a few questioning glances.

Despite his smart military uniform, the young Royal appeared a little jaded, with his hair askew and a definite look of someone who had not had enough sleep.

Now a possible answer to the question of why Harry seemed a touch under par on Royal Wedding day has emerged.

Sources have revealed that the best man was out socialising until 3am -- eight hours before the wedding. 

And he is said to have left the party venue with an athletic leap from a balcony which saw him land  awkwardly on one ankle.

The scene of the raucous goings-on was The Goring, the hotel which the Middleton family had taken over in the days before the wedding on Friday, April 29.

On the Thursday evening, a group of the young Royal circle had congregated in a bar there and were enjoying themselves heartily.

The festivities came to an end only at 3am when a young copper-haired reveller casually jumped off a veranda balcony, landing with a clumsy thump on a lawn 6ft below -- to roars of laughter from his friends. 

According to sources, that reveller was the athletic Harry, whose looming day of duty had not stopped him sharing a few drinks with friends.

An onlooker said: 'Harry was with Pippa Middleton and Chelsy Davy among other friends for some pre-wedding drinks. 

'He was the life and soul of the party until the early hours.

'People were surprised to see him there so late before one of the biggest wedding days of the decade, and even more surprised when he jumped off the balcony -- and landed with a thump. 

'He had struggled to climb up the railings to get into position, so when he jumped over the edge he did so rather unsteadily and landed awkwardly next to a flower bed.

'He flinched for just a moment before he stood up, rubbing his ankle. Then he looked up, smiled and waved to a roar of cheers before disappearing on to the lawn where there was a secret exit.

'People were laughing and joking that his fall could have seen him walking through Westminster Abbey the following morning with a broken leg. At one point it was thought he'd twisted his ankle. 

'It was rather foolish but Harry was loving the attention. It was as if he couldn't resist a bit of showing off. Harry used a secret exit on the side of the hotel garden that leads out on to Eaton Lane. 

'He was in the smoking area of the veranda terrace and he decided it would be quicker to jump the 6ft drop rather than go inside and down the stairs.'

Harry then made his way back to Clarence House, just a stone's throw away, to get some shut-eye in the little time he had left until sunrise.

Palace aides said Harry had dined that evening with his brother, Prince Charles and Camilla at Clarence House, but would not be drawn on what Harry got up to when they retired to bed. 

A spokesman said: 'Prince Harry had a private dinner with his brother, Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall. What he did after that is a private matter.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-leap-reason-Harry-looked-tad-par-Abbey.html


----------



## CobaltBlu

what a scamp!!


----------



## gelbergirl

Harry is w-i-l-d
(and I love watching that tongue-wielding video from his childhood, it's the best)


----------



## nastasja

i do hope harry soon grows out of his wild ways. i'd hate to see him go by way of JFK, Jr. (the adventurer who did not understand his own limits)


----------



## serene

*Now Muslim militants target Prince Harry: Outrage after extremists post chilling online hate video*
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384790/Prince-Harry-targeted-extremists.html


----------



## serene

cute picture from the link above 
_Man's best friend: Prince Harry pictured today at a polo tournament, playing with the vet's dog_


----------



## Ejm1059

serene said:


> *Now Muslim militants target Prince Harry: Outrage after extremists post chilling online hate video*
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384790/Prince-Harry-targeted-extremists.html



That's frightening  I hope he's getting major protection


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## labelwhore04

Prince Harry is looking much sexier than William nowadays IMO. Will used to be soo handsome but now he's just looking old and bald. TEAM HARRY


----------



## serene

labelwhore04 said:


> Prince Harry is looking much sexier than William nowadays IMO. Will used to be soo handsome but now he's just looking old and bald. TEAM HARRY



old, bald and married


----------



## serene

Ejm1059 said:


> That's frightening  I hope he's getting major protection



yeah, but I have a feeling that he's not going to like the extra security around him. It means no more extempore bar nights or walking home.


----------



## doreenjoy

serene said:


> old, bald and married


 

Well, the married part doesn't materially change my odds of getting him (which were nil to begin with). 

But I do agree that Harry's looking much hotter these days.


----------



## chantal1922

*So what were Prince Harry and Charlize Theron chuckling about?*
His usual blonde companion is on-off girlfriend Chelsy Davy.

Yesterday Prince Harry appeared  to have found a stand-in at the polo field, in the form of Oscar-winning actress Charlize Theron.

The 26-year-old prince seemed at his ease with the South African Miss Theron, 35.
The pair laughed and joked together at the Audi Challenge Polo Cup at Coworth Park in Ascot, Berkshire.

Perhaps they were talking about charity work - something they have in common.

Harry helped establish Sentebale, in Lesotho, in southern Africa to help orphans and the forgotten victims of poverty and AIDS.

Miss Theron has established her own outreach project to help prevent the spread of HIV among teenagers.  

An onlooker said: &#8216;They appeared to be getting on very well.&#8217;










Source: Daily Mail


----------



## angelnyc89

^In the 1st pic, it doesnt look like Charlize. Wonder if their a couple? 



labelwhore04 said:


> Prince Harry is looking much sexier than William nowadays IMO. Will used to be soo handsome but now he's just looking old and bald. TEAM HARRY



TEAM HARRY!! I think he has always looked better than Will. Will looked cuter when he was younger, but hes going bald, and looks older.


----------



## kirsten

serene said:


> cute picture from the link above
> _Man's best friend: Prince Harry pictured today at a polo tournament, playing with the vet's dog_



What is he doing with his hands?


----------



## kirsten

chantal1922 said:


> *So what were Prince Harry and Charlize Theron chuckling about?*
> His usual blonde companion is on-off girlfriend Chelsy Davy.
> 
> Yesterday Prince Harry appeared  to have found a stand-in at the polo field, in the form of Oscar-winning actress Charlize Theron.
> 
> The 26-year-old prince seemed at his ease with the South African Miss Theron, 35.
> The pair laughed and joked together at the Audi Challenge Polo Cup at Coworth Park in Ascot, Berkshire.
> 
> Perhaps they were talking about charity work - something they have in common.
> 
> Harry helped establish Sentebale, in Lesotho, in southern Africa to help orphans and the forgotten victims of poverty and AIDS.
> 
> Miss Theron has established her own outreach project to help prevent the spread of HIV among teenagers.
> 
> An onlooker said: They appeared to be getting on very well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: Daily Mail



Is it just me or does he look so much like Charles in that first pic?


----------



## kirsten

Prince Harry answers the question everyone is dying to know. lol


----------



## YSoLovely

^^


----------



## chantal1922

lol I can't believe someone asked him that!


----------



## ellacoach

no...someone did not ask him that. OMG!


----------



## doreenjoy

chantal1922 said:


> lol I can't believe someone asked him that!


 
:lolots: 

Military guys, y'know?


----------



## nastasja

OMG!!  (1) Dumb question (2) Rude, much?!


----------



## LovesYSL

OMG is that really Prince Harry? 
That video might have made me laugh...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

love it


----------



## queenofchic

I doubt that that's Prince Harry, but I am floored that someone actually asked that.  Too funny!


----------



## kirsten

LovesYSL said:


> OMG is that really Prince Harry?
> That video might have made me laugh...





queenofchic said:


> I doubt that that's Prince Harry, but I am floored that someone actually asked that.  Too funny!



It's REALLY him! 

It's part of this video that made some headlines naming him a racist. He said "paki" and "raghead" in the video. This video was shot while he was in the army.

There is also a clip where he is talking to his granny on the phone, Queen Elizabeth II. So cute!


----------



## doreenjoy

kirsten said:


> It's REALLY him!
> 
> It's part of this video that made some headlines naming him a racist. He said "paki" and "raghead" in the video. This video was shot while he was in the army.


 
Yep, no doubt it's him. He was always pretty "rough and tough" in the candid shots they have of him in service, so it's not big surprise to me.


----------



## oonik

kirsten said:


> It's REALLY him!
> 
> It's part of this video that made some headlines naming him a racist. He said "paki" and "raghead" in the video. This video was shot while he was in the army.
> 
> *There is also a clip where he is talking to his granny on the phone, Queen Elizabeth II. So cute!*




I wanna see that !


----------



## kirsten

oonik said:


> I wanna see that !



It's in the latest video I attached.


----------



## oonik

DUH ! LOL !  Sorry, I totally mixed up the 2 videos !


----------



## kirsten

No worries! They look like they would be the same video.


----------



## minababe

scotland yard told today that harry is in danger. he had no privacy but from now on he can't go clubbin or shopping alone anymore.
al kaida published a video where they show harry as a attack target because of his army mission in afghanistan


----------



## serene

I wonder if it was harry who just got married would he still be able to go to his honeymoon?


----------



## BadRomance93

Kelly Ripa told Regis today that he's "Wild about Harry", Kelly, girl, I know you're a lurker. 

Post your YSL collection sometime!


----------



## caitlin1214

I'm Just Wild About Harry is a song written in 1921. 


I used it for the title of this thread because I remember Michigan J. Frog singing and dancing to it. 



. . . . Although I'd be curious to see Kelly Ripa's collection, too.


----------



## kirsten

_Prince Harry leaving da club. Yeah, Eugenie was there too... whatever._

Looks like Prince Harry is still living up to his wild ways.

On Friday night, he was spotted leaving Public nightclub in London &#8212; with a stained shirt. While it&#8217;s unknown what happened (maybe someone spilled a drink on him?), he looked frazzled as he got into a car with his friends. Though Harry, 26, has an on-again, off-again girlfriend Chelsy Davy, she wasn&#8217;t present. Perhaps Harry just needed a boys night out.

For a nightclub facing the loss of its licence because of the rowdy behaviour of its patrons, it is perhaps not the best publicity. Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie were photographed looking dishevelled as they left Public in Chelsea with conspicuous drinks stains on their clothes.
As he made his way at 2.30am to a car waiting outside the nightspot co-owned by his friend Guy Pelly, the 26-year-old Prince was almost unrecognisable from his elegant appearance as best man at his brother Prince William&#8217;s royal wedding.

Accompanied by four protection officers, his blue shirt was stained down one of his sleeves. The mini-dress worn by his 21-year-old cousin, who had two bodyguards, was also splattered by drink.

Howard Spooner, Public&#8217;s co-owner, announced this month that it would appeal against a licensing panel&#8217;s decision to reduce its opening hours after complaints from neighbours about lewd behaviour in the street.

The nightspot, which opened in December, will be required to close at midnight and have its customers off the premises by 12.30am. Mark Daley, a former councillor, told the hearing at Kensington Town Hall in London: &#8220;I have had complaints that people were doing some very unpleasant things including having sex, vomiting, urinating and defecating.


----------



## CobaltBlu

i am sure the girls who love bad boy princes are swooning over this. What a little cutie pie.


----------



## doreenjoy

He has this rep as being such a wild partier. but he doesn't look inebriated in the slightest in those pics. 

He's grown into quite a hottie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

I agree, he just looks like a rascal!!


----------



## Nat

He's cute


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Yes, he is


----------



## queennadine




----------



## Ejm1059

Prince Harry has admitted that he is a single man again but says he has no plans to start dating  and has ruled out getting together with Pippa Middleton.

Harry, who has gone through several high-profile splits from girlfriend Chelsy Davy  most recently last month  said he is too busy to go out with anyone at the moment.

The 26-year-old took time out from his duties as an Apache attack helicopter pilot to attend the Hard Rock Calling concert at Hyde Park, London, on Friday night, where he chatted happily with guests backstage.

And despite rumours that he has struck up a close rapport with the Duchess of Cambridges younger sister since the Royal Wedding in April, Harry said their friendship was strictly platonic.

Pippa? Ha! No, I am not seeing anyone at the moment. Im 100 per cent single, Harry told guests at the Live Nation VIP lounge.

Im working a lot at the moment, so dating and watching TV are the last things I have time for.

Harry also revealed he hopes to enjoy a trip to South Africa this summer. I am hoping to get a holiday in August. I havent been to South Africa in a long time, so maybe Ill go there.

At the concert, the Prince watched The Killers.

He was also seen partying with his cousins, Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice  at one point they all joined the cast of TV show Glee at the Absolute Radio studio, alongside the main stage.

Afterwards, Harry headed to the VIP Hard Rock Cafe restaurant for burgers, chips and mojitos.

A source says: Harry spent much of the meal deep in conversation with a group of girls, including an American blonde.

They were discussing his brother and Kates forthcoming trip to the United States  Harry said he thought they will get along famously there because the Americans are receptive and love confident people.

Later, he and some friends were driven to a party at Beaufont House, Chelsea.

****************************************

While Harry says he is concentrating fully on his duties as a pilot, the Prince has been urged to switch careers, and become a polo player.

Argentine Gonzalito Pieres, who is ranked the No&#8201;2 player in the world, says Harry has what it takes and should turn professional.

Harry is very good  it is a waste to see him just play exhibition charity matches, said Gonzalito, 28, at the Rolex polo lunch at Coworth Park, Berkshire.

There would be many professional teams that would take him. He would be a valuable player.

Gonzalito also praised Prince Charles, saying: He was very good. My father played with him.

However, Prince William, who has also been known to enjoy a chukka, should stick to his day job, says Gonzalito.

William is an OK player, but he is a little slow and too cautious to make it as a professional, he added.


----------



## kirsten

He's single.


----------



## kirsten

Whether he is hitting the clubs with his royal family, chatting up the ladies, or fighting the Taliban with the British Army, Prince Harry is a versatile, and fearless, man. In the new BBC documentary, Harry&#8217;s Arctic Heroes, we see Prince Harry in yet another role: conquering the below freezing ice sheets of the Arctic with fellow servicemen.

It turns out that back in March, while big bro Prince William was preparing for a wedding, Prince Harry took sometime off to join a group of injured servicemen on a 160-mile journey to the North Pole. The journey raised money for the Walking With The Wounded charity, a charity close to the heart of many on the team who suffered serious injuries (including loss of limbs and paralysis) while serving.

Prince Harry joined the team for a total of ten days, three of which were spent on the ice. He was able to complete 30-miles of the total 160-mile trek with the team, before duty called him back. Those few days on the ice were no walk in the park; in fact, the Prince almost lost his ears when he gets frostbit as a result of the severe temperatures. In the program, the Prince recalls the incident:

&#8220;I was happily here chatting and then Inge came over and said, &#8216;Your ears! Your ears!&#8217; Apparently they went while quite quickly.&#8221;

According to the Daily Mail, Prince Harry also admits in the program that he didn&#8217;t tell the Queen about the mission beforehand, and claims that &#8220;My grandparents and the rest of the family probably think I&#8217;m completely mad.&#8221;


----------



## bisousx

I die


----------



## LADC_chick

Well, Prince Harry has touched down stateside, and will be doing military training in California.

Prince Harry Arrives in El Centro


----------



## alouette

^F-I-L was at same restaurant as Harry last night.  Chatted w/ his security a bit.
We're heading on vacay to same location on Monday so maybe we'll bump into him.   Ha!


----------



## Sloane_Ranger

I can't stand him. He come off as someone who is very arrogant but tries to hide it. You can see it in his body language, and this is coming from someone who has seen him in real life. 

Never mind his womanising ways. Personally I can't stand him.


----------



## Nat

Harry on a Harley... look away, Charles: Prince dons a red bandana and aviator shades, then hits Arizona highway on a £11,000 classic bike


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hits-Arizona-highway-11-000-classic-bike.html

They are pictures certain to gladden the hearts of Prince Harrys female fans.
Looking tanned, fit and macho, the Prince jumped on a classic Harley-Davidson motorbike on Friday and roared off across the Arizona desert.
One person unlikely to be impressed  by his exploits, however, is his father Prince Charles, who doesnt share his sons' passion for motorbikes. Harry owns a Ducati 848 and a classic Triumph, and Prince William a Ducati 1198. But Charles admitted last year: 'I hate motorbikes. My sons are interested in them. I can't even get my balance on them.'

Our photos of Harry show the 27-year-old thrill-seeker looking every inch the Easy Rider as he hit the road on the £11,000 bike capable of 110mph.

But unlike the 1969 counter-culture movie  starring Jack Nicholson, Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper as freewheeling hippies riding customised  Harleys on a lone odyssey across the US  Harry was accompanied by a security entourage as he embarked on his weekend road trip.


----------



## Nat

My indispensable grandpa, by Prince Harry: The young royal pays tribute to the Duke of Edinburgh

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ince-Philip-Duke-Edinburgh.html#ixzz1l43wn3P4

Prince Harry has said he does not believe the Queen can now carry out her public duties without the Duke of Edinburgh by her side.
In an interview to mark her Diamond Jubilee, the prince pays tribute to his 85-year-old grandmothers stoicism and sense of duty.
But he makes it clear that none of her achievements would have been possible without the unswerving support of her 90-year-old husband.
Regardless of whether my grandfather seems to be doing his own thing, sort of wandering off like a fish down the river, the fact that hes there  personally, I dont think that she could do it without him, especially when theyre both at this age, he says.

Harrys astute comments on the strength of the couples remarkable 64-year marriage are all the more poignant as they were made before 90-year-old Prince Philips heart scare over Christmas. After developing severe chest pains, he was admitted to hospital where a stent was fitted to clear a blocked coronary artery. He spent four nights under observation and has since been recuperating at Sandringham, his wifes Norfolk estate, as well as carrying out a limited number of public engagements.

Harrys remark was made in an interview with broadcaster Andrew Marr for the documentary Diamond Queen, to be shown on BBC1 on Monday, which is the 60th anniversary of the death of George VI and his daughters accession to the throne.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Thanks for posting this!!! 
the price seems low for that bike though 



Nat said:


> Harry on a Harley... look away, Charles: Prince dons a red bandana and aviator shades, then hits Arizona highway on a £11,000 classic bike
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hits-Arizona-highway-11-000-classic-bike.html
> 
> They are pictures certain to gladden the hearts of Prince Harrys female fans.
> Looking tanned, fit and macho, the Prince jumped on a classic Harley-Davidson motorbike on Friday and roared off across the Arizona desert.
> One person unlikely to be impressed  by his exploits, however, is his father Prince Charles, who doesnt share his sons' passion for motorbikes. Harry owns a Ducati 848 and a classic Triumph, and Prince William a Ducati 1198. But Charles admitted last year: 'I hate motorbikes. My sons are interested in them. I can't even get my balance on them.'
> 
> Our photos of Harry show the 27-year-old thrill-seeker looking every inch the Easy Rider as he hit the road on the £11,000 bike capable of 110mph.
> 
> But unlike the 1969 counter-culture movie  starring Jack Nicholson, Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper as freewheeling hippies riding customised  Harleys on a lone odyssey across the US  Harry was accompanied by a security entourage as he embarked on his weekend road trip.


----------



## Bag*Snob

It looks like a 2003 Anniversary bike so the price may be accurate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Belle49

He's so yummy lol


----------



## Nat

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...ances-street-Belize-Diamond-Jubilee-tour.html

Party Prince reporting for duty! Harry dances in the street in Belize as part of Diamond Jubilee tour

His private secretary boasted Prince Harry would bring his 'own brand of enthusiasm' to his Diamond Jubilee tour of Central America and the Caribbean.

And the fun-loving royal certainly proved him right, as he had a ball knocking back drinks and dancing with the locals in Belize tonight.
It was the first day of his week-long tour of Commonwealth countries in the region, which is also his first solo overseas trip representing his grandmother, and he approached the situation with gusto.

The 27-year-old must have burned more than a few calories as he cavorted with a spirited middle-aged lady during the celebrations.
He twisted and jived around the dance floor as the unlikely couple showed off some of their best moves during the Jubilee Block Party in Balmopan.
And by the end of the song even the super-fit Army officer would have felt like a drink to quench his thirst.

His Royal Highness certainly did that with some relish, and was seen sampling a dazzling array of spirits and cocktails as he enjoyed the local hospitality.

The celebrations followed a ceremony for the newly named HM Queen Elizabeth II Boulevard, where the Prince delivered a message to the people from his grandmother.


----------



## exotikittenx

Lol I love it!  He is so genuine and fun.


----------



## chantal1922

Fun times!


----------



## gsmom

I don't know if anyone else has been following his tour around the Carribean, but it has been fun to watch. This is a clip of an interview (or part of it) that he gave to CBS News. Considering how infrequently he speaks with the press, one on one, this is a rarity and interesting to watch.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57396064/prince-harry-on-emotional-coming-of-age-tour/?tag=morningLeadStoriesAreaMain%3BthisMorningLeadHero


----------



## caitlin1214

Prince Harry Pokes Fun at Brother Prince William in Brazil

So which prince was running in the Brazilian heat? 

Prince Harry goofily donned a mask of his brother Prince William as he took part in a mile-long fun-run Saturday. 

He was given it by another runner among a group who'd decided to don royal masks, and he flipped it on during the six-minute run.


Rest of the article here:

http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20395222_20577605,00.html


----------



## meluvs2shop

love him!


----------



## exotikittenx

Lol that mask is so funny!


----------



## flashy.stems

harry is the king of my world  so hot!


----------



## doreenjoy

Any news reports on Harry's secret FB page?


----------



## chantal1922

^^I have not heard anything.


----------



## doreenjoy

chantal1922 said:
			
		

> ^^I have not heard anything.



I heard he posted nude photos of himself...


----------



## Llisa

Love this thread! Love him!


----------



## Nat

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ay-brain-injury-charity-visit-Nottingham.html

Getting some practice in? Uncle-to-be Harry changes a nappy with one hand as he visits brain injury charity with James Cracknell

He is about to become an uncle for the first time - but William and Kate might not want to let him near their little one quite yet.
Asked to tackle the tricky task of changing a baby's nappy with one hand today, Prince Harry didn't exactly pass the test with flying colours.
The Prince, who admitted he had never even changed a nappy with two hands before, was given the challenge when he visited a charity that helps people with brain injuries.
Fortunately for all concerned Harry was only practising on a plastic doll - which was probably just as well, considering that grabbing babies by one leg to flip them over on to their front is not normally accepted childcare practice.


----------



## gelbergirl

His visit to the US has been great!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BagLovingMom

Oh he's so fabulous!


----------



## buzzytoes

An acquaintance of mine is singing the anthem for the Warrior Games - not sure if she gets to meet him or not but he will be in attendance. Talk about pressure!


----------



## PJ86

Harry and his girlfriend Cressida went to a wedding this past weekend and took the train home.

She is grabbing her crotch in all the pics at the train station.  Did her zipper break, or does  she have crabs like all the commenters on the article were making?

It is an odd series of photos, she doesn't stop grabbing her crotch.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...y-Cressida-Bonas-dress-return-home-train.html


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

It looks like she's holding her pant legs up. She's cute. She looks so young. How old is she?


----------



## PJ86

That's not a normal place women grab to hold up their pants.  Why she chose there, and in front of cameras, I am at a loss.


----------



## PJ86

Oops, forgot to add.  She is 24.  She is very young looking.  She will love it as she ages though


----------



## tangowithme

Harry seems to have a wonderful way with children, he's a natural. He'll be a fun uncle for Will and Kate's baby.


----------



## ellieroma

It's nice that he seems to have found someone. I always feel sorry for him being the third wheel at events, having to walk on his own behind Wills and Kate. Cressida does look very young, and 24 seems a bit too young to be settling down, especially when that means marrying into the Royal family. If they really are for keeps, i can't see Harry marrying until he's into his 30s. 

On a fashion note, though, that's 2 weddings Cressida's been to recently and she hasn't worn hat to either of them. As a hat lover, that makes me kinda sad.


----------



## ebonyone

She is grabbing her pants leg not her crotch the pants are too big, It has been said on another site she is wearing Harry's clothes.


----------



## Encore Hermes

Omg thanks!! I don't know how I missed it!


----------



## Sasha2012

Just Jared

2013 Boodles Boxing Ball held on Saturday evening (September 21) at the Grosvenor House Hotel in London, England.


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2013/09/27/prince-harry-mapaction-reception-for-charity/

Prince Harry shares a laugh with a guest while attending the MapAction Reception held at the Royal Society on Thursday (September 26) in London, England.

The 29-year-old royal stepped out to support the organization, which delivers vital information in mapped form to disaster-aid agencies after catastrophes.

MapAction harnesses technology to a powerful volunteer ethos, Harry says on the charitys website. They are a real asset to the humanitarian cause. Im proud to be their patron.


----------



## Chanel522

I adore Harry!  He has that mischievous look in his eyes all the time.  So cute...


----------



## Nathalya

^agree


----------



## leeann

Harry kinda reminds me of beavis when he smiles!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2013/10/05/prince-harry-international-fleet-review-in-sydney/

Prince Harry is a handsome gentleman while attending the 2013 International Fleet Review on Saturday (October 5) in Sydney, Australia.

The 29-year-old royal is scheduled to participate in the fleet review during his two-day visit to celebrate the 100 year anniversary of the Royal Australian Navys fleet arriving in Sydney. Over 50 ships will participate in the review at Sydney Harbour.

The day before, Harry donned a suit while arriving at his hotel in Sydney.

Last week, Harry was dapper while attending the MapAction Reception in London, England.


----------



## robotindisguise

He's supposed to be here in my city today, but no idea where/what he is doing here! lol. Would've loved to have seen him.

Just sounds like it's a meeting with our state premier (who is horrid btw)


----------



## Avril

Harry and Cressida have split up:

http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20395222_20811770,00.html



> Prince Harry and his girlfriend Cressida Bonas have broken up, a source confirms to PEOPLE.
> 
> After dating for nearly two years, Harry, 29, recently confided in friends that things were not going well with the 24-year-old beauty.
> 
> "He found her too needy and it just wasn't working out," says a source close to the prince.
> 
> But another source, who is close to the couple, says the breakup was "amicable."
> 
> "It's very sad but they have decided to split up," the second source tells PEOPLE. "This is an amicable decision and they are very much still the best of friends but they have decided to go their separate ways."
> 
> The source adds that Cressida wants to concentrate on her career and they are hoping that they will not be "hounded" now that the news has emerged.
> 
> The couple were introduced by Princess Eugenie, a close friend of Bonas, who recently completed a postgraduate program in dance studies at London's Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance. But they had always tried to keep their relationship out of the spotlight.
> 
> Recently, though, the couple had been seen out and about, enjoying dinner dates, and Cressida  known as Cressy to her friends  even attended her first official event last month, supporting Prince Harry as he gave a speech at the launch of WE Day, a charity event for Free the Children at Wembley Arena.
> 
> On Tuesday, Harry met with wounded service personnel hoping to take part in the Invictus Games, which he will launch this fall. Meanwhile, Cressida was spotted picking a healthy takeout from a juice bar.


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2014/05/18...memorative-event-in-italy-after-estonia-trip/

Prince Harry shares a touching moment with a member of the New Zealand Air Force during the Polish Commemoration service Ceremony on Sunday (May 18) in Monte Cassino, Italy.

The 29-year-old royal is expected to attend a number of events commemorating the Allied Campaign during WWII, focusing on the 70th anniversary of the Battle of Monte Cassino during his two-day official visit.

The day before, Harry donned his army uniform while visiting troops participating in the Spring Storm NATO military exercises in Kanepi, Estonia.


----------



## berrydiva

I don't know when Harry became hot but he's a hottie.


----------



## Sasha2012

He's famously got an eye for the ladies but Prince Harry looked less at ease when confronted by an enormous bull during a visit to the Suffolk County Show in Ipswich this afternoon.

But nothing daunted, the royal carried on chatting to its owner - even when the Red Poll began beadily rolling its eyes. Luckily for Harry, the rest of the animals at the showground proved less intimidating, with the prince even stretching out a tentative hand to stroke one cow.

Later, he was shown around the sheep pens and in true Prince Harry style, stopped off to pose for a photo with an excited young fan and his flock of prize-winning sheep.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...lty-shoot-children-Suffolk.html#ixzz337pyj52i


----------



## nastasja

Haha, that pic of the mom taking a picture of Harry with her kid...she's cropping out half of the kid's face.


----------



## Chanel522

I absolutely adore Prince Harry &#10084;!!!


----------



## Swanky

*Party boy Harry's VERY merry wedding weekend: A lost wallet and  phone. Asleep at the bar at 6am. Two all-nighters - and a mystery  brunette...*



*Prince partied at the secluded five-star Chateau Bela hotel in Slovakia*
*Attended wedding of friends* *Alexander Mavros and Alexandra von Krockow*
*Was said to have spent most of the evening downing cocktails 
*
*His ex-girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, 28, was among the 250 guests at event*
*Reportedly remained at her side for most of the weekend 
*

If you thought his party-loving  days were over &#8211; think again. Prince Harry attended an aristocratic  friend&#8217;s wedding where hotel staff say he fell asleep at the bar and  lost his wallet and iPhone.
The  Prince celebrated the wedding at the secluded, five-star Chateau Bela  hotel in Slovakia, where for two nights he downed cocktails, was seen  flirting with a mystery brunette and stayed up until 6am.
Harry&#8217;s  ex-girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, 28, was among the guests, and reportedly  remained at his side for most of the weekend as well as splashing around  with him in a swimming pool.






Carrying on till morning: The picture, taken by a  person at the wedding in Slovakia, shows the Prince, at about 6am, as  he appears to be following the mystery brunette, who is wearing a  flowing, dark-green skirt and a sleeveless black top

Our exclusive picture,  taken by a person at the wedding, shows the Prince, at about 6am, as he  appears to be following the mystery brunette, who is wearing a flowing,  dark-green skirt and a sleeveless black top.
In  the grainy image, Harry, 29, who had his white shirt hanging out, seems  to gesture at another young woman to join him and the unidentified  brunette.

 In other photographs seen by  The Mail on Sunday, the Prince was pictured talking to the two women  while three male guests stand around and three others sit drinking and  smoking at white tables on the hotel grounds. 

The  Prince was attending the wedding of his friends Alexander Mavros, 34,  and Alexandra von Krockow, 29, earlier this month near Sturovo, 100  miles east of the capital Bratislava.




Conversation: Prince Harry (right in white shirt) is seen talking to two women at the party

He was among 250 guests who included business tycoons as well as members of some of the most aristocratic families of Europe.
After  arriving at the hotel on Friday afternoon, the Prince spent the early  evening enjoying a barbecue accompanied by local gipsy music.
The  Prince and his friends then went into the hotel&#8217;s main oak-panelled  bar, and ordered rounds of Bloody Mary cocktails and rum and Coke.
A waiter, who didn&#8217;t want to be named, said: &#8216;The bar was open all night, and they just ordered Bloody
Marys, ten, 11, at a time. It was so busy. Harry also liked rum and Coke, and he ordered vodka as well.&#8217;
Following  the first night of partying, reports appeared in Slovakian newspaper  Novy Cas &#8211; which published the main picture above &#8211; and in the Hungarian  newspaper Borsonline.hu. They claimed that the Prince fell asleep in  front of a bus at the hotel and in the bar.
When  asked if Harry fell asleep at the bar in the early hours of Saturday  morning, a barman replied &#8216;yes&#8217;, and then quickly changed the subject.
Following  the wedding on Saturday, Harry and his friends danced and drank until  late at night. When they left a salon room, Harry forgot his wallet and  iPhone on a table.
Luckily,  waiter Stephan Csonto, found them and returned them to him after rifling  through the wallet and finding Harry&#8217;s name on his HSBC bank card.
He said: &#8216;When I returned it to the Prince he was happy and thanked me and shook my hand.
&#8216;I knew it was Harry&#8217;s as I had seen him with the same wallet before. He puts it on the table when he sits down.
&#8216;He  told us that the best thing about the wedding was that he could be  himself, and nobody bothered him because he was Prince Harry.
Mr Csonto continued: &#8216;He was so funny. He drank a bit during the wedding, but they all drank.
&#8216;The  English, they like to drink at parties. But he was having such a good  time. He also told us he had never been to Slovakia before. He spent a  lot of time with Chelsy, but they seemed to be good friends,&#8217; he added.  The main bar closed at 6am, and Harry and some other guests, including  Ms Davy, went into the front courtyard of the hotel.





Still the party prince: Harry and friends at the  marriage ceremony of Alexander Mavros and Alexandra von Krockow, up  until dawn at the hotel

A barman added: &#8216;I was about to drive off, and Harry was out in the grounds with friends.
&#8216;He  then jumped in front of my car with his arms stretched, shouting,  &#8220;Arghh.&#8221; He then told me, &#8220;Don&#8217;t go, don&#8217;t go!&#8221; It was funny. His  handprint is still on my windscreen.&#8217;
Brunch for the guests was served at 11am on Sunday, after which everyone gradually departed.
It  is believed that London-based Mr Mavros, a scion of a Zimbabwean  jewellery dynasty, has been friends with the Prince for about three  years.
Harry caught a Ryanair flight from Bratislava on Sunday afternoon, bound for Luton.
The bride&#8217;s mother, Countess Von Krockow, said yesterday: &#8216;Harry had a good time.
&#8216;Of course people were a bit tipsy at the wedding &#8211; that&#8217;s what happens.&#8217;
The  47-room Hotel Chateau Bela is one of Slovakia&#8217;s most famous historic  hotels.  Once the seat of the von Krockows, it is still owned by the  family. 
Prince Harry stayed in a standard en suite double room on the first floor, costing about £90.
Buckingham Palace refused to comment about the wedding weekend, as it was a personal matter.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-nighters-mystery-brunette.html#ixzz35NfFzb2l 
​


----------



## sdkitty

He's a cutie.  When they were kids, I thought William was better looking but now that Will has aged a bit and lost a lot of his hair, Harry is the hottie.


----------



## Nathalya

I agree + he has a very nice smile


----------



## Swanky

He's definitely cuter. . .  and he's so naughty!


----------



## Swanky

*Prince William Receives Amazing Birthday Gift From Queen Elizabeth: A Helicopter! *





*Prince Harry*  flashes his winning smile atop his horse at a charity polo match at  Beaufort Polo Club on Sunday afternoon (June 22) in Tetbury, England.
 The 29-year-old royal was joined by his older brother, *Prince William*, who also played in the match that afternoon.
*Prince William* celebrated his 32nd birthday the day before, and reportedly, received quite the large gift from his grandmother, *Queen Elizabeth II*.
 The Queen leased a 2008 Agusta A109S Grand helicopter for* Prince William* and his wife *Kate Middleton*, E! News reports. The ride has been dubbed &#8220;Heirforce One,&#8221; and will feature the Queen&#8217;s crest on the side.


----------



## Chanel522

Swanky Mama Of Three said:


> He's definitely cuter. . .  and he's so naughty!




Yes!!  That makes him even cuter!! &#128521;


----------



## Swanky

*Too late Harry, England are already out! By amazing coincidence, Prince arrives in Brazil to begin a week-long tour of South America *



*Prince Harry is beginning a week-long tour of Brazil and Chile*
*Looked tired following a 15-hour flight but chatted happily to locals*
*Toured the Rede Sarah hospital which treats people with brain injuries*
*Joined patients for a canoeing trip on Brasilia's Paranoá Lake
*
*Will watch Brazil vs Cameroon tonight at the Estádio Nacional de Brasilia*
*Travels to Belo Horizonte tomorrow for England's final World Cup match*
  He spent  last week enjoying the races at Ascot but Prince Harry was back on duty  today as he met a little boy at a hospital in the Brazilian capital.
The prince, who is starting a week-long tour of Brazil and Chile, was at  the Rede Sarah hospital which treats patients with brain injuries and  other neurological problems.
Despite looking a little bleary-eyed following a 15-hour flight from London, Harry was on typically chatty form as he met patients.





All smiles: A little boy gets a hug from Prince Harry during his visit to the Rede Sarah hospital in Brasilia







Prince Charming: Harry makes a little girl burst into delighted giggles during a visit to the Rede Sarah hospital   

The Brasilia branch of the Sarah network of rehabilitation hospitals, of  which there are 10 in Brazil, the medical centre specialises in rehabilitating  the victims of serious brain injuries.

During the tour, the prince stopped to watch a group battling it out on  court as they played wheelchair basketball and true to form, couldn't resist getting involved.
 
After around 10 minutes, play was stopped and the prince sat down for a chat - as well as a photo or two - with patients.

Sitting among the group of wheelchair-users, Harry put his arm round one small boy who smiled delightedly at the attention.
Later, the prince showed himself to be a dab hand when it comes to charming the ladies, leaving a little girl giggling helplessly during a chat.
 





Can't resist: Although Harry didn't fancy playing he couldn't resist joining in and doing a spot of refereeing


 




Prince Popular: It seems that everyone wanted to get a picture with a smiling Prince Harry
Chatty man: Although Harry was too tired to play, the Prince was keen to talk to all the basketball players 





 
Team player: Although Harry had been on a 15-hour flight he was quite happy to meet all of the patients

And when, at the end of his tour, he got a chance to go canoeing, the sporty prince simply couldn't resist and  mucked in with other canoeists, all of whom were patients at the  hospital, as they took to the water.

Beaming broadly, Harry then hopped into a bright yellow canoe  for a paddle on Lake Paranoá, the second largest  man-made water course in Brazil.
The trip to the hospital was his first stop on his tour of Brazil and  Chile, which will later see him join the crowds at the Estádio Nacional  de Brasilia for the Group A World Cup match between the hosts and  Cameroon.
Tomorrow, Harry will travel to Belo Horizonte, the southeastern city that will be Team GB's base for the 2016 Olympic Games.
While there, he will tour training facilities for the UK's Olympic and  Paralympic athletes before taking in his second match in two days -  England's dead rubber game against Costa Rica at the Estádio Mineirão.





 
Forgotten your trunks? Unfortunately Harry had to stay on dry land at the pool at Rede Sarah Hospital 






 

Friendly face: Harry was seen joking with patients and members of staff at the hospital  


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2665991/Hes-real-prince-hearts-A-bleary-eyed-Prince-Harry-wins-locals-meets-disabled-children-Brasilia.html#ixzz35VJ6DcYD


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Swanky

*Harry's tears for Brazil's orphans: Prince almost breaks down  hearing children's heartbreaking plight - and tells them the loss of his  mother was 'nothing' compared to their suffering *



*Prince spoke at party honoring Queen Elizabeth II's official birthday at British Consulate in* *São Paulo*
*Said he **was reduced me to tears by local children's tales 
*
*Added that smiles on their faces showed positive impact their community is  having on them*
*Said he wanted to share his experience but 'no point' as it's 'so far removed'*
*Rarely speaks about tragic death of his mother, Princess Diana
*
*The party was attended by the mayor of the city as well as Victoria's Secret model Alessandra Ambrosio 
*
*Earlier in the day he visited a centre for underprivileged children and played a game of football with the boys and girls 
*
*Earlier he visited the Atlantic Rainforest 
*
*He learnt about efforts to preserve the eco system*
*Got to work in hot conditions planting a tree*
*He joked about royal life: 'Planting trees - it's what we do'*
 
Prince Harry has described how he was  reduced to tears by the moving stories of young Brazilian children who  have lost a parent to drugs, violence or prison.
 The prince also told how he wanted to  share his experience of losing his mother after being told about two  sisters being cared for by their grandmother as their drug-dealing  father was in jail and their mother had been murdered.
 Harry met the sisters and their  grandmother on Wednesday during a visit to Acer - the Association for  Support of Children at Risk  to help underprivileged children in Diadema near Sao Paulo.






Moved: Speaking at a reception to mark the  Queen's official birthday, Prince Harry said he had been moved to tears  by many of the children's tales

 In a speech at a reception late last  night in Sao Paulo to mark the Queens official birthday Harry said:  'Some of the childrens stories in Diadema have reduced me to tears, but  the smiles on their faces show the positive impact their community is  having on them and the success of Acer.' 

During his visit to Acer Harry  learned how Cristina da Cruz Nascimento has struggled to bring up her  granddaughters Karina, eight, and Carolina, nine, and is also caring for  her great niece Kettelyn, three, because her mother is a drug addict in  Sao Paulos infamous Cracolandia - 'Crackland'. 

Harry  said after meeting the family: 'There are two little girls - I'm quite  emotional - just looking at them I wanted to talk about my own  experiences. But there is no point because it is just so far removed.'

Sombre: In his moving speech, Harry said: 'Some  of the children's stories in Diadema have reduced me to tears, but the  smiles on their faces show the positive impact their community is having  on them and the success of Acer'

  While he rarely speaks about the tragic loss of his mother, Princess Diana, he added: 'The  bravery of them looking at me, smiling at me... I wanted to use my own  experiences in a very small way to try to give them a bit of  understanding about the fact (that) I see what you're going through.

'But you hear the stories and think that's nothing to what they have been through.'
The prince  met the sisters and their grandmother during his visit to Acer - the  Association for Support of Children at Risk - a project run by Briton  Jonathan Hannay.

Mr Hannay, son of the diplomat Sir David  Hannay, said he founded Acer in 1993 after first working with children  while a student at Columbia University in New York in 1990.

  Encounter: Prince Harry meets Brazilian TV personality Sabrina Sato at the Sao Paulo reception




Celebrity: Ms Sato, who has appeared in the  Brazilian version of Playboy magazine, wore a cream dress and towering  Christian Louboutin heels as she chatted with the prince
Harry chats to Ms Sato, who said she had invited the prince to attend the city's carnival in February

One of its projects is to help children with no parents by reuniting them with members of their extended family.

After  the visit Harry said: 'I was completely overwhelmed and shocked. I've  never blubbed in public as far as I can remember but I was pretty damn  close. It was amazing to hear those stories.'
The prince will visit the notorious area later today as his tour of Brazil comes to an end.
 Harry will tour the area with the  Mayor of Sao Paulo, Fernando Haddad, and the Chief Inspector of the  Metropolitan Police, who will explain how they have adopted a policy of  providing housing, food and work for addicts in a bid to tackle the drug  problem.
 Harrys final engagement will take  him to the Ayrton Senna Institute where members of the former Formula  One racing drivers family will show him around the organisation that  uses education to fight social exclusion and inequality.  





Sharing his experience: The prince also told how  he wanted to share his experience of losing his mother after hearing  tales of young girls being raised by their grandmother

 After spending a day playing soccer  with underprivileged children and planting trees in the rainforest,  Prince Harry's tour of Brazil ventured back to the city of Sao Paulo  where he hobnobbed at a party in honor of his grandmother Queen  Elizabeth II's official birthday last night.

 Though the Queen's actually birthday  is in April, the official celebration takes place every year on a  Saturday in June. This year's official celebration took place on June  14, and British Ambassador to Brazil Alex Ellis decided to continue the  celebrations during Harry's visit to the country this week.
The  reception held at the British Consulate was attended by such  dignitaries as mayor of Sao Paulo Fernando Haddad as well as Brazilian  celebrities like Victoria's Secret model Alessandra Ambrosio and television personality Sabrina Sato, 33.
Ms  Sato, who has appeared in the Brazilian version of Playboy magazine,  wore a cream dress and towering Christian Louboutin heels as she chatted  with the prince.

Prince  Harry also got to meet Sao Paulo's oldest British community member,  102-year-old Gertrude Viger, and he was even picked kicking around a  soccer ball in the reception hall.  






Are you sure you want to wear that? The prince greets a boy in England kit
 Support a winning team: Perhaps the boys wishes he'd worn Brazilian kit like Harry






Badly tackled? The prince needs to give him a hand after he's suffered a fall
 Helping hand: The royal gets the young footballer back on his feet






Bend it like Wales: The prince enjoys the kickabout

 Only English footballer still playing in Brazil: Last night he watched as England were knocked out of the World Cup







Serious side: The prince was all smiles during the game but said the visit was a moving experience
 Many of the children at the centre have lost a parent like Harry
 Admiration: Harry said the children he met were very brave







Welcome: A fan takes the prince's picture as he arrives


----------



## Swanky

CONT. . . 


Earlier on yesterday, the prince visited the jungle to support a conservation project.
Dressed  in blue jeans and a grey shirt, the prince, 29, visited the  Atlantic  Rainforest that surrounds the city of São Paulo to learn about  their  efforts to preserve the eco system.
The forest  has been described as an extraordinary cultural and  historical resource  with hundreds of trees and thousands of plant  species.

An  initiative led by the Brazilian government is trying to re-house  some  communities that live in the area to help protect the rainforest  and  allow new saplings to be planted.

Harry wasn't afraid to get stuck in and helped plant some trees himself, working up a sweat in the humid environment.
When  he was asked if he was enjoying himself, he joked about life as a  royal  saying with a wry smile: 'Planting trees - it's what we do.'

Harry  was helping residents from the settlement of Cota, located within  the  Atlantic rainforest on a steep hill overlooking the port of  Santos,  plant trees to replace those lost due to urban development and  to  protect the homes from mudslides.





Jungle visit: Harry arrived in the scenic surroundings of Atlantic Rainforest today






Popular guest: The prince was greeted by villagers and those who support the rainforest eco project





Let's dig: The prince was happy to get to work  helping to plant a sapling 





For me? A local girl hands Harry a sign to display with the tree he plants






Conservationist: The prince gets stuck in planting the tree





Humid conditions: The effort in the warm climate meant Harry worked up quite a sweat






Good job: The prince delicately places the sapling in the hole he dug





Here's another one: The prince joked that planting trees was all part of royal life

    He was joined by villagers and children who seemed delighted by the royal presence.
He was happy to pose for pictures in the scenic setting before moving on to help paint a wall at one of the villager's homes.
He showed off is artistic talent by doing some stencil painting. 

He  was then rewarded for his efforts with the chance to try some  Brazilian  cuisine. He joined Brazilian chef David Hertz, who runs a not  for  profit organisation that uses cooking to improve the lives of   disadvantaged people, at a cooking demonstration.

He did not try his hand at being a cook but sampled the dish caponata, made from bananas.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-mother-compared-suffering.html#ixzz35mj7nArshttp://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail


----------



## Sasha2012

His sunny brand of charm saw him mobbed by excited crowds in Brazil and now Prince Harry has claimed a new conquest - Chile's president, Michelle Bachelet.

The veteran stateswoman and the country's first female head of state was all smiles as she welcomed Harry to the La Moneda palace in Santiago.

Harry himself looked equally thrilled, with the pair enjoying a warm conversation and swapping smiles as they wandered through the presidential residence.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...lle-Bachelet-arrives-Chile.html#ixzz35rqEnLWj


----------



## Swanky

*Happy £10million birthday, Harry! Prince will get  his inheritance from Diana as he turns 30 in September - but £4million  goes straight to the tax man*



*Prince could reduce tax bill if he gives some of the money to charity  *
*He currently earns £38,847 a year as a captain in the Army  *
*His brother William was given the same amount for his 30th birthday *
*The Princess left them an inheritance of nearly £13 million  *
 
 Prince Harry is set to receive £10million of his mother Diana's inheritance when he celebrates his 30th birthday.
He  faces a £4million deduction due to inheritance tax, but experts say he  could slash the bill if he gives some of the money to charity.
Harry,  who is currently in Chile after watching England&#8217;s disappointing World  Cup exit in Brazil on Tuesday, currently earns £38,847 a year as an Army  captain.





    Legacy: Prince Harry is expected to inherit £10 million from Diana's inheritance on his 30th birthday

According to the Sunday Mirrorhe could limit the duty to £3.6million if he donates the cash when he receives the sum on September 15.
When William received the same amount of his mother's estate two years ago, 40 per cent went was given straight to the tax man. 

    A royal source told the paper: 'There is no way Harry would dodge the tax.
'There  are few similarities between the average person and Harry and William  but when it comes to tax, they also have to pay their way.
'William  got hit with a hefty bill when he turned 30 and so will Harry. His  aides have to work out the most tax-efficient way for him to handle the  money.'  





    Estate: The Princess (pictured with  Harry in Hyde Park) left her sons £12,966,022 after an inheritance tax  of £8,502,330 was deducted

The milestone means he will take control of half of a trust fund believed to be worth more than £20million.
Princess  Diana bequeathed the trust to the Duke of Cambridge and his brother,  Prince Harry, who were 15 and 12 at the time of her death in 1997.
Diana left a net estate of £12,966,022 after inheritance tax of £8,502,330 was deducted.
It is widely believed that with shrewd investment the fund has almost doubled.
Her  estate comprised stocks and shares, jewellery, cash from her £17million  divorce settlement, dresses and other personal belongings at her  Kensington Palace apartment.
Diana  stipulated that it would be held in trust to be shared equally between  her two sons, even though William will inherit income from the Duchy of  Cornwall estate when he becomes Prince of Wales.
In  her original will, drawn up in 1993, the princess had stipulated that  both princes would be entitled to their entire share of the capital on  reaching 25. 
But  details of the will were changed by a variation order granted by the  High Court on Dec 19 1997 - three months after her premature death in a  Paris car crash. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...lion-goes-straight-tax-man.html#ixzz364IBDlpZ 

​


----------



## autumngrace

What a adorable baby and little boy he was.
Both Harry and his brother have grown into fine young men both seem genuinely caring and wanting to do good in the world.

Harry is my favorite of the two he just seems like someone you could grab a beer with and have a good chat.


----------



## nastasja

That was smart of her to set the age limit at 30, rather than 18 or 25.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Excellent photobomb at the Commonwealth Games....


----------



## Lounorada

CobaltBlu said:


> Excellent photobomb at the Commonwealth Games....
> 
> i.dlisted.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/opphotobombprincehotginge.jpg


 

 Brilliant, this is better than the Queen's one!


----------



## CobaltBlu

I know, right, it's perfection!


----------



## afsweet

love the photobombs from the royal family! that would complete my life- to be photobombed by a royal!


----------



## nastasja

Hahaha, that's awesome!


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2014/08/13...wind-the-crowd-finds-it-very-funny-watch-now/

*Prince Harry's Speech Gets Blown Away in the Wind & the Crowd Finds It Very Funny - Watch Now!*

Prince Harry speaks in front of the crowd at the announcement of the British team for the Invictus Games on Wednesday (August 13) in London, England.

During his speech, the 29-year-old royals papers got blown away with the wind, eliciting a huge response from the crowd. No blowing from the left, thank you! Prince Harry said after the moment. Watch below!

The British team includes 130 wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women to compete in the international Paralympic-style multi-sport event designed for wounded soldiers.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Personally, I wish William would step aside and let Harry be the heir to the throne. I think he would be a better king... especially since he spends a significant amount of time serving his country. 

But you know that there's no way in hell Kate and her family will want that to happen! 

Article

_Prince William has been criticised for taking on a new role as an air ambulance pilot rather than becoming a full-time royal by former royal protection officer Ken Wharfe, who dismissed the new job as a publicity stunt.

It was confirmed last week that William, after a year assessing his future as a full-time royal, was to take up a role with the East Anglian air ambulance based at Cambridge airport early next year.

Writing in the Guardian last weekend, Wharfe claimed it was time that William, his brother Harry and wife the Duchess of Cambridge, accepted that they&#8217;re not the same as normal people.



Princes William and Harry have had, as much as they can, a normal upbringing (FameFlynetUK)

The former Metropolitan police inspector, worked as the personal protection officer to Diana, Princess of Wales from 1986 - 1994, when William and Harry were growing up as royal children. He claimed this latest move was just another attempt to be seen as &#8220;normal&#8221; and merely a PR stunt, to impress the public.

He wrote: "William&#8217;s new job is the latest PR stunt from the royal advisers, coupled with the prince&#8217;s own quest to be seen to be &#8216;normal&#8217;.&#8221;

While the future King will be donating his £40,000 a year salary, in full to charity, Wharfe claims it&#8217;s just another example of the royals, getting their own way. He also criticised the prince for failing to take on more royal duties, in light of his aging grandparents.



The Queen and Prince Philip due the majority of royal engagments (FameFlynetUK)

It&#8217;s a criticism that isn&#8217;t unfairly levelled at the younger members of the royal family. The majority of engagements carried out are by the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and Prince Charles, according to data compiled from the court circular and published by The Times.

The heir to the throne, Prince Charles is 65 and would be heading to retirement this year if he was &#8220;normal,&#8221; but he&#8217;s actually carrying out over 500 engagements a year. In 2012 it was 592 and 2011 601.

The Queen at 88 and Prince Philip age 93, aren&#8217;t too far behind. Last year the monarch carried out 344 engagements in the UK and abroad, while her husband attended 184. The Duke of Edinburgh is only just slowing down though, before illness struck him in 2012, he head been hitting an average of over 300 engagements, not bad for a man a few birthdays away from 100.

In comparison, the young and fit princes Harry and William are lagging behind. While they do have full time jobs, Harry is still in the army and William was an RAF Search and Rescue pilot until September 2013, it&#8217;s a fraction of what their aging family members are doing. Last year William attended 62 engagements and Harry 52.



The younger royals at the recent Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh (FameFlynetUK)

The Duchess of Cambridge managed to get to 44, despite the fact she was pregnant, which puts the boys to shame a little. Wharfe&#8217;s argument for William going into a full-time role appears to be that while there are other candidates for the job he&#8217;ll be fulfilling, there&#8217;s only one person who can play the role of future King and that&#8217;s him.

He wrote: "Leave these specialist posts to the experts. Prince Charles, after leaving his ship, Bronington, didn&#8217;t make any overtures to become the coxswain of the Cromer lifeboat."

"William, his wife and his brother are experts in the field of royalty, and however much they display their loom bands, they are not normal. He should listen to his grandmother, get out there, use his position and raise money for his charities in a royal way &#8211; and not rely on stunts seemingly encouraged by sycophants.&#8221;

What do you think? Should Princes William and Harry be able to have their own careers, or is it about time they stepped up and took the pressure off their elder relatives.

_


----------



## Lounorada

The Invictus Games are going to be great, it's such an incredible event to create. Looking forward to the games... and Harry is lookin' good


----------



## Swanky

Adorable!


*It's Harry to the rescue! How kind-hearted royal came to aid of  tearful little girl after finding her sobbing during Invictus Games 
*



*Isabelle Nixon, five, was left tearful after being unable to see the stage*
*Adam Nixon, 31, had earlier captained Team GB to victory in basketball*
*Prince Harry spotted tearful little girl and swung her onto his shoulders*
*The royal then stayed and danced with Isabelle for the rest of the evening*
*Her soldier father lost his left leg following an IED blast in Basra in 2004*

Unable to  see the stage and blocked in by other fans, five-year-old Isabelle Nixon  was less than impressed with the Invictus Games closing ceremony -  until, that is, Prince Harry came to the rescue.
After  spotting the tearful little girl, the prince, 30, hoisted her on to his  shoulders and then stayed to dance with her as the Foo Fighters took to  the stage.
Isabelle,  whose father Adam, 31, from Hereford, captained Team GB's wheelchair  basketball team to victory on Sunday, didn't realise who her hero was  until her delighted mother Taryn exclaimed: 'You're dancing with Prince  Harry!'
*
*








 




Party prince: Harry picked up Isabelle Nixon, five, put her on his shoulders and danced for the rest of the gig






Mr Nixon, a former Gunner in  26 Regiment Royal Artillery, lost his one of his legs following an IED  explosion in Basra in Iraq in March 2004.

His left leg had to be amputated while his right was badly damaged, leaving him confined to a wheelchair.

Despite  his injury, Mr Nixon, who has four children, daughter Abigail, 11,  Jayden, eight, five-year-old Isabelle and three-year-old Lilyana,  continued to play his basketball.
'Prince  Harry had spoken to us at the ceremony, just to say how proud he was of  us guys,' explained Mr Nixon. 'We were underdogs in the final but we  beat the US at their own game.'





 

Thrilled: Former soldier Greg Nixon, 31, with Prince Harry (centre) and his five-year-old daughter, Isabelle





 

Delighted: Earlier, former gunner Mr Nixon had captained Team GB to victory in the wheelchair basketball

'He came up, shook my hand and said: "You are a legend" and I asked him for a photo with him and my family. 

'Then later, after his speech, Foo Fighters were on the main stage. He came to listen to the music.'
But  when Harry, who had earlier told Mr Nixon that he just wanted to 'chill  out' and watch the show, spotted the tearful Isabelle, he swung into  action.
'He recognised her from earlier in the day and saw she was getting upset because she couldnt see the band,' adds Mr Nixon.
'He approached us and smiled at me and just literally picked her up and just started to dance so she could see the stage.
              On royal shoulders, Harry gives little girl a boost to see stage



 











 

Thrilled: The entire Nixon family had turned out to support Mr Nixon and Team GB as they went for gold







 

Royal welcome: Isabelle and her brother Jayden and sisters Abigail and Lilyana pose with Prince Harry  







'There was  no calculation to it. He just recognised her from earlier and lifted  her up on his shoulders so she could see. It was a bit of a whirlwind.  It was very surreal.'
Thrilled  at being picked up and given a proper view of the stage, Isabelle at  first had no idea who her rescuer was, only realising when her mother  Taryn, 30, revealed her rescuer's identity.

'When  she realised who it was, she was lost for words,' added her proud  father. 'She just danced along to the Foo Fighters with him and hasnt  stopped smiling since.'
Harry,  who is now planning next year's event as well as working on other  projects such as the Rugby World Cup, certainly made an impression.

'Isabelle now says  she's a princess and tells all her friends she danced with "Uncle  Harry",' said her mother Taryn. 'He was the perfect gentleman and made everyones day, especially Isabelles.'
'Harry  just seems like one of the lads,' concluded Mr Nixon. 'He is a real  credit to himself. It is a lifelong memory [for Isabelle]. She will  always remember it.'
MailOnline has approached Kensington Palace for a comment.










 

Next step: Harry is now working on the Rugby World Cup and released this snap with Jonny Wilkinson


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...tus-Games-closing-ceremony.html#ixzz3DfswExnN
​


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Swanky Mama Of Three said:


> Adorable!
> 
> 
> *It's Harry to the rescue! How kind-hearted royal came to aid of  tearful little girl after finding her sobbing during Invictus Games
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *Isabelle Nixon, five, was left tearful after being unable to see the stage*
> *Adam Nixon, 31, had earlier captained Team GB to victory in basketball*
> *Prince Harry spotted tearful little girl and swung her onto his shoulders*
> *The royal then stayed and danced with Isabelle for the rest of the evening*
> *Her soldier father lost his left leg following an IED blast in Basra in 2004*
> 
> Unable to  see the stage and blocked in by other fans, five-year-old Isabelle Nixon  was less than impressed with the Invictus Games closing ceremony -  until, that is, Prince Harry came to the rescue.
> After  spotting the tearful little girl, the prince, 30, hoisted her on to his  shoulders and then stayed to dance with her as the Foo Fighters took to  the stage.
> Isabelle,  whose father Adam, 31, from Hereford, captained Team GB's wheelchair  basketball team to victory on Sunday, didn't realise who her hero was  until her delighted mother Taryn exclaimed: 'You're dancing with Prince  Harry!'
> *
> *
> 
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173775600000578-562_306x495.jpgi.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173779700000578-20_306x495.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Party prince: Harry picked up Isabelle Nixon, five, put her on his shoulders and danced for the rest of the gig
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Nixon, a former Gunner in  26 Regiment Royal Artillery, lost his one of his legs following an IED  explosion in Basra in Iraq in March 2004.
> 
> His left leg had to be amputated while his right was badly damaged, leaving him confined to a wheelchair.
> 
> Despite  his injury, Mr Nixon, who has four children, daughter Abigail, 11,  Jayden, eight, five-year-old Isabelle and three-year-old Lilyana,  continued to play his basketball.
> 'Prince  Harry had spoken to us at the ceremony, just to say how proud he was of  us guys,' explained Mr Nixon. 'We were underdogs in the final but we  beat the US at their own game.'
> 
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173778D00000578-935_634x405.jpg
> 
> Thrilled: Former soldier Greg Nixon, 31, with Prince Harry (centre) and his five-year-old daughter, Isabelle
> 
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173759800000578-145_634x500.jpg
> 
> Delighted: Earlier, former gunner Mr Nixon had captained Team GB to victory in the wheelchair basketball
> 
> 'He came up, shook my hand and said: "You are a legend" and I asked him for a photo with him and my family.
> 
> 'Then later, after his speech, Foo Fighters were on the main stage. He came to listen to the music.'
> But  when Harry, who had earlier told Mr Nixon that he just wanted to 'chill  out' and watch the show, spotted the tearful Isabelle, he swung into  action.
> 'He recognised her from earlier in the day and saw she was getting upset because she couldnt see the band,' adds Mr Nixon.
> 'He approached us and smiled at me and just literally picked her up and just started to dance so she could see the stage.
> On royal shoulders, Harry gives little girl a boost to see stage
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/video-undefined-2175B89E00000578-612_636x358.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173759000000578-681_634x418.jpg
> 
> Thrilled: The entire Nixon family had turned out to support Mr Nixon and Team GB as they went for gold
> 
> 
> 
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173777100000578-620_634x443.jpg
> 
> Royal welcome: Isabelle and her brother Jayden and sisters Abigail and Lilyana pose with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'There was  no calculation to it. He just recognised her from earlier and lifted  her up on his shoulders so she could see. It was a bit of a whirlwind.  It was very surreal.'
> Thrilled  at being picked up and given a proper view of the stage, Isabelle at  first had no idea who her rescuer was, only realising when her mother  Taryn, 30, revealed her rescuer's identity.
> 
> 'When  she realised who it was, she was lost for words,' added her proud  father. 'She just danced along to the Foo Fighters with him and hasnt  stopped smiling since.'
> Harry,  who is now planning next year's event as well as working on other  projects such as the Rugby World Cup, certainly made an impression.
> 
> 'Isabelle now says  she's a princess and tells all her friends she danced with "Uncle  Harry",' said her mother Taryn. 'He was the perfect gentleman and made everyones day, especially Isabelles.'
> 'Harry  just seems like one of the lads,' concluded Mr Nixon. 'He is a real  credit to himself. It is a lifelong memory [for Isabelle]. She will  always remember it.'
> MailOnline has approached Kensington Palace for a comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/18/article-2760629-2173169800000578-165_634x364.jpg
> 
> Next step: Harry is now working on the Rugby World Cup and released this snap with Jonny Wilkinson
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...tus-Games-closing-ceremony.html#ixzz3DfswExnN
> ​


 Harry is just the best, what a sweet thing to do!


----------



## Docjeun

Everyone's going to Malta...

http://www.independent.com.mt/artic...chess-of-cambridge-for-malta-trip-6596952064/


----------



## Docjeun

Not Harry but William....

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/n...hess_of_cambridge_on_malta_visit#.VBtMk5RdX5M


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2014/10/16/prince-harry-cracks-harry-potter-joke-at-100-women-gala/

*Prince Harry Cracks 'Harry Potter' Joke at 100 Women Gala*

Prince Harry is as handsome as ever in a tux while attending the 100 Women in Hedge Funds Gala Dinner on Thursday evening (October 16) in London, England.

The 30-year-old royal spoke at the event, which is in aid of WellChild at Royal Hospital Chelsea.

Thank you all very much for coming this evening, Harry said. I am not entirely sure who made the seating plan but I am sitting between two men. I thought it would just be 100 women and myself.

He also charmed the crowd by saying, It is great to see you in this rather wonderful Harry Potter-esque setting. There will be no Quidditch.


----------



## berrydiva

He's just freaking adorable.


----------



## Lounorada

He's looking damn good in that tux


----------



## Sasha2012

Zimbio

Prince Harry with firefighters during his visit to Salford Fire Station on October 20, 2014 in Manchester, England. Also playing rugby at Eccles RFC.


----------



## Sasha2012

Poop Appeal Event and hosting the President's Party in London. (October 30)


----------



## pink1

He is so handsome   Thanks for posting these!


----------



## Thingofbeauty

Oh&#8230;yes...


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2014/11/06/prince-harry-plans-mini-tour-to-middle-east-later-this-month/

*Prince Harry Plans Mini Tour to Middle East Later This Month*

Prince Harry salutes a group of service men and women while visiting the Field of Remembrance at Westminster Abbey on Thursday (November 6) in London, England.

The 30-year-old royal met with veterans, servicemen and women, widows, and even some service animals at the event.

Prince Harry has just announced a mini tour to the Middle East beginning on November 18 in Oman, Us Weekly reports. During his trip, he will also visit Abu Dhabi for the Sentebale Polo Cup. Prince Harry helped found the Sentebale charity alongside Prince Seeiso of Lesotho, Africa.


----------



## Thingofbeauty

WOW. He looks so handsome.


----------



## Lounorada

He looks even more handsome when he's in uniform. I'd marry him tomorrow, if he'd have me!


----------



## Thingofbeauty

Lounorada said:


> He looks even more handsome when he's in uniform. I'd marry him tomorrow, if he'd have me!


LOL. I love this gif


----------



## Lounorada

thingofbeauty said:


> lol. I love this gif


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Nathalya

Wow he is one handsome guy!


----------



## MegsVC

Ohhh Harry.. Just gets more and more handsome every time.. 
Time for me to go put on my tiara and be a princess! Tata ladies *royal wave*


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

Lounorada said:


> He looks even more handsome when he's in uniform. I'd marry him tomorrow, if he'd have me!



Word.


----------



## Lounorada

*What a gentleman! Prince Harry comes to the aid of a lady whose hat blew off as he made a speech at RAF base*


Prince Harry came to the rescue of a lady who lost her hat after a gust of wind blew it off as he made a speech at RAF Honington in Suffolk this morning.
Ever the gentleman, the Prince, 30, rushed to her aid and scooped up the wayward titfer before returning the garment to its delighted owner with a big smile.
Harry's moment of gallantry came just after he had made a speech in which he praised the 'professionalism and determination' of the RAF's 26 Squadron.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...RAF-counter-terrorism-unit.html#ixzz3IzMRpQAB


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2014/12/01/prince-harry-reveals-a-big-secret-in-feelnoshame-video/

Prince Harry is opening up about a big secret in his video for the #FeelNoShame campaign.

The 30-year-old royal started the campaign with his charity Sentebale as a way to destigmatize talking about HIV and AIDS.

Today, World AIDS Day, my secret is, believe it or not, I get incredibly nervous before public speaking, no matter how big the crowd or the audience, Harry said.

Despite the fact that I laugh and joke all the time, I get incredibly nervous, if not anxious actually, before going into rooms full of people when Im wearing a suit, Harry added. Now that Ive confessed that, Ill probably be even more worried that people are looking at me.


----------



## Lounorada

Aww.


----------



## minababe

sooo any News in his love life?


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2014/12/03...s-photos-a-classic-case-of-not-enough-prince/

*Prince Harry Calls Those Infamous Naked Vegas Photos a Classic Case of 'Not Enough Prince'*

Prince Harrys freckles come out for their close-up on the Issue 10 cover of Man of the World magazine, on newsstands December 3.

Heres what the 30-year-old royal had to share with the mag:

*On his first tour in Afghanistan:* To see young ladsmuch younger than mewrapped in plastic and missing limbs with hundreds of tubes coming out of them was something I never prepared myself for.

*On his infamous Vegas vacation:* It was probably a classic case of me being too much Army and not enough prince. Its a simple case of that.

*On his second tour after that:* I saw some horrendous things. The tragic injuries and deaths of local people from roadside bombs, some of whom were children; coalition forces lying on the battlefield.

For more on Prince Harry, visit ManoftheWorld.com.

Also pictured below: Harry attends 2014 ICAP Charity Day at ICAP on Wednesday (December 3) in London, England.


----------



## Nathalya

Is that a mime in the 5th pic?


----------



## chowlover2

Nathalya said:


> Is that a mime in the 5th pic?




It certainly looks like one!


----------



## Sasha2012

He's not known for being fond of photographers but it seems Prince Harry does at least know his way around a camera - as the photos taken by the royal during a trip to Lesotho last week reveal.

Among the touching shots taken by the 30-year-old is a black and white photo of a group of herd boys who attend a school run by his African charity Sentebale - all of whom happily strike a pose for his camera.

Another portrait, which was taken by the prince on a £729 Fuji X100 camera, shows another of the herd boys being educated by the charity staring silently into the lens, his face framed by a traditional straw hat.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-photography-Lesotho-visit.html#ixzz3MOgXiH00


----------



## Sasha2012

More pictures.

via Daily Mail


----------



## Lounorada

Every picture in that DailyMail article^ made me love Harry even more. So damn cute.


----------



## Sasha2012

I see so much of his mother in him, he seems genuinely happy with the kids and helping people. 

via Daily Mail


----------



## Gimmethebag

WHY CAN'T HE BE KING?

Harry's more charitable. He's more empathetic. He understands that he has this incredible platform to create change. He's truly Diana's son.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MegsVC

Ok srsly.. I'm booking a flight to London.. Where does this man hang out because YUM. 

I think the fact that he seems genuine, kind and fun makes him sooo much more studly &#128525;


----------



## Sasha2012

Prince Harry, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie were among the guests today, as Glasses Direct founder Jamie Murray Wells married his long-term girlfriend, barrister Lottie Fry.

The traditional country wedding took place at Dorchester Abbey and saw guests, among them Ben Fogle and his wife Marina, descend on the pretty Oxfordshire village of Dorchester-on-Thames.

But it was the royal contingent that drew the most glances, with Princess Beatrice, once again showing off her increasingly chic sense of style, stealing the show in her £910 pale blue wool coat by French label, Carven.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-Ben-Fogle-wife-Marina-too.html#ixzz3MPL6rOTA


----------



## NYC Chicky

Gimmethebag said:


> WHY CAN'T HE BE KING?
> 
> Harry's more charitable. He's more empathetic. He understands that he has this incredible platform to create change. He's truly Diana's son.




Totally agree his parents would be / are proud - love seeing these pics reminds me of what everyone loved about Di


----------



## Chanel522

I'm absolutely adore Prince Harry and if I weren't already married to the best guy ever I would be heading to England to find Harry!! Lol!!

What a sweet, caring, genuine person &#10084;&#65039;


----------



## ellieroma

Harry looks like he'll make a fantastic husband and father one day. *swoon*


----------



## myown

he is so handsome. he looks so happy in those pics (don´t mean the wedding ones)


----------



## hermes_lemming

Chanel522 said:


> I'm absolutely adore Prince Harry and if I weren't already married to the best guy ever I would be heading to England to find Harry!! Lol!!
> 
> What a sweet, caring, genuine person &#10084;&#65039;



Ditto. Minus the married part lol (don't tell my beau). Prince Harry is the type of man I'd imagine who'd make me laugh all the way to the bedroom. Gingers are normally not my thing. Hell,  nor is strip pool. But for Prince Harry, lmao, I might make an exception. Sigh, now I just have to magically become 10 years younger.


----------



## Alexenjie

I love the pictures of Harry and the kids. He is so relaxed and at ease with them. 

He might appear to be a better choice for becoming king one day but you have to remember that he has grown up without all the pressure and responsibility of being a future monarch on his shoulders. He is the lucky one of the two brothers. He can do what he wants with his life, within reason.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Alexenjie said:


> I love the pictures of Harry and the kids. He is so relaxed and at ease with them.
> 
> He might appear to be a better choice for becoming king one day but you have to remember that he has grown up without all the pressure and responsibility of being a future monarch on his shoulders. He is the lucky one of the two brothers. He can do what he wants with his life, within reason.


I think Harry has put himself in plenty of stressful situations (like fighting in Afghanistan) and he, for a long time, was 4th in line. 

I think he has more of a drive to help others than William. I always got the impression that William doesn't really want to be a monarch -- he'd be happier living a private life in the country side. But William got pushed into the role as a young man, and I doubt the Middletons would have ever supported a decision to step aside. With Prince George, that now will never happen.

So now William needs a vacation before and after a 6 week course on agriculture. He and Kate do very little public charity work compared to Harry. 

Harry doesn't consider himself as intellectual/smart as William, because he didn't go to university but I think Harry is better at relating to people. He has army friends from different backgrounds than himself, and he seems more comfortable/genuine when interacting with commoners.


----------



## Sasha2012

The prince is known  to be a keen sportsman and his competitive nature certainly shone through today as he played in a football match between Sandringham estate workers and villagers from neighbouring Castle Rising in Norfolk.

Joined by Kate's younger brother James Middleton in the now-traditional Christmas Eve fixture, Harry didn't hold back as he careened around the pitch, covering his legs in spattering of mud.

Leading his team to a 7-2 victory the Prince warmly embraced James, who played this year for the first time in the annual match.

His passion etched on his face, the 30-year-old prince, who is staying with the rest of the extended royal family at the Sandringham estate with the Queen over the festive period, couldn't keep from exclaiming loudly at his team's success.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...Sandringham-football-match.html#ixzz3MprVR5pL


----------



## Nathalya

Haha that pic with the horse is so random between the other pictures


----------



## Lounorada

Nathalya said:


> Haha that pic with the horse is so random between the other pictures


 
IKR?  It's like he paused the game to pet the horse


----------



## Sasha2012

Daily Mail

Christmas day service at Sandringham Church on Thursday morning (December 25) in Kings Lynn, England.


----------



## Sasha2012

Prince Harry enjoyed a night at the arrows when he headed to the home of the darts for an evening of fun.

The royal is often seen at rugby and polo matches and recently hosted a Christmas Eve football match for staff at Sandringham.

But he enjoyed a more laid back spectator sport last night when he was seen at the William Hill PDC World Darts Championships at Alexandra Palace in north London.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ads-Ally-Pally-night-darts.html#ixzz3NQ05T9Ks


----------



## Lounorada

Oh, Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2015/01/14...blanc-told-princes-william-harry-to-f-ck-off/

Prince Harry poses with his brand new basketball jersey and size 15 shoes by NBA All-Star Carmelo Anthony during a Coach-Core Graduation event at St Jamess Palace on Wednesday (January 14) in London, England.

The Coach Core model, a year long apprenticeship, aspires to produce well qualified sports coaches to work in the community.

Friends star Matt LeBlanc just appeared on Conan and talked about a time when he met Prince Harry and Prince William at a polo match. You get invited by the royals, you go, Matt said. When the Princes asked Matt when a Friends reunion was happening, Matt told them to F**k off!


----------



## minababe

such a cutie. I'm so curios who will win his heart one day


----------



## Lounorada

I think I love him  He's just too damn handsome and charismatic.


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20395222_20896332,00.html

*Prince Harry Takes a New Army Role Helping Injured Soldiers*

Prince Harry has a new role in the army  securing the best care for injured servicemen and women. 

Harry, 30, is working to help the sick and wounded either return to their military roles or gain meaningful employment and care in civilian life. 

The prince, who is known as Captain Wales in the military, has just begun working in the new position with a Personal Recovery unit to ensure injured, wounded or sick servicepeople have the right recovery plans. 

Still based in London, he will carry out the new role for several months. It is seen as a continuation of his work in setting up and seeing through the Paralympic-style Invictus Games. 

"It is a natural progression, following on from the Games," a source at his Kensington Palace office tells PEOPLE. "This is something he is both committed to and is passionate about in both his army job and his public royal role." 

The source adds: "This is something he will always have an interest in regardless of what job he has. But he has a chance at the moment to use his military job to get a better understanding and experience of the process and help put procedures in place to help those who have been wounded." 

Each wounded warrior has an individual plan based around medical care, as well as housing and employment issues that might be relevant. 

Harry was praised for bringing his brainchild games for injured servicemen and women to fruition, and organizers have invited bids to put them on again. 

The next Invictus Games are likely to be held in 2016.


----------



## hermes_lemming

Sigh. If I were only 10 years younger.. british... gorgeous... and a Billionaire (preferably a princess), lol he would be mine. All mine.


----------



## Sasha2012

He's not long started walking, but Prince Harry is already joking about training Prince George up for the London Marathon.

The prince, who is patron of the event, met people who will be running on April 26 to raise money for his charities at a training session at Twickenham Rugby Stadium today.

Harry said he wasn't going to run the marathon himself but joked he thought it would be a good idea to train his nephew up as he chatted with Jane Fishwick, 59, from Shrewsbury, Wiltshire.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...s-London-Marathon-hopefuls.html#ixzz3QWzvbE32


----------



## Glitterandstuds

He really has grown into a beautiful man.


----------



## Lounorada

Visiting Nottingham, England, Feb 3rd


































Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry looking for a full-time job after making 'tough' decision to leave Army*

Prince Harry is looking for a full-time job after making the really tough decision to leave the Army.
Speaking for the first time about his choice to bring his active military career to an end, he said he had reached a crossroads and was looking forward to starting a new chapter in his life.
Kensington Palace confirmed that the Prince, 30, will end his ten-year military career in June, after which he will be actively considering other longer term employment opportunities.
A source close to the Prince said his options were wide and varied but he was likely to look for a role with a charity or in some form of public service, following the example of his brother, the Duke of Cambridge, who has taken a job as an air ambulance pilot after leaving the RAF.
The one thing he wont be doing is full-time royal duties, said the source, but he will continue to fulfil royal engagements as and when he is asked to.
Explaining his decision to leave the Army, the Prince said: After a decade of service, moving on from the Army has been a really tough decision. I consider myself incredibly lucky to have had the chance to do some very challenging jobs and have met many fantastic people in the process.
From learning the hard way to stay onside with my Colour Sergeant at Sandhurst, to the incredible people I served with during two tours in Afghanistan - the experiences I have had over the last 10 years will stay with me for the rest of my life. For that I will always be hugely grateful.
Inevitably most good things come to an end and I am at a crossroads in my military career. Luckily for me, I will continue to wear the uniform and mix with fellow servicemen and women for the rest of my life.
He said he would continue to be involved with the Invictus Games, the event for wounded service personnel he founded last year, which is next expected to take place abroad in 2016.
He added: I am considering the options for the future and I am really excited about the possibilitiesso while I am finishing one part of my life, I am getting straight into a new chapter. I am really looking forward to it.
If the Prince had stayed in the Army, he would have been expected to go through staff college to move up through the ranks in a succession of desk jobs, a prospect that was not for him, sources said. As well as being an action man he is not naturally academic; he left Eton with a B in A-level art and a D in geography.
Before leaving the Army the Prince will spend four weeks seconded to the Australian Defence Force in April and May, spending time in Darwin, Perth and Sydney to gain an appreciation of the Australian Armys domestic operating environment and capabilities, Kensington Palace said.
In July he will travel to Africa to spend several weeks volunteering in a conservation project, which could lead to him taking on a new charity patronage.
Then, while he is deciding on a full-time job, he will return to the Ministry of Defences Recovery Capability Programme as a volunteer, to increase his knowledge of physical and mental health treatment for recovering service personnel, which has become his main focus in life.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...fter-making-tough-decision-to-leave-Army.html


----------



## anitalilac

What a beautiful redhead, him , Julianne Moore, Kevin McKid, Christina from Mad Men...
*sigh*


----------



## Lounorada

He might be retiring from the Army but it appears that Prince Harry won't be ending all of his military commitments.
Today, the 30-year-old royal revealed that he will be taking part in an epic 1,000 mile trek through the UK as part of a fundraising drive for Walking With The Wounded.
Speaking during the launch of Walk of Britain at London's Mandarin Oriental Hotel, the prince said he was 'delighted' to be taking part in the trek and is 'looking forward to it'.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...oving-military-challenging.html#ixzz3UlpWmpqx 

































Dailymail


----------



## CobaltBlu

He's cute as can be.


----------



## Lounorada

**

*Prince Harry's a hit in Australia as he meets fans but tells teenagers they need to get out of the habit of taking selfies *


Prince Harry arrived in Canberra and visited the Australian War Memorial in his only official public appearance
During this visit, he told a teenage admirer to give up the trend of snapping self-portraits, saying 'selfies are bad' 
The Prince, who is in Australia for a four-week secondment with Australian Defence Force, then reported for duty
The 30-year-old touched in Sydney on Monday at 8.30am, before travelling to Canberra in the ACT on a RAAF jet
Dressed in his white tropical dress uniform of the British Army, he also visited the Australian War Memorial

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...onth-long-deployment-Under.html#ixzz3WYqSrqd0


----------



## Lounorada

Continued...


































Dailymail


----------



## nastasja

Love these pictures! He seems like such a good time!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sasha2012

It was one of the most horrific disasters of the First World War, which still haunts the descendants of those who died.

 Yesterday, as commemorations were held all over the world to mark the 100th anniversary of the Gallipoli campaign, the Royal Family led tributes to those who fought and fell in the ill-fated offensive.

The day began in London with a dawn ceremony at Wellington Arch on Hyde Park Corner, attended by Princess Anne. Later the Queen, joined by the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince William and political leaders, led the nation during a ceremony at the Cenotaph in Whitehall, while Prince Charles was in Turkey with Prince Harry.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nniversary-ceremony-London.html#ixzz3YNEW0te7


----------



## Lounorada

*Action man Harry: Prince abseils from a helicopter, wields an assault rifle and gives Daniel Craig a run for his money as he emerges from the sea in new photographs of his stint with the Australian army*


Series of dramatic pictures released as Captain Wales finishes month-long embed with the Australian armed forces
He took part in a number of counter-terrorism exercises with teams of SAS commandos and navy clearance divers
Harry, who is due to quit British Army in June, said: 'All it's done has made me not want to finish my military career'
Stalking buildings with an assault rifle, abseiling from helicopters and raiding ships with a team of navy divers   this is Prince Harry as you rarely seen him.
These dramatic photographs show Captain Wales on a series of counter-terrorism exercises during his month-long embed with the Australian military.
During his time Down Under, Harry trained in the country's arid north in bush survival skills, including how to source food and water. 
The 30-year-old also spent time flying helicopters, training with SAS commandos and taking part in drills with Royal Australian Navy Clearance Divers.
Harry, who is due to quit the British Army in June, said: 'All it's done has made me not want to finish my military career to be honest with you.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aphs-stint-Australian-army.html#ixzz3ZaZsUlPP 

































Oh, Harry...


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2015/05/09...stralian-military-training-session-watch-now/

Prince Harry rubs noses with a elderly woman while visiting the National War Memorial on Saturday (May 9) in Wellington, New Zealand.

On the same day, the 30-year-old royal was spotted watching the round 13 Super Rugby match between the Hurricanes and the Sharks at Westpac Stadium.

Check out Harry doing some military training exercises in this newly released clip.

We have some footage of Prince Harry training with the Australian Defence Force (ADF). His Royal Highness, or Captain Harry Wales as he is known in the Army, spent a month training with the ADF working and living alongside colleagues in the Australian Army in a number of regiments in Sydney, Darwin and Perth. This footage shows Captain Wales taking part in unit-based activities and training exercises, some in the water and some on dry land, the British Monarachy wrote on Facebook.


----------



## Coach Lover Too

He has grown into such a handsome guy! I used to think Prince William was the handsome one, but not anymore! Harry reeks of charisma!


----------



## Florasun

Coach Lover Too said:


> He has grown into such a handsome guy! I used to think Prince William was the handsome one, but not anymore! Harry reeks of charisma!



I thought the same thing. He is now "the cute one".


----------



## Gimmethebag

Coach Lover Too said:


> He has grown into such a handsome guy! I used to think Prince William was the handsome one, but not anymore! Harry reeks of charisma!


Plus he is the hardworking and charitable one.


----------



## Coach Lover Too

His momma would be proud of him.


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2015/05/12...our-with-canterbury-university-museum-visits/

Prince Harry is all smiles as he rides a vintage bike while visiting the Quake City Museum on Tuesday afternoon (May 12) in Christchurch, New Zealand.

The 30-year-old royal, who is in the country until Saturday (May 16), then switched into something more comfortable to visit Canterbury University.

During his visit, Harry handed out cupcakes, took part in some spray painting, planted vegetables with students, and spoke with the members of the Student Volunteer Army.


----------



## nastasja

OMG that pic of him and the baby [emoji7]


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I know!


----------



## Lounorada

Harry! 
He's just adorable and so handsome


----------



## favoritethingshawaii

Prince Harry Performs the Haka in New Zealand - Wall Street Journal

He is somewhat restrained (especially compared to the fellow next to him) but it's still charming!

http://www.wsj.com/video/prince-harry-performs-the-haka-in-new-zealand/66C86FF5-F750-4C44-8AD0-4042B160B663.html?mod=trending_now_video_2


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.justjared.com/2015/05/13...to-play-touch-rugby-with-kids-in-new-zealand/

Prince Harry shows off his handsome looks while rocking his uniform at the Linton Military Camp on Wednesday (May 13) in Palmerston North, New Zealand.

The 30-year-old royal, who is in the country until Saturday (May 16), took command of a light arm armored vehicle, rode an ATV, helped remove a hangi, and played a fun game of touch rugby with children during this visit.

The day before, Harry suited up to visit the Quake City Museum before heading off to meet students at Canterbury University.


----------



## amoxie92

He's so cool. These boys were raised right. Good for them, Diana would be proud!


----------



## Lounorada

*Because Of Africa Trip, Prince Harry Will Likely Miss Princess Charlotte&#8217;s Christening*


Prince Harry will likely miss his niece Princess Charlotte&#8217;s christening on July 5, as he is expected to travel to Africa after his military service ends this month. The 30-year-old royal will travel to Africa for a three-month visit to pursue conservation work following his upcoming departure from the army, People reported.
While his exit date has yet to be confirmed, the royal is expected to leave the military life by the end of the month and, in the short term, immerse himself in helping the cause of wildlife in Africa -- including the battle against the illegal trade in animal parts. It&#8217;s also been reported that he will head to Namibia to help efforts to save the black rhino.
People also quoted Harry telling the British media about his expectations for the Africa trip. "For me, it's three months of hard grafting, working with animals. To actually get the chance to embed myself with the top vet in southern Africa, travel with him for three weeks and every job he gets called up to do ... That's like my dream."
Princess Charlotte&#8217;s christening will be held at St. Mary Magdalene's Church on Queen Elizabeth II's Sandringham estate. The church is near Prince William and Kate Middleton&#8217;s country home Anmer Hall, and is the same church where William&#8217;s late mother, Diana, was baptized, Vanity Fair reported. Palace aides also revealed that the royal christening will be private and limited to family and close friends. Prince George&#8217;s christening in 2013 had only 22 guests.
Meanwhile, Harry&#8217;s Africa trip will allow him to work closely with the Nature Conservancy -- a charitable environmental organization, and with Save the Rhino Trust, to learn more about saving rhinos and desert elephants, Royal Central reported. The royal has been an active proponent for animal conservation and is an ambassador for United for Wildlife, a wildlife charity that he and the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge established to create a global movement for change.
Prince Harry is expected to return to Britain in September.


http://www.ibtimes.com/because-afri...-miss-princess-charlottes-christening-1959909


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minimom

He is going to be a great father one day.   Just love him&#55357;&#56471;


----------



## gracekelly

He has his mother's personal charm and ability to focus completely on the person in front him so that they feel he is really listening and interested.  Stunning looking man too!  The perfect package!


----------



## nillacobain

Coach Lover Too said:


> He has grown into such a handsome guy! I used to think Prince William was the handsome one, but not anymore! Harry reeks of charisma!



I agree!


----------



## Lounorada

**

*Harry The Lionheart: Remarkable images of the conservationist Prince, who declares: 'I have to go along with the way my life is. But I want to be here' *


*Prince Harry is seen monitoring the lion's heart while vets carry out tests*
*Tells of how Africa and conservation work has become 'precious' to him*
*He **jokes of being a 'bad uncle' for missing Princess Charlotte's christening*
*The Prince speaks of the perils of living life in the shadow of bodyguards*
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eclares-way-life-want-here.html#ixzz3kKR1XCMZ


----------



## Longchamp

Great article. Thanks for posting.


----------



## Lounorada

Longchamp said:


> Great article. Thanks for posting.


You're welcome!


----------



## Sasha2012

Laughing into the night sky, Prince Harry's former girlfriend Cressida Bonas is seen leaving his 31st birthday celebrations in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

Wearing a white button shirt with frilly bow, the newly-single actress shares a laugh and a joke with a pal minutes before her old flame exits the same London pub after a five-hour birthday party.

Just hours after it was revealed that the 26-year-old had split from her actor boyfriend, Cressida joined Harry and friends - including Zara Phillips and husband Mike Tindall - at The Cross Keys pub in Chelsea. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-old-flame-Cressida-Bonas.html#ixzz3m7W9dTrq


----------



## berrydiva

I really don't understand when Harry turned into such a hottie.


----------



## littlerock

berrydiva said:


> I really don't understand when Harry turned into such a hottie.



This. But he certainly is.


----------



## terebina786

berrydiva said:


> I really don't understand when Harry turned into such a hottie.



Around the same time Will became a non-hottie.


----------



## berrydiva

terebina786 said:


> Around the same time Will became a non-hottie.



Lol


----------



## Lounorada

Oh my...  Look at you Harry, with your _fine_ self and your facial hair


----------



## anitalilac

Lounorada said:


> Oh my...  Look at you Harry, with your _fine_ self and your facial hair


----------



## Vanilla Bean

He used to be cute; with the beard, he is *HOT!*


----------



## VickyB

berrydiva said:


> I really don't understand when Harry turned into such a hottie.



About 5 years ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

he's adorable.....I still don't think Charles is his bio father but as long as they're both accepting of eachother...


----------



## Lounorada

The opening ceremony for the 2015 Rugby World Cup and Pool A match between England and Fiji at Twickenham Stadium, London on Sept 18th.



































Zimbio/DailyMail


----------



## VickyB

I've always loved Harry!!! He is charming and has a warm personality. William and Kate, I refer to them as The Squares, are so meh.


----------



## Crystalina

I can't wait til Harry gets married and we can watch it on TV.  I hope he marries someone like Diana!!!


----------



## wilding

The scruff really suits him. He's truly blossomed and grown into his looks (you know what I mean) over the years. Will has always across as stiff and wooden to me I don't know. He comes across as a free spirit. 

I'm procrastinating from what I am supposed to be doing, and rambling now.


----------



## Sasha2012

Standing with friends outside one of his favourite pubs, Prince Harry drags heavily on a cigarette.

Pictured on his 31st birthday, the fifth in line to the throne has apparently failed to give up the filthy habit that his father vehemently disapproves of.

Fastidiously healthy, Prince Charles hates the habit so much that he persuaded his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall, herself a life-long smoker, to quit, and made all his main residences no smoking zones  even outside.

Harry has reportedly been trying to quit smoking for years after taking it up as a 15-year-old pupil at Eton. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ating-birthday-Chelsea-pub.html#ixzz3mLDHg7Fv


----------



## Flawn08

Harry and I, we could make beautiful babies together.. *swoon


----------



## myown

Crystalina said:


> I can't wait til Harry gets married and we can watch it on TV.  I hope he marries someone like Diana!!!



I thought he is back with Chelsea?


----------



## Lounorada

*Yes they can! William and Harry don workmen's helmets with their names on as they join BBC's DIY SOS team to transform derelict street into homes for ex-servicemen *


Entire street in Manchester will be rejuvenated for Armed Forces veterans
Princes donned personalised hard hats as they arrived at the building site
Joined presenter Nick Knowles and the BBC's DIY SOS team of builders
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...street-homes-ex-servicemen.html#ixzz3magpvCt5


----------



## skarsbabe

I like how their helmets have their names - like no one would otherwise know who they are! lol


----------



## Crystalina

Harry is super hot. He should be king!


----------



## Lounorada

England v Wales during the Rugby World Cup 2015 on Sept 26th at Twickenham Stadium, London.





























tumblr


----------



## Coach Lover Too

That last picture cracks me up!


----------



## wilding

Coach Lover Too said:


> That last picture cracks me up!




Someone needs to photoshop some laser beams shooting from them :lolots:


----------



## HandbagAngel

I wonder why those people sat around them were not excited but only they laughed so hard?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Harry in a tux- oh, lawd... :ninja:

The Cinema and Television Benevolent Fund's Royal Film Performance 2015 of the 24th James Bond Adventure, "Spectre" at Royal Albert Hall on October 26, 2015 in London.

















Zimbio / Getty Images


----------



## CobaltBlu

oh hai harry


----------



## Lounorada

*Humble Harry's White House trip: Prince ditches the motorcade to walk into Oval Office for meeting with ***** and gets presidential support for his Invictus Games*


Prince Harry is on one-day trip to United States to launch 2016 Invictus Games for wounded veterans, being held in USA for first time 
He received warm support from president who met him for first time and said: 'Michelle and myself are interested in promoting it.'
Prince and First Lady had launched games earlier today at military facility outside Washington and Harry hugged recovering Marine 
After Oval Office meeting Harry was told 'nice beard' by a White House correspondent and jibed back: 'Mine's not gray yet.'


































Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ial-support-Invictus-Games.html#ixzz3pztkNk8p


----------



## ScorpionDoom

Lounorada said:


> *Humble Harry's White House trip: Prince ditches the motorcade to walk into Oval Office for meeting with ***** and gets presidential support for his Invictus Games*



He just gets better and better with age. I hope the beard is a permanent fixture


----------



## White Orchid

How do you go from that Helmsworth guy to this Lou???



Lounorada said:


> Harry in a tux- oh, lawd... :ninja:
> 
> The Cinema and Television Benevolent Fund's Royal Film Performance 2015 of the 24th James Bond Adventure, "Spectre" at Royal Albert Hall on October 26, 2015 in London.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zimbio / Getty Images


----------



## Lounorada

White Orchid said:


> How do you go from that Helmsworth guy to this Lou???



What do you mean?


----------



## White Orchid

Lounorada said:


> What do you mean?



Don't you go playin dumb with me girl!


----------



## Lounorada

White Orchid said:


> Don't you go playin dumb with me girl!



But, Harry is just so charming, philanthropic and handsome... I can't help it


----------



## Lounorada

Prince Harry speaks with members of the Walking With The Wounded team in the forecourt of Buckingham Palace after their latest endeavour, the Walk Of Britain on November 1, 2015 in London, England. Six members of the Walk of Britain team concluded their 1000-mile trek, which began on 22 August in Scotland and continued through the length and breadth of the country to London.

















Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

Prince Harry places a cross during a Service in the Field of Remembrance at Westminster Abbey on November 5, 2015 in London, England.





















Zimbio


----------



## Crystalina

***swoon!*** [emoji171][emoji175][emoji172][emoji173]&#65039;[emoji169]


----------



## CobaltBlu

I dont even like beards.....but man, there is something about Harry.


----------



## Apricots in wc1

CobaltBlu said:


> I dont even like beards.....but man, there is something about Harry.



I get that. Was not a fan of men with beards until harry grew his


----------



## Lounorada

Attending the annual Remembrance Sunday Service at the Cenotaph on Whitehall on November 8, 2015 in London. People across the UK gather to pay tribute to service personnel who have died in the two World Wars and subsequent conflicts.













Zimbio/Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

CobaltBlu said:


> I dont even like beards.....but man, there is something about Harry.


 
Agreed. I'm not normally a fan of guys with beards unless it's maintained and well-groomed, which Harrys appears to be...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## nastasja

Dying [emoji7][emoji7]


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

He looks so good. I do think he looks better sans beard though.


----------



## Lounorada

*The Royal Variety Performance at the Royal Albert Hall on November 13, 2015 in London.*






























DailyMail/Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

*UNICEF Match for Children in Old Trafford, Manchester on November 14th.*









DailyMail


----------



## chowlover2

lounorada said:


> agreed. I'm not normally a fan of guys with beards unless it's maintained and well-groomed, which harrys appears to be...




+2!


----------



## Lounorada

*Opening of the Sentebale Mamohato Children's Centre*

Children greet Prince Harry as he visits  to the Sentebale charity on November 26, 2015 in Maeru, Lesotho, Sentebale. Lesotho's Prince Seeiso co-founded Sentebale with Harry in 2006, and the new facility is named after his mother Queen Mamohato but also recognises the Princess of Wales.
In this handout provided by Sentebale, Prince Harry hugs 'Mutso' a young boy he made friends with on his first visit to Lesotho at the Official Opening of the new Mamohato Children's Centre on October 17, 2015 in Maseru, Lesotho. In a photography project supported by Getty Images the vulnerable children at the Mamohato Camp have been using Instant photography as an educational tool to build interpersonnel skills and creativity. The Sentebale Mamohato Children's Centre at Thaba Bosiu just outside Maseu is Sentebale's first purpose built camp for the disadvantaged and HIV positive childen of Lesotho. Getty Images  Sentebale is a charity started by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho ten years ago to help the vulnerable children of Lesotho.

























Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

**

*Harry's emotional reunion with the boy in the blue gumboots: African orphan's huge hug for prince 11 years after royal gave him a present he never forgot*


Prince Harry opened centre for children with HIV and AIDS in Africa
He was reunited with orphan Mutsu Potsane he first met 11 years ago
Harry appears delighted to be reunited with the young boy
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...-gingers-getting-sunburned.html#ixzz3sd8KlwPa


----------



## Lounorada

Some more pictures...





























DailyMail


----------



## myown

he´s handsome. I can´t get over him


----------



## Longchamp

Love love Prince Harry. The Mutsu story and pictures are heartwarming.
Why can't this lovely man find a wife?  From what we see, appears he would be good husband and father.


----------



## HandbagAngel

His smile is so genuine, and his happiness is from inside;  not liking his in-law sometimes I felt was doing a show.


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## Lounorada

(Loads more pics in the article/link!)


*Harry breaks a little girl's heart: Screaming four-year-old has to be prised away from prince after he played with her at football centre in South Africa*


Harry played soccer at The Football for Hope Centre in Khayelitsha
Earlier he visited Ottery Youth Centre in Cape Town, which looks after teenagers from troubled backgrounds 
This morning, Harry met with renowned peace campaigner Desmond Tutu
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...four-day-tour-South-Africa.html#ixzz3t0VtBLt3


----------



## berrydiva

I like that he seems genuinely happy in all of his humanitarian work. You can see it in his face that it truly does mean a great deal to him perhaps because it connects him to his mom or he's carrying on her work. Either way, it's nice.


----------



## chowlover2

He really is Prince Charming!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

berrydiva said:


> I like that he seems genuinely happy in all of his humanitarian work. You can see it in his face that it truly does mean a great deal to him perhaps because it connects him to his mom or he's carrying on her work. Either way, it's nice.


+1



chowlover2 said:


> He really is Prince Charming!


----------



## Sasha2012

The Duchess of Cambridge beamed as she arrived alongside husband William for the traditional Christmas Day church service at Sandringham estate - but their two young children were nowhere to be seen.

The royal couple chatted to Prince Harry as they followed the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall to St Mary Magdalene Church. But despite speculation that two-year-old Prince George might make his first appearance at the event, the toddler and his seven-month-old sister Charlotte were left at home.

Led by the Queen who arrived in a Bentley wearing a festive red dress coat, the rest of the family made their way on foot from Sandringham House.

Anne, the Princess Royal, looked in good spirits as she accompanied her father, the Duke of Edinburgh, while the Duke of York was joined by his children, Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice. 

Prince Edward and the Countess of Wessex walked alongside their children, Lady Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn. Some 1,000 well-wishers gathered braved bad weather to join in the festivities, which started with the National Anthem and the hymn Angels From The Realm Of Glory.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...as-Day-service-Sandringham.html#ixzz3vM6nGM6h


----------



## solange

I really like Harry's coat. Anyone have info?


----------



## minababe

is he Dating someone?


----------



## twinkle.tink

Lounorada said:


>




 I am sure you have probably run across this...but it was too cute not to make sure 

As soon as I saw it, I thought of you. I have had it on my phone forever and kept forgetting to upload.


----------



## Lounorada

twinkle.tink said:


> I am sure you have probably run across this...but it was too cute not to make sure
> 
> As soon as I saw it, I thought of you. I have had it on my phone forever and kept forgetting to upload.



 That's adorable, thanks for posting Twinkle.tink!


----------



## VickyB

Harry is so dapper and darling!!!!!


----------



## alisonmrichie

VickyB said:


> Harry is so dapper and darling!!!!!


Harry is definitely the better looking brother I think its the ginger hair though.


----------



## Lounorada

Some pics from Harrys visit to South Africa, back in early December...

*Prince Harry plays tag rugby with children at Kings Park Stadium as part of his visit to South Africa on December 1, 2015.*


























tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry visits Siyabonga Secondary School and meets children participating in the Nelson Mandela Champion within program in Soweto on December 3, 2015 in Johannesburg, South Africa. *





















tumblr


----------



## redney

He seems to have inherited his mother's warmth and grace with others.


----------



## Lounorada

(Pics from last month)
*Prince Harry during a visit to see the impact of recent floods in St Michael's on Wyre on February 5, 2016 in England.* 

Zimbio


----------



## Bag*Snob

He seems to have fun no matter what he is doing.


----------



## pink1

^He does.  Who knows how he is in person but he genuinely seems like a nice guy.


----------



## myown

he seems very comfortable in public


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Longchamp

I never get tired of looking at his pix. Thanks for posting everyone!


----------



## Lounorada

Longchamp said:


> I never get tired of looking at his pix. Thanks for posting everyone!


----------



## Sasha2012

Kate, William and Harry took centre stage this afternoon as they joined three generations of the Royal Family to celebrate the Queen's commitment to the Commonwealth in the year of her 90th birthday.

The three young royals were seen smiling and laughing with one another as they arrived alongside the monarch and Prince Philip for the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey, one of the highlights of the Queen's calendar.

The rare joint public engagement, which was also attended by Prince Andrew, was broadcast live on the BBC for the first time in the union's 67-year history, in celebration of Her Majesty's lifetime commitment to the 'family' in this milestone year.

As head of the 53 nations, the Queen - whose father King George VI was the union's first figurehead - sees the continuation of the Commonwealth as one of the greatest achievements of her reign and is keen to pass on her enthusiasm for it to her grandchildren. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...port-need-accept-diversity.html#ixzz42uS0jFZo


----------



## Lounorada

*At the RBS Six Nations match between England and Wales at Twickenham Stadium on March 12, 2016 in London, England.*

Zimbio


----------



## pursecrzy

invictus games will be held in Toronto in 2017!


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry speaks with MapAction volunteers during a briefing by MapAction to learn more about the charity's response to the recent Nepal earthquakes, ahead of his tour to the country later this month on March 16, 2016 in London, United Kingdom.*

Zimbio


----------



## chowlover2

Robin Roberts is interviewing Prince Harry on GMA tomorrow, I'm setting my DVR!


----------



## VickyB

chowlover2 said:


> Robin Roberts is interviewing Prince Harry on GMA tomorrow, I'm setting my DVR!



Thanks!


----------



## Grande Latte

Wow. 

Who wouldn't be wild about Harry.


----------



## knasarae

It's funny to me...

I think William looks like Diana.  Diana was beautiful to me, but I do not find William attractive at all.  I think Harry looks like Charles.  I don't find Charles attractive, but I think Harry is. It's funny how features are interpreted by others.


----------



## Sasha2012

Prince Harry was greeted with garlands in Kathmandu today by five colourfully dressed local girls known 'pancha kanya' - the five virgins.

The group of girls aged between 17 and 27, whose name comes from five iconic Hindu heroines, gave the royal four bouquets of flowers, with the fifth girl Maiya Maharjan, 25, placing a fragrant garland of marigolds over his head.

Dressed casually for a morning's sightseeing in chinos, a blue shirt and desert boots - with colourful bracelets on his wrist - Harry looked delighted at the gesture and thanked them profusely.

He even showed off his grey and blue socks when asked to remove his shoes as a mark of respect while enjoying a tour around the courtyards at Patal Palace.

The red mark on his forehead - a symbol of welcome and honour - was made by Secretary General of Red Cross Nepal Dev Ratna Dhakhwa. He was also given a garland of flowers before he heard about the charity's work. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...areas-Kathmandu-Nepal-trip.html#ixzz43Sq3EPlu


----------



## redney

Love him. His presence and what looks to be genuine personality and interest in interacting with those he meets is so like Diana.


----------



## sdkitty

knasarae said:


> It's funny to me...
> 
> I think William looks like Diana.  Diana was beautiful to me, but I do not find William attractive at all.  I think Harry looks like Charles.  I don't find Charles attractive, but I think Harry is. It's funny how features are interpreted by others.


I think William was cuter when they were adolescents but Harry has grown up to be more attractive.  I think he looks like one of Diana's lovers.


----------



## LavenderIce

redney said:


> Love him. His presence and what looks to be genuine personality and interest in interacting with those he meets is so like Diana.



This.  I've come to grow fond of him.


----------



## VickyB

He is adorable!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry visits the village of Leorani in the Himalayan foothills on day three of his visit to Nepal on March 21, 2016 in Bardia, Nepal.*
* Harry is on a five day visit to Nepal, his first official tour of the country.*

Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry (wearing a feta turnban after being given the honour of being 'village head man') dances during a visit to the village of Leorani in **the Himalayan foothills on day three of his visit to Nepal on March 21, 2016 in Bardia, Nepal.* 

Zimbio


----------



## VickyB

Thanks for posting these! Harry is just so at ease with people, unlike The Squares.


----------



## Lounorada

VickyB said:


> Thanks for posting these! Harry is just so at ease with people, unlike The Squares.


No problem!  and  @ 'The Squares'


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry watches the sun rise after spending the night in the Himalayan hilltop village of Leorani on day four of his visit to Nepal on March 22, 2016 in Bardia, Nepal.*

Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry visits the village of Leorani and the Himalayan village of Okhari  on day four of his visit to Nepal on March 22, 2016. Harry is on a five day visit to Nepal, his first official tour of the country.*

Zimbio


----------



## lovely

I just think he is so cool.


----------



## VickyB

Lounorada said:


> No problem!  and  @ 'The Squares'



 I just can't help myself. Kate and William are just so square so I call them The Squares.


----------



## VickyB

Lounorada said:


> *Prince Harry visits the village of Leorani and the Himalayan village of Okhari  on day four of his visit to Nepal on March 22, 2016. Harry is on a five day visit to Nepal, his first official tour of the country.*
> 
> Zimbio



Thanks again for more darling pics of Harry . His personality really comes thru in photos. Seems so genuine and honestly engaged in his surroundings.


----------



## VickyB

lovely said:


> I just think he is so cool.


----------



## Longchamp

Ahhhhh.  I'm in love!


----------



## myown

gosh. he seems like he is really enjoying his time! 
he is so handsome.


----------



## CMaylv

I just imagine looking at those photos how infectious his laughs are. 

:dreaming:


----------



## Hobbsy

VickyB said:


> I just can't help myself. Kate and William are just so square so I call them The Squares.



I think when you're in line to be the King and Queen of England someday it's a requirement you be square and stay square?!


----------



## Sasha2012

Prince Harry once again proved that he had his mother's touch today when he visited a hospital unit for children suffering from appalling burns injuries on his final day in Nepal.

Visibly moved, the royal, 31, made the children he met laugh by playing with their dolls and posing for photographs with staff and parents...and even high-fiving one youngster.

Harry was at the Kanti Children's Hospital in Kathmandu, where he met 16 children aged between 11 months and 11 years, many of whom had been injured after being displaced by the earthquake that devastated parts of the country in 2015.

It marks the final day of his official tour; this afternoon Harry revealed that he will stay in the country for another week to help rebuild a school that was badly damaged when an earthquake struck Nepal in 2015 saying he hoped to 'shine a light on the country's resilience.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ms-tour-Kathmandu-hospital.html#ixzz43kRhS0Jr


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sasha2012

More pictures from Nepal- March 23, 2016










































via Daily Mail


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry greets members of the public as he visits young burns victims at Kanti Children's Hospital on the final day of his tour of the country on March 23, 2016 in Kathmandu, Nepal. Established in 1963 the hospital has a capacity of 320 beds and treats children up to the age of 14. Many of it's patients have been injured whilst living in the hazardous environments of the camps following the earthquake.*


Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## VickyB

Hobbsy said:


> I think when you're in line to be the King and Queen of England someday it's a requirement you be square and stay square?!



Yes, but more so decades ago than now. The Squares make Charles and Camilla look like the life of the party.


----------



## myown

Hobbsy said:


> I think when you're in line to be the King and Queen of England someday it's a requirement you be square and stay square?!



I agree.

I also think they do a great job. I bet it´s not easy. Kate comes of very nice and down to earth. And both truly seems to love each other.




VickyB said:


> Yes, but more so decades ago than now. The Squares make Charles and Camilla look like the life of the party.



Charles had his square time in the past. he married someone who he did´t want to marry just to please the queen and maybe the kingdom. I think he does´t sees himself as the future king. I hardly doubt he´ll ever be. so he´s free for faults.


----------



## Lounorada

Instagram


----------



## nastasja

How did I not know they had an IG [emoji85]


----------



## edanc

That photo of him and the baby 

He's extending his stay in Nepal to help rebuild a school as well.


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry attends unveiling of the UK Invictus Games 2016 Team at Buckingham Palace on April 6, 2016 in London, England.*

Zimbio


----------



## lovely

Be still my heart...


----------



## Lounorada

*The Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry on a tour of the Star Wars sets at Pinewood studios on April 19, 2016 in Iver Heath, England.* 
Prince William and Prince Harry are touring Pinewood studios to visit the production workshops and meet the creative teams working behind the scenes on the Star Wars films. 

Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## pink1

I think I have said this before but he always seems so sincere in these pics.  Not like he has to do these things but he truly enjoys doing them.


----------



## nancyramos

pink1 said:


> I think I have said this before but he always seems so sincere in these pics.  Not like he has to do these things but he truly enjoys doing them.



Agree. My exact thoughts when I was going through the pictures


----------



## Glitterandstuds

He's perfect


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

pink1 said:


> I think I have said this before but he always seems so sincere in these pics.  Not like he has to do these things but he truly enjoys doing them.



So, so true. Harry is extraordinary!

And that photo of him with Chewie


----------



## Sasha2012

Taking a tumble in public is always an embarrassing occurrence. 

But when former Olympian Sylvia Disley, 86, slipped over during the medal presentation at today's London marathon, at least she had a royal on hand to come to her rescue.

Prince Harry, 31, who is patron of The London Marathon Charitable Trust raced to Sylvia's aid when he spotted the retired sprinter slipping up on stage.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...an-slipped-London-Marathon.html#ixzz46mAkGO16


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry attends ANZAC Day service at Westminster Abbey on April 25, 2016 in London, England.*

Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

Damn, he looks so _good_ in a tux 

*The BT Sport Industry Awards 2016 at Battersea Evolution on April 28, 2016 in London, England.* The BT Sport Industry Awards is the most prestigious commercial sports awards ceremony in Europe, where over 1750 of the industry's key decision-makers mix with high profile sporting celebrities for the most important networking occasion in the sport business calendar. 

Zimbio


----------



## edanc

Damn.  He always looks like he's moving with such ease.


----------



## mkr

He looks like he'd be fun to party with.


----------



## lovehgss1

I sense of fun from Prince Harry and President and Mrs. ***** for his Invictus Games (sporting
event for wounded warriors)

https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal

Unfortunately for you @FLOTUS and @***** I wasn't alone when you sent me that video &#55357;&#56841; - H.


----------



## Lounorada

lovehgss1 said:


> I sense of fun from Prince Harry and President and Mrs. ***** for his Invictus Games (sporting
> event for wounded warriors)
> 
> https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal
> 
> Unfortunately for you @FLOTUS and @***** I wasn't alone when you sent me that video &#65533;&#65533; - H.


 Love that!


----------



## BagLovingMom

That video is great. He is fabulous


----------



## lizmil

Class will out!

Sent from my SM-G900V using PurseForum mobile app


----------



## VickyB

He is adorable!!!!


----------



## Longchamp

I'm so in lust with Harry.  Did I mention my loins??


----------



## beekmanhill

Lounorada said:


> Love that!



Wow, Prince Harry killed that.   And the Queen has great timing.


----------



## pursecrzy

Harry was in Toronto yesterday

From Lainey gossip


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry Launches The Invictus Games In Toronto* 
Prince Harry gives a speech at the Launch of Invictus 2017 Toronto at the Fairmont Royal York Hotel on May 2, 2016 in Toronto, Canada. Prince Harry is in Toronto for the Launch of the 2017 Toronto Invictus Games before heading down to Miami and the 2016 Invictus Games in Orlando.


Tumblr


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Prince Harry and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau watch a sledge-hockey match Mattany at the Athletic Centre on May 2, 2016 in Toronto, Canada. Prince Harry is in Toronto for the Launch of the 2017 Toronto Invictus Games before heading down to Miami and the 2016 Invictus Games in Orlando. 

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Wasting no time! Prince Harry hits the polo field for a charity match just hours after he touched down in Florida for the third annual Invictus Games*


The 31-year-old will be helping to organize the Olympic-style competition for wounded war veterans in Orlando starting May 8
He landed in the US on Tuesday night, much to the excitement of locals 
On Wednesday, he took part in the Sentebale Royal Salute Polo Cup in nearby Wellington, which raised funds for his Sentebale charity
The prince appears on the cover of People this week, telling the magazine he'd like to have kids and enjoys being a 'fun uncle'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...rida-annual-Invictus-Games.html#ixzz47jWAQzRf


----------



## BridesdeGala

Operation Marry Harry has begun in Florida....be on the lookout


----------



## Lounorada

BridesdeGala said:


> Operation Marry Harry has begun in Florida....be on the lookout


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry meets with athletes ahead of Invictus Games Orlando 2016 at ESPN Wide World of Sports on May 6, 2016 in Orlando, Florida. *
Prince Harry, patron of the  Invictus Games Foundation is in Orlando ahead of the opening of Invictus Games which will open on Sunday. The Invictus Games is the only International sporting event for wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women. Started in 2014 by Prince Harry, the Invictus Games uses the power of Sport to inspire recovery and support rehabilitation. 

Zimbio


----------



## VickyB

Adorable!!!!!!


----------



## beekmanhill

He is so natural.  You can tell he loves what he is doing and is not faking it.


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry meets athletes and supporters at the ESPN Wide World of Sports in Orlando, Florida, 7 May 2016.*


Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Meeting supporters and athletes at the Invictus Games, May 7, 2016 in Orlando, Florida.*

Tumblr


----------



## redney

He always looks so engaged with the people at the events.


----------



## Lounorada

Oh my goodness, so cute! 


*Prince Harry and Rio Woolf during the Invictus Games in 2014 and 2016.*

Tumblr

2014






2016


----------



## mkr

He looks like he's having a ball.  Always seems very at ease.  Love him!


----------



## Lounorada

*Invictus Games 2016 - The Opening Ceremony on May 8, 2016.*



Tumblr


----------



## beekmanhill

Loved last night's ceremony and interviews.  Kudos to FLOTUS too for putting in the time for this cause.

Maybe Prince Harry will meet a nice American woman and spend half his time here!


----------



## Crystalina

He has a way with people, like Diana.

Love him![emoji171][emoji178][emoji170]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

I can almost hear him laughing from looking at the pics


----------



## lilly2002

Crystalina said:


> He has a way with people, like Diana.
> 
> Love him![emoji171][emoji178][emoji170]



I was just thinking this he's very like Diana


----------



## Lounorada

Prince Harry talking about his mother (Diana, Princess of Wales) and how he hopes that she would be proud of him. 

Tumblr


----------



## chowlover2

Lounorada said:


> Prince Harry talking about his mother (Diana, Princess of Wales) and how he hopes that she would be proud of him.
> 
> Tumblr




That just makes me cry. I really think Harry is most like Diana and am sure she watches over him and is very proud.


----------



## Lounorada

*Some more pics from Invictus Games Orlando 2016...*

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Visiting the Chelsea Flower Show in London on May 23, 2016.*

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry attends a reception for Normandy Veterans at Southwick House on June 2, 2016 in Portsmouth, England.* The veterans, from across the armed forces, took part in the D-Day Landings and are attending the reception ahead of their annual pilgrimage to Normandy. 

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

.


----------



## Lounorada

*During a visit to the Double Jab Boxing Club to support Sport for Social Development initiatives on June 6, 2016 in London, United Kingdom.* 

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*National Service Of Thanksgiving To Celebrate The Queen's 90th Birthday   *
Attending the service of thanksgiving for Queen Elizabeth II's 90th birthday at St Paul's cathedral on June 10, 2016 in London, United Kingdom. 

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Attending a reception at the Guildhall following the National Service of Thanksgiving for Queen Elizabeth II's 90th birthday at St Paul's Cathedral on June 10, 2016 in London, United Kingdom. *

Tumblr


----------



## VickyB

He just seems so comfortable in his own skin and genuinely excited about engaging with people. These are qualities William and Kate do not have. And Kate wasn't raised as a royal, so that says something about her.


----------



## Sharont2305

A friend of mine was at the Invictus Games (her nephew was in Team GB) and she said Harry was everywhere, a nightmare for security as he was wandering around on his own or with the athletes or families, he wouldn't sit where he was supposed to sit, always in the crowd with the families and so so normal. A true gent but very cheeky and nobody minded their language when he was around


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

VickyB said:


> He just seems so comfortable in his own skin and genuinely excited about engaging with people. These are qualities William and Kate do not have. And Kate wasn't raised as a royal, so that says something about her.



Will and the Middleton kids have always seemed aimless and bored.


----------



## VickyB

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Will and the Middleton kids have always seemed aimless and bored.



Yes!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry attending the Trooping the Colour, this year marking the Queen's 90th birthday at The Mall on June 11, 2016 in London, England.* The ceremony is Queen Elizabeth II's annual birthday parade and dates back to the time of Charles II in the 17th Century when the Colours of a regiment were used as a rallying point in battle. 

Tumblr


----------



## Longchamp

Always love when you post pix of my future husband.


----------



## Lounorada

*Attending "The Patron's Lunch" celebrations for The Queen's 90th birthday at  on June 12, 2016 in London, England.* 

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry attending day 1 at Royal Ascot on June 14, 2016 in Ascot, England.*

Tumblr


----------



## Chagall

I love the person Harry has grown up to be. He seems a lot more warm and genuine than William.


----------



## Lounorada

*At a polo match at Beaufort Polo Club in Gloucestershire, England on June 18, 2016.*

Tumblr


----------



## Chagall

William reminds me of his father Charles and Harry reminds me of Diana. He relates so naturally and warmly with people.


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry visiting a RFU-backed community rugby programme at Alexandra Park in Stockport, England on June 21, 2016.*

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*At the Queen's Young Leaders Awards at Buckingham Palace on June 23, in London, United Kingdom.*

Tumblr


----------



## alansgail

I love that he always seems to be smiling.....that and he's dashing as well!!!!!


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

I could be on this thread all day long.. he's way too precious


----------



## BagLovingMom

Cinamonn_girl said:


> I could be on this thread all day long.. he's way too precious


 Yes! He is fabulous!


----------



## mkr

Lounorada said:


> *At the Queen's Young Leaders Awards at Buckingham Palace on June 23, in London, United Kingdom.*
> 
> Tumblr


David Beckham was there.


----------



## myown

Lounorada said:


> *At a polo match at Beaufort Polo Club in Gloucestershire, England on June 18, 2016.*
> 
> Tumblr


Poor William!


----------



## Lounorada

* Prince Harry visits the Basotho Youth Choir during their rehearsals at the Brit School on June 27, 2016 in London, England.*
The Basotho Youth Choir will perform alongside Sentebale Ambassador Joss Stone at tomorrow's Sentebale Concert at Kensington Palace, headlined by Coldplay. The choir members have all been supported by Sentebale's Secondary School Bursaries Progamme or Care for Vulnerable Children Programme. The Bursaries Programme covers the cost of school fees, uniforms and books for some of Lesotho's most disadvantaged children.

Tumblr


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry attending the Sentebale Concert at Kensington Palace on June 28, 2016 in London, England.*
Sentebale was founded by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho over ten years ago. It helps the vulnerable and HIV positive children of Lesotho and Botswana.

Zimbio


----------



## Lounorada

*Attending a military-led vigil to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the beginning of the Battle of the Somme 
at the Thiepval memorial to the Missing in June 30, 2016 in Thiepval, France.*

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

Today would have been Diana's 55th birthday 

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

Can one of the mods PLEASE change the title of this thread to simply; 'The Prince Harry Thread'.
The current title is a little too much ... makes me roll my eyes.


----------



## Lounorada

*At the Thiepval Memorial to attend a ceremony marking the 100th Anniversary of the Battle of Somme on July 1, 2016 in Thiepval, France.*

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry meets young people as he visits the Wigan Youth Zone, *a purpose-built youth facility that provides a safe and fun environment for 8-19 year-olds or anyone aged up to 25 with a disability to use in their leisure time, on July 5, 2016 in Wigan, England.

Tumblr


----------



## Lounorada

*Prince Harry has claimed the prize of second place in one of the world’s biggest yacht races, sailing aboard a vessel named Invictus.*
Harry was one of 16,000 competitors taking part in the Round the Island race on the coast of the Isle of Wight on Saturday. He joined friends including Paralympian athletes aboard millionaire Sir Keith Mills’ 40-foot yacht in the 85th J.P.Morgan Asset Management Round the Island Race.

Tumblr


----------



## Sasha2012

http://www.people.com/people/package/article/0,,20395222_21026630,00.html

*Prince Harry Moves 262 Elephants to Safety*

We already know he's a rhino rescuer and a champion of lions, but now Prince Harry is a hero to elephants, too.

The royal conservationist recently helped move 262 elephants to safety as he worked on a key mission to support populations in Africa.

"He is amazing and down to earth. He is very social but a respectable gentleman. We ate together at the camp and we camped in the same grounds – this is unique for someone of his status," Patricio Ndadzela, country director for the nonprofit conservation body African Parks in Malawi, tells PEOPLE of the prince's visit this earlier this month.

Harry spent time in the southern African country working with the 500 Elephants initiative, which aims to help reduce habitat pressures, ease human-wildlife conflict and boost elephant populations in places where poaching is rampant.

"He was very at home, nothing bothered him," says Ndadzela. "We were close to a river and there were thousands of crocodiles and he was not scared!"

The former British Army captain, 31, who has regularly visited the continentboth for pleasure and to support his charity for kids in Lesotho, Sentebale, sees conservation work as a key part of his public life.

The royal "is very passionate and knowledgeable about conservation," adds Ndadzela, "from these species as well as the others that are endangered in Africa."

He also helped move more than 1,500 antelope and buffalo and put tagging collars on rhinos and lions.

"He is someone who wants to help and do things to help African wildlife survive," says Ndadzela. "He saw his work with us as a continuation of the visitshe has made to South Africa, Namibia and Bostwana."

And Harry outlined his desire to see even more support for anti-poaching efforts. "He wants to support the training and motivation for the rangers in Malawi," says Ndadzela. "These are the people on the front line in terms of conservation, and he wants to see what he can do to support law enforcement activities, especially in wildlife conservation."

The organization hopes that his presence will raise the profile of their work and enable them to do more for the wild animals of the continent. "We have seen him as a friend, a colleague of conservation in Africa," says Ndadzela.


----------



## lilapot

I absolutely love this guy!


----------



## Chagall

lilapot said:


> I absolutely love this guy!


He is great. He just exudes warmth.


----------



## Sasha2012

A brave little boy who has a terminal illness and can barely walk got to his feet and flung his arms around Prince Harry an an awards ceremony tonight.

Ollie Carroll, five, from Cheshire, was born a healthy little boy but developed the rare genetic condition Battens Disease, for which there is no known cure, and will eventually leave him unable to walk, see, eat or breathe.

As Harry sank to his knee to chat to him, Ollie, who has great difficulty in controlling his limbs, managed to pull himself up with the help of his mother and gave the royal a huge hug.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...age-seriously-ill-children.html#ixzz4M4X4Sj00


----------



## chowlover2

Sasha2012 said:


> A brave little boy who has a terminal illness and can barely walk got to his feet and flung his arms around Prince Harry an an awards ceremony tonight.
> 
> Ollie Carroll, five, from Cheshire, was born a healthy little boy but developed the rare genetic condition Battens Disease, for which there is no known cure, and will eventually leave him unable to walk, see, eat or breathe.
> 
> As Harry sank to his knee to chat to him, Ollie, who has great difficulty in controlling his limbs, managed to pull himself up with the help of his mother and gave the royal a huge hug.
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...age-seriously-ill-children.html#ixzz4M4X4Sj00


That is so sweet! I can't wait to see him as a Dad!


----------



## VickyB

Harry is just the best!!!! Absolutely love him!


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

He would be such a perfect king, but for real.


----------



## Lounorada

Oh, hey Harry!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sasha2012

Prince Harry scrapped a secret trip to Canada to meet with new lover Meghan Markle after details of their alleged six-month relationship emerged.


A 'besotted' Harry, 32, was booked on to a British Airways flight from Heathrow to Toronto at 11.30am and due to land in the Canadian city at 3.30pm yesterday but was a 'no show', a source said.

Hours before he was due to leave the country claims they had been seeing eachother for nearly six months broke in Britain.

And it appears that concerns photographers would be waiting for him in London and Toronto may have scuppered their transatlantic tryst.

A source told the Evening Standard: 'The flight was booked last week but he was a no-show. The crew for the British Airways flight knew the Prince was booked to travel with them. It appears he pulled out at the last minute and decided not to travel.'

One royal source suggested the pair are in a relationship but it is still considered 'very early days', and yesterday afternoon, at around the time Harry would have landed, Meghan wished people a 'happy Sunday' as she went for a drive with her two dogs.

The 35-year-old actress, who is best known for her role as Rachel Zane in US legal drama Suits, is believed to have charmed the royal when he visited Toronto in May.

As claims the pair were 'besotted' with each other emerged, keen observers spotted pictures of them wearing matching bracelets and it's possible he gave a similar to trinket to Meghan as a gift.

Toronto-based actress Meghan, 35, shared a snap of herself wearing the jewellery on a recent trip to Soho Farmhouse in Oxfordshire, and its blue, white and black colours mean friendship, fearlessness and independence'.

But she has also been linked with Northern Irish golfer Rory McIlroy and Canadian star chef Cory Vitiello, who she was apparently romantically linked to when she met Harry.

In March Mr Vitiello was boasting on Twitter that he was 'so proud of my lady' after she was named a global ambassador for the children's charity World Vision.

The prince, 32, also follows the actress on the picture sharing website Instagram using a pseudonym, the Mail can reveal.

Intriguingly, Harry, who publicly professes to hate social media, is one of her million followers and she also follows him.

The revelation is telling because the prince has a private account and only 'follows' a few close friends and charities, suggesting the pair know each other fairly well. 

The Prince is said to be besotted with Meghan after meeting in Toronto during the summer as Harry promoted his Invictus Games.

A source close to the prince, who is fifth-in-line to the throne, told The Express that he is 'besotted' with the star,who plays Rachel Zane in the hit legal drama Suits.

'He's happier than he's been for many years,' they said. 'He's in a very relaxed period of his life and Meghan has come along at the right time.

'They are taking each week as it comes and just enjoying each other's company but it's fair to say that they love seeing each other and there's a definite chemistry between them.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...budding-relationship-broke.html#ixzz4OhYbquHh


----------



## gillianna

Wonder if she will try to become a baby mama?


----------



## mizzle

I like them as a couple. I hope it works out.


----------



## Tivo

Daily Mail is trying to make this girl look horrible in that article. So shady, lol.


----------



## krissa

gillianna said:


> Wonder if she will try to become a baby mama?



Why would she want to be a baby momma? She doesn't seem like a fame seeking starlet, most non Suits watchers didn't even know who she was before this news exploded. I don't follow these boards but were his other exes considered potential baby mama's. Such an odd choice of words tbh.


----------



## Frivole88

She has a resemblance to Pippa Middleton.


----------



## Tivo

krissa said:


> Why would she want to be a baby momma? She doesn't seem like a fame seeking starlet, most non Suits watchers didn't even know who she was before this news exploded. I don't follow these boards but were his other exes considered potential baby mama's. Such an odd choice of words tbh.


Perhaps those are the kinds of circles the OP travels amongst?


----------



## myown

Tivo said:


> Daily Mail is trying to make this girl look horrible in that article. So shady, lol.


yeah i read a few, too. 
DM is ********


----------



## myown

kristinlorraine said:


> She has a resemblance to Pippa Middleton.


I read that all the time, but i dont see it..


----------



## gillianna

I do not see the Queen welcoming this woman into her family that easily.   I think she is lovely and would be a great match for Harry versus all the rich blond society type girls he has dated in the past.  A pregnancy might be the only way they would accept her because it would get too much bad press to turn her away.  He stated he would love to have a family.   From what I thought the princes have to ask approval to the Queen on who they can marry.  At his age he should be able to do what he wants.  I do think she would be more like Diana with a mind of her own versus able to be pushed around by the palace but then again she is older and much wiser.


----------



## krissa

https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...unprecedented-statement-on/amp/?client=safari


----------



## GoStanford

Is she a divorcee, and in this day and age would she be accepted by the royal family if so?


----------



## pursecrzy

GoStanford said:


> Is she a divorcee, and in this day and age would she be accepted by the royal family if so?



Yes, she's divorced. Same as Prince Charles and Camilla so I can't see it be an issue.


----------



## terebina786

I feel like the Queen isn't as hard on Harry and William.  I think she learned her lesson from the Diana/Charles fiasco and they're both old enough to understand and do what they feel is right.


----------



## myown

gillianna said:


> I do not see the Queen welcoming this woman into her family that easily.   I think she is lovely and would be a great match for Harry versus all the rich blond society type girls he has dated in the past.  A pregnancy might be the only way they would accept her because it would get too much bad press to turn her away.  He stated he would love to have a family.   From what I thought the princes have to ask approval to the Queen on who they can marry.  At his age he should be able to do what he wants.  I do think she would be more like Diana with a mind of her own versus able to be pushed around by the palace but then again she is older and much wiser.


agree. and I also think he is not the crown prince, he should be allowed to make his own decisions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

pursecrzy said:


> Yes, she's divorced. Same as Prince Charles and Camilla so I can't see it be an issue.


also other royal family members (other countries) married divorcees.
again. he is not the crown prince. i don´t see a problem with that as long as they behave correctly


----------



## sdkitty

boo hoo....sorry if this is callous but if the B-level actress can't stand the heat, she can get out of the relationship

From the Daily Beast:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-time-off-work-struggling-with-attention.html


*IT AIN’T EASY*
*Prince Harry’s Girlfriend Meghan Markle Takes Time Off Work, Struggling With Attention*
Harry’s new girlfriend Meghan Markle is struggling to cope with the attention and is taking some time off work. Is this why Harry went public?



*TOM SYKES*
*11.10.16 2:06 AM ET*


Prince Harry’s new girlfriend Meghan Markle is taking some time off from filming her TV show _Suits_ as she tries to come to terms with what Harry has described as a “wave of abuse and harassment” since their relationship became public knowledge.

Page Six reports the actress, 35, has told her bosses she needs to skip filming for her USA Network show in Toronto this week because she has “something important to do.”

Page Six reports: “The reason for the absence is being kept a closely guarded secret, but insiders speculate that Markle is meeting with lawyers to help manage her turbulent and sudden rise to international fame.”


If Markle is having trouble coping with the attention since it was disclosed she is dating Harry, it may explain why, earlier this week, Prince Harry, 32, issued an unprecedented public statement accusing both mainstream and social-media trolls of racist abuse in coverage of his relationship with his new American girlfriend, who has one white parent and one black parent.

Kensington Palace declined to tell The Daily Beast exactly which stories they were referring to, but a _Daily Mail_ story headlined “Harry’s Girl Is (Almost) Straight Outta Compton” is in the frame.

 “It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm,” the letter said.

Kensington Palace listed a string of complaints in the letter, citing “nightly legal battles” to keep defamatory stories out of papers; Markle’s mother “having to struggle past photographers” in order to get to her front door; the attempts of “reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home”; and “substantial bribes” being offered by papers to Markle’s ex-boyfriend along with the “bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker, and loved one in her life” as papers seek information on her.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> boo hoo....sorry if this is callous but if the B-level actress can't stand the heat, she can get out of the relationship
> 
> From the Daily Beast:
> 
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-time-off-work-struggling-with-attention.html
> 
> 
> *IT AIN’T EASY*
> *Prince Harry’s Girlfriend Meghan Markle Takes Time Off Work, Struggling With Attention*
> Harry’s new girlfriend Meghan Markle is struggling to cope with the attention and is taking some time off work. Is this why Harry went public?
> 
> 
> 
> *TOM SYKES*
> *11.10.16 2:06 AM ET*
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s new girlfriend Meghan Markle is taking some time off from filming her TV show _Suits_ as she tries to come to terms with what Harry has described as a “wave of abuse and harassment” since their relationship became public knowledge.
> 
> Page Six reports the actress, 35, has told her bosses she needs to skip filming for her USA Network show in Toronto this week because she has “something important to do.”
> 
> Page Six reports: “The reason for the absence is being kept a closely guarded secret, but insiders speculate that Markle is meeting with lawyers to help manage her turbulent and sudden rise to international fame.”
> 
> 
> If Markle is having trouble coping with the attention since it was disclosed she is dating Harry, it may explain why, earlier this week, Prince Harry, 32, issued an unprecedented public statement accusing both mainstream and social-media trolls of racist abuse in coverage of his relationship with his new American girlfriend, who has one white parent and one black parent.
> 
> Kensington Palace declined to tell The Daily Beast exactly which stories they were referring to, but a _Daily Mail_ story headlined “Harry’s Girl Is (Almost) Straight Outta Compton” is in the frame.
> 
> “It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm,” the letter said.
> 
> Kensington Palace listed a string of complaints in the letter, citing “nightly legal battles” to keep defamatory stories out of papers; Markle’s mother “having to struggle past photographers” in order to get to her front door; the attempts of “reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home”; and “substantial bribes” being offered by papers to Markle’s ex-boyfriend along with the “bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker, and loved one in her life” as papers seek information on her.



It is callous, because she has experienced a barrage of racist messages and threats - that is not to be taken lightly or joked about.

ETA: not sure why her being a b-level actress is relevant.


----------



## kkfiregirl

krissa said:


> Why would she want to be a baby momma? She doesn't seem like a fame seeking starlet, most non Suits watchers didn't even know who she was before this news exploded. I don't follow these boards but were his other exes considered potential baby mama's. Such an odd choice of words tbh.



Yes it is an odd choice of words to use to describe a black woman's relationship with a man, especially given the stereotypes surrounding that term.


----------



## TC1

I'm sure they can shoot for a week around her...she's not in every scence or anything. The racist remarks are disgusting, it's sad if she feels the need to miss work due to harrassment. This applies for everyone, celebrity or not.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> It is callous, because she has experienced a barrage of racist messages and threats - that is not to be taken lightly or joked about.
> 
> ETA: not sure why her being a b-level actress is relevant.


you're right....it's not OK to threaten her....as far as the Internet and racist comments - there are a lot of people who make very ugly comments....creeps sitting behind a screen
She's possibly landed one of the most eligible bachelors in the world and I guess this is the price if she wants to continue the relationship


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> you're right....it's not OK to threaten her....as far as the Internet and racist comments - there are a lot of people who make very ugly comments....creeps sitting behind a screen
> She's possibly landed one of the most eligible bachelors in the world and I guess this is the price if she wants to continue the relationship



Yes, it's sad - all of those comments are likely from people jealous of her.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> Yes, it's sad - all of those comments are likely from people jealous of her.


one of the nice things here at TPF is that the ugliness is pretty much kept down.  sometimes we get a bit frustrated when our comments are deleted because they're deemed controversial or political.  but when I look a news stories sometimes on big sites like Yahoo and see some of the ugly comments posted below the stories, it's just plain creepy.
Anyway in terms of this woman - if she should by chance marry Harry, she'll have security.  But I'm sure the ugly comments won't go away entirely.  In fact they may escalate for a while.  So, assuming Harry is serious about her, she will have to make a choice.  Can she deal with this or not?


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> one of the nice things here at TPF is that the ugliness is pretty much kept down.  sometimes we get a bit frustrated when our comments are deleted because they're deemed controversial or political.  but when I look a news stories sometimes on big sites like Yahoo and see some of the ugly comments posted below the stories, it's just plain creepy.
> Anyway in terms of this woman - if she should by chance marry Harry, she'll have security.  But I'm sure the ugly comments won't go away entirely.  In fact they may escalate for a while.  So, assuming Harry is serious about her, she will have to make a choice.  Can she deal with this or not?


Wait, wut? Expecting her to "deal with" racial harassment and personal threats as a trade off to dating Harry is ridiculous and offensive, which is likely what led him to issue the statement. Why should the burden be on HER vs. those lowlifes who are actually harassing and threatening her? That's messed up.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Wait, wut? Expecting her to "deal with" racial harassment and personal threats as a trade off to dating Harry is ridiculous and offensive, which is likely what led him to issue the statement. Why should the burden be on HER vs. those lowlifes who are actually harassing and threatening her? That's messed up.


not saying it's ok, but can you stop it?


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> not saying it's ok, but can you stop it?



Of course not and I can also not victim blame.


----------



## gillianna

Anyone famous with social media accounts can be attacked by crazy people and sadly the person has little control over it aside from making their account private.


----------



## GoStanford

myown said:


> agree. and I also think he is not the crown prince, he should be allowed to make his own decisions.



However, given the queen's own rise to the throne as a result of her uncle abdicating, I suspect she will still be involved in approving her potential successors' engagements.


----------



## Underoos!

Why did Harry release this statement?  He cannot protect his GF from the internet.  The media seem to be making fun of it and racist trolls will always be racist!  The offenders will ignore this and keep on.  All he did was confirm that he's dating Meghan.  I really don't think that was his objective.


----------



## VickyB

Harry is 32 not 22. He's kept his highly spirited/ mischievous and  genuine personality intact while seeming to have matured greatly since his  stumbling out of Bijoux at the BCOD  and Vegas naked shooting pool days. Altho , must admit, loved when Harry misbehaved!  Granny dotes on him. She probably wants to see him settled down with the person he chooses to be with rather than choosing somebody for him. Lesson learned there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> *one of the nice things here at TPF is that the ugliness is pretty much kept down.*  ...



I am sure Angelina Jolie feels the same - especially since the break-up with Brad.


----------



## zen1965

The Queen is 90 years old. She was brought up in an incredible restricted and formal fashion. Etiquette is most likely everything to her. She would never make a public statement of disapproval about her grandchildren's choices. Yet, I am fairly certain that she strongly believes aristocrates and especially high nobility should marry among themselves. And despite the fact that the European princes of Spain, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Monaco as well as William himself married commoners, there are countless aristocratic families (earls, dukes, barons etc.) that predominantly marry among themselves "keeping up traditions".
I am not judging BTW. The above is merely an observation gleened from personal experience.


----------



## Singra

I've only watched a few episodes but I recognize her from the TV show Suits. She's very bubbly and sweet on the show, she and her females costars are always shimmying down the hallways in very stylish threads. Only knowing her form the show I wouldn't have thought of her the type to be able to handle someone like Prince Harry.

I know a couple of stories about Prince Harry from some friends who worked high profile events years ago... and oh boy... judging from those stories (and the some of the stories that have been in the press) Prince Harry is a handful.





Tivo said:


> Daily Mail is trying to make this girl look horrible in that article. So shady, lol.


Business as usual, the British tabloids are particularly vicious especially where the royal family is concerned. The royals can and do take care of themselves but I wish the tabs could be contained. It's catch-22 because if they've taken the step of making a statement it must be pretty serious which only feeds the press cycle but what else can you do?


----------



## myown

kkfiregirl said:


> It is callous, because she has experienced a barrage of racist messages and threats - that is not to be taken lightly or joked about.
> 
> ETA: not sure why her being a b-level actress is relevant.


agree 100%!!!

and her own Half sister is feeding the heat.
actually I feel sad for her. everyone seems to hate her for no reasons at all.


----------



## minoxa33

I checked her CV on Wikipedia - seems like she is an intelligent woman, actress by chance. They might have some interests in common...

"Markle was educated privately at the Immaculate Heart High School, an all-girls, independent Roman Catholic high school in Los Angeles.[10] She graduated in 2003 with a double major in theatre and international relations from Northwestern University.[11]

Markle is actively involved in the socio-political arena. In 2016 she became the Global Ambassador for World Vision Canada, traveling to Rwanda for the Clean Water Campaign.[13]She has also worked with the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women as an Advocate—she made a presentation at UN Headquarters for the HeforShe gender equality campaign in September 2014. Markle traveled to Afghanistan with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on a USO tour in December 2014.
Markle was a Counsellor for the international charity One Young World, speaking at the annual summit in Dublin (2014)[14] on the topics of gender equality and modern-day slavery. She also attended the Ottawa summit in 2016.[15]"


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> The Queen is 90 years old. She was brought up in an incredible restricted and formal fashion. Etiquette is most likely everything to her. She would never make a public statement of disapproval about her grandchildren's choices. Yet, I am fairly certain that she strongly believes aristocrates and especially high nobility should marry among themselves. And despite the fact that the European princes of Spain, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Monaco as well as William himself married commoners, there are countless aristocratic families (earls, dukes, barons etc.) that predominantly marry among themselves "keeping up traditions".
> I am not judging BTW. The above is merely an observation gleened from personal experience.


I'm sure the queen is very traditional.  But I'm sure she can see Harry has his own ideas.  I doubt he's going to marry an aristocrat.  So since he's fifth (I think) in line, I doubt she will interfere if he want to marry (unless it's someone she feels is wildly inappropriate).  After all they went through with Diana, I think they had to change somewhat.


----------



## TC1

The Monarchy are just a bunch of rich figureheads at this point. I don't really think the Queen cares about what he does, as long as it doesn't reflect badly in the press. He's not going to be on the throne..so, meh..just let him be.


----------



## Lounorada

Singra said:


> I've only watched a few episodes but I recognize her from the TV show Suits. She's very bubbly and sweet on the show, she and her females costars are always shimmying down the hallways in very stylish threads. Only knowing her form the show I wouldn't have thought of her the type to be able to handle someone like Prince Harry.
> 
> *I know a couple of stories about Prince Harry from some friends who worked high profile events years ago... and oh boy... judging from those stories (and the some of the stories that have been in the press) Prince Harry is a handful.*


How so? Girl, spill the details!


----------



## White Orchid

I must be the only bish here that finds nothing even remotely attractive about him.  But I'm here for that tea


----------



## Singra

I can't share the full story because I wasn't there directly and it's not mine to share. It was from a private party and people have the right to party it up in private...but even if I told you all the details it wouldn't be that interesting, it's not that extreme a story... there weren't a bevy of prostitutes entertaining people with drugs or anything like that (well not when my friend was working . I bet by most people's standards they probably behave the same way it's just not as annoying because they're not obscenely wealthy toffs.

In the story Prince Harry was far from the worst one and depending on your level of party-dom perhaps not even that bad, I would say his girlfriend (at the time) made much more of a spectacle of herself... completely rude and sh*tfaced would be a good description.


----------



## sdkitty

from the Daily Beast.  Funny thing is if Harry hadn't written the letter, a lot few people would even notice the relationship;


*FROM THE HEART*
*Was Prince Harry’s Angry Letter Just for Show?*
Harry’s letter appealing to social media trolls to leave his girlfriend alone was hopelessly naïve. He can’t have imagined it would work. Perhaps there was a hidden agenda.



*TOM SYKES*
*11.10.16 11:28 AM ET*


An appealing narrative has developed around Prince Harry over the past several years: while he may be prone to recurring outbursts of youthful idiocy, Harry is a Prince more in touch with the real world than his brother, a regular guy who knows what it is to dab and to mic-drop, who understands the immense privilege and good fortune into which he has been born, and who knows that as a royal, self-pity is unbecoming.

However, that reputation is now under threat after a bizarre letter was issued on his behalf and with his approval this week concerning his new girlfriend, _Suits_ actress Meghan Markle.

The letter was drowning in self-pity, with a bizarre ‘poor little me’ tone (“_He has tried to develop a thick skin about the level of media interest”_) that will win Harry little sympathy either in the press or in the general public’s estimation.


But, most bizarrely of all, the letter also attacked a section of the general public, taking direct aim at, “the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments,” concerning his relationship.

This line clearly means that Harry is getting upset _after reading the comments section_ of online newspaper articles written about him.

It also means that Harry is searching for his name or Markle’s name on Twitter, and then reading the toxic messages aimed at him.


This is never a good idea.

But complaining about it is an even worse one.

Harry’s actions invite comparison with the advisers of King Canute, who flattered him that his mere word could stop the tide coming in.


It is sometimes forgotten that in that case, it was the king who demanded the throne be taken down to the beach to prove the advisers wrong.

If only Harry had taken a similar line with his advisers on this issue.

The fingerprints of the head of the Kensington Palace PR team, Canadian Jason Knauf, are all over the letter sent yesterday.

GET THE DAILY BEAST IN YOUR INBOX
By clicking "Subscribe," you agree to have read theTerms of Use and Privacy Policy

FOLLOW THE DAILY BEAST
Knauf, 30, is widely believed to have been behind a letter appealing for privacy for Prince George that came with a similar plaintive tone, that, warning that if the “dangerous and distressing” tactics of paparazzi photographers pursuing the royal children were not curtailed, Prince George and Princess Charlotte would be at risk of growing up, “exclusively behind palace gates and in walled gardens.”

I know—poor them, right?

Harry has clearly allowed Knauf to direct this latest assault on the press, and it seems to have been strategically muddled from the get-go.

Even if you agree it was the right thing to do, releasing this letter on the actual day of the US election was an absurd move. This appeal, if it was truly intended to reach users of social media, needed to be discussed and chewed on by Twitter and Facebook users for several days, but it was inevitably swept from the news agenda and social feeds as soon as polls in the US closed, even before the unexpected ***** victory, which has comprehensively buried all other news, including the angry wailings of a cross Prince.

Some insiders say that the Palace press operation has been all at sea ever since the departure of old timer Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton two years ago, when Knauf took over. The operation was weakened by the departure of another steady hand this summer, Nick Loughran, a former police spokesman, who left for KP for PR firm Freuds after he split up with his former girlfriend, Kate Middleton’s aide Rebecca Deacon, and started going out with Harry’s assistant, Clara Madden, which created a certain amount of awkwardness at Kensington Palace according to sources.

But was the letter the right thing to do anyway? Even if you ignore the unfortunate timing which all-but ensured it had zero long-term impact, it’s hard to make that case. Tabloids, generally, don’t seem to be swayed by emotional appeals to behave, and it is hopelessly naïve to expect they will. The queen advises all royals to never complain about upsetting press coverage and simply ignore it.

The British press pack—who, incidentally, feel they treat the Royals with kid gloves and never get any thanks for it--were quick to publicly bite back at Harry for releasing the letter.

Robert Jobson of the Evening Standard wrote a piece accusing Harry of  “pouring fuel on the flames of global media interest... His forthcoming tour of the Caribbean—where he is representing the Queen—will now become a media circus. The press in tow won’t be interested in what he does, they will just want to know when the ‘wedding’ is.”

Such criticism has been mirrored in countless other outlets.

So, why do it?

One intriguing possibility is that Harry released the letter simply to show Markle that he took the harassment she is experiencing seriously.

She is reported to have taken a week off work as she struggles to cope with her sudden celebrity and the unwelcome attention attendant on being Harry’s girlfriend.

There’s no denying that Harry is very upset about the treatment Markle has been receiving, and rather than seriously hoping to stop it happening, this letter may simply be a gesture to show her that.


----------



## TC1

White Orchid said:


> I must be the only bish here that finds nothing even remotely attractive about him.  But I'm here for that tea


 I don't find him remotely attractive. Just another balding, less than average ginger.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> I don't find him remotely attractive. Just another balding, less than average ginger.


when they were kids William was cuter. Now Harry has a certain ruggedness.  And he's a prince.


----------



## White Orchid

TC1 said:


> I don't find him remotely attractive. Just another balding, less than average ginger.


Now we're both gonna be sent to the corner again


----------



## White Orchid

sdkitty said:


> when they were kids William was cuter. Now Harry has a certain ruggedness.  And he's a prince.


True.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

White Orchid said:


> True.


well, he's not so cute in that picture


----------



## troubadour

*http://www.celebitchy.com/512040/prince_harry_went_to_a_rugby_match_with_princess_charlene_not_meghan_markle/*
*Prince Harry went to a rugby match with Princess Charlene, not Meghan Markle*

November 13, 2016

By Kaiser
Charlene Wittstock, Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, Royals





If Prince Harry was currently single, we would have had a lot of fun with the fact that he and Monaco’s Princess Charlene sat together for the Saturday rugby match between Team England and Team South Africa. Like, we might have even hoped for a brief hookup between them – Charlene is so blonde and sad, and Harry has a touch of Captain Save-A-Ho-ism. Alas, Harry is not single right now. And Charlene didn’t look into it anyway. She was probably more into the rugby players. I will say this: while I don’t mind the fact that Charlene has short hair, I think she’s doing it way too short. It’s like she’s channeling Brigitte Nielsen. It’s very Princess Valkyrie.

Anyway, many hoped that this would be the first coupled-up outing for Harry and Meghan Markle. We knew Meghan was in London last week and many believed we were due for Meghan and Harry’s first photo-op. But it was not to be. According to Us Weekly, Meghan had already flown back to Canada by the time Harry was attending this rugby match. Us Weekly’s source also noted, _“To be honest they’re relieved that they got to spend time together without being seen. It was a great trip. Going to the rugby together was never going to happen. It was an official engagement, not a social event, and Harry is a professional.”_ Yeah, but… Harry attended a few “official” events with other girlfriends, like Cressida Bonas and Chelsy Davy. Basically, we’re going to have to wait a while longer before their first photo-op, probably. Harry is headed to the Caribbean for a two-week tour, after which… maybe he’ll fly back to Toronto? Or maybe he’ll fly to LA, to meet Meghan’s family?

Meghan Markle has met Prince Harry’s dad and now it’s time for him to return the favor. While new photos emerge of the Suits star toting grocery bags to her British beau’s Kensington Palace home, Nottingham Cottage, a source tells E! News that the 32-year-old royal is gearing up to make his own transatlantic trip.

As the insider said, there is talk of Harry planning a trip to go and meet Markle’s family. “It is seriously serious,” the source added.

[From E! News]

Sources are also saying that Meghan has likely met most of Harry’s family at this point: Charles and Camilla, the cousins, and of course William and Keen Kate. Some people believe that Harry and Meghan could be engaged as soon as Christmas. Which… I don’t know, you guys. If it was just about Harry and his passion and emotions, I would say maybe a Christmas engagement is possible. But doesn’t the Queen feel strongly about lengthy courtships? And even with Harry’s passion for Meghan, I think a good rule of royal thumb is to at least date a person for one full year. No one’s saying that Harry has to make Meghan is Waity 2.0 and have her hang around for a decade. But wait one full year, I guess.


----------



## sdkitty

troubadour said:


> *http://www.celebitchy.com/512040/prince_harry_went_to_a_rugby_match_with_princess_charlene_not_meghan_markle/*
> *Prince Harry went to a rugby match with Princess Charlene, not Meghan Markle*
> 
> November 13, 2016
> 
> By Kaiser
> Charlene Wittstock, Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, Royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Prince Harry was currently single, we would have had a lot of fun with the fact that he and Monaco’s Princess Charlene sat together for the Saturday rugby match between Team England and Team South Africa. Like, we might have even hoped for a brief hookup between them – Charlene is so blonde and sad, and Harry has a touch of Captain Save-A-Ho-ism. Alas, Harry is not single right now. And Charlene didn’t look into it anyway. She was probably more into the rugby players. I will say this: while I don’t mind the fact that Charlene has short hair, I think she’s doing it way too short. It’s like she’s channeling Brigitte Nielsen. It’s very Princess Valkyrie.
> 
> Anyway, many hoped that this would be the first coupled-up outing for Harry and Meghan Markle. We knew Meghan was in London last week and many believed we were due for Meghan and Harry’s first photo-op. But it was not to be. According to Us Weekly, Meghan had already flown back to Canada by the time Harry was attending this rugby match. Us Weekly’s source also noted, _“To be honest they’re relieved that they got to spend time together without being seen. It was a great trip. Going to the rugby together was never going to happen. It was an official engagement, not a social event, and Harry is a professional.”_ Yeah, but… Harry attended a few “official” events with other girlfriends, like Cressida Bonas and Chelsy Davy. Basically, we’re going to have to wait a while longer before their first photo-op, probably. Harry is headed to the Caribbean for a two-week tour, after which… maybe he’ll fly back to Toronto? Or maybe he’ll fly to LA, to meet Meghan’s family?
> 
> Meghan Markle has met Prince Harry’s dad and now it’s time for him to return the favor. While new photos emerge of the Suits star toting grocery bags to her British beau’s Kensington Palace home, Nottingham Cottage, a source tells E! News that the 32-year-old royal is gearing up to make his own transatlantic trip.
> 
> As the insider said, there is talk of Harry planning a trip to go and meet Markle’s family. “It is seriously serious,” the source added.
> 
> [From E! News]
> 
> Sources are also saying that Meghan has likely met most of Harry’s family at this point: Charles and Camilla, the cousins, and of course William and Keen Kate. Some people believe that Harry and Meghan could be engaged as soon as Christmas. Which… I don’t know, you guys. If it was just about Harry and his passion and emotions, I would say maybe a Christmas engagement is possible. But doesn’t the Queen feel strongly about lengthy courtships? And even with Harry’s passion for Meghan, I think a good rule of royal thumb is to at least date a person for one full year. No one’s saying that Harry has to make Meghan is Waity 2.0 and have her hang around for a decade. But wait one full year, I guess.


All this speculation must be making Harry feel a bit pressured.....


----------



## Vintage Leather

TC1 said:


> I don't find him remotely attractive. Just another balding, less than average ginger.



I started royal watching because I like to see what women wear who have a variety of body shapes and a near-unlimited budget.  
I stayed for the tea.  

I like to think I'm pretty typical of royalists.  He came across my radar because he's a prince - but there are a lot of princes and kings out there. Many of them are far more attractive.  I pay attention to Harry because I am impressed with his military service (that actually involved a war zone), the work he has done on the Invictus Games, and to a lesser extent, his various children's charities.


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> I started royal watching because I like to see what women wear who have a variety of body shapes and a near-unlimited budget.
> I stayed for the tea.
> 
> I like to think I'm pretty typical of royalists.  He came across my radar because he's a prince - but there are a lot of princes and kings out there. Many of them are far more attractive.  I pay attention to Harry becaagreuse I am impressed with his military service (that actually involved a war zone), the work he has done on the Invictus Games, and to a lesser extent, his various children's charities.


agree
also most of us "Yanks" are far more aware of the British royals than other royal families (with the possible exception of Monaco, where an American became a Princess)


----------



## GoStanford

Vintage Leather said:


> I started royal watching because I like to see what women wear who have a variety of body shapes and a near-unlimited budget.



This is a very interesting point - I agree the royals are a great source of fashion ideas for ladies of all sizes.  Shows how well-tailored clothes really accentuate any body type.  I'm sure it helps to be sample size so that there are many choices, but most of us are not sample size, after all!


----------



## Vintage Leather

GoStanford said:


> This is a very interesting point - I agree the royals are a great source of fashion ideas for ladies of all sizes.  Shows how well-tailored clothes really accentuate any body type.  I'm sure it helps to be sample size so that there are many choices, but most of us are not sample size, after all!



I'll admit, one of my favorite royals is Marie Theresa of Luxembourg.  She is shorter than I, but we have a similar bust-waist-hips ratio.  Her style is polished, and tailored, despite a few N-company (Natan) mistakes.  I adore her Elie Saab!


----------



## GoStanford

Vintage Leather said:


> I'll admit, one of my favorite royals is Marie Theresa of Luxembourg.  She is shorter than I, but we have a similar bust-waist-hips ratio.  Her style is polished, and tailored, despite a few N-company (Natan) mistakes.  I adore her Elie Saab!



Sorry to sidetrack this thread, but I just looked her up - she is gorgeous!  There's a photo of her in a golden dress and hat at Prince Guillaume's wedding.  She looks fantastic.


----------



## gelbergirl

troubadour said:


> *http://www.celebitchy.com/512040/prince_harry_went_to_a_rugby_match_with_princess_charlene_not_meghan_markle/*
> *Prince Harry went to a rugby match with Princess Charlene, not Meghan Markle*
> 
> November 13, 2016
> 
> By Kaiser
> Charlene Wittstock, Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, Royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Prince Harry was currently single, we would have had a lot of fun with the fact that he and Monaco’s Princess Charlene sat together for the Saturday rugby match between Team England and Team South Africa. Like, we might have even hoped for a brief hookup between them – Charlene is so blonde and sad, and Harry has a touch of Captain Save-A-Ho-ism. Alas, Harry is not single right now. And Charlene didn’t look into it anyway. She was probably more into the rugby players. I will say this: while I don’t mind the fact that Charlene has short hair, I think she’s doing it way too short. It’s like she’s channeling Brigitte Nielsen. It’s very Princess Valkyrie.
> 
> Anyway, many hoped that this would be the first coupled-up outing for Harry and Meghan Markle. We knew Meghan was in London last week and many believed we were due for Meghan and Harry’s first photo-op. But it was not to be. According to Us Weekly, Meghan had already flown back to Canada by the time Harry was attending this rugby match. Us Weekly’s source also noted, _“To be honest they’re relieved that they got to spend time together without being seen. It was a great trip. Going to the rugby together was never going to happen. It was an official engagement, not a social event, and Harry is a professional.”_ Yeah, but… Harry attended a few “official” events with other girlfriends, like Cressida Bonas and Chelsy Davy. Basically, we’re going to have to wait a while longer before their first photo-op, probably. Harry is headed to the Caribbean for a two-week tour, after which… maybe he’ll fly back to Toronto? Or maybe he’ll fly to LA, to meet Meghan’s family?
> 
> Meghan Markle has met Prince Harry’s dad and now it’s time for him to return the favor. While new photos emerge of the Suits star toting grocery bags to her British beau’s Kensington Palace home, Nottingham Cottage, a source tells E! News that the 32-year-old royal is gearing up to make his own transatlantic trip.
> 
> As the insider said, there is talk of Harry planning a trip to go and meet Markle’s family. “It is seriously serious,” the source added.
> 
> [From E! News]
> 
> Sources are also saying that Meghan has likely met most of Harry’s family at this point: Charles and Camilla, the cousins, and of course William and Keen Kate. Some people believe that Harry and Meghan could be engaged as soon as Christmas. Which… I don’t know, you guys. If it was just about Harry and his passion and emotions, I would say maybe a Christmas engagement is possible. But doesn’t the Queen feel strongly about lengthy courtships? And even with Harry’s passion for Meghan, I think a good rule of royal thumb is to at least date a person for one full year. No one’s saying that Harry has to make Meghan is Waity 2.0 and have her hang around for a decade. But wait one full year, I guess.



Charlene and Harry look nice together !!!


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> Charlene and Harry look nice together !!!


Charlene always reminds me of a less attractive Charlize Theron


----------



## Stephanie***

I was happy to hear that he is with Meghan! Love her! I always asked myself why she doesnt have her own thread...


----------



## troubadour

Prince Harry has arrived in Antigua for a major tour of the Caribbean which will see him celebrate the region's history, achievements and culture. 
Blue skies and blazing sunshine greeted the 32-year-old when he landed for the tour he is 'honoured' to fulfil on behalf of the Queen.
He was wearing a navy suit, white shirt and light blue tie when he touched down on the island and shook hands with the Governor General Sir Rodney Williams at V.C. Bird International Airport.
The prince will now spend 15 days visiting the Caribbean to mark the 35th Anniversary of Independence in Antigua and Barbuda and the 50th Anniversary of Independence in Barbados and Guyana.


----------



## Sasha2012

Prince Harry was joined by Meghan Markle to celebrate the wedding of one of his closest friends in Jamaica yesterday.

Wearing a navy blue suit and yellow corsage, Harry looked every bit the handsome Prince as he undertook his official usher duties at the ceremony in Montego Bay.

Miss Markle made the most of the Caribbean sunshine, sporting a flowery dress and sunglasses as she accompanied her beau at the wedding of Tom 'Skippy' Inskip with flame-haired literary agent the Hon Laura Hughes-Young.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nce-Harry-friend-s-wedding.html#ixzz4aLjlUIYh


----------



## anitalilac

sdkitty said:


> Charlene always reminds me of a less attractive Charlize Theron


Me too.


----------



## White Orchid

So the bride decided to forego wearing a bra knowing full well the media would swoop on the event


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

White Orchid said:


> So the bride decided to forego wearing a bra knowing full well the media would swoop on the event



I so love you! I was going to post the same thing!!!!!!!!


----------



## White Orchid

VickyB said:


> I so love you! I was going to post the same thing!!!!!!!!


----------



## Morgan R

*Prince Harry: I sought counselling after 20 years of not thinking about the death of my mother, Diana, and two years of total chaos in my life
*
By Hannah Furness, royal correspondent

17 APRIL 2017 • 12:53PM

*Audio of Prince Harry's Interview here: *http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...counselling-death-mother-led-two-years-total/



Prince Harry has disclosed that he sought counselling after enduring two years of “total chaos” while still struggling in his late twenties to come to terms with the death of his mother.

The Prince says in an interview with The Telegraph that he “shut down all his emotions” for almost two decades after losing his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, despite his brother, Prince William, trying to persuade him to seek help.

Disclosing that he has spoken to a professional about his mental health, he describes how he only began to address his grief when he was 28 after feeling “on the verge of punching someone” and facing anxiety during royal engagements.






Prince Harry speaks frankly about fighting his demons on the wake of his mother's death and how he finally sought professional help CREDIT:  GETTY IMAGES



Describing the “quite serious effect” that losing his mother had on his personal and professional life, he tells how living in the public eye left him feeling he could be “very close to a complete breakdown on numerous occasions”.

The Prince, now 32, turned to counsellors and even took up boxing. He says he is now in “a good place”.

Prince Harry has decided to give an unprecedented insight into his past in the hope it will encourage people to break the stigma surrounding mental health issues.

He has spoken to Bryony Gordon for the first episode of her podcast, Mad World, in which she will interview high-profile guests about their mental health experiences.


The 30-minute conversation is one of the most candid insights into the innermost thoughts of a modern young member of the Royal family. The Prince, together with his brother and sister-in-law, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, have set up Heads Together, a charity which promotes good mental well-being.

Prince Harry, who was 12 when his mother died, says in the podcast that he spent his teenage years and twenties determined not to think about her.

“I can safely say that losing my mum at the age of 12, and therefore shutting down all of my emotions for the last 20 years, has had a quite serious effect on not only my personal life but my work as well,” he said.





Diana, Princess of Wales with Prince Harry who has said he regrets not opening up sooner about how his mother's death affected him CREDIT:  PA


“I have probably been very close to a complete breakdown on numerous occasions when all sorts of grief and sort of lies and misconceptions and everything are coming to you from every angle.”

Asked whether he had been to see a 'shrink' to offload his thoughts, he said: “I’ve done that a couple of times, more than a couple of times, but it’s great.”

The Prince admitted that at times he had struggled with aggression and turned to boxing as an outlet for his frustration.

“During those years I took up boxing, because everyone was saying boxing is good for you and it’s a really good way of letting out aggression,” he said.

“And that really saved me because I was on the verge of punching someone, so being able to punch someone who had pads was certainly easier.”

He eventually sought support with the encouragement of his brother and others close to him, who told him: “Look, you really need to deal with this. It is not normal to think that nothing has affected you.”

Since learning to talk honestly about his feelings, he said, he now feels able to put “blood, sweat and tears” into making a difference for others.

“The experience I have had is that once you start talking about it, you realise that actually you’re part of quite a big club,” he said. Later this year, the Prince and the Duke will commemorate the 20th anniversary of their mother’s death, commissioning a statue and presenting awards in her name to honour “kindness, compassion and service”.





Prince Harry with a picture of his mother Princess Diana, with staff and users of The Running Charity, which is the UK's first running-orientated programme for homeless and vulnerable young people, in Willesden in north west London. CREDIT: GEOFF PUGH


Prince Harry said of his loss: “My way of dealing with it was sticking my head in the sand, refusing to ever think about my mum, because why would that help?

“[I thought] it’s only going to make you sad, it’s not going to bring her back.
“So from an emotional side, I was like ‘right, don’t ever let your emotions be part of anything’.

“So I was a typical 20, 25, 28-year-old running around going ‘life is great’, or ‘life is fine’ and that was exactly it.

“And then _ started to have a few conversations and actually all of a sudden, all of this grief that I have never processed started to come to the  forefront and I was like, there is actually a lot of stuff here that I need to deal with.”

He said he now counts himself very lucky that it was “only two years … of total chaos” before he learnt how to talk about it. “I just couldn’t put my finger on it,” he said. “I just didn’t know what was wrong with me.”





Prince Harry Prince Harry leaving Public nightclub, London, Britain in 2011  CREDIT: REX FEATURES
_


_Even at royal engagements, he said, he had found himself battling a “flight or fight” reaction without properly  understanding why. Once he started opening up to friends, he added, he found those same friends felt able to “unravel their own issues”.

Dismissing previous speculation he may have suffered mental health issues because of his time in Afghanistan, he said he felt clear that coping with the death of his mother on a very public platform had the greatest impact.

“I can safely say it’s not Afghanistan-related. I’m not one of those guys that has had to see my best mate blown up next to me and have to apply a tourniquet to both their legs. Luckily, thank God, I wasn’t one of those people.”

Prince Harry said his work with the personnel recovery unit, where he listened to wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women talk about   serious mental health issues, had proved a turning point in his understanding.

“I know there is huge merit in talking about your issues and the only thing about keeping it quiet is that it’s only ever going to make it worse,” he said.





Prince Harry left the British Army in May 2015 after 10 years' service that saw him fight on the front line in Afghanistan twice CREDIT:  AFP/GETTY IMAGES


“Not just for you but everybody else around you as well because you become a problem. I, through a lot of my twenties, was a problem and I didn’t know how to deal with it.”

On eventually seeking help, the Prince said: “It’s all about timing. And for me personally, my brother, you know, bless him, he was a huge support to me. He kept saying this is not right, this is not normal, you need to talk to [someone] about stuff, it’s OK.

“The timing wasn’t right. You need to feel it in yourself, you need to find the right person to talk to as well.”

But he added: “I can’t encourage people enough to just have that conversation because you will be surprised firstly, how much support you get and secondly, how many people literally are longing for you to come out.”

Confessing he was “a little nervous, a little tight in the chest” about the interview, the Prince said he was determined to make a difference while the younger members of the Royal family are “still interesting” to the public, doing his bit before Prince George, Princess Charlotte and any of his own future children step into the spotlight.
Of his current focus on mental health, he said: “What we are trying to do is normalise the conversation to the point where anyone can sit down and have a coffee and just go ‘you know what, I’ve had a really s--- day, can I just tell about it? Because then you walk away and it’s done.” He is now in a “good place”.

“Because of the process I have been through over the past two and a half years, I’ve now been able to take my work seriously, been able to take my private life seriously as well, and been able to put blood, sweat and tears into the things that really make a difference and things that I think will make a difference to everybody else.”
_


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


> *Prince Harry: I sought counselling after 20 years of not thinking about the death of my mother, Diana, and two years of total chaos in my life
> *
> By Hannah Furness, royal correspondent
> 
> 17 APRIL 2017 • 12:53PM
> 
> *Audio of Prince Harry's Interview here: *http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...counselling-death-mother-led-two-years-total/
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has disclosed that he sought counselling after enduring two years of “total chaos” while still struggling in his late twenties to come to terms with the death of his mother.
> 
> The Prince says in an interview with The Telegraph that he “shut down all his emotions” for almost two decades after losing his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, despite his brother, Prince William, trying to persuade him to seek help.
> 
> Disclosing that he has spoken to a professional about his mental health, he describes how he only began to address his grief when he was 28 after feeling “on the verge of punching someone” and facing anxiety during royal engagements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry speaks frankly about fighting his demons on the wake of his mother's death and how he finally sought professional help CREDIT:  GETTY IMAGES
> 
> 
> 
> Describing the “quite serious effect” that losing his mother had on his personal and professional life, he tells how living in the public eye left him feeling he could be “very close to a complete breakdown on numerous occasions”.
> 
> The Prince, now 32, turned to counsellors and even took up boxing. He says he is now in “a good place”.
> 
> Prince Harry has decided to give an unprecedented insight into his past in the hope it will encourage people to break the stigma surrounding mental health issues.
> 
> He has spoken to Bryony Gordon for the first episode of her podcast, Mad World, in which she will interview high-profile guests about their mental health experiences.
> 
> 
> The 30-minute conversation is one of the most candid insights into the innermost thoughts of a modern young member of the Royal family. The Prince, together with his brother and sister-in-law, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, have set up Heads Together, a charity which promotes good mental well-being.
> 
> Prince Harry, who was 12 when his mother died, says in the podcast that he spent his teenage years and twenties determined not to think about her.
> 
> “I can safely say that losing my mum at the age of 12, and therefore shutting down all of my emotions for the last 20 years, has had a quite serious effect on not only my personal life but my work as well,” he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana, Princess of Wales with Prince Harry who has said he regrets not opening up sooner about how his mother's death affected him CREDIT:  PA
> 
> 
> “I have probably been very close to a complete breakdown on numerous occasions when all sorts of grief and sort of lies and misconceptions and everything are coming to you from every angle.”
> 
> Asked whether he had been to see a 'shrink' to offload his thoughts, he said: “I’ve done that a couple of times, more than a couple of times, but it’s great.”
> 
> The Prince admitted that at times he had struggled with aggression and turned to boxing as an outlet for his frustration.
> 
> “During those years I took up boxing, because everyone was saying boxing is good for you and it’s a really good way of letting out aggression,” he said.
> 
> “And that really saved me because I was on the verge of punching someone, so being able to punch someone who had pads was certainly easier.”
> 
> He eventually sought support with the encouragement of his brother and others close to him, who told him: “Look, you really need to deal with this. It is not normal to think that nothing has affected you.”
> 
> Since learning to talk honestly about his feelings, he said, he now feels able to put “blood, sweat and tears” into making a difference for others.
> 
> “The experience I have had is that once you start talking about it, you realise that actually you’re part of quite a big club,” he said. Later this year, the Prince and the Duke will commemorate the 20th anniversary of their mother’s death, commissioning a statue and presenting awards in her name to honour “kindness, compassion and service”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry with a picture of his mother Princess Diana, with staff and users of The Running Charity, which is the UK's first running-orientated programme for homeless and vulnerable young people, in Willesden in north west London. CREDIT: GEOFF PUGH
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said of his loss: “My way of dealing with it was sticking my head in the sand, refusing to ever think about my mum, because why would that help?
> 
> “[I thought] it’s only going to make you sad, it’s not going to bring her back.
> “So from an emotional side, I was like ‘right, don’t ever let your emotions be part of anything’.
> 
> “So I was a typical 20, 25, 28-year-old running around going ‘life is great’, or ‘life is fine’ and that was exactly it.
> 
> “And then _ started to have a few conversations and actually all of a sudden, all of this grief that I have never processed started to come to the  forefront and I was like, there is actually a lot of stuff here that I need to deal with.”
> 
> He said he now counts himself very lucky that it was “only two years … of total chaos” before he learnt how to talk about it. “I just couldn’t put my finger on it,” he said. “I just didn’t know what was wrong with me.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Prince Harry leaving Public nightclub, London, Britain in 2011  CREDIT: REX FEATURES
> _
> 
> 
> _Even at royal engagements, he said, he had found himself battling a “flight or fight” reaction without properly  understanding why. Once he started opening up to friends, he added, he found those same friends felt able to “unravel their own issues”.
> 
> Dismissing previous speculation he may have suffered mental health issues because of his time in Afghanistan, he said he felt clear that coping with the death of his mother on a very public platform had the greatest impact.
> 
> “I can safely say it’s not Afghanistan-related. I’m not one of those guys that has had to see my best mate blown up next to me and have to apply a tourniquet to both their legs. Luckily, thank God, I wasn’t one of those people.”
> 
> Prince Harry said his work with the personnel recovery unit, where he listened to wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women talk about   serious mental health issues, had proved a turning point in his understanding.
> 
> “I know there is huge merit in talking about your issues and the only thing about keeping it quiet is that it’s only ever going to make it worse,” he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry left the British Army in May 2015 after 10 years' service that saw him fight on the front line in Afghanistan twice CREDIT:  AFP/GETTY IMAGES
> 
> 
> “Not just for you but everybody else around you as well because you become a problem. I, through a lot of my twenties, was a problem and I didn’t know how to deal with it.”
> 
> On eventually seeking help, the Prince said: “It’s all about timing. And for me personally, my brother, you know, bless him, he was a huge support to me. He kept saying this is not right, this is not normal, you need to talk to [someone] about stuff, it’s OK.
> 
> “The timing wasn’t right. You need to feel it in yourself, you need to find the right person to talk to as well.”
> 
> But he added: “I can’t encourage people enough to just have that conversation because you will be surprised firstly, how much support you get and secondly, how many people literally are longing for you to come out.”
> 
> Confessing he was “a little nervous, a little tight in the chest” about the interview, the Prince said he was determined to make a difference while the younger members of the Royal family are “still interesting” to the public, doing his bit before Prince George, Princess Charlotte and any of his own future children step into the spotlight.
> Of his current focus on mental health, he said: “What we are trying to do is normalise the conversation to the point where anyone can sit down and have a coffee and just go ‘you know what, I’ve had a really s--- day, can I just tell about it? Because then you walk away and it’s done.” He is now in a “good place”.
> 
> “Because of the process I have been through over the past two and a half years, I’ve now been able to take my work seriously, been able to take my private life seriously as well, and been able to put blood, sweat and tears into the things that really make a difference and things that I think will make a difference to everybody else.”_


Diana would be proud


----------



## gelbergirl

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry public kiss @ polo match


----------



## Morgan R

Kensington Palace had released a few family photographs from the late Diana, Princess of Wales' personal photo albums ahead of the documentary _Diana, Our Mother: Her Life and Legacy_. There are more previously unseen pictures included within the documentary.

Here were the photographs posted by Kensington Palace that included Prince Harry

_






_
Also here is the documentary _Diana, Our Mother: Her Life and Legacy_


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and his girlfriend Meghan Markle spotted at an Airport Tarmac. According to reports they were headed to Africa.


----------



## gelbergirl

Meghan Markle opens up about her relationship with Prince Harry in the new issue of Vanity Fair.
"She's Just Wild About Harry!"







Peter Lindbergh exclusively for Vanity Fair
Meghan Markle opens up about her relationship with Prince Harry in the new issue of Vanity Fair.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

So they put her on the cover because she is dating Harry? 

She just got played.


----------



## gazoo

She's a beautiful girl.


----------



## Singra

She's very beautiful... I hope their relationship is really serious because a cover story on why you're dating Prince Harry doesn't seem wise... especially following the anniversary of Di's death. 



BagOuttaHell said:


> So they put her on the cover because she is dating Harry?
> 
> *She just got played.*


Surely she knew where they'd go with it?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Sounds like maybe an engagement announcement will be coming soon. Perhaps late this year?


----------



## beekmanhill

I think this was all planned for an engagement soon.   She wouldn't do this article without approval.   He's so far from the throne now, don't know why it should make a difference to anyone.
Hope she knows what she is getting into.


----------



## chowlover2

Meghan really reminds me of Kate's sister Pippa.


----------



## White Orchid

chowlover2 said:


> Meghan really reminds me of Kate's sister Pippa.


Me too!  But a prettier version lol.  I often wondered if he fancied Pippa at some stage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

BagOuttaHell said:


> So they put her on the cover because she is dating Harry?
> 
> She just got played.


Who really knew who she was before Harry dated her?  A B-level cable TV actress?  Not saying their relationship isn't real but I don't see how she's losing by doing this magazine cover.


----------



## Stansy

hollieplus2 said:


> Sounds like maybe an engagement announcement will be coming soon. Perhaps late this year?


I wonder if the royal baby #3 will cause delays on this?


----------



## beekmanhill

I think baby #3 is perfect timing for this.  People realize that Harry is so far from the throne what difference does it make who he marries.  She went to Northwestern so she must have a brain.  If people put up with Camilla, who will be queen someday I guess, why would they object to Harry's love?  Charles' brothers and sister do not exactly have pristine marriage records.  For that matter, neither did Princess Margaret.  She wouldn't even do her royal duties to boot.


----------



## Singra

Hmmmm I don't know just yet... I'm fairly certain most would not have a problem with Markle but I don't see how a magazine cover helps her with Harry even if an engagement is imminent. They usually like to keep things on the DL and only open themselves to press if they have to. Plus following so soon after the anniversary of the death of Princess Di... I'm pretty sure Prince Harry's camp would want to put as much space between that and an engagement.

Has Markle been appearing at any official engagements with Prince Harry recently? That would seem like it would be a better indicator of a potential engagement.

Doesn't Vanity Fair usually do interviews with subjects a month or two in advance especially if it's going to be a cover? This feels a bit like exploitation on the part of Vanity Fair tbh... and it could just be PR for Markle... not saying she's shamelessly using this opportunity, she seems like a very sweet person... she probably just has a really aggressive publicist.


----------



## beekmanhill

I guess I'm the only one who thinks that she is the one who should be thinking twice.  Who would want to be involved in all the folderal involved with becoming a member of that family, the press scrutiny, lack of privacy, what is allowed, what is not allowed, etc.


----------



## GaitreeS

The problem with announcing you are in love is that you will be expected to announce when you are out of love...


----------



## jiangjiang

sdkitty said:


> Who really knew who she was before Harry dated her?  A B-level cable TV actress?  Not saying their relationship isn't real but I don't see how she's losing by doing this magazine cover.



Definitely a Come up for her!


----------



## jiangjiang

hollieplus2 said:


> Sounds like maybe an engagement announcement will be coming soon. Perhaps late this year?



Not sure how a divorcee fits for royal protocols...


----------



## gazoo

jiangjiang said:


> Not sure how a divorcee fits for royal protocols...



Charles and Camilla were both divorcees when they married, so times have changed dramatically.


----------



## jiangjiang

gazoo said:


> Charles and Camilla were both divorcees when they married, so times have changed dramatically.



That's true. Whereas his great grand uncle had to abdicate the throne. His father might have similar agreement with HM. So Let's wait and see.


----------



## beekmanhill

jiangjiang said:


> Not sure how a divorcee fits for royal protocols...



It sure has suited the Windsors: Charles divorced Diana,  Edward divorced Fergie, Anne divorced Mark Phillips.  Before them, Princess Margaret  divorced Armstrong-Jones.   Why should Harry be treated differently.


----------



## sdkitty

beekmanhill said:


> It sure has suited the Windsors: Charles divorced Diana,  Edward divorced Fergie, Anne divorced Mark Phillips.  Before them, Princess Margaret  divorced Armstrong-Jones.   Why should Harry be treated differently.


Plus Harry not being in line for the throne would ease the pressure more I'd think


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Singra said:


> Hmmmm I don't know just yet... I'm fairly certain most would not have a problem with Markle but I don't see how a magazine cover helps her with Harry even if an engagement is imminent. They usually like to keep things on the DL and only open themselves to press if they have to. Plus following so soon after the anniversary of the death of Princess Di... I'm pretty sure Prince Harry's camp would want to put as much space between that and an engagement.
> 
> Has Markle been appearing at any official engagements with Prince Harry recently? That would seem like it would be a better indicator of a potential engagement.
> 
> Doesn't Vanity Fair usually do interviews with subjects a month or two in advance especially if it's going to be a cover? This feels a bit like exploitation on the part of Vanity Fair tbh... and it could just be PR for Markle... not saying she's shamelessly using this opportunity, she seems like a very sweet person... she probably just has a really aggressive publicist.


she's been doing promo work for Suits and panels for the show. i have watched Suits since the beginning and only this season (since she started dating Harry) has Markle kept all her clothes on for the show and not kissed her co-star AT ALL, which is huge, considering they are engaged on the show and had tons of hot/heavy love scenes right up until she started dating Harry. i think she's trying to clean up her image as much as possible for a possible ring and must have specifically asked the show to eliminate her love scenes and cleavage, lol


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> she's been doing promo work for Suits and panels for the show. i have watched Suits since the beginning and only this season (since she started dating Harry) has Markle kept all her clothes on for the show and not kissed her co-star AT ALL, which is huge, considering they are engaged on the show and had tons of hot/heavy love scenes right up until she started dating Harry. i think she's trying to clean up her image as much as possible for a possible ring and must have specifically asked the show to eliminate her love scenes and cleavage, lol


I've never watched that show but if you're correct that's amazing that she could have that kind of control.  Only thing I could attribute it to would be all the attention she's getting for being harry's girlfriend is getting attention for the show?


----------



## jiangjiang

beekmanhill said:


> It sure has suited the Windsors: Charles divorced Diana,  Edward divorced Fergie, Anne divorced Mark Phillips.  Before them, Princess Margaret  divorced Armstrong-Jones.   Why should Harry be treated differently.



You meant Andrew divorced Fergie. 

They divorced, not divorcee to be married at the first place, that's against their religion. 

Anyway, good luck to them either way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

sdkitty said:


> I've never watched that show but if you're correct that's amazing that she could have that kind of control.  Only thing I could attribute it to would be all the attention she's getting for being harry's girlfriend is getting attention for the show?


i'm sure people might watch once or twice, just to see who Markle is. it's a long-running series (6 years now). i don't know what kind of control Markle has, but her character has done a 180 for sure - the love scenes are gone, the sexy clothes are less, no kissing scenes, and they are pretty much breaking her and the co-star up this season. her character is completely different from past seasons where she'd be lying in bed with nothing but a sheet and strutting into the office with a top half-undone. she plays a very sexy character. it makes me think the show is writing her character with room to exit if Markle needs to... no doubt she spoke with her bosses about her love life and they are accommodating! changing herself for her man already


----------



## Singra

ccbaggirl89 said:


> she's been doing promo work for Suits and panels for the show. i have watched Suits since the beginning and only this season (since she started dating Harry) has Markle kept all her clothes on for the show and not kissed her co-star AT ALL, which is huge, considering they are engaged on the show and had tons of hot/heavy love scenes right up until she started dating Harry. i think she's trying to clean up her image as much as possible for a possible ring and must have specifically asked the show to eliminate her love scenes and cleavage, lol


I've watched some episodes on Suits... I haven't kept up with it but didn't Gina Torres leave not that long ago? The show's been around a while could it be that the show is simply going through changes unrelated to Markle? I'm assuming her character is still engaged to the Mike character,  maybe it's a scheduling thing. Suits isn't an HBO style show with nudity, it's not remotely risqué... sure most of the characters tend to shimmy down corridors in high fashion but I don't see what the big deal is... if her being an actress was an issue or if she needed to clean up her image wouldn't she just leave the show? I don't know that the royal firm is that stuck in the past.

I don't know... if she were to be engaged and possibly married to a royal she'd have to do royal engagements, it would become her new job so lets see if she starts accompanying Prince Harry on official engagements... I would see that as more of a confirmation of something.




beekmanhill said:


> I guess I'm the only one who thinks that she is the one who should be thinking twice.  Who would want to be involved in all the folderal involved with becoming a member of that family, the press scrutiny, lack of privacy, what is allowed, what is not allowed, etc.


Nope you're not the only one... I also don't get what's so great about it.


----------



## Jayne1

beekmanhill said:


> It sure has suited the Windsors: Charles divorced Diana,  Edward divorced Fergie, Anne divorced Mark Phillips.  Before them, Princess Margaret  divorced Armstrong-Jones.   Why should Harry be treated differently.


Exactly -- especially since he is falling even more so down the line for the throne.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Singra said:


> I've watched some episodes on Suits... I haven't kept up with it but didn't Gina Torres leave not that long ago? The show's been around a while could it be that the show is simply going through changes unrelated to Markle? I'm assuming her character is still engaged to the Mike character,  maybe it's a scheduling thing. Suits isn't an HBO style show with nudity, it's not remotely risqué... sure most of the characters tend to shimmy down corridors in high fashion but I don't see what the big deal is... if her being an actress was an issue or if she needed to clean up her image wouldn't she just leave the show? I don't know that the royal firm is that stuck in the past.
> 
> I don't know... if she were to be engaged and possibly married to a royal she'd have to do royal engagements, it would become her new job so lets see if she starts accompanying Prince Harry on official engagements... I would see that as more of a confirmation of something.
> 
> 
> 
> Nope you're not the only one... I also don't get what's so great about it.


i think if she up and left the show it'd be a huge marker that they're more than just dating? Torres did leave for a short while, but she's back... Suits is getting a spin-off and Torres is the lead on that


----------



## beekmanhill

jiangjiang said:


> You meant Andrew divorced Fergie.
> 
> They divorced, not divorcee to be married at the first place, that's against their religion.
> 
> Anyway, good luck to them either way.



Camilla was divorced before she married Charles, wasn't she?  And Charles will be king.


----------



## jiangjiang

beekmanhill said:


> Camilla was divorced before she married Charles, wasn't she?  And Charles will be king.



He won't! It's part of the deal. Camila will never be the queen!


----------



## carebearz

Maybe they should do what the Japanese royal family does..if you are not in the "immediate line" for the throne, you marry a commoner and you give up your title. Like Prince Edward's children, his wife  and him specifically didnt want their children to have royal titles. 

If it's true love, I'm sure they wouldn't hestitate to give up their titles.


----------



## redney

jiangjiang said:


> He won't! It's part of the deal. Camila will never be the queen!


If Charles ascends to the throne, it's been rumored Camilla will not receive the title of Queen, and instead will be Princess Consort.


----------



## RAINDANCE

carebearz said:


> Maybe they should do what the Japanese royal family does..if you are not in the "immediate line" for the throne, you marry a commoner and you give up your title. Like Prince Edward's children, his wife  and him specifically didnt want their children to have royal titles.
> 
> If it's true love, I'm sure they wouldn't hestitate to give up their titles.


----------



## RAINDANCE

That's Princess Anne's children with no titles. Zara and Peter Phillips

Edward's children are Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn


----------



## carebearz

RAINDANCE said:


> That's Princess Anne's children with no titles. Zara and Peter Phillips
> 
> Edward's children are Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn



Thanks for the clarifications! I forgot about Zara and Peter. 
I would consider Edwards's kids as having no royal titles as well as they are not styled Princess/Prince like Beatrice and Eugenie are.


----------



## Esizzle

I thought the VF cover was lovely and clearly done with an OK from Harry and his office. Its unofficially official that they are moving towards an engagement. A royal wedding and a royal baby on the agenda for next year.


----------



## beekmanhill

Esizzle said:


> I thought the VF cover was lovely and clearly done with an OK from Harry and his office. Its unofficially official that they are moving towards an engagement. A royal wedding and a royal baby on the agenda for next year.



Absolutely agree.


----------



## VickyB

In the interview she speaks about how their relationship is private and they keep it on the DL. At the same time, she's on the cover of VF and speaking  about their relationship in an interview. Doesn't seem very DL to me. 
I don't understand why she said yes to the cover/interview. If they are really getting engaged and she's giving up her career(I'm guessing she'll have to give up her career) , why would she or Harry's camp think this cover etc was an appropriate move.


----------



## beekmanhill

VickyB said:


> In the interview she speaks about how their relationship is private and they keep it on the DL. At the same time, she's on the cover of VF and speaking  about their relationship in an interview. Doesn't seem very DL to me.
> I don't understand why she said yes to the cover/interview. If they are really getting engaged and she's giving up her career(I'm guessing she'll have to give up her career) , why would she or Harry's camp think this cover etc was an appropriate move.



Because once they are engaged there will be all sorts of articles.   This one was very favorable to start the ball rolling to introduce her to the public.   Most people in the US have never heard of her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> In the interview she speaks about how their relationship is private and they keep it on the DL. At the same time, she's on the cover of VF and speaking  about their relationship in an interview. Doesn't seem very DL to me.
> I don't understand why she said yes to the cover/interview. If they are really getting engaged and she's giving up her career(I'm guessing she'll have to give up her career) , why would she or Harry's camp think this cover etc was an appropriate move.


she wants attention?


----------



## gelbergirl

Being married to Prince Harry will be a public role.  He is immediate senior level royal family.  This is a way to control the press. A trade in some respect, without the press hounding her just before the engagement and announcement.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> Being married to Prince Harry will be a public role.  He is immediate senior level royal family.  This is a way to control the press. A trade in some respect, without the press hounding her just before the engagement and announcement.


I still say she wants attention.  She's an actress (and not a very well known one prior to her involvement with Harry).  I'm sure Harry is aware on some level that a big part of her attraction to him is that he's royalty and one of the most famous bachelors in the world.


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> I still say she wants attention.  She's an actress (and not a very well known one prior to her involvement with Harry).  I'm sure Harry is aware on some level that a big part of her attraction to him is that he's royalty and one of the most famous bachelors in the world.


I agree.
And I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss what her sister had to say about her when it first came out that Harry was dating Markle.
Everyone was quick to call the sister a jealous, spiteful b*tch, but none of us know much about Markle and we know nothing about her sister. But i'm sure she knows Markle much better than anyone else.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I agree.
> And I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss what her sister had to say about her when it first came out that Harry was dating Markle.
> Everyone was quick to call the sister a jealous, spiteful b*tch, but none of us know much about Markle and we know nothing about her sister. But i'm sure she knows Markle much better than anyone else.


what did her sister day?
whatever it was, for her to say negative things publicly about her sister, they must have been on bad terms - or they would have been after if not before


----------



## sdkitty

interesting story from the Daily Beast:
*BELLS*
*Did Meghan Markle’s ‘Vanity Fair’ Cover Herald the Next Royal Wedding?*
*Meghan Markle’s headline-making ‘Vanity Fair’ cover story talking about her love for Prince Harry may have been a soft launch for an upcoming engagement announcement.*



TOM SYKES
*09.09.17 12:01 AM ET*
As a swan song for Graydon Carter, the outgoing editor of _Vanity Fair_ who announced his decision to quit the magazine at the end of the year this week, it was a great royal coup: an up close and personal interview with Meghan Markle, in which she spoke frankly and in lyrical terms about her love for her “boyfriend” Prince Harry.

In the most revealing section of the interview, Markle said: “We’re a couple. We’re in love. I’m sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell, but I hope what people will understand is that this is our time. This is for us. It’s part of what makes it so special, that it’s just ours. But we’re happy. Personally, I love a great love story.”

While the interview was greeted with rapturous enthusiasm by Harry and Meghan’s millions of fans around the world, it didn’t go down so well with old hands at the palace, and the millions of British people who believe all members of the Monarchy should emulate the example of the queen and be seen and not heard.

Once again, Harry (this time via Meghan; it is impossible to imagine she gave this interview without consulting with Harry) has broken the only rule of royal publicity which might be best summarized as: Say nothing that might cause a fuss.

Part of the resigned dismay from the old guard is frustration that Harry and Meghan do not seem to understand that they are opening themselves up to easily provable charges of hypocrisy by making such public requests for privacy (“I hope people will understand that this is our time”) that never go down particularly well.

And while it’s hard not to feel compassion for Meghan and Harry given the scrutiny they are now constantly under—she has to contend with photographers regularly camped outside her house—the cry of “please leave us alone!” is rather absurd when issued from the pages of the world’s most glamorous celebrity magazine, along with page after page of gorgeous photographs of the actress by Peter Lindbergh.





*Meghan Markle: Prince Harry and I Are in Love*



*William: I Felt Diana's Presence As I Walked Behind Coffin*



*Princess Diana Still Rules Buckingham Palace*
But, as one source says: “I think it is a mistake. You can hardly bleat about privacy if you choose to do such things.”

Ultimately, to make a call on whether this was a good or bad idea, one has to question who this interview actually benefits, and what it achieves.

On the plus side, it has introduced Meghan in a very positive way and more or less on her own terms to a huge global audience. The article spoke warmly about her humanitarian work and general character, and her authenticity and charm was abundantly apparent.

A _Vanity Fair_ cover will also be very helpful for Meghan personally if she chooses to continue with her acting career, either with or without Harry by her side.

On the negative side, the interview increases pressure on the couple to announce they are marrying. “It’s a declaration of intent,” says a source.

GET THE BEAST IN YOUR INBOX!


*

By clicking “Subscribe,” you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy


Christopher Andersen, whose book The Day Diana Died is currently topping e-book charts, told The Daily Beast via email: “For Harry a large part of Meghan’s appeal is that she breaks—make that shatters—all precedent when it comes to royal brides. She is a television actress, she is American, she is biracial, she is divorced.

“The fact that Meghan is the last person Britain’s establishment would choose for him to wed make her that much more irresistible to the renegade prince. Like Kate Middleton, Meghan has played her cards right. She seems utterly unflappable despite all the hounding by the press, and like Kate has demonstrated a remarkable amount of patience.

“The consensus now in royal circles is that a royal wedding is inevitable, and it will probably take place next spring. There’s no turning back really at this stage.”

The only possible way this interview makes any kind of long term strategic sense for Harry and Meghan is if they have already secretly decided to marry (much as some of their fans may wish, even Harry probably realizes that living as an unmarried couple long term is not realistic).

Indeed, Meghan’s comment, “I’m sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves,” suggests that this is exactly what has happened.

In this case, the Vanity Fair profile is perhaps best regarded as the soft launch of the happy couple, and may not be as ill-considered a move as the naysayers insist.

The increasingly public manner in which Harry and Meghan are conducting their relationship is ramping up speculation that the couple will announce an engagement soon.

It’s very different from Harry’s previous relationship with Cressida Bonas, which was marked by a desire on his part to protect her from the press. The strategy worked for as long as the secret was kept, but once their relationship became public knowledge, the romance fell apart almost instantly.

Perhaps, then, all Meghan and Harry are doing is taking the opposite—and, let’s be honest, way more realistic—route.

The risk, of course, with fate so extensively tempted, is that something happens and the relationship breaks up.

If that happens, Harry may well find himself wishing he had observed the old model of public facing royalty, and that neither he nor his girlfriend had said a thing before they publicly put a ring on it.

Ultimately, outsiders should give Meghan and Harry the benefit of the doubt; assume they are playing their cards to the best of their ability—and expect an announcement of a new royal wedding in the next few months.




*


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> what did her sister day?
> whatever it was, for her to say negative things publicly about her sister, they must have been on bad terms - or they would have been after if not before


They were estranged for a while, but when her half-sister spoke out I didn't rush to judge her and the things she said because Markle is basically unknown unless you watch Suits (I had never heard of her before & still know nothing about her).
The story was pretty much shared on every news outlet at the time, first link that pops up on Google is the DailyFail one, but you'll get the idea of what she had to say...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-aspiring-princess-let-father-bankrupt.html


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> They were estranged for a while, but when her half-sister spoke out I didn't rush to judge her and the things she said because Markle is basically unknown unless you watch Suits (I had never heard of her before & still know nothing about her).
> The story was pretty much shared on every news outlet at the time, first link that pops up on Google is the DailyFail one, but you'll get the idea of what she had to say...
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-aspiring-princess-let-father-bankrupt.html


I guess I'd take what the sister says with a grain of salt.  Another article says they were very far apart in age and weren't raised together and paints the sister as an opportunist.  But if there is any truth to the story that both her parents have declared bankruptcy I'm sure the royals wouldn't be impressed with her background.  On the other hand, it's not her fault and I think they will let harry decide for himself.


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> *I guess I'd take what the sister says with a grain of salt.*  Another article says they were very far apart in age and weren't raised together and paints the sister as an opportunist.  But if there is any truth to the story that both her parents have declared bankruptcy I'm sure the royals wouldn't be impressed with her background.  On the other hand, it's not her fault and I think they will let harry decide for himself.


I agree, but I wouldn't dismiss it either.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I agree, but I wouldn't dismiss it either.


bottom line - seems she's an actress and doesn't come from a perfect background (to put it mildly).  But with all that happened with Charles/Diana/Camilla, I don't think anyone will interfere if Harry wants her, esp since he's now 5th or 6th in line


----------



## beekmanhill

I'm sure all the schedules of engagement, marriage are planned.
Diana's mother deserted the whole family to run off with a polo player.  Her father had a drinking problem.   So not many around the royal family are perfect.


----------



## sdkitty

beekmanhill said:


> I'm sure all the schedules of engagement, marriage are planned.
> Diana's mother deserted the whole family to run off with a polo player.  Her father had a drinking problem.   So not many around the royal family are perfect.


true about Diana's family; on the other hand, I believe their bloodlines were closer to English royalty than the current royals who are of German descent.  I'm sure someone here can elaborate or correct me if I'm wrong


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> true about Diana's family; on the other hand, I believe their bloodlines were closer to English royalty than the current royals who are of German descent.  I'm sure someone here can elaborate or correct me if I'm wrong


I know you are right about Diana's ancestors. The Windsor line is relatively new.


----------



## sdkitty

chowlover2 said:


> I know you are right about Diana's ancestors. The Windsor line is relatively new.


so while her mother may have been a tramp or whatever, she brought good blood to the family


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> so while her mother may have been a tramp or whatever, she brought good blood to the family


I think it may have been her Dad, but don't really know. I do now there was a Keira Knightley movie a few years ago, about a relative of Diana, Duchess Georgina. Sad story, but a good movie if you like historical stuff.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Singra

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i think if she up and left the show it'd be a huge marker that they're more than just dating? Torres did leave for a short while, but she's back... Suits is getting a spin-off and Torres is the lead on that


That's good to hear about Torres, I really like her and had thought the show was foolish to let her go. I take your points about the VF interview being linked to an engagement and you're most likely right but I still think Suits isn't watched by enough people for it to factor in too much... but again what do I know.


----------



## Singra

This is the thing about royalty... inevitably it boils down to discussions of bloodlines, reputation and all sorts of weird archaic rules, the more closely you look at it the more ridiculous it appears and the more you start to wonder why they're still around.

Did anyone watch that BBC documentary _Diana, 7 Days_ a couple of weeks back? It traced the week after Diana's death and the preparations for her funeral, it included interviews with William and Harry and a bunch of people close to the family. The one thing that stuck out was that the more you hold the door open to the press the more they intrude. Arguably Diana's life had become quite unbearable in her final years (being hounded by press etc.) because she had revealed too much of herself... which at the time she had felt was justified and necessary.

William and Kate seem to have struck a pretty good balance, both however are quite low key people... if Megan Markle and Harry were to get hitched would they be able to do the same?

There was some fuss recently about Harry's new PR person and how much Harry had been allowed to reveal of his struggles dealing with his mother's death. If Harry is going in a new direction with this new press person I hope they know what they're doing,  the points made in the articles sdkitty posted are very valid... once a genie is out of the bottle you can't put it back again.


----------



## papertiger

VickyB said:


> In the interview she speaks about how their relationship is private and they keep it on the DL. At the same time, she's on the cover of VF and speaking  about their relationship in an interview. Doesn't seem very DL to me.
> I don't understand why she said yes to the cover/interview. If they are really getting engaged and she's giving up her career(I'm guessing she'll have to give up her career) , why would she or Harry's camp think this cover etc was an appropriate move.



Exactly. All this 'how dare you' and pleas for privacy to the tabloids and then a cover that proclaims relationship status on the cover of a magazine done with full cooperation. That doesn't usually 'announce' closer ties at all.


----------



## sdkitty

chowlover2 said:


> I think it may have been her Dad, but don't really know. I do now there was a Keira Knightley movie a few years ago, about a relative of Diana, Duchess Georgina. Sad story, but a good movie if you like historical stuff.


yes, when is said "she" I was talking about Diana
Here's something from Time magazine:
PEOPLE
*What to Know About the Royal Blood in Princess Diana's Family*
Olivia B. Waxman
Aug 30, 2017
make a pilgrimage to her burial site at Althorp, her childhood home in Northamptonshire, England. That home, which has been in her family since 1508, is just one of the reminders that, while Diana was often characterized as "the girl next door" at the time of her fairytale wedding to Prince Charles, that door would have been located — literally and metaphorically — in an unusual neighborhood.

Long before she was actually a Princess, Lady Diana Spencer was connected to the royal family.


*RELATED*



REMEMBRANCERead TIME's Original 1997 Special Report on Princess Diana's Death
Born Diana Spencer in 1961, she earned the title "Lady" in 1975 when her father inherited the title of Earl. TIME reported in 1981 that, over the years, royals befriended various members of the Spencer family, who served as courtiers to the Crown. "Diana's brother, Charles, 16, is Queen Elizabeth's godson," the magazine added. "Her father, the very wealthy eighth Earl Spencer, is the late Queen Mary's godson, as well as former personal aide to both King George VI and the present Queen. Her maternal grandmother, Lady Fermoy, is a lady in waiting to the Queen Mother. Said a consultant to _Burke's Peerage_, the _Who's Who_ of British aristocracy: 'There cannot be another family so stiff with royal connections.'"

Within a cover package on Charles and Diana's engagement published the following month, one article delved into her illustrious family tree even further:

She has more English royal blood in her veins than does Prince Charles, her 16th cousin once removed. All of it flowing from illegitimate unions. Four of her ancestors were mistresses to English Kings. Three dallied with Charles II (1630-85), a compulsive philanderer whose amorous activities produced more than a quarter of the 26 dukedoms in Great Britain and Ireland. The fourth royal paramour, Arabella, daughter of the first Sir Winston Churchill, was a favorite of James II (1633-1701) and bore him a daughter. In short, while Diana's blood may run blue, even purple, scarlet women and black sheep have added to its color...

Others of Diana's kinsmen made their mark in worldly affairs, many as great statesmen. George Washington is an eighth cousin seven times removed, and through the wife of an eccentric American great-great-grandfather, Diana is related to Presidents John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Calvin Coolidge, Millard Fillmore, Rutherford B. Hayes, Grover Cleveland and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Sir Winston Churchill (middle name: Spencer) is a cousin, as is former Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home. Scholarly limbs include Historian Henry Adams, Philosopher Bertrand Russell and Lexicographer Noah Webster. Theatrical boughs: Humphrey Bogart and Lillian Gish.

The family was there for the royals during good times and bad. Queen Victoria once said the fourth Earl Spencer, Frederick, (1798-1857), had the best legs she'd ever seen on a man, according to _The Spencers: A Personal History of an English Family, _written by Diana's journalist brother Charles. On a more serious note, the Third Baron Spencer, Henry, helped fund Charles I's army during the English Civil War, and died in battle during a clash at Newbury. And Sarah Jennings Churchill, the Duchess of Marlborough (who was linked to the Spencer family through her daughter, who married Charles Spencer the third Earl of Sunderland) was the richest woman in England at one point during the 18th century, and famous for being Queen Anne's confidante.

_Get your history fix in one place: sign up for the weekly TIME History newsletter_

There even happened to be another Lady Diana Spencer in the family in the mid-18th century. Her family tried to set her up with Prince of Wales, and Charles Spencer's book claims that a wedding date was secretly being hammered out, and that at the peak of marriage negotiations her dowry boasted £100,000. However, when the Prime Minister found out about the plan, he encouraged King George II, "to find someone less politically threatening" for the prince, who ended up marrying the younger Princess Augusta of Saxe-Coburg. That Diana ended up marrying the brother of the Duke of Bedford, Lord John Russell, but she would die tragically young, at 25, of consumption.

The Spencer to whom Diana has been most famously compared is her great-great-great-great aunt Georgiana, the Duchess of Devonshire (1757-1806). Both married men who were more than 10 years older than they were, and both also struggled with bulimia. Georgiana had her scandalous side — there were reports that she tore the rings off her fingers to place on gaming tables — but she was best known as a style icon, for popularizing French hair powder, muslin gowns, hairpieces made of ostrich feathers, and three-foot hair towers. "It would be no exaggeration to state that Georgiana was the epicentre of all that was modish and desirable."

Sound familiar?

Today, the glamour gene in the Spencer family continues, with the flashy lifestyles of the current generation of Spencers on display on social media.


----------



## Jayne1

Singra said:


> This is the thing about royalty... inevitably it boils down to discussions of bloodlines, reputation and all sorts of weird archaic rules, the more closely you look at it the more ridiculous it appears and the more you start to wonder why they're still around.
> 
> Did anyone watch that BBC documentary _Diana, 7 Days_ a couple of weeks back? It traced the week after Diana's death and the preparations for her funeral, it included interviews with William and Harry and a bunch of people close to the family. The one thing that stuck out was that the more you hold the door open to the press the more they intrude. Arguably Diana's life had become quite unbearable in her final years (being hounded by press etc.) because she had revealed too much of herself... which at the time she had felt was justified and necessary.
> 
> William and Kate seem to have struck a pretty good balance, both however are quite low key people... if Megan Markle and Harry were to get hitched would they be able to do the same?
> 
> There was some fuss recently about Harry's new PR person and how much Harry had been allowed to reveal of his struggles dealing with his mother's death. If Harry is going in a new direction with this new press person I hope they know what they're doing,  the points made in the articles sdkitty posted are very valid... once a genie is out of the bottle you can't put it back again.


Agree and yes I watched it too, although they didn't go into how kooky and unpredictable she could be.

Diana loved the press.  She invented that thing the Ks do now, thanks Di.

I do think the genie is out of the bottle. Once the Queen, who is the most hardworking woman in the UK, is gone, it will be a watered down monarchy.  William is considered lazy and his royal duties schedule never increased once he stopped flying helicopters.

I can see Harry and M staying low key, although I wish he would stop talking about wanting to be  "normal" because they only want to be normal when it suits them. Try getting up every morning at 6am and waiting in the pouring rain for the bus to drop the kids off a daycare, while trying to figure out how to pay the rent and car insurance, because that is your life. Not something he thought might be fun to do one time.


----------



## jiangjiang

sdkitty said:


> I still say she wants attention.  She's an actress (and not a very well known one prior to her involvement with Harry).  I'm sure Harry is aware on some level that a big part of her attraction to him is that he's royalty and one of the most famous bachelors in the world.



Totally come up for her! 
Not sure why one article gave people idea of engagement? 
Kate and William were together for 8 years and broke up once before they tied the knot.  

Harry is now a bit further down the throne, certainly no rush to produce a heir.


----------



## sdkitty

jiangjiang said:


> Totally come up for her!
> Not sure why one article gave people idea of engagement?
> Kate and William were together for 8 years and broke up once before they tied the knot.
> 
> Harry is now a bit further down the throne, certainly no rush to produce a heir.


Not sure how this momentum builds to where everyone is convinced they are getting engaged.  Maybe partly due to Harry getting older and maybe the time being right


----------



## Singra

I can understand some of the speculation because the VF cover article doesn't make a lot of sense for her current level of exposure and fame, I would even go as far to say it comes across as slightly presumptuous to people who have no idea who she is, it would make more sense to me if it came out after an engagement... but I'm obviously working from an old model of what PR for royals has been... maybe this is the new and improved method.


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> I can understand some of the speculation because the VF cover article doesn't make a lot of sense for her current level of exposure and fame, I would even go as far to say it comes across as slightly presumptuous to people who have no idea who she is, it would make more sense to me if it came out after an engagement... but I'm obviously working from an old model of what PR for royals has been... maybe this is the new and improved method.


again - seeking attention IMO - maybe this should be a red flag for harry


----------



## Singra

There is an attention seeking aspect... though Attention seeking is an adjective I'd also use to describe Harry to a certain degree. 

There's something perhaps a little too eager about it as well, if you're entering into the orbit of the royals without healthy scepticism and wariness you haven't been paying the right kind of attention. 

I don't want to condemn Markle too quickly though, she's probably a lovely person it's just that what's normal and appropriate to her (partly determined by her job) isn't nesseasarily a good thing in the context of the royals.

Less is more... I cannot say that enough.


----------



## Jayne1

Some inside info from someone who works at the Downsview studio -- Markle has a house here in downtown Toronto, but _Suits_ is filmed in the suburbs, at the Downsview Film studios.  _Designated Survivor_ is filmed there too.  

Also in the Downsview park, is  the Canadian Forces Base.  Harry flies directly to the base, without going through security because he is a member of the Army Air Corps.

So he can fly directly to her, when she's working on set at the film studio and keep it really private.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Not a military base for over ten years - since the 90's. The military wouldn't shuttle Harry around to have tryst with a woman anyway. And he's no longer in the military. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFB_Toronto


----------



## Jayne1

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Not a military base for over ten years - since the 90's. The military wouldn't shuttle Harry around to have tryst with a woman anyway. And he's no longer in the military.
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFB_Toronto


I didn't mean the miltary flew him there. I know for a fact, from people who work there, that he flies directly there without having to go through secuity because of his military background.


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> she wants attention?


thank you!

everyone seems to forget that she went public with the relationship on instagram!


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't mean the miltary flew him there. I know for a fact, from people who work there, that he flies directly there without having to go through secuity because of his military background.


I don't mean to be argumentative, but it's a civilian airport so anyone can fly into it. And he doesn't go to custom like regular peasants at ANY airport. He's a prince that's why she's trying so hard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I don't mean to be argumentative, but it's a civilian airport so anyone can fly into it. And he doesn't go to custom like regular peasants at ANY airport. He's a prince that's why she's trying so hard.


I don't mean to get argumentative either. This is interesting.

I have been under the impression that royalty have to adhere to customs and immigration rules, though it may be fast tracked. Military ID is enough for those who have it.

Whatever, the guy has a good life. lol


----------



## shiba

Royalty carry a Diplomatic passport.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

shiba said:


> Royalty carry a Diplomatic passport.


Yup.


----------



## Jayne1

shiba said:


> Royalty carry a Diplomatic passport.


Everyone except the Queen have passports but they still have to go though customs and even the Queen had to have an identity check.


----------



## Esizzle

The only time world royals dont have to go through customs is when they are travelling on official business and doing royal business in other countries. If they are doing private trips, they have go through customs like everyone else. You mean to tell me Princess Beatrice or Princess Eugene, royals just like Harry, just stroll into a country without any check? Nope.

For example when Princes Will and Harry were in America a few years ago for a friends wedding they both flew commercial and went through customs.


----------



## VickyB

beekmanhill said:


> Because once they are engaged there will be all sorts of articles.   This one was very favorable to start the ball rolling to introduce her to the public.   Most people in the US have never heard of her.


I had never heard of her but my mother is a Suits fan.


----------



## Tivo

I'm not particularly fond of Megan, but I doubt she had control over what the magazine was going to spotlight or even that she'd be on the cover. Because that cover pic is not flattering at all.


----------



## terebina786

Jayne1 said:


> Some inside info from someone who works at the Downsview studio -- Markle has a house here in downtown Toronto, but* Suits is filmed in the suburbs*, at the Downsview Film studios.  _Designated Survivor_ is filmed there too.
> 
> Also in the Downsview park, is  the Canadian Forces Base.  Harry flies directly to the base, without going through security because he is a member of the Army Air Corps.
> 
> So he can fly directly to her, when she's working on set at the film studio and keep it really private.



It is?? I keep seeing them in various buildings downtown.. They also shoot a lot behind my office and at Bay/Adelaide.  Unless it's just one offs.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I keep seeing articles over the past few days that Markle's close friend - Priyanka Chopra - is commenting on the VF interview/cover and I recall that last year she came out on behalf of Markle as well, and did the same thing over an interview Markle gave. Somehow I find this really ... unroyal?... that Markle has a group of friends who are willing to be quoted and speak so openly about her and her life. I get that Markle wants to be taken seriously, but lets be real, she's a C-list actress and really only famous right now b/c of Harry. Perhaps the royals are moving in a completely different direction these days, but I thought after Diana's situation they really tried hard to stay away from courting publicity. Markle is an actress and I'm sure she loves the attention - I think it'd be very hard for an actress to give that up. Unless she turns into a Grace Kelly and renounces Hollywood stuff forever to marry Harry. Her friends should be quiet imho.


----------



## TC1

terebina786 said:


> It is?? I keep seeing them in various buildings downtown.. They also shoot a lot behind my office and at Bay/Adelaide.  Unless it's just one offs.


You're right.You can often see downtown in the episodes. The episode 2 weeks ago was on the Fairmont Royal York hotel.


----------



## TC1

Tivo said:


> I'm not particularly fond of Megan, but I doubt she had control over what the magazine was going to spotlight or even that she'd be on the cover. Because that cover pic is not flattering at all.


She said she was excited about the picture they chose to use because it would showcase her freckles. So..she knew.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I keep seeing articles over the past few days that Markle's close friend - Priyanka Chopra - is commenting on the VF interview/cover and I recall that last year she came out on behalf of Markle as well, and did the same thing over an interview Markle gave. Somehow I find this really ... unroyal?... that Markle has a group of friends who are willing to be quoted and speak so openly about her and her life. I get that Markle wants to be taken seriously, but lets be real, she's a C-list actress and really only famous right now b/c of Harry. Perhaps the royals are moving in a completely different direction these days, but I thought after Diana's situation they really tried hard to stay away from courting publicity. Markle is an actress and I'm sure she loves the attention - I think it'd be very hard for an actress to give that up. Unless she turns into a Grace Kelly and renounces Hollywood stuff forever to marry Harry. Her friends should be quiet imho.


I thought of Grace Kelly too.  First of all she was no C-list actress she was a huge star.  And I think it's fairly well known that she wasn't that happy in Monaco.  I think she stayed married for her family.  So if that's what this young woman is thinking maybe she ought to think twice.
I think Harry would be better off with someone like Katherine rather than an actress but he didn't ask me.


----------



## Jayne1

terebina786 said:


> It is?? I keep seeing them in various buildings downtown.. They also shoot a lot behind my office and at Bay/Adelaide.  Unless it's just one offs.


They like to show off the financial district and other scenic areas and buildings around Toronto, but most of the indoor scenes are filmed at Downsview Park. That's home base.


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> . Perhaps the royals are moving in a completely different direction these days, but I thought after Diana's situation they really tried hard to stay away from courting publicity. Markle is an actress and I'm sure she loves the attention - I think it'd be very hard for an actress to give that up. Unless she turns into a Grace Kelly and renounces Hollywood stuff forever to marry Harry. Her friends should be quiet imho.


William has said he wants to modernize the monarchy.  I have little hope for him but really, the Queen will be a very hard act to follow.


----------



## terebina786

Jayne1 said:


> They like to show off the financial district and other scenic areas and buildings around Toronto, but most of the indoor scenes are filmed at Downsview Park. That's home base.



Oh right.. makes sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I keep seeing articles over the past few days that Markle's close friend - Priyanka Chopra - is commenting on the VF interview/cover and I recall that last year she came out on behalf of Markle as well, and did the same thing over an interview Markle gave. Somehow I find this really ... unroyal?... that Markle has a group of friends who are willing to be quoted and speak so openly about her and her life. I get that Markle wants to be taken seriously, but lets be real, she's a C-list actress and really only famous right now b/c of Harry. Perhaps the royals are moving in a completely different direction these days, but I thought after Diana's situation they really tried hard to stay away from courting publicity. Markle is an actress and I'm sure she loves the attention - I think it'd be very hard for an actress to give that up. Unless she turns into a Grace Kelly and renounces Hollywood stuff forever to marry Harry. Her friends should be quiet imho.



Totally C-list.  I watched suits last night jus to see her in action. Meh at best.


----------



## TC1

VickyB said:


> Totally C-list.  I watched suits last night jus to see her in action. Meh at best.


I swear she used to be better in this series. Now, meh at best indeed.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VickyB said:


> Totally C-list.  I watched suits last night jus to see her in action. Meh at best.





TC1 said:


> I swear she used to be better in this series. Now, meh at best indeed.


i've watched Suits for 6 years. she was considerably better before. well, not a great actress by any means, but her character was diminished this season (because of all her travelling and requests for time off, which the network said they accommodated -- obviously for time with Harry).


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry is in Toronto this weekend!  For his charity.
Engagement rumors swirl!


----------



## Singra

If there's going to be an engagement I wish they'd get on with it.



sdkitty said:


> I thought of Grace Kelly too.  First of all she was no C-list actress she was a huge star.  And I think it's fairly well known that she wasn't that happy in Monaco.  I think she stayed married for her family.  So if that's what this young woman is thinking maybe she ought to think twice.
> *I think Harry would be better off with someone like Katherine rather than an actress but he didn't ask me.*


Harry himself seems more extrovert and thrill/attention seeking (well more than his bro) so it makes sense to some degree that he's with an actress. Not sure he's always had the best taste in girlfriends, I've heard stories about two of his former girlfriends and they aren't exactly flattering... considering that Markle is a bit of an upgrade.


----------



## Esizzle

He dated a couple actresses before Megan but his first long term girlfriend was Chelsy Davy who is an heiress or some kind but also a lawyer. Apparently she broke up with Harry because she didn't want the scrutiny of princess life. She is rich enough already doesn't need the money like Kate did.


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> He dated a couple actresses before Megan but his first long term girlfriend was Chelsy Davy who is an heiress or some kind but also a lawyer. Apparently she broke up with Harry because she didn't want the scrutiny of princess life. She is rich enough already doesn't need the money like Kate did.


Kate did?  assume you're being sarcastic....Kate's family is wealthy


----------



## Esizzle

sdkitty said:


> Kate did?  assume you're being sarcastic....Kate's family is wealthy


They're rich but they still have to work to keep the money flowing in. Or at least they did before Kate married Will. They're no where as rich as Chelsys family. Kate spent most of her twenties being a full time girlfriend of Will being supported by her parents. The end goal was to marry the prince and live luxuriously ever after.

I was comparing Kate's family being barely millionaires to Chelsys family who are multimillionaires and of course Will will inherit millions once he becomes the Duke of Cornwall


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> They're rich but they still have to work to keep the money flowing in. Or at least they did before Kate married Will. They're no where as rich as Chelsys family. Kate spent most of her twenties being a full time girlfriend of Will being supported by her parents. The end goal was to marry the prince and live luxuriously ever after.
> 
> I was comparing Kate's family being barely millionaires to Chelsys family who are multimillionaires and of course Will will inherit millions once he becomes the Duke of Cornwall


all relative I suppose


----------



## Singra

Yeah lets not get into Chelsea Davy's family... having a ton of money doesn't buy you class. 

Also... You often have to question how uber wealthy families living on the African continent made their millions, most of the time it's not a pretty picture.


----------



## peppermintpatty

I find Kate marrying Will for money laughable.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gelbergirl said:


> Prince Harry is in Toronto this weekend!  For his charity.
> Engagement rumors swirl!


her contract for Suits ends in 6-8 months and the show might be ending. she's totally free in less than a year from contractual obligations.
as for Toronto... they attended the games but sat a few rows apart.. article with pics
http://www.justjared.com/2017/09/23/prince-harry-meghan-markle-attend-first-public-event-together/


----------



## gelbergirl

On Saturday night, the American actress made her first appearance at one of Prince Harry' events, cheering him on as he opened the Invictus Games.







Meghan Markle attends the Invictus Games Opening Ceremonies in Toronto on Saturday, a few rows apart from her boyfriend, Britain’s Prince Harry. (Frank Gunn/Canadian Press/AP)


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry has done a wonderful thing with this Invictus games.  For this community.
A big thumbs up to him.





“Time and time again, competitors from around the world tell me that sport has saved them; that the Invictus Games have given them a new lease on life; and that to represent their country again with fellow comrades is something they could only have dreamt of while lying in hospital.”

— Prince Harry


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and his girlfriend Meghan Markle step out for their first public engagement together at the Invictus Games in Toronto, Canada

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4917834/Prince-Harry-mental-health-conference-Toronto.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Esizzle

Love this! I was disappointed that they did not sit together for the opening ceremony but I guess she has to be officially engaged to him to sit in the section with the world leaders. I liked her dress for the opening ceremony


----------



## Hollyberry1213

Anyone know who makes the cute leather tote she was carrying?


----------



## jiangjiang

sdkitty said:


> Kate did?  assume you're being sarcastic....Kate's family is wealthy



Kate’s family is middle class. 
I’m sure a Lot of ladies family on this forum are wealthier than hers.


----------



## jiangjiang

peppermintpatty said:


> I find Kate marrying Will for money laughable.



Of course she did. Money, wealth, social status.

Her mother is a well known social climber, made sure both their daughters went to the best boarding school so they can be mixed with guys from upper class. 

Success!


----------



## Pagan

terebina786 said:


> It is?? I keep seeing them in various buildings downtown.. They also shoot a lot behind my office and at Bay/Adelaide.  Unless it's just one offs.


They set up on Wellington Street near Bay all the time.


----------



## jiangjiang

Esizzle said:


> Love this! I was disappointed that they did not sit together for the opening ceremony but I guess she has to be officially engaged to him to sit in the section with the world leaders. I liked her dress for the opening ceremony



Chelsy Davy sit with Harry on many public occasions.
Not sure why they didn’t sit together.


----------



## BagLovingMom

They probably didn't sit together to minimize detracting from the opening ceremonies. I think they make a nice couple !


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Prince Harry and his girlfriend Meghan Markle out for their first public engagement together at the Invictus Games in Toronto, Canada

http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Prince+Harry/Invictus+Games+Toronto+2017+Day+3/P0Hf49Wqp4X


----------



## ccbaggirl89

jiangjiang said:


> Chelsy Davy sit with Harry on many public occasions.
> Not sure why they didn’t sit together.


i don't know this to be certain, but i think it could be because Chelsea comes from an very rich diamond/jewel family and was in a very high social class to begin with. she probably would have been seated in premiere areas even without Harry, so perhaps was allowed to just continue on as she would have? as in, she'd be sitting in a high seat even w/out Harry. Megan doesn't have that kind of status


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Hollyberry1213 said:


> Anyone know who makes the cute leather tote she was carrying?


*"Meghan* is wearing the “Husband Shirt” from _Misha Nonoo_ ($185), the “Looker Ankle Fray” jeans in Love Gun from _Mother Denim_ ($114), the “Natalie” shoes from _Sarah Flint_ ($495), and the “Day Market Tote” from _Everlane_ ($165)."


----------



## Esizzle

jiangjiang said:


> Of course she did. Money, wealth, social status.
> 
> Her mother is a well known social climber, made sure both their daughters went to the best boarding school so they can be mixed with guys from upper class.
> 
> Success!


Kate made sure she spent all of her twenties trying to bag a prince. William proposed to her when it was clear that none of his "high society" female friends were interested in the scrutiny that comes with becoming a princess. Now she is a princess and can kick back and spend her father in laws money and produce heirs. Easy peasy life. Im jealous lol.


----------



## MarvelGirl

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and his girlfriend Meghan Markle step out for their first public engagement together at the Invictus Games in Toronto, Canada
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4917834/Prince-Harry-mental-health-conference-Toronto.html
> 
> View attachment 3834730
> View attachment 3834731
> View attachment 3834732
> View attachment 3834733
> View attachment 3834734
> View attachment 3834736
> View attachment 3834737



Love them together so much!  Can't wait for the engagement to happen and then the wedding!


----------



## Jayne1

jiangjiang said:


> Of course she did. Money, wealth, social status.
> 
> Her mother is a well known social climber, made sure both their daughters went to the best boarding school so they can be mixed with guys from upper class.
> 
> Success!


Exactly.  That's how it's seen across the pond.


----------



## Jayne1

Harry had already been in Toronto for a couple days before the games started.  He stays with her in her house which is situated downtown.

I love how famous people can be invisible if they really want to be.

I also think they make a very beautiful couple and since she's an actress, she can smile on command. It's miserably hot and humid here and she's not wilting.  I'm impressed!


----------



## gazoo

Over on the British newspaper pages the commenters are losing their minds at her wearing clothes with "holes" and her "untucked" shirt. 

I think she's very attractive and they seem to be very into each other. On the topic of Kate, I don't think her life is easy at all. The protocols of everything being so regimented would drive me nuts, even if I was able to soften the stress with palaces and jewels.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

jiangjiang said:


> Of course she did. Money, wealth, social status.
> 
> Her mother is a well known social climber, made sure both their daughters went to the best boarding school so they can be mixed with guys from upper class.
> 
> Success!


I somewhere read she was sent to the same college/uni so she can be close to Will and try to get him. It was all planned from the mother.


----------



## gazoo

^ I suppose that seems low classy nowadays but it's been done since the beginning of time. I can't fault her mother for ensuring her girls met potential partners in higher social tiers than they were in. Although I still maintain the Middleton's weren't poor! It makes me laugh to hear people speak of them as if they're these poor social climbers. Sending their girls to those schools wasn't free for them. I doubt many could casually afford that kind of long term investment.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Does anyone know if Harry's Invictus games are televised. I was able to catch some of it last year on espn. I tell you it was beyond inspiring and moving so major kudos to Harry !


----------



## myown

gazoo said:


> ^ I suppose that seems low classy nowadays but it's been done since the beginning of time. I can't fault her mother for ensuring her girls met potential partners in higher social tiers than they were in. Although I still maintain the Middleton's weren't poor! It makes me laugh to hear people speak of them as if they're these poor social climbers. Sending their girls to those schools wasn't free for them. I doubt many could casually afford that kind of long term investment.


no but I bet Kate had a hard time growing up. I bet she kind of knew where her mother lay her path. and its hard to fit in some else's shoes.

also I agree. I all try the best for our kids, giving them in better schools, universities, hoping for the best


----------



## ccbaggirl89

BagLovingMom said:


> Does anyone know if Harry's Invictus games are televised. I was able to catch some of it last year on espn. I tell you it was beyond inspiring and moving so major kudos to Harry !


yes, but not on traditional channels.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

how is this relationship being received overseas? she has no money, no pedigree, has stripped down for shows, etc. is Markle seen as a respectable/okay choice for Harry? is there any anti-British sentiment towards her or are the people in favor of the match?


----------



## Jayne1

gazoo said:


> On the topic of Kate, I don't think her life is easy at all. The protocols of everything being so regimented would drive me nuts, even if I was able to soften the stress with palaces and jewels.


Kate and Will have been criticized for being lazy about official duties. They do far less than the 90-something Queen.  Even the 96 year old Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh does more.

My point is, well under a 100 official occasions a year shouldn't be such a strain for her. lol


----------



## Pessie

ccbaggirl89 said:


> how is this relationship being received overseas? she has no money, no pedigree, has stripped down for shows, etc. is Markle seen as a respectable/okay choice for Harry? is there any anti-British sentiment towards her or are the people in favor of the match?


I'm British, I can only speak for myself but I have no strong feelings either way about this girl, and I don't know anyone that does.  If he loves her I hope he marries her and makes a life with her.  Pretty soon he'll become peripheral to the royal family in the same way that Andrew is now.  It's not really important tbh.


----------



## Singra

^ Yeah I don't know anyone that really cares. For mysterious reasons unknown to me my mom is usually very clued into news like this but this time she's not terribly interested... perhaps if North Korea and Brexit weren't happening it would be a different story. 

I think if there's a fancy wedding people will be excited but things will roll on unless there's some kind of scandal or if people get bored. 

I find her very beautiful and she seems very vivacious. I don't find her particularly good actress but I can see her being suited to philanthropic efforts, if they make it work and they can bring about good things I say go for it.


----------



## labelwhore04

Its crazy that Megan is older than Kate. Megan looks great, i thought she was in her late 20's, no idea that she was 36.


----------



## gazoo

She's older than Prince William too!

I agree that she looks fresh and vibrant compared to most.


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> Kate and Will have been criticized for being lazy about official duties. They do far less than the 90-something Queen.  Even the 96 year old Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh does more.
> 
> My point is, well under a 100 official occasions a year shouldn't be such a strain for her. lol


*did* Prince Philip retired, didn't he?


----------



## myown

labelwhore04 said:


> Its crazy that Megan is older than Kate. Megan looks great, i thought she was in her late 20's, no idea that she was 36.


nah 
to me she looks like in the early 30s. 
but agree, I would have thought she and Kate would be around the same age


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> *did* Prince Philip retired, didn't he?


This year, I think. But untill recently, he did mote than his grandkids combined.


----------



## jiangjiang

labelwhore04 said:


> Its crazy that Megan is older than Kate. Megan looks great, i thought she was in her late 20's, no idea that she was 36.



2 Middleton sisters do not age well... 

Harry looks so much younger than Megan though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jiangjiang

ccbaggirl89 said:


> how is this relationship being received overseas? she has no money, no pedigree, has stripped down for shows, etc. is Markle seen as a respectable/okay choice for Harry? is there any anti-British sentiment towards her or are the people in favor of the match?



I was watching BBC news, royal correspondent referring her as ‘another American divorcee’ in comparison to Simpson back in 60s, people’s attitudes have changed over the years. 

I suppose that interview with VF was ahead for their first public appearance. 

People already speculating engagement even though they have only been together for a year.


----------



## beekmanhill

Mrs Simpson was back in the 30's!   And Harry isn't going to be king. Hard to believe anyone in the Windsor family could object to divorce.  I figured the VF article was their first "coming out," approved by the family.  To me, they look well matched.


----------



## Esizzle

Jeez BBC news. What a dumb thing to say - just another American divorcee? Its 2017 I dont get the negativity around a divorce. If youre not happy in a marriage, get a divorce and go find someone else that will make you happy. Thats exactly what Megan did. Cant wait for the engagement news!!


----------



## Jayne1

Princess Anne got a divorce, did anyone care?


----------



## chowlover2

Prince Charles got a divorce! What does it matter?


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

They did not divorce after just two years though.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Esizzle said:


> Jeez BBC news. What a dumb thing to say - just another American divorcee? Its 2017 I dont get the negativity around a divorce. If youre not happy in a marriage, get a divorce and go find someone else that will make you happy. Thats exactly what Megan did. Cant wait for the engagement news!!


i think that applies to us common folk  divorces and divorcees bring scandal to the family. as advanced as society is the royal house isn't. even though Andrew wasn't next in line it was very scandalous when he and Fergie divorced, so it's still a very negative thing to royals. a major reason Charles could never be with Camila was because she was married and they would both have to divorce to be with one another. even all these years later she isn't fully accepted (more for Diana, but still... she was divorced, as was Charles). more often than not a divorce also brings with it affairs and a dirty backstory and someone wanting to profit. those are huge negatives when they are trying to project a positive image. i get it, i might not agree, but i get the thinking


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Marbles ex-husband is already going to do a tv show involving the royals. Harry's gone Hollywood and not A list either, those at least try to hang on to their marriages for a decade or so.


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> a major reason Charles could never be with Camila was because she was married and they would both have to divorce to be with one another. even all these years later she isn't fully accepted (more for Diana, but still... she was divorced, as was Charles). more often than not a divorce also brings with it affairs and a dirty backstory and someone wanting to profit. those are huge negatives when they are trying to project a positive image. i get it, i might not agree, but i get the thinking


IIRC, Charles was single, loved Camilla but felt she wasn't marriage material. Not a virgin and all. Oh the good old days.  He didn't want her to marry Parker Bowles, but she did anyway. 

Charles was no saint in his marriage to Diana, but she was a psychological mess and very damaged.


----------



## Esizzle

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i think that applies to us common folk  divorces and divorcees bring scandal to the family. as advanced as society is the royal house isn't. even though Andrew wasn't next in line it was very scandalous when he and Fergie divorced, so it's still a very negative thing to royals. a major reason Charles could never be with Camila was because she was married and they would both have to divorce to be with one another. even all these years later she isn't fully accepted (more for Diana, but still... she was divorced, as was Charles). more often than not a divorce also brings with it affairs and a dirty backstory and someone wanting to profit. those are huge negatives when they are trying to project a positive image. i get it, i might not agree, but i get the thinking


I know what youre saying it makes sense. But the thing is BBC was the one that called her an American divorcee. The royal family more or less approves of her as seen with the VF cover. Three of the Queen's four children have been divorced so I doubt the fact that she is divorced matters to any of them. Certainly Harry is ok with it and in love with her. 

The problem I have with anyone making divorce seem like the devil is that a lot of times people, especially women, stay in abusive or unhappy relationships because divorce is frowned upon because of society and religion. Stupid stupid stupid!!


----------



## Singra

^Yeah if the press or royal fam were to push the "American divorcee" angle too much they'll risk coming off as out of touch and hypocritical.

A lot of depends on if people warm to someone or not and Markle seems to have a very pleasant personality, she could become irritating if she's overexposed I think. 

Look at Camilla... she was vilified for a long time... fast forward a few public engagements in some stylish threads + hats and some well considered PR and the tide turned... though if Diana had still been alive things would have been different.


----------



## beekmanhill

My gosh, every time I see Harry he is here and there doing public works, now at the Invictus games.  What the heck does the British public want.   Everyone likes him globally.  How much public service do Anne and Andrew and Edward do?  They live off the British trough too.   I think if William and Harry were two deadbeats the monarchy would be done for.  Let Harry marry the woman he loves.  So she's American, half black and divorced.  Get over it.    

I always loved the relationship Harry had with Michelle *****, especially at Invictus.


----------



## Jayne1

beekmanhill said:


> My gosh, every time I see Harry he is here and there doing public works, now at the Invictus games.  What the heck does the British public want.   Everyone likes him globally.  How much public service do Anne and Andrew and Edward do?  They live off the British trough too.   I think if William and Harry were two deadbeats the monarchy would be done for.


Actually,  Anne is the hardest working royal, after her parents, the Queen and Philip, although Charles is conducting more engagements recently.

The 3 youngest, Kate, Will and Harry do the least. Harry supports charities and organizations such as the Invictus Games, but those aren't official engagements.

The future King of England's work ethic and productivity gets questioned all the time and they call it his “work-shyness” which is a nice way to put it.

Kate does the least and my point was, when someone said they wouldn't want her life, I was thinking it wasn't so bad.


----------



## Morgan R

Thought this was both hilarious and adorable.


----------



## Esizzle

Awh that's adorable!! Why aren't the little girls parents noticing that she is eating someone's popcorn? Lol. The couple look like Harry's friends 

Harry and Megan's babies are going to be so cute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beekmanhill

Harry seems to put his heart and soul into his engagements, official or not.  Maybe its that he has selected activities he really enjoys.  He does not seem fake at all to me.


----------



## MarvelGirl

Morgan R said:


> Thought this was both hilarious and adorable.




Thanks for posting this! I loved it! He is so amazing and down to earth. Megan is a very lucky woman and I am so rooting for them! And yes, I also agree that their babies are going to be gorgeous AND kind.  Just like their parents.


----------



## Sharont2305

I really hope that a proposal has been made and that they have waited till the end of the games to announce it so as not to distract from the games itself. Fingers crossed.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> I really hope that a proposal has been made and that they have waited till the end of the games to announce it so as not to distract from the games itself. Fingers crossed.


i'm voting no. she has to finish her show contract (7 more months), so i say after that contract ends. then she's completely free. how would it look if his fiancee was on tv each week kissing another man?! they have to wait i'm sure.


----------



## Jayne1

When they appear holding hands in the UK and not just here in Canada, then it will be the start of her introduction.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and his girlfriend Meghan Markle at the closing ceremony of the Invictus Games

Also Meghan's mother, Doria is in the last 2 pictures standing in front of Prince Harry and Meghan .

More pictures from the Invictus Games closing ceremony are here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4936500/Prince-Harry-vows-continue-Invictus-Games-day.html


----------



## beekmanhill

Yesterday on Kensington Palace IG, there was a pic of Prince Harry with ***** and ***** at Invictus.  Happy the Obamas have continued their interest.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry with former President Barack *****, former Vice President Joe *****, and Jill ***** at the Invictus Games


----------



## gelbergirl

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i'm voting no. she has to finish her show contract (7 more months), so i say after that contract ends. then she's completely free. how would it look if his fiancee was on tv each week kissing another man?! they have to wait i'm sure.



So you think a July or August 2018 wedding?


----------



## Tivo

There’s something about Meghan I just don’t like. Can’t put my finger on it.
Happy for Harry, he seems to be in love. She seems...I dunno.


----------



## Jayne1

beekmanhill said:


> Yesterday on Kensington Palace IG, there was a pic of Prince Harry with ***** and ***** at Invictus.  Happy the Obamas have continued their interest.


***** wasn't in Toronto to go to the Invictus Games.  He was here to give a speech at the Toronto Convention Centre for an obscene amount of money, as most ex-presidents do on speaking tours.

He notified the press that he would stop by the Invictus Games for a photo op.  Boy, is he ever photogenic. Takes a beautiful photo.

I'm surprised Meghan's mom is so young. I thought she would look older.


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i'm voting no. she has to finish her show contract (7 more months), so i say after that contract ends. then she's completely free. how would it look if his fiancee was on tv each week kissing another man?! they have to wait i'm sure.


Think I agree too, didn't know she had 7 months to go in her contract. That makes sense. But, could they change her storylines so that she doesn't kiss another man? I'm not familiar with the show at all, I'm just thinking ( and hoping ) engagement very soon and wedding sometime soon after baby Cambridge is born, lol.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> Think I agree too, didn't know she had 7 months to go in her contract. That makes sense. But, could they change her storylines so that she doesn't kiss another man? I'm not familiar with the show at all, I'm just thinking ( and hoping ) engagement very soon and wedding sometime soon after baby Cambridge is born, lol.


yes, they can alter it. they already did this past season once she started dating Harry. she kept all her clothes on, lol. usually she does love scenes and she didn't do any.


----------



## Pagan

gazoo said:


> Over on the British newspaper pages the commenters are losing their minds at her wearing clothes with "holes" and her "untucked" shirt.
> 
> I think she's very attractive and they seem to be very into each other. On the topic of Kate, I don't think her life is easy at all. The protocols of everything being so regimented would drive me nuts, even if I was able to soften the stress with palaces and jewels.


I have to say, the untucked shirt and jeans look sloppy to me too. Either wear the shirt out or tuck it in, not both. Maybe I'm just old. LOL


----------



## BagLovingMom

Jayne1 said:


> When they appear holding hands in the UK and not just here in Canada, then it will be the start of her introduction.[/
> Hm I wonder if that's a fair measure because it doesn't seem like any of the key members of the royal family show very much affection in public. I recall reading they have strict protocols about that type of thing but could be wrong


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MarvelGirl

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and his girlfriend Meghan Markle at the closing ceremony of the Invictus Games
> 
> Also Meghan's mother, Doria is in the last 2 pictures standing in front of Prince Harry and Meghan .
> 
> More pictures from the Invictus Games closing ceremony are here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4936500/Prince-Harry-vows-continue-Invictus-Games-day.html
> 
> View attachment 3839929
> View attachment 3839930
> View attachment 3839931
> View attachment 3839936
> View attachment 3839937
> View attachment 3839938
> View attachment 3839939
> View attachment 3839940
> View attachment 3839941
> View attachment 3839942



They look so cute and happy and in love! Her mom looks gorgeous too! I'm getting so excited about this couple!!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> When they appear holding hands in the UK and not just here in Canada, then it will be the start of her introduction.


they already have several times. she was in the UK visiting him and they were out and about together and hand-holding. maybe 7/8 months ago? this is one pic i found of several (courtesy google images). if it's toronto please correct me, i am fairly certain this was during a UK visit


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> they already have several times. she was in the UK visiting him and they were out and about together and hand-holding. maybe 7/8 months ago? this is one pic i found of several (courtesy google images). if it's toronto please correct me, i am fairly certain this was during a UK visit
> View attachment 3841429


Yep, this was in London a few months ago.


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> they already have several times. she was in the UK visiting him and they were out and about together and hand-holding. maybe 7/8 months ago? this is one pic i found of several (courtesy google images). if it's toronto please correct me, i am fairly certain this was during a UK visit
> View attachment 3841429


You're right, so I suupose the next step is during some official engagements.

Anyway, I find her face so adorable and I do like them together.


----------



## chelseavrb

I just read that she quit her acting gig. That engagement announcement must be just around the corner.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4982114/Meghan-Markle-quits-Suits.html


----------



## Esizzle

Omg can’t wait!


----------



## Tivo

Hope he marries you girl.
Otherwise you are screwed.


----------



## Jayne1

I think they are lovely together. I hope they get married and are happy. And I like that Kate, supposedly, isn't into this. Kate isn't as sweet as her smile suggests.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Jayne1 said:


> I think they are lovely together. I hope they get married and are happy. And I like that Kate, supposedly, isn't into this. Kate isn't as sweet as her smile suggests.


Kate isn't into Harry & Meghan? I was just asking because I wasn't sure what you were referring to!


----------



## arnott

Jayne1 said:


> I think they are lovely together. I hope they get married and are happy. *And I like that Kate, supposedly, isn't into this. Kate isn't as sweet as her smile suggests.*



Oh really?   Share please!


----------



## Jayne1

arnott said:


> Oh really?   Share please!


She may be nice when it becomes official. So far, she's a date with no reason to give special attention to.


----------



## Esizzle

I have seen some on the internet say that Kate wont be happy if Harry proposes to Megan. The reasoning is that Megan will steal all the attention away from Kate. That might be true in the beginning but I dont think Kate has anything to worry about. She is married to a future king and mother of a future king. She will always have plenty of attention


----------



## GoStanford

I wonder about the adjustment to life with Harry, should an engagement be announced.  Kate already enjoyed similar pursuits like hunting and country life, and even she had extensive coaching on how to acclimate to the goldfish bowl life of the royals.  I still think that Harry won’t settle down till he is ready to have kids, and since he has niece(s) and nephew(s) he really has no official pressure.

But what do I know?  I’m just speculating!


----------



## Singra

Well whatever happens for the moment Harry and Megan have enough charisma between them that they can steal a lot of people's thunder. 

Don't know if that's a good thing or bad thing... considering he's the spare probably not the best thing.


----------



## chelseavrb

I wouldn't read into what gossip magazines who have no legitimate sources say. I highly doubt Kate Middleton is somewhere crying about all the attention being stolen from her after she had the wedding of the century.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Esizzle

And the babies of the century too


----------



## Jayne1

chelseavrb said:


> I wouldn't read into what gossip magazines who have no legitimate sources say. I highly doubt Kate Middleton is somewhere crying about all the attention being stolen from her after she had the wedding of the century.


No one said anything about crying.  But there is such a thing as being overshadowed. I can see Meghan being far more interesting than Kate.


----------



## chelseavrb

@Jayne1 I'm not necessarily referring to any post here although someone did say she read that Kate is upset. But i've read a few shady magazine articles online saying that Kate is pissed off that she is losing attention.

I've always loved kate. She seems like a nice girl and she has a cute sense of style but personally I LOVE Meghan's style. It's a little more youthful and fun and quite frankly she is more interesting to me personality wise. That being said she is in the entertainment industry so there are interviews we can refer to to see glimpses of her personality. Kate has always been a private citizen and William made sure it stayed that way.

For all we know we could have a wedding and then Megan will become as reserved as Kate it. Though I hope not!


----------



## Esizzle

*Meghan Markle & Prince Harry are looking for a country estate near Highgrove*

Remember two weeks ago, when the biggest gossip stories were about Sarah Jessica Parker and Kim Cattrall’s feud and Meghan Markle and Prince Harry? Simpler times. When we last checked in on Meghan and the ginger prince, they were totally engaged but not telling anyone, and they were being forced to spend time apart because Harry had work to do in London and Meghan is still filming _Suits_ in Toronto. She will be done with _Suits_ in the next month, probably, and after that she’ll be moving to London full-time. I don’t even want to say “allegedly” there. It’s happening. She’s moving to London and they’ll announce their engagement in the next few months.

So, what’s new? Not much. Us Weekly has an “exclusive” in the current issue about how Harry and Meghan are – DERP – already engaged and they’ll be making the announcement “soon,” but not while she’s still in Toronto because_ “it would be a security nightmare”_ for her. Sources say that the engagement will come with a _“detailed media rollout”_ and once the announcement is made, Meghan and Harry will do a photocall at Kensington Palace, then _“On the same day, they’ll do a TV interview that will be syndicated around the world.”_ I could have told you that.

Meanwhile, the Daily Star (via the Daily Mail) reports that of course Meghan is quitting _Suits_and _“Meghan knows she can’t really act at the same time as being a princess and is happy to make this career sacrifice. She really enjoys her charity work with Unicef and will broaden out her charity commitments when she becomes a full-time royal.” _The Mail also says that Harry is already house-hunting for a country pile for when he and Meg do get hitched – he’s apparently looking in Oxfordshire, and they are _“particularly interested in high-end properties tucked away in the rolling Cotswold hills,”_ which would mean that they’re looking for a place close to Prince Charles’ country estate, Highgrove. That’s the most interesting piece of news in this reporting, because it reflects something that has been long whispered: Harry and Charles are close, and Harry would prefer to be closer to his dad than his brother.

What else? Dickie Arbiter, the Queen’s former press secretary, told Sky News that there is significant conflict between the various royal camps, but not among the royals themselves (I disagree). Arbiter claims that _“There’s a tendency for people who join the royal households to get a bit of red carpet fever, feel a bit more important than they should do and don’t get on with the job properly. So there is a conflict of interest, a personality clash amongst each other, and that is not good.”_ He explained that some of the people working for the older royals are going to get their panties in a bunch when it comes time for Kate to take a bigger role (good luck with that!) and when Meghan joins the Firm. I tend to think Arbiter is saying that Charles is going to have a problem when he starts to get overshadowed by his daughters-in-law on a regular basis. Which could be, but I think the fractures within the royal family are a lot more significant than that.

http://www.celebitchy.com/553551/me..._looking_for_a_country_estate_near_highgrove/


----------



## arnott

chelseavrb said:


> I wouldn't read into what gossip magazines who have no legitimate sources say. I highly doubt Kate Middleton is somewhere crying about all the attention being stolen from her *after she had the wedding of the century.*


----------



## westjenn

So since these 2 just had tea with the Queen, supposedly an engagement is imminent- thoughts? 
I really wonder what he or she will pick out for a ring!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

westjenn said:


> So since these 2 just had tea with the Queen, supposedly an engagement is imminent- thoughts?
> I really wonder what he or she will pick out for a ring!


I was in an all girls school when Kate and William were engaged, and it was really fun as a buzz to talk to as a group of young girls. Happy love is a wonderful thing to witness!


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> No one said anything about crying.  But there is such a thing as being overshadowed. I can see Meghan being far more interesting than Kate.


what's so interesting about her?  do you watch her TV series?  to me she's a B-list actress but if Harry loves her I wish them well


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> what's so interesting about her?  do you watch her TV series?  to me she's a B-list actress but if Harry loves her I wish them well


she's not interesting! nobody knew her until she made th relationship public on instagram


----------



## gazoo

I've never seen her act, but she seems far more multi-faceted than Kate. Kate is very one dimensional to me, duty driven, and frankly boring. Which is probably exactly what William wanted, so that's ok. She's just not very engaging at all. Whereas I've seen several interviews of Meghan, and she has a certain something, poise or cheekiness, whatever you want to call it. She's experienced more in life than Kate has, IMO. Been divorced, raised in a single home, bi-racial, educated, made her way without family wealth/connections, has a long standing history of philanthropy before meeting Harry. Maybe it's unfair, Meghan is older than Kate and wasn't as sheltered growing up, again JMO, so she's more interesting to me. And her fashion choices are way more interesting to me than anything Kate has ever worn, barring her wedding dresses, which were spectacular to my eye.

I think each Prince has chosen what he wants, William wanted someone very particular (reserved and devoted), and it seems Wild Harry has chosen something different, just as he's wildly different to his brother. I'm here for this matching. I think it's a great addition to a very constrained family and I hope they can make each other very happy. Compared to the Royals from Monaco, Meghan's past is tame. I hope people can accept her, if Harry has indeed decided she's the one.


----------



## myown

westjenn said:


> So since these 2 just had tea with the Queen, supposedly an engagement is imminent- thoughts?
> I really wonder what he or she will pick out for a ring!


someone commented this on DM:

_Only problem with this story: Last Thursday, both HM and PH were not at the Palace at said time. PH arrived at the Attitude Dinner at 16:45 and stayed there until roughly 18:30 (confirmed by Kensington Palace). Then he went to accept the Legacy Award on behalf of his late mother. HM throughout the day was busy receiving the ambassador of Cambodia and the ambassador of Belgium at Buckingham Palace, then headed out with the Princess Royal to the reception of the WRNS. So care to explain how the three of them were able to have tea at Buckingham Palace at 5 p.m. - especially with MM being in Toronto and working.
_
_You're a bit of a stalker._​_ It doesn´t require any stalking. It´s all there on the official outlets of the households (Kensington Royal on Twitter, etc.) and anyone can obtain the info within 2 minutes - if they are fans of the Royals, if they like to know which engagements they were at on certain days, and most of all, if they care for actual FACTS instead of fabricated stories and lies._​http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l?offset=663&max=100&jumpTo=comment-249499937


----------



## westjenn

gazoo said:


> I've never seen her act, but she seems far more multi-faceted than Kate. Kate is very one dimensional to me, duty driven, and frankly boring. Which is probably exactly what William wanted, so that's ok. She's just not very engaging at all. Whereas I've seen several interviews of Meghan, and she has a certain something, poise or cheekiness, whatever you want to call it. She's experienced more in life than Kate has, IMO. Been divorced, raised in a single home, bi-racial, educated, made her way without family wealth/connections, has a long standing history of philanthropy before meeting Harry. Maybe it's unfair, Meghan is older than Kate and wasn't as sheltered growing up, again JMO, so she's more interesting to me. And her fashion choices are way more interesting to me than anything Kate has ever worn, barring her wedding dresses, which were spectacular to my eye.
> 
> I think each Prince has chosen what he wants, William wanted someone very particular (reserved and devoted), and it seems Wild Harry has chosen something different, just as he's wildly different to his brother. I'm here for this matching. I think it's a great addition to a very constrained family and I hope they can make each other very happy. Compared to the Royals from Monaco, Meghan's past is tame. I hope people can accept her, if Harry has indeed decided she's the one.[/QUO
> 
> I tend to agree with you. Bottom line is- to each her (his) own! If you think she's interesting and I don't, great! Wouldn't it be boring if everyone had the same likes and dislikes? I don't care how Megan got popular, never saw her show.. BUT I do have a fondness for Harry and how authentic he appears at his royal engagements/events.  And if he chose her, she has to be pretty special!
> 3 things I find intruiging:
> 1) She is older than Harry & a departure from who he has dating prevously- I like that she has an established working relationship with Unicef- outside of anything Royal-related.
> 2) Let's face it- the Royal family is very Anglo Saxon.  Megan's ethnic background is a breath of fresh air! And she's Canadian.
> 3) The fact that she talked to the press about their relationship (Vanity Fair) I'm sure we won't see that happen again...


----------



## chelseavrb

@westjenn I know i've been wondering the same. I would think something from the family. I read it might be an emerald his mother used to wear? I could see her wearing a diamond though.


----------



## westjenn

@chelseavrb I was thinking Emerald too for some reason.  But I do think it'll be a diamond.. I think because of Kate getting Diana's sapphire.. No colored stones for them. I think there's a little more pressure with this ring!


----------



## chelseavrb

@westjenn Could be! I love the idea of an emerald with diamonds flanking it though. It might also keep with the tradition of Kate getting one of Diana's gemstones. I guess we will see though!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gazoo

I thought she was from LA? I keep seeing people refer to her as Canadian, but isn't she only working in Canada for Suits?


----------



## Tivo

I don’t think Meghan Markle is all that interesting. She loves all this spotlight and that bit with the Vanity Fair cover - which was dreadfully dull and calculating - confirmed that for me. I thought she was interesting at first, but the more I learn about her the less I like her. IF they make it down the aisle I doubt it will last.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> I don’t think Meghan Markle is all that interesting. She loves all this spotlight and that bit with the Vanity Fair cover - which was dreadfully dull and calculating - confirmed that for me. I thought she was interesting at first, but the more I learn about her the less I like her. IF they make it down the aisle I doubt it will last.


I guess her being bi-racial, from a divorced family and divorced makes her less traditional than usual for the royals.  IDK if that necessarily makes her more interesting.


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> I guess her being bi-racial, from a divorced family and divorced makes her less traditional than usual for the royals.  IDK if that necessarily makes her more interesting.


I just don’t think she has any it factor as an actress.  Nor does she seem to have much charm. But what do I know? She’s a pretty girl...but not stunning at all. And in a weird way she and Harry kind of look alike.


----------



## VickyB

She does nothing for me. Running to the corner now.


----------



## Lounorada

Tivo said:


> I don’t think Meghan Markle is all that interesting. She loves all this spotlight and that bit with the Vanity Fair cover - which was dreadfully dull and calculating - confirmed that for me. I thought she was interesting at first, but the more I learn about her the less I like her. IF they make it down the aisle I doubt it will last.


Totally agree with everything you said.


----------



## Singra

I think she's pretty and bubbly, a lot better than some others... the royals aren't exactly the most interesting or charming bunch on the planet.



Tivo said:


> I just don’t think she has any it factor as an actress.  Nor does she seem to have much charm. But what do I know? She’s a pretty girl...but not stunning at all. *And in a weird way she and Harry kind of look alike.*


LOL weirdly that probably bodes well for their relationship, there's apparently a correlation between the length of a relationship and how similar you and your partner look.


----------



## Laila619

Never heard of her until she started dating Harry, but she seems very average to me, looks wise. I see much more spectacular, striking looking women at my local Target. But then again Catherine isn't some traffic stopping bombshell either, so maybe Will and Harry don't have looks high on their list. Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## TC1

gazoo said:


> I thought she was from LA? I keep seeing people refer to her as Canadian, but isn't she only working in Canada for Suits?


Yes. She is indeed from L.A


----------



## Jayne1

gazoo said:


> I've never seen her act, but she seems far more multi-faceted than Kate. Kate is very one dimensional to me, duty driven, and frankly boring. Which is probably exactly what William wanted, so that's ok. She's just not very engaging at all. Whereas I've seen several interviews of Meghan, and she has a certain something, poise or cheekiness, whatever you want to call it. She's experienced more in life than Kate has, IMO. Been divorced, raised in a single home, bi-racial, educated, made her way without family wealth/connections, has a long standing history of philanthropy before meeting Harry. Maybe it's unfair, Meghan is older than Kate and wasn't as sheltered growing up, again JMO, so she's more interesting to me. And her fashion choices are way more interesting to me than anything Kate has ever worn, barring her wedding dresses, which were spectacular to my eye.
> 
> I think each Prince has chosen what he wants, William wanted someone very particular (reserved and devoted), and it seems Wild Harry has chosen something different, just as he's wildly different to his brother. I'm here for this matching. I think it's a great addition to a very constrained family and I hope they can make each other very happy. Compared to the Royals from Monaco, Meghan's past is tame. I hope people can accept her, if Harry has indeed decided she's the one.


Agree with everything you wrote.

I also thought Will picked someone complacent because the family didn't want another erratic, attention seeking loose cannon like Diana.

She's quite perfect for the role but as boring as anything. Even her clothes and shoes and and pencil thin frame -- nothing to see here but probably on purpose.

MM looks so adorably pretty with an interesting background. Hope she doesn't have to change her style too much!


----------



## jessicaofromvan

I think they'll marry and I don't think it'll last (long time royal watcher here, but not in a super fan girlish kinda way - am cool with disagreements!). Meghan is an attention whore, from what I've seen of her. She's an actress, it's expected, so this isn't me singling her out. Not only is it expected, it's kind of her job given that she's not A or B list and hustle/publicity is part of it when you're not at the top. I do want to see them married for the spectacle, plus she's beautiful and both of them seem more outgoing then either Wills and Kate. I want to see a big fancy sparkly British high society wedding with all the bells and whistles.

Kate, although I do find her boring, is a lot less 'free' to do (dress, speak etc.) as she pleases, as the wife and mother of future kings. She's good at her job, which is looking pretty but not in a challenging way, not rocking boats, smiling at peasants and making babies. Ha.


----------



## Jayne1

jessicaofromvan said:


> Kate, although I do find her boring, is a lot less 'free' to do (dress, speak etc.) as she pleases, as the wife and mother of future kings. She's good at her job, which is looking pretty but not in a challenging way, not rocking boats, smiling at peasants and making babies. Ha.


Diana wore all kinds of attention seeking outfits, well before her divorce and she too was the wife and mother of future kings.

I thought Diana's outfits were kind of ugly, but I always looked to see what kind of get up she picked.


----------



## sdkitty

jessicaofromvan said:


> I think they'll marry and I don't think it'll last (long time royal watcher here, but not in a super fan girlish kinda way - am cool with disagreements!). Meghan is an attention whore, from what I've seen of her. She's an actress, it's expected, so this isn't me singling her out. Not only is it expected, it's kind of her job given that she's not A or B list and hustle/publicity is part of it when you're not at the top. I do want to see them married for the spectacle, plus she's beautiful and both of them seem more outgoing then either Wills and Kate. I want to see a big fancy sparkly British high society wedding with all the bells and whistles.
> 
> Kate, although I do find her boring, is a lot less 'free' to do (dress, speak etc.) as she pleases, as the wife and mother of future kings. She's good at her job, which is looking pretty but not in a challenging way, not rocking boats, smiling at peasants and making babies. Ha.


I don't find Meghan that beautiful or interesting.  But I think with their contrasting coloring, they could make pretty babies.


----------



## terebina786

Meghan is a lot more relatable to some people than Kate.  Kate’s always been boring to me - personality and style-wise.  I just don’t care for it.  I can totally see her being jealous because technically she’s “old news” lol.

Also, I’ve never gotten the fame ho vibe from her.  If she’s giving up acting to marry Harry, then how is she a fame ho?  She won’t need to get publicity for anything if that’s the case and she’s leaving Suits.  I also think that VF article was okayed by the royal family.


----------



## Esizzle

There were reports that Meghan and Harry had tea with the Queen this past week. I hope an engagement announcement is going to happen soon. I believe they are already engaged but havent officially announced it because Meghan is in Canada and its going to be a security nightmare. Cant wait!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> I don't find Meghan that beautiful or interesting.  But I think with their contrasting coloring, they could make pretty babies.


ITA about not beautiful or interesting but I am not sure about the babies part.We'll find out soon enough!


----------



## jessicaofromvan

ITA Esizzle, they're already engaged. A lot of very loud signals that this is the case.

terebina786 - I can see Meghan being 'more relatable' in some ways, and not in others. For one thing, she's already (somewhat) famous, Kate wasn't. But Meghan is definitely from a more normal social strata (Kate is middle class but middle class in the UK is different to middle class in N America). As for fameho, I mean she's not as bad as some in Hollywood for sure and it's not like I even blame her for it. But I've watched those speeches of hers, read that VF interview (agreed, btw, there is NO WAY she did that without palace approval), and she screams preening, look-at-me actress. Just a really fake LA vibe, imo. 

sdkitty - Has she had work done? A nose job? I've seen a few old photos of her and I suspect she's had her nose done, at least. Her boobs are fake, too, which kind of makes me laugh. Fake boobs in the royal fam oh noooes! Maybe she'll make it acceptable and Wills and Harry can go get hair transplants like you know they want to. Anyway, the surgery comment was with regards to their kids, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were good looking. Harry and William both went through a period of being movie-star hot, Harry is in the midst of losing it now and William has totally lost it so hopefully Meghan's genes, like Diana's, can bring something attractive to the bloodline. 

Jaybe1 - I don't know, I kind of see Diana's fashion as similar to Kate's but different time periods. Both wore expensive designers, both were watched by fashionistas etc., but Diana wasn't sporting acid-washed denim microminis any more than Kate is wearing ass-cheek revealing rompers. There was and is an expectation of a certain kind of conservative stylishness, and it has to be said Kate seems much less inclined to rocking the boat in a general sense than Diana did.


----------



## sdkitty

jessicaofromvan said:


> ITA Esizzle, they're already engaged. A lot of very loud signals that this is the case.
> 
> terebina786 - I can see Meghan being 'more relatable' in some ways, and not in others. For one thing, she's already (somewhat) famous, Kate wasn't. But Meghan is definitely from a more normal social strata (Kate is middle class but middle class in the UK is different to middle class in N America). As for fameho, I mean she's not as bad as some in Hollywood for sure and it's not like I even blame her for it. But I've watched those speeches of hers, read that VF interview (agreed, btw, there is NO WAY she did that without palace approval), and she screams preening, look-at-me actress. Just a really fake LA vibe, imo.
> 
> sdkitty - Has she had work done? A nose job? I've seen a few old photos of her and I suspect she's had her nose done, at least. Her boobs are fake, too, which kind of makes me laugh. Fake boobs in the royal fam oh noooes! Maybe she'll make it acceptable and Wills and Harry can go get hair transplants like you know they want to. Anyway, the surgery comment was with regards to their kids, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were good looking. Harry and William both went through a period of being movie-star hot, Harry is in the midst of losing it now and William has totally lost it so hopefully Meghan's genes, like Diana's, can bring something attractive to the bloodline.
> 
> Jaybe1 - I don't know, I kind of see Diana's fashion as similar to Kate's but different time periods. Both wore expensive designers, both were watched by fashionistas etc., but Diana wasn't sporting acid-washed denim microminis any more than Kate is wearing ass-cheek revealing rompers. There was and is an expectation of a certain kind of conservative stylishness, and it has to be said Kate seems much less inclined to rocking the boat in a general sense than Diana did.


I'm no expert on PS or Meghan so I Googled it.  According to Beauty Editor, she has probably had her nose done and maybe fillers in her upper lip


----------



## Singra

Wow I never really looked at her in still photos before, not sure still photos are the most flattering for her. 

She looks really different without her eyelashes/eyes made up... it's kinda crazy.


----------



## myown

jessicaofromvan said:


> Kate, although I do find her boring, is a lot less 'free' to do (dress, speak etc.) as she pleases, as the wife and mother of future kings. She's good at her job, which is looking pretty but not in a challenging way, not rocking boats, smiling at peasants and making babies. Ha.


exctly. its not part of her job to look like a supermodel


----------



## sdkitty

now they're saying maybe they will live together before getting engaged.  seems like a good idea to me.
from The Daily Beast:
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Get to the Church in Their Own Time*
*Royal watchers say time is running out for a Prince Harry-Meghan Markle engagement announcement this year. Will they live together first, and what careers will they choose after?*



TOM SYKES
*11.04.17 12:00 AM ET*
Reports that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are poised to imminently announce their engagement may be wide of the mark, sources say, with some insiders speculating that the couple will want to live together full time for up to a year before making any permanent, public commitment.

Despite there being little doubt that the couple have privately made a serious commitment to each other, the theory that Meghan’s _Vanity Fair_ interview (which would not have been conducted without Harry’s agreement) was going to be swiftly followed by an announcement is starting to look less likely, as October rolls inexorably into November and the careful choreography of the royal Christmas impends.

“There won’t be any announcement until at least after Kate has had her baby in April,” one source with excellent contacts in the palace confidently tells The Daily Beast. The source said that they expect Harry and Meghan may even want to live together for as much as a year—as is normal among their peer group—before taking the next step.

There is, theoretically, a window over the next three weeks in which an engagement could be announced, but if there is no announcement by the end of the month there is unlikely to be one this year.

Harry may have a reputation as a royal iconoclast, but he cares deeply about not upsetting his grandmother, and would be wary of appearing to seek to upstage the carefully planned royal Christmas schedule with an announcement any time after late November.

There is little sign of any chatter in Harry’s royal office at Kensington Palace which would suggest a major announcement is in the offing.


_VF_ cover, appearing together in public—but there is always room for doubt because he is a serial commitment-phobe. He is said to be a ‘love addict’ and his parents’ example is far from encouraging.”

*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*Harry and Meghan Could Be Secretly Engaged*



*Meghan Markle and Harry Will Announce Engagement Soon*



*What It's Like to Have Tea With the Queen*
Prince Harry’s representatives declined to comment.

Prince Harry’s biographer, Penny Junor told The Daily Beast that she is doubtful there will be any rush to the altar: “The bottom line is, only the two of them know. But, personally, I am not 100 percent convinced. The longer it doesn’t happen, the more doubt I have about it, not least because her biological clock [Meghan is 36] means that if they were going to marry and have children, they would need to get going sooner rather than later.”

But it’s not just Meghan’s age that feeds Junor’s caution: “It is one hell of an ask for her to give up everything she is and has achieved to marry into the British royal family.

“As an actress, we can assume that she enjoys publicity, and likes to be in the limelight, and that is one of the reasons the relationship has thrived. But the attention that comes with being a British royal is very different to the attention that comes with being a Hollywood star.

“Harry is impetuous and he does make decisions quickly—unlike William who ponders and ponders—but he is not foolish. He knows, of course, exactly what a royal marriage break up is like and how much attention it gets.”

GET THE BEAST IN YOUR INBOX!


*

By clicking “Subscribe,” you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy


The only thing all the experts—yes, including me—can agree on is that all we really know is that nobody knows anything.

Richard Palmer, a veteran royal correspondent for Britain’s Daily Express, told The Daily Beast that his money was still on a 2018 wedding, saying: “The truth is, like everyone, I don't know. All I do know is that someone close to Harry told me that the time for him and Meghan to start thinking about an engagement would be when they had been dating for a year and that has since passed.

“My guess is they will get engaged towards the end of this year or early next with a view to a summer wedding, perhaps in July. But that is just a guess.”

Christopher Andersen, the royal author, concurs with Palmer, saying: “I am still being told that an engagement announcement will occur before the end of the year, and that a Summer of 2018 wedding is the most likely timeline. Harry is something of a loose cannon, but, right now, all systems are go.”

However it is notable that as of last week, tea with the queen notwithstanding, Meghan Markle was still living in Toronto filming the legal drama Suits, and appears not to have moved to London as many reports have speculated she will do.

The second half of season seven will air in the New Year, and Meghan will be in it. Which raises the other big question: What do they both want to do with their lives?

Despite his success with the Invictus games project, Harry hasn’t “solved that problem yet” says one source—and Meghan’s continued apparent commitment to her acting career suggests maybe she hasn’t either.

Until they do, wedding bells may have to wait.
*


----------



## Tivo

Interesting.


----------



## gelbergirl

I wonder if they would secretly marry?
He's under no obligation to marry in public.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if they would secretly marry?
> He's under no obligation to marry in public.


I imagine Meghan would like the big wedding.  If she wasn't interested in attention I don't think she would have done that VF interview/cover.


----------



## Esizzle

I’ll take a fall engagement and spring wedding. Can’t wait to see them get married. It’s going to be beautiful.


----------



## BagLovingMom

sdkitty said:


> I imagine Meghan would like the big wedding.  If she wasn't interested in attention I don't think she would have done that VF interview/cover.


 Hm, I think the opposite especially since it'd be her second wedding and with all the attention they already garner.


----------



## sdkitty

BagLovingMom said:


> Hm, I think the opposite especially since it'd be her second wedding and with all the attention they already garner.


being second (or third, etc) wedding doesn't seem to change anything for most people these days.  Look at Eva Longoria


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> I imagine Meghan would like the big wedding.  If she wasn't interested in attention I don't think she would have done that VF interview/cover.


Exactly. Very few people even know who she is outside of “Harry’s Girlfriend.” That cover was for attention. She seems very phony.


----------



## BagLovingMom

sdkitty said:


> being second (or third, etc) wedding doesn't seem to change anything for most people these days.  Look at Eva Longoria


Yeah but was Eva's husband of the stature of Prince Harry? JMO it wouldn't be some massive wedding


----------



## sdkitty

BagLovingMom said:


> Yeah but was Eva's husband of the stature of Prince Harry? JMO it wouldn't be some massive wedding


maybe not on the scale of william's but I think Fergie's was pretty lavish


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

thats such a interesting couple at all. I'm excited to see what happens with them .. if they really will marry ..
I love the tv Show suits. So i knew her before all the rumors came out about Dating prince Harry but at first I wouldn't expect it would be last. but it seems like really serious so who knows 

I really hope we will see more real stories of them and Pictures and not all the rumors everywhere, its really exhausting to hear everyday fake News about them ..

Harry seems like someone who wants a Family and Kids now, not sure about her, especially she was already married and she is in her mid 30ies but when its the big love for both of them.
I really like her look and style and she Looks really different from ALL the other royals, so that would be a really good Thing at all haha


----------



## bellebellebelle19

minababe said:


> thats such a interesting couple at all. I'm excited to see what happens with them .. if they really will marry ..
> I love the tv Show suits. So i knew her before all the rumors came out about Dating prince Harry but at first I wouldn't expect it would be last. but it seems like really serious so who knows
> 
> I really hope we will see more real stories of them and Pictures and not all the rumors everywhere, its really exhausting to hear everyday fake News about them ..
> 
> Harry seems like someone who wants a Family and Kids now, not sure about her, especially she was already married and she is in her mid 30ies but when its the big love for both of them.
> I really like her look and style and she Looks really different from ALL the other royals, so that would be a really good Thing at all haha


I agree - I don't really know anything about her, but I always found her very beautiful when I watched her on suits! I think the best thing about their relationship is def how unexpected it is.


----------



## VickyB

Is she even going to be allowed a church wedding since she is divorced? Maybe they'll have to go the Charles Camilla route of civil service and church blessing.?


----------



## gelbergirl

VickyB said:


> Is she even going to be allowed a church wedding since she is divorced? Maybe they'll have to go the Charles Camilla route of civil service and church blessing.?



This brings up some interesting questions.  What is her religion?  Maybe it does not matter.
Harry will never be the leader (Supreme Governor) of the Church of England as Charles and William will both become one day, so the wedding service was so important.  So maybe it does not matter.  What it brings will be probably a nice wedding however they want to do it (and I for one can not wait!)


----------



## westjenn

Just read this today:
http://people.com/royals/why-meghan-markles-engagement-ring-will-not-be-a-family-heirloom/


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle engagement reportedly ‘imminent’.

Betting has been suspended on Harry's proposal and the BBC is reported to be primed for a royal announcement.


----------



## Singra

^ Yes I saw that. 

When people here were first going on about it I was very skeptical but you guys called it, well done. Although I suppose we should wait until the deal is actually done before properly calling it.


----------



## Esizzle

Yay! Can’t wait!


----------



## MarvelGirl




----------



## Esizzle

They might announce it on Monday. I want to hear about the proposal story.


----------



## westjenn

I hope so!


----------



## Handbag1234

The comparisons with Wallace Simpson have already started on programmes in U.K. Another divorced American marrying a British prince. Overall tone was who is she? She's not well known in U.K.  They did the same with Kate, looking at her family and where she grew up etc


----------



## VickyB

I'm in the US and still say " Who is she?".  She's a B-list (at best) TV actress on a cable network show that has a decent following but not mainstream. Never heard of her until the news broke about Harry.
I don't know anything about her. She looks pretty tacky in some of her "red carpet" photos.


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> I'm in the US and still say " Who is she?".  She's a B-list (at best) TV actress on a cable network show that has a decent following but not mainstream. Never heard of her until the news broke about Harry.
> I don't know anything about her. She looks pretty tacky in some of her "red carpet" photos.


agree...I never heard of her before she got together with Harry either....don't know about the red carpet pics but she just strikes me as a pretty B-list TV actress


----------



## Singra

*Meghan Markle Guarded By Royal Protection Officers; Engagement Announcement Happening This Week?*

Many are expecting Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to announce their engagement this week.

It's the last week of November and the palace is expected to announce the "Suits" star's engagement to Prince Harry. According to The Guardian, the engagement announcement reached a fever pitch over the weekend. Last week, TV crews were set up outside Kensington Palace in anticipation of Prince Harry and Markle's engagement announcement. But it never came.

There is a major sign that prompts many to believe that an engagement announcement is happening this week. According to Daily Mail, Prince Harry's girlfriend is being guarded by the Met Police's Protection Command when she was spotted shopping at the King's Road in Chelsea on Tuesday.

Aside from having security personnel with her, Markle was reportedly taught by the specially trained officers some tips to keep herself safe from terrorist attack. She was also informed what she should do if she's taken hostage.

It was the first time Markle has been seen with security personnel around the city. Kate Middleton only received police protection after she became secretly engaged to Prince William following their trip to Kenya. It happened almost a month before the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge officially announced their engagement in November 2010.

The publication added that Prince Harry and Markle might announce their engagement on Tuesday. Prince William and Prince Charles made their engagement announcement on the same day of the week. Thus, Prince Harry might do the same.

Richard Fitzwilliams, a royal commentator, said in October that the "Horrible Bosses" star's engagement to Prince Harry might likely happen at the end of November. The couple opted to delay the announcement to not steal the limelight from Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip who celebrated their 70th wedding anniversary last Monday.

"We are confidently expecting an engagement between Harry and Meghan," Fitzwilliams said. "But it isn't likely to be announced before the Queen and the Duke's Platinum Wedding Anniversary in November."

Last week, a source told Us Weekly that Prince Harry and Markle are already engaged. In fact, the "Dater's Handbook" star is reportedly moving to the palace to live with Prince Harry.

_Do you agree that Prince Harry and Markle's engagement announcement is imminent? Drop a comment below._

http://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-markl...ers-engagement-announcement-happening-2619818


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jiangjiang

Breaking News! Confirmed marriage!


----------



## finer_woman

Confirmed *engagement and marriage to take place in the spring


----------



## Singra

That wait felt like forever. 

Congrats to them.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Yaasssss!!!!!


----------



## gelbergirl

Singra said:


> That wait felt like forever.
> 
> *Congrats to them*.



It did feel like forever!
(I was starting to get annoyed!)
But now I am THRILLED!  And look forward to seeing this two as a couple.


----------



## Glitterandstuds

Yesssssss I’m so excited


----------



## DC-Cutie

Spring wedding - they are not playing around. 

News is reporting they will make a televised appearance today around 9ET, no questions. Hope to see the ring!


----------



## uhpharm01

OMG!!!  It's happened!!


----------



## Singra

gelbergirl said:


> *It did feel like forever!*
> (I was starting to get annoyed!)
> But now I am THRILLED!  And look forward to seeing this two as a couple.


Especially because some people read the tea leaves so accurately so early on, looking back on how they released the news bit by bit it's actually not a bad strategy. I stand corrected on things I said when the Markle VF article came out.

Truly wish them all the best, think any nonsense the press or people might want to drum up on her being a divorcee is ridiculous.



DC-Cutie said:


> Spring wedding - they are not playing around.
> 
> News is reporting they will make a televised appearance today around 9ET, no questions. *Hope to see the ring!*


Usually I don't care about what the ring looks like but this time I want to see it. Yeah this is kinda exciting.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I like that Harry took his time, choose his lady and seems to be doing things his way.   

What will she be called? Duchess?


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> Spring wedding - they are not playing around.
> 
> News is reporting they will make a televised appearance today around 9ET, no questions. Hope to see the ring!


9 Am today?


----------



## beekmanhill

I'm happy for him.  I think the VF interview was the beginning of the process.


----------



## .pursefiend.

I'm happy for both of them!


----------



## joyeaux

DC-Cutie said:


> I like that Harry took his time, choose his lady and seems to be doing things his way.
> 
> What will she be called? Duchess?


Duchess of Sussex I’ve read... so happy for Harry, I bet Diana would have LOVED his choice of girl, which bucks the system in a lot of ways.


----------



## horse17

I love how people make mention of her “background” ie: divorce etc..as if the “royal “ family is so perfect..smh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

westjenn said:


> 9 Am today?


yes


----------



## Antonia

I'm very happy for them!


----------



## DC-Cutie

horse17 said:


> I love how people make mention of her “background” ie: divorce etc..as if the “royal “ family is so perfect..smh


I said the same thing.  In a lot of ways, Harry has it better. He's marched to the beat of his own drum, lived his single life and since he's farther down on the succession line, I guess Buckingham Palace probably didn't care much that his mate, Meghan, isn't as 'perfect' as William's Kate.

But I'm here for a Sista wearing crowns!!!!


----------



## fashiontattle

Yay! I am so happy for them! Usually I’m not interested in the royals but I have always liked Harry! And I think he’s got the most flavor! Lol [emoji23]


----------



## Alexenjie

I’m so happy they are engaged. I find her so attractive compared to boring Kate (who is pretty but not stunning). I hope they will be very happy together.


----------



## whimsic

I'm very happy for her! I look forward to seeing her at her wedding, she'll make a beautiful bride.


----------



## Love Of My Life

Great news!!!


----------



## Cocoabean

just saw the news appearance. No cloes-up on the ring, but it did not appear to have coloured gemstones.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

So excited! It was so fun following their relationship when the news first broke. I've always watched and loved Suits with my family, so it was very interesting to me when they started dating. I hope they have all the happiness!!


----------



## DC-Cutie

Cocoabean said:


> just saw the news appearance. No cloes-up on the ring, but it did not appear to have coloured gemstones.


it appeared to be a bit yellow


----------



## DC-Cutie

The couple also showed off Markle’s stunning diamond engagement ring, which Harry designed himself. The center stone is a diamond from Botswana, a country that holds a significant place in Harry’s heart. The outside two diamonds are from his late mother Princess Diana’s collection.

http://people.com/royals/prince-har...edium=social&xid=socialflow_twitter_peoplemag


----------



## Singra




----------



## westjenn

So, NOON Central time we will see their interview on the BBC!  Cannot wait 
Nevermind then! Wow- yay I am soooo excited for them!!!


----------



## gazoo

Come on, how gorgeous are these two?!

Love the ring, and love how tactile they are with each other. Such happy news to end the year with.


----------



## westjenn

gazoo said:


> Come on, how gorgeous are these two?!
> 
> Love the ring, and love how tactile they are with each other. Such happy news to end the year with.


Yes!!! There's an ease with these two, isn't there? And they look absolutely giddy with happiness and I am loving it!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Glitterandstuds

Look how giddy they are. I love it


----------



## MarvelGirl

I am soo loving this and them!! Love the ring and as you all have commented, how in love and happy they look. Can't wait to enjoy all the updates and coverage of the wedding to come. Woohoo!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

The engagement pics are so awkward. I am excited to see the wedding!


----------



## Sassys

How can the ring be designed by him when my aunt had the exact same ring since the 70's.


----------



## Esizzle

Omg!! This is the best news to wake up to!! Congrats to Megan and Harry. Love the ring and can’t wait for the wedding. 

Edit. From what I have seen of Megan in the past year, she has a very warm, friendly and poised personality. I bet it will take no time for the people in the UK to love her. And she will shine brighter (personality and work wise) than Kate.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Sassys said:


> How can the ring be designed by him when my aunt had the exact same ring since the 70's.


I'm sure the diamonds in your Aunt's ring wasn't from Princess Diana's stash or handpicked from Botswana.  A ring design can be similar, but clearly he put his own touch on it.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Esizzle said:


> Omg!! This is the best news to wake up to!! Congrats to Megan and Harry. Love the ring and can’t wait for the wedding.


Harry likes to dance, so I hope that have a dope DJ!


----------



## cdtracing

I like the ring; it's elegant but understated.  She doesn't seem to wear flashy jewelry so it suits her.  Anyone know the carat weight of the diamonds?​


----------



## Sassys

DC-Cutie said:


> *I'm sure the diamonds in your Aunt's ring wasn't from Princess Diana's stash or handpicked from Botswana. * A ring design can be similar, but clearly he put his own touch on it.



Hmmm, I'm going to have to call and ask her.


----------



## DC-Cutie

cdtracing said:


> I like the ring; it's elegant but understated.  She doesn't seem to wear flashy jewelry so it suits her.  Anyone know the carat weight of the diamonds?​


I like it, too.


----------



## Esizzle

So they got engaged in London earlier this month and not on their holiday in Botswana. All this time I thought I KNEW they had been engaged since August lol


----------



## LabelLover81

I can't wait to see her wedding gown. I know she's gonna be absolutely stunning and totally rock it!


----------



## RayKay

I don't normally give a toss about the Royals, but I do like Harry more than most of the others (perhaps because he has always sort of had ability to do things his way away from a lot of the spotlight, and seems to be very comfortable being, well, Harry, as well as taking his time in the dating world). Plus, I adore Suits (though not necessarily Meghan's character) and she _is_ Canadian  and seems to have a very engaging personality.

They do appear to have a genuine ease and comfort with each other and they look very happy together and loving with each other. I wish them the very best, and I hope they can continue to manage living their own lives away from the major spotlight as they have managed to do.


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm sure the diamonds in your Aunt's ring wasn't from Princess Diana's stash or handpicked from Botswana.  A ring design can be similar, but clearly he put his own touch on it.


Exactly!


----------



## sdkitty

DC-Cutie said:


> I said the same thing.  In a lot of ways, Harry has it better. He's marched to the beat of his own drum, lived his single life and since he's farther down on the succession line, I guess Buckingham Palace probably didn't care much that his mate, Meghan, isn't as 'perfect' as William's Kate.
> 
> But I'm here for a Sista wearing crowns!!!!


I like Harry and hope they will be happy.  For those who are excited about Meghan, I see no reason to disparage Kate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tina_Bina

So happy [emoji16]!! Can’t wait to watch another royal wedding!!!

Any of you watch the Crown though? I have so many feelings for Princess Margaret [emoji27]


----------



## Yoshi1296

So excited!! Congrats to them! I can't wait to see who designs the wedding dress and what it looks like. Also the ring is gorgeous!


----------



## Sharont2305

She will be HRH Princess Henry of Wales


----------



## bisbee

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> The engagement pics are so awkward. I am excited to see the wedding!


They don’t look awkward to me...they look like real people who are very happy!


----------



## DC-Cutie

Tina_Bina said:


> Any of you watch the Crown though? I have so many feelings for Princess Margaret [emoji27]


no I haven't.  It's pretty good, I take it?


----------



## Tuned83

They clearly adore each other and that makes me happy. Congrats to them both Xx


----------



## Sassys

Sharont2305 said:


> She will be HRH Princess Henry of Wales



Meghan Markle will become part of the Royal Family next Spring ... the question is whether she'll be able to use the title Her Royal Highness.

As you know, Meghan's an American citizen and the protocol is ... you have to live in England for 5 years to become a British citizen. And here's the key ... you can't use a royal title unless you're a citizen.

In addition to 5 years' residency in the UK, a prospective British citizen must be 18 or over, of "good character" and fluent in the English language. They must also take an oath of allegiance to the Queen.

It's unclear if Meghan can short-circuit the process. It's gotta be helpful she has the Queen's blessing in marrying Harry.

When she does get the title, she will probably become a duchess, like her soon-to-be in-law, *Kate Middleton*. The rumor is ... Harry will become the Duke of Sussex, and she would become the Duchess of Sussex.

And finally, check this out ... if Meghan has to wait 5 years before becoming a British citizen and before that happens she has a child, that kid will get dual citizenship. If for some reason that child ascends to the throne, it would be the first monarch in British history to be both a U.S. and British citizen.

Tmz.com


----------



## Sharont2305

You mean the Duchess of Cambridge, she ceased using Kate Middleton the day she married William


----------



## KatharinaV

I guess it will be just like here in Denmark when CP Mary from Australia was made a Danish citizen. The royals have their own ways. She will be made a British citizen before the marriage, no worries


----------



## mrs moulds

I'm so happy about this engagement. Love the fact that race didn't make a difference, I love when ask the question How did he know that she was the one? And the response ' from the moment I met her' my heart burst[emoji173] California girls... we rock !


----------



## DC-Cutie

KatharinaV said:


> I guess it will be just like here in Denmark when CP Mary from Australia was made a Danish citizen. The royals have their own ways. She will be made a British citizen before the marriage, no worries


probably already in the works.


----------



## keodi

DC-Cutie said:


> no I haven't.  It's pretty good, I take it?


Very Good, season 2 starts Dec 8th.


----------



## berrydiva

I like Harry....they seem genuinely giddy in that engagement picture.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I'm trying to envision their children - curly hair with hints of ginger


----------



## Esizzle

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm trying to envision their children - curly hair with hints of ginger


Omg I’m so excited for mixed royal babies. They will be gorgeous!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Esizzle said:


> Omg I’m so excited for mixed royal babies. They will be gorgeous!



agree & I think they will look pretty white.


----------



## DC-Cutie

kkfiregirl said:


> agree & I think they will look pretty white.


for some reason I imagine they will look like Boris Becker's kids - his coloring and hair, not much of the mom


----------



## mundodabolsa

LabelLover81 said:


> I can't wait to see her wedding gown. I know she's gonna be absolutely stunning and totally rock it!



I'm pretty excited there will be a young woman in the royal family now who dresses well and like it's 2017!  I always think Kate dresses three times her age and with styles that would fit in three decades ago. 

Most of the time I'm the oddball who loves what Beatrice and Eugenie wear because at least it's modern. I have faith that Megan will the perfect balance between contemporary, yet elegant looks.


----------



## scarlet555

idk, I'd hate to be married to a prince, specifically one with a lot of paps and stuff.  It would seem too much to take.  So much politics.

Not at any risk of meeting a prince, just frogs at this point though...lol


----------



## DC-Cutie

scarlet555 said:


> idk, I'd hate to be married to a prince, specifically one with a lot of paps and stuff.  It would seem too much to take.  So much politics.


you know, it seems as though the paps are pretty distant and give them their privacy (save for those telephoto lens pics that captured William and Kate on vacation).  Not much hounding.


----------



## Esizzle

scarlet555 said:


> idk, I'd hate to be married to a prince, specifically one with a lot of paps and stuff.  It would seem too much to take.  So much politics.
> 
> Not at any risk of meeting a prince, just frogs at this point though...lol


I wouldn’t be able to handle the worldwide scrutiny into every little thing! It’s scary. But then again Kate ans now Megan are princesses living in castles, married to princes and living their best lives. It’s not too bad hahaha


----------



## RayKay

RayKay said:


> I don't normally give a toss about the Royals, but I do like Harry more than most of the others (perhaps because he has always sort of had ability to do things his way away from a lot of the spotlight, and seems to be very comfortable being, well, Harry, as well as taking his time in the dating world). Plus, I adore Suits (though not necessarily Meghan's character) and she _is_ Canadian  and seems to have a very engaging personality.
> 
> They do appear to have a genuine ease and comfort with each other and they look very happy together and loving with each other. I wish them the very best, and I hope they can continue to manage living their own lives away from the major spotlight as they have managed to do.



Just to be clear in case there is any confusion, I _know_ she is American but since she has been based in Toronto for a while I grant her honorary Canadian status.

Also, how is this for a headline? 

View image on Twitter


----------



## sdkitty

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm trying to envision their children - curly hair with hints of ginger


you never know....they could be redheads with olive complexion.....or they could have one that looks like her and one that looks like him


----------



## daisychainz

Barring any fertility issues, I am fairly certain babies will come fast for this couple given her age, and Spring is quite soon for the wedding. Can she marry in a church since she has been divorced?


----------



## Esizzle

daisychainz said:


> Barring any fertility issues, I am fairly certain babies will come fast for this couple given her age, and Spring is quite soon for the wedding. Can she marry in a church since she has been divorced?


Dont know but royals do what royals want. So if she and Harry want a church wedding, thats what they will get.


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> Dont know but royals do what royals want. So if she and Harry want a church wedding, thats what they will get.


I'd be very surprised if they didn't have a very big wedding.  If she wanted to be low-key, she would not have done that VF cover.


----------



## DC-Cutie

The proposal http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42144300


----------



## afsweet

she is incredibly gorgeous, and they look very smitten with each other. i wonder how much the royal family tried to convince harry not to marry her though...i hope they embrace her and treat her kindly.


----------



## Singra

DC-Cutie said:


> The proposal http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42144300


 I’m watching this on TV right now, they come across very well. It’s very sweet.


----------



## Sharont2305

I for one think they are perfect for each other, he's besotted. She came across as a lovely lovely woman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

sdkitty said:


> I'd be very surprised if they didn't have a very big wedding.  If she wanted to be low-key, she would not have done that VF cover.


Yes. I momentarily forgot she was an actress! I think they do tend to love attention, so the wedding would likely be big rather than small. The due date for the new royal baby is said to be in April, so it seems two major royal events within a few weeks of each other.


----------



## Esizzle

First interview


----------



## MarvelGirl

Esizzle said:


> First interview



Thanks so much for posting! Love seeing them together, their faces, hearing about their love story. The part where the journalist mentions "husband"...his reaction, face, etc. He is very, very much in love with her! WOW! Fairy tale!!!


----------



## Rouge H

I’m so happy for both of the brothers they found love❤️


----------



## Esizzle

I wonder if Megan will join the Royal family for Christmas this year since she is officially engaged now?


----------



## kkfiregirl

Esizzle said:


> I wonder if Megan will join the Royal family for Christmas this year since she is officially engaged now?



I imagine she will want to spend time with her own family.


----------



## DC-Cutie

maybe since her parents haven't met the Queen (as far as I know), they will cross the pond and all spend Christmas together.  that would be nice


----------



## jiangjiang

daisychainz said:


> Barring any fertility issues, I am fairly certain babies will come fast for this couple given her age, and Spring is quite soon for the wedding. Can she marry in a church since she has been divorced?



People here hoping it would be Windsor castle. Seems appropriate.


----------



## Esizzle

jiangjiang said:


> People here hoping it would be Windsor castle. Seems appropriate.


The Chapel at Windsor castle is beautiful! Id like to see a country wedding for them more than a London wedding!


----------



## horse17

Im kind of surprised we haven seen any (or many) photos of the four of them together..with Kate
 and Will...they are close in age and I would imagine they would have fun together..


----------



## horse17

just watched the interview..soooo, how could she not know anything about him?...not sure about that one...lol


----------



## Eva1991

Watched the full interview a while ago. They seem so in love! The way they look at each other says it all!
Meghan is handling everything so well; all the press and the attention her relationship with Harry brought into her life.


----------



## Eva1991

Hope she wears a very modern wedding dress. As another tpfer mentioned, Meghan is a breath of fresh air for the royal family, style wise. She chooses very elegant yet modern pieces and does not dress as old shcool as Kate. Of course this may change after their wedding since she'll probably have to follow certain rules and dress codes, but I'm hoping she'll be able to add modern touches to her outfits.


----------



## MarvelGirl

horse17 said:


> just watched the interview..soooo, how could she not know anything about him?...not sure about that one...lol



Yep. I noticed that too and didn't take it that she meant she didn't really know ANYTHING about him. I took it to mean that she knew of him (of course) but maybe wasn't following his daily movements or love life with heightened vested interest before. I know I didn't until finding out he was dating Meghan and now. Working in marketing and public relations, I also felt it was the appropriate, very classy and elegant response and one that I would have said if asked in that setting. She did a superb job in the interview!


----------



## westjenn

Esizzle said:


> I wonder if Megan will join the Royal family for Christmas this year since she is officially engaged now?


I read that she will be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

kkfiregirl said:


> I imagine she will want to spend time with her own family.


They are her family now.


----------



## kkfiregirl

westjenn said:


> They are her family now.



Not until they have officially married. Engagements can be called off ...


----------



## westjenn

kkfiregirl said:


> Not until they have officially married. Engagements can be called off ...


Ha.... It ain't happening.... Harry hasn't even met her father yet..... And they're engaged... She obviously is not close to her entire family.. her half siblings have been paid to give interviews about their estranged relationships.. This is a girl created a new life with a new family.  Wishing them the best!


----------



## kkfiregirl

westjenn said:


> Ha.... It ain't happening.... Harry hasn't even met her father yet..... And they're engaged... She obviously is not close to her entire family.. her half siblings have been paid to give interviews about their estranged relationships.. This is a girl created a new life with a new family.  Wishing them the best!



He has met her mother and they seem fond of each other.


----------



## westjenn

kkfiregirl said:


> He has met her mother and they seem fond of each other.


Yes, this is true.....


----------



## minimom

Now I’m curious as to who set them up.    They do make a lovely couple and he looks so happy and I’m sure Diana would be quite pleased with how her sons have grown up.


----------



## uhpharm01

westjenn said:


> Ha.... It ain't happening.... Harry hasn't even met her father yet..... And they're engaged... She obviously is not close to her entire family.. her half siblings have been paid to give interviews about their estranged relationships.. This is a girl created a new life with a new family.  Wishing them the best!


Harry got her Father's blessing to propose to Megan.


----------



## Melinalea

I love how they keep looking at each other during the interview and finishing each other sentences.  And I LOVE the ring!


----------



## kkfiregirl

Melinalea said:


> I love how they keep looking at each other during the interview and finishing each other sentences.  And I LOVE the ring!



Me too .. reminds me of how I felt when I met my husband!


----------



## westjenn

uhpharm01 said:


> Harry got her Father's blessing to propose to Megan.


Correct, but if you saw the interview she said that Harry has not met her father yet.


----------



## uhpharm01

westjenn said:


> Correct, but if you saw the interview she said that Harry has not met her father yet.


You're right.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her legs look amazing in that photo shoot this morning.


----------



## westjenn

I wonder if her hemlines will get longer? You know how conservative Kate's hemlines are and all.  It'll be interesting!


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Her legs look amazing in that photo shoot this morning.


And no stockings...


----------



## Longchamp

Remember Sarah Duchess of York; she didn't tow the royal line.  Sarah was much less refined and elegant than Meghan.
But in time Harry's media worth will plummet since he's no longer eligible and moving further away from the throne.  I hope not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Singra

Times are different though and I think both William and Harry received quite a bit of money from their mother, to the extent they may be financially independent (not 100% on this but that’s what I remember). They or at least Harry may be able to achieve more independence than others in the past and Harry is showing he has quite a bit of media savvy. Out of William and Harry, Harry has always seemed the more outgoing and seems to be more comfortable in the limelight. We’ll see how it goes I suppose, it’s early days.


----------



## terebina786

minimom said:


> Now I’m curious as to who set them up.    They do make a lovely couple and he looks so happy and I’m sure Diana would be quite pleased with how her sons have grown up.



I was wondering who set them up too... Like how did this whole thing happen.


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry is in such good spot right now,  marriage and family in his future now.
And his position in the family has become even more important, Charles and William will surely look to him for consultation for many, many years.  I continue to be impressed with his charity work - and now he's got Meghan by his side.


----------



## westjenn

The thing that is worrisome to me (and inevitable) is the media's constant comparison of the 2 young wives.  I can't help but wonder if Catherine is the teensiest bit envious of the freedom afforded to Harry & Meghan.


----------



## westjenn

gelbergirl said:


> Prince Harry is in such good spot right now,  marriage and family in his future now.
> And his position in the family has become even more important, Charles and William will surely look to him for consultation for many, many years.  I continue to be impressed with his charity work - and now he's got Meghan by his side.


@gelbergirl well said!


----------



## myown

anyone else thinks her outfit is horrible? the way she bends in makes her look like hiding a baby-bump, also the way her belt is. and her shoes are at least one size too big. 
i also wish she wouldn't have worn a white coat, that's so hollywooddramaqueen


----------



## westjenn

myown said:


> anyone else thinks her outfit is horrible? the way she bends in makes her look like hiding a baby-bump, also the way her belt is. and her shoes are at least one size too big.
> i also wish she wouldn't have worn a white coat, that's so hollywooddramaqueen


I liked the coat.. the shoes meh... imo, not very appropriate for the season.. That bendy thing she does.. idk.. I think that'll change. I think it was nerves honestly. I'm betting her team will sit down with her and go through all of the things she did right and wrong for future appearances!


----------



## westjenn

This is cute: 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5123801/Shots-Meghan-Harrys-engagement-interview.html


----------



## myown

westjenn said:


> I liked the coat.. the shoes meh... imo, not very appropriate for the season.. That bendy thing she does.. idk.. I think that'll change. I think it was nerves honestly. I'm betting her team will sit down with her and go through all of the things she did right and wrong for future appearances!


that is what I wonder. Kate had to undergo a school to learn how to be the wife of  royal. learning proper british english, how to act in public, what to say and how to say nothing etc. 
and the other thing is, will Meghan go by Meghan or Rachel?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^I've been wondering this too. I feel like for official purposes they will have to write Rachel, Duchess of Essex. 

She won't have many official duties so she'll probably just get basic etiquette training and be sent on her way. Much less pressure on her than Kate.


----------



## westjenn

It seems like Meghan and not Rachel. I wonder why she goes by her middle name? Does anyone know? 
I would bet you, that now that they are engaged we're going to see so much of them, and although she won't have official duties yet- they are grooming her the way they do all Royals.  It is bound to happen.  I should go back and look at Fergie & her history- she wasn't a perfect royal.. but she did grow up in an Upper Crust English fam, right? She definately stayed true to herself, but that didn't earn her any points with other members of the Royal Fam! 
I feel like ever since Charles married Camilla so much has changed with that family- a little less strict, a little less stuffy? Meghan will learn, she just needs a litle time


----------



## Jayne1

Singra said:


> Times are different though and I think both William and Harry received quite a bit of money from their mother, to the extent they may be financially independent (not 100% on this but that’s what I remember).


Diana had lots of money and left nothing to charity, all to her kids. So yes, they must have plenty, plus what comes from the treasury that's funded by British taxpayers. That's what they live off -it covers the expenses of the Prince of Wales and his heirs.


----------



## Jayne1

westjenn said:


> I would bet you, that now that they are engaged we're going to see so much of them, and although she won't have official duties yet- they are grooming her the way they do all Royals.  It is bound to happen.  I should go back and look at Fergie & her history- she wasn't a perfect royal.. but she did grow up in an Upper Crust English fam, right? She definately stayed true to herself, but that didn't earn her any points with other members of the Royal Fam!


Fergie was an idiot, ruining everything for herself, being very un-royal and having that silly affair, but I suppose others may disagree with my assessment.  lol

Her father was the polo manager for Prince Philip, so that's how Fergie met Andrew... attending polo matches.


----------



## DC-Cutie

westjenn said:


> It seems like Meghan and not Rachel. I wonder why she goes by her middle name? Does anyone know?


maybe a hollywood thing.  Many people go by middle names, usually because it rolls off the tongue better


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> maybe a hollywood thing.  Many people go by middle names, usually because it rolls off the tongue better


I supposed it could also be, being an actress- there was already a Rachel Markle.. and there can't be two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

myown said:


> anyone else thinks her outfit is horrible? the way she bends in makes her look like hiding a baby-bump, also the way her belt is. and her shoes are at least one size too big.
> i also wish she wouldn't have worn a white coat, that's so hollywooddramaqueen


I will agree. I did not think for her first real introduction she looked anything other than average. The coat made her body look quite lumpy?, especially from the back. And yes, the shoes were not well-fitted either. I have nothing against her and think she seems sweet, but the thing I find fascinating? or weird? is how a woman with very little personal style will suddenly become a "style icon" and everyone will go buy what she wears.  Maybe it was purposely done to get her image away from her character on the show, who wears very sexy clothing and tight fitted skirts and shirts. As a way to present her as completely leaving that life behind? I am sure these clothing choices are well-planned.


----------



## jiangjiang

jiangjiang said:


> People here hoping it would be Windsor castle. Seems appropriate.



Confirmed! Windsor castle next May!


----------



## zen1965

I do wonder how she will fare.

As someone said in the Royalty Fashion Thread will she really enjoy years of ribbon-cutting and functions? She is marrying into a world of extreme entitlement and snobbery; and the expectation clearly is that she will toe the line (including most likely a more conservative dress style). I do not imagine either of Windsor Princes to be particularly good at compromising - never mind their public personas that are very affable. They have never had to in their lives. Thus, if need arises their wives have to do so. Moreover, I do not think that the circles Meghan is going to move around in will appreciate her for what she is. Not only is she is not one of them, she is (or was) a C- or B-list actress. 
Like it or not, in Europe you still have many titled aristocrats that hold traditions and public decorum very high. Their social circles are almost incestuous with only "selected commoners” present (and those “commoners” do not have pasts of being scantily clad in a US TV series). Heck, there are still associations and clubs the statutes of which clearly determine that membership is limited to aristocrats only. Sure, the younger generations mingle much more. Notwithstanding this however, in my opinion European higher nobility remains a screened-off parallel universe.

Much more than Kate who at least mixed with those circles from teenage age onwards, Meghan has some very tough adjustments ahead of her regardless of whether the British public is going to love her or not.

My prognosis for a long-term union is not too optimistic.  

BTW, I do not mean to rain on anybody’s parade. I am merely describing my observations.


----------



## Singra

That's okay, variety of options is good 

I'm not terribly involved in anything royal and don't know much about it  so it's easy for me to be optimistic. The only negative I felt when watching their interview was that they're were so obviously in the first flush of love and that always fades. People won't really be able to get a sense of where things are headed until it really gets going.


----------



## DC-Cutie

daisychainz said:


> I will agree. I did not think for her first real introduction she looked anything other than average. The coat made her body look quite lumpy?, especially from the back. And yes, the shoes were not well-fitted either. I have nothing against her and think she seems sweet, but the thing I find fascinating? or weird? is how a *woman with very little personal style will suddenly become a "style icon" and everyone will go buy what she wears. * Maybe it was purposely done to get her image away from her character on the show, who wears very sexy clothing and tight fitted skirts and shirts. As a way to present her as completely leaving that life behind? I am sure these clothing choices are well-planned.


Diana was the same way.. sans everybody going out and buying what she wore.  But she didn't have much style until she became Princess Diana


----------



## DC-Cutie

It's like you've calling her out of the game and the race hasn't even started.   SMH



zen1965 said:


> I do wonder how she will fare.
> 
> As someone said in the Royalty Fashion Thread will she really enjoy years of ribbon-cutting and functions? She is marrying into a world of extreme entitlement and snobbery; and the expectation clearly is that she will toe the line (including most likely a more conservative dress style). I do not imagine either of Windsor Princes to be particularly good at compromising - never mind their public personas that are very affable. They have never had to in their lives. Thus, if need arises their wives have to do so. Moreover, I do not think that the circles Meghan is going to move around in will appreciate her for what she is. Not only is she is not one of them, she is (or was) a C- or B-list actress.
> Like it or not, in Europe you still have many titled aristocrats that hold traditions and public decorum very high. Their social circles are almost incestuous with only "selected commoners” present (and those “commoners” do not have pasts of being scantily clad in a US TV series). Heck, there are still associations and clubs the statutes of which clearly determine that membership is limited to aristocrats only. Sure, the younger generations mingle much more. Notwithstanding this however, in my opinion European higher nobility remains a screened-off parallel universe.
> 
> Much more than Kate who at least mixed with those circles from teenage age onwards, Meghan has some very tough adjustments ahead of her regardless of whether the British public is going to love her or not.
> 
> My prognosis for a long-term union is not too optimistic.
> 
> BTW, I do not mean to rain on anybody’s parade. I am merely describing my observations.


----------



## westjenn

zen1965 said:


> I do wonder how she will fare.
> 
> As someone said in the Royalty Fashion Thread will she really enjoy years of ribbon-cutting and functions? She is marrying into a world of extreme entitlement and snobbery; and the expectation clearly is that she will toe the line (including most likely a more conservative dress style). I do not imagine either of Windsor Princes to be particularly good at compromising - never mind their public personas that are very affable. They have never had to in their lives. Thus, if need arises their wives have to do so. Moreover, I do not think that the circles Meghan is going to move around in will appreciate her for what she is. Not only is she is not one of them, she is (or was) a C- or B-list actress.
> Like it or not, in Europe you still have many titled aristocrats that hold traditions and public decorum very high. Their social circles are almost incestuous with only "selected commoners” present (and those “commoners” do not have pasts of being scantily clad in a US TV series). Heck, there are still associations and clubs the statutes of which clearly determine that membership is limited to aristocrats only. Sure, the younger generations mingle much more. Notwithstanding this however, in my opinion European higher nobility remains a screened-off parallel universe.
> 
> Much more than Kate who at least mixed with those circles from teenage age onwards, Meghan has some very tough adjustments ahead of her regardless of whether the British public is going to love her or not.
> 
> My prognosis for a long-term union is not too optimistic.
> 
> BTW, I do not mean to rain on anybody’s parade. I am merely describing my observations.


The thing that stuck out most to me during the interview yesterday was that Harry awknowledged the fact that she did not travel in the same circles-- they didn't run with the same crowd, which was a departure from the women he's dated in the past. This is what is so refreshing about this union, imo.


----------



## westjenn

westjenn said:


> The thing that stuck out most to me during the interview yesterday was that Harry awknowledged the fact that she did not travel in the same circles-- they didn't run with the same crowd, which was a departure from the women he's dated in the past. This is what is so refreshing about this union, imo.


Breaking news:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5124891/Harry-Meghan-marry-Windsor-Castle-MAY.html

Are there any UK based members out there that can explain why they made a point of saying that the Royal Family would be paying for the wedding?


----------



## Coconuts40

No doubt it will be difficult for Meghan and the European aristocracy may not be kind to her.  However, she has mingled and is good friends with a lot of well known people - well known actors/actresses/the fashion world and a strong social network- Markus Anderson to name a good friend.  I don't think this will be easy but I also think she has a connection and social circle that will also support her. In the 16 months? that they dated, not one friend leaked anything to the media. I think she is very protected and I think that will carry her a long way during difficult times.

I really enjoyed the BBC interview - I think she is a sweet girl. However, I do agree with others , I do find it hard to believe she didn't know anything about Prince Harry before the blind date, she lost me there.


----------



## daisychainz

DC-Cutie said:


> Diana was the same way.. sans everybody going out and buying what she wore.  But she didn't have much style until she became Princess Diana


Yes! You're right. They all seem to improve as the role and their comfort level increases. Even Catherine, who I think has always been fashionable, has improved with each year. Meghan will get help!


----------



## Jayne1

I like that she didn't have a stylist dress her for the first interview. I'm so sick of phoney Hollywood.


----------



## Hessefan

westjenn said:


> Breaking news:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5124891/Harry-Meghan-marry-Windsor-Castle-MAY.html
> 
> Are there any UK based members out there that can explain why they made a point of saying that the Royal Family would be paying for the wedding?



Probably because there will be lots of Daily Mail readers complaining about the cost of the event to the taxpayers. The anti-monarchy sentiment is quite strong these days, even though they receive most of their income from land they own and the taxpayers pay less than £1 a year or something. 
Buckingham Palace is currently being renovated, and there were a lot of complaints about the costs.


----------



## bagsforme

I hope she doesn't get treated like Fergie.  She was a commoner and basically pushed out of the family.


----------



## gelbergirl

jiangjiang said:


> Confirmed! Windsor castle next May!



I remember this location from when Prince Edward was married there.
Very pretty and very special.
Especially the long road-walkway that leads to the castle.


----------



## daisychainz

During their joint interview it was mentioned that Harry has never met her father. I read that he was bankrupt and living in Mexico?? I know we'll find out much more about her family as time goes on, but I wonder who would walk her down the aisle if there is no father-daughter relationship there, or if the father is not the sort they would want at a royal affair. It should be interesting the degree to which her family is involved in her wedding and life moving forward.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

bagsforme said:


> I hope she doesn't get treated like Fergie.  She was a commoner and basically pushed out of the family.


I have a feeling Harry will fiercely protect her.


----------



## bagsforme

^oh boy, you know her family is going to be coming out of the woodwork now.  $$$.   

Saw her half sister interviewed yesterday.   Said she hasn't spoken to her in over a year.  And doubt she'd be invited to wedding.


----------



## DC-Cutie

bagsforme said:


> ^oh boy, you know her family is going to be coming out of the woodwork now.  $$$.
> 
> Saw her half sister interviewed yesterday.   Said she hasn't spoken to her in over a year.  And doubt she'd be invited to wedding.


invite got lost in the mail


----------



## Singra

gelbergirl said:


> I remember this location from when Prince Edward was married there.
> Very pretty and very special.
> Especially the long road-walkway that leads to the castle.



That’s a good location.

Personally I don’t go for all the royal pomp and ceremony.

They should have a wedding like JFK jnr, small and intimate ending with a casual shot of them coming out of the chapel... of course that would *never* happen but that photo is my favorite famous wedding shot of all time.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Singra said:


> That’s a good location.
> 
> They should have a wedding like JFK jnr, small and intimate ending with a casual shot of them coming out of the chapel... of course that would *never* happen but that photo is my favorite famous wedding shot of all time.
> 
> I don’t go for all the royal pomp and ceremony.


that was the most romantic, intimate wedding photo ever!  Iconic


----------



## uhpharm01

jiangjiang said:


> Confirmed! Windsor castle next May!


----------



## daisychainz

terebina786 said:


> I was wondering who set them up too... Like how did this whole thing happen.


Misha Nonoo? Apparently she is the only common link between them, according to news reports.


----------



## horse17

zen1965 said:


> I do wonder how she will fare.
> 
> As someone said in the Royalty Fashion Thread will she really enjoy years of ribbon-cutting and functions? She is marrying into a world of extreme entitlement and snobbery; and the expectation clearly is that she will toe the line (including most likely a more conservative dress style). I do not imagine either of Windsor Princes to be particularly good at compromising - never mind their public personas that are very affable. They have never had to in their lives. Thus, if need arises their wives have to do so. Moreover, I do not think that the circles Meghan is going to move around in will appreciate her for what she is. Not only is she is not one of them, she is (or was) a C- or B-list actress.
> Like it or not, in Europe you still have many titled aristocrats that hold traditions and public decorum very high. Their social circles are almost incestuous with only "selected commoners” present (and those “commoners” do not have pasts of being scantily clad in a US TV series). Heck, there are still associations and clubs the statutes of which clearly determine that membership is limited to aristocrats only. Sure, the younger generations mingle much more. Notwithstanding this however, in my opinion European higher nobility remains a screened-off parallel universe.
> 
> Much more than Kate who at least mixed with those circles from teenage age onwards, Meghan has some very tough adjustments ahead of her regardless of whether the British public is going to love her or not.
> 
> My prognosis for a long-term union is not too optimistic.
> 
> BTW, I do not mean to rain on anybody’s parade. I am merely describing my noobservations.


"European higher nobility"... please..that's a changin!..lol....that whole term to me is just a bunch of old disfunctional bs...


----------



## Sassys

kkfiregirl said:


> I imagine she will want to spend time with her own family.



I recall Kate was not allowed to spend xmas with her family, her first xmas married to Will


----------



## Jayne1

bagsforme said:


> I hope she doesn't get treated like Fergie.  She was a commoner and basically pushed out of the family.


Fergie pushed herself out of the royal family.  Her behaviour was beyond ridiculous, especially for a Brit knowing exactly how the royals are expected to behave -- meaning in a dignified manner.  She could have been wild, crude and inappropriate in private, but not in front of the paps.  She loved publicity.

She also loved to spend money she didn't have.

She was considered a breath of fresh air in the very beginning, but soon carried it so far, no one sympathized or wanted to give her any more chances.

I think MM will do very well in her new role.  She'll be the opposite of silly Fergie.


----------



## Tivo

Harry seems very smitten with her based on their interview. He stared longingly at her so often. But something about her reads insincere and I get the feeling she’s “acting.”


----------



## uhpharm01

I'm hoping that they good long and happy marriage. They both look like really good people.


----------



## knasarae

Coconuts40 said:


> No doubt it will be difficult for Meghan and the European aristocracy may not be kind to her.  However, she has mingled and is good friends with a lot of well known people - well known actors/actresses/the fashion world and a strong social network- Markus Anderson to name a good friend.  I don't think this will be easy but I also think she has a connection and social circle that will also support her. In the 16 months? that they dated, not one friend leaked anything to the media. I think she is very protected and I think that will carry her a long way during difficult times.
> 
> I* really enjoyed the BBC interview - I think she is a sweet girl. However, I do agree with others , I do find it hard to believe she didn't know anything about Prince Harry before the blind date, she lost me there.*



I don't know anything about Harry other than him being the son of Diana and Charles and what he looks like.


----------



## Sassys

knasarae said:


> I don't know anything about Harry other than him being the son of Diana and Charles and what he looks like.



Agree! I also have no clue about him other than name and son of Diana/Charles.. Not everyone is into the royals. Could not name any of them if my life depended on it.


----------



## kemilia

Tivo said:


> Harry seems very smitten with her based on their interview. He stared longingly at her so often. But something about her reads insincere and I get the feeling she’s “acting.”


I kinda agree with what you are saying here, I just didn't want to be the negative Nancy.

Harry does seem totally heads over heals over her which is so sweet to see. Meghan--more controlled and pleased with her new status. But this could just be how this couple is but I did not like her basically shutting him up over who the "mystery" person was who introduced them citing her "privacy", especially since it was already on the news that it was Misha N.--that was pretty bossy and not respectful, imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

DC-Cutie said:


> It's like you've calling her out of the game and the race hasn't even started.   SMH


I am not calling her out of any game. I merely described my observations of what goes on in certain circles. 
For her sake I hope that her husband-to-be will back her all the way. Is he likely to do so? I do not know. He certainly will never have experienced any condescending slights (at least not right to his face).


----------



## Clearblueskies

Tivo said:


> Harry seems very smitten with her based on their interview. He stared longingly at her so often. But something about her reads insincere and I get the feeling she’s “acting.”


I thought this too.  He's clearly nuts about her, but she didn't convince me I'm sorry to say.


----------



## Antonia

I just read that she used to be one of the models on "Deal or No Deal"...too funny!  Here is the link:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebr...deal-case-model-—-watch/ar-BBFSkOo?li=BBnbfcL


----------



## horse17

Imo Megan seems much more savvy then Kate therefore she may be much better at handling criticism Etc


----------



## westjenn

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought this too.  He's clearly nuts about her, but she didn't convince me I'm sorry to say.[/QUO
> You must have watched a different interview.


----------



## Eva1991

Singra said:


> Times are different though and I think both William and Harry received quite a bit of money from their mother, to the extent they may be financially independent (not 100% on this but that’s what I remember). They or at least Harry may be able to achieve more independence than others in the past and Harry is showing he has quite a bit of media savvy. *Out of William and Harry, Harry has always seemed the more outgoing and seems to be more comfortable in the limelight.* We’ll see how it goes I suppose, it’s early days.


This is probably due to the fact that Harry isn't a direct heir to the throne like William is. William has to keep up appearances because he will become king in the future. This applies for Kate as well as she's the future king's wife and mother to another future king herself.

Harry and Meghan on the other hand can be more laid back and enjoy all the perks of being a royal without the stress imposed on William and Kate. Not saying it will be easy for Meghan, especially in the first few years. She doesn't have any royal background and didn't grow up in a monarchy to be familiar with how it works but I don't think she'll be in the public eye as much as Kate is. I think - or at least I hope so - that she'll be given the time to adjust as much as possible in the next few months leading up to the wedding.


----------



## westjenn

Not sure why that was blank! What I wanted to say was- @Clearblueskies you must have watched a different interview? Or are you saying she was acting? Clearly the hand holding, gazing etc on her part (both their parts) show true affection.


----------



## Clearblueskies

^ It's my opinion, having watched the interview.  You're entitled to your take on it and I'm entitled to mine.  No need to be snippy about it


----------



## westjenn

Eva1991 said:


> This is probably due to the fact that Harry isn't a direct heir to the throne like William is. William has to keep up appearances because he will become king in the future. This applies for Kate as well as she's the future king's wife and mother to another future king herself.
> 
> Harry and Meghan on the other hand can be more laid back and enjoy all the perks of being a royal without the stress imposed on William and Kate. Not saying it will be easy for Meghan, especially in the first few years. She doesn't have any royal background and didn't grow up in a monarchy to be familiar with how it works but I don't think she'll be in the public eye as much as Kate is. I think - or at least I hope so - that she'll be given the time to adjust as much as possible in the next few months leading up to the wedding.


Her first royal engagement is Friday. Looks like they aren't wasting any time getting her acclimated.


----------



## westjenn

Clearblueskies said:


> ^ It's my opinion, having watched the interview.  You're entitled to your take on it and I'm entitled to mine.  No need to be snippy about it


On the contrary, I am quite enjoying hearing both sides in this thread- those that are excited for these two and wish them the very best  and the few that think she's the greatest actress around since Meryl Streep.


----------



## jiangjiang

My friend just pointed out, Megan looks like Pippa Middleton [emoji1]


----------



## lanasyogamama

A comic I like, Chris Franjola said he worked at a restaurant with her years ago and that she was super sweet


----------



## Coconuts40

knasarae said:


> I don't know anything about Harry other than him being the son of Diana and Charles and what he looks like.





Sassys said:


> Agree! I also have no clue about him other than name and son of Diana/Charles.. Not everyone is into the royals. Could not name any of them if my life depended on it.



Oh wow, I thought everyone knew who the British Royals were, lol!
Thanks for the feedback. When I heard her say during the interview that she didn't know about him, I nearly spit out my coffee thinking that was impossible.


----------



## Coconuts40

I would love to know Meaghan Markle's skincare routine. Her skin is gorgeous!


----------



## horse17

I wonder if it's ever difficult for someone like Harry... To wonder if someone is really as in love with you..as much as he seems to be with her......?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Just Askin

westjenn said:


> Breaking news:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5124891/Harry-Meghan-marry-Windsor-Castle-MAY.html
> 
> Are there any UK based members out there that can explain why they made a point of saying that the Royal Family would be paying for the wedding?


Because a good few of us would be fuming to have to pay towards this wedding, they are aware of that, and so are clearing it up right from the start.


----------



## Sassys

Coconuts40 said:


> Oh wow, I thought everyone knew who the British Royals were, lol!
> Thanks for the feedback. When I heard her say during the interview that she didn't know about him, I nearly spit out my coffee thinking that was impossible.



Sorry, nope. I believe her when she says she didn't know anything about him. If you showed her a pic, she might can say, who it is, but that is the extent. I have never been into the royals (was not that little girl watching Diana's wedding), was not watching Diana's funeral. I do recall being in times square in 1997 when they announced her car accident. Me and my boyfriend at the time were hanging with friends, saw it on the jumbo screen, said "oh wow" and continued to Barcode (old Bar/Arcade in Times Square), never gave it a second thought. 

Now when JFK jr disappeared in his plane; was GLUED to the tv.


----------



## DC-Cutie

The palace has confirmed she will be baptized and given citizenship before the wedding!


----------



## pearlyqueen

Just Askin said:


> Because a good few of us would be fuming to have to pay towards this wedding, they are aware of that, and so are clearing it up right from the start.



Loool, the royals won’t be paying the bulk of it either - the police/security and clear up costs will run into £20-£30 million if similar to William’s wedding. They’re only paying for the cheaper elements. There are a lot of people here fuming...


----------



## pearlyqueen

DC-Cutie said:


> The palace has confirmed she will be baptized and given citizenship before the wedding!



How nice and convenient... nothing like bending over backwards for the privileged...One rule for them, meanwhile for the rest of us:


----------



## Pagan

I'm no monarchist, but I've always liked Harry. I wish these two nothing but happiness; I'll always remember him as that little boy walking behind his mother's coffin. He deserves some happiness from this life.

What struck me about the interview (apart from the ridiculous not very aware of him comment) was how she talked over him a few times. I didn't think that was cool. Not because he's a man, but because it was her introduction to his country. I wouldn't have interrupted my husband to speak over him the first time I met his mother either, you know? I don't think that makes a very good impression. Nor did telling him not to mention their friend's name in the way she did. The vibe that gave me was not 'a breath of fresh air'. 

I don't think she needs to just shut up and gaze at him adoringly like a lapdog, but come on. The guy _is_ a British Prince. She's a celebrity herself, but that particular interview was really about him, not her. It would have gone forward no matter who he decided to marry. I'm not suggesting that she should be subservient in any way, but I felt like she tried to be the main focus. Maybe it's just their dynamic, but he actually had to point out (however jokingly) that the interviewer was actually looking for _him_ to respond. I can see where people are coming from when they suggest that she might be acting. I hope that's not the case.

I agree with everyone else that they will make beautiful babies. He's far from hard on the eyes, and she's absolutely stunning.


----------



## lovieluvslux

Wow. They resemble each other.   What a great looking couple.


gazoo said:


> Come on, how gorgeous are these two?!
> 
> Love the ring, and love how tactile they are with each other. Such happy news to end the year with.


----------



## Just Askin

Esizzle said:


> I wonder if Megan will join the Royal family for Christmas this year since she is officially engaged now?


Do you think attending a family dinner is a big deal in a couples relationship? Is being accepted by the fold and invited to special events significant to the validation of a couple? I wonder if this is true of all couples or just those we favour?  Hmm interesting post.


----------



## DC-Cutie

pearlyqueen said:


> How nice and convenient... nothing like bending over backwards for the privileged...One rule for them, meanwhile for the rest of us


Nothing new. Privilege has gotten many people many things and will continue to go do


----------



## Livia1

Tivo said:


> Harry seems very smitten with her based on their interview. He stared longingly at her so often. But something about her reads insincere and I get the feeling she’s “acting.”



Thank you!
This is exactly how I felt when I watched them. 
I hope I'm wrong though.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I see them as they presented themselves - two people that fell in love and ready to get married. 

I didnt even think of she’s acting nor did I try to read more into it.


----------



## pearlyqueen

DC-Cutie said:


> Nothing new. Privilege has gotten many people many things and will continue to go do



Indeed - doesn’t mean we have to endorse it though. Hope one of our more enlightened MPs raises the issue of how Ms Markle can qualify to become a British citizen in such a short space of time. From our government’s website:




https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...British-citizen-by-discretion-v1.0.pdf#page13

Didn’t notice a special chapter for would be royals in the document - guess some civil servant has been tasked with sneakily inserting one...


----------



## Pagan

pearlyqueen said:


> Indeed - doesn’t mean we have to endorse it though. Hope one of our more enlightened MPs raises the issue of how Ms Markle can qualify to become a British citizen in such a short space of time. From our government’s website:
> 
> View attachment 3891958
> 
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...British-citizen-by-discretion-v1.0.pdf#page13
> 
> Didn’t notice a special chapter for would be royals in the document - guess some civil servant has been tasked with sneakily inserting one...


I think the word 'usually' gets them there.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Pagan said:


> I think the word 'usually' gets them there.



Loool - guarantee the “usually” is only applied for the privileged few!


----------



## uhpharm01

DC-Cutie said:


> The palace has confirmed she will be baptized and given citizenship before the wedding!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Coconuts40 said:


> Oh wow, I thought everyone knew who the British Royals were, lol!


Me too.  

I'm Canadian and Canada is a constitutional monarchy.  I remember studying a lot more British history than Canadian history when I was in high school, so I forget how others may not be familiar with the royals.


----------



## Longchamp

She will learn to take the good with bad with royal privilege.
I thought some of her mis steps during the interview were due to nervous energy.

OH CHIT. Much more important royalty news. King James for the first time in his 15 years in the league was just ejected from a game.


----------



## DC-Cutie

uhpharm01 said:


>


don't endorse it... people will get in their feelings...  lol


----------



## DC-Cutie

Wonder what it was like for her having to leave her career.  Like this that had to be an epic 'resignation letter' of sorts.
Why are you leaving?
I'm going to marry my Prince!  Peace out bishes!


----------



## uhpharm01

pearlyqueen said:


> Indeed - doesn’t mean we have to endorse it though. Hope one of our more enlightened MPs raises the issue of how Ms Markle can qualify to become a British citizen in such a short space of time. From our government’s website:
> 
> View attachment 3891958
> 
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...British-citizen-by-discretion-v1.0.pdf#page13
> 
> Didn’t notice a special chapter for would be royals in the document - guess some civil servant has been tasked with sneakily inserting one...


She will be applying for citizenship  under this part of the rules due to the fact that she will be marrying Harry.
https://www.gov.uk/becoming-a-british-citizen/if-your-spouse-is-a-british-citizen


----------



## Esizzle

Yay! I was hoping yesterday that they get married at Windsor castle and thats what they are doing can't wait!! May is too far. They should have done it in March lol


----------



## uhpharm01

DC-Cutie said:


> don't endorse it... people will get in their feelings...  lol


I hear you!
They are now claiming that her citizenship is expected to take several years. 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/28/europe/prince-harry-meghan-markle-wedding-details/index.html

A spokesman said Markle would retain US citizenship through the process of becoming a UK citizen but it was "too early to say" if she would retain dual nationality. *The process is expected to take several years.*
The wedding is likely to fall after another big royal occasion -- Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, the former Kate Middleton, are expecting their third child in April.







Here's another article. 
*Royal Title Up in the Air ... Because of Citizenship Questions*
http://www.tmz.com/2017/11/27/meghan-markle-engagement-royal-title-england-citizen/



DC-Cutie said:


> don't endorse it... people will get in their feelings...  lol


----------



## DC-Cutie

I'm sure many are breathing a sigh of relief!  


uhpharm01 said:


> I hear you!
> They are now claiming that her citizenship is expected to take several years.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/28/europe/prince-harry-meghan-markle-wedding-details/index.html
> 
> A spokesman said Markle would retain US citizenship through the process of becoming a UK citizen but it was "too early to say" if she would retain dual nationality. *The process is expected to take several years.*
> The wedding is likely to fall after another big royal occasion -- Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, the former Kate Middleton, are expecting their third child in April.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's another article.
> *Royal Title Up in the Air ... Because of Citizenship Questions*
> http://www.tmz.com/2017/11/27/meghan-markle-engagement-royal-title-england-citizen/


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I'm surprised she is allowed to marry him still a US citizen. That seems nuts. That means heirs to the British throne will be US citizens?! I assumed she would have to renounce her allegiance to the US and the queen would just bestow her UK citizenship or something to that affect.


----------



## uhpharm01

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I'm surprised she is allowed to marry him still a US citizen. That seems nuts. That means heirs to the British throne will be US citizens?! I assumed she would have to renounce her allegiance to the US and the queen would just bestow her UK citizenship or something to that affect.


The heirs would have dual citizenship. But I see your point.


----------



## Esizzle

One of the Swedish princesses is married to an American/British guy and I think their kids have dual citizenship. But she is so far from the throne that no one cares. its going to be the same with Harry's kids. George, Charlotte and the new baby are in line before Harry and his kids.


----------



## berrydiva

She's a U.S. citizen but would their kids actually be dual citizens? Technically, the US doesn't allow dual citizenship but it's hardly enforced.....but I always understood it to mean unless your kids were born here, they would not be US citizens. Are your children US citizens if you hold dual passports?


----------



## Esizzle

berrydiva said:


> She's a U.S. citizen but would their kids actually be dual citizens? Technically, the US doesn't allow dual citizenship but it's hardly enforced.....but I always understood it to mean unless your kids were born here, they would not be US citizens. Are your children US citizens if you hold dual passports?


I think so. Joel Kinnaman's (the actor) dad is American and his mom is Swedish. He was born in Sweden but had dual citizenship. I think it isn't automatic, you have to file paperwork and stuff but it can be done.


----------



## Longchamp

LIST OF COUNTRIES THAT ALLOW OR DISALLOWDUAL CITIZENSHIP

Dual citizenships has been in much of the debate over the years. Much of the developed countries such as US, UK, Australia, Switzerland have no restrictions on holding dual nationality, whereas countries such as Singapore, Austria, India, Saudi Arabia do not “recognize” or “restrict” dual citizenships, leading to automatic loss of citizenship upon acquiring other. Some countries such as Austria, Spain may still grant dual citizenships upon certain special conditions under exceptional cases like celebrities..

The following are list of countries which allow and do not allow dual citizenships.

Please keep in mind that countries amend nationality laws from time to time and is subjected to change:

DUAL CITIZENSHIPS ALLOWED:

Australia, Barbados, Belgium, Bangladesh, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, United States, United Kingdom, Switzerland, South Korea, South Africa (requires permission) , Egypt(requires prior permission), Greece, France, Finland, Germany (requires prior permission), Iraq, Italy, Israel, Ireland, Hungary, Iceland, Sweden, Slovenia, Syria, Serbia, Armenia, Lebanon, Malta, Spain ( allows only with certain Latin American countries), Tonga, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka (by retention), Pakistan (accepts only with 16 countries), Portugal, Turkey (requires permission)

DUAL CITIZENSHIPS NOT ALLOWED

Andorra, Austria, Azerbaijan ,Burma, Bahrain, Botswana, Japan, China ,Czech Republic, Fiji,India,Indonesia, Ecuador, Estonia, Iran, Poland, Papua New Guinea, Brunei, Japan, Peru, Kuwait , Kenya, Kazakhstan, Chile, Kiribati, Poland, Korea, Kuwait, Latvia,Singapore, Slovakia, Ecuador, Lithuania, Solomon Islands ,Fiji ,Malaysia, Mauritius, Netherlands, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Romania, Thailand, Mexico, Nepal, Venezuela, Norway, Zimbabwe, Mauritius, Myanmar, Nepal


----------



## VickyB

westjenn said:


> The thing that is worrisome to me (and inevitable) is the media's constant comparison of the 2 young wives.  I can't help but wonder if Catherine is the teensiest bit envious of the freedom afforded to Harry & Meghan.



It will be non stop and harsh. Wonder if they will really become friends or get along only because of their husbands or just can't stand each other. Meghan's personality seems a bit OTT(going by her interview with Harry) which can be fun in the beginning when you meet somebody but can quickly become tiresome.
She is well educated and intelligent and that came across in the interview in spades. Felt that she should have kept her mouth shut more than she did in the interview. Hopefully, she'll realize or learn during Princess School that she's not in Hollywood any more.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

myown said:


> anyone else thinks her outfit is horrible? the way she bends in makes her look like hiding a baby-bump, also the way her belt is. and her shoes are at least one size too big.
> i also wish she wouldn't have worn a white coat, that's so hollywooddramaqueen



ITA. The coat was a sloppy mess and a bad color choice, hated the dress hanging below the coat haphazardly, the shoes were inappropriate both in color and for the weather, and the HAIR was beyond ridiculous and tacky.


----------



## VickyB

zen1965 said:


> I do wonder how she will fare.
> 
> As someone said in the Royalty Fashion Thread will she really enjoy years of ribbon-cutting and functions? She is marrying into a world of extreme entitlement and snobbery; and the expectation clearly is that she will toe the line (including most likely a more conservative dress style). I do not imagine either of Windsor Princes to be particularly good at compromising - never mind their public personas that are very affable. They have never had to in their lives. Thus, if need arises their wives have to do so. Moreover, I do not think that the circles Meghan is going to move around in will appreciate her for what she is. Not only is she is not one of them, she is (or was) a C- or B-list actress.
> Like it or not, in Europe you still have many titled aristocrats that hold traditions and public decorum very high. Their social circles are almost incestuous with only "selected commoners” present (and those “commoners” do not have pasts of being scantily clad in a US TV series). Heck, there are still associations and clubs the statutes of which clearly determine that membership is limited to aristocrats only. Sure, the younger generations mingle much more. Notwithstanding this however, in my opinion European higher nobility remains a screened-off parallel universe.
> 
> Much more than Kate who at least mixed with those circles from teenage age onwards, Meghan has some very tough adjustments ahead of her regardless of whether the British public is going to love her or not.
> 
> My prognosis for a long-term union is not too optimistic.
> 
> BTW, I do not mean to rain on anybody’s parade. I am merely describing my observations.



You are spot on. I guess there is always the chance that she'll adapt well to what is expected of her. We all love Harry for being so relatable and down to earth (as much as a royal can be) yet he still tows the (royal) line.


----------



## VickyB

DC-Cutie said:


> Diana was the same way.. sans everybody going out and buying what she wore.  But she didn't have much style until she became Princess Diana



Well Diana was a 19 year old girl and Meghan is 36 so seems to me that Meghan has pretty much established her "style" or lack thereof.


----------



## VickyB

DC-Cutie said:


> I have a feeling Harry will fiercely protect her.


ITA, until he no longer can.


----------



## VickyB

Tivo said:


> Harry seems very smitten with her based on their interview. He stared longingly at her so often. But something about her reads insincere and I get the feeling she’s “acting.”


Yes. Felt that she was acting a part in the interview. Especially in the un aired portions w/o sound released today.


----------



## VickyB

kemilia said:


> I kinda agree with what you are saying here, I just didn't want to be the negative Nancy.
> 
> Harry does seem totally heads over heals over her which is so sweet to see. Meghan--more controlled and pleased with her new status. But this could just be how this couple is but I did not like her basically shutting him up over who the "mystery" person was who introduced them citing her "privacy", especially since it was already on the news that it was Misha N.--that was pretty bossy and not respectful, imo.



Yes. Felt she hardly gave him a chance to talk during the entire interview. Not surprising that she basically stopped his proposal to accept.


----------



## VickyB

horse17 said:


> Imo Megan seems much more savvy then Kate therefore she may be much better at handling criticism Etc


ITA but I also think it could backfire on her.


----------



## VickyB

Coconuts40 said:


> Oh wow, I thought everyone knew who the British Royals were, lol!
> Thanks for the feedback. When I heard her say during the interview that she didn't know about him, I nearly spit out my coffee thinking that was impossible.



ITA. No way she didn't know at least basic data on him.


----------



## LnA

I usually just lurk this thread but can’t help chiming in on H/M’s engagement. First off I think they are a great match and am very excited for them as a couple. 

For the person who said Meghan seemed like she was acting in their interview, ITA but not necessarily for the same reasons. From what I’ve seen in LA, actors have a way of covering up their nerves by flipping on the acting switch to help appear calm and collected. It doesn’t always come across organic and natural, but it’s better than looking nervous. She was likely REALLY nervous (who wouldn’t be?) and her way of curbing that was to be “on” like she often had to be as an actress. It’s probably innate by now. And being “on” includes not being a shrinking violet and commanding the attention of the interviewer/audience, which understandably some people interpreted as rude. 

I thought she brazenly took command of the interview at times (which was a little off-putting) and some of her smiles and movements seemed very calculated in an attempt to show people how in love they are and how perfect this all is. But all in all, other than a little exaggeration, I think they really are very much in love and given the circumstances she did an outstanding job. And Harry’s reaction to the word Husband? So adorable. 

On a side note, I thought it was hilarious that her mom supposedly lives in WINDSOR Square, which is a little neighborhood in Mid-City LA. Of all the many neighborhood names in LA...hahaha


----------



## VickyB

Pagan said:


> I'm no monarchist, but I've always liked Harry. I wish these two nothing but happiness; I'll always remember him as that little boy walking behind his mother's coffin. He deserves some happiness from this life.
> 
> What struck me about the interview (apart from the ridiculous not very aware of him comment) was how she talked over him a few times. I didn't think that was cool. Not because he's a man, but because it was her introduction to his country. I wouldn't have interrupted my husband to speak over him the first time I met his mother either, you know? I don't think that makes a very good impression. Nor did telling him not to mention their friend's name in the way she did. The vibe that gave me was not 'a breath of fresh air'.
> 
> I don't think she needs to just shut up and gaze at him adoringly like a lapdog, but come on. The guy _is_ a British Prince. She's a celebrity herself, but that particular interview was really about him, not her. It would have gone forward no matter who he decided to marry. I'm not suggesting that she should be subservient in any way, but I felt like she tried to be the main focus. Maybe it's just their dynamic, but he actually had to point out (however jokingly) that the interviewer was actually looking for _him_ to respond. I can see where people are coming from when they suggest that she might be acting. I hope that's not the case.
> 
> I agree with everyone else that they will make beautiful babies. He's far from hard on the eyes, and she's absolutely stunning.



Very well said!!!!!!!!!


----------



## pearlyqueen

uhpharm01 said:


> She will be applying for citizenship  under this part of the rules due to the fact that she will be marrying Harry.
> https://www.gov.uk/becoming-a-british-citizen/if-your-spouse-is-a-british-citizen



Well not really.....Legally he’s not her spouse until they are married, and the residency rule is still a minimum of 3 years in the UK.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Hessefan said:


> We must be reading different DM comments then (on the rare occasion I do read them they are always complaining), but I don’t disagree with you on the monarchy. It’s a strange concept for anyone from a republic or the 21st century.



There’s a difference between those here who buy the DM newspaper and those who leave comments on its online version which is open to people abroad too.
Here the typical readers are conservative, right wing and either ignore or applaud the bias and prejudice in the DM. Its articles about the royals are, as far as I know from seeing the front pages, gushing and obsequious.


----------



## carebearz

Meghan doesn’t really give off good vibes to me, but that’s just my opinion. Some royal families only give titles to the direct lines to the throne. 

I kind of hope that Prince Harry will give up his royal title and I believe he can still continue his charity work. 
Just like Diana, he doesn’t need a royal title to continue to do good. 

Then we will see if Meghan will still stick with him, title, money and what’s not.


----------



## LnA

LnA said:


> On a side note, I thought it was hilarious that her mom supposedly lives in WINDSOR Square, which is a little neighborhood in Mid-City LA. Of all the many neighborhood names in LA...hahaha



Turns out her mom lives in View Park-Windsor Hills and not Windsor Square but my point still stands [emoji851]


----------



## pearlyqueen

carebearz said:


> Meghan doesn’t really give off good vibes to me, but that’s just my opinion. Some royal families only give titles to the direct lines to the throne.
> 
> I kind of hope that Prince Harry will give up his royal title and I believe he can still continue his charity work.
> Just like Diana, he doesn’t need a royal title to continue to do good.
> 
> Then we will see if Meghan will still stick with him, title, money and what’s not.



He won’t give up his royal title - royals may bleat about being in the public gaze etc but they don’t walk away from it; too fond of all the perks and being funded by tax payers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

I watched the VF interview last night. I have to give credit for Meghan's poise and her eloquence. She's obviously a very smart woman. But in my gut, I just don't think she's the right woman for Harry.

Yes. Harry is SMITTEN with her (it's obvious in his body language), but marriage is not a sprint, it's a race. I'm very iffy on these two even though the majority of the comments here really root for her. I don't dislike her. I just don't think she's suited for the royal life. And as the days progress, there will be more and more dirt on her coming out and it won't be a pretty sight. She can go and marry a billionaire if she lands one, but a member of the royal family? I'm not so sure.

Stories about her cheating on her ex husband. Stories on her living with someone when she met Harry. Come on. This doesn't sound very good.


----------



## horse17

My guess is that Harry needs a challenge...he may just have gotten one with Meghan...


----------



## DC-Cutie

VickyB said:


> HAIR was beyond ridiculous and tacky.



SMDH....  hate to see what people will say if she ever wears her naturally curly hair.


----------



## horse17

VickyB said:


> ITA. The coat was a sloppy mess and a bad color choice, hated the dress hanging below the coat haphazardly, the shoes were inappropriate both in color and for the weather, and the HAIR was beyond ridiculous and tacky.


Oh no!  Lol...I actually thought the coat color was beautiful...winter white....why did you think her hair was tacky?


----------



## DC-Cutie

VickyB said:


> ITA. No way she didn't know at least basic data on him.


Where are you reading she didn’t know about him?


----------



## DC-Cutie

horse17 said:


> Oh no!  Lol...I actually thought the coat color was beautiful...winter white....why did you think her hair was tacky?


I literally had to look at the pictures again. Her hair looked fine. Hardly ‘behind ridiculous and tacky’


----------



## Esizzle

Her hair and outfit looked beautiful. Simple and elegant.


----------



## uhpharm01

pearlyqueen said:


> Well not really.....Legally he’s not her spouse until they are married, and the residency rule is still a minimum of 3 years in the UK.


Yes I know that. That's why I posted that link she will apply for citizenship after they are married because that other post about non married people apply does apply to her.


----------



## uhpharm01

VickyB said:


> ITA. The coat was a sloppy mess and a bad color choice, hated the dress hanging below the coat haphazardly, the shoes were inappropriate both in color and for the weather, and the HAIR was beyond ridiculous and tacky.


That's $580 coat has sold out and so has her dress. Too. That coat was pretty.


----------



## finer_woman

DC-Cutie said:


> SMDH....  hate to see what people will say if she ever wears her naturally curly hair.



Right, they'd probably have a stroke at the sight


----------



## finer_woman

uhpharm01 said:


> That's $580 coat has sold out and so has her dress. Too. That coat was pretty.



I'm not a personal fan of wrap coats but I don't think she looked bad at all in it.


----------



## uhpharm01

finer_woman said:


> I'm not a personal fan of wrap coats but I don't think she looked bad at all in it.


I agree. That company has renamed that wrap coat    It's called the Meghan now. http://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/fas...han-markle-coat-designer-exclusive-interview/


----------



## mundodabolsa

I LOVED her hair.


----------



## uhpharm01

LnA said:


> Turns out her mom lives in View Park-Windsor Hills and not Windsor Square but my point still stands [emoji851]


There is security outside her mother's home now.


----------



## Esizzle

DC-Cutie said:


> SMDH....  hate to see what people will say if she ever wears her naturally curly hair.


A lot of people will show their true colors and what they really think of her if she ever wears her hair curly. If you know what I mean.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

Esizzle said:


> A lot of people will show their true colors and what they really think of her if she ever wears her hair curly. If you know what I mean.


Oh I know exactly what you mean....


----------



## Coconuts40

I agree she was took the lead a bit too much in the interview. I am a big believer of etiquette and this was Harry's introduction of his fiancé . I feel she should have let him take the lead. Even he got annoyed - obvious with the lip biting and the body language. And the edited clips of them - he even jokes (truth) about how he is being asked to answer the question and not her.


----------



## Just Askin

Coconuts40 said:


> I agree she was took the lead a bit too much in the interview. I am a big believer of etiquette and this was Harry's introduction of his fiancé . I feel she should have let him take the lead. Even he got annoyed - obvious with the lip biting and the body language. And the edited clips of them - he even jokes (truth) about how he is being asked to answer the question and not her.


Whilst I’m glad she was confident enough to take the lead, it was definitely a bit different to what we are used to seeing in these situations. It was a little uncomfortable to watch but the change is positive.


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> his C list actress fiancée.


C list huh? I think you forgot “divorced” and “American” too. Lol. At least she has a job and a career before she met her prince and fell in love. Now she is going to be a princess yayyy!

I’m sure a lot of people in the UK are triggered by Megan.


----------



## Just Askin

VickyB said:


> ITA. The coat was a sloppy mess and a bad color choice, hated the dress hanging below the coat haphazardly, the shoes were inappropriate both in color and for the weather, and the HAIR was beyond ridiculous and tacky.


Bit harsh. I think her hair looks fine. It’s her hair!


----------



## buffym

Meghan did take the lead and it actually remind me of Queen Letzia and King Felipe's of Spain interview.  Letzia told him to be quiet and let her finish talking. It is something royal watchers still criticize her for, but she has not made that mistake again. Letzia and Meghan are or were independent women who had to stand for what they wanted. It took time for Letzia to adjust to her role and I think it will take for Meghan.

I do find it disappointing that people are essential writing her off after one insight interview especially some posters who post in the Duchess of Cambridge thread continue to give her room improvement. Six years later and she still  works the least out of the senior royals- yet she is in line to be the Queen consort.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Just Askin said:


> Bit harsh. I think her hair looks fine. It’s her hair!


It’s not her hair.  She’s the good old Hollywood manufactured type all the way down to her demeanor and bad acting. He’s nothing to write home about either,  so whatever.


----------



## Esizzle

“Not her hair”. Of course. Except it’s literally all her hair.


----------



## Esizzle

buffym said:


> Meghan did take the lead and it actually remind me of Queen Letzia and King Felipe's of Spain interview.  Letzia told him to be quiet and let her finish talking. It is something royal watchers still criticize her for, but she has not made that mistake again. Letzia and Meghan are or were independent women who had to stand for what they wanted. It took time for Letzia to adjust to her role and I think it will take for Meghan.
> 
> I do find it disappointing that people are essential writing her off after one insight interview especially some posters who post in the Duchess of Cambridge thread continue to give her room improvement. Six years later and she still  works the least out of the senior royals- yet she is in line to be the Queen consort.


I agree with your post. A lot of people have been making comparisons between Megan and Kate’s engagement interviews. Kate is very shy by nature and I’m sure she isn’t fond of public speaking like many of Us so she came across very quiet and reserved. Megan is a poised and confident public speaker and that showed in the interview. She is going to do great in her royal role.


----------



## horse17

DC-Cutie said:


> Where are you reading she didn’t know about him?


She mentioned it in the interview


----------



## DC-Cutie

horse17 said:


> She mentioned it in the interview


I gotta see this interview


----------



## Jayne1

pearlyqueen said:


> Why not tell that to the poster I was responding to?
> 
> Anyway, it’s a thread about royalty and my post is about royalty. They are part of the establishment set up here in the UK (worse luck) and a large percentage of us would rather dispense with them. That includes Harry and his C list actress fiancée.


I like hearing the opinions of the Brits -- so I appreciate when you post your impressions.

I was in London at the time of William's wedding and was surprised by all the ambivalent feelings of many younger folks. Back home in Canada, the press was positively gushing.  So it's good to hear all sides, I think.


----------



## horse17

I think the "monarchy" took a big hit after Diana died..


----------



## buffym

horse17 said:


> She mentioned it in the interview



She didn't say she didn't know him, she said she didn't know much about him.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> C list huh? I think you forgot “divorced” and “American” too. Lol. At least she has a job and a career before she met her prince and fell in love. Now she is going to be a princess yayyy!
> 
> I’m sure a lot of people in the UK are triggered by Megan.



Is she divorced? Couldn’t care less. Wasn’t she a “briefcase girl” - not that great a career, not like she’s an Oscar winner Lol 

Nothing against her or Harry as individuals, just the whole royalty thing that stinks.

Oh and sorry to disappoint but she won’t be a princess - wives of second sons don’t qualify apparently - lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Just Askin

Esizzle said:


> C list huh? I think you forgot “divorced” and “American” too. Lol. At least she has a job and a career before she met her prince and fell in love. Now she is going to be a princess yayyy!
> 
> I’m sure a lot of people in the UK are triggered by Megan.



Why is divorce or American an issue for you? As for the UK trigger...seriously?  I think you’ll find the issues people in the uk are having is supporting a Monarchy - full stop...not who Harry is going to marry.
Typical sentiment at the moment...


----------



## DC-Cutie

buffym said:


> I do find it disappointing that people are essential writing her off after one insight interview especially some posters who post in the Duchess of Cambridge thread continue to give her room improvement. Six years later and she still  works the least out of the senior royals- yet she is in line to be the Queen consort.


I would love to be able to type exactly why she's being written off after one interview...


----------



## Just Askin

Pagan said:


> I'm no monarchist, but I've always liked Harry. I wish these two nothing but happiness; I'll always remember him as that little boy walking behind his mother's coffin. He deserves some happiness from this life.
> 
> What struck me about the interview (apart from the ridiculous not very aware of him comment) was how she talked over him a few times. I didn't think that was cool. Not because he's a man, but because it was her introduction to his country. I wouldn't have interrupted my husband to speak over him the first time I met his mother either, you know? I don't think that makes a very good impression. Nor did telling him not to mention their friend's name in the way she did. The vibe that gave me was not 'a breath of fresh air'.
> 
> I don't think she needs to just shut up and gaze at him adoringly like a lapdog, but come on. The guy _is_ a British Prince. She's a celebrity herself, but that particular interview was really about him, not her. It would have gone forward no matter who he decided to marry. I'm not suggesting that she should be subservient in any way, but I felt like she tried to be the main focus. Maybe it's just their dynamic, but he actually had to point out (however jokingly) that the interviewer was actually looking for _him_ to respond. I can see where people are coming from when they suggest that she might be acting. I hope that's not the case.
> 
> I agree with everyone else that they will make beautiful babies. He's far from hard on the eyes, and she's absolutely stunning.


I pretty much agree with this.


----------



## DC-Cutie

pearlyqueen said:


> Is she divorced? Couldn’t care less. Wasn’t she a “briefcase girl” - not that great a career, not like she’s an Oscar winner Lol
> 
> Nothing against her or Harry as individuals, just the whole royalty thing that stinks.
> 
> Oh and sorry to disappoint but she won’t be a princess - wives of second sons don’t qualify apparently - lol


oh, you must care


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought her hair looked gorgeous.   

It kind of seems like with William and Harry, no woman is deemed “good enough” for them.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Just Askin said:


> Why is divorce or American an issue for you? As for the UK trigger...seriously?  I think you’ll find the issues people in the uk are having is supporting a Monarchy - full stop...not who Harry is going to marry.
> Typical sentiment at the moment...
> View attachment 3892747


I don’t have a problem with her being divorced or American. I’m American and I’m anti monarchy. I think she’s plastic, insincere, and a terrible actress. However, she’s not my problem so good luck to them.


----------



## Just Askin

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I don’t have a problem with her being divorced or American. I’m American and I’m anti monarchy. I think she’s plastic, insincere, and a terrible actress. However, she’s not my problem so good luck to them.


Didn’t mean to quote you on that post. Sorry. The comments weren’t meant for you


----------



## DC-Cutie

all of these adjectives used to describe her have me scratching my head


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Just Askin said:


> Didn’t mean to quote you on that post. Sorry. The comments weren’t meant for you


Well, I’m glad I made my regard clear anyway. And I agree with the British in that the institution is outdated and undemocratic. I would be pissed to be paying taxes for people with billions in offshore accounts.


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> Is she divorced? Couldn’t care less. Wasn’t she a “briefcase girl” - not that great a career, not like she’s an Oscar winner Lol
> 
> Nothing against her or Harry as individuals, just the whole royalty thing that stinks.
> 
> Oh and sorry to disappoint but she won’t be a princess - wives of second sons don’t qualify apparently - lol


Yea she was the suitcase girl and did extras in many movies too. Then she played a series regular on an ok rated tv show for 7 years. Thats something right? I mean its no Angelina Jolie or Nicole Kidman or Charlize Theron level career but its pretty stable job as an actress. No one cares about the oscars and they are bought and paid for anyways.

I don't care what the royal rules are. Megan is going to marry a Prince and she is going to be a princess and a duchess and I am so excited.


----------



## Esizzle

Just Askin said:


> Why is divorce or American an issue for you? As for the UK trigger...seriously?  I think you’ll find the issues people in the uk are having is supporting a Monarchy - full stop...not who Harry is going to marry.
> Typical sentiment at the moment...
> View attachment 3892747


Its not for me but it is for some people in the UK. I obviously adore her as seen through my posts here.


----------



## horse17

Esizzle said:


> Its not for me but it is for some people in the UK. I obviously adore her as seen through my posts here.


That is so ridiculous... especially considering the dysfunctionality of the monarchy


----------



## Esizzle

horse17 said:


> That is so ridiculous... especially considering the dysfunctionality of the monarchy


I know!! I was reading on celebitchy about how someone that works closely with the monarchy commented on how Megan isn't a good match because she doesn't know the proper etiquette and she is a loud American. So ridiculous


----------



## westjenn

VickyB said:


> It will be non stop and harsh. Wonder if they will really become friends or get along only because of their husbands or just can't stand each other. Meghan's personality seems a bit OTT(going by her interview with Harry) which can be fun in the beginning when you meet somebody but can quickly become tiresome.
> She is well educated and intelligent and that came across in the interview in spades. Felt that she should have kept her mouth shut more than she did in the interview. Hopefully, she'll realize or learn during Princess School that she's not in Hollywood any more.


I do agree with you here. What does "OTT" mean? LOL- idk all the shorthand!


----------



## westjenn

Esizzle said:


> I know!! I was reading on celebitchy about how someone that works closely with the monarchy commented on how Megan isn't a good match because she doesn't know the proper etiquette and she is a loud American. So ridiculous


She'll learn


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

VickyB said:


> Yes. Felt she hardly gave him a chance to talk during the entire interview. Not surprising that she basically stopped his proposal to accept.


HAAAAA YES!


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> SMDH....  hate to see what people will say if she ever wears her naturally curly hair.


I don't think she will.... She hasn't for years as far as I can tell.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> Yea she was the suitcase girl and did extras in many movies too. Then she played a series regular on an ok rated tv show for 7 years. Thats something right? I mean its no Angelina Jolie or Nicole Kidman or Charlize Theron level career but its pretty stable job as an actress. No one cares about the oscars and they are bought and paid for anyways.
> 
> I don't care what the royal rules are. Megan is going to marry a Prince and she is going to be a princess and a duchess and I am so excited.



Loool, if you say so, vast majority of people here had never heard of her, actresses in “ok TV shows” are ten a penny, it’s the talented ones who get to headline in feature films and win Oscars. 

You might not care what the Royal rules are but they exist despite your refusal to acknowledge them. Meghan WILL NOT be a princess.




http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42150762


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> I know!! I was reading on celebitchy about how someone that works closely with the monarchy commented on how Megan isn't a good match because she doesn't know the proper etiquette and she is a loud American. So ridiculous



Loool at the idea of “someone who works closely with royalty” writing on that trash site celebitchy. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] Too funny . Still promoting that nonsense all goes to helps to fan the flames I suppose.


----------



## Esizzle

She will be Princess Henry of Wales just like Kate is Princess William of Wales. Megan will also be a duchess just like Kate is a duchess. Princess and duchess yay can't wait! 

LOL Pearly I thought you didn't think much of Oscars. Why are they suddenly such an important career landmark?


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> Loool at the idea of “someone who works closely with royalty” writing on that trash site celebitchy. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] Too funny . Still promoting that nonsense all goes to helps to fan the flames I suppose.


They didn't write on celebitchy. The article was quoting them.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Loool at the idea of “someone who works closely with royalty” writing on that trash site celebitchy. [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] Too funny . Still promoting that nonsense all goes to helps to fan the flames I suppose.


Lainey gossip is Mehgan’s friend, she’s been leaking stories to her since this show began, you’re about to live through another soap opera. they’ll make you Brits as proud as Andrew and Fergie did.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

It’s Meghan, with an “H”


----------



## pearlyqueen

Jayne1 said:


> I like hearing the opinions of the Brits -- so I appreciate when you post your impressions.
> 
> I was in London at the time of William's wedding and was surprised by all the ambivalent feelings of many younger folks. Back home in Canada, the press was positively gushing.  So it's good to hear all sides, I think.



You’re more than welcome! 

I find the gushing very peculiar; there’s not as much of it here except in certain tabloids. As you observed yourself, there are many people here who are pissed by royalty and what it represents, plus the cost to taxpayers of funding these entitled millionaires. 

I’m curious to know if Canadians (and citizens of other countries where the queen is head of state) have to pay towards the upkeep of the royals? Or is it just us who are lumbered with it?


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> They didn't write on celebitchy. The article was quoting them.



Oh well that makes it reliable then LOL [emoji23][emoji23]


----------



## Just Askin

Esizzle said:


> They didn't write on celebitchy. The article was quoting them.


Wow did it actually give a proper reference for the quote this time? Who was it that said that?


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> She will be Princess Henry of Wales just like Kate is Princess William of Wales. Megan will also be a duchess just like Kate is a duchess. Princess and duchess yay can't wait!
> 
> LOL Pearly I thought you didn't think much of Oscars. Why are they suddenly such an important career landmark?



Oscar winners/nominees can be a useful tool  to separate the wheat from the chaff. 

Being “Princess Henry of Wales” DOES NOT make her a princess.... Only females born into the royal family can be princesses.... sigh... why won’t you accept that? However Catherine will be a Queen if and when William becomes king.... unless we’ve got rid of them all by then, loool


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I think it will be fun to see her take on this role. She's a confident woman who loves philanthropy. I have high hopes for the kind of work she'll do to better the world.

As for those criticizing her career…I think where she is is wonderful. I work in a creative industry (not acting) and I deeply admire my peers/co-workers who manage to find work doing what they love. We can't all be Oscar winners, but I don't believe that de-values the small work of everyone else. I think it's admirable to find your passion and to chip away at it and constantly better yourself doing it. Most A-listers were in Meghan's place once because it takes a lot of hard work and thick skin and dedication to your craft. Besides, what I'm learning from the Harvey Weinsteun explosion is that it's probably a good thing (for her own sake…) that she never made it that far up the acting career ladder.

Anyway, I think it's fun to discuss public figures (as long as comments don't take an…unpleasant…undertone) and this is a gossip thread!!


----------



## pearlyqueen

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Lainey gossip is Mehgan’s friend, she’s been leaking stories to her since this show began, you’re about to live through another soap opera. they’ll make you Brits as proud as Andrew and Fergie did.



Spare me the sorry details .... the embarrassment of all this silliness...


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Spare me the sorry details .... the embarrassment of all this silliness...


I’m so sorry, my dear.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pearlyqueen

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I think it will be fun to see her take on this role. She's a confident woman who loves philanthropy. I have high hopes for the kind of work she'll do to better the world.
> 
> As for those criticizing her career…I think where she is is wonderful. I work in a creative industry (not acting) and I deeply admire my peers/co-workers who manage to find work doing what they love. We can't all be Oscar winners, but I don't believe that de-values the small work of everyone else. I think it's admirable to find your passion and to chip away at it and constantly better yourself doing it. Most A-listers were in Meghan's place once because it takes a lot of hard work and thick skin and dedication to your craft. Besides, what I'm learning from the Harvey Weinsteun explosion is that it's probably a good thing (for her own sake…) that she never made it that far up the acting career ladder.
> 
> Anyway, I think it's fun to discuss public figures (as long as comments don't take an…unpleasant…undertone) and this is a gossip thread!!



True - but that doesn’t mean that those who are A listers were helped by Weinstein either. The disgusting man abused a lot of women but I thoroughly dislike the notion promoted by some people (not you) that those who found success at the top level have him to thank for it. 

I make no apology for my distaste for royalty and believe British people are more than entitled to vent on it. Tbh I think Meghan will get bored with royal life after a while - the circles they move in are full of obsequious snobs - don’t envy her having to put up with them!


----------



## horse17

DC-Cutie said:


> I would love to be able to type exactly why she's being written off after one interview...


what do you mean?


----------



## terebina786

I mean does it really matter that she isn't going to be formally styled as "Princess Meghan"??  Diana wasn't formally styled as "Princess Diana" by the royal family but the media and everybody else didn't seem to care.

I'm here for someone that's not a boring log to finally join the royal family lol.  Yes, Kate is boring to me.  Actually so is Will haha.


----------



## DC-Cutie

horse17 said:


> what do you mean?


I'll just leave my comment as is


----------



## Gal4Dior

Grande Latte said:


> I watched the VF interview last night. I have to give credit for Meghan's poise and her eloquence. She's obviously a very smart woman. But in my gut, I just don't think she's the right woman for Harry.
> 
> Yes. Harry is SMITTEN with her (it's obvious in his body language), but marriage is not a sprint, it's a race. I'm very iffy on these two even though the majority of the comments here really root for her. I don't dislike her. I just don't think she's suited for the royal life. And as the days progress, there will be more and more dirt on her coming out and it won't be a pretty sight. She can go and marry a billionaire if she lands one, but a member of the royal family? I'm not so sure.
> 
> Stories about her cheating on her ex husband. Stories on her living with someone when she met Harry. Come on. This doesn't sound very good.



I’m in the same boat. She’s lovely and I appreciate that she’s educated and stylish, but at the same time I see them together and it looks like they’re still in the honeymoon stage after 16 months of dating. 

Marriage is the real deal, and you want to see the person (warts and all) prior to taking the plunge. He appears to be completely infatuated with her and I just have a feeling that this newness will wear off, her independence will wear thin on the family, and her fire will eventually be subdued due to “training” or she will just divorce with a good chunk of change and the fame that comes with marrying a royal. 

William and Kate dated for what, two years, prior to getting engaged and even broke up for a short time in between? I’m not saying they are perfect by any means, but Kate (although who some might say is boring) seems in it for the long haul. Her wardrobe and mannerisms have been transformed since they got engaged. She’s become a royal robot.

For me, the jury is still out on Meghan. Based on her media and social media presence, she loves the limelight. I’m not saying she’s being calculated in anyway, but in the US she was, at best, a B list or C list actress. I never even heard of her until she started dating Harry. Any publicity she receives in this relationship will only bump up her future stock - no matter what happens - so what does she have to lose? 

For the sake of Harry’s happiness, I hope this works out for him. However, we’ll see about the long term success of this union. The statistics for a second marriage are not kind.


----------



## Esizzle

LVSistinaMM said:


> I’m in the same boat. She’s lovely and I appreciate that she’s educated and stylish, but at the same time I see them together and it looks like they’re still in the honeymoon stage after 16 months of dating.
> 
> Marriage is the real deal, and you want to see the person (warts and all) prior to taking the plunge. He appears to be completely infatuated with her and I just have a feeling that this newness will wear off, her independence will wear thin on the family, and her fire will eventually be subdued due to “training” or she will just divorce with a good chunk of change and the fame that comes with marrying a royal.
> 
> William and Kate dated for what, two years, prior to getting engaged and even broke up for a short time in between? I’m not saying they are perfect by any means, but Kate (although who some might say is boring) seems in it for the long haul. Her wardrobe and mannerisms have been transformed since they got engaged. She’s become a royal robot.
> 
> For me, the jury is still out on Meghan. Based on her media and social media presence, she loves the limelight. I’m not saying she’s being calculated in anyway, but in the US she was, at best, a B list or C list actress. I never even heard of her until she started dating Harry. Any publicity she receives in this relationship will only bump up her future stock - no matter what happens - so what does she have to lose?
> 
> For the sake of Harry’s happiness, I hope this works out for him. However, we’ll see about the long term success of this union. The statistics for a second marriage are not kind.


Will and Kate were together for 9 years before they got married. I think they broke up a couple times in those 9 years. They started dating in college


----------



## DC-Cutie

talking divorce and settlement, when they haven't even married. 

I hope for the sake of BOTH of their happiness it works out.


----------



## horse17

LVSistinaMM said:


> I’m in the same boat. She’s lovely and I appreciate that she’s educated and stylish, but at the same time I see them together and it looks like they’re still in the honeymoon stage after 16 months of dating.
> 
> Marriage is the real deal, and you want to see the person (warts and all) prior to taking the plunge. He appears to be completely infatuated with her and I just have a feeling that this newness will wear off, her independence will wear thin on the family, and her fire will eventually be subdued due to “training” or she will just divorce with a good chunk of change and the fame that comes with marrying a royal.
> 
> William and Kate dated for what, two years, prior to getting engaged and even broke up for a short time in between? I’m not saying they are perfect by any means, but Kate (although who some might say is boring) seems in it for the long haul. Her wardrobe and mannerisms have been transformed since they got engaged. She’s become a royal robot.
> 
> For me, the jury is still out on Meghan. Based on her media and social media presence, she loves the limelight. I’m not saying she’s being calculated in anyway, but in the US she was, at best, a B list or C list actress. I never even heard of her until she started dating Harry. Any publicity she receives in this relationship will only bump up her future stock - no matter what happens - so what does she have to lose?
> 
> For the sake of Harry’s happiness, I hope this works out for him. However, we’ll see about the long term success of this union. The statistics for a second marriage are not kind.


Nah...I have to disagree Megan's been around the block she knows exactly what she's getting into.... I think she will relish this..... is she independent ?...yes... but I think she will keep it in check for the sake of keeping her place and everything that comes with it...


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> Oscar winners/nominees can be a useful tool  to separate the wheat from the chaff.
> 
> Being “Princess Henry of Wales” DOES NOT make her a princess.... Only females born into the royal family can be princesses.... sigh... why won’t you accept that? However Catherine will be a Queen if and when William becomes king.... unless we’ve got rid of them all by then, loool


If we are getting technical then Kate will be the queen consort not the queen right? Prince Phillips isn’t the king. 

Anyways this is getting boring. I just can’t wait for Princess Megs wedding. I’m sure she will wear a stunning gown and look beautiful for her fairy tale wedding.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Esizzle said:


> Will and Kate were together for 9 years before they got married. I think they broke up a couple times in those 9 years. They started dating in college



Thanks for the clarification! With 9 years you would definitely get to know each other well enough before taking vows for life!


----------



## Gal4Dior

horse17 said:


> Nah...I have to disagree Megan's been around the block she knows exactly what she's getting into.... I think she will relish this..... is she independent ?...yes... but I think she will keep it in check for the sake of keeping her place and everything that comes with it...



I feel like the British monarchy can be a bit more oppressive compared to the controlled public persona of an actor or an actress.


----------



## buffym

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Lainey gossip is Mehgan’s friend, she’s been leaking stories to her since this show began, you’re about to live through another soap opera. they’ll make you Brits as proud as Andrew and Fergie did.



Their is one picture of Lainey with Meghan and from that Meghan has been included as friends with Lainey? There is no proof only gossip and it a bit early to believe they are the next Andrew and Fergie. 

Similarities so far would say no. Prince Harry's charities IG and Sentable for example. Meghan's ability to support herself and college degree make her also different than Fergie.


----------



## terebina786

Um I married my husband after 9 months of dating and we're approaching our 2nd anniversary with no issues.  I liken Meghan's situation to be like marrying into a family vastly different than one's own - which is what I did.  Also, how come I don't read any comparisons to Grace Kelly, who also married into a royal family?  She fared pretty well.


----------



## Longchamp

Meghan seems like the real deal to me. In love, nervous about the future, but looking forward to the changes.
It doesn't appear that she had a stylist assist with her clothing/presentation for the announcement and interview. Very unpolished. It came off genuine and in love to me.  
I bet this will change quickly and she will embrace the role; and hope she is happy with her Prince Charming.

Kate on the other hand is a shady character if you believe just HALF the stories how she and her Mum worked to snag William.  I think everything about Kate is an act or academy performance.


----------



## terebina786

Longchamp said:


> Meghan seems like the real deal to me. In love, nervous about the future, but looking forward to the changes.
> It doesn't appear that she had a stylist assist with her clothing/presentation for the announcement and interview. Very unpolished. It came off genuine and in love to me.
> I bet this will change quickly and she will embrace the role; and hope she is happy with her Prince Charming.
> 
> *Kate on the other hand is a shady character if you believe just HALF the stories how she and her Mum worked to snag William.  I think everything about Kate is an act or academy performance*.



I've always felt that way about Kate too.  Meghan doesn't strike as a socialite-type who set her sights on my marrying into money or a royal family.  She had her life, her job, her lifestyle blog and she seemed happy with it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pagan

terebina786 said:


> Also, how come I don't read any comparisons to Grace Kelly, who also married into a royal family?  She fared pretty well.



I'm guessing many of us are too young to remember their marriage. My mother was still a child, and I'm not exactly in the first flush of youth. 

There was lots of chat about 'Waity Katie' and her unsuitability to be a royal bride as well, since she's also a 'commoner'. It's died down over time.


----------



## kemilia

Longchamp said:


> Meghan seems like the real deal to me. In love, nervous about the future, but looking forward to the changes.
> It doesn't appear that she had a stylist assist with her clothing/presentation for the announcement and interview. Very unpolished. It came off genuine and in love to me.
> I bet this will change quickly and she will embrace the role; and hope she is happy with her Prince Charming.
> 
> Kate on the other hand is a shady character if you believe just HALF the stories how she and her Mum worked to snag William.  I think everything about Kate is an act or academy performance.


I think I remember reading that Kate's mom made sure she was in the same college as William. And it worked.


----------



## kkfiregirl

omg I stepped away for a few moments and this thread has become insane. it’s like all the haters decided to show up today!

people are taking this way too personally, as if harry would have chosen them instead of Meghan ... lol. why did he choose HER?! It should be ME or someone who looks like ME!!


----------



## DC-Cutie

kkfiregirl said:


> omg I stepped away for a few moments and this thread has become insane. it’s like all the haters decided to show up today!
> 
> people are taking this way too personally, as if harry would have chosen them instead of Meghan ... lol. why did he choose HER?! It should be ME or someone who looks like ME!!


you said it best!


----------



## Esizzle

kkfiregirl said:


> omg I stepped away for a few moments and this thread has become insane. it’s like all the haters decided to show up today!
> 
> people are taking this way too personally, as if harry would have chosen them instead of Meghan ... lol. why did he choose HER?! It should be ME or someone who looks like ME!!


I mean I wouldn’t mind if Harry picked me.  But he made the perfect choice with Meghan.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

That fool? It’s NOT that serious.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> If we are getting technical then Kate will be the queen consort not the queen right? Prince Phillips isn’t the king.
> 
> Anyways this is getting boring. I just can’t wait for Princess Megs wedding. I’m sure she will wear a stunning gown and look beautiful for her fairy tale wedding.



She will be Queen Catherine, Queen consort. Female consorts have the title of “Queen” so she will be called Queen Catherine. Male consorts don’t get the title of king. 

Call her what you like, she still won’t be a princess, lol.


----------



## terebina786

kkfiregirl said:


> omg I stepped away for a few moments and this thread has become insane. it’s like all the haters decided to show up today!
> 
> *people are taking this way too personally, as if harry would have chosen them instead of Meghan ... lol. why did he choose HER?! It should be ME or someone who looks like ME!!*


Well I mean, yeah he should've chosen me  but whatevs.


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> Their is one picture of Lainey with Meghan and from that Meghan has been included as friends with Lainey? There is no proof only gossip and it a bit early to believe they are the next Andrew and Fergie.
> 
> Similarities so far would say no. Prince Harry's charities IG and Sentable for example. Meghan's ability to support herself and college degree make her also different than Fergie.



Yay! So she will fund herself then? British tax payers won’t have to keep her? Pigs might fly...


----------



## Flatsy

LVSistinaMM said:


> *William and Kate dated for what, two years, prior to getting engaged and even broke up for a short time in between? I’m not saying they are perfect by any means, but Kate (although who some might say is boring) seems in it for the long haul. *Her wardrobe and mannerisms have been transformed since they got engaged. She’s become a royal robot.
> ....
> For the sake of Harry’s happiness, I hope this works out for him. *However, we’ll see about the long term success of this union. The statistics for a second marriage are not kind*.


There is an extremely long list of socio-economic factors that influence divorce statistics and the overall "second marriage" failure rate is overstated.   

Harry and Megan have some pluses and minuses going for them.  On the plus side - they are both over 25, college educated, have a household income over $125,000, no religious conflict (as Meghan will be converting to COE), and neither of them are bringing children into the marriage.  Those stack the odds very heavily in their favor.  

Additionally, a total courtship length of about 25 months (two years) prior to marriage has been shown to be ideal in at least one study (Penn State University's 2006 study.) It's enough time for a couple to get to know each other while they steadily progress toward marriage.  Couples like Will and Kate who date for an extended period of time without a commitment (about 10 years in their case) and who break up during their courtship have two big strikes against them statistics-wise.

Emory University's study says that a 3 year courtship is a little better, but 2 years is not bad either: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/10/the-divorce-proof-marriage/381401/ 

Some other predictors that relate to Harry and Meghan: big wedding with lots of people (good), expensive wedding (bad), expensive engagement ring (bad).  The fact that they will go on a honeymoon makes them 41% less likely to divorce.  

It's a complicated puzzle, but I think Harry and Meghan have excellent chances.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Yay! So she will fund herself then? British tax payers won’t have to keep her? Pigs might fly...


The IRS may want a cut of your money too. I’m so sorry. 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-british-royal-family/?utm_term=.74359edcc08d


----------



## terebina786

pearlyqueen said:


> Yay! So she will fund herself then? British tax payers won’t have to keep her? Pigs might fly...



Ok... but tax payers are funding the ENTIRE royal family, not just her.  Like they're not going anywhere.


----------



## buffym

pearlyqueen said:


> Yay! So she will fund herself then? British tax payers won’t have to keep her? Pigs might fly...



Well if you have a problem with monarchy you may want to start at the top for the complaint. Instead complaining about the fifth in line to the throne- the cheapest out of the senior royals. I don't think taking Harry of the taxpayer tally is going to make a stellar monetary advancement- since again he is lower on the totem pole.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> There is an extremely long list of socio-economic factors that influence divorce statistics and the overall "second marriage" failure rate is overstated.
> 
> Harry and Megan have some pluses and minuses going for them.  On the plus side - they are both over 25, college educated, have a household income over $125,000, no religious conflict (as Meghan will be converting to COE), and neither of them are bringing children into the marriage.  Those stack the odds very heavily in their favor.
> 
> Additionally, a total courtship length of about 25 months (two years) prior to marriage has been shown to be ideal in at least one study (Penn State University's 2006 study.) It's enough time for a couple to get to know each other while they steadily progress toward marriage.  Couples like Will and Kate who date for an extended period of time without a commitment (about 10 years in their case) and who break up during their courtship have two big strikes against them statistics-wise.
> 
> Emory University's study says that a 3 year courtship is a little better, but 2 years is not bad either: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/10/the-divorce-proof-marriage/381401/
> 
> Some other predictors that relate to Harry and Meghan: big wedding with lots of people (good), expensive wedding (bad), expensive engagement ring (bad).  The fact that they will go on a honeymoon makes them 41% less likely to divorce.
> 
> It's a complicated puzzle, but I think Harry and Meghan have excellent chances.



Great stats. Thanks for providing. 

I just want to state again that Meghan is perfectly lovely and I’m glad she’s educated. However, I’m not sold on the relationship. Harry has proven to be impulsive. 

Just stating my observations and did not even say anything favorable about Kate except that woman has basically conformed to the British monarchy quickly and I can’t even distinguish her apart from the royal family anymore. However, I think it wasn’t as much of a stretch for her since she seemed to surround herself with many of the upper crust in college. 

Although her mother may have pushed her to attend the same college as the prince, I’m sure many other mothers did so as well and there is absolutely no guarantee there would even be interest in her by him. I’m sure many girls threw themselves at William in college. So to the degree of calculation that her mother had I can’t honestly say she was possibly any different from others. If there were other things they did to set her up for role William’s wife I wouldn’t be surprised.

However, it seems that many who have married into the family have shown that it’s not the fairytale we want to make it out to be.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

I think you’ll find pearlyqueen doesn’t believe anyone should have to pay for any of them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

Longchamp said:


> Meghan seems like the real deal to me. In love, nervous about the future, but looking forward to the changes.
> It doesn't appear that she had a stylist assist with her clothing/presentation for the announcement and interview. Very unpolished. It came off genuine and in love to me.
> I bet this will change quickly and she will embrace the role; and hope she is happy with her Prince Charming.
> 
> Kate on the other hand is a shady character if you believe just HALF the stories how she and her Mum worked to snag William.  I think everything about Kate is an act or academy performance.



Totally agree. I don’t find anything appealing or redeeming about Kate, from her groomed position to snag a prince to her waiting around pathetically for a proposal to her lack of drive and work ethic. 

Meghan is going to win the hearts of many people.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> The IRS may want a cut of your money too. I’m so sorry.
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-british-royal-family/?utm_term=.74359edcc08d



Wtf! Actually this could be a blessing in disguise if it lifts the lid on just how fabulously wealthy this lot really are....could be very embarrassing for them with all sorts of consequences ....


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Wtf! Actually this could be a blessing in disguise if it lifts the lid on just how fabulously wealthy this lot really are....could be very embarrassing for them with all sorts of consequences ....


Bring it on!!!


----------



## Esizzle

terebina786 said:


> Ok... but tax payers are funding the ENTIRE royal family, not just her.  Like they're not going anywhere.


The problem seems to be specifically with Meghan. Or Princess Meg as I’m going to start calling her now lol. I’m sure she will be a great and vibrant addition to the royal family.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Bring it on!!!



The French had the right idea back in the 1790s! You guys got shot of them too just before that - our turn next!


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> The problem seems to be specifically with Meghan. Or Princess Meg as I’m going to start calling her now lol. I’m sure she will be a great and vibrant addition to the royal family.



There is no need to put words in my mouth - I’ve made it abundantly clear I RESENT PAYING FOR ALL OF THEM. And I reject the institution of monarchy which is undemocratic and anachronistic as well as perpetuating the class divide. 

With any luck your “princess meg” will take them all back to Hollywood with her and they can open a theme park and really live up to being a tourist attraction [emoji23][emoji23]


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> The French had the right idea back in the 1790s! You guys got shot of them too just before that - our turn next!


I think you might have to wait until the queen is gone. She’s made a lot of mistakes, but she has been exemplary, at least on the surface.


----------



## Jayne1

Esizzle said:


> Will and Kate were together for 9 years before they got married. I think they broke up a couple times in those 9 years. They started dating in college


They lived together, too.


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> There is no need to put words in my mouth - I’ve made it abundantly clear I RESENT PAYING FOR ALL OF THEM. And I reject the institution of monarchy which is undemocratic and anachronistic as well as perpetuating the class divide.
> 
> With any luck your “princess meg” will take them all back to Hollywood with her and they can open a theme park and really live up to being a tourist attraction [emoji23][emoji23]


Nope Princess Meg and all the other royals are going to stay right where they are. If someone doesn’t like it they can move to a different country.


----------



## Longchamp

I wonder how much money in tourism the monarchy brings to the UK.  I'm not supporting or defending them.
Think of all the meals and hotel rooms and trinkets sold with engagements, marriage, death, divorce, pregnancy, childbirth etc.
and airline tickets for all the foreigners to "catch a glimpse."


----------



## Jayne1

pearlyqueen said:


> I’m curious to know if Canadians (and citizens of other countries where the queen is head of state) have to pay towards the upkeep of the royals? Or is it just us who are lumbered with it?


Apparently we do, but no one talks about it, so few know about it. 

And of course, we  pay for the cost of their visits, which amounts to a lot, security wise.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Longchamp said:


> I wonder how much money in tourism the monarchy brings to the UK.  I'm not supporting or defending them.
> Think of all the meals and hotel rooms and trinkets sold with engagements, marriage, death, divorce, pregnancy, childbirth etc.
> and airline tickets for all the foreigners to "catch a glimpse."


I often hear this argument, but I don’t think the monarchy is the main reason for tourism to be honest. If that were the case, France and Italy would not be two of the most visited countries in the world. Both had monarchies and both did away with them. Versailles is filled with tourists year after year!


----------



## pearlyqueen

LVSistinaMM said:


> True. Every time 45 takes another golf trip I think about the tax dollars and it pisses me off. Ah well.



Who or what is 45? Is it a nickname for *****?


----------



## Gal4Dior

pearlyqueen said:


> That’s all a rouse to try to justify their existence. I can’t believe many foreigners visit here with much expectation of seeing any of them; a study around the time of William’s wedding exposed the flaws in that argument and found there was no evidence to support it. As for the souvenir trinkets etc - the proceeds don’t go to us taxpayers.
> 
> The establishment tries to hoodwink us into believing royalty enhances our economy, mainly by using the tourist attraction spin. But the truth is the majority of tourists come to see assets that belong to the nation - places that had historical royal significance but which would still belong to the nation if the monarchy was abolished.



Personally my visit to Britain had nothing to do with spotting British royalty or buying any trinkets and everything to do with visiting museums, landmarks, and enjoying the parks and gardens. To visit for that sole reason would extremely limiting what Britain has to offer.


----------



## Gal4Dior

pearlyqueen said:


> Who or what is 45? Is it a nickname for *****?



Yes, that is a nickname for *****.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pearlyqueen

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I think you might have to wait until the queen is gone. She’s made a lot of mistakes, but she has been exemplary, at least on the surface.



Yeah I’m banking on the goodwill she enjoys not passing down to Charles - he’s not exactly popular or respected here....lol


----------



## pearlyqueen

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yes, that is a nickname for *****.



Haha - what does it mean?

At least you don’t have to pay for the upkeep of his extended family for perpetuity though!


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Who or what is 45? Is it a nickname for *****?


He’s the 45 president of the United States. Yes, it’s a nickname and all living presidents are often called by their numbers.


----------



## pearlyqueen

LVSistinaMM said:


> Personally my visit to Britain had nothing to do with spotting British royalty or buying any trinkets and everything to do with visiting museums, landmarks, and enjoying the parks and gardens. To visit for that sole reason would extremely limiting what Britain has to offer.



And I’m sure that’s exactly the same for 99.9% of tourists!


----------



## pearlyqueen

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> He’s the 45 president of the United States. Yes, it’s a nickname and all living presidents are often called by their numbers.



Lol, maybe we should call the queen “66” then?


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> Haha - what does it mean?
> 
> At least you don’t have to pay for the upkeep of his extended family for perpetuity though!


He is the 45th president. And he and his administration is eating up our taxes. People will be unhappy no matter where they are.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> And I’m sure that’s exactly the same for 99.9% of tourists!


None of these people are impressive. When I go to London I want enjoy the West End first and foremost, then the parks, museums, the people.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Lol, maybe we should call the queen “66” then?


You have to be elected by the people, so no, you’re stuck with HM.


----------



## Esizzle

Tax talk is boring and hopefully royalty won’t be abolished until years after George is the king.

Anyways. Back to Meghan and Harry. Apparently Meg was only able to take one of her fur babies, Guy to London. Bogart, the older baby is too old to fly and has to stay back in America with friends and family . Both of the dogs are rescues. I hope Harry and Meg adopt more dogs after they get married.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Yeah I’m banking on the goodwill she enjoys not passing down to Charles - he’s not exactly popular or respected here....lol


He’s never going to see the throne at the rate they are going. The queen doesn’t care though, she’s had a long run for the history books.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> He’s never going to see the throne at the rate they are going. The queen doesn’t care though, she’s had a long run for the history books.



Hope you’re right! Charles is  looking pretty rough - in fact he looks older than his mother [emoji23][emoji23]


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Hope you’re right! Charles is  looking pretty rough - in fact he looks older than his mother [emoji23][emoji23]


 All that waiting your turn will do that to you.


----------



## White Orchid

Esizzle said:


> Tax talk is boring and hopefully royalty won’t be abolished until years after George is the king.
> 
> Anyways. Back to Meghan and Harry. Apparently Meg was only able to take one of her fur babies, Guy to London. Bogart, the older baby is too old to fly and has to stay back in America with friends and family . Both of the dogs are rescues. I hope Harry and Meg adopt more dogs after they get married.


This actually left me really sad amongst all the happiness.  Personally, I couldn’t do it.  Heck, I couldn’t even leave behind my cats let alone a dog (who was like my own child).

I’d be like sorry Harry, you’ll have to move here - God knows our weather is better!


----------



## zen1965

terebina786 said:


> Um I married my husband after 9 months of dating and we're approaching our 2nd anniversary with no issues. I liken Meghan's situation to be like marrying into a family vastly different than one's own - which is what I did. Also, how come I don't read any comparisons to Grace Kelly, who also married into a royal family? She fared pretty well.



It is an open secret that Grace Kelly was wildly unhappy in Monaco.


----------



## Esizzle

White Orchid said:


> This actually left me really sad amongst all the happiness.  Personally, I couldn’t do it.  Heck, I couldn’t even leave behind my cats let alone a dog (who was like my own child).
> 
> I’d be like sorry Harry, you’ll have to move here - God knows our weather is better!


I know!!! Must be so hard for Meghan. I couldn’t even imagine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

pearlyqueen said:


> Haha - what does it mean?
> 
> At least you don’t have to pay for the upkeep of his extended family for perpetuity though!


Well actually, the taxpayers will be paying for ***** for the rest of this life.  In addition to the pension, there's Secret Service protection for the rest of his life.


----------



## Eva1991

Regarding their interview and what some tpfers said that Meghan was trying to make it all about her by interrupting Harry, I think it _was _about her, as it should be actually. The British public know who Harry is; it's Meghan who has to be introduced. Her interrupting him was off-putting sometimes, I have to admit, but it was probably due to nervousness on her behalf. I didn't think she was acting at all. I got the vibe that they're very, very much in love. They also look like a great match and fit for each other, IMO.

And I don't care whether or not she'll formally become a Princess. As long as she's marrying a Prince, she's a Princess in my book! LOL


----------



## Gal4Dior

zen1965 said:


> It is an open secret that Grace Kelly was wildly unhappy in Monaco.



Yes, I have heard that she did regret giving up her acting career. Although, Grace Kelly was a huge movie star at that time so I could see how it must be difficult to give that up.


----------



## Pagan

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yes, I have heard that she did regret giving up her acting career. Although, Grace Kelly was a huge movie star at that time so I could see how it must be difficult to give that up.


I can't imagine giving up even a normal, everyday life to live in a fishbowl like that. There's no amount of money that would make that kind of a life worth it to me. I'd hate it.


----------



## Just Askin

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yes, that is a nickname for *****.


Is it the shade of Orange he uses?
Never mind just realised he's 45th President.


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry seems to enjoy the jet set lifestyle over the British fishbowl life.
I wonder if he and Meghan can continue on with their global charity work and avoid some of the society royal stuff.

Also, I was also hoping for a March wedding.
Sooner rather than later!


----------



## knasarae

I friend of mine posted some screenshots from citizen's response to Harry's engagement.  I won't repost, it was very insulting.    I'm a fan of love... if you can find it, I'm happy for you.


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> Well actually, the taxpayers will be paying for ***** for the rest of this life.  In addition to the pension, there's Secret Service protection for the rest of his life.



At least he’s not a young man though so the payments won’t go on for ever.

But with the royals, it’s the sheer number of them... 

Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, George, Charlotte, Baby 3, Harry, Anne, Timothy, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Sophie, Louise, James 

19 so far... all funded by the tax payer living in palaces and mansions...and then there are the “minor” royals and nobility...


----------



## pearlyqueen

White Orchid said:


> This actually left me really sad amongst all the happiness.  Personally, I couldn’t do it.  Heck, I couldn’t even leave behind my cats let alone a dog (who was like my own child).
> 
> I’d be like sorry Harry, you’ll have to move here - God knows our weather is better!



Great suggestion!


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> Great suggestion!


You have had it...


----------



## buffym

pearlyqueen said:


> At least he’s not a young man though so the payments won’t go on for ever.
> 
> But with the royals, it’s the sheer number of them...
> 
> Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, George, Charlotte, Baby 3, Harry, Anne, Timothy, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Sophie, Louise, James
> 
> 19 so far... all funded by the tax payer living in palaces and mansions...and then there are the “minor” royals and nobility...



I think that is a little broad. You pay for senior royals The Queen and Charles line. Anne, Andrew, and Edward and family get money from The Queen. She decides the salary - if you have a problem with it cut her salary. Taxpayers do not directly fund the lesser royal life style. Louise and James are children- their money comes from their parents which comes from the Queen.

This is what I have a problem with you are in a senior royal but lesser royal thread complaining about the royal family. Why not take it to William's thread - the one who will be King instead of his brother's.

It seems like instead of blaming the system you are blaming one person. I haven't seen any statements about this in William's and Kate's thread.


----------



## Esizzle

buffym said:


> I think that is a little broad. You pay for senior royals The Queen and Charles line. Anne, Andrew, and Edward and family get money from The Queen. She decides the salary - if you have a problem with it cut her salary. Taxpayers do not directly fund the lesser royal life style. Louise and James are children- their money comes from their parents which comes from the Queen.
> 
> This is what I have a problem with you are in a senior royal but lesser royal thread complaining about the royal family. Why not take it to William's thread - the one who will be King instead of his brother's.
> 
> It seems like instead of blaming the system you are blaming one person. I haven't seen any statements about this in William's and Kate's thread.


The statements only started right after Harry got engaged to a “C list actress”. Very interesting. Oh well. Harry works more and does good charity so he deserves the salary and apartments he has gotten. Plus he served in the military.


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> I think that is a little broad. You pay for senior royals The Queen and Charles line. Anne, Andrew, and Edward and family get money from The Queen. She decides the salary - if you have a problem with it cut her salary. Taxpayers do not directly fund the lesser royal life style. Louise and James are children- their money comes from their parents which comes from the Queen.
> 
> This is what I have a problem with you are in a senior royal but lesser royal thread complaining about the royal family. Why not take it to William's thread - the one who will be King instead of his brother's.
> 
> It seems like instead of blaming the system you are blaming one person. I haven't seen any statements about this in William's and Kate's thread.



Where do you think the Queen gets her money from? Trust me, taxpayers fund all of them - they have no proper jobs.
What difference does it make if it’s in a William or Harry thread? Same issues.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> The statements only started right after Harry got engaged to a “C list actress”. Very interesting. Oh well. Harry works more and does good charity so he deserves the salary and apartments he has gotten. Plus he served in the military.



Why should British tax payers fund millionaire charity workers? Other millionaires who do charity work keep themselves, as do ex military personnel.


----------



## Luvbolide

Longchamp said:


> OH CHIT. Much more important royalty news. King James for the first time in his 15 years in the league was just ejected from a game.  [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 
> Hahahahahaha - you crack me up with that King stuff...hey, look, the crown is slipping!!  And here comes Steph to grab it!!  Speaking of heir apparent....LOL!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

pearlyqueen said:


> At least he’s not a young man though so the payments won’t go on for ever.
> 
> But with the royals, it’s the sheer number of them...
> 
> Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, George, Charlotte, Baby 3, Harry, Anne, Timothy, Andrew, Beatrice, Eugenie, Edward, Sophie, Louise, James
> 
> 19 so far... all funded by the tax payer living in palaces and mansions...and then there are the “minor” royals and nobility...


If the rumours are correct, Harry will be given the Duchy of Sussex, which should provide enough income so he is not on the public dole.

Prince Charles has a similar arrangement, as does the Queen, both of whom actually pay taxes on their income.

Yes, the Royal family receives a sum from the government, which they use to do the upkeep on the various mansions, castles etc. that they use.

But really, that's no different than the vast sums of money every ********ic government pays out to senators, congress people, members of parliament etc.


----------



## Just Askin

PatsyCline said:


> If the rumours are correct, Harry will be given the Duchy of Sussex, which should provide enough income so he is not on the public dole.
> 
> Prince Charles has a similar arrangement, as does the Queen, both of whom actually pay taxes on their income.
> 
> Yes, the Royal family receives a sum from the government, which they use to do the upkeep on the various mansions, castles etc. that they use.
> 
> But really, that's no different than the vast sums of money every ********ic government pays out to senators, congress people, members of parliament etc.


Does that mean we should just stay quiet and accept it. It’s just not right. There are vulnerable people all across Britain that could be helped with the money wasted on the royals. I’d love to see Harry opt out of it all. I have a soft spot for him and I hope on a personal level he has a long and happy marriage....but please don’t expect those of us paying for the royals to be excited about it.


----------



## Jayne1

zen1965 said:


> It is an open secret that Grace Kelly was wildly unhappy in Monaco.


She certainly looked it!


----------



## Jayne1

Pagan said:


> I can't imagine giving up even a normal, everyday life to live in a fishbowl like that. There's no amount of money that would make that kind of a life worth it to me. I'd hate it.


Keep in mind, that fishbowl is only when they venture out to do their few royal duties.  Most of the time, they live quite nicely in private. Will has been called "work shy" and Kate the Duchess of Cambridge has  has her own moniker -- Duchess of Do-Little.


----------



## bisousx

Jayne1 said:


> She certainly looked it!



And do we all remember shortly before Charlene married Albert, the royals took away her passport so she couldn't leave the country? Poor thing also looks miserable.

For all of Monaco's beauty and glamour, makes you wonder what could be so terrible about being a royal.

I hope Meghan receives the love and support from her in laws that she deserves. Kate was groomed to live this life so naturally she fits in nicely...


----------



## Jayne1

bisousx said:


> And do we all remember shortly before Charlene married Albert, the royals took away her passport so she couldn't leave the country? Poor thing also looks miserable.


Agree. Watching her cry at her wedding was heartbreaking.


----------



## Pursejoy9

Jayne1 said:


> Keep in mind, that fishbowl is only when they venture out to do their few royal duties.  Most of the time, they live quite nicely in private. Will has been called "work shy" and Kate the Duchess of Cambridge has  has her own moniker -- Duchess of Do-Little.


to be fair, she is a mother to two young children and deserves time with them if she chooses. Now her total lack of work or a life before marriage is another story.


----------



## Pursejoy9

PatsyCline said:


> If the rumours are correct, Harry will be given the Duchy of Sussex, which should provide enough income so he is not on the public dole.
> 
> Prince Charles has a similar arrangement, as does the Queen, both of whom actually pay taxes on their income.
> 
> Yes, the Royal family receives a sum from the government, which they use to do the upkeep on the various mansions, castles etc. that they use.
> 
> But really, that's no different than the vast sums of money every ********ic government pays out to senators, congress people, members of parliament etc.


I think people’s point is that these are elected officials and royalty is not. However, even with elected officials there should be a cap with expenses and it should not include their family members, period.


----------



## baglover1973

Harry seems sweet and so does she, but who the hell knows how either one of them is behind doors.  I think just like every other celebrity couple people put their own expectations on them and try to almost live through them...its a strange phenomenon,  See this so much in the couple threads...


----------



## buffym

Pursejoy9 said:


> I think people’s point is that these are elected officials and royalty is not. However, even with elected officials there should be a cap with expenses and it should not include their family members, period.



But why only Prince Harry's thread- these same poster have nothing to say about it in Prince William's thread.

It is interesting that the Prince who is going to marry a mixed race woman gets post about the use of the monarch.

However, the brother who is the future king, is married, with three kids, and has two homes including a fifty bedroom mansion- i.e. the one that cost more and will always cost more- no one is saying anything. No complaints about William and Kate's cost in that thread, but Harry is getting married- now it is to expensive to have a monarchy.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> But why only Prince Harry's thread- these same poster have nothing to say about it in Prince William's thread.
> 
> It is interesting that the Prince who is going to marry a mixed race woman gets post about the use of the monarch.
> 
> However, the brother who is the future king, is married, with three kids, and has two homes including a fifty bedroom mansion- i.e. the one that cost more and will always cost more- no one is saying anything. No complaints about William and Kate's cost in that thread, but Harry is getting married- now it is to expensive to have a monarchy.



Not taking any sides here, but I think that this is just discussed right now in this thread because they announced their engagement recently and this thread is more active.

Kate and William’s thread hasn’t had such big news (aside from the baby). I would think the same people who have an issue with this wedding also have major issues with the Queen and extended family, and especially William and Kate and their growing brood.


----------



## Esizzle

buffym said:


> But why only Prince Harry's thread- these same poster have nothing to say about it in Prince William's thread.
> 
> *It is interesting that the Prince who is going to marry a mixed race woman gets post about the use of the monarch.*
> 
> However, the brother who is the future king, is married, with three kids, and has two homes including a fifty bedroom mansion- i.e. the one that cost more and will always cost more- no one is saying anything. No complaints about William and Kate's cost in that thread, but Harry is getting married- now it is to expensive to have a monarchy.


Hit the nail right on the head.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> Not taking any sides here, but I think that this is just discussed right now in this thread because they announced their engagement recently and this thread is more active.
> 
> Kate and William’s thread hasn’t had such big news (aside from the baby). I would think the same people who have an issue with this wedding also have major issues with the Queen and extended family, and especially William and Kate and their growing brood.



I would believe that, except Kate and William are having the third child and you can find crickets. That is my issue- I find it to be bias and the lack of consistency. x

The same way they weren't complaining about George or Charlotte's.

I'm moving on we will not see eye to eye which is okay, everyone is entitled to an opinion.

x The way I came to this conclusion is because there is another thread about royalty William and Kate's, yet it doesn't have the same free the U.K. comments even with the added expense of another baby.


----------



## Looking4Love

Maybe I'm cynical, but they just seem so mismatched to me, an odd couple. I feel like his ex Chelsy Davy is more his type. I hope they don't end up in a Charles-Diana-Camilla situation. I could totally be wrong but anybody else feels this way?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Looking4Love said:


> Maybe I'm cynical, but they just seem so mismatched to me, an odd couple. I feel like his ex Chelsy Davy is more his type. I hope they don't end up in a Charles-Diana-Camilla situation. I could totally be wrong but anybody else feels this way?



I agree about the mismatch, but not in the Camila, Charles, Diana way. I truly believe Harry infatuated with her. He is very different from most he has dated. She was a challenge for him. Let’s see how he will act after he has won her over. 

Life will not be as exciting when you aren’t secretly seeing each other and some of the family and/or the general public is against the relationship. He seems like a very passionate and sensitive young man who wants to save his “princess” from the evil press and break barriers. He seems very similar to Diana and we know how that went. Hope things have changed since.

Personally, I never found either brother attractive and she is far better looking than he is. I can see why he’s totally entranced by her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

Meghan is WILD and beautiful, so yes I can see why Harry would be infatuated with her. She's unlike anyone he's previously dated. 

But it's not the WILD attribute that makes me feel wary (in fact, I think the royals needs to shake things up a bit!!!). It's her previous marriage to the cricket player, and her relationship to both her parents and none-existent friendships in Hollywood that makes me think that she's a very shady character. And I only wish the best for Harry. Not being jealous here. 
Actually his two previous girlfriends were better matches for him, but since no one is opposed to them, it takes the adventure out of the romance. Because deep down we all want what is forbidden. So I guess the more people are opposed to Meghan, the more Harry wants to marry her.


----------



## Looking4Love

I don't know who's infatuated with whom. I saw their engagement announcement and interview on TV, and Meghan was clingy on overdrive! She was clinging/stroking his hand the whole time, staring at him with puppy eyes, like she couldn't walk on her own or he would disappear if she looks away or something. It was very hard to watch a modern American woman acting that way. Dare I say that it looks a lot like Lust to me, or she's putting on a performance. But it was too over the top, especially from someone who's been married before. She should be a little wary, and should know from experience that just because you sign a piece of paper, doesn't mean it will last forever. Boredom will set in. You will see more of each other's flaws. An ex will contact out of the blue. You may grow apart. Cheating happens. How will they deal with these issues?


----------



## Just Askin

buffym said:


> But why only Prince Harry's thread- these same poster have nothing to say about it in Prince William's thread.
> 
> It is interesting that the Prince who is going to marry a mixed race woman gets post about the use of the monarch.
> 
> However, the brother who is the future king, is married, with three kids, and has two homes including a fifty bedroom mansion- i.e. the one that cost more and will always cost more- no one is saying anything. No complaints about William and Kate's cost in that thread, but Harry is getting married- now it is to expensive to have a monarchy.


I think you’ll find she’s actually marrying into the circles that may have an issue with her race. The rest of us are just vexed at the waste of money.
Also this announcement has come at a time when the people of Britain have had enough of austerity . Being forced to watch the education system, health services and general standard of living go into decline whilst the fat cats polish their shoes for this wedding is just a bit of a p-ss take.


----------



## Looking4Love

^^ I know what you mean. But if Meghan is intelligent and empathetic like people claim she is, she would understand that sentiment, especially coming from the US where our leader changes every 4 or 8 years. Can she work and have a normal job while being a royal? Can she and Harry have a simple backyard wedding if they choose to? I mean, there are no rules against these things right?


----------



## Gal4Dior

And I guess the more people are opposed to Meghan, the more Harry wants to marry her.[/QUOTE]

Agree. I think this excessive fawning over each other is him being a giddy school boy completely infatuated by her and she - knowing how to play the part of the happy couple. I don’t see her nervousness as an issue at all. I rather think it’s manufactured based on what I’ve seen from her during speeches she’s done for charities.

Sooner or later, this lust will fade...and Harry, the playboy may not be able to kick off his old ways. She’s way too good for him, even if she is acting through this process, or not.


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> If the rumours are correct, Harry will be given the Duchy of Sussex, which should provide enough income so he is not on the public dole.
> 
> Prince Charles has a similar arrangement, as does the Queen, both of whom actually pay taxes on their income.
> 
> Yes, the Royal family receives a sum from the government, which they use to do the upkeep on the various mansions, castles etc. that they use.
> 
> But really, that's no different than the vast sums of money every ********ic government pays out to senators, congress people, members of parliament etc.



Yes it is different, very different. 

We are keeping a growing number of people with no relevant role to play and who don’t warrant their upkeep. The Queen dodges loads of taxes. The castles, mansions etc cost us a fortune in upkeep, but it’s not like any of us benefit from it - accommodation is only for them - and why do they need so many to live in? As I said in an earlier post, the lands and estates “belonging” to the Queen weren’t fairly bought, most of them were confiscated or stolen by her ancestors. The greed knows few limits - she owns the Duchy of Lancaster which benefits from the assets of anyone in the UK who dies without leaving any beneficiaries... nice little earner... 

We also pay for our ELECTED representatives and that’s fair enough, they actually work on our behalf and we can get rid of them if they fail to.


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> But why only Prince Harry's thread- these same poster have nothing to say about it in Prince William's thread.
> 
> It is interesting that the Prince who is going to marry a mixed race woman gets post about the use of the monarch.
> 
> However, the brother who is the future king, is married, with three kids, and has two homes including a fifty bedroom mansion- i.e. the one that cost more and will always cost more- no one is saying anything. No complaints about William and Kate's cost in that thread, but Harry is getting married- now it is to expensive to have a monarchy.



What are you implying exactly? That myself and others were cock a hoop about royalty before now and are only up in arms now because of a proposed marriage to a mixed race woman? 

I’ve had my opinions all my life and have made them known on other sites over the years. Wasn’t aware that royals had threads on tPF until earlier this week when posts on my dash about Harry were visible. If it makes anyone feel better I will certainly cut and paste them all and stick them on any William threads too.


----------



## pearlyqueen

LVSistinaMM said:


> Not taking any sides here, but I think that this is just discussed right now in this thread because they announced their engagement recently and this thread is more active.
> 
> Kate and William’s thread hasn’t had such big news (aside from the baby). I would think the same people who have an issue with this wedding also have major issues with the Queen and extended family, and especially William and Kate and their growing brood.



You’ve hit the nail on the head. Disappointing there are always some people hinting at ulterior motives and insinuating racism where none exists.


----------



## pearlyqueen

LVSistinaMM said:


> And I guess the more people are opposed to Meghan, the more Harry wants to marry her.



Agree. I think this excessive fawning over each other is him being a giddy school boy completely infatuated by her and she - knowing how to play the part of the happy couple. I don’t see her nervousness as an issue at all. I rather think it’s manufactured based on what I’ve seen from her during speeches she’s done for charities.

Sooner or later, this lust will fade...and Harry, the playboy may not be able to kick off his old ways. She’s way too good for him, even if she is acting through this process, or not.[/QUOTE]

You may well be right here - Harry has a well earned reputation as a playboy prince and let’s not forget he thought it funny to turn up to his brothers 21st birthday party in Nazi uniform....

I’m now reading here of suspicions that Meghan cheated on her ex husband, is something of a social climber and has no significant friendships .... no idea of how much truth there is in any of this but IF there is it doesn’t exactly augur well....


----------



## Singra

I don't know why there's always a hurry on the internet to tear people down before they've even got going. I'm sure they'll do lots of stuff that'll provoke opinion good and bad. Nobody knows what the future holds least of all them but everyone always hopes things will turn out for the best.

Can only wait and see I suppose.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Singra said:


> I don't know why there's always a hurry on the internet to tear people down before they've even got going. I'm sure they'll do lots of stuff that'll provoke opinion good and bad. Nobody knows what the future holds least of all them but everyone always hopes things will turn out for the best.
> 
> Can only wait and see I suppose.



I know ... instead of being happy for them, people are coming up with reasons why the relationship won’t work. 

They should send all of these well-thought-out objections in one compiled email to Harry and Meghan ... I think that would be more effective.


----------



## gelbergirl

On Friday, the engaged couple will travel to Nottingham for their first official engagement.

Kensington Palace said it is important to Prince Harry to show his wife-to-be the "community that has become very special to him".

He first visited  the city in 2013 when he explored issues surrounding youth violence, and has also been back to raise awareness of HIV/Aids.

And back in October 2016, a visit to Nottingham saw Harry open a police station and visit an inner-city youth club.


----------



## horse17

buffym said:


> But why only Prince Harry's thread- these same poster have nothing to say about it in Prince William's thread.
> 
> It is interesting that the Prince who is going to marry a mixed race woman gets post about the use of the monarch.
> 
> However, the brother who is the future king, is married, with three kids, and has two homes including a fifty bedroom mansion- i.e. the one that cost more and will always cost more- no one is saying anything. No complaints about William and Kate's cost in that thread, but Harry is getting married- now it is to expensive to have a monarchy.


Didn’t this issue start because of the cost of the wedding, them announcing they will play for it..ect..?


----------



## horse17

As for her being biracial....who cares?...most everything that’s been said about her is that she is an American actress and divorced...based on her looks, no one would even know she is biracial


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> Fergie pushed herself out of the royal family.  Her behaviour was beyond ridiculous, especially for a Brit knowing exactly how the royals are expected to behave -- meaning in a dignified manner.  She could have been wild, crude and inappropriate in private, but not in front of the paps.  She loved publicity.
> 
> She also loved to spend money she didn't have.
> 
> She was considered a breath of fresh air in the very beginning, but soon carried it so far, no one sympathized or wanted to give her any more chances.


That's exactly the public opinion of Fergie here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Swanky

It never entered my brain to consider her race until I read this thread and also saw a friend post something on FB about horrible things people have said about this.  She's a cute enough girl, hope they're making good decisions and live happily ever after 

We need to stay completely OFF politics please, and also make sure all posts are respectful.
Thanks!


----------



## gazoo

I saw at least one British article referring to her race. I refuse to paste it completely because it's despicable. It's no wonder Harry came out swinging against the British media months ago. Ironically, it's likely that the experience of her being shamed over her race and other things brought them even closer together.

Here's the link if anybody wants to see: https://www.google.com/amp/www.dail...arry-s-girlfriend-actress-Meghan-Markles.html


----------



## mundodabolsa

Grande Latte said:


> Meghan is WILD and beautiful, so yes I can see why Harry would be infatuated with her. She's unlike anyone he's previously dated.
> 
> But it's not the WILD attribute that makes me feel wary (in fact, I think the royals needs to shake things up a bit!!!). It's her previous marriage to the cricket player, and her relationship to both her parents and none-existent friendships in Hollywood that makes me think that she's a very shady character. And I only wish the best for Harry. Not being jealous here.



Honest question, what is wild about her?  I didn't even know she existed before she started dating Harry, it's not like she was a Tara Reid or Lindsay Lohan type actress who was constantly all over the gossip pages.  I think she dresses super well but it's not anything wild and outrageous, she's pretty classic. 

Is it her past that you described?  After seeing her family coming out of the woodwork for fame after the engagement, I think they are the shady ones, not her.  If anything I think it's more respectable that she cut off ties with them if they are like that. Do we know she doesn't have Hollywood friendships or is it just because her life hasn't been previously plastered all over People magazine that you assume that?

Maybe there is a lot to her I don't know? But to me the only "wild" thing I can imagine about her is that she isn't a young, blue-eyed blonde?  If anything, Chelsy was the wild one.   It just seems like the word "wild" here is being used the same way people use "exotic."  Is it something else?


----------



## Jayne1

LVSistinaMM said:


> Not taking any sides here, but I think that this is just discussed right now in this thread because they announced their engagement recently and this thread is more active.
> 
> Kate and William’s thread hasn’t had such big news (aside from the baby). I would think the same people who have an issue with this wedding also have major issues with the Queen and extended family, and especially William and Kate and their growing brood.


Agree.  Didn't even know there was a Will thread.


----------



## horse17

^agree...I never heard of her before, like many others....but from the little Ive seen and read about her,  I would never think “wild”...also, I thought I read that her ex husband was a producer..?

Lindsey Lohan, hilton, Reid..etc etc...they are wild...imo...to me, she seems like a free spirit, loves fashion, and likes to be philanthropic...time will telll


----------



## Jayne1

horse17 said:


> As for her being biracial....who cares?...most everything that’s been said about her is that she is an American actress and divorced...based on her looks, no one would even know she is biracial


I always forget she's biracial. I tend to fixate on her pretty face, choice of clothes and demeanour. She'll be the only one who interests me in the royal family because as I said, Kate, who worked so hard to change her accent with a voice coach and and adopt the traditional RP along with doing all the right things, is a total bore.  But MM is lovely in what looks like a very real way to me.


----------



## terebina786

I watch Suits and I had no idea she was biracial until my husband told me.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Maybe because I'm a black woman, I knew straight away she was black/biracial  *kanye shrug*


----------



## buffym

Here is a picture from her high school year. She looks the same except now she is skinner. When Harry and her announced their engagement - I was surprised by their facial symmetry.


----------



## rcy

i admit i haven't read the entire thread, and i may be in the minority here, but i thought they were cute together. i don't think she was over the top or acting - quite on the contrary her mannerisms remind me of a dear friend of mine, who tends to be quite animated, can bring humor and goofiness to an otherwise serious situation, and is quite frankly quite a joy and one of my favorite people in the world to be around. i wish them all the joy


----------



## kkfiregirl

DC-Cutie said:


> Maybe because I'm a black woman, I knew straight away she was black/biracial  *kanye shrug*



when she wears her hair curly, she looks more like a black woman. when her hair is straightened, she looks a bit more ‘racially ambiguous.’


----------



## Tivo

DC-Cutie said:


> Maybe because I'm a black woman, I knew straight away she was black/biracial  *kanye shrug*


It’s quite obvious.


----------



## Singra

rcy said:


> i admit i haven't read the entire thread, and i may be in the minority here, but i thought they were cute together. i don't think she was over the top or acting - quite on the contrary her mannerisms remind me of a dear friend of mine, who tends to be quite animated, can bring humor and goofiness to an otherwise serious situation, and is quite frankly quite a joy and one of my favorite people in the world to be around. i wish them all the joy


I haven't kept a proper count, it may be fifty-fifty at this point but the first wave of posts were in support. You know how these things go, it ping pongs back and forth, one thing feeds on the other. 

I think she's great, very vivacious. I haven't really paid much attention to the details, I can see how some people might be put off by certain things but this is the introduction there's bound to be some weirdness before they find their proper footing and as time goes by things will change and shift.

Can't say I'm much of a royalist... if every royal person on the planet mysteriously disappeared from the planet over night I would barely notice... but I really like people's enthusiasm for these kind of occasions so on that level I think it's brilliant. And I genuinely think they make a lovely couple.


----------



## Tivo

I don’t care for Meghan at all. But I do chuckle at how her being half black is driving haters into a tizzy! Lol! 
They will deal.


----------



## Singra

Tivo said:


> *I don’t care for Meghan at all.* But I do chuckle at how her being half black is driving haters into a tizzy! Lol!
> They will deal.


Yeah I saw your earlier comment, that was one of the ones I passed by and thought... "hmmm interesting that was your impression". I don't mind if people have a negative impression, it's perfectly valid.

To me she came across as very American... and I mean that in the best possible sense... there's a particular positivity/enthusiasm that certain Americans project and she has it imo... and I quite like that about her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

So people must like her because she’s black? No, I’m black and I don’t have to like someone just because they are too. That’s absurd.


----------



## Esizzle

So people are now annoyed at Meghan because she seemed giddy, happy, preppy, touchy feely and taking charge during the interview. Obvi she is happy because she just got engaged to someone she loves. You guys want her to sit there quiet and looking sad and morose? The eff.


----------



## horse17

Tivo said:


> I don’t care for Meghan at all. But I do chuckle at how her being half black is driving haters into a tizzy! Lol!
> They will deal.


Please ...please,  dont  make this a general statement....my comments about her have been mostly positive, along with the question of her not knowing harry....If i ever decide to make a negative comment about anything regarding Meghan, It does NOT mean Iam a hater...


----------



## westjenn

Looking4Love said:


> I don't know who's infatuated with whom. I saw their engagement announcement and interview on TV, and Meghan was clingy on overdrive! She was clinging/stroking his hand the whole time, staring at him with puppy eyes, like she couldn't walk on her own or he would disappear if she looks away or something. It was very hard to watch a modern American woman acting that way. Dare I say that it looks a lot like Lust to me, or she's putting on a performance. But it was too over the top, especially from someone who's been married before. She should be a little wary, and should know from experience that just because you sign a piece of paper, doesn't mean it will last forever. Boredom will set in. You will see more of each other's flaws. An ex will contact out of the blue. You may grow apart. Cheating happens. How will they deal with these issues?


Just as any other couple does.


----------



## westjenn

Esizzle said:


> So people are now annoyed at Meghan because she seemed giddy, happy, preppy, touchy feely and taking charge during the interview. Obvi she is happy because she just got engaged to someone she loves. You guys want her to sit there quiet and looking sad and morose? The eff.


@Esizzle THIS! Exactly this!!


----------



## DC-Cutie

Esizzle said:


> So people are now annoyed at Meghan because she seemed giddy, happy, preppy, touchy feely and taking charge during the interview. Obvi she is happy because she just got engaged to someone she loves. You guys want her to sit there quiet and looking sad and morose? The eff.


she can't win can she?


----------



## bisousx

I did a little reading on Meghan to see why some feel she’s a bit wild and the only thing I could pull up is that she’s outspoken (a huge no no for a royal).

They’re a lovely couple and I wish them well, but I don’t have high hopes for her to stay happy in the long run. I see a Fergie 2.0 situation brewing if she doesn’t adapt well. Meghan didn’t grow up dreaming of the prince and the crown, and there’s either going to be a lot of stifling of her lifestyle & personality to come, or a lot of rebelling.


----------



## buffym

buffym said:


> View attachment 3893936
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a picture from her high school year. She looks the same except now she is skinner. When Harry and her announced their engagement - I was surprised by their facial symmetry.



Actually it is her sorority photo when she was a sophomore at Northwestern. She was in Kappa Kappa Gamma.


----------



## westjenn

Jayne1 said:


> I always forget she's biracial. I tend to fixate on her pretty face, choice of clothes and demeanour. She'll be the only one who interests me in the royal family because as I said, Kate, who worked so hard to change her accent with a voice coach and and adopt the traditional RP along with doing all the right things, is a total bore.  But MM is lovely in what looks like a very real way to me.


Queen Charlotte was also biracial... Directly related to Queen Elizabeth.. so let the haters hate.
http://www.aaregistry.org/historic_events/view/englands-first-black-queen-sophie-charlotte-born


----------



## westjenn

Interesting: 
https://cupofjo.com/2017/11/royal-family-rules-meghan-markle/


----------



## buffym

Harry was seen leaving the gym the day after the announcement.


----------



## Singra

That’s a horrible tracksuit. Sorry Harry.


----------



## pearlyqueen

bisousx said:


> I did a little reading on Meghan to see why some feel she’s a bit wild and the only thing I could pull up is that she’s outspoken (a huge no no for a royal).
> 
> They’re a lovely couple and I wish them well, but I don’t have high hopes for her to stay happy in the long run. I see a Fergie 2.0 situation brewing if she doesn’t adapt well. Meghan didn’t grow up dreaming of the prince and the crown, and there’s either going to be a lot of stifling of her lifestyle & personality to come, or a lot of rebelling.



Will be interesting to see how long this lasts... he looks infatuated and who’s to say she isn’t more excited by the prospect of being “royal” than being in love with him....I’m sure there was a lot of show for the cameras during their interview and photocall - you can bet she knows how to play it up. Wait until she has to hang out with his friends too... Lol


----------



## kkfiregirl

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> So people must like her because she’s black? No, I’m black and I don’t have to like someone just because they are too. That’s absurd.



you have missed the point entirely. no one is saying that people should like her because she is black. however, people dislike meghan because of her race.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Harry looks good in gym clothes. I wonder what meghan is doing. probably designing her tiara.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

pearlyqueen said:


> Will be interesting to see how long this lasts... he looks infatuated and who’s to say she isn’t more excited by the prospect of being “royal” than being in love with him....I’m sure there was a lot of show for the cameras during their interview and photocall - you can bet she knows how to play it up. Wait until she has to hang out with his friends too... Lol


when you attend friends' weddings do you wonder how long it will last?


----------



## DC-Cutie

bisousx said:


> I did a little reading on Meghan to see why some feel she’s a bit wild and the only thing I could pull up is that she’s outspoken (a huge no no for a royal).
> 
> They’re a lovely couple and I wish them well, but I don’t have high hopes for her to stay happy in the long run. I see a Fergie 2.0 situation brewing if she doesn’t adapt well. Meghan didn’t grow up dreaming of the prince and the crown, and there’s either going to be a lot of stifling of her lifestyle & personality to come, or a lot of rebelling.


then they seemed equally yoked, since Harry went through his wild side period.  LOL


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

kkfiregirl said:


> you have missed the point entirely. no one is saying that people should like her because she is black. however, people dislike meghan because of her race.


I think that’s BS to silence those that are not salivating over some lifetime tv princess romance.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I think that’s BS to silence those that are not salivating over some lifetime tv princess romance.



no one is silencing anyone.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

kkfiregirl said:


> no one is silencing anyone.


Calling people racist is a sure way to do just that. She used it herself last November. Doesn’t work with me. I don’t hate her, but I’m not buying the celebrity HYPE.


----------



## Tivo

horse17 said:


> Please ...please,  dont  make this a general statement....my comments about her have been mostly positive, along with the question of her not knowing harry....If i ever decide to make a negative comment about anything regarding Meghan, It does NOT mean Iam a hater...


My apologies. I didn’t mean you or anybody in this thread when I spoke of haters. I mean real haters who make hateful comments online in places like, Daily Mail. I read tons of articles about them over the last year and the shade thrown at this girl has been amusing. People are really betting against this couple. It’s Alicia Vikander/Michael Fassbender level. 

So that’s where I was coming from with that.  

I just think it’s funny because there is nothing they can do about it..because Harry is head over heels.

But the more I read about her, I just did not like her. From the very beginning she has seemed calculating. Something just rubs me the wrong way. (I’ve watched enough Game of Thrones to spot a phony when I see one!) 
So no, I do not like her, and I doubt this will last.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Calling people racist is a sure way to do just that. She used it herself last November. Doesn’t work with me. I don’t hate her, but I’m not buying the celebrity HYPE.



ok.


----------



## bisousx

No one has to like Meghan or anyone else for that matter. But don't put blinders on and think that the racists aren't coming out of the woodworks. Even Harry knew this early on. This is an old statement:

_"The statement released Tuesday by Kensington Palace not only confirms Harry’s relationship with Markle ― it’s been going on for “a few months,” apparently ― but expressed Harry’s dislike for the treatment she’s received online and otherwise.

The prince’s communications secretary said Markle has been “subject to a wave of abuse and harassment,” including a “smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments.”_​
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...markle-harassment_us_5821c920e4b0e80b02cc890e


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

That statement was an embarrassing preemptive strikes so that the press wouldn’t go dig into her past. Manipulators. Good luck to them.


----------



## OhBlackrabbit

I dont think she being biracial is the prob here. I just feel that their engagement is too damn fast , one year, really? Apart of her being too touchy and kept leaning on Harry, I just couldnt stop guessing if they are really in love or just temporary infatuation ? Hope Harry made the right decision to marry her, and of course, I will be here watching her because this will be interesting fo sureeee


----------



## Just Askin

Swanky said:


> It never entered my brain to consider her race until I read this thread and also saw a friend post something on FB about horrible things people have said about this.  She's a cute enough girl, hope they're making good decisions and live happily ever after
> 
> We need to stay completely OFF politics please, and also make sure all posts are respectful.
> Thanks!


I agree there was no need for the race issue to be thrown as the reason people are not happy about the wedding. As for the politics..yeah I suppose it was OT, so I apologise for that on this thread. I’m sure people can understand the frustration a lot of the UK is feeling  though.


----------



## Esizzle

kkfiregirl said:


> Harry looks good in gym clothes. I wonder what meghan is doing. probably designing her tiara.


Designing her princess tiara and wedding gown. Lol!


----------



## Just Askin

Have people checked what side of the pond all the internet trash aimed at Meg was coming from? It might be wise to do so.


----------



## Tivo

Just Askin said:


> Have people checked what side of the pond all the internet trash aimed at Meg was coming from? It might be wise to do so.


Based on the comments in the many Daily Mail articles I’d say the UK. Very few Americans cared.


----------



## Just Askin

Tivo said:


> Based on the comments in the many Daily Mail articles I’d say the UK. Very few Americans cared.


Thanks I’ll check that, however from past experience most of the horrible comments on th DM are from...well places other than the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## arnott

kkfiregirl said:


> omg I stepped away for a few moments and this thread has become insane. it’s like all the haters decided to show up today!
> 
> people are taking this way too personally, as if harry would have chosen them instead of Meghan ... lol. why did he choose HER?! It should be ME or someone who looks like ME!!



I don't see a lot of haters on here?        Why can't people have an unfavourable opinion about someone without being called jealous?   I think most people on here would choose their own lives over living under a microscope for the rest of their lives.


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> View attachment 3893936
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a picture from her high school year. She looks the same except now she is skinner. When Harry and her announced their engagement - I was surprised by their facial symmetry.


Well, she looks similar, but with a new nose, which I quite like.  It turns up now and it's cute.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Tivo said:


> Based on the comments in the many Daily Mail articles I’d say the UK. Very few Americans cared.



But the DM online attracts comments from all over the world - I haven’t seen any of the ones you refer to but I’ve read the comments section on other topics and there were several from people claiming to be in the USA. 

I get the impression Americans are way more excited by this engagement that those in the UK and it’s not because we have issues with her race, despite what some people try to insinuate. Too many of us are so fed up with having the royals shoved down our throats and for the reasons I outlined in earlier posts.


----------



## sdkitty

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> So people must like her because she’s black? No, I’m black and I don’t have to like someone just because they are too. That’s absurd.


You don't have to like someone because they're black but as Whoopi Goldberg said, this makes young girls of color feel good, seeing a biracial young woman marrying a prince. Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## pearlyqueen

arnott said:


> I don't see a lot of haters on here?        Why can't people have an unfavourable opinion about someone without being called jealous?   I think most people on here would choose their own lives over living under a microscope for the rest of their lives.



Exactly - why are people with unfavourable opinions about this wedding being called haters and racist? Nobody here has said anything remotely racist about her as far as I can see.


----------



## horse17

bisousx said:


> I did a little reading on Meghan to see why some feel she’s a bit wild and the only thing I could pull up is that she’s outspoken (a huge no no for a royal).
> 
> They’re a lovely couple and I wish them well, but I don’t have high hopes for her to stay happy in the long run. I see a Fergie 2.0 situation brewing if she doesn’t adapt well. Meghan didn’t grow up dreaming of the prince and the crown, and there’s either going to be a lot of stifling of her lifestyle & personality to come, or a lot of rebelling.





Tivo said:


> My apologies. I didn’t mean you or anybody in this thread when I spoke of haters. I mean real haters who make hateful comments online in places like, Daily Mail. I read tons of articles about them over the last year and the shade thrown at this girl has been amusing. People are really betting against this couple. It’s Alicia Vikander/Michael Fassbender level.
> 
> So that’s where I was coming from with that.
> 
> I just think it’s funny because there is nothing they can do about it..because Harry is head over heels.
> 
> But the more I read about her, I just did not like her. From the very beginning she has seemed calculating. Something just rubs me the wrong way. (I’ve watched enough Game of Thrones to spot a phony when I see one!)
> So no, I do not like her, and I doubt this will last.


no worries..I realize there are haters in this world for all kinds of sick reasons..I just dont want those of us who would make a negative comment to be labeled unfairly....


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

sdkitty said:


> You don't have to like someone because they're black but as Whoopi Goldberg said, this makes young girls of color feel good, seeing a biracial young woman marrying a prince. Nothing wrong with that.


No, when I want to feel good, I look to my family, friends, co-workers that are doing great work to make real difference in people’s lives. I certainly don’t need to look up to a bunch of millionaire freeloaders doing photo ops.


----------



## serenluv202

Meghan is a lovely young woman and Harry loves her.  That's really all that counts.  Who cares what nationality she is?  The queen obviously does not care.


----------



## serenluv202

terebina786 said:


> I watch Suits and I had no idea she was biracial until my husband told me.


I guess the fact that her father on Suits is black didn't give a hint huh?


----------



## terebina786

serenluv202 said:


> I guess the fact that her father on Suits is black didn't give a hint huh?


I started watching as of last season, so I wasn't very familiar with the characters.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Tivo said:


> My apologies. I didn’t mean you or anybody in this thread when I spoke of haters. I mean real haters who make hateful comments online in places like, Daily Mail. I read tons of articles about them over the last year and the shade thrown at this girl has been amusing. People are really betting against this couple. It’s Alicia Vikander/Michael Fassbender level.
> 
> So that’s where I was coming from with that.
> 
> I just think it’s funny because there is nothing they can do about it..because Harry is head over heels.
> 
> But the more I read about her, I just did not like her. From the very beginning she has seemed calculating. Something just rubs me the wrong way. (I’ve watched enough Game of Thrones to spot a phony when I see one!)
> So no, I do not like her, and I doubt this will last.



I neither like nor dislike Meghan, I’m ambivalent - I don’t know her or much about her. I don’t dislike Harry on an individual level - just the institution of royalty and what it represents, as I’ve made plain. Problem is it is impossible for us in the UK to separate royalty and politics as they are so closely entwined. We don’t have the luxury that Americans have of seeing them as celebrities. I wish that’s all they were so that I could ignore them as I do with other celebrities I find boring or dislike. 

I don’t know if Meghan is calculated or not - don’t know enough about her to have an opinion on that. But I do think she may have had her head turned with the prospect of being a royal which may have influenced her to think Harry was the man for her... would she be interested in him if he worked in a shop? I wonder...

I’ve yet to see anything on here in the same league as the truly nasty stuff that some people regularly post/posted on the Michael Fassbender/Alicia Vikander threads, relentlessly trashing her and their relationship. You can imagine how badly they reacted when he married her, lol.....

Will it last? Who knows, but I’d guess there are some flies in the ointment, not least when she discovers just how boring the royals are and how odiously snobby their circle is. Not to mention Harry’s track record as something of a playboy prince.


----------



## buffym

xx
But to get the thread back on track and away from politics
https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/style/885795/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-pictures-revealed

Meghan may wear a dress by Erdem - it is a good fight since he is Canadian- British. But I consider it a bad fight because I find most of his dress to busy and lacey.

Some of the his prints remind me of curtains.

Examples above why a print, ruffle bottom, high collar, pleated dress, and ruffle sleeve.

Pick one- unfortunately I think Meghan dress may end up being a lace embroidered mess.

Unless she uses some one else or Erdem uses self control and picks one thing to focus on.


----------



## rcy

buffym said:


> View attachment 3894281
> View attachment 3894282
> View attachment 3894283
> View attachment 3894284
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But to get the thread back on track and away from politics
> https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/style/885795/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-pictures-revealed
> 
> Meghan may wear a dress by Erdem - it is a good fight since he is Canadian- British. But I consider it a bad fight because I find most of his dress to busy and lacey.
> 
> Some of the his prints remind me of curtains.
> 
> Examples above why a print, ruffle bottom, high collar, pleated dress, and ruffle sleeve.
> 
> Pick one- unfortunately I think Meghan dress may end up being a lace embroidered mess.
> 
> Unless she uses some one else or Erdem uses self control and picks one thing to focus on.



can we have a mm style thread? i think it will be interesting to see how her style evolves over the coming months (or will she fall into the royal style thread?)


----------



## Esizzle

This thread is so political and boring now. Anyone who does not care to repeatedly hear about abolition of royalty in the UK: we also have a royal wedding thread which is much more pleasant and fun!

And I say hell yes to a Meghan Markle Style Thread. Love her recent style while she has been with Harry. Cant wait to see what she will wear on her first official appearance tomorrow


----------



## Esizzle

pearlyqueen said:


> Have I made spiteful or mocking comments about her? .


Uh yea you called her a briefcase girl and a C List actress because she doesnt have a highly regarding and very important Oscar in her acting career. Mocking her job.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Esizzle

buffym said:


> View attachment 3894281
> View attachment 3894282
> View attachment 3894283
> View attachment 3894284
> 
> 
> 
> x
> But to get the thread back on track and away from politics
> https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/style/885795/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-pictures-revealed
> 
> Meghan may wear a dress by Erdem - it is a good fight since he is Canadian- British. But I consider it a bad fight because I find most of his dress to busy and lacey.
> 
> Some of the his prints remind me of curtains.
> 
> Examples above why a print, ruffle bottom, high collar, pleated dress, and ruffle sleeve.
> 
> Pick one- unfortunately I think Meghan dress may end up being a lace embroidered mess.
> 
> Unless she uses some one else or Erdem uses self control and picks one thing to focus on.


Love the green Erdem on her!


----------



## horse17

Esizzle said:


> This thread is so political and boring now. Anyone who does not care to repeatedly hear about abolition of royalty in the UK: we also have a royal wedding thread which is much more pleasant and fun!
> 
> And I say hell yes to a Meghan Markle Style Thread. Love her recent style while she has been with Harry. Cant wait to see what she will wear on her first official appearance tomorrow


I'm really looking forward to her style thread... my guess is she'll be a little more daring and modern than Kate


----------



## pearlyqueen

Esizzle said:


> Uh yea you called her a briefcase girl and a C List actress because she doesnt have a highly regarding and very important Oscar in her acting career. Mocking her job.



So she didn’t have a job wielding a briefcase/suitcase on a TV show? Is she more than a C list actress? 

Maybe it’s not kind to mock a career, but let’s be real it happens an awful lot on tPF as you well know... and it’s not racist to do so.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Cry me a river...


----------



## Eva1991

horse17 said:


> I'm really looking forward to her style thread... my guess is she'll be a little more daring and modern than Kate



I hope so. I used to like Kate's style during the first years of her marriage but it's become quite boring.
As far as I know, however, there are certain rules the royal ladies, especially those who belong the BRF, have to follow. That's probably why Kate's style looks somewhat outdated.
I hope Meghan goes one step forward and adds more modern elements to her outfits.


----------



## Esizzle

I think Meghan has a eye for what style looks good for her while still keeping it simple and elegant. I have high hopes for her!


----------



## pearlyqueen

Eva1991 said:


> I hope so. I used to like Kate's style during the first years of her marriage but it's become quite boring.
> As far as I know, however, there are certain rules the royal ladies, especially those who belong the BRF, have to follow. That's probably why Kate's style looks somewhat outdated.
> I hope Meghan goes one step forward and adds more modern elements to her outfits.



I liked her green dress but the white coat was giving me a sack of potatoes vibe.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

pearlyqueen said:


> I liked her green dress but the white coat was giving me a sack of potatoes vibe.


 It looked like a bathrobe.


----------



## bisousx

horse17 said:


> I'm really looking forward to her style thread... my guess is she'll be a little more daring and modern than Kate



I hope Meghan continues to have fun with her fashion. Kate doesn't dress like she used to, and certainly not like other women around her age. Just frumpy and old fashioned, like a mannequin. I'd be upset if I was forced to change my style, surely one can be fashionable and conservative at the same time.


----------



## Esizzle

Can we make this a Meghan and Harry thread instead of just Harry thread?

New on cover of ELLE France


----------



## Eva1991

^ She looks stunning on that magazine cover!
Love the details of the skirt she's wearing. I hope she incorporates details like these in her wedding dress!


----------



## rcy

Esizzle said:


> This thread is so political and boring now. Anyone who does not care to repeatedly hear about abolition of royalty in the UK: we also have a royal wedding thread which is much more pleasant and fun!
> 
> And I say hell yes to a Meghan Markle Style Thread. Love her recent style while she has been with Harry. Cant wait to see what she will wear on her first official appearance tomorrow


i started one... sorry esizzle, i didn't quote you correctly to bring the great magazine cover you posted over!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> No, when I want to feel good, I look to my family, friends, co-workers that are doing great work to make real difference in people’s lives. I certainly don’t need to look up to a bunch of millionaire freeloaders doing photo ops.


It’s a good thing then that Meghan is half black AND does great work to make a real difference in people’s lives


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It’s a good thing then that Meghan is half black AND does great work to make a real difference in people’s lives


Where? Please. These people are about self image. I’ll pass.


----------



## Esizzle

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It’s a good thing then that Meghan is half black AND does great work to make a real difference in people’s lives


Her past charity and ambassador work is great and I am glad she is familiar with that type of role because she is going to be doing a lot more as a Royal princess. People she has worked with only have great things to say about her passion for helping others.

Meghan's first official royal engagement will be meeting with people who have lost their loved ones to HIV on World Aids Day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> Her past charity and ambassador work is great and I am glad she is familiar with that type of role because she is going to be doing a lot more as a Royal princess. People she has worked with only have great things to say about her passion for helping others.


I'm not really interested enough to look into her past charity work.  I guess that's good that she and harry have that in common.  She'll probably retire from acting and join him in doing that kind of work.
I wonder how big her role as an "ambassador" could be since not many people knew who she was until she met harry.


----------



## Esizzle

sdkitty said:


> I'm not really interested enough to look into her past charity work.  I guess that's good that she and harry have that in common.  She'll probably retire from acting and join him in doing that kind of work.
> I wonder how big her role as an "ambassador" could be since not many people knew who she was until she met harry.


She was not attached to many high profile charities but she was an ambassador for UN for gender equality. She was also attached to World Vision Canada and Clear water campaign for which she travelled to Rwanda and India.


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> She was not attached to many high profile charities but she was an ambassador for UN for gender equality. She was also attached to World Vision Canada and Clear water campaign for which she travelled to Rwanda and India.


Good for her.  But if she's on a tv show here and most of us didn't know who she was, then people in Rwanda and India really wouldn't know who she was  So would she have any more value than you or I?


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> Good for her.  But if she's on a tv show here and most of us didn't know who she was, then people in Rwanda and India really wouldn't know who she was  So would she have any more value than you or I?



Good point. There are many people who hold 40 hour week normal jobs and do tons of charity work. I would hope their contributions were to be viewed equally as important as any Hollywood star.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

These things are set up by publicists to raise clients profiles. The truly talented may genuinely do it, but for the most part it’s just self serving photo ops at best.


----------



## Esizzle

sdkitty said:


> Good for her.  But if she's on a tv show here and most of us didn't know who she was, then people in Rwanda and India really wouldn't know who she was  So would she have any more value than you or I?


Yes I am not sure how much donations or attention she was able to garner for these charities. But in her new role she will bring instant worldwide attention to the issues she wants to focus on. Thats great.

She is doing an HIV related engagement as her first official royal engagement tomorrow. You know everyones going to be talking about that! And comparing her to Princess Diana. Lol


----------



## horse17

I saw a clip of her at age 11 talking about gender equality...so she's been at it for a while..


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

It was a group school project and she took all the credit for it. She did a speech about it years later and added some lies saying Hilary ******* was First Lady during the Rodney King riots in la in the spring of 1992. Bill ******* was not sworn in until January 1993.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Where? Please. These people are about self image. I’ll pass.


If you want to be petty about someone doing charity that's up to you! There are better things to criticize a person for other than speaking out about women's rights and girls' education 
And my first reply was really about the first half of my comment


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

You call me petty all you want, but I call it like it is.


----------



## buffym

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> It was a group school project and she took all the credit for it. She did a speech about it years later and added some lies saying Hilary ******* was First Lady during the Rodney King riots in la in the spring of 1992. Bill ******* was not sworn in until January 1993.



It wasn't a lie I have attached the original video from 1993. She had the First Lady correct and it wasn't a group project. She was the only one interviewed because she was the only who wrote the letters. She did watch the commercial that offended her while she was at school.


http://www.insideedition.com/how-me...ng-girl-letter-challenging-gender-roles-38542


----------



## Esizzle

I guess some people would rather their fave celebrities get paid obscene amounts of money to wear ugly clothes for big fashion houses rather than see celebs doing charity. Both are set up publicists and aim to raise the celebs profile. Different priorities for different people.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> You call me petty all you want, but I call it like it is.


Just remember, there's a difference between the way it is and the way you think it is


----------



## horse17

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> It was a group school project and she took all the credit for it. She did a speech about it years later and added some lies saying Hilary ******* was First Lady during the Rodney King riots in la in the spring of 1992. Bill ******* was not sworn in until January 1993.


I realize it was a school project..but it's still impressive for a girl that age to be well versed and interested in speaking about an issue such as that..no?


----------



## Esizzle

bellebellebelle19 said:


> If you want to be petty about someone doing charity that's up to you! There are better things to criticize a person for other than speaking out about women's rights and girls' education
> And my first reply was really about the first half of my comment


Even though she was virtually unknown, it is commendable that she was doing these things! Her heart is in the right place.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

It was a social studies assignment that prompted her to write a letter. She told the story in at U.N. and added some lie to it. It’s on the DM and I’m too lazy to find you the link.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Esizzle said:


> Even though she was virtually unknown, it is commendable that she was doing these things! Her heart is in the right place.


I totally agree! Also if she were only doing charity as a publicity stunt she would've stopped a long time ago because clearly it's not working; she's been on Suits for 7 years and there was hardly a change in her career (not saying that like it's a bad thing; just pointing out that her philanthropy does not equate to her career!)


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

horse17 said:


> I realize it was a school project..but it's still impressive for a girl that age to be well versed and interested in speaking about an issue such as that..no?


Oh, she’s obviously bright, I’ll give her that.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I totally agree! Also if she were only doing charity as a publicity stunt she would've stopped a long time ago because clearly it's not working; she's been on Suits for 7 years and there was hardly a change in her career (not saying that like it's a bad thing; just pointing out that her philanthropy does not equate to her career!)


It’s not working because no one cares, she’s not talented, and couldn’t make a mark.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Just remember, there's a difference between the way it is and the way you think it is


Absolutely.


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> Yes I am not sure how much donations or attention she was able to garner for these charities. But in her new role she will bring instant worldwide attention to the issues she wants to focus on. Thats great.
> 
> She is doing an HIV related engagement as her first official royal engagement tomorrow. You know everyones going to be talking about that! And comparing her to Princess Diana. Lol


and she did that Elle cover and the VF......I don't hate her but I do think she likes the attention she's getting for being engaged to a prince


----------



## buffym

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> It was a social studies assignment that prompted her to write a letter. She told the story in at U.N. and added some lie to it. It’s on the DM and I’m too lazy to find you the link.



You don't have to find me the link. I attached it in the post #1435. The original video of her on Nick News at the age of 11. If you watch the video filmed during the original time. You would know she didn't lie. Hillary was First Lady.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Hilary was not First Lady in the spring of 1992 during the Rodney King riots in LA. That’s what she said at the U.N. regarding this ivory Soap commercial.


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> and she did that Elle cover and the VF......I don't hate her but I do think she likes the attention she's getting for being engaged to a prince



The Elle cover was from 2015. It is not new. It was pre Harry. 

 Meghan wasn't a A list before Harry and she may not have been on your radar but she had media presence. She was in Elle, Good Housekeeping, Glamour- she was interviewed by the Today show.

These publications are going to re release the articles. They aren't new. 

The only thing she did new is the VF article and Harry does not mind it. He is marrying her, there is no way she would do the article without his approval after she shut down her blog, did not attend the premiere for Suits, or promote her clothin line.  The VF interview wasn't the best, I think it was a sad attempt to prepare the public for an engagement. 

However, I doubt Harry would announce an engagement to someone if the person did an interview mentioning him without his approval.


----------



## Esizzle

Are we to believe that an 11 year would lie in an interview so that 25 some odd years later she can appear more charitable when she is engaged to a Prince of a different country? OKAYYYYY.

Here is Meghan's UN speech. If anyone is interested. She has great public speaking skills


----------



## buffym

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Hilary was not First Lady in the spring of 1992 during the Rodney King riots in LA. That’s what she said at the U.N. regarding this ivory Soap commercial.




You are correct Hillary wasn't the First Lady in 1992, but she was in 1993. Which is when Meghan spoke to Nick News.

I don't know where the 1992 date comes from but in the original video it states 1993. I'm not embedding the video but if you click on the best you can watch it.  It is from 1993.


----------



## Esizzle

A million videos incoming! LOL I just found these and wanted to post them for anyone who wants to see her work in Rwanda.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

buffym said:


> You are correct Hillary wasn't the First Lady in 1992, but she was in 1993. Which is when Meghan spoke to Nick News.
> 
> I don't know where the 1992 date comes from but in the original video it states 1992. I'm not embedding the video but if you click on the best you can watch it.  It is from 1993.


There is a discrepancy in her story. She embellished it, but it doesn’t matter for me enough to go search for the info. Nothing is straightforward when it comes to this woman. With that, I’ll take my leave.


----------



## Esizzle

Last thing for tonight - Meghan's essay about her visit to India for gender equality.

http://time.com/4694568/meghan-markle-period-stigma/







*Meghan Markle: How Periods Affect Potential*

Imagine a world where the female leaders we revere never achieved their full potential because they dropped out of school at the age of thirteen. In the Western world this is challenging to fathom, but for millions of young women globally, this remains their harsh reality for a staggering reason. From sub-Saharan Africa to India, Iran, and several other countries, the stigma surrounding menstruation and lack of access to proper sanitation directly inhibit young women from pursuing an education.

Based on societal ignominy in the developing world, shame surrounding menstruation and its direct barrier to girls education remains a hushed conversation. As a result, both household dialogue and policy making discussions often leave Menstrual Hygiene Management (MHM) off the table. Former First Lady Michelle ***** spoke directly about this subject at the World Bank in April 2016, and various NGOs actively seek out policy reform and programming to address this concern, yet the topic remains neglected.

I traveled to Delhi and Mumbai this January with World Vision to meet girls and women directly impacted by the stigmatization of menstrual health and to learn how it hinders girls’ education. One hundred and thirteen million adolescent girls between the ages of 12-14 in India alone are at risk of dropping out of school because of the stigma surrounding menstrual health. During my time in the field, many girls shared that they feel embarrassed to go to school during their periods, ill equipped with rags instead of pads, unable to participate in sports, and without bathrooms available to care for themselves, they often opt to drop out of school entirely. Furthermore, with minimal dialogue about menstrual health hygiene either at school or home due to the taboo nature of the subject, many girls believe their bodies are purging evil spirits, or that they are injured once a month; this is a shame-filled reality they quietly endure. All of these factors perpetuate the cycle of poverty and stunt a young girl’s dream for a more prolific future.

The Indian government initiated a campaign in 2014 called “Save the Girl Child, Educate the Girl Child,” reinforcing the value of a girl’s life and her education. And while this initiative steers India closer to the Sustainable Development Goals, (specifically universal education & gender equality), the fact remains that only fifty percent of secondary schools in India have toilets, leaving roughly fifty percent of the population deterred from attending. If MHM were part of the conversation surrounding policy change, just as access to clean water and sanitation, it would push the conversation (and actualization of it) significantly further.

When a girl misses school because of her period, cumulatively that puts her behind her male classmates by 145 days. And that’s the mitigated setback if she opts to stay in school, which most do not. The latter elect to return home, increasing their subjection to dangerous work, susceptibility to being victims of violence, and most commonly, being conditioned for early childhood marriage. As a female in India, the challenge of survival begins at birth, first overcoming female feticide, then being victim to malnourishment, potentially abuse, and lack of access to proper sanitation facilities. Why, if she is able to overcome all of these challenges and finally get to school, should her education and potential to succeed, be sacrificed because of shame surrounding her period?

To remedy this problem, young girls need MHM, access to toilets, and at a most basic level, sanitary pads. Twenty-three percent of girls in India drop out of school because these factors are not at play. During my time in the slum communities outside of Mumbai, I shadowed women who are part of a microfinance system where they manufacture sanitary napkins and sell them within the community. The namesake of the organization, Myna Mahila Foundation, refers to a chatty bird (“myna”) and “mahila” meaning woman. The name echoes the undercurrent of this issue: we need to speak about it, to be “chatty” about it. Ninety-seven percent of the employees of Myna Mahila live and work within the slums, creating a system which as, Nobel Peace prize nominee Dr. Jockin Arputham shared with me, is the key to breaking the cycle of poverty and allowing access to education. In addition, the women’s work opens the dialogue of menstrual hygiene in their homes, liberating them from silent suffering, and equipping their daughters to attend school.

Beyond India, in communities all over the globe, young girls’ potential is being squandered because we are too shy to talk about the most natural thing in the world. To that I say: we need to push the conversation, mobilize policy making surrounding menstrual health initiatives, support organizations who foster girls’ education from the ground up, and within our own homes, we need to rise above our puritanical bashfulness when it comes to talking about menstruation.

Wasted opportunity is unacceptable with stakes this high. To break the cycle of poverty, and to achieve economic growth and sustainability in developing countries, young women need access to education. When we empower girls hungry for education, we cultivate women who are emboldened to effect change within their communities and globally. If that is our dream for them, then the promise of it must begin with us.

_Markle is an actress and humanitarian who has worked with organizations such as World Vision, the United Nations, One Young World and Myna Mahila Foundation to achieve equality for women worldwide._


----------



## Keline

Take away the status "Prince" and the occupation "actress", the two of them are really just another person like you and I (okay fine he has red hair and he is really cute). Ordinary people who are capable of falling in love, capable of falling out of love too.

For now, I think they must be really in love with each other to want to marry each other, although yes, royal status entitles you to benefits and privileges. 

Anyway I think she is beautiful and I hope a blissful and lasting marriage for them !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> There is a discrepancy in her story. She embellished it, but it doesn’t matter for me enough to go search for the info. Nothing is straightforward when it comes to this woman. With that, I’ll take my leave.



How is an embellishment when one of the people she wrote a letter to supported Meghan's version of events. One of the people she wrote a letter was the producer of Nick News which is why they filmed her in 1993. 

What Meghan said in the UN speech is supported by the video from 1993. 

There is no proof she lied.


----------



## VickyB

DC-Cutie said:


> when you attend friends' weddings do you wonder how long it will last?


A few times  and they ended up divorced.


----------



## VickyB

pearlyqueen said:


> You’ve hit the nail on the head. Disappointing there are always some people hinting at ulterior motives and insinuating racism where none exists.



This.


----------



## Gal4Dior

VickyB said:


> A few times  and they ended up divorced.



Ditto. I’m sure some may have thought the same thing at my first wedding. I know I sure did, but wasn’t willing to admit I had reservations...


----------



## Esizzle

Well if their marriage doesn’t work out they will get divorced. They’ll never know unless they do actually get married and try it out. What’s the big deal? Princess Diana and Prince Charles got divorced too. It may happen or they may be married forever. No one knows not even them.


----------



## Singra

It's a bit like Game of Thrones, there's an impatience to know how the story ends and because everyone knows the characters and the general plot trajectory the speculation is never-ending... and there are weird brownie points for the people that guess correctly ahead of everyone else.


----------



## chaneljewel

Harry and Meghan seem very much in love.  I’m happy for them and only wish them the best. 
I’ll be curious to see what they do with Meghan’s character on Suits.  I really liked her on the show.


----------



## Luvbolide

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I think that’s BS to silence those that are not salivating over some lifetime tv princess romance.




Oh please - the way some of you carried on on the Fassbender thread shreiking at anyone who was slightly less than delirious about Alicia Vikander - and now you are here with constant criticism of another actress that you don't know.  

I know virtually nothing about Meghan other than she is on Suits.  Which tells me zero about what she is like, how she dresses, etc.  I am definitely less tuned into this type of thing than many others, but I am not sure that she was particularly well known before she started dating Prince Harry, so who really knows what she is like.

Hopefully they will be happy together.  Why should we wish anything less?


----------



## Luvbolide

pearlyqueen said:


> But the DM online attracts comments from all over the world - I haven’t seen any of the ones you refer to but I’ve read the comments section on other topics and there were several from people claiming to be in the USA.
> 
> I get the impression Americans are way more excited by this engagement that those in the UK and it’s not because we have issues with her race, despite what some people try to insinuate. Too many of us are so fed up with having the royals shoved down our throats and for the reasons I outlined in earlier posts.




While it may well be true that Americans posting here are more excited by this than posters from the UK - something I would not know as I don't know where most posters are from, I don't think that in the larger picture people in the US are taking particular notice of this.  As a general rule, I don't get the sense that most Americans really care either way about the royals and at this point in time, we have plenty of our own things going on to think about.

That said, there will always be people (regardless of residence) who are fascinated by "princess" stories...


----------



## redney

Luvbolide said:


> Oh please - the way some of you carried on on the Fassbender thread shreiking at anyone who was slightly less than delirious about Alicia Vikander - and now you are here with constant criticism of another actress that you don't know.
> 
> I know virtually nothing about Meghan other than she is on Suits.  Which tells me zero about what she is like, how she dresses, etc.  I am definitely less tuned into this type of thing than many others, but I am not sure that she was particularly well known before she started dating Prince Harry, so who really knows what she is like.
> 
> Hopefully they will be happy together.  Why should we wish anything less?



Bravo! All of this! ALL of it.


----------



## arnott

Esizzle said:


> Are we to believe that an 11 year would lie in an interview so that 25 some odd years later she can appear more charitable when she is engaged to a Prince of a different country? OKAYYYYY.
> 
> Here is Meghan's UN speech. If anyone is interested. She has great public speaking skills




Is that a rash on her chest?


----------



## Grande Latte

Her race has never been an issue for me. She's an attractive women and that's all I see, not really her color or anything. I'm rather color-blind.

She's also very smart too and eloquent. I think Harry went for someone who plays the love game better, someone out of his control. Someone who can't be tamed. Someone who knows men REALLY well. That's all.

The wild comment. Come on. She's a wild card. Who would have guessed? Didn't we all expect him to marry someone who's never been married, has had very few boyfriends, is already in his royal circle, younger than him,.....etc. That's that "wild" meant. Not Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton "wild". No.


----------



## arnott

Grande Latte said:


> Her race has never been an issue for me. She's an attractive women and that's all I see, not really her color or anything. I'm rather color-blind.
> 
> She's also very smart too and eloquent. I think Harry went for someone who plays the love game better, someone out of his control. Someone who can't be tamed. Someone who knows men REALLY well. That's all.
> 
> The wild comment. Come on. She's a wild card. Who would have guessed? Didn't we all expect him to marry someone who's never been married, has had very few boyfriends, is already in his royal circle, younger than him,.....etc. That's that "wild" meant. *Not Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton "wild". No.*



So no pictures of her falling out of bars drunk?     If I remember correctly there were some  photos of drunk Kate (before she got with William) released.


----------



## kkfiregirl

arnott said:


> Is that a rash on her chest?



maybe she’s just overheated and feeling flushed. In any case, it was an unfortunate choice of dress for the event.


----------



## minababe

they seem to fit perfectly together. their engagemnt interview is so full of love and emotions, I love them together! can't wait for more public Pictures from now on and of course for the weeding and Babys !!
they look so much in love, it's beautiful to look at


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

VickyB said:


> A few times  and they ended up divorced.


Yeah.... that question wasn’t for you


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Luvbolide said:


> Oh please - the way some of you carried on on the Fassbender thread shreiking at anyone who was slightly less than delirious about Alicia Vikander - and now you are here with constant criticism of another actress that you don't know.
> 
> I know virtually nothing about Meghan other than she is on Suits.  Which tells me zero about what she is like, how she dresses, etc.  I am definitely less tuned into this type of thing than many others, but I am not sure that she was particularly well known before she started dating Prince Harry, so who really knows what she is like.
> 
> Hopefully they will be happy together.  Why should we wish anything less?


Nice try, but I always use my words and don’t go around being nasty to posters or call anyone names. I make no apologies for not liking Markle or not being a fan of the monarchy.


----------



## gelbergirl

Nottingham (today)


----------



## uhpharm01

chaneljewel said:


> Harry and Meghan seem very much in love.  I’m happy for them and only wish them the best.
> I’ll be curious to see what they do with Meghan’s character on Suits.  I really liked her on the show.


I agree. 
I heard that the guy that plays her fiancé on the show is leaving too.


----------



## bisbee

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> There is a discrepancy in her story. She embellished it, but it doesn’t matter for me enough to go search for the info. Nothing is straightforward when it comes to this woman. With that, I’ll take my leave.


I’m astonished at the depths of your dislike for this woman.  What did she do to you to warrant such feelings?


----------



## horse17

I really think this girl is going to ace this role...and of course I’m basing this on nothing, but the clip i just saw of her with harry this am...its almost as though she couldn’t wait to be out there..greeting people, smiling, etc.....she wants this and I believe it shows...so far...


----------



## Grande Latte

Come on. We are all entitled to our own opinions. There's no need to be so divided on Camp Meghan, or Camp no Meghan. It's like in the old days people were Camp Aniston, or Camp Jolie. It's not so black and white. And seriously, it's their personal relationship, we're only here to gossip and share our opinions.

It's almost like if we don't find Meghan PERFECT for Harry, we're attacked on this forum.

There's still quite a bit of time until their wedding in May (?). So who knows what will come out from now until then. Truth is, I don't just "INSTANTLY" admire a woman because she's marrying a royal. I see her the way I see her based on my intuition. And you view her based on yours. No one has to defend their opinions like we're in a war.


----------



## BagLovingMom

She looks great at the appearance ! I’m so excited about this couple ! They both look so happy !


----------



## Pagan

I watched Suits for the first few seasons, but have lost interest. I came to really dislike the insipid character Meghan plays, but that's not a proxy for her own personality. I don't like where they took the storyline; I never bought that Jessica would have put her own firm at risk to protect Mike, much less Lewis and the others. It just doesn't make sense.  A bit like Lost; they continued the show past the point where they should have, IMO. 

With respect to Meghan herself, I don't think most people wish her and Harry anything but the best. I wasn't a huge fan of the way she handled the interview, but it takes more than a single interview for me to form an opinion of someone. I'm not a fan of the monarchy in general, but that's not a personal dig at any of the people who find themselves in that life whether by birth or marriage. I just don't think a Royal Family makes sense in 2017. If the British monarchy went away after the Queen dies, that would be more than fine with me. I don't wish any of them ill, I just don't see their relevance in the modern age. As a Canadian, I definitely don't see the Queen as my Head of State, despite Canada being a constitutional monarchy. Figurehead or not, I'd prefer that we stand alone as a nation.

I don't see William/Kate or Harry/Meghan as different than any other celebrity couple. Don't know much about any of them really, but of course I'd wish them personal happiness as I would anyone else. I wouldn't want their lives, but thankfully I have my own non-remarkable but happy life to live.


----------



## buffym

Grande Latte said:


> Come on. We are all entitled to our own opinions. There's no need to be so divided on Camp Meghan, or Camp no Meghan. It's like in the old days people were Camp Aniston, or Camp Jolie. It's not so black and white. And seriously, it's their personal relationship, we're only here to gossip and share our opinions.
> 
> It's almost like if we don't find Meghan PERFECT for Harry, we're attacked on this forum.



I don't have a problem with anyone disliking Meghan. I find it weird that people say the reason they dislike her is because and then that reason has be proven false for example,

Someone said they wished Harry would marry someone with an education- Meghan has a college degree from Northwestern.

Another the Elle December 2017 cover - someone said it makes her look attention seeking - the article and pictures are from 2015. It is a re release.

You have the right to dislike whoever you want but it shouldn't be about that person based on a lie.


----------



## DC-Cutie

It interesting to see how people have so much dislike, borderline hate for this woman, like it’s personal.  Rather creepy.


----------



## boxermom

arnott said:


> Is that a rash on her chest?



I saw another view of this appearance, and her skin looked perfect, no redness. It must be a bad photocopy.


----------



## Singra

It's a big story so it draws more people than average, the more people the more opinions, the more opinions the greater chance for conflict. Give it enough time and people start turning on each other for reasons not entirely related to the thread topic. I'd say it's business as usual.


----------



## Jayne1

horse17 said:


> I really think this girl is going to ace this role...and of course I’m basing this on nothing, but the clip i just saw of her with harry this am...its almost as though she couldn’t wait to be out there..greeting people, smiling, etc.....she wants this and I believe it shows...so far...


I agree.  She's going to ace this role and I'm basing my opinion on many video clips that have been posted over the last few days.

Sorry Kate and your newly acquired received pronunciation accent -- you will have stiff competition in the popularity department.


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> when you attend friends' weddings do you wonder how long it will last?


@DC-Cutie Yesssssssss!!!! I'll never forget the ONE time (and last time) I ever made a comment at a friend's wedding to another guest.. Something to the effect of "This isn't going to last" and that person said to me "That's not kind.  It's as if you're willing it to fail." I NEVER did it again!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

buffym said:


> I don't have a problem with anyone disliking Meghan. I find it weird that people say the reason they dislike her is because and then that reason has be proven false for example,
> 
> Someone said they wished Harry would marry someone with an education- Meghan has a college degree from Northwestern.
> 
> Another the Elle December 2017 cover - someone said it makes her look attention seeking - the article and pictures are from 2015. It is a re release.
> 
> You have the right to dislike whoever you want but it shouldn't be about that person based on a lie.


@buffym well said!


----------



## pearlyqueen

Luvbolide said:


> Oh please - the way some of you carried on on the Fassbender thread shreiking at anyone who was slightly less than delirious about Alicia Vikander - and now you are here with constant criticism of another actress that you don't know.
> 
> I know virtually nothing about Meghan other than she is on Suits.  Which tells me zero about what she is like, how she dresses, etc.  I am definitely less tuned into this type of thing than many others, but I am not sure that she was particularly well known before she started dating Prince Harry, so who really knows what she is like.
> 
> Hopefully they will be happy together.  Why should we wish anything less?



So, Meghan can’t even be slightly criticised? And your observations about the Fassbender thread are a long way from giving the full picture. Some of the posters on here have spent a very long time posting incredibly nasty things about Alicia Vikander, mocking her, inventing vile stories, trashing her relationship with Fassbender and now their marriage. Take a look at his thread and you will see this trashing still continues, even though Alicia is now his wife.... you might even recognise some of the posters there. But the slightest criticism of Ms Markle and the same posters don’t like it, implying ulterior motives. To paraphrase the justification - this is a celebrity gossip thread so will write whatever I like about celebrities... usually with several LOLs attached. I get that many of you want to defend your “princess” but it’s not fair to slam those who were/are up in arms at the much worse and sustained attacks on Mrs Fassbender. 

Now I’m not advocating anyone stoops to that level and attacks Meghan in that way - that would be spiteful and childish, but people should be allowed to dislike her or have a negative view of the relationship. There is never 100% public approval or agreement on any celebrity or relationship. Different people have different views. 

I freely admit I know next to nothing about Meghan, I’m only viewing her at face value, so I’m not really qualified to have an opinion on her personality or whether she has/had ulterior motives, but I choose not to assume nasty negative things about her just to fill in the gaps. As for her appearance, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it’s a subjective opinion. Criticising her clothes is fair enough, but mocking her physical attributes and body shaming is out of order imo. 

Who knows if their relationship will last long term? Royal marriages haven’t exactly had a good track record in recent times with three of the queen’s children divorcing. They will face a lot of scrutiny and Meghan may well find the royal lifestyle isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I do wonder if this is all a bit too hasty and it would have been wiser to have a much longer courtship - 16 months isn’t long enough to really test the waters. And as I’ve said before, wait until she gets to know the kind of people royals are friends with and the circles they move in....


----------



## pearlyqueen

DC-Cutie said:


> It interesting to see how people have so much dislike, borderline hate for this woman, like it’s personal.  Rather creepy.



What people?


----------



## pearlyqueen

bisbee said:


> I’m astonished at the depths of your dislike for this woman.  What did she do to you to warrant such feelings?



She just doesn’t like her which is her prerogative. Time and time again people take against someone well known without them having done anything personally to them - she’s entitled to dislike Meghan or anyone else if she so chooses - why does she need to explain herself?


----------



## Esizzle

arnott said:


> Is that a rash on her chest?


I think it’s horrible lighting plus some flushing from being nervous?


----------



## pearlyqueen

For anyone here who’s interested in the first impressions after the Nottingham visit today, Meghan was a huge hit with the British public.


----------



## Esizzle

Meghan looks beautiful at today’s appearance!! I’ll post pics of her outfit and any videos I find. 

I agree she will ace this new role no doubt!!


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

A very balanced article on the whole thing. 
http://www.macleans.ca/opinion/why-meghan-markle-giving-it-all-up-for-love-is-not-social-progress/


----------



## Esizzle

What do we think of the outfit? I like it all except the boots could have been better.


----------



## chicinthecity777

pearlyqueen said:


> For anyone here who’s interested in the first impressions after the Nottingham visit today, *Meghan was a huge hit with the British public.*


I stumbled on this thread. errrhhh... Maghan may be a huge hit for those who care. 99.99% of the people around me haven't said a thing about this. All I see is the media shovelling it down our throat day in day out. I have no opinion on Harry or Meghan because I consider in this day and age in this society, royals are pretty irrelevant.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Although I will say I do have a lot of respect for HRH Queen Elizabeth II who has been through a lot with the country.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

I think she looked great outside in the coat. I did not care for her inside look. The shoes made the outfit too casual. You can tell she was in her element outside with the people but very nervous and appeared out of place inside.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I agree.  She's going to ace this role and I'm basing my opinion on many video clips that have been posted over the last few days.
> 
> Sorry Kate and your newly acquired received pronunciation accent -- you will have stiff competition in the popularity department.


I'm sure Meghan is going to do a fine job with the ambassador role.  I don't think it's a competition between her and Kate.
Why do so many of the people who are happy about Meghan want to trash Kate?  I think she's lovely and a good match for William.
Harry is not in line for the throne so if he chooses a different type of woman, good for him.  Can't both of the women be liked?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Loved the coat. Disliked the outfit underneath. The boots were especially a disappointment as they were not flattering on her at all.


----------



## pearlyqueen

xiangxiang0731 said:


> I stumbled on this thread. errrhhh... Maghan may be a huge hit for those who care. 99.99% of the people around me haven't said a thing about this. All I see is the media shovelling it down our throat day in day out. I have no opinion on Harry or Meghan because I consider in this day and age in this society, royals are pretty irrelevant.



Sorry, I should have clarified - a hit with those who turned out and certain media outlets here. IA most people I know are distinctly disinterested. And yes totally agree with your royalty sentiment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

pearlyqueen said:


> So, Meghan can’t even be slightly criticised? And your observations about the Fassbender thread are a long way from giving the full picture. Some of the posters on here have spent a very long time posting incredibly nasty things about Alicia Vikander, mocking her, inventing vile stories, trashing her relationship with Fassbender and now their marriage. Take a look at his thread and you will see this trashing still continues, even though Alicia is now his wife.... you might even recognise some of the posters there. But the slightest criticism of Ms Markle and the same posters don’t like it, implying ulterior motives. To paraphrase the justification - this is a celebrity gossip thread so will write whatever I like about celebrities... usually with several LOLs attached. I get that many of you want to defend your “princess” but it’s not fair to slam those who were/are up in arms at the much worse and sustained attacks on Mrs Fassbender.
> 
> Now I’m not advocating anyone stoops to that level and attacks Meghan in that way - that would be spiteful and childish, but people should be allowed to dislike her or have a negative view of the relationship. There is never 100% public approval or agreement on any celebrity or relationship. Different people have different views.
> 
> I freely admit I know next to nothing about Meghan, I’m only viewing her at face value, so I’m not really qualified to have an opinion on her personality or whether she has/had ulterior motives, but I choose not to assume nasty negative things about her just to fill in the gaps. As for her appearance, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it’s a subjective opinion. Criticising her clothes is fair enough, but mocking her physical attributes and body shaming is out of order imo.
> 
> Who knows if their relationship will last long term? Royal marriages haven’t exactly had a good track record in recent times with three of the queen’s children divorcing. They will face a lot of scrutiny and Meghan may well find the royal lifestyle isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I do wonder if this is all a bit too hasty and it would have been wiser to have a much longer courtship - 16 months isn’t long enough to really test the waters. And as I’ve said before, wait until she gets to know the kind of people royals are friends with and the circles they move in....


Sure she can be criticized. But criticism (on a public figure whom you've never met and only have read about in popular news) is an opinion and if you put it out on a public forum, people are going to agree/disagree with your opinion, especially if the criticism is hardly based on anything valid ✌️ You can't expect to write something on here and just expect people to take it, and that goes for both positive and negative opinions, and myself included


----------



## pearlyqueen

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Sure she can be criticized. But criticism (on a public figure whom you've never met and only have read about in popular news) is an opinion and if you put it out on a public forum, people are going to agree/disagree with your opinion, especially if the criticism is hardly based on anything valid [emoji111]️ You can't expect to write something on here and just expect people to take it, and that goes for both positive and negative opinions, and myself included



I think you’re agreeing with me - kind of complements my post.


----------



## bisousx

arnott said:


> So no pictures of her falling out of bars drunk?     If I remember correctly there were some  photos of drunk Kate (before she got with William) released.



None that I've seen. I've read stories of her partying in college (big whoop).
Kate received the same treatment before she was married.. lots of media chatter with embarrassing college photos of her.


----------



## afsweet

I think the coat was too long and the skirt could have worked with a more elegant heel. such a hard length to pull off, but i think this is a look Melania could have rocked far better. Meghan is beautiful and not overdone.


----------



## Just Askin

Esizzle said:


> Her past charity and ambassador work is great and I am glad she is familiar with that type of role because she is going to be doing a lot more as a Royal princess. People she has worked with only have great things to say about her passion for helping others.
> 
> Meghan's first official royal engagement will be meeting with people who have lost their loved ones to HIV on World Aids Day.


Some people will do anything to remain in the spotlight. Most real charity workers never ask for any recognition and certainly don’t need to orchestrate a “princesses crown”  into the deal.


----------



## Just Askin

Esizzle said:


> So people are now annoyed at Meghan because she seemed giddy, happy, preppy, touchy feely and taking charge during the interview. Obvi she is happy because she just got engaged to someone she loves. You guys want her to sit there quiet and looking sad and morose? The eff.


These are obviously clear signs of attention seeking. How do you equate that to love? I really hope Harry knows what he’s in for.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Yikes this thread got snarky fast for no reason imo. 
Anyways I think they are doing great with public relations as I read that they will be touring the UK in the next few months and go on a world tour after the wedding. It’s like they are giving the media loads of the photo ops and access that they want in the beginning and hopefully will be able to keep a degree of privacy down the road.


----------



## Just Askin

BagLovingMom said:


> Yikes this thread got snarky fast for no reason imo.
> Anyways I think they are doing great with public relations as I read that they will be touring the UK in the next few months and go on a world tour after the wedding. It’s like they are giving the media loads of the photo ops and access that they want in the beginning and hopefully will be able to keep a degree of privacy down the road.


Sorry but I just feel sometimes some people’s BS has to be called. I thought this was Harry’s thread. Not the Meg Thread. Too much gushing if you ask me.


----------



## L etoile

How does she keep her hair so straight in Africa and India? I spent 2 weeks in Africa and I was a complete mess. Does these people go back to a 5* hotel at the end of the photo op for hair/make-up?


----------



## Gal4Dior

After viewing all the photos today with their first appearance, I must say she is a natural for all the attention. 

I don’t feel Kate is quite that comfortable with it as Meghan is. Makes sense since Meghan didn’t get into the acting business to be any shrinking violet.

I did notice that in the majority of the photos she’s tucking back her hair.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure Meghan is going to do a fine job with the ambassador role.  I don't think it's a competition between her and Kate.
> Why do so many of the people who are happy about Meghan want to trash Kate?  I think she's lovely and a good match for William.
> Harry is not in line for the throne so if he chooses a different type of woman, good for him.  Can't both of the women be liked?


Of course, you are right.  It's not a competition, it's just that Work-shy Will and and Duchess of Do-Little, Kate, are so disappointing. I did not make up those monikers.  The British press did.

I find MM quite refreshing and as I said, I think she is going to ace this job.


----------



## Singra

The British press is so harsh though, they have two small children to look after with a third on the way and although it is important to attend to your duties your children are only going to be young once. The parenting from afar didn’t exactly help the royals. Lol I say this and I have no idea if they have nannies, they probably have loads of help and they could probably try harder in the work arena, it’s not a bad thing to keep a spotlight on how they’re spending their time but pillorying the royals is the number one pastime of the UK press.

With Megan and Harry there’s a whole other layer of flash points that will set people off. On one level I could care less and on another I think it must suck so much... they’re only two people they can’t be everything to everyone.


----------



## bisbee

pearlyqueen said:


> She just doesn’t like her which is her prerogative. Time and time again people take against someone well known without them having done anything personally to them - she’s entitled to dislike Meghan or anyone else if she so chooses - why does she need to explain herself?


I didn’t say she had to like the woman.  I said I was surprised at the level of her dislike.  I was curious what could have led her to that mindset.  And no, she certainly doesn’t have to explain, but she is certainly vocal about her feelings...


----------



## bisousx

Singra said:


> *The British press is so harsh though, they have two small children to look after with a third on the way and although it is important to attend to your duties your children are only going to be young once. *The parenting from afar didn’t exactly help the royals. Lol I say this and I have no idea if they have nannies, they probably have loads of help and they could probably try harder in the work arena, it’s not a bad thing to keep a spotlight on how they’re spending their time but pillorying the royals is the number one pastime of the UK press.
> 
> With Megan and Harry there’s a whole other layer of flash points that will set people off. On one level I could care less and on another I think it must suck so much... they’re only two people they can’t be everything to everyone.



Will and Kate earned those nicknames long before their children though...


----------



## terebina786

I loved the outfit from today except for the boots.  I think a pump would’ve been better but she looked great.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

L etoile said:


> How does she keep her hair so straight in Africa and India? I spent 2 weeks in Africa and I was a complete mess. Does these people go back to a 5* hotel at the end of the photo op for hair/make-up?



my guess would be Japanese or Brasilian hair straightening.


----------



## Esizzle

BagLovingMom said:


> *Yikes this thread got snarky fast for no reason imo. *
> Anyways I think they are doing great with public relations as I read that they will be touring the UK in the next few months and go on a world tour after the wedding. It’s like they are giving the media loads of the photo ops and access that they want in the beginning and hopefully will be able to keep a degree of privacy down the road.


Lol some people just trying to seek attention online. I ain’t giving any though!


----------



## kkfiregirl

Just Askin said:


> You seem very involved with this lady’s life. You’ll be telling us what she had for breakfast next. Do you know her personally?



you are out of line. just chill. you can make your point without personal attacks.


----------



## Esizzle

kkfiregirl said:


> my guess would be Japanese or Brasilian hair straightening.


Yeah I was going to say Brazilian blow out. I think that keeps hair straight and frizz free for 4-6 weeks. I might be wrong...


----------



## Jayne1

kkfiregirl said:


> my guess would be Japanese or Brasilian hair straightening.


I saw an older youtube video of her on Craig Ferguson and she said she doesn't remember what her hair used to look like. lol


----------



## kkfiregirl

Esizzle said:


> Yeah I was going to say Brazilian blow out. I think that keeps hair straight and frizz free for 4-6 weeks. I might be wrong...



It does! 



Jayne1 said:


> I saw an older youtube video of her on Craig Ferguson and she said she doesn't remember what her hair used to look like. lol



all she has to do is let her hair treatments grow out .. she will remember very quickly!


----------



## horse17

I


Esizzle said:


> What do we think of the outfit? I like it all except the boots could have been better.


whats up with her hemline in this pic?..it look frayed at the ends?


----------



## Jayne1

Singra said:


> The British press is so harsh though, they have two small children to look after with a third on the way and although it is important to attend to your duties your children are only going to be young once. The parenting from afar didn’t exactly help the royals. Lol I say this and I have no idea if they have nannies, they probably have loads of help and they could probably try harder in the work arena, it’s not a bad thing to keep a spotlight on how they’re spending their time but pillorying the royals is the number one pastime of the UK press.
> 
> With Megan and Harry there’s a whole other layer of flash points that will set people off. On one level I could care less and on another I think it must suck so much... they’re only two people they can’t be everything to everyone.


It's different for them though.  They live like the royalty they are, with maids and servants, wait staff, cooks and massive security and they are supposed to perform their royal duties. That's why they have first class nannies for each child. It's part of her job to do something for the country in return for the taxpayers coughing up millions of pounds so they can live like royalty.

Will carried out his royal duties for less than two weeks in 2017. Kate did less. Will did go on holiday and out with the boys though.

If they have to leave the children with some of the best nannies in the world, so be it.  Kate knows what she signed up for.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Just Askin said:


> Why would That happen? Not everyone is besotted with Meg.  What about those of us that are fans of Harry and Just want to stay on topic with him here. Talk about pushing your views down peoples throats.



Loool at the clothes she’s wearing on that cover - the skirt looks like it’s made from curtains whipped down quick from Buckingham Palace [emoji23]


----------



## pearlyqueen

Jayne1 said:


> Of course, you are right.  It's not a competition, it's just that Work-shy Will and and Duchess of Do-Little, Kate, are so disappointing. I did not make up those monikers.  The British press did.
> 
> I find MM quite refreshing and as I said, I think she is going to ace this job.



I’m no apologist for William but to be fair Harry is no better and just as work shy without even the part time air ambulance job or a family to raise. There’s a breakdown here of days worked on royal duties:

http://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/cul...24/royal-family-member-worked-most-days-year/


----------



## Eva1991

Having seen so many photos of her outfits before her engagement, I was expecting her to wear something better today, something more modern. She opted for a very conservative, old school look. It probably felt like a safe choice for her first public appearance as Harry's fiancee. I hope she doesn't sacrfice her personal style though.


----------



## pearlyqueen

BagLovingMom said:


> Yikes this thread got snarky fast for no reason imo.
> Anyways I think they are doing great with public relations as I read that they will be touring the UK in the next few months and go on a world tour after the wedding. It’s like they are giving the media loads of the photo ops and access that they want in the beginning and hopefully will be able to keep a degree of privacy down the road.



Really? A world tour? Whatever for?


----------



## BagLovingMom

pearlyqueen said:


> Really? A world tour? Whatever for?


Well the article said world tour but that is probably a bit of hyperbole. I’d think more likely it’d be a tour of select countries that would perhaps be too arduous of travel for the queen to travel to like when  Kate and William went to Australia


----------



## Just Askin

Esizzle said:


> Lol some people just trying to seek attention online. I ain’t giving any though!


It’s awful when people do that. Ive heard of that happening on other threads. Especially the Fassbender thread. Posters turning up just to upset the regulars. Throwing all sorts of hurtful, unfounded and sometimes personal trash around. Hopefully that sort of thing won’t find its way to Harry’s thread. Hopefully this thread can remain on topic about Harry and stay positive about him.


----------



## Just Askin

kkfiregirl said:


> you are out of line. just chill. you can make your point without personal attacks.


Excuse me? Out of line why? How is that a personal attack. I’m intrigued as to how so much is known about Meg? Is it wrong to ask that stuff from those who seem to have so much knowledge about the subject?
I’d also appreciate you not attacking me personally and trying to tell me what to do. Last i looked this was a gossip thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

horse17 said:


> I
> 
> whats up with her hemline in this pic?..it look frayed at the ends?


Agreed lol. Also interesting fashion choices on Harry's part


----------



## Gal4Dior

I think we are all allowed our opinion positive or negative on this thread. I can agree to disagree just fine. After all,  it’s a gossip thread and honestly I didn’t even know a thread like this existed until Monday. It just appeared on my unread list for some reason. I suppose others had the same thing happen to them. 

I’m now going to check the Will and Kate gossip thread. [emoji4]


----------



## kkfiregirl

Just Askin said:


> Excuse me? Out of line why? How is that a personal attack. I’m intrigued as to how so much is known about Meg? Is it wrong to ask that stuff from those who seem to have so much knowledge about the subject?
> I’d also appreciate you not attacking me personally and trying to tell me what to do. Last i looked this was a gossip thread.



‘You seem very involved with this person’s life.’ What do you call that?


----------



## Just Askin

kkfiregirl said:


> ‘You seem very involved with this person’s life.’ What do you call that?


Well I’d say my assumption is that particular poster is a great fan of Megs and so is a person to ask for information about her.
Is there a reason you are questioning me personally? Your comments are very OT and feel a bit aggressive.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wish they would stop interviewing her half sister.


----------



## Esizzle

lanasyogamama said:


> I wish they would stop interviewing her half sister.


Ugh. I KNOW. the sister comes across really nasty and jealous. She needs to go away.


----------



## brownsugarplum

Meghan is so beautiful and natural at her new role. I am so thrilled for her and Harry and I especially love how their relationship makes some people uncomfortable. I hope the thread changes to Harry and Meghan and people can seethe.


----------



## arnott

brownsugarplum said:


> Meghan is so beautiful and natural at her new role. I am so thrilled for her and Harry *and I especially love how their relationship makes some people uncomfortable. *I hope the thread changes to Harry and Meghan and people can seethe.



Why do you love that?


----------



## Glitterandstuds

DC-Cutie said:


> It interesting to see how people have so much dislike, borderline hate for this woman, like it’s personal.  Rather creepy.



OMG I'm reading through this thread and I'm like WTF. It does seem rather personal.


----------



## redney

Bless some people's hearts around here!

Meghan's Mirror on Twitter has been commenting on her style and fashion choices for about a year. https://twitter.com/meghansmirror?lang=en


----------



## redney

Glitterandstuds said:


> OMG I'm reading through this thread and I'm like WTF. It does seem rather personal.


Right??!!! The viciousness from new posters joining this thread is really uncalled for.


----------



## Grande Latte

Meghan has good fashion taste and she knows what works on her. She's also incredibly comfortable in front of the cameras.

Bear in mind she's not married into the royal family yet so all her clothes are bought with her own money. Once she's royalty, I'm sure she'll get a pretty decent expense account to spend and royal jewels to wear. And then, I think she'll beat Kate fashion-wise. EVERY SINGLE TIME. Really, Meghan will kick Kate's ass.

And shhhh.....I think Meghan's a lot more attractive than Kate. Kate's aging SO fast.


----------



## horse17

Grande Latte said:


> Meghan has good fashion taste and she knows what works on her. She's also incredibly comfortable in front of the cameras.
> 
> Bear in mind she's not married into the royal family yet so all her clothes are bought with her own money. Once she's royalty, I'm sure she'll get a pretty decent expense account to spend and royal jewels to wear. And then, I think she'll beat Kate fashion-wise. EVERY SINGLE TIME. Really, Meghan will kick Kate's ass.
> 
> And shhhh.....I think Meghan's a lot more attractive than Kate. Kate's aging SO fast.


What is the age difference between them?...I agree, Meghan will be much more interesting to watch...


----------



## pursecrzy

Meghan turned 36 in August, Kate turns 36 in early January.


----------



## Esizzle

horse17 said:


> What is the age difference between them?...I agree, Meghan will be much more interesting to watch...


Meghan is a few months older than Kate!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Esizzle

Grande Latte said:


> Meghan has good fashion taste and she knows what works on her. She's also incredibly comfortable in front of the cameras.
> 
> Bear in mind she's not married into the royal family yet so all her clothes are bought with her own money. Once she's royalty, I'm sure she'll get a pretty decent expense account to spend and royal jewels to wear. And then, I think she'll beat Kate fashion-wise. EVERY SINGLE TIME. Really, Meghan will kick Kate's ass.
> 
> And shhhh.....I think Meghan's a lot more attractive than Kate. Kate's aging SO fast.


Agreed Meghan will be the one to watch out for fashion wise. Can not wait to see Meghan rocking the royals jewels and tiaras!!


----------



## horse17

Esizzle said:


> Meghan is a few months older than Kate!


Interesting Meghan def looks younger....


----------



## pursecrzy

I’ve used the ignore feature more in this thread than any other.


----------



## Jayne1

pearlyqueen said:


> I’m no apologist for William but to be fair Harry is no better and just as work shy without even the part time air ambulance job or a family to raise. There’s a breakdown here of days worked on royal duties:
> 
> http://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/cul...24/royal-family-member-worked-most-days-year/


Completely agree. Can you imagine what it's going to be like when the Queen is gone? (I really admire the Queen) Charles and Will. Who will be worse?


----------



## horse17

pursecrzy said:


> I’ve used the ignore feature more in this thread than any other.


Was it something I posted?..lol


----------



## buffym

pearlyqueen said:


> I’m no apologist for William but to be fair Harry is no better and just as work shy without even the part time air ambulance job or a family to raise. There’s a breakdown here of days worked on royal duties:
> 
> http://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/cul...24/royal-family-member-worked-most-days-year/



Harry also founded two charities that run as non profit business, IG and Sentebale like Prince Charles’s the Prince’s trust. William does not have or ever started his own charities. 

Harry has two.


----------



## pursecrzy

horse17 said:


> Was it something I posted?..lol



Nope


----------



## Esizzle

buffym said:


> Harry also founded two charities that run as non profit business, IG and Sentebale like Prince Charles’s the Prince’s trust. William does not have or ever started his own charities.
> 
> Harry has two.


Doesn't Will, Kate and Harry have an umbrella charity together that is a group of a lot of little charities? I think its called Heads Together.


----------



## horse17

I just watched the interview again....and i really did not see Meghan interrupting Harry like others have said.. ..I watched about 90 percent of it..so not sure but if it was at the end ...


----------



## Esizzle




----------



## finer_woman

Esizzle said:


>




I couldn't do the shaking so many hands. I'd be cringing screaming internally over the thought of germs [emoji23]


----------



## Gal4Dior

The boots she wore today were Kurt Geiger Violet over the knee boots in black suede. I love the brand and own two pairs of their pumps, one pair I purchased in London. 

They might have been cuter with a different outfit. They are a bit too slouchy and puss in boots in the style. Link to them is here: 

https://www.kurtgeiger.us/women/shoes/boots/over-the-knee-boots/violet-black-suede-kg-kurt-geiger

I feel badly for people criticizing Kate. I feel she’s bound by rules of the monarchy on how she is to dress. If you see old photos of her, hemlines were higher, necklines were lower and she definitely dressed more modern. 

I’ve heard she can’t even wear colored nail polish now that she is Duchess as it distracts from the royal duties. It’s like if she had any personality, it’s totally been sucked out of her through all the rules and training.

I am fairly certain Meghan will go through something similar, perhaps that’s why the unfortunate pair of boots paired with that skirt came into play today.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LVSistinaMM said:


> I am fairly certain Meghan will go through something similar, perhaps that’s why the unfortunate pair of boots paired with that skirt came into play today.


the un-ironed skirt. it was a hot mess of a look and i heard all the pieces sold out already. here's hoping other women wear those pieces in different ways. i look forward to Meghan dressing better. is there a separate thread for her lack-of-but-hopefully-evolving-style?


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> the un-ironed skirt. it was a hot mess of a look and i heard all the pieces sold out already. here's hoping other women wear those pieces in different ways. i look forward to Meghan dressing better. is there a separate thread for her lack-of-but-hopefully-evolving-style?



The boots are sold out except for tiny sizes in the black suede now. I checked for the coat and it’s no where to be found. It’s hard to find a retailer in the US that carries Line the Label, which sucks because her coat today was the only thing I liked. 

Her bag was hideous, too. It was like a mishmash of great pieces paired horribly.


----------



## VickyB

DC-Cutie said:


> Yeah.... that question wasn’t for you





ccbaggirl89 said:


> the un-ironed skirt. it was a hot mess of a look and i heard all the pieces sold out already. here's hoping other women wear those pieces in different ways. i look forward to Meghan dressing better. is there a separate thread for her lack-of-but-hopefully-evolving-style?



Being "un-ironed" was unfortunate( wrinkling could have happened during travel but that doesn't happen typically to quality wool fabrics - got a wool vibe from the pics don't know if it is) yet easily fixable.  I actually liked the skirt shape until I saw the the front "zipper" which, for me, totally ruined the style potential the skirt had. Style hit and miss really is in the details. Not a fan of the slouchy boot. A nice slim fitted boot would have been more complimentary to the snug top and the fitted top part of the skirt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VickyB said:


> Being "un-ironed" was unfortunate( wrinkling could have happened during travel but that doesn't happen typically to quality wool fabrics - got a wool vibe from the pics don't know if it is) yet easily fixable.  I actually liked the skirt shape until I saw the the front "zipper" which, for me, totally ruined the style potential the skirt had. Style hit and miss really is in the details. Not a fan of the slouchy boot. A nice slim fitted boot would have been more complimentary to the snug top and the fitted top part of the skirt.


yes! that would have looked so much better. the skirt had too much volume and needed slim boots. does she even get a personal stylist? - i assume Catherine does, although i don't know


----------



## Esizzle

ccbaggirl89 said:


> the un-ironed skirt. it was a hot mess of a look and i heard all the pieces sold out already. here's hoping other women wear those pieces in different ways. i look forward to Meghan dressing better. is there a separate thread for her lack-of-but-hopefully-evolving-style?


Yes there is a Meghan Markle style thread in the celebrity style section of the forum!


----------



## VickyB

When I see a slouchy boot, all I can think of is that that was Dorothy (from the Golden Girls) favorite footwear!


----------



## VickyB

LVSistinaMM said:


> The boots are sold out except for tiny sizes in the black suede now. I checked for the coat and it’s no where to be found. It’s hard to find a retailer in the US that carries Line the Label, which sucks because her coat today was the only thing I liked.
> 
> Her bag was hideous, too. It was like a mishmash of great pieces paired horribly.



DIdn't mean to post.


----------



## buffym

Esizzle said:


> Doesn't Will, Kate and Harry have an umbrella charity together that is a group of a lot of little charities? I think its called Heads Together.



Yes, but it isn’t just one person- all three of them share it and Harry has two separate charities on top of that.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> The boots are sold out except for tiny sizes in the black suede now. I checked for the coat and it’s no where to be found. It’s hard to find a retailer in the US that carries Line the Label, which sucks because her coat today was the only thing I liked.
> 
> Her bag was hideous, too. It was like a mishmash of great pieces paired horribly.



The coat is Mackage a Canadian designer, but it is from 2016 Fall.


----------



## Gal4Dior

VickyB said:


> When I see a slouchy boot, all I can think of is that that was Dorothy (from the Golden Girls) favorite footwear!



Omg. Dying! [emoji23] It totally does! It’s just so disappointing because these were such fashion missteps by a a supposed style maven (based on her blogs in the Tig and Instagram, clothing collections). I can’t help but think the royal rules for dressing are already starting to be implemented so she was limited in what she could wear.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> The coat is Mackage a Canadian designer, but it is from 2016 Fall.



Thanks. I must have misread the article today.


----------



## VickyB

Post error.


----------



## VickyB

DC-Cutie said:


> Yeah.... that question wasn’t for you



Mea culpa. I didn't realize that you were singling out somebody in this community to respond and that the rest of us were not permitted to do so.


----------



## VickyB

LVSistinaMM said:


> Omg. Dying! [emoji23] It totally does! It’s just so disappointing because these were such fashion missteps by a a supposed style maven (based on her blogs in the Tig and Instagram, clothing collections). I can’t help but think the royal rules for dressing are already starting to be implemented so she was limited in what she could wear.


----------



## VickyB

Yi


Esizzle said:


> Yes there is a Meghan Markle style thread in the celebrity style section of the forum![/QUOT]
> 
> Fab! Wanted to start one!


----------



## pearlyqueen

redney said:


> Right??!!! The viciousness from new posters joining this thread is really uncalled for.



Viscousness? How? Where? I haven’t seen anything I would describe as vicious towards Meghan on this thread.

If you want to see viciousness head over to the Michael Fassbender thread - his wife has been the target of naked maliciousness for nearly three years and some of those who engage in it are very active elsewhere on tPF, presenting a completely different attitude. It’s a real eye opener. Here’s a link for anyone curious:
https://forum.purseblog.com/index.php?threads/Michael-Fassbender.851097/
Fortunately many of those who actively engaged in her trashing threw in the towel when they married in October, but there are some who still persist, just scroll back a few pages to see extreme viciousness.

Any negative remarks against Meghan here are not in the same league and I sincerely hope that nobody stoops to that level when discussing Meghan.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Grande Latte said:


> Meghan has good fashion taste and she knows what works on her. She's also incredibly comfortable in front of the cameras.
> 
> Bear in mind she's not married into the royal family yet so all her clothes are bought with her own money. Once she's royalty, I'm sure she'll get a pretty decent expense account to spend and royal jewels to wear. And then, I think she'll beat Kate fashion-wise. EVERY SINGLE TIME. Really, Meghan will kick Kate's ass.
> 
> And shhhh.....I think Meghan's a lot more attractive than Kate. Kate's aging SO fast.



Kate has been controlled by “The Firm” since marrying William - they will seek to control Meghan too, just wait and see...
As for aging, that’s what happens living a royal life, lol.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Jayne1 said:


> Completely agree. Can you imagine what it's going to be like when the Queen is gone? (I really admire the Queen) Charles and Will. Who will be worse?



Tough call.... I think Charles; he’s the most entitled, pampered man who really believes that he’s God’s gift and has flunkies attending his every whim. One ex flunky described how Charles insists on having 6 eggs boiled for breakfast just so that at least one was cooked to his taste, and having to hold the urine bottle for him whilst he provided a sample.... He is well known for throwing tantrums when he’s not getting his own way too. Politicians here dread getting letters from him - usually ill informed - poking his nose into politics which is a no-no for royals. William might be work shy but he comes across as fairly decent on a personal level - not that I know for sure of course, but nobody seems to have issues with him like they do with his old Dad. And doesn’t he look old... for a man of 69 he looks 10 years older!

Good luck to Meghan having Charles as her father-in-law! Lol [emoji23]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> Harry also founded two charities that run as non profit business, IG and Sentebale like Prince Charles’s the Prince’s trust. William does not have or ever started his own charities.
> 
> Harry has two.



As well as Heads Together which William and Harry founded, William and Catherine established the Royal Charity Wedding Fund to support various charities and the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. Here’s a link to his charity work:
https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/prince-william

William will one day be king - unless we get rid of the monarchy beforehand - and is supposedly being groomed for this. Harry has no job and no role to play in British constitution so has to be seen to try to justify his privilege. He could do the decent thing, walk away from being a royal and keep himself as he’s a multi millionaire, but that’s never going to happen. 

You will note there are other non royals listed as being charity workers in the same fields who I’m sure are just as committed but fund themselves.


----------



## pearlyqueen

bisbee said:


> I didn’t say she had to like the woman.  I said I was surprised at the level of her dislike.  I was curious what could have led her to that mindset.  And no, she certainly doesn’t have to explain, but she is certainly vocal about her feelings...



Conversely what led to the mindset of those who suddenly love Meghan? What has she ever done to them personally to warrant that level of adoration? Some are even scurrying to order copies of her clothes and make-up to emulate her ...LOL...not to mention the gushing.... yuk.
Nobody is being asked what motivates them and it’s just as pertinent IMO....


----------



## andrashik

*Meghan's maid of honour at her first wedding blames the future Royal for the mysterious end to the marriage: Friend since the age of two describes how fame changed Harry's bride-to-be*

Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.

The actress was 30 years old and riding high on the success of the first series of the American TV drama Suits when she vowed to love and cherish film producer Trevor Engelson in front of more than 100 guests on a beach in Jamaica.

Such was the jubilation at the chic colonial-style hotel that the celebrations lasted several days.

‘Meg literally shone with happiness,’ says Ninaki, who was maid of honour. ‘We’d been like sisters since we were two years old, so I knew she’d always wanted to get married.
‘To see her finally doing that was . . . well, it was a big deal. It was such a moving wedding. I started crying the moment I saw her in her dress. We had the ceremony on the beach. It was so beautiful to watch, beautiful to be a part of. They each wrote their own vows. They loved each other so much.

‘Meg had just finished the first series of Suits [in which she played the bewitching paralegal Rachel Zane]. It was a big part for her — her first full-time role.
‘She’d hustled for years to get there, so that was huge. Trevor was so supportive. He travelled back and forth [from Los Angeles to Toronto, where Suits is filmed] and there was a lot of Skyping and FaceTiming going on.

‘It was an exciting time. This was the man she wanted to have children with.’

Fast forward six years. That marriage is over and Meghan has just become engaged to Prince Harry. Many of the friends who celebrated with the newlyweds on that beach are no longer speaking to Meghan.





Talking about Meghan's marriage to Engelson (above), Ninaki says: ‘It was such a shock when she told me they were getting divorced. After about three seasons of Suits, she called me and said she wanted me to know because it was going to come out in the papers'
Running her finger over this picture of Meghan - the day before she made her vows to Trevor, now 41 - Ninaki says:  ‘Look at her. She was so ecstatic,’ Ninaki smiles fondly. Then her face hardens. ‘The person I knew is not there any more’.




Ninaki says her own falling out with Meghan came after she disapproved of the manner of Meghan’s break-up from Trevor.

But there is no doubt Ninaki misses Meghan as she tells the story of their friendship.

The girls were inseparable from their first days at Hollywood’s private Little Red School House, which they both joined at the age of two, before moving on together at 11 to the Immaculate Heart girls’ high school in Los Angeles.
Choosing her words carefully, Ninaki says she no longer recognises the girl with whom she shared her childhood.
More to the point, she feels desperately for Trevor, for whom the ignominy of seeing his former wife now lovestruck with her very own Prince Charming is almost too much to bear. He truly believed they would grow old together.
‘A month after the divorce, I wanted to see how Trevor was doing,’ says Ninaki. ‘We met and talked. It’s not up to me to speak for Trevor, but I know he was travelling to Toronto every few weeks and would have walked the earth to make their marriage work.

‘I don’t believe she gave him enough of an opportunity. I think there was an element of “out of sight, out of mind” for Meghan.

‘The way she handled it, Trevor definitely had the rug pulled out from under him. He was hurt.’

Meghan reportedly began dating dashing celebrity chef Cory Vitiello who also lives in Toronto, in 2014, a few months after her separation from Trevor.

‘I tried to get details from her, but she wouldn’t tell me. What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan. I think everybody who knew them both was in shock.
‘All I can say now is that I think Meghan was calculated — very calculated — in the way she handled people and relationships. She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends. Once she decides you’re not part of her life, she can be very cold.

‘It’s this shutdown mechanism she has. There’s nothing to negotiate. She’s made her decision and that’s it.’
Ninaki says this not with malice, but sadness, for she and Meghan were ‘like sisters’ for decades.


The article contains a lot of photos with Meghan and her formerly best friend:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5137785/Meghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html
I think it is an interesting article. What do you guys think?


----------



## buffym

pearlyqueen said:


> As well as Heads Together which William and Harry founded, William and Catherine established the Royal Charity Wedding Fund to support various charities and the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. Here’s a link to his charity work:
> https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/prince-william
> 
> William will one day be king - unless we get rid of the monarchy beforehand - and is supposedly being groomed for this. Harry has no job and no role to play in British constitution so has to be seen to try to justify his privilege. He could do the decent thing, walk away from being a royal and keep himself as he’s a multi millionaire, but that’s never going to happen.
> 
> You will note there are other non royals listed as being charity workers in the same fields who I’m sure are just as committed but fund themselves.



Charles funds Harry, William, and Kate. The public pays for their security, when they do charity work abroad, and allow them to live rent free.

Charles will also be King and he has the Prince Trust so William could have his own charity to focus on.


----------



## buffym

andrashik said:


> *Meghan's maid of honour at her first wedding blames the future Royal for the mysterious end to the marriage: Friend since the age of two describes how fame changed Harry's bride-to-be*
> 
> Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.
> 
> The actress was 30 years old and riding high on the success of the first series of the American TV drama Suits when she vowed to love and cherish film producer Trevor Engelson in front of more than 100 guests on a beach in Jamaica.
> 
> Such was the jubilation at the chic colonial-style hotel that the celebrations lasted several days.
> 
> ‘Meg literally shone with happiness,’ says Ninaki, who was maid of honour. ‘We’d been like sisters since we were two years old, so I knew she’d always wanted to get married.
> ‘To see her finally doing that was . . . well, it was a big deal. It was such a moving wedding. I started crying the moment I saw her in her dress. We had the ceremony on the beach. It was so beautiful to watch, beautiful to be a part of. They each wrote their own vows. They loved each other so much.
> 
> ‘Meg had just finished the first series of Suits [in which she played the bewitching paralegal Rachel Zane]. It was a big part for her — her first full-time role.
> ‘She’d hustled for years to get there, so that was huge. Trevor was so supportive. He travelled back and forth [from Los Angeles to Toronto, where Suits is filmed] and there was a lot of Skyping and FaceTiming going on.
> 
> ‘It was an exciting time. This was the man she wanted to have children with.’
> 
> Fast forward six years. That marriage is over and Meghan has just become engaged to Prince Harry. Many of the friends who celebrated with the newlyweds on that beach are no longer speaking to Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talking about Meghan's marriage to Engelson (above), Ninaki says: ‘It was such a shock when she told me they were getting divorced. After about three seasons of Suits, she called me and said she wanted me to know because it was going to come out in the papers'
> Running her finger over this picture of Meghan - the day before she made her vows to Trevor, now 41 - Ninaki says:  ‘Look at her. She was so ecstatic,’ Ninaki smiles fondly. Then her face hardens. ‘The person I knew is not there any more’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ninaki says her own falling out with Meghan came after she disapproved of the manner of Meghan’s break-up from Trevor.
> 
> But there is no doubt Ninaki misses Meghan as she tells the story of their friendship.
> 
> The girls were inseparable from their first days at Hollywood’s private Little Red School House, which they both joined at the age of two, before moving on together at 11 to the Immaculate Heart girls’ high school in Los Angeles.
> Choosing her words carefully, Ninaki says she no longer recognises the girl with whom she shared her childhood.
> More to the point, she feels desperately for Trevor, for whom the ignominy of seeing his former wife now lovestruck with her very own Prince Charming is almost too much to bear. He truly believed they would grow old together.
> ‘A month after the divorce, I wanted to see how Trevor was doing,’ says Ninaki. ‘We met and talked. It’s not up to me to speak for Trevor, but I know he was travelling to Toronto every few weeks and would have walked the earth to make their marriage work.
> 
> ‘I don’t believe she gave him enough of an opportunity. I think there was an element of “out of sight, out of mind” for Meghan.
> 
> ‘The way she handled it, Trevor definitely had the rug pulled out from under him. He was hurt.’
> 
> Meghan reportedly began dating dashing celebrity chef Cory Vitiello who also lives in Toronto, in 2014, a few months after her separation from Trevor.
> 
> ‘I tried to get details from her, but she wouldn’t tell me. What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan. I think everybody who knew them both was in shock.
> ‘All I can say now is that I think Meghan was calculated — very calculated — in the way she handled people and relationships. She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends. Once she decides you’re not part of her life, she can be very cold.
> 
> ‘It’s this shutdown mechanism she has. There’s nothing to negotiate. She’s made her decision and that’s it.’
> Ninaki says this not with malice, but sadness, for she and Meghan were ‘like sisters’ for decades.
> 
> 
> The article contains a lot of photos with Meghan and her formerly best friend:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5137785/Meghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html
> I think it is an interesting article. What do you guys think?



I think this article does not paint the friend in a good light.

Your friend of 31 years tells you she is getting a divorce and you call the soon to be ex husband and ask him if he is okay.

She doesn’t sound like a friend.


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> Charles funds Harry, William, and Kate. The public pays for their security, when they do charity work abroad, and allow them to live rent free.
> 
> Charles will also be King and he has the Prince Trust so William could have his own charity to focus on.



Yes but who funds Charles? The public, like we do all the royal family, none of them have jobs providing an income and their only other source of income is from profits on their vast estates (questionably acquired) and dividends from their colossal investment funds, many off shore to avoid taxes naturally.


----------



## DC-Cutie

VickyB said:


> Mea culpa. I didn't realize that you were singling out somebody in this community to respond and that the rest of us were not permitted to do so.


Well when you quote someone, like I did, that means you’re responding to them. So my question was for the other poster


----------



## Eva1991

If they were so close for so many years and they haven't talked to each other for a few years - for a variety of reasons that are not anyone's business - then why give that interview? Friendship is a personal relationship between two people that can go wrong sometimes. All relationships can go wrong, even close family bonds.The best thing to do in this case is move on and let go, especially when you're an accomplished adult in your mid-30's. Meghan has clearly moved on.


----------



## horse17

pearlyqueen said:


> Kate has been controlled by “The Firm” since marrying William - they will seek to control Meghan too, just wait and see...
> As for aging, that’s what happens living a royal life, lol.


Yes..she has been vocal about her political interests, and I believe “the firm” will want her to stay neutral on that front...right?


----------



## horse17

Ugg....”the firm”....gives me the creeps...remembering that movie and living in any world like that is scary...


----------



## Singra

^ Not expressing a political opinion is one of the most important parts of being a royal isn't it? You can't be seen to show favor or influence anything. 

This article goes into a little of the behind the scenes protocol, it's not the best article in the world but there are parts that are interesting... https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-role-of-meghan-markles-lifetime-princess


----------



## horse17

Singra said:


> ^ Not expressing a political opinion is one of the most important parts of being a royal isn't it? You can't be seen to show favor or influence anything.
> 
> This article goes into a little of the behind the scenes protocol, it's not the best article in the world but there are parts that are interesting... https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-role-of-meghan-markles-lifetime-princess


Interesting article...i would be scared shi$...lol...of course I’m exaggerating...but still,  living under a bubble of rules and regulations with a powerful monarchy watching every move....no way...


----------



## terebina786

Um if my bff called my soon-to-be ex husband after I told her we were getting a divorce, I would not be happy to say the least.   And I don’t see anything wrong with completely cutting off people that are toxic to your life.  I’ve done it many times.


----------



## buffym

pearlyqueen said:


> Yes but who funds Charles? The public, like we do all the royal family, none of them have jobs providing an income and their only other source of income is from profits on their vast estates (questionably acquired) and dividends from their colossal investment funds, many off shore to avoid taxes naturally.



Charles gets his money from the Duchy of Cornwell. It is real estate and investments. Not taxpayers and it is not a gift. People pay him rent- yes, they probably like saying they rented from the future king but it is not a blank check. It is a business he pays taxes on.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-record-high-salary-goes-past-20m-time.html


----------



## Esizzle

Ugh the “bff” sounds like a snake. Just like the half sister probably trying to get her 2 minutes in now that Meghan is going to be a Princess. Oh well. Meghan slap on a tiara and forgot about the haters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

Esizzle said:


> What do we think of the outfit? I like it all except the boots could have been better.


Agree  about the boots. Otherwise i loved the outfit.


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> Charles gets his money from the Duchy of Cornwell. It is real estate and investments. Not taxpayers and it is not a gift. People pay him rent- yes, they probably like saying they rented from the future king but it is not a blank check. It is a business he pays taxes on.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-record-high-salary-goes-past-20m-time.html



The Duchy of Cornwall comprises very questionably acquired lands and assets....

http://duchyofcornwall.eu/duchy02.php


----------



## westjenn

Just Askin said:


> Sorry but I just feel sometimes some people’s BS has to be called. I thought this was Harry’s thread. Not the Meg Thread. Too much gushing if you ask me.


It’s as simple as starting a new thread or not bothering to look at this one.. there’s enough negatively in the world, let’s try to be kind and respectful here?


----------



## pearlyqueen

westjenn said:


> It’s as simple as starting a new thread or not bothering to look at this one.. there’s enough negatively in the world, let’s try to be kind and respectful here?



Trust me this thread is ultra kind and respectful compared to some on tPF; take a peek at Michael Fassbender’s:
https://forum.purseblog.com/index.php?threads/Michael-Fassbender.851097/

Nobody here has trashed Meghan so far.


----------



## Esizzle

I keep forgetting Meghan is 36 she looks to be in her early thirties!! I wonder how soon They will make babies. I hope they get in it right away lol.


----------



## Esizzle

westjenn said:


> It’s as simple as starting a new thread or not bothering to look at this one.. there’s enough negatively in the world, let’s try to be kind and respectful here?


I want to make a Meghan and Harry Thread but there are two threads for them already this one and the royal wedding one  

And I don’t want to be rude to whoever made this thread.


----------



## Eva1991

Singra said:


> ^ Not expressing a political opinion is one of the most important parts of being a royal isn't it? You can't be seen to show favor or influence anything.
> 
> This article goes into a little of the behind the scenes protocol, it's not the best article in the world but there are parts that are interesting... https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-role-of-meghan-markles-lifetime-princess



I'm pretty sure she knows how eat at a dinner or how to have a nice posture while walking.

I'm no royalty but I was taught at age 10 - maybe I was even younger; I don't remember- how to properly use utensils during dinner, i.e. using the ones on the ouside first and moving towards the ones closer to the plate as the courses follow one another. Apropriate posture is also taught to most girls who attend ballet classes from a very young age. I don't think these things are difficult to learn and I'm sure that her background in acting will help.

The toughest thing she'll have to learn is not to express her opinion on politics and issues that can be even remotely considered political. Instructing a mid-30s college educated adult with a career of their own not to express their opinion sounds challenging.


----------



## horse17

Eva1991 said:


> I'm pretty sure she knows how eat at a dinner or how to have a nice posture while walking.
> 
> I'm no royalty but I was taught at age 10 - maybe I was even younger; I don't remember- how to properly use utensils during dinner, i.e. using the ones on the ouside first and moving towards the ones closer to the plate as the courses follow one another. Apropriate posture is also taught to most girls who attend ballet classes from a very young age. I don't think these things are difficult to learn and I'm sure that her background in acting will help.
> 
> The toughest thing she'll have to learn is not to express her opinion on politics and issues that can be even remotely considered political. Instructing a mid-30s college educated adult with a career of their own not to express their opinion sounds challenging.


Agreed.... it would be especially difficult if you're very passionate about your causes...


----------



## Esizzle

It will be hard for her but she can express her views privately just not in the public. From her time before Harry she doesn’t seem to be too outspoken about politics. But she wasn’t famous either so it’s hard to tell


----------



## redney

pearlyqueen said:


> Viscousness? How? Where? I haven’t seen anything I would describe as vicious towards Meghan on this thread.
> 
> If you want to see viciousness head over to the Michael Fassbender thread - his wife has been the target of naked maliciousness for nearly three years and some of those who engage in it are very active elsewhere on tPF, presenting a completely different attitude. It’s a real eye opener. Here’s a link for anyone curious:
> https://forum.purseblog.com/index.php?threads/Michael-Fassbender.851097/
> Fortunately many of those who actively engaged in her trashing threw in the towel when they married in October, but there are some who still persist, just scroll back a few pages to see extreme viciousness.
> 
> Any negative remarks against Meghan here are not in the same league and I sincerely hope that nobody stoops to that level when discussing Meghan.


Oh, doll. You wrote ALL this? How precious.


----------



## Swanky

We typically don't combine threads until they're married.  Then when they divorce we usually separate them too lol


----------



## horse17

her ex resembles harry


----------



## pearlyqueen

redney said:


> Oh, doll. You wrote ALL this? How precious.



Yep [emoji106][emoji106]


----------



## Jayne1

horse17 said:


> her ex resembles harry


That's what I thought!


----------



## Esizzle

Ok I will wait until May to make a Prince Harry and Princess Meghan thread. Duke and Duchess of somewhere.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

pearlyqueen said:


> The Duchy of Cornwall comprises very questionably acquired lands and assets....
> 
> http://duchyofcornwall.eu/duchy02.php



You say something like the Duchy gets money from the people. I back up proof it is a private estate that consists of land management and investments.

You counter with it is questionable...

You originally wrote the public pays - I countered with proof that is incorrect and your answer is not admitting your wrong but that land is questionable.

Questionable does not equal the public pays - it is private business. Prince Charles lives off the money from his investments.

You don't have to like them, but you should not make things up when there is proof you are incorrect.

Furthermore, I don't understand why you keep bringing up Fassbender in this thread about Henry. They have nothing to do with each other.

Lastly, I'm not going to ignore you but I am not going to engage with you anymore. You seem to just enjoy posting whatever you want even if it is your true so i see it is pointless.


----------



## redney

pearlyqueen said:


> Yep [emoji106][emoji106]


So much effort! Nice work![emoji106]


----------



## buffym

To get the topic back on Harry. Harry met with the PM of Fiji. Unfortunately the court circle is not giving him credit for his work. The PM published these pictures on Fiji's website.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Harry is a bit of a Monet...up close he’s not great looking at all, but far away I actually find him attractive. Lol


----------



## pearlyqueen

redney said:


> So much effort! Nice work![emoji106]



Yeah it’s very good work [emoji106][emoji106]


----------



## Jayne1

LVSistinaMM said:


> Harry is a bit of a Monet...up close he’s not great looking at all, but far away I actually find him attractive. Lol


True -- although Harry isn't as cute as he once was.  Same with his brother, but Will got less cute _much_ faster.


----------



## horse17

Jayne1 said:


> True -- although Harry isn't as cute as he once was.  Same with his brother, but Will got less cute _much_ faster.


 I think harrys wild side keeps him attractive...lol


----------



## Esizzle

IMO Will was conventionally pretty when he was younger but he has lost some of the attractiveness as he has gotten over. Harry isn’t conventionally handsome but his personality shines and makes him attractive.


----------



## Sharont2305

Esizzle said:


> IMO Will was conventionally pretty when he was younger but he has lost some of the attractiveness as he has gotten over. Harry isn’t conventionally handsome but his personality shines and makes him attractive.


Totally agree about both. X


----------



## pearlyqueen

buffym said:


> You say something like the Duchy gets money from the people. I back up proof it is a private estate that consists of land management and investments.
> 
> You counter with it is questionable...
> 
> You originally wrote the public pays - I countered with proof that is incorrect and your answer is not admitting your wrong but that land is questionable.
> 
> Questionable does not equal the public pays - it is private business. Prince Charles lives off the money from his investments.
> 
> You don't have to like them, but you should not make things up when there is proof you are incorrect.
> 
> Furthermore, I don't understand why you keep bringing up Fassbender in this thread about Henry. They have nothing to do with each other.
> 
> Lastly, I'm not going to ignore you but I am not going to engage with you anymore. You seem to just enjoy posting whatever you want even if it is your true so i see it is pointless.



 Charles doesn’t own the Duchy but via antiquated arrangements passed down over the centuries, receives all the income from it. He also collects the assets of everyone in Cornwall who dies without a will and beneficiaries. If the monarchy was abolished all the income from the Duchy would revert to the public, so you see he and his family do cost us dear. 

Aside from that Charles, William and family and Harry cost taxpayers millions for all their travel, security and the upkeep of their luxurious homes. 

I don’t make any of this up. Check official websites if you must. Also it wasn’t me who first introduced Fassbender to this thread, but his thread provides a useful comparative tool to accusations of “viciousness”.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Jayne1 said:


> True -- although Harry isn't as cute as he once was.  Same with his brother, but Will got less cute _much_ faster.



I think the only time I thought Will was attractive was when he was in college. That premature balding was so sad. During the wedding, I would just stare at that poor bald spot at the top of his head. Those overhead cameras are not kind. [emoji23]

Looks like Harry is undergoing the same thing, but at least he doesn’t have a receding hairline on top of that.


----------



## Jayne1

andrashik said:


> *Meghan's maid of honour at her first wedding blames the future Royal for the mysterious end to the marriage: Friend since the age of two describes how fame changed Harry's bride-to-be*
> 
> Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.
> 
> The actress was 30 years old and riding high on the success of the first series of the American TV drama Suits when she vowed to love and cherish film producer Trevor Engelson in front of more than 100 guests on a beach in Jamaica.
> 
> Such was the jubilation at the chic colonial-style hotel that the celebrations lasted several days.
> 
> ‘Meg literally shone with happiness,’ says Ninaki, who was maid of honour. ‘We’d been like sisters since we were two years old, so I knew she’d always wanted to get married.
> ‘To see her finally doing that was . . . well, it was a big deal. It was such a moving wedding. I started crying the moment I saw her in her dress. We had the ceremony on the beach. It was so beautiful to watch, beautiful to be a part of. They each wrote their own vows. They loved each other so much.
> 
> ‘Meg had just finished the first series of Suits [in which she played the bewitching paralegal Rachel Zane]. It was a big part for her — her first full-time role.
> ‘She’d hustled for years to get there, so that was huge. Trevor was so supportive. He travelled back and forth [from Los Angeles to Toronto, where Suits is filmed] and there was a lot of Skyping and FaceTiming going on.
> 
> ‘It was an exciting time. This was the man she wanted to have children with.’
> 
> Fast forward six years. That marriage is over and Meghan has just become engaged to Prince Harry. Many of the friends who celebrated with the newlyweds on that beach are no longer speaking to Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talking about Meghan's marriage to Engelson (above), Ninaki says: ‘It was such a shock when she told me they were getting divorced. After about three seasons of Suits, she called me and said she wanted me to know because it was going to come out in the papers'
> Running her finger over this picture of Meghan - the day before she made her vows to Trevor, now 41 - Ninaki says:  ‘Look at her. She was so ecstatic,’ Ninaki smiles fondly. Then her face hardens. ‘The person I knew is not there any more’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ninaki says her own falling out with Meghan came after she disapproved of the manner of Meghan’s break-up from Trevor.
> 
> But there is no doubt Ninaki misses Meghan as she tells the story of their friendship.
> 
> The girls were inseparable from their first days at Hollywood’s private Little Red School House, which they both joined at the age of two, before moving on together at 11 to the Immaculate Heart girls’ high school in Los Angeles.
> Choosing her words carefully, Ninaki says she no longer recognises the girl with whom she shared her childhood.
> More to the point, she feels desperately for Trevor, for whom the ignominy of seeing his former wife now lovestruck with her very own Prince Charming is almost too much to bear. He truly believed they would grow old together.
> ‘A month after the divorce, I wanted to see how Trevor was doing,’ says Ninaki. ‘We met and talked. It’s not up to me to speak for Trevor, but I know he was travelling to Toronto every few weeks and would have walked the earth to make their marriage work.
> 
> ‘I don’t believe she gave him enough of an opportunity. I think there was an element of “out of sight, out of mind” for Meghan.
> 
> ‘The way she handled it, Trevor definitely had the rug pulled out from under him. He was hurt.’
> 
> Meghan reportedly began dating dashing celebrity chef Cory Vitiello who also lives in Toronto, in 2014, a few months after her separation from Trevor.
> 
> ‘I tried to get details from her, but she wouldn’t tell me. What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan. I think everybody who knew them both was in shock.
> ‘All I can say now is that I think Meghan was calculated — very calculated — in the way she handled people and relationships. She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends. Once she decides you’re not part of her life, she can be very cold.
> 
> ‘It’s this shutdown mechanism she has. There’s nothing to negotiate. She’s made her decision and that’s it.’
> Ninaki says this not with malice, but sadness, for she and Meghan were ‘like sisters’ for decades.
> 
> 
> The article contains a lot of photos with Meghan and her formerly best friend:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5137785/Meghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html
> I think it is an interesting article. What do you guys think?


I see her  teensy bit differently now.  Not just that she dropped her closest friend from childhood, but her wedding photos too.


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> I see her  teensy bit differently now.  Not just that she dropped her closest friend from childhood, but her wedding photos too.



She dropped her because her friend was in contact with her ex husband. The friend new Meghan 31 years but decided to still be friends with Meghan's ex. That doesn't sound like friendship. I wouldn't talk to any of my friends if I broke up with a guy and she or he decided to still hangout with him.


----------



## Eva1991

Jayne1 said:


> I see her  teensy bit differently now.  Not just that she dropped her closest friend from childhood, but her wedding photos too.



What's wrong with her wedding photos?


----------



## bisousx

If the other chick was truly Meghan's friend since childhood, she would have supported her, minded her business and not put in her 2 cents about how Meghan should have handled her divorce. 

I'm married now but still vividly remember my last breakup with a bf of 4 years, and how he was able to spin the story so well that nearly all of our mutual friends took his side. There was no cheating and more of a slow disintegration of the relationship from him flirting with our mutual female friends. There were many fights and tears shed. One day I woke up and realized I was fed up.. I cut the cord and because I moved on so well, I was painted as the bad guy.

FWIW, I wouldn't want to stay friends with a girl who continues to hang out with my ex, which is highly suspect IMO. Can't tell you how many girls were waiting in the wings for my breakup.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Esizzle

Lolol!! This is so cute and funny.


----------



## arnott

Esizzle said:


> Lolol!! This is so cute and funny.




I don't get it.     Who are those kids?


----------



## gelbergirl

I was just reading the wiki page for Meghan.
The Ancestry group researched her family, it turns out Harry and Meghan are 17th cousins.  That's so cute.


----------



## sdkitty

interesting article about Meaghean's training (or not) for the "princess" role.  From the Daily Beast.


LVSistinaMM said:


> I think the only time I thought Will was attractive was when he was in college. That premature balding was so sad. During the wedding, I would just stare at that poor bald spot at the top of his head. Those overhead cameras are not kind. [emoji23]
> 
> Looks like Harry is undergoing the same thing, but at least he doesn’t have a receding hairline on top of that.


I thought will was cute as a teen at the time of Diana's death.  The receding hairline has really hurt him.  Harry is cute in a different way.  I don't think he's losing it yet.  Both of them are cuter than Charles every was.


----------



## Esizzle

arnott said:


> I don't get it.     Who are those kids?


Kids from the movie Love Actually. The boy is a red head from London and girl is mixed race american. They meet and fall in love and get engaged when older.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> I see her  teensy bit differently now.  Not just that she dropped her closest friend from childhood, but her wedding photos too.


wow, so many pics! she looks like an average girl who grew up... i don't see anything wrong with these images. but i'm sure dirt will be dug up on her constantly from now on!!


----------



## pearlyqueen

gelbergirl said:


> I was just reading the wiki page for Meghan.
> The Ancestry group researched her family, it turns out Harry and Meghan are 17th cousins.  That's so cute.



Apparently, like her, 50 million Americans are descended from King Edward III and would be 17th cousins too

https://www.channel4.com/news/royal-wedding-william-and-kate-are-very-distant-cousins


----------



## Jayne1

Eva1991 said:


> What's wrong with her wedding photos?


Nothing. She's remarkably photogenic and appeared extremely happy. It looked like a gorgeous affair.


----------



## Grande Latte

Kate and Meghan look quite similar from far away. Similar long brown hair (styled similarly), similar height and similar weight. I'm surprised Harry went for someone who looked like his sister-in-law.

Agree with the other poster that Meghan (by Hollywood standards) is quite a normal, charming girl, but nothing exceptional. If you met her at a VIP party, I can't say that she's the prettiest girl in the room, I'd never remember her face.

But I think it's this approachableness, this girl next door kind of look that is helping people relate to her a little more. If Harry's choice had been someone who looked like Sharon Stone, or Charlize Theron, or Catherine Zeta Jones, Angelina Jolie type mega super, sexy woman, then they will be even harder to relate to. 

Yes. Harry is losing his looks slowly. Don't know why because he's still very young. Maybe it's the hair, but I feel that it's in general. Not as fast as William though.


----------



## Singra

I've also thought there's something similar about Kate and Megans' looks. It's weird because they don't look alike but they also do look alike... I can't explain it... I think it's the jawline, nose and smile and of course their hairstyle is similar.  

Kate Middleton supposedly looks quite a bit like William and Harry's nanny. When the engagement to Kate was announced it was brought up and "experts" commented on how early nurturing experiences can prime your brain for what you find attractive. Maybe it's not so much that Megan is a reminder of Kate but that Megan is a reminder of the nanny.


----------



## Singra

The entire human race is more closely related than people tend to think. It's more remarkable if you're not linked to some famous descendant than if you are.


----------



## Eva1991

Singra said:


> I've also thought there's something similar about Kate and Megans' looks. It's weird because they don't look alike but they also do look alike... I can't explain it... I think it's the jawline, nose and smile and of course their hairstyle is similar.
> 
> Kate Middleton supposedly looks quite a bit like William and Harry's nanny. When the engagement to Kate was announced it was brought up and "experts" commented on how *early nurturing experiences can prime your brain for what you find attractive*. Maybe it's not so much that Megan is a reminder of Kate but that Megan is a reminder of the nanny.



I've read that too and it seems quite reasonable if you think about it.
However, I just googled William and Harry's nanny - I haven't heard about her similarity to Kate before - and apart from the fact that they both have the same hair color I don't see any other similarities.
As far as Meghan is concerned, the only thing she has in common with Kate is the haircolor and maybe the hairstyle. They're both very attractive but they don't look alike at all IMO.


----------



## White Orchid

Personally I don’t think Meghan is overly attractive.  But why she does stand out for me, in a way, is her almost vivacious smile.  And for me, someone who smiles a lot, radiates beauty - even if it’s not “beauty” in the conventional sense.


----------



## myown

westjenn said:


> Breaking news:
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5124891/Harry-Meghan-marry-Windsor-Castle-MAY.html
> 
> Are there any UK based members out there that can explain why they made a point of saying that the Royal Family would be paying for the wedding?


does the article say that? i did not read it.

but my guess is DM-readers hate the royals and love to mention that THEY (the taxpayers) pay for everything the royals wear or do. I also read lots of comments alike the line "now we have to feed another sponge" and "hope she pays for her own clothes and not ME" and so on. So maybe DM jumped on that train


----------



## myown

bagsforme said:


> ^oh boy, you know her family is going to be coming out of the woodwork now.  $$$.
> 
> Saw her half sister interviewed yesterday.   Said she hasn't spoken to her in over a year.  And doubt she'd be invited to wedding.


would you invite her? not spoken to her in a year and instead of talking to you she went to the camera?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

Truth is, only Harry decides whether or not he wants to hear about rumors on Meghan. Right now he's so head over heels for her, that I doubt anything that comes up will deter his plans. Anything.

Not taking sides here, but if too many people from Meghan's past come out and they all start bad mouthing her, and NO ONE says anything remotely nice about her. What does this say about her as a human being? They need to do some damage control. Yes, she's captured Harry's heart right now, but how long does infatuation last?


----------



## pearlyqueen

myown said:


> does the article say that? i did not read it.
> 
> but my guess is DM-readers hate the royals and love to mention that THEY (the taxpayers) pay for everything the royals wear or do. I also read lots of comments alike the line "now we have to feed another sponge" and "hope she pays for her own clothes and not ME" and so on. So maybe DM jumped on that train



DM readers on the whole do not hate the royals, if anything they are more enamoured of them than readers of other newspapers.

There are a LOT of people in the UK though who want to dispense with the monarchy and bitterly resent funding the lot of them. 

As usual, there is the official spin that the royal family will pay for the wedding but the truth is the bulk of it will be paid for by taxpayers as the heftiest costs are for police, security, road closures and clear up costs.


----------



## myown

Grande Latte said:


> Truth is, only Harry decides whether or not he wants to hear about rumors on Meghan. Right now he's so head over heels for her, that I doubt anything that comes up will deter his plans. Anything.
> 
> Not taking sides here, but if too many people from Meghan's past come out and they all start bad mouthing her, and NO ONE says anything remotely nice about her. What does this say about her as a human being? They need to do some damage control. Yes, she's captured Harry's heart right now, but how long does infatuation last?


its just like YELP etc. talking bad is easier than saying something nice


----------



## Grande Latte

No. It's not hard to say something nice about someone, especially if she's about to marry into royalty. Just something simple like Meghan is an incredibly nice and intelligent woman, but we lost touch. Glad she's doing very well these days. That will suffice. 

On the contrary since Meghan is marrying royalty soon to be powerful, I find it HARDER to jump out and attack her. I'd be afraid of retaliation. I wouldn't want to be on her bad side.


----------



## buffym

Grande Latte said:


> Truth is, only Harry decides whether or not he wants to hear about rumors on Meghan. Right now he's so head over heels for her, that I doubt anything that comes up will deter his plans. Anything.
> 
> Not taking sides here, but if too many people from Meghan's past come out and they all start bad mouthing her, and NO ONE says anything remotely nice about her. What does this say about her as a human being? They need to do some damage control. Yes, she's captured Harry's heart right now, but how long does infatuation last?



But there have been nice articles about Meghan, but people ignore them or say they are PR. Her coworkers on Suits and the producer of Suits have all released statements of support. Her former college professor has spoken well of her.

Her ex husband and ex boyfriend has not spoken against her. Instead it is a "friend" who was upset about the divorce.

I think the type of negative information matter and I feel Harry would be a fool to listen to an ex friend who admitted she choose her friends future ex husband over the friend.

Meghan should not be blamed for a toxic person who admits to doing something toxic but acts like she should be forgiven.

I also think Harry knows Meghan more than us outsiders looking in. Like Harry said in the engagement interview people think they know him.

The public only gets a snippet of their life and we form an opinion. But an opinion is not truth especially when it is about a public person the public actually does not know.

So, I choose to trust Harry's judgement of what Harry wants and needs and unless she commits a crime or something a long that lines I will give her the benefit of doub.

Because again I don't know Harry, I just have a positive perception of his work and public persona which leads me to have one of Meghan because there is no concrete wrong.


----------



## Eva1991

buffym said:


> But there have been nice articles about Meghan, but people ignore them or say they are PR. Her coworkers on Suits and the producer of Suits have all released statements of support. Her former college professor has spoken well of her.
> 
> Her ex husband and ex boyfriend has not spoken against her. Instead it is a "friend" who was upset about the divorce.
> 
> I think the type of negative information matter and I feel Harry would be a fool to listen to an ex friend who admitted she choose her friends future ex husband over the friend.
> 
> Meghan should not be blamed for a toxic person who admits to doing something toxic but acts like she should be forgiven.
> 
> I also think Harry knows Meghan more than us outsiders looking in. Like Harry said in the engagement interview people think they know him.
> 
> The public only gets a snippet of their life and we form an opinion. But an opinion is not truth especially when it is about a public person the public actually does not know.
> 
> So, I choose to trust Harry's judgement of what Harry wants and needs and unless she commits a crime or something a long that lines I will give her the benefit of doub.
> 
> Because again I don't know Harry, I just have a positive perception of his work and public persona which leads me to have one of Meghan because there is no concrete wrong.



Very well said. Do you remember what was written in the press about Kate when she married William? There were so many articles painting Kate in the worst light possible. However, she's been married to William for 6 years now and they're expecting their third child together. This goes to show that most of what's written out there is mainly negative untruths used to attract clicks and views.

I think that both Meghan and Harrry know how to handle publicity. Meghan was in a hit TV show for a few years before she met Harry and she's also done many other TV appearances. I've watched some youtube videos of interviews of her and she seems quite confident in front of the camera. Harry, on the other hand, has been in the public eye since he was born. They are both in their mid-30s and well educated. I think they're smart enough to know what they want.


----------



## Gal4Dior

It’s really easy to “love” or be enamored by someone you don’t know well. This goes for Harry, Meghan, and all of us (the general public). We just don’t know them well enough personally to know for sure, and it doesn’t seem many Royals have the opportunity to know each other well before marriage (with the exception of maybe Will and Kate) due to the restrictions on “dating” when being a monarch. The public scrutiny alone must be exhausting for them.

16 months of dating long distance doesn’t strike me as enough time to get to know each other, especially if you’re still feeling the feelings of infatuation, but that’s just my opinion.


----------



## DC-Cutie

LVSistinaMM said:


> It’s really easy to “love” or be enamored by someone you don’t know well. This goes for Harry, Meghan, and all of us (the general public). We just don’t know them well enough personally to know for sure, and it doesn’t seem many Royals have the opportunity to know each other well before marriage (with the exception of maybe Will and Kate) due to the restrictions on “dating” when being a monarch. The public scrutiny alone must be exhausting for them.
> 
> 16 months of dating long distance doesn’t strike me as enough time to get to know each other, especially if you’re still feeling the feelings of infatuation, but that’s just my opinion.


 Charles and Camilla had PLENTY of time to get to know each other.  LOL

then there are some people together for years, get married and then divorce shortly thereafter.  Claiming they didn't really know their partners.  Think about people in arranged marriages.  One of my best friends had an arranged marriage. I asked her 'what about love?'.  She said her parents told her 'love will come later'.  They met 3 times before their engagement and have been married for 15 years now.


----------



## Gal4Dior

DC-Cutie said:


> Charles and Camilla had PLENTY of time to get to know each other.  LOL
> 
> then there are some people together for years, get married and then divorce shortly thereafter.  Claiming they didn't really know their partners.  Think about people in arranged marriages.  One of my best friends had an arranged marriage. I asked her 'what about love?'.  She said her parents told her 'love will come later'.  They met 3 times before their engagement and have been married for 15 years now.



Actually my friends who have arranged marriages - actually wanted it because it’s is a big part of their culture which treasures the bonds of marriage and that they don’t go in with an “American” expectation of being head over heels in Love. It’s more realistic, they say...so couples tend to stay together. They claim “Americans” tend to get married due to infatuation.

I’m not trying to insult anyone with that comment above, since I have been married twice with a partner of my choosing and I am an American. Lol.


----------



## Eva1991

No one can predict the future and I don't think that anyone who's getting married is thinking about divorce whether the marriage is a result of love and year long courtship or an arrangement. The dynamics that develop in a household of two married people are quite unique; there is not "one fits all" rule. There are many cases of people who'd been together for years before they got married and their marriage ended with divorce and there are cases of arranged marriages that proved to be more solid than one whould have initially thought.

Time will tell how successful Harry's and Meghan's wedding will be but at the time being I think the nice thing to do is wish them happiness. They seem quite happy and in love themselves and we have no reason to doubt that. Besides, as I've said in one of my previous posts, I think they both know what they're getting into. Neither of them seems naive to me.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

My current relationship has been for three years. The first half of it we spent more time apart than we did together, but I firmly believe it was beneficial in the long run. Being long distance taught us that a relationship is a choice, and it also taught us effective communication. I've been in long distance relationships where I decided it wasn't worth it, but my current relationship definitely was, which was also beneficial. I think it helped us get to know each other because being long distance basically bares all your flaws, lol. So from my personal experiences with LDRs, I wouldn't say that the odds are against Meghan and Harry because of theirs.


----------



## White Orchid

LVSistinaMM said:


> Actually my friends who have arranged marriages - actually wanted it because it’s is a big part of their culture which treasures the bonds of marriage and that they don’t go in with an “American” expectation of being head over heels in Love. It’s more realistic, they say...so couples tend to stay together. They claim “Americans” tend to get married due to infatuation.
> 
> I’m not trying to insult anyone with that comment above, since I have been married twice with a partner of my choosing and I am an American. Lol.


I’m the same.  I have friends and have friends, whose parents had arranged marriages and it worked for them.  It didn’t work for my late grandmother (she was very young and her family very poor), but for many cultures (particularly from the sub-continent), it works.  What do I know?  They say true love only comes after you’ve been together.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bellebellebelle19 said:


> My current relationship has been for three years. The first half of it we spent more time apart than we did together, but I firmly believe it was beneficial in the long run. Being long distance taught us that a relationship is a choice, and it also taught us effective communication. I've been in long distance relationships where I decided it wasn't worth it, but my current relationship definitely was, which was also beneficial. I think it helped us get to know each other because being long distance basically bares all your flaws, lol. So from my personal experiences with LDRs, I wouldn't say that the odds are against Meghan and Harry because of theirs.



I applaud you for 3 years of long distance. It’s definitely a challenge not to see each other all the time, I’m sure.

I do have disagree that long distance bares all your flaws. From my experience, living together bares all flaws. Having a to share a small space with any significant other can make you realize just how many flaws we have.


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> I applaud you for 3 years of long distance. It’s definitely a challenge not to see each other all the time, I’m sure.
> 
> I do have disagree that long distance bares all your flaws. From my experience, living together bares all flaws. Having a to share a small space with any significant other can make you realize just how many flaws we have.


yes, and there's a lot of compromise


----------



## horse17

Esizzle said:


> Are we to believe that an 11 year would lie in an interview so that 25 some odd years later she can appear more charitable when she is engaged to a Prince of a different country? OKAYYYYY.
> 
> Here is Meghan's UN speech. If anyone is interested. She has great public speaking skills





Esizzle said:


> Are we to believe that an 11 year would lie in an interview so that 25 some odd years later she can appear more charitable when she is engaged to a Prince of a different country? OKAYYYYY.
> 
> Here is Meghan's UN speech. If anyone is interested. She has great public speaking skills



Just saw this.....dont hate on me, but some parts of this seem a bit exaggerated..when she was talking about when she was eleven and so hurt and offended.....I do commend her for her work though....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pearlyqueen

Eva1991 said:


> No one can predict the future and I don't think that anyone who's getting married is thinking about divorce whether the marriage is a result of love and year long courtship or an arrangement. The dynamics that develop in a household of two married people are quite unique; there is not "one fits all" rule. There are many cases of people who'd been together for years before they got married and their marriage ended with divorce and there are cases of arranged marriages that proved to be more solid than one whould have initially thought.
> 
> Time will tell how successful Harry's and Meghan's wedding will be but at the time being I think the nice thing to do is wish them happiness. They seem quite happy and in love themselves and we have no reason to doubt that. Besides, as I've said in one of my previous posts, I think they both know what they're getting into. Neither of them seems naive to me.



A lot of truth in all this. Like you say they look like they are in love and there’s no reason to doubt it, unless you are mean minded. 

It’s a shame that not all couples in love can be perceived to be just that and have happiness wished upon them. Some people are really cynical and decide its all false and for PR purposes.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

pearlyqueen said:


> A lot of truth in all this. Like you say they look like they are in love and there’s no reason to doubt it, unless you are mean minded.
> 
> It’s a shame that not all couples in love can be perceived to be just that and have happiness wished upon them. Some people are really cynical and decide its all false and for PR purposes.


It's true, and it's also sad that some celebrities do start "relationships" for PR purposes. I don't believe based on the little we've seen so far that M&H's relationship is one of them though.


----------



## Esizzle

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It's true, and it's also sad that some celebrities do start "relationships" for PR purposes. I don't believe based on the little we've seen so far that M&H's relationship is one of them though.


Some celeb couples absolutely do have PR relationships. Meghan and Harry are too classy for that and have no need for it. Theyre just giddy in love with each other at this stage. Harry couldnt keep his hands off his fiance at their first official engagement


----------



## pearlyqueen

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It's true, and it's also sad that some celebrities do start "relationships" for PR purposes. I don't believe based on the little we've seen so far that M&H's relationship is one of them though.



IA, nothing to suggest that Meghan and Harry’s relationship is orchestrated or PR. 

The number of celebrities who enter into PR relationships is relatively low, and it’s usually fairly obvious - they maximise any photo opportunities and the “relationships” are short lived. Sadly some people choose to label any they don’t approve of as false or PR; there are several fandoms that have been polluted by the crazy theories these disaffected people promote. It’s telling how some relationships that are “approved” of are gushed over and others that shatter fantasies are trashed by the same people.

As I’ve stated, I am opposed to royalty but don’t harbour any ill feeling towards Harry and Meghan as individuals. They look happy together and I hope they make their marriage work... although I’d like it much better if they exited royalty and lived as private individuals.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Is it obvious? With all the revelations that came out last week about Matt Lauer, we've learned that he was encouraged to get married when he did because top brass didn't think a playboy image was good for a host on a show with such a large female audience. So he was introduced to his wife and married her quickly after. When she had enough and filed for divorce, he worked out an arrangement with her where they'd live separate lives but remain married to help his image.
I think the tell tale sign that Meghan and Harry are genuine is that she's giving up A LOT to marry him. She's said she's giving up her career. If there were a way for her to be a duchess and continue acting, I could see the trade off - playboy prince stabilizes his image, C list actress raises her profile. But she's walking away from her career and replacing it with marriage and public service. To me, that's a life choice and not a PR choice.


----------



## Esizzle

Celebitchy says that Meghan will spend Christmas with the Windsors. 

Future royal Meghan Markle plans to celebrate Christmas with the Queen this year, breaking tradition that blocked Kate Middleton from enjoying royal family festivities in 2010. Experts say the actress, 36, will join the Windsors for their annual, three-day celebrations at Sandringham – a privilege usually reserved for members of the royal family.

Richard Fitzwilliams, an expert in royal affairs, explained Meghan’s family still reside in the US, meaning she will likely get cosy with the Queen this year instead. Although it breaks traditional protocol, PR advisers claim the gesture is needed to avoid ill feeling with Meghan, who is due to marry Prince Harry in 2018. But the move could spark tension with Meghan’s soon-to-be sister-in-law Kate Middleton who was snubbed from the celebrations seven years ago.

The Duchess of Cambridge was forced to wait until she was married before being allowed to sit at the royal dining table. Mike Tindall was also prevented from joining until he wed Princess Anne’s daughter, Zara. Mr Fitzwilliams told the Express: “It is expected Meghan will join Harry and the rest of the Royal Family for Christmas on the Queen ‘s estate in Norfolk this year. In 2010 Kate was not invited to do so after her engagement to William nor was Mike Tindall after his to the Princess Royal’s daughter Zara Phillips and only spouses and close family are usually invited. However Harry and Meghan will be living together at Nottingham Cottage at Kensington Palace and her family are in the United States. The monarchy relies heavily on precedent and tradition but it also makes its own.

More photo ops yay!


----------



## PatsyCline

Kate could spend the holidays with her family, where Meghan would be alone, or forced to fly to the US. 

Being that she’s already living there, it would seem odd to not include her. 

But then I’m not up on Royal protocol. 

Maybe Harry would spend the holidays in the US with Meghan had she not be invited.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Reports have always indicated that Harry was one of the Queen's favorites, so it's quite possible that she made an exception because it's for Harry.


----------



## horse17

Good for her...this must be so exciting for her...


----------



## Eva1991

I think that the fact that William is to become King someday probably influnced the BRF's decision not to include his then fiancee in their official Christmas celebrations. They're very strict on protocol from what I understand but I guess since Harry is quite far from the throne now they can let him "get away with it". Moreover, as *PatsyCline *said, if they didn't grant Meghan permission to celebrate Christmas with Harry, she would have to fly back to the US to spend the holidays with her family or Harry would have to fly with her so that she doesn't spend Christmas alone and all this would create very bad publicity for the BRF in general.


----------



## pearlyqueen

What a lot of twaddle by this self proclaimed royal “expert” hinting at tensions with Catherine over a Christmas invite and suggesting it was a “snub”. He is not part of the royals circle he just likes people to think he is. 

If there is one thing certain, the queen would never let it be known if she had favourite grandchildren. People are getting carried away and writing their own scripts.


----------



## pearlyqueen

LibbyRuth said:


> Is it obvious? With all the revelations that came out last week about Matt Lauer, we've learned that he was encouraged to get married when he did because top brass didn't think a playboy image was good for a host on a show with such a large female audience. So he was introduced to his wife and married her quickly after. When she had enough and filed for divorce, he worked out an arrangement with her where they'd live separate lives but remain married to help his image.
> I think the tell tale sign that Meghan and Harry are genuine is that she's giving up A LOT to marry him. She's said she's giving up her career. If there were a way for her to be a duchess and continue acting, I could see the trade off - playboy prince stabilizes his image, C list actress raises her profile. But she's walking away from her career and replacing it with marriage and public service. To me, that's a life choice and not a PR choice.



 No idea who Matt Lauer is but just because he had an arranged marriage it doesn’t mean that’s the norm.

Meghan might be giving up her career, but truthfully it’s not all that and she is gaining one hell of a lot more in marrying Harry than a part in an “ok tv show”. 

I’ve already said I’ve no reason to believe they are PR; it’s just nasty and childish to go around accusing well known people of being fake or PR when it’s blatantly clear they are in love and committed to each other. Why do it?


----------



## Eva1991

The press will have a field day trying to create a rift between Catherine and Meghan.


----------



## LibbyRuth

pearlyqueen said:


> No idea who Matt Lauer is but just because he had an arranged marriage it doesn’t mean that’s the norm.
> 
> Meghan might be giving up her career, but truthfully it’s not all that and she is gaining one hell of a lot more in marrying Harry than a part in an “ok tv show”.
> 
> I’ve already said I’ve no reason to believe they are PR; it’s just nasty and childish to go around accusing well known people of being fake or PR when it’s blatantly clear they are in love and committed to each other. Why do it?



Matt Lauer is a former morning talk show host in the US who was fired last week after his network learned he was harassing women who worked there. I didn't cite him as an example to prove that PR couples are the norm. I cited him as an example to illustrate that it's not always very obvious when a couple is a PR arrangement and not true love.
I also acknowledged that Megan's career was not huge - though if she were to continue acting in her new role, I think that she'd get more offers because she's become so well known.  Her star power has most certainly grown in the past few months.
Why speculate about couples? Because gossip is a fun activity, as evidenced by the number of people won particiapte in the celebrity threads here on a regular basis. As long as the gossip is done with a premise of speculation and not a declaration of fact, I don't see the harm.



Eva1991 said:


> The press will have a field day trying to create a rift between Catherine and Meghan.



Probably.  And I bet that Catherine and Megan will follow the lead set by Diana and Sarah, taking opportunities for photo ops showing them really enjoying being together to discredit any claims made to the contrary.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Eva1991 said:


> The press will have a field day trying to create a rift between Catherine and Meghan.



Won’t they just.... and try to fill both their heads with insecurities whilst they are about it. 

They did the same with Diana and Sarah Ferguson and Diana, a very insecure woman, fell out with her sister-in-law partly due to some throwaway remark Sarah allegedly made about her. They didn’t speak for a year and weren’t reconciled before her death... Who says gossip is harmless...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Esizzle

Who says Sarah and Diana wanted to be reunited?

There are already a ton of articles about how Kate is worried she won't be the center of attention anymore now that Meghan has arrived. Who cares. As I have said before Kate is the future queen and mother of the future king. She will always have plenty of attention. I am sure Kate and Meghan will get along just fine. They might not end up being best friends but they will be friends and cordial.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Kate and Meghan have already spent plenty of time together. Early reports were they got along quite well, that approval from Kate and William mattered a great deal to Harry and he got it. I've also read that Kate has been instrumental in showing Meghan the ropes. It's fun to create cat fight stories, but that doesn't mean they are true. Kate's primary focus right now is her children. If Meghan comes along and takes some of the spotlight and does some of the appearance duties to take the heat off of Kate, all the better.
It's funny to me how quickly the stories can change. Kate was being criticized for not doing enough public appearances and not embracing the spotlight enough.  Now that there's "competition" for that role, all the sudden she's upset that she's being pushed out of a job that people thought she was resisting anyway?


----------



## Eva1991

LibbyRuth said:


> Kate and Meghan have already spent plenty of time together. Early reports were they got along quite well, that approval from Kate and William mattered a great deal to Harry and he got it. I've also read that Kate has been instrumental in showing Meghan the ropes. It's fun to create cat fight stories, but that doesn't mean they are true. Kate's primary focus right now is her children. If Meghan comes along and takes some of the spotlight and does some of the appearance duties to take the heat off of Kate, all the better.
> It's funny to me how quickly the stories can change. Kate was being criticized for not doing enough public appearances and not embracing the spotlight enough.  Now that there's "competition" for that role, all the sudden she's upset that she's being pushed out of a job that people thought she was resisting anyway?



I agree. Meghan's arrival will take the heat off Kate at least for a while and let her focus on her children. She has two already and is expecting her third one that will only be a few months old at the time of Harry's and Meghan's wedding. I'm sure she'll appreciate being able to spend some extra time at home.

As far as Meghan is concerned, she doesn't seem like the type of person who would want a rivalry with Kate. Let's not foget that Kate is the wife and mother of future kings. I don't think that anyone can take that away from her and Meghan is too smart to make outshining Kate her sole purpose.

Moreover, the two brothers seem quite close to each other and Harry seeked William's and Kate's approval of Meghan. I think they will all get along fine.


----------



## Hackensack

X


----------



## boxermom

pearlyqueen said:


> No idea who Matt Lauer is but just because he had an arranged marriage it doesn’t mean that’s the norm.



You're not missing anything by not knowing about Matt Lauer. I've always thought he was an overrated, smug, self-absorbed jerk. Glad he was fired.

I find your opinions and information about the Royals interesting. I've always wondered if I would like living in the U.K. because I love traveling there. I guess it would have the good and the bad, like most places.


----------



## Jayne1

LibbyRuth said:


> Kate and Meghan have already spent plenty of time together. Early reports were they got along quite well, that approval from Kate and William mattered a great deal to Harry and he got it. I've also read that Kate has been instrumental in showing Meghan the ropes. It's fun to create cat fight stories, but that doesn't mean they are true. Kate's primary focus right now is her children. If Meghan comes along and takes some of the spotlight and does some of the appearance duties to take the heat off of Kate, all the better.


It's all gossip and speculation, but the insider rumour has been that Kate would have nothing to do with MM. She wasn't official, just a girlfriend and Kate snubbed her, even when when heading out to the stores and going to the same places.

Now that MM is official, it might be different, but the stories have been that Kate was feeling her royalness and MM was a nobody.


----------



## Grande Latte

I wouldn't be surprised if Kate continues to snub MM. When William becomes King, Kate will become Queen, wouldn't she? She's above everyone. Why would she give two cents about MM!!!

It's common sense that in-laws don't get along. That's across culture, nationalities and race. It would be almost impossible for them to be fond of each other. The chances are slim. Especially if you put two attractive women together, in the same age group, both wanting to be the center of attention! Hello???

What will be will be. Who cares. It's their business. We're just here to gossip and watch the fashion.

I do wonder; however, if MM is going to start picking up the British accent soon. It's almost inevitable.


----------



## horse17

^ I dont get the impression that Kate wants to be the center of attention...doesn’t seem to love the spotlight....seems like shes happy having children and being married to will...and what ever comes later...


----------



## Eva1991

^ I agree with *horse17*. Kate's not a fan of being in the spotlight. She knows she has to sometimes but I think that deep inside all she wants is a quiet family life with William and her children; at least until William becomes king. With Meghan in the pitcure as well, Kate will probably be relieved that she won't be the center of attention 24/7.


----------



## buffym

Harry wearing a new suit. He attended London’s Fire Brigade Carol.


----------



## finer_woman

buffym said:


> View attachment 3898799
> 
> 
> Harry wearing a new suit. He attended London’s Fire Brigade Carol.



I can't really pinpoint why but I don't like him in this suit. Maybe the color on him?


----------



## Jayne1

Eva1991 said:


> ... I think that deep inside all she wants is a quiet family life with William and her children; at least until William becomes king.


Well, if it's a quiet life with children she wants, she picked the wrong guy.  lol

It's her duty to be in the public eye.


----------



## gazoo

finer_woman said:


> I can't really pinpoint why but I don't like him in this suit. Maybe the color on him?



Totally washes him out, IMO.


----------



## afsweet

i think he needs a more tailored suit. he's skinny, and the suit doesn't look right on him.


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> It's all gossip and speculation, but the insider rumour has been that Kate would have nothing to do with MM. She wasn't official, just a girlfriend and Kate snubbed her, even when when heading out to the stores and going to the same places.
> 
> Now that MM is official, it might be different, but the stories have been that Kate was feeling her royalness and MM was a nobody.


I heard/read these rumors as well. But some of these “reports” also say Meghan went overboard trying to cozy up to Kate, and rubbed her the wrong way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Eva1991

Tivo said:


> I heard/read these rumors as well. But some of these “reports” also say Meghan went overboard trying to cozy up to Kate, and rubbed her the wrong way.



Kate is married to a future king and mother to another one. She's been with William for ages and married for 6 years. I would not find it odd if she wasn't very warm towards Meghan _at first_, when she was _just _Harry's girlfriend. After all, Harry had plenty of girlfriends over the years. What if they broke up? 

Harry's engagement however made his relationship with Meghan official and she will soon be a member of the royal family. I think that this gives the two ladies a chance to get to know each other better, if they want to. I don't think that Meghan's image will have a negative impact on Kate's image. They seem to have quite different personalities. I don't think they'll clash.


----------



## Tivo

^^^
Neither woman can negatively effect the other’s image as far as I’m concerned.
They are individuals. But Meghan is an actress and knows how to play a role so I suspect she’s figuring out how best to use those skills in this situation. There is a lot she’ll have to quietly endure because she’s the outsider. If Kate is cold to her there is nothing Meghan can do about it. But if this is the life she desperately wants after a year and a half, well, she’s a big girl.


----------



## Esizzle

I doubt Meghan really cares what Kate thinks of her. If they don't get along they will just live their separate lives and have to see each other for a short time at engagements and family holidays.


----------



## Tivo

Esizzle said:


> I doubt Meghan really cares what Kate thinks of her. If they don't get along they will just live their separate lives and have to see each other for a short time at engagements and family holidays.


True, but being snubbed is not a good feeling. Especially in new surroundings. So it’s unfortunate if that happens. But jumping all-in after a year and a half...I imagine she wants/needs as many friendly faces around as possible. The hard part hasn’t even started for her.


----------



## Jayne1

Esizzle said:


> I doubt Meghan really cares what Kate thinks of her. If they don't get along they will just live their separate lives and have to see each other for a short time at engagements and family holidays.


That's what I think.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Esizzle said:


> I doubt Meghan really cares what Kate thinks of her. If they don't get along they will just live their separate lives and have to see each other for a short time at engagements and family holidays.



She has no family in the UK so I would think she would be heavily dependent on her in laws to become her adopted family. Nothing can be more lonely and like other have said, the hard part hasn’t even started. 

The world always thought Diana and Charles were some fairytale, but it ended up that fairytales do not exist. The monarchy and its antiquated rules can be extremely trying for someone young and independent (as well as vocal) as Meghan. Good luck to her. I don’t think she even realizes what’s she’s in for. Right now is the honeymoon stage.


----------



## Esizzle

I disagree with you on that. I think she has a very good idea of what it means to marry Harry and live in a fishbowl for the rest of her life. I am sure Harry has tried to prepare her as much as possible before proposing too. Of course knowing a truth and living it are two different things. So there will be an adjustment period. As for family, I am sure Meghan will make good friends when she is married and finds her circle. Sometimes good friends are more beneficial than family.


----------



## horse17

^ plus, she will probably start her own family...


----------



## Esizzle

Yes! Little redhead mixed royal babies coming in 2019 lol.

As for Kate making friends in the royal family, I don't think she is a very friendly type. Its been well known that Kate is very close to her own family and prefers to spend as much time as possible with her mom and sister. Theres also been widespread gossip that Kate does not get along with Will's cousins Princess Beatrice and Eugene. She does get along with Zara, Phillip and Sophie according to the gossip. So it wouldn't be unusual which every way Kate and Meghan's relationship turns out. Obviously the press is going to create drama and gossip because thats fun. And thats what we are here for lol.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Grande Latte said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if Kate continues to snub MM. When William becomes King, Kate will become Queen, wouldn't she? She's above everyone. Why would she give two cents about MM!!!
> 
> It's common sense that in-laws don't get along. That's across culture, nationalities and race. It would be almost impossible for them to be fond of each other. The chances are slim. Especially if you put two attractive women together, in the same age group, both wanting to be the center of attention! Hello???
> 
> What will be will be. Who cares. It's their business. We're just here to gossip and watch the fashion.
> 
> I do wonder; however, if MM is going to start picking up the British accent soon. It's almost inevitable.


Sadly, I agree with this. I think it's sad because women do tend to hate on each other and compete instead of supporting one another. I'm sure some envy from both sides will be there, but Kate will be Queen one day and her role and image are fairly set, and her life is so different from Meghan. Meghan will have freedom that Kate never will. But I think Kate has a huge advantage because she has already been through much of the scrutiny and media hardships that Meghan still has to endure. They are both very lovely women and there is no necessity for them to like one another, but hopefully they do.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Comments from British actor Matt Smith, who is playing Prince Philip in _The Crown_.


----------



## Eva1991

^ I would not go as far as to say I feel sorry for her. She's not a teenage girl all wrapped up in a fairytale romance with a Prince. I think she knows what she's doing. Marrying Harry has its pros and its cons but I'm quite sure she's aware of this by now and Harry seems like the type that will guide and protect her when she needs it.


----------



## westjenn

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Comments from British actor Matt Smith, who is playing Prince Philip in _The Crown_.



This is so interesting. Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Jayne1

Esizzle said:


> As for family, I am sure Meghan will make good friends when she is married and finds her circle. Sometimes good friends are more beneficial than family.


Exactly.  She already has a large circle of (even famous) friends in the US and Canada -- she's so outgoing, she'll make new, probably influential friends in the UK.


----------



## Tivo

She is going to be so lonely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Esizzle said:


> I doubt Meghan really cares what Kate thinks of her. If they don't get along they will just live their separate lives and have to see each other for a short time at engagements and family holidays.


I would think they could get along and not necessarily be close.  I see no reason to think Kate would be cruel or rude to her.  Meghan can probably develop relationships in the charitable giving community if that's what she's interested in.  She may not entirely know what she's getting into but I don't see her as giving up so much.  She has a mediocre acting career and now she will be part of one of the highest profile/wealthiest families in the western world.  And Harry seems sweet and attractive and is in love with her.  And I like her ring


----------



## minababe

all that ******** is just gossip. the papers want something to write and talk about.
but meghan and Harry said in their Engagement interview last week that everything is fine with her and kate. They met several times and like each other. Harry was really proud of the Situation and said now she is a Player of the Team.
So nothing to worry about


----------



## Cocoabean

minababe said:


> all that ******** is just gossip. the papers want something to write and talk about.
> but meghan and Harry said in their Engagement interview last week that everything is fine with her and kate. They met several times and like each other. Harry was really proud of the Situation and said now she is a Player of the Team.
> So nothing to worry about



I’d expect Harry to say no different, but yeah, negative gossip sells. Saying Meghan and Kate are getting along splendidly doesn’t. Time will tell. 

I hope that Meghan and Kate DO get along well, and find great happiness in their respective positions in the Firm.


----------



## horse17

^ ita....and most likely she will be starting her family very soon, so I’m not so sure how lonely she will be, and maybe the little cousins (as well as the brothers) will be a bond for her and Kate....
Post in response to sdkitty


----------



## gelbergirl

Who will her ladies in waiting be??  Does she get those?  Maybe not at her level?
Also, I wonder if Meghan's mother will make trips from the US often.


----------



## Eva1991

gelbergirl said:


> Who will her ladies in waiting be??  Does she get those?  Maybe not at her level?
> Also, I wonder if Meghan's mother will make trips from the US often.



A lady in waiting is some sort of a personal assistant to a female royal as far as I'm aware of - correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure she'll need one, especially if she's planning to get involved with lots of charities. She has to have someone to help her better organize her schedule.


----------



## Esizzle

gelbergirl said:


> Who will her ladies in waiting be??  Does she get those?  Maybe not at her level?
> Also, I wonder if Meghan's mother will make trips from the US often.


I think she will get an assistant/manager to handle her schedule and appearances once she gets married. I am sure her mother will spend lots of time in London. Meghan is an only child for her mother and they are very close to each other.


----------



## sdkitty

Back to Harry and why we love him.  I was watching some PBS documentary about the queen recently.  They said when Diana died little Harry immediately said he wanted to walk behind her casket.  With that, Prince Philip said he would walk with him. And of course William did but I guess Harry volunteered before his older brother.  And love him for his military service.  And his fun loving spirit.  And his charitable work, carrying on Diana's legacy.
I'm sure most of this has been posted her before but right now so much is focused on Meghan.


----------



## Singra

^ Interesting, was that an old documentary? I'd love to know the exact context. If is was an oldish documentary I'm sure it's accurate to how they saw it at the time but it seems like their perspective changed with time and hindsight.

There was a recent BBC documentary where William and Harry talked about how traumatic the experience of being on display and walking behind the casket was. They expressed complicated feelings about the whole thing. William said the reason he looked down while walking behind the casket was because he was so uncomfortable and was trying to hide behind his hair. The doc suggested that if something similar happened now the children would be kept out of the public eye.


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> ^ Interesting, was that an old documentary? I'd love to know the exact context. If is was an oldish documentary I'm sure it's accurate to how they saw it at the time but with time and hindsight it seems like their perspective changed.
> 
> There was a recent BBC documentary where William and Harry talked about how traumatic the experience of being on display and walking behind the casket was. They expressed complicated feelings about the whole thing. William said the reason he looked down while walking behind the casket was because he was so uncomfortable and was trying to hide behind his hair. The doc suggested that if something similar happened now the children would be kept out of the public eye.


I don't know if the documentary was old or not.  It very well could have been.  I just happened to tune in.  It was all about elizabeth from her youth before being queen on.


----------



## Singra

Oh okay so the focus wasn't so much on the funeral. I can see how they would have framed it like they did.


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> Oh okay so the focus wasn't so much on the funeral. I can see how they would have framed it like they did.


I found it interesting that according to this documentary, Elizabeth and Margaret were considered very glamorous and beautiful when they were young.  Looking at the footage, they didn't appear that way to me.  Different times, different perception I guess.


----------



## VickyB

Singra said:


> ^ Interesting, was that an old documentary? I'd love to know the exact context. If is was an oldish documentary I'm sure it's accurate to how they saw it at the time but it seems like their perspective changed with time and hindsight.
> 
> There was a recent BBC documentary where William and Harry talked about how traumatic the experience of being on display and walking behind the casket was. They expressed complicated feelings about the whole thing. William said the reason he looked down while walking behind the casket was because he was so uncomfortable and was trying to hide behind his hair. The doc suggested that if something similar happened now the children would be kept out of the public eye.



I've seen a few docs too and also recall that Prince Philip said if they walked, he would be with them.


----------



## Esizzle

US weekly scoop about Harry and Meghan's Christmas day plans

Good tidings for all! Prince William and Duchess Kate will host Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at their family’s home over the holiday season, a source reveals exclusively in the new issue of Us Weekly. After celebrating Christmas Eve at Queen Elizabeth II’s Sandringham House, newly engaged Harry, 33, and Markle, 36, will join William and Kate, both 35, at their nearby Anmer Hall home in Norfolk, England. “They’ll be William and Kate’s guests and travel back and forth with them,” the source tells Us.

Come Christmas Day, the foursome will be served a traditional English breakfast, attend a mandatory 11 a.m. service at St. Mary Magdalene Church and then enjoy a lunch featuring two roast turkeys — a third is sent up to the nursery, where it’s carved up for William and Kate’s children, Prince George, 4, and Princess Charlotte, 2.

The royals (and soon-to-be royal Markle) will later retire to the fire-lit saloon to listen to the queen’s 3 p.m. taped speech. “In this year’s address, she will congratulate Harry and Meghan,” a source tells Us. However, the Suits alum will bow out on Boxing Day to stay home with Kate, who is expecting her third child. “They’ve developed a friendship, and Meghan can turn to Kate for advice,” a source says.


----------



## Eva1991

^So nice to hear this! It seems that despite all the gossip Catherine and Meghan are close.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Eva1991 said:


> ^So nice to hear this! It seems that despite all the gossip Catherine and Meghan are close.


I was thinking the Meghan/Kate thing was gossip.  lol

US weekly makes stuff up, especially with their unnamed sources.


----------



## sdkitty

Eva1991 said:


> ^So nice to hear this! It seems that despite all the gossip Catherine and Meghan are close.


I would take it with a grain of salt either way...they could be close or not.  I doubt Kate would be rude to her but not necessarily buying that they're best buds.  I think she and Will love Harry and therefore will try to accept her.


----------



## terebina786

The only thing that stood out to me was that they carve an entire roast turkey for two children.


----------



## kkfiregirl

terebina786 said:


> The only thing that stood out to me was that they carve an entire roast turkey for two children.



haha, I noticed that too! maybe the children share some turkey with their nanny?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Just finished watching Season 2 of the crown. During this season we see more of Charles as a child. I’ve heard the 3rd season will have a new “older cast” to carry the story through to the 70s and 80s! Which means the whole Diana story may come into play! Should be interesting.


----------



## sdkitty

she left her dog behind.......guess it wasn't that beloved
from Page Six
Even marriage to a prince can bring heartache.

Actress Meghan Markle left behind one of her two beloved dogs in the US when she moved to Britain to prepare to marry Prince Harry, a palace official said Tuesday.

according to the Guardian.

“Miss Markle is very fond of her dogs, and any decision about moving a dog over the ocean will have lots of complexity to it.”


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> she left her dog behind.......guess it wasn't that beloved
> from Page Six
> Even marriage to a prince can bring heartache.
> 
> Actress Meghan Markle left behind one of her two beloved dogs in the US when she moved to Britain to prepare to marry Prince Harry, a palace official said Tuesday.
> 
> according to the Guardian.
> 
> “Miss Markle is very fond of her dogs, and any decision about moving a dog over the ocean will have lots of complexity to it.”


I read he was an older dog and the dog would have problems on the plane trip to the UK. I have read of animals having problems breathing in cargo hold. He was a larger dog, so I don't think he could ride with Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

chowlover2 said:


> I read he was an older dog and the dog would have problems on the plane trip to the UK. I have read of animals having problems breathing in cargo hold. He was a larger dog, so I don't think he could ride with Meghan.


at least she left him with friends


----------



## Florasun

I was just thinking it probably galls Kim Kardashian to no end that this older, divorced, mixed race, American actress is marrying Prince Harry. She wishes she were in Megan's shoes and would trade her fake a$$ to be a royal. I started to move this to the Kim Kardashian thread but she is on page two and I didn't want to be responsible for popping her thread back to the top!


----------



## BagLovingMom

I have to laugh about  Kim K being brought into nearly every TPF thread lol....the royal Christmas sounds interesting I wonder if it’s uptight or somewhat relaxed.


----------



## horse17

BagLovingMom said:


> I have to laugh about  Kim K being brought into nearly every TPF thread lol....the royal Christmas sounds interesting I wonder if it’s uptight or somewhat relaxed.


I'm sure Harry makes it fun


----------



## Eva1991

Florasun said:


> I was just thinking it probably galls Kim Kardashian to no end that this older, divorced, mixed race, American actress is marrying Prince Harry. She wishes she were in Megan's shoes and would trade her fake a$$ to be a royal. I started to move this to the Kim Kardashian thread but she is on page two and I didn't want to be responsible for popping her thread back to the top!



Kim K would kill to be in Meghan's shoes but there's no way on earth Harry would ever fall for her! Even typing the names Kim K and Harry in the same sentence seems odd! 



BagLovingMom said:


> I have to laugh about  Kim K being brought into nearly every TPF thread lol....the royal Christmas sounds interesting I wonder if it’s uptight or somewhat relaxed.



From what I've read the schedule is pretty tight and it seems quite stressful. They'll probably relax on Boxing Day though.


----------



## sdkitty

I'd forgotten Harry hunts.  Hope Meghan will change this.
From Daily Beast

*HARRY GOES HUNTING*
*Harry the Hunting Hypocrite Joins Royal Shooting Party*
*The prince is engaged to a woman who has spoken out about animal cruelty and owns two rescue dogs. So why is he killing animals for fun?*



TOM SYKES
*12.11.17 5:43 AM ET*
The question of how long after getting engaged to Meghan Markle it would be before Prince Harry did something insanely stupid has been answered.

This weekend, less than two weeks after the global media were rejoicing on his behalf, Prince Harry flew by private jet to Germany where he participated in a hunting party with a German prince nicknamed ‘The Boar Terminator,” who once uploaded a video that shows him in a snowy forest killing half a dozen bolting wild boars in rapid succession.

Hunting enthusiasts will be quick to point out that wild boar are an extremely unwelcome pest in central Europe, breeding quickly and destroying vast quantities of crops annually.

That may be true, and indeed many conservationists around the world now argue that trophy hunting and game shooting are, ironic as it may seem, effective ways to promote biodiversity and provide a financial incentive to locals to protect habitats.

A similar argument is used by proponents of fox hunting, and pheasant and grouse shooting, in the U.K.


a very privileged man killing dumb animals for fun.

*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*It’s On! Prince Harry and Meghan to Marry Next Spring*



*Harry Wanted a Celebrity Girlfriend*



*Meghan Markle Triumphs on First Public Appearance With Harry*
And anything that gives the media the opportunity to run, once again, the awful 2004 photograph of Harry perched atop a water buffalo he has just shot dead during a hunt in Argentina should be avoided.

https://twitter.com/crankycrocodile/status/526851277125189632



marie charnley@crankycrocodile

Prince Harry Kills a Water Buffalo? http://www.thepetitionsite.com/108/703/158/ask-prince-harry-to-give-the-answers-about-this-photo/#bbtw=605211124 … @peggyrussell

1:41 PM - Oct 27, 2014



*petition: Prince Harry Kills a Water Buffalo?*
Days ago, Prince Harry committed himself to helping endangered species. So what is he doing with a dead water buffalo? (98739 signatures on petition)

thepetitionsite.com


 11 Reply


 66 Retweets


 22 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy


The animal was killed lawfully. But so was Cecil the Lion.

It is particularly extraordinary that less than two weeks after he announced his engagement to a woman who has spoken out frequently about cruelty to animals and made much of her two adopted rescue dogs, that Harry should have allowed himself to be portrayed in such a fashion.

Germany’s biggest newspaper, _Bild am Sonntag_, reported that Harry jetted into the country on a private Gulfstream on Friday before going to the hunting party near Berlin.

Harry was with a taxpayer-funded security detail when he arrived at Berlin’s Schoenefeld Airport before being driven to Oettingen Castle in Bavaria, where he was one of 60 guests for the Friday afternoon hunt, before flying home on Saturday afternoon.
*

That Harry went to the shoot this year is made all the more remarkable by the outcry that greeted his participation in it in previous years. It shows not only the arrogance of the young royals when it comes to their lifestyles, but also the naivety of hopes that Meghan’s influence might be able to deter Harry away from bloodthirsty activities.  

Harry must recognize (even if it is not logical) the perceived hypocrisy between his public stance as conservationist and his private enjoyment of slaughtering birds by the hundred—and that this perception hinders his conservationist cause.

There is no doubt that Harry is genuinely passionate about conservation.

But his only real use in that fight is as a symbol. And symbols need to be uncomplicated.

Harry and William demonstrate their arrogance when they take continue to take pleasure in killing animals shooting while simultaneously campaigning against the poaching of protected species such as rhinos and elephants.

If he really wants to be taken seriously as an advocate for the animal kingdom, it is time to put down his guns.




*


----------



## Gal4Dior

Doubt Harry will give that up. Isn’t it a tradition in the royal family to do this? 

Meghan will deal. If she is giving up her citizenship, changing her religion, leaving behind one dog she desperately loves as well as her family in the states, and giving up her career - she will likely compromise on this, too.

As you all say, she’s in love and she will do an amazing job falling in line for her new role in the royal family.


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> Doubt Harry will give that up. Isn’t it a tradition in the royal family to do this?
> 
> Meghan will deal. If she is giving up her citizenship, changing her religion, leaving behind one dog she desperately loves as well as her family in the states, and giving up her career - she will likely compromise on this, too.
> 
> As you all say, she’s in love and she will do an amazing job falling in line for her new role in the royal family.


Yes, I think the fox hunting is traditional but not the African trophy hunting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

That picture of him in Argentina is 13 years old so I doubt he's doing much of that lately.


----------



## sdkitty

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> That picture of him in Argentina is 13 years old so I doubt he's doing much of that lately.


hope not


----------



## sdkitty

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> That picture of him in Argentina is 13 years old so I doubt he's doing much of that lately.


actually I agree with the person who wrote the article - I hate the idea of killing animals for fun, whether it's foxes, deer, whatever.  But big trophy hunting is the worst


----------



## Singra

sdkitty said:


> Yes, I think the fox hunting is traditional but not the African trophy hunting


In a way yes and in a way no. There's nothing more colonial than African trophy hunting and there's nothing more colonial than the British royal class divide, I'm sure you'll find lots of people in Harry's social strata go trophy hunting. 

I would be surprised if he's kept it up but if he has you can bet there'll be intense pressure put on him.


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> In a way yes and in a way no. There's nothing more colonial than African trophy hunting and there's nothing more colonial than the British royal class divide, I'm sure you'll find lots of people in Harry's social strata go trophy hunting.
> 
> I would be surprised if he's kept it up but if he has you can bet there'll be intense pressure put on him.


I hope so........trophy hunting sickens me


----------



## myown

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> That picture of him in Argentina is 13 years old so I doubt he's doing much of that lately.


i hate when they dig out that old stories


----------



## pearlyqueen

sdkitty said:


> actually I agree with the person who wrote the article - I hate the idea of killing animals for fun, whether it's foxes, deer, whatever.  But big trophy hunting is the worst



It’s disgusting and make no mistake these rich, arrogant entitled royals and their ilk do it because they enjoy not only killing animals but making them suffer in the process. Fox hunting is brutally cruel but they don’t care. It’s been banned in the UK but their classes frequently lobby to get the Act repealed. 

All the hypocrisy about environmental concerns too and the carbon footprint the royals are responsible for; classic example - private jet to Germany to satisfy blood lust and of course security at the British tax payers expense. 

The hypocrisy and abuse of their positions is sickening - not to mention too much time for idle hands to spend on mindless hobbies.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

pearlyqueen said:


> It’s disgusting and make no mistake these rich, arrogant entitled royals and their ilk do it because they enjoy not only killing animals but making them suffer in the process. Fox hunting is brutally cruel but they don’t care. It’s been banned in the UK but their classes frequently lobby to get the Act repealed.
> 
> All the hypocrisy about environmental concerns too and the carbon footprint the royals are responsible for; classic example - private jet to Germany to satisfy blood lust and of course security at the British tax payers expense.
> 
> The hypocrisy and abuse of their positions is sickening - not to mention too much time for idle hands to spend on mindless hobbies.


I wholly agree. Hunting and private jets are things I entirely disapprove of. Can't we all take more sustainable transport and just shoot clay pigeons??


----------



## PatsyCline

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I wholly agree. Hunting and private jets are things I entirely disapprove of. Can't we all take more sustainable transport and just shoot clay pigeons??



As someone who has and does both, your insinuation is ridiculous.

Flying private is no different than choosing to drive a private vehicle, instead of taking public transportation.  It's simply a matter of convenience.  We choose to fly on our own schedule, rather than be dictated to by the airlines, and not be subject to the long wait times and inspections the general flying public has to deal with.

As for hunting, we hunt for food and elimination of unwanted invasive species. We hunt several times a year in Texas to help eliminate the wild hog population that devastates the farms and crops wherever they appear.

All the animals we hunt, are harvested and every possible effort is made to use all of the animal.  We donate hundreds of pounds of hog meat to food banks, over what we keep for ourselves.

I personally abhor trophy hunters, and those that hunt strictly for sport.


----------



## horse17

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I wholly agree. Hunting and private jets are things I entirely disapprove of. Can't we all take more sustainable transport and just shoot clay pigeons??


I dont care for hunting myself, nor do I fly private ....but i do find it amusing how a great majority of the people that preach to us about keeping the earth more sustainable fly private....


----------



## bellebellebelle19

PatsyCline said:


> As someone who has and does both, your insinuation is ridiculous.
> 
> Flying private is no different than choosing to drive a private vehicle, instead of taking public transportation.  It's simply a matter of convenience.  We choose to fly on our own schedule, rather than be dictated to by the airlines, and not be subject to the long wait times and inspections the general flying public has to deal with.
> 
> As for hunting, we hunt for food and elimination of unwanted invasive species. We hunt several times a year in Texas to help eliminate the wild hog population that devastates the farms and crops wherever they appear.
> 
> All the animals we hunt, are harvested and every possible effort is made to use all of the animal.  We donate hundreds of pounds of hog meat to food banks, over what we keep for ourselves.
> 
> I personally abhor trophy hunters, and those that hunt strictly for sport.


Thanks for sharing your opinion. You haven't convinced me that hunting or flying private is necessary for anyone including Prince Harry, so let's just agree to disagree.


----------



## PatsyCline

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Thanks for sharing your opinion. You haven't convinced me that hunting or flying private is necessary for anyone including Prince Harry, so let's just agree to disagree.



No one has to fly private, nor hunt, that's not the issue.  It isn't necessary that anyone has a telephone, running water, or electricity either.  All can be accomplished by other methods, it's just most of these are more convenient, and make life as we know it a bit easier.

I'll give you an example.  From our house to our friends ranch in Texas is approximately 500 miles.  To drive that distance, is an 8 hour drive each way.  To fly commercial, would require flying into Houston, and having our friends drive an hour each way to pick us up, or we rent a vehicle and drive. Travel time would be in the range of 4-5 hours, because of the time needed to clear security at the airport etc.

We bring multiple firearms with us when we come to hunt, and I have a service dog, so all of that requires extra expense when flying commercial.

With our plane, it takes less than 15 minutes to pre-flight, assuming the plane has been fuelled beforehand, we take off and land in a bit over an hour, 10 minutes away from our friends ranch.  They come and pick us up and we are usually sitting on the deck, having a barbecue and enjoying the company within 90 minutes of takeoff.

When we leave, we have room for all the meat we've hunted, and can leave when we want, not on a commercial flight schedule.

We've eliminated a bunch of hogs that do nothing but destroy crops, and make little hogs.  Our hunt is good for the economy, the butcher loves it when we come, we're helping out the farmers and ranchers in the area by getting rid of an invasive species that destroys crops and their livelihood.

Without people killing these hogs, entire sections of Texas would have their farms and ranches destroyed by these animals.

And our plane allows us the freedom to come down for a weekend, visit friends and help out at the same time.

We're lucky enough to have the ability to have our own plane. Yes we could do without it, but as long as we're not harming anyone else, and we can afford it, why shouldn't we?

Our house isn't lined with animal heads, nor our floors and walls lined with animals hides.

As for Prince Harry, I'm sure flying private is also a security issue.  I doubt he flies commercial, simply because of the security detail which accompanies him, and the hassle having an entire plane load of people going through extra security because he's on the plane.


----------



## TC1

PatsyCline said:


> No one has to fly private, nor hunt, that's not the issue.  It isn't necessary that anyone has a telephone, running water, or electricity either.  All can be accomplished by other methods, it's just most of these are more convenient, and make life as we know it a bit easier.
> 
> I'll give you an example.  From our house to our friends ranch in Texas is approximately 500 miles.  To drive that distance, is an 8 hour drive each way.  To fly commercial, would require flying into Houston, and having our friends drive an hour each way to pick us up, or we rent a vehicle and drive. Travel time would be in the range of 4-5 hours, because of the time needed to clear security at the airport etc.
> 
> We bring multiple firearms with us when we come to hunt, and I have a service dog, so all of that requires extra expense when flying commercial.
> 
> With our plane, it takes less than 15 minutes to pre-flight, assuming the plane has been fuelled beforehand, we take off and land in a bit over an hour, 10 minutes away from our friends ranch.  They come and pick us up and we are usually sitting on the deck, having a barbecue and enjoying the company within 90 minutes of takeoff.
> 
> When we leave, we have room for all the meat we've hunted, and can leave when we want, not on a commercial flight schedule.
> 
> We've eliminated a bunch of hogs that do nothing but destroy crops, and make little hogs.  Our hunt is good for the economy, the butcher loves it when we come, we're helping out the farmers and ranchers in the area by getting rid of an invasive species that destroys crops and their livelihood.
> 
> Without people killing these hogs, entire sections of Texas would have their farms and ranches destroyed by these animals.
> 
> And our plane allows us the freedom to come down for a weekend, visit friends and help out at the same time.
> 
> We're lucky enough to have the ability to have our own plane. Yes we could do without it, but as long as we're not harming anyone else, and we can afford it, why shouldn't we?
> 
> Our house isn't lined with animal heads, nor our floors and walls lined with animals hides.
> 
> As for Prince Harry, I'm sure flying private is also a security issue.  I doubt he flies commercial, simply because of the security detail which accompanies him, and the hassle having an entire plane load of people going through extra security because he's on the plane.


I don't think anyone was debating the convenience of flying private but rather the carbon footprint. That's how I read it anyhow.


----------



## snibor

I cannot believe..I’m flipping tv channels and a show is on “when Harry met Meghan. A royal engagement”.  It’s an hour long show on tlc (US channel).


----------



## VickyB

chowlover2 said:


> I read he was an older dog and the dog would have problems on the plane trip to the UK. I have read of animals having problems breathing in cargo hold. He was a larger dog, so I don't think he could ride with Meghan.


Yeah, just don't get leaving the dog behind. She could fly private and the doggie would be in the cabin with her. She could even hire a vet or vet tech for the trip. Pet stress, there are natural and chemical  remedies for that Not like $$'s a deal breaker here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> I don't think anyone was debating the convenience of flying private but rather the carbon footprint. That's how I read it anyhow.


Agree. What's the big deal about a carbon footprint when you don't want to be inconvenienced .  (Sarcasm)


----------



## PatsyCline

VickyB said:


> Yeah, just don't get leaving the dog behind. She could fly private and the doggie would be in the cabin with her. She could even hire a vet or vet tech for the trip. Pet stress, there are natural and chemical  remedies for that Not like $$'s a deal breaker here.


We don't know if the reason the dog was left behind was a health reason, or an immigration issue.

Give her a chance, she has just gotten engaged, and probably still doesn't have the perks that might come once she gets married.


----------



## PatsyCline

TC1 said:


> I don't think anyone was debating the convenience of flying private but rather the carbon footprint. That's how I read it anyhow.


The post I replied to was specifically opposed to hunting and private jets. No mention of the carbon footprint.

We just did an upgrade to the plane, reducing fuel consumption in the range of 20%, so we are, in a small way reducing our carbon footprint.


----------



## Gal4Dior

VickyB said:


> Yeah, just don't get leaving the dog behind. She could fly private and the doggie would be in the cabin with her. She could even hire a vet or vet tech for the trip. Pet stress, there are natural and chemical  remedies for that Not like $$'s a deal breaker here.



That’s a really good point. I never thought of that.


----------



## myown

horse17 said:


> I dont care for hunting myself, nor do I fly private ....but i do find it amusing how a great majority of the people that preach to us about keeping the earth more sustainable fly private....


i guess in some occasions flying private is more safe


----------



## gelbergirl

Nice picture of Prince William, Prince Harry at the Stars Wars premiere


----------



## myown

can we re-name this thread?


----------



## OhBlackrabbit

gelbergirl said:


> Nice picture of Prince William, Prince Harry at the Stars Wars premiere



William looks 40. Harry looks like ed sheeran but taller,more handsome and royal.  Lol


----------



## horse17

myown said:


> i guess in some occasions flying private is more safe


And no paparazzi


----------



## PatsyCline

horse17 said:


> And no paparazzi


That's not necessarily true. If you've got the plane's registration number, you can track them via the flight plan.  Unless it's the CIA, or other covert organisation that doesn't have to file a flight plan, it's pretty easy to find out where the plane is going.


----------



## horse17

PatsyCline said:


> That's not necessarily true. If you've got the plane's registration number, you can track them via the flight plan.  Unless it's the CIA, or other covert organisation that doesn't have to file a flight plan, it's pretty easy to find out where the plane is going.


Didn’t know that.....I was kind of being sarcastic...


----------



## PatsyCline

horse17 said:


> Didn’t know that.....I was kind of being sarcastic...



Just passing on information...


----------



## TC1

PatsyCline said:


> The post I replied to was specifically opposed to hunting and private jets. No mention of the carbon footprint.
> 
> We just did an upgrade to the plane, reducing fuel consumption in the range of 20%, so we are, in a small way reducing our carbon footprint.


Well, the first post you replied to the poster said "Can't we all just take more sustainable transport". So that's where things went from. But you do you. Back to pics of Harry. Sorry for derailing!


----------



## boxermom

I used to think William was more handsome than Harry but as they mature, I think Harry has gotten more attractive.


----------



## sdkitty

OhBlackrabbit said:


> William looks 40. Harry looks like ed sheeran but taller,more handsome and royal.  Lol


William's boyish looks haven't aged well.   He's not bad looking but was so much cuter as a kid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> William's boyish looks haven't aged well.   He's not bad looking but was so much cuter as a kid.



take away the suit & will is not handsome at all. 

... and what is that awful face he is making? it’s like he’s smiling, but is in pain at the same time.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> take away the suit & will is not handsome at all.
> 
> ... and what is that awful face he is making? it’s like he’s smiling, but is in pain at the same time.


I don't want to be cruel about it.  He's not bad looking compared to the average guy - just not as good looking as he was when a kid.  I often wonder when I see cute kids if they will grow up to be good looking adults; you never know.  Seems William looks like his mother but it somehow didn't translate that well on him.  Harry looks like one of his mother's lovers.  He's a red-head which often doesn't look good on men but he has a rugged look that's appealing.
Glad I don't have thousands of strangers commenting on my looks


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> Glad I don't have thousands of strangers commenting on my looks



I hear ya. Though I doubt that he cares what we think about him — he’s a billionaire, and here we are discussing his appearance on a gossip forum


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I hear ya. Though I doubt that he cares what we think about him — he’s a billionaire, and here we are discussing his appearance on a gossip forum


I'm sure he doesn't come here so I'm not worried about it either.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure he doesn't come here so I'm not worried about it either.



Lol


----------



## OhBlackrabbit

boxermom said:


> I used to think William was more handsome than Harry but as they mature, I think Harry has gotten more attractive.



Agreed! I used to have a crush on william back when he was 16 or 17. Lol. Now he is just plain unattractive.. with all the money he got, he should really visit dermatologist more often or just go for hair implant already..


----------



## sdkitty

OhBlackrabbit said:


> Agreed! I used to have a crush on william back when he was 16 or 17. Lol. Now he is just plain unattractive.. with all the money he got, he should really visit dermatologist more often or just go for hair implant already..


I don't need for him to be vain.....seems like a nice guy, good husband and father


----------



## gazoo

I think Prince Harry looks just like the Duke of Edinburgh (his grandfather) did when he was young. 

I agree that William was kinda hot when younger. He is so not cute these days. Maybe he'd look better if he just shaved his head.


----------



## sdkitty

gazoo said:


> I think Prince Harry looks just like the Duke of Edinburgh (his grandfather) did when he was young.
> 
> I agree that William was kinda hot when younger. He is so not cute these days. Maybe he'd look better if he just shaved his head.


LOL
that might be a good idea


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> I don't want to be cruel about it.  He's not bad looking compared to the average guy - just not as good looking as he was when a kid. * I often wonder when I see cute kids if they will grow up to be good looking adults;* you never know.  Seems William looks like his mother but it somehow didn't translate that well on him.  Harry looks like one of his mother's lovers.  He's a red-head which often doesn't look good on men but he has a rugged look that's appealing.
> Glad I don't have thousands of strangers commenting on my looks


few years ago I met a girl that was in my class as a teenager. all the boys loved her back then. she looks worn out and pretty bad now 20 years later. 

William is not bad looking. he's just not Hollywood-hot, what we are used to see on the internet


----------



## Eva1991

Harry's more handsome than William but I think that William would look better if he'd grow a beard like his brother.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure he doesn't come here so I'm not worried about it either.


Not only that, for those who have watched his interviews throughout the years, he has developed an attitude. A royal attitude. An intonation.  It's subtle, but it's there.

He's going to be king and the rest of the UK are his subjects. In other words, he's not that concerned with what you think. lol


----------



## Tivo

gazoo said:


> I think Prince Harry looks just like the Duke of Edinburgh (his grandfather) did when he was young.
> 
> I agree that William was kinda hot when younger. He is so not cute these days. Maybe he'd look better if he just shaved his head.


He looks so much like his grandfather that it’s a tad creepy, lol.


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> few years ago I met a girl that was in my class as a teenager. all the boys loved her back then. she looks worn out and pretty bad now 20 years later.
> 
> William is not bad looking. he's just not Hollywood-hot, what we are used to see on the internet


Makes me think about my sisters BF in high school.  Cute, bubbly blonde cheerleader.  Now she's fat.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> He looks so much like his grandfather that it’s a tad creepy, lol.


yes, he does
that should help to dispel the idea that charles isn't his bio dad


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Tivo said:


> He looks so much like his grandfather that it’s a tad creepy, lol.


That's a fluke photo.  I've never seen Prince Philip look like that.  He usually looked more like this:


----------



## gazoo

Jayne1 said:


> That's a fluke photo.  I've never seen Prince Philip look like that.  He usually looked more like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 3907612
> View attachment 3907613



Yeah, he's usually crusty.


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> That's a fluke photo.  I've never seen Prince Philip look like that.  He usually looked more like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 3907612
> View attachment 3907613


I still see it...


----------



## sdkitty

if it's true Harry is the queen's favorite, this could be part of the reason....from what understand she fell hard for him when they were young


----------



## afsweet

Philip was quite handsome!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> if it's true Harry is the queen's favorite, this could be part of the reason....from what understand she fell hard for him when they were young


It was arranged by Philip and his uncle from the start.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> It was arranged by Philip and his uncle from the start.


that may be but for whatever it's worth the documentary about the queen I watch on PBS pretty much said she met him and that was it for her


----------



## Eva1991

Harry definitely looks a lot like Philip in the pictures above. Philip was considered quite handsome back in the day.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Tivo said:


> I still see it...


I agree with you.  Harry has A LOT of Spencer in him, but there is most certainly a resemblance to those old photos of Prince Phillip too!


----------



## Singra

^ Do you think so? I always thought Harry looked the most like Charles or a Windsor with his narrow eyes and large nose.

It seems like most of the Windsor men were attractive in their youth then they hit a certain age and it becomes... what happened?


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> ^ Do you think so? I always thought Harry looked the most like Charles or a Windsor with his narrow eyes and large nose.
> 
> It seems like most of the Windsor men were attractive in their youth then they hit a certain age and it becomes... what happened?


I don't think Charles was ever good looking


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> I don't think Charles was ever good looking



Yet droves of women threw themselves at him and he reportedly dated many prior to marrying Diana. I guess if you’re a Prince, it doesn’t matter what what you look like...there will still be plenty of women putting themselves in the best position to secure a relationship and marriage.


----------



## White Orchid

I see the resemblance with his grandfather too, but what would I know, I think he resembles James Hewitt as well, lol.


----------



## White Orchid

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yet droves of women threw themselves at him and he reportedly dated many prior to marrying Diana. I guess if you’re a Prince, it doesn’t matter what what you look like...there will still be plenty of women putting themselves in the best position to secure a relationship and marriage.


Well you only have to look at Jay Z


----------



## Singra

Jay Z isn't an oil painting but he's a smart guy I can the attraction to smart people. 




sdkitty said:


> I don't think Charles was ever good looking


HAHAHAHAHA... no probably not.

His "what happened?" moment came very early.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yet droves of women threw themselves at him and he reportedly dated many prior to marrying Diana. I guess if you’re a Prince, it doesn’t matter what what you look like...there will still be plenty of women putting themselves in the best position to secure a relationship and marriage.


i have this very very very (!!!) unattractive friend. he looks kinda unwashed, even thro he is not. he has and had so many girlfriends! once I asked his ex why she felt for him and she agreed she had no idea, maybe his personality, definitely not his looks. I mean his personality is great, I love him as a friend. 
maybe the same is with charles.


----------



## kkfiregirl

myown said:


> i have this very very very (!!!) unattractive friend. he looks kinda unwashed, even thro he is not. he has and had so many girlfriends! once I asked his ex why she felt for him and she agreed she had no idea, maybe his personality, definitely not his looks. I mean his personality is great, I love him as a friend.
> maybe the same is with charles.



It’s funny how when a man is unattractive, people will talk about his great personality, but when a woman is unattractive, she gets written off.


----------



## gelbergirl

*** Sat.  May 19 ***  Wedding date ***

"His Royal Highness Prince Henry of Wales and Ms. Meghan Markle will marry on 19th May 2018," Kensington Palace said.


----------



## myown

if anyone else wondered why we keep on calling Henry Harry:

*"The infant, third in line to the throne (see story on page 36) after his father and brother, would be known officially as Prince Henry Charles Albert David, it was announced—and just “Harry” to his family and chums."
http://people.com/archive/cover-story-hello-harry-vol-22-no-14/

*


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> Jay Z isn't an oil painting but he's a smart guy I can the attraction to smart people.
> 
> 
> 
> HAHAHAHAHA... no probably not.
> 
> His "what happened?" moment came very early.


LOL.....and his sister Anne too


----------



## MarvelGirl

*We Have a Date! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reveal When Their Wedding Will Take Place.*

We have a date! Kensington Palace announced on Friday morning that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will officially tie the knot on *Saturday, May 19.* Harry and Meghan announced their engagement on Nov. 27 and Kensington Palace has already revealed several details about the upcoming nuptials — including its location (St. George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle) and that Meghan will get baptized and confirmed in the Church of England before the ceremony.  

PEOPLE.COM - Read the full story


----------



## cluelessguy265

He is a dapper young man. Congrats on his engagement.


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> i have this very very very (!!!) unattractive friend. he looks kinda unwashed, even thro he is not. he has and had so many girlfriends! once I asked his ex why she felt for him and she agreed she had no idea, maybe his personality, definitely not his looks. I mean his personality is great, I love him as a friend.
> maybe the same is with charles.


No......Charles got the attention because he was a prince.....not because of his personality, although he may be a nice enough person


----------



## gelbergirl

*Prince Harry takes on Royal Marines role from Duke of Edinburgh*

Prince Harry has replaced the Duke of Edinburgh to be appointed ceremonial head of the Royal Marines. His appointment as Captain General of the Marines comes after the Duke held the position for more than 64 years.

The Duke’s last solo public duty before retiring in August was to take the salute from a group of fundraising Royal Marines and on Tuesday he was joined at Buckingham Palace by his grandson, as he assumed his new position.

Buckingham Palace said The Queen “has been pleased to give her formal approval to the appointment of His Royal Highness Prince Henry of Wales as Captain General Royal Marines."


----------



## PatsyCline

Glad to see Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth turn some of their duties over to the younger royals.  They have served the country well, and hopefully will enjoy more time to themselves now. 

And besides, who doesn't want to see Harry in another dashing uniform?


----------



## Sharont2305

Official engagement photos. Beautiful, particularly love the black and white one. His face says it all.


----------



## Singra

Wow. That black and white photo is lovely.

I'm sure the jewellers will be pleased with the placement of the hand and ring.


----------



## horse17

I love her style


----------



## gelbergirl

Sharont2305 said:


> Official engagement photos. Beautiful, particularly love the black and white one. His face says it all.



I adore this couple.
& simply look forward to the wedding.


----------



## myown

DM also remembered us how how Will and Kates looked like:








there clearly are huge differences between these two couple photos


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MarieCurie

Sharont2305 said:


> Official engagement photos. Beautiful, particularly love the black and white one. His face says it all.


He looks a bit odd in the 1st photo, but lovely photos all in all


----------



## Sharont2305

Absolutely agree, I think as William will be King after Charles there will always be more formality with them even when we see more the more relaxed photographs, if you see what i mean? With Harry, everything will be more relaxed. And even though its a Royal Wedding, that's going to be more of an informal do which I really can't blame them if that's how it will end up being.


----------



## MarvelGirl

Sharont2305 said:


> Official engagement photos. Beautiful, particularly love the black and white one. His face says it all.



I LOOOVEE the photos! They look so happy and in love. I can't take how cute they are and adore them together! Thanks so much for posting!!


----------



## PatsyCline

Different styles to suit their personalities.  I think the photographer did an excellent job.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Photos are done really well. Not a fan of Meghan’s black beaded dress, though. Kate and William just look odd in the first one. Lol! William looks so stiff!


----------



## sdkitty

Singra said:


> Wow. That black and white photo is lovely.
> 
> I'm sure the jewellers will be pleased with the placement of the hand and ring.


I like the black & white photos too.  I think that blue suit was a bit distracting in the color photo


----------



## Jayne1

LVSistinaMM said:


> William looks so stiff!


Everything about him is stiff and boring.  lol

Meghan is so photogenic!


----------



## skarsbabe

Beautiful photos - they look like a very happy couple! I wanna marry a prince!


----------



## kkfiregirl

for some reason I feel the love radiating from the meghan & harry photos ... no so much from will & kate.


----------



## Pagan

I don't like the first b&w photo at all. I think it looks weirdly staged. I know they're all staged, but the way she's holding his face with her eyes closed just doesn't seem natural at all. I don't like the shot of them walking by the lake either; be nice to see them looking at each other or not have her hair in her face. I do like the colour photo very much though.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Pagan said:


> I don't like the first b&w photo at all. I think it looks weirdly staged. I know they're all staged, but the way she's holding his face with her eyes closed just doesn't seem natural at all. I don't like the shot of them walking by the lake either; be nice to see them looking at each other or not have her hair in her face. I do like the colour photo very much though.



It’s definitely looking unnatural and staged. The third photo is best, because it’s more natural. We’ve seen them like this already. 

That black and white close up is the same pose that my engagement and wedding photographer made us do specifically to show off the ring. Lol


----------



## Laila619

Harry and Meghan's engagement pics have a glamorous, sexy look whereas William and Catherine's give off more of a sweet and cuddly vibe.


----------



## Laila619

Does anyone think Harry will wear a wedding band when they are married, or will he do like William does and not wear one?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Laila619 said:


> Harry and Meghan's engagement pics have a glamorous, sexy look whereas William and Catherine's give off more of a sweet and cuddly vibe.




There is definitely a “Hollywood” touch to Harry and Meghan’s photos.

I do have to cut Will and Kate some slack, though. Will has never been big on attention and Kate may not know how to take a great picture like Meghan does.

Meghan has been an actress for a while and I’m sure she knows all her good angles and how to look great in every shot. She’s done how many step and repeats as well as photo shoots in her life? I doubt she has ever taken a bad pic in the last decade.


----------



## Eva1991

myown said:


> DM also remembered us how how Will and Kates looked like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> there clearly are huge differences between these two couple photos



I like the Harry and Meghan's black and white photo. Even though it's staged - obviously - it shows how infatuated they are with each other. Meghan's dress is gorgeous as well. Ralph & Russo can do no wrong! The only picture I don't like is the first one, where they're sitting on some steps (?). They look like they're posing for that one and it just looks weird.

The comparisons with William and Kate are unfounded. First of all, they had theirs taken indoors, in what looks like a palace. William is set to become king someday so the official photos must look formal. Harry and Meghan are free to do as they please - as free as any royal being in the public eye 24/7 can be that is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LnA

Never realized how model-esque Harry is until I saw their e-photos. They’re both lovely people. Definitely did feel staged esp the hand placement on his face but I suppose most e-photos are pretty much staged. A majority of mine were. The dress looks gorg on Meghan but the top part reminds me of a figure skating costume. Not digging it but she wore it well.


----------



## Gal4Dior

LnA said:


> Never realized how model-esque Harry is until I saw their e-photos. They’re both lovely people. Definitely did feel staged esp the hand placement on his face but I suppose most e-photos are pretty much staged. A majority of mine were. The dress looks gorg on Meghan but the top part reminds me of a figure skating costume. Not digging it but she wore it well.



Lol! That’s it! That’s why I don’t like that dress on her. It belongs in the Olympics! I normally love Ralph and Russo and I’m sure it cost a fortune, but it was a miss for me. 

I much prefer Kate’s white dress. 

The posed photo on the steps looks like a bad Vogue cover. The one with them up close looks totally staged - almost as if her hand is clasping too tight on to Harry. The third one is my favorite. They are natural and you can see the bottom half of the gown, making it less figure skating costume-esque.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

All of the pics with her in a black evening gown and him in a navy suit look a bit odd. They are all a bit dramatic/forced. 

I actually really like those pics of Kate and Will. Will is not terribly handsome but he and Kate are a really cute smiley couple.


----------



## arnott

Don't like the engagement pictures.    In one she's grabbing his face, in the 3rd one she looks like she's clinging onto his arm for dear life, while his open hand is bad body language (she's intertwining her fingers with him while his hand is open).   I think Will and Kate's pictures are a lot better, especially the first one where you can practically see the love between them.


----------



## myown

kkfiregirl said:


> for some reason I feel the love radiating from the meghan & harry photos ... no so much from will & kate.


really? for me its the other way round. 
Williams and KAtes photo looks like something they give their families and Harrys and Meghans looks like they were casted for an advertising


----------



## myown

LnA said:


> Never realized how model-esque Harry is until I saw their e-photos. They’re both lovely people. Definitely did feel staged esp the hand placement on his face but I suppose most e-photos are pretty much staged. A majority of mine were. The dress looks gorg on Meghan but the top part reminds me of a figure skating costume. Not digging it but she wore it well.


isn't each professional photo taken from a photograph with instructions staged? I remember my wedding photos "now walk slow" "now run" "now go to the ocean"


----------



## Gal4Dior

myown said:


> really? for me its the other way round.
> Williams and KAtes photo looks like something they give their families and Harrys and Meghans looks like they were casted for an advertising



True. They look like they are straight out of a magazine ad for a fragrance or something.


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol! That’s it! That’s why I don’t like that dress on her. It belongs in the Olympics! I normally love Ralph and Russo and I’m sure it cost a fortune, but it was a miss for me.


DM says its 46 650  £


----------



## arnott

myown said:


> isn't each professional photo taken from a photograph with instructions staged? I remember my wedding photos "now walk slow" "now run" "now go to the ocean"



For us it would be,  "Touch noses"!     And,  "Go up to her and be like heeeey!".


----------



## LnA

myown said:


> really? for me its the other way round.
> Williams and KAtes photo looks like something they give their families and Harrys and Meghans looks like they were casted for an advertising



Hahahaha totally looks like a jewelry/watch ad.


----------



## Coconuts40

The photos do look quite different from previous royal engagement photos, most recently Kate and William.  It might have to do with the photographer that Harry and Meghan used, which is an LA based photographer. Different approach and definitely looks like a true add inspired/commercial photoshoot instead of a portrait style photos as seen in the past.


----------



## gazoo

I like the pictures. She's beautiful and he looks good. I hope they are as hot for each other as the photos imply.

It's a bit unfair to compare William and Kate's photos to these. I'd bet they didn't have much choice on composition or poses since they're next in line to rule after Charles. Harry really has all the perks with little down sides compared to his brother.


----------



## gelbergirl

Harry looks like he's walking on LoveCloud 9 , Meghan may have shifted into to publicity shoot mode but I suppose she would automatically when the camera are around.  Harry is also used to cameras all his life but he's thinking of his love here.


----------



## horse17

I think I heard her dress is 75k...


----------



## buffym

horse17 said:


> I think I heard her dress is 75k...



It is interesting that people focus on the price of Meghan's dress. She is the first royal bride to have her on money. She made around $500,000 a year from Suits and she had endorsement deals. 

Kate has worn expensive things and no one seems to bat an eye or gives her a pass. It's Charles or her parents money, but with Meghan it is her money and that breaks to preset mold

Royal wives shouldn't be independent or confident, they should look demure and likely for the fight.




http://theduchessdiary.com/2014/11/...-cambridge-cartier-trinity-necklace-olympics/

That is a $50,000 Kate has worn only twice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## horse17

buffym said:


> It is interesting that people focus on the price of Meghan's dress. She is the first royal bride to have her on money. She made around $500,000 a year from Suits and she had endorsement deals.
> 
> Kate has worn expensive things and no one seems to bat an eye or gives her a pass. It's Charles or her parents money, but with Meghan it is her money and that breaks to preset mold
> 
> Royal wives shouldn't be independent or confident, they should look demure and likely for the fight.
> 
> View attachment 3913357
> 
> 
> http://theduchessdiary.com/2014/11/...-cambridge-cartier-trinity-necklace-olympics/
> 
> That is a $50,000 Kate has worn only twice.


I’m not knocking her for it....lol...shes a royal now (almost)....why not!....

Not to start a big debate, but I wonder who actually pays for that?


----------



## terebina786

I’m sure the dress was “gifted” to her for the photo shoot because everything else she’s worn has sold out immediately.


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> It is interesting that people focus on the price of Meghan's dress. She is the first royal bride to have her on money. She made around $500,000 a year from Suits and she had endorsement deals.
> 
> Kate has worn expensive things and no one seems to bat an eye or gives her a pass. It's Charles or her parents money, but with Meghan it is her money and that breaks to preset mold





terebina786 said:


> I’m sure the dress was “gifted” to her for the photo shoot because everything else she’s worn has sold out immediately.


As *terebina* said, I'm pretty sure that $75,000 engagement dress was comped. Excellent publicity for the couture house.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> It is interesting that people focus on the price of Meghan's dress. She is the first royal bride to have her on money. She made around $500,000 a year from Suits and she had endorsement deals.
> 
> Kate has worn expensive things and no one seems to bat an eye or gives her a pass. It's Charles or her parents money, but with Meghan it is her money and that breaks to preset mold
> 
> Royal wives shouldn't be independent or confident, they should look demure and likely for the fight.
> 
> View attachment 3913357
> 
> 
> http://theduchessdiary.com/2014/11/...-cambridge-cartier-trinity-necklace-olympics/
> 
> That is a $50,000 Kate has worn only twice.



Doubt she purchased that gown. I’m sure she either borrowed it from the designer for the shoot or they did gift it to her. 

I could care less how much her pieces cost. I’m in the US. None of my money goes towards the monarchy, so I can enjoy watching what they wear.


----------



## gelbergirl

Interesting to see if Prince Harry's uncle might offer the Spencer family tiara to Meghan for the wedding.
Diana wore it as a bride in 1981 and many times.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> It is interesting that people focus on the price of Meghan's dress. She is the first royal bride to have her on money. She made around $500,000 a year from Suits and she had endorsement deals.
> 
> Kate has worn expensive things and no one seems to bat an eye or gives her a pass. It's Charles or her parents money, but with Meghan it is her money and that breaks to preset mold
> 
> Royal wives shouldn't be independent or confident, they should look demure and likely for the fight.
> 
> View attachment 3913357
> 
> 
> http://theduchessdiary.com/2014/11/...-cambridge-cartier-trinity-necklace-olympics/
> 
> That is a $50,000 Kate has worn only twice.



Wow 500k isn’t much I guess, I just read that some of the Real Housewives pull in that amount and even double for one season. That’s nuts. Meghan films far more episodes than those housewives.


----------



## Scarlett210

Only Spencer women wear the Spencer tiara so Meghan won't be wearing it, nor Kate.


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^hm but doesn’t seem to be only blood Spencer women, I believe I read that one of Diana’s brother’s wives wore it when they married. It’s a lovely tiara, the boys seem to frequently remember their mother through her jewelry so if Meghan wore it, that’d be lovely and meaningful imo !


----------



## terebina786

I just read that during Meghan’s introduction to the extended family, Princess Michael wore a piece of racist jewellery.  SMH...


----------



## uhpharm01

terebina786 said:


> I just read that during Meghan’s introduction to the extended family, Princess Michael wore a piece of racist jewellery.  SMH...



So Princess Micheal claims the following.  We shall see. This is not her first misstep. 
EXCLUSIVE
*PRINCESS MICHAEL*
*SORRY FOR RACIST BROOCH ...*
*I'M GOING TO RETIRE IT by TMZ staff *
*http://m.tmz.com/#!article/2017/12/...gizes-racist-brooch-blackamoor-meghan-markle/*


----------



## Singra

I reckon there are quite a few of people like princess Michael (I don’t even know who she is btw) in that seam of society. They’re really removed and clueless about certain things. I’ve had the opportunity to come into contact with people like that a few times... insufferable and pompous are words I’d use to describe them.


----------



## PatsyCline

How is the pin racist?  It's simply a pin of a dark skinned person with jewellery.


----------



## terebina786

PatsyCline said:


> How is the pin racist?  It's simply a pin of a dark skinned person with jewellery.



You need to research the history of where such jewellery came from... Coupled with her questionable past comments.


----------



## Singra

PatsyCline said:


> How is the pin racist?  It's simply a pin of a dark skinned person with jewellery.


As terebina786 says it's about the history and context, if that woman had an ounce of sensitivity she'd know it's inappropriate to wear.... it's especially inappropriate for someone in her position. She's in the clueless Marie Antoinette bracket of casual racism.


----------



## Tivo

I hope Markle has a thick skin and hope the fame & fortune she’s chasing is worth it. She’s in for a lot of unhappiness.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## terebina786

Singra said:


> As terebina786 says it's about the history and context, if that woman had an ounce of sensitivity she'd know it's inappropriate to wear.... it's especially inappropriate for someone in her position. She's in the clueless Marie Antoinette bracket of casual racism.



I have no doubt in my mind that she knew exactly what she was doing when she put it on.


----------



## Tivo

terebina786 said:


> I have no doubt in my mind that she knew exactly what she was doing when she put it on.


Of course. And it won’t be the last nasty thing she does.


----------



## Singra

terebina786 said:


> I have no doubt in my mind that she knew exactly what she was doing when she put it on.


Yeah probably. I didn't even read her full set of comments or the articles. Reading the Guardian article now and that woman is a piece of work. I just saw the one comment in headlines about her wishing she was a "half-caste" and didn't bother reading more.. what's the point? you're just going to get upset. I've met people who say things like that, they think they're... actually I have no idea what they think they're doing but they wrap everything they say in so many layers of delusion and they're so far in a particular bubble that there's genuine surprise on their part when someone is offended, it doesn't make it less offensive... so that's what I meant by the Marie Antoinette reference.

If you go to these luxury game parks in Africa that offer up ye old colonial fantasy and add a few British toffs you have a recipe for offensive bulls*t. I've friends who've worked functions with these type of people, basically a lot of Harry's social class, and they are an offensive lot... they joke about "the colonies" and plebeians all the time, it's very common to hear that.




Tivo said:


> I hope Markle has a thick skin and *hope the fame & fortune she’s chasing* is worth it. She’s in for a lot of unhappiness.


Saying it like that makes it sound so cold. I think she is chasing something but I think she views it in more idealistic terms. Harry is offering up this opportunity to be this globe trotting influential philanthropic figure, I'm sure it appeals to her actress side but also to her idealistic side. At this point in the game I really think she's gaga in love and can't see the forest for the trees.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I'm in a biracial relationship myself, and it makes me wonder what Harry thinks. My boyfriend would've been livid if something like this happened.


----------



## horse17

Tivo said:


> I hope Markle has a thick skin and hope the fame & fortune she’s chasing is worth it. She’s in for a lot of unhappiness.


My guess is that she has a thick skin...and she also has the fierce  support of harry....some of these royals seem insufferable....would never want to be in that circle..


----------



## gazoo

Princess Michael of Kent is trash. Always has been. Gross to know she lives a "stone's throw" from Harry and William. 

I think Meghan likely does have a thick skin. She was raised in America, where sadly racism is still very much experienced everywhere. Hopefully her early struggles being a bi-racial person (which she's spoken about), will enable her to weather the sure to come repeated gaffes the people around her will throw her way. I feel sorry for her, yet am also hopeful that what she has with Harry will buffer the static from the ignorant jerks.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

One of the Three Wise Men was a blackamoor. She was probably wearing it for Christmas. It is a brooch depicting one of the Three Kings - Balthazar who brought myrrh - Google it.

It’s fake controversy like this that makes people not care when there are real race issues and concerns that need to be highlighted. Crying wolf is never a good thing, and for the record I’m black.


----------



## Tivo

IDC how “strong” you are. Being surrounded by people who make a sport of/take pleasure in “trying you” day in and out will wear her down. This will not last.


----------



## Pagan

In this day and age, you don’t have to be particularly woke to know better than to wear jewelry like that. I wouldn’t wear a brooch of an aboriginal woman as costume jewelry either, and for the same reasons. I don’t believe that vile woman didn’t know what she was doing. 

Perhaps this is overly naive of me, but I hope Meghan’s presence in the family will serve to open some eyes to unspoken racism and perhaps change both perceptions and behaviours. I hope Harry and other members of the family made it clear to this woman that racism will not be tolerated in their home or company.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Everyone is racist including Mehgan herself, who’s only bi-racial when it suits her purpose. I don’t know what “woke” is, but yeah, I’m cynical.


----------



## Singra

horse17 said:


> My guess is that she has a thick skin...and she also has the fierce  support of harry....some of these royals seem insufferable...*.would never want to be in that circle..*


Neither would I. My parents had a school friend who married into that sector of society, they weren't related to royalty but they were wealthy through old inherited money and the stories... oi vey! Never would I want to be in it, I think if most people saw it up close they wouldn't either.



Tivo said:


> IDC how “strong” you are. Being surrounded by people who make a sport of/take pleasure in “trying you” day in and out will wear her down. This will not last.


On the other hand how do we know what they're life will be like of who they'll be mixing with, maybe for the majority of the time they could live a life of relative independence from the institution of the royals. I have no idea either way just trying to look for a silver lining.


----------



## Coconuts40

I think that Harry will be incredibly protective of Meghan, just as William appears to be with Kate.  With their beautiful mother passing as a result of being chased by paparazzi, I think they have zero tolerance for anything that may jeopardize their loved ones that enter into the establishment.  As for this racist woman - Diana appeared to raise her boys well and I could not see him tolerating this.  I do wonder how they're dealing with it.  I am sure the bubble has bursted and Meghan is getting a dose of reality of what it's like to marry into a royal family.


----------



## Singra

There are all these stories from people like Fergie and Diana who had trouble living in that bubble... maybe the royal family learnt from it and it's better now, maybe there's more freedom, maybe more protection.... they probably only see this Princess Michael of Kent on the rare occasion as well as a host of other insufferable people. 

Marriage is hard enough without the pressures of a fish bowl and royal protocol, it could go well it could not go well we have no idea until time passes.


----------



## buffym

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> One of the Three Wise Men was a blackamoor. She was probably wearing it for Christmas. It is a brooch depicting one of the Three Kings - Balthazar who brought myrrh - Google it.
> 
> It’s fake controversy like this that makes people not care when there are real race issues and concerns that need to be highlighted. Crying wolf is never a good thing, and for the record I’m black.



The problem isn't just the brooch, it is the person wearing the brooch. It is someone who has said racist things in the past so it is a hard to believe she is innocent. 

 If she was innocent  why did she apologize.

It is also disheartening when there is subtle or overt racism and people say get over it, it is fake controversy, or crying wolf.

Meghan hasn't said anything, members of the public called out Princess Michael and the press for not mentioning, it so how is this Meghan's fault.

Also, just because you are black doesn't mean you can't be racist against blacks or especially bi-racials. As a black female, I have encountered almost as much racism and sexism from my gender and racial group as another. Even though, the person will say well I'm black or female so I can't be racist or sexist. 

No, of disregard someone's experience or have a derogatory comment focused on gender or race than yes you are. It just makes it extra sad.


----------



## redney

I love that, per royal protocol, Princess Racistpants will be required to curtesy to Markle, once she's married. Suck it, old white racist! [emoji23]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

I’m sure this subtle racism is just the beginning. Marriage is one thing, but introducing a mixed bloodline is another to some of these royals. 

It’s vile and I don’t think Harry or Meghan see this as a huge issue right now because they appear to be completely smitten at 18 months. 

Being a “princess” is not what it’s all cracked up to be. I know all of us have at one point in our lives dreamed of being one, but after reading about what goes behind palace doors and what many have gone through marrying into this family, I certainly wouldn’t want to be one now.


----------



## Tivo

LVSistinaMM said:


> I’m sure this subtle racism is just the beginning. Marriage is one thing, but introducing a mixed bloodline is another to some of these royals.
> 
> It’s vile and I don’t think Harry or Meghan see this as a huge issue right now because they appear to be completely smitten at 18 months.
> 
> Being a “princess” is not what it’s all cracked up to be. I know all of us have at one point in our lives dreamed of being one, but after reading about what goes behind palace doors and what many have gone through marrying into this family, I certainly wouldn’t want to be one now.


You’ve explained this perfectly. Couldn’t agree more.


----------



## horse17

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> One of the Three Wise Men was a blackamoor. She was probably wearing it for Christmas. It is a brooch depicting one of the Three Kings - Balthazar who brought myrrh - Google it.
> 
> *It’s fake controversy like this that makes people not care when there are real race issues and concerns that need to be highlighted*. Crying wolf is never a good thing, and for the record I’m black.


totally agree...although I know nothing about this woman, and her motives (past and present)...so im not going to defend her....


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

horse17 said:


> totally agree...although I know nothing about this woman, and her motives (past and present)...so im not going to defend her....


I’m not defending her either. Don’t know her or even care to.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I know this is the Harry thread and all but let’s not forget he himself dressed like a Nazi for A “colonial” birthday party one year.  They aren’t the most conscientious bunch.

And it sounds like she will see a lot of PMK, they are going to be living practically next door to each other.


----------



## buffym

A1aGypsy said:


> I know this is the Harry thread and all but let’s not forget he himself dressed like a Nazi for A “colonial” birthday party one year.  They aren’t the most conscientious bunch.
> 
> And it sounds like she will see a lot of PMK, they are going to be living practically next door to each other.




Harry was 18. He was dumb, but also sheltered and came from an all white boarding school. 

Princess Michael is in her 60s, claims she is a historian, father was a Nazi, and has been quoted telling people to remember the colonies. It makes it hard to believe she did not anticipate a negative effect.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Harry was twenty and came from a family who was in power during WWII and his grandma was even a hostage risk during the war. I am certainly not saying PMK is better than he but the swastika is an infamous symbol. You don’t slap that on your arm and have no idea what it means. 

I have no doubt it was a form of rebellion. But it was an extremely poor choice. And the fact that it was a colonial party to begin with speaks volumes about the views of those who surround the royals and the royals themselves. Meghan has gotten herself into a whole lot more than just one crazy cousin.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

She doesn’t care who these people really are, she’s just making a name for herself and will drop him in 2+ years just like she did the first husband.


----------



## horse17

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> She doesn’t care who these people really are, she’s just making a name for herself and will drop him in 2+ years just like she did the first husband.


Oh no!.... really?... I have to respectfully disagree .. whether she's truly in love infatuated or none of the above I still think she's in it....


----------



## horse17

Now I really wonder who or what type of girl would be engaged to Harry that we wouldn't say had an ulterior motive?... I'm not hating on the doubters it's just a true question


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

horse17 said:


> Oh no!.... really?... I have to respectfully disagree .. whether she's truly in love infatuated or none of the above I still think she's in it....


Oh, she’s in it... as a mean to an end. The ex husband got the wee bit role in suits and she ran with it.... until she got the chef then she was the wannabe lifestyle guru... until she met Harry and drop the chef... now she’s famous beyond her imagination in a way she could never have been because let’s face it, she’s not talented, and besides she’s old by Hollywood standards. This is her dream come true until something less restrictive comes along... she’s on top of the world now, but wait until reality sets in...


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

horse17 said:


> Now I really wonder who or what type of girl would be engaged to Harry that we wouldn't say had an ulterior motive?... I'm not hating on the doubters it's just a true question


Harry without his title wouldn’t be given the time day except for exactly what he got. This is the only type that would go for him. He gets what he deserves quite frankly.


----------



## horse17

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Oh, she’s in it... as a mean to an end. The ex husband got the wee bit role in suits and she ran with it.... until she got the chef then she was the wannabe lifestyle guru... until she met Harry and drop the chef... now she’s famous beyond her imagination in a way she could never have been because let’s face it, she’s not talented, and besides she’s old by Hollywood standards. This is her dream come true until something less restrictive comes along... she’s on top of the world now, but wait until reality sets in...


Interesting I didn't know all that


----------



## Pinkie*

He is adorable


----------



## Gal4Dior

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Oh, she’s in it... as a mean to an end. The ex husband got the wee bit role in suits and she ran with it.... until she got the chef then she was the wannabe lifestyle guru... until she met Harry and drop the chef... now she’s famous beyond her imagination in a way she could never have been because let’s face it, she’s not talented, and besides she’s old by Hollywood standards. This is her dream come true until something less restrictive comes along... she’s on top of the world now, but wait until reality sets in...



I have to be honest, Meghan is no dummy. She knew her career had an expiration date if she was on a USA network show at 36. 

She turned to being a lifestyle guru who cashed in on endorsement deals. The following she had after dating Prince Harry only upped her stock.

If you see her Instagram posts she sold this “lifestyle” that a lot of ladies aspire to, making it seem that her life was seemingly perfect -  full of self love slogans and advertising her good volunteer work and her excellent cooking skills. 

I do not think for one second that this is ENTIRELY the real her. No one can be that perfect. She’s just amazing at marketing herself. I admire that. 

She got Prince Harry because she was just craftier than the others. I’m sure I would have been scheming the whole way if that was my end game. I can’t fault her for that either. She had the beauty and the brains to beat out the other ladies. 

You can’t doubt her ambition or her intelligence. Even if this doesn’t work out, she’s can easily go back to being this lifestyle guru and never have to worry about money again. She’s got herself set up either way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Singra

Wow a lot of thought has been put into this. I can't say that I know enough about Megan or Harry to know what their true motivations are or what their future will be. I'm more a casual observer, whatever happens happens.



LVSistinaMM said:


> I’m sure this subtle racism is just the beginning. Marriage is one thing, but introducing a mixed bloodline is another to some of these royals.
> 
> It’s vile and I don’t think Harry or Meghan see this as a huge issue right now because they appear to be completely smitten at 18 months.
> 
> Being a “princess” is not what it’s all cracked up to be. *I know all of us have at one point in our lives dreamed of being one, *but after reading about what goes behind palace doors and what many have gone through marrying into this family, I certainly wouldn’t want to be one now.


Has everyone had this fantasy? I can't recall wanting it even as a child but I do remember feeling pressure to want it and everyone presumed I wanted it. In today's terms a princess is basically a celebrity with a bunch more rules and regulations.. that doesn't sound at all appealing.

I've said it before if every royal dropped off the face of the planet I wouldn't have a problem with it but some people get something out of it, the pomp and ceremony seem to bring a large enough number of people together for them to be useful in a socially cohesive way. If they're put to work and held to account and if the public get something tangible out of the deal then go for it.

I generally have a strong dislike for this sector of people but not everyone is the same, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt before it all goes to sh*t.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

LVSistinaMM said:


> I have to be honest, Meghan is no dummy. She knew her career had an expiration date if she was on a USA network show at 36.
> 
> She turned to being a lifestyle guru who cashed in on endorsement deals. The following she had after dating Prince Harry only upped her stock.
> 
> If you see her Instagram posts she sold this “lifestyle” that a lot of ladies aspire to, making it seem that her life was seemingly perfect -  full of self love slogans and advertising her good volunteer work and her excellent cooking skills.
> 
> I do not think for one second that this is ENTIRELY the real her. No one can be that perfect. She’s just amazing at marketing herself. I admire that.
> 
> She got Prince Harry because she was just craftier than the others. I’m sure I would have been scheming the whole way if that was my end game. I can’t fault her for that either. She had the beauty and the brains to beat out the other ladies.
> 
> You can’t doubt her ambition or her intelligence. Even if this doesn’t work out, she’s can easily go back to being this lifestyle guru and never have to worry about money again. She’s got herself set up either way.


Except for the admiration part, you got it.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

I’m an observer as well, but I’m not a fan of Disney princess stories, so naturally I’m more cynical. The entire British and North American press have been bombarding us with stories for the past year and a half. There’s been a lot of white washing, but most importantly, it’s some genius PR for someone not that accomplished that I’ve haven’t seen since the Kardashian’s.


----------



## Singra

^ Yeah I don't tune in too carefully, I'm more interested to know how many people are into it and what they think about it. I suppose there's a lot of money to be made from the media reporting on it and it's an easy feel good story that fits the fairy tale template... you don't have to work hard to get people to report on it.


If people like the princess story or the royal story I don't have a problem with that. I'm not a hardline anti-royalist.

I read an interview with Stephen Fry once where he talked about the royal family, he talked about examples of countries where the royal families were overthrown and how it didn't result in a more ********ic environment (most of Europe still has their monarchy I think)... that is was perhaps a sign of tolerance the royals were allowed to exist obviously as long as they were kept in check. I didn't delve too deeply into it and Stephen Fry isn't exactly 'of the people' but it seems to make some sense.

These days it seems like their main function has to do with national branding, there's all the charity work that's useful I suppose but they still remain a symbol for a lot of people... I'm talking about the main visible royal family members not the hanger-ons or members we never hear or know about until they do something embarrassing... if a large enough group of people still want the royals to exist as an institution I can live with that, just make sure to get something useful out of the deal.


----------



## boxermom

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Harry without his title wouldn’t be given the time day except for exactly what he got. This is the only type that would go for him. He gets what he deserves quite frankly.



I disagree. I think he's attractive, appears to have lots of personality, does a lot of charity work, and may be a thoughtful, kind person to those around him. He deserves someone who loves him and I hope Meghan is that person.


----------



## Eva1991

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Everyone is racist including Mehgan herself, *who’s only bi-racial when it suits her purpose.* I don’t know what “woke” is, but yeah, I’m cynical.



What do you mean exactly? I don't think she's ever denied the fact that she's biracial.

As far as this Princess Michael is concerned, I imagine she's just like one of those annoying relatives that we are all forced to see during family gatherings; Meghan can choose to ignore her next time. After all, if I'm not mistaken, once Meghan marries Harry she'll be a superior royal than Princess Michael.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

boxermom said:


> I disagree. I think he's attractive, appears to have lots of personality, does a lot of charity work, and may be a thoughtful, kind person to those around him. He deserves someone who loves him and I hope Meghan is that person.


I’m not easily fooled by good public relations. What else does he have to do with his time besides going on lavish vacation? He’s nothing but a screw up who gets his messes cleaned by daddy.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Eva1991 said:


> What do you mean exactly? I don't think she's ever denied the fact that she's biracial.


Exactly what I said. She’s only half black when that label is beneficial to her.


----------



## Flatsy

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Exactly what I said. She’s only half black when that label is beneficial to her.


I think she was looking for some examples of what you mean, and I would need a few too to understand what you are saying.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Everyone she associates with are white from her husbands, friends, appearance, etc. go take a look at her Instagram or her tig website for all the examples you need.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I’m an observer as well, but I’m not a fan of Disney princess stories, so naturally I’m more cynical. The entire British and North American press have been bombarding us with stories for the past year and a half. There’s been a lot of white washing, but most importantly, it’s some genius PR for someone not that accomplished that I’ve haven’t seen since the Kardashian’s.



Not a fan of the Kardashian’s at all, but I have to admit the matriarch is brilliant. She has made a fortune and managed to have her daughters become famous and make money for doing absolutely nothing. We have social media to thank for their rise. 

Meghan is smarter than the average actress. She knows that a lifestyle brand is the future and that it is far more lucrative than just another role on another B rate show.

Don’t hate the player, hate the game. [emoji23]


----------



## Flatsy

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Everyone she associates with are white from her husbands, friends, appearance, etc. go take a look at her Instagram or her tig website for all the examples you need.


Having white friends does not change her racial identity.  You are implying that she selects her friends based on race and has nefarious motives for doing so.  I understand that you don't like the royals, but please refrain from being flagrantly racist.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Flatsy said:


> Having white friends does not change her racial identity.  You are implying that she selects her friends based on race and has nefarious motives for doing so.  I understand that you don't like the royals, but please refrain from being flagrantly racist.


I’m racist? Nice try.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

LVSistinaMM said:


> Not a fan of the Kardashian’s at all, but I have to admit the matriarch is brilliant. She has made a fortune and managed to have her daughters become famous and make money for doing absolutely nothing. We have social media to thank for their rise.
> 
> Meghan is smarter than the average actress. She knows that a lifestyle brand is the future and that it is far more lucrative than just another role on another B rate show.
> 
> Don’t hate the player, hate the game. [emoji23]


I don’t have any respect for the player nor the game. Although it’s not easy to avoid, I do my best to.


----------



## Flatsy

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I’m racist? Nice try.


Yes, extremely racist.  I grew up in a racially mixed neighborhood where unfortunately this type of racism still existed.  Black kids couldn't be friends with white kids without being accused of being "Oreos" (black on the outside, white on the inside).  This attitude is a way of trying to "keep people in their place" and keep people segregated.

Megan is biracial - half black and half white.  She can have 100% white friends and that doesn't make her any less black.  To even say that she goes through life using her race to be "beneficial" to her in some way is something you would never say about a white person.  It is racist AF.  And then to imply that she's being hypocritical by having white friends is even more so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Flatsy said:


> Yes, extremely racist.  I grew up in a racially mixed neighborhood where unfortunately this type of racism still existed.  Black kids couldn't be friends with white kids without being accused of being "Oreos" (black on the outside, white on the inside).  This attitude is a way of trying to "keep people in their place" and keep people segregated.
> 
> Megan is biracial - half black and half white.  She can have 100% white friends and that doesn't make her any less black.  To even say that she goes through life using her race to be "beneficial" to her in some way is something you would never say about a white person.  It is racist AF.  And then to imply that she's being hypocritical by having white friends is even more so.


You can be outraged all you want, and you can also call me racist if you need to, that’s your propagative. I’m not afraid of the word and therefore has no effect on me, so there. I also don’t need to justify myself to you or anyone. I have no idea what you are talking about Oreo, but where I come from you can be who you are as long as you are genuine. But this is about Meghan who cried racism so the press couldn’t dig into her past shenanigans, so yes, she’s using her race to her advantage.


----------



## Flatsy

I hesitate to ask what you think her "past shenanigans" are.  She's divorced and her former best friend has been bought by the tabloids and still didn't have anything shocking to say about her.

There were some tremendously racist things written about her, particularly in that garbage publication "The Daily Mail".  Harry rightfully called them out on it.  "Cried racism" is a loaded expression almost exclusively used by racists.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Oh, please. The RF is full of racists including Harry himself. You know...institutionalized racism, the real thing, but keep calling me a racist because eh, I don’t believe Mehgan and her thirst is the best thing ever. If not for the garbage press like the Daily Mail, no one would know who the heck she is. People finally know her now, but most don’t care, especially the Brits.


----------



## Flatsy

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> Oh, please. The RF is full of racists including Harry himself. You know...institutionalized racism, the real thing, but keep calling me a racist because eh, I don’t believe Mehgan and her thirst is the best thing ever.


There are many types of racism.  Yes, the royal family is full of racists.  The things you are saying are every bit as much "the real thing".


----------



## ccbaggirl89

horse17 said:


> Now I really wonder who or what type of girl would be engaged to Harry that we wouldn't say had an ulterior motive?... I'm not hating on the doubters it's just a true question


Probably the girls he dated originally, like Cressida Bonas, who came from a boatload of money and privilege. Maybe that is another reason royalty around the world tend to stick very close to other people with money and status and not pursue 'commoners.' If you have money and status already then Harry wouldn't be *that* amazing to you, b/c you'd be in contact with amazing people all the time, with titles and etc.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

Flatsy said:


> There are many types of racism.  Yes, the royal family is full of racists.  The things you are saying are every bit as much "the real thing".


You are convinced I’m racist and I don’t really care because I’m not. I’m judging Meghan, that’s what we do here, and I say she uses her race to her benefits. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m done here!


----------



## Gal4Dior

I don’t think accusing people of posting on here being racist is really necessary on this thread. 

Let’s stick to gossip about the Royal Family. Who we all know have a racist streak in their heritage, but they are judgmental on other aspects of this match, as well.

If people have an issue with Meghan it’s not JUST that she’s biracial. She is also divorced, older than him, and an American commoner. This is all very controversial to the Royals even though there has been progress made in the last few decades.

I know many disagree with my opinion, but I still think 19 months of long distance dating when not knowing the other person before seems a bit rushed. Especially when it comes to choosing a wife of Prince.

They seem very happy now, at least.


----------



## Flatsy

LVSistinaMM said:


> I don’t think accusing people of posting on here being racist is really necessary on this thread.


I'm sorry if you don't like it, but I think it's wrong not to speak up when people say and do racist things, whether it's in a gossip forum or elsewhere.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

LVSistinaMM said:


> I don’t think accusing people of posting on here being racist is really necessary on this thread.
> 
> Let’s stick to gossip about the Royal Family.


It's a gossip thread. Nothing on it is necessary. I don't see why we have to silence one person's opinions and not another's. I disagree with Caroline Mathilda wholeheartedly but I'm not trying to shut them down; I just ignore their posts. Everyone else here can choose to do the same with anyone else.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It's a gossip thread. Nothing on it is necessary. I don't see why we have to silence one person's opinions and not another's. I disagree with Caroline Mathilda wholeheartedly but I'm not trying to shut them down; I just ignore their posts. Everyone else here can choose to do the same with anyone else.




When did I silence anyone? It’s my opinion that it isn’t necessary, because it suddenly went to us sniping at each other. I thought it was supposed to be just gossiping about Harry and Meghan...possibly the rest of the royals. 

I never forbid someone to do it. If you must snipe at each other on a gossip thread, I can’t stop you.


----------



## buffym

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Probably the girls he dated originally, like Cressida Bonas, who came from a boatload of money and privilege. Maybe that is another reason royalty around the world tend to stick very close to other people with money and status and not pursue 'commoners.' If you have money and status already then Harry wouldn't be *that* amazing to you, b/c you'd be in contact with amazing people all the time, with titles and etc.



But, that makes the dislike of Meghan weird. She is worth 5 million, it is not Windsor money but it isn’t change. Cressida has an old name but was cash poor. Chelsy was the richest ex she worth, well her parents were worth 30 million. Kate’s parents are worth 10 million. 

Yet, people say Meghan is not good enough. Who would, if you or your family had 100s of millions or billions, why would you marry into the royal family. Where people will tell you how to spend your money.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> But, that makes the dislike of Meghan weird. She is worth 5 million, it is not Windsor money but it isn’t change. Cressida has an old name but was cash poor. Chelsy was the richest ex she worth, well her parents were worth 30 million. Kate’s parents are worth 10 million.
> 
> Yet, people say Meghan is not good enough. Who would, if you or your family had 100s of millions or billions, why would you marry into the royal family. Where people will tell you how to spend your money.



I think for the royal family it’s more about good breeding than money. I don’t think either should be a great issue if two are in love, but then again,  I disagree with a lot of their antiquated ways.


----------



## horse17

buffym said:


> But, that makes the dislike of Meghan weird. She is worth 5 million, it is not Windsor money but it isn’t change. Cressida has an old name but was cash poor. Chelsy was the richest ex she worth, well her parents were worth 30 million. Kate’s parents are worth 10 million.
> 
> Yet, people say Meghan is not good enough. Who would, if you or your family had 100s of millions or billions, why would you marry into the royal family. Where people will tell you how to spend your money.


I know what you mean but 5 mil isn't a lot of money..by Hollywood or royal standards..


----------



## Eva1991

Even if she came from an extremely wealthy family people would still question her motives. At least her net worth comes from her own money; she worked for it, which is rare is those circles.


----------



## buffym

This picture shows a lot of Harry’s personality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Singra

Eva1991 said:


> Even if she came from an extremely wealthy family people would still question her motives. At least her net worth comes from her own money; she worked for it, *which is rare is those circles.*


Not really related just wanted an excuse to post this... Let us take a moment to remember the ultra posh...


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> I have to be honest, Meghan is no dummy. She knew her career had an expiration date if she was on a USA network show at 36.
> 
> She turned to being a lifestyle guru who cashed in on endorsement deals. The following she had after dating Prince Harry only upped her stock.
> 
> If you see her Instagram posts she sold this “lifestyle” that a lot of ladies aspire to, making it seem that her life was seemingly perfect -  full of self love slogans and advertising her good volunteer work and her excellent cooking skills.
> 
> I do not think for one second that this is ENTIRELY the real her. No one can be that perfect. She’s just amazing at marketing herself. I admire that.
> 
> She got Prince Harry because she was just craftier than the others. I’m sure I would have been scheming the whole way if that was my end game. I can’t fault her for that either. She had the beauty and the brains to beat out the other ladies.
> 
> You can’t doubt her ambition or her intelligence. Even if this doesn’t work out, she’s can easily go back to being this lifestyle guru and never have to worry about money again. She’s got herself set up either way.


people seem to forget that it was Meghan who announced their relationship on instagram


----------



## buffym

myown said:


> people seem to forget that it was Meghan who announced their relationship on instagram



Meghan put up spooning bananas on instagram before the story broke. The Sun announced the relationship. Harry was spotted at Meghan's apartment with a police detail. Her neighborhood has a Facebook page. The neighbors were talking about why their was an off duty police officer and the figured it was Prince Harry.


----------



## Gal4Dior

myown said:


> people seem to forget that it was Meghan who announced their relationship on instagram



That’s what I’m talking about. She knows how to play an impending news release. She’s very keen on this whole marketing machine.


----------



## Jayne1

Caroline-Mathilda said:


> I’m not easily fooled by good public relations. What else does he have to do with his time besides going on lavish vacation? He’s nothing but a screw up who gets his messes cleaned by daddy.


He's seems nice, but not that bright.  None of them are very bright. I read it's because of all the inbreeding.  lol


----------



## ccbaggirl89

buffym said:


> But, that makes the dislike of Meghan weird. She is worth 5 million, it is not Windsor money but it isn’t change. Cressida has an old name but was cash poor. Chelsy was the richest ex she worth, well her parents were worth 30 million. Kate’s parents are worth 10 million.
> 
> Yet, people say Meghan is not good enough. Who would, if you or your family had 100s of millions or billions, why would you marry into the royal family. Where people will tell you how to spend your money.


As a few others have mentioned it's not a matter of money, but breeding and titles. Most royal lines have inbreeding for that very reason, to not bring in 'new blood' and 'ruin' their lineage. 5 million isn't really that much when a title is at stake, because her children (if she has any) will be princes and princesses, so that's heavy incentive to people seeking royal lineage (who have 100s of millions). It's all very archaic and is only starting, slowly, to be modernized.


----------



## horse17

Jayne1 said:


> He's seems nice, but not that bright.  None of them are very bright. I read it's because of all the inbreeding.  lol


Omg lol


----------



## Singra

Jayne1 said:


> He's seems nice, but not that bright.  None of them are very bright. I read it's because of all the inbreeding.  lol


 They don't need to be bright they have the British public footing their bill... who's the bright one now?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Jayne1 said:


> He's seems nice, but not that bright.  None of them are very bright. I read it's because of all the inbreeding.  lol



Lol! Exactly why they need “new blood” in the British monarchy.

Charles does not seem at all good looking, interesting, or bright, but that didn’t stop him from being a huge ladies man prior to marrying Diana.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle arriving to Morning Service in Sandringham on Christmas Day.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> No......Charles got the attention because he was a prince.....not because of his personality, although *he may be a nice enough person*


No, he's not renowned for being a nice person here either. And he is definitely not attractive because of his personality. Women threw themselves at him because he was a prince and a multi-millionaire.


----------



## zen1965

Ughhh. They really look bad in these pics. Hate Kate's coat. Like Meghan's coat but the colouring does nothing for her. And her hat is frightful. Likewise steely greys and blues do not look good on Harry. And Wills looks old beyond his years.


----------



## Eva1991

I'm pretty sure that having a royal title makes someone more attractive for most.

Regarding the Sandrigham appearance, I loved Meghan's outfit; so well put together and fashionable at the same time. Harry however could take his hands out of his pockets and hold his fiancee's hand. If you look closely, she's holding his arm while he has his hands in his pockets which looks really awkward.


----------



## Alexenjie

No end to the British royals and their horrible hats. I like both Meghan and Kate but neither is flattered by hats and the two this morning are just ugly. I don't know if the world missing good hat designers (not many women wear hats anymore). It's shame to me that British royalty and whoever else holds on to this unflattering tradition.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Both hats are total misses for me. I’m not a fan of Kate’s coat. Meghan’s coat is not a flattering color on her. Why must Meghan wear baggy-ish boots again? It ends up looking dumpy on her now that her entire body is covered in bulk. Similar to her last appearance where those boots were a miss!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BagLovingMom

Team Meghan lol. I think they all look great . Merry Christmas !


----------



## MarvelGirl

I think Meghan looks great too! I think the tan coloring looks very chic and sophisticated and she wears it well! Merry Christmas everyone!


----------



## terebina786

I knew something was off about Meghan’s coat.  The colour is not good for her and yeah those boots are too baggy.


----------



## threadbender

Maybe I need new glasses. I thought they all looked fine and happy. I am not a huge royal fan, by any means, but I thought this was a nice, not stiff, photo.


----------



## Eva1991

Alexenjie said:


> No end to the British royals and their horrible hats. I like both Meghan and Kate but neither is flattered by hats and the two this morning are just ugly. I don't know if the world missing good hat designers (not many women wear hats anymore). It's shame to me that British royalty and whoever else holds on to this unflattering tradition.



I agree that some of the hats they wear are tacky and unflattering but that doesn't mean they should ditch wearing hats completely. They should just opt for more flattering pieces.



LVSistinaMM said:


> Both hats are total misses for me. I’m not a fan of Kate’s coat. Meghan’s coat is not a flattering color on her. Why must Meghan wear baggy-ish boots again? It ends up looking dumpy on her now that her entire body is covered in bulk. Similar to her last appearance where those boots were a miss!



Regarding the baggy boots, she probably has very thin calves which makes the boots look like they're not fitting well.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Eva1991 said:


> I agree that some of the hats they wear are tacky and unflattering but that doesn't mean they should ditch wearing hats completely. They should just opt for more flattering pieces.
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding the baggy boots, she probably has very thin calves which makes the boots look like they're not fitting well.



While I understand that issue, the first pair were purposely baggy - more of a boho look. Both boots would be stunning over jeans or leggings. Just not under a bulky midi coat. 

Besides, she can easily have custom boots made now.


----------



## Eva1991

LVSistinaMM said:


> While I understand that issue, the first pair were purposely baggy - more of a boho look. Both boots would be stunning over jeans or leggings. Just not under a bulky midi coat.
> 
> Besides, she can easily have custom boots made now.



I agree that the big coat doesn't help. A pair of booties would've looked better.

However, I think she's tyring to figure out her style as a new royal at the moment. It's the first time we see her wearing a hat for example. I'm pretty sure she wasn't used to wearing hats before - apart from the occasional fedora - and I think she wore it well and color coordinated everything.

Her personal style, judging from older pictures of her, before her engagement to Harry, was quite bohemian. I really hope she succeeds in incorporating more modern / boho touches to her outfits. It's not easy trying to balance being a modern 30-something with being a royal with all those outfit restrictions, so it's probably going to take some time for her to adjust.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Eva1991 said:


> I agree that the big coat doesn't help. A pair of booties would've looked better.
> 
> However, I think she's tyring to figure out her style as a new royal at the moment. It's the first time we see her wearing a hat for example. I'm pretty sure she wasn't used to wearing hats before - apart from the occasional fedora - and I think she wore it well and color coordinated everything.
> 
> Her personal style, judging from older pictures of her, before her engagement to Harry, was quite bohemian. I really hope she succeeds in incorporating more modern / boho touches to her outfits. It's not easy trying to balance being a modern 30-something with being a royal with all those outfit restrictions, so it's probably going to take some time for her to adjust.



I agree on the bootie with maybe opaque black wool tights.

I think I’m just more disappointed with Meghan’s outfit because she is a self proclaimed stylista in her prior life.

Whereas, Kate is an accidental one. She became one mostly because she is married to Prince William. She often looks stuffy - no doubt bound to more royal protocol than Meghan would.

Besides you and I (who are not pro stylists) can easily refine that outfit to look more stylish. So I hope to see more hits than misses from her in the future.


----------



## White Orchid

Not a fan of her latest.  And that tied in a knot belt reminds me too much of the way I tie up my dressing gown.


----------



## carebearz

They do look happy together but I have reservations. 

I’m no body language expert but the way she always clings onto him, seems more like she’s hanging onto to her pot of gold. Maybe it’s just me.


----------



## Gal4Dior

carebearz said:


> They do look happy together but I have reservations.
> 
> I’m no body language expert but the way she always clings onto him, seems more like she’s hanging onto to her pot of gold. Maybe it’s just me.



Lol! Pot of gold. [emoji23]


----------



## peppermintpatty

Idk if Harry is her Pot of Gold, but me oh my!!!!! She is a clinger!!! She's not 19. she's been married before, I don't get it??!!! I really do not find it to be the behavior of a confident person. Turns me off to her, big time! By all means hold hands, gaze lovingly at each other, but this clingy business, no! It's way too much


----------



## HandbagAngel

Their romance developed quick and shortly.  Plus, she is an American so may need some time to fit in to a British royal family.  About Meghan being divorced before, I don’t know why this is a big deal? Isn’t British’s future queen Camilla not only divorced but also cheated too?


----------



## zen1965

Camilla will never be Queen.


----------



## Eva1991

peppermintpatty said:


> Idk if Harry is her Pot of Gold, but me oh my!!!!! She is a clinger!!! She's not 19. she's been married before, I don't get it??!!! I really do not find it to be the behavior of a confident person. Turns me off to her, big time! By all means hold hands, gaze lovingly at each other, but this clingy business, no! It's way too much



I think she was feeling insecure. It was her first official appearance with all the members of the BRF including the Queen. She was an actress before and used to the cameras and all that but the attention that comes with being a member of the BRF is of a completely different scale. I got the impression she was clinging on to Harry to guide her. If she continues clinging on to him, then I will go on and say she's not a confident person but it's quite early to tell.

Overall, I think she did quite well. The outfit was nice, color coordinated and didn't scream "look at me, look at me", she did great during the walk to the church and curtsied to the Queen as she was leaving. Sure, the boots were baggy, the hat was not that styish and the way she was clinging on to Harry was off putting at times but who would look and do everything perfect under such circumstances?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

I agree that they all look happy, but I did not like meghan’s outift at all. From the awkwardly styled coat, to the boots hanging off her tiny legs ... just NO. I’ve seen better dressed girls attending university classes.


----------



## gazoo

I found the series of photos and videos endearing. She's the oldest of the four, yet seemed vulnerable. Not a fan of the tied coats at all, but I am loving seeing William and Kate so at ease with Meghan. That bodes well for her future. Harry looked pretty nervous too. He and she both looked washed out in their colour choices. Made William and Kate stand out, which may have been the intent, and if so, smart of them.


----------



## carebearz

Eva1991 said:


> I think she was feeling insecure. It was her first official appearance with all the members of the BRF including the Queen. She was an actress before and used to the cameras and all that but the attention that comes with being a member of the BRF is of a completely different scale. I got the impression she was clinging on to Harry to guide her. If she continues clinging on to him, then I will go on and say she's not a confident person but it's quite early to tell.
> 
> Overall, I think she did quite well. The outfit was nice, color coordinated and didn't scream "look at me, look at me", she did great during the walk to the church and curtsied to the Queen as she was leaving. Sure, the boots were baggy, the hat was not that styish and the way she was clinging on to Harry was off putting at times but who would look and do everything perfect under such circumstances?



She’s been clinging to him since the engagement announcement, then on her first walkabout in Nottingham, to the engagement photos and now at Christmas. And in the interview on the engagement day, her hand was mostly on top of Harry’s. Some of the UK media asked experts what they thought, they mostly said something along-the-lines of ‘she wear the pants in the relationship’.

I remember there was another local celebrity couple who displayed the same body language, the experts said, it was,’Hands off, he’s my man’. With the royal couple, I thought the experts were being very kind and mild in their expert opinions. 

It does look more like to me she was clinging onto a pot of gold, rather than clinging on for security and guidance. 
Her otherwise confident expression and posture just doesn’t gel with her clinging onto Harry’s arms for security.   

This will no doubt be an interesting romance to follow.


----------



## Alexenjie

I don’t see Meghan clinging to Harry for gold. She is wealthy on her own in the real world. It must be scary to join the royal family with all the rules and millions if not billions of people watching everything you do. I would hate it no matter how much money is involved. Meghan has got to feel nervous doing public things with the royal family and the constant scrutiny. Her old style probably has to be made more formal and she will most likely struggle some to look elegant but with her own personality. I hope she and Harry are able to live a more regular life, the kind Kate and William can never live.


----------



## Eva1991

carebearz said:


> She’s been clinging to him since the engagement announcement, then on her first walkabout in Nottingham, to the engagement photos and now at Christmas. And in the interview on the engagement day, her hand was mostly on top of Harry’s. Some of the UK media asked experts what they thought, they mostly said something along-the-lines of ‘she wear the pants in the relationship’.
> 
> I remember there was another local celebrity couple who displayed the same body language, the experts said, it was,’Hands off, he’s my man’. With the royal couple, I thought the experts were being very kind and mild in their expert opinions.
> 
> It does look more like to me she was clinging onto a pot of gold, rather than clinging on for security and guidance.
> Her otherwise confident expression and posture just doesn’t gel with her clinging onto Harry’s arms for security.
> 
> This will no doubt be an interesting romance to follow.



I don't know what those body language experts have to say but even the fact that there are body language experts and lip readers etc. analyzing and criticizing her every move goes to show how stressful her new role must be. No one would appear perfect after being scrutinized like that.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

carebearz said:


> She’s been clinging to him since the engagement announcement, then on her first walkabout in Nottingham, to the engagement photos and now at Christmas. And in the interview on the engagement day, her hand was mostly on top of Harry’s. Some of the UK media asked experts what they thought, they mostly said something along-the-lines of ‘she wear the pants in the relationship’.
> 
> I remember there was another local celebrity couple who displayed the same body language, the experts said, it was,’Hands off, he’s my man’. With the royal couple, I thought the experts were being very kind and mild in their expert opinions.
> 
> It does look more like to me she was clinging onto a pot of gold, rather than clinging on for security and guidance.
> Her otherwise confident expression and posture just doesn’t gel with her clinging onto Harry’s arms for security.
> 
> This will no doubt be an interesting romance to follow.


It will upset some people who see it different of course, but this was my impression as well. I think, though, much of it stems from needing a ton of guidance from him right now in terms of etiquette and what the heck to do. I watched their walk "live" in and out of the church on Christmas and on the way out he was giving her instructions the entire time (as was Kate). It could be she is generally clingy (if you look at the beach wedding they attended many months ago it was the same type of holding/postures she displays), or it could be she's clingy b/c she really needs lots of help in these beginning stages. She looks very awkward and out-of-place, but I'm sure as time goes on she'll blend better.


----------



## Gal4Dior

From the photos I’ve seen previously (with her last husband and now with Harry) she does cling on her men a lot. 

I used to cling on when I was in my teens and mid twenties. By the time I married my first husband, I wasn’t and after even an amiable divorce, with my second husband I most definitely am not. 

It’s not that I’m not affectionate, I am just more reserved and the days where I dreamed of fairytale romances and marrying my “Prince Charming” were long gone. I was just no longer naive to the fact about how difficult marriage is even in the best of circumstances.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh my word, I've just seen on our news ( UK ) that Harry and Meghan have been asked, by our Government I think, not to invite the Obamas to their wedding as it might upset *****! How funny.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh my word, I've just seen on our news ( UK ) that Harry and Meghan have been asked, by our Government I think, not to invite the Obamas to their wedding as it might upset *****! How funny.



Wow, I certainly hope this isn’t true.


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> Wow, I certainly hope this isn’t true.


I hope it isn't true either x


----------



## terebina786

I read an article a couple of days ago where her (ex) friend said that Meghan’s been obsessed with the royal family for years and dreamed about being a princess one day.  Also, what she said about not knowing who Harry was is BS.  This is the same friend that was the MOH at her first wedding.  Don’t know how true any of this is or if it’s just bitterness from her.


----------



## kkfiregirl

terebina786 said:


> I read an article a couple of days ago where her (ex) friend said that Meghan’s been obsessed with the royal family for years and dreamed about being a princess one day.  Also, what she said about not knowing who Harry was is BS.  This is the same friend that was the MOH at her first wedding.  Don’t know how true any of this is or if it’s just bitterness from her.



the friend sounds like she's trying to get her moment of fame too. i would take her convenient stories with a grain of salt.


----------



## Flatsy

Meghan posed for a photo in front of Buckingham Palace as a tourist when she was 15 and The Daily Mail got her former best friend to say, "It's like she's been planning it her whole life!"  That's the evidence. 

I was a little skeptical when Meghan said she didn't realize what a big deal the royal family is and I still am.  But I don't believe she's been obsessed her whole life with the royal family either, like The Daily Mail would have everyone believe.

It doesn't speak well of Meghan that she's got a broken long-time friendship and that her former friend is eager to say a bunch of catty things about her to the tabloids.  That's not really a good sign.  But the ex-friend seems like a real piece of work and Meghan's biggest mistake may have been being friends with her as long as she did.   Sometimes childhood friendships can turn toxic and they are hard to shake.


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> Meghan posed for a photo in front of Buckingham Palace as a tourist when she was 15 and The Daily Mail got her former best friend to say, "It's like she's been planning it her whole life!"  That's the evidence.
> 
> I was a little skeptical when *Meghan said she didn't realize what a big deal the royal family is* and I still am.  But I don't believe she's been obsessed her whole life with the royal family either, like The Daily Mail would have everyone believe.
> 
> It doesn't speak well of Meghan that she's got a broken long-time friendship and that her former friend is eager to say a bunch of catty things about her to the tabloids.  That's not really a good sign.  But the ex-friend seems like a real piece of work and Meghan's biggest mistake may have been being friends with her as long as she did.   Sometimes childhood friendships can turn toxic and they are hard to shake.



This tells me everything I need to know.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Tivo said:


> This tells me everything I need to know.



Me too. If she did actually say that, I would find that hard to believe. Most people in the US know that the royal family is a big deal in England.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## terebina786

Especially people who posed in front of Buckingham Palace... I do find it odd that her friend is willing to sell her out but her ex husband hasn’t said a word, nor the man that she was dating when she met Harry.


----------



## PatsyCline

I would imagine almost every tourist who visits London gets a photo of themselves in front of Buckingham Palace. I wouldn’t put much stock in that being an obsession.


----------



## Flatsy

kkfiregirl said:


> Me too. If she did actually say that, I would find that hard to believe. Most people in the US know that the royal family is a big deal in England.


Her quote: "I, you know, because I’m from the States, you don’t grow up with the same understanding of the royal family and so while I now understand very clearly, there’s a global interest there. I didn’t know much about him, and so the only thing that I had asked her when she said that she wanted to set us up, was, I had one question. I said, 'Well is he nice?' "

I find it hard to believe that she wasn't aware that there is "global interest" in the royal family.  She grew up during the Princess Di era, she lived through the inescapable coverage of Di's death, which was just as big in the US as it was in the UK. I can buy that she didn't follow Prince Harry or his personal life, but....


----------



## marthastoo

That quote does not say she didn't understand the global interest in the royal family.  She said she didn't "grow up with the same understanding of the royal family" but that she now understands "very clearly there's a global interest there."

Also, she was all of 16 when Princess Di died.  I don't know about you, but most 16 American YOs I know couldn't care less about about British royalty, and certainly not about the young second son.  To most Americans, he would have been a B list celeb ... known by sight, but not much more.

I guess if people are set on believing that Meghan is a grasping, manipulative would-be princess archly planning her world domination via a moderately successful acting career and lifestyle blog (because that's how all bi-racial American girls become British royal princesses ), then there's no changing their minds.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> That quote does not say she didn't understand the global interest in the royal family.  She said she didn't "grow up with the same understanding of the royal family" but that she now understands "very clearly there's a global interest there."


I see absolutely no distinction.

I think she was probably (definitely) coached before the interview and one of her talking points was to make it clear that she understands what she is getting into and that she understands what her job is going to be.  And I think she also wanted to make it clear that she did not chase after Harry just because he's famous and a prince.  I think in her nervousness, those thoughts may have gotten jumbled a bit.



> Also, she was all of 16 when Princess Di died.  I don't know about you, but most 16 American YOs I know couldn't care less about about British royalty, and certainly not about the young second son.  To most Americans, he would have been a B list celeb ... known by sight, but not much more.


When Princess Di died, the coverage was inescapable.  It was on TV 24/7, it was on the cover of every single magazine and tabloid.  You couldn't go near a newsstand or grocery store for a year (or more) without Di's face being plastered over the cover of everything.  It doesn't matter that she was 16, she was alive.  She would have been very well aware of it.  I was an American teenager too at the time, and I can tell you exactly where I was and what I was doing when I heard that Princess Di was killed.  I wasn't into royalty at all.  But I ran and told my parents because I understood that it was a HUGE DEAL.



> I guess if people are set on believing that Meghan is a grasping, manipulative would-be princess archly planning her world domination via a moderately successful acting career and lifestyle blog (because that's how all bi-racial American girls become British royal princesses ), then there's no changing their minds.


I don't believe that at all.  But I do think she's very actressy and did not come across as 100% genuine in the joint interview.  But I do think she and Harry have a genuine relationship.  

I do not support the narrative of innocent celebrity men being manipulated and duped into relationships by conniving women with ulterior motives.


----------



## Gal4Dior

marthastoo said:


> That quote does not say she didn't understand the global interest in the royal family.  She said she didn't "grow up with the same understanding of the royal family" but that she now understands "very clearly there's a global interest there."
> 
> Also, she was all of 16 when Princess Di died.  I don't know about you, but most 16 American YOs I know couldn't care less about about British royalty, and certainly not about the young second son.  To most Americans, he would have been a B list celeb ... known by sight, but not much more.
> 
> I guess if people are set on believing that Meghan is a grasping, manipulative would-be princess archly planning her world domination via a moderately successful acting career and lifestyle blog (because that's how all bi-racial American girls become British royal princesses ), then there's no changing their minds.



I am Meghan’s age and I will tell you while I never had the opportunity to visit Buckingham Palace, because I was truly middle class by Southern Californian standards (she is not - she went to private school - I don’t care what she claims to come from, it’s not middle class) and could not afford to do so, BUT...

I ABSOLUTELY knew what a big deal the British monarchy was in the US and at the age of 16 had a crush on Prince William.

I also was FULLY aware that Diana existed, followed the whole dramatic controversy with their marriage, and was glued to the TV when the accident first happened. I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing the moment I found out she officially had passed away. I also read tons of magazine publications and books before and after her death. I also watched her funeral. You couldn’t have escaped it. It was huge news by any standard.

Therefore, I do not find it believable that she didn’t realize the monarchy was so big on a global scale. I am really bothered by this statement, because I grew up almost downright lower middle class in an immigrant family, and if I knew who William and Harry were, she should to.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LVSistinaMM said:


> I am Meghan’s age and I will tell you while I never had the opportunity to visit Buckingham Palace, because I was truly middle class by Southern Californian standards (she is not - she went to private school - I don’t care what she claims to come from, it’s not middle class) and could not afford to do so, BUT...
> 
> I ABSOLUTELY knew what a big deal the British monarchy was in the US and at the age of 16 had a crush on Prince William.
> 
> I also was FULLY aware that Diana existed, followed the whole dramatic controversy with their marriage, and was glued to the TV when the accident first happened. I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing the moment I found out she officially had passed away. I also read tons of magazine publications and books before and after her death. I also watched her funeral. You couldn’t have escaped it. It was huge news by any standard.
> 
> Therefore, I do not find it believable that she didn’t realize the monarchy was so big on a global scale. I am really bothered by this statement, because I grew up almost downright lower middle class in an immigrant family, and if I knew who William and Harry were, she should to.


I grew up in an upper class family and am the same age as Kate/Meghan. For years I thought Harry was the first in line for the throne and would constantly mix up the two boys. I' went to England three times, at 14, 18, and 24. It really wasn't until he was engaged to Kate that I knew which was which. I had a vague knowledge of Diana and remember it was on tv a lot when she died, but I could care less tbh. We all have diverse interests and hobbies and lives, and they can revolve (or not revolve) around knowledge of other countries and their socialites regardless of what social class you hail from. When she said that she really didn't know too much about him I nodded in agreement and laughed, because much of William and Harry's life would be unknown to me as well. I just didn't care to follow them or listen to news about them. There are probably lots of girls in England who don't know what a Kardashian is


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I grew up in an upper class family and am the same age as Kate/Meghan. For years I thought Harry was the first in line for the throne and would constantly mix up the two boys. I' went to England three times, at 14, 18, and 24. It really wasn't until he was engaged to Kate that I knew which was which. I had a vague knowledge of Diana and remember it was on tv a lot when she died, but I could care less tbh. We all have diverse interests and hobbies and lives, and they can revolve (or not revolve) around knowledge of other countries and their socialites regardless of what social class you hail from. When she said that she really didn't know too much about him I nodded in agreement and laughed, because much of William and Harry's life would be unknown to me as well. I just didn't care to follow them or listen to news about them. There are probably lots of girls in England who don't know what a Kardashian is



I was always aware of how big of a deal they are, even though I didn’t necessarily agree with why they were so revered. 

If you went to any grocery or drug store back then with Mom or Dad, you would see tabloids covering them all the time. I just don’t agree a 16 kid from the US wouldn’t know.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LVSistinaMM said:


> I was always aware of how big of a deal they are, even though I didn’t necessarily agree with why they were so revered.
> 
> If you went to any grocery or drug store back then with Mom or Dad, you would see tabloids covering them all the time. I just don’t agree a 16 kid from the US wouldn’t know.


It might depend on what type of interest you have in entertainment and gossip at that age, and what your family promotes. But you can't assume your experiences are everyone else's experiences is all. Just because *you* knew about him doesn't mean there isn't a portion of people your age who didn't. I didn't, she claims to not have, and I'm sure there are many others. There are probably popular toys and games from our era that not everyone will know because they didn't play them, not everyone heard the same music and knows the same songs, so you might name a singer really popular that someone your age has no idea of, and so on. We don't all see and experience the world the same. I'm also certain she knew who Harry was to some extent, but perhaps not the level of his importance.


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> It might depend on what type of interest you have in entertainment and gossip at that age, and what your family promotes. But you can't assume your experiences are everyone else's experiences is all. Just because *you* knew about him doesn't mean there isn't a portion of people your age who didn't. I didn't, she claims to not have, and I'm sure there are many others. There are probably popular toys and games from our era that not everyone will know because they didn't play them, not everyone heard the same music and knows the same songs, so you might name a singer really popular that someone your age has no idea of, and so on. We don't all see and experience the world the same. I'm also certain she knew who Harry was to some extent, but perhaps not the level of his importance.



Let’s agree to disagree. I made it a point to know about a lot of things in my teenage years. The royals were not my focus. Politics and academics were my focus back then.

My parents were very strict and strongly discouraged any interest related to entertainment and gossip. Yet, I still managed to be aware of the royals and how important they were by the amount of coverage they received in newspapers, news channels, and books.


----------



## Eva1991

Flatsy said:


> Meghan posed for a photo in front of Buckingham Palace as a tourist when she was 15 and The Daily Mail got her former best friend to say, "It's like she's been planning it her whole life!"  That's the evidence.
> 
> I was a little skeptical when Meghan said she didn't realize what a big deal the royal family is and I still am.  But I don't believe she's been obsessed her whole life with the royal family either, like The Daily Mail would have everyone believe.
> 
> It doesn't speak well of Meghan that she's got a broken long-time friendship and that her former friend is eager to say a bunch of catty things about her to the tabloids.  That's not really a good sign.  But the ex-friend seems like a real piece of work and Meghan's biggest mistake may have been being friends with her as long as she did.   Sometimes childhood friendships can turn toxic and they are hard to shake.



Just because she posed in front of Buckingham palace - like most tourist do - and her "friend" - who's clearly not her friend anymore - said something, this automatically means that she has been planning to marry Harry all of her life? Even if she was one of those girls who dream of their prince charming there's no way she could have been planning this. How could she? They are from different countries, different backgrounds, different carreer paths. There's no way she could have known that they will meet.


----------



## zen1965

Who says she has been planning this all her life? Some of us feel she comes across as very "actressy" ( as another poster called it). No need to ridicule these opinions.


----------



## myown

Eva1991 said:


> I'm pretty sure that having a royal title makes someone more attractive for most.
> 
> Regarding the Sandrigham appearance, I loved Meghan's outfit; so well put together and fashionable at the same time. Harry however could take his hands out of his pockets and hold his fiancee's hand. If you look closely, she's holding his arm while he has his hands in his pockets which looks really awkward.


I read more into that. he may be cold and warming his hands in his pockets. she - on the other hand - seems to search for something to comfort herself in that new situation she is in. she holds him to not get lost, he is familiar with the situation, he is more calm. she is not comfortable.






that's a strange photo. 
Harry and Meghan look shy while William and Kate seem more confident nowadays (since Meghan is there? alike "I'm a big sister now, I am so proud of my baby and so confident"?)


----------



## myown

Eva1991 said:


> I agree that the big coat doesn't help. A pair of booties would've looked better.
> 
> However, I think she's tyring to figure out her style as a new royal at the moment. It's the first time we see her wearing a hat for example. I'm pretty sure she wasn't used to wearing hats before - apart from the occasional fedora - and I think she wore it well and color coordinated everything.
> 
> Her personal style, judging from older pictures of her, before her engagement to Harry, was quite bohemian. I really hope she succeeds in incorporating more modern / boho touches to her outfits. It's not easy trying to balance being a modern 30-something with being a royal with all those outfit restrictions, so it's probably going to take some time for her to adjust.


yup, I agree. one can clearly see she tries new outfits to make them more royal-ish. 
what she now wears is not what she used to wear or how she styled herself. she tries to fit in. she needs to find her new style.


----------



## myown

terebina786 said:


> I read an article a couple of days ago where her (ex) friend said that Meghan’s been obsessed with the royal family for years and dreamed about being a princess one day.  Also, what she said about not knowing who Harry was is BS.  This is the same friend that was the MOH at her first wedding.  Don’t know how true any of this is or if it’s just bitterness from her.


it crosses my mind, that I recognize most celebs on the internet/TV/photos, but I stood in front of a bunch and never new who they were.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Flatsy said:


> Her quote: "I, you know, because I’m from the States, you don’t grow up with the same understanding of the royal family and so while I now understand very clearly, there’s a global interest there. I didn’t know much about him, and so the only thing that I had asked her when she said that she wanted to set us up, was, I had one question. I said, 'Well is he nice?' "
> 
> I find it hard to believe that she wasn't aware that there is "global interest" in the royal family.  She grew up during the Princess Di era, she lived through the inescapable coverage of Di's death, which was just as big in the US as it was in the UK. I can buy that she didn't follow Prince Harry or his personal life, but....


maybe she simply meant, she well knew there was interest, but she did not know how big the interest was



LVSistinaMM said:


> I was always aware of how big of a deal they are, even though I didn’t necessarily agree with why they were so revered.
> 
> If you went to any grocery or drug store back then with Mom or Dad, you would see tabloids covering them all the time. I just don’t agree a 16 kid from the US wouldn’t know.


she didn't said she didn't know them, she said she didn't realized how big of a deal they are


----------



## myown

Eva1991 said:


> Just because she posed in front of Buckingham palace - like most tourist do - and her "friend" - who's clearly not her friend anymore - said something, this automatically means that she has been planning to marry Harry all of her life? Even if she was one of those girls who dream of their prince charming there's no way she could have been planning this. How could she? They are from different countries, different backgrounds, different carreer paths. There's no way she could have known that they will meet.


she planned all her life to become and actress, marry and get divorced just to meet Harry through friends.


----------



## terebina786

Is Meghan shorter than Kate?


----------



## horse17

terebina786 said:


> Is Meghan shorter than Kate?


Much shorter


----------



## marthastoo

What I think is so funny is that because one's personal experience is such (like knowing exactly who Princess Di, Prince Harry and the global significance of the British Royal Family were), therefore, everyone simply must have the same experience as well.  What?  An American teen not knowing or caring who Princess Di was?  Inconceivable!!!!  Must be lying!!!!

We are talking about the same population of whom 15% can't tell you from whom America declared independence. Not saying Meghan's one of those since by all accounts she's intelligent and did well in school, but my point being is that not everyone has the same level of consciousness as others.  Or some things are more important than others.  I'm not saying she didn't know who Princess Di was - yes, there was non-stop media coverage of her death.  But having a 16 YO daughter and worked with teens my entire adult life, I know that many teens just. don't. care.  Now, if Kylie were in a crash in the Pont de l'Alma ... now all teens would be glued to snapchat/Instagram for updates.


----------



## DC-Cutie

myown said:


> she planned all her life to become and actress, marry and get divorced just to meet Harry through friends.


I can't tell if you're being serious or facetious...


----------



## DC-Cutie

marthastoo said:


> What I think is so funny is that because one's personal experience is such (like knowing exactly who Princess Di, Prince Harry and the global significance of the British Royal Family were), therefore, everyone simply must have the same experience as well.  What?  An American teen not knowing or caring who Princess Di was?  Inconceivable!!!!  Must be lying!!!!
> 
> We are talking about the same population of whom 15% can't tell you from whom America declared independence. Not saying Meghan's one of those since by all accounts she's intelligent and did well in school, but my point being is that not everyone has the same level of consciousness as others.  Or some things are more important than others.  I'm not saying she didn't know who Princess Di was - yes, there was non-stop media coverage of her death.  But having a 16 YO daughter and worked with teens my entire adult life, *I know that many teens just. don't. care. * Now, if Kylie were in a crash in the Pont de l'Alma ... now all teens would be glued to snapchat/Instagram for updates.



ALL OF THIS!!!

I asked my sister who is around the same age as Harry if she knew who he was and/or followed the Royal Family.  She said she remembered Diana and her death, then remembers the hoopla over William's wedding.  But didn't follow the family so close.  It's not uncommon.

Some people just. don't. care!


----------



## gelbergirl

I remember in the years following Diana’s death, the boys were well protected from cameras and media & Harry away at school.
There really wasn’t much coverage of him at that time.  I practically forgot about him.  
There was much more focus on Charles and Camilla becoming a legitimate couple, their marriage and then William & Kate.


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry as guest editor at BBC radio.


----------



## Tivo

marthastoo said:


> What I think is so funny is that because one's personal experience is such (like knowing exactly who Princess Di, Prince Harry and the global significance of the British Royal Family were), therefore, everyone simply must have the same experience as well.  What?  *An American teen not knowing or caring who Princess Di was?  Inconceivable!!!!  Must be lying!!!!*
> 
> We are talking about the same population of whom 15% can't tell you from whom America declared independence. Not saying Meghan's one of those since by all accounts she's intelligent and did well in school, but my point being is that not everyone has the same level of consciousness as others.  Or some things are more important than others.  I'm not saying she didn't know who Princess Di was - yes, there was non-stop media coverage of her death.  But having a 16 YO daughter and worked with teens my entire adult life, I know that many teens just. don't. care.  Now, if Kylie were in a crash in the Pont de l'Alma ... now all teens would be glued to snapchat/Instagram for updates.


 
She hasn't been a teen for a very long time. And the royal family has been heavy in the news with Kate and Will. Their wedding was broadcast globally just a few short years ago.
Harry was all over TMZ after his little trip to Vegas.
Kate and Will visited the states not long after they married and our media made a huge deal of it.


----------



## marthastoo

Tivo said:


> She hasn't been a teen for a very long time. And the royal family has been heavy in the news with Kate and Will. Their wedding was broadcast globally just a few short years ago.
> Harry was all over TMZ after his little trip to Vegas.
> Kate and Will visited the states not long after they married and our media made a huge deal of it.


Once again ... some people just. don't. care. about. the. royal. family.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

myown said:


> it crosses my mind, that I recognize most celebs on the internet/TV/photos, but I stood in front of a bunch and never new who they were.


I sat right next to Sean Penn once in an airport lounge for quite some time - maybe 30 minutes - and although I'd seen a few of his movies I had no idea who he was until someone came up for an autograph (which he rudely declined).  You often hear celebrities say it was refreshing to meet someone (like their spouse) who didn't know who they were at all. I think it's not at all far-fetched to believe someone wasn't fully aware of someone else who is famous. I imagine Harry, and William, and royals, and celebs, and anyone with money/power/influence can detect when people are disingenuous and after them for something other than themselves. If Markle had ulterior motives or falsity he'd probably sense that. And she never said she didn't know about Harry, as that would be pretty unbelievable.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> Once again ... some people just. don't. care. about. the. royal. family.


Once again, caring doesn't matter. Certain people permeate pop culture to such a degree that they are unavoidable.   Everybody knows who the royal family are and how important they are.  Just like everybody knows about President Donald *****, even if they actively try to avoid the news.  

I can believe that she didn't know a lot about Prince Harry personally, including his dating habits or his tabloid adventures.  But that stuff about her not knowing about the royal family because she's American just doesn't wash.


----------



## Flatsy

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I imagine Harry, and William, and royals, and celebs, and anyone with money/power/influence can detect when people are disingenuous and after them for something other than themselves. If Markle had ulterior motives or falsity he'd probably sense that.


Agreed.  He seems quite intelligent to me as well as very socially adept, and he's had girls trying to get at him for about two decades.  I think he learned long, long ago how to detect ulterior motives.


----------



## myown

next time i see my brother I will ask him "who are william, kate, harry and meghan" and I am sure he has no idea who meghan, kate, harry or william are.

ETA I of course knew the british royal family before, but before I came to TPB I had no idea about some royal families (for example luxembourg, Jordan) or just never cared (like the spanish one, like I knew they have a monarchy, but didnt know any face)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

myown said:


> next time i see my brother I will ask him "who are william, kate, harry and meghan" and I am sure he has no idea who meghan, kate, harry or william are.
> 
> ETA I of course knew the british royal family before, but before I came to TPB I had no idea about some royal families (for example luxembourg, Jordan) or just never cared (like the spanish one, like I knew they have a monarchy, but didnt know any face)


LOL. My brother too! I am fairly certain he would think they are people from a reality show I'm watching or something. He probably would not even be able to find England on a map, either.


----------



## Flatsy

Somehow I don't expect Meghan will go so far as to claim she was unable to locate England on a map.


----------



## joyeaux

Flatsy said:


> Agreed.  He seems quite intelligent to me as well as very socially adept, and he's had girls trying to get at him for about two decades.  I think he learned long, long ago how to detect ulterior motives.



When I went to St. Andrews (the same time as William and Kate),  I remember hearing that lots of times William would plant fake stories to other students he was hanging out with to see if it ended up in the papers, essentially telling him who he could trust and who was really there to sell him out. The stories were specific enough that he could tell who the person was that had talked. (I can't remember where, but I know I  read this again somewhere so that sort of confirmed it was true to me).

I  bet Harry has the same strategy. Can't imagine what it would be like to have to live never knowing who you could trust. That's one thing I've always admired about Kate-- she has _never_ talked, not even when they broke up. I    imagine she proved herself trustworthy to William from really early on.

So back to Harry, I can see Megan being very genuinely interested in him and not google-eyed starstruck in his presence. Also, the fact that they were set up rather than her approaching him or throwing herself at him, I'd think would start them off on the right foot.


----------



## DC-Cutie

joyeaux said:


> When I went to St. Andrews (the same time as William and Kate),  I remember hearing that lots of times William would plant fake stories to other students he was hanging out with to see if it ended up in the papers, essentially telling him who he could trust and who was really there to sell him out. The stories were specific enough that he could tell who the person was that had talked. (I can't remember where, but I know I  read this again somewhere so that sort of confirmed it was true to me).



There are a few celebs that have done something quite similar, to see who in their circle is leaking stories.


----------



## Sukrita opr

Tina_Bina said:


> So happy [emoji16]!! Can’t wait to watch another royal wedding!!!
> 
> Any of you watch the Crown though? I have so many feelings for Princess Margaret [emoji27]


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Once again, caring doesn't matter. Certain people permeate pop culture to such a degree that they are unavoidable.   Everybody knows who the royal family are and how important they are.  Just like everybody knows about President Donald *****, even if they actively try to avoid the news.
> 
> I can believe that she didn't know a lot about Prince Harry personally, including his dating habits or his tabloid adventures.  But that stuff about her not knowing about the royal family because she's American just doesn't wash.



The whole bit about her not being aware of how big of a deal the royal family was very unbelievable. She didn’t have to follow all the tabloid trash about Harry, but she had to have known he existed not just during the teen years after Diana’s death, but in the recent few years. He did a lot of charity work - and so did she?? 

I was never a fan of Harry, yet I knew he fought in the war, about him getting dressed up as a Nazi for a party, and the girls he dates because I sometimes watched CNN in the last decade.


----------



## daisychainz

joyeaux said:


> When I went to St. Andrews (the same time as William and Kate),  I remember hearing that lots of times William would plant fake stories to other students he was hanging out with to see if it ended up in the papers, essentially telling him who he could trust and who was really there to sell him out. The stories were specific enough that he could tell who the person was that had talked. (I can't remember where, but I know I  read this again somewhere so that sort of confirmed it was true to me).
> 
> I  bet Harry has the same strategy. Can't imagine what it would be like to have to live never knowing who you could trust. That's one thing I've always admired about Kate-- she has _never_ talked, not even when they broke up. I    imagine she proved herself trustworthy to William from really early on.
> 
> So back to Harry, I can see Megan being very genuinely interested in him and not google-eyed starstruck in his presence. Also, the fact that they were set up rather than her approaching him or throwing herself at him, I'd think would start them off on the right foot.


How interesting to know you attended school with them! I have always admired Kate for being discreet as well, but perhaps that is just her personality anyway, to be very private. I do wonder, though, if Kate would have been bound by any type of agreement to remain silent? Your statement reminded me of Tom Cruise and how none of his wives have ever spoken out about the marriage to him because they enter into legal agreements that bar them from talking. I would think some type of silence/media agreement is something royals could have too, since pre-nups are allowed. Maybe?


----------



## marthastoo

You seem very convinced of her pre-knowledge of the BRF and Prince Harry.   She never said she didn't know anything about the royal family.  She said she didn't know_ much_ about Harry.  Which I personally believe.  I think the average American couldn't tell you much about him other than he has red hair. As to the extent of what she knew ... who knows?  As others have mentioned, I'm pretty sure Prince Harry has had his share of women who have thrown themselves at him.  I would think by now he and the Queen would be able to ferret out the phonies and conniving social climbers.


----------



## mundodabolsa

marthastoo said:


> You seem very convinced of her pre-knowledge of the BRF and Prince Harry.   She never said she didn't know anything about the royal family.  She said she didn't know_ much_ about Harry.  Which I personally believe.  .



Exactly!  I feel like people are entirely missing the point she was making.  She didn't say she didn't know anything, she said she didn't have the same exposure and knowledge as someone who grew up in the UK might have had.  She was speaking in relative terms.  Which strikes me as a perfectly logical, reasonable point. 

This thread is actually a perfect illustration of her point actually.  The posters with direct relation to the monarchy are really passionate about what it all means, the finances, the history, etc.  Those of us who grew up without monarchy simply few them as celebrities like all the others.  

It's just not the same and that was what she was saying.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> The whole bit about her not being aware of how big of a deal the royal family was very unbelievable. She didn’t have to follow all the tabloid trash about Harry, but she had to have known he existed not just during the teen years after Diana’s death, but in the recent few years. He did a lot of charity work - and so did she??
> 
> I was never a fan of Harry, yet I knew he fought in the war, about him getting dressed up as a Nazi for a party, and the girls he dates because I sometimes watched CNN in the last decade.



But, that is your experience. My circle is an informed circle: lawyers, doctors, and accountants, but they couldn’t tell you who Prince Harry exes are. They know basic information. The Queen, Princess Diana, the just. 

I can believe her because my friends don’t follow royalty and they wouldn’t know what I know, because I do.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> But, that is your experience. My circle is an informed circle: lawyers, doctors, and accountants, but they couldn’t tell you who Prince Harry exes are. They know basic information. The Queen, Princess Diana, the just.
> 
> I can believe her because my friends don’t follow royalty and they wouldn’t know what I know, because I do.



Ok, I’m going to stop this right here. My circle (which also includes me) is also an informed circle. My friends and coworkers are all doctors, scientists, architects, and engineers. They could care less about the royal family, the Kardashians, and most pop culture icons. I don’t think it matters what positions they hold to be considered informed IMHO.

Although most of us in our group don’t care or know a lot about Harry or the rest of the royal family, they know he is a big enough of deal to be covered. That is my point. Meghan out of all people who is media savvy should know who gets covered and why/how to get covered. In Hollywood that is what makes you relevant.

So once again, let’s agree to disagree.


----------



## Eva1991

Meghan didn't grow up in the UK so unless she had had a specific interest in the BRF she couldn't have known _many details _about Harry. That being said, I think the fact that she did say something like that in her first interview was sort of naive on her behalf. She - or her coaches / consultants - should have known that a statement like that would raise some eyebrows.


----------



## solange

I'm sure I'm going to see my reply a zillion pages forward in the middle of a different conversation, but


The Nazi costume at that offensive party was brilliant. He dressed like a colonizer, a real, arrogant, egoistic, genocidal colonizer.


----------



## solange

LVSistinaMM said:


> I am Meghan’s age and I will tell you while I never had the opportunity to visit Buckingham Palace, because I was truly middle class by Southern Californian standards (she is not - she went to private school - I don’t care what she claims to come from, it’s not middle class) and could not afford to do so, BUT...
> 
> I ABSOLUTELY knew what a big deal the British monarchy was in the US and at the age of 16 had a crush on Prince William.
> 
> I also was FULLY aware that Diana existed, followed the whole dramatic controversy with their marriage, and was glued to the TV when the accident first happened. I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing the moment I found out she officially had passed away. I also read tons of magazine publications and books before and after her death. I also watched her funeral. You couldn’t have escaped it. It was huge news by any standard.
> 
> Therefore, I do not find it believable that she didn’t realize the monarchy was so big on a global scale. I am really bothered by this statement, because I grew up almost downright lower middle class in an immigrant family, and if I knew who William and Harry were, she should to.


While I knew who Harry, William and some other European royals were at that time, my older sister had no idea, didn't care, and made no effort to discover more. It's possible that Harry was really a minor enough blip on his fiancee's radar.


----------



## zen1965

Where is that flogging-a-dead-horse smiley when you need it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## solange

The emoji union hid it, because the other emojis wouldn't be used anymore.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

terebina786 said:


> Especially people who posed in front of Buckingham Palace... I do find it odd that her friend is willing to sell her out but her ex husband hasn’t said a word, nor the man that she was dating when she met Harry.


I think I read online that he (the ex-husband) is under contract to do a book or show about their life, or he is coming up with a concept for one. That might account for his silence... perhaps waiting to tell all in a much larger way.


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think I read online that he (the ex-husband) is under contract to do a book or show about their life, or he is coming up with a concept for one. That might account for his silence... perhaps waiting to tell all in a much larger way.



If that’s the case, her ex is smarter than I thought. He’s thinking less about petty gossip mag money and all about the major cash with a big book deal. 

Wonder if he’s going to time it a month before the wedding or something.


----------



## myown

Why is this thread not called "Prince Harry and meghan"?


----------



## myown

*'Actually she has a large family who were always there for her': Meghan Markle's estranged sister hits back at Prince Harry's claim that the royals are 'the family she never had'*

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-hits-Prince-Harrys-claim.html#ixzz52XxiqfdU ​its one thing to have a large family, and another to feel home and welcome and loved.


----------



## PatsyCline

myown said:


> Why is this thread not called "Prince Harry and meghan"?


Give it time, maybe after the wedding?


----------



## myown

is Meghan having a Thread here?


----------



## mundodabolsa

Oy the sister is such a fame whore it's making me irrationally irritated and I have no investment in this at all.  I hope Meghan is so used to her toxicity that she just shrugs it off.


----------



## joyeaux

daisychainz said:


> How interesting to know you attended school with them! I have always admired Kate for being discreet as well, but perhaps that is just her personality anyway, to be very private. I do wonder, though, if Kate would have been bound by any type of agreement to remain silent? Your statement reminded me of Tom Cruise and how none of his wives have ever spoken out about the marriage to him because they enter into legal agreements that bar them from talking. I would think some type of silence/media agreement is something royals could have too, since pre-nups are allowed. Maybe?



It was so cool, I have to admit  I  know the paps had an agreement with the family that if William would do a "first day of school" type photoshoot, they'd leave him alone while he was at university. It's a very small town, so seeing him or Kate at a bar or supermarket wasn't too uncommon. I passed their flat (where they lived with friends the year before moving out a little to a farmhouse) every day on my way to class, everyone knew where it was. Which makes me think that there wouldn't have been a lot of non-disclosures signed there while everyone was a student, but who knows. As far as Kate having one then or later, it would make a lot of sense! But from what I understood, she is a very shy and private person and I  think kept everything close to the vest from the beginning of even their friendship.

But this is all just my conjecture  

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack! So to bring it back to Harry-- I    remember reading somewhere where Chelsy or Cressida or someone told the press after they broke up that the publicity around life with him was just wayyyy to much. Not that that's really "talking," but it's saying _something _to the press. Again, I  have no idea about the NDA, so just sort of thinking out loud, LOL!


----------



## bisousx

myown said:


> *'Actually she has a large family who were always there for her': Meghan Markle's estranged sister hits back at Prince Harry's claim that the royals are 'the family she never had'*
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-hits-Prince-Harrys-claim.html#ixzz52XxiqfdU​its one thing to have a large family, and another to feel home and welcome and loved.



The sister would probably still have a relationship if she wasn’t the type to blab to the press...


----------



## A1aGypsy

I thought those comments by Harry were an odd misstep given that she isn’t an orphan and you could imagine drama would follow.  So I wasn’t surprised when the sister popped up but man, lady you may have had a point until you talked about the awful hateful things your family called MM and her father. Honest to god people can look in the mirror and not see themselvesz.


----------



## lovieluvslux

Jayne1 said:


> Well, she looks similar, but with a new nose, which I quite like.  It turns up now and it's cute.



I've said the same.  They look alike and make a good looking couple, to say the least.


----------



## Eva1991

joyeaux said:


> It was so cool, I have to admit  I  know the paps had an agreement with the family that if William would do a "first day of school" type photoshoot, they'd leave him alone while he was at university. It's a very small town, so seeing him or Kate at a bar or supermarket wasn't too uncommon. I passed their flat (where they lived with friends the year before moving out a little to a farmhouse) every day on my way to class, everyone knew where it was. Which makes me think that there wouldn't have been a lot of non-disclosures signed there while everyone was a student, but who knows. As far as Kate having one then or later, it would make a lot of sense! But from what I understood, she is a very shy and private person and I  think kept everything close to the vest from the beginning of even their friendship.
> 
> But this is all just my conjecture
> 
> Sorry, didn't mean to hijack! So to bring it back to Harry-- I    remember reading somewhere where Chelsy or Cressida or someone told the press after they broke up that the publicity around life with him was just wayyyy to much. Not that that's really "talking," but it's saying _something _to the press. Again, I  have no idea about the NDA, so just sort of thinking out loud, LOL!



How exciting you got to study in the same university William and Kate did and at the same time! Did you also attend courses with them?

Regarding the NDA, I don't think William would make Kate sign an NDA when they were _just _dating. Maybe they did when they got married but we'll never know. However now that 2 kids are in the picture and a 3rd one is on its way I doubt Kate would talk, NDA or no NDA. She's been a part of the "Firm" for many years now and she's also mother to the future king; not to mention she seems like a publicity-shy person anyway.

Meghan's an actress and definitely not publicity-shy (though she appeared quite nervous on Christmas day at Sandrigham) but I'm pretty sure she knows, like they all do, that talking to the press will prove more harmful than beneficial for their personal image in the long run.


----------



## kkfiregirl

myown said:


> *'Actually she has a large family who were always there for her': Meghan Markle's estranged sister hits back at Prince Harry's claim that the royals are 'the family she never had'*
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-hits-Prince-Harrys-claim.html#ixzz52XxiqfdU​its one thing to have a large family, and another to feel home and welcome and loved.



I agree. I think this article explains it well:https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/...angement.html?referer=https://www.google.com/


----------



## threadbender

Not sure if it is OK to post this link or not. But, it was an interesting article and there is a decent photo of the 4 of them. If not, I am sorry and please remove it.
http://www.tmz.com/2017/12/28/royal...nvil-daughter-tuition-us-vacation/?adid=hero3


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

myown said:


> *'Actually she has a large family who were always there for her': Meghan Markle's estranged sister hits back at Prince Harry's claim that the royals are 'the family she never had'*
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-hits-Prince-Harrys-claim.html#ixzz52XxiqfdU​its one thing to have a large family, and another to feel home and welcome and loved.



LOL. Welcomed and loved like Diana? The Royal Family  hardly know Meagan let alone had time to develop  feelings of love for her. I really doubt that W & K or C & C , let alone Queen & DOE have logged in significant get to know you hours over the last year with Meagan.


----------



## VickyB

lovieluvslux said:


> I've said the same.  They look alike and make a good looking couple, to say the least.



Sorry, don't see a resemblance at all.


----------



## LnA

Just saw a video of the “fab four” on Christmas day. How exciting for that woman who captured the photo of them. I think I read somewhere that it was with her iPhone? I find that hilarious given all the fancy cameras I’m sure many had in hopes of catching a good shot.


----------



## PatsyCline

LnA said:


> Just saw a video of the “fab four” on Christmas day. How exciting for that woman who captured the photo of them. I think I read somewhere that it was with her iPhone? I find that hilarious given all the fancy cameras I’m sure many had in hopes of catching a good shot.


Yes, I read she took it with her iPhone SE.  And she's making a good amount of money, $6700+ already for licensing the photo.

Any camera can take a good photo, if you know how to use it, and you stay within the parameters of the camera's ability.  

The better the camera, the wider your parameters are going to be, however.  But if you don't know how to use it, it's not worth much to you.

It's sort of like owning a Ferrari.  Just because you own it, doesn't mean you can drive it to it's potential.


----------



## Gal4Dior

VickyB said:


> LOL. Welcomed and loved like Diana? The Royal Family  hardly know Meagan let alone had time to develop  feelings of love for her. I really doubt that W & K or C & C , let alone Queen & DOE have logged in significant get to know you hours over the last year with Meagan.



I don’t believe either side. The truth is always somewhere in between.


----------



## buffym

VickyB said:


> LOL. Welcomed and loved like Diana? The Royal Family  hardly know Meagan let alone had time to develop  feelings of love for her. I really doubt that W & K or C & C , let alone Queen & DOE have logged in significant get to know you hours over the last year with Meagan.



It is from a tabloid, does it really matter. Harry said on his brother’s engagement that he was looking forward to getting to know Kate. William and Kate dated 10 years.

It doesn’t stop from the Royal Family wishing them joy. Because they love Harry and most families even royals ones wants the members of it to be happy.


----------



## buffym

PatsyCline said:


> Yes, I read she took it with her iPhone SE.  And she's making a good amount of money, $6700+ already for licensing the photo.
> 
> Any camera can take a good photo, if you know how to use it, and you stay within the parameters of the camera's
> The better the camera, the wider your parameters are going to be, however.  But if you don't know how to use it, it's not worth much to you.
> 
> It's sort of like owning a Ferrari.  Just because you own it, doesn't mean you can drive it to it's potential.



That is good to hear because the Daily Mail only paid her 50 pounds and it was on the front page.


----------



## labelwhore04

I find it funny how whenever a woman marries into the royal family, there's always comments about "how they were planning to snag a prince their whole life." As if there is some elaborate scheme at play. Do people really think Kate and Meaghan spent all their lives scheming and calculating some devious, elaborate plan to marry William and Harry? You would have to have serious mental problems, like scary stalker-level issues. and i'm sure any guy with half a brain would be able to spot a crazy woman like that. Megan clearly didn't plan this, she had her own life and career in a different country. She's 36 years old and previously married, she had her own life going on. She wasn't waiting around for a Royal to pop out of nowhere..I mean i'm sure when she realized she might have a chance with Harry she went after it, but you can't fault her for that. It's just really far fetched to claim she had been "planning" it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Totally agree, she really is being heavily scrutinized, just like Kate was for being "waity-Katie".


----------



## Cocoabean

I found her statement of her awareness of the BRF to be a bit disingenuous. I felt she downplayed it in an attempt to appear to be a complete non-gold digger. Or perhaps it was just the way she phrased it. I can believe she didn't follow the family.  The fact that she took a photo in front of Buckingham Palace as a tourist proves that she knew of the BRF....so what? So did I. Maybe she did dream of being a princess one day, so did I when I watched the wedding of Charles and Diana. The wedding was the summer I graduated high school. I never thought it would happen. It was a wonderful fantasy...then I went off to school and a wonderful career.

I accept she knew very little of Harry. Even if she had seen him in the tabloids, she didn't really know him. Asking someone who did know him if he is nice sounds reasonable to me. Then again, of course I like to set my friends up with people who are not nice


----------



## horse17

wasn't harry very involved with charity in the same place in Africa?(I cant remember the area)...im surprised she wouldn't have known that...


----------



## threadbender

I was checking out cheesy movies on Hallmark and who do I see? Meghan Markle! lol


----------



## Gal4Dior

DH saw the photo of the Fab Four and remarked that Meghan’s hat looked like a Hershey’s Kiss. Then my friend told me she thought it looked like a chocolate chip! [emoji23]

I’m hoping to see more fashions from all. So far almost all the ones that Meghan has been photographed in or stepped out in have been a bust for me since the engagement announcement.

Maybe she just looks better in more casual, California boho looks that don’t jive with royal protocol?


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Reprezent Radio in Brixton


----------



## MarvelGirl

She looks classic and lovely here! Everything fits her frame nicely. Well done, Meghan!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

I like her hair up, especially as it looks as though she decided last minute "mmm I think I'll put my hair up" Also I really liked as she walked in she turned to the crowd and giggled and put her hand over her mouth.


----------



## Eva1991

She looks lovely. The last outfit was a success as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Cocoabean

Eva1991 said:


> She looks lovely. The last outfit was a success as far as I'm concerned.



Me too, I give it a thumbs up!


----------



## Gal4Dior

Finally a gorgeous outfit! Love how modern it is! The hair was a bit of a miss, but I’m sure the poor weather did it no favors.


----------



## arnott

myown said:


> I read more into that. he may be cold and warming his hands in his pockets. she - on the other hand - seems to search for something to comfort herself in that new situation she is in. she holds him to not get lost, he is familiar with the situation, he is more calm. she is not comfortable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that's a strange photo.
> Harry and Meghan look shy while William and Kate seem more confident nowadays (since Meghan is there? alike "I'm a big sister now, I am so proud of my baby and so confident"?)



I'm in the minority but I love Kate's coat!    It even looks like it has some sparkle to it.         Who's it by?    Any  ID?     Meghan on the other hand looks like a hot mess.   Looks like that coat is wearing her instead of the other way around.   And that hat looks ridiculous on her.


----------



## Grande Latte

Yes. I like this last look with the casual updo. Very chic and modern. She's got a sweet face.


----------



## zen1965

arnott said:


> I'm in the minority but I love Kate's coat!    It even looks like it has some sparkle to it.         Who's it by?    Any  ID?     Meghan on the other hand looks like a hot mess.   Looks like that coat is wearing her instead of the other way around.   And that hat looks ridiculous on her.



Kate's coat is by Miu Miu.


----------



## arnott

zen1965 said:


> Kate's coat is by Miu Miu.



Thanks!    It's probably sold out by now!


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visit Cardiff Castle in Wales


----------



## steph14

This is really random but does anyone else notice that nodule on Harry's forehead?


----------



## daisychainz

steph14 said:


> This is really random but does anyone else notice that nodule on Harry's forehead?


Since you mentioned it, yes.


----------



## gelbergirl

steph14 said:


> This is really random but does anyone else notice that nodule on Harry's forehead?



No.
But I have noticed she wraps herself in heavy winter coats and scarves and he walks around like it's a crisp Fall day.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I know she loves neutrals, but omg I am dying for some bright colors!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Is she going to get a hair stylist like Kate?


----------



## Cocoabean

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Is she going to get a hair stylist like Kate?



I hope so, those tendrils in her face drive me batty! Although the messy bun is fine with me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

gelbergirl said:


> No.
> But I have noticed she wraps herself in heavy winter coats and scarves and he walks around like it's a crisp Fall day.


Maybe he's more used to the cold than she is?  Although she has been in Montreal for awhile.


----------



## TC1

I read that Megan "broke protocol" by wearing mismatched earrings, LOL, like that's a newsworthy tidbit


----------



## zen1965

Yeah, but that is the world she chose.


----------



## Bellagarofalo

I have seen a lot of Meghan buzz on the Prince Harry thread but thought she deserved her own!

Let's kick it off by identifying this bag she wore in Cardiff a few days ago. I think it resembles a small Chloé Marcie, but some of the details threw me off. 

What say you?


----------



## redney

Her bag is the Mini Venice by British brand DeMellier London. https://www.demellierlondon.com/the-mini-venice.html

Interestingly, the brand donates a set of lifesaving vaccines for children in need in the name of every customer who buys one of their bags. (sources: DeMellier's website + http://people.com/royals/the-inspiring-hidden-message-behind-meghan-markles-sold-out-designer-bag/)


----------



## ~Fabulousity~

I love her coat and boots!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

redney said:


> Her bag is the Mini Venice by British brand DeMellier London. https://www.demellierlondon.com/the-mini-venice.html
> 
> Interestingly, the brand donates a set of lifesaving vaccines for children in need in the name of every customer who buys one of their bags. (sources: DeMellier's website + http://people.com/royals/the-inspiring-hidden-message-behind-meghan-markles-sold-out-designer-bag/)


That's lovely!


----------



## Traminer

Bellagarofalo said:


> I have seen a lot of Meghan buzz on the Prince Harry thread but thought she deserved her own!



I agree!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

How do you all think MM feels about Princess Eugenie having a wedding this year too? I keep seeing articles casting it as Princess Eugenie stealing her thunder. I think it may turn into a royal headache if the negative publicity and commentary continues.

I know many women are touchy about  wedding dates and attention being diverted from theirs, but I doubt MM cares a wit --
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 she is about to become a Princess after all!


----------



## berrydiva

redney said:


> Her bag is the Mini Venice by British brand DeMellier London. https://www.demellierlondon.com/the-mini-venice.html
> 
> Interestingly, the brand donates a set of lifesaving vaccines for children in need in the name of every customer who buys one of their bags. (sources: DeMellier's website + http://people.com/royals/the-inspiring-hidden-message-behind-meghan-markles-sold-out-designer-bag/)


This is fantastic.


----------



## Traminer

Bellagarofalo said:


> How do you all think MM feels about Princess Eugenie having a wedding this year too? I keep seeing articles casting it as Princess Eugenie stealing her thunder.



I do not think that Princess Eugenie can steal MM's  thunder.
And I doubt that that was her intention.


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe he's more used to the cold than she is?


Lol, it really isn't that cold here x


----------



## dangerouscurves

That's true. It's rarely hit minus. Global warming.


----------



## minababe

is anyone really exciting for the wedding of eugenie? I don't think so 
It will be all about Harry and Meghan this year in Great Britian, I'm sure 

But now they are engaged she can bring him with her to the wedding of Harry and meghan right? so maybe they just wanted to be sure haha


----------



## Traminer

minababe said:


> But now they are engaged she can bring him with her to the wedding of Harry and meghan right? so maybe they just wanted to be sure haha



That may well have been the idea behind it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

gelbergirl said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visit Cardiff Castle in Wales


The Royals do not sign autographs. What the heck is Meagan doing with that pen?????


----------



## PatsyCline

She’s not a royal yet??


----------



## myown

VickyB said:


> The Royals do not sign autographs. What the heck is Meagan doing with that pen?????


signing autographs? looks like exactly that


----------



## gelbergirl

I'm excited that two of Queen Elizabeth's grandchildren are getting married in 2018 !


----------



## Traminer

What about the Rule of Three?  

Maybe we 'll have  a third Royal Marriage in 2018?


----------



## Bellagarofalo

Traminer said:


> What about the Rule of Three?
> 
> Maybe we 'll have  a third Royal Marriage in 2018?


I think my head would explode! That would be too exciting! I am so looking forward to seeing the dresses.


----------



## baglover1973

Am I the only one that feels like she found her way to be famous and relevant?  Not like she was super popular from doing Suits.  I had never really heard of her.  Hmmmmm


----------



## pursecrzy

I’d watched Suits and knew who she was. 

Suits has been on for awhile and probably won’t have many more seasons left.  She’s in her mid-thirties, which for most actresses is the end of a career. Harry came along at the right time. 

I wish them a long and happy marriage.


----------



## PatsyCline

baglover1973 said:


> Am I the only one that feels like she found her way to be famous and relevant?  Not like she was super popular from doing Suits.  I had never really heard of her.  Hmmmmm



Why so cynical? Why not accept it on face value?  Two people met and fell in love?

I would think the downside of living in a fish bowl would more than even out the positives.


----------



## Flatsy

baglover1973 said:


> Am I the only one that feels like she found her way to be famous and relevant?  Not like she was super popular from doing Suits.  I had never really heard of her.  Hmmmmm


Yes.  And that's not to say that their relationship is not genuine.  But some people feel like they have a calling to be famous and important, and one way or another, that happens for them and it's not a coincidence.  

She reminds me a little bit of Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, an ordinary suburban girl with no particular talents who *always* dated rich/famous guys even when she was back in college (Alessandro Benetton, hockey player John Cullen, that actor from Good Will Hunting, the Calvin Klein model Michael Bergin).  CBK dyed her hair, moved to New York, and worked her way into the fashion industry.  She made herself part of that world where she would encounter people like JFK, Jr and she seized the opportunity when it presented itself.  She never was going to date an ordinary shmoe and move to Long Island to be a housewife.  She felt she was destined for greater things and she made it happen.

Likewise, Meghan befriended a British aristocrat with fashion connections and the name "Violet von Westenholz" and, as Vanity Fair says, Meghan made herself part of the London social scene. 

I don't think Meghan targeted Harry specifically, but she definitely did some deliberate social climbing that led to her winding up in his orbit.  And knowing now how they were fixed up, it makes her claim that she didn't know much about Harry sound even more disingenuous.


----------



## arnott

Just saw a video clip of William and Harry meeting the Star Wars cast at the London premiere and saw that Harry went in and hugged the guy who plays Chewbacca.    Just wondering,  is that against royal protocol or is that normal?


----------



## baglover1973

I was not being cynical.  I was merely stating my opinion.  I don't watch Suits and had never heard of her before that. (and I watch E and am into pop culture. ie aware) These are just my thoughts from what I have read and know of her.  Nothing more, nothing less.


PatsyCline said:


> Why so cynical? Why not accept it on face value?  Two people met and fell in love?
> 
> I would think the downside of living in a fish bowl would more than even out the positives.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

My British friends are all very cynical about it. They view this engagement as a move by the monarchy to seem more accessible and ensure they don't become obsolete.


----------



## PatsyCline

baglover1973 said:


> I was not being cynical.  I was merely stating my opinion.  I don't watch Suits and had never heard of her before that. (and I watch E and am into pop culture. ie aware) These are just my thoughts from what I have read and know of her.  Nothing more, nothing less.



Actually that’s the exact definition of being cynical. You’re perceiving the absolute worst in someone who you admittedly know nothing about.


----------



## TC1

VickyB said:


> The Royals do not sign autographs. What the heck is Meagan doing with that pen?????


She didn't sign her own name. Apparently she asked the girl her name then wrote the fan's name with a heart.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Alexenjie

I don't understand anyone caring whether she is marrying him to move up in the world or to be rich and famous. Whether you have ever heard of her prior to this is unimportant. She had built a successful career and life long before she met him. As other broken royal marriages have demonstrated, there is no great benefit that comes with marrying into the royal family, if anything I would say she is the one taking the bigger risk marrying into their closed off and demanding world.

I hope they have a peaceful, happy, love filled life,


----------



## baglover1973

PatsyCline said:


> Actually that’s the exact definition of being cynical. You’re perceiving the absolute worst in someone who you admittedly know nothing about.



Well Ok then.


----------



## Flatsy

Alexenjie said:


> I don't understand anyone caring whether she is marrying him to move up in the world or to be rich and famous. Whether you have ever heard of her prior to this is unimportant. She had built a successful career and life long before she met him. As other broken royal marriages have demonstrated, there is no great benefit that comes with marrying into the royal family, if anything I would say she is the one taking the bigger risk marrying into their closed off and demanding world.


Having a role on a basic cable TV show and a lifestyle blog is not in the same league as becoming a princess.  Yes, the actual job of being a princess blows, but it's still something little girls (and a lot of grown women) dream about.  Meghan obviously thought there was no comparison since she didn't hesitate to completely drop her old life.


----------



## TC1

Flatsy said:


> Having a role on a basic cable TV show and a lifestyle blog is not in the same league as becoming a princess.  Yes, the actual job of being a princess blows, but it's still something little girls (and a lot of grown women) dream about.  Meghan obviously thought there was no comparison since she didn't hesitate to completely drop her old life.


And it wasn't just her life that was affected by that decision. They wrapped the entire show because she left.


----------



## Tivo

Alexenjie said:


> I don't understand anyone caring whether she is marrying him to move up in the world or to be rich and famous. Whether you have ever heard of her prior to this is unimportant. She had built a successful career and life long before she met him. As other broken royal marriages have demonstrated, there is no great benefit that comes with marrying into the royal family, if anything I would say she is the one taking the bigger risk marrying into their closed off and demanding world.
> 
> I hope they have a peaceful, happy, love filled life,


I don’t care about that. I just side-eye her for pretending to be so innocent, wide-eyed and bushy tailed. “Oh, I hardly knew anything about Harry or the royals! I can’t believe this all just fell in my lap!”

Meghan, you’re 36 years old. Girl, bye.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Tivo said:


> I don’t care about that. I just side-eye her for pretending to be so innocent, wide-eyed and bushy tailed. “Oh, I hardly knew anything about Harry or the royals! I can’t believe this all just fell in my lap!”
> 
> Meghan, you’re 36 years old. Girl, bye.



Lol!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

"Because I'm from the states you don't grow up with the same understanding of the royal family, and so - while I now understand very clearly there's a global interest there - I didn't know much about him. So the only thing I had asked her when she said she wanted to set us up was, I had one question, 'Well is he nice?'"

Just because there's been debate about this I thought it would make sense to quote her verbatim. Personally, I don't see anything wrong about this statement, but I guess it is up to the individual to interpret.


----------



## Jayne1

arnott said:


> Just saw a video clip of William and Harry meeting the Star Wars cast at the London premiere and saw that Harry went in and hugged the guy who plays Chewbacca.    Just wondering,  is that against royal protocol or is that normal?


He seems to be trying hard to be a normal person while keeping all the benefits of a very privileged lifestyle.  

Well, Princess Margaret ran around doing exactly what she pleased, with all the royal benefits, so I'm sure he will successfully do it too.


----------



## PatsyCline

TC1 said:


> And it wasn't just her life that was affected by that decision. They wrapped the entire show because she left.


I believe her TV fiance announced he was leaving also.  Didn't know they decided to end the series though.


----------



## arnott

Jayne1 said:


> He seems to be trying hard to be a normal person while keeping all the benefits of a very privileged lifestyle.
> 
> Well, Princess Margaret ran around doing exactly what she pleased, with all the royal benefits, so I'm sure he will successfully do it too.



So it is against royal protocol or not?


----------



## dangerouscurves

They look happy, that all that matters. Y'all been too long in Kardashian thread that anything genuine seems foreign. Lol.


----------



## horse17

I wish them happiness....this is a gossip thread, so I dont think it fair to label people who express doubt based on what they see....although I do agree with TiVo’s innocent, wide eyed bushy tailed comment..lol...

.I dont know MM and never heard of her before...from what i see, shes not a Hollywood trash party girl...and she seems to spend her time helping worthy causes.....if she purposely put herself in elite social circles..who cares?
Time will tell, and If she continues her philanthropic work now that shes in a privileged life, that will show her true character...imho..


----------



## honeydaze

bellebellebelle19 said:


> "Because I'm from the states you don't grow up with the same understanding of the royal family, and so - while I now understand very clearly there's a global interest there - I didn't know much about him. So the only thing I had asked her when she said she wanted to set us up was, I had one question, 'Well is he nice?'"
> 
> Just because there's been debate about this I thought it would make sense to quote her verbatim. Personally, I don't see anything wrong about this statement, but I guess it is up to the individual to interpret.



First time poster in this thread. While Ms. Markle is "from the states," she has been living in Canada since 2011. Canada is a part of the British Commonwealth. All of the Commonwealth coutries share the same Queen as head of state. 

It is highly unlikely that after six years, she was completely unaware of the "global interest" in the  royal family. Just saying...


----------



## Coconuts40

honeydaze said:


> First time poster in this thread. While Ms. Markle is "from the states," she has been living in Canada since 2011. Canada is a part of the British Commonwealth. All of the Commonwealth coutries share the same Queen as head of state.
> 
> It is highly unlikely that after six years, she was completely unaware of the "global interest" in the  royal family. Just saying...



As a Canadian I completely agree with this!  In addition, she was part of a very affluent social circle; from what I read about her, she is very good friends with Markus Anderson the director of Soho house. She frequented the Soho houses across the world - can't do that with her head in the sand.  In her lifestyle/friends/social circle there is absolutely no way she did not know who Prince Harry was.


----------



## PatsyCline

Coconuts40 said:


> As a Canadian I completely agree with this!  In addition, she was part of a very affluent social circle; from what I read about her, she is very good friends with Markus Anderson the director of Soho house. She frequented the Soho houses across the world - can't do that with her head in the sand.  In her lifestyle/friends/social circle there is absolutely no way she did not know who Prince Harry was.


Recognising someone's name, and 'knowing' them are two vastly different things.
I know who the Trumps are, but I don't 'know' them. I know nothing of them socially, so if I happened to meet them in that respect, I would be completely unaware of their likes, dislikes etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

I agree, I think she should have worded it differently


----------



## Coconuts40

PatsyCline said:


> Recognising someone's name, and 'knowing' them are two vastly different things.
> I know who the Trumps are, but I don't 'know' them. I know nothing of them socially, so if I happened to meet them in that respect, I would be completely unaware of their likes, dislikes etc.



No one is saying she knew him. But she says in the interview she didn't know who he was.  Personally, I don't believe that.
I happen to like Meghan Markle and Price Harry together and wish them well. But that statement of now knowing who he was was quite unbelievable to me.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tivo said:


> I don’t care about that. I just side-eye her for pretending to be so innocent, wide-eyed and bushy tailed. “Oh, I hardly knew anything about Harry or the royals! I can’t believe this all just fell in my lap!”
> 
> Meghan, you’re 36 years old. Girl, bye.



That reminds me of Alec Baldwin's wife, Hilaria. I heard an interview with him, where he was talking about how not into pop-culture she is, and he said he had to show her how to use the remote control at his house when they met. Fast forward to about six weeks later, and she's a guest correspondent on Extra!  She sure had him fooled.


----------



## PatsyCline

Coconuts40 said:


> No one is saying she knew him. But she says in the interview she didn't know who he was.  Personally, I don't believe that.
> I happen to like Meghan Markle and Price Harry together and wish them well. But that statement of now knowing who he was was quite unbelievable to me.


Maybe a bad choice of words then.  Outside of the British royal family, I wouldn't know any other royal family by name either.


----------



## LibbyRuth

PatsyCline said:


> Recognising someone's name, and 'knowing' them are two vastly different things.
> I know who the Trumps are, but I don't 'know' them. I know nothing of them socially, so if I happened to meet them in that respect, I would be completely unaware of their likes, dislikes etc.



I completely agree with you. I think that if Megan had been shown a picture of Prince Harry she could have identified him by name. But she didn't know a great deal about who he was, and was trying to convey that she marrying him for the person she's gotten to know him to be, and not because of his title or the family he comes from. I think it's fairly common for a woman to want to know something about the character of a man she's being set up with - and certainly wants to know those details before getting married! Any woman whose suffered through enough "Hey, you're single, and he's single, you should date" fix ups knows to ask questions before agreeing.


----------



## Coconuts40

I think Prince Harry and Meghan Markle can be a great couple and do some amazing work around the globe raising awareness to important global concerns.   Looking forward to seeing what they do.


----------



## PatsyCline

Maybe I'm too much of a hopeless romantic.  I just think it's so nice that two people connected, after a mutual acquaintance put them together.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m Canadian.  She said that she didn’t understand the hoopla surrounding the royal family.  I could say the same. We do not have the same zeal for them that the Brits do.  I think a lot of people are misconstruing what she said personally.


----------



## Flatsy

From Vogue: 





> Von Westenholz, who works in public relations for Ralph Lauren in London, met Markle through her job and the pair became close. *“Meghan had been a part of the London social scene for a while and had slotted into the high society set really easily. *And so when Harry told Violet he was having trouble finding someone, Violet said she might just have the perfect girl for him,” the source continues.



USA Today wrote a story in 2016 documenting her MULTIPLE friendships with members of the British aristocracy - all part of the royal set and friends with Prince Harry - and her gallivanting around Soho House and Wimbledon with these people.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life...-harry-and-meghan-markle-connection/93179604/

She clearly had an intimate knowledge of the British aristocracy and a role in it herself.   Her defenders need to stop trying to act like she was some sheltered person who had her head in the sand to such a degree that she had even less awareness of the royal family than your average fourth grader.  She was in London socializing amongst his aristocrat friends.  "Didn't know much about him" is downright absurd.


----------



## Coconuts40

Flatsy said:


> From Vogue:
> 
> USA Today wrote a story in 2016 documenting her MULTIPLE friendships with members of the British aristocracy - all part of the royal set and friends with Prince Harry - and her gallivanting around Soho House and Wimbledon with these people.
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/life...-harry-and-meghan-markle-connection/93179604/
> 
> She clearly had an intimate knowledge of the British aristocracy and a role in it herself.   Her defenders need to stop trying to act like she was some sheltered person who had her head in the sand to such a degree that she had even less awareness of the royal family than your average fourth grader.  She was in London socializing amongst his aristocrat friends.  "Didn't know much about him" is downright absurd.




Exactly!!!  This is exactly my point in my post made earlier today.  Thanks for sharing the article


----------



## PatsyCline

This article doesn’t show anything for or against your accusation. 

Just because A knows B, and B knows C, doesn’t mean A & C know each other. I would imagine the London social scene is large and vast, and there’s multiple spheres within. 

The article doesn’t give any examples of the two of them meeting each other, socially or any other way before.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> This article doesn’t show anything for or against your accusation.


You can relax with the "accusation" stuff.  Nobody is accusing her of murdering anybody, just playing up a naivete that didn't exist.



> Just because A knows B, and B knows C, doesn’t mean A & C know each other. I would imagine the London social scene is large and vast, and there’s multiple spheres within.  The article doesn’t give any examples of the two of them meeting each other, socially or any other way before.


It's not large and vast, but even if it were, Meghan was smack dab in the middle of Harry's corner of it.  Nobody's saying she'd actually met him before, but it was almost inevitable that she would.


----------



## Alexenjie

Flatsy said:


> Having a role on a basic cable TV show and a lifestyle blog is not in the same league as becoming a princess.  Yes, the actual job of being a princess blows, but it's still something little girls (and a lot of grown women) dream about.  Meghan obviously thought there was no comparison since she didn't hesitate to completely drop her old life.



I don't know about the rest of the people here but most off us outgrew our "want to be a princess when I grow up" fantasies long before we were teenagers. Maybe the British hold on to those ideas longer but seeing how unsuccessful that life was for Princess Diana, I doubt there are as many "girls" dreaming of being a princess as there were a generation ago. Like you said the reality of the job of being a princess blows.

If the marriage is going strong in 10 years, good for them. Even people madly in love and with the best intentions can still make bad mistakes with the person they marry, no matter who they are.


----------



## PatsyCline

Flatsy said:


> You can relax with the "accusation" stuff.  Nobody is accusing her of murdering anybody, just playing up a naivete that didn't exist.
> 
> 
> It's not large and vast, but even if it were, Meghan was smack dab in the middle of Harry's corner of it.  Nobody's saying she'd actually met him before, but it was almost inevitable that she would.



Remember the time frame the article speaks about is AFTER they had their first date.  So it’s quite possible Meghan was spending more time in London, seeing Harry on the sly.


----------



## baglover1973

PatsyCline said:


> This article doesn’t show anything for or against your accusation.
> 
> Just because A knows B, and B knows C, doesn’t mean A & C know each other. I would imagine the London social scene is large and vast, and there’s multiple spheres within.
> 
> The article doesn’t give any examples of the two of them meeting each other, socially or any other way before.



This is a gossip forum....seems to me you are taking this a tad bit too seriously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

baglover1973 said:


> This is a gossip forum....seems to me you are taking this a tad bit too seriously.



My mistake. I thought I was dealing with adults, not a group of twelve year old girls gossiping.


----------



## Gal4Dior

PatsyCline said:


> My mistake. I thought I was dealing with adults, not a group of twelve year old girls gossiping.



Now now, plenty of adults who gossip! The whole Real Housewives shows are based on that kind of drama and it’s the best becausethr drama is not about me personally. [emoji13] 

Anyway- someone please get Meg a rich color or jewel tone! Her neutrals are classic and femme, but were is the fire personality. The life? I want her to see in beautiful color!!


----------



## PatsyCline

LVSistinaMM said:


> Now now, plenty of adults who gossip! The whole Real Housewives shows are based on that kind of drama and it’s the best becausethr drama is not about me personally. [emoji13]
> 
> Anyway- someone please get Meg a rich color or jewel tone! Her neutrals are classic and femme, but were is the fire personality. The life? I want her to see in beautiful color!!


I abhor that series.  It's fake, scripted, and just brings out the worst about people.


----------



## Gal4Dior

PatsyCline said:


> I abhor that series.  It's fake, scripted, and just brings out the worst about people.



That’s exactly why I find it entertaining. Now about some color in Meghan’s wardrobe....I think she would look amazing in emerald green.


----------



## daisychainz

Coconuts40 said:


> No one is saying she knew him. But she says in the interview she didn't know who he was.  Personally, I don't believe that.
> I happen to like Meghan Markle and Price Harry together and wish them well. But that statement of now knowing who he was was quite unbelievable to me.


Most American citizens cannot even tell you if there are 50 or 51 states, or how many people are in the House of Representatives or the Senate. I guess I find it very easy to believe that an American would be ignorant of British aristocracy when most American citizens are fairly ignorant of the politics and geography of their own country. If she was British I would be the first to call her a liar, but she's an American and likely just had cursory knowledge of him.


----------



## bisousx

daisychainz said:


> Most American citizens cannot even tell you if there are 50 or 51 states, or how many people are in the House of Representatives or the Senate. I guess I find it very easy to believe that an American would be ignorant of British aristocracy when most American citizens are fairly ignorant of the politics and geography of their own country. If she was British I would be the first to call her a liar, but she's an American and likely just had cursory knowledge of him.



Yep. Example: I just met an American college aged guy who proudly told me he wanted to join the FBI, where the training would take him to the west coast.... he literally mixed up Washington D.C. and Washington state, and which coast D.C was on. It was a nice facepalm moment.


----------



## daisychainz

bisousx said:


> Yep. Example: I just met an American college aged guy who proudly told me he wanted to join the FBI, where the training would take him to the west coast.... he literally mixed up Washington D.C. and Washington state, and which coast D.C was on. It was a nice facepalm moment.


LOL. That's funny.  I used to enjoy watching Jay Leno on his show doing Jay-walking interviews with Americans about the country and politics... it was hilarious the answers they gave to such simple American politics/geography questions. Someone actually thought the current president was Martin Sheen (from The West Wing).


----------



## Gal4Dior

bisousx said:


> Yep. Example: I just met an American college aged guy who proudly told me he wanted to join the FBI, where the training would take him to the west coast.... he literally mixed up Washington D.C. and Washington state, and which coast D.C was on. It was a nice facepalm moment.



While I understand many Americans are not very aware of other cultures (or even their own), given that Meghan seems extremely intelligent and well spoken, educated, traveled, and seemingly cultured - I find her statement hard to believe. I am allowed to have his opinion without being piled upon. 

In addition, she was ambitious enough to put herself in excellent positions to succeed in her career and possibly meet someone equally as successful to partner and marry. Ambition is not a dirty word. I applaud her for working hard and wanting to move up from the social status she was born into. I also have to give her credit for winning over Harry. Multiple women have certainly tried and failed.


----------



## baglover1973

LVSistinaMM said:


> While I understand many Americans are not very aware of other cultures (or even their own), given that Meghan seems extremely intelligent and well spoken, educated, traveled, and seemingly cultured - I find her statement hard to believe. I am allowed to have his opinion without being piled upon.
> 
> In addition, she was ambitious enough to put herself in excellent positions to succeed in her career and possibly meet someone equally as successful to partner and marry. Ambition is not a dirty word. I applaud her for working hard and wanting to move up from the social status she was born into. I also have to give her credit for winning over Harry. Multiple women have certainly tried and failed.



Amen girl.  Don't worry about people piling up on you.  Happens to me all of the time.  People think that if you don't have the politically correct opinion that you are wrong.  I have learned to smile and laugh it off  This is a gossip forum and not to be taken so seriously.


----------



## bisousx

daisychainz said:


> LOL. That's funny.  I used to enjoy watching Jay Leno on his show doing Jay-walking interviews with Americans about the country and politics... it was hilarious the answers they gave to such simple American politics/geography questions. Someone actually thought the current president was Martin Sheen (from The West Wing).



Yeah!! I was kind of shocked lol. I always thought that people were exaggerating for the Jay Leno shows but now I know some of them were dead serious. You’d have to be a bit of an Anglophile to know much more than the names of the Princes of England. Nothing wrong with having an interest in other countries. I just find it to be a silly debate.


----------



## threadbender

Hallmark Channel is taking full advantage of Meghan Markle's new found fame. lol Another of the movies she did for them is on.


----------



## PatsyCline

carlpsmom said:


> Hallmark Channel is taking full advantage of Meghan Markle's new found fame. lol Another of the movies she did for them is on.


I heard about another movie she did last year, was re-edited to take advantage of the situation.

I guess some people have no scruples. And that includes her half-sister.  If I were her, I wouldn't be waiting near the mail box waiting for her invitation to the wedding.


----------



## PatsyCline

LVSistinaMM said:


> While I understand many Americans are not very aware of other cultures (or even their own), given that Meghan seems extremely intelligent and well spoken, educated, traveled, and seemingly cultured - I find her statement hard to believe. I am allowed to have his opinion without being piled upon.
> 
> In addition, she was ambitious enough to put herself in excellent positions to succeed in her career and possibly meet someone equally as successful to partner and marry. Ambition is not a dirty word. I applaud her for working hard and wanting to move up from the social status she was born into. I also have to give her credit for winning over Harry. Multiple women have certainly tried and failed.





LVSistinaMM said:


> While I understand many Americans are not very aware of other cultures (or even their own), given that Meghan seems extremely intelligent and well spoken, educated, traveled, and seemingly cultured - I find her statement hard to believe. I am allowed to have his opinion without being piled upon.
> 
> In addition, she was ambitious enough to put herself in excellent positions to succeed in her career and possibly meet someone equally as successful to partner and marry. Ambition is not a dirty word. I applaud her for working hard and wanting to move up from the social status she was born into. I also have to give her credit for winning over Harry. Multiple women have certainly tried and failed.


You're not giving Harry much credit at all. By your standards, he's just some idiot waiting to fall for the first conniving woman who passed by him.


----------



## Gal4Dior

PatsyCline said:


> You're not giving Harry much credit at all. By your standards, he's just some idiot waiting to fall for the first conniving woman who passed by him.



No, that’s not what I meant. I would appreciate you not putting words into my mouth.

As I said, she wanted to find a husband equally as successful and of similar social standing. Good for her. Harry is a hot commodity. There are many women who would probably gladly be his wife. They didn’t make the cut, which makes her special.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

More like they didn’t want a buffoon for a partner.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Coconuts40

daisychainz said:


> Most American citizens cannot even tell you if there are 50 or 51 states, or how many people are in the House of Representatives or the Senate. I guess I find it very easy to believe that an American would be ignorant of British aristocracy when most American citizens are fairly ignorant of the politics and geography of their own country. If she was British I would be the first to call her a liar, but she's an American and likely just had cursory knowledge of him.



You're missing my point entirely.  Meghan Markle is not just an average American. She is an actress that rubbed shoulders with celebrities, and people who were friends with the British aristocracy. Her friend (I now forgot her name but she is a clothing designer) that set them up was married to Prince Harry's friend.  How can she then say she didn't know who Prince Harry was?  I am not saying that Meghan Markle 'knew' Prince Harry well - during her first TV interview, she says she didn't know anything about the royal family. That is B.S. when her friends were within the social circle of Prince Harry.  So no I don't believe her statement that she didn't know who he was.  For the last time, she is not just some average person living in America/Canada that can't remember the number of states.  She is a well educated, well traveled, well connected actress.

I can like her and not believe everything she has to say.  I sincerely wish them well and I think they are well suited.  I am just saying that her statement about not knowing him is rather unbelievable to me.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Coconuts40 said:


> You're missing my point entirely.  Meghan Markle is not just an average American. She is an actress that rubbed shoulders with celebrities, and people who were friends with the British aristocracy. Her friend (I now forgot her name but she is a clothing designer) that set them up was married to Prince Harry's friend.  How can she then say she didn't know who Prince Harry was?  I am not saying that Meghan Markle 'knew' Prince Harry well - during her first TV interview, she says she didn't know anything about the royal family. That is B.S. when her friends were within the social circle of Prince Harry.  So no I don't believe her statement that she didn't know who he was.  For the last time, she is not just some average person living in America/Canada that can't remember the number of states.  She is a well educated, well traveled, well connected actress.
> 
> I can like her and not believe everything she has to say.  I sincerely wish them well and I think they are well suited.  I am just saying that her statement about not knowing him is rather unbelievable to me.



I think it’s Misha Nonoo (the clothing designer you are referring to).


----------



## Coconuts40

LVSistinaMM said:


> I think it’s Misha Nonoo (the clothing designer you are referring to).



Yes! That's her, thank you


----------



## daisychainz

Coconuts40 said:


> You're missing my point entirely.  Meghan Markle is not just an average American. She is an actress that rubbed shoulders with celebrities, and people who were friends with the British aristocracy. Her friend (I now forgot her name but she is a clothing designer) that set them up was married to Prince Harry's friend.  How can she then say she didn't know who Prince Harry was?  I am not saying that Meghan Markle 'knew' Prince Harry well - during her first TV interview, she says she didn't know anything about the royal family. That is B.S. when her friends were within the social circle of Prince Harry.  So no I don't believe her statement that she didn't know who he was.  For the last time, she is not just some average person living in America/Canada that can't remember the number of states.  She is a well educated, well traveled, well connected actress.
> 
> I can like her and not believe everything she has to say.  I sincerely wish them well and I think they are well suited.  I am just saying that her statement about not knowing him is rather unbelievable to me.


I have no issue with your opinion and just don't see it your way, but you're perfectly entitled. Being college educated does not necessarily mean someone is broadly aware, though. You need to update part of your information though - it was apparently Harry's childhood friend Violet von Westenholz who set them up and not a fashion designer. At least that is what the news has stated now.. could change again!


----------



## Flatsy

I don't know why people think it makes Meghan look better to portray her as ridiculously stupid and uninformed than to think that she exaggerated a little bit in an interview.


PatsyCline said:


> Remember the time frame the article speaks about is AFTER they had their first date.  So it’s quite possible Meghan was spending more time in London, seeing Harry on the sly.


Their first date was in July 2016 (according to Harry) which is when Meghan was attending Wimbledon with the von Westenholz's.   Meghan was in London with her very close friend Misha Nonoo, who is from London and whose ex-husband was one of Harry's best friends at Eton and whose brother was good friends with Will at Eton.  But I guess the words "Eton" or "Prince Harry" or "London" would have meant nothing to a dingbat like Meghan, who could only possibly know about American things like McDonald's and American Idol.

Vogue said Meghan was already moving comfortably in London's upper class circles by the time she met Harry.  I believe Vogue.


----------



## PatsyCline

Flatsy said:


> I don't know why people think it makes Meghan look better to portray her as ridiculously stupid and uninformed than to think that she exaggerated a little bit in an interview.
> 
> Their first date was in July 2016 (according to Harry) which is when Meghan was attending Wimbledon with the von Westenholz's.   Meghan was in London with her very close friend Misha Nonoo, who is from London and whose ex-husband was one of Harry's best friends at Eton and whose brother was good friends with Will at Eton.  But I guess the words "Eton" or "Prince Harry" or "London" would have meant nothing to a dingbat like Meghan, who could only possibly know about American things like McDonald's and American Idol.
> 
> Vogue said Meghan was already moving comfortably in London's upper class circles by the time she met Harry.  I believe Vogue.


You're taking a couple of huge leaps of logic without a single piece of evidence to support any of them.

What I don't understand, is your vicious gossip regarding her.  Why so spiteful?


----------



## Alexenjie

I don't get the need to take anything and everything that Meghan has said and apply her remarks in the most unflattering way possible. She seems like a nice person who is engaged to a Prince who also seems like a nice person. As an American I am removed from the focus on the British family as every day entertainment. I don't see why Meghan marrying someone who is highly unlikely to ever be King is such a big deal. Yes they are young, nice looking and rich and hopefully more exciting to observe compared to Will and Kate (who I like but find pretty boring). The royal family of Britain are interesting in a old fashioned vague way but I am not fascinated by their every move and they aren't running the British empire so the interest in them is puzzling to me. I hope they get to lead a somewhat normal life outside of the intensity of the spotlight.

If Meghan is a social climber who is only marrying Harry for a title and some money, their marriage probably won't have much of a happy ending but we won't know that for probably years.

This is my last post on this subject. Truthfully I hope they make it but if they don't it won't affect me in the slightest.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> You're taking a couple of huge leaps of logic without a single piece of evidence to support any of them.
> 
> What I don't understand, is your vicious gossip regarding her.  Why so spiteful?


What huge leaps of logic?  What lack of evidence?  Where Meghan was, when she was there, and who she was with are all documented.  In fact, I linked articles above, and there are about 5,000 more articles like that online.


----------



## daisychainz

carlpsmom said:


> Hallmark Channel is taking full advantage of Meghan Markle's new found fame. lol Another of the movies she did for them is on.


Yes, so is Suits, the show she stared on. We watch it and always have, and it has always started the second part of the season in January. They have delayed it until late March, almost right before the wedding. Trying to capitalize as well! For those who are Suits fans, it was just renewed for an 8th season (minus Mike and Rachel).


----------



## PatsyCline

Flatsy said:


> What huge leaps of logic?  What lack of evidence?  Where Meghan was, when she was there, and who she was with are all documented.  In fact, I linked articles above, and there are about 5,000 more articles like that online.


But have you presented a single incident where Meghan and Harry were at the same event, much less were introduced, before their blind date?

You seem to be hung up on the definition of 'know'. I know who Prince Harry is, but I don't know anything about him.  I don't know his likes, dislikes, etc.  To me that's the definition of knowing someone.

Using your logic, Meghan knows everyone in Hollywood, because she's lived and worked there.  She knows everyone in the UN, because she's involved in projects with the UN. 

And it still doesn't explain your viciousness over the definition of 'knowing' someone.  Isn't it possible you and her have a different definition of what is considered 'knowing' someone?

Unless you have proof she lied about meeting Harry before, I don't understand your attacks on her.


----------



## baglover1973

Flatsy said:


> What huge leaps of logic?  What lack of evidence?  Where Meghan was, when she was there, and who she was with are all documented.  In fact, I linked articles above, and there are about 5,000 more articles like that online.



Don't let her get to you (PatsyCline) , looks like she is practicing her "law" here....lol.


----------



## Cocoabean

I felt her comment was intended to prove that she was not one of the many who were scheming to hook Prince Harry. I think it fell short because it came across as disingenuous. The way it was phrased was interpreted by many that she hadn't heard of him before, and knew not a whit about him.

I felt it was a bit exaggerated, and that what it was meant to imply was that she didn't follow the monarchy, and knew nothing about Harry other than what she'd seen in passing in the media. Asking her friend if he is nice is something I could see her doing (maybe), and certainly makes a cute soundbite. Why she couldn't have just said, "Yes, I'd seen him in the media, but really didn't know anything about him other than that. So I asked my friend if he's a nice person. She said, 'Of course, or I'd not be setting you up!' So I went out with him." That's a much more believable story to me.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I am curious to see who on this thread has purchased some of the items Meghan has been shown as wearing?

I’m guilty of buying those Burberry pants, the Marks and Spencer sweater, theory jacket, Birks ring, and Stuart Weitzman booties. [emoji4] I was fortunate to get the Burberry pants, Theory jacket, and Stuart Weitzman booties on sale!!! 

My style is similar to hers (mainly neutrals), but I wear some jewel tones. I’ve been buying a lot more camel colored items since following her style, though.

I do wish she would wear more color. Although her style is enviable for any ordinary person, as a style maker I was hoping to see more bright colors and prints!! I’m sad that since she’s been officially engaged she has had to forego her boho chic look complete with distressed jeans and tees.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> But have you presented a single incident where Meghan and Harry were at the same event, much less were introduced, before their blind date?


Absolutely nobody, including me, thinks they met before their blind date.  In fact, I already specifically stated this a page or two back.  You are completely misrepresenting everything I have said, and it doesn't make your point of view any more convincing.

My opinion, as I have stated here repeatedly, is very similar to what Cocoabean said above.  I think Meghan exaggerated a little bit.  She wanted to make it clear that she hadn't been pursuing Harry or trying to get a date with him.  

Given that it was her first big interview and she was nervous, she stated it in a bit of a clunky way.  But to me (and to others) it also came off as slightly disingenuous.   (Please look up the definition of that word before you make it out to be a vicious attack equivalent to murder.)

You are going to have a really tough time of it if you can brook no criticism of Meghan, particularly such mild criticism.  I'm sure she's going to say and do things in the future that are far more controversial.  (Unless she goes to the doctor and gets the same lobotomy Kate got.)


----------



## Gal4Dior

Another black and white outfit at a recent awards ceremony that was super chic, but still black and white. 

I saw that the suit jacket and the cropped straight leg trouser was Stella McCartney and almost lost it when I saw how much it was. I just went on Zara and found one that was the same style for under $100 total.

I did splurge on the bodysuit, though. I couldn’t find anything quite like it, and it was far more affordable in comparison to her suit and pant set! 

Girl needs to wear some color, though. I already wear too much black! [emoji23]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## vargagirl

redney said:


> Her bag is the Mini Venice by British brand DeMellier London. https://www.demellierlondon.com/the-mini-venice.html
> 
> I too have looked at the DeMellier website since seeing MM with her Mini Venice. I love the look of the Manhattan - reminiscent of the Gucci Soho Disco.
> Does anyone have any of these bags? What are your opinions?
> It is a difficult decision to buy a bag that expensive when you can’t see it or touch it IRL.


----------



## minababe

they looked so happy and perfect last night! what a beautiful couple !


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I'm also really curious about this brand too. They have a bespoke service which I'm really excited about. I emailed them asking about it but they said they currently are unable to take orders and will let me know when they can. There's one person on YouTube who made several videos about their bags and has written a review in the comments as well, so you should check them out! I like that the Berlin is a nice dupe for the LV pochette metis without being an unoriginal copy/fake, especially if I get to customize the bag.


----------



## Traminer

vargagirl said:


> .



And where has the text gone to?


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Traminer said:


> And where has the text gone to?


I belive due to typo or technical issues, her original post is actually included in the quote, not in a new reply


----------



## vargagirl

Yes - sorry seems to have been incorporated into the quote.
I am really interested in these bags and keen on people’s impressions. I’m in Aust so would not be able to see in real life. 
I like the look of the Manhattan!


----------



## vargagirl

Well I got my red Manhattan today and it is very pretty, and seems comfortable to wear. It is so similar to the Gucci Soho disco in terms of size, functionality. Leather is  smooshy and really nice.


----------



## Traminer

vargagirl said:


> View attachment 3970080



Fine picture!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

vargagirl said:


> Well I got my red Manhattan today and it is very pretty, and seems comfortable to wear. It is so similar to the Gucci Soho disco in terms of size, functionality. Leather is  smooshy and really nice.
> 
> View attachment 3970080



Beautiful color!


----------



## Alexenjie

I haven't read every post about her but I am curious, does she have naturally curly hair? It seems a shame to wear it straight all the time though she probably felt it got her work in the entertainment business where straight hair is considered normal. I love curly hair on most people and it's a million times easier to deal with what your hair wants to do naturally then to chemically alter or straighten it with tools constantly. There is prejudice against some people with curly hair though I've never encountered it (I'm half Irish, half Norwegian) I'd love to see any pictures of Meghan with curly hair if they are out there.


----------



## Bellagarofalo

Alexenjie said:


> I haven't read every post about her but I am curious, does she have naturally curly hair? It seems a shame to wear it straight all the time though she probably felt it got her work in the entertainment business where straight hair is considered normal. I love curly hair on most people and it's a million times easier to deal with what your hair wants to do naturally then to chemically alter or straighten it with tools constantly. There is prejudice against some people with curly hair though I've never encountered it (I'm half Irish, half Norwegian) I'd love to see any pictures of Meghan with curly hair if they are out there.





Her hair IS naturally curly, though that does not seem to be her preferred style. As someone with a similar hair texture to Meghan, I can tell you that straightening it is actually easier than maintaining the curls. it's a ton of work! But yes, her curls are quite lovely.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

vargagirl said:


> Well I got my red Manhattan today and it is very pretty, and seems comfortable to wear. It is so similar to the Gucci Soho disco in terms of size, functionality. Leather is  smooshy and really nice.
> 
> View attachment 3970080


Just gorgeous! Thanks for sharing. I would love to hear more thoughts on the quality of the lining and zippers - glad to hear the leather seems nice! It's so hard to tell leather quality from pictures  I'm determined to get a Berlin and a Chicago from them, but I'm more of a fan of smooth leather and I'm waiting for the DeMellier bespoke options to be available again. Can you believe the mini Venice that Meghan carried is almost sold out in pre-order?


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Kate Middleton, and Prince William at the Royal Foundation Forum


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Kate and Meghan both have such beautiful smiles.


----------



## GoStanford

What nice pictures!  I have to say, I really think Kate looks beautiful when she's pregnant.  Her face is rounder and closer to her look in college, which is how I always think of her, as that's when she met and started going out with William.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

GoStanford said:


> What nice pictures!  I have to say, I really think Kate looks beautiful when she's pregnant.  Her face is rounder and closer to her look in college, which is how I always think of her, as that's when she met and started going out with William.



Definitely agree that she looks so much better with just a bit of weight on her. She looks far younger.


----------



## minababe

Bellagarofalo said:


> View attachment 3970307
> 
> Her hair IS naturally curly, though that does not seem to be her preferred style. As someone with a similar hair texture to Meghan, I can tell you that straightening it is actually easier than maintaining the curls. it's a ton of work! But yes, her curls are quite lovely.



wow this Picture! she Looks totally different  crazy what make up and a new haircut  could do for you haha


----------



## Bellagarofalo

minababe said:


> wow this Picture! she Looks totally different  crazy what make up and a new haircut  could do for you haha


True! This was also when she was probably a teenager -- I know I looked a hot mess in my teen awkward years. Not saying that *she* looks like a hot mess, of course...


----------



## minababe

they looked amazing and so powerful ! Fab4 is so right at These 4 People !


----------



## minababe

Bellagarofalo said:


> True! This was also when she was probably a teenager -- I know I looked a hot mess in my teen awkward years. Not saying that *she* looks like a hot mess, of course...


oh yes so true .. me too haha


----------



## myown

EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle has been baptised by the Archbishop of Canterbury using holy water from the River Jordan in a secret ceremony at the Chapel Royal with Prince Harry by her side


Meghan Markle has been baptised into the Church of England in a secret ceremony with Prince Harry at her side.​
The intimate 45-minute service was conducted by the Archbishop of Canterbury at the Chapel Royal on Tuesday evening.

They were joined by Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, but neither Prince William nor the Queen were present.


Miss Markle’s baptism, which formally introduces her into the Anglican faith ahead of her wedding to Harry in two months, marks an important step on her transformation from divorced American actress to future granddaughter-in-law to the Queen.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cret-ceremony-Chapel-Royal.html#ixzz599A9kTWN​


----------



## Morgan R

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in Birmingham
*
More Pictures: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Markle-attend-education-event-Birmingham.html


----------



## Traminer

Meghan has now been baptized.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Commonwealth Day service


----------



## sdkitty

I'm sure Diana would be proud of her two sons


----------



## melissatrv

I have always been amazed that Kate can wear such high heels, walking on her feet all day, in her third trimester.  Go girl!


----------



## Cocoabean

melissatrv said:


> I have always been amazed that Kate can wear such high heels, walking on her feet all day, in her third trimester.  Go girl!



I don't know how they wear those heels at any time! It amazes me. What do you all think they carry in their tiny bags? I just cannot downsize that much, but I don't have "people" to carry things for me. 

Do they carry ID? Or dental floss? Tissue? Nothing? A lipstick? A mirror? A comb?

My absolute minimum is a card case (ID, credit card, debit card, car insurance, health insurance, and two other pieces of personal info), sunglasses, lip stuff, anti-bacterial gel, lotion, and floss. I usually carry a bunch more..why I don't know. I really need to get rid of the rest and downsize.


----------



## sdkitty

Cocoabean said:


> I don't know how they wear those heels at any time! It amazes me. What do you all think they carry in their tiny bags? I just cannot downsize that much, but I don't have "people" to carry things for me.
> 
> Do they carry ID? Or dental floss? Tissue? Nothing? A lipstick? A mirror? A comb?
> 
> My absolute minimum is a card case (ID, credit card, debit card, car insurance, health insurance, and two other pieces of personal info), sunglasses, lip stuff, anti-bacterial gel, lotion, and floss. I usually carry a bunch more..why I don't know. I really need to get rid of the rest and downsize.


I know.  I drive (they don't usually).  My car and house keys are clunky due to the transmitter thingy.  Then I carry a continental wallet, sunnies and reading glasses.  Plus a cosmetic bag with lipstick, etc. and cell phone.
 For a formal occasion where I would carry an evening bag I could eliminate some stuff but generally I feel I need all this.
She probably doesn't need glasses.  And she could have someone carry some stuff or leave it in the car I guess.


----------



## Cocoabean

sdkitty said:


> I know.  I drive (they don't usually).  My car and house keys are clunky due to the transmitter thingy.  Then I carry a continental wallet, sunnies and reading glasses.  Plus a cosmetic bag with lipstick, etc. and cell phone.
> For a formal occasion where I would carry an evening bag I could eliminate some stuff but generally I feel I need all this.
> She probably doesn't need glasses.  And she could have someone carry some stuff or leave it in the car I guess.



Yes, forgot all about my keys and phone! Those are close to the chunkiest. I suppose they don't need house keys, either. Sunglasses can be easily left in the car, but at my age...readers are a must, or one of those people could read to me, I suppose!  Then for sure I'd not need my phone.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Commonwealth Day service
> 
> View attachment 3999512
> View attachment 3999513
> View attachment 3999514
> View attachment 3999516
> View attachment 3999517
> View attachment 3999518
> View attachment 3999519
> View attachment 3999520
> View attachment 3999521
> View attachment 3999522


what a truly beautiful couple they are !! they look so happy, proud and confident. love These two! Normally I think she Looks more interesting and exotic than beautiful but this is by far her best look I've ever seen her, her make up is perfect. she is glowing and looks really beautiful in These Pictures !!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Bellagarofalo

Any more notable Meghan purse sightings ladies? I have been slacking thanks to sleep deprivation (teething 6 month old).

My mom just purchased me the mini venice for an early birthday gift -- not sure which color -- I will post pictures when it arrives!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

vargagirl said:


> Well I got my red Manhattan today and it is very pretty, and seems comfortable to wear. It is so similar to the Gucci Soho disco in terms of size, functionality. Leather is  smooshy and really nice.
> 
> View attachment 3970080



This bag has such a rich color! It is lovely! Any action pics you can share?


----------



## vargagirl

Bellagarofalo said:


> This bag has such a rich color! It is lovely! Any action pics you can share?



It is really a great little bag! I have been using it a lot so far. Fits my Kindle, small purse, sunglasses, keys and iPhone 7 Plus. 

Here is a terrible photo from when I first got it...


----------



## elinda

Bellagarofalo said:


> Any more notable Meghan purse sightings ladies? I have been slacking thanks to sleep deprivation (teething 6 month old).
> 
> My mom just purchased me the mini venice for an early birthday gift -- not sure which color -- I will post pictures when it arrives!


Congrats on your birthday!
I ordered a red mini Venice for my birthday back in February, still waiting for it to arrive.
Apparently it was a preorder and I should receive it anytime between mid-March to mid-April.


----------



## Bellagarofalo

vargagirl said:


> It is really a great little bag! I have been using it a lot so far. Fits my Kindle, small purse, sunglasses, keys and iPhone 7 Plus.
> Not terrible at all, thanks for sharing! It
> Here is a terrible photo from when I first got it...
> View attachment 4002919





vargagirl said:


> It is really a great little bag! I have been using it a lot so far. Fits my Kindle, small purse, sunglasses, keys and iPhone 7 Plus.
> 
> Here is a terrible photo from when I first got it...
> View attachment 4002919



It really fits a lot of essentials for being so compact. Thanks for sharing the (not terrible) pic!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

elinda said:


> Congrats on your birthday!
> I ordered a red mini Venice for my birthday back in February, still waiting for it to arrive.
> Apparently it was a preorder and I should receive it anytime between mid-March to mid-April.



Thank you! Mine is set to arrive on the same schedule. I wish I was adventurous enough for the red because it is such a vibrant shade. Please share pics when it arrives if you can!


----------



## elinda

Bellagarofalo said:


> Thank you! Mine is set to arrive on the same schedule. I wish I was adventurous enough for the red because it is such a vibrant shade. Please share pics when it arrives if you can!


Sure, will do!
This is my first time being this adventurous with color actually  all my other bags are black/blue/brown; I hope I like it!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in Belfast


----------



## uhpharm01

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in Belfast
> 
> View attachment 4011817
> View attachment 4011814
> View attachment 4011815
> View attachment 4011816
> View attachment 4011813
> View attachment 4011808
> View attachment 4011811
> View attachment 4011812
> View attachment 4011824
> View attachment 4011810


She's so pretty!!!


----------



## afsweet

great look! finally a coat that is the right size and proportion for her.


----------



## sdkitty

I saw a video of her as a little girl playing queen.  She had a big mane of NC/frizzy hair.  Too bad she (and most other curly haired celebs) feels she has to straighten her hair to be beautiful.


----------



## Shopgirl1996

sdkitty said:


> I saw a video of her as a little girl playing queen.  She had a big mane of NC/frizzy hair.  Too bad she (and most other curly haired celebs) feels she has to straighten her hair to be beautiful.



I agree. I love naturally curly hair! I think it's so beautiful. I have straight hair and used to get perms when I was younger.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopgirl1996 said:


> I agree. I love naturally curly hair! I think it's so beautiful. I have straight hair and used to get perms when I was younger.


I have curly/wavy hair and I get all kinds of compliments - including from women who say they have curly hair too but they straighten it.


----------



## Bellagarofalo

Early birthday gift has arrived...


----------



## VickyB

Not a fan of this recent look. I like the pieces individually but they don't all work well together.
The hanging belt flaps look sloppy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elinda

Bellagarofalo said:


> Early birthday gift has arrived...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4014932
> View attachment 4014931


Congratulations!
I haven’t received mine yet 
Will you post a few more photos (outside/inside) please?
Or post a link if you’re putting them somewhere else on Tpf


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Bellagarofalo said:


> Early birthday gift has arrived...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4014932
> View attachment 4014931


Ooh hooray!! What do you think of the quality?


----------



## Bellagarofalo

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Ooh hooray!! What do you think of the quality?



This pains me to say it but I am not impressed by the quality. There was wax or something dropped on some of the hardware and the leather that I had to peel off — it looked unintentional and sloppy. 

There also is more creasing than I like that is not due to the grain of the leather. 

I remind myself that this bag is around 10% of the cost of my other bags and is supporting a great cause so I will wear it with pride and hope to generate buzz in my circles so more people will buy. So far I have sparked one purchase! 

I would buy it again despite my issues with it unless the price went up substantially.


----------



## Bellagarofalo

elinda said:


> Congratulations!
> I haven’t received mine yet
> Will you post a few more photos (outside/inside) please?
> Or post a link if you’re putting them somewhere else on Tpf



Ask and you shall receive. Posting below.


----------



## Bellagarofalo

Here is the bag, what I have inside, and what it looks like with and without the strap. The inside is difficult to show because it is narrow. 

What’s inside also includes my work cell but I used it to take the picture of what I had inside.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Bellagarofalo said:


> This pains me to say it but I am not impressed by the quality. There was wax or something dropped on some of the hardware and the leather that I had to peel off — it looked unintentional and sloppy.
> 
> There also is more creasing than I like that is not due to the grain of the leather.
> 
> I remind myself that this bag is around 10% of the cost of my other bags and is supporting a great cause so I will wear it with pride and hope to generate buzz in my circles so more people will buy. So far I have sparked one purchase!
> 
> I would buy it again despite my issues with it unless the price went up substantially.


Thank you for sharing!! It is a great cause, so at least there's that! How does the quality of the materials (leather, cotton lining, hardware) feel?sorry for all the questions and I really appreciate your review!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Thank you for sharing!! It is a great cause, so at least there's that! How does the quality of the materials (leather, cotton lining, hardware) feel?sorry for all the questions and I really appreciate your review!



No worries I am happy to answer any and all questions!

The leather feels soft and pliable, but not so soft it will not hold its shape. The quality of the leather is good, I would give it an 8 out of 10.  

The stitching was done very well and is soft -- it is clear care was taken with the stitching but there is one frayed stitch so I would give it a 6 out of 10 since this portends unfavorably for the stitching standing the test of time. 

The hardware feels sturdy despite the rings for the strap feeling hollow -- which is good because it helps the bag stay light. Nothing about the bag is flimsy, of course. I would give the hardware 7 out of 10 only because the gold colored plating on the top handle hardware does not match the gold colored plating for the rest of the bag. It is not super noticeable unless you are looking critically at the bag, however. 

I really think the quality is great for the price. I believe you will be in love once your bag arrives and I cannot wait to hear your thoughts and see pictures!


----------



## V0N1B2

Now I know why Megan Markle didn't have a style thread until she hooked up with the Prince.  She's obviously just not that interesting.


----------



## DC-Cutie

V0N1B2 said:


> Now I know why Megan Markle didn't have a style thread until she hooked up with the Prince.  She's obviously just not that interesting.


uh, ok....


----------



## Bellagarofalo

V0N1B2 said:


> Now I know why Megan Markle didn't have a style thread until she hooked up with the Prince.  She's obviously just not that interesting.



Well, her style may not have been on the radar but that probably is just because she has been more focused on huminatarian efforts (see link below) and those are not the venues you will see paparazzi flocking too. 

Type her name into a search engine and you will be hard pressed to find a lot of shallow, vapid discussion about her style -- but you will find a lot of discourse about her intelligence, kindness and indefatigable efforts on behalf of impoverished women, children and nations around the globe. 

So, although her style may not be front and center, she is very interesting. If you are into things like charity, intelligence and goodness, that is. 

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a13945782/meghan-markle-charity-work-philanthropy/


----------



## V0N1B2

DC-Cutie said:


> uh, ok....





Bellagarofalo said:


> Well, her style may not have been on the radar but that probably is just because she has been more focused on huminatarian efforts (see link below) and those are not the venues you will see paparazzi flocking too.
> 
> Type her name into a search engine and you will be hard pressed to find a lot of shallow, vapid discussion about her style -- but you will find a lot of discourse about her intelligence, kindness and indefatigable efforts on behalf of impoverished women, children and nations around the globe.
> 
> So, although her style may not be front and center, she is very interesting. If you are into things like charity, intelligence and goodness, that is.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a13945782/meghan-markle-charity-work-philanthropy/


I just find it funny that in the 43 posts preceding mine, less than half were about Megan. The rest were about members' bags. In four pages of the thread, there's three pictures of her and 14 pictures of people's purses.
I'm sure she's a lovely person.


----------



## DC-Cutie

shade...


----------



## Bellagarofalo

For those of you interested, these are some of my favorite Meghan photos ... I especially like it when her bags add a pop of color to her outfits. Looking back through the years her style has (thankfully) evolved from somewhat cheesy to sleek and chic. I get the sense from the progression that she favors comfort above all else and falls back on certain staple items in her wardrobe.

She now probably takes notes from the royals and is moving toward a more regal, refined style but I doubt she ever will be as dolled up as Duchess Kate since that does not seem to be her style.


----------



## Frivole88

I'm not a fan of Meghan but i think she is very pretty and youthful. I also love her style. it's effortless, chic and contemporary. I hope she gets to maintain some of her casual look. Kate's style is too safe and boring.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I hope she doesn't dress more like Kate either. I love her style and especially love all of her understated bags. The best part is now that's she's got all eyes on her/what she's wearing, she's highlighting fashion that that is about others instead of just about our usual vanity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## fashion16

Does anyone know who makes the shoes she is wearing in this pic?


----------



## Bellagarofalo

fashion16 said:


> Does anyone know who makes the shoes she is wearing in this pic?
> 
> View attachment 4018061



Aquazzura makes them. Those are the Amazon suede pumps. She wears the brand a lot.


----------



## VickyB

I don't think she has a sense of style and  she is 36 not 26 so one would think she'd have some by now.  In fact, I think her look tends to be tacky. Fashion and style are two different things. Style is innate. Ya either have it or you don't. She doesn't. Or she just doesn't care . Cannot wait to see the wedding dress. If it is only 1/2 as bad as that engagement photo gown, I'll be cheering.


----------



## lilflobowl

I think she looks fine? Don’t understand what’s with the viciousness.


----------



## bisbee

lilflobowl said:


> I think she looks fine? Don’t understand what’s with the viciousness.


I agree...I think she always looks well put together.  I don’t think “tacky” describes her at all.  If someone’s taste doesn’t match yours, that doesn’t mean they don’t have style...it means theirs is different than yours.


----------



## clu13

VickyB said:


> I don't think she has a sense of style and  she is 36 not 26 so one would think she'd have some by now.  In fact, I think her look tends to be tacky. Fashion and style are two different things. Style is innate. Ya either have it or you don't. She doesn't. Or she just doesn't care . Cannot wait to see the wedding dress. If it is only 1/2 as bad as that engagement photo gown, I'll be cheering.



Cheering for something you consider bad? Why? I’m being completely sincere . . . Why would one derive joy? I’m involved in projects and businesses that focus on empowering and benefiting women so this is a fascinating thought process.


----------



## sdkitty

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I hope she doesn't dress more like Kate either. I love her style and especially love all of her understated bags. The best part is now that's she's got all eyes on her/what she's wearing, she's highlighting fashion that that is about others instead of just about our usual vanity.


all about others?  you mean designers everyone doesn't know?


----------



## VickyB

clu13 said:


> Cheering for something you consider bad? Why? I’m being completely sincere . . . Why would one derive joy? I’m involved in projects and businesses that focus on empowering and benefiting women so this is a fascinating thought process.


I don't think you read my post carefully. I will be cheering if the wedding dress is better than the engagement gown.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

sdkitty said:


> all about others?  you mean designers everyone doesn't know?


As in fashion brands that are about more than just pretty clothes. And not to insult those brands (I'm a sucker for them too which is why I'm here lol), but she wears (ie, promotes) brands like Everlane (ethical manufacturing and transparent pricing), DeMellier (vaccines donated with every bag purchase), and Charlotte Elizabeth (a designer with chronic illnesses who has a Prince's Trust). Hope that answers your question.


----------



## A1aGypsy

She wore a lot of Canadian designers when she lived here which was wonderful. Also, I don’t think people understand just how much influence her new role has on what she can no longer wear.  I think the ethical choices she is making is really great.


----------



## clu13

VickyB said:


> I don't think you read my post carefully. I will be cheering if the wedding dress is better than the engagement gown.



Now I see - my mistake. My apologies.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

kristinlorraine said:


> I'm not a fan of Meghan but i think she is very pretty and youthful. I also love her style. it's effortless, chic and contemporary. I hope she gets to maintain some of her casual look. Kate's style is too safe and boring.


Kate needs a certain amount of boring because she will be Queen, Meghan doesn't need to worry about that, so she has more flexibility. Does anyone know if she can wear white for her wedding, according to protocol/etiquette? I know the royals have different 'rules,' so wondering if she has to wear ivory/cream or something other than white?


----------



## minababe

V0N1B2 said:


> Now I know why Megan Markle didn't have a style thread until she hooked up with the Prince.  She's obviously just not that interesting.


haha poor girl


----------



## RueHermes

Has anyone commented on her beauty? I thought she looked stunning in her engagement photo in the black dress sitting with harry.  I like her style as well. Much more than Kate.


----------



## VickyB

clu13 said:


> Now I see - my mistake. My apologies.


Thanks. Much appreciated!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## aerinha

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Kate needs a certain amount of boring because she will be Queen, Meghan doesn't need to worry about that, so she has more flexibility. Does anyone know if she can wear white for her wedding, according to protocol/etiquette? I know the royals have different 'rules,' so wondering if she has to wear ivory/cream or something other than white?


Not sure on protocol, but I think she would look better in ivory, cream or even blush than stark white.


----------



## bag-princess

anyone know if the wedding will be televised??


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> anyone know if the wedding will be televised??


I'm pretty sure it will....some morning show people were talking about watching it......I think it will be early morning here in the US


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> I'm pretty sure it will....some morning show people were talking about watching it......I think it will be early morning here in the US




I remember having to get up early to watch the others too!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> I remember having to get up early to watch the others too!


I remember watching Fergie's wedding in the conference room at my office


----------



## sdkitty

from The Sun:
*How you can watch the royal marriage on May 19?*
The wedding will be able to be broadcast on various TV channels across the globe.

For those without a TV, there will also be the option for the wedding to be live streamed via computers and smart devices.

On May 19, the couple will marry at midday and at 1pm they will travel through Windsor in a carriage.


----------



## minababe

can't wait for their wedding!!!!!!


----------



## Alexenjie

I love and have naturally curly hair and would be happy to see Meghan embrace her own. I can understand her straightening her hair when she became an actress as almost all of the actresses/singers who used to have lovely natural curls (Nicole Kidman, Kerrie Russell, Mariah Carey, Andie MacDowell, Julianna Margulies, Debra Messing, Julia Roberts, Julia Louis Dreyfus, Taylor Swift, Sarah Jessica Parker and on and on) reverted to straight, flat boring hair like everyone else. I think society or maybe it is just the entertainment world (?) doesn't like curly hair though I cannot figure out why.


----------



## bisbee

Alexenjie said:


> I love and have naturally curly hair and would be happy to see Meghan embrace her own. I can understand her straightening her hair when she became an actress as almost all of the actresses/singers who used to have lovely natural curls (Nicole Kidman, Kerrie Russell, Mariah Carey, Andie MacDowell, Julianna Margulies, Debra Messing, Julia Roberts, Julia Louis Dreyfus, Taylor Swift, Sarah Jessica Parker and on and on) reverted to straight, flat boring hair like everyone else. I think society or maybe it is just the entertainment world (?) doesn't like curly hair though I cannot figure out why.


I have curly hair.  I have gone for years wearing it curly, and years wearing it straight.  I tried recently to wear it curly, but the top layer won’t really curl anymore...just frizzes, no matter what I try.  Underneath I have my old spiral curls!

I think I liked wearing my hair straight for the consistency.  My hair, when curly, has a mind of its own...looks different every day.  Sometimes it’s good, often not.  I had to wash or rinse it daily to refresh the curls...and I don’t want to do that anymore.  Maybe she wears her hair straight for a similar reason?

My granddaughter has very curly, very thick, coarse hair (mine was finer).  She pulls it back in a ponytail daily for control, but it still frizzes on top.  She is almost 13, but into sports more than her appearance...we’ll see how it evolves as she gets older!


----------



## sdkitty

Alexenjie said:


> I love and have naturally curly hair and would be happy to see Meghan embrace her own. I can understand her straightening her hair when she became an actress as almost all of the actresses/singers who used to have lovely natural curls (Nicole Kidman, Kerrie Russell, Mariah Carey, Andie MacDowell, Julianna Margulies, Debra Messing, Julia Roberts, Julia Louis Dreyfus, Taylor Swift, Sarah Jessica Parker and on and on) reverted to straight, flat boring hair like everyone else. I think society or maybe it is just the entertainment world (?) doesn't like curly hair though I cannot figure out why.


You're right....there's a long list of celebs who used to have curly hair and now wear it straight all or most of the time.  And have you noticed when you see makeovers on TV, if the woman has curly hair they always straighten it?  It's like curly hair is messy and straightened hair is groomed. 
 Some of the women you listed I have to admit may look better with straight hair.  But some I really miss seeing with their curls.  I loved Debra Messing's hair back in the day.  It may not have been totally natural.  They probably straightened it then curled it.  

I wore my hair straight for years, then stopped fighting it.  Wearing my hair long and natural has gotten me more compliments than anything.

I guess I'm biased but when I see a beautiful girl with curly hair I want to compliment her.  Lately I've seen a couple of lovely black girls wearing their hair short and natural.  Love to see it.

Maybe when Megan goes out to do charitable work in other countries, we'll see her natural hair.


----------



## TC1

All this talk of hair and poor Harry's is falling out at quite a rate. Kind of surprised he hasn't had some help with that..


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> All this talk of hair and poor Harry's is falling out at quite a rate. Kind of surprised he hasn't had some help with that..


I hadn't noticed.  Not as bad as his brother, but yes, he's losing on top and in back
I like that they don't "get help" with it.


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> I hadn't noticed.  Not as bad as his brother, but yes, he's losing on top and in back
> I like that they don't "get help" with it.


I'm not judging..we all "like" what we like...I just thought he may have had help at some point. A la Gordon Ramsay.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> I'm not judging..we all "like" what we like...I just thought he may have had help at some point. A la Gordon Ramsay.


yes, you're entitled to your opinion but I don't think baldness in a man is so bad.  In William's case, it he definitely did look better when he was younger but I'm glad they're not so vain as to get plugs or whatever


----------



## dangerouscurves

Cocoabean said:


> I don't know how they wear those heels at any time! It amazes me. What do you all think they carry in their tiny bags? I just cannot downsize that much, but I don't have "people" to carry things for me.
> 
> Do they carry ID? Or dental floss? Tissue? Nothing? A lipstick? A mirror? A comb?
> 
> My absolute minimum is a card case (ID, credit card, debit card, car insurance, health insurance, and two other pieces of personal info), sunglasses, lip stuff, anti-bacterial gel, lotion, and floss. I usually carry a bunch more..why I don't know. I really need to get rid of the rest and downsize.



In Europe, when we carry a tiny bag, inside is usually just cards, lipgloss and powder. Anti-bacterial gel, floss and lotion we leave in a bigger bag.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

TC1 said:


> All this talk of hair and poor Harry's is falling out at quite a rate. Kind of surprised he hasn't had some help with that..



I like that they appear to be natural, but then again us women are expected to shave, wax, pluck, highlight, stay trim, and look young forever so on the other hand, maybe these guys ought to put some effort into their appearance too.


----------



## minababe

bisousx said:


> I like that they appear to be natural, but then again us women are expected to shave, wax, pluck, highlight, stay trim, and look young forever so on the other hand, maybe these guys ought to put some effort into their appearance too.


but only us celebs .. the normal us women not. europeam womem are way more polished


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend the Commonwealth Youth Forum


----------



## queennadine

Well, she's trying...I think. She should have put the jacket ON, and paired the outfit with a handheld bag IMO.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend CHOGM Women's Empowerment Reception


----------



## MarvelGirl

Classic, chic and so lovely! Looking good, Meghan!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

This is probably the best I've seen her put together. Heels are a bit too evening.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

This might be a bizarre thought, but I was wondering if women (or men) who marry into the royal family have to pass some sort of health exam/physical? Like in the US the president has to pass a physical exam to show fitness. I have no idea what got me on to this train of thought, but what if someone with a pre-existing illness got engaged a royal (not just a British royal necessarily), wouldn't that be something that would need to be disclosed somehow through exams? (and disclosed to the royal person, not us obviously).


----------



## PatsyCline

I seem to recall hearing Diana had a check to ensure she could have children before the marriage. Not sure if that was something specific or just a general medical exam. 

I would hope any prospective couples would have some sort of test before becoming intimate, just to be on the safe side.


----------



## chowlover2

PatsyCline said:


> I seem to recall hearing Diana had a check to ensure she could have children before the marriage. Not sure if that was something specific or just a general medical exam.
> 
> I would hope any prospective couples would have some sort of test before becoming intimate, just to be on the safe side.


Diana was checked to see if she was still a virgin. In one of the Andrew Morton books she said she kept herself " tidy " as she thought something big was headed her way. Things have certainly changed, since both Kate and William lived together before marriage, as well as Harry and Meghan.


----------



## mdcx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This might be a bizarre thought, but I was wondering if women (or men) who marry into the royal family have to pass some sort of health exam/physical? Like in the US the president has to pass a physical exam to show fitness. I have no idea what got me on to this train of thought, but what if someone with a pre-existing illness got engaged a royal (not just a British royal necessarily), wouldn't that be something that would need to be disclosed somehow through exams? (and disclosed to the royal person, not us obviously).


For the "commoner" marrying in, I believe their virginity and fertility was a major consideration and would have been established before the engagement would be allowed to proceed. Things like covering off that there was no possibility that they had existing children they were hiding, or that they had been born with no womb etc.
All of this would only have applied to the woman marrying the direct heir so I imagine Diana went through all of this.
Basically Diana was required to provide an heir and a spare for Charles, so she had to meet the criteria for that.

Nowadays obviously things are done differently but I would guess Kate's fertility was tested.


----------



## afsweet

love the blazer but not with the dress. also love the black dress, but not a fan of the belt with it. it reminds me of something you buy from mango or h&m.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Attend Invictus Games Reception - April 21, 2018


----------



## mdcx

That sixth photo of her - she is so radiant!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Attend Queen Elizabeth II's 92nd Birthday Celebration


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

Gosh i love her !! Her style is flawless! all her Looks are completely different, i'm sure she is the new style queen of all royals


----------



## queennadine

SO much better with the last two looks! And I loooooove that dress she wore to the Queen's bday event.


----------



## myown

chowlover2 said:


> Diana was checked to see if she was still a virgin. In one of the Andrew Morton books she said she kept herself " tidy " as she thought something big was headed her way. Things have certainly changed, since both Kate and William lived together before marriage, as well as Harry and Meghan.


wasn´t that also the reason why Charles couldn't marry Camilla? Because she wasn't a vigrin?


----------



## gazoo

Does it really matter if the 6th or 7th in line to the throne doesn't have children? Genuinely curious.


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> Gosh i love her !! Her style is flawless! all her Looks are completely different, i'm sure she is the new style queen of all royals


All? or just all british?
If you're saying All Royals, I'm going to  have to disagree with you


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend Service of Commemoration for an Anzac Day Dawn Service


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with Prince William at Westminster Abbey for annual Anzac Day service


----------



## afsweet

they look very happy together


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Agreed - the way they look at each other is very sweet


----------



## Sharont2305

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Agreed - the way they look at each other is very sweet


Its as if he's saying to her "you're doing ôk" So sweet


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

gazoo said:


> Does it really matter if the 6th or 7th in line to the throne doesn't have children? Genuinely curious.



I would think not? Even if Will and his entire family were to die in a tragic plane crash that takes out four heirs, the queen has many children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. I guess maybe it would be uncomfortable if Harry were king with no direct descendant.


----------



## mdcx

gazoo said:


> Does it really matter if the 6th or 7th in line to the throne doesn't have children? Genuinely curious.


I wouldn't think so. Charles, William and his three children would need to be wiped out before Harry was even up to bat. I believe they tend to travel separately etc to avoid the possibility of that happening.
I think Harry and Meghan are freer to just have a "love marriage" and do what they wish within the confines.


----------



## finer_woman

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend Service of Commemoration for an Anzac Day Dawn Service
> 
> 
> View attachment 4047793
> View attachment 4047794
> View attachment 4047795
> View attachment 4047796
> View attachment 4047797
> View attachment 4047798
> View attachment 4047799
> View attachment 4047800
> View attachment 4047801
> View attachment 4047802


I love the picture of them looking at each other [emoji7]


----------



## bag-princess

It looks like you won't have to sneak your way into the royal wedding after all-Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's nuptials will be televised, a spokesperson for the pair confirmed.

The couple wants "the day to be shaped so as to allow members of the public to feel part of the celebrations too," according to the rep. Broadcasting the highly-anticipated event for royal fans across the pond should do the trick.

The ceremony, set at St. George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle, begins at 12 noon local time, which means it’ll start 7 a.m. ET/4 a.m. PT. But, as with all newsy events, there’ll be coverage of preparations and guests arriving hours before the service begins.

Here's where you can tune in:

*CBS* will start live coverage at 4 a.m. ET, hosted by Gayle King and Kevin Frazier. The network’s correspondent Tina Brown will also join in for commentary. Later that day, CBS will also air a two-hour special, _Royal Romance: The Marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle_, at 8 p.m. ET/PT.

*CBSN*, CBS’s livestreaming site, will broadcast the network’s live coverage online starting at 4 a.m. ET. WATCH HERE

*The Today Show* (NBC) will also start early-their live coverage begins at 4:30 a.m. ET, with Savannah Guthrie and Hoda Kotb hosting “from a special vantage point” overseeing Windsor Castle. The pair will also anchor a live show the day prior (Friday, May 18) from a location overlooking the castle, followed by Al Roker and Sheinelle Jones anchoring at their respective hours.

*PBS* will have live coverage of the ceremony on May 19, but timing has not been announced yet. The network will also air a special nightly series, _Royal Wedding Watch_, from May 14-18, leading up to the big day.

*BBC America* will also offer live coverage and commentary during the event. You can watch the livestream online by signing in with your subscription to a cable or satellite provider. WATCH HERE



https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/harry-meghan-apos-wedding-televised-222000809.html


----------



## minababe

I can't wait anymore .... I'm soooo excited for These two beautiful People 
never have seen so much love showing with just their faces between a royal couple.I wonder if Harry will have tears in his eyes when she is entering the church. like Carl philip ( swedisch prince) when sofia went down the aisle. it was too sweet to see how much he loves her. I truly feel the same about Harrys feelings for meghan


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> I can't wait anymore .... I'm soooo excited for These two beautiful People
> never have seen so much love showing with just their faces between a royal couple.I wonder if Harry will have tears in his eyes when she is entering the church.


I certainly will, he's adorable. I think he's my favourite of the 2 "boys"


----------



## sdkitty

Interesting article from the daily beast.  Imagine having to curtsey to Eugenie and Beatrice?
*TITLED*
*Inside Meghan Markle’s New, Very Confusing Royal Life*
*Meghan Markle is about to become a princess who takes her husband’s first name. Then she suddenly may lose that title. And she may have to spend quite a lot of time curtseying.*



TOM SYKES
*05.04.18 9:47 PM ET*

When Meghan Markle walks into St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle on May 19, on the arm of her father Thomas Markle, who, it has been confirmed, will walk her down the aisle, she will do so as Miss Meghan Markle.

But after the service, which will take around an hour, has concluded, and Meghan walks out of the chapel into the cloister of the chapel where she and Harry will greet 1200 hand-picked members of the public, she will be a new person.

Her nuptials completed, her official name will have transformed, and she will be Her Royal Highness, Princess Henry of Wales (Kate can technically be known as Princess William).

Meghan will, in exactly the same way that Kate Middleton did, have become a “princess of the United Kingdom”—as Kate tends to describe her “occupation” on the birth certificates of her children—by virtue of her marriage to a prince.

But, if the queen follows the protocol laid down after Kate married William, and there seems no reason for her to deviate from that path, within an hour or so of the wedding Meghan will be a given new title and her title of “Princess Harry” will effectively become redundant.

Harry and Meghan will almost certainly be made a duke and duchess, just like Kate and William were, with Her Majesty likely reviving an old title that has fallen into abeyance (the current best gossip is that the Dukedom of Sussex may have Harry’s name on it).





*Will Meghan Change the Royals, or Will They Change Her?*



*Everything We Don’t Know About Harry and Meghan’s Wedding*



*Kate & William Had Their Third Child. Why Were We Watching?*
Many wonder why the queen cannot just _not_ give them another title—and leave Meghan with the moniker of every good fairy tale ending, princess?


“The problem for Meghan of being ‘just’ a princess by virtue of her marriage to Prince Harry is that she would only hold the rank of princess when she was physically with her spouse.”
To answer that question requires a deep dive into the archaic and often ludicrously solipsistic world of British titles and precedence (which, a word of warning, might cause the more **********-minded Daily Beast reader to cast their phones/laptops/tablets to the floor in disgust).

That said, here goes: The problem for Meghan of being “just” a princess by virtue of her marriage to Prince Harry is that she would only hold the rank of princess when she was physically with her spouse.

This would mean that, for the rest of her life, Meghan, when not accompanied by Harry, would be required, technically, to curtsey and defer to anyone who outranked her, not just to the queen and but also to Princesses Eugene and Beatrice and, indeed, any other of the minor royals she might encounter on a daily basis.

There is unfortunately, no way for Meghan to hold the title of princess as her primary title without being left at the mercy of a myriad of assorted royal hangers-on who could at any moment choose to make an issue of it.

GET THE BEAST IN YOUR INBOX!


*

By clicking “Subscribe,” you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy


An interesting example to look at, for comparison, is Princess Michael of Kent.

Although the queen was said to have joked that Marie Christine Anna Agnes Hedwig Ida von Reibnitz sounded “a bit too grand” to marry into the royal family, when she was proposed as a bride for the queen’s cousin Prince Michael, she actually has no British or active, recognized, foreign title.

Upon her marriage to Prince Michael, who rejoices in the position of 46th in the line of succession to the British throne, she became Her Royal Highness Princess Michael of Kent, but, as she is not a “blood princess” she has literally no official status unless she is accompanied by her husband.


“Deep down inside me. I always hear my mother’s words: 900 years of breeding must be worth something.”
MC—as she is known—is thin-skinned, and extremely defensive about her lineage.

She is the daughter of a German baron and a Hungarian countess (but both those countries are republics which have abolished these titles, so although they are often used by the one-time peers, but mean nothing, have no basis in law, and do not, for example, appear on driving licenses or passports) and can trace her lineage back to various notable figures of Euro-nobility, including Catherine the Great, William the Conqueror, and Marie Antoinette.

“Deep down inside me,” she has said, “I always hear my mother’s words: 900 years of breeding must be worth something.”

This is why she is never ever seen in the presence of other members of the royal family without her husband—and the power of his title—in tow.

Unlike the Kents, Harry (and therefore his future spouse and children) does receive taxpayer funding from the Sovereign Grant (which used to be known as the Civil List) sparing himself and Meghan from the fate of becoming the next “Rent-a-Kents,” as the Kents have been dubbed.

This is in itself a mark of their seniority and importance, but the fact remains that Meghan is not of noble birth, and would, unless made a noble, as a consequence, be outranked by a whole host of royals when not in the presence of her husband.

For instance, Meghan will have to curtsey to Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice when she encounters them without her husband by her side. If Harry’s in the room, then they should curtsey to her.

Meghan, like Kate, will have to bend the knee to Prince Edward, but not to his wife Sophie Wessex, unless Sophie is with Edward in which case she assumes his rank, and so on.

But if she wasn’t made a duchess, she’d always have to curtsey even to the unaccompanied Sophie’s of this world.

Of course, one valid question is why a confident American woman should give a damn about all this hideous British class-based nonsense?

The problem is that the queen is very keen on it, and approves of correctly directed curtseying, and expects it in all situations.

The current rules on who-curtseys-to-who were actually formalized in a 2005 document entitled “Precedence Of The Royal Family To Be Observed At Court” which aimed to clarify Camilla’s position in the hierarchy following her marriage to Charles.

It was updated in 2012 to incorporate Kate, and, no doubt those regulations will be getting another update when Meghan becomes the latest princess-not-a-princess to attempt to navigate the minefields of British royal custom.




*


----------



## bag-princess

omg - reading that made me eyes crossed!   i can only imagine what it must be like to have to live with these kinds of "rules" everyday!

so she will only be known as a "princess" if she is in the presence of harry!


----------



## Tivo

This girl has no idea what she’s in for. Hope it’s worth it.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> This girl has no idea what she’s in for. Hope it’s worth it.


guess she'll have to take the bad with the good....


----------



## bag-princess

Tivo said:


> This girl has no idea what she’s in for. Hope it’s worth it.



She would have to be from another solar system to not know!! But even then being on the inside is going to be totally different.


----------



## gazoo

If he's worth it, then all will be well. I'm rooting for these two, but do worry for Meghan. Between the snobby aristocracy and her batsh!t family, she may feel very alone if Harry's affection cools. Hopefully they remain deeply in love and devoted to each other. 

Kate has a strong family to lean on. It seems Meghan is only close to her mom, who will be very far away.


----------



## mdcx

People will still call her 'Princess Meghan', the same way they called Diana 'Princess Diana', even though it was "incorrect".
I think Harry will do his best to guide her through all the rigmarole, but yes, it's a job at the end of the day being part of this family.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

So I just was reading some articles and this is going to be her 3rd wedding? Is this legit? I guess it was first reported in a tabloid but some actual news agencies have found it could be real?

"Meghan Markle’s first husband is not Trevor Engelson but rather a Northwestern University alumni and now a criminal lawyer named Joseph Goldman-Guiliano. The relationship lasted for 2 years but ended up in an annulment."


----------



## bisousx

mdcx said:


> People will still call her 'Princess Meghan', the same way they called Diana 'Princess Diana', even though it was "incorrect".
> I think Harry will do his best to guide her through all the rigmarole, but yes, it's a job at the end of the day being part of this family.



Do people call Kate a princess? I feel like she's still referred to as Kate Middleton

example: 
First days at home: Prince William, Kate Middleton share photos of Prince Louis
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-royal-baby-prince-louis-photos-20180505-story.html


----------



## mdcx

bisousx said:


> Do people call Kate a princess? I feel like she's still referred to as Kate Middleton
> 
> example:
> First days at home: Prince William, Kate Middleton share photos of Prince Louis
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-royal-baby-prince-louis-photos-20180505-story.html


In conversation people do. I live in Australia though.


----------



## mdcx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> So I just was reading some articles and this is going to be her 3rd wedding? Is this legit? I guess it was first reported in a tabloid but some actual news agencies have found it could be real?
> 
> "Meghan Markle’s first husband is not Trevor Engelson but rather a Northwestern University alumni and now a criminal lawyer named Joseph Goldman-Guiliano. The relationship lasted for 2 years but ended up in an annulment."


Wow, in Googling this it brought up a website dedicated to trying to "out" Meghan as a con artist.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> People will still call her 'Princess Meghan', the same way they called Diana 'Princess Diana', even though it was "incorrect".
> I think Harry will do his best to guide her through all the rigmarole, but yes, it's a job at the end of the day being part of this family.


If they are made Duke and Duchess which looks highly likely people will call her Duchess Meghan, which is also incorrect. She will be Meghan, Duchess of ?, just like Catherine. She's Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and not Duchess Kate / Catherine........or Kate Middleton, she stopped being that on her Wedding Day!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Wow, in Googling this it brought up a website dedicated to trying to "out" Meghan as a con artist.


I was actually just looking at pictures of the new little Prince Louis and Princess Charlotte on Youtube and on the sidebar was a video about Meghan's possible dress so I watched that, and then all of a sudden I started reading loads about her (possible) other marriage in the comments sections. You know how it is, one video leads to another and you totally go away from what you were originally looking at, lol


----------



## gazoo

I feel so bad for her. She's what 36? She's had a life. Harry has been with a ton of girls, but there are no endless articles of all his shenanigans and public gaffes, and there are some shameful doozies. Once or twice divorced, what does it matter now? Not like anyone is expecting her to be a virgin. I hope she has really thick skin.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## HandbagAngel

She has been divorced, but I have to say it’s better than cheating when was still in marriage then turns to be a future king’s wife.


----------



## sdkitty

HandbagAngel said:


> She has been divorced, but I have to say it’s better than cheating when was still in marriage then turns to be a future king’s wife.


Duchess of Windsor?


----------



## threadbender

ccbaggirl89 said:


> So I just was reading some articles and this is going to be her 3rd wedding? Is this legit? I guess it was first reported in a tabloid but some actual news agencies have found it could be real?
> 
> "Meghan Markle’s first husband is not Trevor Engelson but rather a Northwestern University alumni and now a criminal lawyer named Joseph Goldman-Guiliano. The relationship lasted for 2 years but ended up in an annulment."


It may be a 3rd wedding but only a 2nd marriage. I have not read any of the articles but an annulment would mean there was no marriage, legally.


----------



## minababe

gazoo said:


> If he's worth it, then all will be well. I'm rooting for these two, but do worry for Meghan. Between the snobby aristocracy and her batsh!t family, she may feel very alone if Harry's affection cools. Hopefully they remain deeply in love and devoted to each other.
> 
> Kate has a strong family to lean on. It seems Meghan is only close to her mom, who will be very far away.



you are so right ! I  Kate is still very close to her Family especially mother and sister.
I heard that meghan's mom is moving to London. but don't know if this is only a rumor or true. I think this would be the best for meghan she has no 'no normal' People in her new life anymore and she will not able to visit her mom in the us very often.


----------



## gelbergirl

Wondering if we will see any photos of Meghan in the days prior to the wedding.
Maybe out shopping with her mom ,  something like that . ..


----------



## Tivo

I’ll be surprised if this marriage lasts 2 years.


----------



## PatsyCline

Tivo said:


> I’ll be surprised if this marriage lasts 2 years.



Why so negative? Where’s your romantic streak?


----------



## GoStanford

Seems to me like the Windsor/Wales men do stick to relationships and marriages when their heart is in it and they've made the right match.  Even Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York live in the same building and spend time together.  She's often commented that the time apart they spent early in their marriage when he was off on his military assignments had a negative impact.  I think Harry has had enough time to know what he's looking for, and based on that, I think he and Meghan have a good chance at happiness.


----------



## Sharont2305

gazoo said:


> I feel so bad for her. She's what 36? She's had a life. Harry has been with a ton of girls, but there are no endless articles of all his shenanigans and public gaffes, and there are some shameful doozies. Once or twice divorced, what does it matter now? Not like anyone is expecting her to be a virgin. I hope she has really thick skin.


Exactly... And to be fair, if things don't work out its not going to be a constitutional crisis is it? He's in line far enough away from the throne for it to affect that.
I really hope it works, I adore Harry and she seems a good match, you can tell they are both head over heels in love. My only reservation is that she has no family here in the UK to support her. She is going to find it tough, I've no doubt about that and I hope that William and Catherine especially will guide her while she learns the ropes.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Tivo said:


> I’ll be surprised if this marriage lasts 2 years.



IA. 

No way have they been together long enough to know if it’s a love that can last, IMO they look more like a pair of infatuated teenagers. And once the novelty wears off, especially for her....


----------



## bellebellebelle19

They're both in their 30s and have had their fair share of previous relationships…I feel like they're old/experienced enough to know what they want in a marriage. Just because they look at each other like infatuated teenagers doesn't mean their relationship is that shallow!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gelbergirl said:


> Wondering if we will see any photos of Meghan in the days prior to the wedding.
> Maybe out shopping with her mom ,  something like that . ..


Two or three days ago, going to the gym.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Tivo said:


> I’ll be surprised if this marriage lasts 2 years.


Awww... where's your sense of romance?! They will for sure have a baby, so give them at least 4 years


----------



## Gal4Dior

bellebellebelle19 said:


> They're both in their 30s and have had their fair share of previous relationships…I feel like they're old/experienced enough to know what they want in a marriage. Just because they look at each other like infatuated teenagers doesn't mean their relationship is that shallow!



I know a few people who have been married two or three times in their 50s and still getting into relationships that aren’t good for them. I don’t think that age changes things...or rather experiences. Experiences are only worthwhile once you learn from them.

Marrying a prince in the BRF is beyond any experience that an average US citizen would experience. Good luck to them both. I hope it will work out for the sake of their happiness.


----------



## sdkitty

article about where they will live from Daily Beast.  Doesn't sound so bad to me 
*Harry and Meghan to Move Into Flat Next to William and Kate, With Connecting Door
Talk about brothers-in-arms.

Prince Harry is to move in next door to his brother Prince William shortly after his marriage to Meghan Markle, according to reports.

Harry, 33, is to take over Apartment 1 in Kensington Palace, which boasts an interconnecting door to Apartment 1A, better known as the home of Prince William and Kate Middleton and their ever expanding family.

“Apartment” is in fact something of a misnomer, since both apartments are enormous townhouses spread over some 20 rooms.

According to a report in the Daily Mail, Harry and Meghan will move into their new apartment as soon as renovations on the property, which has until now been occupied by the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, are completed.

The Gloucesters scored the apartment after their marriage in 1972, and it became their family home where they raised their three children. 





Prince Harry Chooses Brother William as Groomsman



Harry and Meghan Can’t Stop Gazing Lovingly at Each Other



Kate Middleton's Third Baby Is A Boy
William also lived in the low-ceilinged “Not Cott” for several years before he was married (and indeed for a few months afterward) whilst Apartment 1A was renovated at vast expense.

Kensington Palace has long been known for accommodating a rotating cast of minor royals, and was formerly regarded very much as a consolation prize when it came to royal accommodation.

Indeed, one former king, Edward VII, referred to it as “the aunt heap.”

However William and Harry have revived the fortunes of Kensington Palace, to which they have a considerable emotional attachment not least because they grew up here, as their mother, Princess Diana, kept an apartment in the palace even after her divorce from Prince Charles.

According to the report in the Daily Mail, a line of fir trees has been planted to obscure the view of the garden of Apartment 1 from Kensington Palace Gardens, Britain’s most expensive street which adjoins the palace.

GET THE BEAST IN YOUR INBOX!

The young royals have made a concerted attempt to turn Kensington Palace into a power base, as Princess Eugenie also lives at Kensington Palace in Ivy Cottage, a three-bedroom property that was previously the family home of a palace employee.

The move to a bigger house is fueling speculation that Harry and Meghan, who has persuaded her intended to give up smoking and cut down on alcohol, hope to start a family soon after their wedding.

Harry and Meghan are also reportedly in line for another house in the country—it is said they will be handed York Cottage, in the grounds of the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk, by the queen.





*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I get the impression this is a panicky "I'm in my mid-thirties and it's time for me to get married and have kids! marriage."


----------



## bellebellebelle19

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I get the impression this is a panicky "I'm in my mid-thirties and it's time for me to get married and have kids! marriage."


Now this is a criticism I can see as more probable haha. I hope not though. They seem so happy it would be sad to have it ruined.


----------



## sdkitty

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I get the impression this is a panicky "I'm in my mid-thirties and it's time for me to get married and have kids! marriage."


I don't really think so.  On his part?  I think if he was getting married just to get married he would have picked someone closer to home.  I think he fell for the American TV "star".  I guess they have common interests in the activist arena.  

On her part?  He's a prince and one of the most famous and eligible bachelors in the world.  She gets to be a "princess" (or duchess).  Even with the baggage, I'm pretty sure that for a b-level actress in her late 30's this looks like a pretty good move.  Now she is one of the most famous women in the world.


----------



## bag-princess

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I get the impression this is a panicky "I'm in my mid-thirties and it's time for me to get married and have kids! marriage."



I totally disagree! 

Not by the way he looks at her! Now Charles with Diana DID have that look!  Every single time he was with her!  

I think these two are definitely in love but I am not sitting around betting on how long that will last!


----------



## myown

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I get the impression this is a panicky "I'm in my mid-thirties and it's time for me to get married and have kids! marriage."


why would he? Men have way more time than women. John Stamos just became father at  the age of 54


----------



## pixiejenna

Fox is running a Megan markel special right now. It’s fun to see her growing up but I didn’t appreciate the bit about her half sister, felt like a cheap shot Megan should help me buy a house and hasn’t invited me to her wedding. Also Stephanie Pratt was on it as a commutator labeled as a London socialite. How the heck did that happen? It’s interesting to hear about all the other members of family that I don’t really know much about.


----------



## mdcx

pixiejenna said:


> Fox is running a Megan markel special right now. It’s fun to see her growing up but I didn’t appreciate the bit about her half sister, felt like a cheap shot Megan should help me buy a house and hasn’t invited me to her wedding. Also Stephanie Pratt was on it as a commutator labeled as a London socialite. How the heck did that happen? It’s interesting to hear about all the other members of family that I don’t really know much about.


I know Stephanie Pratt has been on the reality show  'Made in Chelsea' for a while, it's about posh Londoners.


----------



## baewatch

does anyone see through her? we had a free loader actress who lives in hollywood stay with us for weeks at a time and she was the biggest actress (in real life) going.....meghan reminds me of her


----------



## mdcx

baewatch said:


> does anyone see through her? we had a free loader actress who lives in hollywood stay with us for weeks at a time and she was the biggest actress (in real life) going.....meghan reminds me of her


I don't really get this. She has been starring on Suits for seven seasons, and I would imagine is financially independent because of it.


----------



## bisousx

baewatch said:


> does anyone see through her? we had a free loader actress who lives in hollywood stay with us for weeks at a time and she was the biggest actress (in real life) going.....meghan reminds me of her



Harry’s a big boy. If he wants to marry a so called freeloader then that’s on him. But I don’t see that ... being a royal is going to clip Meghan’s wings big time. She can easily bag a rich guy if that’s what she wants.


----------



## White Orchid

pixiejenna said:


> Fox is running a Megan markel special right now. It’s fun to see her growing up but I didn’t appreciate the bit about her half sister, felt like a cheap shot Megan should help me buy a house and hasn’t invited me to her wedding. Also Stephanie Pratt was on it as a commutator labeled as a London socialite. How the heck did that happen? It’s interesting to hear about all the other members of family that I don’t really know much about.


I just saw this now on the telly and almost fell off the couch.  Stephanie Pratt a London socialite?!?!  Puh-lease!


----------



## Alexenjie

baewatch said:


> does anyone see through her? we had a free loader actress who lives in hollywood stay with us for weeks at a time and she was the biggest actress (in real life) going.....meghan reminds me of her


Because you met a freeloader you now assume ANY actress is one?

Meghan and Harry look like they are in love right now. Nobody knows if their marriage is going to turn out great, be average/ordinary or a total disaster (or some combination of these, depending on what year it is). They are human beings, I imagine they are trying to do the best with their lives, like most people.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I think the true freeloader is Meghan’s father. Read today he collaborated with a paparazzo to sell some photos for major cash. That is some scum of a father to do try to cash in on his daughter’s sudden fame. This is far more fame Meghan would have ever received while on suits. Everything will be a cover story - wedding, honeymoon, birth of a baby...

Certainly the BRF must be on guard as to what else is leaked to the press for easy money.


----------



## Tivo

Unfortunately Harry’s love is not enough. When is love ever enough to make a relationship work?
Meghan will be fighting constant passive aggressive attempts to “put her in her place” in that toxic circle of snobs and blue bloods. All comfortable in their titles and blood lines and jealous of her media hype. It’s not much different than a new person coming into a toxic work environment with cliques and “sides” already established...only it’s worse. It’s a lonely fight she can’t win.

She’ll never fit in because the raging heat of irrational envy and jealousy won’t let her.
And to top it off, she doesn’t seem to have any real friends, a la Bethenny Frankel. A big red flag.

But, this is what she wanted, so...


----------



## PatsyCline

Tivo said:


> Unfortunately Harry’s love is not enough. When is love ever enough to make a relationship work?
> Meghan will be fighting constant passive aggressive attempts to “put her in her place” in that toxic circle of snobs and blue bloods. All comfortable in their titles and blood lines and jealous of her media hype. It’s no different than a new person coming into a toxic work environment with cliques and “sides” already established...only worse. It’s a lonely fight she can’t win.
> 
> She’ll never fit in because the raging heat of irrational envy and jealousy won’t let her.
> And to top it off, she doesn’t seem to have any real friends, a la Bethenny Frankel. A big red flag.
> 
> But, this is what she wanted, so...


I so hope you're wrong.  Wouldn't want to see her beat down like Diana was. Diana didn't have her husband's support, which Meghan has, so I'm hoping everyone has learned from mistakes of the past, and she succeeds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

PatsyCline said:


> I so hope you're wrong.  Wouldn't want to see her beat down like Diana was. Diana didn't have her husband's support, which Meghan has, so I'm hoping everyone has learned from mistakes of the past, and she succeeds.


Harry’s support can go a long way, but it can’t shield her from the jealousy and the hate. It’s cute to talk about “haters” but living and breathing it every day is a different story. Add kids to the mix and she’s stuck. Those royals have centuries of playing these games under their belts. And Harry can’t be there all the time.

I admit I’m taking the extreme negative view, but this is the world we live in. As you mentioned, Diana already went through it. The game doesn’t change. Just the players.


----------



## Gal4Dior

As Han Solo says - I don’t have a good feeling about this...

We are all living the “American Princess” dream with her right now, but The Firm will be oppressive. 

I am wishing them the best, as I do like Harry and felt sorry for him losing his mother so early on in his life, but I don’t have high hopes for this union to last. I think she will be happy with Harry, but will that be enough against the day to day as part of the BRF?


----------



## gazoo

If that happens then the onus is on him to "retire" from his Royal position and live happily with her as a commoner. He's wealthy enough from inheritances to do so. They could continue their philanthropy without the rascist/elitists poking at them. But I cynically doubt either of them would accept that option. 

Diana was a total noob, Meghan is far savier and experienced. Hopefully this isn't a Diana 2.0 situation.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gazoo said:


> If that happens then the onus is on him to "retire" from his Royal position and live happily with her as a commoner. He's wealthy enough from inheritances to do so. They could continue their philanthropy without the rascist/elitists poking at them. But I cynically doubt either of them would accept that option.
> 
> Diana was a total noob, Meghan is far savier and experienced. Hopefully this isn't a Diana 2.0 situation.



Agreed. They probably would be an ideal match if he wasn’t a Prince in the BRF. I am also cynical. I don’t think Meghan or Harry would give up these titles.

Meghan is far too savvy to stick around IMHO. Unlike Diana, she has options. She’s almost 37! Poor Diana was what, 19, when she married into the BRF as a virgin?


----------



## myown

I don't know how Will and Kate are in real life, but they look like they like Harry and Meghan, so I would guess Meghan fits in. Will and Kate sometimes look like they have a stick in their a s but i would guess they are fun people. So I don't see how Meghan won't fit in? If they manage to be friends. Kate gives me the vibes, that she is a total different person in private than what she shows us.


----------



## PatsyCline

Who watched "Harry and Meghan: A Royal Romance"? Comments?


----------



## Alexenjie

Is expecting them to split in the future now the cure for not being disappointed if their life together is less than perfect? I don't really feel a need to cast shadows on a wedding where nobody here personally knows the people involved and therefore why even give it serious thought? Harry isn't still 2nd in line for the thrown, the pressure should be off as to whether they succeed or fail. Prince Charles and Princess Diana had a terrible marriage but life still continued, the world did not come to an end when they ended their marriage. Harry and Meghan are mature adults, I give them credit for having been in previous relationships and figured out what they really want in a spouse.

As to the people ready to criticize Meghan because she isn't British or already way high up in the British class system, that was no help to Diana when she married into the Royal family. People have too much time on their hands if all they want to do is tear them down for nothing but amusement or cruelty. What a weird and awful world if people don't appreciate them for what good they do for Britain, in whatever causes they are involved in and for having family and friends, a normal life as much as possible.


----------



## Tivo

Alexenjie said:


> Is expecting them to split in the future now the cure for not being disappointed if their life together is less than perfect? I don't really feel a need to cast shadows on a wedding where nobody here personally knows the people involved and therefore why even give it serious thought? Harry isn't still 2nd in line for the thrown, the pressure should be off as to whether they succeed or fail. Prince Charles and Princess Diana had a terrible marriage but life still continued, the world did not come to an end when they ended their marriage. Harry and Meghan are mature adults, I give them credit for having been in previous relationships and figured out what they really want in a spouse.
> 
> As to the people ready to criticize Meghan because she isn't British or already way high up in the British class system, that was no help to Diana when she married into the Royal family. People have too much time on their hands if all they want to do is tear them down for nothing but amusement or cruelty. What a weird and awful world if people don't appreciate them for what good they do for Britain, in whatever causes they are involved in and for having family and friends, a normal life as much as possible.


People are free to opine about this very public relationship and wedding as they see fit. You don’t have to like it, nor is your approval necessary. We will carry on.


----------



## pearlyqueen

Tivo said:


> People are free to opine about this very public relationship and wedding as they see fit. You don’t have to like it, nor is your approval necessary. We will carry on.



Especially those of us who have to pay for the upkeep of these rich privileged pampered people.


----------



## PatsyCline

pearlyqueen said:


> Especially those of us who have to pay for the upkeep of these rich privileged pampered people.



I’m sure your £1.50 is well spent. You probably would have blown it on an expensive coffee sometime during the year.


----------



## bag-princess

PatsyCline said:


> I’m sure your £1.50 is well spent. You probably would have blown it on an expensive coffee sometime during the year.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Apparently her fatherd will not be attending the wedding

http://www.tmz.com/2018/05/14/megha...-royal-wedding-prince-harry-photos-paparazzi/

Meghan Markle's father will not be walking her down the aisle Saturday ... he isn't going to the wedding at all because of the fallout over selling photos of himself ... TMZ has learned.

*Thomas Markle* tells TMZ, he meant no harm to Meghan or the Royal Family when he made a deal to allow a photo agency to take pics of him getting ready for the wedding. He says he had a reason and it was not principally about money.

Markle tells us over the last year he's been ambushed by paparazzi who have photographed him in the most unflattering circumstances ... buying beer, looking disheveled and reclusive. He's especially upset that they made him look like a lush. Thomas says he doesn't even drink beer ... he was buying it for the guards at the place where he lives.

He says since his daughter started dating Prince Harry he's been offered anywhere between $50,000 and $100k for interviews and he's turned all of them down.

Thomas says the paparazzi agency approached him, offered him money -- though nowhere near the reported $100k -- and he figured there was no harm in it and it would help recast his image. 

He admits the pics look "stupid and hammy." He says he was just going along with the paparazzi agency, which he now deeply regrets.

*And, Thomas says, he suffered a heart attack 6 days ago but checked himself out of the hospital so he could attend the wedding. He's now decided not to go because he doesn't want to embarrass the Royal Family or his daughter.*


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> I’m sure your £1.50 is well spent. You probably would have blown it on an expensive coffee sometime during the year.



Right, well multiply my £1.50 by 30 million and you can see they cost us a lot of money. That £45 million could go to much needed public services. Fabulously wealthy individuals who could and should pay for themselves.


----------



## ap.

Is being able to marry the person he loves no matter what the benefit of being the second child?  Considering the drama (and I've not been following closely but it seems there were several controversies with (half) siblings and parents) with her family, would Megan Markle have passed the vetting if Harry was in the immediate line to the throne? 
_
There are lots of assumptions in my post -- feel free to correct any of them if I have things wrong.  _


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^^wow about her father not attending and just having a heart attack. The situation with some of her family members seems really toxic and unfortunate. Hopefully he recovers well and Meghan’s at peace if he attends or doesn’t.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

DC-Cutie said:


> Apparently her fatherd will not be attending the wedding
> 
> 
> 
> *And, Thomas says, he suffered a heart attack 6 days ago but checked himself out of the hospital so he could attend the wedding. He's now decided not to go because he doesn't want to embarrass the Royal Family or his daughter.*


----------



## PatsyCline

pearlyqueen said:


> Right, well multiply my £1.50 by 30 million and you can see they cost us a lot of money. That £45 million could go to much needed public services. Fabulously wealthy individuals who could and should pay for themselves.



So could a thousand other projects the government pays for that you might object to. 

They work for that money, maybe not to the extent you would like them to, but who says you earn the money you make at your job?

You’re free to run for parliament and try and change the current system. That’s how a democracy works. 

I personally wouldn’t do that job, with all the restrictions put upon their lives, for any amount of money.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Summer wear for royal fans. Or for those who are not, Dear God Republic Now?!


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> So could a thousand other projects the government pays for that you might object to.
> 
> They work for that money, maybe not to the extent you would like them to, but who says you earn the money you make at your job?
> 
> You’re free to run for parliament and try and change the current system. That’s how a democracy works.
> 
> I personally wouldn’t do that job, with all the restrictions put upon their lives, for any amount of money.



Wouldn’t you? Funny how none of them walks away from it despite whinging about the restrictions. IMO the royal system is the antithesis of democracy and has no place in the 21st century. Yes there are plenty of British people who fawn over them but there are just as many opposed to the system. I can’t see them lasting as they are now for very much longer.


----------



## bag-princess

these people!! 


*Meghan Markle's half-sister claims responsibility for dad's photoshoot set up*

*Meghan Markle's half-sister has claimed responsibility for a setting up a controversial paparazzi photoshoot for her father, Thomas Markle, ahead of the Royal wedding.


Samantha Grant, who is no longer in contact with Ms Markle, said she had suggested their father pose for "positive" photographs "for the benefit of the Royal Family".


Instead, the images caused deep embarrassment, appearing to show Mr Markle colluding with photographers despite Kensington Palace's repeated insistence that he was a private individual who had no interest in working with the media.


Ms Grant, writing on Twitter, said: “The bad press over my father doing staged photos is my fault.


"The media was unfairly making him look bad so I suggested he do positive photos for his benefit and the benefit of the royal family. 

“We had no idea he would be taken advantage of. It was not for money.” 


It is not clear what Ms Grant meant in her claim that he had been "taken advantage of", with CCTV images of Mr Markle working with a photographer being published by the Mail on Sunday. 


Her brother, also called Thomas, told the Daily Mirror Mr Markle "won’t saying anything publicly but he’ll apologise sincerely to Meg and the Royal Family".  


https://www.yahoo.com/news/meghan-markle-apos-half-sister-112341791.html
*


----------



## PatsyCline

pearlyqueen said:


> Wouldn’t you? Funny how none of them walks away from it despite whinging about the restrictions. IMO the royal system is the antithesis of democracy and has no place in the 21st century. Yes there are plenty of British people who fawn over them but there are just as many opposed to the system. I can’t see them lasting as they are now for very much longer.



To be under public scrutiny for everything you do for the rest of your life? No thanks, I like my privacy. The only person I have to answer to is my husband. If I please him, no one else matters. 

I don’t have to worry about someone taking my photo if I do something embarrassing. I don’t have to worry about people commenting on what I’m wearing or what I do every moment of the day.


----------



## daisychainz

DC-Cutie said:


> Apparently her fatherd will not be attending the wedding
> 
> http://www.tmz.com/2018/05/14/megha...-royal-wedding-prince-harry-photos-paparazzi/
> 
> Meghan Markle's father will not be walking her down the aisle Saturday ... he isn't going to the wedding at all because of the fallout over selling photos of himself ... TMZ has learned.
> 
> *Thomas Markle* tells TMZ, he meant no harm to Meghan or the Royal Family when he made a deal to allow a photo agency to take pics of him getting ready for the wedding. He says he had a reason and it was not principally about money.
> 
> Markle tells us over the last year he's been ambushed by paparazzi who have photographed him in the most unflattering circumstances ... buying beer, looking disheveled and reclusive. He's especially upset that they made him look like a lush. Thomas says he doesn't even drink beer ... he was buying it for the guards at the place where he lives.
> 
> He says since his daughter started dating Prince Harry he's been offered anywhere between $50,000 and $100k for interviews and he's turned all of them down.
> 
> Thomas says the paparazzi agency approached him, offered him money -- though nowhere near the reported $100k -- and he figured there was no harm in it and it would help recast his image.
> 
> He admits the pics look "stupid and hammy." He says he was just going along with the paparazzi agency, which he now deeply regrets.
> 
> *And, Thomas says, he suffered a heart attack 6 days ago but checked himself out of the hospital so he could attend the wedding. He's now decided not to go because he doesn't want to embarrass the Royal Family or his daughter.*


Her family seems like a train wreck for the BRF. To start off your marriage this way is not a good sign, and from the interview they conducted he (Harry) had never even met her father, and I suppose now he never will. I don't believe the heart attack story, they seem to be a family of liars and opportunists.


----------



## DC-Cutie

a this point Mom is the only one looking good


----------



## PatsyCline

daisychainz said:


> Her family seems like a train wreck for the BRF. To start off your marriage this way is not a good sign, and from the interview they conducted he (Harry) had never even met her father, and I suppose now he never will. I don't believe the heart attack story, they seem to be a family of liars and opportunists.



Unfortunately her half-siblings seem to be crass opportunists who will do just about anything for money and 15 minutes of fame. No wonder she didn’t invite them to the wedding.


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> To be under public scrutiny for everything you do for the rest of your life? No thanks, I like my privacy. The only person I have to answer to is my husband. If I please him, no one else matters.
> 
> I don’t have to worry about someone taking my photo if I do something embarrassing. I don’t have to worry about people commenting on what I’m wearing or what I do every moment of the day.



That’s up to you how you want to live your life. They have choices too but never opt to walk away. They aren’t the only category who are under public scrutiny either, however most of the others fund themselves.


----------



## BagLovingMom

DC-Cutie said:


> a this point Mom is the only one looking good


Agreed, I wonder if she has family, it doesn’t seem like we’ve heard a peep from anyone on her side.


----------



## westjenn

So, Dad has not done one interview about his daughter and soon to be SIL. But somehow his other daughter (Meghan's half sister) convinces him to pose for staged photos to show him in a "better light" i.e.- working out, reading about his soon-to-be Princess daughter in an internet cafe in Mexico....He seemed like a respectable man til now. Why did he think his daughter would condone him posing for these for money and that no one would find out these photos were a hoax?


----------



## queennadine

I'm no fan of MM, but this family drama the week before/of her wedding?! Sheesh, I feel bad for her. How embarrassing.


----------



## Allisonfaye

pearlyqueen said:


> I can’t see them lasting as they are now for very much longer.



My husband said the same thing when we were on our way to London back in 2001. He changed his mind after being there.


----------



## queennadine

Wondering now who will walk her down the aisle. Will they have a member of the BRF do it? Or could she go "ultra modern" and have her mom do it? Wonder if they'd even allow that!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

queennadine said:


> Wondering now who will walk her down the aisle. Will they have a member of the BRF do it? Or could she go "ultra modern" and have her mom do it? Wonder if they'd even allow that!


Maybe she will go it alone? I would guess that's her best option, just go down the aisle herself and maybe have her mom up at the front of the altar for her. I cannot imagine a BRF member could do it. Although modern, I think having the mother walk her down would just be too much.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

apey_grapey said:


> Is being able to marry the person he loves no matter what the benefit of being the second child?  Considering the drama (and I've not been following closely but it seems there were several controversies with (half) siblings and parents) with her family, would Megan Markle have passed the vetting if Harry was in the immediate line to the throne?
> _
> There are lots of assumptions in my post -- feel free to correct any of them if I have things wrong.  _


I have no inside info on this of course, but I'm assuming she wouldn't have passed the vetting. But who knows, doesn't Kate have one not so presentable uncle as well? I do feel sorry for Meghan having her dysfunctional family members publicly displayed like this. They're not her fault.


----------



## Brendutch

I’m loving her shoes!


----------



## DC-Cutie

Her father's side of the family is just a mess:

Meghan Markle's *extended family wasn't invited to the Royal wedding, but that didn't stop them from jetting off to London.*

Meghan's nephew *Tyler* and his brother, *Thomas Dooley*, arrived at London Heathrow Airport along with their mother *Tracy Dooley*, who was the wife of Meghan's half brother, *Thomas Markle Jr*. Despite no invite, the family does have a purpose there -- they'll be special correspondents on "Good Morning Britain" ... presumably dishing family deets for Saturday's big day.

Also not going to the wedding? Meghan's father, *Thomas*. TMZ broke the story ... Thomas decided not to go because he doesn't want to embarrass the Royal Family or his daughter. The decision comes on the heels of the fallout over him selling photos of himself.


----------



## ap.

pearlyqueen said:


> That’s up to you how you want to live your life. They have choices too but never opt to walk away. They aren’t the only category who are under public scrutiny either, however most of the others fund themselves.



Has anyone actually done a study on whether the British Royal Family is a net loss or gain on the UK economy?  This wedding is expected to give a $1.4B boost, so that would be positive against the cost of the wedding.


----------



## ap.

This episode reminds me of Pride and Prejudice where Elizabeth Bennet's family were unsuitable (and one became a burden (Lydia) constantly asking for money -- hope that doesn't happen, but I see some trying to profit on the connection).


----------



## scarlet555

Not sure why or how but find her prettier since she has been engaged to Prince Harry.


----------



## PatsyCline

scarlet555 said:


> Not sure why or how but find her prettier since she has been engaged to Prince Harry.



She beams because she’s in love?


----------



## pearlyqueen

apey_grapey said:


> Has anyone actually done a study on whether the British Royal Family is a net loss or gain on the UK economy?  This wedding is expected to give a $1.4B boost, so that would be positive against the cost of the wedding.



I’d say that figure is hugely inflated. Sure the likes of hotels and tacky souvenir makers will make money but that won’t benefit the populace as a whole. The security bill alone for the tax payer is estimated at £32 million.


----------



## PatsyCline

pearlyqueen said:


> I’d say that figure is hugely inflated. Sure the likes of hotels and tacky souvenir makers will make money but that won’t benefit the populace as a whole. The security bill alone for the tax payer is estimated at £32 million.



The government earns tax revenue from hotels, souvenirs etc.  Plus various businesses will earn revenue from visitors. Businesses pay taxes on revenue. 

Tax revenue benefits everyone, whether it’s direct or not. Tax revenue pays for health coverage etc.


----------



## SallyS

DC-Cutie said:


> a this point Mom is the only one looking good



I think Charles could be an option as well, or even William doing double duty in addition to best man. Feel for Meghan right about now..


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> The government earns tax revenue from hotels, souvenirs etc.  Plus various businesses will earn revenue from visitors. Businesses pay taxes on revenue.
> 
> Tax revenue benefits everyone, whether it’s direct or not. Tax revenue pays for health coverage etc.



I can guarantee the ordinary British taxpayer won’t benefit financially from this wedding, any more than we did from William’s wedding.


----------



## serenluv202

"Sister" Samantha Grant advised her dad to pose for pictures, and there just happened to be a fee involved?  She can't stand Meghan and would do anything to try to ruin the wedding...including having her own father shamed.  It was very clear from the looks of things that he did not have the finances to get to the UK.  He also had little money to purchase suitable clothing.  He now claims he had a heart attack...days ago?  Honestly, I don't think he was ever invited to the wedding.  Has anyone close to Meghan or her mom stated that he was invited?  The fake car travel, budget motel stay and heart attack claim all seem to point to the fact that he was never invited.  He wanted to pretend he was on his way so that people would offer him money for photos and interviews. The brother pens two open letters in the press telling Harry to cancel the wedding. Now the brother's psycho ex-wife and her two motley looking sons were spotted at Heathrow?  Surely they were not invited either.  That whole side of her family is an opportunistic nightmare.  The Queen must be ready to scream...not to mention what snooty Camilla must be saying!


----------



## gazoo

serenluv202 said:


> "Sister" Samantha Grant advised her dad to pose for pictures, and there just happened to be a fee involved?  She can't stand Meghan and would do anything to try to ruin the wedding...including having her own father shamed.  It was very clear from the looks of things that he did not have the finances to get to the UK.  He also had little money to purchase suitable clothing.  He now claims he had a heart attack...days ago?  Honestly, I don't think he was ever invited to the wedding.  Has anyone close to Meghan or her mom stated that he was invited?  The fake car travel, budget motel stay and heart attack claim all seem to point to the fact that he was never invited.  He wanted to pretend he was on his way so that people would offer him money for photos and interviews. The brother pens two open letters in the press telling Harry to cancel the wedding. Now the brother's psycho ex-wife and her two motley looking sons were spotted at Heathrow?  Surely they were not invited either.  That whole side of her family is an opportunistic nightmare.  The Queen must be ready to scream...not to mention what snooty Camilla must be saying!



Didn't Kensington Palace confirm he was walking her down the aisle as far back as early May? This entire spectacle is getting crazy. I can't believe my eyes at each new update. Major cringe fest.

This is from:https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...sington-palace-statement-about-thomas-markle/

In a press briefing from May 4, Kensington Palace confirmed, "Mr. Markle will walk his daughter down the aisle of St George's Chapel. Ms. Markle is delighted to have her parents by her side on this important and happy occasion."

There's further information from the Palace about this latest development in this article.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

"The first thing I would like to share is that Prince Harry and Ms. Markle are very much looking forward to welcoming Ms. Markle's parents to Windsor for the wedding. Mr. Thomas Markle and Ms. Doria Ragland will be arriving in the UK in the week of the wedding, allowing time for Prince Harry's family, including The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Prince of Wales, The Duchess of Cornwall, and The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, to spend time with them before the big day." From the royal website https://www.royal.uk/update-communications-secretary-prince-harry-wedding-prince-harry-and-ms-markle

I wonder if he's really pulling out of the wedding, or if TMZ is just spewing nonsense.

Honestly, it seems weak to pull out. You promised your daughter you'd be there, and you agreed to engagements with all these people who also booked time out of their day to meet with you - just apologize for your actions, try to make it better, and don't go back on your word.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jiangjiang

Royal wedding: Meghan's father may not attend ceremony http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44117335


----------



## mdcx

Poor Meghan.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Did her dad walk her down the aisle the first two times? I know her first reportedly resulted in an annulment, but seriously...that family has no shame.

This is definitely not something the BRF appreciates. She is probably so stressed already and she needs to deal with this days before her wedding.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Oh man, the stories that are breaking now.... crazy stuff. The dad was in McDonalds and KFC the day of the 'heart attack.' And he went to the mother's home, too, with flowers. Wonder if Harry is having second thoughts...


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Oh man, the stories that are breaking now.... crazy stuff. The dad was in McDonalds and KFC the day of the 'heart attack.' And he went to the mother's home, too, with flowers. Wonder if Harry is having second thoughts...



Oh geez. As they say, you don’t just marry your partner, you marry their family.


----------



## mdcx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Oh man, the stories that are breaking now.... crazy stuff. The dad was in McDonalds and KFC the day of the 'heart attack.' And he went to the mother's home, too, with flowers. Wonder if Harry is having second thoughts...


I wonder if the heart attack story was to generate sympathy. It's all very messy and unfortunate.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> I wonder if the heart attack story was to generate sympathy. It's all very messy and unfortunate.


This is the story... yeah, it's a royal mess for sure... 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tend-Royal-Wedding-suffered-heart-attack.html


----------



## melissatrv

gazoo said:


> If that happens then the onus is on him to "retire" from his Royal position and live happily with her as a commoner. He's wealthy enough from inheritances to do so. They could continue their philanthropy without the rascist/elitists poking at them. But I cynically doubt either of them would accept that option.
> 
> Diana was a total noob, Meghan is far savier and experienced. Hopefully this isn't a Diana 2.0 situation.



Agree that Meghan is savvier and used to the spotlight but not used to being under a microscope.  Diana was from a very old aristocratic family and was very sheltered before her marriage.  In other words, there was not a lot of dirt to dig up. The press will try to dig up every speck of dirt they can on Meghan and her family for years.  TV stars have varying degrees of popularity depending upon the popularity of their show etc.  The BRF is perpetually in the public eye



apey_grapey said:


> Is being able to marry the person he loves no matter what the benefit of being the second child?  Considering the drama (and I've not been following closely but it seems there were several controversies with (half) siblings and parents) with her family, would Megan Markle have passed the vetting if Harry was in the immediate line to the throne?
> _
> There are lots of assumptions in my post -- feel free to correct any of them if I have things wrong.  _



Harry is now 6th in line to the throne so it is highly unlikely in this day and age that he could ever be king.  In the past centuries, it mattered more as people died young and more frequently due to disease and childbirth.   If William and Kate had one more child prior to the engagement, Harry would not even need the Queen's permission as the 7th in line. Plus I think Harry doesn't give a fig whether anyone approves or not 

What a colossal disaster all this family drama! Maybe her TV Dad will walk her down the aisle or she will just go it alone?  I have a half brother and sister from my Dad's first marriage and they are 20 years older than me so we were never very close.  I wonder if they would come out of the woodwork if I were in Meghan's shoes. Scary to think about


----------



## pixiejenna

I feel bad for Megan like a wedding isn’t stressful enough to begin with and this drama added on top. Her fathers side seems to be very opportunistic. A special on them made me really dislike her half sister who whined that Megan didn’t buy her a home (she needs special accommodations for her disability) and hasn’t invited her to the wedding. Pretty obvious that doing the interview was a money grab. Just because Megan works doesn’t mean that she’s expected to find your lifestyle. It’s pretty clear that she has pretty much little to no relationship with her half sister because if she she did her half sister wouldn’t have done that interview in that light. It reminded me of Mariah’s sister who’s also very ill, and whining that she doesn’t fund her life. I’m guessing that Megan is going to walk the aisle alone now. The BRF is probably annoyed by this extra drama but regardless they’re going to gossip about her either way.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I guess this is going to be just par for the course now...this is why Diana was chosen - 19 with no previous baggage. 

Meghan has one annulment, a divorce, and an opportunistic trashy family.

Although she was famous for Suits, most didn’t even know who she was until she dated Harry. BRF fame is the kind of fame that has as much bad as good. Her every single move will be monitored and judged. I would gladly take my normal life instead of the life that will become hers.

I imagine many more will emerge out of the woodwork to make some easy money.


----------



## mdcx

I think with Kate, you had a family that were united in their goal of Kate marrying William. Nothing was going to get in the way of that. They were also wealthy and upper middle class. They knew how to handle themselves mostly.
Meghan has none of those benefits, her family is split up, most are dysfunctional, they don't seem to "get" at all what the BRF is all about, they are not wealthy etc. It must make it hard.


----------



## GoStanford

LVSistinaMM said:


> I would gladly take my normal life instead of the life that will become hers.


I agree - there's a lot to be said for being able to maintain privacy and stay under the radar.  So many stresses seem to be accumulating in the days prior to their wedding.  I'm with you - an uncomplicated life is a gift!


----------



## Lodpah

I've been reading and following everything about this upcoming wedding. I read somewhere that MM dad had to suck it up and ask MM for money one tiME as he is extremely broke and she flat out refused. Apparently he had won 750,000 in a lottery years ago thus MM was able to go to elite schools and do all those extracurricular things that go along with the schools. Anyway, I think she should have just quietly invited the family and try to be the bigger person (we all have those ones in our family that is quite . . . ). Anyway this is a big mess and sad to see where it's going. AS FOR ME, if I wanted my father there for my wedding I WOULD PAY his expenses to come to my wedding. I only get one father in this lifetime and one mother.  For some reason I think she is very tight (greedy) with her money as I see the changes (bowl food and telling the peasants to bring their own picnic food to the wedding?  Dang, I've done a million dollar wedding and half a million dollar wedding and it's expected (as part of the wedding planning vendor). They can afford to feed 1200 guests. It's not that expensive for their caliber.
SMH.


----------



## White Orchid

I’m lost.  Peasants?  Bowl food?


----------



## minababe

I feel so sorry for ,meghan .. the world is looking at your Family Drama .. how embarrassing .. poor Girl .. i don't have words for this Family anymore .. it's just disgusting how they want their seconds of fame .. I would never talk to one of them again.. I hope she is doing still good and is happy for her upcoming wedding and has her People there .. her best friends and her mother .. I've heard the whole cast of suits is coming also, that would be soo great they seem to have a really good relationship for the past 7 years.

and to her father .. I don't see him as a victim. he is the same like all his Kids .. I knew it from the first News .. if you are a good Person and father you would never let your Kids be that mad about one of your children .. personally i think it was all planned .. to make a scandal few days before the wedding and that he never wanted to come to the wedding .. poor meghan really ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

Lodpah said:


> I've been reading and following everything about this upcoming wedding. I read somewhere that MM dad had to suck it up and ask MM for money one tiME as he is extremely broke and she flat out refused. Apparently he had won 750,000 in a lottery years ago thus MM was able to go to elite schools and do all those extracurricular things that go along with the schools. Anyway, I think she should have just quietly invited the family and try to be the bigger person (we all have those ones in our family that is quite . . . ). Anyway this is a big mess and sad to see where it's going. AS FOR ME, if I wanted my father there for my wedding I WOULD PAY his expenses to come to my wedding. I only get one father in this lifetime and one mother.  For some reason I think she is very tight (greedy) with her money as I see the changes (bowl food and telling the peasants to bring their own picnic food to the wedding?  Dang, I've done a million dollar wedding and half a million dollar wedding and it's expected (as part of the wedding planning vendor). They can afford to feed 1200 guests. It's not that expensive for their caliber.
> SMH.




That’s what a parent is supposed to do for their child!  And I seriously doubt if that was the only time or even the first time he has asked for money. They seem to be waiting around with their hands out now and when nothing happens they decide to make it happen with their photos and press statements!  I don’t how not throwing money at them equals she’s obviously tight with her money.


----------



## gelbergirl

I’d have thought the Palace would have brought him over to England for the wedding but kept him busy with tours and kept him under lock and key in some hotel.  Treat him like a VIP so he did not do any of this stuff.

Is he still going to meet the Queen and Prince Charles??


----------



## ccbaggirl89

DC-Cutie said:


> a this point Mom is the only one looking good


Not really. She filmed an Oprah special that is supposed to air after the wedding, and the $$$ from that likely allowed her to quit her job yesterday. So mom can go on Oprah to spill secrets on tv for $ but dad can't pose for pics for $?
https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-cu...kle-mother-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-gifts/
https://www.wmagazine.com/story/meghan-markle-mom-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-racism-interview


----------



## roseykitten

White Orchid said:


> I’m lost.  Peasants?  Bowl food?


----------



## Coconuts40

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Not really. She filmed an Oprah special that is supposed to air after the wedding, and the $$$ from that likely allowed her to quit her job yesterday. So mom can go on Oprah to spill secrets on tv for $ but dad can't pose for pics for $?
> https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-cu...kle-mother-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-gifts/
> https://www.wmagazine.com/story/meghan-markle-mom-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-racism-interview



She quite her job?  
Ok I may get a lot of flack here by saying this, but it seems the true colours of the Markle family are shining through.  I wonder if she plans on moving to London eventually?

I actually don't like the modernization of the royal family.  They  become common and normal and at that point, why have them?  The allure and mystery is unveiled.  I have a feeling there is deep regret within the royal family about this wedding.


----------



## roseykitten

White Orchid said:


> I’m lost.  Peasants?  Bowl food?


Going on whats been in the media here the guests, members of the public who received invites, are a little unhappy they won't be provided with some drinks or food. The invites state they should bring picnics. 
There's been some talk in the media about the couple not having a sit down formal meal after, hence where this 'bowl' food thing came from. I assume they want more of a buffet?! Who really knows though what will happen  There's a different story everyday! 
Windsor is near me but i don't think we'll try and go on Saturday. Parking in the Great Park is £30 and you need to arrive by 6am!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Coconuts40 said:


> She quite her job?
> Ok I may get a lot of flack here by saying this, but it seems the true colours of the Markle family are shining through.  I wonder if she plans on moving to London eventually?
> 
> I actually don't like the modernization of the royal family.  They  become common and normal and at that point, why have them?  The allure and mystery is unveiled.  I have a feeling there is deep regret within the royal family about this wedding.


Yep, she quits the same day the dad gets caught with fake pics. https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...doria-ragland-quits-job-before-royal-wedding/
A good portion of my family is British and was saying the same thing, about modernization and how it has ruined the monarchy and respect they once had.


----------



## DC-Cutie

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Not really. She filmed an Oprah special that is supposed to air after the wedding, and the $$$ from that likely allowed her to quit her job yesterday. So mom can go on Oprah to spill secrets on tv for $ but dad can't pose for pics for $?
> https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-cu...kle-mother-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-gifts/
> https://www.wmagazine.com/story/meghan-markle-mom-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-racism-interview


Maybe she spoke to the Royal family AND Meghan, getting their blessing/approval to do the sitdown with Oprah


----------



## westjenn

Do you guys really think that Bride or Groom (or Groom's family) would not put the parents up in a nice hotel? Also, do you really think they would allow Mr Markle to show up on the wedding day in a suit created here?  Doubtful.  I would think his besoke suit would have been made MONTHS ago..


----------



## serenluv202

There is a big difference between an Oprah Winfrey interview and random paparazzi.  An Oprah interview is always classy and tasteful and I'm sure what she will mostly ask is about Meghan as a child, her rise as an actress and the mother daughter relationship.  The father sold some very tacky pictures on bad advice from his bitter other daughter.  No comparison in parental behavior here.


----------



## serenluv202

westjenn said:


> Do you guys really think that Bride or Groom (or Groom's family) would not put the parents up in a nice hotel? Also, do you really think they would allow Mr Markle to show up on the wedding day in a suit created here?  Doubtful.  I would think his besoke suit would have been made MONTHS ago..


Amen to that!  London has some of the most world renowned tailors and gentlemen's shops.  He would have been fitted, groomed and pampered.


----------



## DC-Cutie

serenluv202 said:


> There is a big difference between an Oprah Winfrey interview and random paparazzi.  An Oprah interview is always classy and tasteful and I'm sure what she will mostly ask is about Meghan as a child, her rise as an actress and the mother daughter relationship.  The father sold some very tacky pictures on bad advice from his bitter other daughter.  No comparison in parental behavior here.


thank you!  Oprah isn't trying to get her hands in some messy mess of an interview.


----------



## gazoo

Her mom could have sold her out weeks ago and didn't. In fact I can't even name one family member from her mom's side of the family. No one has been talking, and I can't imagine that her mother is completely alone in the world without relatives. 

I agree that Oprah is on another level to paps. It's still weird to me as I'm not used to Royals giving interviews, (Meghan's Vanity Fair interview months ago and even the Prince William and Harry's HBO special for Diana's 20th anniversary of her death.) But whatever, things are changing rapidly. Both Princes are going against the grain, speaking out about mental health, and actively changing the way things are done within their limited scope of power. I do wonder what Prince Charles and Prince Philip think about all this. 

I can't blame Meghan for her family's behavior. If anything she's tried to distance herself as much as she can, and been slammed for that as well. Her mom seems a very nice person, keeping herself low key since the circus started. I thought her dad was doing the same, but his recent behavior is pretty sketchy, down to claiming to have had a heart attack. My mom has had 6 heart attacks of varying seriousness. She wasn't driving around within hours of any them. Just makes him look less believable. I feel like he's trying to save face and not thinking of his child at all. Hopefully Meghan's mom does move to London. If Meghan and Harry intend to start a family ASAP, Meghan will really need to have a familiar, trusted face around.

As to what she talked to Oprah about, there are many topical things of interest, from her marriage to a white man, raising a bi-racial child that excelled in school and the arts, her struggles as a single mom, etc. She's interesting to me even without knowing that her daughter went on to marry a Prince. Oprah's the perfect person to interview her, bringing gravitas that most other reporters can't do.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

DC-Cutie said:


> Maybe she spoke to the Royal family AND Meghan, getting their blessing/approval to do the sitdown with Oprah


Yes, she likely did. But getting special permission to be an opportunist means you are not one? I don't think so. Your daughter is marrying into royalty and your first thought is "OPRAH INTERVIEW!!" What mom does that? Have some class... no better than the father imho, of course


----------



## DC-Cutie

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Yes, she likely did. But getting special permission to be an opportunist means you are not one? I don't think so. Your daughter is marrying into royalty and your first thought is "OPRAH INTERVIEW!!" What mom does that? Have some class... no better than the father imho, of course


oh, so you know that was her first thought?  How do you know she wasn't approached by other magazines, news outlets and such, turning them all down to sit with one of the most respected women in the world?

I didn't realize doing a sitdown interview made you classless... learn something new everyday


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

queennadine said:


> I'm no fan of MM, but this family drama the week before/of her wedding?! Sheesh, I feel bad for her. How embarrassing.


Overwhelmingly embarrassing. Gosh, even if she makes it through this debacle of dirty laundry with her family how can she feel being in a room of royals and upper crust people who will always think less of her. I would be running for the hills right now if I was her. I cannot imagine being so embarrassed in the company of everyone for the rest of my life. How will they ever accept her? She must be very strong to get through this all.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

DC-Cutie said:


> oh, so you know that was her first thought?  How do you know she wasn't approached by other magazines, news outlets and such, turning them all down to sit with one of the most respected women in the world?
> 
> I didn't realize doing a sitdown interview made you classless... learn something new everyday


I guess you're assuming everyone shares the same opinion of Oprah. She's just an interviewer to me, like any other news person out for a story. And it's certainly classless to do an interview given the situation her daughter is in. The situation is not normal and interviews in general are fine. But you've got your daughter under the world microscope and this doesn't seem like the wisest choice for a mom to make. It seems like Meghan's needs are secondary to her parents and family all-around. I feel bad for her. She's in a family mess.


----------



## DC-Cutie

nope not assuming, it's a fact about Oprah!  

You don't know if Megan and her mother sat down to discuss her doing the interview, do you?  I don't.   From all accounts Harry and the mother get along well, so maybe they ALL discussed it.

Perhaps her mother wanted to share what is what like raising the daughter who would become Royalty or like @gazoo mentioned, what it was like being a single parent to a bi-racial child, watching her become an actress, her love of charity, etc.


----------



## terebina786

Hold on!  So the BRF confirmed her dad would be walking her down the aisle, so why was he still in Mexico?  Why wasn't he flown in sometime in the past weeks for suit fittings, rehearsals (assuming they have that) and what not?  Everything seems off with her family.


----------



## Gal4Dior

DC-Cutie said:


> oh, so you know that was her first thought?  How do you know she wasn't approached by other magazines, news outlets and such, turning them all down to sit with one of the most respected women in the world?
> 
> I didn't realize doing a sitdown interview made you classless... learn something new everyday



I think it’s perfectly fine if she weren’t marrying into the BRF. Their need for privacy is a whole other level. Being that open on anything personal like that is likely unseemly for them.

Hopefully it will be vetted by the palace. I’m curious to hear what she says.


----------



## DC-Cutie

LVSistinaMM said:


> I think it’s perfectly fine if she weren’t marrying into the BRF. Their need for privacy is a whole other level. Being that open on anything personal like that is likely unseemly for them.
> 
> Hopefully it will be vetted by the palace. I’m curious to hear what she says.


seems unlike who?  William and Harry have become very open to the media over the last 10 years or so.  

It's a new dawn, a new day....


----------



## Gal4Dior

DC-Cutie said:


> seems unlike who?  William and Harry have become very open to the media over the last 10 years or so.
> 
> It's a new dawn, a new day....



In a controlled way, yes. Their interviews are open but likely vetted prior to airing.


----------



## PinkTulip

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Yes, she likely did. But getting special permission to be an opportunist means you are not one? I don't think so. Your daughter is marrying into royalty and your first thought is "OPRAH INTERVIEW!!" What mom does that? Have some class... no better than the father imho, of course


Whatever the reasons for Meghan Markle’s Dad not going to the wedding, aren’t there double standards over his treatment re allegedly paying paps? The Middletons have made money out of their royal connection for years - they just did it in a more subtle and media savvy way. << That was a tweet from Jane Merrick, but it's a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with.

The Middletons were savvier and toed the line of leaking news to the Press. Kate's uncle? I think the worst element of this story is that it's coming from immediate (and immediate adjacent) family. Honestly, the boom of Party Pieces, the then-new purchase of Bucklebury Manor? Hell, Pippa Today interviews and the trial segment she got but never went to air. The Middletons have greatly benefited from their Royal connections. Meghan family are just small time, vainglorious famewhores.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

PinkTulip said:


> Whatever the reasons for Meghan Markle’s Dad not going to the wedding, aren’t there double standards over his treatment re allegedly paying paps? The Middletons have made money out of their royal connection for years - they just did it in a more subtle and media savvy way. << That was a tweet from Jane Merrick, but it's a sentiment I wholeheartedly agree with.
> 
> The Middletons were savvier and toed the line of leaking news to the Press. Kate's uncle? I think the worst element of this story is that it's coming from immediate (and immediate adjacent) family. Honestly, the boom of Party Pieces, the then-new purchase of Bucklebury Manor? Hell, Pippa Today interviews and the trial segment she got but never went to air. The Middletons have greatly benefited from their Royal connections. Meghan family are just small time, vainglorious famewhores.


Oh heck, if my sister was marrying into royalty I would for sure be expecting favors too, I'd admit that freely. I think there is that famewhore part to everyone, and most people would enjoy benefiting in some way from the position of a family member who ascended to more, for sure. Her mom and dad are entitled to benefit if she chooses to allow that, so perhaps the bother here is how blatant they are in doing so. Keep it on the downlow a la The Middleton's, or at least wait until after the wedding has happened before you go seeking $$ opportunities. The mom couldn't wait a year or two for a sit down? The dad couldn't attend the wedding first and then make dumb decisions? Play the long game and keep it on the DL like the Middleton's, and then people won't vilify you as much because it's just less obvious.


----------



## gazoo

Anyone that Harry wanted to marry would be picked apart. It's unfortunate that in Meghan's case there is so much ammunition. Despite it all, she's a gorgeous girl that has that "it" sparkle, and hopefully he realizes all the crap being thrown her way is his fault. If anything, this circus may cement their relationship even further, bonding them tighter than they already were. I'm being optimistic as I've never seen him so happy, despite all the crazy relatives. Hey the Royals are just like us, with batsh!t in-laws that can't be controlled! I have to laugh at it all. My husband is English and loathes the BRF, feeling they're a pale shadow of what once was. I've been a diehard stan for the BRF since I was a small child, getting up in the middle of the night to watch the weddings, etc.

The Middletons have indeed benefited from their Royal connections. Party favors, come on! They've made an empire out of the unlikeliest of things. Good on them. People have been angling to get Royal favor or plain old political power favor since time began. Social media just highlights it in ways we've not seen before. I do feel the Markle side is super low-classy compared to the others in question. Yet Harry's family isn't only composed of great people. That Princess Michael is a piece of trash (remember when she had two black goats and named them Serena and Venus?!), and lets not forget the future King of England himself was caught telling his mistress he longed to be her tampon. Humans are messy, blue blooded or not.


----------



## berrydiva

LVSistinaMM said:


> I think it’s perfectly fine if she weren’t marrying into the BRF. Their need for privacy is a whole other level. Being that open on anything personal like that is likely unseemly for them.
> 
> Hopefully it will be vetted by the palace. I’m curious to hear what she says.


Haven't they become far more open as long as it's respectable interviewers? Not just Harry and Will but the Queen also being more receptive to understanding the need to ease up on being so controlling. Don't they have a whole social media management team now? I'm not into the royals family as much as some are but I can definitely see the change even with the queen herself. Seem like the palace has relaxed on a few of their stiff ways....they seem to also be more proactive in getting in front of media.


----------



## Jayne1

Tivo said:


> Harry’s support can go a long way, but it can’t shield her from the jealousy and the hate. It’s cute to talk about “haters” but living and breathing it every day is a different story. Add kids to the mix and she’s stuck. Those royals have centuries of playing these games under their belts. And Harry can’t be there all the time.
> 
> I admit I’m taking the extreme negative view, but this is the world we live in. As you mentioned, Diana already went through it. The game doesn’t change. Just the players.


Diana wouldn't play the game and she knew more about it than Meghan. Diana purposely set out to piss-off Kensington Palace... and she succeeded.

I think Meghan isn't that type at all and she'll know her place in the Royal Business.  Just like Kate. 

Meghan's estranged family is another matter but since the sister doesn't even know her, I think she won't be able to do much more damage.


----------



## berrydiva

gazoo said:


> and lets not forget the future King of England himself was caught telling his mistress he longed to be her tampon. Humans are messy, blue blooded or not.


No matter how many times I hear this line in life, I'm still very perplexed as to why out of all the "vulgar-I'm trying to be sexy" things to say was this what he chose to say....it's so gross and makes me question his understanding of human sexuality.


----------



## Jayne1

pearlyqueen said:


> Wouldn’t you? Funny how none of them walks away from it despite whinging about the restrictions. IMO the royal system is the antithesis of democracy and has no place in the 21st century. Yes there are plenty of British people who fawn over them but there are just as many opposed to the system. I can’t see them lasting as they are now for very much longer.


Princess Margaret! She wouldn't give up her fancy royal life for anything. Everyone felt sorry for her because she couldn't marry the man she loved.  Yes she could marry the guy, but she wanted to stay a princess more.


----------



## Jayne1

DC-Cutie said:


> seems unlike who?  William and Harry have become very open to the media over the last 10 years or so.
> 
> It's a new dawn, a new day....


William not so much. Harry does what he likes and has a great life no matter what.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

Jayne1 said:


> William not so much. Harry does what he likes and has a great life no matter what.





Jayne1 said:


> William not so much. Harry does what he likes and has a great life no matter what.


And just now.. breaking news... Dad is coming to the wedding... lol.. what in the world is going on...


----------



## Gal4Dior

westjenn said:


> And just now.. breaking news... Dad is coming to the wedding... lol.. what in the world is going on...



This roller coaster is ridiculous. I feel sorry for her.


----------



## daisychainz

westjenn said:


> And just now.. breaking news... Dad is coming to the wedding... lol.. what in the world is going on...


This is like a 3-ring circus.


----------



## DC-Cutie

westjenn said:


> And just now.. breaking news... Dad is coming to the wedding... lol.. what in the world is going on...


at this point, we will just have to really wait and see...  LOL


----------



## gazoo

Yeah Diana became a loose cannon, but the root cause was the triangle and her refusal let her husband carry on with Camilla whilst she turned the other cheek. I really wonder if there were no third party at that time, would Diana be alive now. Maybe she'd even be with Charles still. We will never know. 

I don't get the feeling that Meghan will be anything like Diana. There's no triangle for one, and if Harry does cheat then any wrath Meghan wants to unleash on him is deserved, IMO. I was impressed that Diana was so heavy handed in exposing Charles and his parents in their treatment of the seedy affair, and it was crazy messy between him and Camilla. It's a new day and women shouldn't put up with that archaic "all Royals have mistresses" BS. 

I know opinion is split on Charles and Camilla. My husband for one, thinks theirs is the great love story. I always felt sorry for Diana. She was complicated, but also fragile and steel willed. I'd bet  both her sons have the same traits to a degree.


----------



## bisousx

Jayne1 said:


> Princess Margaret! She wouldn't give up her fancy royal life for anything. Everyone felt sorry for her because she couldn't marry the man she loved.  Yes she could marry the guy, but she wanted to stay a princess more.



I know very little about the royals and had to look up Princess Margaret after reading your post. Wow, what a beauty she was and how sad that she had to choose between the life she knew and the man she was in love with. Fascinating.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bisousx said:


> I know very little about the royals and had to look up Princess Margaret after reading your post. Wow, what a beauty she was and how sad that she had to choose between the life she knew and the man she was in love with. Fascinating.


Watch "The Queen" on Netflix if you get a chance.


----------



## bag-princess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Not really. She filmed an Oprah special that is supposed to air after the wedding, and the $$$ from that likely allowed her to quit her job yesterday. So mom can go on Oprah to spill secrets on tv for $ but dad can't pose for pics for $?
> https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-cu...kle-mother-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-gifts/
> https://www.wmagazine.com/story/meghan-markle-mom-doria-ragland-oprah-winfrey-racism-interview




AFTER the wedding is the key word. How do you know Megan didn’t give her permission to? 
And if it was my mom heck yeah- I would love if  my mom quit her job and came across the pond to support me and help me get settled in to that life. She will need it!


----------



## terebina786

westjenn said:


> And just now.. breaking news... Dad is coming to the wedding... lol.. what in the world is going on...


And like why is her dad speaking to TMZ telling them that he changed his mind and just spoke to Meghan, wants to be apart of history, etc.  Why can't he conduct himself privately?  I think he's getting paid by them.


----------



## westjenn

berrydiva said:


> Haven't they become far more open as long as it's respectable interviewers? Not just Harry and Will but the Queen also being more receptive to understanding the need to ease up on being so controlling. Don't they have a whole social media management team now? I'm not into the royals family as much as some are but I can definitely see the change even with the queen herself. Seem like the palace has relaxed on a few of their stiff ways....they seem to also be more proactive in getting in front of media.


It would seem to me that their PR team failed miserably here. Isn't it their job to handle the media?  It appears that they did nothing to stop this trainwreck and I truly don't understand why! Meghans half brother writing those silly open letters first to Prince Harry then to Meghan... Meghan's half sister, selling family photos and stories for profit.... What about a ceast and desist?  The Markle family has turned this wedding into a circus and really put a damper on the whole thing and I feel very sorry for the bride..   I really think this is a royal family fail.. I hate to say it.


----------



## bisousx

westjenn said:


> It would seem to me that their PR team failed miserably here. Isn't it their job to handle the media?  It appears that they did nothing to stop this trainwreck and I truly don't understand why! Meghans half brother writing those silly open letters first to Prince Harry then to Meghan... Meghan's half sister, selling family photos and stories for profit.... What about a ceast and desist?  The Markle family has turned this wedding into a circus and really put a damper on the whole thing and I feel very sorry for the bride..   I really think this is a royal family fail.. I hate to say it.



No one, not even a professional PR team or a royal, can stop a person from writing an open letter and selling family items especially if there’s a very willing media outlet ready to pay and publish. Their PR team can only try to do damage control after the fact.


----------



## westjenn

terebina786 said:


> And like why is her dad speaking to TMZ telling them that he changed his mind and just spoke to Meghan, wants to be apart of history, etc.  Why can't he conduct himself privately?  I think he's getting paid by them.


If he is working with TMZ, how very slimy of him... Meghan's half sister needs therapy STAT.  She admits to convincing their father to pose for these photos.  IMO the only reason she did this was to make even more of a mockery of their dad and to embarrass Meghan.


----------



## westjenn

bisousx said:


> No one, not even a professional PR team or a royal, can stop a person from writing an open letter and selling family items especially if there’s a very willing media outlet ready to pay and publish. Their PR team can only try to do damage control after the fact.


This is so sad to me.. It means that she is basically at their mercy.. for how long? As long as the media is buying their stories.  It's all truly sad to me.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-princess said:


> AFTER the wedding is the key word. How do you know Megan didn’t give her permission to?
> And if it was my mom heck yeah- I would love if  my mom quit her job and came across the pond to support me and help me get settled in to that life. She will need it!


I already replied to this. She likely did have permission, although since it will air right after the wedding portions were already filmed. And that would mean the daughter isn't married yet, right? So accepting gifts and cash from Oprah before...okay, sure. I linked the article someplace above and it makes no mention of the mother quitting to move, but said she quit to potentially start her own social service agency. I assumed that would be in the US and not abroad, but who knows, it doesn't state specifically. Her mother is still hanging out in Los Angeles according to pics from just today, so she isn't even over there yet helping to support Meghan or get her ready, but is still going about her chores. I'd expect my mom to be over there by now, but that's just me.
https://www.insideedition.com/megha...land-excited-she-prepares-royal-wedding-43279


----------



## DC-Cutie

westjenn said:


> It would seem to me that their PR team failed miserably here. Isn't it their job to handle the media?  It appears that they did nothing to stop this trainwreck and I truly don't understand why! Meghans half brother writing those silly open letters first to Prince Harry then to Meghan... Meghan's half sister, selling family photos and stories for profit.... What about a ceast and desist?  The Markle family has turned this wedding into a circus and really put a damper on the whole thing and I feel very sorry for the bride..   I really think this is a royal family fail.. I hate to say it.


how do you stop a person from doing what they want to do?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> how do you stop a person from doing what they want to do?


It seems that in the past, the Royal Family had so much control over what was reported in the press. As someone else previously stated, this is a new (media/press) world and it's disheartening to me.  This should be the happiest day of a bride's life and her family has made a joke of it.


----------



## pearlyqueen

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I already replied to this. She likely did have permission, although since it will air right after the wedding portions were already filmed. And that would mean the daughter isn't married yet, right? So accepting gifts and cash from Oprah before...okay, sure. I linked the article someplace above and it makes no mention of the mother quitting to move, but said she quit to potentially start her own social service agency. I assumed that would be in the US and not abroad, but who knows, it doesn't state specifically. Her mother is still hanging out in Los Angeles according to pics from just today, so she isn't even over there yet helping to support Meghan or get her ready, but is still going about her chores. I'd expect my mom to be over there by now, but that's just me.
> https://www.insideedition.com/megha...land-excited-she-prepares-royal-wedding-43279



Weird how her mum is leaving it to the last minute to get to London - most mothers I know would have been supporting their daughter in person for the past couple weeks at least. 
Why the suggestion she will move here? We have immigration laws and what with the Brexit momentum I don’t think she’d qualify for residency. There’s already been a fuss  here about bending the rules for Meghan re citizenship, I’m sure it would be a bigger outcry if extended to her family.


----------



## westjenn

pearlyqueen said:


> Weird how her mum is leaving it to the last minute to get to London - most mothers I know would have been supporting their daughter in person for the past couple weeks at least.
> Why the suggestion she will move here? We have immigration laws and what with the Brexit momentum I don’t think she’d qualify for residency. There’s already been a fuss  here about bending the rules for Meghan re citizenship, I’m sure it would be a bigger outcry if extended to her family.


I would assume most Americans forget about Brexit and residency requirements.  I think that a lot of women look at the fact that Meghan's mom is a single woman, and with Meghan being her only child,  might have the ability to move to be near her and help her transition to her new life.


----------



## zen1965

Residency requirements would also have been applied before the Brexit. Just like EU citizens cannot move to the US to live and work without the right visa, the same applies to US citizens in the EU.
Meghan's mother may be able to provide support to her daughter (why isn't she in UK yet, though?) but to help her transition to her new life Meghan needs an ally from the inner circle who knows the workings of the Firm. I have no idea who this may be. Could be Kate but somehow those two have not struck me as chummy.
As a another poster said, the damage her family has done so far will haunt Meghan for times to come. The "upper crust types" (who are Harry's inner circle) will not let her forget. She needs to be steely-tough to get through this.
By now, I suspect the Queen and Prince Philip are not amused at all. Posing for/ making statements to paps or giving interviews to Oprah does not make a lot of difference in their world.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Another breaking news - apparently her father will have surgery on Wednesday and will NOT attend the wedding....

Like I said, we will just have to wait and see


----------



## melissatrv

Did the father even really have a heart attack?  I don't know what to believe now!  Regardless, I think at this point he should not attend.  I think it would cast a negative light on everything and the press would have a field day picking him apart

Perhaps the mother quit her job to get away from the Paparazzi that follows her every move?  I am sure wherever she worked did not like 100 photographers camped outside the door.

I know there is a perception in parts of Europe that Americans are loud and crass. Sadly Meghan's father's side of the family is doing nothing to dispel that image.  ,


----------



## daisychainz

zen1965 said:


> Residency requirements would also have been applied before the Brexit. Just like EU citizens cannot move to the US to live and work without the right visa, the same applies to US citizens in the EU.
> Meghan's mother may be able to provide support to her daughter (why isn't she in UK yet, though?) but to help her transition to her new life Meghan needs an ally from the inner circle who knows the workings of the Firm. I have no idea who this may be. Could be Kate but somehow those two have not struck me as chummy.
> As a another poster said, the damage her family has done so far will haunt Meghan for times to come. The "upper crust types" (who are Harry's inner circle) will not let her forget. She needs to be steely-tough to get through this.
> By now, I suspect the Queen and Prince Philip are not amused at all. Posing for/ making statements to paps or giving interviews to Oprah does not make a lot of difference in their world.


Maybe she could get help from Beatrice and Eugenie? They are reportedly very close to Harry and their mother is a complete outcast because of Prince Philip, so perhaps Meghan will find sympathy from that side of the family. They would know how their mom was/is treated and I imagine Meghan could suffer that same fate. She is wading in all alone here and that is going to be very difficult for her. But she is older so she has a better chance than young Sarah and Diana did.


----------



## PatsyCline

zen1965 said:


> Residency requirements would also have been applied before the Brexit. Just like EU citizens cannot move to the US to live and work without the right visa, the same applies to US citizens in the EU.
> Meghan's mother may be able to provide support to her daughter (why isn't she in UK yet, though?) but to help her transition to her new life Meghan needs an ally from the inner circle who knows the workings of the Firm. I have no idea who this may be. Could be Kate but somehow those two have not struck me as chummy.
> As a another poster said, the damage her family has done so far will haunt Meghan for times to come. The "upper crust types" (who are Harry's inner circle) will not let her forget. She needs to be steely-tough to get through this.
> By now, I suspect the Queen and Prince Philip are not amused at all. Posing for/ making statements to paps or giving interviews to Oprah does not make a lot of difference in their world.



Are there time limits on visits? Can Meghan’s mom stay with them, for an extended period of time before she would have to return to the USA?


----------



## berrydiva

westjenn said:


> It would seem to me that their PR team failed miserably here. Isn't it their job to handle the media?  It appears that they did nothing to stop this trainwreck and I truly don't understand why! Meghans half brother writing those silly open letters first to Prince Harry then to Meghan... Meghan's half sister, selling family photos and stories for profit.... What about a ceast and desist?  The Markle family has turned this wedding into a circus and really put a damper on the whole thing and I feel very sorry for the bride..   I really think this is a royal family fail.. I hate to say it.


Isn't her family here? I don't know how international law works but I imagine that a cease and desist might not work the same across international waters as it does here in the US. What can their PR really do if her family doesn't live there nor do they control the media here? Furthermore, how do you stop someone from speaking openly?


----------



## melissatrv

daisychainz said:


> Maybe she could get help from Beatrice and Eugenie? They are reportedly very close to Harry and their mother is a complete outcast because of Prince Philip, so perhaps Meghan will find sympathy from that side of the family. They would know how their mom was/is treated and I imagine Meghan could suffer that same fate. She is wading in all alone here and that is going to be very difficult for her. But she is older so she has a better chance than young Sarah and Diana did.



I heard that Beatrice and Eugenie do not like Kate.  I know there is a lot of tension since the princesses were taken off of the royal dole. Also that Kate and Countess Sophie do not get along.  Makes me wonder if  Kate and Meghan are genuinely friendly with each other.  They say Princess Margaret's daughter Lady Sarah Chatto is super nice, generous, low key and well respected in the royal family (reportedly a favorite of the Queen).  Perhaps Meghan can find support and guidance from her.


----------



## berrydiva

westjenn said:


> It seems that in the past, the Royal Family had so much control over what was reported in the press. As someone else previously stated, this is a new (media/press) world and it's disheartening to me.  This should be the happiest day of a bride's life and her family has made a joke of it.


I think the control they had over what was told about them was also married to people's interest in the royal family.  That has waned over the years with younger generations not being as interested as the previous generations as well as the fact that the media is now in the social networking ether. Stories spread fast not like the days of print journalism where you had time to bribe a paper, offer them a scoop, cultivate a relationship to not print a story.  All anyone has to do now is sell a scoop to an IG gossip page and within minutes it becomes viral.


----------



## bag-mania

*For Meghan Markle’s American Family, a Relentless U.K. Glare*
It is notoriously hard to escape your background in Britain, no matter how successful you are or how much your life has diverged from that of your relatives. And so the British tabloids have for some months been treating the family of Meghan Markle, the American actress who is to marry Prince Harry on Saturday, like the stars of some sort of reality show: The Real Dysfunctional Families of America.

Other people’s family squabbles can be diverting to read about, if you like that sort of thing, until they are not. On Monday, a relentless campaign of unflattering attention on Ms. Markle’s father, a 73-year-old former Hollywood lighting director living quietly by himself in Mexico, turned into something sad and ugly, leading to reports that he was too embarrassed to attend his daughter’s wedding.

“Meghan Agony as Dad Pulls Out of Wedding,” The Daily Mail blared on Tuesday morning. (By afternoon, the reports had shifted: Mr. Markle wanted to attend, if he felt up to it after recent heart trouble.)

Every family has its unsavory secrets and internecine squabbles, of course. And Ms. Markle’s family — including divorced parents, estranged siblings, self-promoting loose cannons and people who, if you look far enough, have been on the wrong side of the law — easily lends itself to shallow stereotypes about class and race in the United States.

Her parents divorced when she was young, and she is said to have been estranged from her father, Thomas Markle. But the two had reconciled, and, until this most recent development, he had planned to walk his daughter down the aisle.

Mr. Markle, reclusive and unskilled in the ways of the media, has been a favorite punching bag of the British tabloids, which have a knack for generating controversies and stirring up class-based discord — and then claiming to be shocked, shocked that the controversies have taken place. On Sunday, The Mail printed an article saying that Mr. Markle had conspired with a photographer in Rosarito, Mexico, where he lives, to pose for photographs that were then falsely peddled to news outlets as having been taken without his permission.

“The revelation that Mr. Markle has been cooperating with a paparazzo behind the backs of his daughter, Prince Harry and Kensington Palace officials will cause huge embarrassment to the royal family in the run-up to the wedding,” the paper wrote, after having caused the embarrassment with its revelation in the first place. (It did not know, it admitted far down in the piece, whether Mr. Markle had in fact been paid for the photographs.)

That led to more trouble when Queen Elizabeth II, Harry’s grandmother, was said (without attribution) to be furious, and when Mr. Markle’s daughter Samantha Markle, among a contingent of Markle relatives who have not been invited to the wedding — yet have been vocal in their opinions about it — went on Twitter, and on British television, to stick up for her father.

“The bad press over my father doing staged photos is my fault,” Samantha Markle said. “The media was unfairly making him look bad, so I suggested he do positive photos for his benefit and the benefit of the royal family. We had no idea he would be taken advantage of. It was not for money.”
Reports that Mr. Markle would not attend the wedding came Monday night from the American celebrity news website TMZ. Kensington Palace, while neither confirming nor denying the report, soon released a statement that asked “for understanding and respect to be extended to Mr. Markle in this difficult situation.”

Even before the publication of The Mail on Sunday article, Kensington Palace had already tried to crack down on media coverage of Ms. Markle’s parents, sending a confidential letter to British editors imploring the tabloids to stop harassing them. Ms. Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland, has remained silent but also has been hounded by paparrazi, even on her way to and from work.

Ms. Ragland is already set to accompany her daughter to the wedding venue — a break with tradition — but, if Mr. Markle does not come, she could wind up walking her down the aisle, too.

Having lured the family into their trap, the tabloids are now adding to the abuse. Writing Tuesday in Mail Online, Piers Morgan, the television presenter, accused Ms. Markle’s family as having “already behaved like the worst kind of vile, dysfunctional, money-grabbing misfits in the run-up to her marriage.”

It has to be said that others in Ms. Markle’s family — particularly ancillary members who have not been invited to the wedding — have not helped. Ms. Markle is estranged from her two half siblings, products of her father’s first marriage; they are the ones currently making the most mischief, egged on with promises of fame and with monetary compensation from the tabloids.

Samantha Markle, the half sister who on Monday rose to her father’s defense, announced last fall that she was writing a book — pure fiction, she insisted — called “The Diary of the Princess of Pushy’s Sister.”

More recently, Thomas Markle Jr., Samantha’s brother and Meghan’s half brother, called Meghan a “jaded, shallow, conceited woman.” He also warned Harry, in an open letter he provided to the news media, that the marriage would be “the biggest mistake in royal wedding history,” which is saying a lot when you consider that the royal family has been around for 1,000 years and that its history includes, to name a random example, the murderous matrimonial behavior of Henry VIII.

Then there is Tracy Dooley, the ex-wife of the half brother (which makes her Meghan’s former sister-in-law). Ms. Dooley says she does not feel hurt that neither she nor her sons, Tyler and Thomas III, were invited — especially since she separated from her ex-husband in 1992 and last spoke to Meghan about 20 years ago.

“Her brother has said such horrible things about her that she couldn’t have invited her nephews or me to the wedding,” Ms. Dooley said in an interview.

Ms. Dooley would like to make it clear that she has no intention of exploiting, exaggerating, inflating, monetizing, misrepresenting or in anyway abusing her connection.

But she and Tyler have come to London for the wedding week to make a scheduled appearance as Meghan experts on “Good Morning Britain,” a live daily program, and possibly on other shows, part of an army of guests recruited for their close (or not) connections as part of a week of all-royal-all-the-time coverage. She says she especially wants to provide a corrective to the public unpleasantness being disseminated by bitter Markle relatives.

“I am the only person who is old enough to see the whole family dynamic and the only person in the family, outside of Meghan’s mom and dad, who is respectable and honorable,” Ms. Dooley, 53, said in an interview last week, speaking from her home in Grants Pass, Oregon.

In Grants Pass, Ms. Dooley is a businesswoman who says she has bought and sold florist shops and is now promoting a new business, in partnership with Tyler, called Royally Grown. The idea is to sell hemp-based clothing and makeup as well as “Markle Sparkle,” a new line of marijuana that Tyler Dooley said “literally smells just what you picture a blueberry would smell like.” (Marijuana is legal in Oregon.)

Tyler Dooley, who has been in the marijuana business for several years, said in an interview that the “royally” in the company’s title was just a coincidence — he thought of it well before Meghan’s engagement, he said — and that the name Markle Sparkle was derived from his own elementary-school nickname. In any case, the new strain is to be introduced next month at the regional High Times Cannabis Cup, a trade show and superior-weed competition.

He said he thought Meghan, with her open and fun-loving nature, would approve. And he said that his grandfather, a private and somewhat isolated person, was being treated unfairly by other members of the family, and by the news media. The Dooleys’ presence as commentators during the wedding would help combat that, he said in an interview.

“Our family is so small,” he said. “There’s just six of us, and what my grandfather has been through — it’s making a mockery of us. We just want to show that we are nice and normal.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/15/world/europe/meghan-markle-prince-harry-family.html


----------



## pearlyqueen

PatsyCline said:


> Are there time limits on visits? Can Meghan’s mom stay with them, for an extended period of time before she would have to return to the USA?



A maximum of 6 months as a visitor. Immigration laws were in place long before Brexit for any non-EU citizens, but Brexit has resulted in an increased public focus on immigration and application of the rules.


----------



## melissatrv

OMFG!!!!  And the hits just keep coming!  No wonder none of these people were invited. The wedding would be a freak show if they were.  Meghan has got to be thisclose to a nervous breakdown



bag-mania said:


> *Ms. Dooley would like to make it clear that she has no intention of exploiting, exaggerating, inflating, monetizing, misrepresenting or in anyway abusing her connection.*
> 
> In Grants Pass, Ms. Dooley is a businesswoman who says she has bought and sold florist shops and is now p*romoting a new business, in partnership with Tyler, called Royally Grown. The idea is to sell hemp-based clothing and makeup as well as “Markle Sparkle,” a new line of marijuana t*hat Tyler Dooley said “literally smells just what you picture a blueberry would smell like.” (Marijuana is legal in Oregon.)
> /QUOTE]


----------



## melissatrv

I am curious about the silence of Meghan's ex-husband.  I am sure the tabloids would pay huge money for him to talk.   He either has a lot of love and respect for her, they broke up on friendly terms, or the BRF threw money at him to keep quiet.   Not even anyone in his family is saying anything. He is the one the tabloid readers would probably be the most interested in hearing from too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gazoo

melissatrv said:


> I am curious about the silence of Meghan's ex-husband.  I am sure the tabloids would pay huge money for him to talk.   He either has a lot of love and respect for her, they broke up on friendly terms, or the BRF threw money at him to keep quiet.   Not even anyone in his family is saying anything. He is the one the tabloid readers would probably be the most interested in hearing from too



Last I read he was developing a series about someone that becomes a Princess, so if he's being quiet it's to make bank. Or maybe not. Who knows. Most people's exes aren't going to be complimentary. You are an ex for a reason after all. 

I kinda get now why Royals are/were encouraged to only marry virgins.


----------



## mdcx

gazoo said:


> Yeah Diana became a loose cannon, but the root cause was the triangle and her refusal let her husband carry on with Camilla whilst she turned the other cheek. I really wonder if there were no third party at that time, would Diana be alive now. Maybe she'd even be with Charles still. We will never know.
> 
> I don't get the feeling that Meghan will be anything like Diana. There's no triangle for one, and if Harry does cheat then any wrath Meghan wants to unleash on him is deserved, IMO. I was impressed that Diana was so heavy handed in exposing Charles and his parents in their treatment of the seedy affair, and it was crazy messy between him and Camilla. It's a new day and women shouldn't put up with that archaic "all Royals have mistresses" BS.
> 
> I know opinion is split on Charles and Camilla. My husband for one, thinks theirs is the great love story. I always felt sorry for Diana. She was complicated, but also fragile and steel willed. I'd bet  both her sons have the same traits to a degree.


Diana imploded when she realised that her "love story" was a con from the beginning, that everyone else knew this and that the BRF expected her to just shut up and play nice about it, acting as though everything was fine.

It would be quite devastating to think you were marrying for love as a 19 year old virgin then discover after having kids that your husband never loved you, it was only that he wasn't allowed to marry his true love and yours was a marriage of convenience. Poor Diana was already emotionally damaged before all of this due to her own childhood.

I think all of this will make Harry not care too much what the press tries to do to drag Meghan down. He wants to be with the woman he loves. I feel so sorry for Meghan because I don't think she would have had any real idea what the press would be like, or her family for that matter.


----------



## mdcx

melissatrv said:


> I heard that Beatrice and Eugenie do not like Kate.  I know there is a lot of tension since the princesses were taken off of the royal dole. Also that Kate and Countess Sophie do not get along.  Makes me wonder if  Kate and Meghan are genuinely friendly with each other.  They say Princess Margaret's daughter Lady Sarah Chatto is super nice, generous, low key and well respected in the royal family (reportedly a favorite of the Queen).  Perhaps Meghan can find support and guidance from her.


I agree, Margarets children both seem nice. So does Anne's daughter Zara Tindall, then there are all Harry's cousins on his mothers side like Lady Kitty Spencer etc.

ETA I always got the impression that Harry's former girlfriend Chelsy Davy wanted nothing to do with being part of the BRF and that's why they ended.


----------



## Jayne1

melissatrv said:


> I heard that Beatrice and Eugenie do not like Kate.  I know there is a lot of tension since the princesses were taken off of the royal dole. Also that Kate and Countess Sophie do not get along.  Makes me wonder if  Kate and Meghan are genuinely friendly with each other.  They say Princess Margaret's daughter Lady Sarah Chatto is super nice, generous, low key and well respected in the royal family (reportedly a favorite of the Queen).  Perhaps Meghan can find support and guidance from her.


I haven't heard of anyone liking Kate. 

The press, especially the US press, likes to pretend that she and Meghan are besties, but I don't think that's true.


----------



## catlover46

The Daily Mail is reporting that none of the Queen’s cousins children and grandchildren have been invited.


----------



## chowlover2

I read an article yesterday about what she has to give up, I could not do it. The pros don't match the cons. You are never  supposed to hug or kiss royalty in public, you are supposed to walk 2 steps behind Harry at all times. 4 colors of nail polish are allowed, all neutral. Skirts have to be below your knee, stockings should be worn. No wedge heels allowed ( something Kate does anyway ) Royalty has to fly on different planes as if there were a crash the whole family will not perish. They must always carry  black mourning clothes with them in case the monarch at home passes and they don't want to be pictured in casual wear arriving home. It goes on and on. 

Diana was young and I am sure the BRF thought she would be easily molded as Princess. Meghan is quite a bit older and sure to be more settled in her ways. Only plus is that Harry is far from the throne at this point, perhaps he will have more leeway.  I wish them both the best, but I could't do it.


----------



## TC1

She hasn't ever walked 2 steps behind him. They've been in numerous public appearances and walked side by side. Same with William and Kate.


----------



## Lodpah

melissatrv said:


> I am curious about the silence of Meghan's ex-husband.  I am sure the tabloids would pay huge money for him to talk.   He either has a lot of love and respect for her, they broke up on friendly terms, or the BRF threw money at him to keep quiet.   Not even anyone in his family is saying anything. He is the one the tabloid readers would probably be the most interested in hearing from too


From what I read she did not tell him about breaking up. She sent back her wedding and engagement rings by post.  He's successful in his own right so I doubt he even wants to be in on this drama unfolding.


----------



## zen1965

Markle  Sparkle... By now Meghan could probably do with a puff or two.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think a good ally for her would be Sophie, Countess of Wessex. Although before marriage they're lives could not have been more different I think Sophie must know how she could be feeling. When she got married Edward was ( if my calculations are correct ) 7th in line to the throne, Harry is 6th, so she would have been one of the 4th (or 5th if you count Princess Margaret) highest ranking female member of the Royal Family at that time. That's pressure in itself.


----------



## Traminer

Jayne1 said:


> I haven't heard of anyone liking Kate.



I have.


----------



## gazoo

I think a lot more people appreciate Kate now after the messy Markle relatives have come to light. Kate has been criticised for not having a proper job before marrying,  and for not doing as many Royal engagements as she could have. And I guess many clutched their pearls over her skirts blowing up in the wind several times. She's birthed 3 heirs within 6 years of marriage though, which is her main purpose, and hasn't embarrassed the Firm. I'd say she's been a big asset. Hopefully both she and William will help Meghan navigate what's to come.


----------



## bag-princess

TC1 said:


> She hasn't ever walked 2 steps behind him. They've been in numerous public appearances and walked side by side. Same with William and Kate.




Exactly!! What century was that “rule” written?? [emoji15]


----------



## myown

scarlet555 said:


> Not sure why or how but find her prettier since she has been engaged to Prince Harry.


she lost lots of weight


----------



## myown

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Oh man, the stories that are breaking now.... crazy stuff. The dad was in McDonalds and KFC the day of the 'heart attack.' And he went to the mother's home, too, with flowers. Wonder if Harry is having second thoughts...


why would he? 
don´t we all have a Familie? nobody choses their origin Family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> BRF fame is the kind of fame that has as much bad as good. Her every single move will be monitored and judged. I would gladly take my normal life instead of the life that will become hers.ey.


Harrys ex girlfriend (I think it was Chelsea) said she loved him and would have married him, but didn't like the fame that came with him and that's the reason they split


----------



## debbiesdaughter

The only thing I am just curious about trying to put myself into her shoes, if you know you have a strained relationship with your father,and you know he makes bad choices why is it shocking or surprising that he is doing this?  I in no way condone his behavior and I feel sad for her however, you are asking a lot of a dad who hasn't even met your fiance yet please show up in front of millions of people and walk me down the aisle and look like we have a perfect relationship....l think if I was in her shoes I might have done some early damage control.  Same with the crazy family, yes you can't control people but no one thought crazy people were going to do crazy things?  No battle plan is in action?


----------



## myown

Lodpah said:


> I read somewhere that MM dad had to suck it up and ask MM for money one tiME as he is extremely broke and she flat out refused. Apparently he had won 750,000 in a lottery years ago thus MM was able to go to elite schools and do all those extracurricular things that go along with the schools.
> SMH.


I disagree. As a parent it is your duty/purpose to provide the best life for your children. Yet my son doesnt owe me anything


----------



## westjenn

berrydiva said:


> Isn't her family here? I don't know how international law works but I imagine that a cease and desist might not work the same across international waters as it does here in the US. What can their PR really do if her family doesn't live there nor do they control the media here? Furthermore, how do you stop someone from speaking openly?


That's what I was looking for- Cease & Desist!  There must be a reason why it hasn't been used yet!


----------



## bag-mania

*Behind Thomas Markle's special relationship with Meghan Markle*

It's been a dizzying week of gossip and speculation for Meghan Markle's father days before one of the most anticipated weddings of the year.

The American actress will wed Prince Harry on Saturday at St. George's Chapel in Windsor Castle in a ceremony watched by millions around the world.

But while she's largely stayed out of the spotlight in the days leading up to the wedding, the father of the bride has been busy making headlines worldwide with one theme -- will he be there or won't he?

Thomas Markle has given multiple interviews to celebrity news site TMZ on whether he'll walk his famous daughter down the aisle -- saying in the latest that he won't.

At first, the former Hollywood lighting director was expected to play a key role on his daughter's big day, but it emerged Tuesday that he could miss the wedding because of heart surgery.

The announcement marked the latest twist after accusations that he posed for wedding preparation photos for a paparazzi agency. After the revelation, he pulled out of the wedding, reportedly saying he doesn't want to embarrass the royal family or his daughter.

*Close ties despite divorce *
Whether or not he attends the wedding, the father and daughter share a close relationship by all accounts.

Meghan is said to be upset about the staged photos, but still wants her father to walk her down the aisle.

Markle divorced Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland, in the 1980s but has remained part of his daughter's life.
In a 2016 message titled "Happy Father's Day" posted on her now-deleted Instagram account, Meghan Markle paid tribute to him.

"Thanks for my work ethic, my love of Busby Berkeley films & club sandwiches, for teaching me the importance of handwritten thank you notes, and for giving me that signature Markle nose. I love you," she reportedly posted. 

Meghan has said she spent most of her childhood hanging out at her father's job after school.

"Every day after school for 10 years, I was on the set of 'Married ... with Children,' which is a really funny and perverse place for a little girl in a Catholic school uniform to grow up," she told Esquire in 2013.

"There were a lot of times my dad would say, 'Meg, why don't you go and help with the craft services room over there? This is just a little off-color for your 11-year-old eyes.' "



Thomas Markle is being vilified for one reason: he's American

Those days on the set with her father shaped her career. In the interview, she said he'd call and offer her advice on lighting while she was on television show "Suits."

"... [M]y dad will be the first person to call me and say like, 'Why aren't you using this sort of lighting gel?' The crew guys know that it's where I grew up," she said.

Meghan said in the 2013 interview that her father had retired about six years earlier. She recalled watching the credits at the end of "Married .. with Children" episodes and giving the screen a kiss when she saw his name go by.

*'Draw your own box'*
Long before she turned into a Hollywood star, Meghan struggled with her biracial identity. She's said her father helped her realize she doesn't need to pick one race over the other.

When she was in seventh grade, her English teacher asked her to check the ethnicity box for Caucasian on a census, which made her feel like she was choosing one parent over another
When she told her father about the incident, he was angry.

'"If that happens again, you draw your own box," she said he told her, according to Elle UK. 

The issue of race would be a confusing thread throughout Meghan's early years. When she was 7, she wanted a doll set that came in either an all-white or all-black family. Her father took apart the doll packages and mixed a black mom doll, a white dad doll and two children of both races, and gave them to her as a Christmas gift.

"My dad had taken the sets apart and customized my family," she wrote.

*He lives in Mexico *
Thomas Markle lives in the Mexican beach city of Rosarito, where he was photographed by a paparazzo in the apparently staged photos over the past few weeks.

Her half-sister Samantha Markle has added to the controversy by leaking details on their father even as Kensington Palace has requested that journalists respect his privacy.

The estranged sibling has said their father suffered a heart attack after reports emerged that Thomas Markle may not attend the royal wedding on Saturday.

While Samantha Markle has reportedly not spoken to her sister for several years, she has not been shy about making media rounds. She did not specify the timing of her father's heart attack, but told the "Good Morning Britain" program that while she's concerned for his health, she did not want him to miss out on the big day.

"I wanted to see him go. I didn't want him deprived of that. But clearly the propriety should be whether or not it is safe for him to do that," Markle added.

Samantha Markle has previously said she was the one who had encouraged their father to stage the photos in an ill-fated bid to improve his image.

*He was to meet with the royal family*
Both of Meghan's parents were due to fly into the UK in the days before the wedding. Once there, they are expected to spend time with the British royal family, including Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh.
Prince Harry has yet to meet his fiancée's father.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/16/europe/royal-wedding-thomas-markle-profile/index.html


----------



## daisychainz

debbiesdaughter said:


> The only thing I am just curious about trying to put myself into her shoes, if you know you have a strained relationship with your father,and you know he makes bad choices why is it shocking or surprising that he is doing this?  I in no way condone his behavior and I feel sad for her however, you are asking a lot of a dad who hasn't even met your fiance yet please show up in front of millions of people and walk me down the aisle and look like we have a perfect relationship....l think if I was in her shoes I might have done some early damage control.  Same with the crazy family, yes you can't control people but no one thought crazy people were going to do crazy things?  No battle plan is in action?


I think it is testimony to how whirlwind their courtship was. It has happened so fast there was no time for family preparation. I agree with you very much. They have been estranged for years and he, the dad, is now supposed to be perfect for her event and all of a sudden do no wrong for months on end. That's asking a lot of someone who she is not close to and who she obviously knows has a history of bad choices. It seems like the only people under control are ex-husbands and ex-lovers because we have not heard from any of them yet.


----------



## terebina786

I would just like to know why I'm getting breaking news alerts on her father's situation every 5 minutes... It really isn't that important


----------



## queennadine

DC-Cutie said:


> how do you stop a person from doing what they want to do?



I bet $$$ and an NDA could work with these people.


----------



## westjenn

queennadine said:


> I bet $$$ and an NDA could work with these people.


Agreed.


----------



## gelbergirl

Hope he has a good recovery.  Was sorry to hear of his health problems.


----------



## DC-Cutie

queennadine said:


> I bet $$$ and an NDA could work with these people.


do you know what NDAs are for?  it's not for what is happening here


----------



## westjenn

DC-Cutie said:


> do you know what NDAs are for?  it's not for what is happening here


Cease & Desist, Non Disclosure.. People without a legal background use these terms interchangeably. I think we all know what is trying to be said here: Is there a legal way to get someone to cease talking about you in public, in magazines in newspaper either for monetary gain or not.


----------



## queennadine

DC-Cutie said:


> do you know what NDAs are for?  it's not for what is happening here



Sure do, since I'm an attorney. You can ask a party to sign an NDA at any time to keep quiet. $$$ could have been provided as consideration, and jurisdiction and forum specified. Not difficult to understand.


----------



## DC-Cutie

queennadine said:


> Sure do, since I'm an attorney. You can ask a party to sign an NDA at any time to keep quiet. $$$ could have been provided as consideration, and jurisdiction and forum specified. Not difficult to understand.


Ask is the key word... they don't have to.
not difficult to understand


----------



## queennadine

DC-Cutie said:


> Ask is the key word... they don't have to.
> not difficult to understand


Lolz, yes "ask" is the key word. $$$ would have incentivized them. I never said it would have been binding. Since they appear money hungry, this could have been an option.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## knasarae

> Then there is *Tracy Dooley*, the ex-wife of the half brother (which makes her Meghan’s former sister-in-law). Ms. Dooley says she does not feel hurt that neither she nor her sons, Tyler and Thomas III, were invited — especially since she separated from her ex-husband in 1992 and* last spoke to Meghan about 20 years ago.*
> 
> “Her brother has said such horrible things about her that she couldn’t have invited her nephews or me to the wedding,” Ms. Dooley said in an interview.
> 
> *Ms. Dooley would like to make it clear that she has no intention of exploiting, exaggerating, inflating, monetizing, misrepresenting or in anyway abusing her connection.*
> 
> But she and Tyler have come to London for the wedding week to make a scheduled appearance as Meghan experts on “Good Morning Britain,” a live daily program, and possibly on other shows, part of an army of guests recruited for their close (or not) connections as part of a week of all-royal-all-the-time coverage. She says she especially wants to provide a corrective to the public unpleasantness being disseminated by bitter Markle relatives.
> 
> *“I am the only person who is old enough to see the whole family dynamic and the only person in the family, outside of Meghan’s mom and dad, who is respectable and honorable,”* Ms. Dooley, 53, said in an interview last week, speaking from her home in Grants Pass, Oregon.



Oh the irony!


----------



## BagLovingMom

The irony to me is what do they even have to disclose ? I haven’t heard of any damning reveal from her background or the types of things that people usually enter into NDAs to keep from coming out. They just seem to gripe about her not taking care of them from what I can tell. No one has a perfect family though!


----------



## Traminer

BagLovingMom said:


> No one has a perfect family though!



I second that!


----------



## berrydiva

queennadine said:


> Sure do, since I'm an attorney. You can ask a party to sign an NDA at any time to keep quiet. $$$ could have been provided as consideration, and jurisdiction and forum specified. Not difficult to understand.


How does an NDA get enforced for private citizens when the asking party is in a totally different country on a different continent? 

It works in the corporate world as you're an employee of a company but often works council are involved. How would that work in this case?


----------



## BagLovingMom

berrydiva said:


> How does an NDA get enforced for private citizens when the asking party is in a totally different country on a different continent?
> 
> It works in the corporate world as you're an employee of a company but often works council are involved. How would that work in this case?



Presumably the NDA would have a choice of law clause as is usually in contracts. I’d think an NDA would be more easily enforceable than non compete agreements are but idk. I’m an attorney but this isn’t my practice area. Anyways only a few days left , I think some networks are starting coverage tomorrow. I’m lookinh forward to it !


----------



## queennadine

Because it’s a private contract and the parties could specify jurisdiction, forum, and choice of law.
Celebrities ask people they hook up with to sign NDA’s all the time. Different than this case obviously, lol. But NDA’s work for quite a bit.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan must just want to go to sleep and wake up an hour before the ceremony! 

Must be so worrying to think _what will they do next_ about her dysfunctional family.


----------



## berrydiva

BagLovingMom said:


> Presumably the NDA would have a choice of law clause as is usually in contracts. I’d think an NDA would be more easily enforceable than non compete agreements are but idk. I’m an attorney but this isn’t my practice area. Anyways only a few days left , I think some networks are starting coverage tomorrow. I’m lookinh forward to it !





queennadine said:


> Because it’s a private contract and the parties could specify jurisdiction, forum, and choice of law.
> Celebrities ask people they hook up with to sign NDA’s all the time. Different than this case obviously, lol. But NDA’s work for quite a bit.


Thanks. I was genuinely curious as I'm wondering how do you enforce it if they break the NDA or what would be needed to do to enforce it given the complexity of different countries. In the case of celebs getting folks to sign NDAs, how enforceable are they when the parties are in separate countries? Sounds like a lawsuit and nothing much more can be done.


----------



## queennadine

That’s essentially it: provides cause of action for a lawsuit. But with people who like fame, that in and of itself could be reason to break confidentiality. 
Hopefully the rest of the week is quiet as far as her family is concerned!


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Must be so worrying to think _what will they do next_ about her dysfunctional family.



I’d think she’d be more worried about those media outlets obsessed with seeking out every person she’s ever had contact with in an attempt to find dirt on her and embarrass her. That probably won’t end after the wedding.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bag-mania said:


> I’d think she’d be more worried about those media outlets obsessed with seeking out every person she’s ever had contact with in an attempt to find dirt on her and embarrass her. That probably won’t end after the wedding.



For sure. They are all out to make some major money from her 36 years of baggage. I think she’s going to be even more scrutinized after becoming an official member of the BRF.

Kate was fortunate to have a somewhat normal family and I’m sure she’s making the BRF proud by producing 3 heirs and causing little to no drama or scandal. Kudos to her, because I would probably lose my mind under that all those ridiculous rules and protocols.


----------



## Lodpah

myown said:


> I disagree. As a parent it is your duty/purpose to provide the best life for your children. Yet my son doesnt owe me anything



Yes that's true but if in later years my parents or parent are not doing too well (like life happens, one minute it can all be gone due to the economy, health, etc.) I WOULD HELP THEM. It's in my culture. When my mother was getting sick and eventually died the travel costs to keep getting her back and forth to get treated was in the thousands but did I complain? HECK NO! I would give everything up to hear her talk, see her smile and would even mortgage my house, wipe out my 401K whatever.  I wouldn't walk away and see them struggle (which I have done many times helping them).


----------



## minababe

her sister coloured her hair dark and is saying again **** about meghan..  she is such a poor Person..
did you know that her own daughter has nothing to do with her mom anymore because she is such a bad human?
she said everything samantha is saying about meghan is a lie and she always talked bad about meghan even before Harry and she didn't see her for more than 10 years ..

I wish the press would say how ugly a Person can be inside and outside because of jealousy and how stultify she is making herself with all her interviews ..instead of giving her all the time this platform ..
her father got a heart attack because of his evil children .. but they all don't stop it's shocking


----------



## myown

Lodpah said:


> Yes that's true but if in later years my parents or parent are not doing too well (like life happens, one minute it can all be gone due to the economy, health, etc.) I WOULD HELP THEM. It's in my culture. When my mother was getting sick and eventually died the travel costs to keep getting her back and forth to get treated was in the thousands but did I complain? HECK NO! I would give everything up to hear her talk, see her smile and would even mortgage my house, wipe out my 401K whatever.  I wouldn't walk away and see them struggle (which I have done many times helping them).


but how do we know she never helped her dad or tried and he refused or something. did she ever said something about that or was it only him?


----------



## westjenn

bag-mania said:


> I’d think she’d be more worried about those media outlets obsessed with seeking out every person she’s ever had contact with in an attempt to find dirt on her and embarrass her. That probably won’t end after the wedding.


Exactly what I was getting at. Where does it end? This is what she signed up for? Sigh. Can't help but feel sorry for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## westjenn

Lodpah said:


> Yes that's true but if in later years my parents or parent are not doing too well (like life happens, one minute it can all be gone due to the economy, health, etc.) I WOULD HELP THEM. It's in my culture. When my mother was getting sick and eventually died the travel costs to keep getting her back and forth to get treated was in the thousands but did I complain? HECK NO! I would give everything up to hear her talk, see her smile and would even mortgage my house, wipe out my 401K whatever.  I wouldn't walk away and see them struggle (which I have done many times helping them).


A statement was just released where Meghan stated she has helped her father throught the years...


----------



## zen1965

This has turned into a real circus. The father's side of the family going stark raving mad, and the mother going to Oprah. Her statement only added fuel to the fire.
Behind the scenes there will be a few by now smirking that Harry made the wrong choice. Unfortunately, this will haunt her for some time to come. And there is no end in sight. She must feel pretty distraught.


----------



## Alexenjie

I have read recently that Meghan's dad needed her financial help in the past and she helped him. I'm sure she will probably continue to help him. The step sister and brother seem like the most obnoxious type of family members and I would personally cut them off both financially and socially (which she might have done already as they did not get wedding invitations. I feel for Meghan, being the only child of her dad and her mom, there are probably not many people to vent to, especially over these greedy, publicity seeking, horrible, half related attention seekers. At the very least you would think the press would see through their stories and ignore them.

It seems like Meghan's father had a decent career in lighting for TV shows. I can't imagine that he doesn't have both social security and probably a pension to get him through retirement (plus that lotto win which was not huge but a ice bonus). He shouldn't need her help to live though retirement except for the fact that some people never take care of their finances responsibly. Even without marrying Harry, Meghan had the means to assist him for years to come if she wanted to.


----------



## bag-mania

The whole thing reminds me of something we've seen often in comedy movie plots. A young woman falls in love with a man considered above her in class. Then her uncouth family shows up with a kindly but oafish father, a scheming half-sister, and a bitter half-brother. The snobs all look down their noses at the woman and consider her unworthy. Hilarity commences.

Hopefully this will turn out like a movie where love prevails in the end.


----------



## daisychainz

Alexenjie said:


> I have read recently that Meghan's dad needed her financial help in the past and she helped him. I'm sure she will probably continue to help him. The step sister and brother seem like the most obnoxious type of family members and I would personally cut them off both financially and socially (which she might have done already as they did not get wedding invitations. I feel for Meghan, being the only child of her dad and her mom, there are probably not many people to vent to, especially over these greedy, publicity seeking, horrible, half related attention seekers. At the very least you would think the press would see through their stories and ignore them.
> 
> It seems like Meghan's father had a decent career in lighting for TV shows. I can't imagine that he doesn't have both social security and probably a pension to get him through retirement (plus that lotto win which was not huge but a ice bonus). He shouldn't need her help to live though retirement except for the fact that some people never take care of their finances responsibly. Even without marrying Harry, Meghan had the means to assist him for years to come if she wanted to.


I had read the opposite, lol. That she didn't help him when needed. But either way, in helping her father she is indirectly helping her half-siblings, because the father is obviously close to them and likely funnels some of what he has to them, too. We know he's close to the sister because he apparently took her advice. And Meghan is not going to be there to help him in his old age, his other kids are more present. Perhaps if she did not financially help her dad it was because she knew some portion of the money would go to the half-siblings.


----------



## myown

Meghan with old university friend Lindsay Roth
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




















Misha Nonoo is said to have introduced the couple












fitness instructor Heather Dorak















 co-star Sarah Rafferty
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	

























Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...men-friends-fly-UK-big-day.html#ixzz5Fm4RagXF 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


----------



## ap.

wrong thread


----------



## Loulibelle

Up until the divorce she will be a 'kept' woman but I imagine with the amount of money she has earnt anyway she would be able to fund whatever her heart desires.
Post divorce she can revert to selling her tale of woe. Poor Harry, I would be gutted if my sons married someone fake like her.


----------



## Antonia

So, now I hear the sister who was a passenger in a car got into an accident due to papparazzi following them.  It's getting worse by the minute!


----------



## Loulibelle

Antonia said:


> So, now I hear the sister who was a passenger in a car got into an accident due to papparazzi following them.  It's getting worse by the minute!


----------



## Loulibelle

I dislike her intensely as she comes across as though she is acting but to have risen to where she has and her personal achievements do demonstrate grit. But people revert to type and unless her Mum is able to support her, in her new life then she is in for a rough ride. But she seems to be a survivor.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Loulibelle said:


> I dislike her intensely as she comes across as though she is acting but to have risen to where she has and her personal achievements do demonstrate grit. But people revert to type and unless her Mum is able to support her, in her new life then she is in for a rough ride. But she seems to be a survivor.


how do you dislike someone to that extent that you've never met?


----------



## bag-mania

There wouldn't be a "problem" with her family if the British tabloid media (and TMZ) would leave them alone. This is all a media-created, media-driven story. The British tabloids love to stir the pot and cause drama whenever possible.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Antonia said:


> So, now I hear the sister who was a passenger in a car got into an accident due to papparazzi following them.  It's getting worse by the minute!


man!  I wonder if they've thought about eloping in Vegas


----------



## ap.

Loulibelle said:


> Up until the divorce she will be a 'kept' woman but I imagine with the amount of money she has earnt anyway she would be able to fund whatever her heart desires.
> Post divorce she can revert to selling her tale of woe. Poor Harry, I would be gutted if my sons married someone fake like her.



 "up until the divorce"  I guess there's always the tell-all book to fall back on, but I wonder if she had to sign an NDA (with the prenup?).  Do royals do prenups?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## alismarr

I do hope her mother removes her nose ring for the big day.


----------



## daisychainz

DC-Cutie said:


> how do you dislike someone to that extent that you've never met?


How can you like someone you've never met? It goes both ways, no?


----------



## DC-Cutie

daisychainz said:


> How can you like someone you've never met? It goes both ways, no?


true.  I just think to dislike someone intensely takes much more effort.  

But whateves...


----------



## daisychainz

DC-Cutie said:


> true.  I just think to dislike someone intensely takes much more effort.
> 
> But whateves...


I'm neutral about Meghan myself. I think with movie stars and royalty and those types we can only form impressions from images we see in magazines and on tv and some speeches, since we'll never know them. Some people have positive reactions and others have negative ones, for whatever reason. I think we can feel about her however she comes across to us.

I was actually thinking last night about Harry's decision to marry a television personality because with the media frenzy that surrounded Diana you might think he'd select a partner that was not so limelight-worthy and already in the media. Diana is a bit before my time, I was too young to know much, but it's almost as though he is going right back into the center of media controversy and issues with Meghan as a wife. Hopefully it dies down for them and all of us after the wedding is done.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I'm just taking Issa Rae's approach to Megan...  'tis all


----------



## Loulibelle

daisychainz said:


> How can you like someone you've never met? It goes both ways, no?


Her behaviour, selling herself for money and the way she treats her family....it takes no effort at all to dislike her, she is repellent. Now liking her would take so much effort and life is too short.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I was actually thinking last night about Harry's decision to marry a television personality because with the media frenzy that surrounded Diana you might think he'd select a partner that was not so limelight-worthy and already in the media. Diana is a bit before my time, I was too young to know much, but it's almost as though he is going right back into the center of media controversy and issues with Meghan as a wife. Hopefully it dies down for them and all of us after the wedding is done.



Diana as a new bride was different from Diana as a princess. She was only 19 and she was shy and very much in love. Over time she learned how to navigate her way in the public eye and deal with the media. It helped that she was much more charismatic than Charles and she became the beloved peoples' princess. Unfortunately for her, the media was so obsessed with her every move that she never had any peace. 

Harry was young when she died. I doubt he thought about media uproar when he chose Meghan.


----------



## Traminer

Antonia said:


> So, now I hear the sister who was a passenger in a car got into an accident due to papparazzi following them.  It's getting worse by the minute!



A Diana déjà vu?


----------



## Sharont2305

apey_grapey said:


> "up until the divorce"  I guess there's always the tell-all book to fall back on, but I wonder if she had to sign an NDA (with the prenup?).  Do royals do prenups?


I believe a pre nup has been suggested but Harry has said no,  no need. I don't think there would be a tell all book if they divorce because she, like Diana and Sarah, would keep her title of Duchess of (wherever) and that would be enough to bank roll the rest of her life. The title Her Royal Highness would be taken away, just like it was for Diana and Sarah. Plus, if they have children, they would still be members of the Royal Family and great grandchildren to our current Monarch and Grandchildren of the next.


----------



## Sharont2305

Traminer said:


> A Diana déjà vu?


My thoughts exactly! You couldn't make it up!


----------



## Lounorada

DC-Cutie said:


> true.  *I just think to dislike someone intensely takes much more effort.*
> 
> But whateves...


I think it goes both ways... super-fans/stans can be batsh*t crazy and make it look pretty damn exhausting and time consuming to be that devoted to a celebrity they have never met.


----------



## melissatrv

Sharont2305 said:


> I think a good ally for her would be Sophie, Countess of Wessex. Although before marriage they're lives could not have been more different I think Sophie must know how she could be feeling. When she got married Edward was ( if my calculations are correct ) 7th in line to the throne, Harry is 6th, so she would have been one of the 4th (or 5th if you count Princess Margaret) highest ranking female member of the Royal Family at that time. That's pressure in itself.



Edward is 10th now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_to_the_British_throne 
I agree that Sophie would be a good mentor also.  A model of quiet grace


----------



## melissatrv

terebina786 said:


> I would just like to know why I'm getting breaking news alerts on her father's situation every 5 minutes... It really isn't that important


I am in the US and I am getting this too.  It must be out of control in the UK!!


----------



## jiangjiang

apey_grapey said:


> "up until the divorce"  I guess there's always the tell-all book to fall back on, but I wonder if she had to sign an NDA (with the prenup?).  Do royals do prenups?



There is no prenup! 
Good luck to both.


----------



## melissatrv

I have seen these circulated also.  I bet that when the Queen passes that some of these rules will be changed....perhaps wearing nylons?   I have also heard "no garlic" and "no shellfish".  The garlic is the Queen's personal preference and the shellfish rule pre-dates her

At least she did not have to learn Danish like Princess Mary of Denmark.  From what I hear, it is not the easiest language to learn!



chowlover2 said:


> I read an article yesterday about what she has to give up, I could not do it. The pros don't match the cons. You are never  supposed to hug or kiss royalty in public, you are supposed to walk 2 steps behind Harry at all times. 4 colors of nail polish are allowed, all neutral. Skirts have to be below your knee, stockings should be worn. No wedge heels allowed ( something Kate does anyway ) Royalty has to fly on different planes as if there were a crash the whole family will not perish. They must always carry  black mourning clothes with them in case the monarch at home passes and they don't want to be pictured in casual wear arriving home. It goes on and on.
> 
> Diana was young and I am sure the BRF thought she would be easily molded as Princess. Meghan is quite a bit older and sure to be more settled in her ways. Only plus is that Harry is far from the throne at this point, perhaps he will have more leeway.  I wish them both the best, but I could't do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jiangjiang

melissatrv said:


> I am in the US and I am getting this too.  It must be out of control in the UK!!



It’s actually quite ok here,  emphasis on all American TV hosts keep saying how excited they are, first American princess dream come true!  

I’m just so glad it is not in London!


----------



## westjenn

Antonia said:


> So, now I hear the sister who was a passenger in a car got into an accident due to papparazzi following them.  It's getting worse by the minute!


Supposedly according to authorities, there’s no evidence of a car cash. I guess all made up by Meghan’s sister..


----------



## Sharont2305

melissatrv said:


> Edward is 10th now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_to_the_British_throne
> I agree that Sophie would be a good mentor also.  A model of quiet grace


Yes, i was saying that then, at the time of marriage he was 7th, so similar placing to Harry x


----------



## Sharont2305

jiangjiang said:


> It’s actually quite ok here,  emphasis on all American TV hosts keep saying how excited they are, first American princess dream come true!
> 
> I’m just so glad it is not in London!


Have they forgotten Princess Grace? Lol, she would be the first American Princess. 
Over here the TV hosts seem to be obsessed with finding American tourists in Windsor to ask for their opinions


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> Have they forgotten Princess Grace? Lol, she would be the first American Princess.
> Over here the TV hosts seem to be obsessed with finding American tourists in Windsor to ask for their opinions




Took the words right out of my mouth re Princess Grace!  And don't I keep reading that Meghan will not be a princess anyway?  Could be wrong as I am not really paying much attention.  I can still picture Harry as a little boy walking behind his mother's coffin - I do hope that he has chosen someone who will make him happy.


----------



## melissatrv

Luvbolide said:


> Took the words right out of my mouth re Princess Grace!  And don't I keep reading that Meghan will not be a princess anyway?  Could be wrong as I am not really paying much attention.  I can still picture Harry as a little boy walking behind his mother's coffin - I do hope that he has chosen someone who will make him happy.



They say Harry will be made a Duke (bets of Duke of Sussex) and then Meghan will be The Duchess of Sussex.  If he does not become a Royal Duke, Meghan would technically be Princess Henry of Wales - similar to Princess Michael of Kent.  But Royal Duke outranks "prince" so William uses that title.  Only the children of the sovereign and children of sons of the sovereign are a prince and princess by birth...for example, Princess Anne, Princess Beatrice, etc  Princess Anne's children are not prince and princess. I heard Prince Edward opted out of these tiles for his children (Lady Louise etc) I read a great article on it recently but for the life of me cannot find it.  Others I have found do not seem to be very thorough


----------



## Hobbsy

Loulibelle said:


> Up until the divorce she will be a 'kept' woman but I imagine with the amount of money she has earnt anyway she would be able to fund whatever her heart desires.
> Post divorce she can revert to selling her tale of woe. Poor Harry, I would be gutted if my sons married someone fake like her.


Do you know Her? Related to her? How would you think you know all this?


----------



## Hobbsy

Loulibelle said:


> I dislike her intensely as she comes across as though she is acting but to have risen to where she has and her personal achievements do demonstrate grit. But people revert to type and unless her Mum is able to support her, in her new life then she is in for a rough ride. But she seems to be a survivor.


I bet you're fun at a party.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Have they forgotten Princess Grace? Lol, she would be the first American Princess.
> Over here the TV hosts seem to be obsessed with finding American tourists in Windsor to ask for their opinions


I think Grace Kelly was a Much bigger movie star while Meghan is on a basic cable tv show that not many people watch.  But English royalty is more prominent here than monarchy in Monaco.
Grace Kelly was before my time but she gave up a big career to marry him.  Meghan doesn't have that much to give up IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

Loulibelle said:


> I dislike her intensely as she comes across as though she is acting but to have risen to where she has and her personal achievements do demonstrate grit. But people revert to type and unless her Mum is able to support her, in her new life then she is in for a rough ride. But she seems to be a survivor.


Not everyone is that close to their mother.  If her mother isn't near, she can get support from friends and her husband.  And if she is close with her mother, they can talk on the phone and mother can visit.


----------



## SkeeWee1908

I think Megan is Gorgeous and I love her style...


----------



## SkeeWee1908

Bellagarofalo said:


> I have seen a lot of Meghan buzz on the Prince Harry thread but thought she deserved her own!
> 
> Let's kick it off by identifying this bag she wore in Cardiff a few days ago. I think it resembles a small Chloé Marcie, but some of the details threw me off.
> 
> What say you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 3942335



Thank you for this thread OP....


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Rehearsal today (Thurs.)


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Rehearsal today (Thurs.)


----------



## Sharont2305

melissatrv said:


> They say Harry will be made a Duke (bets of Duke of Sussex) and then Meghan will be The Duchess of Sussex.  If he does not become a Royal Duke, Meghan would technically be Princess Henry of Wales - similar to Princess Michael of Kent.  But Royal Duke outranks "prince" so William uses that title.  Only the children of the sovereign and children of sons of the sovereign are a prince and princess by birth...for example, Princess Anne, Princess Beatrice, etc  Princess Anne's children are not prince and princess. I heard Prince Edward opted out of these tiles for his children (Lady Louise etc) I read a great article on it recently but for the life of me cannot find it.  Others I have found do not seem to be very thorough


Princess Anne chose not to give titles to her children, so they could have a more normal life so they could have been Prince and Princess. Prince Edward and Sophie are Earl and Countess, so their children are Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn. I've heard also that, when the time comes Edward will become Duke of Edinburgh ( pronounced Edinbrruh )so Sophie will be the Duchess. But I suppose that may not happen if it's Charles, Prince of Wales that's King at that time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## GoStanford

Sharont2305 said:


> Princess Anne chose not to give titles to her children, so they could have a more normal life...when the time comes Edward will become Duke of Edinburgh ( pronounced Edinbrruh )so Sophie will be the Duchess.


I always found it interesting that Anne, who is reportedly quite traditional and a stickler for what's proper in the monarchy, opted for her kids not to have titles, while Edward, who wanted to make his own name through his documentaries and other projects, ended up conforming more to the traditional role of prince, including having his kids have titles.


----------



## Traminer

SkeeWee1908 said:


> I think Megan is Gorgeous and I love her style...



Absolutely!


----------



## Sharont2305

GoStanford said:


> I always found it interesting that Anne, who is reportedly quite traditional and a stickler for what's proper in the monarchy, opted for her kids not to have titles, while Edward, who wanted to make his own name through his documentaries and other projects, ended up conforming more to the traditional role of prince, including having his kids have titles.


That's very true, I hadn't thought of it like that. And then there's Andrew.............still wants his daughters to be bank rolled by the Monarch!


----------



## Lodpah

So did she invite anyone from her mother's side of the family? I mean not everybody can be that bad unless she is embarrassed of them.


----------



## PatsyCline

Just read that Prince Charles will walk Meghan down the aisle. A nice alternative, I think.


----------



## minababe

Traminer said:


> A Diana déjà vu?



come one guys .. I wouldn't wonder if they did it with purpose just to be again in the media. These People are just disgusting and they would do EVERYTHING for a bit fame ..


----------



## khriseeee

PatsyCline said:


> Just read that Prince Charles will walk Meghan down the aisle. A nice alternative, I think.



I just read this too! I have to admit I got a little teary eyed, I'm so excited for tomorrow!


----------



## minababe

please stop talking bad about her mother. she is doing a great Job so far, reared a Independent women who fight for women rights and the love of her life. she didn't give any interviews or comments about meghan or Harry, she is the only one so far !!

and her Meeting with oprah was because of the disgusting comments People had about meghan because she is half black. it's about racism. what People and media wrote about meghan .. a serious Topic especially in the us. so whats wrong with it??
it must be hard to give your own children ideals and Moral on the way, reared her liberal and see now how People think she is not good enough to be the wife of a prince because of the colour of her skin.


----------



## minababe

sdkitty said:


> I think Grace Kelly was a Much bigger movie star while Meghan is on a basic cable tv show that not many people watch.  But English royalty is more prominent here than monarchy in Monaco.
> Grace Kelly was before my time but she gave up a big career to marry him.  Meghan doesn't have that much to give up IMO.



Suits is a big show world wide!

she is a caflornia Girl .. free Soul, open minded, indpendent. to be in London as the wife of prince Harry couldn't be more opposite . I think she gave up a lot!


----------



## mdcx

PatsyCline said:


> Just read that Prince Charles will walk Meghan down the aisle. A nice alternative, I think.


I think this is lovely.


----------



## minababe

myown said:


> Meghan with old university friend Lindsay Roth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Misha Nonoo is said to have introduced the couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fitness instructor Heather Dorak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> co-star Sarah Rafferty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...men-friends-fly-UK-big-day.html#ixzz5Fm4RagXF
> Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook



beautiful Pictures !!! She seems to have good circle of friends! I hope they are all there tomorrow to Support her !!


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> People think she is not good enough to be the wife of a prince because of the colour of her skin.


is that a topic?


----------



## Traminer

> minababe said: ↑
> People think she is not good enough to be the wife of a prince because of the colour of her skin.



Who are those people who think such rubbish?


----------



## DC-Cutie

Of course the color of her skin is a topic and anybody that thinks is not, is living in their own bubble.

We still live in a world where people can’t get past the color of our skin. Sadly.

Heck in this thread alone, I’ve read shady comments that don’t come outright and say it, but it’s obvious how people think.


----------



## myown

I like my bubble

ETA to be honest, I didnt even noticed her skin color isn't _white_ until they mentioned it on suits


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Prince Charles will walk her down? Interesting. Is there not one male friend she knows who could have done it? She's that alone? I think it's a very lovely gesture and of great magnitude but I do find it bizarre to be 'given away' by someone not in your own family. Wonder why the mom couldn't have stood in, or why she wasn't able to walk alone.


----------



## myown

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Prince Charles will walk her down? Interesting. Is there not one male friend she knows who could have done it? She's that alone? I think it's a very lovely gesture and of great magnitude but I do find it bizarre to be 'given away' by someone not in your own family. Wonder why the mom couldn't have stood in, or why she wasn't able to walk alone.


maybe she feels a connection to the family and is close to them.


----------



## catlover46

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Prince Charles will walk her down? Interesting. Is there not one male friend she knows who could have done it? She's that alone? I think it's a very lovely gesture and of great magnitude but I do find it bizarre to be 'given away' by someone not in your own family. Wonder why the mom couldn't have stood in, or why she wasn't able to walk alone.



He’s not walking her all the way down. She’s walking alone through the Nave and he’s meeting her when she reaches the Quire and will walk her through the Quire.


----------



## Coconuts40

I love the gesture that Prince Charles will walk Meghan down the aisle.  When we found out her father would not attend, I was secretly hoping Prince Charles would step in.  I think it's the ultimate gesture of acceptance, and trust that Meghan is accepted into the family as the one that will marry his youngest son.


----------



## Traminer

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I do find it bizarre to be 'given away' by someone not in your own family.



I do not like this expression "to be given away" at at all.
Btw: Who gives the bridegroom away? 

For me the most natural thing will always be that bride and bridegroom walk to the altar side by side und nobody is "leading" anybody und nobody is giving anybody away.


----------



## myown

Traminer said:


> Btw: Who gives the bridegroom away?


no one. and then we have these 50 year olds that almost still get breastfeeded


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Traminer said:


> I do not like this expression "to be given away" at at all.
> Btw: Who gives the bridegroom away?
> 
> For me the most natural thing will always be that bride and bridegroom walk to the altar side by side und nobody is "leading" anybody und nobody is giving anybody away.


You'd have to change tons of cultural beliefs for that to ever happen. Weddings are steeped in traditions and history and family.


----------



## Traminer

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Weddings are steeped in traditions and history and family.



I know.

But not every tradition is in itself a good thing, just because it is a tradition.

Who likes the idea, that the bride is the property of her father, who "gives her away"  so that she may become the property of her husband then?

That is what this ceremony symbolizes.

More fitting for the stone age than for the year 2018.

---------------------

But we are treading on thin ice here  -  I know ....


----------



## rose60610

I had a feeling Prince Charles would be walking her down the aisle. I think it's a more of a publicity/political move to become more popular. On the other hand, it's a nice gesture to walk divorced Meghan down the aisle as both he himself and his second wife, Camilla, are also divorced.


----------



## queennadine

I seriously could not care less what color her skin is, or what her background is. I don't know why people obsess, if they even do.


----------



## westjenn

queennadine said:


> I seriously could not care less what color her skin is, or what her background is. I don't know why people obsess, if they even do.


Agreed. I think the issue that many people have is that she is an American "commoner".  Not her "race" but her lack of aristocratic pedigree.


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Prince Charles will walk her down? Interesting. Is there not one male friend she knows who could have done it? She's that alone? I think it's a very lovely gesture and of great magnitude but I do find it bizarre to be 'given away' by someone not in your own family


I'm not thinking it as ' given away' I'm thinking its more of welcome to our family. I think it's lovely.


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> is that a topic?


the other aspect that no one here is talking about but which I've heard talked about on TV is the excitement of young girls of color seeing a woman of color in this role......can't be denied that some of the excitement about her is about her race - not just that she's an American divorcee


----------



## westjenn

sdkitty said:


> the other aspect that no one here is talking about but which I've heard talked about on TV is the excitement of young girls of color seeing a woman of color in this role......can't be denied that some of the excitement about her is about her race - not just that she's an American divorcee[/Q


100% this.


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> the other aspect that no one here is talking about but which I've heard talked about on TV is the excitement of young girls of color seeing a woman of color in this role......can't be denied that some of the excitement about her is about her race - not just that she's an American divorcee


That's interesting....is this an angle the media is trying to make a story or actually true? Obviously, I can't speak for all but I haven't come across any young women of color who cares about her marrying Harry with greater interest.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> That's interesting....is this an angle the media is trying to make a story or actually true? Obviously, I can't speak for all but I haven't come across any young women of color who cares about her marrying Harry with greater interest.


I recall Whoopi talking about this.....basically saying a little black girl can now see herself as having the possibility of being a princess....not saying this is an accomplishment in the same way as some others but it is progress in a way.  Not something that would likely have happened 50 years ago.  Even Prince Charles apparently could not marry the woman he loved back then.


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> I recall Whoopi talking about this.....basically saying a little black girl can now see herself as having the possibility of being a princess....not saying this is an accomplishment in the same way as some others but it is progress in a way.  Not something that would likely have happened 50 years ago.  Even Prince Charles apparently could not marry the woman he loved back then.


I don't know about Whoopi's opinions of things as of late but perhaps. There are black princesses so guess this is from a non-black measure of the possibility of becoming a princess....the ones currently don't count I guess because it's not to the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> I don't know about Whoopi's opinions of things as of late but perhaps. There are black princesses so guess this is from a non-black measure of the possibility of becoming a princess....the ones currently don't count I guess because it's not to the BRF.


IDK....not saying every little girl of color feels this way - or every young woman.  But she has just gone from being a b-list actress to being one of the most famous and talked-about (at least for now) women in the world


----------



## Sharont2305

He and William have just done a walkabout outside the castle.


----------



## Sharont2305

And now Meghan and her Mum have arrived at the hotel they're staying at. Her mum looks lovely


----------



## zen1965

westjenn said:


> Agreed. I think the issue that many people have is that she is an American "commoner".  Not her "race" but her lack of aristocratic pedigree.


I tend to agree with this but think the issue with a lot of the Hooray Henrys is not so much her lack of pedigree (marrying commoners is very common these days - look at Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Spain...) but more so her being US American and a TV actress on her second or even third marriage. Sure, Gracia Patricia was US American, too. However, I feel the image of US Americans in Europe has greatly changed in the past 40 years or so. And the trashy behaviour of parts of her family just does not help to dispel clichés.


----------



## Hobbsy

Traminer said:


> I know.
> 
> But not every tradition is in itself a good thing, just because it is a tradition.
> 
> Who likes the idea, that the bride is the property of her father, who "gives her away"  so that she may become the property of her husband then?
> 
> That is what this ceremony symbolizes.
> 
> More fitting for the stone age than for the year 2018.
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> But we are treading on thin ice here  -  I know ....


Many people don't take everything so literal.


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> I tend to agree with this but think the issue with a lot of the Hooray Henrys is not so much her lack of pedigree (marrying commoners is very common these days - look at Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Spain...) but more so her being US American and a TV actress on her second or even third marriage. Sure, Gracia Patricia was US American, too. However, I feel the image of US Americans in Europe has greatly changed in the past 40 years or so. And the trashy behaviour of parts of her family just does not help to dispel clichés.


It would have been easier for her if she came from a more traditional intact family with a father who could walk her down the aisle, etc.
But they seem  to have overcome this


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Traminer said:


> I know.
> 
> But not every tradition is in itself a good thing, just because it is a tradition.
> 
> Who likes the idea, that the bride is the property of her father, who "gives her away"  so that she may become the property of her husband then?
> 
> That is what this ceremony symbolizes.
> 
> More fitting for the stone age than for the year 2018.
> 
> ---------------------
> 
> But we are treading on thin ice here  -  I know ....


I agree, not everything is good just because traditional calls for it. Traditions do change with time, so maybe one day your vision will be the norm. I think the more we see royals/politicians/celebs do things we become more accepting, too.


----------



## Coconuts40

Sharont2305 said:


> And now Meghan and her Mum have arrived at the hotel they're staying at. Her mum looks lovely



I agree, her mother looks so sweet and adorable.  She has a very kind and gentle vibe to her.


----------



## westjenn

sdkitty said:


> It would have been easier for her if she came from a more traditional intact family with a father who could walk her down the aisle, etc.
> But they seem  to have overcome this


Absolutely agree! Imagine the insane half siblings removed from this situation. I hope they leave her alone now.


----------



## DC-Cutie

her mom is beautiful.  Rockin' those locs!


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> IDK....not saying every little girl of color feels this way - or every young woman.  But she has just gone from being a b-list actress to being one of the most famous and talked-about (at least for now) women in the world


I could definitely see the excitement around her being a commoner marrying a royal....it's like every Disney fairy tale.


----------



## Traminer

For those who understand French:

*Meghan Markle a des origines alsaciennes*



> Ce week-end aura lieu le mariage de Meghan Markle et du prince Harry. Les généalogistes du monde entier cherchent depuis plusieurs jours les origines de la future princesse.
> A leur grande surprise, elle aurait des origines alsaciennes. Son nom viendrait même de la déformation du patronyme Merckel et la souche familiale de l'actrice américaine viendrait d'un petit village situé au Nord de l'Alsace, à Lampertsloch.



http://www.cnews.fr/videos/people/2018-05-16/meghan-markle-des-origines-alsaciennes-781802​


----------



## Traminer

> We're just wild about Harry ...



Only about Harry?
And what about Meghan?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CherryCokeCoach

Traminer said:


> Only about Harry?
> And what about Meghan?



Seeing as this thread was created in 2006 and the title hasn’t been updated (similar to other threads in this forum that also do not get updated), I think we all know that the original intention of the headline wasn’t an offense to Meghan. 

Whoever will create another BRF post specifically for the newlyweds?


----------



## carebearz

Personally I’m not too into the wedding but I do love the pomp, celebratory stuff. So I’ll be watching just for that; I’m more interested in see other royals, than the couple.


----------



## Traminer

CherryCokeCoach said:


> Seeing as this thread was created in 2006 and the title hasn’t been updated  ..... and so on and so on....



I know all that.
Don't you understand a bit of irony?


----------



## Gal4Dior

The wedding has taken over my instagram and annoying me with stupid posts about how Harry and Meghan are a perfect match astrologically even though their signs aren’t technically compatible. Seriously, Instyle? 

At first I was looking forward to this wedding, but then all the alerts about the royal wedding is making me think this is more just a dog and pony show for the BRF. Basically good publicity. It takes away from the main purpose of their union.


----------



## VickyB

melissatrv said:


> Edward is 10th now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_to_the_British_throne
> I agree that Sophie would be a good mentor also.  A model of quiet grace



Wasn't Sophie caught on tape ages ago suggesting that she would use her royal connections to make a business deal?


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> I think Grace Kelly was a Much bigger movie star while Meghan is on a basic cable tv show that not many people watch.  But English royalty is more prominent here than monarchy in Monaco.
> Grace Kelly was before my time but she gave up a big career to marry him.  Meghan doesn't have that much to give up IMO.



ITA. Grace was an Oscar winner and had had a stellar film career. You can't compare that to a c-list actress on a cable TV show. I's never heard of her until their dating surfaced. My mom tho is a big Suits fan so she is excited.


----------



## VickyB

westjenn said:


> Absolutely agree! Imagine the insane half siblings removed from this situation. I hope they leave her alone now.



I hope so too but those 2 (especially that hateful 1/2 sister) seem to be total grifters. They're gonna milk their connections until the day they die.


----------



## mdcx

VickyB said:


> Wasn't Sophie caught on tape ages ago suggesting that she would use her royal connections to make a business deal?


I know Sarah Ferguson was caught offering access to Prince Andrew for $$$$. Link here
I haven't heard anything similar about Sophie though.


----------



## VickyB

mdcx said:


> I know Sarah Ferguson was caught offering access to Prince Andrew for $$$$. Link here
> I haven't heard anything similar about Sophie though.



Yes, indeed. Sophie was set up and caught on tape suggesting that if a deal was struck the party could indeed benefit from her royal connections. It was a scandal!


----------



## Traminer

VickyB said:


> ...  but those 2 (especially that hateful 1/2 sister) seem to be total grifters.



Isn't it a bit like in fairy tales? 
In fairy tales we also have  hateful step sisters.


----------



## Bellagarofalo




----------



## Bellagarofalo




----------



## Bellagarofalo




----------



## Bellagarofalo




----------



## Bellagarofalo

Sorry for any repeats! Having trouble uploading due to size.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Traminer

Bellagarofalo said:


> Sorry for any repeats! Having trouble uploading due to size.



That is OK! I had a simular problem today. 
And your pictures are all fine!


----------



## Bellagarofalo

And a few more. Again, sorry if repeats.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Am I the only one not getting 100% sincerity from Meghan, like she's acting a bit to seem nice and kind? She's lovely and everything but Harry just looks more emotionally taken and smitten than she does. Or maybe it's just her red carpet mannerism/acting ability coming through to cope with it all?


----------



## meluvs2shop

So all those ppl in the back of the cathedral when she walked in alone are completely blocked from view right? If so the seating arrangement is interesting. I’d like to know the history of this 16th century cathedral.


----------



## sdkitty

almost like a Disney princess wedding


----------



## sdkitty

DC-Cutie said:


> Of course the color of her skin is a topic and anybody that thinks is not, is living in their own bubble.
> 
> We still live in a world where people can’t get past the color of our skin. Sadly.
> 
> Heck in this thread alone, I’ve read shady comments that don’t come outright and say it, but it’s obvious how people think.


Agree.....here in CA people are much more "color blind" than when I was growing up on the east coast.  I see many mixed race couples, esp teens.  But not to say everyone is free of prejudice.  And of course there are other forms of prejudice - like religion and country or origin.
But things have changed a lot and this wedding shows that.


----------



## DC-Cutie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Am I the only one not getting 100% sincerity from Meghan, like she's acting a bit to seem nice and kind? She's lovely and everything but Harry just looks more emotionally taken and smitten than she does. Or maybe it's just her red carpet mannerism/acting ability coming through to cope with it all?


Chi.... nvm


----------



## Yoshi1296

She looks stunning. I absolutely love her entire look.

Congrats to the newlyweds!


----------



## berrydiva

DC-Cutie said:


> Chi.... nvm


----------



## meluvs2shop

I loved her wedding look too. I’ve said it so many times already, but it’s timeless, classic and elegant. She looks stunning. 

I love her freckles too.


----------



## meluvs2shop

We should change the title of this thread to Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

DC-Cutie said:


> Chi.... nvm


Please translate


----------



## gelbergirl

Love the addition of Meghan to the title of this thread . . . but I still want "We're still wild about Harry" in the title . . . . 

Her hair looked fabulous, loved the dress, and looking for more information on that tiara . . 
congrats to the family especially Prince Charles, as it is his youngest son, and Meghan's Mom who I hope celebrated wonderfully today.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> Love the addition of Meghan to the title of this thread . . . but I still want "We're still wild about Harry" in the title . . . .
> 
> Her hair looked fabulous, loved the dress, and looking for more information on that tiara . .
> congrats to the family especially Prince Charles, as it is his youngest son, and Meghan's Mom who I hope celebrated wonderfully today.


I'm sure her mom was very proud but wonder if she felt lonely attending by herself.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I hope that she is around at Christmas and such and doesn't get totally left behind.
I felt bad for Meghan having no other family and it didn't seem like many friends at the wedding. The commentators were calling celebs who she has probably only met a few times in a work/charitable capacity her "close friends." Hopefully Harry's family is kind to her or it might get very lonely very quickly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I hope that she is around at Christmas and such and doesn't get totally left behind.
> I felt bad for Meghan having no other family and it didn't seem like many friends at the wedding. The commentators were calling celebs who she has probably only met a few times in a work/charitable capacity her "close friends." Hopefully Harry's family is kind to her or *it might get very lonely very quickly*.



Harry will not let that happen. . . Harry and her are a team . . .  I believe that.


----------



## berrydiva

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I hope that she is around at Christmas and such and doesn't get totally left behind.
> I felt bad for Meghan having no other family and it didn't seem like many friends at the wedding. The commentators were calling celebs who she has probably only met a few times in a work/charitable capacity her "close friends." Hopefully Harry's family is kind to her or it might get very lonely very quickly.


I haven't followed much but was it mostly her father's side of the family acting out or were both sides a mess? Did she really have no other family in attendance?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

berrydiva said:


> I haven't followed much but was it mostly her father's side of the family acting out or were both sides a mess? Did she really have no other family in attendance?



I have not been following the family drama either but they said many times her mother was her only family member in attendance. And on her side of the church the front pews were filled in with celebs like the Clooneys.


----------



## CherryCokeCoach

gelbergirl said:


> Love the addition of Meghan to the title of this thread . . . but I still want "We're still wild about Harry" in the title . . . .
> 
> Her hair looked fabulous, loved the dress, and looking for more information on that tiara . .



Information regarding the tiara can be found here:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ellievhall...arkles-wedding?utm_term=.gaQry0YE3#.flPnzVyr2[/QUOTE]


----------



## meluvs2shop

YASS!! I love this look.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Even though she looks nice for the reception it's still odd to me that there will probably be at least half a dozen better dressed people there. She just married a prince and became a duchess. This is like a beach reception dress.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> I know Sarah Ferguson was caught offering access to Prince Andrew for $$$$. Link here
> I haven't heard anything similar about Sophie though.


With Andrew's blessing.  They are peas in a pod, those two.


----------



## Jayne1

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I felt bad for Meghan having no other family and it didn't seem like many friends at the wedding. The commentators were calling celebs who she has probably only met a few times in a work/charitable capacity her "close friends." Hopefully Harry's family is kind to her or it might get very lonely very quickly.


I was noticing Meghan had many friends at the wedding and they, in celebrity tradition, were all famous!


----------



## VickyB

FLAWLESS!!!!!!! So chic!!! Make up was perfection! That veil was stunning!
OMG - flowers were spectacular!

Loved her evening party halter dress too!


----------



## Chamber Doll

meluvs2shop said:


> YASS!! I love this look.




this makes me want to go work out my shoulders and arms.....ugh  =/


----------



## CherryCokeCoach

Chamber Doll said:


> this makes me want to go work out my shoulders and arms.....ugh =/



Join the club! Purchase some dumbbells (hey, Marshall’s may sell them for cheap) and look up shoulder presses, lateral raises and other similar exercises. And this is coming from someone who haaaates working out.


----------



## CherryCokeCoach

VickyB said:


> That veil was stunning!



And I love the “story” behind it! Compliments of People, it “featured a trim of hand-embroidered flowers from each of the 53 counties in the Commonwealth in threads and organza“


----------



## Yoshi1296

berrydiva said:


> I haven't followed much but was it mostly her father's side of the family acting out or were both sides a mess? Did she really have no other family in attendance?



Yup they are a total mess. They didn't care about Meghan at all and once she got engaged to Harry they all began to pretend like they were so involved and loved her. Her half sister arranged to have staged pictures taken by the paps of Meghan's father getting ready for the royal wedding. Then, they made statements that put her under bad light. Also her half brother is a weed farmer and named a strain that he grows after her...wtf?? .


----------



## bag-princess

I don’t think anyone needs to feel sorry for her that it was just her mother there. They obviously are very close and are used to not having anyone else to depend on but each other!   It looks like that’s all they needed.  When you know nothing else you deal with it and it’s only other people that view it as a problem.


----------



## mchris55

I can't believe how much I am into this, but it is because they did it just right, especially after the drama!! Minimalist, the Jag...OMG!!

And that tiara.... Where has that been hiding?!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Murphy47

mchris55 said:


> I can't believe how much I am into this, but it is because they did it just right, especially after the drama!! Minimalist, the Jag...OMG!!
> 
> And that tiara.... Where has that been hiding?!?



The Tower with all the other royal jewels.


----------



## Cocoabean

bag-princess said:


> I don’t think anyone needs to feel sorry for her that it was just her mother there. They obviously are very close and are used to not having anyone else to depend on but each other!   It looks like that’s all they needed.  When you know nothing else you deal with it and it’s only other people that view it as a problem.



And some families are small. My wedding was not big...maybe 30 people. My side was five people. My parents, sister, brother, and his wife. All of my cousins, aunts, and uncles are on the East Coast. We are not close. They'd not go to the expense to come to California for my wedding. I'd not send an invite. 

My friends were from work. I felt that to invite one meant to invite all (DH and I worked together). We were NOT interested in having our entire work crew join us. We wanted to keep it very small, but DH's entire family is nearby. 

I paid to bring my sister here from Guam because her DH was in the Navy, and they could not afford it. She was my matron-of-honor. I have doubts that Meghan's half-siblings could have afforded to get to the wedding, and I doubt she wanted to foot the bill. From the limited things I have read, I would not blame her! I'd bring my parents (or parent, if that is all that applies), and enjoy my day.


----------



## mchris55

Murphy47 said:


> The Tower with all the other royal jewels.


Thanks!! 
Thanks, I hope... I really did not mean any harm if that was implied.


----------



## mdcx

meluvs2shop said:


> So all those ppl in the back of the cathedral when she walked in alone are completely blocked from view right? If so the seating arrangement is interesting. I’d like to know the history of this 16th century cathedral.


They could only see through the doorway into the chapel which is right at the back of the church.


----------



## mdcx

I thought Meghan looked like she was being true to her own style, as much as possible given the constraints. 
She is quite a simple, natural beauty and I thought both dresses and her makeup/hair allowed her to shine.
They were definitely less ornate than Kate's but Kate likely had a lot less say over what she wore etc.


----------



## Materielgrrl

I've watched this ceremony twice.  loving it!  The dresses give off the image or maybe inner persona she wants; simple, detail oriented, thoughtful, elegant, when sewn on her with her good looks and newlywed high, stunning!

There were many dresses I LOVED on the guests who arrived.  As one MSNBC giddy commentator said, they came to slay.  HRH showed up to get married, enjoy as much of her day as a new bride, and stun!  And she's been stunning all day.

Loved the cars, people, soldiers, guests, religious messages, great behavior, Fergie present again, her gf's coming in together, cast mates, horses, countryside, bride and groom, EVERYTHING about the day.  Compromises that were made by all made for a perfect wedding day. 

Not much to nitpick, and I'm the biggest one to pick on stuff that could have been better.  Just can't today.


----------



## mdcx

I just realised we will see Meghan again soon at Princess Eugenie's wedding which will be held at the same location.
That will be exciting, to see Meghan as one of the Royals.


----------



## bag-princess

Cocoabean said:


> And some families are small. My wedding was not big...maybe 30 people. My side was five people. My parents, sister, brother, and his wife. All of my cousins, aunts, and uncles are on the East Coast. We are not close. They'd not go to the expense to come to California for my wedding. I'd not send an invite.
> 
> My friends were from work. I felt that to invite one meant to invite all (DH and I worked together). We were NOT interested in having our entire work crew join us. We wanted to keep it very small, but DH's entire family is nearby.
> 
> I paid to bring my sister here from Guam because her DH was in the Navy, and they could not afford it. She was my matron-of-honor. I have doubts that Meghan's half-siblings could have afforded to get to the wedding, and I doubt she wanted to foot the bill. From the limited things I have read, I would not blame her! I'd bring my parents (or parent, if that is all that applies), and enjoy my day.




Exactly my point! [emoji1360] some families are very small - mine is one! It’s just me,my mother and my brother and sister! We never dealt with many of our other family growing up.


----------



## mdcx

Yes and many people have "troubled" family dynamics, parents who split acrimoniously, estranged relatives, weird stuff going on that makes it easier to keep things very small.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Some people have to make their own families from friends when their own (in this case, her father's side) are toxic. It's natural a lot of those are from the industry she works in.  I don't feel sorry for her, her mother seems like a strong woman who chose to get her and Meghan out and rise above the situation. She seems to have passed that on to Meghan.

I loved she walked in on her own, and then Charles took her arm - there was something great about that.  I loved the whole service including the black pastor, who shook up the congregation with his preaching.  The cellist, the choir, the beautiful chapel - and most of all the interaction between Harry and Meghan was just lovely.


----------



## bisousx

bag-princess said:


> I don’t think anyone needs to feel sorry for her that it was just her mother there. They obviously are very close and are used to not having anyone else to depend on but each other!   It looks like that’s all they needed.  When you know nothing else you deal with it and it’s only other people that view it as a problem.



And by the looks of what her family has said and done, Meghan isn't missing out on much.


----------



## Yoshi1296

Small families and small group of friends is better! My cousins wedding had 1100 people.[emoji88][emoji88]

Mine will end up being around the same unfortunately, IF I get married haha


----------



## leuleu

Yoshi1296 said:


> Small families and small group of friends is better! My cousins wedding had 1100 people.[emoji88][emoji88]
> 
> Mine will end up being around the same unfortunately, IF I get married haha


I don't even know 1100 people


----------



## myown

DC-Cutie said:


> Chi.... nvm


what does that mean?


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> I just realised we will see Meghan again soon at Princess Eugenie's wedding which will be held at the same location.
> That will be exciting, to see Meghan as one of the Royals.


the comments on the (german) tv made me believe they don't air Eugenies Wedding on TV?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I loved she walked in on her own, and then Charles took her arm - there was something great about that. .


that was like "oh , we already love you deeply, I want to be on your side stepping into our family"


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

meluvs2shop said:


> YASS!! I love this look.



Fabulous dress and she looked perfect in it. More Hollywood than royal maybe, but why not? 



myown said:


> that was like "oh , we already love you deeply, I want to be on your side stepping into our family"


I only saw a short version on this on a British newspaper website, but his smile when he looked at her was lovely to see.


----------



## meluvs2shop

Murphy47 said:


> The Tower with all the other royal jewels.


I visited the Tower once. Such a cool place.


----------



## meluvs2shop

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I hope that she is around at Christmas and such and doesn't get totally left behind.
> I felt bad for Meghan having no other family and it didn't seem like many friends at the wedding. The commentators were calling celebs who she has probably only met a few times in a work/charitable capacity her "close friends." Hopefully Harry's family is kind to her or it might get very lonely very quickly.



I think she has far more friends than we think. Remember, it was a mutual friend that introduced her to Prince Harry. That right there is respect and love. IMO.

She’s also close to that gorgeous actress ... I don’t know her name...Indian maybe? Not sure, anyway, she posted IG pics with several of Meghan’s friends titled pre wedding shenanigans or something to that effect. Everyone talked about Pipa’s butt at Kate’s. Meghan did it right. No adult bridesmaids, all eyes on her. Afterall, she’s the bride. It should be that way. I also heard she couldn’t decide and didn’t want to pick a MOH bc she’s close to many of her friends. I think she’s even besties with her college friends still. She may have even been in a sorority.


----------



## Rouge H

Lovely wedding, I wish them both happiness. ❤️


----------



## westjenn

Wanted to share a few of my favorite pictures from yesterday! Sorry If they’re duplicates!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I'm sort of glad you can't down vote me for this  It's hilarious, that pastor...


----------



## Addicted to bags

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Summer wear for royal fans. Or for those who are not, Dear God Republic Now?!
> View attachment 4067978


OMG!!!! How tacky, lol


----------



## Brandless

meluvs2shop said:


> I think she has far more friends than we think. Remember, it was a mutual friend that introduced her to Prince Harry. That right there is respect and love. IMO.
> 
> She’s also close to that gorgeous actress ... I don’t know her name...Indian maybe? Not sure, anyway, she posted IG pics with several of Meghan’s friends titled pre wedding shenanigans or something to that effect. Everyone talked about Pipa’s butt at Kate’s. Meghan did it right. No adult bridesmaids, all eyes on her. Afterall, she’s the bride. It should be that way. I also heard she couldn’t decide and didn’t want to pick a MOH bc she’s close to many of her friends. I think she’s even besties with her college friends still. She may have even been in a sorority.



True! I remember when Kate was married a lot of buzz was about Pippa’s outfit. A pattern company even came out with a sewing pattern duplicating Pippa’s dress.


----------



## Gal4Dior

meluvs2shop said:


> I think she has far more friends than we think. Remember, it was a mutual friend that introduced her to Prince Harry. That right there is respect and love. IMO.
> 
> She’s also close to that gorgeous actress ... I don’t know her name...Indian maybe? Not sure, anyway, she posted IG pics with several of Meghan’s friends titled pre wedding shenanigans or something to that effect. Everyone talked about Pipa’s butt at Kate’s. Meghan did it right. No adult bridesmaids, all eyes on her. Afterall, she’s the bride. It should be that way. I also heard she couldn’t decide and didn’t want to pick a MOH bc she’s close to many of her friends. I think she’s even besties with her college friends still. She may have even been in a sorority.



It’s her 3rd wedding, already. I don’t think she wanted to bother with bridesmaids. During my second wedding (only because my husband wanted one since he has never been married - I preferred to elope), I had no bridesmaids. I felt it was weird to make it a huge show when it was second time around. Just my opinion, of course.


----------



## marthastoo

LVSistinaMM said:


> It’s her 3rd wedding, already. I don’t think she wanted to bother with bridesmaids. During my second wedding (only because my husband wanted one since he has never been married - I preferred to elope), I had no bridesmaids. I felt it was weird to make it a huge show when it was second time around. Just my opinion, of course.


It's her second wedding.


----------



## Gal4Dior

marthastoo said:


> It's her second wedding.



Third if you count her annulment from her first husband - the college sweetheart.

I should clarify - reported marriage. So it would be her third marriage. Not sure if she ever had a wedding to her supposed first husband.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> I just realised we will see Meghan again soon at Princess Eugenie's wedding which will be held at the same location.
> That will be exciting, to see Meghan as one of the Royals.


This Tuesday, first engagement as a member of the Royal Family, something to do with Prince Charles being 70 this year.


----------



## marthastoo

LVSistinaMM said:


> Third if you count her annulment from her first husband - the college sweetheart.
> 
> I should clarify - reported marriage. So it would be her third marriage. Not sure if she ever had a wedding to her supposed first husband.


Once again, not true.  National Enquire claim.


----------



## Gal4Dior

marthastoo said:


> Once again, not true.  National Enquire claim.



I really don’t care enough if it is true or not. Also, I used “reported” or “supposed.”

At the end of the day, does it really matter if it’s second or third when it refers to my main point of NOT having a wedding party because you’ve already done it before?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

LVSistinaMM said:


> I really don’t care it if is or not. Also, I used “reported” or “supposed.”
> 
> Also, does it really matter if it’s second or third??


If it doesn't matter, then why do you insist on repeating what has been debunked?   I wouldn't use the National Enquirer as a reputable source.  

If I need to explain why a third marriage would be considered more negative for Meghan than a second marriage, then ... whatever.


----------



## Gal4Dior

marthastoo said:


> If it doesn't matter, then why do you insist on repeating what has been debunked?   I wouldn't use the National Enquirer as a reputable source.
> 
> If I need to explain why a third marriage would be considered more negative for Meghan than a second marriage, then ... whatever.



I haven’t seen where it’s been debunked and I didn’t read it from the National Enquirer, but if you would like to share a link of where it has been debunked - go right ahead.

Done now.


----------



## snibor

LVSistinaMM said:


> I haven’t seen where it’s been debunked and I didn’t read it from the National Enquirer, but if you would like to share a link of where it has been debunked - go right ahead.
> 
> Done now.



Let’s move  on. I too read about the annulled first marriage but then read an article stating it was completely false and this was her 2nd marriage. Nevertheless it’s Harry’s first, she has no children from a prior and seeing as he is part of the royal family, this was a big deal wedding.  The fact the she was married previously seems to have no relevance to the wedding ceremony or festivities.


----------



## Gal4Dior

snibor said:


> Let’s move  on. I too read about the annulled first marriage but then read an article stating it was completely false and this was her 2nd marriage. Nevertheless it’s Harry’s first, she has no children from a prior and seeing as he is part of the royal family, this was a big deal wedding.  The fact the she was married previously seems to have no relevance to the wedding ceremony or festivities.



Already have moved on. 

I think even if she had children it would be a big deal wedding, because of Harry. Wonder if the BRF would have deemed it non negotiable if she did have children. Hope more progress has been made to prevent that.


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> Wonder if the BRF would have deemed it non negotiable if she did have children. Hope more progress has been made to prevent that.


Considering what's gone on re Charles / Diana and Camilla I can't see that there would be a hoo ha, and I think Harry is stubborn enough to argue the case.....he would marry for love, no matter who she was.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Addicted to bags said:


> OMG!!!! How tacky, lol


Lets just say that picture got a lot of more love over at the Just because it's designer... thread


----------



## Irishgal

sdkitty said:


> Agree.....here in CA people are much more "color blind" than when I was growing up on the east coast.  I see many mixed race couples, esp teens.  But not to say everyone is free of prejudice.  And of course there are other forms of prejudice - like religion and country or origin.
> But things have changed a lot and this wedding shows that.



As a California native I agree but I don’t call it “color blind” (I’m not arguing your terminology I’m just expressing a different way to say it) - but I grew up mingling with all groups. Of course we knew as kids and teens and young adults what color our skin was but I just don’t recall it being a point of conversation. That said - part of it was my mom was an artist and had friends from many backgrounds so what happens in a persons home often carries with them as they grow up.


----------



## PatsyCline

I love this touch. Meghan’s wedding bouquet sent to the tomb of the unknown solider.


----------



## Irishgal

I’m sure for everyone this whole event was such a surreal, exhausting, emotional and exciting thing. Damn I can’t even go to Target without coming home tired so I can’t imagine how it was to be involved in this [emoji23]


----------



## PatsyCline

Irishgal said:


> I’m sure for everyone this whole event was such a surreal, exhausting, emotional and exciting thing. Damn I can’t even go to Target without coming home tired so I can’t imagine how it was to be involved in this [emoji23]



I was thinking the same thing. This morning must have been a huge relief for the couple.


----------



## Cocoabean

PatsyCline said:


> I love this touch. Meghan’s wedding bouquet sent to the tomb of the unknown solider.
> View attachment 4074615



Harry's great-grand mother (QEII's mother) started this when she got married in Westminster Abbey.


----------



## mdcx

myown said:


> the comments on the (german) tv made me believe they don't air Eugenies Wedding on TV?


No I don't think they will, I meant more we will see photos of her etc in her new role as just part of the Royal Family.



Sharont2305 said:


> This Tuesday, first engagement as a member of the Royal Family, something to do with Prince Charles being 70 this year.


Oh yay, I can't wait to see her.



meluvs2shop said:


> I think she has far more friends than we think. Remember, it was a mutual friend that introduced her to Prince Harry. That right there is respect and love. IMO.
> 
> She’s also close to that gorgeous actress ... I don’t know her name...Indian maybe? Not sure, anyway, she posted IG pics with several of Meghan’s friends titled pre wedding shenanigans or something to that effect. Everyone talked about Pipa’s butt at Kate’s. Meghan did it right. No adult bridesmaids, all eyes on her. Afterall, she’s the bride. It should be that way. I also heard she couldn’t decide and didn’t want to pick a MOH bc she’s close to many of her friends. I think she’s even besties with her college friends still. She may have even been in a sorority.


Priyanka Chopra. I think Priyanka is quite fond of the spotlight so maybe it was wise not to pick her as a bridesmaid


----------



## myown

meluvs2shop said:


> . I also heard she couldn’t decide and didn’t want to pick a MOH bc she’s close to many of her friends. I think she’s even besties with her college friends still. She may have even been in a sorority.


if that's true it shows what a lovely person she is


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> Already have moved on.
> 
> I think even if she had children it would be a big deal wedding, because of Harry. Wonder if the BRF would have deemed it non negotiable if she did have children. Hope more progress has been made to prevent that.


Mette-Marit had a child when she married a crown prince. No one really cares


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> No I don't think they will, I meant more we will see photos of her etc in her new role as just part of the Royal Family.


do you know why we won't see her wedding on TV? does she not want it (I cannot see that, I see her parents as very attention seeking) or is she such a no deal to even bother?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

It might depend on how senior Eugenie is considered in the BRF.  I don't think she is that senior anymore, her role may have shrunk as William and Harry, the children of Charles starting growing up and taking more of a role.  

I'm sure we will see some coverage though.  This is the Queen's granddaughter after all!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> Priyanka Chopra. I think Priyanka is quite fond of the spotlight so maybe it was wise not to pick her as a bridesmaid


LOL!


----------



## MarvelGirl

Official Wedding Photos Released today. Love them!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...icial-royal-wedding-photos.html?ITO=applenews


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Gorgeous!


----------



## Murphy47

They look truly happy.


----------



## gazoo

YAY - Harry's face!!

Gorgeous photos!


----------



## DC-Cutie

I love the pics, especially on the steps.  It's very relaxed and modern.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I love the pics!  For the one with the kids, I love that the kids are allowed to smile and pose like themselves instead of like little programmed robots.  I wish that Meghan was as relaxed as they are. One of my favorite royal wedding pics of all times is the one of Diana on the steps, dress all around her just looking relaxed and happy with the kids from their wedding.

This one:


----------



## kuriso

Oh, these pictures are lovely!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

The first pic is the best, it's beautiful and the dress really stands out in black and white. That wedding dress is perfection, btw.

Meghan's mom is really pretty in the other pic. She just comes off as so vulnerable- I felt she looked the same in the church- and I wish she'd had someone by _her_ side. Both she and Harry have natural true expressions. Sorry, but Meghan's got that Muriel's Wedding face going on. But she just married a prince so that's understandable


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The first pic is the best, it's beautiful and the dress really stands out in black and white. That wedding dress is perfection, btw.
> 
> Meghan's mom is really pretty in the other pic. She just comes off as so vulnerable- I felt she looked the same in the church- and I wish she'd had someone by _her_ side. Both she and Harry have natural true expressions. Sorry, but Meghan's got that *Muriel's Wedding face* going on. But she just married a prince so that's understandable


a what?


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The first pic is the best, it's beautiful and the dress really stands out in black and white. That wedding dress is perfection, btw.
> 
> Meghan's mom is really pretty in the other pic. She just comes off as so vulnerable- I felt she looked the same in the church- and I wish she'd had someone by _her_ side. Both she and Harry have natural true expressions. Sorry, but Meghan's got that Muriel's Wedding face going on. But she just married a prince so that's understandable


That's funny.  I sometimes think Toni Collette always has that face though. lol


----------



## Jayne1

LibbyRuth said:


> I love the pics!  For the one with the kids, I love that the kids are allowed to smile and pose like themselves instead of like little programmed robots.  I wish that Meghan was as relaxed as they are. One of my favorite royal wedding pics of all times is the one of Diana on the steps, dress all around her just looking relaxed and happy with the kids from their wedding.
> 
> This one:


Look at Charles and Andrew.  You can see the future, just looking at their faces.


----------



## gelbergirl

LibbyRuth said:


> I love the pics!  For the one with the kids, I love that the kids are allowed to smile and pose like themselves instead of like little programmed robots.  I wish that Meghan was as relaxed as they are. One of my favorite royal wedding pics of all times is the one of Diana on the steps, dress all around her just looking relaxed and happy with the kids from their wedding.
> 
> This one:



Ha ha, Diana’s poofy dress was made for this moment!


----------



## jellyv

Coconuts40 said:


> it seems the true colours of the Markle family are shining through.
> 
> I actually don't like the modernization of the royal family.  They  become common and normal and at that point, why have them?  The allure and mystery is unveiled.  I have a feeling there is deep regret within the royal family about this wedding.



Did you feel the same about Kate and family? If not, what could possibly be the difference....

[emoji19]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made history as more Americans (29 million [emoji44]) watched their wedding than the weddings of Prince William and Kate Middleton and Prince Charles and Princess Diana!


----------



## DC-Cutie

jellyv said:


> Did you feel the same about Kate and family? If not, what could possibly be the difference....
> 
> [emoji19]


I'm gonna wait for this answer...


----------



## bag-princess

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm gonna wait for this answer...




Me too! Scooch over.........


----------



## MarvelGirl

^


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made history as more Americans (29 million
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) watched their wedding than the weddings of Prince William and Kate Middleton and Prince Charles and Princess Diana!





bag-princess said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made history as more Americans (29 million [emoji44]) watched their wedding than the weddings of Prince William and Kate Middleton and Prince Charles and Princess Diana!



but to be fair, Kate and William's wedding was on a Friday.  Harry's was on the weekend


----------



## Coconuts40

jellyv said:


> Did you feel the same about Kate and family? If not, what could possibly be the difference....
> 
> [emoji19]



Yes I do feel this way regardless of whether it is Kate, Meghan, or anyone else for that matter. I feel the BRF keeps speaking about feeling modern and leading a more normal life.  As far as I"m concerned, you can't have it both ways.  You want the privilege of leading a normal family life with the privilege and perks of royalty. 

And please don't suggest that it is a racial thing, as that is the undertone I get from your comment.  My SO is biracial and I understand Meghan's struggle very very well.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Look at Charles and Andrew.  You can see the future, just looking at their faces.


Charles looks stressed


----------



## KM7029

I don’t know why this is being made into such a racial thing whenever someone doesn’t think this marriage is going to last.  Not denying that there are some racists in the royal family.

I’d be just as skeptical if this was a WHITE divorced American celebrity marrying Harry.  We all know what the shelf lives are like for celeb marriages, that factor doesn’t have to do with race.

Meghan seems to like to project herself as independent and feminist, which is all fine.  However, she’s marrying into an oppressive monarchy and giving up all her freedom.

Sure, I bet it will be great at first, but after a while it probably feels constricting.

I think this marriage would be equally likely to fail with a white or black divorced American.  This just is not their culture!


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> but to be fair, Kate and William's wedding was on a Friday.  Harry's was on the weekend



Also would like to add, this time around it was a marriage to an American. I would think that made a big difference to the viewership.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Coconuts40 said:


> Yes I do feel this way regardless of whether it is Kate, Meghan, or anyone else for that matter. I feel the BRF keeps speaking about feeling modern and leading a more normal life.  As far as I"m concerned, you can't have it both ways.  You want the privilege of leading a normal family life with the privilege and perks of royalty.
> 
> And please don't suggest that it is a racial thing, as that is the undertone I get from your comment.  My SO is biracial and I understand Meghan's struggle very very well.


Have you been with your SO since ya'll were kids?


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> Also would like to add, this time around it was a marriage to an American. I would think that made a big difference to the viewership.


I wonder if we americans like the royals more than the brits do.  Obviously a lot of British love them but I was looking up approval for Kate and found some hating about the money they get and how they are very rich just due to being born into it.


----------



## DC-Cutie

sdkitty said:


> Charles looks stressed


He always looks constipated to me


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if we americans like the royals more than the brits do.  Obviously a lot of British love them but I was looking up approval for Kate and found some hating about the money they get and how they are very rich just due to being born into it.



I definitely think this is true. I find the concept of a monarchy abhorrent, but since I'm American it's fun for me to just look at the pomp and circumstance and easy for me to ignore the implications of it. All of the my British friends are very opposed to it. That being said, ********** sentiment is still quite low in the UK and the royal family remains very popular.


----------



## sdkitty

KM7029 said:


> I don’t know why this is being made into such a racial thing whenever someone doesn’t think this marriage is going to last.  Not denying that there are some racists in the royal family.
> 
> I’d be just as skeptical if this was a WHITE divorced American celebrity marrying Harry.  We all know what the shelf lives are like for celeb marriages, that factor doesn’t have to do with race.
> 
> Meghan seems to like to project herself as independent and feminist, which is all fine.  However, she’s marrying into an oppressive monarchy and giving up all her freedom.
> 
> Sure, I bet it will be great at first, but after a while it probably feels constricting.
> 
> I think this marriage would be equally likely to fail with a white or black divorced American.  This just is not their culture!


She may love Harry but it can't be denied that being a royal with all the fame and riches that come with it is part of the package.  Hopefully she will get satisfaction from her "work" as a royal and from raising a family.  Time will tell.  Maybe she will be like most celebs and stay married for a period of time (many years or not many years) and then divorce him.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Even though the royals can now admit that they enjoy curry and ordering pizza, are now sometimes photographed driving a car, or get to do something crazy like marry a person that  they are in love with rather than someone who checks all the boxes, I think they remain far from common.  A common person gets to give birth to a baby and then go home without makeup on, wearing yoga pants, applying ice and trying to heal from the process. A royal has an hour of hair and makeup to wear heals and look perfect to celebrate the birth experience she just went through. A common person goes to a job that they may love or hate, works for around 40 hours in exchange for a paycheck. A royal can be scheduled 6-7 days a week meeting with people they may or may not want to, bringing attention to causes, raising the profile of the arts, encouraging volunteerism, etc etc. They can get some flexibility in supporting causes they are passionate about (children, disabled vets) but also have to respect an agenda established by a higher order, and do it with a  smile on their face.
I think the reason there is still a royal family is that they do the work of promoting causes, the arts, etc that has been deemed to be important - and they draw in tourism dollars. I think the further proof they are not common is the assumption anytime an individual marries into the family that the family will eat that person alive. That's not said at most common weddings. But I think that the royals doing things like driving, eating curry, and getting in trouble by drinking too much in Vegas have helped people to realize they are human and not boring programmed robots, which is why their popularity seems to be on the rise again. 
When we see Will declining to attend conferences and openings because he's got a huge report due for his job in a CPA firm and he can't be late on the report or he may lose his job and he's got three kids to feed ... and when we see Meghan's mother sitting next to her best friend at her daughter's wedding because she's the only family member attending and who would make the mother of the bride sit alone at wedding ...  we'll know the royals are truly common.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> Even though the royals can now admit that they enjoy curry and ordering pizza, are now sometimes photographed driving a car, or get to do something crazy like marry a person that  they are in love with rather than someone who checks all the boxes, I think they remain far from common.  A common person gets to give birth to a baby and then go home without makeup on, wearing yoga pants, applying ice and trying to heal from the process. A royal has an hour of hair and makeup to wear heals and look perfect to celebrate the birth experience she just went through. A common person goes to a job that they may love or hate, works for around 40 hours in exchange for a paycheck. A royal can be scheduled 6-7 days a week meeting with people they may or may not want to, bringing attention to causes, raising the profile of the arts, encouraging volunteerism, etc etc. They can get some flexibility in supporting causes they are passionate about (children, disabled vets) but also have to respect an agenda established by a higher order, and do it with a  smile on their face.
> I think the reason there is still a royal family is that they do the work of promoting causes, the arts, etc that has been deemed to be important - and they draw in tourism dollars. I think the further proof they are not common is the assumption anytime an individual marries into the family that the family will eat that person alive. That's not said at most common weddings. But I think that the royals doing things like driving, eating curry, and getting in trouble by drinking too much in Vegas have helped people to realize they are human and not boring programmed robots, which is why their popularity seems to be on the rise again.
> When we see Will declining to attend conferences and openings because he's got a huge report due for his job in a CPA firm and he can't be late on the report or he may lose his job and he's got three kids to feed ... and when we see Meghan's mother sitting next to her best friend at her daughter's wedding because she's the only family member attending and who would make the mother of the bride sit alone at wedding ...  we'll know the royals are truly common.


they are not common.  But I think Harry and William are more human than the Kardashians.


----------



## Coconuts40

DC-Cutie said:


> Have you been with your SO since ya'll were kids?



Actually  yes I have known him since we were children.  He then went on to marry, divorce and we reconnected; now I am helping him raise his biracial children- 3 daughters for that matter.

Does this somehow add more validity to my comments for you?


----------



## BagLovingMom

KM7029 said:


> I don’t know why this is being made into such a racial thing whenever someone doesn’t think this marriage is going to last.  Not denying that there are some racists in the royal family.
> 
> I’d be just as skeptical if this was a WHITE divorced American celebrity marrying Harry.  We all know what the shelf lives are like for celeb marriages, that factor doesn’t have to do with race.
> 
> Meghan seems to like to project herself as independent and feminist, which is all fine.  However, she’s marrying into an oppressive monarchy and giving up all her freedom.
> 
> Sure, I bet it will be great at first, but after a while it probably feels constricting.
> 
> I think this marriage would be equally likely to fail with a white or black divorced American.  This just is not their culture!



Hm perception I suppose. I’m a black woman and haven’t found this thread to be filled with ‘making critiques into a racist thing’ at all . Loads of people think they’ll fail and loads think they will succeed is what I’ve gathered. People are entitled to their opinions, fair enough. 

Anyways back to direct topic, I love the wedding pics and agree it’s hard to compare recent viewership bc This wedding was on a weekend, although I think that was a deliberate move by the couple. I wonder where they are going on their honeymoon. It seems I read Namibia. Hopefully they will have privacy.


----------



## LibbyRuth

sdkitty said:


> they are not common.  But I think Harry and William are more human than the Kardashians.


I agree. I think that Diana's lasting touch on that family will be that while the kids grow up with great privilege and education which continues with them in adulthood, they are now a little better in touch with understanding that everyone does not live like they do.  While I don't think they fully understand things like the stresses of getting all the bills paid in a month or the worries that come with possible job loss, I think they have a little more compassion in understanding that people live with a variety of experiences, and they may have more gratitude and appreciation for the luxury they live in ... which may make the duty element of their lives more palatable.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LibbyRuth said:


> Even though the royals can now admit that they enjoy curry and ordering pizza, are now sometimes photographed driving a car, or get to do something crazy like marry a person that  they are in love with rather than someone who checks all the boxes, I think they remain far from common.  A common person gets to give birth to a baby and then go home without makeup on, wearing yoga pants, applying ice and trying to heal from the process. A royal has an hour of hair and makeup to wear heals and look perfect to celebrate the birth experience she just went through. A common person goes to a job that they may love or hate, works for around 40 hours in exchange for a paycheck. A royal can be scheduled 6-7 days a week meeting with people they may or may not want to, bringing attention to causes, raising the profile of the arts, encouraging volunteerism, etc etc. They can get some flexibility in supporting causes they are passionate about (children, disabled vets) but also have to respect an agenda established by a higher order, and do it with a  smile on their face.
> I think the reason there is still a royal family is that they do the work of promoting causes, the arts, etc that has been deemed to be important - and they draw in tourism dollars. I think the further proof they are not common is the assumption anytime an individual marries into the family that the family will eat that person alive. That's not said at most common weddings. But I think that the royals doing things like driving, eating curry, and getting in trouble by drinking too much in Vegas have helped people to realize they are human and not boring programmed robots, which is why their popularity seems to be on the rise again.
> When we see Will declining to attend conferences and openings because he's got a huge report due for his job in a CPA firm and he can't be late on the report or he may lose his job and he's got three kids to feed ... and when we see Meghan's mother sitting next to her best friend at her daughter's wedding because she's the only family member attending and who would make the mother of the bride sit alone at wedding ...  we'll know the royals are truly common.



But I have to give it to Kate that after her first child, she came out on those steps with a stomach that looked just like the stomach of a woman who's just given birth. No bellyband for her. She probably put it on right after those photos were taken but still. One of my biggest surprises after I'd just given birth was realising, while looking down at my stomach, that it was almost as big as before giving birth. I thought it would be restored to its former self almost immediately    Har har.


----------



## gelbergirl

Harry and Meghan have a scheduled appearance tomorrow.
Anyone know what this is??
Wondering if there will be a photo of this?  I recall it has something to do with Price Charles so I am not sure if it is a public or family event.


----------



## BagLovingMom

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But I have to give it to Kate that after her first child, she came out on those steps with a stomach that looked just like the stomach of a woman who's just given birth. No bellyband for her. She probably put it on right after those photos were taken but still. One of my biggest surprises after I'd just given birth was realising, while looking down at my stomach, that it was almost as big as before giving birth. I thought it would be restored to its former self almost immediately    Har har.


 Omg yes I totally agree ! I felt like it happened at time when various models were having babies and a week later they were in the Victoria’s Secret fashion show . I liked Kate from the start but I especially appreciated that moment. I still looked pregnant a good 3 weeks after the birth !


----------



## LibbyRuth

gelbergirl said:


> Harry and Meghan have a scheduled appearance tomorrow.
> Anyone know what this is??
> Wondering if there will be a photo of this?  I recall it has something to do with Price Charles so I am not sure if it is a public or family event.


I heard that Prince Charles is hosting a garden party at either Buckingham or Kensington palace, and they will be attending - so most likely we'll get pictures.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

BagLovingMom said:


> Omg yes I totally agree ! I felt like it happened at time when various models were having babies and a week later they were in the Victoria’s Secret fashion show . I liked Kate from the start but I especially appreciated that moment. I still looked pregnant a good 3 weeks after the birth !


No wonder we wonder if some of these celebs actually carry their children themselves!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> a what?


Muriel's Wedding is an Australian movie, hilarious and Toni Colette is brilliant in it. Everyone in it is. You have to see it I guess to get the reference.


----------



## Irishgal

I assume she will have to give up her US citizenship at this point because even living in another country if she holds dual citizenship, in other words does not give up being a US citizen, she is still subject to US tax law. Could be messy.


----------



## Jayne1

Coconuts40 said:


> I actually don't like the modernization of the royal family.  They  become common and normal and at that point, why have them?  The allure and mystery is unveiled.  I have a feeling there is deep regret within the royal family about this wedding.


I agree - though not about the wedding.  They were all messy and inbred and no one cares about the lesser royals. We like Harry because he used to be so cute, but he's not important in the lineage.

I agree with you as to not preferring the modernization of the royal family.   There's no point in having them if they are like everyone else.


----------



## bag-princess

LibbyRuth said:


> I heard that Prince Charles is hosting a garden party at either Buckingham or Kensington palace, and they will be attending - so most likely we'll get pictures.





it is Charles's 70th birthday party they will be attending.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Prince Charles has two birthdays also? 

Where is the honeymoon?


----------



## Eva1991

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree. I think that Diana's lasting touch on that family will be that while the kids grow up with great privilege and education which continues with them in adulthood, they are now a little better in touch with understanding that everyone does not live like they do.  While I don't think they fully understand things like the stresses of getting all the bills paid in a month or the worries that come with possible job loss, I think they have a little more compassion in understanding that people live with a variety of experiences, and they may have more gratitude and appreciation for the luxury they live in ... which may make the duty element of their lives more palatable.



I agree with all of your points. Modern royals are not as detached from reality as the older generations. William's marriage to Kate (a commoner) is proof that the younger generations care more about living the life they want rather than the one designated for them by royal protocol. Harry's marriage to Meghan is even further proof. These marriages would be frowned upon - if not forbidden - 50 years ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

I heard that no one from Meghan's family was there except her mother. We all know the drama from her father's side, but why was there no one from her mother's side....an aunt, an uncle, a cousin????  It is all so odd.  I felt so bad for her mom being there with just Harry's family. Even Kate's family was there!!!  That would be uncomfortable with just any groom's family but compound that by 10 million being the BRF.  The poor woman looked like a deer in the headlights


----------



## Eva1991

^ I think they should have arranged for her to sit with the royal family in order not to feel alone. Sitting next to Charles and Camilla would be nice.


----------



## beekmanhill

sdkitty said:


> She may love Harry but it can't be denied that being a royal with all the fame and riches that come with it is part of the package.  Hopefully she will get satisfaction from her "work" as a royal and from raising a family.  Time will tell.  Maybe she will be like most celebs and stay married for a period of time (many years or not many years) and then divorce him.



Most royals seem to do the same as celebs. Prince Charles,  Princess Margaret, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew.   They had their kids and moved on to the next spouse.   Meghan is giving up a life of freedom for a life of constraints, constant criticism, schedules.   They can't enjoy money as a normally wealthy family would.   Even their housing accommodations are not too special from what I've read, other than their historical significance.  Maybe when the Queen dies, and Charles takes over, some of the rigidity will be softened.   Same if Charles is bypassed and William takes over.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

melissatrv said:


> I heard that no one from Meghan's family was there except her mother. We all know the drama from her father's side, but why was there no one from her mother's side....an aunt, an uncle, a cousin????  It is all so odd.  I felt so bad for her mom being there with just Harry's family. Even Kate's family was there!!!  That would be uncomfortable with just any groom's family but compound that by 10 million being the BRF.  The poor woman looked like a deer in the headlights


I read somewhere that the mother was like Meghan, from a family with half-siblings, making her - technically - an only child as well. So she's probably very much like Meghan and not close to them. That's just what I've read, if others know diff. I'm sure they'll post.


----------



## Eva1991

beekmanhill said:


> Most royals seem to do the same as celebs. Prince Charles,  Princess Margaret, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew.   They had their kids and moved on to the next spouse.   Meghan is giving up a life of freedom for a life of constraints, constant criticism, schedules.   They can't enjoy money as a normally wealthy family would.   Even their housing accommodations are not too special from what I've read, other than their historical significance.  Maybe when the Queen dies, and Charles takes over, some of the rigidity will be softened.   Same if Charles is bypassed and William takes over.



I don't think that Charles can be bypassed unless he decides for himself not to take over; then William will have to take over.


----------



## beekmanhill

I don't know the technicalities of the British monarchy.  I know at one time it was widely speculated that Charles would be passed over.


----------



## Murphy47

beekmanhill said:


> I don't know the technicalities of the British monarchy.  I know at one time it was widely speculated that Charles would be passed over.



I think that was more of a hope back when he was a young playboy.


----------



## sdkitty

beekmanhill said:


> Most royals seem to do the same as celebs. Prince Charles,  Princess Margaret, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew.   They had their kids and moved on to the next spouse.   Meghan is giving up a life of freedom for a life of constraints, constant criticism, schedules.   They can't enjoy money as a normally wealthy family would.   Even their housing accommodations are not too special from what I've read, other than their historical significance.  Maybe when the Queen dies, and Charles takes over, some of the rigidity will be softened.   Same if Charles is bypassed and William takes over.


Housing accommodations don't sound bad to me - an apartment next to Will and Kate that has something like 20 rooms


----------



## beekmanhill

Not yet.
A two bedroom cottage.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...nsington-home-meghan-harry-will-live-married/


----------



## Coconuts40

beekmanhill said:


> Not yet.
> A two bedroom cottage.
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...nsington-home-meghan-harry-will-live-married/



Nottingham cottage looks so absolutely charming!


----------



## sdkitty

beekmanhill said:


> Not yet.
> A two bedroom cottage.
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...nsington-home-meghan-harry-will-live-married/


What I heard was that they were moving out of the cottage and some other royals were vacating the larger apartment - more suitable for raising a family.  Maybe the move and/or remodeling isn't complete yet.  I think I'd prefer the cottage myself.


----------



## beekmanhill

Murphy47 said:


> I think that was more of a hope back when he was a young playboy.



Charles was young?


----------



## Murphy47

beekmanhill said:


> Charles was young?



Hard to believe, right?!? 
And far wilder than Harry ever was.


----------



## Jayne1

Eva1991 said:


> ^ I think they should have arranged for her to sit with the royal family in order not to feel alone. Sitting next to Charles and Camilla would be nice.


She was sitting a row behind a friend of Meghan's -- he's the son of a former Canadian prime minister and an entertainment reporter, here in Toronto. Yes, his twins were page boys and holding up Meghan's veil, but if he was in the front row -- why wasn't her mother?


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> What I heard was that they were moving out of the cottage and some other royals were vacating the larger apartment - more suitable for raising a family.  Maybe the move and/or remodeling isn't complete yet.  I think I'd prefer the cottage myself.


Yes, I read they will be moving into Kensington Palace as soon as it is renovated for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## HiromiT

Jayne1 said:


> She was sitting a row behind a friend of Meghan's -- he's the son of a former Canadian prime minister and an entertainment reporter, here in Toronto. Yes, his twins were page boys and holding up Meghan's veil, but if he was in the front row -- why wasn't her mother?



I was wondering the same thing -- why Ben and Jessica were front row while her mom was behind them. Unless her mom didn't want to be front and centre. At the same time, I wondered if she was seated in the second row for the benefit of the cameras. You could see her clearly in the background behind Meghan during the ceremony. It wouldn't have been the same if Jessica was in the frame while Meghan said her vows LOL.


----------



## meluvs2shop

Jayne1 said:


> She was sitting a row behind a friend of Meghan's -- he's the son of a former Canadian prime minister and an entertainment reporter, here in Toronto. Yes, his twins were page boys and holding up Meghan's veil, but if he was in the front row -- why wasn't her mother?


I wondered that too but then thought her placement was perfect. She was visible throughout the entire wedding ceremony. The ppl below her not so much.  She  was right there front and center from a TV perspective.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

It really really bothered me that her mother was in the second row, but what you say about the camera makes sense. Jessica is her stylist and I noticed her tending to her train at one point so I think maybe she was seated there for that purpose and they didn't want to separate her and her husband?


----------



## mdcx

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree. I think that Diana's lasting touch on that family will be that while the kids grow up with great privilege and education which continues with them in adulthood, they are now a little better in touch with understanding that everyone does not live like they do.  While I don't think they fully understand things like the stresses of getting all the bills paid in a month or the worries that come with possible job loss, I think they have a little more compassion in understanding that people live with a variety of experiences, and they may have more gratitude and appreciation for the luxury they live in ... which may make the duty element of their lives more palatable.


I am reasonably sure I saw a a little smile between Meghan and Harry when they said the "for richer or poorer" part of the vows


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> She was sitting a row behind a friend of Meghan's -- he's the son of a former Canadian prime minister and an entertainment reporter, here in Toronto. Yes, his twins were page boys and holding up Meghan's veil, but if he was in the front row -- why wasn't her mother?


Doria may have requested to not be in the front row. This way she could see everything very clearly and be very close to Meghan but not be front and centre herself.


----------



## LibbyRuth

As soon as I saw how perfect the camera angle was capturing Doria over Meghan’s shoulder ... and that there was a shot with Charles over Harry’s I was convinced it was done on purpose. And I’m so glad it was done that way because some of the expressions of pride they caught on Doria's face were highlights of the day.


----------



## zinacef

Whatever happen to meghan’s best friend Ninaki Priddy?  She was her best friend since they were little  and was her MOH on her first wedding. Seemed like nobody from her “old life” was there.  I knew somebody from high school who did just that. Like she dated this new guy and prepping for wedding—— crickets. Everybody in the wedding was his party and had her parents only. Really really rich guy and she does not talk to us anymore. Phone or text—— crickets. Surprised she invited her parents to the wedding. But anyways, what happened to her original  best friend?


----------



## Cocoabean

meluvs2shop said:


> I wondered that too but then thought her placement was perfect. She was visible throughout the entire wedding ceremony. The ppl below her not so much.  She  was right there front and center from a TV perspective.



This, plus I noticed she was exactly opposite the queen. Second row, first seat. Good enyfor Her Majesty, good enough for the Mother of the Bride.


----------



## traveler727

zinacef said:


> Whatever happen to meghan’s best friend Ninaki Priddy?  She was her best friend since they were little  and was her MOH on her first wedding. Seemed like nobody from her “old life” was there.  I knew somebody from high school who did just that. Like she dated this new guy and prepping for wedding—— crickets. Everybody in the wedding was his party and had her parents only. Really really rich guy and she does not talk to us anymore. Phone or text—— crickets. Surprised she invited her parents to the wedding. But anyways, what happened to her original  best friend?



I read this interview Ninaki gave the Daily Mail.  https://www.google.com/amp/www.dail...ghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html

Ninaki says she stopped being friends with Meghan after she divorced her first husband because she didn’t approve of how he was treated.  I found the whole thing incredibly bizarre.  I would never dump my lifelong friend because I didn’t like how she divorced her husband.  I find it very suspicious.  I’m just speculating, but if I had to guess, Ninaki had the hots for Meghan’s ex.


----------



## Jayne1

beekmanhill said:


> I don't know the technicalities of the British monarchy.  I know at one time it was widely speculated that Charles would be passed over.


Wishful thinking on their part.  lol But his son won't be that much better. It will be hard to follow the Queen.


HiromiT said:


> I was wondering the same thing -- why Ben and Jessica were front row while her mom was behind them. Unless her mom didn't want to be front and centre. At the same time, I wondered if she was seated in the second row for the benefit of the cameras. You could see her clearly in the background behind Meghan during the ceremony. It wouldn't have been the same if Jessica was in the frame while Meghan said her vows LOL.


Makes sense!


----------



## Gal4Dior

zinacef said:


> Whatever happen to meghan’s best friend Ninaki Priddy?  She was her best friend since they were little  and was her MOH on her first wedding. Seemed like nobody from her “old life” was there.  I knew somebody from high school who did just that. Like she dated this new guy and prepping for wedding—— crickets. Everybody in the wedding was his party and had her parents only. Really really rich guy and she does not talk to us anymore. Phone or text—— crickets. Surprised she invited her parents to the wedding. But anyways, what happened to her original  best friend?



I had a friend who did something similar. She grew up, just like me, lower middle class. We were really close through college and I was in her first wedding. I even was there for her during her divorce, but after her divorce we sort of grew apart.

Now she is married to some guy with family money. She hasn’t spoken to her old group of friends for over 5 years now. We weren’t even invited to her 2nd wedding. She had a whole new set of upper crust friends.

Ah well. I used to be hurt about it, but TBH I don’t even know who she really is nowadays. Not sure what we would have in common.


----------



## bisousx

On the flip side, I have seen a lot of girls get crazy jealous when their friends date a wealthy guy. A lot
of people can’t stand to see their friends loosing weight and becoming prettier, dating/marrying up and doing better than when they first met. Maybe Meghan couldn’t handle the cattiness of her old crowd anymore?


----------



## Gal4Dior

bisousx said:


> On the flip side, I have seen a lot of girls get crazy jealous when their friends date a wealthy guy. A lot
> of people can’t stand to see their friends loosing weight and becoming prettier, dating/marrying up and doing better than when they first met. Maybe Meghan couldn’t handle the cattiness of her old crowd anymore?



I haven’t seen that. I guess I’m lucky. No real friends in my life would be jealous about something as silly as losing weight and especially dating a rich guy!! 

We take pride in the fact that we’ve done very well in life, due to hard work and hustle. My husband and I are very fortunate not to be in want of much of anything. 

Meghan seems self made, as well. I may not be a super fan, but I respect her hustle.


----------



## PatsyCline

Good grief, people are putting the guest wedding tote bags on eBay. Have people no shame?


----------



## Lodpah

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Am I the only one not getting 100% sincerity from Meghan, like she's acting a bit to seem nice and kind? She's lovely and everything but Harry just looks more emotionally taken and smitten than she does. Or maybe it's just her red carpet mannerism/acting ability coming through to cope with it all?


No you're not. I've been known to have a sixth sense about people. Heck, at least Kim Kardashian is nasty and she knows it and we call her out. Meghan, in my opinion, is calculating. Everyone liked Heather Mills, at one point.  Anyways, Meghan will spit out anyone who does not agree with her. It's very telling that NO ONE in her family other than her mother is worthy of an invite. She treated her uncle who was an ambassador and gave her an internship like . . it's like everyone is not good enough for her. She's plainly embarrassed.

Very telling her pastor preached about love . . . well Meghan could have have diffused the situation with her family before the wedding and be a bigger person.  Nope, she is very calculating, sinister and is a kettle waiting to blow up.  She is a facade.  No one wants to talk about the fact that she did not curtsy to the Queen when she passed her. The Queen was not on the steps for the photos. 

In my opinion she wanted her mother there alone so that she can control/manipulate the situation. Look at her friends, they are all people she can benefit from.  Her mother looked overwhelmed, scared and I can just see Meghan putting in her in her place. If she had her way, there's no way in on this green earth she would have invited her mother. It's because of the stigma she would have endured. 

It's amazing how people jump on the band wagon and just assume she is this magnificent, never can do wrong people but she has a sinister appearance.   

IMO, Meghan is one of those who attains perfection,  herself to be who she wants to be depending on the person but underneath she is a simmering kettle who will blow one day.  To paraphrase JLo, don't be fooled by the coolness and calmness of Meghan Markle.  
I had to figure out what was it about her then it dawned on me, take a good look at her pictures in the wedding photos and some of them, she looks downright scary, like a Chuckie's bride.  
Like I said, I've been known to have a sixth sense about people and so far I've not been wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

I've seen a few posts on a few threads about the Queen not being on the steps with them afterwards. Here's my theory....
I think it was deliberate by the Queen to not do it because it was her way of saying that the next chapter of the RF is now complete now that the two sons are married. Also I would have thought all the bridesmaids and page boys would have been on the steps. George and Charlotte walked back down the aisle with their mum and dad, not with the other children as I expected. They were the only children on the steps. This is your Royal Family after the Queen passes. Also, considering her age and that the Duke of Edinburgh has recently had an operation the steps were a definite no no for him to navigate and maybe, just maybe she didn't want to do it without her husband. 
That's my take on it anyway.


----------



## Lodpah

Sharont2305 said:


> I've seen a few posts on a few threads about the Queen not being on the steps with them afterwards. Here's my theory....
> I think it was deliberate by the Queen to not do it because it was her way of saying that the next chapter of the RF is now complete now that the two sons are married. Also I would have thought all the bridesmaids and page boys would have been on the steps. George and Charlotte walked back down the aisle with their mum and dad, not with the other children as I expected. They were the only children on the steps. This is your Royal Family after the Queen passes. Also, considering her age and that the Duke of Edinburgh has recently had an operation the steps were a definite no no for him to navigate and maybe, just maybe she didn't want to do it without her husband.
> That's my take on it anyway.


Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> I've seen a few posts on a few threads about the Queen not being on the steps with them afterwards. Here's my theory....
> I think it was deliberate by the Queen to not do it because it was her way of saying that the next chapter of the RF is now complete now that the two sons are married. Also I would have thought all the bridesmaids and page boys would have been on the steps. George and Charlotte walked back down the aisle with their mum and dad, not with the other children as I expected. They were the only children on the steps. This is your Royal Family after the Queen passes. Also, considering her age and that the Duke of Edinburgh has recently had an operation the steps were a definite no no for him to navigate and maybe, just maybe she didn't want to do it without her husband.
> That's my take on it anyway.


It's easy to forget that the queen is over 90 sometimes. She seems pretty energetic still though. And as someone said earlier, the popularity of the British monarchy is resting on her.


----------



## beekmanhill

Meghan did curtsy to the queen.  I had a sixth sense and Googled it, .  Cameraman missed it.  
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...markle-did-curtsy-to-the-queen-royal-wedding/


----------



## beekmanhill

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's easy to forget that the queen is over 90 sometimes. She seems pretty energetic still though. And as someone said earlier, the popularity of the British monarchy is resting on her.



I hadn't seen pictures of her in a while, and I felt sorry for her.  Her neck now seems to be bent over and its got to be uncomfortable participating in all these ceremonies at her age.  I really admire her old school tenacity.  Look what she had to take on at such a young age after living through the war and then the sickness and death of her father.


----------



## Firstchanellv28

Oh my! I happened to stumble into this forum just to see what everyone thinks about Meghan marrying a royalty! I’m surprised to know how many haters she has and also some admirers! I’m no where in between but I just like to share my own thoughts! She is sooooo amazingly lucky to marry a prince! I meant everyone on earth would love to marry a good prince not just any prince of any country! I also read about her best friend! I can see she treasured the relationship so much that she was the first one to be told of their divorce before it leaks out! I just wonder why would her bff doubt her in the first place when they were so close together and she kind of knew Meghan has a closed up personality when is not on stage! If I were Meghan I’ll be pissed off to be doubted that way and whatt? She even called her ex husband to find out! I’m pretty sure he would be all sobs coz she is marrying someone she loves and believes he could treat her with love n respect! Also, if she always wanted to get marry in the first place, I am sure all she wanted is lots of love and happiness. As for her mom not being in the first role of sit, this is sooo huge n dramatic for her to be even stepping into her wedding. It is prolly too much to imagined and she prolly likes less attention on her so she could just focus on her baby finally getting married to someone well deserving! This is all so surreal for her mom as well as her. Prolly she is still ecstatic that the man she loves and loves her is a prince.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

There's always somebody who hates somebody, but I certainly don't hate Meghan. I don't know these people, they're not really my business. They didn't have to, but they insisted on making their wedding hugely public with all of the exposure of private dysfunctional drama and probably a lot of personal stress it entailed, so... I'm more fascinated by how different people react to these kinds of events, and that they react as strongly as they do. And how differently we view them.

I find the commentary more interesting than the wedding, tbh.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

After seeing this:


I can't help but think of this  (OT, dancers in the 80's had the coolest outfits. Like totally!  )


----------



## myown

Coconuts40 said:


> Yes I do feel this way regardless of whether it is Kate, Meghan, or anyone else for that matter. *I feel the BRF keeps speaking about feeling modern and leading a more normal life.  As far as I"m concerned, you can't have it both ways.  You want the privilege of leading a normal family life with the privilege and perks of royalty. *
> 
> And please don't suggest that it is a racial thing, as that is the undertone I get from your comment.  My SO is biracial and I understand Meghan's struggle very very well.


but this is exactly how the Swedish royal family is living


----------



## myown

traveler727 said:


> I read this interview Ninaki gave the Daily Mail.  https://www.google.com/amp/www.dail...ghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html
> 
> Ninaki says she stopped being friends with Meghan after she divorced her first husband because she didn’t approve of how he was treated.  I found the whole thing incredibly bizarre.  I would never dump my lifelong friend because I didn’t like how she divorced her husband.  I find it very suspicious.  I’m just speculating, but if I had to guess, Ninaki had the hots for Meghan’s ex.


my very very close friend, my best friend back then, she dumped me when I started dating my husband. 
I have no idea why. 
some people are just weird


----------



## bag-princess

Lodpah said:


> No you're not. I've been known to have a sixth sense about people. Heck, at least Kim Kardashian is nasty and she knows it and we call her out. Meghan, in my opinion, is calculating. Everyone liked Heather Mills, at one point.  Anyways, Meghan will spit out anyone who does not agree with her. It's very telling that NO ONE in her family other than her mother is worthy of an invite. She treated her uncle who was an ambassador and gave her an internship like . . it's like everyone is not good enough for her. She's plainly embarrassed.
> 
> Very telling her pastor preached about love . . . well Meghan could have have diffused the situation with her family before the wedding and be a bigger person.  Nope, she is very calculating, sinister and is a kettle waiting to blow up.  She is a facade.  No one wants to talk about the fact that she did not curtsy to the Queen when she passed her. The Queen was not on the steps for the photos.
> 
> In my opinion she wanted her mother there alone so that she can control/manipulate the situation. Look at her friends, they are all people she can benefit from.  Her mother looked overwhelmed, scared and I can just see Meghan putting in her in her place. If she had her way, there's no way in on this green earth she would have invited her mother. It's because of the stigma she would have endured.
> 
> It's amazing how people jump on the band wagon and just assume she is this magnificent, never can do wrong people but she has a sinister appearance.
> 
> IMO, Meghan is one of those who attains perfection,  herself to be who she wants to be depending on the person but underneath she is a simmering kettle who will blow one day.  To paraphrase JLo, don't be fooled by the coolness and calmness of Meghan Markle.
> I had to figure out what was it about her then it dawned on me, take a good look at her pictures in the wedding photos and some of them, she looks downright scary, like a Chuckie's bride.
> Like I said, I've been known to have a sixth sense about people and so far I've not been wrong.




https://giphy.com/gifs/news-chris-8uw7IdKfHDVPG


----------



## myown

beekmanhill said:


> Meghan did curtsy to the queen.  I had a sixth sense and Googled it, .  Cameraman missed it.
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...markle-did-curtsy-to-the-queen-royal-wedding/


gosh and if she would have forgotten it, it was her big day, the day she steps into the royal Familie, its so easy to be overwhelmed and to forget. there is now so much protocol for her, we should all leave her a minute to breath. Kate had  years to learn the rules, Meghan probably needs some time, too. 
I am sure she get coached prior each event, but there is just so much to forget or to get or do wrong. the media will tear her apart each time.


----------



## bisbee

I’m still amazed at the number of people who have a “sixth sense” about others, and can form such negative opinions about people they don’t know at all (and state those opinions as fact).

What ever happened to judging people by what they do instead of by your “feelings” about them?


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


Hi, I don't really get what you're trying to say. I am well aware of the other grandkids they have, I was just remarking about the fact that Charles, William and Harry and their wives and children will be the 'core' of the BRF when Charles is King and this was what The Queen was showing. 
I really don't think it was to do with her disapproving of Meghan in the slightest, racially or otherwise.
And I do know about other black members of the Royal Family. I know my British history


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


Hi, I don't really get what you're trying to say. I am well aware of the other grandkids they have, I was just remarking about the fact that Charles, William and Harry and their wives and children will be the 'core' of the BRF when Charles is King and this was what The Queen was showing. 
I really don't think it was to do with her disapproving of Meghan in the slightest, racially or otherwise.
And I do know about other black members of the Royal Family. I know my British history


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


Hi, I don't really get what you're trying to say. I am well aware of the other grandkids they have, I was just remarking about the fact that Charles, William and Harry and their wives and children will be the 'core' of the BRF when Charles is King and this was what The Queen was showing. 
I really don't think it was to do with her disapproving of Meghan in the slightest, racially or otherwise.
And I do know about other black members of the Royal Family. I know my British history


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


Hi, I don't really get what you're trying to say. I am well aware of the other grandkids they have, I was just remarking about the fact that Charles, William and Harry and their wives and children will be the 'core' of the BRF when Charles is King and this was what The Queen was showing. 
I really don't think it was to do with her disapproving of Meghan in the slightest, racially or otherwise.
And I do know about other black members of the Royal Family. I know my British history


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


Hi, I don't really get what you're trying to say. I am well aware of the other grandkids they have, I was just remarking about the fact that Charles, William and Harry and their wives and children will be the 'core' of the BRF when Charles is King and this was what The Queen was showing. 
I really don't think it was to do with her disapproving of Meghan in the slightest, racially or otherwise.
And I do know about other black members of the Royal Family. I know my British history


----------



## afsweet

didn't realize till he took off his hat to enter the church, but harry is balding in the back...


----------



## BagOuttaHell

I really never thought they were sooo hot. But seeing him and his brother in uniform at the wedding. Whoooooooo.


----------



## berrydiva

BagOuttaHell said:


> I really never thought they were sooo hot. But seeing him and his brother in uniform at the wedding. Whoooooooo.


A uniform and a beard works wonders for men.


----------



## berrydiva

bisbee said:


> I’m still amazed at the number of people who have a “sixth sense” about others, and can form such negative opinions about people they don’t know at all (and state those opinions as fact).
> 
> What ever happened to judging people by what they do instead of by your “feelings” about them?


I shudder to think of what type of negative behaviors towards strangers those negative opinions from those "sixth senses" form.


----------



## berrydiva

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first *"Black"* woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


Chillllllleeeee....I don't even know where to begin.


----------



## bag-princess

berrydiva said:


> Chillllllleeeee....I don't even know where to begin.





Hunni I just can’t. No.  Just too much.


----------



## berrydiva

bag-princess said:


> Hunni I just can’t. No.  Just too much.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.


I am waiting to see pics from Eugenie's wedding. If the Queen does the same thing than her decision to not come out was motivated by something else. If she comes out for Eugenie then there is some passive-aggressive stuff going on there. We'll have to wait and see. I did see the garden pics as well, so she was definitely up to the task if she wanted to.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

So Meghan did curtsy to the Queen. I guess it's time to go back to the drawing board.

I don't know why she didn't have more people from her mom's side. I would like to think that if her mother wanted to invite someone, she would not have a problem.

I don't think there is any diffusing her father's side. They have proven to be disgusting opportunists. They would have Ebayed the hell out of that wedding if they were allowed to attend.


----------



## slsk

Meghan did curtsy to the Queen (as was pointed out) and HM did come out and wave to H&M in their carriage. There’s a photo of it! Harry is saluting her!  Maybe her 94 yo husband just had hip surgery  and can’t skip down stairs (and she’s 92 herself!) so maybe she took her time and went down a RAMP or something with her husband.  Why anyone would assume that the Queen doesn’t approve of MM because she wasn’t outside when all evidence points to the contrary (she had MM’s dog ride in her car for heavens sake!) is astounding.


----------



## chicsylvie

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am waiting to see pics from Eugenie's wedding. If the Queen does the same thing than her decision to not come out was motivated by something else. If she comes out for Eugenie then there is some passive-aggressive stuff going on there. We'll have to wait and see. I did see the garden pics as well, so she was definitely up to the task if she wanted to.



Could be health issues, but more likely has to do with succession. In her Christmas address, the selection and placement of family photos is deliberate, and the most recent ones point to the future. William’s children are closer to the throne than Harry.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

BagOuttaHell said:


> They would have Ebayed the hell out of that wedding if they were allowed to attend.


LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

BagOuttaHell said:


> I really never thought they were sooo hot. But seeing him and his brother in uniform at the wedding. Whoooooooo.


they both have a nice swagger walk...


----------



## BagOuttaHell

She was dog sitting for Meghan.


----------



## gelbergirl

slsk said:


> Meghan did curtsy to the Queen (as was pointed out) and HM did come out and wave to H&M in their carriage. There’s a photo of it! Harry is saluting her!  Maybe her 94 yo husband just had hip surgery  and can’t skip down stairs (and she’s 92 herself!) so maybe she took her time and went down a RAMP or something with her husband.  Why anyone would assume that the Queen doesn’t approve of MM because she wasn’t outside when all evidence points to the contrary (she had MM’s dog ride in her car for heavens sake!) is astounding.



Queen Elizabeth entered through some side door, not the main steps so I believe that is how she departed.  This was no State occasion, just a family wedding put on by Charles from what I recall the invitation said.
The Queen attended as a grandmother.


----------



## Sharont2305

slsk said:


> Meghan did curtsy to the Queen (as was pointed out) and HM did come out and wave to H&M in their carriage. There’s a photo of it! Harry is saluting her!  Maybe her 94 yo husband just had hip surgery  and can’t skip down stairs (and she’s 92 herself!) so maybe she took her time and went down a RAMP or something with her husband.  Why anyone would assume that the Queen doesn’t approve of MM because she wasn’t outside when all evidence points to the contrary (she had MM’s dog ride in her car for heavens sake!) is astounding.


She came out of a side entrance, same way as she entered. Most of the family did the same.


----------



## sdkitty

I watched the movie "The Queen" with Helen Mirren last night.  Assuming that was anything close to an accurate portrayal of the queen and Prince Philip, I doubt they were really comfortable with Harry's choice of a wife. At the time of Diana's death, they were very rigid and stuck in old traditions.   But I guess they have learned that times have changed and they had to put on a positive face for their grandson (like it or not).


----------



## gazoo

They adore and indulge Harry. As such, I'd assume, based on just being a human, that you come to love anyone that makes those you love happy. Even if you have reservations about it all.

If they were totally against Meghan, they could easily have not allowed the grand wedding, given the official blessing, and made him step down from Royal duties to be with her. They didn't do that, and seem to have given Harry free rein with everything. Let us not forget Meghan even attended Christmas festivities whilst not being an official member of the family. Something that was not afforded to Kate.

Reading into their actual actions, I think Meghan is as accepted as she could be.


----------



## DC-Cutie

gazoo said:


> They adore and indulge Harry. As such, I'd assume, based on just being a human, that you come to love anyone that makes those you love happy. Even if you have reservations about it all.
> 
> If they were totally against Meghan, they could easily have not allowed the grand wedding, given the official blessing, and made him step down from Royal duties to be with her. They didn't do that, and seem to have given Harry free reign with everything. Reading into their actual actions, I think Meghan is as accepted as she could be.


I agree..


----------



## jcnc

*Duke and Duchess of Sussex make first appearance since royal wedding*

*(CNN)The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made their first public appearance Tuesday since they were married Saturday in a star-studded ceremony watched by millions around the world.*

*Prince Harry and Meghan arrived at Buckingham Palace in London on Tuesday afternoon to attend a garden party in honor of Harry's father, Prince Charles, ahead of his 70th birthday.*
*They newlyweds had delayed jetting off on their honeymoon in order to attend the garden party -- a gesture no doubt welcomed by Prince Charles, who accompanied Meghan part of the way down the aisle during the wedding at St. George's Chapel in Windsor Castle on Saturday.*
*




*

*Harry, pictured left, gives a speech next to Prince Charles, his wife Camilla, and Meghan, at Tuesday's party.*

*



*


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attending the 70th birthday garden party for Prince Charles as their first official engagement as a married couple


----------



## gazoo

She's wearing _stockings_! Meghan is officially a Royal.


----------



## bisousx

Oh no.. they’ve already put her in one of those outfits


----------



## Cocoabean

jcnc said:


> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex make first appearance since royal wedding*
> 
> *(CNN)The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made their first public appearance Tuesday since they were married Saturday in a star-studded ceremony watched by millions around the world.*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan arrived at Buckingham Palace in London on Tuesday afternoon to attend a garden party in honor of Harry's father, Prince Charles, ahead of his 70th birthday.*
> *They newlyweds had delayed jetting off on their honeymoon in order to attend the garden party -- a gesture no doubt welcomed by Prince Charles, who accompanied Meghan part of the way down the aisle during the wedding at St. George's Chapel in Windsor Castle on Saturday.*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *Harry, pictured left, gives a speech next to Prince Charles, his wife Camilla, and Meghan, at Tuesday's party.*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *



Her hair is pinned back! I love it. And I love the hat!


----------



## Cocoabean

gazoo said:


> She's wearing _stockings_! Meghan is officially a Royal.



How can you tell?


----------



## berrydiva

gelbergirl said:


> Queen Elizabeth entered through some side door, not the main steps so I believe that is how she departed.  This was no State occasion, just a family wedding put on by Charles from what I recall the invitation said.
> The Queen attended as a grandmother.


Was William's a family wedding or a state occasion?


----------



## gazoo

Cocoabean said:


> How can you tell?



The sheen when zooming in. And of course the Daily Mail feels it's newsworthy enough to write about it as well.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...s-new-polished-style-official-engagement.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## HiromiT

gazoo said:


> She's wearing _stockings_! Meghan is officially a Royal.


Yep, first thing I noticed in these pics! Stockings and tidy hair without the wisps! I must say I wish she wore her hair this way at the wedding.


----------



## Cocoabean

gazoo said:


> The sheen when zooming in. And of course the Daily Mail feels it's newsworthy enough to write about it as well.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...s-new-polished-style-official-engagement.html



Ah yes, in the DM’s photo you can see her legs. In the ones here I couldn’t. I thought you really had eagle eyes!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bisbee said:


> I’m still amazed at the number of people who have a “sixth sense” about others, and can form such negative opinions about people they don’t know at all (and state those opinions as fact).
> 
> What ever happened to judging people by what they do instead of by your “feelings” about them?


Although I definitely agree with you in general, this is after all a gossip forum. I think the style threads have been designated to be more of safe spaces, free from snark and judging?

If there was no indulging in judging here, many wouldn't be here. They're just a bit particular about what and who to judge and why, it seems


----------



## sdkitty

gazoo said:


> The sheen when zooming in. And of course the Daily Mail feels it's newsworthy enough to write about it as well.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...s-new-polished-style-official-engagement.html


of course, the DM said she "stunned" (just as Amal Clooney stuns every time they see her)


----------



## scarlet555

I'm seeing a lot of loose fitting dress in the belly area... the wedding dress, the afterwedding dress and this outfit, loose belly... makes me wonder if she's pregnant.  She's super thin, maybe just conservative is another thought?


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm being really picky here but she needs to learn how to "walk like a Royal" I noticed when she and Harry came out to go in the Jaguar on Saturday evening and today as they were walking up the steps back into Buckingham Palace she had what I call the red carpet wiggle. Needs to tone it down, lol


----------



## DC-Cutie

we gotta get her some flesh tone stockings


----------



## bag-princess

Reading this made my eyes cross!! [emoji854] The rules these people must live by!!




Here’s Why Meghan Markle Will Always Have To Curtsy To Kate Middleton



https://www.southernliving.com/synd...utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=southernliving


----------



## LibbyRuth

Lodpah said:


> No you're not. I've been known to have a sixth sense about people. Heck, at least Kim Kardashian is nasty and she knows it and we call her out. Meghan, in my opinion, is calculating. Everyone liked Heather Mills, at one point.  Anyways, Meghan will spit out anyone who does not agree with her. It's very telling that NO ONE in her family other than her mother is worthy of an invite. She treated her uncle who was an ambassador and gave her an internship like . . it's like everyone is not good enough for her. She's plainly embarrassed.
> 
> Very telling her pastor preached about love . . . well Meghan could have have diffused the situation with her family before the wedding and be a bigger person.  Nope, she is very calculating, sinister and is a kettle waiting to blow up.  She is a facade.  No one wants to talk about the fact that she did not curtsy to the Queen when she passed her. The Queen was not on the steps for the photos.
> 
> In my opinion she wanted her mother there alone so that she can control/manipulate the situation. Look at her friends, they are all people she can benefit from.  Her mother looked overwhelmed, scared and I can just see Meghan putting in her in her place. If she had her way, there's no way in on this green earth she would have invited her mother. It's because of the stigma she would have endured.
> 
> It's amazing how people jump on the band wagon and just assume she is this magnificent, never can do wrong people but she has a sinister appearance.
> 
> IMO, Meghan is one of those who attains perfection,  herself to be who she wants to be depending on the person but underneath she is a simmering kettle who will blow one day.  To paraphrase JLo, don't be fooled by the coolness and calmness of Meghan Markle.
> I had to figure out what was it about her then it dawned on me, take a good look at her pictures in the wedding photos and some of them, she looks downright scary, like a Chuckie's bride.
> Like I said, I've been known to have a sixth sense about people and so far I've not been wrong.



"There is always something about another person we're ignorant of, and usually, that thing we're ignorant of is the most important".  That quote is my mantra, and in my life it's applied SO many times in correcting the conclusions I draw about people like is being done with Meghan.  I'll look at a person who shows up to work disheveled, late, and coming across as a mess and figure there's something that is causing that, assuming the worst and writing the person off. Then I find out the person has been dealing with a family member battling drug abuse and the same time the person is battling cancer, and suddenly I discover there's a very good reason the person shows up that way and instead of assuming the worst, I stand in awe of the person for actually showing up every day.
You're right - there's a reason that Meghan's mom was the only family member to come to the wedding. That reason may be negative or positive, and we're most likely never going to know what that reason is.  So people can declare they have a sixth sense and assume the worst, and pat themselves on the back for not being disproved. Or, they can accept that we don't know the reason, and it could be something that shows she's not a person of good character OR could be something that would amaze us at the fact that she got to that moment and carried herself with such poise.  To each his own.


----------



## DC-Cutie

bag-princess said:


> Reading this made my eyes cross!! [emoji854] The rules these people must live by!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s Why Meghan Markle Will Always Have To Curtsy To Kate Middleton
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.southernliving.com/synd...utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=southernliving


I would have to have someone remind me everytime.  like give me an earpice and tell me what I'm supposed to do  and when


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Lodpah said:


> No you're not. I've been known to have a sixth sense about people. Heck, at least Kim Kardashian is nasty and she knows it and we call her out. Meghan, in my opinion, is calculating. Everyone liked Heather Mills, at one point.  Anyways, Meghan will spit out anyone who does not agree with her. It's very telling that NO ONE in her family other than her mother is worthy of an invite. She treated her uncle who was an ambassador and gave her an internship like . . it's like everyone is not good enough for her. She's plainly embarrassed.
> 
> Very telling her pastor preached about love . . . well Meghan could have have diffused the situation with her family before the wedding and be a bigger person.  Nope, she is very calculating, sinister and is a kettle waiting to blow up.  She is a facade.  No one wants to talk about the fact that she did not curtsy to the Queen when she passed her. The Queen was not on the steps for the photos.
> 
> In my opinion she wanted her mother there alone so that she can control/manipulate the situation. Look at her friends, they are all people she can benefit from.  Her mother looked overwhelmed, scared and I can just see Meghan putting in her in her place. If she had her way, there's no way in on this green earth she would have invited her mother. It's because of the stigma she would have endured.
> 
> It's amazing how people jump on the band wagon and just assume she is this magnificent, never can do wrong people but she has a sinister appearance.
> 
> IMO, Meghan is one of those who attains perfection,  herself to be who she wants to be depending on the person but underneath she is a simmering kettle who will blow one day.  To paraphrase JLo, don't be fooled by the coolness and calmness of Meghan Markle.
> I had to figure out what was it about her then it dawned on me, take a good look at her pictures in the wedding photos and some of them, she looks downright scary, like a Chuckie's bride.
> Like I said, I've been known to have a sixth sense about people and so far I've not been wrong.


This is a truly unhinged post


----------



## DC-Cutie

bellebellebelle19 said:


> This is a truly unhinged post


sometimes you really have to just sit back and read something.  then you say 'this can't be real'....


----------



## berrydiva

bag-princess said:


> Reading this made my eyes cross!! [emoji854] The rules these people must live by!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s Why Meghan Markle Will Always Have To Curtsy To Kate Middleton
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.southernliving.com/synd...utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=southernliving


I can't find anything appealing about their lives...this drives me crazy for her.


----------



## terebina786

bisousx said:


> Oh no.. they’ve already put her in one of those outfits



That’s exactly what I was thinking when I saw these pics too lol.

I also noticed she’s wearing more makeup... And where are Will and Kate? And why does Camilla not have to wear those awful stockings??


----------



## berrydiva

Why do they have to wear stockings?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

berrydiva said:


> Why do they have to wear stockings?


Because in the 1950s that's what women did?


----------



## berrydiva

LibbyRuth said:


> Because in the 1950s that's what women did?


I honestly was kind of wondering the same...if it had some outdated notion that if you weren't wearing stockings, you were not a lady or a trollop. lol


----------



## daisychainz

Bare legs are so unpolished. I see lots of women whose legs should be covered up. Gorgeous dresses and then you look down and see their bruised legs or bright veins or marks and cuts and they are walking around with bare stinky feet inside their shoes, too. I'm getting grossed out just thinking of it. Perhaps it has to do with culture norms and looking ladylike or something, but hooray for the pantyhose policy! I'm a supporter and wearer.


----------



## Sharont2305

terebina786 said:


> and where are Will and Kate? And why does Camilla not have to wear those awful stockings??


William was in Manchester at the Memorial Service to remember the victims of the terrorist attack at the Ariana Grande concert 1 year ago today.
I'm certain Camilla was wearing tights, its practically the law in the RF that the women have to wear them. Meghan, I think, just wore the wrong colour for her skin tone.


----------



## TinksDelite

> No you're not. I've been known to have a sixth sense about people.
> Very telling* her pastor *preached about love *. . .*
> Like I said, I've been known to have a sixth sense about people and *so far I've not been wrong. *[*/*QUOTE]



He wasn't her pastor..http://nationalpost.com/news/theres-power-in-love-meet-rev-michael-bruce-curry-the-famous-royal-wedding-pastor "Rev. Michael Bruce Curry delivered the sermon with heartfelt emotion. He was hand-picked by the couple to speak, though *neither had ever met him*"


----------



## Lounorada

berrydiva said:


> I honestly was kind of wondering the same...if it had some outdated notion that* if you weren't wearing stockings, you were not a lady or a trollop*. lol


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I think the stockings look nice on her. The styling all looks great. It's the dress that doesn't work.


----------



## terebina786

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think the stockings look nice on her. The styling all looks great. It's the dress that doesn't work.



Agreed.. She needs a waist so she can’t wear dresses like this.


----------



## berrydiva

daisychainz said:


> Bare legs are so unpolished. I see lots of women whose legs should be covered up. Gorgeous dresses and then you look down and see their bruised legs or bright veins or marks and cuts and they are walking around with bare stinky feet inside their shoes, too. I'm getting grossed out just thinking of it. Perhaps it has to do with culture norms and looking ladylike or something, but hooray for the pantyhose policy! I'm a supporter and wearer.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

terebina786 said:


> Agreed.. She needs a waist so she can’t wear dresses like this.



Yeah, I think an empire waist, a-line skirt like that green self-portrait dress she wore a little while back is the way to go for her.


----------



## gelbergirl

berrydiva said:


> Was William's a family wedding or a state occasion?



from what I recall it was a state occasion or even semi-state occasion, other country royal families attended, politicians.  William is going to be King one day and had a constitutional obligation to marry and produce an heir.


----------



## berrydiva

gelbergirl said:


> from what I recall it was a state occasion or even semi-state occasion, other country royal families attended, politicians.  William is going to be King one day and had a constitutional obligation to marry and produce an heir.


Makes sense. Thanks.


----------



## deltalady

melissatrv said:


> I heard that no one from Meghan's family was there except her mother. We all know the drama from her father's side, but why was there no one from her mother's side....an aunt, an uncle, a cousin????  It is all so odd.  I felt so bad for her mom being there with just Harry's family. Even Kate's family was there!!!  That would be uncomfortable with just any groom's family but compound that by 10 million being the BRF.  The poor woman looked like a deer in the headlights



There’s an assumption that she has other family. Meghan is her mom’s only child. Perhaps her mother is also an only child.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Who styles them? I actually like what he is wearing better.


----------



## gelbergirl

Glad they stayed for the Prince Charles 70th birthday event.
Now though, I'd like them to take a honeymoon.  I think it'll be good for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## deltalady

What I find funny is how someone can have a sixth sense about an actress being fake. Honey her former profession was to pretend to be someone else.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> I can't find anything appealing about their lives...this drives me crazy for her.


I dont think you need to feel sorry for her.  You might not find this life appealing but I think she does and many others would.  I personally would hate having millions of people looking at me.  But clearly she loves it.  As far as the restrictions, etc, time will tell how she does.


----------



## mdcx

LibbyRuth said:


> "There is always something about another person we're ignorant of, and usually, that thing we're ignorant of is the most important".  That quote is my mantra, and in my life it's applied SO many times in correcting the conclusions I draw about people like is being done with Meghan.  I'll look at a person who shows up to work disheveled, late, and coming across as a mess and figure there's something that is causing that, assuming the worst and writing the person off. Then I find out the person has been dealing with a family member battling drug abuse and the same time the person is battling cancer, and suddenly I discover there's a very good reason the person shows up that way and instead of assuming the worst, I stand in awe of the person for actually showing up every day.
> You're right - there's a reason that Meghan's mom was the only family member to come to the wedding. That reason may be negative or positive, and we're most likely never going to know what that reason is.  So people can declare they have a sixth sense and assume the worst, and pat themselves on the back for not being disproved. Or, they can accept that we don't know the reason, and it could be something that shows she's not a person of good character OR could be something that would amaze us at the fact that she got to that moment and carried herself with such poise.  To each his own.


"There is always something about another person we're ignorant of, and usually, that thing we're ignorant of is the most important".  I love this, I've never heard it put like this before.


----------



## mdcx

We have now entered the zone where Meghan's dress and grooming choices are not 100% within her control.
She appeared to be wearing heavier makeup in the latest pics than at the wedding, her hair was more tightly styled.
Then there's her behaviour, no more great big smiles, laughs etc. It's all about being demure, controlled.
I wonder if they didn't have the correct colour of tights available for her, i know that Kate usually wears a certain kind of tights to these events, Wolford I think.
I think it's reasonable to assume that a lot of her clothes will be picked out for her in the coming weeks/months.


----------



## Irishgal

berrydiva said:


>



Add this to our list of what women who are either over 40 or don’t have perfect skin need to do... ‍♀️


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

deltalady said:


> What I find funny is how someone can have a sixth sense about an actress being fake. Honey her former profession was to pretend to be someone else.


True, but that doesn't really speak to her advantage when it comes to fakery  As sdkitty pointed out Meghan seems to love the attention. Demure, she is not. It's the role of a lifetime then 

Others would like to say it's revolutionary but it's a very PC wedding to me. I'm sure they both had their ulterior motives for choosing each other besides attraction.

Anyway, they're both rich and gorgeous and don't need to give a *** what I or anyone else thinks   Like for any couple that gets married, I hope they have a happy marriage.


----------



## mdcx

Irishgal said:


> Add this to our list of what women who are either over 40 or don’t have perfect skin need to do... ‍♀️


Was this a reference to the pantyhose post?


----------



## Irishgal

mdcx said:


> Was this a reference to the pantyhose post?



Yep.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone know why they are having Prince Charles' 70th birthday celebration now? His birthday isn't until November. I can understand wanting to have it at a time when everyone is available and the weather is nice, but it seems weird having it a full six months early.


----------



## Bentley1

Where are William & Kate


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ William had another event and Kate is on maternity leave


----------



## bag-princess

DC-Cutie said:


> I would have to have someone remind me everytime.  like give me an earpice and tell me what I'm supposed to do  and when




[emoji1][emoji1] that is exactly what I said!! Someone would be whispering in my ear what to do and when! 





deltalady said:


> What I find funny is how someone can have a sixth sense about an actress being fake. Honey her former profession was to pretend to be someone else.




Lawd!! [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] [emoji1360]


----------



## gelbergirl

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know why they are having Prince Charles' 70th birthday celebration now? His birthday isn't until November. I can understand wanting to have it at a time when everyone is available and the weather is nice, but it seems weird having it a full six months early.



I'm thinking it's something like how Queen Elizabeth celebrates in June but her birthday is in April.  The BRF has this thing where they like birthday celebrations during good weather for British-economy tourism possibilities.  That is my theory at least.


----------



## mkr

Irishgal said:


> Add this to our list of what women who are either over 40 or don’t have perfect skin need to do... ‍♀️



I’m way over 40 and I don’t wear them.  I don’t even own any.  Do I need to go buy some or what ?


----------



## mkr

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know why they are having Prince Charles' 70th birthday celebration now? His birthday isn't until November. I can understand wanting to have it at a time when everyone is available and the weather is nice, but it seems weird having it a full six months early.



Well he does look like he might not make it to November.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Irishgal

mkr said:


> I’m way over 40 and I don’t wear them.  I don’t even own any.  Do I need to go buy some or what ?



No no no. There have been various parents to in the celeb thread that imply women who actually have the nerve to age should not leave the house and now we read that if someone has less than perfect skin it could be an assault to someone’s sense of aesthetics (gasp!) and they should cover themselves with pantyhose. 

To add- men are not subject to these rules. [emoji23]


----------



## PatsyCline

gelbergirl said:


> Glad they stayed for the Prince Charles 70th birthday event.
> Now though, I'd like them to take a honeymoon.  I think it'll be good for them.


I heard Namibia was high on the list of sites. I was in Africa a couple of years ago, and it's a wonderful place to visit, if you don't mind roughing it a bit.

I even got used to taking ice cold showers behind a tarp, hung behind the vehicle, with my DH pouring buckets of water on me. I didn't mind sleeping outdoors, but I had to have a shower every day.


----------



## PatsyCline

sdkitty said:


> I dont think you need to feel sorry for her.  You might not find this life appealing but I think she does and many others would.  I personally would hate having millions of people looking at me.  But clearly she loves it.  As far as the restrictions, etc, time will tell how she does.


If she wants to do charity work, and help make the world a better place, being a royal will give her a bigger platform than anything else she would probably achieve on her own.

Sounds like Harry and her have very similar goals in life, so hopefully they're a good match.


----------



## jcnc

berrydiva said:


> I honestly was kind of wondering the same...if it had some outdated notion that if you weren't wearing stockings, you were not a lady or a trollop. lol



Maybe a morbid notion but i feel this rule might end with Queen Elizabeth’s rule


----------



## traveler727

I despise pantyhose. I think they look sooo dated.  Like a throwback from the 80s and 90s.  But, to each her own.


----------



## Bentley1

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ William had another event and Kate is on maternity leave


I see, thanks


----------



## PoohBear

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Am I the only one not getting 100% sincerity from Meghan, like she's acting a bit to seem nice and kind? She's lovely and everything but Harry just looks more emotionally taken and smitten than she does. Or maybe it's just her red carpet mannerism/acting ability coming through to cope with it all?



She seemed so calm at the wedding, I joked that she must’ve taken a Xanax. I don’t know how she did it. I would’ve been a nervous wreck. Shaking, tears and everything in between!


----------



## mdcx

Meghan and Harry's assistant private secretary is Amy Pickerill:
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a18676259/amy-pickerill-meghan-markle-assistant/


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> I dont think you need to feel sorry for her.  You might not find this life appealing but I think she does and many others would.  I personally would hate having millions of people looking at me.  But clearly she loves it.  As far as the restrictions, etc, time will tell how she does.


I feel like this is totally different from the level of Hollywood fame though....it's restrictive and heavy in outdated notions.



Irishgal said:


> Add this to our list of what women who are either over 40 or don’t have perfect skin need to do... ‍♀️


Do not age is the moral of tpf....if you're a woman don't attempt to feel attractive over 40 and/or after having a child. And, for the love of goodness, do not go out until your child is 17 years old.



jcnc said:


> Maybe a morbid notion but i feel this rule might end with Queen Elizabeth’s rule


I think so too.


----------



## Jayne1

BagOuttaHell said:


> I don't think there is any diffusing her father's side. They have proven to be disgusting opportunists. They would have Ebayed the hell out of that wedding if they were allowed to attend.


The gift bags that were handed out to the guests are already appearing on eBay. And not a Markle seller in sight.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/21/royal-wedding-gift-bags-for-sale-on-ebay.html


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> True, but that doesn't really speak to her advantage when it comes to fakery  As sdkitty pointed out Meghan seems to love the attention. Demure, she is not. It's the role of a lifetime then


I was thinking that. A role of a lifetime -- a role she appears to be very good at.



bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know why they are having Prince Charles' 70th birthday celebration now? His birthday isn't until November. I can understand wanting to have it at a time when everyone is available and the weather is nice, but it seems weird having it a full six months early.


They always have had two birthdays.

I think it started out so they could celebrate in good weather and the tradition of an official birthday just continued -- Queen Elizabeth was born in April.


----------



## Grande Latte

PoohBear said:


> She seemed so calm at the wedding, I joked that she must’ve taken a Xanax. I don’t know how she did it. I would’ve been a nervous wreck. Shaking, tears and everything in between!



I don't know if it's Xanax or sheer self control. She nailed the wedding. This woman can really withstand serious stress, I  would've passed out or something.

Where are they going for honeymoon?


----------



## Lodpah

deltalady said:


> What I find funny is how someone can have a sixth sense about an actress being fake. Honey her former profession was to pretend to be someone else.


Maybe an actress but to use a layman's term, the spirit does not lie.


----------



## Lodpah

TinksDelite said:


> He wasn't her pastor..http://nationalpost.com/news/theres-power-in-love-meet-rev-michael-bruce-curry-the-famous-royal-wedding-pastor "Rev. Michael Bruce Curry delivered the sermon with heartfelt emotion. He was hand-picked by the couple to speak, though *neither had ever met him*"


 Hmmmm . . . for all purposes and intent that was the pastor she chose for her wedding.  Not her regular pastor.


----------



## Lodpah

LibbyRuth said:


> "There is always something about another person we're ignorant of, and usually, that thing we're ignorant of is the most important".  That quote is my mantra, and in my life it's applied SO many times in correcting the conclusions I draw about people like is being done with Meghan.  I'll look at a person who shows up to work disheveled, late, and coming across as a mess and figure there's something that is causing that, assuming the worst and writing the person off. Then I find out the person has been dealing with a family member battling drug abuse and the same time the person is battling cancer, and suddenly I discover there's a very good reason the person shows up that way and instead of assuming the worst, I stand in awe of the person for actually showing up every day.
> You're right - there's a reason that Meghan's mom was the only family member to come to the wedding. That reason may be negative or positive, and we're most likely never going to know what that reason is.  So people can declare they have a sixth sense and assume the worst, and pat themselves on the back for not being disproved. Or, they can accept that we don't know the reason, and it could be something that shows she's not a person of good character OR could be something that would amaze us at the fact that she got to that moment and carried herself with such poise.  To each his own.


Ok


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I was thinking that. A role of a lifetime -- a role she appears to be very good at.
> 
> 
> They always have had two birthdays.
> 
> I think it started out so they could celebrate in good weather and the tradition of an official birthday just continued -- Queen Elizabeth was born in April.


Charles has never had 2 birthdays. I think this was partly done this year because of all the charities he's involved in and all the good work he does, it was a mutual thank you type of thing. Also, a lot of garden parties are held at Buckingham Palace around this time every year. Made sense for him to have a 70th celebration now rather than an evening do indoors in November. You can get more people from his charities etc into the garden, he'd have to have a limit in the state rooms


----------



## Lodpah

berrydiva said:


> I shudder to think of what type of negative behaviors towards strangers those negative opinions from those "sixth senses" form.
> 
> ly


Who said anything about "negative opinions?" We can agree to disagree. You have a "gray" opinion yourself as I have a sixth sense. It took years of realizing the gift and running away from it and finally caving in and accepting it. Instead of "sixth sense" I should probably called it what it's normally called and what others who have the same gift I have the real proper name for it.

Would you like to know what I 'sense" "about you? But I wouldn't do that to you. So don't mock what you don't know.  I can pretty much ascertain the type of person you are within a few minutes of meeting you . . . sort of like those handwriting experts, you know, that lawyers use for jury trials, of course some are good and some are on the money.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> Who said anything about "negative opinions?" We can agree to disagree. You have a "gray" opinion yourself as I have a sixth sense. It took years of realizing the gift and running away from it and finally caving in and accepting it. Instead of "sixth sense" I should probably called it what it's normally called and what others who have the same gift I have the real proper name for it.
> 
> Would you like to know what I 'sense" about you? But I wouldn't do that to you. So don't mock what you don't know.  It can pretty much ascertain the type of person you are within a few minutes of meeting you . . . sort of like those handwriting experts, you know, that lawyers use for jury trials.


Lodpah, are you an empath?


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> Lodpah, are you an empath?


Traits of it but on a higher level (which I really, really wish sometimes I do not have the gift). It's emotionally taxing and worrisome. Now I learn how to turn it off and on and deal with it as it pertains to my life and if something catches my attention.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> Traits of it but on a higher level (which I really, really wish sometimes I do not have the gift). It's emotionally taxing and worrisome. Now I learn how to turn it off and on and deal with it as it pertains to my life and if something catches my attention.


That's interesting, thanks for sharing.


----------



## myown

slsk said:


> Meghan did curtsy to the Queen (as was pointed out) and HM did come out and wave to H&M in their carriage. There’s a photo of it! Harry is saluting her!  Maybe her 94 yo husband just had hip surgery  and can’t skip down stairs (and she’s 92 herself!) so maybe she took her time and went down a RAMP or something with her husband.  Why anyone would assume that the Queen doesn’t approve of MM because she wasn’t outside when all evidence points to the contrary (she had MM’s dog ride in her car for heavens sake!) is astounding.


that where my thoughts, too. the church is huge, and the Queen sat for a while. Looking at my grandma (who is 10 years younger than the Queen), she wouldn't make it to the steps, that fast or at all. I bet they looked for the shortest way out and that was not through the church



HiromiT said:


> Yep, first thing I noticed in these pics! Stockings and tidy hair without the wisps! I must say I wish she wore her hair this way at the wedding.


i liked her messy (if you can even call it that way) hair at her wedding



bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know why they are having Prince Charles' 70th birthday celebration now? His birthday isn't until November. I can understand wanting to have it at a time when everyone is available and the weather is nice, but it seems weird having it a full six months early.


My birthday is in november, too, and if I would want a garden party, I would celebrate 6 month later not earlier



PoohBear said:


> She seemed so calm at the wedding, I joked that she must’ve taken a Xanax. I don’t know how she did it. I would’ve been a nervous wreck. Shaking, tears and everything in between!


some people get calmer the more stressful something is. 
I am one of them. I used to work in a kindergarten and one day a child throw a stone at the head of another kid and he had a huge trauma and his face was covered in blood. I was super calm, talking to him, calling the ambulance, keeping him distracted. all my workmates went nuts and cried and I was like "uh you know, best thing is, you can sit INSIDE an ambulance!" I am more of stressful-I am cal, then afterwards I sit there tearing


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> that where my thoughts, too. the church is huge, and the Queen sat for a while. Looking at my grandma (who is 10 years younger than the Queen), she wouldn't make it to the steps, that fast or at all. I bet they looked for the shortest way out and that was not through the church


My point exactly


----------



## beekmanhill

gazoo said:


> They adore and indulge Harry. As such, I'd assume, based on just being a human, that you come to love anyone that makes those you love happy. Even if you have reservations about it all.
> 
> If they were totally against Meghan, they could easily have not allowed the grand wedding, given the official blessing, and made him step down from Royal duties to be with her. They didn't do that, and seem to have given Harry free rein with everything. Let us not forget Meghan even attended Christmas festivities whilst not being an official member of the family. Something that was not afforded to Kate.
> 
> Reading into their actual actions, I think Meghan is as accepted as she could be.



Remember the Instagram video Harry and the Queen sent to Michelle ***** regarding the Invictus Games?

You can see what a great relationship they have.  I was so shocked when I saw this video; I never thought the Queen would do anything like that. I think he can do no wrong in her eyes.   In any event, she won't be around too much longer, sadly, and things will loosen up for certain in the next generation.


----------



## berrydiva

Lodpah said:


> Who said anything about "negative opinions?" We can agree to disagree. You have a "gray" opinion yourself as I have a sixth sense. It took years of realizing the gift and running away from it and finally caving in and accepting it. Instead of "sixth sense" I should probably called it what it's normally called and what others who have the same gift I have the real proper name for it.
> 
> Would you like to know what I 'sense" "about you? But I wouldn't do that to you. So don't mock what you don't know.  I can pretty much ascertain the type of person you are within a few minutes of meeting you . . . sort of like those handwriting experts, you know, that lawyers use for jury trials, of course some are good and some are on the money.


You're a stranger on the internet who only knows what I post and selectively share to a very limited scope, why do you have any belief that I care what you sense about me?


----------



## White Orchid

Saw this on Instagram.  Much preferred her makeup on the day.


----------



## queennadine

See, I think the above looks beautiful. It was her WEDDING DAY. She clearly knows about the importance of good makeup, since she's been properly made up for tons of red carpet events. And then you decide you want to look almost completely natural on the most important day of your life?! There's a huuuuuuuuge spectrum in between Meghan's wedding-day-makeup and Kim Kardashian, for example. Polished does not have to mean 'caked on makeup.'
Kate didn't look overly made up. But she looked like she made an effort.


----------



## berrydiva

queennadine said:


> See, I think the above looks beautiful. It was her WEDDING DAY. She clearly knows about the importance of good makeup, since she's been properly made up for tons of red carpet events. And then you decide you want to look almost completely natural on the most important day of your life?! There's a huuuuuuuuge spectrum in between Meghan's wedding-day-makeup and Kim Kardashian, for example. Polished does not have to mean 'caked on makeup.'
> Kate didn't look overly made up. But she looked like she made an effort.


That pic is photoshopped, she was pretty bare-faced for the wedding day....she didn't have on that much makeup nor a red lip...even the earrings was changed.


----------



## mkr

Is she even allowed to wear a red lip?


----------



## terebina786

Let me tell you that I decided to stop wearing any full coverage foundation during the day! LOL... I'm letting my freckles through haha


----------



## queennadine

berrydiva said:


> That pic is photoshopped, she was pretty bare-faced for the wedding day....she didn't have on that much makeup nor a red lip...even the earrings was changed.


I definitely knew that was photoshopped. My point all along has been how her natural looking makeup didn't look polished, IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## deltalady

I thought she looked polished. At my wedding, I told my MUA that I wanted to look like myself but better. I had a very natural look and I’m so glad. I didn’t want to look back and say what the hell was I thinking with this makeup. Also, your hugging tons of people, kissing your new spouse. Who wants to worry about touching up your makeup or it getting wiped off accidentally during a hug. To each their own but I thought she looked lovely.


----------



## daisychainz

queennadine said:


> See, I think the above looks beautiful. It was her WEDDING DAY. She clearly knows about the importance of good makeup, since she's been properly made up for tons of red carpet events. And then you decide you want to look almost completely natural on the most important day of your life?! There's a huuuuuuuuge spectrum in between Meghan's wedding-day-makeup and Kim Kardashian, for example. Polished does not have to mean 'caked on makeup.'
> Kate didn't look overly made up. But she looked like she made an effort.


That puzzles me as well. We all know her acting background and that she has attended red-carpet events looking "hot" and "sexy" and with a full face of makeup and hair perfectly styled. So she has a better body than that dress gave and she can do proper hair and makeup. So, what happened on the wedding day? The hair, makeup and dress all went ??. If she was trying to make a statement that she was going to be simple and average and bare-faced moving forward then why the full face of makeup and perfectly styled hair just two days later that looked better than her wedding day style? I think she's pretty either way, but the lack of effort for the wedding day is puzzling. She was meeting many of those guests for the first time so perhaps that was the image she wanted to present that day. Maybe Harry even told her to look that way, who knows. I agree, Kate managed to look simple and easy, but you could see the effort.


----------



## cafecreme15

Personally I thought Lady Kitty Spencer had the best makeup of the wedding day.


----------



## berrydiva

queennadine said:


> I definitely knew that was photoshopped. My point all along has been how her natural looking makeup didn't look polished, IMO.


Maybe some people feel polished with natural looking makeup or maybe she's acknowledged that her red carpet days are behind her...just a thought.


----------



## sdkitty

I think she was smart to choose a simple gown that covered her appropriately as per royal custom and I don't see anything wrong with her makeup.  In her case, not being as young as most traditional "princess brides" like Diana for instance (and with the other factors, being divorced, etc., I think being tasteful was important.  As much as she may have a few people her criticizing here for being a bit plain in her look, better than the other way around.  Having people say she was cheap looking, too Hollywood, etc.


----------



## deltalady

I thought Kate’s wedding makeup aged her. I did not like it at all.


----------



## mkr

She was probably going for an understated look.   She probably wore panty hose too.  She wants acceptance and respect and her cray family already made her look like a fool. Imagine the tabloid gossip if she went glam. In England.


----------



## daisychainz

cafecreme15 said:


> Personally I thought Lady Kitty Spencer had the best makeup of the wedding day.


She had the best everything! This young lady is stunning.


----------



## deltalady

berrydiva said:


> Maybe some people feel polished with natural looking makeup or maybe she's acknowledged that her red carpet days are behind her...just a thought.



It’s funny you say that. I actually feel more polished with natural looking makeup. When I go all out, I feel like I look like I tried too hard.


----------



## berrydiva

deltalady said:


> It’s funny you say that. I actually feel more polished with natural looking makeup. When I go all out, I feel like I look like I tried too hard.


Same here....for daytime events, I tend to always do more natural looking makeup. For night time/party type events, i'll go full face but that's more "fun" makeup....rarely things that I feel are very special occasions. I want to look back at pics and remember the occasion not regret my makeup.


----------



## gazoo

She looks younger in her wedding day makeup and older in her appearance yesterday, with fuller coverage. She probably knows the lighter makeup makes her look younger. She comes across as very self-aware. 

FWIW, I'd choose younger and fresh faced for wedding photos that will be around and used for decades to come.


----------



## Bentley1

From IG...Right was Meghan at the wedding. What do we think, should she have had more makeup on or is the plain face better?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Bentley1 said:


> From IG...Right was Meghan at the wedding. What do we think, should she have had more makeup on or is the plain face better?


Something inbetween? This side-by-side makes it seem like she didn't even put on chapstick?


----------



## queennadine

^^ I think something in between would be been perfect. Something like this:


----------



## bag-mania

I think the plain face was fine. Contrary to popular myth, brides DO perspire. She had a long day ahead and she planned for it. It would have been much worse if she had been caught in photos with her makeup smudged or running.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

Stunning here:


----------



## queennadine

berrydiva said:


> Maybe some people feel polished with natural looking makeup or maybe *she's acknowledged that her red carpet days are behind her.*..just a thought.



This! I think you're so right. This was her 're-birth,' for lack of better phrasing. Completely agree.


----------



## cafecreme15

daisychainz said:


> She had the best everything! This young lady is stunning.


I'm still obsessed with the entire look!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

queennadine said:


> ^^ I think something in between would be been perfect. Something like this:


this would have been great. polished but with effort, and still very natural and toned down. even with her hair back it would have been fine.


----------



## berrydiva

queennadine said:


> ^^ I think something in between would be been perfect. Something like this:


The only real difference I'm seeing is that her face makeup has far less application to let her freckles shine through and not so heavy liner. I can understand not wanting much eyeliner on your wedding day as you may cry. Some people are fine with "imperfections" shining through (if you consider freckles an imperfection)....I think from a Hollywood/Red Carpet perspective, trying to create the idea of perfection is what they strive for so foundation to cover everything is the standard. But seems many people would've preferred for her to cover her freckles completely and gone more glam....to each their own. 

Plus she's marrying into royalty so I feel like the makeup considerations are totally different.


----------



## berrydiva

Does she get a new name like Kate did?


----------



## Jayne1

White Orchid said:


> Saw this on Instagram.  Much preferred her makeup on the day.


Agree. This photoshopped makeup makes her look like all the girls on Instagram.

I prefer her unique style, which may be disappearing as her first royal appearance shows.


----------



## bisousx

Meghan has the type of face that doesn't need makeup to be gorgeous, I didn't even notice her bare face until I read the complaints about it. Sheesh.


----------



## afsweet

Meghan is beautiful and doesn't need a face full of makeup, even on her wedding day. Her natural makeup is a refreshing change. I'm tired of seeing brides with caked on makeup or brides who don't even look like themselves.


----------



## LibbyRuth

It would not surprise me if for the next couple of months when she does appearances we see her looking like the garden party - hair pulled back tightly, traditional makeup, classic hats, etc.  After a few months, it won't surprise me if she doesn't slowly go back to more of the looks we saw after their engagement - hair down sometimes, lighter makeup, more modern hats, etc. I think that right now she's got to go classical so that it doesn't look like she's bucking the system. Once she's shown the respect for tradition, she'll possibly feel more free to be herself.


----------



## mariyelle

cafecreme15 said:


> Personally I thought Lady Kitty Spencer had the best makeup of the wedding day.


Best overall! I'm obsessed with this look


----------



## roses5682

mkr said:


> She was probably going for an understated look.   She probably wore panty hose too.  She wants acceptance and respect and her cray family already made her look like a fool. Imagine the tabloid gossip if she went glam. In England.



Good points. I thought the dress was quite boring but I never thought of it from this perspective. 

Its sad that Megan is going to have to give up so much autonomy for the sake of her marriage. She had an established career and wealth of her own and now she can't even decide where she wants to live. Once of the perks of being an adult is making your own decisions so I hate she has to be everything by the queen. The whole royal thing is not my cup of tea.


----------



## TMA

Lodpah said:


> Possibly, but Prince Harry and Prince William are not the only grandkids. She was shown walking around the next day and was rumored to be at the parties (both of them). In any event, it was either a passive-aggressive move on the Queen's part to tacitly show her "disapproval." Meghan made a mockery of centuries old tradition and please know that she is not the first "Black" woman to marry into royalty. There was a Black woman in the BRF I believe a great, great, great grandmother. I can't remember the history right now but one King George V's. Plus there are notable black women in other European countries that married into royalty. One of my partying friends back in the day who is a full blooded Black woman married into royalty whom she met on a European jaunt with her mother. Although not as highly placed as MM she still married into royalty.



That is untrue. If you watched the wedding, there was a side entrance through which most of the royals went in the Church. Other than parents, William & Kate and the rest, all the other royals (including the Queen and Prince Phillip) waved from that side entrance.


----------



## bag-princess

queennadine said:


> See, I think the above looks beautiful. It was her WEDDING DAY. She clearly knows about the importance of good makeup, since she's been properly made up for tons of red carpet events. And then you decide you want to look almost completely natural on the most important day of your life?! There's a huuuuuuuuge spectrum in between Meghan's wedding-day-makeup and Kim Kardashian, for example. Polished does not have to mean 'caked on makeup.'
> Kate didn't look overly made up. But she looked like she made an effort.




Exactly! HER wedding day and she obviously felt comfortable like that. And maybe Harry likes that look better and that’s how she wanted him to remember her on that day. I rarely wear makeup and when I do it a small amount. My husband hated it even when I was 16 years old! He always said I look better without it and to leave it for girls that really need it! [emoji1]



berrydiva said:


> Does she get a new name like Kate did?




I have wondered that too but haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

They are calling her Meghan, Duchess of Sussex instead of Rachel, Duchess of Sussex so I don't think so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Eva1991

White Orchid said:


> Saw this on Instagram.  Much preferred her makeup on the day.


The photoshopped make-up look looks horrendous. She would ridicule herself if she'd opted for a look like that. The simple make up look she chose was much, much better. The only think I would change in her actual look is the nude lip. A light berry colored lip tint would look nicer.



bag-mania said:


> I think the plain face was fine.* Contrary to popular myth, brides DO perspire.* She had a long day ahead and she planned for it. It would have been much worse if she had been caught in photos with her makeup smudged or running.







queennadine said:


> Stunning here:



Stunning indeed but her foundation is too cakey.



berrydiva said:


> Does she get a new name like Kate did?


What new name did Kate get? If you're referring to Catherine, it's her actual name.



roses5682 said:


> Good points. I thought the dress was quite boring but I never thought of it from this perspective.
> 
> Its sad that Megan is going to have to give up so much autonomy for the sake of her marriage. She had an established career and wealth of her own and now she can't even decide where she wants to live. *Once of the perks of being an adult is making your own decisions* so I hate she has to be everything by the queen. The whole royal thing is not my cup of tea.


She made her decision by marrying a member of the BRF. I think she knew what this entailed.


----------



## meluvs2shop

I can’t believe we are debating the lack of makeup. It’s her day. I thought she looked gorgeous. I had makeup professionally done on my big day, but it was minimal & more natural looking. I wonder if the current makeup trend was not as heavy as it is today with every other IG post being about contouring and heavy makeup application- would we see things differently? Probably not. I truly thought her makeup went with her attire. Simple yet elegant. 

And I know this is a public forum. Free speech yada yada. Perhaps the horse is dead already and has been for sometime.


----------



## TMA

stephc005 said:


> Meghan is beautiful and doesn't need a face full of makeup, even on her wedding day. Her natural makeup is a refreshing change. I'm tired of seeing brides with caked on makeup or brides who don't even look like themselves.



Agree. I think everything was stunning. No drama on the dress keep everyone focused on her face and tiara. No distraction whatsoever. Loved it!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> They are calling her Meghan, Duchess of Sussex instead of Rachel, Duchess of Sussex so I don't think so.


Why didn't Harry say Rachel during the ceremony? Unless I missed something?


----------



## gazoo

They used their full names and their chosen ones during the vows.

Harry's name is Henry, yet during his vows he used Harry. At least I'm pretty sure he did. 

It's kinda sweet that neither of them go by their given first names.


----------



## chaneljewel

IMO, Meghan looked beautiful on her wedding day.  Personally, it was HER special day so whatever she wanted to wear, etc was perfectly fine with me.  She’s a gorgeous, confident woman who is changing her life completely for the love of her life.  I think most of us would do the same.


----------



## Just Askin

Sorry if this has already been posted. Too funny.


----------



## Cocoabean

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Why didn't Harry say Rachel during the ceremony? Unless I missed something?



And Meghan said Harry, not Henry. Their full names were used early on in the ceremony talking of who was being joined.


----------



## pixiejenna

I think her make up was great, I enjoy seeing people looking natural. 

There was some talk about her dress in her fashion thread or wedding dress predictions thread and someone speculated that one of the reasons why her dress was so plain was because they didn’t want it to our shine Kate’s wedding dress, as she’ll one day be queen. It’s not something that I ever would have thought of but I can kind of see that being a factor in the choice of her dress. Things is mare mortals would never have to worry about lol.


----------



## berrydiva

Eva1991 said:


> What new name did Kate get? If you're referring to Catherine, it's her actual name.


Guess I meant is there a formal name she has to go by officially. When Kate & Will got married, I remember the whole decree that she is to officially be referred to as Catherine and no longer by Kate. Guess it doesn't matter since I don't know any nickname or shortened name that Meghan used to be called.

ETA: I see that her actual first name is Rachel. So is she officially Rachel now?


----------



## westjenn

berrydiva said:


> Guess I meant is there a formal name she has to go by officially. When Kate & Will got married, I remember the whole decree that she is to officially be referred to as Catherine and no longer by Kate. Guess it doesn't matter since I don't know any nickname or shortened name that Meghan used to be called.
> 
> ETA: I see that her actual first name is Rachel. So is she officially Rachel now?


Catherine has never gone by “Kate”.. it’s what the press calls her.. to everyone else in her life it’s Catherine.
Meghan won’t go by Rachel. She’s been using her middle name since childhood.


----------



## berrydiva

westjenn said:


> Catherine has never gone by “Kate”.. it’s what the press calls her.. to everyone else in her life it’s Catherine.
> Meghan won’t go by Rachel. She’s been using her middle name since childhood.


Got it. Thanks. That's all I've ever known her by...didn't realize it was the press that gave her that name.


----------



## westjenn

berrydiva said:


> Got it. Thanks. That's all I've ever known her by...didn't realize it was the press that gave her that name.


No problem


----------



## marthastoo

I'm fairly certain Kate Middleton has gone by Kate and was not named by the press.  Prince William calls her Catherine and some others, but she was called Kate in school.


----------



## gazoo

berrydiva said:


> Got it. Thanks. That's all I've ever known her by...didn't realize it was the press that gave her that name.



I think they dubbed her "Waity Katie" for waiting around for years for him to make up his mind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gazoo said:


> I think they dubbed her "Waity Katie" for waiting around for years for him to make up his mind.


Yes, first it was Waity Katie and now it's Duchess Do Little.  lol


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, first it was Waity Katie and now it's Duchess Do Little.  lol



Duchess Do Little? Doesn’t she accompany William on nearly every occasion, and does her own appearances?

In her defence, she does have three children, who should take priority. 

She’s done the most important thing, she’s given the nation a heir, and a spare, and another spare. [emoji16]


----------



## Jayne1

PatsyCline said:


> Duchess Do Little? Doesn’t she accompany William on nearly every occasion, and does her own appearances?
> 
> In her defence, she does have three children, who should take priority.
> 
> She’s done the most important thing, she’s given the nation a heir, and a spare, and another spare. [emoji16]


He does even less than her. There's a reason he is called work-shy Wills. 

This is her job. She signed up for it. She's got great help, assistants, maids, hairdressers and nannies.  She could leave for a few hours a day, like the 92 year old Queen.

I have a feeling Meghan will be more enthusiastic about royal duties.


----------



## PatsyCline

gazoo said:


> I think they dubbed her "Waity Katie" for waiting around for years for him to make up his mind.



Sometimes the ring DOES come to those who wait. [emoji6][emoji183]


----------



## bisousx

roses5682 said:


> Good points. I thought the dress was quite boring but I never thought of it from this perspective.
> 
> Its sad that Megan is going to have to give up so much autonomy for the sake of her marriage. She had an established career and wealth of her own and now she can't even decide where she wants to live. Once of the perks of being an adult is making your own decisions so I hate she has to be everything by the queen. The whole royal thing is not my cup of tea.



I think it's possible that Meghan feels she can do more good for the world as a stifled royal than an actress waiting for the next role. Like everyone else, she's well aware of what she has to sacrifice in order to have a much more powerful voice for the causes she cares for. Sometimes when you have already completed one goal after another.. going from nothing to something.. maybe she is trying to achieve an even higher goal of feeling like her life has purpose.. since she got the TV roles, made her money and had the career. 

... of course, being financially taken care of forever and a cute hubby wouldn't hurt either.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Some creative people in the innanets


----------



## anitalilac

DC-Cutie said:


> Some creative people in the innanets



hahahahaha!


----------



## anitalilac

meluvs2shop said:


> I can’t believe we are debating the lack of makeup. It’s her day. I thought she looked gorgeous. I had makeup professionally done on my big day, but it was minimal & more natural looking. I wonder if the current makeup trend was not as heavy as it is today with every other IG post being about contouring and heavy makeup application- would we see things differently? Probably not. I truly thought her makeup went with her attire. Simple yet elegant.
> 
> And I know this is a public forum. Free speech yada yada. Perhaps the horse is dead already and has been for sometime.


If I am  beautiful like her , I'll wear little or no makeup too. This drag queen makeup trend is really getting to much.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Just read that the diamond Cartier tennis bracelet she's wearing here, for 20K, was a gift from Harry after the wedding. Diana got the aquamarine ring the night of her wedding. Not sure what piece Catherine got.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

From the movie The Wedding Planner.


----------



## Jayne1

Meghan's does fit better.  lol


----------



## Grande Latte

ccbaggirl89 said:


> From the movie The Wedding Planner.
> View attachment 4077792
> View attachment 4077793



Wow. The same silhouette. I can see her getting inspiration from this movie. In fact, I can Megan getting lots of fashion inspirations from movies. She's very creative and can invent looks.


----------



## myown

berrydiva said:


> That pic is photoshopped, she was pretty bare-faced for the wedding day....she didn't have on that much makeup nor a red lip...even the earrings was changed.


lol I hardly recognized her on the photoshopped picture.


----------



## myown

berrydiva said:


> Does she get a new name like Kate did?


kate got a new name?


----------



## myown

everyone here is like  she stepped back with the minimal make up to agree with the royals. and as confirmation a they use her red carpet make up. 
what if the red carpet make up was just that? a hollywood red carpet makeup and she self likes minimal make up better but that didn't fit in with flashing lights, cameras and spotlight on the red carpet?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

marthastoo said:


> I'm fairly certain Kate Middleton has gone by Kate and was not named by the press.  Prince William calls her Catherine and some others, but she was called Kate in school.


she probably never liked it.


----------



## Morgan R

myown said:


> kate got a new name?



Upon their marriages the Queen confers titles to the royals and the woman that they marry receive titles as well.

Prince William is the Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn and Baron Carrickfergus.
Catherine Middleton is the Duchess of Cambridge,  Countess of Strathearn, and Baroness Carrickfergus.

Prince Harry is now the Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton, and Baron Kilkeel.
Meghan Markle is now the Dutchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton, and Baroness Kilkeel.


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Upon their marriages the Queen confers titles to the royals and the woman that they marry receive titles as well.
> 
> Prince William is the Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn and Baron Carrickfergus.
> Catherine Middleton is the Duchess of Cambridge,  Countess of Strathearn, and Baroness Carrickfergus.
> 
> Prince Harry is now the Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton, and Baron Kilkeel.
> Meghan Markle is now the Dutchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton, and Baroness Kilkeel.


a title is not a name


----------



## beekmanhill

Jayne1 said:


> He does even less than her. There's a reason he is called work-shy Wills.
> 
> This is her job. She signed up for it. She's got great help, assistants, maids, hairdressers and nannies.  She could leave for a few hours a day, like the 92 year old Queen.
> 
> I have a feeling Meghan will be more enthusiastic about royal duties.



I had no idea.  I thought Kate could do no wrong.  

Harry seems so enthusiastic when he is doing something involved with vets, or athletics, etc.  I followed the Invictus games and he was such a positive presence.  But there are so many appearances when he just stands throughout a presentation and then gives a short speech or the like.  I'd die of boredom.  I hope they have some discretion about what they are involved in.  Do Andrew and Edward and Anne step up to the plate to earn their money?


----------



## gazoo

beekmanhill said:


> I had no idea.  I thought Kate could do no wrong.
> 
> Harry seems so enthusiastic when he is doing something involved with vets, or athletics, etc.  I followed the Invictus games and he was such a positive presence.  But there are so many appearances when he just stands throughout a presentation and then gives a short speech or the like.  I'd die of boredom.  I hope they have some discretion about what they are involved in.  Do Andrew and Edward and Anne step up to the plate to earn their money?



Anne works. A Lot. Edward and his wife do a lot too. 

Andrew has always been problematic. Google him. It's pretty disturbing. Here's just a taste:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/08/prince-andrew-201108/amp


----------



## beekmanhill

gazoo said:


> Anne works. A Lot. Edward and his wife do a lot too.
> 
> Andrew has always been problematic. Google him. It's pretty disturbing. Here's just a taste:
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/08/prince-andrew-201108/amp



Thanks, I'll read it later.   I knew of his earlier history, but am not up to date.  I was shocked when I saw him at the wedding; he had aged so badly.


----------



## Jayne1

beekmanhill said:


> I had no idea.  I thought Kate could do no wrong.
> 
> Harry seems so enthusiastic when he is doing something involved with vets, or athletics, etc.  I followed the Invictus games and he was such a positive presence.  But there are so many appearances when he just stands throughout a presentation and then gives a short speech or the like.  I'd die of boredom.  I hope they have some discretion about what they are involved in.  Do Andrew and Edward and Anne step up to the plate to earn their money?


Harry isn't performing his royal duties when he does his charity work.


----------



## beekmanhill

Jayne1 said:


> Harry isn't performing his royal duties when he does his charity work.



Oh, no, how many royal duties are there.  There seem to be so many people to split the work among if you count just Charles and his siblings and their kids. Invictus is not a royal duty?


----------



## terebina786

Here's my theory on her makeup.  If she had caked it on or done more, it would've looked TERRIBLE in natural light, which the church and the post carriage ride was full of - more makeup wouldn't have been her friend that day.  She did enough diffusing/perfecting of her face with a light foundation (I think I read it was Dior Face and Body) so it looked good in natural light and whoever her MUA was that guided her to that was genius and really took the weather into account because it was bright and sunny.  I've never seen heavy makeup look good in sunlight... It only looks good under IG studio lights or professional photography lights and then photoshopped after.


----------



## berrydiva

myown said:


> kate got a new name?


https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...n-markle-thread.679793/page-192#post-32304154

https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...n-markle-thread.679793/page-192#post-32304220


----------



## berrydiva

terebina786 said:


> Here's my theory on her makeup.  If she had caked it on or done more, it would've looked TERRIBLE in natural light, which the church and the post carriage ride was full of - more makeup wouldn't have been her friend that day.  She did enough diffusing/perfecting of her face with a light foundation (I think I read it was Dior Face and Body) so it looked good in natural light and whoever her MUA was that guided her to that was genius and really took the weather into account because it was bright and sunny.  I've never seen heavy makeup look good in sunlight... It only looks good under IG studio lights or professional photography lights and then photoshopped after.


Agreed.  I don't t think people are taking into account how bad heavier makeup would've looked under natural daylight.


----------



## terebina786

berrydiva said:


> Agreed.  I don't t think people are taking into account how bad heavier makeup would've looked under natural daylight.


I personally didn't like Kate's makeup on her wedding day.  It seemed dry and tired - She could've used a nice mist of Fix +.  Now this Kitty Spencer lady also did it right!


----------



## DC-Cutie

terebina786 said:


> I personally didn't like Kate's makeup on her wedding day.  It seemed dry and tired - She could've used a nice mist of Fix +.  Now this Kitty Spencer lady also did it right!


I think the dark waterline liner she used to wear, made her look so dated and harsh


----------



## Grande Latte

This is a closeup pic. Not on her wedding day, but shows her love for natural makeup.

I like her not trying to "cover up" everything, and showing real skin. You can see some fine lines, you can see some marks. But it's natural and modern. She's a very pretty girl.


----------



## Sharont2305

gazoo said:


> Anne works. A Lot. Edward and his wife do a lot too.
> 
> Andrew has always been problematic. Google him. It's pretty disturbing. Here's just a taste:
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/08/prince-andrew-201108/amp


Andrew, otherwise known as Air Miles Andy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

beekmanhill said:


> Invictus is not a royal duty?


No, Harry set it up after coming back from serving in Afghanistan.


----------



## Petruspus

beekmanhill said:


> I had no idea.  I thought Kate could do no wrong.
> 
> Harry seems so enthusiastic when he is doing something involved with vets, or athletics, etc.  I followed the Invictus games and he was such a positive presence.  But there are so many appearances when he just stands throughout a presentation and then gives a short speech or the like.  I'd die of boredom.  I hope they have some discretion about what they are involved in.  Do Andrew and Edward and Anne step up to the plate to earn their money?


----------



## bag-princess

Meghan Markle to Take Six Months of Duchess Lessons




Now that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are married, the time has come for her to kiss her bare legs goodbye, slip into some questionable pantyhose, and get to work being a royal. But one can't simply start Duchessing without a lesson in how the hell this whole ~royal thing~ works, which is why Meghan is reportedly starting a six month course in protocol.


The Queen has reportedly selected one of her senior aides to spend the next six months training Meghan in how to properly act like a member of the royal family, and the lucky woman tasked with the gig is 49-year-old Samantha Cohen. Turns out she's even moving from Buckingham Palace to Kensington Palace just to whip Meghan into royal shape.




Samantha with the Queen in 2016


https://www.housebeautiful.com/life...ng-to-be-royal-six-months/?src=socialflowFBED


----------



## bellebellebelle19

bag-princess said:


> Meghan Markle to Take Six Months of Duchess Lessons
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are married, the time has come for her to kiss her bare legs goodbye, slip into some questionable pantyhose, and get to work being a royal. But one can't simply start Duchessing without a lesson in how the hell this whole ~royal thing~ works, which is why Meghan is reportedly starting a six month course in protocol.
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly selected one of her senior aides to spend the next six months training Meghan in how to properly act like a member of the royal family, and the lucky woman tasked with the gig is 49-year-old Samantha Cohen. Turns out she's even moving from Buckingham Palace to Kensington Palace just to whip Meghan into royal shape.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4078480
> 
> Samantha with the Queen in 2016
> 
> 
> https://www.housebeautiful.com/life...ng-to-be-royal-six-months/?src=socialflowFBED


So unrelated, but the Queen has got some gorgeous tweed on. I wonder where she got it…potentially Chanel, but the UK Is famous for its tweed, so I wish I could find out about any potential under-the-radar brands


----------



## PatsyCline

Good for her.  Might as well get into the 'Royal' groove right from the start.  Meghan can't be seen making errors.


----------



## anitalilac

bellebellebelle19 said:


> So unrelated, but the Queen has got some gorgeous tweed on. I wonder where she got it…potentially Chanel, but the UK Is famous for its tweed, so I wish I could find out about any potential under-the-radar brands


I know. That tweed is gorgeous!


----------



## jcnc

bag-princess said:


> Meghan Markle to Take Six Months of Duchess Lessons
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are married, the time has come for her to kiss her bare legs goodbye, slip into some questionable pantyhose, and get to work being a royal. But one can't simply start Duchessing without a lesson in how the hell this whole ~royal thing~ works, which is why Meghan is reportedly starting a six month course in protocol.
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly selected one of her senior aides to spend the next six months training Meghan in how to properly act like a member of the royal family, and the lucky woman tasked with the gig is 49-year-old Samantha Cohen. Turns out she's even moving from Buckingham Palace to Kensington Palace just to whip Meghan into royal shape.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4078480
> 
> Samantha with the Queen in 2016
> 
> 
> https://www.housebeautiful.com/life...ng-to-be-royal-six-months/?src=socialflowFBED


I assumed she would have had some already. At least after they were engaged


----------



## mkr

That woman isn't wearing panty hose.
.  Trollop.


----------



## Grande Latte

A few more iconic images from the wedding. Enjoy.


----------



## Grande Latte

....And this kid's expression seems to photobomb everything!


----------



## prettyprincess

mkr said:


> That woman isn't wearing panty hose.
> .  Trollop.


Maybe a little old fashioned modesty and ladylike behavior in today’s society is exactly what we need.


----------



## beekmanhill

Did they ever give lessons to Fergie? I guess they didn't take.  Did anyone see her galumping down the walk at the wedding?

That woman must be wearing stockings if she works so closely with the queen..  If so they are the sheerest on the market.


----------



## absolutpink

Meghan’s bio is up on the BRF website https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Grande Latte said:


> ....And this kid's expression seems to photobomb everything!
> View attachment 4078750
> View attachment 4078753


Was it really safe for her and her veil to be alone in the car with those two


----------



## bag-princess

Grande Latte said:


> ....And this kid's expression seems to photobomb everything!
> View attachment 4078750
> View attachment 4078753




In my grandmother’s voice - “who does this child belong to!?” [emoji1][emoji1] he was having a ball that day!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

prettyprincess said:


> Maybe a little old fashioned modesty and ladylike behavior in today’s society is exactly what we need.


Most women will eventually be back in the pantyhose department whether they want to or not ... their compression days will come, lol  Pretty sure that's what the Queen sports. At this point it's probably medical for her as much as anything else.


----------



## Jayne1

beekmanhill said:


> Did they ever give lessons to Fergie? I guess they didn't take.  Did anyone see her galumping down the walk at the wedding?


I think Meghan is just naturally elegant. 

If people didn't care for Meghan's wedding hair --- this was a bit worse.  Also, notice the posture:


----------



## papertiger

bellebellebelle19 said:


> So unrelated, but the Queen has got some gorgeous tweed on. I wonder where she got it…potentially Chanel, but the UK Is famous for its tweed, so I wish I could find out about any potential under-the-radar brands



Her shoes are made and repaired by former Rayne employee called David Hyatt (she formally bought only from Rayne)
Her hats are made by Rachel Trevor-Morgan
Her bags are made by Launer
Until 2010 her dresses, gowns and separates were by Hardy Amies
Angela Kelly is responsible for designing and coordinating her outfits since and all material is sourced from the UK.

Scotland still makes the best hand-loom woven tweed in the world and some of the finest cashmere. Chanel got her ideas from practical sportswear that the landed gentry wore. Pure wool tweed is warm, durable, wind resistant, serviceable ad the traditional colours work seasonaly as camouflage against the Scottish landscape(s).


----------



## papertiger

beekmanhill said:


> Did they ever give lessons to Fergie? I guess they didn't take.  Did anyone see her galumping down the walk at the wedding?
> 
> That woman must be wearing stockings if she works so closely with the queen..  If so they are the sheerest on the market.



Diana and Fergie were give very little help to acclimatise (from what I've read)


----------



## Morgan R

*Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex: Coat Of Arms*

A Coat of Arms has been created for The Duchess of Sussex. The design of the Arms was agreed and approved by Her Majesty The Queen and Mr. Thomas Woodcock (Garter King of Arms and Senior Herald in England), who is based at the College of Arms in London.

Her Royal Highness worked closely with the College of Arms throughout the design process to create a Coat of Arms that was both personal and representative.

The blue background of the shield represents the Pacific Ocean off the California coast, while the two golden rays across the shield are symbolic of the sunshine of The Duchess's home state. The three quills represent communication and the power of words.

Beneath the shield on the grass sits a collection of golden poppies, California's state flower, and wintersweet, which grows at Kensington Palace.

It is customary for Supporters of the shield to be assigned to Members of the Royal Family, and for wives of Members of the Royal Family to have one of their husband’s Supporters and one relating to themselves. The Supporter relating to The Duchess of Sussex is a songbird with wings elevated as if flying and an open beak, which with the quill represents the power of communication.

A Coronet has also been assigned to The Duchess of Sussex. It is the Coronet laid down by a Royal Warrant of 1917 for the sons and daughters of the Heir Apparent. It is composed of two crosses patée, four fleurs-de-lys and two strawberry leaves.

The arms of a married woman are shown with those of her husband and the technical term is that they are impaled, meaning placed side by side in the same shield.

Mr. Thomas Woodcock, Garter King of Arms said: "The Duchess of Sussex took a great interest in the design. Good heraldic design is nearly always simple and the Arms of The Duchess of Sussex stand well beside the historic beauty of the quartered British Royal Arms. Heraldry as a means of identification has flourished in Europe for almost nine hundred years and is associated with both individual people and great corporate bodies such as Cities, Universities and for instance the Livery Companies in the City of London. "

https://www.royal.uk/her-royal-highness-duchess-sussex-coat-arms


----------



## PatsyCline

Meghan’s new coat of arms


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> I think Meghan is just naturally elegant.
> 
> If people didn't care for Meghan's wedding hair --- this was a bit worse.  Also, notice the posture:
> 
> View attachment 4079089


I know it’s with hindsight, but the body language says it all really


----------



## gazoo

PatsyCline said:


> Meghan’s new coat of arms
> View attachment 4079168



The tongue and red nails on the lion cracked me up.


----------



## daisychainz

Currently watching Royally Ever After on Hallmark channel. Did anyone else watch? It's funny.  Loosely based on MM and PH.


----------



## White Orchid

Clearblueskies said:


> I know it’s with hindsight, but the body language says it all really


Especially with Charles!


----------



## bag-princess

Meghan’s new royal monogram


----------



## bellebellebelle19

papertiger said:


> Her shoes are made and repaired by former Rayne employee called David Hyatt (she formally bought only from Rayne)
> Her hats are made by Rachel Trevor-Morgan
> Her bags are made by Launer
> Until 2010 her dresses, gowns and separates were by Hardy Amies
> Angela Kelly is responsible for designing and coordinating her outfits since and all material is sourced from the UK.
> 
> Scotland still makes the best hand-loom woven tweed in the world and some of the finest cashmere. Chanel got her ideas from practical sportswear that the landed gentry wore. Pure wool tweed is warm, durable, wind resistant, serviceable ad the traditional colours work seasonaly as camouflage against the Scottish landscape(s).


Love how informative this is! Wish I oculus save posts on TPF. Thanks papertiger!


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I know it’s with hindsight, but the body language says it all really



Watch this then, a few days before the wedding. Looking back, this is absolutely heartbreaking. Poor girl. There's a lot of "I" not "We" from Charles.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Watch this then, a few days before the wedding. Looking back, this is absolutely heartbreaking. Poor girl. There's a lot of "I" not "We" from Charles.



yes, she eventually made some trouble for that family but she really got roped into a marriage she thought was real while he was in love with someone else.  sad.


----------



## Jayne1

Grande Latte said:


> ....And this kid's expression seems to photobomb everything!
> View attachment 4078750
> View attachment 4078753


He is one of Ben Mulroney's children.  Meghan only had famous friends, when living in Toronto. I like Meghan very much, but the famous friends thing is true.  lol

Anyway, Ben Mulroney is the son of a former, kinda hated, Canadian prime minister and works as a talk show host, here in Toronto.  His twins were page boys accompanying Meghan in the car and carrying her veil up the steps and down the aisle.

They're only 7 and I think they did a great job. They're just normal kids.  Their parents haven't brought them along to red carpet events since birth, the way some Hollywood parents do.

Ben said they had a rehearsal, but obviously there were no trumpets, flowers and crowds and when they walked in and saw all the pomp and pageantry, they were very excited. But really well behaved, I thought.
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> He is one of Ben Mulroney's children.  Meghan only had famous friends, when living in Toronto. I like Meghan very much, but the famous friends thing is true.  lol
> 
> Anyway, Ben Mulroney is the son of a former, kinda hated, Canadian prime minister and works as a talk show host, here in Toronto.  His twins were page boys accompanying Meghan in the car and carrying her veil up the steps and down the aisle.
> 
> They're only 7 and I think they did a great job. They're just normal kids.  Their parents haven't brought them along to red carpet events since birth, the way some Hollywood parents do.
> 
> Ben said they had a rehearsal, but obviously there were no trumpets, flowers and crowds and when they walked in and saw all the pomp and pageantry, they were very excited. But really well behaved, I thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4079404
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


They're lovely  Acting like proper kids, but Meghan looks a bit tense though


----------



## peppermintpatty

Sharont2305 said:


> Watch this then, a few days before the wedding. Looking back, this is absolutely heartbreaking. Poor girl. There's a lot of "I" not "We" from Charles.



That was painful to watch. I don't ever remember seeing that. She is understandably lacking confidence going into this larger than life role. I don't think there was any chance for them. He was older, more experienced, and without being in love I don't think he had what it would have taken to be there for her and support her. Most 20 year old women would have needed quite a bit of hand holding. He wasn't in love enough and he had his mistress and Diana knew it. They were just not suited for one another- like I said hard to watch.
How ironic is it that she gained some confidence and that she would be the one to reach out to those who had Aids, the poor, and shine a spot light on the mines. That she would become the much more popular one.
It is so clear by looking at what her sons have done to include her, as they did in Harry and Meghans wedding, how much they love her and miss her. I wonder what in the world they think of their father and Camilla now that they are grown men and know everything. My guess is that their relationship with their grandparents was instrumental in them growing up with someone they could trust. They seem to be ok with Charles... IDK, I just can't imagine it.


----------



## bisousx

peppermintpatty said:


> It is so clear by looking at what her sons have done to include her, as they did in Harry and Meghans wedding, how much they love her and miss her. I wonder what in the world they think of their father and Camilla now that they are grown men and know everything. My guess is that their relationship with their grandparents was instrumental in them growing up with someone they could trust. They seem to be ok with Charles... IDK, I just can't imagine it.



A lot of people grow up with parents who cheat.. some seem to find a way to forgive. I think especially in the case of the RF, it's not like they can avoid each other. Perhaps the boys put themselves in their father's shoes and understood that he was in love with another woman but couldn't marry her at that time. Like them or not, Charles and Camilla have a real love between them and to me that's a tad easier to understand than if Charles was a womanizer who cheated uncontrollably with a slew of women.


----------



## Jayne1

bisousx said:


> A lot of people grow up with parents who cheat.. some seem to find a way to forgive. I think especially in the case of the RF, it's not like they can avoid each other. Perhaps the boys put themselves in their father's shoes and understood that he was in love with another woman but couldn't marry her at that time. Like them or not, Charles and Camilla have a real love between them and to me that's a tad easier to understand than if Charles was a womanizer who cheated uncontrollably with a slew of women.


Completely agree.


----------



## Jayne1

peppermintpatty said:


> How ironic is it that she gained some confidence and that she would be the one to reach out to those who had Aids, the poor, and shine a spot light on the mines. That she would become the much more popular one.


Yes, she gained confidence and was extremely popular, but threw it in his face, and Charles has a very superior attitude and couldn't handle it.

Can you imagine Meghan purposely trying to outshine her husband? I can't.


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she gained confidence and was extremely popular, but threw it in his face, and Charles has a very superior attitude and couldn't handle it.
> 
> Can you imagine Meghan purposely trying to outshine her husband? I can't.



Sadly, I think I can.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she gained confidence and was extremely popular, but threw it in his face, and Charles has a very superior attitude and couldn't handle it.
> 
> Can you imagine Meghan purposely trying to outshine her husband? I can't.



TBH I don’t think it’s hard to outshine Charles. He’s just insecure enough to have it bother him.

I don’t see this with Harry, so hopefully he won’t have an issue with a wife who loves the limelight and the attention.


----------



## Sharont2305

bisousx said:


> Like them or not, Charles and Camilla have a real love between them and to me that's a tad easier to understand than if Charles was a womanizer who cheated uncontrollably with a slew of women.


Totally agree


----------



## Sharont2305

bisousx said:


> A lot of people grow up with parents who cheat.. some seem to find a way to forgive. I think especially in the case of the RF, it's not like they can avoid each other. Perhaps the boys put themselves in their father's shoes and understood that he was in love with another woman but couldn't marry her at that time. Like them or not, Charles and Camilla have a real love between them and to me that's a tad easier to understand than if Charles was a womanizer who cheated uncontrollably with a slew of women.


Camilla introduced herself to Charles with the words " My Great Grandmother was mistress to your Great Great Grandfather.... How about it?"

Alice Keppel became Edward VII's mistress in 1898, when she was aged just 29 and he was 57, and remained the favourite of Queen Victoria's son until his death 12 years later.
She married the Honourable George Keppel in 1891, when she was aged 23, and the couple had two children, but her husband's lack of money led her to engage in affairs with richer men.

Her association with the king did much to help her family's financial affairs. He gave her shares in a rubber company, which gained her around £50,000 - the equivalent of £7.5million today - and he allowed her to use his own bankers and financial advisers.

King Edward VII was also instrumental in securing well-paid jobs for her husband and brother, Archie.

Extraordinarily, the monarch asked for Alice to be at his side during his last hours, much to the dismay of his wife.
Throughout the king's reign, which began in 1901, Alice liked to say she was the real Queen of England, and that his wife Alexandra was not his soulmate — she was


----------



## peppermintpatty

bisousx said:


> A lot of people grow up with parents who cheat.. some seem to find a way to forgive. I think especially in the case of the RF, it's not like they can avoid each other. Perhaps the boys put themselves in their father's shoes and understood that he was in love with another woman but couldn't marry her at that time. Like them or not, Charles and Camilla have a real love between them and to me that's a tad easier to understand than if Charles was a womanizer who cheated uncontrollably with a slew of women.


Luckily for me as a child if it did happen I was blissfully unaware. The difference between " a lot of people" and William and Harry is that they have access to the good, the bad, and the ugly that few people do. I would imagine that leaves a mark, one that is hard for any child, even an adult child to look at. My only person that comes to mind is John Edwards. After his ex wife Elizabeth passed away, his eldest daughter was some how able to have a relationship with him. I'm not saying it's right or wrong for her or Harry and William. I just think it would be hard not to feel very badly for their moms. It doesn't mean they don't love their fathers, but it can't be easy to come to terms with the man who hurts your mom also being your dad. Plus these are very public hurts for the whole world to see. I can't imagine they are fond of Camilla!
I do seem to recall that Prince Charles did step up. Went to bring back Diana's body himself . He seemed to be there for the boys as much as one can tell. I still stand by how very confusing and how many mixed emotions William and Harry must have...
I don't think there is a son that is going to give his dad a pat on the back for cheating with one woman and not several. They do seem to be in love. I doubt the boys feel the need to put themselves in their dad's shoes. I would imagine they have done much more of putting themselves in their moms shoes.


----------



## peppermintpatty

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she gained confidence and was extremely popular, but threw it in his face, and Charles has a very superior attitude and couldn't handle it.
> 
> Can you imagine Meghan purposely trying to outshine her husband? I can't.


I don't know about throwing it in his face. It was like it took on a life of it's own the obsession with Diana. I don't imagine it was easy for him to handle.

I have yet to be able to get beyond Meghan giggling and acting like a school girl with her first boyfriend. No one mentions it, so idk if it's just me. The woman is what 36 old and acts like she's not even 16.  I think she is beautiful, sounds like she is smart and is very philanthropy minded. Even so, her batting her eyes and giggling. She just reminds me of a school girl. I think Kate while she looks at William rather adoringly, does not come across as a love sick school girl.


----------



## Grande Latte

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she gained confidence and was extremely popular, but threw it in his face, and Charles has a very superior attitude and couldn't handle it.
> 
> Can you imagine Meghan purposely trying to outshine her husband? I can't.



I think Meghan will eventually outshine Harry. She's intelligent, beautiful, and now powerful too. But I don't think she'll throw it in his face. I think she'll try to manage the marriage as well as she manages the royal family, press, and the public. She's smart in life. Anyway, I wish the new couple all the best.


----------



## morgan20

I am ready for some babies now...


----------



## VickyB

peppermintpatty said:


> I don't know about throwing it in his face. It was like it took on a life of it's own the obsession with Diana. I don't imagine it was easy for him to handle.
> 
> I have yet to be able to get beyond Meghan giggling and acting like a school girl with her first boyfriend. No one mentions it, so idk if it's just me. The woman is what 36 old and acts like she's not even 16.  I think she is beautiful, sounds like she is smart and is very philanthropy minded. Even so, her batting her eyes and giggling. She just reminds me of a school girl. I think Kate while she looks at William rather adoringly, does not come across as a love sick school girl.



Yes. Haven't decided if I am a fan or not. Was excited about their union. And she looked and acted flawlessly at the wedding. Dunno what's to come. Her trademark  is quickly becoming "giggle and cover mouth" and then look around sheepishly. For a woman on the world stage, it looks kinda staged/calculated behavior to me especially at  her age and with her life experiences. She switches between giggly girl and uber poised woman of the world at the drop of a hat. Is she  playing the role of a lifetime? Dunno.  I really hope that isn't the case. I adore Harry and really hope he chose somebody with as open a heart as he has.


----------



## TMA

I am 43 and giggle all the time. I try to keep a straight face at meetings (I am a professional) but that is just my personality. I relate to how she is as I am quite similar. Also, the happiness of love would amplify that in a person. She probably never thought in her wildest dreams with her antecedents she would be marrying a real life prince. She will settle and probably will get less or it may not. Wishing them the very best.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> TBH I don’t think it’s hard to outshine Charles. He’s just insecure enough to have it bother him.
> .


even Camilla outshines him


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> even Camilla outshines him


Yes, I think so to.


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> even Camilla outshines him


Agree.  Even Camilla.  But she doesn't phone her favourite paps to get her photo taken and purposely take the spotlight off her husband.

Prince Phiip famously said he disliked Diana because she made the monarchy all about herself instead of realizing she only represented it.


----------



## bag-mania

peppermintpatty said:


> Luckily for me as a child if it did happen I was blissfully unaware. The difference between " a lot of people" and William and Harry is that they have access to the good, the bad, and the ugly that few people do. I would imagine that leaves a mark, one that is hard for any child, even an adult child to look at. My only person that comes to mind is John Edwards. After his ex wife Elizabeth passed away, his eldest daughter was some how able to have a relationship with him. I'm not saying it's right or wrong for her or Harry and William. I just think it would be hard not to feel very badly for their moms. It doesn't mean they don't love their fathers, but it can't be easy to come to terms with the man who hurts your mom also being your dad. Plus these are very public hurts for the whole world to see. I can't imagine they are fond of Camilla!
> I do seem to recall that Prince Charles did step up. Went to bring back Diana's body himself . He seemed to be there for the boys as much as one can tell. I still stand by how very confusing and how many mixed emotions William and Harry must have...
> I don't think there is a son that is going to give his dad a pat on the back for cheating with one woman and not several. They do seem to be in love. I doubt the boys feel the need to put themselves in their dad's shoes. I would imagine they have done much more of putting themselves in their moms shoes.



Like most children of divorce, I think they loved both parents and may not have fully grasped all of the dynamics of what was happening at that time. I’d hope they were sheltered from the constant tabloid headlines. 

Keep in mind that in the years that preceded the divorce the couple were living apart most of the time and Diana had taken a lover or two herself. The boys undoubtedly understood at a young age that their parents’ marriage was not a happy one. Maybe their mindset about it may have been more about seeing their parents happy rather than placing blame.


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> Her shoes are made and repaired by former Rayne employee called David Hyatt (she formally bought only from Rayne)
> Her hats are made by Rachel Trevor-Morgan
> Her bags are made by Launer
> Until 2010 her dresses, gowns and separates were by Hardy Amies
> Angela Kelly is responsible for designing and coordinating her outfits since and all material is sourced from the UK.
> 
> Scotland still makes the best hand-loom woven tweed in the world and some of the finest cashmere. Chanel got her ideas from practical sportswear that the landed gentry wore. Pure wool tweed is warm, durable, wind resistant, serviceable ad the traditional colours work seasonaly as camouflage against the Scottish landscape(s).



I just looked up Rayne shoes, since they recently underwent a brand revamp. Not terribly impressed with their line, a bit too avant garde for me.


----------



## papertiger

cafecreme15 said:


> I just looked up Rayne shoes, since they recently underwent a brand revamp. Not terribly impressed with their line, a bit too avant garde for me.



In 1975 Rayne was bought by a dept store and it hasn't been the same since. Laurence Dacade now designs for them, I don't like his own line either.


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> In 1975 Rayne was bought by a dept store and it hasn't been the same since. Laurence Dacade now designs for them, I don't like his own line either.


Such a shame when this happens to an historic brand. I think the designs are supposed to be "refreshed" and trendy takes on the old classics, but I can't imagine any modern woman wearing them, including MM. My favorite department store in my city carries a few models of them, and my SA told me they have not sold at all.


----------



## alismarr

VickyB said:


> Yes. Haven't decided if I am a fan or not. Was excited about their union. And she looked and acted flawlessly at the wedding. Dunno what's to come. Her trademark  is quickly becoming "giggle and cover mouth" and then look around sheepishly. For a woman on the world stage, it looks kinda staged/calculated behavior to me especially at  her age and with her life experiences. She switches between giggly girl and uber poised woman of the world at the drop of a hat. Is she  playing the role of a lifetime? Dunno.  I really hope that isn't the case. I adore Harry and really hope he chose somebody with as open a heart as he has.



Hopefully “Samantha the panther” will calm her down, get her to refrain from pawing Harry like a lovesick teenager and encourage her to keep shtum.  She’ll certainly have her work cut out.


----------



## papertiger

cafecreme15 said:


> Such a shame when this happens to an historic brand. I think the designs are supposed to be "refreshed" and trendy takes on the old classics, but I can't imagine any modern woman wearing them, including MM. My favorite department store in my city carries a few models of them, and my SA told me they have not sold at all.



Well I wouldn't wear them and I don't know anyone who does. Seems to me they're going for the safe, conservative market, and then the young colours, not sure there's may in that market anymore, classic pumps are one thing, but even company wives don't want to look so stuffy anymore.


----------



## Gal4Dior

TMA said:


> I am 43 and giggle all the time. I try to keep a straight face at meetings (I am a professional) but that is just my personality. I relate to how she is as I am quite similar. Also, the happiness of love would amplify that in a person. She probably never thought in her wildest dreams with her antecedents she would be marrying a real life prince. She will settle and probably will get less or it may not. Wishing them the very best.



I totally agree it’s okay to be that way IRL with her friends or family, but when most of these photos are taken, they are of her representing the BRF. She should treat it like any other professional acting role she’s had and present herself accordingly. 

I work in the engineering industry my husband and we work in the same company. Most clients and coworkers who don’t know us wouldn’t even know we are married. In fact, I made sure we were so professional during the time we dated, no one even knew we were together until we got engaged. Off work I am very silly and affectionate with him. 

How she wants to be with Harry at home, is totally her business and I won’t knock that. There is just a time and a place.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Keep in mind that in the years that preceded the divorce the couple were living apart most of the time *and Diana had taken a lover or two herself.* The boys undoubtedly understood at a young age that their parents’ marriage was not a happy one. Maybe their mindset about it may have been more about seeing their parents happy rather than placing blame.


Or three or four.  lol


----------



## gelbergirl

I read somewhere that Charles would be married to Diana, cheat with Camilla,  and then cheat with other ladies on Camilla !!  It kept it all very exciting apparently.

No doubt William and Harry have heard all these stories.
Both of them did all right with their partners.  Kudos to the RF for pretty much keeping the pressure off.


----------



## VickyB

alismarr said:


> Hopefully “Samantha the panther” will calm her down, get her to refrain from pawing Harry like a lovesick teenager and encourage her to keep shtum.  She’ll certainly have her work cut out.



ITA!!! So true. I think much of it is calculated.


----------



## VickyB

LVSistinaMM said:


> I totally agree it’s okay to be that way IRL with her friends or family, but when most of these photos are taken, they are of her representing the BRF. She should treat it like any other professional acting role she’s had and present herself accordingly.
> 
> I work in the engineering industry my husband and we work in the same company. Most clients and coworkers who don’t know us wouldn’t even know we are married. In fact, I made sure we were so professional during the time we dated, no one even knew we were together until we got engaged. Off work I am very silly and affectionate with him.
> 
> How she wants to be with Harry at home, is totally her business and I won’t knock that. There is just a time and a place.



Yes.


----------



## Eva1991

Having to adjust to wearing pantyhose everyday and below the knee dresses is one thing. Having to adjust your personality and how tactile or giggly you are in order to fit certain standards is another and will take some time. Harry doesn't seem to bother though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## arnott

bag-princess said:


> Meghan’s new royal monogram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4079240



That looks like the crown from Burger King.


----------



## peppermintpatty

bag-mania said:


> Like most children of divorce, I think they loved both parents and may not have fully grasped all of the dynamics of what was happening at that time. I’d hope they were sheltered from the constant tabloid headlines.
> 
> Keep in mind that in the years that preceded the divorce the couple were living apart most of the time and Diana had taken a lover or two herself. The boys undoubtedly understood at a young age that their parents’ marriage was not a happy one. Maybe their mindset about it may have been more about seeing their parents happy rather than placing blame.


I said I think they loved their dad. I also said that as adults they would be able to read all about their parents marriage.

I don't think it's as simple as who took a lover first or how many lovers they each had. For the life of me I can't remember exactly what Diana found on their honeymoon, but something from Camilla that he took along with him- on the honeymoon.One time I know it was cufflinks with CC for Charles and Camilla. Also when she did the big interview and let a lot of cats out of the bag, Diana said her marriage was a little crowded as there were 3 people in the marriage. To me, there is a Huge difference being in love really from the start of their marriage or taking a lover or 4 after a young 19 or 20 year old young adult realizes its not really much of a marriage and more of a sham. 

In that time apart before the divorce, I would be curious to know how many photos were taken of the boys with Diana doing things most kids do with their parents, and how many pictures there are of Charles with the boys doing similar things. Not the exact same thing, but real meaningful and fun time for a child with their dad. I think the bond with their mom was incredibly strong. I do think Charles stepped up after Diana died, I don't know if he did or not before.

As 2 30 something grown men who have access to all that both of their parents activities shall we say, I think most definitely an adult child may feel there is blame. It doesn't mean they don't love their dad, but it also doesn't mean that they don't see what he did to their mom. She was barely more than a child, she married him believing it to be a real marriage and he married her totally in love with another woman. And now that other woman is their step mom, it can't be easy for them.


----------



## Sharont2305

peppermintpatty said:


> In that time apart before the divorce, I would be curious to know how many photos were taken of the boys with Diana doing things most kids do with their parents, and how many pictures there are of Charles with the boys doing similar things. Not the exact same thing, but real meaningful and fun time for a child with their dad. I think the bond with their mom was incredibly strong. I do think Charles stepped up after Diana died, I don't know if he did or not before.


After the divorce they had joint custody of the boys, bearing in mind they would have been at boarding school so holidays would have been split between parents. I think Charles was more private in where he went with them away. We'd get the official press photos of them at the beginning of their skiing holiday and that would be it., so that the press wouldn't hound them in what would be a very public place. 
That summer of 1997 the boys went away with Diana and Dodi around the Mediterranean on Al-Fayeds yacht then they flew home to spend the rest of the holiday with they're father at Balmoral whilst Diana stayed with Dodi. Unfortunately, we know the rest.....
There are photos of the boys from that holiday and ones with Charles taken a few days before the accident.


----------



## Clearblueskies

peppermintpatty said:


> I said I think they loved their dad. I also said that as adults they would be able to read all about their parents marriage.
> 
> I don't think it's as simple as who took a lover first or how many lovers they each had. For the life of me I can't remember exactly what Diana found on their honeymoon, but something from Camilla that he took along with him- on the honeymoon.One time I know it was cufflinks with CC for Charles and Camilla. Also when she did the big interview and let a lot of cats out of the bag, Diana said her marriage was a little crowded as there were 3 people in the marriage. To me, there is a Huge difference being in love really from the start of their marriage or taking a lover or 4 after a young 19 or 20 year old young adult realizes its not really much of a marriage and more of a sham.
> 
> In that time apart before the divorce, I would be curious to know how many photos were taken of the boys with Diana doing things most kids do with their parents, and how many pictures there are of Charles with the boys doing similar things. Not the exact same thing, but real meaningful and fun time for a child with their dad. I think the bond with their mom was incredibly strong. I do think Charles stepped up after Diana died, I don't know if he did or not before.
> 
> As 2 30 something grown men who have access to all that both of their parents activities shall we say, I think most definitely an adult child may feel there is blame. It doesn't mean they don't love their dad, but it also doesn't mean that they don't see what he did to their mom. She was barely more than a child, she married him believing it to be a real marriage and he married her totally in love with another woman. And now that other woman is their step mom, it can't be easy for them.


I imagine like most kids with parents divorcing they loved them both, whilst at the same time knowing their faults.  Diana knew what she was getting into IMO - and thought she could change Charles, it didn’t work.  And Charles was under pressure to marry and produce an heir.  Horrible situation all round really.  I remember being heartily sick and tired of seeing Diana’s photo opportunities all over the press at the time of the divorce and in the period afterwards.  I was never a fan tbh, I thought her a manipulative personality, but all the same she did adore her sons that was very clear to see.


----------



## Jayne1

peppermintpatty said:


> I said I think they loved their dad. I also said that as adults they would be able to read all about their parents marriage.
> 
> I don't think it's as simple as who took a lover first or how many lovers they each had. For the life of me I can't remember exactly what Diana found on their honeymoon, but something from Camilla that he took along with him- on the honeymoon.One time I know it was cufflinks with CC for Charles and Camilla. Also when she did the big interview and let a lot of cats out of the bag, Diana said her marriage was a little crowded as there were 3 people in the marriage. To me, there is a Huge difference being in love really from the start of their marriage or taking a lover or 4 after a young 19 or 20 year old young adult realizes its not really much of a marriage and more of a sham.
> 
> In that time apart before the divorce, I would be curious to know how many photos were taken of the boys with Diana doing things most kids do with their parents, and how many pictures there are of Charles with the boys doing similar things. Not the exact same thing, but real meaningful and fun time for a child with their dad. I think the bond with their mom was incredibly strong. I do think Charles stepped up after Diana died, I don't know if he did or not before.
> 
> As 2 30 something grown men who have access to all that both of their parents activities shall we say, I think most definitely an adult child may feel there is blame. It doesn't mean they don't love their dad, but it also doesn't mean that they don't see what he did to their mom. She was barely more than a child, she married him believing it to be a real marriage and he married her totally in love with another woman. And now that other woman is their step mom, it can't be easy for them.


Charles never called the paps to take photos of him and the boys -- that was Diana's routine.


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> I imagine like most kids with parents divorcing they loved them both, whilst at the same time knowing their faults.  Diana knew what she was getting into IMO - and thought she could change Charles, it didn’t work.  And Charles was under pressure to marry and produce an heir.  Horrible situation all round really.  I remember being heartily sick and tired of seeing Diana’s photo opportunities all over the press at the time of the divorce and in the period afterwards.  I was never a fan tbh, I thought her a manipulative personality, but all the same she did adore her sons that was very clear to see.


Agree. It was so transparent, all her photo ops.  But it was fun to see what she was wearing.

Kris Jenner took on the role of calling the paps to make headlines. Don't you think she got the idea from Diana, who was one of the first to showcase her daily life and was very successful at getting media attention?


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think it’s all speculation at this point but I’m not sure the negative spin on Diana’s public relationship with the boys is entirely fair. Many people (and I believe even herself) commented before and after her death that she was terrified the monarchy was going to cut her out of the boy’s lives after the divorce and they could have quite quickly. She fought that in the only “court” that she has a shot in, the court of public opinion. Looking back, it really was a brilliant offensive. If the public loved her and saw her as a good mum the Royals certainly couldn’t cut her out of the equation.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> Looking back, it really was a brilliant offensive. If the public loved her and saw her as a good mum the Royals certainly couldn’t cut her out of the equation.


So that confirms *Clearblueskies* comment that she had a manipulative personality, lol


----------



## mkr

Diana was always sought after by the paps and the public loved her. Did she really call the paps?  I don’t think she’d need to.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I imagine like most kids with parents divorcing they loved them both, whilst at the same time knowing their faults.  Diana knew what she was getting into IMO - and thought she could change Charles, it didn’t work.  And Charles was under pressure to marry and produce an heir.  Horrible situation all round really.  I remember being heartily sick and tired of seeing Diana’s photo opportunities all over the press at the time of the divorce and in the period afterwards.  I was never a fan tbh, I thought her a manipulative personality, but all the same she did adore her sons that was very clear to see.


I don't know if she knew what she was getting into .  She was very young.  I'm sure she liked the idea of being a princess.  And later she was manipulative but in the beginning I don't think so.  She wasn't a perfect person but by all accounts she was a very good mother and her work for social causes was good.


----------



## Flatsy

Diana was good at photo ops with the kids, but the media helped because they really loved the narrative that she was the warm and loving antidote to the cold, unloving royal family.

This video kind of sums it up.  The still photo of Diana with her arms out about to give her boys a big hug was printed over and over again.  The video of her hugging the boys was also replayed again and again - but it almost always cut off before the part where Charles also gives his sons warm hugs and kisses.



William and Harry always seemed to have a relaxed, happy and normal relationship with their father from what I can see.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Diana was good at photo ops with the kids, but the media helped because they really loved the narrative that she was the warm and loving antidote to the cold, unloving royal family.
> 
> This video kind of sums it up.  The still photo of Diana with her arms out about to give her boys a big hug was printed over and over again.  The video of her hugging the boys was also replayed again and again - but it almost always cut off before the part where Charles also gives his sons warm hugs and kisses.
> 
> 
> 
> William and Harry always seemed to have a relaxed, happy and normal relationship with their father from what I can see.



That scene was a set-up by Diana, in that she was almost performing for the cameras, which were plentiful. At that point, she was a master of the game.  But still a loving mother, of course.


----------



## bisousx

peppermintpatty said:


> As 2 30 something grown men who have access to all that both of their parents activities shall we say, I think most definitely an adult child may feel there is blame. It doesn't mean they don't love their dad, but it also doesn't mean that they don't see what he did to their mom. She was barely more than a child, she married him believing it to be a real marriage and he married her totally in love with another woman. And now that other woman is their step mom, it can't be easy for them.



As a child of divorced parents who both cheated, I will say that of course there are feelings especially when we're young. But you can choose to get over it, especially once you've grown up and experienced the intricacies and complications of relationships yourself. 

Especially with Diana being gone, it's not like she can see them for dinner every Sunday, vent and rehash her bitter feelings in front of her sons and force them to relive her unhappiness. It's very likely that at some point in their adult life, William and Harry simply accepted their dad's mistakes and moved on completely. They could live in bitterness or just accept that their dad is human, like a lot of us just do. 

Some people just move on and don't look back at the bad stuff. Some hang onto it. We'll never know.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> As a child of divorced parents who both cheated, I will say that of course there are feelings especially when we're young. But you can choose to get over it, especially once you've grown up and experienced the intricacies and complications of relationships yourself.
> 
> Especially with Diana being gone, it's not like she can see them for dinner every Sunday, vent and rehash her bitter feelings in front of her sons and force them to relive her unhappiness. It's very likely that at some point in their adult life, William and Harry simply accepted their dad's mistakes and moved on completely. They could live in bitterness or just accept that their dad is human, like a lot of us just do.
> 
> Some people just move on and don't look back at the bad stuff. Some hang onto it. We'll never know.


they are probably mostly over it and love their father.  But deep down somewhere they may have some negative feelings toward Camilla or Charles or both


----------



## DC-Cutie

mkr said:


> Diana was always sought after by the paps and the public loved her. Did she really call the paps?  I don’t think she’d need to.


and during her time, people didn't call the paps like they do now


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

mkr said:


> Diana was always sought after by the paps and the public loved her. Did she really call the paps?  I don’t think she’d need to.





Exactly!  Don’t they say she was the most photographed woman in the world? Why would she need to ever call anyone?


----------



## JessicaRabbit1

I really like Meghan as a royal. Honestly I think her and Harry make a lovely couple. They look so in love, sweet, happy and just comfortable with each other. It makes me happy to see them so happy. Their photos of the wedding, engagement and the after wedding photos were gorgeous. I don't think they could take a bad photo!
Sometimes I do find it a bit weird, as I watched her in Suits and now she is a Duchess! I could not have predicted that!

Meghan looks so effortless and sophisticated in her new role. Loved the wedding dress, makeup, THE TIARA, and her second reception dress as well. She did a great job. Harry looked the part as well. 
Her mother looked gorgeous. I liked how close Meghan and her mother were at the wedding. 

Family drama quite often a part of weddings unfortunately. It doesn't have to be, but it usually is. I don't think the media got the full story, it seems so much information was missing. Meghan looked like she handled it so well. If my father wouldn't (or couldnt) come to my wedding I would be very upset. Her sister looked like a total crazed jealous human in all the media surrounding her. 

Anyways Im delighted for the happy couple. Many happy years to them!


----------



## Sharont2305

mkr said:


> Diana was always sought after by the paps and the public loved her. Did she really call the paps?  I don’t think she’d need to.


She did


----------



## Jayne1

mkr said:


> Diana was always sought after by the paps and the public loved her. Did she really call the paps?  I don’t think she’d need to.


Diana would call her favourite photographers and they would all know where to show up. 

She especially loved to do this when Charles was scheduled to attend something, somewhere. Diana would call her favourites, show up dressed in something that would garner headlines and take all the shine away from Charles and his stodgy appearances elsewhere.

That's why I thought she shouldn't complain about the paps so much if she was calling them when she wanted photos, but angry when she didn't.  It's hard to stop that kind of ball from rolling.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Diana would call her favourite photographers and they would all know where to show up.
> 
> She especially loved to do this when Charles was scheduled to attend something, somewhere. Diana would call her favourites, show up dressed in something that would garner headlines and take all the shine away from Charles and his stodgy appearances elsewhere.
> 
> That's why I thought she shouldn't complain about the paps so much if she was calling them when she wanted photos, but angry when she didn't.  It's hard to stop that kind of ball from rolling.


Is it known whether Diana knew about Charles's other women, Camilla in particular, before the marriage? I mean, it's not like you _have_ to marry a prince or a king just because you're presented with the opportunity. Even if you are 20


----------



## bisousx

I was curious and looked it up...

_It is the defining, history-changing moment in the controversial new film Diana: when celebrity photographer Jason Fraser agonises over whether to release the iconic pictures of the princess and Dodi Fayed kissing on his father Mohammed’s £15 million yacht Jonikal.

In the film, Fraser is portrayed by Daniel Pirrie. And it was by chance that the real Fraser – who knows the full truth behind the pictures of Diana and Dodi’s tragic last days and is now telling it to the Mail for the first time – was visiting on set when the pivotal scene was being shot.
_
*Jason, now 46, says he was invited by Diana herself to photograph her holidaying with her lover Dodi in the last days before her death in Paris on August 31, 1997.*
_
'She told me she’d be on the yacht somewhere in the Mediterranean - she didn’t have a clue whereabouts. Neither did I - it was a needle in a haystack.’_


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...elationship-Princess-Diana.html#ixzz5GkCWOevM 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


----------



## mdcx

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Is it known whether Diana knew about Charles's other women, Camilla in particular, before the marriage? I mean, it's not like you _have_ to marry a prince or a king just because you're presented with the opportunity. Even if you are 20



She had no clue about Camilla and was very humiliated when she found out that Charles had been in love with her the whole time and everyone else knew.
Diana was just filling the role of "well bred virgin" in the marriage and Charles never loved her. 

It really played into her abandonment issues from her childhood and her bulimia was a way of coping with that.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> She had no clue about Camilla and was very humiliated when she found out that Charles had been in love with her the whole time and everyone else knew.
> Diana was just filling the role of "well bred virgin" in the marriage and Charles never loved her.
> 
> It really played into her abandonment issues from her childhood and her bulimia was a way of coping with that.


If this is true I can definitely understand her alleged obsession of upstaging Charles at every opportunity. Although I think she may have been happier if she wouldn't have?


----------



## meluvs2shop

I recently saw a documentary and was surprised to hear how often she called the paps and how she planted stories.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If this is true I can definitely understand her alleged obsession of upstaging Charles at every opportunity. *Although I think she may have been happier if she wouldn't have?*



Well, we could easily say that about anyone who was in a bad marriage. 

Charles courted her and pretended he was in love with her. Perhaps he actually did care for her in those early years but it wasn’t anything like what she felt for him. Camilla was waiting in the wings though I don’t know at what point he took up with her again. It’s bad enough Diana was duped by the man who she thought loved her. But, because the royals are always fodder for gossip, those nasty (and public) rumors came to her attention long before she had confirmation of Charles’ infidelity. Under those circumstances no one should blame her for becoming bitter, and yes, even spiteful.


----------



## gazoo

In their HBO special this past summer, both Princes spoke about the weeks before her death. How hard it was to be kept apart from her for weeks at a time due to the divorce. Frankly it didn't look too good for Charles; they didn't even speak about him much at all. I think they both have a lot of issues with their dad and it's more evident when you look at the recent press. Such as Charles not seeing his grandchildren very often, William choosing to spend more time with the Middletons, etc. Harry may be a different story, but I'd say William isn't close to Charles and Camilla.

I can't say I'd be either. The Monarchy treated Diana horribly. She definitely had issues, which became magnified at the treatment she received, but no one can deny that she wasn't treated very nicely. She unraveled before their(our) eyes and they dropped the ball when she died. The Queen having to be talked into lowering the flag to half mast by a newly minted PM says it all. The boys are probably even more aware now of how horribly she was treated as they look back in the fullness of time and experience. I think the Queen has risen to the occasion and corrected the course, so to speak. She has been more open, and supportive of the boys marrying commoners. Charles was always a spoilt Prince, IMO, pouting about everything. The letters he wrote to Nancy Reagan complaining about the "Greek Tragedy" of his marriage while married to Diana were scummy. He'd not been close friends with Nancy, but still felt he could talk like that about his wife and mother of his children.

The palace wanted a "virgin" bride and Charles went along with it. Maybe he had reservations, but he still went through with it. He should have just run off with Camilla when he had the chance, but he didn't. And it's not like he was stuck on Camilla only. He was with a lot of girls around that time. Camilla too went off and married another and had kids. It's not like she was waiting around pining for Charles. That they're together now is kind of surprising really. But you can understand why the boys dug in and married who THEY wanted to marry. I've often wondered about William breaking things off with Kate for a while there before their engagement, was it pressure from the FIRM for him to marry a better bred girl?

Diana was scrappy. She used the press once she figured out how much power she had. Yet she loathed them at the same time. There are plenty of videos showing them yelling horrible things at her to get a reaction, as she makes her way around the city with tears running. She was a very complicated person who never really stood a chance once she was deemed an appropriate choice for the future King of England. Her work with Aids patients and her other endeavors of philanthropy is her legacy. I don't think she was disingenuous about that part of her life and it's really the most impactful. I remember being a kid and my father (a dramatic germaphobe) being gobsmacked at video footage of her touching and hugging a man that had Aids. It was deeply impactful for our family as during that time my cousin was dying of Aids and many family members wouldn't even enter the house he was in. I guess my point is as with most humans, Diana had her light and dark side. Messy and complicated, but also nurturing and charitable.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> Well, we could easily say that about anyone who was in a bad marriage.
> 
> Charles courted her and pretended he was in love with her. Perhaps he actually did care for her in those early years but it wasn’t anything like what she felt for him. Camilla was waiting in the wings though I don’t know at what point he took up with her again. It’s bad enough Diana was she duped by the man who she thought loved her. But, because the royals are always fodder for gossip, those nasty (and public) rumors came to her attention long before she had confirmation of Charles’ infidelity. Under those circumstances no one should blame her for becoming bitter, and yes, even spiteful.


I agree with you, maybe you misunderstood my meaning? If that's what happened to Diana, I think she showed restraint, actually. My take is just that many of us let our lives be influenced by the negative people we meet along the way, and let them take so much of our energy via our thoughts and actions, literally letting them steer us off course from our own path. She paid a too high price for her media savviness.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If this is true I can definitely understand her alleged obsession of upstaging Charles at every opportunity. Although I think she may have been happier if she wouldn't have?


It wasn't as simple as that. Putting Charles and Diana together was never going to wrok.

Diana was troubled, with an unstable temperament.  Charles was petulant and needed devotion and adoration (that Camilla gave him) and Diana never did.

Her lack of deference was a major turn off, not to mention, as he said, the constant smell of vomit being a turn off as well. Diana was too unstable and manipulative to try to be the wife that would make Charles satisfied.


----------



## Sharont2305

I heard she knew about Camilla before the wedding, though apparently Charles agreed to cool it. 
Instead of explaining to Diana at the outset that Camilla was an old girlfriend, he had presented her as nothing more than a friend, It didn't occur to him that she needed to know before someone else told her ... He came clean after the engagement, admitting that Camilla had been one of his most intimate friends, but reassured Diana that from now on there would be no other women.
She discovered a number of gifts exchanged between the two, including gold chain bracelet given before the wedding with the letters G and F: "'Gladys' and 'Fred' — they were their nicknames.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Well, we could easily say that about anyone who was in a bad marriage.
> 
> Charles courted her and pretended he was in love with her. Perhaps he actually did care for her in those early years but it wasn’t anything like what she felt for him. Camilla was waiting in the wings though I don’t know at what point he took up with her again. It’s bad enough Diana was duped by the man who she thought loved her. But, because the royals are always fodder for gossip, those nasty (and public) rumors came to her attention long before she had confirmation of Charles’ infidelity. Under those circumstances no one should blame her for becoming bitter, and yes, even spiteful.


He didn't really court her.  They barely knew each other.

Coming from a legitimate line of descent, she knew she had a shot at being his wife from an early age and kept herself "tidy" as she called it, so she would be suitable.

He was pushed into a date or two and it was decided they would marry.  They didn't know each other well at all and if you watch the interviews, I'm sure he never spoke about love either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> It wasn't as simple as that. Putting Charles and Diana together was never going to wrok.
> 
> Diana was troubled, with an unstable temperament.  Charles was petulant and needed devotion and adoration (that Camilla gave him) and Diana never did.
> 
> Her lack of deference was a major turn off, not to mention, as he said, the constant smell of vomit being a turn off as well. Diana was too unstable and manipulative to try to be the wife that would make Charles satisfied.



I agree that their temperaments ultimately wouldn’t have led to a successful marriage. But I disagree with your assessment of Diana at the time. She didn’t become bulimic until after she married. It’s been documented it was in response to the tabloids writing snarky stories about how she appeared “pudgy.” Maybe if she’d had a husband who made her feel loved and attractive she wouldn’t have resorted to that. We’ll never know. The fact is Charles was 12 years older than Diana and it was his decision to propose to her, apparently after they had only dated maybe a dozen times. They didn’t truly know each other before marrying.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> I agree that their temperaments ultimately wouldn’t have led to a successful marriage. But I disagree with your assessment of Diana at the time. She didn’t become bulimic until after she married. It’s been documented it was in response to the tabloids writing snarky stories about how she appeared “pudgy.” *Maybe if she’d had a husband who made her feel loved and attractive she wouldn’t have resorted to that. We’ll never know.* The fact is Charles was 12 years older than Diana and it was his decision to propose to her, apparently after they had only dated maybe a dozen times. They didn’t truly know each other before marrying.


Bulimia is neither caused nor cured by having a certain type of husband.   That is irrelevant.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Honeymoon info.

"*Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry* are heading to a spot with a royal reputation for their honeymoon, and it's not too far from her homeland, just up north of the border ... TMZ has learned.

We're told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are going to Alberta, Canada's Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge for their post-wedding getaway, and will be staying at the 6,000 sq. ft. Outlook Cabin ... aka "The Royal Retreat."

Our sources say the resort ordered some gear and goodies it doesn't normally keep on hand for Meghan and Harry. It's unclear exactly when they'll be arriving, but we're told both British and Canadian security will be involved when they do.

So, why this place? Well, it's considered a Canadian Paradise -- tucked away in the middle of Jasper National Park -- and has a rich history of royal guests ... from both England and Hollywood.

*King George VI* and *Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother* stayed there in 1939, and the current *Queen* and *Prince Philip* hit it up in June 2005. Celebs like *Anthony Hopkins*, *John Travolta* and *Bill Gates* vacation there ... and it's where the 1954 *Marilyn Monroe*/*Robert Mitchum* film "River of No Return" was shot."

We vacation here often, it's a stunning, beautiful place.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Bulimia is neither caused nor cured by having a certain type of husband.   That is irrelevant.



If she had had bulimia when she was a teenager I might agree with you, but I’ve never read anything saying that it occurred before she married. Eating disorders are complex and there are many reasons why they happen. Feeling unloved and unattractive can certainly contribute to it.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Honeymoon info.
> 
> "*Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry* are heading to a spot with a royal reputation for their honeymoon, and it's not too far from her homeland, just up north of the border ... TMZ has learned.
> 
> We're told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are going to Alberta, Canada's Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge for their post-wedding getaway, and will be staying at the 6,000 sq. ft. Outlook Cabin ... aka "The Royal Retreat."
> 
> Our sources say the resort ordered some gear and goodies it doesn't normally keep on hand for Meghan and Harry. It's unclear exactly when they'll be arriving, but we're told both British and Canadian security will be involved when they do.
> 
> So, why this place? Well, it's considered a Canadian Paradise -- tucked away in the middle of Jasper National Park -- and has a rich history of royal guests ... from both England and Hollywood.
> 
> *King George VI* and *Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother* stayed there in 1939, and the current *Queen* and *Prince Philip* hit it up in June 2005. Celebs like *Anthony Hopkins*, *John Travolta* and *Bill Gates* vacation there ... and it's where the 1954 *Marilyn Monroe*/*Robert Mitchum* film "River of No Return" was shot."
> 
> We vacation here often, it's a stunning, beautiful place.


Poor Meghan.....what a life she has before her


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I agree that their temperaments ultimately wouldn’t have led to a successful marriage. But I disagree with your assessment of Diana at the time. She didn’t become bulimic until after she married. It’s been documented it was in response to the tabloids writing snarky stories about how she appeared “pudgy.” Maybe if she’d had a husband who made her feel loved and attractive she wouldn’t have resorted to that. We’ll never know. The fact is Charles was 12 years older than Diana and it was his decision to propose to her, apparently after they had only dated maybe a dozen times. They didn’t truly know each other before marrying.


Diana had food issues before the wedding and kept losing more and more weight. Every appearance, she was more and more slim. Then her wedding dress had to be taken in multiple times.

I guess the press can be blamed (although others may have dieted, like Fergie who the press was mean about -  and not stuck their finger down their throats) but I'm not sure we can blame Charles.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> If she had had bulimia when she was a teenager I might agree with you, but I’ve never read anything saying that it occurred before she married. Eating disorders are complex and there are many reasons why they happen. Feeling unloved and unattractive can certainly contribute to it.


Sorry to keep quoting you , but we're really just having a discussion and not arguing, right? 

If that were true and she felt unloved and unattractive -- then why did her bulimia continue for so many years after she had so much praise and adoration and lovers who thought her beautiful?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Honeymoon info.
> 
> "*Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry* are heading to a spot with a royal reputation for their honeymoon, and it's not too far from her homeland, just up north of the border ... TMZ has learned.
> 
> We're told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are going to Alberta, Canada's Fairmont Jasper Park Lodge for their post-wedding getaway, and will be staying at the 6,000 sq. ft. Outlook Cabin ... aka "The Royal Retreat."
> 
> Our sources say the resort ordered some gear and goodies it doesn't normally keep on hand for Meghan and Harry. It's unclear exactly when they'll be arriving, but we're told both British and Canadian security will be involved when they do.
> 
> So, why this place? Well, it's considered a Canadian Paradise -- tucked away in the middle of Jasper National Park -- and has a rich history of royal guests ... from both England and Hollywood.
> 
> *King George VI* and *Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother* stayed there in 1939, and the current *Queen* and *Prince Philip* hit it up in June 2005. Celebs like *Anthony Hopkins*, *John Travolta* and *Bill Gates* vacation there ... and it's where the 1954 *Marilyn Monroe*/*Robert Mitchum* film "River of No Return" was shot."
> 
> We vacation here often, it's a stunning, beautiful place.


Lucky them, I've never been to Canada but the nature seems fantastic.


Jayne1 said:


> Diana had food issues before the wedding and kept losing more and more weight. Every appearance, she was more and more slim. Then her wedding dress had to be taken in multiple times.
> 
> I guess the press can be blamed (although others may have dieted, like Fergie who the press was mean about -  and not stuck their finger down their throats) but I'm not sure we can blame Charles.


It's all just so sad. But I'm sure both Charles and Diana, if she were alive, would agree that, looking at their boys, it was worth it.


----------



## gelbergirl

Jayne1 said:


> Sorry to keep quoting you , but we're really just having a discussion and not arguing, right?
> 
> If that were true and she felt unloved and unattractive -- then why did her bulimia continue for so many years after she had so much praise and adoration and lovers who thought her beautiful?



I thought she had finally gotten help for it.  The BRF has the best doctors, therapists I am sure.
I recall it started at just around age 19, when she became engaged.


----------



## DC-Cutie

How did talk start on Diana’s eating disorder


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Sorry to keep quoting you , but we're really just having a discussion and not arguing, right?
> 
> If that were true and she felt unloved and unattractive -- then why did her bulimia continue for so many years after she had so much praise and adoration and lovers who thought her beautiful?



Nope, not arguing just expressing opposing opinions, hopefully in a respectful way.

Diana went into treatment for her bulimia in the late 80s and they didn’t divorce until 1996. So she did have it under control by the time she was 30.

I didn’t realize this when I posted earlier but I found this quote from her biography where Diana herself identified Charles as being a factor. Some may feel she was a bit over dramatic but these are her own words.



> Her struggle with bulimia began just days after the Prince of Wales proposed in 1981, according to transcript tapes published by the Daily Mail.
> 
> In recordings to author Andrew Morton – who transcribed them for his 1992 book Diana: Her True Story - she describes being sick as “cathartic” and “shrunk to nothing” in the months leading up to their wedding.
> 
> Diana said: “The bulimia started the week after we got engaged (and would take nearly a decade to overcome.
> 
> “My husband put his hand on my waistline and said: ‘Oh, a bit chubby here, aren’t we?’ and that triggered something in me. And the Camilla thing. I was desperate, desperate.


www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/621355/Princess-Diana-eating-disorder-Prince-Charles-chubby/amp


----------



## StylishMD

Sharont2305 said:


> I've seen a few posts on a few threads about the Queen not being on the steps with them afterwards. Here's my theory....
> I think it was deliberate by the Queen to not do it because it was her way of saying that the next chapter of the RF is now complete now that the two sons are married. Also I would have thought all the bridesmaids and page boys would have been on the steps. George and Charlotte walked back down the aisle with their mum and dad, not with the other children as I expected. They were the only children on the steps. This is your Royal Family after the Queen passes. Also, considering her age and that the Duke of Edinburgh has recently had an operation the steps were a definite no no for him to navigate and maybe, just maybe she didn't want to do it without her husband.
> That's my take on it anyway.


That was exactly my thought too. She WAS at the side door with Philip and the rest of the RF. No steps for him to navigate


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Nope, not arguing just expressing opposing opinions, hopefully in a respectful way.
> 
> Diana went into treatment for her bulimia in the late 80s and they didn’t divorce until 1996. So she did have it under control by the time she was 30.
> 
> I didn’t realize this when I posted earlier but I found this quote from her biography where Diana herself identified Charles as being a factor. Some may feel she was a bit over dramatic but these are her own words.
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/621355/Princess-Diana-eating-disorder-Prince-Charles-chubby/amp



I remember being 20 and every relationship or even friendship was a huge deal to me. Even if it’s easy to say that Diana should have left Charles earlier or she didn’t have to marry him, I could totally see how (at that age) she must have felt helpless. 

Combined with being a royal and expected to behave a certain way (....or else!) it wasn’t like she could lash out or react the way a normal girl would. She probably couldn’t even confide in her girlfriends or parents, because all eyes and ears were on her and she was probably even being spied on. Eating disorder must have been the only thing she felt she could control.


----------



## chowlover2

Diana found out Charles was still seeing Camilla shortly before the wedding. He had a bracelet engraved to " Gladys", which was his pet name for her. I forget what her pet name was for him. Anyway, Diana found the bracelet and told her sisters to which they replied as " It was too late, her face was on the tea towels." So Diana went through with the wedding and hoped things would change.


----------



## mdcx

Eating disorders are generally a symptom or expression of mental/emotional distress or mental illness. I think it's fair to say that Diana was emotionally distressed by her childhood before she met Charles. Their marriage didn't help matters though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chowlover2 said:


> Diana found out Charles was still seeing Camilla shortly before the wedding. He had a bracelet engraved to " Gladys", which was his pet name for her. I forget what her pet name was for him. Anyway, Diana found the bracelet and told her sisters to which they replied as " It was too late, her face was on the tea towels." So Diana went through with the wedding and hoped things would change.


Fred... the bracelet had G&F on it. She still wears it


----------



## absolutpink

Jasper is super close to where I live. Beautiful place, but not somewhere I would want to honeymoon!


----------



## gelbergirl

bisousx said:


> I remember being 20 and every relationship or even friendship was a huge deal to me. Even if it’s easy to say that Diana should have left Charles earlier or she didn’t have to marry him, I could totally see how (at that age) she must have felt helpless.
> 
> Combined with being a royal and expected to behave a certain way (....or else!) it wasn’t like she could lash out or react the way a normal girl would. She probably couldn’t even confide in her girlfriends or parents, because all eyes and ears were on her and she was probably even being spied on. Eating disorder must have been the only thing she felt she could control.



I always got the sense the Spencer Family just wanted Diana in Buckingham Palace as part of the RF.  Like it was finally a place for her.


----------



## Grande Latte

So one of the main reasons I think Harry picked Megan is precisely because Megan is tough. She's not fragile or sensitive like Diana. Harry wanted someone who looks up to him, can stand her own ground, and won't break down whatever the circumstances. She's like Maeve in Westworld!!!  I love that show btw.


----------



## Jayne1

Grande Latte said:


> So one of the main reasons I think Harry picked Megan is precisely because Megan is tough. She's not fragile or sensitive like Diana. Harry wanted someone who looks up to him, can stand her own ground, and won't break down whatever the circumstances. She's like Maeve in Westworld!!!  I love that show btw.


Agree with both -- she's not fragile and is a bit like Maeve!


----------



## Jayne1

I doubt they will honeymoon in Alberta now, if they were ever going there to begin with.

Any and all celebrities can disappear when they want to and I bet H and M are off somewhere in total privacy.


----------



## TC1

absolutpink said:


> Jasper is super close to where I live. Beautiful place, but not somewhere I would want to honeymoon!


I thought that too. But then again if I had a 6,000 sq foot house to stay in I could probaby manage


----------



## absolutpink

TC1 said:


> I thought that too. But then again if I had a 6,000 sq foot house to stay in I could probaby manage



True!


----------



## LibbyRuth

TC1 said:


> I thought that too. But then again if I had a 6,000 sq foot house to stay in I could probaby manage



Not to mention, haven't there been other royal couples who used their honeymoon to "promote" places in the commonwealth?  It would not surprise me if they went to Alberta allowing the public to know they are going there for a honeymoon that they could also check off as duty for the family business - and then at a different time go somewhere private and secretive that they can see as their true honeymoon.  I could see these two doing quite a bit that is sharing parts of their relationship for "duty" but then in return getting other things to remain private for the health of their relationship.


----------



## PatsyCline

absolutpink said:


> Jasper is super close to where I live. Beautiful place, but not somewhere I would want to honeymoon!


What's wrong with Jasper? Beautiful scenery, lots of things to do outdoors.


----------



## absolutpink

PatsyCline said:


> What's wrong with Jasper? Beautiful scenery, lots of things to do outdoors.



It's just not somewhere that appeals to me personally, Banff and Jasper are basically on my doorstep and I'm not a mountain person so I never go there. It is really beautiful, and I can see why they would go there! I've stayed at the Jasper Park Lodge and it's a great resort.


----------



## absolutpink

LibbyRuth said:


> Not to mention, haven't there been other royal couples who used their honeymoon to "promote" places in the commonwealth?  It would not surprise me if they went to Alberta allowing the public to know they are going there for a honeymoon that they could also check off as duty for the family business - and then at a different time go somewhere private and secretive that they can see as their true honeymoon.  I could see these two doing quite a bit that is sharing parts of their relationship for "duty" but then in return getting other things to remain private for the health of their relationship.



I actually have some insight to this that I can't post here, but I totally agree, I think this is more than just picking a beautiful spot.


----------



## chessmont

Just tuned into the Hallmark movie channel and there is a movie on starring Meghan Markle!  From 2014.


----------



## meluvs2shop

Has anyone watched their lifetime movie yet? I’m want to watch it but I wonder if it’s corny. Haha


----------



## PatsyCline

meluvs2shop said:


> Has anyone watched their lifetime movie yet? I’m want to watch it but I wonder if it’s corny. Haha



I watched it, but there’s no proof most of what’s described actually happened. 

Take it for what it is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

bag-princess said:


> Exactly!  Don’t they say she was the most photographed woman in the world? Why would she need to ever call anyone?


maybe more of telling them where she is going to next and when she will do this or that

she had a "personal" paparazzo. he did an interview a few years ago where he told Diana called him or told him where she is going to make sure her pictures were taking at the  right times



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Is it known whether Diana knew about Charles's other women, Camilla in particular, before the marriage? I mean, it's not like you _have_ to marry a prince or a king just because you're presented with the opportunity. Even if you are 20


Diana lived in a  flat with 3 flatmates and had several low paid jobs, she failed at the O-level twice. 
I think she needed someone rich



ccbaggirl89 said:


> Fred... the bracelet had G&F on it. She still wears it


where do "Gladys" and "Fred" are coming from?


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> maybe more of telling them where she is going to next and when she will do this or that
> 
> she had a "personal" paparazzo. he did an interview a few years ago where he told Diana called him or told him where she is going to make sure her pictures were taking at the  right times


Right.  Her personal paps said she notified them that she would be on the yacht with Dodi and where they were staying in Paris. All the while shielding herself from the cameras, as if she didn't want to be photographed.

Seriously?


----------



## chowlover2

myown said:


> where do "Gladys" and "Fred" are coming from?


No idea. Perhaps they sound like British blue collar?


----------



## PatsyCline

I read Kim Kardashian has a similar arrangement with some paparazzi.  She actually gets a cut of what they sell the photos for.


----------



## mkr

chowlover2 said:


> No idea. Perhaps they sound like British blue collar?



Those were their pet names for each other.


----------



## mdcx

myown said:


> where do "Gladys" and "Fred" are coming from?


Possibly inspired by the UK tv comedy 'George and Mildred' from the 1970's about a working class husband and wife trying to pass as middle class.

I would guess they both thought it was jolly fun to use "common" names like Fred and Gladys as nicknames for themselves.


----------



## chowlover2

PatsyCline said:


> I read Kim Kardashian has a similar arrangement with some paparazzi.  She actually gets a cut of what they sell the photos for.


Her guy works for Splash photos. I want to say his name is Brian. They are always photoshopped to the gills. She even takes him on vacation.


----------



## Jayne1

chowlover2 said:


> Her guy works for Splash photos. I want to say his name is Brian. They are always photoshopped to the gills. She even takes him on vacation.


Can you imagine the un-retouched photos Brian has in his arsenal? He must have signed his life away if any get out for public viewing.


----------



## chowlover2

Jayne1 said:


> Can you imagine the un-retouched photos Brian has in his arsenal? He must have signed his life away if any get out for public viewing.


I think I read or saw something where her personal pap is paid $150,000 a year. Nice work if you can get it!


----------



## papertiger

myown said:


> maybe more of telling them where she is going to next and when she will do this or that
> 
> she had a "personal" paparazzo. he did an interview a few years ago where he told Diana called him or told him where she is going to make sure her pictures were taking at the  right times
> 
> 
> Diana lived in a  flat with 3 flatmates and had several low paid jobs, she failed at the O-level twice.
> *I think she needed someone rich*
> 
> 
> where do "Gladys" and "Fred" are coming from?



She was a Lady, an Earl's daughter and she was *only 19*. The Coleherne Court Lady Diana Spencer shared with friends was a smoke screen and a stop gap, she lived in Kensington, off the Old Brompton Rd, a nanny's starter salary would not have covered the rent even with 2 others. Though debutante seasons had been long abandoned,  at that time 'Sloanes' often took nanny/PR/boutique jobs waiting for 'arrangements' to be made inside their own set, there was never any doubt she was going to marry someone connected and well off. It was all a set up, her elder sister went out with Charles but he played around for too long so Diana was decided on completely.


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> She was a Lady, an Earl's daughter and she was *only 19*. The Coleherne Court Lady Diana Spencer shared with friends was a smoke screen and a stop gap, she lived in Kensington, off the Old Brompton Rd, a nanny's starter salary would not have covered the rent even with 2 others. Though debutante seasons had been long abandoned,  at that time 'Sloanes' often took nanny/PR/boutique jobs waiting for 'arrangements' to be made inside their own set, there was never any doubt she was going to marry someone connected and well off. *It was all a set up, her elder sister wet out with Charles but he played around for too long so Diana was decided on completely*.








Lordt!
And a lot of people think it's 'romantic' and a 'fairytale' to marry a Prince and become part of the royal family... Uhhm, it sounds like a twisted nightmare to me. Thanks but no thanks!


----------



## bag-princess

*Harry and Meghan Return $9M in Wedding Gifts*


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly returning $9.3 million (£7 million) in wedding gifts because palace aides want to prevent people and companies from using the newlywed Duke and Duchess of Sussex for publicity, _The Express_ reports.


Family is that no gifts, including hospitality or services, should be accepted which would, or might appear to, place the Member of The Royal Family under any obligation to the donor."

Express reports that one brand, Bags of Love, sent the couple matching bathing suits in hopes that they'll wear them on their honeymoon. Royal guidelines state that gifts offered from businesses in the UK "should normally be declined," unless they're a souvenir from an official visit or in celebration for a royal marriage or other personal occasion. But the royal's decision to accept the present should be "contingent upon the enterprise undertaking not to exploit the gift for commercial purposes."" data-reactid="43">_Express_ reports that one brand, Bags of Love, sent the couple matching bathing suits in hopes that they'll wear them on their honeymoon. Royal guidelines state that gifts offered from businesses in the UK "should normally be declined," unless they're a souvenir from an official visit or in celebration for a royal marriage or other personal occasion. But the royal's decision to accept the present should be "contingent upon the enterprise undertaking not to exploit the gift for commercial purposes."

And when it comes to gifts from individuals royals don't know personally, the offering "should be refused where there are concerns about the propriety or motives
of the donor or the gift itself."

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/harry-meghan-return-9m-wedding-125300647.html


----------



## mdcx

papertiger said:


> She was a Lady, an Earl's daughter and she was *only 19*. The Coleherne Court Lady Diana Spencer shared with friends was a smoke screen and a stop gap, she lived in Kensington, off the Old Brompton Rd, a nanny's starter salary would not have covered the rent even with 2 others. Though debutante seasons had been long abandoned,  at that time 'Sloanes' often took nanny/PR/boutique jobs waiting for 'arrangements' to be made inside their own set, there was never any doubt she was going to marry someone connected and well off. It was all a set up, her elder sister went out with Charles but he played around for too long so Diana was decided on completely.



Much like Kate Middleton, but Kate being from a non-aristo background, the maneuverings were a bit more obvious.

Her family angled for her to marry Wills and played the long game to make it happen. She was always "available" i.e. not working full-time, no obvious other boyfriends, nothing unsavoury in her behaviour etc. She was always "royal wife material".


----------



## VickyB

chowlover2 said:


> I think I read or saw something where her personal pap is paid $150,000 a year. Nice work if you can get it!


Dunno. That doesn't sound like much to me when you factor in all the hours of eye damage he's doing to photoshop that bag of damage she calls an a$$.


----------



## mdcx

VickyB said:


> Dunno. That doesn't sound like much to me when you factor in all the hours of eye damage he's doing to photoshop that bag of damage she calls an a$$.


I find this so amazing, so even the "candid" pics of Kim K have been retouched? Does anyone know what her real a$$ looks like?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

mdcx said:


> I find this so amazing, so even the "candid" pics of Kim K have been retouched? Does anyone know what her real a$$ looks like?


I just know Brian of Splash photo is her personal pap. You can generally tell the non- photoshopped pics as she looks fat in them and her arse is huge. She also photoshop her selfies. You can tell by looking at the lines in the background. They will be wavy or even non-existent.


----------



## redney

mdcx said:


> I find this so amazing, so even the "candid" pics of Kim K have been retouched? Does anyone know what her real a$$ looks like?


Yes. Untouched photos have gotten out. You don't want to see.


----------



## chowlover2

redney said:


> Yes. Untouched photos have gotten out. You don't want to see.


That is true! There is one of KK at the beach and she has that giant arse sitting on the side of a rowboat. It was huge and looked even worse as it was covered in sand. One of the regs here photoshopped a watermelon on each cheek side and posted the pic. It was hilarious. Serious Kimmie is no fun. I long for the days of the 72 day wedding...


----------



## mdcx

Things make a lot more sense now. The top pic I can assume is photoshopped by her paparazzo, hence the perfect skin, no stretch marks, weirdly thin thighs etc. The second one, not so much.


----------



## minababe

mdcx said:


> Things make a lot more sense now. The top pic I can assume is photoshopped by her paparazzo, hence the perfect skin, no stretch marks, weirdly thin thighs etc. The second one, not so much.
> View attachment 4085742
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4085743


omg .. she Looks like a granny here ..
I never liked her and still don't understand that she is so famous in the us. this whole Family is pointless .. but hey look at the us president  I really liked the us but These days they make it really hard to take them serious or lovable


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> Much like Kate Middleton, but Kate being from a non-aristo background, the maneuverings were a bit more obvious.
> 
> Her family angled for her to marry Wills and played the long game to make it happen. She was always "available" i.e. not working full-time, no obvious other boyfriends, nothing unsavoury in her behaviour etc. She was always "royal wife material".



That sounds more like Kate's family set it up so there were 'no disadvantages', like a Jane Austin novel.  In Diana's case, when she referred to the British Royal family as 'The Firm' she wasn't joking. I think I heard M refer to them as The Firm already, I think she should be a little careful. there, apparently the Queen found it funny and it's an in joke but...


----------



## doni

myown said:


> where do "Gladys" and "Fred" are coming from?



They are characters from the Goon Show.


----------



## gelbergirl

mdcx said:


> Much like Kate Middleton, but Kate being from a non-aristo background, the maneuverings were a bit more obvious.
> 
> Her family angled for her to marry Wills and played the long game to make it happen. She was always "available" i.e. not working full-time, no obvious other boyfriends, nothing unsavoury in her behaviour etc. She was always "royal wife material".



I know she had to wait for him for quite some time.  And she had to limit her working hours because she would have to travel and make herself available based on his schedule.  As he got older I do believe his options for a wife were becoming limited as well.  If these two did not end up together, I think it would have been very easy for her to find another spouse.  For him, it would have been more difficult because of his future position, maybe a convenience marriage to fulfill his obligation to the monarchy.


----------



## gazoo

So next appearance for Harry and Meghan is the Trooping the Colours. I'm already curious about what placement will be given to Harry and Meghan on the balcony. Usually it's the main Royals in the front row, with Harry at the back.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> Much like Kate Middleton, but Kate being from a non-aristo background, the maneuverings were a bit more obvious.
> 
> Her family angled for her to marry Wills and played the long game to make it happen. She was always "available" i.e. not working full-time, no obvious other boyfriends, nothing unsavoury in her behaviour etc. She was always "royal wife material".


Talk about obvious - have you heard Kate's new accent?  She took lessons from a voice coach to achieve perfect RP English. Even William doesn't sound as plummy, but I think he's doing the opposite as his wife, trying to sound less so.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> Things make a lot more sense now. The top pic I can assume is photoshopped by her paparazzo, hence the perfect skin, no stretch marks, weirdly thin thighs etc. The second one, not so much.
> View attachment 4085742
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4085743


Also, anytime you see a detailed, very clear photo, such as the top picture - it means the pap was right there, in front of her face. He wasn't hundreds of yards away, hiding in the bushes, using a zoom lens.  Photos like that would be a bit more grainy.

The second photo, with the lumpier skin, looks accurate but her thighs look photoshopped against the water in the background and I can't figure out why.


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Talk about obvious - have you heard Kate's new accent?  She took lessons from a voice coach to achieve perfect RP English. Even William doesn't sound as plummy, but I think he's doing the opposite as his wife, trying to sound less so.



Did she really? Was this before or after she got married? I suppose this is one thing Meghan doesn’t have to worry about!


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> Did she really? Was this before or after she got married? I suppose this is one thing Meghan doesn’t have to worry about!


It was after. She's trying to be very regal. The public has noticed - they comment on it all the time.


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> It was after. She's trying to be very regal. The public has noticed - they comment on it all the time.


In a derogatory way? As in, she is trying too hard? I hope Meghan keeps her nice, approachable American accent. There isn't really an alternative for her -- would be downright ridiculous if she started speaking with a British accent.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> In a derogatory way? As in, she is trying too hard? I hope Meghan keeps her nice, approachable American accent. There isn't really an alternative for her -- would be downright ridiculous if she started speaking with a British accent.


like Madonna?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> like Madonna?


 exactly


----------



## Bentley1

Jayne1 said:


> Talk about obvious - have you heard Kate's new accent?  She took lessons from a voice coach to achieve perfect RP English. Even William doesn't sound as plummy, but I think he's doing the opposite as his wife, trying to sound less so.


Really? Oh that's really interesting, i think I've heard her speak once during their engagement interview. I need to listen to some more recent stuff. lol

ETA: I sure hope Meghan doesn't start up with a faux British accent. Yes, like Madonna or for those that watch Housewives of Beverly Hills, like Dorit!


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> I hope Meghan keeps her nice, approachable American accent. There isn't really an alternative for her -- would be downright ridiculous if she started speaking with a British accent.


In time I think her accent will have a British lilt, I'm sure its inevitable. I actually liked Madonnas accent after she'd lived here for a while, don't know if it was faux or not.
The one accent I cannot stand is Catherine Zeta Jones fake fake fake American twang!!


----------



## gelbergirl

I’d think after a while being in the RF, you’d have to put on an act and take those speaking lessons.  Might be the best way to deal with the stress - just become one of them.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> In a derogatory way? As in, she is trying too hard? I hope Meghan keeps her nice, approachable American accent. There isn't really an alternative for her -- would be downright ridiculous if she started speaking with a British accent.


you can pick up an accent by being around people who speak that way all the time.  She will be travelling and not spending all of her time in Britain and I think it also just depends on the person.  But if/when she has kids they will most likely speak with a British accent.


----------



## chowlover2

I have a very good friend who has a heavy British accent. I assumed he grew up in the UK and moved here as a teen. He didn't he was born here. I dind't find this out til I had known him about 6-7 yrs. He told me his parents both had accents and as a kid mimicking their speech resulted in his accent.


----------



## cafecreme15

I would think children generally pick up the speech patterns and accents of those who they are around the most. So when they are little and first learning to speak, they pick up on the speech patterns of their parents, and when they start spending more time around other people in school and in public, they pick would pick up on that.


----------



## sdkitty

I worked with an Italian girl years ago.  She spoke like she just got off the boat.  Her younger sister spoke with an American accent (or no accent to us).  They came here when they were maybe 10 and 12 or something around that age.  I guess her sister was just more of a sponge picking up the American accent.


----------



## cafecreme15

At the same time I know of people who have moved across the pond as full fledged adults and have retained their native accents.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> At the same time I know of people who have moved across the pond as full fledged adults and have retained their native accents.


Yes, that's also true. My 88 year old Aunt has lived just outside of London for the last 60+ years and speaks with a very posh RP, yet her husband sounded ( he's now passed away ) like he'd never left where I and they were brought up in a small rural place in North West Wales, just before you get to Anglesey, and we have a very distinctive accent.


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> In a derogatory way? As in, she is trying too hard? I hope Meghan keeps her nice, approachable American accent. There isn't really an alternative for her -- would be downright ridiculous if she started speaking with a British accent.





sdkitty said:


> like Madonna?


You know how there are so many English accents and regional dialects? Cockney, Yorkshire, Geordie, so many more.

You've heard actors not playing roles, like Michael Cain and Adele and their natural Cockney accents and Mel B and her Yorkshire accent.

If you want the snobbiest, there is the Queen's English, also called Received Pronunciation or "posh" or cut glass accent. It oozes privilege, expensive schools and upper class. Prince Charles speaks with the most extreme version of R.P.

Keira Knightley is somewhere between RP and Estuary. Ricky Gervais speaks with Estuary pronunciation.

William, for some reason (some think he's trying to sound less aristocratic) has a near-RP accent, meaning it's close to Received Pronunciation but with some contemporary features thrown in.

Kate, on the other hand, took lessons to purposely speak with a very royal sounding accent and now, as many in Britain have noticed, she sounds plummier, more aristocratic than her husband.

Madonna just picked  up an affected accent while living in London. Not the same thing.

Someone from the UK please chime in!


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> You know how there are so many English accents and regional dialects? Cockney, Yorkshire, Geordie, so many more.
> 
> You've heard actors not playing roles, like Michael Cain and Adele and their natural Cockney accents and Mel B and her Yorkshire accent.
> 
> If you want the snobbiest, there is the Queen's English, also called Received Pronunciation or "posh" or cut glass accent. It oozes privilege, expensive schools and upper class. Prince Charles speaks with the most extreme version of R.P.
> 
> Keira Knightley is somewhere between RP and Estuary. Ricky Gervais speaks with Estuary pronunciation.
> 
> William, for some reason (some think he's trying to sound less aristocratic) has a near-RP accent, meaning it's close to Received Pronunciation but with some contemporary features thrown in.
> 
> Kate, on the other hand, took lessons to purposely speak with a very royal sounding accent and now, as many in Britain have noticed, she sounds plummier, more aristocratic than her husband.
> 
> Madonna just picked  up an affected accent while living in London. Not the same thing.
> 
> Someone from the UK please chime in!


This is all so fascinating! Obviously here in the US we have different accents, but I think associations with accents are strictly regional in nature, no at all class-based. But it seems in the UK accents cross both regional and class lines? I just watched a great introductory youtube video on the RP accent.


----------



## Eva1991

Jayne1 said:


> Talk about obvious - have you heard Kate's new accent?  She took lessons from a voice coach to achieve perfect RP English. Even William doesn't sound as plummy, but I think he's doing the opposite as his wife, trying to sound less so.


What's an RP accent?

I took linguistics at university and the basic rule is that the younger we are, the easier it is to learn a foreign language - or an accent, in Meghan's case. Meghan moved to the UK in her mid-30s. It will be hard for her to change her accent now and to be honest, I don't think she needs to. She is who she is and Harry loves her for that. Changing her accent may backfire on her popularity.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> You know how there are so many English accents and regional dialects? Cockney, Yorkshire, Geordie, so many more.
> 
> You've heard actors not playing roles, like Michael Cain and Adele and their natural Cockney accents and Mel B and her Yorkshire accent.
> 
> If you want the snobbiest, there is the Queen's English, also called Received Pronunciation or "posh" or cut glass accent. It oozes privilege, expensive schools and upper class. Prince Charles speaks with the most extreme version of R.P.
> 
> Keira Knightley is somewhere between RP and Estuary. Ricky Gervais speaks with Estuary pronunciation.
> 
> William, for some reason (some think he's trying to sound less aristocratic) has a near-RP accent, meaning it's close to Received Pronunciation but with some contemporary features thrown in.
> 
> Kate, on the other hand, took lessons to purposely speak with a very royal sounding accent and now, as many in Britain have noticed, she sounds plummier, more aristocratic than her husband.
> 
> Madonna just picked  up an affected accent while living in London. Not the same thing.
> 
> Someone from the UK please chime in!


Yes Madonna seemed like she was putting it on


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Languages and music are the only things I was good at in school, so it was very tempting for my ear to pick up an accent when I studied in London. However, I am an awful actress and I knew any accent that would come out would be embarrassing LOL. But I can see how someone could pick it up over time.

I knew a girl whose parents were Australian and another whose parents were British (and spent summers in those countries), and both could easily switch between their respective accents and their American one, and sound completely flawless. 

I personally find it silly/pretentious to hear an American calling things "flat/lift/cushion/mate/etc", even though I think it's understandable if you've lived there a long time. But I still would think it would sound silly if Meghan picked it up x)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## absolutpink

I grew up in England but I live in Canada now and I sound 100% Canadian.


----------



## ap.

Jayne1 said:


> Talk about obvious - have you heard Kate's new accent?  She took lessons from a voice coach to achieve perfect RP English. Even William doesn't sound as plummy, but I think he's doing the opposite as his wife, trying to sound less so.



I don't think Kate needed to newly acquire RP.  She was educated/boarded at public (private) schools from age 4 (St. Andrews, Downe House, Marlborough College according to Wikipedia) and would have come out sounding sufficiently posh.


----------



## ap.

Eva1991 said:


> What's an RP accent?



Received pronunciation.  I guess it's the accent most non-British people think of when they think (normal) "English accent".  Some UK expats and I were talking about accents some time ago; most acknowledged "adjusting" their accents depending on the situation.


----------



## Jayne1

apey_grapey said:


> I don't think Kate needed to newly acquire RP.  She was educated/boarded at public (private) schools from age 4 (St. Andrews, Downe House, Marlborough College according to Wikipedia) and would have come out sounding sufficiently posh.


Tell that to Kate.  lol


----------



## mdcx

The book _Noblesse Oblige: An Enquiry Into the Identifiable Characteristics of the English Aristocracy_ gives some good insights into the British class system including Received Pronunciation. 

RP used to be the standard for all BBC presenters.


----------



## cafecreme15

mdcx said:


> The book _Noblesse Oblige: An Enquiry Into the Identifiable Characteristics of the English Aristocracy_ gives some good insights into the British class system including Received Pronunciation.
> 
> RP used to be the standard for all BBC presenters.



Thanks for the recommendation! I’m going to check this out.


----------



## ap.

Jayne1 said:


> Tell that to Kate.  lol



This is what she sounds like when they got engaged in 2010.  I haven't heard her before now and know nothing of English accents besides what I've learned from British friends (and Masterpiece Theater), but has her accent changed dramatically since?


There's also this:
http://www.ibtimes.com.au/pregnant-...-conscious-middle-class-accent-report-1393448


----------



## mdcx

I didn't know this was a point of discussion but Googled it and she does sound a bit different in this video:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/33897...yal-husband-while-prince-harrys-slang-shocks/
Obviously she has been trained and is trying to be the best royal wife ever by doing everything right and may not know when to stop 

ETA her sister Pippa's voice is probably what Kate's "natural" accent sounds like.


----------



## alex9179

I feel that commenting on speech patterns isn't realistic. I may not change my Mid-Western U.S., news anchor, accent at this point in my life, but I do change how I phrase sentences. It depends on the audience. My kids are native born Texans. Their words and accents change a lot between peers, teachers, neighbors, and us. They'll use their peer vernacular at home, on occasion, but change it when speaking to adult friends.  It's another pattern with kids from different areas. Accents and colloquialisms will come and go, depending on who they're around at the time. People are influenced by their surroundings. I just can't seem to influence the disuse of "brang", this year. It will be banished, forever!


----------



## Jayne1

The whole point was that Kate is doing everything she can to be as regal as she thinks she should be. I can't remember the name of her voice coach but she made a concerted effort to sound aristocratic.

The British public noticed the new, posher accent with a dose of side eye.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> You know how there are so many English accents and regional dialects? Cockney, Yorkshire, Geordie, so many more.
> 
> You've heard actors not playing roles, like Michael Cain and Adele and their natural Cockney accents and Mel B and her Yorkshire accent.
> 
> If you want the snobbiest, there is the Queen's English, also called Received Pronunciation or "posh" or cut glass accent. It oozes privilege, expensive schools and upper class. Prince Charles speaks with the most extreme version of R.P.
> 
> Keira Knightley is somewhere between RP and Estuary. Ricky Gervais speaks with Estuary pronunciation.
> 
> William, for some reason (some think he's trying to sound less aristocratic) has a near-RP accent, meaning it's close to Received Pronunciation but with some contemporary features thrown in.
> 
> Kate, on the other hand, took lessons to purposely speak with a very royal sounding accent and now, as many in Britain have noticed, she sounds plummier, more aristocratic than her husband.
> 
> Madonna just picked  up an affected accent while living in London. Not the same thing.
> 
> Someone from the UK please chime in!


Absolutely agree, I'm British, Welsh actually where we have lots and lots of regional accents too. When people think of a Welsh accent they typically think we all speak like Catherine Zeta Jones ( before her fake American twang ) Tom Jones, Anthony Hopkins, Shirley Bassey. They are South Walian
North Wales has lots of different accents, which are totally different to South Wales. Google Rhys Ifans, Robbie Savage, Mark Hughes and that'll cover some of them.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I personally find it silly/pretentious to hear an American calling things "flat/lift/cushion/mate/etc", even though I think it's understandable if you've lived there a long time. But I still would think it would sound silly if Meghan picked it up x)


I'm the same the other way, sounds silly/pretentious when a Brit starts using American terms, ha ha, like apartment, elevator, sidewalk, purse etc, especially if they've only lived over there for 5 minutes!


----------



## Sharont2305

Eva1991 said:


> Meghan moved to the UK in her mid-30s. It will be hard for her to change her accent now and to be honest, I don't think she needs to. She is who she is and Harry loves her for that. Changing her accent may backfire on her popularity.


I think in time her accent will become softer rather than change completely, 
Think American Film actresses of the 1950s and 60s particularly and ironically Grace Kelly.


----------



## Handbag1234

apey_grapey said:


> I don't think Kate needed to newly acquire RP.  She was educated/boarded at public (private) schools from age 4 (St. Andrews, Downe House, Marlborough College according to Wikipedia) and would have come out sounding sufficiently posh.


Her accent makes me cringe. It’s so false and old fashioned posh. She sounds ridiculous.


----------



## BagLovingMom

I didn’t see this posted , it’s a link to an article about designer Emilia Wickstead and some unflattering comments she reportedly made about the Duchess of Sussex’s wedding look.

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/wor...-frank-comments-meghan-markle-s-wedding-dress


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

BagLovingMom said:


> I didn’t see this posted , it’s a link to an article about designer Emilia Wickstead and some unflattering comments she reportedly made about the Duchess of Sussex’s wedding look.
> 
> https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/wor...-frank-comments-meghan-markle-s-wedding-dress


Perfect example of don't bite the hands that feed you. Catherine has worn a lot of her designs. Wonder if she will carry on


----------



## cafecreme15

apey_grapey said:


> This is what she sounds like when they got engaged in 2010.  I haven't heard her before now and know nothing of English accents besides what I've learned from British friends (and Masterpiece Theater), but has her accent changed dramatically since?
> 
> 
> There's also this:
> http://www.ibtimes.com.au/pregnant-...-conscious-middle-class-accent-report-1393448



Wow I can’t believe how much more hair Will had less than 10 years ago. And they’re so much more restrained in their interview than Harry and Megan  were in theirs. 


BagLovingMom said:


> I didn’t see this posted , it’s a link to an article about designer Emilia Wickstead and some unflattering comments she reportedly made about the Duchess of Sussex’s wedding look.
> 
> https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/wor...-frank-comments-meghan-markle-s-wedding-dress


I’m not sure about the copy part, but she’s not wrong on the other points. Still, she should have known this was likely to get her in hot water.


----------



## ap.

Handbag1234 said:


> Her accent makes me cringe. It’s so false and old fashioned posh. She sounds ridiculous.



That may well be — I’m not arguing that fact. What I was curious about was @Jayne1 ’s point that it was recently acquired via a voice coach, which, if I understood her correctly, occurred post-marriage. 

Just to stay on the thread topic, I expect Meghan will pick up a little of the accent and colloquialisms of the people she’s most around. Add the fact that she’s probably better than the average bear at picking up accents due to her actor training — it’s only natural. I don’t think it’s putting on airs.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely agree, I'm British, Welsh actually where we have lots and lots of regional accents too. When people think of a Welsh accent they typically think we all speak like Catherine Zeta Jones ( before her fake American twang ) Tom Jones, Anthony Hopkins, Shirley Bassey. They are South Walian
> North Wales has lots of different accents, which are totally different to South Wales. Google Rhys Ifans, Robbie Savage, Mark Hughes and that'll cover some of them.


I spent the morning checking out the various Welsh accents and some are hard for me to understand! I never knew Anthony Hopkins real accent is Valleys.


Sharont2305 said:


> Perfect example of don't bite the hands that feed you. Catherine has worn a lot of her designs. Wonder if she will carry on


The thing is, Meghan’s Givenchy was more a nod to the Givenchy archives and less a copy of Emilia Wickstead.  EW should have done her research before commenting.

I also wondered if Kate and even Meghan (who wore one of her dresses) will continue to wear them.


----------



## Jayne1

apey_grapey said:


> That may well be — I’m not arguing that fact. What I was curious about was @Jayne1 ’s point that it was recently acquired via a voice coach, which, if I understood her correctly, occurred post-marriage.
> 
> Just to stay on the thread topic, I expect Meghan will pick up a little of the accent and colloquialisms of the people she’s most around. Add the fact that she’s probably better than the average bear at picking up accents due to her actor training — it’s only natural. I don’t think it’s putting on airs.


Apparently, it's been a work in progress and the public has been noticing with some disdain.

I'm also curious if Meghan will deliberately imitate or naturally adapt her new family's accent - or maybe try hard not to pick up RP or any English accent at all.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently, it's been a work in progress and the public has been noticing with some disdain.
> 
> I'm also curious if Meghan will deliberately imitate or naturally adapt her new family's accent - or maybe try hard not to pick up RP or any English accent at all.


I would think she'd just be herself and pick up the accent or not.  But she's an actress so what do I know?


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I would think she'd just be herself and pick up the accent or not.  But she's an actress so what do I know?


So true.  She already started wearing stockings and a neat bun, so who knows. lol


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> So true.  She alreayesdy started wearing stockings and a neat bun, so who knows. lol



she's an actress with the role of a lifetime


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I spent the morning checking out the various Welsh accents and some are hard for me to understand! I never knew Anthony Hopkins real accent is Valleys.
> QUOTE]
> Ha ha, thank you x


----------



## terebina786

My husband and his brother came to Canada 20 years ago.  Hubby lost his entire Indian accent but my BIL still has his and it’s strong.  I asked my husband how and he said he made himself adapt to sounding more Canadian.


----------



## VickyB

What I loved about the WIlliam/Kate interview is that he refers to her as KATE not Catherine. So very telling!!!!! Remember that once they were married all of a sudden it was announced that she actually has always gone by Catherine and William started calling her that in public going forward???? What BS!!!!!  I think is more pretentious than her slight accent change!!!!!!!! Of course it doesn't matter since so many still refer to her as Kate Middleton.


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> she's an actress with the role of a lifetime



Maybe she can take British accent lessons from Madonna!


----------



## Handbag1234

apey_grapey said:


> That may well be — I’m not arguing that fact. What I was curious about was @Jayne1 ’s point that it was recently acquired via a voice coach, which, if I understood her correctly, occurred post-marriage.
> 
> Just to stay on the thread topic, I expect Meghan will pick up a little of the accent and colloquialisms of the people she’s most around. Add the fact that she’s probably better than the average bear at picking up accents due to her actor training — it’s only natural. I don’t think it’s putting on airs.


It was a personal opinion comment not directed at you personally or anyone else on this thread.  I live near the Middleton’s, so hear lots of local gossip. A good friend of mine went to the same school too. Apparently Kate’s accent got posher every year!


----------



## redney

VickyB said:


> What I loved about the WIlliam/Kate interview is that he refers to her as KATE not Catherine. So very telling!!!!! Remember that once they were married all of a sudden it was announced that she actually has always gone by Catherine and William started calling her that in public going forward???? What BS!!!!!  I think is more pretentious than her slight accent change!!!!!!!! Of course it doesn't matter since so many still refer to her as Kate Middleton.


Wasn't it a directive from the palace for her wedding and official Duchess title that she is known by her given name, not a nickname? I've read she's "Kate" when not on official royal duties.


----------



## Jayne1

Handbag1234 said:


> It was a personal opinion comment not directed at you personally or anyone else on this thread.  I live near the Middleton’s, so hear lots of local gossip. A good friend of mine went to the same school too. Apparently Kate’s accent got posher every year!


Tell us anything you like!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ap.

Handbag1234 said:


> It was a personal opinion comment not directed at you personally or anyone else on this thread.  I live near the Middleton’s, so hear lots of local gossip. A good friend of mine went to the same school too. Apparently Kate’s accent got posher every year!



Sorry.  You quoted me, so I thought your comment was directed at me. 

Doesn’t matter.  I’m just following the conversation and asking questions when one pops in my head.


----------



## meluvs2shop

absolutpink said:


> I grew up in England but I live in Canada now and I sound 100% Canadian.


I spent sometime in Germany years ago and met a guy who grew up in Germany but went to college in the US. California to be exact. He sounded sooo American compared to his other german friends that spoke English. They clearly did not sound American.


----------



## VickyB

redney said:


> Wasn't it a directive from the palace for her wedding and official Duchess title that she is known by her given name, not a nickname? I've read she's "Kate" when not on official royal duties.



Could very well be.


----------



## mdcx

Handbag1234 said:


> It was a personal opinion comment not directed at you personally or anyone else on this thread.  I live near the Middleton’s, so hear lots of local gossip. A good friend of mine went to the same school too. Apparently Kate’s accent got posher every year!


Yay! I love insider info. It seems very obvious that the Middletons were social climbers with very high aspirations for marrying their girls well. Kate, sorry "Catherine" played her part very well


----------



## cafecreme15

Yes more inside gossip please Handbag!!


----------



## sdkitty

Handbag1234 said:


> It was a personal opinion comment not directed at you personally or anyone else on this thread.  I live near the Middleton’s, so hear lots of local gossip. A good friend of mine went to the same school too. Apparently Kate’s accent got posher every year!


I like her anyway.  Until I hear something really bad to change my mind, I'm gonna continue to like her


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I like her anyway.  Until I hear something really bad to change my mind, I'm gonna continue to like her


Same here. I live close to where she and William lived on Anglesey and can only say nice things about her. She's lovely.


----------



## myown

apey_grapey said:


> Just to stay on the thread topic, I expect Meghan will pick up a little of the accent and colloquialisms of the people she’s most around. Add the fact that she’s probably better than the average bear at picking up accents due to her actor training — it’s only natural. I don’t think it’s putting on airs.


I can't see what's wrong with that.
We moved 4 years ago, my husband has more to do with the people here than I do, he picked up so many regional words already.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

When I saw the wedding and George/Amal Clooney there I was confused why they'd be there... I figured Meghan wasn't big enough a star to know George and Amal would not have scored the invite. Then I read an article yesterday by chance... turns out George employs close friends of the royal family through his tequila company. The person who holds one of the highest positions at his company is the guy who is marrying Eugenie (Jack??). So chances are very high he'll be at that wedding with Amal too - so he's getting invites by being an employer to close friends of royals. Guess they're serving tequila at all the receptions and parties


----------



## chowlover2

ccbaggirl89 said:


> When I saw the wedding and George/Amal Clooney there I was confused why they'd be there... I figured Meghan wasn't big enough a star to know George and Amal would not have scored the invite. Then I read an article yesterday by chance... turns out George employs close friends of the royal family through his tequila company. The person who holds one of the highest positions at his company is the guy who is marrying Eugenie (Jack??). So chances are very high he'll be at that wedding with Amal too - so he's getting invites by being an employer to close friends of royals. Guess they're serving tequila at all the receptions and parties


I also read Amal reached out to Meghan when she first moved to London. Where to get her hair cut, manicures, etc.


----------



## Handbag1234

cafecreme15 said:


> Yes more inside gossip please Handbag!!


Haha! Pippa was a bit of a minx by all accounts


----------



## TMA

mdcx said:


> Yay! I love insider info. It seems very obvious that the Middletons were social climbers with very high aspirations for marrying their girls well. Kate, sorry "Catherine" played her part very well



I really find the use of the word “social climber” a head-scratcher. Every time I hear the word, it makes me feel that everyone who aspires to be a little more than the station they were born to in life is a social climber. I have kids and I am making certain choices about their schooling, their activities, etc in an attempt to open up more opportunities for them than I had. I wonder if in the future something awesome comes their way, my choices today will be viewed as social climbing?


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> I can't see what's wrong with that.
> We moved 4 years ago, my husband has more to do with the people here than I do, he picked up so many regional words already.


When I worked in the UK (London, Edinburgh & Dublin), my "accent" never changed (I'm from Connecticut .. where most DO NOT have an accent).  However, I did have to pick up on the slang and pronunciations of various words pretty quickly because otherwise, it became office fodder (_although in many cases, we all laughed about it_).  If anything, when in Scotland, I would hear "oh, we hate the Irish, but hate the Brits even more" .. and in Ireland, I would hear "oh, we hate the Scots, but hate the British even more"!  I used to laugh at that because I would then say, "well then, there are some similarities .. you both hate the British more"!  

Apparently, when Harry & Meghan were in Wales before the wedding, Meghan used the Brit pronunciation of _Scone_ as opposed to the American version and got crap about it.  From my perspective, when I am in a foreign country, I .. *a)* try to speak their native tongue and* b)* make sure to use their pronunciations.  I have found, especially in France, Italy and Belgium, they appreciate the effort!


----------



## cafecreme15

Handbag1234 said:


> Haha! Pippa was a bit of a minx by all accounts



Haha! What do you mean by minx? Wily, or cunning? That’s not a common descriptor in the US!


----------



## mdcx

TMA said:


> I really find the use of the word “social climber” a head-scratcher. Every time I hear the word, it makes me feel that everyone who aspires to be a little more than the station they were born to in life is a social climber. I have kids and I am making certain choices about their schooling, their activities, etc in an attempt to open up more opportunities for them than I had. I wonder if in the future something awesome comes their way, my choices today will be viewed as social climbing?


I don't think so. What you're describing is very normal and I do that too. What the Middleton's display is what I consider social climbing i.e. a concerted effort to improve their social class for the sake of status.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Glitterandstuds

I had to double check this was Meghan and Harry’s thread and not Kim


----------



## gazoo

TMA said:


> I really find the use of the word “social climber” a head-scratcher. Every time I hear the word, it makes me feel that everyone who aspires to be a little more than the station they were born to in life is a social climber. I have kids and I am making certain choices about their schooling, their activities, etc in an attempt to open up more opportunities for them than I had. I wonder if in the future something awesome comes their way, my choices today will be viewed as social climbing?



I don't think any parent can or should honestly wish their children remain stagnated. IMO, it would be negligent to be so. I say climb and reach for the stars. It's what I'm striving for with my children. Thankfully today it is easier to achieve than in bygone eras. The Middletons aren't the first or last to maneuver their offspring for maximum advantage. Slow clap from me.


----------



## Jayne1

Things will be very quiet until Meghan and Harry reappear.  

Notice how easy it is to disappear when they, and all celebrities, want to?


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Things will be very quiet until Meghan and Harry reappear.
> 
> Notice how easy it is to disappear when they, and all celebrities, want to?



Where do they go when they aren’t making public appearances? Do they ever leave Kensington Palace? Because it seems if they did then someone, somewhere would snag a photo


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> Where do they go when they aren’t making public appearances? Do they ever leave Kensington Palace? Because it seems if they did then someone, somewhere would snag a photo


I assumed they are on their honeymoon someplace unknown. Not Alberta obviously.


----------



## afsweet

I'll be honest, I'd be annoyed if I just became a Princess/Duchess and had to return all those gifts. Free stuff is exciting lol


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> I assumed they are on their honeymoon someplace unknown. Not Alberta obviously.


I wonder in general where they go. If they don’t have public engagements for a couple of weeks at a time and are not seen in public doing normal people stuff, then where are they hiding?


stephc005 said:


> I'll be honest, I'd be annoyed if I just became a Princess/Duchess and had to return all those gifts. Free stuff is exciting lol


The best free stuff is always given to people who don’t need it. It would have been better to donate all their gifts than merely return them to the sender.


----------



## Sharont2305

Next week the Duchess of Sussex will accompany the Queen on a day of engagements in Chester. I think there will be 3 engagements that day.
Well done Your Majesty.


----------



## bisousx

stephc005 said:


> I'll be honest, I'd be annoyed if I just became a Princess/Duchess and had to return all those gifts. Free stuff is exciting lol



Their entire life is free though, thanks to the taxpayers and/or private wealth from generations of ruling, chopping heads, being royalty.


----------



## Handbag1234

cafecreme15 said:


> Haha! What do you mean by minx? Wily, or cunning? That’s not a common descriptor in the US!


Oh I see! One example I’ve been told was Pippa behaving badly on a night out/flirting with all the men in a skimpy ‘fancy dress’ outfit at a private function (pre dating marriage of course) . An eye witness account was that the behaviour was ‘terrible’ all round and several guests tried to leave without paying their bill. ( not Pippa.)


----------



## bisousx

gazoo said:


> I don't think any parent can or should honestly wish their children remain stagnated. IMO, it would be negligent to be so. I say climb and reach for the stars. It's what I'm striving for with my children. Thankfully today it is easier to achieve than in bygone eras. The Middletons aren't the first or last to maneuver their offspring for maximum advantage. Slow clap from me.



There’s a lot of parents who push their daughters to strive to be their best based on their own accomplishments, not angling their girls to marry the richest or most famous man they can get themselves in arm’s reach of.


----------



## zen1965

Well said, bisousx!


----------



## BlueCherry

bisousx said:


> Their entire life is free though, thanks to the taxpayers and/or private wealth from generations of ruling, chopping heads, being royalty.



 and I’m English ...


----------



## gazoo

bisousx said:


> There’s a lot of parents who push their daughters to strive to be their best based on their own accomplishments, not angling their girls to marry the richest or most famous man they can get themselves in arm’s reach of.



Um, I never said the achievement was marrying the richest or most famous man or woman. I was responding to @TMA  musing that his or her choices for their children would see them labeled a social climber. The Middletons are self made, and sent their kids to better schools than they went to. They then married rich and connected men, but even if they hadn't married up, their education and their parent's choices gave them better opportunities. I don't see anything wrong with that.


----------



## queennadine

^^ Agreed. I think the snobby Brits who call(ed) the Middletons "social climbers" feel threatened and cling too much to their own titles and status.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> I wonder in general where they go. If they don’t have public engagements for a couple of weeks at a time and are not seen in public doing normal people stuff, then where are they hiding?


They have lots of homes (castles and palaces) to hang out in.

There's Buckingham Palace, which is their London residence and their country home is Windsor Castle. They have a Scottish castle called Holyrood and Irish castle called Hillsborough.

They summer at Balmoral, which is in the Highlands.  I think Prince Charles has his own palatial place on the Balmoral grounds.

They have a holiday home called Sandringham Estate, which is in Norfolk, England.

I remember when Charles and Diana got married and he loved to stay at Balmoral, which is in the Scottish highlands and paint and garden and Diana wouldn't stay there because she missed the city and shopping and paparazzi.  Those two were never going to work!

Anyway, since the Queen and Prince Philip seem to have carried out most of the royal duties, I assume Harry, William and Kate enjoy a lot of time off  living the royal  life in one of the family castles.

Someone from the UK please chime in!


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> They have lots of homes (castles and palaces) to hang out in.
> 
> There's Buckingham Palace, which is their London residence and their country home is Windsor Castle. They have a Scottish castle called Holyrood and Irish castle called Hillsborough.
> 
> They summer at Balmoral, which is in the Highlands.  I think Prince Charles has his own palatial place on the Balmoral grounds.
> 
> They have a holiday home called Sandringham Estate, which is in Norfolk, England.
> 
> I remember when Charles and Diana got married and he loved to stay at Balmoral, which is in the Scottish highlands and paint and garden and Diana wouldn't stay there because she missed the city and shopping and paparazzi.  Those two were never going to work!
> 
> Anyway, since the Queen and Prince Philip seem to have carried out most of the royal duties, I assume Harry, William and Kate enjoy a lot of time off  living the royal  life in one of the family castles.
> 
> Someone from the UK please chime in!


So I suppose when they are staying at other royal estates that they exclusively stay on the grounds? Or else I feel like there would be photos of them around the towns or wherever.


----------



## bisousx

gazoo said:


> Um, I never said the achievement was marrying the richest or most famous man or woman. I was responding to @TMA  musing that his or her choices for their children would see them labeled a social climber. The Middletons are self made, and sent their kids to better schools than they went to. They then married rich and connected men, but even if they hadn't married up, their education and their parent's choices *gave them better opportunities*. I don't see anything wrong with that.



Better opportunities to do what exactly? That was my point - in the case of Kate and Pippa, they went to fantastic schools only to return to working for their parents' companies part time and waiting for a proposal or waiting to be scooped up, doing a whole lotta nothing. Their parents' end game was for the girls to become socialities and marry well. Nothing wrong with that. It just needs to be called what it is. Social climbing.


----------



## Jayne1

bisousx said:


> Better opportunities to do what exactly? That was my point - in the case of Kate and Pippa, they went to fantastic schools only to return to working for their parents' companies part time and waiting for a proposal or waiting to be scooped up, doing a whole lotta nothing. Their parents' end game was for the girls to become socialities and marry well. Nothing wrong with that. It just needs to be called what it is. Social climbing.


That's a good point. They were sent to the best schools to find a husband. 

Pippa in particular, would not have found such a successful guy if her sister hadn't done it first! And she sure wouldn't have a book about party-planning.


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> So I suppose when they are staying at other royal estates that they exclusively stay on the grounds? Or else I feel like there would be photos of them around the towns or wherever.


Their palaces and castles have extensive grounds. Balmoral is 50,000 acres of wild Highlands and Sandringham is about 20,000 acres. So, for the royals who like to be outside, riding and gardening - it's a great place to spend time.

And it's not like they have to run out for a litre of milk or some peanut butter if they need anything.


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Their palaces and castles have extensive grounds. Balmoral is 50,000 acres of wild Highlands and Sandringham is about 20,000 acres. So, for the royals who like to be outside, riding and gardening - it's a great place to spend time.
> 
> And it's not like they have to run out for a litre of milk or some peanut butter if they need anything.



Very true! For a second I was thinking I feel bad that they are cooped up to avoid public scrutiny, but then I remembered I do not feel bad for any of them AT ALL.


----------



## mdcx

I am guessing Harry and Megs are really on their honeymoon somewhere in Africa.
ETA: sorry, when they honeymoon it will be there. Not sure when that will be.


----------



## PatsyCline

It was announced today that Meghan will be accompanying the Queen on a triple event later this month. 

Nothing like learning from the best!


----------



## myown

cafecreme15 said:


> So I suppose when they are staying at other royal estates that they exclusively stay on the grounds? Or else I feel like there would be photos of them around the towns or wherever.


the paparazzi lifestyle isn't as strong in europe as it is in the USA. A lot of celebs life in London or Paris and you hardly ever see paparazzi pictures of them. Also some Countries have laws against getting your pictures taken without your agreement


----------



## PatsyCline

myown said:


> the paparazzi lifestyle isn't as strong in europe as it is in the USA. A lot of celebs life in London or Paris and you hardly ever see paparazzi pictures of them. Also some Countries have laws against getting your pictures taken without your agreement


And that's the way it should be.  If you're out for an event, or some public appearance, fine, but if you're out doing personal things, you should be left alone.


----------



## anitalilac

bisousx said:


> There’s a lot of parents who push their daughters to strive to be their best based on their own accomplishments, not angling their girls to marry the richest or most famous man they can get themselves in arm’s reach of.


Yes!


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> the paparazzi lifestyle isn't as strong in europe as it is in the USA. A lot of celebs life in London or Paris and you hardly ever see paparazzi pictures of them. Also some Countries have laws against getting your pictures taken without your agreement


Which is why you have to wonder about the Diana frenzy and how she might have participated in it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

prettyprincess said:


> Maybe a little old fashioned modesty and ladylike behavior in today’s society is exactly what we need.


It's really annoying some keep going on and on about pantyhose! 
They are called tights here! And we average women in the UK have been wearing them for years and years! The weather here is simply not warm enough 3 seasons in a year to brave bare legs! It's very very normal here! And it's not just wore by "older" ladies either! Just because you don't wear them, doesn't mean nobody else in the world should wear them! And it's the UK where she will be living from now on, not in the U.S! So get used to it!


----------



## LibbyRuth

Jayne1 said:


> Which is why you have to wonder about the Diana frenzy and how she might have participated in it.


In many cases, the current laws were enacted in response to Diana's death.


----------



## Jayne1

LibbyRuth said:


> In many cases, the current laws were enacted in response to Diana's death.


Yes, but she did call her favourites. She desperately needed the attention, it seems.

I hope Meghan keeps her messy bun, which I love. We'll see, but she is already wearing stockings, not that I mind.  I like those too. It reminds me of a bygone era in the US and Canada. One that I think should never have left.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> They have lots of homes (castles and palaces) to hang out in.
> 
> There's Buckingham Palace, which is their London residence and their country home is Windsor Castle. They have a Scottish castle called Holyrood and Irish castle called Hillsborough.QUOTE]
> Buckingham Palace is the Queens London residence, Prince Charles and Camillas London residence is Clarence House which is practically next door to Buckingham Palace.
> Highgrove House near Tetbury, Gloucestershire, is the family home of Charles and Camilla.
> Birkhall is their private residence in Scotland. It is the former home of Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother on the Balmoral Estate.
> Llwynywermod, near Llandovery in Carmarthenshire, is their Welsh home.
> Holyrood and Hillsborough are more Government buildings, only used if they have any engagements in those areas, not used as holiday homes.


----------



## Sharont2305

Didn't quote properly on previous post.........
Buckingham Palace is the Queens London residence, Prince Charles and Camillas London residence is Clarence House which is practically next door to Buckingham Palace.
Highgrove House near Tetbury, Gloucestershire, is the family home of Charles and Camilla.
Birkhall is their private residence in Scotland. It is the former home of Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother on the Balmoral Estate.
Llwynywermod, near Llandovery in Carmarthenshire, is their Welsh home.
Holyrood and Hillsborough are more Government buildings, only used if they have any engagements in those areas, not used as holiday homes.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, but she did call her favourites. She desperately needed the attention, it seems.



The media was already obsessed with Diana long before she started using them. She took the "if you can't beat them, join them" approach. By contacting them and granting her own interviews and access to her for photos, she was able to wrest back some control over what they printed about her. That was one of the smartest things Diana did and showed how much she learned in her years as a celebrity.  They were going to write about her and photograph her anyway. Nothing wrong with making sure what they wrote/photographed was as acceptable to her as she could make it.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> That was one of the smartest things Diana did and *showed how much she learned in her years as a celebrity.  *They were going to write about her and photograph her anyway. Nothing wrong with making sure what they wrote/photographed was as acceptable to her as she could make it.


That's exactly what Prince Philip and the Queen strongly disliked.  She made herself a celebrity.

Meghan could probably be a celebrity if she wished, but I bet she remembers she has a role in the monarchy and the attention should go to what she represents and not herself.

I don't think Diana was smart about that, I think she was short-sighted and made her her own life miserable.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> That's exactly what Prince Philip and the Queen strongly disliked.  She made herself a celebrity.
> 
> Meghan could probably be a celebrity if she wished, but I bet she remembers she has a role in the monarchy and the attention should go to what she represents and not herself.
> 
> I don't think Diana was smart about that, I think she was short-sighted and made her her own life miserable.



She was a celebrity from the moment she accepted Charles' proposal. She didn't make herself one. I'm surprised you think so. Charles had the reputation of not being very relatable, or even that likable, to the public and Diana was. As to what Prince Philip and the Queen expected of her, they wanted her to be quiet and have babies. That's not a life anyone needs to settle for.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> She was a celebrity from the moment she accepted Charles' proposal. She didn't make herself one. I'm surprised you think so. Charles had the reputation of not being very relatable, or even that likable, to the public and Diana was. As to what Prince Philip and the Queen expected of her, they wanted her to be quiet and have babies. That's not a life anyone needs to settle for.


But she chose to do that and she should have settled.  It's a role and a duty she agreed to and Diana made it all abut herself.  

Like Kate, who also chose. They weren't born into it. Except Kate is being the perfect princess and Diana wanted more attention. 

It _is _possible to keep a low profile. But she hated summering at Balmoral with her husband, for example. No one takes your picture somewhere within the private 50,000 acres of wild Highlands, unless you do the odd press conference to pose. She wanted to be in the city where the shopping and action was.


----------



## daisychainz

Diana was supposed to one day be a queen, and as much interest as there may be in Meghan she will never generate that same level of interest because she is not going anywhere higher than her current title. I think as the years pass, the interest will shift heavily back to Kate and Camilla more than anything, because those are the two women that will hold higher titles. There is no doubt Meghan will be followed as a result of her celebrity and background, and when she gets pregnant/has children, but I do see her fading into the background and just being a royal wife.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> Diana was supposed to one day be a queen, and as much interest as there may be in Meghan she will never generate that same level of interest because she is not going anywhere higher than her current title. I think as the years pass, the interest will shift heavily back to Kate and Camilla more than anything, because those are the two women that will hold higher titles. There is no doubt Meghan will be followed as a result of her celebrity and background, and when she gets pregnant/has children, but I do see her fading into the background and just being a royal wife.


Agree, In time once Charles, then William become King and George, Charlotte and Louis have grown up and start having families she will on the same level as Sophie, Countess of Wessex. At the time of her wedding she would have been higher in the Royal ladies ranking than she is now.... The Queen, The Queen Mother, Princess Anne and her.


----------



## ebonyeleven

I don't see Meghan fading into the background or just becoming a royal wife. It has been said that when Charles is King his immediate family will be front and center at engagements. I think basically his brothers and their wives and even his sister will have less roles. William and Kate Harry and Meghan along with Camilla will have most of the work at least until
George , Charlotte and Louis can take on engagements. It is said he wants to stream line the royal family.


----------



## pixiejenna

For the love of God please someone post pics so I can stop seeing kimbos awful diaper booty in the thread pictures [emoji31]


----------



## bisousx

Meghan won’t fade from the spotlight. She’s the most attractive royal.... some may even dare to say she’s the only attractive royal. Besides Harry, of course.


----------



## mdcx

Cute pic of Megs and Kate just for fun:


----------



## gelbergirl

next Invictus Games for sick and injured military service men and women will be in The Hague, Netherlands, in 2020








Prince Harry took a break during his honeymoon to announce that the next Invictus Games for sick and injured military service men and women will be in The Hague, Netherlands, in 2020 and will be held every two years for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Suzie

gelbergirl said:


> next Invictus Games for sick and injured military service men and women will be in The Hague, Netherlands, in 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry took a break during his honeymoon to announce that the next Invictus Games for sick and injured military service men and women will be in The Hague, Netherlands, in 2020 and will be held every two years for the foreseeable future.


The next one is in Sydney in October, but it is the next one after that, happy we get to see them both down under soon.


----------



## myown

I can't wait to see their babies. I bet they make the most beautiful ones. Also my guess is their start soon-ish


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

gelbergirl said:


> next Invictus Games for sick and injured military service men and women will be in The Hague, Netherlands, in 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry took a break during his honeymoon to announce that the next Invictus Games for sick and injured military service men and women will be in The Hague, Netherlands, in 2020 and will be held every two years for the foreseeable future.



Announced from a honeymoon location still unknown?


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> I can't wait to see their babies. I bet they make the most beautiful ones. Also my guess is their start soon-ish


I originally thought an announcement by October with a due date of April, but now I'm thinking that they may wait to try till after the Invictus Games in Sydney in October combined with a tour of the rest of Australia, New Zealand the islands of the Pacific. 
I think I've been over thinking this, can you tell?


----------



## Sharont2305

Trooping the Colour on Saturday, first time we will see them together on the balcony. I'm wondering if we will see George and Charlotte in a carriage this year. Usually Catherine is in a carriage with Camilla and Harry....William is on horseback along with Charles. This year I'm hoping that Meghan will either be with Catherine, Camilla and obviously Harry or we will have the newlyweds in their own carriage and the children with Catherine and Camilla.


----------



## mkr

pixiejenna said:


> For the love of God please someone post pics so I can stop seeing kimbos awful diaper booty in the thread pictures [emoji31]


----------



## mkr

https://giphy.com/gifs/prince-DVHrK100eH3J6


----------



## mkr

Rats my GIF didn’t load


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I originally thought an announcement by October with a due date of April, but now I'm thinking that they may wait to try till after the Invictus Games in Sydney in October combined with a tour of the rest of Australia, New Zealand the islands of the Pacific.
> I think I've been over thinking this, can you tell?


for what it's worth the talking heads on TV seemed to think at the time of the wedding they'd get to work on it right away.  She's not getting any younger.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> for what it's worth the talking heads on TV seemed to think at the time of the wedding they'd get to work on it right away.  She's not getting any younger.


That was my initial thinking, definitely a baby before their first anniversary. I hope so anyway.


----------



## Vanilla Bean

mkr said:


> https://giphy.com/gifs/prince-DVHrK100eH3J6


Swoon...fanning self.


----------



## Bentley1

bisousx said:


> Meghan won’t fade from the spotlight. She’s the most attractive royal.... some may even dare to say she’s the only attractive royal. Besides Harry, of course.


Is Kate not considered attractive? Genuinely curious. I do think she was a very pretty girl but seems to have aged a great deal and become somewhat matronly. Overall I think she's pretty, but not the type of pretty that draws attention, which is exactly how they want her to present I'm sure. Blend right in.


----------



## mkr

I think she is attractive. But it looks like she does her own makeup and she’s not very good at it.


----------



## bisousx

Bentley1 said:


> Is Kate not considered attractive? Genuinely curious. I do think she was a very pretty girl but seems to have aged a great deal and become somewhat matronly. Overall I think she's pretty, but not the type of pretty that draws attention, which is exactly how they want her to present I'm sure. Blend right in.



Many say Kate is average and nothing special. She does look like the image of a perfect royal though, very conservative, poised and like you said - matronly. I don’t think she’d have any trouble in the dating world. But she’s not beautiful like Meghan, where some girls are so stunning that you can’t help but stare.


----------



## Jayne1

Bentley1 said:


> Is Kate not considered attractive? Genuinely curious. I do think she was a very pretty girl but seems to have aged a great deal and become somewhat matronly. Overall I think she's pretty, but not the type of pretty that draws attention, which is exactly how they want her to present I'm sure. Blend right in.


Kate is extremely attractive and so skinny, she looks fabulous in her clothes... but the clothes are boring because she must be respectful of her position.  She's great at her job, when she does it, that is.

Meghan is far more interesting and also really pretty and I think the public will be interested in her for a long time. _Unless_ she goes the route of Sophie, Countess of Wessex, who was never interesting, but even less so now.   Not even interesting when she had that Diana haircut.


----------



## RueMonge

Jayne1 said:


> Kate is extremely attractive and so skinny, she looks fabulous in her clothes... but the clothes are boring because she must be respectful of her position.  She's great at her job, when she does it, that is.



She excelled at having babies.  I'd think she'd get a break from other jobs for a while.


----------



## Sharont2305

Close up with no or barely there make up her skin is fantastic, but yes I think her make up is very ageing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

RueMonge said:


> She excelled at having babies.  I'd think she'd get a break from other jobs for a while.


The Royals aren't supposed to be like us. They have a duty to perform, for which they get to live like, well, royalty.


----------



## Bentley1

bisousx said:


> Many say Kate is average and nothing special. She does look like the image of a perfect royal though, very conservative, poised and like you said - matronly. I don’t think she’d have any trouble in the dating world. But she’s not beautiful like Meghan, where some girls are so stunning that you can’t help but stare.


Yes she is definitely fulfilling her role as the perfect royal wife. 
Curious to see if Meghan goes the route of toning down her attractiveness, especially once she has kids.


----------



## Bentley1

Jayne1 said:


> Kate is extremely attractive and so skinny, she looks fabulous in her clothes... but the clothes are boring because she must be respectful of her position.  She's great at her job, when she does it, that is.
> 
> Meghan is far more interesting and also really pretty and I think the public will be interested in her for a long time. _Unless_ she goes the route of Sophie, Countess of Wessex, who was never interesting, but even less so now.   Not even interesting when she had that Diana haircut.


I find Meghan more interesting as well for the time being. Kate's been that perfect princess from the minute she was engaged and has just blended into that family and churned out her children . Wondering if Megan Will go the matronly, stepford wife route once she has kids.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Neither Kate nor Meghan are particularly beautiful IMO, but they are both pretty and smiley. They are the kind of generic, pleasantly, unassumingly attractive that is ideal for a royal. Someone who was particularly alluring or vivacious would probably face harsher criticism in the role.


----------



## sdkitty

Bentley1 said:


> Is Kate not considered attractive? Genuinely curious. I do think she was a very pretty girl but seems to have aged a great deal and become somewhat matronly. Overall I think she's pretty, but not the type of pretty that draws attention, which is exactly how they want her to present I'm sure. Blend right in.


I think Kate is very attractive.  Slender, nice hair, nice features.  Just because Meaghan has come along and is different looking - not a typical English woman - shouldn't take anything away from Kate IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

Who really thinks royalty have to be attractive? History has proven that is not the case. 

Real royals are not Disney princes/princesses. They look more like average people than Hollywood stars.


----------



## mdcx

myown said:


> I can't wait to see their babies. I bet they make the most beautiful ones. Also my guess is their start soon-ish


Yes! They will be some gorgeous children.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan is stunning. The first time i saw her on Suits my jaw dropped. She just has this aura and energy. You want to smile when you see her.
Kate is very attractive but a lot more self-contained. She has a lot of restrictions on her dress, appearance, grooming. Those won't apply quite so harshly to Meghan so I think she will remain "herself" more.


----------



## cafecreme15

mdcx said:


> Meghan is stunning. The first time i saw her on Suits my jaw dropped. She just has this aura and energy. You want to smile when you see her.
> Kate is very attractive but a lot more self-contained. She has a lot of restrictions on her dress, appearance, grooming. Those won't apply quite so harshly to Meghan so I think she will remain "herself" more.


I certainly hope so! Though her staid look at the garden party doesn't exactly inspire my confidence. Hopefully she will find her comfort zone as time goes on.


----------



## Jayne1

Bentley1 said:


> I find Meghan more interesting as well for the time being. Kate's been that perfect princess from the minute she was engaged and has just blended into that family and churned out her children . Wondering if Megan Will go the matronly, stepford wife route once she has kids.


Funny, I think Stepford too, when I think of Kate. The book or the original movie, not the second. That one made no sense.  lol


----------



## threadbender

I do think Meghan is pretty, attractive but I do not find her stunning. Then again, we all have different tastes. I think Kate is quite pretty, as well.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I don’t think either Kate or Meghan stunning. Both have friendly faces, natural beauty, and aren’t so stunning they would attract attention for the wrong reasons. Which is kind of perfect to fit in to the BRF.

I just think Meghan has aged a bit better, though. However, I think she’s been more accustomed to taking care of her skin due to the demands of being an actress in Hollywood. At 36, I would probably obsess about it since it’s such a competitive business.

I have a feeling Meghan will become stepford in no time. Which is sad, but kind of expected. She will always stand out due to her mixed ethnicity. I a good way.


----------



## myown

Bentley1 said:


> Is Kate not considered attractive? Genuinely curious. I do think she was a very pretty girl *but seems to have aged a great deal *and become somewhat matronly. Overall I think she's pretty, but not the type of pretty that draws attention, which is exactly how they want her to present I'm sure. Blend right in.


when Louis was born all those pictures came up of her stepping out the hospital with George and Charlotte. She was so youthful back then. I know its 4? 5? years ago with George, but she aged a lot more


----------



## DC-Cutie

bag-mania said:


> Who really thinks royalty have to be attractive? History has proven that is not the case.
> 
> Real royals are not Disney princes/princesses. They look more like average people than Hollywood stars.



I agree because Eugenie and Beatrice both have rather unique looking faces, very pedestrian


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> Who really thinks royalty have to be attractive? History has proven that is not the case.
> 
> Real royals are not Disney princes/princesses. They look more like average people than Hollywood stars.



For real!!  Looking at some of them at the wedding they better thank their lucky stars they are royal because that’s all they have going for them and attractive to a man!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

I think Eugenie is very attractive, she certainly looks like her father who was considered quite good looking in his younger days. She also reminds me of a young Queen Mother.


----------



## sdkitty

DC-Cutie said:


> I agree because Eugenie and Beatrice both have rather unique looking faces, very pedestrian


those two seem to have gotten the worst from both parents facial features.....sorry, I guess to be fair they're average looking but something about them is very unappealing to me


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I think Eugenie is very attractive, she certainly looks like her father who was considered quite good looking in his younger days. She also reminds me of a young Queen Mother.


sometimes features that look good on a man don't look so attractive on a female......some of the Kennedys are examples of this


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> I think Eugenie is very attractive, she certainly looks like her father who was considered quite good looking in his younger days. She also reminds me of a young Queen Mother.


So, now that you mention Andrew being the better looking sibling. Wasn't there a rumour that Lord Porchester was the father? There certainly is a resemblance. Philip always did his own thing, while being a good husband, so I don't feel sorry for him at all.

It's said that the Queen favours Andrew, even though he's a bit useless. Could be why. She was very close to Porchester. She favours Harry too, now that I think about it. Understanding from a personal perspective? lol


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> when Louis was born all those pictures came up of her stepping out the hospital with George and Charlotte. She was so youthful back then. I know its 4? 5? years ago with George, but she aged a lot more


She is incredibly thin. (As I mentioned, her clothes look fabulous on her as a result.) That's why she looks so pretty when pregnant - it adds a bit of fullness to her face.  But otherwise, her thinness makes her look a bit gaunt in the face?

Just wondering if that could be it.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> So, now that you mention Andrew being the better looking sibling. Wasn't there a rumour that Lord Porchester was the father? There certainly is a resemblance. Philip always did his own thing, while being a good husband, so I don't feel sorry for him at all.
> 
> It's said that the Queen favours Andrew, even though he's a bit useless. Could be why. She was very close to Porchester. She favours Harry too, now that I think about it. Understanding from a personal perspective? lol


you never know with people but the queen doesn't seem like the type to have an affair to me.  And I thought Phillip was her great love.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> She is incredibly thin. (As I mentioned, her clothes look fabulous on her as a result.) That's why she looks so pretty when pregnant - it adds a bit of fullness to her face.  But otherwise, her thinness makes her look a bit gaunt in the face?
> 
> Just wondering if that could be it.


Agree, she looks fantastic when pregnant, she suits a curvier figure


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Philip always did his own thing/QUOTE]
> That's true


----------



## Bentley1

myown said:


> when Louis was born all those pictures came up of her stepping out the hospital with George and Charlotte. She was so youthful back then. I know its 4? 5? years ago with George, but she aged a lot more


She looked so young, almost had a baby face at that point still & still seemed full of life. At times she can look vacant and tired. She's a pretty woman, imo, but has physically changed a lot since getting married and she's not even old.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> you never know with people but the queen doesn't seem like the type to have an affair to me.  And I thought Phillip was her great love.


Well, he certainly was her first love, but after a few kids and a wandering husband (but faithful to his duties) she did become even better friends with Lord Porchester. Not saying the Queen and Philip didn't have a great relationship though. It is how things have been done in the royal family.

Since Andrew, in his younger days, was better looking and not similar to his brothers and sister, it was a rumour that started. Andrew does resemble Porchester somewhat. And  his mother of course.


----------



## bag-princess

Bentley1 said:


> She looked so young, almost had a baby face at that point still & still seemed full of life. At times she can look vacant and tired. *She's a pretty woman, imo, but has physically changed a lot since getting married and she's not even old*.




3 kids close in age and very difficult pregnancies will do it!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry heading to a gym in London


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the OnSide Youth Zones Gala


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry heading to a gym in London
> 
> View attachment 4092628
> View attachment 4092629
> View attachment 4092630
> View attachment 4092632
> View attachment 4092634
> View attachment 4092631
> View attachment 4092633



Are these from today? They’re back from their mini moon in Ireland?


----------



## Morgan R

cafecreme15 said:


> Are these from today? They’re back from their mini moon in Ireland?



Yes they are from today. Both the pictures of him heading to the gym and him at a gala event are from today.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry heading to a gym in London
> 
> View attachment 4092628
> View attachment 4092629
> View attachment 4092630
> View attachment 4092632
> View attachment 4092634
> View attachment 4092631
> View attachment 4092633


He touces his face soo much!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry heading to a gym in London
> 
> View attachment 4092628
> View attachment 4092629
> View attachment 4092630
> View attachment 4092632
> View attachment 4092634
> View attachment 4092631
> View attachment 4092633


Don't the royals have a gym at home? Seems like these are photo ops more than anything. They can stay at home and do yoga or whatever.


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Don't the royals have a gym at home? Seems like these are photo ops more than anything. They can stay at home and do yoga or whatever.


I don't think it would enter Harry's head to do photo ops, nor William, given what happened to their mum.
Given the size of Kensington Palace, with all the Royals that have apartments there, the offices and state rooms, and the part the public can visit, I don't think there would be room for a full gym. He lives in a two bedroom cottage within the grounds so can't see that he would have one.
Catherine has taken George, and now Charlotte most probably over to Buckingham Palace to use the swimming poll there.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry at the OnSide Youth Zones Gala
> 
> View attachment 4092658
> View attachment 4092657
> View attachment 4092656
> View attachment 4092655
> View attachment 4092659



he is such a Sweetheart  and he seems in good shape


----------



## minababe

cafecreme15 said:


> Are these from today? They’re back from their mini moon in Ireland?


mini ? they were 2 weeks in honeymoon. that's pretty normal imo


----------



## myown

bag-princess said:


> For real!!  Looking at some of them at the wedding they better thank their lucky stars they are royal because that’s all they have going for them and attractive to a man!


and then you read those kind of stories along the lines "the next hot royal bachelor" or "where did harrys cousin xxx hid?"


----------



## cafecreme15

minababe said:


> mini ? they were 2 weeks in honeymoon. that's pretty normal imo



Only called it ‘mini’ since that’s what the media’s been calling it. And it wasn’t two weeks I don’t believe. I guess the world is anticipating they will do another, longer honeymoon in a more exotic location?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.in...nimoon-in-ireland-after-wedding-36724030.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...-harry-meghan-markle-ashford-castle-mayo/amp/


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Prince Harry at the OnSide Youth Zones Gala


----------



## mkr

jcnc said:


> He touces his face soo much!



The photos were taken in rapid succession. Those photos were all taken in like 3 seconds.


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> More pictures of Prince Harry at the OnSide Youth Zones Gala
> 
> View attachment 4093349
> View attachment 4093348
> View attachment 4093344
> View attachment 4093346
> View attachment 4093345
> View attachment 4093347


I love that he has broken the mold and decided to wear a wedding band.


----------



## absolutpink

cafecreme15 said:


> I love that he has broken the mold and decided to wear a wedding band.



Agreed! And, how good does that look on his finger?!


----------



## Sharont2305

absolutpink said:


> Agreed! And, how good does that look on his finger?!


Looks fantastic, and he looks so radiant


----------



## Tivo

cafecreme15 said:


> I love that he has broken the mold and decided to wear a wedding band.


He is head over heels in love.


----------



## PatsyCline

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry at the OnSide Youth Zones Gala
> 
> View attachment 4092658
> View attachment 4092657
> View attachment 4092656
> View attachment 4092655
> View attachment 4092659



Wonder where Meghan is, taking duchess lessons?


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Megan Markle attend the Trooping the Colour.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

Now that’s what I’m talking about! Loving this look. I think the asymmetrical big buttons and neckline make this different and fun. I wish we could see the whole thing without the balcony in the way. She looks so poised and comfortable riding in the carriage already, and her makeup is so fresh and lovely.


----------



## absolutpink

They both look so happy and radiant!


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Prince Harry and Megan Markle attending Trooping the Colour


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> More pictures of Prince Harry and Megan Markle attending Trooping the Colour
> 
> View attachment 4094540
> View attachment 4094483
> View attachment 4094484
> View attachment 4094485
> View attachment 4094497
> View attachment 4094487
> View attachment 4094486
> View attachment 4094488
> View attachment 4094489
> View attachment 4094490


I cannot get over how radiant and fresh Kate looks!


----------



## Lady1mport

cafecreme15 said:


> I cannot get over how radiant and fresh Kate looks!


She's a beauty!


----------



## GoStanford

They all look great, including the cute grandkids/greatgrandkids lined up across the front.  Meghan's hair and makeup look terrific.  The outfit and hat are tailored perfectly, but I don't know if champagne blush in a cut like this is what she typically would have worn pre-wedding.  It all works with the clothing choices of the other ladies in the family for the event, though, and they probably do have to present a somewhat unified fashion look.

Nice to see Peter Phillips and his wife, Autumn, and their family.  They aren't photographed as often.  Autumn's hat is spectacular!


----------



## cafecreme15

Lady1mport said:


> She's a beauty!


So nice to see especially because I think she has been looking matronly and haggard as of late (understandable, considering she just came off another difficult pregnancy)



GoStanford said:


> They all look great, including the cute grandkids/greatgrandkids lined up across the front.  Meghan's hair and makeup look terrific.  The outfit and hat are tailored perfectly, but I don't know if champagne blush in a cut like this is what she typically would have worn pre-wedding.  It all works with the clothing choices of the other ladies in the family for the event, though, and they probably do have to present a somewhat unified fashion look.
> 
> Nice to see Peter Phillips and his wife, Autumn, and their family.  They aren't photographed as often.  Autumn's hat is spectacular!


I totally agree with you! It is a different look from what we would have seen Meghan Markle the fiancee wear, but it is still pushing back on tradition just enough to be interesting, but not too much so as to create a ruckus.


----------



## VickyB

Like the color of the suite, her makeup and hat. The design of the suite doesn't work for me. The hair is awful.
Enough with the giggling and covering mouth. Even the children on the balcony weren't doing that.


----------



## PatsyCline

VickyB said:


> Like the color of the suite, her makeup and hat. The design of the suite doesn't work for me. The hair is awful.
> Enough with the giggling and covering mouth. Even the children on the balcony weren't doing that.



They’re newlyweds, they’re sharing something between them, what’s the problem?

And what’s wrong with her hair? It’s loose and natural.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VickyB said:


> Like the color of the suite, her makeup and hat. The design of the suite doesn't work for me. The hair is awful.
> Enough with the giggling and covering mouth. Even the children on the balcony weren't doing that.


It's her first time, she's probably all excited over everything. At least it's real emotion and not acting


----------



## ap.

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and Megan Markle attend the Trooping the Colour.
> 
> View attachment 4094289
> 
> View attachment 4094277
> View attachment 4094276
> 
> View attachment 4094273
> View attachment 4094275
> 
> View attachment 4094280
> View attachment 4094288
> View attachment 4094314
> View attachment 4094310
> View attachment 4094312



I wonder if the Queen (or someone) talked to Meghan about too much pda.  I'm surprised there's not a picture with them holding hands or her holding on to Harry's arm.


----------



## A1aGypsy

This all looks very much like, “okay, I’ve had my third child and a bit of sleep finally, you’ve had your wedding, I’m now taking back centre stage thankyouverymuch” lol. Kate looks great. And so tall!!


----------



## gazoo

I enjoy reading the comments here as much as seeing the photos. I've never thought or known that giggling and covering of one's mouth is something one shouldn't do after a certain age. It's a no-no? It's something that I see often in "youthful" people, no matter their age. Is it grating for some? I'd really like to know why it's a common complaint. I've seen the same commentary in other comment sections of articles apart from tPF. Victoria Beckham is a stone and slammed for that. I'm so curious about this.

I think both Meghan and Harry are fidgeters. She touches her hair constantly and he is always tucking his fingers into his jacket or touching his face. Mannerisms make us each different, IMO. My dad was always on my case about swinging my legs when sat down. He was right, it's distracting and doesn't look polished. I guess the same applies for the other mannerisms on display here by Meghan?  

Nice to see the family on the balcony. Missed seeing Philip with the Queen though.

You're right @apey_grapey , the marked lack of PDA hints that someone was told off for it. Even in the carriage they weren't touching.


----------



## cafecreme15

apey_grapey said:


> I wonder if the Queen (or someone) talked to Meghan about too much pda.  I'm surprised there's not a picture with them holding hands or her holding on to Harry's arm.


Someone must have, either the Queen or the Queen's aid giving her duchess lessons. The constant touching and public proclaiming "he's mine!!" was undignified.


----------



## cafecreme15

gazoo said:


> I enjoy reading the comments here as much as seeing the photos. I've never thought or known that giggling and covering of one's mouth is something one shouldn't do after a certain age. It's a no-no? It's something that I see often in "youthful" people, no matter their age. Is it grating for some? I'd really like to know why it's a common complaint. I've seen the same commentary in other comment sections of articles apart from tPF. Victoria Beckham is a stone and slammed for that. I'm so curious about this.
> 
> I think both Meghan and Harry are fidgeters. She touches her hair constantly and he is always tucking his fingers into his jacket or touching his face. Mannerisms make us each different, IMO. My dad was always on my case about swinging my legs when sat down. He was right, it's distracting and doesn't look polished. I guess the same applies for the other mannerisms on display here by Meghan?
> 
> Nice to see the family on the balcony. Missed seeing Philip with the Queen though.
> 
> You're right @apey_grapey , the marked lack of PDA hints that someone was told off for it. Even in the carriage they weren't touching.


I was thinking to myself earlier when I watched the Queen ride into the Palace in her carriage without Philip if that made her sad. It must certainly be on her mind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

cafecreme15 said:


> Someone must have, either the Queen or the Queen's aid giving her duchess lessons. The constant touching and public proclaiming "he's mine!!" was undignified.



I noticed that her smile was subdued during her appearance today. I guess she is starting to conform to the mold of the BRF.

Personally, I do find the giggling and touching of the hair distracting. As a professional actress and seemingly smart young woman, I am sure she had scoped out “her role” of a lifetime and would know this is not customary for the firm?


----------



## gazoo

A1aGypsy said:


> This all looks very much like, “okay, I’ve had my third child and a bit of sleep finally, you’ve had your wedding, I’m now taking back centre stage thankyouverymuch” lol. Kate looks great. And so tall!!



I'd bet nothing is accidental with this crew, so her placement at center in some of the key photos and elsewhere today was likely the Queen making sure Kate got some shine. I wonder if Meghan was asked to wear a contrasting shade to mark her place for the crowds as well. She does stand out amongst all that blue.

And I know the uniforms all have meaning, but I REALLY wish Harry had worn this uniform instead of that other one on his wedding day. He looks far more dashing today.

All in all it feels like the Queen is making sure all the ladies get their fair share of attention. Feels really thoughtful somehow, or I'm just feeling sappy today. It's so nice to see Charles looking so relaxed and frankly adoring of both his daughters-in-law. I've not been a fan of his, but this side of him is wearing me down.


----------



## mkr

Where was Prince Phillip?


----------



## cafecreme15

mkr said:


> Where was Prince Phillip?



He’s retired from official royal duties and doesn’t appear at public or state occasions like this anymore, only personal ones (the royal wedding)


----------



## terebina786

This is her job now so I agree, enough of the giggling.  Not saying she can’t smile and wave but if I behaved the way she did with clients or in meetings in a work environment, I wouldn’t be taken seriously.  JMO.

The colour and cut of her suit is great and so his her makeup.


----------



## Irishgal

VickyB said:


> Dunno. That doesn't sound like much to me when you factor in all the hours of eye damage he's doing to photoshop that bag of damage she calls an a$$.



And in southern calif that isn’t a lot at all. I think 80k for a family of 4 is considered an extremely low income and would qualify for some government assistance given the high COL.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

apey_grapey said:


> I wonder if the Queen (or someone) talked to Meghan about too much pda.  I'm surprised there's not a picture with them holding hands or her holding on to Harry's arm.


I noted that too, especially in the carriage. I figured b/c he was in gloves?


----------



## VickyB

PatsyCline said:


> They’re newlyweds, they’re sharing something between them, what’s the problem?
> 
> And what’s wrong with her hair? It’s loose and natural.



I have no issue with them sharing something between themselves. I'm not a fan of her mannerisms.
I think the hair is fine if she was competing in some Beauty Pageant or was on a soap - not for a a formal occasion such as this. Also, don't think it suited the hat she wore either. Only my opinion.

Kate looks marvelous!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VickyB said:


> I have no issue with them sharing something between themselves. I'm not a fan of her mannerisms.
> I think the hair is fine if she was competing in some Beauty Pageant or was on a soap - not for a a formal occasion such as this. Also, don't think it suited the hat she wore either. Only my opinion.
> 
> Kate looks marvelous!


Here is a pic of Kate at her very first trooping... I think it takes time to get a look right and know how to dress like a royal. I think Meghan looked so-so, the off the shoulder dress was less appropriate than the hair imo. But look at Kate, her hair was all down and flowing too, the first time. Maybe she took a look at what Kate did and copied - I'm sure someone is helping her?


----------



## peppermintpatty

William looks so stern when he looks at George. A lot of the time. I would imagine they have to have the children behave, I just wish he would look less stern. George is adorable and only 4 I believe.


----------



## mkr

William is looking down so I think it just looks worse than it really is.


----------



## PatsyCline

VickyB said:


> I have no issue with them sharing something between themselves. I'm not a fan of her mannerisms.
> I think the hair is fine if she was competing in some Beauty Pageant or was on a soap - not for a a formal occasion such as this. Also, don't think it suited the hat she wore either. Only my opinion.
> 
> Kate looks marvelous!


Give her time, she's only been on the 'job' for a month.  

Can't wait for her trip with the Queen next week. She'll be learning from the best.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Kate looks fabulous. Meghan looks nice, but I don't love the suit on her and I agree she definitely needs some decorum training.


----------



## mdcx

I would guess Meghan is incredibly nervous and that sometimes makes people giggle and fidget. She is getting there. Her look has been "smoothed out" a bit since the wedding. 

Again, she now has little to no control over her dress/grooming for these big required public events. And the palace may not have hairdressers who are skilled in styling her hair type which is naturally very curly I think. They may have also wanted a contrast between her hair being down and Kates being up.

Older pics of Meghan:


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I think her hair looks great, personally. Better than it did at the wedding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think her hair looks great, personally. Better than it did at the wedding.


I wonder if she will ever wear it more "natural" with the curl and texture showing. That would be amazing.


----------



## ap.

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I noted that too, especially in the carriage. I figured b/c he was in gloves?



Weren't they holding hands after the wedding; I think he had gloves on then.  I read somewhere (I forget which publication; it was probably in the Apple News app) that Harry has sometimes discouraged all the hand-holding and hanging-on in public by putting his hands behind his back.  I have a feeling it's just generally frowned upon in the Royal Family during official appearances and she was informed of that fact now that she's in the clan.


----------



## VickyB

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Here is a pic of Kate at her very first trooping... I think it takes time to get a look right and know how to dress like a royal. I think Meghan looked so-so, the off the shoulder dress was less appropriate than the hair imo. But look at Kate, her hair was all down and flowing too, the first time. Maybe she took a look at what Kate did and copied - I'm sure someone is helping her?



Yes! And finally she lopped off a few inches and looks so much fresher and modern!


----------



## Grande Latte

Kate was stunning in that baby blue. I'm sorry but Meghan looked washed out in that blush color and her curls are a bit tight. The suit and the silhouette are fine, but it's the color that isn't flattering on her. Meghan wears white beautifully, and I think she can rock baby colors too, but not that muted, faded, pale nude, not-pink color!!!

Kate took my breath away.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> I wonder if she will ever wear it more "natural" with the curl and texture showing. That would be amazing.


It would be nice but I doubt it'll ever happen. I've watched Suits for 7 years and it was never anything but stick straight, ever. I think that's the look now and it's never changing... it'd be nice to see, though. As a curly girl myself I know it's much less work to just live with your curls natural rather than go through the hassle of straightening all the time, it's a serious chore


----------



## Grande Latte

I think this picture sort of captures the royal dynamics at this juncture. Kate is in charge. She is the new power. I don't know what Meghan looks like. I hate to say this, but she looks like she doesn't even belong there.


----------



## cafecreme15

Grande Latte said:


> I think this picture sort of captures the royal dynamics at this juncture. Kate is in charge. She is the new power. I don't know what Meghan looks like. I hate to say this, but she looks like she doesn't even belong there.
> 
> View attachment 4095093



Kate is also a seasoned veteran at this point. But I simply cannot get enough of her outfit. This has been her best look in what might be years.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

cafecreme15 said:


> Kate is also a seasoned veteran at this point. But I simply cannot get enough of her outfit. This has been her best look in what might be years.


I am dying for the jewelry, it's just perfect, everything is. She looks like she could be a queen


----------



## threadbender

Grande Latte said:


> I think this picture sort of captures the royal dynamics at this juncture. Kate is in charge. She is the new power. I don't know what Meghan looks like. I hate to say this, but she looks like she doesn't even belong there.
> 
> View attachment 4095093


That photo is amazing in its undertone. Look at the hats and the postures. Kate truly does look regal and that color is phenomenal on her. I believe Meghan will grow into her role and become more comfortable. I agree that the color doesn't suit her. I thought the texture of her hair was kind of weird. But, it could be the hat or whatever. lol


----------



## PatsyCline

I wonder if there's a hierarchy of where certain members of the Royal Family stand on the balcony?


----------



## mdcx

PatsyCline said:


> I wonder if there's a hierarchy of where certain members of the Royal Family stand on the balcony?


I would say very much. All the lesser royals are on the far edges. It seems the middle balcony section is arranged by line of succession.
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 .


----------



## MarvelGirl

Meghan looks so lovely (and tan) and DEFINITELY like she belongs on that balcony! Not sure why anyone would say or feel that she doesn't? Also, her hair and texture looks soft and fantastic and very much in line with what Kate did on her first outing. Well done, Meghan!!


----------



## DC-Cutie

MarvelGirl said:


> Meghan looks so lovely (and tan) and DEFINITELY like she belongs on that balcony! Not sure why anyone would say or feel that she doesn't? Also, her hair and texture looks soft and fantastic and very much in line with what Kate did on her first outing. Well done, Meghan!!


I love her hair too. She looks great


----------



## BagOuttaHell

lmao. I see some subs in this thread. But I'm asleep.

Meg looks nice here. I like this outfit better than her last appearance.


----------



## Sharont2305

peppermintpatty said:


> William looks so stern when he looks at George. A lot of the time. I would imagine they have to have the children behave, I just wish he would look less stern. George is adorable and only 4 I believe.


It was during the National Anthem so obviously he's going to look serious..... I wouldn't have said stern


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Grande Latte said:


> I think this picture sort of captures the royal dynamics at this juncture. Kate is in charge. She is the new power. I don't know what Meghan looks like. I hate to say this, but she looks like she doesn't even belong there.
> 
> View attachment 4095093


I thought that too, you look at Catherine and think she is definitely made for her future role as Queen Consort. The observation and concentration in her face says it all, just like the Queen. And to think she's only been doing the "job" for 7 years.....with a lot of years of "training" before that.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

The commentators were talking during the royal wedding about how they really put Kate through the ringer to make sure she was up to the job before they could get engaged, whereas Meghan and Harry got engaged much quicker and hadn't spent that much time together being from different countries so Meghan really didn't have the prep. She won't be queen so it's obviously less important, but she's coming from Hollywood whereas Kate was coming from British prep schools. She's already behind and probably could have used some experience. She jumped into a new life real quick and I hope she doesn't find she's not cut out for it. It would have been smart to wait a bit before getting married IMO.


----------



## Jayne1

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> The commentators were talking during the royal wedding about how they really put Kate through the ringer to make sure she was up to the job before they could get engaged, whereas Meghan and Harry got engaged much quicker and hadn't spent that much time together being from different countries so Meghan really didn't have the prep. She won't be queen so it's obviously less important, but she's coming from Hollywood whereas Kate was coming from British prep schools. She's already behind and probably could have used some experience. She jumped into a new life real quick and I hope she doesn't find she's not cut out for it. It would have been smart to wait a bit before getting married IMO.


Except waiting would mean putting off babies and she might feel like she needs to get started.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ Rushing to have babies would not be the smartest thing either.


----------



## TMA

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Kate looks fabulous. Meghan looks nice, but I don't love the suit on her and I agree she definitely needs some decorum training.



[emoji50]. I had to go watch he videos. I thought maybe she jumped on he balcony and started twerking


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ Now that would have been a good time


----------



## Bagisa

Weird - everyone is complaining about Kate being too matronly, yet are praising this look, which could be worn by a woman twice her age.


----------



## Lounorada

Meghan looked good yesterday, but I couldn't help but think how her outfit seemed inappropriate for the event, it was more like something she could wear to one of the Queens garden parties or a wedding, but not the Trooping the Colour. She really stood out on the balcony when every other woman (& girl) had a dress or jacket on with their shoulders covered and some sort of sleeves.

That Carolina Herrera top and skirt she wore were beautiful, although that flat, upside-down-plate looking hat was horrible and didn't go with her outfit at all, IMO. She should have gone for a more statement hat in a brighter, more complimentary colour to her outfit and I think her hair would have looked better if the front pieces were kept back from her face, it would have looked more neat.

Yes, I am nitpicky and unapologetically so.


----------



## bag-princess

Queen Elizabeth Is Granting Meghan Markle This Royal Perk Before William, Harry, or Kate! 




https://www.southernliving.com/synd...ign=southernliving&xid=sl_socialflow_facebook


----------



## peppermintpatty

Sharont2305 said:


> It was during the National Anthem so obviously he's going to look serious..... I wouldn't have said stern


I said he looks like that at George, a lot. Not just during the National Anthem. You think he looks serious and I think he looks stern. I just wanted to be clear I do not see this as a one time thing.


----------



## Spellman

Totally late but I wanted to add to the accents thing: I live in the South West, so it's all a bit Pirates of the Caribbean here, but I lived for a year on the Isle of Wight and Portsmouth, where the accents remind me of London. I came back speaking that way, but two months into my new job and I was back to being a Pirate. When my cousin got married it was a very fancy affair (the other side of the family, shall we say, haha) and I found myself speaking with no accent because no-one else had one. it just depends on the situation and who you're talking to, and how long for.  

Also bless the Queen, she does so well to go to all these things at 92. A job for life.


----------



## daisychainz

Lounorada said:


> Meghan looked good yesterday, but I couldn't help but think how her outfit seemed inappropriate for the event, it was more like something she could wear to one of the Queens garden parties or a wedding, but not the Trooping the Colour. She really stood out on the balcony when every other woman (& girl) had a dress or jacket on with their shoulders covered and some sort of sleeves.
> 
> That Carolina Herrera top and skirt she wore were beautiful, although that flat, upside-down-plate looking hat was horrible and didn't go with her outfit at all, IMO. She should have gone for a more statement hat in a brighter, more complimentary colour to her outfit and I think her hair would have looked better if the front pieces were kept back from her face, it would have looked more neat.
> 
> Yes, I am nitpicky and unapologetically so.


I agree with your opinion. The only thing I noticed about Meghan was that she was not in blue, as Kate, Camilla, and the Queen were. It was almost as though they coordinated and she did not get the memo, lol. I saw online people calling it a flying saucer hat


----------



## LibbyRuth

I've seen a few people speculate that the reason Meghan didn't wear blue was so that she'd blend in and show respect to the higher ranking royals who had been around longer.  If that's the case I think it's a smart move.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I would guess Meghan is incredibly nervous and that sometimes makes people giggle and fidget. She is getting there. Her look has been "smoothed out" a bit since the wedding.
> 
> Again, she now has little to no control over her dress/grooming for these big required public events. And the palace may not have hairdressers who are skilled in styling her hair type which is naturally very curly I think. They may have also wanted a contrast between her hair being down and Kates being up.
> 
> Older pics of Meghan:
> 
> View attachment 4095030


wish she (and a lot of other celebs) would wear their hair natural


----------



## Longchamp

I'm always distracted by the content of one's words when they have lots of hand motions.
Because of that I've taught myself not to use my hands a lot while talking or giving presentations.

For me the worst is touching your face or your hair frequently while giving a presentation or non social conversation.
My ex DH used to use a dog clicker when I would practice presentations on him. He'd click it when my hands did something funky.
Must say it worked as I could hear the dog clicker anytime my hands started to get a mind of their own.  

But now that I'm programmed, I find myself not using my hands at all in everyday conversation and am startled when others do. (we need a dog emoji)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Bentley1

LibbyRuth said:


> I've seen a few people speculate that the reason Meghan didn't wear blue was so that she'd blend in and show respect to the higher ranking royals who had been around longer.  If that's the case I think it's a smart move.


Um, doesn't she stand out more by wearing a different color from the higher ranking women who were all wearing blue? All blue then pink/off the shoulder/hair down, I actually think it's the opposte and that she was actually trying to stand out from the back row as much as she could.


----------



## DC-Cutie

she does stand out.  I wish the dress was a different color, it kinds of washes her out.  But I still like it


----------



## Lounorada

daisychainz said:


> I agree with your opinion. The only thing I noticed about Meghan was that she was not in blue, as Kate, Camilla, and the Queen were. It was almost as though they coordinated and she did not get the memo, lol.* I saw online people calling it a flying saucer hat*


 That's more accurate than my description!


----------



## sanga

MM looks fine and appropriate for the occasion.  Pale pink pastels are appropriate for springtime.  She fits in with everyone else in the crowd on that balcony.  No difference.


----------



## mdcx

Bentley1 said:


> Um, doesn't she stand out more by wearing a different color from the higher ranking women who were all wearing blue? All blue then pink/off the shoulder/hair down, I actually think it's the opposte and that she was actually trying to stand out from the back row as much as she could.


I don't know that Meghan actually gets too much choice in what she wears. She wore the same tone as Beatrice or Eugenie (can never remember which is which) who was also in the centre back. The more "senior " ladies were all in similar tones in the front. None of it is accidental I would think.


----------



## Bentley1

mdcx said:


> I don't know that Meghan actually gets too much choice in what she wears. She wore the same tone as Beatrice or Eugenie (can never remember which is which) who was also in the centre back. The more "senior " ladies were all in similar tones in the front. None of it is accidental I would think.


 I agree that she is most likely given a set of options that she has to choose from, otherwise she can possibly ask for something to be approved by the queen.  Definitely can't show up wearing whatever she felt like wearing, I'm sure. 
I still believe she's the type that would like to stand out more than blend in if she has any say in it.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I kind of disagree. I feel like Meghan's style has always been sexy but subdued. She's never really dressed in a way that was extraordinary, especially compared to celebrities nowadays. I would say she likes to stand out but not in a loud way.


----------



## myown

gazoo said:


> I enjoy reading the comments here as much as seeing the photos. I've never thought or known that giggling and covering of one's mouth is something one shouldn't do after a certain age. .


----------



## myown

gazoo said:


> *I'd bet nothing is accidental with this crew,* so her placement at center in some of the key photos and elsewhere today was likely the Queen making sure Kate got some shine. I wonder if Meghan was asked to wear a contrasting shade to mark her place for the crowds as well. She does stand out amongst all that blue.
> 
> And I know the uniforms all have meaning, but I REALLY wish Harry had worn this uniform instead of that other one on his wedding day. He looks far more dashing today.
> 
> All in all it feels like the Queen is making sure all the ladies get their fair share of attention. Feels really thoughtful somehow, or I'm just feeling sappy today. It's so nice to see Charles looking so relaxed and frankly adoring of both his daughters-in-law. I've not been a fan of his, but this side of him is wearing me down.


I'm sure on that


----------



## myown

soooooo weird everyone here loves Kates look but hates Meghans????
I must be the only one who loved Megs look and I hated Kates dress


----------



## myown

Grande Latte said:


> I think this picture sort of captures the royal dynamics at this juncture. Kate is in charge. She is the new power. I don't know what Meghan looks like. I hate to say this, but she looks like she doesn't even belong there.
> 
> View attachment 4095093


Kate looks like Fräulein Rottenmeier


----------



## lucifers

myown said:


> soooooo weird everyone here loves Kates look but hates Meghans????
> I must be the only one who loved Megs look and I hated Kates dress



nope you are not alone i prefered megans look cause its stylish


----------



## myown

Bentley1 said:


> Um, doesn't she stand out more by wearing a different color from the higher ranking women who were all wearing blue? All blue then pink/off the shoulder/hair down, I actually think it's the opposte and that she was actually trying to stand out from the back row as much as she could.







IF anyone is standing out it is Eugenie in green!


----------



## mkr

Kate’s dress would be better without the poofy shoulders. Is Meghan photobombing her?

Maybe the queens favorite color is blue and those who know it wore it. Or they all wore it to make sure Meghan knows she’s never gonna be a member of the future queens club. Just some options.


----------



## LibbyRuth

myown said:


> IF anyone is standing out it is Eugenie in green!



Exactly! Meghan kind of blends into the palace stone.  I think she's doing a smart job of stepping aside to let the higher ranking royal women have center stage.  Lots of attention was given to this time on the balcony because it was a first for her, and instead of embracing that spotlight, she stepped aside to let those who belong in it have it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

when you look at that photo of all of them, there are a variety of colors.....pink, green, blue.....maybe too much is being read into this


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Exactly! Meghan kind of blends into the palace stone.  I think she's doing a smart job of stepping aside to let the higher ranking royal women have center stage.  Lots of attention was given to this time on the balcony because it was a first for her, and instead of embracing that spotlight, she stepped aside to let those who belong in it have it.


Spot on, totally agree.


----------



## bag-mania

Does the color choice really matter? There's someone in the second row (I don't recognize her) wearing bright red/pink. I'm surprised nobody called her out for being a harlot.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> Does the color choice really matter? There's someone in the second row (I don't recognize her) wearing bright red/pink. I'm surprised nobody called her out for being a harlot.


The word harlot, just can not be used too often  



myown said:


> Kate looks like Fräulein Rottenmeier




But no, she doesn't  Both Kate and Meghan are beautiful in my opinion but it's not fair to compare Meghan to Kate, Kate's been doing this for years now.

Observation that's very armchair and probably totally off but anyway: William and Kate seem to make each other more confident when in public, like they give each other strength. Harry and Meghan do not. I don't know why that is but they seem much more insecure together?


----------



## daisychainz

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The word harlot, just can not be used too often
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But no, she doesn't  Both Kate and Meghan are beautiful in my opinion but it's not fair to compare Meghan to Kate, Kate's been doing this for years now.
> 
> Observation that's very armchair and probably totally off but anyway: William and Kate seem to make each other more confident when in public, like they give each other strength. Harry and Meghan do not. I don't know why that is but they seem much more insecure together?


I see that as well. It is probably all their many years together, they have such a long history as a couple compared to Harry and Meghan who have very little time as a couple. I think they have a huge level of comfort and trust of the partner, and a lot of confidence between them that allows them to shine individually. I generally see that among established couples who have been married a long time versus young couples that have to grow into it. It takes time to see that between a pair imo.


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> I would say very much. All the lesser royals are on the far edges. It seems the middle balcony section is arranged by line of succession.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4095289
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



That's out of date now. Harry's now 6 in-line as Will (and Kate) has had a third child

Anyway the law has changed regarding gender. Why should Andrew 3rd born (and his children) and Edward  4th born (and his children) be before Anne (and her children) she was second child to the Queen?


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> That's out of date now. Harry's now 6 in-line as Will (and Kate) has had a third child
> 
> Anyway the law has changed regarding gender. Why should Andrew 3rd born (and his children) and Edward  4th born (and his children) be before Anne (and her children) she was second child to the Queen?


It's too bad the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 couldn't apply retroactively to the living royals. It seems wrong that Princess Anne's children and grandchildren don't even have courtesy titles


----------



## papertiger

cafecreme15 said:


> It's too bad the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 couldn't apply retroactively to the living royals. It seems wrong that Princess Anne's children and grandchildren don't even have courtesy titles



I think it's a bl&&dy disgrace. After all, although it is written, there has been no change of monarch so why should 'retrospective' even apply. If little Charlotte is 4 Anne _should_ be 7, same Succession.  Move over Andrew and Edward! How can the UK have Sex Discrimination Act 1977 and an Equalities Act 2010 and the Royal Family not be subject to the laws of the Land, making their own rules up with get-out clauses. Better shut-up now before they cart me off to the Tower!

I think she and her (first) husband chose her children not to have titles.


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> I think it's a bl&&dy disgrace. After all, although it is written, there has been no change of monarch so why should 'retrospective' even apply. If little Charlotte is 4 Anne _should_ be 7, same Succession.  Move over Andrew and Edward! How can the UK have Sex Discrimination Act 1977 and an Equalities Act 2010 and the Royal Family not be subject to the laws of the Land, making their own rules up with get-out clauses. Better shut-up now before they cart me off to the Tower!
> 
> I think she and her (first) husband chose her children not to have titles.



Oohhh I quite like the singular line of succession argument! Unfortunately I think the act specifically states that it modifies that order of succession for children born after X date. But you are so right! I will come bail you out of the tower hehe. I wonder why they chose for their children not to have titles?


----------



## marthastoo

Maybe it was in the other thread, but there was commentary about the off the shoulder look and how it broke protocol and how the Queen didn't approve (or something along those lines).  Maybe I read that somewhere else.  But when I think back to the wedding and the haters who clearly saw a very different wedding than I talking about how Meghan was going to come in like an bull in a china shop, breaking rules, that clueless American, how dare she.

Here's my take.  I think the Queen loves it.  I think the Queen is tickled by Meghan.  She had a framed photo of Harry and Meghan strategically placed right next to a photo of Charles and Camilla during her Christmas speech.  Then she invited Meghan to Christmas services at Sandringham when she was still the fiancee - the only fiancee ever to be invited.  Now she in taking Meghan out on the road for a dual public engagement next week (way earlier than HM went out with Kate by over a year) and Meghan gets the unheard of honor of accompanying her on the royal train, something even Prince William and Prince Harry, let alone Kate, have never ridden.  

The Queen has a new favorite IMO.


----------



## LibbyRuth

marthastoo said:


> Maybe it was in the other thread, but there was commentary about the off the shoulder look and how it broke protocol and how the Queen didn't approve (or something along those lines).  Maybe I read that somewhere else.  But when I think back to the wedding and the haters who clearly saw a very different wedding than I talking about how Meghan was going to come in like an bull in a china shop, breaking rules, that clueless American, how dare she.
> 
> Here's my take.  I think the Queen loves it.  I think the Queen is tickled by Meghan.  She had a framed photo of Harry and Meghan strategically placed right next to a photo of Charles and Camilla during her Christmas speech.  Then she invited Meghan to Christmas services at Sandringham when she was still the fiancee - the only fiancee ever to be invited.  Now she in taking Meghan out on the road for a dual public engagement next week (way earlier than HM went out with Kate by over a year) and Meghan gets the unheard of honor of accompanying her on the royal train, something even Prince William and Prince Harry, let alone Kate, have never ridden.
> 
> The Queen has a new favorite IMO.



I think you may be right.  I think it's possible that since Meghan did not grow up under the crown that she approaches the Queen differently - perhaps more out of respect than fear - and it delights the Queen to be treated that way.


----------



## Bagisa

The royals are no strangers to bare shoulders. Where is this so called book on etiquette that prohibits it?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ Evening versus day I suspect.


----------



## papertiger

cafecreme15 said:


> Oohhh I quite like the singular line of succession argument! Unfortunately I think the act specifically states that it modifies that order of succession for children born after X date. But you are so right! I will come bail you out of the tower hehe. I wonder why they chose for their children not to have titles?


 
I think you will have to dig or fly me out of the Tower, I have total faith in your abilities. 

Good question, 'll have to research why. As a child of the daughter of a monarch (Princess) there is no automatic right as you pointed out but the monarch can bestow one who ever s/he wishes and apparently the Queen offered. Edward and Sophie's children also have no royal title though their's _would _have had automatic right but they chose to reject the convention.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Anyway the law has changed regarding gender. Why should Andrew 3rd born (and his children) and Edward  4th born (and his children) be before Anne (and her children) she was second child to the Queen?


It's really too bad because Anne would make a terrific hard working queen, unlike some others in her family.

Also, just my observation, she is in no rush to modernize the monarchy and I agree with that. lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Bagisa

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ Evening versus day I suspect.



Kate’s red off the shoulder dress was for a daytime affair.


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> It's too bad the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 couldn't apply retroactively to the living royals. It seems wrong that Princess Anne's children and grandchildren don't even have courtesy titles


They don't and that's because as I'm sure most know, Princess Anne’s children are through the female line, so they don't hold any titles.

I remember reading the Queen offered to give them titles but Anne refused.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Bagisa said:


> Kate’s red off the shoulder dress was for a daytime affair.



Nope that was an evening reception, unless she's worn it multiple times for something in the day too? I suspect it's considered improper to wear an ankle length dress for day as well.


----------



## Bagisa

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Nope that was an evening reception, unless she's worn it multiple times for something in the day too? I suspect it's considered improper to wear an ankle length dress for day as well.



It was a garden party that took place in Berlin last year. Here’s another photo to add more perspective on the type of affair. It was not evening attire. 

My point is, some people are quick to criticize Meghan on the littlest things, for the sole sake of being critical.

View attachment 4098152


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Bagisa said:


> It was a garden party that took place in Berlin last year. Here’s another photo to add more perspective on the type of affair. It was not evening attire.
> 
> My point is, some people are quick to criticize Meghan on the littlest things, for the sole sake of being critical.
> 
> View attachment 4098152



Yeah that was the event I was thinking of. It was an evening event it just wasn’t formal. I don’t think Kate would wear this dress at a daytime event.


----------



## Bagisa

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Yeah that was the event I was thinking of. It was an evening event it just wasn’t formal. I don’t think Kate would wear this dress at a daytime event.



It was a garden party held at the home of the UK ambassador to Germany. Ergo, I assume it started before sunset, as is protocol for official garden parties at Buckingham Palace.


----------



## StylishMD

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ Evening versus day I suspect.


Sophie of Wessex had her back out. No difference IMO
Meghan looked fine


----------



## StylishMD

Bagisa said:


> It was a garden party that took place in Berlin last year. Here’s another photo to add more perspective on the type of affair. It was not evening attire.
> 
> My point is, *some people are quick to criticize Meghan on the littlest things, for the sole sake of being critical.*
> 
> View attachment 4098152


I TOTALLY agree!


----------



## chaneljewel

Simply put:  Meghan is beautiful and wears her clothes well.  She’s only been part of the royal family officially for a few weeks so is still learning the ropes.  IMO, she can do such good work for humanity as a royal that wearing the wrong dress, shoe, or hat is trivial.  I will adore her no matter what she wears.


----------



## mdcx

Megs would not have been allowed to wear anything that was non-kosher to such a major event. Her dress would have been signed off. Kate has different expectations around her now that she will be Queen at some point, basically I doubt that Kate would have been allowed to wear Meghan's style of dress to the same event.  
(there is a view that Charles will step aside and let William be King so the pressure on Kate is pretty immense.)


----------



## mkr

Can Charles step aside?  Does he want to?  After all he went through to marry the perfect virgin queen and produce proper heirs to the throne even though he was in love with Camilla?

Just asking - I don’t know how royalty operates.


----------



## daisychainz

Bagisa said:


> The royals are no strangers to bare shoulders. Where is this so called book on etiquette that prohibits it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4097927
> View attachment 4097929
> View attachment 4097930
> View attachment 4097931
> View attachment 4097932
> View attachment 4097933
> View attachment 4097934


These are sitting portraits/pictures, which are entirely different, and done in the privacy of a home or studio. And the other ladies do have their arms covered for evening events or low attendance events where they are not so visible to the public.


----------



## gazoo

I'd be shocked if Charles abdicated. Can't see it happening, even though many would prefer it.


----------



## Jayne1

gazoo said:


> I'd be shocked if Charles abdicated. Can't see it happening, even though many would prefer it.


Agree. Charles was born to it and has expected it his whole life. I’ve always read he wants that job.

Also work-shy Will (that’s what the press calls him) can continue to be work shy for many more years. It’s a win-win.


----------



## bag-mania

mkr said:


> Can Charles step aside?  Does he want to?  After all he went through to marry the perfect virgin queen and produce proper heirs to the throne even though he was in love with Camilla?
> 
> Just asking - I don’t know how royalty operates.



He could step aside if he wants. I doubt he will. Since his mother took the throne when she was only 25, he was destined to wait a long time, particularly given the longevity of the family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Bagisa said:


> My point is, *some people are quick to criticize Meghan on the littlest things, for the sole sake of being critical.*


Same goes for Kate, people love to criticize her too for the most ridiculous, little things. It goes both ways and unfortunately it comes with being a public figure of any sort.


----------



## Bagisa

Lounorada said:


> Same goes for Kate, people love to criticize her too for the most ridiculous, little things. It goes both ways and unfortunately it comes with being a public figure of any sort.



I agree. It’s unfortunate when outsiders are judged with a more critical eye because there’s a sense they don’t belong. The bare shoulders thing reminds me of the uproar caused by the sleeveless dress worn by Michelle ***** for her official portrait. Michelle *****’s, another “outsider”.


----------



## gelbergirl

Jayne1 said:


> Agree. Charles was born to it and has expected it his whole life. I’ve always read he wants that job.
> 
> Also *work-shy Will* (that’s what the press calls him) can continue to be work shy for many more years. It’s a win-win.



what is he doing instead of working?
Family time, hobbies?  I have to think he's doing something to support the monarchy, his Grandmother and father.
Or is it not enough number of appearances.


----------



## Bentley1

I do not see Charles stepping aside and giving up the chance to be King. No way, imo.

I sure wouldn't if I were him lol


----------



## chaneljewel

I don’t think Charles will step aside and give the throne to William.  It’s slways been his duty to become king...one I’m sure he takes seriously.  There may be many in the younger set who prefer William and Kate as king and queen, however, Charles has waited a long time for this honor to be his.


----------



## pixiejenna

I don’t think Charles will give up the role. I think it’s wishful thinking that William and Kate will jump into the role when the time comes. I also don’t think that they would want to take it on so soon either. They just had their third kid if they had to take on that roll right now I think they would hate it, it would substantially take them away from their kids. Especially given how young both will and harry where when they lost their mother, I think that quality family time is important for them.  I think that will is perfectly fine to take on the roll when he’s older after he’s lived his life.


----------



## LibbyRuth

pixiejenna said:


> I don’t think Charles will give up the role. I think it’s wishful thinking that William and Kate will jump into the role when the time comes. I also don’t think that they would want to take it on so soon either. They just had their third kid if they had to take on that roll right now I think they would hate it, it would substantially take them away from their kids. Especially given how young both will and harry where when they lost their mother, I think that quality family time is important for them.  I think that will is perfectly fine to take on the roll when he’s older after he’s lived his life.



I agree with you, and would add to this that Charles has his own experience with being a young child whose mother was pulled away with the demands of being Queen. I just watched the documentary that was done for the Queen's 90th birthday that is on Netflix where they show various members of the family watching old home movies and commenting.  In it, Charles makes a couple of comments that lead you to believe he was aware of the absence.  I don't think he'd want to play a hand in his grandchildren having that experience.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> It's too bad the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 couldn't apply retroactively to the living royals. It seems wrong that Princess Anne's children and grandchildren don't even have courtesy titles


Princess Anne refused to title her children.


papertiger said:


> I think you will have to dig or fly me out of the Tower, I have total faith in your abilities.
> 
> Good question, 'll have to research why. As a child of the daughter of a monarch (Princess) there is no automatic right as you pointed out but the monarch can bestow one who ever s/he wishes and apparently the Queen offered. Edward and Sophie's children also have no royal title though their's _would _have had automatic right but they chose to reject the convention.


They do have titles, Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn


----------



## Jayne1

gelbergirl said:


> what is he doing instead of working?
> Family time, hobbies?  I have to think he's doing something to support the monarchy, his Grandmother and father.
> Or is it not enough number of appearances.


Good question.  The press likes to tally up Harry, Will and Kate's official duties and appearances and they did less, combined, than the 91 year old (at the time) Queen. Anne, Princess Royal works really hard, but not William, Kate or Harry.

Harry likes his charity work but those aren't his royal duties.

I've said this before, but I think they look especially bad because the Queen is such a hard act to follow.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Princess Anne refused to title her children.
> 
> *They do have titles, Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn*



They are courtesy titles:

From http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/the-children-of-the-earl-and-countess-of-wessex/

"The Earl and Countess of Wessex (Prince Edward and the former Sophie Rhys-Jones) have two children – Lady Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn. Their titles and styles are often disputed. Under the terms of King George V’s Letters Patent of 1917, as grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line, they are Prince and Princess of the United Kingdom, with the style of Royal Highness. However, at the time of Edward and Sophie’s marriage, a press release was issued from Buckingham Palace. *Along with announcing Prince Edward’s new title as Earl of Wessex, it stated that The Queen, with the agreement of Edward and Sophie, had decided that any children born to them should not be given the style of Royal Highness, but instead be given courtesy titles as children of an Earl.* As they would already be well down the line of succession (Prince Edward was 7th in line at the time of his marriage), it is believed that this was done to alleviate some of the ‘burdens’ associated with having a royal title, and to allow them somewhat more of a normal life. However, many argue that the press release does not supersede the terms of the 1917 Letters Patent and that Louise and James are, in fact, Prince and Princess. Lady Louise and Viscount Severn live with their parents at Bagshot Park, in Surrey."


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> They are courtesy titles:
> 
> From http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/the-children-of-the-earl-and-countess-of-wessex/
> 
> "The Earl and Countess of Wessex (Prince Edward and the former Sophie Rhys-Jones) have two children – Lady Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn. Their titles and styles are often disputed. Under the terms of King George V’s Letters Patent of 1917, as grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line, they are Prince and Princess of the United Kingdom, with the style of Royal Highness. However, at the time of Edward and Sophie’s marriage, a press release was issued from Buckingham Palace. *Along with announcing Prince Edward’s new title as Earl of Wessex, it stated that The Queen, with the agreement of Edward and Sophie, had decided that any children born to them should not be given the style of Royal Highness, but instead be given courtesy titles as children of an Earl.* As they would already be well down the line of succession (Prince Edward was 7th in line at the time of his marriage), it is believed that this was done to alleviate some of the ‘burdens’ associated with having a royal title, and to allow them somewhat more of a normal life. However, many argue that the press release does not supersede the terms of the 1917 Letters Patent and that Louise and James are, in fact, Prince and Princess. Lady Louise and Viscount Severn live with their parents at Bagshot Park, in Surrey."


Fascinating! I wonder what the arguments for it not superseding the press releases are, and if it would make a difference if the press release were signed by the Queen. I believe it would (without knowing the intricacies of UK law).


----------



## papertiger

cafecreme15 said:


> Fascinating! I wonder what the arguments for it not superseding the press releases are, and if it would make a difference if the press release were signed by the Queen. I believe it would (without knowing the intricacies of UK law).



I'm not 100% if I have interpreted your question correctly.  My view is (I am not a lawyer) that is the Queen's decision (was informed by E & S wishes and that) supersedes that of George V Letters Patent of 1917 but remains an exception.


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> I'm not 100% if I have interpreted your question correctly.  My view is (I am not a lawyer) that is the Queen's decision (was informed by E & S wishes and that) supersedes that of George V Letters Patent of 1917 but remains an exception.


That sounds like it could be correct from my legal training vantage point! There must be some 'royal law' experts out there somewhere...would be a very cool job to have to consult on these matters


----------



## finer_woman

gelbergirl said:


> what is he doing instead of working?
> Family time, hobbies?  I have to think he's doing something to support the monarchy, his Grandmother and father.
> Or is it not enough number of appearances.


Doesn't he still work as an emergency pilot or whatever it's called?


----------



## VickyB

finer_woman said:


> Doesn't he still work as an emergency pilot or whatever it's called?


I think he retired from that a bit ago and now works full time for the Firm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

VickyB said:


> I think he retired from that a bit ago and now works full time for the Firm.



William was a search & rescue pilot. Probably the equivalent of working for the US Coast Guard.


----------



## Sharont2305

Indeed he was a search and rescue pilot, here on Anglesey. He finished shortly after George was born in 2013, then they moved from here to Norfolk to work with the Air Ambulance, part time I believe so he could still carry out his Royal duties. I think he has left that job now so he can be a full time Royal, as in supporting the Queen on a full time basis and not to be just a Prince / Duke.
I hate the 'Work shy Wills' tag. I don't believe it for one second, just because we don't see them doing their official Royal duties doesn't mean that he / they aren't doing anything! We saw him less when he was working because yes, he was working, in 12 hour shifts helping others who needed rescuing or needed air lifting in the air ambulance. I know when he was here on Anglesey he was at the base for a 24hr period on call, sometimes 48 hours over a weekend. So to do that, and to do Royal duties and have a young family must have been hard. And yes, I am aware other people have that kind of work shifts too....minus Royal duties obviously, lol, so I think people I.e the press shouldn't judge.


----------



## Sharont2305

Well, they've arrived.


----------



## finer_woman

Sharont2305 said:


> Well, they've arrived.


My initial reaction to that dress is NO


----------



## Morgan R

Queen Elizabeth II and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex arrive by Royal Train at Runcorn Station


----------



## Morgan R

Queen Elizabeth II and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex arrive to open the new Mersey Gateway Bridge


----------



## mdcx

That last picture Meghan looks like she is trying very hard to sit correctly with her legs crossed at the ankle etc. I think she looks lovely, if a tad wrinkly due to sitting down in the train so long I guess.

She does have very slim ankles and calves but there's not much she can do about that and it seems the royal women are required to wear dresses most of the time.


----------



## Hobbsy

peppermintpatty said:


> I said he looks like that at George, a lot. Not just during the National Anthem. You think he looks serious and I think he looks stern. I just wanted to be clear I do not see this as a one time thing.


There are a whole of kids that could use a little more "stern" in their lives!


----------



## Sharont2305

I wish she'd tie the front of her hair back, saw some footage of this and its very windy there, she's constantly fighting with her hair.
Well done to the Queen for wearing green today, very thoughtful.


----------



## Hobbsy

Morgan R said:


> Queen Elizabeth II and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex arrive to open the new Mersey Gateway Bridge
> 
> View attachment 4099374
> View attachment 4099375
> View attachment 4099376
> View attachment 4099378
> View attachment 4099373
> View attachment 4099372
> View attachment 4099388
> View attachment 4099377


I love her dress. I think it looks like Meghan brings out a little different side of the Queen, she seems to smile and laugh a lot around the girl?


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that Meghan's dress is a subtle way to say to the world "Hey, I heard a rumor you guys were worried I was showing too much shoulder?"


----------



## Grande Latte

I didn't like the previous "blush" colored off shoulder dress, but I like this one. It's MODERN. And Meghan does modern very well. She rocks white and off-white beautifully. Yes, it was windy, but she looked like she had fun with Queen E! They look like they really get along swell.


----------



## finer_woman

finer_woman said:


> My initial reaction to that dress is NO


I've realized why.  The color is blah on her and the material obviously doesn't travel well.  I like the style though.


----------



## White Orchid

I’m not feeling this outfit.


----------



## DC-Cutie

she a woman of color, I need her to wear some COLOR!!!  these blush tones aren't doing her any justice


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Laurie Lou

The dress is starting to grow on me. Initially I was disappointed only because I wanted to see a brighter color than what she’s been wearing but I do like the style/fit of it. The material didn’t travel well as previously stated and it looked super windy. I wouldn’t have minded seeing a different hairstyle or hat (although idk about a hat and the cape working together). Overall though, she looked lovely and seemed to have handled herself well for her first solo outing with the Queen.


----------



## mkr

She looks very nice.  Call me picky but her right leg should be behind the left straight leg when sitting.


----------



## terebina786

The dress looks blah because of the colour.  I agree, she should probably keep her hair back if she's going to keep fighting with it.


----------



## jcnc

I love the dress. especially the shoulder piece. The material, not sommuch.

Not a fan of her hair style. Looks too messy to me.

Plus, with a belted dress, she is putting to rest the pregnancy rumors


----------



## daisychainz

I think the Queen looks amazing, as usual 
I guess I just don't get Meghan's style   It looks to me like she's going to a corporate meeting for Suits.


----------



## afsweet

I like the dress. Feel like this would be a good opportunity for a low bun.


----------



## bisbee

I like the dress...by going with a neutral color, she was sure not to clash with the Queen.  And I like that color on her.  I would have liked a low bun, but it doesn’t kill the look.  And does it really matter which leg is in front?  If it does, it’s time for a change.


----------



## myown

sorry, i quote you again


gazoo said:


> *I enjoy reading the comments here as much as seeing the photos. I've never thought or known that giggling and covering of one's mouth is something one shouldn't do after a certain age. It's a no-no?* .









QE really should atop giggling!


----------



## Gal4Dior

I’m absolutely in love with this look. She carries cream off very well and I love how it fits on her slender figure! He only thing that was lacking was her hair. She needs to pull it back. All I see are photos of her messing it with/brushing it back.

So far, one of the best ones to date for me!!


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> I wish she'd tie the front of her hair back, saw some footage of this and its very windy there, she's constantly fighting with her hair.
> *Well done to the Queen for wearing green today, very thoughtful.*


how comes?


----------



## absolutpink

Morgan R said:


> Queen Elizabeth II and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex arrive to open the new Mersey Gateway Bridge
> 
> View attachment 4099374
> View attachment 4099375
> View attachment 4099376
> View attachment 4099378
> View attachment 4099373
> View attachment 4099372
> View attachment 4099388
> View attachment 4099377



Hey, that's the town I grew up in!


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> how comes?


Today marks the first anniversary of the Grenfell Tower disaster in London. Green is the colour that has been chosen to symbolise it.


----------



## sdkitty

DC-Cutie said:


> she a woman of color, I need her to wear some COLOR!!!  these blush tones aren't doing her any justice


seems this is the third time in a row she's been photographed in this blush color....guess that's what she likes or feels comfortable in


----------



## sdkitty

mkr said:


> She looks very nice.  Call me picky but her right leg should be behind the left straight leg when sitting.


are you being facetious?  I'd have a hard time with this.  I like to cross my legs at the knee


----------



## mkr

sdkitty said:


> are you being facetious?  I'd have a hard time with this.  I like to cross my legs at the knee



They’re not allowed to cross their legs at the knee.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mkr said:


> They’re not allowed to cross their legs at the knee.


I realize that but didn't understand your comment on the way her legs were crossed


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## mkr

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/130/750x445/925220.jpg


----------



## mkr

Like kate


----------



## mkr

sdkitty said:


> I realize that but didn't understand your comment on the way her legs were crossed



Sorry I forgot to quote you in my post.  Meghan looks sloppy compared to Kate at the ankles.


----------



## sdkitty

mkr said:


> Sorry I forgot to quote you in my post.  Meghan looks sloppy compared to Kate at the ankles.


ok, but while they aren't "allowed" to cross at knee, it doesn't matter whether left over right or vice versa


----------



## mkr

sdkitty said:


> ok, but while they aren't "allowed" to cross at knee, it doesn't matter whether left over right or vice versa



I know I’m just picky[emoji4]


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I like her look a lot! I don't know want her to look starched and pressed. I think wrinkles are a sign of good fabric! I don't think she's ever been a colorful dresser either, so this is in line with her style. I like seeing her dressed like herself!


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> ok, but while they aren't "allowed" to cross at knee, it doesn't matter whether left over right or vice versa


I've just tried it, its more comfortable for me Meghans way


----------



## absolutpink

Sharont2305 said:


> I've just tried it, its more comfortable for me Meghans way



Lol I just tried too, definitely more comfortable Meghan's way.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oooh naughty Catherine


----------



## pixiejenna

I like the dress on her. I think that she’s going with such bland color choices on purpose. She’s trying to blend in and not stand out. I think in part as respect if she wore a wild color dress on her first outing with the queen she would most likely end up as the center of attention outshining HRH. I think she knows her role and is doing her best to stay in her lane. I will say HRH really seems to be enjoying her time with Megan she looks very happy. Even though it seemed to happen relatively quickly it seems like Harry’s family has really taken Megan in with open arms. They all look to be at ease with her.

I love the sweater Kate has on in the first picture it looks so cozy.


----------



## Chamber Doll

Meghan crossed her legs too in the first video.......LOL
she just looked awkward....fussing with her hair and the legs while sitting......

ugh how annoying to not be able to cross them.....what a crazy world to get involved into

Meghan looked okay....the dress looked kind of tight.....

Kate looks cute in the first pic with the sweater, jeans, and cowboy boots


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'd like to see Meghan wear her air pulled up for one simple reason.  When I was in college I can remember being told repeatedly by a woman who was tryingto mold me and several other women into classy professional women that you can always tell the difference between an American woman and a European woman because European women don't mess with their hair and make up in public.  American mess with those things all the time, and it makes us look less classy and less glamorous.  So I'd like Meghan to wear her hair pulled up so she can help American women to shed that stereotype.


----------



## Sharont2305

pixiejenna said:


> I like the dress on her. I think that she’s going with such bland color choices on purpose. She’s trying to blend in and not stand out. I think in part as respect if she wore a wild color dress on her first outing with the queen she would most likely end up as the center of attention outshining HRH. I think she knows her role and is doing her best to stay in her lane. I will say HRH really seems to be enjoying her time with Megan she looks very happy. Even though it seemed to happen relatively quickly it seems like Harry’s family has really taken Megan in with open arms. They all look to be at ease with her.
> 
> I love the sweater Kate has on in the first picture it looks so cozy.


Its Her Majesty not HRH


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

LibbyRuth said:


> I'd like to see Meghan wear her air pulled up for one simple reason.  When I was in college I can remember being told repeatedly by a woman who was tryingto mold me and several other women into classy professional women that you can always tell the difference between an American woman and a European woman because European women don't mess with their hair and make up in public.  American mess with those things all the time, and it makes us look less classy and less glamorous.  So I'd like Meghan to wear her hair pulled up so she can help American women to shed that stereotype.


----------



## Jayne1

finer_woman said:


> Doesn't he still work as an emergency pilot or whatever it's called?


The joke was - he said he couldn't perform his royal duties because he was working as a pilot and he couldn't work as a pilot because he was performing his royal duties.

Anyway, as stated above, he quit the Air Ambulance after a two year term and was expected to take on full time royal duties on behalf of the Queen. At that point, the two children had started school.

Apparently, he still only works sporadically, in huge contrast to Philip and the Queen who worked constantly.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> I wish she'd tie the front of her hair back, saw some footage of this and its very windy there, she's constantly fighting with her hair.
> Well done to the Queen for wearing green today, very thoughtful.


Agree. I watched the video and she constantly adjusts it, putting it behind her ear or something, so I guess she should just wear it back, especially if it's a windy day.

I'm impressed with her wearing those heels if she's doing a fair bit of standing.


----------



## TMA

DC-Cutie said:


> she a woman of color, I need her to wear some COLOR!!!  these blush tones aren't doing her any justice



She can’t win. She wears color and they’ll say she’s seeking attention. She’ll get there eventually. Slow and steady wins the race[emoji2]


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh naughty Catherine


I think the leg crossing at the ankles has to do with modesty.  Clearly in these photos she's in a casual setting and wearing clothing where nothing is going to be exposed


----------



## cafecreme15

I’m dying to know what Meghan’s arm workout is. How does she get her forearms so toned??


----------



## PatsyCline

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh naughty Catherine


Maybe it's OK to cross at the knees if you're wearing pants?


----------



## mkr

More like it’s ok if the queen isn’t around....[emoji57]


----------



## StylishMD

pixiejenna said:


> I like the dress on her. I think that she’s going with such bland color choices on purpose. She’s trying to blend in and not stand out. I think in part as respect if she wore a wild color dress on her first outing with the queen she would most likely end up as the center of attention outshining HRH. I think she knows her role and is doing her best to stay in her lane. I will say HRH really seems to be enjoying her time with Megan she looks very happy. Even though it seemed to happen relatively quickly it seems like Harry’s family has really taken Megan in with open arms. They all look to be at ease with her.
> 
> I love the sweater Kate has on in the first picture it looks so cozy.


The jacket is by a Canadian company called Sentaler. I have it in black and yes it is VERY cozy


----------



## pixiejenna

StylishMD said:


> The jacket is by a Canadian company called Sentaler. I have it in black and yes it is VERY cozy


Thanks it's really cute. Is it soft I've never owned anything made with alpaca. They even have a few moto version.


Sharont2305 said:


> Its Her Majesty not HRH [emoji3]


Sorry I get confused with the different royal   titles.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Jayne1 said:


> The joke was - he said he couldn't perform his royal duties because he was working as a pilot and he couldn't work as a pilot because he was performing his royal duties.
> 
> Anyway, as stated above, he quit the Air Ambulance after a two year term and was expected to take on full time royal duties on behalf of the Queen. At that point, the two children had started school.
> 
> Apparently, he still only works sporadically, in huge contrast to Philip and the Queen who worked constantly.


Phillip is retired I believe!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LibbyRuth said:


> I'd like to see Meghan wear her air pulled up for one simple reason.  When I was in college I can remember being told repeatedly by a woman who was tryingto mold me and several other women into classy professional women that you can always tell the difference between an American woman and a European woman because European women don't mess with their hair and make up in public.  American mess with those things all the time, and it makes us look less classy and less glamorous.  So I'd like Meghan to wear her hair pulled up so she can help American women to shed that stereotype.


Really? I've never heard this but I just see women in general messing with their hair constantly. Nerves? Self-conscious? Boredom? Could be lots of reasons. Some cultures use their hands far more than others to talk so it could be true to some extent. I just imagine all of the germs that hands in the hair pick up and then spreading those close to the face and that's enough to stop me from doing it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

cafecreme15 said:


> I’m dying to know what Meghan’s arm workout is. How does she get her forearms so toned??


Yoga!


----------



## cafecreme15

lanasyogamama said:


> Yoga!



Is that a fact?? Yoga studio here I come!


----------



## lanasyogamama

cafecreme15 said:


> Is that a fact?? Yoga studio here I come!



Well, I know her mom is an instructor and they used to practice a lot together.  

And from personal experience, it definitely tones up your arms, you’re putting so much of your body weight on them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Phillip is retired I believe!


Just this year, no?

I was referring to past years, after William quit the Air Ambulance and comparing his work to Philip's, when Philip was in his 90s and not retired.


----------



## rcy

no comment on her fidgeting/messing with her hair, or acting like a giggling schoolgirl, but what i DID like was how well it appeared she related to the queen, and how they seemed to get along so well.


----------



## VickyB

daisychainz said:


> I think the Queen looks amazing, as usual
> I guess I just don't get Meghan's style   It looks to me like she's going to a corporate meeting for Suits.



Or in a straight jacket.


----------



## VickyB

myown said:


> sorry, i quote you again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> QE really should atop giggling!


Note that the Queen embraces laughter and doesn't cover up her mouth and look around sheepishly like a teenager. Regardless, looks like they are having a fun time together!!


----------



## VickyB

Loved the dress with her arms down. When she raised them the top of the dress looked ridiculous. Liked the color. Agree with another posters who said the dress was a little too tight and the fabric was a bad choice due to wrinkle factor. 
Also agree with other posters that hair was not good - it was a mess especially after it got wind blown. Looked like she was wearing a bad wig/ hair extensions. Agree with other posters that a casual bun(which she has done on other walk a bouts) would have been the appropriate choice. 
Hair is too long and out dated, especially with the uber sprayed contrived waves/curls( read soap actress or adult film star). Hair would look modern and relevant if it was 4 inches shorter. Just my opinion.


----------



## Grande Latte

The thing with Meghan and a white dress can easily parallel Don Draper in a white shirt. It just oozes sexiness and modern appeal. I think she can play around with color and prints, but white is ultimately her signature color. Yes, refine the hair (pending weather), make sure the dress is wrinkle free,...etc. She is still fine-tuning, but I think she's got a handle on style and Hollywood glamor. 

And white is a perfect business color if you don't want to do black. Black can be too somber, especially in a royal family. Anyhow, can't wait for more good looks from her.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Today marks the first anniversary of the Grenfell Tower disaster in London. Green is the colour that has been chosen to symbolise it.


ah thanks. I didn't know!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wasn’t she known for preferring neutral over color since before the wedding?


----------



## myown

VickyB said:


> Note that the Queen embraces laughter and doesn't cover up her mouth and look around sheepishly like a teenager. Regardless, looks like they are having a fun time together!!


my mistake


----------



## Jayne1

Funny, I just see Meghan doing her best to show interest, love and support to the Queen and the Queen, being used to reverence and people ingratiating themselves is just being the Queen.

I see people do this with Prince Charles as well.  They laugh at everything he says, never take their eyes off him, totally captivated.

I knew Meghan would be good at this job. I think we all did.


----------



## minababe

cafecreme15 said:


> I’m dying to know what Meghan’s arm workout is. How does she get her forearms so toned??



I think it's more genes than Sport. xxxx Training only can reach. meghan really has the full package. very slim but trained Body.


----------



## minababe

she is staying meghan I love that on her. she is a total different type as kate and she Shows that I love that fact !


----------



## cafecreme15

minababe said:


> I think it's more genes than Sport. black People have such a beautiful muscle Building White People could never or with haaaard Training only can reach. meghan really has the full package. very slim but trained Body.



My poor arms are string beans no matter what I do!


----------



## PatsyCline

cafecreme15 said:


> My poor arms are string beans no matter what I do!



Weight training will build muscle. Time to start pumping iron! Good diet helps also. When you exercise, it’s important to feed your body what it needs to grow.


----------



## cafecreme15

PatsyCline said:


> Weight training will build muscle. Time to start pumping iron! Good diet helps also. When you exercise, it’s important to feed your body what it needs to grow.


I try and weight train a couple of times a week but I despise it!! Meghan probably has a bunch of trainers to help her get her butt to the gym and do what she needs to do


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

Sometimes your trainer needs to be your worst enemy. They have to resist complaining and tears. 

And I get no sympathy from my DH either.


----------



## bag-princess

The Queen obviously adores her new granddaughter!


----------



## prettyprincess

lanasyogamama said:


> Yoga!


Arms, check. Now can you tell me how she gets her face so gorgeous!! Her features are simply stunning.


----------



## mkr

Anyone need a Valium?


----------



## lanasyogamama

prettyprincess said:


> Arms, check. Now can you tell me how she gets her face so gorgeous!! Her features are simply stunning.



Now if I had THAT secret, I would really be in business!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

mkr said:


> Anyone need a Valium?


Unsure why this post is still up and I don't really see the humor? I'm not sure to whom you are referring, but it seems like me you're telling people who are fighting back on racist remarks to calm down, and I fail to see how that's funny. But maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## cafecreme15

Has anyone subscribed to the new True Royalty TV streaming service? There’s supposed to be some excellent documentaries on there.


----------



## Grande Latte

No. I wouldn't subscribe to True Royalty TV. Documentary and drama won't give me real reality when real royalty still exists. I much prefer fiction. Succession on HBO is now one of my new favorite TV shows! It's brilliant! Highly recommend.


----------



## cafecreme15

Grande Latte said:


> No. I wouldn't subscribe to True Royalty TV. Documentary and drama won't give me real reality when real royalty still exists. I much prefer fiction. Succession on HBO is now one of my new favorite TV shows! It's brilliant! Highly recommend.




I’m a history buff but I love my fiction as well! I will 100% check this out, thanks for the recommendation!


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the wedding of Celia McCorquodale (Prince Harry's cousin/Daughter of Princess Diana's sister, Sarah McCorquodale)


----------



## White Orchid

I take it, it was a windy day lol.  But yeah, a fail from me.  Not flattering in the least.


----------



## Sharont2305

White Orchid said:


> I take it, it was a windy day lol.  But yeah, a fail from me.  Not flattering in the least.


Looks like curtains. Its a no from me
The young man hugging Harry is his cousin Louis, Viscount Althorp, son of Charles, Earl Spencer and his first wife Victoria.


----------



## Sharont2305

And here's the bride and groom


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> And here's the bride and groom



Is that the Spencer tiara?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She picks the absolute worst shapes for her body.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

Morgan R said:


> Attending the wedding of Celia McCorquodale (Prince Harry's cousin/Daughter of Princess Diana's sister, Sarah McCorquodale)
> 
> View attachment 4102575
> View attachment 4102576
> View attachment 4102577
> View attachment 4102578
> View attachment 4102579
> View attachment 4102580
> View attachment 4102581
> View attachment 4102585
> View attachment 4102586
> View attachment 4102587



I [emoji173]️[emoji173]️ the dress but.....le sigh [emoji17]..... it just ain’t hitting her in the right places. It looks to big even though it obviously should be a flowing summer dress. 



Sharont2305 said:


> And here's the bride and groom



He must have lots of big money! [emoji41]


----------



## sdkitty

it's not beige or blush colored....not bad IMO


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Strangely casual looking, but maybe that's just my style lol.


----------



## jcnc

cafecreme15 said:


> Is that the Spencer tiara?



Yes it is. Its a Spencer family heirloom worn by many brides - Diana, her sister and now her niece


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> Is that the Spencer tiara?


Yes, it looks like it! All the Spencer brides wear it, I think.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Looks like curtains. Its a no from me
> The young man hugging Harry is his cousin Louis, Viscount Althorp, son of Charles, Earl Spencer and his first wife Victoria.


What's happening with Diana's brother Earl Spencer? I know he was at the wedding, but isn't he a bit personae non grata with the older Windsors?


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> Is that the Spencer tiara?


Yes


----------



## berrydiva

That blue dress is very pretty.


----------



## Cocoabean

Jayne1 said:


> What's happening with Diana's brother Earl Spencer? I know he was at the wedding, but isn't he a bit personae non grata with the older Windsors?



I believe this wedding was in the Spencer family. The Earl's niece was the bride.


----------



## Sharont2305

jcnc said:


> Yes it is. Its a Spencer family heirloom worn by many brides - Diana, her sister and now her niece



Dianas two sisters wore it. So did Earl Spencers first wife ( Kitty's mother ) The bride's sister wore another Spencer tiara for hers, can't remember what its called


----------



## Sharont2305

Cocoabean said:


> I believe this wedding was in the Spencer family. The Earl's niece was the bride.


Yes, the bride's mother is sister to the Earl. Not a Royal Wedding, the only Royal was Harry, and Meghan now of course. I'm wondering where William was.


----------



## Jayne1

Cocoabean said:


> I believe this wedding was in the Spencer family. The Earl's niece was the bride.


Sorry, wasn't clear.  I meant what's happening with Diana's brother Earl Spencer -- I know he was at Harry's wedding, but otherwise, what's going on with the mutual dislike between him and the Windsors. Also he had a few marriages, some causing headlines when divorcing. I thought perhaps someone might know about this guy.

Whenever I see Earl Spencer, I think of the funeral and his speech.  He was never close like he said he would be.


----------



## kemilia

White Orchid said:


> I take it, it was a windy day lol.  But yeah, a fail from me.  Not flattering in the least.


Another bad hair day. Are there no hair pins on her dresser?


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Whenever I see Earl Spencer, I think of the funeral and his speech.  He was never close like he said he would be.


How do we know though? We usually only see William and Harry with their cousins on their fathers side, particularly Zara and Peter who they are especially close to. They probably see more of the Spencer side than we think.


----------



## Sharont2305

This is possibly the main reason that Meghan didn't wear the Spencer tiara, apart from the fact that we don't know if she was offered it in the first place, it would have been too soon after her wedding. I can just imagine all the "who wore it better?" column inches. I would have felt sorry for Celia who, after all has more right to wear it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

That blue & white dress is fugly, so is the white hat she's wearing.


----------



## mkr

I can’t tell if it’s nice. Maybe if it fit her...the hat is awful.


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Attending the wedding of Celia McCorquodale (Prince Harry's cousin/Daughter of Princess Diana's sister, Sarah McCorquodale)
> 
> View attachment 4102575
> View attachment 4102576
> View attachment 4102577
> View attachment 4102578
> View attachment 4102579
> View attachment 4102580
> View attachment 4102581
> View attachment 4102585
> View attachment 4102586
> View attachment 4102587


. 
Kust read that Meghan’s dress is worth almost $5500.. 
That dress is NOT doing her justice and she is not doing justice to that dress


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if Meghan thought wearing something loose fitting and "covering " would help her blend in and not attract attention away from the bride.

This dress overwhelms her though and looks out of place. She really needs to stick to more form fitting dresses. It will take her a while to get the hang of it. She needs to take all the help and advice the Palace offers and probably just accept that she will always be centre of attention so dress for it. 

I understand not wanting to be 'done up' all the time but it's kind of the job.


----------



## VickyB

I agree with the other posters. This dress just doesn't work on many levels - too big/ill fit,  too long and without any defining design. At a first very quick glance, It would make a nice dressing gown. 
I really liked the blue/white pattern at first and then realized it was because i'd like it as wallpaper!!!! The hat looks silly - awkward design, style and tilt..
Together they are awful. Plus hair is a mess.


----------



## A1aGypsy

That tiara, coupled with how much she looks like Diana made me smile. ❤️


----------



## mdcx

Video of the wedding:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/fe...odale-ties-knot-George-Woodhouse-Lincoln.html
The poor bride's veil gets caught on stones as she walks in. Meghan's dress does look a bit more elegant in movement, you can see her at the 50 second mark.
ETA: the bride looks so like Diana, lovely.


----------



## terebina786

That dress seems very informal for a wedding especially next to what Harry’s wearing.  Like I’d wear that to the beach or something.  It’s unflattering as well.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

She would have looked great if the top of the dress had have been more fitted. Having it all-over billowing like that does her great figure no favours whatsoever.  Her hairdressers should also have taken note of the weather and given her a tighter updo.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgan R said:


> Attending the wedding of Celia McCorquodale (Prince Harry's cousin/Daughter of Princess Diana's sister, Sarah McCorquodale)
> 
> View attachment 4102575
> View attachment 4102576
> View attachment 4102577
> View attachment 4102578
> View attachment 4102579
> View attachment 4102580
> View attachment 4102581
> View attachment 4102585
> View attachment 4102586
> View attachment 4102587



I really dislike this look. It looked like someone ripped off the curtains from the palace and made her a dress 3 times too big for her. It’s sloppy and not at all accentuates her lovely figure. The dress wears her!

I also don’t see how her formal shoes and fascinator match with this flowy, oversized boho dress. Her hair is a mess again, too. That woman has amazing hair. It just looks so frizzy and dull in that hairdo.

I thought her last look was perfection except for the hair. I just don’t understand how she could go so wrong so fast. I hope she doesn’t have a stylist, because if she had one and he/she sent her out looking like that - he/she would be fired!


----------



## cafecreme15

terebina786 said:


> That dress seems very informal for a wedding especially next to what Harry’s wearing.  Like I’d wear that to the beach or something.  It’s unflattering as well.



It is from OdlR’s resort collection, so certainly it was designed with that in mind. Completely inappropriate for a wedding of this nature.


----------



## VickyB

cafecreme15 said:


> It is from OdlR’s resort collection, so certainly it was designed with that in mind. Completely inappropriate for a wedding of this nature.


Yes! I thought great for an island get away or beach wedding.


----------



## minababe

the Dress Looks really good in moving Pictures ! lovely look and Harry match with his blue tie


----------



## afsweet

love the pattern and color of the dress, but the loose top makes it look like a bathrobe. it's definitely too casual for the occasion.


----------



## terebina786

Maybe she's still trying to hang onto her Cali boho vibe... But it's just not working.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Murphy47

terebina786 said:


> Maybe she's still trying to hang onto her Cali boho vibe... But it's just not working.



I like the dress. 
Probably because I am 54 and in the “mother of the bride” category.


----------



## daisychainz

Murphy47 said:


> I like the dress.
> Probably because I am 54 and in the “mother of the bride” category.


I'm 30 and like the dress too, and would wear it. But it just was not styled right on her. I think the dress needed to fit her, the hair needed to be pinned back, a different shoe, and for sure a different hat. There is nothing really wrong with the dress itself, but it comes down to fit and styling, and she did not have either. The event seemed more upscale than her dress, if you go by what other ladies wore. It is great to be so natural and effortless with style, but you have to make *some* effort now Meghan!


----------



## gazoo

I"m feeling really sorry for her right now. Her dad is at it again. I won't post the article text because there is political talk. Here is a link: 
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/18/uk/thomas-markle-interview-intl/index.html


----------



## SupaUltra_J

Comparing to Lady Kitty Spencer who also opted for a flowy dress all I can say is Meghan still has so much to learn. The latter looks absolutely stunning, from hat to toe.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

gazoo said:


> I"m feeling really sorry for her right now. Her dad is at it again. I won't post the article text because there is political talk. Here is a link:
> https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/18/uk/thomas-markle-interview-intl/index.html



These people are trashhhhhhhhhhhhh.


----------



## Bentley1

She's not going to let the hand holding thing go, is she.


----------



## TMA

Bentley1 said:


> She's not going to let the hand holding thing go, is she.



Why should she? Is there something wrong with holding a partner’s hands?


----------



## TMA

BagOuttaHell said:


> These people are trashhhhhhhhhhhhh.



Don’t think the father is trash - I watched the interview. My impression was that their relationship seems to have broken down as there is no way MM or KP would have authorized that interview, especially since with Piers Morgan. If one wanted to be critical, almost seems like her Dad is complicit with the half-siblings to ensure the marriage doesn’t work. If he had just kept the interview personal to his relationship with his daughter, one could have taken the view that he feels hamstrung in not being able to defend himself from the level of abuse/criticism he has taken since the relationship started, but bringing in Harry’s opinion of ***** and Brexit was just bound to cause problems for Harry and the RF. Also, seems as if he is so intent on “laundering” his own image that he doesn’t care what the blowback is on his daughter. That speaks a bit to him as a parent as I can’t understand why he thinks this is so much about him. Her mother goes about her business, photographed, etc and I bet she made some adjustments to her routine, dressing, etc, knowing that she would be photographed and all that indirectly reflects on her daughter. This man however can not be bothered about that. I really hope their love can withstand the strain - it has been a bombardment from her family.


----------



## mkr

Well at least she is far enough away from them that they can’t get to her and she might not hear the gossip.


----------



## Morgan R

TMA said:


> Why should she? Is there something wrong with holding a partner’s hands?



Yeah I don't see anything wrong with it. That is what many couples do.

And actually video from them arriving to the wedding show Harry was the one to reach for Meghan's hand to hold which was shortly after he put his hand on her back.



Another video of them arriving to the wedding:


----------



## Bentley1

TMA said:


> Why should she? Is there something wrong with holding a partner’s hands?


From my understanding, yes there is in the RF.  They are not to hold hands or show PDA in public settings, from what I have read and heard, and the rule that other couples in the RF follow pretty strictly. 
You'll never see a photo of William & Kate holding hands, for example.


----------



## Jayne1

Bentley1 said:


> She's not going to let the hand holding thing go, is she.


I watched that video and she almost slipped at one point. I would hold on too!

Those shoes are not meant for walking in the countryside, I don't know how people do it.


----------



## Bentley1

Morgan R said:


> Yeah I don't see anything wrong with it. That is what many couples do.
> 
> And actually video from them arriving to the wedding show Harry was the one to reach for Meghan's hand to hold which was shortly after he put his hand on her back.
> 
> 
> 
> Another video of them arriving to the wedding:



They are not other couples, they are part of the Royal family with 100 different rules that us commoners don't have to follow. Do we also have to wear stockings and cross our legs at the ankles when In public? No, but Megan does.


----------



## Bentley1

Jayne1 said:


> I watched that video and she almost slipped at one point. I would hold on too!
> 
> Those shoes are not meant for walking in the countryside, I don't know how people do it.


It's in every public setting, not just this one.


----------



## TMA

I thought this article was instructive: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.to...meghan-markle-is-not-breaking-royal-protocol/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TMA

Things have been done a certain way for a long time because that is how people knew to do things. Doesn’t mean they can’t change. I remember seeing a picture of Sophie, Countess of Wessex at one of the past trooping the colors and she had on a bubblegum
Pink outfit, almost off the shoulder and (clutching my pearls) showing décolletage. Now I don’t know what the reaction was to that (thankfully, Social
Media was not yet on steroids at the time) but something in me says the outcry would probably not have been as loud as it was when MM did it.


----------



## Jayne1

Bentley1 said:


> It's in every public setting, not just this one.


True -- but I noticed Harry does what he wants. Marry who he wants, work at what he wants to work at and not work at other things, hold hands if he wants to. He's living the life, that's for sure. lol


----------



## Laurie Lou

TMA said:


> I thought this article was instructive: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.to...meghan-markle-is-not-breaking-royal-protocol/



Great article.....everyone should read it.......

“Rather, protocol is how Meghan conducts herself with diplomats, with the Queen, and when she's representing the royal family out in public, something she's done with grace and poise so far.”

"She’s one person that’s really just trying to do her best. It’s only been a month. Let’s cut her a little slack," Arbiter says. "We don’t want to destroy her before she’s even had a chance to get started."


----------



## BagOuttaHell

TMA said:


> Don’t think the father is trash - I watched the interview. My impression was that their relationship seems to have broken down as there is no way MM or KP would have authorized that interview, especially since with Piers Morgan. If one wanted to be critical, almost seems like her Dad is complicit with the half-siblings to ensure the marriage doesn’t work. If he had just kept the interview personal to his relationship with his daughter, one could have taken the view that he feels hamstrung in not being able to defend himself from the level of abuse/criticism he has taken since the relationship started, but bringing in Harry’s opinion of ***** and Brexit was just bound to cause problems for Harry and the RF. Also, seems as if he is so intent on “laundering” his own image that he doesn’t care what the blowback is on his daughter. That speaks a bit to him as a parent as I can’t understand why he thinks this is so much about him. Her mother goes about her business, photographed, etc and I bet she made some adjustments to her routine, dressing, etc, knowing that she would be photographed and all that indirectly reflects on her daughter. This man however can not be bothered about that. I really hope their love can withstand the strain - it has been a bombardment from her family.



Trash. They asked him to not speak to the press. What is he doing? Speaking to the press. For money. Again.


----------



## bag-princess

Laurie Lou said:


> Great article.....everyone should read it.......
> 
> 
> 
> "She’s one person that’s really just trying to do her best. It’s only been a month. Let’s cut her a little slack," Arbiter says. "We don’t want to destroy her before she’s even had a chance to get started."




THIS part!!!  [emoji1360]



TMA said:


> Why should she? Is there something wrong with holding a partner’s hands?




Why would anyone expect her not to!?


----------



## cafecreme15

Bentley1 said:


> It's in every public setting, not just this one.



I think the rules are more lax at private, family weddings than official engagements. I agree Meghan needs to stop with the hand holding and touching Harry at official outings. It seemed she got the memo at Trooping the Colour though.


----------



## Bentley1

Jayne1 said:


> True -- but I noticed Harry does what he wants. Marry who he wants, work at what he wants to work at and not work at other things, hold hands if he wants to. He's living the life, that's for sure. lol


Lol this is very true!! Being 6 th in line to throne, meaning he'll never be King, allows Harry a lot more freedom and he certainly takes advantage of it


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Bentley1 said:


> She's not going to let the hand holding thing go, is she.


In this case she needed it.. it's on video how she almost fell..he was able to stop her from sliding downwards.


----------



## Alexenjie

So much criticism and snark for someone who is new to the royal family. Like people have just been waiting to knock her down from the moment of the engagement. Why the joy in pointing out flaws and mistakes that aren't important? Basically the monarchy is for show, they have influence but very little power other then their personalities. Why do people want to see Meghan fail? Haven't people ever heard about learning on the job? I do think it's very relevant that Harry and Meghan are very far from being next in line for the thrown and the rules they have to follow should not be the same as William and Kate.The queen has been in charge for approximately 70+ years. I hope the rules (most of which seem silly and out dated) will ease up once Queen Elizabeth is gone.


----------



## VickyB

Don't mean to step on any toes - this is a frivolous gossip forum where everybody is free to post comments, opinions, criticisms, etc. I apologize if I have missed any new updates from Mods re revised allowable post content. The beauty here is we can  agree or disagree with each other in a respectful way.


----------



## myown

why do people keep calling her "Meghan MARKLE"? And Catherine "Kate Middelton". One would never say "Mette-Marit Tjessem Hoiby" or "Mary Donaldson"


----------



## cafecreme15

myown said:


> why do people keep calling her "Meghan MARKLE"? And Catherine "Kate Middelton". One would never say "Mette-Marit Tjessem Hoiby" or "Mary Donaldson"



I do it because the latter two’s titles are easier to say and type out quickly eg CP Mette Marit or Princess Mary. Meghan’s and Kate’s titles can’t be preceded by Princess [Name] or even Duchess [Name]. And Catherine, Duchess is Cambridge and more so Meghan, Duchess of Sussex are mouthfuls to say and time consuming to type. Can’t speak as to why others do it.


----------



## LibbyRuth

cafecreme15 said:


> I do it because the latter two’s titles are easier to say and type out quickly eg CP Mette Marit or Princess Mary. Meghan’s and Kate’s titles can’t be preceded by Princess [Name] or even Duchess [Name]. And Catherine, Duchess is Cambridge and more so Meghan, Duchess of Sussex are mouthfuls to say and time consuming to type. Can’t speak as to why others do it.


Agreed.  When a person says Kate Middleton or Meghan Markle, I know who they are talking about.If they say Catherine or Meghan - even Catherine Cambridge or Meghan Sussex, I have to think about it.  It's a matter of simplicity.  But if I were sending a formal invitation to either, I would not use those names.


----------



## Bentley1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> In this case she needed it.. it's on video how she almost fell..he was able to stop her from sliding downwards.


True


----------



## Morgan R

Attending The Royal Ascot


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

Charles has some fat hands.  Almost swollen like.
I'm digging Megan's hat... the dress, not so much


----------



## Laurie Lou

DC-Cutie said:


> Charles has some fat hands.  Almost swollen like.
> I'm digging Megan's hat... the dress, not so much



I think she looks very nice but I do go back in forth between liking the dress and being like “meh”


----------



## Gal4Dior

DC-Cutie said:


> Charles has some fat hands.  Almost swollen like.
> I'm digging Megan's hat... the dress, not so much



It looks like a large handkerchief and it’s about 5 inches too long. I just think she generally looks better in more structured outfits. Loving the accessories though and the hair is perfection!


----------



## myown

I thought Meghan was tall, but is that Beatrice behind her?


----------



## daisychainz

myown said:


> I thought Meghan was tall, but is that Beatrice behind her?


Maybe you can see it better from this angle? If you look at the shoes, Beatrice has a stiletto heel on that is much taller than Meghan's more kitten. I think without shoes Meghan is taller by maybe 3 inches. I would put Meghan at 5'7. They are not standing back to back so the camera angle is making a difference, too.


----------



## cafecreme15

daisychainz said:


> Maybe you can see it better from this angle? If you look at the shoes, Beatrice has a stiletto heel on that is much taller than Meghan's more kitten. I think without shoes Meghan is taller by maybe 3 inches. I would put Meghan at 5'7. They are not standing back to back so the camera angle is making a difference, too.
> View attachment 4105016


I wonder how Beatrice is not hopelessly sinking into the grass in those stilettos. Meghan's heels look like they curve under, making them much more practical for walking on grass and turf.


----------



## pixiejenna

Omg so many top hats i die. I legitimately can’t even think of the last time I saw a top hat that wasn’t on tv/movie. I honestly don’t think I’ve ever seen a top hat IRL on someone.


----------



## mkr

That’s a fantastic hat. She looks good.


----------



## daisychainz

cafecreme15 said:


> I wonder how Beatrice is not hopelessly sinking into the grass in those stilettos. Meghan's heels look like they curve under, making them much more practical for walking on grass and turf.


Maybe that is what is making a height difference too. Some people are sinking into the soft grass.


----------



## VickyB

Oy. I can't with that hat.
I don't get the dress at all. I thought the days of handkerchief hems were thankfully behind us. Also seems too casual.  You know it's really a bad outfit when Bea and Eugenie look so much better. Hair looks good!!!!!


----------



## daisychainz

pixiejenna said:


> Omg so many top hats i die. I legitimately can’t even think of the last time I saw a top hat that wasn’t on tv/movie. I honestly don’t think I’ve ever seen a top hat IRL on someone.


My friend got married last year in a Steampunk wedding and her husband wore one for their wedding. Very.... unique


----------



## Gal4Dior

VickyB said:


> Oy. Who sold her on that hat?????
> I don't get the dress at all. I thought the days of handkerchief hems were thankfully behind us. Also seems too casual.  You know it's really a bad outfit when Bea and Eugenie look so much better.



That’s the exact thing I was thinking!! Bea and Eugenie looked great.


----------



## terebina786

I might be in the minority, but I like her dress, hat and makeup.


----------



## VickyB

terebina786 said:


> I might be in the minority, but I like her dress, hat and makeup.


I like her makeup too.


----------



## mkr

That hat is gorgeous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Love that hat. I also love the white and black. The dress isn’t as structured as I would have like on her but this is more fitting of her style it seems and cudos if she can keep some of that.

Heels are fine in grass. You just have to walk on the balls of your feet. No weight on the heel.


----------



## mkr

She looks better than most at the event. They all have long sleeves and thick fabric. She looks breezy.


----------



## Laurie Lou

Love the look of the whole outfit here...with the bottom part of the dress cut off lol




[emoji7][emoji7]


----------



## RueMonge

I bet the detail in the fabric is pretty in person. 
I'd be afraid to eat in that dress for sure. Everyone would know if you dribbled.


----------



## mdcx

I think she looks lovely. It must be so nerve wracking for her. The hair looks great and under control.
She will get the hang of what dresses suit her best for these public events.
She is so very petite and slim, it's much more noticeable in these types of photos than when she on was Suits.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I love what she has on. It's classic but not stuffy. I think she's still finding her feet with regards to dressing for her new role. Hopefully she finds a happy medium soon.


----------



## KM7029

Laurie Lou said:


> View attachment 4105192
> 
> 
> Love the look of the whole outfit here...with the bottom part of the dress cut off lol
> 
> View attachment 4105197
> 
> 
> [emoji7][emoji7]



I do not love this outfit, but I think she looks appropriately dressed here.


----------



## mdcx

KM7029 said:


> I do not love this outfit, but I think she looks appropriately dressed here.


Yes, she does look appropriately dressed. The rest of them (Beatrice, Eugenie etc) have had a lifetime of 'training' about what is appropriate to wear when appearing as a royal at a public event. They always wear quite structured clothing.
I think the idea is to be inoffensive and respectful and modest while still being formal enough.
Meghan is still finding her feet. She looks fantastic in white I have noticed.


----------



## Jayne1

Laurie Lou said:


> Love the look of the whole outfit here...with the bottom part of the dress cut off lol
> View attachment 4105197


Sometimes I think she is straining to keep smiling.  Her mouth looks like it hurts. I admire the ability, I can't do it.

I like what she's wearing, it seems perfect for the occasion.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Attending The Royal Ascot
> 
> 
> View attachment 4104911
> View attachment 4104863
> View attachment 4104867
> View attachment 4104871
> View attachment 4104920
> View attachment 4104864
> View attachment 4104913
> View attachment 4104872
> View attachment 4104929
> View attachment 4104930



simply beautiful !!
what a lovely look! the material of her Dress Looks stunning. too funny look at the Picture of meghan, Harry and the two Cousins Beatrice and eugine... the Dress of Beatrice Looks pretty but doesn't fit her Body, she Needs a number bigger and eugine Looks like a marshmellow .. meghan Looks so classy there ! well done meghan


----------



## mdcx

The way Harry is looking at her in this photo is so sweet:


----------



## minababe

mdcx said:


> I think she looks lovely. It must be so nerve wracking for her. The hair looks great and under control.
> She will get the hang of what dresses suit her best for these public events.
> She is so very petite and slim, it's much more noticeable in these types of photos than when she on was Suits.



she is really slim yes but not Petit. you can see it on suits and now as a royal as well. the british Family is really tall at all but you can see everywhere she goes she is mostly the same height than the men around her. she is 5'7 without heels


----------



## minababe

Alexenjie said:


> So much criticism and snark for someone who is new to the royal family. Like people have just been waiting to knock her down from the moment of the engagement. Why the joy in pointing out flaws and mistakes that aren't important? Basically the monarchy is for show, they have influence but very little power other then their personalities. Why do people want to see Meghan fail? Haven't people ever heard about learning on the job? I do think it's very relevant that Harry and Meghan are very far from being next in line for the thrown and the rules they have to follow should not be the same as William and Kate.The queen has been in charge for approximately 70+ years. I hope the rules (most of which seem silly and out dated) will ease up once Queen Elizabeth is gone.



so true! too sad .. but I don't think she notice these bad comments at all haha the press is in love with her and the most People too. I here are some of These women too who just came to sad negative Things about meghan for no reason .. of Coursee everyone has their own opinion but it#s different when you say the Dress is not my taste or I don't like this look instead of she looks awful ..her hair is a mess .. her Stylist should be fired blabla .. lol
I love her style and hope she is keeping meghan in her Outfits, like she is doing the whole time since their Engagement. so authentic I really like that.


----------



## mdcx

minababe said:


> she is really slim yes but not Petit. you can see it on suits and now as a royal as well. the british Family is really tall at all but you can see everywhere she goes she is mostly the same height than the men around her. she is 5'7 without heels


Yes, i realised after that in the US "petite" is used to mean short basically, which she is not. I was using it to mean small boned, delicate etc.


----------



## minababe

mdcx said:


> Yes, i realised after that in the US "petite" is used to mean short basically, which she is not. I was using it to mean small boned, delicate etc.



oh sry my fault then


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## anitalilac

Laurie Lou said:


> View attachment 4105192
> 
> 
> Love the look of the whole outfit here...with the bottom part of the dress cut off lol
> 
> View attachment 4105197
> 
> 
> [emoji7][emoji7]


I love everything about her, except the dress. Hair, makeup , shoes,  hat , all beautiful and fits nicely but the dress, looks odd to me.


----------



## mdcx

I am guessing by the next time Meghan appears, her transformation into perfect Royal will be complete! She has just about cracked it. A few things still need to be ironed out, but she is looking more "suitable" every time.

It must be hard to realise that you can't really "express yourself" through your clothes anymore because you need to fit the mould.


----------



## Gal4Dior

minababe said:


> so true! too sad .. but I don't think she notice these bad comments at all haha the press is in love with her and the most People too. I here are some of These women too who just came to sad negative Things about meghan for no reason .. of Coursee everyone has their own opinion but it#s different when you say the Dress is not my taste or I don't like this look instead of she looks awful ..her hair is a mess .. her Stylist should be fired blabla .. lol
> I love her style and hope she is keeping meghan in her Outfits, like she is doing the whole time since their Engagement. so authentic I really like that.



How is saying her hair is a mess and her stylist should be fired a horrible personal slight against her? I would say this about any celebrity or royal with something awful on, or with bad hairdo! It’s not like I hate that celebrity!


----------



## mkr

We’re not here to people please. We’re allowed to love and hate and criticize and compliment. This IS a gossip forum where we gossip.


----------



## Bentley1

mkr said:


> We’re not here to people please. We’re allowed to love and hate and criticize and compliment. This IS a gossip forum where we gossip.


Thank you


----------



## lulu212121

mkr said:


> We’re not here to people please. We’re allowed to love and hate and criticize and compliment. This IS a gossip forum where we gossip.


Seems this needs to be a sticky!


----------



## berrydiva

I love that hat but that white dress is tragic and there's nothing more I can't stand seeing than black shoes with a white outfit. It burns my soul.


----------



## Lounorada

berrydiva said:


> I love that hat but that white dress is tragic *and there's nothing more I can't stand seeing than black shoes with a white outfit. It burns my soul*.


Completely agree- great hat, bad dress.
Plus the hat is white, but the dress is an off-white/ivory and the two colours don't look good together, IMO.
@ the bolded - I thought I was the only one who felt that way  I've said this out loud to people before and was met with a blank stare and/or the question, what's so wrong with black shoes and a white outfit?... Uhmm, _everything _is wrong with it. Especially when the black shoes are fugly, plain and cheap looking


----------



## Grande Latte

Meghan looks great. I think I'm one of the few who actually liked the dress. It seemed appropriate and comfortable. I wouldn't want to wear really figure hugging dresses ALL the time, just some of the time.

In all seriousness, Internet published heights and weights of celebrities aren't really accurate. I don't think Meghan's 5-7. I think she's smaller. And is probably a size 0 or 2 in real life. Most celebs are actually more petite in real life, it's the screen that they fill up which gives us the illusion that they are bigger than life.


----------



## VickyB

Alexenjie said:


> The queen has been in charge for approximately 70+ years. I hope the rules (most of which seem silly and out dated) will ease up once Queen Elizabeth is gone.


_[I only included the part of your post on which I am commenting]_
*Really??  I say heaven help them when The Queen dies. *


----------



## VickyB

minababe said:


> so true! too sad .. but I don't think she notice these bad comments at all haha the press is in love with her and the most People too. I here are some of These women too who just came to sad negative Things about meghan for no reason .. of Coursee everyone has their own opinion but it#s different when you say the Dress is not my taste or I don't like this look instead of she looks awful ..her hair is a mess .. her Stylist should be fired blabla .. lol
> I love her style and hope she is keeping meghan in her Outfits, like she is doing the whole time since their Engagement. so authentic I really like that.



Hi There. Reposting a recent post of mine:
Don't mean to step on any toes - this is a frivolous gossip forum where everybody is free to post comments, opinions, criticisms, etc. I apologize if I have missed any new updates from Mods re revised allowable post content. The beauty here is we can agree or disagree with each other in a respectful way.


----------



## VickyB

Grande Latte said:


> Meghan looks great. I think I'm one of the few who actually liked the dress. It seemed appropriate and comfortable. I wouldn't want to wear really figure hugging dresses ALL the time, just some of the time.
> 
> In all seriousness, Internet published heights and weights of celebrities aren't really accurate. I don't think Meghan's 5-7. I think she's smaller. And is probably a size 0 or 2 in real life. Most celebs are actually more petite in real life, it's the screen that they fill up which gives us the illusion that they are bigger than life.



This is so true!! Particularly about height!!! I bet she is 5'5 tops.


----------



## PatsyCline

mdcx said:


> The way Harry is looking at her in this photo is so sweet:
> 
> View attachment 4105998



Who are the other two in the carriage?


----------



## VickyB

mkr said:


> We’re not here to people please. We’re allowed to love and hate and criticize and compliment. This IS a gossip forum where we gossip.



Thank you! Voice of reason!


----------



## Morgan R

PatsyCline said:


> Who are the other two in the carriage?



Prince Edward (Prince Harry's Uncle/The youngest of Queen Elizabeth II's four children) and his wife Sophie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

Lounorada said:


> Completely agree- great hat, bad dress.
> Plus the hat is white, but the dress is an off-white/ivory and the two colours don't look good together, IMO.
> @ the bolded - I thought I was the only one who felt that way  I've said this out loud to people before and was met with a blank stare and/or the question, what's so wrong with black shoes and a white outfit?... Uhmm, _everything _is wrong with it. Especially when the black shoes are fugly, plain and cheap looking


I actually like the black shoes, which repeat the black trim on the hat, the belt and the clutch.  Introducing another color wouldn’t have worked, in my opinion, and I hate white shoes.  The pumps were Givenchy...anything but cheap.


----------



## Lounorada

bisbee said:


> I actually like the black shoes, which repeat the black trim on the hat, the belt and the clutch.  Introducing another color wouldn’t have worked, in my opinion, and I hate white shoes.  The pumps were Givenchy...anything but cheap.


OK and that's _your_ opinion.
I didn't like the shoes or belt with that dress, both were too heavy for such a delicate dress. 
Also, IMO the hat didn't even go with the dress, I think a more neutral straw coloured hat would have looked better and then the accessories could have been neutral, more complimentary to the ivory.
Just because the shoes are expensive and have a Givenchy tag on them doesn't make me think they are any less cheap looking.


----------



## DC-Cutie

those shoes do 'look' cheap..  I don't care how high end they are


----------



## Gal4Dior

Lounorada said:


> OK and that's _your_ opinion.
> I didn't like the shoes or belt with that dress, both were too heavy for such a delicate dress.
> Also, IMO the hat didn't even go with the dress, I think a more neutral straw coloured hat would have looked better and then the accessories could have been neutral, more complimentary to the ivory.
> Just because the shoes are expensive and have a Givenchy tag on them doesn't make me think they are any less cheap looking.



I have to agree. I was shocked to find out they were Givenchy, as well. I liked the Sarah Flint Black Pumps better, and those were a lot less expensive.

The belt she wore was meant for a structured dress. I didn’t mind the hat and the clutch, though. Those were beautiful picks - just not with the weird handkerchief shirt dress.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VickyB said:


> This is so true!! Particularly about height!!! I bet she is 5'5 tops.


I've been a Suits junkie for 7 years... maybe this can help us all judge. Rick and Sarah in the center are both 5'9. Sarah has heels bringing her closer to 5'11 and Patrick at 6'. If Meghan took off the 3 inches she appears to be wearing here she'd drop below Rick/Sarah in this pic by 3 inches, and her former leading man by probably 5, putting her at about 5'5-5'6. So 5'5-5'6 is a really good guesstimate. Suits hires super tall females, Katherine Heigl is 5'9 and Jacinda Barrett is 5'10, and Gina is 5'10/5'11. I'm guessing she isn't shorter than 5'5-5'6 just based on the females they hire as leads for that show.

Pic credit from US weekly online.


----------



## jcnc

Sounds like pure gossip to me.    
*Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Want To Raise Their Royal Twins In The United States *
*Markle is reportedly pregnant already.*

https://www.mtlblog.com/news/meghan...-raise-their-royal-twins-in-the-united-states


----------



## TMA

jcnc said:


> Sounds like pure gossip to me.
> *Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Want To Raise Their Royal Twins In The United States *
> *Markle is reportedly pregnant already.*
> 
> https://www.mtlblog.com/news/meghan...-raise-their-royal-twins-in-the-united-states



Some of these people have overactive imaginations.


----------



## mdcx

jcnc said:


> Sounds like pure gossip to me.
> *Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Want To Raise Their Royal Twins In The United States *
> *Markle is reportedly pregnant already.*
> 
> https://www.mtlblog.com/news/meghan...-raise-their-royal-twins-in-the-united-states



I'm sure Megs and Harry both got the talk about how any pregnancy super soon after the wedding would be perceived. It wouldn't surprise me if she is pregnant six months from now though.


----------



## pixiejenna

Lmao pregnant with twins already. I’m sure she’ll get pregnant soon but I highly doubt she’s pregnant with twins one month after getting married.

 On a side note I’m hoping that their babies have ginger curly hair! At least that’s what i’m hoping for.


----------



## anitalilac

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I've been a Suits junkie for 7 years... maybe this can help us all judge. Rick and Sarah in the center are both 5'9. Sarah has heels bringing her closer to 5'11 and Patrick at 6'. If Meghan took off the 3 inches she appears to be wearing here she'd drop below Rick/Sarah in this pic by 3 inches, and her former leading man by probably 5, putting her at about 5'5-5'6. So 5'5-5'6 is a really good guesstimate. Suits hires super tall females, Katherine Heigl is 5'9 and Jacinda Barrett is 5'10, and Gina is 5'10/5'11. I'm guessing she isn't shorter than 5'5-5'6 just based on the females they hire as leads for that show.
> 
> Pic credit from US weekly online.


Her dress is beautiful and with her hair down like that, I like this more then what she has been wearing since being engaged ! Why can't she wear something like this? but with more coverage of course...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

anitalilac said:


> Her dress is beautiful and with her hair down like that, I like this more then what she has been wearing since being engaged ! Why can't she wear something like this? but with more coverage of course...


Right?! Agree 100%. She looks great here.


----------



## mdcx

The dress above is a nice length on her and the ankle strap shoes make her very slim legs look more proportional.


----------



## minababe

jcnc said:


> Sounds like pure gossip to me.
> *Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Want To Raise Their Royal Twins In The United States *
> *Markle is reportedly pregnant already.*
> 
> https://www.mtlblog.com/news/meghan...-raise-their-royal-twins-in-the-united-states


from us right? they wish ! hahaha this will never happen


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> I'm sure Megs and Harry both got the talk about how any pregnancy super soon after the wedding would be perceived. It wouldn't surprise me if she is pregnant six months from now though.


I think announcement by October, baby by April.


----------



## Dawn72

PatsyCline said:


> Who are the other two in the carriage?



Prince Edward and his wife. Harry’s uncle, his dad’s youngest brother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince Harry is on a low key visit to Lesotho opening a school.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Harry is on a low key visit to Lesotho opening a school.


No Meghan in tow?


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> No Meghan in tow?


Low key, not publicised, focus on the school and his charity Sentebale. It would be a circus if she had gone.


----------



## myown

jcnc said:


> Sounds like pure gossip to me.
> *Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Want To Raise Their Royal Twins In The United States *
> *Markle is reportedly pregnant already.*
> 
> https://www.mtlblog.com/news/meghan...-raise-their-royal-twins-in-the-united-states


twins... wouldn't twins show pretty early in pregnancy? and just recently she wore a very fitted dress


----------



## roxies_mom

cafecreme15 said:


> Kate is also a seasoned veteran at this point. But I simply cannot get enough of her outfit. This has been her best look in what might be years.


Because she's the future queen, she gets front row. I read that's protocol.


Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Young Leaders Awards at Buckingham Palace with Queen Elizabeth II


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Young Leaders Awards at Buckingham Palace with Queen Elizabeth II
> 
> View attachment 4112875
> View attachment 4112880
> View attachment 4112877
> View attachment 4112876
> View attachment 4112882
> View attachment 4112878


She looks like a Stepford doll in that last pic. Maybe relax just a tad?


----------



## DC-Cutie

is part of the protocol shinny pantyhose?


----------



## afsweet

love her dainty bracelet!


----------



## Lounorada

The more photos I see of her attending Royal events, the more it looks like her personality is being wiped out. She's like a mannequin in the pics above.

That outfit is ugly. It would have looked better without all those buttons, but at least her shoes are cute with some detail rather than plain.
IMO, she should stay away from dresses/skirts/tops in these thick, rigid fabrics and go for more fluid, softer fabrics... they'd be so much more flattering to her figure.


----------



## purseproblm

Legwear is required by HM. I don’t *think* it has to be shiny, but Kate’s always are too.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Her makeup looks great. Outfit looks awful on her.


----------



## chowlover2

Lounorada said:


> The more photos I see of her attending Royal events, the more it looks like her personality is being wiped out. She's like a mannequin in the pics above.
> 
> That outfit is ugly. It would have looked better without all those buttons, but at least her shoes are cute with some detail rather than plain.
> IMO, she should stay away from dresses/skirts/tops in these thick, rigid fabrics and go for more fluid, softer fabrics... they'd be so much more flattering to her figure.


I thought the same thing when I saw that pic! I realize it's summer, but I would love to see her in a bit of color and better tailoring.


----------



## LnA

I have to say, after meeting/marrying MM, Harry really does look a lot healthier and overall happier.


----------



## MarvelGirl

LnA said:


> I have to say, after meeting/marrying MM, Harry really does look a lot healthier and overall happier.



He really does! It is so wonderful to see after all he went through because of what happened to his mother. Finally in love, at peace and very happy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

The buttons on that jacket make it look super dated and ages her. I like the skirt, and her hair and make-up are perfection!

The Aquazurra shoes were a nice choice to break up the bland of the dress and jacket. What is up with her and blush pink tones?? 

I agree with others that she’s looking stepfordy...but I guess that’s what she’s required to do marrying into the BRF.

I would feel sorry for her, but she chose this life and is smart enough to know what it entails. It also comes with a lot of perks, too.


----------



## terebina786

She needs to keep whoever did her makeup for her wedding forever.  That un-blended contour and blush look really bad.


----------



## anitalilac

terebina786 said:


> She needs to keep whoever did her makeup for her wedding forever.  That un-blended contour and blush look really bad.


I agree...that blush and contour looks harsh on her...


----------



## finer_woman

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> She looks like a Stepford doll in that last pic. Maybe relax just a tad?


That was my thought as well,  even in the first pic


----------



## bag-princess

He just doesn’t know when to stop! 

——————-


Thomas Markle Sr. Has Some Thoughts on Queen Elizabeth's Meeting with President *****



Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle Sr., is speaking with TMZ again. And this time, he's commenting on his daughter's grandmother-in-law, the Queen. In the new interview, Markle Sr. weighed in on the British monarch's upcoming visit with President *****.

"If the Queen is willing to meet our arrogant and insensitive president she has no excuse not to meet me, I’m nowhere near as bad," he said, according to the publication.

Queen Elizabeth will reportedly meet with ***** on July 13 at Windsor Castle. "[President *****] has to see the head of state. Putting his foot on the ground of British soil, it's job one—very, very important, very symbolic," US Ambassador to the UK Robert Wood Johnson told Sky News earlier this month.

Markle Sr. also shared with TMZ that he feels like the royal family is putting him in the "penalty box" following his interview last week with Good Morning Britain, and that he hasn't spoken with anyone from Kensington Palace, including his daughter Meghan, following that appearance.

During his on-air conversation with Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid on June 18, Markle Sr. revealed details of his conversations with Prince Harry about President ***** and Brexit. Markle Sr. also shared what was said when Meghan told him she was dating Prince Harry for the first time.



https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...paign=socialflowFBTCO&utm_medium=social-media


----------



## Gal4Dior

bag-princess said:


> He just doesn’t know when to stop!
> 
> ——————-
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Sr. Has Some Thoughts on Queen Elizabeth's Meeting with President *****
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle Sr., is speaking with TMZ again. And this time, he's commenting on his daughter's grandmother-in-law, the Queen. In the new interview, Markle Sr. weighed in on the British monarch's upcoming visit with President *****.
> 
> "If the Queen is willing to meet our arrogant and insensitive president she has no excuse not to meet me, I’m nowhere near as bad," he said, according to the publication.
> 
> Queen Elizabeth will reportedly meet with ***** on July 13 at Windsor Castle. "[President *****] has to see the head of state. Putting his foot on the ground of British soil, it's job one—very, very important, very symbolic," US Ambassador to the UK Robert Wood Johnson told Sky News earlier this month.
> 
> Markle Sr. also shared with TMZ that he feels like the royal family is putting him in the "penalty box" following his interview last week with Good Morning Britain, and that he hasn't spoken with anyone from Kensington Palace, including his daughter Meghan, following that appearance.
> 
> During his on-air conversation with Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid on June 18, Markle Sr. revealed details of his conversations with Prince Harry about President ***** and Brexit. Markle Sr. also shared what was said when Meghan told him she was dating Prince Harry for the first time.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...paign=socialflowFBTCO&utm_medium=social-media



If this is just the start, Meghan’s life in this spotlight is going to be so grim.


----------



## bag-princess

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> She looks like a Stepford doll in that last pic. Maybe relax just a tad?



I’m sure she will - just give her some time! I can’t imagine how nervous she must be having to follow all the protocols when she’s in the Queen’s presence. It must be nerve wracking but I am sure she will adjust just fine after a while.


----------



## Addicted to bags

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> She looks like a Stepford doll in that last pic. Maybe relax just a tad?


That was exactly what I thought immediately!!! 
Well, maybe I thought Stepford Wife, lol


----------



## mdcx

I think Meghan looks good apart from the makeup needing a tad more blending. She looks appropriate to her role, fits in with the other royals and looks more comfortable in her role than she has before. 

She will never look cutting edge or the height of fashion at these events, I think she looks about right. The dress colour and length and the shoes style is very flattering on her.


----------



## mdcx

LVSistinaMM said:


> If this is just the start, Meghan’s life in this spotlight is going to be so grim.


He will be frozen out by the royals in a similar way to Fergie I would guess. Poor guy doesn't realise people like Piers Morgan are just using him.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mdcx said:


> I think Meghan looks good apart from the makeup needing a tad more blending. She looks appropriate to her role, fits in with the other royals and looks more comfortable in her role than she has before.
> 
> She will never look cutting edge or the height of fashion at these events, I think she looks about right. The dress colour and length and the shoes style is very flattering on her.



A part of me thinks Meghan is going to tire of this life very quickly. She seems strong, independent, outspoken. So far all she’s done is to appear some place in an “appropriate” outfit, smile, and schmooze. I don’t know how Kate does it either, but Kate never struck me as a woman with huge ambitions. Meghan does.


----------



## mdcx

LVSistinaMM said:


> A part of me thinks Meghan is going to tire of this life very quickly. She seems strong, independent, outspoken. So far all she’s done is to appear some place in an “appropriate” outfit, smile, and schmooze. I don’t know how Kate does it either, but Kate never struck me as a woman with huge ambitions. Meghan does.


Yeah Kate was working her whole life towards this. It will wear on Meghan I'm sure, but her and Harry seem like the types to go off and have wild times somewhere in private to let off steam.


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Prince Harry and Meghan attending the Young Leaders Awards at Buckingham Palace


----------



## Gal4Dior

The first one was just an odd picture...

The more I look at photos of her dress, the more I feel like it should be on a woman 2 times her age?

Sorry - meant to quote the above post.


----------



## shpahlc

Am I the only one who thinks she looks pregnant? In a very good way, she’s glowing...but she’s progressively been wearing items that look baggy and that traditionally has not been her style (pre-wedding).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-princess said:


> He just doesn’t know when to stop!
> 
> ——————-
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Sr. Has Some Thoughts on Queen Elizabeth's Meeting with President *****
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle Sr., is speaking with TMZ again. And this time, he's commenting on his daughter's grandmother-in-law, the Queen. In the new interview, Markle Sr. weighed in on the British monarch's upcoming visit with President *****.
> 
> "If the Queen is willing to meet our arrogant and insensitive president she has no excuse not to meet me, I’m nowhere near as bad," he said, according to the publication.
> 
> Queen Elizabeth will reportedly meet with ***** on July 13 at Windsor Castle. "[President *****] has to see the head of state. Putting his foot on the ground of British soil, it's job one—very, very important, very symbolic," US Ambassador to the UK Robert Wood Johnson told Sky News earlier this month.
> 
> Markle Sr. also shared with TMZ that he feels like the royal family is putting him in the "penalty box" following his interview last week with Good Morning Britain, and that he hasn't spoken with anyone from Kensington Palace, including his daughter Meghan, following that appearance.
> 
> During his on-air conversation with Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid on June 18, Markle Sr. revealed details of his conversations with Prince Harry about President ***** and Brexit. Markle Sr. also shared what was said when Meghan told him she was dating Prince Harry for the first time.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...paign=socialflowFBTCO&utm_medium=social-media


What an utter a***se he seems to be, this so called father of Meghan. Well, yes, I'm _sure_ this will make his daughter keep up contact with him even more


----------



## minababe

I don't get what her father is thinking .. I thought he would be ashamed for the rest of his life what he did to meghan right before her wedding day .. and now is going on and on and on .. for someone who is not a public love Person he really seems to love the Attention .. weird .. I think it's a shame that he talked about his talk to Harry to the media at all but this Topic now .. why the queen not invited him instead of *****? what the hell is he thinking?? I don't think the queen will ever meet him after all that Drama ..

love her outift and look at the Event yesterday. so classy like always and totally her style. I think she is really into neutral colours when they have Events with the queen. just to be sure to match the Picture. I'm really cuirous to see her Dress for the christening of Louis, I don't think she should wear creme there. maybe a summer flowery maxi oder midi Dress. I would like to see her in something like this.


----------



## Suzie

I think she looks lovely.


----------



## myown

Lounorada said:


> The more photos I see of her attending Royal events, the more it looks like her personality is being wiped out. She's like a mannequin in the pics above.
> .


I agree, but my guess is, once she settled as a Royal, she will become more herself again.


----------



## myown

bag-princess said:


> I’m sure she will - just give her some time! I can’t imagine how nervous she must be having to follow all the protocols when she’s in the Queen’s presence. It must be nerve wracking but I am sure she will adjust just fine after a while.


I would think the  queen seems like a nice old lady, and I would guess Meghan and Kate treat her like just the grandma of their spouses - with a lot of respect. 
I would think the media attention and all the negative comments and comments overall must be nerve wracking


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> The first one was just an odd picture...
> 
> The more I look at photos of her dress, the more I feel like it should be on a woman 2 times her age?
> 
> Sorry - meant to quote the above post.


I read that outfit was an homage            at Diana


----------



## myown

shpahlc said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she looks pregnant? In a very good way, she’s glowing...but she’s progressively been wearing items that look baggy and that traditionally has not been her style (pre-wedding).


I dont thik she is hiding a bump here 



Morgan R said:


> Attending The Royal Ascot
> View attachment 4104871
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> I agree, but my guess is, once she settled as a Royal, she will become more herself again.


I think that too, she's just trying to fit in to her new role, in time she will be more relaxed and become more settled and re find her old style, obviously making it protocol appropriate too. I initially thought this of Catherine as well and now look at her, 7 years in and it feels like she's been a Royal forever. 
Meghan will be fine.


----------



## mkr

Dang Meghan has her legs crossed and Harry’s got the man spread going on just like us peasants.


----------



## bag-princess

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (that’s Prince Harry and Meghan Markle) have made no secret of the fact that they’re excited to expand their family. But despite being bestowed their fancy titles from the queen herself, their future children may not receive the same honor.

Confused? Allow us to explain.

Per a royal family rule, the title of “prince” and “princess” (as well as “his or her royal highness”) are reserved for children or grandchildren of the monarch. This means that Harry and Meghan’s future children—let’s call them Arthur and Alice—would simply be Lord Arthur and Lady Alice Mountbatten-Windsor. (Not too shabby, but it’s no HRH.)

Wait, but what about George, Char and Louis? OK, here’s where it gets a little complicated. Thanks to another confusing (and um, sexist) rule, George was always entitled to be HRH Prince George, since he is the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. Charlotte, on the other hand, was not entitled to the same honor and would have been Lady Charlotte Mountbatten-Windsor had the queen not stepped in.

While Kate Middleton (aka the Duchess of Cambridge—still with us?) was pregnant with Charlotte, the queen issued a rule, stating: “All the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of royal highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour.”

Translation? All of Prince William’s children (i.e., not just George) can be a prince or princess. Because what Gan-Gan says goes.

Now, back to Prince Harry and Meghan. One way for their future offspring to receive a “prince” or “princess” title would be if the queen made a similar rule change for them as she did for Charlotte. Alternatively, if Charles became king before Meghan gave birth, then baby Alice’s grandfather would sit on the throne, meaning that the royal title would be rightfully hers. (And you thought deciphering the Game of Thrones royal lineage was complicated.)








https://www.purewow.com/news/prince...&utm_campaign=audience_testing&utm_medium=cpc


----------



## Yoshi1296

bag-princess said:


> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (that’s Prince Harry and Meghan Markle) have made no secret of the fact that they’re excited to expand their family. But despite being bestowed their fancy titles from the queen herself, their future children may not receive the same honor.
> 
> Confused? Allow us to explain.
> 
> Per a royal family rule, the title of “prince” and “princess” (as well as “his or her royal highness”) are reserved for children or grandchildren of the monarch. This means that Harry and Meghan’s future children—let’s call them Arthur and Alice—would simply be Lord Arthur and Lady Alice Mountbatten-Windsor. (Not too shabby, but it’s no HRH.)
> 
> Wait, but what about George, Char and Louis? OK, here’s where it gets a little complicated. Thanks to another confusing (and um, sexist) rule, George was always entitled to be HRH Prince George, since he is the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. Charlotte, on the other hand, was not entitled to the same honor and would have been Lady Charlotte Mountbatten-Windsor had the queen not stepped in.
> 
> While Kate Middleton (aka the Duchess of Cambridge—still with us?) was pregnant with Charlotte, the queen issued a rule, stating: “All the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of royal highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour.”
> 
> Translation? All of Prince William’s children (i.e., not just George) can be a prince or princess. Because what Gan-Gan says goes.
> 
> Now, back to Prince Harry and Meghan. One way for their future offspring to receive a “prince” or “princess” title would be if the queen made a similar rule change for them as she did for Charlotte. Alternatively, if Charles became king before Meghan gave birth, then baby Alice’s grandfather would sit on the throne, meaning that the royal title would be rightfully hers. (And you thought deciphering the Game of Thrones royal lineage was complicated.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.purewow.com/news/prince...&utm_campaign=audience_testing&utm_medium=cpc





Thanks for this! I was always confused about how this worked. Royal titles and lineage is so freakin complicated haha


----------



## bag-princess

myown said:


> I would think the  queen seems like a nice old lady, and I would guess Meghan and Kate treat her like just the grandma of their spouses - with a lot of respect.
> I would think the media attention and all the negative comments and comments overall must be nerve wracking





She does seem like a nice little old lady but she is the Queen and then knowing how much Harry loves,adores and respects her must add to any nerves she already had. But they seem to get along well and like each other so I am sure she’s more comfortable in her presence more and more.


----------



## bag-princess

Yoshi1296 said:


> Thanks for this! I was always confused about how this worked. Royal titles and lineage is so freakin complicated haha




It really is so complicated and confusing! Sometimes I have to read an article twice trying to understand it all!


----------



## myown

bag-princess said:


> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (that’s Prince Harry and Meghan Markle) have made no secret of the fact that they’re excited to expand their family. But despite being bestowed their fancy titles from the queen herself, their future children may not receive the same honor.
> 
> Confused? Allow us to explain.
> 
> Per a royal family rule, the title of “prince” and “princess” (as well as “his or her royal highness”) are reserved for children or grandchildren of the monarch. This means that Harry and Meghan’s future children—let’s call them Arthur and Alice—would simply be Lord Arthur and Lady Alice Mountbatten-Windsor. (Not too shabby, but it’s no HRH.)
> 
> Wait, but what about George, Char and Louis? OK, here’s where it gets a little complicated. Thanks to another confusing (and um, sexist) rule, George was always entitled to be HRH Prince George, since he is the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. Charlotte, on the other hand, was not entitled to the same honor and would have been Lady Charlotte Mountbatten-Windsor had the queen not stepped in.
> 
> While Kate Middleton (aka the Duchess of Cambridge—still with us?) was pregnant with Charlotte, the queen issued a rule, stating: “All the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of royal highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour.”
> 
> Translation? All of Prince William’s children (i.e., not just George) can be a prince or princess. Because what Gan-Gan says goes.
> 
> Now, back to Prince Harry and Meghan. One way for their future offspring to receive a “prince” or “princess” title would be if the queen made a similar rule change for them as she did for Charlotte. Alternatively, if Charles became king before Meghan gave birth, then baby Alice’s grandfather would sit on the throne, meaning that the royal title would be rightfully hers. (And you thought deciphering the Game of Thrones royal lineage was complicated.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.purewow.com/news/prince...&utm_campaign=audience_testing&utm_medium=cpc


dang! first I thought that was a pregnancy announcement. what a bummer!

so that is why Eugenie and Beatrice are Princesses? Because their Grandmother (QE) wa son the throne before they were born?


----------



## myown

Yoshi1296 said:


> Thanks for this! I was always confused about how this worked. Royal titles and lineage is so freakin complicated haha


and different in each Kingdom


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## berrydiva

I mentioned in her style and looking at the pics again, I don't understand her show selection.  The black shoe is terrible.


----------



## PatsyCline

If you use royal jurisprudence, once Charles ascends the throne, his grandchildren would inherit the HRH also.


----------



## berrydiva

PatsyCline said:


> If you use royal jurisprudence, once Charles ascends the throne, his grandchildren would inherit the HRH also.


Are William/Kate's kids already not HRH given he's next in line?


----------



## PatsyCline

berrydiva said:


> Are William/Kate's kids already not HRH given he's next in line?



I believe in a previous post, some me mentioned the Queen made a rule for William’s children.


----------



## daisychainz

mkr said:


> Dang Meghan has her legs crossed and Harry’s got the man spread going on just like us peasants.


The first thing I noticed in the picture was how Harry was sitting. All the focus is on Meghan being appropriate and sitting right, but he can do a spread?! That doesn't look royal


----------



## Morgan R

At the Audi Polo Cup












Meghan with Serena Williams and Alexis Ohanian


----------



## VickyB

Not a fan of the Prada outfit worn at the reception earlier this week. The color did nothing for her and the odd piece of fabric that winged out just didn't work. Makeup seemed too heavy and hair was too soap opera in style. Liked the black shoes!


----------



## Grande Latte

She's a chameleon. She blends right in with the royal family.


----------



## VickyB

Grande Latte said:


> She's a chameleon. She blends right in with the royal family.


She's an actress.


----------



## Morgan R

At the Audi Polo Challenge (July 1, 2018)


----------



## DC-Cutie

never realized how tall Harry is


----------



## afsweet

She looks good in both outfits at the Audi Polo Cup. Seems much more like her own style, and she looks relaxed and happy.


----------



## TNgypsy

She always looks cute to me. She looked great at the Audi event.


----------



## kemilia

stephc005 said:


> She looks good in both outfits at the Audi Polo Cup. Seems much more like her own style, and she looks relaxed and happy.


Yes she does, and no pantyhose!


----------



## PatsyCline

DC-Cutie said:


> never realized how tall Harry is



I think he’s 6’2”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cph706

berrydiva said:


> Are William/Kate's kids already not HRH given he's next in line?



It also depends on preference of children’s parents. The Earl of Wessex’s children are entitled to be Princess Louise and Prince James, as they are grandchildren of the monarch. However their parents wished that they be styled Lord and Lady, which are customary for children of an Earl.

Frankly if I were them I’d complain. Lol.


----------



## minababe

meghan wore flats at the Weekend and didn't look small against the other People around. I think she is taller than the most People think. she is just slimly built. serena doesn't look taller than her ..and I think she is tall


----------



## Morgan R

*Prince Harry attending the Wheels Down Ball 









*


----------



## mdcx

Morgan R said:


> *Prince Harry attending the Wheels Down Ball
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


He looks so happy


----------



## Kat Madridista

minababe said:


> meghan wore flats at the Weekend and didn't look small against the other People around. I think she is taller than the most People think. she is just slimly built. serena doesn't look taller than her ..and I think she is tall



People who have met her in person have said that she's probably between 5'3" and 5'4", max 5'5". She barely clears Harry's eyeline when she wears her 4-5in heels, and he's 6'1". So I think 5'3"-5'5" sounds about right.


----------



## myown

on her wedding makeup:

*Duchess Meghan Markle‘s makeup artist, Daniel Martin, went on Good Morning America on Tuesday (July 3) and revealed how the new royal informed him about her royal wedding to Prince Harry!
It turns out, the Duchess used emojis to let him know his services were needed!
“She [texted and] was, like, ‘Hey — what are you doing May 19th?’ And then she sent me two emojis of the bride and groom. I was, like, ‘OK, yeah, whatever you need,’” Daniel recalled.
He also said of her wedding day look, “It wasn’t about a trendy makeup. It wasn’t about a lot of eye, or a lot of lip. It was about her, and her being confident.”

-jj*


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> He looks so happy


The guy's got a great life. He should be happy.  lol


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Commonwealth Youth Reception


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Harry and Meghan attending the Commonwealth Youth Reception


----------



## BagLovingMom

Great photos , thank you *Morgan R. !*
Meghan’s posture looks great, she’s carrying the dress off beautifully!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

At least this dress has a little shape, but it's still not a great cut for her. I also don't think yellow is her color, but it's nice to see her in some color.


----------



## TNgypsy

Not many people can wear yellow but she looks beautiful in it. I wish the dress was a smidge shorter but she still looks great. I think for a new royal that she’s doing very well.


----------



## Addicted to bags

TNgypsy said:


> Not many people can wear yellow but she looks beautiful in it. I wish the dress was a smidge shorter but she still looks great. I think for a new royal that she’s doing very well.


Yes exactly! Everything looks good but the dress is too long for her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think she looks great. The cut is long and lean and suits her body shape. She's rocking the yellow, which is hard to do.


----------



## minababe

BEAUTIFUL !!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

I love the yellow on her and the length is great. Since the dress is so simple, the length really works. Knee length would be too normal/ ordinary.


----------



## mdcx

I think the length is great also, it suits her very slim legs and doesn't make then look even slimmer. I like seeing her in something more form fitting. Her hair looks nice and she looks a lot more comfortable.
They are just adorable together


----------



## prettyprincess

The more I see her the more I love her!! She’s so refined and regal compared to the garbage we see all over the media.


----------



## bag-mania

They are such a cute couple. I love the shots where Harry is fiddling with his wedding band, like he's not quite used to wearing a ring yet.


----------



## Chamber Doll

lol In some pics it looks like they want to touch each other.   It must be hard to have to keep their hands off of each other some times.


----------



## redney

I love the midi dress length, currently trendy.


----------



## White Orchid

Whilst she has a great body, her waistline is quite boxy.  This however dress however is a great improvement and especially in regards to the fit.  And that shade of yellow really does become her.


----------



## gazoo

White Orchid said:


> Whilst she has a great body, her waistline is quite boxy.  This however dress however is a great improvement and especially in regards to the fit.  And that shade of yellow really does become her.


It's only fair she has a boxy waist after being blessed with that face. 

I love the dress on her. And hey @berrydiva, no black shoes this time!


----------



## berrydiva

gazoo said:


> It's only fair she has a boxy waist after being blessed with that face.
> 
> I love the dress on her. And hey @berrydiva, no black shoes this time!


You think she reads here?! *squeek* lol


----------



## prettyprincess

Does she kiiiiind of sort of remind anyone else of a less mischievous Angelina lol? The humanitarian side of Angelina. Not in terms of looks, but how she speaks to fans and her demeanor? I can’t quite put my finger on it.


----------



## VickyB

Dress cut and color - terrific!
Hair and makeup - terrific!
Nude shoes - ugh
Toothpick legs - creepy


----------



## TMA

VickyB said:


> Dress cut and color - terrific!
> Hair and makeup - terrific!
> Nude shoes - ugh
> Toothpick legs - creepy



I guess I’m creepy too as I have them toothpick legs[emoji17]


----------



## minababe

I want to see Meghan at Wimbledon ! maybe at Serena's next game .. or at the finals


----------



## Tivo

prettyprincess said:


> Does she kiiiiind of sort of remind anyone else of a less mischievous Angelina lol? The humanitarian side of Angelina. Not in terms of looks, but how she speaks to fans and her demeanor? I can’t quite put my finger on it.


I don’t think she’s less mischievous than Angie, and I do love Angie - despite her faults. Meghan is an actress playing the role of a lifetime. It’s a role she clearly enjoys so at least there is that.


----------



## Laurie Lou

Oh great, we’re back to comments on her legs...... [emoji19][emoji58]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## StylishMD

Laurie Lou said:


> Oh great, we’re back to comments on her legs...... [emoji19][emoji58]


IKR, don't think she can help the way her legs look
The criticism of her physical appearance (other than her clothes and accessories) is disappointing


----------



## Jayne1

VickyB said:


> Dress cut and color - terrific!
> Hair and makeup - terrific!
> Nude shoes - ugh
> Toothpick legs - creepy


But she can't do anything about skinny legs.  Kind of like eyes too close together - it's not something that can be changed, so best to focus on the rest that's fabulous.


Tivo said:


> I don’t think she’s less mischievous than Angie, and I do love Angie - despite her faults. Meghan is an actress playing the role of a lifetime. It’s a role she clearly enjoys so at least there is that.


Agree.  When I see videos (not stills) it's like we are seeing her play the role of a lifetime.  She's very good at it too.


----------



## VickyB

TMA said:


> I guess I’m creepy too as I have them toothpick legs[emoji17]


For the record, I too have very very slim legs, just not as thin as hers. I'd rather that mine had a bit more meat on them as well.


----------



## MizGemma

She looks beautiful and has that newlywed glow still.


----------



## VickyB

StylishMD said:


> IKR, don't think she can help the way her legs look
> The criticism of her physical appearance (other than her clothes and accessories) is disappointing


 double post


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> But she can't do anything about skinny legs.  Kind of like eyes too close together - it's not something that can be changed, so best to focus on the rest that's fabulous.
> 
> Agree.  When I see videos (not stills) it's like we are seeing her play the role of a lifetime.  She's very good at it too.



Just a reminder to all that this is a gossip forum and we are free to post our opinions whatever they might be w/in the rules set forth. We may like some posts, might hate others or find some disappointing. It's a mixed bag of nuts as to what you will find here. I would never presume  to try to limit or drive the conversations in certain directions.Nevertheless, there is something to be said for a positive perspective.


----------



## Jayne1

VickyB said:


> Just a reminder to all that this is a gossip forum and we are free to post our opinions whatever they might be w/in the rules set forth. We may like some posts, might hate others or find some disappointing. It's a mixed bag of nuts as to what you will find here. I would never presume  to try to limit or drive the conversations in certain directions.Nevertheless, there is something to be said for a positive perspective.


I didn't mean you should focus on the positive, I just meant that if someone has something they cannot change, like close set eyes or really skinny legs, it is best to try and get over it and accentuate the positive attributes.

Sorry if I wasn't clear.


----------



## mkr

Well thank you for telling us what is best for us but as Vicky said, this Is a gossip thread and we thoroughly enjoy criticizing others as much as we enjoy complimenting them.   [emoji8]


----------



## bisbee

mkr said:


> Well thank you for telling us what is best for us but as Vicky said, this Is a gossip thread and we thoroughly enjoy criticizing others as much as we enjoy complimenting them.   [emoji8]


If you thoroughly enjoy criticizing others, you are certainly free to continue.  At the same time, others are also free to criticize your criticism.


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't mean you should focus on the positive, I just meant that if someone has something they cannot change, like close set eyes or really skinny legs, it is best to try and get over it and accentuate the positive attributes.
> 
> Sorry if I wasn't clear.



Thanks, I understood you perfectly. My post was in response to you trying to "guide" what content members should or should not post.
Here are the important take-aways  from my previous post:
gossip forum - free to post our opinions w/in the rules -* I would never presume to try to limit or drive the conversations in certain directions.*


----------



## VickyB

bisbee said:


> If you thoroughly enjoy criticizing others, you are certainly free to continue.  At the same time, others are also free to criticize your criticism.



ITA


----------



## BagLovingMom

Should be a good week of photos coming up with the christening and the trip to Ireland


----------



## VickyB

mkr said:


> Well thank you for telling us what is best for us but as Vicky said, this Is a gossip thread and we thoroughly enjoy criticizing others as much as we enjoy complimenting them.   [emoji8]


----------



## minababe

what do you think of the relationship between meghan and kate ?
I always liked (and still like ) kate but since the wedding I'm a bit dissapointed of her .. she looked the whole time pissed at the wedding and her clothing choice was a statement for me too .. to wear something you already wore 2 times in public and in such a light colour .. not due to me


----------



## myown

that she wore something she has worn before could be a statement. Kate is called out to spent too much money on clothes and does nothing for the firm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseproblm

I think she wore a repeat also to make sure there was little attention on her. She did the same when Zara got married.


----------



## mkr

minababe said:


> what do you think of the relationship between meghan and kate ?
> I always liked (and still like ) kate but since the wedding I'm a bit dissapointed of her .. she looked the whole time pissed at the wedding and her clothing choice was a statement for me too .. to wear something you already wore 2 times in public and in such a light colour .. not due to me



You might look p!ssed to if you had to look after two toddlers while trying to be the perfect future queen for the world to see. But I get the feeling she and Meghan get along just fine.


----------



## mkr

bisbee said:


> If you thoroughly enjoy criticizing others, you are certainly free to continue.  At the same time, others are also free to criticize your criticism.



Criticize away my friend![emoji8]


----------



## Jayne1

VickyB said:


> Thanks, I understood you perfectly. My post was in response to you trying to "guide" what content members should or should not post.
> Here are the important take-aways  from my previous post:
> gossip forum - free to post our opinions w/in the rules -* I would never presume to try to limit or drive the conversations in certain directions.*


I'm still not telling you what to do.  I would never guide anyone, especially on-line. What an impossible task.

I was just thinking in general terms - if someone (not Meghan) has something they cannot change, they (_not us_) should try to accentuate the positive.

I'm all for free speech on a gossip forum. Again, I am not lecturing this forum.  Although reprimanding _me_ in bold and red, for something you misunderstood, is a bit much.  lol


----------



## mkr

Um you’re doing it again.


----------



## daisychainz

minababe said:


> what do you think of the relationship between meghan and kate ?
> I always liked (and still like ) kate but since the wedding I'm a bit dissapointed of her .. she looked the whole time pissed at the wedding and her clothing choice was a statement for me too .. to wear something you already wore 2 times in public and in such a light colour .. not due to me


It is hard to be a friend to a single or newly married woman when you are a mom of 3 little toddlers/babies. I think they may have stuff in common, both being in the royal family, but their current lives and future roles are very different. I imagine they would be friendly to each other but not have much in common beyond the marriage into the royal family. Kate relishes her role and seems to thrive in it, she is leaps and bounds ahead of Meghan in that family and might not want to teach and train her (or have the time for it). I guess I imagine they'd be friendly but not friends, so Kate doing something slightly spiteful to appear better... I can see that happening.


----------



## LibbyRuth

From the outside looking in, I think it's very tough to get any real hints as to what their relationship is.  Kate has been on maternity leave for the entire time that Harry and Meghan have been married, so when we haven't seen her around there's no way to discern if it's because of her thoughts on Meghan, or having just given birth. In due time, we'll see if they have a bond looking out for each other like Diana and Sarah did, or if they are two women who happen to marry into the same family / work together.
Regarding her chosen attire for the wedding, I don't think a lot can be read into that.  Could she have chosen to wear something that was a repeat to show she didn't think the wedding was that big a deal? Maybe.  But I think it's far more likely that she either chose to wear that so that she'd blend in ensuring Meghan would be THE focus of the day OR that she planned on wearing something else, and the reality of being a woman who'd just recently given birth is that sometimes you go to get dressed and discover that what you were going to wear doesn't fit, so you improvise.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> It is hard to be a friend to a single or newly married woman when you are a mom of 3 little toddlers/babies. I think they may have stuff in common, both being in the royal family, but their current lives and future roles are very different. I imagine they would be friendly to each other but not have much in common beyond the marriage into the royal family. Kate relishes her role and seems to thrive in it, she is leaps and bounds ahead of Meghan in that family and might not want to teach and train her (or have the time for it). I guess I imagine they'd be friendly but not friends, so Kate doing something slightly spiteful to appear better... I can see that happening.


They may or may not become real friends.  Kate may feel a twinge of jealousy while Meghan is new and getting a lot of attention.  But that will calm down.  In the long run, I don't think Kate has anything to worry about.


----------



## Morgan R

At Prince Louis' Christening


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


> At Prince Louis' Christening
> 
> View attachment 4126332


I think this is the best I've seen her looking


----------



## mkr

She looks great!  I’d like to see the gloves on.


----------



## Laurie Lou

You can’t tell from these pics but her hair is in a ponytail.....the color suits her.....I think she nailed it!


----------



## mkr

Yes she did


----------



## CherryCokeCoach

The top portion seems to be a bit ill fitting.


----------



## berrydiva

She looks good. 

I can't wait for those stockings to go and their legs can be free. #freethelegs lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Laurie Lou

Lol I apologize for the quality....it’s a screenshot from a video but here’s a look at her hair!


----------



## RueMonge

berrydiva said:


> She looks good.
> 
> I can't wait for those stockings to go and their legs can be free. #freethelegs lol.



Yes! freethelegs.


----------



## mdcx

I like this look, great length, great silhouette, she fits in and looks lovely.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think the dress Kate wore wasn’t actually a re-wear, just very similar to a past style:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.hel...iddleton-royal-wedding-dress-coat/?viewas=amp

And I don’t think you can compare Sarah and Diane to these two. Sarah and Diane were close before Sarah married Andrew.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Westminster Abbey service celebrating the 100th Anniversary of the Royal Air Force


----------



## bag-princess

Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??


----------



## chicaloca

I don’t think I’ve weighed in on Meghan yet. I think she is a breath of fresh air for the royal family. She is striking the perfect balance between youthfulness and their conservative dress requirements. I’m pleasantly surprised she’s managed not to look as matronly as the other British royal women.

I also love how tiny she is next to Harry. She looks like a doll.


----------



## Laurie Lou

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Westminster Abbey service celebrating the 100th Anniversary of the Royal Air Force
> 
> View attachment 4127017
> 
> View attachment 4127054
> View attachment 4127053
> View attachment 4127067
> 
> View attachment 4127103
> 
> View attachment 4127012
> 
> View attachment 4127013
> View attachment 4127014
> View attachment 4127015
> View attachment 4127016



Well she’s nailed it again! I do wish it was a slightly lighter Navy, as it looks almost black in some pics but she looks great! They all do! I can’t wait to see what she’s gonna wear in Ireland.


----------



## StylishMD

bag-princess said:


> Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??


Totally agree @bag-princess


----------



## Coconuts40

This dress looks stunning on her!  Very similar silhouette to her wedding dress.  Too bad her wedding dress wasn't as tailored as this dress.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-princess said:


> Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??


Well said.  I think that being an actress prepared her for some elements of being a member of the royal family that could throw your average commoner for a loop - the number of pictures you have to pose for and delivering a needed "look", the attention you get walking from a car to a door, etc. While those things are on a much bigger scale in Meghan's life now, she probably didn't need as much training as some in those areas.  But I totally agree that when her life is talked about as a role, it kind of demeans the relationship between her and Harry for no good reason.


----------



## TMA

bag-princess said:


> Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??


----------



## TMA

I can’t get over those comments either but I guess we now have a cynical world where everyone assumes every and all things even if it is baseless.


----------



## mkr

I like Meghan and love her clothing choices even if they’re too dark but dang she’s getting annoying with the Harry touching.


----------



## terebina786

She needs to ALWAYS wear dresses cut like that black one.  She looks great!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TMA

mkr said:


> I like Meghan and love her clothing choices even if they’re too dark but dang she’s getting annoying with the Harry touching.



[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]. love the touching. She seems to be a touchy-feely type. I’m sure at some point if view points like his filter through to her, she may stop or she may just say, will do me. As long as Harry doesn’t flinch from her touch or patronized by it, all good


----------



## mkr

Harry already got caught dodging her on camera.


----------



## westjenn

bag-princess said:


> Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??


@bag-princess AMEN!!


----------



## DC-Cutie

mkr said:


> I like Meghan and love her clothing choices even if they’re too dark but dang she’s getting annoying with the Harry touching.


she just wants to love on her man!  LOL


----------



## bag-princess

DC-Cutie said:


> she just wants to love on her man!  LOL



  exactly!   i always wonder if it's people that have a problem with touching/being touched that can't stand it when they see someone else doing it.


----------



## TMA

mkr said:


> Harry already got caught dodging her on camera.



A perusal of the video is warranted. She wasn’t even going for his hand in it. There is so much sound-bites and sometimes outright  lies that one has to trust their own eyes and as much as possible, view things with an open mind.


----------



## mkr

bag-princess said:


> exactly!   i always wonder if it's people that have a problem with touching/being touched that can't stand it when they see someone else doing it.



No I don’t have a problem with touching!  The rules for them is no touching. I like people who follow rules.


----------



## White Orchid

I don’t like how it squishes her boobies but otherwise it’s a winner for me.


----------



## mkr

White Orchid said:


> I don’t like how it squishes her boobies but otherwise it’s a winner for me.



I saw a close-up of her. It looks like she’s wearing a strapless spandex type slip and it’s smashing them.


----------



## minababe

the last Outfits were all a 10 !! loove her dior Dress today. she Looks amazing. the colour Looks really dark compared to the rest but it Matches harry's uniform so perfectly. I'm in love haha

I'm not sure if she is really a (annoying type) touchy Person  she just needs (who would not ) secure from him. where to walk where to stand, she is really Close to him just to be sure she is right I think. i think it's lovely how she is doing so far in her new life 

btw what a tough schedule Harry and meghan have today. first westminder abbey, beckíngham Palace and than their first offical trip to ireland.


----------



## minababe

mkr said:


> You might look p!ssed to if you had to look after two toddlers while trying to be the perfect future queen for the world to see. But I get the feeling she and Meghan get along just fine.



i would look happy af if the brother of my husband, who I'm really Close with Looks that happy as Harry on his wedding day ! I don't mean she should look perfect or something. she just didn't smile once at the whole wedding ceremony. and she seems to look down the whole time while the rest of the guests were totally happy for the lovely couple. I like Kate since the beginning I just think that she was weird at the wedding day .. and I think it could be something because she was for many years the only attractive women in the royal Family and she was always with William and Harry and now there is a another couple. and meghan got a ot of Attention .. just saying


----------



## Morgan R

At Buckingham Palace


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving in Dublin


----------



## berrydiva

That green dress looks great on her. Harry has that walk where he knows his wife is a hottie. lol.


----------



## marthastoo

Those last few photos of them walking off the plane seriously look like a photo shoot or an ad campaign.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

Love the last two looks! It’s like she’s reading this forum and following our recommendations


----------



## redney

Love the bateau neckline and midi length dresses!


----------



## Laurie Lou

Garden Party at the British Ambassadors residence. I believe the dress is by Emilia Wickstead.


----------



## MarvelGirl

Meghan is living The Glamorous Life!  She's looking so lovely and chic and Harry so handsome and debonaire! Loving everything so far. Brava Meghan!!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

She's starting to find her style. Those last three dresses are near perfect.


----------



## ap.

Beautiful!  Her clothes finally fit her properly.  She must have discovered a tailor / seamstress or they're made for her.


----------



## ap.

bag-princess said:


> Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??



A good deal of royal duties are the public appearances -- they're performance and they're the only "interaction" we have with them (at least for me).  Their behavior is constrained during these appearances, but Harry, William, the Queen, etc...have the benefit of being raised in that environment so (we assume) it comes more naturally while Meghan would have to make an effort (as in playing a role) at least initially.  

The lack of PDA is an example.  She seems naturally touchy-feely and my guess is if she had her druthers she'd be hanging on Harry's arm every time they're walking, but her "role" and convention requires her to keep her hands to herself.


----------



## roses5682

Love both the green dress with the tan shoes as well as last black dress. I agree with others who have noted that the tailoring has greatly improved.


----------



## Laurie Lou

So because they’re in Ireland are they being referred to as Baron and Baroness of Kilkeel?


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Harry and Meghan  at the Garden Party at British Ambassdor's headquarters (Glencairn House)


----------



## Morgan R

Some of you have pointed out that Meghan seems like she is the touchy-feely type.

Am I only the one that noticed they are both touchy-feely. If you watch videos of them interact from the time they were dating to now a married couple they both come across as the touchy-feely type. In videos a lot of the time Harry often reaches for Meghan's hand to hold or touches her back while Meghan often also touches his back or holds onto his arm. And they both tend to whisper things back and forth to one another.


----------



## PatsyCline

Morgan R said:


> Some of you have pointed out that Meghan seems like she is the touchy-feely type.
> 
> Am I only the one that noticed they are both touchy-feely. If you watch videos of them interact from the time they were dating to now a married couple they both come across as the touchy-feely type. In videos a lot of the time Harry often reaches for Meghan's hand to hold or touches her back while Meghan often also touches his back or holds onto his arm. And they both tend to whisper things back and forth to one another.



I love the fact that they hold hands and such.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She looked so great in that navy dress and then she reverted back to shapeless ones.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I don't see anything shapeless about her last dress choices. Far more tailored than her first efforts.  She was never going to dress like her pre-wedding self once her royal duties began but I feel like she's walking the line really well at the moment.


----------



## bag-mania

It’s to be expected that newlyweds can’t keep their hands off of each other. I doubt they’ll still be like that in a year or two after they have settled into the reality of marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

It’s so odd, I didn’t really follow them pre wedding, but now I can’t get enough of them! Marriage goals, humanitarian goals, great body goals, dewy skin goals, etc.


----------



## Hobbsy

Morgan R said:


> Some of you have pointed out that Meghan seems like she is the touchy-feely type.
> 
> Am I only the one that noticed they are both touchy-feely. If you watch videos of them interact from the time they were dating to now a married couple they both come across as the touchy-feely type. In videos a lot of the time Harry often reaches for Meghan's hand to hold or touches her back while Meghan often also touches his back or holds onto his arm. And they both tend to whisper things back and forth to one another.


Just going to say the same thing. I've seen a lot of pictures he is reaching for her hand. Holding hands or her having her hand through his arm while walking is refreshing! I hope they continue for the next 50, 60 years.


----------



## Chamber Doll

prettyprincess said:


> It’s so odd, I didn’t really follow them pre wedding, but now I can’t get enough of them!.



ME TOO!.....I never followed the royal family or her career........but now I keep checking this thread for more pictures of them........and now the will and kate thread........I can't say that I love these people......i'm just intrigued


----------



## VickyB

mkr said:


> Harry already got caught dodging her on camera.



Yes, there have been a number of times very recently caught on camera/video where she is reaching for his hand or arm and he moves his out of grasp by seemingly to attend to  his tie or jacket - leaving her grasping hand/arm awkwardly in limbo. A very obvious one was in one of the Christening videos . Also, one snap from this morning, I think, seemed to show her giving him a "look" for not doing something she expected(grasping hand).


----------



## VickyB

mkr said:


> I like Meghan and love her clothing choices even if they’re too dark but dang she’s getting annoying with the Harry touching.



ITA. The Christening outfit was fab but didn't think the color was good for a July Christening. The hat was terrific with the ponytail.


----------



## VickyB

Laurie Lou said:


> Well she’s nailed it again! I do wish it was a slightly lighter Navy, as it looks almost black in some pics but she looks great! They all do! I can’t wait to see what she’s gonna wear in Ireland.



ITA. The dress is fantastic but wish it didn't come off as black even tho it is navy.

I know you all are fans of the nude shoe but just think it doe not work here with this dress.


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still not telling you what to do.  I would never guide anyone, especially on-line. What an impossible task.
> 
> I was just thinking in general terms - if someone (not Meghan) has something they cannot change, they (_not us_) should try to accentuate the positive.
> 
> I'm all for free speech on a gossip forum. Again, I am not lecturing this forum.  Although reprimanding _me_ in bold and red, for something you misunderstood, is a bit much.  lol



Totally confused now. If I misunderstood .


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> They may or may not become real friends.  Kate may feel a twinge of jealousy while Meghan is new and getting a lot of attention.  But that will calm down.  In the long run, I don't think Kate has anything to worry about.


ITA. I think it could be a bumpy road. It would be hard to imagine that there would not be some unspoken competition between the two of them re fashion/style/social conduct. Can't think either would want to be upstaged by the other. Kate because she's been on the scene so long (and future Queen/mother of future King) and is accustomed to the singular adoration and Meghan because she comes from a celebrity background and is used to commanding the spotlight. It will be very interesting to see how things unfold.


----------



## VickyB

mkr said:


> No I don’t have a problem with touching!  The rules for them is no touching. I like people who follow rules.



Also, sometimes the way she does it looks so...I don't know what...maybe forced?


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Arriving in Dublin
> 
> View attachment 4127420
> View attachment 4127383
> View attachment 4127422
> View attachment 4127423
> View attachment 4127424
> View attachment 4127419
> View attachment 4127388
> View attachment 4127389



Love this from the front but does not look good at all from the side.


----------



## VickyB

Laurie Lou said:


> View attachment 4127637
> View attachment 4127638
> 
> 
> Garden Party at the British Ambassadors residence. I believe the dress is by Emilia Wickstead.



Like this dress very much but who wears black to a July garden party? I thought Royals were very limited as to events to which they can wear black.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I don't see anything shapeless about her last dress choices. Far more tailored than her first efforts.  She was never going to dress like her pre-wedding self once her royal duties began but I feel like she's walking the line really well at the moment.


Totally agree, the last few outfits from the yellow dress onwards have been perfect. It would have been nice if the one she wore to the garden party wasn't black but the shape and fit was lovely. 
She's finding her style, looking forward to seeing what she wears today.


----------



## Sharont2305

Laurie Lou said:


> So because they’re in Ireland are they being referred to as Baron and Baroness of Kilkeel?


Yes


----------



## Grande Latte

Her fashion has been spot-on lately. She picks up SO fast and is looking divine. Not very many women can wear hats and look royal immediately. She's nailed it.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> More pictures of Harry and Meghan  at the Garden Party at British Ambassdor's headquarters (Glencairn House)
> 
> 
> View attachment 4127721
> View attachment 4127722
> View attachment 4127720
> View attachment 4127723
> View attachment 4127724
> View attachment 4127726
> 
> View attachment 4127727
> View attachment 4127728
> View attachment 4127729
> View attachment 4127730



this couple is to die for. there is so much love and happiness and they are such a hot match. just perfect 
and I love how Harry wants to reach her Hand here .. ooooooo I melt away haha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Meeting the President and his wife, and their dogs


----------



## White Orchid

I looove this capture.  The dog is literally sitting on her feet!   Royalty, shmoyalty eh?


----------



## Tivo

bag-princess said:


> Why do people feel the need to keep saying “she’s an actress in the role of a lifetime”?? She’s not pretending to be married obviously so what exactly is she pretending to be/do??


 No, of course she’s not “acting” like a newlywed, but “acting” out her royal duties. The royals most certainly “perform” and Meghan is an actress. This is the role of her life....a role she seems more than happy to take on.


----------



## mkr

Any aristocrat who brings his dogs along for the pictures is a winner in my book.

Are they Burmese Mountain dogs?  They stole everyone's thunder.


----------



## minababe

White Orchid said:


> I looove this capture.  The dog is literally sitting on her feet!   Royalty, shmoyalty eh?



hahahah what a lovely Picture !
love her Dress !


----------



## Suzie

mkr said:


> Any aristocrat who brings his dogs along for the pictures is a winner in my book.
> 
> Are they Burmese Mountain dogs?  They stole everyone's thunder.


I think so, there are 2 that live in my street, they are massive dogs, my little whippets pale in comparison.


----------



## Morgan R

At Croke Park Stadium attending the Gaelic Sports Festival


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> Well said.  I think that being an actress prepared her for some elements of being a member of the royal family that could throw your average commoner for a loop - the number of pictures you have to pose for and delivering a needed "look", the attention you get walking from a car to a door, etc. While those things are on a much bigger scale in Meghan's life now, she probably didn't need as much training as some in those areas.  But I totally agree that when her life is talked about as a role, it kind of demeans the relationship between her and Harry for no good reason.


she probably also already knew how to give a certain impression of herself, Kate on the other hand needed to learn that. 
But that is just how everyone else is: you can be giggly and young at work and a strikt grown woman at home.


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> i would look happy af if the brother of my husband, who I'm really Close with Looks that happy as Harry on his wedding day ! I don't mean she should look perfect or something. she just didn't smile once at the whole wedding ceremony. and she seems to look down the whole time while the rest of the guests were totally happy for the lovely couple. I like Kate since the beginning I just think that she was weird at the wedding day .. and I think it could be something because she was for many years the only attractive women in the royal Family and she was always with William and Harry and now there is a another couple. and meghan got a ot of Attention .. just saying


exactly. 
I could be as tried as could be yet be happy for my friend to get married and I wouldn't stop smiling.


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> At Buckingham Palace
> 
> View attachment 4127373
> View attachment 4127378
> View attachment 4127391
> View attachment 4127375
> View attachment 4127380
> View attachment 4127376
> View attachment 4127377
> View attachment 4127381


she is such a fresh breeze. I love seeing her.


----------



## Sharont2305

mkr said:


> Any aristocrat who brings his dogs along for the pictures is a winner in my book.


He's not an aristocrat, lol x


----------



## myown

White Orchid said:


> I looove this capture.  The dog is literally sitting on her feet!   Royalty, shmoyalty eh?


this really looks like  a very honest photo. nothing forced here, only pure joy


----------



## LibbyRuth

I love the way that in so many pictures of Harry meeting people, he appears to be so focused on the person he's greeting in any moment.  In some of the pictures above with the kids, you can really see it.  It appears that he appreciates the importance of connecting with each person instead of arrogantly going about the job figuring that shaking a persons hand is enough.


----------



## daisychainz

I think some of these recent outfits have been really nice, especially the ones from yesterday. But so many of her clothes do not fit well. That gray/taupe dress with the dogs is so bunched at the top and gives her entire chest a saggy boobs look. It's quite awful, perhaps because of the boatneck? Or the lack of shapewear or something. The elder woman next to her actually looks better in her dress. And her pants and jacket in the field photo are both 3/4 cropped so they look very ill-fitting. I wish some of us on here could style her. I love how her hair is looking lately - it looks freshly cut.


----------



## bisousx

Meghan is stunning in black and looking fresh in that suit. It’s making me envious of her skinny frame!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

She looks soooo good in that suit. I think it fits her very well, very crisp!


----------



## White Orchid

myown said:


> this really looks like  a very honest photo. nothing forced here, only pure joy


Cos she’s a dog lover.  I can relate


----------



## White Orchid

bellebellebelle19 said:


> She looks soooo good in that suit. I think it fits her very well, very crisp!


Yep, she looks great in those pencil-thin pants.  Very flattering!


----------



## White Orchid

daisychainz said:


> I think some of these recent outfits have been really nice, especially the ones from yesterday. But so many of her clothes do not fit well. That gray/taupe dress with the dogs is so bunched at the top and gives her entire chest a saggy boobs look. It's quite awful, perhaps because of the boatneck? Or the lack of shapewear or something. The elder woman next to her actually looks better in her dress. And her pants and jacket in the field photo are both 3/4 cropped so they look very ill-fitting. I wish some of us on here could style her. I love how her hair is looking lately - it looks freshly cut.


I think the problem is she’s not wearing a proper bra which that taupe-coloured dress only highlights.  That’s what I noticed first: the visible strapless bra which was more noticeable under her boobies.

Meghan, if you’re reading this, you need to get a better bra for your girls, lol.  Otherwise, I’m loving her recent looks.


----------



## terebina786

How are her heels not sinking into the grass????


----------



## berrydiva

terebina786 said:


> How are her heels not sinking into the grass????


I stand/walk more on the balls of my feet when standing on grass or walking across the sidewalk grates so my heels don't sink.   Perhaps she's doing the same.


----------



## berrydiva

I love a good tailored pant.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> I love the way that in so many pictures of Harry meeting people, he appears to be so focused on the person he's greeting in any moment.  In some of the pictures above with the kids, you can really see it.  It appears that he appreciates the importance of connecting with each person instead of arrogantly going about the job figuring that shaking a persons hand is enough.



He is very much like his mother in that way.


----------



## RueMonge

bag-mania said:


> He is very much like his mother in that way.



Yes! I think of his mother so often when I see him in pictures lately. And he still has the look of the sweet boy we loved then.

It is so delightful to see them happy and relaxed. I'm not a avid royal watcher, but as others have been saying, I just can't get enough of these two.


----------



## ap.

VickyB said:


> Love this from the front but does not look good at all from the side.



Meghan would be better served if she wore less of a padded/push-up bra.  For someone with her shape (as I do), I find a smaller bust, strange as it might seem, looks more feminine because the clothes fit better.  There's none of that pulling around the bust.


----------



## ap.

myown said:


> exactly.
> I could be as tried as could be yet be happy for my friend to get married and I wouldn't stop smiling.



Or maybe Kate was just an exhausted mother having to make a public appearance soon after giving birth to her third child.  Didn't William get caught dozing off in church a few days before?


----------



## pixiejenna

Her style is evolving and she looks great. I feel like her hair is finally on point now, no more loose whispys flying around.  I wish she’d wear it curly but she seems to like it straight.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I like that suit.


----------



## berrydiva

apey_grapey said:


> Meghan would be better served if she wore less of a padded/push-up bra.  For someone with her shape (as I do), I find a smaller bust, strange as it might seem, looks more feminine because the clothes fit better.  There's none of that pulling around the bust.


As a member of the big boobie club, I agree with the struggle of the pulling around the bust. It can quickly ruin a tailored look and often makes it difficult to get a proper fit.


----------



## mkr

berrydiva said:


> As a member of the big boobie club, I agree with the struggle of the pulling around the bust. It can quickly ruin a tailored look and often makes it difficult to get a proper fit.



I would love to have small boobies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

She looks fantastic and appropriate.

Regards her bra situation, I would guarantee she's been told that her bra straps must never be visible, so is turning to strapless bras. When you are small busted (I used to be) it's hard to get good fitting strapless bras.
Looking back now I used to try and wear the same size as my regular bra if not smaller, just to try and keep one on.
Now I know better, you generally need to go up a cup size when you wear strapless.
She will figure it out, she has people who can help advise her and will see the photos herself and pick it up.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Her books look quite lovely to me lol. The visible bra is unfortunate though. She should wear a normal bra and get snaps sewn into the shoulders for the straps.


----------



## ap.

mdcx said:


> She looks fantastic and appropriate.
> 
> Regards her bra situation, I would guarantee she's been told that her bra straps must never be visible, so is turning to strapless bras. When you are small busted (I used to be) it's hard to get good fitting strapless bras.
> Looking back now I used to try and wear the same size as my regular bra if not smaller, just to try and keep one on.
> Now I know better, you generally need to go up a cup size when you wear strapless.
> She will figure it out, she has people who can help advise her and will see the photos herself and pick it up.



One of the benefits of having small boobs is being able to go without a bra.  Meghan's gray dress is so fitted that it might have been better if she had gone braless -- again, making sure the nipples aren't "visible".


----------



## VickyB

apey_grapey said:


> One of the benefits of having small boobs is being able to go without a bra.  Meghan's gray dress is so fitted that it might have been better if she had gone braless -- again, making sure the nipples aren't "visible".



No bra Duchess? Clutching my pearls.  LOL


----------



## airkay

VickyB said:


> Also, sometimes the way she does it looks so...I don't know what...maybe forced?



Insecure? Both of them maybe? PDA at work is odd.


----------



## VickyB

bellebellebelle19 said:


> She looks soooo good in that suit. I think it fits her very well, very crisp!



She looks terrific in pant suits! There was that black quasi take on a tux pre wedding one that made her look like a million bucks! I think it was a  Stella McCartney?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

airkay said:


> Insecure? Both of them maybe? PDA at work is odd.


I hate to infringe on the love fest on this thread but this is how I've felt about them ever since the marriage. Harry does not look like the happy newly-wed (not even at the wedding) and Meghan looks very "forced" in her mannerisms- and skinnier than ever. Something's off.


----------



## myown

berrydiva said:


> I stand/walk more on the balls of my feet when standing on grass or walking across the sidewalk grates so my heels don't sink.   Perhaps she's doing the same.


yeah I think I can see that on the pictures


----------



## ccbaggirl89

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I hate to infringe on the love fest on this thread but this is how I've felt about them ever since the marriage. Harry does not look like the happy newly-wed (not even at the wedding) and Meghan looks very "forced" in her mannerisms- and skinnier than ever. Something's off.


I don't know too much about Harry tbh, before this wedding, but he doesn't look that happy to me in some pictures. I see genuine affection when William laughs with Kate or looks at her but more restrained happiness with Harry. Perhaps that is just "him?" Meghan appears overly affectionate in comparison, you can see she's really happy.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't know too much about Harry tbh, before this wedding, but he doesn't look that happy to me in some pictures. I see genuine affection when William laughs with Kate or looks at her but more restrained happiness with Harry. Perhaps that is just "him?" Meghan appears overly affectionate in comparison, you can see she's really happy.


I honestly don't think she looks genuinely happy a lot of the time with Harry, its seems very plastered on. He's not reciprocating her bids for contact. He just doesn't seem as affectionate as before the wedding. Maybe something happened, some information came up that Harry didn't know before the wedding? Who knows. There was a lot of toxic family drama. I know her dad divulged publicly private conversations he was supposed to have had with both of them. Maybe she spoke about things to someone she shouldn't have? Again, who knows, this is pure speculation but their body language is just off.

I'm no expert on royalty but I find that Will looks to have a lot of admiration for Kate, she seems really strong psychologically. I think she makes him feel secure, that's how they look together. She has that slightly amused look sometimes. Not in a bad way, just a lot of integrity and not taking her self too seriously. When they broke up it seems she just went on her way and he had to work to get her back. She would probably have done just fine without him, like her sister.

All right, amateur armchair psychology session over  

B t w, I saw a vid on youtube claiming that Harry is really in love with Kate, and she with him


----------



## DC-Cutie

the theories....


----------



## Fally420

Meghan is always considered as an independent and strong woman, but I think she looks like the opposite because of her clingy behaviour whilst doing public performances. She seems so dependent on Harry, like an appendage. I'm curious if this changes over time.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Fally420 said:


> Meghan is always considered as an independent and strong woman, but I think she looks like the opposite because of her clingy behaviour whilst doing public performances. She seems so dependent on Harry, like an appendage. I'm curious if this changes over time.



I disagree with this.  I'd agree that in public appearance right now she seems to be staying by Harry's side, holding his hand, etc.  But I don't see it as clingy.  Rather I see it as a woman who is in a new environment and leaning on the person she knows the best - whose totally comfortable in those settings - for support. 
While none of us got to see the ins and outs of their courtship, if reports are to be believed, Meghan established what she's tolerate and what she would not to be with Harry, and wasn't willing to do anything necessary in order to keep him around. (heck, if you believe the Lifetime movie she even dumped him at one point).  No question - she made sacrifices.  She gave up work and moved a great distance for him ... but there are plenty of strong men and women who choose to do that for what is best for their relationship. I think she's figured out how to remain herself in their marriage, making sacrifices but also expecting Harry to give and make sacrifices as well.  To me, that's an equal partnership.


----------



## daisychainz

Fally420 said:


> Meghan is always considered as an independent and strong woman, but I think she looks like the opposite because of her clingy behaviour whilst doing public performances. She seems so dependent on Harry, like an appendage. I'm curious if this changes over time.


My mom was visiting last night and said I am following Meghan, and so we started to look at some online pictures and just chat. My mom said she seems like a very clingy woman and needs to stop latching on to Harry everywhere since it makes her look weak. I also see her doing that very often, but I think it is because she may be using his arm/hand and closeness for support and guidance. Like a hand squeeze between them might indicate go left/right or yes, you did ok during that event and introduction, and like that. She was clinging on to him before marriage though in many of their dating pictures, so I think she is far more touchy and that is probably just her. She seems affectionate and likes touch, that is obvious. Only now since they are a royal couple it looks less ok somehow, as if less pda is expected and she all of a sudden should be more independent. She needs a lot of help right now so I think she is reaching for that with him since he is her only support.


----------



## Sharont2305

Meghan and Catherine will be attending the Wimbledon Ladies Final together on Saturday, then Catherine will be attending the Men's Final on Sunday with William.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

VickyB said:


> No bra Duchess? Clutching my pearls.  LOL


What's next--no pantyhose? Double clutch!!


----------



## prettyprincess

Even if she _is _being “clingy” who cares? aren’t husbands supposed to be a source of strength and support? She’s in a new country and the entire world is scrutinizing her every move. I’d be clingy too.


----------



## westjenn

prettyprincess said:


> Even if she _is _being “clingy” who cares? aren’t husbands supposed to be a source of strength and support? She’s in a new country and the entire world is scrutinizing her every move. I’d be clingy too.


agree 100%!!


----------



## DC-Cutie

prettyprincess said:


> Even if she _is _being “clingy” who cares? aren’t husbands supposed to be a source of strength and support? She’s in a new country and the entire world is scrutinizing her every move. I’d be clingy too.


please say this again!  I don't see it as clingy.  she's literally by herself in a new country, a new life, a new way of doing things. she has Harry for support.  I'm independent but love to be affectionate towards my man and he does the same.  It's not 'get a room' type of affection in public, but it's very loving and caring.  
If that's "clingy' to some of ya'll, well clingy it is


----------



## PatsyCline

DC-Cutie said:


> please say this again!  I don't see it as clingy.  she's literally by herself in a new country, a new life, a new way of doing things. she has Harry for support.  I'm independent but love to be affectionate towards my man and he does the same.  It's not 'get a room' type of affection in public, but it's very loving and caring.
> If that's "clingy' to some of ya'll, well clingy it is



I saw a video the other day where it claimed Meghan is developing a British accent. 

Makes sense, she’s been there full-time since the fall, so I’m sure she’s taken some mannerisms and speech from her new in-laws.


----------



## bag-mania

A lot of snap judgements are being made based solely on tabloid photos and videos.

I bet nobody posting here would believe her own relationship could be accurately interpreted by how she appears in a few photos.


----------



## Morgan R

PatsyCline said:


> I saw a video the other day where it claimed Meghan is developing a British accent.
> 
> Makes sense, she’s been there full-time since the fall, so I’m sure she’s taken some mannerisms and speech from her new in-laws.



I saw that story but I didn't hear an accent in the video. It felt like a story about nothing she just speaks proper (but that isn't really new information).

This is her yesterday and you can hear that she hasn't developed an accent.


----------



## PatsyCline

Morgan R said:


> I saw that story but I didn't hear an accent in the video. It felt like a story about nothing she just speaks proper (but that isn't really new information).
> 
> This is her yesterday and you can hear that she hasn't developed an accent.



I didn't notice an accent either.  Maybe someone has a better ear than I do.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Some people absorb accents faster - especially if you're actually living in a new country. I'm one of them. It's not fake, it starts happening hefore you even realise it.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Yes, who'd have known that public scrutiny would be part and parcel of marrying one of the most eligible princes in the world. And isn't snap judgement what this forum is for? Or is Meghan somehow exempt from this? 

Is there a style thread created for Meghan yet? If not, maybe that's a good idea just like it was for Melania.


----------



## redney

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Yes, who'd have known that public scrutiny would be part and parcel of marrying one of the most eligible princes in the world. And isn't snap judgement what this forum is for? Or is Meghan somehow exempt from this? [emoji2]
> 
> Is there a style thread created for Meghan yet? If not, maybe that's a good idea just like it was for Melania.


Meghan has a style thread.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-mania said:


> A lot of snap judgements are being made based solely on tabloid photos and videos.
> 
> I bet nobody posting here would believe her own relationship could be accurately interpreted by how she appears in a few photos.


None of us will ever meet her, so of course judgment has to be based on photos and videos. I'm pretty sure that's how we assess all celebs and models and politicians and whatnots since we don't know them personally.


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> None of us will ever meet her, so of course judgment has to be based on photos and videos. I'm pretty sure that's how we assess all celebs and models and politicians and whatnots since we don't know them personally.



I form opinions of celebrities based on what they say and do. Meghan hasn’t said or done anything to make me suspect there’s anything “off” about their marriage. A look or a touch in a photo is insignificant, it’s only a single moment captured in time. That’s far too little to pass judgment IMO but obviously others feel differently.


----------



## Tivo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I hate to infringe on the love fest on this thread but this is how I've felt about them ever since the marriage. *Harry does not look like the happy newly-wed* (not even at the wedding) and Meghan looks very "forced" in her mannerisms- and skinnier than ever. Something's off.


I have to disagree. Whatever my feelings about Meghan and her motives, at least Harry seems quite in love and taken with his bride.


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I
> 
> B t w, I saw a vid on youtube claiming that Harry is really in love with Kate, and she with him


does that mean Meghan is in love with William and Harry and Meghan only wed so that Meghan and Will can be together?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

ccbaggirl89 said:


> None of us will ever meet her, so of course judgment has to be based on photos and videos. I'm pretty sure that's how we assess all celebs and models and politicians and whatnots since we don't know them personally.


wouldn't it be cruel if we knew them in real life, go to have coffee with them, but write here in this thread?!


----------



## Fally420

myown said:


> wouldn't it be cruel if we knew them in real life, go to have coffee with them, but write here in this thread?!



so true!

I think we all know that all our statements are based on photos, videos, connotations and what not and that we don't know what is really going on or how the person is in private.
But since being a public figure I think it's ok to share our opinions on what we see and think and to make assumptions about how this person appears (to us) at public events.

And I think Meghan knew what she was getting into, as she was partly experiencing the press and media storm when it became known that Meghan and Harry were dating. Plus she was a public figure before the marriage.


----------



## Sharont2305

She seems fully at ease when she is on a walkabout talking and shaking hands with the public. I find that the times I've seen she looks uncomfortable are when at these different engagements when in the presence of the "dignitaries" she sometimes has a glazed look. I think this is a) because she is learning about these things and the charities and b) the accents. She's been to a few different places in the UK and Ireland where accents are vastly different and if your not used to British accents you do have to listen hard to what people are saying to you. I know I do with some, and I am British.
I'm sure the same is true in other countries too.


----------



## mdcx

It's Meghan's birthday in a few weeks, August 4. I think she seems to be doing pretty well in her new role.


Sharont2305 said:


> She seems fully at ease when she is on a walkabout talking and shaking hands with the public. I find that the times I've seen she looks uncomfortable are when at these different engagements when in the presence of the "dignitaries" she sometimes has a glazed look. I think this is a) because she is learning about these things and the charities and b) the accents. She's been to a few different places in the UK and Ireland where accents are vastly different and if your not used to British accents you do have to listen hard to what people are saying to you. I know I do with some, and I am British.
> I'm sure the same is true in other countries too.


Yes! I can understand a pretty wide range of foreign accents due to being around them as a child, but not everyone has had that exposure. Also she is probably petrified of making a faux pas.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> does that mean Meghan is in love with William and Harry and Meghan only wed so that Meghan and Will can be together?


Actually, I was too pre-occupied by the youtube information that Prince Philip shape-shifted in to a lizard several times during Meghan's and Harry's wedding to pay enough attention to the alleged Harry-Kate-William love triangle  _but _if I remember correctly_, _the theory was that Harry and Kate have fallen in love long ago but the fact that she's married to his brother, the future king of England, as well as has kids with him, sort of put a halt to their plans. 

So now Harry has to do with Meghan. The proof for this was that Kate refused to even look at Meghan for the whole wedding and anytime Camilla spoke to Kate it was to console her as Camilla was the perfect person to know what Kate is going through. Yep, that was about it. But I like your theory just as much


----------



## TMA

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, I was too pre-occupied by the youtube information that Prince Philip shape-shifted in to a lizard several times during Meghan's and Harry's wedding to pay enough attention to the alleged Harry-Kate-William love triangle  _but _if I remember correctly_, _the theory was that Harry and Kate have fallen in love long ago but the fact that she's married to his brother, the future king of England, as well as has kids with him, sort of put a halt to their plans.
> 
> So now Harry has to do with Meghan. The proof for this was that Kate refused to even look at Meghan for the whole wedding and anytime Camilla spoke to Kate it was to console her as Camilla was the perfect person to know what Kate is going through. Yep, that was about it. But I like your theory just as much



Wow, just wow [emoji50]


----------



## anitalilac

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, I was too pre-occupied by the youtube information that Prince Philip shape-shifted in to a lizard several times during Meghan's and Harry's wedding to pay enough attention to the alleged Harry-Kate-William love triangle  _but _if I remember correctly_, _the theory was that Harry and Kate have fallen in love long ago but the fact that she's married to his brother, the future king of England, as well as has kids with him, sort of put a halt to their plans.
> 
> So now Harry has to do with Meghan. The proof for this was that Kate refused to even look at Meghan for the whole wedding and anytime Camilla spoke to Kate it was to console her as Camilla was the perfect person to know what Kate is going through. Yep, that was about it. But I like your theory just as much


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, I was too pre-occupied by the youtube information that Prince Philip shape-shifted in to a lizard several times during Meghan's and Harry's wedding to pay enough attention to the alleged Harry-Kate-William love triangle  _but _if I remember correctly_, _the theory was that Harry and Kate have fallen in love long ago but the fact that she's married to his brother, the future king of England, as well as has kids with him, sort of put a halt to their plans.
> 
> So now Harry has to do with Meghan. The proof for this was that Kate refused to even look at Meghan for the whole wedding and anytime Camilla spoke to Kate it was to console her as Camilla was the perfect person to know what Kate is going through. Yep, that was about it. But I like your theory just as much


this makes so much sense!
So is Harry Louis dad then?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

myown said:


> wouldn't it be cruel if we knew them in real life, go to have coffee with them, but write here in this thread?!


Kind of like the workplace rant thread or some of the other threads on here, too. Friends to their face and then creating posts for advice on how to deal with said friends... wouldn't surprise me if we did ...


----------



## DesigningStyle

Check out this MM look-a-like lady in the ad at the bottom of tPF.


----------



## afsweet

Morgan R said:


> I saw that story but I didn't hear an accent in the video. It felt like a story about nothing she just speaks proper (but that isn't really new information).
> 
> This is her yesterday and you can hear that she hasn't developed an accent.




even just from that short clip i feel exhausted for her! she's very kind and genuine to these people. my face would hurt from the big smiles.


----------



## ap.

daisychainz said:


> My mom was visiting last night and said I am following Meghan, and so we started to look at some online pictures and just chat. My mom said she seems like a very clingy woman and *needs to stop latching on to Harry everywhere since it makes her look weak*...



I have to say this was my first reaction to Meghan Markel when I first became aware of her and Harry.  Maybe it's a generational thing and I'm just old   I also see their appearances as part of their duties and I don't think PDA is appropriate at work. 

But I do think Meghan has not been "clingy" in official appearances since the wedding.


----------



## daisychainz

apey_grapey said:


> I have to say this was my first reaction to Meghan Markel when I first became aware of her and Harry.  Maybe it's a generational thing and I'm just old   I also see their appearances as part of their duties and I don't think PDA is appropriate at work.
> 
> But I do think Meghan has not been "clingy" in official appearances since the wedding.


It could be generational. It could also be how/where you live and were raised. As a (very old) British citizen my mom is much more reserved (more like the Queen would be) and not comfortable with pda. I think how we see their interactions has much to do with our own cultural norms and values, and ages, too, probably


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> this makes so much sense!
> So is Harry Louis dad then?


OMG! How did you know!? As a matter of internet gossip fact, yes, he is!


----------



## Jayne1

stephc005 said:


> even just from that short clip i feel exhausted for her! she's very kind and genuine to these people. my face would hurt from the big smiles.


That's what I always think when I see her on her walkabouts.

If you watch the start of some videos, you can see her almost get her face ready. She steadies her eyes and puts on a big smile. It may be the actress in her, but that could be why some here say this is the role of a lifetime.

In any case, she's great at it and I wonder how many of us could keep that smile plastered.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

^Maybe she knows that if she doesn’t keep a smile plastered on her face at all times people will claim that is proof she is miserable and that her marriage is on the rocks already.


----------



## chicaloca

I love the PDA between Meg & Harry. The way they steal glances at each other is kinda sexy and I hope they keep it up.


----------



## minababe

never have seen so much chemistry and love between two royals. Harry never looked happier before and seems to be secure and relaxed more and more.
a true fairytale. I'm so happy for them


----------



## maryg1

Suzie said:


> I think so, there are 2 that live in my street, they are massive dogs, my little whippets pale in comparison.


totally OT, you have 2 whippets? I do have 2 too!


----------



## Suzie

maryg1 said:


> totally OT, you have 2 whippets? I do have 2 too!


Yes, I do maryg, the are almost 10 and 11 years old.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan and Kate at Wimbledon


----------



## afsweet

kate and meghan look great! must be a bit uncomfortable to carry around a purse and hat and having to shake hands along the way.


----------



## CherryCokeCoach

I understand that Meghan couldn’t fix her shirt when she arrived at the venue and I understand the look she is going for, but her top again looks ill fitting. The way it sags and then forms against her body before tucking into her pants gives the illusion that her her breasts are that saggy. And the previous pictures that show her back, has that same sagging in the material. 

Perhaps the shirt is Harry’s? 

Not a fan of how this look is presented / being pulled off.


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> OMG! How did you know!? As a matter of internet gossip fact, yes, he is!


this is just way too good


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan looks fresh & chic. I love the relaxed “boyfriend” shirt. She is  dressed perfectly for the occasion. Kate is dressed for a sorority reunion mixer or a date night. I remain surprised that Kate is the younger of the two.

It seems we are truly in a Kardashian world where all clothes must be body-con. Any wrinkle, roominess, or evidence of movement on the garment renders it “ill-fitting”. I’m totally here for Meg’s relaxed looks.


----------



## beekmanhill

I love that shirt.  Wish I owned it.  Just saw a closeup of her on TV and she looks wonderful, fresh and sporty.  Kate looks lovely, and maybe her role requires it, but her outfit is something an older woman would wear.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chicaloca said:


> [...]I remain surprised that Kate is the younger of the two.[...]


Given that Kate has given birth to three children and seems to be somewhat of a hands-on mom, as compared to Meghan who hasn't yet, I am not... 

I liked the striped shirt too. There was just something wrong with the cut or size the way it folded in the middle of nowhere. I wonder if Kate prefers to dress this way or would change it up a bit if she could. From the little I've seen of royals, I always thought that Queen Rania of Jordan is one of their most best-dressed representatives.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I wish I could get a better look at their bags, lol.


----------



## redney

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I wish I could get a better look at their bags, lol.


Look on the Royalty Fashion thread in the Celebrity style section here, close ups of both purses. Catherine's is Dolce and Gabbana and Meghan's is Altazurra. 
https://forum.purseblog.com/index.php?posts/32429032


----------



## BagLovingMom

I thought they both looked great! Loved Kate’s DG handbag


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hobbsy

CherryCokeCoach said:


> View attachment 4131989
> 
> 
> I understand that Meghan couldn’t fix her shirt when she arrived at the venue and I understand the look she is going for, but her top again looks ill fitting. The way it sags and then forms against her body before tucking into her pants gives the illusion that her her breasts are that saggy. And the previous pictures that show her back, has that same sagging in the material.
> 
> Perhaps the shirt is Harry’s? [emoji14]
> 
> Not a fan of how this look is presented / being pulled off.


I love the blouse, the fit, the entire look. Saggy boobs?! Lmao....where?


----------



## mkr

Hobbsy said:


> I love the blouse, the fit, the entire look. Saggy boobs?! Lmao....where?



It looks more like NO boobs.


----------



## Vlad

Alright peeps, animal control here. Let's hold off on silly analogies, not doing the royals or amphibians any favors. Carry on.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> Meghan looks fresh & chic. I love the relaxed “boyfriend” shirt. She is  dressed perfectly for the occasion. Kate is dressed for a sorority reunion mixer or a date night. I remain surprised that Kate is the younger of the two.
> 
> It seems we are truly in a Kardashian world where all clothes must be body-con. Any wrinkle, roominess, or evidence of movement on the garment renders it “ill-fitting”. I’m totally here for Meg’s relaxed looks.


Me too. Totally agree. I can't relate to her more formal stuff, but I do love her more casual things.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Kate looked kind of dowdy IMHO. Meghan looked more modern and fresh, but those white wide leg pants (high fashion, or not) was a bit “extra” in white. I’m all for wide leg pants, but them dragging on the ground and so large they could pass for a maxi dress bottom in white, is just plain ridiculous to me. If she did, indeed, wear black heels - that would look weird, too. Although, I’m not sure what kind of heel you could really pull off with those clown pants.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I feel sad for Kate. I’m sure she has to dress proper-like or she feels like she has to dress proper-like but she seems so... old. Remember the crop top, cut offs and uggs? Lol. I hope she loves her life and is just doing what is expected of her in public.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the Xerjoff Royal Charity Polo Cup


----------



## A1aGypsy

In bare feet!!! ❤️


----------



## APhiJill

Love Meghan’s blouse. And Kate’s purse is stunning


----------



## pixiejenna

Why do they even carry handbags, especially if they are empty? Since th have a team of people toting around anything that they can possibly need. I’d rather have my hands free especially when you’re doing meet and greats shaking hands with nearly everyone you visit.


----------



## PatsyCline

pixiejenna said:


> Why do they even carry handbags, especially if they are empty? Since th have a team of people toting around anything that they can possibly need. I’d rather have my hands free especially when you’re doing meet and greats shaking hands with nearly everyone you visit.



Tissues, cell phone, make-up perhaps?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CherryCokeCoach said:


> View attachment 4131989
> 
> 
> Perhaps the shirt is Harry’s?


 funny

I think they both looked pretty good. Kate looked very nice but perhaps a bit too dressed up for a sporting event. I think for this event I preferred Meghan's look a bit more, although I do agree the shirt, while nice, gives off an impression of being messy and big, along with her messy hair, again. She's not a prim dresser, she does seem to prefer an un-done look.


----------



## Grande Latte

I think it's one of Meghan's looks: an oversized, masculine shirt. It makes her even more feminine by comparison. Meghan does casual REALLY well. She's always very relaxed and poised at the same time.

I can't say I like Kate's dress. She looked matronly.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan looks awesome, elegant, relaxed and fresh. She definitely has the better role, she gets all the perks of royalty but doesn't have to be as perfect and prim as Kate.


----------



## 2cello

Aren’t there people dressing both Kate and Meghan?  If I were either one, I’d hire my own stylist if I had to.  We can’t see ourselves in 360 degree vision like others see us.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

here he goes again!  



*Duchess of Sussex 'is struggling to cope and not answering my calls' says father*



Thomas Markle has said his daughter Meghan is struggling to cope with the burdens of royalty, and refuses to take his calls.

He said he is worried the Duchess of Sussex is hiding the pressure of her new life behind a “pained” smile as she adjusts to her “prim” duties as wife of the fifth-in-line to the Throne.

But he revealed she has not been in touch since a phone call after the Royal Wedding while he was recovering from the heart operation which caused him to miss her big day.

He told the Sun on Sunday: “My thing about my daughter right now is that I think she is terrified.

“I see it in her eyes, I see it in her face and I see it in her smile. I’ve seen her smile for years. I know her smile. I don’t like the one I’m seeing now.”

He said that while her expression might be due to a “bad couple of days” it worried him, and led him to conclude she was under “too much pressure”.

Adding that he could “die soon”, he said he wishes they would reconcile so he could tell her how proud he was - but she no longer answers her phone to him and staff at Kensington Palace will not return his texts.

Mr Markle said: “I had a heart attack, doesn’t anybody care? I could actually die soon. Does she want this to be the last thing we’ve said to each other?”

He said they pair had never gone so long without speaking, and that he wanted to clear the air and tell her how proud he is.

Speaking from his seaside home in Rosarito in Mexico, the retired lighting director, 73, also offered an apology, saying: “If I had one message for her it would be that I’m sorry for anything that went wrong. I’d like to put our differences behind us and get together. I miss you very much.”

In early May Thomas Markle caused headlines around the world when it emerged he had colluded with a photographer to sell staged ‘paparazzi’ shots of his wedding preparations.

After the scandal broke, Meghan is understood to have forgiven her father and his invitation to the Windsor ceremony was not withdrawn.

But he developed chest pains on the day he was due to be driven to the airport and went instead to Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center, ten miles over the US border,  where surgeons installed stents to open his clogged arteries.




https://www.yahoo.com/news/duchess-sussex-apos-struggling-cope-114743338.html


----------



## bag-princess

LVSistinaMM said:


> *Kate looked kind of dowdy IMHO. Meghan looked more modern and fresh,* but those white wide leg pants (high fashion, or not) was a bit “extra” in white. I’m all for wide leg pants, but them dragging on the ground and so large they could pass for a maxi dress bottom in white, is just plain ridiculous to me. If she did, indeed, wear black heels - that would look weird, too. Although, I’m not sure what kind of heel you could really pull off with those clown pants.



i bet she misses the days when she could dress more like that - instead of the queen-to-be and mother of 3.  that dress was more like sunday school meeting than a nice casual day.
but clown pants......no.   at least she didn't look as bad a Pipa!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

bag-princess said:


> Speaking from his seaside home in Rosarito in Mexico, the retired lighting director, 73, also offered an apology, saying: “If I had one message for her it would be that I’m sorry for anything that went wrong. I’d like to put our differences behind us and get together. I miss you very much."


Family stuff is messy so I have no comment on the rest of it, but jeez I hate non-apologies like this - too many public figures apologize like this. Why doesn't anyone know how to apologize for real - understand and acknowledge what you did wrong, take responsibility, apologize, and promise to work hard to change and grow and not do it again? Phrases like "anything that went wrong," "any possible inconvenience," "sorry IF I hurt anyone," are so passive and total cop outs.


----------



## berrydiva

Chile.  Her father and his side of the family are a mess.


----------



## PatsyCline

berrydiva said:


> Chile.  Her father and his side of the family are a mess.



I don’t understand why he doesn’t stop talking to the press.


----------



## Morgan R

Official photographs released to mark the Christening of Prince Louis


----------



## berrydiva

They all look deranged in this photos. 

George and Charlotte are cuties.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I agree, the lighting in the official palace portraits is always super eerie.


----------



## PatsyCline

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I agree, the lighting in the official palace portraits is always super eerie.



What’s wrong with the lighting? Nary a shadow anywhere.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

PatsyCline said:


> What’s wrong with the lighting? Nary a shadow anywhere.



I don't know exactly what it is. Something about the coloring makes it look like an old photograph from a horror film or something. All of the christening photos have been like that. It's too bright and artificial and looks dated.


----------



## mdcx

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I don't know exactly what it is. Something about the coloring makes it look like an old photograph from a horror film or something. All of the christening photos have been like that. It's too bright and artificial and looks dated.


It looks a bit like an old National Geographic photo.


----------



## mdcx

bag-princess said:


> here he goes again!
> 
> 
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex 'is struggling to cope and not answering my calls' says father*
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle has said his daughter Meghan is struggling to cope with the burdens of royalty, and refuses to take his calls.
> 
> He said he is worried the Duchess of Sussex is hiding the pressure of her new life behind a “pained” smile as she adjusts to her “prim” duties as wife of the fifth-in-line to the Throne.
> 
> But he revealed she has not been in touch since a phone call after the Royal Wedding while he was recovering from the heart operation which caused him to miss her big day.
> 
> He told the Sun on Sunday: “My thing about my daughter right now is that I think she is terrified.
> 
> “I see it in her eyes, I see it in her face and I see it in her smile. I’ve seen her smile for years. I know her smile. I don’t like the one I’m seeing now.”
> 
> He said that while her expression might be due to a “bad couple of days” it worried him, and led him to conclude she was under “too much pressure”.
> 
> Adding that he could “die soon”, he said he wishes they would reconcile so he could tell her how proud he was - but she no longer answers her phone to him and staff at Kensington Palace will not return his texts.
> 
> Mr Markle said: “I had a heart attack, doesn’t anybody care? I could actually die soon. Does she want this to be the last thing we’ve said to each other?”
> 
> He said they pair had never gone so long without speaking, and that he wanted to clear the air and tell her how proud he is.
> 
> Speaking from his seaside home in Rosarito in Mexico, the retired lighting director, 73, also offered an apology, saying: “If I had one message for her it would be that I’m sorry for anything that went wrong. I’d like to put our differences behind us and get together. I miss you very much.”
> 
> In early May Thomas Markle caused headlines around the world when it emerged he had colluded with a photographer to sell staged ‘paparazzi’ shots of his wedding preparations.
> 
> After the scandal broke, Meghan is understood to have forgiven her father and his invitation to the Windsor ceremony was not withdrawn.
> 
> But he developed chest pains on the day he was due to be driven to the airport and went instead to Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center, ten miles over the US border,  where surgeons installed stents to open his clogged arteries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/duchess-sussex-apos-struggling-cope-114743338.html


Oh please. If he really cared he would shut up and start acting with some dignity. Leave her alone to enjoy her new life and happiness.


----------



## knasarae

For those who were asking about Meghan's height earlier...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...prince-harry/ar-AAA4j42?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=wispr

When Meghan Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, her sense of style was thrust into the spotlight.

But when the ex_-Suits_ actress stepped onto a sporting ground in Dublin earlier this week, there was one question on everyone’s minds – why on _earth_ did she choose to wear stilettos on grass?!

Anyone who has ever worn heels on grass knows just how _damn_ difficult it is to walk without sinking.

But it turns out the Duchess of Sussex’s preference for classic stilettos isn’t just for fashion’s sake.

According to _Glamour,_ the 36-year-old chooses heels over flats at events with Prince Harry to avoid creating an 'unbalanced' look in pictures.

By wearing heels, Meghan, who is seven inches shorter than her husband, helps take away the height difference.

Speaking to _Daily Mail,_ celebrity photographer Glenn Gratton said "couples with a big height difference look slightly unbalanced in pictures, and often the smaller of the two ends up looking even smaller and is constantly looking up at their partner.

The Windsors are a particularly tall family, with Prince Harry standing in at 6ft 1 and Prince William at 6ft 3.

Unlike Meghan, who is 5ft 6, the Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton is 5ft 10, meaning she is often seen wearing flats alongside her husband Prince William.

 Meghan's outfit choices, including her preference for high-waisted skirts, is also used to elevate the appearance of her height.

"Careful use of wardrobe choices will be important for Harry and Meghan to make sure the couples height difference is minimised," Gratton said.

"The shape of skirts will also give the optical illusion to make her look taller than she actually is."

When Meghan Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, her sense of style was thrust into the spotlight.

But when the ex_-Suits_ actress stepped onto a sporting ground in Dublin earlier this week, there was one question on everyone’s minds – why on _earth_ did she choose to wear stilettos on grass?!

Anyone who has ever worn heels on grass knows just how _damn_ difficult it is to walk without sinking.

But it turns out the Duchess of Sussex’s preference for classic stilettos isn’t just for fashion’s sake.

According to _Glamour,_ the 36-year-old chooses heels over flats at events with Prince Harry to avoid creating an 'unbalanced' look in pictures.

By wearing heels, Meghan, who is seven inches shorter than her husband, helps take away the height difference.

Speaking to _Daily Mail,_ celebrity photographer Glenn Gratton said "couples with a big height difference look slightly unbalanced in pictures, and often the smaller of the two ends up looking even smaller and is constantly looking up at their partner.

The Windsors are a particularly tall family, with Prince Harry standing in at 6ft 1 and Prince William at 6ft 3.

Unlike Meghan, who is 5ft 6, the Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton is 5ft 10, meaning she is often seen wearing flats alongside her husband Prince William.

Meghan's outfit choices, including her preference for high-waisted skirts, is also used to elevate the appearance of her height.

"Careful use of wardrobe choices will be important for Harry and Meghan to make sure the couples height difference is minimised," Gratton said.

"The shape of skirts will also give the optical illusion to make her look taller than she actually is."


----------



## Gal4Dior

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I agree, the lighting in the official palace portraits is always super eerie.



I agree, as well. Meghan’s dress was supposed to be this olive green and this lighting makes it look like a muddy brown. The lighting makes these portraits so weird looking.


----------



## berrydiva

PatsyCline said:


> What’s wrong with the lighting? Nary a shadow anywhere.


Shadows are natural and aren't necessarily a bad thing...no shadows makes it very American Gothic. They look like their eyes follow you no matter where you move. lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

berrydiva said:


> Shadows are natural and aren't necessarily a bad thing...no shadows makes it very American Gothic. They look like their eyes follow you no matter where you move. lol



Shadows look horrible in portraits. They distract the eye from what it should be focusing on. 

That’s why studio lights are almost always higher than the subject, to reflect shadows below, and often a back light is used to lessen or eliminate shadows on the walls.


----------



## berrydiva

PatsyCline said:


> Shadows look horrible in portraits. They distract the eye from what it should be focusing on.
> 
> That’s why studio lights are almost always higher than the subject, to reflect shadows below, and often a back light is used to lessen or eliminate shadows on the walls.


Yes, yes....my brother has provided me enough photography lectures. Personally, _I_ have no issue with shadows and, _for me_, they don't always look horrible in a photo especially if they make it look less creepy horror show..  My eye is only focusing on how creepy the photo is, so if that was their intention they nailed it.


----------



## PatsyCline

berrydiva said:


> Yes, yes....my brother has provided me enough photography lectures. Personally, _I_ have no issue with shadows and, _for me_, they don't always look horrible in a photo especially if they make it look less creepy horror show..  My eye is only focusing on how creepy the photo is, so if that was their intention they nailed it.


Art is in the eye of the beholder, so what may be good for one, isn't always good for someone else.

Multi-person or family portraits can be a nightmare, especially when children are involved.  They have such short attention spans, and can be distracted by just about anything out of view.


----------



## minababe

Love Kate and Meghan at Wimbledon! So grrat to see them together without their husbands.
look like they had fun that day. They both loooked beautiful. Not a fan of Kate's Dress that day, especially the colour washed her out imo but she looked beautiful as always. Loooooved her bag though!
Meghans Outfit was on Point. so classy and great for Wimbledon and Tennis. perfect look. With the hat on she Looked like a style Icon. great Choice Meghan !!

Again to her father .. I fell so sorry for her .. what the hell .. can't he just shut up .. I think he can't stand it that she is happy without him .. like her half sister said her father is a complicated Person and he gets unfair and mean if someone doesn't Need him anymore .. Looks like she was right ..


----------



## TMA

minababe said:


> Love Kate and Meghan at Wimbledon! So grrat to see them together without their husbands.
> look like they had fun that day. They both loooked beautiful. Not a fan of Kate's Dress that day, especially the colour washed her out imo but she looked beautiful as always. Loooooved her bag though!
> Meghans Outfit was on Point. so classy and great for Wimbledon and Tennis. perfect look. With the hat on she Looked like a style Icon. great Choice Meghan !!
> 
> Again to her father .. I fell so sorry for her .. what the hell .. can't he just shut up .. I think he can't stand it that she is happy without him .. like her half sister said her father is a complicated Person and he gets unfair and mean if someone doesn't Need him anymore .. Looks like she was right ..



Didn’t know the sister said that. Wow, what a family they are. I bet she has learnt how to extract herself from such situations, which has probably carried over into her other relationships. Her father is a real shame and he is out to sabotage her marriage. At first I thought maybe he was really that reclusive and found it hard coping with he spotlight but he seems to crave it and thinks this is about him. Also doing these for money? Just tells you what the world has become.


----------



## knasarae

minababe said:


> Love Kate and Meghan at Wimbledon! So grrat to see them together without their husbands.
> look like they had fun that day. They both loooked beautiful. Not a fan of Kate's Dress that day, especially the colour washed her out imo but she looked beautiful as always. Loooooved her bag though!
> Meghans Outfit was on Point. so classy and great for Wimbledon and Tennis. perfect look. With the hat on she Looked like a style Icon. great Choice Meghan !!
> 
> Again to her father .. I fell so sorry for her .. what the hell .. can't he just shut up .. I think he can't stand it that she is happy without him .. like her half sister said her father is a complicated Person and he gets unfair and mean if someone doesn't Need him anymore .. Looks like she was right ..



The thing about this is it seems like it will be a never ending cycle:  He will keep talking to the press, hoping to say something in order to get her to reach out to him personally.  She won't, out of fear of what he might go back and tell the press about their conversation.  It's a shame.


----------



## Brandless

berrydiva said:


> Shadows are natural and aren't necessarily a bad thing...no shadows makes it very American Gothic. They look like their eyes follow you no matter where you move. lol



Lol, I tried moving from side to side and you’re right, their eyes followed me! So eerie!


----------



## berrydiva

PatsyCline said:


> Art is in the eye of the beholder, so what may be good for one, isn't always good for someone else.
> 
> Multi-person or family portraits can be a nightmare, especially when children are involved.  They have such short attention spans, and can be distracted by just about anything out of view.


Thanks...I've never taken a pic with kids or family or a large group before....this is good information to know.


----------



## DC-Cutie

knasarae said:


> The thing about this is it seems like it will be a never ending cycle:  He will keep talking to the press, hoping to say something in order to get her to reach out to him personally.  She won't, out of fear of what he might go back and tell the press about their conversation.  It's a shame.


i'm blaming these new outlets!  Stop contacting this family, because they will talk.  I notice none of the big US outlets (CBS, ABC,NBC, etc..) aren't giving them the time of day!


----------



## daisychainz

Those official photos look very filtered or altered or something. Their faces and expressions look so weird.


----------



## myown

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I don't know exactly what it is. Something about the coloring makes it look *like an old photograph from a horror film* or something. All of the christening photos have been like that. It's too bright and artificial and looks dated.


that's it!
also their faces look like exactly that!


----------



## PatsyCline

myown said:


> that's it!
> also their faces look like exactly that!


Their smiles seem a bit forced. Maybe it was the end of a long day, and they just wanted to get the photos done?


----------



## PatsyCline

DC-Cutie said:


> i'm blaming these new outlets!  Stop contacting this family, because they will talk.  I notice none of the big US outlets (CBS, ABC,NBC, etc..) aren't giving them the time of day!


TMZ is one of the worst.  Gutter journalism at it's worst. 

I'm surprised someone in the Palace hasn't tried to guide him (maybe they have, but he keeps ignoring their advice).

The Firm will close ranks and he will get frozen out, permanently if he's not careful.


----------



## PatsyCline

berrydiva said:


> Thanks...I've never taken a pic with kids or family or a large group before....this is good information to know.


If you do, make sure you do the photos that include the children first, that way they don't get restless and it takes more of your time.

For weddings etc. one tip I got was to involve the children in getting different family members. Keeps them occupied and interested in what you're doing.


----------



## PatsyCline

knasarae said:


> For those who were asking about Meghan's height earlier...
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...prince-harry/ar-AAA4j42?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=wispr
> 
> When Meghan Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, her sense of style was thrust into the spotlight.
> 
> But when the ex_-Suits_ actress stepped onto a sporting ground in Dublin earlier this week, there was one question on everyone’s minds – why on _earth_ did she choose to wear stilettos on grass?!
> 
> Anyone who has ever worn heels on grass knows just how _damn_ difficult it is to walk without sinking.
> 
> But it turns out the Duchess of Sussex’s preference for classic stilettos isn’t just for fashion’s sake.
> 
> According to _Glamour,_ the 36-year-old chooses heels over flats at events with Prince Harry to avoid creating an 'unbalanced' look in pictures.
> 
> By wearing heels, Meghan, who is seven inches shorter than her husband, helps take away the height difference.
> 
> Speaking to _Daily Mail,_ celebrity photographer Glenn Gratton said "couples with a big height difference look slightly unbalanced in pictures, and often the smaller of the two ends up looking even smaller and is constantly looking up at their partner.
> 
> The Windsors are a particularly tall family, with Prince Harry standing in at 6ft 1 and Prince William at 6ft 3.
> 
> Unlike Meghan, who is 5ft 6, the Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton is 5ft 10, meaning she is often seen wearing flats alongside her husband Prince William.
> 
> Meghan's outfit choices, including her preference for high-waisted skirts, is also used to elevate the appearance of her height.
> 
> "Careful use of wardrobe choices will be important for Harry and Meghan to make sure the couples height difference is minimised," Gratton said.
> 
> "The shape of skirts will also give the optical illusion to make her look taller than she actually is."
> 
> When Meghan Markle became engaged to Prince Harry, her sense of style was thrust into the spotlight.
> 
> But when the ex_-Suits_ actress stepped onto a sporting ground in Dublin earlier this week, there was one question on everyone’s minds – why on _earth_ did she choose to wear stilettos on grass?!
> 
> Anyone who has ever worn heels on grass knows just how _damn_ difficult it is to walk without sinking.
> 
> But it turns out the Duchess of Sussex’s preference for classic stilettos isn’t just for fashion’s sake.
> 
> According to _Glamour,_ the 36-year-old chooses heels over flats at events with Prince Harry to avoid creating an 'unbalanced' look in pictures.
> 
> By wearing heels, Meghan, who is seven inches shorter than her husband, helps take away the height difference.
> 
> Speaking to _Daily Mail,_ celebrity photographer Glenn Gratton said "couples with a big height difference look slightly unbalanced in pictures, and often the smaller of the two ends up looking even smaller and is constantly looking up at their partner.
> 
> The Windsors are a particularly tall family, with Prince Harry standing in at 6ft 1 and Prince William at 6ft 3.
> 
> Unlike Meghan, who is 5ft 6, the Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton is 5ft 10, meaning she is often seen wearing flats alongside her husband Prince William.
> 
> Meghan's outfit choices, including her preference for high-waisted skirts, is also used to elevate the appearance of her height.
> 
> "Careful use of wardrobe choices will be important for Harry and Meghan to make sure the couples height difference is minimised," Gratton said.
> 
> "The shape of skirts will also give the optical illusion to make her look taller than she actually is."


I have the same problem, except my DH is a foot taller than I am.  I'm not short, but he's 6'8", so wearing heels is almost mandatory when I'm with him.

Luckily for me, he loves seeing me in heels.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

PatsyCline said:


> Their smiles seem a bit forced. Maybe it was the end of a long day, and they just wanted to get the photos done?


Taking photos with small children can have that effect on you. Trying to do anything organised with small children, come to think of it...


----------



## mkr

PatsyCline said:


> TMZ is one of the worst.  Gutter journalism at it's worst.
> 
> I'm surprised someone in the Palace hasn't tried to guide him (maybe they have, but he keeps ignoring their advice).
> 
> The Firm will close ranks and he will get frozen out, permanently if he's not careful.



He’ll keep talking if he’s getting paid.  

Looks like he’s already been frozen out.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

But why can't this loose cannon dad be payed to stay silent, sign some kind of agreement? The Royals have the means for it and if it's money he wants (and it seems he does) it must be possible to solve?


----------



## PatsyCline

mkr said:


> He’ll keep talking if he’s getting paid.
> 
> Looks like he’s already been frozen out.


But at what cost? His relationship with his daughter?


----------



## sdkitty

PatsyCline said:


> But at what cost? His relationship with his daughter?


he's throwing that away himself by his actions....sometimes blood is not thicker than water


----------



## kemilia

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But why can't this loose cannon dad be payed to stay silent, sign some kind of agreement? The Royals have the means for it and if it's money he wants (and it seems he does) it must be possible to solve?


I think the other relatives would come out of the woodwork for their own paychecks, it would not end. That side of the family obviously has no class and honestly--if they truly cared for Meghan, this would not be happening. As we have seen, it is not just her father that blabs and whines.

I feel for her mom, who we don't ever hear a peep from. I hope she and Meghan are close enough so when this crap happens--Meghan can talk to her and basically say "WTF!" A hubbie (even a Prince) is one thing--but a Mom is a Mom!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

kemilia said:


> I think the other relatives would come out of the woodwork for their own paychecks, it would not end. That side of the family obviously has no class and honestly--if they truly cared for Meghan, this would not be happening. As we have seen, it is not just her father that blabs and whines.
> 
> I feel for her mom, who we don't ever hear a peep from. I hope she and Meghan are close enough so when this crap happens--Meghan can talk to her and basically say "WTF!" A hubbie (even a Prince) is one thing--but a Mom is a Mom!


You are probably right, I forgot about the rest of them.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

kemilia said:


> I feel for her mom, who we don't ever hear a peep from. I hope she and Meghan are close enough so when this crap happens--Meghan can talk to her and basically say "WTF!" A hubbie (even a Prince) is one thing--but a Mom is a Mom!


Her mom was photographed doing laundry at the dollar wash a few days ago. I'd expect if they were super close and loving she'd be helping her mom out slightly more than this? 
	

		
			
		

		
	




I'm thinking Meghan flies completely solo, so hopefully she made a good life decision for herself cuz she really seems to have isolated herself from any family members.


----------



## PatsyCline

Maybe her mom doesn’t want her assistance?


----------



## bisousx

Believe it or not, some people are just stuck in their ways no matter how much they could be spending.


----------



## PatsyCline

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Her mom was photographed doing laundry at the dollar wash a few days ago. I'd expect if they were super close and loving she'd be helping her mom out slightly more than this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4134296
> 
> 
> I'm thinking Meghan flies completely solo, so hopefully she made a good life decision for herself cuz she really seems to have isolated herself from any family members.



By the sounds of it, she wasn’t close to her siblings for years before. 

She seems only to be close to her mother.


----------



## APhiJill

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Her mom was photographed doing laundry at the dollar wash a few days ago. I'd expect if they were super close and loving she'd be helping her mom out slightly more than this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4134296
> 
> 
> I'm thinking Meghan flies completely solo, so hopefully she made a good life decision for herself cuz she really seems to have isolated herself from any family members.



And playing devils advocate, it looks like she’s washing large comforters. Those are much better washed in a heavy duty washer that most laundromats have


----------



## RueMonge

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But why can't this loose cannon dad be payed to stay silent, sign some kind of agreement? The Royals have the means for it and if it's money he wants (and it seems he does) it must be possible to solve?



I wondered this also, but if the royals pay him to keep quiet, he'd probably blab about that.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

APhiJill said:


> And playing devils advocate, it looks like she’s washing large comforters. Those are much better washed in a heavy duty washer that most laundromats have


Nope, that was her weekly laundry run. She is photographed almost each week with her bag of clothes going to the laundry places  I guess she's followed all the time although it seems we don't see the coverage unless we look for it.


----------



## PatsyCline

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Nope, that was her weekly laundry run. She is photographed almost each week with her bag of clothes going to the laundry places  I guess she's followed all the time although it seems we don't see the coverage unless we look for it.



Why is her laundry run something that’s worth someone’s time? I’ve never understood paparazzi.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RueMonge

I think I love Meghan's mother.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

PatsyCline said:


> Why is her laundry run something that’s worth someone’s time? I’ve never understood paparazzi.


The same reason they hound her father... hoping she'll talk, probably.


----------



## mdcx

Does her mom live in the UK? Maybe she's in a flat with no washer/dryer and there is no laundry pickup/drop-off service available?
I don't have a great relationship with my mother but even if I did, she has some odd ideas about how to spend money etc and wouldn't accept a lot of gifts(services, home help) that would make life easier for her. 
Maybe Meghan's mother is like that?


----------



## bag-princess

PatsyCline said:


> Maybe her mom doesn’t want her assistance?



Exactly! She’s been doing her own thing for years and seems like a proud independent woman. And I wouldn’t assume she isn’t doing anything for her! I doubt that you would ever hear anything from her about her daughter! 



ccbaggirl89 said:


> The same reason they hound her father... hoping she'll talk, probably.




I hope they are not holding their breath waiting for that to happen!


----------



## anitalilac

PatsyCline said:


> Why is her laundry run something that’s worth someone’s time? I’ve never understood paparazzi.


Exactly! and to conclude Meghan's relationship with her mom based on this laundry photo is absurd.


----------



## myown

how weird it must be to attend a royal wedding and have tea with the future king in a castle and palace, and few weeks late do your Laundry at a dollar shop



ccbaggirl89 said:


> Her mom was photographed doing laundry at the dollar wash a few days ago. I'd expect if they were super close and loving she'd be helping her mom out slightly more than this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4134296
> 
> *
> I'm thinking Meghan flies completely solo, so hopefully she made a good life decision for herself cuz she really seems to have isolated herself from any family members*.


sometimes that's the best for your mental health


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> how weird it must be to attend a royal wedding and have tea with the future king in a castle and palace, and few weeks late do your Laundry at a dollar shop
> 
> 
> sometimes that's the best for your mental health





Yes, great observation!


----------



## bag-princess

myown said:


> how weird it must be to attend a royal wedding and have tea with the future king in a castle and palace, and few weeks late do your Laundry at a dollar shop
> 
> 
> sometimes that's the best for your mental health





i don't think it is weird at all and i would bet she doesn't either.   she knows that is meghan's life - not hers.  and unlike her ex husband i seriously doubt she had any designs on being a part of it other than being there to support her daughter.


----------



## Morgan R

At the opening of the Nelson Mandela Centenary Exhibition


----------



## westjenn

mdcx said:


> Does her mom live in the UK? Maybe she's in a flat with no washer/dryer and there is no laundry pickup/drop-off service available?
> I don't have a great relationship with my mother but even if I did, she has some odd ideas about how to spend money etc and wouldn't accept a lot of gifts(services, home help) that would make life easier for her.
> Maybe Meghan's mother is like that?


She lives in CA. I believe.


----------



## minababe

I really hope that if meghan gets pregnant her mother will move to London. sell the house in California and move to London. she gets older and is by herself. to have your grandchildren around you is the best Thing and for meghan have her mother there. I think kate is still really Close with her Family so they have time etc to see each other. I saw Pictures of kate's parents with George all bei theirself going for a walk on the shoulders of his grandpa. so cute and normal.

the Picture of her mother at the wash Salon is really mean, I'm waiting for stories like : meghan's mom homeless -- no help from her daughter lol..
seems like meghan's mom is the last one who cares for fame or Money. but I hope meghan involve her mom in her life ..


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> At the opening of the Nelson Mandela Centenary Exhibition
> 
> 
> View attachment 4135028
> 
> View attachment 4134968
> View attachment 4134970
> View attachment 4134972
> View attachment 4134973
> View attachment 4134974
> View attachment 4134977
> View attachment 4134982
> View attachment 4135027



STUNNING


----------



## bag-mania

minababe said:


> I really hope that if meghan gets pregnant her mother will move to London. sell the house in California and move to London. she gets older and is by herself. to have your grandchildren around you is the best Thing and for meghan have her mother there. I think kate is still really Close with her Family so they have time etc to see each other. I saw Pictures of kate's parents with George all bei theirself going for a walk on the shoulders of his grandpa. so cute and normal.
> 
> the Picture of her mother at the wash Salon is really mean, I'm waiting for stories like : meghan's mom homeless -- no help from her daughter lol..
> seems like meghan's mom is the last one who cares for fame or Money. but I hope meghan involve her mom in her life ..



I’m sure her mother has her own life, home, activities, and friends. A photo taken at the laundromat does not mean she’s living in squalor. Moving to a new country where you only know one other person is a big change and not one to make without considerable thought.

I’ve never understood those women who drop everything in their lives to follow a grown child just because a baby is born. Meghan and her mom may be close but I don’t get the impression they are that clingy.


----------



## westjenn

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure her mother has her own life, home, activities, and friends. A photo taken at the laundromat does not mean she’s living in squalor. Moving to a new country where you only know one other person is a big change and not one to make without considerable thought.
> 
> I’ve never understood those women who drop everything in their lives to follow a grown child just because a baby is born. Meghan and her mom may be close but I don’t get the impression they are that clingy.


The Obamas had Michelle's mother move into the White House for 8 years.  Very smart on their part and I respected them so much for that.  I 100 percent understand why people do this and think it's great.


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> *I’m sure her mother has her own life, home, activities, and friends. A photo taken at the laundromat does not mean she’s living in squalor*. Moving to a new country where you only know one other person is a big change and not one to make without considerable thought.
> 
> I’ve never understood those women who drop everything in their lives to follow a grown child just because a baby is born. Meghan and her mom may be close but I don’t get the impression they are that clingy.




ITA with this!!  she has been doing her own thing for years so why would she want to leave everything!  and that is the exactly the tone i get from the posts i see about her leaving the laundromat - that the poor woman has to do her own laundry while her daughter is married to a prince!   please.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

westjenn said:


> The Obamas had Michelle's mother move into the White House for 8 years.  Very smart on their part and I respected them so much for that.  I 100 percent understand why people do this and think it's great.



i think it was great too and obviously something she wanted to do!  meghan's mom should not be expected to do the same though and i wonder why people think she should.


----------



## westjenn

bag-princess said:


> ITA with this!!  she has been doing her own thing for years so why would she want to leave everything!  and that is the exactly the tone i get from the posts i see about her leaving the laundromat - that the poor woman has to do her own laundry while her daughter is married to a prince!   please



I'm going to assume that the majority would prefer having a family member watching their child vs. a Nanny? If her life allows, she is unmarried and has no other children, why wouldn't she take care of her grandchild IF Meghan asked. I dont really understand how this is not a respected choice.


----------



## westjenn

bag-princess said:


> i think it was great too and obviously something she wanted to do!  meghan's mom should not be expected to do the same though and i wonder why people think she should.


Oh of course- not expected!  But IF Meghan wanted her mom there I'm going to guess Mom will fly on over!


----------



## bag-mania

westjenn said:


> I'm going to assume that the majority would prefer having a family member watching their child vs. a Nanny? If her life allows, she is unmarried and has no other children, why wouldn't she take care of her grandchild IF Meghan asked. I dont really understand how this is not a respected choice.



You make it sound like taking care of a grandchild is an honor. It is not. It’s hard work and Meghan can easily afford nannies. Poor mom already raised HER child without any extra help. She deserves to enjoy her golden years without chasing after the royal rugrats. When and if Meghan has kids I’m hoping she isn’t so selfish to try to get her mother moved in for grandma child care.


----------



## DC-Cutie

dang!  ya'll talking kids, grandparents and nannies already!


----------



## westjenn

bag-mania said:


> You make it sound like taking care of a grandchild is an honor. It is not. It’s hard work and Meghan can easily afford nannies. Poor mom already raised HER child without any extra help. She deserves to enjoy her golden years without chasing after the royal rugrats. When and if Meghan has kids I’m hoping she isn’t so selfish to try to get her mother moved in for grandma child care.


Hmmmm... @bag-mania as a mother of 2 children whose mother has taken care of both (live-in care for my children) I do not consider this to be a selfish act on my part. It is partly a cultural thing for me.  And let me add, in my family it is an honor to take care of grandchildren.  I take offense and I'm out! Have a good day.


----------



## pixiejenna

Why would she want to move to a foreign country where she most likely doesn’t have any friends? On top of which if she where to live with them she’d probably be subjected to some of the rules they live by. While I enjoy all the pictures I think living that life is probably exhausting. Having to dress/act all day every day on top of which she’d be thrown into the public spotlight and have paparazzi follow you even more so then she already is. I think that when Megan has kids I can see her spending a month or two there in the beginning to help her out with a new born. And then see her going back home and living her life.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Can ya'll let Miss Doria live!  Please!  This woman has been minding her business, going to yoga and the laundromat.  Not bothering a sole.


----------



## Tivo

bag-mania said:


> You make it sound like taking care of a grandchild is an honor. It is not. It’s hard work and Meghan can easily afford nannies. Poor mom already raised HER child without any extra help. She deserves to enjoy her golden years without chasing after the royal rugrats. When and if Meghan has kids I’m hoping she isn’t so selfish to try to get her mother moved in for grandma child care.


You better preach.


----------



## bag-princess

westjenn said:


> Oh of course- not expected!  But IF Meghan wanted her mom there I'm going to guess Mom will fly on over!



before she had finished asking you better know she would be on the next flight out!  



bag-mania said:


> *You make it sound like taking care of a grandchild is an honor. It is not. I*t’s hard work and Meghan can easily afford nannies. Poor mom already raised HER child without any extra help. She deserves to enjoy her golden years without chasing after the royal rugrats. When and if Meghan has kids I’m hoping she isn’t so selfish to try to get her mother moved in for grandma child care.




you can't speak for anyone but yourself.  for many women it IS an honor to be there and very present in their grandchild's life if not every day then as often as possible!  i know a lot of women that go out of their way to take care of their grandchild because i am one of them.  yes a 40 year old grandmother having raised my kids but to be able to do the same with my grandson gives me unspeakable joy! every.single.day!


----------



## LittleStar88

Has anyone asked Meghan's mom what SHE wants?


----------



## bag-princess

LittleStar88 said:


> Has anyone asked Meghan's mom what SHE wants?



i think that is a question only she can answer.  





DC-Cutie said:


> Can ya'll let Miss Doria live!  Please!  *This woman has been minding her business, going to yoga and the laundromat. * Not bothering a sole.



this killed me!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-princess said:


> i think that is a question only she can answer.



Exactly my point


----------



## redney

DC-Cutie said:


> dang!  ya'll talking kids, grandparents and nannies already!


Yes, this!!! Anyone want to wait for an official announcement before starting to plan their child care for them? [emoji23]


----------



## cafecreme15

I thought Harry looked particularly dashing at their engagement today. Love that gray and tan combination. My eyes went to him before Meghan this time!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Laurie Lou

cafecreme15 said:


> I thought Harry looked particularly dashing at their engagement today. Love that gray and tan combination. My eyes went to him before Meghan this time!



Lol my eyes go to him first every time , he’s always hot. ‍♀️


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I don't think anyone here actually needs to worry about the child care plans for Harry's and Meghan's future children, they will have access to the best nannies _anywhere_. But it sure makes for a great gossip discussion


----------



## bisbee

westjenn said:


> I'm going to assume that the majority would prefer having a family member watching their child vs. a Nanny? If her life allows, she is unmarried and has no other children, why wouldn't she take care of her grandchild IF Meghan asked. I dont really understand how this is not a respected choice.


Not every woman wants to take care of grandchildren.  I didn’t (at least not full time).  I already raised my children and so did she!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

There's more at play here than just a conversation about any children and Doria looking after them.

After years of fighting discrimination (and the many shadowy racist comments on articles about both Doria and Meghan that still continue) I can see them both wanting to stay away from any role for Doria in the Royal household that gives an image of her being subservient.

I think she'll be a wonderful grandmother when and if the time comes, with all the access to those children she desires. She's also worked very hard to have a life of her own.

Yes, being the assigned caretaker for grandchildren is what SOME women want (and some posters are really getting huffy about their _own_ choices) but joyful as it is - it is work.


----------



## bisousx

bisbee said:


> Not every woman wants to take care of grandchildren.  I didn’t (at least not full time).  I already raised my children and so did she!



Yep. My parents make it very clear that they are not interested in babysitting any potential future children.


----------



## bisbee

bisousx said:


> Yep. My parents make it very clear that they are not interested in babysitting any potential future children.


I do babysit...and I have stayed with my grandchildren when my son and DIL have gone away.  BUT, I made it clear to them that, while always available in an emergency, even when I was working, I would not want to provide childcare on a regular basis.  Now that I am retired, that has not changed. 

Meghan’s mother has her own life to lead!  She will make her own decision, but I doubt she would be expected to provide childcare to the Royal couple.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> You make it sound like taking care of a grandchild is an honor. It is not. It’s hard work and Meghan can easily afford nannies. Poor mom already raised HER child without any extra help. She deserves to enjoy her golden years without chasing after the royal rugrats. When and if Meghan has kids I’m hoping she isn’t so selfish to try to get her mother moved in for grandma child care.


Where I live I very often see elderly grandparents caring for very young grandchildren. It seems kind of unfair on both sides, is a 75 year old person who doesn't look in great health really the best nanny? They often seem cranky and tired and I'm sure it must affect their relationship with their child, just to save some money.


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> I really hope that if meghan gets pregnant her mother will move to London. sell the house in California and move to London. she gets older and is by herself. to have your grandchildren around you is the best Thing and for meghan have her mother there. I think kate is still really Close with her Family so they have time etc to see each other. I saw Pictures of kate's parents with George all bei theirself going for a walk on the shoulders of his grandpa. so cute and normal.
> 
> the Picture of her mother at the wash Salon is really mean, I'm waiting for stories like : meghan's mom homeless -- no help from her daughter lol..
> seems like meghan's mom is the last one who cares for fame or Money. but I hope meghan involve her mom in her life ..


it isn't that easy to relocate. you need visa etc


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures of Harry and Meghan at the opening of the Nelson Mandela Centenary Exhibition


----------



## terebina786

bisousx said:


> Yep. My parents make it very clear that they are not interested in babysitting any potential future children.


My parents are the opposite.  They offered to fully take care of my children... BUT I don't want any, so that was the end of that! LOL


----------



## bag-princess

for those in the back that were saying how they feel sooooo sorry for him!  save your pity.   i can't remember if it was on this board or somewhere else but someone got it exactly right - he is trying to make them comment on his stupidity and stop ignoring him!  smh 




*Meghan Markle's Dad: 'I'm Enjoying the Fact That I Can Make the Entire Royal Family Not Speak'*


Thomas Markle is going back on his word to stop talking to the press.

Just two days after telling _The Sun on Sunday_ he was doing his “last interview,” Meghan Markle‘s father spoke to TMZ in response to reports that his daughter and Prince Harry were unhappy that he had once again gone to the press in exchange for cash.

“I was silent for a full year and the press beat me up every day saying I was a hermit hiding in Mexico, so I gave my story,” he said. “Apparently that interview put the royal family in their silence mode … so, I gave another interview to break the silence. *All they have to do is speak to me*.”

Before talking to _The Sun_, Thomas appeared on the U.K.’s _Good Morning Britain_ in June to discuss his phone calls with Harry, Meghan’s desire to have children and the couple’s “disappointment” that he missed the royal wedding.

Thomas also told TMZ that he didn’t plan on disappearing.

“Tomorrow is my birthday, 74 years old, and I’m enjoying the fact that* I can make the entire royal family not speak and maybe I can get a laugh out of the duchess*,” he said.

Thomas told _The Sun _that he doesn’t think his daughter is having the easiest time adjusting to her new role as a member of the royal family.

“My thing about my daughter right now is that I think she is terrified. I see it in her eyes, I see it in her face and I see it in her smile,” he said. “I’ve seen her smile for years. I know her smile. I don’t like the one I’m seeing now. This one isn’t even a stage smile — this is a pained smile.”

However, Priyanka Chopra recently told PEOPLE that her close friend is loving her new life as a royal.

“She’s doing amazing,” said the actress, who was part of the star-studded guest list at the couple’s wedding. “It’s so nice to see.”

In the same interview with the _Sun,_ Thomas admitted that he has not spoken to his daughter since the May 19 wedding.

“I spoke to Meghan and Harry briefly after the wedding,” he told the publication, adding, “the phone number I had been calling Meghan on is no longer picking up. And I don’t have an address for her.”

“It is probably the longest time I have gone without speaking to her ever,” he said. “If I had one message for her, it would be that I’m sorry for anything that went wrong.” 

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-apos-dad-apos-205543704.html


----------



## PatsyCline

I can't understand his logic either.  He's not going to get them to comment, privately or publicly, he'll simply get frozen out and ignored.

You don't see her mom commenting, positively or negatively. She hasn't given any interviews, she keeps her head down and lives her life.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-princess said:


> for those in the back that were saying how they feel sooooo sorry for him!  save your pity.   i can't remember if it was on this board or somewhere else but someone got it exactly right - he is trying to make them comment on his stupidity and stop ignoring him!  smh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Dad: 'I'm Enjoying the Fact That I Can Make the Entire Royal Family Not Speak'*
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle is going back on his word to stop talking to the press.
> 
> Just two days after telling _The Sun on Sunday_ he was doing his “last interview,” Meghan Markle‘s father spoke to TMZ in response to reports that his daughter and Prince Harry were unhappy that he had once again gone to the press in exchange for cash.
> 
> “I was silent for a full year and the press beat me up every day saying I was a hermit hiding in Mexico, so I gave my story,” he said. “Apparently that interview put the royal family in their silence mode … so, I gave another interview to break the silence. *All they have to do is speak to me*.”
> 
> Before talking to _The Sun_, Thomas appeared on the U.K.’s _Good Morning Britain_ in June to discuss his phone calls with Harry, Meghan’s desire to have children and the couple’s “disappointment” that he missed the royal wedding.
> 
> Thomas also told TMZ that he didn’t plan on disappearing.
> 
> “Tomorrow is my birthday, 74 years old, and I’m enjoying the fact that* I can make the entire royal family not speak and maybe I can get a laugh out of the duchess*,” he said.
> 
> Thomas told _The Sun _that he doesn’t think his daughter is having the easiest time adjusting to her new role as a member of the royal family.
> 
> “My thing about my daughter right now is that I think she is terrified. I see it in her eyes, I see it in her face and I see it in her smile,” he said. “I’ve seen her smile for years. I know her smile. I don’t like the one I’m seeing now. This one isn’t even a stage smile — this is a pained smile.”
> 
> However, Priyanka Chopra recently told PEOPLE that her close friend is loving her new life as a royal.
> 
> “She’s doing amazing,” said the actress, who was part of the star-studded guest list at the couple’s wedding. “It’s so nice to see.”
> 
> In the same interview with the _Sun,_ Thomas admitted that he has not spoken to his daughter since the May 19 wedding.
> 
> “I spoke to Meghan and Harry briefly after the wedding,” he told the publication, adding, “the phone number I had been calling Meghan on is no longer picking up. And I don’t have an address for her.”
> 
> “It is probably the longest time I have gone without speaking to her ever,” he said. “If I had one message for her, it would be that I’m sorry for anything that went wrong.”
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-apos-dad-apos-205543704.html


If she's in fear it's more likely fear of him and what he'll blurt out next.


----------



## bag-princess

PatsyCline said:


> I can't understand his logic either.  He's not going to get them to comment, privately or publicly, he'll simply get frozen out and ignored.
> 
> You don't see her mom commenting, positively or negatively. She hasn't given any interviews, she keeps her head down and lives her life.




i think he is just loving all the attention from these idiots that keep wasting time talking to him!  and especially the ones that are paying him. he will keep digging himself into a hole and ITA with you - they are never going to comment on him and will just pretend he doesn't exist!


----------



## BagLovingMom

They look so good together ! I think Meghan’s dad is having a tantrum oy vey....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If she's in fear it's more likely fear of him and what he'll blurt out next.



i don't blame her!  he has really taken it too far now admitting that he is doing this supposedly just to make them talk about him!   she wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole now!


----------



## PatsyCline

bag-princess said:


> i think he is just loving all the attention from these idiots that keep wasting time talking to him!  and especially the ones that are paying him. he will keep digging himself into a hole and ITA with you - they are never going to comment on him and will just pretend he doesn't exist!


And her half-sister Samantha is ranting on Twitter again, claiming that Meghan is ignoring her father.


----------



## mkr

They need a cease and desist order.


----------



## bag-princess

PatsyCline said:


> And her half-sister Samantha is ranting on Twitter again, claiming that Meghan is ignoring her father.



smh - well duh!!  i don't blame her.  this person obviously doesn't see anything wrong with their father's behavior either.


----------



## PatsyCline

People article claiming Meghan is finding it some Palace rules 'difficult to understand'.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-finds-certain-royal-rules-difficult-understand/
I would think that life would be daunting for someone who's used to all the protocols etc., much less someone who is new to it.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Morgan R said:


> More pictures of Harry and Meghan at the opening of the Nelson Mandela Centenary Exhibition
> View attachment 4135767


The way they look at each other in these photos is so sweet.


----------



## bag-princess

PatsyCline said:


> People article claiming Meghan is finding it some Palace rules 'difficult to understand'.
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-finds-certain-royal-rules-difficult-understand/
> *I would think that life would be daunting for someone who's used to all the protocols etc., much less someone who is new to it*.




exactly!  that isn't ground breaking news to anyone.


----------



## Pessie

PatsyCline said:


> I can't understand his logic either.  He's not going to get them to comment, privately or publicly, he'll simply get frozen out and ignored.
> 
> You don't see her mom commenting, positively or negatively. She hasn't given any interviews, she keeps her head down and lives her life.


He’ll be frozen out.  I think these people thought their ship had come in when Meghan married Harry   Er, no!  Eventually the press will move on, in fact he’s making little news over here despite the interviews.  No one cares.


----------



## RueMonge

Morgan R said:


> More pictures of Harry and Meghan at the opening of the Nelson Mandela Centenary Exhibition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4135767
> View attachment 4135768



I am obsessed with this dress. If I were Meghan, I'd be trying to figure out how to wear it again.


----------



## bag-princess

[QUOTE="Pessie, post: 32438877, member: 512208"*]*He’ll be frozen out.  I think these people thought their ship had come in when Meghan married Harry   Er, no!  *Eventually the press will move on*, in fact he’s making little news over here despite the interviews.  No one cares.[/QUOTE]


i think he has already been deeply frozen!  and yes the press will move on and get tired of paying him for saying nothing important at all.they are just using him to make a headline.  but then i guess that is when he will get desperate and start trying to give out the kind of news that will grab bigger headlines and bigger payouts for him.  he is not beneath it as we can see.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the RFU Injured Players Foundation


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Samantha Grant (her name until Meghan started dating Harry, then she changed it to Markle) and Thomas Markle are both raging narcissists.

The father particularly. His tone is becoming increasingly threatening. I think Meghan has no choice but to continue freezing them both out - any contact will be immediately sold to gutter trash British press.

It's worth noting all of the pictures of Meghan and her Dad are from when she was a baby or in her teens.  At some point there was a big rift which caused the disconnect.

As for Samantha, she's a seething harpy who used to call Doria "the maid" and hasn't had contact with Meghan for 10+ years. That she continues to try and lecture Meghan and Harry on family is pretty rich when she's estranged from her own mother and children.

They are true narcissists. No contact, no payoff, would ever be enough for those grifters.

Sometimes toxic people need to be cut from your life. IMO this is one of those instances. Meghan, Harry and Doria are doing the right thing.


----------



## pixiejenna

Her dad has probably been frozen out for a while. I think she tried to make nice by inviting him to the wedding and his stunt was the final straw. I think that if he went and behaved she might have kept him in the loop with her life. At this point he’s going just to get a reaction out of her or the royal family that he’s not going to get it and that kills him. As long as he can get paid he’s going to keep doing whatever he can to keep the gravy train.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Eventually he'll exhaust any information he has - and I believe he's already at that point.  The only thing to report on is his reaction to the goings on in Meghan's life - which is pretty pathetic.  Already some outlets are refusing to run his stories. It looks like only The Sun, DailyFail and TMZ are interested. Hopefully that dries up as well.

The only way to respond to a narcissist - is not to respond at all.  It just gives them oxygen. They're best not to deal with him on any level.

As for Samantha's claim that it will be Meghan's fault if he dies, I find that laughable.  Maybe she should try looking at his addiction to KFC and McDonalds first.  That belly didn't just appear, it comes through years of neglecting his health.

I love seeing photo's of Meghan and Harry.  Success and  just living your life really is the best way of countering this negativity.


----------



## mdcx

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Samantha Grant (her name until Meghan started dating Harry, then she changed it to Markle) and Thomas Markle are both raging narcissists.
> 
> The father particularly. His tone is becoming increasingly threatening. I think Meghan has no choice but to continue freezing them both out - any contact will be immediately sold to gutter trash British press.
> 
> It's worth noting all of the pictures of Meghan and her Dad are from when she was a baby or in her teens.  At some point there was a big rift which caused the disconnect.
> 
> As for Samantha, she's a seething harpy who used to call Doria "the maid" and hasn't had contact with Meghan for 10+ years. That she continues to try and lecture Meghan and Harry on family is pretty rich when she's estranged from her own mother and children.
> 
> They are true narcissists. No contact, no payoff, would ever be enough for those grifters.
> 
> Sometimes toxic people need to be cut from your life. IMO this is one of those instances. Meghan, Harry and Doria are doing the right thing.


Agreed, those of us with dysfunctional families of origin know this all too well. The fear of _what will they do/say to humiliate me this time_ is very anxiety producing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

OT but the lady in the red stripes looks fabulous:


----------



## Morgan R

mdcx said:


> OT but the lady in the red stripes looks fabulous:
> View attachment 4136985



That is Nelson Mandela's granddaughter, Zamaswazi Dlamini-Mandela.


----------



## prettyprincess

I haven’t been this inspired and intrigued by a couple since Posh & Becks.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgan R said:


> That is Nelson Mandela's granddaughter, Zamaswazi Dlamini-Mandela.



Love his grand daughter’s outfit MUCH more than Meghan’s. It’s colorful and fun, but still so chic and classy. [emoji106]


----------



## mkr

mdcx said:


> OT but the lady in the red stripes looks fabulous:
> View attachment 4136985



I dig that Dionysus.


----------



## Pessie

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Eventually he'll exhaust any information he has - and I believe he's already at that point.  The only thing to report on is his reaction to the goings on in Meghan's life - which is pretty pathetic.  Already some outlets are refusing to run his stories. It looks like only The Sun, DailyFail and TMZ are interested. Hopefully that dries up as well.
> 
> The only way to respond to a narcissist - is not to respond at all.  It just gives them oxygen. They're best not to deal with him on any level.
> 
> As for Samantha's claim that it will be Meghan's fault if he dies, I find that laughable.  Maybe she should try looking at his addiction to KFC and McDonalds first.  That belly didn't just appear, it comes through years of neglecting his health.
> 
> I love seeing photo's of Meghan and Harry.  Success and  just living your life really is the best way of countering this negativity.


You’re right I think, he has nothing new to say re Meghan.  I suspect therefore we’ll be seeing some episodes of “ill health” as an alternative way to maintain attention on himself and keep turning the screw.  Poor woman, I feel sorry for her.


----------



## mkr

Just goes to show that it doesn’t matter who you are. There’s an @sshole in every family.


----------



## Rouge H

mkr said:


> Just goes to show that it doesn’t matter who you are. There’s an @sshole in every family.



Or 2...


----------



## minababe

I really hope the rumors are not true that meghan is doing vacation alone in the us to visit Family and friends to fix some Problems with her Family.

I really hope she stays away from These parasits ..
just visit mom and real friends or Family.
I wish meghan and Harry all the best and I hope they don't let this ******** touch their souls. could be really burdensome ..
would like to see hem happy in their vacation on a Island with friends and maybe doria. I think she has a great mom at her side


----------



## VickyB

minababe said:


> I really hope the rumors are not true that meghan is doing vacation alone in the us to visit Family and friends to fix some Problems with her Family.
> 
> I really hope she stays away from These parasits ..
> just visit mom and real friends or Family.
> I wish meghan and Harry all the best and I hope they don't let this ******** touch their souls. could be really burdensome ..
> would like to see hem happy in their vacation on a Island with friends and maybe doria. I think she has a great mom at her side



Aside from her mom, what other family does she have that she is close with? Only her mom was at the wedding. On her mom's side I guess  no uncles, aunts, close old family friends of her mother's?


----------



## Sharont2305

I really hope that what I have read today isn't true in that Megan's half sister Samantha has been signed up to do Celebrity Big Brother! I don't even think Channel 5 would stoop that low......would they?


----------



## krissa

Sharont2305 said:


> I really hope that what I have read today isn't true in that Megan's half sister Samantha has been signed up to do Celebrity Big Brother! I don't even think Channel 5 would stoop that low......would they?


I’ve never watched the celeb versions, but how would they accommodate her condition? Aren’t the challenges sometimes physical? Considering the source (the evil half sister) I would take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## berrydiva

Her dad's side are such gutter trash humans....instead of laying low and being quiet so they can possibly enjoy some benefits of her marrying Harry, they'd rather be filth. Better she knows now who's in her corner than be hurt by it later. Her mom seems lovely and I'm sure she'll be treated fantastically by the royal family.


----------



## PatsyCline

Unfortunately some people simply can’t see past the nose on their face. 

Rather than wait and see, they chose to try and grab whatever attention they can, no matter how much it damages those close to them.


----------



## minababe

Sharont2305 said:


> I really hope that what I have read today isn't true in that Megan's half sister Samantha has been signed up to do Celebrity Big Brother! I don't even think Channel 5 would stoop that low......would they?



that would be the worst ..
I think it's time to make her silent.. can't you proceed poeple that they are not allowed to talk about you anymore? I thought there would be something like that?

or meghan has to talk with her father, if he doesn't get his daughter under Control than that's it.
but maybe he is the same .. more into Money than into meghan ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Just released pictures of Prince Harry's private visit to Lesotho last month which was a visit to meet with children and young people involved with the programmes of his Sentebale charity:


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> I really hope that what I have read today isn't true in that Megan's half sister Samantha has been signed up to do Celebrity Big Brother! I don't even think Channel 5 would stoop that low......would they?


so talking sh it about someone in public makes you a celeb these days?


----------



## mdcx

I don't know what Meghan's father and sister think they will achieve with all this. The Royal Family will not engage, they will protect Meghan. Meghan's loyalty is to Harry and his family now and rightfully so, as they have treated her way better than her own. Maybe they will get it eventually and give up.
(ETA excluding Doria here obviously, as she seems to have a great relationship with Meghan).


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> so talking sh it about someone in public makes you a celeb these days?


Apparently so. Here in the UK it is anyway. Sick of it


----------



## solange

minababe said:


> what do you think of the relationship between meghan and kate ?
> I always liked (and still like ) kate but since the wedding I'm a bit dissapointed of her .. she looked the whole time pissed at the wedding and her clothing choice was a statement for me too .. to wear something you already wore 2 times in public and in such a light colour .. not due to me


It seemed clear she looked ticked at Mrs. Cornwall's running commentary during the wedding. Did you notice Kate stop ignoring her just long enough to divert her attention while Prince Charles exited the row and William returned to block her in? Kept invasion of private wedding moment 2.0 from happening like it did during Kate and Will's wedding.


*EEP! Just realized how long ago that question was posted. Sorry!


----------



## PatsyCline

Samantha Grant admits in interview, she's doing all this for the money.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-cashing-Meghans-marriage-Prince-Harry.html

Trash, pure trailer trash.


----------



## chicinthecity777

westjenn said:


> Hmmmm... @bag-mania as a mother of 2 children whose mother has taken care of both (live-in care for my children) I do not consider this to be a selfish act on my part. It is partly a cultural thing for me.  And let me add, in my family it is an honor to take care of grandchildren.  I take offense and I'm out! Have a good day.


It's not an honour in all cultures. You can't assume people should conform your culture.


----------



## Tivo

PatsyCline said:


> Samantha Grant admits in interview, she's doing all this for the money.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-cashing-Meghans-marriage-Prince-Harry.html
> 
> Trash, pure trailer trash.


The Daily Fail is loving this.


----------



## DC-Cutie

PatsyCline said:


> Samantha Grant admits in interview, she's doing all this for the money.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-cashing-Meghans-marriage-Prince-Harry.html
> 
> Trash, pure trailer trash.


at least she's made her sick intentions known.  I hope NONE of the US media outlets give them 2 seconds of airtime.


----------



## mdcx

xiangxiang0731 said:


> It's not an honour in all cultures. You can't assume people should conform your culture.


In my case, my mother is not capable(mentally or emotionally) to look after my children, nor do I trust her. Then the other side is, geographically she is not close, nor would she want to spend her time as a full-time/part-time child carer even if I asked. 
If I had a different mother and a different situation, I would be thrilled to have a mother that helped out occasionally with childcare, but not all of us are that lucky. I would also not expect her to do it.
It seems that Doria and Meghan have a really great relationship, so I'm sure Meghan will be happy for her to spend time with any future grandkids.


----------



## Grande Latte

The best way to deal with toxic people is to avoid them because you can't beat them at their games.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the International Aids Conference at the RAI Amsterdam Convention Centre 7/23/18


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at Young Netherlands Leaders Reception 7/23/18


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Everybody loves Harry  It seems, everyone is positively gushing around him. He seems a very accessible and relateable royal.

About Meghan's mom, how do so many of you know that their relationship is good? Have they talked about it? Meghan allegedly tried to get her father to come to the wedding, which obviously was no sign that they were on good terms, as we've seen now from his public behaviour towards her. There seem to be no other relatives "visible" on her mother's side which is also strange. Maybe her mother already cut many of them off, long before Meghan married Harry?


----------



## Morgan R

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Everybody loves Harry  It seems, everyone is positively gushing around him. He seems a very accessible and relateable royal.
> 
> About Meghan's mom, how do so many of you know that their relationship is good? Have they talked about it? Meghan allegedly tried to get her father to come to the wedding, which obviously was no sign that they were on good terms, as we've seen now from his public behaviour towards her. There seem to be no other relatives "visible" on her mother's side which is also strange. Maybe her mother already cut many of them off, long before Meghan married Harry?



Well in their engagement interview Meghan mentioned that her mother had spent a lot of time with her and Harry also in the interview Harry mentioned that Doria was amazing. Also this is what Meghan wrote about Doria on her website _The Tig _years before she was with Harry - https://web.archive.org/web/20140626050902/http://thetig.com/love-letter/.

I don't think Doria nor Meghan cut Doria's side of the family off it just seems that side of Meghan's family doesn't want the attention that the Markle side clearly wants (the Markles just keep continuing to give interviews and sell stories to the media as a way to get money from the press despite it being quite obvious their relationship was strained with Meghan before she was with Harry). Both of Doria's parents passed away but she has 3 half-siblings and only one of the siblings (Joseph Johnson) once spoke to media about Meghan and it was actually positive in comparison to the Markles. Here is what Doria's brother Joseph said about Meghan :

“She was always a special child, so happy. Right from the start it was clear she was special and had a magical quality about her. She always had a happy demeanor. Meghan was raised in a household of strong women because there were no men on the scene.Culturally the women were the backbone of the family. Doria and my grandmother were both whip-smart and funny. Meghan gets her sense of humor from them. When you are raised by strong women, you are not intimidated by anyone. Meghan's nickname in the family was Flower. She was always sunny and had a lovely disposition. The camera loved her from the start.” (more from the interview is included here along with pictures of Meghan with her mom's side of the family: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...amily-share-intimate-private-photo-album.html).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the International AIDS Conference in Amsterdam


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Morgan R said:


> Well in their engagement interview Meghan mentioned that her mother had spent a lot of time with her and Harry also in the interview Harry mentioned that Doria was amazing. Also this is what Meghan wrote about Doria on her website _The Tig _years before she was with Harry - https://web.archive.org/web/20140626050902/http://thetig.com/love-letter/.
> 
> I don't think Doria nor Meghan cut Doria's side of the family off it just seems that side of Meghan's family doesn't want the attention that the Markle side clearly wants (the Markles just keep continuing to give interviews and sell stories to the media as a way to get money from the press despite it being quite obvious their relationship was strained with Meghan before she was with Harry). Both of Doria's parents passed away but she has 3 half-siblings and only one of the siblings (Joseph Johnson) once spoke to media about Meghan and it was actually positive in comparison to the Markles. Here is what Doria's brother Joseph said about Meghan :
> 
> “She was always a special child, so happy. Right from the start it was clear she was special and had a magical quality about her. She always had a happy demeanor. Meghan was raised in a household of strong women because there were no men on the scene.Culturally the women were the backbone of the family. Doria and my grandmother were both whip-smart and funny. Meghan gets her sense of humor from them. When you are raised by strong women, you are not intimidated by anyone. Meghan's nickname in the family was Flower. She was always sunny and had a lovely disposition. The camera loved her from the start.” (more from the interview is included here along with pictures of Meghan with her mom's side of the family: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...amily-share-intimate-private-photo-album.html).


Lucky for Meghan then, as the major part of her father's side seems to be just a constant source of public embarrassment and probably much pain to her.


----------



## Chamber Doll

I don't think Harry is good looking but he's so lively and his fun personality shines through......and that makes him very attractive......I enjoy seeing these pics of him out and about


----------



## myown

Chamber Doll said:


> I don't think Harry is good looking but he's so lively and his fun personality shines through......and that makes him very attractive......I enjoy seeing these pics of him out and about


there are definitely princes out there that are worse looking


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Morgan R said:


> Well in their engagement interview Meghan mentioned that her mother had spent a lot of time with her and Harry also in the interview Harry mentioned that Doria was amazing. Also this is what Meghan wrote about Doria on her website _The Tig _years before she was with Harry - https://web.archive.org/web/20140626050902/http://thetig.com/love-letter/.
> 
> I don't think Doria nor Meghan cut Doria's side of the family off it just seems that side of Meghan's family doesn't want the attention that the Markle side clearly wants (the Markles just keep continuing to give interviews and sell stories to the media as a way to get money from the press despite it being quite obvious their relationship was strained with Meghan before she was with Harry). Both of Doria's parents passed away but she has 3 half-siblings and only one of the siblings (Joseph Johnson) once spoke to media about Meghan and it was actually positive in comparison to the Markles. Here is what Doria's brother Joseph said about Meghan :
> 
> “She was always a special child, so happy. Right from the start it was clear she was special and had a magical quality about her. She always had a happy demeanor. Meghan was raised in a household of strong women because there were no men on the scene.Culturally the women were the backbone of the family. Doria and my grandmother were both whip-smart and funny. Meghan gets her sense of humor from them. When you are raised by strong women, you are not intimidated by anyone. Meghan's nickname in the family was Flower. She was always sunny and had a lovely disposition. The camera loved her from the start.” (more from the interview is included here along with pictures of Meghan with her mom's side of the family: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...amily-share-intimate-private-photo-album.html).


Thanks for sharing! Doria seems so beautiful, inside and out. Family is so important to me personally so I really admire and relate to family-oriented public figures. 

Also, I love Harry's charity work! It's hard to forget the stupid stuff he did when he was in his 20s (especially since I'm in my 20s!) but I really admire how he's grown since then. Improvement is always admirable!


----------



## chowlover2

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Thanks for sharing! Doria seems so beautiful, inside and out. Family is so important to me personally so I really admire and relate to family-oriented public figures.
> 
> Also, I love Harry's charity work! It's hard to forget the stupid stuff he did when he was in his 20s (especially since I'm in my 20s!) but I really admire how he's grown since then. Improvement is always admirable!


I have good news for you. The brain doesn't fully develop until you are about 25 yrs old. Women tend to mature earlier and men later. When someone does something stupid I look at the age first. I imagine Harry did most of his craziness before he was 27 or so. As his brain matured so did his actions. And it doesn't matter if you are a Prince or the boy next store.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

chowlover2 said:


> I have good news for you. The brain doesn't fully develop until you are about 25 yrs old. Women tend to mature earlier and men later. When someone does something stupid I look at the age first. I imagine Harry did most of his craziness before he was 27 or so. As his brain matured so did his actions. And it doesn't matter if you are a Prince or the boy next store.


I have a degree in developmental psychology so I get the brain, but like my original comment said, I am in my 20s and I don't personally know any 20-somethings male or females who would do what he did so it's hard for me to fathom his actions. Anyway, in my original comment I was trying to focus on his growth, not condemn his past. I think we can all agree that he's very much grown up since then so no point on dwelling on past mistakes - sorry if my original post didn't come across this way.

Now that I think about it, it must be taught for Harry if/when people bring that up to him, so I kinda wish I didn't say that in the first place!


----------



## chowlover2

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I have a degree in developmental psychology so I get the brain, but like my original comment said, I am in my 20s and I don't personally know any 20-somethings male or females who would do what he did so it's hard for me to fathom his actions. Anyway, in my original comment I was trying to focus on his growth, not condemn his past. I think we can all agree that he's very much grown up since then so no point on dwelling on past mistakes - sorry if my original post didn't come across this way.
> 
> Now that I think about it, it must be taught for Harry if/when people bring that up to him, so I kinda wish I didn't say that in the first place!


I can't imagine growing up in the public eye as he and his brother have. How can you no want to rebel at some point? Or they have some crazy friend who dares them to do something. Boys are so different than girls. He has turned out really well, I wish he and Meghan the best.


----------



## myown

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Now that I think about it, it must be taught for Harry if/when people bring that up to him, so I kinda wish I didn't say that in the first place!


and his kids will be able to google that!


----------



## Morgan R

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I have a degree in developmental psychology so I get the brain, but like my original comment said, I am in my 20s and I don't personally know any 20-somethings male or females who would do what he did so it's hard for me to fathom his actions. Anyway, in my original comment I was trying to focus on his growth, not condemn his past. I think we can all agree that he's very much grown up since then so no point on dwelling on past mistakes - sorry if my original post didn't come across this way.
> 
> Now that I think about it, it must be taught for Harry if/when people bring that up to him, so I kinda wish I didn't say that in the first place!



I don't think it is tough for him to talk about it when/if people bring up his past but at the same time I'm not sure that people do bring up his past to him publicly anymore considering there has been so much new things happening with him and there will be so much more that will happen with him in the future.

Harry did open up last year about his past though and mentioned that he acted out as a way to avoid thinking about his mother. He mentioned that since he hadn't properly dealt with her death he had come close to nervous breakdowns but also developed anxiety as well as had panic attacks. He said he only began to seek counseling starting when he was 28 for issues he developed from not properly dealing with his mother's death.


Both the audio to Harry's interview and a summary of the interview where he talks about his mental health is included here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...counselling-death-mother-led-two-years-total/


----------



## gazoo

People have respected him in interviews, and anyways Royals are not subjected to drilling interviews like celebrities are. I doubt the Palace would even allow certain questions. He stumbled a lot in his wild days, embarrassingly so, but he's more than made up for it, IMO. He's beloved for more than just being the little boy that lost his mother. His commitment to his causes and his humanity in dealing with people really are his biggest assets.

I too don't think he is classically handsome. His eyes are tiny and very close set. But his swagger counters it.


----------



## Glitterandstuds

The trashy sister is apparently going on Celebrity Big Brother. UGH I wish they wouldn't.


----------



## lulu212121

Where is Megan? Just wondering why she is not with him.


----------



## Morgan R

lulu212121 said:


> Where is Megan? Just wondering why she is not with him.



Royals to go on solo and joint engagements. The past few engagements for Harry were announced awhile ago that they would be solo engagements for him.

Possible that Meghan makes an appearance at Harry's charity, Sentebale Polo match tomorrow though.


----------



## PatsyCline

lulu212121 said:


> Where is Megan? Just wondering why she is not with him.



Princess lessons?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan arrive at the Sentebale Polo Cup


----------



## minababe

they kissed at the winning ceremony! so lovely !
and they were Holding Hands when they left the field. Harry Looks so happy. I'm so happy for them. can't get enough of the lovebirds


----------



## DC-Cutie

I love the fit of this dress on her AND it has pockets!!!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan at the Sentebale Polo Cup


----------



## Tivo

Her smile looks faker with every appearance. She really has toothpick legs.


----------



## cafecreme15

Tivo said:


> Her smile looks faker with every appearance. She really has toothpick legs.



I can’t begrudge her her legs because I have very similar ‘toothpick’ legs no matter what I do, but this does look more grimace than smile. Can’t say I blame her though.


----------



## Gal4Dior

It must be so exhausting having to be “on” like this all then time. Throw in the “royal protocol,” and I would run screaming from a life like this. I don’t envy Kate or Meghan’s life sometimes...even with all the perks that go along with it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t understand the toothpick leg thing. Her legs (what you can see of them) look perfectly normal in these pics?


----------



## Tivo

I imagine she is so tired of smiling and going through all these motions. There is a lot to remember.


----------



## PatsyCline

I wonder if she simply ignores all the press and attention, and just goes about her day 

I think I would be a wreck after a few months. Worrying about every outfit, whether someone took a photo of me making a faux pas etc.  

It takes a certain person to want to marry into the Royal Family. I think she’s doing a great job.


----------



## Tivo

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t understand the toothpick leg thing. Her legs (what you can see of them) look perfectly normal in these pics?


Ok


----------



## queennadine

Like the overall look of her hair and dress here.


----------



## mdcx

I love it! Love the dress, the hair. To me she looks comfortable here, finally.


----------



## VickyB

DC-Cutie said:


> I love the fit of this dress on her AND it has pockets!!!



I LOVE this dress too!!!!! Not a fan of the shoes she put with it tho. Like them but not for this event/dress.


----------



## VickyB

Tivo said:


> Her smile looks faker with every appearance. She really has toothpick legs.



I see what you are saying about the smile. Doesn't seem as natural as it was pre wedding when she and Harry were doing all those walkabouts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

she makes everything right ! it doesn't seem to bother her what the Family of her father is doing lately. I think that's the best for her. she is living far away from them and lives her life to the fullest with Harry.
I'm pretty sure she will never see them again in her life so who cares about These poor People who wants their 2 sec of fame. the time will come where everyone of this Family has nothing to tell anymore because they haven't see her for many years now and will never see her again so that's it. I hope the press gets bored as well to let them talk always the same stories over and over again. it's done.


----------



## westjenn

xiangxiang0731 said:


> It's not an honour in all cultures. You can't assume people should conform your culture.


Are you serious? I would never ever expect anyone to conform to my culture. I was simply explaining my background and why it would make perfect sense to me.


----------



## chicinthecity777

westjenn said:


> Are you serious? I would never ever expect anyone to conform to my culture. I was simply explaining my background and why it would make perfect sense to me.


Dead serious! You didn't sugguest looking after grandchildren to yourself, you suggested that it would be the perfect life for Meghan's mother who may or may not come from your culture.


----------



## westjenn

xiangxiang0731 said:


> Dead serious! You didn't sugguest looking after grandchildren to yourself, you suggested that it would be the perfect life for Meghan's mother who may or may not come from your culture.


@xiangxiang0731 Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.  Not at one time did I ever use the words "perfect life for Meghan's mother.  I was simply stating MY experience and that in SOME cultures, this is the norm.  Whether or not Ms. Ragland and I are from similar backgrounds is something that I will keep to myself.


----------



## chicinthecity777

westjenn said:


> @xiangxiang0731 Please refrain from putting words in my mouth.  Not at one time did I ever use the words "perfect life for Meghan's mother.  I was simply stating MY experience and that in SOME cultures, this is the norm.  Whether or not Ms. Ragland and I are from similar backgrounds is something that I will keep to myself.


That explains it all.


----------



## westjenn

xiangxiang0731 said:


> That explains it all.


You're about a half a step away from being completely out of line and offensive. I suggest you dial it back.


----------



## chicinthecity777

westjenn said:


> You're about a half a step away from being completely out of line and offensive. I suggest you dial it back.


I think you are! Get off your high horse because nobody is really interested in your lecture!


----------



## JetSetGo!

No need to argue. Ignore and carry on.


----------



## solange

So, favorite official outing outfit since the wedding?


----------



## prettyprincess

My favorites so far.


----------



## Chamber Doll

ugh she is so pretty it annoys me........hahaha lol

I think her outfits have been looking better and better........I'm glad that she has been tying her hair back...it bugs me to see her fussing with it so much......i'm not being judge-y because I have the tendency to mess with mine.....but it does look annoying

it's nice to see them look normal at this last outing (holding hands and kissing)...........So are Will & Kate not allowed to do this at more casual events?


----------



## Chamber Doll

I don't think slingbacks look nice on her........I've never really been wowed at her shoe choices

She looked great in yellow.....but Kate really wowed me when she wore yellow......she looked super banging.......Megan looked too square in her dress........maybe a halter type would look more better


----------



## Morgan R

Chamber Doll said:


> ugh she is so pretty it annoys me........hahaha lol
> 
> I think her outfits have been looking better and better........I'm glad that she has been tying her hair back...it bugs me to see her fussing with it so much......i'm not being judge-y because I have the tendency to mess with mine.....but it does look annoying
> *
> it's nice to see them look normal at this last outing (holding hands and kissing)...........So are Will & Kate not allowed to do this at more casual events?*



They are allowed to do it they just don't do it as often but Prince Charles use to do the same thing more often with Diana as well as later on with Camilla.


----------



## RueMonge

solange said:


> So, favorite official outing outfit since the wedding?



I'm obsessed with this one.


----------



## Spellman

Some people are just not a fan of the PDA, my other half hates being cuddly and whatnot in public. Perhaps William and Kate are similar and there’s no need for it.

I think Meghan is doing an amazing job so far.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## loogirl

minababe said:


> i would look happy af if the brother of my husband, who I'm really Close with Looks that happy as Harry on his wedding day ! I don't mean she should look perfect or something. she just didn't smile once at the whole wedding ceremony. and she seems to look down the whole time while the rest of the guests were totally happy for the lovely couple. I like Kate since the beginning I just think that she was weird at the wedding day .. and I think it could be something because she was for many years the only attractive women in the royal Family and she was always with William and Harry and now there is a another couple. and meghan got a ot of Attention .. just saying



Uh she just had a baby and is probably tired AF. The last thing I worried about when I had a newborn was what other women looked like. I had no energy to care. 

I think you are reaching big time - Kate doesn't gaf about Meghan getting attention.


----------



## Sharont2305

Spellman said:


> Some people are just not a fan of the PDA, my other half hates being cuddly and whatnot in public. Perhaps William and Kate are similar and there’s no need for it.
> 
> I think Meghan is doing an amazing job so far.


I don't think there is any need for it either, okay at the polo match was fine, less formal, they weren't on Royal duty there, it was adorable actually. Sometimes it looks too much though. I think it's a British Upper class thing not to do too much PDA.
I also think William and Catherine don't overly do the PDA thing, they don't need too...... You can tell the way they look at each other, on the balcony at Trooping the Colour and at Wimbledon for example , they looked like they were the newlyweds. They were besotted with each other and you can tell that they are still madly in love.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Personally I don’t think it’s about “needing” to show PDA for them, perhaps they simply like to. Their relationship is still pretty new compared to how long Kate and William were together even before marriage so I don’t even see the point of comparisons; plus they are simply different people. It’s not like they’re embarrassing themselves or their positions. I enjoy them looking so happy !


----------



## berrydiva

I love that denim dress.  Where's the ID on it?


----------



## Lounorada

berrydiva said:


> I love that denim dress.  Where's the ID on it?


It's Carolina Herrera from the Resort 2019 collection!


----------



## berrydiva

Lounorada said:


> It's Carolina Herrera from the Resort 2019 collection!


You're my crush.  Thanks.


----------



## krissa

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...er-Meghan-got-wilful-streak-mother-Doria.html

Markle clan continues to be trash. Daddy dearest siding with Sam says it all. Everyone had so much sympathy for him with his fake heart attack.

View attachment 4147293
View attachment 4147294


----------



## FreeSpirit71

krissa said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...er-Meghan-got-wilful-streak-mother-Doria.html
> 
> Markle clan continues to be trash. Daddy dearest siding with Sam says it all. Everyone had so much sympathy for him with his fake heart attack.
> 
> View attachment 4147293
> View attachment 4147294



This douchecanoe can just step back with shading Doria.  She's got more class in her little finger than that junk-food-chugging-lying-moneygrabbing-fatazz.


----------



## gazoo

With every word he is explaining Meghan's actions. I hope she holds fast and stays away from him. He and his children are toxic. Hopefully Harry, the BRF, Doria and her family are enough. This poor woman, I just can't even comprehend how a parent could continuously act this way towards his own flesh and blood. Good riddance to this moronic, petty trash.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

gazoo said:


> With every word he is explaining Meghan's actions. I hope she holds fast and stays away from him. He and his children are toxic. Hopefully Harry, the BRF, Doria and her family are enough. This poor woman, *I just can't even comprehend how a parent could continuously act this way towards his own flesh and blood*. Good riddance to this moronic, petty trash.


Because he's an entitled narcissist that's increasingly more desperate.  Having a crack at Meghan directly hasn't worked so he's working what he perceives to be her soft spots ie; her mother.

He really is trash.


----------



## PatsyCline

I would be afraid to even talk to him, as he would probably blab the whole conversation to some tabloid or worse. 

Maybe they could send 007 to have a word with him...


----------



## FreeSpirit71

There's more on the DM where apparently he spoke for NINE HOURS over three days to the The Mail on Sunday, venting his spleen. I'm loathe to link to it for fear it gets more hits.

No class, and thick as two bricks.

Edit: I'll just put this little gem here:



> *I refuse to stay quiet. What riles me is Meghan's sense of superiority. She'd be nothing without me. I made her the Duchess she is today. Everything that Meghan is, I made her.*'



*N A R C I S S I S T*


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Ok I have to link to it, because this is ridiculous:



> *Mr Markle said: ‘They [the Royal Family] have Meghan treating her father in a way that Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, would have loathed. That’s not what Diana stood for.’
> 
> Perhaps aware that such sensitive comments may risk enraging his Royal son-in-law, he insisted: ‘I don’t care if Harry never speaks to me again, I’ll survive.’*





> *If such observations risk alienating him yet further from the Royal family, then Mr Markle is untroubled, warning that there may be worse to come.
> 
> ‘I tell you, I’ve just about reached my limit on Meghan and the Royal Family,’ he said ominously. ‘I’m about to unload on them.*



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6002773/Thomas-Markle-says-Meghan-cut-life.html


----------



## mdcx

What a fool he is.


----------



## Spellman

The Daily Fail must be having a field day with all this trash talk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Spellman said:


> The Daily Fail must be having a field day with all this trash talk.


Even they are probably thinking _dude, rein it in, This is your daughter!!!!_


----------



## berrydiva

FreeSpirit71 said:


> This douchecanoe can just step back with shading Doria.  She's got more class in her little finger than that junk-food-chugging-lying-moneygrabbing-fatazz.


douchecanoe is hilarious


----------



## JessicaRabbit1

Does anyone know the size of Meghan's (Duchess of Sussex) main diamond in her engagement ring? I thought I saw an interview with Prince Harry and MM saying the centre stone was about 3ct. However, on googling I cant find it with some "diamond experts" saying its up to 5cts? Did Prince Harry say it was around 3?


----------



## Laurie Lou

Pretty sure if he “unloads” on them, it’s very likely he won’t see or talk to her again. Freaking weirdo makes NO sense; you want to repair things with your daughter but you keep talking crazy....and now you’re bringing Diana and Doria into. What an idiot!


----------



## Spellman

Most places seem to say it “appears to be” a 3 carat cushion. 

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20094731/meghan-markle-engagement-ring-cost/


----------



## Sharont2305

He says that Meghan now has a sense of superiority about her. Yes, she does. And that, to me has nothing to do with her being a Duchess and a member of the Royal Family.. It's called class! Something that he will never have.


----------



## Eva1991

I'm probably the minority here but I feel sorry for him. Some of the things he says are accurate but the way he says them is making him look bad. I think that deep down he really wants to fix things with Meghan but this is not the right way to do it.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I have no sympathy for him. He's done nothing but berate and try to antagonise his daughter while accepting payment from the gutter press for selling her out in every single way..

He's also enabled his other daughter to do the same. This is a grown-azz man having the mother of all tantrums and its pathetic.


----------



## gazoo

If he really wanted to fix things, and if he really cared about his "Bean" (his nickname for her that he keeps namedropping), then he'd be empathetic to her circumstances and hyper sensitive to ensuring nothing made her look bad. He is gleefully trying to trash her and willfully giving ammo to the folks that already felt she wasn't good enough for PH. If people can rationlaize this as fatherly, yet "misunderstood" love, then we are really screwed as a society. I find the fact that some people feel sorry for him even more shocking than the vitriol coming out of his mouth. 

@JessicaRabbit1, if you look at how slim her hands are, the cushion isn't huge in finger coverage. I'd say the main diamond is 2-ish cts and the side stones make up an extra carat or so. I don't believe anyone from the Palace has confirmed the exact size beyond stating where the stones came from, and why they were set in yellow gold.


----------



## Lounorada

berrydiva said:


> You're my crush.  Thanks.


----------



## mkr

Meghan and her father clearly had issues before she married Harry. She never even brought Harry to meet her father before she got married. Not that it’s easy to do being a prince but if they had a functional relationship they would have met. 

Daddy is going apeshit cuz no one will engage.


----------



## Eva1991

gazoo said:


> If he really wanted to fix things, and if he really cared about his "Bean" (his nickname for her that he keeps namedropping), then he'd be empathetic to her circumstances and hyper sensitive to ensuring nothing made her look bad. He is gleefully trying to trash her and willfully giving ammo to the folks that already felt she wasn't good enough for PH. If people can rationlaize this as fatherly, yet "misunderstood" love, then we are really screwed as a society. *I find the fact that some people feel sorry for him even more shocking than the vitriol coming out of his mouth. *
> 
> @JessicaRabbit1, if you look at how slim her hands are, the cushion isn't huge in finger coverage. I'd say the main diamond is 2-ish cts and the side stones make up an extra carat or so. I don't believe anyone from the Palace has confirmed the exact size beyond stating where the stones came from, and why they were set in yellow gold.



Why? What has he done to not deserve even an ounce of sympathy?

Personally, I agree with his comments about the royal family being an archaic institution. I also agree with the fact that Meghan should try and bring them to the 21st centuty but I doubt she'll succeed.

The only thing that's off putting is the way he chose to come forward about the issues he has with his daughter. I'd like to see Meghan giving him a second chance but it's something that should be done privately. The media attention he's brought to all these issues actually works against him.


----------



## PatsyCline

Eva1991 said:


> Why? What has he done to not deserve even an ounce of sympathy?
> 
> Personally, I agree with his comments about the royal family being an archaic institution. I also agree with the fact that Meghan should try and bring them to the 21st centuty but I doubt she'll succeed.
> 
> The only thing that's off putting is the way he chose to come forward about the issues he has with his daughter. I'd like to see Meghan giving him a second chance but it's something that should be done privately. The media attention he's brought to all these issues actually works against him.



No sympathy whatsoever. He’s selling out his daughter for money. 

He was asked not to speak to the media, and he refused. So the Royal Family is closing ranks and freezing him out.


----------



## Sharont2305

PatsyCline said:


> He was asked not to speak to the media, and he refused. So the Royal Family is closing ranks and freezing him out.


^^^ this


----------



## TMA

This all boils down to one thing. They believe she’s now in he big leagues and they want some of the gravy. This is and was never about love. Dragging her constantly before the world media is nothing short of abuse and the nerve to say he made her everything she is. No sir, you did not. Left to you, she would have turned out like Samantha and Thomas Jr. I cannot have any ounce of sympathy for anyone who thinks to emotionally abuse another in the world media is the way to go. If she married Joe Nobody, which media outlet would he sell his story to? How would he have gone about applying pressure? Also talking about getting kidnapped in Mexico - really? Is that the next item to be pulled out of his bag of tricks?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

TMA said:


> This all boils down to one thing. They believe she’s now in he big leagues and they want some of the gravy. This is and was never about love. Dragging her constantly before the world media is nothing short of abuse and the nerve to say he made her everything she is. No sir, you did not. Left to you, she would have turned out like Samantha and Thomas Jr. I cannot have any ounce of sympathy for anyone who thinks to emotionally abuse another in the world media is the way to go. If she married Joe Nobody, which media outlet would he sell his story to? How would he have gone about applying pressure? Also talking about getting kidnapped in Mexico - really? Is that the next item to be pulled out of his bag of tricks?


he's a low life and even though it's not her fault I'm sure it's embarassing for her


----------



## mkr

Yeah so if she looks like she’s about to crack it’s because of him not her new duchessness.


----------



## bisousx

Eva1991 said:


> Why? What has he done to not deserve even an ounce of sympathy?
> 
> Personally, I agree with his comments about the royal family being an archaic institution. I also agree with the fact that Meghan should try and bring them to the 21st centuty but I doubt she'll succeed.
> 
> The only thing that's off putting is the way he chose to come forward about the issues he has with his daughter. I'd like to see Meghan giving him a second chance but it's something that should be done privately. The media attention he's brought to all these issues actually works against him.



The media interviews are a flat out betrayal. He’s way old enough to know better. I wouldn’t give him a second chance if it was my own father. Chances are that he and the half siblings have done much more and much worse in private over the years. They probably had their palms out for money since she made her first paycheck as an actress.


----------



## sdkitty

mkr said:


> Yeah so if she looks like she’s about to crack it’s because of him not her new duchessness.


but she has a loving husband and she's been around the block before so she'll be fine I think
still humiliating to marry into one of the highest profile families in the world and then have your family behave this way


----------



## bag-princess

this man!!  why are these people bothering with him - he sat down for a 9 hour interview with Daily Mail!! 
speaking any kind of way that they will view as an insult to Diana is going to be the last straw - as if there were any left before this! 
------------------------------------------------------

Duchess Meghan's father Thomas Markle just gave a 9-hour interview with _The Daily Mail_, during which he spent most of his time slamming his daughter and taking credit for her success. It's gross, and even Chrissy Teigen is pissed.

But perhaps the most disgraceful part of the interview is Thomas' comments on Prince Harry's late mother Princess Diana, who he claims would have been on his side. Because apparently he's now an expert in what Princess Diana would think about things?

Speaking of the Royal Family, Thomas said "They have Meghan treating her father in a way that Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, would have loathed. That’s not what Diana stood for."

He also seemed to low-key insult Diana, saying, "Princess Diana is credited with changing the Royal Family, but she wasn’t perfect. She was still very much one of them. I think Meghan’s the one who’ll bring them into the 21st Century, if they’ll let her."

It looks like at this point Thomas realized making these comments could put him in even worse standing with Meghan and Harry, because he said: "I don’t care if Harry never speaks to me again, I’ll survive."




https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/thomas-markle-insults-princess-diana-134400866.html


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Even they are probably thinking _dude, rein it in, This is your daughter!!!!_



No, I’m sure it’s just the opposite. The Daily Mail and the other gossip sites revel in this sort of drama, particularly when they can tie it to the royal family. These are the stories that get lots of readers and that equals $$$ for them.

The man comes off as an unsophisticated bumpkin and he is probably easily manipulated and led by their interviewers. You can bet they’re asking loaded questions to try to goad just these kinds of absurd responses out of him. DM loves it so much they keep contacting him every week or so.


----------



## bag-princess

bisousx said:


> T*he media interviews are a flat out betrayal.* He’s way old enough to know better. *I wouldn’t give him a second chance if it was my own father.* Chances are that he and the half siblings have done much more and much worse in private over the years. They probably had their palms out for money since she made her first paycheck as an actress.




ITA with these!!  he has shown his true colors.  he keeps claiming how hurt he is that she doesn't speak to him but he keep running his mouth.


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> No, I’m sure it’s just the opposite. The Daily Mail and the other gossip sites revel in this sort of drama, particularly when they can tie it to the royal family. These are the stories that get lots of readers and that equals $$$ for them.
> 
> The man comes off as an unsophisticated bumpkin and he is probably easily manipulated and led by their interviewers.* You can bet they’re asking loaded questions to try to goad just these kinds of absurd responses out of him. DM loves it so much they keep contacting him every week or so*.




exactly!!  and he sounds like a crazy drunk on a ramble!  of course they are loving it and are encouraging it and he plays right into their hands.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> this man!!  why are these people bothering with him - he sat down for a 9 hour interview with Daily Mail!!
> speaking any kind of way that they will view as an insult to Diana is going to be the last straw - as if there were any left before this!
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Duchess Meghan's father Thomas Markle just gave a 9-hour interview with _The Daily Mail_, during which he spent most of his time slamming his daughter and taking credit for her success. It's gross, and even Chrissy Teigen is pissed.
> 
> But perhaps the most disgraceful part of the interview is Thomas' comments on Prince Harry's late mother Princess Diana, who he claims would have been on his side. Because apparently he's now an expert in what Princess Diana would think about things?
> 
> Speaking of the Royal Family, Thomas said "They have Meghan treating her father in a way that Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, would have loathed. That’s not what Diana stood for."
> 
> He also seemed to low-key insult Diana, saying, "Princess Diana is credited with changing the Royal Family, but she wasn’t perfect. She was still very much one of them. I think Meghan’s the one who’ll bring them into the 21st Century, if they’ll let her."
> 
> It looks like at this point Thomas realized making these comments could put him in even worse standing with Meghan and Harry, because he said: "I don’t care if Harry never speaks to me again, I’ll survive."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/thomas-markle-insults-princess-diana-134400866.html


it's the daily mail


----------



## BagLovingMom

Oh boy now it’s stateside, I just got a USA Today alert “She’s caught me off completely, Meghan’s father says.”  He’s too much.


----------



## sdkitty

BagLovingMom said:


> Oh boy now it’s stateside, I just got a USA Today alert “She’s caught me off completely, Meghan’s father says.”  He’s too much.


he's making a fool of himself
I think eventually there will be no more for him to say and even the DM will lose interest


----------



## bisousx

I feel bad for Meghan. Even though Harry may be understanding, it’s a lot of drama for newlyweds. I hope it doesn’t take too much of a toll on what should be an incredible time in a couple’s marriage.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> he's making a fool of himself
> I think eventually there will be no more for him to say and even the DM will lose interest


This. If he and the Daily Fail articles don't get a reaction, no one will pay him any mind.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

A poster wrote this on Dlisted and they absolutely nailed it:



> *I said it before but it bears repeating, a narcissistic parent is like The Terminator: they get off on attention and fear, forever.*
> *"Listen, and understand. That Terminator is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."*


----------



## myown

Spellman said:


> The Daily Fail must be having a field day with all this trash talk.


are other papers wrote about Meghans dad or only the daily mail?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bisousx said:


> I feel bad for Meghan. Even though Harry may be understanding, it’s a lot of drama for newlyweds. I hope it doesn’t take too much of a toll on what should be an incredible time in a couple’s marriage.


Sadly, I can't see this _NOT_ affecting them both, this is just bad. But maybe they both just shrug and say "another day, another crazy daddy story."

Bottom line--if he truly loved and cared for his daughter, he would just shut up--he must need the money bad. Such a slime ball.


----------



## PatsyCline

kemilia said:


> Sadly, I can't see this _NOT_ affecting them both, this is just bad. But maybe they both just shrug and say "another day, another crazy daddy story."
> 
> Bottom line--if he truly loved and cared for his daughter, he would just shut up--he must need the money bad. Such a slime ball.


I'm truly disappointed in the gutter press that keep paying for these types of stories.

The Royal Family is never going to comment on them, so I hope they'll simply get tired of paying the Markles for their gossip, and move on to something else.

And as you said, if he really cared for his daughter, he wouldn't do this.


----------



## Spellman

They are so quick to forget that the press hounded Princess Diana to the point of no return and this must be particularly frustrating for Harry as Meghan is surely hurting from this. I agree that if it was my father I wouldn’t be contacting him anytime soon.


----------



## PatsyCline

Just found this...Harry & Meghan's new Monogram.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




Pretty stylish, I'd say.  Wonder if Meghan designed it.  She has a background in calligraphy.


----------



## Sharont2305

PatsyCline said:


> Just found this...Harry & Meghan's new Monogram.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty stylish, I'd say.  Wonder if Meghan designed it.  She has a background in calligraphy.


I like it.


----------



## gelbergirl

Will we still photos of the royal family in August? 
I know the Queen goes away for the month.  The entire family to Balmoral?


----------



## Morgan R

gelbergirl said:


> Will we still photos of the royal family in August?
> I know the Queen goes away for the month.  The entire family to Balmoral?



There will be some pictures on Saturday of Prince Harry and Meghan. They are expected to attend the wedding of Prince Harry's friend Charlie van Straubenzee (Prince William and Kate are possibly attending as well). Also Saturday is Meghan's birthday so possible the Royal family will release an unseen picture or portrait of Meghan which they sometimes do on royal family members' birthdays (sometimes they just share a paparazzi picture). August is usually the "vacation" month for the royals so certain members only have a few events planned but they are in early August. The last 2 years Harry and Meghan have gone to Africa during August.


----------



## Morgan R

Thought this was sweet. I noticed once that Harry did this when I was watching one of their walk abouts but didn't realize he did it on multiple ocassions...


----------



## chareen

Just binge-watched Suits seasons 1 and 2 on Amazon Prime.  I didn't know Meghan was casted the "hot" girl in that show.  From Season 1 episode 2 on, I loved her outfits.  She looked good.

Meghan Markle Funny Moments (SUITS BLOOPERS)

It's fun to see her relaxed and having a good laugh.  I have to admit, the guy who played Louis in Suits is funny, funny, funny.  And Harvey Specter is super fine in Season 1.  LoL

Glad she filmed Suits.  I can see why Harry thought she was hot and very charming the first time they met. 

I heard Meghan's character cries a lot in later seasons so I stopped after Season 2.


----------



## PatsyCline

I only started watching Suits the last two seasons, on the recommendation of a friend. Might have to consider Amazon Prime to watch the earlier seasons.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Just to revisit this: This is how estranged Samantha Grant (Markle) is from her family and just how distant she's really been from Meghan for a _very_ long time.  She knows nothing about Meghan and hasn't since 2008.

Full story here


----------



## DC-Cutie

So sweet.  I love it.  


Morgan R said:


> Thought this was sweet. I noticed once that Harry did this when I was watching one of their walk abouts but didn't realize he did it on multiple ocassions...


----------



## PatsyCline

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Just to revisit this: This is how estranged Samantha Grant (Markle) is from her family and just how distant she's really been from Meghan for a _very_ long time.  She knows nothing about Meghan and hasn't since 2008.
> 
> Full story here



Thanks for the link.


----------



## Kat Madridista

Morgan R said:


> There will be some pictures on Saturday of Prince Harry and Meghan. They are expected to attend the wedding of Prince Harry's friend Charlie van Straubenzee (Prince William and Kate are possibly attending as well). Also Saturday is Meghan's birthday so possible the Royal family will release an unseen picture or portrait of Meghan which they sometimes do on royal family members' birthdays (sometimes they just share a paparazzi picture). August is usually the "vacation" month for the royals so certain members only have a few events planned but they are in early August. The last 2 years Harry and Meghan have gone to Africa during August.



The release of birthday portraits is usually reserved for the Queen and of course the "senior" royal children (i.e. the Cambridge kids and probably the future Sussex babies). The other royals rarely or never do it, and when they do, it's for milestone birthdays, like the one Charles released for his 60th. If they do do it, it will almost always be an official portrait and if not, then a photo taken from an engagement by someone from the photographer pool (i.e. Getty, AP, etc.) that cover their events (although it's happened for Christmas cards, I've never seen that happen for a birthday photo release). It will certainly never be a paparazzi picture.


----------



## Morgan R

Kat Madridista said:


> The release of birthday portraits is usually reserved for the Queen and of course the "senior" royal children (i.e. the Cambridge kids and probably the future Sussex babies). The other royals rarely or never do it, and when they do, it's for milestone birthdays, like the one Charles released for his 60th. If they do do it, it will almost always be an official portrait and if not, then a photo taken from an engagement by someone from the photographer pool (i.e. Getty, AP, etc.) that cover their events (although it's happened for Christmas cards, I've never seen that happen for a birthday photo release). It will certainly never be a paparazzi picture.



Yeah paparazzi wasn't technically the right word. I did mean a picture by someone in the photographer pool taken during an engagement. I've seen the royal family use a photograph/photographs taken from an engagement be used to wish whichever royal a Happy Birthday/Thank those who wished whichever royal a happy birthday (They recently did this with Prince William on his birthday on the Kensington Palace,Clarence House, & The Royal Family social media accounts). A portrait of Kate was released around her birthday in 2013 (granted she is patron of National Portrait Gallery where the piece is displayed)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MarvelGirl

Morgan R said:


> Thought this was sweet. I noticed once that Harry did this when I was watching one of their walk abouts but didn't realize he did it on multiple ocassions...


----------



## chareen

PatsyCline said:


> I only started watching Suits the last two seasons, on the recommendation of a friend. Might have to consider Amazon Prime to watch the earlier seasons.



She definitely looks different in the first 2 seasons!  Young and fresh with lighter colored hair that bounces.  She is really charming and has seductress scenes.

I read that she asked for more time off when she began meeting Harry.  Perhaps season 5?  So less of her, and more tears for her character.  Plus her outfits got pretty conservative.

It's free if you have Amazon Prime.  And no commercials.


----------



## chareen

I also saw this YouTube video where Meghan gives a speech as a UN ambassador for gender equality.  I think her dad, if he is a good man, just wishes she can speak up.  But if he has seen Netflix's Crown, the monarchy is neutral when it comes to political issues.  Meghan is new to the monarchy.  He should give her some time (perhaps after babies) before he can expect more public appearances like this.  Either way, her dad needs to shut up.  He is making her look bad.

It was a good speech.  She is very poised.  If she gave that speech today, she might have even received a standing ovation since she is more famous.  I hope to see more of this from her if she can break the monarchy rules.



Her reference to that dishwashing soap commercial is getting old though. It becomes a bit embarrassing if that is her only claim to feminism.   She references it a lot in youtube interviews.  I hope she can add more examples in decades to follow and show more support for equal rights.


----------



## chareen

Another recent video I found that we are familiar with.   Hopefully the monarchy empowers Meghan to use her voice and I hope the monarchy will listen to her.  Otherwise, isn't it ironic? 



Time will tell.  She is a smart woman.  She will figure it out as Diana did.  She did marry Diana's son who is known to test and break the rules of the monarchy.  The royal bad boy. Good luck to her and we will keep watching!  But Meg's dad, shut up and sit back.  She is navigating the ropes of the monarchy.  She will call if she feels the time is right.


----------



## PatsyCline

chareen said:


> She definitely looks different in the first 2 seasons!  Young and fresh with lighter colored hair that bounces.  She is really charming and has seductress scenes.
> 
> I read that she asked for more time off when she began meeting Harry.  Perhaps season 5?  So less of her, and more tears for her character.  Plus her outfits got pretty conservative.
> 
> It's free if you have Amazon Prime.  And no commercials.


I recall seeing an interview with Wendell Pierce, the actor who played her father on the show.  He mentioned that he had not been on set the first time Harry showed up on set to visit Meghan.

He asked one of the crew if they were sure it was Prince Harry.  He said the fellow told him 'he arrived in a helicopter!'


----------



## ap.

solange said:


> So, favorite official outing outfit since the wedding?



I thought the dark navy Dior boatneck was gorgeous on her.


----------



## Sharont2305

Happy Birthday to HRH The Duchess of Sussex. I believe that they are at a friend's wedding today. 
It's also the Queen Mother's date of birth too, she would have been 118 today.


----------



## PatsyCline

Latest article from People Magazine. 

https://www.eonline.com/news/957120...he-rules-the-spotlight-and-an-unrelenting-dad


----------



## Sharont2305

Duchess of Sussex arriving at their friends wedding, Harry arrived separately as he is the best man of the groom.
I think the lady in the vest and grey skirt is Harry and Williams cousin, the one who married shortly after Harry and Meghan.


----------



## Morgan R

At the Wedding of Charlie Van Straubenzee


----------



## Bentley1

Are they at a cemetery?


----------



## Sharont2305

Bentley1 said:


> Are they at a cemetery?


Yes, they are. Usually found in church grounds. That's quite normal.


----------



## Alexenjie

I don't get the bow or whatever it is that is at the end of Meghan's shoes. It looks silly to me, though maybe it is highly fashionable? I'm not a fan of this dress or her hat (but I confess to hating all hats, especially the British royal hats).


----------



## zen1965

Outfit is too dark for a summer wedding. I neither like the cut of the top nor the belt.


----------



## lakeshow

zen1965 said:


> Outfit is too dark for a summer wedding. I neither like the cut of the top nor the belt.



it also looks rather casual? 

cute BV clutch though, and i like his persol shades.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Wow. Harry is looking sharp!! I like how the dress fits Meghan, but hate the dress. The color combo doesn’t appeal to me and the thick belt is quite strange paired with it. Not sure if the hat and dress go together but the hat and shoes do!! Love her shoes! Her make-up was flawless, too!


----------



## chareen

That black dress beats this dress by a landslide.

She looks like a walking blue and white Chinese vase with a big white gift ribbon on top.  


I LOVE blue and white dresses with that pattern, but this look was hilarious.  She is gorgeous, but she needs a wardrobe stylist asap!

The look on her face says it all, "What the heck am I wearing?"  LoL


----------



## mdcx

Morgan R said:


> At the Wedding of Charlie Van Straubenzee
> 
> View attachment 4153400
> View attachment 4153431
> View attachment 4153467
> View attachment 4153469
> View attachment 4153533
> View attachment 4153453
> View attachment 4153454
> View attachment 4153458
> View attachment 4153457



I like everything except the top, it looks like a black blouse tucked into a not quite matching skirt. Love the shoes.


----------



## maryg1

Is it allowed to wear black at weddings in England?
Not a fan of this dress for a wedding, especially a Summer wedding.


----------



## White Orchid

A huge miss from me.  And with all this Summery weather, why opt for such dreary dark colours?  Get those Summer colours out Meghan!


----------



## Sharont2305

maryg1 said:


> Is it allowed to wear black at weddings in England?


Yes, you are allowed to wear black at weddings in England, and in the rest of the UK too


----------



## gazoo

She was glowing and looked happy. In light of everything going on with her dad, seeing her show up with a big smile on her beautiful face is a win for me. Harry looks the best he's ever looked. Marriage suits him.


----------



## sdkitty

I actually like the belt.  She seems to be dressed way more casually than Harry.  Maybe he's in the wedding party?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

someone must have told her to button up her shirt before entering the church. before entering she's showing her lacy bra and in the later ones others she looks all buttoned up. i think she gets dressed in a rush and forgets to check in a mirror.


----------



## ap.

chareen said:


> That black dress beats this dress by a landslide.
> 
> She looks like a walking blue and white Chinese vase with a big white gift ribbon on top.
> 
> 
> I LOVE blue and white dresses with that pattern, but this look was hilarious.  She is gorgeous, but she needs a wardrobe stylist asap!
> 
> The look on her face says it all, "What the heck am I wearing?"  LoL



I think this dress just needed to be 2 sizes smaller or altered to fit.  If a seamstress made the top and sleeves (a lot) less blousy, this would have been a winner (at least to me).


----------



## redney

I loved the dress. It's navy on top, not black, and is from Club Monaco. I dislike the hat paired with it, though.


----------



## LnA

chareen said:


> Her reference to that dishwashing soap commercial is getting old though. It becomes a bit embarrassing if that is her only claim to feminism.   She references it a lot in youtube interviews.  I hope she can add more examples in decades to follow and show more support for equal rights.



Haha I think you’re spot on because the dishwashing soap commercial has been her claim to fame (not just feminism) since the 7th grade! It was so hugely emphasized that I thought she saw the commercial at home and decided to write P&G herself, but after she started dating PH I learned that it was a social studies project arranged by her elementary school teacher, so multiple students reached out to companies and probably got similar responses. But good for her for turning that experience into a life defining event (genuinely mean that, no sarcasm).


----------



## SassySiren

Sorry, not sorry, but she looks like she‘s attending a funeral.


----------



## Grande Latte

Yeah, even if allowed, I've never worn black to weddings or birthdays. It just sends off the wrong vibe.


----------



## daisychainz

The dress looks like something for grandma. It's not nice for a wedding, it doesn't look bright or fresh or happy. It's nice that she wears cheaper dresses and accessories though, like Kate does as well from time to time. It makes their style accessible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Grande Latte said:


> Yeah, even if allowed, I've never worn black to weddings or birthdays. It just sends off the wrong vibe.



Nobody I know wears black-on-black-with black to a wedding in Britain. Not black, not white. Bizarre choice. Years ago there were lots and lots of older ladies wearing navy to avoid wearing black but staying coordinated, nowadays when hats are less common and when colours don't have to match anyway people wear whatever, but not black or white (unless they're the bride or still in recent mourning for a close relative).


----------



## berrydiva

They have been to 50leven weddings already. lol


----------



## Tivo

berrydiva said:


> They have been to 50leven weddings already. lol


50levenDozen as my daddy used to say, lol


----------



## BagLovingMom

redney said:


> I loved the dress. It's navy on top, not black, and is from Club Monaco. I dislike the hat paired with it, though.


Lol me too, I have the dress and got loads of compliments the time I wore it. Also I’m not a grandma and it is indeed navy  This thread can be hilarity!


----------



## HandbagAngel

Talking about wearing dark to a wedding, I recall Victoria Beckham wore a very dark navy dress to William and Kate’s wedding.


----------



## Morgan R

HandbagAngel said:


> Talking about wearing dark to a wedding, I recall Victoria Beckham wore a very dark navy dress to William and Kate’s wedding.



She did. She also wore a dark navy dress to Harry and Meghan's wedding as well.


----------



## Gal4Dior

BagLovingMom said:


> Lol me too, I have the dress and got loads of compliments the time I wore it. Also I’m not a grandma and it is indeed navy  This thread can be hilarity!



I tried it on the store. It looked like Neapolitan ice cream pattern on the skirt. If it was a solid color or different colors, I probably would have bought it in a heart beat!


----------



## Kat Madridista

Morgan R said:


> Yeah paparazzi wasn't technically the right word. I did mean a picture by someone in the photographer pool taken during an engagement. I've seen the royal family use a photograph/photographs taken from an engagement be used to wish whichever royal a Happy Birthday/Thank those who wished whichever royal a happy birthday (They recently did this with Prince William on his birthday on the Kensington Palace,Clarence House, & The Royal Family social media accounts). A portrait of Kate was released around her birthday in 2013 (granted she is patron of National Portrait Gallery where the piece is displayed)



Right. In those cases, though, those photos used for social media purposes are not considered birthday portraits. They don't even use the same photos across the social media accounts. Those photos aren't considered an official "release" of any sort, but more of, "here's a bunch of old pictures of the birthday girl/boy!". Haha.


----------



## myown

chareen said:


> That black dress beats this dress by a landslide.
> 
> She looks like a walking blue and white Chinese vase with a big white gift ribbon on top.
> 
> 
> I LOVE blue and white dresses with that pattern, but this look was hilarious.  She is gorgeous, but she needs a wardrobe stylist asap!
> 
> The look on her face says it all, "What the heck am I wearing?"  LoL


i liked that dress *shrug+


----------



## myown

daisychainz said:


> The dress looks like something for grandma. It's not nice for a wedding, it doesn't look bright or fresh or happy. It's nice that she wears cheaper dresses and accessories though, like Kate does as well from time to time. It makes their style accessible.


wow your grandma must be very young. mine would definitely not be wearing that


----------



## afsweet

the dress is just eh. surprised she didn't wear blush pink to this wedding.


----------



## daisychainz

myown said:


> wow your grandma must be very young. mine would definitely not be wearing that


My would not either, really. I would not allow her to be seen in it.


----------



## BagLovingMom

LVSistinaMM said:


> I tried it on the store. It looked like Neapolitan ice cream pattern on the skirt. If it was a solid color or different colors, I probably would have bought it in a heart beat!


Ha , fashion is so subjective. I think the skirt is the best part, it has great movement . If the skirt had been plain navy I would have passed on it as too dark for summer. Anyways back to direct topic . Here’s an interesting tidbit from Town & Country On allowable gifts . 

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...29/meghan-markle-birthday-gifts-royal-policy/

And apparently Harry had a big hole in his shoe . People don’t miss a thing these days....
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...y-shoe-hole-charlie-van-straubenzees-wedding/


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I can see her and VB being fashion soul mates. They have the same general look, very basic pieces and lines. Not much color variety. Dark picks even during summer events. Maybe she'll wear VB one day, if she hasn't already.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Duchess of Sussex arriving at their friends wedding, Harry arrived separately as he is the best man of the groom.
> I think the lady in the vest and grey skirt is Harry and Williams cousin, the one who married shortly after Harry and Meghan.


I like the outfit, hell I even like the fascinator! But it's the wrong occasion to wear it. If you look at the other female guests, her outfit was way way too dark too heavy for the weather. It's out of place in this heat! A lighter outfit would be so much better. I guess it may be that she chose that outfit well in advance not anticipating the weather to be this hot.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

The dress isn’t black...it is navy.  And...it doesn’t look that heavy to me...the fabric looks light, and the pleated skirt looks summery to me, especially with the white and pink.  If the top had been one of the lighter colors in the skirt, I doubt we would be having this conversation at all!


----------



## absolutpink

I grew up in England and always saw women wearing navy at weddings. It's not uncommon.


----------



## PatsyCline

I've noticed that neither Meghan or Kate ever wear Christian Louboutin footwear. 

Wonder if there on the 'do not wear' list?


----------



## cafecreme15

PatsyCline said:


> I've noticed that neither Meghan or Kate ever wear Christian Louboutin footwear.
> 
> Wonder if there on the 'do not wear' list?



I’ve noticed this too! Perhaps because it’s such an overt status symbol? Maybe it’s the same reason why they don’t carry Hermès and Chanel bags.


----------



## PatsyCline

cafecreme15 said:


> I’ve noticed this too! Perhaps because it’s such an overt status symbol? Maybe it’s the same reason why they don’t carry Hermès and Chanel bags.


I think you may have hit on the reason.  There's no way not to realise what they're wearing when you see the red soles, and maybe the same for the bags.


----------



## minoxa33

cafecreme15 said:


> I’ve noticed this too! Perhaps because it’s such an overt status symbol? Maybe it’s the same reason why they don’t carry Hermès and Chanel bags.



Kate has been seen with the same Chanel bag at least three times:



https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...dleton-duchess-of-cambridge-style-paris-rugby

Regarding Louboutin shoes, I guess they are too sexy, not classy enough for the royal style. There is an article here:

https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/christian-louboutin-shoes-duchess-of-cambridge-victoria-beckham


----------



## PatsyCline

Thanks so much for the link. I thought someone here might be able to shed some light on this.


----------



## berrydiva

I couldn't imagine being in Loubs given all the standing/walking they do for appearances


----------



## rcy

PatsyCline said:


> I've noticed that neither Meghan or Kate ever wear Christian Louboutin footwear.
> 
> Wonder if there on the 'do not wear' list?



maybe because they're horribly uncomfortable and i can't imagine wearing them for as long as they're required to be on their feet!


----------



## PatsyCline

rcy said:


> maybe because they're horribly uncomfortable and i can't imagine wearing them for as long as they're required to be on their feet!


They're not 'horribly uncomfortable' if you get a pair that fits your feet.


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> I’ve noticed this too! Perhaps because it’s such an overt status symbol? Maybe it’s the same reason why they don’t carry Hermès and Chanel bags.


Diana always carried high end status symbol bags and wore designer shoes. I liked her gold Cartier jewellery that was available to everyone in the stores. 

I think the blatant advertisement of a red sole may be too much for this group though.


----------



## bisousx

PatsyCline said:


> They're not 'horribly uncomfortable' if you get a pair that fits your feet.



I have a pair of CLs that I wear for all my work events that require me to be on my feet for 5+ hours.


----------



## Grande Latte

Maybe they just don't feel like "advertising" for the major big brands. Perhaps they just want to be seen as closer to the average people.


----------



## gazoo

I think it's about sexiness. They all wear plenty of expensive designers and let's not forget the jewels and tiaras. Average people don't have that kind of stuff. The BRF seems actively allergic to anything remotely sexy in their presentation, and CLs are usually pretty sexy. Diana was the anomaly when she and Charles split; she started showing more skin. In contrast, the Royals from other countries wear far sexier clothing and shoes.


----------



## myown

C


PatsyCline said:


> They're not 'horribly uncomfortable' if you get a pair that fits your feet.


Christian Louboutin himself said he doesn't design shoes that are comfortable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

myown said:


> C
> 
> Christian Louboutin himself said he doesn't design shoes that are comfortable.



Designing a shoe that’s ‘comfortable’ and stylish are not mutually exclusive. 

Some are just less comfortable than others.


----------



## cakegirl

The visible red sole makes CL's flashier than other shoes, and similar to logo items. That seems very off brand for the royal family.


----------



## Addicted to bags

Can you divorce your loser family?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7000067/thomas-markle-never-speak-meghan-again/


----------



## LibbyRuth

Addicted to bags said:


> Can you divorce your loser family?
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7000067/thomas-markle-never-speak-meghan-again/


He's not exactly fearing that he'll never talk to her again.  He's ensuring it by continuing to engage in the behavior that created problems to begin with!


----------



## LittleStar88

Addicted to bags said:


> Can you divorce your loser family?
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7000067/thomas-markle-never-speak-meghan-again/


What a joke. Displacing responsibility for his own actions and the outcome that has resulted from them. Narcissist.


----------



## bag-princess

I wish they would stop indulging this fool!  He is a waste of time and doesn’t seem to know or care how they are making a fool out of him.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

If you look up Classic Narcissistic Behaviour, I'm sure this a-hole's face is there. None of what he said is really about Meghan. At. All. It's about him. Only him. 

I believe she was being polite in her earlier references to her father. Also known as having some class and not airing your family's dirty laundry in public.  There's a reason for the rupture in their family. This is on him. Not Meghan. I see he's passed on his douchebag DNA to Samanatha aka Vonnie.   Whereas Meghan got the luck of the draw by having Doria as her real role model.

That Prince Hot Ginge warned him about the press and he has STILL gone to them time and time again speaks volumes. This guy wants to call the shots and has met his match in the British Royal Family. 

I hope Doria _does_ move temporarily or permanently to the UK (and still keeps her own interests etc) - because that would make Thomas Markle uselessly seeth.  

You reap what you sow.

PS: I expect some fantasy health crisis for this guy soon. Narcissists wither without attention.


----------



## Brigitte Evans

I loved Meghan's wedding dress, obviously!  I am thinking about getting my own wedding dress made to be similar.


----------



## minababe

I heard today in the News that doria will move to London in the next months.

I also heard that some journalists will not write about thomas markle anymore because to respect the british royal Family.

meghan has no contact for years even way before she met Harry with this part of her Family. they haven't seen her for many years and they never complained about that. no one of These Family members can Show Pictures of meghan and them in the last 5 years. they only show really old Pictures of meghan with them as a teen or Student. if she would date or marry anyone else not famous or not someone from the hollywod Business they wouldn't give a ****. it's just that they want Attention because they are all loosers. I'm sure meghan and veryone else know that so I will not give a **** about the anymore and I think These People are dead for the royals. I hope for meghan too. But I really tink that. her dad just did too much. I couldn't forgive him that.


----------



## PatsyCline

I'm sure Meghan will appreciate having her mom closer to her. Phone calls just can't replace actual face to face time together.


----------



## Tivo

If Doria is planning to move out there, Megan must really need her. She’s probably so stressed.

As far as her dad is concerned, that’s her father. She can’t just turn that relationship off, I mean she wanted him to walk her down the isle. If she has a soft heart it would crush her.


----------



## redney

Tivo said:


> If Doria is planning to move out there, Megan must really need her. She’s probably so stressed.
> 
> As far as her dad is concerned, that’s her father. She can’t just turn that relationship off, I mean she wanted him to walk her down the isle. If she has a soft heart it would crush her.


Meh. She and he apparently weren't in touch for a while, and perhaps she extended the olive branch for her wedding. But, he has proven himself to be a complete a$$ and continue to humiliate her (and himself, really) with his multiple narcissistic ramblings to the press. IMO she has every right to cut him completely out of her life. Look at the narcissist thread in the relationships and family subforum here...many people do this all the time, which improves their lives letting these people go.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

^ what @redney said. This guy is a textbook narcissist. When it gets to this stage, people need to cut off contact completely for self-preservation.

It's the only way. I don't see him stopping, the only hope is the tabloids stop giving him and Samantha air-time, because that just feeds into his desire for attention.

But those articles and the vitriol in the comments are dog-whistling at it's "finest". The DM and Sun know who their audience is, put it that way.


----------



## mkr

Meghan didn’t have anything to do with him before Harry for a reason. No need to have anything to do with him now.


----------



## melissatrv

I think they need to handle Megan's father like they would in the US.  Throw some money at him and make him sign an NDA and conditions that he not disparage the royal family anymore.  Everyone writes off Samantha as money grubbing so who cares if she rants and raves....but it looks bad when your father is doing it.  This should have been done months ago.  In the long run, it will be worth it for the royal family....almost like a non-divorce


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

berrydiva said:


> I couldn't imagine being in Loubs given all the standing/walking they do for appearances


Yeah but they still wear sky high uncomfortable looking heels.  I don't know how they do it.  Not just the British royals but look the royal women in Sweden and Denmark. I don't suggest they wear old lady shoes like the Queen but personally I would want to wear a mid-sized heel.   Guess for aesthetics a higher shoe makes you look better in photos


----------



## bag-princess

I wouldn’t give him one thin dime as my grandmother used to say!  That is exactly what he wants.He’s shown who he really is - an old bitter and worthless man! There’s no way I would pay him to do what anyone with good sense - not to mention a father! - would already be doing!


----------



## melissatrv

bag-princess said:


> I wouldn’t give him one thin dime as my grandmother used to say!  That is exactly what he wants.He’s shown who he really is - an old bitter and worthless man! There’s no way I would pay him to do what anyone with good sense - not to mention a father! - would already be doing!



I am with you, he is not acting like a good father.  But I truly believe it is the only way to shut him up. Plus this has to be upsetting Megan and putting more stress on her.  In the long run, just like companies who pay bad employees to shut up, it will be worth it


----------



## redney

If all his ramblings in the press garner no response (drama) from the palace, the media and audience will lose interest quickly and the press will stop giving him any time. Ignoring this crazy is probably the best way to shut him up.


----------



## pixiejenna

I also wouldn’t give him a dime, it would be a waste of money because once he blows through it he’ll start talking again. Megan is doing the best thing she can possibly do in this  situation  and ice him out. Not to mention if they were to pay him off her half sister will be looking for a pay out and god knows who else. He was pretty much iced out before the wedding she offered a olive branch probably with great reservation. She’s pretty much damnned if she dose and damnned if she doesn’t. Could you imagine the press talking about how she didn’t ask her father to walk her down the aisle? Then the interviews he’d give over not being asked would probably be even worse than what he’s doing now.


----------



## mkr

He’s played his hand and shown his true colors.  He’s trash and the world knows it. There’s not much he can say that would hurt and humiliate Meghan any more than he already has.  She’s a strong woman. She has a good support system. She will get through it.  When they go low we go high.


----------



## chowlover2

I'm glad Doria is moving to the UK. Harry and the Royal family are fine, but having your Mom close by is so much better.


----------



## mdcx

melissatrv said:


> Yeah but they still wear sky high uncomfortable looking heels.  I don't know how they do it.  Not just the British royals but look the royal women in Sweden and Denmark. I don't suggest they wear old lady shoes like the Queen but personally I would want to wear a mid-sized heel.   Guess for aesthetics a higher shoe makes you look better in photos


I would agree that it's probably to look good in photos as they know they'll be photographed. Maybe they slip them off the minute they are out of camera shot


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-princess said:


> I wouldn’t give him one thin dime as my grandmother used to say!  That is exactly what he wants.He’s shown who he really is - an old bitter and worthless man! There’s no way I would pay him to do what anyone with good sense - not to mention a father! - would already be doing!



This. 1000 times.  It wouldn't end with one payment. Meghan's old man is increasingly looking and acting like a grifter.

The hide of him demanding "payback" for paying for her education etc.  Hey mate, I have a newsflash for you - that's what _parents_ do. I'm pretty sure she was plenty grateful until whatever you did to cause the rift with her *over 10 years ago*. 

You don't get an award (and you shouldn't get a post on the DM about it) for acting like a decent human being should.

Just seeing his face in the media now irritates me. He obviously has no salacious stories about her, nor do any of them. So they've taken to whining for bucks.  Pathetic.


----------



## bag-mania

The father and sister see Meghan marrying a prince as being the same as if she were a lottery jackpot winner. They are those estranged, loser relatives who appear at the door and pretend to be closer than they are because they think deserve a share of the money just for being related.


----------



## PatsyCline

Good grief, he's at it again.  Now he's comparing the Royal Family to Scientologists.
https://people.com/royals/thomas-markle-calls-royal-family-cult-like/


----------



## Tivo

PatsyCline said:


> Good grief, he's at it again.  Now he's comparing the Royal Family to Scientologists.
> https://people.com/royals/thomas-markle-calls-royal-family-cult-like/


And the press won’t stop giving him time because of who Meghan is.
What a pos.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> And the press won’t stop giving him time because of who Meghan is.
> What a pos.


As soon as Meghan's newness wears off, they will stop giving him attention.  He really has nothing new to say.  What a POS


----------



## mkr

She was rich before she married Harry so I don't see why he wants paid now.  I guess extortion is easier when you reach royal status.


----------



## sdkitty

mkr said:


> She was rich before she married Harry so I don't see why he wants paid now.  I guess extortion is easier when you reach royal status.


she wasn't that famous before
on a cable tv show that wasn't widely viewed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> As soon as Meghan's newness wears off, they will stop giving him attention.  He really has nothing new to say.  What a POS


She’s the first black duchess in the BRF, I doubt her newness will ever wear off.


----------



## girleuro

Tivo said:


> She’s the first black duchess in the BRF, I doubt her newness will ever wear off.



No she is not . Queen Charlotte Sophia and King George both were Moors ( which you call them black) Black or white is not a race . Moors ruled Europe for thousands of years. So all these castles, in Europe were built by them. The history is stolen and that’s sad.  Real royal blood is Moorish blood , or you would call them black 
The rest are imposters


----------



## minababe

didn't he say the last time was his last interview? didn't he wish the royal family all the best and is moving now where no one can find him? and now again talking bad .. is he drunk? or just crazy ? ..
So Meghan is right now in Toronto to visit friends after that she is flying to her mother in LA. I really hope she is not visiting her father .. he deserves nothing anymore .. it would be the wrong sign when it Comes out that she met her father ..


----------



## FreeSpirit71

They won't shut up. 

There's rumours they're getting a reality show.

So. Much. Oy.


----------



## PatsyCline

FreeSpirit71 said:


> They won't shut up.
> 
> There's rumours they're getting a reality show.
> 
> So. Much. Oy.



Good grief. Can TV sink much lower?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Yes ... it could sink even lower if Meghan decided to put an end to this by going on Maury Povich to do a DNA test and reveal that Thomas is actually not her father.
Thta's a joke by the way ... I'm not starting a rumor that he may not be her father.


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> she wasn't that famous before
> on a cable tv show that wasn't widely viewed



why did the UN latch on to her for that international charity work?  Did they pay her?  Or was her mid-level tv success good enough


----------



## Gal4Dior

gelbergirl said:


> why did the UN latch on to her for that international charity work?  Did they pay her?  Or was her mid-level tv success good enough



Still waiting for the BRF to give her a platform she used to have. When I originally thought these two got together, I thought the BRF was turning a corner...and she was going to have a larger spotlight to do speeches and do charity work as she’s done before.

So far, she has just been presented as “eye candy” for public events. I hope this will change over time, as it is a waste of her talents. Surely society schmoozing can’t be the extent of her life from now on....


----------



## PatsyCline

LVSistinaMM said:


> Still waiting for the BRF to give her a platform she used to have. When I originally thought these two got together, I thought the BRF was turning a corner...and she was going to have a larger spotlight to do speeches and do charity work as she’s done before.
> 
> So far, she has just been presented as “eye candy” for public events. I hope this will change over time, as it is a waste of her talents. Surely society schmoozing can’t be the extent of her life from now on....


I think new royals will pick certain charities to become patrons of. Maybe they're easing Meghan into the 'Firm'.


----------



## mkr

LVSistinaMM said:


> Still waiting for the BRF to give her a platform she used to have. When I originally thought these two got together, I thought the BRF was turning a corner...and she was going to have a larger spotlight to do speeches and do charity work as she’s done before.
> 
> So far, she has just been presented as “eye candy” for public events. I hope this will change over time, as it is a waste of her talents. Surely society schmoozing can’t be the extent of her life from now on....



She’s still in princess school.  When she’s done she’ll probably get something to do.


----------



## Lubina

PatsyCline said:


> I think new royals will pick certain charities to become patrons of. Maybe they're easing Meghan into the 'Firm'.



Makes sense that they would. She has only been married 3 months. Give her at least a year to ease into things especially since Harry is not the future king. She also has starting a family to consider so her role may not be as prominent as some would think it should be or others would like. She is like Fergie or Sophie, a married-in to someone down the line of succession. They have been on a few engagements and of course she is eager to help out, but all the hype about her background and making history seems to be mostly media generated.


----------



## Kat Madridista

LVSistinaMM said:


> Still waiting for the BRF to give her a platform she used to have. When I originally thought these two got together, I thought the BRF was turning a corner...and she was going to have a larger spotlight to do speeches and do charity work as she’s done before.
> 
> So far, she has just been presented as “eye candy” for public events. I hope this will change over time, as it is a waste of her talents. Surely society schmoozing can’t be the extent of her life from now on....



It takes a while. For comparison, it took more than 6 months before Kate's first patronages were announced in January 2012, she and William were married the April prior. Kate's first solo public engagement was almost a year after they were married, in February 2012. So Kate, too, spent most of her first year as a royal being "eye candy". 

Harry and Meghan have only been married 3 months, so it's not like a long time has already passed. And you can argue that they've had to deal with a lot more behind the scenes drama than William and Kate have in that time. Plus Harry seems to be a lot more protective of Meghan than William was of Kate (probably due to the treatment Meghan's getting from the press and her godawful family) and so they might be easing her in even more carefully than they did Kate. Meghan will get her own patronages and going on solo engagements in due time.


----------



## mdcx

Kat Madridista said:


> It takes a while. For comparison, it took more than 6 months before Kate's first patronages were announced in January 2012, she and William were married the April prior. Kate's first solo public engagement was almost a year after they were married, in February 2012. So Kate, too, spent most of her first year as a royal being "eye candy".
> 
> Harry and Meghan have only been married 3 months, so it's not like a long time has already passed. And you can argue that they've had to deal with a lot more behind the scenes drama than William and Kate have in that time. Plus Harry seems to be a lot more protective of Meghan than William was of Kate (probably due to the treatment Meghan's getting from the press and her godawful family) and so they might be easing her in even more carefully than they did Kate. Meghan will get her own patronages and going on solo engagements in due time.


I would guess that Meghan and Harry wanting to start a family will be factored into all of it too. They probably won't weigh her down with lots of commitments right now.


----------



## pixiejenna

They got a pup! I hope we get to see it soon.


----------



## berrydiva

It's sad that they just got married and people are already on wondering when they'll have their first child.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Addicted to bags

berrydiva said:


> It's sad that they just got married and people are already on wondering when they'll have their first child.


People do that to all newlyweds!


----------



## berrydiva

Addicted to bags said:


> People do that to all newlyweds!


Yes I know, doesn't make it a good thing, does it?...I think it's horrible and unnecessary pressure.


----------



## minababe

berrydiva said:


> Yes I know, doesn't make it a good thing, does it?...I think it's horrible and unnecessary pressure.


I htink in her case it's because of her age. she is already 37. to start a Family with more than one children is not getting easier at that Point.


----------



## Bentley1

berrydiva said:


> Yes I know, doesn't make it a good thing, does it?...I think it's horrible and unnecessary pressure.


Totally agree


----------



## mkr

I just wanna see the dog!


----------



## bag-mania

Dare I ask, do they have to have children? Will and Kate have three so the next generation of the monarchy is already assured. Would it be such a tragedy if Meghan and Harry were happy with their dog and no babies?


----------



## PatsyCline

There’s no ‘rule’ although I believe both have stated the desire to have children. With Harry falling to #6 in line to the throne, there’s virtually no chance of him ascending the throne.


----------



## minababe

bag-mania said:


> Dare I ask, do they have to have children? Will and Kate have three so the next generation of the monarchy is already assured. Would it be such a tragedy if Meghan and Harry were happy with their dog and no babies?



of course this could be enough.
but I think Harry wants children at any cost. I don't think he married meghan if she said no Kids sorry. He truly loves children.


----------



## Kat Madridista

berrydiva said:


> It's sad that they just got married and people are already on wondering when they'll have their first child.



It's natural, it happened to Kate and William, and it happens to even us commoners. Add to the fact that Harry has been vocal about wanting children even before he started dating Meghan. I think it's fine, as long as people are not being intrusive, gross, or creepy about it. Unfortunately, the tabloids do tend to get intrusive, gross, and creepy about it, and some people are forever on "bump watch". But most people are just excited at the prospect of a baby.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Kat Madridista said:


> It's natural, it happened to Kate and William, and it happens to even us commoners. Add to the fact that Harry has been vocal about wanting children even before he started dating Meghan. I think it's fine, as long as people are not being intrusive, gross, or creepy about it. Unfortunately, the tabloids do tend to get intrusive, gross, and creepy about it, and some people are forever on "bump watch". But most people are just excited at the prospect of a baby.



I agree that it is natural.  I also agree that people are excited at the prospect of a baby. But it's not always about the people who are excited and  in truth no matter how good the intentions I think it's always intrusive.  It doesn't seem that way, but the truth is that if a child is not on the way in the timing the person asking thinks is okay, there's no good way to answer the question.  If a couple is dealing with infertility, it's a crushing question, and not the business of the people asking to share that information. If the couple doesn't want children, there's still a social stigma to admitting that. If the couple is having other issues making the process of making a baby something that isn't happening - again, not something that a person wants to answer to anyone who is asking.
I've had a couple of friends go through the misery of infertility, and saw the pain they'd go through each time that people asked them about having kids.  Even the very best of intentions lead to pain and reminders of the frustrations. It's always intrusive.  While we're talking here about a public couple who've expressed their desire to have kids, and if we're being honest know it's their duty and expectation to have kids, putting the focus on that adds to the belief that people are not quite whole without having kids or that a marriage is not validated fully until there are kids. If we put more focus on the work they are doing or the ways they are enjoying being a partnership in their first year of marriage and less on the validation of procreating, I think it would be good for those couples who can't have kids and/or choose not to.


----------



## berrydiva

Kat Madridista said:


> It's natural, it happened to Kate and William, and it happens to even us commoners. Add to the fact that Harry has been vocal about wanting children even before he started dating Meghan. I think it's fine, as long as people are not being intrusive, gross, or creepy about it. Unfortunately, the tabloids do tend to get intrusive, gross, and creepy about it, and some people are forever on "bump watch". But most people are just excited at the prospect of a baby.


It's intrusive at first question regardless of intentions. One never knows what a couple may be dealing with or truly wants in that regard. Plus, it's another way to reinforce to women that they can't be whole without marriage and having a child.


----------



## Tivo

berrydiva said:


> It's intrusive at first question regardless of intentions. One never knows what a couple may be dealing with or truly wants in that regard. Plus, it's another way to reinforce to women that they can't be whole without marriage and having a child.


So true. Imagine how awful it would be for them if she can’t conceive for some reason. I kinda hope she gets pregnant quickly so all the “ageists” with all their “facts” about “older” women can shut the hell up.


----------



## PatsyCline

I wonder if she had to take a fertility test before marriage?


----------



## PatsyCline

Congrats to Harry & Meghan on their 100 day anniversary!


----------



## TC1

LOL, I've had Mayo in my fridge longer than 100 days


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kat Madridista

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree that it is natural.  I also agree that people are excited at the prospect of a baby. But it's not always about the people who are excited and  in truth no matter how good the intentions I think it's always intrusive.  It doesn't seem that way, but the truth is that if a child is not on the way in the timing the person asking thinks is okay, there's no good way to answer the question.  If a couple is dealing with infertility, it's a crushing question, and not the business of the people asking to share that information. If the couple doesn't want children, there's still a social stigma to admitting that. If the couple is having other issues making the process of making a baby something that isn't happening - again, not something that a person wants to answer to anyone who is asking.
> I've had a couple of friends go through the misery of infertility, and saw the pain they'd go through each time that people asked them about having kids.  Even the very best of intentions lead to pain and reminders of the frustrations. It's always intrusive.  While we're talking here about a public couple who've expressed their desire to have kids, and if we're being honest know it's their duty and expectation to have kids, putting the focus on that adds to the belief that people are not quite whole without having kids or that a marriage is not validated fully until there are kids. If we put more focus on the work they are doing or the ways they are enjoying being a partnership in their first year of marriage and less on the validation of procreating, I think it would be good for those couples who can't have kids and/or choose not to.





berrydiva said:


> It's intrusive at first question regardless of intentions. One never knows what a couple may be dealing with or truly wants in that regard. Plus, it's another way to reinforce to women that they can't be whole without marriage and having a child.




There's a difference between being excited at the prospect of a royal baby (or any baby for that matter) and actively asking or wondering when a couple will have theirs or, worse, having an opinion on when it should happen, speculating about their plans or health, etc. Most people, including me, are in the former category. The former is more just about having cute baby cheeks to squee at. The latter is, indeed, intrusive and sexist.


----------



## Jayne1

PatsyCline said:


> I wonder if she had to take a fertility test before marriage?


I thought Diana had to. They probably all do, no matter how far down the line the husband is.


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> I thought Diana had to. They probably all do, no matter how far down the line the husband is.


I can understand Diana, as she was marrying the heir to the throne, and would be expected to produce an heir.


----------



## Kat Madridista

Jayne1 said:


> I thought Diana had to. They probably all do, no matter how far down the line the husband is.



Diana "had" to be a virgin. I don't think she or any other woman marrying into the royal family, had to take a fertility test. The fact that there's a "spare" in the direct heirs should be enough insurance in case of fertility issues or sudden tragedy.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

That's actually not true anymore. The Royal Family must have realised how ridiculous it was. Since Diana, the "rule" about virginity has changed.  If you Google it, there's a plethora of articles about it.


----------



## Jayne1

Kat Madridista said:


> Diana "had" to be a virgin. I don't think she or any other woman marrying into the royal family, had to take a fertility test. The fact that there's a "spare" in the direct heirs should be enough insurance in case of fertility issues or sudden tragedy.


I remember reading in multiple places that Diana had to be fertile.  Charles wasn't marrying her for love, but for offsprings.  She had to produce or why marry her. A fertilely test was supposedly needed to make sure. So, not so much about virginity as fertility.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attending a gala performance of Hamilton in support of Sentebale


----------



## prettyprincess

She looks great!! who makes that dress?


----------



## lulu212121

That is a great dress on her!


----------



## Morgan R

prettyprincess said:


> She looks great!! who makes that dress?



The tuxedo dress is by Judith & Charles


----------



## sdkitty

that dress is very flattering on her


----------



## gazoo

They look great! Love her edgy earrings.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

She looks smashing. Polished, and I love the swept-back bun.

Also, Lin-Manuel Miranda.


----------



## Tivo

Hollywood Life is reporting the two of them had a blowout over her family drama and her feeling suffocated by the Royal protocols. But I’m not sure I believe it because it’s not coming from the Daily Fail, and I have no doubt “The Fail” would be the first to know.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Tivo said:


> Hollywood Life is reporting the two of them had a blowout over her family drama and her feeling suffocated by the Royal protocols. But I’m not sure I believe it because it’s not coming from the Daily Fail, and I have no doubt “The Fail” would be the first to know.


Their body language is certainly less touchy feely, but this is official business? I can never tell if they're on royal duty or not haha.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

Tivo said:


> Hollywood Life is reporting the two of them had a blowout over her family drama and her feeling suffocated by the Royal protocols. But I’m not sure I believe it because it’s not coming from the Daily Fail, and I have no doubt “The Fail” would be the first to know.



Well part of that story is completely false. Meghan was never in Toronto recently, as was reported by some news outlets. 

Some outlets had reported that Air Canada was asked to ensure no one disturbed Meghan on her flight to Toronto, which turned out to be wrong, as she was not in Toronto.


----------



## prettyprincess

She makes me feel less self conscious about my chicken legs. From now on they’re going on display!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Tivo said:


> Hollywood Life is reporting the two of them had a blowout over her family drama and her feeling suffocated by the Royal protocols. But I’m not sure I believe it because it’s not coming from the Daily Fail, and I have no doubt “The Fail” would be the first to know.



Hollywood Life is right up there (down there?) with OK!, Grazia etc for celeb/royal fiction.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I love the dress on her, but I don’t think it appropriate for her current role. It was a bit too low cut and a bit too short. 

If she was still in Hollywood, it would have been perfect. Sexy and elegant at the same time! All in all, one of her best looks this far!


----------



## berrydiva

prettyprincess said:


> She makes me feel less self conscious about my chicken legs. From now on they’re going on display!


Wear what makes you feel good!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meeting the cast of Hamilton













Leaving Victoria Palace Theatre:


----------



## afsweet

love how happy they look!


----------



## Sharont2305

stephc005 said:


> love how happy they look!


Me too, wonder if they have a secret they're not sharing, lol?


----------



## DC-Cutie

Sharont2305 said:


> Me too, wonder if they have a secret they're not sharing, lol?


and her dress is looking a little snug around the mid-section


----------



## LibbyRuth

I love that dress on her.  It's a great way to respect the expectations of a royal family dress code while also showing a little personality for her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

You can tell she feels good in that dress! [emoji7]


----------



## MarvelGirl

Meghan looks fantastic! Love the whole outfit. And yes, they do look so happy. I hadn't realized how much I missed seeing pics of them. Can't get enough of looking at these two and their happy love!


----------



## minababe

the last look is pure perfection ! the fit is amazing on her ! can't wait for the next one. i'm so happy to see These two beautiful People enjoying their new life together and don't let anything ruin it

btw love how Harry is holding her waist in the group Picture and how protective he is with her as they leave the theatre.


----------



## bisbee

LVSistinaMM said:


> I love the dress on her, but I don’t think it appropriate for her current role. It was a bit too low cut and a bit too short.
> 
> If she was still in Hollywood, it would have been perfect. Sexy and elegant at the same time! All in all, one of her best looks this far!


Maybe a bit short, but low cut?  Does she have to wear a turtleneck?  There is NO cleavage!


----------



## Sharont2305

DC-Cutie said:


> and her dress is looking a little snug around the mid-section


I'm keeping an eye on her hair from now on, not sure if I read this on this forum so apologies if this has been noted before. Apparently, the type of blow dry she has to straighten her hair, or rather the product / procedure used, you cannot use that during pregnancy. So, I'm looking for more frizz


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

bisbee said:


> Maybe a bit short, but low cut?  Does she have to wear a turtleneck?  There is NO cleavage!



Who said turtleneck? Wow, take that out of context. It could have just a couple inches higher and there would be no issues. Geez.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I'm surprised to see her in something that low and that short with no stockings. I like it but it does nothing for her.


----------



## Hobbsy

Where is it low??


----------



## berrydiva

Hobbsy said:


> Where is it low??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4178455


It's not low or short but she's married now so she can only wear knee length dresses and have babies  (I jokes folks don't get in a wad)


----------



## pixiejenna

I think that the dress is a bit short, I would like it more if it was two or three inches longer. I didn't catch the lack of pantyhose until one of you pointed it out. I wonder if it depends on the event if she's required to wear them. Since it was a play it's semi formal event and they're the only royals there. I think she looked more like herself than we've seen in a while. I don't think that it looks snug. But if she is pregnant that makes more sense about her mom moving there. Which we recently heard that she's planning too, I was surprised to hear.


----------



## VickyB

Love the dress!!! Pity it was too tight. You can really see it pulling  - especially on the left side. 
Hair and make up are fab!!!


----------



## myown

.


----------



## Hobbsy

berrydiva said:


> It's not low or short but she's married now so she can only wear knee length dresses and have babies [emoji23] (I jokes folks don't get in a wad)


[emoji23][emoji16]


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Is this a legit dress or a blazer she's wearing as a dress? I've gotten used to her looking average, so she looks just average, again. Her smile helps her look, she looks very happy.


----------



## Morgan R

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Is this a legit dress or a blazer she's wearing as a dress? I've gotten used to her looking average, so she looks just average, again. Her smile helps her look, she looks very happy.



It is a dress.

Here is the dress on the designer's website: https://us.judithandcharles.com/products/digital-dress?variant=13032880636013


----------



## A1aGypsy

I imagine they are away in the US and she isn’t with the Queen so she is getting away with a little more than she probably would be able to in the UK. Harry is not without his history of rebuffing expectations and I also suspect there is a component of the royal family who likes having someone who is American and a little more relatable as a regular “celebrity”. 

Although, if I were Kate right now, I would be staring down the bottle of a wine bottle whilst angerly burning skin coloured hose and puffy quarter length sleeves.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Hollywood Life is right up there (down there?) with OK!, Grazia etc for celeb/royal fiction.


Except they were right.  Meghan was in Toronto.  She stayed with her best friend, who probably let the cat out of the bag. The best friend loves the media attention.


----------



## White Orchid

She seems like she’d be fun.


----------



## redney

A1aGypsy said:


> I imagine they are away in the US and she isn’t with the Queen so she is getting away with a little more than she probably would be able to in the UK. Harry is not without his history of rebuffing expectations and I also suspect there is a component of the royal family who likes having someone who is American and a little more relatable as a regular “celebrity”.
> 
> Although, if I were Kate right now, I would be staring down the bottle of a wine bottle whilst angerly burning skin coloured hose and puffy quarter length sleeves.


They were in London.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Well damn then, the girl has chops!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gazoo

I love the dress on her. It's sexy, so maybe that's why some deem it inappropriate. I don't think the cleavage area is too low at all. I do admit the hemline is short, about as short as Kate used to wear right after she got married, and way shorter than we're used to seeing from the BRF, but she looked great, IMO. On the model, the dress fits properly. Looks like the model has more of a defined waist than Meghan, which would then make it tighter across her midriff. Yet another tailoring mistake, but beyond that I think she looked fantastic. I do wish she'd find a decent tailor.  She's beautiful and very fit, she only needs a tailor that can work with her body shape. I've yet to see her in something that is perfectly tailored to her body.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

gazoo said:


> I love the dress on her. It's sexy, so maybe that's why some deem it inappropriate. I don't think the cleavage area is too low at all. I do admit the hemline is short, about as short as Kate used to wear right after she got married, and way shorter than we're used to seeing from the BRF, but she looked great, IMO. On the model, the dress fits properly. Looks like the model has more of a defined waist than Meghan, which would then make it tighter across her midriff. Yet another tailoring mistake, but beyond that I think she looked fantastic. I do wish she'd find a decent tailor.  She's beautiful and very fit, she only needs a tailor that can work with her body shape. I've yet to see her in something that is perfectly tailored to her body.


I agree with this! I love her and her style, but if she gets her clothes tailored it's very hard to tell!


----------



## bisbee

LVSistinaMM said:


> Who said turtleneck? Wow, take that out of context. It could have just a couple inches higher and there would be no issues. Geez.


I was exaggerating - I didn’t say you wanted her in a turtleneck!  I don’t think it was low at all!


----------



## PatsyCline

Meghan reveals her nickname for Harry. 

https://www.eonline.com/news/964628...eveals-her-adorable-nickname-for-prince-harry


----------



## mkr

[emoji849]


----------



## White Orchid

Reminds me of Yolanda, lol.


----------



## Morgan R

PatsyCline said:


> Meghan reveals her nickname for Harry.
> 
> https://www.eonline.com/news/964628...eveals-her-adorable-nickname-for-prince-harry



Couples do tend to have nicknames for one another so it's funny the media felt the need to make a story out of Meghan calling Harry a nickname but at the at the same time I expected them to because the media are making stories out of the smallest things they notice regarding Harry and Meghan. Earlier this year the media also made a story about how Harry called Meghan the nickname "Meg":


----------



## sdkitty

from the Daily Beast.  I think Harry comes out looking good from this article.  Charles and Camilla not so much.


There have always been rumors of significant tension between Prince Charles and his sons, Harry and William.

Of course, it would be unsurprising—considering their father’s appalling behavior towards their mother Princess Diana—if there were a complete absence of resentment from the younger men towards their father.

As has been well documented, Charles was having an affair with Camilla Parker Bowles while engaged to Diana, and continued it right throughout their troubled marriage.

The transgressions were blatant and egregious—one tiny example: Two weeks before their marriage, Charles sent Camilla a bracelet engraved with his pet name for her, which Diana found.

Publicly, Harry and William have never directly allowed that there is as much as a cigarette paper of distance between them and their father.

Shrewdly, they have never openly spoken of anything other than their untold admiration and respect for him.

However the Daily Beast has been told by a source, speaking on condition of anonymity, that it is well known in the intimate circles of the higher echelons of the royal family that the two boys’ relationship with their father is “strained.”


“They are very different people and they just don’t get on. It’s as simple as that. They rarely see each other outside of official business,” the source said.

The source also added that Charles "hates" William and Harry’s public "emoting" which has seen them discuss, in heartbreaking detail, the psychological troubles they endured following the loss of their mother, as part of their efforts to reduce the stigma around discussing mental health issues.


“My mother had just died, and I had to walk a long way behind her coffin, surrounded by thousands of people watching me while millions more did on television. I don’t think any child should be asked to do that, under any circumstances. I don’t think it would happen today”
The public declarations of vulnerability by the princes reached a height around the 20th anniversary of Diana’s death last year, from which Charles was completely airbrushed.

The closest Harry came to expressing what many believe to be his deep-seated anger towards his father was in a an interview to mark her deathwhen he said: “My mother had just died, and I had to walk a long way behind her coffin, surrounded by thousands of people watching me while millions more did on television. I don’t think any child should be asked to do that, under any circumstances. I don’t think it would happen today.” 

Although Charles was not mentioned by name it’s hard to see how Harry could have had anyone in mind but his father.

William and Harry spent much more time with Diana than they did with Charles after their parents' divorce, and so were exposed to Diana's loathing and contempt for 'that woman' from an early age—and the relationship with Camilla has not been easy for them to accept.

Another figure who appears at many key moments in this story is Prince Charles's former adviser, Mark Bolland.

Bolland ran a ruthless media operation after Diana's death aimed at getting the public and the media to accept Camilla. Under Bolland's influence, Prince Charles sanctioned gross violations of his sons' privacy in return for positive media coverage.

As the Daily Beast has previously reported, in 1998, a 16-year-old William agreed for the first time to meet Camilla. Every moment of that traumatic first meeting was subsequently described in vivid detail in the _Sun_newspaper. William was furious, and demanded to know how the story had got out.

The _Sun's_ royal editor of the time, Charlie Rae, told the BBC documentary _Reinventing The Royals_, "Apart from Camilla and William telling us, you couldn’t have got it from a better source… It was Mark Bolland." Bolland denied being the _Sun's_ source.

Bolland also used Harry to make Charles look good. After the _News of the World_ got hold of a story that Harry had smoked weed, the palace agreed to confirm the story if the paper ran an item saying that Charles had taken him to a drug rehab centre to guide him in the dangers of drugs. In fact, the visit to the drug rehab had happened months earlier.

Harry was furious and felt betrayed.

Richard Kay, a veteran Daily Mail journalist told the BBC documentary that William's anger at being manipulated by his father's staff "explained a lot about what happened in subsequent years when he decided to break away from his father’s people.”



The Daily Beast understands that, generally, the very different, more informal way of doing things beloved by the younger royals is another cause of irritation to Charles, who considers it inappropriate for the royals.

For instance, William, Kate, Meghan and Harry all call staff by their first names, a studied rejection of Charles’s high-handed interpersonal communication style.

Harry regularly brings in coffee from Starbucks to his staff at Kensington Palace, one insider previously told the Daily Beast, popping out to the street in just a baseball cap pulled low for disguise.  


“William loves his father and is tremendously loyal to him, but from the beginning he has said he is his own man and hates being told what to do”
The writer Christopher Andersen told the Daily Beast that tension has also been brewing between Charles and William owing to disagreements over William and Kate’s work schedule.

“William loves his father and is tremendously loyal to him, but from the beginning he has said he is his own man and hates being told what to do. So whenever he's pressured by Charles' aides at St. James's Palace to take on some royal assignment he isn't interested in, William complains bitterly.  

“William is also unhappy with Charles's camp for promulgating the notion that the Cambridges aren't pulling their weight. In fairness, they have three young children and there is no reasonable way they can be expected to match the hundreds of tree-plantings, plaque-unveilings, ribbon-cuttings, hospital visits, and walkabouts Charles and Camilla perform each year.”

These fresh suggestions of strained relationships—unexpectedly, perhaps, Harry is said to be more willing to compromise with Charles than William in the cause of keeping the peace—fit with other stories that have been doing the rounds, some of them for many years.

One of the most assiduous chroniclers of these stories has been the investigative journalist Tom Bower.

In his new book, _Rebel Prince_, Bower claimed that Charles sees far less of his grandchildren than do the Middletons, and is annoyed by the important role Kate's family has been given in the rearing of the future king.

Bower also suggested that the geographical distance between Prince Charles’s house at Highgrove and the Cambridges' base at Sandringham was part of the reason William and Kate chose to be based there.


“Charles saw Kate and William as the new stars and feared he’d be in trouble”
Diana famously claimed Charles was jealous of the attention she received, and Charles allegedly feels similarly aggrieved by the attention William and Kate have received, Bower suggests.


“People don't fully realize the extent to which Charles is jealous of anyone who gets more attention than he does”
“Charles saw Kate and William as the new stars and feared he’d be in trouble,” the late Robert Higdon, a friend of Charles’ who looked after the interests of his charities in America, told Bower for his book.

Andersen makes a similar point: “People don't fully realize the extent to which Charles is jealous of anyone who gets more attention than he does. Charles was incredibly jealous of Diana for swallowing up all the attention, and the fact that polls routinely show that two-thirds of Britons would rather have William and Kate as their king and queen than Charles andCamilla has always been a source of tension between the two camps.”

The palace almost never comments on the personal lives and relations of its principal characters, and the palace declined to comment on a detailed email request for this story sent by the Daily Beast.


----------



## prettyprincess

I may be in the minority, but I’ve always felt sad for Charles and Camila. They should’ve been allowed to marry when they wanted to. You can’t help who you love.


----------



## Jayne1

What’s the nickname. I can’t click the link.


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> What’s the nickname. I can’t click the link.


Neither can I. Is it Meg per the clip of Harry? Or is it "My Love"?


----------



## Jayne1

prettyprincess said:


> I may be in the minority, but I’ve always felt sad for Charles and Camila. They should’ve been allowed to marry when they wanted to. You can’t help who you love.


I agree. They stayed true to each other for decades and still get along so well. I always watch their interactions with each other.


----------



## Morgan R

Jayne1 said:


> What’s the nickname. I can’t click the link.





VickyB said:


> Neither can I. Is it Meg per the clip of Harry? Or is it "My Love"?



"Meg" is a nickname Harry was heard saying to Meghan at a Invictus Games reception earlier this year.

"My Love" is a nickname Meghan was heard saying to Harry at the gala performance of Hamilton in support of Sentebale when they were taking pictures with the Hamilton cast


----------



## threadbender

So, is it a nickname or just a term of endearment? "My love" is relatively generic.


----------



## Gal4Dior

carlpsmom said:


> So, is it a nickname or just a term of endearment? "My love" is relatively generic.



I view it as a term of endearment. Rather generic, actually. It’s making something out of relatively nothing IMHO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

LVSistinaMM said:


> I view it as a term of endearment. Rather generic, actually. It’s making something out of relatively nothing IMHO.


This!


----------



## chicinthecity777

prettyprincess said:


> I may be in the minority, but I’ve always felt sad for Charles and Camila. They should’ve been allowed to marry when they wanted to. You can’t help who you love.


Charlies married Diana because he wanted to be remained as the heir to the throne (at the time it was the condition). If he is of any decency, he should have given up his status and married Camila instead of marrying Diana and having an affair so that he can holding on to the opportunity to become the King some day! People did that for true love! I have no empathy for him whatsoever!


----------



## Tivo

xiangxiang0731 said:


> Charlies married Diana because he wanted to be remained as the heir to the throne (at the time it was the condition). If he is of any decency, he should have given up his status and married Camila instead of marrying Diana and having an affair so that he can holding on to the opportunity to become the King some day! People did that for true love! I have no empathy for him whatsoever!


And the poetic justice seems to be he’ll likely never be King.


----------



## mkr

Why won’t he be king?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Tivo said:


> And the poetic justice seems to be he’ll likely never be King.


I really really hope so!


----------



## mkr

The queen doesn’t have the power to bypass Charles. It would be up to Parliament.  The only way Charles isn’t king is if he dies before the queen.


----------



## bag-mania

mkr said:


> The queen doesn’t have the power to bypass Charles. It would be up to Parliament.  The only way Charles isn’t king is if he dies before the queen.



He’ll likely be king, but given his age he’ll only be in the role for a matter of years instead of decades like his mother.


----------



## bag-mania

prettyprincess said:


> I may be in the minority, but I’ve always felt sad for Charles and Camila. They should’ve been allowed to marry when they wanted to. You can’t help who you love.



That true love between them thing has always seemed like revisionist history to make their finally getting together more palatable after Diana’s death. I was a kid at the time, but nobody thought Charles was anywhere close to get married when he and Camilla dated the first time. The tabloids were full of stories of the women he was dating. He was practically a playboy back then, believe it or not. You can blame it on the Queen or Mountbatten or anyone else, but in the end the decision was Charles’. Kings have given up the throne before for true love.

He wasn’t ready and Camilla wasn’t going to wait around. She married her on-again, off-again boyfriend quickly enough when Charles went away.


----------



## mkr

He clearly wanted the throne more than Camilla.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I think you are underestimating the familial, political, national, and international consequences of Charles giving up the throne. It wasn’t like he could just toss his responsibilities, family, and country because he fell in love.


----------



## bag-mania

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think you are underestimating the familial, political, national, and international consequences of Charles giving up the throne. It wasn’t like he could just toss his responsibilities, family, and country because he fell in love.



Hey, King Edward gave up his throne to marry the woman he loved. That was back in the 1930s when the monarchy still held much more power and influence than in the 70s when Charles came along. Charles chose the throne over true love. There’s nothing wrong with that but you can’t go back and say he was kept from marrying the woman he loved because he could’ve made it happen if he had really wanted it. Since royalty and infidelity seem to go together he assumed he could have his cake and eat it too. So he married the approved bride and kept his “love” on the side.


----------



## sdkitty

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think you are underestimating the familial, political, national, and international consequences of Charles giving up the throne. It wasn’t like he could just toss his responsibilities, family, and country because he fell in love.


the Duke of Windsor did


----------



## Tivo

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think you are underestimating the familial, political, national, and international consequences of Charles giving up the throne. It wasn’t like he could just toss his responsibilities, family, and country because he fell in love.


Men do what they want to do.


----------



## TC1

Let's be honest, he probably thought he could have Diana for public appearances and see whomever on the side. Decades before you didn't have the paps following your every move and selling stories to gossip rags. Diana was great for image and producing children..he didn't want to be with JUST her..and I doubt he ever was.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> He’ll likely be king, but given his age he’ll only be in the role for a matter of years instead of decades like his mother.


If he has the same long-life genes of his mother and grandmother, he'll be king for 25 years or more, don't you think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Hey, King Edward gave up his throne to marry the woman he loved. That was back in the 1930s when the monarchy still held much more power and influence than in the 70s when Charles came along. Charles chose the throne over true love. There’s nothing wrong with that but you can’t go back and say he was kept from marrying the woman he loved because he could’ve made it happen if he had really wanted it. Since royalty and infidelity seem to go together he assumed he could have his cake and eat it too. So he married the approved bride and kept his “love” on the side.


Wallis Simpson did the world a favour by getting Edward VIII to give up the throne.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

bag-mania said:


> Hey, King Edward gave up his throne to marry the woman he loved. That was back in the 1930s when the monarchy still held much more power and influence than in the 70s when Charles came along. Charles chose the throne over true love. There’s nothing wrong with that but you can’t go back and say he was kept from marrying the woman he loved because he could’ve made it happen if he had really wanted it. Since royalty and infidelity seem to go together he assumed he could have his cake and eat it too. So he married the approved bride and kept his “love” on the side.



And when King Edward did that it had major consequences for him, his family, the institution of the monarchy, and nations across Europe and across the globe when you factor in colonialism, WWII, and the Nazi involvement. If Prince Charles had done that again two generations later it probably would have been even worse.


----------



## prettyprincess

bag-mania said:


> That true love between them thing has always seemed like revisionist history to make their finally getting together more palatable after Diana’s death. I was a kid at the time, but nobody thought Charles was anywhere close to get married when he and Camilla dated the first time. The tabloids were full of stories of the women he was dating. He was practically a playboy back then, believe it or not. You can blame it on the Queen or Mountbatten or anyone else, but in the end the decision was Charles’. Kings have given up the throne before for true love.
> 
> He wasn’t ready and Camilla wasn’t going to wait around. She married her on-again, off-again boyfriend quickly enough when Charles went away.


I’ll admit I don’t know the full history. I wasn’t even born when he married Diana, but from what I’ve read and watched it seemed like he never really loved her the way she deserved. I remember my parents expressing outrage that he could cheat on Diana with someone like Camila (Diana was very popular in my household growing up lol). Love denied is always sad so I’m happy he was able to marry her in the end. And from what I’ve read Diana also found love with that Pakistani doctor before she passed.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> That true love between them thing has always seemed like revisionist history to make their finally getting together more palatable after Diana’s death. I was a kid at the time, but nobody thought Charles was anywhere close to get married when he and Camilla dated the first time. The tabloids were full of stories of the women he was dating. He was practically a playboy back then, believe it or not. You can blame it on the Queen or Mountbatten or anyone else, but in the end the decision was Charles’. Kings have given up the throne before for true love.
> 
> He wasn’t ready and Camilla wasn’t going to wait around. She married her on-again, off-again boyfriend quickly enough when Charles went away.


Charles was never a playboy. He never had the personality to be a ladies man. He was a whiny, thin skinned, overly sensitive demanding guy who got into the best schools, in spite of his poor grades because of his title. The playboy thing was made up in the press by his aides and especially Lord Mountbatten. 

Charles loved Camilla, but she was supposed to be a learning experience (especially for a ninny like him) and not marriage material. He married Diana for his Country and for his family, but he never stopped loving Camilla.

Diana's sister dated Charles first and a chance at marrying him but didn't want anything to do with the life she would have with him.  Diana jumped at the chance.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Wallis Simpson did the world a favour by getting Edward VIII to give up the throne.



Why do you say that? He was popular enough during the brief time he was king. He was not as tied to tradition as the others and would have likely tried to change some things. We’ll never know whether that would have been for the best. However, if he had then Charles could have married whoever he wanted because he wouldn’t have been in direct line for the throne.


----------



## Jayne1

prettyprincess said:


> I’ll admit I don’t know the full history. I wasn’t even born when he married Diana, but from what I’ve read and watched it seemed like he never really loved her the way she deserved. I remember my parents expressing outrage that he could cheat on Diana with someone like Camila (Diana was very popular in my household growing up lol). Love denied is always sad so I’m happy he was able to marry her in the end. And from what I’ve read Diana also found love with that Pakistani doctor before she passed.


Diana had many lovers, although she picked all the wrong men. One was a car salesman.  Their tapes were made public and we got to hear their conversations, which the press called the Squidgygate scandal.

Another was Barry Mannakee, her married bodyguard that she badgered and kept calling. Of course there was James Hewitt.  She gave him permission to write a book about their affair.

The heart surgeon broke up with her because the relationship could never go anywhere and so Diana tried to make him jealous by flaunting her new relationship with Dodi Fayed (she's the one who called the press to let them know where they'd be) and look where that ended up.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Why do you say that? He was popular enough during the brief time he was king. He was not as tied to tradition as the others and would have likely tried to change some things. We’ll never know whether that would have been for the best. However, if he had then Charles could have married whoever he wanted because he wouldn’t have been in direct line for the throne.


Well, he was pro nazi for one thing. He had fascist sympathies and liked to interfere in political matters, which the King of England should not be doing. Also, apparently he liked the luxurious part of being king but not the dull working part.  Historians think that Edward VIII's abdication saved the monarchy.

Historians also think that his bother, George VI (who might have been shy with a bad stammer) was nevertheless a much better king as his personality was better suited for it.


----------



## chowlover2

bag-mania said:


> Why do you say that? He was popular enough during the brief time he was king. He was not as tied to tradition as the others and would have likely tried to change some things. We’ll never know whether that would have been for the best. However, if he had then Charles could have married whoever he wanted because he wouldn’t have been in direct line for the throne.


Edward was a Nazi sympathizer. There is an interesting documentary on Netflix about it all. I believe it is called Edward the Nazi prince.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Well, he was pro nazi for one thing. He had fascist sympathies and liked to interfere in political matters, which the King of England should not be doing. Also, apparently he liked the luxurious part of being king but not the dull working part.  Historians think that Edward VIII's abdication saved the monarchy.
> 
> Historians also think that his bother, George VI (who might have been shy with a bad stammer) was nevertheless a much better king as his personality was better suited for it.



Ah, gotcha. I remember seeing a show with something about that. Didn’t Churchhill send him off to the Bahamas to keep him out of trouble?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Diana had many lovers, although she picked all the wrong men. One was a car salesman.  Their tapes were made public and we got to hear their conversations, which the press called the Squidgygate scandal.
> 
> Another was Barry Mannakee, her married bodyguard that she badgered and kept calling. Of course there was James Hewitt.  She gave him permission to write a book about their affair.
> 
> The heart surgeon broke up with her because the relationship could never go anywhere and so Diana tried to make him jealous by flaunting her new relationship with Dodi Fayed (she's the one who called the press to let them know where they'd be) and look where that ended up.


But when she married Charles Diana was an innocent virgin.  If he had really loved her and been a faithful husband, she probably wouldn't have taken all those lovers


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Charles was never a playboy. He never had the personality to be a ladies man. He was a whiny, thin skinned, overly sensitive demanding guy who got into the best schools, in spite of his poor grades because of his title. The playboy thing was made up in the press by his aides and especially Lord Mountbatten.
> 
> Charles loved Camilla, but she was supposed to be a learning experience (especially for a ninny like him) and not marriage material. He married Diana for his Country and for his family, but he never stopped loving Camilla.
> 
> Diana's sister dated Charles first and a chance at marrying him but didn't want anything to do with the life she would have with him.  Diana jumped at the chance.



Charles dated around quite a bit. So much so that the Telegraph did this “Where are they now?” a few years ago to locate the whereabouts of 20 of his exes. Of course some lasted longer than others, but Charles wasn’t a wallflower by any means.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...036/Prince-Charles-and-his-relationships.html


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Charles dated around quite a bit. So much so that the Telegraph did this “Where are they now?” a few years ago to locate the whereabouts of 20 of his exes. Of course some lasted longer than others, but Charles wasn’t a wallflower by any means.
> 
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...036/Prince-Charles-and-his-relationships.html


If he had not been a royal he probably wouldn't have had many dates....not attractive looking and seems to have a somewhat strange personality.  Those boys were lucky to get Diana's genes mixed in (IMO)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If he had not been a royal he probably wouldn't have had many dates....not attractive looking and seems to have a somewhat strange personality.  Those boys were lucky to get Diana's genes mixed in (IMO)



You got that right.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> But when she married Charles Diana was an innocent virgin.  If he had really loved her and been a faithful husband, she probably wouldn't have taken all those lovers


Yes, she was an innocent virgin but anyone who knows anything about the British royal family (and Diana came from a bloodline with more royal connections than Queen Elizabeth) should have known that they get married for duty but get to have affairs on the side and on the down low. Everyone knows that. I know Diana wasn't educated but it doesn't take education to know how it works.

Prince Philip is the perfect example.  Do your duty, be a loving husband and do your own thing quietly on the side. 

Occasionally it's a real love match, like Victoria and Albert (first cousins!) -- the royal family is so inbred but that's another discussion.


----------



## mkr

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she was an innocent virgin but anyone who knows anything about the British royal family (and Diana came from a bloodline with more royal connections than Queen Elizabeth) should have known that they get married for duty but get to have affairs on the side and on the down low. Everyone knows that. I know Diana wasn't educated but it doesn't take education to know how it works.
> 
> Prince Philip is the perfect example.  Do your duty, be a loving husband and do your own thing quietly on the side.
> 
> Occasionally it's a real love match, like Victoria and Albert (first cousins!) -- the royal family is so inbred but that's another discussion.



Charles wasn’t exactly a loving husband.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she was an innocent virgin but anyone who knows anything about the British royal family (and Diana came from a bloodline with more royal connections than Queen Elizabeth) should have known that they get married for duty but get to have affairs on the side and on the down low. Everyone knows that. I know Diana wasn't educated but it doesn't take education to know how it works.
> 
> Prince Philip is the perfect example.  Do your duty, be a loving husband and do your own thing quietly on the side.
> 
> Occasionally it's a real love match, like Victoria and Albert (first cousins!) -- the royal family is so inbred but that's another discussion.


Well number one, she was very young and maybe naive.  And he wasn't that down low....seemed like it was kinda in her face


----------



## Jayne1

mkr said:


> Charles wasn’t exactly a loving husband.


And Diana wasn't a loving wife.

First of all, she was a teenager and wasn't deferential and he expected that.  She'd make fun of him.  She liked to upstage him.  He was homebody and she would go out without him. She belittled him and said he wasn't fit to rule as King of England.

I'm not saying a wife should be all the things Charles needed, but if you want to marry a prince, known for being a whiny, pampered guy who has been given special treatment his whole life, you may have to try to work with that. 

Her family has said she loved the idea of marrying a prince and didn't necessarily love the price she married, just the idea of it.


----------



## chowlover2

Diana found out that Charles was still seeing Camilla before they married. She found a bracelet with the name Gladys engraved on it. ( Gladys was Charles pet name for Camilla ) She spoke to her 2 sisters about it, and they told her it was too late to do anything about it. She obviously could have backed out, but for whatever reason she married him. I'm sure she felt her youth and beauty would win him over in the end, but sadly it did not.


----------



## girleuro

Jayne1 said:


> Diana had many lovers, although she picked all the wrong men. One was a car salesman.  Their tapes were made public and we got to hear their conversations, which the press called the Squidgygate scandal.
> 
> Another was Barry Mannakee, her married bodyguard that she badgered and kept calling. Of course there was James Hewitt.  She gave him permission to write a book about their affair.
> 
> The heart surgeon broke up with her because the relationship could never go anywhere and so Diana tried to make him jealous by flaunting her new relationship with Dodi Fayed (she's the one who called the press to let them know where they'd be) and look where that ended up.



Ridiculous what a young woman could do if it was 3 people in her marriage from the very beginning. And it’s not where they ended up but where they were ended by Royal family!


----------



## Jayne1

chowlover2 said:


> Diana found out that Charles was still seeing Camilla before they married. She found a bracelet with the name Gladys engraved on it. ( Gladys was Charles pet name for Camilla ) She spoke to her 2 sisters about it, and they told her it was too late to do anything about it. She obviously could have backed out, but for whatever reason she married him. I'm sure she felt her youth and beauty would win him over in the end, but sadly it did not.


Obviously it took more than youth and beauty. Camilla was never a beauty but she won his heart because she gave him what he needed.  

Charles and Diana were a mismatch from the very beginning.


----------



## myown

mkr said:


> He clearly wanted the throne more than Camilla.


poor Camilla


----------



## myown

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I think you are underestimating the familial, political, national, and international consequences of Charles giving up the throne. It wasn’t like he could just toss his responsibilities, family, and country because he fell in love.


I think he was under very big pressure given by his mother and his father. didn't Charles stated that it wasn't a warm and lovely family to begin with? Maybe he did what he thought they wanted him to do. Maybe giving up the throne never crossed his mind (makes that worse actually). He married the one his parents have chosen for him


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> But when she married Charles Diana was an innocent virgin.  If he had really loved her and been a faithful husband, she probably wouldn't have taken all those lovers


are we even sure Diana loved him? or did she just loved the idea of being in love?


----------



## bag-princess

prettyprincess said:


> I may be in the minority, but I’ve always felt sad for Charles and Camila. They should’ve been allowed to marry when they wanted to. You can’t help who you love.




i think they are both pathetic. period.


----------



## bag-mania

myown said:


> are we even sure Diana loved him? or did she just loved the idea of being in love?



I believe she did, unless you think a 19-year-old doesn't have the life experience to truly love someone. Being young, I think she was swept away by the romance and didn't see any of the red flags that an older, more experienced woman might have noticed. Remember, Charles played his role well, he courted her and made her believe he wanted her. In the early photos of them together Diana was always looking at him adoringly. She wasn't faking it for the cameras. She wasn't that good an actress. It took her years before she learned how to handle the media.


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving at the WellChild Awards


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I believe she did, unless you think a 19-year-old doesn't have the life experience to truly love someone. Being young, I think she was swept away by the romance and didn't see any of the red flags that an older, more experienced woman might have noticed. Remember, Charles played his role well, he courted her and made her believe he wanted her. In the early photos of them together Diana was always looking at him adoringly. She wasn't faking it for the cameras. She wasn't that good an actress. It took her years before she learned how to handle the media.


They didn't really know each other. Granted, they met a few years before when he was dating her sister, but once he kinda picked her, they only met up 12 times, according to the biographers. 

So, they met and married within 5 months.  

She had a crush on a prince, but did she love him?  How could she?  She didn't know him.


----------



## bisousx

Historically, the monarchy and royalty just marry for bloodlines and for show. In the old days, taking lovers was not only common, but acceptable in a lot of high bred marriages. I think someone in Diana’s family could have prepped her better for the reality of marrying a prince .. or maybe at that age, she didn’t want to listen to any naysaying. Something tells me if Charles had married an older woman, the wife might be ok with a certain “arrangement” as long as she was well taken care of and could have boyfriends too. Methinks the Camilla thing was no secret at all, and in plain sight for a rational person to see and decide on their own if they wanted to deal with it. But a teenager would want the whole fairytale and one true love forever, that type of thing.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> They didn't really know each other. Granted, they met a few years before when he was dating her sister, but once he kinda picked her, they only met up 12 times, according to the biographers.
> 
> So, they met and married within 5 months.
> 
> *She had a crush on a prince, but did she love him?  How could she?  She didn't know him.[*/QUOTE]



You could say that about every teen/20-something girl who has ever fallen in love and believed she found "the one." We are looking at this from the lens of 2018 where, thanks to the internet and the media, young women are savvier and much more aware than they were back in 1980. But hell, there are even girls today who believe in love at first sight. You only learn from the experience that comes from living.

True, Diana was a sheltered, naive virgin. Charles was in his 30s and had been auditioning many potential wives for several years. Isn't he to blame for not taking more time to actually get to know her? Apparently he mistook her shy nature and thought she would be compliant and obedient. He was too dense to realize Diana had spirit (and horrors, an actual personality!) underneath and she wasn't going to be his cute, quiet, baby-birthing doormat.

Kate and Meghan can thank the disaster that was Charles and Diana's marriage for the end of the antiquated virginity rule. Their husbands were allowed to marry them for love and compatibility rather than breeding potential. Time will tell whether it's still a given that the royals will take lovers. I don't see Kate and Meghan tolerating infidelity any better than Diana did.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> You could say that about every teen/20-something girl who has ever fallen in love and believed she found "the one." We are looking at this from the lens of 2018 where, thanks to the internet and the media, young women are savvier and much more aware than they were back in 1980. But hell, there are even girls today who believe in love at first sight. You only learn from the experience that comes from living.
> 
> True, Diana was a sheltered, naive virgin. Charles was in his 30s and had been auditioning many potential wives for several years. Isn't he to blame for not taking more time to actually get to know her? Apparently he mistook her shy nature and thought she would be compliant and obedient. He was too dense to realize Diana had spirit (and horrors, an actual personality!) underneath and she wasn't going to be his cute, quiet, baby-birthing doormat.
> 
> Kate and Meghan can thank the disaster that was Charles and Diana's marriage for the end of the antiquated virginity rule. Their husbands were allowed to marry them for love and compatibility rather than breeding potential. Time will tell whether it's still a given that the royals will take lovers. I don't see Kate and Meghan tolerating infidelity any better than Diana did.


Very true. All of what you wrote.

I just wonder how a 19 year old could be in love with a guy who didn't love her. 

They weren't sexually involved, so no lust masquerading as love. They spent almost no time together, so not soul mates or even best friends. He wasn't trying to woo her or seek her affection, so no sweeping her off her feet. 

It was well known what a whiny,  tantrum-throwing entitled guy he was and not the best looking, so it's not like falling in love with his character or good looks.

If he wasn't a prince one day to be king, making her a future queen, what did she love?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

At the WellChild Awards


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Look at her in a pant suit! She looks great.


----------



## Alexenjie

Charles was infatuated with Diana at the beginning. She seemed to have it all to be a perfect wife, mother, queen, etc. He tried to give up Camilla and he wouldn't have even tried if he hadn't wanted a real marriage with Diana. But like anyone who marries a stranger, the person you went on glamorous dates with, is not the real person you spend your life with. She wanted love, she deserved much better than what he had to offer so he went back to comfortable Camilla. Diana had every reason to get emotionally distraught, depressed and ill, none of those qualities will make you a good marriage partner but he had lied to her. If he had been honest with her, I doubt she would have gone through with the marriage. All the money in the world means nothing if you have to share or not have to yourself the person you married. Who in their right mind would choose that? Especially at the age of 19 years old, at the very beginning of adulthood who would want that lonely, unloved life? Nobody I can think of.


----------



## VickyB

Love the pant suit! Like the hair too.


----------



## myown

remember in their engagement interview they were asked if they are in love and Charles said whatever being in love means



Jayne1 said:


> She had a crush on a prince, but did she love *Charles*?  How could she?  She didn't know him.


I fixed that.


----------



## myown

Alexenjie said:


> If he had been honest with her, I doubt she would have gone through with the marriage. All the money in the world means nothing if you have to share or not have to yourself the person you married. Who in their right mind would choose that? Especially at the age of 19 years old, at the very beginning of adulthood who would want that lonely, unloved life? Nobody I can think of.


I honestly think many would


----------



## doni

bag-princess said:


> i think they are both pathetic. period.



I think if Camilla had been the pretty and lovely and charismatic and the younger one, and Diana the ugly but proper aristocrat his family forced him to marry, Charles and Camilla would have become the romance of the century...

In any event, the idea that kings would marry plebeians for love is an extremely recent one (actually, the idea of love marriages themselves is pretty new too), and had only started to materialize in Charles’ generation with some Scandinavian princes. The British royal family was never going to be among the first to jump in that boat. There was no sense at the time that Charles was marrying for love, they hardly knew each other and she had been hand picked. What she thought I don’t know, she was very young and it seems rather naive, but coming from the family she came from, she certainly had access to the information of exactly what was going on there. I think she probably felt in love with the idea of being the perfect fairy tale princess and reality didn’t match.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> At the WellChild Awards
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4182769
> View attachment 4182768
> View attachment 4182765
> View attachment 4182738
> View attachment 4182763
> View attachment 4182739
> View attachment 4182723
> View attachment 4182727
> View attachment 4182726
> View attachment 4182725




so lovely !


----------



## absolutpink

Love the pant suit! I feel as though this is the look for her, she seems much more relaxed.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Very true. All of what you wrote.
> 
> I just wonder how a 19 year old could be in love with a guy who didn't love her.
> 
> They weren't sexually involved, so no lust masquerading as love. They spent almost no time together, so not soul mates or even best friends. He wasn't trying to woo her or seek her affection, so no sweeping her off her feet.
> 
> It was well known what a whiny,  tantrum-throwing entitled guy he was and not the best looking, so it's not like falling in love with his character or good looks.
> 
> If he wasn't a prince one day to be king, making her a future queen, what did she love?



I think Diana was in love with Charles when they married. When you think back to being that young you remember how easy it was to fall in love. Of course it is different from the love that comes from years of actually knowing someone but those feelings are still real and they are very strong. I hate to keep dwelling on her inexperience, but any dating she had done previously was probably with boys her own age. Dating a prince has to be so organized and outside the realm of regular dating that I don't see how any of us would know what was normal and what was off. Charles was trying to win her over and he's likely somewhat different in-person than he appears to us. He may be kind, funny, a good conversationalist when he's alone with someone.

I'm sure Diana liked the idea of being a princess or she wouldn't have said yes, but that doesn't mean she wasn't in love. I think she went into the marriage wholeheartedly with the best of intentions. Charles, on the other hand, wouldn't let go of the past. Camilla had been married for several years at that point and Charles should have stayed away from her.

If Diana had known what awaited her I doubt she would have married him. The only exception is those boys. She loved them so much I think she would have gone through it all for them.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> I think Diana was in love with Charles when they married. When you think back to being that young you remember how easy it was to fall in love. Of course it is different from the love that comes from years of actually knowing someone but those feelings are still real and they are very strong. I hate to keep dwelling on her inexperience, but any dating she had done previously was probably with boys her own age. Dating a prince has to be so organized and outside the realm of regular dating that I don't see how any of us would know what was normal and what was off. Charles was trying to win her over and he's likely somewhat different in-person than he appears to us. He may be kind, funny, a good conversationalist when he's alone with someone.
> 
> I'm sure Diana liked the idea of being a princess or she wouldn't have said yes, but that doesn't mean she wasn't in love. I think she went into the marriage wholeheartedly with the best of intentions. Charles, on the other hand, wouldn't let go of the past. Camilla had been married for several years at that point and Charles should have stayed away from her.
> 
> If Diana had known what awaited her I doubt she would have married him. The only exception is those boys. She loved them so much I think she would have gone through it all for them.



I don't think it can be forgotten that Diana would have been raised with a certain sense of duty.  There's been talk in the past speculating that the Middletons worked hard to put Kate in a position that she could catch WIlliams eye ... the same can be said of the Spencer family.  She had an older sister who had dated Charles ... it's common for a younger sister to develop a crush on any man her older sister considers desirable. So I think its quite possible that Diana was in love with the idea of being with Charles, and the idea of who she thought he was more so than truly being in love with him. 
I am of the school of thought that both of them contributed to the failing of their marriage. On Diana's side, I think if she truly loved Charles in a mature way, she may have recognized that she was overshadowing him and backed away so they could share the spotlight.  She didn't.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> On Diana's side, I think if she truly loved Charles in a mature way, she may have recognized that she was overshadowing him and backed away so they could share the spotlight.  She didn't.



Diana had a bunch of insecurities of her own to worry about, which Charles largely ignored or belittled her. I can't blame her for not putting her focus on Charles and his issues. Charles has never wanted to be in the spotlight and that was true both before and after Diana. He makes appearances when he needs to but he doesn't seek attention. He may have been jealous of her popularity with the public but it's not like he had the personality to go out there and be among the people himself.

Even though we may disagree about who bears the most responsibility I guess we can all agree they were a horrible mismatch.


----------



## prettyprincess

bag-mania said:


> Diana had a bunch of insecurities of her own to worry about, which Charles largely ignored or belittled her. I can't blame her for not putting her focus on Charles and his issues. Charles has never wanted to be in the spotlight and that was true both before and after Diana. He makes appearances when he needs to but he doesn't seek attention. He may have been jealous of her popularity with the public but it's not like he had the personality to go out there and be among the people himself.
> 
> Even though we may disagree about who bears the most responsibility *I guess we can all agree they were a horrible mismatch*.


The silver lining is that they had two beautiful boys who brought life to the royal family


----------



## LibbyRuth

prettyprincess said:


> The silver lining is that they had two beautiful boys who brought life to the royal family


AND that because of the disaster that they went through (along with Andrew and Anne's divorces) things in the family changed, and William and Harry were both allowed to marry for love instead of duty.


----------



## bag-mania

prettyprincess said:


> The silver lining is that they had two beautiful boys who brought life to the royal family



True, they are both handsome young men. Will's smile looks just like Diana's, though he's clearly inherited his father's hairline.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mkr

Yes they were horribly mismatched but if the hadn’t married we never would have heard of Diana and her goodness and there would be no Will and Harry. So maybe it was all meant to be.  Diana certainly changed the royal family and the world for the better


----------



## afsweet

i prefer meghan in pant suits instead of dresses. seems to flatter her much more. no idea how she smiles without looking strained or her cheeks hurting!


----------



## sdkitty

stephc005 said:


> i prefer meghan in pant suits instead of dresses. seems to flatter her much more. no idea how she smiles without looking strained or her cheeks hurting!


I think I like her in dark tailored clothes - the pant suit and also the other day she wore a dark (black?) tailored dress that was very flattering.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She has a boxy torso so fitted dresses don't flatter her. She needs some structured pieces and volume on the bottom. Blazers, boot/wide leg pants, empire waists, a-line and full skirts, etc.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> She has a boxy torso so fitted dresses don't flatter her. She needs some structured pieces and volume on the bottom. Blazers, boot/wide leg pants, empire waists, a-line and full skirts, etc.



I also have a boxy torso.  I have always preferred pants to dresses, and I cannot wear belts.


----------



## DesigningStyle

I wish there were more photos of these two.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the 100 Days to Peace gala concert


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgan R said:


> Attending the 100 Days to Peace gala concert
> 
> View attachment 4184767
> View attachment 4184769
> View attachment 4184775
> View attachment 4184770
> View attachment 4184780
> View attachment 4184771
> View attachment 4184773
> View attachment 4184772
> View attachment 4184776



Beautiful hair!! HORRIBLE and incredibly unflattering dress.


----------



## Jayne1

These two make Will and Kate look so lazy.  Which they are.  And having kids is no excuse for not doing their royal duties.

Harry and Meghan seem to be going non-stop.


----------



## VickyB

LVSistinaMM said:


> Beautiful hair!! HORRIBLE and incredibly unflattering dress.



I don't get the design of this dress. It doesn't do anything for her nice figure but makes her breasts look bigger.  I do love the color and it looks very nice on her. 
 I know ya'll hate all the baby speculation posts but is this dress meant to hide the beginning of something? That's the only reason I can come up with as to why she chose it.


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> These two make Will and Kate look so lazy.  Which they are.  And having kids is no excuse for not doing their royal duties.
> 
> Harry and Meghan seem to be going non-stop.



Could be! Isn't Kate's "maternity leave" done at the end of this month? And the two oldest are in school for at least a few hours each day so she can do her "work" during those hours as much as possible?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Prince Louis is literally not even four and a half months old.


----------



## GoStanford

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Prince Louis is literally not even four and a half months old.


Agreed, and also I assume there are pressure within Palace walls to do a lot of socializing within the family, adhere to certain daily routines, etc.  I think it's OK for Will and Kate to be seen less often with three small children.


----------



## VickyB

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Prince Louis is literally not even four and a half months old.


Maybe she's off until the new year?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

VickyB said:


> Maybe she's off until the new year?



I saw the press say royal moms are supposed to take six months leave, but I don’t know if she’ll do that cause she did unexpectedly go to some events. Maternity leave in the UK is normally about nine months I think?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Her blue dress is just  a total fail  She looks maybe 10 pounds heavier. Her middle and chest look so thick and heavy. It makes me dislike all the designers she wears because I think what ugly clothes they make, lol. She's making designer clothes less desirable. Her makeup and hair are done very pretty, but that's a really bad outfit for her body. I am convinced they do not own a mirror in their home because she just does not see the reality of her poor choices.


----------



## pixiejenna

VickyB said:


> I don't get the design of this dress. It doesn't do anything for her nice figure but makes her breasts look bigger.  I do love the color and it looks very nice on her.
> I know ya'll hate all the baby speculation posts but is this dress meant to hide the beginning of something? That's the only reason I can come up with as to why she chose it.



The last time someone said she looks like she might be pregnant she didn’t really look like it to me. But this time I have to say she dose look like she might be. Between the boxyness of the dress with the ruffles down the center definitely makes it look like she’s got a bun in the oven and trying to hide it. Maybe that’s a part of why she’s doing so many events right now, because as she gets further along she’ll have to scale back.


----------



## Jayne1

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Prince Louis is literally not even four and a half months old.


So what’s Will’s excuse?

If all the fathers throughout the UK can take years off when they have kids, who’s going to be working? 

Anyway, Meghan and Harry are keeping very busy and very visible.


----------



## VickyB

pixiejenna said:


> The last time someone said she looks like she might be pregnant she didn’t really look like it to me. But this time I have to say she dose look like she might be. Between the boxyness of the dress with the ruffles down the center definitely makes it look like she’s got a bun in the oven and trying to hide it. Maybe that’s a part of why she’s doing so many events right now, because as she gets further along she’ll have to scale back.



Perhaps??? But aren't all the Royals' event calendars set very many many months in advance? When do they leave for their big tour abroad?


----------



## White Orchid

Aww man, this lass needs a fashion intervention stat!


----------



## mkr

VickyB said:


> I don't get the design of this dress. It doesn't do anything for her nice figure but makes her breasts look bigger.  I do love the color and it looks very nice on her.
> I know ya'll hate all the baby speculation posts but is this dress meant to hide the beginning of something? That's the only reason I can come up with as to why she chose it.



Those boobs made me think pregnant too.


----------



## bisbee

Jayne1 said:


> These two make Will and Kate look so lazy.  Which they are.  And having kids is no excuse for not doing their royal duties.
> 
> Harry and Meghan seem to be going non-stop.


Kate is still on maternity leave.  And I won’t fault her for wanting to raise her children.


----------



## prettyprincess

White Orchid said:


> Aww man, this lass needs a fashion intervention stat!


I don’t think it’s _that _bad. Out of the last dozen or so looks, maybe 2 or 3 needed improvement. It’s usually just an alteration issue. 
At least she’s not out in spanks...


----------



## myown

bisbee said:


> Kate is still on maternity leave.  And I won’t fault her for wanting to raise her children.


and if she would work again, everyone would be like "oh why is she not looking after her kids. these kids are raised by the nanny"


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m sure I’ve seen William at at least three things this week. Heathrow, with a school and something else. Seems he is back to work but a bit more low key. I’m sure the paps prefer the newlyweds right now


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Jayne1 said:


> So what’s Will’s excuse?
> 
> If all the fathers throughout the UK can take years off when they have kids, who’s going to be working?
> 
> Anyway, Meghan and Harry are keeping very busy and very visible.



Fathers and mothers in the UK get to split a year’s worth of leave if they want to. So Will could take six months after Kate’s six months with every baby if he wanted to, but he hasn’t. I don’t understand the hostility towards raising children, the future heir no less. I sure hope he has a well-adjusted childhood so he becomes a level headed, compassionate, and gracious king someday. 

Meghan and Harry just got married and they need to establish Meghan with all of these events.


----------



## Jayne1

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Fathers and mothers in the UK get to split a year’s worth of leave if they want to. So Will could take six months after Kate’s six months with every baby if he wanted to, but he hasn’t. I don’t understand the hostility towards raising children, the future heir no less. I sure hope he has a well-adjusted childhood so he becomes a level headed, compassionate, and gracious king someday.
> 
> Meghan and Harry just got married and they need to establish Meghan with all of these events.


No hostility at all.  I was a stay at home mom and purposely gave up a high paying job to be so.

I'm just saying I didn't give him the moniker of “work-shy William" and the name is going to stick if he doesn't do something about it.

He doesn't have a 9-5 job. He has a full staff of maids, cooks, secretaries, assistants and the best nannies to choose from. Kate has someone to shop, get her dresses and do her hair and the laundry and cook a meal and clean the bathroom while she gets driven to some place for an hour or two.

These two are not everyday people. They live on public pay and should perform their royal duties.


----------



## Antonia

Everyone on line is saying she's pregnant...the blue dress with the perfectly placed ruffles is what's causing the media buzz.  I'm thinking it might be true but only time will tell...or an announcement!


----------



## afsweet

that blue dress looks like a tent on her. she could do much better.


----------



## Jayne1

I thought her boobs looked bigger but then realized it was the dress. So yes, my first thought went to pregnant too.  lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Poor Meghan! If she's not pregnant it sure is embarrassing for people to think you look pregnant!


----------



## VickyB

prettyprincess said:


> I don’t think it’s _that _bad. Out of the last dozen or so looks, maybe 2 or 3 needed improvement. It’s usually just an alteration issue.
> At least she’s not out in spanks...



Like somebody else we know?


----------



## sdkitty

I think it's just an unflattering dress.  Maybe it looks prettier IRL than in pics.


----------



## berrydiva

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Poor Meghan! If she's not pregnant it sure is embarrassing for people to think you look pregnant!


With celebs in the spotlight, people will look to anything to assume pregnancy. For her it's fulfilling the Disney princess fantasy for some I guess.


----------



## Alexenjie

I agree the blue dress, pretty color, but very unflattering. It must be hard to go from having your own style (I liked a lot how she dressed before) to conforming to the rules of dressing as a royal. I think mostly she dresses well but there are bound to be misses.

As to whether she is pregnant, I feel they are waiting until they get back from whatever big tours they have planned. It would be awful to have morning sickness (or all day sickness depending on the person), fatigue, etc. on tour and really mess with their schedule. That's just my guess.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Alexenjie said:


> I agree the blue dress, pretty color, but very unflattering. It must be hard to go from having your own style (I liked a lot how she dressed before) to conforming to the rules of dressing as a royal. I think mostly she dresses well but there are bound to be misses.
> 
> As to whether she is pregnant, I feel they are waiting until they get back from whatever big tours they have planned. It would be awful to have morning sickness (or all day sickness depending on the person), fatigue, etc. on tour and really mess with their schedule. That's just my guess.


I think it'd be refreshing if both Kate and Meghan took control a bit more of their outfits. The Queen's style although impeccable and iconic for her, is the Queen's style. No need and not possible to try and be Queen Elisabeth 2.0. Break out, girls!

I'm no royalty outfit expert, but from the little I've seen, I've always thought queen Rania of Jordan dresses with fabulous style. Current but with integrity (wow, I should start a fashion commentary blog  ).


----------



## Addicted to bags

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think it'd be refreshing if both Kate and Meghan took control a bit more of their outfits. The Queen's style although impeccable and iconic for her, is the Queen's style. No need and not possible to try and be Queen Elisabeth 2.0. Break out, girls!
> 
> I'm no royalty outfit expert, but from the little I've seen, I've always thought queen Rania of Jordan dresses with fabulous style. Current but with integrity (wow, I should start a fashion commentary blog  ).


She has a fabulous handbag collection too! She doesn't seem to be bound down with as many rules as the BRF.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I get the impression Kate isn’t super into fashion. She was athletic with a casual style when she was younger, jeans and uggs. So I think she just wears what she’s told and it doesn’t bother her. Meghan probably pays more attention to how she looks because it was her job for a long time, and she’s not a future queen so she can get away with pants, no stockings, etc.


----------



## Tivo

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I get the impression Kate isn’t super into fashion. She was athletic with a casual style when she was younger, jeans and uggs. So I think she just wears what she’s told and it doesn’t bother her. Meghan probably pays more attention to how she looks because it was her job for a long time, and she’s not a future queen so she can get away with pants, no stockings, etc.


Very good point!


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> No hostility at all.  I was a stay at home mom and purposely gave up a high paying job to be so.
> 
> I'm just saying I didn't give him the moniker of “work-shy William" and the name is going to stick if he doesn't do something about it.
> 
> He doesn't have a 9-5 job. He has a full staff of maids, cooks, secretaries, assistants and the best nannies to choose from. Kate has someone to shop, get her dresses and do her hair and the laundry and cook a meal and clean the bathroom while she gets driven to some place for an hour or two.
> 
> These two are not everyday people. They live on public pay and should perform their royal duties.


are we sure they use all these maids? 
i thought both are pretty hands on and would at least cook and Kate was photographed going grocery shopping.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> are we sure they use all these maids?
> i thought both are pretty hands on and would at least cook and Kate was photographed going grocery shopping.


Many seem to think that having all this help around in your home makes everything so easy, but there's also something to be said for privacy which is hard to maintain if you have help around 24/7. I'm sure even royals like to have some privacy at times.

My guess there is always staff on stand-by though.


----------



## Morgan R

Their October is going to be busy.

The schedule for their Autumn tour of Australia, Fiji, the Kingdom of Tonga, and New Zealand was released earlier today: https://www.royal.uk/duke-and-duchess-sussexs-autumn-tour-0




_As previously announced, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will undertake an official visit to Australia, Fiji, the Kingdom of Tonga, and New Zealand. The visit will take place between Tuesday 16th October and Wednesday 31st October.

Their Royal Highnesses have been invited to visit the Commonwealth Realms of Australia and New Zealand by the countries' respective governments. The Duke and Duchess will visit Fiji and Tonga at the request of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

The programme across these four Commonwealth countries will focus on youth leadership, environmental and conservation efforts – including the dedication of several new Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy projects – and the recovery and rehabilitation of servicemen and women through the Invictus Games Sydney 2018.

Full details will be announced in due course._

*Tour Outline*

Tuesday 16th October: Sydney, Australia
Wednesday 17th October: Dubbo, Australia
Thursday 18th October: Melbourne, Australia
Friday 19th October: Sydney, Australia
Saturday 20th October: Sydney, Australia
Sunday 21st October: Sydney, Australia
Monday 22nd October: Fraser Island, Australia
Tuesday 23rd October: Suva, Fiji
Wednesday 24th October: Suva, Fiji
Thursday 25th October: Nadi, Fiji and Nuku’alofa, Tonga
Friday 26th October: Nuku’alofa, Tonga and Sydney, Australia
Saturday 27th October: Sydney, Australia
Sunday 28th October: Wellington, New Zealand
Monday 29th October: Wellington and Abel Tasman, New Zealand
Tuesday 30th October: Auckland, New Zealand
Wednesday 31st October: Rotorua, New Zealand


----------



## Kat Madridista

Addicted to bags said:


> She has a fabulous handbag collection too! She doesn't seem to be bound down with as many rules as the BRF.



Umm, Rania is the Queen of an Islamic country. She's definitely bound by A LOT more rules than the ladies of the BRF. And in Rania's case, the rules are very real and there will be serious consequences if she breaks them. The "rules" governing the ladies of the BRF are in most cases informal and sometimes completely made up by the press. 



Alexenjie said:


> As to whether she is pregnant, I feel they are waiting until they get back from whatever big tours they have planned. It would be awful to have morning sickness (or all day sickness depending on the person), fatigue, etc. on tour and really mess with their schedule. That's just my guess.



There are also Zika travel warnings to some of the places they are visiting in October. So I don't think they will risk Meghan going on this trip if she was pregnant or there was any chance that she was.


----------



## VickyB

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think it'd be refreshing if both Kate and Meghan took control a bit more of their outfits. The Queen's style although impeccable and iconic for her, is the Queen's style. No need and not possible to try and be Queen Elisabeth 2.0. Break out, girls!
> 
> I'm no royalty outfit expert, but from the little I've seen, I've always thought queen Rania of Jordan dresses with fabulous style. Current but with integrity (wow, I should start a fashion commentary blog  ).



ITA. And she is stunning, educated, intelligent, mother of 4 and gracious. Just based on what I read and see about her


----------



## Addicted to bags

Kat Madridista said:


> Umm, Rania is the Queen of an Islamic country. She's definitely bound by A LOT more rules than the ladies of the BRF. And in Rania's case, the rules are very real and there will be serious consequences if she breaks them. The "rules" governing the ladies of the BRF are in most cases informal and sometimes completely made up by the press.
> 
> 
> 
> There are also Zika travel warnings to some of the places they are visiting in October. So I don't think they will risk Meghan going on this trip if she was pregnant or there was any chance that she was.


Ummm, I just meant clothing and handbags; fashion ONLY as Queen Rania seems to dress with a flair and is obviously doing so without a problem already.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MizGemma

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think it'd be refreshing if both Kate and Meghan took control a bit more of their outfits. The Queen's style although impeccable and iconic for her, is the Queen's style. No need and not possible to try and be Queen Elisabeth 2.0. Break out, girls!
> 
> I'm no royalty outfit expert, but from the little I've seen, I've always thought queen Rania of Jordan dresses with fabulous style. Current but with integrity (wow, I should start a fashion commentary blog  ).


For Kate and Meghan, they are aware of the job requirements and rules. The perks for following them are enormous: fame, a high salary, travel to exotic places, the best clothing, fine and expensive jewelry. They made their choices.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan's dog has a children's book coming out. 

https://www.amazon.com/His-Royal-Do...=1536702246&sr=8-1&keywords=his+royal+dogness


----------



## doni

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm no royalty outfit expert, but from the little I've seen, I've always thought queen Rania of Jordan dresses with fabulous style. Current but with integrity (wow, I should start a fashion commentary blog  ).



Queen Rania has an humongous wardrobe of super luxury brand items. No European royal would get away with that. (Not that it goes uncritizised in her own country either, but that is another story).


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> Queen Rania has an humongous wardrobe of super luxury brand items. No European royal would get away with that. (Not that it goes uncritizised in her own country either, but that is another story).


True -- Rania spends a small fortune, but she also gets and accepts gifted items, all in the pursuit of looking the best and wearing the best.  Many accuse her of wasteful spending, even with the freebies.

Kate on the other hand, tries to stay modest with her spending and will not accept gifts or discounts for her wardrobe.

I wonder how much Meghan gets.  She seems very careful too, which is a very smart thing to do.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Jayne1 said:


> True -- Rania spends a small fortune, but she also gets and accepts gifted items, all in the pursuit of looking the best and wearing the best.  Many accuse her of wasteful spending, even with the freebies.
> 
> Kate on the other hand, tries to stay modest with her spending and will not accept gifts or discounts for her wardrobe.
> 
> I wonder how much Meghan gets.  She seems very careful too, which is a very smart thing to do.



Well, I’ve been told personally that Meghan gets free shoes from Aquazurra. Must be nice...


----------



## Alexenjie

I've read that the royal family doesn't accept any clothing for free (I assume that includes shoes, bags, etc.) I think Prince Charles pretty much pays for  expensive wardrobes for William and Harry (and families).


----------



## Kat Madridista

Addicted to bags said:


> Ummm, I just meant clothing and handbags; fashion ONLY as Queen Rania seems to dress with a flair and is obviously doing so without a problem already.



Ummmm, yes, exactly. Her FASHION, her CLOTHING are governed by very strict rules. Very REAL rules based on their religion. If she breaks those rules, it will cause real issues for her and the Jordanian royal family, unlike the mostly press-created "issues" when the ladies of the BRF go without pantyhose.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Alexenjie said:


> I've read that the royal family doesn't accept any clothing for free (I assume that includes shoes, bags, etc.) I think Prince Charles pretty much pays for  expensive wardrobes for William and Harry (and families).



Yes, that’s what I heard, too. However, I was just in a boutique the other day and a salesperson told me point blank that free shoes were sent to her to wear.


----------



## Hobbsy

Queen Letizia of Spain has much better fashion sense than Rania.


----------



## 2cello

I think rania and letizia have very similar styles.   But both have body types similar to Meghan’s (boxy torso) so Meghan could stand to pick up some tips from either one.


----------



## doni

Kat Madridista said:


> Ummmm, yes, exactly. Her FASHION, her CLOTHING are governed by very strict rules. Very REAL rules based on their religion. If she breaks those rules, it will cause real issues for her and the Jordanian royal family, unlike the mostly press-created "issues" when the ladies of the BRF go without pantyhose.



But Rania doesn’t dress by Muslim rule... unlike, say, the Sheika Moza of Qatar, who is always head covered (and is a strikingly elegant and stilish woman, much more so than Rania in my opinion). In truly strict Muslim royal families, such as the Saudi, the wives of the king and princes play no public role and are not seen.


----------



## Kat Madridista

doni said:


> But Rania doesn’t dress by Muslim rule... unlike, say, the Sheika Moza of Qatar, who is always head covered (and is a strikingly elegant and stilish woman, much more so than Rania in my opinion). In truly strict Muslim royal families, such as the Saudi, the wives of the king and princes play no public role and are not seen.



Jordan is more progressive than Qatar and of course that reflects on how women dress in each country, the royal women included. That said, Rania does dress within certain parameters. With few exceptions, her dresses are always at the knee or longer, her arms are covered up to the elbows at least, shoulders are always covered, necklines are always modest (no hint of cleavage ever), etc.



LVSistinaMM said:


> Yes, that’s what I heard, too. However, I was just in a boutique the other day and a salesperson told me point blank that free shoes were sent to her to wear.



That rule about the BRF not accepting freebies seems to have relaxed over the years. There have been persistent rumors that Kate has accepted freebies in recent years. A reputable royal watcher said so on Twitter (can't recall who now) and they deleted their tweet after a while. That only fueled the gossip further, with people suggesting that they deleted it at the request of Kensington Palace.


----------



## doni

Kat Madridista said:


> Jordan is more progressive than Qatar and of course that reflects on how women dress in each country, the royal women included. That said, Rania does dress within certain parameters. With few exceptions, her dresses are always at the knee or longer, her arms are covered up to the elbows at least, shoulders are always covered, necklines are always modest (no hint of cleavage ever), etc.



Mmm, I beg to different... she follows protocol like all Royals do (Royals don’t wear mini skirts even in Europe), but it doesn’t seem to me that she feels threatened in her safety by going sleeveless... she went even sleeveless and with an open neckline for her wedding party. She also does not dress like most Jordanian women, who are typically covered.
(Of course she is not Jordanian herself, and the King is half American and quite ‘westernized’)


----------



## PatsyCline

Meghan’s dog Guy, is getting his own book. 

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-rescue-dog-guy-book/


----------



## Alexenjie

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yes, that’s what I heard, too. However, I was just in a boutique the other day and a salesperson told me point blank that free shoes were sent to her to wear.


It actually makes me think less of Meghan and Kate if they are accepting free clothing/accessories. The queen is one of the richest women in the world and Prince Charles is estimated to be worth 400 million dollars (and shares generously with his sons and their families). They have no need to accept gifts. I thought it was supposed to prevent them from showing favoritism to any particular designer but have no idea if that even makes sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

For a long time they only wore British designers. One of the first things Diana did when she got divorced was wear Versace and others she couldn't wear as the Princess of Wales.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Prince Charles has paid for both Kate and Meghan's clothing out of his own pocket.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

doni said:


> Mmm, I beg to different... she follows protocol like all Royals do (Royals don’t wear mini skirts even in Europe), but it doesn’t seem to me that she feels threatened in her safety by going sleeveless... she went even sleeveless and with an open neckline for her wedding party. She also does not dress like most Jordanian women, who are typically covered.
> (Of course she is not Jordanian herself, and the King is half American and quite ‘westernized’)
> 
> View attachment 4190394
> View attachment 4190395
> View attachment 4190396
> View attachment 4190397


Agree. Let's try this in Iran or Saudi Arabia


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Kat Madridista said:


> Ummmm, yes, exactly. Her FASHION, her CLOTHING are governed by very strict rules. Very REAL rules based on their religion. If she breaks those rules, it will cause real issues for her and the Jordanian royal family, unlike the mostly press-created "issues" when the ladies of the BRF go without pantyhose.


Where do you get this from? Source? What you're saying just does not compute with what we see of her in public.

This is her official Jordan site:
https://www.queenrania.jo/en
Not a photo on the front page of her in traditional garb. The only one of her wearing a scarf was on a visit to Saudi Arabia and even then she just wore it to cover her head a bit, her hair clearly seen loose around her face.

Official family pic:


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting the Royal Marines Commando Training Centre


----------



## myown

Alexenjie said:


> It actually makes me think less of Meghan and Kate if they are accepting free clothing/accessories. The queen is one of the richest women in the world and Prince Charles is estimated to be worth 400 million dollars (and shares generously with his sons and their families). They have no need to accept gifts. I thought it was supposed to prevent them from showing favoritism to any particular designer but have no idea if that even makes sense.


when a celebrity accepts gifts its some sort of advertising for that product. that makes Kate and Meghan to some sort of an advertising character


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I don't see anything wrong with advertising  British-made brands - won't it just help British economy? But I think if they're accepting from anyone, then they'll definitely seem just like any other celebrity.


----------



## prettyprincess

Kat Madridista said:


> Umm, Rania is the Queen of an Islamic country. She's definitely bound by A LOT more rules than the ladies of the BRF. And in Rania's case, the rules are very real and there will be serious consequences if she breaks them. The "rules" governing the ladies of the BRF are in most cases informal and sometimes completely made up by the press.
> 
> It seems like she wears whatever she wants, within the bounds of good taste of course. Jordan is a Muslim country, but they’re more on the liberal side in terms of how women dress, kind of like Lebanon, Palestine, and some parts of Syria. Lebanon is the most westernized though. Anyway, my point is I don’t think her “rules” are vastly different from other royalty.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Because Meghan is the only woman who's ever dreamed of being a princess as a child    Samantha is really doing her part as the evil sister. 

"In their most recent family feud, the Duchess' estranged half-sister Samantha launched a series of vicious tweets against Meghan, calling her a "DuchASS".
"Speaking to the Sun, Samantha said: “Hollywood has changed her. I think her ambition is to become a princess. It was something she dreamed of as a girl when we watched the royals on TV."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...mantha-markle-thomas-markle-royal-family-news


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

OK, Meghan's mom went to prison? And because of this Meghan grew up with her dad? I'm not going to go searching for links but apparently a prison stint is being reported in celeb rags in the UK.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> OK, Meghan's mom went to prison? And because of this Meghan grew up with her dad? I'm not going to go searching for links but apparently a prison stint is being reported in celeb rags in the UK.



That sounds like the stuff that only the most bottom-feeder gossip sites make up for attention. If it were true the media would have uncovered it and announced it right before the wedding for maximum drama.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> That sounds like the stuff that only the most bottom-feeder gossip sites make up for attention. If it were true the media would have uncovered it and announced it right before the wedding for maximum drama.


It was in the comments section of the site I linked to, apparently the Sun  have written something about it. I just wondered if anyone here had heard about it.


----------



## Tivo

bag-mania said:


> That sounds like the stuff that only the most bottom-feeder gossip sites make up for attention. If it were true the media would have uncovered it and announced it right before the wedding for maximum drama.


This is very true. Also, if the ‘Daily Fail’ hasn’t jumped on it...there’s nothing to see.


----------



## Addicted to bags

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Because Meghan is the only woman who's ever dreamed of being a princess as a child    Samantha is really doing her part as the evil sister.
> 
> "In their most recent family feud, the Duchess' estranged half-sister Samantha launched a series of vicious tweets against Meghan, calling her a "DuchASS".
> "Speaking to the Sun, Samantha said: “Hollywood has changed her. I think her ambition is to become a princess. It was something she dreamed of as a girl when we watched the royals on TV."
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...mantha-markle-thomas-markle-royal-family-news


I can't even read what this "sister" is saying. She's so out of bounds with her jealousy.


----------



## Kat Madridista

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Where do you get this from? Source? What you're saying just does not compute with what we see of her in public.
> 
> This is her official Jordan site:
> https://www.queenrania.jo/en
> Not a photo on the front page of her in traditional garb. The only one of her wearing a scarf was on a visit to Saudi Arabia and even then she just wore it to cover her head a bit, her hair clearly seen loose around her face.
> 
> Official family pic:
> View attachment 4191351


I didn't say she was required to wear" traditional garb" or a scarf. But most of her outfits (not all, her dress code seems to relax when she's overseas) meet the following criteria: always with sleeves that covers arms up to her elbows, dresses no shorter than knee-length, etc. 



Alexenjie said:


> It actually makes me think less of Meghan and Kate if they are accepting free clothing/accessories. The queen is one of the richest women in the world and Prince Charles is estimated to be worth 400 million dollars (and shares generously with his sons and their families). They have no need to accept gifts. I thought it was supposed to prevent them from showing favoritism to any particular designer but have no idea if that even makes sense.



It's a double-edged sword. There are people who will criticize them either way. If they pay for designer clothing, then some people will criticize them for being too extravagant. If they accept free clothing, then they will be criticized by other (and sometimes the same) people for it as well. If they limit themselves to affordable, high-street clothing they will be criticized for not supporting the British luxury fashion industry. If they keep re-wearing outfits to save on their wardrobe, they will be criticized for disrespecting whatever event the repeat outfit was worn to and, again, for not promoting British fashion. It's a no-win situation, whichever way Kate and Meghan choose to go.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gazoo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It was in the comments section of the site I linked to, apparently the Sun  have written something about it. I just wondered if anyone here had heard about it.



I've seen it mentioned several times, along with snark about Meghan allegedly having been married an additional time that ended in an annulment, and Meghan having been an escort aboard yachts, but this was all on comment sections. I don't think any of it is true, or else it would have been reported widely. The only thing I've seen reported about Doria beyond her being hard working, going back to school later in life, and being a yoga teacher, is that she filed bankruptcy way back when. Along with almost every other member of Meghan's paternal family. Big yawn from me.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Morgan R




----------



## afsweet

now that's a cookbook i might actually buy


----------



## bellebellebelle19

That's really great for her. Doesn't she love cooking? How nice to be able to help other people doing something you love.

Wasn't it Harry's birthday recently? I wonder how they celebrated/will celebrate/are celebrating.


----------



## PatsyCline

bellebellebelle19 said:


> That's really great for her. Doesn't she love cooking? How nice to be able to help other people doing something you love.
> 
> Wasn't it Harry's birthday recently? I wonder how they celebrated/will celebrate/are celebrating.



Yes, September 15, he's 34.


----------



## prettyprincess

Ahhh! I love her!!


----------



## White Orchid

That spread looks so much like my Syrian Mum’s spread!


----------



## Morgan R

Harry, Meghan, and Doria Ragland at the launch of the 'Together' cookbook at Kensington Palace


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Harry, Meghan, and Doria Ragland at the launch of the 'Together' cookbook at Kensington Palace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4198297
> View attachment 4198296
> View attachment 4198300
> View attachment 4198299
> View attachment 4198314
> View attachment 4198298
> View attachment 4198319
> View attachment 4198320
> View attachment 4198302
> View attachment 4198303



She looks so happy and comfortable. Plus having her mom on her side must be nice.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## krissa

Thanks for all these pics. They look great. The video where he fixes her hair then puts his head in her shoulder.


----------



## gazoo

That looks like a super fun event. Bet the food was amazing. So jelly.


----------



## minababe

krissa said:


> Thanks for all these pics. They look great. The video where he fixes her hair then puts his head in her shoulder.



I loooove how he is not afraid of showing his love for her in every second. he seems so normal and nice. I bet he is a great husband. lucky meghan


----------



## minababe

bag-mania said:


> Meghan's dog has a children's book coming out.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/His-Royal-Do...=1536702246&sr=8-1&keywords=his+royal+dogness


OMG this is so cute!
If I would have Kids right now I would totally buy it.
it is a offical product?
such a sweet idea.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## legaldiva

I am totally falling in love with her.


----------



## Tivo

Aw! Her mom is there. I bet she needs her mama these days.


----------



## Bentley1

I’m sure these pics are meant for just that, to get her into people’s hearts. Good PR move having Harry & her Mom there too


----------



## prettyprincess

Bentley1 said:


> I’m sure these pics are meant for just that, to get her into people’s hearts. Good PR move having Harry & her Mom there too


It worked lol.


----------



## Bentley1

prettyprincess said:


> It worked lol.


For some, yes. But many of us can see right through these types of PR tricks, so it’s a no for me lol


----------



## White Orchid

Bentley1 said:


> For some, yes. But many of us can see right through these types of PR tricks, so it’s a no for me lol


I don’t understand.  Do you think she’s being fake?


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## afsweet

Morgan R said:


>




that's very sweet. convenient too lol.


----------



## PatsyCline

Bentley1 said:


> For some, yes. But many of us can see right through these types of PR tricks, so it’s a no for me lol



Of course it’s PR, that’s what the Royal Family does. She’s promoting something that’s important to her.


----------



## Bentley1

White Orchid said:


> I don’t understand.  Do you think she’s being fake?


Yes


----------



## Bentley1

PatsyCline said:


> Of course it’s PR, that’s what the Royal Family does. She’s promoting something that’s important to her.


K well my opinion is that it’s not important to her and she’s just doing it because she has to do something & she just picked this & put on a good show to look relatable.


----------



## Laurie Lou

She’s a foodie who enjoys cooking.....sooo doing a cookbook that benefits a community of multicultural women seems like a pretty good/relevant thing for her to be doing [emoji849]


----------



## PatsyCline

Bentley1 said:


> K well my opinion is that it’s not important to her and she’s just doing it because she has to do something & she just picked this & put on a good show to look relatable.



OK I’ll bite, what facts do you have to back up your opinion? She could pick literally hundreds of things to give her backing to, why would she pick something she has no interest in?

And besides, that’s one of the things the Royal Family does, gives attention to a cause. It’s a big deal (at least in Britain) to have patronage from a member of the Royal Family. Sort of like a celebrity endorsement elsewhere. 

And it’s big news to have Meghan, the newest Royal at an event. I’m sure things will calm down in a while.

I thought it was great that her mom was there. I believe this was her first event where she took the lead. Prince Harry looked very much like the beaming supportive husband, proud of his wife. 

With Kate on maternity leave, I’m guessing some of duties have shifted to Meghan & Harry for the time being.


----------



## Bentley1

PatsyCline said:


> OK I’ll bite, what facts do you have to back up your opinion? She could pick literally hundreds of things to give her backing to, why would she pick something she has no interest in?
> 
> And besides, that’s one of the things the Royal Family does, gives attention to a cause. It’s a big deal (at least in Britain) to have patronage from a member of the Royal Family. Sort of like a celebrity endorsement elsewhere.
> 
> And it’s big news to have Meghan, the newest Royal at an event. I’m sure things will calm down in a while.
> 
> I thought it was great that her mom was there. I believe this was her first event where she took the lead. Prince Harry looked very much like the beaming supportive husband, proud of his wife.
> 
> With Kate on maternity leave, I’m guessing some of duties have shifted to Meghan & Harry for the time being.


I don’t have any facts as I don’t really follow her besides what I read here or hear/read on the news. My overall opinion of her is that she, and the palace, are just trying to do something that would put her in the public’s good graces. Sure there are many things to choose from since the world is her oyster & she picked this, next week/month will be something else. I just don’t get a genuine vibe from her whatsoever, I sense she is a social climber & just doing what she’s being directed to do by the Queen/Palace to come across as endearing & likeable. 
It’s fine if you, and everyone else for that matter, don’t agree. I respect other’s opinions. this is just my opinion of her at the moment.


----------



## prettyprincess

Bentley1 said:


> Yes


Really, why? Maybe I’ve just turned into a Stan (or Stannete? lol), but she seems sincere, attentive, and genuinely humbled when she’s speaking to people. Its kind of analogous to Angelina Jolie. Is it possible she’s trying to “manipulate” her image? sure, but at least she’s bringing attention to noble causes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

Oh sorry, I just saw your response above


----------



## krissa

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-coach-core-event/
View attachment 4202196


----------



## berrydiva

That's a sweet story about the blue fabric from their first date...wondering if she was instructed to wear blue as they seem to wear many shades of blue quite often.


----------



## Morgan R

At Loughborough University for the Coach Core Awards


----------



## Antonia

She's been hiding her tummy lately.......hmmmm.


----------



## berrydiva

Love that jacket!!


----------



## afsweet

she looks good!


----------



## aanj

She is pregnant, I think.


----------



## legaldiva

aanj said:


> She is pregnant, I think.


That explains her mom and the moving to England rumors, then.


----------



## prettyprincess

aanj said:


> She is pregnant, I think.


Ooh I hope so!!


----------



## Grande Latte

No pressure. But I don't think so. Not yet. If she were carrying royal baby, I think she'll skip the heels just to be extra cautious.

When I got pregnant at her age, I was super cautious from day one.

I can see her wanting her mom to move to England. Pregnant or not yet, she needs family support. It can't always be her all by herself in a new country. Grace Kelly was all by herself in Monaco, it was lonely as hell.


----------



## berrydiva

Grande Latte said:


> No pressure. But I don't think so. Not yet. If she were carrying royal baby, I think she'll skip the heels just to be extra cautious.
> 
> When I got pregnant at her age, I was super cautious from day one.
> 
> I can see her wanting her mom to move to England. Pregnant or not yet, she needs family support. It can't always be her all by herself in a new country. Grace Kelly was all by herself in Monaco, it was lonely as hell.


Can't remember but did Kate skip heels during early pregnancy?


----------



## Sharont2305

Catherine in November 2012, early stages of pregnancy with George


berrydiva said:


> Can't remember but did Kate skip heels during early pregnancy?


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> At Loughborough University for the Coach Core Awards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4202346
> View attachment 4202347
> View attachment 4202348
> View attachment 4202352
> View attachment 4202353
> View attachment 4202356
> View attachment 4202361
> View attachment 4202349
> View attachment 4202344
> View attachment 4202343




Great! love the Outfit!
she is looking so young it's crazy. she Looks like 28/29/30 !


----------



## berrydiva

Sharont2305 said:


> Catherine in November 2012, early stages of pregnancy with George


Not just wearing heels but playing too....I can't imagine why they'd give up heels if they're used to it but to each. Some women choose to give up heels and some choose not to...I see women still workout hard in the gym very far into their pregnancy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

berrydiva said:


> Not just wearing heels but playing too....I can't imagine why they'd give up heels if they're used to it but to each. Some women choose to give up heels and some choose not to...I see women still workout hard in the gym very far into their pregnancy.


I saw a pregnant woman jogging the other day. She looked really fit, looked like an athlete who'd trained for years. Her bump looked fantastic and looked quite far along too.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan at the Royal Academy for the opening of the exhibition "Oceania"


----------



## berrydiva

For some reason I feel like I'd like this dress more if it were a jumpsuit...guess it wouldn't be a dress then


----------



## jcnc

Looks like her nipple is visible in some shots. The queen will not be amused


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Dress is giving her a little shape at least, but still not a great cut for her.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

jcnc said:


> Looks like her nipple is visible in some shots. The queen will not be amused


had to look, but just saw that. just add it to her huge list of misses.


----------



## gelbergirl

You all have me on Meghan pregnancy watch now.  Wow-za, she looks terrific in that jacket and pants at the Coach Core Awards.


----------



## krissa

Queen of the World doc available on YouTube


----------



## PatsyCline

Must be a slow news day, Meghan is getting coverage for closing the door on the car she arrived in.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/meghan-markle-makes-headlines-for-closing-car-door-1.4109918


----------



## PatsyCline

krissa said:


> Queen of the World doc available on YouTube



Thanks for posting!


----------



## the_black_tie_diyer

PatsyCline said:


> Must be a slow news day, Meghan is getting coverage for closing the door on the car she arrived in.
> https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/meghan-markle-makes-headlines-for-closing-car-door-1.4109918



Wondering if she was sent to bed without dinner that night?! Such a sassy little princess, closing a door all by herself. ... 

But that something like this even makes the news ... 

Kind regards,
Oliver


----------



## Addicted to bags

the_black_tie_diyer said:


> Wondering if she was sent to bed without dinner that night?! Such a sassy little princess, closing a door all by herself. ...
> 
> But that something like this even makes the news ...
> 
> Kind regards,
> Oliver


Oliver I agree. The Queen will definitely chastise her for making the rest of the family look bad  Just kidding, I'm sure Harry, Kate or William have closed their own doors. It must have been a really slow news day!


----------



## White Orchid

Not crazy about the dress but looks lovely and those shoes!!!


----------



## Grande Latte

I actually find the act adorable. If I were made royalty, I'd find old habits die hard too.


----------



## minababe

the_black_tie_diyer said:


> Wondering if she was sent to bed without dinner that night?! Such a sassy little princess, closing a door all by herself. ...
> 
> But that something like this even makes the news ...
> 
> Kind regards,
> Oliver


but that shows how much the People care about her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

jcnc said:


> Looks like her nipple is visible in some shots. The queen will not be amused


Well, Kate was caught sunbathing topless while on holiday, and no one really cared.  Granted the paps did a greet job with their telephoto lens.

She was not at the closing of some important event she and Will were hosting because they had prior commitments.  That's the part I always wondered about. Holiday in the south of France, being more important than their royal duty, I mean.

Anyway, I went off topic.  I guess because thinking we see a nipple doesn't seem like much.  lol


----------



## meluvs2shop

I love her black heels with the sheer black dress. Can anyone ID them?


----------



## chicinthecity777

minababe said:


> but that shows how much the People care about her.


I can tell you over here, nobody apart from the tabloids and media cared about this. They invented a non-story. People don't care! At all!


----------



## Pessie

Some idiot has let Samantha into the country  what a circus


----------



## uhpharm01

Pessie said:


> Some idiot has let Samantha into the country  what a circus


Who is Samantha?


----------



## Pessie

uhpharm01 said:


> Who is Samantha?


Samantha Grant (Markle)


----------



## uhpharm01

Pessie said:


> Samantha Grant (Markle)


Oh. That's not good.


----------



## Pessie

uhpharm01 said:


> Oh. That's not good.


Nope.  She’ll be chaining herself to the palace gates I expect


----------



## uhpharm01

Pessie said:


> Nope.  She’ll be chaining herself to the palace gates I expect


That sorry sister. SMH.


----------



## PatsyCline

uhpharm01 said:


> That sorry sister. SMH.



Too bad someone in British Customs didn’t take it upon themselves and ban her from the country.


----------



## Florasun

PatsyCline said:


> Must be a slow news day, Meghan is getting coverage for closing the door on the car she arrived in.
> https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/meghan-markle-makes-headlines-for-closing-car-door-1.4109918


What a rebel!


----------



## PatsyCline

Florasun said:


> What a rebel!


Yup, you can take the California girl out of the valley...


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Sussex

View attachment 4211806


----------



## Alexenjie

I like this blouse/skirt outfit, especially the color.


----------



## Sharont2305

Alexenjie said:


> I like this blouse/skirt outfit, especially the color.


I do too, I think I'm starting to like her style more. OK some things have been a bit hit and miss. I can't wait to see what she wears on the tour to Australia and New Zealand etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## terebina786

That green is stunning.. I need a green leather skirt now! LOL


----------



## absolutpink

terebina786 said:


> That green is stunning.. I need a green leather skirt now! LOL



I was thinking the same thing!


----------



## Morgan R

Details of their tour have been released: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's visit to Australia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand

They will be doing 76 engagements during their tour of Australia, Fiji, Tonga, and New Zealand.



Also some videos from their engagements in Sussex:


----------



## VickyB

Yikes! Just reading that trip schedule fatigued me!


----------



## minababe

love her latest look! Finally a Hugo boss skirt.
great choice !! she should stay with this brand!

I'm so curious to see her look for the wedding next week. I really hope for a glamouros Dress not by givenchy please


----------



## minababe

her sister gave another interview in London where she said she is Feeling so sorry for everyhing that happened .. and that she would like to talk about everything that went wrong ..
hahaha what a Person .. shame on you ..

so glad meghan is still ignoring them  
I think that's it. now we will have our peace and especially meghan


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Sussex
> 
> View attachment 4211806
> View attachment 4211808
> View attachment 4211810
> View attachment 4211836
> View attachment 4211809
> View attachment 4211811
> View attachment 4211812
> View attachment 4211813
> View attachment 4211814
> View attachment 4211815



Hands


----------



## GoStanford

"Meghan Markle's sister Samantha turned away from Kensington Palace after arriving unannounced" (Yahoo News UK - I need to dig a little deeper for another source)


----------



## PatsyCline

GoStanford said:


> "Meghan Markle's sister Samantha turned away from Kensington Palace after arriving unannounced" (Yahoo News UK - I need to dig a little deeper for another source)



Let me guess, she dragged the press along with her. Sheer self-promotion.


----------



## Prufrock613

PatsyCline said:


> Let me guess, she dragged the press along with her. Sheer self-promotion.


She (and the others) insufferable.


----------



## bag-princess

GoStanford said:


> "Meghan Markle's sister Samantha turned away from Kensington Palace after arriving unannounced" (Yahoo News UK - I need to dig a little deeper for another source)



I saw it on FB from BET - this headline [emoji1][emoji1][emoji1]

They dished it all!!!! 

——————


Meghan Markle's Hatin' Half-Sister Had The Nerve To Show Up At Kensington Palace

https://bet.us/2RzfPhc


----------



## Kat Madridista

PatsyCline said:


> Let me guess, she dragged the press along with her. Sheer self-promotion.



She also made sure she was photographed buying Meghan and Harry souvenir face masks! A TOTALLY normal thing to do. /sarcasm

Seriously, she is the absolute WORST. Apparently she wrote a letter to KP issuing an ultimatum to meet Meghan, or else she'd show up at the palace. I'm glad Meghan and Harry didn't give in either way. Samatha is trying to spin this to make her come out as victim here, the poor woman in a wheelchair turned away at the palace gate, but when will she realize that NO ONE is buying it. Ugh.


----------



## bag-princess

Kat Madridista said:


> *She also made sure she was photographed buying Meghan and Harry souvenir face masks!*A TOTALLY normal thing to do. /sarcasm
> 
> Seriously, she is the absolute WORST. Apparently she wrote a letter to KP issuing an ultimatum to meet Meghan, or else she'd show up at the palace. I'm glad Meghan and Harry didn't give in either way. Samatha is trying to spin this to make her come out as victim here, the poor woman in a wheelchair turned away at the palace gate, but when will she realize that NO ONE is buying it. Ugh.


 

That is the only way her face will come anywhere close to theirs! [emoji1][emoji1] s


----------



## LibbyRuth

Kat Madridista said:


> She also made sure she was photographed buying Meghan and Harry souvenir face masks! A TOTALLY normal thing to do. /sarcasm
> 
> Seriously, she is the absolute WORST. Apparently she wrote a letter to KP issuing an ultimatum to meet Meghan, or else she'd show up at the palace. I'm glad Meghan and Harry didn't give in either way. Samatha is trying to spin this to make her come out as victim here, the poor woman in a wheelchair turned away at the palace gate, but when will she realize that NO ONE is buying it. Ugh.



I think we've reached a point where the very best thing that can be done for Samantha, Meghan and Harry is to ignore Samantha's antics.  I wish the press would stop reporting on it.  And if I"m being honest, I wish that people would stop discussing her. So I'll do my part by making this my last comment on her.


----------



## PatsyCline

LibbyRuth said:


> I think we've reached a point where the very best thing that can be done for Samantha, Meghan and Harry is to ignore Samantha's antics.  I wish the press would stop reporting on it.  And if I"m being honest, I wish that people would stop discussing her. So I'll do my part by making this my last comment on her.



Agreed. If the press stops covering her (and more important, stop paying her) then she’ll go back to whatever life she had before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

PatsyCline said:


> Agreed. If the press stops covering her (and more important, stop paying her) then she’ll go back to whatever life she had before.


I don’t think she’ll ever go back to her life before. She’s having way too much fun and attention so I suspect she won’t give it up anytime soon. This is far better than her life.


----------



## RueMonge

VickyB said:


> Yikes! Just reading that trip schedule fatigued me!



Until I watched the Crown I didn't understand how these visits can be considered work, but it is definitely work.


----------



## PatsyCline

RueMonge said:


> Until I watched the Crown I didn't understand how these visits can be considered work, but it is definitely work.



I can only imagine. The Royals might be visiting dozens of sites in the course of a visit, and they have to ‘ON’ all the time. 

It’s probably draining for them, because each site they visit, for those people waiting, it’s a special visit for them, so having a cranky Royal wouldn’t do at all.


----------



## PatsyCline

Tivo said:


> I don’t think she’ll ever go back to her life before. She’s having way too much fun and attention so I suspect she won’t give it up anytime soon. This is far better than her life.



I hope you’re wrong, but with the tabloid press, they might never tire of her antics.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh, forget ignoring Markle’s sister, I have no doubt one of the “press” orgs paid for her trip to the UK. They’ll never let go of this story as long as she is willing to participate in it. And probably not even after that.


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh, forget ignoring Markle’s sister, I have no doubt one of the “press” orgs paid for her trip to the UK. They’ll never let go of this story as long as she is willing to participate in it. And probably not even after that.



I have no doubt one of the tabloids set it all up for Samantha and paid for it. A trip to London isn’t cheap and someone is covering her hotel, meals, airfare, and a driver. Does the British media hate Meghan or is it just important to them to always stir the pot in matters involving the royal family?


----------



## LibbyRuth

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh, forget ignoring Markle’s sister, I have no doubt one of the “press” orgs paid for her trip to the UK. They’ll never let go of this story as long as she is willing to participate in it. And probably not even after that.


They cover what we click on.  If we quit paying attention to the coverage, they'll move on to stories we do click on and give impressions to the ads they are paid for.


----------



## minababe

you are all so right! I will never talk about the blonde crazy women again, she is blonde again right? she coloured her hair dark at the wedding to look more like meghan hahahahahahahah craaaaaazy  sorry thats it..

I'm excited to see meghan and Harry back at Windsor on friday. can't wait to see her Dress and than their first big trip is starting, so excited to see them almost everyday for the next weeks


----------



## LibbyRuth

It's gotta be very cool for them to be back for a wedding in the same spot they got married so soon!


----------



## pixiejenna

Sadly someone from the press funded this excursion for her sister in hopes of making a story out of it. The real question is which side did it? I’m guessing it’s from the US I feel like while they like a juicy story they show more respect for the Royals. I feel like if it was instigated on thier side they’d probably suffer heavy  repercussions.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## DC-Cutie

pixiejenna said:


> Sadly someone from the press funded this excursion for her sister in hopes of making a story out of it. The real question is which side did it? I’m guessing it’s from the US I feel like while they like a juicy story they show more respect for the Royals. I feel like if it was instigated on thier side they’d probably suffer heavy  repercussions.


I think it's that UK Channel that she's done the most interviews with... I can't think of the name now. But she was on like every damn day leading up to the wedding


----------



## Morgan R

At St James's Palace to officially open the International Wildlife Trade Conference in London


----------



## Alexenjie

VickyB said:


> Yikes! Just reading that trip schedule fatigued me!


76 visits in 16 days is a lot to me. I feel sorry for them to have such a busy schedule. I wonder how many outfits Meghan (or whoever helps with her wardrobe, a stylist?) had to choose to take with her? Harry gets off easy when I think about how everyone dissects whatever Meghan is wearing and Harry can just wear a nice suit and all is well with the world. You could probably put all his clothes in 2 suitcases whereas hers will take up half a plane.


----------



## minababe

Alexenjie said:


> 76 visits in 16 days is a lot to me. I feel sorry for them to have such a busy schedule. I wonder how many outfits Meghan (or whoever helps with her wardrobe, a stylist?) had to choose to take with her? Harry gets off easy when I think about how everyone dissects whatever Meghan is wearing and Harry can just wear a nice suit and all is well with the world. You could probably put all his clothes in 2 suitcases whereas hers will take up half a plane.



totally agree.But  I'm really curious to see These two lovebirds every day for 16 days haha
can't wait


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

Is she pregnant? She could be.. considering her coat.


----------



## Fally420

Think she looks average - everytime wearing a dark hue of blue.


----------



## Morgan R

Fally420 said:


> Think she looks average - everytime wearing a dark hue of blue.



It seems blue was a theme in Eugenie's wedding. A lot of the royal family members were also wearing a variation of blue many of the guests were wearing a variation of blue as well.


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

That shade of blue just makes her look ill. I don't know, it just doesn't suit her - not from the head to toe.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She's dull.


----------



## White Orchid

She kinda looks pregnant to me too.  But it could be just the cut of the coat.


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> She's dull.



I so agree. I thought at first that she'd be more interesting than Kate, that she'd overshadow Kate, yet that hasn't happened. Kate is by far more interesting, more beautiful and definitely more charismatic - at least it seems like that in the photos.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

another boring outfit, fit for a funeral   she has the ability to make everyone around her look amazing.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> another boring outfit, fit for a funeral   she has the ability to make everyone around her look amazing.


I somewhat think she does it on purpose for certain events out of respect for higher up royals. She had to know that since he last time all eyes were on that chapel for a wedding, it was hers, that she'd get a certain level of attention. By dressing in a boring dark dress, she redirects the attention to Eugenie.


----------



## Caisah

LibbyRuth said:


> I somewhat think she does it on purpose for certain events out of respect for higher up royals. She had to know that since he last time all eyes were on that chapel for a wedding, it was hers, that she'd get a certain level of attention. By dressing in a boring dark dress, she redirects the attention to Eugenie.



I think you're right.


----------



## Alexenjie

minababe said:


> totally agree.But  I'm really curious to see These two lovebirds every day for 16 days haha
> can't wait


I agree!


----------



## Addicted to bags

bag-princess said:


> I saw it on FB from BET - this headline [emoji1][emoji1][emoji1]
> 
> They dished it all!!!!
> 
> ——————
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Hatin' Half-Sister Had The Nerve To Show Up At Kensington Palace
> 
> https://bet.us/2RzfPhc


Is the half sister mentally stable? I know she's narcissist and opportunistic but she also seems to be more then that.


----------



## MJDaisy

LibbyRuth said:


> I somewhat think she does it on purpose for certain events out of respect for higher up royals. She had to know that since he last time all eyes were on that chapel for a wedding, it was hers, that she'd get a certain level of attention. By dressing in a boring dark dress, she redirects the attention to Eugenie.


I agree with this


----------



## TC1

If she's not pregnant..wearing that coat was a total ploy to get the rumour mills swiring (further)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I saw people talking about this on twitter and someone pointed out she’s going to be traveling to areas with Zika soon so unless she alters her itinerary probably not pregnant.


----------



## MizGemma

Addicted to bags said:


> Is the half sister mentally stable? I know she's narcissist and opportunistic but she also seems to be more then that.


I think it's a ploy to squeeze money out of the royal family.  She must be a envious that her little sis has been on the most dizzying upward trajectory.  She wants a share.

I truly feel sorry for Meghan. I imagine she thought she had left these greedy nutbags far behind.


----------



## Alexenjie

I didn't realize there was a danger of Zika in both Fiji and Tonga. If Harry and Meghan wanted to have a child right away, I would have refused that section of their trip. Plus you have to wait to try to get pregnant for 3-6 months (maybe longer) afterward. I don't believe at all that Meghan is pregnant now, who would take that kind of chance?


----------



## Jayne1

RueMonge said:


> Until I watched the Crown I didn't understand how these visits can be considered work, but it is definitely work.


It's work, in that they have to appear pleasant, unless they are Anne, Princess Royal, but she's a hard worker, so she doesn't have to smile.

But if you think about it, all they have to do is get dressed (helped by others if they need it) get their hair done by someone, if they want, have breakfast served, no need to do the dishes, get driven to the site (no need to find a place to park) get out of the car and walk around while everyone smiles and gushes at them.  Shake a few hands and smile. Laundry and cleaning the bathroom is being done at home as we speak!

Factory workers taking their kids to day care on the bus on a rainy day and figuring out how to pay the rent is work.  Appearing before an adoring crowd for a few hours a day isn't really work.  lol


----------



## Flatsy

One also needs to take into consideration how much of this "work" various members of the royal family are taking on.  Yes, the Queen has had her nose to the grindstone for 65 years and maintains a loaded schedule because she takes her duty seriously.

The younger generation does charity work here and there, but it's a couple of days a week at most.  They spend far more time enjoying the perks of being royal - vacationing at their palaces and country houses, socializing with their upper class friends.  

Meghan and Harry have a few worthy projects and they will be very busy during their trip, but this one trip is the centerpiece of their whole year.  I know people say that the younger generation is just waiting their turn, but they are pushing 40 at this point.  How nice to spend 40, 50 or 60 years not expected to work full time "yet".  

And when you do work, it's such laborious work as sitting in the Royal Box for the Wimbledon final and congratulating the players afterward.  Or attending the royal gala performance of Hamilton.  Oh the hard work!


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> One also needs to take into consideration how much of this "work" various members of the royal family are taking on.  Yes, the Queen has had her nose to the grindstone for 65 years and maintains a loaded schedule because she takes her duty seriously.
> 
> The younger generation does charity work here and there, but it's a couple of days a week at most.  They spend far more time enjoying the perks of being royal - vacationing at their palaces and country houses, socializing with their upper class friends.
> 
> Meghan and Harry have a few worthy projects and they will be very busy during their trip, but this one trip is the centerpiece of their whole year.  I know people say that the younger generation is just waiting their turn, but they are pushing 40 at this point.  How nice to spend 40, 50 or 60 years not expected to work full time "yet".
> 
> And when you do work, it's such laborious work as sitting in the Royal Box for the Wimbledon final and congratulating the players afterward.  Or attending the royal gala performance of Hamilton.  Oh the hard work!


Exactly.

I do think that Meghan makes it look a bit strenuous because she puts that smile on her face, pretty as her smile is, but it does look forced and excruciating to keep it there.

I admire her ability to never let it leave her face!

Kate does the same thing - not with such a big smile but it also seem unnatural. Just not as painful.


----------



## Fally420

Flatsy said:


> One also needs to take into consideration how much of this "work" various members of the royal family are taking on.  Yes, the Queen has had her nose to the grindstone for 65 years and maintains a loaded schedule because she takes her duty seriously.
> 
> The younger generation does charity work here and there, but it's a couple of days a week at most.  They spend far more time enjoying the perks of being royal - vacationing at their palaces and country houses, socializing with their upper class friends.
> 
> Meghan and Harry have a few worthy projects and they will be very busy during their trip, but this one trip is the centerpiece of their whole year.  I know people say that the younger generation is just waiting their turn, but they are pushing 40 at this point.  How nice to spend 40, 50 or 60 years not expected to work full time "yet".
> 
> And when you do work, it's such laborious work as sitting in the Royal Box for the Wimbledon final and congratulating the players afterward.  Or attending the royal gala performance of Hamilton.  Oh the hard work!



Totally agree with you!

I also cannot imagine that the young royals do much more when the older generation 'resigns'. They are used to this work ethos for too long.


----------



## Alexenjie

Flatsy said:


> One also needs to take into consideration how much of this "work" various members of the royal family are taking on.  Yes, the Queen has had her nose to the grindstone for 65 years and maintains a loaded schedule because she takes her duty seriously.
> 
> The younger generation does charity work here and there, but it's a couple of days a week at most.  They spend far more time enjoying the perks of being royal - vacationing at their palaces and country houses, socializing with their upper class friends.
> 
> Meghan and Harry have a few worthy projects and they will be very busy during their trip, but this one trip is the centerpiece of their whole year.  I know people say that the younger generation is just waiting their turn, but they are pushing 40 at this point.  How nice to spend 40, 50 or 60 years not expected to work full time "yet".
> 
> And when you do work, it's such laborious work as sitting in the Royal Box for the Wimbledon final and congratulating the players afterward.  Or attending the royal gala performance of Hamilton.  Oh the hard work!


I agree with you that the work they do sounds the opposite of strenuous. Hasn't the money from the government been pared down so that now the only people getting paid are the Queen, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry? I read articles about Eugenie and Beatrice no longer getting paid, no longer having royal protection and that they both have regular jobs. How are the people still getting paid expected to take on all the work that (I'm assuming) a larger royal family used to do? Maybe the Queen's other children still get paid but they are getting older. It seems like it would leave a lot of work with very few people left to go around. I don't know much about how the British family works and what is expected of them. I am just curious.


----------



## redney

Sophie and Edward are currently on, or have recently returned, from a state visit, so I assume they are still working [paid] Royals. Princess Anne still works quite a bit. Perhaps it's the Queen, her children, and Chatles' children who have official duties and are on the payroll.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Looking forward to the Australia trip !


----------



## FreeSpirit71

They've just landed in Sydney not long ago.

We're having bad weather up and down the east coast at the moment, so I hope they still get good photo's.


----------



## MizGemma

Jayne1 said:


> It's work, in that they have to appear pleasant, unless they are Anne, Princess Royal, but she's a hard worker, so she doesn't have to smile.
> 
> But if you think about it, all they have to do is get dressed (helped by others if they need it) get their hair done by someone, if they want, have breakfast served, no need to do the dishes, get driven to the site (no need to find a place to park) get out of the car and walk around while everyone smiles and gushes at them.  Shake a few hands and smile. Laundry and cleaning the bathroom is being done at home as we speak!
> 
> Factory workers taking their kids to day care on the bus on a rainy day and figuring out how to pay the rent is work.  Appearing before an adoring crowd for a few hours a day isn't really work.  lol


From what I see, I have to agree. I have heard this many times before: they are a big tourist draw. They are allowed to keep doing the royal shtick so the UK economy can keep afloat.

I'm in the US. I only pay attention for the fashion and the hair. If I lived in the UK, I would not be happy with my hard-earned salary supporting part time workers to live in luxury.


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving in Sydney


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

redney said:


> Sophie and Edward are currently on, or have recently returned, from a state visit, so I assume they are still working [paid] Royals. Princess Anne still works quite a bit. Perhaps it's the Queen, her children, and Chatles' children who have official duties and are on the payroll.



Apparently, there are rumors that Princess Eugenie could become a working royal considering her very public wedding, but who knows? She's been at many royal events during the last year. The Duke of York certainly wants his both daughters to become full time working royals, The Queen would definitely approve of that, but Prince Charles isn't so fond of the idea.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## girleuro

MizGemma said:


> From what I see, I have to agree. I have heard this many times before: they are a big tourist draw. They are allowed to keep doing the royal shtick so the UK economy can keep afloat.
> 
> I'm in the US. I only pay attention for the fashion and the hair. If I lived in the UK, I would not be happy with my hard-earned salary supporting part time workers to live in luxury.



Queen does get a lot of your earned money too.....


----------



## MCF

Morgan R said:


>



That was quick


----------



## chicinthecity777

It has just been announced that she's pregnant.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Just saw that.

Mazel Tov to the happy couple. Lovely news.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Wonder if she's going to skip Tonga and Fiji? Can't imagine she'd go there carrying a future heir.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## minababe

FreeSpirit71 said:


>




I'm really happy for them but wow that Comes totally unexpected to me right now. i wonder why they make it public right now. she doesn't look pregnant so they could enyjoy her secret a bit more private. but maybe the Palast felt sorry for meghan that she has to wear that coat closed the whole time at the wedding while everyone else wore only Dresses?
or the guests already saw or heard something at the wedding and the Palast want to be sure that they are the first to announce.

I'm still shocked.. positive of Course but shocked haha


----------



## DeMonica

Rumours have been going around. IMO that was pretty obvious from the dress she wore at Eugenie's wedding, so there's no big surprise here. Congrats to the fertile couple.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think she is over the 12 week mark and they've probably done it now before the tour officially starts to stop speculation if she misses a day if she's not feeling too good. 
I called it months ago, lol.. ... I said announcement in October, birth before April.
I'm really happy for them.


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


>




GOOD!


----------



## bag-princess

arnott said:


> GOOD!




I don’t see anything but the “unsupported video” error! [emoji15]


----------



## threadbender

Probably announced since the schedule would likely be changed in order to avoid stops where potential diseases could be contracted.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she is over the 12 week mark and they've probably done it now before the tour officially starts to stop speculation if she misses a day if she's not feeling too good.
> I called it months ago, lol.. ... I said announcement in October, birth before April.
> I'm really happy for them.


Most probably, you're right. You should try lottery.  Kate's pregnancies were announced earlier because she had HG.  
BTW, it was a decent move to announce it after Eugenie's wedding and not to upstage her on her wedding day.


----------



## Tivo

This is great news! 
A 37 year old woman who didn't take long to get pregnant! Wow! What are the odds? *sarcasm*


----------



## DeMonica

Tivo said:


> This is great news!
> A 37 year old woman who didn't take long to get pregnant! Wow! What are the odds? *sarcasm*


I'm not going to be uber PC and I do understand that not everyone is that thrilled with the news, especially if you consider the millions that taxpayers spend on them, but yes there are plenty of women in their 30 who fight a long and painful battle to get pregnant because it's not that easy in many cases as you put it down to be. She was lucky and she probably had the best healthcare options available to do so, still expecting a baby is a miracle to still come true, so please, don't be sarcastic with that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

Congrats to the couple and royal family!
I wonder if the baby will get a title??  We'll have to see what happens.


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> BTW, it was a decent move to announce it after Eugenie's wedding and not to upstage her on her wedding day.


Mixed feelings about that tbh, I'm sure Meghan's mother, The Queen, DofE, Prince Charles, William, Catherine have known for a while but apparently the extended family were told on Friday after the wedding.


----------



## Sharont2305

Earlier on the news they said not, maybe just a token title which I'm guessing would be Viscount or Lady. Different circumstances to George, Charlotte and Louis because of William (and George) being King one day and Harry won't.


gelbergirl said:


> Congrats to the couple and royal family!
> I wonder if the baby will get a title??  We'll have to see what happens.


----------



## labelwhore04

Wow! that was quick, surprising that she's that fertile at 37. First try, lucky her!


----------



## Morgan R

minababe said:


> I'm really happy for them but wow that Comes totally unexpected to me right now. i wonder why they make it public right now. she doesn't look pregnant so they could enjoy her secret a bit more private. but maybe the palace felt sorry for meghan that she has to wear that coat closed the whole time at the wedding while everyone else wore only Dresses?
> or the guests already saw or heard something at the wedding and the palace want to be sure that they are the first to announce.
> 
> I'm still shocked.. positive of Course but shocked haha



I think they announced it because there had been speculation that she was pregnant with each appearance she made since her and Harry have returned from the royals' August vacation. Now the tour will be 16 days with 76 engagements. If they wouldn't have announced it before the tour engagements it would've just created more speculation. Also if it would've been announced after the tour she would have had to attempt to hide her bump through all the various engagements and they would have had attempt to explain her absence if she happened to become sick prior to an engagement.

Speculation had started since they came back from the royals' August vacation because it was noticeable to people that Meghan had gained some weight. No one was saying she had gained weight in a negative way but were saying it like she either gained healthy weight back because she had lost a lot of weight leading up to the wedding like some of the other previous royal brides did or she may be pregnant.

If you look at her wardrobe choices from their first engagement after their August vacation ended which was the Hamilton event through them arriving in Sydney yesterday her weight gain, her wardrobe choices (i.e shirts/dresses with additional material, loose shirts, & wearing over-sized jackets), and her constant hand/arm placement in front of her stomach is why many were speculating she was pregnant before it was confirmed. Of all the appearances though the most notable where you do see a baby bump was during her and Harry's visit to Sussex (the green outfit) which was October 3rd.


----------



## Yoshi1296

Wow that was quick! Congrats to them.


----------



## Kat Madridista

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Wonder if she's going to skip Tonga and Fiji? Can't imagine she'd go there carrying a future heir.



Per the royal press pool, there will be no changes to the plans. The palace has made it clear that they sought medical advice and have decided to push through with Tonga and Fiji. If their doctor, who I assume is the best money can buy, said it was ok, then I guess it's ok. It's worth noting that Meghan won't be in attending the early morning Fiji War Memorial event, or the engagement in the forest. My guess is that Meghan will probably slathered in insect repellant throughout the trip to Tonga and Fiji.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

minababe said:


> I'm really happy for them but wow that Comes totally unexpected to me right now. i wonder why they make it public right now. she doesn't look pregnant so they could enyjoy her secret a bit more private. but maybe the Palast felt sorry for meghan that she has to wear that coat closed the whole time at the wedding while everyone else wore only Dresses?
> or the guests already saw or heard something at the wedding and the Palast want to be sure that they are the first to announce.
> 
> I'm still shocked.. positive of Course but shocked haha


they're going on that trip for a while. it would look pretty odd if she was constantly turning down food/drinks offered to her. she now has a legit reason and won't look ungracious to whomever hosts them on a given day. she might get sick during the trip or bow out of an event on a given day.. seems very reasonable they'd have to say something prior.


----------



## Antonia

I knew it!  I'm so happy for them.  Can't wait to see the royal baby!!


----------



## MarvelGirl

Such fantastic news and a most wonderful blessing for Harry and Meghan! I am truly overjoyed for them and feel they will be really engaged and loving parents. Wishing her a healthy and happy pregnancy. Congratulations to the beautiful couple!


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> Earlier on the news they said not, maybe just a token title which I'm guessing would be Viscount or Lady. Different circumstances to George, Charlotte and Louis because of William (and George) being King one day and Harry won't.


Isn't there some room for that decision to be made by the Queen with input from Harry and Megan?  Looking at the queens own grandchildren, William and Harry were going to get titles automatically. Princess Anne and Prince Edward did not want their children to have titles, and they didn't.  But Prince Andrew wanted his daughters to have titles, so they are both Princesses. By the time Beatrice and Eugenie were born William and Harry were around, so their distance from the throne was similar ... and they had not yet changed the rule saying girls could be in line. 
But it would not surprise me if Harry and Megan don't follow in the path of Princess Anne and Prince Edward and choose against it to protect their kids from the baggage that can come from a title.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Isn't there some room for that decision to be made by the Queen with input from Harry and Megan?  Looking at the queens own grandchildren, William and Harry were going to get titles automatically. Princess Anne and Prince Edward did not want their children to have titles, and they didn't.  But Prince Andrew wanted his daughters to have titles, so they are both Princesses. By the time Beatrice and Eugenie were born William and Harry were around, so their distance from the throne was similar ... and they had not yet changed the rule saying girls could be in line.
> But it would not surprise me if Harry and Megan don't follow in the path of Princess Anne and Prince Edward and choose against it to protect their kids from the baggage that can come from a title.


Agree, that's why I said token. Prince Charles has wanted a more scaled down Royal Family, I heard that when Catherine came onto the family, and yes, it could be at the discretion of the Queen to give Harry's child /children a more Royal title as in His/Her Royal Highness Prince/Princess (insert name) of Sussex. I do think it'll be Viscount or Lady (again insert name) of Sussex.
If William wasn't married, Harry would be 3rd in line to the throne at this point so there still could have been a chance that Harry would be King, therefore this baby would be a Prince or Princess and 4th in line.


----------



## doni

labelwhore04 said:


> Wow! that was quick, surprising that she's that fertile at 37. First try, lucky her!



Many women are fertile at 37 and later!


----------



## MizGemma

girleuro said:


> Queen does get a lot of your earned money too.....


How? Am curious. Does the US send aid to the UK, or does the US government pay for security when they come here?

Seen this has been overshadowed by expectant baby news!


----------



## DC-Cutie

Congratulations!  I hope the baby has a head of curly red hair - good mix of Harry and Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## afsweet

these royals don't waste time! congrats to harry and meghan. harry looks like a natural with children, so it'll be nice to see him as a father. can't wait to see who the baby looks like.


----------



## Kat Madridista

LibbyRuth said:


> Isn't there some room for that decision to be made by the Queen with input from Harry and Megan?  Looking at the queens own grandchildren, William and Harry were going to get titles automatically. Princess Anne and Prince Edward did not want their children to have titles, and they didn't.  But Prince Andrew wanted his daughters to have titles, so they are both Princesses. By the time Beatrice and Eugenie were born William and Harry were around, so their distance from the throne was similar ... and they had not yet changed the rule saying girls could be in line.
> But it would not surprise me if Harry and Megan don't follow in the path of Princess Anne and Prince Edward and choose against it to protect their kids from the baggage that can come from a title.






Sharont2305 said:


> Agree, that's why I said token. Prince Charles has wanted a more scaled down Royal Family, I heard that when Catherine came onto the family, and yes, it could be at the discretion of the Queen to give Harry's child /children a more Royal title as in His/Her Royal Highness Prince/Princess (insert name) of Sussex. I do think it'll be Viscount or Lady (again insert name) of Sussex.
> If William wasn't married, Harry would be 3rd in line to the throne at this point so there still could have been a chance that Harry would be King, therefore this baby would be a Prince or Princess and 4th in line.



This is all inaccurate. Let me break it down: 
- Prince William's and Prince Harry's titles as Dukes are not "automatic". They are, however, automatically Princes, as children of the son of a monarch. In the same vein, Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice are automatically Princesses. They are not Princesses because Andrew wanted his daughters to have titles, they were born Princesses. And actually, Edward's children are still technically HRH Princess Louise and Prince James by right but they don't use those titles because their parents prefer that they don't. Officially speaking, however, they are HRH Prince and Princess, because the Queen never got letters of patent drawn up to strip them of their status as Prince and Princess of the United Kingdom. Princess Anne's children are not HRH Prince and Princess because they are grandchildren of the monarch via a _daughter_. The queen did offer Princess Anne's first husband a title so that their children will at least be Lord and Lady, but Princess Anne and Mark Phillips declined. 
- Girls, even at the time of the birth of Eugenie and Beatrice, were never excluded from the succession. So the York girls were always in line for the throne. However, if they had a younger brother, their younger brother would have been ahead of them in the succession. 
- A son of Meghan and Harry's cannot be Viscount Sussex, unless he is created by the Queen as such via letters of patent, which is highly unlikely. As things stand, any children of Meghan and Harry will be styled as children of a duke, i.e. lord or lady. As children of the second son of the heir to the throne (i.e. Charles) they are not born HRH Prince/Princess, BUT will rise to HRH Princes/Princess of Sussex once Charles becomes King. The Queen can of course elevate any Sussex children to HRH at this point, via letters of patent, as she did for William and Kate's children after George. That said, a son of a Duke can use one of his father's lesser titles as a courtesy (i.e. not official title), as is the practice with non-royal Dukes and their sons. So a son of Harry's _may_ use Earl of Dumbarton or Baron Kilkeel. That said, I don't think they will. 
- Even if William weren't married, the above still stands, any child born to Harry and Meghan won't be HRH Princes/Princess at birth just because they would be 4th in line to the throne.


----------



## Sharont2305

Kat Madridista said:


> This is all inaccurate. Let me break it down:
> - Prince William's and Prince Harry's titles as Dukes are not "automatic". They are, however, automatically Princes, as children of the son of a monarch. In the same vein, Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice are automatically Princesses. They are not Princesses because Andrew wanted his daughters to have titles, they were born Princesses. And actually, Edward's children are still technically HRH Princess Louise and Prince James by right but they don't use those titles because their parents prefer that they don't. Officially speaking, however, they are HRH Prince and Princess, because the Queen never got letters of patent drawn up to strip them of their status as Prince and Princess of the United Kingdom. Princess Anne's children are not HRH Prince and Princess because they are grandchildren of the monarch via a _daughter_. The queen did offer Princess Anne's first husband a title so that their children will at least be Lord and Lady, but Princess Anne and Mark Phillips declined.
> - Girls, even at the time of the birth of Eugenie and Beatrice, were never excluded from the succession. So the York girls were always in line for the throne. However, if they had a younger brother, their younger brother would have been ahead of them in the succession.
> - A son of Meghan and Harry's cannot be Viscount Sussex, unless he is created by the Queen as such via letters of patent, which is highly unlikely. As things stand, any children of Meghan and Harry will be styled as children of a duke, i.e. lord or lady. As children of the second son of the heir to the throne (i.e. Charles) they are not born HRH Prince/Princess, BUT will rise to HRH Princes/Princess of Sussex once Charles becomes King. The Queen can of course elevate any Sussex children to HRH at this point, via letters of patent, as she did for William and Kate's children after George. That said, a son of a Duke can use one of his father's lesser titles as a courtesy (i.e. not official title), as is the practice with non-royal Dukes and their sons. So a son of Harry's _may_ use Earl of Dumbarton or Baron Kilkeel. That said, I don't think they will.
> - Even if William weren't married, the above still stands, any child born to Harry and Meghan won't be HRH Princes/Princess at birth just because they would be 4th in line to the throne.


In that case I stand corrected x


----------



## DC-Cutie

I am amazed at how you ladies and gents know Royal history and such.  It's very interesting to me!


----------



## cafecreme15

I've had such a crappy morning and seeing the baby news made me so happy! Meghan is indeed lucky she was able to get pregnant so quickly - I cant wait to see them at all their engagements on the tour!


----------



## queennadine

So happy for them! Prayers for a safe and healthy pregnancy


----------



## VickyB

Yippee!!!!!!!! How exciting!

Of course we figured it out weeks ago.


----------



## uhpharm01

Yayyy. Another royal baby.


----------



## pixiejenna

Yea it's official! I'm excited and am team curly ginger hair baby.


----------



## berrydiva

I couldn't imagine rushing to have children and not at least enjoy the first year of marriage. The explanation above of the royal titles is very interesting and dizzying.


----------



## Sharont2305

I know we know it's spring but I'm secretly hoping she forgets Royal protocol and spills the beans as to when she's due. We never know with these Royals, they're never specific. Even if she says something like first two weeks in March or first week of April. 
But then again, it'll be nice not to know, she's going to be under such scrutiny and it will be so nice for them to have that secret just between them


----------



## bag-mania

berrydiva said:


> I couldn't imagine rushing to have children and not at least enjoy the first year of marriage. The explanation above of the royal titles is very interesting and dizzying.



I was thinking that too. They should take time to enjoy being together while they can. I suppose it's a biological clock thing with her being in her upper 30s. Maybe they're hoping to have more than one child and that's why they wanted to get started.


----------



## myown

Alexenjie said:


> I didn't realize there was a danger of Zika in both Fiji and Tonga. If Harry and Meghan wanted to have a child right away, I would have refused that section of their trip. Plus you have to wait to try to get pregnant for 3-6 months (maybe longer) afterward. I don't believe at all that Meghan is pregnant now, who would take that kind of chance?


but is it Zika time now?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> I was thinking that too. They should take time to enjoy being together while they can. I suppose it's a biological clock thing with her being in her upper 30s. Maybe they're hoping to have more than one child and that's why they wanted to get started.



I think this is definitely the reason.


----------



## myown

MizGemma said:


> From what I see, I have to agree. I have heard this many times before: they are a big tourist draw. They are allowed to keep doing the royal shtick so the UK economy can keep afloat.
> 
> I'm in the US. I only pay attention for the fashion and the hair. If I lived in the UK, I would not be happy with my hard-earned salary supporting part time workers to live in luxury.


do Canadian and Australian people "pay" the royals, too?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Earlier on the news they said not, maybe just a token title which I'm guessing would be Viscount or Lady. Different circumstances to George, Charlotte and Louis because of William (and George) being King one day and Harry won't.


but Eugenie and Bea have the Princess-title, too.


----------



## Coconuts40

myown said:


> do Canadian and Australian people "pay" the royals, too?



Yes, I am Canadian and we are part of the Commonwealth.  We pay about $20M per year to the Commonwealth.

I was in London this past spring and we spoke to many who had no idea that we, as part of the Commonwealth, make annual payments.  It is an expensive payout.  However not sure where the money goes exactly.


----------



## myown

ccbaggirl89 said:


> they're going on that trip for a while. it would look pretty odd if she was constantly turning down food/drinks offered to her. she now has a legit reason and won't look ungracious to whomever hosts them on a given day. she might get sick during the trip or bow out of an event on a given day.. seems very reasonable they'd have to say something prior.


Kate did a tour and we saw her holding alcoholic drinks when she was already pregnant with Louis.


----------



## myown

berrydiva said:


> I couldn't imagine rushing to have children and not at least enjoy the first year of marriage. The explanation above of the royal titles is very interesting and dizzying.


maybe they only got married to have kids that soon


----------



## myown

Coconuts40 said:


> Yes, I am Canadian and we are part of the Commonwealth.  We pay about $20M per year to the Commonwealth.
> 
> I was in London this past spring and we spoke to many who had no idea that we, as part of the Commonwealth, make annual payments.  It is an expensive payout.  However not sure where the money goes exactly.


ah thanks for your answer!


----------



## Alexenjie

I am thrilled for them and everyone who was ready for them to have a family right away. It did make me nervous that Meghan is 37 (though I know many women give birth into their 40's). I'm glad they decided not to wait.

I had no idea how complicated it is, within the royal family, as to who gets what title. In some ways I think the ones that are far from the line of succession get to live a more normal life without having a royal title. But I'm sure there are advantages I'm unaware of.


----------



## legaldiva

I just fell more in love with her becoming a mom for the first time at 37.


----------



## Tivo

DeMonica said:


> I'm not going to be uber PC and I do understand that not everyone is that thrilled with the news, especially if you consider the millions that taxpayers spend on them, but yes there are plenty of women in their 30 who fight a long and painful battle to get pregnant because it's not that easy in many cases as you put it down to be. She was lucky and she probably had the best healthcare options available to do so, still expecting a baby is a miracle to still come true, so please, don't be sarcastic with that.


I’m being sarcastic because I’m tired of that narrative. I know a great number of women who conceived after age 35 so many women don’t fall into the “unlucky” category. But we’re not allowed to celebrate that because some are “unlucky.” Society tries to push that narrative because there are some who do have trouble. And they are held up as the standard. I’m happy they got pregnant so quickly just because it reminds older women that there is another side to the coin and age doesn’t guarantee success or failure.


----------



## melissatrv

berrydiva said:


> I couldn't imagine rushing to have children and not at least enjoy the first year of marriage. The explanation above of the royal titles is very interesting and dizzying.



Megan's age is a factor too.  The risks increase for the mother especially after 40.  If they want more than one child and I am sure they do, they kind of needed to get started now


----------



## melissatrv

I am just worried that Megan's father's side of the family is going to ruin the pregnancy for her.  They are really going to up their game now.  Samantha Markle just cannot seem to shut up.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> I couldn't imagine rushing to have children and not at least enjoy the first year of marriage. The explanation above of the royal titles is very interesting and dizzying.


she's not getting any younger, esp if they want more than one


----------



## berrydiva

bag-mania said:


> I was thinking that too. They should take time to enjoy being together while they can. I suppose it's a biological clock thing with her being in her upper 30s. Maybe they're hoping to have more than one child and that's why they wanted to get started.





myown said:


> maybe they only got married to have kids that soon





melissatrv said:


> Megan's age is a factor too.  The risks increase for the mother especially after 40.  If they want more than one child and I am sure they do, they kind of needed to get started now


I'm sure all of what you guys said is a factor....she's just having so many life changing experiences all at once without giving herself any adjustment period. I hope it all works out for them.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

They got married quite quickly too. They had only really been on the same continent a handful of times.  I suspect they’re going to have three children and she doesn’t want to be having them into her mid forties.


----------



## sdkitty

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> They got married quite quickly too. They had only really been on the same continent a handful of times.  I suspect they’re going to have three children and she doesn’t want to be having them into her mid forties.


why three? 
not two or four?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

sdkitty said:


> why three?
> not two or four?



No real reason. I see Harry with a large family and Will has three kids. I think it would be a bit gauche for a royal to have four kids today. Will even got some side-eye for three. Meghan would also probably be in her mid-forties by then unless she has them back to back to back to back, which is not ideal medically.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> No real reason. I see Harry with a large family and Will has three kids. I think it would be a bit gauche for a royal to have four kids today. Will even got some side-eye for three. Meghan would also probably be in her mid-forties by then unless she has them back to back to back to back, which is not ideal medically.


I didn't know people didn't like Will having three kids.  why?  due to cost to taxpayers?


----------



## skarsbabe

Is four seen as the ideal family size in the UK as it is here in the US? With one boy, one girl, being the "perfect" combination. If so then I guess people would think they "screwed" that up by adding Louis lol.


----------



## Alexenjie

I hadn't given any thought to a cost to the tax payers. Do William/Kate and Harry/Meghan get more money from the government after having a child or children? That seems pretty crazy if they do since we know wealthy people (royal or not) can afford to pay for their own children.

 I am pretty shocked that people would give William & Kate a hard time for having more than 2 children. It seems like such a private decision that should be between the couple having the kids, not something average citizens would be involved in.


----------



## Alexenjie

skarsbabe said:


> Is four seen as the ideal family size in the UK as it is here in the US? With one boy, one girl, being the "perfect" combination. If so then I guess people would think they "screwed" that up by adding Louis lol.


I don't know where you live but where I am in the US, the Pacific Northwest, having 4 kids is pretty unusual. Some people have 1, most people have 2, many fewer people have 3 but 4 is rare. This is just based on my own observations and the people I know. I'm not a population expert by any means,


----------



## berrydiva

People love sticking their noses in the business of others....what's the big deal if they want 2 kids or 15 kids? lol


----------



## labelwhore04

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> They got married quite quickly too. They had only really been on the same continent a handful of times.  I suspect they’re going to have three children and she doesn’t want to be having them into her mid forties.



She should freeze her eggs. She seems to be fertile now so it's a good time, and there's always the option of surrogacy (although i don't know if thats "allowed" in the royal family). I know it's not always easy to get pregnant even for younger women so to get pregnant on her (likely) first try is incredibly lucky.


----------



## MizGemma

myown said:


> do Canadian and Australian people "pay" the royals, too?


You guys are in the commonwealth. We got rid of those pesky Brits (or maybe we didn't??) a few centuries ago.


----------



## Morgan R

At Admiralty House


----------



## Flatsy

Alexenjie said:


> I hadn't given any thought to a cost to the tax payers. Do William/Kate and Harry/Meghan get more money from the government after having a child or children? That seems pretty crazy if they do since we know wealthy people (royal or not) can afford to pay for their own children.


The Prince of Wales is provided for by the Duchy of Cornwall, which is a portfolio of income-producing land and investments worth approximately $1 billion.  It does not belong to him, but he gets all of the annual revenue - which is about $30 million per year.  He uses that money to pay for all of his own expenses and that of the Cambridges and Sussexes.  One more mouth to feed in the Cambridge household therefore does not make any difference financially to anyone except Prince Charles.


----------



## sdkitty

we don't know what they plan.....since she's American and getting a late start maybe two will be enough......most people don't seem to want one child if they have a choice


----------



## lulilu

Large families has been a sign of wealth in the last decade = proof you can afford them and the private schools, lessons, et.

I read that they advised the Queen and others of the pregnancy on Friday at Eugenie's wedding.  I wonder if that's true.  Timing seems to take away from Eugenie's special day.

Personally, I think Meghan wore the dress with the coat unbuttoned as a signal she is pregnant.  She is hardly showing so much that she needed to wear the coat that way (as the photos of Australia show).


----------



## ccbaggirl89

skarsbabe said:


> Is four seen as the ideal family size in the UK as it is here in the US? With one boy, one girl, being the "perfect" combination. If so then I guess people would think they "screwed" that up by adding Louis lol.


i think they screwed with the numbers, lol. because now Charlotte needs a sister. i guess for me, the mind operates in the perfect set (boy/girl) or pair (m/m and f/f), so 3 is odd since they're mixed genders, and i expect they'll have a 4th in the hopes it's a girl.


----------



## Aimee3

According to the CDC pregnant women are supposed to avoid Fiji and Tonga due to Zika. Even if they don’t go, if their partner goes, they have to follow strict protocols when the partner returns since not everyone who gets Zika will show symptoms.  Therefore, the partner could pass the virus on to his pregnant partner.  Couldn’t they have postponed the trip under the circumstances?


----------



## solange

Since the threat is infected mosquito bites hurting the baby early in the pregnancy, we might assume they are far enough is not as much of a threat or that they're taking extra precautions for bug bites.


----------



## Aimee3

solange said:


> Since the threat is infected mosquito bites hurting the baby early in the pregnancy, we might assume they are far enough is not as much of a threat or that they're taking extra precautions for bug bites.



Zika infection in first trimester of pregnancy  8% will have a baby affected, this drops to 5% in the second trimester and 4% in the third trimester...according to google.  Still risky.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Gifted by Prince Harry, Meghan is wearing a gold bracelet and butterfly earrings that once belonged to Princess Diana


----------



## gazoo

I think it's happy news. Wish they hadn't announced it to the Queen on Eugenie's wedding day. Could have waited a day or two. 

I also think they will be offered Prince/Princess titles because they will be grandchildren of Charles, the future King. No way will Charles want Andrew's kids to be higher titled than his own grandchildren. 

Praying the Markles STFU now. Meaghan needs to be stressfree and she deserves to have a healthy pregnancy in peace.


----------



## solange

Aimee3 said:


> Zika infection in first trimester of pregnancy  8% will have a baby affected, this drops to 5% in the second trimester and 4% in the third trimester...according to google.  Still risky.


Right. It's risky, but not impossible. My youngest came out of a US Zika scare pregnancy well. So many places are dangerous. I hope and assume she's under great medical care.


----------



## Aimee3

solange said:


> Right. It's risky, but not impossible. My youngest came out of a US Zika scare pregnancy well. So many places are dangerous. I hope and assume she's under great medical care.



I’m sure she is and if we flip it, it sounds way better to say 92% are fine in 1st trimester, 95% in second and 96% in third.  It’s just you don’t want to be the unlucky one(s). 
So glad your pregnancy came out ok because I can’t imagine the worry and stress you must have gone through.


----------



## Morgane

She's not showing that much. I know her coat at the wedding fueled speculation,but some weeks ago I saw a photo at some sport event  where her face was particularly revealing.



Flatsy said:


> The Prince of Wales is provided for by the Duchy of Cornwall, which is a portfolio of income-producing land and investments worth approximately $1 billion.  *It does not belong to him, but he gets all of the annual revenue - which is about $30 million per year.  *He uses that money to pay for all of his own expenses and that of the Cambridges and Sussexes.  One more mouth to feed in the Cambridge household therefore does not make any difference financially to anyone except Prince Charles.


I was curious about the Duchy of Cornwall since it's always mentioned in relation to their clothing expenses,and I found out that it's basically a State asset.   It's also one of the many arguments brought up by **********s when they discuss the abolition of monarchy because they want to renationalise it.


----------



## Prufrock613

DM has pictures of the “emerging bump.”  That’s how I look after 2 Diet Coke’s


----------



## melissatrv

Samantha Markle sounds miffed that her father was not mentioned by Kensington Palace tweet but her mother was....yeah he is not going to let this go

https://www.eonline.com/news/977456/how-samantha-markle-feels-about-meghan-markle-s-pregnancy


----------



## Prufrock613

melissatrv said:


> Samantha Markle sounds miffed that her father was not mentioned by Kensington Palace tweet but her mother was....yeah he is not going to let this go
> 
> https://www.eonline.com/news/977456/how-samantha-markle-feels-about-meghan-markle-s-pregnancy


Wouldn’t we all had great respect for a man that was daunted by the press, but offered no commentary?  A nice sit down interview was all he needed- with respected journalists.


----------



## Alexenjie

Aimee3 said:


> Zika infection in first trimester of pregnancy  8% will have a baby affected, this drops to 5% in the second trimester and 4% in the third trimester...according to google.  Still risky.


No matter what medical people they consulted with, it still strikes me as a bad decision to go to countries with Zika while Meghan is pregnant, no matter how low the risk is. They may keep her away from mosquitoes and slathered in insect repellant but Harry should be treated the same. He can get the disease, show no symptoms and transmit it to her and the baby months afterward. I can't imagine anyone advising that this is an acceptable risk to take. It's not like they are going to strike a deal for world peace or something that would save mankind (as far as I know.)


----------



## Kat Madridista

gazoo said:


> I think it's happy news. Wish they hadn't announced it to the Queen on Eugenie's wedding day. Could have waited a day or two.
> 
> I also think they will be offered Prince/Princess titles because they will be grandchildren of Charles, the future King. No way will Charles want Andrew's kids to be higher titled than his own grandchildren.
> 
> Praying the Markles STFU now. Meaghan needs to be stressfree and she deserves to have a healthy pregnancy in peace.



Announcing it to the family at Eugenie's wedding was not ideal, but it was the best option they had, I think. Everyone was already there, to begin with. That was Friday, they left the UK for Australia on Sunday, so their window to tell the Queen and everyone else was tight. And they probably preferred to tell the Queen and Charles in person versus over the phone. The only other option was for H&M to run around London stopping at BP and Clarence House on Saturday, they day before they leave for a huge royal tour. So the best option was really to just tell everyone at Eugenie's wedding. H&M are close to Eugenie and Jack by most accounts anyway and I'd think H&M are considerate enough to be as discreet about it as possible, that Eugenie and Jack were probably fine with it. It's Fergie (and probably Andrew) who's being salty about it. Hahaha. 

The kids will eventually be HRH Prince/Princess and outrank Andrew's girls once Charles is King anyway. I don't think Charles is as petty as Andrew, so I'm not sure he'll mind that his grandchildren won't be HRH at birth, given that it's a temporary situation. There is also a chance that H&M would want to delay the titles for their kids (or maybe decline them entirely) and try to give them a shot at as normal a childhood as possible.


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


> Gifted by Prince Harry, Meghan is wearing a gold bracelet and butterfly earrings that once belonged to Princess Diana
> 
> View attachment 4223314
> View attachment 4223303



Wow,  those butterfly earrings are timeless!!


----------



## Lodpah

Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends. 

Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself. 



I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.


----------



## girleuro

PatsyCline said:


> Can you expand on this? Are you saying the Queen get a portion of Social Security of the USA?



Yes she does and not just our SS big chunk of our taxes as well ...


----------



## Suzie

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.



I totally disagree. You can pick your friends but not your relatives. I would cut them off at the knee as they are poison.
No family is perfect and in my life one of my husbands sisters and brothers are horrible people, we haven’t spoken in over 20 years to them and it has been wonderful without them in our life.


----------



## arnott

Just saw this article on what the baby's title will be:

Their baby will not be a prince nor a princess, nor an HRH because George V limited titles within the Royal Family in 1917.

Instead, if the baby is a boy he would be known as Earl of Dumbarton – because a first son of a duke is allowed to use one of his father’s other lesser titles as a courtesy title.

Harry was also made the Earl of Dumbarton on the morning of his wedding, as well as being given a dukedom.

If the baby is a girl, she would be Lady (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor.

https://ca.yahoo.com/style/meghan-harrys-baby-isnt-going-prince-princess-090324462.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.




I don't agree with any of this.
Harry is head over heels in love with Meghan...far more than she appears to be with him.
If she's too ambitious, he's certainly in love with those ambitions.


----------



## myown

Alexenjie said:


> I don't know where you live but where I am in the US, the Pacific Northwest, having 4 kids is pretty unusual. Some people have 1, most people have 2, many fewer people have 3 but 4 is rare. This is just based on my own observations and the people I know. I'm not a population expert by any means,


I think it meant 4 people in the family, means 2 parents and two kids


----------



## minababe

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.




how pathetic you are.
regardless if you like meghan or not Harry never looked any happier than now. put your envy and grudge beside and move on.
I liked him with chelsey but he matured. they don't fit anymore. she seems like still he Person she was 10 years ago.
I love him with meghan, she seems to be everything he ever was searching for


----------



## minababe

My guess is they will have a Girl.
she gets pregnant again next year. 2020 Comes a Boy.
princess and prince .

I don't think they will something less than prince and princess because the Cambridge Kids got also their title extra. they won't be princess and prince automaticly. I don't think charles or the queen will make any differences to them. especially since Harry is the favorite


----------



## Morgan R

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.





Meghan shouldn't have to be the "bigger person" and reconcile with certain members of her family when her family are the ones that continue to say negative and questionable things. Not only is it negative and questionable about Meghan that are being said but it is also things about Doria (Samantha's comments about Doria are often borderline racist), Harry, Diana, and members of the British Royal Family. They weren't interested in reconnecting with her when she was an actress and on Suits. Yet some of the family wants to reconnect with her now because she is more popular and a part of royalty.There is a 15+ year age gap between Meghan and her siblings Thomas Jr and Samantha so they didn't grow up close in age to begin with because they were adults when Meghan was a kid. Samantha specifically has issues with Meghan. Samantha's own mother (who took part in raising Samantha's children) and one of Samantha's daughters have said that Samantha has always been nothing but disrespectful towards Meghan while it is also known Meghan is actually close to Samantha's daughter Ashleigh Hale. Meghan was talking to her dad while she had been dating Harry through shortly after they got married but then he kept doing interviews and gave away information to the tabloids because he seems to be following the guidance of Samantha.The media seems to want Meghan to reconcile with them because they want an insider to Meghan's private life with Harry because they have been able to go about their relationship privately despite being public figures and a very public couple. Outside of Meghan's siblings (more notably Samantha) and her father the rest of Meghan's family either hasn't talked to media or the family that has talked to the media has said nothing but positive things about Meghan.

Meghan has not cut off her friends along the way that is narrative seems to have been put out there yet it isn't true (my guess is because her friends aren't giving away tidbits about Harry and Meghan's relationship). She has friends from college and even her childhood that she has remained friends with that were at her wedding. For example two of Meghan's bridesmaids were Remi and Rylan Litt who are the daughters of Benita Litt her childhood best friend. Benita was sitting next to Doria at the wedding. Lindsay Roth is a friend she met while she attended Northwestern and they remained friends and she attended the wedding. Those are just 2 examples though their are more. Yes some of Meghan's friends are celebrity friends but that is to be expected considering she worked in the entertainment industry. Doesn't matter how big or small the celebrity they've all got some celebrity friends.

Chelsy becoming Harry's Camilla is doubtful in my opinion. He could've stayed with her if he wanted to but didn't. Meanwhile Charles was in a completely different position than Harry is. Camilla's relationship with Charles was put on hold when he was part of the Royal Navy, they broke up when he returned, and then she got married to someone else shortly afterwards...She also wasn't deemed "suitable" for the wife of a future King (though they are married now). Harry may be the son of a future King but he will very likely never be King due to William's kids pushing Harry down to 6th in the line of succession vs. him previously being 3rd at the time of his birth. Harry in all honesty didn't have to marry Meghan and could've remained a bachelor but that wasn't what he wanted. He stated before he was with Meghan that he wanted to get married to someone that could take on the role that comes with the position of being a royal and he also made it no secret over the years that he wanted to have kids. Also something to put in perspective Harry might be the same person physically but mentally the Harry that dated Chelsy isn't the same as the Harry that dated then married Meghan. Harry and Chelsy were never considered or thought to be some serious/long-term relationship but more of a "turbulent young love" relationship because it happened when they were both young so they constantly broke up then got back together for years and were constantly partying as well as being under the influence of alcohol or high. Harry only just last year mentioned that he acted when he was younger (essentially from his teens throughout his late 20s) as a way to avoid thinking about his mother. He mentioned that since he hadn't properly dealt with her death he had come close to nervous breakdowns but also developed anxiety as well as had panic attacks. He said he only began to seek counseling starting when he was 28 for issues he developed from not properly dealing with his mother's death. So Meghan dated, married, and is currently expecting a child with a matured Harry that seeked help for his issues.


----------



## Morgan R

*At Sydney Opera House*











*At Taronga Zoo to open its new institute of Science and Learning*







*Attending a reception at Admiralty House*


----------



## DeMonica

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.



It's hard to be a bigger person when your half-siblings did everything except going on the Maury show. The only thing Meghan might be able to achieve with them is a ceasefire not peace. I don't know how much of their allegations made against Meghan is true but in any half-decent family these issues could be settled without involving the media. Even IF Samantha was right (although she just sounds jealous and bitter), I'd rather bit my tongue and swallow the bitter pill that my half-sister doesn't care about me anymore than plaster the media with my family business because she might put her half-sister in a bad light but she paints an equally bad picture of herself while doing it and it leads to further estrangement.
Sometimes families and friends grow apart because we are constantly changing and growing. It's sad but happens. If you want to reverse it, you'd rather keep the brigdes intact instead of burning them all.


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.



I kinda agree with you if only in a calculated way. They’re crying out for her attention and a little might make them stop their antics. 

When Meghan was living in Toronto, it was     often commented on that all her friends were either famous or very well connected. 

Nevertheless, she’s just perfect for this job.


----------



## berrydiva

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.


Why should she reconcile with people who clearly are out for their own selfish interest and looking to capitalize off of their proximity to royalty in the most obnoxious way possible?

You can't choose the family you're born into....clearly her dad's side is trash and they need to stay in the hole they dug for themselves. I don't see where they're trying to reconcile at all; seems like they're doing everything possible to keep their names in the media to gain attention for themselves. If they were truly trying to reconcile, we wouldn't hear a peep out of them until they've worked through their issues with Megan.

Harry seems genuinely taken with Megan...didn't realize she was causing Kardashian levels of vitriol in people.


----------



## bag-princess

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.





I disagree!!!  She doesn’t need to be the bigger person at all! They are pathetic. I wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire - as my grandmother used to say! 

As far as Harry’s eyes not having any joy in his eyes with her - sigh as I SMDH.  Sounds like projecting and seeing what you want to see.


----------



## bag-princess

Seriously!? [emoji849]. They specifically mention “in the US” which they obviously are not! 


————————-

Meghan and Harry announced their pregnancy on a sensitive day


Most of the world — including the queen — was elated by the newlyweds' news, but some pointed out that their timing was a little inconsiderate.


Oct. 15 is International Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day, which recognizes pregnancy loss and infant death due to causes like SIDS, miscarriage and stillbirth. In the U.S., the month is designated as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month.



https://www.wapt.com/article/meghan...ancy-and-infant-loss-remembrance-day/23828472


----------



## TMA

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.




Did I mistakenly wander on to the DailyFail website? Re-checking if I am on the right app


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Reconcile with these wack jobs for what? They don't even talk among themselves. That a-hole sister is so "concerned" about Megan and their father when she doesn't even talk to her own teenage daughter.

You can't reconcile with people that have behaved in the way that they have. I don't know why people think that is what the Markles want anyway. They are making more money than they ever have because of the estrangement. They are all a bunch of low-life's. The father, the siblings and her nephew.


----------



## TMA

Morgan R said:


> Meghan shouldn't have to be the "bigger person" and reconcile with certain members of her family when her family are the ones that continue to say negative and questionable things. Not only is it negative and questionable about Meghan that are being said but it is also things about Doria (Samantha's comments about Doria are often borderline racist), Harry, Diana, and members of the British Royal Family. They weren't interested in reconnecting with her when she was an actress and on Suits. Yet some of the family wants to reconnect with her now because she is more popular and a part of royalty.There is a 15+ year age gap between Meghan and her siblings Thomas Jr and Samantha so they didn't grow up close in age to begin with because they were adults when Meghan was a kid. Samantha specifically has issues with Meghan. Samantha's own mother (who took part in raising Samantha's children) and one of Samantha's daughters have said that Samantha has always been nothing but disrespectful towards Meghan while it is also known Meghan is actually close to Samantha's daughter Ashleigh Hale. Meghan was talking to her dad while she had been dating Harry through shortly after they got married but then he kept doing interviews and gave away information to the tabloids because he seems to be following the guidance of Samantha.The media seems to want Meghan to reconcile with them because they want an insider to Meghan's private life with Harry because they have been able to go about their relationship privately despite being public figures and a very public couple. Outside of Meghan's siblings (more notably Samantha) and her father the rest of Meghan's family either hasn't talked to media or the family that has talked to the media has said nothing but positive things about Meghan.
> 
> Meghan has not cut off her friends along the way that is narrative seems to have been put out there yet it isn't true (my guess is because her friends aren't giving away tidbits about Harry and Meghan's relationship). She has friends from college and even her childhood that she has remained friends with that were at her wedding. For example two of Meghan's bridesmaids were Remi and Rylan Litt who are the daughters of Benita Litt her childhood best friend. Benita was sitting next to Doria at the wedding. Lindsay Roth is a friend she met while she attended Northwestern and they remained friends and she attended the wedding. Those are just 2 examples though their are more. Yes some of Meghan's friends are celebrity friends but that is to be expected considering she worked in the entertainment industry. Doesn't matter how big or small the celebrity they've all got some celebrity friends.
> 
> Chelsy becoming Harry's Camilla is doubtful in my opinion. He could've stayed with her if he wanted to but didn't. Meanwhile Charles was in a completely different position than Harry is. Camilla's relationship with Charles was put on hold when he was part of the Royal Navy, they broke up when he returned, and then she got married to someone else shortly afterwards...She also wasn't deemed "suitable" for the wife of a future King (though they are married now). Harry may be the son of a future King but he will very likely never be King due to William's kids pushing Harry down to 6th in the line of succession vs. him previously being 3rd at the time of his birth. Harry in all honesty didn't have to marry Meghan and could've remained a bachelor but that wasn't what he wanted. He stated before he was with Meghan that he wanted to get married to someone that could take on the role that comes with the position of being a royal and he also made it no secret over the years that he wanted to have kids. Also something to put in perspective Harry might be the same person physically but mentally the Harry that dated Chelsy isn't the same as the Harry that dated then married Meghan. Harry and Chelsy were never considered or thought to be some serious/long-term relationship but more of a "turbulent young love" relationship because it happened when they were both young so they constantly broke up then got back together for years and were constantly partying as well as being under the influence of alcohol or high. Harry only just last year mentioned that he acted when he was younger (essentially from his teens throughout his late 20s) as a way to avoid thinking about his mother. He mentioned that since he hadn't properly dealt with her death he had come close to nervous breakdowns but also developed anxiety as well as had panic attacks. He said he only began to seek counseling starting when he was 28 for issues he developed from not properly dealing with his mother's death. So Meghan dated, married, and is currently expecting a child with a matured Harry that seeked help for his issues.



So articulately put I have very little to add. The comments of the OP is either steeped in a different type of prejudice, or it shows that the narrative developed by much of the English media, abetted by Ninaki Priddy (Meghan’s childhood friend) and particularly Samantha Markle was effective. The UK has a real social mobility issue, so for most of the people there anyone that can go beyond their “station” is deemed a social climber and Samantha and Ninaki put that out there first. The deep-rooted hatred of accomplishment by a lot of the UK public found a kindred spirit in that narrative. How dare she aspire to be more? She should never even have accepted his advances just on account of her background. They would have preferred Chelsy (as messy as she is but they think she’s better than them) or Cressida (who is somehow gentry-adjacent) because in their minds those people are not cocky and trying to rise above their station. Sad that a lot of the UK populace do not seek to enlighten themselves, rather they take hook, line and sinker any narrative fed to them by the gossip mags. As a general matter, I see whittling away of independent and intellectual thought in daily life. It extends to the immaterial and most alarming, the important.


----------



## PatsyCline

Morgane said:


> She's not showing that much. I know her coat at the wedding fueled speculation,but some weeks ago I saw a photo at some sport event  where her face was particularly revealing.
> 
> 
> I was curious about the Duchy of Cornwall since it's always mentioned in relation to their clothing expenses,and I found out that it's basically a State asset.   It's also one of the many arguments brought up by **********s when they discuss the abolition of monarchy because they want to renationalise it.



I believe I read Prince Charles picks up the expenses for both Meghan & Kate’s wardrobes. His holdings as the Prince of Wales are quite large and generate a sizeable income.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.




Can’t say I agree with this. Meghan wanted her father at the wedding, and it was only after he started with the interviews and remarks did he get cut out. The rest of that side of her family seem to be desperate gold diggers trying to earn any amount of money or attention. 

As an example, you don’t hear anything from her mother’s side at all. 

And I think Harry just adores Meghan.  The clip I saw this morning where he was teasing a fan for giving Meghan a large bouquet of flowers was so funny. 

The only problem I see with Meghan making an attempt to reconcile, is her father and sister would blab the details to the press. 

Maybe a royal aide could be an intermediary and get assurances about discretion and then arrange a meeting?


----------



## caramelize126

This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary. 

For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!


----------



## lulilu

caramelize126 said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary.
> 
> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!



I mentioned the unbutton coat above or in another thread -- I kind of agree that Meghan was pushing it with the unbuttoned coat as it clearly was unnecessary.  Whether it was an attempt to get attention, give signals or whether she is simply so in love with the idea of being pregnant that she couldn't help herself -- who knows?


----------



## DeMonica

I'm sure that the royal family, at least the closer family, has heard about it before. Yes, the coat made even those people guessing who wouldn't have otherwise.


bag-princess said:


> Seriously!? [emoji849]. They specifically mention “in the US” which they obviously are not!
> 
> 
> ————————-
> 
> Meghan and Harry announced their pregnancy on a sensitive day
> 
> 
> Most of the world — including the queen — was elated by the newlyweds' news, but some pointed out that their timing was a little inconsiderate.
> 
> 
> Oct. 15 is International Pregnancy and Infant Loss Remembrance Day, which recognizes pregnancy loss and infant death due to causes like SIDS, miscarriage and stillbirth. In the U.S., the month is designated as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.wapt.com/article/meghan...ancy-and-infant-loss-remembrance-day/23828472


To be honest that's a first time I heard about this and only because someone I follow on IG  had mentioned it. If it was a universally known rememberance day someone at the PR dept should have noticed it. I feel for everyone who lost a pregnancy, especially multiple times, or a child, and I'm sure the Palace didn't intentionally pick that sad day for the announcement..


----------



## berrydiva

caramelize126 said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary.
> 
> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!


Folks have been speculating that she's pregnant since they said 'I do'. She definitely looks like she has a very visible bump in the pic with the green leather skirt/blouse, so I can understand the coat. For those on bump watch, she's showing enough for them to speculate and make a big deal out of her bump. I agree with the poster above about the timing and that was probably the only real time for them to inform the Queen before leaving on their trip. I'm making an assumption that politeness to the Queen and ensuring she's the first to know probably outranks Eugenie. Unfortunately, such is life as a royal - there's a pecking order.


----------



## Sharont2305

caramelize126 said:


> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!


I'm absolutely certain that the Queen, DofE., Charles, William and Catherine and obviously Meghan's mum will have known for weeks, and I believe the other senior Royals which I would think are Anne, Andrew and Edward were told that morning via email or calls.
They may have told the cousins sooner than that being that they are close. It's the extended family and friends who were told at the wedding.
Also I think they who are dealing with the tour would have been told way sooner than Friday as there apparently been some tweaking to the tour. This tour will have probably been started to be planned long before even Harry and Meghan's wedding or even their engagement. Can't remember when Sydney was announced the next Invictus games, Harry was always going to go to that obviously and even if Meghan hadn't come along I'd imagine a smaller tour would have been in the planning for him around that.


----------



## MizGemma

Tivo said:


> I don't agree with any of this.
> Harry is head over heels in love with Meghan...far more than she appears to be with him.
> If she's too ambitious, he's certainly in love with those ambitions.


I tend to agree about him making a choice out of love. Why would he marry her? He is not pushing 65 and needing a loyal nurse. He is 34 and does not have to worry about making heirs for a royal family to keep going/will never be king.  I am sure someone will say shotgun marriage if she gives birth the first week of March 2019!


----------



## Hobbsy

Lodpah said:


> Megan needs to be the bigger person and reconcile with her family or at least meet with them and talk to things out, amend their differences and move on.  You must clean the inside of the cup before you clean the outside.  My point is that she was not abused, she was not raised in a drug infested household, maybe dysfunctional at best but she's a total fake and needs to show the world that she is what she says she is. What I see from the family is a desperate attempt to reconcile (albeit too out there).  They feel hurt. Megan threw all her old friends away from long away and most of her new friends are show biz friends.
> 
> Prince Harry has never displayed these facial emotions and joy in his eyes with Megan. His body language speaks for itself.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid that Davey will be Prince Harry's Camila. Megan is too ambitious.  Yes I went there.


I'll have to disagree with everything you've said.


----------



## Hobbsy

girleuro said:


> Yes she does and not just our SS big chunk of our taxes as well ...


Sounds like a good conspiracy theory anyway.


----------



## Hobbsy

caramelize126 said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary.
> 
> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!


Do you really think she needs to "pull a stunt" to get publicity?!!


----------



## bag-princess

Hobbsy said:


> Do you really think she needs to "pull a stunt" to get publicity?!!




And seriously [emoji15] - people are attempting a drag because her coat was not buttoned. [emoji1][emoji1][emoji1] Which means she was trying to show it obviously! [emoji849] Maybe she could not get it to button over her little bump and it was uncomfortable! #justthatsimple #geewhiz


----------



## girleuro

Hobbsy said:


> Sounds like a good conspiracy theory anyway.



You can call it anyways you want. But there are laws , records , treaties of many so called conspiracy theories. 
And since you are throwing words without any knowledge, please learn what does conspiracy theory means???
Conspiracy theory- well hidden true
Why don’t you start looking for phrases that you heard somewhere and repeating them in Black’s law dictionary 
I don’t understand why people throwing words around and never worry to find out what is the meaning??? Why I am repeating phrases that someone said it???
Again just because you don’t know, doesn’t mean that is not true


----------



## bisbee

girleuro said:


> Yes she does and not just our SS big chunk of our taxes as well ...


That is not true, I’m sure.  Where do you get your information?


----------



## TMA

girleuro said:


> You can call it anyways you want. But there are laws , records , treaties of many so called conspiracy theories.
> And since you are throwing words without any knowledge, please learn what does conspiracy theory means???
> Conspiracy theory- well hidden true
> Why don’t you start looking for phrases that you heard somewhere and repeating them in Black’s law dictionary
> I don’t understand why people throwing words around and never worry to find out what is the meaning??? Why I am repeating phrases that someone said it???
> Again just because you don’t know, doesn’t mean that is not true



Just saying as a lawyer, you are unlikely to find the meaning of conspiracy theory in Black’s law dictionary. If it were there, I can assure you it would read something like this: an unfounded theory without support in fact or logic.


----------



## TMA

Hobbsy said:


> Sounds like a good conspiracy theory anyway.



It is most ridiculous for anyone who has any knowledge of the history of America and Britain to suggest that the Queen still receives tributes or any other form of remittances from the U.S. That was the very basis of the Declaration of Independence and the related war. Any financial exchanges between the two countries are purely on the basis of mutually beneficial trade or bilateral commitments.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## krissa

Hobbsy said:


> I'll have to disagree with everything you've said.



Exactly. You can’t reconcile with people that don’t want to make amends. They just want attention and $$$. Not all abuse is physical.


----------



## DC-Cutie

ya'll better not try to drag the good Sis Meghan!  Let her and Harry be great.


----------



## krissa




----------



## cafecreme15

Can we get back to Harry and Meghan and away from these half baked psychotic conspiracy theories? 

It’s funny, now that we know she is pregnant, I can’t believe I didn’t notice it months ago. She is positively glowing in all photos.


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

caramelize126 said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary.
> 
> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!



I definitely agree with you - they could have waited a couple of more days. They really could have.


----------



## Cinamonn_girl

caramelize126 said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary.
> 
> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!



I definitely agree with you - they could have waited a couple of more days. They really could have.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

PatsyCline said:


> Can’t say I agree with this. Meghan wanted her father at the wedding, and it was only after he started with the interviews and remarks did he get cut out. The rest of that side of her family seem to be desperate gold diggers trying to earn any amount of money or attention.
> 
> As an example, you don’t hear anything from her mother’s side at all.
> 
> And I think Harry just adores Meghan.  The clip I saw this morning where he was teasing a fan for giving Meghan a large bouquet of flowers was so funny.
> 
> The only problem I see with Meghan making an attempt to reconcile, is her father and sister would blab the details to the press.
> 
> Maybe a royal aide could be an intermediary and get assurances about discretion and then arrange a meeting?


I'm pretty sure no assurances in the world would assure this. I don't know these people but if Meghan is the meanie in all of this, normally, a normal family would stay far away from her and be happy they're rid of her. It's sad about her father but he had no reason to blabber to the press. It's just not what you do if you really care about someone. What the heck does Harry's opinion on Brexit have to do with Meghan's father's relationship with her? 

If Meghan is this awful person, then why are they so desperate to be in contact with her  What ever she is or isn't, I think her father and his relatives left her no choice but to keep them out of her life.


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If Meghan is this awful person, then why are they so desperate to be in contact with her  What ever she is or isn't, I think her father and his relatives left her no choice but to keep them out of her life.


I think this is the most sensible thing I've read about the Markle Debacle in ages. Absolutely. 
And the answer is....  £££££££ obviously.


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry soaking wet, he's adorable


----------



## djuna1

*Arriving at Dubbo Airport on October 17, 2018 in Dubbo, Australia.*

Zimbio


----------



## minababe

djuna1 said:


> *Arriving at Dubbo Airport on October 17, 2018 in Dubbo, Australia.*
> 
> Zimbio



they are the cutest


----------



## minababe

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry soaking wet, he's adorable




how could you not love them


----------



## gelbergirl

That little kid with the hat and the hug.  :so sweet:
Looking forward to this thread during this tour.


----------



## Kat Madridista

caramelize126 said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but the unbuttoned coat at Eugenie’s wedding seems like it was just a publicity stunt/ Meghan trying to get attention. I don’t think she is showing to the point where it would’ve been obvious if she had worn her usual type of outfit. Her recent outfits have been pretty ill-fitting with loose material, which could’ve worked for the wedding as well. It seems like the half unbuttoned coat was totally unnecessary.
> 
> For all we know, the rest of the family may have been told of the pregnancy ahead of time. If they really did tell the family on the day of the wedding, that is pretty inconsiderate and I would definitely be upset if I was Eugenie!





Cinamonn_girl said:


> I definitely agree with you - they could have waited a couple of more days. They really could have.



Really, a publicity stunt? Have we really reached that point of cynicism around these parts? It's not like Meghan lacks attention, she's already one of the most watched women in the world, and the pregnancy rumors have gained traction ever since she wore that blue dress in September. So you really have to believe the worst in her to suspect that she pulled a publicity stunt at someone else's wedding to get even more attention than she already does. 

If they told the family before the wedding, H&M will be raked through the coals for trying to steal Eugenie's thunder before the wedding or something like that. So damned if they do, damned if they don't. 

Let's give Harry and Meghan some credit. H&M are close to Eugenie and Jack and I assume that they know how to read a room and are discreet as well. So they will very likely have taken Eugenie's feelings into account and taken care that the news didn't spread like wildfire on the day of the wedding. 

And, actually, they couldn't have waited a couple of days. They probably preferred to tell people in person, versus over the phone. There was probably no other opportunity to tell the Queen and Prince Charles in person, without significant inconvenience to everyone involved. I doubt it was practical to drop by Buckingham Palace and Clarence House the day before they were to leave for a massive tour when they were probably up to their necks in royal tour prep, not to mention Her Maj's and Charles' busy schedules.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Whether they waited a little longer to tell family or not, when Megan went through the full wedding festivities without drinking, any family members who are not totally self absorbed would have noticed and figured it out.  Happens in families all the time!  While Megan does not look massively pregnant right now, she is showing a bit and on the tour they are on it would have been figured out. So they announced when they had to, still making Eugenie's day about her.  But the bride gets a day ... not a month!  And her wedding struggled for TV coverage in Britain, so it's not like it was a wedding that was going to be talked about for weeks to come!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Like I've stated before, I am certain The Queen, DofE, Charles and William and Catherine will have known for a few weeks.


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> Like I've stated before, I am certain The Queen, DofE, Charles and William and Catherine will have known for a few weeks.




in.that.order!!!    you know the Queen will always be the first to know.


----------



## Sharont2305

I just wrote them down rank wise, in case I missed anyone. I also think that, actually Meghan's mother would have been the first to know.


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> I just wrote them down rank wise, in case I missed anyone. I also think that, actually Meghan's mother would have been the first to know.



i meant the Queen - as in the royal family pecking order!   but i am sure she and her mother knew around the same period of time.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-princess said:


> i meant the Queen - as in the royal family pecking order!   but i am sure she and her mother knew around the same period of time.


Absolutely, she's usually the first to know, lol. X


----------



## minababe

it's disgusting how many bad People we have outthere. the comments under eugenies last Instagram Picture are so bad .. how could People .. there seems to be many of those jealous and embittered People on Instagram that wants to say bad Things about meghan and Harry all over ..
can't stand those haters ..
Attention seeker, they stole eugenies day, light, Moment, what ever ..so many mean comments about meghan and Harry.. really poor People ..

they are in love and she is pregnant. get over it ..  if they made it public before the wedding. theose people would hate the same as now .
they made it public on monday not friday. they got gratulations on friday from their Family members, thats all. they didn't crushed the wedding celebrations etc. if you haven't seen the whole Family for some time it's totally normal to do that time you actually see tem. it's totally ridicoulus to say they wanted the Attention etc. Hello? It's Harry and meghan?? they god since last Nov the most of Attention from alll royals. And even at the wedding they got the most screams of the people, Pictures etc . so nothing to worry about to anyone
Nothing is right what meghan is doing for some People.. those people should get a life and grand them their happiness. they deserve it.
so now I will move on in this thread.


----------



## Hobbsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry soaking wet, he's adorable


Anybody that looks at this picture and does not think these two are incredibly happy...maybe time for an eye exam?!! 
I love seeing the bond between them!


----------



## TMA

Cinamonn_girl said:


> I definitely agree with you - they could have waited a couple of more days. They really could have.



There is a side by side pic on Twitter of her in the Yellow shift dress in July and the white she wore on the first day of the Tour and from the side aspect, you can see the bump. Some people suspected a bump when they were out in Sussex but being a leather skirt, it was easier to think the bulk was from the material. If they had waited even 2 days on the Tour, the speculation would have been the main focus. They respectfully gave Eugenie the whole weekend to bask in the limelight, which she did, but they were starting a Tour on which the cameras would be trained on her constantly. The media would just have made a meal of them if she looked more rounded or chose to wear baggy clothes. There was no winning that one.


----------



## Kat Madridista

TMA said:


> There is a side by side pic on Twitter of her in the Yellow shift dress in July and the white she wore on the first day of the Tour and from the side aspect, you can see the bump. Some people suspected a bump when they were out in Sussex but being a leather skirt, it was easier to think the bulk was from the material. If they had waited even 2 days on the Tour, the speculation would have been the main focus. They respectfully gave Eugenie the whole weekend to bask in the limelight, which she did, but they were starting a Tour on which the cameras would be trained on her constantly. The media would just have made a meal of them if she looked more rounded or chose to wear baggy clothes. There was no winning that one.



Not to mention, she would probably be offered all sorts of alcoholic beverages for toasts and such or unconventional delicacies during this tour, and she couldn’t decline without arousing suspicion. They really had no choice but to announce at the start of it.


----------



## myown

people calling her unbuttoned coat a public stand should remember how they felt in their first pregnancy 12 weeks along - huge.

now on the recent pictures:
they look so happy its amazing


----------



## bellebellebelle19

She is beautiful, even in the oversized clothes and unflattering (for everyone) middle part. Her smile is really something special, and her profile is so pretty when she's looking at Harry. I wonder if she had a difficult first trimester?


----------



## sdkitty

I'm glad Harry is happy.  I think we Americans have a soft spot for him and Will in great part due to their mother and her death and they way they were at the funeral.
That said, the whole thing about Meghan, the pregnancy, etc, really isn't that big a deal to me.
I guess they could have waited a week after the wedding to make a public announcement.


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> I'm glad Harry is happy.  I think we Americans have a soft spot for him and Will in great part due to their mother and her death and they way they were at the funeral.
> That said, the whole thing about Meghan, the pregnancy, etc, really isn't that big a deal to me.
> I guess they could have waited a week after the wedding to make a public announcement.



Exactly what I was thinking this morning.
I don’t care when, where or how good news comes from palace spokespeople, as long as it’s good news!


----------



## Alexenjie

LibbyRuth said:


> Whether they waited a little longer to tell family or not, when Megan went through the full wedding festivities without drinking, any family members who are not totally self absorbed would have noticed and figured it out.  Happens in families all the time!  While Megan does not look massively pregnant right now, she is showing a bit and on the tour they are on it would have been figured out. So they announced when they had to, still making Eugenie's day about her.  But the bride gets a day ... not a month!  And her wedding struggled for TV coverage in Britain, so it's not like it was a wedding that was going to be talked about for weeks to come!


I was under the impression that Harry and Meghan missed 2 out of the 3 after parties from the wedding so they could get rested or ready for their long trip? Still it seemed necessary to me to announce the pregnancy at the beginning of the trip so she can alter her schedule if necessary. Here is a Harpers Bazaar article that says they did not announce her pregnancy at the wedding, it was just the first chance for the people who knew to congratulate the happy couple:
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...gnancy-announcement-princess-eugenie-wedding/

 I have no idea when women begin to show in pregnancy. It seems so different with each woman. Kate always took months and months before she would look pregnant (to me) but she has all that height to hide her little ones.


----------



## Lubina

Sharont2305 said:


> I just wrote them down rank wise, in case I missed anyone. I also think that, actually Meghan's mother would have been the first to know.



Weren't there stories floating around not too long ago that her mom was taking baby care classes in LA ? If so she may have known then and is preparing to lend a hand.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## uhpharm01

Lubina said:


> Weren't there stories floating around not too long ago that her mom was taking baby care classes in LA ? If so she may have known then and is preparing to lend a hand.


I figured that Meghan was pregnant when her mother was on that Trip with her and Harry.  I kept thinking Meghan is pregnant.


----------



## hockeygirl

Q b


----------



## Morgan R

At Government House in Melbourne, Australia


----------



## MizGemma

Morgan R said:


> At Government House in Melbourne, Australia
> 
> View attachment 4225151
> View attachment 4225211
> View attachment 4225152
> View attachment 4225160
> View attachment 4225150
> View attachment 4225153
> View attachment 4225212


Gorgeous dress! I have the poor woman's version from Cleobella.com, but Meghan's is much, much nicer.   I am sure I cannot afford hers.  Mine:


----------



## VickyB

uhpharm01 said:


> I figured that Meghan was pregnant when her mother was on that Trip with her and Harry.  I kept thinking Meghan is pregnant.



And she was wearing the waistband of her skirt very high that day.


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> At Government House in Melbourne, Australia
> 
> View attachment 4225151
> View attachment 4225211
> View attachment 4225152
> View attachment 4225160
> View attachment 4225150
> View attachment 4225153
> View attachment 4225212



Right before wedding and going forward, I  have been loving Meghan's clothes!!!!!! Fabulous!!! But for that phase where she wore a few pairs of pants that were hemmed in a way that they were dragging on the floor. So, I am a bit surprised at the blue dress she wore today....she's known she's been pregnant for around 3 months and she's known about and been planning her wardrobe for this trip for at least 4 months. This blue dress is cool BUT not flattering at all on her 1st going into 2nd trimester body - to tight and pulling in all the wrong directions. Don't get it. My bad and running to the corner now.

P.S. Love the Rothy shout out! Have been wearing them since they 1st rolled off the assembly line.


----------



## myown

VickyB said:


> Right before wedding and going forward, I  have been loving Meghan's clothes!!!!!! Fabulous!!! But for that phase where she wore a few pairs of pants that were hemmed in a way that they were dragging on the floor. So, I am a bit surprised at the blue dress she wore today....she's known she's been pregnant for around 3 months and she's known about and been planning her wardrobe for this trip for at least 4 months. This blue dress is cool BUT not flattering at all on her 1st going into 2nd trimester body - to tight and pulling in all the wrong directions. Don't get it. My bad and running to the corner now.
> 
> P.S. Love the Rothy shout out! Have been wearing them since they 1st rolled off the assembly line.


but you don't know how your bump looks in 2 weeks.


----------



## VickyB

myown said:


> but you don't know how your bump looks in 2 weeks.



She has demonstrated over and over again how clothes fit is clearly important to her. Seems to me that she could have erred on the side of caution. Ie, when in doubt, go looser not tighter. Plus, she and Harry have a team of 8-10 people with them AND she has her off the royal payroll "stylist" /BFF with her. I'm sure if an item looked too big, they could easily Mcgyver a way to take it in. Even if they had to use tape or some other available fix-it. I've done that in a pinch as I am sure others here have.


----------



## minababe

her Dresses fit perfectly. it's tight in the middle because of her Baby bump what's wrong with that? her belly is growing not her whole Body. I think she is proud to be pregnant and want to show that. I love  that we finally see the Baby bump. she Looks beautiful


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures from their Melbourne, Australia visit which in addition to visiting Government House included visiting a social enterprise café which offers training programmes for young Aboriginal people, visiting a primary school, and traveling on a Melbourne tram to South Melbourne beach


----------



## krissa

I love all the handholding (I’m not even one for pda, lol). ❤️ Them.


----------



## bag-mania

Cute story of a Harry fan getting to meet him.

*How Harry-obsessed teenager camped out for more than SEVEN hours to meet her Prince – who broke royal protocol to reward her with a hug*

*Young woman has cried with happiness after snaring a hug with Prince Harry *
*India Brown was among thousands of fans in Melbourne's Royal Botanic Gardens*
*The university student has been in love with Prince Harry since she was eight *
Prince Harry reduced a young fan to tears when he broke royal protocol by giving her a hug during his walkabout in Melbourne on Thursday.

India Brown, 19, from Marysville, revealed that she camped out for over seven hours in order to catch a glimpse of the royal couple in action.

However, the university student's dreams came true when the prince spotted her sign which read 'we've been here since 4am! Loved u since I was 8!!!' and approached her in the crowd.   

The lucky teen became the envy of the crowd when Prince Harry stopped and accepted her offer for a hug over the barricade.

Overcome with shock, the starstruck teen immediately burst into tears.



'He is someone I have looked up to for many many years,' Ms Brown told reporters.

'Everything he stands for is amazing. I've loved that family since I was eight and I've followed them around the world. '

The teen from country Victoria had been waiting at the Royal Botanic Gardens in the rain with her best friend Molly since 4am.

She caught the eye of the prince with her handwritten sign explaining how long she had been waiting to meet him.

'Been here since 4am. Loved you since I was eight,' her sign read.

She told the prince she knew the hug was against protocol.

'He just said: 'You are going to get me into trouble',' Ms Brown said.

'It was just such an opportunity and I just went for it. I didn't expect it to happen because it's actually against protocol. He reciprocated the hug too. It was awesome.' 

Ms Brown, who describes herself as an 'avid monarchist',  rated the hug as 'the best ever.'

Earlier in the morning, the self-confessed monarchist told the ABC she was a big supporter of the prince and his wife Meghan Markle.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ralian-teenager-broke-royal-protocol-hug.html


----------



## Chamber Doll

^^^^ OMG how sweet of Harry.....love that 


and barf barf barf at the double hand holding......lol   I don't care who is doing that.....super cheesy.....lol


----------



## Alexenjie

I don't mind the dress, I just don't think Meghan looks good in navy blue. It takes away her skin's vibrancy (or something) to me. I think, despite all the people to help her, she hasn't found her way yet (she hasn't even been married for half a year yet), to dress well as a royal and have it be right for her own individual look.


----------



## Addicted to bags

krissa said:


> I love all the handholding (I’m not even one for pda, lol). ❤️ Them.



I'm not touchy-feely or into PDA but I find this cute for a newlywed couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Alexenjie said:


> I don't mind the dress, I just don't think Meghan looks good in navy blue. It takes away her skin's vibrancy (or something) to me. I think, despite all the people to help her, she hasn't found her way yet (she hasn't even been married for half a year yet), to dress well as a royal and have it be right for her own individual look.


I feel like she has and knows her style enough that I know her style (clothing with a charitable twist, fitted, all the suits, clean lines, etc) but sometimes she just veers somewhere that's so different and not always successful?? Like that flowy dress this summer at that wedding everyone hated, and her outfit at Eugenie's wedding that looks like something Kate would wear. I appreciate that she can take risks though.


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Bondi Beach where they met local surfing community group OneWave  (which encourages the discussion of mental health issues)


----------



## arnott

Chamber Doll said:


> ^^^^ OMG how sweet of Harry.....love that
> 
> 
> and *barf barf barf at the double hand holding*......lol   I don't care who is doing that.....super cheesy.....lol


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Bondi Beach where they met local surfing community group OneWave  (which encourages the discussion of mental health issues)
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4226595
> View attachment 4226599
> View attachment 4226593
> View attachment 4226597
> View attachment 4226598
> View attachment 4226600
> View attachment 4226596



Wearing leis is a thing in Oz and not just Hawaii?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I love that dress but it doesn’t fit very well and she doesn’t look very comfortable.


----------



## White Orchid

arnott said:


> Wearing leis is a thing in Oz and not just Hawaii?


Umm, nope lol.


----------



## bag-princess

Chamber Doll said:


> ^^^^ OMG how sweet of Harry.....love that
> 
> 
> and barf barf barf at the double hand holding......lol   I don't care who is doing that.....super cheesy.....lol



lawd!!!  it still amazes and surprises me the things that people will complain about!  



Addicted to bags said:


> I'm not touchy-feely or into PDA but I find this cute for a newlywed couple.



i think it is for any couple no matter how long they have been married!  i always wonder what is going on with a person that makes them uncomfortable/not like seeing other people touching and expressing love for each other??


----------



## Morgan R

*At MacArthur Girls High School*










*At Kirribilli House*


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry climbing the Sydney Harbour Bridge to raise the Invictus Games Flag


----------



## Chamber Doll

ugh she is SO pretty!!......I hate her....lol 

I notice that she likes to wear blue a lot.....I really like those blue heels....I want to find a pair like that =/


----------



## MizGemma

bag-princess said:


> lawd!!!  it still amazes and surprises me the things that people will complain about!
> 
> 
> 
> i think it is for any couple no matter how long they have been married!  i always wonder what is going on with a person that makes them uncomfortable/not like seeing other people touching and expressing love for each other??


This is pretty mild pda. I have seen plenty worse on main thoroughfares of big US cities. 

Just a thought and I am probably wrong, perhaps Harry is calming his wife in crowds by holding her hand, etc.  I know she was an actress but don't think she's experienced the mad rush of these royal appearances.  It would scare me too!


----------



## Alexenjie

arnott said:


> Wearing leis is a thing in Oz and not just Hawaii?


Leis are common in Polynesian cultures perhaps that includes parts of Australia? I'm sure we will see leis again when they go to Fiji and Tonga. I spent 5 years in Hawaii so I like them as a welcome/farewell gesture. They are beautiful and smell so good!

I was going to criticize Meghan for wearing more navy blue until the pictures seem to indicate that is the school's traditional color (or everyone agreed to dress in blue for pictures). I like her long dress (though I think it should have been shorter). I think she looks more lively with prints rather than all solid colors. I should not be critical though, she is pregnant and perhaps doesn't feel all great and glowy all the time so maybe it's not her clothes that are unflattering.


----------



## berrydiva

Love that dress she has on at the beach.


----------



## bag-princess

MizGemma said:


> This is pretty mild pda. I have seen plenty worse on main thoroughfares of big US cities.
> 
> Just a thought and I am probably wrong, perhaps Harry is calming his wife in crowds by holding her hand, etc. * I know she was an actress but don't think she's experienced the mad rush of these royal appearances.  It would scare me too!*




i always thought that was part of the reason,too - to let her know he is there and that there was nothing to worry about!  i am sure it is very overwhelming to her seeing how many people come out to meet them.  she is not to used to that kind of crowd no matter how nice and behaved they seem to be.  all those crying young girls and people wanting to touch and hug you - i don't know how i would deal with that either.


----------



## arnott

White Orchid said:


> Umm, nope lol.



I knew it!    I asked my Aussie friend if that's how Aussies dress and she replied,  "Weirdos maybe."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chessmont

I love that Bondi beach group picture!


----------



## mtg116

cafecreme15 said:


> Can we get back to Harry and Meghan and away from these half baked psychotic conspiracy theories?
> 
> It’s funny, now that we know she is pregnant, I can’t believe I didn’t notice it months ago. She is positively glowing in all photos.



She is very pretty and I am happy for both of them. I cant help thinking she may have twins.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the opening of the Anzac Memorial Centenary Extension


----------



## Morgan R

On Cockatoo Island for Invictus Games Sydney 2018 Jaguar Land Rover Driving Challenge


----------



## sdkitty

mtg116 said:


> She is very pretty and I am happy for both of them. I cant help thinking she may have twins.


those little legs won't hold her up if she's pregnant with twins


----------



## Alexenjie

I like seeing Meghan wearing her hair long and loose. Is that not allowed (much) in Britain? Kate (I think) wears her hair loose most of the time so I'm kind of confused why Meghan seems to always be in that messy bun or have her hair contained most of the time.

I love that picture of Harry (and group) on top of the bridge where you can see the Opera house - so gorgeous.


----------



## sdkitty

Alexenjie said:


> I like seeing Meghan wearing her hair long and loose. Is that not allowed (much) in Britain? Kate (I think) wears her hair loose most of the time so I'm kind of confused why Meghan seems to always be in that messy bun or have her hair contained most of the time.
> 
> I love that picture of Harry (and group) on top of the bridge where you can see the Opera house - so gorgeous.


I'd like to see her natural hair sometime.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> those little legs won't hold her up if she's pregnant with twins


Interesting that she is crossing her legs at these events, no "Duchess Slant" going on.


----------



## DeMonica

I love her shoes. That Memorial dress is lovely but I like to see her in colours instead of black and b/w. I know it's elegant but with a little life growing in her she could dress a little more cheerful.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Interesting that she is crossing her legs at these events, no "Duchess Slant" going on.


I noticed that....and with that dress being longer, she looks very modest


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the 2018 Invictus Games Opening Ceremony


----------



## MarvelGirl

Gosh, she never takes a bad picture!  Such a gorgeous face and woman!


----------



## GoStanford

MarvelGirl said:


> Gosh, she never takes a bad picture!  Such a gorgeous face and woman!


Agree!  She really is one of those people who looks fantastic in each photo.  I like the way she uses solid colors to put together her looks.  I especially like the various green shades she wears.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> those little legs won't hold her up if she's pregnant with twins


[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] For real? Hahaha!


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


> Attending the 2018 Invictus Games Opening Ceremony
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4228055
> View attachment 4228047
> View attachment 4228048
> View attachment 4228081
> View attachment 4228044
> View attachment 4228082
> View attachment 4228061
> View attachment 4228065
> View attachment 4228050




In that first picture her calves look the size of a woman's forearms!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry climbing the Sydney Harbour Bridge to raise the Invictus Games Flag
> 
> View attachment 4226732
> View attachment 4226737
> View attachment 4226735
> View attachment 4226734
> View attachment 4226742



Anyone know why there's a man between them?    Is it to catch Harry if he falls?


----------



## Morgan R

At reception with Invictus Games competitors and community representatives hosted by the Australian Prime Minister


----------



## Izzybet

I read on one of the Uk news sites (most likely BBC)  that she is 12 weeks pregnant.


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Attending the opening of the Anzac Memorial Centenary Extension
> 
> View attachment 4227402
> View attachment 4227403
> View attachment 4227406
> View attachment 4227405
> View attachment 4227407
> View attachment 4227408
> View attachment 4227424
> View attachment 4227434
> View attachment 4227436
> View attachment 4227435



LOVE this dress!!! She looks great!


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> On Cockatoo Island for Invictus Games Sydney 2018 Jaguar Land Rover Driving Challenge
> 
> View attachment 4227566
> View attachment 4227568
> View attachment 4227564
> View attachment 4227562
> View attachment 4227567
> View attachment 4227571
> View attachment 4227573
> View attachment 4227563
> View attachment 4227565



Is she wearing black sling back dressy heels with black jeans? Tacky. Looks like they are the same shoes she wore with the fabulous black dress earlier in the day. I'll give her a pass since the poor thing has a hundred wardrobe changes a day on this tour.


----------



## VickyB

kemilia said:


> Interesting that she is crossing her legs at these events, no "Duchess Slant" going on.



Noticed that too! But love that rules are being broken left and right! Meghan taking her shoes off on the beach, Meghan having a pic taken with her "look a like" and Harry giving a BIG hug and a kiss to that girl! Diana is beaming!


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Elliott 7 Team Final during Sailing at the Invictus Games


----------



## Hobbsy

VickyB said:


> Is she wearing black sling back dressy heels with black jeans? Tacky. Looks like they are the same shoes she wore with the fabulous black dress earlier in the day. I'll give her a pass since the poor thing has a hundred wardrobe changes a day on this tour.


Why do you think that's tacky?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Alexenjie said:


> I like seeing Meghan wearing her hair long and loose. Is that not allowed (much) in Britain? Kate (I think) wears her hair loose most of the time so I'm kind of confused why Meghan seems to always be in that messy bun or have her hair contained most of the time.
> 
> I love that picture of Harry (and group) on top of the bridge where you can see the Opera house - so gorgeous.


i think if you have hair like Meghan's you'd understand why it's imprisoned 99% of the time. not everyone is blessed with Kate's lush hair. it's one of the few things i understand about her style.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Reception for the Invictus Games Foundation at Government House


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i think if you have hair like Meghan's you'd understand why it's imprisoned 99% of the time. not everyone is blessed with Kate's lush hair. it's one of the few things i understand about her style.


Do you have hair like hers?
I suppose a case can be made that straight hair looks more groomed but I see nothing wrong with naturally curly hair.  It can be cut and styled to look beautiful.  Not even saying she should wear it natural all the time but doesn't have to be straightened all the time either


----------



## DeMonica

She obviously prefers the sleek and wavy to her natural African-American hair. Besides, any kind of curly hair can go wild and frizzy if exposed to the elements. With so many outdoor events I'm sure she's more comfortable to wear it in a nice, loose bun sometimes than get a blow dry twice or three times a day.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Attending Reception for the Invictus Games Foundation at Government House
> 
> 
> View attachment 4228878
> View attachment 4228877
> View attachment 4228880
> View attachment 4228879


That first picture, it's like there is no one else in the room.


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Attending Reception for the Invictus Games Foundation at Government House
> 
> 
> View attachment 4228878
> View attachment 4228877
> View attachment 4228880
> View attachment 4228879



I saw full shots of this dress and she looked terrific!!!!!


----------



## arnott

VickyB said:


> I saw full shots of this dress and she looked terrific!!!!!



Is it a long dress?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

VickyB said:


> I saw full shots of this dress and she looked terrific!!!!!





arnott said:


> Is it a long dress?



Blurry picture but full picture of the dress


----------



## Sharont2305

Maybe it's the flow of the dress or that since the news of the pregnancy she's been able to relax ( as in not having to breathe in to try and hide any bump, I know she hasn't been able to relax much on the tour) but that bump has grown in a week.
That happened to a friend of mine, she was almost 4 months when she told everyone and you really couldn't tell, she looked as though she'd put on a tiny bit of weight. Within a week of her news she had a definite baby bump.


----------



## Morgan R

At Kingfisher Bay Jetty during their visit of Fraser Island


----------



## myown

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I feel like she has and knows her style enough that I know her style (clothing with a charitable twist, fitted, all the suits, clean lines, etc) but sometimes she just veers somewhere that's so different and not always successful?? Like that flowy dress this summer at that wedding everyone hated, and her outfit at Eugenie's wedding that looks like something Kate would wear. I appreciate that she can take risks though.


since Meghan stepped into the game I feel like Kate dresses so boring and always the same. Its so refreshing to have Meghans-style


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> More pictures from their Melbourne, Australia visit which in addition to visiting Government House included visiting a social enterprise café which offers training programmes for young Aboriginal people, visiting a primary school, and traveling on a Melbourne tram to South Melbourne beach
> 
> View attachment 4225619
> View attachment 4225626
> View attachment 4225661
> View attachment 4225624
> View attachment 4225622
> View attachment 4225621
> View attachment 4225620
> View attachment 4225623
> View attachment 4225625


I love that she wears flats.


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Bondi Beach where they met local surfing community group OneWave  (which encourages the discussion of mental health issues)
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4226595
> View attachment 4226599
> View attachment 4226631
> View attachment 4226593
> View attachment 4226597
> View attachment 4226598
> View attachment 4226600
> View attachment 4226596


they really should do more stuff like this, they seem so happy on this trip


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry climbing the Sydney Harbour Bridge to raise the Invictus Games Flag
> 
> View attachment 4226732
> View attachment 4226737
> View attachment 4226735
> View attachment 4226734
> View attachment 4226742


those things remind me way too much of Mary-KAte and Ashley doing that "our lips are sealed" movie


----------



## Suzie

arnott said:


> Anyone know why there's a man between them?    Is it to catch Harry if he falls?


Too funny, the guy wearing light grey is our Prime Minister.


----------



## anitalilac

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i think if you have hair like Meghan's you'd understand why it's imprisoned 99% of the time. not everyone is blessed with Kate's lush hair. it's one of the few things i understand about her style.


What is her hair type?


----------



## Alexenjie

anitalilac said:


> What is her hair type?


From pictures of her as a young girl Meghan has curly hair but she has worn it straight since high school (it appears). I'm assuming she has it straightened professionally so wouldn't it stay straight all the time? I like (and have) natural curls myself and hate the fact that 99 percent of curly haired celebrities have abandoned their natural hair. Plus it frees up thousands of hours in your life not spend all that time (and money) straightening it.


----------



## sdkitty

Alexenjie said:


> From pictures of her as a young girl Meghan has curly hair but she has worn it straight since high school (it appears). I'm assuming she has it straightened professionally so wouldn't it stay straight all the time? I like (and have) natural curls myself and hate the fact that 99 percent of curly haired celebrities have abandoned their natural hair. Plus it frees up thousands of hours in your life not spend all that time (and money) straightening it.


thank you 
my thoughts exactly
I have NC hair and I get compliments all the time....hard to understand why all these celebs feel the need to straighten theirs


----------



## berrydiva

DeMonica said:


> She obviously prefers the sleek and wavy to her natural African-American hair. Besides, any kind of curly hair can go wild and frizzy if exposed to the elements. With so many outdoor events I'm sure she's more comfortable to wear it in a nice, loose bun sometimes than get a blow dry twice or three times a day.


There's no such thing as African-American hair....it's okay to say Black. It's not a dirty word.


----------



## doni

Her natural hair:




She would look wonderful if she would wear it like that I find. But the fact is, most African-American celebrities and personalities straighten theirs.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> There's no such thing as African-American hair.


Right, you can speak to this better than I maybe but african american hair can be super tight, kinky curly or looser curls - I don't think ever straight.
From her photos as a child she had big poofy curly hair - uncontrolled.  If you took that hair and styled it and used product, you could have nice curls.  My hair as a kid - the rare times when my mother allowed it to be long - was like her childhood photo.


----------



## berrydiva

Alexenjie said:


> From pictures of her as a young girl Meghan has curly hair but she has worn it straight since high school (it appears). I'm assuming she has it straightened professionally so wouldn't it stay straight all the time? I like (and have) natural curls myself and hate the fact that 99 percent of curly haired celebrities have abandoned their natural hair. Plus it frees up thousands of hours in your life not spend all that time (and money) straightening it.


Possible she just relaxes it and skips the whole weekly straightening process. Since my hair has texture, personally, I find my curls more to maintain (time and money) than when my hair is straight.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> Right, you can speak to this better than I maybe but african american hair can be super tight, kinky curly or looser curls - I don't think ever straight.
> From her photos as a child she had big poofy curly hair - uncontrolled.  If you took that hair and styled it and used product, you could have nice curls.  My hair as a kid - the rare times when my mother allowed it to be long - was like her childhood photo.


Dunno if her hair texture remained the same as it was when she was a kid but it's sometimes a bit more than just put some product in and go...totally depends on her hair type/texture.


----------



## DeMonica

berrydiva said:


> There's no such thing as African-American hair....it's okay to say Black. It's not a dirty word.


So what is the proper term to describe it ? Because it's beyond curly.


----------



## berrydiva

DeMonica said:


> So what is the proper term to describe it ? Because it's beyond curly.


What's wrong with curly? Looking at that pic, she just has tight curls. Some people have tight curls, some people have loose curls, some have in between.


----------



## roxaana

I saw an interview with her a while ago (I think on Conan) and she said she lost her curls because of straightening all the time. I guess she didn't have the super curly hair that she had as a child, but maybe looser curls that turned straight in time?

I think it's completely possible that the hair now is close to its natural state.


----------



## sdkitty

roxaana said:


> I saw an interview with her a while ago (I think on Conan) and she said she lost her curls because of straightening all the time. I guess she didn't have the super curly hair that she had as a child, but maybe looser curls that turned straight in time?
> 
> I think it's completely possible that the hair now is close to its natural state.


I guess anything is possible but doesn't sound right to me.  Possibly the ends of he hair are straight but I doubt new growth would be


----------



## skarsbabe

She really is doing wonderfully at jumping right into this royalty thing. I agree she takes great photos and they look so darn happy together. I really have nothing bad to say about her!


----------



## beantownSugar

roxaana said:


> I saw an interview with her a while ago (I think on Conan) and she said she lost her curls because of straightening all the time. I guess she didn't have the super curly hair that she had as a child, but maybe looser curls that turned straight in time?
> 
> I think it's completely possible that the hair now is close to its natural state.


I'd bet she has a lot of heat damage from wearing it straight all the time. She'd need to do "the big chop" to restore her curls again.


----------



## beantownSugar

DeMonica said:


> So what is the proper term to describe it ? Because it's beyond curly.


I'm black and I call my hair curly. My curl pattern is so much tighter than Meghan's but at the end of the day, a curl is a curl.

Her hair is curly.


----------



## LibbyRuth

beantownSugar said:


> I'm black and I call my hair curly. My curl pattern is so much tighter than Meghan's but at the end of the day, a curl is a curl.
> 
> Her hair is curly.


Exactly. Regardless of how it's described, all this started with a comparison of the way Megan wears her hair to the Kate and other royals wear theirs.  Her hair is a different texture and is going to need to be styled different as a result. Just like people drive hair dresses crazy bringing in pictures of women with totally different texture / thickness than they have an wanting the look replicated on their own head, royal hair stylists can't do the same thing for every woman in the family. Megan (and Kate) knows what works on her head, and what she's comfortable and confident with - and she does it well.


----------



## DeMonica

berrydiva said:


> What's wrong with curly? Looking at that pic, she just has tight curls. Some people have tight curls, some people have loose curls, some have in between.


Ok. Let's call it super  tight curly then.


----------



## berrydiva

DeMonica said:


> Ok. Let's call it super  tight curly then.


So obviously to you curly is strictly for the use of describing a non-black person's hair? It's not good enough to be called curly - which it is? You can call it super tight curly though if it makes you feel better. I'll just stick with referring to our hair as curly and we can agree to disagree.


----------



## berrydiva

beantownSugar said:


> I'm black and I call my hair curly. My curl pattern is so much tighter than Meghan's but at the end of the day, a curl is a curl.
> 
> Her hair is curly.


Same here....I refer to my hair as curly because that's what it is....not sure why that's not seen as okay.


----------



## queennadine

Love that black dress on her from the Government House! I think she looks super pretty with her hair down, wish she did more.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tuesday
The Duke and Duchess will fly to the Fijian capital of Suva.

The couple will attend a traditional welcoming ceremony at Albert Park in the city’s centre.

*The day will end with a state dinner at the Grand Pacific Hotel, hosted by the President of Fiji.
*
Wonder if she's packed a tiara?


----------



## afsweet

VickyB said:


> Is she wearing black sling back dressy heels with black jeans? Tacky. Looks like they are the same shoes she wore with the fabulous black dress earlier in the day. I'll give her a pass since the poor thing has a hundred wardrobe changes a day on this tour.



I think the shoes work for both outfits. I don't think they're that dressy. If it were me and I had to walk so much in heels, you bet I'd wear the ones I've already broken in!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## anitalilac

doni said:


> Her natural hair:
> 
> View attachment 4229807
> 
> 
> She would look wonderful if she would wear it like that I find. But the fact is, most African-American celebrities and personalities straighten theirs.


She's such a beautiful baby!


----------



## Jayne1

roxaana said:


> I saw an interview with her a while ago (I think on Conan) and she said she lost her curls because of straightening all the time. I guess she didn't have the super curly hair that she had as a child, but maybe looser curls that turned straight in time?
> 
> I think it's completely possible that the hair now is close to its natural state.


I saw an interview where she said she hasn't seen her natural hair in decades.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I saw an interview where she said she hasn't seen her natural hair in decades.


well she may not have seen it but it's still there 
so since she talked about this in an interview did she say why she hates her curls?


----------



## Voyageuse

Why is it that black women get called out for not wearing their hair “natural”, but no other ethnicities do?  I’m Mexican and hate my natural hair.

If I wore it ethnically, I’d have a white, frizzy, poofy mess of hair braided with middle part, because that’s how all of the Latina babes pictured on the Mexican food products wear their hair. As you can see from my photo, I’m not having any of that nonsense.  Megan is a doll and wears her hair as she likes, as we all should.  [emoji6]


----------



## sdkitty

Voyageuse said:


> Why is it that black women get called out for not wearing their hair “natural”, but no other ethnicities do?  I’m Hispanic and hate my natural hair.  If I did, I’d have a white, frizzy, poofy mess on my head.[emoji6]  Megan is a doll and wears her hair as she likes, as we all should.


I call out all the celebs who used to have beautiful curls and now always wear their hair straight.   Not just black ones.  Debra Messing is one who comes to mind.  Nicole Kidman, Keri Russell.  Not even saying they should never wear their hair straight but basically there are a whole bunch of them who became famous with curls and who now are never seen with their natural hair.


----------



## Voyageuse

sdkitty said:


> I call out all the celebs who used to have beautiful curls and now always wear their hair straight.   Not just black ones.  Debra Messing is one who comes to mind.  Nicole Kidman, Keri Russell.  Not even saying they should never wear their hair straight but basically there are a whole bunch of them who became famous with curls and who now are never seen with their natural hair.



Hair can be frustrating.  My husband has tightly curled hair.  Sometimes the path of least resistance is to just straighten it.  He would if he could.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> well she may not have seen it but it's still there
> so since she talked about this in an interview did she say why she hates her curls?


No, it was a Craig Ferguson interview (I think) and it was all very light and fluffy.


----------



## krissa




----------



## VickyB

Voyageuse said:


> Why is it that black women get called out for not wearing their hair “natural”, but no other ethnicities do?  I’m Mexican and hate my natural hair.
> 
> If I wore it ethnically, I’d have a white, frizzy, poofy mess of hair braided with middle part, because that’s how all of the Latina babes pictured on the Mexican food products wear their hair. As you can see from my photo, I’m not having any of that nonsense.  Megan is a doll and wears her hair as she likes, as we all should.  [emoji6]



ITA! As you said " wears her hair as she likes, as we all should".


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> At Kingfisher Bay Jetty during their visit of Fraser Island
> 
> View attachment 4229492
> View attachment 4229472
> View attachment 4229471
> View attachment 4229473
> View attachment 4229482
> View attachment 4229478
> View attachment 4229476



LOVE this! It looks like there are shorts under the dress? Really cute! Any ID on the "dress"?


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I saw an interview where she said she hasn't seen her natural hair in decades.


LOL, I don't think many of us have, I'm talking colour wise here.


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving in Fiji, visiting the President of Fiji at Borron House, attending official welcome ceremony at Albert Park in Suva, and appearing on the balcony of Grand Pacific Hotel


----------



## Morgan R

Attending State Dinner hosted by the President of Fiji at Grand Pacific Hotel


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh wow, I love the blue gown, even though in some pictures it doesn't look fitted enough across the shoulders and bust.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that's because the tailor put all the effort into fitting the waist to make sure the bump was emphasized!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I think that's because the tailor put all the effort into fitting the waist to make sure the bump was emphasized!


Yeah, that's what I was thinking too


----------



## myown

doni said:


> Her natural hair:
> 
> View attachment 4229807
> 
> 
> She would look wonderful if she would wear it like that I find. But the fact is, most African-American celebrities and personalities straighten theirs.


even Michelle ***** did


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> I guess anything is possible but doesn't sound right to me.  Possibly the ends of he hair are straight but I doubt new growth would be


but other way round is possible. I always had super straight natural  hair. 2 years ago I got a new haircut and was super unhappy, so I started making curls (and got pregnant, maybe that did something, too). Now I have natural waves! But they are far from nice, looks more like I need to brush my hair


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Attending State Dinner hosted by the President of Fiji at Grand Pacific Hotel
> 
> View attachment 4230460
> 
> View attachment 4230459
> View attachment 4230458
> View attachment 4230501


BEAUTIFUL !!!
best look so far !!
love the White Zimmermann Dress too ! best Looks to me so far!
love to see them everyday with new Pictures! they have a tight .

I really hope they get the nov off for themselfes. she Looks really pregnant here.
they Need time to relax after that trip! I think the Baby is coming in march.


----------



## sdkitty

interesting....she and harry have very different coloring but their noses are similar....looking at that profile pic in the blue gown above


----------



## uhpharm01

I just wondering if she further along than just 3 months.


----------



## gelbergirl

Under what circumstances does Prince Harry wear the medals? Anyone know?


----------



## Alexenjie

sdkitty said:


> I call out all the celebs who used to have beautiful curls and now always wear their hair straight.   Not just black ones.  Debra Messing is one who comes to mind.  Nicole Kidman, Keri Russell.  Not even saying they should never wear their hair straight but basically there are a whole bunch of them who became famous with curls and who now are never seen with their natural hair.


Totally agree. I think it's healthy to embrace the fact that we were not all born with the same cookie cutter looks (though Hollywood disagrees).  Curly hair for whatever ethnicity should never be out of style. I spent years growing my curly hair trying to look like Andie MacDowell in the movie Green Card. Others I miss with curls: Sarah Jessica Parker, Juliana Margulies, Taylor Swift, Julia Louis-Dreyfus,  Mariah Carey, Julia Roberts, I could go on and on. I just don't get wiping out a whole huge selection of hair styles that were flattering and (most likely) much easier to obtain and sustain.


----------



## minababe

uhpharm01 said:


> I just wondering if she further along than just 3 months.


for sure!. I would say end of 4 beginning of 5. month.


----------



## minababe

Alexenjie said:


> Totally agree. I think it's healthy to embrace the fact that we were not all born with the same cookie cutter looks (though Hollywood disagrees).  Curly hair for whatever ethnicity should never be out of style. I spent years growing my curly hair trying to look like Andie MacDowell in the movie Green Card. Others I miss with curls: Sarah Jessica Parker, Juliana Margulies, Taylor Swift, Julia Louis-Dreyfus,  Mariah Carey, Julia Roberts, I could go on and on. I just don't get wiping out a whole huge selection of hair styles that were flattering and (most likely) much easier to obtain and sustain.



I don't think it's that everyone hates curly hair.
you always want to have what you don't have. we all know that. Girls with straight hair doing waves and curls and the Girls with curly hair straight their hair. it's ridicilous but that's how it is haha
and for tv Shows etc I think you can style straigh hair so much easier than curly hair. especialy when you are filming. sometimes you Need more than one day for a Scene and the next day the curls are going in the other way. it's not always under controll instead of stright hair.
and for Sarah Jessica parker. she got an iconic with her curly head in sex and the City. but over the years her hair got thinner because of all the blonde colouring and now she is wearing it most of the time straight.
sometimes you want a Change, sometimes your hair is chainging from year to year. some women don't have curly hair after pregnancy as well. so many different Options. I don't think it's mean in any way mean that they straight their hair. it's just easier to work with.
Maybe straight hair Looks more serious on a person. best example is taylor Swift.  I don't know why but the most People think women with curls are romantic and Kind of naiv haha that's too funny I know but I think it's how it is

I have very curly hair by myself. I always wanted to have that shiny silk hair from all the People on tv. but now I'm really happy with my curly hair because most of the womend and Girls aorund us curl their straigh hair every morning to get some volume haha
I always gets compliments for my hair especially from men.
there are so many types of curly hair. some look good without doing anything, some Needs controll otherwise they are everywhere, end of Story, meghan Looks great with her hair. and I think her hair is already so damaged from years of straightening her hair that it would probably doesn't look that curly anymore like in her teen years. so she is wearing it all straight. or she hates her hair back in her teen years and now with all the Things you can do today it's so much easier to get your hair under controll. I think she is able to do everything with her hair, she has the best People with the best products by her side. lucky women she doesn't have to do it on her own haha


----------



## sdkitty

Alexenjie said:


> Totally agree. I think it's healthy to embrace the fact that we were not all born with the same cookie cutter looks (though Hollywood disagrees).  Curly hair for whatever ethnicity should never be out of style. I spent years growing my curly hair trying to look like Andie MacDowell in the movie Green Card. Others I miss with curls: Sarah Jessica Parker, Juliana Margulies, Taylor Swift, Julia Louis-Dreyfus,  Mariah Carey, Julia Roberts, I could go on and on. I just don't get wiping out a whole huge selection of hair styles that were flattering and (most likely) much easier to obtain and sustain.


good list
one who still does wear her curls and looks gorgeous is Kera Sedgwick


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> I don't think it's that everyone hates curly hair.
> you always want to have what you don't have. we all know that. Girls with straight hair doing waves and curls and the Girls with curly hair straight their hair. it's ridicilous but that's how it is haha
> and for tv Shows etc I think you can style straigh hair so much easier than curly hair. especialy when you are filming. sometimes you Need more than one day for a Scene and the next day the curls are going in the other way. it's not always under controll instead of stright hair.
> and for Sarah Jessica parker. she got an iconic with her curly head in sex and the City. but over the years her hair got thinner because of all the blonde colouring and now she is wearing it most of the time straight.
> sometimes you want a Change, sometimes your hair is chainging from year to year. some women don't have curly hair after pregnancy as well. so many different Options. I don't think it's mean in any way mean that they straight their hair. it's just easier to work with.
> Maybe straight hair Looks more serious on a person. best example is taylor Swift.  I don't know why but the most People think women with curls are romantic and Kind of naiv haha that's too funny I know but I think it's how it is
> 
> I have very curly hair by myself. I always wanted to have that shiny silk hair from all the People on tv. but now I'm really happy with my curly hair because most of the womend and Girls aorund us curl their straigh hair every morning to get some volume haha
> I always gets compliments for my hair especially from men.
> there are so many types of curly hair. some look good without doing anything, some Needs controll otherwise they are everywhere, end of Story, meghan Looks great with her hair. and I think her hair is already so damaged from years of straightening her hair that it would probably doesn't look that curly anymore like in her teen years. I think she is able to do everything with her hair, she has the best People with the best products by her side. lucky women she doesn't have to do it on her own haha


Like you, I tried to make my curls straight (or at least smooth) for many years.  But now I embrace them and truly get a lot of attention for my hair.
Meghan can do what she wishes of course.  I just said I'd like to see her with her natural hair - not necessarily all the time but sometimes.


----------



## doni

minababe said:


> I think you can style straight hair so much easier than curly hair. especialy when you are filming. sometimes you Need more than one day for a Scene and the next day the curls are going in the other way. it's not always under controll instead of stright hair.



It is also fashion... I don't know whether it is easier to straighten very curly hair than to curl very flat hair, but I sure know in the 80s, we were ALL doing those perms!


----------



## prettyprincess

doni said:


> Her natural hair:
> 
> View attachment 4229807
> 
> 
> She would look wonderful if she would wear it like that I find. But the fact is, most African-American celebrities and personalities straighten theirs.


She’s adorable!! The way she wears her hair now suits her bone structure more. Plus, not many women can pull off that big wild curly hair. I can’t imagine Meghan with Queen Beyoncé hair. Or Tracee Ellis Ross’s hair. It doesn’t fit her persona lol. But the way she wears it is beautiful and sophisticated.


----------



## pixiejenna

I love that both of the royal threads are at the top of the list and the kartrashian threads so much lower 

I think most people tend to want  what they don’t have hair wise. People with curly hair want it straight and people with straight hair want curls/waves. I would love to see her with curls but obviously she doesn’t really want to wear it that way so I don’t get what the big deal is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm really interested to see this little baby's hair.


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> interesting....she and harry have very different coloring but their noses are similar....looking at that profile pic in the blue gown above


I actually think they look alike.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I think so too! 

She is too pretty to consistently be looking this bad. She needs a new team stat. It should be trivial to make her look good.


----------



## bisbee

sdkitty said:


> well she may not have seen it but it's still there
> so since she talked about this in an interview did she say why she hates her curls?


Why would you say she hates her curls? 

I have very curly hair...I have worn it curly and straight.  Over the years, the top layers have lost a lot of curl...it can dry frizzy on top with nice spiral curls underneath.  I had to wash my hair daily when I wore it curly...the nice curls got crushed at night.  I find it easier to wear my hair straight...it’s more predictable.  When curly, my hair has a mind of its own!

Meghan may have decided straight hair is easier to maintain.


----------



## Jayne1

Her best friend, who Meghan met when living in Toronto went along on this trip. The best friend's husband, who I have mentioned before, is the son of a kinda hated ex-prime minister, but Ben, the son, is very well liked and works in the entertainment industry as a talking head.  Their kids were the page boys in the royal wedding wedding.

Anyway, her best friend, who works as a stylist, and her husband went along on this trip.

I wonder where they are.  Do they do their own thing while M and H are working or is she trailing behind, out of the spotlight, to adjust her clothes and hair.


----------



## myown

Alexenjie said:


> Totally agree. I think it's healthy to embrace the fact that we were not all born with the same cookie cutter looks (though Hollywood disagrees).  Curly hair for whatever ethnicity should never be out of style. I spent years growing my curly hair trying to look like Andie MacDowell in the movie Green Card. Others I miss with curls: Sarah Jessica Parker, Juliana Margulies, Taylor Swift, Julia Louis-Dreyfus,  Mariah Carey, Julia Roberts, I could go on and on. I just don't get wiping out a whole huge selection of hair styles that were flattering and (most likely) much easier to obtain and sustain.


SJP has curls?


----------



## prettyprincess

myown said:


> SJP has curls?


Yes! Crazy beautiful wild ones.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I think so too!
> 
> She is too pretty to consistently be looking this bad. She needs a new team stat. It should be trivial to make her look good.


Maybe her style is a reflection of the (lack of) funds that go Harry's way? Some of her pieces are ok (and pricey), but her look overall is pretty bland and could def. benefit from some help. I imagine Kate has several stylists and helpers/advisors and maybe since Harry is now far from the throne the $$$ just isn't there for Meghan to have a team?


----------



## uhpharm01

minababe said:


> for sure!. I would say end of 4 beginning of 5. month.


it would be really interesting if we see a Feb birth instead of An April Birth.


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> SJP has curls?


here's an old pic but you don't have to go that far back


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Maybe her style is a reflection of the (lack of) funds that go Harry's way? Some of her pieces are ok (and pricey), but her look overall is pretty bland and could def. benefit from some help. I imagine Kate has several stylists and helpers/advisors and maybe since Harry is now far from the throne the $$$ just isn't there for Meghan to have a team?



I'll be off to the tower for suggesting it but Harry or Megan could always get a job if they feel like they need more money. They maybe far from the throne but their earning potential's huge. Edward (Harry's uncle) got himself a job when he was third in line and actually there is no reason Megan couldn't get a job (like other working mums do). This is all relative - I don't think she needs a stylist or 'team' - just saying...


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Maybe her style is a reflection of the (lack of) funds that go Harry's way? Some of her pieces are ok (and pricey), but her look overall is pretty bland and could def. benefit from some help. I imagine Kate has several stylists and helpers/advisors and maybe since Harry is now far from the throne the $$$ just isn't there for Meghan to have a team?


they're not hurting for money
From Forbes:
Thinking of what to get Meghan Markle and Prince Harry of Wales for their upcoming wedding? You can probably scratch that card with $100 tucked inside off the list of ideas.

The latest royal engagement is hardly a typical tale of a commoner and a royal. While neither half of the couple was exactly struggling to get by before, together they’re set to be a financial powerhouse.

Before diving into the bank accounts of the happy couple, it’s worth noting that neither holds a candle to the queen. She’s estimated to have a personal net worth of roughly $425 million. Harry might get some of that when she passes away, but for now he’s the royal equivalent of a working stiff.

As a pilot in the British Army Air Corps, he drew an annual salary of around $45,000. That’s far below the $50,000 Markle reportedly earns per episode on _Suits_. Her salary on the show is said to be around $450,000 per year. Film income has supplemented that in previous years. (Keep an eye on her clothing budget, though. The Line the Label coat she wore in the official engagement photos shows she has a knack for fashion.)

Harry has a bit more in the bank overall than his fiancée. When he turned 30 in 2014, he received £10 million (about $13.3 million) from a trust fund set up by his late mother, Princess Diana of Wales.

Additionally, Harry’s expenses for any official royal duties are covered by the Duchy of Cornwall, a private estate overseen by his father Prince Charles. In 2016 and 2017, that organization paid nearly $9 million for Prince Harry, Prince William and Kate Middleton’s activities and other expenses.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> It is also fashion... I don't know whether it is easier to straighten very curly hair than to curl very flat hair, but I sure know in the 80s, we were ALL doing those perms!
> 
> View attachment 4230966



Although that pic of DB is 1969 

IMO Megan should have her hair any way she pleases. The same freedom other women enjoy.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, I have curly hair and it’s exhausting. You don’t get to role out of bed and have someone straighten or brush it and go as I imagine they are doing right now. It’s fine so I have to wash my hair every day for any semblance of decency and it still looks like I stuck my finger in a light socket if I encounter any wind or humidity. Not everyone has perfect curls. Also, she likely has to grow her hair out to revive the curl which means frizzy roots. Not beautiful glossy curls. 

Anyway, I figure everyone should do them as they see fit.


----------



## Vanilla Bean

I love their matching ski-jump noses. I hope baby has one too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> SJP has curls?


The best!


----------



## HiromiT

I too wonder what the Mulroneys are doing on this trip. Do Jess and Ben follow along in their own car, armed with an emergency sewing kit and a change of clothes/shoes? At the end of the day, do they meet up in H & M's suite for coffee and a debrief? Does Jess lay out Meghan's outfit for the next day? Curious minds want to know lol.

Also, I'm not convinced that Jessica is doing such a great job as a stylist. Meghan's outfits on this tour have been, um, inconsistent. Some are super casual and inappropriate for a royal -- that sheer sundress with the thigh-high slit was a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen. The wrinkly white BF shirt and black jeans that she wore to board the plane departing Australia was something that a mere plebian like me would wear.

But she chose well in the caped blue gown and white Zimmerman dress -- both looked lovely on Meghan.

I think Jessica needs to step it up if she wants to continue styling a duchess! Lol


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> Although that pic of DB is 1969
> .



He was always ahead of his times


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> He was always ahead of his times



 

He looked so gorgeous either way, straight hair or curly


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> here's an old pic but you don't have to go that far back


thanks. I always thought these are done and not natural


----------



## myown

HiromiT said:


> Also, I'm not convinced that Jessica is doing such a great job as a stylist. Meghan's outfits on this tour have been, um, inconsistent. Some are super casual and inappropriate for a royal -- that sheer sundress with the thigh-high slit was a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen. *The wrinkly white BF shirt and black jeans that she wore to board the plane departing Australia was something that a mere plebian like me would wear.*


this is simply her style. she wore exactly the same outfit over and over again before Harry


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> this is simply her style. she wore exactly the same outfit over and over again before Harry


And I think that that particular flight was a "private" flight, as in no officials to wave them off so yes, I agree people like us would have dressed down for that.


----------



## minababe

HiromiT said:


> I too wonder what the Mulroneys are doing on this trip. Do Jess and Ben follow along in their own car, armed with an emergency sewing kit and a change of clothes/shoes? At the end of the day, do they meet up in H & M's suite for coffee and a debrief? Does Jess lay out Meghan's outfit for the next day? Curious minds want to know lol.
> 
> Also, I'm not convinced that Jessica is doing such a great job as a stylist. Meghan's outfits on this tour have been, um, inconsistent. Some are super casual and inappropriate for a royal -- that sheer sundress with the thigh-high slit was a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen. The wrinkly white BF shirt and black jeans that she wore to board the plane departing Australia was something that a mere plebian like me would wear.
> 
> But she chose well in the caped blue gown and white Zimmerman dress -- both looked lovely on Meghan.
> 
> I think Jessica needs to step it up if she wants to continue styling a duchess! Lol



I don't think they doing that much together.
Ben is reporting from the invictus games in australia.
Maybe they met once or went for dinner with Harry and meghan. or Jessica visited meghan when she quit her appointments and Harry went solo.
but you can almost follow meghan and Harry on every step they  in australia because of the reporters and Paparazzi. beside their many appointments they stayed at their house. and ben and Jessica had Instagram stories where they were most of the time on different places than the duke and duchess.
next week they will come back to australia for the closing ceremony maybe they will meet again. but I think that's it.


----------



## minababe

uhpharm01 said:


> it would be really interesting if we see a Feb birth instead of An April Birth.



When my hunch is right the Baby is coming in march. fingers crossed


----------



## bag-princess

the people were not happy as you can imagine. 


*Bodyguard Rushes Meghan Markle Out of Fiji Market After *Six Minutes* Due to Security Risks*


Meghan Markle's first solo engagement in Fiji was unexpectedly shut down after just six minutes due to security risks. The Duchess was visiting female vendors participating in the UN Women's project "Markets for Change," and was supposed to chill for just under a half hour. But a few short minutes in, Meghan's bodyguard was seen rushing to her side and ushering her away over a "security risk."

A Kensington Palace representative told the Associated Press that there were crowd management concerns, and one royal aid reportedly said the event was "hot, humid and uncomfortably busy and there were far larger crowds than expected. She met everyone she was meant to meet and left. There would have been a lot of people who would have been keen to meet her but she did met those who had hoped to. On advice she was taken out due to crowd management issue."

Fair enough, but some royal reporters think was an over-reaction. Either way, Meghan handled the situation like a pro-remaining super calm and waving to the crowd as she left. But damn, that sounds intense!


https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bodyguard-rushes-meghan-markle-fiji-095400945.html





 
 Rebecca English *✔*  @RE_DailyMail 

 ·   14h 

 Replying to @RE_DailyMail 
The Duchess spent just six minutes in the market and only met a handful of people. She should have been there around 20. There were huge crowds but they were being kept back by the police. It was very hot and humid, however, so perhaps that played a part in their decision.





 Rebecca English *✔*  @RE_DailyMail 

Personally, it looked like an over reaction to me. I’ve seen far more chaotic crowd scenes. But, and this is a big but, she is pregnant so it could be that the palace were being cautious.


----------



## Alexenjie

bag-princess said:


> the people were not happy as you can imagine.
> 
> 
> *Bodyguard Rushes Meghan Markle Out of Fiji Market After *Six Minutes* Due to Security Risks*
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's first solo engagement in Fiji was unexpectedly shut down after just six minutes due to security risks. The Duchess was visiting female vendors participating in the UN Women's project "Markets for Change," and was supposed to chill for just under a half hour. But a few short minutes in, Meghan's bodyguard was seen rushing to her side and ushering her away over a "security risk."
> 
> A Kensington Palace representative told the Associated Press that there were crowd management concerns, and one royal aid reportedly said the event was "hot, humid and uncomfortably busy and there were far larger crowds than expected. She met everyone she was meant to meet and left. There would have been a lot of people who would have been keen to meet her but she did met those who had hoped to. On advice she was taken out due to crowd management issue."
> 
> Fair enough, but some royal reporters think was an over-reaction. Either way, Meghan handled the situation like a pro-remaining super calm and waving to the crowd as she left. But damn, that sounds intense!
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bodyguard-rushes-meghan-markle-fiji-095400945.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rebecca English *✔*  @RE_DailyMail
> 
> ·   14h
> 
> Replying to @RE_DailyMail
> The Duchess spent just six minutes in the market and only met a handful of people. She should have been there around 20. There were huge crowds but they were being kept back by the police. It was very hot and humid, however, so perhaps that played a part in their decision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rebecca English *✔*  @RE_DailyMail
> 
> Personally, it looked like an over reaction to me. I’ve seen far more chaotic crowd scenes. But, and this is a big but, she is pregnant so it could be that the palace were being cautious.


Better safe than sorry. Maybe someone spotted a mosquito?

I read somewhere that Meghan and Harry are traveling with staff of at least 13 people which I'm sure includes help with their clothes, hair, make up, etc. I don't think we can blame all the style mistakes on her friend (and I don't think she has made that many mistakes). She is probably getting advice from more than one person.


----------



## Jayne1

HiromiT said:


> I too wonder what the Mulroneys are doing on this trip. Do Jess and Ben follow along in their own car, armed with an emergency sewing kit and a change of clothes/shoes? At the end of the day, do they meet up in H & M's suite for coffee and a debrief? Does Jess lay out Meghan's outfit for the next day? Curious minds want to know lol.
> 
> Also, I'm not convinced that Jessica is doing such a great job as a stylist. Meghan's outfits on this tour have been, um, inconsistent. Some are super casual and inappropriate for a royal -- that sheer sundress with the thigh-high slit was a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen. The wrinkly white BF shirt and black jeans that she wore to board the plane departing Australia was something that a mere plebian like me would wear.
> 
> But she chose well in the caped blue gown and white Zimmerman dress -- both looked lovely on Meghan.
> 
> I think Jessica needs to step it up if she wants to continue styling a duchess! Lol


I agree with everything you wrote.

I kinda imagined the Mulroneys going sightseeing on their own and H and M, after working a few hours during the day, go back to the hotel or house, where the 4 of them hang out and have fun. Unless H and M work nights, then they hang out and have fun during the day.  Good company for them.

 I never understood Jessica's stylist status.  Is she any good?


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> thanks. I always thought these are done and not natural


They're done but still her natural curls?  Am I contradicting myself?

Here is when she first appeared on the scene with her original hair.


----------



## Jayne1

minababe said:


> I don't think they doing that much together.
> Ben is reporting from the invictus games in australia.
> Maybe they met once or went for dinner with Harry and meghan. or Jessica visited meghan when she quit her appointments and Harry went solo.
> but you can almost follow meghan and Harry on every step they  in australia because of the reporters and Paparazzi. beside their many appointments they stayed at their house. and ben and Jessica had Instagram stories where they were most of the time on different places than the duke and duchess.
> next week they will come back to australia for the closing ceremony maybe they will meet again. but I think that's it.


How much reporting can Ben do.  It's not a Canadian thing, like last year, so I think that one quick segment is enough for his CTV  audience.

I read that they were joining the royal couple on this trip and I can see Meghan wanting her best friend, who works as a stylist, there for some of her off time.


----------



## kemilia

bisbee said:


> Why would you say she hates her curls?
> 
> I have very curly hair...I have worn it curly and straight.  Over the years, the top layers have lost a lot of curl...it can dry frizzy on top with nice spiral curls underneath.  I had to wash my hair daily when I wore it curly...the nice curls got crushed at night.  I find it easier to wear my hair straight...it’s more predictable.  When curly, my hair has a mind of its own!
> 
> Meghan may have decided straight hair is easier to maintain.


When I was a little kid, I had stick straight hair, my mom would "set" it on Saturday night so that It would have some curl the next morning for church. She even gave me perms, which I hated (the smell!). 

Then puberty struck and my hair turned into a mess of waves, curls and frizz (in humid weather I looked like I had a bush growing on my head). I even saved empty orange juice cans and set my hair on those! My mom would buy straightener and we would spend a few hours combing that gunk through my hair (once again, I hated the smell).

Then in my early twenties puberty left and the straight hair returned--I was so happy, and I still have it, so I can say that for myself, having had both kinds of hair, I definitely prefer my straight hair. Meghan may feel the same way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## uhpharm01




----------



## cafecreme15

Vanilla Bean said:


> I love their matching ski-jump noses. I hope baby has one too.


I do believe that Meghan's nose has been "enhanced." But it is uncanny how her and Harry's noses match almost exactly.


----------



## uhpharm01

I think her security team was scared because those people jumping onto the tables when Meghan was talking to that first female farmers market sales person.


----------



## Vanilla Bean

cafecreme15 said:


> I do believe that Meghan's nose has been "enhanced." But it is uncanny how her and Harry's noses match almost exactly.


Really? I think her mom has the same nose.


----------



## cafecreme15

Vanilla Bean said:


> Really? I think her mom has the same nose.



I believe old pictures show that her nose was made a bit more narrow. I’m not sure how much the slope was changed.


----------



## Morgan R

At the University of the South Pacific in Suva, Fiji


----------



## Morgan R

Attending welcome ceremony in Nadi,Fiji and unveiling a new statue commemorating Sergeant Talaiasi Labalaba


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> I believe old pictures show that her nose was made a bit more narrow. I’m not sure how much the slope was changed.


Agree.  I think it's more narrow now. 

As an actress, she probably needed to be camera perfect. She wasn't playing character roles, she seems to have gone after pretty girl roles.


----------



## HiromiT

It was your earlier post that got me thinking of the Mulroneys' role on this trip. Jess and Ben have the financial means to drop everything and tag along for a couple of weeks, not to mention that it's a semi-work-related thing for Ben. And since Meghan is still adjusting to her new role and job, she must surely want/need a trusted friend to support her on this trip. Sure, she has Harry, but it must be nice to decompress with a girlfriend who knew/understood her well before she embarked on this crazy new life. So that's how I imagine it too.

As for Jessica's styling work, does she have other clients? I know she is friends with Tessa Virtue so maybe she helps her out, but are there enough famous Canadian women in need of a stylist? 

Also I find her personal style a little tacky. And let's not get started on all her PS!

I actually didn't know anything about her except that she worked as a Birks ambassador. In my eyes, she became more well known when she married Ben and their wedding got a mention in the society pages. And only recently did I realize that her family owns Browns Shoes.

Is she more famous to people living in ON and PQ?



Jayne1 said:


> I agree with everything you wrote.
> 
> I kinda imagined the Mulroneys going sightseeing on their own and H and M, after working a few hours during the day, go back to the hotel or house, where the 4 of them hang out and have fun. Unless H and M work nights, then they hang out and have fun during the day.  Good company for them.
> 
> I never understood Jessica's stylist status.  Is she any good?


----------



## VickyB

The blue cape dress is fabulous on her!!!! So love!
Also loved the red patterned day dress with the ruffle hem and pompoms. Terrific!!!
Not a fan of the on arrival red dress or the green one.
I agree with other posters that she is farther along than the palace disclosed. Only thing is the palace has nothing to gain by sharing false data. Even if she got pregnant on her wedding night, that's only 5 months ago and she doesn't look 5 months pregnant.


----------



## HiromiT

The green dress looks nice on Meghan. It resembles a blue Stella McCartney dress that Kate has worn. The inverted darts on the bodice are quite distinctive. I wonder if the two sisters-in-law are exchanging shopping and styling tips?







Morgan R said:


> Attending welcome ceremony in Nadi,Fiji and unveiling a new statue commemorating Sergeant Talaiasi Labalaba
> 
> View attachment 4232303


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving at Fua'amotu Airport in Nuku'alofa,Tonga


----------



## berrydiva

I like that both she and Kate wear bold colors.


----------



## GoStanford

I think the green and red dresses are very pretty - she likes that green color (so do I).  And it's a lovely idea to give a nod to the Tongan flag with the red dress.  I also give Meghan a lot of credit for getting dressed up and wearing heels when she's pregnant.  Each person's experience varies, but for me, it was about all I could do to make it through the day till I got home and could put my feet up.


----------



## Sharont2305

GoStanford said:


> I also give Meghan a lot of credit for getting dressed up and wearing heels when she's pregnant


Catherine too, she was wearing heels right to the end of her pregnancies! I give credit to any woman who does that, well done ladies. It was flats for me towards the end of mine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Attending reception and dinner hosted by Tonga's King Tupou VI and Queen Nanasipau'u at Consular House


----------



## Laurie Lou

Morgan R said:


> Arriving at Fua'amotu Airport in Nuku'alofa,Tonga
> 
> 
> View attachment 4232400
> View attachment 4232392
> View attachment 4232393
> View attachment 4232394
> View attachment 4232390
> View attachment 4232386
> 
> View attachment 4232389
> View attachment 4232388



She should DEFINITELY wear red more often [emoji7]


----------



## myown

bag-princess said:


> the people were not happy as you can imagine.
> 
> 
> *Bodyguard Rushes Meghan Markle Out of Fiji Market After *Six Minutes* Due to Security Risks*
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's first solo engagement in Fiji was unexpectedly shut down after just six minutes due to security risks. The Duchess was visiting female vendors participating in the UN Women's project "Markets for Change," and was supposed to chill for just under a half hour. But a few short minutes in, Meghan's bodyguard was seen rushing to her side and ushering her away over a "security risk."
> 
> A Kensington Palace representative told the Associated Press that there were crowd management concerns, and one royal aid reportedly said the event was "hot, humid and uncomfortably busy and there were far larger crowds than expected. She met everyone she was meant to meet and left. There would have been a lot of people who would have been keen to meet her but she did met those who had hoped to. On advice she was taken out due to crowd management issue."
> 
> Fair enough, but some royal reporters think was an over-reaction. Either way, Meghan handled the situation like a pro-remaining super calm and waving to the crowd as she left. But damn, that sounds intense!
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bodyguard-rushes-meghan-markle-fiji-095400945.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rebecca English *✔*  @RE_DailyMail
> 
> ·   14h
> 
> Replying to @RE_DailyMail
> The Duchess spent just six minutes in the market and only met a handful of people. She should have been there around 20. There were huge crowds but they were being kept back by the police. It was very hot and humid, however, so perhaps that played a part in their decision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rebecca English *✔*  @RE_DailyMail
> 
> Personally, it looked like an over reaction to me. I’ve seen far more chaotic crowd scenes. But, and this is a big but, she is pregnant so it could be that the palace were being cautious.


they should add, she is pregnant. you always are more concerned when someone is pregnant


----------



## bag-princess

Sh has a new bodyguard - a female! 



Everything We Know About Meghan Markle's New Female Bodyguard



While visiting Suva, Fiji during her 16-day royal tour with Prince Harry, Meghan Markle was rushed out of a busy marketplace due to a "security risk" only six minutes after her originally 20-minute scheduled meet-and-greet. Nobody knew exactly why the Duchess had to be escorted out of the indoor market, but that wasn't the only aspect fans were focused on—they also noticed Meghan's new bodyguard, who just so happens to be a woman.

According to the Daily Mail, this woman has worked for the Duke and Duchess for several months now, and will be accompanying them throughout their entire 16-day royal tour. She reportedly oversees the entire police operation for the couple.


SHE REPLACED SERGEANT BILL RENSHAW.
Renshaw has frequently been spotted with Prince Harry over the years, and this woman reportedly replaced him after his retirement.

Kate Middleton also has a female bodyguard: Sergeant Emma Probert. It's unclear if Probert is still working for the Duchess, but she began her job shortly after Kate and William got engaged in 2010. While the Palace was searching for Meghan's protection officer, it was originally reported that her new bodyguard would be trained by Probert.

According to the International Business Times, "It's expected that a new female bodyguard would learn the necessary ropes with Emma first. It would be a trial period to make sure she is the right woman for the job. And if so, she would then be transferred to Meghan and Harry's team."
	

		
			
		

		
	






https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...O&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social-media


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> thanks. I always thought these are done and not natural


I'm pretty sure she has naturally curly hair
From W:
ear Ms. Sarah Jessica Parker,

I'm going to say something slightly controversial: The best episode of _Sex and the City_ is the first one. Here's why: It shows Carrie's curls in their most natural state of buoyant freedom. It's the pilot, so this was before the show became a big-budget HBO hit with two film spinoffs; before Carrie became a style icon and _Vogue_bride.

When we first meet her, Carrie is a woman with flyaway frizz and a bad dye job, not Goldilocks of the Upper East Side. In other words, she's you—a then 33-year-old actress with a string of fun, vivacious roles behind her, in everything from _L.A. Story_ to David Letterman's couch, taking a gamble on a cable show before cable was respectable and unsure of what was going to happen next. Your hair was so big because it was full of real life.

Sarah Jessica Parker filming the first episode of &quot;Sex and the City&quot; on Broadway.

" data-credit="New York Daily News Archive/Getty Images" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 30px 0px; position: relative; padding: 0px;">





Sarah Jessica Parker filming the first episode of "Sex and the City" on Broadway.

New York Daily News Archive/Getty Images
As a curly haired high-schooler with her mom's password for this new thing called HBO Go, _Sex and the City_ was an eye-opener for me in every sense of the phrase. If _Girls_ taught me that sex can be awkward and unsatisfying, it was because _Sex and the City_ taught me that it was okay to want it in the first place. Not to mention that female friendships might be worth a try. But, if there's one thing that I am eternally grateful to _Sex and the City_ for, it's for casting you, Sarah Jessica Parker. It was you who convinced me that my curly hair was cool and beautiful, and that my straightener was a Medieval torture torch.

*WATCH*
*Emma Stone's Current Crush? (Hint: It's Not Andrew Garfield)*

Name me a '90s princess or Disney Channel character with curly hair. I'll wait. Okay, maybe Ginger from _As Told by Ginger_, but her hair was the same shape as the Nickelodeon logo. American Girl Doll? Supermodel? Pop star? Still waiting. Growing up, all I had was Scary Spice, (I was a more of a Sporty), Shakira, and Ms. Frizzle from _The Magic School Bus_, who happened to look exactly like my mother.

The first girl I ever saw on a screen who I related to was a curly-haired Amelia "Mia" Thermopolis (Anne Hathaway) in _The_ _Princess Diaries._ And guess what? When Julie Andrews swoops in to tell her she's actually the Princess of Genovia, the first thing she serves up is a full makeover. A guy named Paolo is enlisted to brush Mia's hair, saying it's thick "Like a wolf!" before her knots break his brush in half. He then proceeds to blow out, cut, and straighten her hair, finishing with before and after pictures if anyone doubted how big of a mess she was prior to his arrival. I can't remember how the movie ends, but this scene messed me up for life.

By around 7th or 8th grade, I had a solid hunch that if I wanted guys to think I was pretty, I had to straighten my hair. This was proven by the fact that when I finally did straighten my hair, boys told me: "You look pretty." By high school, the operative word was "hot," and I subsequently begged my mother to spend two hours each weekend ironing my hair in the bathroom. And between New York private school Bar Mitzvahs and Sweet Sixteens, she practically earned her cosmetology license by the time I graduated.

And then, in my senior year I was introduced to you, SJP.





Courtesy HBO/Getty Images.
Who was this fashionably DGAF woman who got a guy in a limo to treat her like Cinderella? Who made bed-head and depression-head look like her best head? Who delivered the most quotable curly hair line in history: "I will never be the woman with the perfect hair...and I can't feel bad about that."

Her name was Carrie Bradshaw, yes. But that was all you, girl. You owned it! On and off screen, you proved that curly hair gets you noticed _and_ laid _and_ for all the right reasons. (I see you, Kevin Bacon, Robert Downey Jr., and now-husband Matthew Broderick). You inspired me to take risks with haircuts and up-dos and side-dos and everything in-between. But more importantly—beyond the superficial approval of men and women—you made it look really good to look and feel like yourself. That is what made Carrie one of the most beloved characters on television. Thanks to the two of you, I now realize that it's fun as hell to have curly hair, and that everyone should want it, too.

Since high school, I've only straightened my hair twice, and both occasions were on Halloween. I no longer like myself without curls; they're a part of who I am inside and out.

But, um, I have to say: I've noticed that in the past few years, you've gone completely straight. I can't help but wonder: What gives? It's been years since your curls walked a red carpet. Years! I saw this coming at the end of the series, but didn't think it was going to be this long of a spell. Not only do I miss them, but you're sending me a message that by the time I'm 52, society might not want me to have the same youthful curls anymore, either.

SARAH JESSICA PARKER’S STYLE EVOLUTION FROM THE '80S TO TODAY
Sarah Jessica Parker circa 1987 at a premiere party in Hollywood wFULL SCREEN
It has always been a dream of mine to grow old and have long, white curly hair like a witch. I want to scare small children in the park. Heck, maybe I'll even get a poodle to match. But you know what would be even cooler? To look like you, Sarah Jessica Parker. Without your help, I'm afraid that a century from now, I'm going to be right back where I started—with no other hair likeness besides cartoon villains.

So please, Ms. Parker I am begging you: Bring back your curls. As you once said yourself, (or maybe it was "some great man"), they're forever thine, forever mine, forever us.

Sincerely,

Emilia Petrarca


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.  I think it's more narrow now.
> 
> As an actress, she probably needed to be camera perfect. She wasn't playing character roles, she seems to have gone after pretty girl roles.


I would think if she had her nose done it would be straight and narrow like all the others.....or is a slope something that's hard to change?


----------



## minababe

her nose looked always the same like today!
you can do a lot with make up and contouring. But for me her nose never ever looked different.
some People are really fast in judging. she was a actress yes but not everyone is doing operations.


----------



## berrydiva

I love that white dress!


----------



## kemilia

minababe said:


> her nose looked always the same like today!
> you can do a lot with make up and contouring. But for me her nose never ever looked different.
> some People are really fast in judging. she was a actress yes but not everyone is doing operations.


If you look at old pics, she seems to have had something done with her nose, like a refinement and the tip worked on.


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> I would think if she had her nose done it would be straight and narrow like all the others.....or is a slope something that's hard to change?


I saw an interview with SJP years go and she had been asked to have a nose job, but she resisted. I have always admired her for that. Too many cookie cutter woman in Hollywood.


----------



## bag-princess

berrydiva said:


> I love that white dress!



so do i!  i know everyone has been saying how she looks great in colors but i think she is even more stunning in the white!


----------



## Alexenjie

bag-princess said:


> so do i!  i know everyone has been saying how she looks great in colors but i think she is even more stunning in the white!


I agree she does looking great in white.


----------



## prettyprincess

chowlover2 said:


> I saw an interview with SJP years go and she had been asked to have a nose job, but she resisted. I have always admired her for that. Too many cookie cutter woman in Hollywood.


Imo SJP has always been really beautiful, unconventionally beautiful, but still a knockout.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

prettyprincess said:


> Imo SJP has always been really beautiful, unconventionally beautiful, but still a knockout.


totally unconventionally pretty, and you have to admire her style... she's always been a huge risk-taker with fashion


----------



## VickyB

LOVE the white gown! Fabulous!!!!!!! She looks awesome!!!!!  Saw some other unfortunate snaps tho where the strapless bra she was wearing seemed very prominent under the fabric - didn't look as great in those pics. Must be such a pain in the patootee  to dress if one is a Royal!!!!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suzie

chowlover2 said:


> I saw an interview with SJP years go and she had been asked to have a nose job, but she resisted. I have always admired her for that. Too many cookie cutter woman in Hollywood.


Just like Babs.


----------



## Morgan R

*Visiting Tonga's Prime Minister at St George Building *









* Attending an exhibition at the Faonelua Centre





*


----------



## Morgan R

*At Tupou College to dedicate two forest reserves into the Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy*






*Farewell to Tonga at The Royal Palace by Tonga's King Tupou VI and Queen Nanasipau' 


*


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Australian Geographic Society Awards


----------



## uhpharm01

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Australian Geographic Society Awards
> 
> 
> View attachment 4233516
> View attachment 4233498
> View attachment 4233517
> View attachment 4233496


I love that black and white dress.


----------



## bag-princess

VickyB said:


> LOVE the white gown! Fabulous!!!!!!! She looks awesome!!!!!  Saw some other unfortunate snaps tho where the strapless bra she was wearing seemed very prominent under the fabric - didn't look as great in those pics. *Must be such a pain in the patootee  to dress if one is a Royal!*!!!!!!!




especially when they posted the pics of her in the red dress - i think it was - with the tag still on it!!!  




Morgan R said:


> Attending the Australian Geographic Society Awards
> 
> 
> View attachment 4233516
> View attachment 4233498
> View attachment 4233517
> View attachment 4233496




i loooooove this look!!  the dress and those shoes!!   this and the white gown are my favorites!


----------



## stephci

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Australian Geographic Society Awards
> 
> 
> View attachment 4233516
> View attachment 4233498
> View attachment 4233517
> View attachment 4233496



Lovvveee this!


----------



## bag-princess

no wonder we are loving that black and white/tulle - it's Oscar de la Renta's pre-fall 2018!  i absolutely  his designs! if i could have i would have loved having a custom wedding gown designed by him!


----------



## absolutpink

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Australian Geographic Society Awards
> 
> 
> View attachment 4233516
> View attachment 4233498
> View attachment 4233517
> View attachment 4233496



This look is everything!


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Imo SJP has always been really beautiful, unconventionally beautiful, but still a knockout.


and she seems like a really sweet person


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder if she's further along in her pregnancy or if she's just so happy to be pregnant.  For someone who's not showing much she's doing pregnant body language a lot (hands over belly)


----------



## prettyprincess

Haha! I love how smug she looks here! She’s like yes, a throne is where I belong


----------



## uhpharm01

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she's further along in her pregnancy or if she's just so happy to be pregnant.  For someone who's not showing much she's doing pregnant body language a lot (hands over belly)


 I think she is one month further along than they are saying.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Beautiful dress. Harry could do with some new shoes and some better tailored pants. He’s looked a bit scraggly this trip.


----------



## afsweet

the oscar de la renta dress might be my favorite thing she's ever worn


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> View attachment 4233788
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha! I love how smug she looks here! She’s like yes, a throne is where I belong


smug isn't a quality I admire....not even saying that she is or looks smug


----------



## Tivo

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Australian Geographic Society Awards
> 
> 
> View attachment 4233516
> View attachment 4233498
> View attachment 4233517
> View attachment 4233496


She looks gorgeous here. Her hair looks amazing.


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> smug isn't a quality I admire....not even saying that she is or looks smug


Agreed. I was just being silly.
I should say I like how confident she’s becoming in her newfound  royalness.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Invictus Games Wheelchair Basketball Final


----------



## DeMonica

She's simply gorgeous. I don't know if it's the stylist or her but the last half a dozen outfits are perfect for her. She's getting that beautiful pregnancy glow and starts to look a little fuller which is pretty and healthy.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Invictus Games Closing Ceremony


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Agreed. I was just being silly.
> I should say I like how confident she’s becoming in her newfound  royalness.


I like that better


----------



## uhpharm01

How many more days left for this tour?


----------



## DeMonica

Pretty again. I love to see the two of them interacting. Their attraction and attention to each other is so genuine. This baby is definitely coming to parents in love.


----------



## Morgan R

uhpharm01 said:


> How many more days left for this tour?



4 more days


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> 4 more days


They fly to New Zealand on Sunday... Its already Sunday am there now


----------



## Sharont2305

*Sunday, October 28 - Wellington, New Zealand*

Meghan and Harry fly to the city of Wellington in New Zealand where they will be greeted by Prime Minster Jacinta Ardem and attend a ceremony at Government House.

*Monday, October 29 - Wellington, New Zealand*

The Duke and Duchess start the day by visiting to one of New Zealand’s most famous cafes where they will discuss mental health campaigns.

They will then receive a traditional welcome at Abel Tasman National Park.

*Tuesday, October 30 - Auckland, New Zealand*

The couple travel to Auckland to visit the North Short to dedicate a 20-hectare area of native bush to the Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy.

In the afternoon they will attend a reception hosed by the Prime Minister at the Auckland War Museum.

*Wednesday, 31 October - Rotorua, New Zealand*

On the last day of the tour the Duke and Duchess will visit Rotorua.

In the afternoon they will visit Rainbow Springs to learn about its kiwi breeding program and meet with conservationists.

They will conclude their tour in Rotorua by meeting members of the public and they take an educational tree walk and meet representatives of the local biking community.

Meghan and Harry will then return to Auckland before flying back to London the next day.


----------



## chareen

Jayne1 said:


> I saw an interview where she said she hasn't seen her natural hair in decades.



I saw this picture of her circulating when she first dated Harry.  I think she was in high school in this picture with her natural curly hair.


----------



## chareen

Based on this recent pic, you can tell her hair is still curly by looking at her hair growth on her "sideburns" or hairline.


----------



## chareen

More old natural hair pics


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chareen

Unless she can grow her hair longer like "Felicity", I doubt she will sport her natural curly hair in the future.

The actress who played Felicity had natural curly hair in that TV series.  Lately her hair is also relaxed to straight.


----------



## White Orchid

Wow, she was so petty and that hair


----------



## Morgan R

Leaving Sydney, Australia


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving in Wellington, New Zealand


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

They are looking better!


----------



## Florasun

prettyprincess said:


> View attachment 4233788
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha! I love how smug she looks here! She’s like yes, a throne is where I belong


That is a perfect description of my cat.
(She lives with a dear friend but I call her my cat since I rescued her and her brother, and raised them until they were 3 months.)


----------



## Morgan R

Attending reception to mark the 125th anniversary of Women’s Suffrage in New Zealand at Government House


----------



## Grande Latte

I think she looks great all the time. She' assimilated so well and so fast into the royal family and she's beaming. Personally I'm happy an American has married into the royals.  She certainly brings modernity and diversity into an otherwise very archaic system.

Heck, she can wear her hair however she wants. I like her hair straightened with big, wavy curls and apparently she does too. Why the pressure to look a certain way?


----------



## myown

chareen said:


> I saw this picture of her circulating when she first dated Harry.  I think she was in high school in this picture with her natural curly hair.


those are stunning curls, but they look like they are a lot of work


----------



## myown

chareen said:


> More old natural hair pics


and her nose looks exactly the same


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she's further along in her pregnancy or if she's just so happy to be pregnant.  For someone who's not showing much she's doing pregnant body language a lot (hands over belly)


I bet she feels like she is showing a lot. like her belly is huge yet. 

but also, where else to put your hands?


----------



## sdkitty

chareen said:


> Unless she can grow her hair longer like "Felicity", I doubt she will sport her natural curly hair in the future.
> 
> The actress who played Felicity had natural curly hair in that TV series.  Lately her hair is also relaxed to straight.


how pretty keri russell was.....I've heard her say looking back she doesn't like her curls....not sure how she felt about them at the time


----------



## princess101804

aren't they "working" why the hand holding?


----------



## chareen

myown said:


> and her nose looks exactly the same



I think the only surgery she had, unless it was a good bra, was breast surgery during her Deal or No Deal days.  Then she had them removed.  Or she could have been like Gisele...blossomed in her 20s then the boobs went away.

I agree, her nose looks the same.  I doubt she had it done.  It is actually a bit "taller" than Harry's.  It is funny how their noses are similar.

I heard somewhere that she loves her hair blown out especially for Suits.  I doubt she will go back to her natural curls.


----------



## Morgan R

At Maranui Café where they met young people from a number of mental health projects


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> how pretty keri russell was.....I've heard her say looking back she doesn't like her curls....not sure how she felt about them at the time


Seriously! With a face like this who even needs a scalp lol.


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> and her nose looks exactly the same


I don't think it is though. Look at how wide it was.

I have to agree with whoever said it's a great nose job. I also agree it's impossible to take a bad photo of her.  But the nose is slimmer and the veneers are gorgeous.


----------



## Jayne1

chareen said:


> I think the only surgery she had, unless it was a good bra, was breast surgery during her Deal or No Deal days.  Then she had them removed.  Or she could have been like Gisele...blossomed in her 20s then the boobs went away.
> 
> I agree, her nose looks the same.  I doubt she had it done.  It is actually a bit "taller" than Harry's.  It is funny how their noses are similar.
> 
> I heard somewhere that she loves her hair blown out especially for Suits.  I doubt she will go back to her natural curls.


Giselle never had boobs, then she had implants, then she took them out.

I remember seeing Gisele on the scene from her first catwalk with Prada and the like. No boobs. Then bikini Gisele and bigger boobs, then she got married and no boobs. Don't know what they look like now.  lol


----------



## uhpharm01

Jayne1 said:


> I don't think it is though. Look at how wide it was.
> 
> I have to agree with whoever said it's a great nose job. I also agree it's impossible to take a bad photo of her.  But the nose is slimmer and the veneers are gorgeous.
> View attachment 4236241
> View attachment 4236242


would her nose be smaller in terms of width due to weight loss?


----------



## Addicted to bags

uhpharm01 said:


> would her nose be smaller in terms of width due to weight loss?


Or the angle the photo is shot at?


----------



## Morgan R

At Abel Tasman National Park


----------



## Grande Latte

I think breast implants are overrated and just don't suit certain people. So post surgery regret happens frequently, and they had them taken out. Because after all it's a very unnatural look. And as women, we really have to be at peace with our boobs. 

PS: I like Megan small chested. She's already a very attractive lady, she doesn't need the bells and whistles.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think already we are seeing her boobs getting a bit bigger through the pregnancy. She does suit a little more weight, in some of the pictures we've seen she doesn't look pregnant, just looks curvy.
I wonder how she'll carry later on?


----------



## Morgan R

At Courtenay Creative


----------



## minababe

def 5. month and a Girl haha
her face gets rounder and her hips and middle part are already round and her boobs! meghan got boobs haha . she is totally glowing! and they are so proud to be pregnant, Harry mentioned the ' Little bump' in his speech today. so much love for These two

I can totally understand why she is wearing her hair like she does. it suits her Petit Frame so much better, and she doesn't look black at all. her skin is really pale and she has all over freckles. I always thought on suits she is something exotic or mexican. she is really a beautiful mix.

btw most of the time she wore really fitted Dresses and tops at suits even when she was really "flat" and she didn't wore any push up bras there. so I think she loves her Body how it is


----------



## DeMonica

She's in her second trimester so it's pretty normal and healthy that she's rounder than before, She seems to be naturally thin but she's probably excercising less or differently now, and eats a little more than she used to. I think she's looking radiant.


----------



## cafecreme15

I've loved her last few looks! She is gorgeous and positively glowing. Being pregnant really suits her. But that maternity dress she wore to deplane in New Zealand...come on. So unnecessary.


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^^lol my thought was she is so happy to be pregnant she is really looking forward to maternity wear. I know loads of women who were like that-just so ready to look pregnant out of excitement.


----------



## Morgan R

At the dedication of Carol Whaley Native Bush to the Queens Commonwealth Canopy


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting the Pillars Charity and having a walkabout at Viaduct Harbour


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's reception at Auckland War Memorial Museum in Auckland,New Zealand


----------



## minababe

cafecreme15 said:


> I've loved her last few looks! She is gorgeous and positively glowing. Being pregnant really suits her. But that maternity dress she wore to deplane in New Zealand...come on. So unnecessary.



I don't think this was a big Thing.
she just wanted to be comfortable and Relaxing on the flight. nothing wrong with that. I think she jiust forgot to close her coat when she left the plane. because after that she was the whole time in her coat and than changed the Outfit for the next appointment.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Attending Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's reception at Auckland War Memorial Museum in Auckland,New Zealand
> 
> View attachment 4237478
> View attachment 4237485
> View attachment 4237482
> View attachment 4237483
> View attachment 4237481



beautiful ! I remember the Dress. she wore it last year at a polo ,match of Harry.


----------



## cafecreme15

minababe said:


> I don't think this was a big Thing.
> she just wanted to be comfortable and Relaxing on the flight. nothing wrong with that. I think she jiust forgot to close her coat when she left the plane. because after that she was the whole time in her coat and than changed the Outfit for the next appointment.


Perhaps I am more cynical but I think everything about this was very much intentional. As if anyone needed to be reminded that she is pregnant.


----------



## Tivo

cafecreme15 said:


> Perhaps I am more cynical but I think everything about this was very much intentional. As if anyone needed to be reminded that she is pregnant.


Many people want to see the bump. They’re on an official tour so that’s the staged stuff that may happen. Or it could be innocent. Who knows? It doesn’t matter anyway...especially if it’s work.


----------



## cafecreme15

Tivo said:


> Many people want to see the bump. They’re on an official tour so that’s the staged stuff that may happen. Or it could be innocent. Who knows? It doesn’t matter anyway...especially if it’s work.


This is all very true. It just seemed, in my opinion, like a staged and smug thing for her to do. She did not need to wear maternity clothes before or after this one outfit. All eyes are on her anyway, so this particular appearance seemed more like a publicity stunt than anything else. That being said, I am loving keeping up with all the outfits on this tour. It is very possible that I am reading something into that outfit that she didn't intend to put out there, but that is my take nonetheless.


----------



## Tivo

cafecreme15 said:


> This is all very true. It just seemed, in my opinion, like a staged and smug thing for her to do. She did not need to wear maternity clothes before or after this one outfit. All eyes are on her anyway, so this particular appearance seemed more like a publicity stunt than anything else. That being said, I am loving keeping up with all the outfits on this tour. It is very possible that I am reading something into that outfit that she didn't intend to put out there, but that is my take nonetheless.


I kind of liken these Royal tours to concerts. Each city gets the same song and dance...all very staged, but I imagine they’re flooded with requests for more access from all directions. So they’re probably doing their best to get through this and go home.


----------



## bisbee

cafecreme15 said:


> This is all very true. It just seemed, in my opinion, like a staged and smug thing for her to do. She did not need to wear maternity clothes before or after this one outfit. All eyes are on her anyway, so this particular appearance seemed more like a publicity stunt than anything else. That being said, I am loving keeping up with all the outfits on this tour. It is very possible that I am reading something into that outfit that she didn't intend to put out there, but that is my take nonetheless.


Staged and smug?  Publicity stunt?  She is pregnant...everyone knows it!  Most who like her and Harry are happy about it.  Many women pregnant for the first time wear maternity clothes before it is necessary.

Give her a break!


----------



## LittleStar88

cafecreme15 said:


> This is all very true. It just seemed, in my opinion, like a staged and smug thing for her to do. She did not need to wear maternity clothes before or after this one outfit. All eyes are on her anyway, so this particular appearance seemed more like a publicity stunt than anything else. That being said, I am loving keeping up with all the outfits on this tour. It is very possible that I am reading something into that outfit that she didn't intend to put out there, but that is my take nonetheless.



Not sure about smug. She seems quite genuine and down-to-earth/relatable (or as much as she can be).

May have felt bloaty, puffy, just generally needing to be comfy and roomy around the middle and needed the extra room a maternity dress could give.

I have never been preggo, so not about to even speculate what it is like. But honestly one burrito and I feel the need for a maternity dress. Sometimes it doesn't take much to get you there when you are not pregnant so having your body go through all of the things it goes through when pregnant, plus extended travel abroad and marathon engagements...


----------



## Morgan R

Sweet moment that happened yesterday during the walkabout at Viaduct Harbour


----------



## cafecreme15

bisbee said:


> Staged and smug?  Publicity stunt?  She is pregnant...everyone knows it!  Most who like her and Harry are happy about it.  Many women pregnant for the first time wear maternity clothes before it is necessary.
> 
> Give her a break!





LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure about smug. She seems quite genuine and down-to-earth/relatable (or as much as she can be).
> 
> May have felt bloaty, puffy, just generally needing to be comfy and roomy around the middle and needed the extra room a maternity dress could give.
> 
> I have never been preggo, so not about to even speculate what it is like. But honestly one burrito and I feel the need for a maternity dress. Sometimes it doesn't take much to get you there when you are not pregnant so having your body go through all of the things it goes through when pregnant, plus extended travel abroad and marathon engagements...


This very well could be the explanation. Perhaps I am wrong, but to me the maternity dress and constant cradling of a nonexistent bump seems more attention seeking than anything else. As I said, I seem to be naturally more cynical. Meghan does know how to work a camera and give the people what they seem to want, which is her being clearly pregnant. Whether or not she feels like this in real life, no one can say for sure. Just my opinion.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I had a friend who desperately wanted a baby and as soon as she was finally able to become pregnant, she immediately started wearing maternity clothes out of sheer joy.

She doesn’t need to seek attention, she has it in spades. She’s married to one of the most photographed people in the world and on a tour where their primary purpose is to be photographed.  She also seems to have an inability to know what to do with her hands so maybe this helps her.


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Te Papaiouru Marae (a Maori community hub)


----------



## berrydiva

cafecreme15 said:


> This very well could be the explanation. Perhaps I am wrong, but to me *the maternity dress and constant cradling of a nonexistent bump* seems more attention seeking than anything else..


But isn't this what everyone wanted to see? Folks couldn't wait for her to be pregnant and now that she is, there's fault to find with how she's being pregnant. It seems like it's just so impossibly difficult to be a woman celeb and having to carry that weight of your uterus never pleasing others.


----------



## redney

Harry looks as though he's cradling a bump too. [emoji23] It's likely just having nothing to do with their hands


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting the National Kiwi Hatchery at Rainbow Springs and at walkabout in Rotorua


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting the Redwoods Treewalk


----------



## DC-Cutie

I really like seeing them together.  Just puts a smile on my face...


----------



## Jayne1

I'm in constant awe of her being able to keep a smile on her face at all times. Even when Harry is looking serious.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> I'm in constant awe of her being able to keep a smile on her face at all times. Even when Harry is looking serious.


I'm impressed by it too.  Harry is allowed to look however he looks, but Meghan knows that ONE photo of her face looking less than contented and it will be used against her in the tabloids.


----------



## afsweet

redney said:


> Harry looks as though he's cradling a bump too. [emoji23] It's likely just having nothing to do with their hands



lol! hand placement is so awkward.


----------



## StylishMD

bisbee said:


> Staged and smug?  Publicity stunt?  She is pregnant...everyone knows it!  Most who like her and Harry are happy about it.  Many women pregnant for the first time wear maternity clothes before it is necessary.
> 
> Give her a break!


@bisbee totally agree with you
I know I did, just more comfortable


----------



## prettyprincess

Jayne1 said:


> I'm in constant awe of her being able to keep a smile on her face at all times. Even when Harry is looking serious.


She has every reason to be smiling, and I hope it stays that way for them.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> I'm impressed by it too.  Harry is allowed to look however he looks, but Meghan knows that ONE photo of her face looking less than contented and it will be used against her in the tabloids.


Exactly!


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> I'm in constant awe of her being able to keep a smile on her face at all times. Even when Harry is looking serious.


She has to keep smiling. That’s her job, but also as someone else mentioned, every facial expression/movement will be scrutinized and dissected so it’s in her best interest to keep smiling!


----------



## Alexenjie

I think Meghan really is one of those rare people who always seems to look good in photographs. Harry doesn't have this trait but Princess Diana did. Her life was awful and it was sort of hard to believe because she always looked so good. I don't think Meghan is as stunningly beautiful as Diana was but never taking a bad picture is amazing.

Will the palace say at some point when Meghan and Harry's baby is due? I can't remember how it worked with Kate but I don't remember having no clue whatsoever as to when she would give birth.


----------



## Sharont2305

Alexenjie said:


> Will the palace say at some point when Meghan and Harry's baby is due? I can't remember how it worked with Kate but I don't remember having no clue whatsoever as to when she would give birth.


The Palace will never divulge a due date, All that's been said is Spring and that's all we will get... unless Meghan slips up and accidentally says it. If the decide on having the baby at the Lindo wing there will be a notice a couple of weeks beforehand of parking restrictions or road closure, apart from emergency vehicles obviously between two dates, I think with Catherine it was for about 2 weeks.


----------



## Alexenjie

Sharont2305 said:


> The Palace will never divulge a due date, All that's been said is Spring and that's all we will get... unless Meghan slips up and accidentally says it. If the decide on having the baby at the Lindo wing there will be a notice a couple of weeks beforehand of parking restrictions or road closure, apart from emergency vehicles obviously between two dates, I think with Catherine it was for about 2 weeks.


I went back on this web site and looked at Kate's pages close to giving birth last spring and it was 2 weeks of parking restrictions around the hospital that told people that Prince Louis's birth was close. I don't know if Harry and Meghan are high enough up in the royal family that they would get the same preparation? I would be surprised if Meghan didn't go to the Lindo Wing since there have been so many royal women giving birth there. On our board here everyone seemed pretty certain that Kate was due in April, though no specific date.


----------



## Sharont2305

Alexenjie said:


> I went back on this web site and looked at Kate's pages close to giving birth last spring and it was 2 weeks of parking restrictions around the hospital that told people that Prince Louis's birth was close. I don't know if Harry and Meghan are high enough up in the royal family that they would get the same preparation? I would be surprised if Meghan didn't go to the Lindo Wing since there have been so many royal women giving birth there. On our board here everyone seemed pretty certain that Kate was due in April, though no specific date.


Yeah, I know, that's why I said they never give a date and about the notice. They would have to give some notice ahead of time of restrictions to parking, they can't just say "as of tomorrow road will be closed for 2 weeks etc" I think it was mid March we were told.
As far as pecking order re same treatment as William and Catherine, I think same rules apply should they chose the Lindo wing. They wouldn't be able to go in and out quietly, absolutely not, this is Harry we are talking about. These two are the new superstar couple of our Royal Family, lol.


----------



## Grande Latte

Don't know if this has been posted before, but Meghan looks really good in RED!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

A message from Harry and Meghan regarding their tour of Australia, Fiji, Tonga, and New Zealand included with photo of Meghan taken by Harry was posted on Kensington Palace's Instagram:


----------



## solange

minababe said:


> def 5. month and a Girl haha
> her face gets rounder and her hips and middle part are already round and her boobs! meghan got boobs haha . she is totally glowing! and they are so proud to be pregnant, Harry mentioned the ' Little bump' in his speech today. so much love for These two[emoji813]
> 
> I can totally understand why she is wearing her hair like she does. it suits her Petit Frame so much better, and she doesn't look black at all. her skin is really pale and she has all over freckles. I always thought on suits she is something exotic or mexican. she is really a beautiful mix.
> 
> btw most of the time she wore really fitted Dresses and tops at suits even when she was really "flat" and she didn't wore any push up bras there. so I think she loves her Body how it is [emoji2]


I thought her looking "black" was obvious, actually.



cafecreme15 said:


> This very well could be the explanation. Perhaps I am wrong, but to me the maternity dress and constant cradling of a nonexistent bump seems more attention seeking than anything else. As I said, I seem to be naturally more cynical. Meghan does know how to work a camera and give the people what they seem to want, which is her being clearly pregnant. Whether or not she feels like this in real life, no one can say for sure. Just my opinion.


I'd suggest she might be calling so much because she can feel the baby move already. In that case, at least she's not walking around prodding herself to get more baby flutters.



StylishMD said:


> @bisbee totally agree with you
> I know I did, just more comfortable


I still wear some of mine [emoji15]


----------



## DC-Cutie

"she doesn't look black at all....  always thought she was exotic"  What tha.....

News flash, black people have color range of very pale to dark beautiful ebony, we also have freckles.  and we are VERY VERY exotic.


----------



## solange

DC-Cutie said:


> "she doesn't look black at all....  always thought she was exotic"  What tha.....
> 
> News flash, black people have color range of very pale to dark beautiful ebony, we also have freckles.  and we are VERY VERY exotic.


Yes, we are. [emoji41]


----------



## Tivo

DC-Cutie said:


> "she doesn't look black at all....  always thought she was exotic"  What tha.....
> 
> News flash, black people have color range of very pale to dark beautiful ebony, we also have freckles.  and we are VERY VERY exotic.


I caught that as well, but chose not to respond because the poster told on themselves and I just didn’t have the energy.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Tivo said:


> I caught that as well, but chose not to respond because the poster told on themselves and I just didn’t have the energy.


I had time today


----------



## Tivo

DC-Cutie said:


> I had time today


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> A message from Harry and Meghan regarding their tour of Australia, Fiji, Tonga, and New Zealand included with photo of Meghan taken by Harry was posted on Kensington Palace's Instagram:



This forest looks so serene and magical


----------



## RueHermes

Does anyone know the designer of her plaid trench that she wore in New Zealand ?


----------



## jcnc

I saw a video of her . He definitely looks more pregnant in the video than in photos. At least 5 months IMO


----------



## StylishMD

DC-Cutie said:


> I had time today


Thanks @DC-Cutie, I found that borderline offensive but I'm tired of educating folks


----------



## BagLovingMom

RueHermes said:


> Does anyone know the designer of her plaid trench that she wore in New Zealand ?


I’m pretty sure I read it was Karen Walker. It’s gorgeous indeed !


----------



## Grande Latte

The fact this girl is photogenic ALL THE TIME is just amazing. She never takes a bad photo even though we all know how reporters/ photographers can be so cruel sometimes.

Her poise and a variety of smiles are just incredible. It's like she's made/ meant for this role. Because in all seriousness, even big Hollywood stars can't pull of looking so perfect all the time. It's true. You gotta give her credit for that.

At first, I wasn't so sure about Harry's choice. But as time goes by, I can't help but have more and more respect for her. I'm slowly becoming a Megan fan!


----------



## LittleStar88

Grande Latte said:


> The fact this girl is photogenic ALL THE TIME is just amazing. She never takes a bad photo even though we all know how reporters/ photographers can be so cruel sometimes.
> 
> Her poise and a variety of smiles are just incredible. It's like she's made/ meant for this role. Because in all seriousness, even big Hollywood stars can't pull of looking so perfect all the time. It's true. You gotta give her credit for that.
> 
> At first, I wasn't so sure about Harry's choice. But as time goes by, I can't help but have more and more respect for her. I'm slowly becoming a Megan fan!



THIS 100%!

I felt the same way when she and Harry started dating... Meghan WHO?? And from that point on she has completely captivated me. Always flawless, gracious, and well-spoken. Now her charm, poise, and classic image... Despite a few wardrobe misses, she can only continue to get better.

As an American, I could not be more proud to have her as an unofficial representation of what an American woman to the rest of the world. Commoner made princess. Total fairy tale!


----------



## chicaloca

I am struck by the modernity Meghan  brings to the British royals in terms of her style. Nothing about  her fashion during the tour was stuffy, dated or old-ladyish. I think think she will be the most influential British royal style-wise. I have never paid attention to the British royals style until now.

I keep trying to figure out why Kate’s fashion reads as less modern. She’s done better with her last few outfits ( no doubt due to the Meghan effect) but for the most part her style still reads “old.” I think it’s partly the tightly curled hair that seems dated and pageanty. Meghan’s loose waves and casual buns seem more youthful. Kate also really needs to retire the matching coat/dress sets. No woman under 70 should dress like that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

chicaloca said:


> I am struck by the modernity Meghan  brings to the British royals in terms of her style. Nothing about  her fashion during the tour was stuffy, dated or old-ladyish. I think think she will be the most influential British royal style-wise. I have never paid attention to the British royals style until now.
> 
> I keep trying to figure out why Kate’s fashion reads as less modern. She’s done better with her last few outfits ( no doubt due to the Meghan effect) but for the most part her style still reads “old.” I think it’s partly the tightly curled hair that seems dated and pageanty. Meghan’s loose waves and casual buns seem more youthful. Kate also really needs to retire the matching coat/dress sets. No woman under 70 should dress like that.



Kate and Meghan's wardrobe differ because of the role they play within the monarchy in my opinion. Kate will be Queen Consort when William is King and she is also the mother to George who will be a future King. I think she feels her wardrobe choices now should be reflected of her future role yet honestly at this current time she could dress more modern despite her future role. In comparison Diana's wardrobe was very modern for it's time while they she was married to Charles and then after her divorce to Charles. And now currently Camilla's wardrobe is still very modern for her age (which is over 70) and fits the role she will inevitably have which is Queen Consort when Charles is King. So I think Kate's wardrobe could be more modern than what she wears currently.

Meghan's wardrobe to me is very much a reflection of her as well as Harry's role within the monarchy which is going to be heavily involved with the youth of Commonwealth countries. Queen Elizabeth II is the monarch of 16 of the 53 Commonwealth countries and while some of the countries of the Commonwealth are now republics and have a president as Head of State and some of them have kept the Queen as Head of State. Queen Elizabeth II with the help of her family have worked hard to keep peace and good communication between all nations that are members of Commonwealth regardless if they have her as monarch or a republic. Queen Elizabeth II earlier this year named Harry the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador. All royals take on tours but Harry and Meghan's recent tour of Australia, Fiji, the Kingdom of Tonga, and New Zealand was very much reflective of Harry's role as the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador. Of course with any royal tour that royals take that meant they met with Prime Ministers, presidents, other royals, and dignitaries. Yet many of the engagements they did while on tour were youth orientated to reflect the Youth (youth meaning those 30 and younger) which make up a large percentage of the various Commonwealth Nations.


----------



## Swanky

The styles may also differ due to their personal choices, age and one being a mother several times over.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Swanky said:


> The styles may also differ due to their personal choices, age and one being a mother several times over.


I agree although I think they are both around the same age. They’re simply different women with different personalities and tastes I figure. I think they both look great and appropriate. Also I never get the impression that Kate is all that into fashion anyways.


----------



## sdkitty

BagLovingMom said:


> I agree although I think they are both around the same age. They’re simply different women with different personalities and tastes I figure. I think they both look great and appropriate. Also I never get the impression that Kate is all that into fashion anyways.


agree 
I think Kate is very pretty.  I don't feel the need to see her be a fashion icon.  She's pretty, slender and dresses appropriately.
Meghan has her own style.  She's a different person and an actress.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> I caught that as well, but chose not to respond because the poster told on themselves and I just didn’t have the energy.


I can definitely appreciate your reaction to that comment.  the post implied that not looking black was a positive thing.
There is nothing wrong with being black or looking black (or brown or whatever)  And I love when I see a beautiful black woman with natural hair.
But it does occur to me that in addition to maybe liking her hair straight, she may have thought as an actress she would have more access to different roles if her look was more ambiguous.
Anyway I've been liking her wardrobe lately and they look happy together.


----------



## Morgan R

Some royal fans stumbled across a rare photograph of Harry and Meghan. This photograph seems to be Harry and Meghan's official joint photograph. It is a standard for royals to have an official photograph be among the gifts they give to dignitaries of the countries they visit. This particular photograph was spotted on display at Government House in New Zealand and seemingly gifted to New Zealand's current Governor - General Patsy Reddy.







The same photograph was previously seen months ago in the background during one of Queen Elizabeth II's meetings at Buckingham Palace as one of her family photographs she had on display.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Some royal fans stumbled across a rare photograph of Harry and Meghan. This photograph seems to be Harry and Meghan's official joint photograph. It is a standard for royals to have an official photograph be among the gifts they give to dignitaries of the countries they visit. This particular photograph was spotted on display at Government House in New Zealand and seemingly gifted to New Zealand's current Governor - General Patsy Reddy.
> 
> View attachment 4242037
> View attachment 4242066
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The same photograph was previously seen months ago in the background during one of Queen Elizabeth II's meetings at Buckingham Palace as one of her family photographs she had on display.
> View attachment 4242045
> View attachment 4242062


The last picture just tickles me, The Queens glasses are there, like we would do.


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Visiting the Pillars Charity and having a walkabout at Viaduct Harbour
> 
> View attachment 4237395
> View attachment 4237394
> View attachment 4237391
> View attachment 4237392
> View attachment 4237393
> View attachment 4237398
> View attachment 4237397


I remember when I was 3 - 4 month pregnant, my bump hurt so much and I always felt the need to "hold it", like if I wouldn't it'd drop


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> The last picture just tickles me, The Queens glasses are there, like we would do.


I noticed them too and thought "the Queen's specs!"


----------



## bag-princess

*The Queen Just Broke Another Major Royal Protocol for Meghan's Mom, Doria Ragland*


Last year, Meghan became the first non-royal to score an invitation to the Queen's annual Christmas celebration at her Sandringham estate in Norfolk, where the Windsor clan always spend the Christmas holidays. This year, it looks like Elizabeth is breaking royal tradition again for another member of Meghan's family: Her mother, Doria Ragland.

According to _The Sun_, a "senior royal source" says Her Majesty has invited Doria to spend the holidays with the royal family. This is a huge deal since royal in-laws aren't usually invited to do, well, much of anything important with the royal family. Sure, they're invited to weddings and christenings, but they can't call dibs on Christmas or Easter or even necessarily tag along for the royals' celebrations.

So why is an exception being made for Doria?

"It’s a mark of the Queen’s respect for Meghan and an acknowledgement that she doesn’t have any other relations in this country-unlike Kate who has the support of a very close family," the senior source told Daily Express.


https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/queen-just-broke-another-major-142800579.html


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> *The Queen Just Broke Another Major Royal Protocol for Meghan's Mom, Doria Ragland*
> 
> 
> Last year, Meghan became the first non-royal to score an invitation to the Queen's annual Christmas celebration at her Sandringham estate in Norfolk, where the Windsor clan always spend the Christmas holidays. This year, it looks like Elizabeth is breaking royal tradition again for another member of Meghan's family: Her mother, Doria Ragland.
> 
> According to _The Sun_, a "senior royal source" says Her Majesty has invited Doria to spend the holidays with the royal family. This is a huge deal since royal in-laws aren't usually invited to do, well, much of anything important with the royal family. Sure, they're invited to weddings and christenings, but they can't call dibs on Christmas or Easter or even necessarily tag along for the royals' celebrations.
> 
> So why is an exception being made for Doria?
> 
> "It’s a mark of the Queen’s respect for Meghan and an acknowledgement that she doesn’t have any other relations in this country-unlike Kate who has the support of a very close family," the senior source told Daily Express.
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/queen-just-broke-another-major-142800579.html


that's nice 
but of course the daily express is speculating....they don't know why the queen did this
Maybe Diana's death and the public outcry afterwards taught her some lessons
Or maybe Harry went to his grandmother and asked for this.  Supposedly she had a soft spot for him


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> that's nice
> but of course the daily express is speculating....they don't know why the queen did this
> Maybe Diana's death and the public outcry afterwards taught her some lessons
> Or maybe Harry went to his grandmother and asked for this.  Supposedly she had a soft spot for him




the point is - Dora was invited.  of course they don't know why and it doesn't matter what they think.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> the point is - Dora was invited.  of course they don't know why and it doesn't matter what they think.


right
I said it's nice
I just find it annoying the way they explain it as if they know the reason behind it


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> right
> I said it's nice
> I just find it annoying the way they explain it as if they know the reason behind it




i have noticed how they do that often - as if they want people to believe they know so much about what goes on inside the palace.


----------



## myown

I always wonder if the Royals are truly that strict, or if - behind closed doors - they break lots if rules


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

Grande Latte said:


> The fact this girl is photogenic ALL THE TIME is just amazing. She never takes a bad photo even though we all know how reporters/ photographers can be so cruel sometimes.
> 
> Her poise and a variety of smiles are just incredible. It's like she's made/ meant for this role. Because in all seriousness, even big Hollywood stars can't pull of looking so perfect all the time. It's true. You gotta give her credit for that.
> 
> At first, I wasn't so sure about Harry's choice. But as time goes by, I can't help but have more and more respect for her. I'm slowly becoming a Megan fan!


Couldn't agree more with all of this! 



bag-princess said:


> *The Queen Just Broke Another Major Royal Protocol for Meghan's Mom, Doria Ragland*
> 
> 
> Last year, Meghan became the first non-royal to score an invitation to the Queen's annual Christmas celebration at her Sandringham estate in Norfolk, where the Windsor clan always spend the Christmas holidays. This year, it looks like Elizabeth is breaking royal tradition again for another member of Meghan's family: Her mother, Doria Ragland.
> 
> According to _The Sun_, a "senior royal source" says Her Majesty has invited Doria to spend the holidays with the royal family. This is a huge deal since royal in-laws aren't usually invited to do, well, much of anything important with the royal family. Sure, they're invited to weddings and christenings, but they can't call dibs on Christmas or Easter or even necessarily tag along for the royals' celebrations.
> 
> So why is an exception being made for Doria?
> 
> "It’s a mark of the Queen’s respect for Meghan and an acknowledgement that she doesn’t have any other relations in this country-unlike Kate who has the support of a very close family," the senior source told Daily Express.
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/queen-just-broke-another-major-142800579.html





lovehgss1 said:


> Queen Elizabeth II enjoys a horseback ride around Windsor Park while her husband Prince Phillip enjoyed a carriage drive though the park.
> 
> dailymail


Whatever the actual reason for the invite, this is very gracious and thoughtful of the Queen.


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> I always wonder if the Royals are truly that strict, or if - behind closed doors - they break lots if rules


well I don't know if this is breaking protocol but I heard Andy Cohen say something one time that stuck in my mind.  He saw (or heard about) Katherine holding a glass of wine and smoking.  Now I almost hate to say it here because everyone gets so upset about celebs who smoke.  But Andy found it humanizing.


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> well I don't know if this is breaking protocol but I heard Andy Cohen say something one time that stuck in my mind.  He saw (or heard about) Katherine holding a glass of wine and smoking.  Now I almost hate to say it here because everyone gets so upset about celebs who smoke.  But Andy found it humanizing.


I know she used to be a smoker but I wonder if she has since quit since joining the royal family and having children. I hope she has, anyway.


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> that's nice
> but of course the daily express is speculating....they don't know why the queen did this
> Maybe Diana's death and the public outcry afterwards taught her some lessons
> Or maybe Harry went to his grandmother and asked for this.  Supposedly she had a soft spot for him


I think the Queen is being kind to Meghan for sure, and showing support as Meghan copes with her sister and father.  There’s also the fact that Prince Phillips health hasn’t been good of late, and at 96 this might be the last opportunity to have all the family together with her and her husband at Christmas.   Harry and Meghan would be unlikely to leave Doria on her own at Christmas if she hadn’t had an invitation IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> I think the Queen is being kind to Meghan for sure, and showing support as Meghan copes with her sister and father.  There’s also the fact that Prince Phillips health hasn’t been good of late, and at 96 this might be the last opportunity to have all the family together with her and her husband at Christmas.   Harry and Meghan would be unlikely to leave Doria on her own at Christmas if she hadn’t had an invitation IMO.


Of course in a "normal" world it totally makes sense that she wouldn't be expected to leave her mother alone on Christmas.


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> Of course in a "normal" world it totally makes sense that she wouldn't be expected to leave her mother alone on Christmas.


Not sure what you mean?


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> Not sure what you mean?


Just saying in the royal family this is apparently a break with protocol.  IRL it would just be normal


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> Just saying in the royal family this is apparently a break with protocol.  IRL it would just be normal


The Middletons have spent time there in the past.  But headlines sell newspapers I suppose.


----------



## berrydiva

The Queen seems to have a special place in her heart for Harry and William and humanizes herself for them a bit more than she does other members of the royal family.


----------



## LibbyRuth

berrydiva said:


> The Queen seems to have a special place in her heart for Harry and William and humanizes herself for them a bit more than she does other members of the royal family.


I think that some of this is her affection for Harry.  I think that a big part of it is likely Harry making it clear that Megan is his top priority and if he ever had to choose between her well being and the family, he'd choose her. Unlike William, Harry has the luxury of choices. If he and Megan were expected to leave her mother out in the cold to honor the tradition of "the firm", I think Harry would choose to let them cut him off and take care of his wife and mother-in-law.  William has more at stake, so he can't take the same independent streak to get Kate's family to be given the same treatment.


----------



## gazoo

I think it's lovely that Doria is being included. 

As far as William and the Middletons, it's been well documented that he is very close to them and the children spend a lot more time with the Middletons than with Charles. I suspect William may prefer to keep the two sides separate to have that contrast and relaxation. At the end of the day, however lovely the Queen is, it's got to be really stressful and regimented to have a Royal holiday vs just a normal family holiday (peasant style in a huge mansion lol). I hope the Middletons aren't offended or hurt over the reported difference in their treatment by the Queen. Of course making it seem negative sells papers and gets those clicks clicked.


----------



## Tivo

berrydiva said:


> The Queen seems to have a special place in her heart for Harry and William and humanizes herself for them a bit more than she does other members of the royal family.


I agree. Especially Harry. I suspect partly it’s because of his striking resemblance to his grandfather.


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> Just saying in the royal family this is apparently a break with protocol.  IRL it would just be normal


Inviting guests to Christmas is no "break in protocol".  The press is obsessed with that term and it's become meaningless at this point.


----------



## Alexenjie

I just expect that the Queen can invite anyone she wants to share Christmas with the rest of the family, regardless of whatever has been done in the past. I do not get all these royal traditions that seem so strict and useless. It would be incredibly rude to leave Meghan's mom alone for Christmas since she is new to the country and Meghan and Harry are her only family (at least in Britain). Is Britain more concerned with tradition than good manners and hospitality?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Maybe they go hand in hand?  By maintaining a protocol for decades that immediate family is all that is included for Christmas with the Queen, it gives her an excuse to exclude other relatives she doesn't care for?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lubina

Chamber Doll said:


> ^^^^ OMG how sweet of Harry.....love that
> 
> 
> and barf barf barf at the double hand holding......lol   I don't care who is doing that.....super cheesy.....lol



It took me a couple sessions, but I finally caught up here, oddly fascinated hair posts and all! Thanks for whomever posted her different looks. I too saw the double hand hold and thought it was a bit odd until a news article included an instagram containing this photo speculating that he probably learned it from his mom and finds comfort in it:


----------



## berrydiva

Lubina said:


> It took me a couple sessions, but I finally caught up here, oddly fascinated hair posts and all! Thanks for whomever posted her different looks. I too saw the double hand hold and thought it was a bit odd until a news article included an instagram containing this photo speculating that he probably learned it from his mom and finds comfort in it:
> 
> View attachment 4245174


That's very sweet.


----------



## gelbergirl

I think it'll be a lovely walk to Christmas Church Services for Meghan's mom along with the rest of the royal family.


----------



## LibbyRuth

On the surface, the Christmas invite seems lovely.  Then Meghan's mom starts thinking about having to buy a Christmas gift for the Queen,and the panic sets in!


----------



## Laurie Lou

^ apparently they all give each other gag gifts.....lol so I think she’ll be okay


----------



## berrydiva

Laurie Lou said:


> ^ apparently they all give each other gag gifts.....lol so I think she’ll be okay


I'd still have anxiety over a gag gift and if it boarders offending the Queen lol.


----------



## Aimee3

berrydiva said:


> I'd still have anxiety over a gag gift and if it boarders offending the Queen lol.



Yes I was about to say a gag gift might be even harder to find when it concerns the Royals!  I imagine Harry will help with the selection.


----------



## Lubina

Aimee3 said:


> Yes I was about to say a gag gift might be even harder to find when it concerns the Royals!  I imagine Harry will help with the selection.



Harry must know his grandmother well!

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-harry-shower-cap_n_4492606


----------



## Alexenjie

It's funny for me to imagine the royal family with only gag gifts but it absolutely makes sense as they would have no need for anything else.

Do we know if Meghan's mother is living with Harry and Meghan? I know they could live in a huge castle where you could disappear for days with so many rooms but personally I wouldn't want to permanently live  under the same roof with my own mother or mother-in-law. I would definitely want my own space and for her to have the same.


----------



## RueMonge

LibbyRuth said:


> Maybe they go hand in hand?  By maintaining a protocol for decades that immediate family is all that is included for Christmas with the Queen, it gives her an excuse to exclude other relatives she doesn't care for?



I am stealing this idea.


----------



## Morgan R

Alexenjie said:


> It's funny for me to imagine the royal family with only gag gifts but it absolutely makes sense as they would have no need for anything else.
> 
> Do we know if Meghan's mother is living with Harry and Meghan? I know they could live in a huge castle where you could disappear for days with so many rooms but personally I wouldn't want to permanently live under the same roof with my own mother or mother-in-law. I would definitely want my own space and for her to have the same.



Doria lives in California. She travels to see Meghan and Harry. I do imagine though she will probably end up traveling more if not move to the UK now that she will have a grandchild and that I imagine she will want to visit often.

Harry & Meghan have a few places where they live though. They have Nottingham Cottage at Kensington Palace but will likely eventually move into one of the apartments at Kensington Palace. They also have a Country home in Cotswolds (Oxfordshire) and it has been speculated that Queen Elizabeth II gifted them York Cottage (she similarly gifted William and Kate Anmner Hall a few years after they got married).


----------



## prettyprincess

Lubina said:


> It took me a couple sessions, but I finally caught up here, oddly fascinated hair posts and all! Thanks for whomever posted her different looks. I too saw the double hand hold and thought it was a bit odd until a news article included an instagram containing this photo speculating that he probably learned it from his mom and finds comfort in it:
> 
> View attachment 4245174


I wish there was a love love love button!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Lubina said:


> It took me a couple sessions, but I finally caught up here, oddly fascinated hair posts and all! Thanks for whomever posted her different looks. I too saw the double hand hold and thought it was a bit odd until a news article included an instagram containing this photo speculating that he probably learned it from his mom and finds comfort in it:
> 
> View attachment 4245174



This just made my heart melt.


----------



## NY_Mami

Grande Latte said:


> The fact this girl is photogenic ALL THE TIME is just amazing. She never takes a bad photo even though we all know how reporters/ photographers can be so cruel sometimes.
> 
> Her poise and a variety of smiles are just incredible. It's like she's made/ meant for this role. Because in all seriousness, even big Hollywood stars can't pull of looking so perfect all the time. It's true. You gotta give her credit for that.
> 
> At first, I wasn't so sure about Harry's choice. But as time goes by, I can't help but have more and more respect for her. I'm slowly becoming a Megan fan!



I agree, she photographs very well.


----------



## NY_Mami

DC-Cutie said:


> "she doesn't look black at all....  always thought she was exotic"  What tha.....
> 
> News flash, black people have color range of very pale to dark beautiful ebony, we also have freckles.  and we are VERY VERY exotic.



Very True


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> On the surface, the Christmas invite seems lovely.  Then Meghan's mom starts thinking about having to buy a Christmas gift for the Queen,and the panic sets in!


----------



## Morgan R

Lubina said:


> It took me a couple sessions, but I finally caught up here, oddly fascinated hair posts and all! Thanks for whomever posted her different looks. *I too saw the double hand hold and thought it was a bit odd until a news article included an instagram containing this photo speculating that he probably learned it from his mom and finds comfort in it*:
> 
> View attachment 4245174



I've always thought Harry being affectionate rather it be with Meghan (i.e the hand holding, touching her back, or other reassuring touches we've seen him do) or with members of his family happens because that is how his mother was with him (examples below)...so I wouldn't be surprised if he does find comfort in it. Diana was notoriously affectionate with William and Harry (which many have pointed out in documentaries wasn't the royal norm but obviously how you expect a mother to be) then she was hands on with the various people she met much like Harry is as well. William even as a little kid (and not that much older than Harry) many have pointed out acted more reserved like he has as an adult so that is where Harry and William have always more so differed. Though you obviously do get those moments where William is affectionate with Kate and their kids.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at The Field of Remembrance at Westminster Abbey


----------



## berrydiva

Heeyyyy Harry!


----------



## Chamber Doll

Lubina said:


> I too saw the double hand hold and thought it was a bit odd until a news article included an instagram containing this photo speculating that he probably learned it from his mom and finds comfort in it:
> 
> View attachment 4245174



Oh that is really sweet! 
I take back my barf barf barf comment


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince Harry admits he’s definitely learned a thing or two from his father Prince Charles.
Both Harry and William tell the camera they now make sure to turn the lights off in their homes, just like their dad.
Harry explains, “He’s a stickler for turning lights off. And that’s now something that I’m obsessed with as well.”
William adds: “I know, I’ve got serious OCD on light switches now, which is terrible,” as Harry continues: “Which is insane because actually you know, I don’t know whether your wife doesn’t, my wife certainly goes, ‘Well why turn the lights off? You know it’s dark’. I go, ‘We only need one light, we don’t need like six.’”
The Duke of Sussex goes on to share, “And all of a sudden it becomes a habit and those small habit changes he’s making, every single person can do. And I think it’s one of the key lessons that he taught us.”


----------



## alex9179

William looks so much like his mother.


----------



## White Orchid

Those photos with his Mum just made me sigh and imagine, “What if...”


----------



## Sharont2305

alex9179 said:


> William looks so much like his mother.


He always has, and I think Charlotte looks like William and Diana as a child and not the Queen as so many have remarked.


----------



## Grande Latte

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Harry admits he’s definitely learned a thing or two from his father Prince Charles.
> Both Harry and William tell the camera they now make sure to turn the lights off in their homes, just like their dad.
> Harry explains, “He’s a stickler for turning lights off. And that’s now something that I’m obsessed with as well.”
> William adds: “I know, I’ve got serious OCD on light switches now, which is terrible,” as Harry continues: “Which is insane because actually you know, I don’t know whether your wife doesn’t, my wife certainly goes, ‘Well why turn the lights off? You know it’s dark’. I go, ‘We only need one light, we don’t need like six.’”
> The Duke of Sussex goes on to share, “And all of a sudden it becomes a habit and those small habit changes he’s making, every single person can do. And I think it’s one of the key lessons that he taught us.”



I might get flack for this, but I for one, don't like the house/ room dark. It scares me. Doesn't mean I have 10 lights on, but I won't just have one light on either. 

For instance, when you're in the living room, or bedroom watching TV, it's important to make sure the room is well lit, otherwise, it's very bad for your eyesight. Because you force your eyes to squint at bluelight for long duration of time.


----------



## Longchamp

Not sure where your research is from that you bright lights on in the room when you are at a movie theater, watching TV at home or using your computer.  If that was the case, the the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO)  would be up in arms and releasing PSA's. 
*It does help to have some low light back lighting*. The problem with screen watching is eye strain that leads to dry eye. I am a huge advocate of naturale tears. There has been low probability link to glaucoma. Which if you live long enough,  you'll probably get anyways. Our grandparents weren't overdoing the blue screen.  Glaucoma, AMD and cataracts in the elderly keeps Retinal ophthalmologists in business and allows them 2-3 mos off a year to go to Europe.


----------



## Longchamp

x


----------



## Longchamp

x


----------



## Longchamp

x


----------



## Morgan R

The Royal Mail has issued six stamps in honor of Prince Charles’ 70th birthday which is on November 14th. The stamp collection includes a never-before-seen photo of Prince Charles with Prince William and Prince Harry taken in July during celebrations for the 100th anniversary of the Royal Air Force. Prince William and Prince Harry also appear in a stamp that includes a throwback photo of them with Prince Charles at the 2004 Gurkha Welfare Challenge Trophy Polo Match


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

alex9179 said:


> William looks so much like his mother.



Yeah William has always looked like Diana. I have always thought Harry looked like a mixture of his family members rather than Diana and Charles themselves. Harry to me has always looked like a mixture of his aunt Sarah McCorquodale (Diana's sister) plus he has the red hair many of the Spencers have and his grandfather Prince Philip.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Yeah William has always looked like Diana. I have always thought Harry looked like a mixture of his family members rather than Diana and Charles themselves. Harry to me has always looked like a mixture of his aunt Sarah McCorquodale (Diana's sister) plus he has the red hair many of the Spencers have and his grandfather Prince Philip.
> 
> View attachment 4248384
> View attachment 4248112
> View attachment 4248143
> View attachment 4248111


And this picture... Harry is exactly like the Duke of Edinburgh.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the England vs New Zealand rugby match at Twickenham Stadium


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Festival of Remembrance at Royal Albert Hall


----------



## alismarr

I wouldn’t place too much credence on the light switching on / off patter.  They live in a palace.......




Ce


----------



## Flatsy

alismarr said:


> I wouldn’t place too much credence on the light switching on / off patter.  They live in a palace.......Ce


Harry and Meghan had been living in a 2-room cottage, which is a suitable size for an environmentally-conscious couple with no children.  However they have since moved into a 21-room apartment in Kensington Palace, which is not.


----------



## prettyprincess

Has she been spray tanning?


----------



## myown

prettyprincess said:


> Has she been spray tanning?


why would she?


----------



## DeMonica

myown said:


> why would she?


She looks more tanned than during the royal tour. Maybe it's just the lighting.


----------



## Tivo

She needs better makeup


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Service of Remembrance at the Cenotaph


----------



## Eva1991

^ She looks stunning and her make-up is perfect.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Tivo said:


> She needs better makeup


I was just thinking this. It's a mess. Maybe that's why she stays with a fresh, natural look a lot. A fresh face suits her better.


----------



## Alexenjie

The last look is perfect but agree that in some pictures her blush or bronzer looks like too much, too shiny, not placed correctly on her cheekbones. Maybe it is the lighting but it's something I have seen in other pictures as well. Kate should take lessons on how to apply eye makeup from Meghan.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Service to mark the Centenary of the Armistice at Westminster Abbey


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Leaving Westminster Abbey after attending Service to mark the Centenary of the Armistice


----------



## queennadine

Eh to this last outfit.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She needs less shiny pantyhose.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Maybe her fake tan oils leaking through her pantyhose?...  Or, maybe she spilled water all over herself in the restroom?


----------



## Suzie

Morgan R said:


> Attending Service of Remembrance at the Cenotaph
> 
> View attachment 4249291
> View attachment 4249239
> View attachment 4249290
> View attachment 4249289


She looks stunning here, can anyone ID her jacket?


----------



## Morgan R

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Maybe her fake tan oils leaking through her pantyhose?...  Or, maybe she spilled water all over herself in the restroom?
> View attachment 4249803



It was rain. You can see the rain on her jacket as well.


----------



## hellosunshine

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Maybe her fake tan oils leaking through her pantyhose?...  Or, maybe she spilled water all over herself in the restroom?
> View attachment 4249803



Isn't this rain?!?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Morgan R said:


> It was rain. You can see the rain on her jacket as well.


i guess? they don't show her coming in. first time i've seen hose turn orange at the shin from rain.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh I had that dress Kate is wearing in burgundy in the late 90s. I kept it forever because I loved it and I always hoped it would come back into style. 

Now I’m sad.


----------



## Gal4Dior

That shiny hose is really a disaster. It just ages her. I agree on her tendency on over bronzing. The outfit is a snooze, too. 

I feel she wears the same styles over and over again.


----------



## prettyprincess

myown said:


> why would she?


I imagine it would be for the same reason everyone does it (when it’s done right) to have that sexy sun kissed glow.


----------



## leeann

Morgan R said:


> Leaving Westminster Abbey after attending Service to mark the Centenary of the Armistice
> 
> View attachment 4249678
> View attachment 4249674
> View attachment 4249675
> View attachment 4249676
> View attachment 4249696
> View attachment 4249673



She needs a slip with that skirt


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i guess? they don't show her coming in. first time i've seen hose turn orange at the shin from rain.


This is them arriving, I saw these pictures were on here before the event started. It is rain.


----------



## doni

ccbaggirl89 said:


> i guess? they don't show her coming in. first time i've seen hose turn orange at the shin from rain.


They haven’t turned orange... the tights are lighter than her skin (which may not have been the best choice) so the water spots show more, also because of the lighting.


----------



## caramelize126

This is interesting- 

Three of Meghan and Prince Harry’s top aides quit in just six months

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...rry-lost-THREE-close-aides-royal-wedding.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Fally420

there are some more articles. One said that Harry yelled at royal stuff before the wedding that what Meghan wants, she get.
Another said that Meghan wanted to choose an Emerald tiara and the queen was not amused.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-difficult-Meghans-choice-wedding-tiara.html


----------



## Morgan R

caramelize126 said:


> This is interesting-
> 
> Three of Meghan and Prince Harry’s top aides quit in just six months
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...rry-lost-THREE-close-aides-royal-wedding.html



It actually isn't interesting there is no record of the "Melissa" person existing (all the names of aides are made public because they get paid by taxes). Edward Lane Fox was already going to leave but stayed on a little longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Samantha Cohen was always going to be a temporary assistant for Meghan on given to her by the Queen to help Meghan learn the royal "ropes".



Fally420 said:


> there are some more articles. One said that Harry yelled at royal stuff before the wedding that what Meghan wants, she get.
> Another said that Meghan wanted to choose an Emerald tiara and the queen was not amused.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-difficult-Meghans-choice-wedding-tiara.html



There is literally an exhibition running at Windsor Castle about their wedding with audio from Harry and Meghan themselves that describe the details of them picking the music, Harry being with Meghan when she picked the tiara, and more. Also at the Festival Of Remembrance this past Saturday not so subtly denied the rumors by wearing the same brooch she wore at Harry and Meghan's wedding to the Festival of Remembrance.


In the exhibition this is what Meghan and Harry said about the tiara:

‘When it came to the tiara on the day I was very fortunate to be able to choose this very gorgeous Art Deco-style bandeau tiara,’ the Duchess of Sussex recalls. ‘Harry and I had gone to Buckingham Palace to meet with Her Majesty The Queen to select one of the options that were there, which was an incredibly surreal day, as you can imagine.

'That was the one that I think as we tried them on stood out; I think it was just perfect because it was so clean and simple, and I think also at that point an extension to what Clare and I had been trying to do with the dress, which was have something that could be so incredibly timeless but still feel modern.’

‘Every girl’s dream,’ the Duke interjects. ‘To be able to try on a tiara and funnily enough the one that suited the best, the one that looked the best on you without question. I shouldn’t have really been there; it was such an incredible loan by my grandmother. Very sweet.’


----------



## caramelize126

Fally420 said:


> there are some more articles. One said that Harry yelled at royal stuff before the wedding that what Meghan wants, she get.
> Another said that Meghan wanted to choose an Emerald tiara and the queen was not amused.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-difficult-Meghans-choice-wedding-tiara.html



It’s interesting that Meghan has not been loaned any other jewelry, broaches, etc. from the Queen. I would think she would’ve borrowed pieces for the New Zealand trip. Most of the jewelry that she has been seen wearing was Diana’s.


----------



## skarsbabe

caramelize126 said:


> It’s interesting that Meghan has not been loaned any other jewelry, broaches, etc. from the Queen. I would think she would’ve borrowed pieces for the New Zealand trip. Most of the jewelry that she has been seen wearing was Diana’s.


It's the queen's jewelry, maybe she's picky about who she lends to and where?


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> It’s interesting that Meghan has not been loaned any other jewelry, broaches, etc. from the Queen. I would think she would’ve borrowed pieces for the New Zealand trip. Most of the jewelry that she has been seen wearing was Diana’s.


maybe important pieces aren't taken on overseas travel


----------



## sdkitty

Fally420 said:


> there are some more articles. One said that Harry yelled at royal stuff before the wedding that what Meghan wants, she get.
> Another said that Meghan wanted to choose an Emerald tiara and the queen was not amused.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-difficult-Meghans-choice-wedding-tiara.html


it would take a lot more than the DM to convince me that Harry is rude or abusive esp to staff


----------



## caramelize126

skarsbabe said:


> It's the queen's jewelry, maybe she's picky about who she lends to and where?



Agreed. I only noted that because Kate was often loaned the items by the Queen while on royal tours, even if it was just small broaches, earrings, etc.


----------



## Fally420

Morgan R said:


> It actually isn't interesting there is no record of the "Melissa" person existing (all the names of aides are made public because they get paid by taxes). Edward Lane Fox was already going to leave but stayed on a little longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Samantha Cohen was always going to be a temporary assistant for Meghan on given to her by the Queen to help Meghan learn the royal "ropes".
> 
> 
> 
> There is literally an exhibition running at Windsor Castle about their wedding with audio from Harry and Meghan themselves that describe the details of them picking the music, Harry being with Meghan when she picked the tiara, and more. Also at the Festival Of Remembrance this past Saturday not so subtly denied the rumors by wearing the same brooch she wore at Harry and Meghan's wedding to the Festival of Remembrance.
> 
> 
> In the exhibition this is what Meghan and Harry said about the tiara:
> 
> ‘When it came to the tiara on the day I was very fortunate to be able to choose this very gorgeous Art Deco-style bandeau tiara,’ the Duchess of Sussex recalls. ‘Harry and I had gone to Buckingham Palace to meet with Her Majesty The Queen to select one of the options that were there, which was an incredibly surreal day, as you can imagine.
> 
> 'That was the one that I think as we tried them on stood out; I think it was just perfect because it was so clean and simple, and I think also at that point an extension to what Clare and I had been trying to do with the dress, which was have something that could be so incredibly timeless but still feel modern.’
> 
> ‘Every girl’s dream,’ the Duke interjects. ‘To be able to try on a tiara and funnily enough the one that suited the best, the one that looked the best on you without question. I shouldn’t have really been there; it was such an incredible loan by my grandmother. Very sweet.’



The article about picking the tiara may be true or not. Same thing goes to what Meghan tells about her version of picking the tiara. Doubt she will say publicly that she didn't get the tiara she wanted and wore the second best choice.
That said, independently how she got the tiara, it suited her well!


----------



## bag-princess

caramelize126 said:


> This is interesting-
> 
> Three of Meghan and Prince Harry’s top aides quit in just six months
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...rry-lost-THREE-close-aides-royal-wedding.html




very interesting indeed!!


----------



## Morgan R

Fally420 said:


> The article about picking the tiara may be true or not. Same thing goes to what Meghan tells about her version of picking the tiara. Doubt she will say publicly that she didn't get the tiara she wanted and wore the second best choice.
> That said, independently how she got the tiara, it suited her well!



Well I guess we can agree to disagree but I do think it makes more sense to believe Meghan and Harry who both gave their commentary (because they were both there when Meghan chose the tiara) long before a "speculative" story was released than give credit to the Daily Mail who got their tiara story via The Sun (more notably the author of the original article was from Dan Wooten for The Sun who has been called out multiple times with facts for the lies that he has reported regarding Meghan and sometimes her mother Doria).

Daily Mail and The Sun are two of the UK outlets that have tried to paint Meghan a certain type of way and they have since they found out Harry was dating Meghan. I mean they were subtly (without being named) were addressed by Prince Harry when the letter (https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry) was released back in November 2016 that both confirmed Meghan was his girlfriend but also addressed that she had been subject to defamatory stories, stories that were sexist, and stories that racial undertones. If you read Daily Mail and The Sun's articles regarding Meghan not all of them but a good portion of the articles they release about Meghan often fit what was called out in that letter.


----------



## uhpharm01

Morgan R said:


> It actually isn't interesting there is no record of the "Melissa" person existing (all the names of aides are made public because they get paid by taxes). Edward Lane Fox was already going to leave but stayed on a little longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Samantha Cohen was always going to be a temporary assistant for Meghan on given to her by the Queen to help Meghan learn the royal "ropes".
> 
> 
> 
> There is literally an exhibition running at Windsor Castle about their wedding with audio from Harry and Meghan themselves that describe the details of them picking the music, Harry being with Meghan when she picked the tiara, and more. Also at the Festival Of Remembrance this past Saturday not so subtly denied the rumors by wearing the same brooch she wore at Harry and Meghan's wedding to the Festival of Remembrance.
> 
> 
> In the exhibition this is what Meghan and Harry said about the tiara:
> 
> ‘When it came to the tiara on the day I was very fortunate to be able to choose this very gorgeous Art Deco-style bandeau tiara,’ the Duchess of Sussex recalls. ‘Harry and I had gone to Buckingham Palace to meet with Her Majesty The Queen to select one of the options that were there, which was an incredibly surreal day, as you can imagine.
> 
> 'That was the one that I think as we tried them on stood out; I think it was just perfect because it was so clean and simple, and I think also at that point an extension to what Clare and I had been trying to do with the dress, which was have something that could be so incredibly timeless but still feel modern.’
> 
> ‘Every girl’s dream,’ the Duke interjects. ‘To be able to try on a tiara and funnily enough the one that suited the best, the one that looked the best on you without question. I shouldn’t have really been there; it was such an incredible loan by my grandmother. Very sweet.’


----------



## MCF

I heard the reason she didn't get her first choice of tiara was because they couldn't confirm the origins of it.  It was thought to be from Russia which the Queen or whoever decides this stuff thought it would be problematic.


----------



## Aimee3

MCF said:


> I heard the reason she didn't get her first choice of tiara was because they couldn't confirm the origins of it.  It was thought to be from Russia which the Queen or whoever decides this stuff thought it would be problematic.



What would be the big deal if the emeralds were from Russia?  I don’t understand. Was someone going to stop the wedding, grab the tiara, and scientifically test the stones there and then, assuming a test is even possible?  Did the stones in the tiara Meghan did wear originate in the UK?  Seriously confused here.  Thank you if anyone could clarify for me.  [emoji253]


----------



## LibbyRuth

Aimee3 said:


> What would be the big deal if the emeralds were from Russia?  I don’t understand. Was someone going to stop the wedding, grab the tiara, and scientifically test the stones there and then, assuming a test is even possible?  Did the stones in the tiara Meghan did wear originate in the UK?  Seriously confused here.  Thank you if anyone could clarify for me.  [emoji253]


There is symbolism in everything they do.  When you consider the current state of relations with Russia, emeralds from Russia could be considered to be a nod of endorsement or a move honoring the country. The Queen has no choice but to be mindful of that. Anything she does or says can be read as an endorsement or rebuke.


----------



## Morgan R

The irony of tiara story is that for Princess Eugenie's wedding...Eugenie herself wore a Greville Emerald Kokoshnik Tiara (commonly referred to as the Boucheron Tiara) lent to her by her grandmother the Queen. The tiara was made by Boucheron for Dame Margaret Helen Greville in 1919 in the fashionable “kokoshnik” style popularized in the Russian Imperial Court. So there is a Russian connection to the tiara Eugenie wore .

I've seen many royal reporters and royal fans believe the tiara story might have been leaked out of spite not truth by Prince Andrew (the tiara in story is described as one that happens to be one similar to the one his daughter Eugenie wore for her wedding) because him and his brother Prince Charles famously don't get along (though Harry is close to Prince Andrew's daughters Eugenie and Beatrice) but Prince Andrew is also said to be Queen Elizabeth II's favorite child (if you believe that) and many think his many scandals (both known and rumored) have been suppressed because of his mother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^^ this stuff can get juicy. After reading that report about Meghan’s Tiara choice I wondered if the one she wanted to wear was the one Eugenie later wore, but it sounds like although both tiaras have emeralds, they were different tiaras ? I think The all diamond tiara was perfection for Meghan’s look, personally I don’t think emeralds would have looked as good with the minimalist, sleek look she had. Also, I read that Eugenie had to push her wedding back for Harry’s. Maybe she decided to wear emeralds before Meghan made her choice and that played a role too, who knows !


----------



## cd01

I think the tiara story is false why would they put tiaras on the table to look at only to say no that one is not available.


----------



## Aimee3

Morgan R said:


> The irony of tiara story is that for Princess Eugenie's wedding...Eugenie herself wore a Greville Emerald Kokoshnik Tiara (commonly referred to as the Boucheron Tiara) lent to her by her grandmother the Queen. The tiara was made by Boucheron for Dame Margaret Helen Greville in 1919 in the fashionable “kokoshnik” style popularized in the Russian Imperial Court. So there is a Russian connection to the tiara Eugenie wore .
> 
> I've seen many royal reporters and royal fans believe the tiara story might have been leaked out of spite not truth by Prince Andrew (the tiara in story is described as one that happens to be one similar to the one his daughter Eugenie wore for her wedding) because him and his brother Prince Charles famously don't get along (though Harry is close to Prince Andrew's daughters Eugenie and Beatrice) but Prince Andrew is also said to be Queen Elizabeth II's favorite child (if you believe that) and many think his many scandals (both known and rumored) have been suppressed because of his mother.



But was this a Russian style  or Russian sourced emeralds? 
Thank you ladies for the explanations!


----------



## BagLovingMom

cd01 said:


> I think the tiara story is false why would they put tiaras on the table to look at only to say no that one is not available.


Yes good point although maybe it was unknowing staff who laid out the tiaras. I doubt the story myself!


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


>



that charlotte is a little scene stealer


----------



## Sharont2305

BagLovingMom said:


> Yes good point although maybe it was unknowing staff who laid out the tiaras. I doubt the story myself!


Possible, but I doubt it. And, like you, I don't believe the story anyway.


----------



## Kat Madridista

BagLovingMom said:


> Yes good point although maybe it was unknowing staff who laid out the tiaras. I doubt the story myself!



Very unlikely. Even if the staff who laid out the tiaras was "unknowing" they would not have been laid out without the Queen's knowledge or approval first. "Unknowing" staff don't get to go into the vaults and pick a selection for a royal wedding.



Aimee3 said:


> But was this a Russian style  or Russian sourced emeralds?
> Thank you ladies for the explanations!



The tiara was definitely a Russian style. As to the provenance of the emeralds, there has been no information made public about that.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Double post ]


----------



## BagLovingMom

Kat Madridista said:


> Very unlikely. Even if the staff who laid out the tiaras was "unknowing" they would not have been laid out without the Queen's knowledge or approval first. "Unknowing" staff don't get to go into the vaults and pick a selection for a royal wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> The tiara was definitely a Russian style. As to the provenance of the emeralds, there has been no information made public about that.



Well, the staff could be very qualified and experienced  but not fully knowledgeable about the entire history (confirmed and/or unconfirmed of each Tiara) that’s what I meant by “unknowing.” None of us know, right?
  Anyways,  I recall an older post from a UK member  in this thread about how the press has been giving Meghan a “honeymoon” period but then more negative coverage would begin. I’m wondering if that is what is starting to happen.


----------



## Morgan R

Arriving at Buckingham Palace for Prince Charles' 70th Birthday Party


----------



## Chamber Doll

ugh she's so pretty!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think Eugenie had already picked an Emerald tiara and MM was let down gently with the Russian story to prevent a faux pas and drama.

Although, I’m sure the Brits have scads of things in the drawers that would not be looked kindly upon today. Let’s say the tiara in question was gifted by a Russian oligarch that was connected later to the axis or some such history. I think it can get quite tricky.

I also wonder, if the rumours are true of fired assistants, if one of them didn’t leak this info. It certainly makes the fairy tale story Megan and Harry recorded about the tiara seen like a fable... and the timing is interesting.

And now I’m wondering how I have had the time to form this opinion lol.


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


> Arriving at Buckingham Palace for Prince Charles' 70th Birthday Party
> 
> View attachment 4252914
> View attachment 4252915


I love when Will and Harry drive


----------



## RueHermes

No comment on her earrings? Beautiful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

RueHermes said:


> No comment on her earrings? Beautiful.


Agreed, gorgeous!


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> I also wonder, if the rumours are true of fired assistants, if one of them didn’t leak this info. It certainly makes the fairy tale story Megan and Harry recorded about the tiara seen like a fable... and the timing is interesting.
> 
> And now I’m wondering how I have had the time to form this opinion lol.


Well, there's a new book, written by royal reporter Robert Jobson and it's about Prince Charles. He travelled with Prince Charles for over a year.

Anyway, not so nice things have come out, like William gets jealous of Harry's attention (like his father did with Diana!) and does not like being overshadowed.  By anyone.

William does not always get along with his brother and feels he looks bad because Harry is so energetic.  The two brothers are separating their courts and they will be independent of each other.

This was in Jobson’s book.  So why did he put it there. People think he is trying to make Charles more sympathetic. How Charles has to manage each son's mood. 

Charles invited Will and Kate last summer to spend time together wherever he summers and they declined, but Harry and Meghan did go.

I've forgotten my point now.  lol  It's just that not everything is roses behind the scenes, I guess.


----------



## Kat Madridista

BagLovingMom said:


> Well, the staff could be very qualified and experienced  but not fully knowledgeable about the entire history (confirmed and/or unconfirmed of each Tiara) that’s what I meant by “unknowing.” None of us know, right?
> Anyways,  I recall an older post from a UK member  in this thread about how the press has been giving Meghan a “honeymoon” period but then more negative coverage would begin. I’m wondering if that is what is starting to happen.



My point is, anyone the Queen would trust to to provide inputs on tiara options WOULD KNOW their tiara history, provenance, etc. There are people who are employed to catalogue, inventory, and maintain the Queen's massive jewelry collection. It's someone's LITERAL JOB to know if a certain tiara's emeralds' provenance is suspect. So I really doubt the story that this "Russian tiara" was part of the selection Meghan could have chosen from and then removed from contention after she chose it, precisely because there are people in place who would've prevented the tiara from being part of the options to begin with. 

That said, the story doesn't actually say that this is what happened, that Meghan was presented with options, she chose one,  and then was informed after the fact that she it wasn't going to happen. It just says that her first choice wasn't possible. Could it be that Meghan had an option in mind before she was even presented with options by the Queen?


----------



## Flatsy

Kat Madridista, you are right.  People are parsing the details of a story that never came with any details to begin with.

I think there are any number of ways Meghan might have seen a tiara she liked that turned out not to be available.  I read all about what a keen little student of royal family history she was being in preparation for joining the family.  Maybe she saw a picture of it.  Maybe she saw it in the archive catalog.  Maybe at some point she got a tour of the royal jewel vault.

What I find extremely implausible is that the queen herself actually picked out a selection of tiaras and personally presented them to Meghan and she instantly fell in love with the tiara she wore at the wedding.  That was the BS they were selling in that documentary.

Knowing how the machinery of Buckingham Palace works, by the time Meghan would have gotten formal face-time with Her Majesty, the tiara choice would basically have been a done deal, brokered and vetted by 20 layers of The Firm.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> *What I find extremely implausible is that the queen herself actually picked out a selection of tiaras and personally presented them to Meghan *and she instantly fell in love with the tiara she wore at the wedding.  That was the BS they were selling in that documentary.
> 
> Knowing how the machinery of Buckingham Palace works, by the time Meghan would have gotten formal face-time with Her Majesty, the tiara choice would basically have been a done deal, brokered and vetted by 20 layers of The Firm.


^^^^^^ this. Absolutely.


----------



## TMA

Sharont2305 said:


> ^^^^^^ this. Absolutely.



I don’t think anyone said the Queen picked it out. It seemed there was a selection presented when they met the queen and from that selection they made the choice. What is implausible about that? I doubt she was allowed to just walk into the vault and start pointing at Tiara options. It also could have been that discussions were had before hand or a catalogue presented to her of various choices which they then whittled down to a shortlist. Mot aware of any bride that picks a tiara from a picture without trying it out. So very plausible there were options that she tried out and they liked the one she wore best.


----------



## gazoo

I believe the tiara story. I can see the Queen not wanting an American bride wearing Russian jewels due to the climate right now. Eugenie got first dibs, has green eyes to match the tiara, and is a blood born Princess. Plus she had to delay her wedding which I am sure was a pain.

I think Meghan and Harry's recounting the story of picking it out to be a spin to make things look better because they may have suspected the story would leak. It's all speculation, but I can buy it. I suspect we are seeing Royal shade between the courtiers, Charles and Andrew.


----------



## Kat Madridista

Flatsy said:


> What I find extremely implausible is that the queen herself actually picked out a selection of tiaras and personally presented them to Meghan and she instantly fell in love with the tiara she wore at the wedding.  That was the BS they were selling in that documentary.
> 
> Knowing how the machinery of Buckingham Palace works, by the time Meghan would have gotten formal face-time with Her Majesty, the tiara choice would basically have been a done deal, brokered and vetted by 20 layers of The Firm.



Actually, my bet is that that's EXACTLY how it happened. That's also probably how it happened for Kate as well, as it's been widely reported that Kate chose her own tiara for her wedding. That both duchesses-to-be were given a selection to choose from really is the most logical way to do things, versus either the Queen choosing one and asking them to take it or leave it (the Queen is a kinder, more generous person than that) or Kate and Meghan selecting one of their own choosing out of the blue (how do they even know what they have to choose from?). 



gazoo said:


> I believe the tiara story. I can see the Queen not wanting an American bride wearing Russian jewels due to the climate right now. Eugenie got first dibs, has green eyes to match the tiara, and is a blood born Princess. Plus she had to delay her wedding which I am sure was a pain.



But Eugenie's tiara is NOT Russian. It is of a Russian _style_, but it is certainly not made in or had it's stones sourced from Russia. So they are not actually "Russian jewels".


----------



## Fally420

gazoo said:


> I believe the tiara story. I can see the Queen not wanting an American bride wearing Russian jewels due to the climate right now. Eugenie got first dibs, has green eyes to match the tiara, and is a blood born Princess. Plus she had to delay her wedding which I am sure was a pain.
> 
> I think Meghan and Harry's recounting the story of picking it out to be a spin to make things look better because they may have suspected the story would leak. It's all speculation, but I can buy it. I suspect we are seeing Royal shade between the courtiers, Charles and Andrew.



Just curious, but why Eugenie had to delay her wedding? If she had set first a wedding date, wouldn't it be common that Harry and Meghan had to choose another date?


----------



## gazoo

Fally420 said:


> Just curious, but why Eugenie had to delay her wedding? If she had set first a wedding date, wouldn't it be common that Harry and Meghan had to choose another date?



Harry outranks Eugenie. Here's just one of many articles about Eugenie's year long wedding postponement:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ne...s/news-story/491e2f3d48861799c270db091e5e94bf


----------



## Fally420

Thank you for this article! Glad, that Eugenie was OK with the postponement of the her wedding.


----------



## MCF

I thought there might be a look book or something that the women in the family have access to.  They pick a couple items they like and then more people get involved in picking the best option from the items selected.


----------



## gazoo

[QUOTE="Kat Madridista, post: 
But Eugenie's tiara is NOT Russian. It is of a Russian _style_, but it is certainly not made in or had it's stones sourced from Russia. So they are not actually "Russian jewels".[/QUOTE]

True, it isn't Russian, but even its name, "kokoshnik", implies Russia. I think Eugenie had picked it earlier on and the Queen knew she wanted that green pop. Were Meghan to wear any emerald tiara months before Eugenie,  it would have impacted the final effect of Eugenie's long awaited wedding. Remember, Eugenie didn't even wear a veil, her big bang that day was that gorgeous green tiara. I bet her wedding look was locked down before Meghan even got engaged.

The Russian angle excuse is pure gossip. This could simply be a Grandmother giving one grandchild first dibs over another.

The timing of all these leaks is interesting. The book on Charles written by someone allowed direct access for months on end, Harry's publicised tantrums about  "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets", William declining to visit Charles over the summer, William being "a little grand". It feels like a hit job on the younger Royals.  The only person to benefit is Charles, who has been historically less popular than his sons and their wives. Things that make you go hmmmmm.


----------



## Sharont2305

TMA said:


> I don’t think anyone said the Queen picked it out. It seemed there was a selection presented when they met the queen and from that selection they made the choice. What is implausible about that? I doubt she was allowed to just walk into the vault and start pointing at Tiara options. It also could have been that discussions were had before hand or a catalogue presented to her of various choices which they then whittled down to a shortlist. Mot aware of any bride that picks a tiara from a picture without trying it out. So very plausible there were options that she tried out and they liked the one she wore best.


This is what I was thinking, why I highlighted in bold was people have seemed to think The Queen just said something along lines of Come with me and take your pick. It would have been meticulously planned for weeks as to which she could and couldn't wear for whatever reason. And the Queen would have had that final decicion before "the chat" with Meghan.
I just can't believe that some think that anyone can pick anything they wanted.


----------



## bag-mania

gazoo said:


> The timing of all these leaks is interesting. The book on Charles written by someone allowed direct access for months on end, Harry's publicised tantrums about  "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets", William declining to visit Charles over the summer, William being "a little grand". It feels like a hit job on the younger Royals.  The only person to benefit is Charles, who has been historically less popular than his sons and their wives. Things that make you go hmmmmm.



I've never liked Charles but I don't believe he'd ever say anything negative about his sons or their wives to someone in the media. I think William and Harry have reached an age where it's open season on them in the tabloids, just like it was for their parents 30+ years ago. If anything I think the media was kinder to them than they would have been had their mother lived.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Color me confused, but is there any chance at all of there being another tiara with emeralds that is not the one Eugenie wore?


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> I've never liked Charles but I don't believe he'd ever say anything negative about his sons or their wives to someone in the media. I think William and Harry have reached an age where it's open season on them in the tabloids, just like it was for their parents 30+ years ago. If anything I think the media was kinder to them than they would have been had their mother lived.


Sometimes people say things that they would never say in public and trusts get abused. Charles is definitely not the most popular member of the royal family but I doubt that he would put them in bad light just to increase his own popularity.
I think it's hard to guess what would happen had Diana been alive.  I don't know how public opinion would have changed (if changed at all) about her in the last 20 something years, but the boys benefitted of being Diana's sons.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'd say the chances of that are very high.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> *I just can't believe that some think that anyone can pick anything they wanted.*


So said Her Majesty the Queen to Prince Harry when she chewed him out. 

I don't particularly buy the tiara story, but Harry in particular laid it on SO THICK in that documentary: 





> “[It’s] every girl’s dream to be able to try on a tiara and funnily enough, [that was] the one that suited the best, I shouldn’t have really even been there, but [it was] such an incredible loan by my grandmother, it was very sweet,” Harry says in the recording.


Oh yes, Her Majesty is so generous and gracious!  As if lending a tiara for the wedding was some unusual gesture and _not something that happens automatically at every single royal wedding ever.  _Like Meghan was going to show up with a Coachella flower wreath on her head if the Queen hadn't stepped in with her delightfully kind offer.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe he’s laying it on thick to subtly make some point to her family (the ones who cause problems and seemed to try to ruin her wedding day).


----------



## Flatsy

Nah, I just think humbly ass-kissing Her Majesty in public is part of his job.


----------



## GoStanford

Flatsy said:


> As if lending a tiara for the wedding was some unusual gesture and _not something that happens automatically at every single royal wedding ever._


Agreed that this generation of royal brides have been loaned tiaras by the Queen, but I believe that Princess Diana wore the Spencer tiara.  I believe it's still in the Spencer family.


----------



## Flatsy

GoStanford said:


> Agreed that this generation of royal brides have been loaned tiaras by the Queen, but I believe that Princess Diana wore the Spencer tiara.  I believe it's still in the Spencer family.


True, in the old days princesses often came equipped with their own jewels.  But it goes without saying that a royal bride will wear a tiara and if she doesn't have access to one it will be provided. The Queen had no other choice in Meghan's case, so I don't see it as a praise-worthy act of kindness.  Meghan signed up to have her children be official property of the monarch.  The least that lady could do is lend her a piece of jewelry for a few hours.

Fergie's wedding tiara was a gift  (which she made off with in the divorce settlement) so the Queen is actually being a little stingy with Kate and Meghan.  Maybe once they move up a generation, the King will give them their own tiaras.


----------



## Kat Madridista

gazoo said:


> True, it isn't Russian, but even its name, "kokoshnik", implies Russia. I think Eugenie had picked it earlier on and the Queen knew she wanted that green pop. Were Meghan to wear any emerald tiara months before Eugenie,  it would have impacted the final effect of Eugenie's long awaited wedding. Remember, Eugenie didn't even wear a veil, her big bang that day was that gorgeous green tiara. I bet her wedding look was locked down before Meghan even got engaged.
> 
> The Russian angle excuse is pure gossip. This could simply be a Grandmother giving one grandchild first dibs over another.
> 
> The timing of all these leaks is interesting. The book on Charles written by someone allowed direct access for months on end, Harry's publicised tantrums about  "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets", William declining to visit Charles over the summer, William being "a little grand". It feels like a hit job on the younger Royals.  The only person to benefit is Charles, who has been historically less popular than his sons and their wives. Things that make you go hmmmmm.




If it is a "leak", it's not going to be from Charles or anyone from his team. It makes zero sense for Charles to badmouth his son and their wives in the press. It actually reflects poorly on him. So what's the benefit? Most people suspect that the source is a York one, and honestly, that's where my mind went too. I won't be surprised if the Yorks (the parents, not the girls, who seem nice enough) are still salty about Meghan supposedly stealing Eugenie's thunder by announcing the pregnancy days after Eugenie's wedding on top of the wedding delay. Andrew's and Fergie's behavior around the time of the wedding certainly implied so.

Honestly, I think this tiara fiasco has some truth to it, but it was blown out of proportion and extra dramatized by the sources and the media. Most level-headed people who have weighed in on this seem to agree that this is probably what actually happened:
*Meghan: *I was thinking maybe emeralds for the tiara? I think the green would be beautiful against the white of my dress and the black of my hair?
*The Queen/The Keeper of the Jewel Vault: *Oh, you know what, Eugenie mentioned that she's considering emeralds, too. Maybe you want to go a different direction?
*Meghan: *Oh, ok! Yeah, of course, that was just an initial idea anyway, I'm SURE we can find something else that would be beautiful.
- end scene -

In short, Meghan was considering emeralds _in general_ but pivoted when she learned that Eugenie was going the same way.

But of course, that version of the story would be boring and uninteresting, so someone decided to ramp up the drama with mini tantrums from Harry and an "intervention" from the Queen.

Also, let's all note that the guy who broke this story for The Sun is also the guy who said Doria was going to give an interview to Oprah, I think. So...



Flatsy said:


> Fergie's wedding tiara was a gift  (which she made off with in the divorce settlement) so the Queen is actually being a little stingy with Kate and Meghan.  Maybe once they move up a generation, the King will give them their own tiaras.



It's just bad optics to gift the new duchesses a tiara at this point. The actual existence of the monarchy has been in question more than ever, it won't endear the BRF to the public if the Queen or Charles splashed out on new tiaras for Meghan and Kate, especially given that there are treasures untold in the Queen's vaults. Like you said, maybe Charles will do it, but I doubt that as well. Or maybe the Queen will bequeath some existing bling to the duchesses in her will.


----------



## Tivo

Kat Madridista said:


> If it is a "leak", it's not going to be from Charles or anyone from his team. It makes zero sense for Charles to badmouth his son and their wives in the press. It actually reflects poorly on him. So what's the benefit? Most people suspect that the source is a York one, and honestly, that's where my mind went too. I won't be surprised if the Yorks (the parents, not the girls, who seem nice enough) are still salty about Meghan supposedly stealing Eugenie's thunder by announcing the pregnancy days after Eugenie's wedding on top of the wedding delay. Andrew's and Fergie's behavior around the time of the wedding certainly implied so.
> 
> Honestly, I think this tiara fiasco has some truth to it, but it was blown out of proportion and extra dramatized by the sources and the media. Most level-headed people who have weighed in on this seem to agree that this is probably what actually happened:
> *Meghan: *I was thinking maybe emeralds for the tiara? I think the green would be beautiful against the white of my dress and the black of my hair?
> *The Queen/The Keeper of the Jewel Vault: *Oh, you know what, Eugenie mentioned that she's considering emeralds, too. Maybe you want to go a different direction?
> *Meghan: *Oh, ok! Yeah, of course, that was just an initial idea anyway, I'm SURE we can find something else that would be beautiful.
> - end scene -
> 
> In short, Meghan was considering emeralds _in general_ but pivoted when she learned that Eugenie was going the same way.
> 
> But of course, that version of the story would be boring and uninteresting, so someone decided to ramp up the drama with mini tantrums from Harry and an "intervention" from the Queen.
> 
> Also, let's all note that the guy who broke this story for The Sun is also the guy who said Doria was going to give an interview to Oprah, I think. So...
> 
> 
> 
> It's just bad optics to gift the new duchesses a tiara at this point. The actual existence of the monarchy has been in question more than ever, it won't endear the BRF to the public if the Queen or Charles splashed out on new tiaras for Meghan and Kate, especially given that there are treasures untold in the Queen's vaults. Like you said, maybe Charles will do it, but I doubt that as well. Or maybe the Queen will bequeath some existing bling to the duchesses in her will.


I find you assessment completely believable! Agree with everything!

Can you elaborate on Fergie and Andrew’s behavior around the time of the wedding?


----------



## Morgan R

At the annual Royal Foundation dinner


----------



## minababe

I'm sure the Tiara Story is ******** the same ******** all the books about the royal Family are all lies. it must be disgusting to see People who write Things about you just to sell a book. most of them never met any of the royals. that's so crazy.
especially all the rumors about meghan with the Tiara and the staff that ran away from her. they just don't know what to write anymore about them.
Harry is saying it again and again about the press and that they think they know Things from them.. You can't trust any of These stories. I would be careful with that.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> At the annual Royal Foundation dinner
> 
> View attachment 4254783



uuu what a beautiful look! I hope we see more pics of her Dress. Looks like a strapless dress. how beautiful and sexy


----------



## DeMonica

Flatsy said:


> Nah, I just think humbly ass-kissing Her Majesty in public is part of his job.


Her Majesty happens to ber his grandmother, too. I think there's nothing wrong with being publicly polite. I wonder which tiara worth more. IMO Megan's.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder if this is the tiara being talked about. It's the Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara. It's interchangeable, can be emerald or pearl droplets, or none at all. I can't say I like the emerald version. Pearls or nothing looks better.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if this is the tiara being talked about. It's the Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara. It's interchangeable, can be emerald or pearl droplets, or none at all. I can't say I like the emerald version. Pearls or nothing looks better.


This is my favorite tiara in the entire collection - I'm hoping to model the crystal belt on my wedding dress after it! Would love to see it out more.


----------



## Alexenjie

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if this is the tiara being talked about. It's the Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara. It's interchangeable, can be emerald or pearl droplets, or none at all. I can't say I like the emerald version. Pearls or nothing looks better.


I'm not a tiara person at all but I love this tiara with the emeralds (not so much with the pearls or without jewels at all). The queen has worn this tiara a lot so I think it is one of her favorites. This tiara definitely has Russian origins but I am not sure where the stones came from. As far as Meghan, I think her tiara was perfect with the simple/elegant wedding dress she wore. I thought Eugenie looked lovely with her emerald tiara and the way it went perfect with the rest of her attire.


----------



## Flatsy

Kat Madridista said:


> If it is a "leak", it's not going to be from Charles or anyone from his team. It makes zero sense for Charles to badmouth his son and their wives in the press. It actually reflects poorly on him. So what's the benefit? Most people suspect that the source is a York one, and honestly, that's where my mind went too.


Charles just participated in a biography that casts headline-making shade on both of his sons.  While the book was not officially sanctioned, it was informally sanctioned.  So it does appear that Charles thinks his sons needed some badmouthing.

Speculation about his motives: he's always been jealous when it comes to family members outshining him or being more popular; he has some behind-the-scenes conflicts with his sons and wanted to put them in their place; he wanted to engender sympathy over a father's tribulations raising sons who can be a little spoiled.  Or maybe Charles thought it was time to change the traditional narratives about him being a villain into him being a victim.

Lainey (of Lainey Gossip) thinks that the tiara story was essentially an out-take from the biography that went a little too far to be included in a book Charles participated in, so it was given to Dan Wootten of The Sun in a more anonymous way.



> Honestly, I think this tiara fiasco has some truth to it, but it was blown out of proportion and extra dramatized by the sources and the media. Most level-headed people who have weighed in on this seem to agree that this is probably what actually happened:
> *Meghan: *I was thinking maybe emeralds for the tiara? I think the green would be beautiful against the white of my dress and the black of my hair?
> *The Queen/The Keeper of the Jewel Vault: *Oh, you know what, Eugenie mentioned that she's considering emeralds, too. Maybe you want to go a different direction?
> *Meghan: *Oh, ok! Yeah, of course, that was just an initial idea anyway, I'm SURE we can find something else that would be beautiful.
> - end scene -
> 
> In short, Meghan was considering emeralds _in general_ but pivoted when she learned that Eugenie was going the same way.


That's really not what the story was at all.


----------



## Sharont2305

Dan Wootten of The S** is a poisonous, vile human being who works for a vile, poisonous rag


----------



## Kat Madridista

Flatsy said:


> Charles just participated in a biography that casts headline-making shade on both of his sons.  While the book was not officially sanctioned, it was informally sanctioned.  So it does appear that Charles thinks his sons needed some badmouthing.
> 
> Speculation about his motives: he's always been jealous when it comes to family members outshining him or being more popular; he has some behind-the-scenes conflicts with his sons and wanted to put them in their place; he wanted to engender sympathy over a father's tribulations raising sons who can be a little spoiled.  Or maybe Charles thought it was time to change the traditional narratives about him being a villain into him being a victim.
> 
> Lainey (of Lainey Gossip) thinks that the tiara story was essentially an out-take from the biography that went a little too far to be included in a book Charles participated in, so it was given to Dan Wootten of The Sun in a more anonymous way.
> 
> 
> That's really not what the story was at all.



If Charles wanted to paint his sons as spoiled brats and himself as the long suffering father having to deal with them, there are better ways to do it than that tiara story. The story doesn’t involve him at all, and even the “see, this is what Charles has to deal with!” angle is a stretch. 

Lainey’s royal analysis and sources aren’t the best, to put it nicely. So I personally don’t pay attention to her royal coverage that much. She’s great at the Hollywood gossip, but she’s overreaching with the royal stuff. There a handful of other royal correspondents I’d rate over her, she doesn’t even cut the top 5.

And Dan Wootten is not the guy you leak to if you want your news to be more favorably received.  If you want your leak to be taken more seriously, you go to The Daily Mail, or if you really want it to be The Sun, then you go to Emily Andrews.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if this is the tiara being talked about. It's the Grand Duchess Vladimir tiara. It's interchangeable, can be emerald or pearl droplets, or none at all. I can't say I like the emerald version. Pearls or nothing looks better.


All I can say is "WOW!" 

I would wear any of these, though the emeralds do add gorgeous color.


----------



## sdkitty

I would hope Charles isn't that mean spirited to paint a nasty picture of his own sons.
Apparently he's a bit eccentric.  Lets squirrels in the house.
From Huffpost

Prince Charles, avid environmentalist and future heir to the throne, is simply nuts about squirrels, his son Prince William revealed.


Charles spoke of his squirrel “infatuation,” in another article in the magazine, calling thm “incredibly special creatures.”

“They come into the house at Birkhall and we get them chasing each other round and round inside,” he said. “If I sit there quietly, they will do so around me.”

Charles, whose 70th birthday is Wednesday, added: “Sometimes, when I leave my jackets on a chair with nuts in the pockets, I see them with their tails sticking out, as they hunt for nuts — they are incredibly special creatures.”






PA ARCHIVE/PA IMAGES
The Prince of Wales receives a toy red squirrel for Prince George, presented by the Scottish Wildlife Trust during the visit to Murthly Castle, Perthshire to attend a reception mark the Trust’s 50th anniversary.
Charles also is pretty thrilled by turkeys the royal family keeps on the estate.

“I love these turkeys, they make me laugh so much,” Charles said, giggling, during a clip from a BBC One documentary marking his 70th birthday.

“Gobble, gobble gobble” he said, mimicking the turkeys’ noises before breaking into a fit of laughter. “So funny.”







Callie Jones@Callie__Jones

Prince Charles doing an impression of a turkey was everything 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


#PrinceCharles #PrinceSonAndHeir


76
1:29 PM - Nov 8, 2018

18 people are talking about this

Twitter Ads info and privacy


To help celebrate the prince’s birthday milestone, Clarence House released two new portraits of Prince Charles and his family on Wednesday.

The sweet photos show the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their three children (including a smiling Prince Louis!), and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, gathered around Charles.

 “It was particularly special to capture such an informal and relaxed family portrait over a fun afternoon in the gardens of Clarence House,” Getty photographer Chris Jackson said of the shots.


----------



## Jayne1

Kat Madridista said:


> And Dan Wootten is not the guy you leak to if you want your news to be more favorably received.  If you want your leak to be taken more seriously, you go to The Daily Mail, or if you really want it to be The Sun, then you go to Emily Andrews.


Well, as you said, certain reporters like to ingratiate themselves with the Royal Family, so if you want nice things said about you, you leak to Emily Andrews.  That doesn't make her articles more factual, just biased.

If you don't care about grovelling, then you may want a another take on the subject, sometimes a more unsentimental one. I never read the reporters who like to cozy up to the Royals.


----------



## Kat Madridista

Jayne1 said:


> Well, as you said, certain reporters like to ingratiate themselves with the Royal Family, so if you want nice things said about you, you leak to Emily Andrews.  That doesn't make her articles more factual, just biased.
> 
> If you don't care about grovelling, then you may want a another take on the subject, sometimes a more unsentimental one. I never read the reporters who like to cozy up to the Royals.



I don’t object to Wootton because he says unfavorable things about the royal family. I just find him less credible than the rest because he gets stuff wrong A LOT. For instance, he was the one who reported that Doria was going to be interviewed by Oprah. And that was completely false. Even when he does get facts right, his sensationalist spin tends to do more harm than good (see his awful handling of the Charlie Sheen HIV story). So apart from the credibility issues, he’s just problematic overall. 

It also baffles me that “cozying up to the royals” is a bad thing for royal reporters to do. It’s part of their job! How else will they gain access, have the royals answer questions, have aides and staff trust them with information, if the reporters don’t nurture those relationships? As long as it doesn’t impact their objectivity (and I don’t think it has.Emily Andrews, Rebecca English, Anthony Edwards, and their ilk have been, at times, critical of the royals), then it’s should be fine.


----------



## Morgan R

In celebration of Prince Charles' 70th Birthday, The Times has released many previously unseen pictures of Prince Charles included were these pictures of Harry and Meghan:


----------



## RueHermes

How old do you think Meghan looks? Versus Kate?


----------



## threadbender

RueHermes said:


> How old do you think Meghan looks? Versus Kate?


They are two totally different women with different histories. Why would we compare what age they look?  I guess I do not understand the need to compare them. They each are their own person, with their own lives having had their own experiences.
I think they are both lovely.


----------



## YSoLovely

RueHermes said:


> How old do you think Meghan looks? Versus Kate?



I the name of shallow, superficial gossiping:

Meghan looks much younger & way more youthful than Kate. She's a stunner. Kate's average. 


*sees herself out*


----------



## chaneljewel

I think both Kate and Meghan are beautiful. Who cares how old or young each looks?  Both women are exceptional and fill an important role in the royal family.


----------



## gazoo

I find Meghan gorgeous. She can't seem to take a bad picture. Beautiful from every angle. Kate is also lovely. Both have huge smiles which instantly makes people more attractive, IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gazoo said:


> I find Meghan gorgeous. She can't seem to take a bad picture. Beautiful from every angle. Kate is also lovely. Both have huge smiles which instantly makes people more attractive, IMO.


right, I see no need to disparage Kate if you like Meghan.....Kate is lovely with good hair, great legs and a pretty face.  And she appears to be a good wife and mother.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

RueHermes said:


> How old do you think Meghan looks? Versus Kate?


I don't know their exact ages as I type this but they both look upper 30s or early 40s. I would say they're the same age, or very close. Considering how many kids Kate has she doesn't look old yet, but certainly she looks more tired in some pics. They can't really be compared too much, especially since one is a mom now 3x over, that affects how the face/body will look as you age.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't know their exact ages as I type this but they both look upper 30s or early 40s. I would say they're the same age, or very close. Considering how many kids Kate has she doesn't look old yet, but certainly she looks more tired in some pics. They can't really be compared too much, especially since one is a mom now 3x over, that affects how the face/body will look as you age.


and also fair skin is going to age more than darker skin.....but I don't think Kate looks old at all


----------



## princess101804

I would say Meghan is 2-3 years older than Kate, Kate being 36-37 and Meghan 38-39. They both wear harsh makeup, but I do think Kate seems more at ease and vibrant compared to Meghan. I don't see Meghan/Harry lasting.


----------



## DeMonica

Who knows what the future brings? Yet, being married for love is good foundation to a long lasting marriage. No-one forced them to get married. It's not like that unfortunate Charles and Diana union.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Who knows what the future brings? Yet, being married for love is good foundation to a long lasting marriage. No-one forced them to get married. It's not like that unfortunate Charles and Diana union.


I tend to agree with you
Of course, most celeb marriages are not permanent so for that reason, poster above may be correct


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan looks at least a decade younger than her actual age. I think it’s a combination of being petite and having a youthful face.


----------



## Tivo

I think Meghan looks her age. She looks good for her age, but she looks her age.


----------



## minababe

I love them both
but I think Meghan is looking harry's age. beginning, middle of 30 (32-35). and kate is looking like end of 30 beginning of 40. (39-42)
but when you see them side by side meghan Looks like a total diffferent Generation. like end of 20 and kate end of 30. if you know what i mean. But they both Matches perfectly their husbands.


----------



## berrydiva

Kate's makeup is harsh and unnecessarily ages her but she obviously likes that look. Side by side, Kate looks about 10 years older than Megan. 

Sad that both of them get reduced to being compared to each other in such superficial ways all the time. I hope that it doesn't impact their relationship in the long run.


----------



## bisbee

Kate will be 37 in January, Meghan turned 37 in August.  They are not related, there is no reason why they would age similarly.  Also, Kate has had 3 children.  That also adds to the differences in appearance.


----------



## afsweet

kate looks like a normal 37 year old to me. meghan looks more hollywood and therefore younger.


----------



## DeMonica

They both look mid thirties Kate is more conservative and serious, as she has to be, since: she's a mother of three and a future queen.  I think Meghan is visibly more mature than Harry. Yes I know that she's older than him, although: not much.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending The Royal Variety Performance at London Palladium


----------



## Jayne1

I read that her taxes are going way up because she still has to pay taxes to the US and now she is a very rich lady.  This includes being taxed on all her gifts, homes and jewellery. 

Even the Queen and Charles might get caught up because Harry apparently doesn't get enough from his mother's multi-million dollar trust fund (she never left a cent to charity) and needs more from his father and grandmother.

Anyone else read this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chamber Doll

After watching that video.....if I had NO idea who those two are I would assume that Markle is the star of the two......She seems very take charge

ugh!  those wispy hairs that she keeps pulling away from her face


----------



## leeann

That black and white top makes her look very wide


----------



## DeMonica

^^^Because she's getting wider. She's in the second trimester,  so she already has a little baby bump which is hidden under the top.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

That dress is atrocious.


----------



## Gal4Dior

This neckline doesn’t suit her body type which is straight up and down, already. I have the same problem and the moment I gain weight, it gets worse. This look is a total miss for me. Makes her look older with all those floral patterns in sequins.


----------



## leeann

That's what I meant. I think she looks better in a v neck with sleeves. The cut off the top makes her look wide, and not in the belly area. In the shoulder/underarm area.


----------



## Morgane

I've noticed that she likes to put belts everywhere,probably to define more the waist. But she needs to avoid these looks now that she's pregnant. It's just unflattering.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgane said:


> I've noticed that she likes to put belts everywhere,probably to define more the waist. But she needs to avoid these looks now that she's pregnant. It's just unflattering.



If she went with a wider neck (off the shoulder like she often does) with a sweetheart or v-neckline and empire waist in a lighter fabric, I think the tiniest part of her waist would still be accented with or without a belt. 

She’s thin, even being pregnant I’m bigger than her! This dress and her stylist aren’t doing her any favors!


----------



## hellosunshine

I really dislike coming to this thread and frequently reading disparaging comments directed towards Meghan (i.e how her marriage to harry won't last or whatever, weird racially coded or colorist comments about her hosiery a few pages back, uncalled for comparisons with Kate, and list goes on and on). It's obvious that certain people who come onto this thread dislike Meghan..I just don't understand why you continue to come here...and it's rather funny that these same people leave no comments of real worth but are rather looking for literally ANYTHING to judge/critique Meghan about.

Btw, people are allowed to comment on anything about her but some of these comments are just so annoying honestly. Some comments are just plain insensitive but ugh whatever..

Glad to have this off my chest.


----------



## myown

chicaloca said:


> Meghan looks at least a decade younger than her actual age. I think it’s a combination of being petite and having a youthful face.


Meghan is in her mid30s, she definitely does not look mid20s


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chamber Doll said:


> After watching that video.....if I had NO idea who those two are I would assume that Markle is the star of the two......She seems very take charge
> 
> ugh!  those wispy hairs that she keeps pulling away from her face


Totally agree on those wisps!  In the photos, they look stylish.  But as often as she was playing with them, clearly the hair style didn't work and better not come back!


----------



## minababe

I'm so dissapointed by the last look. by far the worst for me.
the top with the skirt and this neckolder bra Thing. really bad look.
she still Looks beautiful because of her face and her happiness.
Looks like she is hitting the 6. month so sweet that pregnancy glow.

I've read Harry is doing a oversea flght to Zambia next week.
I wonder if there are appointments for meghan until Christmas. if not I can't wait for seeing her at the Christmas Service. they were so cute last year with Willam and kate.


----------



## Yoshi1296

I usually love her outfits but this two piece dress is a no from me. Just looks weird. I loved the embroidery design though so it would’ve been nice if the dress was a different silhouette or something.


----------



## xjsbellamias13

Not a fan of the latest look, but she still looks absolutely stunning per usual!


----------



## BagLovingMom

xjsbellamias13 said:


> Not a fan of the latest look, but she still looks absolutely stunning per usual!


I totally agree ! This woman could wear burlap and still be a stunner! She looks so healthy and happy, that wins over any outfit !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

BagLovingMom said:


> I totally agree ! This woman could wear burlap and still be a stunner!


I'm a Brit, what's burlap?


----------



## pursecrzy

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm a Brit, what's burlap?



It’s a coarse cloth made from jute.


----------



## Sharont2305

pursecrzy said:


> View attachment 4258314
> 
> 
> It’s a coarse cloth made from jute.


Aah right, thank you for the translation, lol. 
We'd call that a sack cloth.
We'd probably say that she could wear a bin bag (trash bag) and still look great!


----------



## DeMonica

Things we learn on a gossip board,


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> Things we learn on a gossip board,


Always an education, lol


----------



## hellosunshine

I think the dress translates better in movement. She doesn't look as broad in the below video.


----------



## afsweet

^weird how she insists on carrying her clutch in her right hand and then having to switch back and forth to shake hands with a line of people. those princess lessons didn't pay off lol


----------



## stephci

I feel like if she had her hair down the look wouldn't be AS bad


----------



## BagLovingMom

hellosunshine said:


> I think the dress translates better in movement. She doesn't look as broad in the below video.



I love how she took just a moment when getting out of the car to greet those women and accept what looks like a little gift . She is fabulous !


----------



## hellosunshine

stephc005 said:


> ^weird how she insists on carrying her clutch in her right hand and then having to switch back and forth to shake hands with a line of people. those princess lessons didn't pay off lol



Perhaps, she likes to carry things on her dominant hand?



BagLovingMom said:


> I love how she took just a moment when getting out of the car to greet those women and accept what looks like a little gift . She is fabulous !



Yes, it's very kind of her to always take a few seconds and greet people..however short the interaction is. It's just nice that she even makes the effort and gesture. She could've easily gotten out of the car and walked toward Harry and began greeting the guests that were waiting for them atop of the small steps.


----------



## Sharont2305

Grenfell Tower Hubb Kitchen today


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan visiting the Hubb Community Kitchen


----------



## absolutpink

That coat


----------



## Gal4Dior

Not a fan of the two tone red. I know it’s in, but it just jarring to me. Love the coat and boots. Perfection.


----------



## queennadine

^^ Super cute outfit on her! I like everything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## StylishMD

hellosunshine said:


> I really dislike coming to this thread and frequently reading disparaging comments directed towards Meghan (i.e how her marriage to harry won't last or whatever, weird racially coded or colorist comments about her hosiery a few pages back, uncalled for comparisons with Kate, and list goes on and on). It's obvious that certain people who come onto this thread dislike Meghan..I just don't understand why you continue to come here...and it's rather funny that these same people leave no comments of real worth but are rather looking for literally ANYTHING to judge/critique Meghan about.
> 
> Btw, people are allowed to comment on anything about her but some of these comments are just so annoying honestly. Some comments are just plain insensitive but ugh whatever..
> 
> Glad to have this off my chest.


@hellosunshine , thank you, thank you for posting this. These exact thoughts have crossed my mind.
Comments about how she ‘looks different’ for the rest of the people around her in a photo because of the way arm are exposed (hmmm same critique of Mrs ***** come to mind) or how they are placed
Those that point out these thinly veiled racist comments are then disparaged


----------



## StylishMD

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm a Brit, what's burlap?


As In burlap sack used for storing produce, potatoes etc (I’m a Brit too)


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> I really dislike coming to this thread and frequently reading disparaging comments directed towards Meghan (i.e how her marriage to harry won't last or whatever, weird racially coded or colorist comments about her hosiery a few pages back, uncalled for comparisons with Kate, and list goes on and on). It's obvious that certain people who come onto this thread dislike Meghan..I just don't understand why you continue to come here...and it's rather funny that these same people leave no comments of real worth but are rather looking for literally ANYTHING to judge/critique Meghan about.
> 
> Btw, people are allowed to comment on anything about her but some of these comments are just so annoying honestly. Some comments are just plain insensitive but ugh whatever..
> 
> Glad to have this off my chest.


racially coded comments about hosiery?
I missed that one
I think there are more fans on this thread than people who dislike her (if any).  I'm kinda neutral about her.  I think she's attractive and I'm glad they're happy.  But I'm not over the moon because he married an American.
Any celeb thread whether for an entertainer, a politician's wife or a royal is going to have likes and dislikes.


----------



## mkr

This is a gossip thread and anyone can post their opinions good or bad. That’s why it’s called a discussion forum.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

There is also an ignore button that people should make use of. If comments or those who comment do not sit well with you... find your ignore button and use it.


----------



## hellosunshine

StylishMD said:


> @hellosunshine , thank you, thank you for posting this. These exact thoughts have crossed my mind.
> Comments about how she ‘looks different’ for the rest of the people around her in a photo because of the way arm are exposed (hmmm same critique of Mrs ***** come to mind) or how they are placed
> Those that point out these thinly veiled racist comments are then disparaged



No problem.  I'm biracial myself so I've been on the backend of such comments before and am almost hyper aware of these disguised comments. 



mkr said:


> This is a gossip thread and anyone can post their opinions good or bad. That’s why it’s called a discussion forum.



Fair enough. Was just hoping that people could engage in dialogue with each other without comments like "I don't see what's so special about her", "totally unhappy that she's not brit", etc and then throw in a few below the belt jabs about her skincolor...none of these comments warrant any further discussion but alright. Let's continue....

Anyways, did not intend to sideline this thread but it seems people are steadfast on continuing with the usual here..it's alright..I'll begin to utilize the ignore button. Thank you @ccbaggirl89, I did not know about this feature.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Fair enough. Was just hoping that people could engage in dialogue with each other without comments like "I don't see what's so special about her", "totally unhappy that she's not brit", etc


Prince Harry's princess was going to get a whole lot of this no matter who she was. 

And not seeing what's so special about her is a perfectly legitimate opinion, so long as people aren't on a psycho crusade about it.



> and then throw in a few below the belt jabs about her skincolor...none of these comments warrant any further discussion but alright. Let's continue....


Examples?  I saw a few pages back that somebody said Meghan's "nude" pantyhose (as notoriously required by the Queen) look old- ladyish and don't match her skin tone.  This is a common complaint among Meghan's fans who wish she weren't forced to wear them.  Blame the Queen for 1) enforcing totally out of date fashion rules and 2) demanding "flesh colored" pantyhose that aren't actually flesh colored unless you are white.

I wouldn't call those "racially coded comments about hosiery".


----------



## prettyprincess

StylishMD said:


> @hellosunshine , thank you, thank you for posting this. These exact thoughts have crossed my mind.
> Comments about how she ‘looks different’ for the rest of the people around her in a photo because of the way arm are exposed (hmmm same critique of Mrs ***** come to mind) or how they are placed
> Those that point out these thinly veiled racist comments are then disparaged



Is it possible that it’s not racial? maybe it’s just good ol fashioned jealousy and hateration that she got the most eligible bachelor and is now living the princess life that we all want lol. Whoever he married was going to be dissected and criticized to shreds, no matter what. Diana was fluorescent white and she took a brutal beating from everyone.


----------



## Flatsy

I'm all for calling out racism (and I might add, I have done so in this thread when it was said that Meghan is "black when it suits her to be".)  

But tagging any sort of vague criticism as racist and then citing its vagueness as proof of its racism is specious and circular logic.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Prince Harry's princess was going to get a whole lot of this no matter who she was.
> 
> And not seeing what's so special about her is a perfectly legitimate opinion, so long as people aren't on a psycho crusade about it.
> 
> 
> Examples?  I saw a few pages back that somebody said Meghan's "nude" pantyhose (as notoriously required by the Queen) look old- ladyish and don't match her skin tone.  This is a common complaint among Meghan's fans who wish she weren't forced to wear them.  Blame the Queen for 1) enforcing totally out of date fashion rules and 2) demanding "flesh colored" pantyhose that aren't actually flesh colored unless you are white.
> 
> I wouldn't call those "racially coded comments about hosiery".



I really dislike going back and forth with people as it can come off as argumentative to me. I dislike arguing so going forward..this will be the last comment that I acknowledge and/or respond to.

Anyways, I have my suspicions that if Harry had married a white woman..people wouldn't be as critical of her. From my personal observation, people seem to look for reasons to dislike Meghan and literally nitpick at the most minuscule of things. This is not a "any lady that Harry married would be picked apart" sorta thing. Let's broaden our dialogue a bit - do you watch British media and how they've treated Meghan? If not, I'll just fill you in..they are unjustly rude to her. So much so, that Kensington Palace has had to release statements and privately requested to some tv stations to not discuss Meghan in the matter that they were. I don't believe that Kate has even dealt with a quarter of what Meghan has dealt with. Honestly, I can't understand the hate other than perhaps, a lot of blonde haired, blue eyed women are upset that Harry picked a woman that looks nothing like them. Maybe it's a blow to their ego..who knows?! I honestly can't make sense of all the terrible comments that I've read here, YouTube, DailyMail, etc.

Also, yeah not understanding why she's special can be a legitimate question, but it's always asked in a matter as to question whether she's worthy of her new role. "I don't see what's so special about her that Harry married her and now she has -fill in the blank- and gets to do -fill in the blank-" is the implication.  Yes, she deserves all of this because she is special. Harry could've picked anyone but instead married a biracial, one-time divorcee, actress...the fact that the royal family overlooked this is a testament to how unique and special Meghan is in character, personality, and achievements.

As for the hosiery comment, I was referring to one particular comment but I don't want to embarrass this person, as you've said the comments there..people are free to go back and read.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> I'm all for calling out racism (and I might add, I have done so in this thread when it was said that Meghan is "black when it suits her to be".)
> 
> But tagging any sort of vague criticism as racist and then citing its vagueness as proof of its racism is specious and circular logic.



..this makes no sense.


----------



## Flatsy

You accused this thread specifically of containing racist comments that you found disheartening.  Citing racism in The Daily Mail or an unspecified general feeling of racism in the world at large is not a good enough reason to try to shut down the conversation here.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> You accused this thread specifically of containing racist comments that you found disheartening.  Citing racism in The Daily Mail or an unspecified general feeling of racism in the world at large is not a good enough reason to try to shut down the conversation here.



Please do not get snippy with me. I've not been rude to you.

If you read my original post, I was referring to here and here only. You quoting a comment I made about the overall and general reaction and treatment towards Meghan is another comment that I've made today. Please do not confuse the two things.

Also, I'm not trying to shut down any conversation here. Everyone is free to discuss whatever they want. I just don't like how some people disguise their comments. If you do not understand this and don't see the doublespeak that some people here are engaging in, then you'll never see it. This is not something that can be taught - only way you'd know about this is when you've been on the receiving end of it in some capacity throughout your life. I can't teach you to pickup on some of these thinly veiled comments. 

This is really a thing you understand or you simply don't. I'm sorry.


----------



## hellosunshine

Let's get back on topic --

Meghan @ London Community Kitchen with Grenfell survivors --


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Please do not get snippy with me. I've not been rude to you.
> 
> If you read my original post, I was referring to here and here only. You quoting a comment I made about the overall and general reaction and treatment towards Meghan is another comment that I've made today. Please do not confuse the two things.
> 
> Also, I'm not trying to shut down any conversation here. Everyone is free to discuss whatever they want. I just don't like how some people disguise their comments. If you do not understand this and don't see the doublespeak that some people here are engaging in, then you'll never see it. This is not something that can be taught - only way you'd know about this is when you've been on the receiving end of it in some capacity throughout your life. I can't teach you to pickup on some of these thinly veiled comments.
> 
> This is really a thing you understand or you simply don't. I'm sorry.


You are absolutely being rude to me by chalking my disagreement with you up to ignorance and an inability to understand or recognize racism.

Making vague accusations such as "doublespeak" in the thread while refusing to come up with any actual examples is absolutely designed to intimidate everyone and shut down what you clearly don't like, which is anything mildly critical of Meghan. 

If you see a comment you believe to be racist, you should address it directly instead of putting the entire thread on notice.  But that would also require you to back up your argument, as well as listen to someone else's side.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> You are absolutely being rude to me by chalking my disagreement with you up to ignorance and an inability to understand or recognize racism.
> 
> Making vague accusations such as "doublespeak" in the thread while refusing to come up with any actual examples is absolutely designed to intimidate everyone and shut down what you clearly don't like, which is anything mildly critical of Meghan.
> 
> If you see a comment you believe to be racist, you should address it directly instead of putting the entire thread on notice.  But that would also require you to back up your argument, as well as listen to someone else's side.



That's precisely it. You don't see it therefore you disagree. 

I'm not going to go through this thread and find every.single.comment for you. Do you think so highly of yourself that I'd waste my time for you? Please let's be real here...

Again, and I repeat...say whatever you want. People are going to do that anyways..I do not care. My original and first comment regarding this matter was written so I can vent my frustration with what I was continually reading here. 

And no, I will not directly address any particular comment. I've stated several times thus far that I strongly dislike arguing. It's uncomfortable to me and I really wish you'd drop this and let's continue discussing Meghan in whatever form people want. Like I said, you either get it or you don't. It's simple.


----------



## Swanky

Could you guys kindly take it to PM?


----------



## hellosunshine

Swanky said:


> Could you guys kindly take it to PM?



Absolutely not needed. Thank you for asking kindly, Swanky. 

To bring the topic back around to Mrs. Markle - Favorite Looks Ever

1. Dress - Black Halo Jackie O 






2. Dress - Stella McCartney






3. Dress - Givenchy 






4. Dress - Brandon Max well


----------



## GoStanford

hellosunshine said:


> To bring the topic back around to Mrs. Markle - Favorite Looks Ever


She looks stunning in that lemon yellow dress (well, she looks stunning in just about everything - she really photographs well in virtually all images I've seen).  One thing both she and Catherine do well is wear solid colors.  This showcases the cut and embellishments of the garments and also allows for accessories such as jewelry to stand out.


----------



## myown

stephc005 said:


> ^weird how she insists on carrying her clutch in her right hand and then having to switch back and forth to shake hands with a line of people. those princess lessons didn't pay off lol


I don't think that's big deal, you do that without thinking about. 

Also people judge Meghan way too much, most royals carry clutches


----------



## Voyageuse

I’d like to add this to the list of favorite looks.
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
.  I’m glad Meghan eschews panty hose when she can.  I used to wear them for work in the 90s.  Even with pasty, white legs I could never find the right shade; black was my go-to.  Now, I dab a little make-up on my legs to cover imperfections and make my skin more even.

As far as carrying her clutch in the right hand goes, I recently read somewhere that proper etiquette dictates that we carry our handbags on our left side.  That way we can shake hands with our  right.  That’s a REALLY hard habit to break.  I know.


----------



## Yoshi1296

Good thing I’m a lefty and only carry my bags with my left hand! I’m ready to be a princess haha [emoji1528]


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Voyageuse said:


> I’d like to add this to the list of favorite looks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4259994
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .  I’m glad Meghan eschews panty hose when she can.  I used to wear them for work in the 90s.  Even with pasty, white legs I could never find the right shade; black was my go-to.  Now, I dab a little make-up on my legs to cover imperfections and make my skin more even.
> 
> As far as carrying her clutch in the right hand goes, I recently read somewhere that proper etiquette dictates that we carry our handbags on our left side.  That way we can shake hands with our  right.  That’s a REALLY hard habit to break.  I know.


Yes, it's supposed to be carried to the left side. I learned this at a work conference years ago when I was the only one wearing a name badge on my left. And a few people said it was 'right when on the right' - we are supposed to leave right hands free and place name badges to the right since eyes will go that way when shaking right hands.


----------



## Aimee3

Voyageuse said:


> I’d like to add this to the list of favorite looks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4259994
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .  I’m glad Meghan eschews panty hose when she can.  I used to wear them for work in the 90s.  Even with pasty, white legs I could never find the right shade; black was my go-to.  Now, I dab a little make-up on my legs to cover imperfections and make my skin more even.
> 
> As far as carrying her clutch in the right hand goes, I recently read somewhere that proper etiquette dictates that we carry our handbags on our left side.  That way we can shake hands with our  right.  That’s a REALLY hard habit to break.  I know.



Can anyone I.D this dress?  Gorgeous.

As for which hand to carry a bag, I’m a righty and carry in my right hand; unless the bag is heavy and then I keep switching hands when they get tired, lol.  I doubt the royals need to carry anything more than lipstick and tissues.  Someone is there to open the door when they return home, so no need for keys either!


----------



## threadbender

TMA said:


> I think not everything is race based, but it does not make it any less prejudiced. What is “royalable”? What distinguishes one commoner marrying into the the RF from another? I am not saying you are prejudiced, I am just continuing with your example as a logical question to ask. Criticism is fine - I may not like something she’s wearing but I don’t have to express that in a manner that actually goes beyond the outfit. If she is of moral turpitude or there is another reason for the critique, say it. However the issue is all those critiques that make you question what the motivator is. E.g “I don’t trust her, something about her is fake” - most criticisms that cannot be supported have their very root in one or another type of prejudice. And there are times when a person can’t support their criticism, which is fine as humans, but at least they should be able to admit to themselves and others it’s is illogical and they haven’t taken the time to get to the root of it. The more we do this in our daily lives, I think the more positive human interactions we will give and receive.


I can think someone is "fake" and it has nothing to do with their skin color. smh
I read a post in another forum regarding a character on a show where another said something to the effect of them taking HBP meds.  Rather than take it at face value, where another character is likely stressing them out, some poster assumed it was because the man is black and there is a high incidence in the black community therefore,  the dialogue was racist. I have HBP and am fairer than the snow outside. It is far too easy to assume someone else's thought process is being racist when it is actually just an opinion on a given person.
I was not Meghan's biggest fan but have enjoyed watching her progression as a royal. I wish her and Harry the best. And, their baby, as well!!


----------



## hellosunshine

Aimee3 said:


> Can anyone I.D this dress?  Gorgeous.



It's Dior. She was also wearing Cartier jewels.


----------



## Swanky

There's a thread dedicated to her style here, in case anyone's missed it 
Meghan Markle Style


----------



## Swanky

It's the holidays. . .  can't we try and think positive and see some good?
Please choose your words carefully, let's stay on topic and if you have an issue w/ a member please block them or PM them.
Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## White Orchid

Voyageuse said:


> I’d like to add this to the list of favorite looks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4259994
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .  I’m glad Meghan eschews panty hose when she can.  I used to wear them for work in the 90s.  Even with pasty, white legs I could never find the right shade; black was my go-to.  Now, I dab a little make-up on my legs to cover imperfections and make my skin more even.
> 
> As far as carrying her clutch in the right hand goes, I recently read somewhere that proper etiquette dictates that we carry our handbags on our left side.  That way we can shake hands with our  right.  That’s a REALLY hard habit to break.  I know.


Except for the white shoes, agreed.


----------



## zinacef

In the end of the day, nothing and nobody matters—- Harry married Meghan and that’s it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jcnc

H


hellosunshine said:


> I think the dress translates better in movement. She doesn't look as broad in the below video.



Her fidgeting with her hair thing is soo obvious in the video. I guess i hadnt seen a video of her in a long time so I forgot but its very distracting. That said, she looks good and "in the zone" for these public event


----------



## DeMonica

zinacef said:


> In the end of the day, nothing and nobody matters—- Harry married Meghan and that’s it.


Amen to that. No criticism is going to change that.


----------



## DC-Cutie

zinacef said:


> In the end of the day, nothing and nobody matters—- Harry married Meghan and that’s it.


Period!  The end!


----------



## Fally420

DeMonica said:


> Amen to that. No criticism is going to change that.



Don't think someone thinks criticism will change that nor thats the point. It is just a discussion forum after all where people share their opinions. In such a forum you have to live with good and negative opinion about a celeb, outfit or whatever.
Somehow I get the idea some people take it all too serious.


----------



## DeMonica

The beauty of coming to a forum is: different background and opinions. See my point is, what you might have taken a little too seriously, is that is while some people are ready to tear out the other's hair out on a wrong word, accusing each other with racism because of trivial things or  taking things very personal, it doesn't really change anything. So we can keep it light. I'm sure that Meghan is more concerned with her new home in Windsor and baby than what we say here.


----------



## Morgan R

Harry and Meghan will be moving into Frogmore Cottage in Windsor.

Frogmore Cottage is a 10 bedroom cottage which is within the grounds of the Home Park (on the eastern side of Windsor Castle). Frogmore Cottage faces Frogmore House which is where Harry & Meghan had their private evening wedding party and where their engagement pictures were shot. Frogmore Cottage also isn't far from St.George's Chapel which is where Harry was christened as well as where Harry and Meghan were married.


----------



## Morgan R

By the way I'm not sure why (actually I think because royal reporters want to stir drama like they always do when it comes to reporting about the royals) but one royal reporter suggested (now multiple outlets are running with the story) that Harry and Meghan are moving because of "tension" Harry is having with William.

Yet in reality most royals have multiple estates. Usually an estate within/near London and a country home (sometimes they have even more estates). With Harry and Meghan their estate near London will be the Frogmore Cottage and their country home is in Cotswolds. Harry and Meghan moving from Nottingham Cottage which is on the grounds of Kensington Palace was eventually going to happen because it is a small estate (2 bedrooms, a bathroom, and the ceilings of the cottage are low). Some in the media were speculating Harry and Meghan would move to Apartment 1 in Kensington Palace which recently underwent renovations and is next to William and Kate's Apartment 1A (though it is actually known William and Kate with their children more often stay at their Anmer Hall residence). The speculation that Harry and Meghan would move into Apartment 1 never made sense to me in the first place. Prince Richard, The Duke of Gloucester (Cousin Of Queen Elizabeth II) and his wife live in Apartment 1 and have for sometime now. The other residences on the grounds of Kensington Palace are actually occupied by other royal family members, staff, or used for meetings and press rooms. So it was actually inevitable Harry and Meghan would move from Kensington Palace but it is happening sooner than expected because they will be having their first child next year and will possibly/likely have more children.


----------



## caramelize126

I think a lot of the speculation is coming from the new biography on Charles that was discussed a few pages back that has implied tension between the two brothers.


----------



## DeMonica

My guess is that the allocation of the estates is up to the Queen or at least she has a say in it,  and the members of the royal family cannot just move around and use  any estate they choose on a whim. I'm sure that moves like this are thoroughly planned well ahead of time. I might be wrong, but I don't really buy this sudden tension story. Yes, the new couple is more in the limelight at the moment, because of the wedding, the royal tour and the first baby, but it was all about Kate and Prince Louise in the beginning of the year. It will be probably balanced out on the long run.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Morgan R said:


> By the way I'm not sure why (actually I think because royal reporters want to stir drama like they always do when it comes to reporting about the royals) but one royal reporter suggested (now multiple outlets are running with the story) that Harry and Meghan are moving because of "tension" Harry is having with William.
> 
> Yet in reality most royals have multiple estates. Usually an estate within/near London and a country home (sometimes they have even more estates). With Harry and Meghan their estate near London will be the Frogmore Cottage and their country home is in Cotswolds. Harry and Meghan moving from Nottingham Cottage which is on the grounds of Kensington Palace was eventually going to happen because it is a small estate (2 bedrooms, a bathroom, and the ceilings of the cottage are low). Some in the media were speculating Harry and Meghan would move to Apartment 1 in Kensington Palace which recently underwent renovations and is next to William and Kate's Apartment 1A (though it is actually known William and Kate with their children more often stay at their Anmer Hall residence). The speculation that Harry and Meghan would move into Apartment 1 never made sense to me in the first place. Prince Richard, The Duke of Gloucester (Cousin Of Queen Elizabeth II) and his wife live in Apartment 1 and have for sometime now. The other residences on the grounds of Kensington Palace are actually occupied by other royal family members, staff, or used for meetings and press rooms. So it was actually inevitable Harry and Meghan would move from Kensington Palace but it is happening sooner than expected because they will be having their first child next year and will possibly/likely have more children.


William and Kate will be king and queen  Harry and Meghan and their children will be minor.royals more so.as.each year passes


----------



## gelbergirl

Makes sense that William and Kate would have major footing at Kensington.  His next step is Prince of Wales in just a few years.  
I remember this is where Charles and Diana made their home.  Anyone remember where Sarah and Andrew lived all those years ago??


----------



## Sophisticatted

gelbergirl said:


> Makes sense that William and Kate would have major footing at Kensington.  His next step is Prince of Wales in just a few years.
> I remember this is where Charles and Diana made their home.  Anyone remember where Sarah and Andrew lived all those years ago??



They built a home which has since been destroyed.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> They built a home which has since been destroyed.


Which was "affectionately" known as Southyork


----------



## kemilia

jcnc said:


> H
> 
> Her fidgeting with her hair thing is soo obvious in the video. I guess i hadnt seen a video of her in a long time so I forgot but its very distracting. That said, she looks good and "in the zone" for these public event


Yes--the constant fiddling with her hair! If you don't want a clump of hair falling down, use hair pins to hold it back. Does she want it to hang down, does she want it behind her ear? Argghh! 

Also it was funny that she repeatedly tugged at the top of her outfit, like many of us do (me!), to cover her butt or make sure it was in place. I don't think that was good, another insecurity fidget, imo. While I wasn't crazy about her outfit, she looked good in it and it stood out nicely against all the dark clothing when they were seated in their box.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry on Day 1 of his 2 day visit to Zambia. His visit of  Zambia is at the request of the Foreign Office and he is attending events for The Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry is the President of The Queen's Commonwealth Trust and was also appointed the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador by Queen Elizabeth II earlier this year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

kemilia said:


> Yes--the constant fiddling with her hair! If you don't want a clump of hair falling down, use hair pins to hold it back. Does she want it to hang down, does she want it behind her ear? Argghh!
> 
> Also it was funny that she repeatedly tugged at the top of her outfit, like many of us do (me!), to cover her butt or make sure it was in place. I don't think that was good, another insecurity fidget, imo. While I wasn't crazy about her outfit, she looked good in it and it stood out nicely against all the dark clothing when they were seated in their box.



it's a nervous Habit of her.
she is doing that move still when there are no Strands of hair. and sometimes when all eyes are on her she is doing that 4 times in a row. I noticed that several times


----------



## berrydiva

Who knew Meghan sparked such random venom in some people. So strange how people get so worked up over people they don't know. lol


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry on Day 2 of his 2 day visit to Zambia. His visit of Zambia is at the request of the Foreign Office and he is attending events for The Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry is the President of The Queen's Commonwealth Trust and was also appointed the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador by Queen Elizabeth II earlier this year.


----------



## redney

minababe said:


> it's a nervous Habit of her.
> she is doing that move still when there are no Strands of hair. and sometimes when all eyes are on her she is doing that 4 times in a row. I noticed that several times


Kate frequently fidgets with her hair too, so annoying. Now that I think of it, so do most of the Kardashian/Jenner sisters![emoji23]


----------



## Cyanide Rose

Voyageuse said:


> I’d like to add this to the list of favorite looks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4259994
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .  I’m glad Meghan eschews panty hose when she can.  I used to wear them for work in the 90s.  Even with pasty, white legs I could never find the right shade; black was my go-to.  Now, I dab a little make-up on my legs to cover imperfections and make my skin more even.
> 
> As far as carrying her clutch in the right hand goes, I recently read somewhere that proper etiquette dictates that we carry our handbags on our left side.  That way we can shake hands with our  right.  That’s a REALLY hard habit to break.  I know.



This dress reminds me of her wedding dress. It fits her much better, It’s a good look on her.


----------



## hellosunshine

Photos Resurfaced of Meghan visiting Malta in 2015. Her great-great grandmother Mary was born there in 1862. Per the DailyMail, "Speaking in 2015, Meghan said of her trip to the Mediterranean country: ‘Coming to Malta has been really important to me because my great-great-grandmother lived here, so we’ve been trying to trace the ancestry. This trip was mostly about trying to understand where I come from, my identity. There is something so lovely about fitting in a piece of the puzzle. To come somewhere where you so quickly settle in to feeling welcomed is really special. It’s this Maltese hospitality that is really special to the place.'
'Before I came, people were telling me, "When you go to Malta, everyone will look like you," and I started to say, "Oh my gosh I do sort of blend in," and it’s the loveliest feeling. The Maltese people have been so kind.’







Full Photos can be seen here ++ https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7851988/meghan-markle-malta-photos-candid-unseen/


----------



## minababe

everyone on malta is looking like her? not really

And I always find it funny when american People say oh my Family, great Grand parents or whatever come orignally from europe .. don't they have the School subject history in School?


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> everyone on malta is looking like her? not really
> 
> And I always find it funny when american People say oh my Family, great Grand parents or whatever come orignally from europe .. don't they have the School subject history in School?


right, since she's a blend of two very different parents, if everyone there looks like her, it could be a coincidence.....but if it makes her happy....


----------



## sdkitty

from the Daily Beast
Meghan is starting to sound not so good.....but will take with the usual grain of salt

*What A Stink: How Meghan Markle Wanted Air Fresheners for ‘Musty’ 550-Year-Old Chapel*

Meghan asked if the atomisers could be sprayed in St. George’s Chapel. Royal Household staff reportedly said, ‘no.’






*Tom Sykes*
12.01.18 11:35 AM ET




*Chris Jackson/GETTY*

It’s another day of challenging headlines for Meghan Markle this weekend, as two separate reports claim firstly that she asked if air fresheners could be sprayed in the 550-year old chapel in which she was married to Prince Harry in May, and secondly that her relationship with Kate hit the skids after she was slapped down by Kate after she chastised a member of Kate’s staff in the run-up to her weddign to Prince Harry.

_The Sun_ reports that Meghan and Kate fell out after Meghan berated a member of Kate’s staff.

Kate, 36, is said to have told Meghan: “That’s unacceptable, they’re my staff and I speak to them.”

_The Sun_ says that Kensington Palace has denied reports of the row.

Meanwhile the _Daily Mail_ reports that Meghan asked if air-freshening atomisers could be sprayed in St. George’s Chapel at Windsor to mask what she described as a ‘musty’ smell in the chapel.


BURYING THE HATCHET
*Kate Middleton Love Bombs Meghan Markle to Crush Rift Rumors*
*Tom Sykes*



The source said: “Apparently Meghan didn't like the smell of the chapel, which, as you would expect, is a little musty. It's not unpleasant at all, though.

“It just smells how you would expect an old building to smell. And that's something the Royal Family are particularly used to.

*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*Kate Middleton Love Bombs Meghan Markle to Crush Rift Rumors*



*Tension Between Meghan and Kate Could Be Behind Move*



*Is Meghan Really The Royal 'Hurricane' The Tabloids Claim?*
“Meghan wanted staff to go around with these atomisers, like spritzer guns, and spray the chapel with scent before anyone arrived.”

Royal Household staff reportedly said no.

The source told the _Mail_: “I don't believe they said no because they thought it could affect the chapel in any way. It was simply the principle of the thing. This is a place that has held royal weddings, funerals and even contains the Royal Vault. I don't believe a request of that nature had been made before.”

The source stressed the request had caused 'no falling out' but added, “Frankly it was all a bit ridiculous and rather over the top.”


----------



## Yoshi1296

How is that ridiculous?? I went to a catholic school and before mass they would sometimes have the altar boys spray the church with febreeze if something smelled bad. I even saw a glade atomizer plugged in once at the back LOL.

And don’t they usually spray scents in banquet halls before an event? Mine did for my event.


----------



## Jayne1

Yoshi1296 said:


> How is that ridiculous?? I went to a catholic school and before mass they would sometimes have the altar boys spray the church with febreeze if something smelled bad. I even saw a glade atomizer plugged in once at the back LOL.
> 
> And don’t they usually spray scents in banquet halls before an event? Mine did for my event.


According to the article, "It was simply the principle of the thing. This is a place that has held royal weddings, funerals and even contains the Royal Vault. I don't believe a request of that nature had been made before.”

It's understandable when put in that perspective, I think.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I can't think of anything worse than a chapel that smells like air freshener. If it's musty open the doors in the morning. Although I love the smell of old buildings.


----------



## hellosunshine

Yoshi1296 said:


> How is that ridiculous?? I went to a catholic school and before mass they would sometimes have the altar boys spray the church with febreeze if something smelled bad. I even saw a glade atomizer plugged in once at the back LOL.
> 
> And don’t they usually spray scents in banquet halls before an event? Mine did for my event.



Right?! How dare we insult the feelings of a building? These "blind items" about Meghan and her "terrible temper/attitude are ridiculous. First it was that she's terrible to her staff and it's now escalated to fighting with Kate...are the next "blind items" gonna be that she fought with one of Williams' kids? Sometimes you just gotta laugh..


----------



## DeMonica

minababe said:


> everyone on malta is looking like her? not really
> 
> And I always find it funny when american People say oh my Family, great Grand parents or whatever come orignally from europe .. don't they have the School subject history in School?


What is wrong with having European ancestry? There are Americans who have European others who have  African or Asian  or Native American or mixed ancestry. It's just a fact.


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> According to the article, "It was simply the principle of the thing. This is a place that has held royal weddings, funerals and even contains the Royal Vault. I don't believe a request of that nature had been made before.”
> 
> It's understandable when put in that perspective, I think.


This is likely a culture thing. Meghan is American and we like air fresheners. The Royals are into the history of their “everything” and want all the centuries old “must.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BagLovingMom

Interesting CNN opinion piece on recent British Media coverage of the Duchess 
https://www-m.cnn.com/2018/11/28/op...ttps://d-31804990801425357427.ampproject.net/


----------



## DeMonica

Tivo said:


> This is likely a culture thing. Meghan is American and we like air fresheners. The Royals are into the history of their “everything” and want all the centuries old “must.”


Actually that's true. If you ever visit Windsor castle: the housekeeping is really rubbish.


----------



## Yoshi1296

Jayne1 said:


> According to the article, "It was simply the principle of the thing. This is a place that has held royal weddings, funerals and even contains the Royal Vault. I don't believe a request of that nature had been made before.”
> 
> It's understandable when put in that perspective, I think.



That is a good point. I guess it depends on how you request it too. There's always a right way to say things.



CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I can't think of anything worse than a chapel that smells like air freshener. If it's musty open the doors in the morning. Although I love the smell of old buildings.



Yeah my school was weird lol. Usually we only sprayed if there was something that smelled really bad like a certain stain on the carpet or something. But also, incense would help alleviate that smell and prefer that over febreeze but my school was cheap LOL


----------



## Voyageuse

hellosunshine said:


> Photos Resurfaced of Meghan visiting Malta in 2015. Her great-great grandmother Mary was born there in 1862. Per the DailyMail, "Speaking in 2015, Meghan said of her trip to the Mediterranean country: ‘Coming to Malta has been really important to me because my great-great-grandmother lived here, so we’ve been trying to trace the ancestry. This trip was mostly about trying to understand where I come from, my identity. There is something so lovely about fitting in a piece of the puzzle. To come somewhere where you so quickly settle in to feeling welcomed is really special. It’s this Maltese hospitality that is really special to the place.'
> 'Before I came, people were telling me, "When you go to Malta, everyone will look like you," and I started to say, "Oh my gosh I do sort of blend in," and it’s the loveliest feeling. The Maltese people have been so kind.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full Photos can be seen here ++ https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7851988/meghan-markle-malta-photos-candid-unseen/


----------



## Voyageuse

My older son was blonde with light green eyes.   My husband, younger son and I are all dark.  As a little boy, he was sooo excited to meet a cousin who looked like him.  Identification is important to some people, so I totally get this.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Prince William reportedly ‘voiced doubts’ about Meghan Markle*








Prince William expressed doubts about how suitable Meghan Markle would be as Prince Harry‘s bride, it’s claimed.

It’s understood William voiced his concern to the Queen and his brother ahead of the royal wedding in May, the Mail on Sunday reported.

Claims that William questioned Harry’s romantic choice come amid rumors of a tense feud between the two couples.

One of William’s friends told the Mail on Sunday: “The problem is that the Cambridges felt things had moved very quickly between Harry and Meghan.

“Wills particularly was worried and felt close enough to Harry to voice his thoughts.”

The two princes were brought especially close by the death of their mother, with William keeping an eye out for his younger brother.

But Harry was reportedly offended by William’s comments and stood up for his wife-to-be.

The tension could be traced as far back as last Christmas, when a “ghastly row” broke out between the two couples, the report claims.

It’s understood that Kate Middleton has attempted to explain the rules of The Firm to Meghan — and that her advice didn’t go down well.

Kate is also said to have told friends she was very sad about what was happening and felt that Harry was “changing.”

One pal told the Mail on Sunday: “Meghan’s a strong character and so is Kate, so it doesn’t surprise me there have been clashes,” said the source.

The report also claims Kate, William and their three kids, George, Charlotte and Louis, will be spending Christmas with her family at Bucklebury Manor in Berkshire this year after the alleged row. The Sussexes will spend the big day with the Queen at Sandringham.

It comes after recent reports that Harry and his pregnant wife are abandoning their central London base at Kensington Palace for Frogmore Cottage in the grounds of Windsor Castle.

Their move, along with reports of a “dictatorial” Harry allegedly taking issue with his brother, courtiers and servants for failing to “roll out the red carpet” for Meghan, is apparently the latest in a string of issues causing the couples to be at loggerheads.

And a furious Duchess of Cambridge recently slapped down Meghan after she spoke rudely to a member of Kate’s staff, telling her doing so was “unacceptable.”

A spokeswoman for Kensington Palace said: “This is not a story we would comment on.”

https://pagesix.com/2018/12/03/prince-william-reportedly-voiced-doubts-about-meghan-markle/


----------



## Morgan R

There have been non-stop "hit pieces" by some of the UK press (basically the tabloids of the UK so meaning The Telegraph, The Sun, Daily Mail, etc.) on Meghan since she and Harry have returned back from their tour (if you are a longtime royal watcher you know after royal tours there are often some/many "hit pieces" released about royals to downplay their most recent tour if is extremely successful). At this point I'm not even taking the stories with a "grain of salt" I just don't believe them at this point the stories either sound completely made up, there is actually proof the stories are indeed false, and/or the stories are defamatory stories with sexist and racist undertones. I'm honestly not surprised by any of the stories that are being released as we have to remember the attacks from the press (more notably the UK tabloids) are the same reason Harry released the statement he did back in November 2016 that not only confirmed his relationship with Meghan but also defended her and addressed that she had been subject to defamatory stories, stories that were sexist, and stories that had racial undertones (https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry).

The UK press I noticed have actually been rightly called out by many in the worldwide press because with the UK tabloids constant stories they are attacking Meghan who has been a royal not even a complete 7 months/has only been around the royals less than 3 years and is a pregnant woman. The narratives of the stories that have been released often have sexist or racist undertones. Many suspect all the stories are to downplay the expectant announcement of her patronages which were always expected to be announced at end of this year as well as at the beginning of the new year.

Within the past few weeks the UK press has tried to:


Link Meghan and the Women she supports at the Hubb Community Kitchen located within the Muslim Cultural Heritage Centre Al-Manaar to ISIS (other religious groups released statements defending Meghan and the women of the Hubb Community Kitchen). Harry and William have also visited Al-Manaar last year because it is has been a place that has helped those effected by the Grenfell Fire no matter a person's background or religious affiliation.
They have tried to make Meghan the "Angry Black Woman" stereotype. I'm glad that people that have actually worked with the royals those workers most notably being Dickie Arbiter (https://twitter.com/RoyalDickie) and Darren McGrady (https://twitter.com/DarrenMcGrady) have been defending Meghan and calling out the hypocrisy/inaccuracy in the Meghan stories that have been released.
Make it seem like Harry and Meghan moving to Frogmore Cottage is because of tension between Harry and William or tension between Meghan and Kate. In reality it is literally known that permits to update Frogmore Cottage were submitted in April/approved in July. It was always expected they would be gifted a residence by the Queen because there are so many royal residences (residences of past monarchs and royal family members) she inherited through the crown. I know a lot of royal watchers weren't shocked about Harry and Meghan being gifted Frogmore Cottage for multiple reasons: it is in Windsor not far from St. George's Chapel (Windsor Castle) where their wedding was, their private wedding reception was at Frogmore House, their engagement pictures were taken on the Frogmore Estate, Windsor Castle is where Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip live on the weekends and sometimes weekdays (and it is no secret how close Harry is to his grandparents in fact it is known when he attended Eton College and underwent officer training at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst he would visit them in his free time since both places aren't far from Windsor Castle), and also when Charles becomes King it has been said he will be making Windsor Castle the official headquarters of the British monarchy (rather than Buckingham Palace).
Make it seem like Meghan being a royal that carries out as many engagements as she has seem like a bad thing (Meghan has done nearly 100 engagements since her wedding). I find it so hypocritical of the UK press to make it seem like Meghan doing all the engagements she has seem like a bad thing (with the majority of the engagements having been done while she has been pregnant since it is believed she is 5 months now and just became a royal not even a complete 7 months ago) because the very same UK press gave William and Kate the nicknames "Prince Work Shy" and "Duchess Do Little" because they have continuously done minimal engagements in comparison to other senior royals and even some minor royals do more engagements than William and Kate yearly. In comparison back in 2011 when William and Kate got married they respectively only did 90 and 34 engagements. Harry's engagement numbers were actually low as well  but have increased considerably since he has retired from active duty in the military 2015.


----------



## Irishgal

Good grief. She’s not going to catch a break is she? I hope she’s tough enough to toss this crap over her shoulder and laugh. It would have to be hard to be under this much scrutiny.


----------



## Handbag1234

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry on Day 2 of his 2 day visit to Zambia. His visit of Zambia is at the request of the Foreign Office and he is attending events for The Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry is the President of The Queen's Commonwealth Trust and was also appointed the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador by Queen Elizabeth II earlier this year.
> 
> View attachment 4263813
> View attachment 4263815
> View attachment 4263816
> View attachment 4263831
> View attachment 4263826
> View attachment 4263832
> View attachment 4263820
> View attachment 4263821
> View attachment 4263819


Without wishing  to head off track. In the last picture the woman on the right in the blue strapless dress looks stunning.


----------



## Tivo

I’m not surprised. These articles are right on schedule. Meghan, I hope it was worth it, girl.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> I’m not surprised. These articles are right on schedule. Meghan, I hope it was worth it, girl.


this is the culture we live in now.  But in spite of whatever gossip is going on, she is married to one of the most famous men in the western world.  Going to live in a huge home, having a baby.  I doubt she has any regrets at this time.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Well if that's true I can't say I'm not with William. They did move very quickly. They were only on the same continent together a handful of times before they got engaged.


----------



## hellosunshine

Morgan R said:


> There have been non-stop "hit pieces" by some of the UK press (basically the tabloids of the UK so meaning The Telegraph, The Sun, Daily Mail, etc.) on Meghan since she and Harry have returned back from their tour (if you are a longtime royal watcher you know after royal tours there are often some/many "hit pieces" released about royals to downplay their most recent tour if is extremely successful). *At this point I'm not even taking the stories with a "grain of salt" I just don't believe them at this point* the stories either sound completely made up, there is actually proof the stories are indeed false, and/or the stories are defamatory stories with sexist and racist undertones.



Same. I continue to believe that these leaked "attitude" problems are totally lies. I, kind of wish she'd release the gender of the baby or something to squash some of this bad press. Do royals even do this? Apologies if this is a dumb question, first time paying attention to the British royal family.


----------



## MizGemma

This is my first time following the British royal family too. I did not for a long time being against the inherited position stuff, etc, since I'm from the US. It's actually quite entertaining when you start reading the stories. Am sure the Royal Family takes the good and laughs at the weird stuff too.

We do have a royal family here in the US -- they live in the White House -- and are around for 4 or 8 years.  We have had our dramas with the revolving door occupants ever since I can remember.


----------



## ChanelFan29

I don’t know if these stories are true or not, but I would suggest living this life would be oppressive to any American starlet stepping into another culture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

ChanelFan29 said:


> I don’t know if these stories are true or not, but I would suggest living this life would be oppressive to any American starlet stepping into another culture.


maybe oppressive in some ways but she is getting more attention in this role than she ever did as a cable tv actress.....and living a privileged life


----------



## Morgan R

Irishgal said:


> Good grief. She’s not going to catch a break is she? I hope she’s tough enough to toss this crap over her shoulder and laugh. It would have to be hard to be under this much scrutiny.



I would be surprised if she caught a break. In my opinion while a lot of international media is more positive and sometimes even defensive of Meghan there is always some media that is releasing negative stories which then gets regurgitated through different outlets such as forums, social media, talk shows, or magazines. The most positive press about Meghan surrounded big events so that was the engagement, the wedding, the pregnancy announcement, and the Pacific Tour. Outside of that it has been either her dad's side of the family attacking her (mind you due to the age difference Meghan wasn't particularly close to her siblings and has always come across as being closer to her mother) or it has been the UK media more than any other international media that has attacked her through many various articles.

I think their engagement interview gave a lot of great little tidbits about Harry and Meghan's relationship more specifically why the relationship had become so serious so quick and also how they made sure their focus was about their relationship rather than what the media was saying about them. Harry said that what allowed him and Meghan to grow closer faster is that they went about their relationship privately for months which allowed them to get  to know each other better. Harry mentioned that he had warned Meghan about the added "layer" of being with a royal but at the same time said you can't really prepare anyone for the reaction that happens once their relationship became public knowledge (meaning all sorts of scrutiny). Meghan said that though she had been a part of entertainment industry she wasn't a part of the tabloid culture so after the stories by press started she said she made the conscious decision to not read any of the stories that were written about her rather no matter if they were positive or negative. Meghan stated and Harry agreed with her statement that their focus wasn't on the stories written about them but their focus was about their relationship.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I dunno. I saw Toadsworth Castle or wherever it is they are moving and it looks dreary. 

I too hope this is worth it. It looks awful.


----------



## Morgan R

hellosunshine said:


> Same. I continue to believe that these leaked "attitude" problems are totally lies. I, kind of wish she'd release the gender of the baby or something to squash some of this bad press. Do royals even do this? Apologies if this is a dumb question, first time paying attention to the British royal family.



Usually the royals don't announce the gender of the baby to the public until after the birth. What could happen to counteract the bad press is that Queen Elizabeth II could issue a letters patent confirming that Harry and Meghan's children will have the titles Prince/Princess and the style Royal Highness (HRH) upon their birth (it was always expected she would confirm which titles they would receive before the birth of Harry and Meghan's child but she could announce it now). If she does not issues a letters patent the children will still inherit a title regardless because Harry is a Duke. So Harry and Meghan's children would receive the titles Lord/Lady and when Charles becomes King their titles will automatically be changed to Prince/Princess and receive the style Royal Highness (HRH). Another possibility is that if Harry and Meghan were expecting twins they could possibly announce that. Other royal families while still not confirming the gender have had the original pregnancy announcement say that whichever royal couple was expecting a baby and then a few months later there was a second announcement confirming that the royal couple was expecting twins (this most recently happen I believe with Albert II, Prince of Monaco and Charlene, Princess of Monaco when she was pregnant with their twins in 2014).

Meghan's patronages were expected to be announced at the end of this year (so possibly by the end of this month) or early next year. Though she is pregnant now it is still believed her patronages will be announced. Usually the announcement of patronages gains positive media attention because you get a sense of what the royal wants to focus on. Meghan had already been involved with various charities and organizations before she was with Harry so possible that she will become Patron to those various charities and organizations as well as becoming Patron to different charities and organizations as well. Also like other royals have started their own initiatives and charities, Meghan will likely start her own initiatives and charities which she will be the Patron of.


----------



## gazoo

This has turned ugly rather fast.

I feel defensive for her. Kate got a lot of flack as well in the early days but she had the benefit of being William's SO for a long time before becoming official. And she's English. I think Meghan is sure to have culture shock not only due to the BRF and its endless rules and rituals, but also from being an American, independent woman in her 30s. Add her being bi-racial and a divorcee, and the press have a goldmine of clickbait and not a lot of reasons to play nice.

If the William story is true, I'd hope that both Harry and Meghan give him the benefit of the doubt. A whirlwind romance would always raise flags, no matter the background of the bride to be.

I hope this blows over. There is a baby on the way so this will be a lifetime commitment for both Harry and Meghan, regardless if their relationship survives or not.


----------



## mtg116

DeMonica said:


> Actually that's true. If you ever visit Windsor castle: the housekeeping is really rubbish.



It could also be that Meghan is very sensitive to smells right now during pregnancy. I know the smell of coffee during one of my pregnancies made me ill. All throughout my pregnancy. I am ok now. I love the smell of coffee, but then, no go.


----------



## Morgan R

Just goes to show how easy it is to find a lie in rumored stories by UK press. The story about "Meghan wanting to scent the church with Air Fresheners" is literally a lie. St. George's Chapel was in fact scented as you would expect it to be for a major event. Diptyque candles scented the chapel as well as Harry and Meghan's dressing rooms. Among all those articles back in May about the wedding there were articles about how Diptyque candles were used by Harry and Meghan on their wedding day.

The Diptyque company posted about their candles being used by Harry and Meghan on their wedding day on the company's Instagram Story the day of the royal wedding (https://www.instagram.com/diptyque, https://www.instagram.com/stories/highlights/17927586232080394/):


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Kate is Princess Diana and Meghan is Sarah Ferguson - I think that's what we're going to see play out in the press over the long-term.


----------



## Kat Madridista

I find it totally natural that William had concerns about Meghan and Harry moving too fast. Taking into account Harry's previous dating history, the fact that he dated both Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas longer than Meghan, the fact that they were long distance for most of their relationship, and that she was an American! Actress! that came with all the extra attention and hubbub; it makes sense to me that William would have been skeptical of Harry declaring that "she's the one!!!!" Weren't we all? That's nothing against Meghan, that's just brotherly concern. Imagine if your sibling got engaged in a little over a year to someone he/she was in a long-distance relationship with, wouldn't you be a little concerned, too? I hate that the tabloids are making such a fuss out of totally *normal family dynamics*. 

Also, totally normal family dynamics? Not wanting to live in such close proximity to your sibling and his family. Plus, William and Kate were able to stay in Wales and then Anmer when they started their family, why can't Harry and Meghan do the same? There are so many boring, normal reasons for Harry and Meghan to move, but of course "boring" and "normal" doesn't sell papers.


----------



## gelbergirl

Meghan is the perfect choice for Harry.  If this story is true, it's because William's choice for a future wife and queen were limited and controlled by the palace.


----------



## minababe

These Storys are really mean .. I hope they don't give a **** about the press.
Harry and meghan are really loved by the People around the world. I love them together and wish them all the best. it's a perfect match for me and I don't understand why you have to speak so bad about a Person you never met. I think Kate and Meghan are good with each other and William was also really nice to her from the beginning, when they met from what i can say from looking at their Body language. I think they are all happy with each other.

I know they just wan to sell their papers and magazines but isn't this already calumny?


----------



## minababe

DeMonica said:


> What is wrong with having European ancestry? There are Americans who have European others who have  African or Asian  or Native American or mixed ancestry. It's just a fact.


you got me wrong. nothing wrong with it. I know that all american People have their roots from the rest of the world especially europe, but I wonder all the time if the american People don't know that? it sounds like they think thats something Special


----------



## hellosunshine

gelbergirl said:


> Meghan is the perfect choice for Harry.  If this story is true, it's because William's choice for a future wife and queen were limited and controlled by the palace.



As I've mentioned before, I've never paid close enough attention to the royal family but I do vaguely remember William wanting to continue on with a South African girl and didn't really want to settle with Kate. Kate's family however were very patient and persistent with relationship. Does anyone else remember this?


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## chicinthecity777

Morgan R said:


> There have been non-stop "hit pieces" by some of the UK press (*basically the tabloids of the UK so meaning The Telegraph, The Sun, Daily Mail,* etc.) on ...


The Telegraph is not a tabloid newspaper.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## skarsbabe

hellosunshine said:


> As I've mentioned before, I've never paid close enough attention to the royal family but I do vaguely remember William wanting to continue on with a South African girl and didn't really want to settle with Kate. Kate's family however were very patient and persistent with relationship. Does anyone else remember this?



I think that they did break it off for a while before getting back together and becoming engaged. Very odd if you ask me!


----------



## Jayne1

skarsbabe said:


> I think that they did break it off for a while before getting back together and becoming engaged. Very odd if you ask me!


They did but I always thought it was so Kate could resurface with her new ready for the camera perfection.  When they got back together, she was perfectly princess looking.  

And don't anyone tell me she didn't get herself ready. lol


A1aGypsy said:


> I dunno. I saw Toadsworth Castle or wherever it is they are moving and it looks dreary.
> 
> I too hope this is worth it. It looks awful.


I read they were making extension renovations to Frogmore Cottage (but Toadsworth Castle  made me giggle!) before they move in and quite frankly, I think it will be perfection when they are done with it.


----------



## Jayne1

Here's another shot. And this is before all the money and renovations that will go into redoing the interior. I assume it's the interior that they feel needs a major reno.

I think calling it a cottage may throw some people off.  It's also called Frogmore House, isn't it?


----------



## gazoo

I'd be jumpy clapping at living at Frogmore Cottage over KP. The grounds, the space, the privacy... sigh.


----------



## Caroline-Mathilda

She’s getting the cottage. The picture above holds events.


----------



## Morgan R

Jayne1 said:


> Here's another shot. And this is before all the money and renovations that will go into redoing the interior. I assume it's the interior that they feel needs a major reno.
> 
> I think calling it a cottage may throw some people off.  It's also called Frogmore House, isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4270068



That is Frogmore House.

Frogmore House and Frogmore Cottage are both on the Frogmore Estate. 


This is Frogmore Cottage:







Frogmore Cottage appears at 5:53 in this video taken on the grounds of the Frogmore Estate. Frogmore Estate is more private than living at Kensington Palace where people have often gotten a glimpse of royals coming and going from there. Frogmore Estate is only open a few days a year to the public (the video below was shot on one of those days).


----------



## A1aGypsy

Those pictures are beautiful. The press across the pond makes it look like dark row houses that face a fence.  Which would be perfectly fine for the average person but a bit of a rip off if I were told I was going to live in a Castle. With a frog.


----------



## Jayne1

Well, still very nice with lots of potential to be very grand.

I read the renovation has been underway for months. I read there will be 5 bedrooms, a complete redo of the interior, plus they are adding orangeries and new landscaping of the grounds.


----------



## Morgan R

Leaving the Henry Van Straubenzee Memorial Fund Christmas Carol Service


----------



## DeMonica

A1aGypsy said:


> Those pictures are beautiful. The press across the pond makes it look like dark row houses that face a fence.  Which would be perfectly fine for the average person but a bit of a rip off if I were told I was going to live in a Castle. With a frog.


They would have lived in an apartment in Kensington Palace. They wouldn't have the whole thing for themselves. 

IMO that's a very nice place which will be renovated according to the highest standards and probably to some extent according to their taste. As Morgan R said it's much more private, too, which is a big advantage for a freshly married couple who are expecting a baby. IIRC Kate and William stayed at Kate's parents' estate for a while after George's birth because of privacy issues.  I'd take Frogmore Cottage instead of Kensington Palace in a sec.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I just read that Kensington wasn’t an option in any event and just fabricated by the press because one of the queen’s cousins has been quite happily living in that apartment for years.

I was more responding to the viewpoint that she would have assumed she was going to get all this grandeur when she decided to get her hooks into Harry. And now she has complete luxury and opulence. I’m sure it will be lovely. (Paraphrasing)


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


>




I’m not a big Piers Morgan fan but his article in the dailymail today is pretty in line with the video you posted- 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...social-climbing-actress-used-getting-way.html


----------



## FreeSpirit71

To say Piers sounds a bit bitter is an understatement. Let it go, man.

She was most likely advised by the Palace not to continue being friends with him because;

A) He's part of the press
B) He's known to be a big mouth and bitter, as his article and rant clearly shows.


----------



## doloresmia

FreeSpirit71 said:


> To say Piers sounds a bit bitter is an understatement. Let it go, man.
> 
> She was most likely advised by the Palace not to continue being friends with him because;
> 
> A) He's part of the press
> B) He's known to be a big mouth and bitter, as his article and rant clearly shows.



Totally agree - Piers is all about the click bait. In the past few months he posted something mocking Daniel Craig’s manliness for carrying his newborn baby!!! And then he posted something about A Grande for using her beauty and sexuality to sell. She had an awesome response. If Piers fell in a hole without internet, the world would be a nicer place. It is bad enough to have private citizens as internet trolls, worse when they have so much reach.


----------



## Kat Madridista

gelbergirl said:


> Meghan is the perfect choice for Harry.  If this story is true, it's because William's choice for a future wife and queen were limited and controlled by the palace.



No, William's choices for a wife were not "controlled by the palace". That's ridiculous. The Queen or Charles had no "control" on who William chose to be his wife. The Queen had to grant her permission for William to marry of course but it's unlikely that the Queen would ever have withheld her permission, unless William (or Harry, for that matter) chose a racist war criminal for a wife.



hellosunshine said:


> As I've mentioned before, I've never paid close enough attention to the royal family but I do vaguely remember William wanting to continue on with a South African girl and didn't really want to settle with Kate. Kate's family however were very patient and persistent with relationship. Does anyone else remember this?



I don't think William ever dated a South African girl. Do you mean Jecca Craig? She's British but her family owns a ranch in Kenya, where William has spent a lot of time. There were rumors that he was still hung up about Jecca so he broke up with Kate, although those seem like a stretch to me. William and Kate were together 3-4 years when they broke up in 2007, it seems unlikely they'd have lasted that long if William had feelings for someone else the entire time.



skarsbabe said:


> I think that they did break it off for a while before getting back together and becoming engaged. Very odd if you ask me!



Odd? It happens. People and breakup and get back together a lot.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

caramelize126 said:


> I’m not a big Piers Morgan fan but his article in the dailymail today is pretty in line with the video you posted-
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...social-climbing-actress-used-getting-way.html



Interesting that career networking is considered “ ruthless social climbing” when done by a woman. 

He seriously expected someone dating a royal to fraternize with members of the press?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Piers is trash.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Leaving the Henry Van Straubenzee Memorial Fund Christmas Carol Service
> 
> View attachment 4270129
> View attachment 4270120
> View attachment 4270121
> View attachment 4270128
> View attachment 4270122



look at her belly. it's growing really fast in the last weeks


----------



## hellosunshine

*




*

*Meghan Markle May Break Royal Birth Tradition with Her First Child*

You know those much-talked about post-birth photoshoots that royal mums like Kate Middleton and Princess Di have traditionally posed for mere _hours_ after giving birth? Yeah, looks like Meghan Markle was like, "Nah, thank you." 

Sources have revealed to _Vanity Fair_ that Meghan is considering opting out of giving birth at the Lindo Wing in St. Mary’s Hospital in favor of a home birth at their new residence in Windsor, at Frogmore Cottage. Meaning nope, no photos outside of the hospital's maternity ward. 

But things aren't quite ironed out yet. Per _Vanity Fair’s_ report, the Duchess is still considering her options, and she might choose a hospital near Windsor as well. Since this will be Markle’s first child, there’s a high chance that her doctors will advise a hospital birth.

While the question of where the royal baby will be born is still up in the air, one thing that we can count on is that Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland, will be there. According to _Vanity Fair_, the couple are making plans to build both a nursery and a suite for Mama Doria at Frogmore.


“Doria plans to be around a lot when the baby arrives, and there are plans for her to have a dedicated space at their new home,” a source shared. “She wants to be on hand to help Meghan and Harry with the baby. Doria will be involved and if she's involved she will be encouraging Meg to go for a natural birth.”

We'll have to sit tight to see which choice Meghan eventually makes, but we wouldn't blame her if she decided to duck out of the traditional post-birth photo op. 

https://www.instyle.com/news/meghan-markle-home-birth


----------



## Tivo

caramelize126 said:


> I’m not a big Piers Morgan fan but his article in the dailymail today is pretty in line with the video you posted-
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...social-climbing-actress-used-getting-way.html


And in other news, water is wet. 
This has been obvious to me, but how petty for Piers to give this interview, lol.


----------



## TMA

Tivo said:


> And in other news, water is wet.
> This has been obvious to me, but how petty for Piers to give this interview, lol.



Did anyone with google believe that trash person on Wendy? Do people even know how to research information anymore and not be served half baked lies without confirming? Wendy shld be ashamed having that person on. He can’t even report the gossip as he read them without wild embellishments.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle May Break Royal Birth Tradition with Her First Child*
> 
> You know those much-talked about post-birth photoshoots that royal mums like Kate Middleton and Princess Di have traditionally posed for mere _hours_ after giving birth? Yeah, looks like Meghan Markle was like, "Nah, thank you."
> 
> Sources have revealed to _Vanity Fair_ that Meghan is considering opting out of giving birth at the Lindo Wing in St. Mary’s Hospital in favor of a home birth at their new residence in Windsor, at Frogmore Cottage. Meaning nope, no photos outside of the hospital's maternity ward.
> 
> But things aren't quite ironed out yet. Per _Vanity Fair’s_ report, the Duchess is still considering her options, and she might choose a hospital near Windsor as well. Since this will be Markle’s first child, there’s a high chance that her doctors will advise a hospital birth.
> 
> While the question of where the royal baby will be born is still up in the air, one thing that we can count on is that Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland, will be there. According to _Vanity Fair_, the couple are making plans to build both a nursery and a suite for Mama Doria at Frogmore.
> 
> 
> “Doria plans to be around a lot when the baby arrives, and there are plans for her to have a dedicated space at their new home,” a source shared. “She wants to be on hand to help Meghan and Harry with the baby. Doria will be involved and if she's involved she will be encouraging Meg to go for a natural birth.”
> 
> We'll have to sit tight to see which choice Meghan eventually makes, but we wouldn't blame her if she decided to duck out of the traditional post-birth photo op.
> 
> https://www.instyle.com/news/meghan-markle-home-birth


No matter where she gives birth she can still give a photo op.  And my money is on her doing so.


----------



## queennadine

http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/06...d-console-piers-morgan-meghan-markle-ghosted/

Love that they call Piers out for being ridiculous.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Piers Morgan Accuses Meghan Markle Of ‘Ghosting’ Him*


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> No matter where she gives birth she can still give a photo op.  And my money is on her doing so.


I'm sure there will be baby pics in the news. Maybe they won't pose in front of the hospital, but in their new home. I think  she will give birth in a hospital, though. She's  a 37 years old first time mother, so it would be safer.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending gala performance of "Bat Out Of Hell" the Musical in support of the Invictus Games


----------



## doni

DeMonica said:


> I'm sure there will be baby pics in the news. Maybe they won't pose in front of the hospital, but in their new home. I think  she will give birth in a hospital, though. She's  a 37 years old first time mother, so it would be safer.



Also because the costs involved in having a royal birth at home would be frowned upon by the taxpayers, particularly when they were not incurred by those higher up in the line to the throne...


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> Also because the costs involved in having a royal birth at home would be frowned upon by the taxpayers, particularly when they were not incurred by those higher up in the line to the throne...


It probably will be cheaper for us tax payers if she did give birth at home. 
Giving birth here in the UK is free as is all appointments, scans and Obs and Gynae consultations unless you choose to go private which obviously William and Catherine did..... which they paid for. I believe us tax payers may have only paid for the security aspect of it all. 
If Meghan chooses to give birth at home and that will be private and paid for by them, security wouldn't be of any more expense because we are paying for that anyway. 
I think it'll be in hospital, like you say, because of age and being her first.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> It probably will be cheaper for us tax payers if she did give birth at home.
> Giving birth here in the UK is free as is all appointments, scans and Obs and Gynae consultations unless you choose to go private which obviously William and Catherine did..... which they paid for. I believe us tax payers may have only paid for the security aspect of it all.
> If Meghan chooses to give birth at home and that will be private and paid for by them, security wouldn't be of any more expense because we are paying for that anyway.
> I think it'll be in hospital, like you say, because of age and being her first.


IMO the costs would be pretty much the same. Even if they choose home birth, there would be a hospital standing by in case of emergency, so the security expenses cannot be avoided.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> IMO the costs would be pretty much the same. Even if they choose home birth, there would be a hospital standing by in case of emergency, so the security expenses cannot be avoided.


True, I hadn't thought if the hospital being on standby


----------



## prettyprincess

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 4272104



Whoever did her nose (allegedly) did a phenomenal job!! That’s a great nose.


----------



## Tivo

I do not believe she had a nose job.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> True, I hadn't thought if the hospital being on standby


That’s what I meant. Giving birth at home may be cost neutral for us mere mortals, but for a royal they would not want to run any risks and I would imagine having a big entourage at home, extra security, an ambulance at the door and a hospital in stand by. It would be quite a fuss and aide of whether part is paid by taxes and part by the Queen it could be read as excessive.


----------



## hellosunshine

Tivo said:


> I do not believe she had a nose job.



Honestly, judging from photos I've seen..I think she's had at least 2 nose job but does tweak it here and there with fillers. I've read that fillers can be used on the bridge of the nose for quick and minimal definition.

1. High School graduation, I believe this is a good photo to start with as to how her nose looked prior to her first nose job.







2. 2010, first nose job. As you can see, it's smaller or less bulky. The tip and the bridge of the nose is more defined.






3. 2014, side profile






4. 2017, side profile 






5. 2018, a lot of tip and bridge definition. Overall, it looks less bulky and very svelte or very defined.


----------



## chicaloca

It looks to me like the same nose from high school but she just grew into it. 

If she got a nose job it’s a very good one because it looks completely natural including the slight bump on the bridge. I can’t imagine her requesting a bridge bump from a surgeon.


----------



## hellosunshine

chicaloca said:


> It looks to me like the same nose from high school but she just grew into it.
> 
> If she got a nose job it’s a very good one because it looks completely natural including the slight bump on the bridge. I can’t imagine her requesting a bridge bump from a surgeon.



You're right. No one requests a bump on their nose but it does sometimes happen. I have a cousin who got a nose job to correct a 1 bump but after healing noticed that the doctor created another divot in her nose so she was left with 2 bumps.


----------



## hellosunshine

Honestly, her nose job is very subtle and mostly consists of bridge and tip work. She doesn't appear to have done an alarplasty as the width stays pretty consistent in size.


----------



## LittleStar88

It’s difficult to compare photos from when she was young versus adult. Faces continue to grow and change as you age. Even my nose looks slightly different from teen to now.

Don’t discount good contouring and shading/highlighting.

I believe I saw something where she thanked her dad for the Markle nose...


----------



## bisbee

Why does it matter?  Who cares if she did or didn’t have a nose job...I certainly don’t.


----------



## prettyprincess

chicaloca said:


> It looks to me like the same nose from high school but she just grew into it.
> 
> If she got a nose job it’s a very good one because it looks completely natural including the slight bump on the bridge. I can’t imagine her requesting a bridge bump from a surgeon.



Incidentally, I went with my friend to her consultation with Dr. Le, a renowned rhinoplasty revisionist. He asked her if she wanted a slight bump on the bridge bc it looks more natural. So yes, they do do that.


----------



## DeMonica

chicaloca said:


> It looks to me like the same nose from high school but she just grew into it.
> 
> If she got a nose job it’s a very good one because it looks completely natural including the slight bump on the bridge. I can’t imagine her requesting a bridge bump from a surgeon.


I'm not saying that Meghan had a nose job, but a friend of mine ended up with a bump on the bridge after her nose job. She had needed a more serious correction and ended up with a nice new nose, but hated the bump. IMO it made her new nose look completely natural.
IMO those early pics show Meghan in her teens and her face was still changing from adolescence to adulthood. Although: she definitely changed many aspects of her appearance, e.g. her hair or teeth, so she might have got a little work on her face, too. Anyway, she looks very naturally pretty.


----------



## CeeJay

I have a friend here in LA that went to the same Arts High School as Megan and was in the same Senior year play as her (his mother made sure to blast everyone on FB with the playbook).  Bottom line, he liked her .. but he did say she was very determined and of all his theatre classmates, he did feel that it was likely that she would end up in something.  I asked him the 'nose' question because it did look as though it is now much more "refined", and he confirmed that yes, she indeed did have PS on her nose but that she went to a top PS guy here in LA.


----------



## bisousx

Can’t believe people still think you can grow into a thinner and more refined nose.

-Meghan fan


----------



## Sharont2305

bisousx said:


> Can’t believe people still think you can grow into a thinner and more refined nose.
> 
> -Meghan fan


Yeah, like Barbra Streisand..... after about 70 years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

I have no doubt she’s had things tweaked. It’s so competitive out there in Hollywood that I would blame her at all. If she did, I would want the number of her PS lol! Whoever that doctor is, has done an amazing job of making her naturally gorgeous! I just wish more people who have had things done to just be honest about it, because it sets really high and unrealistic standard of beauty for some impressionable ladies.


----------



## DeMonica

bisousx said:


> Can’t believe people still think you can grow into a thinner and more refined nose.
> 
> -Meghan fan


Maybe you can't, but actually you should. Mine got thinner and more refined after my puberty (and the hormon surge) was over without any surgery, so it's technically possible. Whether it happened in Meghan's case or not is a different story.


----------



## TC1

Obvious nose job(s) to me as well (One at minimum) Not that I care, just my 2 cents.


----------



## gazoo

I have never seen a nose's bulbous tip narrow down with age without a scalpel being involved. Overall thickness, sure, with lots of weight loss and maturity. I've seen cheekbones pop, and jaw lines become refined after puberty. I've even seen mouth shape changes due to orthodontia corrections. My 13 year old suddenly has full lips since getting braces and having her bite corrected. But nope, nose tip refinement seems to always have a little help from skilled surgeons.

Meghan is gorgeous. Whoever worked on her deserves high praise. Her nose is perfect for her face.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> Honestly, judging from photos I've seen..I think she's had at least 2 nose job but does tweak it here and there with fillers. I've read that fillers can be used on the bridge of the nose for quick and minimal definition.
> 
> 1. High School graduation, I believe this is a good photo to start with as to how her nose looked prior to her first nose job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. 2010, first nose job. As you can see, it's smaller or less bulky. The tip and the bridge of the nose is more defined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. 2014, side profile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4. 2017, side profile
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. 2018, a lot of tip and bridge definition. Overall, it looks less bulky and very svelte or very defined.


Agree.  It's fabulous and not a cookie cutter, one-size-fits-all typical Hollywood tiny one.  It's unique to her and beautiful, but most certainly more refined than the original nose.


chicaloca said:


> It looks to me like the same nose from high school but she just grew into it.
> 
> If she got a nose job it’s a very good one because it looks completely natural including the slight bump on the bridge. I can’t imagine her requesting a bridge bump from a surgeon.


The best surgeons keep a bit of a bump now. It looks more realistic and unique to the individual and losing the bump can look odd on many faces.

Cher was one of the first to have a nose job with some bump left and it suited her very much by shaping her face just right. Now the surgeons do it all the time if they think they should. 

Not sure a 20 year old can still grow into her nose, buy the way. Although unfortunately our noses continue to grow as we age.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, like Barbra Streisand..... after about 70 years.


Streisand's nose is so short now, isn't it.  I think she had two nose jobs. 

The best and most perfect nose for her, was the original, I think. The tip almost touched her lips when she smiled, so she must have disliked that because now I think there is too much space between her top lip and nose tip... for her face shape, I mean.


----------



## RueHermes

Meghan is stunning. Beautiful smile.


----------



## Irishgal

Typically people get a rhinoplasty for one of three reasons. 1. Medical, internal issues that impact breathing
2. They don’t like the looks of their nose at a resting position 3. Their nose tends to splay out when they smile. Think of Julia Roberts or skater Nancy Kerrigan. 
I’m going to guess it was #3, and someone in the movie or print business told her to get it fixed. Either way she is gorgeous and I sincerely hope she’s doing well with all the media critics who seem to be hoping to see her fail somehow.


----------



## hellosunshine

bisbee said:


> Why does it matter?  Who cares if she did or didn’t have a nose job...I certainly don’t.



It doesn't really matter honestly..someone just happened to ask the question a page or two back and I responded.


----------



## Fally420

bisbee said:


> Why does it matter?  Who cares if she did or didn’t have a nose job...I certainly don’t.


such questions can asked to every subject discussed here, Why are we even discussing her outfits? Maybe because we are interested? Nothing bad about it IMHO


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, like Barbra Streisand..... after about 70 years.


this is news to me.....she refused to change her nose when she was young and now she has done it?


----------



## DeMonica

Fally420 said:


> such questions can asked to every subject discussed here, Why are we even discussing her outfits? Maybe because we are interested? Nothing bad about it IMHO


After all this is the news and gossip section. Where else if not here?  I think there's a separate thread for the outfits, though.


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> this is news to me.....she refused to change her nose when she was young and now she has done it?


I don’t think Barbara did hers. It’s still very prominent, but it worked for her and gave her an exotic look. She was so unconventionally beautiful in her youth. Kind of like SJP. They both have those incrediblly stunning piercing blue eyes. They’re two people I think a nose job wouldve taken away from their originality.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> this is news to me.....she refused to change her nose when she was young and now she has done it?


Yes, years ago, and it doesn't suit her, IMO. Too short.  I bet she's not happy either, since she's such a perfectionist.

She used to have such a unique and quirky beauty. Gone.


----------



## Jayne1

prettyprincess said:


> I don’t think Barbara did hers. It’s still very prominent, but it worked for her and gave her an exotic look. She was so unconventionally beautiful in her youth. Kind of like SJP. They both have those incrediblly stunning piercing blue eyes. They’re two people I think a nose job wouldve taken away from their originality.


Both have had nose jobs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

prettyprincess said:


> I don’t think Barbara did hers. It’s still very prominent, but it worked for her and gave her an exotic look. She was so unconventionally beautiful in her youth. Kind of like SJP. They both have those incrediblly stunning piercing blue eyes. They’re two people I think a nose job wouldve taken away from their originality.


SJP reportedly had many PSs. I don't know when she started to have them but she had looked the best in LA Story. Since then it has gone pear shaped. Aging obviously isn't helping but she became positively haggard.


----------



## Vanilla Bean

CeeJay said:


> I have a friend here in LA that went to the same Arts High School as Megan and was in the same Senior year play as her (his mother made sure to blast everyone on FB with the playbook). .



Whaat? She went to Immaculate Heart High School, an all-girls private school. They would import boys from Loyola High School only for dances and school plays.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Both have had nose jobs.


I could not find anything online about Barbra having her nose done.  In fact, there was a recent story saying (in re Me Too movement) she never got assaulted due to her nose.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I could not find anything online about Barbra having her nose done.  In fact, there was a recent story saying (in re Me Too movement) she never got assaulted due to her nose.


You just have to look at the before shots because she certainly had a great career with the original nose .

It was longer.  Now it's shorter. Look at the space between her nose tip and top lip.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> You just have to look at the before shots because she certainly had a great career with the original nose .
> 
> It was longer.  Now it's shorter. Look at the space between her nose tip and top lip.
> 
> View attachment 4274752
> View attachment 4274753


I see that


----------



## Irishgal

I recall many years ago Barbara came out and said that she had considered a rhinoplasty but surgeons could not guarantee her that the procedure would not change her voice. Techniques have improved since then-


----------



## sdkitty

from The Daily Beast:

To lose one personal assistant might be regarded a misfortune, but lose two and it starts to look like carelessness.

Meghan Markle is at the center of a new maelstrom of gossip after it was reported in _The Sunday Times_ that her much-respected private secretary, Samantha Cohen, 50, intends to leave royal service after Meghan’s baby is born next spring, while another report claims that tensions between William and Harry are at the heart of the recently-revealed frostiness between the two families.



The report in _The Sun_ says that William’s questioning of Meghan’s suitability as a bride after he first met her is at the heart of their brotherly discord.

Cohen—nicknamed Samantha the Panther—worked for the queen for 17 years as assistant private secretary and then press secretary. She got the job after spotting an advert in the paper while on holiday from her native Australia, but said she was leaving that role after a palace coup orchestrated by Prince Charles saw her boss, Sir Christopher Geidt, pensioned off.




She was persuaded to stay on in Palace employ working for Meghan and Harry on an interim basis, but it was no secret that the Sussexes hoped to retain her full time.

News of her departure will do little to help quash stories that Meghan is not easy to work for; another assistant Melissa Touabti, who previously worked for Robbie Williams, quit after six months in her job with rumors circulating that Meghan’s behavior left her in tears.

Meghan is said to be a demanding boss; she is reported to email ideas and requests to palace staff as early as 5 a.m.

*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*The Fractured Royal Relationship: How Meghan Made Kate Cry*



*William, Kate, Meghan, and Harry Are Making Nice. For Now.*



*Is Meghan Really The Royal 'Hurricane' The Tabloids Claim?*
A source told _The Sunday Times_: “Sam will be a huge loss. Going forward, Meghan might need someone cut from a slightly different cloth to traditional courtiers, who is not a career civil servant or royal insider.”


ADVERTISING
_The Sunday Times_ quoted a royal source saying: “Samantha will assist the couple with finding her replacement in the new year.”

Meanwhile, the report in _The Sun_ alleges that tension between William and Harry, not Meghan and Kate, is primarily to blame for the split between the two couples.

A courtier told _The Sun_: “It’s my opinion that Harry feels he couldn’t protect his mother, so he’s going all out to protect his wife. This is his way of atoning.”

_The Sun’s_ Emily Andrews reports that after William first met Meghan, he expressed doubts to Harry over the match.

_The Sun’s_ source says: “William told his brother they knew nothing about her background, her intentions, what she was really like. He just wanted to stress that becoming part of the Royal Family is a massive undertaking and the pressure and scrutiny is unrelenting. Was Meghan the right one?”

The reaction was that, “Harry went mental,” according to a friend and, “accused his brother of trying to finish his romance before it had begun. The brothers’ relationship has not really recovered.”

Intriguingly _The_ _Sun_ reports that it was Meghan who ordered her father should be cut off after he let her down, but William, “having lost his mum — couldn’t understand ignoring a parent, whatever they’d done. He thought Meghan was making a mistake.”


----------



## Swanky

I think Barbara had her lips worked on, not her nose
Meghan’s nose looks tweaked to me a bit, it’s very cute though imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Swanky said:


> I think Barbara had her lips worked on, not her nose
> Meghan’s nose looks tweaked to me a bit, it’s very cute though imo.


there is plenty of info online about Barbra's PS but nothing about her nose being tweaked


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> from The Daily Beast:
> 
> To lose one personal assistant might be regarded a misfortune, but lose two and it starts to look like carelessness.
> 
> Meghan Markle is at the center of a new maelstrom of gossip after it was reported in _The Sunday Times_ that her much-respected private secretary, Samantha Cohen, 50, intends to leave royal service after Meghan’s baby is born next spring, while another report claims that tensions between William and Harry are at the heart of the recently-revealed frostiness between the two families.
> 
> 
> 
> The report in _The Sun_ says that William’s questioning of Meghan’s suitability as a bride after he first met her is at the heart of their brotherly discord.
> 
> Cohen—nicknamed Samantha the Panther—worked for the queen for 17 years as assistant private secretary and then press secretary. She got the job after spotting an advert in the paper while on holiday from her native Australia, but said she was leaving that role after a palace coup orchestrated by Prince Charles saw her boss, Sir Christopher Geidt, pensioned off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She was persuaded to stay on in Palace employ working for Meghan and Harry on an interim basis, but it was no secret that the Sussexes hoped to retain her full time.
> 
> News of her departure will do little to help quash stories that Meghan is not easy to work for; another assistant Melissa Touabti, who previously worked for Robbie Williams, quit after six months in her job with rumors circulating that Meghan’s behavior left her in tears.
> 
> Meghan is said to be a demanding boss; she is reported to email ideas and requests to palace staff as early as 5 a.m.
> 
> *RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*
> 
> 
> 
> *The Fractured Royal Relationship: How Meghan Made Kate Cry*
> 
> 
> 
> *William, Kate, Meghan, and Harry Are Making Nice. For Now.*
> 
> 
> 
> *Is Meghan Really The Royal 'Hurricane' The Tabloids Claim?*
> A source told _The Sunday Times_: “Sam will be a huge loss. Going forward, Meghan might need someone cut from a slightly different cloth to traditional courtiers, who is not a career civil servant or royal insider.”
> 
> 
> ADVERTISING
> _The Sunday Times_ quoted a royal source saying: “Samantha will assist the couple with finding her replacement in the new year.”
> 
> Meanwhile, the report in _The Sun_ alleges that tension between William and Harry, not Meghan and Kate, is primarily to blame for the split between the two couples.
> 
> A courtier told _The Sun_: “It’s my opinion that Harry feels he couldn’t protect his mother, so he’s going all out to protect his wife. This is his way of atoning.”
> 
> _The Sun’s_ Emily Andrews reports that after William first met Meghan, he expressed doubts to Harry over the match.
> 
> _The Sun’s_ source says: “William told his brother they knew nothing about her background, her intentions, what she was really like. He just wanted to stress that becoming part of the Royal Family is a massive undertaking and the pressure and scrutiny is unrelenting. Was Meghan the right one?”
> 
> The reaction was that, “Harry went mental,” according to a friend and, “accused his brother of trying to finish his romance before it had begun. The brothers’ relationship has not really recovered.”
> 
> Intriguingly _The_ _Sun_ reports that it was Meghan who ordered her father should be cut off after he let her down, but William, “having lost his mum — couldn’t understand ignoring a parent, whatever they’d done. He thought Meghan was making a mistake.”


I don’t know if I believe this. That lady was likely going to retire or leave anyway. She’s 50. And probably agreed to stay on through Meghan and Harry’s baby. “Samantha the Panther” works there for 17 years and gets run off because of Meghan? Please.
These people are just trying the Duchess. 
Meghan has no family there and is surrounded by all Royals. I’m to believe she’s a “hurricane” in the middle of all the stress of her family drama and public duties that she’s still learning? 
She’s a social climber for sure, but I doubt she’s in there acting like a diva. 

UK media is spinning this incorrectly. Try again.


----------



## A1aGypsy

You can never say never but I remember hearing her talk years ago openly about actively seeking out plastic surgery but ultimately not getting her nose done because the doctor warned her it could completely change her voice. That seems a big risk to run for a nose job.


----------



## krissa

Tivo said:


> I don’t know if I believe this. That lady was likely going to retire or leave anyway. She’s 50. And probably agreed to stay on through Meghan and Harry’s baby. “Samantha the Panther” works there for 17 years and gets run off because of Meghan? Please.
> These people are just trying the Duchess.
> Meghan has no family there and is surrounded by all Royals. I’m to believe she’s a “hurricane” in the middle of all the stress of her family drama and public duties that she’s still learning?
> She’s a social climber for sure, but I doubt she’s in there acting like a diva.
> 
> UK media is spinning this incorrectly. Try again.



She was only the assistant temporarily. They’re spinning it to make it more dramatic. She’s even staying longer than the 6 months originally intended so things must not be that terrible. It’s amazing all this “diva” nonsense is coming out now after the successful tour. I don’t recall the diva rumors before the wedding.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/24/meghan-markle-given-six-months-training-effective-royal-7573691/


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> there is plenty of info online about Barbra's PS but nothing about her nose being tweaked


I think that's because people never look closely and also, after many years, people forget what someone used to look like. 

If someone is past 70, and their nose is smaller, it was done.  Noses get bigger with age, not smaller. They don't even stay the same.  They get bigger because the cartilage keeps growing. Ear lobes too. Unfortunately!


----------



## Vanilla Bean

If I was going to have a nose job, I'd ask for the nose I used to have when I was younger.


----------



## Jayne1

Vanilla Bean said:


> If I was going to have a nose job, I'd ask for the nose I used to have when I was younger.


Me too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chessmont

Vanilla Bean said:


> If I was going to have a nose job, I'd ask for the nose I used to have when I was younger.


Hehe this reminds me of the first time I met my (future) MIL - she says what's on her mind LOL.  She asked me if I had had a nose job (I had the cutest little nose). I think I was around 21. Now at 60+ my nose is wider than it was, plus I tripped and fell on my face, hitting my nose, so I'm sure that flattened the cartilage out somewhat.


----------



## gazoo

Sadly, the space between the nose and lip also lengthens with age.


----------



## CeeJay

DeMonica said:


> Maybe you can't, but actually you should. Mine got thinner and more refined after my puberty (and the hormon surge) was over without any surgery, so it's technically possible. Whether it happened in Meghan's case or not is a different story.


I guess anything is possible, but from a very good friend of mine who specializes in Geriatrics (Elderly) has always told me that the 2 things that grow on people as they get older are the ears and the nose!  I always thought "well nuts!" .. because I have a big enough nose as it is.  

BTW .. my comments have nothing to do with my like/dislike of Megan; I don't know her personally.  I must say that the whole business with Piers Morgan and his "ghosting" story is IMO .. just stupid; I am NOT a fan of him at all!!


----------



## CeeJay

Vanilla Bean said:


> Whaat? She went to Immaculate Heart High School, an all-girls private school. They would import boys from Loyola High School only for dances and school plays.


Yes, you are correct .. and what I said was that he was in the play with her (actually played her romantic counterpart).  As such, they got to know each other pretty well re: rehearsals, etc.  While he did not pursue theatre beyond those times, he is in the Music business, so I'm sure they have run into each other since HS.  Since he was the romantic counterpart, of anyone (and he is honest to a fault), I would say that he would have the best look at her before/after noses.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan presented the British Designer Womenswear award to Clare Waight Keller (Givenchy) who designed her wedding dress at the British Fashion Awards


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgan R said:


> Meghan presented the British Designer Womenswear award to Clare Waight Keller (Givenchy) who designed her wedding dress at the British Fashion Awards
> 
> View attachment 4275903
> View attachment 4275907
> 
> View attachment 4275905
> View attachment 4275902
> View attachment 4275904
> View attachment 4275901
> View attachment 4275906



Dark nail polish?!? <gasp> lol [emoji23] 

Lovely dress. Compliments her growing baby bump perfectly!


----------



## DeMonica

What a surprise award! She has a lovely bump. I wonder how far she is in her pregnancy.


----------



## Tivo

Morgan R said:


> Meghan presented the British Designer Womenswear award to Clare Waight Keller (Givenchy) who designed her wedding dress at the British Fashion Awards
> 
> View attachment 4275903
> View attachment 4275907
> 
> View attachment 4275905
> View attachment 4275902
> View attachment 4275904
> View attachment 4275901
> View attachment 4275906


Ladies and gents brace yourselves...
The jealousy over the pond is about to hit a frenzy. There’s about to be a tsunami of bad press on Meghan.


----------



## GoStanford

Just because she may e-mail staff at 5 am doesn't mean she's expecting a response then.  (Unless that's the understanding/expectation the way their communications are set up.)  She may be awake and have things on her mind.


----------



## Jayne1

gazoo said:


> Sadly, the space between the nose and lip also lengthens with age.


You meant the nose lengthens and the space shortens, right? That's why Streisand is so obvious to my eye.

Back to Meghan -- I keep reading not so nice things about William and Harry and the speculation is, as mentioned above, the info is from Charles or Andrew. Those two don't really get along, so maybe both have their own agenda?


----------



## Jayne1

GoStanford said:


> Just because she may e-mail staff at 5 am doesn't mean she's expecting a response then.  (Unless that's the understanding/expectation the way their communications are set up.)  She may be awake and have things on her mind.


That's what I was thinking.  She's an early riser and gets right to her emails. Does that mean her staff has to rise early as well?


----------



## gazoo

Jayne1 said:


> You meant the nose lengthens and the space shortens, right? That's why Streisand is so obvious to my eye.
> 
> Back to Meghan -- I keep reading not so nice things about William and Harry and the speculation is, as mentioned above, the info is from Charles or Andrew. Those two don't really get along, so maybe both have their own agenda?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4275923



No, I meant it lengthens. I think it's called the philtrum area. It lengthens about .5mm per decade of age. Nose jobs can certainly impact it, but on its own, everyone's lengthens with time.


----------



## DeMonica

gazoo said:


> No, I meant it lengthens. I think it's called the philtrum area. It lengthens about .5mm per decade of age. Nose jobs can certainly impact it, but on its own, everyone's lengthens with time.


Unfortunately, it's true.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I also wonder if it isn’t partially the angle of the photo as well. In the old photo her jaw is pointing down and away and, in the new photo, it is angling up and towards the camera. There isn’t as short a distance in the photo below. Anyway, it isn’t like she is a stranger to plastic surgery.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> I also wonder if it isn’t partially the angle of the photo as well. In the old photo her jaw is pointing down and away and, in the new photo, it is angling up and towards the camera. There isn’t as short a distance in the photo below. Anyway, it isn’t like she is a stranger to plastic surgery.


I think that photograph was airbrushed as they did in those days with film photography.

We need an un-retouched film photo.  lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

A1aGypsy said:


> I also wonder if it isn’t partially the angle of the photo as well. In the old photo her jaw is pointing down and away and, in the new photo, it is angling up and towards the camera. There isn’t as short a distance in the photo below. Anyway, it isn’t like she is a stranger to plastic surgery.


Nose looks the same to me.


----------



## chowlover2

LVSistinaMM said:


> Dark nail polish?!? <gasp> lol [emoji23]
> 
> Lovely dress. Compliments her growing baby bump perfectly!


I said the same thing in the Royalty thread. A stupid rule to be sure in this day and age.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I was thinking.  She's an early riser and gets right to her emails. Does that mean her staff has to rise early as well?


I believe the original report said 5-6 texts.  Maybe that implies more of an immediate response is expected than emails.  I don't know whether when Meghan was an actress she ever had a personal assistant.  If so, it's possible she's used to having someone on call at whatever hour of the day suits her.

I think texting early is fine as long as she doesn't expect responses at 5 am, or expect the 5-6 things she asked for to be completed 5 minutes after the employee starts the workday either.  All of the Meghan stories from the past 3 weeks have been conspicuously lacking these sorts of details so who can tell.

I think it's always advisable when starting a new job to get a feel for how things are done first before doing them your own way.  I remember back in June or July that People Magazine or a similar publication mentioned Meghan was having a hard time adjusting to all the constraints and procedures of royal life.  That makes a little more sense now in light of the recent stories.


----------



## Voyageuse

CeeJay said:


> I have a friend here in LA that went to the same Arts High School as Megan and was in the same Senior year play as her (his mother made sure to blast everyone on FB with the playbook).  Bottom line, he liked her .. but he did say she was very determined and of all his theatre classmates, he did feel that it was likely that she would end up in something.  I asked him the 'nose' question because it did look as though it is now much more "refined", and he confirmed that yes, she indeed did have PS on her nose but that she went to a top PS guy here in LA.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex
Meghan attended Immaculate Heart High School here in L.A.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I believe the original report said 5-6 texts.  Maybe that implies more of an immediate response is expected than emails.  I don't know whether when Meghan was an actress she ever had a personal assistant.  If so, it's possible she's used to having someone on call at whatever hour of the day suits her.
> 
> I think texting early is fine as long as she doesn't expect responses at 5 am, or expect the 5-6 things she asked for to be completed 5 minutes after the employee starts the workday either.  All of the Meghan stories from the past 3 weeks have been conspicuously lacking these sorts of details so who can tell.
> 
> I think it's always advisable when starting a new job to get a feel for how things are done first before doing them your own way.  I remember back in June or July that People Magazine or a similar publication mentioned Meghan was having a hard time adjusting to all the constraints and procedures of royal life.  That makes a little more sense now in light of the recent stories.


I guess it would depend on whether the assistant's phone is on early in the AM.  If it isn't on and isn't expected to be on, then the message would get to them when they start their work day.  IDK if she had an assistant when she was an actress but to me, she was a B-list actress (do basic cable TV actors have personal assistants?). so she has had a meteoric rise in respect so fame/status.  Do you think she would have been presenting a fashion award before her marriage to Harry?


----------



## TMA

sdkitty said:


> I guess it would depend on whether the assistant's phone is on early in the AM.  If it isn't on and isn't expected to be on, then the message would get to them when they start their work day.  IDK if she had an assistant when she was an actress but to me, she was a B-list actress (do basic cable TV actors have personal assistants?). so she has had a meteoric rise in respect so fame/status.  Do you think she would have been presenting a fashion award before her marriage to Harry?



Would Kate or any of the royal wives have been presenting awards before their marriages to their husbands? Not sure of much of the others but at least Meghan gave a speech at UN women before marriage. So B-list as she was, she did have some accomplishments some royal wives can only dream of.


----------



## sdkitty

TMA said:


> Would Kate or any of the royal wives have been presenting awards before their marriages to their husbands? Not sure of much of the others but at least Meghan gave a speech at UN women before marriage. So B-list as she was, she did have some accomplishments some royal wives can only dream of.


true she did have some accomplishments outside of acting.  I think your language of "can only dream of" is kind of dramatic.....
and has Kate been presenting awards to fashion designers?


----------



## princess101804

has it been reported why she lived with her dad from 11-18 and he had sole custody? where was her mom?


----------



## Morgan R

princess101804 said:


> has it been reported why she lived with her dad from 11-18 and he had sole custody? where was her mom?



He didn't have sole custody. If you let her father tell it he takes subtle shots at Doria because Meghan is admittedly/noticeably closer to Doria as well as constantly contradicts himself to make it seem as if he was the only one that raised Meghan. His house was closer to Meghan's school while Doria's was on the other side of town and she was working. Meghan spent some school nights at her father's house as well at his job (which was lighting director on Married...With Children) and spent some school nights at her mother's house as well as staying on the weekends. Before Meghan's dad even did a single interview Meghan's uncle (Doria's brother) mentioned last year in an interview how Jeanette (Doria's mother) had stayed with Doria and Meghan as well as how Meghan later took care of Jeanette who had a stroke and later passed away.


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> true she did have some accomplishments outside of acting.  I think your language of "can only dream of" is kind of dramatic.....
> and has Kate been presenting awards to fashion designers?



ITA. There are plenty of more accomplished women out there in this world. I’m not going to award her for being more “accomplished” than other royal women. It’s sort of comparing apples and oranges. 

She grew up with the American “can do” attitude and didn’t come from money. Not all women who married into the royal family have needed to do what Meghan did to move up in this world and find a better life for herself.

She seems extremely intelligent, well spoken, and driven - the woman can hustle. This is why I don’t think it’s unheard of that she shoots emails or texts at 5 am. Whether or not it’s scaring staff away is another question.


----------



## princess101804

Morgan R said:


> He didn't have sole custody. If you let her father tell it he takes subtle shots at Doria because Meghan is admittedly/noticeably closer to Doria as well as constantly contradicts himself to make it seem as if he was the only one that raised Meghan. His house was closer to Meghan's school while Doria's was on the other side of town and she was working. Meghan spent some school nights at her father's house as well at his job (which was lighting director on Married...With Children) and spent some school nights at her mother's house as well as staying on the weekends. Before Meghan's dad even did a single interview Meghan's uncle (Doria's brother) mentioned last year in an interview how Jeanette (Doria's mother) had stayed with Doria and Meghan as well as how Meghan later took care of Jeanette who had a stroke and later passed away.



thanks for clarifying!


----------



## TMA

sdkitty said:


> true she did have some accomplishments outside of acting.  I think your language of "can only dream of" is kind of dramatic.....
> and has Kate been presenting awards to fashion designers?



Actually, it is not dramatic. The pool against which she is being compared is quite small- royal wives, not all women in the world. Some of the other wives, even if they didn’t start out with much by way of accomplishments seem to be using the platform to improve themselves while some aren’t. Either way it is fine but to have people diminish another’s achievements no matter how small you think it is, is not doing women favours. For me it is similar to saying a woman hasn’t achieved much in a company because she was a senior manager and not the CEO.


----------



## Fally420

sdkitty said:


> true she did have some accomplishments outside of acting.  I think your language of "can only dream of" is kind of dramatic.....
> and has Kate been presenting awards to fashion designers?



wanna ask the question the other way round... is it royal to present awards for fashion designers?


----------



## gazoo

The Royals mostly present awards and cut ribbons. Not exactly the powerful, iron fisted realms of the past, with extravagant courts and mercurial rulers. When I think of Henry VIII, I bet he'd be horrified to see how marginalized the Royals now are.

As to her texting her admin team at 5am, it's stressful for the recipients. I was an admin for a few years and always felt I had to respond to texts or emails as they arrived. And they did arrive on weekends, and early morning a few times. It wasn't an explicit rule that they needed immediate attention, but my temperament made me unable to leave it until working hours. I'd imagine if one is working for a Royal, it's even more intense, so I get why people are balking at her doing this. Then again, this could all be BS and part of the very obvious smear job. You know, ambitious brash Amercian working all hours. How dare she?


----------



## LittleStar88

gazoo said:


> The Royals mostly present awards and cut ribbons. Not exactly the powerful, iron fisted realms of the past, with extravagant courts and mercurial rulers. When I think of Henry VIII, I bet he'd be horrified to see how marginalized the Royals now are.
> 
> As to her texting her admin team at 5am, it's stressful for the recipients. I was an admin for a few years and always felt I had to respond to texts or emails as they arrived. And they did arrive on weekends, and early morning a few times. It wasn't an explicit rule that they needed immediate attention, but my temperament made me unable to leave it until working hours. I'd imagine if one is working for a Royal, it's even more intense, so I get why people are balking at her doing this. Then again, this could all be BS and part of the very obvious smear job. You know, ambitious brash Amercian working all hours. How dare she?



This. I am an executive admin and supported someone who would text early morning, late night, all weekend. It got to where I felt as though I could not leave the house to get groceries (every weekend had to cancel plans or stop what I was doing - including abandoning groceries in the middle of shopping - to tend to the exec's needs). This was a very driven and ambitious executive who expected/needed a response or to be tended to. Because it did not align with my personal demands, I left that job supporting that exec. So I totally get it. It's not for everyone, especially if it is not the norm or what they are typically accustomed to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Voyageuse said:


> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex
> Meghan attended Immaculate Heart High School here in L.A.


I already answered this before; I am aware that it is an all-girls school .. see below.  I also was not getting into the debate based on whether or not I like Meghan; I don't know her so I can't speak to that.   

_Yes, you are correct .. and what I said was that he was in the play with her (actually played her romantic counterpart). As such, they got to know each other pretty well re: rehearsals, etc. While he did not pursue theatre beyond those times, he is in the Music business, so I'm sure they have run into each other since HS. Since he was the romantic counterpart, of anyone (and he is honest to a fault), I would say that he would have the best look at her before/after noses._


----------



## krissa

I’ll try and find the original article with this rumor, but i think it said she gets up at 5am and in a separate part of article sends emails throughout the day. Not necessarily, she wakes up at 5am firing off a bunch of things at her staff.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Just wanted to add my experience to the debate - my boss also emails me at 6AM, but I don't care nor do I feel pressured to answer until I'm on the clock. I don't even receive phone notifications from my email. I think this is a healthy and acceptable form of communication at work, and so based on my own experiences I wouldn't say receiving emails at 5AM is something that would cause me to quit.


----------



## Kat Madridista

LVSistinaMM said:


> Dark nail polish?!? <gasp> lol [emoji23]
> 
> Lovely dress. Compliments her growing baby bump perfectly!





chowlover2 said:


> I said the same thing in the Royalty thread. A stupid rule to be sure in this day and age.



The thing is, I bet that there is no written rule about what nail polish the royal women are "allowed" to wear. Kate has worn red polish before and she hasn't been sent to the Tower. Eugenie has worn nail art, too, if I remember correctly. Just because the Queen only wears light varnish, doesn't mean that that all everyone is allowed to wear. Besides, the Queen and the courtiers and staff surely have better things to do than to police her daughter-in-law, granddaughters, and granddaughters-in-law's nail color. All this talk about "rules" and "protocol" mostly just comes from the press.


----------



## minababe

hellosunshine said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle May Break Royal Birth Tradition with Her First Child*
> 
> You know those much-talked about post-birth photoshoots that royal mums like Kate Middleton and Princess Di have traditionally posed for mere _hours_ after giving birth? Yeah, looks like Meghan Markle was like, "Nah, thank you."
> 
> Sources have revealed to _Vanity Fair_ that Meghan is considering opting out of giving birth at the Lindo Wing in St. Mary’s Hospital in favor of a home birth at their new residence in Windsor, at Frogmore Cottage. Meaning nope, no photos outside of the hospital's maternity ward.
> 
> But things aren't quite ironed out yet. Per _Vanity Fair’s_ report, the Duchess is still considering her options, and she might choose a hospital near Windsor as well. Since this will be Markle’s first child, there’s a high chance that her doctors will advise a hospital birth.
> 
> While the question of where the royal baby will be born is still up in the air, one thing that we can count on is that Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland, will be there. According to _Vanity Fair_, the couple are making plans to build both a nursery and a suite for Mama Doria at Frogmore.
> 
> 
> “Doria plans to be around a lot when the baby arrives, and there are plans for her to have a dedicated space at their new home,” a source shared. “She wants to be on hand to help Meghan and Harry with the baby. Doria will be involved and if she's involved she will be encouraging Meg to go for a natural birth.”
> 
> We'll have to sit tight to see which choice Meghan eventually makes, but we wouldn't blame her if she decided to duck out of the traditional post-birth photo op.
> 
> https://www.instyle.com/news/meghan-markle-home-birth


oh yes i totally forgot about that fact! maybe they move not only for their first child. doria will be around them a lot in the future, meghan wants her mom by her side, thats of Course so much easier when they not living in kesington Palace anymore. So I think Harry did it for meghan and her mom and of Course for the Baby


----------



## minababe

I don't get what People have with her nose. it Looks completely the same to me like her as a kid or teen  .. it's far away from perfect and sometimes it Looks really wide and sometimes filigrane. it's all the angle.
+ she mentioned her dad a lot in the past on Instagram and interviews for her remarkable nose .. how stupid and Kind of weird would it be if it's not her real nose anymore.
I don't think she would want to put the focus on it


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Prince Charles at a Prince's Trust round table event at Clarence House to discuss youth violent crime (The Prince's Trust is a charity that was founded in 1976 by Prince Charles to help vulnerable young people get their lives on track)


----------



## berrydiva

Is that Tom Hardy?


----------



## Morgan R

berrydiva said:


> Is that Tom Hardy?



Yes


----------



## hellosunshine

Should I be surprised to see Harry (and not William) accompanying Prince Charles for this charity program? It's interesting that Harry is so visible in the public domain.


----------



## BagLovingMom

hellosunshine said:


> Should I be surprised to see Harry (and not William) accompanying Prince Charles for this charity program? It's interesting that Harry is so visible in the public domain.


I don’t think it’s surprising bc i think one of Harry’s major roles is some sort of youth ambassador. So this event seems very consistent with that role.


----------



## DeMonica

gazoo said:


> The Royals mostly present awards and cut ribbons. Not exactly the powerful, iron fisted realms of the past, with extravagant courts and mercurial rulers. When I think of Henry VIII, I bet he'd be horrified to see how marginalized the Royals now are.
> 
> As to her texting her admin team at 5am, it's stressful for the recipients. I was an admin for a few years and always felt I had to respond to texts or emails as they arrived. And they did arrive on weekends, and early morning a few times. It wasn't an explicit rule that they needed immediate attention, but my temperament made me unable to leave it until working hours. I'd imagine if one is working for a Royal, it's even more intense, so I get why people are balking at her doing this. Then again, this could all be BS and part of the very obvious smear job. You know, ambitious brash Amercian working all hours. How dare she?


I spent years in similar positions and it sucked the life out of me sans Dementors. So if the rumours are true, my deepest sympathy to the staff. However: That lady was to leave soon anyway, not that she doesn't deserve a fair treatment in any case. Tabloids are going for the drama, because that sells, so I hope that it's a strong embellishment of what happened.



CeeJay said:


> I guess anything is possible, but from a very good friend of mine who specializes in Geriatrics (Elderly) has always told me that the 2 things that grow on people as they get older are the ears and the nose!  I always thought "well nuts!" .. because I have a big enough nose as it is.


I'm hardly a geriatric patient. Sorry, but your very good friend's rules don't apply in my case yet.



berrydiva said:


> Is that Tom Hardy?


You beat me to it. His beard is longer than usual.


----------



## Kat Madridista

hellosunshine said:


> Should I be surprised to see Harry (and not William) accompanying Prince Charles for this charity program? It's interesting that Harry is so visible in the public domain.



Not really. Harry seems to be the one who gets tapped for the events with Charles, more than William. This is the 2nd or 3rd event they've done together. William is visible, too, except that maybe Harry is more popular currently. William just did a day of events with Kate the other day.


----------



## lulilu

Two thoughts re early texts (of which I have been guilty).

1.  You have an idea and just want to get it off your mind/plate, so you text the person who will be responsible to taking care of it as one of their duties when they get to work.

2.  Similarly,  you are swamped at work with many pressing issues (for me it was trial) and you need your assistant to carry it out asap.  I expected mine to come to work as early as possible to take care of these things.  Note, however, this was episodic and not longterm or constant.


----------



## berrydiva

Bosses who send their employee's text messages early in the morning have no boundaries and consideration for others.  They could just as easily send an email for the items they're texting a person. I never used to answer text messages from anyone at my job, it crossed the line....we're not friends or family.  I set a very clear boundary with everyone that if they text me, I wouldn't respond.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

berrydiva said:


> Bosses who send their employee's text messages early in the morning have no boundaries and consideration for others.  They could just as easily send an email for the items they're texting a person. I never used to answer text messages from anyone at my job, it crossed the line....we're not friends or family.  I set a very clear boundary with everyone that if they text me, I wouldn't respond.



Congratulations on finding a job where there is very any urgency outside of business hours.  Many are not so lucky.


----------



## CeeJay

DeMonica said:


> I'm hardly a geriatric patient. Sorry, but your very good friend's rules don't apply in my case yet.


Under no circumstances was I trying to say that you are Geriatric AT ALL, and sorry if you thought that.  However, what I said is true .. FOR THOSE that are in their later years!!


----------



## berrydiva

lulilu said:


> Congratulations on finding a job where there is very any urgency outside of business hours.  Many are not so lucky.


Congratulations on being condescending because you felt personally attacked which you weren't given that I didn't quote your post. In any event, I worked in finance, investments to be specific, so there were no such thing as "business hours" and urgent existed around the clock for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, on holidays, if you're in labor, attending your mother's funeral or have died yourself.  However, I employed a personal philosophy that I will not yield to terrorist and will not respond to anyone who text my device. It's inconsiderate and lacked boundaries; an email was sufficient. If it's urgent enough to text but not call then it's really not urgent; flag the email as priority in that case. And, in turn, I agreed to follow-up on their email as soon as reasonably possible within a reasonable time....didn't run into any issues.


----------



## Kat Madridista

Christmas card is here!


----------



## cafecreme15

Kat Madridista said:


> Christmas card is here!




Not sure how I feel about this choice of photo for the Christmas card.


----------



## LibbyRuth

It's different, but it does do a pretty good job of summarizing the year for  them.


----------



## Florasun

cafecreme15 said:


> Not sure how I feel about this choice of photo for the Christmas card.


I agree with you. It seems to me like they took very little to no effort.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I don't think it's that uncommon for a couple to choose a wedding picture for a Christmas card the year they get married, and they have shared one that  the public had not seen yet, which is nice. So I don't really think it's odd in terms of level of effort. It's just not the kind of wedding pic that  is normally used for something like that.


----------



## DeMonica

Kat Madridista said:


> Christmas card is here!



It's less of a Christmas card, more of a New Year's card but for that it's perfect. They had a great year behind them: they started a new life together and also created a new life (or two). They really have a lot to look forward to.


----------



## gazoo

^^ And they've got their backs to the haters.


----------



## cafecreme15

I just think it's a bit of a strange choice because without knowing it was their Christmas card, we would have no idea who is actually in this picture.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Yeah, sending out a photo of your backs is quite odd. It's not even a full length shot. This is the kind of thing that would look nice on the interior or back side of the card when you have a portrait on the front.


----------



## Laila619

Odd choice. Feels a bit detached/cold? Not between them, I mean for the recipient who gets their card.


----------



## sdkitty

I think it's pretty....seems kinda Hollywood to me, rather than your typical family pic.....maybe next year they will have something more traditional


----------



## A1aGypsy

It would make a nice Instagram pic but it is pretty far away from the traditional “sweaters and fireplace” that the royals normally do. I think a candid would have been much nicer for an official card.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

gazoo said:


> ^^ And they've got their backs to the haters.


You've got a point!


----------



## leeann

I like the Christmas card!


----------



## afsweet

I'm ok with their choice. they're not normal people so I don't think they need to send out a card with matching sweaters and a mall santa. my only complaint is that Harry's suit looks like a big black blob in that photo, and his posture is bad lol.


----------



## sdkitty

stephc005 said:


> I'm ok with their choice. they're not normal people so I don't think they need to send out a card with matching sweaters and a mall santa. my only complaint is that Harry's suit looks like a big black blob in that photo, and his posture is bad lol.


tough crowd here
I'd say as far as the posture goes, she is shorter and he's leaning toward her


----------



## mia55

Not a fan of this card.


----------



## Morgan R

Morgan R said:


> Some royal fans stumbled across a rare photograph of Harry and Meghan. This photograph seems to be Harry and Meghan's official joint photograph. It is a standard for royals to have an official photograph be among the gifts they give to dignitaries of the countries they visit. This particular photograph was spotted on display at Government House in New Zealand and seemingly gifted to New Zealand's current Governor - General Patsy Reddy.
> 
> View attachment 4242037
> View attachment 4242066
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The same photograph was previously seen months ago in the background during one of Queen Elizabeth II's meetings at Buckingham Palace as one of her family photographs she had on display.
> View attachment 4242045
> View attachment 4242062




Update to a previous post of mine.

A better quality version of the picture used as Harry and Meghan's joint photograph that is presented to foreign dignitaries:


----------



## Grande Latte

I thought the Christmas card photo is very "Great Gatsby".


----------



## DeMonica

^^^She's Hollywood, isn't it?


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> ^^^She's Hollywood, isn't it?


Thats the feeling I get when seeing the "clutching the bump" pictures. It's very actressy.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> Thats the feeling I get when seeing the "clutching the bump" pictures. It's very actressy.


I must agree, that's a bit theatrical, very HW. I still think that she's proud of her bump.


----------



## Jayne1

My first thought was she wants everyone to know she's pregnant. not getting plump, and when these photos are observed, many years from now, it's not that she just gained a few pounds.


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> I must agree, that's a bit theatrical, very HW. I still think that she's proud of her bump.


Absolutely, so she should be, it's a beautiful bump


----------



## berrydiva

I like the card, it's real....same with Kate and Will's card where the kids are being kids. Breaks from the old stuffy rigidly stiff, everyone perfectly posed traditional pics...that's not real life.

I'm not seeing how either pic looks/feels Hollywood....to me, they look like every day people having a special event in those pics.


----------



## BagLovingMom

I liked the card, my first thought was that it was humble yet thoughtful . I’m a bit suprised over the negativity, but hey this is a gossip thread !


----------



## hellosunshine

Kat Madridista said:


> Christmas card is here!




This is a beautiful photo! I love the hand behind the back clasp. I remember seeing a photo of Princess Diana holding Harry's hand in a similar manner. Btw, this photo appears to be taken at Frogmore Cottage right? Can anyone confirm or deny?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## loogirl

chicaloca said:


> Meghan looks at least a decade younger than her actual age. I think it’s a combination of being petite and having a youthful face.



LOL she does NOT look 28.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> This is a beautiful photo! I love the hand behind the back clasp. I remember seeing a photo of Princess Diana holding Harry's hand in a similar manner. Btw, this photo appears to be taken at Frogmore Cottage right? Can anyone confirm or deny?


Frogmore House. Their new home Frogmore Cottage are within the grounds of Frogmore House. Wedding reception was at F House and engagement photos were taken in the grounds


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> Frogmore House. Their new home Frogmore Cottage are within the grounds of Frogmore House. Wedding reception was at F House and engagement photos were taken in the grounds



Thank you. I assumed so. Harry seems to be a very sentimental man, and Meghan as a whole seems to be too. It's little wonder that they're relocating to the Frogmore Cottage..they have many happy memories there.


----------



## hellosunshine

I was watching Wendy Williams the other day and they did a segment on Meghan..apparently people had a problem with Meghan holding her stomach at the British Fashion Awards. British media as well are maligning her for holding it too much. Well, I hope they had the same energy for Kate --


----------



## bag-princess

Florasun said:


> I agree with you. It seems to me like they took very little to no effort.



What did you expect - something like the Kardashian’s Christmas cards??
I like it just fine.


----------



## Morgan R

hellosunshine said:


> Thank you. I assumed so. Harry seems to be a very sentimental man, and Meghan as a whole seems to be too. It's little wonder that they're relocating to the Frogmore Cottage..they have many happy memories there.



Yeah I think the Frogmore Estate is sentimental to them. Not just because their engagement pictures and private wedding reception happened there but the Frogmore Estate is one of the few places that Harry and Meghan often visited back during the months the public didn't know they were dating (the tidbit about them visiting Frogmore Estate was only revealed around the time the engagement pictures were released).


Frogmore Estate is also considered to be one of the most private and secured royal estates (though they are all obviously secured) due to the Royal Mausoleum, the Duchess of Kent's Mausoleum, and the Royal Burial Ground also being within the grounds there (they are a distance away from Frogmore House and Frogmore Cottage but still within the grounds of the Frogmore Estate). Also it is one of the most private and secured royal estates due to it's proximity to Windsor Castle (which is literally down the road). Windsor Castle is Queen Elizabeth II's weekend home (though she sometimes stays on some weekdays as well) and when Prince Charles becomes King it is expected he will turn Windsor Castle into the official headquarters of the British monarchy (rather than Buckingham Palace).


Frogmore Cottage is circled but this gives a view of the grounds of the entire Frogmore Estate:



The Frogmore Estate is just down the road from Windsor Castle. I imagine St. George's Chapel within Windsor Castle  (which is where Harry and Meghan's wedding was as well as where Harry was Christened) will be where Harry and Meghan's child/children are Christened:



Though there are other pictures online (some of which have been posted in this thread) that show a portion of Frogmore Cottage this probably shows the best view of Frogmore Cottage before any renovations for Harry and Meghan took place (the addition of two orangeries and additional landscaping are said to be apart of the renovations to Frogmore Cottage). There is also a guest building behind Frogmore Cottage that will likely be used for staff.:


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Yeah I think the Frogmore Estate is sentimental to them. Not just because their engagement pictures and private wedding reception happened there but the Frogmore Estate is one of the few places that Harry and Meghan often visited back during the months the public didn't know they were dating (the tidbit about them visiting Frogmore Estate was only revealed around the time the engagement pictures were released).
> 
> 
> Frogmore Estate is also considered to be one of the most private and secured royal estates (though they are all obviously secured) due to the Royal Mausoleum, the Duchess of Kent's Mausoleum, and the Royal Burial Ground also being within the grounds there (they are a distance away from Frogmore House and Frogmore Cottage but still within the grounds of the Frogmore Estate). Also it is one of the most private and secured royal estates due to it's proximity to Windsor Castle (which is literally down the road). Windsor Castle is Queen Elizabeth II's weekend home (though she sometimes stays on some weekdays as well) and when Prince Charles becomes King it is expected he will turn Windsor Castle into the official headquarters of the British monarchy (rather than Buckingham Palace).
> 
> 
> Frogmore Cottage is circled but this gives a view of the grounds of the entire Frogmore Estate:
> View attachment 4281939
> 
> 
> The Frogmore Estate is just down the road from Windsor Castle. I imagine St. George's Chapel within Windsor Castle  (which is where Harry and Meghan's wedding was as well as where Harry was Christened) will be where Harry and Meghan's child/children are Christened:
> View attachment 4281913
> 
> 
> Though there are other pictures online (some of which have been posted in this thread) that show a portion of Frogmore Cottage this probably shows the best view of Frogmore Cottage before any renovations for Harry and Meghan took place (the addition of two orangeries and additional landscaping are said to be apart of the renovations to Frogmore Cottage). There is also a guest building behind Frogmore Cottage that will likely be used for staff.:
> 
> View attachment 4282026



the last Picture is their new home right?
Looks big and beautiful! I wish them all the best with their Little Family. it's a more private and normal life there than at kensington Palace.


----------



## bag-princess

anyone else seen clips of the recent interview that her father gave - begging her to reach out to him because he wants to be a part of his grandchild's life. and even going to so far as appealing to the queen to step in and intervene with Meghan on his behalf.


----------



## Morgan R

minababe said:


> the last Picture is their new home right?
> Looks big and beautiful! I wish them all the best with their Little Family. it's a more private and normal life there than at Kensington Palace.



Yes the last picture is their new house Frogmore Cottage. The other pictures I posted were of the entire Frogmore Estate.

The entire Frogmore Estate definitely has beautiful scenery. I can see why it was a place they often visited when the public didn't know they were dating and now where they will raise their family at. It provides privacy and yet at the same time provides openness. It is definitely more private than Kensington Palace which though secured isn't all that private and over the years everyday people and paparazzi have captured royals coming and going from there.


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> Yeah I think the Frogmore Estate is sentimental to them. Not just because their engagement pictures and private wedding reception happened there but the Frogmore Estate is one of the few places that Harry and Meghan often visited back during the months the public didn't know they were dating (the tidbit about them visiting Frogmore Estate was only revealed around the time the engagement pictures were released).
> 
> 
> Frogmore Estate is also considered to be one of the most private and secured royal estates (though they are all obviously secured) due to the Royal Mausoleum, the Duchess of Kent's Mausoleum, and the Royal Burial Ground also being within the grounds there (they are a distance away from Frogmore House and Frogmore Cottage but still within the grounds of the Frogmore Estate). Also it is one of the most private and secured royal estates due to it's proximity to Windsor Castle (which is literally down the road). Windsor Castle is Queen Elizabeth II's weekend home (though she sometimes stays on some weekdays as well) and when Prince Charles becomes King it is expected he will turn Windsor Castle into the official headquarters of the British monarchy (rather than Buckingham Palace).
> 
> 
> Frogmore Cottage is circled but this gives a view of the grounds of the entire Frogmore Estate:
> View attachment 4281939
> 
> 
> The Frogmore Estate is just down the road from Windsor Castle. I imagine St. George's Chapel within Windsor Castle  (which is where Harry and Meghan's wedding was as well as where Harry was Christened) will be where Harry and Meghan's child/children are Christened:
> View attachment 4281913
> 
> 
> Though there are other pictures online (some of which have been posted in this thread) that show a portion of Frogmore Cottage this probably shows the best view of Frogmore Cottage before any renovations for Harry and Meghan took place (the addition of two orangeries and additional landscaping are said to be apart of the renovations to Frogmore Cottage). There is also a guest building behind Frogmore Cottage that will likely be used for staff.:
> 
> View attachment 4282026


Very nice and secluded. It's a perfect place for morning runs with or without a stroller.  I wonder why they need two orangeries.


----------



## Fally420

Morgan R said:


> Yes the last picture is their new house Frogmore Cottage. The other pictures I posted were of the entire Frogmore Estate.
> 
> The entire Frogmore Estate definitely has beautiful scenery. I can see why it was a place they often visited when the public didn't know they were dating and now where they will raise their family at. It provides privacy and yet at the same time provides openness. It is definitely more private than Kensington Palace which though secured isn't all that private and over the years everyday people and paparazzi have captured royals coming and going from there.



Just curious, Is the whole area secured so that you can't enter the grounds?


----------



## Kat Madridista

bag-princess said:


> anyone else seen clips of the recent interview that her father gave - begging her to reach out to him because he wants to be a part of his grandchild's life. and even going to so far as appealing to the queen to step in and intervene with Meghan on his behalf.



I refuse to watch any clips because I don't want to give the press incentive to give Thomas a platform. I also refuse to add to Piers Morgan's viewership. It's so obvious that he only had Thomas on because he's still salty that Meghan ended their supposed "friendship". It's ridiculous. 



Fally420 said:


> Just curious, Is the whole area secured so that you can't enter the grounds?



Frogmore House and Gardens are open to the public on certain days. That would exclude Frogmore Cottage of course.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan visiting The Royal Variety nursing and care home Brinsworth House


----------



## minababe

HOW beautiful is this coat. to die for!! I Need it!!!!
she always has the best coats

not sure about the Dress, it Looks cute but a bit tight at all? doesn't look comfy. is it a maternity Dress?
but she Looks so beautiful pregnant


----------



## Kat Madridista

minababe said:


> HOW beautiful is this coat. to die for!! I Need it!!!!
> she always has the best coats
> 
> not sure about the Dress, it Looks cute but a bit tight at all? doesn't look comfy. is it a maternity Dress?
> but she Looks so beautiful pregnant



No, it's not a maternity dress, so it is probably tight on her. I hope she's still comfortable in it, but it sure doesn't look like it, given how it's stretching and rippling all over.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Handbag1234

Fally420 said:


> Just curious, Is the whole area secured so that you can't enter the grounds?


Yes it is. High walls, gates and security.


----------



## Tivo

According to People Magazine her mom will not be spending Christmas with the Royal family.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people...not-spending-christmas-with-royal-family/amp/


----------



## threadbender

Tivo said:


> According to People Magazine her mom will not be spending Christmas with the Royal family.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/people...not-spending-christmas-with-royal-family/amp/


That makes me sad for her. I understand customs and everything but, Doria should, in my opinion, be included. I am hoping that Meghan and Harry will spend some of the day with her and not only the royals.


----------



## doni

Meghan and Harry can choose how to spend their Christmas. But naturally if they choose to spend them at Sandringham then the Queen is under no obligation to include anyone or break with her Christmas traditions... Most of us don't mix family and inlaws during Christmas but choose to spend them with the family of one or the other spouse. It is just no different for the royals.
I also do not see why Meghan's mother would be expected to move to their residence once they are parents. Naturally, she has her own life and I am sure she will be welcomed often enough.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> anyone else seen clips of the recent interview that her father gave - begging her to reach out to him because he wants to be a part of his grandchild's life. and even going to so far as appealing to the queen to step in and intervene with Meghan on his behalf.


yes.  he is disgusting.  If he has any sense at all he would realize that this is only going to make things worse.  So then, what is his motive?  just getting time on TV?


----------



## threadbender

doni said:


> Meghan and Harry can choose how to spend their Christmas. But naturally if they choose to spend them at Sandringham then the Queen is under no obligation to include anyone or break with her Christmas traditions... Most of us don't mix family and inlaws during Christmas but choose to spend them with the family of one or the other spouse. It is just no different for the royals.
> I also do not see why Meghan's mother would be expected to move to their residence once they are parents. Naturally, she has her own life and I am sure she will be welcomed often enough.


You are absolutely correct. I guess I was looking at it as she is alone and I felt badly for her. But, I imagine this has been discussed and worked out a long while ago.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> yes.  he is disgusting.  If he has any sense at all he would realize that this is only going to make things worse.  So then, what is his motive?  just getting time on TV?


Initially I thought that as well, but now I wonder, if after years and years of trying, it will start to make Meghan look cold.

Anyone else read the Piers Morgan article about Meghan? He corresponded with her before she met Harry while she was just an actress.  I found it interesting how she can drop people when she moves on to better.

I'll post it and would like sincere comments without any hater remarks.


----------



## bag-princess

Jayne1 said:


> Initially I thought that as well, but now I wonder, if after years and years of trying, it will start to make Meghan look cold.
> 
> Anyone else read the Piers Morgan article about Meghan? He corresponded with her before she met Harry while she was just an actress. * I found it interesting how she can drop people when she moves on to better.*
> 
> I'll post it and would like sincere comments without any hater remarks.





i don't really see it as "moves to something better" but i know that everyone that you meet is not going to be or even supposed to be in your life forever.  just because you are good friends with them one day doesn't mean it will last.  sometimes you move on and the role they played for you then is not needed any longer.


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> Initially I thought that as well, but now I wonder, if after years and years of trying, it will start to make Meghan look cold.
> 
> Anyone else read the Piers Morgan article about Meghan? He corresponded with her before she met Harry while she was just an actress.  I found it interesting how she can drop people when she moves on to better.
> 
> I'll post it and would like sincere comments without any hater remarks.


I think most people realize what her father is doing and acknowledge no public response from her means she's unwilling to engage in a public tabloid fracas.

He and her half sister are literally baiting her with their public outrageousness. For her to remain publicly silent doesn't read "cold" but rather "wise" if you ask me.


----------



## bag-princess

redney said:


> *I think most people realize what her father is doing and acknowledge no public response from her means she's unwilling to engage in a public tabloid fracas.*
> 
> He and her half sister are literally baiting her with their public outrageousness. For her to remain publicly silent doesn't read "cold" but rather "wise" if you ask me.




EXACTLY!!!!  they are doing the most to try and get her to react!  i don't see her has being "cold" either but not stupid enough to sink to their level and give them the satisfaction and more material for then to be interviewed about!


----------



## Jayne1

redney said:


> I think most people realize what her father is doing and acknowledge no public response from her means she's unwilling to engage in a public tabloid fracas.
> 
> He and her half sister are literally baiting her with their public outrageousness. For her to remain publicly silent doesn't read "cold" but rather "wise" if you ask me.


I wasn't thinking 'cold' now, I was thinking if her father continues to beg for years on end, it will look cold.  At some point.


----------



## Sharont2305

Meghan and Piers met once after "corresponding" a few times on either Twitter or Instagram, he's pathetic in what he says. Hardly a friendship


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> I wasn't thinking 'cold' now, I was thinking if her father continues to beg for years on end, it will look cold.  At some point.


If he keeps going as he is for years there's even less sympathy for him as time goes by. My bet is he's looking for a payout from the Palace to zip it and will continue his outrageous and pathetic actions until he gets it.


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> If he keeps going as he is for years there's even less sympathy for him as time goes by. My bet is he's looking for a payout from the Palace to zip it and will continue his outrageous and pathetic actions until he gets it.


He'll be waiting forever in that case


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> He'll be waiting forever in that case


Agree! That's why her non-response is not cold.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan and Piers met once after "corresponding" a few times on either Twitter or Instagram, he's pathetic in what he says. Hardly a friendship


I'm not a Piers fan and my only opinion about Meghan is that she is extremely pretty and perfect for the role, so that's where I'm coming from by posting this article by Piers Morgan. Just curious what others think.

*"I was ghosted by Meghan Markle."*

"If you’re not familiar with the term ‘ghosting’, it’s when someone you thought was a friend suddenly cuts off all communication with you, with zero warning, and then you never hear another word from that person again.

I remember it very clearly because it’s never happened to me before.

So I found it very weird.

The saga began one afternoon in the fall of 2015 when I decided to follow on Twitter four stars of the US legal drama Suits - including Ms Markle.

Within minutes, she sent me a private Direct Message: ‘Well hello there – thanks for the follow. Big fan of yours!’

I replied, and for the next few months, we corresponded on a regular basis.

We’d chat about everything from US gun violence (she shares my horror of it) to a charity trip she made for the United Nations to Rwanda, spinning classes, calligraphy, and our joint hatred of 4am filming call-times - hers for Suits and mine for Good Morning Britain in the UK.

She even started sending me early preview episodes of her show so we could debate juicy storylines yet to air – which we did, at length.

Meghan introduced me via cyberspace to another Suits cast member, Rick Hoffman - who played Louis Litt – and he and I also began to regularly correspond. He described their relationship to me as so close it felt like ‘brother and sister’.

In February 2016, Rick came to London and at my invitation, he appeared on Good Morning Britain.

Nobody really knew who he was here, nor Meghan for that matter, but we had a fun interview and I sent the photos to Meghan afterwards - who was thrilled by them.

In early June, 2016, she messaged me to say: ‘I’m in London for a week of meetings and Wimbledon. Would love to say hi!’

I suggested my local pub, the Scarsdale Tavern in Kensington – ironically just a few hundred yards from where she now lives at Kensington Palace.

‘Serena Williams sends her love,’ she texted on the day from Wimbledon, where she was watching her friend play in the annual tennis tournament. ‘You’re very popular as it turns out. Get you!’

I don’t hear those words very often, so they made an impression…

Then she turned up at the pub and we had a very enjoyable time for 90 minutes or so before I put her in a taxi to a dinner she was having with friends at 5 Hertford Street, a fashionable club in London’s Mayfair.

She spoke very candidly about her family - there were some private, sensitive things she told me I would never repeat because they were said in confidence - Donald ***** (she’s not a fan), and of course, Suits.

She asked me for advice on her career and the media, and if she could come on Good Morning Britain next time she was over, which I said I would arrange.

From the cab, Meghan sent me a series of texts thanking me and saying she was looking forward to meeting up again next time we were in the same city.

She even publicly tweeted about how nice it was to see her ‘friend’ – me – in London.

So at this point, I was indeed labouring under the massive misapprehension that we were friends.

I was wrong.

She met Prince Harry at the dinner that night, went on a solo date with him the next night, and I never heard from her again.

Not a word.
I’d been ghosted.

And not just by her.

At Meghan’s behest, Rick Hoffman ghosted me too.

I didn’t hear from him again for 18 months, then he eventually crawled out of the woodwork after attending the big royal wedding last May.

‘Piers! I am very sorry for not responding,’ he wrote in a lengthy message. ‘You must understand, once I heard the news, out of respect for Meghan, I couldn’t share a thing. Now I can share fun stuff! I would love to catch up at that favorite pub of yours. Hope to hear from you pal. Love you pal. Rick.’

I didn’t reply, because no, I didn’t ‘understand’.

A real ‘pal’ doesn’t ghost a friend for 18 months, right?

That’s just rude.
In fact, I found the behaviour of the pair of them damn rude.

I’d been ‘played’ by a couple of B-list actors, who were clearly just using me to advance their careers.

But when someone more important and influential came along, in the shape of Prince Harry, I was instantly dumped like a sack of spuds (that’s what we call potatoes in the UK).

Now, on a certain level, I grudgingly admire the work.

And frankly, who am I, a former tabloid newspaper editor, to take a dim view of such ruthless antics?

But on another level, the whole experience left me feeling suspicious and cynical about Ms Markle."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...social-climbing-actress-used-getting-way.html


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> yes.  he is disgusting.  If he has any sense at all he would realize that this is only going to make things worse.  So then, what is his motive?  just getting time on TV?


I wonder if he has contacted them privately in that matter. If he had done it and they didn't want him in their child's life, it might be better to leave it. I guess this little one is not his only grandchild. It seems that Meghan and his father are kind of estranged from each other and turning to the media for help won't make it any better IMO. Most likely he has fallen in love with the media attention, too. 


Jayne1 said:


> Initially I thought that as well, but now I wonder, if after years and years of trying, it will start to make Meghan look cold.
> 
> Anyone else read the Piers Morgan article about Meghan? He corresponded with her before she met Harry while she was just an actress.  I found it interesting how she can drop people when she moves on to better.
> 
> I'll post it and would like sincere comments without any hater remarks.


I've read the Piers Morgan article. I understand that he feels ghosted/neglected, especially since the former online "friend" could have given him tons of gossip and insight, what him being tv journalist with a tabloid past, could have very useful,  but the tone of the whole article reminds me of a young girl whose bestie just met her first serious boyfriend and focuses her attention mostly on the bf from now on, instead of the other girl. It might not have been perfectly correct from Meghan how she behaved, but IMO most of the women, who met a new partner whom you fall in love with (quickly), would rather be loyal to the bf, not the old friend who wasn't such an old and close friend at all, while the new bf is so hot and promising. I might be a horrible person but I probably would have chosen Harry over Piers.


----------



## Jayne1

There's more if you want to finish the article, but it's not about his own personal experience.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...social-climbing-actress-used-getting-way.html


----------



## bag-princess

Jayne1 said:


> I wasn't thinking 'cold' now,* I was thinking if her father continues to beg for years on end, it will look cold.  *At some point.




i don't think so because in between his begging he always says something that shows his true intentions and how he is not the sweet little old man that he wants people to believe he is.  

Piers sounds like some little girl in jr high!  he said it himself - he is a "a former tabloid newspaper editor" and i am sure that causes some pause because even though she called him "friend" she didn't really know him well.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

That dress is awful.


----------



## redney

This piece reads as bitter and lashing out that he does not have a direct link to Royal Family goings on. Wonder if he'd be this upset had Meghan not remained in contact with him yet remained a B/C list cable TV show actress. Methinks not.

As a former tabloid editor, he knows the tricks of the trade to sell newspapers and clicks to generate money. Perhaps she realized once she and Harry started she wasn't interested in their chats, and once she and H were in deep she realized (or someone realized for her) he couldn't be trusted as a confidante. Which he likely could not.

I agree he sounds like a teenager whose BFF ditched her for a new boyfriend. Get over it, Piers.


----------



## Flatsy

Piers isn't pretending to be hurt over it though.  He just said it was rude for her to cultivate a friendship with him when it suited her, and then to drop him without a word when it didn't.  He is correct.  That is pretty universally considered rude behavior.  It's not as if they only had an online banter; they actually went out and had a friendly dinner together.  

The truth is, she was a social climber.  (Her apologists are now euphemizing it as "networking").  She cast too wide a net when she chose to befriend a toad like Piers Morgan, and the price is *one* article in The Daily Mail in which she got called out for it.  Big deal.

Considering the heaps of bad press she's gotten over the past month, at least some of which appears to be true (the Will/Kate Christmas drama), it's a drop in the bucket.


----------



## bisousx

Flatsy said:


> Piers isn't pretending to be hurt over it though.  He just said it was rude for her to cultivate a friendship with him when it suited her, and then to drop him without a word when it didn't.  He is correct.  That is pretty universally considered rude behavior.  It's not as if they only had an online banter; they actually went out and had a friendly dinner together.
> 
> The truth is, she was a social climber.  (Her apologists are now euphemizing it as "networking").  She cast too wide a net when she chose to befriend a toad like Piers Morgan, and the price is *one* article in The Daily Mail in which she got called out for it.  Big deal.
> 
> Considering the heaps of bad press she's gotten over the past month, at least some of which appears to be true (the Will/Kate Christmas drama), it's a drop in the bucket.



I tend to agree, even if I like Meghan and think she’s beautiful. Not a fan of people who step on others to get to where they want and forget their friends.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The truth is it may not have even been Meghan's decision to stop talking to Piers.  Do you really think the BRF want anyone in The Firm chatting to journalists or being chummy, especially with someone of the likes of Piers Morgan?  Let alone how both Harry and William think of the press and it's role in the last days of their mother?

There's no evidence at all of her stepping over other people to get what they want etc.  I see a determined woman who is used to having to work hard to get where she has in her career. She's no babe in the woods, she had a life before meeting Harry and an established work-ethic.

Honestly, all these dog-whistling DailyMail and The Sun articles reek of courtiers trying to put her in her place.  Noteworthy that all this really kicked up a gear after the uber-successful tour of Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands. Perphaps noses are out of joint that the 6th in line and his wife were so popular.

While Meghan needs to adjust to life in the Royal Family, this continued harassment of her by the press is ridiculous.

Her father is a narcissist.  No true father who really loved his daughter would say those things in the press he has said. He's a nasty man and would use any contact with her to sell to the press IMO.


----------



## cafecreme15

bisousx said:


> I tend to agree, even if I like Meghan and think she’s beautiful. Not a fan of people who step on others to get to where they want and forget their friends.


I don't blame her for dumping Piers because he is no doubt just as willing to use people as he he suggests Meghan is, but she has allegedly done the same thing to many of the Suits cast members.


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> There's no evidence at all of her stepping over other people to get what they want etc.  I see a determined woman who is used to having to work hard to get where she has in her career. She's no babe in the woods, she had a life before meeting Harry and an established work-ethic.


No evidence?  Meghan actually has a very long list of broken relationships and people she's dropped as she achieved greater heights.  

There's the ex-best friend of over two decades who had a falling out over how Meghan treated her ex-husband when she divorced him.  I know all of Meghan's fans discount everything she said simply because she said it publicly, but I consider it at the very least a red flag that someone Meghan was genuinely close to for so long is now so embittered towards her.

There's Meghan's ex-agent, who Meghan hasn't spoken to since letting her go (for obvious reasons) a week before announcing her engagement.  The ex-agent has a lot of good things to say about Meghan, but also paints a portrait of her that is very similar to what's been written in the press in the past month about how she deals with people.

I don't blame Meghan for cutting off her terrible family, but they certainly aren't the only ones she's cut off.  And it's hard to believe that she's always been the innocent victim in every broken relationship.  She is the common denominator in all of those relationships.  There's definitely smoke, not necessarily a lot of fire.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not a "fan" of hers as such. Am I interested? Sure. Certainly not stanning for her though. Just wading through the mountains of absolute crap in the bottom-feeding press at the moment.

For example, can you imagine the uproar if Meghan maintained her relationship (sounds like just an acquaintence to me and he's trying to spin it to something more) with Piers Morgan? What exactly _do _people expect her to do in that scenario?

Truth is she can't win.


----------



## Flatsy

People politely ease acquaintances and work friends out of their lives all the time without completely ghosting them.  It can be done.  You pull the relationship back to lighthearted DM's, stop initiating the contact, don't discuss anything of personal substance, take longer to respond, etc.  

Ghosting someone is going to earn you an enemy.  It's true for all of us.

I really doubt Prince Harry, after one date, demanded that Meghan never make any contact with a particular person/people again.  And if he did and Meghan followed orders, that doesn't say much for either one of them.


----------



## princess101804

Guess I'm in the minority but I think it's pretty sad the way she's treating her dad. He raised her, paid for her high school and college education, and helped her get her foot in the door in Hollywood. Based on letters the dad showed they were still in contact and had a loving relationship as late as 2015/early 2016. His outbursts and talking to the media, while completely inappropriate clearly come from a feeling of hurt and anger. 

Something pretty drastic must have happened for her to completely shun him like this or now she's abandoning all of her family for Harry. Pretty strange that only her mom went to the wedding, not even a single cousin or aunt.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Piers’ true colours have really been laid publically bare since she allegedly “ghosted” him. I’m not sure I would blame someone who had an Instagram friendship with him to back away quietly from that hot mess. Even if they weren’t in love with a member of the BRF.

As for her dad, he tried to profit off her. He has spilled personal details to the press.  Even after that happened he was still included. I don’t see how many times she needs to bang her head against


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Pier's true colors have been known for several years.  He's a complete piece of ****.  I think it's a worse offense on Meghan's part that she ever struck up a friendship with him and told him she was a fan, than the fact that she later dropped him.  

Pure social climbing to attach herself to that turd to begin with.  And by choosing to diss a known turd who also happens to be a loudmouthed member of the media, it was to be expected he wouldn't sing her praises afterward.  She brought this one on herself.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

It's easy to judge a social climber but I think she had her reasons and we can never really know what they are, and without knowing what they are it's pretty impossible to pass judgment. I'd say at the very least the entertainment industry is brutal and unforgiving, and when she was getting her start in the early 2000s especially so.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The truth is it may not have even been Meghan's decision to stop talking to Piers.  Do you really think the BRF want anyone in The Firm chatting to journalists or being chummy, especially with someone of the likes of Piers Morgan?  Let alone how both Harry and William think of the press and it's role in the last days of their mother?


One dinner meeting Harry and the BRF have a say over who she texts?


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> Piers’ true colours have really been laid publically bare since she allegedly “ghosted” him. I’m not sure I would blame someone who had an Instagram friendship with him to back away quietly from that hot mess. Even if they weren’t in love with a member of the BRF.


It wasn't an Instagram friendship.  The texted back and forth with thoughts on life and careers and that doesn't happen under an Insta caption.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

princess101804 said:


> Guess I'm in the minority but I think it's pretty sad the way she's treating her dad. He raised her, paid for her high school and college education, and helped her get her foot in the door in Hollywood. Based on letters the dad showed they were still in contact and had a loving relationship as late as 2015/early 2016. His outbursts and talking to the media, while completely inappropriate clearly come from a feeling of hurt and anger.
> 
> Something pretty drastic must have happened for her to completely shun him like this or now she's abandoning all of her family for Harry. Pretty strange that only her mom went to the wedding, not even a single cousin or aunt.


Totally agree. You can see from Meghan's glaring lack of friendships, all the people who quit, and her family issues that she has some problem getting on with others. She really doesn't have anyone speaking well about her or coming to her defense in any way. She doesn't seem to treat the mother much better than the father imo. Her mother showed up for the wedding and only one other time, right? According to reports her mom isn't even coming to Christmas over there. She doesn't seem close to either parent. Maybe once she has the baby her outlook will change and more love will fill her heart.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Jayne1 said:


> One dinner meeting Harry and the BRF have a say over who she texts?


Are you forgetting this is the BRF?  She had to give up her social media so yes I'd say texting a "journalist" like Piers Morgan is probably frowned upon to say the least.

Nevermind that in 2009 Harry asked a Britain's Got Talent judge "is Piers Morgan really a prat?"

Piers also joked about phone hacking - he was good friends with Rebekah Brooks, editor of The News of the World - who used phone hacking to get information about members of the Royal Family. They found out information between Harry and Chelsy Davey.  Doubtful the BRF wants anyone involved with him.  He's also good friends with Andy Coulson who was convicted in the conspiracy to hack phones - including that of celebs and the BRF.

Piers openly admitted to hearing stolen messages from Paul McCartney's voicemail from his ex-wife.

But sure, the BRF would be happy to have it's members chatting and texting him.


----------



## Flatsy

Valid points as to why the BRF might not like a member of the family being too close to Piers Morgan.  Not valid points as as to why Harry would,* on their first date,* order Meghan to cut off all contact with any of her friends or acquaintances, regardless of who they were.  Or why Meghan,* on their first date,* would agree to conduct her friendships according to the preferences of the BRF.

If anybody would seriously argue that Meghan ghosted a friend upon the orders of Harry after knowing him for literally hours, that would make her the most craven social climber ever.  It would also mean her cultivated image of being a strong, independent woman would be totally phony, and instead she would be a woman willing to do anything she was told in order to land a rich, famous prince.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not arguing that she's made some missteps - only her "friendship" with Piers Morgan.


----------



## doni

Not to defend her father, who’s lost it. But it is simply not true that she was estranged from him before her wedding. On the contrary, judging by her own Instagram account, they seemed to have been quite close. She posted pictures with him and wrote adoringly about him as a dad. There is nothing to suggest that he was not a present and doting father and  I understand that she also lived with him at least for some time when her parents separated, not the most usual. Whatever, it is very sad and must be even more so with the arrival of a new baby.


----------



## DeMonica

Flatsy said:


> Valid points as to why the BRF might not like a member of the family being too close to Piers Morgan.  Not valid points as as to why Harry would,* on their first date,* order Meghan to cut off all contact with any of her friends or acquaintances, regardless of who they were.  Or why Meghan,* on their first date,* would agree to conduct her friendships according to the preferences of the BRF.
> 
> If anybody would seriously argue that Meghan ghosted a friend upon the orders of Harry after knowing him for literally hours, that would make her the most craven social climber ever.  It would also mean her cultivated image of being a strong, independent woman would be totally phony, and instead she would be a woman willing to do anything she was told in order to land a rich, famous prince.


It was *her first meeting with Morgan* in person, too, so technically she didn't know him too well, either. I don't know if their online talks were deep and very personal, but I have a feeling from the article that it wasn't. Meghan didn't lose a BFF in Piers, but a casual online friend who happens to be professionally nosey, live out of gossip, known for dubious moral standards - a guy who potentially mean more harm than benefit on the long run. Maybe their correspondence wouldn't have gone on with or without Harry, who is IMO much more than a money bag prince, but a handsome and interesting young man, not a Harvey Weinstein. People sometimes outgrow friends naturally - but very few goes to fetch simpathy in the press.  I'm not saying, of course, that Meghan is a saint and I'm sure she was/is very determined to do very well, but she's facing much more criticism as Dutchess of Sussex than she would if she remained an actress. I'd bet good money on  that P. Morgan, whom I always considered a phony, talentless p..k, even in his Britain's Got Talent days, wouldn't have even noticed losing this actress "friend" if she hadn't become invoved with Prince Harry.


----------



## Kat Madridista

princess101804 said:


> Guess I'm in the minority but I think it's pretty sad the way she's treating her dad. He raised her, paid for her high school and college education, and helped her get her foot in the door in Hollywood. Based on letters the dad showed they were still in contact and had a loving relationship as late as 2015/early 2016. His outbursts and talking to the media, while completely inappropriate clearly come from a feeling of hurt and anger.
> 
> Something pretty drastic must have happened for her to completely shun him like this or now she's abandoning all of her family for Harry. Pretty strange that only her mom went to the wedding, not even a single cousin or aunt.





ccbaggirl89 said:


> Totally agree. You can see from Meghan's glaring lack of friendships, all the people who quit, and her family issues that she has some problem getting on with others. She really doesn't have anyone speaking well about her or coming to her defense in any way. She doesn't seem to treat the mother much better than the father imo. Her mother showed up for the wedding and only one other time, right? According to reports her mom isn't even coming to Christmas over there. She doesn't seem close to either parent. Maybe once she has the baby her outlook will change and more love will fill her heart.



Yes, Meghan's dad "raised her, paid for her high school and college education, and helped her get her foot in the door in Hollywood". But he is her FATHER. He is supposed to raise his kids and pay for the education of his children. Anything less is neglect of his parental duties and the fact that he did all that doesn't negate the fact that he has betrayed Meghan's trust multiple times in the last year. Let's not forget that he agreed to stage paparazzi photos right before the wedding, talked to the press against his daughter's wishes _multiple times_, divulged details of private conversations with Meghan and Harry, AND made money off said press appearances. He has collaborated at least once with his horrid daughter Samantha in these schemes, there were even reports that they were ready to record conversations with Meghan in case she called on Father's Day to greet Thomas.

It's mind-bloggling to me that somehow people think Meghan is at fault here. She, by all accounts, has reached out to her father around the time of the wedding mess to try and sort things out. But her father has shown that there's no talking sense to him. Her father has previously promised to stop talking to the press, but look at where we are now, talking about him because he went on Piers Morgan's show, of all people. If she talks to him she has absolutely no assurances that he will behave appropriately moving forward, that he won't talk to the press anymore, she can't even know for sure that he won't be recording her. So, what do people expect Meghan to do here?

Regardless of her supposed "pattern" of cutting people out of her life, she is well within her rights to completely cut off her Markle relatives after their behavior. Her nephew even named a cannabis strain after her, and yet people wonder why she didn't invite them to the wedding? Really?!?!

Also bonkers? People wondering at Meghan ending her "friendship" with Piers Morgan. He's demonstrated time and time again that he is a bitter, sexist, self-absorbed, out-of-touch, insert-your-preferred-insult-noun-here. Why would ANYONE want to be friends with him?


----------



## bag-princess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Totally agree. You can see from Meghan's glaring lack of friendships, all the people who quit, and her family issues that she has some problem getting on with others. She really doesn't have anyone speaking well about her or coming to her defense in any way. She doesn't seem to treat the mother much better than the father imo. Her mother showed up for the wedding and only one other time, right? *According to reports her mom isn't even coming to Christmas over there. She doesn't seem close to either parent.* Maybe once she has the baby her outlook will change and more love will fill her heart.




she seems very very close to her mom!  and i agree with other people - dora seems to like her life as it is and doesn't feel the need to be seen among the royal family unlike her pathetic father!  i can't imagine what spending any amount of time with them must be like with all the rules and everything!  it must be exhausting to someone who is not used to it.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Great article by CNN

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2018/12/18/uk/meghan-markle-duchess-of-sussex-media-coverage-gbr-intl/


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> I was watching Wendy Williams the other day and they did a segment on Meghan..apparently people had a problem with Meghan holding her stomach at the British Fashion Awards. British media as well are maligning her for holding it too much. Well, I hope they had the same energy for Kate --



sometimes it seems like everything Meghan does is simply wrong and Kate is all cute


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Queen Elizabeth II's Christmas Luncheon at Buckingham Palace


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gazoo

Regarding that article by Piers, I don't think the story would have ever been different between Piers and any woman that ended up marrying into the BRF. He's British, he shouldn't be shocked or outraged. I'm American, and I wouldn't have expected anyone that was dealing with a Royal to keep up any form of relationship with me, were I a media person. The entire thing makes Piers look stupid and whiny, but hey, gotta get the clicks somehow. Personally, I expected more from a British man. Where's the stiff upper lip and stoicism they're all famous for? His whininess is really something else.

And her father running to Piers, when Piers has been trashing Meghan all over the place, is gross. If Thomas really wanted to get his point across, couldn't he have chosen someone that HASN'T trashed his "beloved Bean?" Thomas doesn't give a crap about Meghan or Harry; he's bent on continuing to trash her and her new family without concern for the ramifications. I hope Harry and Meghan stand firm and keep him away. If they capitulate I'd be disappointed. Never reward bad behavior. And leave the poor Queen out of it, FFS. So embarrassing! As an American, I'm horrified at this freak show that is playing out, and feel nothing but sympathy for Meghan and Harry. Kudos to her for still keeping up her duties/appearances with a smile on her face. This should be the happiest time of their lives, and her own father is leading the haters in providing click bait to trash her.

I think people that don't like Meghan will use her behavior towards her father to slam her. Just like they will use other things to slam her, be it belly cupping too enthusiastically, her hair style, her holding her husband's hand too much, working too early each day, not wearing hose, wearing the wrong color hose, showing shoulders, always finding the camera and looking at it, her feminism, her lack of feminism in marrying into the BRF and giving up her job.. These are just some of the things I've heard about in articles about her.

Kate did not have it easy either, nor did her family. They were regularly criticized for everything from having too much money, to being social climbers, Kate not working, Kate going to the same school as the Princes, etc. People gleefully try to destroy anyone that deals with the BRF. Meghan is no different, she's just the freshest news in the tired cycle.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Totally agree. You can see from Meghan's glaring lack of friendships, all the people who quit, and her family issues that she has some problem getting on with others. She really doesn't have anyone speaking well about her or coming to her defense in any way. She doesn't seem to treat the mother much better than the father imo. Her mother showed up for the wedding and only one other time, right? According to reports her mom isn't even coming to Christmas over there. She doesn't seem close to either parent. Maybe once she has the baby her outlook will change and more love will fill her heart.


She doesn't have a glaring lack of friends.  She's got some very close friends who are also in the public eye. Among them Serena Williams, Jessica Mulroney, and Priyanka Chopra.  Each of them will acknowledge their friendship, but not talk in great depth.  I don't think this is because they are not really friends, and Meghan can't keep friends. I think it's because they respect her privacy and their own, and don't blab about the personal details of their lives to inquiring minds to garner more attention. It seems pretty clear to me - when people blab about Meghan's private life and try to use their relationship for their own benefit, she cuts them off. When they respect her privacy and she theirs, they remain close. Seems pretty normal to me.


----------



## Kat Madridista

gazoo said:


> Regarding that article by Piers, I don't think the story would have ever been different between Piers and any woman that ended up marrying into the BRF. He's British, he shouldn't be shocked or outraged. I'm American, and I wouldn't have expected anyone that was dealing with a Royal to keep up any form of relationship with me, were I a media person. The entire thing makes Piers look stupid and whiny, but hey, gotta get the clicks somehow. Personally, I expected more from a British man. Where's the stiff upper lip and stoicism they're all famous for? His whininess is really something else.
> 
> And her father running to Piers, when Piers has been trashing Meghan all over the place, is gross. If Thomas really wanted to get his point across, couldn't he have chosen someone that HASN'T trashed his "beloved Bean?" Thomas doesn't give a crap about Meghan or Harry; he's bent on continuing to trash her and her new family without concern for the ramifications. I hope Harry and Meghan stand firm and keep him away. If they capitulate I'd be disappointed. Never reward bad behavior. And leave the poor Queen out of it, FFS. So embarrassing! As an American, I'm horrified at this freak show that is playing out, and feel nothing but sympathy for Meghan and Harry. Kudos to her for still keeping up her duties/appearances with a smile on her face. This should be the happiest time of their lives, and her own father is leading the haters in providing click bait to trash her.



Piers is just bitter that a woman who used to be "below" him in the celebrity totem pole is now at the very top of it. And honestly, the thought that he can't get over it is hilarious to me. 

And, yes, EXACTLY. If Thomas truly wanted to patch things up with Meghan and Harry, he would not be talking to Piers Morgan, he wouldn't be talking the press and going on TV giving interviews AT ALL, regardless of who's doing the interviewing! Ummm, hello, that is exactly what they asked him not to do in the first place! If he truly wanted to be reconciled with his daughter, he should give her time and space to process and find it in herself to forgive him. But instead, he is manipulating her into doing it, and in the most public of ways. That is NOT the behavior of someone who really wants to reestablish a meaningful, trusting relationship with their child. That is borderline abusive behavior. And Meghan is right not to tolerate that behavior and stay as far away from it as possible, especially with a child on the way.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Jayne1 said:


> It wasn't an Instagram friendship.  The texted back and forth with thoughts on life and careers and that doesn't happen under an Insta caption.



What I mean by “Instagram friendship” is that, they met on IG and, but for one meeting, it was all done via text on whatever platform. And that’s, of course, if you take him at his word. 

It might be she met him and was unimpressed with something she saw or he said during that meeting. It might be that she met Harry, sparks flew and he called Piers a prat. It might be that she got a better idea of Piers world view on life, celebrities and women in general and backed away. 

The fact that she ghosted Piers doesn’t call into question her integrity to me. If she had STAYED friends with him, that probably would.


----------



## Fally420

LibbyRuth said:


> She doesn't have a glaring lack of friends.  She's got some very close friends who are also in the public eye. Among them Serena Williams, Jessica Mulroney, and Priyanka Chopra.  Each of them will acknowledge their friendship, but not talk in great depth.  I don't think this is because they are not really friends, and Meghan can't keep friends. I think it's because they respect her privacy and their own, and don't blab about the personal details of their lives to inquiring minds to garner more attention. It seems pretty clear to me - when people blab about Meghan's private life and try to use their relationship for their own benefit, she cuts them off. When they respect her privacy and she theirs, they remain close. Seems pretty normal to me.



You mentioned just celebrity "friends". Seems odd to me that she seems to not have any childhood or school friends or some people who got to know her before she aired on TV.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Fally420 said:


> You mentioned just celebrity "friends". Seems odd to me that she seems to not have any childhood or school friends or some people who got to know her before she aired on TV.


I'd put my money on her having such friends. I simply don't know who they are because they are not famous. At their wedding, it was easy to say "Oh, there's Serena, there's Jessica'.  If "Corrie" who Meghan played Barbies with in first grade, and took dance classes with all through high school was there, I had no way of knowing.


----------



## Jayne1

LibbyRuth said:


> She doesn't have a glaring lack of friends.  She's got some very close friends who are also in the public eye. Among them Serena Williams, Jessica Mulroney, and Priyanka Chopra.  Each of them will acknowledge their friendship, but not talk in great depth.  I don't think this is because they are not really friends, and Meghan can't keep friends. I think it's because they respect her privacy and their own, and don't blab about the personal details of their lives to inquiring minds to garner more attention. It seems pretty clear to me - when people blab about Meghan's private life and try to use their relationship for their own benefit, she cuts them off. When they respect her privacy and she theirs, they remain close. Seems pretty normal to me.


Meghan lived in Toronto for years and it was often commented on that she only had famous friends. So now that you mentioned the names, I think they may have been right.

Whatever, look where she is.  All this worked and they seem so happy.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Not to defend her father, who’s lost it. But it is simply not true that she was estranged from him before her wedding. On the contrary, judging by her own Instagram account, they seemed to have been quite close. She posted pictures with him and wrote adoringly about him as a dad. There is nothing to suggest that he was not a present and doting father and  I understand that she also lived with him at least for some time when her parents separated, not the most usual. Whatever, it is very sad and must be even more so with the arrival of a new baby.


So why would she cut him off then?


----------



## Morgan R

gazoo said:


> Regarding that article by Piers, I don't think the story would have ever been different between Piers and any woman that ended up marrying into the BRF. He's British, he shouldn't be shocked or outraged. I'm American, and I wouldn't have expected anyone that was dealing with a Royal to keep up any form of relationship with me, were I a media person. The entire thing makes Piers look stupid and whiny, but hey, gotta get the clicks somehow. Personally, I expected more from a British man. Where's the stiff upper lip and stoicism they're all famous for? His whininess is really something else.
> 
> And her father running to Piers, when Piers has been trashing Meghan all over the place, is gross. If Thomas really wanted to get his point across, couldn't he have chosen someone that HASN'T trashed his "beloved Bean?" Thomas doesn't give a crap about Meghan or Harry; he's bent on continuing to trash her and her new family without concern for the ramifications. I hope Harry and Meghan stand firm and keep him away. If they capitulate I'd be disappointed. Never reward bad behavior. And leave the poor Queen out of it, FFS. So embarrassing! As an American, I'm horrified at this freak show that is playing out, and feel nothing but sympathy for Meghan and Harry. Kudos to her for still keeping up her duties/appearances with a smile on her face. This should be the happiest time of their lives, and her own father is leading the haters in providing click bait to trash her.
> 
> I think people that don't like Meghan will use her behavior towards her father to slam her. Just like they will use other things to slam her, be it belly cupping too enthusiastically, her hair style, her holding her husband's hand too much, working too early each day, not wearing hose, wearing the wrong color hose, showing shoulders, always finding the camera and looking at it, her feminism, her lack of feminism in marrying into the BRF and giving up her job.. These are just some of the things I've heard about in articles about her.
> 
> Kate did not have it easy either, nor did her family. They were regularly criticized for everything from having too much money, to being social climbers, Kate not working, Kate going to the same school as the Princes, etc. People gleefully try to destroy anyone that deals with the BRF. Meghan is no different, she's just the freshest news in the tired cycle.



Totally agree and to add to this it is always interesting to me that that some want to give the British Tabloids credibility. The British Tabloids will say a "palace source" as a way to try to give their stories credibility (which is literally the equivalent to tabloid magazines/websites citing a "source close to *insert name*", a "family friend", "insiders"). And if the stories aren't something overtly extreme the royals don't release statements denying info nor do they defend themselves they just ignore the stories and go on about their engagements. The last time I believe a royal released a statement defending themselves or someone was Harry.  Back in November 2016 he released that statement that not only confirmed his relationship with Meghan but it also defended her and addressed that she had been subject to defamatory stories, stories that were sexist, and stories that had racial undertones.

If you are a longtime royal watcher of the British Royal Family (as well as come across old articles and documentaries about them) you know the British Tabloids have never been all that kind to the people that have married into the British Royal Family.  Before Kate and Meghan the British Tabloids most notably attacked Diana but also Camilla and Sophie (Prince Edward's wife). Fergie has always been a bit overzealous/not private with her behavior so she was the easiest target for them when it came to creating stories. I mean in recent times as you mentioned in your last paragraph the British tabloids attacked Kate and now those attacks have mostly moved onto them attacking Meghan. Before Meghan entered the family the British Tabloids gave Kate a somewhat similar narrative they have given Meghan. They made Kate out to be the "mean girl" to Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie, and some of Harry's past girlfriends. They also called Kate a "spoiled rich girl", "socialite", "social climber", and more because the only long-term job she had prior to marrying William was at her family's company. The British Tabloids famously coined Kate both "Waity Katie" (during the years before William proposed and they got married) and "Duchess Do Little" (since she has continuously done minimal engagements in comparison to both other senior royals and some of the minor royals). They've even tried the same narrative that staff has quit because of Kate when in actuality the royal family in general actually have a large turnover rate of employees because there are so many employees that work for the royals so they are constantly changing.

Regarding Meghan's father he is far from some innocent victim he tries to pretend he is. He says he wants to talk to his daughter but goes to the various British tabloids that have blatantly attacked his daughter but instead of turning the tables on those outlets and defending his daughter he just gives them info about Meghan some of which is pictures and notes. Her father tries to paint this picture that he is someone who just wants to see his daughter and acts like he wasn't offered assistance/protection by the royals. Meghan's parents were both offered protection once Meghan became engaged to Harry. Thomas has mentioned before he had denied the protection meanwhile Doria took the protection. Doria hasn't been cut off by Meghan she just isn't seen often because she has the protection that was offered to her (we will see her more closer to Meghan's due date). Doria has only been at 3 events with Harry and Meghan those were at the Invictus Games Closing Ceremony 2017, the wedding, and the 'Together' cookbook luncheon but Harry and Meghan mentioned in their engagement interview Doria had often spent time with them but the public hasn't gotten to see that together aside from 3 events (though during the time when Harry and Meghan were dating when the paparazzi didn't catch Harry with Meghan often they caught Meghan by herself or with Doria). When Meghan's pregnancy was announced the full statement  included this quote "Ms Doria Ragland is very happy about the lovely news and she looks forward to welcoming her first grandchild.". If Thomas would have avoided the tabloids like Doria has he wouldn't have to wonder why Meghan isn't contacting him he has continuously shown he can't be trusted.


----------



## Morgan R

Fally420 said:


> You mentioned just celebrity "friends". Seems odd to me that she seems to not have any childhood or school friends or some people who got to know her before she aired on TV.





LibbyRuth said:


> I'd put my money on her having such friends. I simply don't know who they are because they are not famous. At their wedding, it was easy to say "Oh, there's Serena, there's Jessica'.  If "Corrie" who Meghan played Barbies with in first grade, and took dance classes with all through high school was there, I had no way of knowing.



She does have those type of friends. Two examples are Benita Litt and Lindsay Roth. Benita Litt has been a friend since Meghan's childhood. Benita was sitting beside Doria at the wedding. Benita's daughters Remi and Rylan Litt were two of Meghan's bridesmaids at the wedding earlier this year. Lindsay Roth (who later became an author and producer) is a friend Meghan met while she attended Northwestern, they remained friends all these years, and she was also in attendance at the wedding (Lindsay has given an interview talking about Meghan before: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-best-friend-lindsay-roth-exclusive-interview/).


----------



## Tivo

I do think her dad genuinely wants to patch things up. That’s his daughter. This is new to him and he’s not sure how to go about connecting. Hopefully they will be able to meet in secret when she comes back to the US. Despite what we all think they are still family and she’s probably gutted by the ongoing tension. 

Yes, dad sucks. But he’s still dad. And hopefully she’ll be able to mend their relationship and move on.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> So why would she cut him off then?


Likely when he started to do things to draw attention and money and fame to himself. Wouldn't you be like WTF if you were her?


----------



## gazoo

Dad needs to sit down and shut up. The damage he and his side of the family have wrecked will not heal overnight. His best course of action, IMO, is to shut his trap and find some dignity. Maybe after a few years, things can warm up again. I can't think of anything he can do to fix this RIGHT NOW. There is far too much damage, too many flippant remarks and leaks that have come out of his mouth. Yes, he's still "Dad", but parents can often be our worse abusers.

He is far too indiscrete to trust. End of. His leaking Harry's feelings about Brexit and ***** alone, would have given the Palace a heart attack. He needs to be what he claims to be, a hermit, and maybe someday he will meet his newest grandchild. 

This is not Meghan or Harry's fault. Thomas is the architect of his present situation. He never reigned Samantha in, he profited from Meghan, continues to work with the tabloids, and has thrown Harry under the bus repeatedly, from leaking Harry's comments (Brexit and *****) to bringing up Harry's own indiscretions of years past. It's sick, and I find it surprising that people still think he deserves empathy and slack simply because he is a biologically linked parent that fulfilled his paternal duties of providing an education for her when she was growing up.


----------



## redney

gazoo said:


> Dad needs to sit down and shut up. The damage he and his side of the family have wrecked will not heal overnight. His best course of action, IMO, is to shut his trap and find some dignity. Maybe after a few years, things can warm up again. I can't think of anything he can do to fix this RIGHT NOW. There is far too much damage, too many flippant remarks and leaks that have come out of his mouth. Yes, he's still "Dad", but parents can often be our worse abusers.
> 
> He is far too indiscrete to trust. End of. His leaking Harry's feelings about Brexit and ***** alone, would have given the Palace a heart attack. He needs to be what he claims to be, a hermit, and maybe someday he will meet his newest grandchild.
> 
> This is not Meghan or Harry's fault. Thomas is the architect of his present situation. He never reigned Samantha in, he profited from Meghan, continues to work with the tabloids, and has thrown Harry under the bus repeatedly, from leaking Harry's comments (Brexit and *****) to bringing up Harry's own indiscretions of years past. It's sick, and I find it surprising that people still think he deserves empathy and slack simply because he is a biologically linked parent that fulfilled his paternal duties of providing an education for her when she was growing up.


Spot on post. Yes to all


----------



## redney

Check this out. An article from the Daily Mail (!!) from May, right after Harry's and Meghan's wedding, detailing Meghan's friends who attended the wedding, including her friends' children who were in the wedding party. So, depending on what's going to sell more papers/generate more clicks, the DM reports on Meghan's good friends or that she has none.  Good job, DM!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-closest-girlfriends-support-wedding-day.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

gazoo said:


> Dad needs to sit down and shut up. The damage he and his side of the family have wrecked will not heal overnight. His best course of action, IMO, is to shut his trap and find some dignity. Maybe after a few years, things can warm up again. I can't think of anything he can do to fix this RIGHT NOW. There is far too much damage, too many flippant remarks and leaks that have come out of his mouth. Yes, he's still "Dad", but parents can often be our worse abusers.
> 
> He is far too indiscrete to trust. End of. His leaking Harry's feelings about Brexit and ***** alone, would have given the Palace a heart attack. He needs to be what he claims to be, a hermit, and maybe someday he will meet his newest grandchild.
> 
> This is not Meghan or Harry's fault. Thomas is the architect of his present situation. He never reigned Samantha in, he profited from Meghan, continues to work with the tabloids, and has thrown Harry under the bus repeatedly, from leaking Harry's comments (Brexit and *****) to bringing up Harry's own indiscretions of years past. It's sick, and I find it surprising that people still think he deserves empathy and slack simply because he is a biologically linked parent that fulfilled his paternal duties of providing an education for her when she was growing up.



I can’t really argue with any any of this.
I just feel bad for her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Dad is a toxic narcissist who will never stop trying to manipulate her.  When he was at his peak selling stories every other week, forum members with narcissistic parents weighed in with how textbook his behaviour was - and how destructive.

Sometimes cutting these people off is the only way to protect yourself.


----------



## Jayne1

redney said:


> Check this out. An article from the Daily Mail (!!) from May, right after Harry's and Meghan's wedding, detailing Meghan's friends who attended the wedding, including her friends' children who were in the wedding party. So, depending on what's going to sell more papers/generate more clicks, the DM reports on Meghan's good friends or that she has none.  Good job, DM!
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-closest-girlfriends-support-wedding-day.html


Jessica Mulroney is "one of her oldest friends" from a few years ago when they met when Meghan moved to Toronto.

Jessica is a celebrity TV stylist (who absolutely loves the limelight) and married to the son of a former prime minister who happens to be a very well known TV talking head/celebrity reporter in Canada.

So, I would say that Jessica firmly belongs in the celebrity group of recent friends.  lol


----------



## bag-princess

LibbyRuth said:


> *She doesn't have a glaring lack of friends.* *She's got some very close friends who are also in the public eye. Among them Serena Williams, Jessica Mulroney, and Priyanka Chopra.  Each of them will acknowledge their friendship, but not talk in great depth.*  I don't think this is because they are not really friends, and Meghan can't keep friends. I think it's because they respect her privacy and their own, and don't blab about the personal details of their lives to inquiring minds to garner more attention. It seems pretty clear to me - when people blab about Meghan's private life and try to use their relationship for their own benefit, she cuts them off. When they respect her privacy and she theirs, they remain close. Seems pretty normal to me.




yeah that "glaring" lack of friends is just too much! 



Fally420 said:


> You mentioned just celebrity "friends". Seems odd to me that *she seems to not have any childhood or school friends* or some people who got to know her before she aired on TV.



we don't know that at all! 



redney said:


> Check this out. An article from the Daily Mail (!!) from May, right after Harry's and Meghan's wedding,* detailing Meghan's friends who attended the wedding, including her friends' children who were in the wedding party.* So, depending on what's going to sell more papers/generate more clicks, the DM reports on Meghan's good friends or that she has none.  Good job, DM!
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-closest-girlfriends-support-wedding-day.html




well there you go!!   of course she must have some but unlike her toxic family - they ain't running to the tabloids to try and get their 15 minutes!!


----------



## bag-princess

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Dad is a toxic narcissist who will never stop trying to manipulate her.  When he was at his peak selling stories every other week, forum members with narcissistic parents weighed in with how textbook his behaviour was - and how destructive.
> 
> *Sometimes cutting these people off is the only way to protect yourself*.




and people know this is the truth!!! but they are going to keep trying to make her into a mean girl.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Likely when he started to do things to draw attention and money and fame to himself. Wouldn't you be like WTF if you were her?





redney said:


> Likely when he started to do things to draw attention and money and fame to himself. Wouldn't you be like WTF if you were her?


yes.....she is one of the highest profile women in the western world and she has this low life dad embarrassing her


----------



## DeMonica

Besides, anyone who has ever been pregnant or has a little empathy knows that it's not an easy time for a woman. Neither physically nor emotionally. Some women have it easy, but most of them don't. If your friends and family really love you than they would try to make your life easier and less stressful when you are expecting, not more complicated.


----------



## TMA

A1aGypsy said:


> What I mean by “Instagram friendship” is that, they met on IG and, but for one meeting, it was all done via text on whatever platform. And that’s, of course, if you take him at his word.
> 
> It might be she met him and was unimpressed with something she saw or he said during that meeting. It might be that she met Harry, sparks flew and he called Piers a prat. It might be that she got a better idea of Piers world view on life, celebrities and women in general and backed away.
> 
> The fact that she ghosted Piers doesn’t call into question her integrity to me. If she had STAYED friends with him, that probably would.



As far as Piers is concerned, he’s the very definition of charm, therefore how can any woman get enough of him? I have often wondered if something at that one meeting spooked her. He didn’t contribute to her career. According to him, when someone from Suits was featured on his show, it was Rick Hoffman, disproving that he was of use to her personally. He really is an asswipe and her father getting in bed with him against his daughter in my view is the ultimate betrayal. I think that interview may have been the death knell to any reconciliation.


----------



## TMA

Fally420 said:


> You mentioned just celebrity "friends". Seems odd to me that she seems to not have any childhood or school friends or some people who got to know her before she aired on TV.



She does have such friends and were at the wedding. As they r not celebs, the media didn’t know them. I watched the coverage and media only pointed out immediately recognizable pple. The loss of one childhood friend who goes and sells stories to DM shld not he used to set a narrative about dropping pple. We outgrow friends - some because they moved off and have less in common with us and some because we moved ahead in life and they had another path. I “dropped” a childhood friend because she set a course for herself that I could not agree or partake in. So does that make me bad? I think not. Be gratefully if u have cradle to grave friendships - a lot of us don’t.


----------



## krissa

TMA said:


> She does have such friends and were at the wedding. As they r not celebs, the media didn’t know them. I watched the coverage and media only pointed out immediately recognizable pple. The loss of one childhood friend who goes and sells stories to DM shld not he used to set a narrative about dropping pple. We outgrow friends - some because they moved off and have less in common with us and some because we moved ahead in life and they had another path. I “dropped” a childhood friend because she set a course for herself that I could not agree or partake in. So does that make me bad? I think not. Be gratefully if u have cradle to grave friendships - a lot of us don’t.



I think some of the children in her bridal party were from a childhood friendship. Benita Litt 

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...markle-royal-wedding-friend-gift-benita-litt/


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> Jessica Mulroney is "one of her oldest friends" from a few years ago when they met when Meghan moved to Toronto.
> 
> Jessica is a celebrity TV stylist (who absolutely loves the limelight) and married to the son of a former prime minister who happens to be a very well known TV talking head/celebrity reporter in Canada.
> 
> So, I would say that Jessica firmly belongs in the celebrity group of recent friends.  lol


Meh, Meghan and Jessica were reported to have become friends when Meghan moved to Toronto to begin filming Suits - 2010 for its 2011 debut including the time when Meghan married her first husband in 2011. That's not an insignificant amount of time. And if she met other people through Jessica whilst in Toronto and as an 'actress' why is that a bad thing?

Meghan is godmother to long term friend Benita Litt's two daughters - both of whom were in the wedding party - and Benita was seated next to Meghan's mother at the ceremony.

Lindsay Roth and Meghan met in a class at Northwestern University. They graduated in 2003. Guess they've remained close through the years since Lindsay chose Meghan to be her maid of honor in her wedding in 2016.

I read somewhere most royal wives have transitioned their time and energy on being part of "the Firm" once married - Diana, Sophia, Kate - which resulted in less 'free' time to maintain those 'past lives" friendships.

Does Kate have lots of friends from university, school, childhood with whom she keeps in regular touch? Serious question.


----------



## Jayne1

redney said:


> Meh, Meghan and Jessica were reported to have become friends when Meghan moved to Toronto to begin filming Suits - 2010 for its 2011 debut including the time when Meghan married her first husband in 2011. That's not an insignificant amount of time. And if she met other people through Jessica whilst in Toronto and as an 'actress' why is that a bad thing?
> 
> Meghan is godmother to long term friend Benita Litt's two daughters - both of whom were in the wedding party - and Benita was seated next to Meghan's mother at the ceremony.
> 
> Lindsay Roth and Meghan met in a class at Northwestern University. They graduated in 2003. Guess they've remained close through the years since Lindsay chose Meghan to be her maid of honor in her wedding in 2016.
> 
> I read somewhere most royal wives have transitioned their time and energy on being part of "the Firm" once married - Diana, Sophia, Kate - which resulted in less 'free' time to maintain those 'past lives" friendships.
> 
> Does Kate have lots of friends from university, school, childhood with whom she keeps in regular touch? Serious question.


I was being sarcastic in regards to the linked article.  That's why I put one of her oldest friends in quotes, because Meghan met that "oldest" friend a few years ago when she moved to Toronto.


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> I was being sarcastic in regards to the linked article.  That's why I put one of her oldest friends in quotes, because Meghan met that "oldest" friend a few years ago when she moved to Toronto.


I see. But certainly that could also be purposeful by the DM to name-drop/glamorize Meghan vis a vis her friends. An old anonymous college buddy isn't as 'exciting' as the daughter in law of the former PM of Canada.


----------



## bag-princess

redney said:


> Meh, Meghan and Jessica were reported to have become friends when Meghan moved to Toronto to begin filming Suits - 2010 for its 2011 debut including the time when Meghan married her first husband in 2011. That's not an insignificant amount of time. And if she met other people through Jessica whilst in Toronto and as an 'actress' why is that a bad thing?
> 
> Meghan is godmother to long term friend Benita Litt's two daughters - both of whom were in the wedding party - and Benita was seated next to Meghan's mother at the ceremony.
> 
> Lindsay Roth and Meghan met in a class at Northwestern University. They graduated in 2003. Guess they've remained close through the years since Lindsay chose Meghan to be her maid of honor in her wedding in 2016.
> 
> I read somewhere most royal wives have transitioned their time and energy on being part of "the Firm" once married - Diana, Sophia, Kate - which resulted in less 'free' time to maintain those 'past lives" friendships.
> 
> *Does Kate have lots of friends from university, school, childhood with whom she keeps in regular touch? Serious question*.




well now..........can't wait to see the replies to this!!!


----------



## Flatsy

Vanity Fair published an in-depth article about Meghan and her family troubles today.  Some interesting quotes:


> _The image Meghan created for herself was free-spirited and earthy—but not entirely consistent with who she really was, according to those who know her. “Meghan’s goal was always becoming a household name,” says an acquaintance in the television world. “She’s insanely smart and poised, but very, very guarded. She’s not a person you can actually be friends with. She’s the type of person who is best friends with her stylist._”





> _Understanding what’s going on behind castle walls is always a game of reading tea leaves, but the posh Brits I spoke with said they’d heard that some stories were correct: Meghan’s staff is annoyed by her waking up at a Californian five A.M. and texting about various initiatives she wants them to pursue, and Meghan is callous toward staff in general. One thought it was “peculiar” that her mother was the only family member at her wedding; another even said she’d heard Meghan was dubbed “Monster Markle” at Kensington Palace. I can’t vouch for any of that, but when papers began reporting that Kate and Meghan had feuded before the wedding, and then Kensington Palace issued a statement denying a feud, I thought about Tina Brown’s comment in The Diana Chronicles, her outstanding biography of the princess: “The palace only bothers to deny something that’s true._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Vanessa Grigoriadis is a good writer. But I take issue with her calling Thomas Markle _"the most important voice in the room"_.  Really?

I do agree with this though:



> aided and abetted by elements that include the British tabloids’ dexterity at fomenting race- and class-based discord, the royal family’s usual resistance to change, and the unbridled loopiness and more than occasional meanness of some Markles (her half-sister has called Meghan “the Duchess of Nonsense”). It has also pointed up an essential difference between our two countries: Brits often can’t escape their families, or even their class, whereas our myth is based on striking out on one’s own.



I also don't like that it's tone is seemingly putting her down for having aspirations of bettering herself. What is wrong with that?

There also seems to be a lot of tussle between Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace courtiers and no agreement on how to move forward regarding Thomas and Samantha.

I do agree however that Meghan has made some missteps and needs to be open to meeting the BRF at least halfway. She can still be a breath of fresh air AND uphold traditions and manners that are important to the BRF.


----------



## Jayne1

Here's more from the Vanity Fair article:

"In Toronto, Meghan became a regular at Soho House, an exclusive club drawing the city’s film, social, and banking set. She began hanging out with an international crowd, including a power stylist—Jessica Mulroney, best known for styling Justin Trudeau’s fabulous wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau—and Bahrain-born Misha Nonoo, at that time married to Alexander Gilkes, the British founder of online auction house Paddle8 and a close friend of Harry’s. “Meghan was socializing with foreign heiresses—upper-crust, smart, ambitious,” says a friend of Nonoo’s. “They have everything and they want everything.” Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information."

Smart, calculating move. Look where it got her and even if she didn't meet a prince, she was moving in upper echelon circles.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...arkle-family-breakdown-thomas-samantha-markle


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Here's more from the Vanity Fair article:
> 
> "In Toronto, Meghan became a regular at Soho House, an exclusive club drawing the city’s film, social, and banking set. She began hanging out with an international crowd, including a power stylist—Jessica Mulroney, best known for styling Justin Trudeau’s fabulous wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau—and Bahrain-born Misha Nonoo, at that time married to Alexander Gilkes, the British founder of online auction house Paddle8 and a close friend of Harry’s. “Meghan was socializing with foreign heiresses—upper-crust, smart, ambitious,” says a friend of Nonoo’s. “They have everything and they want everything.” Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information."
> 
> Smart, calculating move. Look where it got her and even if she didn't meet a prince, she was moving in upper echelon circles.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...arkle-family-breakdown-thomas-samantha-markle


Interesting.......VF writers are usually credible IMO


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Here's more from the Vanity Fair article:
> 
> "In Toronto, Meghan became a regular at Soho House, an exclusive club drawing the city’s film, social, and banking set. She began hanging out with an international crowd, including a power stylist—Jessica Mulroney, best known for styling Justin Trudeau’s fabulous wife, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau—and Bahrain-born Misha Nonoo, at that time married to Alexander Gilkes, the British founder of online auction house Paddle8 and a close friend of Harry’s. “Meghan was socializing with foreign heiresses—upper-crust, smart, ambitious,” says a friend of Nonoo’s. “They have everything and they want everything.” Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information."
> 
> Smart, calculating move. Look where it got her and even if she didn't meet a prince, she was moving in upper echelon circles.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...arkle-family-breakdown-thomas-samantha-markle


Really an excellent article. Thank you for sharing the link.


----------



## Jayne1

One last tidbit from the VF article. Otherwise a fairly positive piece on her, but this part made me wonder why she had to exaggerate, unless it was to motivate her audience?

He seems like he was a good father in her youth and I think it very possible he paid for her university education or at least the tuition:

"But when Meghan arrived at the University of the South Pacific, in Suva, Fiji, this perfection was pierced. She was on hand to deliver a speech about the importance of funding girls’ education, her clavicle swathed in a ceremonial necklace resembling a dozen calves’ feet sprouting orange and pink peonies, and she proceeded with humanizing detail and flawless diction: “As a university graduate, I know the personal feeling of pride and excitement that comes with attending university,” she explained, her raven tresses gently pulled back from her face. “It was through scholarships, financial-aid programs, and work-study where my earnings from a job on campus went directly towards my tuition that I was able to attend university,” she continued. “And, without question, it was worth every effort.”

"Within a day, a dissenting voice piped up from a world away, part of what has become Meghan’s own personal chorus: her American family. Her half-sister, Samantha Markle, a 53-year-old blonde with M.S. who is confined to a wheelchair, began tapping out tweets, soon to be converted into headlines. Insisting_ “Dad paid for her college education,” _Samantha added, “I love my sister but this is ridiculous.” She also called Meghan “delusionally absurd.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...arkle-family-breakdown-thomas-samantha-markle


----------



## redney

Why would we believe Samantha's tweets over Meghan's statements? Curious. Samantha has shown she's an attention seeker and untrustworthy in the past and clearly has no problem continuously slamming Meghan publicly.

Oh, I found this. Samantha could be referring to Meghan's private high school in Los Angeles. Apparently Dad won $ in the lottery and paid for things for his kids - including Meghan's tuition for her private Catholic High School. Northwestern University is nonsectarian and unaffiliated with the Catholic Church or any other religious body. https://www.businessinsider.com/megan-markle-father-won-lottery-spent-winnings-2018-4
Snipped copy/pasted article below. Bolding mine.


> *He won the California State Lottery in 1990, "scooping $750,000 with five numbers, which included Meghan's birth date," *Morton wrote. Meghan was born on August 4, 1981.
> 
> With inflation, Markle's winnings would be worth about $1.5 million in 2018. Unfortunately, he eventually wound up filing for bankruptcy.
> 
> Tom Markle was a successful Hollywood lighting designer and was serving as the lighting director on the long running soap opera "General Hospital" when he met a makeup artist in training, Doria Ragland. Ragland became Markle's second wife and Meghan's mother, but the couple was already divorced by the time he won the lottery.
> 
> To avoid further financial difficulties from his divorce with Ragland, *Markle sent a friend to pick up his lottery winnings from Chicago, according to The Times. Meghan's half-brother, Tom Jr., said that his father lost the bulk of the lottery prize when the same friend convinced him to invest a portion of his winnings into a jewelry business that later failed.*
> 
> *Markle didn't lose all of his money from his friend's scam, however. He gave Tom Jr. money to start a flower shop, bought a car for his daughter Yvonne, and paid Meghan's tuition at a Catholic school with his winnings.*


----------



## redney

multiple post.


----------



## gazoo

I am uncomfortable with the insinuations in that article. Why the snide judgement over her choosing to join elite clubs and meet people in higher echelons of societies? What's the difference between that and people that try to get into Harvard or Yale, not only for the education, but for the networking opportunities that come from mingling with the top tier school attendees? Meghan has been laser focused her whole life. Her brains are never in question, but her motivations to better herself somehow make her trashy? She has persisted on working for good causes (women's issues, feminism, equality, supporting brands that are eco friendly, animal rights, etc.), and yet the conclusion when discussing her choices is that she's ruthless and a "social climber"? Isn't anyone that works hard to have a better lifestyle a social climber in a way? Or is she being judged for it because she's a bi-racial, divorced, American actress, that actually managed to land far above most people's wildest dreams?

She's admittedly polarizing and unapologetic about it, but I can't really see anything that's actually all that bad or downright evil. So she's dropped people, used people, pretended not to know who Prince Harry was (biggest mistake IMO, as that was so out there as to be noticed immediately), she's been creative with how she describes getting her education (her dad footing the bill vs scholarships), and she fiddles with her bump and hair a lot, starts working too early in the morning, isn't sugar and spice when speaking to staff, and hasn't been willing to roll over for bullying relatives... I don't know. If this were a man being discussed, most of society would be saying he's driven, a go getter, eccentric maybe, but wow what a guy!

I do appreciate that the article makes the point that she is the first self made millionaire to enter into the BRF.

I've noticed Harry hasn't seemed as bubbly or happy lately. I know many are thinking it's because he feels he's made a mistake. But my feeling is he is appalled at the treatment his new bride is receiving, not only from the tabloids and the endless "palace sources" referenced in their click bait,  but from her own family. If he was angry enough to release that statement early on in their courtship about her treatment and the racism and snark, imagine his rage now.


----------



## Jayne1

gazoo said:


> I am uncomfortable with the insinuations in that article. Why the snide judgement over her choosing to join elite clubs and meet people in higher echelons of societies? What's the difference between that and people that try to get into Harvard or Yale, not only for the education, but for the networking opportunities that come from mingling with the top tier school attendees? Meghan has been laser focused her whole life. Her brains are never in question, but her motivations to better herself somehow make her trashy? She has persisted on working for good causes (women's issues, feminism, equality, supporting brands that are eco friendly, animal rights, etc.), and yet the conclusion when discussing her choices is that she's ruthless and a "social climber"? Isn't anyone that works hard to have a better lifestyle a social climber in a way? Or is she being judged for it because she's a bi-racial, divorced, American actress, that actually managed to land far above most people's wildest dreams?
> 
> She's admittedly polarizing and unapologetic about it, but I can't really see anything that's actually all that bad or downright evil. So she's dropped people, used people, pretended not to know who Prince Harry was (biggest mistake IMO, as that was so out there as to be noticed immediately), she's been creative with how she describes getting her education (her dad footing the bill vs scholarships), and she fiddles with her bump and hair a lot, starts working too early in the morning, isn't sugar and spice when speaking to staff, and hasn't been willing to roll over for bullying relatives... I don't know. If this were a man being discussed, most of society would be saying he's driven, a go getter, eccentric maybe, but wow what a guy!
> 
> I do appreciate that the article makes the point that she is the first self made millionaire to enter into the BRF.
> 
> I've noticed Harry hasn't seemed as bubbly or happy lately. I know many are thinking it's because he feels he's made a mistake. But my feeling is he is appalled at the treatment his new bride is receiving, not only from the tabloids and the endless "palace sources" referenced in their click bait,  but from her own family. If he was angry enough to release that statement early on in their courtship about her treatment and the racism and snark, imagine his rage now.


I didn't get the impression from reading the Vanity Fair piece of "snide judgement" or "ruthless social climber" and certainly not "trashy". 

It was just a factual article about bits of her past.  She did those things and she succeeded beyond her dreams (I imagine) and not something to take too personally. She seems like a strong, determined, beautiful woman.


----------



## bag-mania

gazoo said:


> I've noticed Harry hasn't seemed as bubbly or happy lately. I know many are thinking it's because he feels he's made a mistake.



It could just be because they’ve been married for several months now. The honeymoon period is brief. It’s typical of most couples that the lovey-dovey stage wears off as they transition into normal married life.


----------



## sdkitty

gazoo said:


> I am uncomfortable with the insinuations in that article. Why the snide judgement over her choosing to join elite clubs and meet people in higher echelons of societies? What's the difference between that and people that try to get into Harvard or Yale, not only for the education, but for the networking opportunities that come from mingling with the top tier school attendees? Meghan has been laser focused her whole life. Her brains are never in question, but her motivations to better herself somehow make her trashy? She has persisted on working for good causes (women's issues, feminism, equality, supporting brands that are eco friendly, animal rights, etc.), and yet the conclusion when discussing her choices is that she's ruthless and a "social climber"? Isn't anyone that works hard to have a better lifestyle a social climber in a way? Or is she being judged for it because she's a bi-racial, divorced, American actress, that actually managed to land far above most people's wildest dreams?
> 
> She's admittedly polarizing and unapologetic about it, but I can't really see anything that's actually all that bad or downright evil. So she's dropped people, used people, pretended not to know who Prince Harry was (biggest mistake IMO, as that was so out there as to be noticed immediately), she's been creative with how she describes getting her education (her dad footing the bill vs scholarships), and she fiddles with her bump and hair a lot, starts working too early in the morning, isn't sugar and spice when speaking to staff, and hasn't been willing to roll over for bullying relatives... I don't know. If this were a man being discussed, most of society would be saying he's driven, a go getter, eccentric maybe, but wow what a guy!
> 
> I do appreciate that the article makes the point that she is the first self made millionaire to enter into the BRF.
> 
> I've noticed Harry hasn't seemed as bubbly or happy lately. I know many are thinking it's because he feels he's made a mistake. But my feeling is he is appalled at the treatment his new bride is receiving, not only from the tabloids and the endless "palace sources" referenced in their click bait,  but from her own family. If he was angry enough to release that statement early on in their courtship about her treatment and the racism and snark, imagine his rage now.


I wouldn't say she's downright evil.  But I do have a problem with her being nasty to staff if that's true.  And I see no real justification for lying about how she funded her education.


----------



## DeMonica

I read the article. To be honest, it hasn't changed my opinion much about Meghan and Co, except maybe the father. It seems that he's a somewhat naive man, who let himself pulled into things, that didn't help his relationship to Meghan, and whose loyality to his children is tested. I guess it must be difficult for him when his children are fighting and the communication with his younger daughter came to a halt. Probably Meghan made a couple of wrong decisions around the wedding and after about his father's involvement in her life. Yet, the half sister and brother are clearly nothing to brag about and I'm not surprised that Meghan doesn't want to involve them in her life. I think it's possible that  they tried to get money out of her. If the Charles part is true then it's rather sad. Painting a nice picture about yourself as a patriarch on the expense of your children is not what a future king should do to gain supporters.
 There's nothing wrong with making friends with people, who happen to be rich and powerful. Obviously those people thought that she was worthy of their friendship, as well. Meghan is a smart woman, used her opportunites wisely and did very well for herself. IMO this is what we all go for: to get as far as possible with our talents and opportunities. In this respect everybody is a social climber. She made some mistakes with her old and new family but the whole is always more than the sum of its parts, and in general BRF got a new member who, if they can put their problems aside in the future, can be valuable to the whole family.


----------



## TMA

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't say she's downright evil.  But I do have a problem with her being nasty to staff if that's true.  And I see no real justification for lying about how she funded her education.



We are not sure she lied about how she funded her education. The writer didn’t provide facts to dispute her account, but assumes that is the case based on what Samantha has said, who’s unreliable and has an axe to grind. I think if Thomas paid it would have come out in the DM article where he mentioned he paid for breakfast at her first wedding or provided evidence of his heart attack as he was in a record setting straight mood. I think it would have been quite ballsy of her to say that before the whole world knowing she has family only too eager to make her look bad.


----------



## TMA

I don’t think she’s a saint but some of these gossip are just hubris. I have been in situations where entrenched people will try to undermine a new addition especially if they have been brought in a higher position than them. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that some courtiers are just snobs looking down their British noses at her being an American and I dare say biracial? None of the gossip has been substantive - she sends early morning emails, but does that suggest staff are meant to jump up at 5am to answer? Also there is constant movement in the media as to whether it is emails or texts. If and when she does something for which she should be criticized, I can assure you the media will still have anonymous sources, but the stories will be fuller and not full of gaps as they are now. In addition, media has misrepresented the staff turnover. Only one can be deemed “unexpected”, Melissa. One pit in his resignation before the engagement as it was know he wanted to leave the post to spend more time with his family and Samantha resigned from Queens service but was to stay on temporarily to help Meghan settle. The general tone of the reporting is quite distasteful.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't say she's downright evil.  But I do have a problem with her being nasty to staff if that's true.  And I see no real justification for lying about how she funded her education.


Do we know for certain if any of that is true? Really. I'm with you that poor treatment of employees is unacceptable - but again, do we know for a fact it is accurate? We do know it is credited to unknown 'sources' and reported by known tabloids - whose business it is to sell papers/generate clicks. Gossip about Meghan sells, so the wilder the better, right?

Further, again I ask why would anyone put faith in her half-sister Samantha, who has repeatedly proven herself to be attention-seeking and willing to bash Meghan publicly over and over again? How gullible can people be? 

Honestly most take this gossip with a grain of salt - considering the sources and motivations of its sources and publishers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BagLovingMom

TMA said:


> We are not sure she lied about how she funded her education. The writer didn’t provide facts to dispute her account, but assumes that is the case based on what Samantha has said, who’s unreliable and has an axe to grind. I think if Thomas paid it would have come out in the DM article where he mentioned he paid for breakfast at her first wedding or provided evidence of his heart attack as he was in a record setting straight mood. I think it would have been quite ballsy of her to say that before the whole world knowing she has family only too eager to make her look bad.


I agree, also isn’t it possible he could have paid for a portion, but not all of her tuition and other school expenses. I’d think Northwestern tuition, housing in Chicago, etc. was pretty expensive and may have required a variety of sources to fund.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Do we know for certain if any of that is true? Really. I'm with you that poor treatment of employees is unacceptable - but again, do we know for a fact it is accurate? We do know it is credited to unknown 'sources' and reported by known tabloids - whose business it is to sell papers/generate clicks. Gossip about Meghan sells, so the wilder the better, right?
> 
> Further, again I ask why would anyone put faith in her half-sister Samantha, who has repeatedly proven herself to be attention-seeking and willing to bash Meghan publicly over and over again? How gullible can people be?
> 
> Honestly most take this gossip with a grain of salt - considering the sources and motivations of its sources and publishers.


I take with a grain of salt too.  I haven't read the whole VF article so not sure what they said about sources whether they said this was good info of just gossip.
However, I will say again, poor treatment of staff is a biggie for me.  So if it turns out that she is guilty of that, then I won't like her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Thomas Markle won the lottery (USD$750,000) and he used part of that to pay for her tuition at Immaculate Heart Boarding School - *not* her college tuition. He also helped Tom Jr open a flower shop and bought his daughter Yvonne a car.

However, even then he was exhibiting non-trustworthy tendencies. Apparently,he wanted to keep the winnings a secret because of outstanding divorce matters with his ex-wife, Doria. So, he had a friend pick up the lottery winnings instead of going in person. However, this backfired when the so-called friend swindled him out of most of the money. Tom went on to declare bankruptcy within three years.

Source 1
Source 2


----------



## Alexenjie

Thank you for the links to the Vanity Fair article. There is another  Vanity Fair interesting article about the supposed rift between Kate and Meghan. The actual rift is between William and Harry.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

gazoo said:


> I am uncomfortable with the insinuations in that article. Why the snide judgement over her choosing to join elite clubs and meet people in higher echelons of societies? What's the difference between that and people that try to get into Harvard or Yale, not only for the education, but for the networking opportunities that come from mingling with the top tier school attendees? Meghan has been laser focused her whole life. Her brains are never in question, but her motivations to better herself somehow make her trashy? She has persisted on working for good causes (women's issues, feminism, equality, supporting brands that are eco friendly, animal rights, etc.), and yet the conclusion when discussing her choices is that she's ruthless and a "social climber"? Isn't anyone that works hard to have a better lifestyle a social climber in a way? Or is she being judged for it because she's a bi-racial, divorced, American actress, that actually managed to land far above most people's wildest dreams?
> 
> She's admittedly polarizing and unapologetic about it, but I can't really see anything that's actually all that bad or downright evil. So she's dropped people, used people, pretended not to know who Prince Harry was (biggest mistake IMO, as that was so out there as to be noticed immediately), she's been creative with how she describes getting her education (her dad footing the bill vs scholarships), and she fiddles with her bump and hair a lot, starts working too early in the morning, isn't sugar and spice when speaking to staff, and hasn't been willing to roll over for bullying relatives... I don't know. If this were a man being discussed, most of society would be saying he's driven, a go getter, eccentric maybe, but wow what a guy!
> 
> I do appreciate that the article makes the point that she is the first self made millionaire to enter into the BRF.
> 
> I've noticed Harry hasn't seemed as bubbly or happy lately. I know many are thinking it's because he feels he's made a mistake. But my feeling is he is appalled at the treatment his new bride is receiving, not only from the tabloids and the endless "palace sources" referenced in their click bait,  but from her own family. If he was angry enough to release that statement early on in their courtship about her treatment and the racism and snark, imagine his rage now.


ITA with what you're saying so please don't think I'm trying to argue with you; I just had to speak out on my biggest pet peeves on the Meghan debate! I've commented this on this thread a few times already, so please pardon me to the long-term readers, but Meghan never said she didn't know who Harry was. She just said she didn't realize the extent of it all. I had to correct it because the idea that she claimed to not know who Harry was is all due to the media's twisting of her words, and I don't think it's fair to allow this gossip to spread for others to judge her on things she never said  Now, if we want to judge her on what she actually said, that's another story!

Here's the whole transcribed quote that keeps getting twisted:
It was a blind date. And it’s so interesting because we talk about it and now and even then, I, you know, because I’m from the States, you don’t grow up with the same understanding of the royal family and so while I now understand very clearly, there’s a global interest there. I didn’t know much about him, and so the only thing that I had asked her when she said that she wanted to set us up, was, I had one question. I said, "Well is he nice?"​


----------



## TMA

bellebellebelle19 said:


> ITA with what you're saying so please don't think I'm trying to argue with you; I just had to speak out on my biggest pet peeves on the Meghan debate! I've commented this on this thread a few times already, so please pardon me to the long-term readers, but Meghan never said she didn't know who Harry was. She just said she didn't realize the extent of it all. I had to correct it because the idea that she claimed to not know who Harry was is all due to the media's twisting of her words, and I don't think it's fair to allow this gossip to spread for others to judge her on things she never said  Now, if we want to judge her on what she actually said, that's another story!
> 
> Here's the whole transcribed quote that keeps getting twisted:
> It was a blind date. And it’s so interesting because we talk about it and now and even then, I, you know, because I’m from the States, you don’t grow up with the same understanding of the royal family and so while I now understand very clearly, there’s a global interest there. I didn’t know much about him, and so the only thing that I had asked her when she said that she wanted to set us up, was, I had one question. I said, "Well is he nice?"​



Exactly, it was not a lack of knowledge of him at all but not knowing much about him. I can say that is very possible. I lived in the US, didn’t digest gossip mags, so I didn’t know anything (and I mean anything ) about his drinking, Nazi uniform etc. I only got to know of his past troubles when I moved to the UK and the Vegas pictures came up, and the media (as they are won’t to do) re-hashed his past mistakes. So for me, when I heard her sentence it made perfect sense. I loved and knew everything about Diana but after she died, I stopped following news of the RF.


----------



## Alexenjie

I feel sorry for Meghan that her side of the family, except for her mother, seem like such a train wreck, especially her step-sister who is just mean and awful. It sounds like cutting them off is perfectly reasonable after all the times they have gone to the press and made spectacles of themselves, trying to embarrass her and for what purpose? I keep reading that the Queen wanted to handle this family differently than the way Meghan has handled it with silence but can't imagine that whatever the Queen wanted to do would have worked out any better. Did she want to pay them off? Give them access to Meghan and pretend that all was well? That would be rewarding them and encouraging their horrid behavior. Anybody who really loved and cared about Meghan would not have increased the stress and turmoil surrounding her wedding. They would also not add stress and havoc to her life while she is pregnant and in her early months of learning her job as a part of the royal family. Everything they have done has hurt her and again for what purpose other than jealousy and greed?


----------



## sdkitty

Alexenjie said:


> I feel sorry for Meghan that her side of the family, except for her mother, seem like such a train wreck, especially her step-sister who is just mean and awful. It sounds like cutting them off is perfectly reasonable after all the times they have gone to the press and made spectacles of themselves, trying to embarrass her and for what purpose? I keep reading that the Queen wanted to handle this family differently than the way Meghan has handled it with silence but can't imagine that whatever the Queen wanted to do would have worked out any better. Did she want to pay them off? Give them access to Meghan and pretend that all was well? That would be rewarding them and encouraging their horrid behavior. Anybody who really loved and cared about Meghan would not have increased the stress and turmoil surrounding her wedding. They would also not add stress and havoc to her life while she is pregnant and in her early months of learning her job as a part of the royal family. Everything they have done has hurt her and again for what purpose other than jealousy and greed?


It is hard to understand.  I can understand the sister being jealous.  She is ill and has no money (at least nothing compared to Meghan).  But why not just grouse about it with your friends and family as other people do?  Maybe the lust for attention runs in the family.
As far as the queen wanting to handle it differently, I doubt it.  What response can you give to people like this?


----------



## mkr

The sister is getting paid every time she runs her mouth.


----------



## sdkitty

mkr said:


> The sister is getting paid every time she runs her mouth.


that's ridiculous


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^ Yeah, the sister has even said she’s  doing all this blabbering for the money, even though it was pretty obvious from the start


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> that's ridiculous


I think it's more like sad. I think she gets paid by the tabloids which run her stories. It was mentioned  in the VF article, too. Although, she's ruining her own (and Meghan's) reputation for pennies.

On the lottery win: I'm not surprised that he wanted to keep it from his ex. He won it long after his divorce. Yet he actually paid into her daughter's education. It doesn't matter if it was high school education or university.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> I think it's more like sad. I think she gets paid by the tabloids which run her stories. It was mentioned  in the VF article, too. Although, she's ruining her own (and Meghan's) reputation for pennies.
> 
> On the lottery win: I'm not surprised that he wanted to keep it from his ex. He won it long after his divorce. Yet he actually paid into her daughter's education. It doesn't matter if it was high school education or university.


right but one of the things being talked about here was that she claimed she got thru college on loans


----------



## redney

BagLovingMom said:


> ^^ Yeah, the sister has even said she’s  doing all this blabbering for the money, even though it was pretty obvious from the start


Which is why no one can really believe anything she says. More talking = more $$$ for her.


----------



## Alexenjie

The only way the step sister will stop getting paid is if no one buys the magazines or newspapers where she is getting publicity. Myself I need to stop clicking on whatever articles are about what she is whining about today. If we all ignored her and anything about her and the rest of this side of the family she would eventually go away.

I liked the dress and coat Meghan wore to the Queen's Christmas lunch but don't know how to post a picture. Would someone please post it? Gray coat with a print dress that was cute and festive. We could go back to talking about Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> right but one of the things being talked about here was that she claimed she got thru college on loans


I was rather reflecting on the "non-trustworthy tendencies" of Meghan's father.  I'm afraid we will never find out for sure how much of her college tuition was paid by her or by her father - if it was paid by him at all.


----------



## redney

Alexenjie said:


> *The only way the step sister will stop getting paid is if no one buys the magazines or newspapers where she is getting publicity. Myself I need to stop clicking on whatever articles are about what she is whining about today. If we all ignored her and anything about her and the rest of this side of the family she would eventually go away.*
> .


Which is exactly what Meghan and the Palace are doing - completely ignoring the dad and half-sister and providing no acknowledgment or response. If they responded in any way, this feed the press to continue to cover the stories and sell more magazines and newspapers thus keeping them relevant with those who buy/click. Thus the cycle. 

That's why I can't fathom how she could be considered 'cold' for not responding. Anything she did or said - even in private - he and her half-sister would exploit for their press money. Thus the cycle.


----------



## Tivo

Saying she didn’t know the extent of it all is just as ridiculous to me as saying she didn’t know him. Especially when there are pictures from her youth of her posing in front of Buckingham Palace.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tivo said:


> Saying she didn’t know the extent of it all is just as ridiculous to me as saying she didn’t know him. Especially when there are pictures from her youth of her posing in front of Buckingham Palace.


How many of us non Americans have posed in front of the White House not really knowing any member of the First family apart from the President and First Lady? I'm talking about pre *****, and certainly pre social media etc. I remember G W Bush having daughters but if one of them walked into this room now I wouldn't have a clue who she was. I don't know how known in the  US media they were during the time they were in the White House.
So, yes I believe Meghan in what she says.


----------



## Tivo

Sharont2305 said:


> How many of us non Americans have posed in front of the White House not really knowing any member of the First family apart from the President and First Lady? I'm talking about pre *****, and certainly pre social media etc. I remember G W Bush having daughters but if one of them walked into this room now I wouldn't have a clue who she was. I don't know how known in the  US media they were during the time they were in the White House.
> So, yes I believe Meghan in what she says.


I’m not buying it. Meghan and I are the same age. I grew up the furthest thing from obsessing about the BRF and even I knew about them, Diana and Charles, the Queen. They were on People mags all the time. We all know this. And Meghan was mixing it up in the entertainment industry so she definitely wasn’t ignorant.


----------



## DeMonica

I know that the Swedish royal family consists of the king  Carl Gustav  + queen Sylvia+ 2 princesses + prince, but practically that's all I know about them. It's possible that some people are in your peripheral vision, yet, you don't know much about them. She might have done her homework before that blind date, though, but I doubt that she had been plotting to hunt him down long before that date.


----------



## Tivo

DeMonica said:


> I know that the Swedish royal family consists of the king  Carl Gustav  + queen Sylvia+ 2 princesses + prince, but practically that's all I know about them. It's possible that some people are in your peripheral vision, yet, you don't know much about them. She might have done her homework before that blind date, though, but I doubt that she had been plotting to hunt him down long before that date.


I doubt she was “hunting him down,” but she saw an opportunity and took it. I’m not mad at her for that, just keep it real.


----------



## DeMonica

Tivo said:


> I doubt she was “hunting him down,” but she saw an opportunity and took it. I’m not mad at her for that, just keep it real.


So where is the problem then? She knew a thing or two about the guy, met him and things worked.


----------



## myown

Fally420 said:


> You mentioned just celebrity "friends". Seems odd to me that she seems to not have any childhood or school friends or some people who got to know her before she aired on TV.


I don´t have childhood friends (because I moved pretty far away and things got lost) does that make me a bad person?

Also some people don't have 20 bffs. some people are happy with 5 very close friends.


----------



## myown

Flatsy said:


> Vanity Fair published an in-depth article about Meghan and her family troubles today.  Some interesting quotes:





> _The image Meghan created for herself was free-spirited and earthy—but not entirely consistent with who she really was, according to those who know her. “Meghan’s goal was always becoming a household name,” says an acquaintance in the television world. “She’s insanely smart and poised, but very, very guarded. She’s not a person you can actually be friends with. She’s the type of person who is best friends with her stylist._”



don´t most actress/actors desire that?


----------



## myown

Tivo said:


> I doubt she was “hunting him down,” but she saw an opportunity and took it. I’m not mad at her for that, just keep it real.


that's we all would do if we met a handsome guy


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> that's we all would do if we met a handsome guy


And charming


----------



## LittleStar88

Tivo said:


> I’m not buying it. Meghan and I are the same age. I grew up the furthest thing from obsessing about the BRF and even I knew about them, Diana and Charles, the Queen. They were on People mags all the time. We all know this. And Meghan was mixing it up in the entertainment industry so she definitely wasn’t ignorant.



Yeah but until you go on a date with a guy and get to know who he really is as a potential life partner, you only know what’s been put out there by magazines, secondhand info, etc. I’ve dated someone from work who I thought I knew well... until I dated him

I just can’t knock her for wanting the best in life. If that includes tiaras and royal titles, good for her for landing herself a prince!


----------



## bisbee

And we are still discussing how Meghan met Harry when they are married and expecting a baby because...?


----------



## Fally420

bisbee said:


> And we are still discussing how Meghan met Harry when they are married and expecting a baby because...?



...because this is a gossip thread


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

bisbee said:


> And we are still discussing how Meghan met Harry when they are married and expecting a baby because...?



Bc we love being petty and gossipy lol


----------



## hellosunshine

Honestly, whether Meghan had her sights on Harry or not..it doesn't matter because this was always supposed to be her life..I mean she's giving birth to his child for goodness' sake! I'm a deeply faithful person and at the end of the day that child is supposed to be on this earth. Doesn't matter how they met, who Meghan had to step over, what new circle of friends she had to mingle with, etc...doesn't matter how well you plan this sorta of stuff...if it's meant to be..then it's meant to be.

Secondly, (anyone feel free to correct me) but didn't Kate meet William through her friends at boarding school, got close to him, got accepted and intended to attend Edinburgh University; however took a year off to stay on course with William (as he took a gap year and traveled a bit) and later applied to and got accepted to University of St. Andrews to be within an eye and ear shot of William. Kate's actions aren't any different than what an intelligent and determined young lady would do..especially when it's in regard to any bachelor from a well-regarded family..forget a royal member.


----------



## Jayne1

bisbee said:


> And we are still discussing how Meghan met Harry when they are married and expecting a baby because...?


Because most of us are happy for a stranger, but we can't get too invested in a stranger's life. Or at least I can't.  Palace gossip usually comes from within and it's fun to speculate about the BRF.


----------



## PatsyCline

hellosunshine said:


> Honestly, whether Meghan had her sights on Harry or not..it doesn't matter because this was always supposed to be her life..I mean she's giving birth to his child for goodness' sake! I'm a deeply faithful person and at the end of the day that child is supposed to be on this earth. Doesn't matter how they met, who Meghan had to step over, what new circle of friends she had to mingle with, etc...doesn't matter how well you plan this sorta of stuff...if it's meant to be..then it's meant to be.
> 
> Secondly, (anyone feel free to correct me) but didn't Kate meet William through her friends at boarding school, got close to him, got accepted and intended to attend Edinburgh University; however took a year off to stay on course with William (as he took a gap year and traveled a bit) and later applied to and got accepted to University of St. Andrews to be within an eye and ear shot of William. Kate's actions aren't any different than what an intelligent and determined young lady would do..especially when it's in regard to any bachelor from a well-regarded family..forget a royal member.



I thought Kate met William @ St. Andrews?


----------



## hellosunshine

PatsyCline said:


> I thought Kate met William @ St. Andrews?



Yeah, well many think it was pure coincidence that this pair met at St Andrews; however there's been several leaks and books written that have suggested that Kate and William first met through friends from Marlborough in the summer of 1999 at Highgrove. Per Jasper Selwyn, a careers adviser at Kate’s former school, Marlborough, and house tutor Joan Gall both confirming some time ago that Kate had a firm place at Edinburgh University in 2000 but gave it up and took a gap year in Italy, reapplying to St Andrews for 2001 after William’s place became public.


----------



## chicaloca

DeMonica said:


> On the lottery win: I'm not surprised that he wanted to keep it from his ex. He won it long after his divorce. *Yet* *he* *actually* *paid* *into* *her* *daughter's* *education*. It doesn't matter if it was high school education or university.



Meghan is Thomas’s daughter too. Your phrasing makes it sound like Thomas went above and beyond by  paying for some unrelated person’s education.

I find it interesting that people believe instantly Meghan’s estranged sister Samantha Markle who has a clear axe to grind. Meghan is being judged based on unreliable commentary from a clearly bitter and jealous relative.

It’s clear to me that Meghan has earned her lot every step of the way.  From struggling actress to duchess she has worked, networked and engaged in philanthropic activities that advanced her socially and careerwise. Transpose her actions onto a man and people would call him intelligent and industrious. But of course Meghan is a woman so her industriousness is labeled as social climbing.

I still don’t get why she’s being regarded as some sort of goldigging opportunist when she has pretty much worked all her life. What goldigger would take such a long trajectory of college, interning, philanthrophy, struggling actress and marrying/divorcing a nobody just to meet her “target” on a blind date at 35 years old?  That sounds like way too much work when you can just attend social functions with rich men, be pretty and wait for an offer.


----------



## DeMonica

chicaloca said:


> Meghan is Thomas’s daughter too.* Your phrasing makes it sound like Thomas went above and beyond by  paying for some unrelated person’s education.*
> 
> I find it interesting that people believe instantly Meghan’s estranged sister Samantha Markle who has a clear axe to grind. Meghan is being judged based on unreliable commentary from a clearly bitter and jealous relative.
> 
> It’s clear to me that Meghan has earned her lot every step of the way.  From struggling actress to duchess she has worked, networked and engaged in philanthropic activities that advanced her socially and careerwise. Transpose her actions onto a man and people would call him intelligent and industrious. But of course Meghan is a woman so her industriousness is labeled as social climbing.


Maybe to you, because you misunderstood it and disregarded those previous posts I had reacted to.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> Honestly, whether Meghan had her sights on Harry or not..it doesn't matter because this was always supposed to be her life..I mean she's giving birth to his child for goodness' sake! I'm a deeply faithful person and at the end of the day that child is supposed to be on this earth. Doesn't matter how they met, who Meghan had to step over, what new circle of friends she had to mingle with, etc...doesn't matter how well you plan this sorta of stuff...if it's meant to be..then it's meant to be.
> 
> Secondly, (anyone feel free to correct me) but didn't Kate meet William through her friends at boarding school, got close to him, got accepted and intended to attend Edinburgh University; however took a year off to stay on course with William (as he took a gap year and traveled a bit) and later applied to and got accepted to University of St. Andrews to be within an eye and ear shot of William. Kate's actions aren't any different than what an intelligent and determined young lady would do..especially when it's in regard to any bachelor from a well-regarded family..forget a royal member.


Agree. Even if Meghan and Kate - or Kate's family - plotted and planned their entire lives to nab a prince they cannot force what wouldn't be. William obviously had to love Kate and Harry had to love Meghan. We can dislike Meghan or Kate for lots of stuff, but they ultimately were chosen because they were loved.


----------



## krissa

I found this clip on Twitter, her nephew that’s on the MTV show confirming Thomas heart attack was bogus.


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^man what an embarrassing group of family members. Interestingly, I read a while back that Thomas Markle’s first wife condemned her family members for making them look like “trash.” At least there’s some common sense on that end. Happy Holidays everyone !


----------



## hellosunshine

Wow, Meghan and Samantha really do look alike in that twitter photo posted by @krissa. Same eyes, cheeks, and nose. Over the last few months, I have come across some comments that have suggested that Meghan takes after her dad..looks-wise..but I totally see it now.


----------



## Tivo

DeMonica said:


> So where is the problem then? She knew a thing or two about the guy, met him and things worked.



I think she’s trying to downplay it because she wants her image a certain way...and pretends she wasn’t extra thirsty. And to me, that’s what makes her look extra thirsty.


----------



## bag-princess

Tivo said:


> I think she’s trying to downplay it because she wants her image a certain way...and pretends she wasn’t extra thirsty. And to me, that’s what makes her look extra thirsty.




LOL  SMH


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Christmas day service in Sandringham


----------



## jcnc

They all look nice. Next to pregnant Meghan, Kate looks extremely thin


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

jcnc said:


> They all look nice. Next to pregnant Meghan, Kate looks extremely thin




Kate looks extremely thin - period.  Doesn’t matter who’s she’s standing next to!


----------



## Fally420

It would be so interesting to see what the ladies carry in their small clutches/purses


----------



## DeMonica

Tivo said:


> I think she’s trying to downplay it because she wants her image a certain way...and pretends she wasn’t extra thirsty. And to me, that’s what makes her look extra thirsty.


How thirsty she was we never going to know. Yet, whatever degree of "thirsty" she was it didn't get her the guy. Neither studying him like a master spy.  Without strong interest and attraction on his side, he would never have started a relationship with her.


----------



## gazoo

They all look beautiful. Charles especially, always has such nicely tailored clothing.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Fally420 said:


> It would be so interesting to see what the ladies carry in their small clutches/purses


They're probably empty... I always imagine an aide is standing nearby with a Neverfull full of supplies to hand them


----------



## Jayne1

bag-princess said:


> Kate looks extremely thin - period.  Doesn’t matter who’s she’s standing next to!


Yes, it shows in her face too.


----------



## redney

I love the navy blue. Apparently it was a popular color for women. Zara and Beatrice wore navy blue too.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Kate looked stunning and festive in her outfit. I loved it!!!

Meghan’s outfit was blah. She needs to venture out of navy. She always look stunning in bright colors. 

The weight Meghan has put on looks great on her. Kate just looks tired and aged. A bit of Botox and a bit of weight on her bones can do wonders for her face.


----------



## Eva1991

All these comments about Kate and Meghan being "thirsty" for the princes and plotting to marry them seem kind of sexist to me to be honest. You never see these comments when a man is marrying "out of his league". It's always the woman who's plotting to get the man; never the other way around.

Even if Kate and Meghan did purposefully try to meet William and Harry by joining the right circles and mingling with the right people, this could only get them as far as meeting the princes. No matter how "conniving" they were - which I doubt they were - they could not actually make William and Harry fall in love with them. The princes probably saw something in their wives and decided to start a relationship and then marry them and start a family. You don't marry someone if you don't like them just because you studied in the same university or have the same group of friends.


----------



## VickyB

Get that Meghan is brand head to foot, that bag looks just plain silly the way she is carrying it. To be fair tho, it is a stupidly constructed bad.


----------



## Sharont2305

VickyB said:


> Get that Meghan is brand head to foot, that bag looks just plain silly the way she is carrying it. To be fair tho, it is a stupidly constructed bad.


It's a Victoria Beckham bag, I've seen this on the website and it looks odd, been wondering what it looks like in real life. Its £1,550 worth of stupid.


----------



## Jayne1

Eva1991 said:


> All these comments about Kate and Meghan being "thirsty" for the princes and plotting to marry them seem kind of sexist to me to be honest. You never see these comments when a man is marrying "out of his league". It's always the woman who's plotting to get the man; never the other way around.
> 
> Even if Kate and Meghan did purposefully try to meet William and Harry by joining the right circles and mingling with the right people, this could only get them as far as meeting the princes. No matter how "conniving" they were - which I doubt they were - they could not actually make William and Harry fall in love with them. The princes probably saw something in their wives and decided to start a relationship and then marry them and start a family. You don't marry someone if you don't like them just because you studied in the same university or have the same group of friends.


That's why they should be great friends. Both with the same mindset, determination and appeal to attract princes. So much in common.


----------



## Fally420

Jayne1 said:


> That's why they should be great friends. Both with the same mindset, determination and appeal to attract princes. So much in common.



same goals can also lead to rivalry (not saying Kate and Meghan are rivals)

Although they may have much in common, I think the two lead different lives. Also even if they may have the same mindset, their character seems to be different too. Where Kate appears to be more "the family at home" type, Meghan seems to like the public, the attention much more. She appears to be more outgoing, open.


----------



## Sharont2305

Fally420 said:


> Where Kate appears to be more "the family at home" type, Meghan seems to like the public, the attention much more. She appears to be more outgoing, open.


I also think with Catherine and William, they are trying to be as "normal as possible" given what they know lies ahead for them when the time comes.... and for George.


----------



## Alexenjie

I love Meghan's Christmas outfit except I could do without the feathers in the hat. I am a confessed royal hat hater so take it with a grain of salt.

In October this year Meghan's ex-husband married a woman with a fortune probably 5 times as big as Prince Harry. I would guess that if Meghan wanted to marry for lots of money she could have chosen someone with more. There is a huge hassle factor that comes with marrying into the royal family. I would never chose it, very little real power but lots of intrusion, almost complete lack of privacy, all those (many ridiculous) rules and the world thinking it should share it's opinion of everything you ever wore or any word you revealed in public. I think they married for love and hope it is successful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Fally420

Alexenjie said:


> I love Meghan's Christmas outfit except I could do without the feathers in the hat. I am a confessed royal hat hater so take it with a grain of salt.
> 
> In October this year Meghan's ex-husband married a woman with a fortune probably 5 times as big as Prince Harry. I would guess that if Meghan wanted to marry for lots of money she could have chosen someone with more. There is a huge hassle factor that comes with marrying into the royal family. I would never chose it, very little real power but lots of intrusion, almost complete lack of privacy, all those (many ridiculous) rules and the world thinking it should share it's opinion of everything you ever wore or any word you revealed in public. I think they married for love and hope it is successful.



With everything in life there are two sides to every coin. We just a get a glimpse in their lives through reporters. It is not easy to live your semi life in publuc. But I do think they have many privileges and privacy. Especially William and Harry are known that they fight for their privacy with law suits and it got much better I think.


----------



## Tivo

DeMonica said:


> How thirsty she was we never going to know. Yet, whatever degree of "thirsty" she was it didn't get her the guy. Neither studying him like a master spy.  Without strong interest and attraction on his side, he would never have started a relationship with her.


No doubt. It’s clear Harry is in love. My point is just I’m not buying this image Meghan is selling about her motives, it prevents me from warming to her the way others have. 

Still, I feel sorry for all this stress she’s enduring from her estranged family, it can’t be easy.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

They really need to put her in something other than navy. She has such a pretty warm skin tone she would look great in jewel tones like ruby and emerald, perfect for Christmas.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I find it interesting that people believe instantly Meghan’s estranged sister Samantha Markle who has a clear axe to grind. Meghan is being judged based on unreliable commentary from a clearly bitter and jealous relative.


I believe Samantha and I believe Meghan because neither of them said anything hard to believe.  Most middle-class parents contribute financially to their children's undergraduate tuition, so I believe that Thomas Markle helped pay for Northwestern.  And most middle-class parents can't cover four years of full private school tuition, so I believe Meghan when she talked about getting financial aid and doing work-study.  As the Vanity Fair article noted, it wasn't "delusionally absurd" that Meghan didn't mention parental contribution on the long list of ways she said her education was funded, but it was likely an omission.



> I still don’t get why she’s being regarded as some sort of goldigging opportunist when she has pretty much worked all her life. What goldigger would take such a long trajectory of college, interning, philanthrophy, struggling actress and marrying/divorcing a nobody just to meet her “target” on a blind date at 35 years old?  That sounds like way too much work when you can just attend social functions with rich men, be pretty and wait for an offer.


I don't recall where Meghan has ever been portrayed as a Melania *****-style golddigger whose only goal in life was to become the trophy wife of a rich husband.

I have used the term "social climber" to describe Meghan, and that always gets distorted and conflated with a lot of other adjectives such as "golddigging" (and previously in this thread, "trashy" and "downright evil").  If Meghan weren't a social climber, she'd be in LA smoking pot with her half-siblings and hoping to win the lottery again, so good for her for getting as far she did even before she met Harry.  

I think Meghan's social climbing was about where she could take herself, not about targeting husbands.  But I do think she probably wasn't giving the time of day to dudes who didn't have some sort of cachet.  

I think there is love on both sides with Harry and Meghan, but there is a little bit of a mercenary element to all of her relationships and a history of her leaving people behind very quickly.  That should have given Harry pause, and if it's true that William was telling him two years ago that he should slow down with Meghan and take that sort of thing into consideration, I don't think that makes William the bad guy.


----------



## Flatsy

Tivo said:


> I think she’s trying to downplay it because she wants her image a certain way...and pretends she wasn’t extra thirsty. And to me, that’s what makes her look extra thirsty.


Exactly.  I would never have thought about how much Meghan knew about the royal family had she not put on her golly-gee voice and pretended to be an uninformed American without an understanding of the "global interest".  That part of the interview really struck the the wrong note.  I think she was trying to get out ahead of it and it backfired.

(The other part of the interview that struck the wrong note for me was when she used the expression "boots on the ground", which is an expression I have only ever heard used by Hollywood actresses.)


----------



## PatsyCline

Flatsy said:


> Exactly.  I would never have thought about how much Meghan knew about the royal family had she not put on her golly-gee voice and pretended to be an uninformed American without an understanding of the "global interest".  That part of the interview really struck the the wrong note.  I think she was trying to get out ahead of it and it backfired.
> 
> (The other part of the interview that struck the wrong note for me was when she used the expression "boots on the ground", which is an expression I have only ever heard used by Hollywood actresses.)



Boots on the ground is a common expression in the military. Means soldiers committed to a battlefield.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, the association to Hollywood actresses is odd to me given that it is a common military / law enforcement / peace keeping term.


----------



## anitalilac

chicaloca said:


> Meghan is Thomas’s daughter too. Your phrasing makes it sound like Thomas went above and beyond by  paying for some unrelated person’s education.
> 
> I find it interesting that people believe instantly Meghan’s estranged sister Samantha Markle who has a clear axe to grind. Meghan is being judged based on unreliable commentary from a clearly bitter and jealous relative.
> 
> It’s clear to me that Meghan has earned her lot every step of the way.  From struggling actress to duchess she has worked, networked and engaged in philanthropic activities that advanced her socially and careerwise. Transpose her actions onto a man and people would call him intelligent and industrious. But of course Meghan is a woman so her industriousness is labeled as social climbing.
> 
> I still don’t get why she’s being regarded as some sort of goldigging opportunist when she has pretty much worked all her life. What goldigger would take such a long trajectory of college, interning, philanthrophy, struggling actress and marrying/divorcing a nobody just to meet her “target” on a blind date at 35 years old?  That sounds like way too much work when you can just attend social functions with rich men, be pretty and wait for an offer.



yeah totally agree, Kate Middleton parents sent and prepped  her to mingle with the wealthy and Kate doesn't really have an illustrious career prior to being DOC, she didn't get 'Katy Waitey ' nickname for nothing.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Boots on the ground is a common expression in the military. Means soldiers committed to a battlefield.


Yes, I know what the expression means and its origins.  I have noticed it has been co-opted by Hollywood, often by actors and actresses who do a little bit of charitable work and throw the phrase around in an attempt to sound serious.


----------



## VickyB

anitalilac said:


> yeah totally agree, Kate Middleton parents sent and prepped  her to mingle with the wealthy and Kate doesn't really have an illustrious career prior to being DOC, she didn't get 'Katy Waitey ' nickname for nothing.




Very true.


----------



## VickyB

Flatsy said:


> Exactly.  I would never have thought about how much Meghan knew about the royal family had she not put on her golly-gee voice and pretended to be an uninformed American without an understanding of the "global interest".  That part of the interview really struck the the wrong note.  I think she was trying to get out ahead of it and it backfired.
> 
> (The other part of the interview that struck the wrong note for me was when she used the expression "boots on the ground", which is an expression I have only ever heard used by Hollywood actresses.)



ITA. We wouldn't be talking about it had she not brought it up.


----------



## chicaloca

As an American. I know of the royal family but don’t have any real detailed knowledge about them. I imagine it’s the same for most Americans including Meghan. I wouldn’t expect any American save for hardcore royal fans to have more than a basic knowledge of the British royal family. Prior to Meghan, I never really checked for the royals. To me there is nothing disingenuous about Meghan being familiar with the royals but not knowing the inner workings of the family or the extent of global interest around them. Why would any American care about that?

If you look at the life of most adults nearing 40 it will be littered with both friendships and romantic relationships that have fallen by the wayside. The difference is that most of us aren’t marrying into high profile families that would cause former friends to come out of the woodwork and publicly detail how bitter they are. All of us would look “mercenary” in our relationships if you completely ignored all of our current positive relationships and focused soley on past ones that fizzled out.

“Social climbing” is never used in a positive light and is only ever used to describe women. Prior to marrying  Harry I doubt anyone would look at Meghan’s resume and relationship history and see a scheming social climber. Her 1st husband was a chef. Marrying a prince was all it took for people disregard her education, career, activism and philanthrophy just to apply the social climbing label.


----------



## Sharont2305

Outside the Church on Christmas Day Meghan spoke to the lady who took the now famous picture of the Fab Four last Christmas Day, accepting good wishes from her Meghan said she was "nearly there" re baby.


----------



## Morgan R

Sharont2305 said:


> Outside the Church on Christmas Day Meghan spoke to the lady who took the now famous picture of the Fab Four last Christmas Day, accepting good wishes from her Meghan said she was "nearly there" re baby.


----------



## kemilia

One thing I noticed in the Christmas pics I saw was no "bump cradling." Maybe she thought it best to pull back on that, especially around the whole dang royal family.

And I agree with those not crazy about her wearing navy blue, she looks great in brighter colors and it is Christmas time, but maybe when the Queen is part of the group, the others are asked to tone down their colors so She shines the most?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> As an American. I know of the royal family but don’t have any real detailed knowledge about them. I imagine it’s the same for most Americans including Meghan. I wouldn’t expect any American save for hardcore royal fans to have more than a basic knowledge of the British royal family. Prior to Meghan, I never really checked for the royals. To me there is nothing disingenuous about Meghan being familiar with the royals but not knowing the inner workings of the family or the extent of global interest around them. Why would any American care about that?


Meghan had not one but TWO personal connections to the royal family.  That is not "average American".  She was good friends with people who went to Eton with  William and Harry.  She was also good friends with a family who were intimates of Prince Charles and kept his polo ponies (which is how she was fixed up with Harry).  And she was traveling in William and Harry's social circle and frequenting the same clubs (and befriending the club owner).  She was already living partially in their world, not some random American who learned about the royal family in passing.



> All of us would look “mercenary” in our relationships if you completely ignored all of our current positive relationships and focused soley on past ones that fizzled out.


I was referring to her current friendships as mercenary.  Friends like Jessica Mulroney with the famous last name and the fashion connections.  Meghan has always had a habit of befriending the most famous person in the room (example: Serena Williams) and now that she's married, she seems to be fostering even more elite friendships (Amal Clooney, Oprah, Michelle *****).  



> Prior to marrying  Harry I doubt anyone would look at Meghan’s resume and relationship history and see a scheming social climber. Her 1st husband was a chef.


If "social climber" is already pejorative, why always the need to add extra adjectives such as "scheming"?  

Her first husband was a producer, her boyfriend before Harry was a celebrity chef in Toronto.  Both had the cachet I spoke of.  Neither were on the level of Prince Harry, but for the level she was at at the time, they were decent "power couple" matches.  There have been multiple sources saying that Meghan's TV success - and her husband's lack of success - had a lot to do with Meghan ending the marriage.


----------



## Flatsy

kemilia said:


> One thing I noticed in the Christmas pics I saw was no "bump cradling." Maybe she thought it best to pull back on that, especially around the whole dang royal family.
> 
> And I agree with those not crazy about her wearing navy blue, she looks great in brighter colors and it is Christmas time, but maybe when the Queen is part of the group, the others are asked to tone down their colors so She shines the most?


I think Meghan's preference is for muted colors, and she would probably prefer to wear daytime black more than she does.  I think the navy is a compromise.

I noticed the total lack of bump cradling as well.  It probably would not have gone over well to do something perceived as attention-grabby when the focus was supposed to be on the entire family and the more senior royals.


----------



## Voyageuse

I’m probably a lot like Meghan in the sense that I “leave people behind very quickly” too.  For years, I gave certain friends and even my own father the benefit of the doubt.  Not surprisingly, they burned me.  Now, if I get the sense that someone is potentially toxic, I dump that person straight away.


----------



## Fally420

Voyageuse said:


> I’m probably a lot like Meghan in the sense that I “leave people behind very quickly” too.  For years, I gave certain friends and even my own father the benefit of the doubt.  Not surprisingly, they burned me.  Now, if I get the sense that someone is potentially toxic, I dump that person straight away.



Everyone understands that it is OK to leave people behind that are toxic, drag you down or aren't good for you.
But with Meghan it seems she leaves people behind more 'cause they aren't useful or beneficial anymore.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> Meghan had not one but TWO personal connections to the royal family.  That is not "average American".  She was good friends with people who went to Eton with  William and Harry.  She was also good friends with a family who were intimates of Prince Charles and kept his polo ponies (which is how she was fixed up with Harry).  And she was traveling in William and Harry's social circle and frequenting the same clubs (and befriending the club owner).  She was already living partially in their world, not some random American who learned about the royal family in passing.
> 
> 
> I was referring to her current friendships as mercenary.  Friends like Jessica Mulroney with the famous last name and the fashion connections.  Meghan has always had a habit of befriending the most famous person in the room (example: Serena Williams) and now that she's married, she seems to be fostering even more elite friendships (Amal Clooney, Oprah, Michelle *****).
> 
> 
> If "social climber" is already pejorative, why always the need to add extra adjectives such as "scheming"?
> 
> Her first husband was a producer, her boyfriend before Harry was a celebrity chef in Toronto.  Both had the cachet I spoke of.  Neither were on the level of Prince Harry, but for the level she was at at the time, they were decent "power couple" matches.  There have been multiple sources saying that Meghan's TV success - and her husband's lack of success - had a lot to do with Meghan ending the marriage.



How does sharing  acquaintances with royals   translate to actually knowing the inner workings of the royal family or understanding their global reach? I think only someone in the royal family would know — or care — about the scope of what they deal with. 

Meghan’s  true friends are mostly former costars unknowns and they  aren’t talking to the media. Just because we don’t hear from them does not mean she abandoned them for Oprah & co. That they aren’t talking to the media is likely why they will remain her true friends. 

None of the people you mentioned likely helped her graduate from Northwestern, become a relatively successful actress, a world traveler,  a human  rights activist or make a prince fall in love with her. All of her endeavors — and friendly disposition - likely put her in a position to meet people who became friends and collaborators and helped reach what people seem to think is the pinnacle - marrying a prince.

The assumption that she somehow “used” every person her life who is no longer a friend is ridiculous and somewhat sexist since no one expects men to maintain friendships with everybody they meet or have a beer with.


----------



## pixiejenna

I’m tired of seeing her in boring colors but Megan was never a flashy dresser to begin with always neutral colors. I also think that when she goes to public events with all the other royals included she isn’t bound to wear something that will steal the spotlight away from them. Imagine how the press would eat her up for that, they already pit her against Kate for basically existing.


----------



## Flatsy

I don't think randomly tossing in "if it were a man, nobody would say that" all the time is convincing.  

But I will give an example of a famous man I think is a social climber: John Krasinski.  It doesn't mean I hate him.  It doesn't mean I think he's a horrible, trashy, evil person who deserves none of his successes.  

Like Meghan, I think he goes out of his way to cultivate friendships with the most famous people he comes into contact with, such as George Clooney, Matt Damon, and Jimmy Kimmel.  As such, I think those friendships aren't purely about friendship, but are a lot about what those guys can do for him professionally (and they have done a lot).

I side-eyed the hell out of him having George Clooney host his wedding weekend on Lake Como, and the fact that a small wedding was so crammed with A-list guests.  I also laughed pretty hard one year when he got himself seated at Leonardo DiCaprio's table at the Golden Globes for no particular reason, and then was completely shut out by Leo and the rest of the Revenant gang, who had no interest in being shmoozed by a thirsty stranger.

My belief that Krasinski is a social climber does not mean I hate him.  I like him well enough.  There's not a lot of middle ground afforded in conversations about Meghan Markle.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I don't think randomly tossing in "if it were a man, nobody would say that" all the time is convincing.
> 
> But I will give an example of a famous man I think is a social climber: John Krasinski.  It doesn't mean I hate him.  It doesn't mean I think he's a horrible, trashy, evil person who deserves none of his successes.
> 
> Like Meghan, I think he goes out of his way to cultivate friendships with the most famous people he comes into contact with, such as George Clooney, Matt Damon, and Jimmy Kimmel.  As such, I think those friendships aren't purely about friendship, but are a lot about what those guys can do for him professionally (and they have done a lot).
> 
> I side-eyed the hell out of him having George Clooney host his wedding weekend on Lake Como, and the fact that a small wedding was so crammed with A-list guests.  I also laughed pretty hard one year when he got himself seated at Leonardo DiCaprio's table at the Golden Globes for no particular reason, and then was completely shut out by Leo and the rest of the Revenant gang, who had no interest in being shmoozed by a thirsty stranger.
> 
> My belief that Krasinski is a social climber does not mean I hate him.  I like him well enough.  There's not a lot of middle ground afforded in conversations about Meghan Markle.



That sounds like networking. 

And it is very true that insidious motives are usually ascribed to women who successfully  network their way to a better job or social position.  Men are rarely referred to as social climbers or gold diggers. There is an unspoken burden on women to maintain relationships while men can toss them and leave them. I don’t think Piers Morgan would expect to become BFFs with George Clooney over one-time beers at a pub.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I guess it’s all about perspective. In my book, John Krasinski is way more influential than, at the very least, Matt Damon and Jimmy Kimmel. And maybe on par with Clooney.  He’s a director and has a production studio. He’s done a lot of behind the scenes work that gives him cache. He’s been nominated for and won tons of awards. He has also starred in a very successful TV show, Amazon production, and a number of really popular movies. So I don’t see him as thirsty at all.

And didn’t one of the publications reference him as one of the most influential people of 2018? Lol. I think he is just fine without DiCaprio.


----------



## Flatsy

2018 Krasinski got a lot of help getting where he is from Damon and Clooney.  Successful sitcom actors very often stay in TV, but Clooney casting him in a movie gave him some legitimacy.  Taking over the Ben Affleck role to co-write and co-star in a Gus van Sant movie with Matt Damon (who Krasinski met through his wife) was a huge boon to his career that led to other opportunities. 

Networking is one thing.  I start to mistrust it when people's nearest and dearest and their professional contacts start to be one in the same.


----------



## A1aGypsy

It’s an interesting chicken / egg discussion.  If I’m not mistaken - Leatherheads was Clooney’s directorial debut. Who’s to say that HE wasn’t the one trying to draw on an actor who played a very popular character on a very popular show to get his numbers up?  That wasn’t JK’s first movie.

And his first screen play got a Sundance nomination. That’s well before Matt Damon. And the Gus van Sant role involved him before Matt Damon.

Anyway, like I said - things look different with perspective. But you certainly don’t see tabloid headlines accusing him (or any of the rest of them) of abusing their friendships or walking on people to get places.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> I don't think randomly tossing in "if it were a man, nobody would say that" all the time is convincing.
> 
> But I will give an example of a famous man I think is a social climber: John Krasinski.  It doesn't mean I hate him.  It doesn't mean I think he's a horrible, trashy, evil person who deserves none of his successes.
> 
> Like Meghan, I think he goes out of his way to cultivate friendships with the most famous people he comes into contact with, such as George Clooney, Matt Damon, and Jimmy Kimmel.  As such, I think those friendships aren't purely about friendship, but are a lot about what those guys can do for him professionally (and they have done a lot).
> 
> I side-eyed the hell out of him having George Clooney host his wedding weekend on Lake Como, and the fact that a small wedding was so crammed with A-list guests.  I also laughed pretty hard one year when he got himself seated at Leonardo DiCaprio's table at the Golden Globes for no particular reason, and then was completely shut out by Leo and the rest of the Revenant gang, who had no interest in being shmoozed by a thirsty stranger.
> 
> My belief that Krasinski is a social climber does not mean I hate him.  I like him well enough.  There's not a lot of middle ground afforded in conversations about Meghan Markle.


That's how I feel about Justin Theroux. When he got together with Jennifer Aniston, I thought it was true love. Then his acting career took off from being associated with her, or because of her help, and they got divorced.  He certainly benefited a lot from that relationship.


----------



## Flatsy

In addition to being a top movie star, Clooney had already directed two very successful films when he did Leatherheads and was also one of the most powerful producers in Hollywood.   Leatherheads was a big break for Krasinski, not Clooney capitalizing on the popularity of the second lead on a sitcom.

And I'm pretty sure Krasinski took the idea/draft screenplay for The Promised Land to Matt Damon, and it was Matt's clout that got the movie made.  The previous movie Krasinski adapted/directed made $27,000 at the box office.  It was a good training film for him, but not something that gave him any sort of clout as a writer or director.

Anyhow, if Krasinski married a prominent member of the British royal family and suddenly became the #1 tabloid celebrity in the world, I think his choices up to this point would be under closer scrutiny and a lot more discussed than they are now.  Especially if he also left behind an ex-spouse, and had an ex-best friend and several estranged family members willing to fuel the tabloid fires with a lot of bad things to say about him.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> Anyhow, if Krasinski married a prominent member of the British royal family and suddenly became the #1 tabloid celebrity in the world, I think his choices up to this point would be under closer scrutiny and a lot more discussed than they are now.  Especially if he also left behind an ex-spouse, and had an ex-best friend and several estranged family members willing to fuel the tabloid fires with a lot of bad things to say about him.



A lot of people in their late 30s have an ex-spouse, an ex best-friend and crappy, opportunist family members. In Meghan’s case family is a half-sister she never had a relationship with & a father who only became estranged after he humiliated her before her wedding and sold her out to the tabloids. 

The only anomaly in Meghan’s life is the part where she marries a prince.  People have retroactively applied  insidious motives to her past relationships only because she married Harry. Remove him from the equation and nothing is unusual about Meghan’s relationships. It makes perfect sense to me that an actress and humanitarian would have wide ranging friendships with people in those worlds. It also makes sense she would marry a chef being that she is a foodie. It also makes sense that as her star rose that relationship ended like it does for a lot of women whose success eclipses their spouses. 

Jealous & opportunistic ex-friends and family coming out of the woodwork after she gained worldwide fame makes the most sense of all.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Some people seem to think Meghan has a penchant for dressing in drab colors, but for some reason I don't have that same image of her because all I can think of is this disaster LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

I must admit I don’t understand the backlash for her “cradling” her bump. Since it’s her first baby she’s probably blown by how it feels to have one growing inside her.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I’ve received backlash for saying she is a social climber and opportunistic. That is her nature, and she’s successful at it because she adapts easily, is intelligent and well spoken.

Guess what, so am I. For sure I network the hell out of my industry to build relationships and future opportunities and FOR SURE I’ve made friends with tons of high level managers in my company, and cultured those relationships to my benefit and my staff’s benefit when I play the corporate game. I’m a woman and a minority in a male dominated industry. I need to do this just to compete with my male counterparts. 

I have only two close friends. One I had since 5th grade and another from my first job in my twenties. All other friends and acquaintances were through my current job and most of the higher ups were invited to my wedding. 

I also married someone whom I love, but is an ideal person to allow me to be successful at my job, because he has the same drive I do and we work in the same company. We are considered a “power couple,” and I use that to my advantage as well, when I need to.

To top that off, I’m very active in my industry in several organizations and have been working my way up and maneuvering for board positions to elevate my name and my reputation. It’s all strategic. I may become friends with these people through the process, but in the end, it’s about my career and how to make it a successful and long lasting one with plenty of upward mobility. When I volunteer for these organizations and programs, it’s not just out of the goodness of my heart, it’s also self serving. 

I guess I’m also cold hearted, because I’m the only child and despite that, I’ve shut out my parents for the last 5 years (it’s been painful and difficult), but they were emotionally manipulative; and mentally, emotionally, and physically abusive. Since that, I quite easily cut out people in my life who disrespect me or show me they are not worthy of my time and attention.

I think most people need to stop making Meghan a sinner or a saint for doing this. I own what I am and what I do.  None of us know her personally, so we all need to stop taking it too personal. Most of the time it’s not about race or ethnicity, and I don’t view it as an entirely bad thing. 

We all need to do what we need to do to move up in status in life if that is the path we choose. As long as I’m not screwing anybody over or stepping on people along the way is what is important. Lastly, to be clear, the close friendships I do retain do not at all beneficial in my industry...because they are 100% genuine. There is no poker face or fake niceties with me. You know where you stand with me at all times.


----------



## Eva1991

The sexist notion about the characterization of Meghan as a social climber is not the characterization per se. There's nothing wrong with trying to become better at your job / life / financially etc. and using networking skills to achieve this.

The sexist notion comes from the implication that Meghan did this by marrying a prince; hence a woman can achieve something better in life only by marrying / relying on a powerful man. Moreover, people insinuate that not only did she marry a prince to achieve her desired social status but everything she did _before _(mingling with the "right people", engaging in philanthropic activities etc.) she did it to actually meet the prince. Claiming that a woman can do anything not to succeed herself but to meet and marry a powerful man and therefore have power through him - as if this is the only way she can succeed in life and her only goal - is sexist.


----------



## hellosunshine

Fally420 said:


> Everyone understands that it is OK to leave people behind that are toxic, drag you down or aren't good for you.
> *But with Meghan it seems she leaves people behind more 'cause they aren't useful or beneficial anymore*.



I'm sorry but you don't know her life or any of the circumstances surrounding any relationship that she has abandoned.

I, sincerely wish we'd stick to facts before making wild accusations about her life. We don't know her.



Eva1991 said:


> The sexist notion about the characterization of Meghan as a social climber is not the characterization per se. There's nothing wrong with trying to become better at your job / life / financially etc. and using networking skills to achieve this.
> 
> The sexist notion comes from the implication that Meghan did this by marrying a prince; hence a woman can achieve something better in life only by marrying / relying on a powerful man. Moreover, people insinuate that not only did she marry a prince to achieve her desired social status but everything she did _before _(mingling with the "right people", engaging in philanthropic activities etc.) she did it to actually meet the prince. Claiming that a woman can do anything not to succeed herself but to meet and marry a powerful man and therefore have power through him - as if this is the only way she can succeed in life and her only goal - is sexist.



Very well said.


----------



## Flatsy

100% of the reason Meghan has become an icon and why we are talking about her is because of who she married.  Are we supposed to pretend we all found her inspirational back when she was on Suits because it's sexist to imply she got where she is because of marriage?

Even her most ardent admirers primarily value her now because of how she dresses, how beautiful she is, and how good she is at playing the part of the happily-ever-after princess.  



hellosunshine said:


> I'm sorry but you don't know her life or any of the circumstances surrounding any relationship that she has abandoned.
> 
> I, sincerely wish we'd stick to facts before making wild accusations about her life. We don't know her.


There are precious few "facts" when it comes to anything about Meghan Markle.  People who like her and defend her are basing their opinions on the exact same information as the people who have other opinions.
This thread wouldn't exist if we limited our discussions to official press releases from the palaces.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Eva1991 said:


> The sexist notion about the characterization of Meghan as a social climber is not the characterization per se. There's nothing wrong with trying to become better at your job / life / financially etc. and using networking skills to achieve this.
> 
> The sexist notion comes from the implication that Meghan did this by marrying a prince; hence a woman can achieve something better in life only by marrying / relying on a powerful man. Moreover, people insinuate that not only did she marry a prince to achieve her desired social status but everything she did _before _(mingling with the "right people", engaging in philanthropic activities etc.) she did it to actually meet the prince. Claiming that a woman can do anything not to succeed herself but to meet and marry a powerful man and therefore have power through him - as if this is the only way she can succeed in life and her only goal - is sexist.



I think it’s entirely fair and not at all sexist to say she was cunning and strategic about her career and her friends to position herself for an influential or powerful man who would benefit either herself or her career. She did it with her ex to help maneuver through Hollywood and land on the show Suits. Where she then capitalized on by mingling with the right set in Hollywood, Toronto, and London. It just so happens the influential powerful man ended up being Harry.

Dating Harry put her on the world stage and elevated her brand. Marrying and having children with Harry guaranteed a comfortable life for the rest of her life. Nothing is wrong with that, why? 

Because I also think it’s entirely fair to say she probably genuinely loved her ex husband and now genuinely loves Harry. They are not mutually exclusive.

Also, there are plenty of men who try to marry women who come from rich families, too, and they seek out this lifestyle because they want it. I’m not going to say if it’s right or wrong if it serves both parties in the relationship. I see it going both ways.


----------



## bisousx

Meh... I have never felt that the term social climbing is sexist or applied only to women.

A few male social climbers that instantly come to mind:

-Kevin Federline and Britney
-Prince Von Anhault (Zsa Zsa’s husband)
-John McCain (dumped his loyal wife for heiress Cindy)
-Any of Ivana’s young hubbies
-Jessica Simpson’s husband, Eric Johnson the “life coach”
-Justin Theroux and Jennifer Aniston
-French Montana and Khloe LOL
-Kylie and Tyga LOL. He dumped his babymama Chyna for an underaged rising star.
-Mary K Blige and her ex hubby whom she pays $30k/mo spousal support (shameful!)
- Scary Spice and both her ex husbands!
- Paris Hilton and various exes

The list can go on... people who are opportunistic will take anything they deem beneficial.

Meghan doesn’t strike me as someone whose life goal was to  chase down a prince, unlike Kate. But she hung out at Soho House, which is an ultra snobby spot designed only to mingle among other elites. You don’t go to Soho House for fun - its setup is boring and it doesn’t have a party atmosphere. You go there to mingle with other elites. So she either had a plan/goal to meet or simply didn’t spend her time hanging around riffraff.. plebs.. lol. She didn’t need to trick Harry. I’m sure he was enamoured by her instantly. But I would categorize her as an opportunist, same way with Kate,  and there’s nothing sexist about that.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> 100% of the reason Meghan has become an icon and why we are talking about her is because of who she married.  Are we supposed to pretend we all found her inspirational back when she was on Suits because it's sexist to imply she got where she is because of marriage?
> 
> Even her most ardent admirers primarily value her now because of how she dresses, how beautiful she is, and how good she is at playing the part of the happily-ever-after princess.
> 
> 
> There are precious few "facts" when it comes to anything about Meghan Markle.  People who like her and defend her are basing their opinions on the exact same information as the people who have other opinions.
> This thread wouldn't exist if we limited our discussions to official press releases from the palaces.



Meghan had 1.9 million people following her on Instagram, 350,000 Twitter Followers, and 800,00 Facebook likes. She wasn't as obscure and unknown as people here are implying. Just because you may not have known who she was..doesn't mean that she had no profile in the public sphere.

And yes, many people found her inspiring. Meghan often interacted with her young fans on Instagram/Twitter..always encouraging them to continue their studies and giving kind/genuine boosts of confidence pep talk. Here is one of such examples - https://www.nowtolove.com.au/royals...meghan-markle-instagram-follower-friend-52137

Secondly, I don't care for Meghan's outfit choices, how beautiful she is, or how good she is "at playing princess"..I'm genuinely interested in her because she seems like such a lovely person. Smart, articulate, kind, and openly humble to people.

Lastly, I'm not saying to limit dialogue to press releases..I'm simply saying that some people here are making some rather bold proclamations about her whereas I'm withholding as I don't know her to make such wild claims. There is a difference..that's all.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan had 1.9 million people following her on Instagram, 350,000 Twitter Followers, and 800,00 Facebook likes. She wasn't as obscure and unknown as people here are implying. Just because you may not have known who she was..doesn't mean that she had no profile in the public sphere.


Oh, really?  So you were actively following her in 2015 and this whole Harry business was just something that happened later that was of no particular interest to you?



> Lastly, I'm not saying to limit dialogue to press releases..I'm simply saying that some people here are making some rather bold proclamations about her whereas I'm withholding as I don't know her to make such wild claims. There is a difference..that's all.


I'm here for news, gossip, and photos - speculation and bold proclamations included.  I'm not interested in limiting myself to fond discussion about how inspirational she is as if I'm having tea with her mother, and won't be told that I need to do so.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Oh, really?  So you were actively following her in 2015 and this whole Harry business was just something that happened later that was of no particular interest to you?
> 
> 
> I'm here for news, gossip, and photos - speculation and bold proclamations included.  I'm not interested in limiting myself to fond discussion about how inspirational she is as if I'm having tea with her mother, and won't be told that I need to do so.



I'm a fan of her tv show, Suits. Yes, I was aware of her. I also followed her on Instagram. This whole Harry/marrying into the royal family has added to her intrigue and I do find her infinitely more interesting, yes. Why is that such a bad thing? Listen, if you didn't know her then you didn't know her..I don't know why people here are acting like she was a nobody. 

News, gossip, and photos..fine! But honestly, judging from your past comments (as you never truly have anything good or kind to say here) and your overall tone..you're just incredibly unpleasant to engage with. Also, as I remember in a past comment you said "you were certain that she's a social climber and that she does dispose of friendships that no longer have a use for her"..where is this near certainty coming from? Listen, you don't know her and neither do I but I'm choosing to think well of people and their motivations/actions/whatever...whereas I can't say the same about you..miss negative nancy. Good day!


----------



## Eva1991

What if she wasn't as well known before her marriage as she is now? We cannot compare a TV show with the BRF and the amount of exposure someone gets by participating in a TV show vs being a member of the BRF. 

Of course she became more famous after her engagement with Harry but this does not mean she married him just to become more famous. We really don't know the dynamics of their relationship and why they married each other. Some say it was love, some say it was all part of Meghan's plan. We'll never know. What we know is that they seem happy and in love with each other and are expecting their first child together. That has to mean something, right?


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Meh... I have never felt that the term social climbing is sexist or applied only to women.
> 
> A few male social climbers that instantly come to mind:
> 
> -Kevin Federline and Britney
> -Prince Von Anhault (Zsa Zsa’s husband)
> -John McCain (dumped his loyal wife for heiress Cindy)
> -Any of Ivana’s young hubbies
> -Jessica Simpson’s husband, Eric Johnson the “life coach”
> -Justin Theroux and Jennifer Aniston
> -French Montana and Khloe LOL
> -Kylie and Tyga LOL. He dumped his babymama Chyna for an underaged rising star.
> -Mary K Blige and her ex hubby whom she pays $30k/mo spousal support (shameful!)
> - Scary Spice and both her ex husbands!
> - Paris Hilton and various exes
> 
> The list can go on... people who are opportunistic will take anything they deem beneficial.
> 
> Meghan doesn’t strike me as someone whose life goal was to  chase down a prince, unlike Kate. But she hung out at Soho House, which is an ultra snobby spot designed only to mingle among other elites. You don’t go to Soho House for fun - its setup is boring and it doesn’t have a party atmosphere. You go there to mingle with other elites. So she either had a plan/goal to meet or simply didn’t spend her time hanging around riffraff.. plebs.. lol. She didn’t need to trick Harry. I’m sure he was enamoured by her instantly. But I would categorize her as an opportunist, same way with Kate,  and there’s nothing sexist about that.


Lets not forget Halle Berry and Gabrielle Aubry .. although I must say, he was FINE!!!

All that being said, no matter what we read about Meghan, do anyone of us "know" her or her motivations, etc.? .. NO.  However, one item that I do want to point out is that most (not all) successful actresses can be pretty tough cookies .. and they get used to NOT hearing the word 'NO'!  Remember Reese Witherspoon and what she said to the cop who arrested she and her husband for drunk driving?  Many of the Hollywood types that have achieved fame can be very demanding, and an interesting observation that I have seen is that oftentimes when they are a 'B' actress, they can be even worse (for some odd reason they are usually very thirsty).  I live out here in LA and run into quite a few of them and honestly, I can count on 1 hand .. the actresses who are NICE, most are NOT.

So, all the chatter about her emails/texts at 5am .. yeah, could very well be .. but on the other hand, it's what people are used to and the BRF staff are likely not used to it.  Anyhoo .. I also wanted to say that you can't always believe everything you see/read on Instagram, etc.  I know a gal who used to work for Oprah, and even though most ADORE her, WOW .. when I heard her stories .. well, let's just say that I have zero respect for her.  Also had a friend who worked for Martha Stewart and pretty much the same thing.  Sadly, there are so few people who make it big by being nice .. just sayin'!

I think we all need to keep an open mind and let everyone have their say; that's what this thread is all about ..


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> News, gossip, and photos..fine! But honestly, judging from your past comments (as you never truly have anything good or kind to say here) and your overall tone..you're just incredibly unpleasant to engage with. Also, as I remember in a past comment you said "you were certain that she's a social climber and that she does dispose of friendships that no longer have a use for her"..where is this near certainty coming from? Listen, you don't know her and neither do I but I'm choosing to think well of people and their motivations/actions/whatever...whereas I can't say the same about you..miss negative nancy. Good day!


You choose to think well of Meghan Markle, but not people who say anything that's not 100% complimentary about Meghan Markle.  Then you pass final judgment that those people's motivations are racist.  Or you high-handedly berate them for being unkind.  Or you tell them they are out line for speculating about someone they don't know personally, which goes on in every page of every thread in the Celebrity forum. 

I used to be a lot more pro-Meghan before she developed a legion of followers who feel she must be defended against any and all criticism as if she's a member of their own family.  

I have never said I was certain about anything, nor was I the one who said she disposes of friendships that are no longer of use to her.  I said she's a social climber and I put in the effort to explain why I believe that, based on what has been written about her relationship history.  You are free to provide counterpoint if you disagree.


----------



## Tivo

I think Meghan likes attention and wants to impress the right people. Which is typical of a Hollywood actress - no big deal. But in her interviews she comes off, as someone mentioned upthread, like she’s doing a “golly-gee” routine. She’s not that good of an actress. It’s like, you’ve already secured the bag! Girl, stop and just be yourself. There is nothing left to prove.

But then, she’s in the BRF game now, and being herself might be currently being frowned upon. Either way, she’ll tire of wearing that mask.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Tivo said:


> I think Meghan likes attention and wants to impress the right people. Which is typical of a Hollywood actress - no big deal. But in her interviews she comes off, as someone mentioned upthread, like she’s doing a “golly-gee” routine. She’s not that good of an actress. It’s like, you’ve already secured the bag! Girl, stop and just be yourself. There is nothing left to prove.
> 
> But then, she’s in the BRF game now, and being herself might be currently being frowned upon. Either way, she’ll tire of wearing that mask.



Based on her difficult childhood with her questionable family, she’s probably been wearing that “mask” for quite some time now. That’s probably her best asset since she’s now dealing with the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

People also used to refer to the late Carolyn Bessete an “opportunist” and “social climber,” but climbing can only take you so far. Like others here said, he fell in love with her. Is it duplicitous to plot and plan, sure, but what’s wrong with trying to elevate ones status? So far she’s kind and considerate and shining her spotlight on some great causes.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> You choose to think well of Meghan Markle, but not people who say anything that's not 100% complimentary about Meghan Markle.  Then you pass final judgment that those people's motivations are racist.  Or you high-handedly berate them for being unkind.  Or you tell them they are out line for speculating about someone they don't know personally, which goes on in every page of every thread in the Celebrity forum.
> 
> I used to be a lot more pro-Meghan before she developed a legion of followers who feel she must be defended against any and all criticism as if she's a member of their own family.
> 
> I have never said I was certain about anything, nor was I the one who said she disposes of friendships that are no longer of use to her.  I said she's a social climber and I put in the effort to explain why I believe that, based on what has been written about her relationship history.  You are free to provide counterpoint if you disagree.


I don't know how much of a social climber she was.  I take all this info with a grain of salt.  But what I do know is that is it undeniable that by marrying Harry she became one of of the most watched women in the world.  Before that, regardless of whatever social media she was on, most of us knew nothing of her.


----------



## Flatsy

prettyprincess said:


> People also used to refer to the late Carolyn Bessete an “opportunist” and “social climber,” but climbing can only take you so far. Like others here said, he fell in love with her. Is it duplicitous to plot and plan, sure, but what’s wrong with trying to elevate ones status? So far she’s kind and considerate and shining her spotlight on some great causes.


I think Carolyn Bessette was a bit of a social climber as well.  Unfortunately, she struggled with depression and other issues that made her not cut out to handle the public "job" part of her marriage.  
One of the reasons Meghan seems to be a very good match for Harry is that she *wants* to be part of his world, she's enthusiastic about the work it involves, she's outgoing, she doesn't shy away from the spotlight, and she's tough.  Any one of those things is a potential double-edged sword, but right now they are pretty big assets.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I think Carolyn Bessette was a bit of a social climber as well.  Unfortunately, she struggled with depression and other issues that made her not cut out to handle the public "job" part of her marriage.
> One of the reasons Meghan seems to be a very good match for Harry is that she *wants* to be part of his world, she's enthusiastic about the work it involves, she's outgoing, she doesn't shy away from the spotlight, and she's tough.  Any one of those things is a potential double-edged sword, but right now they are pretty big assets.


Caroline Bessette had such style IMO.  Loved her wedding gown and the little chapel where they got married.


----------



## bisousx

Social climbing does take one very far if successful. IMO, it’s different from gold digging where a person simply wants luxurious things and a cushy lifestyle.

When you want to have an elevated social status and prestige, including the opportunity to work in the public’s eye, bring exposure to charities and causes (which is actual work instead of sitting around looking pretty for gifts or a nice lifestyle), it’s hardly the same thing. I don’t see anything wrong per se with social climbing and using your newfound status to help other people via charity work.

But... What I think rubs some people the wrong way about Meghan is that she feels the need to act as if she’s not social climbing and it was purely coincidental that she met the prince. She strategically placed herself in the right circles in hopes to achieve something, and ended up landing a great catch. As I stated before, Soho House is not a fun party spot. It is an exclusive member’s only social spot where only the young elite are allowed in. I’ve been to a few of them and personally found the venues to be incredibly boring. You would have to really want to be there, or really want to not mingle with regular folk.

Meghan neither has to explain herself nor act as if it was one big coincidence that she landed a prince. But because she does... she’s coming across as phony. Maybe she isn’t and has made a few missteps. But with the rumors swirling that she’s unpleasant to work with and her feigning innocence about meeting Harry... Kate is becoming far more likeable in my eyes. Because for all of Kate’s social climbing and waiting around for William, at least she doesn’t deny it and is known for being extra kind to her staff.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Social climbing does take one very far if successful. IMO, it’s different from gold digging where a person simply wants luxurious things and a cushy lifestyle.
> 
> When you want to have an elevated social status and prestige, including the opportunity to work in the public’s eye, bring exposure to charities and causes (which is actual work instead of sitting around looking pretty for gifts or a nice lifestyle), it’s hardly the same thing. I don’t see anything wrong per se with social climbing and using your newfound status to help other people via charity work.
> 
> But... What I think rubs some people the wrong way about Meghan is that she feels the need to act as if she’s not social climbing and it was purely coincidental that she met the prince. She strategically placed herself in the right circles in hopes to achieve something, and ended up landing a great catch. As I stated before, Soho House is not a fun party spot. It is an exclusive member’s only social spot where only the young elite are allowed in. I’ve been to a few of them and personally found the venues to be incredibly boring. You would have to really want to be there, or really want to not mingle with regular folk.
> 
> Meghan neither has to explain herself nor act as if it was one big coincidence that she landed a prince. But because she does... she’s coming across as phony. Maybe she isn’t and has made a few missteps. But with the rumors swirling that she’s unpleasant to work with and her feigning innocence about meeting Harry... Kate is becoming far more likeable in my eyes. Because for all of Kate’s social climbing and waiting around for William, at least she doesn’t deny it and is known for being extra kind to her staff.


don't know how Meghan treats staff but if Kate is known for be extra kind to hers, then I like her even more than I already did
It's easy to be nice to the people "above" you but how kind you are to the people "below" you tells more IMO


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> don't know how Meghan treats staff but if Kate is known for be extra kind to hers, then I like her even more than I already did
> It's easy to be nice to the people "above" you but how kind you are to the people "below" you tells more IMO



I agree. I always appreciate when people are kind to others. That’s why I find it hard to like a lot of celebrities, as beautiful as they are and I enjoy looking at their clothes, once they’ve been known to mistreat the “help” or people below them, I can’t look at them the same way.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> I agree. I always appreciate when people are kind to others. That’s why I find it hard to like a lot of celebrities, as beautiful as they are and I enjoy looking at their clothes, once they’ve been known to mistreat the “help” or people below them, I can’t look at them the same way.


same here....as someone posted above, about Reese Witherspoon, I never forgot her arrogance with the police.....she's not the same to me since then


----------



## Gimmethebag

I want to respond to the comments that Soho House is “boring” and that “no one goes there to have fun” or that it’s only a social climbing place. I’m no longer a Meghan fan, but her setting her sights out for a Prince have little to do with Soho House as a whole. I’m a member and in my experience, most people join for ease of entertaining/business meetings, social events to meet new people, and the privacy policy. The club hosts nightly member events so there is entertainment other than the usual dinner or drinks. This month, I went to a lecture on hacking, learned how to tie-dye and wrap gifts using silk scarves, and enjoyed a white elephant holiday party. Some of the houses have movie theaters, spas, gyms, rooftop pools, etc. and members get special rates on hotel rooms. I hate seeing comments that it’s a snobby place because in my experience, that can’t be farther from the truth.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I think Meghan thinks about Kate a lot more than vice versa. I also don't think anyone is in a feud with Meghan per se, but rather, William's on guard after so many palace leaks. After growing up in L.A. and working as an actress, it seems like it's Meghan's instinct to work the press. William without a doubt has reservations about the media after his mother's death. Meghan seems to talk to her "friends" who then either talk openly as a palace source or are coded as "palace insiders." One story I have in mind was that her mother was invited to Sandringham for Christmas, which wasn't the case. It came across like she wanted to make the rumor public, gather positive public sentiment, and then force the BRF into compliance. Add in three staffers quitting within six months for working for the Duchess of Sussex, and I can understand why William is feeling protective of his family, staff, and even the institution he will someday need to head.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> same here....as someone posted above, about Reese Witherspoon, I never forgot her arrogance with the police.....she's not the same to me since then


I totally agree with you about Reese, every time I see her in a C&B commercial, I'm just "eesh."


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I totally agree with you about Reese, every time I see her in a C&B commercial, I'm just "eesh."



that "do you know who I am?" crap........as I recall it was reported her husband was even trying to shut her up.....I know she had been drinking but still.....not something I will forget


----------



## princess101804

I think the problem is Megan is still trying to work the media as though she's still in Hollywood (not that she was really successful in Hollywood). She might care about certain causes etc. but to me, and many others, she doesn't come off as genuine or nice. 

Eugenie moved her wedding so that Harry and Megan could get married in May, but then Megan went and announced her pregnancy the day before/after Eugenie's wedding. The timing of which became suspicious with the leaks about how Megan wanted a certain emerald tiara and didn't get it but Eugenie did. The timing of her pregnancy announcement came off as tacky and rude. And considering how very little we heard of personal matters regarding the BRF all the leaks seem to be coming from Megan feeding them to her friends like Jessica Mulroney etc.

She can keep burning her bridges now but she needs to understand that Will/Kate will be her bosses one day and she needs to understand Harry is now 6th in line to the throne aka as irrelevant as Prince Andrew/Beatrice etc. Kindness and being genuine can take you a long way.


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> same here....as someone posted above, about Reese Witherspoon, I never forgot her arrogance with the police.....she's not the same to me since then


Didn't Reese pull the "don't you know who I am " card? I may have confused her with some other celebs that have.


----------



## VickyB

Being an actress, it will be impossible for anybody to tell who is the "real" Meghan. I have no clue  if her behavior is genuine or not. She seems very "on" at many engagements especially at the one recently at that fashion award show.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

I guess no one recalls all the articles about staff quitting the  Cambridges due to their rudeness and demands? I like how Kate is retroactively being bestowed sainthood regarding staff.

Why would Meghan be leaking all these negative rumors about herself? The press has been claiming that Doria is in London, on the way to London, moving to London..etc for months.  In each case Doria’s  papped minding her own business in LA. Meghan, unlike Kate has been living independently and spending Christmas apart from her mother for years. There is no evidence or reason for her to make up a rumor about a queen invite. That rumor sounds like the media trying to stir the drama pot between Meghan and The Midddletons who have never been invited to Sandringham.

Meghan doesn’t need to work any media angles. She’s the most googled woman in the world. For all the talk of her supposedly being an attention whore, you don’t see Meghan & Harry when they aren’t working. They don’t call the paps on themselves like the Middletons.


----------



## TMA

Every time I stumble into this thread, can never tell if I accidentally stumbled on the DailyFail comment section.


----------



## Flatsy

VickyB said:


> Being an actress, it will be impossible for anybody to tell who is the "real" Meghan. I have no clue  if her behavior is genuine or not. She seems very "on" at many engagements especially at the one recently at that fashion award show.


I don't think I've ever seen her not "on".  She has her "professional" voice and persona.  She seems to have great stamina for it, which is a good thing because that's her job now and if things go well, she'll be doing it for a long time.  But she doesn't come across as 100% genuine.

Her fashion awards speech was her royal persona in a nutshell.  A completely ******** speech about how fashion is about women supporting women and kindness. LOL.  But she looked beautiful, she was poised and graceful, and just by saying a few words, she made the event important and memorable, which is what she was there for.


----------



## CeeJay

Gimmethebag said:


> I think Meghan thinks about Kate a lot more than vice versa. I also don't think anyone is in a feud with Meghan per se, but rather, William's on guard after so many palace leaks. After growing up in L.A. and working as an actress, it seems like it's Meghan's instinct to work the press. William without a doubt has reservations about the media after his mother's death. Meghan seems to talk to her "friends" who then either talk openly as a palace source or are coded as "palace insiders." One story I have in mind was that her mother was invited to Sandringham for Christmas, which wasn't the case. It came across like she wanted to make the rumor public, gather positive public sentiment, and then force the BRF into compliance. Add in three staffers quitting within six months for working for the Duchess of Sussex, and I can understand why William is feeling protective of his family, staff, and even the institution he will someday need to head.


Very interesting, because here in the States, it was originally reported that Meghan's mom WAS going to Sandringham for Christmas and I remember I thought to myself "wow - that's interesting".  Next thing you know, there is an article that Meghan's mother wanted to stay in the US.  AHA !!!!  I believe what you are saying; maybe Meghan wanted her mother there, but under no circumstances was an invitation ever given. 

From other media reports as of late and the video of all leaving the Christmas Mass with William playing with his scarf and appearing to ignore Meghan's convo with him, I suspect that you are also correct in that it's actually William who has concerns.  Again, supposedly, William voiced concern over Harry wanting to marry Meghan very soon after meeting/dating.  I get that, heck .. your immediate family are always going to be the most concerned because they KNOW YOU BEST!


----------



## CeeJay

VickyB said:


> Didn't Reese pull the "don't you know who I am " card? I may have confused her with some other celebs that have.


Yes she did, but trust me .. I've seen quite a bit of that in other stupid situations .. like in a department store when a Z-class TV presenter's boyfriend screamed at me for 'taking pictures' of the Z-class TV presenter trying on shoes in a Neiman Marcus store!  I retorted with "*Who the #F are you?*" as I had no idea who/what he was talking about as I was texting my husband since he had dropped me off before going off to a Doctor's appointment in Beverly Hills!  When I looked up, it took me a few minutes to figure out who he was talking about, to which my second retort was "*sit your A@@ down you fool, as though I would care to take a picture of a FORMER Z-class TV presenter - get a life!*"  The Sales folks all chuckled and he sat down and shut-up.  I don't take crap from anyone (my husband knows this), sure as heck some stupid barely-no-name!


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I don't think I've ever seen her not "on".  She has her "professional" voice and persona.  She seems to have great stamina for it, which is a good thing because that's her job now and if things go well, she'll be doing it for a long time.  But she doesn't come across as 100% genuine.
> 
> Her fashion awards speech was her royal persona in a nutshell.  A completely ******** speech about how fashion is about women supporting women and kindness. LOL.  But she looked beautiful, she was poised and graceful, and just by saying a few words, she made the event important and memorable, which is what she was there for.


Maybe it's just me, but it almost seems as though Kate doesn't really care about fashion and being so "glitzy" as Meghan.  I know that on Instagram, Facebook, etc. (and also since I'm on their mailing list), there were TONS of pictures of Meghan wearing Pippa Small jewelry.  Well, that's great advertisement for Pippa Small, but I can tell you that Pippa's work is RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE!!  Yes, it's beautiful, and yes - it's mostly 22k or 18k gold, but other than the work she does with diamonds, the stones are by no means "extravagant" - e.g., Herkimer Diamonds. Lapis Lazuli, Amethyst, etc.  What I do like about Pippa Small, is that she works with/employs artisans from other countries which benefit from the profits (for instance Turquoise Mountain).  However, when I saw the pieces that Meghan was wearing (a good friend works at Pippa's store in the Brentwood Country Mart), they were not her 'cheap' pieces (which are usually made out of plated gold).  A question for you Brits .. who pays for those pieces, or are they "on loan" (kind of like what many celebrities do when going to the Emmy's or Oscar's)?  If I was a British taxpayer and had to pay for that stuff, man .. I would be pissed!!!


----------



## Morgan R

CeeJay said:


> Maybe it's just me, but it almost seems as though Kate doesn't really care about fashion and being so "glitzy" as Meghan.  I know that on Instagram, Facebook, etc. (and also since I'm on their mailing list), there were TONS of pictures of Meghan wearing Pippa Small jewelry.  Well, that's great advertisement for Pippa Small, but I can tell you that Pippa's work is RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE!!  Yes, it's beautiful, and yes - it's mostly 22k or 18k gold, but other than the work she does with diamonds, the stones are by no means "extravagant" - e.g., Herkimer Diamonds. Lapis Lazuli, Amethyst, etc.  What I do like about Pippa Small, is that she works with/employs artisans from other countries which benefit from the profits (for instance Turquoise Mountain).  However, when I saw the pieces that Meghan was wearing (a good friend works at Pippa's store in the Brentwood Country Mart), they were not her 'cheap' pieces (which are usually made out of plated gold).  A question for you Brits .. who pays for those pieces, or are they "on loan" (kind of like what many celebrities do when going to the Emmy's or Oscar's)?  If I was a British taxpayer and had to pay for that stuff, man .. I would be pissed!!!



The pieces Meghan wore at the British Fashion Awards were from Pippa Small's Turquoise Mountain Foundation which was founded by Prince Charles in 2006. Meghan has actually worn pieces from the Turquoise Mountain Foundation a lot and over again. So possible she was gifted pieces of the jewelery by Prince Charles.


----------



## bisousx

Gimmethebag said:


> I want to respond to the comments that Soho House is “boring” and that “no one goes there to have fun” or that it’s only a social climbing place. I’m no longer a Meghan fan, but her setting her sights out for a Prince have little to do with Soho House as a whole. I’m a member and in my experience, most people join for ease of entertaining/business meetings, social events to meet new people, and the privacy policy. The club hosts nightly member events so there is entertainment other than the usual dinner or drinks. This month, I went to a lecture on hacking, learned how to tie-dye and wrap gifts using silk scarves, and enjoyed a white elephant holiday party. Some of the houses have movie theaters, spas, gyms, rooftop pools, etc. and members get special rates on hotel rooms. I hate seeing comments that it’s a snobby place because in my experience, that can’t be farther from the truth.



You’re taking what I said out of context. As you know, Soho House is a members only club w/ multiple locations. As for boring or not boring, snobby or not snobby, that’s a matter of personal opinion   Part of the appeal of a members only club is the exclusion of others. After all, if I wanted to swim in a very nice pool or go to a clean gym, I could just simply book a room at five-star hotel or sign up at Equinox which is available to anyone who can afford it. Unlike a members only club. 

True, not everyone @ soho house is a social climber.
Either you’re a member “one of them”, or you’re the kind of person who wants to become a member so you can mingle with elites. I was brought to Soho House by girlfriends who desperately wanted to meet a rich husband one day, and I found the venues to be boring. Shrug.  

The fact that news articles reference Meghan’s attendance at Soho House alludes to her wanting to mingle with elites only. I don’t think anyone believes she was gunning to meet a royal. She may have been happy just to meet anyone important who could elevate her status further, whether it was a man or woman, platonic, romantic or whoever.


----------



## Gimmethebag

CeeJay said:


> Very interesting, because here in the States, it was originally reported that Meghan's mom WAS going to Sandringham for Christmas and I remember I thought to myself "wow - that's interesting."  Next thing you know, there is an article that Meghan's mother wanted to stay in the US.  AHA !!!!  I believe what you are saying; maybe Meghan wanted her mother there, but under no circumstances was an invitation ever given.
> 
> From other media reports as of late and the video of all leaving the Christmas Mass with William playing with his scarf and appearing to ignore Meghan's convo with him, I suspect that you are also correct in that it's actually William who has concerns.  Again, supposedly, William voiced concern over Harry wanting to marry Meghan very soon after meeting/dating.  I get that, heck .. your immediate family are always going to be the most concerned because they KNOW YOU BEST!



I believe William has legitimate concerns regarding their personal privacy. He and Kate have worked out a deal with the media that they will give them some pictures of the kids in exchange for mostly private family life. And here comes Harry's new wife, with palace leaks to craft a public persona. My favorite BS articles are the ones about Meghan is giving the Duchess of Cambridge style tips, as if the woman doesn't already have personal relationships with some of the best designers in the world.

I also think William is more angry with Harry and vice versa. I don't think Kate cares enough to have a feud with Meghan. I do believe that Harry is attracted to Meghan and her Hollywood maneuvers because he's trying to find his own purpose and value within the BRF. As the Queen gets older, the divide between the brothers creates two radically different paths. William is now preparing to be Prince of Wales and King, while Harry is now a minor royal. I think Harry likes Meghan's insistence to act like an A-list celebrity instead of a royal. I think Harry sees celebrity as a means to equal influence as his brother.


----------



## bisousx

CeeJay said:


> Yes she did, but trust me .. I've seen quite a bit of that in other stupid situations .. like in a department store when a Z-class TV presenter's boyfriend screamed at me for 'taking pictures' of the Z-class TV presenter trying on shoes in a Neiman Marcus store!  I retorted with "*Who the #F are you?*" as I had no idea who/what he was talking about as I was texting my husband since he had dropped me off before going off to a Doctor's appointment in Beverly Hills!  When I looked up, it took me a few minutes to figure out who he was talking about, to which my second retort was "*sit your A@@ down you fool, as though I would care to take a picture of a FORMER Z-class TV presenter - get a life!*"  The Sales folks all chuckled and he sat down and shut-up.  I don't take crap from anyone (my husband knows this), sure as heck some stupid barely-no-name!



The lower they are on the list, the ruder they are. I used to work in PR and on those red carpet events, the A listers were often gracious and nice, while the D listers are the ones who are snotty and condescending etc. 

It was always the D listers who are asking for the most freebies too!


----------



## Gimmethebag

bisousx said:


> You’re taking what I said out of context. As you know, Soho House is a members only club w/ multiple locations. As for boring or not boring, snobby or not snobby, that’s a matter of personal opinion   Part of the appeal of a members only club is the exclusion of others. *After all, if I wanted to swim in a very nice pool or go to a clean gym, I could just simply book a room at five-star hotel or sign up at Equinox which is available to anyone who can afford it. Unlike a members only club.*
> 
> True, not everyone @ soho house is a social climber.
> Either you’re a member “one of them”, or you’re the kind of person who wants to become a member so you can mingle with elites. I was brought to Soho House by girlfriends who desperately wanted to meet a rich husband one day, and I found the venues to be boring. Shrug.
> 
> *The fact that news articles reference Meghan’s attendance at Soho House alludes to her wanting to mingle with elites only.* I don’t think anyone believes she was gunning to meet a royal. She may have been happy just to meet anyone important who could elevate her status further, whether it was a man or woman, platonic, romantic or whoever.



Just so you're aware, anyone can book a hotel room at a Soho House and use the club amenities during your stay. Members get their own rate on these rooms, but rooms are available to the public. You can also book event spaces and host private events in the clubs. I want to clarify this because again, while the club is shrouded in mystery, I hate people thinking we're all a bunch of elitist snobs, lol.


----------



## mcb100

There are multiple media articles going around saying that she is very difficult to work for and that she has made her staff cry on numerous occasions.
I was kind of surprised because she has been made out to seem to be very likeable and seems like she would be a nice person, but I can't say anything for sure because I do not know the real Meghan.

It is probably a difficult job in general, working for the royal family and handling all of the tasks and drama 24/7.


----------



## Eva1991

Gimmethebag said:


> I believe William has legitimate concerns regarding their personal privacy. He and Kate have worked out a deal with the media that they will give them some pictures of the kids in exchange for mostly private family life. And here comes Harry's new wife, with palace leaks to craft a public persona. My favorite BS articles are the ones about Meghan is giving the Duchess of Cambridge style tips, as if the woman doesn't already have personal relationships with some of the best designers in the world.
> 
> *I also think William is more angry with Harry and vice versa. I don't think Kate cares enough to have a feud with Meghan. I do believe that Harry is attracted to Meghan and her Hollywood maneuvers because he's trying to find his own purpose and value within the BRF. As the Queen gets older, the divide between the brothers creates two radically different paths. William is now preparing to be Prince of Wales and King, while Harry is now a minor royal. I think Harry likes Meghan's insistence to act like an A-list celebrity instead of a royal. I think Harry sees celebrity as a means to equal influence as his brother.*



I agree with this. William is probably concerned that his younger brother married a girl he knew for only a year but not everyone's the same. Some know they found love the moment they meet someone while for others it may take time. For Harry it took a year to propose and for William it took a lot more. This is probably due to the fact that the two brothers have completely different personalities. William seems more like an introvert and perhaps life made him like that; his parents divorced, his mother died while he was still in his teens and then his dad married another woman and all this happened as he was training to be King someday which is not an easy task. Harry on the other hand knew that he probably would never become King and enjoyed living his life with all the perks that being a royal has but not with the responsibilities / restrictions of William.

Kate and Meghan are different people as well. They come from different backgrounds and have different goals in life. I do not think that they're in a feud with each other though. I think the brothers are in disagreement over things and the press makes it seem like it's all about their wives while it's probably not.


----------



## Tivo

bisousx said:


> The lower they are on the list, the ruder they are. I used to work in PR and on those red carpet events, the A listers were often gracious and nice, while the D listers are the ones who are snotty and condescending etc.
> 
> It was always the D listers who are asking for the most freebies too!



I have personally found this to be true. The newbies to fame also tend to be more unpleasant as well.


----------



## TMA

mcb100 said:


> There are multiple media articles going around saying that she is very difficult to work for and that she has made her staff cry on numerous occasions.
> I was kind of surprised because she has been made out to seem to be very likeable and seems like she would be a nice person, but I can't say anything for sure because I do not know the real Meghan.
> 
> It is probably a difficult job in general, working for the royal family and handling all of the tasks and drama 24/7.



Multiple media outlets regurgitate the same story and some even boldly embellish said initial story, which does not mean it is multiple actual events. Also, the media prefers to make it seem was mean to staff but no actual account of this so-called mean behavior - why did the sources not provide an e.g of what happened? Sending emails at 5am is by no means wickedness to staff if they are not expected to react at the time. I send emails at odd hours and expect pple working with me to pick it up when they start their day. Also, the media claim she’s lost 3 members of staff, without making clear the 1st one was Harry’s long term secretary that dropped his resignation before the engagement but stayed through till after the wedding, a temp private secretary seconded to them from the Queen’s staff who had actually resigned from position with the Queen but agreed to help with Meghan’s transition - was meant to be a 6 month   gig but has agreed to stay until baby is born. The only staff that allegedly left was a Melissa woman who I can’t tell anyone has observed with Meghan in her many engagements before the wedding. No news report has said exactly what was so unbearable, except she felt stressed leading up to the wedding. The articles are always marinated in just enough insinuation without actually being factual as to cause. Just as with most things one needs to have a discerning mind to be able to weed through to the substance, which most of the reports are lacking in. Has it occurred to anyone that the staff may have had a bad attitude problem - or an employer is not allowed to react to bad attitude from their staff? Meghan’s current assistant that has been helping before the engagement is constantly seen smiling out on engagements with Meghan and they seem to have a good rapport. May be the issue has been blown out of proportion to push a narrative?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

chicaloca said:


> I guess no one recalls all the articles about staff quitting the  Cambridges due to their rudeness and demands? I like how Kate is retroactively being bestowed sainthood regarding staff.
> 
> Why would Meghan be leaking all these negative rumors about herself? The press has been claiming that Doria is in London, on the way to London, moving to London..etc for months.  In each case Doria’s  papped minding her own business in LA. Meghan, unlike Kate has been living independently and spending Christmas apart from her mother for years. There is no evidence or reason for her to make up a rumor about a queen invite. That rumor sounds like the media trying to stir the drama pot between Meghan and The Midddletons who have never been invited to Sandringham.
> 
> Meghan doesn’t need to work any media angles. She’s the most googled woman in the world. For all the talk of her supposedly being an attention whore, you don’t see Meghan & Harry when they aren’t working. They don’t call the paps on themselves like the Middletons.



I agree it is like people forget or weren't closely following the royals before Meghan got involved. Like all they saw were pictures of Harry and William & Kate plus their kids but didn't actively follow the stories that surrounded them. It seems Meghan formerly being an actress is always going to be used against her by some (either she is referred to as "Hollywood", accused as over-acting at engagements, etc.). I will say I agree she is always "On" but honestly all the royals are always "On" because if they weren't they would all be considered "snobs", "rude", etc. to the various people they meet at charities. Some think Meghan likes the attention yet Meghan unlike a lot of other Royals isn't seen outside of her engagements. I've followed the royals for years before Meghan was a part of the British Royal Family so I've always listened to a lot of commentary by royal reporters and some royal podcasts hosted by royal reporters and a lot of them make it no secret they aren't the fondest of the move to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor because Harry and Meghan will get much more privacy there compared to Kensington Palace (and they are already considered a pretty private couple that are in the spotlight due to being royals). The royal reporters mentioned in recent years now that he has matured they really aren't in the know regarding a lot of info about Harry and more specifically they know even less about Meghan because they all say Harry is very protective of her (something many of them notice when attending joint engagements with Harry and Meghan). A lot of the royal reporters have mentioned they didn't know about Meghan having meetings with Hubb Community Kitchen throughout this year, they got very little notice about the "Together" cookbook being released that was in support of the Hubb Community Kitchen, they didn't know about the British Fashion Awards appearance (so none of them were there), and they haven't had access to the many private engagements Harry and Meghan have done since their Pacific tour (they have only become aware of the engagements due to the "Court Circular" on the royal family website that tells about various royal engagements).  The royal reporters know some of Meghan's patronages will be announced around the start of the new year but they don't know for certain what they are.

Some mentioned they think Meghan is having her friends speak as coded "palace insiders" or "sources" that isn't the case most of the "palace insiders"/"palace sources" articles released have tried to paint Meghan in a bad light something royals always deal with is royal reporters using "palace insiders"/"palace sources" (which more often actually isn't a source but a royal reporters' opinion shaping the narratives for articles) trying to paint royals a certain way. I think what should be put in perspective is that in the press the heir has always gotten far more respectable pieces written about them/protection from hit pieces than the "spare" has and Meghan is married to the "spare" (like do people know Harry and William share essentially the same group of friends, attended the same parties, did a lot of the same things yet what made it to the press was mostly info about Harry's misdoings or articles that made Harry look bad in comparison William during their teens and 20s). I think royal reporters think attacking Meghan is going to make her and Harry use some of them as a source (that is what they did  by constantly attacking William & Kate and they gave into that somewhat and it is also no secret Diana tried to befriend reporters and paparazzi thinking it would help her when honestly it tragically aided in her death). It is an open secret William and Kate use the press (not saying it is bad thing just stating that if you have really been following the royals it is something many know) for the occasional pictures with their kids outside of engagements but also for the occasional "fluff" pieces when they don't have engagements (i.e. stories about their vacations, hinting at patronages months before they visit or are announced, etc.). The people in the press they feed stories to are often Rebecca English of the Dailymail and both Stephanie Petit & Simon Perry of People Magazine. For example Kate's new patronage (Evelina London Children's Hospital) was only just officially announced in early December  but was actually hinted at by Rebecca English back in early September. I think the royal reporters see that as of yet they aren't going to be a source so not only has there been an onslaught of negative articles about Meghan but also through many articles they have been pushing Meghan to reconnect with her father because he has ended up giving info to the press which is exactly what he said Harry and Meghan told him not do. The press really doesn't have a source to Meghan and Harry. Meghan's celebrity friends might share a casual mention about her if asked but it is never anything detailed just like how with Harry and William's celebrity friends (i.e Nacho Figueras, The Beckhams, Elton John, Tom Hardy, Idris Elba, etc.) are asked about them they never say anything to detailed but will tell a quick story if asked.


----------



## Morgan R

Also would like mention that I don't agree that Harry is trying to find his own purpose and value like some have stated. I always see the common misconception (both in this thread and elsewhere) that Harry is a minor royal....currently he is not. Harry and Meghan are both actually considered senior royals. Harry and Meghan actually won't be considered minor royals until William and Kate's kids are all of age. Then Harry and Meghan will become minor working royals. Queen Elizabeth II's 3 children aside from Charles: Andrew, Anne, and Edward plus Sophie (Edward's Wife) were considered Senior Royals until the mid-2000s.
The Senior Royals right now are considered to be Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles, Camilla, Prince William, Kate, Prince Harry, and Meghan. Even though they are more senior in age then William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan the following are considered to be minor working royals: Prince Andrew, Princess Anne, Prince Edward, Sophie (Prince Edward's wife), Prince Richard (Duke of Gloucester), Birgitte (Duchess of Gloucester), Prince Edward (Duke of Kent), Katharine (Duchess of Kent), Prince Michael of Kent, Princess Michael of Kent, and Princess Alexandra. Even when you are a minor royal it doesn't mean you carry out less engagements. Princess Anne often carries out more engagements than anybody in the royal family and for her consistently doing that has been  longtime dubbed by the press the "hardest working royal".

Harry has always known he wasn't going to be King and has mentioned before he is glad he isn't going to be but that still won't lessen his role within the monarchy. He is the grandson on current monarch then in the future he will be the son and brother to future monarchs. The whole idea of being a working royal (regardless if you are a senior royal or minor royal) is to support the monarch. Harry mentioned in the engagement interview his and Meghan's focus was going to very much on the Commonwealth. A few months later Queen Elizabeth II announced that Harry would be Commonwealth Youth Ambassador (a role that he will still have when both Charles and William are Kings) so obviously he knew about the role he was getting months in advance hence him mentioning the Commonwealth often in the engagement interview. The Commonwealth is important to the monarchy yet it seems many in the public forget or don't know in addition to being the monarch to the UK, Queen Elizabeth II is currently also the head of state to 16 of the 53 Commonwealth Nations (something Charles and William will also inherit when they are monarch). Also when Prince Charles becomes King it is no secret he wants to slowly "slim" the monarchy to just it being his direct family so that means him, Camilla, William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan will be the working royals rather than the nearly 20 combined senior and minor working royals. So William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan will actually all have to do more work than they do now/take on bigger roles. Many assume once Prince Charles is King he will give the duties of his charity the Prince's Trust to Harry (in fact Harry was just recently a part of a round table with Prince Charles to support the Prince's Trust) because that charity falls inline with Harry's ongoing goal of helping the youth and more specifically the Prince's Trust is focused on the UK youth (Harry has already been named Commonwealth Youth Ambassador but Harry also created the charity Sentebale back when he was 22 and the goal of that charity which is based in Africa is to help vulnerable youth/communities effected with HIV/AIDS  by helping improve their health, care, and education). Harry knows his role won't be King but he will always have a role supporting the monarch even when he inevitably is a minor royal. He has already created the foundations Invictus Games and Sentebale. Since Harry and Meghan are involved with Commonwealth it pretty much suspected Harry and Meghan will create a foundation or multiple foundations that will strengthen the bonds between the UK and the Commonwealth.


----------



## Eva1991

Morgan R said:


> Also would like mention that I don't agree that Harry is trying to find his own purpose and value like some have stated. I always see the common misconception (both in this thread and elsewhere) that Harry is a minor royal....currently he is not. *Harry and Meghan are both actually considered senior royals. Harry and Meghan actually won't be considered minor royals until William and Kate's kids are all of age. Then Harry and Meghan will become minor working royals. Queen Elizabeth II's 3 children aside from Charles: Andrew, Anne, and Edward plus Sophie (Edward's Wife) were considered Senior Royals until the mid-2000s.
> The Senior Royals right now are considered to be Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles, Camilla, Prince William, Kate, Prince Harry, and Meghan. Even though they are more senior in age then William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan the following are considered to be minor working royals: Prince Andrew, Princess Anne, Prince Edward, Sophie (Prince Edward's wife), Prince Richard (Duke of Gloucester), Birgitte (Duchess of Gloucester), Prince Edward (Duke of Kent), Katharine (Duchess of Kent), Prince Michael of Kent, Princess Michael of Kent, and Princess Alexandra.* Even when you are a minor royal it doesn't mean you carry out less engagements. Princess Anne often carries out more engagements than anybody in the royal family and for her consistently doing that has been  longtime dubbed by the press the "hardest working royal".
> 
> Harry has always known he wasn't going to be King and has mentioned before he is glad he isn't going to be but that still won't lessen his role within the monarchy. He is the grandson on current monarch then in the future he will be the son and brother to future monarchs. The whole idea of being a working royal (regardless if you are a senior royal or minor royal) is to support the monarch. Harry mentioned in the engagement interview his and Meghan's focus was going to very much on the Commonwealth. A few months later Queen Elizabeth II announced that Harry would be Commonwealth Youth Ambassador (a role that he will still have when both Charles and William are Kings) so obviously he knew about the role he was getting months in advance hence him mentioning the Commonwealth often in the engagement interview. The Commonwealth is important to the monarchy yet it seems many in the public forget or don't know in addition to being the monarch to the UK, Queen Elizabeth II is currently also the head of state to 16 of the 53 Commonwealth Nations (something Charles and William will also inherit when they are monarch). Also when Prince Charles becomes King it is no secret he wants to slowly "slim" the monarchy to just it being his direct family so that means him, Camilla, William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan will be the working royals rather than the nearly 20 combined senior and minor working royals. So William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan will actually all have to do more work than they do now/take on bigger roles. Many assume once Prince Charles is King he will give the duties of his charity the Prince's Trust to Harry (in fact Harry was just recently a part of a round table with Prince Charles to support the Prince's Trust) because that charity falls inline with Harry's ongoing goal of helping the youth and more specifically the Prince's Trust is focused on the UK youth (Harry has already been named Commonwealth Youth Ambassador but Harry also created the charity Sentebale back when he was 22 and the goal of that charity which is based in Africa is to help vulnerable youth/communities effected with HIV/AIDS  by helping improve their health, care, and education). Harry knows his role won't be King but he will always have a role supporting the monarch even when he inevitably is a minor royal. He has already created the foundations Invictus Games and Sentebale. Since Harry and Meghan are involved with Commonwealth it pretty much suspected Harry and Meghan will create a foundation or multiple foundations that will strengthen the bonds between the UK and the Commonwealth.



Is this senior / minor royals list something official? Or is it assumed based on how close the relationship that someone has with the current monarch is? Most of the minor royals you mention do a lot of charity work, visits etc. like Sophie, Edward's wife; she's a very active royal.


----------



## Morgan R

Eva1991 said:


> Is this senior / minor royals list something official? Or is it assumed based on how close the relationship that someone has with the current monarch is? Most of the minor royals you mention do a lot of charity work, visits etc. like Sophie, Edward's wife; she's a very active royal.



It is assumed based on the line of succession once you become of age you replace a senior royal who then becomes a minor royal. Just because someone is a minor royal doesn't mean they do less work. William, Kate, and Harry have all gotten slack from the press for being Senior royals that do far less work than minor royals. There are some minor royals are more known because they were recently Senior Royals before William and Harry were of age and got married obviously that is most notably Andrew, Anne, Edward, and Sophie (Queen Elizabeth II's other children plus her daughter-in-law) than their are minor working royals the general public might not be very aware of lets say someone like Prince Richard (Queen Elizabeth II's Cousin/Currently 26th in line to the throne) he is a minor working royal for many years now but was once a Senior royal. Despite being a minor royal now he has consistently carried out over 200+ engagements a year for years now.

In comparison from 2011 to 2018 William has only done over 200+ engagements just this year. Kate really has gotten slack because she has done as little as 34 (back in 2011 - as we know her and William got married that year) engagements a year and at most has done 140 engagements. Harry engagements numbers were more effected due to the fact that he actively served in the British Army so before he retired he did as little as 16 engagements in a year but his numbers of engagements have more steadily increased since he retired army has done but has only  200+ engagements once (in 2017). Meghan hasn't gotten slack for her engagements count because this year she has done nearly 130 engagements since she got married in May. She might get slack if that  number doesn't increase or lowers (obviously excluding years she has maternity leave) in the future but that is a good amount of engagements for only half a year of being a royal.


----------



## DeMonica

CeeJay said:


> Maybe it's just me, but it almost seems as though Kate doesn't really care about fashion and being so "glitzy" as Meghan.  I know that on Instagram, Facebook, etc. (and also since I'm on their mailing list), there were TONS of pictures of Meghan wearing Pippa Small jewelry.  Well, that's great advertisement for Pippa Small, but I can tell you that Pippa's work is RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE!!  Yes, it's beautiful, and yes - it's mostly 22k or 18k gold, but other than the work she does with diamonds, the stones are by no means "extravagant" - e.g., Herkimer Diamonds. Lapis Lazuli, Amethyst, etc.  What I do like about Pippa Small, is that she works with/employs artisans from other countries which benefit from the profits (for instance Turquoise Mountain).  However, when I saw the pieces that Meghan was wearing (a good friend works at Pippa's store in the Brentwood Country Mart), they were not her 'cheap' pieces (which are usually made out of plated gold).  A question for you Brits .. who pays for those pieces, or are they "on loan" (kind of like what many celebrities do when going to the Emmy's or Oscar's)?  If I was a British taxpayer and had to pay for that stuff, man .. I would be pissed!!!


Kate cares about fashion but may not care about being glitzy. She has been doing an excellent job fashion-wise, because she dresses for "the job" perfectly.  William isn't even Heir Apparent yet, but most likely will be king in the future, and eventually Kate is going to be queen, hence she has to be more conservative than Meghan.


----------



## berrydiva

What is the work that the royals actually do? I see a lot of people criticizing Will/Kate for doing less work but I don't think I really understood what their work is outside of appearances.


----------



## Flatsy

berrydiva said:


> What is the work that the royals actually do? I see a lot of people criticizing Will/Kate for doing less work but I don't think I really understood what their work is outside of appearances.


Royal work is ceremonial, so making appearances is the bulk of it.  When they are the patron of a charity, they might go to a board meeting.  William and Harry alternate going to the monthly meetings of their foundation.  (All of which "counts" on their list of engagements.)

One of the things many people appreciate about projects like the Invictus Games or the Hubb Community Kitchen Cookbook is that they clearly involve Meghan and Harry doing some prior background work beyond just showing up for an event.

But all things considered, most of the royals have a pretty light schedule, interrupted frequently by lengthy vacations.


----------



## bag-princess

*Meghan Markle's Protection Officers Reportedly Put Her Sister on a "Fixated Persons" List*


So, uh, looks like Kensington Palace is potentially taking ~measures~ against Meghan Markle's sister Samantha Markle. According to reports from _The Daily Mail_, The Duchess' protection officers briefed Scotland Yard on "the damage Samantha could cause to the Royal family's reputation," and she's allegedly been placed on a "fixated persons list."

Meanwhile, Samantha is less than thrilled about this news, and took it to Twitter to respond. "This is ridiculous you don’t silence somebody by making an example out of them and sensationalizing circumstances by disparaging them," she tweeted. "Sorry you don’t infringe on freedom of speech especially when I talk about my life. #USSupremeCourt #FreedomOfSpeech #SamanthaMarkle."


"There should be a written constitution in the UK that protect individuals for freedom of speech. All I’ve asked is that my sister be good to our father," she continued, noting that "This is a British media attempt at silencing me *when all I’ve done is advocate for the kind treatment of our dad and point out truth. You don’t silence me*."  


It's unclear what being on this alleged list _means_, but a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said_,_ 'We do not confirm the identity of any person who may or may not be of interest to police unless that person has been charged with an offense."



https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/uh-meghan-markle-apos-protection-155400165.html


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> *Meghan Markle's Protection Officers Reportedly Put Her Sister on a "Fixated Persons" List*
> 
> 
> So, uh, looks like Kensington Palace is potentially taking ~measures~ against Meghan Markle's sister Samantha Markle. According to reports from _The Daily Mail_, The Duchess' protection officers briefed Scotland Yard on "the damage Samantha could cause to the Royal family's reputation," and she's allegedly been placed on a "fixated persons list."
> 
> Meanwhile, Samantha is less than thrilled about this news, and took it to Twitter to respond. "This is ridiculous you don’t silence somebody by making an example out of them and sensationalizing circumstances by disparaging them," she tweeted. "Sorry you don’t infringe on freedom of speech especially when I talk about my life. #USSupremeCourt #FreedomOfSpeech #SamanthaMarkle."
> 
> 
> "There should be a written constitution in the UK that protect individuals for freedom of speech. All I’ve asked is that my sister be good to our father," she continued, noting that "This is a British media attempt at silencing me *when all I’ve done is advocate for the kind treatment of our dad and point out truth. You don’t silence me*."
> 
> 
> It's unclear what being on this alleged list _means_, but a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said_,_ 'We do not confirm the identity of any person who may or may not be of interest to police unless that person has been charged with an offense."
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/uh-meghan-markle-apos-protection-155400165.html


seems more of a pest than security risk to me


----------



## Sharont2305

It isn't just ceremonial and they do do a lot of research into whatever they do. They don't just turn up. There's a lot of learning behind the scenes which we don't see obviously.
Members of the Royal Family support The Queen in her many State and national duties, as well as carrying out important work in the areas of public and charitable service, and helping to strengthen national unity and stability.

Those who undertake official duties are members of The Queen's close family: her children, grandchildren and their spouses, and The Queen's cousins (the children of King George VI's brothers) and their spouses.

Every year the Royal Family as a whole carries out over 2,000 official engagements throughout the UK and worldwide.

These engagements may include official State responsibilities. Members of the Royal Family often carry out official duties in the UK and abroad where The Queen cannot be present in person. The Prince of Wales and The Princess Royal, for example, may present members of the public with their honours at an Investiture.

When official events such as receptions, State banquets and garden parties are held, the Royal Family supports The Queen in making her guests welcome.

Members of the Royal Family also often represent The Queen and the nation in Commonwealth or other countries, at events such as State funerals or national festivities, or through longer visits to strengthen Britain's diplomatic and economic relations.

The Royal Family also plays an important role in supporting and encouraging the public and charity sectors. About 3,000 organisations list a member of the Royal Family as patron or president.

The huge range of these organisations - covering every subject from education to the environment, hospitals to housing - allows members of the Royal Family to meet people from a wide spectrum of national and local life, and to understand their interests, problems and concerns.

*2,000:* the number of official engagements carried out by the Royal Family each year in the UK and overseas.

*70,000:* the number of people entertained each year to dinners, lunches, receptions and garden parties at the Royal residences.

*100,000:* the number of letters received and answered each year by the Royal Family.

Some members of the Royal Family have also established their own charities - for example, The Prince's Trust, The Duke of Edinburgh's Award Scheme and The Princess Royal Trust for Carers, a charity which provides advice and support for people acting as carers.

The Royal Family also plays an important role in recognising and supporting the work of the Armed Services. Members of the Royal Family have official relationships with many units of the Forces, paying regular visits to soldiers, sailors and airmen serving at home and abroad.

Finally, the Royal Family as a whole plays a role in strengthening national unity. Members of the Royal Family are able to recognise and participate in community and local events in every part of the UK, from the opening of new buildings to celebrations or acts of commemoration.

The Queen working by herself would be unable to attend every engagement to which she is invited. Members of the Royal Family can undertake local or specialist engagements which would otherwise have to be declined.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> seems more of a pest than security risk to me


Yep. Besides, too little too late.


----------



## Flatsy

I find it very plausible that Samantha's next stunt could involve trying to approach Meghan at an event since she wasn't able to gain access to the palace.  In that case, good idea for Meghan's security to all be on the lookout for her and keep her away.  I assumed they already were though.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> I find it very plausible that Samantha's next stunt could involve trying to approach Meghan at an event since she wasn't able to gain access to the palace.  In that case, good idea for Meghan's security to all be on the lookout for her and keep her away.  I assumed they already were though.


This is exactly my fear. Hope our border force don't let her in!


----------



## Eva1991

Morgan R said:


> It is assumed based on the line of succession once you become of age you replace a senior royal who then becomes a minor royal. Just because someone is a minor royal doesn't mean they do less work. William, Kate, and Harry have all gotten slack from the press for being Senior royals that do far less work than minor royals. There are some minor royals are more known because they were recently Senior Royals before William and Harry were of age and got married obviously that is most notably Andrew, Anne, Edward, and Sophie (Queen Elizabeth II's other children plus her daughter-in-law) than their are minor working royals the general public might not be very aware of lets say someone like Prince Richard (Queen Elizabeth II's Cousin/Currently 26th in line to the throne) he is a minor working royal for many years now but was once a Senior royal. Despite being a minor royal now he has consistently carried out over 200+ engagements a year for years now.
> 
> In comparison from 2011 to 2018 William has only done over 200+ engagements just this year. Kate really has gotten slack because she has done as little as 34 (back in 2011 - as we know her and William got married that year) engagements a year and at most has done 140 engagements. Harry engagements numbers were more effected due to the fact that he actively served in the British Army so before he retired he did as little as 16 engagements in a year but his numbers of engagements have more steadily increased since he retired army has done but has only  200+ engagements once (in 2017). Meghan hasn't gotten slack for her engagements count because this year she has done nearly 130 engagements since she got married in May. She might get slack if that  number doesn't increase or lowers (obviously excluding years she has maternity leave) in the future but that is a good amount of engagements for only half a year of being a royal.



I didn't know all that. Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## bag-princess

Flatsy said:


> I find it very plausible that Samantha's next stunt could involve trying to approach Meghan at an event since she wasn't able to gain access to the palace.  In that case, good idea for Meghan's security to all be on the lookout for her and keep her away.  I assumed they already were though.




EXACTLY!! I could see her going from pest to all out crazy for attention!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Even George, Charlotte and Louis, given the line of succession could be considered senior Royals, obviously because of the ages, they aren't workwise


----------



## Eva1991

Flatsy said:


> I find it very plausible that Samantha's next stunt could involve trying to approach Meghan at an event since she wasn't able to gain access to the palace.  In that case, good idea for Meghan's security to all be on the lookout for her and keep her away.  I assumed they already were though.



If something like that happens then it's up to Meghan to decide what she wants. In case her sister does show up at an event that Meghan is attending then I assume that Meghan's security detail will have to do what she instructs them.

I highly doubt that her sister would do this though. She probably knows that it would cause a great stir and more negative press directed her way. Not to mention that she'll lose any chance she has of rekindling her relationship with Meghan again - if she really wants to rekindle their relationship that is.


----------



## Flatsy

> I highly doubt that her sister would do this though. *She probably knows that it would cause a great stir and more negative press directed her way. *Not to mention that she'll lose any chance she has of rekindling her relationship with Meghan again - if she really wants to rekindle their relationship that is.


LOL, I think that's exactly what Samantha lives for.  That, and the money associated with causing the stir.  Unlike the father, Samantha hasn't had any relationship with Meghan in many, many years.

My guess is that the purpose of the fixated persons list is to make sure that people like Samantha are not granted a ticket to any ticketed royal events, and that her face is known to all security so she can be identified in a crowd if she attempts to crash an event, and removed before Meghan's arrival. I think there's no way she would be placed on such a list without Meghan approving, if not requesting it.


----------



## doloresmia

Eva1991 said:


> If something like that happens then it's up to Meghan to decide what she wants. In case her sister does show up at an event that Meghan is attending then I assume that Meghan's security detail will have to do what she instructs them.
> 
> I highly doubt that her sister would do this though. She probably knows that it would cause a great stir and more negative press directed her way. Not to mention that she'll lose any chance she has of rekindling her relationship with Meghan again - if she really wants to rekindle their relationship that is.



She actually staged a stunt visit to Buckingham Palace to ‘reconcile’ - so yeah she could be a threat. She definitely is mean.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meghan’s security detail will act based upon their own protocols and perceived threat, she won’t have a say in it.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> You choose to think well of Meghan Markle, but not people who say anything that's not 100% complimentary about Meghan Markle.  Then you pass final judgment that those people's motivations are racist.  Or you high-handedly berate them for being unkind.  Or you tell them they are out line for speculating about someone they don't know personally, which goes on in every page of every thread in the Celebrity forum.
> 
> I used to be a lot more pro-Meghan before she developed a legion of followers who feel she must be defended against any and all criticism as if she's a member of their own family.
> 
> I have never said I was certain about anything, nor was I the one who said she disposes of friendships that are no longer of use to her.  I said she's a social climber and I put in the effort to explain why I believe that, based on what has been written about her relationship history.  *You are free to provide counterpoint if you disagree.*



I do disagree but I have no interest in going back and forth with you. I've already responded to you many times before but this is getting boring tbh. #SorryNotSorry


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Meghan’s security detail will act based upon their own protocols and perceived threat, she won’t have a say in it.


Yep, security are in charge, not Meghan.


----------



## Sharont2305

doloresmia said:


> She actually staged a stunt visit to Buckingham Palace to ‘reconcile’ - so yeah she could be a threat. She definitely is mean.



She obviously didn't do any research here. Meghan doesn't live in Buckingham Palace, Harry has never ever lived there! The Queen only basically lives there "part time"


----------



## DeMonica

^^^It's either the lack of research or she wanted to make her plea more dramatic. A little wheelchair bound woman in front of those huge wrought iron fences and gate....it works much better than at Kensington Palace and there's no chance to meet Meghan at all. 
I know of course that Kensington Palace has gates but it's not so grand and it's open most of the time for visitors.


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> ^^^It's either the lack of research or she wanted to make her plea more dramatic. A little wheelchair bound woman in front of those huge wrought iron fences and gate....it works much better than at Kensington Palace and there's no chance to meet Meghan at all.
> I know of course that Kensington Palace has gates but it's not so grand and it's open most of the time for visitors.


True, but it's hardly dramatic at the side gate of Buckingham Palace. To me Kensington Palace would have been more effective as I think there is only one way in, one way out. BP have several ways in.


----------



## Tivo

bag-princess said:


> *Meghan Markle's Protection Officers Reportedly Put Her Sister on a "Fixated Persons" List*
> 
> 
> So, uh, looks like Kensington Palace is potentially taking ~measures~ against Meghan Markle's sister Samantha Markle. According to reports from _The Daily Mail_, The Duchess' protection officers briefed Scotland Yard on "the damage Samantha could cause to the Royal family's reputation," and she's allegedly been placed on a "fixated persons list."
> 
> Meanwhile, Samantha is less than thrilled about this news, and took it to Twitter to respond. "This is ridiculous you don’t silence somebody by making an example out of them and sensationalizing circumstances by disparaging them," she tweeted. "Sorry you don’t infringe on freedom of speech especially when I talk about my life. #USSupremeCourt #FreedomOfSpeech #SamanthaMarkle."
> 
> 
> "There should be a written constitution in the UK that protect individuals for freedom of speech. All I’ve asked is that my sister be good to our father," she continued, noting that "This is a British media attempt at silencing me *when all I’ve done is advocate for the kind treatment of our dad and point out truth. You don’t silence me*."
> 
> 
> It's unclear what being on this alleged list _means_, but a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police said_,_ 'We do not confirm the identity of any person who may or may not be of interest to police unless that person has been charged with an offense."
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/uh-meghan-markle-apos-protection-155400165.html


She is batSh!t crazy.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> True, but it's hardly dramatic at the side gate of Buckingham Palace. To me Kensington Palace would have been more effective as I think there is only one way in, one way out. BP have several ways in.


They don't use the Golden Gates and the other gates are not really spectacular.  I think she only wanted her pic taken there. I think Sam enjoys the attention and doesn't really care about the reconciliation. IMO she has burnt the bridges behind her already.


----------



## Jayne1

Gimmethebag said:


> I also think William is more angry with Harry and vice versa. I don't think Kate cares enough to have a feud with Meghan. I do believe that Harry is attracted to Meghan and her Hollywood maneuvers because he's trying to find his own purpose and value within the BRF. As the Queen gets older, the divide between the brothers creates two radically different paths. William is now preparing to be Prince of Wales and King, while Harry is now a minor royal.* I think Harry likes Meghan's insistence to act like an A-list celebrity instead of a royal.* I think Harry sees celebrity as a means to equal influence as his brother.


That's a good way to put it. 

Harry is very visible and a globe trotter, but he is not performing many royal duties.  Even less than William and Will is called work shy!

It's wonderful to appear at charity events of one's choosing, but those are not part of his royal duties and not included in the list of royal work statistics.


----------



## Jayne1

Morgan R said:


> It seems Meghan formerly being an actress is always going to be used against her by some (either she is referred to as "Hollywood", accused as over-acting at engagements, etc.).* I will say I agree she is always "On" but honestly all the royals are always "On" because if they weren't they would all be considered "snobs", "rude", etc. to the various people they meet at charities.* Some think Meghan likes the attention yet Meghan unlike a lot of other Royals isn't seen outside of her engagements.


The Queen is never "on" and neither is Anne, Princess Royal, or Prince Philip when he was working.

I've noticed William and Kate always appear to be acting and of course, Meghan (she's very good!) and Diana was really aware of her audience and was a great manipulator, but the older royals were just hard working and doing their jobs, IMO.


----------



## hellosunshine

Btw Ayesha Azareka is absolutely correct in her commentary starting @1:54.  The british media scrutiny of Meghan is multi-layered..it's not as simple as "she's the new one" or "anyone Harry married would've received such treatment". 

Honestly, I'm just thankful that sources within Harry & Meghan's circle already saw this reaction coming and therefore now see it as "sad, predictable, and boring".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Eva1991

^ As the repoter in the end said, Meghan has other things to worry about at the moment (a baby on the way, moving to Frogmore Cottage, selecting which charities to be a patron of, adjusting to her duties as a new Duchess etc.). Maybe she has an idea of what's being said and written about her but, at the end of the day, she has far more important things to deal with than negative press.


----------



## chaneljewel

I think Meghan is strong enough to overcome the news media negativity.  She’s newly married and about to have a baby.   These are the important things in life to worry about.  What others think is trivial as most of the time you can’t change their minds anyway.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Jayne1 said:


> That's a good way to put it.
> 
> Harry is very visible and a globe trotter, but he is not performing many royal duties.  Even less than William and Will is called work shy!
> 
> It's wonderful to appear at charity events of one's choosing, but those are not part of his royal duties and not included in the list of royal work statistics.



William the future King did 225 engagements, while Harry the "spare" and sixth in line to the throne did 200. Not that much difference  really.

https://writeroyalty.com/royal-work-statistics-2018-annual-edition


----------



## DeMonica

hellosunshine said:


> Btw Ayesha Azareka is absolutely correct in her commentary starting @1:54.  The british media scrutiny of Meghan is multi-layered..it's not as simple as "she's the new one" or "anyone Harry married would've received such treatment".
> 
> Honestly, I'm just thankful that sources within Harry & Meghan's circle already saw this reaction coming and therefore now see it as "sad, predictable, and boring".



It might be multi layered but I don't think it's racist in a way most people understand racism. It's more like xenophobic. White EU citizens working in the UK have been just as vilified in the press as Sadiq Khan. Unfortunately it's the current political climate which is quite sad, because, according to my personal experience, the British people are nice and welcoming in general. Brexit just made it worse. 
Besides, I don't think that anyone expected Meghan's family behaviour, mostly Samantha's antics. I know that Meghan is not responsible for their behaviour but it makes harder to have the press on your side if your "loving" family acts like backwater hicks.
Anyway, she has other fish to fry. I wish her luck.


----------



## hellosunshine

Did anyone here happen to notice that Meghan's instagram account was re-activated temporarily last week? It apparently was a glitch in their system but people familiar with the account prior to the deactivation last year, noticed that a lot of key photos during the "dating phase" were deleted. For instance, the photo below of Prince Harry in a Golden Girls sweatshirt w/ the caption * "I take full responsibility for this sweatshirt. He wears it well. #goldengirls #truth" *was gone.






https://www.eonline.com/news/997728/here-s-why-meghan-markle-s-instagram-mysteriously-reactivated


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> William the future King did 225 engagements, while Harry the "spare" and sixth in line to the throne did 200. Not that much difference  really.
> 
> https://writeroyalty.com/royal-work-statistics-2018-annual-edition


According to your linked article, they are still way behind their grandmother, father, uncles, aunt and cousin.  All older than them too.


----------



## minababe

hellosunshine said:


> Did anyone here happen to notice that Meghan's instagram account was re-activated temporarily last week? It apparently was a glitch in their system but people familiar with the account prior to the deactivation last year, noticed that a lot of key photos during the "dating phase" were deleted. For instance, the photo below of Prince Harry in a Golden Girls sweatshirt w/ the caption * "I take full responsibility for this sweatshirt. He wears it well. #goldengirls #truth" *was gone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.eonline.com/news/997728/here-s-why-meghan-markle-s-instagram-mysteriously-reactivated



I don' think this is true. I followed her in her suits days and never saw that Picture. she never showed Harry on her Instagram.
btw I don't get why People are so hyped with her Instagram account. she closed it because she wanted. she didn't has to do that. Eugenie and some more royals are having Instagram Accounts. I think she just wanted to have one more just for her friends etc. I'm sure she is still active on Instagram but with a new account that no one should know from press and fans.
many of her friends and co stars mentioned her in their Instagram stories and profiles and they still do so i'm sure she can see that


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Jayne1 said:


> According to your linked article, they are still way behind their grandmother, father, uncles, aunt and cousin.  All older than them too.


Yep, but you were talking about William in comparison, right?


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Yep, but you were talking about William in comparison, right?


I was, yes.

I just can't get over how little the younger generation does in comparison to their older relatives.  The Queen is going to be such a hard act to follow, I keep saying that.


----------



## Fally420

Jayne1 said:


> I was, yes.
> 
> I just can't get over how little the younger generation does in comparison to their older relatives.  The Queen is going to be such a hard act to follow, I keep saying that.



Me too, therefore I wonder how things will change when Will is king. Charles is also a hard worker.


----------



## gazoo

William and Harry have been coddled massively throughout their lives, probably due to the mess with Diana. Now the BRF's reputation is on the line, in a way. Neither of them are known for working their butts off like the other members of the family (the older generation that is). Meghan is actually more of a workaholic than the whole lot of them (William, Harry & Kate) put together, so lets see if she can ramp everyone up. Even if just to compete with her, it's a win. No wonder Charles and the Queen seem so taken with her.


----------



## VickyB

gazoo said:


> William and Harry have been coddled massively throughout their lives, probably due to the mess with Diana. Now the BRF's reputation is on the line, in a way. Neither of them are known for working their butts off like the other members of the family (the older generation that is). Meghan is actually more of a workaholic than the whole lot of them (William, Harry & Kate) put together, so lets see if she can ramp everyone up. Even if just to compete with her, it's a win. No wonder Charles and the Queen seem so taken with her.



I agree. I get the impression that she is fully committed to the role/responsibilities and will NOT be work shy. Am very interested to see of which charities she becomes patron!


----------



## elvisfan4life

FreeSpirit71 said:


> William the future King did 225 engagements, while Harry the "spare" and sixth in line to the throne did 200. Not that much difference  really.
> 
> https://writeroyalty.com/royal-work-statistics-2018-annual-edition


No longer spare there are 3 before him


----------



## Voyageuse

Lol!  At this point, Harry’s merely excess inventory.


----------



## Sharont2305

New engagements announced
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Birkenhead on Monday 14th January. Their Royal Highnesses will visit a number of local organisations that support and empower groups within the local community.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

Sharont2305 said:


> New engagements announced
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Birkenhead on Monday 14th January. Their Royal Highnesses will visit a number of local organisations that support and empower groups within the local community.



can't wait


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## EvaH

She is a real pro. That's a perfect PR, wonderful choices of patronage and again, she has been meeting with those people & having regular visits and no one knew (talking about SmartWork).

I love what a boss she is and how her whole life seems to have brought her exactly where she was supposed to. I mean... can you imagine going to university to study theatre in the USA and end up being patron of one of the oldest national theatre in the world? Talk about trusting that the dots will connect and being intentional in building who you are and practicing who you want to be / get where you want to be...except it is probably not even something she could have dreamed of. Oh how I would love to hear her talk / write a book a la Michelle *****!


----------



## Sharont2305

EvaH said:


> She is a real pro. That's a perfect PR, wonderful choices of patronage and again, she has been meeting with those people & having regular visits and no one knew (talking about SmartWork).
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is how it works for all patronage, it's all very hush hush, they do a tremendous amount of groundwork for all their intended charities etc. They are not just a name, this is why I get a bit tardy when people think they don't work, as in appearances etc. They work behind the scenes.
> These patronage of Meghan's are a good fit for her. Very pleased.
Click to expand...


----------



## Sharont2305

Don't know how that happened ^^^
Yeah, this is how it works for all patronage, it's all very hush hush, they do a tremendous amount of groundwork for all their intended charities etc. They are not just a name, this is why I get a bit tardy when people think they don't work, as in appearances etc. They work behind the scenes.
These patronage of Meghan's are a good fit for her. Very pleased.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan visiting Smart Works


----------



## Sharont2305

I love her bump.


----------



## myown

What exactly is a patron?


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Meghan visiting Smart Works
> 
> View attachment 4301519
> View attachment 4301515
> View attachment 4301516
> View attachment 4301517
> View attachment 4301518
> View attachment 4301548
> View attachment 4301549
> View attachment 4301520
> View attachment 4301521


could someone please fix the labels on the boxes? that hurt my OCD-eyes


----------



## Tivo

Morgan R said:


>



Wow! Good for Meghan. I’m impressed.


----------



## Sharont2305

She's good promotion for Victoria Beckham at the moment Good neighbours


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

myown said:


> What exactly is a patron?



She'll give them money and publicity.


----------



## papertiger

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> *She'll give them money* and publicity.



That's a outmoded role of a patron in her case, although there are patrons of the arts who do give their money generously. 

She won't be expected to give them money but she will make them money from her name being associated with them. She will lend her name to their headed notepaper and presence to key performances, occasions etc. Kind of an ambassador.

Royal patrons usually are tied in with their favourite interest charities or public bodies. The Queen = horses, the late Princess Margret = the ballet Prince Philip = wildlife, Price Harry = injured servicemen  etc


----------



## Flatsy

myown said:


> What exactly is a patron?


The Royal family's website has an explanation of patronages: https://www.royal.uk/charities-and-patronages-1

The word "publicity" is repeated several times and that's pretty much what it amounts to.  It's also an honor to give royal recognition to people who are doing good work.

Meghan's visit to SmartWork is pretty much what it's all about - she did a photo op with them and now more people know about the charity and what it does.


----------



## Jayne1

This isn't new, is it?
*
Meghan and Harry's Frogmore Cottage renovation paid for by taxpayer
*
- Queen gave the 10-bed Cottage to Harry and Meghan,
- it's currently undergoing renovations.
- insiders claim it will cost up to 3 million pounds and will be covered by the Sovereign Grant funded by taxpayers.
- Meghan and Harry will pay for the furniture.
- the environmental-friendly couple wants to add fireplaces, staircases and a floating floor.
- Harry and Meghan plan to move in this Spring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## stephci

Jayne1 said:


> This isn't new, is it?
> *
> Meghan and Harry's Frogmore Cottage renovation paid for by taxpayer
> *
> - Queen gave the 10-bed Cottage to Harry and Meghan,
> - it's currently undergoing renovations.
> - insiders claim it will cost up to 3 million pounds and will be covered by the Sovereign Grant funded by taxpayers.
> - Meghan and Harry will pay for the furniture.
> - the environmental-friendly couple wants to add fireplaces, staircases and a floating floor.
> - Harry and Meghan plan to move in this Spring.



Floating floor???


----------



## alex9179

stephci said:


> Floating floor???



Just a common term for flooring that doesn't need to be nailed, glued, or otherwise attached to the sub-floor.  It can be a variety of materials. Cork, laminate, vinyl, etc.  I imagine that their looking at recycled/recyclable materials since it was even mentioned, at all.


----------



## Jayne1

Apparently the public isn't thrilled about the 3 million pounds it will cost.


----------



## VickyB

Jayne1 said:


> This isn't new, is it?
> *
> Meghan and Harry's Frogmore Cottage renovation paid for by taxpayer
> *
> - Queen gave the 10-bed Cottage to Harry and Meghan,
> - it's currently undergoing renovations.
> - insiders claim it will cost up to 3 million pounds and will be covered by the Sovereign Grant funded by taxpayers.
> - Meghan and Harry will pay for the furniture.
> - the environmental-friendly couple wants to add fireplaces, staircases and a floating floor.
> - Harry and Meghan plan to move in this Spring.



Thanks! What is a floating floor? And last time I checked  fireplaces (wood burning) are not environmentally friendly (in US at least). I have 3 and am shamed if I light fires in them.  Perhaps the happy couple are installing gas fireplaces? Altho now those are under suspicion too re environmentally PC.


----------



## anitalilac

Jayne1 said:


> This isn't new, is it?
> *
> Meghan and Harry's Frogmore Cottage renovation paid for by taxpayer
> *
> - Queen gave the 10-bed Cottage to Harry and Meghan,
> - it's currently undergoing renovations.
> - insiders claim it will cost up to 3 million pounds and will be covered by the Sovereign Grant funded by taxpayers.
> - Meghan and Harry will pay for the furniture.
> - the environmental-friendly couple wants to add fireplaces, staircases and a floating floor.
> - Harry and Meghan plan to move in this Spring.



so what about other royals' renovation?


----------



## VickyB

She looks great! She's starting to really resemble Minnie Driver to me.


----------



## VickyB

alex9179 said:


> Just a common term for flooring that doesn't need to be nailed, glued, or otherwise attached to the sub-floor.  It can be a variety of materials. Cork, laminate, vinyl, etc.  I imagine that their looking at recycled/recyclable materials since it was even mentioned, at all.


Thanks! So how is the flooring secured???


----------



## alex9179

Someone mentioned that they could be plumbed for gas. Other options are manufactured logs similar to Duraflame, or just never lighting a fire and enjoying a decorated mantle. I wouldn't take a fireplace out of an historic home, even I didn't take advantage of having a fire in it.


----------



## alex9179

VickyB said:


> Thanks! So how is the flooring secured???



The planks or sections are secured with a tongue and groove system. The boards/squares have some kind of insulating underlayment adhered to the back of the pieces. To disguise the perimeter, shoe mould is often added on top of the floating floor and married to the existing baseboards. Because I don't care for the look for shoe mould, I prefer to remove the baseboards, lay the floor, then re-install the baseboards on top. That's more labor, of course.


----------



## bklner2014

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently the public isn't thrilled about the 3 million pounds it will cost.


Interesting that the public has to foot the bill! They should be able to well afford 3 million pounds.


----------



## VickyB

alex9179 said:


> Someone mentioned that they could be plumbed for gas. Other options are manufactured logs similar to Duraflame, or just never lighting a fire and enjoying a decorated mantle. I wouldn't take a fireplace out of an historic home, even I didn't take advantage of having a fire in it.



I wouldn't call my home historic but it was built in 1904. The fireplaces/mantles are beautiful and cozy and use them in winter when we get extra chilly. Even Duraflame logs are frowned upon now. And can't use fire places on spare the air days. It's all becoming a bit ridiculous.


----------



## VickyB

alex9179 said:


> The planks or sections are secured with a tongue and groove system. The boards/squares have some kind of insulating underlayment adhered to the back of the pieces. To disguise the perimeter, shoe mould is often added on top of the floating floor and married to the existing baseboards. Because I don't care for the look for shoe mould, I prefer to remove the baseboards, lay the floor, then re-install the baseboards on top. That's more labor, of course.


Thanks so much!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bklner2014 said:


> Interesting that the public has to foot the bill! They should be able to well afford 3 million pounds.


It's not out of the ordinary - for the BRF. The renovation of Buckingham Palace was also paid for by taxpayers - 370 million pounds.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...-82m-to-cover-cost-of-buckingham-palace-works


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> Thanks! What is a floating floor? And last time I checked  fireplaces (wood burning) are not environmentally friendly (in US at least). I have 3 and am shamed if I light fires in them.  Perhaps the happy couple are installing gas fireplaces? Altho now those are under suspicion too re environmentally PC.


I'd be very surprised if an old home (it is old I assume) in England didn't have fireplaces.  That's how you got heat in the old days.  And I think it would be very difficult to add a fireplace.  That is part of the original building.  So probably they are adding gas or something.
I wonder if 10-bed in the description means ten bedrooms or do the brits use this to describe how many people can sleep in the bedrooms?  I thought I heard it was 5 bedrooms.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I'd be very surprised if an old home (it is old I assume) in England didn't have fireplaces.  That's how you got heat in the old days.  And I think it would be very difficult to add a fireplace.  That is part of the original building.  So probably they are adding gas or something.
> I wonder if 10-bed in the description means ten bedrooms or do the brits use this to describe how many people can sleep in the bedrooms?  I thought I heard it was 5 bedrooms.


I think here in the UK about 90% of houses, including new builds have fireplaces. My house, built in the 80s has one but we blocked it up and have an electric fire and have a surround.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## afsweet

great choices for her patronage, and she looks wonderful in the black dress! cute bump.


----------



## CeeJay

Oh boy, according to the Daily Fail, look at how much $$$ (pounds) Meghan has spent on clothing/accessories in comparison to others.  I'm assuming the taxpayers have to pay for this???  If so, I would be pretty pissed off .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ddleton-Meghans-royal-wardrobes-revealed.html

*Cost of new clothing *

Sofia: €53,913 (£48,538.41) - married Prince Carl Phillip of Sweden 

Kate: €61,603 (£55,461.80)

Meghan: €479,048 (£431,291.70)


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently the public isn't thrilled about the 3 million pounds it will cost.


I wouldn't be; heck, the BRF has enough freakin' money to pay for this themselves!  The UK is expensive enough, why do the taxpayers have to fund this?


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Oh boy, according to the Daily Fail, look at how much $$$ (pounds) Meghan has spent on clothing/accessories in comparison to others.  I'm assuming the taxpayers have to pay for this???  If so, I would be pretty pissed off ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ddleton-Meghans-royal-wardrobes-revealed.html
> 
> *Cost of new clothing *
> 
> Sofia: €53,913 (£48,538.41) - married Prince Carl Phillip of Sweden
> 
> Kate: €61,603 (£55,461.80)
> 
> Meghan: €479,048 (£431,291.70)



I hear this comes from the Duchy of Cornwall account, not public funds (not a Brit so I may not understand how it all works).


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Bare in mind, they're giving retail costs. While the RF cannot accept gifts or sponsorship from brands, they are given _vastly_ reduced prices on things because those same items sell out immediately when Meghan (or Kate) wear them, so it's a win for the label to have them wear it.

Meghan also did a big, multi-country tour this year.

One more factor, even though yes I believe Meghan needs to come down in spending - she's still in the middle of setting up her Royal wardrobe. I'd expect (hope) her spending will be drastically less for 2019.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The fine print of that linked article really needs to be read;

http://ufonomore.com/blog/first-year

Meghans total takes into account her jewellery and it is unknown if that was gifted.

Pre-wedding fashion, much of which she may have bought herself.



> We do fully recognize that the ladies may have paid for their items ahead of their weddings out of their own pocket, but it is important to note that after the wedding, their clothing remains to be privately funded. As we have stated above, this article is not claiming our statistics are what was actually spent - only what they are worth. It is important to remember that after the wedding, the clothing is not funded for by taxpayers- it remains to be “funded privately.


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The fine print of that linked article really needs to be read;
> 
> http://ufonomore.com/blog/first-year
> 
> Meghans total takes into account her jewellery and it is unknown if that was gifted.
> 
> Pre-wedding fashion, much of which she may have bought herself.


THANK YOU for this information!  In regards to her Jewelry, the Pippa Small pieces that she was noted wearing .. while one gal said that they were from Pippa's Turquoise Mountain line, I'm not so sure.  They looked to be either the Herkimer Diamonds that Pippa makes (which are in 22k gold and NOT inexpensive) and/or the Diamond Slices line (which again - set in 22k and NOT inexpensive).  

I guess my beef, is that I know Pippa's work VERY well (and I know who makes in in India).  While I do like the organic nature of her work, from a metalsmithing technical standpoint, they are not difficult pieces to make.  It is primarily the gemstone with a gold "bezel" (per se).  Some of the other pieces, such as the Botticelli line are more technical, but not by much (in essence, working the metal in a pitch).  I have always balked at her prices, especially given that she uses folks that live in parts of the world where they are grossly underpaid.  I have been to her shop many times at the Brentwood Country Mart, and have met her personally and she is a lovely woman, but I do really wish she would price her jewelry a little less.  Then again, we are talking LA here .. 

Now, another point that the gal made. was that apparently Prince Charles is a sponsor of  Pippa's Turquoise Mountain project, but let me make it very clear that that line of jewelry does not use Gold (it's plated) and the stones are not "gemstones" per se (then again, other than her diamond work, most of the stones that she uses are not what most Jewelers would consider the "fine" gemstones).  Just a personal beef because as a Metalsmith/Jewelry Designer, I hate to see people get ripped off.


----------



## Flatsy

I'm more interested in what Meghan's tally will be next year and how people will react.  Her total spend is way, way out of whack compared to her peers, including when they were new princesses who needed to "build a wardrobe".  Queen Rania had to publicly apologize for her wardrobe costs this year, and she still only spent half of what Meghan spent. (And it was calculated the same way for all of them, so Meghan is not in some special category with what they included in her totals.)

The truth is, she has expensive taste in clothes and jewelry, and she doesn't seem inclined to repeat items.  She brings out new coats, purses and shoes, when she already has multiple nearly-identical pieces.  When even her most ardent wardrobe fans can't tell the difference between the old and new stuff, what is even the point of everything being new?


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I'm more interested in what Meghan's tally will be next year and how people will react.  Her total spend is way, way out of whack compared to her peers, including when they were new princesses who needed to "build a wardrobe".  Queen Rania had to publicly apologize for her wardrobe costs this year, and she still only spent half of what Meghan spent. (And it was calculated the same way for all of them, so Meghan is not in some special category with what they included in her totals.)
> 
> The truth is, she has expensive taste in clothes and jewelry, and she doesn't seem inclined to repeat items.  She brings out new coats, purses and shoes, when she already has multiple nearly-identical pieces.  When even her most ardent wardrobe fans can't tell the difference between the old and new stuff, what is even the point of everything being new?


THANK YOU, agree 100%!!  Especially given Kate's repeat dressing (and the fact that the press loves to mention it and her supposed frugality), I think Meghan needs to be very careful with her spending next year.  What I don't get, is that while you see many Movie/TV stars on the Red Carpet with expensive jewelry, those items are borrowed for the event (I know because I've been asked to do this).  Why doesn't the BRF do this?  Certainly, it would help "marketing" for the company - right?

Yes, alas, the Celebs will oftentimes get discounts as well since many new jewelers want the press (_ooooh - picture of celebrity with so-&-so's jewels_),. which frankly, PISSES me off 'cos they can freakin' afford it.  I had a PR Lady & Agent (represented some of the Boston actors) on a flight from Boston --> LA ask me "_well, why don't you donate like 10 of those gold/diamond bracelets to this BLA-BLA event_?"  As I researched it on my laptop, it was like .. "_what?, what event?, what 'stars'_?"  My response to her was "_No, you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry. no discounts for the Celebs .. SORRY_"!  (not really sorry!!!)


----------



## cafecreme15

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU, agree 100%!!  Especially given Kate's repeat dressing (and the fact that the press loves to mention it and her supposed frugality), I think Meghan needs to be very careful with her spending next year.  What I don't get, is that while you see many Movie/TV stars on the Red Carpet with expensive jewelry, those items are borrowed for the event (I know because I've been asked to do this).  Why doesn't the BRF do this?  Certainly, it would help "marketing" for the company - right?
> 
> Yes, alas, the Celebs will oftentimes get discounts as well since many new jewelers want the press (_ooooh - picture of celebrity with so-&-so's jewels_),. which frankly, PISSES me off 'cos they can freakin' afford it.  I had a PR Lady & Agent (represented some of the Boston actors) on a flight from Boston --> LA ask me "_well, why don't you donate like 10 of those gold/diamond bracelets to this BLA-BLA event_?"  As I researched it on my laptop, it was like .. "_what?, what event?, what 'stars'_?"  My response to her was "_No, you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry. no discounts for the Celebs .. SORRY_"!  (not really sorry!!!)



This always gets me!! I understand the PR theories behind it, but it pisses me off that freebies are always sent to the people who are best placed to actually afford them.


----------



## Morgan R

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU for this information!  In regards to her Jewelry, the Pippa Small pieces that she was noted wearing .. while one gal said that they were from Pippa's Turquoise Mountain line, I'm not so sure.  They looked to be either the Herkimer Diamonds that Pippa makes (which are in 22k gold and NOT inexpensive) and/or the Diamond Slices line (which again - set in 22k and NOT inexpensive).
> 
> I guess my beef, is that I know Pippa's work VERY well (and I know who makes in in India).  While I do like the organic nature of her work, from a metalsmithing technical standpoint, they are not difficult pieces to make.  It is primarily the gemstone with a gold "bezel" (per se).  Some of the other pieces, such as the Botticelli line are more technical, but not by much (in essence, working the metal in a pitch).  I have always balked at her prices, especially given that she uses folks that live in parts of the world where they are grossly underpaid.  I have been to her shop many times at the Brentwood Country Mart, and have met her personally and she is a lovely woman, but I do really wish she would price her jewelry a little less.  Then again, we are talking LA here ..
> 
> Now, another point that the gal made. was that apparently Prince Charles is a sponsor of  Pippa's Turquoise Mountain project, but let me make it very clear that that line of jewelry does not use Gold (it's plated) and the stones are not "gemstones" per se (then again, other than her diamond work, most of the stones that she uses are not what most Jewelers would consider the "fine" gemstones).  Just a personal beef because as a Metalsmith/Jewelry Designer, I hate to see people get ripped off.



Meghan has worn Pippa Small's regular line of jewelry but also the Turquoise Mountain collection.

When Meghan attended the British Fashion Awards she was wearing Pippa Small's Turquoise Mountain Collection...that day she wore the Nosheen Stud Earrings,Wajiha Bangle, Oshna Bangle, and the Omeen Bangle which are all listed as products from Turquoise Mountain Collection (www.pippasmall.com/product-category/turquoise-mountain-collection-afghanistan/ , https://turquoisemountain.org/afghanistan/products/pippa-small). Some days she has worn pieces from Pippa Small that weren't from the Turquoise Mountain Collection (i.e the jewelry she wore to Princess Eugenie's Wedding). Some days she has worn a mix of pieces of Pippa Small's jewelry that were both from the Turquoise Mountain Collection and pieces that weren't from the collection (this happened often during the tour in October).


----------



## PatsyCline

CeeJay said:


> Oh boy, according to the Daily Fail, look at how much $$$ (pounds) Meghan has spent on clothing/accessories in comparison to others.  I'm assuming the taxpayers have to pay for this???  If so, I would be pretty pissed off ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ddleton-Meghans-royal-wardrobes-revealed.html
> 
> *Cost of new clothing *
> 
> Sofia: €53,913 (£48,538.41) - married Prince Carl Phillip of Sweden
> 
> Kate: €61,603 (£55,461.80)
> 
> Meghan: €479,048 (£431,291.70)



Prince Charles paid for Meghan’s wardrobe. His income from his duchy is large. 

Plus remember, this is Meghan’s first year, so it makes sense she needs more clothing than Kate, as Kate probably has enough clothes and accessories to recycle with some new outfits.


----------



## Morgane

Flatsy said:


> I'm more interested in what Meghan's tally will be next year and how people will react.  Her total spend is way, way out of whack compared to her peers, including when they were new princesses who needed to "build a wardrobe".  Queen Rania had to publicly apologize for her wardrobe costs this year, and she still only spent half of what Meghan spent. (And it was calculated the same way for all of them, so Meghan is not in some special category with what they included in her totals.)
> 
> The truth is, she has expensive taste in clothes and jewelry, and she doesn't seem inclined to repeat items.  She brings out new coats, purses and shoes, when she already has multiple nearly-identical pieces.  When even her most ardent wardrobe fans can't tell the difference between the old and new stuff, what is even the point of everything being new?


Her visit at Smart Works would have been perfect to repeat an outfit or wear a high-street brand,showing that women can look good wearing reasonably priced clothes. She should know that she's basically handing certain headlines to tabloids on a silver platter.


----------



## Morgan R

Morgane said:


> Her visit at Smart Works would have been perfect to wear repeats or a high-street brand to show that women can look good wearing reasonably priced clothes. She should know that she's basically handing certain headlines to tabloids on a silver platter.




During her visit to Smart Works she was wearing some repeats.

The maternity dress she was wearing was Hatch Collection's The Eliza Dress that she wore to a meeting with The Association of Commonwealth Universities in December. The heels she was wearing were Gianvito Rossi Plexi Cow Print Pumps that she has owned since at least 2015, Meghan had previously worn them in a photoshoot for Gritty Pretty Magazine back in 2015 and the heels could also be seen in a picture of her shoe closet that she posted back in spring of 2016 on her now deleted Instagram account.


----------



## Morgan R

I mean if her wardrobe is consistently high I think we could have a better conversation that Meghan's wardrobe spending. Regardless though of how much William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan spend on their wardrobe the source of their expenses are from money they receive from Prince Charles' Duchy of Cornwall income not taxpayers.


But the cost of Meghan's clothing is a bit overblown by the article shared anyways considering a pair of earrings and a bracelet that were a gift to her by Prince Charles is included in the costs and those alone were €206,022. That alone bumps Meghan's new clothing down from  €479,048 to  €273,026.  Meghan had to buy a lot of new wardrobe not just because she was a new royal who had to carry out engagements (which included a 16 day tour with over 70 engagements) but also because her body has been changing due to her being pregnant and she has been pregnant since July. Had she not been pregnant I actually think less money would have been spent because she could've reworn a lot more clothing she owned before becoming a royal or outfits she had worn while her and Harry were engaged. Meghan literally had to get completely new wardrobe not just because she became a royal but because her body has been changing constantly due to her pregnancy. It wouldn't be surprising to me if wardrobe we've seen worn during this pregnancy was reworn when/if she becomes pregnant again. Some the outfits worn during her pregnancy could also be tailored to wear even when she isn't pregnant (obviously more notably the outfits she wore during the tour). During the tour you could tell a lot of those outfits weren't tailored fittingly because that tour was 16 days and it couldn't have been predicted how her stomach was going to change during the tour. When the tour started you could tell the pregnancy had given Meghan wide hips but her bump wasn't really that visible but as the tour continued her bump became more visible.


Notably during the tour Meghan did rewear something from before she was a royal and it honestly shows  Meghan needed some new wardrobe to reflect her body changing because of her pregnancy and couldn't rewear clothes she had or if she did the clothes would be a tight fit. Meghan wore an Antonio Berardi Double Breasted Sleeveless Dress while attending Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's reception at Auckland War Memorial Museum in Auckland,New Zealand. Meghan had previously worn the dress back in May 2017 when she went to watch Harry compete in an Audi Polo Challenge. In this comparison you can tell how the pregnancy has changed Meghan's body. In May 2017 the dress was more so a better fit and was somewhat a loose fit while in October 2018 it fit her tight because her body had changed because of the pregnancy (i.e her getting wide hips and weight gain)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R said:


> Regardless though of how much William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan spend on their wardrobe the source of their expenses are from money they receive from Prince Charles' Duchy of Cornwall income not taxpayers.


The Duchy of Cornwall is essentially an income-generating trust fund provided for The Prince of Wales by the people of Great Britain.  It doesn't belong to him, and if the monarchy were abolished, that would be one of the things the people of Great Britain would get back. So while Meghan's coats are not being purchased directly from anyone's 2018 tax bill, they are still being paid for with the people's money.

The BRF does a lot of fake "paying" for things.  For example, they always announce that they are paying for royal weddings in their entirety, when in actuality they just pay for the ceremony and reception and the taxpayers pay the biggest expense, which is the security. (For Meghan and Harry, it was about $30 million.)

The BRF should absolutely be paying for the renovations to Frogmore Cottage, even if they are just fake-paying through the Duchy of Cornwall.  Maintenance and renovations to Kensington Palace?  Sure, it's not privately owned, so when the taxpayers pay for renovations, they are investing in something that belongs to them.  

But little brother had a spat with big brother and can't stand to live in his own 20-room apartment in the same palace, so granny gifts him his own private mansion?  Yeah, the family should be paying for their own floating floors.  Or open up the place to public tours if they want public funding. 



> But the cost of Meghan's clothing is a bit overblown by the article shared anyways considering a pair of earrings and a bracelet that were a gift to her by Prince Charles is included in the costs and those alone were €206,022.


First of all, this website really did their homework and were unable to determine that the jewelry was a gift, which is why they left it in.  But I don't quite get why there is some big difference between Prince Charles buying Meghan a dress and Prince Charles buying her a bracelet.  I don't know why the latter shouldn't "count".


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU, agree 100%!!  Especially given Kate's repeat dressing (and the fact that the press loves to mention it and her supposed frugality), I think Meghan needs to be very careful with her spending next year.


Kate seems frugal now, but what's funny is that she was given a very hard time about her clothing spending too.  Kate was slammed for spending $45,000 in the first 6 months of 2012 - back when she was also new and "building a wardrobe".  $45,000 in 6 months versus Meghan's $500,000 in 7 months.  It's rather mind-boggling.


----------



## rose60610

Having gone through Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle more than once, I can see how the Royal Family brings in more tourist dollars to the United Kingdom than their expenses.

However, when one realizes the value of the hundreds, if not thousands,  of paintings of Old Masters that the Royal Family has, they could sell just ONE or TWO measly paintings to finance tens of millions of renovations or wardrobe items they wear. Between the gravitas of the actual centuries dead artists and the fact that any such painting comes from the Royal Collection would bring in substantially more money than the same painting from any run-of-the-mill wealthy muckety muck.

All this talk about PC blah blah for the environment cottage renovations is code for "let's soak the public kitty to get a crazy museum to live in" since we're "entitled wonderful people" and no one else is. Come on, the Ritz or Four Seasons pale in comparison to the these royals' ways of life.

I do have much respect for the Royal Family, but it seems they do not fund so much as their own loo paper. I hope I'm wrong. One would think that if their wealth were invested even half assed OK they'd realize enough to cover repairs and renovations on their properties. And not depend on the tourist money from tea in cardboard cups or stuffed corgi pillows.


----------



## Hobbsy

The tax payers have been paying the monarchy since, what, 1200 years ago??? One would think they would have gotten over being pissed a long time ago about it. [emoji23]


----------



## Morgan R

Flatsy said:


> The Duchy of Cornwall is essentially an income-generating trust fund provided for The Prince of Wales by the people of Great Britain.  It doesn't belong to him, and if the monarchy were abolished, that would be one of the things the people of Great Britain would get back. So while Meghan's coats are not being purchased directly from anyone's 2018 tax bill, they are still being paid for with the people's money.
> 
> The BRF does a lot of fake "paying" for things.  For example, they always announce that they are paying for royal weddings in their entirety, when in actuality they just pay for the ceremony and reception and the taxpayers pay the biggest expense, which is the security. (For Meghan and Harry, it was about $30 million.)
> 
> The BRF should absolutely be paying for the renovations to Frogmore Cottage, even if they are just fake-paying through the Duchy of Cornwall.  Maintenance and renovations to Kensington Palace?  Sure, it's not privately owned, so when the taxpayers pay for renovations, they are investing in something that belongs to them.
> 
> But little brother had a spat with big brother and can't stand to live in his own 20-room apartment in the same palace, so granny gifts him his own private mansion?  Yeah, the family should be paying for their own floating floors.  Or open up the place to public tours if they want public funding.
> 
> 
> First of all, this website really did their homework and were unable to determine that the jewelry was a gift, which is why they left it in.  But I don't quite get why there is some big difference between Prince Charles buying Meghan a dress and Prince Charles buying her a bracelet.  I don't know why the latter shouldn't "count".



I should've clarified that Daily Mail's article was the one over blowing the cost of Meghan's clothing not the UFO No More website. I was simply pointing out what the UFO No More website said which made the point to mention that if Prince Charles did in fact gift her the earrings and bracelet that Meghan's amount drops by nearly half but since they aren't certain if it was a gift they included in how much was spent on her clothing.

Quote from the UFO No More website:

"One factor that we have tossed back in forth as we have watched this number climb is that included in this number are her Cartier Reflection Wedding Bracelet and Earrings. The idea has been bounced around that they were gifts, possibly from Prince Charles (our friends at Meghan’s Mirror shared their thoughts on this here), which would see them removed from our tally because we do not include gifts from family members or Government Officials. However because the Palace has not confirmed them to be gifts we left them in. The earrings and bracelet carry a hefty price tag of 206,022€ ($233,000 USD) so if they were indeed gifts, her total spending would be 273,026 € ($286,278 USD). Another thing to note is that her wedding ceremony gown is not included, as it was completely custom made for her by Givenchy and thus has no retail price. Her Stella McCartney gown is included as the designer released a near identical design."




Flatsy said:


> Kate seems frugal now, but what's funny is that she was given a very hard time about her clothing spending too.  Kate was slammed for spending $45,000 in the first 6 months of 2012 - back when she was also new and "building a wardrobe".  $45,000 in 6 months versus Meghan's $500,000 in 7 months.  It's rather mind-boggling.



Meghan carried out more engagements than Kate did during the months after they both got married. In 2011 Kate did 34 engagements after she got married. In 2018 Meghan did 96 engagements after she got married. So obviously Meghan was going to have more money spent on her wardrobe than Kate  regardless since Meghan did nearly 65 more engagements. Add onto the fact Meghan has been pregnant and was going to need new wardrobe regardless because of her constantly changing body. I think Meghan's wardrobe cost could've likely actually been less had she not been pregnant because she could've reworn a lot more clothing but since she was pregnant she obviously was going to need a lot of new wardrobe.


----------



## minababe

some comments here makes me really angry.
I'm speechless because of so much ignorants here .. meghan is not rewearing her Things? are you serious? she is doing it all the time. most of the time she is wearing the same shoes and jewellery.
she is wearing still a lot of the clothes she has for years in her wardrobe.

and those articles about who spend how much are the biggest lies at all.
they don't know how much meghan is spending. how could they.
they don't know her wardrobe,
those articles are just ridicilous. thats just another try from the press to bully meghan.
and People who believe them are just .. sorry.

btw charles is paying for the clothes etc not the british tax Payers..


----------



## Yoshi1296

She’s a freakin royal. She doesn’t need to be in head to toe H&M all the damn time. And doesn’t need to repeat her stuff. Sis got the budget so she better use it. I’m a “commoner” and even I hate repeating my nice outfits for events.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think Charles pays for the "official" clothes, as in state visits, engagements, etc. They (wife and daughters in law) I would think buys their own "normal" clothes, though as we have seen in the past Catherine has been seen wearing something she's worn on an engagement which is more casual on a normal day.


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> some comments here makes me really angry.
> I'm speechless because of so much ignorants here .. meghan is not rewearing her Things? are you serious? she is doing it all the time. most of the time she is wearing the same shoes and jewellery.
> she is wearing still a lot of the clothes she has for years in her wardrobe.
> 
> and those articles about who spend how much are the biggest lies at all.
> they don't know how much meghan is spending. how could they.
> they don't know her wardrobe,
> those articles are just ridicilous. thats just another try from the press to bully meghan.
> and People who believe them are just .. sorry.
> 
> btw charles is paying for the clothes etc not the british tax Payers..


wow, you seem to take this personally
this gossip is part of the deal she entered into.....press is bullying her?
the only thing I really feel sorry for her about is the stupid white trash family.  All the rest is part of the package.  And she's living the royal life.  Sure maybe she has had to make adjustments but I think she wanted it and is enjoying all the benefits.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I think that the clothes she buys are worth the money for the charitable/socially conscious statement they make (eg, Everlane, Stella McCartney, DeMellier). Also, like Kate, she buys from British brands and helps raise their profile (eg. Charlotte Elizabeth). I think if the press actually cared about anything besides stirring up rage about Meghan they'd talk about how cool these brands and their missions are.


----------



## Hobbsy

I think Meghan is smart enough that she's not reading all the tons of trash put out about her. She has much bigger, better and happier things to do.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> wow, you seem to take this personally
> this gossip is part of the deal she entered into.....press is bullying her?
> the only thing I really feel sorry for her about is the stupid white trash family.  All the rest is part of the package.  And she's living the royal life.  Sure maybe she has had to make adjustments but I think *she wanted it and is enjoying all the benefits.*


This. 

She was no naive Princess Diana; based on her having an insta site and a blog or two and being on TV and being 36--she most likely knew what she was signing up for and wanted it. Today's media can be and is brutal, but she's living the life of a Royal now, and that appears, to me, to be pretty darn cushy but suffocating. 

My thoughts on this "life" has been, will she tire of it eventually? Harry dated others (English gals) that wanted no part of the Royal life, they knew what it was going to be like.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

kemilia said:


> This.
> 
> She was no naive Princess Diana; based on her having an insta site and a blog or two and being on TV and being 36--she most likely knew what she was signing up for and wanted it. Today's media can be and is brutal, but she's living the life of a Royal now, and that appears, to me, to be pretty darn cushy but suffocating.
> 
> My thoughts on this "life" has been, will she tire of it eventually? Harry dated others (English gals) that wanted no part of the Royal life, they knew what it was going to be like.


I don't think she'll get tired of it. As an actress, she'd been trying to have a spot in the limelight for 10+ years. If she isn't tired of it now, she probably won't be! And I feel they do have a bit more protection from the press than Diana did. But I'm just speculating haha!


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> My thoughts on this "life" has been, will she tire of it eventually? Harry dated others (English gals) that wanted no part of the Royal life, they knew what it was going to be like.



This is what I fear, she really has no clue what she has let herself in for. I know people have said it's easier for her because she has been in the public eye etc. I think, in all honesty that's partly true but also harder for her too as she has been used to things being about her, now she is not no1, she doesn't take centre stage. There are people higher ranking than her and she has to accept it. Also, she can't speak out and answer her critics, she has to be impartial, not rocking the boat. 
I think if there has been a rift anywhere, it involves William rather than Catherine. He's looking out for his brother.
I really hope I'm wrong as she is doing a good job so far, only time will tell.


----------



## Flatsy

minababe said:


> some comments here makes me really angry.
> I'm speechless because of so much ignorants here .. meghan is not rewearing her Things? are you serious? she is doing it all the time. most of the time she is wearing the same shoes and jewellery.
> she is wearing still a lot of the clothes she has for years in her wardrobe.


It's Meghan's fans who want to cling to ignorance on the topic of her clothing spending because they know spending (approximately) half a million dollars in 7 months on new clothing and accessories is not a good look, especially for someone whose life is now supposed to be devoted to charity and public service.

UFO No More had a very clear methodology for making their list as accurate as they could, and they collaborated with the fan site Meghan's Mirror on it.  Meghan's Mirror announced they would be collaborating with UFO No More in 2019 on tabulating the value of Meghan's new clothing because they thought being "open and transparent" might help reduce some of the controversy.  Meghan's fans flipped out on them and they immediately cancelled the collaboration.

That's because Meghan's fans don't want transparency - they want to continue to muddy the waters with claims that she's pulling large amounts of items out of her old wardrobe or routinely re-wearing a substantial number of items, which close followers of her wardrobe know that for the most part, is not the case.

That's why I'm really curious about next year when those theories and excuses are going to hold even less water.  The only one left will be that she's paying for it all herself from her vast Suits fortune, which her fans would like to believe is an endowment as large and enduring as the Smithsonian's.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> This is what I fear, she really has no clue what she has let herself in for. I know people have said it's easier for her because she has been in the public eye etc. I think, in all honesty that's partly true but also harder for her too as she has been used to things being about her, now she is not no1, she doesn't take centre stage. There are people higher ranking than her and she has to accept it. Also, she can't speak out and answer her critics, she has to be impartial, not rocking the boat.


Part of their engagement interview was assuring everyone that she was fully filled in and prepared for the life, but it's probably not truly possible to understand what it's really like until you live it.

I do think a lot of other royal spouses of the younger generation have benefited from long courtships.  I think CP Victoria of Sweden had 10 years with Daniel Westling before they got married, similarly to Will and Kate.  They had time to get used to the arcane rules and weather a few tabloid storms.  Harry and Meghan didn't have the luxury of that much time because of their ages, but another year or so might have made it easier.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Part of their engagement interview was assuring everyone that she was fully filled in and prepared for the life, but it's probably not truly possible to understand what it's really like until you live it.
> 
> I do think a lot of other royal spouses of the younger generation have benefited from long courtships.  I think CP Victoria of Sweden had 10 years with Daniel Westling before they got married, similarly to Will and Kate.  They had time to get used to the arcane rules and weather a few tabloid storms.  Harry and Meghan didn't have the luxury of that much time because of their ages, but another year or so might have made it easier.


Absolutely agree, the courtship to me seemed so quick but plenty of people get married within 2 years of meeting and are together forever so we shall see.


----------



## Flatsy

kemilia said:


> My thoughts on this "life" has been, will she tire of it eventually? Harry dated others (English gals) that wanted no part of the Royal life, they knew what it was going to be like.


From the beginning, I have had two visions of how it might go with Harry and Meghan. One is that they stay together and raise a family, becoming less and less interesting as the years go by and as Harry's bald spot gets bigger.  (Similar to how I feel about Will and Kate.)

The other is that in 6 or 7 years, they will announce a separation and Meghan will be on the cover of People, opening up about how she "lost herself" in her marriage, and how she needed to reclaim her independence and her need for artistic expression.  

Once a princess, always a princess.  If things go south in her marriage and she gets sick of all of the confinements of royal life, she can take the celebrity of her princess image with her and move on to new ventures in which she has more freedom.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Once a princess, always a princess.  If things go south in her marriage and she gets sick of all of the confinements of royal life, she can take the celebrity of her princess image with her and move on to new ventures in which she has more freedom.


Fergie mk2


----------



## rose60610

It's obvious to me that Markle thrives and craves being in the royal spotlight. She landed a prince in one of the world's top wealthiest families at age whatever. She knew exactly what it all entails. I think most parents would be gobsmacked and beyond ecstatic if their daughter landed anything remotely similar. So she has all theses social engagements and charity functions and might undergo ten wardrobe changes a day. Who the hell cares????  She's living a way of life that's beyond winning the lottery. When the baby is born she isn't going to be anywhere near a dirty diaper, "the help" will take care of all that. The anchor baby to the royal family will be like a Hollywood's socialite's Yorkie dog, a nice fashion accessory.  Harry had to marry somebody, why not a gorgeous girl who loves the position she's in? I mean, this IS a celebrity gossip thread.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> From the beginning, I have had two visions of how it might go with Harry and Meghan. One is that they stay together and raise a family, becoming less and less interesting as the years go by and as Harry's bald spot gets bigger.  (Similar to how I feel about Will and Kate.)
> 
> The other is that in 6 or 7 years, they will announce a separation and Meghan will be on the cover of People, opening up about how she "lost herself" in her marriage, and how she needed to reclaim her independence and her need for artistic expression.
> 
> Once a princess, always a princess.  If things go south in her marriage and she gets sick of all of the confinements of royal life, she can take the celebrity of her princess image with her and move on to new ventures in which she has more freedom.


I think she will probably stay with him in the royal family.  As an actress if you haven't achieved big star status by 36, you're not going to be able to do it at 40 or older.  So, yes if she was really miserable she could divorce, get alimony, maybe write a book but then what?  I think she knew what she wanted and is enjoying it for the main part.


----------



## Morgane

Morgan R said:


> During her visit to Smart Works she was wearing some repeats.
> 
> The maternity dress she was wearing was Hatch Collection's The Eliza Dress that she wore to a meeting with The Association of Commonwealth Universities in December. The heels she was wearing were Gianvito Rossi Plexi Cow Print Pumps that she has owned since at least 2015, Meghan had previously worn them in a photoshoot for Gritty Pretty Magazine back in 2015 and the heels could also be seen in a picture of her shoe closet that she posted back in spring of 2016 on her now deleted Instagram account.


Yes,I see that the shoes and the dress are repeated items,but I was talking about headlines like this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6576589/Meghan-patron-National-Theatre.html
It's  the clickbaity and sensationalistic daily mail but they should know how the various Sun,DM work..
She has definitely other oversized coats (she seems to favor them) and other black purses that could have been repeated.

When it comes to their personal expenses (clothes,renovations for private properties, unnecessary travel bills paid with public funds..),I really think it's a matter of optics too,whether the taxpayer pays directly or indirectly (Flatsy is right about the Duchy of Cornwall being a State asset).
They are not elected politicians,and the whole institution is essentially just symbolic. But those who don't support and don't want them are obliged to contribute to their lifestyle in any case. So,the first thing they should do is avoiding to look tone deaf,above all when the UK is struggling with the Brexit deal.
I also think they should pay for their personal security,and the security for the private residencies that are not opened to the public like Windsor, Buckingham or Kensington.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> From the beginning, I have had two visions of how it might go with Harry and Meghan. One is that they stay together and raise a family, becoming less and less interesting as the years go by and as Harry's bald spot gets bigger.  (Similar to how I feel about Will and Kate.)
> 
> The other is that in 6 or 7 years, they will announce a separation and Meghan will be on the cover of People, opening up about how she "lost herself" in her marriage, and how she needed to reclaim her independence and her need for artistic expression.
> 
> Once a princess, always a princess.  If things go south in her marriage and she gets sick of all of the confinements of royal life, she can take the celebrity of her princess image with her and move on to new ventures in which she has more freedom.



Exactly this. It’s a win win for her and good for her!! She’s smart and pragmatic about things, much more than anyone that Harry has ever dated. That’s probably why she impressed Harry so much in the first place.

The moment she becomes irrelevant and feels oppressed by the monarchy, she has a viable and reasonable exit route. This baby just cements the lifetime “celebrity” following she may otherwise not have if she continued in the acting world past 40.


----------



## Aimee3

I have a question that might be better posed in the general royalty thread but since it’s been discussed here a lot I figured I’d ask here.  Do the tax payers in the other countries with monarchies, specifically Spain, Sweden, Denmark (since they are often shown in the royalty thread in designer clothes) foot the bill as in the UK?  Or is it handled differently in those countries?  What about Monaco?  Isn’t there no income tax there?  TIA


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I think she will probably stay with him in the royal family.  As an actress if you haven't achieved big star status by 36, you're not going to be able to do it at 40 or older.  So, yes if she was really miserable she could divorce, get alimony, maybe write a book but then what?  I think she knew what she wanted and is enjoying it for the main part.


You're right, but I do think that her desire for Hollywood-style fame didn't go away when she got married. (Her husband has a penchant for it too.)  And there are lots of ways to experience that these days without actual acting.  

I think Meghan always modeled herself a little bit after Gwyneth Paltrow, particularly with the Goop-y lifestyle blog.  (The Hubb Kitchen cookbook had remarkable aesthetic similarity to the Goop cookbooks.)  Lifestyle company or fashion line would be right up her alley.  

Anyway, QE2 is not going to be around forever and if that changeover happens in the next few years, there will be seismic shifts all over the place.  I didn't think Harry getting married and sharing KP with Will would be a big deal and it turned into a whole lot of drama.   God knows what kind of drama there might be when Will & Kate get promoted to Prince and Princess of Wales and Charles gets to start doing things the way he's always wanted to do them.


----------



## Morgan R

Aimee3 said:


> I have a question that might be better posed in the general royalty thread but since it’s been discussed here a lot I figured I’d ask here.  Do the tax payers in the other countries with monarchies, specifically Spain, Sweden, Denmark (since they are often shown in the royalty thread in designer clothes) foot the bill as in the UK?  Or is it handled differently in those countries?  What about Monaco?  Isn’t there no income tax there?  TIA



The following monarchies have funds from taxpayers: Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Spain, and the UK (should be noted the UK monarchy extends to 16 countries of the 53 Commonwealth Nations those 16 countries are referred to as the Commonwealth Realms). The taxpayers annual cost per taxpayer is as little as €0.16 (in Spain) and as much as €9.70 (Norway). The taxpayers pay €0.70 per year in the UK and Commonwealth Realms for the British Royal Family. Though the tax can slightly increase these amounts I have mentioned have possibly slightly increased as these amounts listed collectively from courtesy of a Dutch newspaper _de Volkskrant _which published (https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/welk-vorstenhuis-is-het-duurste-van-europa-~b95dad9f/) an overview of the annual expenditure (excluding security expenses) of all European royal houses (not counting Luxembourg and the four monarchical European microstates). I think there really is a misconception that monarchies don't pay tax and are only funded by taxpayers. Two monarchies don't pay tax and that is Norway and Netherlands. Denmark's monarchy only pays an inheritance tax. Belgium, Sweden, Spain, and UK royal family all pay income tax.

In the instance of the British Royal Family though the government considers the Duchy of Cornwall and Duchy of Lancaster to be a crown bodies and therefore exempt from paying corporation tax. Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth voluntarily do in fact pay tax. Prince Charles voluntarily pays a sum equivalent to income tax of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall that is in excess of what is needed to meet official expenditure. Queen Elizabeth II has voluntarily paid income tax on the Duchy of Lancaster so she pays a sum equivalent to income tax on her private income and income from the Privy Purse (which includes the Duchy of Lancaster) that is not used for official purposes. Them paying income tax started in 1993. This details why they voluntarily pay tax: https://assets.publishing.service.g.../uploads/attachment_data/file/235690/0464.pdf. But in short Queen Elizabeth II offered to pay income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax on a voluntary basis and to refund the cost of the Parliamentary Annuities paid to members of the Royal Family and Prince Charles offered to pay income tax on a voluntary basis on his income from the Duchy of Cornwall.:


----------



## TMA

rose60610 said:


> It's obvious to me that Markle thrives and craves being in the royal spotlight. She landed a prince in one of the world's top wealthiest families at age whatever. She knew exactly what it all entails. I think most parents would be gobsmacked and beyond ecstatic if their daughter landed anything remotely similar. So she has all theses social engagements and charity functions and might undergo ten wardrobe changes a day. Who the hell cares????  She's living a way of life that's beyond winning the lottery. When the baby is born she isn't going to be anywhere near a dirty diaper, "the help" will take care of all that. The anchor baby to the royal family will be like a Hollywood's socialite's Yorkie dog, a nice fashion accessory.  Harry had to marry somebody, why not a gorgeous girl who loves the position she's in? I mean, this IS a celebrity gossip thread.



A celebrity gossip thread is no reason to let your prejudice loose or be spiteful about a person that has not given you tangible reason to speak so. Stop hiding behind gossip to be an awful person.


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> The following monarchies have funds from taxpayers: Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Spain, and the UK (should be noted the UK monarchy extends to 16 countries of the 53 Commonwealth Nations those 16 countries are referred to as the Commonwealth Realms). The taxpayers annual cost per taxpayer is as little as €0.16 (in Spain) and as much as €9.70 (Norway). The taxpayers pay €0.70 per year in the UK and Commonwealth Realms for the British Royal Family. Though the tax can slightly increase these amounts I have mentioned have possibly slightly increased as these amounts listed collectively from courtesy of a Dutch newspaper _de Volkskrant _which published (https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/welk-vorstenhuis-is-het-duurste-van-europa-~b95dad9f/) an overview of the annual expenditure (excluding security expenses) of all European royal houses (not counting Luxembourg and the four monarchical European microstates). I think there really is a misconception that monarchies don't pay tax and are only funded by taxpayers. Two monarchies don't pay tax and that is Norway and Netherlands. Denmark's monarchy only pays an inheritance tax. Belgium, Sweden, Spain, and UK royal family all pay income tax.
> 
> In the instance of the British Royal Family though the government considers the Duchy of Cornwall and Duchy of Lancaster to be a crown bodies and therefore exempt from paying corporation tax. Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth voluntarily do in fact pay tax. Prince Charles voluntarily pays a sum equivalent to income tax of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall that is in excess of what is needed to meet official expenditure. Queen Elizabeth II has voluntarily paid income tax on the Duchy of Lancaster so she pays a sum equivalent to income tax on her private income and income from the Privy Purse (which includes the Duchy of Lancaster) that is not used for official purposes. Them paying income tax started in 1993. This details why they voluntarily pay tax: https://assets.publishing.service.g.../uploads/attachment_data/file/235690/0464.pdf. But in short Queen Elizabeth II offered to pay income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax on a voluntary basis and to refund the cost of the Parliamentary Annuities paid to members of the Royal Family and Prince Charles offered to pay income tax on a voluntary basis on his income from the Duchy of Cornwall.:


I wonder whether he pays tax on the income from Dutchy Originals, his mainly organic food venture with Waitrose. I've tried some of the products and those are quite nice, but a little pricey. Waitrose isn't cheap anyway. 



sdkitty said:


> I think she will probably stay with him in the royal family.  As an actress if you haven't achieved big star status by 36, you're not going to be able to do it at 40 or older.  So, yes if she was really miserable she could divorce, get alimony, maybe write a book but then what?  I think she knew what she wanted and is enjoying it for the main part.


I think the most famous role she would be ever known  of is being Dutchess of Sussex. There aren't many actresses as  Kathy Bates or Jessica Tandy who became world famous later in life. Whatever the future brings she would be attached to the Royal family in one way or the other, especially because of the baby. I hope that the tiny one would be raised in a happier family than those two, Meghan and Harry) had when growing up.


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R said:


> But in short Queen Elizabeth II offered to pay income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax on a voluntary basis and to refund the cost of the Parliamentary Annuities paid to members of the Royal Family and Prince Charles offered to pay income tax on a voluntary basis on his income from the Duchy of Cornwall.:


The UK Royals have always been good at sensing when their backs were against the wall and making the concessions needed to keep themselves in power.  1992 was the year of Fergie's toe-sucking, Diana's tell-all, Squidgygate, and the Windsor Castle fire.  There was a big debate about whether the Queen should pay for the $65 million Windsor repairs out of pocket, and general momentum to limit/end the royal gravy train.  It was definitely a case of the Queen volunteering preemptively.


----------



## loogirl

minababe said:


> some comments here makes me really angry.
> I'm speechless because of so much ignorants here .. meghan is not rewearing her Things? are you serious? she is doing it all the time. most of the time she is wearing the same shoes and jewellery.
> she is wearing still a lot of the clothes she has for years in her wardrobe.
> 
> and those articles about who spend how much are the biggest lies at all.
> they don't know how much meghan is spending. how could they.
> they don't know her wardrobe,
> those articles are just ridicilous. thats just another try from the press to bully meghan.
> and People who believe them are just .. sorry.
> 
> btw charles is paying for the clothes etc not the british tax Payers..



People in this thread already explained how it works re: “charles paying for it” it does in fact come from the people. So maybe go back and read. She is overspending and it’s gross. You’ll be ok after finding out your hero isn’t perfect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

TMA said:


> A celebrity gossip thread is no reason to let your prejudice loose or be spiteful about a person that has not given you tangible reason to speak so. Stop hiding behind gossip to be an awful person.


----------



## CeeJay

Hobbsy said:


> The tax payers have been paying the monarchy since, what, 1200 years ago??? One would think they would have gotten over being pissed a long time ago about it. [emoji23]


Well, I guess it depends on where you 'sit' in the hierarchy.  For instance, when I was working in London (and being American), boy did I hear the commentary about the "class system" and how the minute the Brit opens his/her mouth, most immediately know where you come/came from.  Many told me about how if you had a "low-class" (Cockney) accent, you could expect to reach such-&-such a level and no higher.  If one had a "posh" accent, then even though they may not know as much, they would ascend higher up the scale (now, mind you - I was in Financial Services Investments, so I'm assuming that this pertained to the Corporate environments).  MANY of them were extremely displeased at having to 'fund' the Royal Family, and when Queen Elizabeth set out to pay for certain things herself (maybe after the fire?), they were very pleased.  Heck, think of the American Revolution .. why did it happen? .. because the Colonists felt that they were being taxed too high and they had no representation to even discuss it.  Also discussing the economy and the wicked high taxes in the UK (hence the reason why many decide to move to Monaco to escape those high taxes), I can see where it would not make them happy to see an obvious show of very expensive items.  Just sayin' ..


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> That's because Meghan's fans don't want transparency - they want to continue to muddy the waters with claims that she's pulling large amounts of items out of her old wardrobe or routinely re-wearing a substantial number of items, which close followers of her wardrobe know that for the most part, is not the case.


How do you know this lol


----------



## Flatsy

bellebellebelle19 said:


> How do you know this lol


In regards to Meghan's fans not wanting transparency, I know this because I read the overwhelmingly hostile twitter responses to the Meghan's Mirror announcement.  Many of them outright say that all they care about is that it will make Meghan look bad, calling UFO No More's piece "a hit job on Meghan" even though it was about all royal women and they have been doing the annual tally since before Meghan came along.  Many abused MM for not doing the same with Kate's clothing, even though they have.

As for how I know *most* of her stuff is not repeated or old?  Because it's all documented online.  When Meghan got a little blowback for wearing a $3,000 camel coat to an event about providing clothing to destitute women, her fans spammed every gossip website saying it was a repeat she'd worn to a previous engagement.  It wasn't, it was just very, very similar.  (Which makes it even more silly that she had to get a new one.)

Morgan R has gave a couple of examples upthread of things Meghan demonstrably already owned, but those items are few and far between.

None of this is an exact science and nobody could possibly determine the provenance of each and every piece, but UFO No More gave a pretty good ballpark.  When the grand total value of her outfits for 7 months is more than twice what anybody else wore in an entire year, it really doesn't matter if a couple of dresses or pairs of shoes were pulled out from her pre-royal closet.  She's still way, way out of line with her peers.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

My issue is with people who read the Daily Mail/The Sun and all their obviously slanted stories about Meghan and take it all as writ, without even looking at the links in an article.

I'm not a Meghan fan per se, though obvs I read articles on news sites etc, but if we're going to talk about her, let's start with facts and go from there rather than take the grammar-deficient word of a Daily Mail writer with an agenda.

The comments on those articles alone should be a red-flag - that is the audience for these click-bait articles, it's dog-whistling.  The comments reek of "putting her in her place".

As much as commentary in this forum says people are too eager to defend Meghan, I would say equally people are chomping at the bit to tear her to pieces.

The truth in all these articles is grey, somewhere in the middle.


----------



## Morgan R

Flatsy said:


> The UK Royals have always been good at sensing when their backs were against the wall and making the concessions needed to keep themselves in power.  1992 was the year of Fergie's toe-sucking, Diana's tell-all, Squidgygate, and the Windsor Castle fire.  There was a big debate about whether the Queen should pay for the $65 million Windsor repairs out of pocket, and general momentum to limit/end the royal gravy train.  It was definitely a case of the Queen volunteering preemptively.



Oh I know what happened in 1992 for them to voluntarily pay tax starting in 1993. They royal family definitely know how to change the narrative regarding their spending habits. Last year the royal family was getting a lot of slack since they were allowing Princess Eugenie's wedding to be a grand event which included a carnival the day after the wedding plus they made it a public event. Yes Eugenie had the right to make her wedding memorable but it could've been memorable and private. Eugenie has never been a working royal like Harry has. Harry's wedding being public made sense because Harry and Meghan's wedding like William and Kate's wedding was guaranteed to bring in a major boost to the UK economy (for both weddings each brought in around a billion dollar boost to the UK economy due to the tourism, public-relations for the UK, restaurants/retail, fashion, and merchandising that happened because of the weddings). There were so many stories or comments by longtime royal supporters that came out around the time of Eugenie's wedding that pointed out how her wedding should have been private like her cousins Philip and Zara weddings were since she like them has never been a working royal. Zara similarly got married the same year as William just like Eugenie got married the same year as Harry. Difference is Zara's wedding was private and payed for by the royal family fortune with no taxpayers funds. Eugenie's wedding being public meant that the taxpayers funded for security and Eugenie's wedding didn't even have somewhat close to the same amount of turnout of people that Harry and Meghan's wedding had.

It obviously wasn't a coincidence by the British Royal Family when Eugenie's wedding was scheduled to happen. Harry had already announced nearly 2 years in advance back in November 2016 the 2018 Sydney Invictus Games dates (which were tentatively scheduled for October 18-29,2018 then were slightly changed to October 20-27,2018). It seems since the Invictus Games were originally meant to be October 18-29 they were likely going to have Harry do a tour of at least Australia since the royal family is always visiting there considering outside of Canada it is the largest Commonwealth Realm that is under the British Monarchy. But since Harry and Meghan got married and earlier last year Harry was made the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador they made it a Commonwealth Tour and the tour of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, and Tongo was from the October 16-31. Having Harry and Meghan's tour after Eugenie's wedding quickly changed the negative press the British Royal Family was getting for making Eugenie's wedding a public wedding to the narrative quickly changing to it being positive press about the British Royal Family because Harry and Meghan's tour (with the tour helping boost the economy to the various countries they visited) as well as Meghan's pregnancy.


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The comments on those articles alone should be a red-flag - that is the audience for these click-bait articles, it's dog-whistling.  The comments reek of "putting her in her place".
> 
> As much as commentary in this forum says people are too eager to defend Meghan, I would say equally people are chomping at the bit to tear her to pieces.


The last time I glanced at the comments on a Daily Mail article, it was hundreds of people calling Jennifer Lawrence names that I can't repeat in polite company, one after another.  The Daily Mail is a cesspool with articles that are sensationalistic and belitting to all of their subjects, and usually not very subtly.  The comments are a gathering point for some of the worst trolls the internet has to offer.  That is why I stay away from The Daily Mail, and especially the comments.  

I am sick of what's written in The Daily Mail/Daily Mail comments being used as evidence that the whole world is out to get Meghan Markle and therefore no one anywhere else is allowed to have a discussion about her  that isn't about supporting and protecting her. 

And it seems that Meghan's fans are the people who spend the most time at the Daily Mail (and the one or two other bottom-of-the-barrel tabloids), wallowing in all of the most virulent anti-Meghan sentiment that exists.  Why?  For the purpose of accruing more evidence of how done-upon she is?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

@Flatsy like I said the truth is in the middle.

I think Meghan spent a lot of money on her clothes (though not the amount in the DM, which was broken down better on UFO) and I'd be looking for a _big_ decrease this year.

It's more the vehemence and real spite in comments about Meghan (not just on the DM, where I've stopped reading comments, full stop). As far as I can see she hasn't really done anything that warrants that kind of reaction.

Criticism? Of course - she's in the public eye. It's to be expected. This is other level though.


----------



## TMA

If anyone is going to be a heifer, be a heifer with a cause. I’m being a heifer right now. This is not about supporting a person and not seeing any fault, it is I haven’t seen a fault yet. If you cannot see there is a campaign against this woman, then it speaks to your disengaging a part of your rational thinking ability, than to anything else. Moving away specifically from Meghan, this is also applicable in other areas as well. Engage the grey cells as you read and try to disengage your natural bias. When there is an agenda, then you should be more careful about the sources you read to make a judgement. Start from a place of fairness in every situation. Don’t be a heifer with cotton balls for brains. Engage the little grey cells!


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> @Flatsy As far as I can see she hasn't really done anything that warrants that kind of reaction.
> 
> Criticism? Of course - she's in the public eye. It's to be expected. This is other level though.


I mean, fair enough.  It is a matter of opinion rather than fact though.

There used to be (maybe still is) a blog about Crown Princess of Mary that was insanely over the top, calling her "Bogan trash" and chronicling the endless list of unforgivable offenses she has committed (such as the one time her toddler daughter wore a shoe that had a hole in it).  Royaldish still hates CP Mary with a passion that I personally don't see a basis for, but I find it amusing rather than something she needs to be defended against.  

Royal-watching incites passionate love and passionate hate, and what many Markle fans who are new to royal-watching don't seem to understand is that hate wasn't invented just for Meghan.  



TMA said:


> Don’t be a heifer with cotton balls for brains. Engage the little grey cells!


I've never yet had occasion to defend my intelligence or deductive reasoning skills, up to and including right now.  

Since you have an interest in rational thinking abilities, I would recommend you look up the definition of the logical fallacy known as _argumentum ad hominem._  Two posts today and you've done nothing to contribute to the discussion except call people names and attack their intelligence.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> I wonder whether he pays tax on the income from Dutchy Originals, his mainly organic food venture with Waitrose. I've tried some of the products and those are quite nice, but a little pricey. Waitrose isn't cheap anyway.
> 
> 
> K





TMA said:


> If anyone is going to be a heifer, be a heifer with a cause. I’m being a heifer right now. This is not about supporting a person and not seeing any fault, it is I haven’t seen a fault yet. If you cannot see there is a campaign against this woman, then it speaks to your disengaging a part of your rational thinking ability, than to anything else. Moving away specifically from Meghan, this is also applicable in other areas as well. Engage the grey cells as you read and try to disengage your natural bias. When there is an agenda, then you should be more careful about the sources you read to make a judgement. Start from a place of fairness in every situation. Don’t be a heifer with cotton balls for brains. Engage the little grey cells!


I rarely see the DM - except maybe a quote here and there.  But some people here are acting like criticizing this woman is so personal - like you or your family is being attacked (more like bullied).  She is a grown woman living a very privileged life.  Not a victim.  I don't think you need to lose sleep over her or her critics.


----------



## TMA

Flatsy said:


> I mean, fair enough.
> 
> I've never yet had occasion to defend my intelligence or deductive reasoning skills, up to and including right now.
> 
> Since you have an interest in rational thinking abilities, I would recommend you look up the definition of the logical fallacy known as _argumentum ad hominem._  Two posts today and you've done nothing to contribute to the discussion except call people names and attack their intelligence.



My contributions don’t affect heifers without causes (not calling you one but referring back to my initial comment). Others have articulated the points that should be taken into consideration, including as long as the UK has a monarchy, the revenue generated by the Duchy are not state funds but private. Calling it a trust makes it clear the person lacks a fundamental understanding of what a trust is. Look at it more as a leasehold - the lessee can do whatever it wants within the terms of the leasehold agreement and retain any revenues except for rent, if so required by the agreement. A constitutional change has not been made to change that fact. My comments were not ad hominem as this was not an “argument”, rather it was a suggestion/observation as nothing logical had been presented. As one person said - this is gossip, I did not think it was an exercise in logic. My suggestion still stands - people should engage their brains rather than gossip just for the sake of it. And I don’t find people being mean to others amusing as you seem to find about CP Mary. My default setting is to defend if I think a person is being attacked for no justifiable reason. People should try that sometime - it is soul-liberating and leads to a happier life. My comment was not directed specifically at you, but you seem to think it applies, so I will take your word for it.


----------



## Flatsy

TMA said:


> including as long as the UK has a monarchy, the revenue generated by the Duchy are not state funds but private. Calling it a trust makes it clear the person lacks a fundamental understanding of what a trust is. Look at it more as a leasehold - the lessee can do whatever it wants within the terms of the leasehold agreement and retain any revenues except for rent, if so required by the agreement.


This is the weakest, most legalistic nitpicking I've ever read.  I described the Duchy of Cornwall as "essentially an income-generating trust fund provided to the Prince of Wales by the people of Great Britain".  _Which it is. 
_
I did not say it was a legal trust.  It was a figurative comparison to a structure more people would be familiar with.  The Duchy of Cornwall is a state asset.  It does not belong to the Prince of Wales.  Current law grants him the income, but an act of Parliament can change that at any time and take it away.  If the monarchy is abolished, the Queen and the rest of the family have actual _private _funds that belong to them and will be taken with them.  The Duchy of Cornwall is not one of them.

The over-arching point is that excusing all royal clothing purchases as being "paid for by Prince Charles" is only true in the most technical of senses.


----------



## Aimee3

Morgan R said:


> The following monarchies have funds from taxpayers: Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Spain, and the UK (should be noted the UK monarchy extends to 16 countries of the 53 Commonwealth Nations those 16 countries are referred to as the Commonwealth Realms). The taxpayers annual cost per taxpayer is as little as €0.16 (in Spain) and as much as €9.70 (Norway). The taxpayers pay €0.70 per year in the UK and Commonwealth Realms for the British Royal Family. Though the tax can slightly increase these amounts I have mentioned have possibly slightly increased as these amounts listed collectively from courtesy of a Dutch newspaper _de Volkskrant _which published (https://www.volkskrant.nl/economie/welk-vorstenhuis-is-het-duurste-van-europa-~b95dad9f/) an overview of the annual expenditure (excluding security expenses) of all European royal houses (not counting Luxembourg and the four monarchical European microstates). I think there really is a misconception that monarchies don't pay tax and are only funded by taxpayers. Two monarchies don't pay tax and that is Norway and Netherlands. Denmark's monarchy only pays an inheritance tax. Belgium, Sweden, Spain, and UK royal family all pay income tax.
> 
> In the instance of the British Royal Family though the government considers the Duchy of Cornwall and Duchy of Lancaster to be a crown bodies and therefore exempt from paying corporation tax. Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth voluntarily do in fact pay tax. Prince Charles voluntarily pays a sum equivalent to income tax of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall that is in excess of what is needed to meet official expenditure. Queen Elizabeth II has voluntarily paid income tax on the Duchy of Lancaster so she pays a sum equivalent to income tax on her private income and income from the Privy Purse (which includes the Duchy of Lancaster) that is not used for official purposes. Them paying income tax started in 1993. This details why they voluntarily pay tax: https://assets.publishing.service.g.../uploads/attachment_data/file/235690/0464.pdf. But in short Queen Elizabeth II offered to pay income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax on a voluntary basis and to refund the cost of the Parliamentary Annuities paid to members of the Royal Family and Prince Charles offered to pay income tax on a voluntary basis on his income from the Duchy of Cornwall.:



Morgan, Thank you so much for this very informative post.  If I understand, tax payers are paying less than 1 euro a year for the royal family in the UK?  It’s not even a cup of coffee or tea!  The way some people had reported that citizens were grumbling etc about supporting the monarchy monetarily I really thought it was going to be a considerable sum.  But I doubt anyone except someone on a very very limited pension would miss less than one euro a year.  [emoji253]


----------



## caramelize126

Meghan’s bodyguard quits after 6 months on the job- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...n-markle-bodyguard-quits-after-six-months.amp


I was in college and didn’t actively follow the BRF when Kate and will married, but did Kate have this many former friends speaking out against her, staff quitting, stories coming from palace sources, etc. after getting married?

I remember people speculating that she and her mother had planned on her meeting the prince, all the “Waity Katie” talks, but nothing like what is coming out against Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

FreeSpirit71 said:


> My issue is with people who read the Daily Mail/The Sun and all their obviously slanted stories about Meghan and take it all as writ, without even looking at the links in an article.
> 
> I'm not a Meghan fan per se, though obvs I read articles on news sites etc, but if we're going to talk about her, let's start with facts and go from there rather than take the grammar-deficient word of a Daily Mail writer with an agenda.
> 
> The comments on those articles alone should be a red-flag - that is the audience for these click-bait articles, it's dog-whistling.  The comments reek of "putting her in her place".
> 
> As much as commentary in this forum says people are too eager to defend Meghan, I would say equally people are chomping at the bit to tear her to pieces.
> 
> The truth in all these articles is grey, somewhere in the middle.





FreeSpirit71 said:


> @Flatsy like I said the truth is in the middle.
> 
> I think Meghan spent a lot of money on her clothes (though not the amount in the DM, which was broken down better on UFO) and I'd be looking for a _big_ decrease this year.
> 
> It's more the vehemence and real spite in comments about Meghan (not just on the DM, where I've stopped reading comments, full stop). As far as I can see she hasn't really done anything that warrants that kind of reaction.
> 
> Criticism? Of course - she's in the public eye. It's to be expected. This is other level though.



Exactly there is a truth somewhere in the middle and other times stories genuinely get proven to be lies but stories by the press are often exaggerated for headlines because it sells. No one is saying Meghan is above criticism but at the same time we can't act like she isn't getting criticized over a lot of things that aren't necessary for criticism. Yeah I can see why she is getting criticism regarding her costs of clothes. But at the same time the Britsh Tabloids feel the need to criticize Meghan when it comes to outdated "protocol" (that other royals don't even follow but if Meghan doesn't follow it is made a big deal), for the mess that is her Dad's side of the family (yet various British Tabloids are the very ones that keep giving them attention by constantly doing interviews with them), her previously being divorced, and her being American (let's not even get into how if they can they try to bring up Wallis Simpson). The British Tabloids has never been all that kind to the people that marry into the British Royal Family and that isn't new. The British Tabloids have often gotten called out by International Media (i.e American media and media from Commonwealth Nations) for the narrative they try to paint of the people that marry into the royal family.

I already knew whoever William and Harry ended up marrying were going to get labeled something like either "domineering", "determined", "angry", "rude", "bossy", etc. Why did I think they were going to get labeled something  like that well because that is literally the narrative the British Tabloids have used regarding the people that marry into the family. Kate was accused of being "determined" to get a ring (i.e. why she was named "Waity Katie" by the British Tabloids until William proposed and they got married), she gets accused of being a lazy royal for consistently doing a low number of engagements each year in comparison to other royals (i.e why British Tabloids named her "Duchess Do Little"), and was also accused of being a reason why staff members quit. Meghan has been accused of being the reason staff has quit, has been accused of making Harry abandon his friends, and accused of making him change his habits (hobbies, eating, smoking, drinking).  Added to that there have been some stories that have racial undertones about Meghan. That isn't even opinion that is a fact that was/is sometimes noticeable in stories written about her that even Harry pointed out when he released the statement he did back in 2016 regarding Meghan.

Just goes to show you how consistent the British Press is. Quote I saw shared from some royal biography that literally shows how consistent the press is with the narratives the push regarding the people who married into the royal family. Diana was accused of spending to much money on clothes, being the reason for why staff had quit, and also accused of making Charles abandon his friends/change his eating habits/change his wardrobe.:






Diana was even asked about those rumors that were constantly a narrative pushed by the press which constantly said she was "domineering", "determined", and "was trying to change Charles":


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R, I agree with much of your post and appreciate the examples.  The stuff about Meghan forbidding Harry to hunt on Boxing Day because she's an animal rights activist/vegan (which is known not to be true and is just lazily stereotyping her as a liberal Hollywood actress) was obviously silly.  I believe it came from The Daily Mail. 

Accusing royal wives of being domineering is definitely a commonplace sport for the royal press.  Poor Queen Letizia of Spain playfully corrected her then-fiance during an interview in 2003 and the Spanish press still brings it up 15 years later to demonstrate what a controlling shrew she is.

The one I disagree with is the protocol stuff because at the heart of that, almost none of it was actually critical.  I started calling them "protocompliments" because most of them were excuses to praise Meghan. For example:

Meghan broke protocol by closing her own car door - she's so down to earth!

Meghan broke protocol by kissing Prince Harry in public - she's a breath of fresh air, teaching those stuffy royals what it means to be human!

Meghan broke protocol to hug a child at an event - she's so warm and compassionate!  She's Diana reincarnate!

Other stuff, like crossing her legs or walking on the wrong side of the queen, portrayed Meghan as the heroine of a real-life Princess Diaries, in which the regular girl wins the prince and then has to charmingly stumble her way through learning a bunch of arcane rules that we plebs are lucky to not be bound by.

Since the engagement, the only genuine negative press (apart from what her family created) in my opinion started in November-December.  That was a real glut of bad press.  Whether the papers had been holding back until they thought the public would be more receptive to anti-Meghan stories, or whether jealous relatives decided to unleash, or whether disgruntled former employees decided to tell all, it was an abrupt turn.

Normally I would be inclined to defend her from some of the stuff, but at that point I feel like her fans had been crying wolf for a year about the press being out to get her, and so I am no longer so inclined.  And that said, "bad press" is not a synonym for "lies".


----------



## Hobbsy

CeeJay said:


> Well, I guess it depends on where you 'sit' in the hierarchy.  For instance, when I was working in London (and being American), boy did I hear the commentary about the "class system" and how the minute the Brit opens his/her mouth, most immediately know where you come/came from.  Many told me about how if you had a "low-class" (Cockney) accent, you could expect to reach such-&-such a level and no higher.  If one had a "posh" accent, then even though they may not know as much, they would ascend higher up the scale (now, mind you - I was in Financial Services Investments, so I'm assuming that this pertained to the Corporate environments).  MANY of them were extremely displeased at having to 'fund' the Royal Family, and when Queen Elizabeth set out to pay for certain things herself (maybe after the fire?), they were very pleased.  Heck, think of the American Revolution .. why did it happen? .. because the Colonists felt that they were being taxed too high and they had no representation to even discuss it.  Also discussing the economy and the wicked high taxes in the UK (hence the reason why many decide to move to Monaco to escape those high taxes), I can see where it would not make them happy to see an obvious show of very expensive items.  Just sayin' ..


I said that a little off the cuff. I agree with what you said. It would be a hard pill to swallow if you had to watch frivolous spending for sure!


----------



## chaneljewel

It’s very difficult to read all the cynicism regarding Meghan and Harry.  I want their marriage to work and to live happily ever after.  I love looking at the clothes she wears and the bags she carries.  I love that she married royalty but is from America.   And I can’t wait till the little royal baby is born.  I don’t care about how much money is spent on clothes or if someone thinks Meghan is a social climber. I feel like it’s true love and that’s all that matters to me.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

another staff member quits ... she must be a pleasure to work for


----------



## Morgan R

The most recent staff member (a personal protection officer) that left made the decision to leave the Metropolitan Police entirely. Her quitting to work for the royals literally has nothing to do with Meghan but has to with the fact that she is leaving the force completely. Since she left the Metropolitan Police entirely she obviously can't a member of the Royalty and Diplomatic Protection Department (meaning a Personal Protection Officer)

The other staff members that left. 2 of the staff members it was always known they weren't staying and 1 person it has been questioned if she was an employee that was always meant to only serve for a temporary position:
- *Edward Lane Fox:* Was formerly Harry's Personal Protection Officer that was orginally set to leave before Meghan even became a royal and technically was never Meghan's staff even though tabloids keep saying he was. He had stayed on longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Then left a officially  shortly after the wedding.
- *Samantha Cohen:* Was always going to be a temporary assistant because she was retiring after working for the royals for 17 years. But under the instruction of Queen Elizabeth II, Samantha was temporarily given the job of assistant to Meghan to help transition through these early months of her new royal life.
- *"Melissa" :* There has been major speculation by royal reporters if "Melissa" just filled a temporary position and possibly never worked directly with Meghan but worked at Kensington Palace. Daily Mail says the person "Melissa" person is Melissa Touabti and they didn't even have her full name until a month after the assistant story was released (which is highly unusual considering the names of people that work for the royals are made public pretty much immediately unless they only fill a temporary position because the royals' staff are paid by taxpayers). The Daily Mail said Melissa was an assistant to Meghan yet she was never seen on walk abouts like Harry and Meghan's other assistants are. Samantha Cohen, Amy Pickrell (who is  Meghan's Assistant Private Secretary), or Heather Wong (Prince Harry's Assistant Private Secretary) have all been seen with Harry and/or Meghan.

The royals are always losing staff not because of attitudes of royals but because there are so many royal employees. Because there are so many royal employees it isn't considered to be the best paying job especially for a job where the employees are expected to work Monday-Sunday and often around 40 hours (sometime more) a week. Also they British Royal Family loses employees because they do have temporary positions (i.e internships that last 3 or so months or jobs specifically for special events). There are occasional people that stay long term but a lot of people that work for the royals work for a short time span (i.e a few months to a few short years) or they were simply brought in to fill a temporary position. Prince William and Princess Anne both lost long term staff members recently but that really didn't make news it just more of an announcement. Prince William lost his Private Secretary Miguel Head. Princess Anne lost her Private Secretary Nicholas Wright. Prince Charles and Camilla are currently looking for a Personal Assistant.


----------



## TMA

Morgan R said:


> The most recent staff member (a personal protection officer) that left made the decision to leave the Metropolitan Police entirely. Her quitting to work for the royals literally has nothing to do with Meghan but has to with the fact that she is leaving the force completely. Since she left the Metropolitan Police entirely she obviously can't a member of the Royalty and Diplomatic Protection Department (meaning a Personal Protection Officer)
> 
> The other staff members that left. 2 of the staff members it was always known they weren't staying and 1 person it has been questioned if she was an employee that was always meant to only serve for a temporary position:
> - *Edward Lane Fox:* Was formerly Harry's Personal Protection Officer that was orginally set to leave before Meghan even became a royal and technically was never Meghan's staff even though tabloids keep saying he was. He had stayed on longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Then left a officially  shortly after the wedding.
> - *Samantha Cohen:* Was always going to be a temporary assistant because she was retiring after working for the royals for 17 years. But under the instruction of Queen Elizabeth II, Samantha was temporarily given the job of assistant to Meghan to help transition through these early months of her new royal life.
> - *"Melissa" :* There has been major speculation by royal reporters if "Melissa" just filled a temporary position and possibly never worked directly with Meghan but worked at Kensington Palace. Daily Mail says the person "Melissa" person is Melissa Touabti and they didn't even have her full name until a month after the assistant story was released (which is highly unusual considering the names of people that work for the royals are made public pretty much immediately unless they only fill a temporary position because the royals' staff are paid by taxpayers). The Daily Mail said Melissa was an assistant to Meghan yet she was never seen on walk abouts like Harry and Meghan's other assistants are. Samantha Cohen, Amy Pickrell (who is  Meghan's Assistant Private Secretary), or Heather Wong (Prince Harry's Assistant Private Secretary) have all been seen with Harry and/or Meghan.
> 
> The royals are always losing staff not because of attitudes of royals but because there are so many royal employees. Because there are so many royal employees it isn't considered to be the best paying job especially for a job where the employees are expected to work Monday-Sunday and often around 40 hours (sometime more) a week. Also they British Royal Family loses employees because they do have temporary positions (i.e internships that last 3 or so months or jobs specifically for special events). There are occasional people that stay long term but a lot of people that work for the royals work for a short time span (i.e a few months to a few short years) or they were simply brought in to fill a temporary position. Prince William and Princess Anne both lost long term staff members recently but that really didn't make news it just more of an announcement. Prince William lost his Private Secretary Miguel Head. Princess Anne lost her Private Secretary Nicholas Wright. Prince Charles and Camilla are currently looking for a Personal Assistant.



Morgan, kudos to you for trying to educate. My point still remains about engaging one’s grey cells. A person leaves the entire police force and it is a close aide quitting - if they quit working for her then they would have rotated out of the protection officers unit but she left the London force (similar to leaving NYPD and moving to Georgia PD or not working for any police force at all). An educated person would read and question and understand, but far too many are disinclined to do so. The same report with the emblazoned headline then has a line tucked all the way at the end saying why the issue has occurred but refuse to expand on it. If that is not an agenda, I don’t know what is. And this is true of a lot of the Meghan stories. One just needs to be astute to ferret them out. Also when people talk about her fans defending her then that puts them off, it they you had no defending bone in their body to start with. I may be irritated at how some people are going about a “cause” I believe in, but that would not put me off the cause itself.


----------



## scrpo83

Morgan R said:


> The most recent staff member (a personal protection officer) that left made the decision to leave the Metropolitan Police entirely. Her quitting to work for the royals literally has nothing to do with Meghan but has to with the fact that she is leaving the force completely. Since she left the Metropolitan Police entirely she obviously can't a member of the Royalty and Diplomatic Protection Department (meaning a Personal Protection Officer)
> 
> The other staff members that left. 2 of the staff members it was always known they weren't staying and 1 person it has been questioned if she was an employee that was always meant to only serve for a temporary position:
> - *Edward Lane Fox:* Was formerly *Harry's Personal Protection Officer* that was orginally set to leave before Meghan even became a royal and technically was never Meghan's staff even though tabloids keep saying he was. He had stayed on longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Then left a officially  shortly after the wedding.



Ed Lane Fox (ELF) was Harry's Private Secretary, not PPO


----------



## Morgan R

scrpo83 said:


> Ed Lane Fox (ELF) was Harry's Private Secretary, not PPO



Yeah I knew that typing error mistake on my part. I started off talking about Personal Protection Officers and carried that over into my commentary about Edward Lane Fox by mistake. Thanks anyways though.


----------



## myown

caramelize126 said:


> Meghan’s bodyguard quits after 6 months on the job- https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...n-markle-bodyguard-quits-after-six-months.amp
> 
> 
> I was in college and didn’t actively follow the BRF when Kate and will married, but did Kate have this many former friends speaking out against her, staff quitting, stories coming from palace sources, etc. after getting married?
> 
> I remember people speculating that she and her mother had planned on her meeting the prince, all the “Waity Katie” talks, but nothing like what is coming out against Meghan.


I think in average gossip is becoming worse and worse. everywhere. 
they would probably haven't written all these stories about Meghan 10 years ago, while they maybe would write those stories about Kate now


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Birkenhead


----------



## Fally420

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Birkenhead
> 
> View attachment 4305031
> View attachment 4305047
> View attachment 4305030
> View attachment 4305032
> View attachment 4305048
> View attachment 4305033
> View attachment 4305062



wow, would have never expected these colors on her...


----------



## Sharont2305

She's let it slip that she is 6 months along and baby due in April. Doesn't know if it's a girl or boy, wants the surprise.


----------



## daisychainz

Morgan R said:


> The most recent staff member (a personal protection officer) that left made the decision to leave the Metropolitan Police entirely. Her quitting to work for the royals literally has nothing to do with Meghan but has to with the fact that she is leaving the force completely. Since she left the Metropolitan Police entirely she obviously can't a member of the Royalty and Diplomatic Protection Department (meaning a Personal Protection Officer)
> 
> The other staff members that left. 2 of the staff members it was always known they weren't staying and 1 person it has been questioned if she was an employee that was always meant to only serve for a temporary position:
> - *Edward Lane Fox:* Was formerly Harry's Personal Protection Officer that was orginally set to leave before Meghan even became a royal and technically was never Meghan's staff even though tabloids keep saying he was. He had stayed on longer because Harry got engaged and then married. Then left a officially  shortly after the wedding.
> - *Samantha Cohen:* Was always going to be a temporary assistant because she was retiring after working for the royals for 17 years. But under the instruction of Queen Elizabeth II, Samantha was temporarily given the job of assistant to Meghan to help transition through these early months of her new royal life.
> - *"Melissa" :* There has been major speculation by royal reporters if "Melissa" just filled a temporary position and possibly never worked directly with Meghan but worked at Kensington Palace. Daily Mail says the person "Melissa" person is Melissa Touabti and they didn't even have her full name until a month after the assistant story was released (which is highly unusual considering the names of people that work for the royals are made public pretty much immediately unless they only fill a temporary position because the royals' staff are paid by taxpayers). The Daily Mail said Melissa was an assistant to Meghan yet she was never seen on walk abouts like Harry and Meghan's other assistants are. Samantha Cohen, Amy Pickrell (who is  Meghan's Assistant Private Secretary), or Heather Wong (Prince Harry's Assistant Private Secretary) have all been seen with Harry and/or Meghan.
> 
> The royals are always losing staff not because of attitudes of royals but because there are so many royal employees. Because there are so many royal employees it isn't considered to be the best paying job especially for a job where the employees are expected to work Monday-Sunday and often around 40 hours (sometime more) a week. Also they British Royal Family loses employees because they do have temporary positions (i.e internships that last 3 or so months or jobs specifically for special events). There are occasional people that stay long term but a lot of people that work for the royals work for a short time span (i.e a few months to a few short years) or they were simply brought in to fill a temporary position. Prince William and Princess Anne both lost long term staff members recently but that really didn't make news it just more of an announcement. Prince William lost his Private Secretary Miguel Head. Princess Anne lost her Private Secretary Nicholas Wright. Prince Charles and Camilla are currently looking for a Personal Assistant.



It's like any regular company, because people are constantly coming and going from positions. When a new manager comes in to a department lots of people will often make the decision to leave/exit their job. Generally, it's because they dislike the new manager, their new tasks, or the new rules being established. There are probably a mix of reasons why people are deciding to leave their posts as you described, but Meghan is going to be a factor for some of them, at least. We just don't actually know which people exited because of her, unless they write a book.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> She's let it slip that she is 6 months along and baby due in April. Doesn't know if it's a girl or boy, wants the surprise.


When/where did she say this??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

daisychainz said:


> It's like any regular company, because people are constantly coming and going from positions. When a new manager comes in to a department lots of people will often make the decision to leave/exit their job. Generally, it's because they dislike the new manager, their new tasks, or the new rules being established. There are probably a mix of reasons why people are deciding to leave their posts as you described, but Meghan is going to be a factor for some of them, at least. *We just don't actually know which people exited because of her, unless they write a book*.




And that ain’t happening!  They all had to sign non-disclosures so as you said we will not know.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She looks good, but I really hate red and purple together.


----------



## bag-princess

cafecreme15 said:


> When/where did she say this??



During the couple’s visit to the town of Birkenhead on Monday, the Duchess of Sussex told the crowd when she’s due to give birth to their first child.
“We asked her how her pregnancy was going and she said she was six months and she tapped her tummy,” well-wisher Carla Gandy from nearby Wallasey, who was there with her 4-year-old daughter Sofia, tells PEOPLE.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&sou...aw136RRogk0vn006EbccE4xJ&ust=1547567113744793


----------



## bag-princess

lanasyogamama said:


> She looks good, but I really hate red and purple together.




Same!


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> When/where did she say this??


Today in Birkenhead, a few people heard her say late April.


----------



## Sharont2305

And, apparently, Harry asked a little girl called Lily which way she spelt her name!! Possible clue I wonder.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sharont2305 said:


> Today in Birkenhead, a few people heard her say late April.


Late April can't be right, I'd say mid going by my calculations


----------



## daisychainz

lanasyogamama said:


> She looks good, but I really hate red and purple together.


It reminds me of my grandma, lol. She's in the red hat club with her friends and they wear purple/red together for their meetings and outings. I arrived at my grandmas house unexpected one day and walked into a room full of old women playing cards in bright red and purple clothing. It looked so funny. Those two colors remind me of the old ladies and their meetings now.


----------



## sdkitty

chaneljewel said:


> It’s very difficult to read all the cynicism regarding Meghan and Harry.  I want their marriage to work and to live happily ever after.  I love looking at the clothes she wears and the bags she carries.  I love that she married royalty but is from America.   And I can’t wait till the little royal baby is born.  I don’t care about how much money is spent on clothes or if someone thinks Meghan is a social climber. I feel like it’s true love and that’s all that matters to me.





chaneljewel said:


> It’s very difficult to read all the cynicism regarding Meghan and Harry.  I want their marriage to work and to live happily ever after.  I love looking at the clothes she wears and the bags she carries.  I love that she married royalty but is from America.   And I can’t wait till the little royal baby is born.  I don’t care about how much money is spent on clothes or if someone thinks Meghan is a social climber. I feel like it’s true love and that’s all that matters to me.


enjoy your fairy tale.....I have no ill will toward them but they are human beings not fairy prince and princess


----------



## lanasyogamama

daisychainz said:


> It reminds me of my grandma, lol. She's in the red hat club with her friends and they wear purple/red together for their meetings and outings. I arrived at my grandmas house unexpected one day and walked into a room full of old women playing cards in bright red and purple clothing. It looked so funny. Those two colors remind me of the old ladies and their meetings now.



Cute!! [emoji173]️[emoji171][emoji173]️[emoji171]


----------



## CeeJay

Sorry I have to say this (and may get flak for it), but to be told (in essence) to use your grey cells ("_don't have cotton balls_"), and  "_don't be a heifer_" .. IMO, is well .. not very nice.  

Let me just say this, as an American, we don't see much news about Harry / Meghan in our reputable press; obviously, you see more articles in the UK Papers/Sites (e.g., BBC, The Times,Daily Telegraph, etc.) .. but, of course, also on those like the Daily Mail (which I oftentimes refer to as the Daily Fail) and the Sun, etc.  As *FreeSpirit* said, the truth is oftentimes in the middle .. so give us some credit that we do, in fact, read other material.  

This is a Gossip thread after all, so I don't expect for anyone to have to endure commentary about their intelligence and/or lack thereof.  Sometimes, a link is put into place to have a discussion about it's content, and it's nice to get those that are obviously more knowledgeable about the BRF to comment.  Regardless of our opinions about Harry & Meghan, can we at least be civilized and not make comments about people posting???


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

That outfit is awful. Apparently the bookies are certain the baby is a girl and they have stopped taking bets. I suspect the late April comment is fudged so that people won't be stalking the hospital.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think its March not April. Fudged - agreed.


----------



## PatsyCline

CeeJay said:


> Sorry I have to say this (and may get flak for it), but to be told (in essence) to use your grey cells ("_don't have cotton balls_"), and  "_don't be a heifer_" .. IMO, is well .. not very nice.
> 
> Let me just say this, as an American, we don't see much news about Harry / Meghan in our reputable press; obviously, you see more articles in the UK Papers/Sites (e.g., BBC, The Times,Daily Telegraph, etc.) .. but, of course, also on those like the Daily Mail (which I oftentimes refer to as the Daily Fail) and the Sun, etc.  As *FreeSpirit* said, the truth is oftentimes in the middle .. so give us some credit that we do, in fact, read other material.
> 
> This is a Gossip thread after all, so I don't expect for anyone to have to endure commentary about their intelligence and/or lack thereof.  Sometimes, a link is put into place to have a discussion about it's content, and it's nice to get those that are obviously more knowledgeable about the BRF to comment.  Regardless of our opinions about Harry & Meghan, can we at least be civilized and not make comments about people posting???



Are you seriously trying to say it’s OK for people to slang and disparage Meghan, but somehow going after them is off limits?

And where in the title of this thread says it’s a ‘gossip’ thread?


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Are you seriously trying to say it’s OK for people to slang and disparage Meghan, but somehow going after them is off limits?
> 
> And where in the title of this thread says it’s a ‘gossip’ thread?



*Celebrity News and Gossip*
It's at the top of the page every time you come here.

And yes, the mods will frequently remind in these forums that they are for posting opinions about celebrities, not for calling other posters stupid.  Opinions about the celebrities are not required to all be positive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> *Celebrity News and Gossip*
> It's at the top of the page every time you come here.
> 
> And yes, the mods will frequently remind in these forums that they are for posting opinions about celebrities, not for calling other posters stupid.  Opinions about the celebrities are not required to all be positive.


if this sensitivity on the part of Meghan's fans keeps up the thread may be closed like the ***** ones were


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> *Celebrity News and Gossip*
> It's at the top of the page every time you come here.
> 
> And yes, the mods will frequently remind in these forums that they are for posting opinions about celebrities, not for calling other posters stupid.  Opinions about the celebrities are not required to all be positive.





sdkitty said:


> if this sensitivity on the part of Meghan's fans keeps up the thread may be closed like the ***** ones were



Thank you *~Flatsy~* and *~sdkitty~* and all the rest that liked my post.  Regardless of one's opinions on Meghan, that does not warrant calling others names just because he/she has a different point of view.


----------



## chaneljewel

sdkitty said:


> enjoy your fairy tale.....I have no ill will toward them but they are human beings not fairy prince and princess


I don’t think of their story as a fairytale.  I simply like the royals and enjoy reading about them and seeing photos.  On the flip side, I’m sure it would be difficult for any of us to live up to perfection from the public.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Thank you *~Flatsy~* and *~sdkitty~* and all the rest that liked my post.  Regardless of one's opinions on Meghan, that does not warrant calling others names just because he/she has a different point of view.


that's right


----------



## FreeSpirit71

PatsyCline said:


> Are you seriously trying to say it’s OK for people to slang and disparage Meghan, but somehow going after them is off limits?
> *
> And where in the title of this thread says it’s a ‘gossip’ thread*?


Really?

Despite the fact I don't agree with some opinions here, this IS a forum for gossip.  

And sometimes people I don't necessarily agree with raise valid points for discussion.


----------



## sdkitty

PatsyCline said:


> Are you seriously trying to say it’s OK for people to slang and disparage Meghan, but somehow going after them is off limits?
> 
> And where in the title of this thread says it’s a ‘gossip’ thread?


yes, as others have said, this is a gossip sub-forum.  And I think the rules here (or the spirit anyway) are that we aren't supposed to go after people personally.  You can say you disagree or you find what they say offensive but personal attacks and name calling are off limits.


----------



## LittleStar88

Like the color combo or not, perhaps some inspo from Diana?


----------



## anitalilac

lanasyogamama said:


> She looks good, but I really hate red and purple together.


Me too! It's my nightmare color combo. That and red/black , well add yellow/brown too.


----------



## anitalilac

FreeSpirit71 said:


> My issue is with people who read the Daily Mail/The Sun and all their obviously slanted stories about Meghan and take it all as writ, without even looking at the links in an article.
> 
> I'm not a Meghan fan per se, though obvs I read articles on news sites etc, but if we're going to talk about her, let's start with facts and go from there rather than take the grammar-deficient word of a Daily Mail writer with an agenda.
> 
> The comments on those articles alone should be a red-flag - that is the audience for these click-bait articles, it's dog-whistling.  The comments reek of "putting her in her place".
> 
> As much as commentary in this forum says people are too eager to defend Meghan, I would say equally people are chomping at the bit to tear her to pieces.
> 
> The truth in all these articles is grey, somewhere in the middle.


----------



## Morgan R

LittleStar88 said:


> Like the color combo or not, perhaps some inspo from Diana?




Actually I think the wardrobe was inspired to fit in with one of the places they visited while in Birkenhead. Tomorrow's Women Wirral (women's support group) is a place they visited and the colors associated with that organization are different shades of purple and red .


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> yes, as others have said, this is a gossip sub-forum.  And I think the rules here (or the spirit anyway) are that we aren't supposed to go after people personally.  You can say you disagree or you find what they say offensive but personal attacks and name calling are off limits.


Ive been subject to PMs, not nice ones, re my correction of peoples posts when they have got things wrong.. Not from that person but from their fan club.


----------



## VickyB

Aimee3 said:


> Morgan, Thank you so much for this very informative post.  If I understand, tax payers are paying less than 1 euro a year for the royal family in the UK?  It’s not even a cup of coffee or tea!  The way some people had reported that citizens were grumbling etc about supporting the monarchy monetarily I really thought it was going to be a considerable sum.  But I doubt anyone except someone on a very very limited pension would miss less than one euro a year.  [emoji253]


Is this true? tax wise 1 euro per person a year goes to the support of  the royal family?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive been subject to PMs, not nice ones, re my correction of peoples posts when they have got things wrong.. Not from that person but from their fan club.



Sorry to hear that you’ve been this. This is supposed to be an open forum for others to express their opinions on “celebrities” and it should never get personally nasty. Name calling or nasty PMs are really not necessary.


----------



## Morgan R

VickyB said:


> Is this true? tax wise 1 euro per person a year goes to the support of  the royal family?



Yes according to a report released in 2017:


"Official figures show that the royals received 42.8 million pounds ($54.5 million) in 2016-17 from the “Sovereign Grant”, the government handout that covers the running costs of the queen’s household and travel expenses.

That figure is set to rise to 76.1 million pounds after the government agreed an increase to pay for a 369-million-pound, 10-year refurbishment of Buckingham Palace, whose aging electrical wiring, water pipes and heating system are in urgent need of repair.

Alan Reid, the queen’s treasurer known as Keeper of the Privy Purse, said *the cost of the monarchy to every Briton last year amounted to 65 pence - the cost of a first-class postage stamp*. When you consider that against what the queen does and represents for this country, I believe it represents excellent value for money,” Reid told reporters."



Also here is an article better breakdowns what is estimated the British Royal Family is worth, taxpayer  funding, and how royal engagements and events boost the economy.: https://www.fastcompany.com/40571590/british-royals-by-the-numbers-what-they-cost-and-bring-in


----------



## myown

Fally420 said:


> wow, would have never expected these colors on her...


but it looks so good


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think its March not April. Fudged - agreed.


I agree. I guess she said she's 6 month along, which means, she's in 7th month now, makes it a march baby. also there is a 5 weeks span where the baby normally comes (37wks - 42 wks maybe in UK longer, the least come at 40wks). my guess is the span is mid march - mid April, so her due date is around late march/ early April


----------



## minababe

I think we will notice it in the next weeks. her belly is huge already and high.
when its getting lower and the bellybutton Comes out we will know the finish line is near haha
I'm curious to see how Long we will see meghan in the next weeks or if she is done with her work after this week.
because than she visited all her patronages. maybe she is getting some rest after that ..
It's really excitíng to see how they handle this at all. which Hospital, how they will Show the baby to the world and how much Information we will get at all.
I really hope for a Family Picture with the Baby and their two Dogs some weeks after birth. would love to see that.


----------



## chicaloca

It’s clear Meghan’s career as an actress is being weaponized to project characteristics onto her commonly associated  with actresses  (i.e. pretentiousness, diva behavior, social climbing..etc).  Her actual life trajectory shows no evidence of any of these things.

When I look at her history I see a compassionate, philanthropic woman with a strong work ethic — not someone looking to live off a rich man’s money. She has engaged in charity since her teen years,  worked as a calligrapher and took small roles until she landed her lucrative role on Suits. Her ex-husband is a little-known producer — not some Weinstein-level Svengali. Her other major relationship was with a chef. 

There is also no indication l of diva behavior from coworkers and fans in more than a decade of her career. Only when she marries British royalty do we get negative reports from “anonymous royal sources” tapped by known racist British publications.

Being comfortable in the spotlight is not the same as being an attention seeker. An attention seeker does not evade the paparazzi in between appearances. They also wouldn’t secretly visit patronages for a year prior to an official announcement. It is clear Meghan wants to work and not just preen for cameras.


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> when its getting lower and the bellybutton Comes out we will know the finish line is near haha


never happened when I was pregnant. belly was always very high and my bellybutton never popped


----------



## bag-princess

chicaloca said:


> *It’s clear Meghan’s career as an actress is being weaponized to project characteristics onto her commonly associated  with actresses  (i.e. pretentiousness, diva behavior, social climbing..etc). *Her actual life trajectory shows no evidence of any of these things.
> 
> When I look at her history I see a compassionate, philanthropic woman with a strong work ethic — not someone looking to live off a rich man’s money. She has engaged in charity since her teen years,  worked as a calligrapher and took small roles until she landed her lucrative role on Suits. Her ex-husband is a little-known producer — not some Weinstein-level Svengali. Her other major relationship was with a chef.
> 
> There is also no indication l of diva behavior from coworkers and fans in more than a decade of her career. Only when she marries British royalty do we get negative reports from “anonymous royal sources” tapped by known racist British publications.
> 
> Being comfortable in the spotlight is not the same as being an attention seeker. An attention seeker does not evade the paparazzi in between appearances. They also wouldn’t secretly visit patronages for a year prior to an official announcement. It is clear Meghan wants to work and not just preen for cameras.




ITA with this! But as people do their best to try and hide it and dance all around it it’s clear that they also have a problem with her ethnicity too! They say everything but that and get as close to the point as they can without saying the words.


----------



## anitalilac

chicaloca said:


> It’s clear Meghan’s career as an actress is being weaponized to project characteristics onto her commonly associated  with actresses  (i.e. pretentiousness, diva behavior, social climbing..etc).  Her actual life trajectory shows no evidence of any of these things.
> 
> When I look at her history I see a compassionate, philanthropic woman with a strong work ethic — not someone looking to live off a rich man’s money. She has engaged in charity since her teen years,  worked as a calligrapher and took small roles until she landed her lucrative role on Suits. Her ex-husband is a little-known producer — not some Weinstein-level Svengali. Her other major relationship was with a chef.
> 
> There is also no indication l of diva behavior from coworkers and fans in more than a decade of her career. Only when she marries British royalty do we get negative reports from “anonymous royal sources” tapped by known racist British publications.
> 
> Being comfortable in the spotlight is not the same as being an attention seeker. An attention seeker does not evade the paparazzi in between appearances. They also wouldn’t secretly visit patronages for a year prior to an official announcement. It is clear Meghan wants to work and not just preen for cameras.





bag-princess said:


> ITA with this! But as people do their best to try and hide it and dance all around it it’s clear that they also have a problem with her ethnicity too! They say everything but that but get as close to the point as they can without saying the words.


----------



## LittleStar88

Morgan R said:


> Actually I think the wardrobe was inspired to fit in with one of the places they visited while in Birkenhead. Tomorrow's Women Wirral (women's support group) is a place they visited and the colors associated with that organization are different shades of purple and red .
> 
> View attachment 4306022
> View attachment 4306023



Yes, that was confirmed (she wore these colors to match the colors of the organization). Not really a fan of the color combo personally, but in this context she wore it well.


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, that was confirmed (she wore these colors to match the colors of the organization). Not really a fan of the color combo personally, but in this context she wore it well.


I liked how it was color vs. the black and or navy she often wears. 

I just like color, I guess (heck, I drive a bright yellow car!).


----------



## Morgan R

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> That outfit is awful. Apparently the bookies are certain the baby is a girl and they have stopped taking bets. I suspect the late April comment is fudged so that people won't be stalking the hospital.





FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think its March not April. Fudged - agreed.





myown said:


> I agree. I guess she said she's 6 month along, which means, she's in 7th month now, makes it a march baby. also there is a 5 weeks span where the baby normally comes (37wks - 42 wks maybe in UK longer, the least come at 40wks). my guess is the span is mid march - mid April, so her due date is around late march/ early April





minababe said:


> I think we will notice it in the next weeks. her belly is huge already and high.
> when its getting lower and the bellybutton Comes out we will know the finish line is near haha
> I'm curious to see how Long we will see meghan in the next weeks or if she is done with her work after this week.
> because than she visited all her patronages. maybe she is getting some rest after that ..
> It's really excitíng to see how they handle this at all. which Hospital, how they will Show the baby to the world and how much Information we will get at all.
> I really hope for a Family Picture with the Baby and their two Dogs some weeks after birth. would love to see that.



I don't think the comment Meghan made about her due date is wrong.  We will have more of an idea of when Meghan is due based on when her last engagement appearance before maternity leave is (it is always announced when the last appearance is ahead of time). Just based on maternity leaves of other royal women and everyday women it seems likely Meghan will go on maternity leave about a month (possibly a little over month) before her due date. If her maternity leave doesn't start until let's say late February/early March than she likely won't be due until sometime in late March/early April. If she doesn't start her maternity leave until late March/early April she likely isn't due until sometime in late April/early May. In recent times as it retains to the British Royal Family Kate's last appearances before maternity leave were: June 13, 2013 (George was born July 22, 2013)/March 27, 2015 (Charlotte was born May 2,2015)/March 22, 2018 (Louis was born April 23,2018).  Tomorrow though she has an engagement at her patronage Mayhew in the morning and at night will visit Cirque du Soleil’s Totem in support of Sentebale. It was already announced when Meghan's patronages were announced that in the coming weeks she is expected to undertake visits to all of her patronages (so she will visit all her patronages at least once before going on maternity leave).

Security and crowd barriers are always set up at the hospital a royal couple have chosen for their baby to be born at near the time a royal baby is expected arrive within the British Royal Family at least (other monarchies vary). The security and crowd barriers are made to accommodate the crowds and press that are expected show up. Harry isn't the heir but crowds are expected to show up and some press/royal reporters have already mentioned that they will be reporting from outside the hospital (the press will know which hospital closer to when Meghan is due).

As it retains to royal births within the British Royal Family people more notably know that there was press and crowds outside the hospital when Diana gave birth to William and Harry as well as when Kate gave birth to George, Charlotte, and Louis.  But before both of them Princess Anne was the first female royal to give birth at the hospital because prior that British Royal Family members were born at home. Ever since then there is always at minimum some press but often crowds that show up outside the hospital. There was press and/or crowds when Prince Andrew and Fergie and Prince Edward and Sophie had their children as well. Some examples:


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive been subject to PMs, not nice ones, re my correction of peoples posts when they have got things wrong.. Not from that person but from their fan club.


that's interesting
not from the celeb's fans but from the PF member's "fans"?


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> I don't think the comment Meghan made about her due date is wrong.  We will have more of an idea of when Meghan is due based on when her last engagement appearance before maternity leave is (it is always announced when the last appearance is ahead of time). Just based on maternity leaves of other royal women and everyday women it seems likely Meghan will go on maternity leave about a month (possibly a little over month) before her due date. If her maternity leave doesn't start until let's say late February/early March than she likely won't be due until sometime in late March/early April. If she doesn't start her maternity leave until late March/early April she likely isn't due until sometime in late April/early May. In recent times as it retains to the British Royal Family Kate's last appearances before maternity leave were: June 13, 2013 (George was born July 22, 2013)/March 27, 2015 (Charlotte was born May 2,2015)/March 22, 2018 (Louis was born April 23,2018).  Tomorrow though she has an engagement at her patronage Mayhew in the morning and at night will visit Cirque du Soleil’s Totem in support of Sentebale. It was already announced when Meghan's patronages were announced that in the coming weeks she is expected to undertake visits to all of her patronages (so she will visit all her patronages at least once before going on maternity leave).
> 
> Security and crowd barriers are always set up at the hospital a royal couple have chosen for their baby to be born at near the time a royal baby is expected arrive within the British Royal Family at least (other monarchies vary). The security and crowd barriers are made to accommodate the crowds and press that are expected show up. Harry isn't the heir but crowds are expected to show up and some press/royal reporters have already mentioned that they will be reporting from outside the hospital (the press will know which hospital closer to when Meghan is due).
> 
> As it retains to royal births within the British Royal Family people more notably know that there was press and crowds outside the hospital when Diana gave birth to William and Harry as well as when Kate gave birth to George, Charlotte, and Louis.  But before both of them Princess Anne was the first female royal to give birth at the hospital because prior that British Royal Family members were born at home. Ever since then there is always at minimum some press but often crowds that show up outside the hospital. There was press and/or crowds when Prince Andrew and Fergie and Prince Edward and Sophie had their children as well. Some examples:



I'm sure she would never let us know about her exact due date, but based on the above info from* Morgan R* we might able to get a relavitvely accurate guess when she's closer to her date then. My bet: late March. Although: the baby can be early or overdue, then the whole estimation business would go up in smoke.


----------



## kemilia

Morgan R said:


> I don't think the comment Meghan made about her due date is wrong.  We will have more of an idea of when Meghan is due based on when her last engagement appearance before maternity leave is (it is always announced when the last appearance is ahead of time). Just based on maternity leaves of other royal women and everyday women it seems likely Meghan will go on maternity leave about a month (possibly a little over month) before her due date. If her maternity leave doesn't start until let's say late February/early March than she likely won't be due until sometime in late March/early April. If she doesn't start her maternity leave until late March/early April she likely isn't due until sometime in late April/early May. In recent times as it retains to the British Royal Family Kate's last appearances before maternity leave were: June 13, 2013 (George was born July 22, 2013)/March 27, 2015 (Charlotte was born May 2,2015)/March 22, 2018 (Louis was born April 23,2018).  Tomorrow though she has an engagement at her patronage Mayhew in the morning and at night will visit Cirque du Soleil’s Totem in support of Sentebale. It was already announced when Meghan's patronages were announced that in the coming weeks she is expected to undertake visits to all of her patronages (so she will visit all her patronages at least once before going on maternity leave).
> 
> Security and crowd barriers are always set up at the hospital a royal couple have chosen for their baby to be born at near the time a royal baby is expected arrive within the British Royal Family at least (other monarchies vary). The security and crowd barriers are made to accommodate the crowds and press that are expected show up. Harry isn't the heir but crowds are expected to show up and some press/royal reporters have already mentioned that they will be reporting from outside the hospital (the press will know which hospital closer to when Meghan is due).
> 
> As it retains to royal births within the British Royal Family people more notably know that there was press and crowds outside the hospital when Diana gave birth to William and Harry as well as when Kate gave birth to George, Charlotte, and Louis.  But before both of them Princess Anne was the first female royal to give birth at the hospital because prior that British Royal Family members were born at home. Ever since then there is always at minimum some press but often crowds that show up outside the hospital. There was press and/or crowds when Prince Andrew and Fergie and Prince Edward and Sophie had their children as well. Some examples:



Seeing little Harry grab his Momma's hand made me tear up a little.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> that's interesting
> not from the celeb's fans but from the PF member's "fans"?


Yes


----------



## Sharont2305

She did say it
Damn!! Can't link it but found her saying late April on mailonline


----------



## Morgan R

Sharont2305 said:


> She did say it
> Damn!! Can't link it but found her saying late April on mailonline


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


>



Thank you, lol xx


----------



## Flatsy

I agree with Victoria Arbiter - royals don't bluff/lie about this sort of thing.  That's a Hollywood thing.


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> And, apparently, Harry asked a little girl called Lily which way she spelt her name!! Possible clue I wonder.


How many ways are there to spell Lily?


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> Late April can't be right, I'd say mid going by my calculations



I don't have clue but going by her size I'd say early or mid  March.


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Actually I think the wardrobe was inspired to fit in with one of the places they visited while in Birkenhead. Tomorrow's Women Wirral (women's support group) is a place they visited and the colors associated with that organization are different shades of purple and red .
> 
> View attachment 4306022
> View attachment 4306023


What up with the bizarre fit of her dress? Looks tight and uncomfortable.  Is it a maternity dress?


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Yes according to a report released in 2017:
> 
> 
> "Official figures show that the royals received 42.8 million pounds ($54.5 million) in 2016-17 from the “Sovereign Grant”, the government handout that covers the running costs of the queen’s household and travel expenses.
> 
> That figure is set to rise to 76.1 million pounds after the government agreed an increase to pay for a 369-million-pound, 10-year refurbishment of Buckingham Palace, whose aging electrical wiring, water pipes and heating system are in urgent need of repair.
> 
> Alan Reid, the queen’s treasurer known as Keeper of the Privy Purse, said *the cost of the monarchy to every Briton last year amounted to 65 pence - the cost of a first-class postage stamp*. When you consider that against what the queen does and represents for this country, I believe it represents excellent value for money,” Reid told reporters."
> 
> 
> 
> Also here is an article better breakdowns what is estimated the British Royal Family is worth, taxpayer  funding, and how royal engagements and events boost the economy.: https://www.fastcompany.com/40571590/british-royals-by-the-numbers-what-they-cost-and-bring-in


Thanks! If this is correct, that's almost nothing per person to support the monarchy.


----------



## VickyB

kemilia said:


> I liked how it was color vs. the black and or navy she often wears.
> 
> I just like color, I guess (heck, I drive a bright yellow car!).


I love color too and think this color combo is fabulous!


----------



## Sharont2305

VickyB said:


> How many ways are there to spell Lily?


Lily, Lilly, Lillie, Lili


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> I agree with Victoria Arbiter - royals don't bluff/lie about this sort of thing.  That's a Hollywood thing.


Normally Royals wouldn't even have said the month. I knew she'd let slip.


----------



## Lodpah

Nah, Ms. WOS and her coming prince. She gives me the creepy vibe. Even her sclera is . . . I better not say.


----------



## Lodpah

TMA said:


> A celebrity gossip thread is no reason to let your prejudice loose or be spiteful about a person that has not given you tangible reason to speak so. Stop hiding behind gossip to be an awful person.


I'm sorry, where do you get the inference she is prejudiced? Likewise, one could say you are judgmental and quick to assume? 
OPO's matter too.


----------



## minababe

I wonder if she mistakenly talked about the due date or if it was okay.
because I never heard that the british royals give hints to that.

maybe she is just to excited and couldn't resist in that Situation talking with lovely People outside there.
she was really sweet and happy in this Video.
it's just funny that Harry said to a man in australia he hopes for a Girl too and now meghan is saying the month. thats really unusual but so refreshing 

I wonder also if the bookmarker now shred all the papers


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> I wonder if she mistakenly talked about the due date or if it was okay.
> because I never heard that the british royals give hints to that.
> 
> maybe she is just to excited and couldn't resist in that Situation talking with lovely People outside there.
> she was really sweet and happy in this Video.
> it's just funny that Harry said to a man in australia he hopes for a Girl too and now meghan is saying the month. thats really unusual but so refreshing
> 
> I wonder also if the bookmarker now shred all the papers


The Royals never as a rule say exactly when a baby is due, all we get is the season. It's like an unwritten rule. I had a feeling that at some point we'd get to know from Meghan. Yes, maybe it was excitement from her. 
The public have had a better idea ( where Catherine was concerned anyway ) when it's made public that the street outside (Lindo Wing) will be closed between such and such dates. I think it closed on 9th April and Louis was born on 23rd. And it would have had to have been made public about 3 weeks before the 9th as, obviously its a working hospital and a public street.
With Meghan, we don't know where this baby will be born. There may not be any parking restrictions as such if she has the baby at the hospital mentioned in the press (can't remember the name) as that one will be in its own grounds.


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> How many ways are there to spell Lily?


maybe he was just making conversation with the little girl


----------



## cafecreme15

Lodpah said:


> Nah, Ms. WOS and her coming prince. She gives me the creepy vibe. Even her sclera is . . . I better not say.



I think I'll regret this, but I'll bite. Her sclera??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## afsweet

Meaghan would have looked good in either red or purple but not both at the same time.


----------



## sdkitty

stephc005 said:


> Meaghan would have looked good in either red or purple but not both at the same time.


as I think someone else said, it reminds me of the purple hat ladies


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> as I think someone else said, it reminds me of the purple hat ladies


What's a purple hat lady? Brit here and not familiar with that term


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> What's a purple hat lady? Brit here and not familiar with that term


these older women have a club. It's nation-wide as far as I know.
they go out and have fun wearing red hats and purple clothing.....don't know exactly what they do but have seen them in casinos


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> these older women have a club. It's nation-wide as far as I know.
> they go out and have fun wearing red hats and purple clothing.....don't know exactly what they do but have seen them in casinos


Ah, thank you for the explanation.


----------



## Sharont2305

At Cirque de Soleil this evening. Gown by Roland Mouret


----------



## papertiger

*The 'purple hat, red coat club' was inspired by the poem 'Warning' by Jenny Joseph* about when she's a old lady she's going to break all the rules she has to abide by (as a younger person). It has become the anthem to older ladies who refuse to grow old gracefully and instead do as the darn well pleasey

 BTW, purple hats are royal (Imperial State Crown) and purple and red are the Queen's own racing colours (the racing silk colours that the jockeys wear when riding the Queen's horses)


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> purple hats are royal (Imperial State Crown) and purple and red are the Queen's own racing colours (the racing silk colours that the jockeys wear when riding the Queen's horses)


Yes, I knew this but didn't know what the other ladies were talking about, like I said, I'm a Brit. We probably have the same over here.


----------



## DeMonica

papertiger said:


> *The 'purple hat, red coat club' was inspired by the poem Warning by Jenny Joseph* about when she's a old lady she's going to break all the rules she has to abide by (as a younger person). It has become the anthem to older ladies who refuse to grow old gracefully and instead do as the darn well pleasey
> 
> BTW, purple hats are royal (Imperial State Crown) and purple and red are the Queen's own racing colours (the racing silk colours that the jockeys wear when riding the Queen's horses)


I used to see them sightseeing in New York and other places. They seemed to be a cheerful bunch.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> What's a purple hat lady? Brit here and not familiar with that term



It's called the Red Hat Society and it's basically a club for older ladies who enjoy doing fun things that people don't expect women their age to do. 

As someone said above, it's inspiration was this poem:

When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me.
And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves
And satin sandals, and say we’ve no money for butter.
I shall sit down on the pavement when I’m tired
And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells
And run my stick along the public railings
And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
And pick the flowers in other people’s gardens
And learn to spit.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> I used to see them sightseeing in New York and other places. They seemed to be a cheerful bunch.


yes, they are def having fun.....I don't know if there is anything else involved (charity work?) or just plain fun


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan visiting Mayhew

Mayhew is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the premiere of Cirque du Soleil's Totem in support of Sentebale


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> Lily, Lilly, Lillie, Lili


Really? Anything is possible.


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Attending the premiere of Cirque du Soleil's Totem in support of Sentebale
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4307406
> View attachment 4307402
> View attachment 4307403
> View attachment 4307401
> View attachment 4307412



Love this dress. She looks great!!! Why is he in just a suit when she is in a gown? More appropriate if he was in black tie. Or, is she over dressed for rtes event?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

Morgan R said:


> Meghan visiting Mayhew
> 
> Mayhew is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of.
> 
> View attachment 4307394
> View attachment 4307379
> View attachment 4307427
> View attachment 4307376
> View attachment 4307380
> View attachment 4307382


Perfect Patron fit for her. Love it!


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> Meghan visiting Mayhew
> 
> Mayhew is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of.
> 
> View attachment 4307394
> View attachment 4307379
> View attachment 4307427
> View attachment 4307376
> View attachment 4307380
> View attachment 4307382


I'm sure those doggies were screened carefully before the visit.


----------



## minababe

loooove her Looks of yesterday. the beige Ensemble and the evening gown. beautiful Looks! there are many cute Videos of Harry and meghan Holding Hands the whole time even while sitting. love this two!


----------



## hellosunshine

Semi-off topic but I just read that Doria after all did not spend Christmas with the Queen..what happened?


----------



## megs0927

hellosunshine said:


> Semi-off topic but I just read that Doria after all did not spend Christmas with the Queen..what happened?



I read this on Blind Gossip 
https://blindgossip.com/the-pretend-holiday-invitation/#more-97648


----------



## minababe

hellosunshine said:


> Semi-off topic but I just read that Doria after all did not spend Christmas with the Queen..what happened?


I think it was just a rumor prevalent by the News papers in UK. the same like Doria is moving to London etc.
Maybe Doria was in London with Harry and Meghan but wasn't at the church with the royal Family. we probably will never know. but for me it's a bit strange when you are pregnant with your first child and have all the Money in the world I would love to have my mum with me at chiristmas. but maybe she is coming to the birth.
they seemed really Close..


----------



## DeMonica

minababe said:


> I think it was just a rumor prevalent by the News papers in UK. the same like Doria is moving to London etc.
> Maybe Doria was in London with Harry and Meghan but wasn't at the church with the royal Family. we probably will never know. but for me it's a bit strange when you are pregnant with your first child and have all the Money in the world I would love to have my mum with me at chiristmas. but maybe she is coming to the birth.
> they seemed really Close..


Doria might have been even in London for Christmas, or before or after. Since not more than 10% of Meghan's time is in the public eye, I'm sure, she does a lot of things we don't know about. She could even met her mother in private without pics taken of them. I'm not saying that it happened but it could have. There's more to life than what meets the eye or we can see on the net.


----------



## Flatsy

Sandringham seems like a huge drag - the mandatory schedule, the formal meals, the dress codes, the parading through the media to church so they can critique your outfit and analyze your body language.  No, thank you.  

Maybe if you are a distant member of the royal family and you are jockeying for status you clamor for an invitation to that, but a regular person would probably count themselves lucky not to have to go through it.


----------



## pukasonqo

Sharont2305 said:


> What's a purple hat lady? Brit here and not familiar with that term



https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/m.poemhunter.com/poem-amp/warning/


----------



## cjy

chicaloca said:


> It’s clear Meghan’s career as an actress is being weaponized to project characteristics onto her commonly associated  with actresses  (i.e. pretentiousness, diva behavior, social climbing..etc).  Her actual life trajectory shows no evidence of any of these things.
> 
> When I look at her history I see a compassionate, philanthropic woman with a strong work ethic — not someone looking to live off a rich man’s money. She has engaged in charity since her teen years,  worked as a calligrapher and took small roles until she landed her lucrative role on Suits. Her ex-husband is a little-known producer — not some Weinstein-level Svengali. Her other major relationship was with a chef.
> 
> There is also no indication l of diva behavior from coworkers and fans in more than a decade of her career. Only when she marries British royalty do we get negative reports from “anonymous royal sources” tapped by known racist British publications.
> 
> Being comfortable in the spotlight is not the same as being an attention seeker. An attention seeker does not evade the paparazzi in between appearances. They also wouldn’t secretly visit patronages for a year prior to an official announcement. It is clear Meghan wants to work and not just preen for cameras.


Very well said!!! I agree!!


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> I think it was just a rumor prevalent by the News papers in UK. the same like Doria is moving to London etc.
> Maybe Doria was in London with Harry and Meghan but wasn't at the church with the royal Family. we probably will never know. but for me it's a bit strange when you are pregnant with your first child and have all the Money in the world I would love to have my mum with me at chiristmas. but maybe she is coming to the birth.
> they seemed really Close..


for some people Christmas is not that important. also if you are from a country where Christmas is somewhat big.


----------



## A1aGypsy

This thread is in the news!!! (Hee hee hee)

https://people.com/royals/kensingto...ullying-against-kate-middleton-meghan-markle/


----------



## ChanelFan29

I just saw an article about in the NY Post and thought of here too.


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> This thread is in the news!!! (Hee hee hee)
> 
> https://people.com/royals/kensingto...ullying-against-kate-middleton-meghan-markle/




I saw that story earlier today on The Daily Mail, with no acknowledgment whatsoever that the 5,000+ comments attached to every Daily Mail story are exactly what they are talking about.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry who is the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador attending a Commonwealth Youth Roundtable at Lancaster House


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan visiting the National Theatre

The National Theatre is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of. Queen Elizabeth II was formerly patron of the National Theatre but has passed on the Royal Patronage of the the National Theatre to Meghan.


----------



## Fally420

Morgan R said:


> Meghan visiting the National Theatre
> 
> The National Theatre is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of. Queen Elizabeth II was formerly patron of the National Theatre but has passed on the Royal Patronage of the the National Theatre to Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 4325791
> View attachment 4325792
> View attachment 4325794
> View attachment 4325796
> View attachment 4325822
> View attachment 4325823
> View attachment 4325824
> View attachment 4325825
> View attachment 4325826



finally a nearly perfect outfit!


----------



## berrydiva

The neckline on the dress is dreadful. It's like a v-neck t-shirt but on an a-line dress with a flared skirt...it's just so matronly (is the only word I can describe it as right now). The whole outfit is awful...lol. Her skin looks radiant though.


----------



## bisousx

She looks incredible in nude/blush tones outfits.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Her makeup looks great and I like her hair pulled back. I like the outfit and think the neckline of the dress is cool but not great with her pregnant chest and stomach. It needs to just hang straight down.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Why does she seem to wear clothes that aren’t right for the season? This looks like spring/summer to me. I also think clothes would look better if she wore maternity clothes that are meant for the growing body she has now.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I wonder if they commissioned clothing based upon how far along they thought she would be and she is showing more than they thought.


----------



## lulilu

I know clothes that show off one's body are in vogue, but this dress doesn't seem to fit at all -- loose in some places and so tight over her tummy that there are creases below it.  It seems that she is wearing "regular" clothes in bigger sizes to accommodate her tummy instead of maternity clothes.


----------



## Fally420

One thing I notice in so many pictures is that you often can see her bra / underwear through her clothes...


----------



## DeMonica

The colour of the outfit is beautiful and looks amazing from behind. I think she would look better and be more comfortable in a maternity dress, though. Every pregnancy is different and even if you are careful with your diet, you can't predict how exactly your body would change as you advance. I'm sure she could find perfect maternity dresses if she wanted to.


----------



## berrydiva

Maternity dresses/clothing are not the only solution. She can definitely buy regular clothing sized up then tailored to fit her changing body - I'm sure she has some of the best tailors in the world at her disposal. 

I know of a few friends who hated maternity wear because it was designed to hide you vs show that you're proud of your growing belly. They kinda viewed it as being shamed for being pregnant. Maternity clothing is made a little more fashionable nowadays though although still most that I see are made to hide the belly.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Personally, I appreciate that she doesn't seem to buy clothes specifically for the season or for maternity. The more you wear clothes and the more versatile they are, the less waste and better for the environment


----------



## Flatsy

Meghan is one of the last people on the planet who can be commended for saving the planet by conserving on new clothing.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> Meghan is one of the last people on the planet who can be commended for saving the planet by conserving on new clothing.


I guess that's true, but I wasn't saying Meghan's the savior of the environment, I was just specifically replying about the benefits of not buying maternity clothes or clothes you only wear for one season……


----------



## Flatsy

She can't wear a designer dress that's been fitted so closely to her bump again.  Probably not even during a second pregnancy.

Maternity clothes are generally designed to stretch and/or leave room for growth so they can be worn for a chunk of time.  Duchess Kate wore a lot of beautiful dresses during her pregnancies that were looser or simply had more of an empire waist, and those are dresses that she was able to rewear.

I think the super tight tailoring around her bump (which IMO is starting to look weird) is somehow related to the conspicuous and often awkward bump-cradling but I can't exactly figure out how.  Everybody knows she's pregnant.  Is she worried that if she doesn't emphasize the bump at all times, a few years from now somebody's going to look at an old picture and just think she looks fat?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cyanide Rose

Honestly, I don’t care what she wears or how she looks, I adore her [emoji4] Keep your head up girl!


----------



## krissa

I loved her look today.


----------



## pixiejenna

I love the color and the style of her outfit. However the fit is poor it looks too tight on her belly and chest, you can see the outline of her bra. I get that your body changes a lot when pregnant but she must have access to tailors who can fix the fit for her. It looks uncomfortable to be wearing something so snug. I can't imagine wearing such a sung dress and high heels when pregnant.


----------



## DeMonica

berrydiva said:


> Maternity dresses/clothing are not the only solution. She can definitely buy regular clothing sized up then tailored to fit her changing body - I'm sure she has some of the best tailors in the world at her disposal.
> 
> I know of a few friends who hated maternity wear because it was designed to hide you vs show that you're proud of your growing belly. They kinda viewed it as being shamed for being pregnant. Maternity clothing is made a little more fashionable nowadays though although still most that I see are made to hide the belly.


It must have been a long time ago. Nowadays maternity clothes are not those shapeless, tent-like, mumsy monsters. The only difference between maternity and not maternity, that those are more comfortable with the bump. See: Isabella Oliver


----------



## queennadine

Great last look! She looks beautiful!


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> I love the color and the style of her outfit. However the fit is poor it looks too tight on her belly and chest, you can see the outline of her bra. I get that your body changes a lot when pregnant but she must have access to tailors who can fix the fit for her. It looks uncomfortable to be wearing something so snug. I can't imagine wearing such a sung dress and high heels when pregnant.


I was wondering how long she can continue wearing those high heels too


----------



## berrydiva

DeMonica said:


> It must have been a long time ago. Nowadays maternity clothes are not those shapeless, tent-like, mumsy monsters. The only difference between maternity and not maternity, that those are more comfortable with the bump. See: Isabella Oliver


Not that long ago...but I also said* "Maternity clothing is made a little more fashionable nowadays though although still most that I see are made to hide the belly."* as my last sentence. Isabella Oliver is not my speed but women also have to wear what they prefer and not dress for the sake of other women to feel comfortable with their maternity look. Meghan obviously prefers to wear fitted clothing around her bump and I can understand wanting to do that and not hide. Plus I hate ruching....it's designed to cover flaws and a baby belly is not a flaw.


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> I was wondering how long she can continue wearing those high heels too


I'm amazed at women who wear heels for most of their pregnancy.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan looks beautiful fresh and modern. I’m glad she’s not wearing obvious maternity clothes and dowdy coatdresses.


----------



## DeMonica

berrydiva said:


> Not that long ago...but I also said* "Maternity clothing is made a little more fashionable nowadays though although still most that I see are made to hide the belly."* as my last sentence. Isabella Oliver is not my speed but women also have to wear what they prefer and not dress for the sake of other women to feel comfortable with their maternity look. Meghan obviously prefers to wear fitted clothing around her bump and I can understand wanting to do that and not hide. Plus I hate ruching....it's designed to cover flaws and a baby belly is not a flaw.


She can wear whatever she wants to.It's freedom of choice. Sometimes fitted, sometimes less fitted. I can also like it or dislike it.  Ruche or not, nothing can hide a third trimester baby bump, not that any happily expecting mother would do it anyway. BTW ruching just accentuate any extra curves, so using ruching as a camouflage would be useless.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan visiting the Association of Commonwealth Universities.

The Association of Commonwealth Universities is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of. Queen Elizabeth II was formerly patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities but has passed on the Royal Patronage of the Association of Commonwealth Universities to Meghan.


----------



## bisousx

chicaloca said:


> Meghan looks beautiful fresh and modern. I’m glad she’s not wearing obvious maternity clothes and dowdy coatdresses.



I like the look where women show off the bump in a skintight dress. I mean, I don’t know what it feels like or how uncomfortable it is, but I think it looks very cute. If you can pull it off, why not?


----------



## cafecreme15

hollieplus2 said:


> Why does she seem to wear clothes that aren’t right for the season? This looks like spring/summer to me. I also think clothes would look better if she wore maternity clothes that are meant for the growing body she has now.


I think her aversion to maternity clothes is bizarre considering she wore them on the Australia tour when she had no bump to speak of. Now that she needs them, she doesn't wear them.


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Meghan visiting the Association of Commonwealth Universities.
> 
> The Association of Commonwealth Universities is one of the four organizations which she is now patron of. Queen Elizabeth II was formerly patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities but has passed on the Royal Patronage of the Association of Commonwealth Universities to Meghan.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4326738
> View attachment 4326737
> View attachment 4326739
> View attachment 4326772
> View attachment 4326771
> View attachment 4326773
> View attachment 4326774
> View attachment 4326775
> View attachment 4326776


I think this look is much better - less tight and less rumpling of the material. Have we seen this black coat before? Looks sort of familiar.


----------



## Morgan R

cafecreme15 said:


> I think this look is much better - less tight and less rumpling of the material. *Have we seen this black coat before? Looks sort of familiar.*



Yes. She wore it while attending the Service of Remembrance at the Cenotaph in November


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

both of the last Outfits were great! love them both! Can't wait for the next one tomorrow.
the high bun suits her really good, really chic!


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Yes. She wore it while attending the Service of Remembrance at the Cenotaph in November
> 
> View attachment 4326907


Yes! Glad to see her busting out repeats. Given the amount of money she has spent on clothes in less than a year, I think this is a wise move.


----------



## kemilia

Not crazy about the pleated chiffon-y dress hanging out the bottom of the coat (coat is great) and the nude heels should have been black to match (imo), but her hair is great.


----------



## berrydiva

View attachment 4326907

	

		
			
		

		
	
I really love this coat now that I can see a better shot of it close up. Liking the softness of the flowy dress against the detailed tailoring of the coat....i think possibly black shoes would've been less distracting to the outfit.


----------



## VickyB

kemilia said:


> Not crazy about the pleated chiffon-y dress hanging out the bottom of the coat (coat is great) and the nude heels should have been black to match (imo), but her hair is great.


 ITA!!! The handkerchief hem dress, from what we can see of it, looks sloppy hanging beyond the hem of the coat.


----------



## VickyB

ITA with all the posts saying that her choices of late are  ill fitting and why doesn't she get her clothes tailored properly. 
Why doesn't she? Mind boggling. Why would anybody want to wear clothes that are too tight and don't flatter if they don't have to???? Can't be comfortable either!  
I LOVE that coat but why is she trying to squeeze into it? Its style is meant to be worn closed as she wore it many months ago. Don't get it. And don't believe for one second that she's trying to be thrifty. 
She could showcase that bump she 's so proud of in form fitting clothes that fit her total body properly.  
On another note, loved the hair!


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Bristol


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Bristol
> 
> View attachment 4327679
> View attachment 4327688
> View attachment 4327682
> View attachment 4327681
> View attachment 4327683
> View attachment 4327728
> View attachment 4327719
> View attachment 4327722


She looks soo radiant and OMG those boots!!!! But not loving her dress. Its gorgeous but doesn’t do her current body figure any favors. She looks heavy and so round


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

It is really weird how poorly she is dressed. She’s literal royalty how have they not gotten her a better stylist. Harry could use some new trousers too.


----------



## Morgan R

More from their visit to Bristol


----------



## BagLovingMom

She looks gorgeous ! Also looks to enjoy all these various events very much !


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


> More from their visit to Bristol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4327980
> View attachment 4327981
> View attachment 4327982
> View attachment 4327983
> View attachment 4327984
> View attachment 4327988
> View attachment 4327987
> View attachment 4327985
> View attachment 4327986



those heels are thicker but still pretty high.  I would think she would put safety first being pregnant and out in snow/ice


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> those heels are thicker but still pretty high.  I would think she would put safety first being pregnant and out in snow/ice


Perhaps the bottom is rubber. Doesn't look like its much more than flurries and wet ground.


I'm chuckling at the other video that says they "braced the snow" while we had 10-20 degree temps the last two days.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> Perhaps the bottom is rubber. Doesn't look like its much more than flurries and wet ground.
> 
> 
> I'm chuckling at the other video that says they "braced the snow" while we had 10-20 degree temps the last two days.


still, she is pregnant and I would think having that big belly and those skinny little legs and heels would put her off balance....just my opinion


----------



## shelleymuth

sdkitty said:


> still, she is pregnant and I would think having that big belly and those skinny little legs and heels would put her off balance....just my opinion


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> It is really weird how poorly she is dressed. She’s literal royalty how have they not gotten her a better stylist. Harry could use some new trousers too.


I wonder if her handlers try to make sure Kate gets all the good clothes? I can’t think of anything Meghan wears that I would rush out and buy.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> I wonder if her handlers try to make sure Kate gets all the good clothes? I can’t think of anything Meghan wears that I would rush out and buy.


I would think they would each have their own stylist


----------



## shiba

sdkitty said:


> I would think they would each have their own stylist



Agreed, and it doesn't stop her from using a tailor. Kate never seemed to have an issue with poor fit when she was pregnant, even her coats have been altered multiple times.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan looks very glowy and radiant. Pregnancy suits her.

Her pregnancy outfits have been on point. I love the neutral outfits especially - very modern and chic.


----------



## VickyB

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> It is really weird how poorly she is dressed. She’s literal royalty how have they not gotten her a better stylist. Harry could use some new trousers too.


ITA! Again, with the dress hanging below the coat. Why?


----------



## berrydiva

I'm clearly missing how terrible her pregnancy outfits are....besides that ugly blush dress (which I think wouldn't looked good pregnant or not), her outfits seem perfectly fine.


----------



## shiba

berrydiva said:


> I'm clearly missing how terrible her pregnancy outfits are....besides that ugly blush dress (which I think wouldn't looked good pregnant or not), her outfits seem perfectly fine.



I don't think most of her outfits have been horrible either, pregnant or not. She just doesn't seem to bother with tailoring. With the kind of funds to be wearing a $5K+ outfit, she can afford to spend a few pennies on alterations. I guess just a pet peeve of mine.


----------



## chowlover2

shiba said:


> I don't think most of her outfits have been horrible either, pregnant or not. She just doesn't seem to bother with tailoring. With the kind of funds to be wearing a $5K+ outfit, she can afford to spend a few pennies on alterations. I guess just a pet peeve of mine.


You are not alone! You can take a dress from Target, and if it's tailored to fit, look like a million bucks. And vice versa. Look how crummy KimK. looks in designer clothing that isn't tailored.


----------



## berrydiva

shiba said:


> I don't think most of her outfits have been horrible either, pregnant or not. She just doesn't seem to bother with tailoring. With the kind of funds to be wearing a $5K+ outfit, she can afford to spend a few pennies on alterations. I guess just a pet peeve of mine.


I'm not seeing the tailoring issue, outside of that blush dress, aside from folks not comfortable with her wearing things tight around her expanding belly. Most of the complaints seems to be that she's not choosing maternity wear. Having a flowy dress hang from below a coat is actually a look and not a tailoring issue.


----------



## lulilu

It's not the tightness on the belly.  I like that look.  It's the bunching at the top of her belly and the creasing underneath it.  Just shows a bad fit.


----------



## berrydiva

lulilu said:


> It's not the tightness on the belly.  I like that look.  It's the bunching at the top of her belly and the creasing underneath it.  Just shows a bad fit.


Can you point out the outfits you're referring to with the bunching and creasing so I can see? We all agree the blush one is a bad fit...perhaps there's others I missed. I casually glance at this thread so I'm probably not seeing the other tragedies lol.


----------



## lulilu

berrydiva said:


> Can you point out the outfits you're referring to with the bunching and creasing so I can see? We all agree the blush one is a bad fit...perhaps there's others I missed. I casually glance at this thread so I'm probably not seeing the other tragedies lol.



I was referring to the cream outfit, which bunched across the top of her tummy (people were actually thinking it was ruching it was so much) and which had wrinkled creases under her tummy.  The sequined gown, which I loved, also had the bunching at the top of her tummy.  The black outfit seemed to fit nicely even though some people didn't like the uneven hemline -- I thought the skirt was lovely and the top fit nicely.


----------



## shiba

berrydiva said:


> Can you point out the outfits you're referring to with the bunching and creasing so I can see? We all agree the blush one is a bad fit...perhaps there's others I missed. I casually glance at this thread so I'm probably not seeing the other tragedies lol.



For sure, I wouldn't call them disasters, but I do think she needs to look impeccable in her new role. For us mere commoners, I wouldn't be so critical.

The H&M cream one looked fine, maybe a bit casual for an engagement, once it was pulled back down after getting out of the car. The last black dress with the print, isn't horrible though not my taste. I don't have an issue with the dress being lower than the coat - it is the top that is not quite working with her changing body. It is tough to see but there is a fold of material between her bust and belly and her boobs could have popped had she bent over. A couple of darts at the waist probably would have pulled it in a bit more.

The same issue with the evening gown, really tough to see because of the sequins but it is all bunched between her bust and belly which makes the neck line sit higher and the bust area look a bit loose. Here is a link to some better pics, 3rd one down you can see it best. It needed to be a bit bigger in the belly, then it would have sat correctly.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ghan-markle-black-sequin-roland-mouret-dress/

The all black outfit, even though the coat is worn open, looked put together. Had no one seen the coat worn closed before, I doubt there would have been a mention.


----------



## chicaloca

I like that she is not wasting money on expensive maternity clothes for what is a temporary change in her body. When she has worn actual maternity dresses they were ASOS & H&M. Her use of regular wrap coats or only buttoning the the top button is rather clever. She will be able to re-wear most of her seperates post-pregnancy.

Meghan’s body con choices are such a modern, refreshing departure from the boring maternity wear favored by most royals. I could do without seeing another empire waist dress or coatdress.


----------



## Grande Latte

It's her choice what she wants to wear when pregnant. Perhaps she's celebrating the changes in her bodyshape and she *wants* to delineate the different feminine lines rather than trying to be comfortable or more disguised.

I just can't wait to see what the baby looks like.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

I like that wildlife dress on her!


----------



## lulilu

Grande Latte said:


> *It's her choice what she wants to wear* when pregnant. Perhaps she's celebrating the changes in her bodyshape and she *wants* to delineate the different feminine lines r*ather than trying to be comfortable *or more disguised.
> 
> I just can't wait to see what the baby looks like.



No one is suggesting she be *forced* to wear any particular style.  People are suggesting that ill-fitting dresses are not as flattering as things that are tailored.  One can still emphasize one's shape while having a dress fit all areas of her body.  And it seems silly to suggest that she not try to be comfortable.


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> I was referring to the cream outfit, which bunched across the top of her tummy (people were actually thinking it was ruching it was so much) and which had wrinkled creases under her tummy.  The sequined gown, which I loved, also had the bunching at the top of her tummy.  The black outfit seemed to fit nicely even though some people didn't like the uneven hemline -- I thought the skirt was lovely and the top fit nicely.


Yes, the sequined gown was bunched badly like she ordered it when she was not as far along. The black gown (one sleeve) fit the best, imo.


----------



## lookingforlove

What do you guys think about Meghan writing "empowering messages" on bananas for sex workers the other day? There's something tacky and inappropriate about the whole stunt for me. The fact that these sex workers/prostitutes are trying to escape from their pimps, and bananas are phallic symbols (we all know bananas are used to imply penises right?), and then she writes messages on them for these sex workers... just weird...


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I totally agree it was weird and inappropriate. An article I saw used the word "condescending" which I thought encapsulated it. Also why would you write on food with Sharpie?


----------



## Lubina

According to a other articles that aren't laughing and pointing at bananas in a brown bag meal to young women who sell their bodies, are homeless and addicted to drugs, donations have been pouring in since their visit, so if all it took was a note on a banana to bring attention and dollars to the cause , write away.


----------



## VickyB

Lubina said:


> According to a other articles that aren't laughing and pointing at bananas in a brown bag meal to young women who sell their bodies, are homeless and addicted to drugs, donations have been pouring in since their visit, so if all it took was a note on a banana to bring attention and dollars to the cause , write away.



That also is very true.


----------



## Morgan R

Lubina said:


> According to a other articles that aren't laughing and pointing at bananas in a brown bag meal to young women who sell their bodies, are homeless and addicted to drugs, donations have been pouring in since their visit, so if all it took was a note on a banana to bring attention and dollars to the cause , write away.



I agree with this. It brought major attention to the charity. Had she not written on the bananas a lot of people wouldn't have known Harry and Meghan even visited One25 Charity but just knew they visited various places in Bristol. The One25 Charity reaches out to women trapped in street sex work, supporting them to break free, and build new lives away from violence, poverty and addiction. Not all the time but some of the time when Harry and Meghan go on engagements some people are less aware of the places they attended but more so comment on clothing, them interacting with each other (holding hands, whispering to each other, etc.), and other things (obviously nothing wrong with having that commentary though).  But a major part of being a royal is to bring attention to various causes. Harry and Meghan's visit along with Meghan writing those notes brought major attention to the charity (which in turn brings funds to the charity). Not exactly the same but similarly during the Pacific Tour last year in October, Meghan wore Outland Denim jeans on multiple days of the tour. Outland Denim provide careers for women (through fair wages and training/personal development initiatives the brand is able to foster/support their employees) who've been exposed to sex trafficking in Asia. Outland Denim saw a major boost in sales which in turn created jobs for victims of sex trafficking or forced labor (https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...women-have-escaped-desperation-to-a-new-life/). It really is the small things that royals do that bring major awareness and money to causes and charities/charitable brands.


----------



## Gal4Dior

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I totally agree it was weird and inappropriate. An article I saw used the word "condescending" which I thought encapsulated it. Also why would you write on food with Sharpie?



Unfortunately, I would have to agree on this. I think she only had the best intentions and meant well by this gesture, but I don’t think these messages may be received in the same way on the other end. It was also unfortunate that it was a banana...there was no way she was going to win here. Lol!


----------



## chicaloca

I thought the banana messages were a sweet gesture that people are turning into something sinister because they dislike Meghan. If certain perverted people think bananas are sexual objects that is their problem. I don’t think a hungry prostitute views a banana as anything other than food. I’m glad that women who needed a meal got one plus a positive message to boot. That Meghan brought more attention and money to the charity is an added bonus.


----------



## lookingforlove

^^ Bananas have always been sexual objects. They use them in sex ed classes to show people how to put condoms on properly. Tons of commercials/ads show a pretty blonde peeling and eating a banana to imply oral sex. I thought this is universal knowledge?


----------



## LibbyRuth

lookingforlove said:


> What do you guys think about Meghan writing "empowering messages" on bananas for sex workers the other day? There's something tacky and inappropriate about the whole stunt for me. The fact that these sex workers/prostitutes are trying to escape from their pimps, and bananas are phallic symbols (we all know bananas are used to imply penises right?), and then she writes messages on them for these sex workers... just weird...



I think that looking at the whole thing a little closer, it's much ado about nothing. Meghan did not show up at the charity with a box of bananas and a sharpie saying "hey guys, I've got a great idea!"  The charity was putting together the bags, including messages, and asked Meghan to help out. I'm rather confident that the charity knows the population they are serving well enough to know what is effective and meaningful to the people they are focused on helping.  
I volunteer for an organization that works to curb sex trafficking, and do work going into areas with possible victims to provide an avenue to rescue them. When we go into such areas, we have to employee creative ways to reach potential victims because we are aware that the people who hold these victims go to great lengths to keep them captive. They have to be quiet messages that a potential victim can find on her own, and have a quiet way to ask for help safely away from her captor. So when I saw the bananas at first, I thought it was a very creative way to accomplish that. A banana, unlike most other fruit - provides a place that messages can be written without contaminating the food, while staying a nutritious snack. 
So on the surface, I can understand why it seems odd. But diving into the work the charity is doing, it makes a lot of sense.


----------



## doni

I do not care how many ads of a woman peeling a banana are out there. I think we have become a sick society if writing a message in a piece of fruit has to be loaded with sexual innuendo and porn references. My kids love bananas and in my world there are tons of things you can do with a banana peel that are, and feel, utterly innocent.

At the same time, I marvel at how infantile a society has become that believes so-claimed "empowering" cliched words ('you are loved?'  what do you know..?) have the potential to affect any actual change in very real tragic situations in a way that makes us feel good about ourselves. I find it quite undignified.

Then there is the fact that the bad publicity actually brought more money to the charity, probably not the way the whole thing was intended, but there you go, it was all good in the end.


----------



## Pessie

doni said:


> I do not care how many ads are out there of a woman peeling a banana. I think we have become a sick society if writing a message in a piece of fruit has to be loaded with sexual innuendo and porn references. My kids love bananas and in my world there are tons of things you can do with a banana peel that are, and feel, utterly innocent.
> 
> At the same time, I marvel at how infantile a society has become that believes so-claimed "empowering" cliched words ('you are loved?'  what do you know..?) have the potential to affect any actual change in very real tragic situations in a way that makes us feel good about ourselves. I find it quite undignified.
> 
> Then there is the fact that the bad publicity actually brought more money to the charity, probably not the way the whole thing was intended, but there you go, it was all good in the end.


Exactly.  I thought it was a meaningless, stupid and trite gesture, and I agree - very undignified.  Fortunately it’s worked out to the good of the charity as a consequence of the bad publicity.


----------



## LibbyRuth

doni said:


> I do not care how many ads of a woman peeling a banana are out there. I think we have become a sick society if writing a message in a piece of fruit has to be loaded with sexual innuendo and porn references. My kids love bananas and in my world there are tons of things you can do with a banana peel that are, and feel, utterly innocent.
> 
> At the same time, I marvel at how infantile a society has become that believes so-claimed "empowering" cliched words ('you are loved?'  what do you know..?) have the potential to affect any actual change in very real tragic situations in a way that makes us feel good about ourselves. I find it quite undignified.
> 
> Then there is the fact that the bad publicity actually brought more money to the charity, probably not the way the whole thing was intended, but there you go, it was all good in the end.



There may be another issue at play there in that when many people see sex worker, they think of a sexualized image instead of the person being a victim. While there are some who choose to be a sex worker, an organization like this is working to help victims who didn't get into it by choice. It's not sexual, but is sometimes put into that category.  I"m glad that Meghan is involved with them, and can hopefully spread awareness of that aspect


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think you have to work in this area to understand how desperate and alone some of these woman feel. Yes, there are those who will role their eyes and just eat the banana (so, still positive) but there are others who will find the message meaningful.

As someone said up stream, this isn’t something Markle dreamed up on her own, it’s aomethjng the organization was already doing. And they know what they are doing.

Sometimes the smallest thing can have a great impact.  I have often seen messages cut into the banana peel with a nail or edge of a spoon because they show up as the banana ripens. This is just a faster version of that.


----------



## chicaloca

Writing an encouraging message on a banana is no more undignified than making a heart or smiley face in the foam of a latte. Both are just small gestures intended to make people smile — not change the world.


----------



## Gal4Dior

A1aGypsy said:


> I think you have to work in this area to understand how desperate and alone some of these woman feel. Yes, there are those who will role their eyes and just eat the banana (so, still positive) but there are others who will find the message meaningful.
> 
> As someone said up stream, this isn’t something Markle dreamed up on her own, it’s aomethjng the organization was already doing. And they know what they are doing.
> 
> Sometimes the smallest thing can have a great impact.  I have often seen messages cut into the banana peel with a nail or edge of a spoon because they show up as the banana ripens. This is just a faster version of that.



I thought I had read that the messages on fruit were Meghan’s idea. That one of her teachers had written them on various fruit while she was in school? Now I need to go back and check that. Regardless, I’m sure it was with the best of intentions.


----------



## Pessie

chicaloca said:


> Writing an encouraging message on a banana is no more undignified than making a heart or smiley face in the foam of a latte. Both are just small gestures intended to make people smile — not change the world.


Nice touch if you’re a waitress.  But she’s attending these events as a member of the royal family, on behalf of the Queen as head of state - not as Meghan Markle showbiz personality.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I just looked - one news agency reported that she decided to do it based upon a lunch program in the US. Another said they were all doing it. 

But she didn’t come up with the idea of using the bananas or providing them to the sex trade workers. And if the agency had thought it was an issue, they would have told her. This isn’t a novel thing really. It’s been done (at least across the pond) before.


----------



## rose60610

LVSistinaMM said:


> I thought I had read that the messages on fruit were Meghan’s idea. That one of her teachers had written them on various fruit while she was in school? Now I need to go back and check that. Regardless, I’m sure it was with the best of intentions.



I recall reading something about that too. Having googled this just now, the story ranges from Markle thinking of this on the spot asking "Does anyone have a Sharpie, I have an idea!" to others having done something similar in the past. As usual, the media can't get a story straight.

My guess is that every step of their visits to anywhere follows an orchestrated pre-planned itinerary that pretty much dictates when they are inhale and exhale, what to say, wear, and respond. The "Does anyone have a Sharpie, I have an idea!" sounds so cheesy pre-meditated. And, gosh golly gee, somebody DID have a Sharpie! OOOHHHHH!!!!!!

She got backlash for this move. The backlash to the backlash was to say "Bbbbbbut so much money was raised for this cause as a result".  So my question: Will Markle's Charity Visit Supply Kit now include back up Sharpies so she can be credited for raising money for the causes and so she won't be at the mercy of hoping somebody has a damned Sharpie so she can implement her "on-the-spot-ideas".


----------



## LibbyRuth

Pessie said:


> Nice touch if you’re a waitress.  But she’s attending these events as a member of the royal family, on behalf of the Queen as head of state - not as Meghan Markle showbiz personality.



Fair point. But Diana visited AIDs patients in the 80s as a member of the royal family on behalf of the Queen - and she made a huge difference in the world demonstrating to people that the patients did not need to be ostracized.  Sometimes a member of the royal family going against the grain can make a huge difference for the world.  I think the Queen is smart enough to know that.


----------



## Pessie

LibbyRuth said:


> Fair point. But Diana visited AIDs patients in the 80s as a member of the royal family on behalf of the Queen - and she made a huge difference in the world demonstrating to people that the patients did not need to be ostracized.  Sometimes a member of the royal family going against the grain can make a huge difference for the world.  I think the Queen is smart enough to know that.


She wasn’t scribbling on bananas as far as I recall


----------



## sdkitty

yawn


----------



## bag-mania

Huh, maybe I'm too jaded about celebrities, but I figured she wrote the messages on bananas because they are quickly biodegradable and can't be preserved. If she had written her inspirational messages on paper they would be all over eBay by now. That's not something the royal family would want.


----------



## chicaloca

Pessie said:


> Nice touch if you’re a waitress.  But she’s attending these events as a member of the royal family, on behalf of the Queen as head of state - not as Meghan Markle showbiz personality.




I didn’t realize it was “showbiz” to write encouraging messages on food. I’ll guess I’ll keep some bananas and a sharpie on hand for the next time I want to feel like a  superstar.

I said upthread Meghan’s profession as an actress was being weaponized against her and this is a perfect example. Every thing she does is considered “showbiz” or “Hollywood” for no apparent reason.


----------



## 2cello

Everything is relative.  Spending time writing nice messages on a banana is time better spent than complaining about it on the internet.


----------



## A1aGypsy

2cello said:


> Everything is relative.  Spending time writing nice messages on a banana is time better spent than complaining about it on the internet.



This should be a fortune cookie.


----------



## bisousx

So.... charity work and writing encouraging messages on fruit is now offensive.  Yep, we’re doomed.


----------



## Flatsy

I think it was well-intentioned, but there was one sex worker who found it patronizing and her feelings should not be dismissed.  Meghan said she got the idea from something similar being done with children's lunches, and that's great, but these weren't children, they were grown women.  But it was a nice gesture and Piers Morgan and Samantha Markle blew it up far more than necessary with their trolling.


LibbyRuth said:


> I think that looking at the whole thing a little closer, it's much ado about nothing. Meghan did not show up at the charity with a box of bananas and a sharpie saying "hey guys, I've got a great idea!"


LOL, I guess you need to look a little closer at the videotape because that's *exactly *what happened.  She didn't bring the bananas, but she did say, "I have an idea!" and asked for a sharpie.   And she pretended as if it was spontaneous too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bisousx said:


> So.... charity work and writing encouraging messages on fruit is now offensive.  Yep, we’re doomed.


This. The nit-picking is getting a bit desperate now.


----------



## TMA

Flatsy said:


> I think it was well-intentioned, but there was one sex worker who found it patronizing and her feelings should not be dismissed.  Meghan said she got the idea from something similar being done with children's lunches, and that's great, but these weren't children, they were grown women.  But it was a nice gesture and Piers Morgan and Samantha Markle blew it up far more than necessary with their trolling.
> 
> LOL, I guess you need to look a little closer at the videotape because that's *exactly *what happened.  She didn't bring the bananas, but she did say, "I have an idea!" and asked for a sharpie.   And she pretended as if it was spontaneous too.



If you watch the video, the woman in charge told Harry that all the food was donated and they packed those care packages everyday. Considering they went up from London by train, I am sure they didn’t haul the bananas over. Also, the video suggests it was spontaneous.


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> I thought I had read that the messages on fruit were Meghan’s idea. That one of her teachers had written them on various fruit while she was in school? Now I need to go back and check that. Regardless, I’m sure it was with the best of intentions.


I saw a video on instagram, where she was asked to write on the Bananas and she said something along the lines "uhm what can I write" or "need to think of something" so someone asked her to do that!


----------



## Morgan R

myown said:


> I saw a video on instagram, where she was asked to write on the Bananas and she said something along the lines "uhm what can I write" or "need to think of something" so someone asked her to do that!



The fruit (bananas, apples, and oranges) were already on a table within a basket of food that was being prepped as a part of meals for the sex workers. Meghan then says "I have an idea"  to the lady packing the meals at the One25 Charity and then Meghan ask for a sharpie. Meghan mentions how she saw a story where a lady wrote "affirmations"/"positive messages" on a banana to make kids feel empowered. On the last banana she was writing on Meghan asked the lady from they charity "What should I write on it?".

The whole interaction starts at 16:21 in this video


----------



## papertiger

Morgan R said:


> The fruit (bananas, apples, and oranges) were already on a table within a basket of food that was being prepped as a part of meals for the sex workers. Meghan then says "I have an idea"  to the lady packing the meals at the One25 Charity and then Meghan ask for a sharpie. Meghan mentions how she saw a story where a lady wrote "affirmations"/"positive messages" on a banana to make kids feel empowered. On the last banana she was writing on Meghan asked the lady from they charity "What should I write on it?".
> 
> The whole interaction starts at 16:21 in this video




 it's either clear it was her spontaneous idea or the idea was acted 'spontaneously'


----------



## bag-mania

Ha! The banana I just ate had a Mickey Mouse sticker on it saying "Powering the Hero Within."
Is looking to bananas for inspiration all the rage these days?


----------



## A1aGypsy

That damn mouse. Always trying to snatch the spotlight.


----------



## Hobbsy

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I totally agree it was weird and inappropriate. An article I saw used the word "condescending" which I thought encapsulated it. Also why would you write on food with Sharpie?


You don't eat the banana peel. Do you?!


----------



## Hobbsy

lookingforlove said:


> ^^ Bananas have always been sexual objects. They use them in sex ed classes to show people how to put condoms on properly. Tons of commercials/ads show a pretty blonde peeling and eating a banana to imply oral sex. I thought this is universal knowledge?


I eat bananas every day, the sexual implications you imply never cross my mind. I just like bananas.


----------



## Hobbsy

Pessie said:


> She wasn’t scribbling on bananas as far as I recall


Who cares?!


----------



## VickyB

Isn't time we stop splitting bananas?


----------



## sdkitty

Meghan's "friends" speak out for her
from Vanity Fair
I hate these anon friends things....smacks of BS IMO
Quote:
We’re a few months away from the one-year anniversary of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s wedding, and, while there have been a great number of successes for the Duchess of Sussex, of course, it has at times been a bit turbulent, from a media perspective. Her estranged father, Thomas, and half-sister, Samantha, have regularly spoken to the press, airing gripes and grievances, and the press treatment she has faced (particularly in the U.K.) has been sometimes pretty rough. Particularly in the wake of the news that Harry and Meghan (due to give birth later this spring) would be moving some 25 miles outside of London, rampant reports about friction between Meghan and Kate Middleton emerged, as well. (The Palace, in a rare move, actually shot down one specific report related to the dynamic between the two women.)

Meghan, through it all, has essentially remained silent. Without social media or the ability to freely give interviews, she has been left to operate with the typical royal strategy of, well, avoiding comment, and hoping things just blow over. But that has changed (slightly) as of today, as five of Meghan’s friends have spoken exclusively to _People_ magazine about Meghan and Meghan’s life and her family. One has to assume Meghan authorized the “close friends” who “form an essential part of [her] inner circle” to speak to the magazine. All five of the women were given anonymity, which gives the story the _feel_ of one of the many, many reports we’ve read over the past year about Meghan and her behaviors, but with a greater sense of gravity. (If the identities of the friends had been made public, that _really_ would have cut through the noise.) A few weeks ago, Meghan’s makeup artist and friend, Daniel Martin,posted an Instagram shot of avocado toast she had prepared for him over a weekend stay in London, which now seems like it was a bit of a test run for this story, as it indicated we might starting hearing from her friends in a way we had not previously.

Per *People,* the group decided to speak out now “after maintaining their silence for nearly two years,” because of what they see as “global bullying” of their friend. One of the friends (identified as a “co-star”) said that they are worried about “what this is doing to her and the baby,” citing the “level of emotional trauma” from the “lies and untruths.” Another friend said that they have all been to Meghan and Harry's “cottage,” noting that it’s intimate and not in any way _glamified_: “It’s small and she’s made it cozy, but the perception of their lifestyle and the reality are two different things. Meg cooks for herself and Harry every single day.” There is an account from “a friend from L.A.” that stresses how “hands on” Meghan is at home, in surprisingly vivid detail: “We had a couple of days together recently. Her husband was out of town on work. In the room she made up for me, there was a candle lit by the bed, slippers, and a robe. We were the only two in the house. It was our time. She made the most lovely meals. She made tea every day. It was raining and muddy outside, so the dogs got all dirty, and she’s wiping them off with towels. How much she loves her animals, how much she loves her friends, how much she loves feeding you, taking care of you—none of that has changed.” (We must say, it is pretty fun to have “husband was out of town on work” tossed off here as an aside, when we know the husband is one of the most famous men in the world.)

*Watch Now: *
*How Meghan Markle is Preparing for the Royal Wedding*

There’s a whole bunch here pertaining to Meghan’s relationship with her father and half-sister, as well. A close friend claimed that Thomas has not, as he has maintained, reached out to his daughter. “He knows how to get in touch with her. Her telephone number hasn’t changed,” said the close friend. “He’s never called; he’s never texted. It’s super painful, because Meg was always so dutiful. I think she will always feel genuinely devastated by what he’s done. And at the same time, because she’s a daughter, she has a lot of sympathy for him.” The close friend said that Meghan and Harry were focused on getting Thomas to London for the wedding, even after it emerged he had arranged for paparazzi photos to be taken of himself, and that the couple did not hear from him (“Tom wouldn’t take her calls, wouldn’t take Harry’s calls.”). Further quotes claim that Meghan was trying to reach him, after word he had had a heart attack, to no avail. Eventually, according to the close friend, she received a letter from him, in which he asked for “a photo op with her.” That request, it is stated, quite rankled Meghan: “[She] feels like, ‘That’s the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m telling you I don’t want to communicate through the media, and you’re asking me to communicate through the media.’”

There is a _lot_ of information in this _People_ story—it’s almost like the royal equivalent of a surprise album drop—and it certainly provides a different layer of context to the ongoing, fraught, and strange Markle family dramatics that have played out in the public sphere since Meghan and Harry started dating. It certainly makes sense that Meghan would want to share her side of things, as it were, though one wishes she herself could just sit down with Oprah for an interview and hash it all out (or even that Doria Ragland, her mother, could). We continue to maintain that Meghan should get her Instagram account back and have more of a public voice—all of that would feel appropriate and natural and would only help the royal family in its attempts to “modernize.” While this story will likely help to shift the narrative a bit, it also feels like this might provide an opening for Thomas and Samantha to talk to the media again, as they try to refute or respond to these points. The _People_coverline for this story blares the “Truth About Meghan,” but, as ever, even as we are given more information about her and her situation, the actual truth always seems to remain at arm’s length.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Endeavour Fund Awards


----------



## cafecreme15

Already posted this in the Royalty Fashion thread, but applies here too:
Not the most flattering thing she has worn. The waist line is hitting her in an odd place, and the top looks ill-fitting. Obsessed with her Aquazzura shoes, though, and her skin looks gorgeous as always


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> Meghan's "friends" speak out for her
> from Vanity Fair
> I hate these anon friends things....smacks of BS IMO
> Quote:
> We’re a few months away from the one-year anniversary of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s wedding, and, while there have been a great number of successes for the Duchess of Sussex, of course, it has at times been a bit turbulent, from a media perspective. Her estranged father, Thomas, and half-sister, Samantha, have regularly spoken to the press, airing gripes and grievances, and the press treatment she has faced (particularly in the U.K.) has been sometimes pretty rough. Particularly in the wake of the news that Harry and Meghan (due to give birth later this spring) would be moving some 25 miles outside of London, rampant reports about friction between Meghan and Kate Middleton emerged, as well. (The Palace, in a rare move, actually shot down one specific report related to the dynamic between the two women.)
> 
> Meghan, through it all, has essentially remained silent. Without social media or the ability to freely give interviews, she has been left to operate with the typical royal strategy of, well, avoiding comment, and hoping things just blow over. But that has changed (slightly) as of today, as five of Meghan’s friends have spoken exclusively to _People_ magazine about Meghan and Meghan’s life and her family. One has to assume Meghan authorized the “close friends” who “form an essential part of [her] inner circle” to speak to the magazine. All five of the women were given anonymity, which gives the story the _feel_ of one of the many, many reports we’ve read over the past year about Meghan and her behaviors, but with a greater sense of gravity. (If the identities of the friends had been made public, that _really_ would have cut through the noise.) A few weeks ago, Meghan’s makeup artist and friend, Daniel Martin,posted an Instagram shot of avocado toast she had prepared for him over a weekend stay in London, which now seems like it was a bit of a test run for this story, as it indicated we might starting hearing from her friends in a way we had not previously.
> 
> Per *People,* the group decided to speak out now “after maintaining their silence for nearly two years,” because of what they see as “global bullying” of their friend. One of the friends (identified as a “co-star”) said that they are worried about “what this is doing to her and the baby,” citing the “level of emotional trauma” from the “lies and untruths.” Another friend said that they have all been to Meghan and Harry's “cottage,” noting that it’s intimate and not in any way _glamified_: “It’s small and she’s made it cozy, but the perception of their lifestyle and the reality are two different things. Meg cooks for herself and Harry every single day.” There is an account from “a friend from L.A.” that stresses how “hands on” Meghan is at home, in surprisingly vivid detail: “We had a couple of days together recently. Her husband was out of town on work. In the room she made up for me, there was a candle lit by the bed, slippers, and a robe. We were the only two in the house. It was our time. She made the most lovely meals. She made tea every day. It was raining and muddy outside, so the dogs got all dirty, and she’s wiping them off with towels. How much she loves her animals, how much she loves her friends, how much she loves feeding you, taking care of you—none of that has changed.” (We must say, it is pretty fun to have “husband was out of town on work” tossed off here as an aside, when we know the husband is one of the most famous men in the world.)
> 
> *Watch Now: *
> *How Meghan Markle is Preparing for the Royal Wedding*
> 
> There’s a whole bunch here pertaining to Meghan’s relationship with her father and half-sister, as well. A close friend claimed that Thomas has not, as he has maintained, reached out to his daughter. “He knows how to get in touch with her. Her telephone number hasn’t changed,” said the close friend. “He’s never called; he’s never texted. It’s super painful, because Meg was always so dutiful. I think she will always feel genuinely devastated by what he’s done. And at the same time, because she’s a daughter, she has a lot of sympathy for him.” The close friend said that Meghan and Harry were focused on getting Thomas to London for the wedding, even after it emerged he had arranged for paparazzi photos to be taken of himself, and that the couple did not hear from him (“Tom wouldn’t take her calls, wouldn’t take Harry’s calls.”). Further quotes claim that Meghan was trying to reach him, after word he had had a heart attack, to no avail. Eventually, according to the close friend, she received a letter from him, in which he asked for “a photo op with her.” That request, it is stated, quite rankled Meghan: “[She] feels like, ‘That’s the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m telling you I don’t want to communicate through the media, and you’re asking me to communicate through the media.’”
> 
> There is a _lot_ of information in this _People_ story—it’s almost like the royal equivalent of a surprise album drop—and it certainly provides a different layer of context to the ongoing, fraught, and strange Markle family dramatics that have played out in the public sphere since Meghan and Harry started dating. It certainly makes sense that Meghan would want to share her side of things, as it were, though one wishes she herself could just sit down with Oprah for an interview and hash it all out (or even that Doria Ragland, her mother, could). We continue to maintain that Meghan should get her Instagram account back and have more of a public voice—all of that would feel appropriate and natural and would only help the royal family in its attempts to “modernize.” While this story will likely help to shift the narrative a bit, it also feels like this might provide an opening for Thomas and Samantha to talk to the media again, as they try to refute or respond to these points. The _People_coverline for this story blares the “Truth About Meghan,” but, as ever, even as we are given more information about her and her situation, the actual truth always seems to remain at arm’s length.


Names would have been helpful. If you are friends with MM , you are a reputable person and saying good things about her, I can't see the point why you would want to stay anonymous. Unless the whole article is a fabrication. I hope it's not but attaching names to this article would have given gravitas to it.



Hobbsy said:


> I eat bananas every day, the sexual implications you imply never cross my mind. I just like bananas.


Not that I don't know about those implications, but most of us eat the bananas for the nutritional content, esp. potassium and the taste, too. 

I love her shoes and the whole outfit. She was very pretty in the "banana" video, too. Pregnancy really makes her bloom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> Meghan's "friends" speak out for her
> from Vanity Fair
> I hate these anon friends things....smacks of BS IMO
> Quote:
> We’re a few months away from the one-year anniversary of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s wedding, and, while there have been a great number of successes for the Duchess of Sussex, of course, it has at times been a bit turbulent, from a media perspective. Her estranged father, Thomas, and half-sister, Samantha, have regularly spoken to the press, airing gripes and grievances, and the press treatment she has faced (particularly in the U.K.) has been sometimes pretty rough. Particularly in the wake of the news that Harry and Meghan (due to give birth later this spring) would be moving some 25 miles outside of London, rampant reports about friction between Meghan and Kate Middleton emerged, as well. (The Palace, in a rare move, actually shot down one specific report related to the dynamic between the two women.)
> 
> Meghan, through it all, has essentially remained silent. Without social media or the ability to freely give interviews, she has been left to operate with the typical royal strategy of, well, avoiding comment, and hoping things just blow over. But that has changed (slightly) as of today, as five of Meghan’s friends have spoken exclusively to _People_ magazine about Meghan and Meghan’s life and her family. One has to assume Meghan authorized the “close friends” who “form an essential part of [her] inner circle” to speak to the magazine. All five of the women were given anonymity, which gives the story the _feel_ of one of the many, many reports we’ve read over the past year about Meghan and her behaviors, but with a greater sense of gravity. (If the identities of the friends had been made public, that _really_ would have cut through the noise.) A few weeks ago, Meghan’s makeup artist and friend, Daniel Martin,posted an Instagram shot of avocado toast she had prepared for him over a weekend stay in London, which now seems like it was a bit of a test run for this story, as it indicated we might starting hearing from her friends in a way we had not previously.
> 
> Per *People,* the group decided to speak out now “after maintaining their silence for nearly two years,” because of what they see as “global bullying” of their friend. One of the friends (identified as a “co-star”) said that they are worried about “what this is doing to her and the baby,” citing the “level of emotional trauma” from the “lies and untruths.” Another friend said that they have all been to Meghan and Harry's “cottage,” noting that it’s intimate and not in any way _glamified_: “It’s small and she’s made it cozy, but the perception of their lifestyle and the reality are two different things. Meg cooks for herself and Harry every single day.” There is an account from “a friend from L.A.” that stresses how “hands on” Meghan is at home, in surprisingly vivid detail: “We had a couple of days together recently. Her husband was out of town on work. In the room she made up for me, there was a candle lit by the bed, slippers, and a robe. We were the only two in the house. It was our time. She made the most lovely meals. She made tea every day. It was raining and muddy outside, so the dogs got all dirty, and she’s wiping them off with towels. How much she loves her animals, how much she loves her friends, how much she loves feeding you, taking care of you—none of that has changed.” (We must say, it is pretty fun to have “husband was out of town on work” tossed off here as an aside, when we know the husband is one of the most famous men in the world.)
> 
> *Watch Now: *
> *How Meghan Markle is Preparing for the Royal Wedding*
> 
> There’s a whole bunch here pertaining to Meghan’s relationship with her father and half-sister, as well. A close friend claimed that Thomas has not, as he has maintained, reached out to his daughter. “He knows how to get in touch with her. Her telephone number hasn’t changed,” said the close friend. “He’s never called; he’s never texted. It’s super painful, because Meg was always so dutiful. I think she will always feel genuinely devastated by what he’s done. And at the same time, because she’s a daughter, she has a lot of sympathy for him.” The close friend said that Meghan and Harry were focused on getting Thomas to London for the wedding, even after it emerged he had arranged for paparazzi photos to be taken of himself, and that the couple did not hear from him (“Tom wouldn’t take her calls, wouldn’t take Harry’s calls.”). Further quotes claim that Meghan was trying to reach him, after word he had had a heart attack, to no avail. Eventually, according to the close friend, she received a letter from him, in which he asked for “a photo op with her.” That request, it is stated, quite rankled Meghan: “[She] feels like, ‘That’s the opposite of what I’m saying. I’m telling you I don’t want to communicate through the media, and you’re asking me to communicate through the media.’”
> 
> There is a _lot_ of information in this _People_ story—it’s almost like the royal equivalent of a surprise album drop—and it certainly provides a different layer of context to the ongoing, fraught, and strange Markle family dramatics that have played out in the public sphere since Meghan and Harry started dating. It certainly makes sense that Meghan would want to share her side of things, as it were, though one wishes she herself could just sit down with Oprah for an interview and hash it all out (or even that Doria Ragland, her mother, could). We continue to maintain that Meghan should get her Instagram account back and have more of a public voice—all of that would feel appropriate and natural and would only help the royal family in its attempts to “modernize.” While this story will likely help to shift the narrative a bit, it also feels like this might provide an opening for Thomas and Samantha to talk to the media again, as they try to refute or respond to these points. The _People_coverline for this story blares the “Truth About Meghan,” but, as ever, even as we are given more information about her and her situation, the actual truth always seems to remain at arm’s length.



I really feel that this story is over the top. I hope this wasn’t an opportunity that Meghan wanted to “right” the “wrong” about her reputation. She was already fighting it by living her best life with Harry. I thought she rose above all this “nonsense.” It doesn’t change my mind on what kind of character she is before or after reading this, it just makes me wonder who these supposed close friends are.


----------



## lulilu

^^^ it does kind of seem as if these "friends" had to have to unofficial go ahead from Meghan's camp.

I want to like the white blouse and black skirt but the shirt is so ill-fitting and sloppy (open too much, sleeves carelessly rolled up, wrinkled) and the skirt is just a mistake.


----------



## Morgan R

I think the friends did the People article anonymously because the royal reporters don't have a direct source to Meghan so the friends aren't going to willingly put their names out there as a source they can contact. People is a pretty reputable Magazine in comparison to other tabloids and especially in comparison to British Tabloids. So for multiple friends to anonymously go through People isn't a coincidence and they obviously got the go ahead through Meghan (and Harry's) camp because technically royals can't defend themselves from every negative story about themselves. The friends were able to address the overhaul of negative stories while defending their friend but are also giving subtle insight to their friend without  giving much away.  I saw one royal reporter mention that this was a smart move especially because it is known many other royals have also done the same thing to discredit stories and defend themselves without directly addressing the stories. Another royal  reporter mentioned that if you've paid attention to Meghan (more specifically if you were paying attention to Meghan before she was with Harry) it is kind of obvious who the sources are.

I coincidentally happened to notice/started paying attention to Meghan before she was dating then married Harry. I happened to become aware of her because she was on Suits with Gina Torres. I saw Gina Torres promoting Suits somewhere around the start of the first season so I watched Suits because I've always liked Gina Torres' acting. In regards to the article the People article it actually wasn't far off of what her friends have mentioned about her on social media or in interviews before she was with Harry as well as since she has been with Harry.

The People article mentions 5 anonymous sources:

- a longtime friend
- a former co-star
- a friend from LA
- a one time colleague
- a close confidant


My guesses for the sources  are: Lindsay Roth (longtime friend since she has been friend with Meghan since college), Sarah Rafferty (former co-star), Benita Litt or Heather  Dorak (friends from LA), Abigail Spencer (one time colleague as she appeared on Suits but was only about 15 episodes but became good friends with Meghan), and Jessica Mulrouney (confidant).


----------



## Gal4Dior

lulilu said:


> ^^^ it does kind of seem as if these "friends" had to have to unofficial go ahead from Meghan's camp.
> 
> I want to like the white blouse and black skirt but the shirt is so ill-fitting and sloppy (open too much, sleeves carelessly rolled up, wrinkled) and the skirt is just a mistake.



Yes, agreed. The article and its details were so meticulously executed to paint this picture of her in the most idealistic way, that it seems contrived. 

She’s human! It’s ok not to be perfect at all times. It’s ok to cut off toxic family members and her being “bullied” by the press is something she must have clearly known was going to happen to her in this role. BRF famous transcends Hollywood famous. She’s not in her 20s like Diana was and she knew what happened to Diana. She is way too smart to be taken aback by all this drama from the press and her black sheep family.

Also agree that outfit was not as chic as it was probably intended to be. Pre pregnancy it could have totally worked, but this really does look like they draped a black table cloth over Harry’s shirt in a bad way. It doesn’t enhance the beauty of her pregnancy. She looks positively radiant while pregnant!


----------



## Tivo

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Endeavour Fund Awards
> 
> View attachment 4333672
> View attachment 4333652
> View attachment 4333656
> View attachment 4333648
> View attachment 4333649
> View attachment 4333654
> View attachment 4333649
> View attachment 4333653
> View attachment 4333655


Style wise she never looks good, imo. Just doesn’t dress well. Her hair always looks good.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Very Sharon Stone at the Oscars in '98.  It would have looked better tied over the skirt IMO.

There's no way that People article wasn't sanctioned by the BRF and the sources would be legit.  Can you blame them for wanting to be anonymous?  They would get knifed by commentary on places like the DailyMail etc if their identities were known.

The article is a bit OTT but seriously she can't win. I think it's true that she tried to smooth things over with her father, and that he showed himself to be the narcissist he is.  At that point there's no reasoning with him, he's too toxic for her and she has a new baby to think about.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan’s latest outfit is very Carolyn Bessette Kennedy.
-
Her friends were smart to stay anonymous. They have seen first hand how vicious anti-Meghan trolls are.
-
I’m glad a different narrative is  out there from people who actually know Meghan rather than  “anonymous royal sources” from racist British reporters. People  who think the People article is over the top must have missed the royal reporter articles accusing Meghan of causing Harry’s baldness and inciting violence by eating avocados.


----------



## Gal4Dior

chicaloca said:


> Meghan’s latest outfit is very Carolyn Bessette Kennedy.
> -
> Her friends were smart to stay anonymous. They have seen first hand how vicious anti-Meghan trolls are.
> -
> I’m glad a different narrative is  out there from people who actually know Meghan rather than  “anonymous royal sources” from racist British reporters. People  who think the People article is over the top must have missed the royal reporter articles accusing Meghan of causing Harry’s baldness and inciting violence by eating avocados.



All the British press on avocados and Harry’s baldness and her the cause of it is stupid ridiculous. That is not “bullying” of her at all, it simply trash “reporting” that the BRF and Meghan, with all her years in Hollywood, should be able to rise above. This happened to Diana, but far worse as they flat out stalked her and violated. Meghan is no dummy, but maybe her public image team could have done other damage control that didn’t seem as contrived and forced.

I’m just saying that the People article was over the top because it was so obvious it was planned to dispel certain “rumors” and painted her like some kind of saint, it wasn’t believable either.

I choose to believe she is a regular person with good and bad, and she is lucky that her life with Harry is something only some could ever dream of.


----------



## VickyB

double post


----------



## VickyB

double post


----------



## VickyB

Nothing good about this look.


----------



## doni

Oh dear... British members chime in, but I don’t see how this could possibly go down well in the UK, an unashamedly OTT article in an American magazine about how the British press is causing her unborn baby emotional trauma? Seems so misdjuged... Yes, the British press is horrendously vicious, and add to that Internet, and I feel for her, it cannot be easy... Also because she gives me the sense that she though that is she did things right she would be universally loved and she is still under shock... But...  I don’t know, perhaps she is more focused in maintaining her reputation overseas and has given up on her new home already?


----------



## chicaloca

LVSistinaMM said:


> All the British press on avocados and Harry’s baldness and her the cause of it is stupid ridiculous. That is not “bullying” of her at all, it simply trash “reporting” that the BRF and Meghan, with all her years in Hollywood, should be able to rise above. This happened to Diana, but far worse as they flat out stalked her and violated. Meghan is no dummy, but maybe her public image team could have done other damage control that didn’t seem as contrived and forced.
> 
> I’m just saying that the People article was over the top because it was so obvious it was planned to dispel certain “rumors” and painted her like some kind of saint, it wasn’t believable either.
> 
> I choose to believe she is a regular person with good and bad, and she is lucky that her life with Harry is something only some could ever dream of.



It is absolutely bullying to relentlessly spread false, negative information about someone with the intent of inviting public scorn. The negativity has been alarmingly nonstop through her pregnancy with the racial undertones making it more insidious.

Meghan joined the royal family as a successful actress & blogger who was known to be friendly and philanthropic. After marrying Harry the British press has reduced her to a diva that is somehow more entitled than the entire royal family who is berating staff, throwing tantrums over tiaras, and making delicate flower Kate cry. 

Pretty much every thing her friends say about her is corroborated through her social media history. Her love of cooking, her hospitality, and her interactions with her coworkers, friends and their children were all pretty well documented. Nothing about their descriptions of Meghan seem over the top or untrue.

Meanwhile there is zero evidence of the rude entitled diva persona fabricated by the British press. No one who has worked with Meghan  has a bad thing to say about her. Additionally the the “social climbing user” narrative seems even more ridiculous when you consider the people coming to her defense are long-term, non-famous friends.


----------



## Sharont2305

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Morocco from Saturday 23rd February to Monday 25th February 2019.

This visit is at the request of Her Majesty's Government. Full details of the visit will be announced in due course."


----------



## LuckyBitch

LVSistinaMM said:


> All the British press on avocados and Harry’s baldness and her the cause of it is stupid ridiculous. That is not “bullying” of her at all, it simply trash “reporting” that the BRF and Meghan, with all her years in Hollywood, should be able to rise above. This happened to Diana, but far worse as they flat out stalked her and violated. Meghan is no dummy, but maybe her public image team could have done other damage control that didn’t seem as contrived and forced.
> 
> I’m just saying that the People article was over the top because it was so obvious it was planned to dispel certain “rumors” and painted her like some kind of saint, it wasn’t believable either.
> 
> I choose to believe she is a regular person with good and bad, and she is lucky that her life with Harry is something only some could ever dream of.


Only sensible thing written so far.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

LVSistinaMM said:


> I really feel that this story is over the top. I hope this wasn’t an opportunity that Meghan wanted to “right” the “wrong” about her reputation. She was already fighting it by living her best life with Harry. I thought she rose above all this “nonsense.” It doesn’t change my mind on what kind of character she is before or after reading this,* it just makes me wonder who these supposed close friends are*.


Further guess work doesn't help to clear the air. If these anonymous friends wanted to help Meghan with improving her reputation in the UK, they should come forward in a British paper or magazine, because the most important thing is how people think about her in the UK which is her new chosen home where she's going to live with Harry.
I think the "rise above" attitude would be a better tactic IMO. Unfortunately, if you take a public role, regardless how well you do, there would be criticism. The less she let it to effect her and how she lives her life in the UK, the better for her and the little one. I think if she perseveres and keeps up the good work, the attacks would lessen by time.


----------



## Flatsy

I actually think the over-the-top stuff from her friends reconciles quite well with some of the stories that were published about her last fall.  Being a perfect EVERYTHING all the time (perfect duchess, wife, friend, domestic goddess, daughter, humanitarian, fashion icon, yoga guru, health nut, self-improver) is an insane amount of pressure for a person to put on themselves.

It's not hard to believe that the woman who puts on an instagram-worthy tea and makes sure houseguests have a candle by the bed and who writes thank-yous with perfect penmanship is also someone who wanted to spritz her wedding chapel to make sure it didn't smell musty.  

I know from experience that this type of perfectionism leads to high-stress situations when things aren't 100% perfect.  I can believe that she had a meltdown when it was the last minute before she was to go in front of the cameras at an engagement and her hair still needed doing and her dress still needed ironing.  I can believe she drives her staff very hard to make it possible for her to present this perfect-perfect appearance all the time, both in public and socially.


----------



## Morgan R

chicaloca said:


> It is absolutely bullying to relentlessly spread false, negative information about someone with the intent of inviting public scorn. The negativity has been alarmingly nonstop through her pregnancy with the racial undertones making it more insidious.
> 
> Meghan joined the royal family as a successful actress & blogger who was known to be friendly and philanthropic. After marrying Harry the British press has reduced her to a diva that is somehow more entitled than the entire royal family who is berating staff, throwing tantrums over tiaras, and making delicate flower Kate cry.
> 
> Pretty much every thing her friends say about her is corroborated through her social media history. Her love of cooking, her hospitality, and her interactions with her coworkers, friends and their children were all pretty well documented. Nothing about their descriptions of Meghan seem over the top or untrue.
> 
> Meanwhile there is zero evidence of the rude entitled diva persona fabricated by the British press. No one who has worked with Meghan  has a bad thing to say about her. Additionally the the “social climbing user” narrative seems even more ridiculous when you consider the people coming to her defense are long-term, non-famous friends.



Totally agree with much of this. I didn't think the People article was over the top like some others are mentioning. Since Meghan had a public life before she had a royal life pretty much everything that was said in that People article literally wasn't far off from what Meghan's friends as well as some of her colleagues had posted about her in social media posts and/or have said in interviews about Meghan well before she was with Harry as well as since she has been with Harry. Pretty much every point in the article has been mentioned/known about Meghan before the People article was released it is just that the People article sums up and brings up a lot of things that are known about Meghan and put it into one article. I don't think the article being in People was misguided and it certainly wasn't a coincidence because that is a pretty reputable magazine (that also has major readership and a major worldwide online presence) and it is widely known the royals have used the publication before as way to release information on a wide scale even if the royals aren't directly the source friends of the royals give People information. Notably just last year People magazine was behind a widely praised 2 night/4 hour special which was about the royal family called "The Story of the Royals" which aired on ABC. The special involved many friends of the royals and current as well as former royal family staff members.

It is pretty obvious the People article was sanctioned by some members in the British Royal Family (while it is obvious Harry and Meghan approved this article it would not be surprising if Prince Charles approved the article as well especially because there has always been notable closeness between Harry and Charles). The People article reminds me in a way of Meghan's Vanity Fair issue back in 2017 to some people they felt the Vanity Fair article was an attention seeking interview by Meghan but to longtime royal watchers (like myself) it was obvious that the interview was sanctioned by members of the British Royal Family (Prince Charles' Clarence House office in collaboration with Kensington Palace which Harry is under) as a way to better introduce Meghan to the public on a wide-scale because it was obvious to many that an engagement was going to be announced in the coming months following the interview. Sure enough there was a role out to the engagement being announced: In late-September just a few weeks after the Vanity Fair article was released Harry and Meghan attended his Invictus Games where they made their first official appearance together (though paparazzi had obviously captured them before then), then October was filled with stories about how Harry and Meghan were having meetings with Queen Elizabeth II which pretty much further sparked engagement rumors, then there was confirmation that Meghan had filmed her last scenes of Suits in mid-November. Then less than a week before the engagement it was reported that Meghan had moved out of her Toronto house. And finally Clarence House along with Kensington Palace announced Harry and Meghan's engagement.

I personally have a lot of friends in the UK because I studied abroad during college (as well as lived in UK for a little bit afterwards) and my UK friends that pay attention to the royal family (it is worth noting not everybody in the UK does pay attention to the royals/would prefer a republic) and they've mentioned they hate the way Meghan is talked about by most royal reporters and the UK press (i.e trying to make every little thing a scandal or negative) especially when many in the UK  believe the UK press should be focused on more important stories that have many layers/facts to them and are ongoing issues like Brexit and if they really want to talk about a real royal scandal that isn't tabloid gossip they should address Prince Andrew's connection to the ongoing Jeffrey Epstein scandal.  Pretty much since the days of Diana the people in the UK have called out the UK press for the way they talk about the royal family because a lot of their stories are negative and filled with hate and the people in the UK feel that is a bad reflection on the UK. My friends have summed up the UK press like this: They have respect for Queen Elizabeth II but most other Royal Family members aren't so lucky and are subjected to attacks by the press (especially those that have married into the family). Many of my friends in the UK have friends (some of which are my acquaintances) that they have met through the ACU (The Association of Commonwealth Universities) from various Commonwealth Nations (16 of the 53 Commonwealth Nations have Queen Elizabeth II has monarch and head of state) and the people in the Commonwealth Nations don't like how it seems as though the UK press trying to "other" Meghan simply because she is American and they also don't like that some stories about Meghan clearly have racial undertones (especially because the Commonwealth Nations are overwhelming populated by people of color). If anything to me the People article isn't going over well with many royal reporters (many of which who work for tabloids) because it comes across as a reputable magazine got exclusives that they have made it no secret they trying to get.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I actually think the over-the-top stuff from her friends reconciles quite well with some of the stories that were published about her last fall.  Being a perfect EVERYTHING all the time (perfect duchess, wife, friend, domestic goddess, daughter, humanitarian, fashion icon, yoga guru, health nut, self-improver) is an insane amount of pressure for a person to put on themselves.
> 
> It's not hard to believe that the woman who puts on an instagram-worthy tea and makes sure houseguests have a candle by the bed and who writes thank-yous with perfect penmanship is also someone who wanted to spritz her wedding chapel to make sure it didn't smell musty.
> 
> I know from experience that this type of perfectionism leads to high-stress situations when things aren't 100% perfect.  I can believe that she had a meltdown when it was the last minute before she was to go in front of the cameras at an engagement and her hair still needed doing and her dress still needed ironing.  I can believe she drives her staff very hard to make it possible for her to present this perfect-perfect appearance all the time, both in public and socially.


and gets this story from her friends published......too much IMO.  I really don't need to hear from anonymous friends that she puts a candle by their bed, etc.


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> and gets this story from her friends published......too much IMO.  I really don't need to hear from anonymous friends that she puts a candle by their bed, etc.



ITA. The level of detail didn’t change my mind either way.


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> ITA. The level of detail didn’t change my mind either way.


I can understand she doesn't like being described as difficult, mean, whatever.  But actions speak louder than words....and these words are too much IMO


----------



## hockeygirl

sdkitty said:


> and gets this story from her friends published......too much IMO.  I really don't need to hear from anonymous friends that she puts a candle by their bed, etc.



I totally agree.  This People story from anonymous friends is way over the top.


----------



## gazoo

The People article doesn't feel "Royal" to me. I wish she'd have risen above everything and rode it out like the Queen does. Having said that, I think she's been treated horribly, like all the others that have married into the BRF. Megan is "Hollywood", and Hollywood PR tactics don't work in this situation, IMO. However, she's not a weak person. I think any courtiers that have it in for her are probably aghast at her not rolling over. I hope her and Harry continue to be happy and are able to raise their child in a stable home. She's polarizing, and maybe that's not a bad thing, considering how straightlaced and boring the BRF comes across. My MIL is British, and is delighted about Meghan, because she says it's about time the Commonwealth saw themselves in the BRF. I think there's a lot of support for her. Sadly, the loudest platforms don't include those people. Harry chose her. Everyone, including the media, should accept his choice.

My opinion of her family is still that they should go kick rocks. They are users and deserve to be frozen out.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> I can understand she doesn't like being described as difficult, mean, whatever.  But actions speak louder than words....and these words are too much IMO


Agreed. This article won't change much how she's perceived, but her actions might. How she wipes the mud off the legs of her dogs or being an attentive friend won't counterbalance the damage done by those tabloids, e.g.Daily Fail, which continue to publish articles about people leaving the palace because of her or about renting expensive jewellery.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Agreed. This article won't change much how she's perceived, but her actions might. How she wipes the mud off the legs of her dogs or being an attentive friend won't counterbalance the damage done by those tabloids, e.g.Daily Fail, which continue to publish articles about people leaving the palace because of her or about renting expensive jewellery.


her action when she opened the car door for herself impressed me a lot more than this dumb story


----------



## Hobbsy

chicaloca said:


> It is absolutely bullying to relentlessly spread false, negative information about someone with the intent of inviting public scorn. The negativity has been alarmingly nonstop through her pregnancy with the racial undertones making it more insidious.
> 
> Meghan joined the royal family as a successful actress & blogger who was known to be friendly and philanthropic. After marrying Harry the British press has reduced her to a diva that is somehow more entitled than the entire royal family who is berating staff, throwing tantrums over tiaras, and making delicate flower Kate cry.
> 
> Pretty much every thing her friends say about her is corroborated through her social media history. Her love of cooking, her hospitality, and her interactions with her coworkers, friends and their children were all pretty well documented. Nothing about their descriptions of Meghan seem over the top or untrue.
> 
> Meanwhile there is zero evidence of the rude entitled diva persona fabricated by the British press. No one who has worked with Meghan  has a bad thing to say about her. Additionally the the “social climbing user” narrative seems even more ridiculous when you consider the people coming to her defense are long-term, non-famous friends.


This!


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> and gets this story from her friends published......too much IMO.  I really don't need to hear from anonymous friends that she puts a candle by their bed, etc.



Puleeezzzz. I really doubt that many people sleep with a burning candle next to their bed. So find it a hollow touch.


----------



## sdkitty

Hobbsy said:


> This!


what racial undertones?  guess I having been following this closely but I don't know what is meant by that......


----------



## krissa

Daddy dearest also sold the letter Meghan wrote after the wedding. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Did he think that would help HIS case????

It just shows that she did what she should have and tried to make peace with him and get him to stop talking to the tabloid press.  There is anger in her writing but why wouldn't there be?

This man is vile and toxic. That he can't see this actually paints HIM in a bad light is truly astounding.

*EDIT: *You know what else is amazing?  That the DM allow thousands of hateful comments on every post about Meghan but on this one - probably knowing that this exposes this jerk - the comments have been turned OFF.  Uh-huh.  The DM is trash.

And this part, gawd he's a pig. Cares more about his image and getting a photo than the actual relationship with his daughter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Addicted to bags

krissa said:


> Daddy dearest also sold the letter Meghan wrote after the wedding.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html


Wow! Who can blame her for cutting him off?


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> her action when she opened the car door for herself impressed me a lot more than this dumb story


You do know the reason for that right? Because if someone attempts to attack her her security detail would be able to get her back in the car quickly. Every second counts. All heads of state, VIPs and public figures who are constantly out there do not close their own doors. There's a reason for that and that reason is security.  By the time shots or whatever are pressed towards these protected heads, every single second counts. It has nothing to do with "empowerment." It has to do with security. They've got it down to a science. 

SMH.


----------



## Lodpah

krissa said:


> Daddy dearest also sold the letter Meghan wrote after the wedding.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html


Lol, Megan is on the offensive. She does nothing without being a calculated . . . She didn't start climbing the stairs without being shrewd.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> Lol, Megan is on the offensive. She does nothing without being a calculated . . . She didn't start climbing the stairs without being shrewd.



?????????  Meghan didn't release the letter - HER FATHER DID.


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> ?????????  Meghan didn't release the letter - HER FATHER DID.


I know that.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> I know that.



So why the comment about her being calculated and shrewd in relation to the DM post, which you quoted?


----------



## bisousx

It looks like she wrote it knowing her father would release it. While his and Samantha’s actions are as incredulous as usual. I don’t believe her narrative that he didn’t try to reach out. And who pens an actual letter these days? Too suspicious. While I don’t blame her for trying to spin it in her favor, her moves don’t come across as smooth and seamless. It’s way too obvious what she’s trying to do.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

SMH..Some people will work themselves into pretzels to make Meghan in the wrong here. 

I guess she wrote her Dad's letter as well, then asked her father - to whom she is not speaking - to release them both.

Ok, sure


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> SMH..Some people will work themselves into pretzels to make Meghan in the wrong here.
> 
> I guess she wrote her Dad's letter as well, then asked her father - to whom she is not speaking - to release them both.
> 
> Ok, sure


I don't work myself into a pretzel . . . more like discernment . . . worked enough on cases to know that sometimes that diamond is not a natural diamond but a lab created one.  I don't believe in jumping onto the rah rah train . . . yet . . . like one well respected person said . . . content of character matters most.  Anyway MM is just trying too hard but who can blame her?  There is absolutely no chemistry with her and Prince Harry. That coming prince tho of a baby . . .


----------



## chicaloca

The People article seems brilliant in retrospect. It seems now that the article wasn’t just about getting Meghan’s side out. It was also about  eliminating the Thomas Markle problem since   any ounce of credibility he had is now shredded. Her friends brought up the letter because Meghan, sadly, knew her dad would release it. The letter completely exonerates her and now -- thanks to Thomas Markle himself corroborating the details — discredits Thomas. All the reporters who were giving this man a platform and admonishing Meghan for cutting him off should feel like fools.

Thomas is a disgusting man and I would not blame Meghan one bit for permanently cutting him out of her life.


----------



## DeMonica

krissa said:


> Daddy dearest also sold the letter Meghan wrote after the wedding.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html


New level of low: it's abysmal. How can this man hope for reconciliation when he's selling his own daughter and her new family to the tabloids? Actually, he doesn't really want any olive branch, that's pretty obvious now, just a pic with his famous daughter and famous son-in-law, whatever it takes.
 If she wasn't considering to stop the communication with him completely, she should. It's hard to maintain a wholesome image when you have such a base family.
ETA: @FreeSpirit71 , I'm surprised, too, that the comments are not moderated. I've recently read comments to an article about the one who shouldn't be mentioned in the ASkars thread, and the comments about her were moderated. The Daily Fail has very questionable standards for censorship, but, unfortunately, being DM it doesn't come as a big surprise.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I don't work myself into a pretzel . . . more like discernment . . . worked enough on cases to know that sometimes that diamond is not a natural diamond but a lab created one.  I don't believe in jumping onto the rah rah train . . . yet . . . like one well respected person said . . . content of character matters most.  Anyway MM is just trying too hard but who can blame her?  There is absolutely no chemistry with her and Prince Harry. That coming prince tho of a baby . . .


I want to preface this by saying I'm not a fan or defender of this woman....she's ok to me.
But I have to ask how would you know whether she has chemistry with her husband?  By looking at pictures?


----------



## doloresmia

bisousx said:


> It looks like she wrote it knowing her father would release it. While his and Samantha’s actions are as incredulous as usual. I don’t believe her narrative that he didn’t try to reach out. And who pens an actual letter these days? Too suspicious. While I don’t blame her for trying to spin it in her favor, her moves don’t come across as smooth and seamless. It’s way too obvious what she’s trying to do.



I hand write thank yous and letters that are more personal. Meghan happens to be a calligrapher and may prefer the pen.

consider Meghan lives in a country where tabloid press have hacked AND released emails, photos and voice mails. Oh, I guess US does too with Bezos and National Enquirer. 

With snail mail she only risked her father releasing.... which of course he did.

No idea on any of the players’ motivations. And as this is a gossip thread weighing in on the positive side with alternative views of the same events.

In any case looking forward to Morocco!


----------



## sdkitty

doloresmia said:


> I hand write thank yous and letters that are more personal. Meghan happens to be a calligrapher too and may prefer the pen.
> 
> consider Meghan lives in a country where tabloid press have hacked AND released emails, photos and voice mails. Oh, I guess US does too with the Bezos and National Enquirer.
> 
> With snail mail she only risked her father releasing.... which of course he did.


OT but since you mentioned it - the enquirer picked on the wrong guy - richest man in the world.  now they are being investigated and sued by him and the government.  Good.  Hope it costs them big.


----------



## doloresmia

sdkitty said:


> OT but since you mentioned it - the enquirer picked on the wrong guy - richest man in the world.  now they are being investigated and sued by him and the government.  Good.  Hope it costs them big.



Clearly they thought a man that rich would have an ego that couldn’t bear the embarrassment.... and that tactic has worked in the past

Honestly Bezos gets major points from me for standing up the way he did. Publishing the emails was a brilliant move.

As a former journalist I am disgusted. many more stories of how dirty the national enquirer is are coming out. Never be the end of tabloid, but hoping it is the end of the national enquirer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

doloresmia said:


> Clearly they thought a man that rich would have an ego that couldn’t bear the embarrassment.... and that tactic has worked in the past
> 
> Honestly Bezos gets major points from me for standing up the way he did. Publishing the emails was a brilliant move.
> 
> As a former journalist I am disgusted. many more stories of how dirty the national enquirer is are coming out. Never be the end of tabloid, but hoping it is the end of the national enquirer.


Now I believe they're being exposed as having a blackmail machine. Too bad for them they picked on someone who has the means to and the spine to do something about it.


----------



## kemilia

krissa said:


> Daddy dearest also sold the letter Meghan wrote after the wedding.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html


Just an asking--what is with those swoops over some of the letters? To make the handwriting look fancy? I've never seen that done before. 

And as for the letter itself--she had to know he would release it for all the world to see (for the right price).


----------



## Flatsy

I think she clearly wrote the letter knowing that it would likely be published, and it's very sad she's in that position.

Her handwriting is over the top ridiculous.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I think she clearly wrote the letter knowing that it would likely be published, and it's very sad she's in that position.
> 
> Her handwriting is over the top ridiculous.


IDK but I don't think I'd write anything personal if I thought it would be shown to the world.......she needs to keep her dignity intact.....just ignore the creepy family.


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> IDK but I don't think I'd write anything personal if I thought it would be shown to the world.......she needs to keep her dignity intact.....just ignore the creepy family.



Ignoring and not responding is probably the Palace’s advice, but it also leaves her hands tied. I don’t blame her at all for strategizing, but I wonder if she’ll get flack from her new family for this not so subtle move. She knew what to do to make her father freak out and release the letter. I know I’d have a way to handle unruly family members.


----------



## marthastoo

The best takeaway from the DM story is Meghan finally blocked her father's calls.  Good riddance.


----------



## prettyprincess

Every aspect of this makes me so sad!! I wish he would just stop what he’s doing and try to salvage their relationship in a real and meaningful way.
Logically, I know she’s better off without him, but the part of me that can’t imagine a life without my father wants them to work it out 
Imagine the devastation she’ll feel if something happens to him while they’re estranged.
Ugh, I just want to shake him and tell him to be a better man for his daughters sake!!!!


----------



## bisousx

prettyprincess said:


> Every aspect of this makes me so sad!! I wish he would just stop what he’s doing and try to salvage their relationship in a real and meaningful way.
> Logically, I know she’s better off without him, but the part of me that can’t imagine a life without my father wants them to work it out
> Imagine the devastation she’ll feel if something happens to him while they’re estranged.
> Ugh, I just want to shake him and tell him to be a better man for his daughters sake!!!!



He’s so fame and money hungry, it’s crazy to see a person act like a rabid animal when it comes to money. A little shocking to read a parent beg their child for a photo op. She must feel all types of ways, from humiliated to guilty to deeply saddened.


----------



## gazoo

Holy crap!

It does all seem calculated on her part, having the friends allude to a handwritten letter banking on Daddy releasing it in a knee jerk reaction. But I can't blame her for that since it must be very foreign to her to have to sit tight and not respond, which is the way of the Royals. The move does discredit him somewhat. And yet, it doesn't make her look great, since he's now showing text messages to refute her claims that he hasn't reached out to her. He even went so far as to call the number she claims she never changed, in the presence of the press and showing it doesn't work. The main thing that gives me pause is how pretentious she comes across with the handwriting. I know she used to sell her calligraphy skills back in the day, but writing to your dad that way just seems weird to me. Does she not write ANYTHING in regular handwriting? She's coming across contrived, with the mention of candles lit for guests in her friend's dishing to People, fancy handwriting on a personal letter, cooking meals every day, etc. All that level of detail perhaps meant with the intention of adding gravitas to the information from these "sources", just makes her look like she cares way too much about coming across just so, IMO.

If she's this much of a perfectionist, she must be in utter hell right now, with the circus that is her family, the press and public bashing. My first thought goes to what she will be like as a new mom, the new pressures she will put herself under. Ugh. Megan, try to relax a little bit. You got the Prince. Not everyone thinks you're awful. Most people can see how horribly you've been treated. Just relax a bit and let time ease things.

I think the more she tries to direct the narrative the worst things will get. I don't even want to think about what William is thinking about this new media circus. Things had been quiet from Thomas Markle. Now he's back, due largely in part to her. And frankly, William as the future King, is the big deal here, the one Harry and Megan will have to deal with (suck up to) for the rest of their lives. I really hope both couples can somehow be close and supportive of each other.


----------



## Lodpah

gazoo said:


> Holy crap!
> 
> It does all seem calculated on her part, having the friends allude to a handwritten letter banking on Daddy releasing it in a knee jerk reaction. But I can't blame her for that since it must be very foreign to her to have to sit tight and not respond, which is the way of the Royals. The move does discredit him somewhat. And yet, it doesn't make her look great, since he's now showing text messages to refute her claims that he hasn't reached out to her. He even went so far as to call the number she claims she never changed, in the presence of the press and showing it doesn't work. The main thing that gives me pause is how pretentious she comes across with the handwriting. I know she used to sell her calligraphy skills back in the day, but writing to your dad that way just seems weird to me. Does she not write ANYTHING in regular handwriting? She's coming across contrived, with the mention of candles lit for guests in her friend's dishing to People, fancy handwriting on a personal letter, cooking meals every day, etc. All that level of detail perhaps meant with the intention of adding gravitas to the information from these "sources", just makes her look like she cares way too much about coming across just so, IMO.
> 
> If she's this much of a perfectionist, she must be in utter hell right now, with the circus that is her family, the press and public bashing. My first thought goes to what she will be like as a new mom, the new pressures she will put herself under. Ugh. Megan, try to relax a little bit. You got the Prince. Not everyone thinks you're awful. Most people can see how horribly you've been treated. Just relax a bit and let time ease things.
> 
> I think the more she tries to direct the narrative the worst things will get. I don't even want to think about what William is thinking about this new media circus. Things had been quiet from Thomas Markle. Now he's back, due largely in part to her. And frankly, William as the future King, is the big deal here, the one Harry and Megan will have to deal with (suck up to) for the rest of their lives. I really hope both couples can somehow be close and supportive of each other.



I can't find the source right now but it was a legit paper where it says that MM was utterly upset that her child will not have the important title that Prince William and Kate's children will have.
Sorry MM you married a spare (a good spare if you will). Prince Harry seems to be the "down to earth" Prince and seems more in tune with the common folk. 

That coming prince tho.


----------



## Lodpah

prettyprincess said:


> Every aspect of this makes me so sad!! I wish he would just stop what he’s doing and try to salvage their relationship in a real and meaningful way.
> Logically, I know she’s better off without him, but the part of me that can’t imagine a life without my father wants them to work it out
> Imagine the devastation she’ll feel if something happens to him while they’re estranged.
> Ugh, I just want to shake him and tell him to be a better man for his daughters sake!!!!


I thought about that. Thomas Markle has these 2 daughters.  MM is complaining to him about the other daughter.  If you are a parent, can you choose between the two? No, no matter what a parent (at least on my part) you just can't. They are both adults and they can fix it if MM wants. But to be one-sided just because one happens to be in the public eye and in a "Royal" family, I'd say to them, work it out. 

Honestly if her family feels this way there must be a little truth to what to they say. The old adage of there's a little truth in a lie rings a bell here. 

Did her family act this way during her Suit's run?


----------



## lookingforlove

The Markle family drama is never-ending.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I want to preface this by saying I'm not a fan or defender of this woman....she's ok to me.
> But I have to ask how would you know whether she has chemistry with her husband?  By looking at pictures?


Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes. 

She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


----------



## lookingforlove

How does the Middleton family manages to be so peaceful and quiet, just the complete opposite of the Markle family?


----------



## PatsyCline

lookingforlove said:


> How does the Middleton family manages to be so peaceful and quiet, just the complete opposite of the Markle family?



Because they’re not money or fame hungry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Fally420

wonder what Harry thinks about her PR moves?


----------



## lookingforlove

I don't know why, but I like Harry's ex Chelsy Davy. She was a lawyer who's now a jewelry designer. Very independent and free spirited. They just seemed very playful with each other, and no drama. I wonder why things didn't work out between them? Maybe Harry likes drama? Maybe he's more into the damsel-in-distress type of women so he can be the "rescuer"? Who knows.


----------



## HeidiDavis

Her father is unbelievable. He cares more about how he is portrayed in the media than he does about healing his relationship with his daughter. It’s disgusting. I’m not a huge fan of Meghan’s, but I feel bad for her in this instance.  If Thomas Markle really wanted to reconcile, he wouldn’t expose personal letters to the press or request photo ops.  He has to know that these things are not going to help matters. His priorities are out of whack.

On another note, I wish Meghan hadn’t organized or allowed (not sure of her level of involvement) the interview with her friends in People mag. I know it must be frustrating to know that the media is churning out rumors and garbage about you, but I truly think the most dignified thing to do is to rise above it and say nothing. Trying to defend yourself always seems to backfire. She hasn’t done anything that she needs to explain or defend. People who like her already like her. People who dislike her will continue to do so. Her success in her role as time goes on is what will influence those who are undecided. Just my opinion.


----------



## Gal4Dior

lookingforlove said:


> I don't know why, but I like Harry's ex Chelsy Davy. She was a lawyer who's now a jewelry designer. Very independent and free spirited. They just seemed very playful with each other, and no drama. I wonder why things didn't work out between them? Maybe Harry likes drama? Maybe he's more into the damsel-in-distress type of women so he can be the "rescuer"? Who knows.



I for sure think he’s like that. No doubt trying to fix what he couldn’t with his mother. That’s very honorable to do so, although I’m not sure that’s the healthiest attitude. Meghan seems pretty fierce and savvy enough to protect herself, especially when she was single.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes.
> 
> She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


There are not enough eye-rolls in the universe...


----------



## Flatsy

gazoo said:


> The main thing that gives me pause is how pretentious she comes across with the handwriting. I know she used to sell her calligraphy skills back in the day, but writing to your dad that way just seems weird to me. Does she not write ANYTHING in regular handwriting? She's coming across contrived, with the mention of candles lit for guests in her friend's dishing to People, fancy handwriting on a personal letter, cooking meals every day, etc. All that level of detail perhaps meant with the intention of adding gravitas to the information from these "sources", just makes her look like she cares way too much about coming across just so, IMO.
> 
> If she's this much of a perfectionist, she must be in utter hell right now, with the circus that is her family, the press and public bashing. My first thought goes to what she will be like as a new mom, the new pressures she will put herself under. Ugh. Megan, try to relax a little bit. You got the Prince. Not everyone thinks you're awful. Most people can see how horribly you've been treated. Just relax a bit and let time ease things.


+1 to every word of this. 

I'm starting to wonder whether she and Harry are well-matched in a complementary way - i.e., she motivates him to be more serious about things and he helps her be more relaxed - or whether they are polar opposites who are completely mismatched.   The stories about Harry no longer being easygoing and charming but now being stressed out and high-maintenance when he's in Meghan's company?  Makes sense.


----------



## HeidiDavis

And yes, her handwriting is ridiculous. Lol.


----------



## marthastoo

Lodpah said:


> Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes.
> 
> She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


Um, ok.  That sounds so rational.


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> There are not enough eye-rolls in the universe...


Lol. No need for eye rolls.  You might end up like the girl in the Exorcist.  Not worth it if you ask me. Down the rabbit hole you go.


----------



## sdkitty

PatsyCline said:


> Because they’re not money or fame hungry.


it's called class....vs white trash


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> Lol. No need for eye rolls.  You might end up like the girl in the Exorcist.  Not worth it if you ask me. Down the rabbit hole you go.


Lol...I'm not the one "down the rabbit hole". There's legit things to be critical of when it comes to Meghan...the overspending on clothes,  the OTT nature of the People article (even though I think the time has come for her to be defended).

But she's "utterly evil", more than the Kardashians? Kim Kardashian is more spiritual?

Please.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan was a professional calligrapher when she was a struggling actress. Learning calligraphy likely helped her cultivate beautiful penmanship for her day to day writing. Serifs are probably natural for her especially if she uses a calligraphy pen.

I guess we can add “handwriting’s too perfect” to the list of non-stop & ridiculous criticisms being leveled at Meghan.

I hope she finally closes the door on her father.


----------



## lookingforlove

I might be the oddball, but I'm actually more interested in what's going on with Harry's ex Chelsy Davy than with Meghan.  If I had to choose between living Chelsy's life or Meghan's life, I would choose to be Chelsy. Women who marry up or marry for security/status are a dime a dozen. But to be able to walk away from it and make your own way in the world as a single woman, now that's refreshing. I'm clearly team Chelsy.


----------



## DeMonica

lookingforlove said:


> How does the Middleton family manages to be so peaceful and quiet, just the complete opposite of the Markle family?


IMO the question is the other way around: how can the Markles be so utterly trash? I do see chemistry and I'm sure it's there otherwise why Harry would have gone throught the pain of marrying her, especially with his family history. However: it's understandable if the BRF wasn't so keen on this union considering her family which had not looked too promising from the start. I wonder what they would have said to Harry if they had foreseen this tabloid war going on right now. 
Michael Middleton comes from a family which had been rich and without scandals for many generation. Carole comes from hard working, but ambitious working class family. Both of them seem to want the best for their children and not to jeopardize their future by acting like money and fame hungry village idiots as the Markles do.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I guess we can add “handwriting’s too perfect” to the list of non-stop & ridiculous criticisms being leveled at Meghan.


Yeah, only the likes of Joan of Arc has withstood such cruel persecution.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

gazoo said:


> The main thing that gives me pause is how pretentious she comes across with the handwriting. I know she used to sell her calligraphy skills back in the day, but writing to your dad that way just seems weird to me. Does she not write ANYTHING in regular handwriting? She's coming across contrived, with the mention of candles lit for guests in her friend's dishing to People, fancy handwriting on a personal letter, cooking meals every day, etc. All that level of detail perhaps meant with the intention of adding gravitas to the information from these "sources", just makes her look like she cares way too much about coming across just so, IMO.
> 
> If she's this much of a perfectionist, she must be in utter hell right now, with the circus that is her family, the press and public bashing. My first thought goes to what she will be like as a new mom, the new pressures she will put herself under. Ugh. Megan, try to relax a little bit. You got the Prince. Not everyone thinks you're awful. Most people can see how horribly you've been treated. Just relax a bit and let time ease things.


I'm not a fan of the flourishes in the handwritten note, but I did know someone who did calligraphy and her "normal" handwriting _was _calligraphic.  What's worse - dramatic swirls or big circle to dot i's?  (I work with someone in a managerial position who at age 35 dots her i's with giant circles.  I cringe every time I see her handwriting.  She, on the other hand, DGAF that her handwriting looks like a 12 YO girl wrote it).

While people see her efforts to be a good hostess or wife as calculated, it could be just the way she is.  She's been doing the lifestyle blogging a lot longer than she's been involved with Harry.  I did all those kinds of things described in the People article ... when I had no kids and time to do it.  I still cook homemade meals almost everyday.  And guess what?  Meghan's got no job (other than the PR stuff she does as a member of the BRF), no kids and a lot of time on her hands.  Let's see if she can keep it up over time.


----------



## baewatch

With Harry being a naturally sociable person, I wonder if he gets to see his friends much? and if he does would he be timed and checked up on while out? I'd say she has his every move monitored.


----------



## BagLovingMom

lookingforlove said:


> How does the Middleton family manages to be so peaceful and quiet, just the complete opposite of the Markle family?


Err except there’s Kate’s uncle Gary !
Here’s just one of a few ‘reported’ incidents. Agree the Markles have been redic tho !
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...kate-pippa-middletons-uncle-assault-wife/amp/


----------



## Sharont2305

lookingforlove said:


> I don't know why, but I like Harry's ex Chelsy Davy. She was a lawyer who's now a jewelry designer. Very independent and free spirited. They just seemed very playful with each other, and no drama. I wonder why things didn't work out between them?


To me, they were a perfect match but she didn't want that lifestyle. As his girlfriend of 7 years, she saw enough to realise it wasn't for her, especially after William and Catherine got engaged and the media circus that followed.
I really hope, for Meghan's sake that we won't be seeing another Camillagate in the future.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes.
> 
> She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


I'm going to say again, I'm not a big fan of hers.  But this is ridiculous.  Looking at pictures of her and coming to the conclusion that he is evil?  She may be a lot of things - possibly a perfectionist, possibly a social climber, etc.  But evil is a big word.


----------



## bisousx

baewatch said:


> With Harry being a naturally sociable person, I wonder if he gets to see his friends much? and if he does would he be timed and checked up on while out? I'd say she has his every move monitored.



I don't see this at all. He has the upper hand being a royal. If he does socialize less now, he may be choosing not to see his friends because he's tired of being criticized/laughed at by his friends over Markle family antics, and tired of the snooty gossip he must be sensing.


----------



## A1aGypsy

sdkitty said:


> I'm going to say again, I'm not a big fan of hers.  But this is ridiculous.  Looking at pictures of her and coming to the conclusion that he is evil?  She may be a lot of things - possibly a perfectionist, possibly a social climber, etc.  But evil is a big word.



It’s a bit disturbing actually.


----------



## gazoo

Perception is so funny. I feel they have really hot chemistry. I think that was the fundamental thing driving the mad rush to get married. To me they were crazy hot for each other when first introduced to the world. Way hotter than anything he had in the past. Again, JMO.

I really liked him with Chelsy as well, but they broke up quite a lot over the span of what, 7 years? I think Harry is a bit of a drama junkie and on some level prefers that to someone more constrained like Kate. And that's ok.


----------



## Tivo

lookingforlove said:


> I don't know why, but I like Harry's ex Chelsy Davy. She was a lawyer who's now a jewelry designer. Very independent and free spirited. They just seemed very playful with each other, and no drama. I wonder why things didn't work out between them? Maybe Harry likes drama? Maybe he's more into the damsel-in-distress type of women so he can be the "rescuer"? Who knows.


Funny how we can all perceive people so differently. I never thought much of Chelsey Davy. To me she seemed like a drunk and a party girl who probably embarrassed Harry frequently. Their breakup didn’t surprise me. A lawyer? HA!! For whom??? I would never hire her.


----------



## Lodpah

A1aGypsy said:


> It’s a bit disturbing actually.


Lol why? Because I’m not on the train that thinks she’s the best thing ever? I call it what it is. It’s my opinion. There is evil in this world.


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Lol...I'm not the one "down the rabbit hole". There's legit things to be critical of when it comes to Meghan...the overspending on clothes,  the OTT nature of the People article (even though I think the time has come for her to be defended).
> 
> But she's "utterly evil", more than the Kardashians? Kim Kardashian is more spiritual?
> 
> Please.


I meant that in jest about the Kim K. At least she’s honest in your face about being narcissistic and fake whore.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> I meant that in jest about the Kim K. At least she’s honest in your face about being narcissistic and fake whore.


So Meghan's a whore now? Wow. The hate runs deep.
.


----------



## Lodpah

If a man told a woman that she should not do this or that after marriage like MN has done to Harry we would be all over him. The fastest way to ruin a marriage is to do that exactly. First stop his hobbies, second isolate them from friends third I don’t know but she will come up with something.


----------



## HeidiDavis

Sorry, I still cannot get past Thomas Markle’s behavior. It boggles the mind. I’m trying to imagine my father forcing one of our painful disagreements to play out publicly.  As a parent, I couldn’t live with myself if I knew I was inflicting pain and humiliation like this on my own daughter through press leaks and tabloid interviews. It’s not normal. This just really bothers me and makes me sad.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> If a man told a woman that she should not do this or that after marriage like MN has done to Harry we would be all over him. The fastest way to ruin a marriage is to do that exactly. First stop his hobbies, second isolate them from friends third I don’t know but she will come up with something.


Some people really are the Daily Mail's target audience, believing every baiting headline.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Lol why? Because I’m not on the train that thinks she’s the best thing ever? I call it what it is. It’s my opinion. There is evil in this world.


I'm not on that train either
but what you're saying has no basis and is ridiculous


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> If a man told a woman that she should not do this or that after marriage like MN has done to Harry we would be all over him. The fastest way to ruin a marriage is to do that exactly. First stop his hobbies, second isolate them from friends third I don’t know but she will come up with something.


are you a troll just having fun with everyone here?


----------



## DeMonica

Lodpah said:


> I meant that in jest about the Kim K. At least she’s honest in your face about being narcissistic and fake whore.


I'd be trully interested in where KK declared herself being a narcissistic, fake whore. Narcissistic, fake whores rarely do that. However: everthing is possible and I'm not questioning your expertise on KK and the Klan.



Lodpah said:


> If a man told a woman that she should not do this or that after marriage like MN has done to Harry we would be all over him. The fastest way to ruin a marriage is to do that exactly. First stop his hobbies, second isolate them from friends third I don’t know but she will come up with something.


First of all, I'm no fly on any walls, but I have a feeling that you're not one, either. I don't think that any of us know exactly how  their relationship works, e.g. who makes the decisions within the family, but even if it happens to be Meghan: it takes two to tango. He's a grown man who can agree or disagree with his partner's request regarding his hobbies or socializing, but normally when people in a relatively new relationship, or in a new marriage, especially when they are expecting a baby, prefer to concentrate on each other, spend time together instead of going after their hobbies or spend endless nights with friends.
Now on the evil issue: Hitler was evil, so was Stalin or Charles Manson and many other more. Unfortunately, there are so many around. While Meghan may not be exactly Mother Theresa and might have her own motives, I doubt that she deserves such harsh judgement. I know it's your opinion and you're entitled to that, but, let's reserve that label for the ones who definitely proved their evil nature, not just label the ones whom we dislike for any reason.


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> So Meghan's a whore now? Wow. The hate runs deep.
> .


No, I never said that in context.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> I meant that in jest about the Kim K. At least she’s honest in your face about being narcissistic and fake whore.





Lodpah said:


> No, I never said that in context.


You used that term comparing Kim K to Meghan. Meaning you thought Meghan was one too but Kim was at least upfront about it.

But hey, spin it any way you want to.


----------



## shiba

Do we actually believe that Megan wrote that letter?


----------



## Lodpah

DeMonica said:


> I'd be trully interested in where KK declared herself being a narcissistic, fake whore. Narcissistic, fake whores rarely do that. However: everthing is possible and I'm not questioning your expertise on KK and the Klan.
> 
> 
> First of all, I'm no fly on any walls, but I have a feeling that you're not one, either. I don't think that any of us know exactly how  their relationship works, e.g. who makes the decisions within the family, but even if it happens to be Meghan: it takes two to tango. He's a grown man who can agree or disagree with his partner's request regarding his hobbies or socializing, but normally when people in a relatively new relationship, or in a new marriage, especially when they are expecting a baby, prefer to concentrate on each other, spend time together instead of going after their hobbies or spend endless nights with friends.
> Now on the evil issue: Hitler was evil, so was Stalin or Charles Manson and many other more. Unfortunately, there are so many around. While Meghan may not be exactly Mother Theresa and might have her own motives, I doubt that she deserves such harsh judgement. I know it's your opinion and you're entitled to that, but, let's reserve that label for the ones who definitely proved their evil nature, not just label the ones whom we dislike for any reason.


 You know what? I really tried to stifle the opinion that she was not evil but I can't help what I feel. I tend to be very spot on people and I tried to look at every angle and even tried to convince myself . . . oh no. . . blah blah . . . but the feeling is too strong. She may not manifest it now but there is something inherently evil about her and I can't quite let it go yet. There's some people who are straight up mean, whatever and I don't get that "feeling." MM on the other hand is different. By all means disregard what I have to say and even ignore it but my intuitions have been spot on.

Sure some people will try to laugh and I frankly don't care. My intuition is what I go by. 

That coming prince of a baby tho.
___________________________
*O*.*M*.*E*.*N.*


----------



## Lodpah

DeMonica said:


> I'd be trully interested in where KK declared herself being a narcissistic, fake whore. Narcissistic, fake whores rarely do that. However: everthing is possible and I'm not questioning your expertise on KK and the Klan.
> 
> 
> First of all, I'm no fly on any walls, but I have a feeling that you're not one, either. I don't think that any of us know exactly how  their relationship works, e.g. who makes the decisions within the family, but even if it happens to be Meghan: it takes two to tango. He's a grown man who can agree or disagree with his partner's request regarding his hobbies or socializing, but normally when people in a relatively new relationship, or in a new marriage, especially when they are expecting a baby, prefer to concentrate on each other, spend time together instead of going after their hobbies or spend endless nights with friends.
> Now on the evil issue: Hitler was evil, so was Stalin or Charles Manson and many other more. Unfortunately, there are so many around. While Meghan may not be exactly Mother Theresa and might have her own motives, I doubt that she deserves such harsh judgement. I know it's your opinion and you're entitled to that, but, let's reserve that label for the ones who definitely proved their evil nature, not just label the ones whom we dislike for any reason.


The what Klan? I'm not even white and even I know that the Klan are very bad people. Lol you throwing shade at a non-white, minority and ethnically oppressed person like me.


----------



## marthastoo

"I am a great judge of character by reading gossip rags and looking at photos."

Fabulous.


----------



## prettyprincess

Lodpah said:


> Lol why? Because I’m not on the train that thinks she’s the best thing ever? I call it what it is. It’s my opinion. There is evil in this world.


I guess I’m just a Stan because I dont see it at all. Can you give legitimate examples of what she’s done that makes her _sooo _horrible?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Oh boy.

The sign off O.M.E.N and "that coming prince of a baby tho"....

So, the child is the devil's spawn now?



I'm out. Gossip is gossip and not everyone agrees, but that's ridiculous.


----------



## Lodpah

marthastoo said:


> "I am a great judge of character by reading gossip rags and looking at photos."
> 
> Fabulous.


You're pretty smart if that's where you get All your info from.  At ease soldier, there's many different types of bees but are they all the same? I think not. 
Lol at your insinuating that gossip rags and looking at photos make one an expert.  Sigh!


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oh boy.
> 
> The sign off O.M.E.N and "that coming prince of a baby tho"....
> 
> So, the child is the devil's spawn now?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm out. Gossip is gossip and not everyone agrees, but that's ridiculous.


Yes her coming prince. You know what? Americans slumber too much. Americans think vanilla. There's a great big world out there and even tho I'm American by citizenship there is a great big world out there with many different lifestyles, cultures and so forth.  Go on, slumber away.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> You're pretty smart if that's where you get All your info from.  At ease soldier, there's many different types of bees but are they all the same? I think not.
> Lol at your insinuating that gossip rags and looking at photos make one an expert.  Sigh!


I think she is saying that your opinion comes from information gotten there....since you don't know these people personally at all but have such a strong "intuition"


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yup. Nothing disturbing about this at all. No-thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lodpah said:


> Yes her coming prince. You know what? Americans slumber too much. Americans think vanilla. There's a great big world out there and even tho I'm American by citizenship there is a great big world out there with many different lifestyles, cultures and so forth.  Go on, slumber away.









I'm not American, and just because I don't believe in tinfoil hat, conspiracy theories about the Anti-Christ and the BRF, doesn't make me asleep.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Lodpah said:


> Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes.
> 
> She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


Her eyes are dark therefore she's evil? Where's the connection between her color and her moral compass? 

You should really just stop now. This thread has Meghan fans and anti-fans, but no one wants to read your unhinged ramblings.


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not American, and just because I don't believe in tinfoil hat, conspiracy theories about the Anti-Christ and the BRF, doesn't make me asleep.


Sigh! Ask any attorney what charges are on a complaint, especially on RICO charges.  Conspiracy is taken way too out of context.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Sigh! Ask any attorney what charges are on a complaint, especially on RICO charges.  Conspiracy is taken way too out of context.


what?


----------



## Lodpah

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Her eyes are dark therefore she's evil? Where's the connection between her color and her moral compass?
> 
> You should really just stop now. This thread has Meghan fans and anti-fans, but no one wants to read your unhinged ramblings.


Yes, I am agreeing with you. Some things are too dark and too deep for people to understand. Idle away,


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Lodpah said:


> Yes, I am agreeing with you. Some things are too dark and too deep for people to understand. Idle away,


I have never and likely won't ever agree with anything you say. I was rephrasing your words as a question to point out how ridiculous your statement is. Which, apparently, was too deep for you to understand…


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Yeah, only the likes of Joan of Arc has withstood such cruel persecution.



Lol! [emoji23] Truly!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Soooo, Monaco you say? Such a glamorous place....


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> what?


We’re definitely being trolled by Samantha Markle, and it seems that she’s high af.


----------



## Hobbsy

Flatsy said:


> I think she clearly wrote the letter knowing that it would likely be published, and it's very sad she's in that position.
> 
> Her handwriting is over the top ridiculous.


Lol @ her handwriting being ridiculous! Omg, smh!


----------



## Hobbsy

Lodpah said:


> I don't work myself into a pretzel . . . more like discernment . . . worked enough on cases to know that sometimes that diamond is not a natural diamond but a lab created one.  I don't believe in jumping onto the rah rah train . . . yet . . . like one well respected person said . . . content of character matters most.  Anyway MM is just trying too hard but who can blame her?  There is absolutely no chemistry with her and Prince Harry. That coming prince tho of a baby . . .


No chemistry between them? Why do you say that?


----------



## Hobbsy

Lodpah said:


> Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes.
> 
> She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


Lol @ utterly evil!


----------



## Hobbsy

Lodpah said:


> I meant that in jest about the Kim K. At least she’s honest in your face about being narcissistic and fake whore.


What are you smoking?!!!


----------



## Addicted to bags

prettyprincess said:


> We’re definitely being trolled by Samantha Markle, and it seems that she’s high af.


*This!


----------



## VickyB

Double post.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

Double post.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think she's due end of March.


----------



## VickyB

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think she's due end of March.


Really? I thought it was mid-late April?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

VickyB said:


> Really? I thought it was mid-late April?



Well...she said she was six months along, but she could have been at the beginning of the six month, _or_ at the end.  I think she was at the end of the six month making her further along, but that's just my opinion


----------



## baewatch

Lodpah said:


> No, I never said that in context.


don't mind people who can't understand opinions different to their own


----------



## anitalilac

PatsyCline said:


> Because they’re not money or fame hungry.


yes they are, just quietly.


----------



## gelbergirl

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Well...she said she was six months along, but she could have been at the beginning of the six month, _or_ at the end.  I think she was at the end of the six month making her further along, but that's just my opinion



I'll be excited to hear when the streets are closed off near the hospital wing!


----------



## DeMonica

Lodpah said:


> You know what? I really tried to stifle the opinion that she was not evil but I can't help what I feel. I tend to be very spot on people and I tried to look at every angle and even tried to convince myself . . . oh no. . . blah blah . . . *but the feeling is too strong.* *She may not manifest it now but there is something inherently evil about her and I can't quite let it go yet. *There's some people who are straight up mean, whatever and I don't get that "feeling." MM on the other hand is different. By all means disregard what I have to say and even ignore it but *my intuitions have been spot on.*
> 
> Sure some people will try to laugh and I frankly don't care. My intuition is what I go by.
> 
> That coming prince of a baby tho.
> ___________________________
> *O*.*M*.*E*.*N.*


 What is it? A bad horror movie?  Halloween is long gone and not coming back any time soon. 
Albeit let's say I agree with your opinion - which I don't - it wouldn't be like letting a fox in the chicken coop. Some members of the BRF are not exactly innocent flowers (See. Diana's accident or the adventures of Randy Andy). I don't think that you have to be "evil" (I just hate this term used without solid evidence) or even mean to marry into that family but you have to be pretty strong and determined to survive  among those people and to stand these kind of evil comments thrown at you constantly. 



Lodpah said:


> The what Klan? I'm not even white and even I know that the Klan are very bad people. Lol you throwing shade at a non-white, minority and ethnically oppressed person like me.


Kim (although it could be Khloe or any other K named sister) Kardashian's Klan and you know that, too. You just realized that the majority of posters strongly disagree with what you said that's why you're coming back with accusations which are just as groundless as your theory about Meghan's evil character.


----------



## myown

lookingforlove said:


> I don't know why, but I like Harry's ex Chelsy Davy. She was a lawyer who's now a jewelry designer. Very independent and free spirited. They just seemed very playful with each other, and no drama. I wonder why things didn't work out between them? Maybe Harry likes drama? Maybe he's more into the damsel-in-distress type of women so he can be the "rescuer"? Who knows.


she didn't wanted to marry into the BRF


----------



## cafecreme15

Tivo said:


> Funny how we can all perceive people so differently. I never thought much of Chelsey Davy. To me she seemed like a drunk and a party girl who probably embarrassed Harry frequently. Their breakup didn’t surprise me. A lawyer? HA!! For whom??? I would never hire her.



She actually worked for one of the most prestigious law firms in London and the entire world. I give her a lot of credit for being able to walk away from a fairytale life being handed to her on a silver platter - it takes a very strong woman who knows herself to be able to do that.


----------



## daisychainz

shiba said:


> Do we actually believe that Megan wrote that letter?


No. Unless the palace issues a statement to confirm it as authentic. I believe it's phony. And the 5 anonymous friends who gave some interview to a magazine... that's bizarre, too. Fake/manufactured news.


----------



## TMA

cafecreme15 said:


> She actually worked for one of the most prestigious law firms in London and the entire world. I give her a lot of credit for being able to walk away from a fairytale life being handed to her on a silver platter - it takes a very strong woman who knows herself to be able to do that.



Did Harry ever propose to her and she turned him down? Can’t recall hearing that.


----------



## gazoo

Chelsy was born into an ultra connected/wealthy family. If she'd have been a normal working class girl, then her walking away would be more impressive to me. Don't get me wrong, I think she's quite smart to have walked away. She has always had all the perks of crazy rich privilege, so I feel it would totally have been a downgrade to have to live life in the BRF, with all its fishbowl scrutiny, rules and rituals. Honestly, I don't think Harry could have offered her a better life than what she already had/has. They were never engaged. I think he may have wanted to marry her, but she wasn't interested.

Harry really pivoted when he started things with Megan, the only independently self made woman he's ever been linked to.


----------



## bisousx

Harry and Chelsy were the epitome of young love, the rich and royal version. I thought she was adorable but too bad they split.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> The what Klan? I'm not even white and even I know that the Klan are very bad people. Lol you throwing shade at a non-white, minority and ethnically oppressed person like me.


you keep bringing up your race/national origin ......so if people don't agree with you it's because of your ethnic origin (even tho we don't know what that is)?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

cafecreme15 said:


> She actually worked for one of the most prestigious law firms in London and the entire world. I give her a lot of credit for being able to walk away from a fairytale life being handed to her on a silver platter - it takes a very strong woman who knows herself to be able to do that.


One's fairytale life is a nightmare to someone else. I'm not surprised that she preferred being simply rich and free to live her life as someone's plus one under constant scrutiny of the press. Plus, they were both very young  when dating and just grew apart. It happens. IMO she made a good decision.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m sorry you all. It was not right to judge someone evil. My apologies to all.


----------



## rose60610

So how soon does anyone think baby #2 will be coming along? My guess, the kids will be 11-13 months apart.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

rose60610 said:


> So how soon does anyone think baby #2 will be coming along? My guess, the kids will be 11-13 months apart.


They seem to me like they would love a big family! I wonder if they will adopt like Brangelina. Is the royal family "allowed" to adopt? I think it's a very honorable and admirable thing to adopt, but the royal aspect seems like it would complicate things. I'm American and don't know much about the BRF so I'm just speculating!


----------



## shiba

daisychainz said:


> No. Unless the palace issues a statement to confirm it as authentic. I believe it's phony. And the 5 anonymous friends who gave some interview to a magazine... that's bizarre, too. Fake/manufactured news.



whew, I thought I was the only one that thought this looked completely contrived. Both look media manufactured and Daddy is going along with it


----------



## berrydiva

You leave this thread for 5 minutes and . I don't even want to go back anymore pages because I'm not sure what I just read. lol. I'm sure she looks lovely in whatever the last pic posted was.


----------



## Morgan R

daisychainz said:


> No. Unless the palace issues a statement to confirm it as authentic. I believe it's phony. And the 5 anonymous friends who gave some interview to a magazine... that's bizarre, too. Fake/manufactured news.





shiba said:


> whew, I thought I was the only one that thought this looked completely contrived. Both look media manufactured and Daddy is going along with it



Meghan wrote the letter (her writing is available to see online) and the 5 anonymous friends giving the interview isn't bizarre it is royal PR. It is clear that the People article was sanctioned with the backing of multiple members of the royal family I don't know why some the past few pages (not both of you) are acting as if it was solely just Meghan's decision or without royal family members knowledge (Actually I do... some have made it no secret they think everything Meghan does is "Hollywood" and the article to them feels like "Hollywood PR"). The People article screamed Royal PR to me (especially when it is known how often the royals have used People magazine to release stories in the past and just last year People was involved with a British Royal Family television special that included close friends of the royals and current as well as former royal staff).

Like I said in an earlier posts in this thread the People article reminds me of the Vanity Fair interview Meghan did that some thought was attention seeking on Meghan's part but it was clear at the time to many that the Vanity Fair interview was sanctioned by the royal family to better introduce Meghan because in the coming months an engagement was going to be announced and sure enough there was in fact a role out of events and stories that happened leading up to the engagement  being announced which was a little less than 3 months after the Vanity Fair article (Harry and Meghan attended his foundation Invictus Games where they made their first official appearance together though paparazzi had captured them before, then October 2017 was filled with stories about how Harry and Meghan were having meetings with Queen Elizabeth II, confirmation that Meghan had filmed her last scenes of Suits in mid-November 2017, and then a week before the engagement  was announced it was reported that Meghan had moved out of her Toronto house).

Thomas releasing the letter one of the friends purposefully made the point  to mention in the People article is Thomas "taking the bait" and falling for one of the Royals PR moves and actually helps give validation to the People article. Thomas leaking the letter can actually cause legal ramification for him and the Daily Fail. Under UK law, Meghan owns the copyright of the handwritten letter (though Thomas has sold pictures and notes from Meghan before at the time she wrote the notes and was in the pictures it was years before she was a member of the royal family).  An article released  today made note (even though the information was known) of how royals have taken legal action on numerous occasions in recent history to prevent the publication of personal details and have sued for breach of copyright (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...ed-letter-duchess-sussex-could-provoke-legal/). In 2006, the Prince Charles won a privacy case after the court of appeal ruled the Mail on Sunday had infringed his copyright and confidentiality by publishing extracts from his 1997 Hong Kong diaries. In the 1980s, the Sun made a payment to charity and apologized for publishing a letter from the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh about Prince Edward’s decision to leave the Royal Marines. In 1993, the paper settled a breach of copyright case over a leaked copy of the Christmas speech with a payment to charity.


Thomas has shown he will sell information. Doesn't matter if Meghan would've called him (calls can be recorded), texted him (you can get copies of text), sent e-mails (emails can be printed), or sent a letter (which can and in this case were copied then printed) because he has shown he will sell information on Meghan. Thomas giving an interview that accompanies Meghan's letter he sold and also brought up what he said in his return letter to Meghan and in separate letter to Doria doesn't "clear his name" nor does it make Meghan look bad in my opinion it just makes him look worse than people already perceived him.

All Meghan's letter does in my opinion is show that Thomas has been lying about things he had mentioned in his many interviews he has given about Meghan. Thomas is on record of saying multiple times that Meghan hadn't tried to contact him since after the wedding last May. The letter is dated "August 2018" so that shows Meghan was still trying to contact him and also shows she was still trying to contact him even though he said so many negative many things about not only herself and Harry but he also brought up Doria, Diana, and members of the Royal Family. Thomas has continuously mentioned in his various interviews how Meghan never helped him financially but in Meghan's letter she mentions she has. In Thomas letter back to Meghan that he willing sold he admits Meghan gave him "a couple grand here and there". Thomas provided information from the letter he sent back to Meghan and he makes mention that she, Harry, and him should have a "photo op" (which basically comes across as him wanting a picture with them to make him seem credible for so more outlets will approach him/so he can make even more money off of Meghan). The simple fact that he continues to do interviews with same few (but major) outlets pretty much confirms he is getting paid by them and a picture oh him with Meghan and Harry would've been a "gold mind" for him and like would've had more outlets reach out to him. Meghan didn't address her sister by name (refers to her as "your other daughter) in the letter but essentially said her and Samantha didn't really have a sibling relationship due to their age difference. Samantha has literally said Meghan and her haven't ever had a close relationship yet many outlets gave her a platform to talk about Meghan.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at England vs France rugby match at Twickenham Stadium


----------



## bisousx

^ Interesting post. I hope it would be true that the Royal Family sanctioned the People article... she needs her new family in her corner. Poor thing. It's a sh$tty position to be in.


----------



## MarieCurie

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Very Sharon Stone at the Oscars in '98.  It would have looked better tied over the skirt IMO.
> 
> There's no way that People article wasn't sanctioned by the BRF and the sources would be legit.  Can you blame them for wanting to be anonymous?  They would get knifed by commentary on places like the DailyMail etc if their identities were known.
> 
> The article is a bit OTT but seriously she can't win. I think it's true that she tried to smooth things over with her father, and that he showed himself to be the narcissist he is.  At that point there's no reasoning with him, he's too toxic for her and she has a new baby to think about.



What stands out the most for me is that when the smear campaign against Meghan was being spread by anonymous sources people didn't mind but suddenly anonymous sources are problematic.


----------



## MarieCurie

lookingforlove said:


> I might be the oddball, but I'm actually more interested in what's going on with Harry's ex Chelsy Davy than with Meghan.  If I had to choose between living Chelsy's life or Meghan's life, I would choose to be Chelsy. Women who marry up or marry for security/status are a dime a dozen. But to be able to walk away from it and make your own way in the world as a single woman, now that's refreshing. I'm clearly team Chelsy.



You can start a thread where we can discuss all things Chelsy Davy


----------



## prettyprincess

berrydiva said:


> You leave this thread for 5 minutes and . I don't even want to go back anymore pages because I'm not sure what I just read. lol. I'm sure she looks lovely in whatever the last pic posted was.


Haha!! That about sums up the last few pages.


----------



## daisychainz

MarieCurie said:


> What stands out the most for me is that when the smear campaign against Meghan was being spread by anonymous sources people didn't mind but suddenly anonymous sources are problematic.


That is why I dislike 'anonymous' sources for everything. If someone won't put their name to something, why even mention it. The same anonymous friends who support her can also be the anonymous friends feeding negative information to the media too. Or, it can all be phony and made up. "Sources" can be completely made up by reporters, it happens all the time, and by big names.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think the fact that her dad told her to fake it for one photo speaks volumes. 

I feel so badly for her. To have family drama and to feel disconnected from your family is bad enough but to have it played out on the world stage with conservative in-laws to boot, that is really awful.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending gala performance of ‘The Wider Earth’ at the Natural History Museum


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Her belly has gotten considerably larger and more round since the last time we've seen her out and about. She looks lovely.


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> Attending gala performance of ‘The Wider Earth’ at the Natural History Museum
> 
> View attachment 4339383
> View attachment 4339380
> View attachment 4339381
> View attachment 4339382
> View attachment 4339384


Hmmm, it's hard to believe that she has more than two months to go from now judging by the size and shape of her bump. I know that every pregnancy is different and according to Prince Harry it's a really big baby, but still....


----------



## Encore Hermes

I love how engaging with people she is, starts with the eye contact.


----------



## prettyprincess

Morgan R said:


> Attending gala performance of ‘The Wider Earth’ at the Natural History Museum
> 
> View attachment 4339383
> View attachment 4339380
> View attachment 4339381
> View attachment 4339382
> View attachment 4339384
> View attachment 4339428
> View attachment 4339432
> View attachment 4339436


Simply gorgeous!!


----------



## myown

TMA said:


> Did Harry ever propose to her and she turned him down? Can’t recall hearing that.


wasnt there a interview, where she said she didnt want to marry into the BRF? talking about marriage and walking away is kinda the same to me like turning down a propose.


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> wasnt there a interview, where she said she didnt want to marry into the BRF? talking about marriage and walking away is kinda the same to me like turning down a propose.


not necessarily IMO....it's possible she said that after they had broken up and he never asked her


----------



## Tivo

When I think of Chelsy Davy this is what I remember. Wife material? Sure Jan.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> When I think of Chelsy Davy this is what I remember. Wife material? Sure Jan.


But harry was a party boy back then too


----------



## cafecreme15

I also feel like early 'aughts fashion just makes every picture look so much worse.


----------



## Fally420

sdkitty said:


> But harry was a party boy back then too



Chelsy grew up too.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

She looks cute smiley and fun? The horror! 
It was very clear she did not want to sit silently smiling in her nude panty hose. I don't blame her one bit. It has its perks but it is not an easy life Meghan or Kate have chosen.



sdkitty said:


> But harry was a party boy back then too



Harry was dressing up as a Nazi to party back then. Man have they straightened him out.


----------



## LittleStar88

Don't forget Harry playing pool naked in Vegas


----------



## Tivo

Some are trying to paint Chelsy as a more suitable match for Harry, but that just isn’t what I remember.


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> But harry was a party boy back then too



I think you're missing the point...only a few pages back people on here were commenting about how much of a "classy businesswoman" Chelsy was and basically insinuating that she somehow is/was more marriage material than Meghan...I gotta laugh.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> I think you're missing the point...only a few pages back people on here were commenting about how much of a "classy businesswoman" Chelsy was and basically insinuating that she somehow is/was more marriage material than Meghan...I gotta laugh.


I get that....but these photos were from years ago.  If she's an attorney now, she probably does present as a "classy businesswoman".......Harry married who he wanted to marry.   I imagine he was attracted to her as a woman but also liked her activism.  
Nothing to do with Chelsey IMO.....doesn't mean she isn't classy or marriage material if you look at her now
I realize when she was with Harry she wasn't an attorney but he also was a lot different than he is now


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending reception in support of Try for Change and the Jonny Wilkinson Foundation


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm so glad I grew up in an age where age-appropriate shenanigans and finding yourself weren't documented for later use and commentary on your character as an adult in your 30's.


----------



## VickyB

LittleStar88 said:


> Don't forget Harry playing pool naked in Vegas



That was hilarious! I must admit that I did sometimes get a kick out of Harry behaving badly.

And this white dress that Meghan wore. The fit is atrocious. I just don't get it.


----------



## bisousx

Harry clearly was OK with Chelsy as a person, they were together for years! They always looked like they were having fun and being wild young things together. If he thought she was a silly party girl, he wouldn’t have brought her around the Queen and the family as much as he did - and def would not have invited her to his wedding.


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> not necessarily IMO....it's possible she said that after they had broken up and he never asked her


true. I was more like they both talked about their future together and she decided that this is not what she wanted


----------



## chicaloca

Fanshipping Harry with his blonde white girlfriend from a decade ago doesn’t do much to help dispel the racist undertones in the attacks on Meghan. 

Harry is with the woman he wants and clearly adores Meghan.


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> I'm going to say again, I'm not a big fan of hers.  But this is ridiculous.  Looking at pictures of her and coming to the conclusion that he is evil?  She may be a lot of things - possibly a perfectionist, possibly a social climber, etc.  But evil is a big word.




Girl they are really doing the most!  Her eyes are too dark which makes her look evil!? SMH  anything other than saying what they really don’t like about her!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry (who is Captain General of the Royal Marines) visiting Bardufoss Air Force Base on the 50th anniversary of Exercise Clockwork, the Arctic warfare training exercise.


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry (who is Captain General of the Royal Marines) visiting Bardufoss Air Force Base on the 50th anniversary of Operation Clockwork, the Arctic warfare training exercise.
> 
> View attachment 4341307
> View attachment 4341306
> View attachment 4341296
> View attachment 4341321
> View attachment 4341295
> View attachment 4341299
> View attachment 4341322
> View attachment 4341298
> View attachment 4341320



You can just tell he is completely in his element here!


----------



## myown

cafecreme15 said:


> You can just tell he is completely in his element here!


I was just about to say the same!
he looks so happy and pleased


----------



## bisbee

Lodpah said:


> Maybe I should have said "don't seem" to have chemistry. To me, they just don't. I see Harry with a fun-loving, not so serious but at the same time with a woman who can handle herself with poise, grace and dignity.  Megan just seems so plastic, contriving and that shiny face of hers reminds me that movie with a woman who seems to have it all but underneath is a rage that is simmering until it explodes.
> 
> She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it.  I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM.


I have no words to respond to this diatribe of hatred.


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures and video from Prince Harry (who is Captain General of the Royal Marines) visiting Bardufoss Air Force Base on the 50th anniversary of Exercise Clockwork, the Arctic warfare training exercise.


----------



## minababe

Pessie said:


> Nice touch if you’re a waitress.  But she’s attending these events as a member of the royal family, on behalf of the Queen as head of state - not as Meghan Markle showbiz personality.


lol the Palace liked this. they wouldn't show it when they don't like that. but they picked These Pictures, of the bananas in their feed. so what?
I don't get why People always act like the know more about protocoll and how to be a s a royal that the royal herself ... the People doing it and press too . so ridiculous


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Harry clearly was OK with Chelsy as a person, they were together for years! They always looked like they were having fun and being wild young things together. If he thought she was a silly party girl, he wouldn’t have brought her around the Queen and the family as much as he did - and def would not have invited her to his wedding.


I think timing is very key in relationships.  She may have been a good match for him but they weren't ready.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

bag-princess said:


> Girl they are really doing the most!  Her eyes are too dark which makes her look evil!? SMH  anything other than saying what they really don’t like about her!



I leave the thread for a few weeks, log back in and saw that comment you mention. So now dark eyes make one evil, huh? That poster better stay away from me then, mine are almost black


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

I really liked this thread but here are so many strange People at the Moment .. full of hate .. I don't know how poor their lifes must be but some People really Need help ..

why spend so much time here to spread bad vibes, hate and envy. it's really disturbing how some women think about other People especially women. please leave this thread for the People who enjoy Harry and Meghan. Allow them their happiness and love.


----------



## berrydiva

bisbee said:


> I have no words to respond to this diatribe of hatred.


I left the thread for a few day and tried to start reading from where I left off and I was NOT expecting that at all


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> I left the thread for a few day and tried to start reading from where I left off and I was NOT expecting that at all


that person posted many nasty hateful remarks....then apologized and went away


----------



## Bag*Snob

I love the pic of Harry in the snow fort.


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> that person posted many nasty hateful remarks....then apologized and went away


very strange...I think I caught most of the posts before deletions happened.


----------



## PatsyCline

minababe said:


> I really liked this thread but here are so many strange People at the Moment .. full of hate .. I don't know how poor their lifes must be but some People really Need help ..
> 
> why spend so much time here to spread bad vibes, hate and envy. it's really disturbing how some women think about other People especially women. please leave this thread for the People who enjoy Harry and Meghan. Allow them their happiness and love.



I use the block feature on those people. They criticize everything she does, there’s no pleasing them.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

Poor Meghan, I hope she never gets online and reads the comments. People are absolutely hateful towards her. The comments on DM are terrifying. How can one hate another person so much? I get most are keyboard warriors, but the sheer amount of (racist) vitriol she garners is downright scary.


----------



## cafecreme15

Babydoll Chanel said:


> Poor Meghan, I hope she never gets online and reads the comments. People are absolutely hateful towards her. The comments on DM are terrifying. How can one hate another person so much? I get most are keyboard warriors, but the sheer amount of (racist) vitriol she garners is downright scary.


I think so much of the hate directed at Meghan comes from pure jealousy, It just rankles people that, in their minds, a bi-racial B-list actress snagged the most eligible bachelor in the world. Heck, I am a little jealous that she gets to lead this seemingly picture perfect existence, and I have a pretty darn good life of my own! However, there is legitimate criticism (e.g. she should get a better stylist and work with a tailor, she is spending profligately on clothes which is insensitive to economic realities of most citizens), then there is just downright hate and racist dog whistles disguised as legitimate criticism (e.g. she breached protocol AGAIN by looking "different" from everyone else), and then there are just people who have gone off the total deep-end. People in the latter two categories need to concentrate on improving their own lives and their own happiness before taking out their frustration on a complete stranger, about whom, despite the endless gossip rags, they know nothing.


----------



## bisousx

Shallow gossip aside, I hope Meghan can use her new position to help others by influencing her new family first. I just learned about the story of poor Princess Latifa of Dubai. Her father is friends with Queen Elizabeth. Wonder how/if Meghan feels about that horrid situation, and if she has any right to express her opinion in private with the Queen. If she can't... the censorship of royal life must be killing her.


----------



## cafecreme15

bisousx said:


> Shallow gossip aside, I hope Meghan can use her new position to help others by influencing her new family first. I just learned about the story of poor Princess Latifa of Dubai. Her father is friends with Queen Elizabeth. Wonder how/if Meghan feels about that horrid situation, and if she has any right to express her opinion in private with the Queen. If she can't... the censorship of royal life must be killing her.


It is truly a horrid situation. Though I would not be surprised if Meghan were prohibited from speaking out due it being a potentially politically sensitive situation. It would seem that making a broad appeal for people to respect human rights is not political, but singling out a country or individual for not respecting them is. I hope Meghan (or anyone in a position of power) can work behind the scenes to ensure Latifah's safety.


----------



## A1aGypsy

sdkitty said:


> that person posted many nasty hateful remarks....then apologized and went away



It’s really odd because she (he?) apologized but, if you go back, she / he posted horrible things at the time of the wedding in this thread as well.

I’ll never figure out what motivates some people...


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> It’s really odd because she (he?) apologized but, if you go back, she / he posted horrible things at the time of the wedding in this thread as well.
> 
> I’ll never figure out what motivates some people...


I didn't even realize her comments were deleted.  Not surprised because they were hateful and she was very much stirring the pot.  But not political or overtly racial.  So not sure exactly what rule was broken.


----------



## DeMonica

bisousx said:


> Shallow gossip aside, I hope Meghan can use her new position to help others by influencing her new family first. I just learned about the story of poor Princess Latifa of Dubai. Her father is friends with Queen Elizabeth. Wonder how/if Meghan feels about that horrid situation, and if she has any right to express her opinion in private with the Queen. If she can't... the censorship of royal life must be killing her.


It's an awful situation. IMO any woman with morals would feel compassionate when she reads the Princess' story. I don't know how much influence Meghan or even the Queen has in this situation, but considering that Princess Latifah's sister was practically kidnapped in the UK ... it doesn't look too promising. Unfortunately, the BRF also had a few skeletons in closet when it comes to the unfair treatment of family members, See the story of the Queens mentally disabled first  cousins.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

sdkitty said:


> I didn't even realize her comments were deleted.  Not surprised because they were hateful and she was very much stirring the pot.  But not political or overtly racial.  So not sure exactly what rule was broken.


Probably because they were so OTT, that whoever deleted them deemed them as trolling. Which would feel pretty accurate if they weren't so darn insistent


----------



## Aimee3

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Probably because they were so OTT, that whoever deleted them deemed them as trolling. Which would feel pretty accurate if they weren't so darn insistent



Sofa king!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

minababe said:


> lol the Palace liked this. they wouldn't show it when they don't like that. but they picked These Pictures, of the bananas in their feed. so what?
> I don't get why People always act like the know more about protocoll and how to be a s a royal that the royal herself ... the People doing it and press too . so ridiculous




like i said they are doing theeee utmost - won't come out and say why they really don't like her and the fact that she IS a member of the royal family so they pick apart the most asinine and minute aspects of anything about her.  the "her dark eyes make her look evil" takes the cake though!


----------



## paper_flowers

HeidiDavis said:


> Sorry, I still cannot get past Thomas Markle’s behavior. It boggles the mind. I’m trying to imagine my father forcing one of our painful disagreements to play out publicly.  As a parent, I couldn’t live with myself if I knew I was inflicting pain and humiliation like this on my own daughter through press leaks and tabloid interviews. It’s not normal. This just really bothers me and makes me sad.


I totally agree 

I’m about 400 pages too late to this thread, but I just can’t understand what the hell is going on. Like, WHY?? Why is her dad and her sister doing this? This is absolutely humiliating. I feel so bad for Meghan. I wish they’d just let them live in peace, like she said in her letter. Her sister seems seriously deranged


----------



## HeidiDavis

cafecreme15 said:


> I think so much of the hate directed at Meghan comes from pure jealousy, It just rankles people that, in their minds, a bi-racial B-list actress snagged the most eligible bachelor in the world. Heck, I am a little jealous that she gets to lead this seemingly picture perfect existence, and I have a pretty darn good life of my own! However, there is legitimate criticism (e.g. she should get a better stylist and work with a tailor, she is spending profligately on clothes which is insensitive to economic realities of most citizens), then there is just downright hate and racist dog whistles disguised as legitimate criticism (e.g. she breached protocol AGAIN by looking "different" from everyone else), and then there are just people who have gone off the total deep-end. People in the latter two categories need to concentrate on improving their own lives and their own happiness before taking out their frustration on a complete stranger, about whom, despite the endless gossip rags, they know nothing.




I think you are right about much of the hate stemming from jealousy. The funny thing is that I would never ever want her life. Don’t get me wrong, the wealth and privilege would be enjoyable. But the cost is too great, at least for me. I would feel like my life wasn’t my own. Maybe it’s because I’m super private, but I wouldn’t want to have my every move scrutinized and photographed. Even if the press only said glowing things about me and never criticized me (which is unrealistic anyway), I would find it all intrusive and oppressive. I think it takes a certain kind of personality to accept and agree to all that. More power to gals like Meghan and Kate for being up to the challenge! I’m content with my relative impoverishment and anonymity. Lol. But maybe I’m just weird.


----------



## HeidiDavis

paper_flowers said:


> I totally agree
> 
> I’m about 400 pages too late to this thread, but I just can’t understand what the hell is going on. Like, WHY?? Why is her dad and her sister doing this? This is absolutely humiliating. I feel so bad for Meghan. I wish they’d just let them live in peace, like she said in her letter. Her sister seems seriously deranged




Yes! Both Thomas and Samantha Markle seem hell-bent on getting their respective ‘15 minutes of fame’ out of Meghan’s new role in the BRF.  And they seem to think negative attention is better than no attention at all. They’re repulsive.


----------



## sdkitty

HeidiDavis said:


> Yes! Both Thomas and Samantha Markle seem hell-bent on getting their respective ‘15 minutes of fame’ out of Meghan’s new role in the BRF.  And they seem to think negative attention is better than no attention at all. They’re repulsive.


yes, and I guess they're getting some money out of it


----------



## HeidiDavis

sdkitty said:


> yes, and I guess they're getting some money out of it




Yes! You’re right! I forgot about Samantha Markle’s tell-all and the other paid interviews, etc. That makes them even more disgusting.


----------



## sdkitty

HeidiDavis said:


> Yes! You’re right! I forgot about Samantha Markle’s tell-all and the other paid interviews, etc. That makes them even more disgusting.


money and jealousy together - recipe for disaster


----------



## berrydiva

The Markle side of her family is just disgusting. I don't hear a peep out of her mother's side. It's just really sad that they are taking this route for money and a few minutes of fame.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> The Markle side of her family is just disgusting. I don't hear a peep out of her mother's side. It's just really sad that they are taking this route for money and a few minutes of fame.


yes it is a shame.  but I've certainly seen my share of family disputes over money.....the public nature of this is, of course, much different than the usual family fighting.  If she had married a Kardashian it would be different but she married into a very conservative family. 
She needs to stay above the fray on this IMO.  Not try to respond as she apparently did with the story from her friends about all the sweet things she does for  house guests, etc.


----------



## HeidiDavis

berrydiva said:


> The Markle side of her family is just disgusting. I don't hear a peep out of her mother's side. It's just really sad that they are taking this route for money and a few minutes of fame.




Yes, her mother is pure class.  Thank God Meghan has her. At least she has one parent who is a credit to her and who seems to support her the way a parent should.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> yes it is a shame.  but I've certainly seen my share of family disputes over money.....the public nature of this is, of course, much different than the usual family fighting.  If she had married a Kardashian it would be different but she married into a very conservative family.
> She needs to stay above the fray on this IMO.  Not try to respond as she apparently did with the story from her friends about all the sweet things she does for  house guests, etc.


It would be less surprising if it happened in the Kardashian family, but, it wouldn't put them in a good light, either.
I still can't understand how Meghan who seems to be so smart, so image conscious can come from this Maury show family. It must be a positive mutation. The other thing I can't understand is how the BRF hasn't found the way to stop Daddy and Sam.  The Queen and Co has enough money.


----------



## krissa

paper_flowers said:


> I totally agree
> 
> I’m about 400 pages too late to this thread, but I just can’t understand what the hell is going on. Like, WHY?? Why is her dad and her sister doing this? This is absolutely humiliating. I feel so bad for Meghan. I wish they’d just let them live in peace, like she said in her letter. Her sister seems seriously deranged



It’s so sad but some family is just toxic. Her sister seemed to hate Meghan since she was born. She’s resented her all her life it seems. Her own mother and daughter don’t talk to her, so how people continue to pay her andndont see her agenda is astounding. I’ve always thought Thomas was trash, but when he sided with Samantha against Meghan confirmed he’s the worst.


----------



## arnott

HeidiDavis said:


> I think you are right about much of the hate stemming from jealousy. The funny thing is that I would never ever want her life. Don’t get me wrong, the wealth and privilege would be enjoyable. But the cost is too great, at least for me. I would feel like my life wasn’t my own. Maybe it’s because I’m super private, but I wouldn’t want to have my every move scrutinized and photographed. Even if the press only said glowing things about me and never criticized me (which is unrealistic anyway), I would find it all intrusive and oppressive. I think it takes a certain kind of personality to accept and agree to all that. More power to gals like Meghan and Kate for being up to the challenge! I’m content with my relative impoverishment and anonymity. Lol. But maybe I’m just weird.



I agree with everything you wrote after the first sentence.     Which is why I don't understand why people are always called jealous just because they don't like someone.


----------



## Coconuts40

I don't understand the article that came out from Meghan's friends.  Why oh why would you poke the bear.  No good was going to come out of the article and I just wonder what her friends were thinking, and I really wonder if Meghan consented to it.  I think her friends should have remained silent.


----------



## HeidiDavis

arnott said:


> I agree with everything you wrote after the first sentence.     Which is why I don't understand why people are always called jealous just because they don't like someone.




I do understand what you are saying. Sometimes we just don’t like people for whatever reason—there’s no chemistry, they aren’t interesting to us, they seem unremarkable, etc. I don’t dislike MM but I’m certainly not a huge fan. I just mentioned jealousy as a possible explanation for the intense, passionate, almost irrational hatred some people seem to have for her. As far as I know, she hasn’t done anything to warrant abject loathing and vitriol like that. If she just fails to impress certain people, I can respect their opinion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## arnott

bag-princess said:


> Girl they are really doing the most! * Her eyes are too dark which makes her look evil!?* SMH  anything other than saying what they really don’t like about her!



Where did someone say that?     That's hilarious!


----------



## TMA

Coconuts40 said:


> I don't understand the article that came out from Meghan's friends.  Why oh why would you poke the bear.  No good was going to come out of the article and I just wonder what her friends were thinking, and I really wonder if Meghan consented to it.  I think her friends should have remained silent.



I would hazard a guess. This man and Samantha are waiting in the wings until the baby was born and would have tried to hijack the birth. He would have had multiple interviews saying how awful she was “ghosting” him and not letting him see the baby. The media would have piled on her even harder at a time when she should be enjoying the birth of her child. No one would have known she’s actually written to him. He said he’d not heard a word from her as lately as December. The People interview forced his hand. Most people now know he’s a liar. The press will still do their thing when the baby is born, but more people now know he is a lowlife and he’s got less sympathy with the public. That would have been my reason for poking that despicable bear. Imagine having to tiptoe around because your dad is a grifter.


----------



## sdkitty

TMA said:


> I would hazard a guess. This man and Samantha are waiting in the wings until the baby was born and would have tried to hijack the birth. He would have had multiple interviews saying how awful she was “ghosting” him and not letting him see the baby. The media would have piled on her even harder at a time when she should be enjoying the birth of her child. No one would have known she’s actually written to him. He said he’d not heard a word from her as lately as December. The People interview forced his hand. Most people now know he’s a liar. The press will still do their thing when the baby is born, but more people now know he is a lowlife and he’s got less sympathy with the public. That would have been my reason for poking that despicable bear. Imagine having to tiptoe around because your dad is a grifter.


who  had sympathy for him?  I don't think many people are interested in him at all
Need to ignore.....be the bigger person


----------



## HeidiDavis

sdkitty said:


> who  had sympathy for him?  I don't think many people are interested in him at all
> Need to ignore.....be the bigger person



Piers Morgan has actually expressed sympathy for Thomas Markle and even wrote this ridiculous diatribe about how Meghan’s dad is a dying man and she has coldly turned her back on him. I don’t think your average rational person finds him a sympathetic character, but there are at least a handful of people who argue that  Meghan is to blame for all this. I agree that she shouldn’t dignify his embarrassing, self -serving behavior by addressing it in any way though.


----------



## sdkitty

HeidiDavis said:


> Piers Morgan has actually expressed sympathy for Thomas Markle and even wrote this ridiculous diatribe about how Meghan’s dad is a dying man and she has coldly turned her back on him. I don’t think your average rational person finds him a sympathetic character, but there are at least a handful of folks who think Meghan is to blame for all this. I agree that she shouldn’t dignify his embarrassing, self -serving behavior by addressing it in any way though.


right
not to worry about a handful of people
or piers morgan
honestly, I think if the royals had known she came with this baggage, it would have been a problem for them


----------



## HeidiDavis

sdkitty said:


> right
> not to worry about a handful of people
> or piers morgan
> honestly, I think if the royals had known she came with this baggage, it would have been a problem for them




The BRF probably would have had a problem with it because conflict and bad press are anathema to them. It’s not really fair though, imo. Life is messy and I think every single person has something in their family or past that could be controversial or problematic. Thomas  Markle just makes it worse by making it so public. She probably didn’t anticipate that he would stoop so low. Sigh.


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> right
> not to worry about a handful of people
> or piers morgan
> honestly, I think if the royals had known she came with this baggage, it would have been a problem for them



The royals knew. Meghan’s half brother wrote an open letter to Harry begging him not to marry her, before the wedding! 

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20134486/meghan-markle-brother-letter-prince-harry/

I think it was very important for the immediate family to support Harry’s decision. Nothing would’ve changed his mind.


----------



## berrydiva

bisousx said:


> The royals knew. Meghan’s half brother wrote an open letter to Harry begging him not to marry her, before the wedding!
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20134486/meghan-markle-brother-letter-prince-harry/
> 
> I think it was very important for the immediate family to support Harry’s decision. Nothing would’ve changed his mind.


Her father's side of the family is just gutter trash. I never knew about this one. I can't see why he would think TRF would even take someone seriously who would write them an open letter published in a magazine. They're so pathetic and hungry for fame.


----------



## HeidiDavis

bisousx said:


> The royals knew. Meghan’s half brother wrote an open letter to Harry begging him not to marry her, before the wedding!
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20134486/meghan-markle-brother-letter-prince-harry/
> 
> I think it was very important for the immediate family to support Harry’s decision. Nothing would’ve changed his mind.




Omg! I didn’t know about that letter! Not only is it horrible that he publicly lambasted a family member, but the ridiculous letter has countless errors and sounds like it was written by a disgruntled middle schooler! Lol.  Poor Meghan must be so embarrassed to be related to these awful people.


----------



## TMA

sdkitty said:


> who  had sympathy for him?  I don't think many people are interested in him at all
> Need to ignore.....be the bigger person



Do you live in the UK? I do and he does have sympathy especially in the press as it is a low hanging fruit salacious story for them. Also, not just a handful of people believe the story. I have friends who are intelligent professionals and they believe the story because they see the headlines with no context. Some people think parents can never be wrong so add that to the corner of believers. She has done enough to discredit him with a lot more people. I’m sure she wasn’t gunning for 100% approval rating.


----------



## sdkitty

TMA said:


> Do you live in the UK? I do and he does have sympathy especially in the press as it is a low hanging fruit salacious story for them. Also, not just a handful of people believe the story. I have friends who are intelligent professionals and they believe the story because they see the headlines with no context. Some people think parents can never be wrong so add that to the corner of believers. She has done enough to discredit him with a lot more people. I’m sure she wasn’t gunning for 100% approval rating.


no, I live in the US
I think probably most people here lost interest after the wedding....but makes sense that Brits would be watching more closely
Still doesn't make sense to me that anyone would give this guy credibility....even if he was right, the going public part would make him wrong IMO


----------



## bag-princess

arnott said:


> Where did someone say that?     That's hilarious!




girl post *#6056 * and then ended it with........"Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM"


----------



## arnott

bag-princess said:


> girl post *#6056 * and then ended it with........"Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM"



Ok got it,  thanks!

She didn't exactly say dark eyes = evil.   Exact quote:
"She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it. I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM."

Anyways, I don't feel sorry for Meghan for getting hate.     She knew what she was signing up for and has to take the good with the bad.


----------



## DeMonica

HeidiDavis said:


> The BRF probably would have had a problem with it because conflict and bad press are anathema to them. It’s not really fair though, imo. Life is messy and I think every single person has something in their family or past that could be controversial or problematic. Thomas  Markle just makes it worse by making it so public. She probably didn’t anticipate that he would stoop so low. Sigh.


Probably nobody anticipated that the problem escalates into this level of sh..storm. Unfortunately, we can choose our friends, but we can't change our family. I think if the BRF had had a premonition,  they would have tried to dissuade Harry. Albeit, Diana seemed to be sweet as sugar and they had known her family well, still the marriage became a public disaster. Bad press is nothing new to the BRF and they definitely have many things in their past they can't be too proud of.


----------



## bisousx

One thing is for sure, since the bad press started before the wedding, someone in the RF had to have had that awkward conversation to Harry about his fiance’s unsavory family background.  I think the rumors of a family feud are true, perhaps William did try to gently and “diplomatically” ask Harry to consider all the possible consequences of marrying a Markle. Only to have Harry lose his sh$& in defense of Meghan, and feud ensues.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

arnott said:


> Ok got it,  thanks!
> 
> She didn't exactly say dark eyes = evil.   Exact quote:
> "She is utterly evil underneath, heck even her eyes are so dark there's no spark to it. I sense evil when I see her pictures and that's my opinion. This does not happen to me a lot where I sense this about someone. Kim K is a saint (spiritually) compared to MM."
> 
> Anyways, I don't feel sorry for Meghan for getting hate.     She knew what she was signing up for and has to take the good with the bad.


Agree....I think she got what she wanted.  Unfortunate that her family are so trashy but I think she is enjoying her new role.


----------



## arnott

bisousx said:


> One thing is for sure, since the bad press started before the wedding, someone in the RF had to have had that awkward conversation to Harry about his fiance’s unsavory family background.  *I think the rumors of a family feud are true*, perhaps William did try to gently and “diplomatically” ask Harry to consider all the possible consequences of marrying a Markle. Only to have Harry lose his sh$& in defense of Meghan, and feud ensues.



What rumours?


----------



## queennadine

I don't know that Harry would have had William as his best man if William had "gone there" with that type of convo.
Some other thoughts:
1. She looks great in the last pics.
2. I think she's def. farther along and having that baby pretty soon.
3. Criticism of Meghan is not automatically racist. So tired of that word and accusation getting thrown around.


----------



## Flatsy

If Harry hadn't chosen Will as his best man, the public would have known there was a major, major rift between them and that would be a huge scandal.  It would have severely harmed all of their images and immediately cast Meghan into a Yoko role that she would probably never live down.  They had no choice but to keep up appearances.

And on a personal level, there are some lines in a relationship that once you cross them, there's no going back, and cutting your brother out of your wedding is one of them.  William and Harry may not be getting along very well right now, but it doesn't sound irreparable.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

bisousx said:


> One thing is for sure, since the bad press started before the wedding, someone in the RF had to have had that awkward conversation to Harry about his fiance’s unsavory family background.  I think the rumors of a family feud are true, perhaps William did try to gently and “diplomatically” ask Harry to consider all the possible consequences of marrying a Markle. Only to have Harry lose his sh$& in defense of Meghan, and feud ensues.


I think that would be really weird, considering how FAR from perfect the BRF is… They've got just as much - and arguably worse - embarrassments in their closets as well.

No one and no family is perfect, and if I were Harry and anyone tried to suggest that Meghan's family were not good enough, I'd be livid at the hypocrisy.


----------



## 2cello

arnott said:


> I agree with everything you wrote after the first sentence.     Which is why I don't understand why people are always called jealous just because they don't like someone.



When I don’t like someone I ignore them.  The jealousy question arises when a person spends time tearing another person down.


----------



## DeMonica

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I think that would be really weird, considering how FAR from perfect the BRF is… They've got just as much - and arguably worse - embarrassments in their closets as well.
> 
> No one and no family is perfect, and if I were Harry and anyone tried to suggest that Meghan's family were not good enough, I'd be livid at the hypocrisy.


There's a great deal of hypocrisy in the BRF.
On the other hand: I know a number of cases among my friends and relatives when a gentle/ or more serious warning about potiential problems with future SO and SO's family met with heated refusal and anger when the love was at its zenith, Yet, after the honeymoon period was over, the person in question had to admit that the friends or relatives had been right.


----------



## Flatsy

I don't think William objected specifically to Meghan or her family, he just thought Harry was rushing.  And I think he was right.  In hindsight, it would have been easier on Meghan if she'd had another year to be slowly introduced to the public and get used to royal life and rules.

And it was a irresponsible for Meghan and Harry to have gotten engaged/married before he'd ever met half of her family.  Not because her family is unsuitable, but because in-laws can cause problems in any marriage.

The plan to just have Thomas Markle fly in a few days before the wedding and have him meet Harry and the entire British Royal Family all at once always seemed weird.  In hindsight, what the hell were they thinking?  They thought this narcissistic man was just going to do what he was told and be a quiet and cooperative supporting player in the wedding?  

I don't think anybody, including Meghan, could have anticipated quite how Jerry Springer her family would behave.  But if Meghan and Harry had slowed down and road-tested their relationship longer, they might have been able to come up with a plan for how to handle the in-law situation long in advance, instead of having it blow up publicly three days before the wedding.  That's really why it was such a big story.


----------



## DeMonica

I think a longer courtship or engagement would have been better for smoother transition and getting to know each other's families. The families should have met long before the wedding, at least the key members, e.g. the parents of the future spouses. Maybe giving them a little education and some money would have helped them to behave slightly better in public.
There's one reason why I can understand that they wanted to tie the knot asap: this is Meghan's age. It turned out not to be a problem since she got pregnant right away but it might have been a valid concern that they might run into problems in that department if they waited too long with a wedding. I read somewhere (CDaN ?) that Meghan had thought she wouldn't be able to conceive. I know that they can afford the best possible medical assistance, but it's not always enough. They were lucky.


----------



## pixiejenna

ITA I think that they wanted kids and playing the waiting game at her age could have the potential to make it harder to conceive. I think that having s big family is important to both brothers. Yes they have the funds to be able to be able to access assistance but it may not work and will be extremely stressful. Imagine taking hormones and how much it could change you physically like weight gain and bloating. And then being photographed every week and having all the rag mags ripping on you because of the bloating/weight gain. While in private your going through this and are extra hormonal. That would suck big time.


----------



## minababe

I don't think they rush in their relationship. it's totally normal for me.
they were not their 20ies when they met. both were in 30. they Dating since 2016. married in 2018. nothing wrong with it. The most couples are like that. even when you had a Long relationship in your 20ies and then get into a new relationship, most of the time the whole Thing is getting faster. I see that all the time.

the mum met Harry in 2017 many times. not just a week before the wedding. she met the queen days before the wedding, thats totaly fine, she is after all only the Grandma of harry.
Harry didn't met her father. from this you can see that the Family of her father wasn't any Topic at all. I'm sure even if they didn't talk so much trash about meghan, she wouldn't invite them to the wedding. she has for more than 7 years no contact to this part of the Family. only the father has a realtionship with meghan. Personally I don't think she is callingThese People as her Family at all.

maybe they had underestimate how much trash they are talking that they will not stop. but that should no reason to not marry the love of your life.
the only Thing that was surprising to me was the wedding date. 6 months after their Engagement. but they both said they want to have children and to be realistic you should start as soon as possible in her age.
I'm sure the second Baby is coming soon as possible as well.

back to now:
I hope they will have a safe trip to morocco. don't think it's a lot of fun at this stage of pregnancy to do that trip especially in such a conservative Country.. curious to see her outifts thougjh.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Now that she's pregnant with an heir she's pretty much screwed. Her family will never shut up, she's stuck in a foreign country with in laws who don't like her, and she can never go back to being a quiet cable actress after the divorce.


----------



## bisbee

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Now that she's pregnant with an heir she's pretty much screwed. Her family will never shut up, she's stuck in a foreign country with in laws who don't like her, and she can never go back to being a quiet cable actress after the divorce.


And who in the BRF told you they don’t like her?


----------



## DeMonica

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Now that she's pregnant with an heir she's pretty much screwed. Her family will never shut up, she's stuck in a foreign country with in laws who don't like her, and she can never go back to being a quiet cable actress after the divorce.


I wish I were that "screwed". If she had been that devoted to acting she would have never quit it for a man. It takes a certain kind of person. If she ever divorces she would be much more comfortable financially than as an actress with the level of popularity she had gained by Suits. She could still do her blog, become a media correspondent  and many other things. She seems to be smarter than Sarah Fergusson or Diana. She wouldn't sink. Not that I wish a divorce on her or the baby. IMO there's no proof that  the in-laws hate her, other than tabloid gossip, but I'm sure that they could live without the pain-in-the-neck Markle family.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I don't think William objected specifically to Meghan or her family, he just thought Harry was rushing.  And I think he was right.  In hindsight, it would have been easier on Meghan if she'd had another year to be slowly introduced to the public and get used to royal life and rules.
> 
> And it was a irresponsible for Meghan and Harry to have gotten engaged/married before he'd ever met half of her family.  Not because her family is unsuitable, but because in-laws can cause problems in any marriage.
> 
> The plan to just have Thomas Markle fly in a few days before the wedding and have him meet Harry and the entire British Royal Family all at once always seemed weird.  In hindsight, what the hell were they thinking?  They thought this narcissistic man was just going to do what he was told and be a quiet and cooperative supporting player in the wedding?
> 
> I don't think anybody, including Meghan, could have anticipated quite how Jerry Springer her family would behave.  But if Meghan and Harry had slowed down and road-tested their relationship longer, they might have been able to come up with a plan for how to handle the in-law situation long in advance, instead of having it blow up publicly three days before the wedding.  That's really why it was such a big story.



I think Meghan’s relationship with her father has been strained for a while. I suspect it started when she made it big on Suits and he started hitting her up for money. She likely knew the type of person he was and that is why she minimized his contact with Harry. Notice that Harry & Doria seem like old pals. There’s a good reason Harry knows Doria but not Thomas.

As a dutiful daughter she probably felt she had to include him in the wedding. Plus he’s her dad and she genuinely does love him. She was clearly working with Thomas and trying to get  him to England up until he started staging photo ops and heart attacks. Thomas has irreversibly damaged his relationship with his daughter by publicly embarrassing her and betraying her trust.

I hate how the burden seems to be on Meghan to “fix” things with her dad and coddle him so that he behaves the way a father should. People with normal doting fathers would never understand how painful it is to have to “parent” your dad instead of the other way around.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

bisbee said:


> And who in the BRF told you they don’t like her?



They might like her and want to accept her. Who really knows. If my brother married a woman who was smart and beautiful, I’d be happy for him and try to like her. But if she (unknowingly)  brought relentless public drama to my entire family for years to come, I’m going to guess that my feelings will change even if I want to like her.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Even if there was a long engagement does anyone see the Queen, Charles and Camilla paling around with the future in laws? I imagine it is quite rigid and you don’t meet the Queen until right before the wedding. But I have no idea. Super interesting how complex the family is. 

I still stick by my view that she has to really love him to get involved in all of that.


----------



## redney

bisousx said:


> They might like her and want to accept her. Who really knows. If my brother married a woman who was smart and beautiful, I’d be happy for him and try to like her. But if she (unknowingly)  brought relentless public drama to my entire family for years to come, I’m going to guess that my feelings will change even if I want to like her.


The Queen took Meghan on a train trip with her last year...year before? Can't remember. It caused a stir since I don't think the Queen reached out to Kate likewise so quickly.


----------



## Flatsy

minababe said:


> I don't think they rush in their relationship. it's totally normal for me.
> they were not their 20ies when they met. both were in 30. they Dating since 2016. married in 2018. nothing wrong with it. The most couples are like that. even when you had a Long relationship in your 20ies and then get into a new relationship, most of the time the whole Thing is getting faster. I see that all the time.


Two years is totally normal for normal couples, but Meghan and Harry aren't normal.  She underwent all sorts of huge changes in less than two years - a transcontinental move, a retirement from her career, taking on an entirely new career under tremendous scrutiny, a change of nationality, a change of religion, a change of lifestyle.  Plus she went from girlfriend to fiance to wife to mother-to-be.  

I read all of these stories about how Meghan was upset in the days following her marriage about having to follow all of these royal rules that didn't make sense to her.  I'm saying this all might have been easier on her if she'd had some extra time to get accustomed to royal life.  



chicaloca said:


> I hate how the burden seems to be on Meghan to “fix” things with her dad and coddle him so that he behaves the way a father should. People with normal doting fathers would never understand how painful it is to have to “parent” your dad instead of the other way around.


Ugh, the "woe is Meghan" refrain never ends. I don't blame her at all for the difficulties she has with with her narcissistic father.  I never said she should "parent" or "coddle" or "fix" her dad. (I don't even think it's possible.)  

Meghan had enough of a relationship with her father that she had her heart set on him walking her down the aisle.  It's weird under those circumstances that there was never a face-to-face introduction of Harry to his future father-in-law.  

A last-minute introduction three days before a wedding watched by 60 million people was a bad idea.  So was the expectation that they could just tell him where to go and what to do and he would just do as he was told then go back to Mexico.  Maybe Meghan was in denial.  Maybe she didn't have time to properly address the situation with her father.  Either way, it was just a bad decision.


----------



## VickyB

She's been in NYC since the 15th. Baby shower today. Wonder where she is staying.


----------



## krissa

VickyB said:


> She's been in NYC since the 15th. Baby shower today. Wonder where she is staying.



I was just coming to post this! 
https://pagesix.com/2019/02/18/pregnant-meghan-markle-having-baby-shower-in-new-york-city/

Funny how much the royal reporters don’t know. Yet they always are consistent with the toxic, negative, nonsense.


----------



## myown

berrydiva said:


> Her father's side of the family is just gutter trash. I never knew about this one. I can't see why he would think TRF would even take someone seriously who would write them an open letter published in a magazine. They're so pathetic and hungry for fame.


yeah as if the next headlines would have been "bearing news: Harry read open letter from Meghans half brother, now cancels wedding"


----------



## daisychainz

From her NYC baby shower trip. 
"She carried a second wide-brimmed black hat - believed to be a £160 ($195) design from Rag & Bone - in her hand, along with a white bag ... The bodyguard who escorted her to her waiting vehicle also appeared to be carrying a few of her possessions, including a Lululemon tote bag"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ew-York-City-prepares-attend-baby-shower.html


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting StreetGames' "Fit And Fed" February half-term initiative in Streatham


----------



## myown

*Meghan Markle Gets Dinner with BFFs Serena Williams & Markus Anderson in New York*
*
















*

*Meghan Markle & Abigail Spencer Enjoy a Lunch Outing in NYC!

















*

-justjared


----------



## myown

*Meghan Markle Steps Out for Her Baby Shower!*
*



*
*
Abigail Spencer Arrives to Meghan Markle's Baby Shower Holding Blue Gift Bag*
*






*

-justjared


----------



## HeidiDavis

She looks pretty in these pics! I love all of her accessories—the boots, the heels, and both bags.


----------



## skarsbabe

Oh no, a blue gift bag! it *HAS* to mean it's a boy then! /s


----------



## queennadine

Meghan looks great! Minus those awful satin boots. Glad that she was able to come home to have a shower.


----------



## berrydiva

Between her and Kate, I just want a few hours raiding their coat closets. They have the best coats and I love a good coat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Right?? I’m just not rich enough or photographed enough to justify a good stable of coats but I love them so. Always my favourite part of their wardrobes.


----------



## queennadine

I want all of their Sentaler pieces


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Now that she's pregnant with an heir she's pretty much screwed. Her family will never shut up, she's stuck in a foreign country with in laws who don't like her, and she can never go back to being a quiet cable actress after the divorce.


She'll never be on cable again for sure; she's making much bigger Hollywood/acting connections now.


----------



## sdkitty

Poor Meghan


CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Now that she's pregnant with an heir she's pretty much screwed. Her family will never shut up, she's stuck in a foreign country with in laws who don't like her, and she can never go back to being a quiet cable actress after the divorce.


Yeah, poor thing just had a baby shower thrown for her by the richest and most famous female athlete in the world, including a $100K private plane ride and $75K per night hotel rooms paid for by Serena.  
She may have some issues with her birth family but I think that's outweighed by the life she is living and going from a B-level cable actress who most people didn't know to one of the most famous women in the western world.

I'm assuming she does love her husband also.....


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry (who is Capital General of the Royal Marines) visiting the 42 Commando Royal Marines in Bickleigh.


----------



## VickyB

Wonder why her mother wasn't at the shower?


----------



## Morgan R

VickyB said:


> Wonder why her mother wasn't at the shower?



I think she wasn't there because her mother will be coming to the UK in just a few weeks closer to when the baby is due/when Meghan goes on maternity leave and then she will possibly stay for a somewhat extended time after the baby is born. There could possibly be another baby shower in the UK (possibly at Frogmore Cottage which Harry and Meghan will be moving into within the next few weeks). I know a lot of people that have multiple baby showers (i.e one thrown by their co-workers, one thrown by their family, one thrown by friends, etc.) while I also know people who have one big baby shower. The baby shower in New York was thrown by and attended by some of Meghan's friends. Some of the friends that attended are more so based in North America while some of the friends that attended also live in the UK as well and Meghan also has other friends that live in the UK that didn't attend the baby shower that was in New York but could possibly be attending a baby shower in the UK.


----------



## myown

are baby showers a thing in UK?


----------



## doni

Baby showers are becoming more popular in Europe but not something you would see royalty doing... Much less multiple baby showers and showers involving lavish overnight stays in New York. She gets away with it because she is North American


----------



## myown

*Meghan Markle Cradles Her Baby Bump While Departing NYC After Her Baby Shower!*
*







*

*Meghan Markle's Baby Shower Guest List - See Which Celebs Attended! (Photos)
Amal Clooney





Gayle King





Misha Nonoo & Markus Anderson





Jessica Mulroney





Abigail Spencer






Daniel Martin






Erin Hill








*
-justjared


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> I think she wasn't there because her mother will be coming to the UK in just a few weeks closer to when the baby is due/when Meghan goes on maternity leave and then she will possibly stay for a somewhat extended time after the baby is born. There could possibly be another baby shower in the UK (possibly at Frogmore Cottage which Harry and Meghan will be moving into within the next few weeks). I know a lot of people that have multiple baby showers (i.e one thrown by their co-workers, one thrown by their family, one thrown by friends, etc.) while I also know people who have one big baby shower. The baby shower in New York was thrown by and attended by some of Meghan's friends. Some of the friends that attended are more so based in North America while some of the friends that attended also live in the UK as well and Meghan also has other friends that live in the UK that didn't attend the baby shower that was in New York but could possibly be attending a baby shower in the UK.


It's CDaN blind so it may be a complete fabrication: but there was a blind about her baby shower that she had to cancel it (possibly the UK one) because she wasn't supposed to have one there. Royal etiquette maybe?


----------



## cafecreme15

The whole baby shower extravaganza in NYC was the highest key thing possible she could’ve done and stunk of intentional attention grabby-ness. Normally I don’t think this is a fair criticism thrown at her because she is one of the most photographed women in the world whether she likes it or not, but it seems like everything about the baby shower trip was manufactured for attention. Dinner at the Polo Bar. Shower thrown by Serena Williams and attended by A-list celebs in the most expensive hotel room in the country. Promoting her friends tv show on her cap as she departed the hotel.

Of course women should be free to have baby showers and enjoy them, but this whole shebang rubbed me the wrong way.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> Of course women should be free to have baby showers and enjoy them, but this whole shebang rubbed me the wrong way.


Me too I'm afraid to say. It's as though in her mind she's gone from c list celeb to A list Hollywood royalty overnight. She's a member of the BRF now and no, it isn't the same.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Me too I'm afraid to say. It's as though in her mind she's gone from c list celeb to A list Hollywood royalty overnight. She's a member of the BRF now and no, it isn't the same.



Completely agree - it isn’t the same. And she was here for two whole days completely undetected, until it is believed Jess Mulroney leaked the plans for the baby shower to royal reporter Omid Scobie at Harpers Bazaar. So if she wanted to I think the whole thing could’ve been completely low key, but that it was a conscious choice to turn it into an extravaganza.


----------



## A1aGypsy

And then she leaves in leggings, a sweatshirt and a baseball hat? Someone in the royal family is having kittens as we type.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

A1aGypsy said:


> And then she leaves in leggings, a sweatshirt and a baseball hat? Someone in the royal family is having kittens as we type.



And people can’t even argue this was not “on duty” and a “private moment” because the paps had staked out her hotel for days due to an intentional leak by her inner circle that she was there!


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder what William and Catherine make of all this?


----------



## Goodfrtune

Has the concept of a baby shower changed? Isn’t that where people get together and give you gifts that you are going to need for the baby? Doesn’t Meghan need things for the baby? I mean, she gave up her job, her husband is in the military, they are moving into a new house and all so shortly after having to shell out all that money for a wedding. Costs add up people. This baby needs it’s onesies and diapers. Oh wait...they are part of the BRF. They don’t pay for anything. Meghan and Harry’s baby will want for nothing. So what was in those gift bags that all her friends/celebrities brought? Donations for charities? Bananas to write on? I find it to be in very poor taste to throw her a shower at all.


----------



## bag-mania

Goodfrtune said:


> So what was in those gift bags that all her friends/celebrities brought?



Those bags contained the best and most adorable baby clothes that the world's finest fashion designers have to offer. No onesies from Target for this baby. 

And you know how competitive celebrities are, they'll all want to bring something fabulous.


----------



## LittleStar88

I can go either way on this. Yeah, a little over the top and could have been done with more discretion. At the same time, I feel it is unfair to imply she doesn't deserve a shower because she doesn't need anything - which is true - but as a woman pregnant with her first child, shouldn't she have the party and all of the moments with friends that come with being an American woman expecting her first child? 

Let her friends give her gifts and make this a special time for her. Just because she has everything she needs and is a member of the BRF doesn't mean she should be locked away in the castle with no celebrations and can't have special gifts from her friends to the baby to have as mementos.

That said, it did not necessarily need to be done in such an obvious way. But maybe given the logistics it was the easiest way to do it?


----------



## redney

LittleStar88 said:


> I can go either way on this. Yeah, a little over the top and could have been done with more discretion. At the same time, I feel it is unfair to imply she doesn't deserve a shower because she doesn't need anything - which is true - but as a woman pregnant with her first child, shouldn't she have the party and all of the moments with friends that come with being an American woman expecting her first child?
> 
> Let her friends give her gifts and make this a special time for her. Just because she has everything she needs and is a member of the BRF doesn't mean she should be locked away in the castle with no celebrations and can't have special gifts from her friends to the baby to have as mementos.
> 
> That said, it did not necessarily need to be done in such an obvious way. But maybe given the logistics it was the easiest way to do it?


Well said!


----------



## bag-mania

Are these celebrity friends her actual friends? Did she hang out with them before marrying?
I'm hoping they aren't friends in the sense that they met at a charity event once and they vaguely keep in touch from time to time. If that's the case then the shower becomes more like a publicity stunt.


----------



## LittleStar88

Jessica Mulroney, Venus Williams, and Amal Clooney are real friends. Not sure if the others are real friends or publicity friends.


----------



## bag-princess

VickyB said:


> Wonder why her mother wasn't at the shower?



It looked like more of a girl’s trip like they said for a few close friends.  There really wasn’t any need for her to be. She hangs back and lets Megan live her life while she does the same. Unbothered by all the press.


----------



## rose60610

A baby shower for Markle? in NYC? Really? 

Why would I not be surprised if the kid's merry-go-round will feature live decorated ponies?


----------



## queennadine

I'm all Team Meghan/Baby Shower on this. She deserves a baby shower with her friends just like any other pregnant woman. Meaningful gifts hand selected by friends, whether they be clothes, toys, books, etc., can't be replaced by mass ordering or staff just carting in all of the supplies.
I never realized how much people, especially women obviously, ENJOY buying things for a new baby! They love it! Let her friends spoil her and give her some sense of 'normalcy' away from the UK.


----------



## bisousx

Goodfrtune said:


> Has the concept of a baby shower changed? Isn’t that where people get together and give you gifts that you are going to need for the baby? Doesn’t Meghan need things for the baby? I mean, she gave up her job, her husband is in the military, they are moving into a new house and all so shortly after having to shell out all that money for a wedding. Costs add up people. This baby needs it’s onesies and diapers. Oh wait...they are part of the BRF. They don’t pay for anything. Meghan and Harry’s baby will want for nothing. So what was in those gift bags that all her friends/celebrities brought? Donations for charities? Bananas to write on? I find it to be in very poor taste to throw her a shower at all.



Ugh, if baby showers are just a gift grab (and not a reason to bring friends together for an adult daytime party) then I’m declining them from anyone who’s not a close friend. I’ve been invited to a handful of baby showers from women I’m not close to, it’s irritating to think they just want a gift.
In Meghan’s case, I think she desperately misses her friends in the US and wants a good reason to fly home to celebrate. She doesn’t need any baby items or gifts obvi.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> The whole baby shower extravaganza in NYC was the highest key thing possible she could’ve done and stunk of intentional attention grabby-ness. Normally I don’t think this is a fair criticism thrown at her because she is one of the most photographed women in the world whether she likes it or not, but it seems like everything about the baby shower trip was manufactured for attention. Dinner at the Polo Bar. Shower thrown by Serena Williams and attended by A-list celebs in the most expensive hotel room in the country. Promoting her friends tv show on her cap as she departed the hotel.
> 
> Of course women should be free to have baby showers and enjoy them, but this whole shebang rubbed me the wrong way.


Even one of the Today Show personalities said you go to the Polo Bar to be seen......said she is enjoying the love.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Ugh, if baby showers are just a gift grab (and not a reason to bring friends together for an adult daytime party) then I’m declining them from anyone who’s not a close friend. I’ve been invited to a handful of baby showers from women I’m not close to, it’s irritating to think they just want a gift.
> In Meghan’s case, I think she desperately misses her friends in the US and wants a good reason to fly home to celebrate. She doesn’t need any baby items or gifts obvi.


Even if some of these people are "real friends" I doubt she saw them often before marrying.  If I'm not mistaken most of them live in different places or move around.  I'm not a fan of Abagail Spencer but I was impressed that she looked like she was dressed for the weather and not for a photo op.  A warm coat and some boots that one could walk on a NY sidewalk in.

Anyway I'm sure Meghan enjoyed all the attention from her friends and from the media.


----------



## daisychainz

Meghan absolutely deserves a baby shower and her friends to celebrate with, but the royal family knows very well how to be low-key and under the radar. She could have easily entertained all of these women in a private location where they weren't streaming through the front door at a major 'be seen' location for photo ops. This event was purposefully done to get loads of attention and pictures and interest on herself, and to me she looks very much like someone who wants her old life back. She looks extremely happy to be photographed and followed. Why not ask for donations to a charity instead of shower gifts? I'm sure she doesn't actually need anything she was gifted. As much as people want to see only the good in Meghan I really don't think Harry selected a partner that in any way benefits the royal family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> Meghan absolutely deserves a baby shower and her friends to celebrate with, but the royal family knows very well how to be low-key and under the radar. She could have easily entertained all of these women in a private location where they weren't streaming through the front door at a major 'be seen' location for photo ops. This event was purposefully done to get loads of attention and pictures and interest on herself, and to me she looks very much like someone who wants her old life back. She looks extremely happy to be photographed and followed. Why not ask for donations to a charity instead of shower gifts? I'm sure she doesn't actually need anything she was gifted. As much as people want to see only the good in Meghan I really don't think Harry selected a partner that in any way benefits the royal family.


No, she doesn't want her old life back.  Most of the public had no idea who she was.  
I agree with her background, why not ask for charitable contributions?
She obviously wants to be photographed and followed.  So hopefully she and anyone who feels sorry for her will do so because of her trashy family not because of the paps.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> Even if some of these people are "real friends" I doubt she saw them often before marrying.  If I'm not mistaken most of them live in different places or move around.  I'm not a fan of Abagail Spencer but I was impressed that she looked like she was dressed for the weather and not for a photo op.  A warm coat and some boots that one could walk on a NY sidewalk in.
> 
> Anyway I'm sure Meghan enjoyed all the attention from her friends and from the media.



My life is so busy that I see my hairstylist more often than my close friends. Degree of friendship shouldn't be discounted just because someone doesn't spend copious amounts of time with another person.


----------



## minababe

omg .. second round here .. I can't believe that ..

women discuss if a mother to be deserves a Baby shower with her frirends? of Course not because she is rich and a royal now? really?? shame on you..
she deserves it the same like every other mom to be. especially at the first child. come on People .. they all spend their own Money, Money they worked for. if they spend it that way for her friend meghan, thats really nice. I'm happy for her that her real friends are still by her side and Support her.
nothing wrong with the five days in new York. she is different, she is still her own personality. she respects all the rules the royal life has for her but she doesn't let herself die in this whole royal life. I admire her for that.
not many women can say they are still the same Person after becoming a royal.
I'm happy for her she had some really nice days with her friends away from all the bad vibes in the uk ... she Looks refreshed and happy. can't wait to see her back with Harry at their oversea trip to marocco at thr Weekend.
btw I love the last look with Jogging pants and cap. she is a human who is flying almost 7 hours to London. why not feel comfy especially when you are pregnant.


----------



## queennadine

DH and I can technically afford all of the things for our impending little one...but it was NICE to fly home and see all my friends and they ENJOYED buying special outfits and books and having all of us get together. Showers are absolutely more than _just_ about getting gifts. It's getting together with loved ones to celebrate a happy occasion and an upcoming baby. Lord knows there are enough trials and bad days throughout life; you gotta celebrate the good and happy times!


----------



## cafecreme15

minababe said:


> omg .. second round here .. I can't believe that ..
> 
> women discuss if a mother to be deserves a Baby shower with her frirends? of Course not because she is rich and a royal now? really?? shame on you..
> she deserves it the same like every other mom to be. especially at the first child. come on People .. they all spend their own Money, Money they worked for. if they spend it that way for her friend meghan, thats really nice. I'm happy for her that her real friends are still by her side and Support her.
> nothing wrong with the five days in new York. she is different, she is still her own personality. she respects all the rules the royal life has for her but she doesn't let herself die in this whole royal life. I admire her for that.
> not many women can say they are still the same Person after becoming a royal.
> I'm happy for her she had some really nice days with her friends away from all the bad vibes in the uk ... she Looks refreshed and happy. can't wait to see her back with Harry at their oversea trip to marocco at thr Weekend.
> btw I love the last look with Jogging pants and cap. she is a human who is flying almost 7 hours to London. why not feel comfy especially when you are pregnant.


Most people here aren't criticizing her for having a shower at all. Rather, we are taking issue with the circumstances of it - that everything about it was manufactured to garner attention, which is very un-royal and undignified in my opinion.


----------



## LittleStar88

cafecreme15 said:


> Most people here aren't criticizing her for having a shower at all. Rather, we are taking issue with the circumstances of it - that everything about it was manufactured to garner attention, which is very un-royal and undignified in my opinion.



She may not have had a say or orchestrated the whole thing. They may have set it up and all she had to do was fly out. Maybe Serena planned the dinner at the high-profile restaurant? Maybe they have a dish there that Meghan loves and didn't want to skip because she may be photographed there.

I agree that she was very obvious about her presence, but this is her life now and may not have been intentional. These same people were her friends before, it just happens that she is elevated to a new status now and being followed by paparazzi no matter what she does.

I am happy that the BRF are not making a fuss over it. She is am American and Harry is pretty far down the line now for the throne. Let them have their lives and be real people.

Either way, it has no affect on me and it is always nice to see her looking happy and well. And I don't think she cares much what any of us think


----------



## minababe

cafecreme15 said:


> Most people here aren't criticizing her for having a shower at all. Rather, we are taking issue with the circumstances of it - that everything about it was manufactured to garner attention, which is very un-royal and undignified in my opinion.



lets be honest, some women criticize her for everything and after all "she is just a actress" thats so stupid. so many Things here said about her are so stupid.
kate and William went to the bafta Awards,
camilla went to the London Fashion week,
the York sister lived in new York City, one has an Instagram account and she went to store openings, Fashion Shows, Award Shows etc.
but meghan is "still the actress" "act like she is still in Hollywood" "not royal"
she is living a lowkey life with Harry. they actually  leaving London to have more privacy wiht their Family in the Future at Windsor.
but she wants Attention?
ridiculous.

she just spend 5 days in new York for some Quality time with her american friends and got a Baby shower.
of Course that cost a lot of Money. they all are rich People. they spend their own Money. so whats wrong with it.


----------



## StylishMD

minababe said:


> lets be honest, some women criticize her for everything and after all "she is just a actress" thats so stupid. so many Things here said about her are so stupid.
> kate and William went to the bafta Awards,
> camilla went to the London Fashion week,
> the York sister lived in new York City, one has an Instagram account and she went to store openings, Fashion Shows, Award Shows etc.
> but meghan is "still the actress" "act like she is still in Hollywood" "not royal"
> she is living a lowkey life with Harry. they actually  leaving London to have more privacy wiht their Family in the Future at Windsor.
> but she wants Attention?
> ridiculous.
> 
> she just spend 5 days in new York for some Quality time with her american friends and got a Baby shower.
> of Course that cost a lot of Money. they all are rich People. they spend their own Money. so whats wrong with it.




Totally agree with all of this!


----------



## caramelize126

cafecreme15 said:


> Most people here aren't criticizing her for having a shower at all. Rather, we are taking issue with the circumstances of it - that everything about it was manufactured to garner attention, which is very un-royal and undignified in my opinion.



Totally agree with this. Of course she should be able to celebrate her first child with her friends! The details of the shower were leaked by one of the attendees ( I think previous posts mentioned that it may have been Jessica). This would only have been done with Meghan’s blessing. 
You can take the girl out of Hollywood but you can’t take Hollywood out of the girl...


----------



## cafecreme15

minababe said:


> lets be honest, some women criticize her for everything and after all "she is just a actress" thats so stupid. so many Things here said about her are so stupid.
> kate and William went to the bafta Awards,
> camilla went to the London Fashion week,
> the York sister lived in new York City, one has an Instagram account and she went to store openings, Fashion Shows, Award Shows etc.
> but meghan is "still the actress" "act like she is still in Hollywood" "not royal"
> she is living a lowkey life with Harry. they actually  leaving London to have more privacy wiht their Family in the Future at Windsor.
> but she wants Attention?
> ridiculous.
> 
> she just spend 5 days in new York for some Quality time with her american friends and got a Baby shower.
> of Course that cost a lot of Money. they all are rich People. they spend their own Money. so whats wrong with it.


I think the difference is that the activities of Kate, William, Camilla, et al. are official royal events - these events do and should garner attention because they are official events, and royal presence is purposefully included to shine a light on worthy causes and individuals. That's why I said initially that I think it is normally unfair to criticize Meghan for wanting attention since it is the job of the royal family to bring attention to different causes and events, and she gets photographed whether she asks for it or not. But this feels different because one of Meghan's inner circle purposefully tipped off the media about the shower plans and where they would be going and what they would be doing on the NY trip when she had already been in NY for two days spending quality time with her friends completely under the radar. There is no other logical conclusion to draw other than the press was tipped off because Meghan wanted attention on what was otherwise supposed to be a "private event."


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

bag-mania said:


> Are these celebrity friends her actual friends? Did she hang out with them before marrying?
> I'm hoping they aren't friends in the sense that they met at a charity event once and they vaguely keep in touch from time to time. If that's the case then the shower becomes more like a publicity stunt.



I don’t think she has actual friends in the traditional sense. Her former employees, co-stars, and celebrities she’s met twice seem to be listed as her “besties” all the time. In that case I feel bad because this is the only kind of shower she could have but it also is an embarrassing celebrity spectacle.


----------



## daisychainz

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I don’t think she has actual friends in the traditional sense. Her former employees, co-stars, and celebrities she’s met twice seem to be listed as her “besties” all the time. In that case I feel bad because this is the only kind of shower she could have but it also is an embarrassing celebrity spectacle.


I think that is why they call it Hollyweird, lol. These people have friendships and marriages that are very non-traditional and bizarre to us normal folks.


----------



## queennadine

I would think these well-known locations/restaurants have people working there that tip off the paps. I don't know that Venus or Serena or even Meghan herself tipped the press off. I see some employee from the Polo whatever it is (I'm so up on these things ) seeing a chunk of time blocked off for a super VIP and then alerting their media contacts.


----------



## berrydiva

doni said:


> Baby showers are becoming more popular in Europe but not something you would see royalty doing... Much less multiple baby showers and showers involving lavish overnight stays in New York. She gets away with it because she is North American


Perhaps because she is from America they are allowing her to have her cultural norms as well. 



A1aGypsy said:


> And then she leaves in leggings, a sweatshirt and a baseball hat? Someone in the royal family is having kittens as we type.






cafecreme15 said:


> Most people here aren't criticizing her for having a shower at all. Rather, we are taking issue with the circumstances of it - that everything about it was manufactured to garner attention, which is very un-royal and undignified in my opinion.


But didn't Serena plan it?


----------



## berrydiva

Megan, like many first time moms, deserves to get the experience of a baby shower if she wants. It's so strange to see so many people upset with her for having one. It was on Serena's dime so what if she wanted to put her up in a lavish hotel. What exactly is the big deal?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Are these celebrity friends her actual friends? Did she hang out with them before marrying?
> I'm hoping they aren't friends in the sense that they met at a charity event once and they vaguely keep in touch from time to time. If that's the case then the shower becomes more like a publicity stunt.


They are her friends.  It was often mentioned when she lived in Toronto, that she only had famous friends.  All the better for publicity, networking and expensive gifts. 

Seems like she is enjoying the best of both worlds, with things like this excursion to NYC and a shower at the penthouse at The Mark. Michelin-star chef Jean-Georges Vongerichten doing the food, exactly what you would expect for royalty. 

The British press is going on about the private jet to NY and back again, but Meghan did not pay for anything.  Her famous and wealthy friends did.  Even the private jet was supplied by Amal Clooney. Meghan is showing us why it pays to have famous and wealthy friends!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I think it’s improper for a member of the royal family to receive expensive public gifts from prominent foreigners through unofficial channels. Accompanied by an obvious press walk. Becomes even more complicated when you consider who Serena’s husband is. It would be different if there was a celebratory tea at someone’s house.


----------



## cafecreme15

berrydiva said:


> Perhaps because she is from America they are allowing her to have her cultural norms as well.
> 
> 
> 
> But didn't Serena plan it?


She did, but I'm sure Meghan must have known the most important details, and how that would look in the media. I don't agree that she is free to do as she wants - that comes with the territory of being a member of the BRF. She, whether fortunately or unfortunately, needs to think through how things will be perceived by the media. That is always true, but is especially true when you purposefully loop the media into your plans.


----------



## Jayne1

Apparently Will and Kate just went on a ski holiday, with all the children, to the Alps and they also took a private jet to get there. They must have paid for it, unlike Amal Clooney paying for Meghan.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently Will and Kate just went on a ski holiday, with all the children, to the Alps and they also took a private jet to get there. They must have paid for it, unlike Amal Clooney paying for Meghan.


Not necessarily. It's well-reported that the Royals often use jets owned by friends.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> Perhaps because she is from America they are allowing her to have her cultural norms as well.
> 
> 
> 
> But didn't Serena plan it?


Serena paid for it but I doubt she planned the whole thing as a surprise


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> lets be honest, some women criticize her for everything and after all "she is just a actress" thats so stupid. so many Things here said about her are so stupid.
> kate and William went to the bafta Awards,
> camilla went to the London Fashion week,
> the York sister lived in new York City, one has an Instagram account and she went to store openings, Fashion Shows, Award Shows etc.
> but meghan is "still the actress" "act like she is still in Hollywood" "not royal"
> she is living a lowkey life with Harry. they actually  leaving London to have more privacy wiht their Family in the Future at Windsor.
> but she wants Attention?
> ridiculous.
> 
> she just spend 5 days in new York for some Quality time with her american friends and got a Baby shower.
> of Course that cost a lot of Money. they all are rich People. they spend their own Money. so whats wrong with it.


You're entitled to love and revere her.  No need to call other people's opinions stupid.


----------



## berrydiva

cafecreme15 said:


> She did, but I'm sure Meghan must have known the most important details, and how that would look in the media. I don't agree that she is free to do as she wants - that comes with the territory of being a member of the BRF. She, whether fortunately or unfortunately, needs to think through how things will be perceived by the media. That is always true, but is especially true when you purposefully loop the media into your plans.


I have a hard time believing that she didn't receive an okay to go ahead and do this without the Queen's blessing. Everything they do is under scrutiny and I find it impossible to believe that she did this in a vacuum. In any event, folks have a huge problem with this women having a shower thrown in honor of her new baby - seems weird and that people need a life.



sdkitty said:


> Serena paid for it but I doubt she planned the whole thing as a surprise


I don't think it was reported as a surprise, was it? I can't see how it would be if they needed to make sure her security detail was there and other logistics around her schedule.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> I have a hard time believing that she didn't receive an okay to go ahead and do this without the Queen's blessing. Everything they do is under scrutiny and I find it impossible to believe that she did this in a vacuum. In any event, folks have a huge problem with this women having a shower thrown in honor of her new baby - seems weird and that people need a life.
> 
> I don't think it was reported as a surprise, was it? I can't see how it would be if they needed to make sure her security detail was there and other logistics around her schedule.


I was just responding to someone saying serena planned the event....agree, she would have had to work with Meghan on it for security reasons if nothing else


----------



## berrydiva

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently Will and Kate just went on a ski holiday, with all the children, to the Alps and they also took a private jet to get there. They must have paid for it, unlike Amal Clooney paying for Meghan.


Pretty sure I've read that most times they fly private, it's paid for by whoever loans them the jet.


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> She did, but I'm sure Meghan must have known the most important details, and how that would look in the media. I don't agree that she is free to do as she wants - that comes with the territory of being a member of the BRF. She, whether fortunately or unfortunately, needs to think through how things will be perceived by the media. That is always true, but is especially true when you purposefully loop the media into your plans.


Agree.

This NYC whirlwind, going out for lunch with famous friends, going out for dinner with famous friends, allowing herself to be papped and then the shower at the penthouse at The Mark, with lots more pap pictures... well it doesn't seem very royal.  I thought she would give this stuff up,  I thought she would be compelled to give this stuff up.


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.
> 
> This NYC whirlwind, going out for lunch with famous friends, going out for dinner with famous friends, allowing herself to be papped and then the shower at the penthouse at The Mark, with lots more pap pictures... well it doesn't seem very royal.  I thought she would give this stuff up,  I thought she would be compelled to give this stuff up.


Agreed. I mean, if the Queen is genuinely ok with the media circus and pap photos, then who are we say its improper? But I just have a hard time believing that she really approves of the Hollywood hoopla.


----------



## caramelize126

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently Will and Kate just went on a ski holiday, with all the children, to the Alps and they also took a private jet to get there. They must have paid for it, unlike Amal Clooney paying for Meghan.



I think the plane they’ve used on previous family vacations has been loaned by the duke of Westminster’s family. I think the duchess of Westminster is William’s godmother.


----------



## TMA

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I don’t think she has actual friends in the traditional sense. Her former employees, co-stars, and celebrities she’s met twice seem to be listed as her “besties” all the time. In that case I feel bad because this is the only kind of shower she could have but it also is an embarrassing celebrity spectacle.



So her friends of 20 yrs (from Northwestern), 15 years in the industry or Jessica going on 9yrs are not really her friends? There are pictures of those ladies from her Instagram before it was deleted. They were at her wedding and were also at this. Just because the press does not know them (because they are far too lazy to do any research) does not mean they don’t exist.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t have a problem with the family using a private jet. I mean, they can’t very well fly commercial.

Nothing wrong with having a low key private shower either but I do agree that there is something decidedly un-British about the excess surrounding this event. Not to mention the pap photos that feature product names prominently displayed. That’s cool for a Hollywood starlet but not for a member of the Royal family in my book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TMA

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I think it’s improper for a member of the royal family to receive expensive public gifts from prominent foreigners through unofficial channels. Accompanied by an obvious press walk. Becomes even more complicated when you consider who Serena’s husband is. It would be different if there was a celebratory tea at someone’s house.



What? So she can only have British friends even though she is American and has spent 36 of her 37yrs being so. Sometime some of the criticisms are quite ludicrous. Who is Serena’s husband and how is that negative for what Meghan does in the RF? If she needs attention drawn to causes, she can lean on her famous and well-heeled friends. Who do you think Prince Charles leans on for things he does with the Prince’s Trust? So you think it all comes from his personal wealth?


----------



## berrydiva

Meh. Times are a changing.  The royals will change with those times too.  They're celebs anyway.


----------



## caramelize126

minababe said:


> of Course that cost a lot of Money. they all are rich People. they spend their own Money. so whats wrong with it.



I agree. The amount of money spent may seem crazy to us, but maybe it’s chump change in that crowd. 

IMO, it’s just the way they went about it that comes off as tacky. Her friends have given the media a play by play of exactly what they were planning, where, the costs, etc. totally unnecessary. I’m sure they would’ve kept it quiet if Meghan wanted to keep it low key. They wanted the media circus which, using a previous poster’s term, just comes off as so undignified, esp for a Royal.


----------



## caramelize126

TMA said:


> What? So she can only have British friends even though she is American and has spent 36 of her 37yrs being so. Sometime some of the criticisms are quite ludicrous. Who is Serena’s husband and how is that negative for what Meghan does in the RF? If she needs attention drawn to causes, she can lean on her famous and well-heeled friends. Who do you think Prince Charles leans on for things he does with the Prince’s Trust? So you think it all comes from his personal wealth?





CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ I think it’s improper for a member of the royal family to receive expensive public gifts from prominent foreigners through unofficial channels. Accompanied by an obvious press walk. Becomes even more complicated when you consider who Serena’s husband is. It would be different if there was a celebratory tea at someone’s house.



I don’t think that’s what she means. In the US, there are very strict rules about the types of gifts that federal government employees can accept and the costs of these gifts. Gifts through unofficial channels are still subject to ethics rules, as this can come off as bribery or trying to influence. 
Britain has similar rules and this does apply to the British family as well ( this goes into why they can’t accept gifts from designers and have to buy their own clothes).

Leaning on someone to help support a charity cause is very different from accepting tens and thousands of dollars worth of gifts. Does it change when you accept something in a personal vs official capacity? Sure. But Meghan no longer has that separation between personal and official. She’s married into it. 

I’m sure other royals accept expensive gifts. They just don’t do it in such a blatant manner all over the press.


----------



## A1aGypsy

They are Royals but they are also government officials. Every government has a protocol about who gov’t officials can accept gifts from, what they can accept. There is a difference between accepting something for a charity and accepting something personally. It can be quite complicated.

Sorry, I should have just “yah that” to the above. We were typing at the same time!


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t have a problem with the family using a private jet. I mean, they can’t very well fly commercial..


They fly commercial all the time.  It's their usual mode of travel.  First class, British Airways.  And that includes the Queen - although she doesn't travel abroad anymore.   Any celebrity who says it's impossible for them to fly commercial is full of ****.

Prince Phillip has referred to Economy Class as "ghastly".  I don't think he's experienced it, only heard about it.  As someone who exclusively travels Economy Class, I agree with him.


----------



## krissa

I’m glad Meghan seemed to enjoy herself. People already will criticize her for everything including having a baby shower. How dare her enjoy a weekend with friends celebrating the birth of her first child. She was in nyc for 3 days before it leaked, yet some want to spin it as attention seeking.  The level of inane nitpicking is astounding lol.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Fair enough, I was referring to traveling with their children. It seems that what it would take to get them, their kids, their nannies, their security etc on a commercial flight would cost as much, if not more than a private jet (depending on where they are going I guess).  

Although, come to think of it, I doubt they would put the heirs on the same flight...


----------



## anitalilac

minababe said:


> lets be honest, some women criticize her for everything and after all "she is just a actress" thats so stupid. so many Things here said about her are so stupid.
> kate and William went to the bafta Awards,
> camilla went to the London Fashion week,
> the York sister lived in new York City, one has an Instagram account and she went to store openings, Fashion Shows, Award Shows etc.
> but meghan is "still the actress" "act like she is still in Hollywood" "not royal"
> she is living a lowkey life with Harry. they actually  leaving London to have more privacy wiht their Family in the Future at Windsor.
> but she wants Attention?
> ridiculous.
> 
> she just spend 5 days in new York for some Quality time with her american friends and got a Baby shower.
> of Course that cost a lot of Money. they all are rich People. they spend their own Money. so whats wrong with it.


Well said!


----------



## Hobbsy

The woman had a baby shower, God forbid! She is not European so she didn't grow up with a stick up her arse. She's American, she's having her first child, her friends gave her a shower...so what?! It was probably such a nice break from having to act like royalty.


----------



## chicaloca

All the pearl clutching over a baby shower has been ridiculous.

Meghan looked fabulous. I love how she is setting her own narrative and dispelling false ones without saying a word. Supposedly she ditched all her old friends in her climb to the top but this baby shower has shown she has a fiercely loyal circle of friends.


----------



## berrydiva

caramelize126 said:


> I agree. The amount of money spent may seem crazy to us, but maybe it’s chump change in that crowd.
> 
> IMO, it’s just the way they went about it that comes off as tacky. Her friends have given the media a play by play of exactly what they were planning, where, the costs, etc. totally unnecessary. I’m sure they would’ve kept it quiet if Meghan wanted to keep it low key. They wanted the media circus which, using a previous poster’s term, just comes off as so undignified, esp for a Royal.


They leaked the costs? It's very easy to find out how much the room was that they used as well as the cost of Jean Georges catering services.  NYC media doesn't need them to tell the costs for them to know....these things are easy to find out here


----------



## Jayne1

Hobbsy said:


> The woman had a baby shower, God forbid! She is not European so she didn't grow up with a stick up her arse. She's American, she's having her first child, her friends gave her a shower...so what?! It was probably such a nice break from having to act like royalty.


It's not the fact she had a baby shower.  It's that it was such a costly affair.  It's not like her friends had it at one of their houses, which I find really appealing, given their houses.

The Mark penthouse (the largest hotel penthouse in the States) costs $75K a night. Serena paid for it. The details are all on-line.  The flowers, the food, everything.

I don't care what she does.  She's royalty so this is how you treat royalty - extravagantly.  Good thing she has rich friends.

I'm just happy I wasn't invited because I probably would go into debt buying her a baby gift suitable for her.

The papers said she's having another shower in the UK.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

myown said:


> *Meghan Markle Cradles Her Baby Bump While Departing NYC After Her Baby Shower!*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Baby Shower Guest List - See Which Celebs Attended! (Photos)
> Amal Clooney
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Misha Nonoo & Markus Anderson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jessica Mulroney
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abigail Spencer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Erin Hill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> -justjared


It's a red carpet for her baby shower! 

I was never a big believer in dignity, anyway! I look at Meghan and I see a fabulous woman living her best life, props to her. And other than concerns of what she does with taxpayer money, I have never seen her hurt anyone, which is even better.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Those headlines though about her cradling the baby bump just irritate the hell out of me.  They are clearly dog-whistling for the section of the audience that finds it a terrible thing to do or blame her for it somehow.  The DM is the worst for it. The paps probably take hundreds of photo's of her and the DM and The Sun et al publish the ones that get the worst crowd commenting on it.

I mean, how dare she, as a first time Mum cradle her own belly anyway


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

caramelize126 said:


> Totally agree with this. Of course she should be able to celebrate her first child with her friends! The details of the shower were leaked by one of the attendees ( I think previous posts mentioned that it may have been Jessica). This would only have been done with Meghan’s blessing.
> You can take the girl out of Hollywood but you can’t take Hollywood out of the girl...



 ITA with all the above posters on the inappropriateness over the last week.  And , yes, the girl deserves a shower with her friends!!!

That's not the issue for me. She made very bad choices IMO( or just did what she wanted to do and didn't care) regarding pretty much everything about this trip  - how it all would be perceived.  Stay under the radar!!!! How could she have allowed her friends to leak her presence in NYC and her movements?????? I don't believe for one second that she didn't give her approval of the leaks.
Don't have companies "underwriter" your shower  - those Away bags got the best free publicity ever(and oddly enough I had a post card in the mail yesterday from Away bags offering me 15% off my first purchase!!!!!!) .  What the heck? Now, all the planning supposedly wasn't done by her BUT are her friends this stupid (or attention grabbing - Serena excluded) to not realize how all this would look? AND wouldn't they have run things by her because of her new role? I really have been a fan or her and been wanting to think otherwise of her, but after this past week, yes, you can take the (b list) girl out of Hollywood but you can't take the Hollywood out of the girl.  She clearly craves the limelight that she never had before wedding Harry.  And now, she is making foolish choices to  bask in it. I can't even imagine the number of cumulative Royal eye rolls  and snickers that have occurred over the last week.
She has a big hole to dig herself out of.

On another note, what the F was Amal wearing to a mid day baby shower??? How could she have possibly thought that a red strapless jumpsuit would be appropriate? She looked beyond  ridiculous. Talk about craving attention. Yikes.


----------



## VickyB

TMA said:


> So her friends of 20 yrs (from Northwestern), 15 years in the industry or Jessica going on 9yrs are not really her friends? There are pictures of those ladies from her Instagram before it was deleted. They were at her wedding and were also at this. Just because the press does not know them (because they are far too lazy to do any research) does not mean they don’t exist.



Don't mean to speak for other members here. My understanding is that people are questioning her being out of the blue "dear friends" with Amal, Gayle whatever her name is and other celebs. Don't think she was hanging with them as friends let alone besties before hooking up with Harry. As in so very many relationships, Harry might have known these people but Meghan was the "baggage" they had to claim for being friends with him. 

It's been known that she and Serena have been very close pre Harry. Other celebs too but can't recall their names at the moment. Her Canadian informal stylist BFF also predates Harry but she is not even a blip on celeb radar  BUT she sure is thirsting to get  herself into the limelight.


----------



## VickyB

caramelize126 said:


> I think the plane they’ve used on previous family vacations has been loaned by the duke of Westminster’s family. I think the duchess of Westminster is William’s godmother.


Thanks! Wonder how that works. Is it an "any time you want" here is the jet pilot's cell number. Or, does William need to have her over for dinner and say "by the way, can we use the jet to hit the slopes this weekend"? LOL!


----------



## TMA

berrydiva said:


> They leaked the costs? It's very easy to find out how much the room was that they used as well as the cost of Jean Georges catering services.  NYC media doesn't need them to tell the costs for them to know....these things are easy to find out here



I bet you didn’t read a report in the Sun the day before the actual baby shower giving us a play by play of what happened at the fictional baby shower. Did the writer of the article admit they lied the day before? No. They just updated the fabricated story for the day it actually happened. I don’t believe all I read. They always tell you royal sources but no one know who that is. While some on here are claiming her friend leaked the story, it appears the leak of her presence in NY was from someone at an establishment she visited. I doubt that her friends wanted this hullabaloo, including strangers telling Serena and co how to spend their money.


----------



## doni

Hobbsy said:


> The woman had a baby shower, God forbid! She is not European so she didn't grow up with a stick up her arse. She's American, she's having her first child, her friends gave her a shower...so what?! It was probably such a nice break from having to act like royalty.



I think this is the core of the matter... Americans are judging her as if she was a celeb, and from that perspective she obviously did nothing wrong. But we, stick-up-the-arses people living in monarchies, see her differently. The fact is, she has accepted a job and position that consists in serving those people with a stick up their arses. And they are going to judge her against their expectations on royalty, not as any celeb with friends. Whether she ‘deserved’ or not a baby shower is not even a question. Royalty is an extraordinary privilege that you acquire not through merit, but by birth or marriage. As a consequence, royals legitimate their privilege through the carrying of their duties and their behaviour to maintain the respect and acceptance of their people. You don’t take a break from royalty. In Europe, or the UK, her behaviour has stroke the wrong chord, and as a royal that she is, the only relevant opinion is that of the Brits really.

And btw, there was no obligation for her to be working royalty. Harry could have given up his succession rights, quit being part of the royal payroll and live a ‘normal’ life doing other jobs. It has happened before, no big deal. So this is the life they’ve chosen.


----------



## TMA

Not all people with sticks up their asses judge her like a celebrity. A lot of us can see her friends appreciate her enough to throw her a party especially given the horrible treatment she has been subjected to in the British media for no reason. She’s been working for “us” before her wedding, trying to do the right things but every action is cruelly examined. Those of us with sticks up our asses who do not begrudge other people their successes have absolutely no problem. She didn’t use  our taxpayer funds (RPOs would have been paid whether or not utilized)  and she is not in a political decision making position, so her being treated by her friends most of whom she’s know for years is not our business. She is allowed a life while still “serving” us.


----------



## Hobbsy

Jayne1 said:


> It's not the fact she had a baby shower.  It's that it was such a costly affair.  It's not like her friends had it at one of their houses, which I find really appealing, given their houses.
> 
> The Mark penthouse (the largest hotel penthouse in the States) costs $75K a night. Serena paid for it. The details are all on-line.  The flowers, the food, everything.
> 
> I don't care what she does.  She's royalty so this is how you treat royalty - extravagantly.  Good thing she has rich friends.
> 
> I'm just happy I wasn't invited because I probably would go into debt buying her a baby gift suitable for her.
> 
> The papers said she's having another shower in the UK.


Why do you care how much it cost? Did they send you the bill?


----------



## Hobbsy

doni said:


> I think this is the core of the matter... Americans are judging her as if she was a celeb, and from that perspective she obviously did nothing wrong. But we, stick-up-the-arses people living in monarchies, see her differently. The fact is, she has accepted a job and position that consists in serving those people with a stick up their arses. And they are going to judge her against their expectations on royalty, not as any celeb with friends. Whether she ‘deserved’ or not a baby shower is not even a question. Royalty is an extraordinary privilege that you acquire not through merit, but by birth or marriage. As a consequence, royals legitimate their privilege through the carrying of their duties and their behaviour to maintain the respect and acceptance of their people. You don’t take a break from royalty. In Europe, or the UK, her behaviour has stroke the wrong chord, and as a royal that she is, the only relevant opinion is that of the Brits really.
> 
> And btw, there was no obligation for her to be working royalty. Harry could have given up his succession rights, quit being part of the royal payroll and live a ‘normal’ life doing other jobs. It has happened before, no big deal. So this is the life they’ve chosen.


Well, obviously the monarchy had no problem with the shower or she wouldn't have been there! Seems like the only ones having an issue are non members of the BRF, the pedestrian stick up their arses people.


----------



## Hobbsy

TMA said:


> Not all people with sticks up their asses judge her like a celebrity. A lot of us can see her friends appreciate her enough to throw her a party especially given the horrible treatment she has been subjected to in the British media for no reason. She’s been working for “us” before her wedding, trying to do the right things but every action is cruelly examined. Those of us with sticks up our asses who do not begrudge other people their successes have absolutely no problem. She didn’t use  our taxpayer funds (RPOs would have been paid whether or not utilized)  and she is not in a political decision making position, so her being treated by her friends most of whom she’s know for years is not our business. She is allowed a life while still “serving” us.


I like you.


----------



## bag-princess

Hobbsy said:


> Why do you care how much it cost? Did they send you the bill?



Exactly


----------



## minababe

all the flowers from the babyshower were donated to charity and Hospitals in nyc.


----------



## pursecrzy

VickyB said:


> Don't mean to speak for other members here. My understanding is that people are questioning her being out of the blue "dear friends" with Amal, Gayle whatever her name is and other celebs. Don't think she was hanging with them as friends let alone besties before hooking up with Harry. As in so very many relationships, Harry might have known these people but Meghan was the "baggage" they had to claim for being friends with him.
> 
> It's been known that she and Serena have been very close pre Harry. Other celebs too but can't recall their names at the moment. Her Canadian informal stylist BFF also predates Harry but she is not even a blip on celeb radar  BUT she sure is thirsting to get  herself into the limelight.



In Canada, her stylist is known. She’s the DIL of a former PM and wife of a TV commentator. She has also styled for the current PM’s wife.


----------



## krissa

Jayne1 said:


> It's not the fact she had a baby shower.  It's that it was such a costly affair.  It's not like her friends had it at one of their houses, which I find really appealing, given their houses.
> 
> The Mark penthouse (the largest hotel penthouse in the States) costs $75K a night. Serena paid for it. The details are all on-line.  The flowers, the food, everything.
> 
> I don't care what she does.  She's royalty so this is how you treat royalty - extravagantly.  Good thing she has rich friends.
> 
> I'm just happy I wasn't invited because I probably would go into debt buying her a baby gift suitable for her.
> 
> The papers said she's having another shower in the UK.



You would go into debt buying a gift suitable for her? A self made woman who jusy happened to marry a prince has shown she has crazy taste Bc of the cost of a venue her friend paid for? You realize rich people get a lot of things free or heavily discounted. Serena Williams is an international tennis star and her husband has connections, too. I’m not sure why the cost is any indication of Meghan’s taste. She seems pretty down to earth. I don’t get where people are pulling this stuff from. 70k is a lot, but a lot of things are obscenely expensive in nyc.


----------



## chicaloca

The  “friend” narrative is quickly becoming the most ridiculous of the criticisms against Meghan. All we’ve been hearing is that Social Climbing Meghan used and ditched her old friends. The People article and baby shower completely disproves that narrative so now we’re hearing  that her new friends aren’t really her friends. 

It is entirely possible she has met new friends since her marriage to Harry. That does not mean they aren’t legitimate friendships.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chicaloca said:


> The  “friend” narrative is quickly becoming the most ridiculous of the criticisms against Meghan. All we’ve been hearing is that Social Climbing Meghan used and ditched her old friends. The People article and baby shower completely disproves that narrative so now we’re hearing  that her new friends aren’t really her friends.
> 
> It is entirely possible she has met new friends since her marriage to Harry. That does not mean they aren’t legitimate friendships.


So I wonder since she has so many friends if she'll have another baby shower when she gets back? For/from the royal family and maybe her mother? Not sure if they are becoming more common overseas.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## krissa

berrydiva said:


> They leaked the costs? It's very easy to find out how much the room was that they used as well as the cost of Jean Georges catering services.  NYC media doesn't need them to tell the costs for them to know....these things are easy to find out here



Ppl def show with the concern trolling that they’re pulling things to be negative about. It reminds me of the coverage of *****’s tan suit or him using Grey Poupon, lol.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think the reason why what it cost becomes a trigger issue and why they try to be restrained in their projection of wealth would be, imagine you are a single mother with kids to feed working in the UK. A portion of your earnings go to support the royal family. Not a lot, per person, but cumulatively a lot of money that could go to programming that would make your life easier and your kid’s lives better on a daily basis. I imagine if you see a member of the RF having a lavish party like this, you would not be able to help but think, “if they have that level of wealth available to them, why are they being supported by taxes?”


----------



## bisbee

A1aGypsy said:


> I think the reason why what it cost becomes a trigger issue and why they try to be restrained in their projection of wealth would be, imagine you are a single mother with kids to feed working in the UK. A portion of your earnings go to support the royal family. Not a lot, per person, but cumulatively a lot of money that could go to programming that would make your life easier and your kid’s lives better on a daily basis. I imagine if you see a member of the RF having a lavish party like this, you would not be able to help but think, “if they have that level of wealth available to them, why are they being supported by taxes?”


She did not pay for the shower.  Serena is married to a wealthy man, besides being EXTREMELY wealthy on her own.  Paying for that penthouse was just a drop in the bucket...besides, we don’t even know if the hotel charged her.

People really have the nerve to portray themselves as having inside information, don’t they?


----------



## LibbyRuth

It's easy to be outraged by the things that you imagine people to do, and imagine them to be taking advantage of. But at the end of the day, that outrage is created by imagination - not by the actual person's actions. A person can be outraged at Meghan Markle growing up in an average middle class life, dealing with challenges like divorced parents, building a career for herself and then being fortunate enough to marry a prince. A person can be outraged by Serena Williams being born into a poor family to a father who had a dream, working her ass off to be the very best at what she does, and making a lot of money because of it - then spending some of that money on lavish events. People can choose to notice the amount of time and money that Meghan and Serena also devote to helping others to make their lives better, or they can notice that and imagine more sinnister motivations for each of them. But as most of us don't know either woman (or Jessica Mulroney for that matter) so what we're outraged by, or admiring, is what we imagine and not the actual truth.


----------



## A1aGypsy

bisbee said:


> She did not pay for the shower.  Serena is married to a wealthy man, besides being EXTREMELY wealthy on her own.  Paying for that penthouse was just a drop in the bucket...besides, we don’t even know if the hotel charged her.
> 
> People really have the nerve to portray themselves as having inside information, don’t they?



Sorry, is that directed at me? I’m not suggesting I have any inside information. But perception of the public is important to the royal family and their longevity.  And, if the hotel did not charge Serena, that would likely be a legal problem with respect to a govt official benefitting from a freebie.

And this is coming from someone who has advocated hard that she is getting a raw deal from the press in the past. i just think this was a misstep.


----------



## LibbyRuth

A1aGypsy said:


> Sorry, is that directed at me? I’m not suggesting I have any inside information. But perception of the public is important to the royal family and their longevity.  And, if the hotel did not charge Serena, that would likely be a legal problem with respect to a govt official benefitting from a freebie.
> 
> And this is coming from someone who has advocated hard that she is getting a raw deal from the press in the past. i just think this was a misstep.



If the hotel did not charge rent for the room, knowing that the publicity they'd get for holding such an event would be worth more than $75,000, than Serena Williams benefitted from that freebie, not Meghan. And I'm not sure that any rules about freebies to government officials would apply to Meghan since those rules are to prevent elected officials from being swayed by bribes in enacting policy. Meghan has no influence on enacting laws in Great Britain. Yes, her grandmother is he figurehead lead of the British government. But Parliament is not going to change any laws because Serena Williams throws Meghan a baby shower in a swank hotel.
I understand what you are saying about the optics of a lavish party. But lets be honest here - the BRF is not known and followed for modesty. Having as many castles and palaces as they do is lavish. The weddings they throw are lavish. Their Christmas getaway is lavish. People follow the BRF because of it's lavish ways of doing things. So attending one party that is in an expensive location continues with what they do ... it doesn't violate it. And in all honesty, with the things being said about Meghan, had she NOT attended this shower, people would have used it as "proof" that she's blown off all her friends and no one likes her because they didn't even celebrate when she had a baby. People will find reasons to criticize no matter what she does. So she might as well do what she feels is right.


----------



## Hobbsy

A1aGypsy said:


> I think the reason why what it cost becomes a trigger issue and why they try to be restrained in their projection of wealth would be, imagine you are a single mother with kids to feed working in the UK. A portion of your earnings go to support the royal family. Not a lot, per person, but cumulatively a lot of money that could go to programming that would make your life easier and your kid’s lives better on a daily basis. I imagine if you see a member of the RF having a lavish party like this, you would not be able to help but think, “if they have that level of wealth available to them, why are they being supported by taxes?”


Serious? Have you been to the Tower of London? Seen the Crown jewels? Seen the gold punch bowls that are big enough to take a bath in? Have you seen the size of the palace the BRF lives in? Do you know how many years there have been single moms struggling? Do you know how long the monarchy has been there? I don't think trying to blame the vast differences of riches in the UK on Meghan is hardly fair, or the issue.


----------



## Hobbsy

LibbyRuth said:


> It's easy to be outraged by the things that you imagine people to do, and imagine them to be taking advantage of. But at the end of the day, that outrage is created by imagination - not by the actual person's actions. A person can be outraged at Meghan Markle growing up in an average middle class life, dealing with challenges like divorced parents, building a career for herself and then being fortunate enough to marry a prince. A person can be outraged by Serena Williams being born into a poor family to a father who had a dream, working her ass off to be the very best at what she does, and making a lot of money because of it - then spending some of that money on lavish events. People can choose to notice the amount of time and money that Meghan and Serena also devote to helping others to make their lives better, or they can notice that and imagine more sinnister motivations for each of them. But as most of us don't know either woman (or Jessica Mulroney for that matter) so what we're outraged by, or admiring, is what we imagine and not the actual truth.


Amen!


----------



## A1aGypsy

A benefit can be translated through another person. So, if SW’s received a freebie for MM’s shower, that would translate to a freebie for MM, at least according to the policy in the govt agency that I am bound by. I would suspect the rules are the same.

And there appears to actually be guidelines about it:

https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf

Anyway, all I was saying was she is certainly entitled to enjoy herself, her friends and her former home. I just think a little more low key event might have been more prudent. I’m hardly trying to blame the Crown Jewels on MM.


----------



## LibbyRuth

A1aGypsy said:


> A benefit can be translated through another person. So, if SW’s received a freebie for MM’s shower, that would translate to a freebie for MM, at least according to the policy in the govt agency that I am bound by. I would suspect the rules are the same.
> 
> And there appears to actually be legislation about it:
> 
> https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf
> 
> Anyway, all I was saying was she is certainly entitled to enjoy herself, her friends and her former home. I just think a little more low key event might have been more prudent. I’m hardly trying to blame the Crown Jewels on MM.



They didn't sell photos to People magazine. They did not send out press releases ahead of time to make sure people knew all the details. The people who were there have not shared details ... as has been pointed out, some publications just chose to fill in blanks to tell a story. So I think they actually had a low key private event. Meghan didn't even make an announced and publicized trip to New York. But the reality of being the Duchess of Sussex is that when she does something, it isn't low key.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> They didn't sell photos to People magazine. They did not send out press releases ahead of time to make sure people knew all the details. The people who were there have not shared details ... as has been pointed out, some publications just chose to fill in blanks to tell a story. So I think they actually had a low key private event. Meghan didn't even make an announced and publicized trip to New York. But the reality of being the Duchess of Sussex is that when she does something, it isn't low key.


Gayle King talking about the shower on CBS. Someone will ALWAYS talk or sell stories and pictures. it's just human nature I think to not be quiet about amazing stuff!
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meghan-markles-baby-shower-gayle-king-shares-details-repeat-roses/


----------



## Jayne1

Hobbsy said:


> Why do you care how much it cost? Did they send you the bill?


I don't care.  I was quoting Harper's and People.  Try not to get personal.


----------



## cafecreme15

I'm not sure if some of the debate happening here is due to a genuine difference of opinion (which is totally fine!) or a misunderstanding. If it's the latter, I will try and clarify. No one is saying Meghan shouldn't have had a shower or come to NY to celebrate with her friends in whatever way she wished. So long as she is being supported by private funds, it is absolutely her prerogative to keep the company she wants and spend the money on what she wants (so long as the senior members of the BRF approve -- being a royal is not like being any other run of the mill extremely wealthy person). My point specifically is that the evidence suggests Jess Mulroney tipped off the media that the baby shower was happening and provided details. Meghan was in NYC for two whole days on the down low, and this could have continued but for the intentional and I'm sure Meghan-approved media tip-off.

 Once you purposefully loop in the media to your plans, you willingly open yourself up for scrutiny and criticism as the event is no longer really private. In my opinion, this was clearly an attention-grab - if Meghan really wanted this to remain private, I'm sure her friends would have respected her wishes and finished the trip as it started -- quietly.


----------



## rose60610

Next thing you know Meghan will wear that dark nail polish again. Oh the scandal!


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> I'm not sure if some of the debate happening here is due to a genuine difference of opinion (which is totally fine!) or a misunderstanding. If it's the latter, I will try and clarify. No one is saying Meghan shouldn't have had a shower or come to NY to celebrate with her friends in whatever way she wished. So long as she is being supported by private funds, it is absolutely her prerogative to keep the company she wants and spend the money on what she wants (so long as the senior members of the BRF approve -- being a royal is not like being any other run of the mill extremely wealthy person). My point specifically is that the evidence suggests Jess Mulroney tipped off the media that the baby shower was happening and provided details. Meghan was in NYC for two whole days on the down low, and this could have continued but for the intentional and I'm sure Meghan-approved media tip-off.
> 
> Once you purposefully loop in the media to your plans, you willingly open yourself up for scrutiny and criticism as the event is no longer really private. In my opinion, this was clearly an attention-grab - if Meghan really wanted this to remain private, I'm sure her friends would have respected her wishes and finished the trip as it started -- quietly.


Exactly. We also get an idea as to which 5 talked to People magazine on her behalf.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> Don't mean to speak for other members here. My understanding is that people are questioning her being out of the blue "dear friends" with Amal, Gayle whatever her name is and other celebs. Don't think she was hanging with them as friends let alone besties before hooking up with Harry. As in so very many relationships, Harry might have known these people but Meghan was the "baggage" they had to claim for being friends with him.
> 
> It's been known that she and Serena have been very close pre Harry. Other celebs too but can't recall their names at the moment. Her Canadian informal stylist BFF also predates Harry but she is not even a blip on celeb radar  BUT she sure is thirsting to get  herself into the limelight.


I was wondering what Gayle King was doing there.....she seems like a very nice person; maybe Meghan met her once or twice and decided they were "friends"


----------



## kemilia

rose60610 said:


> Next thing you know Meghan will wear that dark nail polish again. Oh the scandal!


I noticed right away that she didn't when the pics started showing up. She missed a good opportunity for the dark polish!


----------



## Hobbsy

Jayne1 said:


> I don't care.  I was quoting Harper's and People.  Try not to get personal.


Lol....oh this isn't personal. Not to me. I'm happy she came over for a baby shower. I wish we could have seen more pictures! I hope we get to see the presents her and Harry open. I am 100% Team Meghan.


----------



## Hobbsy

cafecreme15 said:


> I'm not sure if some of the debate happening here is due to a genuine difference of opinion (which is totally fine!) or a misunderstanding. If it's the latter, I will try and clarify. No one is saying Meghan shouldn't have had a shower or come to NY to celebrate with her friends in whatever way she wished. So long as she is being supported by private funds, it is absolutely her prerogative to keep the company she wants and spend the money on what she wants (so long as the senior members of the BRF approve -- being a royal is not like being any other run of the mill extremely wealthy person). My point specifically is that the evidence suggests Jess Mulroney tipped off the media that the baby shower was happening and provided details. Meghan was in NYC for two whole days on the down low, and this could have continued but for the intentional and I'm sure Meghan-approved media tip-off.
> 
> Once you purposefully loop in the media to your plans, you willingly open yourself up for scrutiny and criticism as the event is no longer really private. In my opinion, this was clearly an attention-grab - if Meghan really wanted this to remain private, I'm sure her friends would have respected her wishes and finished the trip as it started -- quietly.


Who cares if it wasn't private? The stick up your arse people I bet! [emoji23]


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> It's easy to be outraged by the things that you imagine people to do, and imagine them to be taking advantage of. But at the end of the day, that outrage is created by imagination - not by the actual person's actions. A person can be outraged at Meghan Markle growing up in an average middle class life, dealing with challenges like divorced parents, building a career for herself and then being fortunate enough to marry a prince. A person can be outraged by Serena Williams being born into a poor family to a father who had a dream, working her ass off to be the very best at what she does, and making a lot of money because of it - then spending some of that money on lavish events. People can choose to notice the amount of time and money that Meghan and Serena also devote to helping others to make their lives better, or they can notice that and imagine more sinnister motivations for each of them. But as most of us don't know either woman (or Jessica Mulroney for that matter) so what we're outraged by, or admiring, is what we imagine and not the actual truth.


who is outraged?  Does saying she likes and seeks attention mean one is outraged?  I'm not outraged but I guess I'm not quite as impressed with her as some people here.
Harry loves her and that's what counts.


----------



## daisychainz

Hobbsy said:


> Who cares if it wasn't private? The stick up your arse people I bet! [emoji23]


Exactly! Which is much of new British family and their social circle. I'm sure the British monarchs and their friends just adore her.


----------



## TMA

cafecreme15 said:


> I'm not sure if some of the debate happening here is due to a genuine difference of opinion (which is totally fine!) or a misunderstanding. If it's the latter, I will try and clarify. No one is saying Meghan shouldn't have had a shower or come to NY to celebrate with her friends in whatever way she wished. So long as she is being supported by private funds, it is absolutely her prerogative to keep the company she wants and spend the money on what she wants (so long as the senior members of the BRF approve -- being a royal is not like being any other run of the mill extremely wealthy person). My point specifically is that the evidence suggests Jess Mulroney tipped off the media that the baby shower was happening and provided details. Meghan was in NYC for two whole days on the down low, and this could have continued but for the intentional and I'm sure Meghan-approved media tip-off.
> 
> Once you purposefully loop in the media to your plans, you willingly open yourself up for scrutiny and criticism as the event is no longer really private. In my opinion, this was clearly an attention-grab - if Meghan really wanted this to remain private, I'm sure her friends would have respected her wishes and finished the trip as it started -- quietly.



Which evidence is that?


----------



## cafecreme15

Hobbsy said:


> Who cares if it wasn't private? The stick up your arse people I bet! [emoji23]


I don't care at all that it wasn't private. Again, the point is that if you willingly decide to make it not private by informing the media of it, then you can't complain when people scrutinize it. Very simple. When the press oversteps its boundaries, that is another matter entirely.


TMA said:


> Which evidence is that?


Jess Mulroney had been in NYC for a number of days already doing appearances on GMA and styling for Harpers Bazaar. The royal reporter from Harpers Bazaar, Omid Scobie, broke the baby shower story 2 days after Meghan had already landed in NYC. Doesn't take a genius to put two and two together there. Many other royal reporters and watchers, including Elizabeth Holmes of the WSJ, also pointed out this connection. I would link to her sources but unfortunately she posted it on her instagram story so it's no longer there.


----------



## Hobbsy

I think Queen Liz wanted it to get on the news. I think she wants Meghan to be seen in a good, nice, natural light and what better than a good old baby shower?!


----------



## afsweet

With all the public appearances and travel she has done since being married, you'd think Meghan would just want to lounge around her hotel room in pajamas and invite her friends over to hang out without being in the public eye.


----------



## cafecreme15

Hobbsy said:


> I think Queen Liz wanted it to get on the news. I think she wants Meghan to be seen in a good, nice, natural light and what better than a good old baby shower?!


Entirely possible! Although I think the Queen would have thought that some might find the extravagance of the shower distasteful. But as I said in a previous post, if the Queen approves, then who are we to judge? All any of us can do is speculate as to what she really thinks.


----------



## gracekelly

cafecreme15 said:


> I don't care at all that it wasn't private. Again, the point is that if you willingly decide to make it not private by informing the media of it, then you can't complain when people scrutinize it. Very simple. When the press oversteps its boundaries, that is another matter entirely.
> 
> Jess Mulroney had been in NYC for a number of days already doing appearances on GMA and styling for Harpers Bazaar. The royal reporter from Harpers Bazaar, Omid Scobie, broke the baby shower story 2 days after Meghan had already landed in NYC. Doesn't take a genius to put two and two together there. Many other royal reporters and watchers, including Elizabeth Holmes of the WSJ, also pointed out this connection. I would link to her sources but unfortunately she posted it on her instagram story so it's no longer there.


As I mentioned in another thread the “friend” climbing on MM’s back to get a leg up on her career is not doing MM any favors.   They always say there is no such thing as bad publicity, but in this case I don’t think that is true.


----------



## cafecreme15

gracekelly said:


> As I mentioned in another thread the “friend” climbing on MM’s back to get a leg up on her career is not doing MM any favors.   They always say there is no such thing as bad publicity, but in this case I don’t think that is true.


Jess Mulroney has certainly benefited from Meghan's rise to being an international household name, that's for sure. My guess is that for some reason, MM doesn't seem to mind that Jess has used her relationship with her to bolster her own career - perhaps because she can then use Jess as her indirect media mouthpiece? Or maybe MM just thinks that she's doing a good thing for a friend. Who really knows. That's why speculating is entertaining; there are endless theories.


----------



## TMA

cafecreme15 said:


> I don't care at all that it wasn't private. Again, the point is that if you willingly decide to make it not private by informing the media of it, then you can't complain when people scrutinize it. Very simple. When the press oversteps its boundaries, that is another matter entirely.
> 
> Jess Mulroney had been in NYC for a number of days already doing appearances on GMA and styling for Harpers Bazaar. The royal reporter from Harpers Bazaar, Omid Scobie, broke the baby shower story 2 days after Meghan had already landed in NYC. Doesn't take a genius to put two and two together there. Many other royal reporters and watchers, including Elizabeth Holmes of the WSJ, also pointed out this connection. I would link to her sources but unfortunately she posted it on her instagram story so it's no longer there.



Well she must have been lying to him because he initially reported the shower was on Tuesday. Another person wrote a whole newspaper article on the shower having been on Tuesday along with  quotes from “sources” on what was done at the shower. Only for everyone to re-group the next day it was actually happening on Wednesday. Omid’s information was wrong so for me that was def not Jessica feeding him info. Just take most of the reporting with a gazillion tablespoons of salt.  I’m sure they are releasing some info, but I think there was a lot op putting 2 &2 together by the reporters


----------



## cafecreme15

TMA said:


> Well she must have been lying to him because he initially reported the shower was on Tuesday. Another person wrote a whole newspaper article on the shower having been on Tuesday along with  quotes from “sources” on what was done at the shower. Only for everyone to re-group the next day it was actually happening on Wednesday. Omid’s information was wrong so for me that was def not Jessica feeding him info. Just take most of the reporting with a gazillion tablespoons of salt.  I’m sure they are releasing some info, but I think there was a lot op putting 2 &2 together by the reporters


Very well could be. Who knows what Jess allegedly told Omid and what he then may have filled in to get to a certain word count. But Omid is generally a very widely respected royal reporter who does know the royals somewhat personally, so I still think that because he was the first one to break the scoop, he must have gotten at least some information from a reliable inner circle source. As for the bottom feeders who totally fabricate entire stories unabashedly...well...it should be clear what I think of them LOL.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hobbsy

gracekelly said:


> As I mentioned in another thread the “friend” climbing on MM’s back to get a leg up on her career is not doing MM any favors.   They always say there is no such thing as bad publicity, but in this case I don’t think that is true.


I don't see it as bad publicity, just a lot of little gossip and something for people to moan about.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm assuming there's this much outrage on the Wills/Kate thread about them using a private plane for the holiday they're currently enjoying, probably also those bills are also being picked up by friends, family or the British taxpayer  ?

And yet, after checking, their thread is strangely quiet.

Pretty telling.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm assuming there's this much outrage on the Wills/Kate thread about them using a private plane for the holiday they're currently enjoying, probably also those bills are also being picked up by friends, family or the British taxpayer  ?
> 
> And yet, after checking, their thread is strangely quiet.
> 
> Pretty telling.


there wasn't a bunch of media coverage (at least in the US) and there were no celebs involved


----------



## FreeSpirit71

sdkitty said:


> there wasn't a bunch of media coverage (at least in the US) and there were no celebs involved


There is still a _very_ marked difference in the tone and coverage, regardless. 

They could get photo's of them (W & K) if they wanted to, but the Meghan story gives them clickbait.

Is the amount really any less than Kate and Wills are spending or being given by their friends and family.? I think not.


----------



## cafecreme15

Here are some of Elizabeth Holmes’ “So Many Thoughts” on the shower. If you like to stay up to date on Meghan news, whether out of adoration or mere curiosity, you should follow her on Instagram! Her fashion critiques are almost always on point. Handle is eholmes. 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
u


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> There is still a _very_ marked difference in the tone and coverage, regardless.
> 
> They could get photo's of them (W & K) if they wanted to, but the Meghan story gives them clickbait.
> 
> Is the amount really any less than Kate and Wills are spending or being given by their friends and family.? I think not.


She (and her admirers) may not like some of the criticism but I still say she has the life she wants.  And it's probably a good think that she likes to be in the spotlight.  If Harry married someone who craved privacy she might be miserable.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not a stan. But a bit of balanced reporting would be nice, is all I'm saying.

Meghan isn't a crumbling wallflower, she's willing to work hard and doesn't shy from the spotlight, which I actually think is good. 

Other women in the BRF  haven't faired so well in it.

I think the staid courtiers (aka the grey men as Diana called them) are her real enemy.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not a stan. But a bit of balanced reporting would be nice, is all I'm saying.
> 
> Meghan isn't a crumbling wallflower, she's willing to work hard and doesn't shy from the spotlight, which I actually think is good.
> 
> Other women in the BRF  haven't faired so well in it.
> 
> I think the staid courtiers (aka the grey men as Diana called them) are her real enemy.


yes, if she was stressed out over all the attention as I think JFK Jr's wife was, it would be a lot harder for her


----------



## gracekelly

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm assuming there's this much outrage on the Wills/Kate thread about them using a private plane for the holiday they're currently enjoying, probably also those bills are also being picked up by friends, family or the British taxpayer  ?
> 
> And yet, after checking, their thread is strangely quiet.
> 
> Pretty telling.


Prince William,  and Prince Edward and his family are on "private" skiing holiday.  I believe  the translation of "private" means not at gov't expense for anything and that includes the private planes.  They are all independently wealthy enough to foot their own bills.


----------



## gracekelly

Hobbsy said:


> I don't see it as bad publicity, just a lot of little gossip and something for people to moan about.


Time will tell if it is bad publicity in the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

cafecreme15 said:


> Jess Mulroney has certainly benefited from Meghan's rise to being an international household name, that's for sure. My guess is that for some reason, MM doesn't seem to mind that Jess has used her relationship with her to bolster her own career - perhaps because she can then use Jess as her indirect media mouthpiece? Or maybe MM just thinks that she's doing a good thing for a friend. Who really knows. That's why speculating is entertaining; there are endless theories.


I think MM thinks this is helping a friend advance.  That is very kind of her, but I hope it does not get her into trouble.


----------



## caramelize126

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm assuming there's this much outrage on the Wills/Kate thread about them using a private plane for the holiday they're currently enjoying, probably also those bills are also being picked up by friends, family or the British taxpayer  ?
> 
> And yet, after checking, their thread is strangely quiet.
> 
> Pretty telling.





gracekelly said:


> Prince William,  and Prince Edward and his family are on "private" skiing holiday.  I believe  the translation of "private" means not at gov't expense for anything and that includes the private planes.  They are all independently wealthy enough to foot their own bills.



There aren’t any photos of Will and Kate because the media wasn’t tipped off to where they went. News articles are speculating Courchevel, but no one knows for sure. Any photos being posted right now are all from previous engagements or trips. 

Had they have someone from their camp announce where they were going, the cost of their plane, ski chalet, meals, etc. there may be more activity in their thread.


----------



## Morgan R

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not a stan. But a bit of balanced reporting would be nice, is all I'm saying.
> 
> Meghan isn't a crumbling wallflower, she's willing to work hard and doesn't shy from the spotlight, which I actually think is good.
> 
> Other women in the BRF  haven't faired so well in it.
> 
> I think the staid courtiers (aka the grey men as Diana called them) are her real enemy.



Yeah I would love for there to be some balanced reporting. Meghan is getting critiqued for every little thing regardless and "tabloids fodder" about a lot of things she does. Meghan isn't above criticism but accurate reporting would be great rather than articles that are just "click bait" which includes inaccurate or speculative reporting. Like you said Meghan clearly isn't a "crumbling wallflower" and she doesn't shy away from the spotlight that isn't necessarily a bad thing because there were some royal women that have struggled with their role as a royal. Also even before the baby shower happened some British tabloids were asking "Will Meghan break protocol and have a baby shower?". Having a baby shower isn't breaking protocol.

Ever since Meghan has been with Harry there has been so much "faux outrage" about a lot of things she does and since they've gotten married  there are the never ending "breaking protocol" stories about Meghan. Just some of the stories that come to mind.:

-* "Meghan breaks protocol by crossing her legs" :* Yet literally there was an event where Camilla was sitting near Meghan crossing her legs at the exact same time Meghan had her legs crossed. Yes the leg slant is more common but crossing your legs isn't protocol otherwise other royal women have broken protocol. Same with Meghan wearing dark nail polish that isn't protocol otherwise a lot of royal women have broken protocol.
- *"Meghan breaks protocol wearing a one shoulder dress": *So many royal woman wear off the shoulders or one shoulder dresses where are the stories about them "breaking protocol". When Queen Elizabeth II was younger and also in some portraits of her she was either in an off the shoulder dress or in a one shoulder dress.
- *"Is Meghan being to 'Hollywood' holding her baby bump": *I don't even know how that is considered Hollywood when plenty of pregnant women hold their stomach while other pregnant women don't. Also from videos at various engagements Meghan attends during some engagements you can visibly see Harry and Meghan's baby seems to be very reactive to sound so video has been captured where you can see the baby kick/see the fetal movements (I could literally post the videos)
- *"Should Harry and Meghan stop with hand-holding (or other forms of PDA) to seem more professional/royal?":* I've seen some say Harry and Meghan's hand-holding (or other forms of PDA they do such as whispering to each other, placing their hands on each others backs, kissing, etc.) is "Hollywood" which makes literally no sense considering it is known a lot of royal couples do also show PDA to one another. Notably outside of Harry and Meghan there a few couples that show PDA to one another that instantly come to mind  and those are Charles & Camilla, Felipe & Letizia, and Frederik & Mary (though there are so many other royal couples I could name as well). Then there are other royal couples who don't often show PDA and there is nothing wrong with that. All royal couples are different I can't fault any if they do or don't show PDA.
-*"Has Meghan abandoned her friends because of her new royal role?"* - Well the People article and the baby shower clearly show her friends are still around and supportive of her.


The irony in all this criticism and reporting about Meghan's baby shower thrown by/paid for by her friends is quite interesting but not shocking to see. How easily some forget (or conveniently ignore) other royals "private trips" that happened to be made public. While some are saying "Meghan wants to be seen/went to places she would be seen" well that is interesting because I live near Memphis and I personally remember how big a deal it was back in 2014 back when Guy Pelly and Lizzy Wilson got married in Memphis...Prince William, Prince Harry, Princess Beatrice, and Princess Eugenie  were all in Memphis to attend the wedding. Technically that was "private trip" yet the press was very aware of it and technically it could've been "more private" like some are saying Meghan's baby shower could've been. William, Harry, Beatrice, and Eugenie were spotted at various places on/near Beale Street. You don't go to Beale Street unless you want to be seen. Literally when musicians and actors are in town that is a place many of them visit. Also William, Harry, Beatrice, and Eugenie also visited Graceland and that is a place that they were clearly going to be seen because there are always cameras near (either tourist taking pictures or paparazzi taking pictures) because often there are musicians, actors, politicians, and other royals that visit there when they are in Memphis. On top of that some streets were also closed in Memphis and in addition to Personal Protection Officers there were Memphis Police Officers that were additional security for William, Harry, Beatrice, and Eugenie.


----------



## lulilu

I saw on IG a number of the vendors (baker, party planner, etc.) posted photos and talked of their involvement in the shower.  I guess all bets (of privacy) are off after she left the US.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I saw on IG a number of the vendors (baker, party planner, etc.) posted photos and talked of their involvement in the shower.  I guess all bets (of privacy) are off after she left the US.


Perhaps giving their services for free in exchange for free publicity.  They were allowed to post after she left the country?    Several celebs have bartered like this for their weddings.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps giving their services for free in exchange for free publicity.  They were allowed to post after she left the country?    Several celebs have bartered like this for their weddings.



IDK.  I was just surprised that they were publicizing their participation in the "private" baby shower as soon as Meghan left.


----------



## berrydiva

Folks are still on about this....lol.


----------



## caramelize126

I really hope these ladies are genuinely her friends, but I find it hard to believe that they would have done something this extravagant for her if she hadn’t married who she ended up marrying.

Also side note, ABC posted this from when Kate was pregnant. This that any gifts that she would receive for the baby would have to respectfully be returned. I wonder if this applies to Meghan as well? 
https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/kate-middleton-baby-shower/story?id=18838126


----------



## cafecreme15

Ready for some Morocco pics!’


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> I really hope these ladies are genuinely her friends, but I find it hard to believe that they would have done something this extravagant for her if she hadn’t married who she ended up marrying.


right.... she is a really lovely person who happened to marry one of the highest profile and most beloved men in the world
Otherwise, she would be just a lovely person

And to be fair, he is beloved because he happened to be born into royalty and because of the tragic death of his mother


----------



## rose60610

If the Queen wasn't in favor of the shower, maybe she thought it'd be better to stay out of it completely and let the couple learn what happens from the press and publicity, not all good. 

Markle and Harry are in their 30's and they' shouldn't have to be coddled and have their hands held by the Royal Image Consulting Team all the time.  It's important to be allowed to mess up without the ever-protective hovering bubble of The Helicopter Team. You see what happens to kids with Helicopter Parents, they're barely capable of wiping their own butts. At some point you have to know how to act and live without someone pulling every string.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> If the Queen wasn't in favor of the shower, maybe she thought it'd be better to stay out of it completely and let the couple learn what happens from the press and publicity, not all good.
> 
> Markle and Harry are in their 30's and they' shouldn't have to be coddled and have their hands held by the Royal Image Consulting Team all the time.  It's important to be allowed to mess up without the ever-protective hovering bubble of The Helicopter Team. You see what happens to kids with Helicopter Parents, they're barely capable of wiping their own butts. At some point you have to know how to act and live without someone pulling every string.


In spite of getting criticized, I doubt she regrets the shower or how it was done


----------



## ccbaggirl89

lulilu said:


> IDK.  I was just surprised that they were publicizing their participation in the "private" baby shower as soon as Meghan left.


It's not really private imo. It's a private event, hosted for a select group of people, but the host/hostesses - Serena Williams and company - do not fall under any level of private/protected. Meghan, since she married into the royal family, could be afforded privacy if she hosted and used vendors that were royal-approved or used to that level of secrecy, but since she didn't, perhaps that is why details can be leaked. The royal family can keep secrets if they want -  how many wedding dress fittings did she (or Kate) attend and not a soul knew the designers until the day of. Since she didn't plan it the only level of privacy she could expect would be from her friend circle, and celebs are talk-show hosts are not interested in maintaining privacy when it can benefit them.


----------



## A1aGypsy

rose60610 said:


> If the Queen wasn't in favor of the shower, maybe she thought it'd be better to stay out of it completely and let the couple learn what happens from the press and publicity, not all good.
> 
> Markle and Harry are in their 30's and they' shouldn't have to be coddled and have their hands held by the Royal Image Consulting Team all the time.  It's important to be allowed to mess up without the ever-protective hovering bubble of The Helicopter Team. You see what happens to kids with Helicopter Parents, they're barely capable of wiping their own butts. At some point you have to know how to act and live without someone pulling every string.



Not when the longevity of the RF is at stake. They will never be “free” to do as they please. They are state property. Just look at some of the things that Diana said after the divorce. 

Which is probably why MM looked so happy in NYC. I hope she is happy.


----------



## Sharont2305

They haven't arrived in Morocco as yet, apparently the press haven't been allowed to divulge on the exact time of arrival ( it's 5:20pm here in the UK and I think Morocco is either the same time as us or 1 hour later)
They are travelling with a nine strong entourage including a hairdresser. Sources say medical provisions have been made for Meghan, who is around seven months pregnant.


----------



## sdkitty

from the daily beast:

*Inside the Making of Meghan Markle, International Superstar*

As a very pregnant Meghan Markle made her way Wednesday night onto the tarmac for a ride back to the U.K. on Amal Clooney’s Gulfstream, there was a definite sense that we were witnessing a sea change in the presentation of the British royal family, and the birth of its first truly international superstar.

On Saturday, Meghan is due to touch down in Morocco. Meghan and Harryare bound to receive a rapturous reception as they spend three days touring the deeply conservative Islamic kingdom, with a mixed human rights record—Meghan is hoping to advocate for greater access to education for girls—and ongoing problems with terror attacks.


ADVERTISEMENT
Her high-volume brand star power may well prove harder for the institutions of Morocco’s establishment to resist than decades of soft royal diplomacy.

It would be a busy enough schedule for any mere mortal, but given that Meghan is thought to be well over 30 weeks pregnant (Kensington Palace have not confirmed her due date but Meghan has hinted at late April / early May), and she has the added pressure of being scrutinized at every moment by the world’s media, the rate of activity is, frankly, awe-inspiring.


MAJOR FOMO
*Amal Clooney Brings the Glamour to Meghan’s NYC Baby Shower*
*Tom Sykes*



Five nights in New York, a few days at home, then three nights in Morocco quietly making the case for human rights… Meghan is, consciously or unconsciously, modeling herself more on the example of Angelina Jolie and Amal than the Queen, Princess Anne or Kate Middleton (indeed, attempted comparisons with Kate, who fairly or unfairly was seen to use her pregnancies as excuses to retreat from front-line public duties, now seem more absurd than ever).

Meghan is blissfully unconcerned by the criticism of her in the British media (which have been notably way more hostile to Meghan than the global media) which has now reached deafening levels.


“The fact that the British taxpayer is on the hook for precisely none of Meghan's trip, except the cost of a few security cops who are a fixed cost anyway, is being disingenuously downplayed by her critics”
The latest charge to be laid at her feet is extravagance, with estimated costs of the New York trip being gleefully broken down by the tabloids which have now decided the trip was a half-million-dollar folly.

*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*Amal Clooney Brings the Glamour to Meghan’s NYC Baby Shower*



*Meghan Markle’s Starry Trip to NYC*



*Amal, Serena and Priyanka; Guests At Meghan NYC Baby Shower?*
The fact that the British taxpayer is on the hook for precisely none of it (Amal Clooney paid for the jet, Serena Williams shelled out for the rooms at the Mark) except the cost of a few security cops who are a fixed cost anyway, is being disingenuously downplayed by her critics.


ADVERTISING
Self-appointed leader of the anti-Meghan camp, Piers Morgan, for example, said it “doesn’t matter whether she paid for anything,” if “Serena Williams paid for the hotel,” or if “Amal Clooney paid for the flights,” saying, “The key thing about the royals is to be understated. We all know that they’re royal, that they’re very wealthy. But the absolutely number one rule is don’t rub the British people’s noses in your wealth.”

Of course, this depends on the public's suspension of their critical faculties: the royals are extremely rich, live lives of extraordinary privilege ensconced in palaces. That's in British people's faces every day.

Isn’t it odd that we don’t seem to have this level of confected media outrage that Prince Charles endlessly commandeers the royal train, at a cost of £40,000 a time, for overnight journeys that could easily be accomplished in a car?

You don’t see critics expressing outrage that the Queen does not have to pay death duties like everyone else in the UK (an exemption which truly reveals the cost of a trip to New York as small beer). We were not treated to breakdowns of the ‘cost’ of sending a few security men along with Kate, William and their kids on their fancy half term ski holiday this week.

But for Meghan, the rules appear to be different. It’s open season and the gloves are off.

And she quite clearly couldn’t care less.

Disturbingly to some, refreshingly to others, Meghan is not going to pipe down and be silenced by what Diana used to call the ‘men in grey’ at the palace, or their conspirators in the media.

While she clearly has no time for the official Kensington Palace press office(there was no KP press officer with her in New York), she is consolidating an increasingly powerful coterie of supporters and advisers (not least human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, who arrived during a snowstorm on Wednesday at the Mark Hotel for Meghan's baby wearing a red jumpsuit and gold heels).

Trying to imagine how the wider royal family might have reacted to pictures of the baby shower (a little-practiced concept in the U.K., but that now may change) has kept some commentators entertained this week.


“If the emergence of Meghan Markle as a globe-trotting, humanitarian superstar raises any questions, it is surely how she has managed to tolerate the muddy, tweedy environs of British aristocratic life as stoically as she has over the past year”
While Morgan and his ilk are correct that Her Majesty does not like overt displays of wealth (despite the fact she is the richest woman in the U.K. by a long chalk) the idea that she will be shaking her head over a few press photos seems far fetched, when you consider what her family have got up to in the past few decades alone.

The royal family and their advisers are experts on carefully crafted photo ops and staged events to show themselves in the best light.

If the emergence of Meghan Markle as a globe-trotting, humanitarian superstar raises any questions, it is surely how she has managed to tolerate the muddy, tweedy environs of British aristocratic life as stoically as she has over the past year.

Meghan Markle is making it pretty clear that she declines to be bent to the will of the British royal family.

She won’t shut up and put up.

She will complain and she will explain.

She will insist on the right to have an opinion on injustice, British institutional racism, and the marginalization of women and girls.

And she may avail herself of her mates’ private jets now and again to do all this.

Anyone who has a problem with that is welcome to express it. Meghan is finding her own way of tuning the whining and criticism out.


----------



## gelbergirl

I was so busy with work I missed this entire baby shower US visit.
It must have been a fast in and out trip!


----------



## Morgan R

Itinerary for the Morocco trip:

*February 23, 2019*
On arrival at Casablanca Airport, on the evening of Saturday February 23rd, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be welcomed to Morocco by the British Ambassador to the country, Thomas Reilly, and his wife. The Duke of Sussex will inspect a Guard of Honour at the airport.

Additional news released today: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will will have an audience with King Mohammed VI of Morocco and will be greeted privately by Crown Prince Moulay Hassan

*February 24, 2019*
On Sunday, February 24th, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will head into the Atlas mountains to visit Asni and the ‘Education for All’ boarding houses there. Run by a Moroccan NGO, they provide access to secondary school learning for girls between the ages of 12 and 18. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will meet some of those staying at the boarding houses as well as those teaching them while the Duchess of Sussex will also take part in a henna ceremony.

From there, they will head to the Lycee Qualifiant Grand Atlas in Asni to hear more about education provision in the area. And it won’t all be class based – the importance of sport in education will be underlined with a visit to see the pupils playing football.

They will end their time in Asni at the original ‘Education for All’ boarding house where they will meet the organisation’s founder, Michael McHugo, who was awarded an MBE in the New Year’s Honours List. The Duke of Sussex will present him with his honour in a short ceremony.

*February 25, 2019 *
On Monday, February 25th, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Rabat where they will learn about the work of the Moroccan Royal Federation of Equestrian Sports and its developing programme of supporting children with special needs through riding and caring for horses. They will see a riding demonstration and will hear from children and teachers about grooming and caring for horses.

Next on the agenda is a spot of cookery at the Villa des Ambassadors in Rabat. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will see how traditional Moroccan cuisine is being used to help children with disabilities develop new skills. They will enjoy a cookery demonstration and meet young people benefiting from the scheme.

From there, they will travel to the Andalusian Gardens in Rabat to talk to young social entrepreneurs and hear about work in youth empowerment. There will also be a chance for the couple to see traditional Moroccan arts and crafts as they tour the public gardens.


----------



## Sharont2305

Think they've landed, no coming off the plane shots, they've flown commercial
She's wearing a Valentino dress apparently


----------



## krissa

Looks better in motion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Wow to this one, and I love his suit


----------



## A1aGypsy

I love that colour and it’s a very pretty choice give all the restrictions. Very Audrey Hepburnesque


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures and video of Harry and Meghan arriving in Casablanca, Morocco


----------



## Hobbsy

sdkitty said:


> from the daily beast:
> 
> *Inside the Making of Meghan Markle, International Superstar*
> 
> As a very pregnant Meghan Markle made her way Wednesday night onto the tarmac for a ride back to the U.K. on Amal Clooney’s Gulfstream, there was a definite sense that we were witnessing a sea change in the presentation of the British royal family, and the birth of its first truly international superstar.
> 
> On Saturday, Meghan is due to touch down in Morocco. Meghan and Harryare bound to receive a rapturous reception as they spend three days touring the deeply conservative Islamic kingdom, with a mixed human rights record—Meghan is hoping to advocate for greater access to education for girls—and ongoing problems with terror attacks.
> 
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT
> Her high-volume brand star power may well prove harder for the institutions of Morocco’s establishment to resist than decades of soft royal diplomacy.
> 
> It would be a busy enough schedule for any mere mortal, but given that Meghan is thought to be well over 30 weeks pregnant (Kensington Palace have not confirmed her due date but Meghan has hinted at late April / early May), and she has the added pressure of being scrutinized at every moment by the world’s media, the rate of activity is, frankly, awe-inspiring.
> 
> 
> MAJOR FOMO
> *Amal Clooney Brings the Glamour to Meghan’s NYC Baby Shower*
> *Tom Sykes*
> 
> 
> 
> Five nights in New York, a few days at home, then three nights in Morocco quietly making the case for human rights… Meghan is, consciously or unconsciously, modeling herself more on the example of Angelina Jolie and Amal than the Queen, Princess Anne or Kate Middleton (indeed, attempted comparisons with Kate, who fairly or unfairly was seen to use her pregnancies as excuses to retreat from front-line public duties, now seem more absurd than ever).
> 
> Meghan is blissfully unconcerned by the criticism of her in the British media (which have been notably way more hostile to Meghan than the global media) which has now reached deafening levels.
> 
> 
> “The fact that the British taxpayer is on the hook for precisely none of Meghan's trip, except the cost of a few security cops who are a fixed cost anyway, is being disingenuously downplayed by her critics”
> The latest charge to be laid at her feet is extravagance, with estimated costs of the New York trip being gleefully broken down by the tabloids which have now decided the trip was a half-million-dollar folly.
> 
> *RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*
> 
> 
> 
> *Amal Clooney Brings the Glamour to Meghan’s NYC Baby Shower*
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s Starry Trip to NYC*
> 
> 
> 
> *Amal, Serena and Priyanka; Guests At Meghan NYC Baby Shower?*
> The fact that the British taxpayer is on the hook for precisely none of it (Amal Clooney paid for the jet, Serena Williams shelled out for the rooms at the Mark) except the cost of a few security cops who are a fixed cost anyway, is being disingenuously downplayed by her critics.
> 
> 
> ADVERTISING
> Self-appointed leader of the anti-Meghan camp, Piers Morgan, for example, said it “doesn’t matter whether she paid for anything,” if “Serena Williams paid for the hotel,” or if “Amal Clooney paid for the flights,” saying, “The key thing about the royals is to be understated. We all know that they’re royal, that they’re very wealthy. But the absolutely number one rule is don’t rub the British people’s noses in your wealth.”
> 
> Of course, this depends on the public's suspension of their critical faculties: the royals are extremely rich, live lives of extraordinary privilege ensconced in palaces. That's in British people's faces every day.
> 
> Isn’t it odd that we don’t seem to have this level of confected media outrage that Prince Charles endlessly commandeers the royal train, at a cost of £40,000 a time, for overnight journeys that could easily be accomplished in a car?
> 
> You don’t see critics expressing outrage that the Queen does not have to pay death duties like everyone else in the UK (an exemption which truly reveals the cost of a trip to New York as small beer). We were not treated to breakdowns of the ‘cost’ of sending a few security men along with Kate, William and their kids on their fancy half term ski holiday this week.
> 
> But for Meghan, the rules appear to be different. It’s open season and the gloves are off.
> 
> And she quite clearly couldn’t care less.
> 
> Disturbingly to some, refreshingly to others, Meghan is not going to pipe down and be silenced by what Diana used to call the ‘men in grey’ at the palace, or their conspirators in the media.
> 
> While she clearly has no time for the official Kensington Palace press office(there was no KP press officer with her in New York), she is consolidating an increasingly powerful coterie of supporters and advisers (not least human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, who arrived during a snowstorm on Wednesday at the Mark Hotel for Meghan's baby wearing a red jumpsuit and gold heels).
> 
> Trying to imagine how the wider royal family might have reacted to pictures of the baby shower (a little-practiced concept in the U.K., but that now may change) has kept some commentators entertained this week.
> 
> 
> “If the emergence of Meghan Markle as a globe-trotting, humanitarian superstar raises any questions, it is surely how she has managed to tolerate the muddy, tweedy environs of British aristocratic life as stoically as she has over the past year”
> While Morgan and his ilk are correct that Her Majesty does not like overt displays of wealth (despite the fact she is the richest woman in the U.K. by a long chalk) the idea that she will be shaking her head over a few press photos seems far fetched, when you consider what her family have got up to in the past few decades alone.
> 
> The royal family and their advisers are experts on carefully crafted photo ops and staged events to show themselves in the best light.
> 
> If the emergence of Meghan Markle as a globe-trotting, humanitarian superstar raises any questions, it is surely how she has managed to tolerate the muddy, tweedy environs of British aristocratic life as stoically as she has over the past year.
> 
> Meghan Markle is making it pretty clear that she declines to be bent to the will of the British royal family.
> 
> She won’t shut up and put up.
> 
> She will complain and she will explain.
> 
> She will insist on the right to have an opinion on injustice, British institutional racism, and the marginalization of women and girls.
> 
> And she may avail herself of her mates’ private jets now and again to do all this.
> 
> Anyone who has a problem with that is welcome to express it. Meghan is finding her own way of tuning the whining and criticism out.


I hope she stays just as she is, whatever she wants that to be!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

krissa said:


> Looks better in motion.



They're a gorgeous couple.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Going viral is Beyonce and Jay-Z's tribute to Meghan Markle in their Brit Awards video. They also penned her a lovely congratulatory letter on her pregnancy! 

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-regal-portrait-beyonce-jayz-acceptance-speech/


----------



## cafecreme15

Loving Harry in the light gray suit! Though tbh he is such an afterthought next to Meghan. She looks fantastic in red, and I’m really liking the cape top.


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> I really hope these ladies are genuinely her friends, but I find it hard to believe that they would have done something this extravagant for her if she hadn’t married who she ended up marrying.
> 
> Also side note, ABC posted this from when Kate was pregnant. This that any gifts that she would receive for the baby would have to respectfully be returned. I wonder if this applies to Meghan as well?
> https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/kate-middleton-baby-shower/story?id=18838126


Can't remember where I read it, but apparently Meghan will have to pay US Taxes on the Baby items gifted to her!  Sounds crazy to me because let's face it, who does that here in the States .. but I guess with the extravagance of some of the gifts?!?! .. not sure ..


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Gorgeous and very respectful/savvy to wear the red of the Moroccan flag.


----------



## White Orchid

She looks fab in red.  Really matches her skin tones.


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry and Meghan at EFA Morocco.
She's having a Henna tattoo, it's to celebrate 7 months of pregnancy


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry and Meghan at EFA Morocco.
> She's having a Henna tattoo, it's to celebrate 7 months of pregnancy



How nice! Henna tattoos can be works of art, and so meaningful.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> They haven't arrived in Morocco as yet, apparently the press haven't been allowed to divulge on the exact time of arrival ( it's 5:20pm here in the UK and I think Morocco is either the same time as us or 1 hour later)
> They are travelling with a nine strong entourage including a hairdresser. Sources say medical provisions have been made for Meghan, who is around seven months pregnant.


If I was seven months pregnant I would be afraid flying around a lot. She's obviously healthy but she must be pretty brave. I'd be at home cradling my bump, fixing the nursery.


----------



## Morgan R

On Day 2 of their tour of Morocco


----------



## Morgan R

Attending reception hosted by the British Ambassador to Morocco at the British Residence in Rabat


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> If I was seven months pregnant I would be afraid flying around a lot. She's obviously healthy but she must be pretty brave. I'd be at home cradling my bump, fixing the nursery.


esp since she's a bit on the older side for first baby
but I'm sure she's getting the best care and she obviously loves her new role


----------



## Bag*Snob

Beautiful!!


----------



## LibbyRuth

I know of several women in recent years who’ve pushed the third trimester travel rules into the seventh month due both to work needs and personal desires to fit in last trips. In Meghan’s case when you add in that she can likely travel with medical advisors and has the power to ground a flight if needed, I think she’s not doing anything that goes against medical advice.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Love that beige look.


----------



## DeMonica

LibbyRuth said:


> I know of several women in recent years who’ve pushed the third trimester travel rules into the seventh month due both to work needs and personal desires to fit in last trips. In Meghan’s case when you add in that she can likely travel with medical advisors and has the power to ground a flight if needed, I think she’s not doing anything that goes against medical advice.


I never said she does. I'd be scared ****less, like going through a premature delivery in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. Plus, I just can't forget Carrie Fisher.


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> I never said she does. I'd be scared ****less, like going through a premature delivery in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean. Plus, I just can't forget Carrie Fisher.


I thought that too, at least going to Morocco is only a 3hr 20min flight and it's mostly over land


----------



## byzina

caramelize126 said:


> I really hope these ladies are genuinely her friends, but I find it hard to believe that they would have done something this extravagant for her if she hadn’t married who she ended up marrying.


I am nearly 100% sure they wouldn't. It looks like Amal and some other people hadn't known her or paid any attention to her until she met Harry.  I like Meghan but the fact that, though she could have made the baby shower private, she attracted so much publicity to it and made it as lavish as possible, makes me think that she acts in a "new money" way.


----------



## White Orchid

cafecreme15 said:


> How nice! Henna tattoos can be works of art, and so meaningful.


They can be.  This wasn’t.


----------



## Sharont2305

At the Royal Federation For Equestrian Sports


----------



## Sharont2305

byzina said:


> makes me think that she acts in a "new money" way.


... which is not how our RF act.


----------



## Morgan R

At the Moroccan Royal Federation of Equestrian Sports in Rabat, Morocco

The visit was to learn about the work of the Moroccan Royal Federation of Equestrian Sports's developing programme of supporting children with special needs through riding and caring for horses.


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting a cooking demonstration where children from under-privileged backgrounds learn traditional Moroccan recipes at the Villa des Ambassadors in Rabat, Morocco


----------



## Morgan R

At Andalusian Gardens in Rabat,Morocco to talk to young social entrepreneurs and hear about work in youth empowerment


----------



## Superbe

I like her last two outfits. White blazer and black dress/jumpsuit underneath is one of my favourite combos, so feminine. She looks much more comfortable too


----------



## bisbee

White Orchid said:


> They can be.  This wasn’t.


???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## berrydiva

byzina said:


> I am nearly 100% sure they wouldn't. It looks like Amal and some other people hadn't known her or paid any attention to her until she met Harry.  I like Meghan but the fact that, though she could have made the baby shower private, she attracted so much publicity to it and made it as lavish as possible, makes me think that she acts in a "new money" way.


How could she have made it private if it was thrown and paid for by someone else? Guess she could've just said no to the whole affair.


----------



## myown

Hobbsy said:


> The woman had a baby shower, God forbid! She is not European so she didn't grow up with a stick up her arse. She's American, she's having her first child, her friends gave her a shower...so what?! It was probably such a nice break from having to act like royalty.


add people criticize her for touching her bump!


----------



## myown

people in this thread are getting ridiculous


----------



## afsweet

I like all her looks in Morocco. She looks good in just about every color. I think she should have worn flats or riding boots to the equestrian center though.


----------



## LittleStar88

Great looks on this trip! Really loving the black dress and white blazer on her. Very flattering.

She looks happy and healthy


----------



## byzina

berrydiva said:


> How could she have made it private if it was thrown and paid for by someone else? Guess she could've just said no to the whole affair.



If the people who organised it were her genuine friends, they would have understood her wish to keep privacy. Otherwise they just wanted to get publicity for themselves. I personally don't really believe in that. Serena, for example, was Meghan's friend before she met Harry and her success is based on her talent and not on what tabloids write about her.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

byzina said:


> If the people who organised it were her genuine friends, they would have understood her wish to keep privacy. Otherwise they just wanted to get publicity for themselves. I personally don't really believe in that. Serena, for example, was Meghan's friend before she met Harry and her success is based on her talent and not on what tabloids write about her.



I agree. They could have rented a nice house in the Hampton’s or something chic and casual and no one would have known. She was there for a couple days undetected so it was possible. She or they wanted the attention. It is what it is.


----------



## berrydiva

byzina said:


> If the people who organised it were her genuine friends, they would have understood her wish to keep privacy. Otherwise they just wanted to get publicity for themselves. I personally don't really believe in that. Serena, for example, was Meghan's friend before she met Harry and her success is based on her talent and not on what tabloids write about her.


She told you directly she expressed to them her wish to keep it private or even knew Serena's plans? There seems to be a boatload of conjecture based on folks feeling that it was too lavish for her being a royal. I could totally understand folks thinking it was lavish or shouldn't have been so publicized if that's their opinion but these really strange "non-first hand account" add-ons to the narrative just come off as ridiculous.


----------



## berrydiva

hollieplus2 said:


> I agree. They could have rented a nice house in the Hampton’s or something chic and casual and no one would have known. She was there for a couple days undetected so it was possible. She or they wanted the attention. It is what it is.


What would stop them from being just as pap swarmed and it being publicized by being in The Hamptons? Celebs in the Hamptons are always in the news/gossip rags, I'm not understanding how that would make a difference. Seems it would be best if she just declined the offer so folks could have just bad mouthed her for declining Serena's generous offer of a baby shower.


----------



## minababe

White Orchid said:


> They can be.  This wasn’t.



I was so dissapointed .. I love henna but this one didn' tlook good in any way ..I think that was a sweet idea to Show some culture etc but next time let it done by someone who did it before or has Talent for it.
this henna was really not pretty .. the flowers didn't look good and the lines were way too thick.
I'm happy for her that she could wash it off the same day normally it stays for some time.


----------



## hellosunshine

Love the red dress and black dress with white blazer!

Honestly, I'm ecstatic that Meghan has such lovely old friends (considering one spent so much on a baby shower for her) and is making some new acquaintances/friendships. People really do gravitate towards her like a moth to a flame (even with before and after joining the royal family)..tabloid lies and jealous/hateful people yelling the loudest isn't everything.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending an audience with Mohammed VI of Morocco, The King of Morocco




Harry and Meghan presented letters from Her Majesty The Queen to The King



With Moulay Hassan, Crown Prince of Morocco


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the Princess Royal will attend a reception at Buckingham Palace on 5 March, given by the Queen to mark the forthcoming 50th anniversary of the Prince of Wales's investiture.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Attending an audience with Mohammed VI of Morocco, The King of Morocco
> 
> View attachment 4353125


I like the look of that dress, lovely colour.


----------



## berrydiva

minababe said:


> I was so dissapointed .. I love henna but this one didn' tlook good in any way ..I think that was a sweet idea to Show some culture etc but next time let it done by someone who did it before or has Talent for it.
> this henna was really not pretty .. the flowers didn't look good and the lines were way too thick.
> I'm happy for her that she could wash it off the same day normally it stays for some time.


What was the reason they picked that woman to do it? I didn't see the henna up close but I've had them done many times and it's beautiful when someone does it well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> I was so dissapointed .. I love henna but this one didn' tlook good in any way ..I think that was a sweet idea to Show some culture etc but next time let it done by someone who did it before or has Talent for it.
> this henna was really not pretty .. the flowers didn't look good and the lines were way too thick.
> I'm happy for her that she could wash it off the same day normally it stays for some time.


I think it was rushed due to the time frame they had. I would imagine they take a long time to do.


----------



## Sharont2305

Ooh, that dress is lovely, I bet it moves well.


----------



## cafecreme15

Love that periwinkle color on her, and it looks light and comfortable! Some of her past looks have seemed so tight that they made me squirm with discomfort, and I'm not even pregnant.


----------



## chowlover2

hollieplus2 said:


> I agree. They could have rented a nice house in the Hampton’s or something chic and casual and no one would have known. She was there for a couple days undetected so it was possible. She or they wanted the attention. It is what it is.


It's pretty apparent they wanted publicity, they invited Gayle King. And she reported on it the following day.


----------



## LuckyBitch

myown said:


> people in this thread are getting ridiculous


This. Definitely this.


----------



## DeMonica

cafecreme15 said:


> Love that periwinkle color on her, and it looks light and comfortable! Some of her past looks have seemed so tight that they made me squirm with discomfort, and I'm not even pregnant.


ITA. There could be a little tailoring in the breast area, because it looks a bit funny there, but in general it's nice and the colour is very pretty on her.


----------



## Sharont2305

DeMonica said:


> ITA. There could be a little tailoring in the breast area, because it looks a bit funny there, but in general it's nice and the colour is very pretty on her.


Could do with it being about 3 inches shorter, I'd be scared of tripping up, it's dragging on the floor. 
It's gorgeous though.


----------



## Morgan R

Videos from Day 3 (February 25, 2019) of their tour of Morocco


----------



## afsweet

I'd be so nervous trying all those foods, especially when pregnant...ya never know what might not agree with you!


----------



## berrydiva

That blue dress is very pretty.


----------



## chicaloca

Watching the videos, Meghan is a naturally engaging person. I can see how she ended up navigating such exclusive circles. She puts people at ease.


----------



## Aimee3

Is there any color Meghan can’t wear?  She looks great in every color she’s worn so far!  Love the blue dress on her.


----------



## VickyB

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Going viral is Beyonce and Jay-Z's tribute to Meghan Markle in their Brit Awards video. They also penned her a lovely congratulatory letter on her pregnancy!
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-regal-portrait-beyonce-jayz-acceptance-speech/


LMAO


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> At the Royal Federation For Equestrian Sports



The awkward height of those booties(neither ankle or calf) and the way the pant is shoved in looks very sloppy.


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> ... which is not how our RF act.





myown said:


> add people criticize her for touching her bump!



Harry seems to be doing a lot of sympathy bump touching too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

byzina said:


> I am nearly 100% sure they wouldn't. It looks like Amal and some other people hadn't known her or paid any attention to her until she met Harry.  I like Meghan but the fact that, though she could have made the baby shower private, she attracted so much publicity to it and made it as lavish as possible, makes me think that she acts in a "new money" way.



Aside from Serena(and I don't know how they met but they seem to have been close BH) she was totally so far removed from the A list circle of celebs/actors. Very unlikely that she would have become chummy with Alma  w/o the Harry connection.


----------



## VickyB

hollieplus2 said:


> I agree. They could have rented a nice house in the Hampton’s or something chic and casual and no one would have known. She was there for a couple days undetected so it was possible. She or they wanted the attention. It is what it is.



ITA! The writing is on the wall. MM approved the leaks. She's still thirsty.


----------



## redney

VickyB said:


> Harry seems to be doing a lot of sympathy bump touching too. [emoji38]


He's always fidgeted with the buttons of his blazers. Now I guess it gets more attention.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgan R said:


> Attending an audience with Mohammed VI of Morocco, The King of Morocco
> 
> View attachment 4353134
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan presented letters from Her Majesty The Queen to The King
> View attachment 4353139
> 
> 
> With Moulay Hassan, Crown Prince of Morocco
> View attachment 4353164
> View attachment 4353130



Looks like moomoo [emoji1361] Loved the dress she wore the last evening!!


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Videos from Day 3 (February 25, 2019) of their tour of Morocco



oh they greeted her first in the video. what a lovely and welcoming gesture


----------



## myown

her father talks bad about her
*why are there no friends coming for her?*
anonymous friends talks good about her
*so staged!*


Meghan and Harry hold hands prior wedding
*too much touching*
Eugenie and Partner hold hand
*no one says one word*


*I really hope they get married soon*
gets  married soon (after 2(?) years of dating)
*they really married too soon*


*now the bump watching*
Meghan announces pregnancy
*what? pregnant? already?*


Meghan uses some British words
*she tries too hard*


Meghan has an American baby shower
*she really should act more British and royal*
(btw it is said Kate had a baby shower, too)


Meghan laughs at events
*she should behave better*
QE laughs at events
*how lovely QE is!*


Meghan sits not "like a royal"
*WTF! she needs to learn so much*
Kate sits the same way
*yeah Kate does that when the Queen is not around*


Meghan flies private. Paid by a friend
*spents too much money*
Kate and Will fly private. Paid by a friend
*well they always did that way!*


Pregnant woman touches her bump
*why TF is she touching her bump all the time?!*
cause. ya know. her body.


we know the names of some of her friends
*they are rich - therefor can't be true friends*
we also know the names of her childhood friends
*too little*
*can´t name any of Kates friends*


it is said Kate and the Cousins don't get along
*they are only jealous, because she´ll be Queen one day*
*no one actually cares*
Some rumors about Kate and Meghan
*must be Meghans fault*


It is said Kate is bossy
*no one cares*
it is said Meghan is bossy
*WTF! How dare she*


a staff quit
*must be Meghans fault*


should I continue?


----------



## White Orchid

minababe said:


> I was so dissapointed .. I love henna but this one didn' tlook good in any way ..I think that was a sweet idea to Show some culture etc but next time let it done by someone who did it before or has Talent for it.
> this henna was really not pretty .. the flowers didn't look good and the lines were way too thick.
> I'm happy for her that she could wash it off the same day normally it stays for some time.


Yes I love it too.  Last year a friend of mine was getting married and so she hired a lass to do our hands.  She took around 10 - 15 mins to do each hand and I was very impressed.  Here’s a group photo.


----------



## gelbergirl

Morgan R said:


> Attending an audience with Mohammed VI of Morocco, The King of Morocco
> 
> View attachment 4353134
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan presented letters from Her Majesty The Queen to The King
> View attachment 4353139
> 
> 
> With Moulay Hassan, Crown Prince of Morocco
> View attachment 4353164
> View attachment 4353130



I like his blue shoes!


----------



## chicaloca

myown said:


> her father talks bad about her
> *why are there no friends coming for her?*
> anonymous friends talks good about her
> *so staged!*
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry hold hands prior wedding
> *too much touching*
> Eugenie and Partner hold hand
> *no one says one word*
> 
> 
> *I really hope they get married soon*
> gets  married soon (after 2(?) years of dating)
> *they really married too soon*
> 
> 
> *now the bump watching*
> Meghan announces pregnancy
> *what? pregnant? already?*
> 
> 
> Meghan uses some British words
> *she tries too hard*
> 
> 
> Meghan has an American baby shower
> *she really should act more British and royal*
> (btw it is said Kate had a baby shower, too)
> 
> 
> Meghan laughs at events
> *she should behave better*
> QE laughs at events
> *how lovely QE is!*
> 
> 
> Meghan sits not "like a royal"
> *WTF! she needs to learn so much*
> Kate sits the same way
> *yeah Kate does that when the Queen is not around*
> 
> 
> Meghan flies private. Paid by a friend
> *spents too much money*
> Kate and Will fly private. Paid by a friend
> *well they always did that way!*
> 
> 
> Pregnant woman touches her bump
> *why TF is she touching her bump all the time?!*
> cause. ya know. her body.
> 
> 
> we know the names of some of her friends
> *they are rich - therefor can't be true friends*
> we also know the names of her childhood friends
> *too little*
> *can´t name any of Kates friends*
> 
> 
> it is said Kate and the Cousins don't get along
> *they are only jealous, because she´ll be Queen one day*
> *no one actually cares*
> Some rumors about Kate and Meghan
> *must be Meghans fault*
> 
> 
> It is said Kate is bossy
> *no one cares*
> it is said Meghan is bossy
> *WTF! How dare she*
> 
> 
> a staff quit
> *must be Meghans fault*
> 
> 
> should I continue?




Excellent post. Hypocrisy runs rampant.

People were happy to assess Meghan based on estranged family and a couple of ex friends
 but when her actual friends spoke up they were condemned.


----------



## berrydiva

chicaloca said:


> Excellent post. Hypocrisy runs rampant.
> 
> People were happy to assess Meghan based on estranged family and a couple of ex friends
> but when her actual friends spoke up they were condemned.


Apparently, those are not even her friends which had to be nitpicked to death.  The poor girl isn't allowed friends, a baby shower, or anything that brings her happiness so long as some internet miserables are satisfied with her every move. I had no idea she rubs people such a bad way.


----------



## Grande Latte

berrydiva said:


> How could she have made it private if it was thrown and paid for by someone else? Guess she could've just said no to the whole affair.



She could have and should have said no to the whole baby shower and declined all gifts. That would have been the royal way. 

Kate Middleton would have handled everything with grace. Frankly, I don't even think Megan cares what anyone thinks, including the Royal Family.


----------



## gazoo

I know this isn't a popular opinion to have, but I think this may all be strategic on the BRF's part. Meghan and Harry are far down the line, their main role is to work for whatever causes are in need. There's been a lot of grumbling about a ton of stuff, but not the work ethic of either of them. Meghan is killing it on the work front, keeping a pretty heavy work schedule considering her advanced pregnancy. Yes, she isn't exactly what everyone is used to from the BRF, she's got flashy friends, and a nightmare of a toxic family that just won't leave things alone. (FWIT the BRF have plenty of far more scandalous skeletons rattling away in their closets. The Andrew/Epstein sex slave connection alone will make your shiver.) The fact that tax payers do have skin in the game is problematic, as it gives everyone a sense of ownership over everything they all do, yet everyone seems to forget Meghan is personally wealthy. I don't think it's coincidental that it was widely reported that Serena paid for the shower and Amal covered the jet both ways. I feel Meghan wanted that known so people couldn't muddy the waters blaming her for spending govt funds on frivolity. She doesn't behave or look just so (stockings, wispy hair, extravagant parties, etc.), but everything so far has made William and Kate look good. People used to moan endlessly about William and Kate. Suddenly Kate's looking amazing to them. I laugh reading the comments on the various articles. Kate can do no wrong now. The Monarchy needs the direct heirs to be scrupulously well behaved.

This is all a win for the BRF, IMO. As long as Meghan is happy with her life and keeps up her commitment to her job, I don't think they'll be reining her in much. Her star power is currency that the BRF is unlikely to squander. If she comes across as tacky because of excess to do with parties or spending, they can always blame it on her being a gauche American, which is another win for the BRF in a less obvious way.


----------



## chicaloca

Grande Latte said:


> She could have and should have said no to the whole baby shower and declined all gifts. That would have been the royal way.
> 
> Kate Middleton would have handled everything with grace. Frankly, I don't even think Megan cares what anyone thinks, including the Royal Family.



I don’t know if you’re American or not but it would be rude and offensive to refuse friends and family who want to throw you a shower. After weddings, baby showers are the next most significant celebration involving family and friends. I’m glad Meghan allowed her friends to celebrate her baby.


----------



## berrydiva

Grande Latte said:


> She could have and should have said no to the whole baby shower and declined all gifts. That would have been the royal way.
> 
> Kate Middleton would have handled everything with grace. Frankly, I don't even think Megan cares what anyone thinks, including the Royal Family.


I think a big part of this is her being American and having a shower thrown by Americans who have no Monarchy.  It's very possible she declined gifts and they were brought anyway in true fashion of people expecting to go to a shower....who knows, seem you all got an invite though.  It's really interesting that she would be scrutinized for not following/respecting/honoring a tradition or custom of another country/culture but in this case where showers are a big deal here, she's instead being chastised for following something considered so customary here. I think people make a bigger deal over baby showers here than they do a wedding shower or parties celebrating other life events. I've never been super into them but I do recognize how customary is it to people.

It's such a big deal it's taken on a life of it's own with Sip and Sees, Sprinkles, Diaper showers, blessignways and all sorts of other variations of baby showers here.

Ultimately, idk the miserables are high-tea bothered though. Americans like baby showers, Halloween, Thanksgiving and 4th of July....is what it is


----------



## daisychainz

chicaloca said:


> I don’t know if you’re American or not but it would be rude and offensive to refuse friends and family who want to throw you a shower. After weddings, baby showers are the next most significant celebration involving family and friends. I’m glad Meghan allowed her friends to celebrate her baby.


They are quite significant. So, it's interesting to wonder where was her mother? Perhaps she'll go to London soon, but it's certainly weird that a mother skips the shower for her only child and first grandchild, especially since it was held in the US. With all the money they spent it could have been held in Los Angeles, closer to her mom. I'm sure there are a number of excuses Meghan-lovers will have for Doria's absence, but it doesn't make it any less obvious that her only family member was awol for this customary event. Maybe if her mother was there it would have made it seem less showy and attention-seeking and actually more traditional and reasonable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> Apparently, those are not even her friends which had to be nitpicked to death.  The poor girl isn't allowed friends, a baby shower, or anything that brings her happiness so long as some internet miserables are satisfied with her every move. I had no idea she rubs people such a bad way.


poor girl?  she's fine


----------



## berrydiva

sdkitty said:


> poor girl?  she's fine


Not according to this thread


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Attending an audience with Mohammed VI of Morocco, The King of Morocco
> 
> View attachment 4353134
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan presented letters from Her Majesty The Queen to The King
> View attachment 4353139
> 
> 
> With Moulay Hassan, Crown Prince of Morocco
> View attachment 4353164
> View attachment 4353130


oohhhh wowww!!! I am loving each and every outfit she has work on the morocco trip!!! They are on the conservative side but IMO they seem to suit her soo much. She looks beautiful, classy and radiant.


----------



## sdkitty

berrydiva said:


> Not according to this thread


yes, my heart is bleeding for her....such a victim


----------



## afsweet

chicaloca said:


> I don’t know if you’re American or not but it would be rude and offensive to refuse friends and family who want to throw you a shower. After weddings, baby showers are the next most significant celebration involving family and friends. I’m glad Meghan allowed her friends to celebrate her baby.



I'm sure her rich and famous friends would understand if she explained how much scrutiny she is under and what royal etiquette dictates. if MM wanted a shower that is a public spectacle, I'd rather see her enjoy something that at least benefits one of her new patronages.


----------



## DeMonica

chicaloca said:


> I don’t know if you’re American or not but it would be rude and offensive to refuse friends and family who want to throw you a shower. After weddings, baby showers are the next most significant celebration involving family and friends. I’m glad Meghan allowed her friends to celebrate her baby.


Who was there from her family? Friends - the real ones at least - normally accept your requests if you have the right reasons, e.g. not to give gifts because you can't accept them.  When she accepted Harry's proposal, she knew that her life would different than the other B- actresses1 and there would be many rules to obey which might seem to be silly to people who are not part of that millieu. You have to accept to adapt to your new environment, as she did when she said goodbye to acting, converted to Church of England, etc. It's pretty common if the spouses comming from different environments (nationality, ethnicity, religious or cultural) that one or both of the spouses have accept changes in their lifestyle, (eg. if a Christian woman marries a religious Jewish man, she most likely has to convert to Judaism and say goodbye to pork and Christmasses), it doesn't concern Meghan + the BRF alone. Yes, rules can be changed or bent to a certain extent but it's not always possible.


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess is that this is all to overshadow her toxic family.  1st the anonymous friends people interview, then the BABY SHOWER, then the trip to Morocco.  I’m not sure what’s next, then a move to Frogmore, and then the baby arrives.  I’ve no doubt her mom will be welcomed there and her dad and his side will not.

Being criticized for good things in life is better than being criticized for a nasty, toxic, family relationship you have little to no control over.


----------



## chicaloca

For people wondering about Doria at the baby shower it’s not at all unusual for her not to be present if it was thrown by Meghan’s girlfriends. 
Sometimes showers are family affairs other times they’re thrown by friends. If the family and friends know each other well and/or live near each other sometimes it’s a joint affair. My family threw my sister a shower and her friends - who I barely know —  threw her another shower for which I wasn’t present. 

I think lot of people are expressing faux outrage at Meghan’s shower. They’re actually butt hurt because the false narratives they had constructed about her friendships were obliterated and can’t be used to disparage Meghan anymore.  Her friends ranged from old to new and I love that Amal booked her a private plane.


----------



## PatsyCline

chicaloca said:


> For people wondering about Doria at the baby shower it’s not at all unusual for her not to be present if it was thrown by Meghan’s girlfriends.
> Sometimes showers are family affairs other times they’re thrown by friends. If the family and friends know each other well and/or live near each other sometimes it’s a joint affair. My family threw my sister a shower and her friends - who I barely know —  threw her another shower for which I wasn’t present.
> 
> I think lot of people are expressing faux outrage at Meghan’s shower. They’re actually butt hurt because the false narratives they had constructed about her friendships were obliterated and can’t be used to disparage Meghan anymore.  Her friends ranged from old to new and I love that Amal booked her a private plane.



I t would have been much easier for Meghan to come to NYC, than the rest of them to fly to London.


----------



## chicaloca

PatsyCline said:


> I t would have been much easier for Meghan to come to NYC, than the rest of them to fly to London.



True. Also reports said there were 20+ people. We only know about the famous ones. I assume her less famous friends — much like Doria — have regular jobs and aren’t jet setters. ,


----------



## Flatsy

I haven't seen anybody objecting to Meghan having a baby shower with her friends.  That's silly. The issue was holding it over two days in the most expensive hotel suite in the whole world, with private jet transport, giveaways that had the appearance of being sponsored, and all of the lavish details from the Jean-Georges catering to the Serge Normant hairstyling being leaked to the press, possibly in exchange for gratis service.  

Any royal who pulled that would have gotten criticism.  And as usual, Meghan's fans can't ever acknowledge that she ever plays a role in any of the bad press that she gets.  Everything is always just a big conspiracy to beat up on poor, innocent victim Meghan.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> I haven't seen anybody objecting to Meghan having a baby shower with her friends.  That's silly. The issue was holding it over two days in the most expensive hotel suite in the whole world, with private jet transport, giveaways that had the appearance of being sponsored, and all of the lavish details from the Jean-Georges catering to the Serge Normant hairstyling being leaked to the press, possibly in exchange for gratis service.
> 
> Any royal who pulled that would have gotten criticism.  And as usual, Meghan's fans can't ever acknowledge that she ever plays a role in any of the bad press that she gets.  Everything is always just a big conspiracy to beat up on poor, innocent victim Meghan.


Serious question, because I don't follow the RF or any royals at all, but I don't see problem with her getting it for free. I think it looks tackier on brands than her. So why is there outrage? It's not clear in your post or in anyone else's posts. I'm genuinely open to hearing why this is a problem politically or socially.

Edit: I've done a bit of research on Google and I really can't find another reason except that there's a rule not to. I imagine many brands would otherwise try to send bucket loads to BRF but I still don't think I'm grasping what the issue is.


----------



## Flatsy

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Serious question, because I don't follow the RF or any royals at all, but I don't see problem with her getting it for free. I think it looks tackier on brands than her. So why is there outrage? It's not clear in your post or in anyone else's posts. I'm genuinely open to hearing why this is a problem politically or socially.


Being royal is in theory supposed to be about working diligently for the people...not about using (and potentially abusing) your position to hawk designer products so you can get them for free.  It can easily become tacky, crass, and money hungry - from people who are already vastly wealthy.   Fergie is a good example of where it can wind up when someone commercializes their royal status.   The Weight Watchers era was embarrassing for everyone.

The other issue with the baby shower was simply the ostentatious display of wealth.  Everybody knows the royal family is wealthy, but apart from the occasional royal wedding that we all get to enjoy, the royal family is expected to keep the lavish lifestyles a bit in check and not flaunt them out in the open.  Just a bit. 

Everything about that shower could have been toned down and done more discreetly.  The UK is putting together ration boxes and preparing evacuation plans for its leaders in preparation for Brexit, and Meghan is making headlines for having one of the world's most expensive baby showers with a bunch of celebrities in a $75k per night hotel suite.  That is not a juxtaposition that is flattering to Meghan, and it's not the type of press that benefits the royal family.

Coming on the heels of the stories about Meghan's massive overspending on designer clothes, it also doesn't paint a great picture of what her values are.  She said she was all about "activism" in her engagement interview.  She needs to do more of that, and less overt basking in wealth.


----------



## Grande Latte

Flatsy said:


> Being royal is in theory supposed to be about working diligently for the people...not about using (and potentially abusing) your position to hawk designer products so you can get them for free.  It can easily become tacky, crass, and money hungry - from people who are already vastly wealthy.   Fergie is a good example of where it can wind up when someone commercializes their royal status.   The Weight Watchers era was embarrassing for everyone.
> 
> The other issue with the baby shower was simply the ostentatious display of wealth.  Everybody knows the royal family is wealthy, but apart from the occasional royal wedding that we all get to enjoy, the royal family is expected to keep the lavish lifestyles a bit in check and not flaunt them out in the open.  Just a bit.
> 
> Everything about that shower could have been toned down and done more discreetly.  The UK is putting together ration boxes and preparing evacuation plans for its leaders in preparation for Brexit, and Meghan is making headlines for having one of the world's most expensive baby showers with a bunch of celebrities in a $75k per night hotel suite.  That is not a juxtaposition that is flattering to Meghan, and it's not the type of press that benefits the royal family.
> 
> Coming on the heels of the stories about Meghan's massive overspending on designer clothes, it also doesn't paint a great picture of what her values are.  She said she was all about "activism" in her engagement interview.  She needs to do more of that, and less overt basking in wealth.



Completely agree. This new "Kardashian" Megan is not the Megan I adored from the very beginning. I was really rooting for this highly educated, hardworking American girl marrying into the royal family and bringing with her modern ways of interpreting the royal image. But her excessive wardrobe spending and the private jet funded by Amal was just too much.

I understand the importance of a baby shower, but there are baby showers, and there are _baby showers_. It is all about Megan's actions being perceived as a world citizen. The global economy is really, really bad, hence this vast display of wealth is not a very sensitive idea.


----------



## cafecreme15

Flatsy said:


> I haven't seen anybody objecting to Meghan having a baby shower with her friends.  That's silly. The issue was holding it over two days in the most expensive hotel suite in the whole world, with private jet transport, giveaways that had the appearance of being sponsored, and all of the lavish details from the Jean-Georges catering to the Serge Normant hairstyling being leaked to the press, possibly in exchange for gratis service.
> 
> Any royal who pulled that would have gotten criticism.  And as usual, Meghan's fans can't ever acknowledge that she ever plays a role in any of the bad press that she gets.  Everything is always just a big conspiracy to beat up on poor, innocent victim Meghan.



I’ve been trying to make this exact point all week but it seems to be getting lost on some. I’m tired of trying to bring nuance to the conversation so I’ll stop, but you hit the nail on the head here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Serious question, because I don't follow the RF or any royals at all, but I don't see problem with her getting it for free. I think it looks tackier on brands than her. So why is there outrage? It's not clear in your post or in anyone else's posts. I'm genuinely open to hearing why this is a problem politically or socially.
> 
> Edit: I've done a bit of research on Google and I really can't find another reason except that there's a rule not to. I imagine many brands would otherwise try to send bucket loads to BRF but I still don't think I'm grasping what the issue is.



Personally I think it’s because it would turn royalty into a walking billboard, and I see the RF as above commercialism. If they always publicly accepted freebies and did promotional branding, they would be no better than any instagram influencer or Hollywood celebrity. I think royalty does have an important role to play to in promoting local brands, but I think this needs to be strategic to promote commonwealth interests and accomplishments - not whoever wants to give them free high end stuff that they could easily afford in exchange for free publicity.


----------



## caramelize126

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Serious question, because I don't follow the RF or any royals at all, but I don't see problem with her getting it for free. I think it looks tackier on brands than her. So why is there outrage? It's not clear in your post or in anyone else's posts. I'm genuinely open to hearing why this is a problem politically or socially.
> 
> Edit: I've done a bit of research on Google and I really can't find another reason except that there's a rule not to. I imagine many brands would otherwise try to send bucket loads to BRF but I still don't think I'm grasping what the issue is.




The BRF are considered government officials. There are laws in place that prevent government officials ( both elected and non-elected) from accepting free gifts over a certain value, as this can be misconstrued as bribery, the gifter trying to exert influence, or the receiver taking advantage of their position . Normal people have a distinct separation between work and private life, but the BRF obviously doesn’t. This is their lives, full-time.  This is why Kate and Meghan can’t  accept free clothes from designers. 

It’s confusing and  becomes even more complicated when the gifts in question are coming from foreign channels. By law, she isn’t allowed to accept any freebies ( or the gifts for that matter).

The BRF is privately wealthy, so I am sure they have private parties, events and accept gifts from friends. They key word though is private. The rules were created as a way to ensure that they are never put in a situation where they are under any obligation to the donor. Nowadays though, I’m sure it’s all optics.


----------



## berrydiva

caramelize126 said:


> The BRF are considered government officials.


I thought the Queen was no longer considered a gummit official? They can't vote or interject any political positions and are mostly just ceremonial heads. Unless I understood their position wrong. Also, could've sworn I read that the Queen prefers for the family to not accept free clothes not that they are not allow to accept free clothing/gifts due to government relations. I, admittedly, don't fully understand their purpose as a monarchy given that I don't live there only visit.


----------



## caramelize126

berrydiva said:


> I thought the Queen was no longer considered a gummit official? They can't vote or interject any political positions and are mostly just ceremonial heads. Unless I understood their position wrong. Also, could've sworn I read that the Queen prefers for the family to not accept free clothes not that they are not allow to accept free clothing/gifts due to government relations. I, admittedly, don't fully understand their purpose as a monarchy given that I don't live there only visit.



I'm honestly not sure if the concerns are legitimate or is just old rules that are still followed. The rules are supposed to apply to anyone with a full or partial taxpayer funded position. The BRF doesnt have any official political power, but i think they still have alot of influence, if that makes sense? They have to report all the gifts that they receive and the value on a form thats posted publicly.  Theres some info on this site:
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a22724387/royal-family-gift-giving-rules/

I doubt that these are privately followed. I think it just becomes an optics issue when the gifts are made public- the value, source, etc. all have to be taken into account, reported, and any potential sources of conflicts of interest have to be addressed.


----------



## VickyB

Geez. This is all so tedious. As I and many other posters have shared,  I may have opinions but really don't care that she had a shower or about the cost of the shower or if George Clooney paid for her to fly private. What bothers me is that MM was in NYC for 2 days on the DL and then the BFF leaked her presence, her hotel, the shower and unleashed the paps - clearly with MM approval. Nobody goes to the Polo Bar to be on the DL.  The thirst is still real .......not royal.  JMO.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

berrydiva said:


> I thought the Queen was no longer considered a gummit official? They can't vote or interject any political positions and are mostly just ceremonial heads. Unless I understood their position wrong. Also, could've sworn I read that the Queen prefers for the family to not accept free clothes not that they are not allow to accept free clothing/gifts due to government relations. I, admittedly, don't fully understand their purpose as a monarchy given that I don't live there only visit.





caramelize126 said:


> I'm honestly not sure if the concerns are legitimate or is just old rules that are still followed. The rules are supposed to apply to anyone with a full or partial taxpayer funded position. The BRF doesnt have any official political power, but i think they still have alot of influence, if that makes sense? They have to report all the gifts that they receive and the value on a form thats posted publicly.  Theres some info on this site:
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a22724387/royal-family-gift-giving-rules/
> 
> I doubt that these are privately followed. I think it just becomes an optics issue when the gifts are made public- the value, source, etc. all have to be taken into account, reported, and any potential sources of conflicts of interest have to be addressed.



Queen Elizabeth still has immense official political power. It's a common misconception that contemporary monarchs are figureheads, and I'm sure they like it that way.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder about the "token gifts " to the children. We've all seen them being given to William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, especially when the pregnancies have been announced, the stuffed animal Harry and Meghan received in Australia and she was heard to say "our first gift" The stuffed animal Baby George was given, again in Australia, which he promptly threw on the ground. A few weeks ago, William was given something for each of his children and he said "Charlotte will love that" I've seen them being given mini rugby and football tops too.


----------



## chicaloca

I don’t get why people care that Meghan was papped going to her baby shower. What irreparable harm did this cause? the baby shower was the most exciting flurry of news about the royals since the wedding. 

I think the baby shower allowed Meghan to visit her home country, see her friends, celebrate her baby and had the added bonus of shutting down false media narratives concerning her friends. I think her PR has been brilliant at interrupting the false negative narratives coming from the royal reporters. 

This shower also exposed how royal reporters completely make up stories. Has there been any accountability for the reporter who gave a detailed account of the shower the day before it actually occurred?


----------



## gelbergirl

I would have liked this shower to have been a quiet affair in a beautiful rented compound somewhere in the Hamptons.  No reason for the public parade of celebrities and gifts going into the NYC hotel.  Security would not have been a problem.


----------



## daisychainz

chicaloca said:


> I don’t get why people care that Meghan was papped going to her baby shower. What irreparable harm did this cause? the baby shower was the most exciting flurry of news about the royals since the wedding.


TBH, I didn't see this on the local or national news once (USA here), so it certainly didn't make too much of a splash here beyond gossip sites like TMZ. Maybe the NYC local news covered her, though? The only place I really read about MM is on here, Yahoo/Google news and on some gossip sites like TMZ that follow celebrities. Perhaps this was covered in the UK to a much larger extent than the US? She's really not covered much in the US, her wedding was covered, of course, but we don't get any coverage of her - you have to look her up if you're interested or come across it on gossip sites. Does anyone else in the US see her more regularly on the nightly news?


----------



## caramelize126

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder about the "token gifts " to the children. We've all seen them being given to William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, especially when the pregnancies have been announced, the stuffed animal Harry and Meghan received in Australia and she was heard to say "our first gift" The stuffed animal Baby George was given, again in Australia, which he promptly threw on the ground. A few weeks ago, William was given something for each of his children and he said "Charlotte will love that" I've seen them being given mini rugby and football tops too.



They are allowed to accept token gifts as long as its under a certain value. However, the gifts are considered "public property", aka they cant sell the items. I'm not sure if it still has to be reported if its under the amount threshold.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder about the "token gifts " to the children. We've all seen them being given to William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, especially when the pregnancies have been announced, the stuffed animal Harry and Meghan received in Australia and she was heard to say "our first gift" The stuffed animal Baby George was given, again in Australia, which he promptly threw on the ground. A few weeks ago, William was given something for each of his children and he said "Charlotte will love that" I've seen them being given mini rugby and football tops too.


so?


----------



## LittleStar88

The kid is going to be graduating college and y'all are still going to be going on about the baby shower


----------



## Aimee3

daisychainz said:


> TBH, I didn't see this on the local or national news once (USA here), so it certainly didn't make too much of a splash here beyond gossip sites like TMZ. Maybe the NYC local news covered her, though? The only place I really read about MM is on here, Yahoo/Google news and on some gossip sites like TMZ that follow celebrities. Perhaps this was covered in the UK to a much larger extent than the US? She's really not covered much in the US, her wedding was covered, of course, but we don't get any coverage of her - you have to look her up if you're interested or come across it on gossip sites. Does anyone else in the US see her more regularly on the nightly news?



I was right near the Mark Hotel and saw nothing. If I hadn’t read about it after the shower on here and in the NY Post i never would have known she was even there.  I was even at her hair stylists salon the day of the shower and nobody there was talking about it either!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> Being royal is in theory supposed to be about working diligently for the people...not about using (and potentially abusing) your position to hawk designer products so you can get them for free.  It can easily become tacky, crass, and money hungry - from people who are already vastly wealthy.   Fergie is a good example of where it can wind up when someone commercializes their royal status.   The Weight Watchers era was embarrassing for everyone.
> 
> The other issue with the baby shower was simply the ostentatious display of wealth.  Everybody knows the royal family is wealthy, but apart from the occasional royal wedding that we all get to enjoy, the royal family is expected to keep the lavish lifestyles a bit in check and not flaunt them out in the open.  Just a bit.
> 
> Everything about that shower could have been toned down and done more discreetly.  The UK is putting together ration boxes and preparing evacuation plans for its leaders in preparation for Brexit, and Meghan is making headlines for having one of the world's most expensive baby showers with a bunch of celebrities in a $75k per night hotel suite.  That is not a juxtaposition that is flattering to Meghan, and it's not the type of press that benefits the royal family.
> 
> Coming on the heels of the stories about Meghan's massive overspending on designer clothes, it also doesn't paint a great picture of what her values are.  She said she was all about "activism" in her engagement interview.  She needs to do more of that, and less overt basking in wealth.





cafecreme15 said:


> Personally I think it’s because it would turn royalty into a walking billboard, and I see the RF as above commercialism. If they always publicly accepted freebies and did promotional branding, they would be no better than any instagram influencer or Hollywood celebrity. I think royalty does have an important role to play to in promoting local brands, but I think this needs to be strategic to promote commonwealth interests and accomplishments - not whoever wants to give them free high end stuff that they could easily afford in exchange for free publicity.





caramelize126 said:


> The BRF are considered government officials. There are laws in place that prevent government officials ( both elected and non-elected) from accepting free gifts over a certain value, as this can be misconstrued as bribery, the gifter trying to exert influence, or the receiver taking advantage of their position . Normal people have a distinct separation between work and private life, but the BRF obviously doesn’t. This is their lives, full-time.  This is why Kate and Meghan can’t  accept free clothes from designers.
> 
> It’s confusing and  becomes even more complicated when the gifts in question are coming from foreign channels. By law, she isn’t allowed to accept any freebies ( or the gifts for that matter).
> 
> The BRF is privately wealthy, so I am sure they have private parties, events and accept gifts from friends. They key word though is private. The rules were created as a way to ensure that they are never put in a situation where they are under any obligation to the donor. Nowadays though, I’m sure it’s all optics.


Thank you all for taking the time to explain! I understand where you're coming from. I don't think I quite agree, but it's good to get a real understanding. 

And I'm sorry to everyone else for asking and dragging out the baby shower conversation 


Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder about the "token gifts " to the children. We've all seen them being given to William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, especially when the pregnancies have been announced, the stuffed animal Harry and Meghan received in Australia and she was heard to say "our first gift" The stuffed animal Baby George was given, again in Australia, which he promptly threw on the ground. A few weeks ago, William was given something for each of his children and he said "Charlotte will love that" I've seen them being given mini rugby and football tops too.


When I was reading about accepting gifts, I read that they can accept items under £150, which is probably why items like that have been accepted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

daisychainz said:


> TBH, I didn't see this on the local or national news once (USA here), so it certainly didn't make too much of a splash here beyond gossip sites like TMZ. Maybe the NYC local news covered her, though? The only place I really read about MM is on here, Yahoo/Google news and on some gossip sites like TMZ that follow celebrities. Perhaps this was covered in the UK to a much larger extent than the US? She's really not covered much in the US, her wedding was covered, of course, but we don't get any coverage of her - you have to look her up if you're interested or come across it on gossip sites. Does anyone else in the US see her more regularly on the nightly news?



She’s on the cover of People — again.

I don’t watch news on TV. I honestly don’t know anyone under 50 who does.  Every major publication with a social media outlet had breathless coverage including all the major entertainment & fashion magazines. My Instagram timeline was filled with coverage from, People, Marie Claire, Harpers Bazaar ..etc.


----------



## lulu212121

daisychainz said:


> TBH, I didn't see this on the local or national news once (USA here), so it certainly didn't make too much of a splash here beyond gossip sites like TMZ. Maybe the NYC local news covered her, though? The only place I really read about MM is on here, Yahoo/Google news and on some gossip sites like TMZ that follow celebrities. Perhaps this was covered in the UK to a much larger extent than the US? She's really not covered much in the US, her wedding was covered, of course, but we don't get any coverage of her - you have to look her up if you're interested or come across it on gossip sites. Does anyone else in the US see her more regularly on the nightly news?


The only time I have seen the news media mention her was when she got married, announced pregnancy, and when Gail talked about the shower. Gail was the only one I heard mention this shower. 

I don't really care about the baby shower, but the optics didn't look good. I still don't understand why her mother was not there since these are friends _and_ family events. Even when a friend throws a shower, the mother is still invited. I don't know why some are so sure that her mother will be there for the birth, but not Christmas or this shower.


----------



## daisychainz

lulu212121 said:


> The only time I have seen the news media mention her was when she got married, announced pregnancy, and when Gail talked about the shower. Gail was the only one I heard mention this shower.
> 
> I don't really care about the baby shower, but the optics didn't look good. I still don't understand why her mother was not there since these are friends _and_ family events. Even when a friend throws a shower, the mother is still invited. I don't know why some are so sure that her mother will be there for the birth, but not Christmas or this shower.


Oh my goodness, can you imagine a mother not coming for that?! It would be next-level crazy if her mother wasn't there by the day after, at least. Royal baby, first grandchild, only daughter... she has to be there!


----------



## bag-mania

For what it's worth, various media outlets are reporting that Meghan and Harry have been telling their friends that their baby is a boy.


----------



## lulu212121

daisychainz said:


> Oh my goodness, can you imagine a mother not coming for that?! It would be next-level crazy if her mother wasn't there by the day after, at least. Royal baby, first grandchild, only daughter... she has to be there!


I think her mom not being in New York when Megan was is next level crazy.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> For what it's worth, various media outlets are reporting that Meghan and Harry have been telling their friends that their baby is a boy.


Was (and still am) hoping for a girl! Though I think Harry would be wonderful with a son.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> Was (and still am) hoping for a girl! Though I think Harry would be wonderful with a son.


I'm thinking girl too.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> I don’t get why people care that Meghan was papped going to her baby shower. What irreparable harm did this cause? the baby shower was the most exciting flurry of news about the royals since the wedding.
> 
> I think the baby shower allowed Meghan to visit her home country, see her friends, celebrate her baby and had the added bonus of shutting down false media narratives concerning her friends. I think her PR has been brilliant at interrupting the false negative narratives coming from the royal reporters.
> 
> This shower also exposed how royal reporters completely make up stories. Has there been any accountability for the reporter who gave a detailed account of the shower the day before it actually occurred?


The extravagant details were revealed the day before it happened. So maybe that was what the reporter was writing about?

I haven't read anything here that people think she shouldn't have a baby shower. I think that some posters are suggesting that since she became a member of the royal family, they thought she would be more low key and she _is_ low key in London, but when she got to NYC, she was papped going out for lunch, dinner and the shower and it was quite the media circus and she looked like she was enjoying herself much more than what we have seen in the UK photos.

So, it's just a surprise that she let it happen, but it seems she wants and can have it both ways. Still Hollywood, still an actress, and also a beautiful member of the BRF.


----------



## Hobbsy

berrydiva said:


> I thought the Queen was no longer considered a gummit official? They can't vote or interject any political positions and are mostly just ceremonial heads. Unless I understood their position wrong. Also, could've sworn I read that the Queen prefers for the family to not accept free clothes not that they are not allow to accept free clothing/gifts due to government relations. I, admittedly, don't fully understand their purpose as a monarchy given that I don't live there only visit.


They don't have a purpose. They're trying to stay under the radar but do enough for charities that they seem relevant. They're totally disposable and they know it.


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> The kid is going to be graduating college and y'all are still going to be going on about the baby shower


That sounds about right.  I think her vendors might be finished milking the event for publicity around that time.  

Today her makeup artist gave an exclusive interview about the shower to People Magazine.  Yesterday the confectioner revealed a video of the desert table.

All of the vendor details could have been completely secret with confidentiality agreements.  That's why I think all of the vendors worked for free or at reduced rates in exchange for being allowed to flog the event for publicity.


----------



## bisbee

lulu212121 said:


> The only time I have seen the news media mention her was when she got married, announced pregnancy, and when Gail talked about the shower. Gail was the only one I heard mention this shower.
> 
> I don't really care about the baby shower, but the optics didn't look good. I still don't understand why her mother was not there since these are friends _and_ family events. Even when a friend throws a shower, the mother is still invited. I don't know why some are so sure that her mother will be there for the birth, but not Christmas or this shower.


There were no family members present...I don’t think it was strange that her mother didn’t attend.  I wouldn’t speculate about her mother’s presence for the birth...but my feeling is that she will be in 
England before that event.


----------



## minababe

White Orchid said:


> View attachment 4353866
> 
> Yes I love it too.  Last year a friend of mine was getting married and so she hired a lass to do our hands.  She took around 10 - 15 mins to do each hand and I was very impressed.  Here’s a group photo.



Thats what i was talking about! Stunning !!


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> I was right near the Mark Hotel and saw nothing. If I hadn’t read about it after the shower on here and in the NY Post i never would have known she was even there.  I was even at her hair stylists salon the day of the shower and nobody there was talking about it either!


The paps obviously knew when and where to go to find them.


----------



## bag-mania

lulu212121 said:


> I still don't understand why her mother was not there since these are friends _and_ family events. Even when a friend throws a shower, the mother is still invited. I don't know why some are so sure that her mother will be there for the birth, but not Christmas or this shower.



I get the impression Meghan's mother is a modest, low-key woman. She may not have felt comfortable in what was essentially a celebrity party. It was not a normal baby shower in any sense.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> I get the impression Meghan's mother is a modest, low-key woman. She may not have felt comfortable in what was essentially a celebrity party. It was not a normal baby shower in any sense.


This is what I thought! I can't imagine Doria wasn't invited, but I wouldn't be surprised if she declined knowing the ensuing media circus that would occur.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

*Kate Middleton Is Throwing Meghan Markle a Second Baby Shower*

When details about Meghan Markle’s recent baby shower in New York City came to light, it was easy to linger on the absence of Kate Middleton. It was somewhat eyebrow-raising that the Duchess of Cambridge wasn’t in attendance along with her sister-in-law’s inner circle, Serena Williams (who hosted the event), Amal Clooney, Gayle King, her BFFs Jessica Mulroney and Abigail Spencer, the _Blindspotting_ actress Janina Gavankar, Markus Anderson and Misha Nonoo (who were rumored to have set up Markle and Harry), the NBC Cable Entertainment chairman Bonnie Hammer, and some friends from Northwestern University. But Middleton had a solid reason for not attending: She’s planning her own celebration for Markle and all of the members of the mom-to-be’s support system across the pond.

The event isn’t being called a “baby shower,” but it has all of the makings of one, according to a source close to the royal family. “There is still going to be some sort of private baby-centric event for Meghan’s U.K. people, and Kate will host,” the source told_Us Weekly_. “Her glam people and other relatives will be there. Not sure if it’s a total baby ‘shower,’ but you could probably call it that.” There are no further details about where it will be held, what the vibe will be like, or who exactly will be in attendance, but it could be the thing that finally quiets those rumors about the two duchesses engaged in a “feud”that have cast a cloud over Markle’s pregnancy.

Sarah Ferguson, Prince Harry and Prince William’s aunt, said it best when she recently slammed those media outlets inflating these rumors. “Women, in particular, are constantly pitted against and compared with each other in a way that reminds me of how people tried to portray Diana and me all the time as rivals, which is something neither of us ever really felt,” she wrote in a recent open letter. “People feel licensed to say things online that they would never dream of saying to someone’s face, and that encourages others to pile in. It’s so ubiquitous that we’ve all become numb to what’s going on.” Watching the arrival of a baby into this world, though, has a way of softening up even the hardest of hearts.

https://www.wmagazine.com/story/kate-middleton-throwing-meghan-markle-second-baby-shower


----------



## redney

So let's see.
Meghan has no friends. Nope.
Kate and Meghan are feuding enemies. Doesn't seem like it.
Carry on.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

This makes the other shower look even tackier. I was expecting Kate to throw her a more "official" shower and was really surprised by the other.

Who knows if they hate each other or are the best of friends, but Kate throwing her a shower is not indicative of anything. She's her sister-in-law. How many people have thrown showers for in-laws they are constantly bickering with, or secretly or openly hated one another but still chose them as a bridesmaid, groomsman, godparent? And if the palace wants to present a big happy, stable royal family and quiet the rumors about the family drama this is exactly how you do it.


----------



## redney

Thought baby showers aren't a "thing" in the UK? So why is the BRF condoning one for Meghan?


----------



## daisychainz

This is entirely expected. It's the official, royal "shower" and by process of exclusion Kate Middleton is your hostess. They really can't name William or Camilla as hosts. It's an official event that will get them the press they want, and both women will likely come out looking very favorable.


----------



## VickyB

So over showergate. Let's just birth the baby and move on.  She's looking ready to deliver this month.


----------



## Chagall

I have never ever attended a baby shower where the mother wasn’t invited. In nearly all cases they attended unless sick or out of the country or for some other legitimate reason. A lot of people go to things they might feel out of place or uncomfortable at but go because it’s required or the correct thing to do. Doria not being there seems odd to me.


----------



## bag-princess

Chagall said:


> I have never ever attended a baby shower where the mother wasn’t invited. In nearly all cases they attended unless sick or out of the country or for some other legitimate reason. A lot of people go to things they might feel out of place or uncomfortable at but go because it’s required or the correct thing to do. Doria not being there seems odd to me.




You don’t know that she doesn’t have a legitimate reason! Just because it’s not posted all over for everyone to read about does not make it illegitimate.[emoji1362]


----------



## minababe

I don't think she is getting another shower. she was with her besties that day. it's not unusal that her mother wasn't there. I was never on a Baby shower where the mother attend. it's for the mom to be by her girlfriends.
and that kate was not involved ( who knows by the way) is not a big deal to me. she is her in law sister that doesn't mean you have to involve her in anything. it's just another try to make meghan look bad and kate good... it's really childish.


----------



## chicaloca

bag-princess said:


> You don’t know that she doesn’t have a legitimate reason! Just because it’s not posted all over for everyone to read about does not make it illegitimate.[emoji1362]




People forget that Doria actually has a job and life in California. Unlike the Markles, she does not use her daughter as a meal ticket.


----------



## threadbender

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...ince-harry-gender-fluid-baby-palace-response/

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a26582936/meghan-markle-royal-baby-fluid-gender/

How did I miss these stories?


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I have never ever attended a baby shower where the mother wasn’t invited. In nearly all cases they attended unless sick or out of the country or for some other legitimate reason. A lot of people go to things they might feel out of place or uncomfortable at but go because it’s required or the correct thing to do. Doria not being there seems odd to me.


If one is having just one shower then the mother would be there.  But if she's having more than one and the NY one was far away from where her mother lives, I don't see it as odd that she wouldn't be there


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> If one is having just one shower then the mother would be there.  But if she's having more than one and the NY one was far away from where her mother lives, I don't see it as odd that she wouldn't be there


Let’s hope Doria makes the UK shower then (if there is one). It’s further away but definitely could be done.


----------



## bag-mania

Where is Doria living these days? I remember there were rumors last year that she was going to move to the UK but did it actually happen?


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Where is Doria living these days? I remember there were rumors last year that she was going to move to the UK but did it actually happen?


She lives here in LA; not sure exactly where (since LA County is huge) ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

bag-mania said:


> Where is Doria living these days? I remember there were rumors last year that she was going to move to the UK but did it actually happen?





CeeJay said:


> She lives here in LA; not sure exactly where (since LA County is huge) ..



Doria lives in Windsor Hills


----------



## CentralTimeZone

carlpsmom said:


> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...ince-harry-gender-fluid-baby-palace-response/
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a26582936/meghan-markle-royal-baby-fluid-gender/
> 
> How did I miss these stories?



I guess this means the baby will get a title. You can’t raise a gender fluid/neutral baby with a title of prince or princess or even lord/lady.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chagall said:


> I have never ever attended a baby shower where the mother wasn’t invited. In nearly all cases they attended unless sick or out of the country or for some other legitimate reason. A lot of people go to things they might feel out of place or uncomfortable at but go because it’s required or the correct thing to do. Doria not being there seems odd to me.


Doria was too busy with her own life. She had a box she needed to drop at UPS! Maybe she was mailing off her shower gift?!


----------



## Jayne1

Kate is very proper. She knows how to carry herself and how to act as a member of the BRF.

She knows it is the proper thing to do to -- have a baby shower.  We don't know how she really feels about Meghan, maybe they're great friends, maybe she resents the competition... but we _do know_ that Kate will conduct herself with the proper decorum and that is to give Meghan her baby shower.


----------



## Superbe

I doubt it that Kate feels any competition or negativity towards Meghan. The public opinion of Meghan in the UK isn’t very favourable especially given her attention seeking and never-ending family feuds so if anything, Kate is now seen as classier and more likeable. Kate also seems focused on her own family and three kids so probably doesn’t have time to care too much.

I’m actually surprised quite a few people here like Meghan but it seems like it is mostly for her fashion style or posters from the US. Nothing wrong with this - it’s just different from how she’s seen in the UK


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I see a lot of negativity on places like the DM etc but that's to be expected given the slant of the stories. 

Where commenters are saying they are from a Commonwealth country (as I am, Australia) the attitudes are far more positive and the coverage more balanced. That is, she's made some missteps but is a breath of fresh sir.  

The Moroccan tour was really very successful  as was the South Pacific one and hasn't passed the attention of the Queen either if reports are to be believed.

She's new, settling into the role and has certainly made a few errors but overall she's done well IMO and shows a good work ethic.


----------



## Grande Latte

Jayne1 said:


> Kate is very proper. She knows how to carry herself and how to act as a member of the BRF.
> 
> She knows it is the proper thing to do to -- have a baby shower.  We don't know how she really feels about Meghan, maybe they're great friends, maybe she resents the competition... but we _do know_ that Kate will conduct herself with the proper decorum and that is to give Meghan her baby shower.



Kate is very proper and well mannered. I like her conservatism. I think she's really cool and a very good match for William. Very good for the BRF.

What do we know about how anyone thinks/ feels. It doesn't matter. It matters what one DOES.


----------



## myown

carlpsmom said:


> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...ince-harry-gender-fluid-baby-palace-response/
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a26582936/meghan-markle-royal-baby-fluid-gender/
> 
> How did I miss these stories?


what exactly is "gender fluid"?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

myown said:


> what exactly is "gender fluid"?



Basically they're trying to make a big deal out of nothing because gasp! shock! apparently they are making the colours of the nursery soft grey and white rather than blue or pink.

They really are reaching with some of this.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maybe Catherine won't throw a baby shower because it's not a "thing" over here. Yes, it is getting a bit more popular here but it isn't a tradition.


----------



## TMA

Superbe said:


> I doubt it that Kate feels any competition or negativity towards Meghan. The public opinion of Meghan in the UK isn’t very favourable especially given her attention seeking and never-ending family feuds so if anything, Kate is now seen as classier and more likeable. Kate also seems focused on her own family and three kids so probably doesn’t have time to care too much.
> 
> I’m actually surprised quite a few people here like Meghan but it seems like it is mostly for her fashion style or posters from the US. Nothing wrong with this - it’s just different from how she’s seen in the UK



Please speak for yourself. I am English and know lots of people who love Meghan for what she adds to the RF. She is a self-made woman and didn’t have to put her life on hold to marry a prince. A lot of women who are modern identify with her. There are those who hate her, there are those who love her in the UK and frankly, a lot who are indifferent. We haven’t yet had a census to determine the love/hate split.


----------



## bag-princess

chicaloca said:


> People forget that Doria actually has a job and life in California. *Unlike the Markles, she does not use her daughter as a meal ticket.*



THIS THIS THIS!!!   let that woman live her life as she has been doing many years before this all happened!   the women i know with only children do not cling to them for life and believe they need to be everywhere they are!   both are independent and do their own things.  



carlpsmom said:


> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...ince-harry-gender-fluid-baby-palace-response/
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a26582936/meghan-markle-royal-baby-fluid-gender/
> 
> How did I miss these stories?



they ain't worth the time to read!    when i saw the headlines yesterday i did a 




FreeSpirit71 said:


> Basically they're trying to make a big deal out of nothing because gasp! shock! apparently they are making the colours of the nursery soft grey and white rather than blue or pink.
> 
> *They really are reaching with some of this*.




of course!  as with most that they write about meghan!  they will be chalking it all up to her hollywood life and the devil made her do it next!


----------



## caramelize126

TMA said:


> Please speak for yourself. I am English and know lots of people who love Meghan for what she adds to the RF. She is a self-made woman and *didn’t have to put her life on hold to marry a prince.* A lot of women who are modern identify with her. There are those who hate her, there are those who love her in the UK and frankly, a lot who are indifferent. We haven’t yet had a census to determine the love/hate split.



Didnt she give up her old life to marry the prince?


----------



## myown

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Basically they're trying to make a big deal out of nothing because gasp! shock! apparently they are making the colours of the nursery soft grey and white rather than blue or pink.
> 
> They really are reaching with some of this.


okay, that's what I thought, too. remember George wore pink in Australia?!


----------



## TMA

caramelize126 said:


> Didnt she give up her old life to marry the prince?



Key point being she did something with her life and is not a blank canvas. That is no reason to vilify her. A lot of us make changes to our lives and paths when we get married to accommodate the other. That is different from lounging about waiting for the ring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## anitalilac

TMA said:


> Key point being she did something with her life and is not a blank canvas. That is no reason to vilify her. A lot of us make changes to our lives and paths when we get married to accommodate the other. That is different from lounging about waiting for the ring.


Well said!


----------



## chicaloca

TMA said:


> Key point being she did something with her life and is not a blank canvas. That is no reason to vilify her. A lot of us make changes to our lives and paths when we get married to accommodate the other. That is different from lounging about waiting for the ring.



Thank you! I still have no clue what Kate did with her life in 10 years she spent waiting for a proposal. There’s no record of philanthrophy and her employment history is sketchy to nonexistent.


----------



## LibbyRuth

chicaloca said:


> Thank you! I still have no clue what Kate did with her life in 10 years she spent waiting for a proposal. There’s no record of philanthrophy and her employment history is sketchy to nonexistent.



Is it sketchy to non-existent because Kate did nothing, or because it was not a very public job?  Had Meghan worked as a successful accountant who volunteered at a homeless shelter for women on the weekends, would we have as much of a clue what Meghan did in her life before Harry?  Or, had Meghan met and fell in love with Harry in college rather than in her 30s, would she have been on the same path?


----------



## chicaloca

LibbyRuth said:


> Is it sketchy to non-existent because Kate did nothing, or because it was not a very public job?  Had Meghan worked as a successful accountant who volunteered at a homeless shelter for women on the weekends, would we have as much of a clue what Meghan did in her life before Harry?  Or, had Meghan met and fell in love with Harry in college rather than in her 30s, would she have been on the same path?




Kate was followed by the media and papped during her courtship with William because everyone was expecting a proposal. If she had a job we’d know about it.

The what if’s make no sense. You can’t change the past. The fact is Meghan  had a full life including a career, philanthropy and marriage BEFORE she met Harry. Her life prior to Harry didn’t consist of waiting around to marry him.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Didn’t she work as a buyer for a company and then went to work for the family business?


----------



## daisychainz

chicaloca said:


> Kate was followed by the media and papped during her courtship with William because everyone was expecting a proposal. If she had a job we’d know about it.
> 
> The what if’s make no sense. You can’t change the past. The fact is Meghan  had a full life including a career, philanthropy and marriage BEFORE she met Harry. Her life prior to Harry didn’t consist of waiting around to marry him.


I'm fairly certain she was working primarily for her family's business; she was photographed multiple times on her way to work.
It's really not fair to blame Kate for William taking so long to propose - as the future king he had to be very certain that the woman he choose passed muster with the family on all levels and was thoroughly vetted and accepted. I recall much of the waiting was because William was allowing Kate to test the lifestyle and make certain it would be what she wanted.


----------



## LibbyRuth

chicaloca said:


> Kate was followed by the media and papped during her courtship with William because everyone was expecting a proposal. If she had a job we’d know about it.
> 
> The what if’s make no sense. You can’t change the past. The fact is Meghan  had a full life including a career, philanthropy and marriage BEFORE she met Harry. Her life prior to Harry didn’t consist of waiting around to marry him.



With Kate, A1aGypsy is right, and so are you. If Kate had a job during their courtship we'd know about it - and we know that she had one. She may not have made career building choices because she knew that her future was in the BRF, but she worked. 

Had Meghan worked as a buyer, in a family business or as an accountant, we would have read about it and then forgotten about it because it wasn't in the public eye and wasn't notable. And if Meghan had met Harry earlier in her life and knew at that point that being a member of the BRF was her future, she may not have made the career choices that she did. 

I think it's futile to compare the two women in terms of career drive, because there were more factors at play in both of their lives than the notion that one is a driven and together woman, and the other was a lazy blank canvas waiting for prince charming to literally sweep her away.


----------



## bag-mania

Why all the comparisons? Can't both ladies be great while not being anything alike? We each follow our own path and Meghan and Kate both seem like fine people.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> Kate was followed by the media and papped during her courtship with William because everyone was expecting a proposal. If she had a job we’d know about it.
> 
> The what if’s make no sense. You can’t change the past. The fact is Meghan  had a full life including a career, philanthropy and marriage BEFORE she met Harry. Her life prior to Harry didn’t consist of waiting around to marry him.


really?  you're doing the waity katy thing?  after all these years.  Can't you love Meghan without disparaging Kate?


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, I don’t get the need for it to be #teamwhomever. I imagine both of their lives have blessed aspects and difficult aspects and they are both trying to get along as best they can. 

I find this all so depressing, really (the internet attention not this thread per say). I get discussing their choices or their clothing but to make personal judgments... Well, I cannot imagine my life open and exposed for the public. The only people who would be impressed would be Lays and Pepsi for the repeated manner in which pictures would show up of me face first in their products. Beyond that, it would likely appear as a big old dumpster fire.


----------



## TMA

Just to be clear, I was not making a comment on Kate when I said lounging around to marry. My point is Meghan is a 37 yr old woman who lived a full life not knowing it would take her here. So those who think she is Hollywood and the other things they like to use as a derogatory comment on her are just wrong. Kate made her choice the way she did and that is a valid path too, especially since she met William much earlier on in life. I just have an issue with people bringing up Meghan’s past work and friendships as if she should have had no life just on the off chance she’d meet a prince.


----------



## berrydiva

bag-mania said:


> Why all the comparisons? Can't both ladies be great while not being anything alike? We each follow our own path and Meghan and Kate both seem like fine people.


I'm with you.I really don't understand why they have to be pitted against each other. William and Harry seem like two completely different personalities and being such, I don't see how two women who are very similar would work for each of them.


----------



## rose60610

Just think of the comparisons we could make had Diana and Charles had three, four, five or more sons!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I don't know why it has to come down to this.  
This one vs that one.  You can't raise someone by pushing someone else down.

Disheartening.


----------



## berrydiva

rose60610 said:


> Just think of the comparisons we could make had Diana and Charles had three, four, five or more sons!


Probably would be easier tbh....with 4 or 5, at least one son probably would've married a train wreck that made all the other wives seem like saints.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry in Birmingham

In Cannon Hill Park, Officially opening the Sousse and Bardo Memorial, dedicated to those who lost their lives on the attacks in Tunisia in the Bardo Museum in March 2015 and Sousse in June 2015











Visiting the Scar Free Foundation Centre for Conflict Wound Research at Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham


----------



## chicaloca

sdkitty said:


> really?  you're doing the waity katy thing?  after all these years.  Can't you love Meghan without disparaging Kate?



 I don’t care about Kate at all. That’s why I don’t visit or post in her thread. Her fans seem to enjoy bringing her up in the Meg & Harry thread for whatever reason.

As an aside, if she knew she wanted to marry William she could have spent those gap years learning public speaking.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> I don’t care about Kate at all. That’s why I don’t visit or post in her thread. Her fans seem to enjoy bringing her up in the Meg & Harry thread for whatever reason.
> 
> As an aside, if she knew she wanted to marry William she could have spent those gap years learning public speaking.


funny, you don't are about her but you can't resist another dig.....is there something wrong with her speaking?


----------



## Morgan R

sdkitty said:


> funny, you don't care about her but you can't resist another dig.....*is there something wrong with her speaking?*



Even though Kate interacts well with people on walk abouts and at engagements she is widely considered not to be that great of a public speaker when it comes to giving speeches. There have been some reports that have said Kate isn't comfortable with public speaking but some people have argued and will argue those reports are debatable. I personally haven't debated those reports because I'm not comfortable with public speaking myself  so I won't question if a person isn't comfortable with public speaking. The thing is though since she did end up marrying William, Kate is in a position where she will have to do some public speaking for the rest of her life.

If she genuinely isn't comfortable with public speaking I have always felt it would probably be best for her to get a vocal coach or speech coach like many other people of prominence who aren't comfortable or have a fear of public speaking have done. For instance it is known Diana notably hired multiple vocal coaches and speech coaches to help her with her public speaking because she feared public speaking and sometimes joked about her public speaking in some of her speeches. She ended up having many coaches but the ones people mostly associate with Diana are the actor Sir Richard Attenborough, communications strategist Richard Greene, and Peter Settelen (this is the coach people probably most notably associate with Diana due to the fact that videos from his sessions were shown on NBC in a broadcast called "Diana Revealed" and more recently on Channel 4 in a broadcast called "Diana: In Her Own Words").  Due to the availability of the videos of Peter Settlen coaching Diana it shows that in effort to help her become a better public speaker he would help her practice her speeches and did "mock interviews" (which often ended up becoming more so actual conversations in which she revealed a lot). So if you ever watch Diana's interviews or speeches from her 20s (which was in the 1980s) vs. the interviews or speeches she did in her 30s (which was in the 1990s) you can notably see a difference due to the coaching she received.


----------



## minababe

are we sure that doria wasn't at the Baby shower in nyc?
I just saw that her suits co star Sarah attended the shower as well but wasn't on any Paparazzi pics outside of the Hotel. so only the People who wanted to be in the Spotlight were photographed.


----------



## minababe

btw the gender artcles are ********. kensington Palace made a Statement.
can't believe how much ******** the media is reporting about megan and Harry. it's disgusting.


----------



## Morgan R

minababe said:


> are we sure that doria wasn't at the Baby shower in nyc?
> I just saw that her suits co star Sarah attended the shower as well but wasn't on any Paparazzi pics outside of the Hotel. so only the People who wanted to be in the Spotlight were photographed.



Doria was photographed in LA when Meghan was photographed in New York for the baby shower.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending reception at Buckingham Palace to mark the 50th Anniversary of the Investiture of The Prince of Wales


----------



## Sharont2305

^^^that looks like a pretty dress.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> ^^^that looks like a pretty dress.


It really does look nice, like a luxe brocade. Very pretty choice.


----------



## sdkitty

yes, that's a pretty dress
we pretty much know what kind of nose that child will have


----------



## myown

chicaloca said:


> Kate was followed by the media and papped during her courtship with William because everyone was expecting a proposal. If she had a job we’d know about it.
> .


I thought she worked at her familys party supply business


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> yes, that's a pretty dress
> we pretty much know what kind of nose that child will have


Ha! Was thinking the same exact thing. I love this dress and coat but Meghan looks so tired here. She's been doing so much lately, perhaps it's finally caught up to her.

Note: her looking tired is NOT a criticism...who wouldn't be tired in her shoes?


----------



## berrydiva

Love the coat, that dress looks too grandma for her.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> Meghan looks so tired here. She's been doing so much lately, perhaps it's finally caught up to her.
> 
> Note: her looking tired is NOT a criticism...who wouldn't be tired in her shoes?


I thought the same, all the travelling has caught up with her. I think she's at the stage where she's ready to get this pregnancy done. I was like that from about 8 months and I wasn't as big as she is now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## afsweet

great outfit and the dress fits!


----------



## TMA

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought the same, all the travelling has caught up with her. I think she's at the stage where she's ready to get this pregnancy done. I was like that from about 8 months and I wasn't as big as she is now.



I couldn’t wait 3 days to my EDD and had my gynecologist induce me


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

That outfit is good!


----------



## rose60610

It's always preferable to be a good speaker, of course.  Some people never get the hang of it despite decades of giving speeches, Chicago Mayor Richard M Daley comes to mind. After 30 years his speeches were still rough. Some people are great at giving speeches but personality-wise they can be losers, weirdos, or wimps. 

If a Royal gives a speech at whatever function, nobody is really going to care about the delivery for the most part. They WILL all go home and say they were at an event with "so and so".


----------



## Sharont2305

TMA said:


> I couldn’t wait 3 days to my EDD and had my gynecologist induce me


LOL, I went 2 weeks over my due date, I had to be induced too!


----------



## Morgan R

More pictures from the reception at Buckingham Palace to mark the 50th Anniversary of the Investiture of The Prince of Wales


----------



## doni

Love that brocade dress.
How can we be so sure Kate has never done coaching for public speaking? I am sure if it is a problem for her, she would have done so, everybody and their grandmother does that these days anyway...


----------



## FreeSpirit71

She's just a bit uncomfortable with public speaking but she still does it. 

https://www.vogue.com/article/why-we-rarely-hear-kate-middleton-speak

She had vocal coaching for her wedding, she probably still does.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance at an event celebrating young people today.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance at an event celebrating young people today.



She looks like she needs a really good nap!


----------



## afsweet

I'm so used to seeing her hair pulled back that I had to do a double take!


----------



## stephci

Her hair looks so different in the last set of pictures, almost like its a wig?


----------



## berrydiva

stephci said:


> Her hair looks so different in the last set of pictures, almost like its a wig?


Those prenatals seems to work wonders for some women's hair during pregnancy. It's wild how some women start growing thick luxurious hair during pregnancy and others are the absolute opposite and see shedding/breakage.


----------



## bisbee

berrydiva said:


> Those prenatals seems to work wonders for some women's hair during pregnancy. It's wild how some women start growing thick luxurious hair during pregnancy and others are the absolute opposite and see shedding/breakage.


I think most women who experience hair loss start that after the pregnancy.


----------



## VickyB

Love the brocade dress!!!!!!!  I think baby will be born this month.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bisbee said:


> I think most women who experience hair loss start that after the pregnancy.



Yep. I did. About 1-2 months after the birth of my babies.  All those lovely post-birth hormones drop away, as did all the extra hair growth I gained. Shedding _all_ over my house...lol. It stablises eventually.


----------



## Grande Latte

Love the white brocade dress, it's traditional mixed with the new modern cut white coat. Tres chic! 

Yeah, I guess I've gotten used to her hair pulled back, I'm not used to seeing it down now.


----------



## VickyB

Princess Royal's posture is perfect!!!!!!! Wow!

On another note, does anybody follow Gary Janetti?  His Prince George captions are hysterical! Recently he posted a pic of MM from an event this week where she was AGAIN plastering her hand over her belly. Gary's caption was " the child will be born with a hand print on its face" or some such similar comment.


----------



## doni

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Yep. I did. About 1-2 months after the birth of my babies.  All those lovely post-birth hormones drop away, as did all the extra hair growth I gained. Shedding _all_ over my house...lol. It stablises eventually.


Yes. Apparently it is not hair loss, but that hair does not fall during pregnancy, and after, it goes all in one go.

But apparently the use of wigs now among celebs and so is very spread. Queen Letizia regularly wears wigs and hair pieces. Melania ***** is never in public without a wig. So I would also not be surprised, it is just so easy.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duchess of Sussex has become Vice-President of The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, of which The Queen is Patron and The Duke of Sussex is President. It exists to champion, fund and connect young leaders around the world
The Duchess will today join a panel discussion convened by the Trust at King’s College London. It will bring together a special panel of female thought-leaders and activists to discuss a range of issues affecting women today.


----------



## Sharont2305

She's arrived


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan joins a panel discussion convened by The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust to mark International Women’s Day.

The panel features Annie Lennox (founder of The Circle), Adwoa Aboah (founder of Gurls Talk), Julia Gillard (Former Prime Minister of Australia and Chair of the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London), Chrisann Jarrett (Founder of Let us Learn), and Angeline Murimirwa (Executive Director of CAMFED)


----------



## xjsbellamias13

Eh not a fan of the latest outfit. I think that the dress is too short and I don't care for the print or the turtleneck thing.  Shoes are nice though and her hair looks decent!


----------



## chicaloca

She looks fresh and sharp. I can’t wait to hear her commentary. It’s nice to see a royal have a definitive voice and put herself out there like that.


----------



## Goodfrtune

I think the dress is too short, otherwise like the look.


----------



## anitalilac

I agree, too short for that event. I hope there is discussion about giving Scholarships to deserving students to enter higher education...


----------



## daisychainz

That mindress was a bad choice, especially since she's seated center of the panel. Way too short. It looks nice when standing.


----------



## rose60610

She had to have known what she was doing when choosing to wear that dress. You don't wear a dress as a very pregnant royal in a nearly Sharon-Stone-Basic-Instinct pose and not think you're going stir up the tabloids. Quite frankly, the other women on the panel are either dressed down or somewhat frumpy, and here comes huge belly Megan in a minidress? It's as though she's trying to "teach us all a lesson" that a very pregnant woman is allowed to look sexy. She knows she's going to get some side-eyes so she can come back and "make a statement" "for women everywhere".


----------



## jcnc

I love her overall look - the print on the sress , her hair, shoes.... but i agree; it looks too short while sitting.

Maybe its the right of passage?!?! At one point, kate wore shorter dresses too but was more careful while sitting. But her hemline seems go be increasing since her trip to India. I hope meghan finds a better balanace. Personally, I like both duchesses  in knee lenght or above knee length dresses a lot more.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just seen a close up clip of her speaking, she looks so ready to give birth, she looks tired.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> Just seen a close up clip of her speaking, she looks so ready to give birth, she looks tired.





I bet she is! 
It ain’t easy carrying around a little human - and that’s just for us normal women! I can’t imagine having to travel to all these places to stand around smiling and talking people when your body aches and you want to be left alone.


----------



## hb925

Oh goodness, the dress isn't terrible, but much too short if she's going to cross her legs on stage like that.


----------



## bag-mania

I'll be happy when she gives birth just so she'll stop holding her belly all the time.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

rose60610 said:


> She had to have known what she was doing when choosing to wear that dress. You don't wear a dress as a very pregnant royal in a nearly Sharon-Stone-Basic-Instinct pose and not think you're going stir up the tabloids. Quite frankly, the other women on the panel are either dressed down or somewhat frumpy, and here comes huge belly Megan in a minidress? It's as though she's trying to "teach us all a lesson" that a very pregnant woman is allowed to look sexy. She knows she's going to get some side-eyes so she can come back and "make a statement" "for women everywhere".


That was my very first thought when I saw this picture - Basic Instinct, lol


----------



## pixiejenna

I do agree that the dress is short while seated, it looks fine standing. I think that no matter what she wears it’s going to be picked apart so why not give them something to talk about lol.


----------



## queennadine

Dress is too short for sure.


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> Yes. Apparently it is not hair loss, but that hair does not fall during pregnancy, and after, it goes all in one go.
> 
> But apparently the use of wigs now among celebs and so is very spread. Queen Letizia regularly wears wigs and hair pieces. *Melania ***** is never in public without a wig.* So I would also not be surprised, it is just so easy.


Those are wigs?

I found not only did my hair fall out (catching up on not falling out for months) but it did seem thinner than before pregnancy.


----------



## Morgan R

The Queen's Commonwealth Trust International Women's Day Panel - Full Discussion

Features Meghan as well as Annie Lennox (founder of The Circle), Adwoa Aboah (founder of Gurls Talk), Julia Gillard (Former Prime Minister of Australia and Chair of the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London), Chrisann Jarrett (Founder of Let us Learn), and Angeline Murimirwa (Executive Director of CAMFED)


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> I'll be happy when she gives birth just so she'll stop holding her belly all the time.


You do know they take hundreds of photo's then pick and choose only several to post?

And it makes me laugh at the shock! horror! of a first time expectant mother having the _audacity_ to touch her *own* body.

I did it all the time as a protective reflex action.


----------



## chicaloca

Oh the irony of Meghan facing criticism over the length of her skirt on Women’s Day. 

I’ve seen some of the clips and she is smart as whip and very engaging. The royal family should  be thanking their lucky stars Harry chose his spouse so well.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Dress is too short for the occasion, the queen will not be happy! Would have been fine with black stockings. Shouldn’t she have people for this?But her legs look great and I like the look!


----------



## berrydiva

bag-mania said:


> I'll be happy when she gives birth just so she'll stop holding her belly all the time.


I recently was with a friend who did this the entire day. I asked her if the baby was kicking/moving a lot. She said she does it as a way to block other people/stranger from randomly touching her pregnant belly.  Doubt Meghan is doing it for the same reason but I did find it fascinating that it worked.


----------



## bag-mania

berrydiva said:


> I recently was with a friend who did this the entire day. I asked her if the baby was kicking/moving a lot. She said she does it as a way to block other people/stranger from randomly touching her pregnant belly.  Doubt Meghan is doing it for the same reason but I did find it fascinating that it worked.



It’s appalling that strangers would ever think it was okay to touch a pregnant woman’s belly. As you said, I doubt Meghan is doing it for that reason. I like Meghan but she has been in the public eye for awhile and she is accustomed to being photographed by the media. None of it is unintentional.


----------



## Morgan R

I think Meghan holds her belly because that is just a natural protective instinct many pregnant women do. Also Harry and Meghan's baby seems real active. So at the various engagements Meghan has attended when she is holding her belly that can actually can be soothing to the baby. On more than one occasion some videos taken of Meghan at various engagements have been able to capture the baby kicking/fetal movements. Sometimes it is more noticeable than other times but some instances of it happening can be seen in the videos below.

During Harry and Meghan's visit to Bristol:




During Meghan's visit to Mayhew:




During Meghan's visit to Brinsworth House in Twickenham:




From the British Fashion Awards though you don't see it kicking it does seem as though Meghan seems to be reacting to the baby kicking (close her eyes and slightly jerks back which is similar to her reaction in the Bristol video).


----------



## FreeSpirit71

^lol...those video's bring back a lot of memories. My youngest son used to kick the hell out of my ribs. Really active, and sometimes a little uncomfortable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Hate the print of her last dress and length is far too short for her appearance in a stage sitting. Her hair is a bit of a mess, too. At least her skin is glowing and her make up on point! [emoji4]

I really loved that brocade number with the white coat she wore recently. That was one her best pregnancy looks!


----------



## Tivo

Morgan R said:


> I think Meghan's holds her belly be because that is just a natural protective instinct many pregnant women do. Also Harry and Meghan's baby seems real active. So at the various engagements Meghan has attended when she is holding her belly that can actually can be soothing to the baby. On more than one occasion some videos taken of Meghan at various engagements have been able to capture the baby kicking/fetal movements. Sometimes it is more noticeable than other times but some instances of it happening can be seen in the videos below.
> 
> During Harry and Meghan's visit to Bristol:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During Meghan's visit to Mayhew:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During Meghan's visit to Brinsworth House in Twickenham:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the British Fashion Awards though you don't see it kicking it does seem as though Meghan seems to be reacting to the baby kicking (close her eyes and slightly jerks back which is similar to her reaction in the Bristol video).



This has always been my thought. The baby is moving around. I don’t care if she touches her belly. It’s her first pregnancy so experiencing all the changes is probably wild.


----------



## berrydiva

Tivo said:


> This has always been my thought. The baby is moving around. I don’t care if she touches her belly. It’s her first pregnancy so experiencing all the changes is probably wild.


I don't mind either. I don't get why people get so bothered when a pregnant woman is soothing/rubbing/touching her baby. It's her belly...her baby, what's the big deal.


----------



## zen1965

The dress was a huge fail due to its length. I find it hard to perceive that this inappropriate choice was an honest mistake. All eyes are on her anyway, so I do not understand these attention-grabbing moves.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

*Royal family issues social media guidelines after Meghan-Kate abuse*
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/03/04/uk...tml?r=https://amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org/

*Meghan explains why she is staying away from Twitter*
https://edition-m.cnn.com/2019/03/0...ntl/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/&rm=1

So a lot of people have been abusing Meghan online, and she knows it, but it's good she doesn't read it.


----------



## doni

zen1965 said:


> The dress was a huge fail due to its length. I find it hard to perceive that this inappropriate choice was an honest mistake. All eyes are on her anyway, so I do not understand these attention-grabbing moves.



I think it was a mistake. With that huge belly pulling it up,  the dress acts shorter than it really is. She may have not realized the seating arrangements. Yes, these people have stylists, but I think people assume that they are much more micromanaged and spinned than they really are. The stylist would pick outfits for types of events and for some specific special ones but is not a dresser by her closet. Plus in this case her attendance to this seems to have been planned very last minute. A bit of a faux pas dress wise, but her interventions were very good.


----------



## bisbee

Wow.  She should have crossed her ankles instead of her legs in that dress, but she didn’t flash the camera. Big deal!  Minor, minor faux pas!


----------



## bisbee

Duplicate.


----------



## zen1965

doni said:


> I think it was a mistake. With that huge belly pulling it up,  the dress acts shorter than it really is. She may have not realized the seating arrangements. Yes, these people have stylists, but I think people assume that they are much more micromanaged and spinned than they really are. The stylist would pick outfits for types of events and for some specific special ones but is not a dresser by her closet. Plus in this case her attendance to this seems to have been planned very last minute. A bit of a faux pas dress wise, but her interventions were very good.



She was a panelist, and it was a standard seating arrangement for a panel discussion. A faux pas that could have been easily avoided (as every other woman on that panel did). Anyhow, different folks, different strokes. [emoji846]


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Dress is too short for the occasion, the queen will not be happy! Would have been fine with black stockings. Shouldn’t she have people for this?But her legs look great and I like the look!


I was thinking about how the Queen would view this, and then figured that maybe MM doesn't care about the Queen b/c she'll be dead soon anyway. Sad, but true fact. Once QE is gone the standards of dress may shift substantially and the way we've seen Diana, Camilla and Kate adhere to rigid standards of hose/dresses/polish. etc. will be far more relaxed and MM will be the new norm. Eventually Kate will be Queen, too, so perhaps MM and Harry already know that the changes are coming and just don't give a f. Cuz to be perfectly honest she's not adhering to much of what the Queen would normally like (so far as we know of the Queen).


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I was thinking about how the Queen would view this, and then figured that maybe MM doesn't care about the Queen b/c she'll be dead soon anyway. Sad, but true fact. Once QE is gone the standards of dress may shift substantially and the way we've seen Diana, Camilla and Kate adhere to rigid standards of hose/dresses/polish. etc. will be far more relaxed and MM will be the new norm. Eventually Kate will be Queen, too, so perhaps MM and Harry already know that the changes are coming and just don't give a f. Cuz to be perfectly honest she's not adhering to much of what the Queen would normally like (so far as we know of the Queen).


the queen is 92...her mother lived to 101.....I doubt Meghan wants to displease her


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I was thinking about how the Queen would view this, and then figured that maybe MM doesn't care about the Queen b/c she'll be dead soon anyway. Sad, but true fact. Once QE is gone the standards of dress may shift substantially and the way we've seen Diana, Camilla and Kate adhere to rigid standards of hose/dresses/polish. etc. will be far more relaxed and MM will be the new norm. Eventually Kate will be Queen, too, so perhaps MM and Harry already know that the changes are coming and just don't give a f. Cuz to be perfectly honest she's not adhering to much of what the Queen would normally like (so far as we know of the Queen).


the queen is 92...her mother lived to 101.....I doubt Meghan wants to displease her


----------



## Aimee3

Meghan has fabulous legs. I don’t see why some people think she should cover them up and with long unflattering hemlines


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Meghan has fabulous legs. I don’t see why some people think she should cover them up and with long unflattering hemlines


really?
I wish my legs were slimmer but hers are little toothpicks IMO


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I was thinking about how the Queen would view this, and then figured that maybe MM doesn't care about the Queen b/c she'll be dead soon anyway. Sad, but true fact. Once QE is gone the standards of dress may shift substantially and the way we've seen Diana, Camilla and Kate adhere to rigid standards of hose/dresses/polish. etc. will be far more relaxed and MM will be the new norm. Eventually Kate will be Queen, too, so perhaps MM and Harry already know that the changes are coming and just don't give a f. Cuz to be perfectly honest she's not adhering to much of what the Queen would normally like (so far as we know of the Queen).


All these specific rules are a symbol of upper class, and if the younger group start to act like commoners, then what's the point of having the British Royal family?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## berrydiva

So being a "commoner" is a negative thing huh? I can apply commoner vs upper class to a lot of things but certainly takes a certain type to find issue with someone aligning themselves to a "commoner".


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> All these specific rules are a symbol of upper class, and if the younger group start to act like commoners, then what's the point of having the British Royal family?


But the younger group will be in power soon enough, so they might want their rulership to look different? More accepting and less rigid? That's the impression William/Kate have always given off to me - acceptance. I just assume that with each reigning monarch certain rules/codes have been established and as QE leaves we will see new ones. I think MM is a hot mess tbh, but as time marches on her fashion choices will be more accepted because the rigid standards might relax. I do think the rules help create that line between wealth/common and having the royals to look up to, but perhaps that's not how the monarchy will be forever? I dunno, just conjecture


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> Meghan has fabulous legs. I don’t see why some people think she should cover them up and with long unflattering hemlines


I like her legs (and IMO she's very pretty in general) but she's not a leg model - she's part of the BRF now. This is what pays her bills from now on, therefore she has to/should dress according to their dress code and avoid replaying the famous scene from Basic Instinct . Otherwise that dress looked very pretty on her when standing, it's a shame that nobody had noticed before hand how revealing it would look.


----------



## rose60610

Agree with this. I have a hard believing that at least one of her many "handlers" wouldn't realize what mini dresses do when one sits. I'm conscientious of shorter lengths (not even minis) when I get into and out of a car, let alone being famous and knowing you're photographed or filmed most of each day. 
It almost seems that either the RF is attempting to appear a little more modern and using Meghan to promote that image, or Meghan is bent on doing her own thing. In which case, it isn't going to fly too well. She's the one who married into The Firm. Forget your own personal identity, you're part of the Firm Identity.  That's what you sign up for. Deal with it or get out. When in Rome....  
On the other hand, there's Prince Andrew, now there's a screw-up. He's an example of what can happen when no one has expectations of you and you're in a position to be a global playboy with money.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

sdkitty said:


> really?
> I wish my legs were slimmer but hers are little toothpicks IMO



I used to think they were very toothpicky but they look great with a little extra  pregnancy weight IMO.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

doni said:


> I think it was a mistake. With that huge belly pulling it up,  the dress acts shorter than it really is. She may have not realized the seating arrangements. Yes, these people have stylists, but I think people assume that they are much more micromanaged and spinned than they really are. The stylist would pick outfits for types of events and for some specific special ones but is not a dresser by her closet. Plus in this case her attendance to this seems to have been planned very last minute. A bit of a faux pas dress wise, but her interventions were very good.



Yeah, the blazer was way too tight too. The outfit was just not working for her changing body.


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> *But the younger group will be in power soon enough, *so they might want their rulership to look different? More accepting and less rigid? That's the impression William/Kate have always given off to me - acceptance. I just assume that with each reigning monarch certain rules/codes have been established and as QE leaves we will see new ones. I think MM is a hot mess tbh, but as time marches on her fashion choices will be more accepted because the rigid standards might relax. I do think the rules help create that line between wealth/common and having the royals to look up to, but perhaps that's not how the monarchy will be forever? I dunno, just conjecture



Charles (the Prince of Wales) is 70, so not young but may have plenty of time on the throne. By the time William accedes he may be in his 50s or 60s. That's not particularly young. The Queen broke many 'rules' regarding protocols of dress, a younger Princess Anne and Princess Diana also wore over the knee dresses. I don't care what MM wears so long as she's comfortable but I cannot believe she was comfortable in such a short dress on a stage, she probably just got on with it, however, it was a poor choice.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Just read on Google news feed:


"Meghan Markle's 'Close' Assistant Private Secretary Resigns

Meghan Markle is losing one of her closest aides.

The 37-year-old duchess’ assistant private secretary Amy Pickerall has given her notice and plans on leaving her position after Meghan and Prince Harry welcome their child in late April.

“They will stay in touch and Amy will remain as a personal adviser to her in the longer term. They are very close,” a source told People. “It is very amicable.”

After leaving her position, Amy plans on moving abroad.

Amy first started her career at Kensington Palace as a press spokesperson and was “instrumental in helping the duchess adjust to her new life in the U.K.,” the source shared before adding, “they have worked together for a while now and are close.”

Amy is now the third staffer Meghan has lost in over the past few months."


----------



## rose60610

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Just read on Google news feed:
> 
> 
> "Meghan Markle's 'Close' Assistant Private Secretary Resigns
> 
> Meghan Markle is losing one of her closest aides.
> 
> The 37-year-old duchess’ assistant private secretary Amy Pickerall has given her notice and plans on leaving her position after Meghan and Prince Harry welcome their child in late April.
> 
> “They will stay in touch and Amy will remain as a personal adviser to her in the longer term. They are very close,” a source told People. “It is very amicable.”
> 
> After leaving her position, Amy plans on moving abroad.
> 
> Amy first started her career at Kensington Palace as a press spokesperson and was “instrumental in helping the duchess adjust to her new life in the U.K.,” the source shared before adding, “they have worked together for a while now and are close.”
> 
> Amy is now the third staffer Meghan has lost in over the past few months."




I've seen this too. Rumors that MM is difficult may or may not be true.  But if you're a person who's employed by The Firm as a personal advisor or close assistant to a a high profile royal, then I think you also become a desirable person for an uber wealthy private person to hire (poach) you as THEIR assistant.  How trained can you get? Many people serve The Crown or work in the White House for the prestige, not necessarily for the salary.  A few years ago I read that many White House staff/butlers/servers are in high demand to moonlight at other swanky DC parties. The party givers love to brag that they have "White House help".  Don't doubt that Royals' assistants/advisors etc are sought after by wealthy poachers.


----------



## TMA

This is another non-story. Notice how far down the reason for her leaving is? She’s moving abroad. Or did people expect Meghan to chain her down and “refuse” to let her leave? The second person being counted (and media has been reporting it now since November) as having left is Samantha Cohen who was ever only temporary and was still with Meghan at an event last week. British media is relentless pursuing a narrative because they must have one- whether based in fact or lies does not matter. They need “click-bait” until she actually does something (as human, that is expected) for which they will be wanting to hang her


----------



## ccbaggirl89

TMA said:


> This is another non-story. Notice how far down the reason for her leaving is? She’s moving abroad. Or did people expect Meghan to chain her down and “refuse” to let her leave? The second person being counted (and media has been reporting it now since November) as having left is Samantha Cohen who was ever only temporary and was still with Meghan at an event last week. British media is relentless pursuing a narrative because they must have one- whether based in fact or lies does not matter. They need “click-bait” until she actually does something (as human, that is expected) for which they will be wanting to hang her


It seems Samantha Cohen is still at events b/c they work about 6 months notice before being released. Cohen is still doing her 6 months and this newest person, Amy, apparently gave notice back in late Nov/Dec so her time is up near to April/May.


----------



## chicaloca

All the people who’ve left the Sussexes were scheduled to leave. They’re moving away from Kensington Palace so I’d expect some staff transitions. The media narrative of the “difficult duchess” is tired. They did the same to Kate I believe. It’s always  supposedly the woman’s “difficult” behavior driving everyone away and never their husbands.

 I can’t believe how prolonged the discussion of Meghan’s skirt length has been. It only illustrates how easy it is to enforcer gender roles and restrictions in our society. Men set the rules then sit back and watch women play enforcers on each other. I’d love to know who first made the arbitrary determination of where a skirt should fall on a woman’s leg.


----------



## DeMonica

Men aren't supposed to flash their privates in public, either. There's an absolute gender equality in this question.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ Meghan was not flashing anybody. That is ridiculous. There is a long history of misogyny that led to Meghan having to wear a dress and heels to this event in the first place and that dictates style and length because of objectification of women’s bodies. I was critical of her dress length because her people should have known better because the queen has roles (rooted in a long history of sexism) and she is a public facing person navigating a sexist professional world, plus her whole outfit is too small and looks uncomfortable, but trying to suggest she’s flashing someone or that your criticism of her skirt length is in any way about gender equity and not rooted in gender iniquity is prime facie absurd.


----------



## rose60610

chicaloca said:


> All the people who’ve left the Sussexes were scheduled to leave. They’re moving away from Kensington Palace so I’d expect some staff transitions. The media narrative of the “difficult duchess” is tired. They did the same to Kate I believe. It’s always  supposedly the woman’s “difficult” behavior driving everyone away and never their husbands.
> 
> I can’t believe how prolonged the discussion of Meghan’s skirt length has been. It only illustrates how easy it is to enforcer gender roles and restrictions in our society. Men set the rules then sit back and watch women play enforcers on each other. I’d love to know who first made the arbitrary determination of where a skirt should fall on a woman’s leg.



There are plenty of discussions that do seemingly go on an inordinate amount of time, months even. I'm not sure where a skirt should properly fall either. Markle's dress came up so high she could have gotten a gynecological exam done right then and there IMO. Ironic for a person with royal handlers, accustomed and expecting to being photographed and filmed everywhere she goes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^ Meghan was not flashing anybody. That is ridiculous. There is a long history of misogyny that led to Meghan having to wear a dress and heels to this event in the first place and that dictates style and length because of objectification of women’s bodies. I was critical of her dress length because her people should have known better because the queen has roles (rooted in a long history of sexism) and she is a public facing person navigating a sexist professional world, plus her whole outfit is too small and looks uncomfortable, but trying to suggest she’s flashing someone or that your criticism of her skirt length is in any way about gender equity and not rooted in gender iniquity is prime facie absurd.


If I could see up in her dress seeing those photos, so could anybody else who was there. Albeit, I'm sure she wears underwear. Meghan doesn't have to wear a dress or heels unless she chooses to. Royals wear trousers and can wear balerinas, too. Decency is a must in her line of work, though,  and certain conservatism comes with hers, actually with most jobs in the public sector, see nurses, teachers or people who work in banks. I'm sure if she was a stripper she had a different uniform at work. Her job is to represent the BRF which is a conservative institution (and eventually represents the citizens of the UK  from 2 to 102 and of any religion), hence you supposed to dress slightly on the conservative side when working. There's nothing shocking about that and it has more to do with good taste than misoginy or sexual suppression. You accept the dress code when you accept the job.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

DeMonica said:


> If I could see up in her dress seeing those photos, so could anybody else who was there. Albeit, I'm sure she wears underwear. Meghan doesn't have to wear a dress or heels unless she chooses to. Royals wear trousers and can wear balerinas, too. Decency is a must in her line of work, though,  and certain conservatism comes with hers, actually with most jobs in the public sector, see nurses, teachers or people who work in banks. I'm sure if she was a stripper she had a different uniform at work. Her job is to represent the BRF which is a conservative institution (and eventually represents the citizens of the UK  from 2 to 102 and of any religion), hence you supposed to dress slightly on the conservative side when working. There's nothing shocking about that and it has more to do with good taste than misoginy or sexual suppression. You accept the dress code when you accept the job.


I thought she did an excellent job representing the BRF with her answers and discussions on the panel


----------



## DeMonica

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I thought she did an excellent job representing the BRF with her answers and discussions on the panel


She's undoubtably very intelligent, competent public speaker and  very pretty in whatever she wears, too.  Whoever has chosen the dress, it wasn't a perfect choice for this occasion. That's all.


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Canada House  to commemorate Commonwealth Day


----------



## djuna1

*The Duchess of Sussex avoids newspapers and social media following racist abuse*
*"We make a choice in what we click on"*

_By_ Amy Mackelden

For International Women's Day, the Duchess of Sussex took part in a discussion panel along with a group of inspirational women - including Gurls Talk founder and model Adwoa Aboah, musician and founder of The Circle NGO Annie Lennox, Let Us Learn founder Chrisann Jarrett, Global Institute for Women's Leadership Chair Julia Gillard, and CAMFED Executive Director Angeline Murimirwa. 

The panel tackled a number of crucial issues, with feminism forming a big part of the conversation. And the Duchess of Sussex, who regularly blogged and used social media prior to joining the royal family, revealed that she never looks at Twitter anymore, and she doesn't read any newspapers, either.

As reported by ITV News, "The Duchess of Sussex has revealed she does not read newspapers or engage with Twitter during a discussion held to celebrate #InternationalWomensDay":



Explaining why she doesn't use Twitter, Meghan said, "I don't read anything, it's much safer that way, but equally that's just my own personal preference, because I think positive or negative, it can all sort of just feel like noise to a certain extent these days." The duchess' move to eschew social media has to be, in part, due to the very real threats and online abuse she's received since joining the royal family.

However, the royal explained that avoiding social media and daily news gives her a sense of clarity when it comes to feminism. She said, "as opposed to getting muddled with that," avoiding Twitter allows her "to focus on the real cause."

The Duchess of Sussex also encouraged listeners to be mindful of the content that they digest. "It's our responsibility," she said. "We make a choice in what we click on, we make a choice in what we read, we make a choice in what we engage in. That is our personal decision, to not feed into negativity."

But when pressed about whether she ever looks at Twitter, Meghan replied emphatically, "No! Sorry, no."

Harper's Bazaar UK


----------



## A1aGypsy

She looks lovely at Canada House. But honestly. I have never seen anyone dump maple syrup on snow and eat it.  “Canadian candy” is smarties. Or caramilk. Or, if you want to wander on the wild side, Kinder Eggs.


----------



## LibbyRuth

DeMonica said:


> If I could see up in her dress seeing those photos, so could anybody else who was there. Albeit, I'm sure she wears underwear. Meghan doesn't have to wear a dress or heels unless she chooses to. Royals wear trousers and can wear balerinas, too. Decency is a must in her line of work, though,  and certain conservatism comes with hers, actually with most jobs in the public sector, see nurses, teachers or people who work in banks. I'm sure if she was a stripper she had a different uniform at work. Her job is to represent the BRF which is a conservative institution (and eventually represents the citizens of the UK  from 2 to 102 and of any religion), hence you supposed to dress slightly on the conservative side when working. There's nothing shocking about that and it has more to do with good taste than misoginy or sexual suppression. You accept the dress code when you accept the job.



In fairness to Megan, that you had to say you're sure she wears underwear, and not that you know she does because you saw them as she was sitting there indicates that you could not see too much up her dress in those photos. The length of the dress combined with the height of the stage would have no doubt made it an uncomfortable situation for many women. But I don't think it needs to be exaggerated into some sort of Sharon Stone moment. If in fact Meghan sat down and realized the problem she had, she handled it in a way that ensured too much was not seen, and no one left the event announcing that the baby is not crowning yet.


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Canada House  to commemorate Commonwealth Day
> 
> View attachment 4368749
> View attachment 4368676
> View attachment 4368658
> View attachment 4368695
> View attachment 4368729
> View attachment 4368740
> View attachment 4368748
> View attachment 4368718


Fabulous coat! Major props to her for continuing to work away - don't know how she maintains her composure sometimes.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Love the green outfit and the bow backed shoes.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Those shoes are fantastic! Classic look with a slight modern touch - kind of like Meghan herself!


----------



## daisychainz

A1aGypsy said:


> She looks lovely at Canada House. But honestly. I have never seen anyone dump maple syrup on snow and eat it.  “Canadian candy” is smarties. Or caramilk. Or, if you want to wander on the wild side, Kinder Eggs.


Smarties!!!!  I'm having childhood flashbacks!! Wine gums


----------



## Morgan R

At Westminster Abbey attending Commonwealth Day Service


----------



## LittleStar88

I don't like the hat. At first glance looks like an old-timey nurse hat.


----------



## LibbyRuth

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't like the hat. At first glance looks like an old-timey nurse hat.


I'm going back and forth on it for each picture. At first, I really liked it. Then, just like you, I saw a nurses hat!  Would have been great to have that same style hat in the green to match the green coat!


----------



## berrydiva

These last few outfits are just terrible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I like the hat. Pillbox is a retro style but I like it, the British royals are good at all the hat styles. QEII wears them quite a bit.  There's a classic photo of Audrey Hepburn in one so similar to MM's. I think it was a good choice for that particular event. The green coat in #6661 looked like it overwhelmed her, but maybe that's unavoidable when you're so far along. Considering how she's constantly holding her belly it was probably the look she was going for.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I was going to say I love a full length blazer (even though this is probably another coat) and the shoes and I have respect for a vintage look with the hat.

But now I have an image of her in a sailor costume dancing around to Anything Goes stuck in my head. And I’m not sure that was what she was going for....

Although, “in the olden day’s a glimpse of stocking, was looked and as something shocking...”  might be really really apropos for this thread.

Because, nowadays, heaven knows... anything goes!


----------



## DeMonica

LibbyRuth said:


> In fairness to Megan, that you had to say you're sure she wears underwear, and not that you know she does because you saw them as she was sitting there indicates t*hat you could not see too much up her dress in those photos*. The length of the dress combined with the height of the stage would have no doubt made it an uncomfortable situation for many women. But I don't think it needs to be exaggerated into some sort of Sharon Stone moment. If in fact Meghan sat down and realized the problem she had, she handled it in a way that ensured too much was not seen, and no one left the event announcing that the baby is not crowning yet.


Are you seriously expect anyone to go through all the pix, zooming in and ogling whatever she exactly has under her skirt? . On the other hand: did you? You seem to be quite certain. 


LittleStar88 said:


> I don't like the hat. At first glance looks like an old-timey nurse hat.


The hat is funny indeed, because of the colour. I like the coat and the dress, though. The cream and white work so well with her lovely complexion, but Meghan looks lovely in the green combo, too.


----------



## afsweet

I like this outfit but definitely not the hat. I think she could have selected a better headpiece.


----------



## Jayne1

She's really a lucky woman in that she got pregnant immediately, when at her age, it isn't so easy or so quick and now... she carries so nicely, too.  No humungous boobs or swollen feet, that sort of thing.


----------



## LibbyRuth

DeMonica said:


> Are you seriously expect anyone to go through all the pix, zooming in and ogling whatever she exactly has under her skirt? . On the other hand: did you? You seem to be quite certain.


No, I don't expect anyone to do that, nor did I. I took you at your word, because I believe your word is good.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> she carries so nicely, too.  No humungous boobs or swollen feet, that sort of thing.


Compared to pre pregnancy, her boobs are definitely humungous lol. I'm so jealous of her non swollen ankles. 
And I agree, she carries so nicely too.


----------



## Gal4Dior

That green outfit was perfection!! I love that color and the cut of the dress and coat. [emoji173]️ The VB outfit was a huge downer after the green. I hate the print and neckline - it seemed like it was smashing her chest, and that hat. Good god, it looked like a nurse’s hat or a nun’s hat. Horrendous! [emoji1361]


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Church outfit is bad. Harry looks nice.


----------



## jcnc

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't like the hat. At first glance looks like an old-timey nurse hat.


My thoughts exactly. She looks lovely minus the har


----------



## hockeygirl

berrydiva said:


> These last few outfits are just terrible.


Totally agree.  The only great thing about the last few outfits are the black slingbacks.


----------



## arnott

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't like the hat. At first glance looks like an old-timey nurse hat.



My thought exactly.   It makes her look like a freaking nurse!


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> At Westminster Abbey attending Commonwealth Day Service
> 
> View attachment 4368884
> View attachment 4368885
> View attachment 4368886
> View attachment 4368887



simply beautiful.
she may have the best make up artists by her side but she Looks just stunning in her pregnancy. what a beautiful women. she is glowing and pure happiness all over her face.

it's crazy how slim her legs still are. one of my friends is thin like her and at the same stage in pregnancy but got really thick legs right now. meghan is really lucky or has unbelievable genes haha.

love her Outfit for the Service. modern and classy with the hat. the colour is really nursy like but it suits her.
she Looks so fresh next to kate. so modern and Young.
I wonder if that was the last day we have seen her before the birth?


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> simply beautiful.
> she may have the best make up artists by her side but she Looks just stunning in her pregnancy. what a beautiful women. she is glowing and pure happiness all over her face.
> 
> it's crazy how slim her legs still are. one of my friends is thin like her and at the same stage in pregnancy but got really thick legs right now. meghan is really lucky or has unbelievable genes haha.
> 
> love her Outfit for the Service. modern and classy with the hat. the colour is really nursy like but it suits her.
> she Looks so fresh next to kate. so modern and Young.
> I wonder if that was the last day we have seen her before the birth?


again with the put-down of Kate?


----------



## Compass Rose

I always thought Kate and Meghan were two different people married to two different men who are joined at the hip of the royal family.   I don't follow them much at all, but I really think they are two different people even in their stature and how they carry themselves in the  public eye.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> She's really a lucky woman in that she got pregnant immediately, when at her age, it isn't so easy or so quick and now... she carries so nicely, too.  No humungous boobs or swollen feet, that sort of thing.


I know a lot of women who got pregnant at her age and older. It boggles my mind that people act like this is so rare. It really isn’t.


----------



## redney

Tivo said:


> I know a lot of women who got pregnant at her age and older. It boggles my mind that people act like this is so rare. It really isn’t.


OMG so this! Thank you.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t know, i think it may be semantics. I know a lot of people at that age and younger who have had significant difficulties becoming pregnant and, a few, who were unable to as a result of advance maternal age.

While, thankfully, medical technology has made it easier now, the science shows that as we age, our ability to become pregnant (without assistance) is impacted. So, becoming pregnant within a month of marriage is lucky. Hell, it’s lucky even for people who aren’t in their late 30s given everything that has to conspire.

So, it might not be rare because of intervention but it is still lucky that they were able to start their family so quickly.


----------



## Jayne1

Tivo said:


> I know a lot of women who got pregnant at her age and older. It boggles my mind that people act like this is so rare. It really isn’t.


I didn’t say it was rare!  I said she is lucky she got pregnant immediately after getting married.

Lots of women want to get pregnant immediately and just because they want to, it may not be so easy, especially in their mid thirties.


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Canada House  to commemorate Commonwealth Day
> 
> View attachment 4368749
> View attachment 4368676
> View attachment 4368658
> View attachment 4368695
> View attachment 4368729
> View attachment 4368740
> View attachment 4368748
> View attachment 4368718


I like the color on her and the shoes are so cute.
But she looks so big in the photos (and I dont mean that as a criticism at all) that i can only commend her work ethics and energy. she cant be comfortable at this stage. 

But more power to her


----------



## daisychainz

They were probably trying for a baby since the night they met  ... so a month after marriage was just lucky timing! Maybe the women who have it harder (the first time) in their late 30s would have had it harder at any age?... we don't know. We're all so different medically. There is a news reporter in the US - Tamron Hall - who is having her first baby at 48, and Brigette Nielson was the same, right. I don't see getting pregnant (fast) for the first time in the late 30s as amazing anymore. MM and Harry were probably in very good overall health.


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> They were probably trying for a baby since the night they met  ... so a month after marriage was just lucky timing! Maybe the women who have it harder (the first time) in their late 30s would have had it harder at any age?... we don't know. We're all so different medically. There is a news reporter in the US - Tamron Hall - who is having her first baby at 48, and Brigette Nielson was the same, right. I don't see getting pregnant (fast) for the first time in the late 30s as amazing anymore. MM and Harry were probably in very good overall health.


Good health doesn't mean you are fertile though. And fertility peaks in the mid 20s.

All I said was that she is a very lucky woman to get pregnant the second she wanted to.  Yes, they were probably doing it for years or as long as they have known each other, but that doesn't mean she could risk being pregnant as a single woman wanting to marry into the BRF.

So, to decide she wanted to get pregnant the first month she was able to was quite amazing and fortunate.

Also, Brigette Nielson didn't just get pregnant at the drop of a hat.  She spent a long time and money using medical interventions. She had her eggs frozen and used IVF over and over again until it finally took and she said she was lucky since the results aren't always positive no matter how much the doctors try.


----------



## Taimi

Tivo said:


> I know a lot of women who got pregnant at her age and older. It boggles my mind that people act like this is so rare. It really isn’t.



This! It really isn’t rare at all.. I have my own experience (in my late 30s) and I also know a women who got pregnant in her 50s and she was even taking pills! That’s rare for sure though. [emoji6]


----------



## Taimi

Actually, when I think about it, I know a lot of women who got pregnant in their 40s and I’m sure most of them didn’t need any medical help. It’s just a personal thing. Of course age may matter statistically, but I’m quite sure the same people who doesn’t get pregnant easily in their 30s, wouldn’t have get easily in their 20s either. But this is totally off-topic, sorry for that.


----------



## lulu212121

I understand what you are saying @Jayne1 She is fortunate to be pregnant so soon after the wedding, not that pregnancy at her age is rare. 
I don't understand what is hard to understand about this.


----------



## Taimi

lulu212121 said:


> I understand what you are saying @Jayne1 She is fortunate to be pregnant so soon after the wedding, not that pregnancy at her age is rare.
> I don't understand what is hard to understand about this.



What I meant, and I suppose other meant too, it’s not rare to get pregnant immediately in your late 30s or even older. It can happen really fast and that’s not rare. It’s much more rare to have a prince as a spouse. [emoji4]


----------



## doni

My theory is, whenever you decide to go for children (and provided you do the right things) you either get pregnant very quickly, or it takes a long time, because of whatever issue. It is the in-between that is rare in my experience.

Also, women tend to have older partners and age can actually be a bigger factor in the male side of the equation. But here, Harry is a few years younger, so that helps.


----------



## hockeygirl

Meghan still looks great but I think she looks more tired since returning from Morocco.


----------



## VickyB

Tivo said:


> I know a lot of women who got pregnant at her age and older. It boggles my mind that people act like this is so rare. It really isn’t.



ITA! I have so many friends and friends of friends and so on and so on, that have had/are having babies in their late 30s and into their mid 40s. AND pretty much most of them "the old fashion" way - no IVF etc.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I just wish they'd change the damn name of older pregnancies from "geriatric pregnancy" to... anything else really!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## arnott

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I just wish they'd change the damn name of older pregnancies from "geriatric pregnancy" to... anything else really!



I first heard that term when Halle Berry said that term made her cringe when her first pregnancy was labeled that.


----------



## berrydiva

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I just wish they'd change the damn name of older pregnancies from "geriatric pregnancy" to... anything else really!


"Advanced Maternal Age" needs to go too.


----------



## queennadine

^^ Yes! Awful terminology.


----------



## Aimee3

Just looked it up and geriatric pregnancy refers to age 35 and up!!! I didn’t think “geriatric” and age 35 could even be in the same sentence!  So teen pregnancy would be 12-19, regular pregnancy would be 20-34, and geriatric would be anything over 35.  Seems like a very narrow field for a “regular” no adjective pregnancy.


----------



## skarsbabe

I'm young 30s, no kids and one obgyn i went to for annual checkup told me it would be too late for me to ever have 3 kids. And if I wanted 2 I needed to start trying yesterday. I have no idea what I want still in life, but it gave me a good laugh.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Just because people do not tell you they had assistance doesn’t mean that they didn’t have intervention. It’s an intensely private thing and many people do not want to talk about it.

I’m of Jurassic Maternal Age so I’ve been through this quite a few times with friends now. I can only think of two that were willing to discuss the process openly. Most vigorously denied treatment to all but their closest friends. There is a lot of shame wrapped up in it unfortunately and people saying it always comes easily can do a lot of harm.


----------



## zinacef

queennadine said:


> ^^ Yes! Awful terminology.


At 31 , my diagnosis on the chart accdg  to my friends who were my nurses was advanced maternal age
—- I had my second one at age of 31.  Is it because there are young girls who’s having babies at age of 12 and when you’re 30’s you’re really old.


----------



## Taimi

Women have always got pregnant in the age of 40 and above, especially before contraceptives and birth control, so I don’t quite understand how a term of geriatric pregnancy can even exist. And how that can start at the age of 35, so weird. Luckily in my mother language there’s no such a term in use.


----------



## LittleStar88

I believe the term geriatric is more in reference to biological age of ovaries/reproductive system than that of the actual age of the patient. We may feel young and spry at age 35, 40, 45, 50... But our organs and how they function are something completely different.


----------



## MeghanMaternityFashion

I created this for anyone who loves Meghan's maternity outfits and wants to see them all in one place 

https://www.lovethesales.com/editorial/meghan-markle-maternity-style


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending Veterans' Mental Health Conference at King's College


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry attending Veterans' Mental Health Conference at King's College
> 
> View attachment 4371890
> View attachment 4371894
> View attachment 4371889
> View attachment 4371887
> View attachment 4371900
> View attachment 4371891
> View attachment 4371888
> View attachment 4371885
> View attachment 4371886
> View attachment 4371893


Very cool contrast lining on the suit jacket.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry can be quite dapper!


----------



## redney

Harry constantly fidgets with the buttons of his jacket.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duke of Sussex will join schoolchildren as they take part in a tree planting project in support of The Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy (QCC) initiative, together with the Woodland Trust on Wednesday 20 March.
There are no more public appearances currently planned for Meghan before the arrival of their baby although she will continue to work behind the scenes until closer to her due date.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duke of Sussex will join schoolchildren as they take part in a tree planting project in support of The Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy (QCC) initiative, together with the Woodland Trust on Wednesday 20 March.
> There are no more public appearances currently planned for Meghan before the arrival of their baby although she will continue to work behind the scenes until closer to her due date.


So, do we know the due date?


----------



## berrydiva

Harry always looks great in suits.  He has a good build for suits and picks out ones that are really flattering on him.


----------



## Sharont2305

carlpsmom said:


> So, do we know the due date?


We'll never know the due date. The Royal Family never divulge. All we get, as in this case, due in spring (or whatever season) It's only because Meghan has said herself end of April, beginning of May.
We've never actually known if George, Charlotte or Louis were early, late or bang on time.


----------



## berrydiva

Sharont2305 said:


> We'll never know the due date. The Royal Family never divulge. All we get, as in this case, due in spring (or whatever season) It's only because Meghan has said herself end of April, beginning of May.
> We've never actually known if George, Charlotte or Louis were early, late or bang on time.


What's the reason they choose not to divulge?


----------



## Sharont2305

It's just something they never do. No idea to be honest, but I think it's nice that they have something to keep to themselves. Same if they know the sex of the baby, that wouldn't be divulged either.


----------



## Morgan R

Queen Elizabeth II has agreed to the creation of a new Household for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, following their marriage in May last year. The Household, which will be created with the support of The Queen and The Prince of Wales, will be established in the spring.


----------



## chicaloca

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry can be quite dapper!



I think one of Diana’s greatest legacies was the height she gave her boys. If they were as short as Charles they would be woefully unremarkable. 

I hope Meg & Harry get their own Instagram. KP waited two years to address the very obvious abuse of Meghan on their Instagram. That is unacceptable.


----------



## minababe

First the moving out of kesington Palace, where they always said that the Offices will still be together in the future..

And now the split of the Offices too. but to me it's a upgrade at all. Meghan and Harry get the best of everything.
They will have their own house and a lot of privacy at Windsor and they will have their Office at the Buckingham Palace.


----------



## Sharont2305

This was always going to happen anyway, didn't matter as to when or who Harry married. 
It's all in preparation for when Charles is King and William will be the immediate heir.


----------



## redney

The prince brothers are separate 30-something adults, each with separate families. Of course it is the logical next step for their offices and residences to separate. Charles doesn't share offices or residences with his siblings.


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> The prince brothers are separate 30-something adults, each with separate families. Of course it is the logical next step for their offices and residences to separate. Charles doesn't share offices or residences with his siblings.


Exactly, not on here but elsewhere people are commenting about the "rift" and this is adding fuel to the fire. *rolls eyes.


----------



## Sharont2305

It's more logical that Harry and Meghan have their office in Buckingham Palace. Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Prince Edward and Sophie have their offices there.


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> And now the split of the Offices too. but to me it's a upgrade at all. Meghan and Harry get the best of everything.


Not really an upgrade, most of the offices are based there.
I think Buckingham Palace as a whole is considered the "office" Its usually used for state and official occasions etc. Yes, there are apartments there but The Queen considers Windsor Castle, Sandringham and Balmoral as "home"


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> It's more logical that Harry and Meghan have their office in Buckingham Palace. Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Prince Edward and Sophie have their offices there.


Makes sense for those Royals who are not in immediate line of succession. Charles and William have their offices elsewhere.


----------



## pixiejenna

I’ve read that she has done her last public appearance/visit and is now on maternity leave. So I guess we are on baby countdown. They claim late April is the expected due date but we don’t know until we know. I feel like it’s going to be sooner than late April. 

I don’t get why the media is making a big deal about the move of the offices as a rift between the family. Just because will and Harry are brothers doesn’t mean that they need to share office space. As Charles takes over and eventually William down the line you clearly won’t expect them to share thier workspace with thier siblings. It only makes sense for them to have both separate offices in separate locations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

I just love how nobody can make a move literally without not only the Queen’s knowledge but her approval!  That’s a real boss!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-princess said:


> I just love how nobody can make a move literally without not only the Queen’s knowledge but her approval!  That’s a real boss!


She walks softly, and carries a big stick - as the saying goes.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the Christening of Lena Tindall (who is the daughter of Harry's cousin Zara).

Harry was named Lena's godfather


----------



## berrydiva

The buttons on that coat are dreadful.


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Christening of Lena Tindall (who is the daughter of Harry's cousin Zara).
> 
> Harry was named Lena's godfather
> 
> View attachment 4375556
> View attachment 4375557



That hat looks goofy on her.


----------



## stephci

berrydiva said:


> The buttons on that coat are dreadful.



I was thinking the same thing


----------



## daisychainz

arnott said:


> That hat looks goofy on her.


Really? I was thinking it's the only thing cute about the outfit. I see a lot of people (on YT especially) who don't even know how to put on a beret, lol. At least hers is on right.


----------



## kemilia

stephci said:


> I was thinking the same thing


Ditto. Didn't the designer realize that the buttons were just going to hang?


----------



## kemilia

And the hair--she must know by now that her hair is going to blow around, use some barrettes or hair pins! 

Maybe fiddling with her hair is her fidget thingy, but it looks so juvenile and unpolished.


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Christening of Lena Tindall (who is the daughter of Harry's cousin Zara).
> 
> Harry was named Lena's godfather
> 
> View attachment 4375556
> View attachment 4375658
> View attachment 4375557
> View attachment 4375656
> View attachment 4375657
> View attachment 4375646



they look so beautiful together. can't wait for their first Family Picture. the Countdown is on


----------



## lanasyogamama

stephci said:


> I was thinking the same thing



I hate the buttons and the color.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Christening of Lena Tindall (who is the daughter of Harry's cousin Zara).
> 
> Harry was named Lena's godfather
> 
> View attachment 4375556
> View attachment 4375658
> View attachment 4375557
> View attachment 4375656
> View attachment 4375657
> View attachment 4375646


That’s yet another awful outfit.


----------



## DeMonica

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Christening of Lena Tindall (who is the daughter of Harry's cousin Zara).
> 
> Harry was named Lena's godfather
> 
> View attachment 4375556
> View attachment 4375658
> View attachment 4375557
> View attachment 4375656
> View attachment 4375657
> View attachment 4375646


These buttons look funny and the hat is a bit too French, but otherwise she's pretty as usual. I guess she's counting the days now. On a different note: Harry's balding in a better way than William. Maybe it's the Spencer genes.


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> Attending the Christening of Lena Tindall (who is the daughter of Harry's cousin Zara).
> 
> Harry was named Lena's godfather
> 
> View attachment 4375556
> View attachment 4375658
> View attachment 4375557
> View attachment 4375656
> View attachment 4375657
> View attachment 4375646


Everything about this ensemble is dreadful. That vintage coat should have been left mercifully in the past.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

This is interesting.  Hard to imagine Harry and Megan really thought this was possible.

https://www.aol.com/article/enterta...prince-harrys-latest-request-report/23694929/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

Cavalier Girl said:


> This is interesting.  Hard to imagine Harry and Megan really thought this was possible.
> 
> https://www.aol.com/article/enterta...prince-harrys-latest-request-report/23694929/





I don’t believe that Harry would ever think that is possible or that his grandmother would agree! Nope he ain’t stupid.


----------



## berrydiva

AOL is still around?


----------



## chowlover2

berrydiva said:


> AOL is still around?


Yes, they took over email for Verizon FIOS.


----------



## berrydiva

chowlover2 said:


> Yes, they took over email for Verizon FIOS.


Thanks!


----------



## Gal4Dior

That coat is Dior?? Good god, it’s the most ill flattering thing she’s worn to date! I don’t understand! She’s got any designer or tailor at her disposal, why not use them? The hat does not go with that coat at all. The hair is a mess.


----------



## minababe

I'm not a fan of the coat too but she Looks beautiful as always. she is so pretty she would Look beautiful in the ugliest Things

I think at this stage of pregnancy she is happy that she find something that fit her huge belly at all. so we shouldn' t be too critical.

I'm even not sure if this coat is hers because it doesn't fit into her wardrobe style to me. Looks more like somethings old ladies would wear from the material.
she normally is the queen of coats.


----------



## daisychainz

LVSistinaMM said:


> That coat is Dior?? Good god, it’s the most ill flattering thing she’s worn to date! I don’t understand! She’s got any designer or tailor at her disposal, why not use them? The hat does not go with that coat at all. The hair is a mess.


Maybe they don't have as much access to brands as we think? Kate seems to stick to the same designers - people call them her favorite designers, but perhaps those are the only ones that gift or give discounts? Like does she really love Mulberry and Packham that much, or is that the only brand gifting? Maybe it's the same with Meghan - choices are limited and some items might be from her personal closet (like this fugly coat). She's in Givenchy an awful lot, so maybe there is a contract there. I just think, perhaps, they can't have any designer they want.


----------



## doni

daisychainz said:


> Maybe they don't have as much access to brands as we think? Kate seems to stick to the same designers - people call them her favorite designers, but perhaps those are the only ones that gift or give discounts? Like does she really love Mulberry and Packham that much, or is that the only brand gifting? Maybe it's the same with Meghan - choices are limited and some items might be from her personal closet (like this fugly coat). She's in Givenchy an awful lot, so maybe there is a contract there. I just think, perhaps, they can't have any designer they want.



Royal family members cannot accept this kind of gifts. They are extremely limited on which gifts they can accept.
They are certainly under no contract with any brand.
They are in public office fulfilling a public service role.


----------



## daisychainz

doni said:


> Royal family members cannot accept this kind of gifts. They are extremely limited on which gifts they can accept.
> They are certainly under no contract with any brand.
> They are in public office fulfilling a public service role.


I recall Kate receiving handbags from a brand and she happily wore it for a long time (as did her sister, the Pippa??). The queen apparently only wears one brand of nail polish and carries one brand of handbag. There are definitely agreements of some sort with certain brands - perhaps not contracts, then, but why would they remain loyal for years to one brand if there is no incentive at all. It doesn't make sense. There are probably many ways to get them items and not have them labeled as gifts. These are political people, they know how to work a system in ways we'll never know.


----------



## doni

Lots of people are loyal to a brand and they are no royals! It makes lot of sense to stick with what you know if you like it and it works, particularly if you are in a position like the Queen's. Lots of powerful people default to a uniform, like Steve Jobs Miyake's turtlenecks. Saves valuable decision time.

And of course, there are crooks everywhere. But I highly doubt that the Queen, one of the wealthiest women in the world, would risk her reputation and that of the monarchy, let alone blatantly breaking the law, to get a bag on discount! 

Of course, there are the royal warrants (Asprey has one), but this are a kind of privilege awarded by the crown that also serves to promote national business.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect she remains loyal to a brand because they are willing to do certain allowances that are permissible within the rules. Aka, give her certain employees who will be discreet, bring clothing options in house for shopping, deliver and tailor clothing in a certain way that accords with her needs and so on. 

I doubt she would out and out accept a gift unless it was done within the framework of the gift acceptance protocols but who knows really.  But definitely no contracts with the royal family.


----------



## Morgan R

Visiting New Zealand House in London to sign book of condolence on behalf of  the British Royal Family for the victims of the Christchurch terror attack


----------



## LittleStar88

She looks beautiful. Redeemed herself from that brown satin Dior mess.


----------



## Aimee3

LittleStar88 said:


> She looks beautiful. Redeemed herself from that brown satin Dior mess.



This coat looks lovely on her.  She should use this one until she gives birth.  Is there a rule she can’t be seen in the same coat twice???


----------



## queennadine

Love the last outfit! One before, not so much.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

I seem to recall back when Diana was the Princess of Wales she could only wear British designers. It was the Crowns way of promoting them throughout the world. After Diana and Charles separated was when Diana started to wear Versace and such. She was no longer bound by royal protocol. I imagine this has changed today as I remember seeing Kate wearing Chanel when she visited France. But Kate still primarily wears British threads.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

daisychainz said:


> Maybe they don't have as much access to brands as we think? Kate seems to stick to the same designers - people call them her favorite designers, but perhaps those are the only ones that gift or give discounts? Like does she really love Mulberry and Packham that much, or is that the only brand gifting? Maybe it's the same with Meghan - choices are limited and some items might be from her personal closet (like this fugly coat). She's in Givenchy an awful lot, so maybe there is a contract there. I just think, perhaps, they can't have any designer they want.





chowlover2 said:


> I seem to recall back when Diana was the Princess of Wales she could only wear British designers. It was the Crowns way of promoting them throughout the world. After Diana and Charles separated was when Diana started to wear Versace and such. She was no longer bound by royal protocol. I imagine this has changed today as I remember seeing Kate wearing Chanel when she visited France. But Kate still primarily wears British threads.



I would guess it's more what chowlover2 was saying! I think they try to fit in as many British designers and fashion labels as possible to promote British business. And even though Givenchy is a French fashion house, the current designer Clare Waight Keller is actually British!


----------



## White Orchid

For a woman soon to give birth, her legs look great.  Love this entire ensemble.


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> This coat looks lovely on her.  She should use this one until she gives birth.  Is there a rule she can’t be seen in the same coat twice???


Kate regularly recycles outfits. I'm sure Meghan can wear a coat twice or even more. It would be good PR after being accused of spending too much on clothes and shoes. Does anyone know the brand of her sling backs? They are to die for.


----------



## chowlover2

DeMonica said:


> Kate regularly recycles outfits. I'm sure Meghan can wear a coat twice or even more. It would be good PR after being accused of spending too much on clothes and shoes. Does anyone know the brand of her sling backs? They are to die for.


I believe they are Aquazurra, she seems to favor their shoes.


----------



## chicaloca

DeMonica said:


> Kate regularly recycles outfits. I'm sure Meghan can wear a coat twice or even more. It would be good PR after being accused of spending too much on clothes and shoes. Does anyone know the brand of her sling backs? They are to die for.




Kate has 8 years worth of clothing to recycle so it’s a lot easier for her to do so.

I’m guessing everything Meghan is wearing now will be worn again multiple times through the years. Since she favors timeless, separates she will have a good foundation.


----------



## berrydiva

How much money did she actually spend on clothes? It seems to be brought up often but I've never actually heard how much she spent. And, was this a one-time spend to make her look "royal" or is it on-going?

Doesn't Harry have his own money? Guess I'm just curious if personal funds were used to buy the clothing.


----------



## bag-mania

berrydiva said:


> How much money did she actually spend on clothes? It seems to be brought up often but I've never actually heard how much she spent. And, was this a one-time spend to make her look "royal" or is it on-going?
> 
> Doesn't Harry have his own money? Guess I'm just curious if personal funds were used to buy the clothing.



I had to look it up. This article says that Charles provides $6.5 million per year from the Duchy of Cornwall estate for William, Harry, Kate and Meghan "to fund their public lives, which includes salaries, office costs, and other expenses, like clothes." That amount is divided between them. It doesn't break down how much is actually spent on clothing.

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/style-...ays-for-meghan-markle-kate-middleton-clothes/


----------



## berrydiva

bag-mania said:


> I had to look it up. This article says that Charles provides $6.5 million per year from the Duchy of Cornwall estate for William, Harry, Kate and Meghan "to fund their public lives, which includes salaries, office costs, and other expenses, like clothes." That amount is divided between them. It doesn't break down how much is actually spent on clothing.
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/style-...ays-for-meghan-markle-kate-middleton-clothes/


Thanks. Even $6.5 million split between them doesn't seem like an awful lot of money given TRF's wealth.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visits St Vincent’s Catholic Primary School to take part in a tree planting in support of The Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy, together with the Woodland Trust


----------



## kaitydid

berrydiva said:


> How much money did she actually spend on clothes? It seems to be brought up often but I've never actually heard how much she spent. And, was this a one-time spend to make her look "royal" or is it on-going?
> 
> Doesn't Harry have his own money? Guess I'm just curious if personal funds were used to buy the clothing.



I’m not sure how accurate the calculations are, so take this with a grain of salt, but it’s been guessed to be about $500,000. This is all I could find on it:  http://ufonomore.com/blog/costs-2018 and https://www.allure.com/story/meghan-markle-most-expensive-royal-wardrobe.


----------



## buffym

Aimee3 said:


> This coat looks lovely on her.  She should use this one until she gives birth.  Is there a rule she can’t be seen in the same coat twice???



Meghan does rewear clothes.

 Same coat 



Three times rewear




Same coat


----------



## berrydiva

kaitydid said:


> I’m not sure how accurate the calculations are, so take this with a grain of salt, but it’s been guessed to be about $500,000. This is all I could find on it:  http://ufonomore.com/blog/costs-2018 and https://www.allure.com/story/meghan-markle-most-expensive-royal-wardrobe.


That doesn't seem like a lot considering it's all designer clothing and I'm guessing the purpose was to make wardrobe stand up the "royal" standards. Damned if you do, damned if you don't....if she was walking around in her pre-Harry wardrobe, folks would have something to say as well.


----------



## bisousx

I wish I lived in a place cold enough to wear those lovely coats... I miss the winters on the east coast! I’ve been eyeing Max Mara but sadly don’t think I’ll make good use out of them.


----------



## rose60610

From what I gather, Meghan wasn't exactly destitute on her own. I understand the clothing allowances so you don't go to your required functions looking like a skank, or wearing stuff from Target. She and Harry were given their own, (cough, cough) multi million dollar "cottage" and God knows what all else. I question if the Crown covers their security detail, it probably does as well as their car and air travel, house keeping expenses, nannies etc. If she's given 500 G's a year for clothes, she could likely squeak by.  The topic only lightly touched on was the rumor that she and Harry wanted their own "independent philanthropy plan" apart from the rest of the RF. If that's true, how stupid. I think they forget who kindly pays their bills. And their clothing allowances. And their security. And their basically everything. And who provides the $$$$ for "their" philanthropy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## berrydiva

rose60610 said:


> From what I gather, Meghan wasn't exactly destitute on her own. I understand the clothing allowances so you don't go to your required functions looking like a skank, or wearing stuff from Target. She and Harry were given their own, (cough, cough) multi million dollar "cottage" and God knows what all else. I question if the Crown covers their security detail, it probably does as well as their car and air travel, house keeping expenses, nannies etc. If she's given 500 G's a year for clothes, she could likely squeak by.  The topic only lightly touched on was the rumor that she and Harry wanted their own "independent philanthropy plan" apart from the rest of the RF. If that's true, how stupid. I think they forget who kindly pays their bills. And their clothing allowances. And their security. And their basically everything. And who provides the $$$$ for "their" philanthropy.


What's the reason they want their own independent philanthropy plan? Also, is that gossip rumors or was that actually stated somewhere official?


----------



## Morgan R

berrydiva said:


> What's the reason they want their own independent philanthropy plan? Also, is that gossip rumors or was that actually stated somewhere official?



It was gossip rumors. The splitting of Households was inevitable and everybody that has followed the British Royal Family knew it was eventually going to happen it didn't mean Harry and Meghan were going to be/trying to be completely independent. To me I think the press is going to make the split of households a bigger story than it really is to play into the "feud", "rift", etc. narrative the press has created (by the way this narrative was likely always going to happen no matter who Harry married because that makes good "drama" and "drama" sells tabloids more than positive news).

I remember there was the question of which household Harry was going to be under after William and Kate got married. William was under the Clarence House household until he and Kate got married in 2011 and then him & Kate became a part of the Kensington Palace household. Harry was under the Clarence House household until he moved to the Kensington Palace household in 2012. I remember some felt Harry shouldn't have been under the same household as William and Kate because eventually Harry was going to have split households again. Yes Harry could've lived at Kensington Palace's Nottingham Cottage but it would have made more sense for Harry's household office to stay under Clarence House until he got married then split to a different household (this honestly would've been the equivalent to what Harry & Meghan are doing now except Harry & Meghan are moving from Kensington Palace and will live at Frogmore Cottage but their household office/with staff will be at Buckingham Palace). Whenever Harry eventually got married it was always known he was likely going to get his own household and if William would have become Prince of Wales before Harry got married Harry would've very likely had his own household created then (whoever his wife ended up being would've joined him under the household). Aside from Prince Charles & Camilla at Clarence House/in the coming months William & Kate at Kensington Palace every other working royal  has their own offices/staff at Buckingham Palace. In the coming months we should not be surprised if Harry and Meghan end up having a joint social media account created that announces when their engagements are/shares pictures from their engagements/share statements. That account would be similar to the current various British Royal Family social media accounts (on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) which currently include social media accounts for: Royal Family, Clarence House, Kensington Palace, and The Duke Of York.

Anyways the last few years it has been clear Charles, William, and Harry have been preparing for the change in positions that will happen once Queen Elizabeth II passes away. That might not be for another 10+ years but at the same time they are preparing for the change that will happen sometime in the future. Yes we know Charles will be King and William will be Prince of Wales (then eventually King) but in the last few years it has been noticeable what Harry's role in supporting the monarch will be which is doing major work within the Commonwealth. Harry is currently the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador and the President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust (which include projects/charities that involve education, health, the environment, and sports) also Meghan is involved with working in the Commonwealth (Meghan is the Patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities and Vice President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust). Just today we saw that Harry did an engagement with the Queen's Commonwealth Canopy.


----------



## berrydiva

Morgan R said:


> It was gossip rumors. The splitting of Households was inevitable and everybody that has followed the British Royal Family knew it was eventually going to happen it didn't mean Harry and Meghan were going to be/trying to be completely independent. To me I think the press is going to make the split of households a bigger story than it really is to play into the "feud", "rift", etc. narrative the press has created (by the way this narrative was likely always going to happen no matter who Harry married because that makes good "drama" and "drama" sells tabloids more than positive news).
> 
> I remember there was the question of which household Harry was going to be under after William and Kate got married. William was under the Clarence House household until he and Kate got married in 2011 and then him & Kate became a part of the Kensington Palace household. Harry was under the Clarence House household until he moved to the Kensington Palace household in 2012. I remember some felt Harry shouldn't have been under the same household as William and Kate because eventually Harry was going to have split households again. Yes Harry could've lived at Kensington Palace's Nottingham Cottage but it would have made more sense for Harry's household office to stay under Clarence House until he got married then split to a different household (this honestly would've been the equivalent to what Harry & Meghan are doing now except Harry & Meghan are moving from Kensington Palace and will live at Frogmore Cottage but their household office/with staff will be at Buckingham Palace). Whenever Harry eventually got married it was always known he was likely going to get his own household and if William would have become Prince of Wales before Harry got married Harry would've very likely had his own household created then (whoever his wife ended up being would've joined him under the household). Aside from Prince Charles & Camilla at Clarence House/in the coming months William & Kate at Kensington Palace every other working royal  has their own offices/staff at Buckingham Palace. In the coming months we should not be surprised if Harry and Meghan end up having a joint social media account created that announces when their engagements are/shares pictures from their engagements/share statements. That account would be similar to the current various British Royal Family social media accounts (on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) which currently include social media accounts for: Royal Family, Clarence House, Kensington Palace, and The Duke Of York.
> 
> Anyways the last few years it has been clear Charles, William, and Harry have been preparing for the change in positions that will happen once Queen Elizabeth II passes away. That might not be for another 10+ years but at the same time they are preparing for the change that will happen sometime in the future. Yes we know Charles will be King and William will be Prince of Wales (then eventually King) but in the last few years it has been noticeable what Harry's role in supporting the monarch will be which is doing major work within the Commonwealth. Harry is currently the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador and the President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust (which include projects/charities that involve education, health, the environment, and sports) also Meghan is involved with working in the Commonwealth (Meghan is the Patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities and Vice President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust). Just today we saw that Harry did an engagement with the Queen's Commonwealth Canopy.


Thank you for that explanation and I will admit that the entire second paragraph went over my head. I had to read it twice as the household part lost me.


----------



## Morgan R

berrydiva said:


> Thank you for that explanation and* I will admit that the entire second paragraph went over my head. I had to read it twice as the household part lost me. *



Yeah understanding the ins and outs of the royals can be confusing. Usually when people are talking about households they are talking about where someone lives. In this case the households we are talking about refers to offices/staff. It can really be confusing because households (offices/staff) can actually be named after royal residences and actually because of that I misspoke a bit in my previous comment. In 2009, a separate household for William and Harry was established and was formerly based in St James's Palace instead of having a household at Clarence House (though they were still both living within Clarence House). When William and Kate moved to Apartment 1A in Kensington Palace  they made their household Kensington Palace. When Harry moved his residence from Clarence House to Kensington Palace's Nottingham Cottage he moved his household from St. James's Palace to Kensington Palace.

All that being said and to make a long story short lol ...Looking back now in reality it actually would've made more sense for Harry not to move his household from St. James's Palace to Kensington Palace but instead he actually should've either kept his household at St. James's Palace or if he was going to move his household he should've moved from St. James's Palace to Buckingham Palace (where the majority of the royal family's households are) because inevitably being under Kensington Palace meant Harry was going to split from households again sometime after he got married or if William had became Prince Of Wales before then.


----------



## arnott

White Orchid said:


> For a woman soon to give birth, her legs look great.  Love this entire ensemble.



The first thing I noticed were her legs still looking like sticks despite being heavily pregnant.    Lucky her.


----------



## DeMonica

chicaloca said:


> Kate has 8 years worth of clothing to recycle so it’s a lot easier for her to do so.
> 
> I’m guessing everything Meghan is wearing now will be worn again multiple times through the years. Since she favors timeless, separates she will have a good foundation.


I'm sure she hasn't arrived to London naked and accumulated a pretty decent wardrobe since she had been engaged to Harry.  Not that she had been shopping at the discounted section of Asda before. Plus, these maternity outfits can be only worn when she's pregnant.


----------



## minababe

I don't get the critic with her wardorbe. I'm sure she is not spending moe that the other female royals.
even in her first year of part of the royal Family she is wearing a lot Things twice or more. I don't think kate did that in her beginning after marrying William. but meghan gets all the hate. ridicilous.
and she still is wearing clothing that she had for many years before she actually met Harry.but who cares when you can hate right


----------



## DeMonica

minababe said:


> I don't get the critic with her wardorbe. I'm sure she is not spending moe that the other female royals.
> even in her first year of part of the royal Family she is wearing a lot Things twice or more. I don't think kate did that in her beginning after marrying William. but meghan gets all the hate. ridicilous.
> and she still is wearing clothing that she had for many years before she actually met Harry.but who cares when you can hate right


I don't think it's hate mentioning that she can wear some outfits several times. Actually it's common sense. Kate has started it early on and it made her look good. As I said it's good PR, especially in the current political and economical climate. Here in the thread we read articles about how they cover their expenses, but I can assure you that there are still a number of people in the UK who think it comes directly from their tax money and eventually these are the people she has to please.



Morgan R said:


> It was gossip rumors. The splitting of Households was inevitable and everybody that has followed the British Royal Family knew it was eventually going to happen it didn't mean Harry and Meghan were going to be/trying to be completely independent. To me I think the press is going to make the split of households a bigger story than it really is to play into the "feud", "rift", etc. narrative the press has created (by the way this narrative was likely always going to happen no matter who Harry married because that makes good "drama" and "drama" sells tabloids more than positive news).
> 
> I remember there was the question of which household Harry was going to be under after William and Kate got married. William was under the Clarence House household until he and Kate got married in 2011 and then him & Kate became a part of the Kensington Palace household. Harry was under the Clarence House household until he moved to the Kensington Palace household in 2012. I remember some felt Harry shouldn't have been under the same household as William and Kate because eventually Harry was going to have split households again. Yes Harry could've lived at Kensington Palace's Nottingham Cottage but it would have made more sense for Harry's household office to stay under Clarence House until he got married then split to a different household (this honestly would've been the equivalent to what Harry & Meghan are doing now except Harry & Meghan are moving from Kensington Palace and will live at Frogmore Cottage but their household office/with staff will be at Buckingham Palace). Whenever Harry eventually got married it was always known he was likely going to get his own household and if William would have become Prince of Wales before Harry got married Harry would've very likely had his own household created then (whoever his wife ended up being would've joined him under the household). Aside from Prince Charles & Camilla at Clarence House/in the coming months William & Kate at Kensington Palace every other working royal  has their own offices/staff at Buckingham Palace. In the coming months we should not be surprised if Harry and Meghan end up having a joint social media account created that announces when their engagements are/shares pictures from their engagements/share statements. That account would be similar to the current various British Royal Family social media accounts (on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) which currently include social media accounts for: Royal Family, Clarence House, Kensington Palace, and The Duke Of York.
> 
> *Anyways the last few years it has been clear Charles, William, and Harry have been preparing for the change in positions that will happen once Queen Elizabeth II passes away. That might not be for another 10+ years but at the same time they are preparing for the change that will happen sometime in the future. *Yes we know Charles will be King and William will be Prince of Wales (then eventually King) but in the last few years it has been noticeable what Harry's role in supporting the monarch will be which is doing major work within the Commonwealth. Harry is currently the Commonwealth Youth Ambassador and the President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust (which include projects/charities that involve education, health, the environment, and sports) also Meghan is involved with working in the Commonwealth (Meghan is the Patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities and Vice President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust). Just today we saw that Harry did an engagement with the Queen's Commonwealth Canopy.


I've read somewhere that Prince Charles is going to be a Regent if Queen Elizabeth II is still alive at 95. It's just three years from now. Considering the age of the Queen Mother when passing it's quite likely that the Queen herself would live that long, too. I guess there would be a **** in positions then.


----------



## buffym

DeMonica said:


> I don't think it's hate mentioning that she can wear some outfits several times. Actually it's common sense. Kate has started it early on and it made her look good. As I said it's good PR, especially in the current political and economical climate. Here in the thread we read articles about how they cover their expenses, but I can assure you that there are still a number of people in the UK who think it comes directly from their tax money and eventually these are the people she has to please.
> 
> 
> I've read somewhere that Prince Charles is going to be a Regent if Queen Elizabeth II is still alive at 95. It's just three years from now. Considering the age of the Queen Mother when passing it's quite likely that the Queen herself would live that long, too. I guess there would be a **** in positions then.



Meghan does rewear clothes but it gets over looked. 

I posted three different coats she has reworn. 

Here is a dress she has reworn. There are others but the press and the Daily Mail will specially overlook it. They won’t mention it.

Yet, Kate gets credit for a rewear even if it isn’t true. The dress for Charlotte christening was cream but the dress for Harry wedding was pale yellow and it had a different sleeves. Yet, people from the Daily Mail was saying it was old.

I do know Kate recycles but I also see her getting credit when it isn’t a rewear it’s an outfit in the same style. Yet, Meghan is being told she should rewear clothes yet she already does.


----------



## Aimee3

buffym said:


> Meghan does rewear clothes but it gets over looked.
> 
> I posted three different coats she has reworn.
> 
> Here is a dress she has reworn. There are others but the press and the Daily Mail will specially overlook it. They won’t mention it.
> 
> Yet, Kate gets credit for a rewear even if it isn’t true. The dress for Charlotte christening was cream but the dress for Harry wedding was pale yellow and it had a different sleeves. Yet, people from the Daily Mail was saying it was old.
> 
> I do know Kate recycles but I also see her getting credit when it isn’t a rewear it’s an outfit in the same style. Yet, Meghan is being told she should rewear clothes yet she already does.
> 
> View attachment 4379039
> View attachment 4379040
> View attachment 4379041
> View attachment 4379042



Thanks for posting this and also the photos of the costs Meghan has reworn. Since the coats were styled differently I never realized they were the same.  You have good eyes for detail. [emoji253]


----------



## FreeSpirit71

.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

DeMonica said:


> I'm sure she hasn't arrived to London naked and accumulated a pretty decent wardrobe since she had been engaged to Harry.  Not that she had been shopping at the discounted section of Asda before. Plus, these maternity outfits can be only worn when she's pregnant.



Not necessarily. She may keep them for if/when she falls pregnant again. Alternatively she could as I did and get a good tailor to alter the clothes for post-pregnancy wear.


----------



## Grande Latte

Meghan has a very great and very simple style, so it’s very easy for her to re-wear some articles and still have refreshing looks.


----------



## Jayne1

arnott said:


> The first thing I noticed were her legs still looking like sticks despite being heavily pregnant.    Lucky her.


Agree -- very lucky.  Really it's just her stomach that got big and nothing else!


----------



## DeMonica

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Not necessarily. She may keep them for if/when she falls pregnant again. Alternatively she could as I did and get a good tailor to alter the clothes for post-pregnancy wear.


I can see her keeping the clothes for the next pregnancy, but I can't really see her getting them altered. I'm sure she'll be back to her pre-pregnancy figure soon after giving birth and she could recycle those pretty outfits (and get a few new pieces).



OT: I don't understand the **** correction, I don't think that shift is a dirty word.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

DeMonica said:


> I can see her keeping the clothes for the next pregnancy, but I can't really see her getting them altered. I'm sure she'll be back to her pre-pregnancy figure soon after giving birth and she could recycle those pretty outfits (and get a few new pieces).
> 
> 
> 
> OT: I don't understand the **** correction, I don't think that shift is a dirty word.



What happened with the word ‘shift”???
Lol


----------



## Aimee3

DeMonica said:


> I can see her keeping the clothes for the next pregnancy, but I can't really see her getting them altered. I'm sure she'll be back to her pre-pregnancy figure soon after giving birth and she could recycle those pretty outfits (and get a few new pieces).
> 
> 
> 
> OT: I don't understand the **** correction, I don't think that shift is a dirty word.



What happened with the word ‘shift”???
Lol


----------



## Voyageuse

I’m a stickler about properly fitting clothing.  I even had my maternity clothes altered...except for the belly of course.  Not everyone has an eye for fit, but good tailoring makes a world of difference.


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> What happened with the word ‘shift”???
> Lol





Aimee3 said:


> What happened with the word ‘shift”???
> Lol





DeMonica said:


> I don't think it's hate mentioning that she can wear some outfits several times. Actually it's common sense. Kate has started it early on and it made her look good. As I said it's good PR, especially in the current political and economical climate. Here in the thread we read articles about how they cover their expenses, but I can assure you that there are still a number of people in the UK who think it comes directly from their tax money and eventually these are the people she has to please.
> 
> 
> I've read somewhere that Prince Charles is going to be a Regent if Queen Elizabeth II is still alive at 95. It's just three years from now. Considering the age of the Queen Mother when passing it's quite likely that the Queen herself would live that long, too.* I guess there would be a **** in positions then.*


Shift was the word I meant to use where you can see **** now. I either mispelled it or someone was overly zealous at weeding my post.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think you forgot an “f”


----------



## berrydiva

DeMonica said:


> Shift was the word I meant to use where you can see **** now. I either mispelled it or someone was overly zealous at weeding my post.


Think it's just a script that corrects words that they put on a list...I dontdobelieve anyone is physically weeding through the every post.


----------



## DeMonica

I only added as an explanation to Aimee3. I didn't intend to open a poll, esp. since it's quite OT. 
Back to topic: https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a26919762/meghan-markle-return-maternity-leave/


----------



## Aimee3

DeMonica said:


> I only added as an explanation to Aimee3. I didn't intend to open a poll, esp. since it's quite OT.
> Back to topic: https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/a26919762/meghan-markle-return-maternity-leave/



So even royals have trouble with contractors finishing the work on time!!!
Thanks for posting this story.


----------



## meluvs2shop

I cannot wait to see what this baby will look like. Not so much the infancy stage but once the baby starts coming into his or her own personality where you can see whose genes played a stronger role.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder when we will know which hospital she will go to. I thought by now if she goes to the Lindo Wing we would know due to the local council having to give notice to the public of parking restrictions on that street for a certain period.


----------



## Morgan R

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder when we will know which hospital she will go to. I thought by now if she goes to the Lindo Wing we would know due to the local council having to give notice to the public of parking restrictions on that street for a certain period.



I've seen some royal reporters mention that they expect information regarding birth plans to be released sometime shortly after Prince Charles and Camilla's tour ends. So information is expected to be released sometime in the beginning of April.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> I've seen some royal reporters mention that they expect information regarding birth plans to be released sometime shortly after Prince Charles and Camilla's tour ends. So information is expected to be released sometime in the beginning of April.


Fantastic, thank you for that.


----------



## McLoverly

I’ve read that employees in the Lido Wing have been instructed not to take vacation in April. With delayed construction at Frogmore, it certainly makes sense that they might plan on carrying on the more recent Lindo Wing birth tradition.


----------



## minababe

can't wait. only a few weeks until the Baby is coming. crazy. the time flies.
I hope for a title of princess/prince. don't like the Lord/Lady Thing.

does anyone know if it was released before or after the birth of the Cambridge Kids that they will be prince/princess? can't remember. I only know that the queen has to make a Statement if they get a title. it's not automatically.


----------



## chowlover2

I can't wait to see the baby. The only thing I am more excited about is the final season of Game of Thrones!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

chowlover2 said:


> I can't wait to see the baby. The only thing I am more excited about is the final season of Game of Thrones!


LOL, I think I'm one of the few in the world who hasn't seen Game of Thrones!


----------



## chowlover2

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I think I'm one of the few in the world who hasn't seen Game of Thrones!


You have to watch it, it's fabulous, never a dull moment.


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I think I'm one of the few in the world who hasn't seen Game of Thrones!


I'm with you. No interest in it.


----------



## CeeJay

minababe said:


> can't wait. only a few weeks until the Baby is coming. crazy. the time flies.
> I hope for a title of princess/prince. don't like the Lord/Lady Thing.
> 
> does anyone know if it was released before or after the birth of the Cambridge Kids that they will be prince/princess? can't remember. I only know that the queen has to make a Statement if they get a title. it's not automatically.


Can't remember where I read it, but any children born to Harry & Meghan will not have the title of Prince or Princess, since he is not the heir to the throne.  Brits - please correct me if I'm wrong ..


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I think I'm one of the few in the world who hasn't seen Game of Thrones!




Say what!!![emoji15] one of theeee best shows ever!! [emoji173]️


----------



## CeeJay

redney said:


> I'm with you. No interest in it.


I remember seeing a few in the 'early' days, but when I got home after a business trip, I found the rest of the series to be boring, so haven't watched it since!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but any children born to Harry & Meghan will not have the title of Prince or Princess, since he is not the heir to the throne.  Brits - please correct me if I'm wrong ..



Only if the Queen decides to give titles to them.


----------



## bisbee

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I think I'm one of the few in the world who hasn't seen Game of Thrones!


Me neither...not interested.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> Only if the Queen decides to give titles to them.


I'm sure they will get a title, maybe not Prince or Princess, maybe Earl or Lady. After all, this baby's grandfather will be King. Unless they do what Princess Anne did and refused any titles for her children.


----------



## minababe

I really hope for prince and princess


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm sure they will get a title, maybe not Prince or Princess, maybe Earl or Lady. After all, this baby's grandfather will be King. Unless they do what Princess Anne did and refused any titles for her children.



Yes, this is likely. But Prince or Princess title is not likely.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, this is likely. But Prince or Princess title is not likely.


what about Princess Eugenie and whatever her sister's name is?  their father isn't heir to the throne


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> what about Princess Eugenie and whatever her sister's name is?  their father isn't heir to the throne


My gut feeling on that is that Prince Andrew insisted on those titles. Plus, it was the girls grandmother that was /is on the throne. Harry and Meghan's baby's grandfather isn't.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> My gut feeling on that is that Prince Andrew insisted on those titles. Plus, it was the girls grandmother that was /is on the throne. Harry and Meghan's baby's grandfather isn't.


oh, ok
I really don't care
except I find beatrice and eugenie unappealing


----------



## Aimee3

Sharont2305 said:


> My gut feeling on that is that Prince Andrew insisted on those titles. Plus, it was the girls grandmother that was /is on the throne. Harry and Meghan's baby's grandfather isn't.



So if/when Charles becomes king, can he give the child a (higher) title at that time ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> So even royals have trouble with contractors finishing the work on time!!!
> Thanks for posting this story.


My thoughts exactly! What can we unfortunate commoners expect when even royalty can't get their contractors finish on time? 




chowlover2 said:


> I can't wait to see the baby. The only thing I am more excited about is the final season of Game of Thrones!


I know it's blasphemy but I'm more excited about the final season of GT, too....and maybe the final season of Vikings. Now I go to hide.

I wonder about the title, too. The peerage in the UK is far too complicated. Anyway, I like Princess Anne's approach. Her children do well in life without titles.


----------



## Jayne1

DeMonica said:


> I wonder about the title, too. The peerage in the UK is far too complicated. Anyway, I like Princess Anne's approach. Her children do well in life without titles.


Agree. It will tell us lots about the couple if they insist on titles.


----------



## cph706

I believe that Prince/Princess is extended to grandchildren of the monarch. George/Charlotte/Louis were exceptions made by Her Majesty. Children receive their titles through their fathers. Thus since Eugenie’s husband does not have a title neither will their children. Princess Margaret’s children were styled Lord and Lady since their father was a (created) Earl. Edward and Sophie’s children are entitled to be Prince James and Princess Louise but their parents declined this for them (for whatever reason).


----------



## redney

cph706 said:


> I believe that Prince/Princess is extended to grandchildren of the monarch. George/Charlotte/Louis were exceptions made by Her Majesty. Children receive their titles through their fathers. Thus since Eugenie’s husband does not have a title neither will their children. Princess Margaret’s children were styled Lord and Lady since their father was a (created) Earl. Edward and Sophie’s children are entitled to be Prince James and Princess Louise but their parents declined this for them (for whatever reason).


Anne declined titles for her kids too.


----------



## cph706

redney said:


> Anne declined titles for her kids too.



I think that her husband Captain Mark Phillips declined a title for himself (unlike Anthony Armstrong-Jones), knowing that his children would not be titled. If he doesn’t have a title then his children would not.


----------



## berrydiva

Every time this thread pops up, I'm thinking a baby announcement is made.


----------



## chowlover2

berrydiva said:


> Every time this thread pops up, I'm thinking a baby announcement is made.


Me too!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Judging by what I've seen of her personality thus far, Meghan's child(ren) will be taking titles.


----------



## redney

cph706 said:


> I think that her husband Captain Mark Phillips declined a title for himself (unlike Anthony Armstrong-Jones), knowing that his children would not be titled. If he doesn’t have a title then his children would not.


Yes, Mark Phillips turned down the Queen's offer of a title for himself (Earl) as a wedding gift when he and Anne married, the Queen also offered to title Anne's children at their births (courtesy titles Lady and Viscount) but both times Anne and Mark declined.


----------



## Jayne1

cph706 said:


> I believe that Prince/Princess is extended to grandchildren of the monarch. George/Charlotte/Louis were exceptions made by Her Majesty. Children receive their titles through their fathers. Thus since Eugenie’s husband does not have a title neither will their children. Princess Margaret’s children were styled Lord and Lady since their father was a (created) Earl. Edward and Sophie’s children are entitled to be Prince James and Princess Louise but their parents declined this for them (for whatever reason).


It was written that Edward thought having royal titles might hinder them.

So, Princess Anne and her brother Edward declined. Andrew, that ne'er-do-well, insisted, is that correct? that his girls have HRH Princess before their names. 

It will seem so odd if Harry, who seems to act more of the people, still decides his children should have the princely status with Royal Highness titles.


----------



## Morgan R

The way UK Royal titles work can be very interesting but also very confusing. I really don't think the comparison should be made that because Princess Anne's children not having titles that Prince Harry and Meghan's children should have titles. Anne's children Peter and Zara when born were respectively fifth and sixth in line to the throne but Anne knew her children would quickly move down in the line to throne once Charles, Andrew, and Edward had children. And now at this point in just a matter of a few short weeks once Harry and Meghan's child is born Anne will move to 14th in line to throne, Peter will move to 15th in line to the throne, and Zara will move to 18th in line to the throne. Unlike Anne's children even if William and Kate were to have another child Harry and Meghan's children position to the throne will stay in relatively the same positions in line to the throne until George, Charlotte, and Louis start having kids which won't be for another 20+ years. Also in perspective Harry and Meghan's children will be in the position where not only will the current sovereign be their great grandmother but consequently their grandfather (Charles), their Uncle (William), and their cousin (George) will also eventually be future sovereigns. That is slightly different from Peter and Zara's position to the throne which is that their grandmother is currently the sovereign but then their Uncle (Charles) and their Cousin (William) will be sovereigns.

Not that it matters if she does or doesn't but I actually won't be surprised if Queen Elizabeth II does in fact issues a letters patent declaring that Harry and Meghan's children will be given the titles of Prince/Princess and have the style Royal Highness (HRH). In reality because Harry is a Duke they automatically get the titles of Lord/Lady but eventually they will be the grandchildren of the sovereign so their titles would in fact be changed from Lord/Lady to Prince/Princess and the style Royal Highness (HRH) once Charles becomes King. Due to the fact it is known that when Prince Charles becomes King he wants to "slim the monarchy" (have his direct family be working royals rather than having nearly 20 working royals there are now) it is very likely Harry and Meghan's children will be far more visible than how Queen Elizabeth II's grandchildren Peter, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise, and James have been. Also due to Prince Charles slimming the monarchy there is the possibility that Harry and Meghan's children will be working royals (in comparison to now while some grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II are involved with charities and making some appearances they aren't considered working royals. The only adult grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II that are working royals who support the monarch are William and Harry).

Princess Anne's first husband, Mark Philips declined a title which in turn meant Peter and Zara didn't get courtesy titles. If he would've accepted a title they would've had courtesy titles. Even though Anne is the daughter of Queen Elizabeth II according to the letter patents issued by King George V "*the Princely title to all children of the Sovereign, to the Sovereign’s male-line grandchildren, and the Prince of Wales’s eldest son*". Beatrice and Eugenie are titled "HRH Princess Beatrice of York" and "HRH Princess Eugenie of York"  not because Prince Andrew wanted them to have the titles but because in falls in line to King George V Letter Patent. Once Prince Edward got married to his wife Sophie he received the lesser title of Earl rather than Duke (he will though eventually inherit his father's Duke of Edinburgh title). Also should be noted originally him and his wife weren't suppose to be a working royals (hence why he was given the title Earl rather than Duke) but shortly after his wife Sophie's incident where she was misled in a meeting at the Dorchester by a News of the World reporter (Mazher Mahmood) who posed as a Sheikh it was announced both Edward and Sophie would quit their business interests in order to focus on activities and official engagements on behalf of the royal family and aid the Queen in her Golden Jubilee year (so they've remained working royals ever since 2002). But If Prince Edward had originally been given the title Duke his children would've originally had the titles "HRH Princess Louise of Wessex" (instead of the title Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor) and "HRH Prince James of Wessex" (instead of the title James, Viscount Severn).


This article really explains titles of member of the royal family: http://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/wessex...ren-are-not-titled-prince-and-princess-103666


----------



## Sharont2305

Delete


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> The way UK Royal titles work can be very interesting but also very confusing. I really don't think the comparison should be made that because Princess Anne's children not having titles that Prince Harry and Meghan's children should have titles. Anne's children Peter and Zara when born were respectively fifth and sixth in line to the throne but Anne knew her children would quickly move down in the line to throne once Charles, Andrew, and Edward had children. And now at this point in just a matter of a few short weeks once Harry and Meghan's child is born Anne will move to 14th in line to throne, Peter will move to 15th in line to the throne, and Zara will move to 18th in line to the throne. Unlike Anne's children even if William and Kate were to have another child Harry and Meghan's children position to the throne will stay in relatively the same positions in line to the throne until George, Charlotte, and Louis start having kids which won't be for another 20+ years. Also in perspective Harry and Meghan's children will be in the position where not only will the current sovereign be their great grandmother but consequently their grandfather (Charles), their Uncle (William), and their cousin (George) will also eventually be future sovereigns. That is slightly different from Peter and Zara's position to the throne which is that their grandmother is currently the sovereign but then their Uncle (Charles) and their Cousin (William) will be sovereigns.
> 
> Not that it matters if she does or doesn't but I actually won't be surprised if Queen Elizabeth II does in fact issues a letters patent declaring that Harry and Meghan's children will be given the titles of Prince/Princess and have the style Royal Highness (HRH). In reality because Harry is a Duke they automatically get the titles of Lord/Lady but eventually they will be the grandchildren of the sovereign so their titles would in fact be changed from Lord/Lady to Prince/Princess and the style Royal Highness (HRH) once Charles becomes King. Due to the fact it is known that when Prince Charles becomes King he wants to "slim the monarchy" (have his direct family be working royals rather than having nearly 20 working royals there are now) it is very likely Harry and Meghan's children will be far more visible than how Queen Elizabeth II's grandchildren Peter, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise, and James have been. Also due to Prince Charles slimming the monarchy there is the possibility that Harry and Meghan's children will be working royals (in comparison to now while some grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II are involved with charities and making some appearances they aren't considered working royals. The only adult grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II that are working royals who support the monarch are William and Harry).
> 
> Princess Anne's first husband, Mark Philips declined a title which in turn meant Peter and Zara didn't get courtesy titles. If he would've accepted a title they would've had courtesy titles. Even though Anne is the daughter of Queen Elizabeth II according to the letter patents issued by King George V "*the Princely title to all children of the Sovereign, to the Sovereign’s male-line grandchildren, and the Prince of Wales’s eldest son*". Beatrice and Eugenie are titled "HRH Princess Beatrice of York" and "HRH Princess Eugenie of York"  not because Prince Andrew wanted them to have the titles but because in falls in line to King George V Letter Patent. Once Prince Edward got married to his wife Sophie he received the lesser title of Earl rather than Duke (he will though eventually inherit his father's Duke of Edinburgh title). Also should be noted originally him and his wife weren't suppose to be a working royals (hence why he was given the title Earl rather than Duke) but shortly after his wife Sophie's incident where she was misled in a meeting at the Dorchester by a News of the World reporter (Mazher Mahmood) who posed as a Sheikh it was announced both Edward and Sophie would quit their business interests in order to focus on activities and official engagements on behalf of the royal family and aid the Queen in her Golden Jubilee year (so they've remained working royals ever since 2002). But If Prince Edward had originally been given the title Duke his children would've originally had the titles "HRH Princess Louise of Wessex" (instead of the title Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor) and "HRH Prince James of Wessex" (instead of the title James, Viscount Severn).
> 
> 
> This article really explains titles of member of the royal family: http://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/wessex...ren-are-not-titled-prince-and-princess-103666


Excellently put


----------



## doni

I think the situation of the Sussex is the exact same as the one of Prince Andrew at the time. If anything, their kids would be further down on the line because William has three on his own instead of two. Andrew's kids were princesses so it makes sense Harry's will be too. Then, they could decide to renounce the tittles for their children, which is renouncing the privilege but also the burdens. It would depend on whether they wish more of  a 'normal' life for their kids or not. Then there is the public perception and the signs of the times. In Spain, the Royal Family has been stripped to its very bare minimum (also following scandals with some of the political family members...) because it is perceived that this is more acceptable for citizens. But the UK may be different.


----------



## CeeJay

Just my opinion, but I think that if Harry and Megan's children get titles, there will be a lot of negative press about it since it appears that the UK papers don't seem to like her (god knows Piers Morgan - who BTW I cannot stand - would have something to say about it).  Also, giving into the speculation re: their move to Frogmore and having a more "normal" life would make the titles appear disingenuous at best.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

LOL Piers Morgan. What, you say?  Meghan stopped hanging out with a backstabbing member of the gossip press when she began dating Prince Harry?  Instead accusing her of being fake and social climbing (which she may be - we'll never know for sure) because she didn't want to hang out with you anymore, consider she didn't want to hang with with a member of the press.


----------



## CeeJay

marthastoo said:


> LOL Piers Morgan. What, you say?  Meghan stopped hanging out with a backstabbing member of the gossip press when she began dating Prince Harry?  Instead accusing her of being fake and social climbing (which she may be - we'll never know for sure) because she didn't want to hang out with you anymore, consider she didn't want to hang with with a member of the press.


As I said, I LOATHE Piers Morgan!!!  Honestly, with his nasty personality .. who would want to continue any type of relationship with this guy?!??!


----------



## DeMonica

CeeJay said:


> As I said, I LOATHE Piers Morgan!!!  Honestly, with his nasty personality .. who would want to continue any type of relationship with this guy?!??!


It's no surpise that she cut ties with him. The question I ponder is why she started to correspond with him in the first place? I know that she planned her future in acting then but still Piers Morgan?


----------



## Tivo

DeMonica said:


> It's no surpise that she cut ties with him. The question I ponder is why she started to correspond with him in the first place? I know that she planned her future in acting then but still Piers Morgan?


Because he had a “name” and she was networking and social climbing. Once he was no longer useful she bounced. It just so happens he turned out to be super annoying and so it was probably easy to cut him off.


----------



## Jayne1

DeMonica said:


> It's no surpise that she cut ties with him. The question I ponder is why she started to correspond with him in the first place? I know that she planned her future in acting then but still Piers Morgan?


As mentioned above, she was a networker and excellent at it.  Then she met Harry and started on a different track.


----------



## DeMonica

Jayne1 said:


> As mentioned above, she was a networker and excellent at it.  Then she met Harry and started on a different track.


As I said above: the networking part is absolutely understandable and clear, unless someone is completely blind. I was questioning_ the person_ she has chosen to network with. Not an excellent choice even for an ambitious B- actress.


----------



## marthastoo

DeMonica said:


> As I said above: the networking part is absolutely understandable and clear, unless someone is completely blind. I was questioning_ the person_ she has chosen to network with. Not an excellent choice even for an ambitious B- actress.


I can see her or any Hollywood type exchanging numbers with Piers Morgan at a party or chance meeting.  I can also see Piers overstating the extent of their relationship, implying that they hung out regularly. He said they messaged and emailed each other "a lot" according to him.  That could be "Hey nice seeing you at such-and-such party" - "Yes, great seeing you."   Who knows?  I definitely understand cutting ties with him the second she went on a date with Harry.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> I can see her or any Hollywood type exchanging numbers with Piers Morgan at a party or chance meeting.  I can also see Piers overstating the extent of their relationship, implying that they hung out regularly. He said they messaged and emailed each other "a lot" according to him.  That could be "Hey nice seeing you at such-and-such party" - "Yes, great seeing you."   Who knows?  I definitely understand cutting ties with him the second she went on a date with Harry.


There's not much for Piers to overstate.  Meghan initiated contact with him over twitter (saying she was "a big fan") and corresponded with him over twitter for several months (he's posted some of the messages). They met up for drinks & dinner when she was in London and she tweeted afterwords about how nice it was to see her "friend".  She started dating Harry during that trip and ceased contact with Piers immediately.

So yeah, kind of that phony Hollywood thing where you carry on a superficial friendship with someone who might be of use to you and drop them when they don't.  It doesn't speak to the supposed genuineness Meghan's friends want everyone to believe is her hallmark.

He's an obnoxious turd of a person, but she chose to befriend that turd, and then chose to ghost him when she considered him a social liability rather than an asset. The fact that he's mad about it and has several media platforms on which to express his opinion of her?  Well, she made her bed.


----------



## marthastoo

Flatsy said:


> There's not much for Piers to overstate.  Meghan initiated contact with him over twitter (saying she was "a big fan") and corresponded with him over twitter for several months (he's posted some of the messages). They met up for drinks & dinner when she was in London and she tweeted afterwords about how nice it was to see her "friend".  She started dating Harry during that trip and ceased contact with Piers immediately.
> 
> So yeah, kind of that phony Hollywood thing where you carry on a superficial friendship with someone who might be of use to you and drop them when they don't.  It doesn't speak to the supposed genuineness Meghan's friends want everyone to believe is her hallmark.
> 
> He's an obnoxious turd of a person, but she chose to befriend that turd, and then chose to ghost him when she considered him a social liability rather than an asset. The fact that he's mad about it and has several media platforms on which to express his opinion of her?  Well, she made her bed.


I don't think this kind of "befriending" on social media is exclusive to Hollywood.  I've had "conversations" on twitter with people in my industry to network and potentially make contacts with - this is normal.  Also, casually meeting up with people I've had conversations with when I'm in town - also totally normal.   She was an actress.  He is in the media.  This kind of networking is commonplace and expected.  

If you're convinced this kind networking is a clear example of her nefarious social climbing ... well, you already don't like her no matter what.  You can believe tweeting out after a drinks and dinner with her "friend" Piers is proof she's fake and a user v. memorializing something on twitter (I'm not  huge Tweeter, but I will if I just met up with someone well-known in my industry).  I guess that makes me fake too.  LOL


----------



## DeMonica

I think it's safe to assume that this blossoming beautiful friendship would have continued if Harry hadn't ended up in the picture. I don't blame her for trying to make contacts in places where she was virtually unknown pre-Harry, but I think she could have found a better bossom buddy to advertise herself  than this potentially dangerous, aging ego king. I guess she had realized that, too, that's why she dropped him like a hot potato.


----------



## Lifeisgreat

Piers does not enjoy the visibility in the US and Canada that he does in the UK.  Simply put, on this side of the pond most of us don't know how dreadful he is. Since we're assigning motives knowing absolutely nothing about the situation, we could entertain the notion that she may not have realized his reputation and once she did, she removed herself, a la Lady Gaga with R. Kelly.  When we know better, we do better.


----------



## Cocoabean

Lifeisgreat said:


> Piers does not enjoy the visibility in the US and Canada that he does in the UK.  Simply put, on this side of the pond most of us don't know how dreadful he is. Since we're assigning motives knowing absolutely nothing about the situation, we could entertain the notion that she may not have realized his reputation and once she did, she removed herself, a la Lady Gaga with R. Kelly.  When we know better, we do better.



I was just formulating a reply similar to this. I am in the US, and only know Piers from whichever talent show he used to judge. I liked him on that. So, she reached out, they had a "friendship," or whatever it was. She found out he's a twit, and backed away. If Harry weren't in the picture, and she spent some time in the UK, she might have backed away all on her own.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> If you're convinced this kind networking is a clear example of her nefarious social climbing ... well, you already don't like her no matter what.


So recognizing a clear and demonstrable example of social climbing means that "I don't like her no matter what".  Sorry, just because you disagree does not mean that I'm too crazed by hatred to form a reasonable opinion.

Calling it "networking" and trying to pretend it was a purely "business" contact is making it into something it wasn't.  Their contacts were all social and under the label of "friendship".  Losing contact with a business associate is something entirely different from ghosting someone you called your friend.  The former is fairly normal, the latter leaves people embittered towards you.



Lifeisgreat said:


> Piers does not enjoy the visibility in the US and Canada that he does in the UK.  Simply put, on this side of the pond most of us don't know how dreadful he is. Since we're assigning motives knowing absolutely nothing about the situation, we could entertain the notion that she may not have realized his reputation and once she did, she removed herself, a la Lady Gaga with R. Kelly.  When we know better, we do better.


No dice.  I have known about how awful Piers Morgan is for years and I'm in the US and not remotely associated with the entertainment or media industries.  He conducts much of his awfulness on twitter, which is exactly where Meghan expressed to him that she was "a big fan."  (She must have been familiar with his work to call herself a big fan, right?  Or when it's Meghan, do we assume she was lying - but in a totally non-phony way - because she's just so damn nice?)  

If I knew his MO, then an intelligent woman in the entertainment industry seeking to "network" with him certainly has no claim to naivete.  (Also, for the record: Lady Gaga had absolutely no excuse for working with R Kelly either.)


----------



## marthastoo

You say social climbing, I say networking.  I'm pretty sure we've all called people "friends" when they were more like acquaintances.  Like I've said before, people are going to believe the narrative they want to believe.


----------



## Flatsy

And I think people prefer the euphemism of "networking" because it implies legitimate business while the term "social climbing" is pejorative.  They were not discussing business or potential business. 

Meghan's defenders recognize that "friendship" was a guise for her to make a contact that she could leverage in the future for personal gain.  Like it or not, that's what social climbing is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Piers is acting like a scorned lover though, and is being ridiculous and way OTT in his articles about Meghan and Harry. More than likely once they got engaged he thought he had an "in". As if the BRF would allow such close proximity by a bottom-feeding "journalist" such as him who had strong ties to the phone-hacking scandal in Britain.

Bitter much?


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> And I think people prefer the euphemism of "networking" because it implies legitimate business while the term "social climbing" is pejorative.  They were not discussing business or potential business.
> 
> Meghan's defenders recognize that "friendship" was a guise for her to make a contact that she could leverage in the future for personal gain.  Like it or not, that's what social climbing is.



That is also the definition of networking. 

Networking is a process that fosters the exchange of information and ideas among individuals or groups that share a common interest. It may be for social or business purposes. Professionals connect their business network through a series of symbolic ties and contacts.

I just don’t see this super social climber. Meghan is best friends to a woman who family is old Canadian money, that friend is married to a former PM son. Meghan was photographed with work leaders before Prince Harry (is President *****, Trudeau, and the Irish PM). 

She’s had access to these big names yet she dated no name people besides Prince Harry.  If there wasn’t pictures with some of the bigger fishes I could see the social climbing angle but she dated a up and coming chef. She would have dated like Bobby Flay.

And on Piers Morgan, I can believe she didn’t know how awful he was until later. I didn’t think he was awful until I actually watched his show on CNN.


----------



## hellosunshine

Does anyone here ever read blind items? Well, I tend to read them frequently and I just came across the juiciest blind item. Do I believe this? No, but wouldn't it be absolutely wild if this was true??!



> [Blind Gossip] We’ve been telling you for several months now about the problems this actress is experiencing with the family into which she married.
> 
> We received some shocking information which may explain a lot of this… and it’s a bombshell!
> 
> The marriage of Actress and Fiery did not automatically form a tight foursome between them and Fiery’s brother and his wife, who we’ll call BIL and SIL.
> 
> Actress and SIL did not warm up to each other. SIL thinks that Actress is a very manipulative social climber. Fiery and BIL used to be extremely close, but the tension between their two wives created a rift between the brothers.
> 
> Let’s throw a couple more stressors onto the pile. Actress and Fiery are expecting a baby. And SIL recently learned that BIL couldn’t keep his zipper up around one of her friends.
> 
> Now, SIL is nobody’s fool. She did not like the way Actress tried to ingratiate herself into the family. And she did not wait around for years to marry BIL only to have him cheat on her.
> 
> So, Actress and SIL are having problems. Fiery and BIL are having problems. And BIL and SIL are having problems.
> 
> Everybody is completely stressed out. The two married couples – who should be close – are now drifting apart. Actually, they are more than drifting apart. Couple 1 and Couple 2 have basically broken up with each other. They are divvying up staff and duties and physically moving apart.
> 
> Now, you might think that getting some distance from each other will resolve the situation. Not really.
> 
> There is one significant piece of this story that is missing that explains all of the stress and all of the conflict.
> 
> It has to do with something that happened on one of the rare occasions that Couple 1 and Couple 2 were together.
> 
> All four of them were drinking, and a couple of them were smoking weed.
> 
> SIL retired early. Fiery passed out drunk.
> 
> That left Actress and her brother-in-law, BIL, alone together.
> 
> Actress and BIL hooked up.
> 
> It only happened once. But a few weeks later, Actress realized she was pregnant. Then came the tests. And the shocking truth: BIL is the biological father of Actress’ baby!
> 
> There is going to be an announcement about the situation on Monday. We don’t know if it’s an announcement about the baby or an announcement that one of the couples is divorcing. Either way, it’s going to come as a surprise to a lot of people.



Couple 1 (Actress and Fiery): Meghan and Harry

Coupler 2 (BIL and SIL): William and Kate


----------



## redney

hellosunshine said:


> Does anyone here ever read blind items? Well, I tend to read them frequently and I just came across the juiciest blind item. Do I believe this? No, but wouldn't it be absolutely wild if this was true??!
> 
> 
> 
> Couple 1 (Actress and Fiery): Meghan and Harry
> 
> Coupler 2 (BIL and SIL): William and Kate


Someone posted this before... Monday is April 1st - April Fools Day [emoji16]


----------



## hellosunshine

redney said:


> Someone posted this before... Monday is April 1st - April Fools Day [emoji16]



OMG - 

Thanks for letting me know -- like I said I always read blind items and this was one of the few that actually made me gasp out loud. I feel so silly now haha


----------



## minababe

are there any Proofs for this friendship? I don't believe anything he said.
She was maybe nice at a Party to him and responded when he wanted contact. I doubt that they ever were friends.


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> She’s had access to these big names yet she dated no name people besides Prince Harry.  If there wasn’t pictures with some of the bigger fishes I could see the social climbing angle but she dated a up and coming chef. She would have dated like Bobby Flay.


Just mentioning this since you used Bobby Flay as an example -- when Meghan lived in Toronto, she dated a very handsome, well known Canadian chef and restaurateur named Cory Vitiello.  He didn't have his own TV show, but he was a well known celebrity chef in Toronto.  They were an item for 2 years until she met Harry.

Only saying this because you mentioned Flay.  lol


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> Does anyone here ever read blind items? Well, I tend to read them frequently and I just came across the juiciest blind item. Do I believe this? No, but wouldn't it be absolutely wild if this was true??!
> 
> 
> 
> Couple 1 (Actress and Fiery): Meghan and Harry
> 
> Coupler 2 (BIL and SIL): William and Kate


Was about to say this sounds like the stuff of an April Fools joke!


----------



## krissa

Piers also followed her and a bunch of the other cast. It’s  not like she followed him and slid into his dms. 

In more positive news, the #GlobalSussexBabyShower raised a bunch of $$$ for charity. (They has no affiliation with this, just a bunch of Meghann And Harry fans)

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...kle-prince-harry-react-to-online-baby-shower/


----------



## buffym

Harry and Meghan was spotted at a Wellness Store Friday.

https://www.popsugar.com/fashion/Meghan-Markle-White-Sneakers-April-2019-45981638


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Another Twitter thread well-worth a read regarding the Tatler "hit" piece on Meghan.



And THIS one.  Read the whole thread.


----------



## hellosunshine

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Another Twitter thread well-worth a read regarding the Tatler "hit" piece on Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> And THIS one.  Read the whole thread.




Thank you for this. I think it's rather interesting that in the last few weeks, there has been a lot of reports in which the royal family leaks about Meghan may have been coming from Kate/William and their staff. Gotta wonder if perhaps Meghan's popularity is somewhat masking or overriding the to-be-heirs and they are trying (albeit unsuccessfully) to peg Meghan down a few notches...or maybe perhaps there is something else entirely going on behind the scenes. I will say that I am thankful for the many Meghan supporters...a lot of the spin about her is just incredibly unfair.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not sure it's coming from William and Kate directly, but it sure looks like their circle of friends may have taken it upon themselves to write some negative articles on Meghan. _Tatler _is read by all the toffs so it was meant for maximum exposure in that particular class of British citizen.   That's one very inter-connected circle.

Whether it's to distract from that other story currently doing the rounds about William, Kate and the Marchioness, is anyone's guess.


----------



## redney

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not sure it's coming from William and Kate directly, but it sure looks like their circle of friends may have taken it upon themselves to write some negative articles on Meghan. _Tatler _is read by all the toffs so it was meant for maximum exposure in that particular class of British citizen.   That's one very inter-connected circle.
> 
> Whether it's to distract from that other story currently doing the rounds about William, Kate and the Marchioness, is anyone's guess.


Distraction gets my vote.


----------



## hellosunshine

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not sure it's coming from William and Kate directly, but it sure looks like their circle of friends may have taken it upon themselves to write some negative articles on Meghan. _Tatler _is read by all the toffs so it was meant for maximum exposure in that particular class of British citizen.   That's one very inter-connected circle.
> 
> Whether it's to distract from that other story currently doing the rounds about William, Kate and the Marchioness, is anyone's guess.



The likelihood that this is all coming from Kate and/or her staff is rather high. It's her royal reporter "friends" and it's interesting that she's rather chummy with these same people yet she can't be bothered to intervene between these "friends" and her sister-in-law? Wild stories and accusations are being written by your friends about your sister-in-law and you've got nothing to say, eh? Weird...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

@hellosunshine I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt because this is really cr*ppy behaviour.

Definitely sounds suss though.


----------



## minababe

what i Need an update
Kate has something to do witht the negative press about meghan? that would be intense..


----------



## Fally420

lol seems funny... some say Kate has something to do with the negative press about Meghan, while on some other threads it is said that Meghan tries to upstage Kate


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Fally420 said:


> lol seems funny... some say Kate has something to do with the negative press about Meghan, while on some other threads it is said that Meghan tries to upstage Kate


And it's probably neither who is even responsible.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Sharont2305

They've now got their own Instagram account. It's @sussexroyal


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


>



Just pipped me to the post, lol, and did a better job of it. Ha ha x


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> Harry and Meghan was spotted at a Wellness Store Friday.
> 
> https://www.popsugar.com/fashion/Meghan-Markle-White-Sneakers-April-2019-45981638
> View attachment 4391480


Even her boobs didn't get big, she's one lucky woman. At this stage in her pregnancy, many women would be huge and waddling. Oh to look like that in the final months!


----------



## jcnc

She looks like she is in a good place and ready for the end 

It will be interesting to see what she chooses to wear when she introduces the new baby to the world.
That being said, it is unfortunate that new moms are expected to be so decked up and camera ready soo soon aafter birth


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Maybe she'll be able to just go out a back door and get in a car and won't have to do the stair thing like Kate? They only came out for a brief moment with Louis, waved, and went right back inside. It's of less public import when you get that far down the line. We may not see them until the christening.


----------



## daisychainz

Jayne1 said:


> Even her boobs didn't get big, she's one lucky woman. At this stage in her pregnancy, many women would be huge and waddling. Oh to look like that in the final months!


There is so much emphasis on looking good these days that many women strive to maintain a really healthy look through pregnancy so they can look amazing right after. I see heavily pregnant women at the gym all the time - they come in and do workouts. I bet Meghan was probably on some type of healthy workout schedule during her pregnancy. We know she does yoga at the very least.


----------



## hellosunshine

ccbaggirl89 said:


> And it's probably neither who is even responsible.



Please click & read this twitter thread -


----------



## bag-princess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Judging by what I've seen of her personality thus far, Meghan's child(ren) will be taking titles.


----------



## berrydiva

hellosunshine said:


> Please click & read this twitter thread -



Who is this woman on twitter with all the royal gossip? Curious on who she is and why she's being taken to be credible.


----------



## marthastoo

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Maybe she'll be able to just go out a back door and get in a car and won't have to do the stair thing like Kate? They only came out for a brief moment with Louis, waved, and went right back inside. It's of less public import when you get that far down the line. We may not see them until the christening.


Not bloody likely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

berrydiva said:


> Who is this woman on twitter with all the royal gossip? Curious on who she is and why she's being taken to be credible.



I posted that link a few pages back. She's pro Harry and Meghan - _however_ she's also a really good researcher.  If you look at all the people in the links - what she said is true.  All those people have close ties to Kate.

The other link (below) is Nicole Cliffe who is a legit writer for Slate, Vulture, Elle and The Guardian.  It's another good read.  Not taking it as 100% but ....judge for yourself.

The first tweet is the beginning of a thread.


----------



## buffym

Prince Harry on his visit to the YMCA today. He looks like he’s going to be a fun dad.


----------



## Sharont2305

So, with the birth nearly here, what do we think? Boy or Girl?
I think girl and born in the next week.


----------



## zen1965

Boy!


----------



## cafecreme15

Hoping it's a girl, but have a feeling it will be a boy.


----------



## Aimee3

Well if the old wives tale is true the. It’s definitely a boy!
Old wives tale being girls rob the mothers beauty and Meghan has looked insanely beautiful for this entire pregnancy.  No swollen legs nor ankles, doesn’t even look pregnant from the back etc


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting the YMCA in South Ealing


----------



## bag-princess

Boy


----------



## Aminamina

As taxi driver once said to 6 mnts pregnant me:"If you cant tell from behind the woman is pregnant - its a boy!"


----------



## Taimi

Aminamina said:


> As taxi driver once said to 6 mnts pregnant me:"If you cant tell from behind the woman is pregnant - its a boy!"



Well, this haven’t applied for me at all. I have a daughter and I had a huge belly, but it didn’t show from the behind at all. I’m also now pregnant, expecting most likely another baby girl, and my belly is just the same, huge and going only forward. [emoji3] I don’t believe in gender symptoms at all, at least I’ve had them just the opposite way.


----------



## Sharont2305

Taimi said:


> Well, this haven’t applied for me at all. I have a daughter and I had a huge belly, but it didn’t show from the behind at all. I’m also now pregnant, expecting most likely another baby girl, and my belly is just the same, huge and going only forward. [emoji3] I don’t believe in gender symptoms at all, at least I’ve had them just the opposite way.


Congratulations


----------



## Taimi

Sharont2305 said:


> Congratulations



Thank you! [emoji4]


----------



## minababe

they broke the world record with their instgram account. over one Million Follower in just 5 hours and it doesnt stop. they have 3.3 millions right now. crazy but totally deserved. I hope they feel the love from the People around the world

def a Baby Girl. can't wait anymore but I think it will take some more weeks. around easter or one week later would be my bet.
I think they will get birth at the Lindo Wing and we will not see them in front of the stars. it will be a more personal way, like a Hand or foot Picture maybe or some Family Picture at home.


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> it will be a more personal way, like a Hand or foot Picture maybe or some Family Picture at home.


I don't think so, I think they know how important it is for this country to join in with their joy and God knows with all the Brexit s**t going on here, we need a bit of happy news.
I think it'll be like Catherine and William did it, no matter which hospital this baby is born in.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think so, I think they know how important it is for this country to join in with their joy and God knows with all the Brexit s**t going on here, we need a bit of happy news.
> I think it'll be like Catherine and William did it, no matter which hospital this baby is born in.



I agree.  So many people look to the moment on the steps with such anticipation that i think they are wise enough to know that skipping it is somewhat selfish ... and they understand the whole "duty" thing. I also think that doing the steps photo op bought William and Kate an extended level of privacy and will for Harry and Meghan too. When George was born, getting not just the photo op but also the moment where William loaded the car seat into the car and breathed a sigh of relief that he did it right gave the public a glimpse of them as a family ... so when they then disappeared from public view for several weeks, no one thought it was a big deal. I think that Harry and Meghan will respect the tradition, share the moment  and then in return enjoy their privacy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending The Lord Mayor's Big Curry lunch in aid of three national charities: ABF The Soldiers' Charity, the Royal Navy and Royal Marines Charity, and the Royal Air Force Benevolent Fund


----------



## daisychainz

minababe said:


> they broke the world record with their instgram account. over one Million Follower in just 5 hours and it doesnt stop. they have 3.3 millions right now. crazy but totally deserved. I hope they feel the love from the People around the world
> 
> def a Baby Girl. can't wait anymore but I think it will take some more weeks. around easter or one week later would be my bet.
> I think they will get birth at the Lindo Wing and we will not see them in front of the stars. it will be a more personal way, like a Hand or foot Picture maybe or some Family Picture at home.


I don't think that will happen. Harry is similar to Andrew/Sarah in terms of being down the line and they came out with a glimpse of their babies after birth. They'll do the photo op and then maybe you'll get a darling little hand or toe photo in a few weeks on their new instagram. I am also voting it'll be a girl. I think her friends might have carried blue into the shower to throw people off.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry attending The Lord Mayor's Big Curry lunch in aid of three national charities: ABF The Soldiers' Charity, the Royal Navy and Royal Marines Charity, and the Royal Air Force Benevolent Fund
> 
> View attachment 4393982
> View attachment 4393985
> View attachment 4393984
> View attachment 4393983


Maybe he'll take some curry home for his wife, that's known to start labour, ha ha


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry with Prince William and Prince Charles attending the Global Premiere of David Attenborough's Netflix series "Our Planet"


----------



## queennadine

I think their Insta account was prepping for their controlled release of baby pics.

No clue on boy or girl...but if I had to just guess, boy! 

Also, all of those British names in the various circles made my head spin


----------



## PatsyCline

I’m guessing one name you can cross off the list will be Thomas.


----------



## buffym

An picture of Meghan and Harry pre engagement posted on their Instagram account in conjunction with Harry’s engagement tonight. Most think it is from Meghan’s b day trip in 2017.


----------



## HauteMama

^ It's refreshing to see wealthy and well-known people tagging magnificent wild animals instead of playing pay to slay.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> So, with the birth nearly here, what do we think? Boy or Girl?
> I think girl and born in the next week.


Girl .  Maybe twins.


----------



## chowlover2

I hope it's twins as well, but a boy & a  girl!


----------



## Addicted to bags

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry visiting the YMCA in South Ealing



That was really sweet especially with the baby girl reacting to Harry. And I my guess is girl because of the way he was drawn to the baby girl.


----------



## arnott

Sharont2305 said:


> So, with the birth nearly here, what do we think? Boy or Girl?
> I think girl and born in the next week.



Boy!               I imagine with curly black hair.


----------



## arnott

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry visiting the YMCA in South Ealing




Didn't realize he was going bald until he squatted down in front of that baby!


----------



## Morgan R

arnott said:


> Didn't realize he was going bald until he squatted down in front of that baby!



Probably didn't notice because Harry's hair loss hasn't been rapid like William's hair loss has been but Harry's hair loss seems to be more like Charles' hair loss has been. Charles has a bald spot in the back of his head but still has a lot of hair in the front. William ended up losing his hair rapidly like how his uncle Prince Edward did. Edward and William both started to lose their hair in their early 20s. Charles and Harry didn't start to lose their hair/their hair didn't start to thin until they were nearly 30.


----------



## Morgan R

Harry and Meghan have moved into Frogmore Cottage: https://www.itv.com/news/2019-04-04/harry-and-meghan-have-moved-to-windsor-in-time-for-the-baby/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## afsweet

the grounds there look so pretty! really wonderful and private for their family.


----------



## A1aGypsy

arnott said:


> Didn't realize he was going bald until he squatted down in front of that baby!



I was surprised at how obvious it was in the fireworks pic. Poor guy. Nothing he can do about it.


----------



## arnott

A1aGypsy said:


> I was surprised at how obvious it was in the fireworks pic. Poor guy. Nothing he can do about it.



What fireworks pic?


----------



## gelbergirl

Anyone know if she is on official maternity leave yet??  or is it un-official?


----------



## stephci

https://www.brides.com/story/inside...-harry-babymoon?mbid=social_instagram_stories


----------



## A1aGypsy

arnott said:


> What fireworks pic?




The wedding one:


----------



## krissa

Serena Williams may have let it slip that baby Sussex is a girl. 

https://people.com/royals/serena-williams-sent-diapers-meghan-markle/


----------



## FreeSpirit71

^I thought they weren't going to find out.


----------



## bag-princess

krissa said:


> Serena Williams may have let it slip that baby Sussex is a girl.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/serena-williams-sent-diapers-meghan-markle/




I saw this yesterday and don’t get why everyone assumes she’s talking about Meghan - as if that’s her only friend in the world.


----------



## hellosunshine

H&M's instagram account is such a gem. I've been rather busy the last few days but this evening I decided to go onto their instagram and noticed a photo that I have personally never seen of H&M. I believe this is a newly released photo?




I've been reading that this photo was taken in Botswana on Meghan's 36th birthday trip? It's interesting that the British tabloids and a lot of royal reporters want to paint Meghan as the woman who is throwing a hissy fit tantrum over diamonds stolen from past colonies when in reality Meghan was likely excited and happy to spend her birthday trip tagging elephants in a tanktop, cargo pants, and working boots. Does this sound like the "diva" that royal reporters talk about? Honestly, how many artistocrats do we know of that get their hands dirty for a good cause like this? How many actually get out of their comfort zones outside of shaking hands and making pleasantries? How many are so physically hands on like this? 

Anyways, the individual instagram accounts were a good idea. I'm hoping that on their anniversary they share some other never-before-seen photos with us.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan has thus far worn 80 different outfits during her pregnancy - (someone has kindly documented them all) --


----------



## DeMonica

^^^Considering that you are pregnant for 36-40 weeks and she had a lot of public engagements in the last nine months, it's not that bad. Was she supposed to run around naked?


----------



## Aimee3

DeMonica said:


> ^^^Considering that you are pregnant for 36-40 weeks and she had a lot of public engagements in the last nine months, it's not that bad. Was she supposed to run around naked?



And Lo and behold can you imagine the criticism she would have gotten if she had run around looking and dressing badly while being a representative of the BRF?


----------



## Bentley1

I think the point is she can recycle outfits right ? Lol


----------



## Cocoabean

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan has thus far worn 80 different outfits during her pregnancy - (someone has kindly documented them all) --
> 
> View attachment 4397579
> View attachment 4397580
> View attachment 4397581
> View attachment 4397586
> View attachment 4397587
> View attachment 4397588
> View attachment 4397589
> View attachment 4397590



I like her casual looks the best. She just radiates in them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

I like that she's worn a wide variety of outfits. On the whole, I'm not a huge fan of her style but she's knocked some of her looks out of the park!
I'm excited to find out whether the baby is a boy or girl and what they'll name him/her.


----------



## DeMonica

Bentley1 said:


> I think the point is she can recycle outfits right ? Lol


She has already done a bit of recycling as someone had posted pics about it earlier in this thread. She can definitely wear those outfits again which she wore during the first trimester. It's definitely too early to talk about it, but they might want more babies than one, so she might be able to reuse some of the maternity dresses, too.


----------



## lulilu

She was pregnant at Eugenie's wedding but I don't think I see that coat/dress.  I think she may have worn the coat on more than one occasion.


----------



## m_ichele

DeMonica said:


> ^^^Considering that you are pregnant for 36-40 weeks and she had a lot of public engagements in the last nine months, it's not that bad. Was she supposed to run around naked?



I know right? Even though she isn’t full term yet, thats basically only 2 outfits a week. I don’t see the big deal with 80 outfits. She’s a public figure with a lot of public commitments, of course she’s going to wear different outfits.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Interesting to see all those pics together. I notice a complete simplicity in every one, in terms of jewelry and accessories she seems very minimal.


----------



## ChanelFan29

This is interesting: 
The tax headache facing Meghan and the royal baby https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/08/uk/meghan-harry-royal-baby-us-tax-intl-gbr/index.html


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^ I have been wondering how they’re going to deal with an American in the line of succession. Seems like something you really don’t want. I’m sure there are all other kinds of problems associated with it.


----------



## hellosunshine

DeMonica said:


> ^^^Considering that you are pregnant for 36-40 weeks and she had a lot of public engagements in the last nine months, it's not that bad. Was she supposed to run around naked?



Oh no, the person who did this collage is a Meghan fan..as am I. It was done to commerate her style throughout her pregnancy. Sorry I was misunderstood.


----------



## minababe

I've read that meghan and Harry had a romantic Weekend. a Baby moon the press called it. so sweet


----------



## buffym

Bentley1 said:


> I think the point is she can recycle outfits right ? Lol



She has recycled. The pictures show that for example the white coat was worn pre wedding and she’s worn it twice out of the pictures posted so three rewears. She’s worn other pre pregnancy clothes the navy cape dress and the dress she wore for Christmas lunch, she wore it to GMA fashion segment. The pleated skirt and she wore it as a dress. 

She rewears but she styles it differently.


----------



## LittleStar88

ChanelFan29 said:


> This is interesting:
> The tax headache facing Meghan and the royal baby https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/08/uk/meghan-harry-royal-baby-us-tax-intl-gbr/index.html



I have to assume that they figured this one out before they even got married.


----------



## daisychainz

I think recycling outfits is great. I am pretty sure Kate Middleton was the first person I paid attention to who reused her outfits. They have favorite pieces, just like us. I think if they reuse an outfit they probably feel super comfy in that type of style and it's a favorite of theirs.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/style/royal-baby-meghan-markle.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

This article is such a funny read, biting about the ridiculousness of it all without being rude. I recommend  And look what happens to it when you click #25


----------



## berrydiva

buffym said:


> She has recycled. The pictures show that for example the white coat was worn pre wedding and she’s worn it twice out of the pictures posted so three rewears. She’s worn other pre pregnancy clothes the navy cape dress and the dress she wore for Christmas lunch, she wore it to GMA fashion segment. The pleated skirt and she wore it as a dress.
> 
> She rewears but she styles it differently.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4398892
> View attachment 4398893
> View attachment 4398894
> View attachment 4398895
> View attachment 4398896
> View attachment 4398897
> View attachment 4398898


I don't get how many times it has to be proven that she recycles outfits.  I feel like someone has to keep posting proof every few pages.  Lol. Is she really that problematic for people?


----------



## rose60610

I'd think she's worn far more outfits, being that royals undergo wardrobe changes sometimes several times a day for the different events they attend on any given day.  Given her status, event schedule, and no shortage of RF finances I wouldn't care if she wore a thousand different outfits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

From what I've read today, Meghan is hoping to have a home birth.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duke of Sussex has today announced a partnership with Oprah Winfrey, as co-creators and executive producers of a forthcoming mental health documentary series for Apple. The multi-part documentary series will focus on both mental illness and mental wellness.
Harry on partnership with Oprah "Our hope is that this series will be positive, enlightening and inclusive – sharing global stories of unparalleled human spirit fighting back from the darkest places, and the opportunity for us to understand ourselves and those around us better."


----------



## anitalilac

bellebellebelle19 said:


> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/style/royal-baby-meghan-markle.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
> 
> This article is such a funny read, biting about the ridiculousness of it all without being rude. I recommend  And look what happens to it when you click #25


----------



## chowlover2

I jus heard Meghan wants a female OB/GYN to deliver Baby Sussex.


----------



## sdkitty

chowlover2 said:


> I jus heard Meghan wants a female OB/GYN to deliver Baby Sussex.



can't blame her for that


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duke of Sussex has today announced a partnership with Oprah Winfrey, as co-creators and executive producers of a forthcoming mental health documentary series for Apple. The multi-part documentary series will focus on both mental illness and mental wellness.
> Harry on partnership with Oprah "Our hope is that this series will be positive, enlightening and inclusive – sharing global stories of unparalleled human spirit fighting back from the darkest places, and the opportunity for us to understand ourselves and those around us better."


I'm not quite sure what to think of this .. I think that it would have been better had they selected someone less public than Oprah, and while I applaud the thought behind this, I'm just afraid that Oprah will exploit this relationship (_sorry - not an Oprah fan, know some folks that used to work for her and behind the scenes, she is not such a NICE person_).  So far, from what I've read, the British press is not so keen on Oprah either.


----------



## CeeJay

Should have also said, should the series be just about "understanding" mental illness, as one who had to deal with it first hand (_my mother was institutionalized when I was a youngster and pretty much my entire life_), I would rather that they focus on treatments and getting these folks well.  Pay that $$$ forward instead of paying it to Oprah Winfrey .. just my opinion.


----------



## daisychainz

I have often wondered if Harry or Diana suffer(ed) from a form of mental illness. He has mentioned suffering from depression, and the two brothers and KM being so involved with mental illness and its awareness shows a personal connection. Diana had an eating disorder and depression, so perhaps there is something there. Anyway, I am not a fan of Oprah either but enough people like her that she can bring more awareness. People wander around with their issues and don't even get to the point of treatment. We need awareness and acceptance and to lose the stigma that is attached to mental illness so more people will seek help. I love that they support this cause so much.


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> I have often wondered if Harry or Diana suffer(ed) from a form of mental illness. He has mentioned suffering from depression, and the two brothers and KM being so involved with mental illness and its awareness shows a personal connection. Diana had an eating disorder and depression, so perhaps there is something there. Anyway, I am not a fan of Oprah either but enough people like her that she can bring more awareness. People wander around with their issues and don't even get to the point of treatment. We need awareness and acceptance and to lose the stigma that is attached to mental illness so more people will seek help. I love that they support this cause so much.



THIS! I am all for anyone who wants to do this. It is so critical. I would be interested in watching this since Oprah typically does a good job with her topics...


----------



## krissa

CeeJay said:


> I'm not quite sure what to think of this .. I think that it would have been better had they selected someone less public than Oprah, and while I applaud the thought behind this, I'm just afraid that Oprah will exploit this relationship (_sorry - not an Oprah fan, know some folks that used to work for her and behind the scenes, she is not such a NICE person_).  So far, from what I've read, the British press is not so keen on Oprah either.



That’s fine to not like Oprah, but Oprah has a huge audience. The goal is to assist with mental health, and if this helps reach a larger audience so be it. I also heard they are accepting a donation to charity in lieu of a fee/compensation. I’m sure there were strict parameters in place so they aren’t exploited. 

Good for them. Consistently walking the walk with their projects.


----------



## BagsNBaguettes

daisychainz said:


> I have often wondered if Harry or Diana suffer(ed) from a form of mental illness. He has mentioned suffering from depression, and the two brothers and KM being so involved with mental illness and its awareness shows a personal connection. Diana had an eating disorder and depression, so perhaps there is something there. Anyway, I am not a fan of Oprah either but enough people like her that she can bring more awareness. People wander around with their issues and don't even get to the point of treatment. We need awareness and acceptance and to lose the stigma that is attached to mental illness so more people will seek help. I love that they support this cause so much.




It's been remarked by many that were around Diana that she exhibited the hallmarks of a Borderline personality- which explains much of her behaviors, especially later in life.


----------



## Morgan R

daisychainz said:


> I have often wondered if Harry or Diana suffer(ed) from a form of mental illness. He has mentioned suffering from depression, and the two brothers and KM being so involved with mental illness and its awareness shows a personal connection. Diana had an eating disorder and depression, so perhaps there is something there. Anyway, I am not a fan of Oprah either but enough people like her that she can bring more awareness. People wander around with their issues and don't even get to the point of treatment. We need awareness and acceptance and to lose the stigma that is attached to mental illness so more people will seek help. I love that they support this cause so much.



Harry has mentioned suffering from anxiety and he has also said he had come close to having breakdowns (nervous breakdowns). In 2017, Harry talked about how he acted out when he was younger was a way to avoid thinking about his mother and mentioned that since he hadn't properly dealt with her death he had come close to breakdowns, developed anxiety, and battled “flight or fight” reactions (which can lead to panic attacks). He said he only began to seek counseling starting when he was 28 for his mental health issues that he developed from not properly dealing with Diana's death.

Both audio and a summary of the interview where Harry talks about his mental health is included here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...counselling-death-mother-led-two-years-total/.


----------



## Morgan R

Buckingham Palace have released a statement ahead of the arrival of Harry and Meghan's baby


----------



## Morgan R

Additional news courtesy of royal reporters who received a more detail briefing than the statement released. Media will be told when Meghan has gone into labour and subsequently when the baby has been born. But the photocall won't be the traditional hospital photocall. Harry and Meghan will take part in brief photocall with the Press Association with their baby in the days after the birth within the grounds of Windsor Castle.


Worth noting that some royal reporters also believe that Harry and Meghan could very likely share photos of their own on the Sussex Royal Instagram account which likely is why the split households happened when it did and then subsequently the opening of the Sussex Royal Instagram was opened when it was.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Morgan R said:


> Additional news courtesy of royal reporters who received a more detail briefing than the statement released. Media will be told when Meghan has gone into labour and subsequently when the baby has been born. But the photocall won't be the traditional hospital photocall. Harry and Meghan will take part in brief photocall with the Press Association with their baby in the days after the birth within the grounds of Windsor Castle.
> 
> Worth noting that the royal reporters also believe that Harry and Meghan could very likely share photos of their own on the Sussex Royal Instagram account which likely is why the split households then subsequently the opening of the Sussex Royal Instagram was opened when it was.


Sounds like a good compromise to break with tradition but also respect the public's desire to celebrate with them!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Buckingham Palace have released a statement ahead of the arrival of Harry and Meghan's baby
> 
> View attachment 4400553


Perfect, and I don't blame them.


----------



## sdkitty

BagsNBaguettes said:


> It's been remarked by many that were around Diana that she exhibited the hallmarks of a Borderline personality- which explains much of her behaviors, especially later in life.


I don't dispute that mental illness can have biological causes but in Harry's case, he had to have been so traumatized.  Having his mother die at a young age and then the huge spectacle around the death.  He has had a privileged life of course but also a very different experience from most of us.  So depression would be understandable.  Hope he will be happy now.


----------



## sdkitty

chowlover2 said:


> I jus heard Meghan wants a female OB/GYN to deliver Baby Sussex.


I used to work for a medical group and there was at trend of women wanting women doctors in general, not just for OB/GYN.  So in this way, Meghan is being very American


----------



## daisychainz

Could she have already had the baby and they're hiding that until they're ready?


----------



## bag-princess

CeeJay said:


> I'm not quite sure what to think of this .. I think that it would have been better had they selected someone less public than Oprah, and while I applaud the thought behind this, I'm just afraid that Oprah will exploit this relationship (_sorry - not an Oprah fan, know some folks that used to work for her and behind the scenes, she is not such a NICE person_).  So far, from what I've read, the British press is not so keen on Oprah either.




Oh boy! 




krissa said:


> That’s fine to not like Oprah, but Oprah has a huge audience. The goal is to assist with mental health, and if this helps reach a larger audience so be it. I also heard they are accepting a donation to charity in lieu of a fee/compensation. I’m sure there were strict parameters in place so they aren’t exploited.
> 
> Good for them. Consistently walking the walk with their projects.



I agree!  And having seen them together in the past Harry obviously likes/respects her and what she can bring to this project.


----------



## bag-princess

daisychainz said:


> Could she have already had the baby and they're hiding that until they're ready?



Anything is possible!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> Oh boy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree!  And having seen them together in the past Harry obviously likes/respects her and what she can bring to this project.


I guess you can always find someone who has something negative to say about anyone.  I was sorry to hear that someone said Oprah wasn't so nice to her staff.....I like her.  Not sure what to think about that.


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> I guess you can always find someone who has something negative to say about anyone.  I was sorry to hear that someone said Oprah wasn't so nice to her staff.....I like her.  Not sure what to think about that.



I don’t pay any attention to it.   Like you said - You’re going to always have someone who has nothing nice to say and I don’t put much stock into “I know someone....” info.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> I don’t pay any attention to it.   Like you said - You’re going to always have someone who has nothing nice to say and I don’t put much stock into “I know someone....” info.


right
although sometimes I'll hear something that sounds credible and it sticks in my mind.....influences me.  I heard someone on the radio - Andy Cohen or someone on his show - say that lupita Nyong'o was cold or rude to them.  Now when I see her, I don't see a sweet person


----------



## A1aGypsy

It’s an interesting choice in a time when the monarchy is facing some serious questions about their value. 

I wonder what the British people, especially the older ones think about this.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the opening of Barking & Dagenham's Future Youth Zone


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> I used to work for a medical group and there was at trend of women wanting women doctors in general, not just for OB/GYN.  So in this way, Meghan is being very American



There was an article not long ago (can’t recall where I read it) that said women doctors are more likely to LISTEN to the patient.  Nearly all my doctors are female.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry attending the opening of Barking & Dagenham's Future Youth Zone
> 
> View attachment 4400748
> View attachment 4400780
> View attachment 4400786
> 
> View attachment 4400774
> View attachment 4400787
> View attachment 4400746
> View attachment 4400747
> 
> View attachment 4400762
> View attachment 4400773
> View attachment 4400772


It doesn't look like Harry has that "up all night new dad tired look" so I think we can safely say that baby Sussex hasn't made an appearance yet, lol


----------



## minababe

Ha I knew it 
Like i said no Pictures at the steps and a Picture on Instagram

Of Course we want to see the Baby as fast as possible but I love that they break with old traditions and doing things their way,

Would love to see some beautiful Pictures of the sussexx Family at their home or in the garden. the Pictures will be so much more beautiful than in front of the Hospital.
I mean i like the Pictures of William and kate at the lindo wing of course but did we see a lot of the babies there? no. and the next time we saw the Cambridges Kids  were the christenings of each.

So some pictures a bit later but more relaxed and at home will be so much more pretty and enjoyable.
I'm thinking already about the Motives.
I would love to see Harry and his daughter , Meghan holding the Baby and Harry is smiling at both while he has his arm around her and a third Picture all looking to the camera and both dogs are with them. haha
that would be great


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> There was an article not long ago (can’t recall where I read it) that said women doctors are more likely to LISTEN to the patient.  Nearly all my doctors are female.


So are mine, but it's just a coincidence in my case because I just like to have good ones whichever sex they are. If I was Meghan I'd just go for the best but I'm sure, there are many great female OB/GYNs . Since they can afford it, they can even turn Frogmore Cottage a mini hospital, I'm sure it won't be like someone is giving birth in a council flat.
I'm not surprised that they want a little privacy and I support the decision to show the baby when they are ready, in a few days time. Honestly, Kate's pics in front of the clinic with perfect hairdo and glamorousmake-up few hours after the birth are sending the wrong message anyway. I mean how many women would look like that right after labour without a hair and makeup team?
I wish Harry luck with his new project, but involving Oprah it feels just a bit too HW.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## StylishMD

Aimee3 said:


> There was an article not long ago (can’t recall where I read it) that said women doctors are more likely to LISTEN to the patient.  Nearly all my doctors are female.


@aimee good to hear that


----------



## pixiejenna

sdkitty said:


> I used to work for a medical group and there was at trend of women wanting women doctors in general, not just for OB/GYN.  So in this way, Meghan is being very American


I'm not surprised. For me personally I've had horrible experiences with male doctors. Now I only use female doctors and have much better experiences. As a kid all of my doctors were male because you go to whoever your parents take you too, and every one of them was awful. Once I was able to pick my own doctor I chose a female based on my past experiences. 

All of the male doctors basically dismissed everything I said. I recall once as a kid my GP gave me a 5 minute lecture about little kids wasting his time because they don't want to go to school, turns out I had strep. And my parents are old school they didn't take me to the doctor unless it's really bad. Told a obgyn I  thought I  had pcos, had all the symptoms weight gain, irregular periods, extra facial hair growth, extreme pain on my left side. The only thing he said he could do was exploratory surgery and put me on the pill. He also told me that the weight gain is because I must be sneaking extra food and I should stop it.


----------



## threadbender

I have had wonderful luck with both male and female physicians. The only one I really butted heads with was a female OB/GYN when I was pregnant. She refused to consider that my HBP could cause issues. Fortunately, I had a second doctor, a man, who prepared me for the possibilities. I ended up having to go on early leave due to my blood pressure. He had me on meds to regulate it. She told me to relax and stop worrying so much. She insisted it was white coat syndrome and that I was going to have a natural birth no matter what. Thank God, I was at an appointment with the male doctor and he determined my son was in distress. A quick amnio and I was in surgery that evening. He was the kindest man I could have been working with. 2 weeks early and we both were fine. The woman doctor had little empathy and I felt I was bothering her.
All I am trying to say is that it is the person, not the gender, that I pay attention to. My previous PCP was a woman and amazing. She took a position at the VA and I changed to the male physician I have now. He is terrific.
I may be the exception to the rule.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I honestly didn’t realize that all my doctors were women until I was reading this. [emoji23]


----------



## DeMonica

carlpsmom said:


> *I have had wonderful luck with both male and female physicians. *The only one I really butted heads with was a female OB/GYN when I was pregnant. She refused to consider that my HBP could cause issues. Fortunately, I had a second doctor, a man, who prepared me for the possibilities. I ended up having to go on early leave due to my blood pressure. He had me on meds to regulate it. She told me to relax and stop worrying so much. She insisted it was white coat syndrome and that I was going to have a natural birth no matter what. Thank God, I was at an appointment with the male doctor and he determined my son was in distress. A quick amnio and I was in surgery that evening. He was the kindest man I could have been working with. 2 weeks early and we both were fine. The woman doctor had little empathy and I felt I was bothering her.
> *All I am trying to say is that it is the person, not the gender, that I pay attention to. *My previous PCP was a woman and amazing. She took a position at the VA and I changed to the male physician I have now. He is terrific.
> I may be the exception to the rule.


It's a bit OT, but you are not an exception. I moved around a lot so I had to change physicians a lot, so I have vast experience. Knowledge and empathy, plus a little experience: these are the things what I look for when selecting my doctor. I met a great female OB/GYN but now I have a male one whom I have a good reason to trust.
 Meghan seems to have a relatively easy pregnancy. Otherwise she wouldn't have been able to participate in so many events and travel that much. I'm sure that she's been examined regularly by her doctor, so she probably had selected her OB/GYN already in the beginning of her pregnancy.


----------



## threadbender

DeMonica said:


> It's a bit OT, but you are not an exception. I moved around a lot so I had to change physicians a lot, so I have vast experience. Knowledge and empathy, plus a little experience: these are the things what I look for when selecting my doctor. I met a great female OB/GYN but now I have a male one whom I have a good reason to trust.
> Meghan seems to have a relatively easy pregnancy. Otherwise she wouldn't have been able to participate in so many events and travel that much. I'm sure that she's been examined regularly by her doctor, so she probably had selected her OB/GYN already in the beginning of her pregnancy.


I was afraid I might be OT and almost deleted my post. Maybe I should have.
I am pleased that Meghan has appeared to have an easy pregnancy. With the stress involved in her position, it would have been horrible to have been having physical issues, as well.
I am not a big Meghan fan but truly wish her and Harry and their little one the very best. I imagine their baby will be just beautiful. They seem to be very happy and that is wonderful. I like seeing positivity in this crazy world!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I guess you can always find someone who has something negative to say about anyone.  I was sorry to hear that someone said Oprah wasn't so nice to her staff.....I like her.  Not sure what to think about that.


I have 3 friends that worked for Oprah at different times; one was in NYC and worked on the 'O' Magazine and was in the photography department.  She was a huge fan of Oprah's, so she was very surprised when she worked there and saw some of behavior that was exhibited by Oprah.  Her boss got fired and then Oprah went into the studio and told them that they all were fired because she just didn't want to deal with their group anymore. 

Second friend worked on Oprah's show (quite a few years back) and had similar comments to that of my NYC friend, that she was not very supportive of the staff and IF she felt you had done something wrong, would call you right out in front of everyone else regardless of who was there.  Given Oprah's TV personality of being so caring to all, it came as quite a shock to many who worked with her on her show. 

Third was the infamous Hermes 'situation' that occurred years back.  One of my French colleague's sister worked at that Hermes boutique and they were quite upset when they read the newspapers the next day.  As she explained to me (and I know LV does the same), there was an Invitation Only soiree going on that evening and since neither Oprah or Gayle likely knew about it, they assumed that they would be let in.  Alas, the Security personnel informed them that it was Invitation only and that they would not let them in.  Of course, we all heard Oprah's side of the story .. just sayin'. 

I do hope though that through this effort, all parties can shed more light on mental illness such that more folks can get the appropriate treatment to make them well.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

I actually think this is going to be more of a media circus. They will announce when she’s in labor, line the long walk for 3 days with photographers while they’ll get pics of her friends and family arriving/leaving while waiting for them to come out for a photo. I think Lindo would be more private actually. The only thing they are really keeping private is the doctors and the BP easel which only lists time of birth.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m sure they won’t announce that she is in labour.  And the pictures are going to be at Windsor Castle away from their residence at a later point.

“They will share the news once they have had the opportunity to celebrate privately as a family”


----------



## CentralTimeZone

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m sure they won’t announce that she is in labour.  And the pictures are going to be at Windsor Castle away from their residence at a later point.
> 
> “They will share the news once they have had the opportunity to celebrate privately as a family”



Saw this on Twitter, a German media outlet published the whole correspondence that gives more info.


----------



## Murphy47

sdkitty said:


> I guess you can always find someone who has something negative to say about anyone.  I was sorry to hear that someone said Oprah wasn't so nice to her staff.....I like her.  Not sure what to think about that.



No CEO is ever described as “nice”. I’m sure Oprah is no different.


----------



## berrydiva

Oprah is a CEO first and foremost, a TV personality second.


----------



## zen1965

Disrespectful behaviour is never justified regardless of position.


----------



## buffym

hollieplus2 said:


> I actually think this is going to be more of a media circus. They will announce when she’s in labor, line the long walk for 3 days with photographers while they’ll get pics of her friends and family arriving/leaving while waiting for them to come out for a photo. I think Lindo would be more private actually. The only thing they are really keeping private is the doctors and the BP easel which only lists time of birth.



The Sussex aren’t the first royals to deviate, BP has a blue print from the Wessex children. They did the same thing release a picture with Louise and had a photo call later with James.



hollieplus2 said:


> Saw this on Twitter, a German media outlet published the whole correspondence that gives more info.




It doesn’t say they will release the hospital name. The press pen is for the controlled environment at Windsor days later after the birth.

I think it’s wise. The critics keep moaning that Meghan is attention seeking and how this child isn’t important, Meghan and Harry are step back from the crazy and enjoying the birth of their child which probably will not be titled a Prince/Princess and is number 7 in line.


----------



## minababe

I still hope for a title prince or princess


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CentralTimeZone

buffym said:


> The Sussex aren’t the first royals to deviate, BP has a blue print from the Wessex children. They did the same thing release a picture with Louise and had a photo call later with James.
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn’t say they will release the hospital name. The press pen is for the controlled environment at Windsor days later after the birth.
> 
> I think it’s wise. The critics keep moaning that Meghan is attention seeking and how this child isn’t important, Meghan and Harry are step back from the crazy and enjoying the birth of their child which probably will not be titled a Prince/Princess and is number 7 in line.
> View attachment 4401321



The Wessex’s aren’t HRH though so I think it’s different. Harry and Meghan are funded by the taxpayers. I also don’t believe she wants privacy while setting up a media circus is her backyard. Meghan is a lot of things but she’s never been one to shy away from ANY spotlight.


----------



## buffym

The Wessex is a HRH.

Meghan isn’t shying for the publicity. Harry and her are creating a controlled zone over their child. 

It is interesting that they are criticized for wanting a safe space for the child. Yes, they are tax funded so is his brother yet when was the last time the public saw the Cambridge kids. 

To me Harry is following suit with his brother, they saw what happened to their mother and their child hood and are trying to avoid that.


----------



## LittleStar88

As much as the public believes they own Harry and Meghan (and perhaps to an extent they do as taxes go to fund their roles), they do deserve a modicum of privacy for this life event. It is a huge life change, and Meghan deserves a little time to recover and adjust. And savor this moment alone as a new family. 

Like someone else said - I am glad they are doing it this way. I always felt bad for Kate having to go through labor then get all dolled up and be put out for public consumption to present the baby shortly after. I understand that this is her role as being in line for the throne, but it had to suck.

I am looking forward to photos of the baby as much as everyone else, but we have waited this long to see him/her, we can all wait a few more days after the birth... Let the woman recover from childbirth and bond with her child for a few days without the world watching.


----------



## skarsbabe

I'm sorry, but who are the people in the pic above with the 100 and thumbs up??


----------



## Morgan R

skarsbabe said:


> I'm sorry, but who are the people in the pic above with the 100 and thumbs up??



Prince Edward (Prince Harry's Uncle/The youngest of Queen Elizabeth II's four children) and his wife Sophie


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> right
> although sometimes I'll hear something that sounds credible and it sticks in my mind.....influences me.  I heard someone on the radio - Andy Cohen or someone on his show - say that *lupita Nyong'o was cold or rude to them*.  Now when I see her, I don't see a sweet person



I know this to be true first hand.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> I know this to be true first hand.


you mean Lupita?


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> you mean Lupita?


Sadly, yes.


----------



## bag-princess

buffym said:


> The Wessex is a HRH.
> 
> Meghan isn’t shying for the publicity. Harry and her are creating a controlled zone over their child.
> 
> It is interesting that they are criticized for wanting a safe space for the child. Yes, they are tax funded so is his brother yet when was the last time the public saw the Cambridge kids.
> 
> To me Harry is following suit with his brother, they saw what happened to their mother and their child hood and are trying to avoid that.





LittleStar88 said:


> As much as the public believes they own Harry and Meghan (and perhaps to an extent they do as taxes go to fund their roles), they do deserve a modicum of privacy for this life event. It is a huge life change, and Meghan deserves a little time to recover and adjust. And savor this moment alone as a new family.
> 
> Like someone else said - I am glad they are doing it this way. I always felt bad for Kate having to go through labor then get all dolled up and be put out for public consumption to present the baby shortly after. I understand that this is her role as being in line for the throne, but it had to suck.
> 
> I am looking forward to photos of the baby as much as everyone else, but we have waited this long to see him/her, we can all wait a few more days after the birth... Let the woman recover from childbirth and bond with her child for a few days without the world watching.





ITA with both of you!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Tivo said:


> Sadly, yes.


OT, but that's sad. She seems so gracious and intelligent in interviews.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> I know this to be true first hand.


too bad


----------



## anitalilac

buffym said:


> The Wessex is a HRH.
> 
> Meghan isn’t shying for the publicity. Harry and her are creating a controlled zone over their child.
> 
> It is interesting that they are criticized for wanting a safe space for the child. Yes, they are tax funded so is his brother yet when was the last time the public saw the Cambridge kids.
> 
> To me Harry is following suit with his brother, they saw what happened to their mother and their child hood and are trying to avoid that.





LittleStar88 said:


> As much as the public believes they own Harry and Meghan (and perhaps to an extent they do as taxes go to fund their roles), they do deserve a modicum of privacy for this life event. It is a huge life change, and Meghan deserves a little time to recover and adjust. And savor this moment alone as a new family.
> 
> Like someone else said - I am glad they are doing it this way. I always felt bad for Kate having to go through labor then get all dolled up and be put out for public consumption to present the baby shortly after. I understand that this is her role as being in line for the throne, but it had to suck.
> 
> I am looking forward to photos of the baby as much as everyone else, but we have waited this long to see him/her, we can all wait a few more days after the birth... Let the woman recover from childbirth and bond with her child for a few days without the world watching.



I agree, as a new mother just delivering  baby, we need the privacy and rest to bond with a newborn ,  thirsty celebrity ,  attention whore or not..
I see Meghan as a woman that is excited to be a mother and anxiously awaiting to meet her baby. She deserves everything she needs at the moment. Not a thirsty celebrity like people assume she is .


----------



## maryg1

IMO the decision to keep the baby away from the media won’t give them more privacy, on the contrary they will have more paparazzi around them trying to get a picture to sell.
And I’m pretty sure she knows the rules of this game.


----------



## CeeJay

Murphy47 said:


> No CEO is ever described as “nice”. I’m sure Oprah is no different.


100% agree; having worked with quite a few while at Bain, most at the top have gotten there because they are not always the "nicest" people (exception is Mitt Romney), but being at the top doesn't mean that is allows them to treat people horribly .. just sayin'!


----------



## LittleStar88

Once you get to VP and above, the politics change you. I see it at work. These VP’s make a buttload of money (the bonuses alone will make your jaw drop), so to protect their income and position you have to play the politics game. It tends to bring out the worst in most and I’ve seen folks go from pretty cool and approachable to jerk very quickly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

They aren’t keeping the baby from the media. They said they would show the baby,  but just not they day after it is born. 

Am I missing the statement where they said no one gets to see the baby.

How are they criticized for creating a safe environment for their child when they are number six and seven in line yet, number three through five in line are allowed to live quietly with very little or no pap pictures and their parents are applauded for this.


----------



## maryg1

As far as I understand, only 1 photographer will be allowed for the photoshoot, is it right?


----------



## buffym

The statement is posted. Harry and Meghan aren’t doing anything groundbreaking.

The UK royals like Anne, Charles, Andrew took pictures in front of the hospital, release another image two weeks later, and then pictures at the private christening with 1 photographer.

Harry is following his uncle, Edward  with 1 photographer at Windsor. Which makes since in a slimed down monarch. Harry children will probably not receive tax funds except for security and that will probably be cut off at the age of eighteen just like Princess Beatrice and Eugenie.


----------



## gelbergirl

I really want to see them come out of the hospital.  Just say'n.


----------



## myown

buffym said:


> The Wessex is a HRH.
> 
> Meghan isn’t shying for the publicity. Harry and her are creating a controlled zone over their child.
> 
> It is interesting that they are criticized for wanting a safe space for the child. Yes, they are tax funded so is his brother yet when was the last time the public saw the Cambridge kids.
> 
> To me Harry is following suit with his brother, they saw what happened to their mother and their child hood and are trying to avoid that.


Louis just turned one and we have only seen like 3 pictures of him.

first people complain Meghan is doing a public stunt, now she keeps things private and that's wrong again.

edit: Louis turns one next week


----------



## Sharont2305

Louis isn't one till next week and no doubt photos will be released to mark it


----------



## myown

yes, I edited my post. but doesn't change the fact that we hardly ever see anything from Louis and people complain that H&M chose to keep the first moments to themself, too.


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> yes, I edited my post. but doesn't change the fact that we hardly ever see anything from Louis and people complain that H&M chose to keep the first moments to themself, too.


Exactly, I think we only saw photos of George and Charlotte 3 or for times a year in their first couple of years. We've only seen them more frequently now because of all the times they've been a bridesmaid and page boy, lol. And at similar events like we've seen over the weekend of course.


----------



## redney

h/t @lovehgss1  who posted this on the Royal Fashion thread:

*sussexroyal*
Just one week ago, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex asked that you kindly consider supporting various organisations around the world in lieu of sending gifts for the upcoming arrival of their first born. Not only did many of you lend your support, you took action.

Their Royal Highnesses wanted you to know the impact of your support – the direct effect your donation, energy, and action made! YOU chose to be part of the collective good, and you have a made a real difference.

Whether a $5 donation, £1000 contribution, offering to volunteer, or spreading the word – you’ve played your part. And on behalf of The Duke and Duchess (and Baby Sussex), we thank you so much.

YOUR IMPACT:

@thelunchboxfund will now be able to provide a minimum of 100,000 additional hot nutritionally fortified meals to children in dire need across South Africa

@littlevillagehq received donations from all over the world (from UAE to Hong Kong and the US), they’ve increased their monthly donors, had a surge in volunteer applications, and re-energized their hard working team of 200+ staff and volunteers

@wellchild can now provide 300+ additional hours of specialist care by a Well Child Nurse for a child with serious health needs, allowing families to stay together at home vs in hospital

@Baby2Baby have received over 5,000 products to disperse to children in need, including cribs, books, backpacks, diapers and have received monetary donations from around the globe - from Guadalajara to Italy.

You made this happen. Thank you.


----------



## minababe

that brings me to the question if kate really needed to do that or if she wanted it that way?
so many People say it's the royal Thing, but it isn't only some royals did it that way. some others like the queen didn't present their Babys right after the birth to the press and People. so there isn't a rule  .. so could it be that kate wanted it that way?


----------



## LibbyRuth

When the Queen had her children, the celebrity press really didn't work in the same way it does now. I think the royal family has evolved with the public thirst for gossip over the years. They play into some things, and shun others.  I think that Kate accepted that there would be some thing about family that she and William would not have a say in given their place in the family, so they might as well embrace it. I think that Kate and the people around her are wise enough to know it looks bad if she enjoys it too much. But she does have expectations on her and her kids that Meghan won't.


----------



## bag-mania

Back when the Queen had her children there was a little thing called dignity. Royalty would never consider pandering to the gossip media, it would be beneath them. Times have changed.


----------



## LuckyBitch

bag-mania said:


> Back when the Queen had her children there was a little thing called dignity. Royalty would never consider pandering to the gossip media, it would be beneath them. Times have changed.


So true...


----------



## A1aGypsy

Well, most babies were born at home up until Princess Diana decided to do things a bit differently I think.  Charles was born at Buckingham Palace and they would show the baby from the balcony.

I think Diana presented the babies because she knew the people wanted to see them and it would’ve better press than smuggling them out a back door and off in a car. They couldn’t very well spend the first month in a hospital.


----------



## jess236

*US Report: Royal Pilot quits due to Meghan Markle's diva pregnancy demands*
*https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-pilot-quits-vegan-diet

*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cocoabean

jess236 said:


> *US Report: Royal Pilot quits due to Meghan Markle's diva pregnancy demands*
> *https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-pilot-quits-vegan-diet
> 
> *



If his duties were to fetch stuff, then fetch stuff. Don't like it quit. He quit. 

Picturing a Sikorsky landing at the Piggly Wiggly to pick up some pickles and ice cream makes me smile.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Well, most babies were born at home up until Princess Diana decided to do things a bit differently I think.  Charles was born at Buckingham Palace and they would show the baby from the balcony.
> 
> I think Diana presented the babies because she knew the people wanted to see them and it would’ve better press than smuggling them out a back door and off in a car. They couldn’t very well spend the first month in a hospital.


It was Princess Anne who started that trend of having babies at a hospital a few years earlier


----------



## krissa

jess236 said:


> *US Report: Royal Pilot quits due to Meghan Markle's diva pregnancy demands*
> *https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-pilot-quits-vegan-diet
> 
> *



I thought they weren’t at Kensington Palace. I think they’re reaching with this. Why would a pilot have to get her food?


----------



## Aimee3

krissa said:


> I thought they weren’t at Kensington Palace. I think they’re reaching with this. Why would a pilot have to get her food?



I can’t say I’ve ever seen helicopter pads at my local supermarket nor at the restaurants either!  [emoji3]


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> It was Princess Anne who started that trend of having babies at a hospital a few years earlier



Ah! My apologies to Anne then!


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Ah! My apologies to Anne then!


Lol


----------



## bag-mania

Cocoabean said:


> If his duties were to fetch stuff, then fetch stuff. Don't like it quit. He quit.
> 
> *Picturing a Sikorsky landing at the Piggly Wiggly to pick up some pickles and ice cream makes me smile.*



Hey now we're talking royalty here. I wouldn't expect any common cravings. How about a quick trip to Paris to get a meal from her favorite restaurant? They might need a helicopter for that.


----------



## jess236

Cocoabean said:


> If his duties were to fetch stuff, then fetch stuff. Don't like it quit. He quit.
> 
> Picturing a Sikorsky landing at the Piggly Wiggly to pick up some pickles and ice cream makes me smile.


alace. I think they’re reaching with this. Why would a pilot have to get her food?[/QUOTE]


krissa said:


> I thought they weren’t at Kensington Palace. I think they’re reaching with this. Why would a pilot have to get her food?



Yes, I am taking it with a grain of salt, but it's a story out there.  Probably embellished because the press seems to be a little negatively disposed towards her.


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Back when the Queen had her children there was a little thing called dignity. Royalty would never consider pandering to the gossip media, it would be beneath them. Times have changed.


It's hard to compare those times with these times. When the Queen Mother had got engaged and talked about her engagement ring (just the ring!!!) with a reporter there was an uproar within the Family caused by that frivolity. Imagine this nowadays. First had come the international news corporations, then the word wide web. I think it's more like " if you can't beat them, join them". However: some members of the BRF seems to be quite eager to join them and entertain us, while the others try to keep their lives as private as possible. If I had to choose myself, I'd probably try to follow the second option.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Someone just mentioned the Queen's b-day is tomorrow? I'm calling a MM delivery on the Queen's b-day, April 21.


----------



## sdkitty

I know we're not supposed talk politics here so I won't say what I think about Brexit.  But would love to know what the Royals think about it.  They have plenty of personal money but still the outcome will affect their country and also them.


----------



## Jayne1

They have people to do their hair and a touch of makeup. Bring a dress and dress them. Someone carries the bags out the back door to the car. 

How hard is it to stand for a minute, holding the baby, and have their picture taken.


----------



## krissa

Jayne1 said:


> They have people to do their hair and a touch of makeup. Bring a dress and dress them. Someone carries the bags out the back door to the car.
> 
> How hard is it to stand for a minute, holding the baby, and have their picture taken.



Giving birth can be hard. What’s the difference between waiting a few days for a picture? God forbid there are complications. People are ridiculous with their entitlements and expectations.


----------



## sdkitty

krissa said:


> Giving birth can be hard. What’s the difference between waiting a few days for a picture? God forbid there are complications. People are ridiculous with their entitlements and expectations.


right
I'm somewhat interested in what their child will look like but newborns aren't usually that interesting to look at.....will be more interesting later.  I wish them well but I'm not all that fascinated and I have trouble understand those who are.


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Someone just mentioned the Queen's b-day is tomorrow? I'm calling a MM delivery on the Queen's b-day, April 21.


Not forgetting Prince Louis is 1 on the 23rd.
That also means new pictures being released of him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lubina

krissa said:


> Giving birth can be hard. What’s the difference between waiting a few days for a picture? God forbid there are complications. People are ridiculous with their entitlements and expectations.



There is a rather nasty line of thought circulating that people have a right to see this baby soon after its birth (which contradicts other cries of Harry and Meghan aren't that important because Harry isn't the heir/6th in line) because they own the royal family, specifically they own Meghan's body because they pay for it. There is so much wrong with that sentiment, not to mention are the births of babies of other tax funded people firefighters, teachers,  police, parliament members and the sort also open for public viewing?
Does the owner of  the company for whom you work or your chief clients entitled to access your birthing suite?
I think on Monday I'm going to stop by the cafeteria at the middle school up the street. My taxes pay for it so I'm entitled to eat lunch there and use the copier. 
 It is bizarre the whining and outrage that this sacred "tradition" that was carried out not by the queen herself, but by 3 previous royals, none of whose marriage lasted BTW, Diana hated it and her son Harry has said not going to happen on my watch, coupled with the payment of a royal "tax" whose amount is less than the price of a soda at 7-11 somehow equates to ownership of a person.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Sharont2305 said:


> Not forgetting Prince Louis is 1 on the 23rd.
> That also means new pictures being released of him



I saw a post on IG that someone predicted they will announce on Louis’ bday (23rd) that she gave birth on the Queen’s bday (21st) they’ll post a pic on IG on Will and Kate’s anniversary (29th) and be seen in public for the first time on Charlottes bday (2nd) [emoji23]


----------



## Murphy47

In the Middle Ages and up to the 1800’s Royals gave birth in front of many high ranking officials to make sure there was no “substitute” baby in case the Heir died during the process. Makes a few pictures afterwards seem not so bad.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> right
> I'm somewhat interested in what their child will look like but newborns aren't usually that interesting to look at.....will be more interesting later.  I wish them well but I'm not all that fascinated and I have trouble understand those who are.


I don't care to see a glimpse of a cheek of a baby wrapped in a blanket.  I was more interested in seeing the mom.


----------



## VickyB

hollieplus2 said:


> I saw a post on IG that someone predicted they will announce on Louis’ bday (23rd) that she gave birth on the Queen’s bday (21st) they’ll post a pic on IG on Will and Kate’s anniversary (29th) and be seen in public for the first time on Charlottes bday (2nd) [emoji23]


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry and Meghan are being lined up with a major international job by Buckingham Palace that could see them moving abroad to Africa, according to reports.

Harry ’s advisers are working on a “bespoke” role for the “royal rock stars”, probably in Africa that will combine some work on behalf of the Commonwealth along with charity work and a role promoting Britain, the Sunday Times states.


----------



## Sharont2305

hollieplus2 said:


> I saw a post on IG that someone predicted they will announce on Louis’ bday (23rd) that she gave birth on the Queen’s bday (21st) they’ll post a pic on IG on Will and Kate’s anniversary (29th) and be seen in public for the first time on Charlottes bday (2nd) [emoji23]


That's hilarious.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending Easter Service at St. George's Chapel


----------



## Tivo

Meghan Markle is not beloved in Britain. People actively hate on her. Why on earth would she want to step out and grace the people with her newborn baby just to satisfy those who are grumbling about it? 
I wouldn’t do it either and they would deal.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tivo said:


> Meghan Markle is not beloved in Britain. People actively hate on her. Why on earth would she want to step out and grace the people with her newborn baby just to satisfy those who are grumbling about it?
> I wouldn’t do it either and they would deal.


I'm British and I like her


----------



## Voyageuse

I don’t know if the Africa assignment is legit, but geez, I would jump at it if I were H & M.  I have never seen a more visceral reaction to a public figure.  Even the Kardashians are treated more kindly than M.M.  The Sussexes should bolt.


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry attending Easter Service at St. George's Chapel
> 
> View attachment 4410097
> View attachment 4410147
> View attachment 4410124
> View attachment 4410125
> View attachment 4410123
> View attachment 4410101


She is so pregnant she can't go to church?  Seems odd to me.  Maybe she's had the baby


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry and Meghan are being lined up with a major international job by Buckingham Palace that could see them moving abroad to Africa, according to reports..



If true, this could be a good thing for them.  Harry likes spending time in Africa and it may allow them to do humanitarian work that is more personal and have more of an immediate impact perhaps, as opposed to the endless round of fundraisers and formal events.  This would also allow them to perhaps live a more private life, away from the press, in a different time zone. They could also raise baby Sussex a bit out of the limelight for a couple years while they get used to being parents.  I think I read somewhere at some point that Harry had talked about wanting to live in Africa (?) so it may be that this has been in the back of his mind for a number of years.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> She is so pregnant she can't go to church?  Seems odd to me.  Maybe she's had the baby



I thought it was odd as well that she wasn’t there.  Not very strenuous to get out of a car , walk into the church and sit for the service.  Maybe she’s having pre labor pains???


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> I thought it was odd as well that she wasn’t there.  Not very strenuous to get out of a car , walk into the church and sit for the service.  Maybe she’s having pre labor pains???


something is up.....but then if she was in labor Harry would be there with her.....I'm guessing maybe she gave birth yesterday....is that too early?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...rkle-skipping-easter-service-queens-birthday/

they're saying she wasn't at church due to being so close to delivering baby.  I'm not buying it.  I've seen women working in offices whose water broke at work.


----------



## youngster

Honestly, i do not blame her at all for skipping this. With my first, I was overdue. I'd worked up until my due date but those last few days were tough.  I went to a family dinner three nights before my water broke and it really was no fun. So, I can feel for Meghan not wanting to dress up and put on make up and have people critique her outfit and her looks and expressions.


----------



## LibbyRuth

It’s not just going to church for BRF. It’s duty. If Meghan is in maternity leave already then she’s off duty.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...rkle-skipping-easter-service-queens-birthday/
> 
> they're saying she wasn't at church due to being so close to delivering baby.  I'm not buying it.  I've seen women working in offices whose water broke at work.



Totally agree with you!!!


----------



## Aimee3

LibbyRuth said:


> It’s not just going to church for BRF. It’s duty. If Meghan is in maternity leave already then she’s off duty.



I’m confused. The royal family going to church on Easter is considered a “duty” and “working”?


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yup. That’s where all the negativity about her bucking the “system” comes from. Once they stopped ruling, they really became the first reality stars. And now they are basically paid to be in the public eye and do public things so the public can see them.  Complete fish bowl living.


----------



## wee drop o bush

Aimee3 said:


> I’m confused. The royal family going to church on Easter is considered a “duty” and “working”?



Yes, the Duchess of Cambridge also retired from official duties  when she started maternity leave. Here in Britain & Ireland we have longer maternity leave than in the US, it’s currently up to 39 weeks on full pay; with that amount of paid leave no woman needs to work until their waters break, thankfully.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Aimee3 said:


> I’m confused. The royal family going to church on Easter is considered a “duty” and “working”?


Yes. The queen is the head of the Church of England.


----------



## youngster

There is just no standard one-size-fits-all regarding pregnancy.  Every woman should just figure out what is best for her with no judging.  I know people who were on bed rest at 20 weeks and people who worked until the last minute because they felt great.  First pregnancies are generally more challenging, both mentally and physically. So, I give Meghan the benefit of the doubt and let her make the choices about what she wants to take part in at this late stage.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> There is just no standard one-size-fits-all regarding pregnancy.  Every woman should just figure out what is best for her with no judging.  I know people who were on bed rest at 20 weeks and people who worked until the last minute because they felt great.  First pregnancies are generally more challenging, both mentally and physically. So, I give Meghan the benefit of the doubt and let her make the choices about what she wants to take part in at this late stage.


sure
but she seemed to be doing well and seems to like being out and about so that's why I think maybe there's more to this story


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> sure
> but she seemed to be doing well and seems to like being out and about so that's why I think maybe there's more to this story



Oh, yes, there could be a whole variety of possibilities.  She could just be feeling under the weather or is in the very early first stage of labor with erratic contractions or anything in between. Harry might have been driving her crazy, hovering, so she said "please go to church with your granny so I can take a nap" lol.  Harry looked pretty relaxed though in the tiny number of pics that I saw, so maybe nothing is imminent.  I haven't been counting weeks of course but it does feel like she should have delivered by now.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> sure
> but she seemed to be doing well and seems to like being out and about so that's why I think maybe there's more to this story


Why does there have to be more to this story?


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Why does there have to be more to this story?


just my opinion......I could be wrong......said "I think maybe"


----------



## Tivo

She’s likely already had the baby. 
But I don’t see anything wrong with her not wanting to be seen, whether it’s because she’s had the baby or not.

Guess I just don’t understand the issue?
We’ll see her at some point.


----------



## Grande Latte

She's ready to deliver any moment now, or may be doing it as we speak. I wouldn't force her to attend any events. I just wish her well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

People magazine is reporting Meghan's mum, Doria has arrived in London.
https://people.com/royals/doria-ragland-arrives-london-meghan-markle-royal-baby-birth/

Can the baby be far behind?


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...rkle-skipping-easter-service-queens-birthday/
> 
> I've seen women working in offices whose water broke at work.



That’s what happened to me. I was dripping all morning and finally gave in and went home at 11:30. Baby was born at 5:19! They told me not to wait like that if I had another [emoji854]


----------



## Gimmethebag

Looks like the couple is being reassigned abroad... It can be a positive opportunity, but I think after those William/Rose rumors allegedly coming from Meghan's PR camp, they are losing inner-circle privileges. Her Majesty will protect future monarchs. Make no mistake about that. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...harry-duke-duchess-sussex-royal-family-africa


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Honestly, i do not blame her at all for skipping this. With my first, I was overdue. I'd worked up until my due date but those last few days were tough.  I went to a family dinner three nights before my water broke and it really was no fun. So, *I can feel for Meghan not wanting to dress up and put on make up and have people critique her outfit and her looks and expressions*.



Exactly.  Give the woman a break.  She would have to put on her party face whilst most likely feeling very uncomfortable and struggling not to squirm in her seat.  Not to mention the possibility of her water breaking at church!


----------



## bag-princess

hollieplus2 said:


> I saw a post on IG that someone predicted they will announce on Louis’ bday (23rd) that she gave birth on the Queen’s bday (21st) they’ll post a pic on IG on Will and Kate’s anniversary (29th) and be seen in public for the first time on Charlottes bday (2nd) [emoji23]



This is what happens when someone has too much time on their hands!




sdkitty said:


> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...rkle-skipping-easter-service-queens-birthday/
> 
> they're saying she wasn't at church due to being so close to delivering baby.  I'm not buying it.  I've seen women working in offices whose water broke at work.




And so what!  That has nothing to do with her situation. 




youngster said:


> There is just no standard one-size-fits-all regarding pregnancy.  Every woman should just figure out what is best for her with no judging.  I know people who were on bed rest at 20 weeks and people who worked until the last minute because they felt great.  First pregnancies are generally more challenging, both mentally and physically. So, I give Meghan the benefit of the doubt and let her make the choices about what she wants to take part in at this late stage.




THIS! You can’t say just because one woman did it another one should be able to!


----------



## pixiejenna

I half think that she stayed home partly because she probably didn’t feel up to the public event but also out of respect to the queen. If she did show up surely she would be the center of attention because she’s so close to having her baby. She would most likely upstage the queen on her birthday at Easter service. And imagine if she went into labor at the service it would be a circus trying to get out of there.


----------



## TMA

Murphy47 said:


> In the Middle Ages and up to the 1800’s Royals gave birth in front of many high ranking officials to make sure there was no “substitute” baby in case the Heir died during the process. Makes a few pictures afterwards seem not so bad.



And the Queen’s father put a stop to that archaic practice. I’m sure all hell did not break loose and right thinking people (always have to make that distinction these days as there are far too many loonies about) did not think Prince Charles was a substitute baby, especially as his pictures were not released for a month after birth. Thank God traditions change else a lot of us would not be allowed to work or earn a decent wage outside the home.


----------



## TMA

sdkitty said:


> just my opinion......I could be wrong......said "I think maybe"



They walk all the way to the church from somewhere. She’s not the Queen so she doesn’t get to take a car all the way to the entrance for this event. Just imagine the hullabaloo if she did that and the never ending criticisms. At such a late stage of pregnancy, there is really a waddle and some people might find walking long distances a challenge. The week before my due date I would stop in between paces as it was bloody uncomfortable.


----------



## Sharont2305

People elsewhere are saying that Zara Tindall did that same walk to Harry and Meghan's wedding whilst heavily pregnant.
Yes, she did, but Lena was born 1 month later. And, not that it has anything significant to do with it, it was Zaras third pregnancy.
Here we have Meghan, first pregnancy with days away from giving birth, as I write this maybe even hours away. I don't blame her for not going, agree with everyone who has given reasons why she possibly didn't go, especially about it being The Queen's birthday. Here in the UK yesterdays newspapers would have been plastered with photos of Meghan on the front pages.
Personally I wasn't expecting her to be at the service, I would have been very shocked to have seen her there.


----------



## minababe

Can't beliebe that People complain here that she didn't go to the church on sunday .. Crazy world ..
no one is working to the end of the pregnancy. not in the us and not in europe. so don't talk Things like that. thats ********.
she can give birth any Minute. she has to rest. maybe is laying the last weeks of her pregnancy. maybe she is just enjoying the sun at home with her mom. who cares? the only Thing that matters is that meghan and the Baby are doing well.

btw Harry was the first time there since he was a child. maybe just for his granny's birthday


----------



## pukasonqo

minababe said:


> Can't beliebe that People complain here that she didn't go to the church on sunday .. Crazy world ..
> no one is working to the end of the pregnancy. not in the us and not in europe. so don't talk Things like that. thats ********.
> she can give birth any Minute. she has to rest. maybe is laying the last weeks of her pregnancy. maybe she is just enjoying the sun at home with her mom. who cares? the only Thing that matters is that meghan and the Baby are doing well.
> 
> btw Harry was the first time there since he was a child. maybe just for his granny's birthday [emoji2]



i have no dog in this fight but i get the feeling that the same people that criticise her for not being there would probably have made remarks that she was trying to upstage the Queen, cause unnecessary drama by being so close to delivering and turning up, etc, etc.
wishing her a safe delivery


----------



## bag-princess

pukasonqo said:


> i have no dog in this fight but i get the feeling that the same people that criticise her for not being there would probably have made remarks that she was trying to upstage the Queen, cause unnecessary drama by being so close to delivering and turning up, etc, etc.
> wishing her a safe delivery




Exactly!!!


----------



## DeMonica

pukasonqo said:


> i have no dog in this fight but i get the feeling that the same people that criticise her for not being there would probably have made remarks that she was trying to upstage the Queen, cause unnecessary drama by being so close to delivering and turning up, etc, etc.
> wishing her a safe delivery


ITA. Health above anything else. She's lucky that she had such an easy pregnancy allowing her to participate in as many public functions as she did.  Dutchess or not, she deserves a little quiet time before her delivery, just like any woman does, if she chooses it. Whishing her a safe delivery, too.


----------



## LittleStar88

She is damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. People complain either way for the sake of picking on her. Poor woman can't get a break.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

minababe said:


> Can't beliebe that People complain here that she didn't go to the church on sunday .. Crazy world ..
> no one is working to the end of the pregnancy. not in the us and not in europe. so don't talk Things like that. thats ********.
> she can give birth any Minute. she has to rest. maybe is laying the last weeks of her pregnancy. maybe she is just enjoying the sun at home with her mom. who cares? the only Thing that matters is that meghan and the Baby are doing well.
> 
> btw Harry was the first time there since he was a child. maybe just for his granny's birthday



I don’t care either way if she went or didn’t but lots of people work right up to the day they give birth. Unless there were medical reasons everyone I know did including myself. Worked Friday and went into labor on Saturday. Most people don’t have time/money etc to take off work before taking maternity leave.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

LittleStar88 said:


> She is damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. People complain either way for the sake of picking on her. Poor woman can't get a break.


Yep, exactly this. She can't win.

Comparing her to what other pregnant women do in their final days of pregnancy is silly. Everyone is different, and Meghan is officially on maternity leave from duties. So she stayed home, NBD.

Did the press get bent with Kate's pregnancy with Charlotte? Kate's last official public appearance was March 27, 2015 and she gave birth May 2, 2015, 36 days later.

Neither Kate, nor William nor Harry attended Easter church services that year too (April 5, 2015).


----------



## lanasyogamama

I did work until the end, but if I had her kind of money and freedom, I would have loved to have been able to rest at the end.


----------



## CeeJay

hollieplus2 said:


> I don’t care either way if she went or didn’t but lots of people work right up to the day they give birth. Unless there were medical reasons everyone I know did including myself. Worked Friday and went into labor on Saturday. Most people don’t have time/money etc to take off work before taking maternity leave.


Yup, especially here in the US because so many companies are downright CRAPPY when it comes to Maternity leave and the mother wants to spend as much time with the baby post-birth.  When I worked in Europe and heard how much time the mother (and in some cases the father as well) get PAID time off, it was amazing to me .. and something that I WISH the US would follow!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

Recent mothers correct me if I'm wrong as it's 19 years since I've been on mat leave. . 
Here in the UK you get up to 12 months maternity leave, first 6 months are paid in full then 3 months which I think is half pay. The last 3 months are unpaid so it's down to your personal circumstances if you return after 9 months or go back after 12 months.
But I think you have to have worked in that company for more than, I want to say 26 weeks, up to the point of you starting maternity leave to qualify for the max entitlement.


----------



## lulilu

I worked for the US govt with my youngest -- no maternity leave at all.  You can use your accumulated sick and vacation leave, and take time without pay.


----------



## chaneljewel

I would have stayed home too.  I felt so much pressure and discomfort towards the end of my pregnancy.  My bladder constantly needed to be emptied and my legs and feet hurt.   Meghan probably needed to relax and rest.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I took off work, three weeks before the birth of both my boys. Some of the comments about what she should or shouldn't do in her own pregnancy are ridiculous.


----------



## hellosunshine

...so there's been some whispers that Meghan has in fact given birth...congrats to her!!


----------



## anitalilac

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I took off work, three weeks before the birth of both my boys. Some of the comments about what she should or shouldn't do in her own pregnancy are ridiculous.


I agree...it's ridiculous! It's my body, my pregnancy, my life so it has to be my way..


----------



## gelbergirl

hellosunshine said:


> ...so there's been some whispers that Meghan has in fact given birth...congrats to her!!



ohhh, I like this, . . ..  will be interesting to find out when they announce


----------



## minababe

in Europe you have  up to 2 years maternity leave, depends on the Country you are living in but 6 weeks before the birth date you are stopping to work. So Meghan did it like everyone else. no Special Treatment.


----------



## queennadine

I just had my baby (YAY!) and worked the day I went into labor. I was even in Court. And yes, I dressed up and wore heels all day long this past Easter and went to brunch after. 
If she hasn’t had the baby yet, she didn’t attend Easter service because she didn’t want to or because she was already in labor.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> Recent mothers correct me if I'm wrong as it's 19 years since I've been on mat leave. .
> Here in the UK you get up to 12 months maternity leave, first 6 months are paid in full then 3 months which I think is half pay. The last 3 months are unpaid so it's down to your personal circumstances if you return after 9 months or go back after 12 months.
> But I think you have to have worked in that company for more than, I want to say 26 weeks, up to the point of you starting maternity leave to qualify for the max entitlement.


Last time I checked, which was 6 years ago, the situation wasn't  that cheerful. Some companies had better maternity packages, but some of them preferred sticking to the statutory package (26 weeks ordinary maternity leave+ 26 weeks additional, 90% pay for the first 6 weeks, then the general maternity allowance  £150 for 33 weeks, then nothing). My former company paid better and longer, and you could return for the last 12 weeks (which would be unpaid otherwise) you could return to work half-time for full pay. My colleagues normally left around 2 weeks before birth.



minababe said:


> in Europe you have  up to 2 years maternity leave, depends on the Country you are living in but 6 weeks before the birth date you are stopping to work. So Meghan did it like everyone else. no Special Treatment.


Some countries allow you to stay at home but not on full pay. There might be places where the mother-to-bes would start their maternity leave 6 weeks before their due date, but 4-1 week is more common IMO.

I think this comparison game of who left when for maternity leave is a bit distasteful. Most people would choose to leave earlier if they had a chance to do so. Just because some people are denied the opportunity to get a little a rest before birth, which is sad, or decide to work of their own volition till the very last minute, we shouldn't paint anybody black who has the opportunity and uses it. Each and everyone of us is different. It's not a race where medals are given.


----------



## redney

DeMonica said:


> *I think this comparison game of who left when for maternity leave is a bit distasteful.* Most people would choose to leave earlier if they had a chance to do so. Just because some people are denied the opportunity to get a little a rest before birth, which is sad, or decide to work of their own volition till the very last minute, we shouldn't paint anybody black who has the opportunity and uses it. *Each and everyone of us is different. It's not a race where medals are given.*


YES!!! THIS!!!!


----------



## pukasonqo

DeMonica said:


> I think this comparison game of who left when for maternity leave is a bit distasteful. Most people would choose to leave earlier if they had a chance to do so. Just because some people are denied the opportunity to get a little a rest before birth, which is sad, or decide to work of their own volition till the very last minute, we shouldn't paint anybody black who has the opportunity and uses it. Each and everyone of us is different. It's not a race where medals are given.



Well said!
Still we will have to go through the boob versus bottle debate, is she back to her before pregnancy bodygate, natural or  ceasarian discussion...and again we need to remind ourselves that is her body, her baby and her decision, we might not agree but she (and any other mother) deserves respect and support (unless her decisions are clearly harming the child).
Again, hoping for a safe delivery and a healthy baby


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Exactly. She may have, to us, seemingly sailed through the pregnancy but  may be really struggling in the last few weeks. I don't blame her for resting as she's going to need all the energy she has to deliver this baby.


----------



## minababe

DeMonica said:


> Some countries allow you to stay at home but not on full pay. There might be places where the mother-to-bes would start their maternity leave 6 weeks before their due date, but 4-1 week is more common IMO.
> 
> .



of Course full pay. 6 weeks before you have the birth date, you stop to work and still get your normal salary. some women take their vacation days on top to go even ealier than the 6 weeks.
jiust happened last week in my Company. lucky her haha

the day the Baby is born you go into maternity leave and than the payment is not full anymore. but the weeks before the Baby is coming you are getting the full salary. that is why many women hope that the Baby is not coming earlier. because that day the maternity leave is starting they are loosing around 35 % of their salarys from this day on.
it's a bit sad how the System is working but thats how it is.

but nothing meghan Needs to worry about so I hope we are getting Baby News in the next few days


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry, Duke of Sussex will join Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, at Westminster Abbey today where an Anzac Day service is being held. Sources say he had always hoped to be there but his name wasn't  printed on the order of service because of the imminent arrival of the baby.
William is in New Zealand to commemorate Anzac Day and to visit survivors of last month's Mosque terrorist attack.


----------



## berrydiva

People are really in this women's uterus for not attending church while being heavily pregnant?


----------



## maryg1

Harry & Catherine at Westminster Abbey for Anzac Day


----------



## daisychainz

Harry hasn't looked that happy in ages. I bet the baby was already born. He doesn't look stressed at all anymore.


----------



## Candice0985

CeeJay said:


> Yup, especially here in the US because so many companies are downright CRAPPY when it comes to Maternity leave and the mother wants to spend as much time with the baby post-birth.  When I worked in Europe and heard how much time the mother (and in some cases the father as well) get PAID time off, it was amazing to me .. and something that I WISH the US would follow!!!


When I found out how little time maternity leave was in the US i couldn't belive it, you barely have time to physically recover! It's 1 year in Canada and while we don't get our whole wages through the government we do get about 55% of our income.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Harry hasn't looked that happy in ages. I bet the baby was already born. He doesn't look stressed at all anymore.



It looks like he and Kate were having a fun conversation when those photos were taken. I don't buy that the baby has already been born. He would probably be with Meghan and the baby if that was the case.

What benefit could there be in keeping the birth a secret? The royals can have all the privacy they want if they choose to go into seclusion.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> It looks like he and Kate were having a fun conversation when those photos were taken. I don't buy that the baby has already been born. He would probably be with Meghan and the baby if that was the case.
> 
> What benefit could there be in keeping the birth a secret? The royals can have all the privacy they want if they choose to go into seclusion.


I thought they said it was going to be kept private until they were ready to share? The benefit of secrecy being more time alone with the baby before people want all the details. I imagine they wouldn't tell us for quite some time, so Meghan and her mom and Harry can be with the baby uninterrupted.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I thought they said it was going to be kept private until they were ready to share? The benefit of secrecy being more time alone with the baby before people want all the details. I imagine they wouldn't tell us for quite some time, so Meghan and her mom and Harry can be with the baby uninterrupted.



Who said that? Harry and Meghan or someone on their behalf?

Anyway, this article seems to indicate nothing has happened yet.


*Prince Harry just revealed that wife Meghan Markle is not yet in labour*

The *Duke of Sussex* has heavily hinted that his *wife Meghan* is showing no signs of giving birth just yet, as he stepped out for an engagement on Thursday morning. Harry was not previously scheduled to attend the Anzac Day Service of Commemoration and Thanksgiving at Westminster Abbey, but on the morning of the service he decided to make an appearance, suggesting that his wife is not yet in labour. 

The Duke travelled from Windsor to London for the event, where he joined the *Duchess of Cambridge*, the Duke of Gloucester and other honourable guests including the Australian High Commissioner. Harry's name was not printed in the order of service in case he could not attend. 

The commemoration was a traditional church service that incorporated an Act of Remembrance, the Last Post and Kemal Ataturk's words from Anzac Cove read by the Turkish Ambassador to the UK. Anzac Day has been commemorated in London since the first anniversary of the Anzac landings at Gallipoli in 1916, when King George V attended a service at Westminster Abbey. Since then, members of the royal family have marked the day to recognise the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps who died during the landings, and to honour the sacrifices of men and women in all wars.

While Kate and Harry commemorated the day in London, Prince William attended a service in Auckland as part of his two-day visit to New Zealand to honour the *victims of the Christchurch terrorist attack*. William was welcomed with a traditional ccccc, an exchange of calls that forms part of a powhiri, a Maori welcoming ceremony.

Harry and his wife Meghan are preparing to welcome *their first child* any day now. The royal baby is expected to make an appearance very soon, with Meghan previously revealing that she is due at the end of April or beginning of May. The Duchess is nesting in Windsor in the couple's new home, Frogmore Cottage, and is believed to be planning a home birth.

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...ce-harry-reveals-meghan-markle-not-in-labour/


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> I thought they said it was going to be kept private until they were ready to share? The benefit of secrecy being more time alone with the baby before people want all the details. I imagine they wouldn't tell us for quite some time, so Meghan and her mom and Harry can be with the baby uninterrupted.



The official announcement from the palace said that they'd announce when she was in labor and when she'd given birth, and then wait a few days for a photo call. In that announcement they indicated that outside of that things would be kept private.  Aside from the hospital steps photo call most of this is fairly in line with what William and Kate have done.  Outside of leaving the hospital photo and a christening photo, we haven't really seen any of their three children until they reach their first birthday. The other big difference appears to be that for William and Kate there were a slew of reporters and photographers where for Harry and Meghan there will be just a couple who will share with everyone else.

I agree with those who have said when it happens it'll be announced.  I don't buy into the idea that they will keep it secret and then after time passes say "oh by the way the baby has been here".  William and Kate and many before then have proven you can report a birth in real time and still maintain privacy when you have multiple homes with high wall and lots of security.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Who said that? Harry and Meghan or someone on their behalf?
> 
> Anyway, this article seems to indicate nothing has happened yet.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry just revealed that wife Meghan Markle is not yet in labour*
> 
> The *Duke of Sussex* has heavily hinted that his *wife Meghan* is showing no signs of giving birth just yet, as he stepped out for an engagement on Thursday morning. Harry was not previously scheduled to attend the Anzac Day Service of Commemoration and Thanksgiving at Westminster Abbey, but on the morning of the service he decided to make an appearance, suggesting that his wife is not yet in labour.
> 
> The Duke travelled from Windsor to London for the event, where he joined the *Duchess of Cambridge*, the Duke of Gloucester and other honourable guests including the Australian High Commissioner. Harry's name was not printed in the order of service in case he could not attend.
> 
> The commemoration was a traditional church service that incorporated an Act of Remembrance, the Last Post and Kemal Ataturk's words from Anzac Cove read by the Turkish Ambassador to the UK. Anzac Day has been commemorated in London since the first anniversary of the Anzac landings at Gallipoli in 1916, when King George V attended a service at Westminster Abbey. Since then, members of the royal family have marked the day to recognise the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps who died during the landings, and to honour the sacrifices of men and women in all wars.
> 
> While Kate and Harry commemorated the day in London, Prince William attended a service in Auckland as part of his two-day visit to New Zealand to honour the *victims of the Christchurch terrorist attack*. William was welcomed with a traditional ccccc, an exchange of calls that forms part of a powhiri, a Maori welcoming ceremony.
> 
> Harry and his wife Meghan are preparing to welcome *their first child* any day now. The royal baby is expected to make an appearance very soon, with Meghan previously revealing that she is due at the end of April or beginning of May. The Duchess is nesting in Windsor in the couple's new home, Frogmore Cottage, and is believed to be planning a home birth.
> 
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...ce-harry-reveals-meghan-markle-not-in-labour/


You mentioned that if she'd had the child you wouldn't think Harry would be away from the baby, but what about when a woman is about to go into labor any day. Shouldn't he just be at home in case she goes into labor and not out making appearances? That is what makes me think she had her baby, he is happy and confident enough to leave her. Maybe I'm being too cynical, lol but I think they can tell us whatever they want whenever they want (about her being in labour or not). How would anyone but her and doctors and Harry verify that? We have to trust what they say and I guess I don't, lol. I think she had the baby and she and her mom are resting while Harry went out for a bit. We'll hear she's in labour about a week after the actual birth. That's just my theory


----------



## redney

daisychainz said:


> You mentioned that if she'd had the child you wouldn't think Harry would be away from the baby, but what about when a woman is about to go into labor any day. Shouldn't he just be at home in case she goes into labor and not out making appearances? That is what makes me think she had her baby, he is happy and confident enough to leave her. Maybe I'm being too cynical, lol but I think they can tell us whatever they want whenever they want (about her being in labour or not). How would anyone but her and doctors and Harry verify that? We have to trust what they say and I guess I don't, lol. I think she had the baby and she and her mom are resting while Harry went out for a bit. We'll hear she's in labour about a week after the actual birth. That's just my theory


I would expect if she did go into labor, Harry would have time to make it to wherever she is. Most women's labor for the first birth is lengthy, lasting many hours and possibly days before the baby is born.


----------



## LibbyRuth

And most men continue to go to work each day while waiting for their wives to give birth.  I don't think it's necessary to say by her side for weeks just in case.  Harry has to have access to some pretty good transportation!


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> You mentioned that if she'd had the child you wouldn't think Harry would be away from the baby, but what about when a woman is about to go into labor any day. Shouldn't he just be at home in case she goes into labor and not out making appearances? That is what makes me think she had her baby, he is happy and confident enough to leave her. Maybe I'm being too cynical, lol but I think they can tell us whatever they want whenever they want (about her being in labour or not). How would anyone but her and doctors and Harry verify that? We have to trust what they say and I guess I don't, lol. I think she had the baby and she and her mom are resting while Harry went out for a bit. We'll hear she's in labour about a week after the actual birth. That's just my theory



You might be a bit too cynical.  There is no reason for them to hide, and by extension, lie to everyone about the birth. Maybe this rumor got started because it was originally reported that the baby was due in April and we are near the end of the month. However, now it's being reported that her due date is actually late April–early May. So we are only at the beginning of the time frame where she is expected to go into labor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

Don't forget there had also been speculation when she announced her pregnancy that they may be lying about the April due date - in part because some were hoping for signs that she may have been pregnant before getting married.


----------



## doni

I cannot imagine a royal family member, any royal family, going to an official act with their child having been born and without a public announcement. That is simply not going to happen. They can and will manage the whole thing as they see fit, but this kid is not the child of some celebrities, s/he will be royal family and the British subdits which the royal family serves will be dutifully and promptly informed, as has always been done.


----------



## DeMonica

minababe said:


> of Course full pay. 6 weeks before you have the birth date, you stop to work and still get your normal salary. some women take their vacation days on top to go even ealier than the 6 weeks.
> jiust happened last week in my Company. lucky her haha
> 
> the day the Baby is born you go into maternity leave and than the payment is not full anymore. but the weeks before the Baby is coming you are getting the full salary. that is why many women hope that the Baby is not coming earlier. because that day the maternity leave is starting they are loosing around 35 % of their salarys from this day on.
> it's a bit sad how the System is working but thats how it is.
> 
> but nothing meghan Needs to worry about so I hope we are getting Baby News in the next few days





minababe said:


> *in Europe* you have  up to 2 years maternity leave, depends on the Country you are living in but 6 weeks before the birth date you are stopping to work. So Meghan did it like everyone else. no Special Treatment.


You were talking about Europe in general, but I'm trying to point out to you that what happens in your country - which I guess is Germany by your profile page - is not relevant to Europe as a whole, not even to the EU, because every member country has different laws concerning maternity leave and pay, even within the EU framework. It would be wonderful, of course, if any mother in Europe (or anywhere around the globe for that matter) could take a maternity leave that  lasted two years and received full pay for _the entire period_, but it's not happening anywhere in Europe yet as you proved, unfortunately.
Meghan doesn't have to worry about the financial aspects of her maternity leave. Lucky girl!  I wonder how long her break is going to be. Kate took shorter maternity leaves with the first two, than with Louis.


----------



## Gimmethebag

LibbyRuth said:


> Don't forget there had also been speculation when she announced her pregnancy that they may be lying about the April due date - in part because some were hoping for signs that she may have been pregnant before getting married.



I think she announced super early. Poor Princess Eugenie.


----------



## A1aGypsy

daisychainz said:


> Harry hasn't looked that happy in ages. I bet the baby was already born. He doesn't look stressed at all anymore.



Is it time to resurrect the “these two are absolutely shagging” rumour yet?  

THAT’S The one I want to be true!


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> Is it time to resurrect the “these two are absolutely shagging” rumour yet?
> 
> THAT’S The one I want to be true!



A little confused but are you saying that you want Harry to cheat?

..because if you are..it'll never happen...by any & all indications Harry married Meghan for love and their shared ambitions/passions in life...also Harry dated around for a while..searching for the "one"...privately telling friends that he's having a tough time finding a connection with the many woman he was seeing..until friends set him up with Meghan and he just knew. Harry is completely head over heels in admiration and love for Meghan so I don't see that ever happening.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Okay, I’m obviously joking. 

There was a (clearly) crazy rumour at one point that Harry and Katie were star crossed lovers.

Although, never say never...


----------



## PatsyCline

LibbyRuth said:


> Don't forget there had also been speculation when she announced her pregnancy that they may be lying about the April due date - in part because some were hoping for signs that she may have been pregnant before getting married.



Considering they gave been married for 11 months already, that rumour doesn’t make any sense.


----------



## LibbyRuth

PatsyCline said:


> Considering they gave been married for 11 months already, that rumour doesn’t make any sense.


The people who pushed the rumor insisted she’d give birth around the new year. Clearly they were wrong but the math made sense when they insisted she was lying.


----------



## Bagmedic

LibbyRuth said:


> The official announcement from the palace said that they'd announce when she was in labor and when she'd given birth, and then wait a few days for a photo call. In that announcement they indicated that outside of that things would be kept private.  Aside from the hospital steps photo call most of this is fairly in line with what William and Kate have done.  Outside of leaving the hospital photo and a christening photo, we haven't really seen any of their three children until they reach their first birthday. The other big difference appears to be that for William and Kate there were a slew of reporters and photographers where for Harry and Meghan there will be just a couple who will share with everyone else.
> 
> I agree with those who have said when it happens it'll be announced.  I don't buy into the idea that they will keep it secret and then after time passes say "oh by the way the baby has been here".  William and Kate and many before then have proven you can report a birth in real time and still maintain privacy when you have multiple homes with high wall and lots of security.


Part of me wondered if the baby was born and not announced so to not take away any attention from all the royal birthdays - the Queen, Prince Louis and Princess Charlotte.


----------



## myown

youngster said:


> Oh, yes, there could be a whole variety of possibilities.  She could just be feeling under the weather or is in the very early first stage of labor with erratic contractions or anything in between. Harry might have been driving her crazy, hovering, so she said *"please go to church with your granny so I can take a nap" *lol.  Harry looked pretty relaxed though in the tiny number of pics that I saw, so maybe nothing is imminent.  I haven't been counting weeks of course but it does feel like she should have delivered by now.


I remember how tired I was in my pregnancy.  more tired than the first weeks with baby. 



sdkitty said:


> She is so pregnant she can't go to church?  Seems odd to me.  Maybe she's had the baby


it is odd you questioning why a pregnant woman is not going to church. 
well sit on those rock-hard chairs for an hour when sitting is uncomfortable even on a couch!


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> in Europe you have  up to 2 years maternity leave, depends on the Country you are living in but 6 weeks before the birth date you are stopping to work. So Meghan did it like everyone else. no Special Treatment.


uhm I can stay at home for 3 years in Germany


----------



## myown

queennadine said:


> I just had my baby (YAY!) and worked the day I went into labor. I was even in Court. And yes, I dressed up and wore heels all day long this past Easter and went to brunch after.
> If she hasn’t had the baby yet, she didn’t attend Easter service because she didn’t want to or because she was already in labor.


yes. because you worked the day you gave birth she has to, too.


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> Don't forget there had also been speculation when she announced her pregnancy that they may be lying about the April due date - in part because some were hoping for signs that she may have been pregnant before getting married.


also don't forget the whole prganancy is fake, she wears a fake bump and got a surrogate because she is way to old


----------



## redney

So, William and Kate visited Harry and Meghan at their new home Frogmore Cottage after church on Easter Sunday. So much for feuding, eh?
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...am-visit-meghan-markle-prince-harry-frogmore/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I’m obviously joking.
> 
> There was a (clearly) crazy rumour at one point that Harry and Katie were star crossed lovers.
> 
> Although, never say never...



Pre Meghan I've always thought he had a crush on her. When the three of them did official stuff, balcony shots etc there always seemed to be more shots of Harry and Catherine giggling and chatting to one another.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Pre Meghan I've always thought he had a crush on her. When the three of them did official stuff, balcony shots etc there always seemed to be more shots of Harry and Catherine giggling and chatting to one another.



Aw, I want these two to be buddies. Harry never had a sister and Kate has a younger brother and maybe Harry reminds her of him. Surely a man and woman can just really enjoy each other's company without their thoughts turning to lust. Maybe...


----------



## LibbyRuth

Bagmedic said:


> Part of me wondered if the baby was born and not announced so to not take away any attention from all the royal birthdays - the Queen, Prince Louis and Princess Charlotte.



If that were the case, wouldn't Charlotte and Louis' births have had delayed announcements due to the Queen's birthday?


----------



## DC-Cutie

you gotta be miserable AF to wish a man cheats on his wife... I mean MISERABLE


----------



## A1aGypsy

DC-Cutie said:


> you gotta be miserable AF to wish a man cheats on his wife... I mean MISERABLE



Oh you got me. I so am all of those things. Even the caps.

(PS. I didn’t actually say that you know)


----------



## queennadine

myown said:


> yes. because you worked the day you gave birth she has to, too.



No, she clearly doesn’t have to. And no need to get nasty. We all have different experiences. If sharing mine makes other women get on the defensive, that’s not my problem.


----------



## threadbender

Per doctor's orders, I stopped working 6 weeks prior to my son's due date. My co-workers thought I was "faking" something and treated me horribly. But, I took full advantage of that time, knowing my life was going to change like never before. I hold no ill will towards how anyone handles their pregnancy. We are individuals and everyone has their own path. 
I have said before I was not a big Meghan fan but I wish nothing but happiness for her and Harry and their family. I am sure this baby will be loved and cherished and that is all that matters.


----------



## maryg1

hellosunshine said:


> A little confused but are you saying that you want Harry to cheat?
> 
> ..because if you are..it'll never happen...by any & all indications Harry married Meghan for love and their shared ambitions/passions in life...also Harry dated around for a while..searching for the "one"...privately telling friends that he's having a tough time finding a connection with the many woman he was seeing..until friends set him up with Meghan and he just knew. Harry is completely head over heels in admiration and love for Meghan so I don't see that ever happening.



I’ve seen plenty of people in real life, not on magazines covers, that were deeply in love with their spouse and thought they could never cheat. 
And instead it happened, both men and women, so never say never.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> Also, just a feeling but I think William has likely cheated on Kate with more than one woman. Something tells me, Rose is not the first.





hellosunshine said:


> by any & all indications Harry married Meghan for love and their shared ambitions/passions in life...also Harry dated around for a while..searching for the "one"...privately telling friends that he's having a tough time finding a connection with the many woman he was seeing..*until friends set him up with Meghan and he just knew. Harry is completely head over heels in admiration and love for Meghan so I don't see that ever happening.*



Okay, we get that you really like Harry and Meghan and you don't like William and Kate. But favoritism or not, there's no way to know who will cheat or whose marriage will fall apart. For Harry and Meghan it's far too early to make the call.

By the way, if I had a dollar for every couple who said they "just knew" when they fell in love and married and then the wheels came off later, I'd be an extremely wealthy woman.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> Pre Meghan I've always thought he had a crush on her. When the three of them did official stuff, balcony shots etc there always seemed to be more shots of Harry and Catherine giggling and chatting to one another.


I used to see their closeness, too. Always so happy/giddy with each other. I just assumed it was because they were college buddies and just knew one another really well. They've been friends the same amount of time as William and Kate so the closeness is there and the lengthy friendship. They look like they really get on well, always have.


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> Okay, we get that you really like Harry and Meghan and you don't like William and Kate. But favoritism or not, there's no way to know who will cheat or whose marriage will fall apart. For Harry and Meghan it's far too early to make the call.
> 
> By the way, if I had a dollar for every couple who said they "just knew" when they fell in love and married and then the wheels came off later, I'd be an extremely wealthy woman.



Are you telling me that Harry marrying a woman three years older, a divorcee, half african american, and an actress weren't a few hurdles to cross for love? It sure beats waiting in the wings for years (while said man dates around) before he turns around and notices you there and decides to marry you, lol.

Anyways, I think everyone is entitled to support and like whoever they want. And if I'm honest, I used to like the Cambridges (although I never paid much attention to the BRF until Meghan joined) but lately with how things are being handled by them..I just don't agree with it and it's left a bad impression.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> Are you telling me that Harry marrying a woman three years older, a divorcee, half african american, and an actress weren't a few hurdles to cross for love? It sure beats waiting in the wings for years (while said man dates around) before he turns around and notices you there and decides to marry you, lol.
> 
> Anyways, I think everyone is entitled to support and like whoever they want. And if I'm honest, I used to like the Cambridges (although I never paid much attention to the BRF until Meghan joined) but lately with how things are being handled by them..I just don't agree with it and it's left a bad impression.



Maybe dial back on the snark a bit. As the second son Harry didn't have the same restrictions placed on him that William had. Nor does he bear the responsibility of being born to the throne. Do you believe that if Harry had been the eldest he would have married Meghan? Perhaps he would have, but I am not convinced. He would not have had the luxury of growing up as the happy-go-lucky younger brother we've watched over the years.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Gal4Dior

hellosunshine said:


> Are you telling me that Harry marrying a woman three years older, a divorcee, half african american, and an actress weren't a few hurdles to cross for love? It sure beats waiting in the wings for years (while said man dates around) before he turns around and notices you there and decides to marry you, lol.
> 
> Anyways, I think everyone is entitled to support and like whoever they want. And if I'm honest, I used to like the Cambridges (although I never paid much attention to the BRF until Meghan joined) but lately with how things are being handled by them..I just don't agree with it and it's left a bad impression.



I was married to a man who was a divorced with kids, no college education, a low paying job, and turned out to be an alcoholic. He ended up losing his job and I supported him and his children while he got his college degree, and got him cleaned up from alcohol. I moved mountains to marry him despite my family’s opinion of him because I was in “love.” 

I filed for divorce within 2 years, with my finances drained and me emotionally drained. Maybe at the time, I thought since I had to fight so hard to be together, it meant we were really meant to be. I guess I wasn’t right. 

All because you had to overcome obstacles and didn’t marry the ideal person, just for love doesn’t mean it’s going to last. In marriage, just as in life, there are never any guarantees.


----------



## hellosunshine

Harry's need to always hold Meghan's hand --  click & scroll


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Are you telling me that Harry marrying a woman three years older, a divorcee, half african american, and an actress weren't a few hurdles to cross for love? It sure beats waiting in the wings for years (while said man dates around) before he turns around and notices you there and decides to marry you, lol.
> 
> Anyways, I think everyone is entitled to support and like whoever they want. And if I'm honest, I used to like the Cambridges (although I never paid much attention to the BRF until Meghan joined) but lately with how things are being handled by them..I just don't agree with it and it's left a bad impression.


We get that you worship Meghan but I really don't  understand why her "fans" have to disparage Kate.  You don't like the "way they have handled things"?
What things?  Supposedly sending Harry to Africa, which by some reports he would love and the latest I heard isn't happening anyway?


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah,  you don’t have a horse in this race.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Well, this thread has turned into quite the snark-fest  hasn't it?

#Mess


----------



## queennadine

Can’t wait to hear that baby has been born, boy/girl, and a name! I’m a sucker for all things baby related right now


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> We get that you worship Meghan but I really don't  understand why her "fans" have to disparage Kate.  You don't like the "way they have handled things"?
> What things?  Supposedly sending Harry to Africa, which by some reports he would love and the latest I heard isn't happening anyway?



Haha, I think it's funny that people here presume that I worship H & M. I don't. I call a spade..a spade. They are being treated unfairly right now and I don't like deceit. It's all very simple for me.



A1aGypsy said:


> Yeah,  you don’t have a horse in this race.



Correct. What? I can't share my thoughts as everyone here is entitled to? lol


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh honey. I give up.


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh honey. I give up.



Great!


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Haha, I think it's funny that people here presume that I worship H & M. I don't. I call a spade..a spade. They are being treated unfairly right now and I don't like deceit. It's all very simple for me.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. What? I can't share my thoughts as everyone here is entitled to? lol


Right.  And this comment about Kate isn't mean to be snarky?
"Are you telling me that Harry marrying a woman three years older, a divorcee, half african american, and an actress weren't a few hurdles to cross for love? It sure beats waiting in the wings for years (while said man dates around) before he turns around and notices you there and decides to marry you, lol."


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the London Marathon


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> Right.  And this comment about Kate isn't mean to be snarky?
> "Are you telling me that Harry marrying a woman three years older, a divorcee, half african american, and an actress weren't a few hurdles to cross for love? It sure beats waiting in the wings for years (while said man dates around) before he turns around and notices you there and decides to marry you, lol."



Did I lie though? This was the only time that I got a teensy bit snarky otherwise I tend to respond subjectively. Again, others have said and implied way worse things about Meghan here and I think everyone is entitled to. However, people shouldn't get upset when the shoe is on the other foot (as in Kate is being critiqued) or your delusions about Meghan are refuted. This thread and the Kate thread are gossip threads...let people be free to talk.


----------



## bisousx

Ah, it’s still going strong


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Did I lie though? This was the only time that I got a teensy bit snarky otherwise I tend to respond subjectively. Again, others have said and implied way worse things about Meghan here and I think everyone is entitled to. However, people shouldn't get upset when the shoe is on the other foot (as in Kate is being critiqued) or your delusions about Meghan are refuted. This thread and the Kate thread are gossip threads...let people be free to talk.


you know what you're doing
Its the way you compared them.  I'm done


----------



## gelbergirl

I'm here waiting for baby, like many of you, it will be any day now!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

She for sure had the baby already! I can't believe people think she hasn't. Ambulance doing a trial run - lmao. William/Kate visiting her just to say hi? I don't think so. Mom coming in last week - the mom she allowed to come one day before her wedding, likely allowed one day before the birth, too. Harry looking like he's keeping a major secret and grinning ear to ear the past few days. Not sure why it needs to be kept a secret when it was born but they're at home playing with the baby while everyone thinks it's still incubating.


----------



## Alexenjie

They said they would announce when Meghan went into labor and I believe them (even though I think that is rather invasive of their privacy) so I don't believe she has had the baby already. I think they will announce the birth and we will see pictures a few days later, not weeks or months.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bisousx said:


> Ah, it’s still going strong



I know, right?


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## FreeSpirit71

Why the posting of old pics? Just curious.


----------



## hellosunshine

Is there any reason that I shouldn't?


----------



## lulu212121

hellosunshine said:


> Is there any reason that I shouldn't?


They have already been posted. Why are you posting old photos? You didn't answer.


----------



## caramelize126

lulu212121 said:


> They have already been posted. Why are you posting old photos? You didn't answer.





hellosunshine said:


> Is there any reason that I shouldn't?



Older pictures might be better suited for the style/fan thread.  As far as I know, this thread is for *current* news and gossip.

But Mods can feel free to correct me if this is inaccurate.  We usually dont post "throwbacks" unless its directly related to the topic being discussed. It just derails and defeats the purpose of a gossip and news thread.


----------



## hellosunshine

lulu212121 said:


> They have already been posted. Why are you posting old photos? You didn't answer.



Wow, what a hissy fit! Now, repeat this without crying?
LOL.


----------



## lulu212121

hellosunshine said:


> Wow, what a hissy fit! Now, repeat this without crying?
> LOL.


What? You make no sense.

It seems you are seething that your narrative of Kate being a "meanie" to Megan is not working. We all saw the photos of Kate and Harry together laughing and smiling non stop while together.  That admiration for each other can not be faked. You should be happy that they get along so lovingly.


----------



## Swanky

This thread is getting pretty petty. . .  can y'all kindly add members to the Ignore Use list, take the bickering to PM, stay on topic, etc. . . . ?


----------



## bag-princess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She for sure had the baby already! I can't believe people think she hasn't. Ambulance doing a trial run - lmao. William/Kate visiting her just to say hi? I don't think so. Mom coming in last week - the mom she allowed to come one day before her wedding, likely allowed one day before the birth, too. Harry looking like he's keeping a major secret and grinning ear to ear the past few days. Not sure why it needs to be kept a secret when it was born but they're at home playing with the baby while everyone thinks it's still incubating.




Allowed?? You make it sound like she had been banned by Meghan from stepping foot in the country.


----------



## chicaloca

I never would have guessed Harry would end up being the better looking brother. He has really gotten better with age.

I hope all goes well for the Sussexes and their childbirth. I hope it’s soon so the media can shut up and Harry & Meg can enjoy their new baby in peace.


----------



## chicaloca

bag-princess said:


> Allowed?? You make it sound like she had been banned by Meghan from stepping foot in the country.




I think people are accustomed to the proximity and relative idleness of the Middletons that they can’t conceive of Doria being gainfully employed with a life that does not revolve around her daughter.

Doria is not to the manor born and doesn’t appear to be living off her daughter’s wealth. She works for a living and resides an ocean away from Meghan. She cannot just drop everything to hang around Frogmore. Visiting Meghan likely requires careful financial and logistical planning so it makes sense to me that Doria would delay coming to the UK until it was absolutely necessary.


----------



## minababe

why are women so nasty and mean to each other. gosh it's really exhausting to follow this thread ..

don't get why so many women seems to have a problem with meghan but still looking around at the fan pages, threads, Instagram Accounts..
to each their own but to attack meghan and Harry fans all the time is pointless.
the same to the mean rumors that they would lie about the birth date etc.
and I shaking my head to read comments like Harry seems to be in love with kate, look at the way he Looks at her. looool
she is like a older sister or mother, they know each other for over 10 years. it's just Family. he is looking total normal at her. he is a happy person right now., he is smiling at everyone. look at the Marathon Pictures.
it's sad that some People seems to dislike other peoples happiness.


----------



## bag-princess

chicaloca said:


> *I think people are accustomed to the proximity and relative idleness of the Middletons that they can’t conceive of Doria being gainfully employed with a life that does not revolve around her daughter.*
> 
> Doria is not to the manor born and doesn’t appear to be living off her daughter’s wealth. She works for a living and resides an ocean away from Meghan. She cannot just drop everything to hang around Frogmore. Visiting Meghan likely requires careful financial and logistical planning so it makes sense to me that Doria would delay coming to the UK until it was absolutely necessary.





exactly!!  

it just really makes me shake my head at the things that people try to make a problem when it comes to meghan!  if doria was hanging around all the time then yes of course they would be saying that she is living off her wealth and status. but no! meghan being the evil monster she is has banned her from the castle!   and yet when her father acts like a big spoiled child and rants to the papers and anyone else that listens to his foolishness it is all "poor man! did all he could for her and she is the worst daughter"!  they always get all the way up to the line saying things about her without actually crossing it by saying that they really mean and why they have a problem with her.  i see them though!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chicaloca said:


> I think people are accustomed to the proximity and relative idleness of the Middletons that they can’t conceive of Doria being gainfully employed with a life that does not revolve around her daughter.
> 
> Doria is not to the manor born and doesn’t appear to be living off her daughter’s wealth. She works for a living and resides an ocean away from Meghan. She cannot just drop everything to hang around Frogmore. Visiting Meghan likely requires careful financial and logistical planning so it makes sense to me that Doria would delay coming to the UK until it was absolutely necessary.


That's a nice outlook. Seriously, I mean that. I just think Doria isn't really that close to Meghan, and vice-versa. It just doesn't compute for me that if you love your mom she doesn't come to your shower, doesn't come for anything but your actual wedding, comes over once for a photo call for your cookbook, and by extension of what we've seen so far, likely arrived just as Meghan was about to give birth. My guesses are as good as any others b/c absolutely no one hanging out on the purseforum has any personal friendship with or inside knowledge of Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That's a nice outlook. Seriously, I mean that.* I just think Doria isn't really that close to Meghan, and vice-versa.* It just doesn't compute for me that if you love your mom she doesn't come to your shower, doesn't come for anything but your actual wedding, comes over once for a photo call for your cookbook, and by extension of what we've seen so far, likely arrived just as Meghan was about to give birth. My guesses are as good as any others b/c absolutely no one hanging out on the purseforum has any personal friendship with or inside knowledge of Meghan.



and................we are off and running for this week!   this is exactly what i was talking about.
my mom does not live in another country and we don't see each other every day. not even every week - but we talk every.single.day!  people don't see that and would ASSUME that we could not possibly be close since she isn't darkening my doorstep daily either.   i know where she is when or if i need her and she would come running when i need her.  but as she always says - i am a grown woman with a husband and family of my own.  i don't need her constantly holding my hand anymore.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She for sure had the baby already! I can't believe people think she hasn't. Ambulance doing a trial run - lmao. William/Kate visiting her just to say hi? I don't think so. Mom coming in last week - the mom she allowed to come one day before her wedding, likely allowed one day before the birth, too. Harry looking like he's keeping a major secret and grinning ear to ear the past few days. Not sure why it needs to be kept a secret when it was born but they're at home playing with the baby while everyone thinks it's still incubating.



If she announced that she already had her 12 week scan at Eugenie’s wedding/the start of the tour she would be very overdue for her age if she hasn’t.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> I never would have guessed Harry would end up being the better looking brother. He has really gotten better with age.
> 
> I hope all goes well for the Sussexes and their childbirth. I hope it’s soon so the media can shut up and Harry & Meg can enjoy their new baby in peace.


I know.  When they were kids Will was the better looking one.  It's shifted, partly due to Will's hair loss I think.  Sometimes I look at pretty little kids and wonder if they will grow into good looking adults.  Not that William is ugly


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> I never would have guessed Harry would end up being the better looking brother. He has really gotten better with age.


They were both adorable as children, but Will has certainly lost whatever he had in the looks department.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> They were both adorable as children, but Will has certainly lost whatever he had in the looks department.



I think William has a softer face which was cute as a child whereas Harry looks more rugged


----------



## LibbyRuth

I always thought Harry was cuter, but I think that was because as a child he (was allowed to) let more personality show through and came across as a kid. William always came across as prim, proper and duty bound while Harry came across as cute and well behaved with an element of "that vase/curtain/wall may get knocked over at any moment by accident".  As teenagers it was the same way - more stories came out about Harry doing stupid things that teenagers do. Both seem to have grown into good men, though it does seem like Harry is a bit more service oriented, and stories seem to leak out from time to time that make William seem a bit more entitled (again - I think this is the difference in what is set for each man's future). But seeing Harry do well feels like more of an accomplishment because he seemed more human and more challenged to succeed from the start.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hollieplus2 said:


> If she announced that she already had her 12 week scan at Eugenie’s wedding/the start of the tour she would be very overdue for her age if she hasn’t.


I don't quite understand your reply. I don't think she was pregnant her wedding at all, just that the baby likely came already, perhaps last week.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't quite understand your reply. I don't think she was pregnant her wedding at all, just that the baby likely came already, perhaps last week.


The reference is to Eugenie's wedding, which was in October. If she was three months pregnant in mid-October, she would have reached full term in mid-April. 
Of course, doctors are of differing points of view on how far past due to allow a pregnancy to go, so while guesses can be made based on norms, who knows the opinion of Meghan's doctor or the preferences of Meghan. I've known women who begged to be induced, and I've known women who resisted it.


----------



## bag-mania

To put those crazy "baby already born" speculations to rest, I doubt Harry would be hanging out with the London marathoners if he had a new baby at home. According to this article Meghan has been on maternity leave and her due date was yesterday. So it could happen any time now.

*Prince Harry Returns to London Marathon Amid Meghan Markle Baby Birth Watch*





*Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* are almost at the baby finish line, as an announcement on the birth of their first child is due any day.

For now, it's time to congratulate some other runners; Harry traveled to London on Sunday to hand out medals to participants of the 2019 London Marathon. The duke typically attends the annual event, although it was unclear if he would attend this year's due to Meghan's pregnancy.

A photo of him with runners and a message was posted on his and Meghan's SussexRoyal Instagram account.

"Today, The Duke of Sussex, Patron of The London Marathon Charitable Trust, attended the 2019 @LondonMarathon where he cheered on runners, thanked volunteers for their selfless support, and congratulated the winners," the post read. "The Duke has been Patron of the Trust since 2012 because he believes that mental fitness is absolutely crucial to our wellbeing. These runners not only set a goal for themselves personally and emotionally, but the majority of runners choose to raise money for charity. It's the perfect fusion of doing something good for yourself while doing good for others."

"The joyful atmosphere created by locals, tourists, families and friends speaks to the spirit of what community is all about - supporting one another, even complete strangers," the message continued. "The @LondonMarathon is the biggest one-day fundraising event on the planet. This year's Marathon will see the total raised for charity surpass a record-breaking £1 billion. So for every runner, volunteer, sponsor and member of the public that has played a part in making today a success - thanks a billion!"

Last weekend, Harry stepped out without Meghan to attend the royal family's Easter Sunday services, where he reunited with brother *Prince William* and wife *Kate Middleton* amid feud rumors.






The couple then visited Harry and Meghan at their new home at Frogmore Cottage at Windsor Castle, according to multiple reports.

"William and Catherine visited because Meghan was unable to attend the service," a close source told HarpersBazaar.com. "They wanted to be supportive and see how she is doing. It was a lovely afternoon."

Meghan had made her last public appearance last month and then began her maternity leave. Kensington Palace, which had represented her and Harry before *Queen Elizabeth II* recently agreed to "the creation of a new household" for them, had said last year that the duchess was set to give birth in the spring. No specific due date was announced.

According to _The Sun on Sunday_ newspaper, her due date is today, Sunday. The royal family has not verified this information.

https://www.eonline.com/news/103626...-marathon-amid-meghan-markle-baby-birth-watch


----------



## gelbergirl

Early morning here & no news of the labor or birth.
I wait.


----------



## White Orchid

I don’t think either of them are good looking.  Each to their own.

Now, as for Jason Mamoa...*swoon*


----------



## daisychainz

The news is reporting that the palace has reserved pages on its website for boys only - Alexander, James and Arthur - the same way they reserved female names for Kate and one of the pages was Charlotte. Does anyone think it will be a boy with one of these names?


----------



## leeann

Harry kind of reminds me of Beavis


----------



## buffym

daisychainz said:


> The news is reporting that the palace has reserved pages on its website for boys only - Alexander, James and Arthur - the same way they reserved female names for Kate and one of the pages was Charlotte. Does anyone think it will be a boy with one of these names?



I think it’s a boy, I buy into the old wives tell and she carried really well. 

I hope Alexander because the Wessex has a James and Arthur is such an old name. I think it is a great middle name, but it sounds so old not traditional old but like a 70 year old man. He would have to grow into the name.

I hope the palace would revaluate it’s due date policy. Charlotte was supposed to be due in April she was born in May. This baby seems a May baby, too. Tell the public later, so we think earlier.


----------



## MarieCurie

leeann said:


> Harry kind of reminds me of Beavis


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I agree, neither brother is my type, but they both have such nice speaking voices, which can definitely up someone's attractiveness!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Apparently the Queen made a visit to Frogmore over the weekend just to say hello. How sweet  https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a27320818/queen-elizabeth-visited-prince-harry-meghan-markle-frogmore-cottage/


----------



## cafecreme15

buffym said:


> I think it’s a boy, I buy into the old wives tell and she carried really well.
> 
> I hope Alexander because the Wessex has a James and Arthur is such an old name. I think it is a great middle name, but it sounds so old not traditional old but like a 70 year old man. He would have to grow into the name.
> 
> I hope the palace would revaluate it’s due date policy. Charlotte was supposed to be due in April she was born in May. This baby seems a May baby, too. Tell the public later, so we think earlier.



I really hope it’s Alexander if it’s a boy! After Louis was born some outlets were reporting that his name was Alexander, and I remember thinking how nice and modern “Prince Alex” sounded.


----------



## bag-mania

Because people love to gamble, here are the current odds for bets being placed on possible names for the baby.

*Girls names *

Diana 4/1
Victoria 7/1
Alice 12/1
Grace 12/1
Isabella/Isobella 12/1
Elizabeth 14/1
Alexandra 20/1
Harriett 20/1
Rose 20/1
April 25/1
*Boys names*

Arthur 16/1
James 16/1
Albert 16/1
Edward 25/1
Alexander 33/1
Christopher 33/1
Daniel 33/1
Henry 33/1
Phillip 33/1
Joseph 40/1
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...rkle-royal-baby-name-odds-title-prince-harry/


----------



## gracekelly

daisychainz said:


> The news is reporting that the palace has reserved pages on its website for boys only - Alexander, James and Arthur - the same way they reserved female names for Kate and one of the pages was Charlotte. Does anyone think it will be a boy with one of these names?


They are all strong names, but James was the first King of Scotland and England and King Arthur doesn't need any explaining.   My grandfather' s name was Alex so of course I like it haha!  but I don't see it as being chosen.


----------



## bag-princess

cafecreme15 said:


> I really hope it’s Alexander if it’s a boy! After Louis was born some outlets were reporting that his name was Alexander, and I remember thinking how nice and modern “Prince Alex” sounded.



i would LOVE that too!!!   Alexander has always been a favorite name of mine - i named one of boys that.  Prince Alexander would be wonderful!


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Because people love to gamble, here are the current odds for bets being placed on possible names for the baby.
> 
> *Girls names *
> 
> Diana 4/1
> Victoria 7/1
> Alice 12/1
> Grace 12/1
> Isabella/Isobella 12/1
> Elizabeth 14/1
> Alexandra 20/1
> Harriett 20/1
> Rose 20/1
> April 25/1
> *Boys names*
> 
> Arthur 16/1
> James 16/1
> Albert 16/1
> Edward 25/1
> Alexander 33/1
> Christopher 33/1
> Daniel 33/1
> Henry 33/1
> Phillip 33/1
> Joseph 40/1
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...rkle-royal-baby-name-odds-title-prince-harry/



Harriett????  Where’d they pull that one from???


----------



## hellosunshine

From the names mentioned, I place my bets that the baby will be named James.

One of my sisters likes the name Alexander. Excited to find out who owes who a drink.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Harriett????  Where’d they pull that one from???



Who knows? There are other reports claiming that Allegra is a possible choice. I only think of allergy medicine when I hear that name.


----------



## CeeJay

Why do I think that they will break with tradition and name the child something totally different?  Philip also came up as a possibility as Prince Harry and his grandfather were apparently very close.  As far as the Price title, don't think that will happen ..


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I don't see it being Alexander.  Alexander of Sweden is only 3 years old, it just seems too close.


----------



## hellosunshine

I wouldn't rule out a "prince" title....after all the saved pages were "prince alexander", "prince james", and "prince arthur". We'll see soon enough.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

I don’t think it’ll be James, that’s Kate’s brothers name.


----------



## ChanelFan29

Aimee3 said:


> Harriett????  Where’d they pull that one from???



I’m guessing Harriett Tubman.


----------



## Morgan R

Aimee3 said:


> Harriett????  Where’d they pull that one from???





ChanelFan29 said:


> I’m guessing Harriett Tubman.



I think it being on the list has more to do with the fact the name Harriett is the feminine version of the name Harry/Henry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

CeeJay said:


> Why do I think that they will break with tradition and name the child something totally different?  Philip also came up as a possibility as Prince Harry and his grandfather were apparently very close.  As far as the Price title, don't think that will happen ..





The Queen is full of surprises! I would not be shocked at all.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I like Eleanor or Frances for a girl
For a boy Arthur or Alastair.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-princess said:


> The Queen is full of surprises! I would not be shocked at all.


True she is .. BUT, if you recall .. one of the reasons why Meghan and Harry moved to Frogmore was to keep out of the public eye, and they have also said repeatedly that they do not want their child to be in the public eye.  If the child gets the title of Prince/Princess, that would put them very much in the public eye and as such, the title would make Meghan and Harry look somewhat disingenuous .. no?


----------



## hellosunshine

Harry & Meghan moved to Frogmore to lessen the possibilities of leaks...and of course for some level of controlled privacy. It wasn't to keep out the public eye. Both brothers (Harry & William) want to keep their family life private while the kids grow up. I don't think that's disingenious. Also, I think H & M's baby having a title would be a protection...as a title carries some weight in those sorta social circles.

Anyways, we'll see whether the baby gets a title or not.


----------



## Sharont2305

I like the name Alexander too but as its one of Prince George's middle names, would they use it?
I like the name Grace, it's classic and modern.
Each time a Cambridge baby has been due I've always said Frances as a middle name for a girl, Diana's middle name was Frances and it was her mother's first name. So I'm going with it again. Due to rumours regarding William at the moment, I think we can probably discount the name Rose.


----------



## bag-princess

CeeJay said:


> True she is .. BUT, if you recall .. one of the reasons why Meghan and Harry moved to Frogmore was to keep out of the public eye, and they have also said repeatedly that they do not want their child to be in the public eye.  If the child gets the title of Prince/Princess, that would put them very much in the public eye and as such, the title would make Meghan and Harry look somewhat disingenuous .. no?




No....I think the baby could have a title and still manage to avoid much of the public eye and in no way would make them disingenuous.





hellosunshine said:


> *Harry & Meghan moved to Frogmore to lessen the possibilities of leaks...and of course for some level of controlled privacy. It wasn't to keep out the public eye.* Both brothers (Harry & William) want to keep their family life private while the kids grow up. I don't think that's disingenious. Also, I think H & M's baby having a title would be a protection...as a title carries some weight in those sorta social circles.
> 
> Anyways, we'll see whether the baby gets a title or not.



That’s what I always thought too!


----------



## Sharont2305

Buckingham Palace has announced that the Duke of Sussex will visit The Netherlands next Wednesday and Thursday. He has an official visit to Amsterdam then on to The Hague to launch the one year countdown to the Invictus Games The Hague 2020


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Buckingham Palace has announced that the Duke of Sussex will visit The Netherlands next Wednesday and Thursday. He has an official visit to Amsterdam then on to The Hague to launch the one year countdown to the Invictus Games The Hague 2020



I think this further supports the theory that the baby has already been born. Why would they send Harry on an international trip if his wife hadn’t given birth yet?


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> I think this further supports the theory that the baby has already been born. Why would they send Harry on an international trip if his wife hadn’t given birth yet?


I agree, but this is a fixed date which has been in his diary for months and is apparently under review.
Plus, the flight from Heathrow to Amsterdam is about 1hr 20mins and Heathrow is literally next door to Windsor. Takes about an hour from central London to Windsor by car.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree, but this is a fixed date which has been in his diary for months and is apparently under review.



Ah, so in that case I wonder if this is the Palace reaffirming that he is going or if they are still reviewing it as of now and haven’t officially cancelled yet.


----------



## gracekelly

Why would they have scheduled this for Harry in the first place if presumably he would be a new father? They knew the presumed delivery date and it doesn’t seem like a kind thing to do to any man who just became a father for the first time.


----------



## Tivo

gracekelly said:


> Why would they have scheduled this for Harry in the first place if presumably he would be a new father? They knew the presumed delivery date and it *doesn’t seem like a kind thing to do to any man who just became a father for the first time*.


I agree. This is quite suspect.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Why would they have scheduled this for Harry in the first place if presumably he would be a new father? They knew the presumed delivery date and it doesn’t seem like a kind thing to do to any man who just became a father for the first time.


It's Invictus isn't it, its his "other baby" so this would have been planned for him and put in his diary when it was announced that is was going to be in The Netherlands in June 2018.


----------



## DeMonica

cafecreme15 said:


> I think this further supports the theory that the baby has already been born. Why would they send Harry on an international trip if his wife hadn’t given birth yet?


The baby might have been born, but it's also possible that hasn't. It's the very end of her pregnancy by any estimation. She can be induced just as easily. Then they could more or less schedule the birth.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Why would they have scheduled this for Harry in the first place if presumably he would be a new father? They knew the presumed delivery date and it doesn’t seem like a kind thing to do to any man who just became a father for the first time.





Tivo said:


> I agree. This is quite suspect.



IG was announced over a year ago before the pregnancy and he did a day visit in 2018 stating he would be back, so before the baby. 

I think the baby is late, I doubt tomorrow, it’s Charlotte birthday so Friday or Saturday- they will induce labor. The problem with Friday is Kate has an engagement so some criticism from people who swears Meghan is jealous of Kate. I kind hope for Saturday- for all the Star Wars memes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

buffym said:


> IG was announced over a year ago before the pregnancy and he did a day visit in 2018 stating he would be back, so before the baby.
> 
> I think the baby is late, I doubt tomorrow, it’s Charlotte birthday so Friday or Saturday- they will induce labor. The problem with Friday is Kate has an engagement so some criticism from people who swears Meghan is jealous of Kate. I kind hope for Saturday- for all the Star Wars memes.


I would think if they would induce labor it would be on advice of doctor, not to compete with Kate....health of baby is priority


----------



## youngster

I honestly thought the baby would have been born by now and maybe he or she has!  Someone did let out that the Queen did slip into their house yesterday or the day before which might indicate that she was meeting the new great-grandchild. 

As far as the title is concerned, I think the Queen has the final say based on the parents input. Princess Anne did not want titles for her children so they didn't receive them but Prince Andrew did and requested the princess title for Bea and Eugenie. Prince Edward sort of split the difference and so we have Lady Louise and her brother James, Viscount Severn.

Names . . . I'm going with Helena Diana for a girl. Just a wild guess. Helena is not a name on the top 10 list but she was a daughter of Queen Victoria who was very active in charity work in the 19th century.  James is already the name of one of the queen's grandchildren so I don't know if they'd use that.


----------



## LibbyRuth

At this point in pregnancy, Meghan is getting weekly check ups. It's very possible that they have a plan to induce. It's also possible that the doctors have said that she's not dilating at all and chances are the baby will not be here by the time this event happens for Harry, so they've decided he'll go knowing full well that if the baby comes he'll cancel and all will understand.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> It's Invictus isn't it, its his "other baby" so this would have been planned for him and put in his diary when it was announced that is was going to be in The Netherlands in June 2018.


Yes it is, but since this is an extenuating circumstance, they would be happy for him and forgive his not being there.  That being said, I think the baby has been born.


----------



## A1aGypsy

It’s so gross how the media wants to promote faux drama. Headlines in People today was something along the lines of “Why Sussex IG unfollowed Kensington (oh and the other roles)” and it turns out it’s just because they decided to promote something new each month and only follow groups connected to that. 

People are ridiculous.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Yes it is, but since this is an extenuating circumstance, they would be happy for him and forgive his not being there.  That being said, I think the baby has been born.


Of course they wouldn't mind him not being there, was just saying that this engagement was planned as far back as June 2018, before the baby was even conceived. I can bet that today, they will know almost exactly what they will be doing this day next year. Diaries are filled that far in advance in some cases.


----------



## daisychainz

gracekelly said:


> Why would they have scheduled this for Harry in the first place if presumably he would be a new father? They knew the presumed delivery date and it doesn’t seem like a kind thing to do to any man who just became a father for the first time.


Maybe because Meghan could go with him? If she has already given birth then she could travel to the games as well, with the baby, too. She would probably not make an appearance but could still go.


----------



## hellosunshine

I keep going back and forth on whether the baby has been born or not.

I just keep reminding myself that BP announced that there would be an announcement of labour. Announcement of birth to the media along the Long Walk (not at Frogmore). An arranged photo of Harry, Meghan, and baby in Windsor Castle at a time of their choosing w/ 1 video camera.

None of this has happened so I believe the baby hasn't been born...yet.


----------



## LibbyRuth

hellosunshine said:


> I keep going back and forth on whether the baby has been born or not.
> 
> I just keep reminding myself that BP announced that there would be an announcement of labour. Announcement of birth to the media along the Long Walk (not at Frogmore). An arranged photo of Harry, Meghan, and baby in Windsor Castle at a time of their choosing w/ 1 video camera.
> 
> None of this has happened so I believe the baby hasn't been born...yet.


I agree. The palace has nothing to win if they said those things would happen, then didn't do them.  They were under no obligation to announce what would happen when the baby was born if Harry and Meghan wanted to go through the birth secretly and then announce it later. They are deemed liars if they say they will do something and then don't.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> I keep going back and forth on whether the baby has been born or not.
> 
> I just keep reminding myself that BP announced that there would be an announcement of labour. Announcement of birth to the media along the Long Walk (not at Frogmore). An arranged photo of Harry, Meghan, and baby in Windsor Castle at a time of their choosing w/ 1 video camera.
> 
> None of this has happened so I believe the baby hasn't been born...yet.


Exactly.


----------



## youngster

I agree that if they said they would make certain announcements and then didn't, that would not be good.  I vaguely remember reading that they told the family at Eugenie's wedding back on October 12 that she was around 12 weeks (?) so I had guessed the delivery would be around mid-ish April.  She would be overdue if that was correct.  Not unusual with first babies, I was 8 or 9 days overdue with my first, but I hadn't expected her to still be pregnant into May.  I'm sure she's getting excellent medical care though and things are moving along on baby's timetable.  Sometimes they like where they are and don't want a change of scenery!


----------



## hellosunshine

Why the extreme overstatement to deem them as "liars" if they decide to change their minds?


----------



## LibbyRuth

hellosunshine said:


> Why the extreme overstatement to deem them as "liars" if they decide to change their minds?


I don't see it as an overstatement - I see it as an accurate description of what the action would be. Because they chose to offer up the information on how they would announce the birth.  As public servants to a degree, I think their word to the public carries weight. So if they say "this is how we will share with you" and then doing do it, I see it as deliberately misleading rather than changing their minds.  Especially given the timing. Had they said when it was announced Meghan was pregnant that they'd announce when she was in labor, that could be a matter of "after going through the pregnancy we changed our minds".  If they reversed course after a couple of weeks, I see that as something different.

All that said ... I don't believe the baby has been born. I do believe they will keep their word. So it's truly a non-issue.


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> I would think if they would induce labor it would be on advice of doctor, not to compete with Kate....health of baby is priority



Yes, but those who have extreme dislike Meghan will use it as a fault. The people who said she would give birth on the Queen birthday or the people who criticized her for signing the New Zealand condolence book because the press covered her and Harry instead of Kate’s engagement or the people who consider her the starter of the Rose rumors.


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> Yes, but those who have extreme dislike Meghan will use it as a fault. The people who said she would give birth on the Queen birthday or the people who criticized her for signing the New Zealand condolence book because the press covered her and Harry instead of Kate’s engagement or the people who consider her the starter of the Rose rumors.


Clearly those people are going to see anything and everything as a fault. 

Meghan says she doesn't read anything about herself.  If that's true, she's not worrying about the opinions of people who aren't going to like her no matter what.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Encore Hermes

If she has already had the baby they might hold off releasing the information because her crazy family. Not that one of them would show up (again) but they can be so annoying in media


----------



## minababe

It's so exciting haha
the Baby let us wait. so many questions. but because of the visit of the queen I really really hope for a title of prince or princess. And I'm still Team princess haha
I don't think they wll choose a Name that is already in everyones mouth. they do their own Thing I'm sure. maybe they told the queen just the day of the visit the Name they've choosen.

there are speculations that the calculated birth date was last friday.
2 weeks before this date and 2 weeks after that everything is normal and totally fine for mother and Baby


----------



## bag-mania

Encore Hermes said:


> If she has already had the baby they might hold off releasing the information because her crazy family. Not that one of them would show up (again) but they can be so annoying in media



I would hope they wouldn't hold off on announcements because of her relatives. Adjusting anything because of them is giving them too much power over the royal family when they should be treated as being insignificant. 

I can't see any good reason for withholding a birth announcement. Privacy is just fine, secrecy is not.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Encore Hermes said:


> If she has already had the baby they might hold off releasing the information because her crazy family. Not that one of them would show up (again) but they can be so annoying in media



But her family was the way they are when they made the announcement that the palace would announce when she was in labor and again once she'd given birth.  Why promise that information if the intent was to not share it because of her family?


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> But her family was the way they are when they made the announcement that the palace would announce when she was in labor and again once she'd given birth.  Why promise that information if the intent was to not share it because of her family?


The palace can still make an announcement. It does not make the timing true. I think they are just playing us for fools now. We have seen the Queen Elizabeth went to visit along with William and Kate. Doria is there. I like astrology, so it is a bummer I won't be able to know the real birth information!! Oh well. I'm picking Alexander as the name. I don't think she would pick James because it is Catherine's brother.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> I would think if they would induce labor it would be on advice of doctor, not to compete with Kate....health of baby is priority


It's a pretty standard procedure if you are overdue and it's hardly a risky one, esp. the physical dilators. Laminaria is pretty simple.
BTW when did I mention Kate? We were talking about Harry's schedule.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> It's a pretty standard procedure if you are overdue and it's hardly a risky one, esp. the physical dilators. Laminaria is pretty simple.
> BTW when did I mention Kate? We were talking about Harry's schedule.


this was posted above by buffym:

IG was announced over a year ago before the pregnancy and he did a day visit in 2018 stating he would be back, so before the baby. 

I think the baby is late, I doubt tomorrow, it’s Charlotte birthday so Friday or Saturday- they will induce labor. The problem with Friday is Kate has an engagement so some criticism from people who swears Meghan is jealous of Kate. I kind hope for Saturday- for all the Star Wars memes.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> The palace can still make an announcement. It does not make the timing true. I think they are just playing us for fools now. We have seen the Queen Elizabeth went to visit along with William and Kate. Doria is there. I like astrology, so it is a bummer I won't be able to know the real birth information!! Oh well. I'm picking Alexander as the name. I don't think she would pick James because it is Catherine's brother.


The Queen, Kate and William, and Doria also visited them as a couple before Meghan was even pregnant.  I know that as the royal family they have some odd traditions. But history show that one of those traditions is not forbidding visits at home unless a baby is born.


----------



## hellosunshine

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't see it as an overstatement - I see it as an accurate description of what the action would be. Because they chose to offer up the information on how they would announce the birth.  As public servants to a degree, I think their word to the public carries weight. So if they say "this is how we will share with you" and then doing do it, I see it as deliberately misleading rather than changing their minds.  Especially given the timing. Had they said when it was announced Meghan was pregnant that they'd announce when she was in labor, that could be a matter of "after going through the pregnancy we changed our minds".  If they reversed course after a couple of weeks, I see that as something different.
> 
> All that said ... I don't believe the baby has been born. I do believe they will keep their word. So it's truly a non-issue.



so, in your personal life..when you commit to something and further down the line decide that you no longer want to do said thing..do you considr yourself a liar? Dishonest? dilberately misleading? 

I think people are allowed to change their minds..it doesn't make them dishonest. We're humans..one day we are feeling up to something and the next day...we re-evaluate.


----------



## Encore Hermes

Could someone post the formal announcement from BP that an announcement would be made when Meghan is in labor plz...I can’t find one and too lazy to scroll back to find it here. Lol 
I did find this but it is (credit) ET Canada.

“They added regarding the birth, ”Their Royal Highnesses have taken a personal decision to keep the plans around the arrival of their baby private. The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family.”


----------



## LibbyRuth

hellosunshine said:


> so, in your personal life..when you commit to something and further down the line decide that you no longer want to do said thing..do you considr yourself a liar? Dishonest? dilberately misleading?
> 
> I think people are allowed to change their minds..it doesn't make them dishonest. We're humans..one day we are feeling up to something and the next day...we re-evaluate.


It depends on what sort of thing decision we're talking about.  If i say today that i"m going to a movie on Saturday, and then Saturday decide I'm not in the mood to see a movie, and go for a hike instead, I don't see that as being a liar.  If I announce to the team that reports to me at work that I'm going to be announcing key work assignments on Tuesday and then decide Tuesday I'd rather do something else, then if they get frustrated and say I lied, I would consider it a fair complaint. 

I think "ve answered directly, so can I ask you a question now?  I've said on numerous occasions now that I don't believe that the baby has been born, therefore don't believe any lie has been told. So why is it a point that needs to be dissected repeatedly? Why is it a big deal?


----------



## threadbender

Was just scrolling through the channel guide and saw that Dater's Handbook is on Hallmark right now. It stars Meghan Markle. lol


----------



## Sharont2305

I don't think a lie has been told either.
BP has said they will announce when the Duchess is in labour and they will announce when the baby was born. If I remember correctly, George and Charlottes births were announced about 4 hours after they were born, can't remember about Louis. 
I don't know why people think they will "lie", This is  BP and the Royal Family we are talking about, not people representing b or c list celebs full of their own importance.


----------



## Morgan R

Encore Hermes said:


> Could someone post the formal announcement from BP that an announcement would be made when Meghan is in labor plz...I can’t find one and too lazy to scroll back to find it here. Lol
> I did find this but it is (credit) ET Canada.
> 
> “They added regarding the birth, ”Their Royal Highnesses have taken a personal decision to keep the plans around the arrival of their baby private. The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family.”



Official Statement from Buckingham Palace:




Royal Reporters and news outlets received a more detailed briefing. The day Buckingham Palace released the statement royal reporters did mention the media will be told when Meghan has gone into labour and subsequently when the baby has been born and also mentioned the photocall won't be the traditional hospital photocall. Harry and Meghan will take part in brief photocall with the Press Association with their baby in the days after the birth within the grounds of Windsor Castle.

Some German news outlet released the more detailed operational notice that royal reporters and news outlets received.:


----------



## rose60610

I predict a baby girl, born May 4th, 21 inches and 8 pounds 8 ounces.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Encore Hermes

Thank you!  @Morgan R That was all I could find as well. 
One of the outlets that mentioned an announcement will happen when she goes into labor is from E entertainment Canada.  “BP told E.....” 
But I can’t find where  BP states that. Not important but I was curious. Ty again,,,, 
I predict a girl, Alexandrea 
.


----------



## TMA

Encore Hermes said:


> Thank you!  @Morgan R That was all I could find as well.
> One of the outlets that mentioned an announcement will happen when she goes into labor is from E entertainment Canada.  “BP told E.....”
> But I can’t find where  BP states that. Not important but I was curious. Ty again,,,,
> I predict a girl, Alexandrea
> .



The last para of the leaked RR document says media can take up positions on the long walk only after it has been announced she’s in labour. That’s where the information comes from. Also, RRs in the UK have confirmed they will be told when she’s in labour and once baby is born. Not sure why people want to believe their own narrative about the birth. She said late April/early May, so it’s still within the expected period, with up to 2 weeks on the back-end.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Morgan R said:


> Official Statement from Buckingham Palace:
> View attachment 4420792
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Reporters and news outlets received a more detailed briefing. The day Buckingham Palace released the statement royal reporters did mention the media will be told when Meghan has gone into labour and subsequently when the baby has been born and also mentioned the photocall won't be the traditional hospital photocall. Harry and Meghan will take part in brief photocall with the Press Association with their baby in the days after the birth within the grounds of Windsor Castle.
> 
> Some German news outlet released the more detailed operational notice that royal reporters and news outlets received.:
> View attachment 4420793



I don’t see this announcement on the official
royal website. [emoji848]


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I have 3 friends that worked for Oprah at different times; one was in NYC and worked on the 'O' Magazine and was in the photography department.  She was a huge fan of Oprah's, so she was very surprised when she worked there and saw some of behavior that was exhibited by Oprah.  Her boss got fired and then Oprah went into the studio and told them that they all were fired because she just didn't want to deal with their group anymore.
> 
> Second friend worked on Oprah's show (quite a few years back) and had similar comments to that of my NYC friend, that she was not very supportive of the staff and IF she felt you had done something wrong, would call you right out in front of everyone else regardless of who was there.  Given Oprah's TV personality of being so caring to all, it came as quite a shock to many who worked with her on her show.
> 
> Third was the infamous Hermes 'situation' that occurred years back.  One of my French colleague's sister worked at that Hermes boutique and they were quite upset when they read the newspapers the next day.  As she explained to me (and I know LV does the same), there was an Invitation Only soiree going on that evening and since neither Oprah or Gayle likely knew about it, they assumed that they would be let in.  Alas, the Security personnel informed them that it was Invitation only and that they would not let them in.  Of course, we all heard Oprah's side of the story .. just sayin'.
> 
> I do hope though that through this effort, all parties can shed more light on mental illness such that more folks can get the appropriate treatment to make them well.


Just saw this story about Oprah and thought of you

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...ign=VF_HWD_050219&utm_term=VYF_HWD&verso=true


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Just saw this story about Oprah and thought of you
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...ign=VF_HWD_050219&utm_term=VYF_HWD&verso=true


TOTALLY does not surprise me one bit; I also saw that but on the Daily Fail.  So much for being happy for others, it's all about HER, HER, HER .. but then again, many highly successful people got there because they honestly don't give a sh!t about others.


----------



## Morgan R

hollieplus2 said:


> I don’t see this announcement on the official
> royal website.



Every announcement is not always posted on the royal website. The announcement was sent to the press from the Royal Communications office. Royal Communications is responsible for media relations and communicating with various organizations and authorities on matters to do with Queen Elizabeth II and other members of the Royal Family. Media outlets (mostly royal reporters) then post the messages/information they have received from Royal Communications onto their social media accounts. Multiple royal reporters posted that announcement from Buckingham Palace the day it was released.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> TOTALLY does not surprise me one bit; I also saw that but on the Daily Fail.  So much for being happy for others, it's all about HER, HER, HER .. but then again, many highly successful people got there because they honestly don't give a sh!t about others.


well, she did make it starting out from pretty much nothing.  Takes a lot of drive to do that.
Interestingly, I've never heard anything bad about Gayle King.  Hope she is as nice as I've heard she is.


----------



## doni

Why would the Royal Family conceal the birth? And risk resentment  and bad press for what purpose exactly? These are not two celebrities playing a game. A royal birth has institutional significance. Subdits have a legitimate interest to know. Not so long ago members of government would be present when those in the line to the throne were born... when the baby is born they will announce it like they have always done and it really is no big deal.


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> Why would the Royal Family conceal the birth? And risk resentment  and bad press for what purpose exactly? These are not two celebrities playing a game. A royal birth has institutional significance. Subdits have a legitimate interest to know. Not so long ago members of government would be present when those in the line to the throne were born... when the baby is born they will announce it like they have always done and it really is no big deal.



You’re right, they wouldn’t conceal it. It wouldn’t make any sense. I think the rumors are the media stirring the pot because they are getting tired of waiting for a baby who is a little bit late.


----------



## lulu212121

sdkitty said:


> well, she did make it starting out from pretty much nothing.  Takes a lot of drive to do that.
> Interestingly,* I've never heard anything bad about Gayle King.*  Hope she is as nice as I've heard she is.


Off topic, I guess you didn't see the stories today saying Gayle is the reason Norah is out at CBS morning news.


----------



## hellosunshine

Why are Oprah/Gayle being discussed here?


----------



## A1aGypsy

They are pursuing a project with Harry and MM.


----------



## hellosunshine

Oh, the mental health awareness documentary? That was announced nearly a month ago, right?


----------



## minababe

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That's a nice outlook. Seriously, I mean that. I just think Doria isn't really that close to Meghan, and vice-versa. It just doesn't compute for me that if you love your mom she doesn't come to your shower, doesn't come for anything but your actual wedding, comes over once for a photo call for your cookbook, and by extension of what we've seen so far, likely arrived just as Meghan was about to give birth. My guesses are as good as any others b/c absolutely no one hanging out on the purseforum has any personal friendship with or inside knowledge of Meghan.



wow thats really harsh dont you think?
who are you that you can say something so nasty about them?
we can't tell how much they are together, how many times doria visited meghan since she is living in London, how much they were writing or caling etc ..
just because you don't see Pictures of her walking through London doesnt mean she wasn't there. Just because she wasn't at the Baby shower in New York mean she doesnt love her mom or they are not Close.

I was on many Baby showers and just once were a mother there. they all have great relationships with their moms, they are really Close but you don't have to have your mom there to prove that. lol
it's more about having a funny and nice day with your best friends.

I think her mom is just a normal Person, who loves her private life in California.
she doesn't need any spotlight. she doesn't Need photoshoot or to give interviews like the middeltons.
It's totally fine if they Need or like that but there are many others who don't, what i likes way more. Doria seems like a really nice and down to earth person.


----------



## myown

Rumors are running rampant that *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* have already welcomed their first child together, however, the Palace is shutting down all speculation!

As of early Thursday (May 2), *the Palace released a statement saying the new royal baby “hasn’t been born yet,” *via CBS News.

Many believed the baby might have already arrived after the Palace announced that *Prince Harry* would be leaving the UK next week for an official visit to The Netherlands.​

-JustJared


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

minababe said:


> wow thats really harsh dont you think?
> who are you that you can say something so nasty about them?
> we can't tell how much they are together, how many times doria visited meghan since she is living in London, how much they were writing or caling etc ..
> just because you don't see Pictures of her walking through London doesnt mean she wasn't there. Just because she wasn't at the Baby shower in New York mean she doesnt love her mom or they are not Close.
> 
> I was on many Baby showers and just once were a mother there. they all have great relationships with their moms, they are really Close but you don't have to have your mom there to prove that. lol
> it's more about having a funny and nice day with your best friends.
> 
> I think her mom is just a normal Person, who loves her private life in California.
> she doesn't need any spotlight. she doesn't Need photoshoot or to give interviews like the middeltons.
> It's totally fine if they Need or like that but there are many others who don't, what i likes way more. Doria seems like a really nice and down to earth person.


All of your posts are GUSHING  over Meghan, so naturally you have no other view but MEGHAN IS WONDERFUL AND AMAZING!!!! I wouldn't expect you to see any other viewpoint. But thanks for taking time to dig up my many days old thoughts. I moved on once she had the baby.


----------



## hellosunshine

I find it funny how last week when I made a comment on the Cambridges' laziness or lack of work engagements...I got many responses like "we don't see them..they could be working behind-the-scenes"...yet these same people can't imagine nor give the benefit to Meghan that she's communicating with her mother privately. Furthermore, my comment on the Cambridges' was purely quantitative and based on their public appearances over the years whereas Meghan's "closeness" with her mom is purely speculative and judgemental at best.


----------



## sdkitty

lulu212121 said:


> Off topic, I guess you didn't see the stories today saying Gayle is the reason Norah is out at CBS morning news.


CBS is denying that Gayle pushed Nora out.  There have been stories about changes coming up in the CBS morning show for weeks or months.  Weeks ago I read that Nora wanted to be evening anchor.  I choose to not believe this rumor.


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> wow thats really harsh dont you think?
> who are you that you can say something so nasty about them?
> we can't tell how much they are together, how many times doria visited meghan since she is living in London, how much they were writing or caling etc ..
> just because you don't see Pictures of her walking through London doesnt mean she wasn't there. Just because she wasn't at the Baby shower in New York mean she doesnt love her mom or they are not Close.
> 
> I was on many Baby showers and just once were a mother there. they all have great relationships with their moms, they are really Close but you don't have to have your mom there to prove that. lol
> it's more about having a funny and nice day with your best friends.
> 
> I think her mom is just a normal Person, who loves her private life in California.
> she doesn't need any spotlight. she doesn't Need photoshoot or to give interviews like the middeltons.
> It's totally fine if they Need or like that but there are many others who don't, what i likes way more. Doria seems like a really nice and down to earth person.


It is possible to be a decent person and not be very close to your mother.


----------



## Sharont2305

Buckingham Palace has said that they have decided to postpone The Duke of Sussex’s scheduled visit to Amsterdam on Wednesday 8th May 2019. Harry is still scheduled to travel to The Hague on Thursday 9th May for the launch of the Invictus Games The Hague 2020 as planned.


----------



## Encore Hermes

I can see him attending the opening of the Invictus games even after the birth. A flight would be less than an hour and he has the discretion to adapt his schedule.


----------



## lulu212121

Norah at CBS reported this morning that Gayle is in London on "special assignment" with Harry and Megan. They will address the CBS stories on Monday when Gayle is back.


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> Just saw this story about Oprah and thought of you
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...ign=VF_HWD_050219&utm_term=VYF_HWD&verso=true


Well I’ve heard numerous stories over the years about what a raging b*tch Angelica is, so I have to take that into account as well.


----------



## daisychainz

Yes, Gayle tweeted that "Flying to the UK to shoot stuff for prime time Royal special." Since she was at the baby shower also I can't imagine why she would go there for nothing. She must be getting quotes or an interview, or maybe meeting the baby?!!? Oprah is never far behind Gayle, we need to find out where in the world Oprah is today lol. They are also reporting other friends have gone over. Ugh. Is anyone else beginning to think this is bizarre and calculated for more publicity?!!? I did not think the Queen Elizabeth would be approving of this, but everything is a cloud of mystery. I do not think they have to show their child but this is getting weird. I go back and forth with had/not had lol


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Yes, Gayle tweeted that "Flying to the UK to shoot stuff for prime time Royal special." Since she was at the baby shower also I can't imagine why she would go there for nothing. She must be getting quotes or an interview, or maybe meeting the baby?!!? Oprah is never far behind Gayle, we need to find out where in the world Oprah is today lol. They are also reporting other friends have gone over. Ugh. Is anyone else beginning to think this is bizarre and calculated for more publicity?!!? I did not think the Queen Elizabeth would be approving of this, but everything is a cloud of mystery. I do not think they have to show their child but this is getting weird. I go back and forth with had/not had lol



Relax, it doesn't mean anything other than what she said. She's planning on having a prime time special about the Royals and she needs to shoot some footage in the UK. She doesn't specifically say anything about Meghan or the baby. Now, I'm sure if the baby happens to be born while she's there (which she probably hopes), she'll adapt her show accordingly to feature it.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> Yes, Gayle tweeted that "Flying to the UK to shoot stuff for prime time Royal special." Since she was at the baby shower also I can't imagine why she would go there for nothing. She must be getting quotes or an interview, or maybe meeting the baby?!!? Oprah is never far behind Gayle, we need to find out where in the world Oprah is today lol. They are also reporting other friends have gone over. Ugh. Is anyone else beginning to think this is bizarre and calculated for more publicity?!!? I did not think the Queen Elizabeth would be approving of this, but everything is a cloud of mystery. I do not think they have to show their child but this is getting weird. I go back and forth with had/not had lol


Well if that baby hasn't been born yet, it's highly likely it will be while Gayle is there.  Maybe they will be giving Gayle access to the baby to help promote the project they're doing with Oprah


----------



## LittleStar88

With the technology we have now, it is possible Meghan and her mother facetime, call, text, etc quite often.

Travel abroad is hard for some people, and may not be something her mom enjoys doing a lot of (my mom was terrified of flying and would not step foot on a plane for anything). Plus, I imagine Meghan has been very busy up until her leave and her mom probably doesn't want to be sitting in a room somewhere waiting for Meghan to have time for her.

I work with lots of people who have family abroad, and are very close to them, but only see them maybe one a year due to how challenging it is to travel abroad for a visit. But they talk sometimes daily.

Not seeing her mom swanning about the palace or Frogmore doesn't mean anything about their relationship or perceived closeness.


----------



## Encore Hermes

I agree @LittleStar88 
Her mother is American and has a life in the US ..... ‍♀️ How can a relationship be judged from lack of proximity.


----------



## LibbyRuth

How can it be judged period when it's a private relationship?  Truly, the relationship that Meghan and Doria have is private and very little is known about them. So any judgement is a projection of our individual imaginations. For me, I felt very positive things from the look on Doria's face during heir wedding, and it makes me admire their relationship ... but i"m imagining it as good. I don't know that for certain. Others will imagine negative things.  None of us truly knows enough to be making any kind of informed judgement.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> How can it be judged period when it's a private relationship?  Truly, the relationship that Meghan and Doria have is private and very little is known about them. So any judgement is a projection of our individual imaginations. For me, I felt very positive things from the look on Doria's face during heir wedding, and it makes me admire their relationship ... but i"m imagining it as good. I don't know that for certain. Others will imagine negative things.  None of us truly knows enough to be making any kind of informed judgement.


and what's the difference really? maybe she loves her mother but they may not be super close.....doesn't affect my life....it is their life and their relationship whatever the nature


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## minababe

ccbaggirl89 said:


> All of your posts are GUSHING  over Meghan, so naturally you have no other view but MEGHAN IS WONDERFUL AND AMAZING!!!! I wouldn't expect you to see any other viewpoint. But thanks for taking time to dig up my many days old thoughts. I moved on once she had the baby.


loooool
what a ridicoulus comment...
I'm not gushing over meghan.
I like her yes. and I Support women in generell who have something to say, doing a good Job and  achieved something. I'm totally open for different opinions but for example your post was full of mean things, noting else. that says more about you than of me, don't you think?


----------



## Tivo

Looks like Harry canceled his Netherlands trip


----------



## A1aGypsy

God. I just read that it has been fifty days since MM have been seen in public. That poor poor girl must be so ready to get on with things.


----------



## gelbergirl

Tivo said:


> Looks like Harry canceled his Netherlands trip



any day now!!!!!!


----------



## myown

how long can you go over the date in UK?


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> how long can you go over the date in UK?


They let me go 12 days over

Taken from the NHS website.... 

*"If you're overdue*
Induction is offered to all women who don't go into labour naturally by 42 weeks, as there's a higher risk of stillbirth or problems for the baby if you go over 42 weeks pregnant"


----------



## Sharont2305

To lighten to mood and boredom while we wait, there are 5 hours left on Star Wars Day ( May the Fourth be with you) for this baby to be born. If its a girl they could call her Leia and the Queen could bestow the title Princess to her.

And yes, I am bored


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> To lighten to mood and boredom while we wait, there are 5 hours left on Star Wars Day ( May the Fourth be with you) for this baby to be born. If its a girl they could call her Leia and the Queen could bestow the title Princess to her.
> 
> And yes, I am bored



That would be genius. Does the Queen have to approve Harry’s child’s name?


----------



## pixiejenna

That would be so fun, but way too Hollywood the queen would not approve of it.


----------



## Sharont2305

pixiejenna said:


> That would be so fun, but way too Hollywood the queen would not approve of it.


Yes, but so British. I'm a Brit so I can say it, lol


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> To lighten to mood and boredom while we wait, there are 5 hours left on Star Wars Day ( May the Fourth be with you) for this baby to be born. If its a girl they could call her Leia and the Queen could bestow the title Princess to her.
> 
> And yes, I am bored


It's a cool idea and she's a perfect royal role model. So is Merida and Fiona - the flame haired ones. I wonder if she or he would inherit Harry's hair colour.  I'm bored, too (awful weather situation).


----------



## berrydiva

Everytime I come to this thread there's some weird comment about Meghan making a wild assumption from someone who's expressing nothing more than dislike of her for no other reason than just dislike. So now her mom not going to the baby shower has significant meaning. Perhaps, not everyone puts the same stock in a baby shower as you or perhaps her mom couldn't attend or perhaps a million other reasons. So weird.

I just want to see a pic of the baby lol.


----------



## gelbergirl

Betting halted?
Surge in bets on May 3, baby named Ivy???


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> Betting halted?
> Surge in bets on May 3, baby named Ivy???


I read that too, very interesting


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Ivy? That’s cute but seems very unlikely for a royal baby!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

Maybe Jessica or Pearl or Reagan? Sophie?
Or Harry Jr., Michael, Charles, Dudley?


----------



## Sharont2305

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Ivy? That’s cute but seems very unlikely for a royal baby!


I think it's lovely, and if true, quite modern. The old fashioned names are very popular now.


----------



## Grande Latte

That's a cute name.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Love the name Ivy, but I wonder if anyone takes into consideration that too often ‘Poison’ and ‘Creeping’ is attached to the name Ivy. Very easy to be nasty with Ivy.


----------



## buffym




----------



## Sharont2305

Oooh here we go......


----------



## A1aGypsy

Lol, where is everyone?


----------



## ChanelFan29

I just saw on CNN, exciting!


----------



## gelbergirl

Finally! Big sigh of relief!


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think the thing I"m most excited about during her labor is Gary Janetti's instagram posts about it!


----------



## prettyprincess

So exciting! Wishing her a healthy happy delivery


----------



## cafecreme15

Omg finally!! Have been irrationally annoyed that this has taken so long [emoji23]


----------



## lanasyogamama

Woo hoo!!


----------



## bag-princess

Wonderful news!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm saying girl.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

It's a Boy!!!!!!


----------



## CDNinNYC

Its a boy!  Just announced!


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry announced it himself on TV!!!!!!

Early this morning, 7lb 3oz


----------



## bag-princess

7 pounds 3 ounces baby boy!!


----------



## CDNinNYC

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry announced it himself on TV!!!!!!


Really?  I want to see!


----------



## Aimee3

The old wives tale held....a boy.


----------



## cafecreme15

Had a feeling it would be a boy, but was hoping for another little princess


----------



## Sharont2305

CDNinNYC said:


> Really?  I want to see!


He said she was a little overdue and we  will see baby in 2 days.


----------



## Stansy

So she went into labor this morning and the baby is here? Lucky lady....that was fast!


----------



## Sharont2305

Stansy said:


> So she went into labor this morning and the baby is here? Lucky lady....that was fast!


5:26am he was born, so they've had this lovely secret for 9 hours. It's 3pm here in the UK now


----------



## Stansy

Sharont2305 said:


> 5:26am he was born, so they've had this lovely secret for 9 hours. It's 3pm here in the UK now


I meant that the delivery itself was fast, if indeed she went into labor this morning and the baby was born at 5:26
With the first child it often takes muuuuuch longer...


----------



## Sharont2305

Announcement


----------



## DC-Cutie

Ohhhh can't wait to see the baby!!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

Stansy said:


> I meant that the delivery itself was fast, if indeed she went into labor this morning and the baby was born at 5:26
> With the first child it often takes muuuuuch longer...


LOL, I had a 5 hour labour with my first (and only) child


----------



## lulilu

I figured she had already had the baby when they announced she had gone into labor early this morning.  I assume they have to notify the Queen et al before a public birth announcement is made.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

Awwww yay!! Many congrats to them!! Can’t wait to hear of the name and see a pic


----------



## sdkitty

Harry said he was over the moon.  Sweet.
Seems so fast from marriage to birth but I understand since she's older for having first baby they would want to do asap.
Congrats to them


----------



## stephci

Aw congrats to them!!! glad to hear mother and baby are doing well! Looking forward to the name and pictures


----------



## Stansy

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I had a 5 hour labour with my first (and only) child


Lucky you, lol, I had a 32 hour labor with my first (and only) child


----------



## jcnc

Good news!! Does anyone know if it was a home birth?


----------



## Stansy

lulilu said:


> I figured she had already had the baby when they announced she had gone into labor early this morning.  I assume they have to notify the Queen et al before a public birth announcement is made.


exactly what I meant


----------



## Sharont2305

Stansy said:


> Lucky you, lol, I had a 32 hour labor with my first (and only) child


Oh crikey, worth it though I'm sure


----------



## youngster

Well, congrats to them!  I was kind of hoping for a girl but a boy is lovely too and glad that they are healthy and doing well!


----------



## Sharont2305

Stansy said:


> exactly what I meant


Judging by the initial announcement, it said that she "went into labour" and not "in labour" and that Harry was (past tense) with her looked like baby was already here.. especially as it also said "announcement soon"


----------



## DeMonica

So we have a little boy now. Congrats! Harry was soooooo sweet talking about Meghan and the baby. He's clearly over the moon in love with his wife and baby son.


----------



## mkr

How soon do the royals show the baby?


----------



## minababe

sooo crazy. i was waiting so Long and now it was all so fast today hahaha
I was really surprised by the gender. I was so sure it will be a Girl.
can't wait to see the Baby and hear the Name.


----------



## daisychainz

The palace reserved all male names for its website so it was known to be a boy a few weeks ago. I guess we will see if the names match what they put on reserve!! I think I voted for Arthur.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I'm already envisioning this little bundle of joy with a bit of color to his skin and curly red hair.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'm picturing this little boy growing up to look just like Blake Griffin!  

I just watched the video of Harry sharing the news.  I LOVE that in the little touches they were able to do their way that we got that. It was perfect.  He's more camera ready right after the event than she is, and for him to share what he was feeling with the world like that was very special, and showed how very human he is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm already envisioning this little bundle of joy with a bit of color to his skin and curly red hair.


How funny, I'm thinking the opposite, Harry's complexion with dark hair


----------



## Sharont2305

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm already envisioning this little bundle of joy with a bit of color to his skin and curly red hair.


How funny, I'm thinking the opposite, Harry's complexion with dark hair


----------



## gracekelly

DC-Cutie said:


> I'm already envisioning this little bundle of joy with a bit of color to his skin and curly red hair.


I once saw a mixed race little girl exactly like this and she was absolutely beautiful.   The child will be great looking no matter the coloring.


----------



## Aimee3

daisychainz said:


> The palace reserved all male names for its website so it was known to be a boy a few weeks ago. I guess we will see if the names match what they put on reserve!! I think I voted for Arthur.



Could you please explain what you mean by <<reserved all male names for its website? >>
TIA


----------



## Stansy

I vote for Christopher


----------



## daisychainz

Aimee3 said:


> Could you please explain what you mean by <<reserved all male names for its website? >>
> TIA


It's the same like with Charlotte and Louis, the royal family know the gender and reserve webpages on the website in advance for the children and their possible names. They have not been wrong yet the people who notice this!! They reserved Arthur/James/Alexander this time so it was known to a boy with highly likely one of those names. We have to wait and see though! They kept denying it of course!

"The U.K.’s Express paper reported (last) Tuesday that it had detected a bug that appeared on the royal family’s webpages.

It’s the same sort of bug discovered before Princess Charlotte's arrival and last year around the time of Prince Louis’ birth that led people to believe the royal family had accidentally revealed the name and gender.

As Express pointed out, if you search the pages www.royal.uk/prince-arthur, www.royal.uk/prince-james and www.royal.uk/prince-alexander on the royal family’s website, all of the searches redirect to the main royal family page, which currently has a photo of Queen Elizabeth."


----------



## BagLovingMom

This is so exciting, I’m so happy for them !


----------



## Aimee3

Thanks I understand now.


----------



## Sharont2305

As per tradition, the birth announcement has been posted outside Buckingham Palace. 
And to keep things private, it has not been signed by the medical team


----------



## Morgan R

He has talked about wanting a child for years. In this video he could barely contain his excitement.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> He has talked about wanting a child for years. In this video he could barely contain his excitement.



His joy and happiness is contagious. So happy for them


----------



## doni

Agh so sweet, he sounds so happy.
Btw since when do the British Royals say ‘you guys’ every couple sentences? Is this a thing now or Meghan’s influence?


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> Agh so sweet, he sounds so happy.
> Btw since when do the British Royals say ‘you guys’ every couple sentences? Is this a thing now or Meghan’s influence?


I think Harry and William have been using that for years pre Meghan ...... I do think that we as a country have adopted it from America though, especially younger people.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> I think Harry and William have been using that for years pre Meghan ...... I do think that we as a country have adopted it from America though, especially younger people.



Ok! I am aware of the prevalence of this (I do have a teenage daughter who believes she is American ), but I hadn’t realized it had reached the Eton-educated super posh. Ah, I guess I am too old...


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> Ok! I am aware of the prevalence of this (I do have a teenage daughter who believes she is American ), but I hadn’t realized it had reached the Eton-educated super posh. Ah, I guess I am too old...


Have you ever seen Made in Chelsea? They're super posh and they've always used it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Ok! I am aware of the prevalence of this (I do have a teenage daughter who believes she is American ), but I hadn’t realized it had reached the Eton-educated super posh. Ah, I guess I am too old...


I think Harry likes being a regular guy (or like a regular guy in some ways)


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I think Harry likes being a regular guy (or like a regular guy in some ways)


Absolutely


----------



## chowlover2

I'm so happy for them both!


----------



## bag-princess

mkr said:


> How soon do the royals show the baby?



i thought harry said 2 days we would see him


----------



## Encore Hermes

Congratulations! ( I had a toasting champagne emoji but it doesn’t show )


----------



## mchris55

****e I lost in the pool!! I I thought it was going to be a girl. 

Harry looks over the moon!!!

Congrats to the happy healthy family.


----------



## Sharont2305

mchris55 said:


> ****e I lost in the pool!! I I thought it was going to be a girl.
> 
> Harry looks over the moon!!!
> 
> Congrats to the happy healthy family.


I thought girl too. 
Out of the 3 Cambridge and this birth I've been right once, with Charlotte.


----------



## mchris55

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!


----------



## mchris55

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought girl too.
> Out of the 3 Cambridge and this birth I've been right once, with Charlotte.


HAHAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought girl too.
> Out of the 3 Cambridge and this birth I've been right once, with Charlotte.


Ha! I have also hoped for a girl with each royal birth, especially with Prince George. What with having two kings in a row on deck, I would've hoped for Kate and Will's first born to be a future queen.


----------



## myown

Kinda glad its not a girl, so they can't name her "Diana" ...


so happy for them! the last weeks must have felt like ages to them!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> i thought harry said 2 days we would see him


I think if Meghan isn't ready for photos in the next couple of days they could just show photos of the baby....not that I can't wait but just sayin


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> Kinda glad its not a girl, so they can't name her "Diana" ...
> 
> 
> so happy for them! the last weeks must have felt like ages to them!


I don't think either William or Harry would choose Diana as a first name, I was really surprised William and Catherine chose it as a middle name for Charlotte. I thought if they were going to honour Diana, they'd choose Frances as a middle name. Frances being Diana's middle name and her mother's first name.
Seems like Harry is close to his Spencer family, judging by the birth announcement, more so than William is (who knows? ). The male Francis as a middle name for this little one may happen.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think either William or Harry would choose Diana as a first name, I was really surprised William and Catherine chose it as a middle name for Charlotte. I thought if they were going to honour Diana, they'd choose Frances as a middle name. Frances being Diana's middle name and her mother's first name.
> Seems like Harry is close to his Spencer family, judging by the birth announcement, more so than William is (who knows? ). The male Francis as a middle name for this little one may happen.


Great idea to use Francis as a middle name! I hope they do this. Something like Alexander Francis would be lovely!


----------



## cjy

So happy for them!! Harry was too cute talking about his baby!!! Very sweet of him to acknowledge Megan and all women who give birth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mchris55

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think either William or Harry would choose Diana as a first name, I was really surprised William and Catherine chose it as a middle name for Charlotte. I thought if they were going to honour Diana, they'd choose Frances as a middle name. Frances being Diana's middle name and her mother's first name.
> Seems like Harry is close to his Spencer family, judging by the birth announcement, more so than William is (who knows? ). The male Francis as a middle name for this little one may happen.


Clearly, you know your stuff. I'm here, across the pond, waiting for subpoenas and arrests and now, NOW, I have to await a name and a baby picture. LMAO!!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Why do you think they wouldn’t use Diana?


----------



## cafecreme15

A1aGypsy said:


> Why do you think they wouldn’t use Diana?


I think for Harry in particular it would be too raw. He's said he's only recently gotten help to process his grief from his mother's death.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I had a 5 hour labour with my first (and only) child



4 hours for both my boys. Still felt like forever though!

Congrats to Harry and Meghan!


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Why do you think they wouldn’t use Diana?


Can you imagine the comparison between that child and her late grandmother? I think its going to be hard enough as it is for Charlotte, at the moment her being the only female grandchild of Diana's. She is going to be compared to her throughout her life, especially when she is grown up. So another with the same name will be worse.
There have been enough comparisons in the last few years between Diana and her nieces, especially Lady Kitty Spencer. So, to me, the name Diana as a first name would be a burden. Anyway, we need not worry about that as it hasn't happened, I look forward to hearing what they will call this little bundle of joy.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Can you imagine the comparison between that child and her late grandmother? I think its going to be hard enough as it is for Charlotte, at the moment her being the only female grandchild of Diana's. She is going to be compared to her throughout her life, especially when she is grown up. So another with the same name will be worse.
> There have been enough comparisons in the last few years between Diana and her nieces, especially Lady Kitty Spencer. So, to me, the name Diana as a first name would be a burden. Anyway, we need not worry about that as it hasn't happened, I look forward to hearing what they will call this little bundle of joy.


I don't think that Princess Charlotte will be anything like Diana.  Even at this age, she is exhibiting an individuality and confidence that you did not see in Diana.  This girl will always be full steam ahead with whatever she decides to do and she will do it intelligently and well.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Ah, both of those answers make sense. 

I wasn’t passing judgment with my question, I was genuinely curious given how much the boys (Harry especially) seem to love and pine for connections to their mother. I wondered if it was a protocol thing (ie. the Queen would never allow it and she has to sign off on the name)

I’m curious about the name as well.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I don't think that Princess Charlotte will be anything like Diana.  Even at this age, she is exhibiting an individuality and confidence that you did not see in Diana.  This girl will always be full steam ahead with whatever she decides to do and she will do it intelligently and well.


Totally agree with you, but we didn't see Diana as a child so we can't really, truly say what she was like then. But I still think the comparison will be there, because Charlotte is the first and only female desended directly from Diana.


----------



## Sharont2305

Apparently the baby was born at the Portland in London. They arrived yesterday afternoon and came home this morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ecurity-team-took-private-hospital-birth.html


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yes. I see Charlotte being a little Princess Anne, beautifully head strong and slightly odd in a charming way and the complete boss of both her brothers. 

Although, I don’t think we give Diana enough credit. So many of her actions took massive amounts of courage.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently the baby was born at the Portland in London. They arrived yesterday afternoon and came home this morning.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ecurity-team-took-private-hospital-birth.html


Glad to see that common sense prevailed.  *ready to get flamed on this*


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Glad to see that common sense prevailed.  *ready to get flamed on this*


Lol


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Totally agree with you, but we didn't see Diana as a child so we can't really, truly say what she was like then. But I still think the comparison will be there, because Charlotte is the first and only female desended directly from Diana.


Based  upon her early pictures and engagement photos I would say her body language was not that of a self assured person. If she really knew her own mind, she would have refused the marriage proposal.   At the age of 3, Princess Charlotte had more confidence.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently the baby was born at the Portland in London. They arrived yesterday afternoon and came home this morning.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ecurity-team-took-private-hospital-birth.html



Incredible this happened completely undetected. Just goes to show that even the worlds most famous celebrities can be absolutely discreet when they want to be.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Based  upon her early pictures and engagement photos I would say her body language was not that of a self assured person. If she really knew her own mind, she would have refused the marriage proposal.   At the age of 3, Princess Charlotte had more confidence.



I don’t think even the most confident woman is equipped to deal with a husband who is in love with someone else.

Diana loved her sons so much. I can’t help but believe even if she could have known her fate beforehand, she would have still endured it all to be able to have them in her life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Encore Hermes

I’m happy that they included on the announcement that Diana’s family had been notified before public announcement
Harpers bazaar credit


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Glad to see that common sense prevailed.  *ready to get flamed on this*



How is it common sense BP never stated the baby was going to be a home birth. Only the tabloids did, which goes to show that the UK press does not know what is going on with the Sussex’s. 

The only thing I could feel that was common sense is hopefully the public would take the press as a grain of salt.


----------



## gracekelly

*********************************************************


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Cross posting from the Cambridge thread…

Anna Wintour has said recently that the guests she'd want most are Kate and Meghan. Do you think they'd ever go? My guess is no haha.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that in her position Meghan could go and may some day. I could see her going if there were a theme she could be seen as supporting and I doubt Harry would go with her. I don’t think Kate ever could or would go in her position.


----------



## cafecreme15

LibbyRuth said:


> I think that in her position Meghan could go and may some day. I could see her going if there were a theme she could be seen as supporting and I doubt Harry would go with her. I don’t think Kate ever could or would go in her position.



Very possible! Diana went to the Met Gala in 1996 and wore the below by Dior (on display at the Dior exhibit at the V&A).


----------



## cafecreme15




----------



## A1aGypsy

That choker. ❤️  She wore it at the White House when she danced with John Travolta.  I remember watching that on tv and just thinking she was the most glamorous thing I had ever seen.


----------



## Flatsy

Diana and her scandalous lingerie gown.  

At the time, a lot was made of the idea that this was post-divorce Diana, free to hobnob with celebrities and wear daring designer dresses at an event she never would have been allowed to attend when she was an active royal.

These days, I think Meghan or Kate could attend if they played it right.  They would have to come up with a charitable pretense, and make sure they were already in town for some other official business so it didn't look like they flew all the way to the US just to hang out with celebrities.  And they would have to wear very boring gowns.


----------



## hellosunshine

Just want to share with the Washington DC friends here, the UK embassy in Washington DC will be open this Saturday the 11th where visitors can sign a guest book w/ congratulatory messages for the new baby & they’ll also have a mailbox in which you can use to send them cards. Just a FYI.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Lodpah

I called it Boy. The cup and "prince" is here.


----------



## Lodpah

No one can say the Queen does not have  a sense of humor. Banishing Meghan to Frogmore same place as where Wallis Simpson is lain to rest.


----------



## Lubina

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Cross posting from the Cambridge thread…
> 
> Anna Wintour has said recently that the guests she'd want most are Kate and Meghan. Do you think they'd ever go? My guess is no haha.



Maybe. Apparently Princess Beatrice went last year. If you look at the royal women's fashions and note where the photos are taken, it seems like Beatrice, Eugenie and Fergie attend quite a few celeb-filled or celeb-sponsored charity events. Fergie even popped up at the Golden Globes awhile back years after she appeared on Friends.


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think even the most confident woman is equipped to deal with a husband who is in love with someone else..



Oh, millions have done it. Men too. And among royalty it was the usual until very recently, no one expected you to marry someone you were in love with but someone chosen for the job. When the both coincide, as with Queen Victoria, a big fuss was made of it (and she fell in love with Albert after he was designed as consort at age 2). Diana’s case was one of confused expectations in a time of change, they thought because of her rank and education she would know her place, but she had been conquered by the Hollywood version of the Prince charming.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## White Orchid

So if thousands get them a card, where on God’s Earth would she put them, let alone read them???


hellosunshine said:


> Just want to share with the Washington DC friends here, the UK embassy in Washington DC will be open this Saturday the 11th where visitors can sign a guest book w/ congratulatory messages for the new baby & they’ll also have a mailbox in which you can use to send them cards. Just a FYI.


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> Based  upon her early pictures and engagement photos I would say her body language was not that of a self assured person. If she really knew her own mind, she would have refused the marriage proposal.   At the age of 3, Princess Charlotte had more confidence.


 really made me laugh. Go Charlotte!


----------



## myown

White Orchid said:


> So if thousands get them a card, where on God’s Earth would she put them, let alone read them???


I would put them all in to a nice box and give them the baby once it is expecting his first born, too.


----------



## buffym

I was right about the gender, wrong about the date, I may get 2/3 with the name.


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm going with Theo Alexander.
I've been wrong 3 times name wise for the Cambridges and this one I know I'll be wrong again, lol


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm going with Theo Alexander.
> I've been wrong 3 times name wise for the Cambridges and this one I know I'll be wrong again, lol



I’ve always loved the name Theo!


----------



## daisychainz

Lodpah said:


> No one can say the Queen does not have  a sense of humor. Banishing Meghan to Frogmore same place as where Wallis Simpson is lain to rest.


That's super creepy. Not the Wallis Simpson part - although darkly funny - but I wouldn't want to live on a property with bodies buried so near to me. I wouldn't care how historic and famous they were, that's creepy! I didn't know this tidbit. interesting!!


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> He has talked about wanting a child for years. In this video he could barely contain his excitement.




this is so pure love and real.
I love how they announce it yesterday through Harry, the proud dad.
this whole annoucement is so much more personal and real than the few Pictures at the steps of a Hospital.
this was def the right desicion.
and now we will see a beautiful Family tomorrow for the offiical photocall an Name annoucement.
I'm really impressed by Harry and meghan how they handle everything so well


----------



## cjy

minababe said:


> this is so pure love and real.
> I love how they announce it yesterday through Harry, the proud dad.
> this whole annoucement is so much more personal and real than the few Pictures at the steps of a Hospital.
> this was def the right desicion.
> and now we will see a beautiful Family tomorrow for the offiical photocall an Name annoucement.
> I'm really impressed by Harry and meghan how they handle everything so well


I totally agree!!!


----------



## DeMonica

doni said:


> Oh, millions have done it. Men too. And among royalty it was the usual until very recently, no one expected you to marry someone you were in love with but someone chosen for the job. When the both coincide, as with Queen Victoria, a big fuss was made of it (and she fell in love with Albert after he was designed as consort at age 2). Diana’s case was one of confused expectations in a time of change, they thought because of her rank and education she would know her place, but she had been conquered by the Hollywood version of the Prince charming.


In the case of Prince Philip, Princess Elizabeth had done the choosing - and her parents weren't too thrilled. That was more than 70 years ago.
Back to the tiny one: I'd like the name Spencer, but Alexander is nice, too, but I'm almost sure I'll be wrong. Thomas would be a surprise.


----------



## BagsNBaguettes

I've got dibs on the name being either Theodore or Dorian....although with my luck, they'll probably name him after his father or something LOL


----------



## gracekelly

I remember when Lady Diana said that she favored the name Oliver when she was pregnant with Prince William.  I don't know if she was teasing the family with that one or she was serious.  "Oliver" was never going to happen.  I think she forgot about Oliver Cromwell amongst other reasons not to use it. lol!  
I rather like the idea of using Spencer as a name.  I think Alexander, or Arthur are real possibilities.  James is the name of Prince Edward's son, so I really don't think they will use it.


----------



## jcnc

https://www.glamour.com/story/meghan-markle-didnt-have-a-home-birth-like-she-planned-for-the-royal-baby?mbid=nl_050719_daily_glamourgram&CNDID=20922783&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_brand=glm&utm_mailing=glm_glamourlists_news_050719_Active (1) remainder&bxid=MTMyNTE2OTU4MjM4S0&hasha=c2301c4e077400d9a46a6ca1d3b26f41&hashb=10a30246a3b1e4fdce1dbfc1dec3ecab8774e41d&spMailingID=15602381&spUserID=MTMyNTE2OTU4MjM4S0&spJobID=1640495872&spReportId=MTY0MDQ5NTg3MgS2

In the early hours of Monday, May 6, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle—a.k.a. the Duke and Duchess of Sussex—officially welcomed the much anticipated royal baby boy. "We are pleased to announce that Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed their firstborn child in the early morning on May 6th, 2019. Their Royal Highnesses’ son weighs 7lbs. 3oz," the palace wrote in a statement on Instagram.

The palace also confirmed that both Meghan and Baby Sussex are "healthy and well" and that the family is homealong with Meghan's mom, Doria Ragland, at Frogmore Cottage. Prince Harry even came out to give a personal update on the couple's new little bundle of joy—a break from tradition that says a lot about how the Sussexes are helping to modernize the monarchy. "I'm very excited to announce that Meghan and myself had a baby boy early this morning," Prince Harry said. "A very healthy boy. Mother and baby are doing incredibly well. It's been the most amazing experience I could have possibly imagined. How any woman does what they do is beyond comprehension."

“ I'm just over the moon"
The Duke of Sussex came outside of Frogmore Cottage to announce the birth of his baby boy with the Duchess of Sussex!

He also added that the mother and baby are doing well and that we should see the baby and know the name in 2 days time!#RoyalBaby

But one thing apparently _didn't_ go to plan. After months of speculation that the Duchess would have a home birth, the _Daily Mail_ reports that the royal baby was actually born in a London hospital—most likely the Portland, the same hospital where Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie were born—though Buckingham Palace has yet to confirm.

How the royal couple managed to pull off such a stealth trip to the hospital is amazing—especially given the intense scrutiny of the royal-baby watch. According to the _Mail,_ the trip to the hospital on Sunday afternoon was so top secret that not even the "senior royals" were told.

So why the last-minute trip to the hospital in lieu of a home birth? The Sussexes announced last month that they wanted to keep the arrival of the baby a private family moment—a completely understandable decision—and while it was never confirmed, there was much speculation that Meghan wanted to have a home birth to welcome their first child. While Kate Middleton and Princess Diana before her both gave birth in a hospital, most royal births have taken place at home, and the practice is on the rise even outside of the royal family.

But biology can mess with even the best-laid plans. A week past her due date (which feels more like a year to a heavily pregnant woman), the Duchess went to the hospital, the _Mail_ reports. It hasn't been confirmed whether or not she was induced, but the _Mail_ reports that she did stay in the hospital overnight until the couple finally welcomed the royal baby boy at 5:26 A.M.


----------



## Straight-Laced

I like Alexander Spencer Philip, Earl of Dumbarton. Or Arthur Philip Spencer.
Wouldn’t be at all surprised to see a name from Doria’s side of the family included as well, which would be great.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I remember when Lady Diana said that she favored the name Oliver when she was pregnant with Prince William.  I don't know if she was teasing the family with that one or she was serious.  "Oliver" was never going to happen.  I think she forgot about Oliver Cromwell amongst other reasons not to use it. lol!
> I rather like the idea of using Spencer as a name.  I think Alexander, or Arthur are real possibilities.  James is the name of Prince Edward's son, so I really don't think they will use it.


I think we can probably discount the names James and Thomas for their dubious connections.
I wonder what Dorias father was called and if Meghan was close to him?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I think we can probably discount the names James and Thomas for their dubious connections.
> I wonder what Dorias father was called and if Meghan was close to him?


TBH, I was rather surprised at the choice of Charles as a name for a future King given what happened to King Charles I and II.  The Stuarts appear to have the most Charles and James and they didn't do to well on the whole 
Thomas Cromwell and Thomas Moore didn't fare well either though they were not royals.  Maybe they need to go back to some really old English names like Ethelred, Athelstan and Egbert.  Macbeth is definitely out for obvious reasons.
Oh please, whatever they decide, I hope they don't use Dakota. hahahahahaha!


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> TBH, I was rather surprised at the choice of Charles as a name for a future King given what happened to King Charles I and II.  The Stuarts appear to have the most Charles and James and they didn't do to well on the whole
> Thomas Cromwell and Thomas Moore didn't fare well either though they were not royals.  Maybe they need to go back to some really old English names like Ethelred, Athelstan and Egbert.  Macbeth is definitely out for obvious reasons.
> Oh please, whatever they decide, I hope they don't use Dakota. hahahahahaha!


I think with Charles, that's centuries old history, but I get what you're thinking. 
James and Thomas are more recent nuisances, James Hewitt and Thomas Markle, lol


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I think with Charles, that's centuries old history, but I get what you're thinking.
> James and Thomas are more recent nuisances, James Hewitt and Thomas Markle, lol


hahahahaha!  You're right, the historian in me is only looking at the past.  James Hewitt!!!  Oh brother!  That would come under the heading of "Luceeeee you have some 'splaining to do!"


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> hahahahaha!  You're right, the historian in me is only looking at the past.  James Hewitt!!!  Oh brother!  That would come under the heading of "Luceeeee you have some 'splaining to do!"


Apparently he's already been congratulated on becoming a grandad!!  
I'd be shocked, for that reason, if they name this baby James.


----------



## myown

DeMonica said:


> In the case of Prince Philip, Princess Elizabeth had done the choosing - and her parents weren't too thrilled. That was more than 70 years ago.
> Back to the tiny one: I'd like the name Spencer, but Alexander is nice, too, but I'm almost sure I'll be wrong. Thomas would be a surprise.


isn´t thomas her fathers name? that WOULD be a surprise!


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> I think we can probably discount the names James and Thomas for their dubious connections.
> I wonder what Dorias father was called and if Meghan was close to him?









 - dm


----------



## hellosunshine

Today is the day!!! So excited to meet Baby Sussex and sorta sad that I can no longer call the baby...Baby Sussex hahaha!


----------



## hellosunshine

Lodpah said:


> No one can say the Queen does not have  a sense of humor. Banishing Meghan to Frogmore same place as where Wallis Simpson is lain to rest.



That's an interesting choice of word..."banish"?


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan with their son during a photo call in St George's Hall at Windsor Castle


----------



## myown

she looks great. stunning. not bloated at all. 

must be surreal to step out that door to present your baby.


----------



## White Orchid

Yep, she looks great and bubs looks cute too - from what little we see of him lol.


----------



## Tivo

From that angle the baby looks like Thomas Markle.


----------



## berrydiva

She looks great and the baby weight looks good on her face. Is there a name yet?


----------



## White Orchid

Tivo said:


> From that angle the baby looks like Thomas Markle.


Seriously?  You can barely see him lol.  But he does appear to have her lips.


----------



## mchris55

What's the name!?! I have business across the pond!!!

Very, very cute family though. The parents looked overjoyed.

I'm surprised the Duchess went with white, at this point it can be unexpectedly interesting.

Congrats to the family!!! What's the NAME??? LOl!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mchris55 said:


> What's the name!?! I have business across the pond!!!
> 
> Very, very cute family though. The parents looked overjoyed.
> 
> I'm surprised the Duchess went with white, at this point it can be unexpectedly interesting.
> 
> Congrats to the family!!! What's the NAME???


No name announced yet, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder if we will get more official photos of him in a few days time like we did with George, Charlotte and Louis.


----------



## mchris55

Sharont2305 said:


> No name announced yet, lol


Booo!!! LMAO!!!


----------



## stephci

I heard it may be Spencer?


----------



## Sharont2305

stephci said:


> I heard it may be Spencer?


I think that would be lovely


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan with their baby son during photocall in St George's Hall at Windsor Castle
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4426462
> View attachment 4426465
> View attachment 4426466
> View attachment 4426461
> View attachment 4426464



She looks so lovely. Her hair looks really nice and on the more natural side. Curious to know the baby name. 
Harry is definitely more excited and Meghan is what new mums are : a mixture of being excited but also overwhelmed and exhausted.


----------



## Voyageuse

....and let the nitpicking begin.


----------



## Stansy

Cute family! I agree that he looks much more excited than she does, and I also believe that she is still very exhausted. Best wishes for them!

Eta: Meghan also looks very excited and happy but still very exhaused.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Bag*Snob

I love that Harry came out holding the baby.


----------



## daisychainz

Voyageuse said:


> ....and let the nitpicking begin.


Actually, posts like this are worse than "nitpicking" ones because you actually contribute nothing. Whether good or bad, negative or positive, at least contribute something to the gossip party!! Like... what are your thoughts on the baby picture and new parents?   I think they all look very cute and happy. Can't fault them for anything much right now, lol.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I love it!  they both look very happy with their new bundle of love and joy.  I'm really digging their non-traditional photo op!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love that she still has a bump and looks so happy and tired. [emoji173]️


----------



## DC-Cutie

lanasyogamama said:


> I love that she still has a bump and looks so happy and tired. [emoji173]️


in heels


----------



## Sharont2305

ID
Dress by Grace Wales Bonner
Shawl ( £105) and hat ( £64 )by GH Hurt & Son


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

She looks beautiful. First thing I thought was “WHITE??” That’s brave lol. They both look so happy and the baby is adorable. 

This whole thing ended up much more traditional than previously advertised. Much ado about nothing.


----------



## bag-princess

hellosunshine said:


> That's an interesting choice of word..."banish"?



i certainly thought so!  



lanasyogamama said:


> I love that she still has a bump and looks so happy and tired. [emoji173]️



and in those heels!!!    i have a hard enough time with them on a regular day - after just giving birth would be out of the question!  i do admire women that wear them with no problem though.  it's just not me.


----------



## lazeny

Lovely family. Meghan looks beautiful. I’m amazed at women who can walk effortlessly confident in heels after giving birth. I had a 3rd degree episiotomy and I was still waddling a couple of days after delivery even while I was taking pain medication.


----------



## paper_flowers

They look so proud! She looks beautiful, glowing, and a bit tired like any new, jubilant mom. I love the excitement that’s been on Harry’s face since yesterday. 

I’ve never given birth, but dang, walking around in heels the day after delivering.. I can hardly walk in heels on a normal day


----------



## afsweet

I was very surprised she wore white, but the style is pretty much what we've seen her in before. I remember it was a big deal when Kate wore a dress that didn't hide her post partum stomach. I was surprised that Meghan's face is a lot fuller than last I remember. She carried her pregnancy so well the entire time. Glad that her hair wasn't overdone, but she certainly is a pro at posing for the cameras.


----------



## lanasyogamama

DC-Cutie said:


> in heels



Wow, I missed those.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> ID
> Dress by Grace Wales Bonner
> Shawl ( £105) and hat ( £64 )by GH Hurt & Son


I thought I read someplace that the dress was Givenchy?


----------



## Sharont2305

Official
Archie Harrison Mountbatten - Windsor


----------



## cafecreme15

BREAKING: From the Sussex Royal Instagram Account:

The baby is named Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor.

No word on title.


----------



## cafecreme15

Have to say I didn't see Archie Harrison coming! It's cute, but not terribly regal.


----------



## skarsbabe

Well that is quite a mouthful! If he has red hair.... this will be great LOL


----------



## Bag*Snob

No to that name. All I can think of is Archie Bunker. I hope they call him Harrison.


----------



## cafecreme15

Also interesting that there is only one middle name. Very American!


----------



## bag-princess

Archie!? [emoji15]


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> Official
> Archie Harrison Mountbatten - Windsor


Sounds very Downton Abbey


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Doribelle

stephc005 said:


> I was very surprised she wore white, but the style is pretty much what we've seen her in before. I remember it was a big deal when Kate wore a dress that didn't hide her post partum stomach. I was surprised that Meghan's face is a lot fuller than last I remember. She carried her pregnancy so well the entire time. Glad that her hair wasn't overdone, but she certainly is a pro at posing for the cameras.


She looks so beautiful and full of love.  My face did the same thing after each birth...looked a bit swollen but it went down after a few days.  I love the name Archie.  How adorable


----------



## bag-princess




----------



## bag-princess

justwatchin said:


> Sounds very Downton Abbey



It does!


----------



## purseproblm

Isn’t he Earl of Dumbarton? It’s Harry’s lesser title. Until Charles becomes king then he will receive the title of prince as the grandson of the monarch


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-princess said:


> View attachment 4426776


Very sweet that Doria was there. And the Queen looks so delighted.


----------



## doni

Oh I love Archie!
Is it just Archie or Archibald? So retro and very British (Scottish or?), makes me think of Wodehouse too


----------



## cafecreme15

purseproblm said:


> Isn’t he Earl of Dumbarton? It’s Harry’s lesser title. Until Charles becomes king then he will receive the title of prince as the grandson of the monarch


I think that might be the default, but they could have refused a title all together.


----------



## jcnc

Anyone knows the significance of Harrison?


----------



## TC1

jcnc said:


> Anyone knows the significance of Harrison?


Just a more formal version of Harry perhaps?. Nvm, Harry's real name is Henry..my bad. Archie...I just think of Archie Andrews from Riverdale High. LOL


----------



## doni

Harrison for Harry’s son?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Wasn’t there an article a couple months ago where George told someone his name was Archie?


----------



## cafecreme15

hollieplus2 said:


> Wasn’t there an article a couple months ago where George told someone his name was Archie?


Yes! Great memory.

https://www.bustle.com/p/prince-georges-nickname-is-archie-this-theory-may-explain-why-15903725


----------



## CDNinNYC

doni said:


> Harrison for Harry’s son?



That’s what I think as well.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> Also interesting that there is only one middle name. Very American!


Quite British too, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

Bag*Snob said:


> No to that name. All I can think of is Archie Bunker. I hope they call him Harrison.


That means nothing to us in the UK, lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## paper_flowers

Where does Archie come from? I’m guessing royal baby names usually have some significance and are named after someone


----------



## afsweet

not loving the name. I thought they'd choose something more traditional.


----------



## Sharont2305

For a long time I think Archie was an upper class name, obviously short for Archibald, but for the last number of years it's usually in the top 10 boys names used....... Archie, not Archibald

*Harrison* is a common patronymic surname of Englishorigin.[2] It may also be spelled *Harrisson*, *Harryson* or *Harrysson*. Harrison means "son of Harry". Early records suggest that the surnames Harrison and Harriswere used interchangeably by some families. Harrison is the 42nd most common surname in England and 123rd most common in the United States.[1] The first known recording of the surname had been dated from 1355 in London, England.[3]


----------



## buffym

cafecreme15 said:


> I think that might be the default, but they could have refused a title all together.



They did refuse a title for him.


----------



## Tivo

I actually love the baby’s name.


----------



## Stansy

bag-princess said:


> View attachment 4426776


Ahh, QEII looks so happy!


----------



## hellosunshine

Archie means true, bold, & valuable. 

Harrison means son of Harry. 

So, they basically named the baby, “Son of Harry, the true bold and valuable”.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tivo said:


> I actually love the baby’s name.


So do I, it's lovely


----------



## cafecreme15

buffym said:


> They did refuse a title for him.
> 
> View attachment 4426796


Seems to be consistent with Meghan's beliefs (or what we know of them) but I'm a bit disappointed!


----------



## hellosunshine

buffym said:


> They did refuse a title for him.
> 
> View attachment 4426796



Yes, they refused a title but I was just reading that once Charles becomes King...little Archie will automatically have a title but it's H&M's decision on whether he'll use that title..or not.


----------



## daisychainz

I think it's a nice name. It's not uber-traditional but at least it wasn't a really unique name, either. My first thoughts were Archie Bunker and George Harrison, lol, one American and one British, right. I don't know anyone popular with either of those names. I am surprised they didn't take a title though, I really figured they would.


----------



## sdkitty

sorry not trying to be mean but my first though was Archie comics


----------



## youngster

Very cute baby, Meghan looks lovely, Harry looks happy, but I dislike the name Archie tremendously. Maybe because of the very unlikeable, but iconic, sitcom character with the same name here in the U.S.  Harrison is fine of course for a middle name.


----------



## purseproblm

sdkitty said:


> sorry not trying to be mean but my first though was Archie comics


Mine too. I hope he gets red hair.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> I think it's a nice name. It's not uber-traditional but at least it wasn't a really unique name, either. My first thoughts were Archie Bunker and George Harrison, lol, one American and one British, right. I don't know anyone popular with either of those names. I am surprised they didn't take a title though, I really figured they would.


Lol, I think Archie is more British and Harrison is more American.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

Explains why the baby was late......he overheard the name choices........


----------



## DC-Cutie

sdkitty said:


> sorry not trying to be mean but my first though was Archie comics


I thought of Archie Bunker


----------



## gracekelly

Thank you for naming your child after me I am so honored!


----------



## TC1

If they call Prince George "Archie" for a nickname..why would you name your child Archie?. Seems odd. If my nephew had a nickname, I wouldn't name my own child that name *shrugs*


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> Explains why the baby was late......he overheard the name choices........


Spit out my coffee over this


----------



## cafecreme15

TC1 said:


> If they call Prince George "Archie" for a nickname..why would you name your child Archie?. Seems odd. If my nephew had a nickname, I wouldn't name my own child that name *shrugs*


I wonder if PG had overhead a family discussion that the new baby would be named Archie, and decided to give himself the nickname, or thought the adults were talking about him? I feel like this is the theory that Gary Janetti would prefer!


----------



## LibbyRuth

I wasn't crazy about George for a name when he was born, but seeing what a cute kid he is the name has grown on me. Hopefully the same will happen with Archie.


----------



## minababe

I love the Name!
Archie is sooo cute.
lovely choice.
I would like Archie Henry more than Harrison but they will know why they picked Harrison, maybe they will tell us later.

But I knew it will be different than all the other boring names that everyone in this Family seems to have.. Arthur, Arthur, Arthur.. soo boring. and to all the People who acted so smart that they will know the Name already because of the Homepage hahahahahahahh so funny.

loved the presentation today and the Picture with the queen is adorable.
this is so much more personal and real. they did it right! can't wait to see more of this Little Baby. lovely face. can't wait to see the hair colour, hopefully not red

btw I was really surprised that she gained that much weight in the last days of her pregnacy.
she was really in shape in her pregnancy until she went to maternity leave. the last days we didn't see her must be very intense for her. But I like that she didn't cover her Body in a loose Dress today. she was showing how many women look after giving birth.
she looked beautiful today but of Course tired and a bit nervous at all. at the Pictures perfect like always but in the Video you can see what I mean, especially when they are leaving.
I hope she can rest now for some time and just enjoy being a mom now.


----------



## bag-princess

hellosunshine said:


> Archie means true, bold, & valuable.
> 
> Harrison means son of Harry.
> 
> So, they basically named the baby, “Son of Harry, the true bold and valuable”.



 it would be "the true bold and valuable son of Harry"  since Archie is his first name.  i love it!!!


----------



## loveydovey35

Archie!? ... what!?


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> sorry not trying to be mean but my first though was Archie comics


That was mine too. But, I was surprised because I thought George's nickname is Archie. I guess he will have to give it up?


----------



## washington101

I think it's great the name means something to them not just after some old relative.
The way this photo op was handled was really great. No circus atmosphere surrounding them quiet and peaceful.


----------



## minababe

carlpsmom said:


> That was mine too. But, I was surprised because I thought George's nickname is Archie. I guess he will have to give it up?


lol why would be archie a nickname for someone called George?


----------



## threadbender

minababe said:


> lol why would be archie a nickname for someone called George?


I don't know why, but it is. Many nicknames have no association with the actual name but more for the person. I imagine that will change for George now.

Meghan, Harry and the baby look wonderful and happy.


----------



## berrydiva

I love that dress and it was a great pick for their first pics. The picture of them from the back with Meghan's hand on Harry's back while he's looking down at his son is so adorable.

Is there any family or BRF significance to the name Archie? It's not my child so i don't have to love it but I can only think "where's Jughead and Veronica"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mchris55

Very, very nice family picture!!! Archie is  different and unexpected, but everyone is really happy. Good on the cheerful and apparently jovial family!!


----------



## LibbyRuth

washington101 said:


> I think it's great the name means something to them not just after some old relative.
> The way this photo op was handled was really great. No circus atmosphere surrounding them quiet and peaceful.



I agree!  I also loved the bonus of the photo with the Queen. We didn't get to see her meeting any of William's kids, did we?



berrydiva said:


> Is there any family or BRF significance to the name Archie? It's not my child so i don't have to love it but I can only think "where's Jughead and Veronica"


I read somewhere that Diana had an ancestor named Archibald and that's believed to be the link.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> I read somewhere that Diana had an ancestor named Archibald and that's believed to be the link.



Archibald Campbell, 9th Earl of Argyll was an ancestor of Diana's, but that was way back in the 1600s. I'm not convinced he was the inspiration for little Archie. 

So many old names are coming back into fashion. Maybe this is another one.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I too thought of Archie Bunker (yikes!) and understand a lot of people would think of the comics. Also weird to have a nickname as your full name? Harrison also I associate with a last name like other patronymic surnames like Davidson, etc. Very surprising to me!


----------



## zen1965

Not keen on the name Archie but congrats to the happy family!


----------



## bag-mania

The kid has a chance of having red hair, that's in keeping with the comic book Archie.


----------



## daisychainz

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for naming your child after me I am so honored!
> 
> View attachment 4426820


I can't stop seeing this picture now!  Archie has red hair and freckles, so a mix of them both??!! I bet the name has inside meaning or jokes and doesn't have any historical significance at all. Maybe they both just love comic books, lol. It's a cute name. I went to school with a Flash Gordon... his parents did it on purpose. Meghan and Harry might have a good sense of humor.


----------



## bag-princess

DC-Cutie said:


> I thought of Archie Bunker



it was on our noon news report that people here in Ms are loving it - because of our famous quarterback Archie Manning from Ole Miss.


----------



## mchris55

bag-princess said:


> it was on our noon news report that people here in Ms are loving it - because of our famous quarterback Archie Manning from Ole Miss.


I guess, maybe, New Orleans also. LOL!!!


----------



## bag-princess

mchris55 said:


> I guess, maybe, New Orleans also. LOL!!!




LOL  yes they would be too!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I cannot stop laughing at the literalness of Harry-son.


----------



## Bentley1

Wow what a horrible horrible name. Archie?? Lmao I can’t imagine them sitting around going “yeah, Archie sounds great for a royal baby let’s name him ARCHIE.” 

Harrison is ok, at least it’s not cringey like Archie. 
 I feel like that should have at least been the first name. 
And agree with others, why would they name him after Prince George’s nickname ?? No way they didn’t know about it since it was made public knowledge.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maybe it isn't George's nickname at all? Some children can go through phases of wanting to be called different names for whatever reason, maybe it was a character on a cartoon or book and that day he wanted to be "Archie".
A daughter of a friend of mine, no idea why, went through a phase of wanting to be known as Blossom! It lasted a week and was quite hilarious.


----------



## bag-mania

Bentley1 said:


> And agree with others, why would they name him after Prince George’s nickname ?? No way they didn’t know about it since it was made public knowledge.



For some reason I keep thinking of the episode of Seinfeld where George Costanza tells everyone he wants to name his firstborn Seven. Then he's furious when another couple hears it and names their baby Seven. "They stole my name!"


----------



## Bentley1

bag-mania said:


> For some reason I keep thinking of the episode of Seinfeld where George Costanza tells everyone he wants to name his firstborn Seven. Then he's furious when another couple hears it and names their baby Seven. "They stole my name!"


Haha oh yeah I remember that episode


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

So, the parents are radiant as they should be, the baby is cute and tiny, the name is a kind of surprise. I think they really wanted to deviate from traditions and IMO that's nice, even if I'm not  particularly fan of the name "Archie". Harrison is more ok - I used to like Harrison Ford when I was little.
The picture of Harry holding the baby makes my ovaries dance. That can't be just a pose: he looks trully excited being a dad. Meghan might have put on some weight in the last few weeks, but she looks fantastic nevertheless. Personally, I'm happy that she doesn't want to look perfect and doesn't hide those few extra pounds she put on, but looks like a happy mom who recently given birth. Well done!


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Have just learned from a British friend Archie is a super popular name for little boys in England now and I googled and it was quite high on all those “most popular baby names in England” lists. Did not know that.


----------



## hellosunshine

The baby's name is surprising to many but again...H&M are making it very, very clear that they will be doing things their way. They are not interested in public approval.


----------



## hellosunshine

So cute!!


----------



## mchris55

bag-princess said:


> LOL  yes they would be too!


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## jellyv

daisychainz said:


> I think it's a nice name. It's not uber-traditional but at least it wasn't a really unique name, either. My first thoughts were Archie Bunker and George Harrison, lol, one American and .


My first thought was of Archie Shepp, the famous African-African jazz saxophonist.  I speculate it's a nod to the family's now-blended cultural heritage. Even if I'm wrong, it's my preferred reading of the choice.


----------



## afsweet

I've been thinking about it, and in all fairness, Archie does sound better with a British accent lol.


----------



## Sharont2305

stephc005 said:


> I've been thinking about it, and in all fairness, Archie does sound better with a British accent lol.


Yes, it sounds posher as you don't pronounce the r. Aaahchee


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> Archibald Campbell, 9th Earl of Argyll was an ancestor of Diana's, but that was way back in the 1600s. I'm not convinced he was the inspiration for little Archie.
> 
> So many old names are coming back into fashion. Maybe this is another one.



It's possible - and this is merely my speculation - that it could have been some sort of negotiation with the Queen.  Perhaps Harry did want Spencer for his mother's family, and the Queen was against having a great grandson with the name of the man who kind of put her on blast from the pulpit of Westminster Abbey. So the Queen's people search through history to find other Spencer family names that would honor Harry's desire to tie to his mother, without being a direct tie to "that eulogy".


----------



## kemilia

That song by Archie Drell and the Bells (Tighten Up) started playing in my head as soon as I saw the baby's name, sorry (but not sorry--I like that tune!).


----------



## kemilia

daisychainz said:


> I can't stop seeing this picture now!  Archie has red hair and freckles, so a mix of them both??!! I bet the name has inside meaning or jokes and doesn't have any historical significance at all. Maybe they both just love comic books, lol. It's a cute name. I went to school with a Flash Gordon... his parents did it on purpose. Meghan and Harry might have a good sense of humor.


And I had a Candy Cane at my school. As a kid I thought that was very cool.


----------



## Grande Latte

Unlike all the serious, big names you grow into, Archie is very casual. Perhaps they both just want the kid to have as much ocf a "normal" life as humanly possible. I can understand/ respect that.


----------



## kemilia

hellosunshine said:


> The baby's name is surprising to many but again...H&M are making it very, very clear that they will be doing things their way. They are not interested in public approval.


Awww, and now his spare hand is cradling his little baby, so sweet.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> That song by Archie Drell and the Bells (Tighten Up) started playing in my head as soon as I saw the baby's name, sorry (but not sorry--I like that tune!).



Oh thanks. Now I’ve got his voice in my head “we dance just as good as we walk.” [emoji38]


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m a little disappointed actually. I thought they were going to do all this whoo whoo stuff that was in your face out there, we do our own stuff. And it ended up being a hospital birth, with a formal presentation and a fairly traditional British name with a minor tweak.

I wanted the full Beyoncé and now I feel a tad ripped off. Hurumph.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

That's so funny @A1aGypsy. You're not the only one feeling that way. I've been reading a similar reaction all morning. I think it's rather ironic that the media has spent the past two years calling Meghan a "public attention seeker", "married Harry for fame/publicity", etc etc. Yet this time, she scales things back and people are upset that she isn't publicizing her new normal. Real insanity.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, publicity was not what i was referring to. And I’m not sure i would call this scaled back but let’s all just carry on.


----------



## chowlover2

kemilia said:


> That song by Archie Drell and the Bells (Tighten Up) started playing in my head as soon as I saw the baby's name, sorry (but not sorry--I like that tune!).



I thought of Sugar, Sugar by The Archie’s!


----------



## daisychainz

minababe said:


> I love the Name!
> Archie is sooo cute.
> lovely choice.
> I would like Archie Henry more than Harrison but they will know why they picked Harrison, maybe they will tell us later.
> 
> But I knew it will be different than all the other boring names that everyone in this Family seems to have.. Arthur, Arthur, Arthur.. soo boring. and to all the People who acted so smart that they will know the Name already because of the Homepage hahahahahahahh so funny.


Archie is a form of the name Arthur and Archibald. Like you said, soooo boring!


----------



## redney

It's quite popular and trendy, according to this. Archie is 11th on the list of popular UK baby boys' names in 2019, and this is before the royal baby's name was announced.

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-archie-baby-name-1419602?amp=1


----------



## Straight-Laced

Love the name. Under the radar toff.


----------



## Goodfrtune

sdkitty said:


> sorry not trying to be mean but my first though was Archie comics



Me too! At least they didn’t name him Jughead.


----------



## arnott

Wonder if that hat is covering a mop of curly black hair.


----------



## Alexenjie

I don't care for  the name Archie, find it unusual but I am American so I am surprised to hear that it is a popular name in Britain. I have not liked lots of royal baby names including Henry (Harry), Beatrice, Eugenie, George or Louis, I've only ever liked Charlotte and William was okay to me. I know I will grow to love this baby and his name will fit him and be normal in a few months. I respect their right to name him whatever pleases them.


----------



## tulipfield

Archie seems like a weird name, just because it’s supposed to be short for Archibald, but they just named him Archie.  Like naming your kid Kathy rather than Katherine.  I mean I know people do it but I thought the royals would be more traditional.


----------



## Gal4Dior

The baby is so beautiful, but omg the name. Ugh. I also thought that Archie might have been short for Archibald...guess not.


----------



## hellosunshine

"During a 2016 interview, which Bustle recently unearthed, Markle (who was starring in _Suits _at the time) was asked, “What children’s book can you not wait to share with your kids?” Her answer: _The Giving Tree_, by Shel Silverstein. The classic read details the friendship between a boy and a tree, and examines what it means to give and take in our world."

https://www.scholastic.com/parents/...-markle-cant-wait-to-share-with-her-baby.html


----------



## Pessie

tulipfield said:


> Archie seems like a weird name, just because it’s supposed to be short for Archibald, but they just named him Archie.  Like naming your kid Kathy rather than Katherine.  I mean I know people do it but I thought the royals would be more traditional.


I hope they eventually christen him Archibald.  Every child should have a proper name on their passport, not an abbreviation IMO.  I think parents tempted to give their baby a “cute” name should try imagining it on a 45 year old trying to do well in their work/career.


----------



## doni

Harry is also short for Henry, but I believe they named him Henry and announced he would be referred to as Harry. Maybe same in this case? It does seem odd that a royal would be christened with a nickname, but then, some nicknames become proper names after time (like Marlene), and this may be happening to Archie given it is so popular in the UK.

On the subject of George’s nickname, I mean, all we have is a journalist who says when he asked the Prince his name he answered: Archie, and lots of speculation from there. There is absolutely no other sign that this is his nickname. Probably half his friends are called Archie and that’s why he said that . If anything, the fact that the Sussex have named their child Archie is evidence that this is not the name used by the family to refer to Prince George, which would have been absurd in any event.


----------



## tulipfield

doni said:


> Harry is also short for Henry, but I believed they named him Henry and announced he would be referred to as Harry. Maybe same in this case? It does seem odd that a royal would be christened with a nickname, but then, some nicknames become proper names after time (like Marlene), and this may be happening to Archie given it is so popular in the UK.
> 
> On the subject of George’s nickname, I mean, all we have is a journalist who says when he asked the Prince his name he answered: Archie, and lots of speculation from there. There is absolutely no other sign that this is his nickname. Probably half his friends are called Archie and that’s why he said that . If anything, the fact that the Sussex have named their child Archie is evidence that this is not the name used by the family to refer to Prince George, which would have been absurd in any event.



I actually looked it up because I also thought about the Harry/Henry thing, but everywhere I look lists his full name with Archie and not Archibald.  =\


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tulipfield

Pessie said:


> I hope they eventually christen him Archibald.  Every child should have a proper name on their passport, not an abbreviation IMO.  I think parents tempted to give their baby a “cute” name should try imagining it on a 45 year old trying to do well in their work/career.



I agree although in Archie’s case I don’t think he’ll have any issue getting a job.  [emoji23]


----------



## Morgan R

I thought these comparisons were great to see...Harry and Meghan were able to be traditional but at the same time be modern when it came about introducing their baby.

Royal photocall: Prince Charles, Princess Diana, and baby Prince Harry / Prince Harry, Meghan, and baby Archie






Some of the earliest pictures of Meghan (as a baby and as a mother): Doria with her mother Jeanette and baby Meghan/Queen Elizabeth II, Doria, Meghan, and baby Archie


----------



## dangerouscurves

tulipfield said:


> Archie seems like a weird name, just because it’s supposed to be short for Archibald, but they just named him Archie.  Like naming your kid Kathy rather than Katherine.  I mean I know people do it but I thought the royals would be more traditional.



People do this a lot in Germany. A family friend named her son Ben. I asked if it's a short form of Benjamin or Benedikt and she freaked out. Lol! Another friend named her son Tony instead of Anthony or Antonius or Anton.


----------



## gelbergirl

Meghans makeup looked pretty during little Archie's introduction.


----------



## redney

Archie as a name itself, and not a nickname for anything else, seems standard and "normal" in the UK. So many people in the US can't seem to grasp that. Plus Archie Bunker and Archie the comic strip character are pop culture figures in the US, not in the UK.

While Meghan is American and got those references, it's not like she will reside in the US if still married to Harry, so why not embrace her new culture and country of which she not only resides, but also is a member of its Royal family and a public figure?


----------



## Sharont2305

dangerouscurves said:


> People do this a lot in Germany. A family friend named her son Ben. I asked if it's a short form of Benjamin or Benedikt and she freaked out. Lol! Another friend named her son Tony instead of Anthony or Antonius or Anton.


This happens a lot here in the UK too. 
Archie is a name in its own right now as its become so popular. 
I know 2 children called Bobby, not short for Robert in these cases. 
I know a girl called Elsie which is short for Elizabeth, but not in this case either. 
Kitty is short for Katherine but that's used as a given name too


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince Harry in the Netherlands to celebrate the one year countdown to the Invictus Games 2020 being held there.


----------



## jcnc

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Harry in the Netherlands to celebrate the one year countdown to the Invictus Games 2020 being held there.


I wish dad’s would be given/ they take a week or two of leave to spend time with the new baby too.

I am sure Meghan has all the help she needs plus her mom is here but it really bugs me that a baby changed a Mom’s life in a second and dads get to continue the way they were for a lotttt longer


----------



## washington101

Harry has a two week leave for maternity, but the Invictus games are important to him so he went. It is only a day trip so he will be home in the evening.


----------



## washington101

Archie is a proper name to  me , can't stand Archibald. Now lucky is not a normal name.


----------



## floridasun8

Lurker here, but count me in as another not fond of the name.

I think Archie is cute for a little boy, but not a grown man that will be connected to the BRF.  Of course I tend to not like names for men that end in 'ie's' or 'y's' either so...*shrug* LOL.  I think it makes them sound immature and keeping their nicknames as a kid as opposed to a grown manly man.  I know he'd likely never reach the throne being 7th in line, but I still feel they could have gone with something a *bit* more traditional.  Alexander was my pick.

Can't wait to watch little Archie grow up and see real baby pics once he's out from all the newborn swaddling.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Oh thanks. Now I’ve got his voice in my head “we dance just as good as we walk.” [emoji38]


You're welcome!


----------



## minababe

Archie is a normal beautiful Name. no nickname .. it is a really popular Name in the UK.
nothing wrong with the Name. as a Baby, Boy, man, grandpa. classic and timeless. prince archie would be the cutest but archie is cute enough 
nothing to do with teen  tv Show like riverdale etc.
George's nickname is not Archie. that was a Story in the press. he said the Name to a stranger when someone asked him what his Name is.
maybe he likes the Name or has 2 Boys in his class with the same Name.


----------



## Sharont2305

washington101 said:


> Harry has a two week leave for maternity, but the Invictus games are important to him so he went. It is only a day trip so he will be home in the evening.


Yes, not forgetting that he was actually due there yesterday and was staying the night. He cancelled that last week. 
Heathrow is practically next door to Windsor and the flight is just over an hour to Holland so its doable in a few hours. 
It's not like he's doing like the rest of us do, having to arrive at the airport 2 hours beforehand to go through check in and security before boarding and waiting an age at passport control the other end, and then the same coming back. (Yes, I know he'll have to go through security too.)
Once he's off the plane at Heathrow, hell be home probably within half an hour.


----------



## bag-mania

Your opinion of names can change based on the people who have it. I predict that in a few months, maybe a year tops, everyone here will be gushing about baby Archie and won't be able to imagine him having any other name. It will be perfect for him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> Your opinion of names can change based on the people who have it. I predict that in a few months, maybe a year tops, everyone here will be gushing about baby Archie and won't be able to imagine him having any other name. It will be perfect for him.


So true!  I remember not liking the name George when he was born, and his personality has made it a cool name for me.


----------



## TC1

My daughter goes to school with kids named Princess and Excellence. I'm sure Archie will be just fine.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Awful name, but lots of people pick far worse for their kids. At least Archie is something normal. Harrison would have been a nicer first name.


----------



## Aimee3

The photo of Baby Archie we saw made me think he was a C-section. Usually babies  2 days old have scrunched up misshapen puffy red faces and his face looked perfectly smooth.


----------



## zen1965

Aimee3 said:


> The photo of Baby Archie we saw made me think he was a C-section. Usually babies  2 days old have scrunched up misshapen puffy red faces and his face looked perfectly smooth.



Meghan walking around on high heels two days after a c-section would be quite a feat.


----------



## Chagall

Bag*Snob said:


> No to that name. All I can think of is Archie Bunker. I hope they call him Harrison.


I don’t like the name at all. There were so many classy choices they could have used. It’s kind of goofy sounding. JMO


----------



## Aimee3

zen1965 said:


> Meghan walking around on high heels two days after a c-section would be quite a feat.



Never had one so I didn’t think of that but she’s managed high heels all thru pregnancy so anything’s possible.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Aimee3 said:


> The photo of Baby Archie we saw made me think he was a C-section. Usually babies  2 days old have scrunched up misshapen puffy red faces and his face looked perfectly smooth.


That baby is older than 2-3 days. Apparently Harry slipped up and said "the baby changes so much after two weeks"... it's being reported now and speculation again that they hid the birth for whatever reason. Maybe we'll see the birth certificate and the date will be accurate on that. It doesn't matter much now that the baby is here. They do keep excellent secrets, though. As far as I'm aware the honeymoon location was never revealed either.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-harry-slip-people-convinced-161949369.html


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That baby is older than 2-3 days. Apparently Harry slipped up and said "the baby changes so much after two weeks"... it's being reported now and speculation again that they hid the birth for whatever reason. Maybe we'll see the birth certificate and the date will be accurate on that. It doesn't matter much now that the baby is here. They do keep excellent secrets, though. As far as I'm aware the honeymoon location was never revealed either.
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-harry-slip-people-convinced-161949369.html


Really.  I was thinking how much can a baby change in two days?


----------



## A1aGypsy

I honestly do not think that they would lie about the birthdate and saddle him with a different date just to pacify their own needs. That seems crazy.

And she also did not look two weeks post birth.

I think that is hog wash. He said “everyone says babies change a lot over two weeks. Let’s see what he looks like in a month.”

My nephews were born vaginally. Both had big non-squishy smooth melons and faces.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That baby is older than 2-3 days. Apparently Harry slipped up and said "the baby changes so much after two weeks"... it's being reported now and speculation again that they hid the birth for whatever reason. Maybe we'll see the birth certificate and the date will be accurate on that. It doesn't matter much now that the baby is here. They do keep excellent secrets, though. As far as I'm aware the honeymoon location was never revealed either.
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-harry-slip-people-convinced-161949369.html



What he said in that comment (because i rewound to hear it again) was "they say that a baby changes so much in the first two weeks".  That's accurate info that he was told by people, and then they went on to confirm that Archie's face had already changed in two days and they know that will continue to happen.


----------



## zen1965

Aimee3 said:


> Never had one so I didn’t think of that but she’s managed high heels all thru pregnancy so anything’s possible.


Walking on high heels two days after major abdominal stitches is a no for me. I remember the excruciating pain just getting up to hobble to the bathroom. Ouch. IMHO she most likely had a natural birth. I cannot believe the Palace lied about the birth date.


----------



## doni

Oh please, he said that everybody says babies change so much the first couple of weeks, as an answer to the question of whom he resembles...

This has to be one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories... Is Archie going to have a ’secret’ birthday party for the rest of his life? Or is the idea that they are going to lie to their own son about his birth? And all that, including the amazing logistics and planning this would involve, for what exactly? To hang around on their own a few days because they couldn’t be bothered with the photo shooting?
It is just a baby, nothing so out of this world...


----------



## cafecreme15

Agree with others here - I think Harry just meant that babies change a lot in the first couple of weeks so they don't know who he looks like yet. Not sure how anyone interpreted this as meaning the baby was born two weeks ago.


----------



## TC1

Meghan still looked very puffy.. (not in a bad way) just saying 2 WEEKS doesn't make sense. 2 days, yes..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

doni said:


> Oh please, he said that everybody says babies change so much the first couple of weeks, as an answer to the question of whom he resembles...
> 
> This has to be one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories... Is Archie going to have a ’secret’ birthday party for the rest of his life? Or is the idea that they are going to lie to their own son about his birth? And all that, including the amazing logistics and planning this would involve, for what exactly? To hang around on their own because they couldn’t be bother about the boring photo shooting?
> It is just a baby, nothing so out of this world...


Exactly, just a baby and nothing special. So why bother with a super secret/private birth plan at all. And then take 2 days only.


----------



## lulilu

Agree that the notion that the baby is two weeks old is just another click bait story for the gossip rags.  Meghan's tummy looks like she very recently -- say two days ago -- had the baby.

Love that they chose a popular British boy's name for their son.  Sounds like they want him to grow up like a normal kid.


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Exactly, just a baby and nothing special. So why bother with a super secret/private birth plan at all. And then take 2 days only.



Harry and Meghan didn't make it a secret. Meghan went on maternity leave a few weeks before her due date so we didn't see her for awhile. It's the media and the conspiracy theorists who made it seem like something covert was going on.


----------



## Sharont2305

Plus Harry said at the announcement that he was a little overdue.
So, if the baby was 2 weeks old and a little overdue then we are talking he was due possibly around the 10th of April.. ish.
That's a contradiction in what Meghan said in that she was due end of April, early May.
There is no way that woman gave birth 2 weeks prior, she looked amazing, tired, exhausted, still sore, everything a new mum should look like after giving birth only 2 days prior..... and in heels, lol
Stupid conspiracy theories! What for?


----------



## Tivo

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That baby is older than 2-3 days. Apparently Harry slipped up and said "the baby changes so much after two weeks"... it's being reported now and speculation again that they hid the birth for whatever reason. Maybe we'll see the birth certificate and the date will be accurate on that. It doesn't matter much now that the baby is here. They do keep excellent secrets, though. As far as I'm aware the honeymoon location was never revealed either.
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-harry-slip-people-convinced-161949369.html


I dunno. I interpreted his comments to mean the baby will change a lot  over the next 2 weeks.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Well, I didn’t have a csection and my son’s face was perfectly smooth and head not misshapen. In my case, I had a relatively fast Labor, and  I didn’t have to push for very long !


----------



## Encore Hermes

Well......Harry has been glowing since Archie’s birth.....at the announcement, presentation. No way he could have contained himself for two weeks.  
I agree with the two weeks conspiracy.....it’s a click bait trap.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Encore Hermes said:


> Well......Harry has been glowing since Archie’s birth.....at the announcement, presentation. No way he could have contained himself for two weeks.
> I agree with the two weeks conspiracy.....it’s a click bait trap.



Totally agree - there's no human way that Harry could have faked the joy of the DAY his son was born. He may have married an actress, but she has not had enough time to teach him THAT many acting skills!


----------



## gracekelly

I think he was so overcome with joy and lack of sleep that it was just him being a little unclear with his thoughts. Really doubtful the baby came two weeks ago. He just meant the baby will change how he looks.

There is a school of thought that all first babies look like their fathers when they are born and it is nature’s way of assuring dad that he is in fact, the dad.


----------



## Bentley1

BagLovingMom said:


> Well, I didn’t have a csection and my son’s face was perfectly smooth and head not misshapen. In my case, I had a relatively fast Labor, and  I didn’t have to push for very long !


Same


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting The Hague to launch the one-year countdown to the Invictus Games 2020


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan along with Prince William and Kate have launched the Mental Health Texting Service "Shout" - https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ghan-launch-shout-mental-health-text-service/

For the last few months "Shout" started working quietly behind the scenes but is now officially being launched. Behind The Scenes pictures taken a few months ago.:


----------



## bag-princess

LibbyRuth said:


> What he said in that comment (because i rewound to hear it again) was "they say that a baby changes so much in the first two weeks".  That's accurate info that he was told by people, and then they went on to confirm that Archie's face had already changed in two days and they know that will continue to happen.



Exactly! 



Just saw this and I was wondering when it was going to happen! Disgusting people!


----------



## ChanelFan29

Someone else mentioned that they suspected Meghan had a c-section.  That would make sense to me, she didn’t seem herself the other day and being in pain/uncomfortable from a major surgery would certainly explain that.


----------



## chowlover2

I think it was so refreshing to see a woman look like she gave birth 2 days prior. Kate always appears with a flat stomach. I’m glad Meghan did not go down that road.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulu212121

chowlover2 said:


> I think it was so refreshing to see a woman look like she gave birth 2 days prior. Kate always appears with a flat stomach. I’m glad Meghan did not go down that road.


You better look again, Kate did not appear with a flat stomach after any of her children's births.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-princess said:


> Exactly!
> Just saw this and I was wondering when it was going to happen! Disgusting people!
> View attachment 4428571



There are apparently no lows, to which peoole will not stoop.

Racist scumbag.


----------



## hellosunshine

That BBC jockey deserved to be fired. I just took a quick look at his twitter and he seems to be pissed off that he lost his job because he thought an apology and a swift deletion would suffice. What a fool.

Anyways, this morning I was chatting with a good friend at work and the topic of Meghan & Harry came up...and somehow the discussion futher delved into kids that grow up in blended or mixed families. My co-worker was explaining how difficult it can be to feel secure and accepted within your white or black side of the family. The whole "one-drop rule" or "looking too caucasian" and other various judgements...it just gets rough. I only wish that people were more open to love and be loved because at the end of the day...we're all born the same way and die the same way.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## gelbergirl

I wonder, is Prince Harry considered a hard-working Royal?
He seems to do much on his own, then seems scheduled in support of Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


>



OMG!! When are people going to realise she is NOT Duchess Meghan!!!
This really winds me up!
Sorry, I'll get off my high horse now


----------



## Morgan R

Sharont2305 said:


> OMG!! When are people going to realise she is NOT Duchess Meghan!!!
> This really winds me up!
> Sorry, I'll get off my high horse now



On twitter I always see multiple royal reporters/photographers simply calling Meghan and Kate by either just their names they or always respectively calling them "Duchess Meghan" or "Duchess Kate" rather than their proper titles "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" or "Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge". It isn't meant to be disrespectful/not proper but I think it has more to do with the number of characters allowed per tweet and them trying to get all the information about whatever engagement/project/initiative of whichever royal into one tweet/the fewest tweets. In actual articles royal reporters write that is when they will use "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" or "Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge"


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> On twitter I always see multiple royal reporters/photographers simply calling Meghan and Kate by either just their names they are always respectively calling them "Duchess Meghan" or "Duchess Kate" rather than their proper titles "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" or "Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge". It isn't meant to be disrespectful/not proper but I think it has more to do with the number of characters allowed per tweet and them trying to get all the information about whatever engagement/project/initiative of whichever royal into one tweet/the fewest tweets. In actual articles royal reporters write that is when they will use "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" or "Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge"


I know, but it really winds me up, lol. It's worse when the say Duchess Meghan / Catherine of Sussex /Cambridge.
Hashtag I need to chill, lol


----------



## minababe

omg sorry but some People really Need to get a life. stop those mean rumors.

they share their News with the world and all the details we Need to know and some People have nothing more to do than spread mean rumors... how disrespectful ..

Archie was Born on monday, he looked just fine, Meghan also. she is still really bloated but each Body is different. at least when you see meghan you can put those speculations to rest.
Kate also had a belly when she left the Hospital, she just covered it with a loose Dress.
And no c section would be at 6 in the morning. so this is also pointless..


----------



## bisbee

Aimee3 said:


> The photo of Baby Archie we saw made me think he was a C-section. Usually babies  2 days old have scrunched up misshapen puffy red faces and his face looked perfectly smooth.


I had 2 babies...neither one had a scrunched up, misshapen puffy red face and neither one was born via C-section.  Fact.


----------



## stanfordmom

minababe said:


> And no c section would be at 6 in the morning. so this is also pointless..



Totally agree the conspiracy rumors are ridiculous, and there is no way she had a c section (which is major abdominal surgery) and was able to walk normally the next day. But just fyi c sections are at any time they’re needed.


----------



## daisychainz

chowlover2 said:


> I think it was so refreshing to see a woman look like she gave birth 2 days prior. Kate always appears with a flat stomach. I’m glad Meghan did not go down that road.


Kate appeared just as Meghan, with a quite inflated midsection, apparently a few hours after the birth. What pictures did you not see, lol.
I think Meghan looked exhausted. She might have had a major medical complication or birth issues. There is just absolutely no way to tell when her baby was born, what she had done, or even where it was born or what happened surrounding the birth. Even though she looked good her entire pregnancy she could have had something medical wrong with her. It's her vajay and body so everyone can only guess and gossip about her health and what did and didn't happen with her birthing. I think Archie might be an only child though unless they plan on another very fast. The palace did mess up a lot with the birth information!! They announced it was a boy before they even announced she was in labor and called Meghan by Kate's full title. They made a lot of errors and blame the new staff.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> Kate appeared just as Meghan, with a quite inflated midsection, apparently a few hours after the birth. What pictures did you not see, lol.
> I think Meghan looked exhausted. She might have had a major medical complication or birth issues. There is just absolutely no way to tell when her baby was born, what she had done, or even where it was born or what happened surrounding the birth. Even though she looked good her entire pregnancy she could have had something medical wrong with her. It's her vajay and body so everyone can only guess and gossip about her health and what did and didn't happen with her birthing. I think Archie might be an only child though unless they plan on another very fast. The palace did mess up a lot with the birth information!! They announced it was a boy before they even announced she was in labor and called Meghan by Kate's full title. They made a lot of errors and blame the new staff.


I think they will try for another baby soon.  Just my opinion based on how fast she got pregnant with this one.  They will have plenty of help with childcare so only hard part is the pregnancy and birth IMO.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> Kate appeared just as Meghan, with a quite inflated midsection, apparently a few hours after the birth. What pictures did you not see, lol.
> I think Meghan looked exhausted. She might have had a major medical complication or birth issues. There is just absolutely no way to tell when her baby was born, what she had done, or even where it was born or what happened surrounding the birth. Even though she looked good her entire pregnancy she could have had something medical wrong with her. It's her vajay and body so everyone can only guess and gossip about her health and what did and didn't happen with her birthing. I think Archie might be an only child though unless they plan on another very fast. The palace did mess up a lot with the birth information!! They announced it was a boy before they even announced she was in labor and called Meghan by Kate's full title. They made a lot of errors and blame the new staff.



IMO, Meghan did not look exhausted - she just looked like she didn't put a great deal of effort into looking perfect. We're so used to seeing perfection in the royal family, so when hair is just normal or makeup is ordinary, it's surprising. 
I think that Meghan heard loud and clear the chatter about the impact on women when royal family members or other celebrities put on these prefect looks after giving birth and wanted to avoid feeding into it.


----------



## gazoo

X


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gazoo

I think she looked dazed. A look I remember well. I was up walking a day after an emergency cesarean. Puffy and thrilled. Not saying I think she had a cesarean, but it's possible to be up. 

The baby is beautiful, as expected, and they look gorgeous together. Love the interview, and photos released. 

Kate was also puffy and bloated when she delivered. George in particular. I dislike that she's now being slammed for introducing her babies the way she did. I wish everyone could appreciate each woman without comparisons or disparaging one over the other.

Hoping to see the Cambridge kids running around, playing with Archie in years to come. Louis and Archie are so close in age,  I'm excited to see them hopefully be close.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s honestly none of our business what went down during the birth or what she is recovering from.


----------



## gracekelly

Wow this is such a tough crowd. My take was that Meghan looked lovely and still in a daze from the miracle of giving birth to a healthy beautiful baby.


----------



## hellosunshine

Not many would know but people need to remember that Meghan went through an extreme vetting by the palace before the couples' engagement. They did a check on everything including health + fertility...as Harry wanted kids. I don't think there are any fertility issues as some are speculating here. I agree that she will likely have another child after Archie is roughly a year old but she also does have a few good years to have kids if they want to.


----------



## Pessie

hellosunshine said:


> Not many would know but people need to remember that Meghan went through an extreme vetting by the palace before the couples' engagement. They did a check on everything including health + fertility...as Harry wanted kids. I don't think there are any fertility issues as some are speculating here. I agree that she will likely have another child after Archie is roughly a year old but she also does have a few good years to have kids if they want to.


That’s utter nonsense.  It doesn’t matter to the palace whether Harry and Meghan have children or not.  The line of succession is already secured.


----------



## LibbyRuth

It would be a major thing if they pulled it off, but I've had a gut feeling since they married that at some point, Harry and Meghan may also choose to adopt a child.  Given the affinity they share for Africa, I could see them adopting a baby from an African country.  
With the importance of bloodlines in the royal family, I realize it would be a big deal.  I don't think they could broach the subject until the Queen passes and Charles is king. But it would not surprise me if they don't try to continue in their way of doing things their own way by adopting.


----------



## hellosunshine

Pessie said:


> That’s utter nonsense.  It doesn’t matter to the palace whether Harry and Meghan have children or not.  The line of succession is already secured.



It does matter because anything can happen. There's no such thing as "security" in life. One cannot predict what will or will not happen.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> It would be a major thing if they pulled it off, but I've had a gut feeling since they married that at some point, Harry and Meghan may also choose to adopt a child.  Given the affinity they share for Africa, I could see them adopting a baby from an African country.
> With the importance of bloodlines in the royal family, I realize it would be a big deal.  I don't think they could broach the subject until the Queen passes and Charles is king. But it would not surprise me if they don't try to continue in their way of doing things their own way by adopting.


the queen could be around for quite a few more years....I think her mother lived to be very old.....
I think one way or the other they will have another child.  Meghan grew up as an only child, didn't she?  Her step siblings were much older?  Usually I think only children want to have more than one.  And Harry was so close to his brother.  I think that would make him want to have a sibling for his son.  Just my opinion of course.


----------



## LibbyRuth

sdkitty said:


> the queen could be around for quite a few more years....I think her mother lived to be very old.....
> I think one way or the other they will have another child.  Meghan grew up as an only child, didn't she?  Her step siblings were much older?  Usually I think only children want to have more than one.  And Harry was so close to his brother.  I think that would make him want to have a sibling for his son.  Just my opinion of course.



I agree with you that from what they've said they'll likely have more than one child. I think they could do that AND adopt some day ... if his family allowed it.  But I also admit that I've never heard them say that they would like to adopt. It's merely a guess on my part based on time they've spent in orphanages, their awareness of the needs. and their willingness to buck the system to do what makes sense for their immediate family.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Not many would know but people need to remember that Meghan went through an extreme vetting by the palace before the couples' engagement. They did a check on everything including health + fertility...as Harry wanted kids


You are joking, right??? I think we've moved on a lot from that in the last century!


----------



## hellosunshine

@Sharont2305 Why would I joke about this? Yeah, we've moved on a lot from that but at the end of the day..are we really going to think it's so farfetched to assume that Meghan may have taken a fertility test considering Meghan is on the older scale of having a child + Harry wanting children? There are literally over a dozen videos of Harry talking about fatherhood and how he can't wait to have his own little family. Listen, it's unpopular to say this but I don't think Harry would've married Meghan if it was known that she'd be unable to conceive. It is what it is. Now, we can go on and continue to clutch our pearls and pretend like what I'm saying is totally unthinkable.

Btw, this isn't an insult or a snub at Meghan..I am a big fan of hers. 

Again, this is my opinion.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> It does matter because anything can happen. There's no such thing as "security" in life. One cannot predict what will or will not happen.


That would mean Prince Charles and the Cambridges being wiped out by some catastrophe!


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> @Sharont2305 Why would I joke about this? Yeah, we've moved on a lot from that but at the end of the day..are we really going to think it's so farfetched to assume that Meghan may have taken a fertility test considering Meghan is on the older scale of having a child + Harry wanting children? There are literally over a dozen videos of Harry talking about fatherhood and how he can't wait to have his own little family. Listen, it's unpopular to say this but I don't think Harry would've married Meghan if it was known that she'd be unable to conceive. It is what it is. Now, we can go on and continue to clutch our pearls and pretend like what I'm saying is totally unthinkable.
> 
> Btw, this isn't an insult or a snub at Meghan..I am a big fan of hers.
> 
> Again, this is my opinion.


A lot of men and women want to have children desperately but still marry the person they love not knowing how their future path will pan out children wise.


----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> @Sharont2305 Why would I joke about this? Yeah, we've moved on a lot from that but at the end of the day..are we really going to think it's so farfetched to assume that Meghan may have taken a fertility test considering Meghan is on the older scale of having a child + Harry wanting children? There are literally over a dozen videos of Harry talking about fatherhood and how he can't wait to have his own little family. Listen, it's unpopular to say this but I don't think Harry would've married Meghan if it was known that she'd be unable to conceive. It is what it is. Now, we can go on and continue to clutch our pearls and pretend like what I'm saying is totally unthinkable.
> 
> Btw, this isn't an insult or a snub at Meghan..I am a big fan of hers.
> 
> Again, this is my opinion.


I don't have any idea if they do this (vet partners for childbirthing) but getting pregnant so quick could have been something other than luck. She was married before and had long-term bf's she lived with so why didn't she have a baby then? Speculating that she had an issue, or that they wanted to be sure she didn't, isn't out of the realm of possibility. Anything is within possibility because we don't know squat about these people, lol!


----------



## RueMonge

gracekelly said:


> Wow this is such a tough crowd.



Truest words I have read here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> I don't have any idea if they do this (vet partners for childbirthing) but getting pregnant so quick could have been something other than luck. She was married before and had long-term bf's she lived with so why didn't she have a baby then? Speculating that she had an issue, or that they wanted to be sure she didn't, isn't out of the realm of possibility. Anything is within possibility because we don't know squat about these people, lol!


I get that, but the way I interpreted the posters words were that she was vetted and checked prior to engagement and given the go ahead to get engaged. If she was found to be infertile then she would have been cast aside.


----------



## bisousx

For gossip’s sake, I’m open to the notion of women being “checked” before being permission to marry a royal, but is there any evidence that accompanies this?


----------



## doni

William, who is still only the second in line to the throne, already has three kids. The heir to the throne has three siblings, each with their own kids, who are also having kids. The Crown doesn’t care a jot if Harry has kids or not.
As for Harry personally wanting kids, lots of men do, and as far as I am aware, most of them don’t subject their women to fertility tests prior to marriage...



hellosunshine said:


> @Sharont2305 Why would I joke about this? Yeah, we've moved on a lot from that but at the end of the day..are we really going to think it's so farfetched to assume that Meghan may have taken a fertility test considering Meghan is on the older scale of having a child + Harry wanting children? There are literally over a dozen videos of Harry talking about fatherhood and how he can't wait to have his own little family. Listen, it's unpopular to say this but I don't think Harry would've married Meghan if it was known that she'd be unable to conceive. It is what it is. Now, we can go on and continue to clutch our pearls and pretend like what I'm saying is totally unthinkable.


----------



## hellosunshine

I never implied that the crown depended upon Harry's children..it's just one person here who seems to have very low regard for Harry's line of descendents and is being rather dismissive about it all but whatever floats your boat.

Eitherway, I'm on the side that anything can happen. Life is unpredictable.

@bisousx There's no definite evidence (as in any confirmations) but I'd imagine that it is something that is discussed and dealt with accordingly. Royals marrying, starting families, public witnessing and becoming enamored as the kids grow into adulthood, and they themselves going onto marry and starting their own families is very "on brand". They're all about the expansion of "the firm" as they call it. Being able to carry a child is part of the program and if you can't then I'd imagine that they'd move ahead & continue their search.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I vividly recall there being public discussion of Diana being checked for virginity status when she became engaged which I found horrifying. I haven’t heard anything about fertility but it wouldn’t surprise me for the heir to the throne. I don’t know if they would do something like that for lesser royals though. 

Again, WHY anyone would marry into that family is beyond me...


----------



## Aimee3

Meghan’s only 37, not 73!  Lots of women have babies well into their 40’s here in the US. It’s quite common.  If fertility were an issue (and I’m not saying it is) there’s so many IVF treatments available these days.  I’m sure there’s no rush for a second baby.  Let them enjoy this one for a while.


----------



## Voyageuse

BagLovingMom said:


> Well, I didn’t have a csection and my son’s face was perfectly smooth and head not misshapen. In my case, I had a relatively fast Labor, and  I didn’t have to push for very long !



I had natural births too.  My first son was beautiful.  The second one looked like a troll.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The US presidential candidates all have to turn over medical documents during elections to prove fitness and health to serve, as proof they can survive their term. Since heirs are necessary for a monarchy I can see it being important to know before marriage if someone can/can't have kids since you need heirs to keep things moving. It's part of the politics of the position. It seems like it'd be a private conversation between the couple though, and not something they'd be testing for. Maybe with Kate and Diana they did, but it seems so archaic.


----------



## Tivo

Aimee3 said:


> Meghan’s only 37, not 73!  Lots of women have babies well into their 40’s here in the US. It’s quite common.  If fertility were an issue (and I’m not saying it is) there’s so many IVF treatments available these days.  I’m sure there’s no rush for a second baby.  Let them enjoy this one for a while.


The fact that she became pregnant so quickly stopped the merry go round of discussion about “geriatric eggs,”....and how “she waited too long,”....before it had the chance to get started. I doubt she’ll have trouble getting pregnant a second time.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> are we really going to think it's so farfetched to assume that Meghan may have taken a fertility test considering Meghan is on the older scale of having a child + Harry wanting children?


It is absurd.  And I don't know how you can be a fan of the Harry-Meghan partnership to think he would be cruel and selfish enough to hand his girlfriend/fiancee over to the men in grey to make her take completely unnecessary fertility tests, and do so as a condition of marrying her.  That doesn't jibe with how Meghan and Harry conduct their lives in any way.



hellosunshine said:


> I never implied that the crown depended upon Harry's children..it's just one person here who seems to have very low regard for Harry's line of descendents and is being rather dismissive about it all but whatever floats your boat.


I don't know which one person you are referring to since many people apparently disagree with you.  Harry himself has spoken about his relief that he has never had to worry about being anywhere near the throne.  His children will be even further away from it, and it's fairly clear from the lack of title for little Archie that Harry's children aren't going to grow up to be working royals.  Acknowledging that fact does not equate to having "low regard" for anyone.


----------



## TC1

daisychainz said:


> I don't have any idea if they do this (vet partners for childbirthing) but getting pregnant so quick could have been something other than luck. She was married before and had long-term bf's she lived with so why didn't she have a baby then? Speculating that she had an issue, or that they wanted to be sure she didn't, isn't out of the realm of possibility. Anything is within possibility because we don't know squat about these people, lol!


I would assume she didn't have a baby with them because she didn't want to?. There are birth control options until you're ready to settle down and have children with a partner that wants the same.


----------



## hellosunshine

@Flatsy It's not absurd and I refuse to go back and forth with you. My opinion is my opinion. Thank you very much.

Also, I could care less about how many people agree or disagree with me lol  I don't live for others approval.


----------



## hellosunshine

TC1 said:


> I would assume she didn't have a baby with them because she didn't want to?. There are birth control options until you're ready to settle down and have children with a partner that wants the same.



It's been speculated that there was a "no pregnancy clause" in her contract for Suits. She got married to her first husband in September 2011 but started filming the first season of Suits in June 2011. Sometimes writers/producers will require an actress to not get pregnant for ease of character development and filming. This could've been her situation.


----------



## hellosunshine

Sara Latham (PR director to Meghan & Harry) released a detailed interview regarding the birth of little Archie. Hopefully, some of her responses puts to rest some of the more crazy conspiracy theories out there --


----------



## Gal4Dior

chowlover2 said:


> I think it was so refreshing to see a woman look like she gave birth 2 days prior. Kate always appears with a flat stomach. I’m glad Meghan did not go down that road.



Umm, how is it Kate’s fault that she may look like she has a flat stomach? Like that is a choice of hers or Meghan’s?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> It is absurd.  And I don't know how you can be a fan of the Harry-Meghan partnership to think he would be cruel and selfish enough to hand his girlfriend/fiancee over to the men in grey to make her take completely unnecessary fertility tests, and do so as a condition of marrying her.  That doesn't jibe with how Meghan and Harry conduct their lives in any way.
> 
> 
> I don't know which one person you are referring to since many people apparently disagree with you.  Harry himself has spoken about his relief that he has never had to worry about being anywhere near the throne.  His children will be even further away from it, and it's fairly clear from the lack of title for little Archie that Harry's children aren't going to grow up to be working royals.  Acknowledging that fact does not equate to having "low regard" for anyone.


I don't know who the poster is referring to either, certainly hoping it isn't me. I'm a fan of both ladies. 
Agree with both posts you've quoted.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Not many would know but people need to remember that Meghan went through an extreme vetting by the palace before the couples' engagement. They did a check on everything including health + fertility...as Harry wanted kids. I don't think there are any fertility issues as some are speculating here. I agree that she will likely have another child after Archie is roughly a year old but she also does have a few good years to have kids if they want to.


Read your first line, that's why I thought what I thought you meant.


----------



## gelbergirl

hellosunshine said:


> Sara Latham (PR director to Meghan & Harry) released a detailed interview regarding the birth of little Archie. Hopefully, some of her responses puts to rest some of the more crazy conspiracy theories out there --



I love that both Harry and William have thrown down the gauntlet on giving info to the press and holding their privacy close - at the same time.  I'm just glad this was a uneventful birth (from what we know) & everyone is healthy.

The entire family must be falling in love at first sight with this little Archie.


----------



## LibbyRuth

LVSistinaMM said:


> Umm, how is it Kate’s fault that she may look like she has a flat stomach? Like that is a choice of hers or Meghan’s?



She didn’t. I remember very well that when George was born and Kate wore the blue Jenny Packham dress there was a lot of talk, very similar to what was said about Meghan, that it was great that Kate showed what a stomach looks like after birth instead of trying to disguise it. 
Both women have shown realities of birth while still respecting royal traditions.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t think those interviews help at all really. Either do what you said you were going to do or don’t announce / acknowledge anything. Lying does not help the reputation of the BRF at all.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> It's been speculated that there was a "no pregnancy clause" in her contract for Suits.


This shows how worthless "speculation" is because this is illegal in the US.  Women can't be forced to give up their reproductive rights in exchange for a job, nor can they be fired for getting pregnant.  Hunter Tylo successfully sued Melrose Place for firing her due to pregnancy.  No pregnancy clauses exist in Bollywood, not the US.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think there is a big difference between “they are discriminatory” and “they don’t exist”.

Hunter Tylo was a special case - she was already famous, had money to fight and had a job she could return to. Countless female actors talk about being pressured to look a certain way and not get pregnant. There are many examples historically of actors being forced to get abortions even.  I have absolutely no doubt it still exists albeit, they may not be written down.

If HT had just been a young actor starting out and she sued a big studio, she may have won but would likely have never worked in hollywood again.

(Of course, I have no idea if MM was ever pressured or what her deal was, I’m just speaking generally)


----------



## Flatsy

"Clause" means something is written into a contract, and it's simply not possible to require a woman to give up her right to get pregnant, or even directly pressure her.

Melrose Place tried to argue that Hunter Tylo had violated the clause in her contract that prohibited her from changing her appearance.  They also tried to argue that she was hired to play a sexy character and pregnancy would prohibit that.  Both arguments were shut down, and it is considered a landmark case.

Ambient pressure that women feel to postpone pregnancy for the sake of their careers is totally different than an employer prohibiting it via contract.


----------



## youngster

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t think those interviews help at all really. Either do what you said you were going to do or don’t announce / acknowledge anything. Lying does not help the reputation of the BRF at all.



I agree. I found those responses to be confusing and contradictory.  Why didn't they do what they said they would? It seems fairly simple. Announce when she went into labor as they said they would.  Antagonizing the press the way they did, over something that seems so minor, does not seem very smart.


----------



## buffym

youngster said:


> I agree. I found those responses to be confusing and contradictory.  Why didn't they do what they said they would? It seems fairly simple. Announce when she went into labor as they said they would.  Antagonizing the press the way they did, over something that seems so minor, does not seem very smart.



But they did do what they said, she went into labor during the media black out period. BP announced Archie was born in the early morning. It was the tabloids who screwed it up.


----------



## Alexenjie

I will be really surprised if Harry and Meghan's children (once they are adults) are not part of the performing royal family. Their grandfather will be king and all. It has sounded to me that Charles intended (successfully) to slim down the monarchy but that never meant to cut out his own children and their children. I think the royal family will be only Charles family, whoever that ends up including plus their families. This is just my guess from what I've read.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> This shows how worthless "speculation" is because this is illegal in the US.  Women can't be forced to give up their reproductive rights in exchange for a job, nor can they be fired for getting pregnant.  Hunter Tylo successfully sued Melrose Place for firing her due to pregnancy.  No pregnancy clauses exist in Bollywood, not the US.



Wrong, pregnancy clauses do exist and for them to not be illegal..the request is usually made at the beginning of the contract signing. An actress would willingly sign an agreement stating that she will not get pregnant for x-amout of seasons/years/etc.

Hunter Tylo likely had nothing in her contract directly forbidding her from getting pregnant therefore when she did and later got fired..she had grounds to sue. Btw, changing of appearance and directly requesting no pregnancy are two different beasts.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Wrong, pregnancy clauses do exist and for them to not be illegal..


I thought you weren't interested in back and forths with me?

Give one example of a modern-day actress who has a pregnancy clause.  Just one.   If it's not fictional, you should be able to come up with one documented example.  

A "pregnancy clause" violates US labor and discrimination laws.  They exist in certain industries outside of the US and are controversial in those places.


----------



## Flatsy

Alexenjie said:


> I will be really surprised if Harry and Meghan's children (once they are adults) are not part of the performing royal family. Their grandfather will be king and all.


The queen's grandchildren aren't all working royals.  Prince Andrew pushed hard to get working royal status for his daughters, but supposedly Prince Charles was against it and thinks the working portion of the family tree should not include grandchildren who aren't in direct line for the throne.

I think Harry is setting his children on the path of Zara and Peter Phillips.  They are fully part of the family and attend family events, but they don't have titles and don't live on taxpayer funding performing engagements.  

If Harry has enough of a private fortune left when he dies to hand down to his children, it's arguably a better life with a lot more freedom that he's giving to them.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> If Harry has enough of a private fortune left when he dies to hand down to his children, it's arguably a better life with a lot more freedom that he's giving to them.


Apparently, he is worth £30m, most of which was left to him by his mum and great grandmother. I'm imagining that could increase when Her Majesty dies and again when his father does. William will inherit the Duchy of Cornwall fortune but Harry will obviously get some of his personal fortune.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> The queen's grandchildren aren't all working royals.  Prince Andrew pushed hard to get working royal status for his daughters, but supposedly Prince Charles was against it and thinks the working portion of the family tree should not include grandchildren who aren't in direct line for the throne.
> 
> I think Harry is setting his children on the path of Zara and Peter Phillips.  They are fully part of the family and attend family events, but they don't have titles and don't live on taxpayer funding performing engagements.
> 
> If Harry has enough of a private fortune left when he dies to hand down to his children, it's arguably a better life with a lot more freedom that he's giving to them.


If this is what ends up happening, I think it's almost noble of Harry to bear all his work with a smile, even though he apparently doesn't like it enough that he strives to spare his children from it. I don't really know much about the politics of working royals apart what I read on this thread, but from what I know I think that's quite sweet of him to do.


----------



## sdkitty

bellebellebelle19 said:


> If this is what ends up happening, I think it's almost noble of Harry to bear all his work with a smile, even though he apparently doesn't like it enough that he strives to spare his children from it. I don't really know much about the politics of working royals apart what I read on this thread, but from what I know I think that's quite sweet of him to do.


I doubt he does this out of the kindness of his heart.  I think he is doing what he has been expected to do all his life - expected by his father, the queen, etc.
But I do think the and William also yearn to be more "normal" or "regular".
So since his kids won't be in direct succession for the throne, if he can make a more normal life for them, good for him


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I doubt he does this out of the kindness of his heart.  I think he is doing what he has been expected to do all his life - expected by his father, the queen, etc.
> But I do think the and William also yearn to be more "normal" or "regular".
> So since his kids won't be in direct succession for the throne, if he can make a more normal life for them, good for him


Hence the no title for Archie (for now at least)
Good for Harry and Meghan on deciding that.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The cats out of the bag?! Apparently Meghan/Doria had a rescue cat named Archie. Image from Fox News.


----------



## Morgan R

Not sure I believe he was named after a rescue pet.

Archie is a popular name in the U.K. The meaning of Archie is interpreted as being "genuine", "bold", and "brave" they could've just liked the meaning of the name. My opinion (though I could be wrong) is that Archie Harrison is named after both of his parents as well as his grandfather Prince Charles without him officially being given any of their actual names. Obviously Harrison means "Son of Harry" but the name Archie is very similar (almost an anagram) to both the names Charles and Rachel (which is Meghan's first name).

Unless they say specifically why his name is what it is we will never know but can just speculate.


----------



## Morgan R

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan along with Prince William and Kate have launched the Mental Health Texting Service "Shout" - https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ghan-launch-shout-mental-health-text-service/
> 
> For the last few months "Shout" started working quietly behind the scenes but is now officially being launched. Behind The Scenes pictures taken a few months ago.:
> 
> View attachment 4428418
> View attachment 4428416
> View attachment 4428415
> View attachment 4428414



More information and behind the scenes video/pictures regarding the Mental Health Texting Service "Shout":


----------



## hellosunshine

Some people here are more interested in arguing/fighting than talking in a courteous manner. I refuse to respond to replies that are abrasive and caustic in tone.

Anyways, folks in Hollyweird often engage in a lot of illegal things..case in point..the casting coach or sex for roles/contracts/deals. Nothing is out of the realm of imagination in Hollyweird. They march to the beat of their own drum.


----------



## hellosunshine

Morgan R said:


> More information and behind the scenes videos/pictures regarding the Mental Health Texting Service "Shout":
> View attachment 4430172
> View attachment 4430170
> View attachment 4430171



It's interesting that Harry & Meghan are tackling mental health awareness on two fronts...first with the Oprah documentary and secondly with this organization. Are they still doing the Oprah docu-series?


----------



## A1aGypsy

Out of all the reasons for the name Archie, I like “we named the cat Archie” the best. I hope that’s true.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry along with his grandparents Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip attending the Royal Windsor Horse Show


----------



## BagsNBaguettes

I had a random little thought a while ago...if they had given birth to twin boys the names Archie and Arthur would have been perfect together.


----------



## Glitterandstuds

A1aGypsy said:


> Out of all the reasons for the name Archie, I like “we named the cat Archie” the best. I hope that’s true.



Okay, Same! Crazy Cat Lady POWER haha


----------



## A1aGypsy

Glitterandstuds said:


> Okay, Same! Crazy Cat Lady POWER haha



Crazy cat ladies unit!!!!


----------



## bag-princess




----------



## Sharont2305

Just read that Harry told the cousins of Archies birth on their WhatsApp group.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## myown

did we got a birth certificate (like with Will and Kates kids)?


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> did we got a birth certificate (like with Will and Kates kids)?


Ive also read that it's going to be made private so that no one can see it. 
Bring back the conspiracy theories that he was born 2 weeks prior. *rolls eyes


----------



## A1aGypsy

I love the nod to Diana in that photo.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> I love the nod to Diana in that photo.


Me too, so sweet


----------



## buffym

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive also read that it's going to be made private so that no one can see it.
> Bring back the conspiracy theories that he was born 2 weeks prior. *rolls eyes



Legally they can’t do that. They have 42 days to file the certificate, the palace said they would file within the 42 days. The press is tabloids have asked for a copy early which the palace denied. For The Cambridge kids the press just used public records, the press is making a big deal they want a copy before it is public record.


----------



## doni

BagsNBaguettes said:


> I had a random little thought a while ago...if they had given birth to twin boys the names Archie and Arthur would have been perfect together.


Oh, but rumor has it they did have twins, only they want to keep it private. It is speculated that the boys will be taking turns for the photo shoots which will make it all that bit less taxing.


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> Legally they can’t do that. They have 42 days to file the certificate, the palace said they would file within the 42 days. The press is tabloids have asked for a copy early which the palace denied. For The Cambridge kids the press just used public records, the press is making a big deal they want a copy before it is public record.


I know all that, I just commented on what I've read


----------



## gelbergirl

did Meghan go to the Shout event just after giving birth??


----------



## myown

doni said:


> Oh, but rumor has it they did have twins, only they want to keep it private. It is speculated that the boys will be taking turns for the photo shoots which will make it all that bit less taxing.


lol I love all these creepy rumors! so stupid!


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive also read that it's going to be made private so that no one can see it.
> Bring back the conspiracy theories that he was born 2 weeks prior. *rolls eyes


I am curious about the name. if "Archie" is only the nickname they want him to be called, like his dad, Prince Henry.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive also read that it's going to be made private so that no one can see it.
> Bring back the conspiracy theories that he was born 2 weeks prior. *rolls eyes


when they made that appearance with the baby, Harry said something along the lines "they change so much in the first 2 weeks" when he was asked who he looks like. several times I read the quote "he chang*ed* so much in the first 2 weeks"


----------



## Morgan R

gelbergirl said:


> did Meghan go to the Shout event just after giving birth??



No. The behind the scenes video and pictures were taken in November but weren't released until a few days ago.


----------



## TMA

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The cats out of the bag?! Apparently Meghan/Doria had a rescue cat named Archie. Image from Fox News.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4430113



Actually not true. There is an accompanying video of this picture, incidentally on the website of the paper that speculated her cat was named Archie, and she mentioned names of both cats which were feminine names. The British media is cannot be trusted. Too many lies even when your eyes, ears and brain clearly perceive the opposite.


----------



## Encore Hermes

They are really pushing for baitclick with this


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TMA

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive also read that it's going to be made private so that no one can see it.
> Bring back the conspiracy theories that he was born 2 weeks prior. *rolls eyes



They will not publish the birth certificate themselves prior to filing. It would become a matter of public record within 42 days or so of birth so the media organizations can spend money on the fees to get a copy. They are just not making anything easy for them and also buys time for their birthing team and the hospital. The media has created a lot of craziness around the couple.


----------



## gelbergirl

what's with that Mother's Day post today?
The kid's feet are dangling and Prince Harry took the picture from the ground??


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Totally normal to hide your child's birth certificate.


----------



## bag-princess

myown said:


> when they made that appearance with the baby, Harry said something along the lines "they change so much in the first 2 weeks" when he was asked who he looks like. several times I read the quote "he chang*ed* so much in the first 2 weeks"



This has been misquoted so many times!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Totally normal to hide your child's birth certificate.


SMH....They're not hiding it. But why should they give in to the British press when they've published some truly awful stories about both Meghan and Harry.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Just read that Harry told the cousins of Archies birth on their WhatsApp group.



I love that they have a WhatsApp group - would be so fun to be able to read it! Too bad my hacking skills are non-existent [emoji23] (just kidding, obviously).


----------



## mrsinsyder

gelbergirl said:


> what's with that Mother's Day post today?
> The kid's feet are dangling and Prince Harry took the picture from the ground??


I can't imagine how much work went into getting that completely unnatural photo. And they give a nod to Diana, despite it not being Mother's Day in the UK, but leave out her own mother, who Mother's Day would actually apply to. I don't get it. Also...
_
claims to want privacy

posts kid on Insta every day_


----------



## A1aGypsy

Didn’t someone just take a picture down at his feet? I don’t understand how it is a difficult photo to take?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

FreeSpirit71 said:


> SMH....They're not hiding it. But why should they give in to the British press when they've published some truly awful stories about both Meghan and Harry.


There aren't hiding anything? 

"Meghan and Harry will keep Archie's birth certificate under wraps , delaying the time that key medical details will be released. Place of birth and the names of consultants were not included on proclamation, and the birth certificate, which includes these details, will only be sent to local registrar. But as a matter of public record the document will be available within 6 months."

This is hiding, or purposely holding back *something*. The guess as to what, who knows. But going to great lengths to make sure no one has details about a royal baby's birth is not normal. Wants absolute privacy, but let me show you my Instagram photos so you can help me get views. Seriously?!


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> I can't imagine how much work went into getting that completely unnatural photo. And they give a nod to Diana, despite it not being Mother's Day in the UK, but leave out her own mother, who Mother's Day would actually apply to. I don't get it. Also...
> _
> 
> claims to want privacy
> 
> posts kid on Insta every day_



Harry is the president of the Commonwealth Trust, Meghan is the Vice President. It was Mother’s Day in two Commonwealth countries Australia and Canada which is mentioned in the ig post. Princess Diana was a representative Commonwealth countries.

Her mother was included in the picture with the Queen which to me is a nice nod since her mother is not a public person.


----------



## buffym

ccbaggirl89 said:


> There aren't hiding anything?
> 
> "Meghan and Harry will keep Archie's birth certificate under wraps , delaying the time that key medical details will be released. Place of birth and the names of consultants were not included on proclamation, and the birth certificate, which includes these details, will only be sent to local registrar. But as a matter of public record the document will be available within 6 months."
> 
> This is hiding, or purposely holding back *something*. The guess as to what, who knows. But going to great lengths to make sure no one has details about a royal baby's birth is not normal. Wants absolute privacy, but let me show you my Instagram photos so you can help me get views. Seriously?!



So hiding means denying tabloids request. 

If it is public knowledge why can’t the press wait?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

buffym said:


> So hiding means denying tabloids request.
> 
> If it is public knowledge why can’t the press wait?


Exactly. Some people are looking for any slight reason to have a b*tch about Meghan.

I mean criticism where it's warranted, but this stuff? Petty AF.


----------



## bag-princess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> There aren't hiding anything?
> 
> "Meghan and Harry will keep Archie's birth certificate under wraps , delaying the time that key medical details will be released. Place of birth and the names of consultants were not included on proclamation, and the birth certificate, which includes these details, will only be sent to local registrar. But as a matter of public record the document will be available within 6 months."
> 
> This is hiding, or purposely holding back *something*. The guess as to what, who knows. *But going to great lengths to make sure no one has details about a royal baby's birth is not normal.* Wants absolute privacy, but let me show you my Instagram photos so you can help me get views. Seriously?!




You seem very pressed over this!  
What is it exactly that you just can’t live another day without knowing?


----------



## doni

Did they release all these details when Princess Anne gave birth? Will they do when Princess Eugenie gives birth? I don’t think the Crown is expected to immediately feed the press with all details on the birth of everyone who is born into the Family. I imagine they do that just for those in the direct line to the throne. The thing with Harry and Meghan is that their popularity is so high relative to their status the media seem to have some unrealistic expectations.


----------



## Sharont2305

The nod to Diana are the flowers in the picture. Forget me nots were her favourite flower.
Re the birth certificate, here in the UK , the birthing team aren't put on it, only place of birth. So, if it was a hospital birth people then can narrow it down to consultants who work at that hospital.... If indeed any were involved from the hospital


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

gelbergirl said:


> what's with that Mother's Day post today?
> The kid's feet are dangling and Prince Harry took the picture from the ground??



I think its lovely. They made a cute mothers day post, yet kept the baby for themselves. do they own us any picture? they wouldn't have to! 
and Babyfeet are just too cute.


----------



## stanfordmom

mrsinsyder said:


> And they give a nod to Diana, despite it not being Mother's Day in the UK, but leave out her own mother, who Mother's Day would actually apply to. I don't get it.



I am confused, how does this leave out her, or really any, mother? It literally says "all"...

_"Paying tribute to all mothers today - past, present, mothers-to-be, and those lost but forever remembered.

We honor and celebrate each and every one of you."_


----------



## bag-princess

stanfordmom said:


> I am confused, how does this leave out her, or really any, mother? It literally says "all"...
> 
> _"Paying tribute to all mothers today - past, present, mothers-to-be, and those lost but forever remembered.
> 
> We honor and celebrate each and every one of you."_




+1

Not only that but Dora is there with her and I am sure she was not left out of anything!


----------



## bisbee

doni said:


> Oh, but rumor has it they did have twins, only they want to keep it private. It is speculated that the boys will be taking turns for the photo shoots which will make it all that bit less taxing.



Give me a break.  That is ridiculous.

And all this fuss about the birth certificate...some people have too much time on their hands.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that if the conspiracy theorists are going to play, they should go all in. Why settle at just infant sons?  Why not claim that the twins were actually born BEFORE Meghan and Harry were born, are the reason that Meghan had to leave Suits rather than the marriage being the reason, and they will be kept out of the public eye until they are about 8 in order to cover up that they are actually a year old now!


----------



## bag-princess

doni said:


> Oh, but rumor has it they did have twins, only they want to keep it private. It is speculated that the boys will be taking turns for the photo shoots which will make it all that bit less taxing.


----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> Sara Latham (PR director to Meghan & Harry) released a detailed interview regarding the birth of little Archie. Hopefully, some of her responses puts to rest some of the more crazy conspiracy theories out there --


This is called damage control, lol, that is why she is a PR person, that is her job to provide answers to make reporters stop asking. It would be helpful to link where you get information from, like where this comes from. Not just you,that is just helpful in general. I see many people (on all forums on the Internet) who quote things but they never provide credit where it came from.


----------



## daisychainz

gelbergirl said:


> what's with that Mother's Day post today?
> The kid's feet are dangling and Prince Harry took the picture from the ground??


Pictures like this are so bizarre! I don't get baby body part pictures. Next up is the corner of an earlobe, lol. Talk about click-bait!


----------



## doni

Just to be clear, this was a joke!



doni said:


> Oh, but rumor has it they did have twins, only they want to keep it private. It is speculated that the boys will be taking turns for the photo shoots which will make it all that bit less taxing.





bisbee said:


> Give me a break.  That is ridiculous.
> 
> And all this fuss about the birth certificate...some people have too much time on their hands.





LibbyRuth said:


> I think that if the conspiracy theorists are going to play, they should go all in. Why settle at just infant sons?  Why not claim that the twins were actually born BEFORE Meghan and Harry were born, are the reason that Meghan had to leave Suits rather than the marriage being the reason, and they will be kept out of the public eye until they are about 8 in order to cover up that they are actually a year old now!





bag-princess said:


>


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> Pictures like this are so bizarre! I don't get baby body part pictures. Next up is the corner of an earlobe, lol. Talk about click-bait!



I've seen this becoming more common among common folk on social media, due to concerns over images of children being stolen, while still wanting to share pics of kids. There have been a few stories in the news of women who will fake having children on social media - using pictures of a child that a woman babysits for etc and posting those pics claiming the child is her own. It can be creepy, and as a result, some are choosing not to post any pictures of their own children's faces. So they will post a pic of a hand, foot, back of head, instead. 

I'd say that people would not be able to pull off claiming ARchie as their own kid therefore it's a moot point. However, there are other celebrities - Justin TImberlake comes to mind - who won't post pics of their kids faces. So maybe they are going that route?


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I've seen this becoming more common among common folk on social media, due to concerns over images of children being stolen, while still wanting to share pics of kids. There have been a few stories in the news of women who will fake having children on social media - using pictures of a child that a woman babysits for etc and posting those pics claiming the child is her own. It can be creepy, and as a result, some are choosing not to post any pictures of their own children's faces. So they will post a pic of a hand, foot, back of head, instead.
> 
> I'd say that people would not be able to pull off claiming ARchie as their own kid therefore it's a moot point. However, there are other celebrities - Justin TImberlake comes to mind - who won't post pics of their kids faces. So maybe they are going that route?


Yeah, there are a couple of well known male TV presenters here in the UK who do post pictures of their children but they are either the back them or they'll put an emoji to cover their faces.


----------



## berrydiva

This two can't catch a break from the nonsense. I'll come back lol.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> I've seen this becoming more common among common folk on social media, due to concerns over images of children being stolen, while still wanting to share pics of kids. There have been a few stories in the news of women who will fake having children on social media - using pictures of a child that a woman babysits for etc and posting those pics claiming the child is her own. It can be creepy, and as a result, some are choosing not to post any pictures of their own children's faces. So they will post a pic of a hand, foot, back of head, instead.
> 
> I'd say that people would not be able to pull off claiming ARchie as their own kid therefore it's a moot point. However, there are other celebrities - Justin TImberlake comes to mind - who won't post pics of their kids faces. So maybe they are going that route?


Wow. Yes, I have seen these photos from others, too, body part pictures. I didn't realize people stole infant pictures, I know they do it with lots of other social media, so it makes sense.


----------



## bag-princess

daisychainz said:


> This is called damage control, lol, that is why she is a PR person, that is her job to provide answers to make reporters stop asking. It would be helpful to link where you get information from, like where this comes from. Not just you,that is just helpful in general. I see many people (on all forums on the Internet) who quote things but they never provide credit where it came from.




*raises hand*

Miss daisychainz - how many points are taken off the submissions if we don’t provide the source?? [emoji851]


----------



## daisychainz

bag-princess said:


> *raises hand*
> 
> Miss daisychainz - how many points are taken off the submissions if we don’t provide the source?? [emoji851]


*PurseForum Community Rules*

No posting of or linking to content or discussions that are of a political or religious nature.
No posting of or linking to content that is sexually explicit, obscene or pornographic.
No profanity, use of offensive language (e.g., racist or hateful terms), or “shouting” (excessive use of capitalized letters).
*Be respectful towards other forum members.* Personal attacks on other members will not be tolerated. Should you have a problem with a member or post, send the member a Private Message (PM) or optionally, report the post to a Moderator using the ‘Report This Post’ link. Do not take your complaint to the public forums.
Do not post content that reveals the personal information of another person.
Respect TPF’s Administrators and Moderators and follow their instructions and directions.
Only one registered nickname per user. Additional, active nicknames are not permitted and will be banned along with the original.
Keep threads on topic. Start threads in the most appropriate forums.
Do not post or link to messages or content that violate any federal or state laws which include, but are not limited to, materials that violates a copyright, trademark, patent, trade secret, or other intellectual property right, or which violates a person’s privacy or contractual right.
*Do not post or link to materials if you do not have permission to copy or distribute them electronically or otherwise. This includes posting images copied from another website (hotlinking).*
Please post in English only, and refrain from excessive text message shorthand posting (or “text speak”).
Linking to or promotion of other fashion-related online forums or groups is prohibited. However, referencing another forum via a link to credit an original author of a story, information or image is permitted.
Links to your own blog in posts is not permitted. Blog links belong in your signature, only.
I highlighted an extra one for you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I don't understand the complaints about clickbait. Clickbait is for making money off of advertisers on a website. On Instagram, large amounts of likes on posts draws in sponsors. H&M aren't being sponsored by anything, neither are they searching for sponsors. So I'm really not getting why people are calling the photo of their son's foot clickbait??


----------



## bag-princess

daisychainz said:


> I highlighted an extra one for you



awww..........thanks! 




bellebellebelle19 said:


> I don't understand the complaints about clickbait. Clickbait is for making money off of advertisers on a website. On Instagram, large amounts of likes on posts draws in sponsors. H&M aren't being sponsored by anything, neither are they searching for sponsors.* So I'm really not getting why people are calling the photo of their son's foot clickbait*??




i don't get it either!  just need something to complain about i guess.


----------



## gelbergirl

daisychainz said:


> Pictures like this are so bizarre! I don't get baby body part pictures. Next up is the corner of an earlobe, lol. Talk about click-bait!



I mean, unless Meghan is doing opposite of what Kate is doing.
Kate takes all those very traditional photos on a very traditional camera.


----------



## lulu212121

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I don't understand the complaints about clickbait. Clickbait is for making money off of advertisers on a website. On Instagram, large amounts of likes on posts draws in sponsors. H&M aren't being sponsored by anything, neither are they searching for sponsors. So *I'm really not getting why people are calling the photo of their son's foot clickbait??*


Because they "baited" you with a photo of feet to "click" and see if there are more. Clickbait doesn't always have to mean monetary.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I dunno. If they had said “pics of the royal baby, click here!” that would be one thing but it’s just one pic. I think it’s an “artful” thing.  Lots of people try to be artistic with photos now.  She’s a new mom. She thinks his feet are cute. They ARE cute. I think new parents are also protective of kids and exposing them too early. I don’t see this as calculated. They did just have a photo call of the baby.


----------



## bag-princess

lulu212121 said:


> Because they "baited" you with a photo of feet to "click" and see if there are more. Clickbait doesn't always have to mean monetary.



most people know these days that if you are shown a foot - that is all you are going to see at this time!  no clicking needs to be done.  as people have stated the celebrities are doing this more and more now so people should have caught on by now.  that is all you will see until further notice.




A1aGypsy said:


> I dunno.* If they had said “pics of the royal baby, click here!” that would be one thing but it’s just one pic. *I think it’s an “artful” thing.  Lots of people try to be artistic with photos now.  She’s a new mom. She thinks his feet are cute. They ARE cute. I think new parents are also protective of kids and exposing them too early. I don’t see this as calculated. They did just have a photo call of the baby.



exactly!   i even see people on FB doing this with there new babies trying to be artful and having it done in black and white.  he is a brand new baby and they are loving having him all to themselves right now but knew that a pic was needed.   i am sure we will see other parts of him at some point.........i can wait.


----------



## Flatsy

The registrar who filled out Prince George's birth certificate got *death threats *from royal-watching nutjobs because her handwriting was too sloppy, and the nutjob contingent is definitely bigger for Meghan and Harry than it is for Will and Kate.  

Maybe Harry and Meghan are hoping if a little time goes by, the psychos might not care so much anymore and won't terrorize the registrar, or the hospital, or whoever else they can pick out from the birth certificate.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

lulu212121 said:


> Because they "baited" you with a photo of feet to "click" and see if there are more. Clickbait doesn't always have to mean monetary.


I still don't understand. It's on Instagram. There's no clicking involved. You scroll, you see a photo, you like it or ignore it and keep on scrolling. If anyone's clickbaiting, it's the websites that are posting the photo, not H&M.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> I mean, unless Meghan is doing opposite of what Kate is doing.
> Kate takes all those very traditional photos on a very traditional camera.


I think Kate's pics of the kids are beautiful


----------



## Jayne1

We see so many Insta photos of just the baby's foot or fingers, so I was surprised Meghan went with the popular, trendy type of photo.


----------



## berrydiva

lulu212121 said:


> Because they "baited" you with a photo of feet to "click" and see if there are more. Clickbait doesn't always have to mean monetary.


It's an IG post, what more is there to click to see?


----------



## myown

lulu212121 said:


> Because they "baited" you with a photo of feet to "click" and see if there are more. Clickbait doesn't always have to mean monetary.


wait, where did that made me click? 
I saw the feet in the newsfeed and then..? I didn't clicked anywhere, I read the post and kept scrolling


----------



## lulilu

I've seen tons of photos of baby feet or hands.  I don't think it's so unusual.  It was a nice photo and sentiment for Mothers Day.  NBD


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting Oxford Children's Hospital, OXSRAD Disability Sports Centre, and Barton Neighbourhood Centre


----------



## Sharont2305

It's believed that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge went over to Frogmore Cottage to meet their new nephew Archie today.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

"Meghan is one of the fastest rising names baby names for girls in the U.S., according to new data from the Social Security Administration.

The name Meghan rose a whopping 701 spots, jumping from No. 1,404 in 2017 to No. 701 in 2018. It seems undeniable that Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex, played a role in increasing the visibility of the name. Royal wedding-mania ― and subsequently, royal baby-obsession ― dominated headlines in both the U.S. and U.K. throughout 2018. Thus, 411 babies named Meghan were born in the U.S. last year, compared with 163 the previous year. "

I bet lots of little Archie's will be running around soon, too.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...aby-name-for-girls/ar-AABmrbM?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid


----------



## Jayne1

lulilu said:


> I've seen tons of photos of baby feet or hands.  I don't think it's so unusual.  It was a nice photo and sentiment for Mothers Day.  NBD


That’s the point. It’s not unusual, it’s trendy.  

We see just fingers and toes posted by so many celebs on Instagram and I thought Meghan might ignore the cool, fashionable thing. 

Especially since I never saw Meghan as a follower of trends.


----------



## threadbender

cafecreme15 said:


> I love that they have a WhatsApp group - would be so fun to be able to read it! Too bad my hacking skills are non-existent [emoji23] (just kidding, obviously).


I just heard there was a huge hack of WhatsApp.


----------



## cafecreme15

carlpsmom said:


> I just heard there was a huge hack of WhatsApp.



Promise it wasn’t me! [emoji23]


----------



## threadbender

cafecreme15 said:


> Promise it wasn’t me! [emoji23]


I guess it was an itty bitty hack but was reported earlier as a big un! lol
http://fortune.com/2019/05/14/whatsapp-update-software-hack/


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t think taking pictures of feet or fingers or the like is trendy. I remember mom’s doing it and framing them on the wall instead of IG (which we didn’t have back then) twenty years ago. I think it is something some new parents do as they are amazed by the miracle of their new baby.

In fact, I have a picture of a pair of paws (as close as I got to children) from 1997 in a frame. I was ahead of the trend!!


----------



## pukasonqo

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t think taking pictures of feet or fingers or the like is trendy. I remember mom’s doing it and framing them on the wall instead of IG (which we didn’t have back then) twenty years ago. I think it is something some new parents do as they are amazed by the miracle of their new baby.
> 
> In fact, I have a picture of a pair of paws (as close as I got to children) from 1997 in a frame. I was ahead of the trend!!



I think w Meghan is damned if she do, damned if she don’t
If she had published a full view of Archie’s face then she would be slammed for being a publicity whore, etc
She doesn’t owe anything to anyone so if she wants to publish baby paws then she should
Plus now the conspiracy theorist can start creating new rumours


----------



## Tivo

pukasonqo said:


> I think w Meghan is damned if she do, damned if she don’t
> If she had published a full view of Archie’s face then she would be slammed for being a publicity whore, etc
> She doesn’t owe anything to anyone so if she wants to publish baby paws then she should
> Plus now the conspiracy theorist can start creating new rumours



Truth!


----------



## myown

pukasonqo said:


> I think w Meghan is damned if she do, damned if she don’t
> If she had published a full view of Archie’s face then she would be *slammed for being a publicity whore*, etc
> She doesn’t owe anything to anyone so if she wants to publish baby paws then she should
> Plus now the conspiracy theorist can start creating new rumours


I mean, one must only read this thread. she was already accused of being a fame whore because she posted his feet! what would they have called her of she had posted his face!


----------



## myown

myown said:


> lol I love all these creepy rumors! so stupid!


I just read the rumor on Instagram, that "Archie" isn't his real name, because there are no other royals with that name and they were only allowed to pick an already used royal name. so "MeAgain Markle" gave us the wrong name and took us for a fool

wow.... people really have too much time on their hands.


----------



## bag-princess

myown said:


> I mean, one must only read this thread. she was already accused of being a fame whore because she posted his feet! what would they have called her of she had posted his face!




and yet Kate is praised for her beautiful pics of her kids - some even going so far as wanting to know what brand of camera she uses!


----------



## daisychainz

myown said:


> I just read the rumor on Instagram, that "Archie" isn't his real name, because there are no other royals with that name and they were only allowed to pick an already used royal name. so "MeAgain Markle" gave us the wrong name and took us for a fool
> 
> wow.... people really have too much time on their hands.


But if you spend time to read all the rumors doesn't that mean you have too much time, too?  
Maybe when they share the birth certificate it will for sure show the real name is Archie and people will be happy.


----------



## berrydiva

myown said:


> I just read the rumor on Instagram, that "Archie" isn't his real name, because there are no other royals with that name and they were only allowed to pick an already used royal name. so "MeAgain Markle" gave us the wrong name and took us for a fool
> 
> wow.... people really have too much time on their hands.


This is hilarious. Wtf is wrong with people? A fake name...Lmao.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Next  rumor will be that Archie is really a girl, but they were under so much pressure to have a boy that they are lying about that too.


----------



## buffym

It isn’t surprising that the press isn’t covering this, yet they can cover the Meghan has a cat named Archie and harp about not receiving a copy of Archie’s birth certificate.

The Sussex’s won their lawsuit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulu212121

buffym said:


> It isn’t surprising that the press isn’t covering this, yet they can cover the Meghan has a cat named Archie and harp about not receiving a copy of Archie’s birth certificate.
> 
> The Sussex’s won their lawsuit.
> 
> View attachment 4434544


I have see the story on Good Morning America, AP, and Yahoo news. Don't know why you are not seeing it covered


----------



## buffym

lulu212121 said:


> I have see the story on Good Morning America, AP, and Yahoo news. Don't know why you are not seeing it covered



In the UK only the Telegraph mentioned it. Yet, the Sun ran the pictures and the Daily Mail and Express has been very vocal about wanting Archie’s birth certificate but they are not carrying this story.


----------



## Jayne1

pukasonqo said:


> I think w Meghan is damned if she do, damned if she don’t
> If she had published a full view of Archie’s face then she would be slammed for being a publicity whore, etc
> She doesn’t owe anything to anyone so if she wants to publish baby paws then she should
> Plus now the conspiracy theorist can start creating new rumours





myown said:


> I mean, one must only read this thread. she was already accused of being a fame whore because she posted his feet! what would they have called her of she had posted his face!


I can say she did the trendy Pinterest/Instagram thing while still thinking she's very beautiful and extremely charming.

As a rule, I try not to defend _or_ attack celebrities.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-princess said:


> and yet Kate is praised for her beautiful pics of her kids - some even going so far as wanting to know what brand of camera she uses!


Official portraits of the Cambridge kids are routinely released once a year on their birthdays.  Kate has eschewed a professional photographer and taken the photos herself.  It doesn't surprise me that people want to know what kind of camera she uses because for amateur photos, they are very nice.  I'm sure people would like to think that if they get the same camera, they can snap pictures of their own kids that will look pretty good.

That's a little different from what's going on with the Sussexes, as the official photos of Archie are over and done with for a while.

Some of Meghan's biggest advocates in the online gossip world - Lainey and Celebitchy - both speculated that Meghan would release "teaser" photos of the baby on instagram to keep people interested.  That she would hold on to "full face" photos as capital and just release photos of body parts.  And that's exactly what happened.  This pretty much sums it up, from Lainey the day after the official photo call: 





> Now that we’ve been introduced to Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor… when do you think we’ll see him again? As we witnessed yesterday, Meghan Markle is a public relations superstar. She’s not giving up the next shot of Archie without strategy. And besides, we are coming up on a major House Sussex milestone: their first wedding anniversary on Sunday, May 19. Will we get a shot of Archie with his parents on Instagram that day? Or will be it an exclusive never-before-seen photo of them from their wedding day? I’m going with the never-before-seen wedding photo. An updated Archie picture, I think, will be saved for a later date. The longer you wait, the more special it is. You know who does this best? Beyoncé.


Meghan's biggest supporters acknowledge that she is operating under a strategy.  They love it, in fact. They praise her for being a "public relations superstar". But I don't think you can blame people who feel manipulated by "strategy".

"Clickbait" was mentioned above.  That may not be exactly the right word, but popularity and gaining instagram followers certainly has a lot to do with personal photos being dribbled out in a calculated way.   

The Cambridges seek good publicity in their own way, but from what I can tell of their official instagram, they are pretty straightforward about what they put on there.  I don't get the feeling that any day now, Kate is going to post a "never before seen photo" of the day William proposed or something.  And there is the feeling with the Sussexes that potential private glimpses are being dangled out there for their followers.

Some people love that.  IMO it makes for a much more interesting instagram.  I'm not quite sure why millions of people just want to see photos of Will and Kate's public engagements.  But I can also understand why some people find it off-putting.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Official portraits of the Cambridge kids are routinely released once a year on their birthdays.  Kate has eschewed a professional photographer and taken the photos herself.  It doesn't surprise me that people want to know what kind of camera she uses because for amateur photos, they are very nice.  I'm sure people would like to think that if they get the same camera, they can snap pictures of their own kids that will look pretty good.
> 
> That's a little different from what's going on with the Sussexes, as the official photos of Archie are over and done with for a while.
> 
> Some of Meghan's biggest advocates in the online gossip world - Lainey and Celebitchy - both speculated that Meghan would release "teaser" photos of the baby on instagram to keep people interested.  That she would hold on to "full face" photos as capital and just release photos of body parts.  And that's exactly what happened.  This pretty much sums it up, from Lainey the day after the official photo call:
> Meghan's biggest supporters acknowledge that she is operating under a strategy.  They love it, in fact. They praise her for being a "public relations superstar". But I don't think you can blame people who feel manipulated by "strategy".
> 
> "Clickbait" was mentioned above.  That may not be exactly the right word, but popularity and gaining instagram followers certainly has a lot to do with personal photos being dribbled out in a calculated way.
> 
> The Cambridges seek good publicity in their own way, but from what I can tell of their official instagram, they are pretty straightforward about what they put on there.  I don't get the feeling that any day now, Kate is going to post a "never before seen photo" of the day William proposed or something.  And there is the feeling with the Sussexes that potential private glimpses are being dangled out there for their followers.
> 
> Some people love that.  IMO it makes for a much more interesting instagram.  I'm not quite sure why millions of people just want to see photos of Will and Kate's public engagements.  But I can also understand why some people find it off-putting.


Very well put and makes sense.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

If you're in the US, the Gayle King special airs Friday (5/17/19) night @ 8


----------



## Morgan R

Archie's Birth Certificate has been released


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Archie's Birth Certificate has been released




and now .. go away all the haters
I hope they didn't release it because of the pressure from the press. it's disgusting what some People think that they have the right to do and say to them ..

btw I love their Instagram account! it's so personal, fresh and modern.
love the mothers day post so lovely.
can't wait to see what they will post on their wedding anniversay this Weekend.


----------



## bag-princess

Prince Harry Awarded "Significant Sum" in Legal Settlement Over Photos Taken of His and Meghan Markle's Home


Harry's lawyers successfully argued that the photos had "very seriously undermined the safety and security" of the couple.


In January, paparazzi agency Splash News chartered a helicopter to take aerial photographs of Prince Harry's Oxfordshire home. The resulting images, which were published in numerous publications, featured views of "the living area and dining area of the home and directly into the bedroom."

Following the photos' syndication, Harry and Meghan Markle were forced to move out of the privately rented house. Harry chose to bring a legal case against Splash News, drawing a line in the sand for how far he and Meghan will allow the press to intrude.

A statement read in court detailed the terms of Harry's out-of-court settlement, and explained how the photos had harmed the couple. "The syndication and publication of the photographs very seriously undermined the safety and security of the duke and the home to the extent that they are no longer able to live at the property," it read.


Today, Harry was awarded a "significant" (though undisclosed) sum of money in damages. "The duke was awarded a significant sum towards damages and legal fees, which will be put towards a donation to charity and covering the duke’s legal costs," a spokeswoman for Prince Harry told the Guardian.

Splash News has issued a public apology, noting, "this situation represents an error of judgement and we have taken steps to ensure it will not be repeated." Harry has offered a statement in response, saying that he "acknowledges and welcomes the formal apology."


Royal reporter Victoria Murphy noted on Twitter that Harry's decision to pursue legal action could be a sign of things to come. It "very much sets the tone that The Sussexes won’t hesitate to take action in the future if they feel there is unjust intrusion into their family life," she wrote.


https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...O&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social-media


----------



## pixiejenna

I think that Harry will not tolerate any form of invasion of privacy from the press in his immediate family, given how he lost his mom. With a baby at home/on the way during the case it made him even more protective of his family.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the wedding of Lady Gabriella Windsor and Mr.Thomas Kingston at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle


----------



## pukasonqo

those pics of harry and his nan are cute


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry attending the wedding of Lady Gabriella Windsor and Mr.Thomas Kingston at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle
> 
> 
> View attachment 4436129
> View attachment 4436127
> View attachment 4436124
> View attachment 4436126
> View attachment 4436135
> View attachment 4436125
> View attachment 4436149
> View attachment 4436123


The Queen looks gorgeous!  What a great color!

The beautiful lady in blue with Prince Harry is Lady Frederick Windsor aka actress Sophie Winkelman and sister-in-law of the bride.


----------



## gracekelly

Mother of the bride Princess Michael of Kent.  Don't understand this outfit at all.  What was she thinking?


----------



## gracekelly

Princess Beatrice and Sarah Ferguson.    As my mother would have said, "did Sarah look in the mirror before she left the house?" Waaay too tight.    Re Princess Bea,  the dress might not be bad, but I don't get this hat with it at all.  Looks like she stuck her hand in the hat closet and came out with this one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Looks like a very pretty dress.


----------



## Jayne1

Very nice.  Something to be said for traditional.


----------



## BagsNBaguettes

gracekelly said:


> Mother of the bride Princess Michael of Kent.  Don't understand this outfit at all.  What was she thinking?



Given her history of narcissism and gauche behavior, I know exactly what she was thinking......


----------



## White Orchid

Fergie reminds me of those women who are of the mindset that the tighter the dress, the slimmer they’ll look


----------



## White Orchid

I think it’s best we all refrain from Princess Anne’s outfit and the “hairstyle” she’s kept since her wedding day.


----------



## bag-princess

White Orchid said:


> Fergie reminds me of those women who are of the mindset that the tighter the dress, the slimmer they’ll look




Tragic


----------



## hellosunshine

Happy Anniversary to the Duke & Duchess of Sussex. I wish them many more years of happiness and health.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Morgan R

Behind the scenes pictures from Harry and Meghan's wedding day shared on the Sussex Royal Instagram to mark their first wedding anniversary


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## daisychainz

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If you're in the US, the Gayle King special airs Friday (5/17/19) night @ 8


I watched it. It was a fluff piece. Just a vehicle for Gayle King. She talked to basically one person the entire time who said he was Meghans friend, but he didn't even know she was engaged until he read the newspapers. So he can't be that close to her. She talked to a bunch of school children, too. It wasn't good at all, no interviews with anyone, just snapshots of things we have seen already.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Mother of the bride Princess Michael of Kent.  Don't understand this outfit at all.  What was she thinking?


Whoa, I first just glanced at the outfit then read your comment and had another look--the gloves, the necklace, the COAT, the bunny-tail hat--it's like maybe all her fave wardrobe items had to be at this wedding!


----------



## kemilia

BagsNBaguettes said:


> Given her history of narcissism and gauche behavior, I know exactly what she was thinking......


Oooh, do tell!


----------



## Encore Hermes

Great pics! Thank you @Morgan R


----------



## Flatsy

daisychainz said:


> She talked to basically one person the entire time who said he was Meghans friend, but he didn't even know she was engaged until he read the newspapers.


Was that Daniel the makeup artist?  LOL.  Meghan should call him up and request that he not talk about her in public anymore.  The perception is that she dispatched her friends to act as surrogates like she did for the People Magazine article (Buckingham Palace says she didn't) and that guy's weeping on her behalf was really over the top.  He seems like an attention-seeker.

I enjoyed the fluff portions of the show though and thought Gayle King did a good job of handling her personal connection to the subject.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> Was that Daniel the makeup artist?  LOL.  Meghan should call him up and request that he not talk about her in public anymore.  The perception is that she dispatched her friends to act as surrogates like she did for the People Magazine article (Buckingham Palace says she didn't) and that guy's weeping on her behalf was really over the top.  He seems like an attention-seeker.
> 
> I enjoyed the fluff portions of the show though and thought Gayle King did a good job of handling her personal connection to the subject.


Yes, that was him. I was half watching and half playing video games, lol

Unrelated, but I was just reading an article about Meghan online and her first husband.They were together 13 years (married 2). I had no idea they were together so long!


----------



## Flatsy

I think that Daniel guy is also the one who posted on instagram about avocado toast, which was mainly a way to make it known that he was visiting Meghan.  He seems to run to the press to talk about Meghan a lot and promote himself as a makeup artist at the same time.  Jessica Mulroney gets a lot of flak for using Meghan for self promotion, but I think this guy is worse.


----------



## BagsNBaguettes

kemilia said:


> Oooh, do tell!



Let's see-

*repeated racist rows with various people, including naming two black sheep on her farm Serena and Venus and then being obsequiously coy when confronted about it;In May 2004 she was in the news when a group of black diners in a New York restaurant reported that the Princess had told them to "get back to the colonies" when complaining about their noise – an accusation she denied – though it made global headlines. She recounted as having made a remark to one of her fellow dinner guests that "she would be glad to go back to the colonies in order to escape her noisy neighbours". She then labelled her accusers as a "bunch of rappers", somewhat wide of the mark, since the party comprised an investment banker, a music executive, a reporter, a television fashion correspondent, and a lawyer.

In February 2005, she gave a series of interviews to promote her book, in one of which she claimed that Britons should be more concerned about the bloodlines of their children,and claimed that the British media were "excited" by Prince Harry's decision to wear a swastika for a fancy dress party because of the British press' "ownership structure". She claimed that "there wouldn't have been so much fuss made" had he worn the hammer and sickle.


*The Queen herself said (of all the airs and pretenses she gives off) that she's "too grand, even for me." And of course the media claim she once declared to an American fashion magazine that she had "more royal blood in her veins than any person to marry into the royal family since Prince Philip".

*tries to present herself as this much-unfairly-maligned Euro aristocrat even though everybody knows she's little more than a once divorced bogan (Aussie for redneck trash) of the utmost regard


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Don't forget that Blackamoor broach she wore to meet Meghan.

She's a nasty, racist piece of trash. Her nickname isn't Princess Michael of C*** for nothing.

She's not Australian btw, she only lived here for a short time. She was born in what is now the Czech Republic.


----------



## bag-princess

FreeSpirit71 said:


> *Don't forget that Blackamoor broach she wore to meet Meghan*.
> 
> She's a nasty, racist piece of trash. Her nickname isn't Princess Michael of C*** for nothing.
> 
> She's not Australian btw, she only lived here for a short time. She was born in what is now the Czech Republic.





Say what!?[emoji15]


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-princess said:


> Say what!?[emoji15]


She wore it at the Queen's Christmas party in Dec 2017, Meghan's first time attending where she would have met some of the extended family members for the first time, including Princess Pushy


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> She wore it at the Queen's Christmas party in Dec 2017, Meghan's first time attending where she would have met some of the extended family members for the first time, including Princess Pushy



Yep exactly like you said - nasty racist piece of trash!


----------



## kemilia

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Don't forget that Blackamoor broach she wore to meet Meghan.
> 
> She's a nasty, racist piece of trash. Her nickname isn't Princess Michael of C*** for nothing.
> 
> She's not Australian btw, she only lived here for a short time. She was born in what is now the Czech Republic.


Ok yes, I remember the brooch incident, and the sheep too. And now the bad outfit--she's a doozy, the ultimate embarrassing relative.


----------



## myown

does Archie represent the palace? Alike Charlotte or his dad, Harry?
or did H&M denied that when they decided he has no title? has the title anything to do with that?
Is Archie going to have a "normal" Job, alike Eugenie?

I just wonder if they wanted Archie to have a commoner-life, thatß´s why he has no title...

Is Archie officially a Prince? (like Meghans officially occupation is princess)

is he going to represent the palace without a title, or more like just for fun whenever he wants to like Bea and Eugenie?


----------



## myown

daisychainz said:


> But if you spend time to read all the rumors doesn't that mean you have too much time, too?
> Maybe when they share the birth certificate it will for sure show the real name is Archie and people will be happy.


I can't open most links to American websites, so I read the first few comments and hope someone is telling what they write


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> and yet Kate is praised for her beautiful pics of her kids - some even going so far as wanting to know what brand of camera she uses!


does everyone have be team Kate or team Meghan?  can't people like Meghan without criticizing Kate?
Kate does take beautiful pics of the kids.  Meghan hasn't done anything except the one foot picture so time will tell.  But she doesn't have to take any of her own pictures unless she's so inclined


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> does everyone have be team Kate or team Meghan?  can't people like Meghan without criticizing Kate?
> Kate does take beautiful pics of the kids.  Meghan hasn't done anything except the one foot picture so time will tell.  But she doesn't have to take any of her own pictures unless she's so inclined



Can’t people like Kate without criticizing Meghan??  and I am “team” neither.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> Can’t people like Kate without criticizing Meghan??  and I am “team” neither.


can't people criticize Meghan without being viewed as hating her?  I'm pretty neutral about her....don't love her or hate her


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> Is Archie going to have a "normal" Job, alike Eugenie?
> 
> I just wonder if they wanted Archie to have a commoner-life, thatß´s why he has no title...
> is he going to represent the palace without a title, or more like just for fun whenever he wants to like Bea and Eugenie?


Title or no title, they all have the best of both worlds. Being treated like royalty but not having to behave like royalty. Like Harry growing up.


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> can't people criticize Meghan without being viewed as hating her?  I'm pretty neutral about her....don't love her or hate her



ITA! Same with Kate - people can criticize w/o  being viewed as hating her!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

VickyB said:


> ITA! Same with Kate - people can criticize w/o  being viewed as hating her!!!!!!!!!


It is the same on any forum you visit online about anyone. If you say something negative you are jealous or racist or belong to the other political party, whatever. Like you cannot just say a criticism of someone without having some motive other than, hey I just didn't like his or her pants/dress/hair/statement/attitude.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Princess Beatrice and Sarah Ferguson.    As my mother would have said, "did Sarah look in the mirror before she left the house?" Waaay too tight.    Re Princess Bea,  the dress might not be bad, but I don't get this hat with it at all.  Looks like she stuck her hand in the hat closet and came out with this one.


Fergie had lost a


White Orchid said:


> Fergie reminds me of those women who are of the mindset that the tighter the dress, the slimmer they’ll look


fergie lost weight a few years back(weight watchers rep I think).....but this dress does nothing for her.  and her daughters got the worst of both parents IMO


----------



## south-of-france

Everytime I come in here for pics and news, I see words like „hate“ and which team someone is on, it feels so negative. I wish it were a more positive news thread like the Royalty one.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry at the Sentebale ISPS Handa Polo Cup in Rome, Italy


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if Harry is a better rider than his dad. When I was young the tabloids would often print photos of Charles falling off his horse.


----------



## BagsNBaguettes

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Harry is a better rider than his dad. When I was young the tabloids would often print photos of Charles falling off his horse.



They all fall off of their horses apparently- Harry at one point was even said to not be able to ride for a while due to back pain issues from playing, but it appears to have cleared itself up over time.


----------



## Kodi325

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry at the Sentebale ISPS Handa Polo Cup in Rome, Italy
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4442686
> View attachment 4442676
> View attachment 4442642
> View attachment 4442674
> View attachment 4442647
> View attachment 4442673
> View attachment 4442641
> View attachment 4442753
> View attachment 4442643
> View attachment 4442645



i did not know the guy that was in every Polo ad for years was an actual player.. nice!

Kodi-


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry at the Sentebale ISPS Handa Polo Cup in Rome, Italy
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4442686
> View attachment 4442676
> View attachment 4442642
> View attachment 4442674
> View attachment 4442647
> View attachment 4442673
> View attachment 4442641
> View attachment 4442753
> View attachment 4442643
> View attachment 4442645




he looks really handsome here. I wish Meghan and Archie would be with him in Rome. but of Course mom and newborn are safe at home wating for Daddy Harry to come back home.
I hope we see her in the summer at the polo Matches like last year. just love her private style.
And I'm curious to see if she will attend this year Wimbledon.


----------



## sdkitty

south-of-france said:


> Everytime I come in here for pics and news, I see words like „hate“ and which team someone is on, it feels so negative. I wish it were a more positive news thread like the Royalty one.


IMO the reason for that is some people on this thread seem to be in love with Meghan......I honestly find it hard to understand the fervor


----------



## gracekelly

Kodi325 said:


> i did not know the guy that was in every Polo ad for years was an actual player.. nice!
> 
> Kodi-


That handsome guy from the RL ads is Argentinian Nacho Figueras who is a world renown polo player.  Sorry girls, married with four kids.  *sigh*


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> IMO the reason for that is some people on this thread seem to be in love with Meghan......I honestly find it hard to understand the fervor


Me too.  I had a look at their instagram and noticed all the people who signed on and commented using some form of Meghans name as their account name??  OMG if I were if I were Meghan or Harry that would totally freak me out.


----------



## PatsyCline

Just a reminder to those who get Lifetime Network in the USA & Canada, 'Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal' is on tonight.

I guess it's the sequel to 'Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance'. Different actors though.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

PatsyCline said:


> Just a reminder to those who get Lifetime Network in the USA & Canada,
> 
> 'Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal' is on tonight.
> 
> I guess it's the sequel to 'Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance'. Different actors though.




"Lifetime’s Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal airs tonight, May 27 at 8 p.m. ET – and it’s all about the royal wedding!

The upcoming TV movie, based on the marriage of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (AKA Meghan Markle) and Prince Harry, is heavily based on Meghan‘s family drama, according to Vogue.

Tiffany Smith plays Meghan, and Charlie Field plays Harry in the film. The movie is also a sequel to Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance, although the lead roles were recast.

The movie will also feature Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (AKA Kate Middleton), played by Laura Mitchell, as well as Meghan‘s mom, Doria Ragland."


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Lifetime’s Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal airs tonight, May 27 at 8 p.m. ET – and it’s all about the royal wedding!
> 
> The upcoming TV movie, based on the marriage of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (AKA Meghan Markle) and Prince Harry, is heavily based on Meghan‘s family drama, according to Vogue.
> 
> Tiffany Smith plays Meghan, and Charlie Field plays Harry in the film. The movie is also a sequel to Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance, although the lead roles were recast.
> 
> The movie will also feature Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge (AKA Kate Middleton), played by Laura Mitchell, as well as Meghan‘s mom, Doria Ragland."



Wow, why are lifetime movies sooo bad.


----------



## Flatsy

The first one was super cheesy, but I thought the Meghan and Harry actors both nailed it.  This one though, yikes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

Looks like the same actors played Kate, the Queen, Camilla and Doria.


----------



## minababe

I hate those movies. they are really embarassing. those actors dont look like them. and the talks are so stupid. it's so fictional. because they don't know what they were talking or doing .. and it's disgusting that they think they would know them so well that they could tell a Story about their relationship. must be so strange to know there are movies about you, made by People who not know you at all.
would never watch that.


----------



## sdkitty

Lifetime move looked cheesy from what I saw in the commercial.  The actress who played Meghan looked closer than the Harry actor.  It's hard enough for real actors in real movies to portray living persons but this is just .....pandering to the fans I guess


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry meeting with ICC Cricket World Cup Team Captains at Buckingham Palace


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending Garden Party at Buckingham Palace


----------



## chowlover2

The Queen looks so pretty in pink!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the ICC Cricket World Cup 2019


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Flying commercial back from polo in Rome.. a passenger took these and posted online. I think he ended up saying hello to her.


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry attending Garden Party at Buckingham Palace
> 
> 
> View attachment 4447000
> View attachment 4447003
> View attachment 4447128
> View attachment 4447002



He looks absolutely gorgeous in this attire.  Much prefer to see him wearing this than the wrinkled just fell out of bed clothes that he seems to favor many times.


----------



## lulilu

Eugenie and Bea look really nice.


----------



## minababe

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Flying commercial back from polo in Rome.. a passenger took these and posted online. I think he ended up saying hello to her.
> 
> View attachment 4447657
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4447658



wow I heard that many times but couldn't believe they are doing that really.
I would get a heart attack when Harry is sitting in front of me


----------



## Grande Latte

Yeah, you can tell Harry is a very affable, friendly guy.


----------



## bisbee

gracekelly said:


> He looks absolutely gorgeous in this attire.  Much prefer to see him wearing this than the wrinkled just fell out of bed clothes that he seems to favor many times.


For some reason, I can’t recall seeing him in wrinkled just fell out of bed clothes.  Even when he is very casual, he looks neatly dressed to me.  Can’t always wear a morning coat!


----------



## ChanelFan29

Watching my beloved CNN.  Looks like Harry is walking around with Jarad and Ivanka as the queen shows 45 around at Buckingham.  Was he made to do this?


----------



## Compass Rose

ChanelFan29 said:


> Watching my beloved CNN.  Looks like Harry is walking around with Jarad and Ivanka as the queen shows 45 around at Buckingham.  Was he made to do this?


Wow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

ChanelFan29 said:


> Watching my beloved CNN.  Looks like Harry is walking around with Jarad and Ivanka as the queen shows 45 around at Buckingham.  Was he made to do this?


He wanted a state visit, this is what it partly entails. x


----------



## stanfordmom

He was in an awkward position and seems to have found a way to be loyal to his wife while still fulfilling his obligations. I’m not sure what else he could have done given the circumstances? I can think of much worse (and yet understandable) reactions!


----------



## Vlad

I would like to remind everyone that these threads are not the place to discuss politics. Politics are divisive, TPF is not the place to discuss it.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Back to some fun, here's a charming old video. In the end these famous actors get asked about who their favorite royal is.

Everyone loves Harry (and Kate, and the queen!)


----------



## Jayne1

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Back to some fun, here's a charming old video. In the end these famous actors get asked about who their favorite royal is.
> 
> Everyone loves Harry (and Kate, and the queen!)



Damian Lewis got it right.  It's the Queen and no one comes close!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the Founder’s Day Parade at Royal Hospital Chelsea


----------



## Bag*Snob

Please, someone explain those bird hats.


----------



## Pessie

Bag*Snob said:


> Please, someone explain those bird hats.


It harks back to when opposing sides would line up against each other on a single battlefield to fight.  Each army wore a bright uniform so that soldiers could tell who was on their side and who was an enemy soldier.  Senior commanders would wear easily identifiable rank signifiers such as these hats - so they could be spotted from a distance and through all the smoke etc. Hth.


----------



## Bag*Snob

Thanks @Pessie


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Trooping The Colour


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Attending Trooping The Colour
> 
> View attachment 4455975
> View attachment 4455997
> View attachment 4455998
> View attachment 4455977
> View attachment 4455986
> View attachment 4455980


Meghan looks lovely


----------



## Tivo

I’m starting to think rumors are true that Kate and Meghan don’t get along.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan looks lovely


Yes, but something is very different. Maybe the makeup, I dunno, but different. 

And I HATE navy blue so no compliments on her outfit (and those hats--why those hats?  ). She looks super happy to be out and about again, which is great.


----------



## A1aGypsy

She looks totally different in those photos! Nice to see her out and about though. Even though I’m sure this is the last thing a new mom would want to do.


----------



## pixiejenna

She does look different my guess is the makeup looks very minimal. While she usually has a natural look makeup wise she looks pretty barefaced.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

She is looking different as she is carrying baby weight, her face looks fuller. It's only been 4 weeks remember.


----------



## Compass Rose

I am with kemilla on the navy blue color.  I think the color just does not go with any skin tone.


----------



## LittleStar88

Compass Rose said:


> I am with kemilla on the navy blue color.  I think the color just does not go with any skin tone.



Strangely navy blue looks great on me. But I expected something more summery for this event.

She looks very full in the face and maybe a little tired. The hairdo is not the most flattering for her look here. Do not like the outfit from what I can see. She gets a pass this time being a new mom and probably not much energy or care to go overboard this time.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Yes, but something is very different. Maybe the makeup, I dunno, but different.
> 
> And I HATE navy blue so no compliments on her outfit (and those hats--why those hats?  ). She looks super happy to be out and about again, which is great.


is her face fuller?  maybe due to still carrying pregnancy weight?


----------



## myown

I think she looks and is stunning! Never would I want to attend such an event when I gave birth only  last month. 
She looks different, like mentioned, because she just had a baby and still has the baby weight and probably some water. And I think it’s refreshing to see her so normal, we usually get to see pictures (on Instagram etc) of woman who just gave birth and gave their abs back.


----------



## Addicted to bags

Her face looks puffy, which is perfectly fine as she recently gave birth.


----------



## Lake Effect

kemilia said:


> Yes, but something is very different. Maybe the makeup, I dunno, but different.
> 
> And I HATE navy blue so no compliments on her outfit (and those hats--why those hats?  ). She looks super happy to be out and about again, which is great.





LittleStar88 said:


> Strangely navy blue looks great on me. But I expected something more summery for this event.
> 
> She looks very full in the face and maybe a little tired. The hairdo is not the most flattering for her look here. Do not like the outfit from what I can see. She gets a pass this time being a new mom and probably not much energy or care to go overboard this time.


Since it seems more like an event to honor the military, which some might consider more solemn (I could be completely off here) maybe she, her consultant, etc just wanted to go with a more low key look. I am sure as a new mother, with extra weight, fatigue, etc she wanted to be comfortable.


----------



## Encore Hermes

She looks lovely. I think she chose something conservative and that does not draw attention to her larger breasts.


----------



## Gal4Dior

She looks radiant and healthy, but that outfit is dreadful. The dress is very voluminous and juxtaposed against that hat, it makes her otherwise normal size head look like a pin head? Also, why Navy again? 

She is in desperate need of a stylist. Kate’s ensembles are usually dull, but that’s because she stands to be the future queen.


----------



## Cocoabean

kemilia said:


> Yes, but something is very different. Maybe the makeup, I dunno, but different.
> 
> And I HATE navy blue so no compliments on her outfit (and those hats--why those hats?  ). She looks super happy to be out and about again, which is great.



Her eyes look very puffy. It took a while for me to put my finger on it. When I first saw the photos yesterday I thought it was just that she still had some baby weight showing in her face, but that isn't it. To me it is the eyes. She looks exhausted. 

I certainly don't mean my comments as criticism, just my observations. I don't have children, but I can imagine how I'd look at one month postpartum. 

I am not a fan of the navy choice, but I wondered if she made a last minute decision to attend...to "get out of the house" as it were. I can just imagine standing in front of the closet trying to decide what to wear!! "Oh Harry! I so want to go, but nothing fits! I didn't prepare because I am on maternity leave. Wah!" Shoot, I am flying to NYC tomorrow and am agonizing over what to wear, and no one cares what I wear!!


----------



## chowlover2

I was thinking the same thing, she looks exhausted. And that is to be expected with a 4 week old. Bravo for looking so good so soon.


----------



## jcnc

Morgan R said:


> Attending Trooping The Colour
> 
> View attachment 4456023
> View attachment 4455997
> View attachment 4455998
> View attachment 4455977
> View attachment 4455986
> View attachment 4455980


She looks soo much like Doria in these photos


----------



## chessmont

Sharont2305 said:


> She is looking different as she is carrying baby weight, her face looks fuller. It's only been 4 weeks remember.


That's what I was thinking.  Also much more umm, fuller figure on top.


----------



## sdkitty

jcnc said:


> She looks soo much like Doria in these photos



I was thinking that


----------



## Lake Effect

chessmont said:


> That's what I was thinking.  Also much more umm, fuller figure on top.


And if she’s breast feeding she will continue to look fuller on top.
I hope she doesn’t feel pressure to get to her pre-pregnancy size ASAP.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

She looks great.


----------



## Jayne1

Addicted to bags said:


> Her face looks puffy, which is perfectly fine as she recently gave birth.


I was going to say puffy as well.  Not necessarily weight gain, but puffy, even around the eyes.


----------



## Sharont2305

She's had a new eternity ring


----------



## LibbyRuth

Lake Effect said:


> Since it seems more like an event to honor the military, which some might consider more solemn (I could be completely off here) maybe she, her consultant, etc just wanted to go with a more low key look. I am sure as a new mother, with extra weight, fatigue, etc she wanted to be comfortable.


Last year she was criticized for wearing a dress that showed her shoulders so she may have gone with this look in response to that criticism. I also think that for events with all the royals she chooses at times to wear what blends in to defer more attention to the “front of the balcony” royals.


----------



## Lake Effect

LibbyRuth said:


> Last year she was criticized for wearing a dress that showed her shoulders so she may have gone with this look in response to that criticism. I also think that for events with all the royals she chooses at times to wear what blends in to defer more attention to the “front of the balcony” royals.


Completely agree, especially with the idea of the pecking order of the royals. There is fashion protocol more or less. And yes, there is a time to buck it (I’m Diana’s age so I had a front row seat to her life in royal fishbowl) and a time to roll with it. I am still going with the influence of the comfort factor as well.


----------



## Tivo

LibbyRuth said:


> _*Last year she was criticized for wearing a dress that showed her shoulders *_so she may have gone with this look in response to that criticism. I also think that for events with all the royals she chooses at times to wear what blends in to defer more attention to the “front of the balcony” royals.


This is very true.


----------



## Tivo

jcnc said:


> She looks soo much like Doria in these photos


I thought the same thing!


----------



## Flatsy

LibbyRuth said:


> Last year she was criticized for wearing a dress that showed her shoulders so she may have gone with this look in response to that criticism.


Thus far, she has not changed anything she does in response to criticism (and claims not to read any of it anyway).  

And that really wasn't criticism that she got last year.  She was still in the honeymoon phase with the press, who noted that her shoulders were uncovered and then praised her for her bold, modern fashion sense (even though last year's outfit was straight out of the 80s).

This year's dress (from what was visible) appeared to be loose and designed to cover up her nursing's mother's chest, and I think that was done for her comfort.


----------



## kemilia

jcnc said:


> She looks soo much like Doria in these photos


Yes! I went back and looked and she is so much like her Mama in these pics,


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> She's had a new eternity ring


Just read about this: likely a gift for the 1st wedding anniversary or Archie's birth (or both?) 
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/06/234891/meghan-markle-eternity-ring-meaning

*Meghan Markle Just Debuted A Sparkling New Ring With A Deep History*
SARAH MIDKIFF
JUNE 8, 2019, 7:45 AM





CHRIS JACKSON/GETTY IMAGES

Meghan Markle isn’t even officially back from maternity leave and she already has people talking about her fashion choices. The trendsetting royal debuted a new accessory during her first public appearance since giving birth.

Though still on maternity leave, Meghan Markle made an exception for the Trooping of the Colour, a military parade celebrating Queen Elizabeth II’s birthday. It marked her first royal engagement since becoming a mother and, naturally, everyone was eager to see what the new royal would be wearing. Fans quickly spotted the new ring stacked on her left ring finger alongside her engagement and wedding rings.

Encircled in diamonds, speculation abounds that the new accessory is an eternity ring which is traditionally given after the birth of a first child or another major milestone such as a one-year wedding anniversary. Some are speculating that the new ring is to commemorate the birth of her and Prince Harry’s child, Archie. It seems to be a family custom. Prince William gave an eternity band to Kate Middleton after the birth of their first child, Prince George. Megan Flynn, co-founder and co-owner of M.Flynn jewelers in Boston supported this theory saying, "They are usually given as a gift after you're already married to celebrate an occasion, meaning eternal love. The ring was probably given after baby, [signifying the] circle of love and life."

The history of eternity rings, also known as a pavé set band, goes back to the ancient Egyptians. They believed that the bond of marriage was so strong that it would last forever, even after death. The eternity ring represents a continuous circle that can’t be broken. It came back into popularity in the 1960s when jeweller De Beers reintroduced it into popular culture.

Even the placement is a nod to tradition. It was believed by ancient Romans that the veins in the left ring finger ran directly to a person’s heart. By wearing a ring on that finger, it symbolized the things you kept closest to your heart. In Meghan’s case, Prince Harry, her marriage, and her son (cue collective sighs). Science has since disproven this theory, but we’re not talking about science, we’re talking about love.


----------



## Sharont2305

Regarding the navy blue, Lady Louise was wearing navy blue too but there's no criticism there. Is that because she's a teenager? If anything, people may say navy might be too boring or old for a teen girl, she should have worn something brighter, younger. I thought she looked lovely and actually it offset beautifully the bright green her mum wore.


----------



## lulu212121

Sharont2305 said:


> Regarding the navy blue, Lady Louise was wearing navy blue too but there's no criticism there. Is that because she's a teenager? If anything, people may say navy might be too boring or old for a teen girl, she should have worn something brighter, younger. I thought she looked lovely and actually it offset beautifully the bright green her mum wore.


Lady Louise probably had no say in what she would wear. Why would you want people to criticize her?


----------



## Sharont2305

lulu212121 said:


> Lady Louise probably had no say in what she would wear. Why would you want people to criticize her?


I don't want anyone to critisize her, not at all. Just saying that people were critisizing the Duchess but there were other ladies wearing navy too. Like I said, she looked lovely, as did the Duchess. As for Lady Louise not having a say in what she wore, I can't believe that. She's 15 not 5.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't want anyone to critisize her, not at all. Just saying that people were critisizing the Duchess but there were other ladies wearing navy too. Like I said, she looked lovely, as did the Duchess. As for Lady Louise not having a say in what she wore, I can't believe that. She's 15 not 5.


For the record, when I commented on the navy blue outfit, I was NOT criticizing M, I just said that I personally do not like navy blue. Sheesh.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> For the record, when I commented on the navy blue outfit, I was NOT criticizing M, I just said that I personally do not like navy blue. Sheesh.


And I wasn't criticising anyone here to be fair, I haven't read a lot of the comments, I don't think I've seen anyone criticising her on this forum to be honest. I've seen it elsewhere though. My point was all the aggro I've read about looked like Meghan was the one singled out for wearing that colour, no one else was.
I'm not that keen on navy blue either for the record.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## glamourous1098

Sharont2305 said:


> And I wasn't criticising anyone here to be fair, I haven't read a lot of the comments, I don't think I've seen anyone criticising her on this forum to be honest. I've seen it elsewhere though. My point was all the aggro I've read about looked like Meghan was the one singled out for wearing that colour, no one else was.
> I'm not that keen on navy blue either for the record.


I think that commenting on what Meghan (a grown adult and a public figure) wore is _very _different from commenting on what Lady Louise (a child and not a public figure) wore.  Simplest explanation as to why people are more likely to comment on Meghan wearing navy.


----------



## Lubina

Wait, how were Meghan's shoulders a problem last year? Was Sophie picked apart for her low cut trooping outfit a few years back?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

I wish she'd wear a different designer. Givenchy has done nothing for her and every look is the same.


----------



## VickyB

I love navy blue - very chic color.


----------



## VickyB

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> I wish she'd wear a different designer. Givenchy has done nothing for her and every look is the same.



I thought most of the Givenchy pieces have been great. Which did you think failed?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

^^It started with the ill-tailored wedding dress and it hasn't improved since. The poor girl was in an unlined skirt on her royal tour. Most of the others haven't been as egregious they're just boring and emphasize her boxy torso. Would love to see her in more empire waistlines and color like that self-portrait dress.


----------



## VickyB

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^It started with the ill-tailored wedding dress and it hasn't improved since. The poor girl was in an unlined skirt on her royal tour. Most of the others haven't been as egregious they're just boring and emphasize her boxy torso. Would love to see her in more empire waistlines and color like that self-portrait dress.


Fair enough although I don't fully agree. That's the spice of life! The wedding dress was tailored perfectly IMHO. Any tighter it would have looked tacky and cheap - any looser and it would have lost it's shape. I don't recall the unlined skirt.


----------



## Sharont2305

glamourous1098 said:


> I think that commenting on what Meghan (a grown adult and a public figure) wore is _very _different from commenting on what Lady Louise (a child and not a public figure) wore.  Simplest explanation as to why people are more likely to comment on Meghan wearing navy.


Agree. I did say in my original post "Is it because she's a teenager? "


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry meeting the Prime Minister of Nepal KP Sharma Oli during a private audience at Kensington Palace


----------



## myown

VickyB said:


> I love navy blue - very chic color.


yeah, I don´t get what's wrong with navy blue.


----------



## bisbee

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> ^^It started with the ill-tailored wedding dress and it hasn't improved since. The poor girl was in an unlined skirt on her royal tour. Most of the others haven't been as egregious they're just boring and emphasize her boxy torso. Would love to see her in more empire waistlines and color like that self-portrait dress.


I thought and still think her wedding dress was beautiful.  These small comments about her outfits will follow her for years.  I myself would rather read about her activities (after maternity leave) instead of old comments about what is wrong with her clothing.


----------



## MizGemma

myown said:


> yeah, I don´t get what's wrong with navy blue.


I have deep winter coloring. Navy blue, black, bluish red, raspberry, purple, emerald green, strong yellows, and grey are the colors that look decent on me.  Other colors are meh -- wish I could wear them.. Needless to say, I'm a fan of navy blue.


----------



## Sharont2305

Overseas tour alert!!
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning a big tour to Africa later this year which will connect the couple with some of Harry’s greatest passions as well as those of his late mother.

Harry and Meghan plan to visit Malawi to expand the reach of his charity Sentebale into that country.

The couple will also visit Angola to highlight the continuing problems from land mines – an issue about which his mother cared passionately.

The tour will also include a visit to South Africa.

It was in Angola shortly before her death that Princess Diana walked through an active land mine area.

She was famously pictured wearing a visor and detonated a mine in front of a number international reporters.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the Sentebale Audi Concert


----------



## Lubina

myown said:


> yeah, I don´t get what's wrong with navy blue.



Meghan has worn navy blue on a few occasions ergo it is an awful color. Seriously though Britain's royal family is like no other. There are other royal families in Europe, Asia, Africa that are wealthier, better looking and they dress in clothing that looks like it was made in this decade as opposed to 8 decades ago.
Marriage-wise, the British royal family, from pure observation seems to be the most insular.  Other royal families marry people from all over the world, but for the most part the high ranking British royals keep it British with very few modern exceptions and their media is obsessed with them so the cameras is now pointed at the foreign, bi-racial woman who married one of the more beloved high profile ones. He isn't the heir. His "line" will fade over time. Andrew's daughter is only a couple spaces behind Harry. She married a few months after Meghan and Harry and we hear zero about her or her spouse,  but Meghan yawns and 20 reporters and body language experts write a thesis about how yawning is against protocol and means a divorce is imminent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the launch of Made By Sport at Black Prince Trust


----------



## A1aGypsy

Okay. Harry really amuses me. I bet he would be a ton of fun and I kind of think he is adorable, even though I seriously side eye some of his past choices. HOWEVER, I CANNOT with this habit of taking a formal suit jacket and pairing it with casual and mismatched pants. Blazer and pants is an excellent look. But so many men do what he is doing - break up a suit. Suit jackets are not meant to be paired in this way.  They are meant to be suits. He also did it with the blue blazer. It doesn’t work.  You live in ENGLAND for god’s sake. Go get a tweed blazer and carry on.

So much scrutiny on the minutia of the wardrobes of KM and MM and the boys run around like this.

Phew. I feel better.  Oh, wait. Those pants are too short. Now I feel better.


----------



## glamourous1098

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay. Harry really amuses me. I bet he would be a ton of fun and I kind of think he is adorable, even though I seriously side eye some of his past choices. HOWEVER, I CANNOT with this habit of taking a formal suit jacket and pairing it with casual and mismatched pants. Blazer and pants is an excellent look. But so many men do what he is doing - break up a suit. Suit jackets are not meant to be paired in this way.  They are meant to be suits. He also did it with the blue blazer. It doesn’t work.  You live in ENGLAND for god’s sake. Go get a tweed blazer and carry on.
> 
> So much scrutiny on the minutia of the wardrobes of KM and MM and the boys run around like this.
> 
> Phew. I feel better.  Oh, wait. Those pants are too short. Now I feel better.



I cosign all of this and add - what's up with his Aldo looking shoes?  Did the BRF spend all of their money on Kate & Meghan and forget to leave a shoe budget for the men?


----------



## Lounorada

Anthony Joshua


----------



## Lubina

Lounorada said:


> Anthony Joshua



Anthony Joshua station break












okay carry on...


----------



## Lounorada

Lubina said:


> Anthony Joshua station break
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okay carry on...








Thanks Lubina!


----------



## minababe

so tomorrow will be fathersday in UK. I'm so excited to see what they will post. I really hope we will see finally a Picture of Archie. A Picture of Harry and his son would be great


----------



## kemilia

glamourous1098 said:


> I cosign all of this and add - what's up with his Aldo looking shoes?  Did the BRF spend all of their money on Kate & Meghan and forget to leave a shoe budget for the men?


Do you remember a while back there was a photo of him and he had a hole in his shoe. A HOLE! 

You would think that in such a rainy country he would get wet feet (literally), not to even mention that he has gobs of money and can afford, at the very least ('cause it might be his fave pair of shoes) to have them re-soled.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Do you remember a while back there was a photo of him and he had a hole in his shoe. A HOLE!
> 
> You would think that in such a rainy country he would get wet feet (literally), not to even mention that he has gobs of money and can afford, at the very least ('cause it might be his fave pair of shoes) to have them re-soled.


I wonder how and why someone got a picture of this. They're probably all broken in and comfortable.  But in his case, he wouldn't have to take them to the cobbler himself.  I would assume he could give them to staff and get them resoled.  IDK - this makes him seem all the more like a "regular guy" to me


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect someone just snapped a pic of him walking but, with the quality of digital these days, you can zoom in on anything. But yeah, someone take them to be resoled please.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry celebrating the 70th anniversary of the Commonwealth by attending a Garden Party at Marlborough House in his role as Commonwealth Youth Ambassador


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I suspect someone just snapped a pic of him walking but, with the quality of digital these days, you can zoom in on anything. But yeah, someone take them to be resoled please.


I get how this can be done but why?  how very annoying it would be to be scrutinized to this degree......


----------



## M_Butterfly

sdkitty said:


> I get how this can be done but why?  how very annoying it would be to be scrutinized to this degree......




Exactly


----------



## sdkitty

I googled the hole in shoe thing to see what sleazy publication ran the "story"
There were two magazines that ran it.....Harpers Bazaar and I think Cosmo (maybe others too)
So he likes his old shoes....so what?  they claimed that "fans" noticed the hole.  Really?  he's walking and as he walks, they see the bottom of his foot?  I hope he thinks this is funny.  I think its ridiculous


----------



## meluvs2shop

How old is he? In soMe pics his hair looks to be thinning on the top sides, but in other pics he looks like he has thick somewhat curly/wiry hair.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

meluvs2shop said:


> How old is he? In soMe pics his hair looks to be thinning on the top sides, but in other pics he looks like he has thick somewhat curly/wiry hair.


Hell be 35 in September


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## bag-princess

Lubina said:


> Anthony Joshua station break
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okay carry on...





Who IS this???


----------



## Morgan R

bag-princess said:


> Who IS this???



He is boxer Anthony Joshua. He was at the launch of Made By Sport at Black Prince Trust with Harry the other day. So he is in some pictures a few pages ago in this thread which is why he was mentioned and those pictures you quoted got posted lol.


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


>



Either show the baby or don’t. This looks like a plastic doll. Sometimes people can get a little too cute with what they are trying to do


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Either show the baby or don’t. This looks like a plastic doll. Sometimes people can get a little too cute with what they are trying to do


Well, we did see a foot a couple of weeks ago, this might be the way it goes. Shrug.


----------



## Welltraveled!

gracekelly said:


> Either show the baby or don’t. This looks like a plastic doll. Sometimes people can get a little too cute with what they are trying to do



Their baby....they can show as much or as little as they want.  But Archie doesn't look like a plastic doll.


----------



## Alexenjie

I think it is a sweet picture but left me longing to see his whole face. Yes it's up to the parents as to anything they share but don't get the idea of showing pictures of only parts of a baby. Since Kate and William share so few pictures in the first year of their children's lives I am hoping Harry and Meghan show more but still respect that it's their choice whatever they share with the public.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> Well, we did see a foot a couple of weeks ago, this might be the way it goes. Shrug.


Eagerly awaiting shots of his navel.  So far we had partials of head, hand and foot. The bookies are taking bets on the next body part to be shown.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gracekelly said:


> Either show the baby or don’t. This looks like a plastic doll. Sometimes people can get a little too cute with what they are trying to do


It's photoshopped. The sepia, the dark shadows on his head. Whatever. It keeps their followers happy and the haters, too


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> It's photoshopped. The sepia, the dark shadows on his head. Whatever. It keeps their followers happy and the haters, too


Well it certainly doesn't look normal.  He looks like he has furry eyebrows.  Just take a simple picture!  Why fool around with sepia tones etc?  Are they trying to be mysterious about his complexion?  This is all manufactured drama to create interest and keep  the fans salivating for more.  Oh, right, they want their privacy.  So if that is the case, don't post any pictures at all.


----------



## Tivo

Looks like her dad, imo.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I highly doubt they're trying to keep his complexion a secret.  Talk about reaching.


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> I get how this can be done but why?  how very annoying it would be to be scrutinized to this degree......


I think that just jumps to ones eye. like people here see undergarment lines, where i would have never seen them.


----------



## myown

I don´t  mind that we don't see him completely. But that hand is huge and really distracting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

I think they can and should publish whatever they want.

When they do publish in social media I think it is okay to give an opinion about the particular picture provided there is respect.
Personally, I find the picture terrible. Cannot phantom why would anyone think this is a good picture to publish. The sad sepia color, the framing, the shadows, the filters, the huge hand...  But obviously someone thought it was nice.
As for the privacy/publicity debate, I personally like the traditional way better. You keep the kids away from the limelight and occasionally release a proper picture or bring them to an appropriate event. Seems to me uncomplicated but I guess in the age of social media uncomplicated is a bore.


----------



## Sharont2305

It wouldn't of been much to ask that they'd release a picture like this of Harry and Archie would it?***
Is this Athena poster famous world wide or just here in the UK?

***asking for a friend


----------



## minababe

I think the Picture is cute but we can't see that much on it haha.
it shows perfectly how protective they are on Little archie.
hopefully we see full Pictures of him at his christening.

personally i like Baby Pictures in the normal light much more. why do filters on a Baby Picture. especially sepia is so off imo.


----------



## daisychainz

minababe said:


> I think the Picture is cute but we can't see that much on it haha.
> it shows perfectly how protective they are on Little archie.
> hopefully we see full Pictures of him at his christening.
> 
> personally i like Baby Pictures in the normal light much more. why do filters on a Baby Picture. especially sepia is so off imo.


I agree with you. I mean it's nice they released it, but why not release a really nice photo of him. Just photographically (is that a word??) it is not a good picture, not professional or good, and does not show the baby or Harry off well. It would have been better to just have a really nice photo of Harry holding the baby naturally or something. This makes the baby look like a plastic doll head and the focus is all on Harry's hand, which looks giant. The lighting and composition and pose  is just bad. It doesn't show off Archie well.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Either show the baby or don’t. This looks like a plastic doll. Sometimes people can get a little too cute with what they are trying to do


I think maybe this is trying to be artistic....the huge hand and the tiny baby.....I don't care that much.  we'll see him eventually


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think the photo is meant to depict fatherhood rather than a picture of Archie, and does it very well. It shows Archie as center of the role, but also depicts strength in protecting him, as well as the bond of marriage with his wedding band in there. I like it.


----------



## mcb100

Ehh, the picture looks a little awkward but it is their child and they can post what they like. I don't mind if they post no photos of the baby and want to keep him off of social media. If they choose to post his photos, that's fine too. However, the fact that they are constantly teasing people with peekaboo photos (first we can only see his foot, then we can only see some of his face) can be a little annoying....either show him or don't. Kind of strikes me like they are only posting photos of half of the baby to garner fans and media attention and to keep them in the spotlight. 

 I don't mind black and white photos of a baby or even more serious photos of a baby. This picture seemed a little *too* staged, but again, that's up to them. The only part that bothers me is that it's clear that they are only posting photos of just some of the baby to keep fans looking at them. (I don't believe that they are blocking out random baby parts in photos to protect the baby or else they would just not post pics of him at all.) JMHO.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the Chatham House Africa Programme event on "Mine Clearance, Conservation, and Economic Development in Angola" at Chatham House


----------



## VickyB

The picture seemed a bit too too.... too studied, too pretentious, too artsy.
What do I know and who cares?! I happen to prefer something more straight forward.


----------



## bisbee

This is their baby.  He is not the infant next door, and even if he was, the parents can publish whatever pictures they want.  If they liked it enough to post, it is fine with me.  I like the juxtaposition of the little head with his father’s protective hand.


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> The picture seemed a bit too too.... too studied, too pretentious, too artsy.
> What do I know and who cares?! I happen to prefer something more straight forward.


I love kates pics of the kids but those kids are older and more interesting to look at


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> The picture seemed a bit too too.... too studied, too pretentious, too artsy.
> What do I know and who cares?! I happen to prefer something more straight forward.


I love kates pics of the kids but those kids are older and more interesting to look at


----------



## Chagall

mcb100 said:


> Ehh, the picture looks a little awkward but it is their child and they can post what they like. I don't mind if they post no photos of the baby and want to keep him off of social media. If they choose to post his photos, that's fine too. However, the fact that they are constantly teasing people with peekaboo photos (first we can only see his foot, then we can only see some of his face) can be a little annoying....either show him or don't. Kind of strikes me like they are only posting photos of half of the baby to garner fans and media attention and to keep them in the spotlight.
> 
> I don't mind black and white photos of a baby or even more serious photos of a baby. This picture seemed a little *too* staged, but again, that's up to them. The only part that bothers me is that it's clear that they are only posting photos of just some of the baby to keep fans looking at them. (I don't believe that they are blocking out random baby parts in photos to protect the baby or else they would just not post pics of him at all.) JMHO.


They live a life in incredible wealth and privilege. To whom much is given, much is expected. Maybe a picture of the baby would be in order.


----------



## CeeJay

mcb100 said:


> Ehh, the picture looks a little awkward but it is their child and they can post what they like. I don't mind if they post no photos of the baby and want to keep him off of social media. If they choose to post his photos, that's fine too. However, the fact that they are constantly teasing people with peekaboo photos (first we can only see his foot, then we can only see some of his face) can be a little annoying....either show him or don't. Kind of strikes me like they are only posting photos of half of the baby to garner fans and media attention and to keep them in the spotlight.
> 
> I don't mind black and white photos of a baby or even more serious photos of a baby. This picture seemed a little *too* staged, but again, that's up to them. The only part that bothers me is that it's clear that they are only posting photos of just some of the baby to keep fans looking at them. (I don't believe that they are blocking out random baby parts in photos to protect the baby or else they would just not post pics of him at all.) JMHO.


I have to kind of agree with you here; I had thought that they DID NOT want the child in the 'spotlight' such that the Media would leave the child (and them) alone .. out of the public eye.  Yet, as you note, these pictures seem to 'tease' and as such, of course folks want to see more!  Bottom line, at some point and time, "royal" pictures will be taken where everyone will be able to see the "family".  If they truly want to ensure that Archie leads as much of a normal life as possible, then don't put him up on Social Media!


----------



## Bentley1

The repetitive Peekaboo pics are annoying & too calculated. Either show him or don’t. 

The little we’ve seen of him, he reallyyy favors Megan’s father so far, poor thing. 

The filter on the pic was a horrible choice and unnecessary. 

My 2 cents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

The Royal Foundation, the charity body of William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan is likely to be spilt today. It follows the separation of the two couples’ households. The body set up successful charity campaigns like Heads Together, Endeavour Fund and the Invictus Games Foundation.
No surprise really, it was bound to happen once Harry got married.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just confirmed


----------



## sdkitty

Bentley1 said:


> The repetitive Peekaboo pics are annoying & too calculated. Either show him or don’t.
> 
> The little we’ve seen of him, he reallyyy favors Megan’s father so far, poor thing.
> 
> The filter on the pic was a horrible choice and unnecessary.
> 
> My 2 cents.


I think with the baby being so young and not even having seen his whole face, it's really premature to say he favors Meghan's father


----------



## A1aGypsy

I dunno, they showed his full face in the official photos. We’ve seen it. And I’m sure they thought it was cute to have him peeking over Dad’s hand and holding it with little fingers.

The focus was Father’s Day after all. I’m not sure this is any sort of campaign beyond a parent who thinks her photos are better than they are (heelllllo all of IG).


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I dunno, they showed his full face in the official photos. We’ve seen it. And I’m sure they thought it was cute to have him peeking over Dad’s hand and holding it with little fingers.
> 
> The focus was Father’s Day after all. I’m not sure this is any sort of campaign beyond a parent who thinks her photos are better than they are (heelllllo all of IG).


that's funny....do we know whether Meghan took the photo?


----------



## Tivo

Wrong thread


----------



## Bentley1

sdkitty said:


> I think with the baby being so young and not even having seen his whole face, it's really premature to say he favors Meghan's father


That’s my opinion, so why tell another adult their opinion is premature? I have seen enough to shape an opinion SO FAR, just like I said in my post, SO FAR. 

His eyes, nose, shape of his forehead, partial profile, look like him to me.  
SO FAR, he looks like Meghan’s dad IN MY OPINION.


----------



## sdkitty

Bentley1 said:


> That’s my opinion, so why tell another adult their opinion is premature? I have seen enough to shape an opinion SO FAR, just like I said in my post, SO FAR.
> 
> His eyes, nose, shape of his forehead, partial profile, look like him to me.
> SO FAR, he looks like Meghan’s dad IN MY OPINION.


OK, that's your opinion and I have mine....no offense intended...just don't agree


----------



## pukasonqo

Bentley1 said:


> That’s my opinion, so why tell another adult their opinion is premature? I have seen enough to shape an opinion SO FAR, just like I said in my post, SO FAR.
> 
> His eyes, nose, shape of his forehead, partial profile, look like him to me.
> SO FAR, he looks like Meghan’s dad IN MY OPINION.



Does it really matter? The baby is healthy, will have an easier road than most children so who cares if he looks like his grandfather or not or this is somehow implying he would be less loved because he looks like an embarrassing relative?


----------



## Bentley1

pukasonqo said:


> Does it really matter? The baby is healthy, will have an easier road than most children so who cares if he looks like his grandfather or not or this is somehow implying he would be less loved because he looks like an embarrassing relative?


What?? LOL best not to put words into someone else’s mouth and assume what I’m “implying.” He looks like the grandfather, that’s my opinion and this is a free board to share MY opinion. Is there a reason people on here are attempting to censor the opinions of others? 

And it matters bc it’s my opinion and I’m free to share it as the rest of you are doing. But thanks for your input lol


----------



## berrydiva

This thread....lol


----------



## pukasonqo

Bentley1 said:


> What?? LOL best not to put words into someone else’s mouth and assume what I’m “implying.” He looks like the grandfather, that’s my opinion and this is a free board to share MY opinion. Is there a reason people on here are attempting to censor the opinions of others?
> 
> And it matters bc it’s my opinion and I’m free to share it as the rest of you are doing. But thanks for your input lol


 You are welcome but free speech goes both ways


----------



## Candice0985

berrydiva said:


> This thread....lol


I find this thread exhausting lately


----------



## LuckyBitch

Bentley1 said:


> That’s my opinion, so why tell another adult their opinion is premature? I have seen enough to shape an opinion SO FAR, just like I said in my post, SO FAR.
> 
> His eyes, nose, shape of his forehead, partial profile, look like him to me.
> SO FAR, he looks like Meghan’s dad IN MY OPINION.


Sometimes one sees what one wants to see... Just my opinion...


----------



## bisousx

Candice0985 said:


> I find this thread exhausting lately



Only lately?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Only lately?


lots of drama here


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> I have to kind of agree with you here; I had thought that they DID NOT want the child in the 'spotlight' such that the Media would leave the child (and them) alone .. out of the public eye.  Yet, as you note, these pictures seem to 'tease' and as such, of course folks want to see more!  Bottom line, at some point and time, "royal" pictures will be taken where everyone will be able to see the "family".  If they truly want to ensure that Archie leads as much of a normal life as possible, then don't put him up on Social Media!


Agree, of course, but I see her as a celebrity in her past life, someone who had a blog, someone who knew how to use social media and I think she is still doing the PR thing.  I think they have a game plan and they are using social media in a very specific way.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I've been a Suits fan since day 1 but, sadly, Suits will be ending in a few months. Patrick Adams, who played Mike -  Rachel's (MM's) husband on the show is confirmed to return for a cameo or two. What do you think, would MM return for a last scene on that show?? Has she 100% left acting behind or is it a possibility she does a final scene for the show? Maybe they would use her voice only - as in Mike calling Rachel or something?


----------



## hellosunshine

Yes, she's left the acting world and there's no way she'd ever do a voice-over role for Suits. I don't know how many here can understand this - but MM is above acting right now. She's in a different tier of social standing and while acting can be prestigious...it's nothing compared to the power and influence she currently has. This may sound dramatic but MM is on the world stage.


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, she's left the acting world and there's no way she'd ever do a voice-over role for Suits. I don't know how many here can understand this - but MM is above acting right now. She's in a different tier of social standing and while acting can be prestigious...it's nothing compared to the power and influence she currently has. This may sound dramatic but MM is on the world stage.


Plus I feel like the Queen would NEVER allow it.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, she's left the acting world and there's no way she'd ever do a voice-over role for Suits. I don't know how many here can understand this - but MM is above acting right now. She's in a different tier of social standing and while acting can be prestigious...it's nothing compared to the power and influence she currently has. This may sound dramatic but MM is on the world stage.


Gosh it sounds like sainthood is next.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Gosh it sounds like sainthood is next.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> Gosh it sounds like sainthood is next.


Scheduled for next week apparently  walking on water to follow shortly.......


----------



## Flatsy

Apparently you guys just "aren't able to understand" the magnitude of Meghan's importance.  It's very sad for you.  Enjoy this *****y emoji:


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Apparently you guys just "aren't able to understand" the magnitude of Meghan's importance.  It's very sad for you.  Enjoy this *****y emoji:


she is now part of a very important family....."magnitude" of her importance seems a bit exaggerated IMO.....I know sad for me


----------



## jess236

"Awkward moment sheepish Meghan Markle is sternly told to ‘turn around’ by Prince Harry"

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9294911/meghan-markle-told-off-prince-harry-trooping-the-colour/


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> Scheduled for next week apparently  walking on water to follow shortly.......



Cup of water and loaf of bread ready to go


----------



## jess236

*Prince told grandson 'One steps out with actresses, one doesn't marry them', report claims*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ne-steps-actresses-one-doesnt-marry-them.html


----------



## hellosunshine

Jealousy, sure is ugly.

Interesting how petty commentary is the natural response when simply stating a fact.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Jealousy, sure is ugly. Wow.


I don’t think anyone is jealous as that would be pretty silly.   A dose of realism was required for those who suffer from abject adoration.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Yes, I agree. A healthy dose of reality is good and I am fan of MM but Meghan derangement syndrome should also be reined in.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, I agree. A healthy dose of reality is good and I am fan of MM but Meghan derangement syndrome should also be reined in.


derangement syndrome?  you're not saying anyone here is deranged when it comes to Meghan?


----------



## pursecrzy

gracekelly said:


> Cup of water and loaf of bread ready to go



The water into wine thing could come in handy.


----------



## hellosunshine

No, I've seen some people on here exhibit some of those qualities and it's concerning.  Just keeping it real.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, I agree. A healthy dose of reality is good and I am fan of MM but Meghan derangement syndrome should also be reined in.


You seem to see this as all or nothing. That isn’t the case at all. I like many things about her and what she has done, as do many, but she is human and if you put her on too high a pedestal she is sure to topple


----------



## hellosunshine

You shouldn't worry about her "toppling"...she's doing fine so far.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, she's left the acting world and there's no way she'd ever do a voice-over role for Suits. I don't know how many here can understand this - but MM is above acting right now. She's in a different tier of social standing and while acting can be prestigious...it's nothing compared to the power and influence she currently has. This may sound dramatic but MM is on the world stage.


Agree.  Even if she wanted to, it wouldn't be allowed I think.

It was often reported that Grace Kelly wanted to return to acting, but she never did.  It just doesn't seem like a royal thing to do.


----------



## Flatsy

jess236 said:


> *Prince told grandson 'One steps out with actresses, one doesn't marry them', report claims*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ne-steps-actresses-one-doesnt-marry-them.html


I love those toff names:  "Crispin Money-Coutts, 9th Baron Latymer."  It's like something out of Monty Python.

It certainly sounds like something Prince Philip would say.  And probably has been saying since about 1942.  I'm pretty certain Harry's generation of royals has to politely ignore a lot of what his grandfather says (as many of us have to do with our grandparents).


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, I agree. A healthy dose of reality is good and I am fan of MM but Meghan derangement syndrome should also be reined in.


WOW .. seriously?!?!  Everyone here on the forum has the right to input whatever they want within TPF rules.  Under no circumstances, do I see "derangement" .. and frankly, no one but the Admin's have the right to admonish others who have a different opinion.  Like her or not (and I'm in the middle camp), people shouldn't feel as though they have to all agree with one another; a difference of opinion is NOT a bad thing!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

jess236 said:


> "Awkward moment sheepish Meghan Markle is sternly told to ‘turn around’ by Prince Harry"
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9294911/meghan-markle-told-off-prince-harry-trooping-the-colour/


Ooh, that video is awkward.


----------



## CeeJay

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Ooh, that video is awkward.


Agree, almost looks like she was tearing up after (she did just have a baby after all)!!!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.  Even if she wanted to, it wouldn't be allowed I think.
> 
> It was often reported that Grace Kelly wanted to return to acting, but she never did.  It just doesn't seem like a royal thing to do.


She kinda did a few things afterwards ... she did stage work and live readings and narrated documentaries/did voice-overs, but never went in front of a film camera. She did want to work in movies again, but yeah, I guess it wasn't an approved thing. Maybe Meghan can phone it in for Suits finale and use her voice, that wouldn't technically be acting


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Agree, almost looks like she was tearing up after (she did just have a baby after all)!!!


I think she was putting on her serious face. Harry knows what happens once that last plane has fown overhead, even I know that, so it was a gentle reminder to face forward for the National Anthem.


----------



## Tivo

Not surprised by that video. She’s likely miserable living in that circle. Behind the scenes I bet those petty, jealous Royals (not Harry) are TRYING her!
All fun and social climbing until you realize the precious few allies you have...and most live nowhere near you for support.

But this is what she wanted so...


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Agree, almost looks like she was tearing up after (she did just have a baby after all)!!!


Her blinking eyes--trying to hold back the tears, imo. 
But like you said, she did just give birth and it will take a while for her hormones to settle down I guess. And also the British anthem's tune is the same as the US's "My Country Tis of Thee" so add that in and I would tear up too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She did want to work in movies again, but yeah, I guess it wasn't an approved thing. Maybe Meghan can phone it in for Suits finale and use her voice, that wouldn't technically be acting


One also has to remember that it was 40+ years ago that Grace Kelly was unable to return to acting and that it had a lot to do with her very traditional husband forbidding it.  

I think Meghan has more freedom and theoretically, if she decided that royal work is awful (which it is) and that she wanted to return to acting, she could.  But I don't think she can do both at the same time.  That would just look like she was using her position to get better acting jobs and be more famous in the celebrity world.  I think she would need to formally remove herself from royal work and give up royal funding and it would be a pretty big deal.   



Sharont2305 said:


> I think she was putting on her serious face. Harry knows what happens once that last plane has fown overhead, even I know that, so it was a gentle reminder to face forward for the National Anthem.


I lean more towards thinking he was helping her out and she just put her serious face on for the anthem, but it didn't look all that gentle, especially combined with that frowny face he's been wearing a lot recently.  He needs to work on that.  Meghan has spent a year and a half making sure she is always, always, always smiling and looking enthusiastic so that her expression can't be misinterpreted.  And then Harry messes it all up by barking at her to turn around.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> One also has to remember that it was 40+ years ago that Grace Kelly was unable to return to acting and that it had a lot to do with her very traditional husband forbidding it.
> 
> I think Meghan has more freedom and theoretically, if she decided that royal work is awful (which it is) and that she wanted to return to acting, she could.  But I don't think she can do both at the same time.  That would just look like she was using her position to get better acting jobs and be more famous in the celebrity world.  I think she would need to formally remove herself from royal work and give up royal funding and it would be a pretty big deal.
> 
> 
> I lean more towards thinking he was helping her out and she just put her serious face on for the anthem, but it didn't look all that gentle, especially combined with that frowny face he's been wearing a lot recently.  He needs to work on that.  Meghan has spent a year and a half making sure she is always, always, always smiling and looking enthusiastic so that her expression can't be misinterpreted.  And then Harry messes it all up by barking at her to turn around.


I get what you're saying about Harry, but I really don't think he was barking at her


----------



## LibbyRuth

The odd thing about the video from the flyover is that it appears that Harry causes the reason Meghan turns around to start with. The video starts with him turned around, possibly making noise. She turns around to see what he's reacting to. Who knows - maybe something happened inside and they had to pretend it didn't happen which is the reason he said to turn around.  I don't read a great deal into her blinking.  Looking at others on the balcony, the Queen and either Beatrice or Eugenie (not sure which of the two it is that is visible) are also blinking in similar fashion. I don't think Harry was putting all of them near tears. I think it's more likely that perhaps the angle of the sun made them blink since they can't wear sunglasses ... that and that it's natural to blink.


----------



## lulilu

jess236 said:


> "Awkward moment sheepish Meghan Markle is sternly told to ‘turn around’ by Prince Harry"
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9294911/meghan-markle-told-off-prince-harry-trooping-the-colour/





bellebellebelle19 said:


> Ooh, that video is awkward.



I have read various stories about this.  The clip was edited to make it look worse.  And various lip readers have differing opinions as to what was actually said.


----------



## Aimee3

Royals are not allowed to wear sunglasses???


----------



## Tivo

lulilu said:


> I have read various stories about this.  The clip was edited to make it look worse.  And various lip readers have differing opinions as to what was actually said.


Regardless what was actually said, her face betrays her truth. She’s annoyed and upset and doing her best to remain composed. We’ve all been there and we all know what it looks like.


----------



## hellosunshine

Hate to break the narrative going on here but Harry did not tell Meghan off! Here's what happened --


----------



## Tivo

kemilia said:


> *Her blinking eyes--trying to hold back the tears, imo. *
> But like you said, she did just give birth and it will take a while for her hormones to settle down I guess. And also the British anthem's tune is the same as the US's "My Country Tis of Thee" so add that in and I would tear up too.



The look of stress imo.  I’m sure those Royal events are tiresome.


----------



## sdkitty

I didn't think that video was any big deal.  Whatever he said to her, it took like one second.


----------



## Flatsy

Aimee3 said:


> Royals are not allowed to wear sunglasses???


They can and do wear sunglasses frequently (including QEII) but I don't think sunglasses are worn on the Buckingham Palace balcony.  I'm not saying it's some big rule/protocol, just that they don't feel appropriate when the royal family is out there to greet the nation.  It could make it seem like they are trying to look cool and detached or like they are trying to hide themselves, when they would want to be giving the opposite vibe.



hellosunshine said:


> Hate to break the narrative going on here but Harry did not tell Meghan off! Here's what happened --


Thank God you showed up to set us all straight!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

sdkitty said:


> I didn't think that video was any big deal.  Whatever he said to her, it took like one second.


It definitely could be not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out that it only takes one second to say something negative! So that's not necessarily indicative either way.


----------



## sdkitty

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It definitely could be not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out that it only takes one second to say something negative! So that's not necessarily indicative either way.


understand....I just didn't really see anything significant (as many here did)


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Hate to break the narrative going on here but Harry did not tell Meghan off! Here's what happened --



Oh wait!! You were there?!


----------



## Encore Hermes

Better that he tell he tell her to turn around than for her to be in a photograph where everyone is facing forward at the start of the anthem except for her.  The media would run wild with that


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Thank God you showed up to set us all straight!



You're welcome! 



Clearblueskies said:


> Oh wait!! You were there?!



Obviously not....just like you weren't.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It definitely could be not a big deal, but I just wanted to point out that it only takes one second to say something negative! So that's not necessarily indicative either way.


It wasn't negative though, he said turn around. Would people be happier if he said "darling, would you ming turning around, the National Anthem is about to start"
I don't remember this much fuss when William was genuinely told off by the Queen when he crouched down to point something out to George on the very same balcony. That was laughed off as being funny.


----------



## minababe

it's unbelievable what the media and some other People make such a big deal out of nothing..
it's actually funny that some others on the balcony said other People too that the Anthem will start ..
but nobody wants to Report that hahaha
or that camilla tapped at the queen of the netherlands because she was talking to kate when the Parade started and camilla wanted that they stop and listen .. no one was covering this Story. and that was acutally a Story. but hey meghan wasn't there so who cares? the media is really unilateral ...


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Sharont2305 said:


> It wasn't negative though, he said turn around. Would people be happier if he said "darling, would you ming turning around, the National Anthem is about to start"
> I don't remember this much fuss when William was genuinely told off by the Queen when he crouched down to point something out to George on the very same balcony. That was laughed off as being funny.


I mean…that definitely would've been a nicer way to speak to someone. People are used to being reprimanded by their grandmothers, probably less so than their spouses. I'm just saying based on Meghan's reaction, it seemed awkward and she seemed a little upset. It could be pregnancy hormones. It could be not a big deal. Maybe the rest of her day was lovely. I'm just saying based on that one video it looked awkward.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just had a look again, she turns quickly on the first note of the National Anthem, not because Harry told her to.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Just had a look again, she turns quickly on the first note of the National Anthem, not because Harry told her to.


could be.....IMO it's hard to really know anything from this video.....it's amazing how such little things get scrutinized - like harry's hole in the shoe


----------



## LibbyRuth

I still don't see the emotion on her face that some do - she's blinking, and several other people on the balcony including the Queen are blinking. But for fun, I'll go with the notion that she was feeling emotional and it showed on her face. Observers who see that still don't know why she was feeling emotional.  Why put the blame on Harry? As I mentioned before, right before it happens, Harry turn around, looking into the Palace. What if someone was in there telling him something about Archie?  What if they told him that members of Meghan's family were outside the palace gates?  What if they were told something that would have upset anyone, and THAT is the emotion that some see on her face that I don't?  There are so many unknowns in the video that it does not make a lot of sense to me to automatically believe that Harry reprimanded her and it upset her.  She's shown in the past that she's a tough woman. It seems very unlikely that Harry saying "turn around" would put her into a spiral.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I dunno, the snotty look on Harry’s face after she turns around suggests that they probably had a few unnecessary words as we all have, a hundred times in our relationships. It’s just crazy to me that the press is spending so much time on this. Even if they had a moment, it’s perfectly normal, especially given that she is standing in a fish bowl on a balcony while her new baby is being cared for by someone else back stage. 

Man. If someone had filmed me after an interaction with my ex-boyfriend there would have been a distinct eye roll and muttering to myself that would have set the lip reader’s hair on fire lol.


----------



## Swanky

I can't with this convo and thread. . .  amazing lol


----------



## Sharont2305

She's blinged up her engagement ring. The band now has diamonds. This is probably why she didn't wear it towards the end of her pregnancy and not, as we thought, swollen fingers.
Second pic is the day we first saw Archie, before we saw the eternity ring.


----------



## Sterntalerli

Sharont2305 said:


> She's blinged up her engagement ring. The band now has diamonds. This is probably why she didn't wear it towards the end of her pregnancy and not, as we thought, swollen fingers.
> Second pic is the day we first saw Archie, before we saw the eternity ring.


I really like the new look. Is it common to upgrade an engagement ring?


----------



## Tivo

LibbyRuth said:


> I still don't see the emotion on her face that some do - she's blinking, and several other people on the balcony including the Queen are blinking. But for fun, I'll go with the notion that she was feeling emotional and it showed on her face. Observers who see that still don't know why she was feeling emotional.  Why put the blame on Harry? As I mentioned before, right before it happens, Harry turn around, looking into the Palace. What if someone was in there telling him something about Archie?  What if they told him that members of Meghan's family were outside the palace gates?  What if they were told something that would have upset anyone, and THAT is the emotion that some see on her face that I don't?  There are so many unknowns in the video that it does not make a lot of sense to me to automatically believe that Harry reprimanded her and it upset her.  She's shown in the past that she's a tough woman. It seems very unlikely that Harry saying "turn around" would put her into a spiral.


We have zero way of knowing what was said. But I’m not going to act like her expression wasn’t stressed. She has all the reasons in the world to be stressed with all she’s going through right now.


----------



## sdkitty

Sterntalerli said:


> I really like the new look. Is it common to upgrade an engagement ring?


I think it's more common to do after a longer period of time rather than after just a year or so but as long as Harry is fine with it, then it's her business


----------



## Sharont2305

Sterntalerli said:


> I really like the new look. Is it common to upgrade an engagement ring?


When we got engaged my ring was cheap, it was what we could afford at the time (in 1989)
We upgraded when we could afford something more expensive about 10 years ago. I still love my original though.


----------



## buffym

Sharont2305 said:


> She's blinged up her engagement ring. The band now has diamonds. This is probably why she didn't wear it towards the end of her pregnancy and not, as we thought, swollen fingers.
> Second pic is the day we first saw Archie, before we saw the eternity ring.





sdkitty said:


> I think it's more common to do after a longer period of time rather than after just a year or so but as long as Harry is fine with it, then it's her business



It may be a push present for Archie.


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> It may be a push present for Archie.


True, I assumed the eternity ring was that, not the engagement ring itself


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Possible that the additional diamonds  to the engagement ring was the "push present" and the eternity ring was an anniversary present. Eternity rings are usually given on anniversaries. The additional diamonds to Meghan's engagement ring were added by the time Archie was born as she can be seen wearing the changed engagement ring at the photocall with Harry and Archie.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Possible that the additional diamonds  to the engagement ring was the "push present" and the eternity ring was an anniversary present. Eternity rings are usually given on anniversaries. The additional diamonds to Meghan's engagement ring were added by the time Archie was born as she can be seen wearing the changed engagement ring at the photocall with Harry and Archie.


Or indeed vice versa.


----------



## Encore Hermes

I think it goes really well in the stack.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> She's blinged up her engagement ring. The band now has diamonds. This is probably why she didn't wear it towards the end of her pregnancy and not, as we thought, swollen fingers.


It's an entirely new setting.  You can see it a little better here:
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




Source: The Telegraph

The setting is less bulky and the side diamonds are pulled in tighter. 

I like it both ways.  The new setting is more modern, but I liked the traditional look of the old setting.  Everybody wears pave bands these days and although I think they are pretty, it's gotten to the point where a smooth, yellow gold band looks fresh and different.

IMO, it has nothing to do with Archie's birth.  I would assume the current setting is more to Meghan's liking for whatever reason.  Getting fitted for a pave band during pregnancy seems like a risky thing to do, but it looks like it worked out ok.


----------



## Encore Hermes

I think she wanted to surround her gold wedding band with the pave, match the sides.  I think it’s a sharp look flanking the gold.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think I prefer the original setting.
I see why she's done it though, like @Encore Hermes  said, to flank the wedding ring. I did wonder why she wore the eternity ring below the wedding ring. Normally it's wedding, eternity then engagement ring or wedding, engagement then eternity.
Though I know someone who wears hers the way she was given them, engagement, wedding then eternity.


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> The odd thing about the video from the flyover is that it appears that Harry causes the reason Meghan turns around to start with. The video starts with him turned around, possibly making noise. She turns around to see what he's reacting to. Who knows - maybe something happened inside and they had to pretend it didn't happen which is the reason he said to turn around.  I don't read a great deal into her blinking.  Looking at others on the balcony, the Queen and either Beatrice or Eugenie (not sure which of the two it is that is visible) are also blinking in similar fashion. I don't think Harry was putting all of them near tears. I think it's more likely that perhaps the angle of the sun made them blink since they can't wear sunglasses ... that and that it's natural to blink.


could have been that the baby cried. apparently he was there, too. when I was a new mom and my baby would cry and I couldn't comfort him, that would make me cry, too


----------



## RueMonge

myown said:


> could have been that the baby cried. apparently he was there, too. when I was a new mom and my baby would cry and I couldn't comfort him, that would make me cry, too


And your milk can come in. Gosh I'd forgotten that.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> I think I prefer the original setting.
> I see why she's done it though, like @Encore Hermes  said, to flank the wedding ring. I did wonder why she wore the eternity ring below the wedding ring. Normally it's wedding, eternity then engagement ring or wedding, engagement then eternity.
> Though I know someone who wears hers the way she was given them, engagement, wedding then eternity.


This is my preference, too. The order received. I believe my mom wore hers that way, too. It can be however you want, though. The thickness of the bands/settings/the stones makes a difference in how women wear them, in my circle of knowledge, anyway. You might want to really show off one ring vs another. I love looking at wedding and engagement rings. The thread this forum has for them is just tdf!!


----------



## LibbyRuth

Meghan and Harry can do whatever they want and they don't need to listen to me obviously, but I'll admit I'm a little disappointed that the engagement ring has already been altered. When they got engaged, Harry talked about putting so much thought into the design of it - the meaning of the diamonds used, etc. While I do understand why after years of marriage couples choose to redesign an engagement ring either to upgrade it, to adjust to fashion trends, etc it seems odd to do it after only a year - especially when she added an eternity ring too.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Meghan and Harry can do whatever they want and they don't need to listen to me obviously, but I'll admit I'm a little disappointed that the engagement ring has already been altered. When they got engaged, Harry talked about putting so much thought into the design of it - the meaning of the diamonds used, etc. While I do understand why after years of marriage couples choose to redesign an engagement ring either to upgrade it, to adjust to fashion trends, etc it seems odd to do it after only a year - especially when she added an eternity ring too.


I actually agree with you.


----------



## Swanky

People change them for lots of reason, could be a structural flaw with the setting or maybe he chose it knowing it may not be her style and could be changed later.  I couldn't care less really, lol, so not important.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Swanky said:


> People change them for lots of reason, could be a structural flaw with the setting or maybe he chose it knowing it may not be her style and could be changed later.  I couldn't care less really, lol, *so not important.*


Yes but Swanky you're not The Sun or the Daily Mail looking for their next non-story on Meghan and her wicked, wicked ways.


----------



## Flatsy

Swanky said:


> People change them for lots of reason, could be a structural flaw with the setting or maybe he chose it knowing it may not be her style and could be changed later.


I considered that something might have been wrong with the setting, but then I thought the court jeweler who made it (Cleave & Company) does top-notch work to begin with, and probably would have made extra sure that a royal heirloom piece that would be looked at carefully by millions of people wouldn't have any problems.

Harry specifically said he chose the gold band because it's what she would want (and she subsequently said the ring was "perfect") so I don't think it was intended as a placeholder.

IMO, a groom's biggest concern should be that his bride is happy with the ring and he should sincerely encourage her to change it if she doesn't like it.  But I also think a bride should value the love and effort that went into selecting the ring and not be eager to re-do it unless it's really, really off the mark.


----------



## Swanky

Ya. . .  I guess I just think that it's not my business and really not so big a deal.  I'm  pretty good about not giving an eff about other's issues and over analyzing about my decisions, unless I feel misunderstood, but not sure I could ever be her with people scrutinizing all my family's and my personal choices and decisions.  A girl's ring setting changed, big whoop


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LuckyBitch

Sharont2305 said:


> I actually agree with you.


Me too.  The original ring was exquisite...


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> I considered that something might have been wrong with the setting, but then I thought the court jeweler who made it (Cleave & Company) does top-notch work to begin with, and probably would have made extra sure that a royal heirloom piece that would be looked at carefully by millions of people wouldn't have any problems.
> 
> Harry specifically said he chose the gold band because it's what she would want (and she subsequently said the ring was "perfect") so I don't think it was intended as a placeholder.
> 
> IMO, a groom's biggest concern should be that his bride is happy with the ring and he should sincerely encourage her to change it if she doesn't like it.  But I also think a bride should value the love and effort that went into selecting the ring and not be eager to re-do it unless it's really, really off the mark.


I agree. I mean, ultimately another woman and her ring(s) do not affect me, so who cares, but my old school values are just to appreciate the effort that went into the selection and accept it, b/c it also is a reflection of your partner and what they like, and that's worth something. Harry would have afforded and purchased the best so I doubt there was any issue at all. I was surprised they changed it so fast, but I just thought maybe it was a upgrade for Archie's birth?? I never used to like the idea of a woman pre-selecting her engagement ring with her intended, but it does make more sense to have a say in your own rings and designs and not be surprised by what you receive. Maybe it just wasn't flashy enough. Tbh, when I saw her ring I thought it was rather small, considering her new family and title.


----------



## Aimee3

I much prefer the new setting of her ring to the old one. Clearly she does too.  Jewelry is such a personal taste that it’s hard for someone else to buy you exactly the ring you want without your specifically giving them the details, and even then, they can still get it wrong!  Some women don’t care but why wear a piece of jewelry you don’t love if you can change it to something you do love?


----------



## Swanky

My ring was upgraded and the style changed significantly. The metal and stone didn’t hold the sentimental value to me, the symbolism did. I wasn’t sentimental about it at all, neither was DH. The original ring style was sooooo not me.


----------



## PatsyCline

Don't assume that it was her decision to change the setting, and not Harry's or something they decided together.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be touring South Africa this Autumn.


----------



## threadbender

I guess I am weird. My husband gave me my ring almost 20 years ago. It never occurred to me to change it. It isn't a piece of jewelry to me. It a symbol of the love he had for me back then and it has remained a constant in my life. It is not huge or flashy but it is all I could ever want. I love it as much today as I did the day he gave it to me.
That said, hey, if you want to change it up, go for it.


----------



## Tivo

Harry and Meghan haven’t been married that long, so the new ring still has significance. And also, some people are more sentimental than others.


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> Maybe it just wasn't flashy enough. Tbh, when I saw her ring I thought it was rather small, considering her new family and title.


Other than the crown jewels and ceremonial regalia, which is over-the-top lavish and priceless, the BRF are fairly low key with their jewellery I think.  They aren't like the nouveau riche Hollywood stars and Real Housewives... old money isn't as ostentatious.

In other words, I expected her first ring and her only ring (ha-ha) to be modest (in comparison to new money) but of exceptional quality.

For that reason, I'm surprised she upgraded so quickly.


----------



## Encore Hermes

The 3 stones are the same right? It’s only the band that changed?


----------



## Sharont2305

Encore Hermes said:


> The 3 stones are the same right? It’s only the band that changed?


Yeah, it's only the band.


----------



## Flatsy

Nobody actually knows whether the stones were changed.  This is all based on how the ring looks.  And honestly, from the pictures I saw, the side diamonds look slightly different.   I'm pretty certain it was just the angle of the photograph or the new setting because I can't imagine she would change diamonds that have great personal significance.  


Aimee3 said:


> Jewelry is such a personal taste that it’s hard for someone else to buy you* exactly the ring you want *without your specifically giving them the details, and even then, they can still get it wrong!


I think too many people now are hung up on the idea that an engagement ring is supposed to be *exactly* what they want.  Ultimately, it's just supposed to be a gift and a token of love.  I think it's unfortunate that some women are unable to enjoy a perfectly nice ring because they spent too much time planning exactly how it had to be in order for them to be happy.


----------



## TC1

The only reason I'm mildly surprised she changed it...would be how googly eyed she is over Harry and anything he does..I would think she would have been overjoyed to wear a twist tie if that's what her gave her based on how we've seen them together publicly.


----------



## berrydiva

Sterntalerli said:


> I really like the new look. Is it common to upgrade an engagement ring?


Some husbands will do it after the birth of their first. Not unheard of to upgrade an engagement ring.

However, I'm sure she'll catch flack for the upgrade which Harry probably actually had done in reality.


----------



## bag-mania

I can see it from both perspectives. The ring is a symbol of love and commitment and wasn't intended to be a fashion piece. On the other hand, you are (hopefully) going to wear it every day for the rest of your life, you should love it. Meghan certainly wouldn't be the first woman to love that her husband wished to marry her but was less than enamored with the ring he gave her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

PatsyCline said:


> Don't assume that it was her decision to change the setting, and not Harry's or something they decided together.


you're right that we can't assume anything but it seems unlikely to me that it was Harry's idea, since he apparently put a lot of thought into the ring he gave her.  But maybe he's a different kind of guy - one who thinks about women's jewelry more than the average


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## bellebellebelle19

Morgan R said:


>



The link is coming up as an error! What is it?


----------



## Morgan R

bellebellebelle19 said:


> The link is coming up as an error! What is it?



It is a Sussex Royal Instagram post. Harry and Meghan will be touring Southern Africa in the Autumn. Harry, Meghan, and Archie will visit South Africa. Harry will be carrying out visits to Malawi, Angola, and Botswana.


"TRH The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are excited to announce that they have been asked to carry out a tour to Southern Africa this autumn.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office have requested a visit to South Africa as well as The Duke carrying out visits to Malawi and Angola . His Royal Highness will also do a short working visit to Botswana en route to the other countries.

The Duke and Duchess are really looking forward to meeting so many of you on the ground and continuing to raise awareness of the high impact work local communities are doing across the Commonwealth and beyond.

This will be their first official tour as a family!"


----------



## daisychainz

sdkitty said:


> you're right that we can't assume anything but it seems unlikely to me that it was Harry's idea, since he apparently put a lot of thought into the ring he gave her.  But maybe he's a different kind of guy - one who thinks about women's jewelry more than the average


I'd agree w/you. Harry is just another man. I don't think men, whether royal or not, are going around contemplating ring upgrades and babymoons and push presents, this is all stuff women come up with. Harry likely knows more about fine jewelry than the average bloke, but that wouldn't mean he would think about it any more. Men tend to give it a lot of thought before proposing, but not after. Pretty safe bet that this soon into a marriage the woman is unhappy with the ring and asks for a change. My SIL got a huge upgrade after 8 months - she said she didn't like the original ring and my brother and her shopped for a large one. After marriage (and a baby) you probably feel safer asking for what you want then beforehand, when you're just engaged and more accepting.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> I'd agree w/you. Harry is just another man. I don't think men, whether royal or not, are going around contemplating ring upgrades and babymoons and push presents, this is all stuff women come up with. Harry likely knows more about fine jewelry than the average bloke, but that wouldn't mean he would think about it any more. Men tend to give it a lot of thought before proposing, but not after. Pretty safe bet that this soon into a marriage the woman is unhappy with the ring and asks for a change. My SIL got a huge upgrade after 8 months - she said she didn't like the original ring and my brother and her shopped for a large one. After marriage (and a baby) you probably feel safer asking for what you want then beforehand, when you're just engaged and more accepting.


yes.  I could see Harry giving her a separate ring as a gift when the baby was born (on his own without her suggesting it) as more likely than him upgrading her engagement ring so soon.  Maybe she's going to be the next Wallis Simpson.  That woman had a very impressive jewelry collection.


----------



## gracekelly

Ran this by the DH and he thought it was pretty cold if a man actually designs a ring and then it is changed so quickly.  He is a sentimental guy

Wallis was from the go big or go home school of jewelry and the Duke knew it since he made most of the purchases.   Mostly Cartier and really iconic pieces. Her dress style was very subdued so the jewelry really stood out.


----------



## minababe

My first thought was that they simply changed the band because of the swollen fingers.
her fingers are def bigger than before. I could imagine the ring didn't fit her finger anymore. she wanted to changed it and while they try some bands she liked the thinner bands much more. if you have swollen fingers and want to wear all 3 rings together it doesn't look good with a bigger band on. she is really filigree when it Comes to jewelery.
they looked for some Options and liked this one the most.
don't understand the negative Reports about that in the press. I love the new band. the design of the ring itself is the same to me, because what matters are the diamands from Diana and Botswana that Harry choose for her.


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> My first thought was that they simply changed the band because of the swollen fingers.
> her fingers are def bigger than before. I could imagine the ring didn't fit her finger anymore. she wanted to changed it and while they try some bands she liked the thinner bands much more. if you have swollen fingers and want to wear all 3 rings together it doesn't look good with a bigger band on. she is really filigree when it Comes to jewelery.
> they looked for some Options and liked this one the most.
> don't understand the negative Reports about that in the press. I love the new band. the design of the ring itself is the same to me, because what matters are the diamands from Diana and Botswana that Harry choose for her.


I would think the swollen fingers would be temporary


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I would think the swollen fingers would be temporary



It is. And even if it wasn't, you can have a ring resized without redesigning the whole thing.

It seems some people are grasping at straws about why the ring changed. The most obvious reason is probably the correct one. The style wasn't her cup of tea and she waited for an opportune time to gently tell Harry. It doesn't mean she doesn't love Harry enough or that she's pushy. There have been plenty of threads here over the years about this issue. It is what it is.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is. And even if it wasn't, you can have a ring resized without redesigning the whole thing.
> 
> It seems some people are grasping at straws about why the ring changed. The most obvious reason is probably the correct one. The style wasn't her cup of tea and she waited for an opportune time to gently tell Harry. It doesn't mean she doesn't love Harry enough or that she's pushy. There have been plenty of threads here over the years about this issue. It is what it is.


exactly
no one is saying she is a bad person for changing her ring so no need for excuses


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I would think the swollen fingers would be temporary


The problem now is if the fingers go back to normal size then the new eternity and the new engagement ring setting won't fit and it is next to impossible to make them smaller from what I have been told.  Stones all around kind of lock you into a size as the diamonds would pop if you try to make it smaller.


----------



## Tivo

I imagine M&H prefer these travels so they can get away from the Royal Prison and actually breathe.


----------



## zen1965

Good for them.
And this thread. Anything that has nothing to do with jewellery would do at present.


----------



## loogirl

Pave bands are so basic though. I’m surprised fashion “icon” Meghan would choose to give her engagement ring such a basic B look. Everyone and their mom has thin pave diamond bands on their engagement rings. Yawn.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

loogirl said:


> Pave bands are so basic though. I’m surprised fashion “icon” Meghan would choose to give her engagement ring such a basic B look. Everyone and their mom has thin pave diamond bands on their engagement rings. Yawn.


Is that pave.....I thought it was small diamonds - but not as small as pave....may not change your opinion anyway


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> It is. And even if it wasn't, you can have a ring resized without redesigning the whole thing.
> 
> It seems some people are grasping at straws about why the ring changed.


+1.  One of the big downsides to pave bands is that they can't be resized easily like a plain band can, so switching to pave is the exact opposite of what you'd do if you were intent on resizing your ring every time your fingers swelled and unswelled a little bit.  Which would be a silly thing to do anyway.


----------



## loogirl

sdkitty said:


> Is that pave.....I thought it was small diamonds - but not as small as pave....may not change your opinion anyway


The band is very thin. It just looks like the same band everyone has pave or no pave.


----------



## minababe

sdkitty said:


> I would think the swollen fingers would be temporary



but her fingers are still bigger than before. I know some Girls who have a shoe size bigger now and the same goes with the ring sizes. meghan wear normally a lot of rings, but at her pregnancy form middle to end only her wedding ring. so my guess is def that her other rings didn't fit anymore.


----------



## bisousx

Some people are just not sentimental about jewelry.  Some people see it as the one eternal symbol of love, others just see it as a piece of jewelry because there is no way that an object could ever represent the love we share. My husband wanted me to pick out every aspect of my ring since he knew that I was very picky. After we received it, he commented that he wouldn’t mind upgrading it in a year.  This was surprising coming from a guy who grew up in a culture where the women do not wear big diamonds on the regular. So you never know what a couple is thinking. I’m happy for Meghan, hope she gets to have as many beautiful rings and styles as her heart wishes for.


----------



## bag-mania

minababe said:


> but her fingers are still bigger than before. I know some Girls who have a shoe size bigger now and the same goes with the ring sizes. meghan wear normally a lot of rings, but at her pregnancy form middle to end only her wedding ring. so my guess is def that her other rings didn't fit anymore.



Fingers usually return to normal after you lose your pregnancy weight, which she obviously has. Fingers are not the same as feet. Besides rings can be resized. You don’t have to buy all new rings just because you gained weight.


----------



## Mimmy

A bit more info on the Duke, Duchess and Archie’s Africa tour.
https://www.purewow.com/news/meghan-markle-prince-harry-confirm-baby-archie-africa-royal-tour


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the MLB London Series Red Sox vs. Yankees Game

Prince Harry's Invictus Games Foundation is the Official Charity Partner of MLB London Series 2019


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Attending the MLB London Series Red Sox vs. Yankees Game
> 
> Prince Harry's Invictus Games Foundation is the Official Charity Partner of MLB London Series 2019
> 
> View attachment 4475066
> View attachment 4475067


She looks fantastic!


----------



## Morgan R

Morgan R said:


> Attending the MLB London Series Red Sox vs. Yankees Game
> 
> Prince Harry's Invictus Games Foundation is the Official Charity Partner of MLB London Series 2019
> 
> 
> View attachment 4475066
> View attachment 4475067
> View attachment 4475123



More from their attendance of the MLB London Series Red Sox vs. Yankees Game


----------



## Sterntalerli

I like her in flats


Morgan R said:


> More from their attendance of the MLB London Series Red Sox vs. Yankees Game
> 
> View attachment 4475272
> View attachment 4475288
> View attachment 4475285
> View attachment 4475267
> View attachment 4475268


in


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sterntalerli said:


> I like her in flats



Yes, she looks dressed for the occasion.


----------



## bag-mania

That game was insane! I hope people watching in the UK don’t think that is typical for a baseball game. The score almost never gets that high nor does a game usually run that long.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Fingers usually return to normal after you lose your pregnancy weight, which she obviously has. Fingers are not the same as feet. Besides rings can be resized. You don’t have to buy all new rings just because you gained weight.


No, they don't. Mine didn't, even though I lost the baby weight. It's because the bones soften and some parts of the body don't bounce back. It's common.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> No, they don't. Mine didn't, even though I lost the baby weight. It's because the bones soften and some parts of the body don't bounce back. It's common.



Thanks for letting me know. I hadn’t heard that from anyone I’ve known. My point was it doesn’t sound like a plausible reason to replace the ring with a completely different one rather than having a jeweler resize it if she liked the original ring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doloresmia

Bazaar pictures and story on the ring Harry designed for Meghan and their meanings

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...eghan-markle-eternity-ring-lorraine-schwartz/


----------



## Morgan R

doloresmia said:


> Bazaar pictures and story on the ring Harry designed for Meghan and their meanings
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...eghan-markle-eternity-ring-lorraine-schwartz/



I don't if the article is redirecting for anybody else but your link is redirecting me to the shopping page on the website for Harper Bazaar's 


Here is the article...
*

The Moving Story Behind Duchess Meghan's Stunning Lorraine Schwartz Eternity Ring
Prince Harry personally helped to create the ring with the renowned jeweler.*

When Prince Harry announced to the world on May 6 that he had become a father, his beaming smile said it all. Not only was he proud of his newborn son, but also his wife of one year. “I’m absolutely over the moon,” he said. But it was his thoughtful tribute away from the cameras that truly expressed his joy—a stunning eternity ring that honored his new family.

After weeks of speculation about a new diamond on Meghan’s wedding finger, BAZAAR.com can reveal that Harry helped create the piece with renowned jeweler Lorraine Schwartz as a gift to mark the couple’s wedding anniversary—and their growing family.

While creating the bespoke conflict-free diamond eternity band, Harry paid tribute by having Schwartz add birthstones for Meghan, Archie, and himself on the underside of the delicate piece.




“Meghan was touched,” a source says of the May 19 anniversary surprise, which features a flawless green emerald for Archie, a blue sapphire for Harry, and an olive-green peridot stone for the duchess. “A lot of thought went into it," the source reveals.

Each birthstone is said to have its own meaning and significance, with sapphires believed to protect those close to you from harm, peridots said to instill power in the wearer, and emeralds considered a symbol of rebirth and love.

While working closely with the famous Los Angeles-based jeweller, the prince also took the opportunity to have Meghan’s engagement ring—which features two stones that once belonged to Princess Diana—resized and reset with a new delicate diamond band.

Meghan gave the world a first glimpse at the rings during this year’s Trooping the Colour parade on June 8. And fans got a further look during today’s surprise baseball game appearance alongside Harry at the London Stadium to watch the Boston Red Sox play against the New York Yankees. The game was in support of the Invictus Games Foundation and the first time that Major League Baseball hosted two regular season games in Europe.


----------



## GoStanford

Morgan R said:


> *The Moving Story Behind Duchess Meghan's Stunning Lorraine Schwartz Eternity Ring
> Prince Harry personally helped to create the ring with the renowned jeweler.*


Gorgeous set of rings.  Thank you for sharing the article and picture.  I think the overall effect is elegant and fairly understated, given the rings I'm sure Harry could have chosen/chosen from.  I am a big fan of yellow gold, and like the yellow wedding band.  I wonder if it's from the same Welsh gold as other royal wedding rings?


----------



## redney

So Harry redesigned the engagement ring band. Guess that puts that to bed.


----------



## Sharont2305

GoStanford said:


> Gorgeous set of rings.  Thank you for sharing the article and picture.  I think the overall effect is elegant and fairly understated, given the rings I'm sure Harry could have chosen/chosen from.  I am a big fan of yellow gold, and like the yellow wedding band.  I wonder if it's from the same Welsh gold as other royal wedding rings?


It is. The mine it came from is in the same region where I live. I have a piece too


----------



## Gal4Dior

She looks fantastic and I love the flats. I’ve been eyeing those exact flats for a while!
However, that belt she’s wearing with the dress is hideous! Sorry, I just can’t stop staring at it...in a bad way.


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> She looks fantastic and I love the flats. I’ve been eyeing those exact flats for a while!
> However, that belt she’s wearing with the dress is hideous! Sorry, I just can’t stop staring at it...in a bad way.


I know what you mean but, I like that she is wearing a belt as it accentuates the fact she still, thankfully, has baby weight if that makes sense. It's a great message to new mums that someone in the public eye still has baby weight 7 weeks after giving birth.

On a side note, I think she could do with a good few inches of her hair though, lol


----------



## Flatsy

redney said:


> So Harry redesigned the engagement ring band. Guess that puts that to bed.


Not really.  No way would Harry have initiated a ring change unless she told him there was something wrong with it as it was.  And no way would he have changed the ring except per her directions.  (And since it was a relatively subtle change, her directions would have had to be pretty precise.)  And I doubt Harry would have gone to a celebrity jewelry in New York instead of the court jeweler unless that was Meghan's idea.

I still consider it her project and an unnecessary project IMO.  But it was nice on Harry's part that he supported her desire to make the ring into her version of "perfect".


----------



## kemilia

GoStanford said:


> Gorgeous set of rings.  Thank you for sharing the article and picture.  I think the overall effect is elegant and fairly understated, given the rings I'm sure Harry could have chosen/chosen from.  I am a big fan of yellow gold, and like the yellow wedding band.  I wonder if it's from the same Welsh gold as other royal wedding rings?


I think Welsh gold is always used for these royal bands, a very nice tradition, imo.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> I know what you mean but, I like that she is wearing a belt as it accentuates the fact she still, thankfully, has baby weight if that makes sense. It's a great message to new mums that someone in the public eye still has baby weight 7 weeks after giving birth.
> 
> On a side note, I think she could do with a good few inches of her hair though, lol


It kinda seems, from one of the pics, that maybe some of her hair could be extensions. Pregnancy has been known to wreak havoc on hair, a friend of mine could not believe all the hair that fell out after her first baby, but it did grow back.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> I think Welsh gold is always used for these royal bands, a very nice tradition, imo.


1911, at the investiture of Prince Edward of Wales at Caernarfon Castle, the regalia used (which consisted of a coronet, a rod, a ring, a sword and a robe or mantle with doublet and sash) incorporated pure Welsh gold, identified by the Welsh dragon stamp. The regalia were later re-used at Prince Charles's investiture at Caernarfon Castle, in 1969. 

Some members of the British Royal Family have used pure Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, since 1923. This tradition was founded by The Queen Mother, then Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, on her marriage to the Duke of York on 26th April, 1923.

Other members of the Royal Family that have had Welsh gold wedding rings include:

• 1923 The Queen Mother's marriage to King George VI
• 1947 Queen Elizabeth II marriage to Prince Phillip
• 1960 Princess Margaret’s marriage
• 1973 Princess Anne's marriage
• 1981 Prince Charles's marriage to Princess Diana
• 2005 Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
• 2011 Prince William's marriage to Catherine Middleton
• 2018 Prince Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's very own wedding ring, from her marriage to The Duke of Edinburgh on 20th November 1947, is crafted from a nugget of pure Welsh gold from the Clogau St. David's gold mine. 

The tradition of the British Royal Family using Welsh gold wedding rings was carried into its 95th year during the most recent royal wedding of Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on 19th May, 2018. 

Rare Welsh gold is contained within each piece of Clogau jewellery, making it some of the most exclusive jewellery in the world. The content of Welsh gold can be identified by the Welsh dragon stamp, and other unique marks that denote a genuine piece of Clogau.
So it's only The Queen that has a pure Welsh Gold ring, the others contain some.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Christening info. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...hies-christening-Windsor-weekend-private.html

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9404625/meghan-markle-prince-harry-private-christening-archie/

"Baby Archie will be christened at the same Windsor Chapel where both his father and uncle were baptised - and his parents were married in 2018 - next weekend. 

However, the youngest royal's parents are firmly staying true to their desire to raise Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor as a 'private citizen' by closing off the royal event to the public. 

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who faced criticism last week for lavish renovations of their home, Frogmore Cottage, at a cost of £2.4million to the taxpayer, look set to make their son's christening an entirely private affair."


----------



## Flatsy

I have a feeling this will turn out to be like the birth with a lot of unnecessary speculation and angst about everything Harry & Meghan are supposedly planning on not doing, when in the end, they will provide the typical photos and details.

There's no point to being so secretive and jerking the press around like this.  All it does is create drama and more *****y headlines.  Harry and Meghan just need to have their press office lay out what the plan is.  If they are only planning to release photos via instagram, then they should just say that.  They won't even confirm what the date is, something they should have done weeks ago. 

I kept hearing about how getting their own press office was going to solve their press relations problems and allow Meghan to take charge and flex her PR expertise.  Their new press office seems to be inept, and Harry and Meghan come across like petulant celebrities who do nothing but whine about privacy (while still taking millions from the public to renovate their mansion).


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Not really.  No way would Harry have initiated a ring change unless she told him there was something wrong with it as it was.  And no way would he have changed the ring except per her directions.  (And since it was a relatively subtle change, her directions would have had to be pretty precise.)  And I doubt Harry would have gone to a celebrity jewelry in New York instead of the court jeweler unless that was Meghan's idea.
> 
> I still consider it her project and an unnecessary project IMO.  But it was nice on Harry's part that he supported her desire to make the ring into her version of "perfect".


You know, when I read that they used Lorraine Schwartz (a VERY well known "celeb" jeweler out here in LA), I was rather surprised because well {ahem] her work is not known for being cheap by any means.  Yeah, she uses fabulous gemstones, but as I have seen her work IRL, I can tell you that you are not just paying for those stones but the "brand" name .. and that cost is OUTRAGEOUS!  I just recently read an article where many are starting to bristle at the expenditures of Harry & Meghan and that the $2.4m cost of the renovation of Frogmore will be passed to the UK taxpayers.  Not sure of the accuracy of this but I know if I was a UK taxpayer and saw that I had to fund some of these expenditures, I would NOT be happy!!!  They need to tone down the excess IMO ..


----------



## Mrs.Z

Flatsy said:


> I have a feeling this will turn out to be like the birth with a lot of unnecessary speculation and angst about everything Harry & Meghan are supposedly planning on not doing, when in the end, they will provide the typical photos and details.
> 
> There's no point to being so secretive and jerking the press around like this.  All it does is create drama and more *****y headlines.  Harry and Meghan just need to have their press office lay out what the plan is.  If they are only planning to release photos via instagram, then they should just say that.  They won't even confirm what the date is, something they should have done weeks ago.
> 
> I kept hearing about how getting their own press office was going to solve their press relations problems and allow Meghan to take charge and flex her PR expertise.  Their new press office seems to be inept, and Harry and Meghan come across like petulant celebrities who do nothing but whine about privacy (while still taking millions from the public to renovate their mansion).


Agreed! They draw more attention by having to do everything “different”.  How are Royal Christenings public?  We see them arrive, we see them leave ...eventually pics are released.  So now we won’t see them arrive or leave bc they are suddenly private....it’s silly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Flatsy said:


> Not really.  No way would Harry have initiated a ring change unless she told him there was something wrong with it as it was.  And no way would he have changed the ring except per her directions.  (And since it was a relatively subtle change, her directions would have had to be pretty precise.)  And I doubt Harry would have gone to a celebrity jewelry in New York instead of the court jeweler unless that was Meghan's idea.
> 
> I still consider it her project and an unnecessary project IMO.  But it was nice on Harry's part that he supported her desire to make the ring into her version of "perfect".


Do you know Harry and Meghan well enough to "know" there's "no way" he would initiate a change? I know a number of men who take keen interest in the design of their wives' jewelry. I could see it's plausible Harry is this way too (having designed the original ER) so perhaps as he was working with the jeweler on the eternity band design, he and/or the jeweler decided to alter the ER setting to match the eternity band. That's certainly plausible, right?

Anyway unless anyone has talked with them personally, everything - including my own words above - is pure speculation. But certainly keeps the posts coming (adding to TPF's ability to sell ads - YW Vlad, haha!)


----------



## redney

LVSistinaMM said:


> She looks fantastic and I love the flats. I’ve been eyeing those exact flats for a while!
> However, that belt she’s wearing with the dress is hideous! Sorry, I just can’t stop staring at it...in a bad way.


The belt came with the dress. Stella McCartney is the dress designer.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> Agreed! They draw more attention by having to do everything “different”.  How are Royal Christenings public?  We see them arrive, we see them leave ...eventually pics are released.  So now we won’t see them arrive or leave bc they are suddenly private....it’s silly.


Exactly, all Royal christenings are private anyway, I can see the public turning on these two.
Compare these to the Cambridges who, have always kept the children private but shown them at significant events such as birthdays, footage of George starting school and Trooping the Colour. It's an unofficial pact with the press I suppose. People may say, yes but William and George will be Kings, its different. Archies grandfather will be King so therefore he kinda is public property.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Agreed! They draw more attention by having to do everything “different”.  How are Royal Christenings public?  We see them arrive, we see them leave ...eventually pics are released.  So now we won’t see them arrive or leave bc they are suddenly private....it’s silly.


Count me in on this; so they want Archie to be a "private" citizen .. yet they have the IG snaps?!?! .. how is THAT making him private?  I think that this is just going to piss people off ..


----------



## Flatsy

redney said:


> That's certainly plausible, right?


No, it's not.  If Meghan continued telling him the ring was "perfect" as she did in the engagement interview, it is not plausible that Harry would decide all on his own that no, the ring and the setting needed to be redone.  Because he changed his mind from his original design and it's all up to him?  That's never how it works.


----------



## redney

Flatsy said:


> No, it's not.  If Meghan continued telling him the ring was "perfect" as she did in the engagement interview, it is not plausible that Harry would decide all on his own that no, the ring and the setting needed to be redone.  Because he changed his mind from his original design and it's all up to him?  That's never how it works.


Agree to disagree, Flats.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, all Royal christenings are private anyway, I can see the public turning on these two.
> Compare these to the Cambridges who, have always kept the children private but shown them at significant events such as birthdays, footage of George starting school and Trooping the Colour. It's an unofficial pact with the press I suppose. People may say, yes but William and George will be Kings, its different. Archies grandfather will be King so therefore he kinda is public property.



Princess Anne’s children are currently the queens grandchildren, and they have private lives. Prince Edwards children too. So I do think there is a significant difference between William and George being future kings and Archie not. 
I totally agree with the thinking that William and Kate maintain their children’s privacy by sharing the glimpses at significant events. Because the times they share are so consistent, they are respected. I think Harry and Meghan would be wise to either follow their lead, or to follow Edward and Sophie in sharing virtually no exposure. The way they share but claim they don’t want to share is confusing. Though I do wonder how much of it is specifically about Archie and how much is because of the ways Meghan’s family would try to crash.


----------



## Flatsy

Mrs.Z said:


> Agreed! They draw more attention by having to do everything “different”. How are Royal Christenings public? We see them arrive, we see them leave ...eventually pics are released. So now we won’t see them arrive or leave bc they are suddenly private....it’s silly.


That's the thing, Will and Kate's children's christenings were all announced as "private" too - meaning, not televised and with only family and close friends in attendance.  

But they also arranged to allow the press to take photographs outside of the chapel and official portraits were released.  The dates were announced a good three weeks in advance, and the list of godparents were released a few days ahead of time as well.  They didn't play games.  They worked with the press instead of intentionally snubbing them.  

I'm not so sure Meghan and Harry are planning not to allow any photography - they are just being too vague and secretive about what they are planning to do for anyone to know for sure.  We had to go through a whole week of dumb "Meghan wants to make it into a 4th of July party" stories because they won't announce the date.  At this time next week, we'll probably still be discussing whether Oprah, Amal and ***** are the godparents.

I agree that Meghan and Harry seem intent on making a point of doing everything their own way instead of following how things have been successfully done in the past...and then they bungle it like they did the birth announcement.  They are only making their own lives more difficult.

Their relationship with the press was fantastic in the beginning when Buckingham Palace was in charge. I think the turning point really was with their Australia tour and their refusal to do the private kickoff with the press that always precedes a tour.  They snubbed the press for no good reason and when they got back, the press started releasing those stories they'd been sitting on about the poor relationships Meghan was establishing within the palaces.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Compare these to the Cambridges who, have always kept the children private but shown them at significant events such as birthdays, footage of George starting school and Trooping the Colour. It's an unofficial pact with the press I suppose.


Those are pretty standard among all royal families.  I think it's part of the unofficial pact with the public as well.  The payoff for the public supporting the royals is that they get to share in weddings, births and cute babies.  Generally, once the kids get a little older and aren't so cute anymore, the bulk of the interest dissipates.  (William and Harry were the exception because of Diana and her death.)  It's not like a few christening photos are going to lead to Archie not having privacy when he's older.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Princess Anne’s children are currently the queens grandchildren, and they have private lives. Prince Edwards children too. So I do think there is a significant difference between William and George being future kings and Archie not.
> I totally agree with the thinking that William and Kate maintain their children’s privacy by sharing the glimpses at significant events. Because the times they share are so consistent, they are respected. I think Harry and Meghan would be wise to either follow their lead, or to follow Edward and Sophie in sharing virtually no exposure. The way they share but claim they don’t want to share is confusing. Though I do wonder how much of it is specifically about Archie and how much is because of the ways Meghan’s family would try to crash.


Oh I agree, but I also think that Zara and Peter weren't really out of the public eye when they were children. It seems like Harry and Meghan are hell bent on us not seeing anything of Archie. You're possibly right regarding what you said about her family


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Those are pretty standard among all royal families.  I think it's part of the unofficial pact with the public as well.  The payoff for the public supporting the royals is that they get to share in weddings, births and cute babies.  Generally, once the kids get a little older and aren't so cute anymore, the bulk of the interest dissipates.  (William and Harry were the exception because of Diana and her death.)  It's not like a few christening photos are going to lead to Archie not having privacy when he's older.


Yes, I'm aware of the pay offs, and that actually only started bcause of Diana's death


----------



## Flatsy

LOL, somebody at Buckingham Palace came to their senses and decided to be forthright. From CNN: 





> London (CNN)The infant son of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle -- the Duke and Duchess of Sussex -- will be christened Saturday, July 6, a royal source told CNN on Sunday.
> 
> The christening of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor will be a small, private event with fewer than 25 friends and family members in attendance, the source said.
> It will be held at a private chapel in Windsor Castle. Buckingham Palace is expected to release photographs after the event.


Was that so hard?  Three sentences!  They could have said it weeks ago.


----------



## Juilletdix

bag-mania said:


> That game was insane! I hope people watching in the UK don’t think that is typical for a baseball game. The score almost never gets that high nor does a game usually run that long.


Yes, the distance to centerfield was only 385', considerably shorter than most MLB stadiums. It was more like a home run derby!


----------



## Encore Hermes

It’s very plausible that Harry might know Lorraine on a personal basis, had her make other jewelryin the past and it was easy to ask her to take charge of this.....the birthstones imo is very thoughtful and romantic. 
I can imagine Meghan continually mentioning that their baby Archie is perfect....but not her ring as posted above. 
That imo would be odd.


----------



## bag-mania

Juilletdix said:


> Yes, the distance to centerfield was only 385', considerably shorter than most MLB stadiums. It was more like a home run derby!



Thanks, I had no idea. I was wondering why they were knocking them out of the stadium like there was no tomorrow. Well, it sure gave the spectators an action-filled game.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> That game was insane! I hope people watching in the UK don’t think that is typical for a baseball game. The score almost never gets that high nor does a game usually run that long.


We don't watch baseball period


----------



## daisychainz

If Harry and Meghan want so desperately to be private and hide significant events, why not just excuse themselves from royalty altogether? It seems they want the rewards of the position while trying to exclude the people who fund them. I heard another nanny quit too, or was let go. Their household must be difficult.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh I agree, but I also think that Zara and Peter weren't really out of the public eye when they were children. It seems like Harry and Meghan are hell bent on us not seeing anything of Archie. You're possibly right regarding what you said about her family



Indeed, there are plenty of pics of Zara's christening, and pics of the Princess Royal's kids were periodically released or they were spotted and photographed at various events. Which doesn't mean they were not raised pretty much as private citizens, all things considered. Princess Anne just got on with it. Things are more complicated now with all the different media involved. You try to keep all under control but there are more chances of making mistakes or coming across the wrong way.


----------



## minababe

bag-mania said:


> Fingers usually return to normal after you lose your pregnancy weight, which she obviously has. Fingers are not the same as feet. Besides rings can be resized. You don’t have to buy all new rings just because you gained weight.


she def not has lost the Baby weight. look at the Pictures.


----------



## minababe

woh so much negativity calm down People.
everyone is going crazy because of the word private?
of Course it's private. like all the other royal christenings. we will get official Pictures the day after. whats wrong with that?
don't think it's different than at the Cambridges...


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think the big difference between this and the Cambridge christenings is that for those, the communication about what was happning came from the palace - so the first info released included photo info.  With the Sussex christening, the first info that came out was that it would be private, the end. AFTER the fact, we got the same old communication that indicated it would be business as usual. The same applied to the birth - there was little info about Archie's birth not normally released for a royal birth. But since so much had been said ahead of time about them doing things different and private, people thought they would not be getting as much info. 
It's starting to feel like there is a lot of teasing going on. They are getting attention for claims to be different, while in actuality they are doing things the same. If they just did it and didn't talk about it, I doubt anyone would bat an eye.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> We don't watch baseball period



That’s why they did it, to increase exposure to the game. And lots of people went, there were over 59,000 attendees at each of the games. I doubt they were all just Americans who happen to be living in England. Anyway, I hope Meghan and Harry enjoyed themselves.


----------



## minababe

LibbyRuth said:


> I think the big difference between this and the Cambridge christenings is that for those, the communication about what was happning came from the palace - so the first info released included photo info.  With the Sussex christening, the first info that came out was that it would be private, the end. AFTER the fact, we got the same old communication that indicated it would be business as usual. The same applied to the birth - there was little info about Archie's birth not normally released for a royal birth. But since so much had been said ahead of time about them doing things different and private, people thought they would not be getting as much info.
> It's starting to feel like there is a lot of teasing going on. They are getting attention for claims to be different, while in actuality they are doing things the same. If they just did it and didn't talk about it, I doubt anyone would bat an eye.



but does that really Come from meghan and Harry? I think it's coming from the press. all the wrong articles with so many fake Facts or speculations. they truly have no Chance to make it any different now, because the press is so crazy focused on these two. personally i think it's disgusting how the press handle meghan and Harry right now. there is no respect. it's always offensive.


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> but does that really Come from meghan and Harry? I think it's coming from the press. all the wrong articles with so many fake Facts or speculations. they truly have no Chance to make it any different now, because the press is so crazy focused on these two. personally i think it's disgusting how the press handle meghan and Harry right now. there is no respect. it's always offensive.


I feel very much for Harry and Will for the loss of their mother.  Other than that, I think the privileged lives they live far outweighs the annoying parts.  I don't need to waste emotion worrying about Meghan's loss of privacy.  She was very much a grown woman when she made the decision to join this family.


----------



## LibbyRuth

minababe said:


> but does that really Come from meghan and Harry? I think it's coming from the press. all the wrong articles with so many fake Facts or speculations. they truly have no Chance to make it any different now, because the press is so crazy focused on these two. personally i think it's disgusting how the press handle meghan and Harry right now. there is no respect. it's always offensive.


Except that in many cases, what the press reports is not incorrect - so where does it come from?


----------



## buffym

LibbyRuth said:


> Except that in many cases, what the press reports is not incorrect - so where does it come from?



It comes from whatever story the press wants to spin. Personally I think the gossip reporters read forums and blind sites and write it as fact.

For example, the dm said Meghan ‘s mom quit her job and was moving to the UK. Yet, Doria is still living in the US.

If you like some one you will believe the positive stories, if you don’t like someone you will believe the negative stories.

For example, people said Meghan changed her ring poor Harry. It’s a story that Harry decided to change Meghan’s ring. Yet, some still don’t believe it. They enjoy criticizing Meghan yet husband doesn’t seem to have a problem with ring.


----------



## LibbyRuth

buffym said:


> It comes from whatever story the press wants to spin. Personally I think the gossip reporters read forums and blind sites and write it as fact.
> 
> For example, the dm said Meghan ‘s mom quit her job and was moving to the UK. Yet, Doria is still living in the US.
> 
> If you like some one you will believe the positive stories, if you don’t like someone you will believe the negative stories.
> 
> For example, people said Meghan changed her ring poor Harry. It’s a story that Harry decided to change Meghan’s ring. Yet, some still don’t believe it. They enjoy criticizing Meghan yet husband doesn’t seem to have a problem with ring.



There's no question that there are gossip stories that are made up by writers who look at clues, put something together, and brag if they are right and forget about it if they are not. I think the story of Doria moving to the UK is one such story. I was referring to the happenings of the family that get reported because they are events people know will happen - things like the plans for Archie being born, the christening, etc.  The other stuff I agree is merely gossip.  But things like the plans for privacy about the christening matching up to a lot of what is in the actual announcement indicates that is coming from somewhere.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

I recently found out Prince George's godfather is the richest man in the world under the age of 30 (Hugh Grosvenor). I wonder if Archie will be so lucky, and if Hugh Grosvenor gets a lot of godfather requests


----------



## gracekelly

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I recently found out Prince George's godfather is the richest man in the world under the age of 30 (Hugh Grosvenor). I wonder if Archie will be so lucky, and if Hugh Grosvenor gets a lot of godfather requests


If you look up the Grosvenor family  you will see they are intensely private. The current
Duke and his sister  were kept low profile by their parents.   Natalia Grosvenor, his mother, was godmother to Prince William.   It is unlikely that he would say yes to Prince Harry.


----------



## Lubina

minababe said:


> woh so much negativity calm down People.
> everyone is going crazy because of the word private?
> of Course it's private. like all the other royal christenings. we will get official Pictures the day after. whats wrong with that?
> don't think it's different than at the Cambridges...



It isn't. Some just have short memories and they want to be mad about something:

https://www.voanews.com/europe/prince-william-kate-hold-private-christening-new-prince

*Prince William, Kate Hold Private Christening for New Prince*
October 23, 2013 12:08 PM

LONDON - Britain's Prince George was christened on Wednesday in a service attended by just *21 guests, a small and private ceremony for a baby* *whose parents want to shield him from too much media intrusion.*

Prince William, whose mother Diana was hounded by paparazzi and died in a car crash in Paris in 1997, and his wife Kate invited *only very close family and godparents to the ceremony *in the 16th century St. James's Palace in central London.

Television pictures gave the public the first glimpse of the baby - third-in-line to the throne - since his parents carried him out of the London hospital where he was born on July 22.

 In the arms of his mother as she left the the palace's Chapel Royal, George was dressed in a long cream satin robe that was a replica of an 1841 gown made for the christening of Queen Victoria's eldest daughter.

Kate, a style icon whose outfits often increase sales of similar garments, wore an off-white, ruffled skirt-suit, made by British fashion house Alexander McQueen, and pillbox hat by British milliner Jane Taylor.

Queen Elizabeth, her husband Prince Philip, heir apparent Prince Charles, his wife Camilla, and William's brother Harry attended the service in which Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby baptised the prince with water from the River Jordan.

"George is being brought up in a world very different from Prince William's childhood but the royal *couple really is obsessed by privacy and I hope that does not impinge too much on their lives*,'' said Ingrid Seward, editor-in-chief of_ Majesty_magazine and author of  "A Century of Royal Children''.

The parents named six friends and William's cousin Zara Tindallas godparents, *breaking with the tradition *of choosing mostly royal dignitaries, a decision that continued their effort to portray a more informal, modern image to austerity-hit Britons.

Kate's parents, Michael and Carole Middleton, and her sister Pippa were among the guests. A friend of Princess Diana, Julia Samuel, was one of the godmothers alongside Kate's schoolfriend Emilia Jardine-Paterson.

Clarissa Campbell, historian of monarchy at Anglia Ruskin University, said scaling back the number of royals at events and putting Prince William and Prince Harry at the forefront had boosted the royal family's popularity that flagged after Diana's death and a several royal marriage breakdowns.

"It's also very much Her Majesty's wish that the royal family is not seen as an expensive institution in these days,'' Campbell told Reuters.

Although *the service was held behind closed door*s, well-wishers gathered to watch guests drive in and out of the palace commissioned by King Henry VIII.

"*We're dying to see Prince George but I totally respect their decision [for privacy]. It's their child,*'' said Maria Scott, 42, draped in a British flag, who traveled 300 miles (500 km) from Newcastle in northern England for the day.

*Media access to the christening was blocked, with the palace appointing Jason Bell, 44, known for his portraits of rock stars and Hollywood actors, as the sole official photographer.*

As well as the christening, Bell was expected to shoot the first portrait of four generations of the royal family in more than 100 years, with the queen and her three direct heirs, Charles, William and George.

A tier of a cake made for William and Kate's 2011 wedding was to be served at a private tea held after the christening.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

redney said:


> The belt came with the dress. Stella McCartney is the dress designer.
> View attachment 4476434
> View attachment 4476434


Yes, I knew that and it’s still hideous. It’s the large silver buckle that’s is distracting. I never said she shouldn’t worn the belt, but that wide belt with the giant thin silver buckle is super ugly.


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> It's starting to feel like there is a lot of teasing going on. They are getting attention for claims to be different, while in actuality they are doing things the same. If they just did it and didn't talk about it, I doubt anyone would bat an eye.


this


----------



## berrydiva

loogirl said:


> Pave bands are so basic though. I’m surprised fashion “icon” Meghan would choose to give her engagement ring such a basic B look. Everyone and their mom has thin pave diamond bands on their engagement rings. Yawn.


How basic bish is it when one has the ability to put flawless diamonds in the settings? I mean...lmao


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> If you look up the Grosvenor family  you will see they are intensely private. The current
> Duke and his sister  were kept low profile by their parents.   Natalia Grosvenor, his mother, was godmother to Prince William.   It is unlikely that he would say yes to Prince Harry.


lol I don't think bellebellebelle19 meant that H&M will ask him to be the godfather for his money.


----------



## minababe

bellebellebelle19 said:


> I recently found out Prince George's godfather is the richest man in the world under the age of 30 (Hugh Grosvenor). I wonder if Archie will be so lucky, and if Hugh Grosvenor gets a lot of godfather requests


I'm sure many women and Girls starting the hunt now that this has published in uk
poor pippa, there was one she forgot to date haha but he is luckily too young for her


----------



## bellebellebelle19

gracekelly said:


> If you look up the Grosvenor family  you will see they are intensely private. The current
> Duke and his sister  were kept low profile by their parents.   Natalia Grosvenor, his mother, was godmother to Prince William.   It is unlikely that he would say yes to Prince Harry.





myown said:


> lol I don't think bellebellebelle19 meant that H&M will ask him to be the godfather for his money.





minababe said:


> I'm sure many women and Girls starting the hunt now that this has published in uk
> poor pippa, there was one she forgot to date haha but he is luckily too young for her


Yes, I read that they were very private - I don't believe people even know for sure if Hugh Grosvenor is still single!

And yup, I just meant curiosity over which high profile individuals would be chosen for Archie. I doubted they would ask the same person who is already a godparent to one of the little Cambridges!


----------



## gracekelly

Another Grosvenor related possibly is Edward Van Cutsem who is married to Lady Natalia godmother of Prince George.  I tend to doubt it. The overall issue is that I don’t think they want to be linked in any way to an actress.


----------



## daisychainz

I feel like maybe they will pick at least one person who is a celebrity, one American, one who is a school/work friend of Harry, and one relative. Assuming they get about 4?, I don't know.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> I feel like maybe they will pick at least one person who is a celebrity, one American, one who is a school/work friend of Harry, and one relative. Assuming they get about 4?, I don't know.


why more than two?  one of each gender?


----------



## daisychainz

sdkitty said:


> why more than two?  one of each gender?


Harry has 5, Prince Charles has 8 and Prince George has 6. I think they typically name a lot? I assume at least 4, but maybe more? Or they could go American-style and just do 2.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending The Diana Award National Youth Mentoring Summit


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> Harry has 5, Prince Charles has 8 and Prince George has 6. I think they typically name a lot? I assume at least 4, but maybe more? Or they could go American-style and just do 2.


Don't they do it because it's a great opportunity to honor special people?  Kind of like having more than one bridesmaid and groosman for a wedding.


----------



## bag-mania

^^That's a nice story about the kids' summit. 

It is a pet peeve of mine, but I got distracted by the horrible design of the t-shirts. Breaking the word "mentoring" into three pieces so that one of them could be "ME" probably seemed very clever to whoever made it. Unfortunately, nobody considered that "NTOR" is being more prominently featured and it is distracting. The unflattering silhouette of Diana's head doesn't help.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> Don't they do it because it's a great opportunity to honor special people?  Kind of like having more than one bridesmaid and groosman for a wedding.


I'd guess that in the case of royals it is only for show and opportunity for honoring special friends so the list gets long, but I think most couples choose more carefully. Godparents are supposed to be the second set of parents so most people pick 2-3 and they are really trusted friends/relatives.


----------



## LuckyBitch

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yes, I knew that and it’s still hideous. It’s the large silver buckle that’s is distracting. I never said she shouldn’t worn the belt, but that wide belt with the giant thin silver buckle is super ugly.


In your opinion. Obviously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lubina

gracekelly said:


> Another Grosvenor related possibly is Edward Van Cutsem who is married to Lady Natalia godmother of Prince George.  I tend to doubt it. The overall issue is that I don’t think they want to be linked in any way to an actress.



An actress? Lady Frederick Windsor aka actress Sophie Winkleman wants to know what's wrong with being an actress and a member of the royal family? Lol!







Beatrice didn't mind playing a small role. Her mom was one of the movie's producers so she's a natural.


----------



## gracekelly

Lubina said:


> An actress? Lady Frederick Windsor aka actress Sophie Winkleman wants to know what's wrong with being an actress and a member of the royal family? Lol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beatrice didn't mind playing a small role. Her mom was one of the movie's producers so she's a natural.


She came from an upper class family that wasn’t going to have Markle daddy and familyi issues to embarrass the royal family.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

gracekelly said:


> She came from an upper class family that wasn’t going to have Markle daddy and familyi issues to embarrass the royal family.


So it's not actually about her being an actress, but because of her class and family…nice.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bellebellebelle19 said:


> So it's not actually about her being an actress, but because of her class and family…nice.


Right or wrong, there are those in the "high levels" of society who believe that the class your family comes from matters a great deal. Isn't that the foundation of having a royal family to begin with?  Acknowledging that is not necessarily endorsing it.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

LibbyRuth said:


> Right or wrong, there are those in the "high levels" of society who believe that the class your family comes from matters a great deal. Isn't that the foundation of having a royal family to begin with?  Acknowledging that is not necessarily endorsing it.


It's still ridiculous. The royal family has enough embarrassing history to have the nerve to look down on someone else because they don't like their social strata or family.


----------



## gracekelly

bellebellebelle19 said:


> It's still ridiculous. The royal family has enough embarrassing history to have the nerve to look down on someone else because they don't like their social strata or family.


The most recent super  embarrassing history would be the abdication of Edward.   That was pretty tough.   More recently it would be Princess Margaret and the divorces of three out of four children and marriage to a mistress. Wow! Not an actress in the bunch and they still managed all that have drama.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan and Harry have good reason to keep the christening and guests private. The British press has shown no mercy in criticizing Meghan for everything even if they have to make things up. The press will find a way to harass and insult the chosen godparents especially if they are friends of Meghan and/or celebrities. I hope Meg and Harry are able to shield the godparents from that level of scrutiny and harassment.

I thought the handling of Archie’s birth was brilliant. By being so stealth, the Sussexes prevented the disruption of normal affairs at the hospital of birth. Other patients didn’t have to deal with traffic or press intrusion. They were also able to protect the birthing staff from press harassment.


----------



## loogirl

berrydiva said:


> How basic bish is it when one has the ability to put flawless diamonds in the settings? I mean...lmao


Pave diamonds aren’t worth much “flawless” or not. You don’t have to be a duchess to get top quality melee diamonds. Even you can. Literally anyone and everyone. 

You all want to fangirl her as a fashion icon - the design is basic, common and everyone has it. If one has the ability to have any jewelry she wants, why pick a style anyone can and does have? It’s not interesting or unique. Bland, boring, basic. 

Why are you so far up her butt? Lmao.


----------



## chicaloca

I don’t think Meghan cares how much her ring costs. What matters is that her husband put so much thought and effort into it and added personal touches to give it meaning.


----------



## minababe

so curious to see which People will be the godparents of archie.
Harry has a lot of friends so def one of his closest friends will be one or two. but the exciting part will be meghans side. is Jessica in town ? haha maybe they are too obvious but my first thoughts were Jessica, abigail and Marcus.


----------



## lulilu

minababe said:


> so curious to see which People will be the godparents of archie.
> Harry has a lot of friends so def one of his closest friends will be one or two. but the exciting part will be meghans side. is Jessica in town ? haha maybe they are too obvious but my first thoughts were Jessica, abigail and Marcus.



I was guessing Serena.


----------



## LittleStar88

loogirl said:


> Pave diamonds aren’t worth much “flawless” or not. You don’t have to be a duchess to get top quality melee diamonds. Even you can. Literally anyone and everyone.
> 
> You all want to fangirl her as a fashion icon - the design is basic, common and everyone has it. If one has the ability to have any jewelry she wants, why pick a style anyone can and does have? It’s not interesting or unique. Bland, boring, basic.
> 
> Why are you so far up her butt? Lmao.



I am sure she is ok with "basic" and "common" - if she likes it, does anyone think she cares what any of us think?

It's not WHAT you wear but HOW you wear it, and her rings look very pretty on her. Simple, sparkly, sophisticated. Not basic on her but maybe basic on you?


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> I don’t think Meghan cares how much her ring costs. What matters is that her husband put so much thought and effort into it and added personal touches to give it meaning.


seems to me that statement would make more sense if she had kept the ring as it was when he gave it to her


----------



## daisychainz

loogirl said:


> Pave diamonds aren’t worth much “flawless” or not. You don’t have to be a duchess to get top quality melee diamonds. Even you can. Literally anyone and everyone.
> 
> You all want to fangirl her as a fashion icon - the design is basic, common and everyone has it. If one has the ability to have any jewelry she wants, why pick a style anyone can and does have? It’s not interesting or unique. Bland, boring, basic.
> 
> Why are you so far up her butt? Lmao.


Her clothing choices come across as fairly basic and bland too, so the jewelry fits her style. I don't think fashion, jewelry and looking good all the time are at the top of her list. I (personally) don't see Meghan and women similar (like Victoria Beckham) as fashionable, since they are so blah in their colors and styles, but it has appeal to some women for the clean lines and simplicity, so I get that others might like it and follow them. I'm more of a Lady Gaga and Madonna and Katy Perry type, so I just want to yawn when I see Meghan in clothes, lol.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seems to me that statement would make more sense if she had kept the ring as it was when he gave it to her



Exactly. If she had really liked her first engagement ring it would have been cruel to take it away and give her another. No, she has the ring(s) SHE actually wants this time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Morgan R

Official Announcement regarding Archie's Christening


----------



## Mrs.Z

The godparents will remain private until we find out shortly who the godparents are, enjoy the suspense.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> The godparents will remain private until we find out shortly who the godparents are, enjoy the suspense.


Well since Serena and Jessica are going to be there, I think it is a safe bet that either or both could be named as godparent.  MM might be choosing the females and Harry the males.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> Well since Serena and Jessica are going to be there, I think it is a safe bet that either or both could be named as godparent.  MM might be choosing the females and Harry the males.


Shhhhh....it’s secret and MM does not appreciate your leaks Grace Kelly!


----------



## Flatsy

I thought Serena has a match on Saturday?  Presuming that things go according to plan and she advances.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Shhhhh....it’s secret and MM does not appreciate your leaks Grace Kelly!


Oops!!!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The baby was probably already baptized and everything has been completed in utter privacy, as per their bizarre new cloak and dagger lifestyle. The July 6th date is just to appease the public and to snap a photo of a lock of hair under Archie's bonnet. We'll get an altered photo of the wisp of hair on Instagram a few days later with 8 sets of hands covering his face and body. And George and Amal Clooney swearing up and down in interviews all next week that they are not the godparents!! Meghan and Harry are a royal joke, imo. Hopefully they continue to pave the way for the abolishment of the monarchy.


----------



## chicaloca

sdkitty said:


> seems to me that statement would make more sense if she had kept the ring as it was when he gave it to her



According to the article,  Harry is the one who updated both rings as a gift so I don’t get your point? He worked with a famed jeweler to do so.

People are overreacting to Sussexes as per usual. You’d never guess Archie was 6th or 7th in line to the throne with all the hoopla and demands for info about him. If they are going to raise him as a private citizen they have to start now. I don’t blame them for shielding him from the racist British reporters.


----------



## gracekelly

Going by media reports, the public at large is not happy with this behavior and they have linked it to their right as taxpayers, to have access to more information about the baby because they just saw the bill they footed for the Frogmore renovations.  Not saying this is right or wrong, but it has happened.  The thing that I see, is that the more secretive they get, the less the public will want to know as they will grow tired of this game.  So in the end, if privacy is what they REALLY want, t they will get it due to total public disinterest.  Archie will have his 15 min of fame and then go off to Africa with his parents and live his life. Maybe.


----------



## threadbender

lulilu said:


> I was guessing Serena.


That was my first thought, as well.


----------



## gracekelly

I find this entire ring controversy to be somewhat amusing.  These updated rings were probably obtained gratis in exchange for the free publicity.  That's the show biz way.  Quid pro quo.  The design is nothing unique to the jewelry designer as she has done this design  before and it is pretty pedestrian at this point.

@LittleStar88 I agree with you that the rings look very nice on her finger.  What else counts really?

@lulilu I do think Serena could be named as they might want to have an African-American godparent.


----------



## buffym

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The baby was probably already baptized and everything has been completed in utter privacy, as per their bizarre new cloak and dagger lifestyle. The July 6th date is just to appease the public and to snap a photo of a lock of hair under Archie's bonnet. We'll get an altered photo of the wisp of hair on Instagram a few days later with 8 sets of hands covering his face and body. And George and Amal Clooney swearing up and down in interviews all next week that they are not the godparents!! Meghan and Harry are a royal joke, imo. Hopefully they continue to pave the way for the abolishment of the monarchy.



Aren’t you a poster that said Meghan had the baby early. They give the public details and they are called a liar. It really is as if some people get joy about complaining. 

You complained when the details are released and now you are still complaining.

As for being a royal joke, the public seems to disagree. Meghan’s cook book raised over 500,000 pounds for Grenfell victims. 

The MLB baseball match raised funds for IG. 

The public turns out for their meet and greet. They seem to be doing fine. 

It interesting that the same ones who call them a joke, complain about not having information about the couple. 

I expect on the 6 the same posters will complain either about the color of Meghan’s dress for the christening, the baby’s feature’s, and complaining about not knowing the god parents because that is some how relevant to a taxpayer way of life. Even though Archie loses rpos when he turns 18.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

buffym said:


> Aren’t you a poster that said Meghan had the baby early. They give the public details and they are called a liar. It really is as if some people get joy about complaining.
> 
> You complained when the details are released and now you are still complaining.
> 
> As for being a royal joke, the public seems to disagree. Meghan’s cook book raised over 500,000 pounds for Grenfell victims.
> 
> The MLB baseball match raised funds for IG.
> 
> The public turns out for their meet and greet. They seem to be doing fine.
> 
> It interesting that the same ones who call them a joke, complain about not having information about the couple.
> 
> I expect on the 6 the same posters will complain either about the color of Meghan’s dress for the christening, the baby’s feature’s, and complaining about not knowing the god parents because that is some how relevant to a taxpayer way of life. Even though Archie loses rpos when he turns 18.


Awww... you went back and read all my posts?! I feel special now


----------



## gracekelly

https://churchofenglandchristenings...have-to-be-baptized-in-the-church-of-england/
*It is a basic requirement that godparents should be baptized themselves, *and ideally confirmed too, but that doesn’t necessarily mean their baptism/confirmation should have been in the Church of England.

People who have been baptized in the Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, United Reformed Church and other Christian denominations, can also be godparents at a Church of England christening.

Who might this eliminate?


----------



## Flatsy

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Awww... you went back and read all my posts?! I feel special now


Be sure to get something complimentary about Meghan's christening dress and Archie's face on the record.  Otherwise, your credibility is shot and none of your other opinions can be taken seriously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## loogirl

LittleStar88 said:


> I am sure she is ok with "basic" and "common" - if she likes it, does anyone think she cares what any of us think?
> 
> It's not WHAT you wear but HOW you wear it, and her rings look very pretty on her. Simple, sparkly, sophisticated. Not basic on her but maybe basic on you?



Why are you so obsessed with her? You don’t need to defend her basic taste lmao.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Flatsy said:


> Be sure to get something complimentary about Meghan's christening dress and Archie's face on the record.  Otherwise, your credibility is shot and none of your other opinions can be taken seriously.


I have complimented her a few times on outfits... I think?   I've been a Suits superfan since day one... I managed to watch her for 7.5 years so I really don't dislike her entirely


----------



## FreeSpirit71

A lot of things that places like the DM and Sun have reported have turned out to be false, like the ring for example.  I'll wait and see what actually happens at the baptism rather than being eager to criticise.


----------



## Gal4Dior

People can say she’s beautiful and radiant in a post, and in the same post they critique what she wears and then all of a sudden they are hating on Meghan. Hilarious. I’m pretty sure most of us on here don’t know Meghan well enough to hate her or love her. This is a gossip thread for god sakes! She is no different from any other “celebrity.”


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> You know, when I read that they used Lorraine Schwartz (a VERY well known "celeb" jeweler out here in LA), I was rather surprised because well {ahem] her work is not known for being cheap by any means.  Yeah, she uses fabulous gemstones, but as I have seen her work IRL, I can tell you that you are not just paying for those stones but the "brand" name .. and that cost is OUTRAGEOUS!  I just recently read an article where many are starting to bristle at the expenditures of Harry & Meghan and that the $2.4m cost of the renovation of Frogmore will be passed to the UK taxpayers.  Not sure of the accuracy of this but I know if I was a UK taxpayer and saw that I had to fund some of these expenditures, I would NOT be happy!!!  They need to tone down the excess IMO ..


Agree.

Also, as stated above, if Meghan cherished her original ring, no way would he snatch it from her and redesign it.  Remember the quote... What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.

Yes, Harry went to an American  celebrity jeweller, probably on Meghan's request.


bag-mania said:


> It is a pet peeve of mine, but I got distracted by the horrible design of the t-shirts. Breaking the word "mentoring" into three pieces so that one of them could be "ME" probably seemed very clever to whoever made it. Unfortunately, nobody considered that "NTOR" is being more prominently featured and it is distracting. The unflattering silhouette of Diana's head doesn't help.


That's what the design is?  Diana's head?  Thanks for pointing it out!


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> People can say she’s beautiful and radiant in a post, and in the same post they critique what she wears and then all of a sudden they are hating on Meghan. Hilarious. I’m pretty sure most of us on here don’t know Meghan well enough to hate her or love her. This is a gossip thread for god sakes! She is no different from any other “celebrity.”



A critique is one thing like not liking someone’s outfit, but saying Meghan’s engagement ring is basic, saying it shouldn’t have been changed it was unnecessary goes into the hate category.

Even public people should have rights and boundaries, basic decency a person engagement ring should be between the couple. Yet, people are trying to police Meghan’s ring that isn’t gossip to me. It shouldn’t be public’s choice what she should or what Harry should do with the engagement ring.

Meghan isn’t the first royal to change her engagement ring Princess Diana added 6 diamonds to her engagement ring.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I actually don’t think anyone hated on her for changing it. They are allowed their opinion for saying its basic or they thought it kind of fishy that he would be okay changing it. Meghan is very basic and I don’t find that offensive because I am also very basic and I also changed my wedding band and engagement ring within the first year - actually it looks just like hers. People have their opinions and I can respectfully disagree with accusing someone of hating on another. 

Of course, that just my opinion.


----------



## myown

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The baby was probably already baptized and everything has been completed in utter privacy, as per their bizarre new cloak and dagger lifestyle. The July 6th date is just to appease the public and to snap a photo of a lock of hair under Archie's bonnet. We'll get an altered photo of the wisp of hair on Instagram a few days later with 8 sets of hands covering his face and body. And George and Amal Clooney swearing up and down in interviews all next week that they are not the godparents!! Meghan and Harry are a royal joke, imo. Hopefully they continue to pave the way for the abolishment of the monarchy.


then why are you on this thread? if they are a joke to you, leave.


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> Going by media reports.


well are the media making people to think so or are they reflecting the community?


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> https://churchofenglandchristenings...have-to-be-baptized-in-the-church-of-england/
> *It is a basic requirement that godparents should be baptized themselves, *and ideally confirmed too, but that doesn’t necessarily mean their baptism/confirmation should have been in the Church of England.
> 
> People who have been baptized in the Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, United Reformed Church and other Christian denominations, can also be godparents at a Church of England christening.
> 
> Who might this eliminate?


I know many people that aren't baptized but are godparents. if you name more than one, only one needs to be baptized, the rest is only a plus.


----------



## berrydiva

loogirl said:


> Pave diamonds aren’t worth much “flawless” or not. You don’t have to be a duchess to get top quality melee diamonds. Even you can. Literally anyone and everyone.
> 
> You all want to fangirl her as a fashion icon - the design is basic, common and everyone has it. If one has the ability to have any jewelry she wants, why pick a style anyone can and does have? It’s not interesting or unique. Bland, boring, basic.
> 
> Why are you so far up her butt? Lmao.


First, calm down and save the extra.  Take your lame wish you knew how to clapback somewhere else. No one is fangirling or up her butt. You obviously don't know the meaning of basic bish if you're using it in such a lame manner but anything to wish you sound cool I guess.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Maybe he / she didn’t like the way the other band looked with the yellow gold engagement ring.  Maybe he wanted to get her something to commemorate both their anniversary and their first baby and she said slow down on the rings, let’s just change the band then. Who knows. I figure, if you are (theoretically) going to wear something for the rest of your life you should like it.

But, more drama... not releasing the names of the godparents according to People (lol).


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> A critique is one thing like not liking someone’s outfit, but saying Meghan’s engagement ring is basic, saying it shouldn’t have been changed it was unnecessary goes into the hate category.
> 
> Even public people should have rights and boundaries, basic decency a person engagement ring should be between the couple


You don't get to decide what people are allowed to have an opinion on and what they aren't.  Giving an opinion on an engagement ring change is not "hate", it's not a violation of "basic human decency" and it's not a violation of Meghan and Harry's "rights and boundaries".  I would say I have never heard anything so over the top, but actually this is pretty commonplace for Meghan Markle's stans, who think they can bully the whole world into worshiping her.  It's obviously not working, and if anything it engenders more antipathy for her.


----------



## LibbyRuth

buffym said:


> A critique is one thing like not liking someone’s outfit, but saying Meghan’s engagement ring is basic, saying it shouldn’t have been changed it was unnecessary goes into the hate category.
> 
> Even public people should have rights and boundaries, basic decency a person engagement ring should be between the couple. Yet, people are trying to police Meghan’s ring that isn’t gossip to me. It shouldn’t be public’s choice what she should or what Harry should do with the engagement ring.
> 
> Meghan isn’t the first royal to change her engagement ring Princess Diana added 6 diamonds to her engagement ring.


I think you’re missing a big point here. Many of the same people who have expressed disappointment on the ring design have also praised Meghan for other things. That’s free thinking, not hate. Hate is disapproving of EVERYTHING a person does because of who the person is. That’s irrational. It’s also irrational to heap praise and approval on everything a person says and does just because of who the person is. Harry and Meghan are human beings in the public eye. They do things and people comment on them. It’s not hate, it’s gossip ... and it kind of pays their bills.


----------



## Vlad

myown said:


> then why are you on this thread? if they are a joke to you, leave.



No need for the gatekeeping...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

buffym said:


> Meghan isn’t the first royal to change her engagement ring Princess Diana added 6 diamonds to her engagement ring.



No, she didn’t? They added 6 _prongs_ to it, which is obviously something intended to make the stone more secure, not to change the look.


----------



## Swanky

*face palms*
Some people may need a break from this thread?  Enjoy the holiday a bit?!


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.
> 
> Also, as stated above, if Meghan cherished her original ring, no way would he snatch it from her and redesign it.  Remember the quote... What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> Yes, Harry went to an American  celebrity jeweller, probably on Meghan's request.
> 
> That's what the design is?  Diana's head?  Thanks for pointing it out!


Agree....I doubt he put a lot of thought into designing the ring for her and then thought (as a guy) "oh, the ring needs updating" after a year.  The ring is pretty before and after.  It's not huge like J Lo's....more tasteful.  And I'm sure she will have plenty of opportunities for jewelry in the future.


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan attending Wimbledon


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> I know many people that aren't baptized but are godparents. if you name more than one, only one needs to be baptized, the rest is only a plus.


The point here is that these are the rules of The Church of England and since his great grandmother is the head of said church, it is likely a that they will stick to this rule.


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> Meghan attending Wimbledon
> 
> 
> View attachment 4480927
> View attachment 4480895
> View attachment 4480900
> View attachment 4480898
> View attachment 4480899
> View attachment 4480894


who is sitting with her?


----------



## Candice0985

Morgan R said:


> Meghan attending Wimbledon
> 
> 
> View attachment 4480927
> View attachment 4480895
> View attachment 4480900
> View attachment 4480898
> View attachment 4480899
> View attachment 4480894


she looks amazing!


----------



## Morgan R

gracekelly said:


> who is sitting with her?



Her friends from Northwestern University Genevieve Hillis (in the green and pink) and Lindsay Roth (in the blue)


----------



## LibbyRuth

Pretty cool that she’s at court one to watch Serena rather than in the royal box!


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> well are the media making people to think so or are they reflecting the community?


That is always difficult to answer, but given the number of reader comments and the nature of them it would appear to be reflecting public opinion.  There has always been an undercurrent of tax payer dissatisfaction with the amount of money the royals get from the public purse.   It is like the tides and ebbs and flows for and against the monarchy.  Sometimes it isn’t about money. One of the lowest points for the Queen was the initial lack of mourning over the death of Lady Diana.   She was given a wake up call by the people’s reaction and then did her best to rectify the situation.


----------



## gracekelly

Candice0985 said:


> she looks amazing!


Back in skinny jeans too. Looking good,   She should have worn this to the baseball game.   Nice to have a stress free day with the girlfriends. Harry can stay home and feed the baby


----------



## Candice0985

gracekelly said:


> Back in skinny jeans too. Looking good,   She should have worn this to the baseball game.   Nice to have a stress free day with the girlfriends. Harry can stay home and feed the baby


Exactly! it's a well deserved girls day out


----------



## minababe

Morgan R said:


> Meghan attending Wimbledon
> 
> 
> View attachment 4480927
> View attachment 4480895
> View attachment 4480900
> View attachment 4480898
> View attachment 4480899
> View attachment 4480894


she Looks great! I was so sure that she will be there today to Support Serena! great look and her beloved panama hat is back! she Looks so happy and healthy, Looks like a really fun day with her Girls !

AND btw I think we see here the godparents of meghans side


----------



## Tivo

Morgan R said:


> Meghan attending Wimbledon
> 
> 
> View attachment 4480927
> View attachment 4480895
> View attachment 4480900
> View attachment 4480898
> View attachment 4480899
> View attachment 4480894


She looks cute


----------



## White Orchid

I love the black Rossi’s (?) But man, they would be so uncomfortable to wear all day at a tennis match.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

White Orchid said:


> I love the black Rossi’s (?) But man, they would be so uncomfortable to wear all day at a tennis match.


I thought the same thing. An espadrille or many of her cute flats would pair very well with this outfit, too.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Pretty cool that she’s at court one to watch Serena rather than in the royal box!


I think Catherine was at an even lesser court, court 14 the other day watching one of ours. Now, that's cool, lol.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> One of the lowest points for the Queen was the initial lack of mourning over the death of Lady Diana.   She was given a wake up call by the people’s reaction and then did her best to rectify the situation.


As a Brit  I was disgusted with the negativity surrounding th Queen that week. Fellow Brits were and the press were at it "Where is she?" "She should be here (in London) with her people?"
She didn't go to London till the Wednesday..... Where was she? She was exactly where she should have been... with her two grandsons who had just lost their mother! This, to me was totally right, where being a grandmother came before being a Queen.


----------



## berrydiva

gracekelly said:


> Going by media reports, the public at large is not happy with this behavior and they have linked it to their right as taxpayers, to have access to more information about the baby because they just saw the bill they footed for the Frogmore renovations.  Not saying this is right or wrong, but it has happened.  The thing that I see, is that the more secretive they get, the less the public will want to know as they will grow tired of this game.  So in the end, if privacy is what they REALLY want, t they will get it due to total public disinterest.  Archie will have his 15 min of fame and then go off to Africa with his parents and live his life. Maybe.


I'm currently in London and don't seem to get this sense of upset from those that I've casually spoken to about them. Obviously, I didn't poll all of London but seems everyone I've spoken to don't seem to share this negative sentiment about Meghan that Americans seem to have about her.


----------



## Sharont2305

berrydiva said:


> I'm currently in London and don't seem to get this sense of upset from those that I've casually spoken to about them. Obviously, I didn't poll all of London but seems everyone I've spoken to don't seem to share this negative sentiment about Meghan that Americans seem to have about her.


Thank you! There isn't really that much negativity here in the UK.


----------



## doni

I love that she is happily carrying around the baby weight. So many of these public figures seem to be under pressure to get back in shape and diet and work out immediately after giving birth that this is refreshing.


----------



## minababe

berrydiva said:


> I'm currently in London and don't seem to get this sense of upset from those that I've casually spoken to about them. Obviously, I didn't poll all of London but seems everyone I've spoken to don't seem to share this negative sentiment about Meghan that Americans seem to have about her.


nice to hear! they and especialy doesn't deserve this hate at all.
I think the People are happy for Harry and the Sussexes Family. it's just the press that doesn't stop ..


----------



## minababe

doni said:


> I love that she is happily carrying around the baby weight. So many of these public figures seem to be under pressure to get back in shape and diet and work out immediately after giving birth that this is refreshing.



sooo refreshing !!
I like her even more now, because she knows that this is not the most important Thing in life. she is enjoying her new role as a mom totally and thats so nice to see.
I'm so excited to see what she will be wearing tomorrow at the christening.


----------



## Hobbsy

berrydiva said:


> I'm currently in London and don't seem to get this sense of upset from those that I've casually spoken to about them. Obviously, I didn't poll all of London but seems everyone I've spoken to don't seem to share this negative sentiment about Meghan that Americans seem to have about her.


Jealous, I love London!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

Serena has said she won't be attending the christening as she's "working" lol.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Sharont2305

Oops, both Clarence House and Kensington Palace got the two aunts names the wrong way round in their posts. Its Lady Jane Fellowes and Lady Sarah McCorquodale.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Their baby is soooooo cute in that pic. I still can't quite tell who he looks more like!


----------



## GoStanford

The baby is a precious little bundle - he looks adorable.  I'm struck by how gracious Harry and William have been about welcoming Camilla into their life and helping their father to be happy.  When the marriage of Diana and Charles was breaking apart, I couldn't have imagined a time when Camilla would be seated next to Harry and all of them smiling together.  The family seems to have found a way forward to happiness.  And, in their own way, into the 21st century with young brides from outside royalty or nobility.

I still find it poignant that Diana is represented here by her sisters.  Best wishes to the growing family and little Archie.


----------



## DeMonica

GoStanford said:


> The baby is a precious little bundle - he looks adorable.  I'm struck by how gracious Harry and William have been about welcoming Camilla into their life and helping their father to be happy.  When the marriage of Diana and Charles was breaking apart, I couldn't have imagined a time when Camilla would be seated next to Harry and all of them smiling together.  The family seems to have found a way forward to happiness.  And, in their own way, into the 21st century with young brides from outside royalty or nobility.
> 
> I still find it poignant that Diana is represented here by her sisters.  Best wishes to the growing family and little Archie.


22 years is a long time. I think everyone involved has matured a lot - not just the boys - and learnt how to get on with each other. I hope that the rumours of the rift between the brothers are just fabrications of the press.
Little Archie is adorable but it doesn't come as a surprise: he has a pair of good looking parents. I wish I could see his haircolour.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LuckyBitch

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Their baby is soooooo cute in that pic. I still can't quite tell who he looks more like!


On TV today they were showing photos of Diana standing with Charles outside the hospital with newborn baby Harry in her arms. Little Archie looks the spitting image of his father as a baby.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Doria looks fabulous and I like Kate’s hair pulled back with that headband. She looks so young!


----------



## chowlover2

I think Archie is going to be a ginger!


----------



## PatsyCline

Any word on who the godparents are?


----------



## White Orchid

Hate me all you want, but not every newborn is cute.  Archie, however, is


----------



## pixiejenna

This people article has a great side by side pic of Meghan and archie and diana and harry. He really looks just like his dad.

https://people.com/royals/archie-prince-harry-christening-side-by-side-photos/


----------



## hellosunshine

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The baby was probably already baptized and everything has been completed in utter privacy, as per their bizarre new cloak and dagger lifestyle. The July 6th date is just to appease the public and to snap a photo of a lock of hair under Archie's bonnet. We'll get an altered photo of the wisp of hair on Instagram a few days later with 8 sets of hands covering his face and body. And George and Amal Clooney swearing up and down in interviews all next week that they are not the godparents!! Meghan and Harry are a royal joke, imo. Hopefully they continue to pave the way for the abolishment of the monarchy.



none of this happened so is there anything else you would like to falsely predict?


----------



## Grande Latte

Saw this photo on Pinterest. Is this Archie?


----------



## chaneljewel

Archie is adorable and looks so much like his dad!


----------



## doni

Beautiful baby. Is he going to have curly blond/ginger hair?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> none of this happened so is there anything else you would like to falsely predict?


Thank you for taking the time to single out my post sweetie... I have nothing at this time but I am sure you'll look for something when I do.


----------



## Swanky

Seriously, can y’all give the drama a break for a bit please??


----------



## Tivo

Little Archie is so cute. I don’t think he looks like Harry at all right now.


----------



## Morgan R

I don't think Archie looks exactly like Harry or exactly like Meghan. Archie seems to look like a good combination of both of Harry and Meghan.


----------



## caramelize126

Archie is adorable! I think its hard to tell who he looks like right now. I agree he may be more of a combination, as Morgan suggested.

Is the uproar about the private ceremony due to the fact that the family is taxpayer funded? I dont blame meghan and harry for wanting their son's life to be private, but I really don't think you can have it both ways- 
You can't bounce between courting the media and going into complete seclusion at your whim/whenever you feel like it; and still expect the taxpayers to fund most aspects of your life ( 2.4 mill for home renovations is excessive).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

chowlover2 said:


> I think Archie is going to be a ginger!


That would be extremely cute.  IMO it's hard to see at this point, he's not exactly a hair farmer at the moment   but a very pretty baby nevertheless.


----------



## Hobbsy

The royal family cost each British taxpayer *69 pence* last year (up *4 pence* compared to last year), with courtiers insisting the royal family is “excellent value for money.”Jun 28, 2018
That's not much in US$ so I doubt anyone is up in arms too much!


----------



## Sterntalerli

I agree that Archie is the perfect mix of both his parents. 

I definitely see Meghan’s eyes and lips on him. But skintone and hair seems to be more of Harry’s side. 

I love those pics of them. They really seem to be happy as a family.


----------



## Lubina

caramelize126 said:


> Archie is adorable! I think its hard to tell who he looks like right now. I agree he may be more of a combination, as Morgan suggested.
> 
> Is the uproar about the private ceremony due to the fact that the family is taxpayer funded? I dont blame meghan and harry for wanting their son's life to be private, but I really don't think you can have it both ways-
> You can't bounce between courting the media and going into complete seclusion at your whim/whenever you feel like it; and still expect the taxpayers to fund most aspects of your life ( 2.4 mill for home renovations is excessive).



But doesn't the media want it both ways as well? They have said horrible, nasty things ever since 2016 when Meghan's name was linked to Harry. They liken their baby to a monkey (the guy who did it was fired then quietly re-hired)  and other reporters said it was a joke, the Sussexes should laugh it off. Frankly all bets are off after something like that), but then they demand access to their lives beyond their job. Do people demand access to their teachers, policeman and other people whose tax money pays their salary?

The press is the school yard bully and people want Harry and Meghan to cooperate with them. They have access when they make public appearances. The press wants more or we will beat you up everyday.  What person in their right mind would embrace that? Why would Harry give details to a bunch of people who have been horrible to his wife and some of their friends for nearly 3 years? Give them an inch they will take a mile. The British press are insatiable and wouldn't be satisfied if they rigged up their house like Big Brother. What else will they write about anyway? The press knows negative stories sells so more access does guarantee more favorable stories. Diana was proof of that.

There seems to be uproar over the word "private" regarding this baptism. All royal baptism are private. No one actually sees the ceremony except for the invitees. The only thing some people saw with William and Kate were the arrival of the guests. That's it and it was their choice to do that.
William is the future king. His children, one is the future king and the other 2 are future high ranking royals. His family is the future of the monarchy. Other than than arrivals the public only saw photos similar to what Harry and Meghan shared.
The tax payer argument applies to the entire royal family not just Harry and Meghan and the bulk of the budget was spent on Buckingham Palace renovations so of the $1 and change maybe a nickel went to renovations, if that because weren't the renovations earmarked for the house regardless an paid from the sovreign grant? Harry and Meghan live in the smallest houses of most of the high ranking royals. Anne, Andrew, Sophie and Edward live in palaces. Eugenie and Beatrice aren't even working royals and they live in royal housing. Fergie lives in royal housing. No one is demanding to see more of them for the cost of a pack of gum.


----------



## Flatsy

Lubina said:


> There seems to be uproar over the word "private" regarding this baptism. All royal baptism are private. No one actually sees the ceremony except for the invitees. The only thing some people saw with William and Kate were the arrival of the guests. That's it and it was their choice to do that.


As I said previously, I think their PR mishandling of the announcement is largely to blame.  They should have announced weeks ago the details of the christening - announcing right off the bat that they would be releasing photos, but that the location of the chapel in the inner sanctum of Windsor would prohibit the press from photographing the arrivals.  They should not have let rumors abound for weeks that the event was going to be "PRIVATE!!!!  KEEP OUT!!!!  WE MIGHT NOT EVEN TELL YOU THE DATE!!!!!" 



Lubina said:


> Harry and Meghan live in the smallest houses of most of the high ranking royals.


Most people are not aware of that, nor do they care.  I think most people only know about the "2.4 million pound publicly funded renovations" because of all of the recent headlines.  There is always temporary outrage over that stuff, and people forget quickly.  But this was bad timing for Meghan and Harry to appear to be demanding extra privacy when the conversation about how much money was being spent on their home was still going on.



Lubina said:


> Give them an inch they will take a mile. The British press are insatiable and wouldn't be satisfied if they rigged up their house like Big Brother.


Every other royal has been able to share their weddings and christenings with the public without the press gaining out of control power over them and setting up cameras inside the palace bedrooms.  One does not lead to the other.


----------



## Tivo

The British press sounds hateful. Just HATE-FILLED.
So I hope Harry and Meghan continue to keep them pressed, give the bare minimum and keep it moving. Either way they’ll be treated badly so no point going the extra mile. British press want to be able to trash them and also feel victimized if H&M don’t let them invade their privacy.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I agree that in many ways, Harry and Meghan try to have it both ways playing the press game and then crying privacy. I do wonder when they are playing the game if that is out of a desire for attention, or out of an obligation to duty. I think Harry would choose a VERY private life, but he knows that being in the public eye gives him the ability to do good for causes he cares about. 
I do ultimately like that they kept the godparents private. Announcing them would lead to digging into the lives of the godparents, albeit for a short period of time. Allowing the important people in their lives to avoid that makes sense. I think it also hints that higher profile names that had been speculated were likely not chosen.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> As I said previously, I think their PR mishandling of the announcement is largely to blame.  They should have announced weeks ago the details of the christening - announcing right off the bat that they would be releasing photos, but that the location of the chapel in the inner sanctum of Windsor would prohibit the press from photographing the arrivals.  They should not have let rumors abound for weeks that the event was going to be "PRIVATE!!!!  KEEP OUT!!!!  WE MIGHT NOT EVEN TELL YOU THE DATE!!!!!"


Totally 100% agree with this .. in some respects, their "secrecy" has just added fuel to the flames.  While I understand their desire to keep the godparents names out of the press, why couldn't they just be more open about the date .. what's so wrong with that?


----------



## Morgan R

Lubina said:


> But doesn't the media want it both ways as well? They have said horrible, nasty things ever since 2016 when Meghan's name was linked to Harry. They liken their baby to a monkey (the guy who did it was fired that quietly re-hired) and other reporters said it was a joke, the Sussexes should laugh it off. Frankly all bets are off after something like that), but then they demand access to their lives beyond their job. Do people demand access to their teachers, policeman and other people whose tax money pays their salary?
> 
> The press is the school yard bully and people want Harry and Meghan to cooperate with them. They have access when they make public appearances. The press wants more or we will beat you up everyday. What person in their right mind would embrace that? Why would Harry give details to a bunch of people who have been horrible to his wife and some of their friends for nearly 3 years? Give them an inch they will take a mile. The British press are insatiable and wouldn't be satisfied if they rigged up their house like Big Brother. What else will they write about anyway? The press knows negative stories sells so more access does guarantee more favorable stories. Diana was proof of that.
> 
> There seems to be uproar over the word "private" regarding this baptism. All royal baptism are private. No one actually sees the ceremony except for the invitees. The only thing some people saw with William and Kate were the arrival of the guests. That's it and it was their choice to do that.
> William is the future king. His children, one is the future king and the other 2 are future high ranking royals. His family is the future of the monarchy. Other than than arrivals the public only saw photos similar to what Harry and Meghan shared.
> The tax payer argument applies to the entire royal family not just Harry and Meghan and the bulk of the budget was spent on Buckingham Palace renovations so of the $1 and change maybe a nickel went to renovations, if that because weren't the renovations earmarked for the house regardless an paid from the sovreign grant? Harry and Meghan live in the smallest houses of most of the high ranking royals. Anne, Andrew, Sophie and Edward live in palaces. Eugenie and Beatrice aren't even working royals and they live in royal housing. Fergie lives in royal housing. No one is demanding to see more of them for the cost of a pack of gum.



Totally agree with what you said.

The big deal made in some British Media about the Christening was such an overaction on the British Media's part in my opinion and they are "disguising" it as taxpayers are being the ones that are angry about the Christening being private (not saying there aren't angry taxpayers but lets not gloss over the fact that there is an obvious contrived media narrative  going on as well). The British Media used the taxpayer "excuse" when it was announced Harry and Meghan's birth plans were private and the media said the taxpayers had the right to know exactly when Meghan was in labour, what hospital she was going to give birth at, etc. The thing is that narrative the British Media said doesn't work because if Harry and Meghan's birth plans would've said that Meghan was giving birth at a specific hospital the taxpayers would've been paying for the extra security that is set in place at a hospital every time a royal baby is born (that security is set up weeks in advance and stays until after the royal baby leaves the hospital). The birth plans being private avoided taxpayers money being wasted on additional security. The public and press still got all the basic information (the gender revealed, weight announced, there was still a photocall, the name was announced, and the birth certificate was revealed) that they normally do it was just done in a more controlled way.

Some members of the the British Media have notoriously gloated/jokingly said over the years how they could "retire" off pictures they have taken of members of the royal family. I have watched so many documentaries about the royals over the years and a consistent line said by many royal reporters and royal photographer is them jokingly saying a variation of the comment..."If you got the "perfect" pictures of the specific royal family members...bills could be paid for months if not years" (pictures of Diana was a "goldmine" for them and "scandalous" pictures of the royals and pictures of royal babies/children are also profitable for them) . Harry and Meghan doing things privately has stopped the press from getting what would've been some of their most profitable pictures (i.e. the pictures on newborn royal baby on the hospital door steps and now the christening pictures). Harry and Meghan aren't avoiding royal traditions there was still a photocall with their newborn and there were pictures from the Christening. Royal Christenings are like you said always private. With William and Kate for their children's Christening they had a limited press pool set up to get pictures/videos outside of where their children were christened but no media were allowed inside while the Christening was happening (Charlotte's Christening was the only one of their three kids where members of the public could actually stand outside to wait and see William, Kate, George, a baby Charlotte, other royals, Kate's family, and the Godparents arriving and leaving). In my opinion that makes sense because William will be King so there are of course certain images you expect there to be of William with his children. In Harry's case were seeing Harry wants to raise Archie (and any future children he and Meghan may have) like private citizens. The privacy aspect shouldn't be surprising to anybody that has paid attention to Harry over the years. Harry has been consistent about his dislike for the media but knows they have to cover his engagements (his dislike comes from a pretty understandable place as it is no secret Harry and William blame the media for how their mother was treated and the role they believe the media played in her death). William has to be more "friendly"/engaging with the press because of his future position as King but with Harry he has never been as engaging with the press as William has been (Harry was slightly more engaging when he was younger but he hasn't been now that he is older/matured). Harry has always been more engaging with the people at his engagements than he has been with reporters/photographers. The royal reporters are meant to photograph and report on royal engagements they aren't meant to know every little detail/aspect of royal of the lives of royal family members.

Also I think an additional reason Harry and Meghan doing things privately is a safety/security issue as well. I hope some aren't pretending everything surrounding Harry and Meghan since they have been together has been "peaches and cream" with the media and commenters online. Harry has been subjected to backlash for being with a woman of color and has been called a "race traitor" (with his life threatened by people online) for being with Meghan. Meghan has been subjected to many negative comment by many articles and comments online since it was just rumored she was with Harry,,,do people forget the whole reason it was confirmed Harry and Meghan were dating was because Harry issued a statement (https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry)  that both confirmed Meghan was his girlfriend but that statement also addressed that she had been subject to comments and stories that were defamatory stories, sexist, and had racial undertones. Those stories and comments online haven't even come close to stopping some of it is subtle and not subtle but there are definitely articles and comments about Meghan online that are filled with racism, classism, sexism, and xenophobia. For those that don't believe it is happening some people need to take a look under the hashtag "megxit" on various forms of social media (twitter, facebook, instagram, tumblr, etc.) so many vile things are said about Meghan as well as them editing pictures/videos to make things about Meghan look worse than they are. Some have openly threatened Meghan as well did people forget about the story that was confirmed by London’s Metropolitan Police of the racist letter filled with white powder caused "anathrax scare" was sent to Kensignton Palace last year addressed to Meghan and some of those terrible "megxit" people have gloated on social media that they have showed up at  Meghan's engagements (with pictures/videos to prove it) as well as at the Long Walk in Windsor which isn't far from Harry and Meghan's Frogmore Cottage luckily there are major security measures put in place for the royals. The royals are clearly aware of some of the online comments made about members of the royal family but in the past few years you know they had to notice the commentary more specifically said about Harry and Meghan has gotten bad as the royal family released a statement about social media guidelines this year and which concludes by saying "We also reserve the right to send any comments we deem appropriate to law enforcement authorities for investigation as we feel necessary or is required by law." (https://www.royal.uk/social-media-community-guidelines).


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> As I said previously, I think their PR mishandling of the announcement is largely to blame.  They should have announced weeks ago the details of the christening - announcing right off the bat that they would be releasing photos, but that the location of the chapel in the inner sanctum of Windsor would prohibit the press from photographing the arrivals.  They should not have let rumors abound for weeks that the event was going to be "PRIVATE!!!!  KEEP OUT!!!!  WE MIGHT NOT EVEN TELL YOU THE DATE!!!!!"
> 
> 
> Most people are not aware of that, nor do they care.  I think most people only know about the "2.4 million pound publicly funded renovations" because of all of the recent headlines.  There is always temporary outrage over that stuff, and people forget quickly.  But this was bad timing for Meghan and Harry to appear to be demanding extra privacy when the conversation about how much money was being spent on their home was still going on.
> 
> 
> Every other royal has been able to share their weddings and christenings with the public without the press gaining out of control power over them and setting up cameras inside the palace bedrooms.  One does not lead to the other.



Every other royal has been able to share their weddings and christenings with the public without the press gaining out of control power over them and setting up cameras inside the palace bedrooms.  One does not lead to the other.

“But the press has crossed the line with Harry and Meghan. It forced them to move from one of their homes. Certain publications published photos inside of their homes. The press are showing they will not respect Harry and Meghan’s boundaries so I don’t blame them for wanting to protect their family.”

“Prince Harry has accepted substantial damages and an apology from a news agency that took aerial photographs of his Cotswolds home, forcing him and his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, to move out.
In a high court statement, lawyers for the Duke of Sussex said Splash News and Picture Agency, described as a well-known paparazzi agency, flew a chartered helicopter over the Oxfordshire property, photographing “the living area and dining area of the home and directly into the bedroom”. The property was privately rented by Harry and Meghan.
Photographs and videos were syndicated, and published by the Times and other media outlets, the court was told.”

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news...damages-over-pictures-of-his-oxfordshire-home


----------



## PatsyCline

caramelize126 said:


> Archie is adorable! I think its hard to tell who he looks like right now. I agree he may be more of a combination, as Morgan suggested.
> 
> Is the uproar about the private ceremony due to the fact that the family is taxpayer funded? I dont blame meghan and harry for wanting their son's life to be private, but I really don't think you can have it both ways-
> You can't bounce between courting the media and going into complete seclusion at your whim/whenever you feel like it; and still expect the taxpayers to fund most aspects of your life ( 2.4 mill for home renovations is excessive).


The renovation cost isn't an additional cost to the taxpayers, it comes from the fund the government pays the monarch for the upkeep of the residences.

Since we don't know what the state of the house was before renovations, it's impossible to say if they were excessive or not.

Keeping the godparents identity secret could be for their protection as well. They released photos of the event, so it's not like access was denied, it was simply controlled.


----------



## papertiger

PatsyCline said:


> *The renovation cost isn't an additional cost to the taxpayers, it comes from the fund the government pays the monarch for the upkeep of the residences.*
> 
> Since we don't know what the state of the house was before renovations, it's impossible to say if they were excessive or not.
> 
> Keeping the godparents identity secret could be for their protection as well. They released photos of the event, so it's not like access was denied, it was simply controlled.



The Government's' fund' consists of revenue collected from British tax payers.


----------



## Grande Latte

This is a nice new photo too.  Beautiful family.


----------



## mrsinsyder

papertiger said:


> The Government's' fund' consists of revenue collected from British tax payers.


People keep missing this like the money comes out of thin air.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> People keep missing this like the money comes out of thin air.


And it's not like if they didn't use the money to renovate their new home, the money wouldn't have been spent on something else.  It's not an additional fee.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree that in many ways, Harry and Meghan try to have it both ways playing the press game and then crying privacy. I do wonder when they are playing the game if that is out of a desire for attention, or out of an obligation to duty. I think Harry would choose a VERY private life, but he knows that being in the public eye gives him the ability to do good for causes he cares about.
> I do ultimately like that they kept the godparents private. Announcing them would lead to digging into the lives of the godparents, albeit for a short period of time. Allowing the important people in their lives to avoid that makes sense. I think it also hints that higher profile names that had been speculated were likely not chosen.


But they don’t really have a choice but to play the game. Press is going to cover them regardless because it’s Harry. The negative coverage is because they don’t like the wife he chose, so we get this passive aggressive stuff and comparing Archie to a “monkey” and irrational mean spirited-ness. 
I’m sure Meghan didn’t realize how bad all this would be, but so far she seems to be handling it like a champ. And if the press is going to be petty, I don’t blame the Sussex’s for being petty as well. Besides, what can the press really do about it. They’ve already done their worst so they will just have to deal.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> People keep missing this like the money comes out of thin air.


But you're acting like there's an extra charge on your personal taxes for the renovation, which there isn't. The renovation was paid out of the monies allocated to the Royal family.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Tivo said:


> But they don’t really have a choice but to play the game. Press is going to cover them regardless because it’s Harry. The negative coverage is because they don’t like the wife he chose, so we get this passive aggressive stuff and comparing Archie to a “monkey” and irrational mean spirited-ness.
> I’m sure Meghan didn’t realize how bad all this would be, but so far she seems to be handling it like a champ. And if the press is going to be petty, I don’t blame the Sussex’s for being petty as well. Besides, what can the press really do about it. They’ve already done their worst so they will just have to deal.


You make a fair point, but I think it's really hard to tell what life would be like if they didn't do their part to play the press game. There is a strong argument that because he's Diana's son, he could never escape the coverage. But then you look at other royals who are further out of the line of succession but have notable parents - Prince Edward comes to mind - and they have managed to avoid a lot of the scrutiny. So if Harry and Meghan didn't do their part to play the press game, how private of a life could they achieve?  Since we can't live in parallel universes, we'll never know and we'll keep on speculating!


----------



## Jayne1

PatsyCline said:


> But you're acting like there's an extra charge on your personal taxes for the renovation, which there isn't. The renovation was paid out of the monies allocated to the Royal family.


Does that mean -- if it's there, it should be spent?

What happens to the surplus?  Does it get rescinded (spend it now or lose forever, or until next year) or does it accumulate? Is there ever any surplus?


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> Does that mean -- if it's there, it should be spent?
> 
> What happens to the surplus?  Does it get rescinded (spend it now or lose forever, or until next year) or does it accumulate? Is there ever any surplus?



It is the Queen’s, it doesn’t go back. It’s hers to use.


----------



## rose60610

There exists some resentment that British tax payers foot the RF, at least to some extent. On the other hand, I don't believe the RF gets paid to show up at events, but when they do, those events attract many more attendees and publicity than they otherwise would.  The RF also makes fortunes from their own investments and as I  understand, their dinners held in honor of other country leaders and various other things are paid for from their private funds.  It appears to me that the monarchy is financially beneficial to Britain several fold over what it costs Britain to support them.  If they didn't appear at any events, I think many charities would dry up and tourism would take a hit. Plus, by the RF going to events, we get to rave or riff on their fashions, bags and hairstyles.  This whole purse blog would shrink. Oh the humanity!


----------



## TC1

^^ I don't think the purseblog would suffer if the BRF stopped attending events.....


----------



## LibbyRuth

Don't worry Rose60610 -- I laughed at  the PF joke!


----------



## JolieS

TC1 said:


> ^^ I don't think the purseblog would suffer if the BRF stopped attending events.....


 I don’t know... there was a bit of flurry when Camilla started carrying a Moynat Gabrielle...


----------



## akoko

I live in the UK and I have to say that although I liked Harry and Meghan when they started dating, I have been very much put off by their recent behaviour and was quite annoyed by the way they are dealing with the press/public. Meghan and Harry live a life of great luxury, that comes with certain obligations.  In my opinion, keeping up certain traditions and accepting lack of privacy in certain events, is part of that obligation.  A lot of the people I've chatted to these days believe that their behaviour shows arrogance and a sense of entitlement. They seem to like being royal, with all the perks, money, respect and world stage it is giving them. They should be more willing to accept the obligations. I think they are being ill advised on how their behaviour is coming across.


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> Does that mean -- if it's there, it should be spent?
> 
> What happens to the surplus?  Does it get rescinded (spend it now or lose forever, or until next year) or does it accumulate? Is there ever any surplus?


Harry & Meghan needed a bigger residence to live in, with the new baby, so this one was chosen. I'm not sure how big it is, how extensive the renovations were needed to bring it up to a current standard.

Plus you have to add in security equipment etc. that the average home doesn't need. If the property needed a top to bottom renovation (plumbing, wiring, heating etc.) depending on the size of the property, that can add up to a considerable sum of money. If the roof, windows, doors, insulation etc. had to be upgraded that's more money.


----------



## papertiger

PatsyCline said:


> But you're acting like there's an extra charge on your personal taxes for the renovation, which there isn't. The renovation was paid out of the monies allocated to the Royal family.



Frogmore Cottage was already earmarked for renovation and as property of the Crown (that's different than Queen's personal property). It needed to be updated and reinstated from apartments back into a single dwelling. The problem is not the the doing but the figure. People  are not silly and £2.4M for standard renovation is ridiculous. 

When stated that the Queen gifted the 'cottage' to the couple it is also not clear (to me) whether or not she has let them live there (rent free) as Grace and Favour or whether she has gifted them the property (i.e. transferred the property from the Crown to them so now becomes their personal property.). My guess would be the former, If the latter, then I would wonder why the Crown had to pay for renovations at all. If anyone has further info on this let me know )in this thread).


----------



## papertiger

PatsyCline said:


> Harry & Meghan needed a bigger residence to live in, with the new baby, so this one was chosen. I'm not sure how big it is, how extensive the renovations were needed to bring it up to a current standard.
> 
> Plus you have to add in security equipment etc. that the average home doesn't need. If the property needed a top to bottom renovation (plumbing, wiring, heating etc.) depending on the size of the property, that can add up to a considerable sum of money. If the roof, windows, doors, insulation etc. had to be upgraded that's more money.



£2.4M is approx sum needed to restore a Grade 1 listed building in the middle of London the size of a block (a project that I'm involved with) and that includes the legal fees. The equivalent costings for Frogmore Cottage are extortionate and unreasonable.


----------



## DeMonica

rose60610 said:


> There exists some resentment that British tax payers foot the RF, at least to some extent. On the other hand,* I don't believe the RF gets paid to show up at events*, but when they do, those events attract many more attendees and publicity than they otherwise would.  The RF also makes fortunes from their own investments and as I  understand, their dinners held in honor of other country leaders and various other things are paid for from their private funds.  It appears to me that the monarchy is financially beneficial to Britain several fold over what it costs Britain to support them.  If they didn't appear at any events, I think many charities would dry up and tourism would take a hit. Plus, by the RF going to events, we get to rave or riff on their fashions, bags and hairstyles.  This whole purse blog would shrink. Oh the humanity!


Showing up at events is part of their jobs.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Frogmore Cottage was already earmarked for renovation and as property of the Crown (that's different than Queen's personal property). It needed to be updated and reinstated from apartments back into a single dwelling. The problem is not the the doing but the figure. People  are not silly and £2.4M for standard renovation is ridiculous.
> 
> When stated that the Queen gifted the 'cottage' to the couple it is also not clear (to me) whether or not she has let them live there (rent free) as Grace and Favour or whether she has gifted them the property (i.e. transferred the property from the Crown to them so now becomes their personal property.). My guess would be the former, If the latter, then I would wonder why the Crown had to pay for renovations at all. If anyone has further info on this let me know )in this thread).


The Crown Estate owns Frogmore cottage.  This information should explain things more.  In essence, the Queen does not own Frogmore, nor can she give it away.  Harry and MM were not gifted with the property as it cannot be gifted  to anyone.
https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/resources/faqs/


 Who owns The Crown Estate?
The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne.* But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch*, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch.

The Government also does not own The Crown Estate. It is managed by an independent organisation - established by statute - headed by a Board (also known as The Crown Estate Commissioners), and the surplus revenue from the estate is paid each year to the Treasury for the benefit of the nation's finances.

My personal take on Frogmore was that it was not the best choice for them.  It is not  private and in the flight path of Heathrow, so quite noisy.  The building was basically nothing more than servant's quarters and pretty darn unattractive  Obviously it could not be torn down, but it surely would have been easier to do in the long run than trying to upgrade such a property to the standards that Harry and MM would expect.  The upgrade for the property was scheduled, but I doubt that it would have been of the proportions that it subsequently evolved into. Surely the same amount of money could have been spent building a new home for them someplace else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

Is it possible that Frogmore is being stated publicly as their home and will be treated as their official home, but that they live most of their time somewhere else?  I know there are other people in the public eye who do that - have one home they talk about, but spend most of there time in another location where people don't know to look for them so they get more privacy. If that's the case, it would make sense that the crown would decide to do renovations which may not have necessarily been dictated by Harry and Meghan. It would also answer to some of the other questions raised about it being a good home for a couple with a new baby.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> The Crown Estate owns Frogmore cottage.  This information should explain things more.  In essence, the Queen does not own Frogmore, nor can she give it away.  Harry and MM were not gifted with the property as it cannot be gifted  to anyone.
> https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/resources/faqs/
> 
> 
> Who owns The Crown Estate?
> The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of The Crown', that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne.* But it is not the private property of the monarch - it cannot be sold by the monarch*, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch.
> 
> The Government also does not own The Crown Estate. It is managed by an independent organisation - established by statute - headed by a Board (also known as The Crown Estate Commissioners), and the surplus revenue from the estate is paid each year to the Treasury for the benefit of the nation's finances.
> 
> My personal take on Frogmore was that it was not the best choice for them.  It is not  private and in the flight path of Heathrow, so quite noisy.  The building was basically nothing more than servant's quarters and pretty darn unattractive  Obviously it could not be torn down, but it surely would have been easier to do in the long run than trying to upgrade such a property to the standards that Harry and MM would expect.  The upgrade for the property was scheduled, but I doubt that it would have been of the proportions that it subsequently evolved into. *Surely the same amount of money could have been spent building a new home for them someplace else*.



Thank you. The word 'gift' or 'gifted' was misleading IMO.

My guess would be building new could have also proved controversial,  In the past royalty has built on land that others would not be allowed to build on. In this case it seemed that a quicker solution was needed. However, there's nothing to stop H & M from buying their own house or plot should they wish to.


----------



## gracekelly

Anmer Hall where Kate and William live is located in Norfolk on the Queen's Sandringham estate.  There was already a manor house standing and they renovated it   Anmer has been the home to family friends the Van Cutsems as well as the Duke and Duchess of Kent    Sandringham is the Queen's private estate and presumably, the renovation was done with private funds.  Something similar could have been worked out for Harry and MM at some other location.  I think that one issue was that Harry wanted to be closer to London and living in the country would have required more travel time.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I guess the desire for privacy doesn’t extend to Vogue...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7218127/Meghan-Markle-talks-Vogue-regular-column.html

*Meghan Markle is in talks with Vogue to have a regular column in both the magazine's US and UK editions focusing on her charity work, after Amal Clooney 'encouraged Duchess to promote her philanthropy projects'*


----------



## PatsyCline

papertiger said:


> £2.4M is approx sum needed to restore a Grade 1 listed building in the middle of London the size of a block (a project that I'm involved with) and that includes the legal fees. The equivalent costings for Frogmore Cottage are extortionate and unreasonable.


Considering the average price for a house in London is nearly £3 million. Since you don’t know what was done, you don’t know if it was unreasonable.


----------



## papertiger

PatsyCline said:


> Considering the average price for a house in London is nearly £3 million. Since you don’t know what
> was done, you don’t know if it was unreasonable.



I don't understand your argument. The price of house/location is not the same as materials + labour and their house is not in London.


----------



## buffym

papertiger said:


> £2.4M is approx sum needed to restore a Grade 1 listed building in the middle of London the size of a block (a project that I'm involved with) and that includes the legal fees. The equivalent costings for Frogmore Cottage are extortionate and unreasonable.



It seems to be reasonable for a royal residence. William and Kate’s Kensington Palace apartment cost 6.5 million in 2014 https://www.google.com/amp/s/people...refurbishment-cost-more-than-6-5-million/amp/. 

Last year they added another 1 million in renovations to that total, resurface a driveway.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...ngton-palace-frogmore-cottage-royal-today/amp

It is depressingly I interesting how the focus is on Harry and Meghan.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess the desire for privacy doesn’t extend to Vogue...
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rojects'[/B]
> [B][/B]
> [B][/B][/SIZE][/QUOTE]
> 
> .



They asked for privacy with their son. A son who will not receive taxpayer funds after the age is 18. 

She is writing a column for Vogue about charities. How is that even a issue? 

Her job is to bring awareness to charities in the UK and Commonwealth. 

Duchess of Cambridge was on the cover of Vogue, but they also ask for the press to not by pap pictures of their kids and they have threatened to sue over them. Oh, the rpos will tell people they can’t take a picture of the Cambridge kiddos.


----------



## cd01

.


----------



## PatsyCline

papertiger said:


> I don't understand your argument. The price of house/location is not the same as materials + labour and their house is not in London.


My argument is you don’t know what was or wasn’t done to the residence, the land outside, yet you continue to claim it was over priced.

Until you give details and comparisons of cost, item by item your complaints are moot


----------



## stanfordmom

His mother died while being chased by paparazzi. 

The racism endured by Michelle ***** and the ***** daughters was abhorrent and unrelenting.

I won't judge Harry for doing whatever he thinks is best to protect his new family.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Racism?  When did any of this become about racism?  I must have missed something.


----------



## hellosunshine

If you're at all curious why Harry & Meghan have chosen to keep Archie's godparents a secret...

Exhibit A - Meghan's "rumoured" doula. This poor woman was harassed by the media and her life turned upside down.



Past behavior is always a good indicator of future behavior, so I trust that Harry & Meghan know what they're doing in this situation. The media has been very unkind to them and I'm thankful that they're protecting this info.


----------



## buffym

Cavalier Girl said:


> Racism?  When did any of this become about racism?  I must have missed something.



The press gives other royals a benefit of doubt. They criticize Meghan for things while giving credit to other royals.

Meghan cookbook mosque linked to 19 terror suspects including 'Jihadi John' in group's investigation

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...nked-19-terror-suspects-including-jihadi/amp/

William and Harry visited the same mosque but zero mention of it linked to terrorist.

Prince William and Prince Harry comfort Grenfell Tower victims

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...Harry-comfort-Grenfell-Tower-fire-victims/amp





With Kate she has friends even though they actually aren’t, they are two retired tennis players she sat with



With Meghan it is apparently friends 


Meghan shouldn’t make a post about pride even though Harry is the Duke of Sussex so it’s his Instagram too.


William can say he doesn’t mind gay children and the media finds that comforting 

I find the UK media subtly racist with their treatment of Meghan.


----------



## stanfordmom

Cavalier Girl said:


> Racism?  When did any of this become about racism?  I must have missed something.



It's been mentioned throughout this thread, most recently in post # 8209 including the link to Harry's initial statement addressing the issue https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> With Kate she has friends even though they actually aren’t, they are two retired tennis players she sat with
> 
> With Meghan it is apparently friends


Oh my God, of all the idiotic things to imagine a double standard in!  

Tweet says Meghan was with friends.  Period at the end of the sentence.


----------



## hellosunshine

There is a double standard in the reporting of Meghan. Are people really oblivious to that?

I'll give an example -

I remember reading an article on how Meghan "broke" protocol for showing a bit of leg. I remember they referred to it as "taboo". But when Kate shows a little leg..it's "classy" and "elegant". Give me a break lmao


----------



## rose60610

IS the perceived media bias toward Meghan because: A. it doesn't exist; B. her race ; or C.  because she is an American actress?  

If Harry were to marry, oh, a white non British actress, do you really think the media would act differently?   That they'd be oh-so-kind? That they'd wallow in her un-British greatness?  That any faux pas would be ignored? That they wouldn't dare write anything but glowing admiration and worship? We're talking about the media here, the media in where if journalists wrote only nice things they'd be fired.


----------



## rose60610

DeMonica said:


> Showing up at events is part of their jobs.



I couldn't agree more!  You're right!  

It IS their "jobs" when they are receiving tax payer funds. 

 If they were not receiving tax payer funds, they would not be obligated to show up at events.  And maybe they still would, who knows? But not to the extent they do now. 

And therefore I think that many charities would dry up and tourism would take a hit.  So I stand by my statement that it seems that Britain receives much more in financial benefit than what its tax payers fork out to the RF.  I'd be curious to know if the Brits were polled what most would say about supporting the monarchy? Of course, polls being what they are, you can't always count on them.


----------



## Nightshade2502

oh gee... I recently re-watched suits and when saw Rachel with Mike the very first thought was like... what would prince think? LOL


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think it's hard to say exactly why Meghan is treated in the press as she is. Looking back my memory is that when Andrew and Sarah were married, she was treated less favorably than Diana had been early in her marriage to Charles. So being the woman to marry a prince who is not a future king may play in to it.  Being American and not raised into the British aristocracy may play in to it. Her race may play in to it. Harry being so outspoken in speaking to defend her may play into it. Seeming to be happy and in love may play in to it.  In all honesty, I think it's a combination of all of those things. As an outsider, she's going to be subject to some level of suspicion. And ultimately, as the wife of a future king and mother of a future king, there's a need to prop Kate up as superior, and unfortunately often times to prop someone up, people choose the weak path of knocking someone else down.


----------



## papertiger

PatsyCline said:


> My argument is you don’t know what was or wasn’t done to the residence, the land outside, yet you continue to claim it was over priced.
> 
> Until you give details and comparisons of cost, item by item your complaints are moot



I'm allowed an opinion. As are all the people of Britain that fund the work.


----------



## papertiger

buffym said:


> The press gives other royals a benefit of doubt. They criticize Meghan for things while giving credit to other royals.
> 
> Meghan cookbook mosque linked to 19 terror suspects including 'Jihadi John' in group's investigation
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...nked-19-terror-suspects-including-jihadi/amp/
> 
> William and Harry visited the same mosque but zero mention of it linked to terrorist.
> 
> Prince William and Prince Harry comfort Grenfell Tower victims
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...Harry-comfort-Grenfell-Tower-fire-victims/amp
> 
> 
> View attachment 4484343
> 
> 
> With Kate she has friends even though they actually aren’t, they are two retired tennis players she sat with
> 
> View attachment 4484344
> 
> With Meghan it is apparently friends
> View attachment 4484345
> 
> Meghan shouldn’t make a post about pride even though Harry is the Duke of Sussex so it’s his Instagram too.
> View attachment 4484346
> 
> William can say he doesn’t mind gay children and the media finds that comforting
> 
> I find the UK media subtly racist with their treatment of Meghan.



The media is the media. They say anything that create traffic/debate and become news of its own.


----------



## doni

My take on this is: We all know how ruthless the British media can be, no surprises. I don't think race has anything to do with it, if anything, I believe all things being equal, if she was a blond Ukranian actress they would have already eaten her to pieces. She was extraordinarily well received to start with, and as the chosen partner of the most popular member of the family, she had a lot going for her. But also, she was always going to be scrutinized. Their choices in how to handle various things matter, and those made in the last year have not been optimal in terms of their perception by the media and by the citizens.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Anyone new woman to the BRF such as Diana, Fergie and Kate got hauled over the coals by certain sections of the British press,  _however_ there is no doubt in my mind that the articles about Meghan also play to the racists that want her, even more than the others, to "be put in her place".

There is a marked difference in language and tone when each royal couple or woman appears at events.


----------



## buffym

This is the Daily Mail headline even though pictures from the event prove false. 

The British media is vicious but Meghan they take it to another level. They stated she supported terrorism. That is a whole another level of ranking over the coals.


----------



## stanfordmom

I understand the wish to believe we live in a "post racial" society but the sad reality is hate crimes are actually on the rise. 

Harry's life was threatened for being a "race traitor" after his marriage, there was endless speculation about "how black" their baby would be, and in March the BRF worked to combat racist social media attacks.

Denying racism doesn't make it go away, it is incumbent on all of us to call out and confront these incidents when they occur. 

https://fortune.com/2019/03/08/meghan-markle-racist-violent-trolls-abuse/

Earlier this week, the British royal family announced a set of social media guidelines to create a “safe environment” against commentary considered to be discriminatory, threatening, abusive, hateful, and violent, to name a few.

Although Kensington Palace didn’t cite a particular reason for more diligent protocols, sources told CNN that the royal family was taking social media precautions given a rise in “racist online abuse” targeting Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle ever since she announced her pregnancy.

The Palace has reportedly hired more staff to delete negative comments and installed programs that will bar out use of the n-word, as well as emoji weaponry.

Although online abuse isn’t new to the royal couple—Prince Harry released a statement in 2016 condemning “the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls” towards his then-girlfriend—there is a separate, insidious nature to recent attacks.

After analyzing 5,000 anti-Meghan tweets between January and February, advocacy group Hope Not Hate told CNN that only 20 accounts were responsible for sharing 70% of negative tweets containing abusive pictures, hashtags, and memes.

CNN writes, “The fact that such a small number of users generated such a large number of the tweets suggests that the accounts were created for the purpose of producing negative content about the duchess.”

Many of the accounts reportedly used hashtags touting political ideologies of the British and American right, including #Brexit and #****, but Hope Not Hate noted that there wasn’t any evidence that this was an organized far-right campaign against Markle.


----------



## daisychainz

PatsyCline said:


> Any word on who the godparents are?


I think those two older ladies in the released photo - aren't they relatives of Diana? Why else would they be there for the official picture.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> I think those two older ladies in the released photo - aren't they relatives of Diana? Why else would they be there for the official picture.


They are Diana's sisters.  I think they were in the official picture because they are family, and were there to represent Archie's deceased grandmother.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> They are Diana's sisters.  I think they were in the official picture because they are family, and were there to represent Archie's deceased grandmother.


That would make sense if they were both also in William/Kate's children's photos? I don't know if they were.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> That would make sense if they were both also in William/Kate's children's photos? I don't know if they were.


Could have been a number of reasons. It's said that the Queen doesn't think much of the Spencer family after Charles' eulogy, and she wasn't there for Archie's christening, so that could have been a factor. For William's kids, Kate had more family members she wanted in pictures so things were more crowded - that could have been a factor.  It's been reported that Harry feels a deeper connection to Diana's family so he may have wanted them there.  There are a host of reasons why they may have been included beyond their being the godmothers.  And if they were godmothers - wouldn't they have included godfathers in the picture too?


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> That would make sense if they were both also in William/Kate's children's photos? I don't know if they were.


Maybe there were photos like this at the Cambridge christenings, and just not released publicly. Seems to me that Harry is closer to his Spencer family than William is, especially Jane and Sarah's children. They used to holiday together as children. Not sure about Earl Spencer children as they lived in South Africa for a good while. We've seen pictures of Harry at his cousins on the Spencer side weddings and William didn't attend.
And regarding godparents, I think it's highly likely that they include Spencer cousins.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> Could have been a number of reasons. It's said that the Queen doesn't think much of the Spencer family after Charles' eulogy, and she wasn't there for Archie's christening, so that could have been a factor. For William's kids, Kate had more family members she wanted in pictures so things were more crowded - that could have been a factor.  It's been reported that Harry feels a deeper connection to Diana's family so he may have wanted them there.  There are a host of reasons why they may have been included beyond their being the godmothers.  And if they were godmothers - wouldn't they have included godfathers in the picture too?


I just assumed (from the picture) that the godfathers and maybe others, too, were perhaps the ones that fell under "wanting privacy" and the two women were likely named and standing there for that reason. We don't really know, do we, because they won't say, lol, but I guess it's safe to say that at least a few people from Diana's family were included in the godparents role. I read someplace that the Queen hasn't recently attended any of the christenings, so it wasn't a slight to the couple. The picture was nice, though, Meghan looked nice and relaxed the others looked quite stiff and British


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> I read someplace that the Queen hasn't recently attended any of the christenings, so it wasn't a slight to the couple. The picture was nice, though, Meghan looked nice and relaxed the others looked quite stiff and British


You're right, she didn't attend Prince Louis christening, I don't think she attended Zaras daughters christening either a few weeks ago. Meghan and Harry attended that one, Meghan was heavily pregnant. 
I don't recall any fuss being made about The Queen not attending those christenings compared to the fuss being bade about Archie, and all three are her great grandchildren.
Much a do about nothing I say. Bloody press again


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect this was just a family picture and they are family so were included in the picture. Which I think is a lovely tribute to Diana and the Spencer family.

I also love that one of them wore a Panama hat. She looks bad ass right in the centre of it all.

And I don’t think there is any fuss to be had about the Queen not being there. She’s on vacation and old. She went to the two that might be heir. Beyond that I can see her skipping out.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I admit I have not been looking for it, but I have not seen any fuss about the Queen not attending either. I'll admit that in a post earlier today I mentioned that she was not there - but it was a statement of fact, not judgement.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

I like the pic from the Christianing where she is looking at Harry and Harry is looking at the baby.

Anywho she is being treated in the media differently because she is biracial or depending who you ask, black. And her siblings and father are trash that continue to fuel the fire.


----------



## M_Butterfly

A1aGypsy said:


> I suspect this was just a family picture and they are family so were included in the picture. Which I think is a lovely tribute to Diana and the Spencer family.
> 
> *I also love that one of them wore a Panama hat. She looks bad ass right in the centre of it all.*
> 
> And I don’t think there is any fuss to be had about the Queen not being there. She’s on vacation and old. She went to the two that might be heir. Beyond that I can see her skipping out.




She sure does look bad ass


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> There is a double standard in the reporting of Meghan. Are people really oblivious to that?
> 
> I'll give an example -
> 
> I remember reading an article on how Meghan "broke" protocol for showing a bit of leg. I remember they referred to it as "taboo". But when Kate shows a little leg..it's "classy" and "elegant". Give me a break lmao
> 
> View attachment 4484371
> View attachment 4484372


that's not really true. they called out Kate several times, when she stand nearby a helicopter(?) and her skirt blew up so we could see her undies


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I admit I have not been looking for it, but I have not seen any fuss about the Queen not attending either. I'll admit that in a post earlier today I mentioned that she was not there - but it was a statement of fact, not judgement.


There has been some fuss here in the UK, mainly the press.


----------



## Lubina

Sharont2305 said:


> There has been some fuss here in the UK, mainly the press.



The same press who won't write about William's affair, Prince Andrew and Jeff Epstein and Beatrice's boyfriend who left a live in girlfriend and their baby to date her and escapes the social climber label, but the monarchy is dead because Meghan wore black nail polish and we dont know who her son's godparents are. Lol!


----------



## gracekelly

The secrecy regarding the godparents is mystifying to me.  What difference does it really make?  These people will not be hounded and bothered. If they are high profile people, they will get plenty of media coverage based on that alone.   The only potential godparent who makes sense is Tiggy Pettifer, their former nanny.  She made William and Harry godparents to her two sons and kept in close contact with both of them.  Most godparents are strictly for show and on paper.  They might be the friends of parents at a particular time in the lives of the parents, and never seen nor heard from again. If you are a high profile parent, the choices are sometimes made solely on the basis of that and another high profile and wealthy person is chosen with the idea that mentoring and help (for the godchild) in later life is available.  If heaven forbid, something happened to the parents, it is rare that  godparent steps in to take in to take custody of the child if there is family available.  In this case, particularly this case, of this child being a member of the Royal Family, the likelihood of living with a non-familial is slim and nil. 

In light of the fact that sufficient pictures were available of the baby, it doesn't make sense to continue the secrecy of who the godparents were.  If this whole thing was truly private, then there should have been no pictures released at all and the christening done quietly.  The way this was handled was like a "half job."


----------



## bellebellebelle19

gracekelly said:


> The secrecy regarding the godparents is mystifying to me.  What difference does it really make?  These people will not be hounded and bothered. If they are high profile people, they will get plenty of media coverage based on that alone.   The only potential godparent who makes sense is Tiggy Pettifer, their former nanny.  She made William and Harry godparents to her two sons and kept in close contact with both of them.  Most godparents are strictly for show and on paper.  They might be the friends of parents at a particular time in the lives of the parents, and never seen nor heard from again. If you are a high profile parent, the choices are sometimes made solely on the basis of that and another high profile and wealthy person is chosen with the idea that mentoring and help (for the godchild) in later life is available.  If heaven forbid, something happened to the parents, it is rare that  godparent steps in to take in to take custody of the child if there is family available.  In this case, particularly this case, of this child being a member of the Royal Family, the likelihood of living with a non-familial is slim and nil.
> 
> In light of the fact that sufficient pictures were available of the baby, it doesn't make sense to continue the secrecy of who the godparents were.  If this whole thing was truly private, then there should have been no pictures released at all and the christening done quietly.  The way this was handled was like a "half job."


There was a post a page or two ago about the harassment Meghan's supposed doula received. Someone else posited that the secrecy is to protect the godparents from a similar fate, not much more.


----------



## gracekelly

bellebellebelle19 said:


> There was a post a page or two ago about the harassment Meghan's supposed doula received. Someone else posited that the secrecy is to protect the godparents from a similar fate, not much more.


She has enough potential work (deliveries) from this to last her for the next several years.   Just another person using a situation for their own advancement.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lubina said:


> The same press who won't write about William's affair, Prince Andrew and Jeff Epstein and Beatrice's boyfriend who left a live in girlfriend and their baby to date her and escapes the social climber label, but the monarchy is dead because Meghan wore black nail polish and we dont know who her son's godparents are. Lol!


Exactly, lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> She has enough potential work (deliveries) from this to last her for the next several years.   Just another person using a situation for their own advancement.



Those must be some long pregnancies (j/k)


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> Those must be some long pregnancies (j/k)


That’s one way to look at it. People who prefer to home birth will have a list of doulas that can be called upon when the need arises   Lots of free publicity here so her name will be on a short list.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> In light of the fact that sufficient pictures were available of the baby, it doesn't make sense to continue the secrecy of who the godparents were.  If this whole thing was truly private, then there should have been no pictures released at all and the christening done quietly.  The way this was handled was like a "half job."



You're entitled to feel this way however Meghan & Harry were clear to say "ultimately this is a private christening for a citizen who will remain private until he is in a position to choose for himself".

Furthermore, Meghan revealed this bit on The Tig -





So, going forward...we may be informed but may never see anything they consider private. Personal details will be shared at THEIR discretion. Harry and Meghan get to distinguish what they consider personal vs. private not the general public. It’s _really_ not that difficult to understand.


----------



## hellosunshine

Anyways -
Little Archie has made his way into the Royal Family tree on display at Balmoral Castle.


----------



## Sharont2305

Even Balmoral can get things wrong, it's Prince Henry of Wales.
Interestingly they are both still down as Prince (name) of Wales and the wives are down as Duchesses.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> You're entitled to feel this way however Meghan & Harry were clear to say "ultimately this is a private christening for a citizen who will remain private until he is in a position to choose for himself".
> 
> Furthermore, Meghan revealed this bit on The Tig -
> 
> View attachment 4485018
> 
> 
> 
> So, going forward...we may be informed but may never see anything they consider private. Personal details will be shared at THEIR discretion. Harry and Meghan get to distinguish what they consider personal vs. private not the general public. It’s _really_ not that difficult to understand.



She wrote that a while ago when she was experiencing a different life.  Things and her life have changed.  If anyone who thinks that Archie will remain "private" is kidding themselves.  All the milestones will be photographed and out there on their instagram and or the media rags.  No different for him than the other children in the family.  If he joins the cousins at Cousin Zara's horse shows, are they are going to keep him from being photographed?  Zara has it right. She is relaxed and doesn't make a fuss about going out with her children and letting snaps be taken.  As a result, there is no morbid curiously about any of them and no manufactured drama.


----------



## daisychainz

gracekelly said:


> The secrecy regarding the godparents is mystifying to me.  What difference does it really make?  These people will not be hounded and bothered. If they are high profile people, they will get plenty of media coverage based on that alone.   The only potential godparent who makes sense is Tiggy Pettifer, their former nanny.  She made William and Harry godparents to her two sons and kept in close contact with both of them.  Most godparents are strictly for show and on paper.  They might be the friends of parents at a particular time in the lives of the parents, and never seen nor heard from again. If you are a high profile parent, the choices are sometimes made solely on the basis of that and another high profile and wealthy person is chosen with the idea that mentoring and help (for the godchild) in later life is available.  If heaven forbid, something happened to the parents, it is rare that  godparent steps in to take in to take custody of the child if there is family available.  In this case, particularly this case, of this child being a member of the Royal Family, the likelihood of living with a non-familial is slim and nil.
> 
> In light of the fact that sufficient pictures were available of the baby, it doesn't make sense to continue the secrecy of who the godparents were.  If this whole thing was truly private, then there should have been no pictures released at all and the christening done quietly.  The way this was handled was like a "half job."


It makes me believe that Meghan (or Harry, or Harry and Meghan) are fully running their own PR, or not listening to whomever they have placed in charge anyway. I get the feeling they are losing staff because they want to be in control of so many things and their PR is likely one of them. The mistakes of the PR and wording of the christening and other events are likely their own errors, and the demands about privacy (and then fully backing away from privacy afterall) are mistakes that amateurs would make. We don't see those errors with any other royals. I actually don't blame Meghan all that much - she hasn't been royal long enough to know anything, so I'd be of the opinion that Harry is trying to chart a new course for himself and Meghan fully supports him and goes along in her own ways, likely supported by Harry. I do not think Harry likes being a royal and he was always the rebel, and now we see this as an adult and in his choice of wife, too.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Even Balmoral can get things wrong, it's Prince Henry of Wales.
> Interestingly they are both still down as Prince (name) of Wales and the wives are down as Duchesses.



I find it interesting that Prince Harry is listed "of Wales?" I did see it on an official site, so it must be correct.   I really thought that was reserved for Prince William as the Prince *of* Wales.  I do know that they have used Wales as a last name for school and in the army.   I agree that it should have been Prince Henry and for that matter, perhaps Rachel Meghan.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> She wrote that a while ago when she was experiencing a different life.  Things and her life have changed.  If anyone who thinks that Archie will remain "private" is kidding themselves.  All the milestones will be photographed and out there on their instagram and or the media rags.  No different for him than the other children in the family.  If he joins the cousins at Cousin Zara's horse shows, are they are going to keep him from being photographed?  Zara has it right. She is relaxed and doesn't make a fuss about going out with her children and letting snaps be taken.  As a result, there is no morbid curiously about any of them and no manufactured drama.



That is an interesting take Zara let’s her kids be snapped because the interest is not there. How many pap pictures of Zara walking around London, leaving a gym? Very little, Harry seems to be following his brother lead with control access. 

It is not surprising that the same people who are understanding of the Cambridge’s kids controlled pictures are demanding for access to the 7th in line to the throne. Who has an expiration date on tax supporter funds.

The drama wasn’t manufactured, it is only a few and the media who wants to know the godparents, mostly Americans. 

Oh, in Zara kids godparents are not publicly known, so maybe he copied her in that aspect.


----------



## gracekelly

daisychainz said:


> It makes me believe that Meghan (or Harry, or Harry and Meghan) are fully running their own PR, or not listening to whomever they have placed in charge anyway. I get the feeling they are losing staff because they want to be in control of so many things and their PR is likely one of them. The mistakes of the PR and wording of the christening and other events are likely their own errors, and the demands about privacy (and then fully backing away from privacy afterall) are mistakes that amateurs would make. We don't see those errors with any other royals. I actually don't blame Meghan all that much - she hasn't been royal long enough to know anything, so I'd be of the opinion that Harry is trying to chart a new course for himself and Meghan fully supports him and goes along in her own ways, likely supported by Harry. I do not think Harry likes being a royal and he was always the rebel, and now we see this as an adult and in his choice of wife, too.



Hmmmm. nothing stops him from walking away if he prefers not to be a royal.  The Duke of Windsor did it and he gave up a lot more.  He was left with was  his title, which impressed people at cocktail parties, and "the woman he loved."  What he lost was the respect of his family and the people.  What he gained was a peripatetic life filled with  empty days and no raison d'etre.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> That is an interesting take Zara let’s her kids be snapped because the interest is not there. How many pap pictures of Zara walking around London, leaving a gym? Very little, Harry seems to be following his brother lead with control access.
> 
> It is not surprising that the same people who are understanding of the Cambridge’s kids controlled pictures are demanding for access to the 7th in line to the throne. Who has an expiration date on tax supporter funds.
> 
> The drama wasn’t manufactured, it is only a few and the media who wants to know the godparents, mostly Americans.
> 
> Oh, in Zara kids godparents are not publicly known, so maybe he copied her in that aspect.



Zara doesn't live in London.  She lives on her mother's estate in the country, Gatcombe Park.  I don't think she goes to the gym, per se, as she is an avid equestrian and that is probably her chief form of exercise.  The christening of her children was not announced  because no one was particularly   interested.  The church records are available to anyone who wants to look up the godparents.  No pretensions of secrecy.  With Zara and Mike, what you see is what you get.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...all-mia-tindall-barbury-horse-trials-pictures

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/gallery/2019060773832/mia-tindall-cutest-moments-photos/1/
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...en-mia-lena-cousins-royal-day-out-pictures/1/

Edit:  William SHOULD control access to his children.  He is a future monarch as is George.  Different ballgame with different players.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I find it interesting that Prince Harry is listed "of Wales?" I did see it on an official site, so it must be correct.   I really thought that was reserved for Prince William as the Prince *of* Wales.  I do know that they have used Wales as a last name for school and in the army.   I agree that it should have been Prince Henry and for that matter, perhaps Rachel Meghan.



I think it's because both Will and Harry are the Prince of Wales' sons.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Even Balmoral can get things wrong, it's Prince Henry of Wales.
> *Interestingly they are both still down as Prince (name) of Wales and the wives are down as Duchesses*.



Isn't that correct? I think if someone has more than one title the top rank is used, the two boys are princes and their wives are duchesses. Prince (or Princess) denotes royal blood whereas Duke does not.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I think it's because both Will and Harry are the Prince of Wales' sons.


Yes, of course, but it still surprised me.  Obviously it has a slightly different meaning than the title conferred upon Prince Charles in 1969.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Isn't that correct? I think if someone has more than one title the top rank is used, the two boys are princes and their wives are duchesses. Prince (or Princess) denotes royal blood whereas Duke does not.



I think it was poorly done on the whole and should have been Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex.  In this case, he is a royal Duke.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I find it interesting that Prince Harry is listed "of Wales?" I did see it on an official site, so it must be correct.   I really thought that was reserved for Prince William as the Prince *of* Wales.  I do know that they have used Wales as a last name for school and in the army.   I agree that it should have been Prince Henry and for that matter, perhaps Rachel Meghan.


Both boys were born Prince William/Henry of Wales being born to Charles Prince of Wales. He is not Prince Charles of Wales and Diana wasn't Princess Diana of Wales, she was Diana, Princess of Wales. Just like Catherine is Catherine Duchess of Cambridge not Duchess Catherine. If you hold the title it's a different configuration of wording. The children are Prince/Princess (name) of Wales/Cambridge. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Both boys were born Prince William/Henry of Wales being born to Charles Prince of Wales. He is not Prince Charles of Wales and Diana wasn't Princess Diana of Wales, she was Diana, Princess of Wales. Just like Catherine is Catherine Duchess of Cambridge not Duchess Catherine. If you hold the title it's a different configuration of wording. The children are Prince/Princess (name) of Wales/Cambridge. Hope that makes sense.


Thanks!


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Zara doesn't live in London.  She lives on her mother's estate in the country, Gatcombe Park.  I don't think she goes to the gym, per se, as she is an avid equestrian and that is probably her chief form of exercise.  The christening of her children was not announced  because no one was particularly   interested.  The church records are available to anyone who wants to look up the godparents.  No pretensions of secrecy.  With Zara and Mike, what you see is what you get.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...all-mia-tindall-barbury-horse-trials-pictures
> 
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/gallery/2019060773832/mia-tindall-cutest-moments-photos/1/
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...en-mia-lena-cousins-royal-day-out-pictures/1/
> 
> Edit:  William SHOULD control access to his children.  He is a future monarch as is George.  Different ballgame with different players.



The press asked BP about Mia and Lena’s godparents. BP said it was private.




How old was MIA when she attended her mother horse trails? So it is reasonable to believe when Archie is older he will attend his father’s polo matches. 

I also do not understand your rationale Prince George who the public will pay for his whole life the media should have controlled access. 

Archie who the public will stop paying for at the age of 18 the media should have more access to him.

You said it yourself it is a different ball game so why should people get more from Archie when he is further from the throne.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess the desire for privacy doesn’t extend to Vogue...
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7218127/Meghan-Markle-talks-Vogue-regular-column.html
> 
> *Meghan Markle is in talks with Vogue to have a regular column in both the magazine's US and UK editions focusing on her charity work, after Amal Clooney 'encouraged Duchess to promote her philanthropy projects'*


I saw this earlier as well, and my reaction was "uh oh" .. because yet again, I think the British media is going to have a field day with her being in Vogue yet claiming "privacy".  I don't know, it just seems that they kind of want it both ways and I'm just not sure that that can be done, but I guess they sure are going to try ..


----------



## Flatsy

Couldn't Kate and Meghan also go by "Princess William" and "Princess Henry" if they wanted?


gracekelly said:


> Hmmmm. nothing stops him from walking away if he prefers not to be a royal.


+1.  Or at least there's very little stopping him.  He likes being royal.  Just because he likes to complain and rebel doesn't mean he really wants out.

I recently watched the videos of that Antarctic charity race he did several years ago with a bunch of other celebrities.  I thought the jealousy/competitiveness coming off of him towards Alexander Skarsgard was palpable.  It was subtle, but Harry was not going to cede his alpha status.  (Alex seemed perfectly happy to be the goofy beta.)  

As much as Harry might talk about how he he's spent his life blending in with regular guys, he's never not been a prince.  He's never not been the most eligible, most powerful, most wealthy, most famous, most important guy in any situation he's ever been in - except when in the presence of his brother/father/grandfather.  Hell no do I think he would ever want to give up that status. 

During Harry's dating life he found out that there are lots of wealthy, upper class English girls who would not consider giving up their freedom to become royal.  He didn't step away and go marry one of those girls.  When his light went on, he intentionally went out and found a wife who was up for doing "princess" and doing it with a vengeance.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> As much as Harry might talk about how he he's spent his life blending in with regular guys, he's never not been a prince.  He's never not been the most eligible, most powerful, most wealthy, most famous, most important guy in any situation he's ever been in - except when in the presence of his brother/father/grandfather.  Hell no do I think he would ever want to give up that status.
> 
> During Harry's dating life he found out that there are lots of wealthy, upper class English girls who would not consider giving up their freedom to become royal.  He didn't step away and go marry one of those girls.  When his light went on, he intentionally went out and found a wife who was up for doing "princess" and doing it with a vengeance.


Agree.  I've said many times, he has the best of both worlds and he knows it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> I saw this earlier as well, and my reaction was "uh oh" .. because yet again, I think the British media is going to have a field day with her being in Vogue yet claiming "privacy".  I don't know, it just seems that they kind of want it both ways and I'm just not sure that that can be done, but I guess they sure are going to try ..


Yeah.......
When I want true privacy, I don't keep putting myself out there. And if they wanted _more_ privacy, they could easily renounce their titles and bow out of the royal realm. But to tell people they can't take photos of her but then to show up at the Lion King premiere... side eye from me.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> Couldn't Kate and Meghan also go by "Princess William" and "Princess Henry" if they wanted?



In theory that would be acceptable,  Princess Michael. who is married to the Queen's cousin Prince Michael of Kent  does exactly that.  Easy way to piggyback on a title.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> The press asked BP about Mia and Lena’s godparents. BP said it was private.
> 
> View attachment 4485210
> 
> 
> How old was MIA when she attended her mother horse trails? So it is reasonable to believe when Archie is older he will attend his father’s polo matches.
> 
> I also do not understand your rationale Prince George who the public will pay for his whole life the media should have controlled access.
> 
> Archie who the public will stop paying for at the age of 18 the media should have more access to him.
> 
> You said it yourself it is a different ball game so why should people get more from Archie when he is further from the throne.



The Tindall christening was as private as any of the others with the press not being present at the baptismal font.  It was not private as in the names of the godparents are not to be released.  You can go to the church and look it up in the church records.  Pay 12 GBP and it is yours for the asking.

George has no idea who he is at this point.  The Queen is granny to him.  He doesn't have a glimmer as to his future role and importance.  I'm sure some jerk in the media would be happy to tell him just to get a reaction shot.  Limited access to him insures a few years of happy carefree childhood.

What makes you think the public is paying for Archie at all?  His father receives an allowance from Prince Charles  and he inherited a good sum courtesy of his mother's divorce settlement, which he shared with Prince William at her death and is guesstimated at being worth $10 million after taxes.  Some claim he is worth around $ 25 to 40 million.  Let's hope he has a good investment adviser.  The only way Harry is going to get on the publicly funded payroll is if he becomes an active member of the "firm" and opens egg hatcheries in East Anglia or does some kind of foreign service for the Queen and her government.  If he does not do these things, he will be no different from his cousins Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice who are not on the payroll and depend upon an allowance from Prince Andrew and he will still be depending upon Prince Charles for an allowance.

The Queen and Prince Charles are very wealthy, but that doesn't mean that is true of others in the greater family.    The sons live off of the father at this point.

This information might prove helpful.

https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/how-much-does-prince-harry-make-as-duke-of-sussex.html/


----------



## Grande Latte




----------



## gracekelly

Grande Latte said:


> View attachment 4485325


Archie is cuter.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah.......
> When I want true privacy, I don't keep putting myself out there. And if they wanted _more_ privacy, they could easily renounce their titles and bow out of the royal realm. But to tell people they can't take photos of her but then to show up at the Lion King premiere... side eye from me.



Meghan never said someone couldn’t take pictures of her at the Lion King premiere. She hasn’t been confirmed to attend.

She never said one could take pictures of her at Wimbledon. There are literally pictures of people taking pictures of her at Wimbledon.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> But to tell people they can't take photos of her but then to show up at the Lion King premiere... side eye from me.


And Meghan will probably be wearing a $3,000 bracelet that says "Archie's Mom" and carrying a $1,500 Dior clutch that has "May 6, 2019" embroidered on it in print just big enough to be read in a professional photographer's photo.  And then Meghan and Harry will pose with a gift from Beyonce that's a painting of the them as The Lion King family with Archie as Simba....


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> The christening of her children was not announced  because no one was particularly   interested.  The church records are available to anyone who wants to look up the godparents.  No pretensions of secrecy.



I was responding to this in your post- when BP did announce the god parents were a private matter. That isn’t very open book to me.

BP didn’t release Archie birth certificate early yet people still complained even though it was going to be available in the register office.

I’m going to agree to disagree agree with your posts, I think the way Archie was christening was a representation of his place and future place in the royal family. 

Acknowledging public interest by releasing two photos but also trying to protect a person whose future public royal if any is undecided.


----------



## buffym

A picture from Wimbledon that wasn’t posted. How nice of her to greet fans.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> A picture from Wimbledon that wasn’t posted. How nice of her to greet fans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4485367


Yeah, it's been posted 4 billion times around the internet by Meghan's fans.  It was nice that she greeted a little boy.  It wasn't nice that she had her protection officers intimidate multiple adults on her behalf.  

I know you are aware that there is a very clear photo of her protection officer confronting a guy who was taking a selfie, while she sits there smiling and pretending not to notice.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah.......
> When I want true privacy, I don't keep putting myself out there. And if they wanted _more_ privacy, they could easily renounce their titles and bow out of the royal realm. But to tell people they can't take photos of her but then to show up at the Lion King premiere... side eye from me.



Not true. People were free to take photographs of Meghan at Wimbledon. The media is covering some lady that's lying but the man below was the only person told "no photos" as he appeared to be taking her photograph too close.


----------



## Morgan R

How was her royal protection officer suppose to know that the guy that was taking a selfie as all the royal protection officer is seeing is the backside of the phone. From the Royal Protection Officer's point of view it would look like the man is taking a picture of Meghan because of the way the man had his arms extended over the rails.


----------



## Gal4Dior

hellosunshine said:


> You're entitled to feel this way however Meghan & Harry were clear to say "ultimately this is a private christening for a citizen who will remain private until he is in a position to choose for himself".
> 
> Furthermore, Meghan revealed this bit on The Tig -
> 
> View attachment 4485018
> 
> 
> 
> So, going forward...we may be informed but may never see anything they consider private. Personal details will be shared at THEIR discretion. Harry and Meghan get to distinguish what they consider personal vs. private not the general public. It’s _really_ not that difficult to understand.



That’s wonderful sentiment and may work in Hollywood, but it may not fit into the BRF. Publicity, or bad publicity, is on a whole other level. The scrutiny is intense and perception is everything. It would be easier to stay out of the headlines by falling into line than trying to standout and “break the mold” like she has.

I admire her tenacity, but in the end, the British monarchy seems awfully oppressing and the British press, often vicious. Sooner than later these headlines will get old and there will be only so much she’s learned from Hollywood that can help her.


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R said:


> How was her royal protection officer suppose to know that the guy that was taking a selfie as all the royal protection officer is seeing is the backside of the phone. From the Royal Protection Officer's point of view it would look like the man is taking a picture of Meghan because of the way the man had his arms extended over the rails.


But it's none of her PPO's business who takes pictures of her.  He's supposed to protect her from guys attacking her, not guys taking her picture in public, which is no crime.  It would be totally rude to take a picture that way, but again, the PPO's job is not to enforce good manners on people in public places.


hellosunshine said:


> The media is covering some lady that's lying but the man below was the only person told "no photos" as he was rather intrusive.


Yet again, you were conveniently there and witnessed the whole thing!   Meghan is so lucky to have you following her around everywhere and telling people exactly what she did and did not do at all times.


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> Yeah, it's been posted 4 billion times around the internet by Meghan's fans.  It was nice that she greeted a little boy.  It wasn't nice that she had her protection officers intimidate multiple adults on her behalf.
> 
> I know you are aware that there is a very clear photo of her protection officer confronting a guy who was taking a selfie, while she sits there smiling and pretending not to notice.



You mean the adults that stated they were sitting in the same row as her. 



Yet, her friends are the only people in her row.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...dered-not-take-pictures-duchess-sussex-royal/


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> I was responding to this in your post- when BP did announce the god parents were a private matter. That isn’t very open book to me
> 
> .


 Oh that's Just a knee jerk BP response. It turns out that Prince Harry is Lena’s  godfather.   You owe me 12GBP


----------



## Morgan R

The British media is never going to be on Meghan's side and I'm sure she knows that. Doesn't matter how private or public Meghan and Harry are the media will always find an issue with how Harry and Meghan go about things. Meghan could do everything right and exactly the same as others within the royal family and they would still find some fault in it (let's not act like they wouldn't because we've seen this happen in the last year of her being part of the family as she has done a lot things similar to things other royals have done in the past yet Meghan has been called out for doing things that "break protocol" when she actually isn't). British Media has never been all that fair to the people that marry into the British Royal Family they release negativite stories because negativity sells more than positive stories.

I hope some of you seriously aren't ignoring what is going on right now. The Meghan "Wimbledon" story is conveniently being put out there a week after she attended Wimbledon. Yet at the same time the British Media are conveniently barely talking about the ongoing discussion that has been going on in news outlets worldwide which has been about the about Jeffrey Epstein being arrested this past weekend and the media is bringing up how Jeffrey has disturbing connections to many people. One of the people that is he has disturbing connections to is Prince Andrew which many news outlet mention.

Most of the time when Prince Andrew gets caught up in a scandal it seems like the British Media do some protecting of him (it is no secret why as he is said to Queen Elizabeth II favorite child and the media has respect for Queen Elizabeth II). Other royal family members sometimes get thrown under the bus in the process of "hiding" Andrew's scandals and he always ends up conveniently getting various honors in attempts to distract attention from his many various scandals over the years.


----------



## doni

Grande Latte said:


> View attachment 4485325


Yes, Archie is way cuter than his dad. Such a beautiful baby.

The British press is always going to be more careful and protective of the blood royals than with the royals-by-marriage. I mean, it is a monarchy! That is the whole point, entitlement by blood. Specially now that it has become standard to marry plebeians and that even future Kings divorce.
Anyone in Meghan´s position was going to be scrutinized. Look how they digged in Chelsy Davis family, and she was little more than a teenager having fun at the time. And of course Lady Diana, who couldn’t be more establishment, more British or posher than she was. And this is an American actress. But at the end of the day it also matters how you behave and wether you rub people the wrong way.

I think in a sense, Meghan didn’t have enough prep time. She is also in her late 30s, so not someone who is going to be molded easily or who wants to. She has never lived under a monarchy. She may want to change things, but it is difficult to change things when you don’t really understand how things work. And there is always the choice to step out of the role, even Kings have done it. So if you choose to have it people have expectations on you, that can’t be avoided.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Couldn't Kate and Meghan also go by "Princess William" and "Princess Henry" if they wanted?a
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Technically they are that too but as the husband are Dukes, that precedes it.
> When William is Prince of Wales he will be William, Prince of Wales and she will be Catherine, Princess of Wales.
Click to expand...

Technically they are that too but as the husband are Dukes, that precedes it.
When William is Prince of Wales he will be William, Prince of Wales and she will be Catherine, Princess of Wales.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Technically they are that too but as the husband are Dukes, that precedes it.
> When William is Prince of Wales he will be William, Prince of Wales and she will be Catherine, Princess of Wales.



The Prince title in the family tree just denotes royal blood.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> The Prince title in the family tree just denotes royal blood.


I know.
Also, when William becomes Prince of Wales, I'm not sure how it will work with the children.
I assume George will either become George, Duke of Cambridge (till he becomes George Prince of Wales)
The other two will become Princess/Prince Charlotte/Louis of Wales


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, but I think a Royal (blood) Duke is higher than a Prince



I think depends on what the document is about. Perhaps because it's a family tree they are Princes. Princes are born, Dukes are made (unless marrying a reigning Queen to become Prince Consort as in Prince Albert after he married Victoria).

As you can see on the family tree Queen Elizabeth is married to* Philip,  Duke of Edinburgh'* underneath his own parentage denoting his royal blood (a prince in his own right but of Greece and Denmark). He is a Duke because it's the highest rank he holds in GB so as you say a duke trumps a (foreign) prince. In the case of W & H the tree is showing the linage of succession and therefore their prince title is the important one so in this case prince trumps duke.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> I think depends on what the document is about. Perhaps because it's a family tree they are Princes. Princes are born, Dukes are made (unless marrying a reigning Queen to become Prince Consort as in Prince Albert after he married Victoria).
> 
> As you can see on the family tree Queen Elizabeth is married to* Philip,  Duke of Edinburgh'* underneath his own parentage denoting his royal blood (a prince in his own right but of Greece and Denmark). He is a Duke because it's the highest rank he holds in GB so as you say a duke trumps a (foreign) prince. In the case of W & H the tree is showing the linage of succession and therefore their prince title is the important one so in this case prince trumps duke.


Thank you, I realised that after posting as I wasn't sure. It can get very confusing.


----------



## anitalilac

hellosunshine said:


> Not true. People were free to take photographs of Meghan at Wimbledon. The media is covering some lady that's lying but the man below was the only person told "no photos" as he appeared to be taking her photograph too close.
> 
> View attachment 4485374
> 
> View attachment 4485375
> 
> View attachment 4485376


That man is truly intrusive and bloody rude!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

anitalilac said:


> That man is truly intrusive and bloody rude!



Who knows what the truth is but it was reported that he was trying to take a selfie with the court in the background. The other woman scolded was trying to take a selfie too.  Agree, it does at first look like he has his camera pointed at her.


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> As you can see on the family tree Queen Elizabeth is married to* Philip,  Duke of Edinburgh'* underneath his own parentage denoting his royal blood (a prince in his own right but of Greece and Denmark). He is a Duke because it's the highest rank he holds in GB so as you say a duke trumps a (foreign) prince. In the case of W & H the tree is showing the linage of succession and therefore their prince title is the important one so in this case prince trumps duke.


Didn't he gave up the prince title when giving up succession rights to the Greek and Danish thrones?

Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, was Prince Consort... The husbands of Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands or Margrethe of Denmark are also prince (consort). I wonder why in this case the title of Duke of Edinburgh was preferred (probably by him). He maybe didn't like the qualifying  'consort'?
Also, this thing that the wives of kings are queens, but the husbands of queens are not kings should maybe be changed at some point...


----------



## bisbee

Mrs.Z said:


> Who knows what the truth is but it was reported that he was trying to take a selfie with the court in the background. The other woman scolded was trying to take a selfie too.  Agree, it does at first look like he has his camera pointed at her.


It doesn't look like that to me...if he was trying to take a selfie with the court in the background, why were his arms extended over the rail toward Meghan?  No...he was trying to get a close picture of her.


----------



## Mrs.Z




----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> Didn't he gave up the prince title when giving up succession rights to the Greek and Danish thrones?
> 
> Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, was Prince Consort... The husbands of Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands or Margrethe of Denmark are also prince (consort). I wonder why in this case the title of Duke of Edinburgh was preferred (probably by him). He maybe didn't like the qualifying  'consort'?
> Also, this thing that the wives of kings are queens, but the husbands of queens are not kings should maybe be changed at some point...


Philip has held a number of titles throughout his life. Originally holding the title and style of a Prince of Greece and Denmark, Philip abandoned these royal titles prior to his marriage, and was thereafter created a British duke, among other noble titles*. The Queen formally issued letters patent in 1957 making Philip a British prince.
*
Regarding the man taking the selfie, if you look closely at the phone, it looks like it's pointing towards Meghan's friend. Also, you can actually see on the screen that he is actually taking a selfie,


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'm not nearly as bothered by the accomodation of asking people not to take pictures of Meghan as I am with the number of seats that were left empty for her to be there. I love that she was there to support Serena.  But court 1 tickets are such a highly coveted thing, and I had not realized just how many were left empty for her. I put the blame for that on Wimbledon for agreeing to it - not on her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> View attachment 4485714


If you look at the screen it’s clearly a selfie, you can see the grass of the court and the man himself in the corner.  But hey, Meghan assumes it’s all about her lol!  I think she’s becoming ridiculous, Harry too.  Far from being PR experts they’ve made a fantastic job of turning a wave of goodwill into much wtf??  Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory 
And if there were no demand for this type of nonsense from all the squad Sussex and team Kate stans in (mostly) the US the press wouldn’t bother printing it.  But there is a feverish appetite for it - it generates clicks and advertising revenue, and so they supply it!


----------



## lulilu

IDC if the guy was taking a selfie -- he clearly had put himself in her personal space.  Why was that necessary?  I would have assumed he was taking her photo if I was there.


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> If you look at the screen it’s clearly a selfie, you can see the grass of the court and the man himself in the corner.  But hey, Meghan assumes it’s all about her lol!  I think she’s becoming ridiculous, Harry too.  Far from being PR experts they’ve made a fantastic job of turning a wave of goodwill into much wtf??  Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
> And if there were no demand for this type of nonsense from all the squad Sussex and team Kate stans in (mostly) the US the press wouldn’t bother printing it.  But there is a feverish appetite for it - it generates clicks and advertising revenue, and so they supply it!


He was probably trying to do both. Make it look like he was doing a selfie while also getting a pic of her. From the pictures it looks like she had almost the entire front stadium to herself so he could have stood anywhere for his selfie, but chose right in front of her face, lol. I'm a horrible selfie-taker, my arms get so extended and I struggle!, definitely more like this guy.
What's a stans?


----------



## Clearblueskies

It’s foreshortened, he’s two rows down - you can see he’s the guy in the green and blue shirt in the picture where everybody is sitting down, and he’s with 3 other people right at the front.  People that go to Wimbledon want to watch the tennis.


----------



## gracekelly

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm not nearly as bothered by the accomodation of asking people not to take pictures of Meghan as I am with the number of seats that were left empty for her to be there. I love that she was there to support Serena.  But court 1 tickets are such a highly coveted thing, and I had not realized just how many were left empty for her. I put the blame for that on Wimbledon for agreeing to it - not on her.


I wondered about all those seats too. How is it that so many were available on such short notice?  Are they  considered “house”seats to be made available to last minute VIPs?


----------



## A1aGypsy

come on, i think she has made a great number of missteps but it’s not like Meghan snapped her fingers at her security detail, waved them at the guy taking the picture and told them to throw him out.  A security detail at this level is responsible for her safety. They make decisions on what is appropriate and what is not, not her. She can tell them “I’m ok” or “I’m not ok” but they will still react according to their assessment of the level of the threat.

People treat celebrities nowadays like they are things, not humans. I am amazed when I see a celebrity with people around them taking selfies or pictures, not asking or even addressing them just getting right in their personal space.  And, to a certain degree that is a trade off for all the good and fun things that come with being a celebrity but there is a line.

Depending on how close that guy got, he could have been a security threat. And that’s a risk for her, the people with her but also the rest of the people trying to watch that match. Not to mention it is also going to encourage others to try and run over and take pictures.  Whether it was appropriate or not to ask him to step back is certainly something that can be debated but - that falls at the feet of the lead of the detail, not Markle.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> If you look at the screen it’s clearly a selfie, you can see the grass of the court and the man himself in the corner.  But hey, Meghan assumes it’s all about her lol!  I think she’s becoming ridiculous, Harry too.  Far from being PR experts they’ve made a fantastic job of turning a wave of goodwill into much wtf??  Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
> And if there were no demand for this type of nonsense from all the squad Sussex and team Kate stans in (mostly) the US the press wouldn’t bother printing it.  But there is a feverish appetite for it - it generates clicks and advertising revenue, and so they supply it!


I said that too about the selfie.....two posts prior. 
What are stans? We don't hear that term here in the UK, we'll, I haven't anyway.


----------



## Clearblueskies

= Abbreviation/slang for stalker/fan - I had to google it


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> = Abbreviation/slang for stalker/fan - I had to google it


Ah right, thank you. Makes sense now I know what it means


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Clearblueskies said:


> = Abbreviation/slang for stalker/fan - I had to google it





Sharont2305 said:


> Ah right, thank you. Makes sense now I know what it means


It actually comes from an Eminem song. But yes, the meaning is an overzealous fan.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the King Power Royal Charity Polo Day


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Attending the King Power Royal Charity Polo Day
> 
> View attachment 4485949
> View attachment 4485932
> View attachment 4485825
> View attachment 4485824
> View attachment 4485947
> View attachment 4485950


I love that olive dress, looks so comfortable...... and I'm sure that blanket will sell out once it's identified too, lol


----------



## Jayne1

Morgan R said:


> I hope some of you seriously aren't ignoring what is going on right now. The Meghan "Wimbledon" story is conveniently being put out there a week after she attended Wimbledon. Yet at the same time the British Media are conveniently barely talking about the ongoing discussion that has been going on in news outlets worldwide which has been about the about Jeffrey Epstein being arrested this past weekend and the media is bringing up how Jeffrey has disturbing connections to many people. One of the people that is he has disturbing connections to is Prince Andrew which many news outlet mention.
> 
> Most of the time when Prince Andrew gets caught up in a scandal it seems like the British Media do some protecting of him (it is no secret why as he is said to Queen Elizabeth II favorite child and the media has respect for Queen Elizabeth II). Other royal family members sometimes get thrown under the bus in the process of "hiding" Andrew's scandals and he always ends up conveniently getting various honors in attempts to distract attention from his many various scandals over the years.


Oh, distraction! Good point about Andrew.


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> Didn't he gave up the prince title when giving up succession rights to the Greek and Danish thrones?
> 
> Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, was Prince Consort... The husbands of Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands or Margrethe of Denmark are also prince (consort). I wonder why in this case the title of Duke of Edinburgh was preferred (probably by him). He maybe didn't like the qualifying  'consort'?
> Also, this thing that the wives of kings are queens, but the husbands of queens are not kings should maybe be changed at some point...


I always read that if Philip was given the title of King, then he would outrank the Queen, whereas Elizabeth is the rightful reigning Queen.


----------



## Jayne1

Morgan R said:


> Attending the King Power Royal Charity Polo Day
> 
> View attachment 4485949
> View attachment 4485932
> View attachment 4485824
> View attachment 4485825
> View attachment 4485976
> View attachment 4486013
> View attachment 4486014
> View attachment 4485947


Most of these photos show the baby almost slipping down. I think I always held my baby much higher, towards my shoulder or cradled.  These slipping baby pictures are giving me anxiety.  lol


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Megan looks wonderful!  She's showing what most women look like so few weeks after giving birth.  Kudos to her for not perpetuating the prevailing trend to get back in pre pregnancy shape at all cost and in record time.  She's clearly relishing being a mother.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Brilliant move on her part having the bottle of what appears to be sunscreen visible in some of those pics so that people won't criticize her for having a baby out in the sun. 
Taking into account that it is somewhat of a royal tradition to give opportunities for candid baby pics to be snapped at polo matches, I do have to admit that the part of me who thinks H&M are going over board in protecting Archie's privacy wonders if Archie told them it was okay to take him out in public where photos would be snapped!


----------



## TC1

Ok, I'll say it..that baby should have a hat on!  I sound like my grandma...but still, if the sun is strong enough for sunscreen, babies should have a hat on (in my experience)


----------



## threadbender

Jayne1 said:


> Most of these photos show the baby almost slipping down. I think I always held my baby much higher, towards my shoulder or cradled.  These slipping baby pictures are giving me anxiety.  lol


lol Me too. But, I think it is just she is getting used to carrying him. They change so quickly and it is a learning curve! But, yes, I had the same "eeeks" moment.


----------



## threadbender

TC1 said:


> Ok, I'll say it..that baby should have a hat on!  I sound like my grandma...but still, if the sun is strong enough for sunscreen, babies should have a hat on (in my experience)


Oh, yes, definitely needs a hat. My son always had one on. Or, was inside a stroller with a canopy. But, perhaps they were only out in the sun momentarily.


----------



## Bag*Snob

They have sun in England?


----------



## Sharont2305

Bag*Snob said:


> They have sun in England?


Yes, and in Wales, Scotland and Ireland.
Is this proof enough lol


----------



## kemilia

carlpsmom said:


> Oh, yes, definitely needs a hat. My son always had one on. Or, was inside a stroller with a canopy. But, perhaps they were only out in the sun momentarily.


Oh yes to the hat! 

Little ones around here (Chicago-land) wear sunglasses too. Sad how we all seem to hide from the Sun nowadays.


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> come on, i think she has made a great number of missteps but it’s not like Meghan snapped her fingers at her security detail, waved them at the guy taking the picture and told them to throw him out.  A security detail at this level is responsible for her safety. They make decisions on what is appropriate and what is not, not her. She can tell them “I’m ok” or “I’m not ok” but they will still react according to their assessment of the level of the threat.
> 
> People treat celebrities nowadays like they are things, not humans. I am amazed when I see a celebrity with people around them taking selfies or pictures, not asking or even addressing them just getting right in their personal space.  And, to a certain degree that is a trade off for all the good and fun things that come with being a celebrity but there is a line.
> 
> Depending on how close that guy got, he could have been a security threat. And that’s a risk for her, the people with her but also the rest of the people trying to watch that match. Not to mention it is also going to encourage others to try and run over and take pictures.  Whether it was appropriate or not to ask him to step back is certainly something that can be debated but - that falls at the feet of the lead of the detail, not Markle.


I don't know, and maybe this is me .. BUT, *Wimbledon is a PUBLIC venue* where many people pay a LOT of money to go and watch Tennis with the best players in the world.  Now, let's say that it wasn't Meghan, but some other celebrity/royal, would people be as upset about folks taking pictures?  If she had truly wanted privacy, why couldn't she sit in the Royal box .. isn't that what she did last year when she went with Kate?   Yes, people might have been taking pictures, but is that truly a big security risk .. it's not like someone jumped up to the section she was in!!!  

I have run into this "security" nonsense out here in LA (_at a Neiman Marcus of all places_), and while I was actually just texting my husband, to have someone scream at me and get into my face because THEY ASSUMED that I was taking pictures of a 'Z' celebrity (_stupid woman who honestly, is a nobody has-been_).  

I am just thinking, are they making too much of a big deal of this and as such, the paparazzi and others will become even more zealous in their attempt to take pictures???  Heck, if Meghan was out here in LA (filming Suits and it was a hit program), she would have SURE gotten use to the paparazzi snapping pictures as you walk down the street .. it is par for the course out here.  So, that makes me wonder .. what is really up with this privacy stuff? .. is this something that she and Harry thought would make them more 'relevant' or get into the news more .. because I just see this as courting more issues at this point .. just my opinion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, and in Wales, Scotland and Ireland.
> Is this proof enough lol


HA HA HA .. too funny, for sure .. best time of year to visit the UK (GB, Ireland, Wales & Scotland)!!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

CeeJay said:


> I don't know, and maybe this is me .. BUT, *Wimbledon is a PUBLIC venue* where many people pay a LOT of money to go and watch Tennis with the best players in the world.  Now, let's say that it wasn't Meghan, but some other celebrity/royal, would people be as upset about folks taking pictures?  If she had truly wanted privacy, why couldn't she sit in the Royal box .. isn't that what she did last year when she went with Kate?   Yes, people might have been taking pictures, but is that truly a big security risk .. it's not like someone jumped up to the section she was in!!!
> 
> I have run into this "security" nonsense out here in LA (_at a Neiman Marcus of all places_), and while I was actually just texting my husband, to have someone scream at me and get into my face because THEY ASSUMED that I was taking pictures of a 'Z' celebrity (_stupid woman who honestly, is a nobody has-been_).
> 
> I am just thinking, are they making too much of a big deal of this and as such, the paparazzi and others will become even more zealous in their attempt to take pictures???  Heck, if Meghan was out here in LA (filming Suits and it was a hit program), she would have SURE gotten use to the paparazzi snapping pictures as you walk down the street .. it is par for the course out here.  So, that makes me wonder .. what is really up with this privacy stuff? .. is this something that she and Harry thought would make them more 'relevant' or get into the news more .. because I just see this as courting more issues at this point .. just my opinion.




But, again, not their choice. Security’s choice. 

And they agents didn’t stop everyone from taking pictures.


----------



## LibbyRuth

CeeJay said:


> I don't know, and maybe this is me .. BUT, *Wimbledon is a PUBLIC venue* where many people pay a LOT of money to go and watch Tennis with the best players in the world.  Now, let's say that it wasn't Meghan, but some other celebrity/royal, would people be as upset about folks taking pictures?  If she had truly wanted privacy, why couldn't she sit in the Royal box .. isn't that what she did last year when she went with Kate?   Yes, people might have been taking pictures, but is that truly a big security risk .. it's not like someone jumped up to the section she was in!!!
> 
> I have run into this "security" nonsense out here in LA (_at a Neiman Marcus of all places_), and while I was actually just texting my husband, to have someone scream at me and get into my face because THEY ASSUMED that I was taking pictures of a 'Z' celebrity (_stupid woman who honestly, is a nobody has-been_).
> 
> I am just thinking, are they making too much of a big deal of this and as such, the paparazzi and others will become even more zealous in their attempt to take pictures???  Heck, if Meghan was out here in LA (filming Suits and it was a hit program), she would have SURE gotten use to the paparazzi snapping pictures as you walk down the street .. it is par for the course out here.  So, that makes me wonder .. what is really up with this privacy stuff? .. is this something that she and Harry thought would make them more 'relevant' or get into the news more .. because I just see this as courting more issues at this point .. just my opinion.



She legitimately could not sit in the royal box because she was there to watch her friend Serena Williams play and Serena was assigned to court one. With Serena not being at the top of her game there was no promise she’d advance in the tournament to rounds where she’d vertainly be on Centre Court. Now given her royal status, had she let it be known she wanted to see Serena play from the royal box, AELTC club would have likely put Serena’s match on that court. Or course if she were in the royal box, she would have been in an official capacity and not hanging out with friends. 

But truthfully, the way she went about it drew attention. I have a feeling Serena’s team would have made room for her in the friends box which would have given her protection. She didn’t opt for that. She could have been snuck into seats without clearing and entire section as some other high profile celebs have done in the past. She didn’t. Clearing out an entire section and arriving as she did, she drew attention to being there and can’t be surprised by the results. I’m sure there is a defense that her security detail insisted on those accommodations. That leaves me wondering if that was the case how Kate was safe sitting at an earlier court earlier in the week. Doesn’t she require a higher level of protection? 

I like Meghan And Harry A LOT. I really do. But some of their behavior is starting to seem like Taylor Swift, working really hard to pretend everyone’s against them because it elicits sympathy and attention.


----------



## mdcx

Megs needs to read up on Noblesse Oblige. Perhaps take a look at the book of that title by Nancy Mitford.
She is public property now and if she behaves graciously and appropriately to her station, people will leave her alone.
Apparently she hasn't received that memo yet though.

Most people who grew up in the Commonwealth would have a good idea of what marrying Harry would entail, hence the reason why many people said "rather her than me" when the engagement was announced.


----------



## CeeJay

LibbyRuth said:


> She legitimately could not sit in the royal box because she was there to watch her friend Serena Williams play and Serena was assigned to court one. With Serena not being at the top of her game there was no promise she’d advance in the tournament to rounds where she’d vertainly be on Centre Court. Now given her royal status, had she let it be known she wanted to see Serena play from the royal box, AELTC club would have likely put Serena’s match on that court. Or course if she were in the royal box, she would have been in an official capacity and not hanging out with friends.
> 
> But truthfully, the way she went about it drew attention. I have a feeling Serena’s team would have made room for her in the friends box which would have given her protection. She didn’t opt for that. She could have been snuck into seats without clearing and entire section as some other high profile celebs have done in the past. She didn’t. Clearing out an entire section and arriving as she did, she drew attention to being there and can’t be surprised by the results. I’m sure there is a defense that her security detail insisted on those accommodations. That leaves me wondering if that was the case how Kate was safe sitting at an earlier court earlier in the week. Doesn’t she require a higher level of protection?
> 
> I like Meghan And Harry A LOT. I really do. But some of their behavior is starting to seem like Taylor Swift, working really hard to pretend everyone’s against them because it elicits sympathy and attention.


Ah, didn't know that .. thank you!  Have to agree with you though, I think Meghan and Harry need to think of a different approach because it doesn't seem to be helping them (and folks don't think that I just read the Daily Mail because I don't; I used to work in the UK and have MANY friends in London and areas who have told me their opinions and overall, they are not favorable at this point).


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> I have run into this "security" nonsense out here in LA (_at a Neiman Marcus of all places_), and while I was actually just texting my husband, to have someone scream at me and get into my face because THEY ASSUMED that I was taking pictures of a 'Z' celebrity (_stupid woman who honestly, is a nobody has-been_).


LOL.  I know somebody who was taking pictures with her friends at a restaurant in LA and Maks and Peta from Dancing with the Stars had a member of their entourage go over and ask them to stop.  They thought she was trying to take stealth photos of them.  She yelled back, "I don't know those two *****es!" 

I've heard that William, Kate and Harry have all done the same thing Meghan did so it's not like she came up with the idea herself.  It would make my blood boil if some royal or celebrity did that to me.  And I would certainly tell anyone who would listen about what a self-important a-hole that person was.

I understand why celebrities might feel uncomfortable knowing that there could be cameras on them when they are in public, but there were *professional* television and still cameras trained on Meghan the entire time she was at the match and she knew it.  

It's not right to approach people who are having a good time with their friends at a sporting event and a) accuse them of being devious and rude, b) rub in their faces that you are a celebrity and they aren't, and c) tell them they have to put their phones away and aren't allowed to take pictures, as if you have the right to control what they do.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> LOL.  I know somebody who was taking pictures with her friends at a restaurant in LA and Maks and Peta from Dancing with the Stars had a member of their entourage go over and ask them to stop.  They thought she was trying to take stealth photos of them.  She yelled back, "I don't know those two *****es!"
> 
> I've heard that William, Kate and Harry have all done the same thing Meghan did so it's not like she came up with the idea herself.  It would make my blood boil if some royal or celebrity did that to me.  And I would certainly tell anyone who would listen about what a self-important a-hole that person was.
> 
> I understand why celebrities might feel uncomfortable knowing that there could be cameras on them when they are in public, but there were *professional* television and still cameras trained on Meghan the entire time she was at the match and she knew it.
> 
> It's not right to approach people who are having a good time with their friends at a sporting event and a) accuse them of being devious and rude, b) rub in their faces that you are a celebrity and they aren't, and c) tell them they have to put their phones away and aren't allowed to take pictures, as if you have the right to control what they do.


I guess to a certain degree, it depends on "how" you are asked, right? .. but, yes .. it seems as though (at least out here because I've run into much more well-known celebs who could care less that you have taken a photo) it's oftentimes the wanna-be's or the (as I call them) the Class-Z nobodies that get all bent out of  shape.  

That all being said, maybe the situation with Meghan wanting to see Serena was very last minute and as such her Security team could not make other arrangements.  It's unfortunate that she's trying to enjoy watching the game with her friends and then folks are taking photo's, but alas .. it kind of comes with the territory!


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> I always read that if Philip was given the title of King, then he would outrank the Queen, whereas Elizabeth is the rightful reigning Queen.


Yup.  King doesn't *actually* outrank Queen, that's just how people perceive it.  

When Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden takes the throne, it will be interesting how they will deal with that issue, because it's just based on sexism and Swedes consider themselves so egalitarian.


----------



## LibbyRuth

CeeJay said:


> I guess to a certain degree, it depends on "how" you are asked, right? .. but, yes .. it seems as though (at least out here because I've run into much more well-known celebs who could care less that you have taken a photo) it's oftentimes the wanna-be's or the (as I call them) the Class-Z nobodies that get all bent out of  shape.
> 
> That all being said, maybe the situation with Meghan wanting to see Serena was very last minute and as such her Security team could not make other arrangements.  It's unfortunate that she's trying to enjoy watching the game with her friends and then folks are taking photo's, but alas .. it kind of comes with the territory!


If it were a last minute decision for her to attend, how did she get an entire section cleared out?


----------



## CeeJay

LibbyRuth said:


> If it were a last minute decision for her to attend, how did she get an entire section cleared out?


Don't know .. just a thought ..


----------



## mdcx

Royals in Britain generally are in the mix with the public, particularly in this case where all the others in her section of seats were rather "posh". 
Actress Joely Richardson (daughter of Vanessa Redgrave, sister in law of Liam Neeson) was there, in a lovely dress. 
It was a big faux pas(being generous here) of Meghan's to sit alone surrounded by security.


----------



## Flatsy

mdcx said:


> Royals in Britain generally are in the mix with the public, particularly in this case where all the others in her section of seats were rather "posh".
> Actress Joely Richardson (daughter of Vanessa Redgrave, sister in law of Liam Neeson) was there, in a lovely dress.
> It was a big faux pas(being generous here) of Meghan's to sit alone surrounded by security.


And a lot of people in those posh seats are members of the media.  It was Meghan's undoing to have her PPO bully someone who had a platform to publish the story in The Telegraph.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. too funny, for sure .. best time of year to visit the UK (GB, Ireland, Wales & Scotland)!!!


Not forgetting England. 
Sorry, off topic I know, but I have a serious thing about people (not here) thinking that UK/GB consists of only England, that all four countries come under the name of England.
We are four countries of Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England, collectively known as The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Ive even had people ask me if Wales is in England. #Nooooooo
Sorry..... as you were,


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Royals in Britain generally are in the mix with the public, particularly in this case where all the others in her section of seats were rather "posh".
> Actress Joely Richardson (daughter of Vanessa Redgrave, sister in law of Liam Neeson) was there, in a lovely dress.
> It was a big faux pas(being generous here) of Meghan's to sit alone surrounded by security.





Flatsy said:


> And a lot of people in those posh seats are members of the media.  It was Meghan's undoing to have her PPO bully someone who had a platform to publish the story in The Telegraph.


I agree, big mistake.  I doubt Wimbledon will do this again, it has gone down very badly with press and public.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> I always read that if Philip was given the title of King, then he would outrank the Queen, whereas Elizabeth is the rightful reigning Queen.


That would not be the case if he was titled "King Consort", but somehow, that is avoided in many houses for men spouses. I find it a bit demeaning, as there should be no question that a rightful reigning Queen is above a consort King... The husband of the last Spanish reigning Queen, Isabel II, bore the title of King Consort.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> Most of these photos show the baby almost slipping down. I think I always held my baby much higher, towards my shoulder or cradled.  These slipping baby pictures are giving me anxiety.  lol


his head is on her shoulder?


like seriously WOW! seems like everything she does is wrong these days


----------



## myown

TC1 said:


> Ok, I'll say it..that baby should have a hat on!  I sound like my grandma...but still, if the sun is strong enough for sunscreen, babies should have a hat on (in my experience)


one actually should also use sunscreen in winter.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> She legitimately could not sit in the royal box because she was there to watch her friend Serena Williams play and Serena was assigned to court one. With Serena not being at the top of her game there was no promise she’d advance in the tournament to rounds where she’d vertainly be on Centre Court. Now given her royal status, had she let it be known she wanted to see Serena play from the royal box, AELTC club would have likely put Serena’s match on that court. Or course if she were in the royal box, she would have been in an official capacity and not hanging out with friends.
> 
> But truthfully, the way she went about it drew attention. I have a feeling Serena’s team would have made room for her in the friends box which would have given her protection. She didn’t opt for that. She could have been snuck into seats without clearing and entire section as some other high profile celebs have done in the past. She didn’t. Clearing out an entire section and arriving as she did, she drew attention to being there and can’t be surprised by the results. I’m sure there is a defense that her security detail insisted on those accommodations. That leaves me wondering if that was the case how Kate was safe sitting at an earlier court earlier in the week. Doesn’t she require a higher level of protection?
> 
> I like Meghan And Harry A LOT. I really do. But some of their behavior is starting to seem like Taylor Swift, working really hard to pretend everyone’s against them because it elicits sympathy and attention.


There is no way that Wimbledon would switch Serenas match to Centre Court if Meghan wished it! No chance.
Catherine was absolutely safe, she had her PO's with her.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Yet again, you were conveniently there and witnessed the whole thing!   Meghan is so lucky to have you following her around everywhere and telling people exactly what she did and did not do at all times.



Well, all it takes is some common sense to observe the obvious.

Moving on...

At the end of the day, whether the guy intended to take a photo of the DoS or not, security decided it was best to deal with him. Let's not forget that the original complaint was that Meghan had a "no photo" agreement which was false. There were clearly many fans + media photographers taking photos of her.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> There is no way that Wimbledon would switch Serenas match to Centre Court if Meghan wished it! No chance.
> Catherine was absolutely safe, she had her PO's with her.



I'm curious as to your utter confidence that the AELTCC would refuse to accommodate a request from a royal for the royal box given that they were known to have accommodated some of Diana's requests for a player back in the day?  It wasn't going to happen without a request given that there were two British players on Centre Court that day. But there is a great relationship between the royal family and the AELTCC and they've accommodated requests in the past. So how are you so certain there was no chance?
Meghan was also with her POs - also safe. That was my point.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> I don't know, and maybe this is me .. BUT, *Wimbledon is a PUBLIC venue* where many people pay a LOT of money to go and watch Tennis with the best players in the world.  Now, let's say that it wasn't Meghan, but some other celebrity/royal, would people be as upset about folks taking pictures?  I*f she had truly wanted privacy, why couldn't she sit in the Royal box .. isn't that what she did last year when she went with Kate?   *Yes, people might have been taking pictures, but is that truly a big security risk .. it's not like someone jumped up to the section she was in!!!



The privacy they referred to is in regards to Meghan being there in a private capacity which simply means she was not working. It didn’t mean she demanded privacy. What silly person would believe she demanded privacy whilst going to a public tennis match? C'mon now.....


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> his head is on her shoulder?
> 
> 
> like seriously WOW! seems like everything she does is wrong these days


Lots of photos in People magazine and UK  sites show her holding the baby low for most of the time. I didn't say it was wrong, I think she looks uncomfortable. 

Obviously the baby is not or he would be crying, but she doesn't look at ease. We always see her so composed, this was one time she didn't look it. 

Anyway, I like her dress.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> The privacy they referred to is in regards to Meghan being there in a private capacity which simply means she was not working. It didn’t mean she demanded privacy. What silly person would believe she demanded privacy whilst going to a public tennis match? C'mon now.....


Of course she did!  We all saw the large space around her which meant lots of genuine (paying) tennis fans missed seeing the match. You need an eye test! 
The deal with the royals and the public is that whilst they have a great deal of privilege they aren’t seen to abuse it.  Shoving it in people’s faces in this way is extremely gauche behaviour.  They have access to the royal box if they prefer not to be sitting with the crowd.  
I saw two articles in the broadsheets yesterday, one said - “Diana would never have done it” - very true.  The second said Meghan needed to learn the meaning of the British expression - “get over yourself” - yes, absolutely


----------



## myown

Clearblueskies said:


> Of course she did!  We all saw the large space around her which meant lots of genuine (paying) tennis fans missed seeing the match. You need an eye test!
> The deal with the royals and the public is that whilst they have a great deal of privilege they aren’t seen to abuse it.  Shoving it in people’s faces in this way is extremely gauche behaviour.  They have access to the royal box if they prefer not to be sitting with the crowd.
> I saw two articles in the broadsheets yesterday, one said - “Diana would never have done it” - very true.  The second said Meghan needed to learn the meaning of the British expression - “get over yourself” - yes, absolutely


I actually thought it wasn't her choice. 
I thought like she told her staff she wants to go see Serena with her two friends and then her assistant managed everything.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm curious as to your utter confidence that the AELTCC would refuse to accommodate a request from a royal for the royal box given that they were known to have accommodated some of Diana's requests for a player back in the day?  It wasn't going to happen without a request given that there were two British players on Centre Court that day. But there is a great relationship between the royal family and the AELTCC and they've accommodated requests in the past. So how are you so certain there was no chance?
> Meghan was also with her POs - also safe. That was my point.


I just don't think they would, these rounds are planned as to which match plays on what court and it just so happened that Serena was on court one that day. Plus, I know tickets are bought well in advance for that Court and Centre Court (You very rarely buy them on the day) so people on that day will arrive there knowing who they will be seeing.
Can you imagine turning up and finding out that one match was switched because someone wanted to sit in the Royal Box to watch that player and not wanting to go to Court One? The press would really love that!


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> I actually thought it wasn't her choice.
> I thought like she told her staff she wants to go see Serena with her two friends and then her assistant managed everything.


You just don’t put your assistant in the position of asking for special favours just because you can


----------



## myown

Clearblueskies said:


> You just don’t put your assistant in the position of asking for special favours just because you can


where did I said she did?


----------



## minababe

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm not nearly as bothered by the accomodation of asking people not to take pictures of Meghan as I am with the number of seats that were left empty for her to be there. I love that she was there to support Serena.  But court 1 tickets are such a highly coveted thing, and I had not realized just how many were left empty for her. I put the blame for that on Wimbledon for agreeing to it - not on her.


did you watched the game? there were many seats empty. not just the ones around meghan.
so I don't get the critic. its not like People didn't see the match because meghan has arrived.


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> where did I said she did?


You’re saying the assistant came up with the whole idea!?  Yeah right


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> I just don't think they would, these rounds are planned as to which match plays on what court and it just so happened that Serena was on court one that day. Plus, I know tickets are bought well in advance for that Court and Centre Court (You very rarely buy them on the day) so people on that day will arrive there knowing who they will be seeing.
> Can you imagine turning up and finding out that one match was switched because someone wanted to sit in the Royal Box to watch that player and not wanting to go to Court One? The press would really love that!



I was fortunate enough to have had tickets to Centre Court many years ago.  I found out which matches I was seeing the morning we were going when we read it in the paper.  That was in 1989 before there was an internet. Now, attendees can find out which matches are assigned to a court the night before when the play is posted on the Wimbledon website. Same has been true for other tennis tournaments I've attended - you buy tickets for a day and court.  The lineups for that court are determined after the fact.  With each tournament, including Wimbledon, there are also a limited number of general admission seats so if you have a ticket to the grounds and really want to see a particular match you can stand in line to get into that court. The year I had a ticket to Centre Court, Stefan Edberg was playing on court 1. I begged my mom to stand in line so we could see him but she told me I was nuts and we saw Stefi Graf play a little unknown girl named Monica Seles much to my dismay. You really cannot know the matchups when you buy tickets to a tennis tournament, because the wins and losses the days before determine who IS playing. And for the record, the year I had a Centre Court ticket, we sent in a request for tickets - any day, any court, and were lucky enough to be assigned Centre Court on the middle monday.  There is no buying a ticket to see a particular player, unless it's an exhibition. That's why the AELTC can coordinate with requests from the royal family as they see fit if they receive them.



minababe said:


> did you watched the game? there were many seats empty. not just the ones around meghan.
> so I don't get the critic. its not like People didn't see the match because meghan has arrived.



Yes, I did watch the match. As is the norm with any tennis match, the number of seats filled varied through the match. It's quite normal after one match ends that people will step away from their seats, get refreshments, and then return. At Wimbledon, people who leave for the day can return their tickets for the show courts, and others buy them making a donation to charity to reuse them. That's why seats are empty and then refilled through the day. Empty seats scattered among sections are different from an ENTIRE section cleared out except for Meghan, two friends ,and security detail.  That section was clearly cleared out for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, big mistake.  I doubt Wimbledon will do this again, it has gone down very badly with press and public.


I read that it was because she was in blue jeans? That if you are so dressed down you cannot sit in the reserved royal box, where she should have been. And people are angry (British) because she stayed only for Serena and then left before British players.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> I read that it was because she was in blue jeans? That if you are so dressed down you cannot sit in the reserved royal box, where she should have been. And people are angry (British) because she stayed only for Serena and then left before British players.



The AELTC responded to these claims making a statement that her attire was perfectly fine and was not an issue for the club. I think it's clear that she went to court 1 because she was there to see her friend Serena. Camilla was there yesterday, sitting in the royal box where she did not watch any British players either.
I think it's appropriate to give a side eye for the way they cleared out an entire section. I think it's appropriate to give a side eye to any attempts to keep pictures of her from being taken. But I think some of the criticisms of her visit to Wimbledon are overblown and not rooted in fact.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I was fortunate enough to have had tickets to Centre Court many years ago.  I found out which matches I was seeing the morning we were going when we read it in the paper.  That was in 1989 before there was an internet. Now, attendees can find out which matches are assigned to a court the night before when the play is posted on the Wimbledon website. Same has been true for other tennis tournaments I've attended - you buy tickets for a day and court.  The lineups for that court are determined after the fact.  With each tournament, including Wimbledon, there are also a limited number of general admission seats so if you have a ticket to the grounds and really want to see a particular match you can stand in line to get into that court. The year I had a ticket to Centre Court, Stefan Edberg was playing on court 1. I begged my mom to stand in line so we could see him but she told me I was nuts and we saw Stefi Graf play a little unknown girl named Monica Seles much to my dismay. You really cannot know the matchups when you buy tickets to a tennis tournament, because the wins and losses the days before determine who IS playing. And for the record, the year I had a Centre Court ticket, we sent in a request for tickets - any day, any court, and were lucky enough to be assigned Centre Court on the middle monday.  There is no buying a ticket to see a particular player, unless it's an exhibition. That's why the AELTC can coordinate with requests from the royal family as they see fit if they receive them.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I did watch the match. As is the norm with any tennis match, the number of seats filled varied through the match. It's quite normal after one match ends that people will step away from their seats, get refreshments, and then return. At Wimbledon, people who leave for the day can return their tickets for the show courts, and others buy them making a donation to charity to reuse them. That's why seats are empty and then refilled through the day. Empty seats scattered among sections are different from an ENTIRE section cleared out except for Meghan, two friends ,and security detail.  That section was clearly cleared out for her.


I know all that, my point was, as in your case you knew the night before who you were going to see. Up until those days matches you didn't. All I was saying is that in the morning these spectators knew they would be watching Serena, and I'd be excited to see her play too. Turning up and finding out she was switched to another court because someone didn't want to go to Court One to watch her wouldn't go down too well tbh.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> I know all that, my point was, as in your case you knew the night before who you were going to see. Up until those days matches you didn't. All I was saying is that in the morning these spectators knew they would be watching Serena, and I'd be excited to see her play too. Turning up and finding out she was switched to another court because someone didn't want to go to Court One to watch her wouldn't go down too well tbh.



Sorry, I misunderstood. When you said that people bought tickets for a matchup, knowing tickets for Centre Court and Court 1 are purchased before the main draws for the tournament are even known, I misunderstood and thought you were talking about people buying tickets for a particular matchup.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Sorry, I misunderstood. When you said that people bought tickets for a matchup, knowing tickets for Centre Court and Court 1 are purchased before the main draws for the tournament are even known, I misunderstood and thought you were talking about people buying tickets for a particular matchup.


No problem


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> The privacy they referred to is in regards to Meghan being there in a private capacity which simply means she was not working. *It didn’t mean she demanded privacy.* What *silly person* would believe she demanded privacy whilst going to a public tennis match? C'mon now.....


Okay, so then WHY would her security detail been so adamant about folks not taking pictures?  Look, if someone rushed up and attempted to climb into the box she was in, then I totally get it .. re: her security detail being right there to protect her, but taking a photo?

You are very obviously a fan of Meghan and that's okay BUT .. you have many times called people out because they have a different opinion than you do and one of the rules of TPF is that you DO NOT do that, so please be mindful calling people "silly" or other things .. thanks!


----------



## mdcx

Regards Wimbledon making a positive statement about Meghan's appearance there - of course they would! They are not about to say anything negative about a member of the Royal Family! British people will just freeze you out slowly and politely.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry in his role as Commonwealth Youth Ambassador attending a roundtable with Commonwealth Youth Ministers at Marlborough House


----------



## Tivo

I find it interesting that Harry, Kate and Will all posture themselves the same way when chatting with people while having their photo taken. Right down to the hand gestures.


----------



## mdcx

Tivo said:


> I find it interesting that Harry, Kate and Will all posture themselves the same way when chatting with people while having their photo taken. Right down to the hand gestures.


I would agree, I think they have been trained in it. Hands visible, usually clasped in front, good posture, neutral pleasant expression, direct friendly gaze. Poised, basically.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Is this normal?! The level of negative statements in this thread (and other threads) has me scratching my head.


----------



## minababe

Welltraveled! said:


> Is this normal?! The level of negative statements in this thread (and other threads) has me scratching my head.



thank you ..it's so annoying .. don't get why People complain on everything she does.
you don't like her ok than leave this thread alone, but no they are here every second of their lifes .. if you don't like someone why spending so much time and energy here..  100 % ENVY is the answer.


----------



## LibbyRuth

This is the gossip section of the forum right?  Gossip can be commenting on people in the public eye both negative and positive. I also think that there are some comments made in this thread which are written as a neutral observation which are interpreted to be an attack. I've been called a hater before for making rather neutral statements.


----------



## mdcx

It's curious that you attribute all criticism of Meghan's behaviour to envy. No-one is denying that she is beautiful and has married into a very wealthy and powerful family. 
Marrying into the BRF is basically a job though, and she seems well out of her depth.
She is not taking advantage of the endless supply of advisors and wisdom about royal protocol that she has at her fingertips. 
Her behaviour is odd to me and if she continues down this path of 'rebellion' basically, then things won't end well.
Perhaps she is a lovely person in her private life, but she is making a bit of a hash of being Duchess.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Is she really messing up that much as a Duchess though? Even before they got married, when Harry, Meghan, Kate and William would do an event together, she held her own and conducted herself on par with the rest of them. When she and Harry did their tour of the south pacific right after announcing her pregnancy, she got quite favorable reviews, did what she needed to do, and understandably sat out a couple of events due to the newness of pregnancy. She's chosen and been assigned patronages where she's attended events and given the support expected of a Duchess.
Truly I think most of the criticism of her has come while she's been on maternity leave. So it's not really criticism of how she's doing her job. A lot of it is criticisms made over things assumed to be attributed to her - ie she and Harry are being blamed for the cost of renovating Frogmore while no one has any idea who made the budget decisions on that, or even how much say they had in making that their home. I do think that events surrounding her visit to Wimbledon did not reflect well on her, but again, it's hard to say how much of that she had a hand in, and how much was people around her. 
When a person winds up in a position like hers with a lot of wealth and privilege, I think it's not uncommon for there to be some missteps while you figure out what you can and can't do. She seems to be going through some of those growing pains adjusting to a new life. But I don't think that means she won't grow through it, and I also don't see it as a reflection on how she does her job as a duchess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## anitalilac

Welltraveled! said:


> Is this normal?! The level of negative statements in this thread (and other threads) has me scratching my head.


I pop in for the pics, no pics , read the comment, shake my head and get out...


----------



## daisychainz

Welltraveled! said:


> Is this normal?! The level of negative statements in this thread (and other threads) has me scratching my head.


You don't get on the Internet often?  This is everywhere, every site, every forum, this website is no exception. Where there are people, there are opinions. They have a unique ignore feature on this website if someone really bothers you, then you won't see them, or posts you don't like. My favorite is Yahoo forums, OMG!, they get mean about anything. This is very tame and controlled, lol!


----------



## gracekelly

daisychainz said:


> You don't get on the Internet often?  This is everywhere, every site, every forum, this website is no exception. Where there are people, there are opinions. They have a unique ignore feature on this website if someone really bothers you, then you won't see them, or posts you don't like. My favorite is Yahoo forums, OMG!, they get mean about anything. This is very tame and controlled, lol!



So true!  My DH tells me that the sports forums he reads are brutal!!  Mean,nasty and foul language!  Vlad and Swanky won’t tolerate such postings. This place is pretty darn civilized hahaha!

@LibbyRuth

  TIA about neutral and informational postings. I have posted documented facts and been raked over because it didn’t mesh with a person’s opinions.   I expect to get a comment on just this last sentence

Any person in public life is going to have every nuance of their life scrutinized endlessly and it goes with the territory. Many celebs state that they never look at the internet because they don’t want to see all the negative comment as it would drive them crazy.   Poor Meghan will never leave the the house again without a hat and socks on Archie.  How this became a major internet topic was pretty amazing.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duchess of Sussex and the Duchess of Cambridge will attend the Ladies Final at Wimbledon tomorrow.

@gracekelly I love reading your posts.


----------



## Tivo

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duchess of Sussex and the Duchess of Cambridge will attend the Ladies Final at Wimbledon tomorrow.
> 
> @gracekelly I love reading your posts.


I will be watching the body language closely!


----------



## gracekelly

Tivo said:


> I will be watching the body language closely!


You and a gazillion readers of the Daily Mail lol!


@Sharont2305  Thanks so much!  You’re so sweet


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> Not true. People were free to take photographs of Meghan at Wimbledon. The media is covering some lady that's lying but the man below was the only person told "no photos" as he appeared to be taking her photograph too close.
> 
> View attachment 4485374
> 
> View attachment 4485375
> 
> View attachment 4485376


I do think that guy looks like he's too close to Meghan and security were right to step in. The selfie guy could have taken a pic more at a distance or actually asked if he could take a pic with her. Generally, this habit of entitled people sticking their phones up in the faces of people they don't know is out of control. 



Jayne1 said:


> Most of these photos show the baby almost slipping down. I think I always held my baby much higher, towards my shoulder or cradled.  These slipping baby pictures are giving me anxiety.  lol


I felt instant anxiety too seeing her holding her baby like that but it was probably only for a short time she was holding him this way which would explain why he wasn't wearing a hat or socks. Maybe she was holding him like that for photogs to get better angels of him  Nah, of course not 

I think she needs a sling or a Manduca carrier. I loved the Manduca as you can use it from newborn an onward. And they come with a built in sun protector iirc. Can't make any oops improve photo ops with them though because of how they shield the child so probably out of the question for a lot of celebs.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

BagOuttaHell said:


> I like the pic from the Christianing where she is looking at Harry and Harry is looking at the baby.
> 
> Anywho she is being treated in the media differently because she is biracial or depending who you ask, black. And her siblings and father are trash that continue to fuel the fire.


I agree with you about her father's side but what about the family on her mother's side? Why weren't there more of them at the wedding and why are they never seen in photos/public with her? 

Racists of all colours aside, isn't Meghan's main problem being accepted that she is too Hollywood, not primarily that she is bi-racial? She seems like your typical vapid woke Hollywood celeb with a penchant for virtue signaling and me me me. Which doesn't seem to go over well when in your majesty's service. I think that she had the potential to be very loved by the British just by marrying lovable Harry but she (and hubby) are squandering the good-will for reasons already pointed out by other posters. Starting with having a weirdly huge celeb studded wedding despite all those family problems on her father's side and the inexplicable lack of family on her mother's. Rather tone-deaf.

She just comes across as fake, with that little girl voice and mannerism shtick when cameras are on. Other clips show that's not the whole story to her. From what I've read of these people, Kate and her whole family got a lot of flack too (Waity Katie etc) in the beginning. 

The BRF are like the Borg but with much better perks. Marry in to it and you must assimilate. You must comply. You won't, you give up your titles and royal perks and get out.


----------



## LibbyRuth

The more I look at the polo pics of Meghan holding the baby, the more I'm convinced she's holding him like that because he was sleeping and she didn't want to move him too much and wake him up. I think anyone whose held a baby for any length of time has gone through that. When a baby is content and sleeping, you'll contort your body in any way possible to keep the baby happy ... even if it means pictures being snapped so the world can be convinced you're dropping your baby!


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The BRF are like the Borg but with much better perks. Marry in to it and you must assimilate. You must comply. You won't, you give up your titles and royal perks and get out.



  Resistance is futile!


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The BRF are like the Borg but with much better perks. Marry in to it and you must assimilate. You must comply. You won't, you give up your titles and royal perks and get out.



The difference being that the women are not just willing but eager to join the royal family. It's not assimilation when you volunteer. They all know beforehand what that means. It's disingenuous if any of them pretend later that they only want to "be themselves."


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> So true!  My DH tells me that the sports forums he reads are brutal!!  Mean,nasty and foul language!  Vlad and Swanky won’t tolerate such postings. This place is pretty darn civilized hahaha!
> 
> @LibbyRuth
> 
> TIA about neutral and informational postings. I have posted documented facts and been raked over because it didn’t mesh with a person’s opinions.   I expect to get a comment on just this last sentence
> 
> Any person in public life is going to have every nuance of their life scrutinized endlessly and it goes with the territory. Many celebs state that they never look at the internet because they don’t want to see all the negative comment as it would drive them crazy.   Poor Meghan will never leave the the house again without a hat and socks on Archie.  How this became a major internet topic was pretty amazing.


Well said @gracekelly , and 100% true!  My gosh, to be called "envious" because you don't post something that other's think is not favorable of Meghan?!?!  In addition, to tell people that they shouldn't be in this thread if they have nothing good to say about her, seriously!?!?!?  I think some folks need to go back and read the TPF rules; *we should all be respectful* of our fellow TPF members and *not* engage in name-calling or being accused of exhibiting a certain 'behavior'.  As @Swanky reminded us recently, we need to keep the drama in this thread 'in check'!


----------



## threadbender

LibbyRuth said:


> The more I look at the polo pics of Meghan holding the baby, the more I'm convinced she's holding him like that because he was sleeping and she didn't want to move him too much and wake him up. I think anyone whose held a baby for any length of time has gone through that. When a baby is content and sleeping, you'll contort your body in any way possible to keep the baby happy ... even if it means pictures being snapped so the world can be convinced you're dropping your baby!


I agree. I thought she was carrying him low but also said it takes time to get it all right. Yes, my son always had a hat on but we lived in S CA. lol Socks, though, nah, not always.  Every Mom (and Dad) has a learning curve, just not always on the world wide web.
I am not Meghan's biggest fan but look forward to her becoming more comfortable in her roles, both as a Duchess and a mother. I think Archie is adorable and loved. To put this is perspective, I am also not the biggest Diana fan, in her later years, either. But, still wished the best for her and her boys.
I do think Meghan and Harry, as a team, need to figure out what they want to be and do in that family. If they want to be private citizens, go for it. If they want to represent BR all over the world as ambassadors etc, more power to them. If they choose to relocate and concentrate on Africa, so be it.  I honestly doubt they give two hoots what any of us think. lol


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> The difference being that the women are not just willing but eager to join the royal family. It's not assimilation when you volunteer. They all know beforehand what that means. It's disingenuous if any of them pretend later that they only want to "be themselves."


Yes, true.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> The difference being that the women are not just willing but eager to join the royal family. It's not assimilation when you volunteer. They all know beforehand what that means. It's disingenuous if any of them pretend later that they only want to "be themselves."


True, you have to adapt to fit in with them, not the other way round.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I agree with you about her father's side but what about the family on her mother's side? Why weren't there more of them at the wedding and why are they never seen in photos/public with her?
> 
> Racists of all colours aside, isn't Meghan's main problem being accepted that she is too Hollywood, not primarily that she is bi-racial? She seems like your typical vapid woke Hollywood celeb with a penchant for virtue signaling and me me me. Which doesn't seem to go over well when in your majesty's service. I think that she had the potential to be very loved by the British just by marrying lovable Harry but she (and hubby) are squandering the good-will for reasons already pointed out by other posters. Starting with having a weirdly huge celeb studded wedding despite all those family problems on her father's side and the inexplicable lack of family on her mother's. Rather tone-deaf.
> 
> *She just comes across as fake,* with that little girl voice and mannerism shtick when cameras are on. Other clips show that's not the whole story to her. From what I've read of these people, Kate and her whole family got a lot of flack too (Waity Katie etc) in the beginning.
> 
> The BRF are like the Borg but with much better perks. Marry in to it and you must assimilate. You must comply. You won't, you give up your titles and royal perks and get out.



I think a lot of that initial phoniness had to do with wanting to be seen a certain way. I think she was overly eager to show the world she is poised, well-rounded and can hold her own. That first interview she did with Harry, Kate and Will - she clearly let the world know she’s no shrinking wallflower. Fine. But girl, you had NO clue what you were getting yourself into....but you’re clearly learning now. She comes off much more humble now as opposed to before, in my opinion.


----------



## Lubina

What isn't clear is why Meghan has little to no right to privacy, but royal reporters, palace sources and the UK media are very much respecting the privacy of William and  Andrew.

Royal reporters and the UK press are running wild with stories about Meghan's dress, how Meghan she holds her baby, her demanding no photos despite that tons of photos of her were taken by both spectators and professional photographers who were there and everyone is accepting the word of 1 reporter whose story changed.

One man with a camera phone (selfie or not) got too close which made security nervous (has everyone forgotten that Harry's mother was chased to her death by photographers so for all we know he told security to be extra vigilant oh and 2 men just went to jail for branding him a race traitor for marrying her and posted images of killing him). Somehow that morphed into Meghan demanded no photos because 1 reporter said so and she should deal. The no photo issue also wasn't an issue until several days later when what happened? Epstein was arrested.

The US media is talking about Epstein's connection to Andrew, but compared to the number of articles on Meghan's hair, dress and Wimbledon in the UK, UK royal reporters and UK media are rather mute on Epstein's arrest, Andrew sleeping with under age girls and his friendship with Epstein that continued after he was released from jail for solicitation of a minor.
Meghan's dress is disgraceful and she deserves little to no privacy, but Andrew is a-okay and the $1.50 is perfectly fine to support to him and his ex-wife Fergie, who also lives off of tax payers and also borrowed money from Epstein. 

Same with William. His privacy is being respected. He ordered the UK press to shut up about about his "alleged" affair because reporting on it violated his his human rights, not Kate's rights or his children's rights, but his. There are some children separated from their parents living in tents who might need that human rights protection a wee bit more than a philandering husband.
An pedophile and his ex-wife and "alleged" adulterer are worthy of tax payer support, but not that woman who wears a blousy dress or isn't holding her child's head the way others think she should. Mmmkay.

Epstein has requested bail and more of his victims have come forward in the last day or so, so expect the UK press and royal reporters to go defcon 1 on Meghan about what she wears to Wimbledon this weekend and when she meets Beyonce accuse her of being too Hollywood for the royal family, even though her show filmed in Toronto.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Yep, Andrew and William are higher ranking royals.  Rank determines level of protection.  Doesn't mean it's right, but it is how it is.


----------



## jehaga

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I agree with you about her father's side but what about the family on her mother's side? Why weren't there more of them at the wedding and why are they never seen in photos/public with her?
> 
> Racists of all colours aside, isn't Meghan's main problem being accepted that she is too Hollywood, not primarily that she is bi-racial? She seems like your typical vapid woke Hollywood celeb with a penchant for virtue signaling and me me me. Which doesn't seem to go over well when in your majesty's service. I think that she had the potential to be very loved by the British just by marrying lovable Harry but she (and hubby) are squandering the good-will for reasons already pointed out by other posters. Starting with having a weirdly huge celeb studded wedding despite all those family problems on her father's side and the inexplicable lack of family on her mother's. Rather tone-deaf.
> 
> She just comes across as fake, with that little girl voice and mannerism shtick when cameras are on. Other clips show that's not the whole story to her. From what I've read of these people, Kate and her whole family got a lot of flack too (Waity Katie etc) in the beginning.
> 
> The BRF are like the Borg but with much better perks. Marry in to it and you must assimilate. You must comply. You won't, you give up your titles and royal perks and get out.


Spot on!

I liked her quite a lot on “Suits,” but as a royal, photos of her come across a little haughty and smug. Whereas, with Kate, I didn’t care for her much at first and didn’t think she could possibly be queen-worthy (maybe had a little to do with a strange dislike I had of Pippa) but she just appears more and more regal with each new picture.

I hope MM turns all of this around by toeing the line. No one forced her to marry into this venerable institution. It’s a small price to pay to live a life most of us can’t even begin to imagine and to be able to become a historical figure for future generations to read and learn about.


----------



## LibbyRuth

jehaga said:


> Spot on!
> 
> I liked her quite a lot on “Suits,” but as a royal, photos of her come across a little haughty and smug. Whereas, with Kate, I didn’t care for her much at first and didn’t think she could possibly be queen-worthy (maybe had a little to do with a strange dislike I had of Pippa) but she just appears more and more regal with each new picture.
> 
> I hope MM turns all of this around by toeing the line. No one forced her to marry into this venerable institution. It’s a small price to pay to live a life most of us can’t even begin to imagine and to be able to become a historical figure for future generations to read and learn about.



I think that it's quite possible that what you see in Meghan is her adjusting to all the expectations laid on the way she has to behave in public.  It would probably be a more apt comparison to look at pictures of Kate one year into her marriage vs the way she comes across now. Like Meghan, Kate had to grow into her role. She got a little more time since she dated William for so much longer ... not to mention that she grew up in a world where she was groomed to be in the circles they live in now. But I think that early on she also came across as not very comfortable.  When you consider all they have to do right - how to hold a purse, how to sit, where to put their hands when they stand, etc etc etc it's a lot of choreography that does not come naturally at first. 
All that being said - I remember shortly after their wedding when Meghan went out on her first engagement with the Queen and while people did take note that she crossed her legs at one point, the overall consensus was that she was incredibly at ease with the Queen. She's adjusting to the role - it wasn't perfected overnight by Diana or Kate, and it will take Meghan time too.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Can we all stop attacking the Duchess of Sussex now?*
*https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/ce...ll-just-calm-down-over-the-duchess-of-sussex/*

*Personal favorite quotes from the article  -*



> “It’s worth standing back and restating – the British family will now have, at its heart, at its future, a British woman who isn’t white,” the BBC’s former royals correspondent Peter Hunt told us prior to the royal wedding. “That imagery and what it says to people in the UK is a powerful, potent and positive development.” Fast-forward a year and the public and media perception is predictably different. What is more surprising is the level of vitriol that this criticism has now reached – a screeching, acidic and nasty collective trolling that spans both the press and public. Although some of these voices come from white, middle-class men, others are also, perhaps more grimly, from women.





> "The shift began in earnest after Meghan fell pregnant, which is interesting given how many loaded comments were made about her age and ability to have children. Anyway, so Meghan proves herself fertile and bears a child as the right-wing press wanted, but her way of being pregnant somehow started to annoy everyone. A lot was made about how she held her baby bump – “What a narcissist. We get it. You’re pregnant. [...] Meghan Markle is a complete diva,” sniped one Twitter user. Tensions rose again after the couple bucked another royal tradition and decided not to pose for pictures outside the hospital following the birth of their son, Archie. This irked the press once again. “They can't have it both ways,” the royal biographer Penny Junor told _The Sunday Times_. “Either they are totally private, pay for their own house and disappear out of view, or play the game the way it is played.”





> "Then, this week, her bodyguard’s request to a journalist not to take her picture while she watched her friend Serena Williams play at Wimbledon. Her security said the royal attended the match in a “private capacity”, prompting a random TV presenter to brand her behaviour “a joke”. "She wants to have her cake and eat it and it's driving people nuts,” he moaned, referring to the age-old criticism thrown at the royal family when they want an iota of privacy – the taxpayer funds their existence and therefore they are not entitled to the same basic rights as anyone else."





> "The press' new attitude towards Meghan can be attributed to the couple’s decision to reduce their access, which is thought to be rooted in the death of Harry’s mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, who was killed in a road accident. Meghan is thought to have compounded Harry’s coldness to photographers. The problem with shattering this tradition – the nuanced push and pull of royal coverage, which the firm needs to sustain itself and remain relevant – is that the press responds with ill-will and mockery, running stories on the royal family’s alleged extravagance, low intelligence, laziness or diva-like behaviour. The New York Times compared the media response to “the scorned fairy not invited to the princess’s christening in Sleeping Beauty”. A Times journalist said in February that Meghan has no reason to complain. “No one is spying on her in the gym,” he ranted. “No one is listening in on her phone calls.” That’s a low bar indeed."





> If the press’ treatment of the Duchess can be explained, although not justified, it is worth considering the roots of the public’s newfound dislike for her. What prompts someone to publicly question under a picture of a new mother with her child whether “her plan is to look like she’s about to drop her baby” or to say she’s dressed so “sloppily” that she could be mistaken for her “sister-in-law’s nanny”? What does it say about ourselves that we pillory a new mother, royal or otherwise? Part of our consumer culture is based on insecurity – we are fascinated by people that we think are more beautiful, more successful and happier than ourselves – and Meghan and her progressive way of being a woman in the royal family are good outlets for moments of self-doubt and inadequacies.





> Last year, the public deluded themselves into thinking they wanted a modern princess, someone who they felt represented them, but what this vilification shows us is the opposite – perhaps we’re not ready for it. Perhaps what the people really want is a servile woman who keeps her head down and smiles when is appropriate – although not too much, lest she look like she’s courting attention. Of all the unpleasant, racist and sexist high-profile figures currently living in our country, we naturally seem to have reserved our highest anger and upset for a young woman adjusting to motherhood.


----------



## Gabs007

bag-mania said:


> The difference being that the women are not just willing but eager to join the royal family. It's not assimilation when you volunteer. They all know beforehand what that means. It's disingenuous if any of them pretend later that they only want to "be themselves."



Most of them were nobodies before the married in, not quite the case with M, is it? I think she made a choice to be with the guy she loves and she will do her part for the firm, but not be assimilated.  She isn't just an arm piece or somebody willing to give birth to heirs just for a title. The racist abuse was actually horrendous


----------



## Tivo

hellosunshine said:


> *Can we all stop attacking the Duchess of Sussex now?*
> *https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/ce...ll-just-calm-down-over-the-duchess-of-sussex/*
> 
> *Personal favorite quotes from the article  -*


I 100% agree with the part about the pregnancy. Some just knew she was gonna have a hard time getting pregnant. Some were ready and waiting with the “old egg” comments. Lol


----------



## Flatsy

Lubina said:


> One man with a camera phone (selfie or not) got too close which made security nervous (has everyone forgotten that Harry's mother was chased to her death by photographers so for all we know he told security to be extra vigilant oh and 2 men just went to jail for branding him a race traitor for marrying her and posted images of killing him). Somehow that morphed into Meghan demanded no photos because 1 reporter said so and she should deal.


The Wimbledon controversy started with a woman recounting her experience in The Telegraph of being told by Meghan's PPO to stop taking photographs, even though she was quite a distance away from Meghan and was taking photos of Serena Williams playing.  Meghan's stans have decided she was lying and are now pretending she does not exist, but reality is not dictated by Meghan's stans.  

The photos of *another* person approached by Meghan's PPO was corroboration that her PPO was, in fact, telling spectators to stop taking photos.  There may have been even more people who were approached by the PPO and didn't feel the need to tell the media about it.  But there are at least TWO.  (That we know of.)

As for Prince Andrew and Prince William and the press coverage they supposedly have not gotten:
1) We've all seen the coverage, so telling us it doesn't exist is hard to pull off.  The same royal watchers who follow Meghan are fully acquainted with the details of the Rose Hanbury story, so it's not well hidden.
2) The media does have to be more careful about what they write about Prince William and Prince Andrew's situations because every word they write is a potential libel lawsuit.  William never complained about his human rights being violated, so I don't know where you got that from.  He did have his lawyer immediately notify the papers that accusing him of conducting an affair would be libelous.  If the papers had proof of the affair they would have gone ahead and ignored the lawyers, but obviously they didn't.

And accusing the Queen's son of being a criminal pedophile?  Yeah, you gotta come correct if you are going to go there.  You don't even dip a toe into that one without the facts and there are precious few real facts at this point.  

Meghan's easy because writing an article about whether her jeans were dressy enough for the occasion or how people on social media criticized how she held her baby isn't in any way actionable and never will be.  That's tabloid bread and butter.  

Speaking for myself, even though I've seen many, many stories on Epstein while scrolling through The Daily Mail, I have yet to click on any of them.  I don't want to read icky stories about middle-aged pedophiles.  I'm glad he was arrested, but reading the disgusting details is not my idea of entertainment.

As for Meghan, I thought the jeans story was ridiculous and excessive (there's no dress code outside of the Royal Box and the real Wimbledon story had been flogged to death at that point) and I thought the baby-holding story in the Daily Mail was really, really mean and not justifiable in any way.   That story may actually have earned her some sympathy and maybe might turn the tide a little bit for her.  Even Piers Morgan said it was too mean.


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> *Can we all stop attacking the Duchess of Sussex now?*
> *https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/ce...ll-just-calm-down-over-the-duchess-of-sussex/*
> 
> *Personal favorite quotes from the article  -*



I think many are forgetting that Kate and even her family went through the same exact thing. All the comments about “waity katie” are not much different than the ones calling Meghan a social climber. The difference now is that Meghan ( the newbie) is constantly being compared to Kate ( who is now a veteran). Kate didn’t have to deal with that aspect because there was no one else in the family to compare her to. I agree with the previous posters that Meghan has made some missteps, perhaps in her efforts to avoid assimilating, but she will learn. It’ll just take time. Kate was lucky that she had been raised in these circles and had the support of her family.  Until Meghan really learns the ropes, she’s fair game for the media. Just like Kate was.


----------



## Lubina

Flatsy said:


> The Wimbledon controversy started with a woman recounting her experience in The Telegraph of being told by Meghan's PPO to stop taking photographs, even though she was quite a distance away from Meghan and was taking photos of Serena Williams playing.  Meghan's stans have decided she was lying and are now pretending she does not exist, but reality is not dictated by Meghan's stans.
> 
> The photos of *another* person approached by Meghan's PPO was corroboration that her PPO was, in fact, telling spectators to stop taking photos.  There may have been even more people who were approached by the PPO and didn't feel the need to tell the media about it.  But there are at least TWO.  (That we know of.)
> 
> As for Prince Andrew and Prince William and the press coverage they supposedly have not gotten:
> 1) We've all seen the coverage, so telling us it doesn't exist is hard to pull off.  The same royal watchers who follow Meghan are fully acquainted with the details of the Rose Hanbury story, so it's not well hidden.
> 2) The media does have to be more careful about what they write about Prince William and Prince Andrew's situations because every word they write is a potential libel lawsuit.  William never complained about his human rights being violated, so I don't know where you got that from.  He did have his lawyer immediately notify the papers that accusing him of conducting an affair would be libelous.  If the papers had proof of the affair they would have gone ahead and ignored the lawyers, but obviously they didn't.
> 
> And accusing the Queen's son of being a criminal pedophile?  Yeah, you gotta come correct if you are going to go there.  You don't even dip a toe into that one without the facts and there are precious few real facts at this point.
> 
> 
> Meghan's easy because writing an article about whether her jeans were dressy enough for the occasion or how people on social media criticized how she held her baby isn't in any way actionable and never will be.  That's tabloid bread and butter.
> 
> Speaking for myself, even though I've seen many, many stories on Epstein while scrolling through The Daily Mail, I have yet to click on any of them.  I don't want to read icky stories about middle-aged pedophiles.  I'm glad he was arrested, but reading the disgusting details is not my idea of entertainment.
> 
> As for Meghan, I thought the jeans story was ridiculous and excessive (there's no dress code outside of the Royal Box and the real Wimbledon story had been flogged to death at that point) and I thought the baby-holding story in the Daily Mail was really, really mean and not justifiable in any way.   That story may actually have earned her some sympathy and maybe might turn the tide a little bit for her.  Even Piers Morgan said it was too mean.



I didn't accuse Fergie of living off of tax payers and taking money from a convicted pedophile. She does and she did take money from Epstein and knew him and his girlfriend/wrangler. She also was on his plane's manifest a few times. That seems to be okay and not newsworthy.

I didn't accuse Andrew of consorting with underage girls or befriending a pedophile. His victims did. The first time around the UK press actually talked about it. Now they are relatively silent, so that seems to be okay and not newsworthy,
Meghan holding Archie with her elbow at 35 rather than 40 degrees is breaking news.

Being birthed by Elizabeth or Diana does not make a person pure or immune from scrutiny or criminal behavior. It facilitates the notion that they are untouchable. It  doesn't help that royal reporters don't actually report. They gossip because they want clicks which translates to money and continue whatever access they can get and it is easier to write a story about Meghan's dress or her nutty half-sister than delve into Andrew's shady business dealings.

It's ok tear down and nitpick Harry's wife/ Archie's mom and not report on anyone else in the family, specifically fingers in ears about Andrew, because his mother is the queen? The King of Belgium was just sued in court for paternity.  It's 2019 not 1619.

It's fine to read the opinion of non-royals who make their living off of citing sources that whip people into a frenzy because Meghan blinked. Skip the below and don't google image Prince Andrew and Epstein or any of the many stories the US and Canada are running about them.

https://www.celebitchy.com/627581/j...ew_to_lure_even_more_girls_women_to_his_home/

Excerpt:

*Link: Jeffrey Epstein used Prince Andrew to lure even more girls & women to his home*

July 12, 2019
By Kaiser

"I have a feeling that the Duke of York’s years-long connection to Jeffrey Epstein will play out in the media much the same way Prince William’s alleged affair with Rose Hanbury played out in the British media. Which is to say, the British media will largely ignore the giant, smelly elephant in the room – all while continuing to attack the Duchess of Sussex for breathing – and the story will live on social media and partly through the American media. To be fair, I think the American media will do a much better job of reporting on Prince Andrew’s connection to Epstein than they did with the Rose Hanbury situation, but that’s because they’re very different scandals. Epstein is due in court on Monday for a bail hearing, and we continue to learn more about his years-long association and friendship with the Duke of York. The Daily Beast’s Tom Sykes had a lengthy (paywalled) story about why the two gross losers came together, and how Epstein basically used Andrew to lure young girls to his home, and then… well, you get it.  You can read the full story here. Some highlights:

*Why Andrew & Epstein first got together:* Epstein was able to loan Andrew the jet-set lifestyle he always craved. It is a matter of public record that Andrew holidayed with Epstein in Thailand and St. Tropez. It was also on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands where alleged underage..."


----------



## mdcx

Regards Sally Jones who wrote an article about her experience with Meghan's "no photos" rule at Wimbledon, she is a respected former BBC journalist, not some random anti-Meghanite.
Similarly with Hasan Hasanov who was accused of taking a photo of Meghan. He thought security didn't like him taking a selfie with shirtless tennis players in the background, and didn't even realise that Meghan was there until days later when it became a news story.

Most of us who read here live in multi-cultural communities if not multi-cultural families. Racism has zero to do with my views on some of Meghan's behaviour.
I wish her the best and hope that she allows Kate (or someone!) to give her some solid guidance, because she needs it.


----------



## White Orchid

Gabs007 said:


> Telegraph and Daily Mail are notoriously right wing, M isn't, so you should not be surprised if they print stories that show a slight bias...


Slight, lol?


----------



## hellosunshine

*Harry and Meghan's wedding and the birth of Prince Louis helped secure a £3.5m rise in sales of official royal-themed merchandise in 2018-19*
https://news.sky.com/story/royal-wedding-and-baby-bolster-record-official-souvenir-sales-11761464




_Harry and Meghan's wedding and the birth of Prince Louis helped secure record sales of official royal-themed merchandise._




> The Royal Collection Trust netted £21.7m in 2018-19 - a hike of £3.5m from £18.2m the previous year, its annual report shows. Retail sales were bolstered by official souvenirs celebrating royal events, including commemorative china to mark the *marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex*, the arrival of *William and Kate's third child* and the Prince of Wales' 70th birthday. Harry and Meghan's wedding range, which featured a gold monogram of the couple's initials side-by-side, tied together with a white ribbon and topped by a coronet, included a tankard for £39 and a plate at £49.



_Also, worth noting that Harry & Meghan's wedding secured a £4.29m rise in admissions at Windsor and Frogmore in 2018-19 accounting for a 57% increase in admissions across all Royal venues. Frogmore Cottage renovations were 2.4 million, so they've more than covered their expenditures._


----------



## Flatsy

mdcx said:


> Regards Sally Jones who wrote an article about her experience with Meghan's "no photos" rule at Wimbledon, she is a respected former BBC journalist, not some random anti-Meghanite.
> Similarly with Hasan Hasanov who was accused of taking a photo of Meghan. He thought security didn't like him taking a selfie with shirtless tennis players in the background, and didn't even realise that Meghan was there until days later when it became a news story.


Sally Jones certainly did not come across like a liar or a dedicated Meghan hater when she talked about what happened on TV.

I didn't realize the selfie man's identity had been revealed.  I just looked up his name.  He doesn't come across like someone who has any particular interest in Meghan either.  He was taking a selfie with the court in the background to gloat to his wife, who had chosen not to come.

Per this: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-confronted-meghan-markles-bodyguard-17996813 Meghan's PPO did not say to him, "Please don't get so close" or "Please step back".  He said "*Please give them some privacy*."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

anitalilac said:


> I pop in for the pics, no pics , read the comment, *shake my head *and get out...



I just did the bold for the ones that replied to my comment and laugh at their childishness.


----------



## mdcx

Welltraveled! said:


> I just did the bold for the ones that replied to my comment and laugh at their childishness.


You may wish to familiarise yourself with the Terms of Service and Rules for the site, in particular regarding insulting other posters:
https://forum.purseblog.com/help/terms


----------



## Swanky

The incessant reporting and complaining about posts in this thread is making me wanna throw my laptop in the pool!! ughhhhhhhh
If you find yourself getting upset, please consider a different outlet, or add members to Ignore User list, stop reading this thread, etc. . . 
This thread needs to stay on topic please; it's not about other royals, politics, or members.
Stay respectful or you'll be warned, and eventually possibly banned.  
On average I'd surmise there's a dozen reports about a post or posts daily in this thread alone.
Good grief just stahhhhhp,  I'm pleading.


----------



## Grande Latte

Meghan is a very intelligent, modern, independent woman. Harry married her knowing/ embracing her differences. He didn't marry her so she could be a Stepford wife. Yes, there are things that she does which I don't like personally, but overall she's a wild card, and I love ppl making adventurous choices in life. 

Camp Meghan!


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> Sally Jones certainly did not come across like a liar or a dedicated Meghan hater when she talked about what happened on TV.
> 
> I didn't realize the selfie man's identity had been revealed.  I just looked up his name.  He doesn't come across like someone who has any particular interest in Meghan either.  He was taking a selfie with the court in the background to gloat to his wife, who had chosen not to come.
> 
> Per this: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-confronted-meghan-markles-bodyguard-17996813 Meghan's PPO did not say to him, "Please don't get so close" or "Please step back".  He said "*Please give them some privacy*."



Well reading Sally Jones in the Daily Man and the Telegraph May seem suspicious. Her story changes, in one tabloid she is sitting in the same row as Meghan and in another she states she is sitting behind Meghan, not knowing your sit has me questioning it, but who knows maybe she was so upset she forgot where she is sitting.

Also, the man spoke to the Daily Mail, I thought he was taking a selfie. I didn’t know Roger was on Serena’s court. I’m surprised no pap pictures. But to each their own, some will believe it because it supports the negative perception of Meghan they already have.


----------



## myown

Clearblueskies said:


> You’re saying the assistant came up with the whole idea!?  Yeah right


seems like you don't really know what a personal assistant does


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> *Can we all stop attacking the Duchess of Sussex now?*
> *https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/ce...ll-just-calm-down-over-the-duchess-of-sussex/*
> 
> *Personal favorite quotes from the article  -*


_“They can't have it both ways,” the royal biographer Penny Junor told The Sunday Times. “Either they are totally private, pay for their own house and disappear out of view, or play the game the way it is played.”_

I truely don't think they could disappear from the spotlight.
image Harry and Meghan announce to step back from the BRF, that Harry won't engage anymore, etc.
the press would be all over the place. try to find out where they are going to live and hunt them.
IMO they cannot step back.


----------



## myown

caramelize126 said:


> I think many are forgetting that Kate and even her family went through the same exact thing. All the comments about “waity katie” are not much different than the ones calling Meghan a social climber. The difference now is that Meghan ( the newbie) is constantly being compared to Kate ( who is now a veteran). Kate didn’t have to deal with that aspect because there was no one else in the family to compare her to. I agree with the previous posters that Meghan has made some missteps, perhaps in her efforts to avoid assimilating, but she will learn. It’ll just take time. Kate was lucky that she had been raised in these circles and had the support of her family.  Until Meghan really learns the ropes, she’s fair game for the media. Just like Kate was.


both Kate and Meghan got/get compared to Diana. but someone everyone decided that Kate does not *try* to be like Diana, but Meghan is trying to copy Diana. And Kate. And the Queen. 
the press stopped to compare Kate to Diana. They are now that Harry is like Diana and Meghan trying to get on that


----------



## minababe

I think its a Problem of our Society These days.
just because you are a public Person, actor, singer, royal, rich and famous you have to live with that? just because you are rich and have a good life? come on thats ridicilous and shows pretty much how envy some People are in their hearts.


----------



## minababe

myown said:


> both Kate and Meghan got/get compared to Diana. but someone everyone decided that Kate does not *try* to be like Diana, but Meghan is trying to copy Diana. And Kate. And the Queen.
> the press stopped to compare Kate to Diana. They are now that Harry is like Diana and Meghan trying to get on that



thats so funny because kate is the one who copies her Outfits, jewellery etc. sometimes I think it's a bit too much because it's too obvious.
meghan got that comparison because of her charity heart. the difference is that meghan did that her whole life, not since she met Harry.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Flatsy said:


> The Wimbledon controversy started with a woman recounting her experience in The Telegraph of being told by Meghan's PPO to stop taking photographs, even though she was quite a distance away from Meghan and was taking photos of Serena Williams playing.  Meghan's stans have decided she was lying and are now pretending she does not exist, but reality is not dictated by Meghan's stans.
> 
> The photos of *another* person approached by Meghan's PPO was corroboration that her PPO was, in fact, telling spectators to stop taking photos.  There may have been even more people who were approached by the PPO and didn't feel the need to tell the media about it.  But there are at least TWO.  (That we know of.)
> 
> As for Prince Andrew and Prince William and the press coverage they supposedly have not gotten:
> 1) We've all seen the coverage, so telling us it doesn't exist is hard to pull off.  The same royal watchers who follow Meghan are fully acquainted with the details of the Rose Hanbury story, so it's not well hidden.
> 2) The media does have to be more careful about what they write about Prince William and Prince Andrew's situations because every word they write is a potential libel lawsuit.  William never complained about his human rights being violated, so I don't know where you got that from.  He did have his lawyer immediately notify the papers that accusing him of conducting an affair would be libelous.  If the papers had proof of the affair they would have gone ahead and ignored the lawyers, but obviously they didn't.
> 
> And accusing the Queen's son of being a criminal pedophile?  Yeah, you gotta come correct if you are going to go there.  You don't even dip a toe into that one without the facts and there are precious few real facts at this point.
> 
> Meghan's easy because writing an article about whether her jeans were dressy enough for the occasion or how people on social media criticized how she held her baby isn't in any way actionable and never will be.  That's tabloid bread and butter.
> 
> Speaking for myself, even though I've seen many, many stories on Epstein while scrolling through The Daily Mail, I have yet to click on any of them.  I don't want to read icky stories about middle-aged pedophiles.  I'm glad he was arrested, but reading the disgusting details is not my idea of entertainment.
> 
> As for Meghan, I thought the jeans story was ridiculous and excessive (there's no dress code outside of the Royal Box and the real Wimbledon story had been flogged to death at that point) and I thought the baby-holding story in the Daily Mail was really, really mean and not justifiable in any way.   That story may actually have earned her some sympathy and maybe might turn the tide a little bit for her.  Even Piers Morgan said it was too mean.


Well, if Piers says it's too mean...  I've seen some of what he has to say about Meghan and I think he really should find himself a forum somewhere like the rest of us and post about his hurt little feebings in private, not in tabloids etc. It's ridiculous. What right to Meghan's personal friendship does he have? He must have been ghosted by lots of other people through his life, but Meghan ditching him somehow was the last straw he needs to blabber on and on about every chance he gets? How many times did they meet? Two? Pathetic. But lucrative...


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

minababe said:


> thats so funny because kate is the one who copies her Outfits, jewellery etc. sometimes I think it's a bit too much because it's too obvious.
> meghan got that comparison because of her charity heart. the difference is that meghan did that her whole life, not since she met Harry.


I think, that had Kate done that too early, she would have been similarily criticised for it. Kate and William have been together for many years and she is going to be queen so is well within her right now to channel the RBF greats. It's different. Meghan wants too much too soon it seems.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

All this hullabaloo is nonsense.  Meghan is going to settle in just fine and all this silliness about her will be forgotten.  How many people hated Camilla because she was the third person in Charles and Diana's marriage?  Kate had years of public scrutiny before she and William married.  

Meghan was a grown, fully formed woman when she met Harry, and I'm sure her new life is challenging to say the least.  What a shame so many are hell bent on her failing.


----------



## doni

minababe said:


> I think its a Problem of our Society These days.
> s.


Are you serious? Are you aware of how much royals have been mocked and scrutinized through history, also as to their private and sexual lives? Some of the stuff that XVIII and XIX century papers published would be deemed utterly shocking nowadays...


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> seems like you don't really know what a personal assistant does


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Lubina said:


> I didn't accuse Fergie of living off of tax payers and taking money from a convicted pedophile. She does and she did take money from Epstein and knew him and his girlfriend/wrangler. She also was on his plane's manifest a few times. That seems to be okay and not newsworthy.
> 
> I didn't accuse Andrew of consorting with underage girls or befriending a pedophile. His victims did. The first time around the UK press actually talked about it. Now they are relatively silent, so that seems to be okay and not newsworthy,
> Meghan holding Archie with her elbow at 35 rather than 40 degrees is breaking news.
> 
> Being birthed by Elizabeth or Diana does not make a person pure or immune from scrutiny or criminal behavior. It facilitates the notion that they are untouchable. It  doesn't help that royal reporters don't actually report. They gossip because they want clicks which translates to money and continue whatever access they can get and it is easier to write a story about Meghan's dress or her nutty half-sister than delve into Andrew's shady business dealings.
> 
> It's ok tear down and nitpick Harry's wife/ Archie's mom and not report on anyone else in the family, specifically fingers in ears about Andrew, because his mother is the queen? The King of Belgium was just sued in court for paternity.  It's 2019 not 1619.
> 
> It's fine to read the opinion of non-royals who make their living off of citing sources that whip people into a frenzy because Meghan blinked. Skip the below and don't google image Prince Andrew and Epstein or any of the many stories the US and Canada are running about them.
> 
> https://www.celebitchy.com/627581/j...ew_to_lure_even_more_girls_women_to_his_home/
> 
> Excerpt:
> 
> *Link: Jeffrey Epstein used Prince Andrew to lure even more girls & women to his home*
> 
> July 12, 2019
> By Kaiser
> 
> "I have a feeling that the Duke of York’s years-long connection to Jeffrey Epstein will play out in the media much the same way Prince William’s alleged affair with Rose Hanbury played out in the British media. Which is to say, the British media will largely ignore the giant, smelly elephant in the room – all while continuing to attack the Duchess of Sussex for breathing – and the story will live on social media and partly through the American media. To be fair, I think the American media will do a much better job of reporting on Prince Andrew’s connection to Epstein than they did with the Rose Hanbury situation, but that’s because they’re very different scandals. Epstein is due in court on Monday for a bail hearing, and we continue to learn more about his years-long association and friendship with the Duke of York. The Daily Beast’s Tom Sykes had a lengthy (paywalled) story about why the two gross losers came together, and how Epstein basically used Andrew to lure young girls to his home, and then… well, you get it.  You can read the full story here. Some highlights:
> 
> *Why Andrew & Epstein first got together:* Epstein was able to loan Andrew the jet-set lifestyle he always craved. It is a matter of public record that Andrew holidayed with Epstein in Thailand and St. Tropez. It was also on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands where alleged underage..."


A.b.s.o.l.u.t.e.l.y. Celebitchy is _the_ premier go to for unbiased reporting and opinions   

Others here have explained much better the legal implications of accusing others publicly of serious crimes, specifically people with money and contacts. The Epstein case, unless "disappeared" like last time, is going to be huge and it's a totally different matter. I don't know this of course, but I doubt media is holding back and using Meghan to do it. They are holding back on the Epstein case to avoid lawsuits for libel. When and if the damns are opened on that one, Meghan will be able to enjoy some media down time for weeks, maybe even months.

The Epstein case seems so b*y higher up connected/corrupted who knows how it will go. There are a lot of more people with a lot of insight in to it on Twitter, Youtube and various news sites on the left, middle and right who all have forums probably much more suited to discuss the case in detail on than on a luxury fashion forum.

It's not fair, but Kate, her mom, Pippa, Diana, Fergie all had to suffer through this relentless scutinising. It's ugly but it goes with the territory. They can opt out, nobody is forcing them to live that kind of public life. Btw, wasn't Kate and Pippa's mom media's poster woman for social climbers at the time?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

minababe said:


> I think its a Problem of our Society These days.
> just because you are a public Person, actor, singer, royal, rich and famous you have to live with that? just because you are rich and have a good life? come on thats ridicilous and shows pretty much how envy some People are in their hearts.


There are plenty of celebs and public figures who go under the radar at will. 

Somebody wrote they didn't think Harry and Meghan would be let off the scutinising if they opted out but I think they would be eventually. Not at first, of course there'd be massive media coverage. But in time and depending on themselves, people wouldn't be as interested anymore although they'll probably always have media value.

Also, a royal is not the same as a general celeb. A royal is intrinsically tied to the country they are representing and which pays for them to do so. Celebs may be owned by industries and the market, but it's not comparable.


----------



## mdcx

I thought Meghan looked appropriate at Wimbledon today, not the most stylish elegant person there, but appropriate. 
Obviously there was some "guidance" given, including that she sit between Kate and Pippa to minimise any chance of her appearing to be left out. How she appeared today was basically the standard for how she should appear at these things - dressed for the occasion, reasonably humble and gracious, making polite conversation, not drawing attention to herself. Methinks she got a bit of a dressing down from her advisors after last time.
Meghan's skirt:


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> I thought Meghan looked appropriate at Wimbledon today, not the most stylish elegant person there, but appropriate.
> Obviously there was some "guidance" given, including that she sit between Kate and Pippa to minimise any chance of her appearing to be left out. How she appeared today was basically the standard for how she should appear at these things - dressed for the occasion, reasonably humble and gracious, making polite conversation, not drawing attention to herself. Methinks she got a bit of a dressing down from her advisors after last time.
> Meghan's skirt:
> View attachment 4488530


Read your post, then checked out the pix on DM. Yes, a HUGE improvement. Go, Meghan! And even Pippa looked not too bad!


----------



## hellosunshine

*Duchess of Sussex on Day 12 of Wimbledon Championships --*


----------



## hellosunshine

More Photos..


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> thats so funny because kate is the one who copies her Outfits, jewellery etc. sometimes I think it's a bit too much because it's too obvious.
> meghan got that comparison because of her charity heart. the difference is that meghan did that her whole life, not since she met Harry.


I totally agree! but Kate gets praised and Meghan torn apart


----------



## Swanky

She's a cutie!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I so envy her ability and willingness to wear white bottoms. Especially after just having a baby.


----------



## TC1

I read that the earrings Kate wore to Archie's christening were the ones Diana wore to Harry's christening..I would have thought that Meghan would have worn something of that relevance..not Kate. Unless Meghan doesn't have the access to all the jewels Kate does.
Meghan looks great in this last Wimbledon outfit.


----------



## A1aGypsy

TC1 said:


> I read that the earrings Kate wore to Archie's christening were the ones Diana wore to Harry's christening..I would have thought that Meghan would have worn something of that relevance..not Kate. Unless Meghan doesn't have the access to all the jewels Kate does.
> Meghan looks great in this last Wimbledon outfit.



I think the Collingwood pearls were gifted to Kate before Meghan entered the picture.  They were Diana’s and she wore them a lot. They were a part of her collection not on loan.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I believe that Meghan wore the earrings that were a gift for her wedding, so she was wearing something of significance too.


----------



## MaxDexter

Love Meghan's BOSS skirt.


----------



## hellosunshine

This is curious but why is Pippa walking in with the royals?


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> This is curious but why is Pippa walking in with the royals?
> 
> View attachment 4488729
> 
> View attachment 4488730


A guest of her sister?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

I didn't like what either of them wore.  Kate's dress is way too snug and form fitting, especially for a sporting event and Meghan should not be wearing a big pleated skirt at this point.  Pippa looked better than either of them and that isn't saying much since she was wearing granny's bedspread.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I didn't like what either of them wore.  Kate's dress is way too snug and form fitting, especially for a sporting event and Meghan should not be wearing a big pleated skirt at this point.  Pippa looked better than either of them and that isn't saying much since she was wearing granny's bedspread.


Ha ha granny's bedspread!
Agree with you on Catherine's dress, even though it has short sleeves it didn't seem summery for Wimbledon. She's worn better. Looked more business like to me.


----------



## Encore Hermes

Love her outfit and looks comfortable!  t:up


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that Meghan was very smart in the skirt she chose. It looks comfortable, and with the cut you can't really tell what is the shape of the skirt and what is her shape.  The darts on Kate's dress are unfortunate over her chest.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> I thought Meghan looked appropriate at Wimbledon today, not the most stylish elegant person there, but appropriate.
> Obviously there was some "guidance" given, including that she sit between Kate and Pippa to minimise any chance of her appearing to be left out. How she appeared today was basically the standard for how she should appear at these things - dressed for the occasion, reasonably humble and gracious, making polite conversation, not drawing attention to herself. Methinks she got a bit of a dressing down from her advisors after last time.
> Meghan's skirt:
> View attachment 4488530


Checked DM and that was a brilliant photo-op for them all. Well played


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I don't know why you guys don't like Pippa? Isn't she keeping pretty quiet these days? I thought she was really pretty and wore the best outfit of the three. 

Pippa was obviously there as Kate's guest (sister, maid of honour etc). I'd think if Meghan's mom was there, she'd be sitting in the royal box as well, as she is also family? I suspect this was organised to support Meghan to balance out the bad press from the other day.


----------



## Hobbsy

doni said:


> Are you serious? Are you aware of how much royals have been mocked and scrutinized through history, also as to their private and sexual lives? Some of the stuff that XVIII and XIX century papers published would be deemed utterly shocking nowadays...


Well, yeah! Back then they were still marrying their siblings and cousins!


----------



## bisbee

gracekelly said:


> I didn't like what either of them wore.  Kate's dress is way too snug and form fitting, especially for a sporting event and Meghan should not be wearing a big pleated skirt at this point.  Pippa looked better than either of them and that isn't saying much since she was wearing granny's bedspread.


Meghan is carrying baby weight 9 weeks after giving birth...she isn’t trying to hide it.  I think she looks great.


----------



## chaneljewel

I think Meghan looks great too.  The skirt is truly her style...not necessarily mine...but appropriate for her.  I’m not a fan of Kate’s, or at least the fit of the dress on her body.  Pippa’s dress is summery...again, not my style but ok for the occasion.  I like all three ladies. I enjoy seeing their clothes, shoes, bags, jewelry and children, and even the lives they live which are so unlike mine.   I don’t really know them on a personal level...just how society and media portray them so try hard not to be so critical or judgmental.  Yes, each knew she’d be in the limelight, but they’re still real women with feelings.  I know everyone won’t agree with this, but that’s ok too.  That’s what makes each of us unique.


----------



## White Orchid

gracekelly said:


> I didn't like what either of them wore.  Kate's dress is way too snug and form fitting, especially for a sporting event and Meghan should not be wearing a big pleated skirt at this point.  Pippa looked better than either of them and that isn't saying much since she was wearing granny's bedspread.


All of this.  Meghan’s outfit is a just huge no for me.  She looks dowdy and I hate that high-waisted skirt.  Reminds me of how some old men pull up their trousers too high lol.  And Kate, whilst the colour is very nice, is just too tight and accentuates her total lack of curves and boxy waistline.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

White Orchid said:


> All of this.  Meghan’s outfit is a just huge no for me.  She looks dowdy and I hate that high-waisted skirt.  Reminds me of how some old men pull up their trousers too high lol.  And Kate, whilst the colour is very nice, is just too tight and accentuates her total lack of curves and boxy waistline.


That made me laugh, Meghan does have kind of a matronly figure currently but I don't know about the old rotund men in trousers thing 

I don't think the skirt fits well either, especially not with a wide shirt tucked in, but I do think she should be commended for carrying her post baby tummy with pride. 

But let's not get too nice since this is after all a gossip forum; both she and Kate probably only show off their post baby tummies for PR, to seem more relateable and win good-will from the plebs


----------



## Jayne1

Hobbsy said:


> Well, yeah! Back then they were still marrying their siblings and cousins!


Not that long ago...


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't know why you guys don't like Pippa? Isn't she keeping pretty quiet these days? I thought she was really pretty and wore the best outfit of the three.
> 
> Pippa was obviously there as Kate's guest (sister, maid of honour etc). I'd think if Meghan's mom was there, she'd be sitting in the royal box as well, as she is also family? I suspect this was organised to support Meghan to balance out the bad press from the other day.


I don't get the dislike of pippa either.  all I think about when I think of her is her butt when she was maid of honor


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I don't get the dislike of pippa either.  all I think about when I think of her is her butt when she was maid of honor


   I don't think you're alone with that thought.


----------



## Tivo

There just doesn’t seem to be any warmth between Kate and Meghan at all.
Both outfits are horrible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

I believe Pippa and Kate already had plans to attend the final together in the Royal Box and after the situation with Meghan's last appearance at Wimbledon, higher ups felt that sandwiching an appropriately dressed and behaved Meghan between the two sisters might help her PR.
Pippa and Kate would go along with it because they seem rather nice and they know which side their bread is buttered on.


----------



## Hobbsy

Jayne1 said:


> Not that long ago...


No, it hasn't been long at all.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I like Kate's dress - not the darts - but her dress is cute.  I LOVE Meghan's skirt; it's something I would wear with a tank top.  As for Pippa's dress........well......my momma thought it was cute.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I don't get the dislike of pippa either.  all I think about when I think of her is her butt when she was maid of honor


You know how Sarah Burton (for McQueen) explained the structure of Kate's wedding dress and how she made it?  Kate is so thin so Burton padded the hips and bust to give Kate the shape she needed to carry off such a wedding gown.

Well, we've all see Pippas's butt in her day to day outings, especially because the press likes to photograph it... and we can see she has no butt.

Sarah Burton also did Pippa's maid of honour dress for the wedding. She had a lovely shaped butt for that day.

See where I'm going here?

It's only my opinion, but it explains why she had a shapely rear one time and never again.


----------



## anitalilac

mdcx said:


> I thought Meghan looked appropriate at Wimbledon today, not the most stylish elegant person there, but appropriate.
> Obviously there was some "guidance" given, including that she sit between Kate and Pippa to minimise any chance of her appearing to be left out. How she appeared today was basically the standard for how she should appear at these things - dressed for the occasion, reasonably humble and gracious, making polite conversation, not drawing attention to herself. Methinks she got a bit of a dressing down from her advisors after last time.
> Meghan's skirt:
> View attachment 4488530


I'm not a big fan with her style , except her shoes but I really like  this skirt! If anyone can help suggest a high street version that would be great.


----------



## White Orchid

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't think you're alone with that thought.


She’ll forever be known as the lass with the taut butt


----------



## ccbaggirl89

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't know why you guys don't like Pippa? Isn't she keeping pretty quiet these days? I thought she was really pretty and wore the best outfit of the three.
> 
> Pippa was obviously there as Kate's guest (sister, maid of honour etc). I'd think if Meghan's mom was there, she'd be sitting in the royal box as well, as she is also family? I suspect this was organised to support Meghan to balance out the bad press from the other day.


Ditto. I thought Pippa looked the best of the three ladies.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> You know how Sarah Burton (for McQueen) explained the structure of Kate's wedding dress and how she made it?  Kate is so thin so Burton padded the hips and bust to give Kate the shape she needed to carry off such a wedding gown.
> 
> Well, we've all see Pippas's butt in her day to day outings, especially because the press likes to photograph it... and we can see she has no butt.
> 
> Sarah Burton also did Pippa's maid of honour dress for the wedding. She had a lovely shaped butt for that day.
> 
> See where I'm going here?
> 
> It's only my opinion, but it explains why she had a shapely rear one time and never again.


yes, I've heard her butt may have been padded but as I recall at the time, people didn't know that and everyone was noticing her nice butt


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the European premiere of The Lion King


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Fally420

Morgan R said:


> Attending the European premiere of The Lion King
> 
> View attachment 4489506
> View attachment 4489504
> View attachment 4489505


Don't like the fitting in the bust area, but overall a nice look.


----------



## hellosunshine

Beyonce & Meghan have finally met.


----------



## hellosunshine

For anyone interested in the fashion details bit - she's wearing :

Jason Wu Mesh Panel Flared Dress
Gucci Broadway Clutch
Aquazzura Portrait of a Lady Sling Backs
Nikos Koulis 18k Oui Diamond & Black Enamel Stud Earrings


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

At first I liked her dress, then I saw the front and feel it should have been a size larger (her chest is being squished). But overall the dress and shoes are really nice. And Harry looks dapper!


----------



## Sharont2305

Wow


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Wow


Horrible dress


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Horrible dress


I know, I was wowing the thigh reveal,


----------



## mdcx

I would guess there were a few "discussions" at the Palace about what Meghan would wear to the premiere.
Meghan's own personal style would probably be closer to what Beyonce wore - sexy, boobs, glitter, slits.
I would think the very sober black dress with the squashed boobs was a compromise on all fronts.
My opinion - Meghan is still in the dog house over Wimbledon #1 so is being agreeable-ish about her dress.


----------



## DeMonica

mdcx said:


> I would guess there were a few "discussions" at the Palace about what Meghan would wear to the premiere.
> Meghan's own personal style would probably be closer to what Beyonce wore - sexy, boobs, glitter, slits.
> I would think the very sober black dress with the squashed boobs was a compromise on all fronts.
> My opinion - Meghan is still in the dog house over Wimbledon #1 so is being agreeable-ish about her dress.


I disagree. I think Meghan's taste is better than B's. I like the style of the dress, not necessarily the fit, and the Aquazzura shoes are dreamy as always.


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> I would guess there were a few "discussions" at the Palace about what Meghan would wear to the premiere.
> Meghan's own personal style would probably be closer to what Beyonce wore - sexy, boobs, glitter, slits.
> I would think the very sober black dress with the squashed boobs was a compromise on all fronts.
> My opinion - Meghan is still in the dog house over Wimbledon #1 so is being agreeable-ish about her dress.



Meghan has never worn any of that, check her style thread. Her style has always been minimalist.

She’s never had boobs, so her squashed boobs is from getting used to her body after a baby, but good job Mom shaming.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

buffym said:


> Meghan has never worn any of that, check her style thread. Her style has always been minimalist.
> 
> She’s never had boobs, so her squashed boobs is from getting used to her body after a baby, but good job Mom shaming.



This. 100%


----------



## hellosunshine

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't know why you guys don't like Pippa? Isn't she keeping pretty quiet these days?





sdkitty said:


> I don't get the dislike of pippa either.



I don't dislike Pippa. It's just interesting that people are not losing their minds over Pippa hitching a ride in tax payer funded vehicle, receiving tax payer funded security, and sitting in the royal box at Wimbledon when not so long ago, people were so eager to nickel and dime Doria when she accompanied Meghan to the Together: Our Community Cookbook event. Somehow it's an issue when Doria rides a few kilometers with Meghan in a tax payer funded vehicle but it's crickets when Pippa basically rides across town with Kate. The hypocrisy is unreal.


----------



## hellosunshine

mdcx said:


> I would guess there were a few "discussions" at the Palace about what Meghan would wear to the premiere.
> Meghan's own personal style would probably be closer to what Beyonce wore - sexy, boobs, glitter, slits.
> I would think the very sober black dress with the squashed boobs was a compromise on all fronts.
> My opinion - Meghan is still in the dog house over Wimbledon #1 so is being agreeable-ish about her dress.


----------



## Wildflower22

I think her dress is beautiful overall. I remember being so puffy when I nursed. My chest was out of control (I’m normally flat chested), and while nursing, I was popping out of everything. Meghan deserves a major pass as a new mom with this dress. She looks beautiful.


----------



## Encore Hermes

I like her dress, they (M&H look great) 
I really love her shoes ...
Aquazzura Portrait of a Lady Sling Backs


----------



## mdcx

I don't see how pointing out that her boobs are squashed in the black dress equates to mom-shaming, but oh well.


----------



## LibbyRuth

When I look at the pictures from the Lion King premiere, I don’t see the fit of the dress. I see Harry and Meghan totally comfortable with each other and in love with each other. They both have that sparkle that made people love their wedding so much. In the video of them meeting Beyoncé and Jay Z it looks like Meghan wants Harry to join in so they can share the moment together. They are the duo the world sees at their best. So who cares about the dress!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Her  dress was fine and appropriate. I think it would have been nice if her earrings were a bit more noticeable and larger as the dress was so plain. A pearl and diamond drop would have been nice.

No way in h*ll would MM wear what Bey was wearing!  Not her style ever past or present or future.  Bey is a rock star and hoochie goes with her territory and not MM’s.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> Wow


Oh gosh... rock star life I guess.


----------



## stanfordmom

mdcx said:


> Meghan's own personal style would probably be closer to what Beyonce wore - sexy, boobs, glitter, slits.
> I would think the very sober black dress with the squashed boobs was a compromise on all fronts.



Why would you assume that’s her personal style? Have you ever seen her photographed wearing anything like that type of attire?

I believe the mom shaming refers to the boobs comment because she’s likely breast feeding.


----------



## Jayne1

All I noticed was that Harry met Bey for the first time and reached in to kiss her on both cheeks. 

Is that a royal thing and does he kiss everyone he meets for the first time?


----------



## mdcx

Megs is no stranger to revealing, sexy outfits. One only has to have a quick Google. However she is now married into a very conservative family with a dress code:


----------



## hellosunshine

mdcx said:


> Megs is no stranger to revealing, sexy outfits. One only has to have a quick Google. However she is now married into a very conservative family with a dress code:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4489947



This is a far cry from what Beyonce wore. Meghan's look in your photo is the embodiment of the fun, 30-something woman in rom-com movies whose "single and ready to mingle". I love Beyonce but that thigh slit + cleavage was too much.


----------



## myown

Fally420 said:


> Don't like the fitting in the bust area, but overall a nice look.





kemilia said:


> At first I liked her dress, then I saw the front and feel it should have been a size larger (her chest is being squished). But overall the dress and shoes are really nice. And Harry looks dapper!


could have fitted the day before. breast-feeding boobs change a lot


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, I was wowing the thigh reveal,


That's not a thigh reveal. That's a hip reveal and then some


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Eta: This was in answer to your post about Pippa and Doria, hellosunshine. Quote was lost for some reason.

I see. If Meghan's mom was critisised for this, that seems low.


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> That's not a thigh reveal. That's a hip reveal and then some


Lol, am corrected, you're absolutely correct


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> Meghan has never worn any of that, check her style thread. Her style has always been minimalist.
> 
> She’s never had boobs, so her squashed boobs is from getting used to her body after a baby, but good job Mom shaming.


I don't want to burst any bubbles but... 
In Meghan's defense, this is an overall cringe fest, including the clearly overexcited and out of line talkshow host.


----------



## Morgan R

Morgan R said:


> Attending the European premiere of The Lion King
> 
> View attachment 4489506
> View attachment 4489504
> View attachment 4489505
> View attachment 4489566
> View attachment 4489564
> View attachment 4489565





Morgan R said:


>




Videos of Harry and Meghan at the European premiere of The Lion King


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> Megs is no stranger to revealing, sexy outfits. One only has to have a quick Google. However she is now married into a very conservative family with a dress code:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4489947



I did a quick google post. You found one picture from 2015 that was low cut. But you can’t find any from her with Harry so what is your point?
This is also found in a google search


----------



## Clearblueskies

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't want to burst any bubbles but...
> In Meghan's defense, this is an overall cringe fest, including the clearly overexcited and out of line talkshow host.



Ewww 


hellosunshine said:


> Beyonce & Meghan have finally met.



Awww, so this makes them besties now, right?  How sweet.


----------



## daisychainz

I think her dress for Lion King was okay. The bust did look too squished but at least she made an effort, you can see that she was trying for a more elegant look. She at least looked way better than Beyonce.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

buffym said:


> I did a quick google post. You found one picture from 2015 that was low cut. But you can’t find any from her with Harry so what is your point?
> This is also found in a google search
> View attachment 4490198
> View attachment 4490199
> View attachment 4490200
> View attachment 4490201
> View attachment 4490202


I think she looks so much better in all of these outfits than as a royal. I wonder why she went away from this style so much. It was at least much more fashionable and stylish than her minimal looks. imo


----------



## LibbyRuth

There were likely many factors in Meghan's evolving style. As a younger actress, she was likely given clothes by a stylist and told to wear them. An actress on a USA network show does not necessarily have the power to say no to what she's been given - so the older outfits may or may not have been Meghan's preference. The time period we're looking from is also one where she went from being in her late 20s and early 30s to late 30s. Many women change their style in that time to be a little more conservative. Fashion trends have also changed in that time - so not only did the woman change, but the choices being designed did too. And of course, now she's a royal and that comes with it's own set of rules and expectations. I think it's safe to say all those things factor in to older looks vs current ones.


----------



## Kansashalo

I love her Lion King premier look!


----------



## minababe

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think, that had Kate done that too early, she would have been similarily criticised for it. Kate and William have been together for many years and she is going to be queen so is well within her right now to channel the RBF greats. It's different. Meghan wants too much too soon it seems.


lol on what Point meghan copied Diana?


----------



## DeMonica

mdcx said:


> Megs is no stranger to revealing, sexy outfits. One only has to have a quick Google. However she is now married into a very conservative family with a dress code:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4489947


You can be sexy and revealing in many different ways, as the picture you attached illustrates it perfectly. Of course, she was more adventurous with hemlines and cleavage, but she did it more elegantly. Bey is extremely talented, pretty and wears expensive clothes, but her style is more Las Vegas. Apart from a few pics taken early in her career, Meghan's style was and is more sophisticated,


----------



## minababe

Jayne1 said:


> All I noticed was that Harry met Bey for the first time and reached in to kiss her on both cheeks.
> 
> Is that a royal thing and does he kiss everyone he meets for the first time?



no I noticed that too. he is just cute and wants to join them.
he did that before when he met the muslim women from the cookbook. it was a bit clumsy because he met them for the first time + he is a man. so you don't do that in generell with strangers haha
but I think he just did it because meghan did. I don't blame him for but it's an example how big Meghan's Impact is on him.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Beyonce and Meghan have two incredibly different jobs - one of the only common threads is that people watch what they both wear and it reflects on their public image. Beyonce is in a world where she has to be seen as pushing the envelope and doing new things. Personally I think she's always done a great job of wearing clothes that give the illusion they are showing a lot while keeping her covered up, and I think her premiere night dress is an example of that. Meghan dresses in a way that reflects her job of challenging the status quo and moving the BRF forward.  She does it well too - but the two have such different roles they are never going to appear the same at least for public engagements.


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> no I noticed that too. he is just cute and wants to join them.
> he did that before when he met the muslim women from the cookbook. it was a bit clumsy because he met them for the first time + he is a man. so you don't do that in generell with strangers haha
> but I think he just did it because meghan did. I don't blame him for but it's an example how big Meghan's Impact is on him.


of course, it's all about Meghan


----------



## DeMonica

LibbyRuth said:


> Beyonce and Meghan have two incredibly different jobs - one of the only common threads is that people watch what they both wear and it reflects on their public image. Beyonce is in a world where she has to be seen as pushing the envelope and doing new things. Personally I think she's always done a great job of wearing clothes that give the illusion they are showing a lot while keeping her covered up, and I think her premiere night dress is an example of that. Meghan dresses in a way that reflects her job of challenging the status quo and moving the BRF forward.  She does it well too - but the two have such different roles they are never going to appear the same at least for public engagements.


I wasn't comparing the "current Meghan style" to B's style  but the pre-Harry style.


----------



## LibbyRuth

DeMonica said:


> I wasn't comparing the "current Meghan style" to B's style  but the pre-Harry style.



Fair point. But even at that, their jobs were very different which would dictate different styles. It's not uncommon for an actress to be encouraged to dress for events in a way that reinforces the image of a role she has - so that viewers associate the actress with the character. Meghan was also an up and coming actress who may have not had total control of her styling. Beyonce certainly has the power to tell a stylist no. So whether comparing actress to pop queen or duchess to pop queen, the role fashion plays in their public personas is quite different.


----------



## Gimmethebag

LibbyRuth said:


> Fair point. But even at that, their jobs were very different which would dictate different styles. It's not uncommon for an actress to be encouraged to dress for events in a way that reinforces the image of a role she has - so that viewers associate the actress with the character. Meghan was also an up and coming actress who may have not had total control of her styling. Beyonce certainly has the power to tell a stylist no. So whether comparing actress to pop queen or duchess to pop queen, the role fashion plays in their public personas is quite different.



I think Beyonce’s dress was absolutely appropriate for Beyoncé, the performer, to wear as the female lead in the highly anticipated Lion King. She commanded attention and the gold color was very regal on her. 

Beyoncé also showed up after Harry and Megan with a huge security detail. She’s not royal-royal but Beyoncé is a celebrity-royal and she owns it. She rarely breaks character as the Queen Bey. 

I think Megan’s hair was lovely, but her red carpet look was a flop for me. The Jason Wu dress did not fit well at all and it didn’t look event or weather appropriate. I think Meghan would have looked better in a tailored column gown (her shape is similar to my own, tailored waists are not our friend), maybe in a print since it’s Lion King, and definitely in a color. 

The pictures of Beyoncé in gold and Meghan in say, ruby or peridot, would have been next-level.


----------



## DeMonica

LibbyRuth said:


> Fair point. But even at that, their jobs were very different which would dictate different styles. It's not uncommon for an actress to be encouraged to dress for events in a way that reinforces the image of a role she has - so that viewers associate the actress with the character. Meghan was also an up and coming actress who may have not had total control of her styling. Beyonce certainly has the power to tell a stylist no. So whether comparing actress to pop queen or duchess to pop queen, the role fashion plays in their public personas is quite different.


I have a slight problem with this reasoning. According to this logic people would wear uniforms according to their jobs or professions in life which works well in dystopian movies but I can't see that happening. Taylor Switf dressing as Bey? Really? They are both pop divas....Or Lily Allen? The same holds true for actresses.
None of us knows what they said no to, how much (good) guidance they got, but judging by their street style which is more comparable, whatever Meghan got it worked better for her.


----------



## LibbyRuth

DeMonica said:


> I have a slight problem with this reasoning. According to this logic people would wear uniforms according to their jobs or professions in life which works well in dystopian movies but I can't see that happening. Taylor Switf dressing as Bey? Really? They are both pop divas....Or Lily Allen? The same holds true for actresses.
> None of us knows what they said no to, how much (good) guidance they got, but judging by their street style which is more comparable, whatever Meghan got it worked better for her.



The flaw in your point about uniforms is that it applies what I've said to all jobs. While in my job it's important for me to dress a certain way in front of a client to present a professional image in representing my company, there is not nearly as much emphasis on style and fashion. A client report recapping a meeting does not include a section breaking down the fashion, nor do I enter meetings on a red carpet where pictures are taken and people ask me who I'm wearing. So the value of fashion on all jobs is not the same. I think you know that very well too since you used examples of other pop stars and actresses rather than comparing Meghand and Bey to a teacher or sales executive. 
To the comparisons you made in their same fields - while they do the same sort of work, they are not trying to convey the same image therefore do not wear the same clothes. Beyonce has built her career on doing groundbreaking things. She moves performance forward, and does things in a big way. Her clothes reflect that. Taylor Swift has marked her career by approaching music in a different way. I'm not a fan so I'd argue she has built a career on playing victim, giving her fans someone to hate who they believe is picking on Taylor, and then singing songs about it. She goes for a more wholesome "who me?" image, and her clothes reflect it. That's why she makes a big deal about always having her belly button covered. But each woman, when she goes to a big event dresses in a way that ensures that the next day people will be talking about HER.  And it works - we're still talking about beyonce's dress in a Meghan and Harry thread.
In all honesty, I'm not sure why we went down this rabbit hole.  I love Beyonce and thought she looked fabulous and stuck to what she does best by making peole think she showed a lot while she really showed nothing at all. I like Meghan a lot and thought she looked great for the occasion, and as i said earlier I think the best thing about the photos of her is that they showed how happy and truly content she and Harry are together and there's nothing better than that. So Meghan is not Beyonce and Beyonce is not Meghan. I that truly a surprise to anyone or a point to be debated?


----------



## LittleStar88

Basically... Dress your part and in line with your image.

Beyonce I expect flashy and over the top (and then some). 

Meghan I expect more conservative. She is a Duchess now.

I didn't care for what either was wearing, but both were appropriate for the wearer.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, I was wowing the thigh reveal,


I thought beyonce's dress was fine until I saw that thigh shot.  What I noticed was that she's looking like a rather large woman.  I'm larger than I want to be right now so I guess this should make me feel better - the fact that she is viewed as being so hot and she is kinda large everywhere.  But I'm sure she is fit and works out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't want to burst any bubbles but...
> In Meghan's defense, this is an overall cringe fest, including the clearly overexcited and out of line talkshow host.





Craig Ferguson was the host of the Late, Late Show and because of his timeslot (past 12:30AM) he tended to be a little more raunchy, flirty, and conversations were often uninhibited. Female guests on his show usually  dressed a little more risque. Just look at the below examples --








Meghan's out fit for the show was on par with the usual.






I honestly don't see what the big deal is.


----------



## bisbee

I went back a few pages, but I still don’t understand where the comparison between Beyonce’s dress and Meghan’s started.  Why on earth would anyone compare them?  They are totally different women with totally different lives!


----------



## jehaga

bisbee said:


> I went back a few pages, but I still don’t understand where the comparison between Beyonce’s dress and Meghan’s started.  Why on earth would anyone compare them?  They are totally different women with totally different lives!


Post #8491


----------



## minababe

hellosunshine said:


> Craig Ferguson was the host of the Late, Late Show and because of his timeslot (past 12:30AM) he tended to be a little more raunchy, flirty, and conversations were often uninhibited. Female guests on his show usually  dressed a little more risque. Just look at the below examples --
> 
> View attachment 4490579
> 
> View attachment 4490580
> 
> View attachment 4490581
> 
> 
> Meghan's out fit for the show was on par with the usual.
> 
> View attachment 4490609
> 
> View attachment 4490610
> 
> 
> I honestly don't see what the big deal is.



I saw this the Clip on YouTube many years ago and think she Looks amazing there! nothing wrong with her outift. she is a stunner there!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> Craig Ferguson was the host of the Late, Late Show and because of his timeslot (past 12:30AM) he tended to be a little more raunchy, flirty, and conversations were often uninhibited. Female guests on his show usually  dressed a little more risque. Just look at the below examples --
> 
> View attachment 4490579
> 
> View attachment 4490580
> 
> View attachment 4490581
> 
> 
> Meghan's out fit for the show was on par with the usual.
> 
> View attachment 4490609
> 
> View attachment 4490610
> 
> 
> I honestly don't see what the big deal is.


Maybe you didn't notice but my post was in response to another poster who claimed that: "_Meghan has never worn any of that, check her style thread. Her style has always been minimalist._" Not about it being a big deal or not. I'd agree though that it's minimalist all right 

Thanks for explaining about creepy Ferguson, never saw his show.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

minababe said:


> lol on what Point meghan copied Diana?


You tell me. I never wrote that she did.


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> I would guess there were a few "discussions" at the Palace about what Meghan would wear to the premiere.
> Meghan's own personal style would probably be closer to what Beyonce wore - sexy, boobs, glitter, slits.
> I would think the very sober black dress with the squashed boobs was a compromise on all fronts.
> My opinion - Meghan is still in the dog house over Wimbledon #1 so is being agreeable-ish about her dress.





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Maybe you didn't notice but my post was in response to another poster who claimed that: "_Meghan has never worn any of that, check her style thread. Her style has always been minimalist._" Not about it being a big deal or not. I'd agree though that it's minimalist all right
> 
> Thanks for explaining about creepy Ferguson, never saw his show.



I’m the poster who wrote that and I stand by my post. Meghan has never worn anything like Beyonce- which is what the poster said Meghan style is closer to Beyonce, sexy boobs, slit.

These three looks are not similar in my book.


----------



## gracekelly

I really don't understand how this thread has devolved into a style off between MM and Bey.  As was noted up thread, they have/had different careers and certainly now, different life styles and paths in life.  What she wore as a working actress was appropriate for that job.  It certainly doesn't mean that it was her real style at all and it was just "work" clothing.  On the whole, I think her personal style is conservative.


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't want to burst any bubbles but...
> In Meghan's defense, this is an overall cringe fest, including the clearly overexcited and out of line talkshow host.



Colin Ferguson is a NOTORIOUS flirt (how many times has he been married)? .. although I have to say that he does tickle my funny-bone (maybe it's just those Scotsmen)!!  He is very quick-witted though!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I really don't understand how this thread has devolved into a style off between MM and Bey.  As was noted up thread, they have/had different careers and certainly now, different life styles and paths in life.  What she wore as a working actress was appropriate for that job.  It certainly doesn't mean that it was her real style at all and it was just "work" clothing.  On the whole, I think her personal style is conservative.


Again, totally agree @gracekelly .. xxx.  Frankly, I'm tired of being called "silly", "envious" and the like just because I've posted something that they deem negative about Meghan when it fact it's just something I read somewhere.


----------



## Encore Hermes

Beyonce was in the movie and I think her gown was was a way of bringing her part in an animated feature  to real life. An event she was obligated to attend. A Plus....it goes well with red carpet backdrop. 
 Vs Meghan wearing something to see a movie premier. 
B. changed for the afterparty btw.


----------



## daisychainz

gracekelly said:


> I really don't understand how this thread has devolved into a style off between MM and Bey.  As was noted up thread, they have/had different careers and certainly now, different life styles and paths in life.  What she wore as a working actress was appropriate for that job.  It certainly doesn't mean that it was her real style at all and it was just "work" clothing.  On the whole, I think her personal style is conservative.


I agree with you. She was dressing for her actress job for many years and that was probably not her true style, but now she has another job that requires more conservative outfits. So perhaps she isn't *that* conservative but is leaning that way now because she has transferred to this new job. She is for sure dressing for a new role now and that also might not be the real her. I would think maybe candid shots of her (a few years pre-Harry) and maybe the early stages of dating Harry would show her real style and comfort level. I recall lots of blue jeans and casual outfits. I see her as more casual/minimal with conservative creeping in more and more. She doesn't seem to dress for unnecessary attention at all.


----------



## hellosunshine

I really am not understanding why we're judging Meghan pre-Harry. We certainly don't compare Kate or any  royal before their individual marriages...I always see that they're given the leeway of it just being a different time and they were different people. Isn't it natural and normal to expect a difference in how they dress or carry themselves?

Anyways, I just want to say that I've never seen Meghan wear a dress that shows her bikini area like the below photos (outside of a bathing suit) -- Meghan has always dressed very classy, fun, flirty, and tastefully sexy.






Btw, is there any chance that we can move on from this topic? It's getting ridiculous...


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> Again, totally agree @gracekelly .. but MM's stans just can't seem to deal with anything that they deem to be negative about Meghan.  Frankly, I'm tired of being called "silly", "envious" and the like just because I've posted something that they deem negative about Meghan when it fact it's just something I read somewhere.



It wasn’t a Stan that started it, since we seem to name call, it was a hater who stated Meghan would wear a dress like Beyonce. Meghan’s Stan was stating Beyonce and Meghan style is different and even when Meghan was an actress she didn’t dress like Beyonce.

Also, it would help if posters didn’t participate in the name calling ie calling people stans and then being tired of being called jealous or silly.

Non of that was involved in the post about Meghan or Beyonce.


----------



## doloresmia

Meghan appears to tell Pharrell ‘they don’t make it easy’ when he praises marriage and how he is cheering her on.

Understatement of the year!

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...rell-praises-marriage-they-dont-make-it-easy/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

doloresmia said:


> Meghan appears to tell Pharrell ‘they don’t make it easy’ when he praises marriage and how he is cheering her on.
> 
> Understatement of the year!
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...rell-praises-marriage-they-dont-make-it-easy/


Anyone thinking that marrying into this family would be easy is delusional.  They have too much tradition and set in their own ways and are not going to change for anyone. A reason why multiple women rejected Charles, William and Harry.   That is what many of the subjects like about them.  People from outside of the country don't get it.  Not saying right or wrong, just the way it is.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Pharrell praises 'beautiful union' of Prince Harry and Meghan's marriage at Lion King premiere*
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-07-16...y-and-meghans-marriage-at-lion-king-premiere/




> "It's so beautiful, your union. Love is amazing. It’s beautiful. Don’t ever take that for granted, what it means in today’s climate. I wanted to tell you, it’s so significant for so many of us. Seriously. It's significant. We cheer you guys on."




**


----------



## hellosunshine

It appears that Meghan received a lot of kind words at the Lion King premiere from fans and the overall general public.


----------



## Flatsy

I think that whole "they don't make it easy" thing is destined to blow up even bigger tomorrow.  Especially as "they" could be taken to mean anyone (the world at large, British people, The Firm, etc).

A member of the royal family complaining about their lot in life while on a red carpet in front of a horde of cameras at a work engagement seems like a big no-no.  And she's implied that her marriage is suffering and opened that up for more speculation.

I think she gets criticized for a lot of stupid stuff, but she invites drama as well.


----------



## LittleStar88

Yeah, breaking out the popcorn to see how this blows up tomorrow...


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> I think that whole "they don't make it easy" thing is destined to blow up even bigger tomorrow.  Especially as "they" could be taken to mean anyone (the world at large, British people, The Firm, etc).
> 
> A member of the royal family complaining about their lot in life while on a red carpet in front of a horde of cameras at a work engagement seems like a big no-no.  And she's implied that her marriage is suffering and opened that up for more speculation.
> 
> I think she gets criticized for a lot of stupid stuff, but she invites drama as well.


Yes we’ll se how that goes. No stiff upper lip from her so will be interesting to see how it plays. Either they will be sympathetic or call her a whinger.


----------



## hellosunshine

She obviously was talking about the cruel, racist British media. She certainly wasn't referring to her fans, her close friends, her husband, or anyone who sticks up for her. When Pharrell said "in today's climate" he was talking about the racist, hateful, misogynistic and despicable climate so she replied "they don't make it easy". 

Honestly, I already anticipate that reporters will twist her words as some people here are already too eager to jump on her words. 

People can be so disappointing honestly...


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> She obviously was talking about the cruel, racist British media.


You forgot to throw the word "vile" in there three or four times and add another one or two of "racist" for good measure.  We've all heard the refrain many times and can say it by heart.

"Obvious" is your opinion.  She probably meant the media, but it's not what she said.  She said something very vague which is open to all kinds of interpretation.  Which is why people in her position generally refrain from popping off in public about their personal problems and grievances. 

If she's so quick to complain to a stranger in response to something positive and nice, God only knows what she does in private.  It makes all of the media reports of her and Harry being "petulant" in their decision-making all the more believable.


hellosunshine said:


> She certainly wasn't referring to her fans, her close friends, her husband, or anyone who sticks up for her.


She doesn't just work for those people.


----------



## LibbyRuth

doloresmia said:


> Meghan appears to tell Pharrell ‘they don’t make it easy’ when he praises marriage and how he is cheering her on.
> 
> Understatement of the year!
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...rell-praises-marriage-they-dont-make-it-easy/



It's a statement that will be repeated, interpreted, and read in to in so many ways, and no one will have any way of knowing what she actually meant. Who is the "they" she's talking about?  Harry's family?  Her own family?  The press?  The Hollywood people she left behind and misses? The people posting at Purse Forum?  (JOKE!)  No one knows, but many will claim to be able to see into her soul and know exactly what she was talking about.


----------



## bag-princess

gracekelly said:


> Anyone thinking that marrying into this family would be easy is delusional.  They have too much tradition and set in their own ways and are not going to change for anyone. A reason why multiple women rejected Charles, William and Harry.   That is what many of the subjects like about them.  People from outside of the country don't get it.  Not saying right or wrong, just the way it is.




I don’t think for a second she thought it was going to be easy - she was just stating the truth! We’ve all seen that through many different royal marriages!


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> You forgot to throw the word "vile" in there three or four times and add another one or two of "racist" for good measure.  We've all heard the refrain many times and can say it by heart.
> 
> "Obvious" is your opinion.  She probably meant the media, but it's not what she said.  She said something very vague which is open to all kinds of interpretation.  Which is why people in her position generally refrain from popping off in public about their personal problems and grievances.
> 
> If she's so quick to complain to a stranger in response to something positive and nice, God only knows what she does in private.  It makes all of the media reports of her and Harry being "petulant" in their decision-making all the more believable.
> 
> She doesn't just work for those people.



But, the same could be said about those with criticism. Doesn’t it get old to constantly have something negative to say about someone in the public eye, to discuss the negative articles as truth, to ignore any talks of racism or to minimize it as just an facet of public life that a person should just take or to quote articles as long as they support a negative impact.


For example, The DM published this which is mathematically incorrect but it supports a negative view for Meghan.



This article isn’t posted, and if we mention the press crappy treatment it is disregarded as just a Stan talking.


----------



## Gimmethebag

It is possible that the dress retails for £3,454 somewhere. We see price differences all the time. Was it favorable to choose the higher price? No, but they likely assumed she purchased it from the fancier boutique than online or at the beginning of the season. 

Also, the Queen’s motto is “never complain, never explain.” I’m sure the media, public opinion, and their social set is difficult to deal with on a daily basis. But complaining about it is not a good look to the public, who mostly have little sympathy for someone wearing an £15,000+ outfit. 

I don’t think the Queen’s way of doing things is intended to box the women of the BRF in but rather, help them navigate public life and skirt around those who believe the monarchy is outdated, expensive, and should be abolished.


----------



## Grande Latte

The dress is fine, the pricetag is fine. It's just that after giving birth, Meghan's posture and mannerisms seem to have changed.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> You forgot to throw the word "vile" in there three or four times and add another one or two of "racist" for good measure.  We've all heard the refrain many times and can say it by heart.



Well, you'll keep hearing it because it'll keep happening.



> "Obvious" is your opinion.  She probably meant the media, but it's not what she said.  She said something very vague which is open to all kinds of interpretation.  Which is why people in her position generally refrain from popping off in public about their personal problems and grievances.



Let's think for a second, which country's media is smearing her day in, day out? Mischaracterizing her at every turn?


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Anyone thinking that marrying into this family would be easy is delusional.  They have too much tradition and set in their own ways and are not going to change for anyone. A reason why multiple women rejected Charles, William and Harry.   That is what many of the subjects like about them.  People from outside of the country don't get it.  Not saying right or wrong, just the way it is.


Absolutely correct, it's "why this?" "why that?"
Sometimes there is no simple answer, this is how the Royal Family works, simple. Its hard to explain to non Brits how things are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> lol on what Point meghan copied Diana?


people claim that when Meghan wears white and Diana wore white too. for example...


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> It appears that Meghan received a lot of kind words at the Lion King premiere from fans and the overall general public.



I would feel so uncomfortable when random people would come up and talk to me like that (or like Pharrell Williams)


----------



## myown

bag-princess said:


> I don’t think for a second she thought it was going to be easy - she was just stating the truth! We’ve all seen that through many different royal marriages!


I soooo agree!
I also knew my in laws wouldn't make it easy for me, yet I married my husband. they don't make it easy... 

lol


----------



## minababe

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You tell me. I never wrote that she did.


lol come on. now it's getting ridicilious.


----------



## minababe

myown said:


> I would feel so uncomfortable when random people would come up and talk to me like that (or like Pharrell Williams)


I think this was really nice of him.


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> I think this was really nice of him.


maybe, but it would make me feel uncomfortable


----------



## minababe

myown said:


> people claim that when Meghan wears white and Diana wore white too. for example...


hahahahah omg really?? thats so stupid


----------



## Grande Latte

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely correct, it's "why this?" "why that?"
> Sometimes there is no simple answer, this is how the Royal Family works, simple. Its hard to explain to non Brits how things are.



Yeah, it's the royal culture. If you want to marry into the family/ business/ empire, you have to prepare yourself. It's no easy feat. Some women balk at this.

But I'm on this forum to look at more fashion. Can't wait to see her in more colors.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Grande Latte said:


> The dress is fine, the pricetag is fine. It's just that after giving birth, Meghan's posture and mannerisms seem to have changed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4491372


I agree, I think the dress is very pretty, but the upper fit is not the best.

I'd say she is conscious of this and it's making her feel uncomfortable, hence the hunching over. Meghan seems to have been a very slim person all her life. Putting on the pounds for what ever reason can make you feel very uncomfortable about your body and looks. Imagine having to take it out in public (and being scrutinised in high resolution for it) the way celebs have to.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

minababe said:


> lol come on. now it's getting ridicilious.


Yes it is. At least you're right about that.


----------



## anitalilac

CeeJay said:


> Colin Ferguson is a NOTORIOUS flirt (how many times has he been married)? .. although I have to say that he does tickle my funny-bone (maybe it's just those Scotsmen)!!  He is very quick-witted though!


I really really enjoy his wit too. He's funny like James Corden but in a different way.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> She obviously was talking about the cruel, racist British media. She certainly wasn't referring to her fans, her close friends, her husband, or anyone who sticks up for her. When Pharrell said "in today's climate" he was talking about the racist, hateful, misogynistic and despicable climate so she replied "they don't make it easy".
> 
> Honestly, I already anticipate that reporters will twist her words as some people here are already too eager to jump on her words.
> 
> People can be so disappointing honestly...



She couldn't have been referring to the British media. She was on a discussion panel in March and said it herself. She doesn't read her own press (apparently) and doesn't go on some social media sites (like Twitter, but she's on IG). How would she know if they are saying mean things or not when she doesn't read anything. Unless she was lying.

"I don't read anything," she said. "It's much safer that way, but equally that's just my own personal preference, because I think positive or negative, it can all sort of just feel like noise to a certain extent these days, as opposed to getting muddled with that to focus on the real cause. So for me, I think the idea of making the word feminism trendy, that doesn't make any sense to me personally, right? This is something that is going to be part of the conversation forever."


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She couldn't have been referring to the British media. She was on a discussion panel in March and said it herself. She doesn't read her own press (apparently) and doesn't go on some social media sites (like Twitter, but she's on IG). How would she know if they are saying mean things or not when she doesn't read anything. Unless she was lying.
> 
> "I don't read anything," she said. "It's much safer that way, but equally that's just my own personal preference, because I think positive or negative, it can all sort of just feel like noise to a certain extent these days, as opposed to getting muddled with that to focus on the real cause. So for me, I think the idea of making the word feminism trendy, that doesn't make any sense to me personally, right? This is something that is going to be part of the conversation forever."



There are so many people in the public eye who claim they never read media about them that I believe it's a safe way to avoid giving an answer to an awkward question. Truly, there's no good way to answer a question about how you feel about things written about you. If you say it bothers you, you appear weak and invite more insults. If you say it doesn't impact you at all, then you come across as cold and unfeeling.  Saying you don't read it makes the question go away. It's the smart move.


----------



## daisychainz

Gimmethebag said:


> It is possible that the dress retails for £3,454 somewhere. We see price differences all the time. Was it favorable to choose the higher price? No, but they likely assumed she purchased it from the fancier boutique than online or at the beginning of the season.
> 
> Also, the Queen’s motto is “never complain, never explain.” I’m sure the media, public opinion, and their social set is difficult to deal with on a daily basis. But complaining about it is not a good look to the public, who mostly have little sympathy for someone wearing an £15,000+ outfit.
> 
> I don’t think the Queen’s way of doing things is intended to box the women of the BRF in but rather, help them navigate public life and skirt around those who believe the monarchy is outdated, expensive, and should be abolished.


Yes. She should have stopped with "thank you" with Pharrell and not added the extra bit. He made a long statement that was leaning controversial and looking for trouble. She was chatting with Beyonce too, for too long I thought. It's nice to be social and gracious and make new friends but the media is not her friend so it's better to keep those conversations out of public cameras and video. The learning curve is probably very high for this new life.


----------



## LittleStar88

It surprises me how "invested" in their opinions of people they don't know and never met. I guess if even the haters are talking about someone so passionately, they must be doing something right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

I have no doubt that things are a bit rough for MM right now and this evening was a huge life ring for her in the form of a evening in the life she used to know and she slipped back into old habits.

I get this is the life she chose, however. She has moved to a foreign country, with weather that is much different than she is used to. She moved into a dusty old residence that, while renovated, is still likely not what she was used to in terms of space and light. She has moved into a role that is scrutinized, conservative and social media and personal views are frowned upon (whereas she had a profound involvement in both before). She is still in a relatively new relationship in the spotlight. Add to all of that her being a new mother, and all the emotions and fear and adjustment that comes from that and I am amazed she wasn’t clinging to Beyonce’s arm sobbing whilst grabbing the closest champagne and drinking it straight from the bottle.

 Just the baby along would be tough - I had a friend who spent the whole first three months of being a new mom daydreaming about her old life and plotting to leave the baby with her husband and vanish. And hiding those thoughts from most people because she knew people would be horrified.

I don’t always agree with her choices but this has got to be hard.


----------



## Flatsy

daisychainz said:


> Yes. She should have stopped with "thank you" with Pharrell and not added the extra bit. He made a long statement that was leaning controversial and looking for trouble. She was chatting with Beyonce too, for too long I thought. It's nice to be social and gracious and make new friends but the media is not her friend so it's better to keep those conversations out of public cameras and video.


I don't think Pharrell was trying to be controversial.  I think he was saying something sincere and heartfelt that he wanted her to know.  But I agree that her response should have been to think him and leave it at that. The man is a stranger, she was at work, and it was not a private conservation.  Her support system of friends and family should be the ones she turns to discuss the difficulties she's dealing with.  (Not so she can dispatch them to whine on her behalf to People Magazine, just to give her emotional support and help her navigate her new life.)


----------



## LittleStar88

A1aGypsy said:


> I have no doubt that things are a bit rough for MM right now and this evening was a huge life ring for her in the form of a evening in the life she used to know and she slipped back into old habits.
> 
> I get this is the life she chose, however. She has moved to a foreign country, with weather that is much different than she is used to. She moved into a dusty old residence that, while renovated, is still likely not what she was used to in terms of space and light. She has moved into a role that is scrutinized, conservative and social media and personal views are frowned upon (whereas she had a profound involvement in both before). She is still in a relatively new relationship in the spotlight. Add to all of that her being a new mother, and all the emotions and fear and adjustment that comes from that and I am amazed she wasn’t clinging to Beyonce’s arm sobbing whilst grabbing the closest champagne and drinking it straight from the bottle.
> 
> Just the baby along would be tough - I had a friend who spent the whole first three months of being a new mom daydreaming about her old life and plotting to leave the baby with her husband and vanish. And hiding those thoughts from most people because she knew people would be horrified.
> 
> I don’t always agree with her choices but this has got to be hard.



If I was MM, I probably would have had a breakdown by now. Just the constant media scrutiny and the drama from her family alone would have pushed me over the edge.

No matter how ready you think you are for a big life change (marrying into the BRF and bigger media scrutiny), I don't think she really knew just how much of a wild ride was ahead. Add to it a new baby, hormone changes that come with it, and feeling foofy from baby weight... Enough to seriously challenge even the strongest of women. She must have an amazing support system to help her through these challenges and I hope things eventually get easier for her.


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> I don't think Pharrell was trying to be controversial.  I think he was saying something sincere and heartfelt that he wanted her to know.  But I agree that her response should have been to think him and leave it at that. The man is a stranger, she was at work, and it was not a private conservation.  Her support system of friends and family should be the ones she turns to discuss the difficulties she's dealing with.  (Not so she can dispatch them to whine on her behalf to People Magazine, just to give her emotional support and help her navigate her new life.)


Yes, I can see that, he was taking the opportunity to be genuine. I  Pharrell. I saw him on an Oprah/OWN interview many years ago when he was first breaking out as a singer and he had a great way of expressing his viewpoints.


----------



## gracekelly

In retrospect the press had a field day making fun of Kate during the period that she and William were taking a time out in their relationship. They called her Waity  Katey.   During that time she kept her own counsel, never complained and never explained. She also ran up against opposition from the royals who didn’t think she was an appropriate choice for William and they told him as much. The advantage she had in all of this, and really from the beginning of their relationship, was time.   Time to see what the Royal life was like and what was expected and time to decide if it was the right thing for her and if her love for him could hold it all up. Time is what Meghan and Harry did not have and  it shows. When you are in your mid 30’s the clock is ticking more loudly.   Unfortunately there are no time machines to slow it down.   There is no Royalty for Dummies to read. The best you can do is listen to advice and then figure out what to do with it and hopefully make the right decisions. Taking a time out from public life might  be a good idea right now.   They can enjoy their new baby and be removed from public scrutiny and find their footing for future endeavors


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> Taking a time out from public life might  be a good idea right now.   They can enjoy their new baby and be removed from public scrutiny and find their footing for future endeavors



They're not slowing down, they have a South Africa, Malawi, Botswana, and Angola tour planned for this fall. She is also "in talks" for a monthly column with Vogue that is going to highlight her charity causes and any stories that are dear to her.


----------



## Tivo

A1aGypsy said:


> I have no doubt that things are a bit rough for MM right now and this evening was a huge life ring for her in the form of a evening in the life she used to know and she slipped back into old habits.
> 
> I get this is the life she chose, however. She has moved to a foreign country, with weather that is much different than she is used to. She moved into a dusty old residence that, while renovated, is still likely not what she was used to in terms of space and light. She has moved into a role that is scrutinized, conservative and social media and personal views are frowned upon (whereas she had a profound involvement in both before). She is still in a relatively new relationship in the spotlight. Add to all of that her being a new mother, and all the emotions and fear and adjustment that comes from that and I am amazed she wasn’t clinging to Beyonce’s arm sobbing whilst grabbing the closest champagne and drinking it straight from the bottle.
> 
> Just the baby along would be tough - *I had a friend who spent the whole first three months of being a new mom daydreaming about her old life and plotting to leave the baby with her husband and vanish. And hiding those thoughts from most people because she knew people would be horrified.*
> 
> I don’t always agree with her choices but this has got to be hard.


I wish more new moms would be open about feeling this way. So that people could offer support and let them know they won’t always feel like that.


----------



## daisychainz

gracekelly said:


> In retrospect the press had a field day making fun of Kate during the period that she and William were taking a time out in their relationship. They called her Waity  Katey.   During that time she kept her own counsel, never complained and never explained. She also ran up against opposition from the royals who didn’t think she was an appropriate choice for William and they told him as much. The advantage she had in all of this, and really from the beginning of their relationship, was time.   Time to see what the Royal life was like and what was expected and time to decide if it was the right thing for her and if her love for him could hold it all up. Time is what Meghan and Harry did not have and  it shows. When you are in your mid 30’s the clock is ticking more loudly.   Unfortunately there are no time machines to slow it down.   There is no Royalty for Dummies to read. The best you can do is listen to advice and then figure out what to do with it and hopefully make the right decisions. Taking a time out from public life might  be a good idea right now.   They can enjoy their new baby and be removed from public scrutiny and find their footing for future endeavors


You are so right. Kate was very very lucky. William let her have the royal life for years before she actually had it formally. And many of the hateful stories about Kate and her family were written throughout their dating years so by the time they married the media was already over her to some degree, lol. Meghan was throw in full speed. You can see how testing out the life would be so much healthier for the partner of a royal. Maybe because she was an actress he thought she'd be okay with media and able to navigate well. I don't think she's a fail but there have been super slip ups for sure, that could have been avoided with longer dating.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yes, absolutely. She tried to open up to other mothers though and was SAVAGED. I felt so badly for her.  She truly felt that she had made a horrible mistake, she wasn’t cut out to be a mom and she was trying to find the best way out of it. And she felt isolated and like something was wrong with her in the worst way possible. 

And I’m not sure we can say “you won’t always feel like that”. I mean, she loves her child, she always does right by her child but, would she go back and do it again? Not on your life. Does she hate being a mom? Most of the time, unfortunately, yes. 

Having come from a mother who didn’t want to be one and became one accidentally, I think we need to stop the fairytale that every woman will just morph into being a mom and loving it. Some just don’t and never will and some are great moms but don’t love everything about being a mom and it’s okay to seek support for them and their child if and when they find themselves in that situation.  

But that’s a darker topic for another day.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> They're not slowing down, they have a South Africa, Malawi, Botswana, and Angola tour planned for this fall. She is also "in talks" for a monthly column with Vogue that is going to highlight her charity causes and any stories that are dear to her.


I think going to Africa could  be a semi-timeout. Could be totally wrong about that and it will turn out to be a PR explosion with pictures of every baby they kiss and teacup they raise.    Not so sure that the column will happen.  Yes, Anna Wintour has sucked up to the Queen in the past and sat next to her at a fashion show, so  the go-ahead may be given for MM to do it, but I  bet it will be heavily vetted by the palace.  Anna will want that too,  to keep them happy for any future PR Vogue moments.


----------



## gracekelly

daisychainz said:


> You are so right. *Kate was very very lucky. William let her have the royal life for years before she actually had it formally.* And many of the hateful stories about Kate and her family were written throughout their dating years so by the time they married the media was already over her to some degree, lol. Meghan was throw in full speed. You can see how testing out the life would be so much healthier for the partner of a royal. Maybe because she was an actress he thought she'd be okay with media and able to navigate well. *I don't think she's a fail but there have been super slip ups for sure, that could have been avoided with longer dating.*




This.


----------



## Tivo

A1aGypsy said:


> Yes, absolutely. *She tried to open up to other mothers though and was SAVAGED. *I felt so badly for her.  She truly felt that she had made a horrible mistake, she wasn’t cut out to be a mom and she was trying to find the best way out of it. And she felt isolated and like something was wrong with her in the worst way possible.
> 
> *And I’m not sure we can say “you won’t always feel like that”.* I mean, she loves her child, she always does right by her child but, would she go back and do it again? Not on your life. Does she hate being a mom? Most of the time, unfortunately, yes.
> 
> Having come from a mother who didn’t want to be one and became one accidentally, I think we need to stop the fairytale that every woman will just morph into being a mom and loving it. Some just don’t and never will and some are great moms but don’t love everything about being a mom and it’s okay to seek support for them and their child if and when they find themselves in that situation.
> 
> But that’s a darker topic for another day.


Sadly, this could be why she couldn’t settle into it.


----------



## Flatsy

You don't start off a new job by immediately proposing changes and telling everyone all of the ways you intend to do things your own way.  I think Meghan should have spent her first 1-2 years minimum just learning the ropes, following the advice she was given, and doing everything in the tried and true ways before trying to change things up. 

There were many reports around the end of last year about how she was so frustrated with all of the procedures dictated by the palace, and that she was constantly questioning and pushing back and saying she didn't understand why things had to be done certain ways.   I think she would have spared herself a lot of angst (and spared her staff and probably Harry too) if she'd been more willing to be taught the job for a while.  

And it's unfortunate that Kate doesn't seemed to have been willing to take Meghan under her wing in any way.  I think she would have a lot of useful advice to give.  But on the other hand, if it was clear that Meghan didn't want her advice, best to leave it be.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> And it's unfortunate that Kate doesn't seemed to have been willing to take Meghan under her wing in any way.  I think she would have a lot of useful advice to give.  But on the other hand, if it was clear that Meghan didn't want her advice, best to leave it be.



Hmmm....I wonder do we really know that?  Perhaps advice offered and not heeded so she stopped trying.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm....I wonder do we really know that?  Perhaps advice offered and not heeded so she stopped trying.


Plus, do we really know how often they have actually met up with one another privately?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm....I wonder do we really know that? Perhaps advice offered and not heeded so she stopped trying.


Don't know, just speculation.

I think of this Lainey blind item: https://www.laineygossip.com/Didnt-offer-a-ride-blind-riddle/46293
Lainey does have a connection to Meghan and I find it believable.  And the latest word on Harry's feud with Will is that Harry was mad about Will and Kate not being welcoming enough towards Meghan.

I think Kate is an introvert and that has a lot to do with she and Meghan not striking up a great friendship.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> Don't know, just speculation.
> 
> I think of this Lainey blind item: https://www.laineygossip.com/Didnt-offer-a-ride-blind-riddle/46293
> Lainey does have a connection to Meghan and I find it believable.  And the latest word on Harry's feud with Will is that Harry was mad about Will and Kate not being welcoming enough towards Meghan.
> 
> I think Kate is an introvert and that has a lot to do with she and Meghan not striking up a great friendship.


Being an introvert is hardly an excuse for not being welcoming to your sister-in-law (if all this is true, of course).


----------



## A1aGypsy

I agree with a lot of that Flatsy. Although, it did seem that Kate (at least) was welcoming initially and that seemed to dwindle off.  Who knows what you can read into that. Or if there was an issue, for example, the rumours of a row over Charlotte at the wedding were true.

I also wonder if Harry, completely in love and emboldened by everything his mother went through, promised her the moon in a “we will change all this and be the ones who modernize the monarchy” way not truly realizing how the public and, more devastatingly, the media would react and how, in turn, BP would react to the negative press. He now seems to be reverting more to the traditional way of doing things again. And that might have been a bait and switch.

But, all just speculation. I have to admit, I never paid much attention them all until I found this place!!


----------



## Flatsy

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Being an introvert is hardly an excuse for not being welcoming to your sister-in-law (if all this is true, of course).


But who knows what Harry's expectations were.  Being cordial, friendly and inclusive of a new member to the family - which Kate appears to be towards Meghan - is all that's really required.  Harry may have been hoping for a lot more than that.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Eh, I think Kate is being fair to Meghan. She seems friendly enough and puts on a smile when they’re together in public. 

I mean, things change after you get some hands-on mom experience of your own, but there have been public jabs at Kate’s parenting style or rather, her sense of royal tradition (and meeting expectations as the future queen consort). 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.her.ie/amp/celeb/meghan-markle-child-different-prince-george-438377


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly I think the comments on  Lainey and the other site are just smoke blowing. These sites have to churn it out on a daily basis.  Nasty gossip is their business  

Kate doesn’t strike me as being an introvert. She might have been more shy when younger, but I think she was cured of that once she started making public appearances and giving speeches.   No one wants to get off on the wrong foot with new relatives, so I think Kate must have tried and made an effort. I thought that bringing along her sister showed she was trying to make Meghan more inclusive in her family.   When I was growing up I knew cousins of my first (blood) cousins who were not  blood related to me. We celebrated holidays together and I continued to see them into adulthood. Meghan has no family so if she can have a relationship with Pippa, who also has a young son, that would be very nice for her.


----------



## rose60610

If Kate became "best buddies" with Meghan, then you know the media would have run with "Kate being condescending" toward Meghan as though M wouldn't have a clue about how to handle the Royal ambiance. The Firm is The Firm, you marry into it, you damned well better abide by it. The world isn't going to revolve around an outsider whose 30 something year old brain feels how hundreds of years of tradition should be or "modernized" or upended.  Meghan is damned lucky to end up where she is. Waited on hand and foot, nannies galore, servants catering to her every whim, QEII as grandmother in law. A royal husband that covers for her left and right. Poor baby! So she has a lot of appearances, oh the horror!!!!! She has aides helping her dress and basically doing everything but wiping her tush for her. She clawed and married her way into that world, she better deal with it.  The royals don't have to deal with her. Overall I liked her, but I get a sense of overwhelming pity for her new stage of motherhood. I save my admiration for the women who don't have a royal staff to wipe their nose when they sneeze.


----------



## minababe

so nasty comments here about her "complaining".
she never complained about her new role and life. she is happy and in love. don't know what some People try to see and hear all the time. I think some People just want to see  her break down.
But she is doing great. Meghan is a a happy wife and mother. Deal with that.

she is doing a great job, really active and serious with the responsibilitys of her new role If she wouldnt be ok we wouldn't see her so active these days. she doesn't have to be at all these appointments. She is officially still on maternity leave but she wants it that way. she was never a lazy person and she will not be now.
she is a total different Person than kate. she has way more life experience than kate who is at the same age. she worked her ass off for her Career and didn't wait for a man.. can't read the "they are doing Things different" than kate and William anymore. If they do, thank god.


----------



## LibbyRuth

minababe said:


> so nasty comments here about her "complaining".
> she never complained about her new role and life. she is happy and in love. don't know what some People try to see and hear all the time. I think some People just want to see  her break down.
> But she is doing great. Meghan is a a happy wife and mother. Deal with that.
> 
> she is doing a great job, really active and serious with the responsibilitys of her new role If she wouldnt be ok we wouldn't see her so active these days. she doesn't have to be at all these appointments. She is officially still on maternity leave but she wants it that way. she was never a lazy person and she will not be now.
> she is a total different Person than kate. she has way more life experience than kate who is at the same age. she worked her ass off for her Career and didn't wait for a man.. can't read the "they are doing Things different" than kate and William anymore. If they do, thank god.



To the best of my knowledge, there is not a person on this thread that actually knows Meghan - or any other member of the royal family for that matter. People see pictures and hear reports, and interpret them differently. You see her as happy and wonderful, and that's a-ok.  Other people can look at the very same pictures and see something else.  That's a-ok too. None of us truly knows if we are right. We're all just speculating based on our own filters and perceptions. I don't see anything wrong with expressing opinions based on individual perceptions. But I am left wondering where the confidence comes from to declare others perceptions to be wrong or nasty.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> To the best of my knowledge, there is not a person on this thread that actually knows Meghan - or any other member of the royal family for that matter. People see pictures and hear reports, and interpret them differently. You see her as happy and wonderful, and that's a-ok.  Other people can look at the very same pictures and see something else.  That's a-ok too. None of us truly knows if we are right. We're all just speculating based on our own filters and perceptions. I don't see anything wrong with expressing opinions based on individual perceptions. But I am left wondering where the confidence comes from to declare others perceptions to be wrong or nasty.


Exactly right, happening to me on another thread right now, I'm posting things that are true based on knowing the inside if you will and basically being told I'm a liar


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> so nasty comments here about her "complaining".
> she never complained about her new role and life. she is happy and in love. don't know what some People try to see and hear all the time. I think some People just want to see  her break down.
> But she is doing great. Meghan is a a happy wife and mother. Deal with that.
> 
> she is doing a great job, really active and serious with the responsibilitys of her new role If she wouldnt be ok we wouldn't see her so active these days. she doesn't have to be at all these appointments. She is officially still on maternity leave but she wants it that way. she was never a lazy person and she will not be now.
> she is a total different Person than kate. she has way more life experience than kate who is at the same age. she worked her ass off for her Career and didn't wait for a man.. can't read the "they are doing Things different" than kate and William anymore. If they do, thank god.


She was overheard saying "they don't make it easy".  Now people are speculating on who "they" is.  The media?  The public?  The Royals?  Guess she needs to be careful what she says in public.  I really don't get all the emotion around her.  She is a public figure - Much more so than when she was an actress.  She will get admiration (some very extreme) and criticism.  The criticism she gets on this thread is not hate.


----------



## CeeJay

LibbyRuth said:


> To the best of my knowledge, there is not a person on this thread that actually knows Meghan - or any other member of the royal family for that matter. People see pictures and hear reports, and interpret them differently. You see her as happy and wonderful, and that's a-ok.  Other people can look at the very same pictures and see something else.  That's a-ok too. None of us truly knows if we are right. We're all just speculating based on our own filters and perceptions. I don't see anything wrong with expressing opinions based on individual perceptions. But I am left wondering where the confidence comes from to declare others perceptions to be wrong or nasty.





Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly right, happening to me on another thread right now, I'm posting things that are true based on knowing the inside if you will and basically being told I'm a liar





sdkitty said:


> She was overheard saying "they don't make it easy".  Now people are speculating on who "they" is.  The media?  The public?  The Royals?  Guess she needs to be careful what she says in public.  I really don't get all the emotion around her.  She is a public figure - Much more so than when she was an actress.  She will get admiration (some very extreme) and criticism.  The criticism she gets on this thread is not hate.



Agree to all of this; alas .. it seems that only glowing & positive comments are allowed in this thread (_in my experience_).  Rather disappointed with TPF right now (_and let's see if this gets deleted_) ..


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Agree to all of this; alas .. it seems that only glowing & positive comments are allowed in this thread (_in my experience_).  Rather disappointed with TPF right now (_and let's see if this gets deleted_) ..


Mine are glowing but still get negatives at me!!


----------



## hellosunshine

Some cute video conversations/interactions from the UK Lion King premier --


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> Agree to all of this; alas .. it seems that only glowing & positive comments are allowed in this thread (_in my experience_).  Rather disappointed with TPF right now (_and let's see if this gets deleted_) ..



I'm a happy, positive, & optimistic person so I have no interest in reading negative comments. Perhaps, this need for negative critique speaks more about the person wanting it than about Meghan. It's something to ponder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LuckyBitch

gracekelly said:


> I think going to Africa could  be a semi-timeout. Could be totally wrong about that and it will turn out to be a PR explosion with pictures of every baby they kiss and teacup they raise.    Not so sure that the column will happen.  Yes, Anna Wintour has sucked up to the Queen in the past and sat next to her at a fashion show, so  the go-ahead may be given for MM to do it, but I  bet it will be heavily vetted by the palace.  Anna will want that too,  to keep them happy for any future PR Vogue moments.


The queen at a fashion show....? In your dreams possibly.... but never, ever in real life.


----------



## LittleStar88

LuckyBitch said:


> The queen at a fashion show....? In your dreams possibly.... but never, ever in real life.



Yes, it happened!



https://www.royal.uk/queen-attends-london-fashion-week


----------



## gracekelly

LuckyBitch said:


> The queen at a fashion show....? In your dreams possibly.... but never, ever in real life.


Yes she was last year at London Fashion Week.  I know, hard to believe!


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Mine are glowing but still get negatives at me!!



As I am sure you already know, with some people you just can't win.  A balanced opinion is not welcome by some.   The air must be very rarefied where they live


----------



## LuckyBitch

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, it happened!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.royal.uk/queen-attends-london-fashion-week



I'm amazed... Thanks for the pics, at first I thought it was the woman who doubles as the queen but it's definitely our queen. She actually looks as if she's enjoying herself...


----------



## LuckyBitch

gracekelly said:


> Yes she was last year at London Fashion Week.  I know, hard to believe!


Wow!!! Amazing..Thanks.


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> Yes she was last year at London Fashion Week.  I know, hard to believe!



Just wanted to add that the Queen dresses to her own drummer and she looks 100% all the time.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> I'm a happy, positive, & optimistic person so *I have no interest in reading negative comments. *Perhaps, this need for negative critique speaks more about the person wanting it than about Meghan. It's something to ponder.


That's fine, but you are an adult and must realize that not everyone thinks this way.  There will always be an opposite opinion to your opinion on this thread and in real life.  Freedom of speech.


----------



## gracekelly

LuckyBitch said:


> I'm amazed... Thanks for the pics, at first I thought it was the *woman who doubles as the queen* but it's definitely our queen. She actually looks as if she's enjoying herself...


How funny!  I never thought of that.


----------



## LittleStar88

LuckyBitch said:


> She actually looks as if she's enjoying herself...



She really does seem to be enjoying herself!


----------



## Tivo

Never have I seen Anna Wintour so happy.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> Mine are glowing but still get negatives at me!!


You are incredibly neutral. You should lead all our discussions.  I read your posts and they are neither mean nor glowing, just respectful.


----------



## gracekelly

Tivo said:


> Never have I seen Anna Wintour so happy.


Her having the Queen there is the coup of a lifetime!


----------



## gracekelly

daisychainz said:


> You are incredible neutral. You should lead all our discussions.  I read your posts and they are neither mean nor glowing, just respectful.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> You are incredibly neutral. You should lead all our discussions.  I read your posts and they are neither mean nor glowing, just respectful.


Thank you so much, that's made my evening xx


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> Just wanted to add that the Queen dresses to her own drummer and she looks 100% all the time.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> That's fine, but you are an adult and must realize that not everyone thinks this way.  There will always be an opposite opinion to your opinion on this thread and in real life.  Freedom of speech.



I agree but let's not be negative just to be negative.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

LuckyBitch said:


> The queen at a fashion show....? In your dreams possibly.... but never, ever in real life.


She's been a very staunch supporter of Richard Quinn for a while. As far as I know, it's just Richard Quinn?


----------



## bellebellebelle19

LibbyRuth said:


> To the best of my knowledge, there is not a person on this thread that actually knows Meghan - or any other member of the royal family for that matter. People see pictures and hear reports, and interpret them differently. You see her as happy and wonderful, and that's a-ok.  Other people can look at the very same pictures and see something else.  That's a-ok too. None of us truly knows if we are right. We're all just speculating based on our own filters and perceptions. I don't see anything wrong with expressing opinions based on individual perceptions. But I am left wondering where the confidence comes from to declare others perceptions to be wrong or nasty.


The comment about wiping Meghan's tush was nasty.


----------



## mdcx

I have to say after the taking the advice back thread to use the ignore button if particular commenters really get your goat / wind you up etc, this thread is a lot easier to read. 

I speculate that Kate was very accomodating to Meghan, as directed by higher ups no doubt, but that Meghan did not respond with the appropriate level of deference. 
Kate and Meghan are not equals. I think some of this status stuff is probably very hard for Meghan to get her head around or accept.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I have to say after the taking the advice back thread to use the ignore button if particular commenters really get your goat / wind you up etc, this thread is a lot easier to read.
> 
> I speculate that Kate was very accomodating to Meghan, as directed by higher ups no doubt, but that Meghan did not respond with the appropriate level of deference.
> Kate and Meghan are not equals. I think some of this status stuff is probably very hard for Meghan to get her head around or accept.


I get what you're saying about them not being equals - Kate will some day be queen.  But not sure why you are saying Meghan did not respond with the appropriate level of deference?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

According to the Daily mail, this is the convo between Meghan, Harry and Pharrell at the Lion King premiere. Are they speaking in some sort of code?  

_Pharrell: Hey how you doing bro?

Harry: I love the shorts.

Pharrell: So happy for your union. Love is amazing. It’s wonderful. Don’t ever take that for granted but what it means in today’s climate. I just wanted to tell you it’s so significant for so many of us. Seriously.

Meghan: Thank you so much. That’s so nice of you to say.

Pharrell: I mean this. It’s significant. We cheer you guys on.

Meghan: Oh thank you. They don’t make it easy...

Pharrell: So you understand...

Harry: <leans in to group and whispers a joke, group laughs>

Pharrell: So you understand the significance. It’s beautiful. This is my wife right here

Meghan: Nice to meet you, thank you so much._
(https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...reveals-finding-royal-life-hard.html#comments)


----------



## Flatsy

It makes more sense when you watch the video.  Pharrell was not expecting Meghan's comeback and it didn't have time to register because he wanted to make sure he introduced his wife.

All of the celebrities seemed awestruck and a little nervous to be meeting royalty, even Beyonce.  It was cute.


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> I get what you're saying about them not being equals - Kate will some day be queen.  But not sure why you are saying Meghan did not respond with the appropriate level of deference?


Kate knows what is required, she knows that it is expected that she publicly appear to get on with Meghan. 
She would have been asked to advise Meghan, guide her etc.
She would also expect/require a certain level of deference due to her position vs. Meghan's.
They don't seem to be close, so I am just speculating that the issue comes from Meghan's side. 
The incident where Meghan acted like a celeb at Wimbledon versus Kate mingling with the commoners only goes to reinforce that Meghan doesn't get her position in the hierarchy. Pure speculation obvs.


----------



## Vlad

Alrighty, let's please make use of the ignore list instead of getting all worked up in this thread.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> According to the Daily mail, this is the convo between Meghan, Harry and Pharrell at the Lion King premiere. Are they speaking in some sort of code?
> 
> _Pharrell: Hey how you doing bro?
> 
> Harry: I love the shorts.
> 
> Pharrell: So happy for your union. Love is amazing. It’s wonderful. Don’t ever take that for granted but what it means in today’s climate. I just wanted to tell you it’s so significant for so many of us. Seriously.
> 
> Meghan: Thank you so much. That’s so nice of you to say.
> 
> Pharrell: I mean this. It’s significant. We cheer you guys on.
> 
> Meghan: Oh thank you. They don’t make it easy...
> 
> Pharrell: So you understand...
> 
> Harry: <leans in to group and whispers a joke, group laughs>
> 
> Pharrell: So you understand the significance. It’s beautiful. This is my wife right here
> 
> Meghan: Nice to meet you, thank you so much._
> (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...reveals-finding-royal-life-hard.html#comments)


Watched all of the videos and all the conversations were banal. Can't really say much in a meet and greet except something vapid.  It's so awkward.


----------



## anitalilac

gracekelly said:


> Yes she was last year at London Fashion Week.  I know, hard to believe!


Anna Wintour is smiling! How very rare indeed , I would too if I get to sit next to the Queen.


----------



## Grande Latte

I've always loved Anna Wintour's floral dresses. They're so elegant, and always appropriate for the occasion.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> The incident where Meghan acted like a celeb at Wimbledon versus Kate mingling with the commoners only goes to reinforce that Meghan doesn't get her position in the hierarchy. Pure speculation obvs.


Who knows what happened at Wimbledon, but I'm inclined to agree with this statement, unfortunately.


----------



## Flatsy

I think Meghan doesn't even consider herself part of the royal hierarchy.  Or at least considers the hierarchy irrelevant to her.  

I think both Meghan and Harry operate as two celebrities who happen to have derived their fame from royal titles.  I do believe that their primary goal is to be seen as great humanitarians and build a global brand that reflects that, all the while wearing designer clothes and jet-setting with celebrities.  I do think Amal Clooney and Oprah are the icons Meghan aspires to emulate....not Princess Anne or Sophie Wessex.

I don't ever see Meghan and Harry committing themselves to the day-in day-out grind of the unglamorous royal work that someone like Princess Anne does.....way out on the edges of the UK visiting sheep farmers and inaugurating small boats and cutting ribbons at unimportant museums, all with little to no media present.  Hell, even the Queen spends most of her time doing that type of stuff.

If Meghan and Harry were really dedicated to the royal family, they would be looking to help take over that burden from the older generation, who continue to do all of the heavy lifting.  I don't think Kate and William are eager to do it either, but they know it's their destiny.

Meghan and Harry fans are always raving about how hard working they are (and conversely, how lazy William and Kate are).  That's not even remotely true.  Harry has three high-profile charities and the bulk of his engagements are related to those charities (such as the grueling work of raising money by playing polo or attending a movie premiere).  But he still has yet to make it over 200 engagements per year.  William's engagement tally is pretty abysmal too, but he consistently outdoes Harry in that respect.

As for Meghan, she's rightfully taking a maternity leave so it will be a while before she really gets her momentum back. But one cookbook and a few engagements (where her designer outfits and extra credit banana stunts threatened to overshadow the purpose) do not mean she's breaking any ground as a royal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I think Meghan doesn't even consider herself part of the royal hierarchy.  Or at least considers the hierarchy irrelevant to her.
> 
> I think both Meghan and Harry operate as two celebrities who happen to have derived their fame from royal titles.  I do believe that their primary goal is to be seen as great humanitarians and build a global brand that reflects that, all the while wearing designer clothes and jet-setting with celebrities.  I do think Amal Clooney and Oprah are the icons Meghan aspires to emulate....not Princess Anne or Sophie Wessex.
> 
> I don't ever see Meghan and Harry committing themselves to the day-in day-out grind of the unglamorous royal work that someone like Princess Anne does.....way out on the edges of the UK visiting sheep farmers and inaugurating small boats and cutting ribbons at unimportant museums, all with little to no media present.  Hell, even the Queen spends most of her time doing that type of stuff.
> 
> If Meghan and Harry were really dedicated to the royal family, they would be looking to help take over that burden from the older generation, who continue to do all of the heavy lifting.  I don't think Kate and William are eager to do it either, but they know it's their destiny.
> 
> Meghan and Harry fans are always raving about how hard working they are (and conversely, how lazy William and Kate are).  That's not even remotely true.  Harry has three high-profile charities and the bulk of his engagements are related to those charities (such as the grueling work of raising money by playing polo or attending a movie premiere).  But he still has yet to make it over 200 engagements per year.  William's engagement tally is pretty abysmal too, but he consistently outdoes Harry in that respect.
> 
> As for Meghan, she's rightfully taking a maternity leave so it will be a while before she really gets her momentum back. But one cookbook and a few engagements (where her designer outfits and extra credit banana stunts threatened to overshadow the purpose) do not mean she's breaking any ground as a royal.



I hadn't thought about it to this degree, but everything you say here rings true.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> *I think both Meghan and Harry operate as two celebrities who happen to have derived their fame from royal titles. * I do believe that their primary goal is to be seen as great humanitarians and build a global brand that reflects that, all the while wearing designer clothes and jet-setting with celebrities.  I do think Amal Clooney and Oprah are the icons Meghan aspires to emulate....not Princess Anne or Sophie Wessex.
> 
> I don't ever see Meghan and Harry committing themselves to the day-in day-out grind of the unglamorous royal work that someone like Princess Anne does.....way out on the edges of the UK visiting sheep farmers and inaugurating small boats and cutting ribbons at unimportant museums, all with little to no media present.  Hell, even the Queen spends most of her time doing that type of stuff.
> 
> If Meghan and Harry were really dedicated to the royal family, they would be looking to help take over that burden from the older generation, who continue to do all of the heavy lifting.  I don't think Kate and William are eager to do it either, but they know it's their destiny.
> 
> Meghan and Harry fans are always raving about how hard working they are (and conversely, how lazy William and Kate are).  That's not even remotely true.  Harry has three high-profile charities and the bulk of his engagements are related to those charities (such as the grueling work of raising money by playing polo or attending a movie premiere).  But he still has yet to make it over 200 engagements per year.  William's engagement tally is pretty abysmal too, but he consistently outdoes Harry in that respect.
> 
> As for Meghan, she's rightfully taking a maternity leave so it will be a while before she really gets her momentum back. But one cookbook and a few engagements (where her designer outfits and extra credit banana stunts threatened to overshadow the purpose) do not mean she's breaking any ground as a royal.


You said exactly what I was thinking and trying to put into words, but couldn't!  That's it precisely -- two celebrities who derived their fame from royal titles.

Princess Margaret was like that.  She loved the jet set life and the celebrities and got lots of attention, but never did any unglamorous royal work.


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> Kate knows what is required, she knows that it is expected that she publicly appear to get on with Meghan.
> She would have been asked to advise Meghan, guide her etc.
> She would also expect/require a certain level of deference due to her position vs. Meghan's.
> They don't seem to be close, so I am just speculating that the issue comes from Meghan's side.
> The incident where Meghan acted like a celeb at Wimbledon versus Kate mingling with the commoners only goes to reinforce that Meghan doesn't get her position in the hierarchy. Pure speculation obvs.





Sharont2305 said:


> Who knows what happened at Wimbledon, but I'm inclined to agree with this statement, unfortunately.



Kate has had eight years to figure out her role. 

Meghan has had one and the last few months of her year she was on maternity leave.

For me the biggest difference is they have different roles and certain members of the public allowing for grace. 

Kate and Meghan have different paths to follow because of their husbands. The spare can be more relaxed.

Kate also has been allowed grace to make mistakes. Meghan isn’t, Kate walked in front of Prince Charles and had to be pulled back by William which made it incredibly obvious, but it was her first year as a royal.

Yet, her is Meghan one year in being compared to Kate’s eight years in, a lack of grace and no learning curve for Meghan.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect some of the difference in heat comes from the fact that Kate appeared to be trying to tow the line and making slip ups where Meghan is seen, in some circumstances, to have come in hot, fully intending to buck the traditions.

I also think it is complicated and race, class, nationality and a whole mix of other things factor in.


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> where Meghan is seen, in some circumstances, to have come in hot, fully intending to buck the traditions.


Agree.  

In Meghan's first few months on the job, the media was trying to push the narrative of Meghan being a breath of fresh air.  People don't seem to remember it this way, but The Daily Mail couldn't praise Meghan enough when she closed that car door for herself.  It's one of the most adulatory articles I've ever seen in the DM.  "So down to earth!" "Breath of fresh air" etc.   And when Meghan was on tour with the Queen and didn't know which way to get into the car, that was so endearing and she was applauded for handling it with grace.

But somewhere along the way, "Meghan breaching protocol" became a tiresome, runaway theme in the media.  And I don't think it helped that a lot of publications designated themselves Meghan's defenders and wrote these impassioned articles about how Meghan was being picked on/racially targeted for wearing the wrong nail polish or crossing her legs the wrong way....when the original discussions about nail polish and leg crossing were not that big a deal to begin with and have been going on since Diana's day.


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


> LOL, I wish things were as simple as to target her for simply wearing the wrong nail polish or crossing her legs the wrong way. Truth is, she was picked apart in a manner that was far worse and few people seem to remember it. Here's a retrospective view --
> 
> View attachment 4493617
> 
> View attachment 4493619
> 
> View attachment 4493627
> 
> View attachment 4493628
> 
> View attachment 4493629
> 
> View attachment 4493638
> 
> 
> There's more articles out there but I do not have time to search further. Anyways, as you can see...it's not all about nail polish..there is a narrative where they've tried to portray her as violent, "ghetto", and the undertones are racial.



Wow. I have seen some of these but not all of them. How awful and  so crazy that these are condoned.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> I'm a happy, positive, & optimistic person so I have no interest in reading negative comments. Perhaps, this need for negative critique speaks more about the person wanting it than about Meghan. It's something to ponder.


Did I say something specific to you about your personality; I do not believe I ever did .. and as such, I do not appreciate you insinuating that I wish negative things to happen to me or anyone for that matter.  Have I ever said that I hate Meghan? .. the answer is NO, I simply post things as I see them.  As I've said too many times to count at this point, there are folks in here who are obviously very passionate about Meghan and that's fine, but they shouldn't feel the need to bash others who may have a different point of view.  *Please IGNORE me if you do not wish to read my posts .. thank you!*


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> LOL, I wish things were as simple as to target her for simply wearing the wrong nail polish or crossing her legs the wrong way. Truth is, she was picked apart in a manner that was far worse and few people seem to remember it. Here's a retrospective view --
> 
> View attachment 4493617
> 
> View attachment 4493619
> 
> View attachment 4493627
> 
> View attachment 4493628
> 
> View attachment 4493629
> 
> View attachment 4493638
> 
> 
> There's more articles out there but I do not have time to search further. Anyways, as you can see...it's not all about nail polish..there is a narrative where they've tried to portray her as violent, "ghetto", and the undertones are racial.


WOW, now these are TRULY HORRIBLE!!!!


----------



## pukasonqo

CeeJay said:


> WOW, now these are TRULY HORRIBLE!!!!


yup, the tabloid press is the lowest of the low
the one of the couple w the little chimpanzee is vile, i am sure they’d justify it by saying it was a joke, she (meghan) should have some sense of humour...nope, that was racist and vile and, as a mixed raced person, i resent it for myself and my kids


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> yup, the tabloid press is the lowest of the low
> the one of the couple w the little chimpanzee is vile, i am sure they’d justify it by saying it was a joke, she (meghan) should have some sense of humour...nope, that was racist and vile and, as a mixed raced person, i resent it for myself and my kids


yes that was the worst....stuff like that was done to michelle ***** too


----------



## chaneljewel

Terrible media posts.  Just plain cruel to Meghan and her family.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

A1aGypsy said:


> I suspect some of the difference in heat comes from the fact that Kate appeared to be trying to tow the line and making slip ups where Meghan is seen, in some circumstances, to have come in hot, fully intending to buck the traditions.
> 
> I also think it is complicated and race, class, nationality and a whole mix of other things factor in.





Flatsy said:


> Agree.
> 
> In Meghan's first few months on the job, the media was trying to push the narrative of Meghan being a breath of fresh air.  People don't seem to remember it this way, but The Daily Mail couldn't praise Meghan enough when she closed that car door for herself.  It's one of the most adulatory articles I've ever seen in the DM.  "So down to earth!" "Breath of fresh air" etc.   And when Meghan was on tour with the Queen and didn't know which way to get into the car, that was so endearing and she was applauded for handling it with grace.
> 
> But somewhere along the way, "Meghan breaching protocol" became a tiresome, runaway theme in the media.  And I don't think it helped that a lot of publications designated themselves Meghan's defenders and wrote these impassioned articles about how Meghan was being picked on/racially targeted for wearing the wrong nail polish or crossing her legs the wrong way....when the original discussions about nail polish and leg crossing were not that big a deal to begin with and have been going on since Diana's day.


I can't really remember Meghan ever saying she wants to buck traditions. It does seem to be a media narrative.


----------



## Flatsy

I agree that there have been some incredibly terrible things written about Meghan in the gutter tabloids.

What I object to is the idea that this is representative of the bulk of the media coverage of Meghan because it's not.  And I object when her fans try to shut down any and all criticism of Meghan on any topic by equating it to something like the "Straight Out of Compton" headline and saying it all falls under the same heading of "racist abuse".


----------



## mdcx

Flatsy said:


> I agree that there have been some incredibly terrible things written about Meghan in the gutter tabloids.
> 
> What I object to is the idea that this is representative of the bulk of the media coverage of Meghan because it's not.  And I object when her fans try to shut down any and all criticism of Meghan on any topic by equating it to something like the "Straight Out of Compton" headline and saying it all falls under the same heading of "racist abuse".



Agreed. Most of her critics are fairly reasonable in their criticism, and it is of her behaviour, not her family background, skin colour etc. My issues are with things she has control over, like how she acted at Wimbledon, keeping the christening secret, the enormously expensive baby shower in NYC etc. All things that indicate she does not "get it" and chooses not to get it, even when given guidance about how to be royal.


----------



## PatsyCline

mdcx said:


> Agreed. Most of her critics are fairly reasonable in their criticism, and it is of her behaviour, not her family background, skin colour etc. My issues are with things she has control over, like how she acted at Wimbledon, keeping the christening secret, the enormously expensive baby shower in NYC etc. All things that indicate she does not "get it" and chooses not to get it, even when given guidance about how to be royal.


But you're making the assumption that it was her decision to keep the baby shower private. If it wasn't required to be public, then that's the parents decision, not yours or anyone else's.

If her friends decide to throw her a baby shower and they paid for it, why do you care how much it costs?

What's wrong with how she 'acted' at Wimbledon? She attended to give support to her friend Serena.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

PatsyCline said:


> But you're making the assumption that it was her decision to keep the baby shower private. If it wasn't required to be public, then that's the parents decision, not yours or anyone else's.
> 
> If her friends decide to throw her a baby shower and they paid for it, why do you care how much it costs?
> 
> What's wrong with how she 'acted' at Wimbledon? She attended to give support to her friend Serena.


It's probably not worth going over the same ground again, but Meghan has requirements on her behaviour now that she is a member of the BRF. Some are explicit, some are implicit. Life has not as much to do with her rights and desires now, but with her responsibilities. I don't think she will let that stop her from doing as she wishes in any case.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Agreed. Most of her critics are fairly reasonable in their criticism, and it is of her behaviour, not her family background, skin colour etc. My issues are with things she has control over, like how she acted at Wimbledon, keeping the christening secret, the enormously expensive baby shower in NYC etc. All things that indicate she does not "get it" and chooses not to get it, even when given guidance about how to be royal.


I agree that things indicate that she doesn't "get it" She will, I'm sure, in time.
It's not like she married into a big Hollywood type of "royalty" and maybe that's what she thought, I don't know. We are talking about an institution hundreds of years old here with traditions, "rules" and hierarchy that needs to be followed.
It took Catherine time to settle in, obviously she had the advantage of growing up under a Monarchy and then having 8 years within certain parts of the wider circle so she had a better idea of this. Meghan, as a foreigner, not really knowing about it, didn't. I feel for her, but she will be OK.


----------



## PatsyCline

mdcx said:


> It's probably not worth going over the same ground again, but Meghan has requirements on her behaviour now that she is a member of the BRF. Some are explicit, some are implicit. Life has not as much to do with her rights and desires now, but with her responsibilities. I don't think she will let that stop her from doing as she wishes in any case.


Absolutely she has certain requirements as a member of the Royal Family, but you avoided answering any question I asked in regards to your specific complaints about her behaviour.


----------



## south-of-france

Thank you for this thread, I enjoyed it for a while, but am now unsubscribing due to all the arguments... xo


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Absolutely she has certain requirements as a member of the Royal Family, but you avoided answering any question I asked in regards to your specific complaints about her behaviour.


With all due respect, the arguments for and against on the baby shower were covered *exhaustively* in this thread already, and so was Wimbledon.  If you really want to know people's thoughts, they are easily readable upthread.

You are implying that if people aren't willing to restate their arguments over and over and over again in their entirety, then their opinions are void and yours should prevail.


----------



## LittleStar88

Come on you guys. Let’s move on from this.

As an American marrying into the BRF she is bound to have missteps. All of us would. Is she perfect? No. But her intentions are in the right place and she may see being a member of the BRF more as a job or public office rather than a way of life. I’m sure it is a huge adjustment to lifestyle that won’t change overnight.

She is not perfect, but she has potential to bring attention to really great causes. She is composed, well-spoken, and smart. She also seems genuinely kind and warm.

The BRF seems to like her and have embraced her as family, so they must not be too concerned about the path she and Harry want to take.

The media has been just awful to her for the most part. Of course part of being in the public eye is that you will be a target, but the racism is disgusting. Truth is we can argue over our own assumptions, opinions, and interpretations of her but none of us know the truth and beating dead horses won’t change minds in this thread so let’s just let it go.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Agreed. Most of her critics are fairly reasonable in their criticism, and it is of her behaviour, not her family background, skin colour etc. My issues are with things she has control over, like how she acted at Wimbledon, keeping the christening secret, the enormously expensive baby shower in NYC etc. All things that indicate she does not "get it" and chooses not to get it, even when given guidance about how to be royal.


I am starting to blame Harry way more than Meghan, tbh. He is her guide in all of this and you'd think he'd be advising her on royal protocol and expected behaviors and communications. It indicates to me that she is being left to just be herself, which is ending up problematic sometimes. Perhaps she isn't listening, but I tend to think she just isn't getting much guidance from Harry other than to be herself, which doesn't conform to royal protocol all of the time.

For any Suits fans, it started its last season a few nights ago


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am starting to blame Harry way more than Meghan, tbh. He is her guide in all of this and you'd think he'd be advising her on royal protocol and expected behaviors and communications. It indicates to me that she is being left to just be herself, which is ending up problematic sometimes. Perhaps she isn't listening, but I tend to think she just isn't getting much guidance from Harry other than to be herself, which doesn't conform to royal protocol all of the time.
> 
> For any Suits fans, it started its last season a few nights ago


Harry probably wants to guide her but doesn't want to dominate her.  Don't know how much it comes into play but she is older than him and he seems to be smitten with her.


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> Harry probably wants to guide her but doesn't want to dominate her.  Don't know how much it comes into play but she is older than him and he seems to be smitten with her.


Agreed. I 100% believe she wears the pants in this relationship. Nothing wrong with that, because I do the same. She also seems to be headstrong and opinionated.

Harry is head over heels in love with her and will do anything to make her happy. He always seemed to be the more emotional and sensitive one between him and William.


----------



## Encore Hermes

She just got married and had a baby. I assume/hope her priorities are her new husband and baby and how to navigate her new job, being a Royal is lower on the list.   Same with Harry, new marriage and a baby...I think they are both doing great considering the media and public scrutiny.


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am starting to blame Harry way more than Meghan, tbh. He is her guide in all of this and you'd think he'd be advising her on royal protocol and expected behaviors and communications. It indicates to me that she is being left to just be herself, which is ending up problematic sometimes. Perhaps she isn't listening, but I tend to think she just isn't getting much guidance from Harry other than to be herself, which doesn't conform to royal protocol all of the time.



I wouldn't go so far as to say blame should be applied to Harry. He's been trained since birth in royal protocol and it is probably as second nature to him as breathing. I'm sure he has guided Meghan about many things. But there's a point where, as a spouse, giving advice could easily go overboard and become nagging or even condescending.

It might not be something he thinks about because he loves her the way she is. I think Harry was drawn to Meghan for exactly that reason, that she wasn't part of the world he knew. I hadn't realized it before, but most of the women he was romantically linked with were actresses, singers, and models. He isn't attracted to all that proper stuff.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LittleStar88 said:


> Come on you guys. Let’s move on from this.
> 
> As an American marrying into the BRF she is bound to have missteps. All of us would. Is she perfect? No. But her intentions are in the right place and she may see being a member of the BRF more as a job or public office rather than a way of life. I’m sure it is a huge adjustment to lifestyle that won’t change overnight.
> 
> She is not perfect, but she has potential to bring attention to really great causes. She is composed, well-spoken, and smart. She also seems genuinely kind and warm.
> 
> The BRF seems to like her and have embraced her as family, so they must not be too concerned about the path she and Harry want to take.
> 
> The media has been just awful to her for the most part. Of course part of being in the public eye is that you will be a target, but the racism is disgusting. Truth is we can argue over our own assumptions, opinions, and interpretations of her but none of us know the truth and beating dead horses won’t change minds in this thread so let’s just let it go.




Well said!


----------



## chicaloca

People keep complaining about the Sussexes being secretive yet they still provided pics of their newborn baby shortly after birth and we got official pics of the christening. They provided the same pics as other royals but did so without inconveniencing a hospital and it’s patients. We even got the bonus video of Harry coming out to announce the birth and a bonus pic of the Queen meeting Archie. They also protected Archie’s likely non-famous godparents from rabid tabloids by holding the christening at the Queen’s private chapel. 

The perception of the Sussexes being overly private is fanned by tabloids that are angry at not being able to monetize aspects of the Sussexes life. They have abused Meghan at every turn so the Sussexes have every right to protect their son from the same abuse.


----------



## PatsyCline

chicaloca said:


> People keep complaining about the Sussexes being secretive yet they still provided pics of their newborn baby shortly after birth and we got official pics of the christening. They provided the same pics as other royals but did so without inconveniencing a hospital and it’s patients. We even got the bonus video of Harry coming out to announce the birth and a bonus pic of the Queen meeting Archie. They also protected Archie’s likely non-famous godparents from rabid tabloids by holding the christening at the Queen’s private chapel.
> 
> The perception of the Sussexes being overly private is fanned by tabloids that are angry at not being able to monetize aspects of the Sussexes life. They have abused Meghan at every turn so the Sussexes have every right to protect their son from the same abuse.


Thank you.

Your post is well-written and well articulated.


----------



## chessmont

LuckyBitch said:


> I'm amazed... Thanks for the pics, at first I thought it was the woman who doubles as the queen but it's definitely our queen. She actually looks as if she's enjoying herself...


There is a woman who doubles for the queen?  Do you have a pic?  When does this occur?  When she has to be in two places at once?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

chessmont said:


> There is a woman who doubles for the queen?  Do you have a pic?  When does this occur?  When she has to be in two places at once?


No, there's a woman who, to a certain extent, has made a living by being a professional lookalike.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I agree with you about her father's side but what about the family on her mother's side? Why weren't there more of them at the wedding and why are they never seen in photos/public with her?
> 
> Racists of all colours aside, isn't Meghan's main problem being accepted that she is too Hollywood, not primarily that she is bi-racial? She seems like your typical vapid woke Hollywood celeb with a penchant for virtue signaling and me me me. Which doesn't seem to go over well when in your majesty's service. I think that she had the potential to be very loved by the British just by marrying lovable Harry but she (and hubby) are squandering the good-will for reasons already pointed out by other posters. Starting with having a weirdly huge celeb studded wedding despite all those family problems on her father's side and the inexplicable lack of family on her mother's. Rather tone-deaf.
> 
> She just comes across as fake, with that little girl voice and mannerism shtick when cameras are on. Other clips show that's not the whole story to her. From what I've read of these people, Kate and her whole family got a lot of flack too (Waity Katie etc) in the beginning.
> 
> The BRF are like the Borg but with much better perks. Marry in to it and you must assimilate. You must comply. You won't, you give up your titles and royal perks and get out.



I have no idea about her mother’s side. But whatever the issue. They know enough to keep their mouths shut. So far.


----------



## bag-princess

BagOuttaHell said:


> I have no idea about her mother’s side. But whatever the issue. They know enough to keep their mouths shut. So far.



And maybe they could not afford the costs of going across the pond to the wedding. But I am sure people would say Megan should have paid for this too!


----------



## mdcx

Interesting comments in this article regards Pippa Middleton and Meghan's relationship or lack thereof:

Other news reports take the claims further, with one 'insider' saying Pippa's distance from Meghan is out of loyalty to sister Kate.

"On paper Pippa and Meghan seem like a match made in heaven, as they are both good cooks, enjoy exercise and are wealthy moms with small baby sons," a source told Fox News.

"Reality check is she is never going to be more than an American duchess married to Prince Harry who was hurtful to Pippa's sister and who wants to rewrite the rules for the monarchy in the 21st century."

The insider said Pippa is way too savvy to fall for all of that.

"Pippa will be more than capable of dealing with Meghan," the insider continued. "She is a seasoned old Marlburian brought up with good manners, clever and tough enough not to let light in on her sisterly frustrations with the Duchess of Sussex, particularly over the treatment Meghan meted out to Kate."

Althought it isn't clear what "treatment" the insider is referring to.​https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/pi...n-markle/2d85fbce-42dc-4400-b856-7a2046c5c9bd


----------



## PatsyCline

Looks like the National Enquirer/New York Post of Australia.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

PatsyCline said:


> Looks like the National Enquirer/New York Post of Australia.



It's actually the lifestyle/entertainment arm of a major news network here, Channel Nine.  But Honey don't do investigative journalism that's for sure.  They report on things (they have an afternoon segment on tv as well) in the same way E!News or Extra does in the US.

So, not as bad as the DailyMail or National Enquirer, but I'd take what they report with a grain of salt.


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> "Reality check is she is never going to be more than an American duchess married to Prince *Harry who was hurtful to Pippa's sister* and who wants to rewrite the rules for the monarchy in the 21st century."​https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/pi...n-markle/2d85fbce-42dc-4400-b856-7a2046c5c9bd


what?


----------



## hellosunshine

Why are my posts getting moved to other subforums? My post regarding the media treatment/racism towards Meghan was moved to the Miu Miu Authenticate subforum..what's going on here?


----------



## Swanky

Looks like 1 post, and I'm sure Vlad just accidentally moved it instead of deleting it.  I just went ahead and deleted it.
This is off topic for this thread, since you and I have been PMing, it's better suited in PM, not here.  This thread needs desperately to remain on topic.



hellosunshine said:


> Why are my posts getting moved to other subforums? My post regarding the media treatment/racism towards Meghan was moved to the Miu Miu Authenticate subforum..what's going on here?


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending Dr. Jane Goodall’s Roots & Shoots Global Leadership Meeting


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## mdcx

This story rather strains credulity. My understanding is that Omid Scobie is a personal friend of Meghan's which explains much:
*Meghan Markle 'disappointed' by security team's handling of no photos at Wimbledon request*
...
Yahoo UK’s ‘The Royal Box,’ royal commentator Omid Scobie says: “I spoke to a source after that had happened and I was told that Meghan was quite disappointed at just how it played out because, in her words, she had said to this source that she would have happily taken a photo with anyone that had asked.

“So I think that perhaps this might have been a case of a protection officer being slightly too protective, although that’s probably his job.”

Scobie also points out that it’s not the first time that a member of the public has been told not to take photos of the royals.​


----------



## threadbender

He was trying to take a selfie. Looks like security had instructions to not allow photos and misunderstood what he was doing. Seems like misunderstandings between Meghan and security, as well. I think it is a mistake to put this story out.


----------



## chicaloca

carlpsmom said:


> He was trying to take a selfie. Looks like security had instructions to not allow photos and misunderstood what he was doing. Seems like misunderstandings between Meghan and security, as well. I think it is a mistake to put this story out.



 I think it was a mistake to put out a story claiming Duchess  asked for privacy at Wimbledon and said  “no pictures” at an event when she was clearly seen greeting fans and having her picture taken by those fans. Also no attempt was made to verify the truth of the one woman who made the claim and lied about sitting near Meghan. Maybe because the woman’s daughter wrote the article?

It always seems to be a “mistake” for Meghan to defend herself but it’s never a mistake for the media to print lies about her.


----------



## Flatsy

mdcx said:


> This story rather strains credulity. My understanding is that Omid Scobie is a personal friend of Meghan's which explains much:


I don't know whether he's an actual friend, but he definitely functions as a mouthpiece for Harry and Meghan when they want to get their side of a story out.  

The no pictures policy at Wimbledon didn't go over well, and now Meghan is putting the blame on her protection officer.  I don't think that's a very nice thing to do and helps explain her extremely high staff turnover.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Looks like the never complain, never explain memo didn't get through.

What's wrong with Harry's and Meghan's PR team? Best thing would have been to just shut up and do better in the future, have some "spontaneous" selfies taken by adoring fans published, go shear some sheep in the Outer Hebrides or whatever. The situation is not going to change overnight but will take some actual dedication and hard unglamorous work. Having public pity parties with other über rich celebs on how oppressed they all are is not going to help.

I suggest consulting with Harry's aunt Princess Anne, and his grandma, for tips on royal work ethics. Or a move to Hollywood where they'd be more suitably admired as the celebs they seem to prefer to be. If Harry can manage to rise above his oppression he could even join the local California Polo Club.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

It's a misstep for Meghan and Harry and their PR to try and retro-correct what happened at Wimbledon, even if they weren't at fault.

I like them both but sometimes it's wise to take a note from Frozen and let it go.


----------



## Chagall

There has been a lot of unwarranted criticism of Megan. As far as her relationship with her family is concerned, with the type of people they have shown  themselves to be, the wisest and healthiest decision she could make would be to go ‘no contact’ with them. She is the only sane one in the bunch.


----------



## buffym

Duke of Sussex on engagements today. He went to Sheffield University and IG qualifications.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting Sheffield Children’s Hospital, Sheffield Hallam University, and Invictus Games 2020 UK Trials at the English Institute of Sport Sheffield in Sheffield, England


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry visiting Sheffield Children’s Hospital, Sheffield Hallam University, and Invictus Games 2020 UK Trials at the English Institute of Sport Sheffield in Sheffield, England
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4498562
> View attachment 4498565
> View attachment 4498563
> View attachment 4498567
> View attachment 4498569
> View attachment 4498566
> View attachment 4498570
> View attachment 4498564



This was the cutest video!  Loved watching him with the children.


----------



## redney

Harry is his mother's son for sure! He seems to genuinely connect with and enjoy everyone he meets.


----------



## Tivo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Looks like the never complain, never explain memo didn't get through.
> 
> What's wrong with Harry's and Meghan's PR team? Best thing would have been to just shut up and do better in the future, have some "spontaneous" selfies taken by adoring fans published, go shear some sheep in the Outer Hebrides or whatever. The situation is not going to change overnight but will take some actual dedication and hard unglamorous work. Having public pity parties with other über rich celebs on how oppressed they all are is not going to help.
> 
> I suggest consulting with Harry's aunt Princess Anne, and his grandma, for tips on royal work ethics. Or a move to Hollywood where they'd be more suitably admired as the celebs they seem to prefer to be. If Harry can manage to rise above his oppression he could even join the local California Polo Club.


It’s not easy to never complain or explain if you’re being painted as a diva too high and mighty to take pics with fans...if that’s never been your style. It was probably hard to resist defending herself. But the delivery wasn’t good.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Tivo said:


> It’s not easy to never complain or explain if you’re being painted as a diva too high and mighty to take pics with fans...if that’s never been your style. It was probably hard to resist defending herself. But the delivery wasn’t good.


Fair point. But when you consider some of the criticism the Queen has faced - especially the way she was blasted after Diana died - she certainly walks the walk of her talk. So there are people in the family who could give guidance on how to do it even when it’s hard.


----------



## mdcx

Tivo said:


> It’s not easy to never complain or explain if you’re being painted as a diva too high and mighty to take pics with fans...if that’s never been your style. It was probably hard to resist defending herself. But the delivery wasn’t good.


But...that is exactly what happened. Meghan had a section of Wimbledon cleared around her and instructed her security to tell people off for taking photos. The security works for her, they hardly ad lib it. She would be well better off to suck it up and accept that she is primarily a public Royal now, not Meghan Markle, TV actress.

I'm all for feeling sympathy for her in her new role, but she really needs to get a clue and follow the lead of others in the Royal Family regards protocol. You do not alienate your subjects by acting like a diva, blaming your security for bad publicity, rejecting standard norms of dress etc and being uber secretive about your new baby.
I find it hard to imagine MM being able to hold her ground alongside Harry in an event like the one above. It requires a certain type of consistent, neutral yet positive conversation and above all, empathy and an awareness of your position as a role model & source of inspiration. It is not about you, basically.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Okay, except she doesn’t get to set the rules for her security team. They set the rules and make decisions based upon the instructions provided (from their bosses), assessment of risk and the location and asset. So, there’s that.


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, except she doesn’t get to set the rules for her security team. They set the rules and make decisions based upon the instructions provided (from their bosses), assessment of risk and the location and asset. So, there’s that.


Both people who were told to stop taking photos (the two we know of at least) say they were told by the PPO to "*respect her/their privacy*".  They were not told to keep back or given any other sort of security-related instructions.  It was about photos only.

Even Meghan's version as told to Omid Scobie doesn't refute that, so I'm not going to believe that TWO random people are making up the exact same lie.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I didn’t say they were lying.  I’m saying she doesn’t get to tell the security team what to do.  They aren’t private security guards hired by the asset.  

Asking someone not to take pictures and to respect her privacy can still be a security request.  It discourages others from coming forward and engaging in the same behaviour among other reasons. Or it could just be an agent who was being overly protective or overstepped.


----------



## Flatsy

I 100% disagree.  Privacy is different from security, and if Meghan's PPO was enforcing a no photos policy, it was because she asked them to.  That is definitely not a standard security measure when royals are in public places.  And I don't believe at all that Meghan, or any other royal, has absolutely no input or communication with her PPO's about how public appearances are handled.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Hey, we can agree to disagree. It’s all good.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

Never complain or explain unless you’re accused of using Botox.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree with you.  I thought it was odd only two people made that statement about Meghan. Considering the number of people who were in attendance that day.  

Royal or Hollywood Star, the media and public enjoy feeding on the negative.  Regardless If it’s true or not.



chicaloca said:


> I think it was a mistake to put out a story claiming Duchess  asked for privacy at Wimbledon and said  “no pictures” at an event when she was clearly seen greeting fans and having her picture taken by those fans. Also no attempt was made to verify the truth of the one woman who made the claim and lied about sitting near Meghan. Maybe because the woman’s daughter wrote the article?
> 
> It always seems to be a “mistake” for Meghan to defend herself but it’s never a mistake for the media to print lies about her.


----------



## minababe

chicaloca said:


> Never complain or explain unless you’re accused of using Botox.


isn't it crazy that kensington Palace commented that Story and now it's gone? but all the fake stories and lies about meghan didn't get a comment .. the same  happened when the cheating rumors about William came out. thats how the "firm" works.


----------



## daisychainz

minababe said:


> isn't it crazy that kensington Palace commented that Story and now it's gone? but all the fake stories and lies about meghan didn't get a comment .. the same  happened when the cheating rumors about William came out. thats how the "firm" works.


Yes, I was very surprised they gave a statement about it!


----------



## LittleStar88

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, except she doesn’t get to set the rules for her security team. They set the rules and make decisions based upon the instructions provided (from their bosses), assessment of risk and the location and asset. So, there’s that.



Right. And could it be possible they were trying to avoid a mob scene of people crowding around the area to get photos or say hello? I assume a PPO will be thinking ahead to worst case scenarios (crowds, uncontrollable situations) and were being proactive to avoid issues that would further distract from Meghan's presence at the game.

She is going to have missteps and this is probably one of them, but also probably not entirely her fault. Hopefully everyone involved learns from it and moves on.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think the Botox story was an easy one because that doctor advertised that she was a client which violates the law on both sides.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Morgan R said:


> Prince Harry visiting Sheffield Children’s Hospital, Sheffield Hallam University, and Invictus Games 2020 UK Trials at the English Institute of Sport Sheffield in Sheffield, England
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4498562
> View attachment 4498565
> View attachment 4498563
> View attachment 4498567
> View attachment 4498569
> View attachment 4498566
> View attachment 4498570
> View attachment 4498564



Da*n it, Morgan, stop proving me wrong   Well, at least about Harry. He does seem a natural at romancing the public.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> Right. And could it be possible they were trying to avoid a mob scene of people crowding around the area to get photos or say hello? I assume a PPO will be thinking ahead to worst case scenarios (crowds, uncontrollable situations) and were being proactive to avoid issues that would further distract from Meghan's presence at the game.
> 
> She is going to have missteps and this is probably one of them, but also probably not entirely her fault. Hopefully everyone involved learns from it and moves on.


Mob scene  what a joke!  The two people she accused of invading her privacy (in a public venue where they’d paid for tickets, mind you) were both taking photos of something else.  And meanwhile Kate manages to watch a match on court 14 whilst sitting amongst the crowd without any drama or fuss.  The royals are regularly out and about while off duty, and the public don’t mob them.  
Meghan came out of this looking a bit of a prat IMO, and sending out messages via “friends” just rakes it all up again, reminding everyone how silly she was all over again.  Harry and Meghan are a PR mess at the moment.


----------



## LittleStar88

Clearblueskies said:


> Mob scene  what a joke!  The two people she accused of invading her privacy (in a public venue where they’d paid for tickets, mind you) were both taking photos of something else.  And meanwhile Kate manages to watch a match on court 14 whilst sitting amongst the crowd without any drama or fuss.  The royals are regularly out and about while off duty, and the public don’t mob them.
> Meghan came out of this looking a bit of a prat IMO, and sending out messages via “friends” just rakes it all up again, reminding everyone how silly she was all over again.  Harry and Meghan are a PR mess at the moment.



That's not what I mean. I know two people don't make a mob, but it starts with one, then a few, then a few more, then there is a crowd.

I am not saying the entire situation is not a big flub (it was!) but thinking from the perspective of a security officer, they are there to think ahead and be proactive, not wait for a problem to materialize and try to react to it.

They will have a lot to figure out going forward and hopefully they learn from these little lessons and correct procedures going forward.


----------



## buffym

A1aGypsy said:


> I think the Botox story was an easy one because that doctor advertised that she was a client which violates the law on both sides.



The palace has denied Kate wears extensions. I doubt it has to do with legal reasons. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...yal-expert-claim-duchess-of-cambridge-spt/amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.glamour.com/story/kate-middletons-extensions-how/amp


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> Mob scene  what a joke!  The two people she accused of invading her privacy (in a public venue where they’d paid for tickets, mind you) were both taking photos of something else.  And meanwhile Kate manages to watch a match on court 14 whilst sitting amongst the crowd without any drama or fuss.  The royals are regularly out and about while off duty, and the public don’t mob them.
> Meghan came out of this looking a bit of a prat IMO, and sending out messages via “friends” just rakes it all up again, reminding everyone how silly she was all over again.  Harry and Meghan are a PR mess at the moment.



But denying Botox is smart pr or denying you wear hair extensions does not seem very regal but vain.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> But denying Botox is smart pr or denying you wear hair extensions does not seem very regal but vain.


I’m not sure how this relates to my post.  I wouldn’t be surprised if both Kate and Meghan occasionally wear hair extensions - most women in the public eye do these days.  Clarence House confirmed only that Kate has a scar, (I think this is well known) and that’s all.  Other than that I’m not getting into any Meghan v Kate with you it doesn’t interest me in the least.


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m not sure how this relates to my post.  I wouldn’t be surprised if both Kate and Meghan occasionally wear hair extensions - most women in the public I do these days.  Clarence House confirmed only that Kate has a scar, (I think this is well known) and that’s all.  Other than that I’m not getting into any Meghan v Kate with you it doesn’t interest me in the least.



CH confirmed it because the DM wrote questioning it was hair extensions. But, the palace said it was a scar.

However, it was later confirmed by Clarence House the line was in fact a scar from an operation the Duchess had as a child.

It is mentioned because of your post Harry and Meghan pr a mess. I was just showing they are actually following suit, but it seems it is okay to respond to Botox  rumors and hair extensions, but Meghan responded to accusations of being a diva- that is a “pr mess?”

I believe it is double standard and I was pointing it out. But if you don’t get it fine.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> CH confirmed it because the DM wrote questioning it was hair extensions. But, the palace said it was a scar.
> 
> However, it was later confirmed by Clarence House the line was in fact a scar from an operation the Duchess had as a child.
> 
> It is mentioned because of your post Harry and Meghan pr a mess. I was just showing they are actually following suit, but it seems it is okay to respond to Botox  rumors and hair extensions, but Meghan responded to accusations of being a diva- that is a “pr mess?”
> 
> I believe it is double standard and I was pointing it out. But if you don’t get it fine.


The palace confirmed she has a scar, they didn’t deny anything.  The other article was about a claim that was made that Kate was a client of some cosmetic surgeon, again, no denial re surgery.  That’s from articles you chose to post here.  I’m done with this nonsense


----------



## LittleStar88

Clearblueskies said:


> The palace confirmed she has a scar, they didn’t deny anything.  The other article was about a claim that was made that Kate was a client of some cosmetic surgeon, again, no denial re surgery.  That’s from articles you chose to post here.  I’m done with this nonsense



The denial was whether she had botox, not plastic surgery. Really big difference between the two. And he did not claim she was a client, just that she had the botox done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

I read that the Spa, when asked, said we can’t disclose who is our client, we have confidentiality agreements with all our high end clients. “We absolutely cannot comment at all *that she has come to us*.” [Insert sly wink here]

Anyway, I think it is insidious the way both women are treated and used by anyone looking to make a buck. Be it this slime or the press looking to spin a story.


----------



## LittleStar88

A1aGypsy said:


> Anyway, I think it is insidious the way both women are treated and used by anyone looking to make a buck. Be it this slime or the press looking to spin a story.



This. As much as we can all say they knew what they were marrying into, there has been some really awful things written and said about both and I really don't think all of the mental preparation in the world can prepare you for this kind of treatment (and a lot of it has been unreasonable). I guess that's why I feel compelled to stand up for them a little - some things are reasonably pointed out and some things are just self-serving, be it trying to allude to clientele to capitalize or really unnecessary stories to sell magazines/monetize link clicks.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> The denial was whether she had botox, not plastic surgery. Really big difference between the two. And he did not claim she was a client, just that she had the botox done.


My point was in response to the suggestion that Meghan wouldn’t be able to sit in the stand without being mobbed en masse by the great British public.  I used the example of Kate at court 14 to illustrate this point, I could equally have used Sophie. Perhaps if I had it wouldn’t have prompted someone to scurry off and find something to criticise Kate for - a tedious feature of this thread IMO, and I don’t want to get drawn into one woman v the other.
I don’t care if Meghan or Kate have had plastic surgery or Botox - but I do think it’s mean spirited of practitioners to imply they have the royals as clients in order to get publicity.  I don’t care if the Queen decides to celebrate her 100th by dyeing her hair red white and blue - it would make a great stamp.  I must admit though I do wish Harry would ditch the horrible beard.


----------



## cafecreme15

daisychainz said:


> Yes, I was very surprised they gave a statement about it!


What kind of statement did KP make about Botox? I think I missed it.


----------



## buffym

cafecreme15 said:


> What kind of statement did KP make about Botox? I think I missed it.



The complete story is in Willam and Kate Thread, but

“A spokesperson for Kensington Palace said the rumors of Kate Middleton getting "baby Botox" are "categorically not true.””


----------



## A1aGypsy

And “the Royal Family never endorse commercial activity”


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> This. As much as we can all say they knew what they were marrying into, there has been some really awful things written and said about both and I really don't think all of the mental preparation in the world can prepare you for this kind of treatment (and a lot of it has been unreasonable). I guess that's why I feel compelled to stand up for them a little - some things are reasonably pointed out and some things are just self-serving, be it trying to allude to clientele to capitalize or really unnecessary stories to sell magazines/monetize link clicks.



None of this is new. Diana and Fergie were treated every bit as brutally by the gossip media. It's just that back then the lies and exaggerations had to wait until the tabloids were printed and distributed. Now in our Web age the nasty barbs can be broadcast across the world within minutes and opened up to even more cruelty in the comments sections. Anybody who is even remotely a celebrity should avoid reading about themselves online. There's a lot of mean people out there looking for an outlet for their bitterness.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> None of this is new. Diana and Fergie were treated every bit as brutally by the gossip media. It's just that back then the lies and exaggerations had to wait until the tabloids were printed and distributed. Now in our Web age the nasty barbs can be broadcast across the world within minutes and opened up to even more cruelty in the comments sections. Anybody who is even remotely a celebrity should avoid reading about themselves online. There's a lot of mean people out there looking for an outlet for their bitterness.



I know. I remember it all. It is sad that it continues to this degree. I can't imagine living under that kind of scrutiny and criticism.


----------



## mdcx

Whoever is feeding stories the media may want to reel it back a bit - as far as I'm aware, Megs and Harry going to Balmoral with Archie each year is more an obligation than a great honour:

A source told the Sun on Sunday: “The Queen and Prince Philip adore the couple and, of course, their new great-grandson Archie, and they have invited them to Balmoral for a few days.

“It is testament to Meghan that she has been given this invite. It’s a huge honour.

“They will celebrate Meghan’s birthday, and the catering team will bake a cake to mark the occasion.

“Meghan may be a Duchess who can have anything she wants but the Queen is giving her a thoughtful present.

I think in quiet moments and quiet walks up by the river the Queen might have a few words of advice for her [Meghan Markle].​_https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9...kle-balmoral-visit-advise-things-done-better/_


----------



## rose60610

If going to Balmoral is more of an "obligation" than an "honor", then it is as much of an obligation for QEII to have to endure as well.

Considering the support Harry and Family get from the Crown, his family damned well better show up, suck it up, plaster on smiles and act like it's the best thing to have happened to them.

Because, quite frankly, it is.

If they don't tisky tisky like it, they can cut themselves off from it all, the "horrendous" duties they must perform, like showing up at events in tailored designer wear, jewels, chauffeurs, chefs, nannies, staff, castles, palaces, security, luxury vacations, luxury everything........

..........and go sell insurance or something.

Then they could eschew all those pesky obligations.  And all that comes *WITH* it.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

^Except there's zero proof that Harry and Meghan actually have a problem with those obligations.


----------



## minababe

mdcx said:


> Whoever is feeding stories the media may want to reel it back a bit - as far as I'm aware, Megs and Harry going to Balmoral with Archie each year is more an obligation than a great honour:
> 
> A source told the Sun on Sunday: “The Queen and Prince Philip adore the couple and, of course, their new great-grandson Archie, and they have invited them to Balmoral for a few days.
> 
> “It is testament to Meghan that she has been given this invite. It’s a huge honour.
> 
> “They will celebrate Meghan’s birthday, and the catering team will bake a cake to mark the occasion.
> 
> “Meghan may be a Duchess who can have anything she wants but the Queen is giving her a thoughtful present.
> 
> I think in quiet moments and quiet walks up by the river the Queen might have a few words of advice for her [Meghan Markle].​_https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9...kle-balmoral-visit-advise-things-done-better/_



thats really sweet of the Queen. I think she is really happy with Meghan for Harry.


----------



## mdcx

Extraordinary:

Narked neighbours ordered not to talk to Harry and Meghan said last night: “Even the Queen doesn’t demand this.”

Flunkies issued the list of dos and don’ts for people living near the couple’s new Frogmore Cottage home on the Windsor estate.

Locals have been told:


Don't approach or instigate conversation if you see the Royal couple
Do say 'Good Morning' or some other pleasantry if they speak to you
Don't pet or stroke their dogs, even if they come over to you
Don't offer to walk their dogs
Don't ask to see baby Archie or offer to babysit
Don't post anything through the letterbox of Frogmore Cottage
They include royal staff, officials who live in grace-and-favour houses and Crown Estate employees.

Buckingham Palace last night insisted the request had come from an “overly protective palace official” — without Harry and Meghan’s knowledge.

Residents were told not to approach or speak to the privacy-obsessed pair, nor ask to see baby Archie. Patting their two dogs is another no-no.

A local told The Sun: “It’s extraordinary. We’ve never heard anything like it. Everyone who lives on the estate works for the royals and knows how to behave respectfully.

“We aren’t told how to behave around the Queen like this. She’s very happy for people to greet her.”

The warnings were made at a recent residents’ meeting where the issue of the Sussexes’ move to the private Home Park estate was raised.​https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9594704/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-list-neighbours/


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> Extraordinary:
> 
> Narked neighbours ordered not to talk to Harry and Meghan said last night: “Even the Queen doesn’t demand this.”
> 
> Flunkies issued the list of dos and don’ts for people living near the couple’s new Frogmore Cottage home on the Windsor estate.
> 
> Locals have been told:
> 
> 
> Don't approach or instigate conversation if you see the Royal couple
> Do say 'Good Morning' or some other pleasantry if they speak to you
> Don't pet or stroke their dogs, even if they come over to you
> Don't offer to walk their dogs
> Don't ask to see baby Archie or offer to babysit
> Don't post anything through the letterbox of Frogmore Cottage
> They include royal staff, officials who live in grace-and-favour houses and Crown Estate employees.
> 
> Buckingham Palace last night insisted the request had come from an “overly protective palace official” — without Harry and Meghan’s knowledge.
> 
> Residents were told not to approach or speak to the privacy-obsessed pair, nor ask to see baby Archie. Patting their two dogs is another no-no.
> 
> A local told The Sun: “It’s extraordinary. We’ve never heard anything like it. Everyone who lives on the estate works for the royals and knows how to behave respectfully.
> 
> “We aren’t told how to behave around the Queen like this. She’s very happy for people to greet her.”
> 
> The warnings were made at a recent residents’ meeting where the issue of the Sussexes’ move to the private Home Park estate was raised.​https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9594704/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-list-neighbours/


   Great Britain 2019... Or what, the offenders will be thrown in the Tower and put on racks? Honestly, don't pet their dogs if they come running up to you? Teach your dogs to not run up uninvited to other people then. 

And this is supposed to have been decreed without the darling couple agreeing to it?  I was starting to feel bad for Meghan, but it's hard.


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> Extraordinary:
> 
> Narked neighbours ordered not to talk to Harry and Meghan said last night: “Even the Queen doesn’t demand this.”
> 
> Flunkies issued the list of dos and don’ts for people living near the couple’s new Frogmore Cottage home on the Windsor estate.
> 
> Locals have been told:
> 
> 
> Don't approach or instigate conversation if you see the Royal couple
> Do say 'Good Morning' or some other pleasantry if they speak to you
> Don't pet or stroke their dogs, even if they come over to you
> Don't offer to walk their dogs
> Don't ask to see baby Archie or offer to babysit
> Don't post anything through the letterbox of Frogmore Cottage
> They include royal staff, officials who live in grace-and-favour houses and Crown Estate employees.
> 
> Buckingham Palace last night insisted the request had come from an “overly protective palace official” — without Harry and Meghan’s knowledge.
> 
> Residents were told not to approach or speak to the privacy-obsessed pair, nor ask to see baby Archie. Patting their two dogs is another no-no.
> 
> A local told The Sun: “It’s extraordinary. We’ve never heard anything like it. Everyone who lives on the estate works for the royals and knows how to behave respectfully.
> 
> “We aren’t told how to behave around the Queen like this. She’s very happy for people to greet her.”
> 
> The warnings were made at a recent residents’ meeting where the issue of the Sussexes’ move to the private Home Park estate was raised.​https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9594704/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-list-neighbours/





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Great Britain 2019... Or what, the offenders will be thrown in the Tower and put on racks? Honestly, don't pet their dogs if they come running up to you? Teach your dogs to not run up uninvited to other people then.
> 
> And this is supposed to have been decreed without the darling couple agreeing to it?  I was starting to feel bad for Meghan, but it's hard.






The Sun is not always a truthful source, BP stated it didn’t happen. No handout or letter, the Sun doesn’t even have a copy of a letter, which supports the idea the Sun made it up.
When the royals ask for the privacy in the past the tabloids copied and the letter in the story and the local police handed out the letter.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-norfolk-35427842


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

They sure suffer more than their fair share of over enthusiastic staff


----------



## Flatsy

I can believe Buckingham Palace's characterization of this incident, but BP's credibility is strained at this point.  

If Buckingham Palace and Meghan/Harry in general want me to believe their denials, then they shouldn't go around denying things that are clearly true, like that Meghan authorized her friends to speak to People Magazine and Gayle King.  "Buckingham Palace says" doesn't mean a lot to me anymore.

This comes right after Meghan and Harry tried to foist the blame for Wimbledon onto an employee.  And now they are foisting the blame for a very similar sort of incident onto an employee.  Maybe they are telling the truth this time, but I wouldn't blame anybody for not believing them.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Did all this PR misfortune start when Sara Latham became Meghan and Harry's PR manager or had it been going on for a while before that?


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> I can believe Buckingham Palace's characterization of this incident, but BP's credibility is strained at this point.
> 
> If Buckingham Palace and Meghan/Harry in general want me to believe their denials, then they shouldn't go around denying things that are clearly true, like that Meghan authorized her friends to speak to People Magazine and Gayle King.  "Buckingham Palace says" doesn't mean a lot to me anymore.
> 
> This comes right after Meghan and Harry tried to foist the blame for Wimbledon onto an employee.  And now they are foisting the blame for a very similar sort of incident onto an employee.  Maybe they are telling the truth this time, but I wouldn't blame anybody for not believing them.



But you believe the Sun, it’s credible? 
Yet, the Sun doesn’t have a copy of said letter that was handed out?

When this happened in the past with other royals there was proof, copies of said letters and confirmation.

Yet, the press has nothing to show this happened but you believe it?


----------



## Sharont2305

There's a reason the paper is known as The Scum over here, liars through and through


----------



## Welltraveled!

buffym said:


> But you believe the Sun, it’s credible?
> Yet, t*he Sun doesn’t have a copy of said letter that was handed out?*
> 
> When this happened in the past with other royals there was proof, copies of said letters and confirmation.
> 
> Yet, the press has nothing to show this happened but you believe it?



Exactly!!  I kept reading the article to see a copy of said letter.  Then I realized it was from the Sun.....the American version of the National Enquirer!  LOL!


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> But you believe the Sun, it’s credible?
> Yet, the Sun doesn’t have a copy of said letter that was handed out?


The Sun never said a letter was handed out.  They said rules were told to neighbors at a briefing.  *Buckingham Palace confirmed that this briefing took place.  *

The only thing to believe or not to believe is Buckingham Palace's spin, which is that Meghan and Harry did not have anything to do with the briefing, and that it was overall well received, despite the people who ran to The Sun to express how insulted they were by it.


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> The Sun never said a letter was handed out.  They said rules were told to neighbors at a briefing.  *Buckingham Palace confirmed that this briefing took place.  *
> 
> The only thing to believe or not to believe is Buckingham Palace's spin, which is that Meghan and Harry did not have anything to do with the briefing, and that it was overall well received, despite the people who ran to The Sun to express how insulted they were by it.



The Sun article states the neighbors were given a list of dos and don’ts. 

Which is what BP is saying they didn’t do, they confirmed a meeting took place in February before the Sussex moved in informing the neighbors of the move.

So no I don’t believe BP spin because I don’t believe there is a spin. A meeting took place in February yet now the neighbors are complaining in July? 

I think the BBC explained it best


----------



## LuckyBitch

LittleStar88 said:


> That's not what I mean. I know two people don't make a mob, but it starts with one, then a few, then a few more, then there is a crowd.
> 
> I am not saying the entire situation is not a big flub (it was!) but thinking from the perspective of a security officer, they are there to think ahead and be proactive, not wait for a problem to materialize and try to react to it.
> I think you guys should move on.  The dead horse has been well and truly flogged...
> 
> They will have a lot to figure out going forward and hopefully they learn from these little lessons and correct procedures going forward.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> There's a reason the paper is known as The Scum over here, liars through and through


This! The Sun is even less reliable than the Doubtful Mail.


----------



## Encore Hermes

The Sun......pffffttttt
“A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: “The Duke and Duchess had no knowledge of this briefing and no involvement in the concept or the content.“
No written notice and nobody at this meeting thought to record the demands? Sure.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

The Daily Express is hard at work trying to salvage H&M:s reputation, comparing Meghan to Oscar actress Grace Kelly, how the Queen is now taking Meghan under her grandmotherly wing, how Meghan's very sought after by British _and_ American Vogue and how Meghan respects royal hierarchy. Also, poor H&M are apparently oblivious that their aides have gone rogue and are now plotting behind their backs!  Mah perrrls! (in my best Scottish accent) 
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...x-Prince-Harry-Royal-Windsor-Frogmore-Cottage

*Meghan and Harry's aides go behind couple's backs to give neighbours ‘extraordinary rules'*
_"In a statement Buckingham Palace confirmed the advice had been given to locals but said Meghan and Harry had not formulated the briefing. A spokesman said: “The Duke and Duchess had no knowledge of this briefing and no involvement in the concept or the content.

“This was a well-intentioned briefing to help a small local community know how to welcome two new residents and help them with any potential encounter.

“There was no handout or letter. The talk was undertaken by a local manager and was widely viewed as being well received.”_

The comment section is not having it though. According to a Poster, Libra about Harry (and might I add, allegedly):

_"Example; it was arranged 11 MONTHS ago that as Commander-in-chief he would go to Deal to attend the memorial service to 30 marines who were assassinated by the IRA. And what does he do: a few days before sends a message he has a prior engagement. And? A trip to the cinema with his missus to see "The Lion King" and a chance to meet Beyonce! Another report has come to light that he REFUSED an engagement at the Emergency Admissions Centre because the paparazzi might be there! I expect my comment will disappear as little has been in the media about this. Criticism of the favoured one is not allowed."_

Does H&M:s PR team simply hate them, or are H&M just impossible to contain? Writing a column for Vogue sounds like a great strategy sure to endear Meghan to the plebs


----------



## marthastoo

Encore Hermes said:


> The Sun......pffffttttt
> “A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: “The Duke and Duchess had no knowledge of this briefing and no involvement in the concept or the content.“
> No written notice and nobody at this meeting thought to record the demands? Sure.



But...but...but the Sun said Megan demanded these things and someone on this thread said it was corroborated by no less than Buckingham Palace!  Surely this must be true!  

[insert giant eye roll here]


----------



## marthastoo

Gee, now we're quoting from the comment section as journalistic proof?


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> The Sun article states the neighbors were given a list of dos and don’ts.


A list can be delivered verbally.  The Sun never said otherwise.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Again, I never believe anything the Scum says at all. Vile paper. If you go to any shop in Liverpool or Merseyside you will never find a copy of it. They refuse to sell it there.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Again, I never believe anything the Scum says at all. Vile paper. If you go to any shop in Liverpool or Merseyside you will never find a copy of it. They refuse to sell it there.


But Buckingham Palace confirmed it.  You don't believe Buckingham Palace's statement saying that it happened?


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> But Buckingham Palace confirmed it.  You don't believe Buckingham Palace's statement saying that it happened?


I believe that bit but I don't believe what the Scum said happened at the meeting


----------



## Encore Hermes

I keep reading list when appears it was a briefing. And aren’t most of all of the people involved employed by the crown in some capacity? 
A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: “The Duke and Duchess had no knowledge of this briefing and no involvement in the concept or the content.

“This was a well-intentioned briefing to help a small local community know how to welcome two new residents and help them with any potential encounter.

“There was no handout or letter. The talk was undertaken by a local manager and was widely viewed as being well received.”


----------



## Gimmethebag

So... should we expect Harry and Meghan to seek "privacy" back in Los Angeles soon as civilian residents? 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...eghan-Markle-Sussex-royal-news-Prince-Charles


----------



## gracekelly

^^^  I just saw that.  I wonder if there is any real credibility to this. Perhaps he will go on the gov't payroll as an envoy to some African country? That doesn't pay much.   Does she plan on returning to acting.  Not too many roles for a 37 year old.  By Hollywood standard she will play the young grandmother.   He has money, but her clothing budget will run through it pretty quickly.


----------



## Gimmethebag

gracekelly said:


> ^^^  I just saw that.  I wonder if there is any real credibility to this. Perhaps he will go on the gov't payroll as an envoy to some African country? That doesn't pay much.   Does she plan on returning to acting.  Not too many roles for a 37 year old.  By Hollywood standard she will play the young grandmother.   He has money, but her clothing budget will run through it pretty quickly.



Yeah, I will majorly roll my eyes if they seek "privacy" in one of the least private places on earth. Especially if they are having "private" lunches at Nobu in Malibu or a "private" dinner out at Catch.

Charles has said that he believes in streamlining the monarchy and their expenses. So, it may not be personal that he is no longer paying for the Sussex staff.

But I don't think the administrative distance between Clarence House and Sussex, and Cambridge and Sussex, etc. bode well. It looks like Harry is either leaving the BRF as a working royal or they anticipate a scandal of some sort and want to distance themselves from it to protect the monarchy.


----------



## Gimmethebag

gracekelly said:


> ^^^  I just saw that.  I wonder if there is any real credibility to this. Perhaps he will go on the gov't payroll as an envoy to some African country? That doesn't pay much.   Does she plan on returning to acting.  Not too many roles for a 37 year old.  By Hollywood standard she will play the young grandmother.   He has money, but her clothing budget will run through it pretty quickly.



Repeat.


----------



## gracekelly

Gimmethebag said:


> Yeah, I will majorly roll my eyes if they seek "privacy" in one of the least private places on earth. Especially if they are having "private" lunches at Nobu in Malibu or a "private" dinner out at Catch.
> 
> Charles has said that he believes in streamlining the monarchy and their expenses. So, it may not be personal that he is no longer paying for the Sussex staff.


You forgot about Craigs where all all the paps hang out! lol!  I don't think Charles  would just cut them off unless something else was in place.  This has to be something that was requested.


----------



## Morgan R

*HRH The Duchess Of Sussex Guest Edits The September Issue Of British Vogue*
The September 2019 issue, entitled “Forces for Change”, highlights trailblazing female changemakers – from activists to artists, prime ministers to climate change campaigners – who are breaking barriers and setting the agenda across the globe.


HRH The Duchess of Sussex has guest-edited a landmark issue of British Vogue with editor-in-chief Edward Enninful. Entitled “Forces for Change”, the September 2019 issue highlights a cast of brilliant female changemakers who are set to re-shape society in radical and positive ways. It is the first time a September issue of British Vogue has been co-edited.

The cover has been photographed by Peter Lindbergh – his first for the magazine since September 1992 – and features 15 women from the worlds of politics, sport, and the arts, all of whom have made an inspiring impact on modern life. The selection of women was a highly personal process for the Duchess and for Enninful, and the result of a collaboration that began in January of this year.

“These last seven months have been a rewarding process, curating and collaborating with Edward Enninful, British Vogue’s editor-in-chief, to take the year’s most-read fashion issue and steer its focus to the values, causes and people making impact in the world today,” the Duchess said. “Through this lens I hope you’ll feel the strength of the collective in the diverse selection of women chosen for the cover as well as the team of support I called upon within the issue to help bring this to light. I hope readers feel as inspired as I do, by the ‘Forces for Change’ they’ll find within these pages.”

The cover line-up includes *New Zealand Prime Minister* *Jacinda Ardern*, who, in a first for the magazine and for Lindbergh, was photographed for the cover in Auckland, New Zealand via video link; the teenaged climate activist *Greta Thunberg*, lensed by Lindbergh in Sweden, who at 16 is one of the magazine’s youngest ever cover stars; the activist and actor *Jane Fonda*, who, at 81, is its oldest; and the LGBTQIA+ advocate, actor and producer *Laverne Cox*, who becomes the first trans person to feature on the cover of British Vogue.

Also on the cover is *Adwoa Aboah*, the mental health campaigner and model; *Adut Akech*, the former refugee and model; *Ramla Ali*, the former refugee and boxer; *Sinéad Burke*, the diversity advocate and lecturer; *Gemma Chan*, the campaigner and actor; *Salma Hayek Pinault*, the women’s rights advocate, actor and producer; *Francesca Hayward*, the Royal Ballet principal dancer and actress; *Jameela Jamil*, the body positivity activist and actor; *Chimamanda Ngozi* *Adichie*, the author; *Yara Shahidi*, the youth voting activist and actor; and *Christy Turlington Burns*, the maternal health advocate and model.

The 16th spot on the cover will appear in print as a silver reflective mirror, to show how you, the reader, are part of this extraordinary moment in time – and to encourage you to use your own platform to bring change.

The issue also comprises an intimate insight into the Duchess’s world. She introduces Forces for Change in her own words in her guest editor’s letter, and also contributes an interview with the former *First Lady Michelle ******. Other highlights include an interview conducted by her husband, HRH The Duke of Sussex, with the renowned ethologist *Dr Jane Goodall.*



https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/meghan-markle-guest-editor-september-issue-british-vogue-2019


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Oooh great! Vogue! They're so politically unbiased


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Oooh great! Vogue! They're so politically unbiased


I cancelled my subscription because I could not take it anymore.  Fashion magazines should stick to fashion and political magazines to politics.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> I cancelled my subscription because I could not take it anymore.  Fashion magazines should stick to fashion and political magazines to politics.



It will be interesting, I like that she didn’t do the cover but is the editor and she is continuing the royal family’s involvement with Vogue.







gracekelly said:


> You forgot about Craigs where all all the paps hang out! lol!  I don't think Charles  would just cut them off unless something else was in place.  This has to be something that was requested.



I think  is about believable as the Harry and Meghan are moving to Africa for six months. The Express also, ran that story or the Doria is moving to the U.K., but I guess it gets people talking and criticizing even if untrue.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I wonder if MM’s birthday party is going to be a blow out and BP doesn’t want the public to think they paid for it.


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> I wonder if MM’s birthday party is going to be a blow out and BP doesn’t want the public to think they paid for it.


We could start a Go Fund Me to pay for it and then the public wouldn’t be upset


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Agree.  Definitely time to move on and the posters who don't like anything about her can find something new to pick on.



I wish people would give Meghan the same benefit they give her sister in law.



A1aGypsy said:


> I wonder if MM’s birthday party is going to be a blow out and BP doesn’t want the public to think they paid for it.





gracekelly said:


> We could start a Go Fund Me to pay for it and then the public wouldn’t be upset



Since Meghan didn’t have a blowout last year, I expect she want have one this year. Instead people aren’t focusing on Prince Andrew and Epstein or taxpayer paying for security for William and Kate’s private island vacation.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> I wish people would give Meghan the same benefit they give her sister in law.



I think is the first time that I have had a quote made on another  thread moved over to be used in a different location. How unique!

I am all for forgetting about the accusations against Meghan’s alleged demands for privacy to be laid to rest. The problem is that the reports keep cropping up like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen.

As for the costs of security for the royals, it doesn’t matter where they are because there will be  protection men with them no matter what. Having a family in one place is probably less costly than if they are spread all over the place.
If manpower gets a little tight, I saw a picture of 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 Prince George with a toy sword and we can put him to work like his namesake.


----------



## A1aGypsy

buffym said:


> Since Meghan didn’t have a blowout last year, I expect she want have one this year. Instead people aren’t focusing on Prince Andrew and Epstein or taxpayer paying for security for William and Kate’s private island vacation.



Oy. It was tongue in cheek. Something the tabloids would say.

And, of course tax payers are paying for the vacation security. As they would if MM and HW go on vacation or the Queen. Or members of other royal families etc. Protection of the linage and all of that.


----------



## buffym

A1aGypsy said:


> Oy. It was tongue in cheek. Something the tabloids would say.
> 
> And, of course tax payers are paying for the vacation security. As they would if MM and HW go on vacation or the Queen. Or members of other royal families etc. Protection of the linage and all of that.



Yes, but when Meghan went to New York for her baby shower people complained about security cost, and as a long time royal watcher I see the difference, the tabloids and comments would mention the expense of Mustique, so like William's affair rumors were buried under negative Meghan stories or now Prince Andrew. I think a big story about another member of the royal family is going to pop up especially with the Epstein trial and unfortunately Meghan is used as a punching bag.



gracekelly said:


> I think is the first time that I have had a quote made on another  thread moved over to be used in a different location. How unique!
> 
> I am all for forgetting about the accusations against Meghan’s alleged demands for privacy to be laid to rest. The problem is that the reports keep cropping up like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen.
> 
> As for the costs of security for the royals, it doesn’t matter where they are because there will be  protection men with them no matter what. Having a family in one place is probably less costly than if they are spread all over the place.
> If manpower gets a little tight, I saw a picture of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4501459
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince George with a toy sword and we can put him to work like his namesake.



I don't think reports are magically popping up, I think the tabloids have found a niche just like blaming Meghan for her family, posters in this and other threads blamed her for their actions. The tabloids followed that line for as long as they could and now they are trying the Meghan is a diva. Every story has holes but certain people continue to post them because bad gossip is good. The palace confirmed there was a resident meeting that happens routinely it happen in February yet it is just now being reported.  So neighbors are shocked five months later,  I think it is untrue especially since the exclusive is broken by the same tabloid who said they were moving to Africa and her mother was moving in.

Yes, I quoted from another thread because I thought it was nice that it was mentioned how some criticize Kate over little things, yet in Meghan's thread criticizing and believing any tabloid as fact is okay.


----------



## mdcx

Have to love the British take on things:
From https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ause-Meghan-Markle-supporting-Foundation.html

For a start, the first thing Meghan did was to eschew putting herself on the cover of Vogue – a bit of strategic duchessy gamesmanship one has to admire if one were prone to a touch of *****iness.

‘She felt that it would be in some ways a “boastful” thing to do,’ explained the magazine’s editor Edward Enninful, who masterminded the royal liaison.

Boastful? If this was a catty custard pie lobbed at the Duchess of Cambridge – who did appear on the cover of Vogue for its centenary issue in June 2016 – well it landed slap bang on tiara target.​


----------



## FreeSpirit71

^I don't think it's the _"British take on things"_.  I think it's the DM's - and that's a bit different.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

She ran her website for years so I don't see an issue with letting her be a guest editor. She's made her politics well-known already so it's not surprising. Vogue isn't fashion anymore imo anyway, it's all political, and all ads.


----------



## gracekelly

It occurs to me that the majority of people who bring up the Meghan bashing are the same people who keep bringing up the Meghan bashing.  Why don't we just have a hiatus on bashing in general?  Then everyone would be happy.  I thought this was a gossip thread and not a bashing thread.  Perhaps an effort should be made to keep them mutually exclusive? Oh, and not drag in the relatives.  They have their own thread.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> I thought this was a gossip thread and not a bashing thread. Perhaps an effort should be made to keep them mutually exclusive? Oh, and not drag in the relatives. They have their own thread.



Isn't the point of gossip to gush AND bash? Otherwise, what's the use of gossip? Like somebody who can chat up Queen Liz any ol' time she feels like is going to care one wit about a bunch of purse enthusiasts whip out?  Even the Kardashians need another target to get some of the heat off of THEM. Not that I have any allegiance to the K brood, let's not get silly here. BTW, anybody see Kris Jenner on the Sunday Morning Show? Her family may be an uber wealthy toxic mess, but she isn't dumb by a long shot.

Meghan can do as she pleases, and if she irritates the Firm, well, they have remedies for that. If Meghan feels entitled to buck the Royal System, they're experts at hiding disdain and can dispatch of her in a myriad of ways, Archie or no Archie.  If she lives up to what she clawed her way into, then good for her and I wish her well. We can still admire and/or rip on her fashion choices. I hope they get Archie a pony. There's no excuse why William's kids don't have ponies by now. I thought that was a Royal rule. There'a whole equestrian wardrobe to critique.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think it's the overwhelming crush of cruddy articles from bottom-feeding "press" (and I use the term loosely) that gets under people's skin.  It's an abyss, really.  And those stories seldom have the outcome those press outlets suggest.

I've participated in many threads over the years and have felt free to critique where critique is due, ie: her spending on clothing etc or the misstep at Wimbledon.  Those are all things where gossip and criticism is warranted.  Gossip _should_ be fun - even about the Royals, but a lot of this seems to have some bile attached to it.

It does get a bit tiring though seeing articles where she's damned if she does, and damned if she doesn't.  True, the new additions (Princess Diana, Fergie, Kate etc)  to the BRF have always gone through a baptism of fire with the British press, but some of this is really nasty stuff.

Meanwhile there are two, _far_ more juicy stories brewing with the BRF that are being studiously ignored by the British press, most likely because they are scared of being sued.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Isn't the point of gossip to gush AND bash? Otherwise, what's the use of gossip? Like somebody who can chat up Queen Liz any ol' time she feels like is going to care one wit about a bunch of purse enthusiasts whip out?  Even the Kardashians need another target to get some of the heat off of THEM. Not that I have any allegiance to the K brood, let's not get silly here. BTW, anybody see Kris Jenner on the Sunday Morning Show? Her family may be an uber wealthy toxic mess, but she isn't dumb by a long shot.
> 
> Meghan can do as she pleases, and if she irritates the Firm, well, they have remedies for that. If Meghan feels entitled to buck the Royal System, they're experts at hiding disdain and can dispatch of her in a myriad of ways, Archie or no Archie.  If she lives up to what she clawed her way into, then good for her and I wish her well. We can still admire and/or rip on her fashion choices. I hope they get Archie a pony. There's no excuse why William's kids don't have ponies by now. I thought that was a Royal rule. There'a whole equestrian wardrobe to critique.


There is a big difference between cruel bashing and gossip. I don’t believe that they are one and the same.   The problem I see here is the repetitive need for some posters to dwell on the truly ugly and continually  post about it.  They need to get past it. 

As for the pony, Prince George has been taking riding lessons from cousin Zara. I expect that Archie will do the same in a few years. What better instructor than an ex-Olympian?  So I guess the pony is at Zara’s house lol!

Meanwhile Harry has been the only one to use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor. Prince Philip must be pleased as he had quite a fight to get his name attached to anything   He wanted his children to be called Mountbatten, but he was overruled soundly.   At least Master Archie is keeping it going for him.


----------



## stoic

Sharont2305 said:


> Again, I never believe anything the Scum says at all. Vile paper. If you go to any shop in Liverpool or Merseyside you will never find a copy of it. They refuse to sell it there.


They don’t sell it because of The Sun’s ‘reporting’ of the Hillsborough tragedy and the lies they said about Liverpool supporters.


----------



## Sharont2305

stoic said:


> They don’t sell it because of The Sun’s ‘reporting’ of the Hillsborough tragedy and the lies they said about Liverpool supporters.


Yes, I'm well aware of that as a Brit and a Liverpool supporter. I didn't want to go into that as this isn't a thread about all that.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> Yes, but when Meghan went to New York for her baby shower people complained about security cost, and as a long time royal watcher I see the difference, the tabloids and comments would mention the expense of Mustique, so like William's affair rumors were buried under negative Meghan stories or now Prince Andrew. I think a big story about another member of the royal family is going to pop up especially with the Epstein trial and unfortunately Meghan is used as a punching bag.[...]


The Epstein case is on a totally different political and international scale with implications so high up Meghan doesn't even register on it. We're talking foreign and domestic intelligence using blackmail (and providing the perverted and illegal means to it) to "influence" people in power in dealings of political and financial domination, arms and drugs sales and what have you. We're all punching bags and pawns in this political scheming and power grabbing.

So no, Meghan does not win the BRF victim-hood Olympics. I think most would agree that Diana did that.


----------



## buffym

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The Epstein case is on a totally different political and international scale with implications so high up Meghan doesn't even register on it. We're talking foreign and domestic intelligence using blackmail (and providing the perverted and illegal means to it) to "influence" people in power in dealings of political and financial domination, arms and drugs sales and what have you. We're all punching bags and pawns in this political scheming and power grabbing.
> 
> So no, Meghan does not win the BRF victim-hood Olympics. I think most would agree that Diana did that.



I didn’t know there was an award for BRF victim hood instead I stated how Meghan’s treatment compared to present marry in like Kate or Sophie has been worse. No one who worked for the BBC has called Kate or Sophie children a monkey like Archie. Or said Kate or Sophie fund terrorism for visiting a mosque like they called Meghan. Even though Harry, William, and Prince Charles visited the same mosque.

I believe empathy doesn’t have a social economic minimum.

Sneak peak video from the magazine 
It is interesting that Peter Lindbergh shot Jacinda Ardern by Skype. I expect it for interviews, but not with portraits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

My biggest issue with these threads is (as has been said to death), some posters believe you are either teamkate or teammeghan and neither the two shall meet. 

I have been chastised here for being anti-Meghan and pro Kate and the reverse in the other thread. Which is nonsense. I don’t know either from Adam. I like some of their choices and side eye others and understand certain aspects of what is going on as a result of my job. But I’m not anti anyone.

I also have to say, you can gossip and like or dislike things about a person but some of the comments get deeply personal about one or the other and I have to scratch my head at that. No one here admits to knowing these people so that level of vitriol at a person that you don’t know surrounding an intent that you are assuming is pretty remarkable.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wearing a $4,000 Gucci dress to a place that collects clothing for women seeking employment has to be some kind of trolling, right? They have to know her outfits are instantly blasted all over the place. I just don't get it. They cannot be this obtuse.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> Wearing a $4,000 Gucci dress to a place that collects clothing for women seeking employment has to be some kind of trolling, right? They have to know her outfits are instantly blasted all over the place. I just don't get it. They cannot be this obtuse.


I agree it's in poor taste, but I think most women who see/meet her understand that her new title comes with a new fancy $$$ wardrobe that they will not be able to ever afford, and it looks like it was a photo shoot and not a meet and greet? The dress is really cute! If I had an extra 4K floating about I'd buy one.


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> I agree it's in poor taste, but I think most women who see/meet her understand that her new title comes with a new fancy $$$ wardrobe that they will not be able to ever afford, and it looks like it was a photo shoot and not a meet and greet? The dress is really cute! If I had an extra 4K floating about I'd buy one.



No, I totally get that, I truly do. It’s just so surprising to me that they don’t really seem to process the optics of things like this. It’s not so much that she wore it that surprises me, it’s that no one considered how it might play out. Especially with the constant dragging of them lately.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> No, I totally get that, I truly do. It’s just so surprising to me that they don’t really seem to process the optics of things like this. It’s not so much that she wore it that surprises me, it’s that no one considered how it might play out. Especially with the constant dragging of them lately.


Perhaps it is just another indicator she self-styles and listens to her own advice.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, I'm well aware of that as a Brit and a Liverpool supporter. I didn't want to go into that as this isn't a thread about all that.


what does Liverpool supporter mean?  sorry, I'm a Yank and don't know this term


----------



## wkim

mrsinsyder said:


> No, I totally get that, I truly do. It’s just so surprising to me that they don’t really seem to process the optics of things like this. It’s not so much that she wore it that surprises me, it’s that no one considered how it might play out. Especially with the constant dragging of them lately.


Well, if we're talking optics, consider this: everyone knows that the Royal Family lives very well. Top-notch cars, residences, ability to travel wherever, etc., and so by that very token wouldn't Meghan pulling up in the latest Land/Range Rover wearing Gap or J Crew or Zara or ASOS or whatever be pandering? 
I mean, not to bring up old stuff, but Michelle ***** wore J Crew, Kate Spade and all that. Still got slandered to the high heavens. Wore Lanvin sneakers and Faux News couldn't 'Michelle Antoinette' her enough, which they still do. And because they're amazingly self-aware, they're on that '...nobody spoke ill of Michelle ***** - not as much as they do Melania...' mess.
Meghan WILL NOT win souls over any time soon. FACTS. If you want to read delusion, step up to Lipstick Alley and see how deep the Harry/Meghan conspiracy theories roll, complete with YouTube videos. Nobody is perfect, and mistakes will be made by all. Some of the stuff being said is ridiculous, tho' (and especially when the sources are being run by The Daily Fail, The Mirror and The Sun, of all rags.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> what does Liverpool supporter mean?  sorry, I'm a Yank and don't know this term


Liverpool Football Club, one of the biggest in the world. Soccer to you,


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> No, I totally get that, I truly do. It’s just so surprising to me that they don’t really seem to process the optics of things like this. It’s not so much that she wore it that surprises me, it’s that no one considered how it might play out. Especially with the constant dragging of them lately.


The magazine is driving this bus. Putting her in a paper sack isn’t going to sell advertisements and that’s what  pays for the magazine. The joke is that the recipients of charity certainly can’t afford to buy the magazine and probably never see it. 
Of course the optics are poor. My DH has his own name for Vogue...he calls it Vague which pretty much sums up the gauze that filters the view of the editors.


----------



## loogirl

wkim said:


> Well, if we're talking optics, consider this: everyone knows that the Royal Family lives very well. Top-notch cars, residences, ability to travel wherever, etc., and so by that very token wouldn't Meghan pulling up in the latest Land/Range Rover wearing Gap or J Crew or Zara or ASOS or whatever be pandering?
> I mean, not to bring up old stuff, but Michelle ***** wore J Crew, Kate Spade and all that. Still got slandered to the high heavens. Wore Lanvin sneakers and Faux News couldn't 'Michelle Antoinette' her enough, which they still do. And because they're amazingly self-aware, they're on that '...nobody spoke ill of Michelle ***** - not as much as they do Melania...' mess.
> Meghan WILL NOT win souls over any time soon. FACTS. If you want to read delusion, step up to Lipstick Alley and see how deep the Harry/Meghan conspiracy theories roll, complete with YouTube videos. Nobody is perfect, and mistakes will be made by all. Some of the stuff being said is ridiculous, tho' (and especially when the sources are being run by The Daily Fail, The Mirror and The Sun, of all rags.


 
Kate has worn high street stuff after her marriage a lot. Meghan can too. ‍♀️


----------



## loogirl

gracekelly said:


> The magazine is driving this bus. Putting her in a paper sack isn’t going to sell advertisements and that’s what  pays for the magazine. The joke is that the recipients of charity certainly can’t afford to buy the magazine and probably never see it.
> Of course the optics are poor. My DH has his own name for Vogue...he calls it Vague which pretty much sums up the gauze that filters the view of the editors.



Retailers like Jcrew etc also advertise in Vogue. She could have worn something other than 4k Gucci. Like the defense of this is weird - like come on guys, she HAD to wear a 4K dress! No other options. It’s her burden to bear now, must always be decked out in $$$$ clothes or the world will end. Like stop.


----------



## gracekelly

loogirl said:


> Retailers like Jcrew etc also advertise in Vogue. She could have worn something other than 4k Gucci. Like the defense of this is weird - like come on guys, she HAD to wear a 4K dress! No other options. It’s her burden to bear now, must always be decked out in $$$$ clothes or the world will end. Like stop.


I am not defending her. I am stating that Vogue made the decision ultimately with what she was going to wear. Gucci takes a primo place the front of the magazine along with LV, Chanel and other big name designers.  They always make up the bulk of the fashion layouts.  Could she have loudly protested that she needed to wear a Hanes tee shirt with pants from the GAP?  I suppose she could have but they wouldn’t have been happy about it. Quid pro quo. She got her message across and had to wear the designer clothes to do it


----------



## Flatsy

Did Vogue even call out the designer of the dress?  I thought this was an action photo of Meghan at work with the Dress for Success charity, not a posed fashion photo for Vogue that would involve details of her clothing & accessories.

Either way, this is the second time she's worn an outfit to Dress for Success that was on the upper end of her already high-end outfits.  I believe that first outfit was $5k total.  It's a little tone deaf.  It would be a great opportunity with this particular charity for her to model affordable business fashions that the women involved with the charity could aspire to wear.

I'll throw Queen Rania into the mix of people I think Meghan is modeling herself after.  Always wears top-end designer clothing no matter what, and takes great issue when people calculate how much it costs.


----------



## Morgan R

*HRH The Duchess of Sussex Interviews Michelle ***** In The September Issue*
As First Lady of the United States, Michelle ***** forged a path as the nation’s mother-in-chief – and became a style icon in the process. Now, freed from White House protocol, she’s loosening up, but still dispensing immaculate advice. In a rare interview, she talks motherhood and maturity with _Vogue_’s guest editor HRH The Duchess of Sussex.


In formulating the content of the Forces for Change issue, I knew that I wanted to create a magazine that would speak not just to where we are, but to where we hope to be. In doing so, I knew we needed to both open and close strong. Like a beautiful meal: the first bite sets the tone and the final spoonful leaves you satiated, smiling, and sometimes (if you’re dining under the direction of a forward-thinking chef) even inspired. So how could I bring this issue to its logical conclusion? How could I meet that very lofty self-imposed goal?

Turns out British _Vogue_ famously has a back page Q&A feature that is equal parts informative and whimsical, with a special guest each month. My first thought was that it needed to be someone kind, inspirational, motivating, funny, with gravitas and as much depth as levity. My second thought: it needed to be Michelle *****.

So, over a casual lunch of chicken tacos and my ever-burgeoning bump, I asked Michelle if she would help me with this secret project.

It wasn’t a huge ask, so to speak, because the back page of _Vogue c_omprises a few simple questions to garner a few simple answers – tidbits that would leave you, the reader, feeling all of the aforementioned sensations of this analogous culinary experience. She graciously said yes (because she’s Michelle, she’s gracious), and then very promptly sent answers (because she’s Michelle, she’s prompt).

What was sent back to me, however, left me somewhat speechless. A few “simple questions” (which she could have answered with a sentence or two) were returned to me as a thoughtful, reflective and beautifully curated narrative – a gentle reminder not of how but of why she has become such a globally respected public figure.

Whatever your background, it’s easy to feel connected to Mrs *****. There’s something magical about the way in which she draws you in with her endearingly frank, down-to-earth personality. When I heard her speak at London’s Royal Festival Hall last December, I found that I could personally relate to what she was sharing – and that the young British woman sitting a few seats away from me, laughing heartily and nodding in agreement, must have felt the same way.

I share all this with you as a disclaimer of sorts: had I known Michelle would be so generous in making this a comprehensive interview my questions would have been lengthier, more probing, more engaging. I would have called her and included the banter on these pages – the laughs and sighs and ping-pong of dialogue as I chimed in. But to re-engineer that now would rob Michelle’s words of their authenticity, which, for me, is at the crux of what makes this piece special.

That authenticity came out of her innate goodwill to support another woman, to give more than what’s asked for, to be generous, to be kind – all of these attributes make her the ultimate force for change. To my former First Lady, and now friend, Michelle – thank you.

*The Duchess of Sussex: You sent me the kindest message on Mother’s Day this year. What has motherhood taught you?*
*Michelle *****: *Being a mother has been a masterclass in letting go. Try as we might, there’s only so much we can control. And, boy, have I tried – especially at first. As mothers, we just don’t want anything or anyone to hurt our babies. But life has other plans. Bruised knees, bumpy roads and broken hearts are part of the deal. What’s both humbled and heartened me is seeing the resiliency of my daughters. In some ways, Malia and Sasha couldn’t be more different. One speaks freely and often, one opens up on her own terms. One shares her innermost feelings, the other is content to let you figure it out. Neither approach is better or worse, because they’ve both grown into smart, compassionate and independent young women, fully capable of paving their own paths.

Motherhood has taught me that, most of the time, my job is to give them the space to explore and develop into the people they want to be. Not who I want them to be or who I wish I was at that age, but who they are, deep inside. Motherhood has also taught me that my job is not to bulldoze a path for them in an effort to eliminate all possible adversity. But instead, I need to be a safe and consistent place for them to land when they inevitably fail; and to show them, again and again, how to get up on their own.

*What advice do you give your daughters?*
Don’t just check the boxes you think you’re supposed to check, like I did when I was their age. I tell them that I hope they’ll keep trying on new experiences until they find what feels right. And what felt right yesterday might not necessarily feel right today. That’s OK – it’s good, even. When I was in college, I thought I wanted to be a lawyer because it sounded like a job for good, respectable people. It took me a few years to listen to my intuition and find a path that fit better for who I was, inside and out.

Becoming who we are is an ongoing process, and thank God – because where’s the fun in waking up one day and deciding there’s nowhere left to go? That’s something I wish I’d recognised a little earlier. As a younger woman, I spent too much time worrying that I wasn’t achieving enough, or I was straying too far from what I thought was the prescribed path. What I hope my daughters will realise a little earlier is that there is no prescribed path, that it’s OK to swerve, and that the confidence they need to recognise that will come with time.

*How would that advice be different if you were offering it to sons? Or would it be the same?*
It would be exactly the same. My parents, particularly my father, taught my brother and me at an early age to treat boys and girls exactly the same. When I was still in elementary school, my dad bought my brother a pair of boxing gloves. But when he came home from the store, he was carrying not one, but two pairs of gloves. He wasn’t going to teach his son to punch without making sure his daughter could throw a left hook, too. Now, I was a little younger and a little smaller than my brother, but I kept up with him. I could dodge a jab just like he could, and I could hit just as hard as him, too. My father saw that. I think he wanted to make sure that my brother saw that as well.

*What inspired you to start the Girls Opportunity Alliance [a programme of the ***** Foundation that seeks to empower adolescent girls through education], and what is your goal?*
Today, nearly 98 million adolescent girls around the world are not in school. That’s a tragedy – for the girls, of course, but also for all of us. Think of everything we’re missing out on. We know that when we educate girls, when we truly invest in their potential, there is no limit to the good it can do. Girls who attend school have healthier families, they earn higher wages, and the world gets to experience the full expression of their gifts. I formed the Girls Opportunity Alliance because I’ve seen the power of education in my own life. And I believe that every little girl, no matter her circumstances, deserves the opportunity to learn, grow and act on her knowledge. So, we’re connecting grass-roots leaders already working on the ground in countries all over the world, helping them to learn from each other and get the resources, support and platform they need to lift up girls in communities that can use a boost. And we are grateful to all the people around the world who have supported this programme and are interested in taking action to help.

*If you were sitting down with your 15-year-old self, what do you think she would tell you, seeing who you have become today?*
I love this question. I had a lot of fun when I was 15, but when it came right down to it, teenage-me was pretty by the book – straight As, through-the-roof standards for herself. So I imagine that she’d be proud of how far I’ve come – but she wouldn’t let me off the hook, either. I feel like she’d give me one of those silent nods of recognition, you know? She’d remind me there are still too many girls on the South Side of Chicago who are being shushed, cast aside or told they’re dreaming too big. She’d tell me to keep fighting for them. If I’m being honest, she’d probably smile about how cute my husband is, too.

*And now to shift gears for a moment, and end with a wild-card question... What is the most beautiful sound that you’ve ever heard?*
When Malia and Sasha were newborns, Barack and I could lose hours just watching them sleep. We loved to listen to the little sounds they’d make – especially the way they cooed when they were deep into dreaming. Don’t get me wrong, early parenthood is exhausting. I’m sure you know a thing or two about that these days. But there is something so magical about having a baby in the house. Time expands and contracts; each moment holds its own little eternity. I’m so excited for you and Harry to experience that, Meghan. Savour it all.

HRH The Duchess of Sussex Interviews Michelle ***** In The September Issue | British Vogue


----------



## Morgan R

*HRH The Duchess of Sussex Introduces The September Issue In Her Own Words*

It was in early January, on a cold and blustery London day, that I sat down for a cup of tea with British Vogue’s editor-in-chief, Edward Enninful. Though we have several mutual friends, our first encounter had been years in the making, the impetus for which was my asking him to support an organisation I strongly believe in called Smart Works.

What evolved over the next hour was a promising pow wow of two like-minded thinkers, who have much in common, including our love of writing. Over a steaming cup of mint tea, we teased through how one can shine light in a world filled with seemingly daily darkness. Lofty? Of course. Worth it? Without question.

Within hours of our meeting’s end, we were already texting one another – philosophising about how to communicate this shared understanding and the lens through which we see the world, how to pivot from a perspective of frustration to one of optimism.

So I asked the question. Actually, I typed and deleted the question several times until I built up the courage to ask the question in question.

“Edward… instead of doing the cover, would you be open to me guest editing your September issue?”

(Mind you, I know how important the September issue is for the fashion industry. I realise the reach, and I see the opportunity to be a part of fashion’s push for something greater, kinder, more impactful. But I am also a little nervous to be boldly asking the editor-in-chief, whom I’d only just met, to take a chance on me.)

I sent the text.

…

The ellipsis… the “dot dot dot” that inspires the greatest practice of patience in this digital era.

And then it appeared, EE’s reply: “Yes! I would love for you to be my guest editor.”

Sitting on my sofa at home, two dogs nestled across me, I quietly celebrated when the words appeared on my screen.

Within a week, Edward and I were having our regular meetings – discussing goals, ideas, who would feature on the cover, all while I was undergoing a crash course in editorial lingo (“the well”, meaning the inner crux of the book) and acronyms aplenty (“FOB”, which I took a stab at being “front of book”). I was trying to blend in, to keep up with the pace of these seasoned professionals, and to learn as much as I could as quickly as possible.

There were facets I felt were of prime importance to include within this issue – elements that would hopefully set the tone, knowing this issue hits stands in August, just as readers gear up for the September fashion shows, where judgement can become clouded and focus skewed toward the superficial. I had read a book many moons ago called _The Four-Chambered Heart_, by Anaïs Nin, which had a quote that has always resonated with me: “I must be a mermaid, Rango. I have no fear of depths and a great fear of shallow living.” For this issue, I imagined, why would we swim in the shallow end of the pool when we could go to the deep end? A metaphor for life, as well as for this issue. Let’s be braver. Let’s go a bit deeper.

That’s what Edward and I have aimed to achieve. An issue of both substance and levity. It is, after all, the September issue of British _Vogue_, and an opportunity to further diversify what that typically represents. Throughout these pages you’ll find Commonwealth designers, ethical and sustainable brands, as well as features with designers not about clothes but about heritage, history and heirloom. You’ll also find a beauty section that puts its energy towards internal beauty, celebrating the power of breathing and meditation, and a favourite workout that urges you to use your heart as much as your core.

As you flip the pages, you’ll find familiar faces and names that I hope you get to know a bit better, a bit more deeply, even. And there are less familiar names that you may want to know, such as the women of Luminary Bakery and Tessa Clarke, co-founder of food-sharing app Olio, whom I met with discreetly last year.

There are inspiring reads from Brené Brown and Jameela Jamil. You’ll also find a very special piece with Dr Jane Goodall, interviewed by my husband, and a candid and heartfelt conversation between myself and the extraordinary Michelle *****.

But more than anything, this issue is about the power of the collective. In identifying our personal strengths, it is anchored in the knowledge that we are even stronger together. You will find that spirit of inclusivity on the cover: diverse portraiture of women of varying age, colour, creed, nationality and life experience, and of unquestionable inspiration. Some, I’ve had the pleasure of meeting and enlisted personally for this issue, others I’ve admired from afar for their commitment to a cause, their fearlessness in breaking barriers, or what they represent simply by being. These are our forces for change. And among all of these strong women on the cover, a mirror – a space for you, the reader, to see yourself. Because you, too, are part of this collective.

There is one caveat for you to remember: this is a magazine. It’s still a business, after all. I share that to manage expectations for you: there will be advertising sections that are requisite for every issue, so while I feel confident that you’ll feel my thumbprint on most pages, please know that there are elements that just come with the territory. The overall sentiment I hope you’ll find, however, will be one of positivity, kindness, humour and inclusivity.

I was about five months pregnant when this process began, and by the time you hold this issue in your hands, my husband and I will be holding our three-month-old baby boy in ours. It’s a very special time for me personally, on so many levels; working with Edward and his team, both during my pregnancy and my maternity leave, has played no small part in that joy – it has been a privilege to be welcomed and supported by this amazing team. To Edward, thank you for entrusting me with this. I am deeply honoured. To the women who have taken my aspirations for this issue and brought them to life by being a part of this time capsule, both on the cover and in-book, I am so grateful; you are inspirations to me and I’m humbled by your support.

And to you, the reader, thank you – and I hope you enjoy...


HRH The Duchess of Sussex's September 2019 Guest Editor's Letter | British Vogue


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

realise, philosophising, favourite, colour, humour, honoured... Too cute. The guest editor got edited.


----------



## Candice0985

ccbaggirl89 said:


> realise, philosophising, favourite, colour, humour, honoured... Too cute. The guest editor got edited.


MM has also spent quite a bit of time in Canada, we use proper english spelling as well. I'm assuming she is well versed in the Queens English


----------



## buffym

loogirl said:


> Kate has worn high street stuff after her marriage a lot. Meghan can too. ‍♀️



Kate has also worn designer brands, too even Gucci.
A $1,300 Gucci blouse to visit school kids





A $2980 Gucci dress to visit a museum 



A $50,000 Cartier necklace 








loogirl said:


> Retailers like Jcrew etc also advertise in Vogue. She could have worn something other than 4k Gucci. Like the defense of this is weird - like come on guys, she HAD to wear a 4K dress! No other options. It’s her burden to bear now, must always be decked out in $$$$ clothes or the world will end. Like stop.



Meghan in JCrew and Club Monaco high street designers 











Just FYI the coat Kate wore on the cover of Vogue was $7500 Burberry


----------



## minababe

this Shows whats wrong with women or some People in generell. this is a great Project of the vogue. very good content. but some people has nothing better to do than criticize her Outfit?? really?? god .. no words ..


----------



## gracekelly

So tired of this being a Meghan compared to Kate thread.  Boring.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> So tired of this being a Meghan compared to Kate thread.  Boring.


Agreed.  It’s pathetic.


----------



## akoko

I like the fact that she is willing to work. She has worked all her life and seems eager to do so. She obviously spent many hours on this. On the other hand, for some reason, she comes across a bit arrogant -and I don't like it when celebrities or royals "lecture".  
I do think that she is very much working, to promote herself as a brand. In a way, I understand that. On the other hand, she is going about too brazenly. She has a current role that she needs to respect.


----------



## daisychainz

akoko said:


> I like the fact that she is willing to work. She has worked all her life and seems eager to do so. She obviously spent many hours on this. On the other hand, for some reason, she comes across a bit arrogant -and I don't like it when celebrities or royals "lecture".
> I do think that she is very much working, to promote herself as a brand. In a way, I understand that. On the other hand, she is going about too brazenly. She has a current role that she needs to respect.


I agree with you. And Vogue is such a political magazine that it does show her politics, and that her first interview was *****, as well. There are probably other (non-fashion) publications that could have been just as suitable for her article. It seems like she wasted no time in securing this connection since it has been in the works for at least 9 months or more. 
And Kate and Meghan both look amazing in Gucci - Gucci makes some nice dresses!


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> I agree with you. And Vogue is such a political magazine that it does show her politics, and that her first interview was *****, as well. There are probably other (non-fashion) publications that could have been just as suitable for her article. It seems like she wasted no time in securing this connection since it has been in the works for at least 9 months or more.
> And Kate and Meghan both look amazing in Gucci - Gucci makes some nice dresses!



Why wouldn't Vogue jump on this? Duchess Meghan and Michelle ***** will sell magazines, and that is basically what it all comes down to?


----------



## Flatsy

I think this was a great project for her.  She put to use the skills she used on her blog, and she's cut out for the fashion world.  (At that International Women's Day discussion panel she participated in, she was out of her depth and it showed.)

The British tabloids like to say she does a lot of virtue signaling, and to some extent that's true, but virtue signaling is kind of what the royal job is about.  They endorse charities, promote them and help them raise money.  For her to spotlight people who are working on causes she supports via Vogue is just another way of doing it.  It's going to be superficial, but almost everything royals do is surface level.

I wish she had refrained from spending so much time tooting her own horn about how long and hard she worked on it.   Actresses "guest edit" fashion magazines all the time and it's not a role that involves heavy lifting.  The editor is still the editor.  Meghan probably put in more effort than the average actress.  (I've gotten the impression in the past that some actress-editors just showed up one or two times to give their opinions on photos and that's about it.)  But this was not a laborious project that took up all of her time over seven months....and even if it did, it's a little off-putting to solicit credit for doing what is now her job.


----------



## wkim

loogirl said:


> Kate has worn high street stuff after her marriage a lot. Meghan can too. ‍♀️


She's worn High Street - a lot. My point is she's gonna get dragged no matter what.


----------



## chicaloca

Bravo to Meghan for bringing substance to the royal family.  I can’t wait to grab a copy of this magazine.


----------



## buffym

akoko said:


> I like the fact that she is willing to work. She has worked all her life and seems eager to do so. She obviously spent many hours on this. On the other hand, for some reason, she comes across a bit arrogant -and I don't like it when celebrities or royals "lecture".
> I do think that she is very much working, to promote herself as a brand. In a way, I understand that. On the other hand, she is going about too brazenly. She has a current role that she needs to respect.



But how is she not respecting her current role. Every BRF wife and daughter has been in a “fashion magazine.” Kate Vogue cover 2016, Sophie Harpers Bazaar 2015, Beatrice and Eugenia 2018. Meghan is actually following the royals before except she guest edited the magazine and is it on the cover.

Prince Charles has guest edit Country Life Mag two times his 65 birthday and 70.

Kate guest edit Huffington Post

Prince Harry guest edited the Today Program where he interviewed his father and President *****.

She isn’t doing anything off script.


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> My biggest issue with these threads is (as has been said to death), some posters believe you are either teamkate or teammeghan and neither the two shall meet.
> 
> I have been chastised here for being anti-Meghan and pro Kate and the reverse in the other thread. Which is nonsense. I don’t know either from Adam. I like some of their choices and side eye others and understand certain aspects of what is going on as a result of my job. But I’m not anti anyone.
> 
> I also have to say, you can gossip and like or dislike things about a person but some of the comments get deeply personal about one or the other and I have to scratch my head at that. No one here admits to knowing these people so that level of vitriol at a person that you don’t know surrounding an intent that you are assuming is pretty remarkable.


100% agree .. I especially object to the posts with the name-calling because someone else felt that they had written something "against" the individual!  Regardless of whether you like/dislike Kate and/or Meghan should not mean that you get a hateful comment .. you are so right @A1aGypsy .. none of us know them personally!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> The magazine is driving this bus. Putting her in a paper sack isn’t going to sell advertisements and that’s what  pays for the magazine. The joke is that the recipients of charity certainly can’t afford to buy the magazine and probably never see it.
> Of course the optics are poor. My DH has his own name for Vogue...he calls it Vague which pretty much sums up the gauze that filters the view of the editors.


HA HA HA .. are we married to the same man?!! .. my husband also calls it "Vague"!!!  Too funny ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

Seriously, laughing at the British spelling?  She toots her own horn too much?  Would it have been better if she said "I barely spent any time on this.  I really don't care, do you?"  And Word is set to British or American English and autocorrects accordingly.  And since it's British Vogue, it's British spellings.  SMH.

Good for her - it looks like she put time and effort into this job.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> said "I barely spent any time on this. I really don't care, do you?"


No, but hard work speaks for itself.  The instagram announcement called out that she has been working on it for 7 months, which I think was completely unnecessary and was simply there as a self-pat on the book.  Her editor's letter referred to how many months it took at least five or six times.  I think it's too much.   The focus of her projects should not be on how much effort she put in, as if that in and of itself deserves attention and recognition. Effort should be expected, and assumed.


----------



## akoko

buffym said:


> But how is she not respecting her current role. Every BRF wife and daughter has been in a “fashion magazine.” Kate Vogue cover 2016, Sophie Harpers Bazaar 2015, Beatrice and Eugenia 2018. Meghan is actually following the royals before except she guest edited the magazine and is it on the cover.
> 
> Prince Charles has guest edit Country Life Mag two times his 65 birthday and 70.
> 
> Kate guest edit Huffington Post
> 
> Prince Harry guest edited the Today Program where he interviewed his father and President *****.
> 
> She isn’t doing anything off script.


I get a sense that she is using many opportunities to connect with people she wants to and built an international brand for herself in the forefront. As I said, in many ways I understand this and respect where she is coming from. She is an adult woman, used to working with goals and ambitions.
Of course, I am just guessing here, but she does seem to want to create a network she can fall back on.  She became  " fast friends" with so many people, from the fist moment she  started her duties and got access to people like Oprah, Michel *****, ect.
Gaining  access and fame was part of her previous job or at least what success in her previous job would look like. So having it realised must be amazing. But, I do get a feeling that she "forgets" that she is not where she is because of the merits of her work or her own achievement. I would expect some more humility.
With Kate, I got a sense she is more focused on the role, but I do think that she is work shy.


----------



## papertiger

daisychainz said:


> I agree with you. And Vogue is such a political magazine that it does show her politics, and that her first interview was *****, as well. There are probably other (non-fashion) publications that could have been just as suitable for her article. It seems like she wasted no time in securing this connection since it has been in the works for at least 9 months or more.
> And Kate and Meghan both look amazing in Gucci - Gucci makes some nice dresses!



Pretty sure it would have been the other way round and Vogue wasted no time contacting her, its sales have been in steady decline issue after issue after the initial boost after welcoming of the new editor (Enninful)


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

*PIERS MORGAN: Me-Me-Meghan Markle's shamelessly hypocritical super-woke Vogue stunt proves she cares more about promoting herself than the Royal Family or Britain*

*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7298003/PIERS-MORGAN-Meghans-shamelessly-hypocritical-Vogue-stunt.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small*

Two months ago, Meghan Markle was reportedly ‘too busy caring for her baby’ to meet the President of her own country on his state visit to the UK. Now we discover she was in fact preoccupied with the birth of another elitist production – Vogue magazine. News that Meghan has spent the past seven months guest-editing the September issue of Vogue is no surprise to me. As a B-list actress, she’s probably craved all her adult life to be a Vogue star. News that Buckingham Palace has let her do it is a big surprise though, because Meghan is now supposed to be a member of the royal family and not a publicity-craving celebrity. And being a royal means you stay out of politics.

Yet here is Meghan being about as political as any royal has ever been. She’s chosen 15 female ‘trailblazers’ and ‘changemakers’ for the special ‘Forces for Change’ issue, all picked because they promote ‘equality, kindness and open-mindedness’. The women she’s selected represent the greatest hits of virtue-signalling - with a nod to everything from ‘body positivity’, female empowerment, mental health, disability and race to transgender rights, climate change, diversity, and privilege. The last one made me laugh out loud. I’m sure the one thing we all need most in the world right now is a fabulously rich and entitled Princess lecturing us on privilege from her servant-laden royal quarters.

Just as ridiculous was the image of a mirror on the cover, tucked in between all the multi-millionaires.

‘A mirror was included so that when you hold the issue in your hands, you see yourself as part of this collective,’ the Sussex Royal account writes.

Oh pur-lease. Pass the sick bucket.

Vogue’s Editor-in-Chief Edward Enniful gushed: ‘To have the country’s most influential beacon of change guest edit British Vogue has been an honour, a pleasure and a wonderful surprise.’

Sorry, WHAT?

Meghan Markle is many things but ‘the country’s most influential beacon of change’ she is most definitely not. The fact she allowed Enniful to state this as fact in a statement suggests the Duchess’s ego is running dangerously out of control.
(Hilariously, we’re told Meghan insisted on not putting herself on the cover because she didn’t want to appear ‘too boastful’…)

In a post to the Sussex’s Instagram page – at which point, it’s worth remembering that Prince Harry recently told us all to stay off social media because it’s so bad for our mental health - we’re informed the Duchess spent the past seven months creating ‘an issue of inclusivity and inspiration, focusing on what connects rather than what divides us.’ How thoughtful of her! Yet of course her list excludes the planet’s entire male population. So it’s not actually inclusive at all, and nor is her message that only women can change the world.

I thought Meghan might have learned her ‘woke’ lesson after the banana debacle in which she signed the phallic-shaped fruit for a group of sex workers with guff like ‘You are special’ and ‘You are strong’. But nope, Meghan’s here to save us and there’s nothing any of us can do to stop her.

‘LEAVE HER ALONE!’ I hear some cry. But the problem is more that she won’t leave US alone. Meghan didn’t need to guest-edit Vogue. She’s already guzzled at the udder of royal fame like a starving desert traveller arriving at an over-flowing oasis. But that’s not enough.

Meghan’s purpose in guest-editing Vogue is not, as she claims, to simply change the world; it’s to make it the PC-crazed one she wants it to be, and to drag us all with her to ‘woke’ Utopia. Yet by forcing her radical liberal opinions upon us, she’s playing a very ill advised game that I can guarantee will end in tears. There’s a reason royals stay out of politics, and it’s that they run the risk of looking like rank hypocrites.[...]

[...]There are other problems I have with this latest Meghan stunt. First, her primary role now is to promote Britain, like any member of the British Royal Family. That’s why they get the taxpayer-funded palaces, servants and gilded lifestyle. Yet her list features just five British women. She also chooses five American women, and opted for former First Lady Michelle ***** as the subject of her own big interview. The message is pretty clear: promoting Brand Meghan to America is more important to her than promoting Brand Britain. Meghan’s famous friends will love her collaborating with Vogue. It’s the magazine they all read, after all. But I can guarantee the British public won’t be so enamoured with it.

I read one comment on Twitter that said: ‘A feminist who preaches equality and merit, while taking full advantage of the spotlight she only received via marriage to someone who won the birth lottery. Makes me sick.’ This was a popular sentiment.

Meghan’s shown a worrying propensity since marrying Harry for wanting to have cake and eat it. She constantly bleats about privacy but also wants to edit magazines to promote herself and tell us how to lead our lives. This absurd double standard won’t fly, I’m afraid. Here’s my advice to Meghan: take a long hard look in the mirror you stuck on your Vogue cover, and ask yourself one question: ‘Do I want to be a royal or a virtue-signalling political activist celebrity?’

She can’t be both.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. are we married to the same man?!! .. my husband also calls it "Vague"!!!  Too funny ...


Brilliant men!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7298003/PIERS-MORGAN-Meghans-shamelessly-hypocritical-Vogue-stunt.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small*

I like that part about not wanting to appear boastful  Boastful of what exactly? And as compared to whom? The other women she personally chose to be on the cover? Kate, Diana or princess Anne who have all graced the cover of Vogue as someone posted earlier?

Yes. This was a great idea.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Pretty sure it would have been the other way round and Vogue wasted no time contacting her, its sales have been in steady decline issue after issue after the initial boost after welcoming of the new editor (Enninful)


Exactly.  I wasn't sure he still had the job even though he was hand picked by Anna Wintour.  There were rumblings that the company was unhappy with how things were going and he was on his way out the door.  The September and December issues are always the biggest, and they sell well, but you still have to sell the other 10 months.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> No, but hard work speaks for itself.  The instagram announcement called out that she has been working on it for 7 months, which I think was completely unnecessary and was simply there as a self-pat on the book.  Her editor's letter referred to how many months it took at least five or six times.  I think it's too much.   The focus of her projects should not be on how much effort she put in, as if that in and of itself deserves attention and recognition. Effort should be expected, and assumed.



Hard work does not speak for itself in her case. I’m quite sure that had Meghan and Edward not mentioned her hard work the same people complaining about them discussing it would have claimed she barely did anything and questioned why she is taking credit for other people’s work. As it stands Meghan and Edward nipped that “she didn’t really do anything” narrative in the bud.  I suspect having one less thing to criticize Meghan for is what’s truly upsetting some people. Indeed despite refusing  the cover and thanking her collaborators profusely she’s still being accused of lacking humility. Go figure.

Most people gain friends through their spouses  when  they marry. Meghan happens to be married to a well-connected prince. I’m not sure why people are so bothered that she has new celebrity friends. Maybe they are used to the very insular Cambridges and their closed off aristocratic circle?

Long before Meghan met Harry she was already well-connected through her charity work and the very exclusive Soho house — her connections there were how she met Harry. Without Harry her star would have likely continued to rise because she was  ambitious, hard-working and known to be friendly and professional. Meghan & Harry are both warm and friendly people. I suspect their celebrity circle will continue to grow because people seem to genuinely like being around them and are eager to collaborate with them.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I see Piers Morgan has really gotten over her ghosting him. 

Good lawd, he's a bitter pill.


----------



## buffym

akoko said:


> I get a sense that she is using many opportunities to connect with people she wants to and built an international brand for herself in the forefront. As I said, in many ways I understand this and respect where she is coming from. She is an adult woman, used to working with goals and ambitions.
> Of course, I am just guessing here, but she does seem to want to create a network she can fall back on.  She became  " fast friends" with so many people, from the fist moment she  started her duties and got access to people like Oprah, Michel *****, ect.
> Gaining  access and fame was part of her previous job or at least what success in her previous job would look like. So having it realised must be amazing. But, I do get a feeling that she "forgets" that she is not where she is because of the merits of her work or her own achievement. I would expect some more humility.
> With Kate, I got a sense she is more focused on the role, but I do think that she is work shy.



Yes, being married to Harry has open doors, but Meghan met world leaders on her own. Would the Tig had grown enough to interview Michelle *****, probably not but I believe their paths would have cross.


As for her own merit, that can probably be said for most royals it is rarely the person but the title. Who would Queen Elizabeth be without the Queen. Would she garner respect as Lady Elizabeth Bowen or Elizabeth Mountbatten? 

Meghan should be proud of herself, she wanted to be actress, she went from selling calligraphy, to work on a popular cable show but still popular enough for her to do interviews, give a speech at the UN, become charities ambassadors, design a clothing line, and attend movie premieres.

I’m glad she isn’t running I’m so lucky to be a member of the royal family, I’m so far below them. Why?


----------



## chicaloca

buffym said:


> Yes, being married to Harry has open doors, but Meghan met world leaders on her own. Would the Tig had grown enough to interview Michelle *****, probably not but I believe their paths would have cross.
> 
> 
> As for her own merit, that can probably be said for most royals it is rarely the person but the title. Who would Queen Elizabeth be without the Queen. Would she garner respect as Lady Elizabeth Bowen or Elizabeth Mountbatten?
> 
> Meghan should be proud of herself, she wanted to be actress, she went from selling calligraphy, to work on a popular cable show but still popular enough for her to do interviews, give a speech at the UN, become charities ambassadors, design a clothing line, and attend movie premieres.
> 
> I’m glad she isn’t running I’m so lucky to be a member of the royal family, I’m so far below them. Why?
> 
> View attachment 4502150



That’s what I was trying to say. Meghan was an actress on a mid-tier cable show yet she was hobnobbing with high level influencers and leaders. It’s testament to her personality and networking skills. 

The Cambridges are the ones who’d be in trouble without their titles. They don’t strike me as inherently friendly.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *PIERS MORGAN: Me-Me-Meghan Markle's shamelessly hypocritical super-woke Vogue stunt proves she cares more about promoting herself than the Royal Family or Britain*
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7298003/PIERS-MORGAN-Meghans-shamelessly-hypocritical-Vogue-stunt.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small*
> 
> Two months ago, Meghan Markle was reportedly ‘too busy caring for her baby’ to meet the President of her own country on his state visit to the UK. Now we discover she was in fact preoccupied with the birth of another elitist production – Vogue magazine. News that Meghan has spent the past seven months guest-editing the September issue of Vogue is no surprise to me. As a B-list actress, she’s probably craved all her adult life to be a Vogue star. News that Buckingham Palace has let her do it is a big surprise though, because Meghan is now supposed to be a member of the royal family and not a publicity-craving celebrity. And being a royal means you stay out of politics.
> 
> Yet here is Meghan being about as political as any royal has ever been. She’s chosen 15 female ‘trailblazers’ and ‘changemakers’ for the special ‘Forces for Change’ issue, all picked because they promote ‘equality, kindness and open-mindedness’. The women she’s selected represent the greatest hits of virtue-signalling - with a nod to everything from ‘body positivity’, female empowerment, mental health, disability and race to transgender rights, climate change, diversity, and privilege. The last one made me laugh out loud. I’m sure the one thing we all need most in the world right now is a fabulously rich and entitled Princess lecturing us on privilege from her servant-laden royal quarters.
> 
> Just as ridiculous was the image of a mirror on the cover, tucked in between all the multi-millionaires.
> 
> ‘A mirror was included so that when you hold the issue in your hands, you see yourself as part of this collective,’ the Sussex Royal account writes.
> 
> Oh pur-lease. Pass the sick bucket.
> 
> Vogue’s Editor-in-Chief Edward Enniful gushed: ‘To have the country’s most influential beacon of change guest edit British Vogue has been an honour, a pleasure and a wonderful surprise.’
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> Meghan Markle is many things but ‘the country’s most influential beacon of change’ she is most definitely not. The fact she allowed Enniful to state this as fact in a statement suggests the Duchess’s ego is running dangerously out of control.
> (Hilariously, we’re told Meghan insisted on not putting herself on the cover because she didn’t want to appear ‘too boastful’…)
> 
> In a post to the Sussex’s Instagram page – at which point, it’s worth remembering that Prince Harry recently told us all to stay off social media because it’s so bad for our mental health - we’re informed the Duchess spent the past seven months creating ‘an issue of inclusivity and inspiration, focusing on what connects rather than what divides us.’ How thoughtful of her! Yet of course her list excludes the planet’s entire male population. So it’s not actually inclusive at all, and nor is her message that only women can change the world.
> 
> I thought Meghan might have learned her ‘woke’ lesson after the banana debacle in which she signed the phallic-shaped fruit for a group of sex workers with guff like ‘You are special’ and ‘You are strong’. But nope, Meghan’s here to save us and there’s nothing any of us can do to stop her.
> 
> ‘LEAVE HER ALONE!’ I hear some cry. But the problem is more that she won’t leave US alone. Meghan didn’t need to guest-edit Vogue. She’s already guzzled at the udder of royal fame like a starving desert traveller arriving at an over-flowing oasis. But that’s not enough.
> 
> Meghan’s purpose in guest-editing Vogue is not, as she claims, to simply change the world; it’s to make it the PC-crazed one she wants it to be, and to drag us all with her to ‘woke’ Utopia. Yet by forcing her radical liberal opinions upon us, she’s playing a very ill advised game that I can guarantee will end in tears. There’s a reason royals stay out of politics, and it’s that they run the risk of looking like rank hypocrites.[...]
> 
> [...]There are other problems I have with this latest Meghan stunt. First, her primary role now is to promote Britain, like any member of the British Royal Family. That’s why they get the taxpayer-funded palaces, servants and gilded lifestyle. Yet her list features just five British women. She also chooses five American women, and opted for former First Lady Michelle ***** as the subject of her own big interview. The message is pretty clear: promoting Brand Meghan to America is more important to her than promoting Brand Britain. Meghan’s famous friends will love her collaborating with Vogue. It’s the magazine they all read, after all. But I can guarantee the British public won’t be so enamoured with it.
> 
> I read one comment on Twitter that said: ‘A feminist who preaches equality and merit, while taking full advantage of the spotlight she only received via marriage to someone who won the birth lottery. Makes me sick.’ This was a popular sentiment.
> 
> Meghan’s shown a worrying propensity since marrying Harry for wanting to have cake and eat it. She constantly bleats about privacy but also wants to edit magazines to promote herself and tell us how to lead our lives. This absurd double standard won’t fly, I’m afraid. Here’s my advice to Meghan: take a long hard look in the mirror you stuck on your Vogue cover, and ask yourself one question: ‘Do I want to be a royal or a virtue-signalling political activist celebrity?’
> 
> She can’t be both.


He's a good writer.


----------



## buffym

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7298003/PIERS-MORGAN-Meghans-shamelessly-hypocritical-Vogue-stunt.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small*
> 
> I like that part about not wanting to appear boastful  Boastful of what exactly? And as compared to whom? The other women she personally chose to be on the cover? Kate, Diana or princess Anne who have all graced the cover of Vogue as someone posted earlier?
> 
> Yes. This was a great idea.



When she was dating Harry, she appeared on the cover of Vanity Fair people criticized her being on that cover, she wasn’t humble, boastful. She was in magazines before but never on the cover so the accused her of putting herself out there.

Boastful means she listened to the criticism, she isn’t doing covers anymore, but still criticized because instead of scraping and being how lucky am I she stands and knows her worth.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I see Piers Morgan has really gotten over her ghosting him.
> 
> Good lawd, he's a bitter pill.


Scorned and bitter perhaps, but not wrong here


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

Piers Morgan is creepy and I’m glad some of his peers are starting to call him out.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Scorned and bitter perhaps, but not wrong here



That's your opinion, not mine. And not a fact.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I can agree with your statement.  However people with Meghan’s drive always has a list of things they would like to accomplish.  Can it shoot her in the foot....sometimes.  

Is Meghan really doing anything that’s harmful to the BRF? No.  Although I do agree she needs to be a little bit more mindful of her role. 

People with Meghan’s drive tend to attract naysayers.  In my book, that’s how you know you’re doing something right.  When they have to pick apart and find something to say, “aha!  You’re wearing dark nail polish” or some other mediocre thing.  

Harry and Meghan ambition and drive is challenging some of the other Royals to step up their game.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Piers is like the jilted girlfriend that can’t let go!  My gosh he reminds me of my ex.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I am not defending her. I am stating that Vogue made the decision ultimately with what she was going to wear. Gucci takes a primo place the front of the magazine along with LV, Chanel and other big name designers.  They always make up the bulk of the fashion layouts.  Could she have loudly protested that she needed to wear a Hanes tee shirt with pants from the GAP?  I suppose she could have but they wouldn’t have been happy about it. Quid pro quo. She got her message across and had to wear the designer clothes to do it


Why one or the other?  Anything by a British designer and under £900 would be inspirational.


Flatsy said:


> I think this was a great project for her.  She put to use the skills she used on her blog, and she's cut out for the fashion world.  (At that International Women's Day discussion panel she participated in, she was out of her depth and it showed.)
> 
> The British tabloids like to say she does a lot of virtue signaling, and to some extent that's true, but virtue signaling is kind of what the royal job is about.  They endorse charities, promote them and help them raise money.  For her to spotlight people who are working on causes she supports via Vogue is just another way of doing it.  It's going to be superficial, but almost everything royals do is surface level.
> 
> I wish she had refrained from spending so much time tooting her own horn about how long and hard she worked on it.   Actresses "guest edit" fashion magazines all the time and it's not a role that involves heavy lifting.  The editor is still the editor.  Meghan probably put in more effort than the average actress.  (I've gotten the impression in the past that some actress-editors just showed up one or two times to give their opinions on photos and that's about it.)  But this was not a laborious project that took up all of her time over seven months....and even if it did, it's a little off-putting to solicit credit for doing what is now her job.


Love reading your posts!


----------



## Gal4Dior

I love the intent behind the Vogue September issue, but I do find her words often trite boastful. I’m sure I will get tons of criticism for stating my own opinion.

Anyway, if it was Meghan the actress, I would be pretty much on board with this entire issue, since her politics and views are very much in line with mine, but this whole issue ridden with lofty liberal views may disenfranchise existing readers who may not agree - and I simply think it’s not a good fit for her current role as a very visible member of the BRF. 

I’ve always thought that members of the BRF are expected to keep quiet about politics and controversial issues, be gracious, and show up to charitable events. I do think it’s great that Meghan is blazing this trail, but I honestly think it’s too soon? If she were to conform a bit, establish herself in her role before she took down the patriarchy, perhaps it would be more well received?


----------



## mdcx

I'm not sure if it's widely understood that Meghan cannot have a "career" per se, now that she is married to Harry? 
So it doesn't matter how hard working and ambitious she may be, she is effectively constrained by her title and limited to charitable works, basically.

Chelsy Davy wasn't keen on this as a life, and nor would most women be.


----------



## rose60610

Chelsy and Harry dated over 7 years. My guess it didn't all that time to figure it out. When one marries into The Firm, there are expectations, and I'm not so sure I'd use the word "constrained" to describe marrying into a life of complete and total luxury with servants, stylists and speech writers. If showing up at events with a plastered-on smile is constraining and limiting, I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd gladly and gleefully trade places with Ms. Markle.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

For what it's worth, I don't really think it's the BRF that have any kind of problem with Meghan (except perhaps, for Princess Michael of Kent ) .  I can see that Charles might be fond of her (as has been reported) because he has his own ideas about modernising the monarchy and moving it to the future when he eventually becomes King. And along with Kate and William at the forefront, Harry and Meghan will be part of that as well.

Where I think the problem may lay is with the courtiers, or the "gray men" as Diana called them. They aren't just BRF employees, these are people of the highest lineage, from favoured flunkies to military leaders, there are a lot of chesty peacock courtiers who have very rigid ideas about the royal family and it's do's and don't's.  

The reality is that even members of the family such as Charles have admitted it will need to change, and modernise and downsize.  There is constant chatter about the need for them (or if there is a need for them at all), even if they do bring in lots of tourism dollars.  The only way they can survive is to modernise.  Meghan is the more obvious example of that and I have no doubt along with the usual settling in friction that accompanies a BRF newcomer, that those courtiers may see her as the harbinger of the change to their world - and they don't like it.

I think they are mostly responsible for a lot of the stories.  I'm not saying some of the Meghan criticism hasn't been warranted.  Some of it has but I think it goes a little deeper than just one person.

Of course, this is all just hearsay and my opinion


----------



## mdcx

rose60610 said:


> Chelsy and Harry dated over 7 years. My guess it didn't all that time to figure it out. When one marries into The Firm, there are expectations, and I'm not so sure I'd use the word "constrained" to describe marrying into a life of complete and total luxury with servants, stylists and speech writers. If showing up at events with a plastered-on smile is constraining and limiting, I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd gladly and gleefully trade places with Ms. Markle.



I think this may be where the paths diverge - to me, it is not a life of complete and total luxury. There are limits, there are obligations, there are consequences to displaying wealth inappropriately. This is not the same situation as marrying into a privately wealthy family with no public service obligations. In the latter case one could be dripping in diamonds and couture 24/7 and it would be no-ones business. How Meghan spends her time and money and how she behaves in public is the business of her public, however.

Meghan may act as though she is unconstrained by limits to her spending or behaviour and will probably be allowed to do so for a certain period of time, but there will be fallout from that imo.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Pretty sure it would have been the other way round and Vogue wasted no time contacting her, its sales have been in steady decline issue after issue after the initial boost after welcoming of the new editor (Enninful)



I take it back and stand corrected, apparently she got in touch with Vogue. 

And apologies for arguing with myself. 

Something def wrong with Piers, he really loves to hate.


----------



## akoko

buffym said:


> Yes, being married to Harry has open doors, but Meghan met world leaders on her own. Would the Tig had grown enough to interview Michelle *****, probably not but I believe their paths would have cross.
> 
> 
> As for her own merit, that can probably be said for most royals it is rarely the person but the title. Who would Queen Elizabeth be without the Queen. Would she garner respect as Lady Elizabeth Bowen or Elizabeth Mountbatten?
> 
> Meghan should be proud of herself, she wanted to be actress, she went from selling calligraphy, to work on a popular cable show but still popular enough for her to do interviews, give a speech at the UN, become charities ambassadors, design a clothing line, and attend movie premieres.
> 
> I’m glad she isn’t running I’m so lucky to be a member of the royal family, I’m so far below them. Why?
> 
> View attachment 4502150


I agree with what you're saying in many ways. The issue with merit applies an all royals and that is why I think it is important for all of them to show humility and gratefulness for their position. I don't think Meghan should be judged differently and I judge any royal in the same way. For me personally, the Queens has my respect, not for her title but the way she has worked and behaved throughout the years. The same goes for Pincess Ann. Although I like Kate and William, I don't have great respect for them. I do think they are work shy. Maybe that will change in the future. 
I was actually a fan of Meghan before and had watched interviews when she was on Suits. I had been impressed with her confidence at the time and how well spoken she was. This is the part that I like about her, as I said. That she has worked in her life, was succesful and is clearly ambitious. Maybe she would have made it on her own. However, her recent fame is not because of that.  I do think that becoming part of the RF, she needs to switch gears.  I live in the UK and there is a big question of the role of the Royals in todays world. It is a big no no for them to use their position to  influence, given that their position is not earned through merit, as you said. 
It is of course only my opinion, but to me, she is recently she is coming across a bit arrogant with a hint of complaining (for her lack of privacy). Same goes for her aim to change the world and influence events.  This irks my, they way it would do if any Royal behaved that way.


----------



## buffym

akoko said:


> I agree with what you're saying in many ways. The issue with merit applies an all royals and that is why I think it is important for all of them to show humility and gratefulness for their position. I don't think Meghan should be judged differently and I judge any royal in the same way. For me personally, the Queens has my respect, not for her title but the way she has worked and behaved throughout the years. The same goes for Pincess Ann. Although I like Kate and William, I don't have great respect for them. I do think they are work shy. Maybe that will change in the future.
> I was actually a fan of Meghan before and had watched interviews when she was on Suits. I had been impressed with her confidence at the time and how well spoken she was. This is the part that I like about her, as I said. That she has worked in her life, was succesful and is clearly ambitious. Maybe she would have made it on her own. However, her recent fame is not because of that.  I do think that becoming part of the RF, she needs to switch gears.  I live in the UK and there is a big question of the role of the Royals in todays world. It is a big no no for them to use their position to  influence, given that their position is not earned through merit, as you said.
> It is of course only my opinion, but to me, she is recently she is coming across a bit arrogant with a hint of complaining (for her lack of privacy). Same goes for her aim to change the world and influence events.  This irks my, they way it would do if any Royal behaved that way.



I don’t know how a royal doesn’t use their position to influence. Their position is ingrained to why they can raise money and bring awareness to charities. It’s why people to donate thousands to attend a gala they are at, the movie premieres, or even visit the places they attend. Or attend a symposium a royal host. Very few royals have the educational background to host most symposium but they do because of their title.

For me to do their job they have to use their position. Even Princess Anne, she has worked with Save the Children for decades but did she go through regular training to be an ambassador? Probably not, she was asked because of the Princess - Anne.

So that is why I don’t get the criticism for Meghan, she is doing what other royals are doing but she gets slanted for it.

As for the privacy complaint, agree to disagree, it doesn’t bother me and I don’t take it as arrogance. I take it as being hard to deal with the press, Harry and Meghan has to move out of their home because the Sun published pictures of the dining room and bedroom that they took from a helicopter. That has to be hard and I don’t know how you can get use to that because it isn’t the normal in the BRF, what other royal in modern times has had inside pictures of their homes on a cover of a tabloid?


----------



## M_Butterfly

Welltraveled! said:


> Piers is like the jilted girlfriend that can’t let go!  My gosh he reminds me of my ex.


.


----------



## Flatsy

I don't see the issue as being very political.   It's largely a list of actresses, models and entertainers.  

Michelle ***** *is* a political pick, but retired Presidents and First Ladies are generally more about humanitarianism than partisan politics.  And the questions Meghan asked her could not have been more fluffy - questions about her kids and what's her favorite sound she's ever heard.  

I haven't read the other interviews that weren't conducted by Meghan, but I'm not expecting them to be hardball either.  It's Vogue, it's going to be superficial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## akoko

buffym said:


> I don’t know how a royal doesn’t use their position to influence. Their position is ingrained to why they can raise money and bring awareness to charities. It’s why people to donate thousands to attend a gala they are at, the movie premieres, or even visit the places they attend. Or attend a symposium a royal host. Very few royals have the educational background to host most symposium but they do because of their title.
> 
> For me to do their job they have to use their position. Even Princess Anne, she has worked with Save the Children for decades but did she go through regular training to be an ambassador? Probably not, she was asked because of the Princess - Anne.
> 
> So that is why I don’t get the criticism for Meghan, she is doing what other royals are doing but she gets slanted for it.
> 
> As for the privacy complaint, agree to disagree, it doesn’t bother me and I don’t take it as arrogance. I take it as being hard to deal with the press, Harry and Meghan has to move out of their home because the Sun published pictures of the dining room and bedroom that they took from a helicopter. That has to be hard and I don’t know how you can get use to that because it isn’t the normal in the BRF, what other royal in modern times has had inside pictures of their homes on a cover of a tabloid?



I haven't slanted Meghan. I've expressed which aspects from her behaviour I like and which aspects I don't. 
Of course attending charitable events is part of her job as a royal. I don't think she is slanted for it.  But, the editorial, although I liked the idea, I didn't actually like what was written. 
Other royals receive  criticism as well. For examples Charles has been heavily criticised for letters he writes to politicians and it is viewed as a problem, the fact that he wants to influence. On the other hand, he is praised and has received recognition for bringing awareness to issues of sustainability. 

I agree that there has been a huge interest in Meghan, which must be a lot of pressure. It was same with Kate, when private images were published from a binocular. My personal view on that, is that she decided to enter a life of great luxury which comes with certain very important sacrifices. It was her decision as an adult woman to do so.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> When she was dating Harry, she appeared on the cover of Vanity Fair people criticized her being on that cover, she wasn’t humble, boastful. She was in magazines before but never on the cover so the accused her of putting herself out there.
> 
> Boastful means she listened to the criticism, she isn’t doing covers anymore, but still criticized because instead of scraping and being how lucky am I she stands and knows her worth.


"Boastful" is now perceived as a dig at Kate. Correct or not, somebody needs to help Meghan think things through. Not just applaud her every inane move sycophantically.

My bet is she is going to be on the cover of both British and American Vogue as soon as she's lost the baby weight    Scraping and knowing her worth? She willingly married in to a hierarchy. It's now obvious she had other plans, and has that typical modern rightthinker audacity that elevates her above all those wrongthinker bigots    (i e people of a different political opinion) that need to learn how to rightthink. And by Vogue, she will teach them!


----------



## daisychainz

papertiger said:


> Pretty sure it would have been the other way round and Vogue wasted no time contacting her, its sales have been in steady decline issue after issue after the initial boost after welcoming of the new editor (Enninful)


Oh, I agree with that. I am pretty sure Vogue would want her for their sales and (more) exposure. But if you're truly doing something for a cause for unemployed/underemployed women then Vogue wouldn't be the outlet for that. So it's more about shining a light on her than this organization, by teaming with Vogue.


----------



## Flatsy

Let's be clear, nobody criticized Harry and Meghan for stopping tabloid helicopters from filming into their vacation home. They won a big settlement for that and rightfully so.  Nobody said they should put up with that, it's the price you pay, etc.   

And it should be noted that they made minimal public complaint about it.  They sued, they won a settlement, and they announced their victory.  Probably privately they are looking into more secure options for vacation homes.  (Or planning to just live at their semi-rural castle estate, which is what castles are for.)  That is exactly how they should be handling it.  As the British would say, they "are getting on with it".

The criticism has been about stuff like telling people not to take pictures of them at a public sporting event, or being overly secretive and withholding about innocuous information concerning their christening plans.   That's what people see as being arrogant and an unnecessary PITA.  Nothing to do with preventing helicopters from filming inside their living room windows.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This pic of Charles and Diana just popped up on my insta. Cute.


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> Let's be clear, nobody criticized Harry and Meghan for stopping tabloid helicopters from filming into their vacation home. They won a big settlement for that and rightfully so.  Nobody said they should put up with that, it's the price you pay, etc.
> 
> And it should be noted that they made minimal public complaint about it.  They sued, they won a settlement, and they announced their victory.  Probably privately they are looking into more secure options for vacation homes.  (Or planning to just live at their semi-rural castle estate, which is what castles are for.)  That is exactly how they should be handling it.  As the British would say, they "are getting on with it".
> 
> The criticism has been about stuff like telling people not to take pictures of them at a public sporting event, or being overly secretive and withholding about innocuous information concerning their christening plans.   That's what people see as being arrogant and an unnecessary PITA.  Nothing to do with preventing helicopters from filming inside their living room windows.



It has to go with perception, I don’t believe Meghan instructed her security to tell people not to take pictures of her at Wimbledon because there are pictures of her pose with people. 
If you believe it was her decision then this will support the viewpoint of arrogance and also with privacy complaint. I think she was complaining about incidents like that makes it hard. 

From this thread, I’ve learned if you have a negative view of someone then most likely whatever they do will support that negative point of view.
The same with a positive view point.


----------



## buffym

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "Boastful" is now perceived as a dig at Kate. Correct or not, somebody needs to help Meghan think things through. Not just applaud her every inane move sycophantically.
> 
> My bet is she is going to be on the cover of both British and American Vogue as soon as she's lost the baby weight    Scraping and knowing her worth? She willingly married in to a hierarchy. It's now obvious she had other plans, and has that typical modern rightthinker audacity that elevates her above all those wrongthinker bigots    (i e people of a different political opinion) that need to learn how to rightthink. And by Vogue, she will teach them!



I don’t consider boastful as a dig at Kate, Meghan did Vanity Fair cover and her criticizes said she shouldn’t be on the cover, ‘she was boastful.’

Since she is take a dig at Kate by saying that is Kate also political for doing Vogue in 2016? Or did Vogue become too political after Kate’s cover?

Is interviewing Michelle ***** more political than her husband interviewing President ***** in 2017 when he was a guest editor?

I don’t get how Vogue is being viewed as political anymore so than some of the other royals guest edits?
Except for Prince Charles, in Country Life, it’s Country Life, He edited the same magazine twice.
 She was wrong to the cover of Vanity Fair, now she’s wrong for not being on the cover.


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> She was wrong to the cover of Vanity Fair, now she’s wrong for not being on the cover.


These are two entirely separate matters.

I think it was a great decision for her not to be on the cover of the Vogue issue and to keep the focus on the women the issue was meant to spotlight.  The British tabloid writers who are criticizing her for attention grabbing look extra stupid and petty this time around.  

I also think it's fine if she poses for the cover at some point in the future, so long as she doesn't start overdoing her association with Vogue or fashion magazines in general.

I think her first Vanity Fair cover was questionable.  She was not Harry's fiancee yet, and she had not earned a place on the cover on her own merits.  She was basically on the cover of the magazine to discuss her relationship with her famous boyfriend.  I think it was done with the blessing of the royal family as a way to introduce her to the broader public prior to an engagement announcement, but it was not necessary.  

In retrospect, the Vanity Fair cover makes it clear that brand-building was her/her and Harry's priority from the very beginning, and not everybody is in love with the idea of brand-building.



buffym said:


> From this thread, I’ve learned if you have a negative view of someone then most likely whatever they do will support that negative point of view.
> The same with a positive view point.


You are free to think that, but putting everybody into the category of 100% pro or 100% anti has a lot to do with the fighting on this thread.  Many of us have mixed and complicated opinions.  

I find that when I post something that includes three complimentary things and one critical thing, it's the one critical thing that is pulled out for discussion, usually to berate and bemoan "negativity".  And then that's what the conversation becomes all about - the negative stuff.


----------



## daisychainz

buffym said:


> I don’t consider boastful as a dig at Kate, Meghan did Vanity Fair cover and her criticizes said she shouldn’t be on the cover, ‘she was boastful.’
> 
> Since she is take a dig at Kate by saying that is Kate also political for doing Vogue in 2016? Or did Vogue become too political after Kate’s cover?
> 
> Is interviewing Michelle ***** more political than her husband interviewing President ***** in 2017 when he was a guest editor?
> 
> I don’t get how Vogue is being viewed as political anymore so than some of the other royals guest edits?
> Except for Prince Charles, in Country Life, it’s Country Life, He edited the same magazine twice.
> She was wrong to the cover of Vanity Fair, now she’s wrong for not being on the cover.


In 2016 Vogue US endorsed a presidential nominee for the first time in history. And, then it became more widely publicized and known around that time that Anna Wintour was heavily involved financially with the ********ic party, Hollywood Dems, and was bff's with Hollywood giants such as Harvey Weinstein. Obviously those ties and allegiances were there before 2016 too, but not necessarily public. I don't know about Country Life, but I'd assume that appearing on Country Life and Field & Stream and Knitting Today is probably much less problematic for a royal. Vogue USA took a firm political stance so if you go on their cover or guest edit you are doing it with full awareness of where they stand, and articles and participants will skew a certain way in that magazine. Vogue and Vanity Fair are owned by the same company, so they are taking an interest in her and Harry for a reason.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> In 2016 Vogue US endorsed a presidential nominee for the first time in history. And, then it became more widely publicized and known around that time that Anna Wintour was heavily involved financially with the ********ic party, Hollywood Dems, and was bff's with Hollywood giants such as Harvey Weinstein. Obviously those ties and allegiances were there before 2016 too, but not necessarily public. I don't know about Country Life, but I'd assume that appearing on Country Life and Field & Stream and Knitting Today is probably much less problematic for a royal. Vogue USA took a firm political stance so if you go on their cover or guest edit you are doing it with full awareness of where they stand, and articles and participants will skew a certain way in that magazine. Vogue and Vanity Fair are owned by the same company, so they are taking an interest in her and Harry for a reason.


we are getting very close to talking politics here, which is tempting me but not allowed on TPF


----------



## chicaloca

The Sussexes haven’t made any formal requests for privacy. They perform the same public duties and make the same public appearances as other Royals. They provided official pics of Archie after his birth and christening - just like other royals. Meghan went to a Wimbledon with friends and spoke to and posed with fans. She also took Archie to a polo match. The Sussexes aren’t hiding themselves or Archie as the media suggests. 

The tabloids started the privacy narrative because they were pissed at not being able to exploit Archie’s birth for profit. The tabloids are also angry they cant access the hospital birth team or Archie’s god parents to harass them or pay them for info about the Sussexes. After that poor nurse from Cambridge birth team committed suicide due to her harassment the Sussexes made sure the same situation wouldn’t happen again.

This whole privacy narrative is about bullying the Sussexes into giving the media more access to Archie and their personal lives so the tabloids can make a profit. The move to Frogmore meant no more leaks from Kensington Palace so now the tabloids have to make up stories.  The false story claiming the Sussexes told neighbors not to speak to them is a new low. The Sussexes are rightfully keeping the focus on their work and doing exactly what is expected of them — promoting their patronages.


----------



## daisychainz

sdkitty said:


> we are getting very close to talking politics here, which is tempting me but not allowed on TPF


You can be tempted. I find politics


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> You can be tempted. I find politics


that's funny because you are talking about Anna Wintour's and Vogue's political leanings


----------



## daisychainz

sdkitty said:


> that's funny because you are talking about Anna Wintour's and Vogue's political leanings


You can fight with yourself, lol. I'm not interested


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Ladies, ladies! Let's let Vlad and frens decide what's too much politics or not. No need to gate-keep.

Meghan of Sussex just took a major divisive political stand (and so did her hubby Harry if what I'm reading on his interview in the same Vogue is correct) in an era of very turbulent European political happenings. She chose to be woke. If we can't comment on that, why is there even a thread?  Or at least, why are we discussing their collaboration with Vogue, a magazine that won't even have the current US First Lady on their cover because of politics?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ladies, ladies! Let's let Vlad and frens decide what's too much politics or not. No need to gate-keep.
> 
> Meghan of Sussex just took a major divisive political stand (and so did her hubby Harry if what I'm reading on his interview in the same Vogue is correct) in an era of very turbulent European political happenings. She chose to be woke. If we can't comment on that, why is there even a thread?  Or at least, why are we discussing their collaboration with Vogue, a magazine that won't even have the current US First Lady on their cover because of politics?


Exactly! They both took a political stance; however, it’s safer for Harry to do it since he’s born into this family and role and he’s had more years to establish himself before voicing his opinions. 

Meghan could very well be perceived as an outsider American trying to impose on traditional British conservative values and in my mind, that is a complete no no.


----------



## Morgan R

*HRH The Duke of Sussex Interviews Dr Jane Goodall For The September Issue*
It’s an overcast day in Windsor, with temperamental weather threatening to change the locale for an exclusive sit-down between legendary ethologist Dr Jane Goodall and HRH The Duke of Sussex. “The rain stops for Jane,” assures Mary Lewis, long-time VP at the Jane Goodall Institute. And, as it turns out, not only does the rain stop for Jane – so do we. Here, a candid conversation from _Vogue_'s September issue about environment, responsibility and climate change

*Prince Harry: Jane, you’ve been known first and foremost as a world-famous primatologist, but moved at some point to focus on people and the human issues around conservation. When did that shift happen and why?*
*Dr Jane Goodall:* It happened in 1986 – I helped to organise a conference to bring scientists together to learn about comparative chimp behaviour in different environments. We had a session on conservation and on conditions in medical research labs, which was a total shock. I couldn’t sleep after that. I went as a scientist and left as an activist, a spokesperson for the environment and for animals. It came to a head when I flew over tiny Gombe, which had been part of the Equatorial forest belt in the ’60s and ’70s. But by ’90 it was a tiny island of forest surrounded by completely bare hills. People were struggling to survive. That’s when it hit me: if we don’t help these people, then we can’t even try to save the chimps.

*Have you found there’s been more support over the years, or have you found it harder to raise money for these causes?*

[There’s] more support, more awareness. But at the same time, a lot of apathy. The big message I take around is: every single person makes some impact on the planet every day. And you get to choose what you buy, where it comes from. But the thing you have to do first to make this work is to alleviate poverty. Because if you’re really poor, you’re going to cut down the last tree because you’ve got to live. You’re going to take money to kill an elephant because you have to survive.

*You have extreme empathy for all animals, especially primates, and have connected with them in a way that few to no other person has. What have you learned from studying chimpanzees?*

I have to say my favourite animal absolutely is not a primate, it’s a dog. I love dogs. When I went to [the University of] Cambridge, they told me I couldn’t talk about chimps having personalities, minds, emotions, and I should have given them numbers and not names; I had to be objective. It was my dog who taught me when I was young that they were wrong! We changed the way science thought. You can now study animal intellect and animal emotions. [The main difference between chimps and humans] is we developed a spoken language. I can tell you about things you haven’t seen, and you can tell me about things – we can discuss our different viewpoints. So, how is it possible that the most intellectual creature that’s ever walked on the planet, that sent a rocket to Mars from which a little robot crept to take photos, is destroying our only home? It seems to be a disconnect between the clever brain and the heart, love and compassion. And we are now making decisions, not based on “How will this affect future generations?” but “How will this affect me, now?” “How will this affect my next election campaign?” “How will this affect the next shareholders’ meeting?” We’ve become materialistic, greedy, and that’s spread through the world.

*We are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us.*

It’s crazy to think we can have unlimited economic development on a planet with finite natural resources. There’s a lot of violence and war and suffering around the world today, but we’re part of the natural world, and if we can’t learn to live in harmony with it, then this is going to get worse. There will be more conflicts, people fighting over the last fertile land, the last fresh water.
*
What we need to remind everybody is: these are things that are happening now. We are already living in it. We are the frog in the water and it’s already been brought to the boil. Which is terrifying.
*
Happening and happened. It is terrifying. Especially as you’ve just had a baby.
*
[Laughs] I know.
*
Well, it does make it different, doesn’t it?

*It does make it different. I think, weirdly, because of the people that I’ve met and the places that I’ve been fortunate enough to go to, I’ve always had a connection and a love for nature. I view it differently now, without question. But I’ve always wanted to try and ensure that, even before having a child and hoping to have children…*

Not too many! [Laughs]

*Two, maximum! But I’ve always thought: this place is borrowed. And, surely, being as intelligent as we all are, or as evolved as we all are supposed to be, we should be able to leave something better behind for the next generation.*

But, in fact, we’ve stolen their future. Not all of it. But we’ve got to try and pay a little of it back. And get together to try and heal some of the harm, and at least slow down climate change.

*What I love about your work is that you focus on the younger generation. [When] you start to peel away all the layers, all the taught behaviour, the learned behaviour, the experienced behaviour, you start to peel all that away and at the end of the day, we’re all humans.*

Especially if you get little kids together, there’s no difference! They don’t notice, “My skin’s white, mine’s black,” until somebody tells them.

*But again, just as stigma is handed down from generation to generation, your perspective on the world and on life and on people is something that is taught to you. It’s learned from your family, learned from the older generation, or from advertising, from your environment. And, therefore, you have to be able to have a wider perspective. Going back to my questions, how has what you’ve learned from chimpanzees impacted how you feel about people?*

That we have lots of instincts. From studying the chimps and seeing all the similarities it was obvious to me that we have inherited aggressive tendencies. When you look around the world, they’re everywhere. They’re not learned. They’re just… there. You get angry. But with our brain we mostly control them.

*What I love about your work is that you focus on the younger generation. [When] you start to peel away all the layers, all the taught behaviour, the learned behaviour, the experienced behaviour, you start to peel all that away and at the end of the day, we’re all humans.*

Especially if you get little kids together, there’s no difference! They don’t notice, “My skin’s white, mine’s black,” until somebody tells them.

*But again, just as stigma is handed down from generation to generation, your perspective on the world and on life and on people is something that is taught to you. It’s learned from your family, learned from the older generation, or from advertising, from your environment. And, therefore, you have to be able to have a wider perspective. Going back to my questions, how has what you’ve learned from chimpanzees impacted how you feel about people?*

That we have lots of instincts. From studying the chimps and seeing all the similarities it was obvious to me that we have inherited aggressive tendencies. When you look around the world, they’re everywhere. They’re not learned. They’re just… there. You get angry. But with our brain we mostly control them.

*What I love about your work is that you focus on the younger generation. [When] you start to peel away all the layers, all the taught behaviour, the learned behaviour, the experienced behaviour, you start to peel all that away and at the end of the day, we’re all humans.*

Especially if you get little kids together, there’s no difference! They don’t notice, “My skin’s white, mine’s black,” until somebody tells them.

*But again, just as stigma is handed down from generation to generation, your perspective on the world and on life and on people is something that is taught to you. It’s learned from your family, learned from the older generation, or from advertising, from your environment. And, therefore, you have to be able to have a wider perspective. Going back to my questions, how has what you’ve learned from chimpanzees impacted how you feel about people?*

That we have lots of instincts. From studying the chimps and seeing all the similarities it was obvious to me that we have inherited aggressive tendencies. When you look around the world, they’re everywhere. They’re not learned. They’re just… there. You get angry. But with our brain we mostly control them.

*They are the solution. I say “they”, I’m 34 now, so I can’t quite…*

You’re still in the youth category!

*Am I? Good. Phew! I hope to remain youthful for the rest of my life. *

Well, I have. So you can, too [laughs].

*Well, you surround yourself with the right people and you do the right things, and as long as you can be a kid at heart, then, growing up is fun as opposed to scary.*

Exactly. And you hopefully get wiser.

*Yes, you undoubtedly get wiser. I think, again, what I’ve noticed in myself, is that life is about evolving. You are continually changing, and if you don’t think that every day is a learning process, then life is going to be very tricky for you.*

Something new every day, that’s what I like. Understanding that each day you live, you do make a difference. This materialistic [mindset]... We’ve moved away from any kind of spiritual connection with nature which, to me, is really important.

*They’ve actually proved that children need to be out in nature for good psychological development. Now, we’ve got kids who never have a chance to get in nature. But for me, personally – and I’m sure it’s the same for you – nature is a medicine. In so many areas, it’s free. Now, I know more and more people are being brought up in cities completely disconnected from the outside world.*

That’s why it’s so important, these new developments of green in the city: green walls, green on the roofs, it makes a big, big difference.

*It makes a huge difference. This is one question I would love to touch on with you: what can we do to lift up the current and/or emerging leaders within the countries who are dealing with the greatest challenges for wildlife and conservation?*

I have talked with some of these leaders, and if you can tell stories that get into their hearts, sometimes they change. You never know at the time what effect your conversation has had. I was going to Heathrow from London [in a taxi]. I was very tired, it was 5am and [the taxi driver] knew who I was: “Oh, you’re just like my sister, she’s always looking after these animals, we should be caring about people, she wants to go and help stray dogs and cats, and I haven’t got any time for it.” So, I sat in the jump seat and I talked to him, and I told him about the chimps, the stories, and how they help each other and how they can be altruistic. It didn’t work. But when we got to Heathrow, he had no change. He owed me 10 quid, so I said, “Give it to your sister for her work.” [When I] got back from the US, there was a letter from the sister saying, “First, I want to thank you for your donation. Second, what did you do to my brother?! He’s been three times to help me with my work!” If I hadn’t had that letter, I would never have known. So, it’s always worth it.

*It’s always worth it. But there are so many people around the world saying, “Well, what is the work that you’re doing, what effect is it actually having?” Sometimes you have to be able to turn around and say, “I don’t know.”*

Luckily, I can see proof now. I’ve lived long enough to see the proof that this has worked!

*[With] Roots & Shoots [a programme that provides vocational training to young people], specifically, what is your greatest achievement?*

Empowering young people to understand that they can make a difference. When I was 10 years old and wanted to go to Africa, everybody laughed at me. It was only my mother who said, “If you really want this, you’ll have to work really hard and take advantage of every opportunity.” And I wish Mum was around to know the number of people who said, “Jane, thank you, you’ve taught me because you did it, I can do it, too.”

*How do you remain hopeful?*

First of all, youth. Second, this amazing intellect. We’ve done a lot of damage with our intellect, we still are doing it, but we’ve got better and better clean, green energy, and if the government subsidised it, many people could be off the grid altogether. So, our intellect really can help us live in greater harmony and it can help each one of us to leave lighter ecological footprints. Next comes the resilience of nature. There are no bare hills around Gombe any more. Places that we’ve totally destroyed, there are incredible projects going on. The last reason for hope is the indomitable human spirit.
*
Prince Harry Interviews Ethologist Dr Jane Goodall For The September Issue | British Vogue*


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> Something def wrong with Piers, he really loves to hate.



There's little difference in the "hate" between Piers vs the "hate" from the majority of what passes for "journalists" in the United States.  Opinion commentators are one thing, but we get boatloads of hate from even supposed hard news journalists on major networks and print news. There's very little neutral or unbiased ground anymore, anywhere. You could always find deranged or harsh stuff in fringe wacky websites, but now you see them in mainstream outlets. 

Cripes, even Vogue is basically a self anointed politics rag these days. Even articles about skin care often contain a political dig. No wonder journalists are held in even lower esteem than Congress.

It's almost gotten to the point where if one dislikes Markle's dress one day, they're a MEGHAN HATER!  Or if one like Kate's hat one day they're a KATE SYCOPHANT! And it can change day to day just like sixth graders who say they "used to go out with so -and-so" meaning they liked each other for a day and a half two months ago. Y-aaaaaaaaawn.


----------



## cafecreme15

Just wanted to pop in to say that I enjoyed reading the conversation about Meghan's position as guest editor of Vogue - I thought the debate was thoughtful, nuanced, and respectful. Would love to see that continue here! By the time I get around to checking this thread the moment to comment has usually passed, but I enjoy reading everyone's opinions.


----------



## Clearblueskies

One thing I’m really not keen on is the trend for - instant best friends let’s hug and tell the world how much we love/are simpatico with - famous people we barely know /have only just met for the first time.  Call me old fashioned, I don’t care, but it strikes an artificial and rather shallow note with me.  I’ve noticed Harry hugging people a lot lately and looking rather embarrassed about it. He seems to be catching this from MM.  I don’t think you can grapple with strangers one minute and expect to stand on your dignity the next. Royalty isn’t showbiz. JMO.


----------



## byzina

Morgan R said:


> Not too many! [Laughs]
> 
> *Two, maximum! But I’ve always thought: this place is borrowed. And, surely, being as intelligent as we all are, or as evolved as we all are supposed to be, we should be able to leave something better behind for the next generation.*



I didn't quite get it. Does it mean that having more than two children is considered to be harmful for nature?


----------



## Flatsy

I know it was Meghan's project, but so far the interview Harry did with Jane Goodall is the best thing I've read from the Vogue issue.  He knew enough about the subject to ask good questions.  He gave a glimpse into his own thoughts and feelings without making it a piece about himself.  It's great timing as a follow-up to the event he did with her last week.  That's good brand building!


----------



## akoko

A


Flatsy said:


> I know it was Meghan's project, but so far the interview Harry did with Jane Goodall is the best thing I've read from the Vogue issue.  He knew enough about the subject to ask good questions.  He gave a glimpse into his own thoughts and feelings without making it a piece about himself.  It's great timing as a follow-up to the event he did with her last week.  That's good brand building!


I agree! The interview was actually very good and thoughtful.


----------



## papertiger

byzina said:


> I didn't quite get it. Does it mean that having more than two children is considered to be harmful for nature?



Humans are depleting the Earth of its natural resources. Resources are finite at any one time.Carbon emotion and sustainability targets are worked out per head. The more heads there are the less there will be per head. Population growth is totally destabilising the planet.

I totally applaud Harry for coming out with this statement. This is one of the most groundbreaking ever because over-population it has been the elephant in the room since people were silenced after the brief spell of highlighting the issue in the 1960s when there were obviously far fewer people than now. Good for him, I can almost forgive him for thinking it would be hilarious to dress-up as a Nazi (highly publicised) or go spontaneously hunting in Scotland with his mates on a nature reserve a couple of years ago (all hushed up).


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> One thing I’m really not keen on is the trend for - instant best friends let’s hug and tell the world how much we love/are simpatico with - famous people we barely know /have only just met for the first time.  Call me old fashioned, I don’t care, but it strikes an artificial and rather shallow note with me.  I’ve noticed Harry hugging people a lot lately and looking rather embarrassed about it. He seems to be catching this from MM.  I don’t think you can grapple with strangers one minute and expect to stand on your dignity the next. Royalty isn’t showbiz. JMO.



Yes, it's a bit weird.  I sometimes feel the urge to hug, it's actually how we greet each other in my culture but I have leaned how to control myself in the UK, it's absolutely not the norm here.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I know it was Meghan's project, but so far the interview Harry did with Jane Goodall is the best thing I've read from the Vogue issue.  He knew enough about the subject to ask good questions.  He gave a glimpse into his own thoughts and feelings without making it a piece about himself.  It's great timing as a follow-up to the event he did with her last week.  That's good brand building!



Meghan and Harry make a great team. They are always on the same page. I have to roll my eyes articles that suggest Meghan is acting alone on decisions. I’m sure everything they do us planned together.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ladies, ladies! Let's let Vlad and frens decide what's too much politics or not. No need to gate-keep.
> 
> Meghan of Sussex just took a major divisive political stand (and so did her hubby Harry if what I'm reading on his interview in the same Vogue is correct) in an era of very turbulent European political happenings. She chose to be woke. If we can't comment on that, why is there even a thread?  Or at least, why are we discussing their collaboration with Vogue, a magazine that won't even have the current US First Lady on their cover because of politics?


If Jane Fonda on the cover and part of the issue isn’t political, then I don’t know what is.  I have a long memory where she is concerned


----------



## buffym

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ha...8554451/meghan-markle-collection-smart-works/

The capsule will benefit a charity that supports unemployed women trying to enter the workforce.

Meghan Markle is launching a capsule collection of work apparel to benefit the charity Smart Works, one of her royal patronages which provides support for unemployed women.
The collection will launch later this year, and one item will be donated for each item bought.
The Duchess of Sussex's collaborators on the collection include designer Misha Nonoo and U.K. department store Marks & Spencer.

The Duchess of Sussex is on a roll with her fashionable projects this week. Days after revealing that she guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue, Meghan Markle has announced that she's launching a capsule collection of workwear to benefit her royal patronage Smart Works, a charity that benefits disadvantaged and unemployed women who are entering or returning to the workforce.

Meghan broke the news in her Vogue UK issue, according to royal reporter Omid Scobie. She recruited an impressive set of collaborators for the project: British department stores Marks & Spencer and John Lewis, the Google tech incubator Jigsaw, and her close friend and fashion designer Misha Nonoo.

The collection will launch later this year and will be sold on a "one-for-one basis," meaning one item is donated for each item purchased. "Not only does this allow us to be part of each other’s story, it reminds us we are in it together," Duchess Meghan explained in the magazine.

The Duchess of Sussex became the royal patron of Smart Works in January, and had a public engagement at the headquarters that month. During her visit, she helped style one woman for a job interview.

Meghan said during her trip, "It's not just donating your clothes and seeing where they land, it's really being part of each other's success stories as women." Smart Works has grown quickly ever since Duchess Meghan became involved. In February, the organization helped 187 women in London, which is almost 50 percent more than it assisted in the same month last year. Considering the ever-persistent "Meghan effect," the phenomenon where an article of clothing will sell out after the duchess wears it in public, we can only imagine the impact her upcoming collection will have on Smart Works.


----------



## Flatsy

I have to say, I think if Meghan made the same remark Harry made about having a maximum of two kids, the tabloids would be all over her for attempting to insult Kate.  I don't think they will take it the same way coming from Harry.

Maybe they can write stories about how Meghan's liberal politics forced Harry to insult his brother's family, thereby driving the wedge between the brothers deeper.


----------



## cafecreme15

buffym said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ha...8554451/meghan-markle-collection-smart-works/
> 
> The capsule will benefit a charity that supports unemployed women trying to enter the workforce.
> 
> Meghan Markle is launching a capsule collection of work apparel to benefit the charity Smart Works, one of her royal patronages which provides support for unemployed women.
> The collection will launch later this year, and one item will be donated for each item bought.
> The Duchess of Sussex's collaborators on the collection include designer Misha Nonoo and U.K. department store Marks & Spencer.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is on a roll with her fashionable projects this week. Days after revealing that she guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue, Meghan Markle has announced that she's launching a capsule collection of workwear to benefit her royal patronage Smart Works, a charity that benefits disadvantaged and unemployed women who are entering or returning to the workforce.
> 
> Meghan broke the news in her Vogue UK issue, according to royal reporter Omid Scobie. She recruited an impressive set of collaborators for the project: British department stores Marks & Spencer and John Lewis, the Google tech incubator Jigsaw, and her close friend and fashion designer Misha Nonoo.
> 
> The collection will launch later this year and will be sold on a "one-for-one basis," meaning one item is donated for each item purchased. "Not only does this allow us to be part of each other’s story, it reminds us we are in it together," Duchess Meghan explained in the magazine.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex became the royal patron of Smart Works in January, and had a public engagement at the headquarters that month. During her visit, she helped style one woman for a job interview.
> 
> Meghan said during her trip, "It's not just donating your clothes and seeing where they land, it's really being part of each other's success stories as women." Smart Works has grown quickly ever since Duchess Meghan became involved. In February, the organization helped 187 women in London, which is almost 50 percent more than it assisted in the same month last year. Considering the ever-persistent "Meghan effect," the phenomenon where an article of clothing will sell out after the duchess wears it in public, we can only imagine the impact her upcoming collection will have on Smart Works.


This is a fantastic idea! I look forward to seeing the collection.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## akoko

buffym said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ha...8554451/meghan-markle-collection-smart-works/
> 
> The capsule will benefit a charity that supports unemployed women trying to enter the workforce.
> 
> Meghan Markle is launching a capsule collection of work apparel to benefit the charity Smart Works, one of her royal patronages which provides support for unemployed women.
> The collection will launch later this year, and one item will be donated for each item bought.
> The Duchess of Sussex's collaborators on the collection include designer Misha Nonoo and U.K. department store Marks & Spencer.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is on a roll with her fashionable projects this week. Days after revealing that she guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue, Meghan Markle has announced that she's launching a capsule collection of workwear to benefit her royal patronage Smart Works, a charity that benefits disadvantaged and unemployed women who are entering or returning to the workforce.
> 
> Meghan broke the news in her Vogue UK issue, according to royal reporter Omid Scobie. She recruited an impressive set of collaborators for the project: British department stores Marks & Spencer and John Lewis, the Google tech incubator Jigsaw, and her close friend and fashion designer Misha Nonoo.
> 
> The collection will launch later this year and will be sold on a "one-for-one basis," meaning one item is donated for each item purchased. "Not only does this allow us to be part of each other’s story, it reminds us we are in it together," Duchess Meghan explained in the magazine.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex became the royal patron of Smart Works in January, and had a public engagement at the headquarters that month. During her visit, she helped style one woman for a job interview.
> 
> Meghan said during her trip, "It's not just donating your clothes and seeing where they land, it's really being part of each other's success stories as women." Smart Works has grown quickly ever since Duchess Meghan became involved. In February, the organization helped 187 women in London, which is almost 50 percent more than it assisted in the same month last year. Considering the ever-persistent "Meghan effect," the phenomenon where an article of clothing will sell out after the duchess wears it in public, we can only imagine the impact her upcoming collection will have on Smart Works.


This actually sounds like a great idea.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Flatsy said:


> I have to say, I think if Meghan made the same remark Harry made about having a maximum of two kids, the tabloids would be all over her for attempting to insult Kate.  I don't think they will take it the same way coming from Harry.
> 
> Maybe they can write stories about how Meghan's liberal politics forced Harry to insult his brother's family, thereby driving the wedge between the brothers deeper.


They're on it. 

At this point, I think few are doubting that Harry and Meghan are "forces for change" in cahoots.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ne-Goodall-Meghans-edition-British-Vogue.html

*Prince Harry reveals he and Meghan will only have TWO children to help save the planet (unlike William and Kate with three) - and says how 'unconscious bias' is causing racism in Britain in wife's Vogue*

*Duke of Sussex said racism is often the result of unconscious bias passed down from one generation to next*
*He told environmentalist Dr Jane Goodall, 85, we have to understand how bias works to overcome prejudice*
*Harry, 34, also revealed he only wants 'max two children' with wife Meghan, 37, in face of climate change *
*He was interviewed by Dr Goodall for the September edition of British Vogue, which Duchess guest edited *
_Prince Harry has revealed he and Meghan only want two children in a bid to help save the planet.

The Duke of Sussex, 34, made the extraordinary revelation in a candid interview with conservationist Dr Jane Goodall as part of his wife's edition of British Vogue. 

Discussing the 'terrifying' effects of climate change, he assured her he and the Duchess, 37, are only planning on having one more child after the birth of their son Archie. 

He said becoming a father has made him see the world differently and the couple only want 'two maximum' to help protect the environment.  

It strikes a stark contrast with his brother William and wife Kate, who already have three children, with speculation mounting a fourth could be announced soon.

The interview also saw Harry speak frankly about racism in Britain and how 'unconscious bias' is often passed down from generation to generation.

He told Dr Goodall, 85, Britons need to understand where their prejudices come from in order to tackle racial discrimination. 

But Harry is facing a backlash in the wake of the interview, with critics pointing out his own past misdemeanors and warning him to 'stop lecturing people'._


----------



## jess236

I don't know if this has been posted already.

*"Meghan Markle Criticized for Way She’s Holding Baby Archie"*
*https://www.insideedition.com/media...criticized-way-shes-holding-baby-archie-54379*

*The Duchess of Sussex is being mommy-shamed for how she was seen holding baby Archie. Meghan Markle was photographed affectionately cradling her 9-week old son while watching a polo match with other members of the royal family. "What kind of mother holds her baby like that?" was one comment. "Meghan looks like she's about to drop him." But many fans rushed to her defense. "Give her a break! She's still new to it and we've all held our babies awkwardly," someone said.*



*

*


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I have to say, I think if Meghan made the same remark Harry made about having a maximum of two kids, the tabloids would be all over her for attempting to insult Kate.  I don't think they will take it the same way coming from Harry.
> 
> Maybe they can write stories about how Meghan's liberal politics forced Harry to insult his brother's family, thereby driving the wedge between the brothers deeper.


you may be right.  but in addition to whatever ethical reasons harry may have for not wanting more than two kids, he has a wife who started having babies at an older age so that may also be a factor.


----------



## Clearblueskies

.......Or he could save the planet a bit more and just have the one


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

On the subject of overpopulation, is British Vogue the proper mouthpiece for the latest woke decree across the Western world to only have two children? Wouldn't that be the Vogue of India or China? Or even more so Vogue Africa, Africa being the continent with the fastest growing population according to the UN. A population expected to double to more than 2 billion people by 2050. 

With 9,3% of the world population, and the number of children per woman in the EU 2017 being 1.59, Europe really doesn't seem to be the problem. 

https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2018/09/Population-cartogram_World-2.png


----------



## gracekelly

Are they planning on adopting? He stated many times before this that he wanted a large family. Two children is not large.


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> I have to say, I think if Meghan made the same remark Harry made about having a maximum of two kids, the tabloids would be all over her for attempting to insult Kate.  I don't think they will take it the same way coming from Harry.
> 
> Maybe they can write stories about how Meghan's liberal politics forced Harry to insult his brother's family, thereby driving the wedge between the brothers deeper.



William said in 2017, overpopulation was harming the environment. Harry is just echoing that idea.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bu...rpopulationruining-wildlife-tusk-trust2017-11

“Speaking at a gala hosted by the Tusk Trust on Thursday, the Duke of Cambridge said there was "no question" overpopulation had "put wildlife and habitat under enormous pressure."

“Duke of Edinburgh's, who in 2011 said 'voluntary family limitation' was the only way to tackle the growing human population's threat to conservation,”

Harry is saying more than two is too much for him.


----------



## chicaloca

The British Royal Family doesn’t deserve Meghan. While they allow the press to rip her to shreds she spent her maternity leave securing attention and funding for her patronages. In less than two years after officially becoming a royal Meghan is already on her third major project. 

The Sussex Foundation is going to be a huge success thanks to the passion and drive of the Sussexes.


----------



## doloresmia

Per People Magazine, Meghan wears Everlane ($120 In taxpayer money, not including shipping or exchange rate, spent) for Vogue video shoot.

She looks cute!


----------



## chicaloca

Harry actually doesn’t say he’s having only two kids for the environment. All he said was he’s having two kids max. He didn’t say why. 

I’m amazed how how easy it is to spread untruths through the media due to lack of reading comprehension


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Are they planning on adopting? He stated many times before this that he wanted a large family. Two children is not large.


maybe Meghan doesn't want more than two.....that's pretty typical for Americans


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I’m amazed how how easy it is to spread untruths through the media due to lack of reading comprehension


Reading comprehension involves looking at context.  A conservationist, in the midst of a discussion about conservation, told him not to have too many children and he indicated he was going to limit himself to what most people would consider a relatively small number.  In that context, it's overwhelmingly likely they were referring to overpopulation and the environment.


----------



## queennadine

I dislike them both the more I read/hear about them. Their "concern" and "activism" comes across as more and more patronizing. They both clearly think their views are superior and seek to impose them on as many people and organizations as they can. Barf.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> maybe Meghan doesn't want more than two.....that's pretty typical for Americans


Could be and age is against her.  They could forgo another  child of their own and adopt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

It's easy to want a large family when you have not experienced the long nights after a baby is born. As an Uncle Harry didn't do any of the " heavy lifting " as it were. Kate and William did. Most of his experience has been with kids who are fun, not newborns. Walking and talking and general cuteness. Obviously Kate felt having more than one or two after the terrible morning sickness she had through all of her pregnancies was worth it. Maybe Meghan not so much. Who knows?


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> I dislike them both the more I read/hear about them. Their "concern" and "activism" comes across as more and more patronizing. They both clearly think their views are superior and seek to impose them on as many people and organizations as they can. Barf.


Yes it does, lecturing others from your point of privilege?  No thanks Harry.  
Is he going to take the bus to his next international polo game, or turn down the invitation because it’s wasteful on the environment?  Course not.  Because that’s different, natch


----------



## Gal4Dior

queennadine said:


> I dislike them both the more I read/hear about them. Their "concern" and "activism" comes across as more and more patronizing. They both clearly think their views are superior and seek to impose them on as many people and organizations as they can. Barf.



I actually agree with much of their views, but this is the exact kind of preaching that could categorize them as one of the “Liberal Elite.” They are out of touch and quite frankly, Harry was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and Meghan married into it, so they should be the last people schooling the rest of the world on how they are supposed to think.

They truly have no clue (Harry, especially) what it feels like to just be concerned about how to make ends meet. Although Meghan came from humble beginnings, even before she met Harry she was drinking Tig wine (super expensive), buying expensive jewelry from Birks, and eating Avo toast and acai bowls as any Basic B would do when she made it on Suits, maybe even before.

Before any folks get heated over my last statement, I TOO came from VERY humble beginnings, worked my arse off to live comfortably now, which fully includes Basic B items like avo toast and açaí bowls, but I am “woke” enough to realize that half the country could care less about the things I care about, because they are just trying to pay for their basic living expenses and provide for their families (perhaps larger than 2 kids) on one salary or minimum wage. They don’t really concern themselves with how to reduce greenhouse gases or live sustainably. I have the luxury to do so.

This is why I honestly feel the aristocracy, like the old saying in regards to young children, “should be seen and not heard.” These issues regarding equal pay, global warming, etc are best kept with politicians, activists, and the average joe - not a Duke and Duchess. Sorry!


----------



## Gal4Dior

Clearblueskies said:


> Yes it does, lecturing others from your point of privilege?  No thanks Harry.
> Is he going to take the bus to his next international polo game, or turn down the invitation because it’s wasteful on the environment?  Course not.  Because that’s different, natch


This!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> The British Royal Family doesn’t deserve Meghan. While they allow the press to rip her to shreds she spent her maternity leave securing attention and funding for her patronages. In less than two years after officially becoming a royal Meghan is already on her third major project.
> 
> The Sussex Foundation is going to be a huge success thanks to the passion and drive of the Sussexes.


The foundation is a plc not a charity.  I have to disagree with you, marrying Harry has given Meghan the kind of platform she could never have achieved as an actress on a tv programme.  She is full on with project fame for Meghan which is what’s happening and where her ambition lies I think.  The day I see her regularly travelling to obscure towns in the UK to meet ordinary members of the public and do boring events in the rain etc - as so many other members of the Royal Family do every week, is the day I might change my mind.  I can’t see that happening, I get the impression that’s considered somewhat beneath Brand Sussex.  Over the last 12 months I’ve really gone off these two, they are starting to irritate me.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> The foundation is a plc not a charity.  I have to disagree with you, marrying Harry has given Meghan the kind of platform she could never have achieved as an actress on a tv programme.  She is full on with project fame for Meghan which is what’s happening and where her ambition lies I think.  The day I see her regularly travelling to obscure towns in the UK to meet ordinary members of the public and do boring events in the rain etc - as so many other members of the Royal Family do every week, is the day I might change my mind.  I can’t see that happening, I get the impression that’s considered somewhat beneath Brand Sussex.  Over the last 12 months I’ve really gone off these two, they are starting to irritate me.




Meghan and Harry spent part of their engagement period visiting with the public. Meghan was working before she was even a royal. The Sussexes did a whole tour last fall where they visited small towns and met ordinary members of the public or do these commonwealth people not count because they aren’t British?

The Queen assigned Harry and Meghan to the Commonwealth countries so you will see most of their visits centered on those countries. 

Also Meghan got pregnant in short order and has been on maternity leave so she undertook projects she could handle while heavily pregnant. Harry has been out in her place making appearances since Archie’s birth visiting  ordinary people. Meghan’s  cookbook project is still reaping benefits for the Hubb kitchen (which is run by ordinary folks) and now she’s putting Smartworks ( which helps ordinary folks) on the map. She didn’t use her pregnancy as an excuse not to do anything. The Sussexes have done more to help ordinary people in under 2 years than certain other royals have in nearly a decade.

I like how the goalposts continually change for the Sussexes in order for people to diminish their accomplishments. Suddenly randomly shaking hands in the rain is more important than taking care of assigned patronages and people in Commonwealth countries no longer count as far as royal engagement goes.


----------



## stanfordmom

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *PIERS MORGAN: Me-Me-Meghan Markle's shamelessly hypocritical super-woke Vogue stunt proves she cares more about promoting herself than the Royal Family or Britain*
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Vogue-stunt.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small*
> 
> Yet here is Meghan being about as political as any royal has ever been. She’s chosen 15 female ‘trailblazers’ and ‘changemakers’ for the special ‘Forces for Change’ issue, all picked because they promote ‘equality, kindness and open-mindedness’. The women she’s selected represent the greatest hits of virtue-signalling - with a nod to everything from ‘body positivity’, female empowerment, mental health, disability and race to transgender rights, climate change, diversity, and privilege.
> 
> Yet by forcing her radical liberal opinions upon us, she’s playing a very ill advised game that I can guarantee will end in tears.



Poor Piers, he really seems to be unraveling here, I hope he receives the help he clearly needs. Maybe he can form a support group with Luke P from The Bachelorette 

And how dare she "promote ‘equality, kindness and open-mindedness’...‘body positivity’, female empowerment, mental health, disability and race to transgender rights, climate change, diversity, and privilege."

Since when are these "radical liberal opinions"?!?



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Scorned and bitter perhaps, but not wrong here



In your opinion. Definitely not mine. Although we can agree on scorned and bitter.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Meghan and Harry spent part of their engagement period visiting with the public. Meghan was working before she was even a royal. The Sussexes did a whole tour last fall where they visited small towns and met ordinary members of the public or do these commonwealth people not count because they aren’t British?
> 
> The Queen assigned Harry and Meghan to the Commonwealth countries so you will see most of their visits centered on those countries.
> 
> Also Meghan got pregnant in short order and has been on maternity leave so she undertook projects she could handle while heavily pregnant. Harry has been out in her place making appearances since Archie’s birth visiting  ordinary people. Meghan’s  cookbook project is still reaping benefits for the Hubb kitchen (which is run by ordinary folks) and now she’s putting Smartworks ( which helps ordinary folks) on the map. She didn’t use her pregnancy as an excuse not to do anything. The Sussexes have done more to help ordinary people in under 2 years than certain other royals have in nearly a decade.
> 
> I like how the goalposts continually change for the Sussexes in order for people to diminish their accomplishments. Suddenly randomly shaking hands in the rain is more important than taking care of assigned patronages and people in Commonwealth countries no longer count as far as royal engagement goes.


I’m as entitled to my opinion as you are to yours.  And I pay taxes keeping these people in floating floors and vegan paint thank you.  It would be helpful if you didn’t deliberately distort my words to suit your Meghan as victim shtick.  Not interested in your drama.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Please take the bickering to PM.  That's where personal arguments should be solved.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Suddenly randomly shaking hands in the rain is more important than taking care of assigned patronages and people in Commonwealth countries no longer count as far as royal engagement goes.


How often do those Commonwealth-related engagements actually take place?  They are never going to carry out a steady calendar of engagements on commonwealth work alone, especially now that they have a small child and will probably have another on the way before long and travel will be limited.

I think Meghan's Hubb project was great and the clothing project sounds promising (depending on how it's executed.)  I give her credit for taking initiative and organizing projects, not just waiting for people to tell her where to show up and shake hands.

But I'm not ready to give Harry or Meghan credit for being extraordinarily hard working at this point.  Harry's engagement calendar is thin as can be.  He gets a lot of attention every time he does an engagement, but he's doing them at a very leisurely pace.   He did a small handful of engagements in the weeks after Archie's birth and that gave the impression he's just so darn hardworking he can't even take a paternity leave, but in actuality, that didn't amount to a lot of actual work.

I think Meghan has more potential than Harry, but I have yet to see any evidence that she'll ever be out there cranking out engagements several times a week, even after her maternity leave.   She did a healthy amount of engagements in her rookie year prior to her pregnancy.  She got off to a good start, but she was breaking no records.

Organizing fun charitable projects that will have her name on them and yield a lot of attention and a lot of credit for her creativity?  I foresee a lot more of that type of stuff for her.  Which doesn't mean they aren't good projects.  But that kind of stuff is what the average charity-minded actress could put together in her spare time - and without a large staff to do the legwork.   It doesn't constitute a taxing, full-time job that is going to have me in awe of all the hard work.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Cavalier Girl said:


> Please take the bickering to PM.  That's where personal arguments should be solved.


Let the mods do the moderating, thanks


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> isagree with you, marrying Harry has given Meghan the kind of platform she could never have achieved as an actress on a tv programme. She is full on with project fame for Meghan which is what’s happening and where her ambition lies I think.


I think Meghan's beliefs are genuine and she is enthusiastic about her role because of the things she might be able to accomplish.  But I also believe a big component of why marrying Harry was appealing to her was the fame and glory as well.   I think it all coexists with her.

There's no denying that becoming famous was one of her top goals, if not her #1 goal, from the time she was a young girl.  She was out there auditioning for music videos as a teen, and later trying to get any job she could get that would help her become famous - from soap operas to briefcase girl to a background girl on the Wendy Williams show.  I saw a clip of her visit to Europe with her high school classmates when she was 15 and she was signing her name "Star to be Meg" on a wall.

I don't think at any point she stopped being about fame and started being all about selfless altruism.  I just think at some point during her adult life she set her sights on a humanitarian brand of fame that was a more high-quality type of fame and more satisfying to her as well.  And becoming a Princess was an opportunity to achieve the ultimate, highest level of humanitarian fame, along with all of the perks of being rich and famous.

Before anybody jumps down my throat, please note:  I didn't say everything about her is phony or that she doesn't have a genuine relationship with her husband or that ALL she cares about is fame.  But I think fame is a very, very big component of what drives her.


----------



## LittleStar88

queennadine said:


> Their "concern" and "activism" comes across as more and more patronizing. They both clearly think their views are superior and seek to impose them on as many people and organizations as they can. Barf.



Anyone who is passionate about any view will have the same intent. Curious, do you not align with their viewpoint or do you just not like when people actively and vigorously promote their causes? Not being snarky, just curious.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Clearblueskies said:


> Let the mods do the moderating, thanks



Thank you for the suggestion.  They've been notified.


----------



## Jayne1

chowlover2 said:


> Obviously Kate felt having more than one or two after the terrible morning sickness she had through all of her pregnancies was worth it. Maybe Meghan not so much. Who knows?


But isn't it Kate's job to reproduce past two.  And someone's cleaning her house, cooking food for the family and looking after the little ones while she's indisposed, so yes, a few months of morning sickness is tolerable, IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellebellebelle19

LVSistinaMM said:


> I actually agree with much of their views, but this is the exact kind of preaching that could categorize them as one of the “Liberal Elite.” They are out of touch and quite frankly, Harry was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and Meghan married into it, so they should be the last people schooling the rest of the world on how they are supposed to think.
> 
> They truly have no clue (Harry, especially) what it feels like to just be concerned about how to make ends meet. Although Meghan came from humble beginnings, even before she met Harry she was drinking Tig wine (super expensive), buying expensive jewelry from Birks, and eating Avo toast and acai bowls as any Basic B would do when she made it on Suits, maybe even before.
> 
> Before any folks get heated over my last statement, I TOO came from VERY humble beginnings, worked my arse off to live comfortably now, which fully includes Basic B items like avo toast and açaí bowls, but I am “woke” enough to realize that half the country could care less about the things I care about, because they are just trying to pay for their basic living expenses and provide for their families (perhaps larger than 2 kids) on one salary or minimum wage. They don’t really concern themselves with how to reduce greenhouse gases or live sustainably. I have the luxury to do so.
> 
> This is why I honestly feel the aristocracy, like the old saying in regards to young children, “should be seen and not heard.” These issues regarding equal pay, global warming, etc are best kept with politicians, activists, and the average joe - not a Duke and Duchess. Sorry!


Did you read the article before coming to your conclusions? Jane and Harry were talking about how alleviating poverty is the first step to fixing the environment. I'm sure they're not as unaware as you say.


----------



## LittleStar88

I am so confused as to why Meghan (and now Harry) are getting criticized for doing what their roles expect of them. Just because they happen to have access to anything they want and are in a position of privilege does not mean they are clueless hacks just out there to make noise to elevate their position in society. It is their job to do these things - bring awareness to causes and social issues... Why give them grief for it? People are looking at their approach and picking it apart and not the end result. 

Also, I have to say kudos to Meghan for knowing what she wants in life and going for it. Why bring down a woman for that? If it were a man, he would be applauded for his efforts. But as women we tear each other down for it? Yeah she has made some missteps but she keeps pushing forward and doesn't let it stop her. I wish I had her level of drive and ambition at such an early age. All women should be going after their dreams and passions and not be picked apart for it.


----------



## Flatsy

"Being criticized" "Bring down a woman" "tear each other down".  What are you referring to, the tabloids?  Or are you more referring to my recent post(s)?  If so, I said all sorts of positive things about Meghan's work and you are the one reducing it all to an effort to "bring her down".

I disagree with the idea that Meghan has already cemented herself as Greatest! Royal! Ever! and that the royal family should be thanking the Lord night and day that she came along to save them.  

She's a work in progress.  She's done some good things so far and deserves credit for them.  She's also got a lot of potential.  But it remains to be seen whether she will live up to the very high expectations some people have for her.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> "Being criticized" "Bring down a woman" "tear each other down".  What are you referring to, the tabloids?  Or are you more referring to my recent post(s)?  If so, I said all sorts of positive things about Meghan's work and you are the one reducing it all to an effort to "bring her down".
> 
> I disagree with the idea that Meghan has already cemented herself as Greatest! Royal! Ever! and that the royal family should be thanking the Lord night and day that she came along to save them.
> 
> She's a work in progress.  She's done some good things so far and deserves credit for them.  She's also got a lot of potential.  But it remains to be seen whether she will live up to the very high expectations some people have for her.



Sorry, was not referencing to you at all, just the general overtone of both the media and those on this thread who heavily criticize. Am genuinely curious and not trying to attack. Just trying to understand.

Never said she is the greatest royal ever, but good to see her disrupting the norm.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> How often do those Commonwealth-related engagements actually take place?  They are never going to carry out a steady calendar of engagements on commonwealth work alone, especially now that they have a small child and will probably have another on the way before long and travel will be limited.
> 
> I think Meghan's Hubb project was great and the clothing project sounds promising (depending on how it's executed.)  I give her credit for taking initiative and organizing projects, not just waiting for people to tell her where to show up and shake hands.
> 
> But I'm not ready to give Harry or Meghan credit for being extraordinarily hard working at this point.  Harry's engagement calendar is thin as can be.  He gets a lot of attention every time he does an engagement, but he's doing them at a very leisurely pace.   He did a small handful of engagements in the weeks after Archie's birth and that gave the impression he's just so darn hardworking he can't even take a paternity leave, but in actuality, that didn't amount to a lot of actual work.
> 
> I think Meghan has more potential than Harry, but I have yet to see any evidence that she'll ever be out there cranking out engagements several times a week, even after her maternity leave.   She did a healthy amount of engagements in her rookie year prior to her pregnancy.  She got off to a good start, but she was breaking no records.
> 
> Organizing fun charitable projects that will have her name on them and yield a lot of attention and a lot of credit for her creativity?  I foresee a lot more of that type of stuff for her.  Which doesn't mean they aren't good projects.  But that kind of stuff is what the average charity-minded actress could put together in her spare time - and without a large staff to do the legwork.   It doesn't constitute a taxing, full-time job that is going to have me in awe of all the hard work.



Maybe you haven’t seen evidence of her schedule because she has been pregnant and on maternity leave for the past year? 

The fact that Meghan was putting in work before the wedding and now during her pregnancy is evidence enough to me that she is not going to be as lazy as Kate. 

I often wonder if people had held Kate to the same standards they are imposing on Meghan would Kate have accomplished something by now aside from birthing heirs?


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> Maybe you haven’t seen evidence of her schedule because she has been pregnant and on maternity leave for the past year?
> 
> The fact that Meghan was putting in work before the wedding and now during her pregnancy is evidence enough to me that she is not going to be as lazy as Kate.
> 
> I often wonder if people had held Kate to the same standards they are imposing on Meghan would Kate have accomplished something by now aside from birthing heirs?


again with the Kate bashing?


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I think Meghan's beliefs are genuine and she is enthusiastic about her role because of the things she might be able to accomplish.  But I also believe a big component of why marrying Harry was appealing to her was the fame and glory as well.   I think it all coexists with her.
> 
> There's no denying that becoming famous was one of her top goals, if not her #1 goal, from the time she was a young girl.  She was out there auditioning for music videos as a teen, and later trying to get any job she could get that would help her become famous - from soap operas to briefcase girl to a background girl on the Wendy Williams show.  I saw a clip of her visit to Europe with her high school classmates when she was 15 and she was signing her name "Star to be Meg" on a wall.
> ..



This sounds a lot like anyone who aspires to be an actress. They usually know from a young age and start seeking opportunities accordingly. I mean Meghan has a degree in theater. Actresses go on auditions and seek out jobs that will lead to a career in acting whether it be commercials, videos or even briefcase girl. 

Even as a struggling actress Meghan was still doing humanitarian work. All the attempts to make her philanthrophy about fame seem feeble. No one gets world famous just from doing charity unless you’re Mother Teresa. I’ve never  heard of anyone seeking fame by heading on a mission to Rwanda. It was Meghan’s small measure of fame that allowed her to travel the world and do philanthrophy long before she met Harry.


----------



## chicaloca

sdkitty said:


> again with the Kate bashing?



Meghan is being bashed incessantly. Does that concern you as well?


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> Meghan is being bashed incessantly. Does that concern you as well?


I just don't see why people who love Meghan have to bring Kate into the equation every time Meghan is criticized.  It's not a contest.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> .  In that context, it's overwhelmingly likely they were referring to overpopulation and the environment.



...or  It’s more likely that people put words in Harry’s mouth to stoke controversy. It is a fact that he did not say why he was only having two children.  Nor did he tell anyone else they should have only two children as is being implied by the righteous indignation some are expressing on this thread.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## chicaloca

sdkitty said:


> I just don't see why people who love Meghan have to bring Kate into the equation every time Meghan is criticized.  It's not a contest.


 
They are both Duchesses around the same age in the same family. They are always going to be compared. The fact that one is clearly being treated worse and held to a different standard than the other (mostly because of her race) will stop being a point of conversation when the disparity in treatment stops.


----------



## AEGIS

Clearblueskies said:


> One thing I’m really not keen on is the trend for - instant best friends let’s hug and tell the world how much we love/are simpatico with - famous people we barely know /have only just met for the first time.  Call me old fashioned, I don’t care, but it strikes an artificial and rather shallow note with me.  I’ve noticed Harry hugging people a lot lately and looking rather embarrassed about it. He seems to be catching this from MM.  I don’t think you can grapple with strangers one minute and expect to stand on your dignity the next. Royalty isn’t showbiz. JMO.




what? You don't know much about royalty if you think this is a MM thing. His mother was called the People's Princess because she hugged & touched people--like AIDS victims at a time when there was a huge stigma around AIDS. Ppl have always said he is the most like his mother.


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> I just don't see why people who love Meghan have to bring Kate into the equation every time Meghan is criticized.  It's not a contest.



This is Meghan’s thread, so Kate shouldn’t be brought up but it is mostly those who dislike Meghan who bring Kate up.

The Mother’s Day, Meghan should look at Kate’s pictures of her kids or Wimbledon, Meghan should have did like Kate, or the Wimbledon proves Kate understands her position while Meghan doesn’t, or the Vogue article Kate wears high street, Meghan should too.

These posts get crickets but if someone who isn’t bashing Meghan brings up Kate then it’s leave Kate alone. 

It should be equal call out but it isn’t, it’s Kate is okay to use as long as you are saying she is better than Meghan.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Even as a struggling actress Meghan was still doing humanitarian work. All the attempts to make her philanthrophy about fame seem feeble. No one gets world famous just from doing charity unless you’re Mother Teresa. I’ve never heard of anyone seeking fame by heading on a mission to Rwanda. It was Meghan’s small measure of fame that allowed her to travel the world and do philanthrophy long before she met Harry.


Never said she started doing humanitarian work when she met Harry.  I think after she got a foothold as a TV actress, she worked on cultivating a dual image as an actress and a humanitarian, which is something many, many actors do.  



chicaloca said:


> I often wonder if people had held Kate to the same standards they are imposing on Meghan would Kate have accomplished something by now aside from birthing heirs?


I think both Kate and Meghan should take as much maternity leave as they need for as many children as they wish to have and shouldn't be faulted for lack of achievement during their time off.  But I'm not going to evaluate Meghan and declare that she's doing the most amazing job ever at being a royal until she actually has steady time to do more than just demonstrate potential.  I think that will be at least a few years down the road.

This is not a game of Kate versus Meghan and let's declare a winner.  Are you looking for every single member of Purseforum to take a poll and concede that "Meghan Rulz, Kate sux"?  Because it's just not going to happen.  There are always people who are going to have their likes and dislikes.



chicaloca said:


> ...or It’s more likely that people put words in Harry’s mouth to stoke controversy. It is a fact that he did not say why he was only having two children. Nor did he tell anyone else they should have only two children as is being implied by the righteous indignation some are expressing on this thread.


So it would be ok to admit Harry said it if there were no righteous indignation and everybody liked the sentiment?  I'm not interested in going over every literal word he said as if I'm a lawyer and he was testifying at a deposition.  I think the gist of the exchange was clear and if the media also picked up on it, I don't think they are jumping to wild conclusions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> They are both Duchesses around the same age in the same family. They are always going to be compared. The fact that one is clearly being treated worse and held to a different standard than the other (mostly because of her race) will stop being a point of conversation when the disparity in treatment stops.


no doubt there are some people who are hating her due to race.....but I don't think you can attribute any and all criticism of her to racism


----------



## daisychainz

LittleStar88 said:


> Sorry, was not referencing to you at all, just the general overtone of both the media and those on this thread who heavily criticize. Am genuinely curious and not trying to attack. Just trying to understand.
> 
> Never said she is the greatest royal ever, but good to see her disrupting the norm.


I think it's okay for her to disrupt the norm too because it does recognize this is an adult woman with goals and ambition, and trying to completely change a 37? year old is nonsense. But I think, perhaps when she was more established in the royal family and not so newlywed it would have come off better. She's like the new boss that comes in to your workplace and starts making changes and firing people before they even know how the department runs. People react - generally negatively - to that approach. It's often best to get the lay of things before you start your overhaul. Maybe if she'd taken more time to get to know her new country and people before going all out and doing new things it would have been received better. But she was on television, so of course she's going to want to remain in the public eye and court celebrity friends and connections. I fully expected we'd see that and probably will continue to. I would even go so far to say she might be back on tv for something and not give that up entirely.


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> One thing I’m really not keen on is the trend for - instant best friends let’s hug and tell the world how much we love/are simpatico with - famous people we barely know /have only just met for the first time.  Call me old fashioned, I don’t care, but it strikes an artificial and rather shallow note with me.  I’ve noticed Harry hugging people a lot lately and looking rather embarrassed about it. He seems to be catching this from MM.  I don’t think you can grapple with strangers one minute and expect to stand on your dignity the next. Royalty isn’t showbiz. JMO.





papertiger said:


> Yes, it's a bit weird.  I sometimes feel the urge to hug, it's actually how we greet each other in my culture but I have leaned how to control myself in the UK, it's absolutely not the norm here.



Harry has always been a hugger, before Meghan. I think it is from his mother. 


2015



2014
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ans-tries-hand-photography-Lesotho-visit.html



2014
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ttends-awards-ceremony-disabled-children.html




2015


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> no doubt there are some people who are hating her due to race.....but I don't think you can attribute any and all criticism of her to racism


Exactly!



daisychainz said:


> I think it's okay for her to disrupt the norm too because it does recognize this is an adult woman with goals and ambition, and trying to completely change a 37? year old is nonsense. But I think, perhaps when she was more established in the royal family and not so newlywed it would have come off better. She's like the new boss that comes in to your workplace and starts making changes and firing people before they even know how the department runs. People react - generally negatively - to that approach. It's often best to get the lay of things before you start your overhaul. Maybe if she'd taken more time to get to know her new country and people before going all out and doing new things it would have been received better. But she was on television, so of course she's going to want to remain in the public eye and court celebrity friends and connections. I fully expected we'd see that and probably will continue to. I would even go so far to say she might be back on tv for something and not give that up entirely.


That’s a good way of putting it.


----------



## sdkitty

Meghan's new Vogue collaboration (from Vanity Fair)
Good cause and also bringing attention to her and her designer friend
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...ampaign=VF_RW_073019&utm_term=VYF_Royal_Watch


----------



## sdkitty

Meghan's new Vogue collaboration (from Vanity Fair)
Good cause and also bringing attention to her and her designer friend
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...ampaign=VF_RW_073019&utm_term=VYF_Royal_Watch


----------



## sdkitty

sorry for multiple posts...computer glitch


----------



## Clearblueskies

On the subject of hugs and kisses - I wonder when Meghan’s American family will finally get to meet Archie?  There are a couple of Aunts and an Uncle on her mother’s side, I believe, and Doria is said to be very fond of her stepmother who is close to  Doria’s age.  There must be cousins?  They never get a mention for some reason.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> On the subject of hugs and kisses - I wonder when Meghan’s American family will finally get to meet Archie?  There are a couple of Aunts and an Uncle on her mother’s side, I believe, and Doria is said to be very fond of her stepmother who is close to  Doria’s age.  There must be cousins?  They never get a mention for some reason.


I thought the only family member who came to the wedding was her mother


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> I thought the only family member who came to the wedding was her mother



Her step grandmother and an uncle that didn’t sale photos to the DM came. I expect this isn’t reported because it doesn’t fit the narrative, but there are YouTube videos of the wedding where you can see them.

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threa...er-black-family-to-the-royal-wedding.2080849/

If you go to ITV wedding video they are at time stamp 36:22.


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> I think it's okay for her to disrupt the norm too because it does recognize this is an adult woman with goals and ambition, and trying to completely change a 37? year old is nonsense. But I think, perhaps when she was more established in the royal family and not so newlywed it would have come off better. She's like the new boss that comes in to your workplace and starts making changes and firing people before they even know how the department runs. People react - generally negatively - to that approach. It's often best to get the lay of things before you start your overhaul. Maybe if she'd taken more time to get to know her new country and people before going all out and doing new things it would have been received better. But she was on television, so of course she's going to want to remain in the public eye and court celebrity friends and connections. I fully expected we'd see that and probably will continue to. I would even go so far to say she might be back on tv for something and not give that up entirely.



I agree 100%! But she didn't go that route and here we are.

But we also do not know how much room she (and Harry) have been given as the D&D of Sussex to do things their way. But yeah, would have been a more mindful approach to observe and slowly find little places to make her mark rather than dive right in with a big splash.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> Even as a struggling actress Meghan was still doing humanitarian work. All the attempts to make her philanthrophy about fame seem feeble. No one gets world famous just from doing charity unless you’re Mother Teresa.


Even Mother Teresa was no Mother Teresa.  She enjoyed seeing her patients suffer.  We need to use a better example of a charitable person. I suspect Meghan wouldn't dream of withholding medicine from the ill.

Meghan is fascinating.  She always was. That's why I read this thread.  To see what she's doing and not doing.  lol


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> Harry has always been a hugger, before Meghan. I think it is from his mother.
> 
> 
> 2015
> 
> View attachment 4503686
> 
> 2014
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ans-tries-hand-photography-Lesotho-visit.html
> 
> View attachment 4503687
> 
> 2014
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ttends-awards-ceremony-disabled-children.html
> 
> View attachment 4503688
> View attachment 4503689
> 
> 2015
> 
> View attachment 4503690


I don't know.  Hugging kids, especially the ones he supports in charities and such is a far cry from hugging Bey and the rest of Hollywood.

I honestly thought he would want to be more regal. But he seems to want to go down a different path.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Even Mother Teresa was no Mother Teresa.  She enjoyed seeing her patients suffer.  We need to use a better example of a charitable person.
> 
> Meghan is fascinating.  She always was. That's why I read this thread.  To see what she's doing and not doing.  lol


aww.... Mother Teresa was declared a Saint.....I don't wanna hear bad stuff about her


----------



## Encore Hermes

Maybe they have met Archie 


Clearblueskies said:


> On the subject of hugs and kisses - I wonder when Meghan’s American family will finally get to meet Archie?  There are a couple of Aunts and an Uncle on her mother’s side, I believe, and Doria is said to be very fond of her stepmother who is close to  Doria’s age.  There must be cousins?  They never get a mention for some reason.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> I don't know.  Hugging kids, especially the ones he supports in charities and such is a far cry from hugging Bey and the rest of Hollywood.
> 
> I honestly thought he would want to be more regal. But he seems to want to go down a different path.



These are adults from 2015, I think it has less to do with regalness and something to criticize Harry and Meghan about.


----------



## marthastoo

buffym said:


> Her step grandmother and an uncle that didn’t sale photos to the DM came. I expect this isn’t reported because it doesn’t fit the narrative, but there are YouTube videos of the wedding where you can see them.
> 
> https://www.lipstickalley.com/threa...er-black-family-to-the-royal-wedding.2080849/
> 
> If you go to ITV wedding video they are at time stamp 36:22.



Doesn't fit the narrative?  What narrative is that?  Are you insinuating someone actively suppressed that her step-grandmother and uncle attended the wedding?  I don't get how that reflects poorly on Meghan.


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> These are adults from 2015, I think it has less to do with regalness and something to criticize Harry and Meghan about.
> 
> And not forgetting ones a Chewbacca, lol
> 
> View attachment 4503906
> View attachment 4503907
> View attachment 4503909
> View attachment 4503910
> View attachment 4503911
> View attachment 4503912
> View attachment 4503913


----------



## buffym

marthastoo said:


> Doesn't fit the narrative?  What narrative is that?  Are you insinuating someone actively suppressed that her step-grandmother and uncle attended the wedding?  I don't get how that reflects poorly on Meghan.



It doesn’t fit the tabloids narrative of Meghan. Instead the made articles about the people no longer in her life and blaming Meghan for it.


----------



## chicaloca

buffym said:


> It doesn’t fit the tabloids narrative of Meghan. Instead the made articles about the people no longer in her life and blaming Meghan for it.



Exactly. Just like false running narrative that she “uses” and discards her friends. She turned up at Wimbledon with her non-famous college friends of nearly 20 years.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> aww.... Mother Teresa was declared a Saint.....I don't wanna hear bad stuff about her



Yeah, it’s a harsh crowd here. If even Mother Teresa gets dragged for not being good enough, what chance do any of the celebrities in this forum have?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, it’s a harsh crowd here. If even Mother Teresa gets dragged for not being good enough, what chance do any of the celebrities in this forum have?


Google her. Withholding meds. But not for herself when her time came.

I just thought that Meghan would have too kind a heart to be compared to MT.

As for all this hugging -- I admire the Queen more and more. I grew up singing God Save the Queen every morning in school and I have always respected her. There is just no comparison when I see her offspring.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Did you read the article before coming to your conclusions? Jane and Harry were talking about how alleviating poverty is the first step to fixing the environment. I'm sure they're not as unaware as you say.



It’s not the words, it’s the intent behind the words that most people picked up on! How is this so hard to understand?


----------



## Gal4Dior

LittleStar88 said:


> I am so confused as to why Meghan (and now Harry) are getting criticized for doing what their roles expect of them. Just because they happen to have access to anything they want and are in a position of privilege does not mean they are clueless hacks just out there to make noise to elevate their position in society. It is their job to do these things - bring awareness to causes and social issues... Why give them grief for it? People are looking at their approach and picking it apart and not the end result.
> 
> Also, I have to say kudos to Meghan for knowing what she wants in life and going for it. Why bring down a woman for that? If it were a man, he would be applauded for his efforts. But as women we tear each other down for it? Yeah she has made some missteps but she keeps pushing forward and doesn't let it stop her. I wish I had her level of drive and ambition at such an early age. All women should be going after their dreams and passions and not be picked apart for it.


 Oh good grief here we go again. Like I said in my post. I agree with their views, and I think it’s great that they actually care about these causes! However, it’s just comes off as tone deaf! Don’t preach, help and do. In fact, this fashion collaboration with M&S does exactly that. That is all. No one is “hating” on them. It’s not high school. I actually have nothing against these two, and like them more than William and Kate, only because they both seem super boring. Watch, next I will be told I am “hating” on Kate. I don’t know any of these people well enough to hate on them. Also, just to be clear to all those people who seem to think every opinion that isn’t in favor of what H&M do, W&K shouldn’t be spouting off words of wisdom to the public either. Their role isn’t to share their politics or views. Their job is to quietly work at the benefit of the commonwealth.


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> Meghan's new Vogue collaboration (from Vanity Fair)
> Good cause and also bringing attention to her and her designer friend
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...ampaign=VF_RW_073019&utm_term=VYF_Royal_Watch


I love this idea! Can’t wait to see what the designs will be!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I can't see half the posts on here (hello ignore!) so maybe this is already posted? 

"Meghan Markle is launching her own clothing line for a good cause!

The 37-year-old Duchess of Sussex is teaming up with her designer BFF Mischa Nonoo to create the line that will help contribute to her royal patronage Smart Works.

For every item from the collection sold, an item will be donated to Smart Works, a charity that helps women land jobs through interview prep and outfit assistance.

She continued, “To help with this, I asked Marks & Spencer, John Lewis & Partners, Jigsaw and my friend, the designer Mischa Nonoo, if they were willing to design a capsule collection of more classic options for a workwear wardrobe.”

The line is set to be launched in September"


----------



## queennadine

LittleStar88 said:


> Anyone who is passionate about any view will have the same intent. Curious, do you not align with their viewpoint or do you just not like when people actively and vigorously promote their causes? Not being snarky, just curious.



I like when people are passionate and promote their causes, regardless of which "side" they're on, but these two (along with plenty of other people) come across as completely tone deaf and out of touch with reality. There's just a smugness about MM that irks me. She comes across as sitting on her high horse, gracing the masses with her superior ideas and suggestions. No thanks.


----------



## mdcx

Oh my goodness - there is no narrative to bash Meghan!
She just doesn't grasp what her role is in the BRF and her behaviour reflects that and people are commenting on that.

Perhaps you had to have grown up in a Commonwealth country to understand the issue?
All she had to do was be humble, gracious and kind of fade into the background of Kate once her wedding was done. 
Her family scandal pre the wedding was pretty much enough publicity for her for a lifetime as a future royal.
Instead she seems to be seeking publicity at every turn and trying to shake things up.

Princess Mary of Denmark would have been a good role model. Instead she seems to want to become Angelina Jolie.

I'm not sure why racism keeps being brought up - maybe in the US this is much more of an issue? In my life, racial and ethnic diversity is the norm.


----------



## Jayne1

LVSistinaMM said:


> , Also, just to be clear to all those people who seem to think every opinion that isn’t in favor of what H&M do, W&K shouldn’t be spouting off words of wisdom to the public either. Their role isn’t to share their politics or views. Their job is to quietly work at the benefit of the commonwealth.


Yes. I think that’s what bothers me. I don’t want to know the BRF’s political opinions.


----------



## Flatsy

This whole interview with Salma Hayek made me LOL.  https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/ente...inault-meghan-markle-british-vogue/index.html

First she thought Meghan wanted to team up with her on a charity project.  Then she thought Meghan wanted to profile some of the work being done by an organization called Kering that Salma works with.  And then finally, she found out that Meghan likes her and it was just about spotlighting famous women Meghan likes.  Salma inadvertently revealed how much substance there could have been to this versus how much there is.  

But it does sound like she and Meghan plan to network each other in the future, so...networking accomplished!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

Brexit is a political issue. The Sussexes causes include environmental  conservation and women’s empowerment. Those are not political issues IMO. How can they champion these causes without ever speaking about them or calling attention to them? Should the Cambridges shut up about mental
health and broken children or whatever Kate’s cause is?

Meghan literally disappeared for nearly two months during her pregnancy. She visits most of her patronizes in secret and is virtually never photographed by the paparazzi outside of official engagements. If she’s seeking attention she’s going about it in an odd way.  No one seemed to care that Kate spent nearly two weeks basking in the media glow for a flower garden but are upset that Meghan has been (rightfully)  getting attention for a few days for editing Vogue and promoting her patronage with a clothing launch.

I appreciate that the Sussexes put in the work behind the scenes and we only find out about their projects when they have finished results. Their projects always have a clear purpose and results. Others could learn from them. Hopefully the Royal Foundation won’t go bankrupt since Harry and Meghan’s projects comprised the bulk of their income.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> This whole interview with Salma Hayek made me LOL.  https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/ente...inault-meghan-markle-british-vogue/index.html
> 
> First she thought Meghan wanted to team up with her on a charity project.  Then she thought Meghan wanted to profile some of the work being done by an organization called Kering that Salma works with.  And then finally, she found out that Meghan likes her and it was just about spotlighting famous women Meghan likes.  Salma inadvertently revealed how much substance there could have been to this versus how much there is.
> 
> But it does sound like she and Meghan plan to network each other in the future, so...networking accomplished!



The issue is about spotlighting forces of change. You don’t think their causes will be discussed and therefore spotlighted for a broader audience?


Flatsy said:


> This whole interview with Salma Hayek made me LOL.  https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/ente...inault-meghan-markle-british-vogue/index.html
> 
> First she thought Meghan wanted to team up with her on a charity project.  Then she thought Meghan wanted to profile some of the work being done by an organization called Kering that Salma works with.  And then finally, she found out that Meghan likes her and it was just about spotlighting famous women Meghan likes.  Salma inadvertently revealed how much substance there could have been to this versus how much there is.
> 
> But it does sound like she and Meghan plan to network each other in the future, so...networking accomplished!



Meghan took was supposed to be a vanity cover shoot for herself and instead turned the spotlight  on 16 other women and their causes and she’s seriously being criticized for that? Had she done the cover I’m sure that would have been criticized too.

This a perfect example of how over-the-top the criticism of Meghan has become.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> and she’s seriously being criticized for that?


Yep!  No need to blow it way out of proportion or anything...


----------



## Lubina

LittleStar88 said:


> I agree 100%! But she didn't go that route and here we are.
> 
> But we also do not know how much room she (and Harry) have been given as the D&D of Sussex to do things their way. But yeah, would have been a more mindful approach to observe and slowly find little places to make her mark rather than dive right in with a big splash.



Her splash hides all the other's dirt.


chicaloca said:


> The issue is about spotlighting forces of change. You don’t think their causes will be discussed and therefore spotlighted for a broader audience?
> 
> 
> Meghan took was supposed to be a vanity cover shoot for herself and instead turned the spotlight  on 16 other women and their causes and she’s seriously being criticized for that? Had she done the cover I’m sure that would have been criticized too.
> 
> This a perfect example of how over-the-top the criticism of Meghan has become.



Wasn't the vanity shoot just another press/tabloid rumor? Since Diana, Anne and Kate have all been on the cover and done photo shoots, they figured Meghan would do the same. If she has been working on with Vogue for months it is another example of a made up story.

Since everyone has opinion on what she should or shouldn't do, I say she should keep doing what she is doing. If she did little to nothing during her first year of marriage, people would criticize her for slacking. If she did twice as much, she would be criticized for doing way, way too much. There no pleasing some, so please the people who are benefitting from your causes.


----------



## gracekelly

*From the Daily Mail*

*Prince Harry 'gives barefoot speech' at secretive Google Camp climate change conference in Italy in front of A-list crowd including Leo DiCaprio and Naomi Campbell, as it's revealed celebs arrived on total of 114 private jets*

*Tech giants and celebrities have flocked to Sicily for global warming conference*
*Mega yacht Rising Sun dropped Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom off at the event *
*The Duke of Sussex 'gave passionate speech' at the select climate change event *
By DIANNE APEN-SADLER FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 15:17 EDT, 31 July 2019 | UPDATED: 22:11 EDT, 31 July 2019


Prince Harry gave a barefoot speech at a secretive Google Camp climate change conference in Italy according to reports, in front of an A-List crowd who flew in on 114 private jets. 

The Duke of Sussex is said to have given a passionate speech about saving the planet while being watched by Naomi Campbell and Leonardo DiCaprio, among other celebrities and power brokers.

It comes just a day after he revealed his determination to be kind to the planet by having no more than two children in an article with environmentalist Dr Jane Goodall in the edition of Vogue guest-edited by his wife Meghan. 

Tech giants and celebrities flocked to Sicily to show off their green credentials for the camp that focuses on global warming - but many failed to leave their private jets at home.

So I guess they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.  *sigh*  I have to admit I don't quite know what they mean by "barefoot speech."


----------



## rose60610

It's settled.

Throw Mother Theresa under the bus and start a GoFundMe page to erect a mile high shrine to St. Meghan, and if you don't contribute you're racist. You're allowed to pay homage to this shrine when you come visit on one of the 114 private jets that went to the Climate Change Conference that brought all-thoeth-thmart-famouth-thelebriteeth to b*tch about carbon emissions and climate change.


----------



## gracekelly

Even poor Mother Theresa had her critics.  These people do what they do and they are not about to change their lifestyle for anyone.  It was pretty arrogant, but what did people expect? Some people just should have known better and stayed home.


----------



## threadbender

Not much to say. 114 private jets and, I believe, 50 yachts. The royals are, indeed, celebrities. There was another word I thought to use but decided against it. I hope they are able to come up with solutions that, well, you know, protect the earth and so on. And, yes, I am posting this on Will and Kate's thread too.
Just wow.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> *From the Daily Mail*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'gives barefoot speech' at secretive Google Camp climate change conference in Italy in front of A-list crowd including Leo DiCaprio and Naomi Campbell, as it's revealed celebs arrived on total of 114 private jets*
> 
> *Tech giants and celebrities have flocked to Sicily for global warming conference*
> *Mega yacht Rising Sun dropped Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom off at the event *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'gave passionate speech' at the select climate change event *
> By DIANNE APEN-SADLER FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 15:17 EDT, 31 July 2019 | UPDATED: 22:11 EDT, 31 July 2019
> 
> 
> Prince Harry gave a barefoot speech at a secretive Google Camp climate change conference in Italy according to reports, in front of an A-List crowd who flew in on 114 private jets.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is said to have given a passionate speech about saving the planet while being watched by Naomi Campbell and Leonardo DiCaprio, among other celebrities and power brokers.
> 
> It comes just a day after he revealed his determination to be kind to the planet by having no more than two children in an article with environmentalist Dr Jane Goodall in the edition of Vogue guest-edited by his wife Meghan.
> 
> Tech giants and celebrities flocked to Sicily to show off their green credentials for the camp that focuses on global warming - but many failed to leave their private jets at home.
> 
> So I guess they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.  *sigh*  I have to admit I don't quite know what they mean by "barefoot speech."





rose60610 said:


> It's settled.
> 
> Throw Mother Theresa under the bus and start a GoFundMe page to erect a mile high shrine to St. Meghan, and if you don't contribute you're racist. You're allowed to pay homage to this shrine when you come visit on one of the 114 private jets that went to the Climate Change Conference that brought all-thoeth-thmart-famouth-thelebriteeth to b*tch about carbon emissions and climate change.



You can't make this up   But don't we all love being lectured by the 1% philanthropists about how we should have no children and go extinct to save the environment, while they travel around the world on private jets and in helicopters and fuel guzzling luxury cars enjoying their holier than thou no expenses spared lifestyles. Especially by those who live off other people's money.


----------



## threadbender

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You can't make this up   But don't we all love being lectured by the 1% philanthropists about how we should have no children and go extinct to save the environment, while they travel around the world on private jets and in helicopters and fuel guzzling luxury cars enjoying their holier than thou no expenses spared lifestyles. Especially by those who live off other people's money.


If you get a chance, look at some of the photos from this "camp".


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

stanfordmom said:


> Poor Piers, he really seems to be unraveling here, I hope he receives the help he clearly needs. Maybe he can form a support group with Luke P from The Bachelorette
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And how dare she "promote ‘equality, kindness and open-mindedness’...‘body positivity’, female empowerment, mental health, disability and race to transgender rights, climate change, diversity, and privilege."
> 
> 
> Since when are these "radical liberal opinions"?!?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In your opinion. Definitely not mine. Although we can agree on scorned and bitter.



In answer to your last question; since they were hijacked by the progressive movement? It would also depend on your definition of “equality, kindness and open-mindedness” etc. Despite what some claim, no one group gets to determine their meaning. It's a joint human effort.

Generally this knee-jerk reaction that any criticism of Meghan is racist is well, racist. She’s a PR disaster in any skin colour, and seems hell-bent on alienating the plebs in favour of promoting herself and her future aspirations as a globetrotting friend of the stars über humanitarian preacher of elite hypocrisy, with a fancy title and a real prince in tow. That’s why people don’t take to her, not because she’s biracial, they just don’t like her. She’s not the first non-white royal in Europe.

Nobody here is refuting _any_ of Piers Morgan's claims by calling him jilted, bitter and creepy. He may be but he, and a slew of other columnists from the whole political spectrum, are also absolutely right that Meghan- and Harry- have now taken it upon themselves to politicise the Royal British family. The women featured on Meghan’s Vogue cover are all progressive and left leaning. Anyone saying they're fine with it because they happen to share Meghan’s opinions just proves me right. It’s biased and it’s hypocritical. Imagine if Meghan had been conservative and put the likes of Candace Owens, Priti Patel, Antonia Okafor and Jaelene Hinkle on the cover, and interviewed Condoleezza Rice (a former actual US Secretary of State)? Or Melania *****, the actual First lady of the US? No, I can’t either, but I can well imagine the progressive uproar had it happened.

Many here seem to misunderstand the role of the BRF. Preaching partisan or identitarian politics is not the role of the British royals to play. It’s to unite the UK, not divide it. Which is why things like children’s hospitals, wildlife such as preservation of little red squirrels, the arts, addiction prevention, sports, promoting mental health etc are fine for the royals to champion while much more inflammable, controversial and divisive subjects such as Brexit, climate, demographics and trans rights are not.

You mention female empowerment. One of the “forces for change” featured on Meghan’s cover, Jameela Jamil, had this to say after meeting Meghan’s dear gran-in-law, namely about the Queen's breast: “It’s like a bottom on her chest. They're gigantic." (It’s funny really, one week you meet Beyonce and in a few more you feature the woman who called Beyonce a stripper, on a Vogue cover.) Then there’s Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, who publicly stated Meghan should be the next Head of the Commonwealth. No wonder Meghan admires that particular "force for change"  But yeah, women empowering women


----------



## Clearblueskies

We may be headed for a more streamlined monarchy sooner than we thought.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> We may be headed for a more streamlined monarchy sooner than we thought.


But Meghan will still be part of it as the daughter in law of the man who wants it streamlined.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> But Meghan will still be part of it as the daughter in law of the man who wants it streamlined.


As Thomas is still her father?  Albeit yet to see his grandson?
I meant the working taxpayer funded monarchy, as I think most people would have understood.


----------



## akoko

Clearblueskies said:


> We may be headed for a more streamlined monarchy sooner than we thought.


I think that this is part of the reason Meghan and Harry are so aggressive in promoting their own brand. They are creating a future for themselves which they can control, irrespective of the monarchy or what Charles/William will decide for them. One one hand I understand it, because I'm all for people forging their own future. On the other hand, I do think that they are putting their own interests in front of the hand that is currently feeding them. 
Overall, I am of two minds for these two.  I guess time will tell!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## stanfordmom

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> In answer to your last question; since they were hijacked by the progressive movement? It would also depend on your definition of “equality, kindness and open-mindedness” etc. Despite what some claim, no one group gets to determine their meaning. It's a joint human effort.
> 
> Generally this knee-jerk reaction that any criticism of Meghan is racist is well, racist. She’s a PR disaster in any skin colour, and seems hell-bent on alienating the plebs in favour of promoting herself and her future aspirations as a globetrotting friend of the stars über humanitarian preacher of elite hypocrisy, with a fancy title and a real prince in tow. That’s why people don’t take to her, not because she’s biracial, they just don’t like her. She’s not the first non-white royal in Europe.
> 
> Nobody here is refuting _any_ of Piers Morgan's claims by calling him jilted, bitter and creepy. He may be but he, and a slew of other columnists from the whole political spectrum, are also absolutely right that Meghan- and Harry- have now taken it upon themselves to politicise the Royal British family. The women featured on Meghan’s Vogue cover are all progressive and left leaning. Anyone saying they're fine with it because they happen to share Meghan’s opinions just proves me right. It’s biased and it’s hypocritical. Imagine if Meghan had been conservative and put the likes of Candace Owens, Priti Patel, Antonia Okafor and Jaelene Hinkle on the cover, and interviewed Condoleezza Rice (a former actual US Secretary of State)? Or Melania *****, the actual First lady of the US? No, I can’t either, but I can well imagine the progressive uproar had it happened.
> 
> Many here seem to misunderstand the role of the BRF. Preaching partisan or identitarian politics is not the role of the British royals to play. It’s to unite the UK, not divide it. Which is why things like children’s hospitals, wildlife such as preservation of little red squirrels, the arts, addiction prevention, sports, promoting mental health etc are fine for the royals to champion while much more inflammable, controversial and divisive subjects such as Brexit, climate, demographics and trans rights are not.
> 
> You mention female empowerment. One of the “forces for change” featured on Meghan’s cover, Jameela Jamil, had this to say after meeting Meghan’s dear gran-in-law, namely about the Queen's breast: “It’s like a bottom on her chest. They're gigantic." (It’s funny really, one week you meet Beyonce and in a few more you feature the woman who called Beyonce a stripper, on a Vogue cover.) Then there’s Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, who publicly stated Meghan should be the next Head of the Commonwealth. No wonder Meghan admires that particular "force for change"  But yeah, women empowering women



You seem upset. My point was these are values I hope we all support, they shouldn’t be political. Also just FYI I actually didn’t mention anything I was directly quoting from the piece you posted. I am surprised that you consider climate and human rights to be “controversial and divisive subjects” but that’s another thread.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

"Buckingham Palace has refused to say how the Duke of Sussex travelled to Italy"  Maybe he walked on his bare feet.

Aren't we all lucky this pathetic lot have taken it upon themselves to be the saviours of our planet. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...efoot-Prince-Harry-hypocrite-celebrities.html

*Backlash at barefoot Prince Harry and 'hypocrite Greenerati': Eco-warrior elite who turned up at secret climate change Google camp in 114 private jets, helicopters and mega yachts are mocked for leaving their own carbon footprint*

*Prince Harry gave a passionate speech at the secretive Sicily climate event*
*Buckingham Palace has refused to say how the Duke of Sussex travelled to Italy *
*Mega yacht Rising Sun dropped Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom off at the event *
*Some 114 planes were scheduled to land in Palermo for the elite gathering *
A host of A-list celebrities have faced an angry backlash after they travelled to a climate change conference in Italy in a fleet of supercars, expensive yachts and more than 100 private jets. 

Guests at the secretive Google Camp were accused of hypocrisy after they gathered to discuss the environment while leaving a considerable carbon footprint of their own. 

Prince Harry is understood to have given a passionate barefoot speech about saving the planet, although Buckingham Palace has refused to confirm his attendance or whether he too travelled by private jet. 

'This is not something we are commenting on,' a spokeswoman told MailOnline. 

Some 114 fuel-guzzling planes were scheduled to land in Palermo for the elite gathering, according to Italian media, while others brought their super-yachts to a three-day conference whose guests include Katy Perry and Harry Styles. 

BBC presenter Andrew Neil was among those to point out the irony, saying: 'Scores of celebrities and the rich have arrived in Sicily for a Google conference. They came in 114 private jets and a flotilla of super yachts. The conference is on global warming.' 

Former President Barack ***** was also rumoured to be among those attending the event, but has not been spotted so far. 

Orlando Bloom, Stella McCartney, Diane Von Furstenberg and Gayle King were also spotted arriving at the Verdura Resort in Sicily for the welcome dinner on Monday. 

On Tuesday, even more guests arrived at the property, with Nick Jonas and new wife Priyanka Chopra leading the charge of celebrities heading to the island for the three-day conference which is believed to have begun on Monday and finished last night. 

Styles was seen behind the wheel of a luxury car while driving with his friends Jeff Azoff and Ben Winston to the temple. 

Spanish singer-songwriter Rosalia, who later performed on stage on Tuesday, posted an picture of herself getting ready for the event and then walking around the temple ruins. 
David Geffen's Rising Sun did swing by briefly on Monday to drop off Perry and Bloom, but then continued on its way up the Italian coast.

As well as private jets and megayachts, there are buses to herd guests around and a helicopter pad. 

After morning sessions, afternoons are free for guests to relax around the complex and spa, with trips around the coast, to local wineries and to tourist hot spots on offer. 

The resort boasts two 18-hole golf courses, a tennis academy and one of the largest spa complexes in all of Europe on its over one mile of private coastline.

There are a number of suites and private rooms as well as three villas for guests to stay.

Those villas look out on to individual pools as well as the property's massive infinity pool and stunning private beach, filled with imported white sand, a jetty and even a small carpet to take pampered stars into the crystal blue ocean waters.

On the final night, Google spends close to $100,000 renting the 2,500-year-old Valley of the Temples ruins for a concert and sit-down meal, with Sting performing there last summer.

Coldplay also performed at the temple on the final night on Wednesday. 

Prince Harry also attended the event back in 2017 - and may have taken Meghan Markle along with him.

The pair made their first public appearance together at a polo match in Ascot in May that year, and a week after the Google conference she was spotted in London with her mother celebrating her birthday. 

The event, created by Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, sees some of the world's wealthiest business leaders and tech gurus discussing various issues in morning sessions before relaxing in the Italian sunshine in the afternoon.

This year's secretive camp, where social media is banned and the itinerary locked behind a password-protected site, will focus on tackling global warming, reports the New York Post.

One attendee said: 'There will likely be discussions about online privacy, politics, human rights, and of course, the environment, which makes it highly ironic that this event requires 114 private jets to happen.'

Luxury megayacht the Andromeda, which is owned by billionaire Kiwi Graeme Hart has been spotted just off shore, as has Barry Diller's sailing vessel Eos.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> So I guess they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. *sigh* I have to admit I don't quite know what they mean by "barefoot speech."


Yeah, I'd like to know what that means too.  Did he actually take his shoes off, and if so, why?  If it was some kind of symbolic thing....yeah, that's ripe for ridicule and justifiably so.

I appreciate the messages Harry is sending about climate change.  I just wish he didn't consider himself too important to make any kind of attempt to practice what he preaches, other than telling us he likes to turn off lights in the palace when nobody is using them.  He needs to start with eliminating all of the helicopter rides (as do the Cambridges).

And I'm less and less impressed by the celebrity hobnobbing, as if that accomplishes anything but making the celebrities feel good about themselves.  It's difficult these days to firmly justify the need for a royal family.  But I can pretty safely say that there are enough celebrities like Leonardo di Caprio and the Clooneys to jet around doing celebrity activism without royals joining the party.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> As Thomas is still her father?  Albeit yet to see his grandson?
> I meant the working taxpayer funded monarchy, as I think most people would have understood.


No, I said daughter in law, as in Charles. I think his vision is a streamlined monarchy when he is King which includes his children and their families.
I didn't mention Thomas Markle at all.
I understood perfectly what you said.


----------



## momtok

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You mention female empowerment. One of the “forces for change” featured on Meghan’s cover, Jameela Jamil, had this to say after meeting Meghan’s dear gran-in-law, namely about the Queen's breast: “It’s like a bottom on her chest. They're gigantic."



Wait, wait, wait.  I just want to make sure I'm reading that correctly.  I let our Vogue subscription (U.S.) run out a few years ago, and I am unfamiliar with one, 'Jameel Jamil', .... and I'm kind of doing a double-take at this quote.  So just for clarity's sake, are you saying that 'Jameel Jamil' (in quotes because I am unfamiliar with the name) wrote/said that Queen Elizabeth's bosom was gigantic and like a bottom on her chest?  And that Jameel Jamil was then chosen by Markle as a "force for change" and featured on the cover of British Vogue?

That paragraph I just typed strikes me as utterly unbelievable, so I'm honestly questioning if I'm reading things correctly.  Is that correct?  Could you please clarify if incorrect?   (For clarification:  I would genuinely be relieved if reading incorrectly.)


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> In answer to your last question; since they were hijacked by the progressive movement? It would also depend on your definition of “equality, kindness and open-mindedness” etc. Despite what some claim, no one group gets to determine their meaning. It's a joint human effort.
> 
> Generally this knee-jerk reaction that any criticism of Meghan is racist is well, racist. She’s a PR disaster in any skin colour, and seems hell-bent on alienating the plebs in favour of promoting herself and her future aspirations as a globetrotting friend of the stars über humanitarian preacher of elite hypocrisy, with a fancy title and a real prince in tow. That’s why people don’t take to her, not because she’s biracial, they just don’t like her. She’s not the first non-white royal in Europe.
> 
> Nobody here is refuting _any_ of Piers Morgan's claims by calling him jilted, bitter and creepy. He may be but he, and a slew of other columnists from the whole political spectrum, are also absolutely right that Meghan- and Harry- have now taken it upon themselves to politicise the Royal British family. The women featured on Meghan’s Vogue cover are all progressive and left leaning. Anyone saying they're fine with it because they happen to share Meghan’s opinions just proves me right. It’s biased and it’s hypocritical. Imagine if Meghan had been conservative and put the likes of Candace Owens, Priti Patel, Antonia Okafor and Jaelene Hinkle on the cover, and interviewed Condoleezza Rice (a former actual US Secretary of State)? Or Melania *****, the actual First lady of the US? No, I can’t either, but I can well imagine the progressive uproar had it happened.
> 
> Many here seem to misunderstand the role of the BRF. Preaching partisan or identitarian politics is not the role of the British royals to play. It’s to unite the UK, not divide it. Which is why things like children’s hospitals, wildlife such as preservation of little red squirrels, the arts, addiction prevention, sports, promoting mental health etc are fine for the royals to champion while much more inflammable, controversial and divisive subjects such as Brexit, climate, demographics and trans rights are not.
> 
> You mention female empowerment. One of the “forces for change” featured on Meghan’s cover, Jameela Jamil, had this to say after meeting Meghan’s dear gran-in-law, namely about the Queen's breast: “It’s like a bottom on her chest. They're gigantic." (It’s funny really, one week you meet Beyonce and in a few more you feature the woman who called Beyonce a stripper, on a Vogue cover.) Then there’s Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, who publicly stated Meghan should be the next Head of the Commonwealth. No wonder Meghan admires that particular "force for change"  But yeah, women empowering women


My early morning good read!

Anyone remember when Charles was highly criticized for talking to plants and reprimanding UK architects for their modern designs? Not that he was wrong, the media just made so much fun of him.  Let's see how Harry gets treated for his opinions.


----------



## Flatsy

It's the first of the month, so yet again my newsfeed is clogged with articles about how Harry and Meghan just unfollowed everyone on instagram OMG.  They announced they are going to be changing their follows every month so the media needs to stop acting like there is some big controversy every month.  It is tiresome.


----------



## zinacef

Flatsy said:


> This whole interview with Salma Hayek made me LOL.  https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/31/ente...inault-meghan-markle-british-vogue/index.html
> 
> First she thought Meghan wanted to team up with her on a charity project.  Then she thought Meghan wanted to profile some of the work being done by an organization called Kering that Salma works with.  And then finally, she found out that Meghan likes her and it was just about spotlighting famous women Meghan likes.  Salma inadvertently revealed how much substance there could have been to this versus how much there is.
> 
> But it does sound like she and Meghan plan to network each other in the future, so...networking accomplished!


And Salma is the wife of Pinault, the luxury goods CEO and billionaire.


----------



## LittleStar88

All of this is so hilarious! Barefoot Climate Change speeches and QEII has a bottom for a busom. 

What the heck is going on today??! LOL!


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if Harry appreciates the irony and hypocrisy of dozens of elite celebrities who exist in wealth and luxury getting together in an exotic locale to discuss what the little people should be doing to save the world.


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder if Great Britain eventually consists of just England what the impact will be on the BRF.  They will still be very rich but will they still be as important?


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Harry appreciates the irony and hypocrisy of dozens of elite celebrities who exist in wealth and luxury getting together in an exotic locale to discuss what the little people should be doing to save the world.


Hey, he took his suede brogues off - what more do you want?! He didn’t even do that for the christening


----------



## gracekelly

The comments/posts on this thread are wonderful!  I could take up pages just agreeing with them all. Let’s just say that a group of extremely rich clueless people got together to decide things for the rest of the world and then hopped back on their planes and yachts to go home and do nothing except continue to live the way they do and pat themselves on the back for their righteous meeting.   Still don’t know if Harry took off his shoes for his speech. Maybe he gave it whilst floating on a raft in a pool

@Jayne1  Yes I remember all of that about Charles very well and how he was made fun of. I also recall when he was called on the carpet for his criticism os a new buildup in London that he thought was an architectural disaster. I saw s recent interview with  him that really explained it all. He knows that there are things he will never be able to say when he is King so he is taking the opportunity to say them as Prince of Wales. He is a very intelligent man with many good ideas and as we have seen he was way ahead of the group with conservation and organic farming.   William will have the same opportunity and restrictions. Harry has the advantage of saying whatever he likes period. 

BTW. It has been suggested that the plan for this issue was in place a long time ago and that MM was a plug in editor so to speak. It is also suggested that the majority or women on the list were preselected by Vogue and MM just added a few more.  Several of the women have stated that they were surprised to have been chosen and they certainly did not know her.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if Great Britain eventually consists of just England what the impact will be on the BRF.  They will still be very rich but will they still be as important?


It would be called England, not Great Britain lol


----------



## gracekelly

zinacef said:


> And Salma is the wife of Pinault, the luxury goods CEO and billionaire.


The guy who wants to own every luxury good’s house in the world and spends mega millions advertising in Condé Nast magazines. Gee wonder why they picked his wife. 

Why do I think that they would have included Amal Clooney as a civil rights activist attorney but she was smart enough to say no.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Hey, he took his suede brogues off - what more do you want?! He didn’t even do that for the christening



He wants to show us that he can make sacrifices for the betterment of the earth too. I feel more enlightened already knowing that our privileged betters are on the case.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> He wants to show us that he can make sacrifices for the betterment of the earth too. I feel more enlightened already knowing that our privileged betters are on the case.


Yep, the privileged and the pretty inherited the earth hehe


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

momtok said:


> Wait, wait, wait.  I just want to make sure I'm reading that correctly.  I let our Vogue subscription (U.S.) run out a few years ago, and I am unfamiliar with one, 'Jameel Jamil', .... and I'm kind of doing a double-take at this quote.  So just for clarity's sake, are you saying that 'Jameel Jamil' (in quotes because I am unfamiliar with the name) wrote/said that Queen Elizabeth's bosom was gigantic and like a bottom on her chest?  And that Jameel Jamil was then chosen by Markle as a "force for change" and featured on the cover of British Vogue?
> 
> That paragraph I just typed strikes me as utterly unbelievable, so I'm honestly questioning if I'm reading things correctly.  Is that correct?  Could you please clarify if incorrect?   (For clarification:  I would genuinely be relieved if reading incorrectly.)


Hi momtok  (I enjoyed your posts on the "Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin..." thread.) 

After a quick search I can only seem to find a mention of it here in the Sun now https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9604028/meghan-markle-blasted-politics-left-wing-*****-celebs-vogue/ (and the Sun is not exactly reputable as others here have pointed out). There's also a mention of it on another forum but not the source. I had two other magazine sources for it but can’t find them today. It's a highly controversial statement considering the circumstances, more so than anything Jamil has ever said about Beyonce, Rihanna, Miley and other female public figures, so it could very well have been scrubbed off the internets. I'll try and have another look later on.

In all fairness I don't think Meghan had any idea about this, but it's very easy to find what Jamil has said publically about other famous women.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Hi momtok  (I enjoyed your posts on the "Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin..." thread.)
> 
> After a quick search I can only seem to find a mention of it here in the Sun now https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9604028/meghan-markle-blasted-politics-left-wing-*****-celebs-vogue/ (and the Sun is not exactly reputable as others here have pointed out). There's also a mention of it on another forum but not the source. I had two other magazine sources for it but can’t find them today. It's a highly controversial statement considering the circumstances, more so than anything Jamil has ever said about Beyonce, Rihanna, Miley and other female public figures, so it could very well have been scrubbed off the internets. I'll try and have another look later on.
> 
> In all fairness I don't think Meghan had any idea about this, but it's very easy to find what Jamil has said publically about other famous women.


scrubbed off Internet?  how would that be done?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> scrubbed off Internet?  how would that be done?


Oh, it happens if you have the right contacts. And algorithms   I'm not claiming that's what happened but when I googled it yesterday I found it, today I didn't.


----------



## buffym

This is a good start, due to high demand, they stopped preorders on this months Vogue, it will be interesting to see what the final tally is.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> This is a good start, due to high demand, they stopped preorders on this months Vogue, it will be interesting to see what the final tally is.
> 
> View attachment 4504798


This will allow Enninful to hold on to his job for another year   Condé Nast gets to keep all the millions they will make too. They don’t have to share.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Hi momtok  (I enjoyed your posts on the "Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin..." thread.)
> 
> After a quick search I can only seem to find a mention of it here in the Sun now https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9604028/meghan-markle-blasted-politics-left-wing-*****-celebs-vogue/
> 
> In all fairness I don't think Meghan had any idea about this, but it's very easy to find what Jamil has said publically about other famous women.


 That is probably true and just points out that she really didn’t know the people selected.


----------



## MarieCurie

Can someone please share a link to the speech Prince Harry gave? I can't find it anywhere and going by the comments it seems like a couple of commenters have read/seen/heard it. Thank you

The less I say about Piers Morgan the better, he is one bitter pitiful "man." He did however raise a single point I agree with, instead of Michelle *****, who I love, Meghan should have gone for someone Britsh.


----------



## buffym

MarieCurie said:


> Can someone please share a link to the speech Prince Harry gave? I can't find it anywhere and going by the comments it seems like a couple of commenters have read/seen/heard it. Thank you
> 
> The less I say about Piers Morgan the better, he is one bitter pitiful "man." He did however raise a single point I agree with, instead of Michelle *****, who I love, Meghan should have gone for someone Britsh.



The interview is in Vogue here’s a link to the article 

https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/prince-harry-jane-goodall-september-2019-issue


----------



## gracekelly

MarieCurie said:


> Can someone please share a link to the speech Prince Harry gave? I can't find it anywhere and going by the comments it seems like a couple of commenters have read/seen/heard it. Thank you
> 
> The less I say about Piers Morgan the better, he is one bitter pitiful "man." He did however raise a single point I agree with, instead of Michelle *****, who I love, Meghan should have gone for someone Britsh.


I don't believe that they allowed journalists into the "camp" so there will be no transcript of the actual "barefoot" speech.  BP doesn't even acknowledge that he was there.


----------



## Flatsy

The guest list of the Google event is always top secret and the attendees have to sign non-disclosures. The press only knows who was there if they see them coming and going on the island (Priyanka and Nick) or if somebody leaks it anonymously to the press (Harry).

I am surprised I haven't yet heard the Clooneys have popped in, but they are good at getting around undetected.  And they might consider this event beneath them.


----------



## threadbender

Flatsy said:


> The guest list of the Google event is always top secret and the attendees have to sign non-disclosures. The press only knows who was there if they see them coming and going on the island (Priyanka and Nick) or if somebody leaks it anonymously to the press (Harry).
> 
> I am surprised I haven't yet heard the Clooneys have popped in, but they are good at getting around undetected.  And they might consider this event beneath them.


I thought I had read somewhere that they were there but, cannot remember where I saw it.

ETA I cannot find anywhere stating they did attend but many that said they were expected.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> *From the Daily Mail*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'gives barefoot speech' at secretive Google Camp climate change conference in Italy in front of A-list crowd including Leo DiCaprio and Naomi Campbell, as it's revealed celebs arrived on total of 114 private jets*
> 
> *Tech giants and celebrities have flocked to Sicily for global warming conference*
> *Mega yacht Rising Sun dropped Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom off at the event *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'gave passionate speech' at the select climate change event *
> By DIANNE APEN-SADLER FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 15:17 EDT, 31 July 2019 | UPDATED: 22:11 EDT, 31 July 2019
> 
> 
> Prince Harry gave a barefoot speech at a secretive Google Camp climate change conference in Italy according to reports, in front of an A-List crowd who flew in on 114 private jets.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is said to have given a passionate speech about saving the planet while being watched by Naomi Campbell and Leonardo DiCaprio, among other celebrities and power brokers.
> 
> It comes just a day after he revealed his determination to be kind to the planet by having no more than two children in an article with environmentalist Dr Jane Goodall in the edition of Vogue guest-edited by his wife Meghan.
> 
> Tech giants and celebrities flocked to Sicily to show off their green credentials for the camp that focuses on global warming - but many failed to leave their private jets at home.
> 
> So I guess they talk the talk, but don't walk the walk.  *sigh*  I have to admit I don't quite know what they mean by "barefoot speech."


----------



## Lounorada

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "Buckingham Palace has refused to say how the Duke of Sussex travelled to Italy"  *Maybe he walked on his bare feet*.





gracekelly said:


> The comments/posts on this thread are wonderful!  I could take up pages just agreeing with them all. Still don’t know if Harry took off his shoes for his speech.* Maybe he gave it whilst floating on a raft in a pool*


 @ the bolded


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> @ the bolded


Remember when they posted the picture of his shoes with the holes in the soles?  I think he walked all the way to Sicily in them and they finally went to shreds so there he was in his bare feet giving his speech!


----------



## marthastoo

Why do I have an icky feeling when I read this thread?


----------



## jehaga

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> In answer to your last question; since they were hijacked by the progressive movement? It would also depend on your definition of “equality, kindness and open-mindedness” etc. Despite what some claim, no one group gets to determine their meaning. It's a joint human effort.
> 
> Generally this knee-jerk reaction that any criticism of Meghan is racist is well, racist. She’s a PR disaster in any skin colour, and seems hell-bent on alienating the plebs in favour of promoting herself and her future aspirations as a globetrotting friend of the stars über humanitarian preacher of elite hypocrisy, with a fancy title and a real prince in tow. That’s why people don’t take to her, not because she’s biracial, they just don’t like her. She’s not the first non-white royal in Europe.
> 
> Nobody here is refuting _any_ of Piers Morgan's claims by calling him jilted, bitter and creepy. He may be but he, and a slew of other columnists from the whole political spectrum, are also absolutely right that Meghan- and Harry- have now taken it upon themselves to politicise the Royal British family. The women featured on Meghan’s Vogue cover are all progressive and left leaning. Anyone saying they're fine with it because they happen to share Meghan’s opinions just proves me right. It’s biased and it’s hypocritical. Imagine if Meghan had been conservative and put the likes of Candace Owens, Priti Patel, Antonia Okafor and Jaelene Hinkle on the cover, and interviewed Condoleezza Rice (a former actual US Secretary of State)? Or Melania *****, the actual First lady of the US? No, I can’t either, but I can well imagine the progressive uproar had it happened.
> 
> Many here seem to misunderstand the role of the BRF. Preaching partisan or identitarian politics is not the role of the British royals to play. It’s to unite the UK, not divide it. Which is why things like children’s hospitals, wildlife such as preservation of little red squirrels, the arts, addiction prevention, sports, promoting mental health etc are fine for the royals to champion while much more inflammable, controversial and divisive subjects such as Brexit, climate, demographics and trans rights are not.
> 
> You mention female empowerment. One of the “forces for change” featured on Meghan’s cover, Jameela Jamil, had this to say after meeting Meghan’s dear gran-in-law, namely about the Queen's breast: “It’s like a bottom on her chest. They're gigantic." (It’s funny really, one week you meet Beyonce and in a few more you feature the woman who called Beyonce a stripper, on a Vogue cover.) Then there’s Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, who publicly stated Meghan should be the next Head of the Commonwealth. No wonder Meghan admires that particular "force for change"  But yeah, women empowering women


LikeLikeLikeLikeLike and Like!


----------



## jehaga

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "Buckingham Palace has refused to say how the Duke of Sussex travelled to Italy"  Maybe he walked on his bare feet.
> 
> Aren't we all lucky this pathetic lot have taken it upon themselves to be the saviours of our planet.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...efoot-Prince-Harry-hypocrite-celebrities.html
> 
> *Backlash at barefoot Prince Harry and 'hypocrite Greenerati': Eco-warrior elite who turned up at secret climate change Google camp in 114 private jets, helicopters and mega yachts are mocked for leaving their own carbon footprint*
> 
> *Prince Harry gave a passionate speech at the secretive Sicily climate event*
> *Buckingham Palace has refused to say how the Duke of Sussex travelled to Italy *
> *Mega yacht Rising Sun dropped Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom off at the event *
> *Some 114 planes were scheduled to land in Palermo for the elite gathering *
> A host of A-list celebrities have faced an angry backlash after they travelled to a climate change conference in Italy in a fleet of supercars, expensive yachts and more than 100 private jets.
> 
> Guests at the secretive Google Camp were accused of hypocrisy after they gathered to discuss the environment while leaving a considerable carbon footprint of their own.
> 
> Prince Harry is understood to have given a passionate barefoot speech about saving the planet, although Buckingham Palace has refused to confirm his attendance or whether he too travelled by private jet.
> 
> 'This is not something we are commenting on,' a spokeswoman told MailOnline.
> 
> Some 114 fuel-guzzling planes were scheduled to land in Palermo for the elite gathering, according to Italian media, while others brought their super-yachts to a three-day conference whose guests include Katy Perry and Harry Styles.
> 
> BBC presenter Andrew Neil was among those to point out the irony, saying: 'Scores of celebrities and the rich have arrived in Sicily for a Google conference. They came in 114 private jets and a flotilla of super yachts. The conference is on global warming.'
> 
> Former President Barack ***** was also rumoured to be among those attending the event, but has not been spotted so far.
> 
> Orlando Bloom, Stella McCartney, Diane Von Furstenberg and Gayle King were also spotted arriving at the Verdura Resort in Sicily for the welcome dinner on Monday.
> 
> On Tuesday, even more guests arrived at the property, with Nick Jonas and new wife Priyanka Chopra leading the charge of celebrities heading to the island for the three-day conference which is believed to have begun on Monday and finished last night.
> 
> Styles was seen behind the wheel of a luxury car while driving with his friends Jeff Azoff and Ben Winston to the temple.
> 
> Spanish singer-songwriter Rosalia, who later performed on stage on Tuesday, posted an picture of herself getting ready for the event and then walking around the temple ruins.
> David Geffen's Rising Sun did swing by briefly on Monday to drop off Perry and Bloom, but then continued on its way up the Italian coast.
> 
> As well as private jets and megayachts, there are buses to herd guests around and a helicopter pad.
> 
> After morning sessions, afternoons are free for guests to relax around the complex and spa, with trips around the coast, to local wineries and to tourist hot spots on offer.
> 
> The resort boasts two 18-hole golf courses, a tennis academy and one of the largest spa complexes in all of Europe on its over one mile of private coastline.
> 
> There are a number of suites and private rooms as well as three villas for guests to stay.
> 
> Those villas look out on to individual pools as well as the property's massive infinity pool and stunning private beach, filled with imported white sand, a jetty and even a small carpet to take pampered stars into the crystal blue ocean waters.
> 
> On the final night, Google spends close to $100,000 renting the 2,500-year-old Valley of the Temples ruins for a concert and sit-down meal, with Sting performing there last summer.
> 
> Coldplay also performed at the temple on the final night on Wednesday.
> 
> Prince Harry also attended the event back in 2017 - and may have taken Meghan Markle along with him.
> 
> The pair made their first public appearance together at a polo match in Ascot in May that year, and a week after the Google conference she was spotted in London with her mother celebrating her birthday.
> 
> The event, created by Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, sees some of the world's wealthiest business leaders and tech gurus discussing various issues in morning sessions before relaxing in the Italian sunshine in the afternoon.
> 
> This year's secretive camp, where social media is banned and the itinerary locked behind a password-protected site, will focus on tackling global warming, reports the New York Post.
> 
> One attendee said: 'There will likely be discussions about online privacy, politics, human rights, and of course, the environment, which makes it highly ironic that this event requires 114 private jets to happen.'
> 
> Luxury megayacht the Andromeda, which is owned by billionaire Kiwi Graeme Hart has been spotted just off shore, as has Barry Diller's sailing vessel Eos.


Reads like a who’s who cult gathering.


----------



## MarieCurie

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that they allowed journalists into the "camp" so there will be no transcript of the actual "barefoot" speech.  BP doesn't even acknowledge that he was there.


So we are all "throwing a hissy fit" about how the elite is lecturing us peasants in a speech that is not even directed at us

Camp google is not new and it's not a climate change conference as has been reported this week, it's where the elite psyche themselves up into being better humans. They just decided to allegedly (I say this because of the elite and secretive nature around Camp Google) focus on climate change this year, which is tone deaf because they could have done more for the environment by not hosting it at all. The optics are bad with or without Prince Harry giving a "barefoot speech."


----------



## minababe

Flatsy said:


> I think Meghan's beliefs are genuine and she is enthusiastic about her role because of the things she might be able to accomplish.  But I also believe a big component of why marrying Harry was appealing to her was the fame and glory as well.   I think it all coexists with her.
> 
> There's no denying that becoming famous was one of her top goals, if not her #1 goal, from the time she was a young girl.  She was out there auditioning for music videos as a teen, and later trying to get any job she could get that would help her become famous - from soap operas to briefcase girl to a background girl on the Wendy Williams show.  I saw a clip of her visit to Europe with her high school classmates when she was 15 and she was signing her name "Star to be Meg" on a wall.
> 
> I don't think at any point she stopped being about fame and started being all about selfless altruism.  I just think at some point during her adult life she set her sights on a humanitarian brand of fame that was a more high-quality type of fame and more satisfying to her as well.  And becoming a Princess was an opportunity to achieve the ultimate, highest level of humanitarian fame, along with all of the perks of being rich and famous.
> 
> Before anybody jumps down my throat, please note:  I didn't say everything about her is phony or that she doesn't have a genuine relationship with her husband or that ALL she cares about is fame.  But I think fame is a very, very big component of what drives her.



don't think that makes sense at all. because than she would handle a lot different in her past.
she was a actress yes. because she loves to Play roles since her School. she was beside her Job really low key. she lived really private off the set. she was just known for her role in suits not for any pr Stunts to be relevant at the press.
just because she wanted to be a actress as a Young women she is hungry for fame? fame is just what Comes with this Job. she made the best out of it and was active for charities.
and of course she took every acting Job she could, thats what all actors and actresses do. you have to start small to get big and you have to pay your bills.
she was clever and ambitious since her School days. tried to made Things better even the Advertising on tv. don't get why some People try to see something negative in those strong characters

I often think that the negative thoughts from People come because they didn't  know her before harry started to date her. But her tv Show SUITS is a huge success around the world. not just a cable tv Show how some People here think. it's really famous at  netflix around the world and maybe it's the age but I don't know anyone who didn't know her name before Harry became part of her life.

she uses her new role to Keep going her charity Passion but with much more possibilites.
thats all that matters at the end doesnt it?


----------



## myown

minababe said:


> don't think that makes sense at all. because than she would handle a lot different in her past.
> she was a actress yes. because she loves to Play roles since her School. she was beside her Job really low key. she lived really private off the set. she was just known for her role in suits not for any pr Stunts to be relevant at the press.
> just because she wanted to be a actress as a Young women she is hungry for fame? fame is just what Comes with this Job. she made the best out of it and was active for charities.
> and of course she took every acting Job she could, thats what all actors and actresses do. you have to start small to get big and you have to pay your bills.
> she was clever and ambitious since her School days. tried to made Things better even the Advertising on tv. don't get why some People try to see something negative in those strong characters
> 
> I often think that the negative thoughts from People come because they didn't  know her before harry started to date her. But her tv Show SUITS is a huge success around the world. not just a cable tv Show how some People here think. it's really famous at  netflix around the world and maybe it's the age but I don't know anyone who didn't know her name before Harry became part of her life.
> 
> she uses her new role to Keep going her charity Passion but with much more possibilites.
> thats all that matters at the end doesnt it?


100%


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> I often think that the negative thoughts from People come because they didn't  know her before harry started to date her. But her tv Show SUITS is a huge success around the world. not just a cable tv Show how some People here think. it's really famous at  netflix around the world and maybe it's the age but I don't know anyone who didn't know her name before Harry became part of her life.
> 
> she uses her new role to Keep going her charity Passion but with much more possibilites.
> thats all that matters at the end doesnt it?


I hadn't heard of her, or Suits, till she was linked to Harry.


----------



## Clearblueskies

MarieCurie said:


> So we are all "throwing a hissy fit" about how the elite is lecturing us peasants in a speech that is not even directed at us
> 
> Camp google is not new and it's not a climate change conference as has been reported this week, it's where the elite psyche themselves up into being better humans. They just decided to allegedly (I say this because of the elite and secretive nature around Camp Google) focus on climate change this year, which is tone deaf because they could have done more for the environment by not hosting it at all. The optics are bad with or without Prince Harry giving a "barefoot speech."


I think the comments here were tongue in cheek   As for “elite” I suppose it depends on your definition, mine wouldn’t include Harry Styles or Katie Perry for instance  and I don’t think being famous = elite either



Sharont2305 said:


> I hadn't heard of her, or Suits, till she was linked to Harry.


Me neither


----------



## mrsinsyder

So he did travel in via private jet _and _helicopter, it’s now confirmed. I guess everything they eschew is just for the unwashed masses, not them.


----------



## bag-mania

It's a big party for the rich and famous hiding behind the facade of being a secret meeting of influential people. It's a way for celebs to feel important and absolutely nothing will come of any of their speeches and meetings. They will all go back to their fabulous homes and we won't hear another word about it until next year's "camp."


----------



## MarieCurie

Clearblueskies said:


> I think the comments here were tongue in cheek   As for “elite” I suppose it depends on your definition, mine wouldn’t include Harry Styles or Katie Perry for instance  and I don’t think being famous = elite either
> 
> 
> Me neither


"elite"- tongue in cheek as you mentioned


----------



## MarieCurie

bag-mania said:


> It's a big party for the rich and famous hiding behind the facade of being a secret meeting of influential people. It's a way for celebs to feel important and absolutely nothing will come of any of their speeches and meetings. They will all go back to their fabulous homes and we won't hear another word about it until next year's "camp."


100%


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> I hadn't heard of her, or Suits, till she was linked to Harry.


I'd heard of Suits because I would occasionally see ads for it on USA.  Gabriel Macht was always the star of the ads.  Wasn't Meghan a supporting a character?  Who didn't even join the show until a few seasons in?  (Not surprisingly, she features heavily in the ads now!)

If not knowing a supporting actress on a basic cable show that runs about 12 episodes a year makes me old, I guess I'm old.

It doesn't change my opinion that her goal from a young age was primarily to be famous and that she was willing to pursue jobs in a lot of cheap forms of entertainment in order to advance that goal.  If a love of theater was driving her, I doubt it would have been so easy for her to abandon it instantly when the opportunity to become a princess came along.  

Unlike Grace Kelly, I don't foresee Meghan winding up hungering for creative outlets to replace her acting.  Lifestyle blogging, making photo-ready avocado toast, and selecting designer clothing seems to be the type of creativity that satisfies her.


----------



## buffym

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1US1HZ?__twitter_impression=true




This is a good introduction to her Smartworks line release.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## loogirl

Flatsy said:


> I'd heard of Suits because I would occasionally see ads for it on USA.  Gabriel Macht was always the star of the ads.  Wasn't Meghan a supporting a character?  Who didn't even join the show until a few seasons in?  (Not surprisingly, she features heavily in the ads now!)
> 
> If not knowing a supporting actress on a basic cable show that runs about 12 episodes a year makes me old, I guess I'm old.
> 
> It doesn't change my opinion that her goal from a young age was primarily to be famous and that she was willing to pursue jobs in a lot of cheap forms of entertainment in order to advance that goal.  If a love of theater was driving her, I doubt it would have been so easy for her to abandon it instantly when the opportunity to become a princess came along.
> 
> Unlike Grace Kelly, I don't foresee Meghan winding up hungering for creative outlets to replace her acting.  Lifestyle blogging, making photo-ready avocado toast, and selecting designer clothing seems to be the type of creativity that satisfies her.



Exactly. If her whole goal was activism and worldly causes/making a difference or serious acting and not dreams of social climbing and fame, she would have literally done anything else as a career than c list actress. Instead of working for a non profit or something, she chooses briefcase girl? Like come on guys. Her stans are so far up her butt they can’t see the obvious. She wanted to be famous, she wasn’t trying to be “private and low key off set” like someone said earlier. 

She frequented places where the rich and elite were on purpose, with a goal. You don’t join soho house or go there all the time whatever because you want to be part of initiatives that help the planet or women or something. You go there to social climb. 

Also, she was in a relationship when the opportunity to meet Harry came up and she dropped that Toronto chef like a hot potato for a chance to have a go at a prince. I’m in Toronto and one of my editors covers food/restaurants and is close with the chef and others in the community who witnessed this unfold. 

She is using the do-gooder/righteous cause angle because that’s seen as admirable and cool. Like Angelina Jolie and the UN etc. She wants to push her I’m so woke and educated agenda. But if she was really all about her education and cared about that she wouldn’t have been in short dresses holding a briefcase. She could have gotten any other job. Fame was the goal full stop. That’s fine if it’s what you want, but it’s superficial, vapid (her type of “acting”) and doesn’t fit the current strong educated woman activist persona she is trying to cultivate and failing at. If she hadn’t met and married Harry she would still just be a mid level actress not using this education she seems to want to be so proud of now. 

I don’t know what compels the fans to dig in and refuse to find any fault or flaws in MM it’s weird af to me. You don’t know her, she doesnt care about you or know you either. Like she wont come after you if you have critique. And if you dont have critique seek therapy. No one is above reproach. Not even MM. It’s getting creepy and obsessive.


----------



## LittleStar88

loogirl said:


> Exactly. If her whole goal was activism and worldly causes/making a difference or serious acting and not dreams of social climbing and fame, she would have literally done anything else as a career than c list actress. Instead of working for a non profit or something, she chooses briefcase girl? Like come on guys. Her stans are so far up her butt they can’t see the obvious. She wanted to be famous, she wasn’t trying to be “private and low key off set” like someone said earlier.
> 
> She frequented places where the rich and elite were on purpose, with a goal. You don’t join soho house or go there all the time whatever because you want to be part of initiatives that help the planet or women or something. You go there to social climb.
> 
> Also, she was in a relationship when the opportunity to meet Harry came up and she dropped that Toronto chef like a hot potato for a chance to have a go at a prince. I’m in Toronto and one of my editors covers food/restaurants and is close with the chef and others in the community who witnessed this unfold.
> 
> She is using the do-gooder/righteous cause angle because that’s seen as admirable and cool. Like Angelina Jolie and the UN etc. She wants to push her I’m so woke and educated agenda. But if she was really all about her education and cared about that she wouldn’t have been in short dresses holding a briefcase. She could have gotten any other job. Fame was the goal full stop. That’s fine if it’s what you want, but it’s superficial, vapid (her type of “acting”) and doesn’t fit the current strong educated woman activist persona she is trying to cultivate and failing at. If she hadn’t met and married Harry she would still just be a mid level actress not using this education she seems to want to be so proud of now.
> 
> I don’t know what compels the fans to dig in and refuse to find any fault or flaws in MM it’s weird af to me. You don’t know her, she doesnt care about you or know you either. Like she wont come after you if you have critique. And if you dont have critique seek therapy. No one is above reproach. Not even MM. It’s getting creepy and obsessive.



So when a woman is ambitious she is a social climber. When a man does it, it is admirable/acceptable/a non-issue?

Honestly, you have to hustle and start at the bottom and work your way up with any job. Very, very few show up in the acting scene and become a huge sensation overnight so good for her for figuring out what needed to be done to elevate her status. If that means showing up to places where elite go, then you do it (kind of like how we have to do corporate networking events - you want that better job or status, you need to get out there and start networking and meeting people - all executives do this, so why is it a problem in a different line of work?)

No matter what you are doing, you gotta start somewhere and usually that somewhere is the bottom. Good for her for putting in the right kind of effort to achieve her goals (even if you don't agree with them). If taking a job as briefcase holder will get you to the next level, you do it and you do it well with a smile.

And maybe the chef dude wasn't the right match for her. Not our place to decide that she should have stayed with him. At least she ended it with him before pursuing someone else.

Meghan had goals and ambitions and went for them. Good for her. And this is not me being a stan or crazed fan - I have no issue calling her out on missteps.


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> So when a woman is ambitious she is a social climber. When a man does it, it is admirable/acceptable/a non-issue?


This was addressed in the thread before and I listed off the names of some male actors I consider notable social climbers.  (Actors I like!)  People got bent out of shape because they thought I was insulting their faves and that led to off-topic discussion.  Since this is just a Meghan thread, I won't bring other people back into it.  

I'll just say no, I personally don't think social climbing is something just done by women.  I wouldn't call it an admirable quality in men or women, nor would I issue a blanket condemnation of it for men or women.

As I have said before, Meghan has done a lot of fun and interesting things in her life.   Being a social climber (which I do think she is) does not mean she's a horrible person.  If she weren't a social climber, she would probably be back in LA with the loser Markles, doing nothing with her life but smoking pot and trying to win the lottery again.  She put her brains to use, went to a good university, traveled, and pursued a career with dedication.  A+.   I don't think being a briefcase girl is a horrible thing.  I'm just not pretending that it was motivated by artistic dedication to the craft of acting.  It was about becoming famous and eventually rich.

I admire her ambition, her discipline, and her drive.  Those are all great qualities.  But people are complicated, and I think she has flaws as well.  She cares way too much about the image she presents.  She seems to have a need for everyone to think she is perfect at everything, all the time.  She almost always comes off to me like she's putting on a show and not just being herself.  

She approaches things with a level of superficiality that is common among her peers in Hollywood - it's all about how things are "curated" to look.  And I think she is too preoccupied with being friends with celebrities - the bigger and more important the celebrity, the better.


----------



## rose60610

I don't begrudge any actor taking any role they can get, whether it's in ads, soap operas, loser shows/movies, whatever. And if they can use any of that exposure for self promotion to better roles, more power to them. I'm not a total fan of Markle, but I do think she's leveraged her roles to bigger and better things like few others. Marrying into the Royal Family? Hel--LOW! That being said, such a position would normally be ultimate "destination" for most, just crank out the heirs and show up at events all smiley and accept bouquets of flowers. I'm not buying the "she's worked all her life and doesn't know anything else so of course she's building her "brand" ". What's all this "brand" crap anyway? She's part of the RF, isn't that "brand" enough? What could she possibly add with HER "brand" other than cramming her "wokeness" and political views (via Vogue? Really?) down peoples' throats as though she's a new great authority of what and who we should deem important?  So she scored the most eligible bachelor in the world. Good for her.  Princess Diana was revered for her compassion for children, the sick, and landmine awareness. Meghan's "passion" appears to be further self promotion, and it's turning a lot of people off.  And, no, I'm not racist.


----------



## Tivo

There’s nothing particularly wrong with being a social climber. That’s what you do in Hollywood. Meghan has been doing it for most of her life, but I don’t think she factored in a very important component: She can’t control how people view her.
She came in super confident and assertive...which works well in Hollywood circles, but in the BRF not so much. She’s in a different type of celebrity world, and the rules aren’t the same.


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> I'd heard of Suits because I would occasionally see ads for it on USA.  Gabriel Macht was always the star of the ads.  Wasn't Meghan a supporting a character?  Who didn't even join the show until a few seasons in?  (Not surprisingly, she features heavily in the ads now!)
> 
> If not knowing a supporting actress on a basic cable show that runs about 12 episodes a year makes me old, I guess I'm old.
> 
> It doesn't change my opinion that her goal from a young age was primarily to be famous and that she was willing to pursue jobs in a lot of cheap forms of entertainment in order to advance that goal.  If a love of theater was driving her, I doubt it would have been so easy for her to abandon it instantly when the opportunity to become a princess came along.
> 
> Unlike Grace Kelly, I don't foresee Meghan winding up hungering for creative outlets to replace her acting.  Lifestyle blogging, making photo-ready avocado toast, and selecting designer clothing seems to be the type of creativity that satisfies her.


Meghan was part of the original cast, but she was always a supporting character. I think other countries are a few seasons behind the US so it's possible she is more heavily promoted in places like Germany, Ireland, Australia, etc. since they might still be in season 7, and Netflix is behind so they can probably still use her in promos. It's a good thing she hooked up with Harry because she would be unemployed now.  Suits was a hit for the USA network but not a hit show at all, so you're not old or out of touch if you didn't know her! After nine years the entire cast is still pretty unknown and none of them have made movies or anything.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> Meghan was part of the original cast, but she was always a supporting character. I think other countries are a few seasons behind the US so it's possible she is more heavily promoted in places like Germany, Ireland, Australia, etc. since they might still be in season 7, and Netflix is behind so they can probably still use her in promos. It's a good thing she hooked up with Harry because she would be unemployed now.  Suits was a hit for the USA network but not a hit show at all, so you're not old or out of touch if you didn't know her! After nine years the entire cast is still pretty unknown and none of them have made movies or anything.


to go from being  a supporting actor in a cable tv series that wasn't widely watched to being one of the most famous women in the world - quite a step up I'd say.  Now she is "friends" with some big celebs who would never have given her the time of day.  and she is looked upon as some sort of fashion icon.  I think her fashion choices are fine.  but no one would be looking at them if she didn't have the biggest accessory of all - Prince Harry


----------



## Flatsy

I'm fine with the wokeness, I'm fine with the spotlighting celebrities in Vogue who she thinks are doing good things.  What rubs me the wrong way is giving it all the grand title of "changing the world".  

Both she and Harry seem to be under the mistaken impression that getting together with other celebrities to do what mostly amounts to a lot of virtue signaling is the highest form of "activism".  "Activism" is her word, and the fact that she thinks that a) her current job is about activism and b) celebrities virtue signaling together qualifies as activism are both problematic.



daisychainz said:


> After nine years the entire cast is still pretty unknown and none of them have made movies or anything.


I knew Gabriel Macht because he married Jacinda from the Real World!  I like both of them, but not enough to watch the show.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I'm fine with the wokeness, I'm fine with the spotlighting celebrities in Vogue who she thinks are doing good things.  What rubs me the wrong way is giving it all the grand title of "changing the world".
> 
> Both she and Harry seem to be under the mistaken impression that getting together with other celebrities to do what mostly amounts to a lot of virtue signaling is the highest form of "activism".  "Activism" is her word, and the fact that she thinks that a) her current job is about activism and b) celebrities virtue signaling together qualifies as activism are both problematic.
> being woke is fine with me.  and if celebs can influence the public in a positive way, that's fine with me too.
> 
> I knew Gabriel Macht because he married Jacinda from the Real World!  I like both of them, but not enough to watch the show.


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> I knew Gabriel Macht because he married Jacinda from the Real World!  I like both of them, but not enough to watch the show.


I was really young when Jacinda's RW episodes aired and I remember thinking how pretty she was and I wanted her hair when I got older, lol. She's made a few guest appearances on the show.


----------



## bag-mania

It gets annoying when celebrities get all preachy and start putting their opinions out there like they are leaders and we should look up to them. What a joke!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It gets annoying when celebrities get all preachy and start putting their opinions out there like they are leaders and we should look up to them. What a joke!


well if "regular people" go on social media and become "influencers" then why not celebs influencing people?  or just sharing their views


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well if "regular people" go on social media and become "influencers" then why not celebs influencing people?  or just sharing their views



Oh, don't get me started on the influencers. Every human alive has opinions, it doesn't mean everyone should be put on a pedestal or that we should give a rat's @ss about their views.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

loogirl said:


> Exactly. If her whole goal was activism and worldly causes/making a difference or serious acting and not dreams of social climbing and fame, she would have literally done anything else as a career than c list actress. Instead of working for a non profit or something, she chooses briefcase girl? Like come on guys. Her stans are so far up her butt they can’t see the obvious. She wanted to be famous, she wasn’t trying to be “private and low key off set” like someone said earlier.
> 
> She frequented places where the rich and elite were on purpose, with a goal. You don’t join soho house or go there all the time whatever because you want to be part of initiatives that help the planet or women or something. You go there to social climb.
> 
> Also, she was in a relationship when the opportunity to meet Harry came up and she dropped that Toronto chef like a hot potato for a chance to have a go at a prince. I’m in Toronto and one of my editors covers food/restaurants and is close with the chef and others in the community who witnessed this unfold.
> 
> She is using the do-gooder/righteous cause angle because that’s seen as admirable and cool. Like Angelina Jolie and the UN etc. She wants to push her I’m so woke and educated agenda. But if she was really all about her education and cared about that she wouldn’t have been in short dresses holding a briefcase. She could have gotten any other job. Fame was the goal full stop. That’s fine if it’s what you want, but it’s superficial, vapid (her type of “acting”) and doesn’t fit the current strong educated woman activist persona she is trying to cultivate and failing at. If she hadn’t met and married Harry she would still just be a mid level actress not using this education she seems to want to be so proud of now.
> 
> I don’t know what compels the fans to dig in and refuse to find any fault or flaws in MM it’s weird af to me. You don’t know her, she doesnt care about you or know you either. Like she wont come after you if you have critique. And if you dont have critique seek therapy. No one is above reproach. Not even MM. It’s getting creepy and obsessive.


Can we please stop with the insulting each other because we have different opinions?

It would be nice if you didn't insult people for liking Meghan. Talking about disliking Meghan, discussing differences in opinion I can deal with, but saying people who like her have their heads up her butt, calling them stans, saying they're creepy and obsessive is too personal.

And yes, I also believe personal attacks on people who dislike Meghan are wrong too. And no, I'm not trying to mod and I don't like to hit ignore because I think it's important to hear both sides. I'm just trying to enjoy the gossip but the personal attacks are making it really unpleasant, more so than the opinions that I disagree with.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

bag-mania said:


> It gets annoying when celebrities get all preachy and start putting their opinions out there like they are leaders and we should look up to them. What a joke!


They have a platform and a huge audience. I think it's better for celebrities to try and do something good by highlighting important issues for their audience than to lazily sit on their wealth without trying to make the world better. I mean this is why the royal family does so much charity…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bellebellebelle19 said:


> They have a platform and a huge audience. I think it's better for celebrities to try and do something good by highlighting important issues for their audience than to lazily sit on their wealth without trying to make the world better. I mean this is why the royal family does so much charity…


I think most celebs who speak out on causes or politics are just trying to do good.  The one I do have a problem with is Tom Sellek.  Hawking reverse mortgages to senior citizens when this is potentially catastrophic for them.  And he is making money doing this, not just stating his opinion.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I agree with a lot of what you all have said and I also agree that there is a cringe-worthy tone to a lot of MM’s comments. And this whole google event has me truly shaking my head.

That being said, the unfortunate reality currently is that many people are easily influenced by celebrities.  Especially young people. So I do have to respect other celebrities who recognize the impact that they have and are careful with it or who use their platform to bring light to issues and exposure to great people doing great things rather than just subliminally hawking hair growth gummies, diet plans and boxes full of disposable junk.


----------



## bag-mania

bellebellebelle19 said:


> They have a platform and a huge audience. I think it's better for celebrities to try and do something good by highlighting important issues for their audience than to lazily sit on their wealth without trying to make the world better. I mean this is why the royal family does so much charity…



How is what Harry and Meghan accomplished this week making the world better? Meghan got criticized for her Vogue issue having a sanctimonious tone and Harry spoke at a private getaway for rich folks about how people should be doing what he himself doesn't do.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> How is what Harry and Meghan accomplished this week making the world better? Meghan got criticized for her Vogue issue having a sanctimonious tone and Harry spoke at a private getaway for rich folks about how people should be doing what he himself doesn't do.


Exactly.  I think about how much of a real difference they could make by being a role model and encouraging parents to get their kids vaccinated.


----------



## buffym

bag-mania said:


> How is what Harry and Meghan accomplished this week making the world better? Meghan got criticized for her Vogue issue having a sanctimonious tone and Harry spoke at a private getaway for rich folks about how people should be doing what he himself doesn't do.



I’ve seen criticism and I’ve seen her applauded. I’ve seen as many comments from Twitter stating she is harmless and the tabloids are unfairly criticizing her. I guess the sales from Vogue will be the deciding factor. Meghan talks about her charity Smartworks, so this is exposure for them. 

A royals job is to support charities and use their platform to help which is what she is doing. 

I believe some of the criticism has helped because my circle is stem and they aren’t paying attention to royalty but they’re buying Vogue because they consider the media’s coverage crossing over to bullying.


----------



## TC1

bellebellebelle19 said:


> They have a platform and a huge audience. I think it's better for celebrities to try and do something good by highlighting important issues for their audience than to lazily sit on their wealth without trying to make the world better. I mean this is why the royal family does so much charity…


Well, the Royal Family earns their living this way...it's not exactly "charity" per se


----------



## daisychainz

buffym said:


> I’ve seen criticism and I’ve seen her applauded. I’ve seen as many comments from Twitter stating she is harmless and the tabloids are unfairly criticizing her. I guess the sales from Vogue will be the deciding factor. Meghan talks about her charity Smartworks, so this is exposure for them.
> 
> A royals job is to support charities and use their platform to help which is what she is doing.
> 
> I believe some of the criticism has helped because my circle is stem and they aren’t paying attention to royalty but they’re buying Vogue because they consider the media’s coverage crossing over to bullying.


I watched a Youtube video this morning and the woman was talking about giving some of her work clothes and bags to Smartworks. I laughed, and figured she must be a Meghan-follower or Vogue reader. But this girl's followers, in turn, will want to copy her, and it creates a nice effect for the program.


----------



## CeeJay

bellebellebelle19 said:


> Can we please stop with the insulting each other because we have different opinions?
> 
> It would be nice if you didn't insult people for liking Meghan. Talking about disliking Meghan, discussing differences in opinion I can deal with, but saying people who like her have their heads up her butt, calling them stans, saying they're creepy and obsessive is too personal.
> 
> And yes, I also believe personal attacks on people who dislike Meghan are wrong too. And no, I'm not trying to mod and I don't like to hit ignore because I think it's important to hear both sides. I'm just trying to enjoy the gossip but the personal attacks are making it really unpleasant, more so than the opinions that I disagree with.


I said this a while back; tired of people on here calling others "stupid", "jealous", "envious", etc. -- yet, I got called out and then my post was deleted, so be careful.  Bottom line, it really isn't up to any one of us to call out others (as I found); the mods will do that .. just wanted to let you know!


----------



## kemilia

daisychainz said:


> Meghan was part of the original cast, but she was always a supporting character. I think other countries are a few seasons behind the US so it's possible she is more heavily promoted in places like Germany, Ireland, Australia, etc. since they might still be in season 7, and Netflix is behind so they can probably still use her in promos. It's a good thing she hooked up with Harry because she would be unemployed now.  Suits was a hit for the USA network but not a hit show at all, so you're not old or out of touch if you didn't know her! After nine years the entire cast is still pretty unknown and none of them have made movies or anything.


I live in the States and watch a pretty good amount of TV, mostly cable shows. I had heard of Suits but didn't watch (lots of choices now, not much time) but I can honestly say I had never heard of Meghan Markle until she started dating Harry. And then that moved pretty darn fast, imo.


----------



## Jayne1

loogirl said:


> Exactly. If her whole goal was activism and worldly causes/making a difference or serious acting and not dreams of social climbing and fame, she would have literally done anything else as a career than c list actress. Instead of working for a non profit or something, she chooses briefcase girl? Like come on guys. Her stans are so far up her butt they can’t see the obvious. She wanted to be famous, she wasn’t trying to be “private and low key off set” like someone said earlier.
> 
> She frequented places where the rich and elite were on purpose, with a goal. You don’t join soho house or go there all the time whatever because you want to be part of initiatives that help the planet or women or something. You go there to social climb.
> 
> Also, she was in a relationship when the opportunity to meet Harry came up and she dropped that Toronto chef like a hot potato for a chance to have a go at a prince. I’m in Toronto and one of my editors covers food/restaurants and is close with the chef and others in the community who witnessed this unfold.
> 
> She is using the do-gooder/righteous cause angle because that’s seen as admirable and cool. Like Angelina Jolie and the UN etc. She wants to push her I’m so woke and educated agenda. But if she was really all about her education and cared about that she wouldn’t have been in short dresses holding a briefcase. She could have gotten any other job. Fame was the goal full stop. That’s fine if it’s what you want, but it’s superficial, vapid (her type of “acting”) and doesn’t fit the current strong educated woman activist persona she is trying to cultivate and failing at. If she hadn’t met and married Harry she would still just be a mid level actress not using this education she seems to want to be so proud of now.
> 
> I don’t know what compels the fans to dig in and refuse to find any fault or flaws in MM it’s weird af to me. You don’t know her, she doesnt care about you or know you either. Like she wont come after you if you have critique. And if you dont have critique seek therapy. No one is above reproach. Not even MM. It’s getting creepy and obsessive.


I'm from Toronto as well and the only reason we knew about her was because she seemed to get around to places the media covered.

Remember her Reitmans commercial?  That's really the first I heard of her because the commercial on TV  showed two ladies saying, "Oh look, it's Meghan Markle" and I saw the commercial so often, I finally looked up who she was.

She was a spokesperson for that clothing store.  Their brand ambassador or something.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> Remember when they posted the picture of his shoes with the holes in the soles?  I think he walked all the way to Sicily in them and they finally went to shreds so there he was in his bare feet giving his speech!


----------



## Flatsy

daisychainz said:


> I watched a Youtube video this morning and the woman was talking about giving some of her work clothes and bags to Smartworks. I laughed, and figured she must be a Meghan-follower or Vogue reader. But this girl's followers, in turn, will want to copy her, and it creates a nice effect for the program.


Smartworks seems like a good, UK charity and Meghan is really giving them thorough attention and support as their patron.  Donating clothes is great, but when I used to thrift store shop routinely, finding good things was hit or miss.  That won't work when you need to put together a work wardrobe.  I think it's great that Meghan is leveraging her connections to provide new clothes in a variety of sizes.

I have my fingers crossed that Meghan and her team are putting in their due diligence to make sure that the project's execution is above reproach.  The media is going to be all over it if they find out the clothing is being made in sweatshops or the designs are too high-fashion or the pieces are way overpriced and it looks like the designers are out for extra profit.  I do not want to hear Piers Morgan barking about it in 6 months.


----------



## marthastoo

As a casual American royal watcher who only follows the the royals here on TPF, I really have no idea how actual real people view - only what's posted here. No one my my life cares one whit about royals and couldn't tell you one member, except for maybe the Queen.  But as I've read the posts of the past year, I've come to realize the way you see Meghan is a Rorschach test that falls along political beliefs.  So it is no surprise that people are absolutely certain Meghan is X or Y, regardless how thin the evidence is. 

I am sure people will jump on this comment and disagree.    But by and large, I can guess how you view Meghan based on how you feel about certain issues.


----------



## mdcx

Imho there is no room for "hustle" or "ambition" when one marries into the BRF at the level Meghan has.
All that was supposed to be left at the door. 
She had a lifetime ahead of being admired for her beauty, beautiful clothes, pretty kids, charitable works, kindness, warmth etc etc etc. If that was not going to be enough for her (and it would not be for many/most women), then she should not have married into the BRF.
She has to adapt to the BRF, they will not adapt to her.

I knew who Meghan was before Harry as I had seen a few episodes of Suits. I thought Meghan was stunningly pretty, with an amazing figure and incredible skin. Beyond that I didn't know anything about her.


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I think most celebs who speak out on causes or politics are just trying to do good. The one I do have a problem with is Tom Sellek. Hawking reverse mortgages to senior citizens when this is potentially catastrophic for them. And he is making money doing this, not just stating his opinion.


I have a problem with Tom Selleck's support of the NRA, but from his viewpoint and the viewpoint of like-minded people, that's a good cause.

That's the trouble with Harry and Meghan venturing into political territory.  I agree with their basic viewpoints so it's all well and good.  But if they were to start saying things I don't like that would quickly change to, HELL NO, who do these dimwits think they are?  So I understand why people are wary of them aligning themselves with strictly liberal celebrities and championing liberal causes that aren't necessarily charities.

The Queen's job as head of state is supposed to be traditional and ceremonial and not clouded by bad feelings caused by her personal political allegiances.  That should carry down to the rest of the family too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> I have a problem with Tom Selleck's support of the NRA, but from his viewpoint and the viewpoint of like-minded people, that's a good cause.
> 
> That's the trouble with Harry and Meghan venturing into political territory.  I agree with their basic viewpoints so it's all well and good.  But if they were to start saying things I don't like that would quickly change to, HELL NO, who do these dimwits think they are?  So I understand why people are wary of them aligning themselves with strictly liberal celebrities and championing liberal causes that aren't necessarily charities.
> 
> The Queen's job as head of state is supposed to be traditional and ceremonial and not clouded by bad feelings caused by her personal political allegiances.  That should carry down to the rest of the family too.



Prince Charles has been one to take a stance on things that the press has deemed controversial. His next after the Queen, Prince Harry has always credited his father, so he is following his lead.

Is the public really wary or is the same people who do not like Harry, some because he is the spare, and some turned on him for being with Meghan. Yet, when Meghan or Harry a project there is public support. Not from the tabloids, but from the people. There projects produce tangible results. No one is forcing the ‘wary’ masses to buy the cookbook, Vogue cover, or even attend the Invictus Game.

People who post comments online can be any one, someone who is part of the Commonwealth, Americans, or any nationality. It is the public response that Harry and Meghan should focus on besides his father and grandmother. The public not the tabloids including Piers Morgan haven’t been scandalous by Meghan, her projects wouldn’t be successful.


----------



## stanfordmom

marthastoo said:


> As a casual American royal watcher who only follows the the royals here on TPF, I really have no idea how actual real people view - only what's posted here. No one my my life cares one whit about royals and couldn't tell you one member, except for maybe the Queen.  But as I've read the posts of the past year, I've come to realize the way you see Meghan is a Rorschach test that falls along political beliefs.  So it is no surprise that people are absolutely certain Meghan is X or Y, regardless how thin the evidence is.
> 
> I am sure people will jump on this comment and disagree.    But by and large, I can guess how you view Meghan based on how you feel about certain issues.



No disagreement here, I was just thinking this afternoon this thread is like a Rorschach test!  



bag-mania said:


> How is what Harry and Meghan accomplished this week making the world better? Meghan got criticized for her Vogue issue having a sanctimonious tone and Harry spoke at a private getaway for rich folks about how people should be doing what he himself doesn't do.



Given the current climate (no pun intended) I appreciate anyone in a leadership position who isn't making the world worse. They aren't attacking or insulting others or spreading hate. I understand some find them obnoxious or annoying but they really aren't hurting anyone...other than maybe their own reputations.


----------



## Clearblueskies

marthastoo said:


> As a casual American royal watcher who only follows the the royals here on TPF, I really have no idea how actual real people view - only what's posted here. No one my my life cares one whit about royals and couldn't tell you one member, except for maybe the Queen.  But as I've read the posts of the past year, I've come to realize the way you see Meghan is a Rorschach test that falls along political beliefs.  So it is no surprise that people are absolutely certain Meghan is X or Y, regardless how thin the evidence is.
> 
> I am sure people will jump on this comment and disagree.    But by and large, I can guess how you view Meghan based on how you feel about certain issues.


I’m British - have also spent some years living in other countries.  I don’t think British attitudes re Meghan are split along political lines at all, and I don’t think (for the vast majority - there’s always a minority isn’t there?) it’s anything to do with the colour of her skin.  Royals should stay out of politics, and not flaunt their privilege, or act up.  Meghan has joined an ancient institution and is living in a foreign country.  Imagine the reaction if I married ***** junior () and immediately started lecturing Americans about gun law, or cheap petrol??  It wouldn’t go down well.
Actually that’s a key difference - your President and head of State is a political role, the Queen is Head of State for the UK, and Head of the Commonwealth and its an absolutely apolitical role.


----------



## Gabs007

stanfordmom said:


> No disagreement here, I was just thinking this afternoon this thread is like a Rorschach test!
> 
> 
> 
> Given the current climate (no pun intended) I appreciate anyone in a leadership position who isn't making the world worse. They aren't attacking or insulting others or spreading hate. I understand some find them obnoxious or annoying but they really aren't hurting anyone...other than maybe their own reputations.




Tbh if you live in the UK, you can't escape it, I am always totally fascinated with the obsession the media has with them, and while I work in PR for people who are used to a lot of public attention, what the Royals get is on another level, your average celeb or actor can get away a bit, they have the ability to protect themselves from too much invasion, sue somebody who crosses lines, the Royals have to keep the stiff upper lip. For them being out of touch, well, they grew up this way. Condemning people for having been born into wealth and privilege is about as daft as condemning somebody for having been born poor. Personally I think it is a bit of an outdated concept, but a lot of people love it and it does bring a certain amount of tourism, it honestly doesn't bother me quite as much as a lot of other stuff that goes on.

I also can't help but see the hatred people pour on Meghan and sorry, I can't help but think a lot of it has to do with her ethnic background and the fact that she does her own thing. That plonker Piers Morgan literally lost it because she is guest editing the British Vogue and he usually is one of the guys who bows and scrapes if you just mention the Royals.

No real opinion on Meghan, but I have to say she strikes me as somebody who is not a push-over and that is refreshing, something else than an insipid Barbie who will put up with anything just to have a title. I have to admit this thing that bugged me about Kate was the message she sent to young girls, the "Just sit there, be patient, wait for the prince..." which in the 21st century is totally outdated.


----------



## marthastoo

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m British - have also spent some years living in other countries.  I don’t think British attitudes re Meghan are split along political lines at all, and I don’t think (for the vast majority - there’s always a minority isn’t there?) it’s anything to do with the colour of her skin.  Royals should stay out of politics, and not flaunt their privilege, or act up.  Meghan has joined an ancient institution and is living in a foreign country.  Imagine the reaction if I married ***** junior () and immediately started lecturing Americans about gun law, or cheap petrol??  It wouldn’t go down well.
> Actually that’s a key difference - your President and head of State is a political role, the Queen is Head of State for the UK, and Head of the Commonwealth and its an absolutely apolitical role.


You're making my point exactly.  The term "conservative" means wanting to conserve the past and traditional ways.  Some people want those in the Royal Family to stay the way it's always been and are deeply offended by any change.  I'm not making a value judgement about it - just an observation.


----------



## limom

^^
I don’t see any difference between Kate and Meghan, except  that one will be queen eventually.
I also don’t understand how British people willingly support the royal family in 2019.
What a tremendous waste of resource.
As far as Meghan doing her own thing, how can she do her own thing nowadays?
She became part of a firm with well established rules and traditions. She knew what she got into, she will either bend or be expunged one way or another,imho, See what happened with Fergie and to a certain extend Lady Dianna.  
What is that business of keeping secrets from the public who supports you?   For what? Imho, it is misguided and will accomplish nothing but antagonize the mass.
This will not end well.


----------



## Gabs007

marthastoo said:


> You're making my point exactly.  The term "conservative" means wanting to conserve the past and traditional ways.  Some people want those in the Royal Family to stay the way it's always been and are deeply offended by any change.  I'm not making a value judgement about it - just an observation.




But times have changed, they now have divorces, don't really rule the country anymore, I mean if you want to "conserve" it as it was, then how far do you go back? Henry VIII and beheadings instead of divorce, including the whole thing about people being hung, drawn and quartered or nobody of royal blood being allowed to marry a "commoner"?

The RF has adapted to the changing times, or else they would have ceased to exist, they are a bit of an anachronism anyway, but keeping them as they were, where do you start to turn back the time? Because with each new generation something has changed, I guess it has always offended the people who are not good at adapting to anything new and forcing humans to live in a way that is totally outdated, where is the point in that?

They are keeping the pageantry of the marriages and stuff to amuse the masses, though I am sure most of them would prefer to have a quiet romantic marriage with just guests of just their choice.

They are not paid to sell their souls and lives, they are paid to do some public performances, open hospitals, wave, the way some people act, you would think that they own them (the Royals).

I totally love the whole "uber" Britishness of it all, because the Royals are pretty much of German origin, so German that they had to change their name to Windsor.

I guess in a way they are role models, but again, for young women a strong and independent woman is a better role model than some insipid woman playing a 50's housewife.


----------



## Clearblueskies

marthastoo said:


> You're making my point exactly.  The term "conservative" means wanting to conserve the past and traditional ways.  Some people want those in the Royal Family to stay the way it's always been and are deeply offended by any change.  I'm not making a value judgement about it - just an observation.


That’s not what I mean, but nm.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Imagine my shock. So not just a rumour after all.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...remiere-royal-marines-memorial-kate-middleton

*Prince Harry snub? Meghan Markle and Harry ignore Royal Marines memorial for Lion King*
*PRINCE Harry passed up attending a Royal Marine’s memorial event to instead accompany Meghan Markle to the star-studded Lion King premiere in London, Express.co.uk can reveal.*
The 34-year-old had been invited to a memorial concert for the Royal Marines held annually in Deal, Kent, but opted to be Meghan’s plus one at the celerity-flanked bash, which saw the American gush over A-list pals Beyonce and Jay Z. A spokeswoman from Buckingham Palace, who now manages the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they split from Kensington Palace, said: “The Duke’s diary is set a number of months in advance and on this occasion he was unable to attend the memorial concert. The Duke attended the Mountbatten Festival of Music in March this year, where the Deal anniversary was a core theme on the night. This included specially commissioned music and video to remember those that died.

“The Duke was also introduced to and spoke at some length with a number of serving RM Bandsmen who were present at Deal at the time of the bombing.” The event was held last week at Leicester Square in the Capital and saw new mother Meghan, 37, gush about her own acting career as a Deal or No Deal model on the US version of the programme, and her part in law drama Suits. California native Meghan was also seen hugging pals Beyonce and Jay Z, who gave them parenting advice to “always find time for yourself”, the Sun reported. Beyonce was also reported to have told Meghan and Harry: “We love you guys. Your baby is so beautiful.”

The couple caused a stir at this year’s Brit Awards by thanking the UK for an award via video link that featured a painting of Meghan Markle as the Queen in the background. Since becoming a member of the royal family, Meghan - who it emerged this week guest edited British Vogue, with her list of female “trailblazers” out next month - has acquired a long list of celeb friends. She is friendly with Oprah Winfrey, who was revealed months ago to be working on a mental health documentary with Prince Harry, George and Amal Clooney, who Meghan and Harry holidayed with at their Lake Como mansion in Italy, and Gayle King, an American chat show host who was invited to Meghan’s extravagant £285,000 ($350,000) baby shower in New York along with a bunch of other celeb friends. It was reported the Clooneys paid for a private jet so the humanitarian could travel from the UK to the US in comfort.

The couple have faced growing criticism since it was revealed £2.4million of taxpayer cash was spent on a refurb for their new Frogmore cottage residence in Windsor. The pair moved out of Kensington Palace after news emerged of a feud between Meghan and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge. This began during Princess Charlotte’s “tense” bridesmaid dress fitting for Meghan’s wedding, for which Meghan asked for are fresheners to rid St George’s Chapel of a “musty” smell.
Reports also emerged Kate confronted Meghan about the manner in which she spoke to a member of the Cambridges' staff.


----------



## Clearblueskies

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Imagine my shock. So not just a rumour after all.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...remiere-royal-marines-memorial-kate-middleton
> 
> *Prince Harry snub? Meghan Markle and Harry ignore Royal Marines memorial for Lion King*
> *PRINCE Harry passed up attending a Royal Marine’s memorial event to instead accompany Meghan Markle to the star-studded Lion King premiere in London, Express.co.uk can reveal.*
> The 34-year-old had been invited to a memorial concert for the Royal Marines held annually in Deal, Kent, but opted to be Meghan’s plus one at the celerity-flanked bash, which saw the American gush over A-list pals Beyonce and Jay Z. A spokeswoman from Buckingham Palace, who now manages the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they split from Kensington Palace, said: “The Duke’s diary is set a number of months in advance and on this occasion he was unable to attend the memorial concert. The Duke attended the Mountbatten Festival of Music in March this year, where the Deal anniversary was a core theme on the night. This included specially commissioned music and video to remember those that died.
> 
> “The Duke was also introduced to and spoke at some length with a number of serving RM Bandsmen who were present at Deal at the time of the bombing.” The event was held last week at Leicester Square in the Capital and saw new mother Meghan, 37, gush about her own acting career as a Deal or No Deal model on the US version of the programme, and her part in law drama Suits. California native Meghan was also seen hugging pals Beyonce and Jay Z, who gave them parenting advice to “always find time for yourself”, the Sun reported. Beyonce was also reported to have told Meghan and Harry: “We love you guys. Your baby is so beautiful.”
> 
> The couple caused a stir at this year’s Brit Awards by thanking the UK for an award via video link that featured a painting of Meghan Markle as the Queen in the background. Since becoming a member of the royal family, Meghan - who it emerged this week guest edited British Vogue, with her list of female “trailblazers” out next month - has acquired a long list of celeb friends. She is friendly with Oprah Winfrey, who was revealed months ago to be working on a mental health documentary with Prince Harry, George and Amal Clooney, who Meghan and Harry holidayed with at their Lake Como mansion in Italy, and Gayle King, an American chat show host who was invited to Meghan’s extravagant £285,000 ($350,000) baby shower in New York along with a bunch of other celeb friends. It was reported the Clooneys paid for a private jet so the humanitarian could travel from the UK to the US in comfort.
> 
> The couple have faced growing criticism since it was revealed £2.4million of taxpayer cash was spent on a refurb for their new Frogmore cottage residence in Windsor. The pair moved out of Kensington Palace after news emerged of a feud between Meghan and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge. This began during Princess Charlotte’s “tense” bridesmaid dress fitting for Meghan’s wedding, for which Meghan asked for are fresheners to rid St George’s Chapel of a “musty” smell.
> Reports also emerged Kate confronted Meghan about the manner in which she spoke to a member of the Cambridges' staff.


Was this something he’d originally accepted?  I’m not clear.  If he’d said yes and then said no when Beyonce came along, that would not be good.


----------



## Gal4Dior

marthastoo said:


> As a casual American royal watcher who only follows the the royals here on TPF, I really have no idea how actual real people view - only what's posted here. No one my my life cares one whit about royals and couldn't tell you one member, except for maybe the Queen.  But as I've read the posts of the past year, I've come to realize the way you see Meghan is a Rorschach test that falls along political beliefs.  So it is no surprise that people are absolutely certain Meghan is X or Y, regardless how thin the evidence is.
> 
> I am sure people will jump on this comment and disagree.    But by and large, I can guess how you view Meghan based on how you feel about certain issues.



Absolutely not for me. Her politics align with mine but I don’t agree with much of her outward preference for liberal politics, especially so early in the game. 

I used to like Harry, but this Google camp has finally made me realize he’s ridiculously out of touch. Private jets when you are promoting climate change? really???


----------



## rose60610

Well, it's an annually held memorial concert for deceased Marines, so my guess it's on each year's calendar from the get go and never a surprise occurrence.  But Hey! Beyonce AND Lion King!  Sometimes those pesky occasions that mark the deaths of service members so we all get sit around on our free arses, and some cases, thrones, get in the way of really momentous events, like BEYONCE coming to town (because when-oh-when would their paths ever cross again?)


----------



## Jayne1

Gabs007 said:


> I also can't help but see the hatred people pour on Meghan and sorry, I can't help but think a lot of it has to do with her ethnic background and the fact that she does her own thing. That plonker Piers Morgan literally lost it because she is guest editing the British Vogue and he usually is one of the guys who bows and scrapes if you just mention the Royals.


I remember the hatred poured on Fergie, which was vile and Fergie was a ginger, so I do question whether this is completely race related.  

Fergie, like Meghan, loved to do her own thing, but to such an extent that she is gone from the BRF, but I never see Meghan acting up as much.  Far too smart for that.


----------



## marthastoo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Imagine my shock. So not just a rumour after all.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...remiere-royal-marines-memorial-kate-middleton
> 
> *Prince Harry snub? Meghan Markle and Harry ignore Royal Marines memorial for Lion King*
> *PRINCE Harry passed up attending a Royal Marine’s memorial event to instead accompany Meghan Markle to the star-studded Lion King premiere in London, Express.co.uk can reveal.*
> The 34-year-old had been invited to a memorial concert for the Royal Marines held annually in Deal, Kent, but opted to be Meghan’s plus one at the celerity-flanked bash, which saw the American gush over A-list pals Beyonce and Jay Z. A spokeswoman from Buckingham Palace, who now manages the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they split from Kensington Palace, said: “The Duke’s diary is set a number of months in advance and on this occasion he was unable to attend the memorial concert. The Duke attended the Mountbatten Festival of Music in March this year, where the Deal anniversary was a core theme on the night. This included specially commissioned music and video to remember those that died.
> 
> “The Duke was also introduced to and spoke at some length with a number of serving RM Bandsmen who were present at Deal at the time of the bombing.” The event was held last week at Leicester Square in the Capital and saw new mother Meghan, 37, gush about her own acting career as a Deal or No Deal model on the US version of the programme, and her part in law drama Suits. California native Meghan was also seen hugging pals Beyonce and Jay Z, who gave them parenting advice to “always find time for yourself”, the Sun reported. Beyonce was also reported to have told Meghan and Harry: “We love you guys. Your baby is so beautiful.”
> 
> The couple caused a stir at this year’s Brit Awards by thanking the UK for an award via video link that featured a painting of Meghan Markle as the Queen in the background. Since becoming a member of the royal family, Meghan - who it emerged this week guest edited British Vogue, with her list of female “trailblazers” out next month - has acquired a long list of celeb friends. She is friendly with Oprah Winfrey, who was revealed months ago to be working on a mental health documentary with Prince Harry, George and Amal Clooney, who Meghan and Harry holidayed with at their Lake Como mansion in Italy, and Gayle King, an American chat show host who was invited to Meghan’s extravagant £285,000 ($350,000) baby shower in New York along with a bunch of other celeb friends. It was reported the Clooneys paid for a private jet so the humanitarian could travel from the UK to the US in comfort.
> 
> The couple have faced growing criticism since it was revealed £2.4million of taxpayer cash was spent on a refurb for their new Frogmore cottage residence in Windsor. The pair moved out of Kensington Palace after news emerged of a feud between Meghan and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge. This began during Princess Charlotte’s “tense” bridesmaid dress fitting for Meghan’s wedding, for which Meghan asked for are fresheners to rid St George’s Chapel of a “musty” smell.
> Reports also emerged Kate confronted Meghan about the manner in which she spoke to a member of the Cambridges' staff.


Is this what qualifies as journalism?  lol  
Nothing was confirmed - it's all reading between the lines.  Now, it may be true that he decided to not go to the memorial after confirming he said he would attend, but that's not what quoted in the "article," now is it?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Jayne1 said:


> I remember the hatred poured on Fergie, which was vile and Fergie was a ginger, so I do question whether this is completely race related.
> 
> Fergie, like Meghan, loved to do her own thing, but to such an extent that she is gone from the BRF, but I never see Meghan acting up as much.  Far too smart for that.


I don’t think it’s a race thing. It was more of the fact that she stuck out in the BRF when your job is to just be a drying paint on the wall. She didn’t conform. Anyone who broke with conformity would likely not be well received.

Do people forget the public lashing that Camilla received after Charles was outed for his affair? It took years of good PR to allow her to be so well received! It could have been far worse if she, herself, decided to drive the PR train instead of ones employed by the BRF!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> I remember the hatred poured on Fergie, which was vile and Fergie was a ginger, so I do question whether this is completely race related.
> 
> Fergie, like Meghan, loved to do her own thing, but to such an extent that she is gone from the BRF, but I never see Meghan acting up as much.  Far too smart for that.


Fergie was dubbed "parasite" by the media.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

marthastoo said:


> Is this what qualifies as journalism?  lol
> Nothing was confirmed - it's all reading between the lines.  Now, it may be true that he decided to not go to the memorial after confirming he said he would attend, but that's not what quoted in the "article," now is it?


I doubt the Express would run with it if they didn't have it confirmed. 



Clearblueskies said:


> Was this something he’d originally accepted?  I’m not clear.  If he’d said yes and then said no when Beyonce came along, that would not be good.


I think the upset has to do with one of Harry's titles? I can't remember now but I'll try to look it up or if somebody else knows. I e he's a military man, so duty first.


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> I remember the hatred poured on Fergie, which was vile and Fergie was a ginger, so I do question whether this is completely race related.
> 
> Fergie, like Meghan, loved to do her own thing, but to such an extent that she is gone from the BRF, but I never see Meghan acting up as much.  Far too smart for that.


OMG, the poor woman could do no right and then she had to come to the US to make money as a WW spokesperson.
The tabloids were vicious against her and I think that with the internet, it will get even worst for Meghan and sooner if she does not make an effort to win the crowd.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> OMG, the poor woman could do no right and then she had to come to the US to make money as a WW spokesperson.
> The tabloids were vicious against her and I think that with the internet, it will get even worst for Meghan and sooner if she does not make an effort to win the crowd.


I recall Fergie being photographed with some guy sucking on her toes.  I guess maybe that was after she had already been vilified?  The she became friends with Oprah


----------



## buffym

rose60610 said:


> Well, it's an annually held memorial concert for deceased Marines, so my guess it's on each year's calendar from the get go and never a surprise occurrence.  But Hey! Beyonce AND Lion King!  Sometimes those pesky occasions that mark the deaths of service members so we all get sit around on our free arses, and some cases, thrones, get in the way of really momentous events, like BEYONCE coming to town (because when-oh-when would their paths ever cross again?)



It’s an annual mermorial, Harry has been a marine patron since 2017. He didn’t go in 2018 for whatever reason. Yet, zero criticism. Royals have to be invited before attending, we don’t know if he was invited before agreeing to the Lion King.  Plus, royals don’t attend every patron invite, he went in March to a festival supporting the Royal Marines. But hey let’s criticize to criticize.




SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I doubt the Express would run with it if they didn't have it confirmed.
> The express ran ? mark it will depend on if he was invited before agreeing to the Lion King. They have zero confirmation on which he was invited first.
> 
> 
> I think the upset has to do with one of Harry's titles? I can't remember now but I'll try to look it up or if somebody else knows. I e he's a military man, so duty first.


----------



## Flatsy

LVSistinaMM said:


> Absolutely not for me. Her politics align with mine but I don’t agree with much of her outward preference for liberal politics, especially so early in the game.


Ditto.  I'm liberal.  I agree with everything she and Harry say.  But just because the packaging of Harry and Meghan is young and woke and modern-appearing doesn't mean that they aren't still the monarchy.  They have exactly as much right to a place in politics as their racist cretin aunt, Princess Michael of Kent.  I certainly don't want her to start providing us with her political and social leadership.



LVSistinaMM said:


> I used to like Harry, but this Google camp has finally made me realize he’s ridiculously out of touch. Private jets when you are promoting climate change? really???


Harry was rightfully called out for foregoing a 2-hour car ride to take a helicopter to give a speech on climate change in the UK.  And even after that, he doesn't change one bit.  His #1 concern is his own comfort and convenience, just like the rest of the celebrities who were there.  I loved that paparazzi photo of him on the beach, caught red-handed and not happy about it.

His stubbornness and refusal to take good advice are becoming very unattractive.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Ditto.  I'm liberal.  I agree with everything she and Harry say.  But just because the packaging of Harry and Meghan is young and woke and modern-appearing doesn't mean that they aren't still the monarchy.  They have exactly as much right to a place in politics as their racist cretin aunt, Princess Michael of Kent.  I certainly don't want her to start providing us with her political and social leadership.
> 
> His stubbornness and refusal to take good advice are becoming very unattractive.



Exactly this!! Thanks, but NO Thanks to any BRF political views.

Now I’m reaching, but perhaps this is what the alleged “feud” may be about between William and Harry? Maybe William was just offering some sound advice about Harry’s relationship moving fast and to be absolutely sure about it since this IS the BRF. Maybe Harry wanted to prove him and the rest of the BRF all wrong by going through with marrying his love “against all odds.” 

This all kind of lines up with Harry being overly protective of Meghan (also likely due to the fate of his mother) and that quote of, “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”

Anyway,  it’s actually a gender bias to just assume the ladies hate each other, so why fall in that stereotype if we don’t have to?


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> I recall Fergie being photographed with some guy sucking on her toes.  I guess maybe that was after she had already been vilified?  The she became friends with Oprah


I think it was open season on her after that photo was published.  That was the point at which things really kicked off.  I can’t imagine what it was like, her fault, but poor thing.



buffym said:


> It’s an annual mermorial, Harry has been a marine patron since 2017. He didn’t go in 2018 for whatever reason. Yet, zero criticism. Royals have to be invited before attending, we don’t know if he was invited before agreeing to the Lion King.  Plus, royals don’t attend every patron invite, he went in March to a festival supporting the Royal Marines. But hey let’s criticize to criticize.


They can’t attend everything they get asked to do - but if he’d agreed to attend and then said he wouldn’t be going, it’s a legit criticism.  And choosing a party over duty, it’s not that great.


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> It’s an annual mermorial, Harry has been a marine patron since 2017. He didn’t go in 2018 for whatever reason. Yet, zero criticism. Royals have to be invited before attending, we don’t know if he was invited before agreeing to the Lion King. Plus, royals don’t attend every patron invite, he went in March to a festival supporting the Royal Marines. But hey let’s criticize to criticize.


So Harry became patron of the Royal Marines, went to this event one time shortly after taking on the patronage, but has now blown off the event two years in a row.  Do you really think that makes Harry sound good?  

Harry's profile has been raised a lot in the past few years due to his marriage, and that means a lot of things are coming under scrutiny that he used to get away with back when he was just the charming, happy-go-lucky spare.  

I don't think Harry should be required to attend the exact same events every year or meet a specific quota of engagements related to each patronage, but as I have said before, his calendar is mighty, mighty sparse overall.  He's in no position to be telling charities related to his patronages that he's too overbooked to fit them in.  

It doesn't sound that great for his spokesperson to be saying he already did a marine event in March, as if that means he's legitimately done for the year with them.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> So Harry became patron of the Royal Marines, went to this event one time shortly after taking on the patronage, but has now blown off the event two years in a row.  Do you really think that makes Harry sound good?
> 
> Harry's profile has been raised a lot in the past few years due to his marriage, and that means a lot of things are coming under scrutiny that he used to get away with back when he was just the charming, happy-go-lucky spare.
> 
> I don't think Harry should be required to attend the exact same events every year or meet a specific quota of engagements related to each patronage, but as I have said before, his calendar is mighty, mighty sparse overall.  He's in no position to be telling charities related to his patronages that he's too overbooked to fit them in.
> 
> It doesn't sound that great for his spokesperson to be saying he already did a marine event in March, as if that means he's legitimately done for the year with them.



Careful! All this criticism of Harry could potentially get you labeled as a racist against gingers! Lol!


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> They can’t attend everything they get asked to do - but if he’d agreed to attend and then said he wouldn’t be going, it’s a legit criticism. And choosing a party over duty, it’s not that great.


There's definitely nothing indicating that he was supposed to be at the event and backed out.  It's more a matter that he chose to book one event over the other.  

He attended the Deal event previously, and it's pretty certain that they continue to request his presence each year. I've read that he got the Deal invitation 11 months prior to the event and sent his regrets 6 weeks prior, with the message that his calendar was booked, but I don't think there's a good source on those specifics.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I recall Fergie being photographed with some guy sucking on her toes.  I guess maybe that was after she had already been vilified?  The she became friends with Oprah


Well, she was called the duchess of Pork prior to the toe suckage, if you recall the tabloids pitted her against Dianna from the get go.
History repeats itself, same old, same old.


----------



## Flatsy

The tabloids pitted Fergie and Diana against each other, but at the same time, those two did have a volatile friendship and wound up feuding and not on speaking terms.  The tabloids were right to a certain extent.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Well, she was called the duchess of Pork prior to the toe suckage, if you recall the tabloids pitted her against Dianna from the get go.
> History repeats itself, same old, same old.


well, unfortunately for her, she wasn't tall, slender like Diana, nor as pretty.  and the press and the public are influenced by how people look


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> So Harry became patron of the Royal Marines, went to this event one time shortly after taking on the patronage, but has now blown off the event two years in a row.  Do you really think that makes Harry sound good?
> 
> Harry's profile has been raised a lot in the past few years due to his marriage, and that means a lot of things are coming under scrutiny that he used to get away with back when he was just the charming, happy-go-lucky spare.
> 
> I don't think Harry should be required to attend the exact same events every year or meet a specific quota of engagements related to each patronage, but as I have said before, his calendar is mighty, mighty sparse overall.  He's in no position to be telling charities related to his patronages that he's too overbooked to fit them in.
> 
> It doesn't sound that great for his spokesperson to be saying he already did a marine event in March, as if that means he's legitimately done for the year with them.



You said he blew them off two years in a row, then mention he attended an event for them in March 2019. He had every right to choose to attend Lion King. We don’t know if he booked it first. So he is supposed to cancel an invite he booked because his patron invites him later.

The BRF spread out there events they rarely attend more than one event for their patronage, they usually do an event and then fundraiser for that patronage at other events.

The Lion King benefited his conservation project specifically to protect lions. He had every right to support that charity and I’m basing this on the fact the Express put a question mark and the fact he does things with the Royal Marines including an event three months ago.

But, go think about the headlines if Meghan went alone when the proceeds benefited Harry charity. You still criticize him and the press will probably put in the headlines how he attended an event for the Royal Marines before and the movie premiere benefited his project yet he chose not to attend.

The event in March focused on the Deal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> OMG, the poor woman could do no right and then she had to come to the US to make money as a WW spokesperson.
> The tabloids were vicious against her and I think that with the internet, it will get even worst for Meghan and sooner if she does not make an effort to win the crowd.


Well, she did start the whole criticism thing by acting extremely un-royal.  At first she was considered a breath of fresh air, but that got old really fast.

And then all the schemes to make money (with Andrew's approval) really tuned the Brits against her.  Andrew doesn't get the flack though, he's protected.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Harry was rightfully called out for foregoing a 2-hour car ride to take a helicopter to give a speech on climate change in the UK.  And even after that, he doesn't change one bit.  His #1 concern is his own comfort and convenience, just like the rest of the celebrities who were there.  I loved that paparazzi photo of him on the beach, caught red-handed and not happy about it.
> 
> His stubbornness and refusal to take good advice are becoming very unattractive.


The more we see of Harry, and we do see a lot lately, the less I think of him.  If Meghan gets any criticism, I think Harry is right there beside her, probably 2 steps in front, leading the way.


LVSistinaMM said:


> Now I’m reaching, but perhaps this is what the alleged “feud” may be about between William and Harry? Maybe William was just offering some sound advice about Harry’s relationship moving fast and to be absolutely sure about it since this IS the BRF. Maybe Harry wanted to prove him and the rest of the BRF all wrong by going through with marrying his love “against all odds.”


Yes, apparently it's the brothers that are at odds with each other, not the wives.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Well, she did start the whole criticism thing by acting extremely un-royal.  At first she was considered a breath of fresh air, but that got old really fast.
> 
> And then all the schemes to make money (with Andrew's approval) really tuned the Brits against her.  Andrew doesn't get the flack though, he's protected.


I'd forgotten about the financial stuff.  Andrew is protected I guess but not popular?


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> Well, she did start the whole criticism thing by acting extremely un-royal.  At first she was considered a breath of fresh air, but that got old really fast.
> 
> And then all the schemes to make money (with Andrew's approval) really tuned the Brits against her.  Andrew doesn't get the flack though, he's protected.


And he is still being protected. I read recently that Fergie received some money from Epstein and not a peep about Andrew being a close associate of the Perv. So freaking unfair.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

bag-mania said:


> How is what Harry and Meghan accomplished this week making the world better? Meghan got criticized for her Vogue issue having a sanctimonious tone and Harry spoke at a private getaway for rich folks about how people should be doing what he himself doesn't do.


Were you referring to just the past week in your post? Because I was just talking in general.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

limom said:


> And he is still being protected. I read recently that Fergie received some money from Epstein and not a peep about Andrew being a close associate of the Perv. So freaking unfair.


Like you and others here have already mentioned, I agree the way she was treated by the press as a newcomer to the BRF was awful but there has definitely been some shady things going on after that. I find it incredible but telling that most media are being silent on the Epstein affair. It's also quite coincidental that Andrew and Fergie's daughter Eugenie has just now launched a project against slavery and trafficking. Highly commendable, but still... the timing? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7310823/Princess-Eugenie-royal-launch-podcast.html


----------



## doloresmia

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Like you and others here have already mentioned, I agree the way she was treated by the press as a newcomer to the BRF was awful but there has definitely been some shady things going on after that. I find it incredible but telling that most media are being silent on the Epstein affair. It's also quite coincidental that Andrew and Fergie's daughter Eugenie has just now launched a project against slavery and trafficking. Highly commendable, but still... the timing?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7310823/Princess-Eugenie-royal-launch-podcast.html



I saw that article too! I wondered whether people will say Eugenie is acting entitled or hypocritical and political by launching an anti-slavery project when the BRF enriched themselves from slavery and Imperialism.

To be clear, I am for conservation and environmentalist, etc., and don’t see anything wrong with Harry and Meghan having opinions when their status allows them to reach and role model to so many. 

Also am clear that just because I have an opinion doesn’t mean anyone has to pay attention to it... personally would like more stories and less back and forth about people insisting on their view of whatever. 

 And now I will go back to lurking.


----------



## mdcx

It looks like Meghan's next public appearance will be the tour of South Africa in September. That will interesting, her being in public for a longer period with presumably a lot of engagements each day.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


>



It also would have been Harry's great grandmother, the Queen Mothers birthday, born 119 years ago today.


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


>



I think this is the best photo I've been of her


----------



## mrsinsyder

They have no problem using titles on Instagram posts when it's about themselves


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> They have no problem using titles on Instagram posts when it's about themselves


I'm losing track of all that's been said....do they have a problem using titles?


----------



## lulilu

I can never see the IG photos posted and the link just goes to IG not their IG.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I'm losing track of all that's been said....do they have a problem using titles?



There was a kerfuffle because when they wished happy birthday to George, Charlotte, and Louis, they didn't use titles (despite everyone else in the RF doing so).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> There was a kerfuffle because when they wished happy birthday to George, Charlotte, and Louis, they didn't use titles (despite everyone else in the RF doing so).


oh
don't know what to say about all of that
Guess I don't care much


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

MarieCurie said:


> So we are all "throwing a hissy fit" about how the elite is lecturing us peasants in a speech that is not even directed at us
> 
> Camp google is not new and it's not a climate change conference as has been reported this week, it's where the elite psyche themselves up into being better humans. They just decided to allegedly (I say this because of the elite and secretive nature around Camp Google) focus on climate change this year, which is tone deaf because they could have done more for the environment by not hosting it at all. The optics are bad with or without Prince Harry giving a "barefoot speech."


Make no mistake, this meeting was directly geared at the masses. The Google campers all have massive outreach via every kind of media and their virtue signaling at said masses has now been spurred on even further after this mutual admiration fest. It's got nothing to do with them bettering themselves or practicing what they preach. They are, as the camp itself made evident, above all that. It's like the Celebrity version of the Bilderberg meeting. Because nothing says totally above board like secrecy and lack of transparency  And Google knows all about that


----------



## gracekelly

^^ This reminds me of a college professor who loved to quote Thorstein Veblen who was known to be a critic of "conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure". The same professor also loved to quote Karl Marx's phrase that we were all part of the "lumpen proletariat."    I get the feeling that the folks at the Google Camp who reside up in nosebleed territory consider the rest of us unfortunates to be in that category.  I would agree with Veblen that they (Google Campers) are definitely in the former group.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Make no mistake, this meeting was directly geared at the masses. The Google campers all have massive outreach via every kind of media and their virtue signaling at said masses has now been spurred on even further after this mutual admiration fest. It's got nothing to do with them bettering themselves or practicing what they preach. They are, as the camp itself made evident, above all that. It's like the Celebrity version of the Bilderberg meeting. Because nothing says totally above board like secrecy and lack of transparency  And Google knows all about that


If they can do something about global warming with their influence, I don't mind.  Someone needs to do something about this.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> They have no problem using titles on Instagram posts when it's about themselves





mrsinsyder said:


> There was a kerfuffle because when they wished happy birthday to George, Charlotte, and Louis, they didn't use titles (despite everyone else in the RF doing so).



They did it one time, it was one of their first post. After the criticism they made sure to use people’s titles.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Oh, they do something about global warming alright.....by owning and maintaining multiple residences of many thousands of square feet, flying private, motoring around in mega yachts and leaving a huge carbon footprint in their wake.


----------



## sdkitty

Cavalier Girl said:


> Oh, they do something about global warming alright.....by owning and maintaining multiple residences of many thousands of square feet, flying private, motoring around in mega yachts and leaving a huge carbon footprint in their wake.


I said with their influence, since that is what they are allegedly doing - using their influence


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I meant no disrespect.  It is, of course, what I hope as well.


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> They did it one time, it was one of their first post. After the criticism they made sure to use people’s titles.


They did it to each child and there was criticism after the first one. The first at the end of April and the most recent in June. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-harry-instagram-sussexroyal-prince-louis/amp

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...m-sussexroyal-princess-charlotte-birthday/amp

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...han-markle-prince-harry-george-birthday-wish/


----------



## Morgan R

It really is such a faux criticism to me. In real life Harry and Meghan aren't referring to George, Charlotte, and Louis as HRH Prince George, HRH Princess Charlotte, HRH Prince Louis they are referring to them by just their names because Harry & Meghan are their uncle & aunt so the Sussex Royal birthday comments for  each of the kids birthday reflected that. When they wished William a Happy Birthday by just his title and not his name people in the comments found the comment "cold" even though that is what they said they wanted when the kids weren't referred to by their titles. 

Harry is somewhat notorious for calling his relatives not by their titles but by their actual names/a nickname so the fact that some are commenting  about the Sussex Royal comment birthday wishes be a little less informal is interesting. In interviews and at engagements over the years Harry has been heard calling William the name "Wills", he has called Prince George and Princes Charlotte just by their names, has called Charles by the name "Pa", and has called Queen Elizabeth II by the name "Granny".

Even in the Sussex Royal post while it says Meghan's title Harry calls Meghan "Wife" (which he often says if he doesn't call Meghan by her name or her title) and then it is signed "H" rather then Harry's title. The birthday message for Meghan on Sussex Royal is both formal and informal.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Morgan R said:


> It is such a faux criticism to me. In real life Harry and Meghan aren't referring to George, Charlotte, and Louis as HRH Prince George, HRH Princess Charlotte, HRH Prince Louis they are referring them by just their names because Harry & Meghan are their uncle & aunt so the Sussex Royal birthday comments for  each of the kids birthday reflected that. When they wished William a Happy Birthday by just his title and not his name people in the comments found the comment "cold" even though that is what they said they wanted when the kids weren't referred to by their titles.
> 
> Harry is somewhat notorious for calling his relatives not by their titles but by their actual names/a nickname so the fact that some are commenting  about the Sussex Royal comment birthday wishes be a little less informal is interesting. In interviews and at engagements over the years Harry has been heard calling William the name "Wills", he has called George and Charlotte just by their names, has called Charles by the name "Pa", and has called Queen Elizabeth II by the name "Granny".
> 
> Even in the Sussex Royal post while it says Meghan's title Harry calls Meghan "Wife" (which he often says if he doesn't call Meghan by her name or her title) and then it is signed "H". The birthday message for Meghan on Sussex Royal is both formal and informal.



I think the title thing is nonsense but (again) these are the customs of their family - the family she chose to marry into. All the other family Instagram accounts used titles, why wouldn’t H and M? These are the customs and rituals she signed up for. It just came across as petty to me.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> I think the title thing is nonsense but (again) these are the customs of their family - the family she chose to marry into. All the other family Instagram accounts used titles, why wouldn’t H and M? These are the customs and rituals she signed up for. It just came across as petty to me.


I get the impression Meghan enjoys challenging customs and rituals at every turn.


----------



## loogirl

buffym said:


> They did it one time, it was one of their first post. After the criticism they made sure to use people’s titles.


Um they JUST did it again for George’s birthday, so no, they did not “make sure to use people’s titles” after the criticism. Like you don’t even know anything about the people you worship lmaooo


----------



## Gal4Dior

mdcx said:


> I get the impression Meghan enjoys challenging customs and rituals at every turn.



If she does, then she’s got to accept the press and public will call her out each time. Doesn’t this get old? I mean, change the world! It just doesn’t have to be everything at once! Personally, after all the press hate, I would lay low, follow the rules to the T and settle into the traditional role before changing anything. It’s would be much easier if she was born into this role and wanted to change things, but now she just “appears” to be an outsider coming in to tear down the traditions of the BRF.


----------



## buffym

loogirl said:


> Um they JUST did it again for George’s birthday, so no, they did not “make sure to use people’s titles” after the criticism. Like you don’t even know anything about the people you worship lmaooo



I don’t worship Harry and Meghan, I don’t feel the need to criticize everything people do. If I don’t like a person I stay out threads about them. 


They used the correct titles for Prince Phillip and the Queen.

The pictures of the Cambridge children are not on their Instagram. They commented on the post that already had the kids title in it. We they make posts which on their Instagram they use the correct title.

I choose to not be outraged about little things.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> If she does, then she’s got to accept the press and public will call her out each time. Doesn’t this get old? I mean, change the world! It just doesn’t have to be everything at once! Personally, after all the press hate, I would lay low, follow the rules to the T and settle into the traditional role before changing anything. It’s would be much easier if she was born into this role and wanted to change things, but now she just “appears” to be an outsider coming in to tear down the traditions of the BRF.



If she lays low she will be called lazy, what rule actually rule not tabloids make it up just for her that other royals do has she broken? 

She guest edited Vogue. Three other royals have guest edited and every most BRF have been in Vogue except Zara and Sophie who did Harpers Bazaar. She interviewed Michelle *****, Michelle ***** wrote a letter for the Duchess of Cambridge’s Huffpost edit. Harry interviewed President *****.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> If she lays low she will be called lazy, what rule actually rule not tabloids make it up just for her that other royals do has she broken?
> 
> She guest edited Vogue. Three other royals have guest edited and every most BRF have been in Vogue except Zara and Sophie who did Harpers Bazaar. She interviewed Michelle *****, Michelle ***** wrote a letter for the Duchess of Cambridge’s Huffpost edit. Harry interviewed President *****.



For someone who states that you don’t get outraged over little things, this sure seems like something little to be that stressed about! Lol.

She’s going to be written about no matter what. She’s “celebrity” fodder, and as I said - if I were in her place, I would show up to the events Thad are scheduled for me, smile, wave, and be warm. There is nothing wrong with what she’s doing, just doing it now before the commonwealth gets to know her can set the wrong tone. That’s all. Chill.

The rest of the BRF knows this so a lot don’t like to engage in things that could be deemed controversial, which also makes them boring as heck.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> For someone who states that you don’t get outraged over little things, this sure seems like something little to be that stressed about! Lol.
> 
> She’s going to be written about no matter what. She’s “celebrity” fodder, and as I said - if I were in her place, I would show up to the events Thad are scheduled for me, smile, wave, and be warm. There is nothing wrong with what she’s doing, just doing it now before the commonwealth gets to know her can set the wrong tone. That’s all. Chill.
> 
> The rest of the BRF knows this so a lot don’t like to engage in things that could be deemed controversial, which also makes them boring as heck.



Yes, but if you read the following post it will show the poster said was untrue. Celebrity fodder does not equal a lie.



loogirl said:


> Except that you do in fact appear to get super worked up over MM. You have nothing better to do than dig up receipts of when MM managed to use Royal titles properly LOL. Like chill. Now. I was referring to the kid birthday posts not all posts in general where she may have been addressing a royal. I mean even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
> 
> Anyhoo it amuses me greatly that you take this so seriously. Lookit meeee I have receipts of MM being amazingggggg. *Pats head*


“ I have nothing better to do than bring receipts” why would you lie. 

But most importantly look at your responses, you should probably take your own advice.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Gabs007 said:


> Fergie did often behave like the bull in the China shop, one scandal after another, but there was never anything like the stuff with Meghan. I think she was just totally out of her debt, had no clue what she was doing and thought she could get away with it, she was also really terrible with money and boyfriends. If you look at social media, if you see somebody making nasty comments about M, check the TL of them, you will see that they usually tweet or post quite a lot of racist rubbish. I think there is an element of the population that simply drifts to the extreme right


If Twitter and Instagram were around when Fergie was most prominent in the news the coverage would have been intense.  You’re not comparing like with like, social media has made a massive difference to the volume of coverage, and the tone of it.


----------



## Gabs007

Clearblueskies said:


> If Twitter and Instagram were around when Fergie was most prominent in the news the coverage would have been intense.  You’re not comparing like with like, social media has made a massive difference to the volume of coverage, and the tone of it.




I don't buy it at all, you possibly have a reason to deny the racism that is clearly there, so have a lovely day, personally I prefer reality to weird agendas


----------



## Clearblueskies

Gabs007 said:


> I don't buy it at all, you possibly have a reason to deny the racism that is clearly there, so have a lovely day, personally I prefer reality to weird agendas


Suit yourself


----------



## myown

to all the people criticize Harry for not attending this or that, remember Will and Kate took way more maternity leave and everyone thought that's perfectly fine.
Harry actually took none, and now he gets a backlash when he does take days off. 

I have no idea how many events H&M attend actually.


----------



## myown

I just wanted to mention: Halleluja we moved on from Meghans dad! Finally left him behind!


----------



## BagOuttaHell

He'll be back. lol. They can't help themselves.

I wonder how she spent her birthday.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> If they can do something about global warming with their influence, I don't mind.  Someone needs to do something about this.


What can those hypocrites do, other than lecture the rest of us?


----------



## rose60610

As for the RF being boring, well, I think they'd wish Andrew had been much less "boring".  There's nothing wrong being boring. But we live in a social media world that thrives on drama, and the more the better.  Normal people don't get "publicity". Kids feel pressured to be outrageous just to get attention, or "likes".  I'll hand it to QEII and Prince Phillip for being even keeled for decades, and despite their ages, they don't appear to have undergone any cognitive decline. Maybe there's something to be said for "boring". Albeit the castle and palace life is a heck of a lot more exciting life than mine.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> As for the RF being boring, well, I think they'd wish Andrew had been much less "boring".  There's nothing wrong being boring. But we live in a social media world that thrives on drama, and the more the better.  Normal people don't get "publicity". Kids feel pressured to be outrageous just to get attention, or "likes".  I'll hand it to QEII and Prince Phillip for being even keeled for decades, and despite their ages, they don't appear to have undergone any cognitive decline. Maybe there's something to be said for "boring". Albeit the castle and palace life is a heck of a lot more exciting life than mine.


If I'm not mistaken Phillip had had his share of fooling around with other women....just saying


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If I'm not mistaken Phillip had had his share of fooling around with other women....just saying



Yep, those were the rumors. The women who allegedly had affairs with him always denied it and so did Philip. He has outlived those women so I guess we'll never know for sure.

Of course, back in the 50s and 60s the media would never dream of exposing the personal affairs of royalty or world leaders. JFK's affairs were well-known but never reported. After he was assassinated his reputation was kept pristine for a couple of decades. Only after a lot of time passed did the dirt start coming out.

Today there is no line between news and gossip media. They are completely blended.


----------



## Swanky

Y'all wearing us out again. . .  talk about the couple NOT members.  This thread should not be confrontational.



Swanky said:


> This thread is getting pretty petty. . .  can y'all kindly add members to the Ignore Use list, take the bickering to PM, stay on topic, etc. . . . ?


----------



## CeeJay

Swanky said:


> Y'all wearing us out again. . .  talk about the couple NOT members.  This thread should not be confrontational.


Swanky, you know that I agree with this 100% .. but it seems to be the same people making the "comments".  Instead of having to put people on "Ignore", what ever happened to just banning the person for a bit .. you know, a "time out".  Maybe that might make them reconsider their commentary???  Just a thought ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Swanky

It's not only a couple that are being constantly reported, it's dozens of posts every week for many. . .  and it's not always black and white.  
I personally don't read this thread, so I only see what's reported, so I can't possibly note patterns or keep up.  It just needs to stop, by anyone participating.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Yep, those were the rumors. The women who allegedly had affairs with him always denied it and so did Philip. He has outlived those women so I guess we'll never know for sure.
> 
> Of course, back in the 50s and 60s the media would never dream of exposing the personal affairs of royalty or world leaders. JFK's affairs were well-known but never reported. After he was assassinated his reputation was kept pristine for a couple of decades. Only after a lot of time passed did the dirt start coming out.


Apparently it was a lot more than just rumours, but he fulfilled his royal duties as was expected and the Queen seemed to understand the way things went (unlike Diana who was never happy about anything) and everything seemed to work for the Queen and Philip.

But then there were the rumours about Andrew's father, and yes, I'm old and remember things from decades ago.  lol


----------



## A1aGypsy

Reporting is interesting. Everyone keeps saying here that no one is mentioning Epstein’s connection to Andrew but, every report I see in the US and Canada follows Epstein’s name with “he engaged in all kinds of nonsense with Prince Andrew and Fergie took a bunch of money from him.” (Paraphrasing)


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently it was a lot more than just rumours, but he fulfilled his royal duties as was expected and the Queen seemed to understand the way things went (unlike Diana who was never happy about anything) and everything seemed to work for the Queen and Philip.
> 
> But then there were the rumours about Andrew's father, and yes, I'm old and remember things from decades ago.  lol


Yes, apparently there are a few Philips around. 
And I've heard that Andrew rumours too. 
Plus the Margaret rumours too which is fairly local to me


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently it was a lot more than just rumours, but he fulfilled his royal duties as was expected and the Queen seemed to understand the way things went (unlike Diana who was never happy about anything) and everything seemed to work for the Queen and Philip.
> 
> But then there were the rumours about Andrew's father, and yes, I'm old and remember things from decades ago.  lol


but wouldn't you say Diana's situation was different?  Charles was in love with another woman and had been even before they were married.....


----------



## rose60610

We have to keep on track! This thread is only supposed to be about H & M. You want the Mods to bust us again? 

Maybe somebody can start a thread on Prince Philip, because there seems to be a lot of juice THERE. And Andrew/Epstein, even I heard rumors of that for years.

Think H & M are being shipped off to S Africa as a reboot, get them far away to practice being re-likable in case they step in it again?


----------



## chowlover2

rose60610 said:


> We have to keep on track! This thread is only supposed to be about H & M. You want the Mods to bust us again?
> 
> Maybe somebody can start a thread on Prince Philip, because there seems to be a lot of juice THERE. And Andrew/Epstein, even I heard rumors of that for years.
> 
> Think H & M are being shipped off to S Africa as a reboot, get them far away to practice being re-likable in case they step in it again?


H & M may turn out to be this eras Duke & Duchess of Windsor...


----------



## caramelize126

A previous poster made a comment a few pages earlier ( and I apologize I can’t remember who at the moment) but it was about how Harry might be more into the “celeb lifestyle” than we think. It’s unfortunate that Meghan gets the criticism when it might be Harry encouraging the behavior all along. Besides Harry’s antics in Vegas and nights clubbing at Boujis ( where celebs always hung out) , I don’t remember much about the media coverage from his earlier years. I wonder if hes always liked the attention?  Does anyone remember if Harry’s teenage antics appeared to be more wild or in the media more than William’s?


----------



## caramelize126

chowlover2 said:


> H & M may turn out to be this eras Duke & Duchess of Windsor...



This! With the exception of Harry not being next in line, there are so many similarities ( the rebelling and going against BRF traditions, isolating themselves, etc.)

I’ve always read that the Duke of Windsor really tried to get back in with the family with no success. I wonder if he eventually regretted how it all went down. And if Harry will eventually regret it


----------



## chowlover2

caramelize126 said:


> This! With the exception of Harry not being next in line, there are so many similarities ( the rebelling and going against BRF traditions, isolating themselves, etc.)
> 
> I’ve always read that the Duke of Windsor really tried to get back in with the family with no success. I wonder if he eventually regretted how it all went down. And if Harry will eventually regret it


There is a really interesting documentary on Netflix, I think it was called " The Nazi Prince." Both Duke and Duchess of Windsor were sympathetic to many of the Nazi leaders, hosting and attending parties and such. If the Duke had remained King, there might have been a very different ending to World War II.


----------



## chowlover2

caramelize126 said:


> A previous poster made a comment a few pages earlier ( and I apologize I can’t remember who at the moment) but it was about how Harry might be more into the “celeb lifestyle” than we think. It’s unfortunate that Meghan gets the criticism when it might be Harry encouraging the behavior all along. Besides Harry’s antics in Vegas and nights clubbing at Boujis ( where celebs always hung out) , I don’t remember much about the media coverage from his earlier years. I wonder if hes always liked the attention?  Does anyone remember if Harry’s teenage antics appeared to be more wild or in the media more than William’s?


I don't remember William ever being really wild before marriage. Harry has always been the party boy.


----------



## JetSetGo!

rose60610 said:


> Maybe somebody can start a thread on Prince Philip, because there seems to be a lot of juice THERE. And Andrew/Epstein, even I heard rumors of that for years.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> We have to keep on track! This thread is only supposed to be about H & M. You want the Mods to bust us again?
> 
> Maybe somebody can start a thread on Prince Philip, because there seems to be a lot of juice THERE. And Andrew/Epstein, even I heard rumors of that for years.
> 
> Think H & M are being shipped off to S Africa as a reboot, get them far away to practice being re-likable in case they step in it again?


I'd prefer to believe if they go to Africa it will be because that's that they want to do.....not that they are being shipped off


----------



## FreeSpirit71

A1aGypsy said:


> Reporting is interesting. *Everyone keeps saying here that no one is mentioning Epstein’s connection to Andrew but, every report I see in the US and Canada *follows Epstein’s name with “he engaged in all kinds of nonsense with Prince Andrew and Fergie took a bunch of money from him.” (Paraphrasing)



I think when people are speaking of that they mean in Britain, where the story seems to have been smothered.


----------



## Gal4Dior

caramelize126 said:


> A previous poster made a comment a few pages earlier ( and I apologize I can’t remember who at the moment) but it was about how Harry might be more into the “celeb lifestyle” than we think. It’s unfortunate that Meghan gets the criticism when it might be Harry encouraging the behavior all along. Besides Harry’s antics in Vegas and nights clubbing at Boujis ( where celebs always hung out) , I don’t remember much about the media coverage from his earlier years. I wonder if hes always liked the attention?  Does anyone remember if Harry’s teenage antics appeared to be more wild or in the media more than William’s?


I doubt Harry is encouraging Meghan to do anything she doesn’t feel comfortable doing. They are like two peas in a pod, and I really think it’s the other way around - Harry so smitten that he’s totally ok with Meghan doing anything she darn well pleases and supports her regardless of missteps. If you think about it, that’s the kind of relationship you can’t complain about! Lol!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> Reporting is interesting. Everyone keeps saying here that no one is mentioning Epstein’s connection to Andrew but, every report I see in the US and Canada follows Epstein’s name with “he engaged in all kinds of nonsense with Prince Andrew and Fergie took a bunch of money from him.” (Paraphrasing)


That's what a few of us meant when we said he was protected. Even if there is a line or two in the British papers, will there be any consequences for him?



caramelize126 said:


> A previous poster made a comment a few pages earlier ( and I apologize I can’t remember who at the moment) but it was about how Harry might be more into the “celeb lifestyle” than we think. It’s unfortunate that Meghan gets the criticism when it might be Harry encouraging the behavior all along. Besides Harry’s antics in Vegas and nights clubbing at Boujis ( where celebs always hung out) , I don’t remember much about the media coverage from his earlier years. I wonder if hes always liked the attention?  Does anyone remember if Harry’s teenage antics appeared to be more wild or in the media more than William’s?


Harry was wild, but Will always seemed to know his place and position and nothing too terrible if I remember.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

If any Meghan-fans have 1.8 million to lay down, her old Hollywood house could be yours. It's for sale as of today.

https://www.tmz.com/2019/08/05/megh...s-home-for-sale/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange

"Before the palace, Meghan Markle was shacking up in a chic Los Angles pad smack-dab in the middle of Tinseltown -- a home you can now call your own ... if you've got the cash.

The Duchess of Sussex's former L.A. house -- where she lived when she worked as an actress, before Prince Harry -- is currently for sale at a cool $1.8 million. It's in the mid-Wishire/Miracle Mile area near Hancock Park ... so close to just about everything Hollywood.

Meghan's old crib is a 4-bed, 3-bath colonial style house with over 2,000 sq. feet of space and an open floor plan. It's got a fireplace in the living room and a huge kitchen with an eat-in breakfast area. The interior of the home is super modern, with stainless steel appliances and hardwood floors throughout. It's got a pretty sweet backyard too, with a built-in awning.

A property fit for a West Coast king, really ... or a duchess, we should say."


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If any Meghan-fans have 1.8 million to lay down, her old Hollywood house could be yours. It's for sale as of today.
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2019/08/05/megh...s-home-for-sale/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange
> 
> "Before the palace, Meghan Markle was shacking up in a chic Los Angles pad smack-dab in the middle of Tinseltown -- a home you can now call your own ... if you've got the cash.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's former L.A. house -- where she lived when she worked as an actress, before Prince Harry -- is currently for sale at a cool $1.8 million. It's in the mid-Wishire/Miracle Mile area near Hancock Park ... so close to just about everything Hollywood.
> 
> Meghan's old crib is a 4-bed, 3-bath colonial style house with over 2,000 sq. feet of space and an open floor plan. It's got a fireplace in the living room and a huge kitchen with an eat-in breakfast area. The interior of the home is super modern, with stainless steel appliances and hardwood floors throughout. It's got a pretty sweet backyard too, with a built-in awning.
> 
> A property fit for a West Coast king, really ... or a duchess, we should say."


Well then perhaps they could put the proceeds towards the cost of the Frogmore renovations which are now well running at well over £3m


----------



## Lodpah

Have you all read the "Harry Markle Wordpress?" Sounds like someone in the know. There's a picture of Meghan at an event while Harry is with his old love. It's hilarious.  I think it's one of Harry's old pals or a publicist. 

https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## chicaloca

Lodpah said:


> Have you all read the "Harry Markle Wordpress?" Sounds like someone in the know. There's a picture of Meghan at an event while Harry is with his old love. It's hilarious.  I think it's one of Harry's old pals or a publicist.
> 
> https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com



In the know? This site looks like a badly written anti-Sussex tumblr blog.


----------



## chicaloca

It is a Royal reporter fantasy that the Sussexes are “unpopular” which is why those reporters  are working overtime printing 50 negative articles a day hoping life imitates fiction. The Sussexes clearly drive website traffic. The Sussex Instagram account was the fastest ever to 1 million. Everything Meghan wears sells out. Their popularity goes beyond the UK. Harry & Meghan together are a global force.

Only in Royal reporter fantasyland would work ethic and initiatives that yield positive results for charity be considered missteps. Meghan’s Vogue issue is a huge hit and has sold out on many online sights and local stores. Her “misstep” has not only brought attention to her Smartworks patronage but to the charitable initiatives of 16 other women she featured. The head of SmartWorks credits Meghan with a  double digit increase in the number of women they have helped in July alone. Of course Royal reporters aren’t interested in this info as it doesn’t suit the “misstep” narrative. Meghan has several other patronages with projects likely to be unveiled. I’m sure these charities hope she continues her “missteps” on their behalf. 

I trust that Meghan and Harry’s patronages are very happy they got these two passionate people who put in work behind the scenes that yields tangible results and aren’t just “keen” to introduce vague initiatives and show up for photo ops.


----------



## buffym

Article about Meghan’s September venture has already produced some results 

Meghan Markle Charity Link Boosts Marks & Spencer Clothing Unit
By Ellen Milligan
August 1, 2019, 5:14 AM EDT
Duchess is also supporting collections with John Lewis, Jigsaw
M&S has long been struggling to boost its clothing sales

Marks & Spencer Group Plc has a new supporter for its troubled clothing business: Meghan Markle.

The Duchess of Sussex is calling on the U.K. retailer to design a clothing collection with Smart Works, a charity for working women that she backs. Other collaborators include department-store operator John Lewis Partnership Plc, apparel chain Jigsaw and designer Misha Nonoo.

It’s a much-needed endorsement for Marks & Spencer, whose clothing chief Jill McDonald stepped down last month after less than two years in the role. Chief Executive Officer Steve Rowe now oversees that part of the business, which has been losing ground to online fashion retailers like Asos Plc and Boohoo Group Plc. Sales in M&S’s clothing and home business fell 3.6% for the 12 months through March.

Marks & Spencer shares rose as much as 1.8% early Thursday in London.

The retailer has worked for two years with the charity, which helps women enter the corporate world by providing them with appropriate clothing for interviews. For each item purchased from the partners, one is donated to Smart Works.

The charity’s current clothing offering can sometimes “be a potpourri of mismatched sizes and colors, not always the right stylistic choices or range of sizes,” the duchess wrote in a Vogue article. Under the collaboration, confirmed by a Marks & Spencer spokeswoman, Markle said she asked her new partners “if they were willing to design a capsule collection of more classic options for a workwear wardrobe.”

Smart Works says it dressed 27% more women this July than the previous year as it got a boost from Markle’s involvement as a royal patron.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bl...arity-link-boosts-marks-spencer-clothing-unit


----------



## kemilia

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If any Meghan-fans have 1.8 million to lay down, her old Hollywood house could be yours. It's for sale as of today.
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2019/08/05/megh...s-home-for-sale/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange
> 
> "Before the palace, Meghan Markle was shacking up in a chic Los Angles pad smack-dab in the middle of Tinseltown -- a home you can now call your own ... if you've got the cash.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's former L.A. house -- where she lived when she worked as an actress, before Prince Harry -- is currently for sale at a cool $1.8 million. It's in the mid-Wishire/Miracle Mile area near Hancock Park ... so close to just about everything Hollywood.
> 
> Meghan's old crib is a 4-bed, 3-bath colonial style house with over 2,000 sq. feet of space and an open floor plan. It's got a fireplace in the living room and a huge kitchen with an eat-in breakfast area. The interior of the home is super modern, with stainless steel appliances and hardwood floors throughout. It's got a pretty sweet backyard too, with a built-in awning.
> 
> A property fit for a West Coast king, really ... or a duchess, we should say."


There are decorative bars on all the windows, was this in a bad part of Tinseltown? (I don't know Tinseltown at all)


----------



## buffym

kemilia said:


> There are decorative bars on all the windows, was this in a bad part of Tinseltown? (I don't know Tinseltown at all)



The home was in Hancock Park. It’s median homes sell for $3 million, but it also has a lot of burglaries. The area includes Well known Melrose Drive.


“The most dangerous neighborhood in Los Angeles for burglaries is actually one of the priciest enclaves in town, where the median home value is $3.3 million. Hancock Park, home to actors such as Mindy Kaling, George Takei, and once upon a time the likes of Clark Gable and Mae West, had more burglaries per capita than any other area in the city in the first half of 2018.

According to Los Angeles Police Department data, between January and June, Hancock Park registered 61 burglaries, up from 55 during the same period a year earlier. The neighborhood has a population of around 10,000. That translates roughly to a burglary rate of 570. (The rate is calculated by dividing the number of reports by the population, then multiplying by 100,000.)” reported Crosstown.”

https://www.larchmontbuzz.com/featu...bbed-worst-neighborhood-in-la-for-burglaries/









https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.el.../meghan-markle-los-angeles-house-tour-photos/


----------



## jehaga

kemilia said:


> There are decorative bars on all the windows, was this in a bad part of Tinseltown? (I don't know Tinseltown at all)


Miracle Mile (I drove through that part of town almost everyday in the 80’s going to UCLA) is considered fancy for poor people in LA but definitely not where west side snobs would live. Like most parts of LA, it has and is undergoing revitalization. 1.8 for a house is not a price range that can be found in a truly desirable area in LA. The house looks nice, but in LA, never is the adage, location, location, location, truer.


----------



## minababe

buffym said:


> The home was in Hancock Park. It’s median homes sell for $3 million, but it also has a lot of burglaries. The area includes Well known Melrose Drive.
> 
> 
> “The most dangerous neighborhood in Los Angeles for burglaries is actually one of the priciest enclaves in town, where the median home value is $3.3 million. Hancock Park, home to actors such as Mindy Kaling, George Takei, and once upon a time the likes of Clark Gable and Mae West, had more burglaries per capita than any other area in the city in the first half of 2018.
> 
> According to Los Angeles Police Department data, between January and June, Hancock Park registered 61 burglaries, up from 55 during the same period a year earlier. The neighborhood has a population of around 10,000. That translates roughly to a burglary rate of 570. (The rate is calculated by dividing the number of reports by the population, then multiplying by 100,000.)” reported Crosstown.”
> 
> https://www.larchmontbuzz.com/featu...bbed-worst-neighborhood-in-la-for-burglaries/
> 
> View attachment 4509160
> View attachment 4509161
> View attachment 4509162
> View attachment 4509163
> View attachment 4509164
> View attachment 4509165
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.el.../meghan-markle-los-angeles-house-tour-photos/



are we sure this is true hers?
she lived the last 7 years before Meeting Harry in Toronto.


----------



## bag-mania

minababe said:


> are we sure this is true hers?
> she lived the last 7 years before Meeting Harry in Toronto.



Whoever wrote the article conveniently left out a lot of information. Meghan lived in that house back when she was married to her first husband, the producer Trevor Engelson. It was one of a few houses in LA the couple rented. They never owned the house and it's unclear how long she lived in it.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Whoever wrote the article conveniently left out a lot of information. Meghan lived in that house back when she was married to her first husband, the producer Trevor Engelson. It was one of a few houses in LA the couple rented. They never owned the house and it's unclear how long she lived in it.


Well, thanks for the update.  I wondered how she could afford that house, but thought she may have had a large mortgage.

Anyway, the house looks fabulous with great staging. Everything looks better before people drag in all their stuff.  lol

I read all those palm trees are dying, not native and use too much water.  That's the one thing I don't like about the house - those palm tress. Everything else is so pretty.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Whoever wrote the article conveniently left out a lot of information. Meghan lived in that house back when she was married to her first husband, the producer Trevor Engelson. It was one of a few houses in LA the couple rented. They never owned the house and it's unclear how long she lived in it.


Exactly.  Just smart PR to attract buyers.  This is not real Hancock Park and they don't say that it is.  It is Mid-Wilshire.  Big difference and even Hancock Park has big crime issues because it is so close to Hollywood.  I attended a charity meeting one night at a lovely home and the expensive new car of a friend was stolen from the front of the house during the meeting.


----------



## CeeJay

Burglaries are ever present in LA, REGARDLESS of where you live!  Mind you, Beverly Hills is probably the hardest to get hit because those folks can afford very expensive security systems  - AND -  you do not have the homeless population in BH (_they are big-time everywhere else in LA_).  In addition to the homeless stealing items (_you can't have a package delivered and have it on your doorstep because they follow those UPS, FedEx, USPS trucks like mad_) right off your porch regardless of whether or not you have a security system that has cameras; the other problem, is the "professional" thieves!  When my house was broken into (_and yes, I do have a Security System_), the LAPD told me that it was definitely the "professional" crew that stole my items because they were quick (in & out in less than 15 minutes).  Pissed me off big-time because we had just moved into our house and I had yet to "store" my expensive handbags in a locked closet (_yeah - $16k worth of handbags right out the window_)!!!  Thank god that they didn't get any Jewelry (_I have a VERY HEAVY Bank safe - and yes, I had packed all that stuff_).  Needless to say, we upgraded our Security System to the hilt after this; It TOTALLY sucks to be robbed, and it is *THE WORST thing* about living out here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  Just smart PR to attract buyers.  This is not real Hancock Park and they don't say that it is.  It is Mid-Wilshire.  Big difference and even Hancock Park has big crime issues because it is so close to Hollywood.  I attended a charity meeting one night at a lovely home and the expensive new car of a friend was stolen from the front of the house during the meeting.


Yup, not surprised one bit .. I continue to drive my "Boston Bomber" (HA) .. in other words, an old Honda Element (which I love) that has bumps, dings & scratches!  If you drive an expensive car, even though you see them A-PLENTY out here, there is a good chance that at some point, it will be stolen (and these are always the 'professional' crew).


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Yup, not surprised one bit .. I continue to drive my "Boston Bomber" (HA) .. in other words, an old Honda Element (which I love) that has bumps, dings & scratches!  If you drive an expensive car, even though you see them A-PLENTY out here, there is a good chance that at some point, it will be stolen (and these are always the 'professional' crew).


DH and I used to keep an older third car just to use for Dodger Stadium, Coliseum, Rose Bowl and the airport.  I had the exact car that was stolen in Hancock Park and mine was new at the time as well. I was probably saved that night because I carpooled with two other women.    When I had to go back to the same location subsequently, the homeowner told me to park in her gated driveway.  She didn't want a repeat!  The funny thing in retrospect was that she took the car theft in stride!  Must happen way too often.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Burglaries are ever present in LA, REGARDLESS of where you live!  Mind you, Beverly Hills is probably the hardest to get hit because those folks can afford very expensive security systems  - AND -  you do not have the homeless population in BH (_they are big-time everywhere else in LA_).  In addition to the homeless stealing items (_you can't have a package delivered and have it on your doorstep because they follow those UPS, FedEx, USPS trucks like mad_) right off your porch regardless of whether or not you have a security system that has cameras; the other problem, is the "professional" thieves!  When my house was broken into (_and yes, I do have a Security System_), the LAPD told me that it was definitely the "professional" crew that stole my items because they were quick (in & out in less than 15 minutes).  Pissed me off big-time because we had just moved into our house and I had yet to "store" my expensive handbags in a locked closet (_yeah - $16k worth of handbags right out the window_)!!!  Thank god that they didn't get any Jewelry (_I have a VERY HEAVY Bank safe - and yes, I had packed all that stuff_).  Needless to say, we upgraded our Security System to the hilt after this; It TOTALLY sucks to be robbed, and it is *THE WORST thing* about living out here!



That is awful. At least the police came out and took a report. Here in the bay area, they tell you go online and fill one out and best of luck to ya!


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Burglaries are ever present in LA, REGARDLESS of where you live!  Mind you, Beverly Hills is probably the hardest to get hit because those folks can afford very expensive security systems  - AND -  you do not have the homeless population in BH (_they are big-time everywhere else in LA_).  In addition to the homeless stealing items (_you can't have a package delivered and have it on your doorstep because they follow those UPS, FedEx, USPS trucks like mad_) right off your porch regardless of whether or not you have a security system that has cameras; the other problem, is the "professional" thieves!  When my house was broken into (_and yes, I do have a Security System_), the LAPD told me that it was definitely the "professional" crew that stole my items because they were quick (in & out in less than 15 minutes).  Pissed me off big-time because we had just moved into our house and I had yet to "store" my expensive handbags in a locked closet (_yeah - $16k worth of handbags right out the window_)!!!  Thank god that they didn't get any Jewelry (_I have a VERY HEAVY Bank safe - and yes, I had packed all that stuff_).  Needless to say, we upgraded our Security System to the hilt after this; It TOTALLY sucks to be robbed, and it is *THE WORST thing* about living out here!


"*THE WORST thing* about living out here!"

Worse than earth quakes, mud slides, smog and drought? Now you say robberies. Your weather makes living in CA all worth it, it seems!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Burglaries are ever present in LA, REGARDLESS of where you live!  Mind you, Beverly Hills is probably the hardest to get hit because those folks can afford very expensive security systems  - AND -  you do not have the homeless population in BH (_they are big-time everywhere else in LA_).  In addition to the homeless stealing items (_you can't have a package delivered and have it on your doorstep because they follow those UPS, FedEx, USPS trucks like mad_) right off your porch regardless of whether or not you have a security system that has cameras; the other problem, is the "professional" thieves!  When my house was broken into (_and yes, I do have a Security System_), the LAPD told me that it was definitely the "professional" crew that stole my items because they were quick (in & out in less than 15 minutes).  Pissed me off big-time because we had just moved into our house and I had yet to "store" my expensive handbags in a locked closet (_yeah - $16k worth of handbags right out the window_)!!!  Thank god that they didn't get any Jewelry (_I have a VERY HEAVY Bank safe - and yes, I had packed all that stuff_).  Needless to say, we upgraded our Security System to the hilt after this; It TOTALLY sucks to be robbed, and it is *THE WORST thing* about living out here!


that's terrible that you were robbed.....in addition to the loss, you have the feeling of not being as safe in your home, right?
I haven't had that experience but have had a worse one when I lived in NY


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> "*THE WORST thing* about living out here!"
> 
> Worse than earth quakes, mud slides, smog and drought? Now you say robberies. Your weather makes living in CA all worth it, it seems!


OK, so we don't get that many earth quakes and they usually don't cause much. if any damage.  You have to live in the hills to be lucky enough to get the mud slide. yes I have had a couple of those.  Small ones.  The drought is over?  I think they said it was, but you wouldn't know it from my water bill, but you have to keep the pool filled, so what can you do? I want a green lawn and not ground up recycled tires at the front of my house.   Smog was here when the Indians had camp fires.  There are historical documents notating this.  The weather...it sure beats shoveling snow. slipping on ice and driving in it.  I'm staying put!  Watch the news, there are robberies all over unless you are living in an underground bunker in Idaho.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> That is awful. At least the police came out and took a report. Here in the bay area, they tell you go online and fill one out and best of luck to ya!


What?!?! .. whoa!  Trust me though, the LAPD .. especially out here in the Valley, is NOT the best.  They really need to break up LA, it's just way too large!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> "*THE WORST thing* about living out here!"
> 
> Worse than earth quakes, mud slides, smog and drought? Now you say robberies. Your weather makes living in CA all worth it, it seems!


Oh geez .. yeah, yeah, yeah .. the Earthquakes are NO fun; no mud slides where I am (in the FLAT Valley).  Obviously, drought is not great, but that depends on weather conditions and we got a lot of rain this past Winter.  Bottom line, in general, the weather out here is pretty great .. I mean, yes .. it gets into the 100's during the summer, but Arizona (also dry heat) goes way higher in the 100's (also it's a 'Red' state which is no bueno for me)!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> OK, so we don't get that many earth quakes and they usually don't cause much. if any damage.  You have to live in the hills to be lucky enough to get the mud slide. yes I have had a couple of those.  Small ones.  The drought is over?  I think they said it was, but you wouldn't know it from my water bill, but you have to keep the pool filled, so what can you do? I want a green lawn and not ground up recycled tires at the front of my house.   Smog was here when the Indians had camp fires.  There are historical documents notating this.  The weather...it sure beats shoveling snow. slipping on ice and driving in it.  I'm staying put!  Watch the news, there are robberies all over unless you are living in an underground bunker in Idaho.


NO KIDDING, right?!?!?!  In the summer, those LADWP bills just about kill me .. talk about the need to break up a monopoly!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

According to some news outlets, Meghan has been in the UK long enough to be doing a Madonna.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> According to some news outlets, Meghan has been in the UK long enough to be doing a Madonna.


An accent?

I can't watch Coronation Street without picking up a bit of a Manchester accent (not that all the actors do it well, even I can tell) but for a few minutes after watching, I pick it up ever so slightly and then it's gone.

I could not live in the UK without adapting to it, as much as I wouldn't want to because people would make fun of me.

Unless your'e not talking about an accent, then carry on...  lol


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> An accent?
> 
> Unless your'e not talking about an accent, then carry on...  lol



Blimey.! am! And a supposed posh one at that.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> According to some news outlets, Meghan has been in the UK long enough to be doing a Madonna.


It's inevitable really.


----------



## Grande Latte

The house looks really nice. I actually like the decors on the windows, it adds a certain modern charm. Not sure if Meghan is the actual owner or she was a former renter, but I guess any property that has "celebrity/ royalty" connection must sell pretty fast. Plus staging a property helps it sell well too.

Haven't seen any new photos of Meghan, has she been out and about recently?


----------



## minababe

Grande Latte said:


> The house looks really nice. I actually like the decors on the windows, it adds a certain modern charm. Not sure if Meghan is the actual owner or she was a former renter, but I guess any property that has "celebrity/ royalty" connection must sell pretty fast. Plus staging a property helps it sell well too.
> 
> Haven't seen any new photos of Meghan, has she been out and about recently?



she is not the owner. she was living in Toronto the last 7 years. she had a house there. it was sold after she moved to UK.
she is still on maternity leave and August is the royal vacation month so my guess is that they are on a Island, enoying some off time with Little archie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> It's inevitable really.


I’m trying for BBC English myself. Lol!


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> OK, so we don't get that many earth quakes and they usually don't cause much. if any damage.  You have to live in the hills to be lucky enough to get the mud slide. yes I have had a couple of those.  Small ones.  The drought is over?  I think they said it was, but you wouldn't know it from my water bill, but you have to keep the pool filled, so what can you do? I want a green lawn and not ground up recycled tires at the front of my house.   Smog was here when the Indians had camp fires.  There are historical documents notating this.  The weather...it sure beats shoveling snow. slipping on ice and driving in it.  I'm staying put!  Watch the news, there are robberies all over unless you are living in an underground bunker in Idaho.


Just curious -- you said you want a green lawn, but water is at a premium.  Why don't more


gracekelly said:


> I’m trying for BBC English myself. Lol!


RP - That’s the accent I would want too. 

Kate took lessons and now sounds more  posh than Will. The press made fun of her new RP accent for a bit. Anyone remember that?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Just curious -- you said you want a green lawn, but water is at a premium.  Why don't more
> 
> RP - That’s the accent I would want too.
> 
> Kate took lessons and now sounds more  posh than Will. The press made fun of her new RP accent for a bit. Anyone remember that?


Yes I do recall they said she sounded more posh.   Guess she wasn’t going to try for estuary English. . Haha!


----------



## Sharont2305

I so wonder how her accent will change, or if she adapts by saying words the same as we do.
I'd love to hear how she will say certain words in the future especially those that end in borough, berry and ary.


----------



## minababe

of Course she will have a british Accent. that happens automatically when everyone around you have a Accent. if you want it or not haha no choice.


----------



## Clearblueskies

minababe said:


> of Course she will have a british Accent. that happens automatically when everyone around you have a Accent. if you want it or not haha no choice.


Haha not overnight it doesn’t


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> of Course she will have a british Accent. that happens automatically when everyone around you have a Accent. if you want it or not haha no choice.


Not this quickly.


----------



## buffym

Well this is from May, she didn’t have an accent. 



I expect their isn’t an accent change now, and it is just a rumor. I haven’t actually seen a tabloid mention it. But, since when she speaks she sounds the same as before.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> Well this is from May, she didn’t have an accent.
> 
> 
> 
> I expect their isn’t an accent change now, and it is just a rumor. I haven’t actually seen a tabloid mention it. But, since when she speaks she sounds the same as before.



Meghan has one of the fakiest and emptiest smiles I've seen on a celeb in a long time. And that little girl innocent persona she portrays is so irritating. Btw, has anyone actually ever seen baby Archie move or change position in photos or on film? There's just something really off about the whole Archie situation.


----------



## A1aGypsy

You think she is carrying around a fake baby?

I’m the worst parrot for accents. I almost immediately pick them up. It’s embarrassing but I don’t notice I’m doing it.


----------



## LittleStar88

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan has one of the fakiest and emptiest smiles I've seen on a celeb in a long time. And that little girl innocent persona she portrays is so irritating. Btw, has anyone actually ever seen baby Archie move or change position in photos or on film? There's just something really off about the whole Archie situation.



I think that all sounds like way too much effort to put in for a charade. Fake baby lol. Whyyyyy even bother?


----------



## bisbee

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan has one of the fakiest and emptiest smiles I've seen on a celeb in a long time. And that little girl innocent persona she portrays is so irritating. Btw, has anyone actually ever seen baby Archie move or change position in photos or on film? There's just something really off about the whole Archie situation.


O.M.G.  Give me a break...fake smile AND fake baby?


----------



## daisychainz

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan has one of the fakiest and emptiest smiles I've seen on a celeb in a long time. And that little girl innocent persona she portrays is so irritating. Btw, has anyone actually ever seen baby Archie move or change position in photos or on film? There's just something really off about the whole Archie situation.


He's probably just asleep? When I first heard Meghan's voice (from Suits many years ago) I thought it was a complete put-on/act, because it was always so soft and quiet and innocent. Perhaps that plays into your view of her being innocent, the voice? I actually thought it was an acting voice she had created up until her engagement interview with Harry, when I was discovered that was how she truly sounded.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

You guys suggested Archie is a fake baby, I just asked if anyone's ever seen him move  Have you? I have no opinion on this myself, I just find the story and discussions around this couple fascinating.

Btw, this thread is a veritable love fest compared to what's being posted elsewhere about H&M on the internets. I followed a link posted here recently which in turn led me to other forums, threads and YT videos. Let me tell you, this thread is MEEK.

Nothing here about the baby Archie debacle. Allegedly: Meghan and Harry used a (some say two) surrogate but now the surrogate doesn't want to let the baby go/something went wrong so H&M are showing off a "reborn" doll/another baby until the situation can be solved legally. The christening photo is said to be a Photoshop job done very badly. And yes, Kate does look like if she'd stand up she'd tower over everyone else. William is also wearing a watch which states a totally different time than the official one given for the photo. The dates for the photo compared to the official birth of Archie is said to be off. Why did Harry not mention Archie, son or mother on his birthday wish to Meghan? Why didn't the other BRF and friends at the polo game show any interest in Archie? He was held by Meghan in the exact same position for how long? Anyone who's ever carried a baby knows it's impossible to not at least change position of the baby unless the baby is in a sling or similar. 

Nothing about the plagiarism accusations that Meghan took the idea for the Vogue cover from some Australian women who made a book on which Meghan was actually a contributing writer. There's talk the Australian woman is taking legal action. Nothing about H&M's recent Instagram debacle where she asked people to nominate worthwhile causes and posts were deleted in their hundreds.

Quite intriguing all of it. If someone didn't get the memo, this is a gossip thread after all. Everything I mentioned is being discussed in detail on a lot of other sites. And a lot of more alleged details at that. Also, many here like to imply any criticism of Meghan is racist but I have to tell you, some of the harshest stuff I found is posted by American black women. She just seems to be generally not well liked.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

daisychainz said:


> He's probably just asleep? When I first heard Meghan's voice (from Suits many years ago) I thought it was a complete put-on/act, because it was always so soft and quiet and innocent. Perhaps that plays into your view of her being innocent, the voice? I actually thought it was an acting voice she had created up until her engagement interview with Harry, when I was discovered that was how she truly sounded.


He could be a very sleepy baby but I actually think something is off about about the baby situation, as in something didn't go as planned, hence the secrecy and all the speculation.

I think it's her whole demeanor. I don't think she's innocent or "soft" at all which is why she is coming across as fake and manipulative. It's just unattractive for a woman in her late 30's to act and talk like a little girl.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

wow.  just wow.


----------



## loogirl

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> He could be a very sleepy baby but I actually think something is off about about the baby situation, as in something didn't go as planned, hence the secrecy and all the speculation.
> 
> I think it's her whole demeanor. I don't think she's innocent or "soft" at all which is why she is coming across as fake and manipulative. It's just unattractive for a woman in her late 30's to act and talk like a little girl.



Yes the talking like a simpering girl is not attractive especially when she is supposedly trying to be some feminist icon spearheading change etc etc. I think she is very very conscious that she is older than Harry and the voice, clinging to him for dear life at every event and the innocent persona are all a part of that.


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.whimn.com.au/talk/news/...t/news-story/e90513caaa2d44d584e3ec3f4aa2a74e

A friend sent this link to me. 

. @SomethingGoodCanWork  you are so right that this thread is very meek and mild compared to what is out there. Many crazy stories with pictures to prove the theories.  Hey they are still talking about the JFK assassination and the grassy knoll so some things will never go away.   People are people!


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You guys suggested Archie is a fake baby, I just asked if anyone's ever seen him move  Have you? I have no opinion on this myself, I just find the story and discussions around this couple fascinating.
> 
> Btw, this thread is a veritable love fest compared to what's being posted elsewhere about H&M on the internets. I followed a link posted here recently which in turn led me to other forums, threads and YT videos. Let me tell you, this thread is MEEK.
> 
> Nothing here about the baby Archie debacle. Allegedly: Meghan and Harry used a (some say two) surrogate but now the surrogate doesn't want to let the baby go/something went wrong so H&M are showing off a "reborn" doll/another baby until the situation can be solved legally. The christening photo is said to be a Photoshop job done very badly. And yes, Kate does look like if she'd stand up she'd tower over everyone else. William is also wearing a watch which states a totally different time than the official one given for the photo. The dates for the photo compared to the official birth of Archie is said to be off. Why did Harry not mention Archie, son or mother on his birthday wish to Meghan? Why didn't the other BRF and friends at the polo game show any interest in Archie? He was held by Meghan in the exact same position for how long? Anyone who's ever carried a baby knows it's impossible to not at least change position of the baby unless the baby is in a sling or similar.
> 
> Nothing about the plagiarism accusations that Meghan took the idea for the Vogue cover from some Australian women who made a book on which Meghan was actually a contributing writer. There's talk the Australian woman is taking legal action. Nothing about H&M's recent Instagram debacle where she asked people to nominate worthwhile causes and posts were deleted in their hundreds.
> 
> Quite intriguing all of it. If someone didn't get the memo, this is a gossip thread after all. Everything I mentioned is being discussed in detail on a lot of other sites. And a lot of more alleged details at that. Also, many here like to imply any criticism of Meghan is racist but I have to tell you, some of the harshest stuff I found is posted by American black women. She just seems to be generally not well liked.


you are just repeating ridiculous stuff, not saying you believe it, right?


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> https://www.whimn.com.au/talk/news/...t/news-story/e90513caaa2d44d584e3ec3f4aa2a74e
> 
> A friend sent this link to me.
> 
> . @SomethingGoodCanWork  you are so right that this thread is very meek and mild compared to what is out there. Many crazy stories with pictures to prove the theories.  Hey they are still talking about the JFK assassination and the grassy knoll so some things will never go away.   People are people!


There’s a reason Royal births were once publicly witnessed  people haven’t changed one bit!!


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> There’s a reason Royal births were once publicly witnessed  people haven’t changed one bit!!


LOL, that's funny!


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You guys suggested Archie is a fake baby, I just asked if anyone's ever seen him move  Have you? I have no opinion on this myself, I just find the story and discussions around this couple fascinating.
> 
> Btw, this thread is a veritable love fest compared to what's being posted elsewhere about H&M on the internets. I followed a link posted here recently which in turn led me to other forums, threads and YT videos. Let me tell you, this thread is MEEK.
> 
> Nothing here about the baby Archie debacle. Allegedly: Meghan and Harry used a (some say two) surrogate but now the surrogate doesn't want to let the baby go/something went wrong so H&M are showing off a "reborn" doll/another baby until the situation can be solved legally. The christening photo is said to be a Photoshop job done very badly. And yes, Kate does look like if she'd stand up she'd tower over everyone else. William is also wearing a watch which states a totally different time than the official one given for the photo. The dates for the photo compared to the official birth of Archie is said to be off. Why did Harry not mention Archie, son or mother on his birthday wish to Meghan? Why didn't the other BRF and friends at the polo game show any interest in Archie? He was held by Meghan in the exact same position for how long? Anyone who's ever carried a baby knows it's impossible to not at least change position of the baby unless the baby is in a sling or similar.
> 
> Nothing about the plagiarism accusations that Meghan took the idea for the Vogue cover from some Australian women who made a book on which Meghan was actually a contributing writer. There's talk the Australian woman is taking legal action. Nothing about H&M's recent Instagram debacle where she asked people to nominate worthwhile causes and posts were deleted in their hundreds.
> 
> Quite intriguing all of it. If someone didn't get the memo, this is a gossip thread after all. Everything I mentioned is being discussed in detail on a lot of other sites. And a lot of more alleged details at that. Also, many here like to imply any criticism of Meghan is racist but I have to tell you, some of the harshest stuff I found is posted by American black women. She just seems to be generally not well liked.


I love a good conspiracy theory, but the baby one is too farfetched. Nevertheless, they’re fun to read.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> There’s a reason Royal births were once publicly witnessed  people haven’t changed one bit!!


Oh yes!! The "warming pan" baby theory, of  the child of James II, which caused future royal births to be witnessed.  The theory is said to have led to James being deposed from his throne.

Thinking about this has me asking if that is one reason why the Queen's gyn was present at the births of the Cambridge children.  Plus the appearance on the steps of the Lindo Wing.   *I love a good conspiracy theory too hahahahahaha!*


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> Oh yes!! The "warming pan" baby theory, of  the child of James II, which caused future royal births to be witnessed.  The theory is said to have led to James being deposed from his throne.
> 
> Thinking about this has me asking if that is one reason why the Queen's gyn was present at the births of the Cambridge children.  Plus the appearance on the steps of the Lindo Wing.   *I love a good conspiracy theory too hahahahahaha!*


It goes back much further, there even used to be witnesses to the consummation of the marriage.  Imagine that!


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> It goes back much further, there even used to be witnesses to the consummation of the marriage.  Imagine that!


Yes very true!  Don't forget about the bloody sheet!


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> Yes very true!  Don't forget about the bloody sheet!



I guess if Catherine of Aragon and Arthur had had witnesses  in the bedchamber, she never would have been able to marry his brother Henry and start that whole kerfuffle!


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> Yes very true!  Don't forget about the bloody sheet!


Yep “privacy” is a very recent concept when you come to think about it


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Yep “privacy” is a very recent concept when you come to think about it


But sometimes it can be taken to ridiculous proportions and privacy morphs into major curiosity and rumor mongering.  Sometimes being up front is just the simplest and quietest way to handle things.  If MM and Harry and followed the pattern set by his parents and his brother, there would be a lot less bandwidth full of crazy theories.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> But sometimes it can be taken to ridiculous proportions and privacy morphs into major curiosity and rumor mongering.  Sometimes being up front is just the simplest and quietest way to handle things.  If MM and Harry and followed the pattern set by his parents and his brother, there would be a lot less bandwidth full of crazy theories.



You can’t rationalize with crazy. The fact people are making a conspiracy about a fake baby because Archie didn’t move enough for them shows that nothing Harry or Meghan did can prevent that line of thinking.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> But sometimes it can be taken to ridiculous proportions and privacy morphs into major curiosity and rumor mongering.  Sometimes being up front is just the simplest and quietest way to handle things.  If MM and Harry and followed the pattern set by his parents and his brother, there would be a lot less bandwidth full of crazy theories.


I agree, the messing around by H and M made things go daft, and gave those people looking for trouble something to hang a theory on.  I’d like to say they’ll hopefully learn from it, but I don’t get the impression that they will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> You can’t rationalize with crazy. The fact people are making a conspiracy about a fake baby because Archie didn’t move enough for them shows that nothing Harry or Meghan did can prevent that line of thinking.


That's true that you can't rationalize with crazy or people who are extreme in their views, however, sometimes things are done that make the extremism travel more to the forefront, and that  makes the conspiracy theorists all the more vocal.  If they had gone to the Lindo Wing, stood on the steps and held the baby, we wouldn't be discussing fake babies and conspiracy theories.  It would have a been a lot easier and simpler in the long run.  I know you will disagree and support their choices.  Fine, but I can't help but think that all these weird and insulting theories wouldn't have seen the light of day.


----------



## chicaloca

gracekelly said:


> That's true that you can't rationalize with crazy or people who are extreme in their views, however, sometimes things are done that make the extremism travel more to the forefront, and that  makes the conspiracy theorists all the more vocal.  If they had gone to the Lindo Wing, stood on the steps and held the baby, we wouldn't be discussing fake babies and conspiracy theories.  It would have a been a lot easier and simpler in the long run.  I know you will disagree and support their choices.  Fine, but I can't help but think that all these weird and insulting theories wouldn't have seen the light of day.



Preventing crazy people from making fake stories is a very poor excuse for expecting a woman to parade her newborn for reporters right after birth. The Lindo Wing photo op was not a Royal tradition and only started with Diana. 

There was no winning for Meghan. People were swearing she’d do the Lindo Wing photo-op because she was so “attention-seeking” and questioning why the 7th in line to the throne needed that level of attention. When the photo op didn’t happen they moved to other ridiculous theories. Meghan will always be damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t.

Meghan & Harry should continue to do what’s best to protect their baby from all the racist nut jobs that have crawled out of the woodwork since their wedding. It is not their problem if some idiot thinks their baby is a doll and they do not need to tailor their actions to a accommodate the thoughts of extremely stupid people.


----------



## Aimee3

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, the messing around by H and M made things go daft, and gave those people looking for trouble something to hang a theory on.  I’d like to say they’ll hopefully learn from it, but I don’t get the impression that they will.





buffym said:


> You can’t rationalize with crazy. The fact people are making a conspiracy about a fake baby because Archie didn’t move enough for them shows that nothing Harry or Meghan did can prevent that line of thinking.


And if the baby moved, the same people would probably be saying he moved too much and is therefore "hyperactive" or some other ridiculous conclusion.


----------



## Hobbsy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Scorned and bitter perhaps, but not wrong here


He's a nut case!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I think MM and H are hiding out in Toronto partying with the Suits cast. They're filming the last episode this week and having all the wrap parties. How would someone who was on the show for 7 years want to miss that. I'm gonna bet it comes out later that they've been there.


----------



## minababe

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You guys suggested Archie is a fake baby, I just asked if anyone's ever seen him move  Have you? I have no opinion on this myself, I just find the story and discussions around this couple fascinating.
> 
> Btw, this thread is a veritable love fest compared to what's being posted elsewhere about H&M on the internets. I followed a link posted here recently which in turn led me to other forums, threads and YT videos. Let me tell you, this thread is MEEK.
> 
> Nothing here about the baby Archie debacle. Allegedly: Meghan and Harry used a (some say two) surrogate but now the surrogate doesn't want to let the baby go/something went wrong so H&M are showing off a "reborn" doll/another baby until the situation can be solved legally. The christening photo is said to be a Photoshop job done very badly. And yes, Kate does look like if she'd stand up she'd tower over everyone else. William is also wearing a watch which states a totally different time than the official one given for the photo. The dates for the photo compared to the official birth of Archie is said to be off. Why did Harry not mention Archie, son or mother on his birthday wish to Meghan? Why didn't the other BRF and friends at the polo game show any interest in Archie? He was held by Meghan in the exact same position for how long? Anyone who's ever carried a baby knows it's impossible to not at least change position of the baby unless the baby is in a sling or similar.
> 
> Nothing about the plagiarism accusations that Meghan took the idea for the Vogue cover from some Australian women who made a book on which Meghan was actually a contributing writer. There's talk the Australian woman is taking legal action. Nothing about H&M's recent Instagram debacle where she asked people to nominate worthwhile causes and posts were deleted in their hundreds.
> 
> Quite intriguing all of it. If someone didn't get the memo, this is a gossip thread after all. Everything I mentioned is being discussed in detail on a lot of other sites. And a lot of more alleged details at that. Also, many here like to imply any criticism of Meghan is racist but I have to tell you, some of the harshest stuff I found is posted by American black women. She just seems to be generally not well liked.



wow. please go to the doctor.


----------



## minababe

Sharont2305 said:


> Not this quickly.





Clearblueskies said:


> Haha not overnight it doesn’t



omg .. she is more than 2 years in London. Dating Harry for over 3 years.
People get an accent or adopt words after some weeks or months.


----------



## Clearblueskies




----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan has one of the fakiest and emptiest smiles I've seen on a celeb in a long time. And that little girl innocent persona she portrays is so irritating. Btw, has anyone actually ever seen baby Archie move or change position in photos or on film? There's just something really off about the whole Archie situation.


yes yes. don't you know. it is proofed, that baby Archie is a doll in fact.


----------



## A1aGypsy

What rabbit hole do you have to fall down to find these types of rumours?  I just did a quick search to satisfy my curiosity and no google hits for fake baby or photoshopped christening to be found.


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> What rabbit hole do you have to fall down to find these types of rumours?  I just did a quick search to satisfy my curiosity and no google hits for fake baby or photoshopped christening to be found.


Actually the rabbit hole is located in Area 51 along with many aliens from outer space. Elvis and Judge Crater are there as well. Bernie Sanders just  announced that if elected , he promises to release the info about aliens. Can’t wait.


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> What rabbit hole do you have to fall down to find these types of rumours?  I just did a quick search to satisfy my curiosity and no google hits for fake baby or photoshopped christening to be found.


https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/


Theses ladies do have their point of view and they are entitled to their opinions as much as anyone else. . Interesting read.


----------



## limom

Whatever happened to the popcorn eating emoji?
Oh so needed here.


----------



## chicaloca

Why are people promoting other forums here?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> Why are people promoting other forums here?


Because I was answering someone’s question?


----------



## A1aGypsy

It’s disturbing to see so much joy in hate. Honestly. And rumours, even gossip, to me is more than someone mean-spiritedly sitting behind the computer and making things up.


----------



## pursecrzy

limom said:


> Whatever happened to the popcorn eating emoji?
> Oh so needed here.


----------



## buffym




----------



## pursecrzy

limom said:


> Whatever happened to the popcorn eating emoji?
> Oh so needed here.



All the emojis are available through the Help link
Or use :  popcorn  : without the spaces


----------



## momtok

chicaloca said:


> Why are people promoting other forums here?


In all honesty, lipstickalley is often mentioned in this celebrity sub-forum here at tpf, and vice versa, if you just do a search.  For recent examples, it was mentioned here some months ago on a fassbender thread, and I'm sure I saw it recently in the Steve Harvey thread.  And those were just threads that I had happened to read through.  It's not a secret or anything (shrug).  Obviously, as well, some people are members at both places.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

minababe said:


> wow. please go to the doctor.


You’re slipping. You forgot the racism accusation.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> you are just repeating ridiculous stuff, not saying you believe it, right?


No, sdkitty, I don’t think Meghan is wandering around in public with an Archie doll pretending it's a real baby, which would be rather disturbed behavior. But surrogacy? Probably. Allegedly. 

I was making a point or few which seem to conveniently get lost in all of the selective and somewhat hypocritical outrage by some here. Why is this particular gossip thread sacred? There is so much worse stuff written about other celebs on other threads here - and posters slinging slurs at other posters- but none of the present pearl clutchers bat an eye. Deservedly or not; the Kardashian threads anyone? I guess some are just more equal than others.



Finding discussions on what I mentioned is not that hard. But sure, now that Harry was a special guest at the Google camp out, the Google algorithms are probably going to be even more in H&M:s favour which effects searches.


----------



## buffym

Some info about next month tour

Archie doesn’t have the vaccinations needed to travel to the other countries and Meghan may still be breastfeeding Archie.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Some info about next month tour
> 
> Archie doesn’t have the vaccinations needed to travel to the other countries and Meghan may still be breastfeeding Archie.



I would think he is too young for any vaccinations. He should be left at home


----------



## rose60610

Yep, the Kardashians get hit pretty hard. And they laugh all the way to the bank. 

I think it'd be nice if Meghan's mom moved in with them or close by. She can do what she wants, but I wonder why she isn't in the picture more.  She appears to be the only relative of Meghan's who isn't nuts, she seems like a nice and classy lady. I can understand why the rest of her family isn't welcome. While I'm not Meghan's hugest fan, I'll give her loads of credit for becoming successful on her own especially having come from a nut job family, her mother being the exception.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> I would think he is too young for any vaccinations. He should be left at home



Vaccinations differ my ex is a doctor, some vaccinations were given at 2 months old like tetanus. I think it is really up to the parents if they don’t take him, they will be slammed for leaving their child. If they asked to push the tour back they will be called lazy and as already accused of being controlling. “Criticizing to criticize” for some whatever Harry and Meghan do will not be right because it is Harry and Meghan


----------



## rose60610

Leaving behind a tiny baby in the best of care while H & M are in Africa might be criticized by shrews,  but a newborn shouldn't be expected to globe trot. On the other hand, Meghan could stay and Harry could go.  That way she wouldn't be seen as "well I cranked out a royal baby, yippee me, and look how I'm enjoying myself now since I got the best nannies in the world doing everything for me!".


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Vaccinations differ my ex is a doctor, some vaccinations were given at 2 months old like tetanus. I think it is really up to the parents if they don’t take him, they will be slammed for leaving their child. If they asked to push the tour back they will be called lazy and as already accused of being controlling. “Criticizing to criticize” for some whatever Harry and Meghan do will not be right because it is Harry and Meghan



No one is going to slam them for leaving a baby that young at home. I think it would be just the opposite and they would be criticized for taking him and exposing him to unnecessary risk of disease.


----------



## buffym

rose60610 said:


> Leaving behind a tiny baby in the best of care while H & M are in Africa might be criticized by shrews,  but a newborn shouldn't be expected to globe trot. On the other hand, Meghan could stay and Harry could go.  That way she wouldn't be seen as "well I cranked out a royal baby, yippee me, and look how I'm enjoying myself now since I got the best nannies in the world doing everything for me!".



This thread has a poster talking about Meghan faked a pregnancy, leaving Archie world really get the conspiracy theories going. That and Meghan not going the divorce rumors would start, I doubt Archie’s pediatrician would let him go if their was any real dangers. 

I wouldn’t criticize parents for being a parents when I don’t know what options or advice the parents were given to make their decision with their child considering South Africa uses the same vaccination schedule as the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

momtok said:


> In all honesty, lipstickalley is often mentioned in this celebrity sub-forum here at tpf, and vice versa, if you just do a search.  For recent examples, it was mentioned here some months ago on a fassbender thread, and I'm sure I saw it recently in the Steve Harvey thread.  And those were just threads that I had happened to read through.  It's not a secret or anything (shrug).  Obviously, as well, some people are members at both places.


That may be so, but you're not supposed to link to other forums. It's in the rules and guidelines. Only linking to news stories or to name a source on a story but not to other forums. 

I've seen links to that site removed before.

*kanyeshrug*


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> This thread has a poster talking about Meghan faked a pregnancy, leaving Archie world really get the conspiracy theories going. That and Meghan not going the divorce rumors would start, I doubt Archie’s pediatrician would let him go if their was any real dangers.
> 
> I wouldn’t criticize parents for being a parents when I don’t know what options or advice the parents were given to make their decision with their child considering South Africa uses the same vaccination schedule as the UK.


Over here babies or children don't have their own paediatrician, it's the GP (aka family doctor) You'd only see a paediatrician if the child was admitted to hospital or referred to one by your GP if you needed diagnosis or treatment.


----------



## zen1965

I lived in Africa for several years and would travel to South Africa with a baby without having second thoughts - particularly when staying in urban areas and the greater Cape region. Due to malaria risks (no vaccine) I would  avoid Krueger and other NP. Regarding the other countries I would certainly stay away from rural Angola and Malawi when travelling with an infant.
 They seem to be heeding my advice.


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/meghan-markle-unpopular-opinions-thread-pt-2.2215591/



This was an interesting read! All the gifs showing Meghan deliberately pushing her coat back to show her bump to to cameras 

This thread would probably be shut down if we posted any of those things here


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> All the gifs showing Meghan deliberately pushing her coat back to show her bump to to cameras


I think The Daily Mail also put together a bunch of photos of her holding her coat away from her bump or very deliberately pushing her coat out of the way so the bump was visible to the cameras.  She really did it constantly.  Almost as often as she cradled her bump.  

Since I have zero belief in insane fake pregnancy theories, the only conclusion I have been able to come up with is that it was about vanity - that she was worried if somebody saw the photo in a few years and the bump wasn't visible, that they might just think she was fat and bulky, not pregnant.  I have seen actresses on the red carpet cradling their bumps and kind of thought it was for the same reason.


----------



## rose60610

I'm glad Archie is born and she isn't cradling her bump 24/7.  If next time she's expecting twins will she cradle it twice as much? Shortly before Archie was born, her face was very puffy, and afterward, too.  Regardless what one thinks of Hollywood, they can do makeup like nobody's business, but I don't think her face was "fake puffy".


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> I think The Daily Mail also put together a bunch of photos of her holding her coat away from her bump or very deliberately pushing her coat out of the way so the bump was visible to the cameras.  She really did it constantly.  Almost as often as she cradled her bump.
> 
> Since I have zero belief in insane fake pregnancy theories, the only conclusion I have been able to come up with is that it was about vanity - that she was worried if somebody saw the photo in a few years and the bump wasn't visible, that they might just think she was fat and bulky, not pregnant.  I have seen actresses on the red carpet cradling their bumps and kind of thought it was for the same reason.





rose60610 said:


> I'm glad Archie is born and she isn't cradling her bump 24/7.  If next time she's expecting twins will she cradle it twice as much? Shortly before Archie was born, her face was very puffy, and afterward, too.  Regardless what one thinks of Hollywood, they can do makeup like nobody's business, but I don't think her face was "fake puffy".



There could be any number reasons, it was her first pregnancy and watching her body change can be incredibly surreal, Archie May have been incredibly active and she was responding to the movement, she may have been incredibly happy about this time period, that has an expiration date, or she knew there were people who would be annoyed with pictures of her cradling her unborn child so she did it to upset them. 

If I think about I wouldn’t because it isn’t hurting anyone and it is incredibly depressing when people try to control what a person she do with someone else’s body.

If she has twins I hope she would cradle them as much as she wants. 

It is kind of a win those that it bothers and tabloids it gives them something to focus on.


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> and it is incredibly depressing when people try to control what a person she do with someone else’s body.


Everything Meghan ever does or says can fall under the heading of "what she does with her body" if that's how you want to deflect criticism. 

It is not cool to defend Meghan by implying that people who criticize her are bad people.  One way of telling Meghan's critics they are bad people is to call them racist, and another way is to say that they want to control what a woman can do with her body.

I have nothing against bump cradling in general.  Meghan did it excessively and performatively.  It appeared to me to be solely something she did in public to send a message.  What message?  I don't know.  Everyone knew she was pregnant, she didn't need to constantly put her hand on the bump as a reminder.  Yet every time someone said hello to her, or every time she was the center of attention at a public event, she planted her arms on the bump.

About 3:19 is what I'm talking about.  The hands go directly to the bump as if in response to the applause.  (Warning: do not watch the entire video unless you can stomach Meghan engaging in some very phony small talk - literally fluttering her eyelids at people and discussing the weather as if it's fascinating.)   

All I can say is she is definitely someone who cares very much about "optics".  I have every right to notice and find it manipulative when she does something consistently and repeatedly that appears to be for show.

And while I'm at it, both Meghan and Harry can calm down with the hand-grabbing PDA.  At first it was cute - an engaged couple in love.  Now it's starting to come off like they have something to prove.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> she knew there were people who would be annoyed with pictures of her cradling her unborn child so* she did it to upset them*.



HUH?  Cradling the bump to annoy people?  Sorry that sounds pretty outlandish.  I get that she was happy to be pregnant and proud to be pregnant and I am guessing that 99% of all women who are pregnant feel that way, and there is a fair degree of bump cradling, especially with the first one, but even then, after the first few months it is obvious that the baby is not going anywhere and the need to cradle the bump diminishes considerably.



Flatsy said:


> *It is not cool to defend Meghan by implying that people who criticize her are bad people. * One way of telling Meghan's critics they are bad people is to call them racist, and another way is to say that they want to control what a woman can do with her body.
> 
> I have nothing against bump cradling in general.  Meghan did it excessively and performatively.  It appeared to me to be solely something she did in public to send a message.  What message?  I don't know.  Everyone knew she was pregnant, she didn't need to constantly put her hand on the bump as a reminder.  Yet every time someone said hello to her, or every time she was the center of attention at a public event, she planted her arms on the bump.
> 
> About 3:19 is what I'm talking about.  The hands go directly to the bump as if in response to the applause.  (Warning: do not watch the entire video unless you can stomach Meghan engaging in some very phony small talk - literally fluttering her eyelids at people and discussing the weather as if it's fascinating.)
> 
> All I can say is she is definitely someone who cares very much about "optics".  I have every right to notice and find it manipulative when she does something consistently and repeatedly that appears to be for show.
> 
> And while I'm at it, both Meghan and Harry can calm down with the hand-grabbing PDA.  At first it was cute - an engaged couple in love.  Now it's starting to come off like they have something to prove.




I neither love her nor hate her, and consider myself on the fence as an observer for the most part.  I have to say I am tired of having my posts picked apart if any observation is construed as not total and complete 100% love.  The people that do this are pretty predictable and never disappoint.  Step back and take a deep breath.

Re sending a message with bump cradling   I am clueless since this was not the next heir to the throne and I don't even recall that Kate Middleton was doing that all the time when she carried Prince George.

I find Meghan hanging onto Harry's arm at this point to be excessive.  I disliked the engagement pictures because it looked to me like she was holding on to him for dear life so he wouldn't be able to run away.   It is totally possible to convey affection and love for your partner/husband without grabbing them all the time.

Given where I live, I have come in contact with many actors and interacted with them in a professional non-show business capacity..  They are all fine when you are one on one, but once there is a third person (or more) to make an audience, the acting/ performance gene takes over.  I don't think that most of them can help it and it is part of their personality.  So in this case, I just presume that  is what is happening  and it doesn't surprise me.    So folks, get used to it, because I don't think it will change over time.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Given where I live, I have come in contact with many actors and interacted with them in a professional non-show business capacity.. They are all fine when you are one on one, but once there is a third person (or more) to make an audience, the acting/ performance gene takes over. I don't think that most of them can help it and it is part of their personality. So in this case, I just presume that is what is happening and it doesn't surprise me. So folks, get used to it, because I don't think it will change over time.


In some ways, it's a good thing because her job entails making a lot of boring chit chat with total strangers.  It's good to be able to feign interest.  She's been faking enthusiasm from the beginning of her career and I guess it served her well: https://www.usmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/meghan-markle-deal-or-no-deal.jpg

But I feel like I have yet to see the real her peak out from behind the act.  She's just always performing, even in print.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> In some ways, it's a good thing because her job entails making a lot of boring chit chat with total strangers.  It's good to be able to feign interest.  She's been faking enthusiasm from the beginning of her career and I guess it served her well: https://www.usmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/meghan-markle-deal-or-no-deal.jpg
> 
> But I feel like I have yet to see the real her peak out from behind the act.  She's just always performing, even in print.


I understand.  Perhaps with some people, they have been doing this for so long, it just is second nature and that becomes the "real" them.  There may be nothing different when the veil drops.


----------



## gracekelly

You have to walk the walk Prince Harry  and not just talk the talk. Even your granny had to give up the yacht.  Next time you are invited, just say no

*Revealed: Prince Harry 'stayed on a gas guzzling super-yacht for Google's green summit' - as Expedia billionaire Barry Diller reveals the royal spoke about saving the planet by taking fewer selfies at 'trampled' holiday destinations*

Prince Harry facing renewed controversy over his trip to Google's 'green' summit
He was a guest on one of giant vessels moored near Verdura Golf & Spa Resort
390ft super-yacht produces about 3.3 tons of carbon dioxide each hour
Many of the well-heeled guests arrived by private plane to the climate summit
By CHARLOTTE WACE IN SICILY FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY and CAROLINE GRAHAM FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 20:16 EDT, 10 August 2019 | UPDATED: 20:42 EDT, 10 August 2019
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...uper-yacht-Googles-green-summit.html#comments


Prince Harry is facing renewed controversy over his trip to Google's 'green' summit in Sicily amid claims that he stayed on a super-yacht.

Several sources have told The Mail on Sunday that the Prince was a guest on one of the giant vessels moored near the exclusive Verdura Golf and Spa Resort where the climate change retreat was held.

One insider said: 'He was staying on the yacht with some of the other VIPs. He would sleep on there, come in the morning and be around the resort during the day.'

According to experts, a 390ft super-yacht produces about 3.3 tons of damaging carbon dioxide each hour at sea by burning through around 200 gallons of fuel.






Prince Harry is facing renewed controversy over his trip to Google's 'green' summit in Sicily amid claims that he stayed on a super-yacht

*RELATED ARTICLES*

Previous
1
Next




The $20million climate change party: How Camp Google racked...


A £16million love-in for the (private) jet set: ALISON...
*SHARE THIS ARTICLE*
Share
Vessels spotted during the Google Camp – an annual event launched by the tech giant's founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 2012 –included the 300ft Eos, owned by Expedia billionaire Barry Diller, and Infinity, the 290ft yacht belonging to former Google boss Eric Schmidt.

Last night Mr Diller, 77, denied Harry, 34, had joined celebrities including Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom on his yacht, but praised the Prince's 'eloquent' speech – which he reportedly delivered barefoot – about trying to save the planet by taking fewer selfies.

'He was saying there are many holiday destinations that because of Instagram and other things are getting trampled by people taking selfies, and these places... are overwhelmed with tourism,' Mr Diller told The Mail on Sunday.

'The principal argument he was making was the need to actually expand people's interest in places that are not so obviously 'selfie-ised'. It should be a goal to expand where people go for tourism, so these very few places with an enormous concentration of tourists would get some relief.





The superyacht Eos is owned by billionaire movie mogul Barry Diller. 'He was saying there are many holiday destinations that because of Instagram and other things are getting trampled by people taking selfies, and these places... are overwhelmed with tourism,' Mr Diller told The Mail on Sunday.





Last night Mr Diller, 77, (pictured) denied Harry, 34, had joined celebrities including Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom on his yacht, but praised the Prince's 'eloquent' speech – which he reportedly delivered barefoot – about trying to save the planet by taking fewer selfies

'I was very much impressed by him. Standing up on that stage in front of this particular group of people is daunting. He did it both gracefully and without a script. He was simply eloquent.'

Despite attending a summit to discuss tackling climate change, many of the well-heeled guests arrived by private plane.

As well the 114 jets lined up at Palermo airport, The Mail on Sunday has established that a further 220 landed at Trapani airport in North-West Sicily.

Many of the guests were then whisked to the Verdura resort by helicopter.

The airport's director Michele Bufo said: 'The helicopters waited on the runway and were no more than 30 feet from the jets so that guests could travel in the maximum comfort and security.'

According to witnesses, Harry arrived at one event with John Elkann, boss of Fiat Chrysler.

The car-making firm was recently forced to recall 863,000 vehicles that violate emission standards following a ruling by the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Buckingham Palace last night declined to comment.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> There could be any number reasons, it was her first pregnancy and watching her body change can be incredibly surreal, Archie May have been incredibly active and she was responding to the movement, she may have been incredibly happy about this time period, that has an expiration date, or she knew there were people who would be annoyed with pictures of her cradling her unborn child so she did it to upset them.
> 
> If I think about I wouldn’t because it isn’t hurting anyone and it is incredibly depressing when people try to control what a person she do with someone else’s body.
> 
> If she has twins I hope she would cradle them as much as she wants.
> 
> It is kind of a win those that it bothers and tabloids it gives them something to focus on.


Or....she could’ve been showing off, which is what it looks like to me.  As an actress she’s accustomed to posing, and far more camera aware than most women.

Honestly  Meghan is not a victim, and I very much doubt she’d thank you for continuing to paint her as one.  She’s made the absolute most of her looks and her connections and got EXACTLY what she wanted.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> You have to walk the walk Prince Harry  and not just talk the talk. Even your granny had to give up the yacht.  Next time you are invited, just say no
> 
> *Revealed: Prince Harry 'stayed on a gas guzzling super-yacht for Google's green summit' - as Expedia billionaire Barry Diller reveals the royal spoke about saving the planet by taking fewer selfies at 'trampled' holiday destinations*
> 
> Prince Harry facing renewed controversy over his trip to Google's 'green' summit
> He was a guest on one of giant vessels moored near Verdura Golf & Spa Resort
> 390ft super-yacht produces about 3.3 tons of carbon dioxide each hour
> Many of the well-heeled guests arrived by private plane to the climate summit
> By CHARLOTTE WACE IN SICILY FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY and CAROLINE GRAHAM FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY
> 
> PUBLISHED: 20:16 EDT, 10 August 2019 | UPDATED: 20:42 EDT, 10 August 2019
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is facing renewed controversy over his trip to Google's 'green' summit in Sicily amid claims that he stayed on a super-yacht.
> 
> Several sources have told The Mail on Sunday that the Prince was a guest on one of the giant vessels moored near the exclusive Verdura Golf and Spa Resort where the climate change retreat was held.
> 
> One insider said: 'He was staying on the yacht with some of the other VIPs. He would sleep on there, come in the morning and be around the resort during the day.'
> 
> According to experts, a 390ft super-yacht produces about 3.3 tons of damaging carbon dioxide each hour at sea by burning through around 200 gallons of fuel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is facing renewed controversy over his trip to Google's 'green' summit in Sicily amid claims that he stayed on a super-yacht
> 
> *RELATED ARTICLES*
> 
> Previous
> 1
> Next
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The $20million climate change party: How Camp Google racked...
> 
> 
> A £16million love-in for the (private) jet set: ALISON...
> *SHARE THIS ARTICLE*
> Share
> Vessels spotted during the Google Camp – an annual event launched by the tech giant's founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin in 2012 –included the 300ft Eos, owned by Expedia billionaire Barry Diller, and Infinity, the 290ft yacht belonging to former Google boss Eric Schmidt.
> 
> Last night Mr Diller, 77, denied Harry, 34, had joined celebrities including Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom on his yacht, but praised the Prince's 'eloquent' speech – which he reportedly delivered barefoot – about trying to save the planet by taking fewer selfies.
> 
> 'He was saying there are many holiday destinations that because of Instagram and other things are getting trampled by people taking selfies, and these places... are overwhelmed with tourism,' Mr Diller told The Mail on Sunday.
> 
> 'The principal argument he was making was the need to actually expand people's interest in places that are not so obviously 'selfie-ised'. It should be a goal to expand where people go for tourism, so these very few places with an enormous concentration of tourists would get some relief.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The superyacht Eos is owned by billionaire movie mogul Barry Diller. 'He was saying there are many holiday destinations that because of Instagram and other things are getting trampled by people taking selfies, and these places... are overwhelmed with tourism,' Mr Diller told The Mail on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Last night Mr Diller, 77, (pictured) denied Harry, 34, had joined celebrities including Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom on his yacht, but praised the Prince's 'eloquent' speech – which he reportedly delivered barefoot – about trying to save the planet by taking fewer selfies
> 
> 'I was very much impressed by him. Standing up on that stage in front of this particular group of people is daunting. He did it both gracefully and without a script. He was simply eloquent.'
> 
> Despite attending a summit to discuss tackling climate change, many of the well-heeled guests arrived by private plane.
> 
> As well the 114 jets lined up at Palermo airport, The Mail on Sunday has established that a further 220 landed at Trapani airport in North-West Sicily.
> 
> Many of the guests were then whisked to the Verdura resort by helicopter.
> 
> The airport's director Michele Bufo said: 'The helicopters waited on the runway and were no more than 30 feet from the jets so that guests could travel in the maximum comfort and security.'
> 
> According to witnesses, Harry arrived at one event with John Elkann, boss of Fiat Chrysler.
> 
> The car-making firm was recently forced to recall 863,000 vehicles that violate emission standards following a ruling by the US Environmental Protection Agency.
> 
> Buckingham Palace last night declined to comment.


Harry really is clueless.  He simply has no idea how privileged he is.


----------



## chicaloca

I can’t imagine men spending pages discussing where or how another man places his hands on his body. There is no better upholder of patriarchy than women. 

Meghan’s legacy is going to be a great one. People can criticize how she holds her baby but can’t refute the direct impact she has had on the organizations she’s patronized and how many people have been helped as a result. Outland Denim, The Hubb Kitchen, Smartworks and now Luminary bakery.  I suspect this list will continue to grow with the launch of the Sussex Foundation. 

Meghan continually leverages whatever social currency she has to help others. Certain royals who are attempting to undermine Meghan through the press may do better by seeking her advice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Meghan and Harry highlighted these charities this month


----------



## rose60610

I won't begrudge Harry for being on Miller's yacht. The yacht was already there. Now the whole symposium was dumb, but not the fact that Harry was on the boat. 

As for all this "carbon footprint" emissions stuff, it's misleading when companies claim to have "saved bla bla bla tons of carbon by not sending Flopsy, Topsy and Mopsy to the wherever".  No they didn't. The commercial plane they would have taken still took off with other passengers.  Now if they didn't use the corporate jet, OK, but most business travelers fly commercial. Not sending employees somewhere doesn't save on carbon emissions. 

The yachts that are out there, Barry's and others, are still out there. Whether they go to Googleland or wherever, they're out there. If they never leave the dock, OK. Leaving their castles or 30,000 square foot homes to take private jets to lecture the rest of us on "green" when they could have all connected on a videoconference is a little rich.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I can’t imagine men spending pages discussing where or how another man places his hands on his body. There is no better upholder of patriarchy than women.


Please spare us your indignation.  You are participating in a celebrity gossip forum on a website devoted to high-end purses.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I won't begrudge Harry for being on Miller's yacht. The yacht was already there. Now the whole symposium was dumb, but not the fact that Harry was on the boat.
> 
> As for all this "carbon footprint" emissions stuff, it's misleading when companies claim to have "saved bla bla bla tons of carbon by not sending Flopsy, Topsy and Mopsy to the wherever".  No they didn't. The commercial plane they would have taken still took off with other passengers.  Now if they didn't use the corporate jet, OK, but most business travelers fly commercial. Not sending employees somewhere doesn't save on carbon emissions.
> 
> The yachts that are out there, Barry's and others, are still out there. Whether they go to Googleland or wherever, they're out there. If they never leave the dock, OK. Leaving their castles or 30,000 square foot homes to take private jets to lecture the rest of us on "green" when they could have all connected on a videoconference is a little rich.


I think we all know these people and companies  have huge carbon footprints, but this time it was flaunted and was the opposite of what they were discussing.  At least we think they were discussing climate change when they weren't playing tennis, swimming in the mega size pool and going to a Cold Play concert etc.  I do hope that they all remembered to have proper nutrition with adequate amounts of champagne, caviar and seafood delicacies.

Well, Harry had to sleep somewhere.  Since he went barefoot, he could have done the full Monty and slept in a sleeping bag on the beach.


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ner-party-etiquette-engaging-frowned-PDA.html

I have always thought that if you are invited to a dinner party or planned event, you should abide by the rules and not doing so is rude and insulting to the hostess.  The Brits are formal about such things in certain circles and if you agree to attend, you have to expect it.  I don't think that what they did was polite at all.  Aren't they past the "get a room stage?" Don't they see and speak to each other at home? Is this a show for the public?  I am going to presume these are Harry's friends and he will find that the only friends that he has are her friends.  Perhaps that is the plan.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ner-party-etiquette-engaging-frowned-PDA.html
> 
> I have always thought that if you are invited to a dinner party or planned event, you should abide by the rules and not doing so is rude and insulting to the hostess.  The Brits are formal about such things in certain circles and if you agree to attend, you have to expect it.  I don't think that what they did was polite at all.  Aren't they past the "get a room stage?" Don't they see and speak to each other at home? Is this a show for the public?  I am going to presume these are Harry's friends and he will find that the only friends that he has are her friends.  Perhaps that is the plan.


I'm pretty sure they both have sufficient social skills to be able to make conversations with people other than each other.  So they should sit where the host assigns them to sit.  If this is a show for the public I'm not impressed.


----------



## gracekelly

I have been to dinner parties over the years in this country where I did not sit next to the DH.  It's not terrible lol!  You can learn lots of interesting things from other people.  I just can't fathom having the nerve to insult the hosts in this way.  The hosts have taken the trouble to seat people in what they think will make for an interesting and exciting evening.  There was one NYC hostess who used to put people of opposing views at the same table and everyone had a great time.  In the real world, people make connections like this to advance careers and social relationships.


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> I'm pretty sure they both have sufficient social skills to be able to make conversations with people other than each other.  So they should sit where the host assigns them to sit.  If this is a show for the public I'm not impressed.


Meghan may have wanted this, but it was Harry’s job to correct her before this could became an issue. He should know better. In the scheme of things, this is really not a humongous deal, but these tiny missteps keep happening, so it’s more of a cumulative affect that’s probably wearing on the British public.


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> Meghan may have wanted this, but it was Harry’s job to correct her before this could became an issue. He should know better. In the scheme of things, this is really not a humongous deal, but these tiny missteps keep happening, so it’s more of a cumulative affect that’s probably wearing on the British public.


honestly I'm rather shy so in a group where I don't know people well I prefer to be seated with my husband.  But I don't see Meghan as shy.  She's an actress with her own blog, etc, etc.  So why?  If she want to show off the PDA, not a good idea IMO


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have been to dinner parties over the years in this country where I did not sit next to the DH.  It's not terrible lol!  You can learn lots of interesting things from other people.  I just can't fathom having the nerve to insult the hosts in this way.  The hosts have taken the trouble to seat people in what they think will make for an interesting and exciting evening.  There was one NYC hostess who used to put people of opposing views at the same table and everyone had a great time.  In the real world, people make connections like this to advance careers and social relationships.


and Meghan is very experienced in making connections and advancing her career and social status


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and Meghan is very experienced in making connections and advancing her career and social status


Yup, but I am guessing she thinks these people don't matter.  Well guess what, they do matter for her son because he is going to mingle with their children.  Unless the grand plan is to bring him up in the US, he will be an outsider.  

There is a whole school of thought that believes that she is where she is today because of a few people who paved the way for her and their pay day is coming very soon.  For some, it is already here.


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> Meghan may have wanted this, but it was Harry’s job to correct her before this could became an issue. He should know better. In the scheme of things, this is really not a humongous deal, but these tiny missteps keep happening, so it’s more of a cumulative affect that’s probably wearing on the British public.


Yes, he certainly should  have said NO!    People tend to remember things like this,  The public won't care if she insulted a particular host, but they will care that she is seemingly trying to consciously go against certain social traditions.  She did that at Wimbledon too.

What happened to all that talk of her becoming a UK citizen at the time of the marriage?  Why marry into this family and agree to live in a country with a different  set of social mores?  One woman against centuries of traditions?  That is not even a battle and no amount of going out to the shires to open dairies like the Duchess of Cornwall is going to make it better for her.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Yes, he certainly should  have said NO!    People tend to remember things like this,  The public won't care if she insulted a particular host, but they will care that she is seemingly trying to consciously go again certain social traditions.  She did that at Wimbledon too.
> 
> What happened to all that talk of her becoming a UK citizen at the time of the marriage?  Why marry into this family and agree to live in a country with a different  set of social mores?  One woman against centuries of traditions?  That is not even a battle and no amount of going out to the shires to open dairies like the Duchess of Cornwall is going to make it better for her.


I just have to wonder, how long will it take before (in addition to Prince William) .. Harry's friends start to either tell him that he's no longer invited/wanted or just abandon him completely.  While they may, at this time, want to be "just the 3 of them", well .. that can get very tiresome and while Harry clearly is infatuated with Meghan at this point, what happens when that wears off?  Just thinking about the Duke & Duchess of Windsor where, after some time, the Duke (supposedly) realized what he had given up for Wallis Simpson and some articles/books have said that he came to resent her.  Personally, I never think it's a good idea to isolate yourselves .. and Harry still has duties to perform unless he just wants to get away from it all .. but if that is the case, I think the British public will not want to support him (monetarily either).  I think Meghan needs to realize that many thought of her as a "breath of fresh air"; if she doesn't want to be then called a "breath of stink air", she (and Harry) should be mindful of what they are doing!


----------



## bag-mania

LVSistinaMM said:


> Meghan may have wanted this, but it was Harry’s job to correct her before this could became an issue. He should know better. In the scheme of things, this is really not a humongous deal, but these tiny missteps keep happening, so it’s more of a cumulative affect that’s probably wearing on the British public.



Possibly this is a continuation of Harry’s “what Meghan wants she gets” from last year. She seems to have the dominant or stronger personality in the marriage and I can tell he genuinely wants to please her.


----------



## gracekelly

@CeeJay  stink air


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Possibly this is a continuation of Harry’s “what Meghan wants she gets” from last year. She seems to have the dominant or stronger personality in the marriage and I can tell he genuinely wants to please her.


You know I find that desperate and sad. What kind of partnership is that?


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Yes, he certainly should  have said NO!    People tend to remember things like this,  The public won't care if she insulted a particular host, but they will care that she is seemingly trying to consciously go again certain social traditions.  She did that at Wimbledon too.
> 
> What happened to all that talk of her becoming a UK citizen at the time of the marriage?  Why marry into this family and agree to live in a country with a different  set of social mores?  One woman against centuries of traditions?  That is not even a battle and no amount of going out to the shires to open dairies like the Duchess of Cornwall is going to make it better for her.



You have to be married three years to a UK citizen before you can apply to become a UK citizen.

This isn’t surprising with everything going on. One about Epstein and Prince Andrew, but let’s criticize Meghan and Harry. Even though, they add certain tidbits in the article 

“Meghan isn't a stranger to breaking the rules after she recently fell foul of Wimbledon etiquette.

She donned jeans in the private members' only area in a surprise visit to watch her BFF Serena Williams compete in the tournament.”

“An England Club insider told The Times that she was not supposed to be wearing jeans in the members' areas of the tennis club and that she couldn't be invited to the Royal Box because of her outfit.”

Not she wasn’t in the Royal Box because the court Serena was playing at didn’t have a royal box. 

I don’t believe Meghan would try to change any hosts rule, I think it is untrue just like the Meghan and Harry rule story was proven untrue. As many who criticize Meghan for being fake, she plays the game to well for this faux pas.


----------



## Tivo

These complaints from “sources” sound trivial and petty. Is that all they got?


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> I don’t believe Meghan would try to change any hosts rule, I think it is untrue just like the Meghan and Harry rule story was proven untrue. As many who criticize Meghan for being fake, she plays the game to well for this faux pas.



Of course you think it is untrue.  Don’t shock me! Lol!

The story about rules for Frogmore May have been untrue, but something spurred a person to go to the trouble to make it up.   I find there is usually some little truth lurking in the background in cases like this

 Regrettably she has made numerous faux pas with the Queen and Harry in public. Hopefully she learned from them and won’t do it again. 

As far as playing the game, ,that would infer that she is playing within their rules and it doesn’t appear that she is so I don’t think she is playing well at all. She is playing with her set of rules and that is not the same thing.  That’s like playing baseball and demanding 4 outs before your side will be retired.


----------



## Morgan R

I find Daily Fail articles pathetic no matter if they are about celebrities or royals always amazing to see they are shared so often not just here on the Purse Forum but elsewhere online and that people believe them. Daily Fail are notorious for trashing the royals it is just Harry & Meghan are just their newest targets but a few years ago they were trashing William & Kate. We can't talk politics so I'll just say this it is public knowledge Daily Fail leans a certain direction but also have respect for Queen Elizabeth II above of all the other members everybody else in the family can and have been subjected to negative stories about them from the Daily Fail. Amazingly but not shockingly there are a whole bunch of new Harry and Meghan stories on the Daily Fail as if they are the biggest royal controversy right now when literally Prince Andrew has been mentioned in newly released documents as it relates to his connection Jeffrey Epstein.

The story about PDA definitely seems off to me. Harry has always been one of the more tactile members of the British Royal Family when it comes to him interacting with his family, friends, previous girlfriends, and now Meghan. Harry's friends would know that because that isn't a new characteristic of Harry's.  Often times if you actually watch clips of Harry and Meghan it is actually Harry that is reaching out his hand for Meghan not Meghan making Harry hold her hand (that is not to say Meghan doesn't reach out for Harry's hand because she does it is just that I notice Harry actually us the one that reaches for Meghan's hand more). Harry and Meghan holding hands, touching each other's backs, Meghan holding onto Harry's arm, etc. honestly reminds of some other royal couples that are tactile in public those couple notably they remind me of Felipe & Letizia, Frederik & Mary, and sometimes even Charles & Camilla.


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> I find Daily Fail articles pathetic no matter if they are about celebrities or royals always amazing to see they are shared so often not just here on the Purse Forum but elsewhere online and that people believe them. Daily Fail are notorious for trashing the royals it is just Harry & Meghan are just their newest targets but a few years ago they were trashing William & Kate. We can't talk politics so I'll just say this it is public knowledge Daily Fail leans a certain direction but also have respect for Queen Elizabeth II above of all the other members everybody else in the family can and have been subjected to negative stories about them from the Daily Fail. Amazingly but not shockingly there are a whole bunch of new Harry and Meghan stories on the Daily Fail as if they are the biggest royal controversy right now when literally Prince Andrew has been mentioned in newly released documents as it relates to his connection Jeffrey Epstein.
> 
> The story about PDA definitely seems off to me. Harry has always been one of the more tactile members of the British Royal Family when it comes to him interacting with his family, friends, previous girlfriends, and now Meghan. Harry's friends would know that because that isn't a new characteristic of Harry's.  Often times if you actually watch clips of Harry and Meghan it is actually Harry that is reaching out his hand for Meghan not Meghan making Harry hold her hand (that is not to say Meghan doesn't reach out for Harry's hand because she does it is just that I notice Harry actually us the one that reaches for Meghan's hand more). Harry and Meghan holding hands, touching each other's backs, Meghan holding onto Harry's arm, etc. honestly reminds of some other royal couples that are tactile in public those couple notably they remind me of Felipe & Letizia, Frederik & Mary, and sometimes even Charles & Camilla.


Please post a picture of the aforementioned royals illustrating one of them hanging on the other as to look like they will both hit the floor  any second. Thanks in advance.


----------



## caramelize126

CeeJay said:


> I just have to wonder, how long will it take before (in addition to Prince William) .. Harry's friends start to either tell him that he's no longer invited/wanted or just abandon him completely.  While they may, at this time, want to be "just the 3 of them", well .. that can get very tiresome and while Harry clearly is infatuated with Meghan at this point, what happens when that wears off?  Just thinking about the Duke & Duchess of Windsor where, after some time, the Duke (supposedly) realized what he had given up for Wallis Simpson and some articles/books have said that he came to resent her.  Personally, I never think it's a good idea to isolate yourselves .. and Harry still has duties to perform unless he just wants to get away from it all .. but if that is the case, I think the British public will not want to support him (monetarily either).  I think Meghan needs to realize that many thought of her as a "breath of fresh air"; if she doesn't want to be then called a "breath of stink air", she (and Harry) should be mindful of what they are doing!



She obviously has him mesmerized. For anyone that has read the art of seduction, "isolating your victim" is actually the title of one of the chapters.

Meghan appears to be acutely aware of the fact that she is older than him. IMO, the constant grabbing, baby voice, not wanting to be separated from him, etc. is to counteract that. Being seating away from your spouse is common at dinner parties, as it allows you to socialize with other people. This just makes it seem like she doesn't want him to make any new friends 

Also, for all the folks that keep bringing up Epstein and Prince Andrew, please create a new thread to discuss that. I am not clear on why folks insist on bringing that up in a *Henry and Meghan* thread.


----------



## Morgan R

gracekelly said:


> Please post a picture of the aforementioned royals illustrating one of them hanging on the other as to look like they will both hit the floor  any second. Thanks in advance.



Why do I need to post pictures? You can look them up as there are multiple pictures of them available online.

Felipe & Letizia as well as Frederik & Mary are often seen kissing each other on the cheeks in public (occasionally also on the lips), often holding hands, have their hands on each other's back, etc. Charles and Camilla do those things less often but there are pictures of them doing those things as well.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> You know I find that desperate and sad. What kind of partnership is that?


100% Agree!! .. at some point, the other party becomes resentful .. a 50/50 partnership is ALWAYS the best!


----------



## mdcx

Does anyone else remember the dating book 'The Rules'? I get the feeling Megs may be a 'Rules" girl.


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> I just have to wonder, how long will it take before (in addition to Prince William) .. Harry's friends start to either tell him that he's no longer invited/wanted or just abandon him completely.


It's been widely reported that Harry had a falling out with one of his closest friends, Tom Inskip, over Meghan.  Very similar to the falling out with William in that Tom ("Skippy") expressed doubts to Harry about the Meghan relationship and was then frozen out.  He was invited to the wedding, but pointedly not invited to the family-and-close-friends reception.  (The one where the Clooneys held court.)  

It is very much a red flag when close friends and siblings are concerned enough about a relationship to stick their necks out and say something, and also a red flag when they subsequently get cut off over it.  Good relationships usually do not lead to the destruction of friendships and close sibling bonds.


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> Does anyone else remember the dating book 'The Rules'? I get the feeling Megs may be a 'Rules" girl.


Made me laugh cuz she was in a TV movie called "The Dater's Handbook", I think


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> Also, for all the folks that keep bringing up Epstein and Prince Andrew, please create a new thread to discuss that. I am not clear on why folks insist on bringing that up in a *Henry and Meghan* thread.


Amen.  There are PLENTY of Prince Andrew stories in the media right now, including the Daily Mail.  They are not relevant to Meghan.


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> I just have to wonder, how long will it take before (in addition to Prince William) .. Harry's friends start to either tell him that he's no longer invited/wanted or just abandon him completely.  While they may, at this time, want to be "just the 3 of them", well .. that can get very tiresome and while Harry clearly is infatuated with Meghan at this point, what happens when that wears off?  Just thinking about the Duke & Duchess of Windsor where, after some time, the Duke (supposedly) realized what he had given up for Wallis Simpson and some articles/books have said that he came to resent her.  Personally, I never think it's a good idea to isolate yourselves .. and Harry still has duties to perform unless he just wants to get away from it all .. but if that is the case, I think the British public will not want to support him (monetarily either).  I think Meghan needs to realize that many thought of her as a "breath of fresh air"; if she doesn't want to be then called a "breath of stink air", she (and Harry) should be mindful of what they are doing!


I've read that Wallis thought of leaving Edward, but knowing what he gave up for her she could not.


----------



## loogirl

buffym said:


> You have to be married three years to a UK citizen before you can apply to become a UK citizen.
> 
> This isn’t surprising with everything going on. One about Epstein and Prince Andrew, but let’s criticize Meghan and Harry. Even though, they add certain tidbits in the article
> 
> “Meghan isn't a stranger to breaking the rules after she recently fell foul of Wimbledon etiquette.
> 
> She donned jeans in the private members' only area in a surprise visit to watch her BFF Serena Williams compete in the tournament.”
> 
> “An England Club insider told The Times that she was not supposed to be wearing jeans in the members' areas of the tennis club and that she couldn't be invited to the Royal Box because of her outfit.”
> 
> Not she wasn’t in the Royal Box because the court Serena was playing at didn’t have a royal box.
> 
> I don’t believe Meghan would try to change any hosts rule, I think it is untrue just like the Meghan and Harry rule story was proven untrue. As many who criticize Meghan for being fake, she plays the game to well for this faux pas.



We get it. You love MM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## loogirl

Morgan R said:


> Why do I need to post pictures? You can look them up as there are multiple pictures of them available online.
> 
> Felipe & Letizia as well as Frederik & Mary are often seen kissing each other on the cheeks in public (occasionally also on the lips), often holding hands, have their hands on each other's back, etc. Charles and Camilla do those things less often but there are pictures of them doing those things as well.



Pictures of them occasionally doing it. I follow the Royal Fashion thread and I do NOT see Letizia & Felipe hanging on to each other like MM does to Harry. It is painfully obvious in the way she does it and looks ridiculous. Others look natural. It stands out because it is so OTT and constant.


----------



## Sharont2305

It's not just the hand holding, it's the clinging on with her other arm too that's annoying. And the fact it's practically every time. There is no need, especially at more auspicious occasions ie ceremonies at Westminster Abbey etc. You very rarely see others do it, when William and Catherine do it (rarely) there's usually a gap between their bodies, Meghan seems to cling onto him.
I'm not a Meghan hater, far from it, I like her, it's just a tad annoying.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Morgan R said:


> I find Daily Fail articles pathetic no matter if they are about celebrities or royals always amazing to see they are shared so often not just here on the Purse Forum but elsewhere online and that people believe them. Daily Fail are notorious for trashing the royals it is just Harry & Meghan are just their newest targets but a few years ago they were trashing William & Kate. We can't talk politics so I'll just say this it is public knowledge Daily Fail leans a certain direction but also have respect for Queen Elizabeth II above of all the other members everybody else in the family can and have been subjected to negative stories about them from the Daily Fail. Amazingly but not shockingly there are a whole bunch of new Harry and Meghan stories on the Daily Fail as if they are the biggest royal controversy right now when literally Prince Andrew has been mentioned in newly released documents as it relates to his connection Jeffrey Epstein.
> 
> The story about PDA definitely seems off to me. Harry has always been one of the more tactile members of the British Royal Family when it comes to him interacting with his family, friends, previous girlfriends, and now Meghan. Harry's friends would know that because that isn't a new characteristic of Harry's.  Often times if you actually watch clips of Harry and Meghan it is actually Harry that is reaching out his hand for Meghan not Meghan making Harry hold her hand (that is not to say Meghan doesn't reach out for Harry's hand because she does it is just that I notice Harry actually us the one that reaches for Meghan's hand more). Harry and Meghan holding hands, touching each other's backs, Meghan holding onto Harry's arm, etc. honestly reminds of some other royal couples that are tactile in public those couple notably they remind me of Felipe & Letizia, Frederik & Mary, and sometimes even Charles & Camilla.


The press are all over Prince Andrew, both online and in print.  Its disingenuous to imply that the Epstein issue is being ignored in favour of criticism of Meghan and Harry, as if it’s some kind of establishment cover up - or as a means to derail this thread.


----------



## buffym

Sharont2305 said:


> It's not just the hand holding, it's the clinging on with her other arm too that's annoying. And the fact it's practically every time. There is no need, especially at more auspicious occasions ie ceremonies at Westminster Abbey etc. You very rarely see others do it, when William and Catherine do it (rarely) there's usually a gap between their bodies, Meghan seems to cling onto him.
> I'm not a Meghan hater, far from it, I like her, it's just a tad annoying.



We each see from different perspectives because I’ve seen as many pictures of Harry touching Meghan as vs. 



I don’t find it annoying because it isn’t me and I do not believe it effects their ability to represent charities. Some find the lack of physical affection between the Cambridges annoying. 

I don’t compare them to William and Kate because Harry and William have always been different, Harry has always been more physical affectionate.

I see more similarities with the couple and the Spanish King and Queen.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...y/39873674/image/40111688/HandArm-Holding/amp


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> We each see from different perspectives because I’ve seen as many pictures of Harry touching Meghan as vs.
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t find it annoying because it isn’t me and I do not believe it effects their ability to represent charities. Some find the lack of physical affection between the Cambridges annoying.
> 
> I don’t compare them to William and Kate because each couple are different and express themselves differently.



I get it, each to their own, just giving my opinion and appreciate others. Don't mind the back touching, it's the clinging I was talking about.


----------



## myown

*wait... how did we fall back to her touching her baby bump? I thought we were over that!*


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> Of course you think it is untrue.  Don’t shock me! Lol!
> 
> The story about rules for Frogmore May have been untrue, but something spurred a person to go to the trouble to make it up.   I find there is usually some little truth lurking in the background in cases like this
> 
> Regrettably she has made numerous faux pas with the Queen and Harry in public. Hopefully she learned from them and won’t do it again.
> 
> As far as playing the game, ,that would infer that she is playing within their rules and it doesn’t appear that she is so I don’t think she is playing well at all. She is playing with her set of rules and that is not the same thing.  That’s like playing baseball and demanding 4 outs before your side will be retired.


Exactly, as a royal you are not supposed to be wearing dark nail polish and what does she do?
Wear dark polish. Same situation with the jeans, she is way too smart to be so cavalier, imo she does it for attention.
I don’t know if she is the seductress that some portrays her to be but she is very much calculating.
As far as the touching, it seems that both of them can’t keep their hands off one another. Let’s remember that they are still in the honeymoon phase, so it is natural, imo.
On the French news, there was a short tidbit about Meagan and the person strongly believed that there was a bit of racism element in the way, the British public views the Duchess.
I would love to hear what Philip had to say when he met her..


----------



## buffym

limom said:


> Exactly, as a royal you are not supposed to be wearing dark nail polish and what does she do?
> Wear dark polish. Same situation with the jeans, she is way too smart to be so cavalier, imo she does it for attention.
> I don’t know if she is the seductress that some portrays her to be but she is very much calculating.
> As far as the touching, it seems that both of them can’t keep their hands off one another. Let’s remember that they are still in the honeymoon phase, so it is natural, imo.
> On the French news, there was a short tidbit about Meagan and the person strongly believed that there was a bit of racism element in the way, the British public views the Duchess.
> I would love to hear what Philip had to say when he met her..



There are no actual rules royals about wearing dark nail polishes.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.el...kle-kate-middleton-dark-nail-polish-protocol/

Some were quick to speculate that Meghan broke protocol by wearing dark nail polish; Harper's Bazaar pointed out yesterday that Kate has worn dark nail polish too in the past, back in 2012 when she went to a dinner for The Thirty Club. Meghan is not alone in her love of dark nail polish, and wearing it doesn't even break royal protocol at all.

While royal etiquette expert Myka Meier, Beaumont Etiquette's founder/director and a British-American trained by a former member of the Queen's household, told ELLE.com earlier this year that Meghan had changed her nails generally to wear "that light, neutral pink that is favored in the palaces and [with] other royals. We see her with that now, nice, short, square nails," she also noted that Meghan would not go out in anything protocol-breaking; she wouldn't have the option to. And "favored," additionally, doesn't mean mandated.

Jeans are allowed at Wimbledon just not in the royal box. Since Serena was playing at a court without a royal box it wasn’t a issue.

In fact, unlike Ascot, there is no official dress code for Wimbledon. ... There is an unspoken rule that Wimbledon attendees should make an effort, especially when heading to a hospitality area. Darker shades of denim look smarter than pale-wash so stick to black or deep indigo.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...royals/dos-donts-wearing-jeans-wimbledon/amp/


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> The press are all over Prince Andrew, both online and in print. Its disingenuous to imply that the Epstein issue is being ignored in favour of criticism of Meghan and Harry, as if it’s some kind of establishment cover up - or as a means to derail this thread.


Yes, it's not an either-or situation.  Andrew's face was all over the Daily Mail yesterday.  There were multiple articles about Andrew alone, as well as multiple articles about Epstein that featured Andrew.  The Daily Mail did not need to suspend their normal coverage of Meghan (or Miley Cyrus or the 900 other celebrities they cover) in order to cover Andrew.  

It's just the new thing now to defend Meghan by saying, "criticizing Meghan instead of Andrew and Epstein!".   There's no "instead" involved.  They have nothing to do with each other.


----------



## marthastoo

minababe said:


> omg .. she is more than 2 years in London. Dating Harry for over 3 years.
> People get an accent or adopt words after some weeks or months.


I like how people keep dusting off the same video from 2 years ago as PROOF Meghan is such a PHONY with her FAKE POSH ACCENT! Now as when I listened to it the first time, I was like, "What accent?"  You mean, maybe when she said "thank you"?  I literally do not hear any kind of British accent, posh or not. 

Also, not getting the whole girlish, faux-innocent voice.  Her voice sounds normal.  I would not note the tone if I had met her IRL as a non-celebrity.  Yes, her voice isn't harsh, grating, or loud.  Does that mean it's baby-like and phony?  No.


----------



## doloresmia

After more than 14 years, my DH and I still hold hands and look at each other like this. Hope the same for Harry and Meghan. It is a lovely feeling.


----------



## A1aGypsy

doloresmia said:


> After more than 14 years, my DH and I still hold hands and look at each other like this. Hope the same for Harry and Meghan. It is a lovely feeling.




LOVE this.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that both Harry and Meghan are expressive people, which is the key reason for the touching and hand holding. But I have to say as carefully scrutinized as their relationship is, and probably always will be, I don't blame them. It's a nice simple way to show the world they are committed to each other. If they were making out on red carpets while attending events, it would be over the top and inappropriate. But they are not. They are giving subtle signals to the world that they love each other and are committed to each other.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> The press are all over Prince Andrew, both online and in print.  Its disingenuous to imply that the Epstein issue is being ignored in favour of criticism of Meghan and Harry, as if it’s some kind of establishment cover up - or as a means to derail this thread.


I have seen andrew mentioned as one of the men involved....not really being singled out in reports I've seen here in US


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I have seen andrew mentioned as one of the men involved....not really being singled out in reports I've seen here in US


I've seen a few (NBC, for example).  But mostly the US media is focused on Epstein himself and his US associates (the President of the US, for one).  There's no reason for the US media to give special attention to a relatively minor British royal in the context of a serious news story.

Now in the "British royal gossip" context....I scrolled down The Daily Mail's front page yesterday.  Five separate photos of Prince Andrew.  2-3 stories about Andrew individually.  Too many Epstein stories to count, but most of them including Andrew.  The Daily Mail definitely did not have to skimp on their Andrew coverage in order to bring us a story about Meghan's supposed dinner party habits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

I don’t mind the touching. It’s affectionate and shows the couple are close and connected. It’s human. 
Sure, it’s not favorably looked upon by some officials, but I would love to have such an affectionate relationship. So kudos to them.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> I think that both Harry and Meghan are expressive people, which is the key reason for the touching and hand holding. But I have to say as carefully scrutinized as their relationship is, and probably always will be, I don't blame them. It's a nice simple way to show the world they are committed to each other. If they were making out on red carpets while attending events, it would be over the top and inappropriate. But they are not. They are giving subtle signals to the world that they love each other and are committed to each other.


I think that's fine but the business about them needing to sit together even when the host assigns them not to is inappropriate IMO


----------



## LibbyRuth

sdkitty said:


> I think that's fine but the business about them needing to sit together even when the host assigns them not to is inappropriate IMO



I'd agree with that. For the sorts of events they are attending with assigned seating, it's common to split up couples and it's done so that more people have an opportunity to get to spend time with one of them. As in love as they are, they should be able to handle a couple of hours on other sides of a room so that more people can say they dined with a Sussex.


----------



## zen1965

limom said:


> (...)
> I would love to hear what Philip had to say when he met her..



You are evil!


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> I think that's fine but the business about them needing to sit together even when the host assigns them not to is inappropriate IMO



Yes, but there is zero proof that is true, it is a tabloid stating that Meghan and Harry are demanding to sit by each other. A tabloid also said Meghan and Harry gave a list of demands to the neighbors. It turned out to be untrue.

As smart as Meghan is and as often as she has been called calculating and manipulate this does not fit her personality. For one it was a mutual friend that reportedly introduced them and I can’t see Meghan not playing any society game with Harry friends. 

This story seems untrue, the same way the neighbors story was untrue but Harry and Meghan were criticized for it.


----------



## gracekelly

The dinner party seating story has now been surfacing in all papers/tabloids and cable news and internet services.  I don't think the cable news services would pass along a story that they did not verify in some way as they are not into gossip mongering.  Some of the services did find the story to be amusing and thought the entire process of placement was pretty funny.  Those were non British services as one might expect.

As far as whether she did it or not, I could see her tweaking his upper class friends if her feeling is that they don't like her, because  it would be no loss in her opinion if she upset them to the point of not being invited in the future.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> Exactly, as a royal you are not supposed to be wearing dark nail polish and what does she do?
> Wear dark polish. Same situation with the jeans, she is way too smart to be so cavalier, imo she does it for attention.
> I don’t know if she is the seductress that some portrays her to be but she is very much calculating.
> As far as the touching, it seems that both of them can’t keep their hands off one another. Let’s remember that they are still in the honeymoon phase, so it is natural, imo.
> On the French news, there was a short tidbit about Meagan and the person strongly believed that there was a bit of racism element in the way, the British public views the Duchess.
> *I would love to hear what Philip had to say when he met her.*.



Being well bred, despite his reputation for a sharp tongue, I think he was very polite. Phillip always appreciates a pretty face lol!  However, if he ever gets the feeling that MM has insulted the Queen or the family, she is toast.  Sarah Ferguson had to move her tush out of Balmoral because he showed up early and he has stated that he *will not *be under the same roof as Sarah for doing just that.


----------



## zen1965

Sharp tongue is one way to put it....
„People think there‘s a rigid class system here, but dukes have even been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.“ (DoE in 2000)


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> The dinner party seating story has now been surfacing in all papers/tabloids and cable news and internet services.  I don't think the cable news services would pass along a story that they did not verify in some way as they are not into gossip mongering.  Some of the services did find the story to be amusing and thought the entire process of placement was pretty funny.  Those were non British services as one might expect.
> 
> As far as whether she did it or not, I could see her tweaking his upper class friends if her feeling is that they don't like her, because  it would be no loss in her opinion if she upset them to the point of not being invited in the future.



They also ran the neighbors story, and British tabloid reporters were on tv quoting it. Very few though are running the retraction.

Quantity and quality are not the same, the Sun started the other story and the other tabloids copied it, the Daily Mail started this one and now the other tabloids are copying it.


----------



## Sharont2305

zen1965 said:


> Sharp tongue is one way to put it....
> „People think there‘s a rigid class system here, but dukes have even been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.“ (DoE in 2000)


Yup, that's our Prince Philip for ya


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> They also ran the neighbors story, and British tabloid reporters were on tv quoting it. Very few though are running the retraction.


Just want to say, what you posted did not refute the neighbors story.  Buckingham Palace confirmed that a meeting took place to advise the neighbors.  There was controversy over whether there was an actual written list of rules handed out at this meeting.  It turns out there was and it was written sarcastically by a neighbor who was sick of Meghan and Harry's security imposing on him and specifically his ability to walk his dog.  Which basically reinforces much of the original tabloid report and doesn't make Harry and Meghan sound like the best of neighbors.  The fact that Harry and Meghan didn't personally write out a list of rules, which was never stated in the original report anyway, is extremely weak vindication.


----------



## loogirl

buffym said:


> There are no actual rules royals about wearing dark nail polishes.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.el...kle-kate-middleton-dark-nail-polish-protocol/
> 
> Some were quick to speculate that Meghan broke protocol by wearing dark nail polish; Harper's Bazaar pointed out yesterday that Kate has worn dark nail polish too in the past, back in 2012 when she went to a dinner for The Thirty Club. Meghan is not alone in her love of dark nail polish, and wearing it doesn't even break royal protocol at all.
> 
> While royal etiquette expert Myka Meier, Beaumont Etiquette's founder/director and a British-American trained by a former member of the Queen's household, told ELLE.com earlier this year that Meghan had changed her nails generally to wear "that light, neutral pink that is favored in the palaces and [with] other royals. We see her with that now, nice, short, square nails," she also noted that Meghan would not go out in anything protocol-breaking; she wouldn't have the option to. And "favored," additionally, doesn't mean mandated.
> 
> Jeans are allowed at Wimbledon just not in the royal box. Since Serena was playing at a court without a royal box it wasn’t a issue.
> 
> In fact, unlike Ascot, there is no official dress code for Wimbledon. ... There is an unspoken rule that Wimbledon attendees should make an effort, especially when heading to a hospitality area. Darker shades of denim look smarter than pale-wash so stick to black or deep indigo.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...royals/dos-donts-wearing-jeans-wimbledon/amp/
> 
> View attachment 4513954



Omg you write epic poem length posts about MM. Do you not have anything else to do? Like your posts are so OTT. Compiling photos, writing out long winded observations etc. Like we alllll get it. You love them. Fine. Your posts aren’t going to change anyone’s mind if they dislike them or think they are annoying or whatever. Chill. You are way too invested in them.


----------



## Vlad

loogirl said:


> Omg you write epic poem length posts about MM. Do you not have anything else to do? Like your posts are so OTT. Compiling photos, writing out long winded observations etc. Like we alllll get it. You love them. Fine. Your posts aren’t going to change anyone’s mind if they dislike them or think they are annoying or whatever. Chill. *You are way too invested in them*.



...which is perfectly within her rights. Let's not start gatekeeping in this thread who ought to contribute which was in this thread. If you are annoyed or put off by a particular poster, please use the ignore list.


----------



## doloresmia

Here are two stories from today ....

Harper’s Bazaar reporting on a Private Eye, a UK newspaper, story showing the rules about approaching Harry and Meghan around Frogmore were a prank by a neighbor. I couldn’t access the original story, so am copying the Harpersbazaar repost
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...rince-harry-list-demands-for-neighbors-spoof/

And a picture of the original Sun article with the alleged rules written in Olde English




In other stories, the Daily Express wrote a clickbait headline to say Harry and Meghan are splitting.... if you read the story you learn Mme Tussauds is splitting the wax statues of the two.

https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...rince-harry-news-latest-split-Madame-Tussauds


----------



## gracekelly

@loogirl  Hmmmmm   epic poem.  Like the Iliad and the Odyssey?  Odysseus means trouble in Greek.  I do get the feeling that most of the things written about on this thread equate to some type of trouble,  viz.,  created, resulted in or landed in. 

@buffym   Check out msn,com, foxnews.com, yahoo.com, cosmopolitan.com (etc.) and let's not leave out laineygossip.com who has always been a big MM supporter.  just a sample of news services who thought the dinner party story was truthful enough to land on their sites.

Getting a very large virtual Valium pill ready for the stans.  Someone is going to need it one of these days.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

doloresmia said:


> Here are two stories from today ....
> 
> Harper’s Bazaar reporting on a Private Eye, a UK newspaper, story showing the rules about approaching Harry and Meghan around Frogmore were a prank by a neighbor. I couldn’t access the original story, so am copying the Harpersbazaar repost
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...rince-harry-list-demands-for-neighbors-spoof/
> 
> And a picture of the original Sun article with the alleged rules written in Olde English
> 
> View attachment 4514403
> 
> 
> In other stories, the Daily Express wrote a clickbait headline to say Harry and Meghan are splitting.... if you read the story you learn Mme Tussauds is splitting the wax statues of the two.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...rince-harry-news-latest-split-Madame-Tussauds


Thou shalt ...lol!  Too bad they didn't Photoshop it onto something resembling the tablets  that Moses carried.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> @loogirl  Hmmmmm   epic poem.  Like the Iliad and the Odyssey?  Odysseus means trouble in Greek.  I do get the feeling that most of the things written about on this thread equate to some type of trouble,  viz.,  created, resulted in or landed in.
> 
> @buffym   Check out msn,com, foxnews.com, yahoo.com, cosmopolitan.com (etc.) and let's not leave out laineygossip.com who has always been a big MM supporter.  just a sample of news services who thought the dinner party story was truthful enough to land on their sites.
> 
> Getting a very large virtual Valium pill ready for the stans.  Someone is going to need it one of these days.



Cosmopolitan also ran the neighbors story 
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...n-markle-prince-harry-neighbors-list-demands/
and I bit so did the other gossip sites. But it has been proven untrue. 

Again quality and quantity are not synonymous.

For example, Lainey ran the Prince William cheated on Kate. 

https://www.laineygossip.com/rumour...nes-friend-rose-hanbury-come-to-surface/52289

As did MSN and probably the other gossip sites, they just copy each other. But, it doesn’t make it true.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle...h-the-prince-william-affair-rumour/ar-AABRsWO


----------



## myown

just recently there was a hack on a german newspapers twitter account. the hacker put up some headlines and even the hacked newspaper brought the story. the next day some other newspaper asked what was wrong with the twitter account and weather its been hacked and only then they discovered that. tons of news-sites quoted the tweets.
so if it happened to a newspaper, that they run untrue stories, why now gossip sites?

just because a story is printed doesn't make it true.


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> just because a story is printed doesn't make it true.


My thoughts exactly


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> It's not just the hand holding, it's the clinging on with her other arm too that's annoying. And the fact it's practically every time. There is no need, especially at more auspicious occasions ie ceremonies at Westminster Abbey etc. You very rarely see others do it, when William and Catherine do it (rarely) there's usually a gap between their bodies, Meghan seems to cling onto him.
> I'm not a Meghan hater, far from it, I like her, it's just a tad annoying.


I think she does it because she (still) needs a lot of help/guidance from him at events and whatnot. The closer she clings, the easier to get some verbal and non-verbal direction on what to do. It's not a gesture of affection imo, but done for help. Unless there are pics of her doing this with other boyfriends/her husband that would indicate this is her affection style. It could also be her telling him what to do - giving an arm squeeze to quiet him in conversation, show support, or show her discomfort. I think she's communicating with her fingers


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think she does it because she (still) needs a lot of help/guidance from him at events and whatnot. The closer she clings, the easier to get some verbal and non-verbal direction on what to do. It's not a gesture of affection imo, but done for help. *Unless there are pics of her doing this with other boyfriends/her husband that would indicate this is her affection style.* It could also be her telling him what to do - giving an arm squeeze to quiet him in conversation, show support, or show her discomfort. I think she's communicating with her fingers



That's a good question! A quick Google search and I found photos of her with her ex-husband that could be construed as her affection style being clingy and touchy-feely. Keep in mind she wasn't famous back then, so photos of her with others are relatively few. Anyway, she sure doesn't look like she needs guidance IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Cosmopolitan also ran the neighbors story
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...n-markle-prince-harry-neighbors-list-demands/
> and I bit so did the other gossip sites. But it has been proven untrue.
> 
> Again quality and quantity are not synonymous.
> 
> For example, Lainey ran the Prince William cheated on Kate.
> 
> https://www.laineygossip.com/rumour...nes-friend-rose-hanbury-come-to-surface/52289
> 
> As did MSN and probably the other gossip sites, they just copy each other. But, it doesn’t make it true.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle...h-the-prince-william-affair-rumour/ar-AABRsWO



FYI reread my comment about the sites. It was specific to the dinner party story

You know in show business there is no such thing as bad publicity. So yes even untrue stories keeps your profile high in the media and quantity trumps quality every time . Always a plus for thirsty people.


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think she does it because she (still) needs a lot of help/guidance from him at events and whatnot. The closer she clings, the easier to get some verbal and non-verbal direction on what to do. It's not a gesture of affection imo, but done for help. Unless there are pics of her doing this with other boyfriends/her husband that would indicate this is her affection style. It could also be her telling him what to do - giving an arm squeeze to quiet him in conversation, show support, or show her discomfort. I think she's communicating with her fingers


It reads as a possessive gesture to me.  As did the picture she posted on Instagram on fathers day in which Harry’s ring dominated all


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> It reads as a possessive gesture to me.  As did the picture she posted on Instagram on fathers day in which Harry’s ring dominated all


Control control control


----------



## cafecreme15

Clearblueskies said:


> It reads as a possessive gesture to me.  As did the picture she posted on Instagram on fathers day in which Harry’s ring dominated all


Interesting take! Hadn't considered the composition of the photo from this angle.


----------



## chicaloca

Perception of the Sussexes so rarely matches actual reality. Harry initiates the hand -holding nearly every time. There are numerous gifs floating around social media dedicated to him doing so. His affectionate nature comes from his mother.

The press has no idea what happens at a Sussex dinner party. They didn’t know the Sussexes and Clooney’s dined together regularly until George said so. They didn’t know Oprah was meeting Harry in London regularly for their documentary. They didn’t know when Doria arrived or left the UK. They didn’t know Meghan was making all those trips to her patronages like The Hubb and Smart Works. They didn’t know Meghan was lunching with and interviewing Michelle *****. They didn’t know when Meghan went into labor or what hospital she went to and on and on.

All that to say that the media knows nothing about the Sussexes until the Sussexes tell them. The move to Frogmore and the lack of full time staff there means there are zero leaks coming out of the Sussex camp so all the press can do is write fan fiction.


----------



## chicaloca

Just gonna leave these here. Harry’s a real gentleman. Meghan’s not the clingy one.


----------



## cafecreme15

chicaloca said:


> Just gonna leave these here. Harry’s a real gentleman. Meghan’s not the clingy one.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4514913
> View attachment 4514914
> View attachment 4514915
> View attachment 4514916
> View attachment 4514917


Thank you for sharing these. This is also probably a protective gesture on his part. Unfortunately it seems to be backfiring and causing more criticism of Meghan.


----------



## Tivo

chicaloca said:


> Just gonna leave these here. Harry’s a real gentleman. Meghan’s not the clingy one.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4514913
> View attachment 4514914
> View attachment 4514915
> View attachment 4514916
> View attachment 4514917


I actually love this.


----------



## Encore Hermes

A lot of newlyweds hold hands or touch each other a lot and so do a lot of older couples who have been married for decades. I dont why she/ they are criticized for doing something that is loving. 
Maybe if he/she never reached out they would be called cold.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

How do you have lunch with a person when your  lunch time is  five hours ahead of the interviewee and 3460 miles separate you?


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> How do you have lunch with a person when your  lunch time is  five hours ahead of the interviewee and 3460 miles separate you?


She didn’t have lunch with her, she just phrased it to imply that she did.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> She didn’t have lunch with her, she just phrased it to imply that she did.


I know, but it wasn't entirely truthful.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> I know, but it wasn't entirely truthful.


Nope, it wasn’t at all truthful. It’s stuff like this that I don’t understand the reasoning behind them doing.


----------



## Swanky

I friggin' hate this thread lol

I love the affection, my man and I are affectionate as well.  We're not clingy, but we hold hands a lot and he likes to have his hand on my back, runs to get the door, etc. . .


----------



## chicaloca

gracekelly said:


> How do you have lunch with a person when your  lunch time is  five hours ahead of the interviewee and 3460 miles separate you?



The interview was proposed over lunch. It didn’t happen during the same lunch. Meghan sent Michelle the questions via email. This is all written in the interview.


----------



## bag-mania

Swanky said:


> I love the affection, my man and I are as well.  We're not clingy, but we hold hands a lot and he likes to have his hand on my back, runs to get the door, etc. . .



I understand to some extent. My husband and I hold hands a lot too. But since they are famous, Harry and Meghan already know their every move in public is being filmed or photographed by a very attentive gossip media. That's a little different than being an anonymous couple holding hands in the store IMO. Should knowing their behavior will be analyzed on social media cause them to dial it back on the PDAs a bit? Not necessarily, but if they are presenting themselves a certain way, it's because that's how they want us to see them.


----------



## Swanky

Not imo 
To be super honest, I can't believe it's even being discussed, lol
I can't believe that half the things being discussed in here are a "thing".


----------



## bag-mania

That why I don't understand why they took away our beating the dead horse emoji. It was perfect for threads like this one.


----------



## Tivo

I also love the affection the Obamas show each other. It’s just sweet and refreshing and nice to see.


----------



## gracekelly

chicaloca said:


> The interview was proposed over lunch. It didn’t happen during the same lunch. Meghan sent Michelle the questions via email. This is all written in the interview.



Meghan ate her lunch tacos whilst emailing Q &A  back and forth  with Mrs *****.  That’ s It


----------



## Bag*Snob

There you go.


----------



## bag-mania

Thank you! How did you get him back?


----------



## LittleStar88

Really?? Picking on the amount of affection they show to one another in public? 

With the state of this world, we should be encouraging this from them and doing it ourselves as much as possible.


----------



## hockeygirl

bag-mania said:


> I understand to some extent. My husband and I hold hands a lot too. But since they are famous, Harry and Meghan already know their every move in public is being filmed or photographed by a very attentive gossip media. That's a little different than being an anonymous couple holding hands in the store IMO. Should knowing their behavior will be analyzed on social media cause them to dial it back on the PDAs a bit? Not necessarily, but if they are presenting themselves a certain way, it's because that's how they want us to see them.


I agree entirely.  I think there are also times and places for affection and the PDAs are a bit much when they are technically "working"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

hockeygirl said:


> I agree entirely.  I think there are also times and places for affection and the PDAs are a bit much when they are technically "working"


Exactly. A formal event on the world stage as a working royal isn’t the same as holding hands during date night at Cheesecake Factory.


----------



## gracekelly

Swanky said:


> Not imo
> To be super honest, I can't believe it's even being discussed, lol
> I can't believe that half the things being discussed in here are a "thing".


This is true. I think we should all step back for a moment and pray for world peace and understanding and smaller carbon footprints.   Ok moment is over. Back to gossip


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> The press has no idea what happens at a Sussex dinner party. They didn’t know the Sussexes and Clooney’s dined together regularly until George said so. They didn’t know Oprah was meeting Harry in London regularly for their documentary. They didn’t know when Doria arrived or left the UK. They didn’t know Meghan was making all those trips to her patronages like The Hubb and Smart Works. They didn’t know Meghan was lunching with and interviewing Michelle *****. They didn’t know when Meghan went into labor or what hospital she went to and on and on.


The Clooneys, Oprah, Doria, & Michelle ***** are not people inclined to call up the British gossip press to dish about Meghan.  The Daily Mail said several times these were dinner parties with "Harry's society circle".  Do I think members of Harry's society circle are inclined to call up the press and say catty things about an outsider that everybody wants juicy gossip on?  Hell yes. And they all have extensive media contacts to easily do so.

I take the story with a huge grain of salt because it's not verifiable one way or the other.  Also, a little dinner party PDA doesn't really make sense as a reason someone would become so unpopular as to stop getting social invitations.  If Harry's social circle doesn't like Meghan (and it's quite possible they don't), I don't think it's because they are offended by a husband and wife sitting next to each other at a meal.

As for the patronages, I feel a little bad for little guys like Hubb and Smartworks.  I'm sure they were happy to have a new patron working with them.  But I also know that Salma Hayek was so intimidated by the secrecy imposed on her inconsequential Vogue interview that she followed orders and kept her photo shoot secret from her own husband.  And Salma's a powerful woman who I wouldn't think would be possible to intimidate.  I can only imagine the level of pressure felt by the unfamous Hubb & Smartworks employees who probably lived in fear of revealing the big secret.


----------



## chicaloca

gracekelly said:


> Meghan ate her lunch tacos whilst emailing Q &A  back and forth  with Mrs *****.  That’ s It



That’s it if you didn’t actually read the article.

Also why do people pick the oddest things to cast doubt on about Meghan? Harry has been friends with the Obamas for years. Meghan campaigned for Barack before she met Harry. She also paid Michelle a private visit during Michelle’s UK book tour. Both Obamas congratulated the Sussexes on the birth of Archie and indicated they couldn’t wait to meet him. There is clearly a friendship between the two couples. Why would it be improbable that Meghan and Michelle had lunch? 

This is like how people doubted Meghan and Amal Clooney’s friendship despite their common humanitarian past. Then Amal turned up at Meghan’s baby shower and George mentioned how how he and Amal regularly dined with the Sussexes so the doubt was completely illegitimate.

How many times do people have to be disproven to realize Meghan isn’t the one who’s lying or has a problem?


----------



## chicaloca

LittleStar88 said:


> Really?? Picking on the amount of affection they show to one another in public?
> 
> With the state of this world, we should be encouraging this from them and doing it ourselves as much as possible.



You’d think Meghan and Harry were tongue kissing and groping each other the way folks are clutching their pearls. From photos I’ve seen it’s quite common for European royal couples to hold hands or show minor displays of affection during appearances. Even Charles and Camilla show affection. The Cambridges are the odd ones out with their sibling-like interactions.


----------



## Bag*Snob

@bag-mania 
Click on HELP button on the bottom of this page, then click on SMILIES.  It is in there.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> That’s it if you didn’t actually read the article.


It's not totally clear from the article. Meghan's crappy writing is to blame for that.  The silly lifestyle bloggy detail of the chicken tacos makes it sound like it was an in-person lunch, but it also vaguely sounds like they were emailing and Michelle emailed her answers back "right away". 

Given that they don't live on the same continent and don't appear to be close personal friends who socialize in person very often, it's not a big leap to wonder whether they were communicating electronically on this occasion.  Especially since they were definitely communicating electronically for the interview portion.



chicaloca said:


> This is like how people doubted Meghan and Amal Clooney’s friendship despite their common humanitarian past. Then Amal turned up at Meghan’s baby shower and George mentioned how how he and Amal regularly dined with the Sussexes so the doubt was completely illegitimate.


I will continue to doubt that just because two celebrities know each other and network together means that they are BFF's until there is evidence over time of a closer relationship.  George and Amal don't seem to be inner-inner circle, but they were (slightly surprisingly) seated in the choir at the wedding and were also invited to the private reception.  As mentioned, Amal was invited to Meghan's baby shower. 

I haven't seen either of the Obamas strutting around like Amal at Meghan and Harry's personal events.  The Obamas have a large network, but they aren't spending all of their personal time with every celebrity who worked with them on a charity project or helped with their campaign.  You don't need to make that into something slanderous against Meghan. 

Re-reading the interview, I'm overwhelmed by what a truly awful writer she is.  Like this for example:


> It wasn’t a huge ask, so to speak, because the back page of _Vogue_ comprises a few simple questions to garner a few simple answers – tidbits that would leave you, the reader, feeling all of the aforementioned sensations of this analogous culinary experience.


It's the same as when she gives a speech - sometimes I have to remind myself she's a college-educated woman who should be more than capable of saying a few straightforward words.  Instead, it's nonsensical word salads.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> It's not totally clear from the article. Meghan's crappy writing is to blame for that.  The silly lifestyle bloggy detail of the chicken tacos makes it sound like it was an in-person lunch, but it also vaguely sounds like they were emailing and Michelle emailed her answers back "right away".
> 
> Given that they don't live on the same continent and don't appear to be close personal friends who socialize in person very often, it's not a big leap to wonder whether they were communicating electronically on this occasion.  Especially since they were definitely communicating electronically for the interview portion.
> 
> 
> I will continue to doubt that just because two celebrities know each other and network together means that they are BFF's until there is evidence over time of a closer relationship.  George and Amal don't seem to be inner-inner circle, but they were (slightly surprisingly) seated in the choir at the wedding and were also invited to the private reception.  As mentioned, Amal was invited to Meghan's baby shower.
> 
> I haven't seen either of the Obamas strutting around like Amal at Meghan and Harry's personal events.  The Obamas have a large network, but they aren't spending all of their personal time with every celebrity who worked with them on a charity project or helped with their campaign.  You don't need to make that into something slanderous against Meghan.


Right. None of these people wanted anything to do with Meghan when she was a D list actress so of course people will be curious that they’re being played off as besties with all of them.


----------



## rose60610

If it wasn't for this thread, I'd have never known Meghan and Harry tongue kiss and grope each other at Cheesecake factory. Can you imagine what they probably do at Olive Garden? The Mirror needs to inform us.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Swanky said:


> Not imo
> To be super honest, I can't believe it's even being discussed, lol
> I can't believe that half the things being discussed in here are a "thing".


Oh this...100%


----------



## muchstuff

bag-mania said:


> That why I don't understand why they took away our beating the dead horse emoji. It was perfect for threads like this one.


----------



## muchstuff

Still here!


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> It's not totally clear from the article. Meghan's crappy writing is to blame for that.  The silly lifestyle bloggy detail of the chicken tacos makes it sound like it was an in-person lunch, but it also vaguely sounds like they were emailing and Michelle emailed her answers back "right away".
> 
> Given that they don't live on the same continent and don't appear to be close personal friends who socialize in person very often, it's not a big leap to wonder whether they were communicating electronically on this occasion.  Especially since they were definitely communicating electronically for the interview portion.
> 
> 
> I will continue to doubt that just because two celebrities know each other and network together means that they are BFF's until there is evidence over time of a closer relationship.  George and Amal don't seem to be inner-inner circle, but they were (slightly surprisingly) seated in the choir at the wedding and were also invited to the private reception.  As mentioned, Amal was invited to Meghan's baby shower.
> 
> I haven't seen either of the Obamas strutting around like Amal at Meghan and Harry's personal events.  The Obamas have a large network, but they aren't spending all of their personal time with every celebrity who worked with them on a charity project or helped with their campaign.  You don't need to make that into something slanderous against Meghan.
> 
> Re-reading the interview, I'm overwhelmed by what a truly awful writer she is.  Like this for example:
> 
> It's the same as when she gives a speech - sometimes I have to remind myself she's a college-educated woman who should be more than capable of saying a few straightforward words.  Instead, it's nonsensical word salads.



Lord she is a bad writer. She needs to stay away from all that pretentious dribble. It sounds so try-hard.


----------



## mdcx

Amal, Michelle etc will show up to events(or do interviews) with Meghan because it's good PR.
Meghan will spin it as "we are besties" because that suits her narrative.

As for William and Kate not making out etc in public - the man will be King. He will be under some pretty solid instructions about how to behave in public, and I imagine PDA would make his subjects deeply uncomfortable. Harry can do as he likes, within reason. He is not that important any more.


----------



## chicaloca

As they say it’s not where you’re from but where you’re at. Like it or not Meghan and Harry are an A-list power couple now. People will have to deal. With their upcoming tour and foundation launch there going to be getting a lot more attention soon.



Flatsy said:


> It's not totally clear from the article. Meghan's crappy writing is to blame for that.  The silly lifestyle bloggy detail of the chicken tacos makes it sound like it was an in-person lunch, but it also vaguely sounds like they were emailing and Michelle emailed her answers back "right away".
> 
> Given that they don't live on the same continent and don't appear to be close personal friends who socialize in person very often, it's not a big leap to wonder whether they were communicating electronically on this occasion.  Especially since they were definitely communicating electronically for the interview portion.




 If someone says “I proposed this idea to her over lunch” the normal assumption is that the two people were having lunch together and the idea was proposed. If they weren’t having lunch she would say “I was eating tacos when I contacted Michelle.” Of course if someone  dislikes Meghan and doesn’t  want to believe she lunched with Michelle, it’s easier to disregard the obvious logic and instead interject personal  theories about Michelle *****’s schedule, who she’d spend time with ..etc. It takes more of a leap to come to any other conclusion than the two women having lunch.

It’s clear the two had an in-person lunch where Meghan got permission for the interview. She then sent Michelle the questions to which Michelle responded quickly. I didn’t have any trouble interpreting this nor did the zillion media outlets that reported on the interview.

People seem so bitter that Meghan has high-powered friends in her corner.  It’s actually weird. A lot of women meet new people through their spouses. I’m not sure why people are so angry Meghan has done the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Tivo said:


> I also love the affection the Obamas show each other. It’s just sweet and refreshing and nice to see.


exactly! 
I love seeing a couple in love and affected to each other. there is nothing clingy about that!

I think its kinda weird when a newlywed couple never touches.


----------



## kemilia

Bag*Snob said:


> @bag-mania
> Click on HELP button on the bottom of this page, then click on SMILIES.  It is in there.


Thanks for this info!


----------



## kemilia

Tivo said:


> Lord she is a bad writer. She needs to stay away from all that pretentious dribble. It sounds so try-hard.


I used to work with someone who kept a thesaurus on his desk, he used it constantly when writing emails. He always used a twenty-five dollar word when a one dollar word would do just fine, drove me nuts when I got these emails. I think she needed a decent editor for this article.


----------



## Flatsy

Can we please stop with the "this thread is stupid"?  If you don't like what other people are discussing, you can just skim over those conversations.  There's no need to tell people they are dumb for being interested in what they are interested in.

And instead of just complaining about the topics, try contributing some of your own.


----------



## mrsinsyder

More let them eat cake...

*Meghan Markle ‘flew to Ibiza on a private jet' with Prince Harry and their son Archie for a five-day break to celebrate her birthday in early August*

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...biza-private-jet-Prince-Harry-son-Archie.html


----------



## rose60610

kemilia said:


> I used to work with someone who kept a thesaurus on his desk, he used it constantly when writing emails. He always used a twenty-five dollar word when a one dollar word would do just fine, drove me nuts when I got these emails. *I think she needed a decent editor for this article.*



Editing something normal is one thing, but the whole passage cited needed to be completely gutted and reworked. That editor didn't have the courage to tell Markle her writing stinks, probably just fawned and slobbered over it all.  The editor could have been afraid of being fired for critiquing her work.


----------



## Tivo

mrsinsyder said:


> More let them eat cake...
> 
> *Meghan Markle ‘flew to Ibiza on a private jet' with Prince Harry and their son Archie for a five-day break to celebrate her birthday in early August*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...biza-private-jet-Prince-Harry-son-Archie.html


See, I don’t understand how this is “Let them eat cake?” They went on vacation. What is the issue? Because they flew private? So? Most wealthy people do. It’s faster and efficient. Airplanes exist to help people travel. Most of us take them. It doesn’t mean we don’t care about the environment. 
Or is it the security? Celebs have security. And we don’t know what threats H&M have received.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Editing something normal is one thing, but the whole passage cited needed to be completely gutted and reworked. That editor didn't have the courage to tell Markle her writing stinks, probably just fawned and slobbered over it all.  The editor could have been afraid of being fired for critiquing her work.



I'm sure they rationalized the non-editing by saying it was Meghan in her own words.

I have noticed over the last several years that many publications in general having poor editing. It seems like companies aren't investing in good editors like they used to and are relying more on proofreading to find the problems. Even that isn't working well. The last few books I've bought all had typos that should have been noticed if anyone had bothered to really read the manuscript.


----------



## daisychainz

Tivo said:


> See, I don’t understand how this is “Let them eat cake?” They went on vacation. What is the issue? Because they flew private? So? Most wealthy people do. It’s faster and efficient. Airplanes exist to help people travel. Most of us take them. It doesn’t mean we don’t care about the environment.
> Or is it the security? Celebs have security. And we don’t know what threats H&M have received.


I think because it comes across as hypocritical. He has an interview appear just two weeks ago where he talks about the environment and our impact, and then says he only wants two kids (presumably to contribute to a minimal footprint). And then yes, he goes in a private jet. So, you either care about the environment through actions or you don't. It's not genuine sentiment when actions and words don't align, so they are saying what people want to hear while still doing whatever they want. That's my take.


----------



## Flatsy

Going on vacation via airplane is a whole lot different than going on vacation via private jet.  The carbon footprint of taking a private jet is massive compared to taking a scheduled commercial flight (and there are tons of commercial flight options from the UK to Spain.)  

If one truly cares about the environment and is committed to doing what one personally can do to help, taking a private jet anywhere would be off the table.  That applies to Harry, Leo, George and Amal and every single attendee at that Google summit.

The whole topic of Harry's speech at the Google summit was how celebrities could influence we plebs to lower the environmental damage of our vacations.  It's very clear he only cares about what the rest of us can do to change, not himself.  

I'm sure Harry has a long list of reasons why he feels entitled to fly private.  Probably many of those reasons involve a pity party about the media and his precious privacy.  In truth, the royal family up to and including the queen are able to fly first class on commercial flights in total safety and with zero personal disruption because they are cocooned and protected no matter where they go.

And for the record, I disapprove of Will, Kate, Beatrice, Eugenie and anyone else in the royal family hopping on a private jet for their vacations (and I know they do).  But Harry in particular has been making a real PITA of himself lately on these topics, so I think he's more than deserving of the heat.


----------



## Flatsy

It's not just her writing.  This is one of the lines from Meghan's fashion awards speech: 





> "We have a deep connection to what we wear, sometimes it's very personal, sometimes it's emotional, but for me this connection is rooted in really being able to understand that it's about supporting and empowering each other, especially as women."


WTF does that nonsense even mean?  And she delivered it with such gravitas, as if she was saying something really profound and important about women.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> It's not just her writing.  This is one of the lines from Meghan's fashion awards speech:
> WTF does that nonsense even mean?  And she delivered it with such gravitas, as if she was saying something really profound and important about women.


LOL....seems like she's taking herself very seriously


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> LOL....seems like she's taking herself very seriously



Cringeworthy and in 10 years a person could look back  and say to themselves “what was I thinking?”


----------



## gracekelly

I have the feeling that she flew on the private plane with Harry, but went to Ibiza and he went to the Google  Camp and he joined her afterwards.   Google stated that they were paying the transportation costs of all Camp participants so maybe she hitched a free ride.


----------



## Jayne1

hockeygirl said:


> I agree entirely.  I think there are also times and places for affection and the PDAs are a bit much when they are technically "working"


I always imagine the Queen in the place of the younger set. Would she grin manically with a big open mouth or cling to her husband. No, he has to walk a few steps behind, but you know what I mean.  I like the Queen being all regal. That's what I grew up with.

If they act like us, there's no point in having them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> I always imagine the Queen in the place of the younger set. Would she grin manically with a big open mouth or cling to her husband. No, he has to walk a few steps behind, but you know what I mean.  I like the Queen being all regal. That's what I grew up with.
> 
> If they act like us, there's no point in having them.


Huge difference in royal protocol between the Queen and Prince Philip, and Harry and Meghan.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Can we please stop with the "this thread is stupid"?  If you don't like what other people are discussing, you can just skim over those conversations.  There's no need to tell people they are dumb for being interested in what they are interested in.
> 
> And instead of just complaining about the topics, try contributing some of your own.


Agree --  also saying I can't believe this thread is getting kinda personal, isn't it?


----------



## Jayne1

PatsyCline said:


> Huge difference in royal protocol between the Queen and Prince Philip, and Harry and Meghan.


If Prince Harry gets an HRH in his title, such as his Royal Highness, The Duke, plus the prince title, plus all the privileges, wealth, royal homes, free accommodations, less of a workload, servants to do his every bidding, free transportation with police escort... then he can act as regal as the Queen and try to never break royal protocol.  

IMO, of course.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Agree --  also saying I can't believe this thread is getting kinda personal, isn't it?


Yes because some posters take any negative criticism of the Sussex duo as a personal affront. I think MM and Harry would be thrilled to know that there were people willing to fight to the death on their behalf. Unfortunately the pair  don’t even know that these posters exist.


----------



## loogirl

Tivo said:


> See, I don’t understand how this is “Let them eat cake?” They went on vacation. What is the issue? Because they flew private? So? Most wealthy people do. It’s faster and efficient. Airplanes exist to help people travel. Most of us take them. It doesn’t mean we don’t care about the environment.
> Or is it the security? Celebs have security. And we don’t know what threats H&M have received.



They aren’t normal wealthy people - their wealth comes from the support of the public over centuries. He can’t just do whatever he wants, flaunt his wealth when tax payers support his lifestyle etc. It’s not the same as someone who is self made or inherited wealth from someone who was self made. 

They both need to stop acting like they are the Clooneys or even the Obamas. They are very much not. They are held to a different standard and have different protocols, expectations etc.


----------



## loogirl

gracekelly said:


> Yes because some posters take any negative criticism of the Sussex duo as a personal affront. I think MM and Harry would be thrilled to know that there were people willing to fight to the death on their behalf. Unfortunately the pair  don’t even know that these posters exist.



I mean maybe they do know they exist. Why would anyone devote that much time writing up thesis papers related to MM with hypothesis on why she did her latest blunder and endless posts in defence with photo research unless they were getting something out of it. If I’m wasting my time doing all that MM better be paying me.


----------



## gracekelly

loogirl said:


> I mean maybe they do know they exist. Why would anyone devote that much time writing up thesis papers related to MM with hypothesis on why she did her latest blunder and endless posts in defence with photo research unless they were getting something out of it. If I’m wasting my time doing all that MM better be paying me.




They have spin doctors certainly., but some people think it is their moral duty to defend. It could also be a case of putting people on a pedestal that is very high and they can’t stand the thought of their idols falling off.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> They have spin doctors certainly., but some people think it is their moral duty to defend. It could also be a case of putting people on a pedestal that is very high and they can’t stand the thought of their idols falling off.



If it is okay to criticize then it is okay to say you do not see an issue. 

It is an opinion and a positive one is as valid as a negative one.


----------



## buffym




----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> If Prince Harry gets an HRH in his title, such as his Royal Highness, The Duke, plus the prince title, plus all the privileges, wealth, royal homes, free accommodations, less of a workload, servants to do his every bidding, free transportation with police escort... then he can act as regal as the Queen and try to never break royal protocol.
> 
> IMO, of course.


But you're assuming that royal protocol is the same for both.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Going on vacation via airplane is a whole lot different than going on vacation via private jet.  The carbon footprint of taking a private jet is massive compared to taking a scheduled commercial flight (and there are tons of commercial flight options from the UK to Spain.)
> 
> If one truly cares about the environment and is committed to doing what one personally can do to help, taking a private jet anywhere would be off the table.  That applies to Harry, Leo, George and Amal and every single attendee at that Google summit.
> 
> The whole topic of Harry's speech at the Google summit was how celebrities could influence we plebs to lower the environmental damage of our vacations.  It's very clear he only cares about what the rest of us can do to change, not himself.
> 
> I'm sure Harry has a long list of reasons why he feels entitled to fly private.  Probably many of those reasons involve a pity party about the media and his precious privacy.  In truth, the royal family up to and including the queen are able to fly first class on commercial flights in total safety and with zero personal disruption because they are cocooned and protected no matter where they go.
> 
> *And for the record, I disapprove of Will, Kate, Beatrice, Eugenie and anyone else in the royal family hopping on a private jet for their vacations (and I know they do).  But Harry in particular has been making a real PITA of himself lately on these topics, so I think he's more than deserving of the heat.*



Exactly this. Don’t just talk the talk, walk the walk. Otherwise, you just come off as a unlikeable hypocrite. All these actions are eye roll worthy given what he’s written and spoken about recently.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure they rationalized the non-editing by saying it was Meghan in her own words.
> 
> I have noticed over the last several years that many publications in general having poor editing. It seems like companies aren't investing in good editors like they used to and are relying more on proofreading to find the problems. Even that isn't working well. The last few books I've bought all had typos that should have been noticed if anyone had bothered to really read the manuscript.



I can’t stand her writing style. It’s so much more exaggerated than it needs to be and incredibly hard to follow. Before anyone jumps on my case and accuses me of hating Meghan; I don’t hate her. I don’t know her well enough her!!! It’s my opinion and I’m allowed to have it and I won’t compare her to Kate, because it’s not about that!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

About spin. Well, they say there's a war on for our minds. I think it'd be safe to say spin doctors are everywhere on the internets. Both the self appointed variety, the paid for private and state intelligence. Especially if politics and money are involved. And I'd say H&M are bigly political, both in and of themselves but also as highly coveted symbols by many to be able to use for their particular agendas.

I don't care about their public displays of affection (although I agree with everyone here who says H&M should adhere to royal protocol if they are going to remain HRH:s). If genuine (there are also pics/vids out there that show differently), it's cute and good for them. It's when they use their very privileged and public platsform for hypocritical virtue signaling and political spouting that's none of their business and which is highly divisive in an already volatile European political situation, that I react.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> If it is okay to criticize then it is okay to say you do not see an issue.
> 
> It is an opinion and a positive one is as valid as a negative one.



Yes, we all are allowed to have our opinions positive and negative.  We should also try to be open minded 
Nothing is all black or all white and lately there has been plenty of gray. 

@SomethingGoodCanWork   The stories of these boiler room paid operatives who set up bots and try to sway public opinion are pretty scary.  I don't even think they care what they are pushing and it is all about money.  Not going to touch the politics associated with this, but it is probably true that PR agents have access to similar operatives to spin something positive for a client.  Mind control and welcome to the dystopian future.  It also helps to have a "useful idiot" to get your point across.


----------



## gracekelly

loogirl said:


> They aren’t normal wealthy people - their wealth comes from the support of the public over centuries. He can’t just do whatever he wants, flaunt his wealth when tax payers support his lifestyle etc. It’s not the same as someone who is self made or inherited wealth from someone who was self made.
> 
> They both need to stop acting like they are the Clooneys or even the Obamas. They are very much not. They are held to a different standard and have different protocols, expectations etc.



As I know I posted a long time ago, Prince Harry gets his living allowance from Prince Charles, as does Prince William.  Depending on how you want to look at it you could say that a portion does come from the people via his father and his stipend.  His father also operates money making enterprises via his Dukedoms so you could say a portion comes from that as well.  The bottom line is that since the money is coming in with the public involved  one way or the other, the recipients of this largess has to be mindful not to insult the hand that feeds.  That includes his father personally and in future, his brother.

I think Amal Clooney is pretty mindful of her presentation and very much like the Obamas.  All dignified.  George gets cut some slack because he is an actor and the presumption is that he can say  and do things that are a bit more out there.  They are all independent and really don't have to answer to anyone and makes a huge difference.  Not that that they would do it, but their actions are not going to create a flashback unlike the Sussex duo and potentially embarrass the Queen/family.  It is going to take a while for that two children/carbon footprint thing to die down, but given the short attention span of the public, it probably will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

PatsyCline said:


> But you're assuming that royal protocol is the same for both.


Personally I don't think it's protocol as such, I think its more to do with etiquette, courtesy and respect to the Crown.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Agree --  also saying I can't believe this thread is getting kinda personal, isn't it?


I've said this time and time again, and then got "chastised" by even saying it .. but totally agree @Jayne1 , some people are just getting way too upset about comments that they deem negative!  Sheesh ..


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I've said this time and time again, and then got "chastised" by even saying it .. but totally agree @Jayne1 , some people are just getting way too upset about comments that they deem negative!  Sheesh ..



And they aren't going to change even if true and unspeakable revelations appear.

Denial isn't just a river in Egypt,


----------



## loogirl

*rude comments removed by mod


----------



## Flatsy

As someone who writes lengthy posts with some frequency,  I don't think that's a reason to criticize another poster.

I often don't agree with Buffy's views, but she's polite and remains on topic.  I don't see any problem.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> I often don't agree with Buffy's views, but she's polite and remains on topic.  I don't see any problem.



@buffym I enjoy our differences of opinion.    I'm having fun and hope you are too.


----------



## PatsyCline

Sharont2305 said:


> Personally I don't think it's protocol as such, I think its more to do with etiquette, courtesy and respect to the Crown.


But would holding hands be considered improper? Personally I think it’s delightful.


----------



## gracekelly

PatsyCline said:


> But would holding hands be considered improper? Personally I think it’s delightful.


Strictly speaking there is supposed to be no PDA.  I guess you have to get used to it.  There is an advantage to being one of the little people


----------



## PatsyCline

gracekelly said:


> Strictly speaking there is supposed to be no PDA.  I guess you have to get used to it.  There is an advantage to being one of the little people


Maybe Harry & Meghan are nudging the bar, just a little bit?


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Strictly speaking there is supposed to be no PDA.  I guess you have to get used to it.  There is an advantage to being one of the little people





PatsyCline said:


> Maybe Harry & Meghan are nudging the bar, just a little bit?



I don’t think the BRF is as strict on that rule.

Harry and Meghan hold hands the most but almost every BRF couple has shown PDA.


----------



## rose60610

PatsyCline said:


> Maybe Harry & Meghan are nudging the bar, just a little bit?



Oh I think they Nudge The Bar. 

Now, let's have a moment of silence because I stated something that could be interpreted as being somewhat less than a Meghan disciple. Having said that, I hope they have a life filled with happiness, peace and love.  
And Less Nudging The Bar.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> I often don't agree with Buffy's views, but she's polite and remains on topic.  I don't see any problem.


Agree.  It's good to have a difference of opinion.


----------



## gracekelly

I wonder if the PDA rule only had to do with public appearances and private occasions don’t fall under that rule.  Perhaps this is just one of those directives like the ladies being required to wear hosiery at public functions.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> I don’t think the BRF is as strict on that rule.
> 
> Harry and Meghan hold hands the most but almost every BRF couple has shown PDA.
> 
> View attachment 4516096
> View attachment 4516097
> View attachment 4516098
> View attachment 4516099
> View attachment 4516100
> View attachment 4516101
> View attachment 4516102
> View attachment 4516103
> View attachment 4516104
> View attachment 4516105
> View attachment 4516106
> View attachment 4516107


Off with their heads!  Haha!


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> Maybe Harry & Meghan are nudging the bar, just a little bit?


Why would that necessarily be a good thing?  Do you behave at work exactly as you do when at home with family and friends?  There are occasions when some formality is appropriate.  Perhaps you’d like to see them turning up to events in jeans all the time?



gracekelly said:


> I wonder if the PDA rule only had to do with public appearances and private occasions don’t fall under that rule.  Perhaps this is just one of those directives like the ladies being required to wear hosiery at public functions.


Yes, on public occasions they are working.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Another way of looking at is, I know this is not the same as Harry and Meghan's life but if there was a couple in your work, it wouldn't be deemed professional if they were showing a lot of pda within the office.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Sharont2305 said:


> Another way of looking at is, I know this is not the same as Harry and Meghan's life but if there was a couple in your work, it wouldn't be deemed professional if they were showing a lot of pda within the office.


My husband and I work at the same company. We are both in managerial positions, and during work events (event social ones) you will never ever see us lovey dovey or affectionate. He’s lucky to get any special acknowledgement in these situations. Or home situation is completely different and there is nothing wrong with how we act. It’s simply professional to act that way.

I don’t think there is anything wrong being affectionate with your partner, but don’t seem clingy during the times that you are attending an event representing the BRF.

Nothing wrong with the holding of the hands, is just arm clinging that I notice a lot with her. He’s there and he’s not leaving, Megs!  No worries! Lol


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> My husband and I work at the same company. We are both in managerial positions, and during work events (event social ones) you will never ever see us lovey dovey or affectionate. He’s lucky to get any special acknowledgement in these situations. Or home situation is completely different and there is nothing wrong with how we act. It’s simply professional to act that way.
> 
> I don’t think there is anything wrong being affectionate with your partner, but don’t seem clingy during the times that you are attending an event representing the BRF.
> 
> Nothing wrong with the holding of the hands, is just arm clinging that I notice a lot with her. He’s there and he’s not leaving, Megs!  No worries! Lol


Exactly, you and your husband are representing your company, Harry and Meghan are representing our BRF. Agree with the clinging, it's too much, sometimes even the hand holding is a bit much sometimes, especially on more solemn occasions when attending something in Westminster Abbey for example.


----------



## doni

LVSistinaMM said:


> My husband and I work at the same company. We are both in managerial positions, and during work events (event social ones) you will never ever see us lovey dovey or affectionate. He’s lucky to get any special acknowledgement in these situations. Or home situation is completely different and there is nothing wrong with how we act. It’s simply professional to act that way.
> 
> I don’t think there is anything wrong being affectionate with your partner, but don’t seem clingy during the times that you are attending an event representing the BRF.
> 
> Nothing wrong with the holding of the hands, is just arm clinging that I notice a lot with her. He’s there and he’s not leaving, Megs!  No worries! Lol


But the difference is that you and your husband got to your positions on professional merit and independent of each other, whereas the position Meghan now holds and the power it carries is based _exclusively_ on a man (whose position is also independent of merit) having fallen in love with her enough to marry. So in a way, asserting their love asserts her position. You keep your relationship with your husband separate from your work because it has nothing to do with it. For Meghan, they are intwined. So I guess it is a quite natural thing, in that context, specially if she is feeling unsure or lacking confidence.


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> But the difference is that you and your husband got to your positions on professional merit and independent of each other, whereas the position Meghan now holds and the power it carries is based _exclusively_ on a man (whose position is also independent of merit) having fallen in love with her enough to marry. So in a way, asserting their love asserts her position. You keep your relationship with your husband separate from your work because it has nothing to do with it. For Meghan, they are intwined. So I guess it is a quite natural thing, in that context, specially if she is feeling unsure or lacking confidence.


And Harry’s only in his position due to the accident of birth.  He’s not there through merit.  He needs to remember this when he’s preaching at us lol.  (Nothing’s more brain achingly tiresome than a recent convert )


----------



## mdcx

Having worked with people who were either related to each other or in relationships, I really appreciated the fact that they all behaved extremely professionally at work i.e. called each other by their first names rather than family titles, kept their conversation topics appropriate as they would with other employees, didn't drop into informalities or heaven forbid, domestic disputes, in the office.
PDAs would have been pretty unthinkable in any of my workplaces in any case so that wasn't really a problem.

Meghan is an employee of the BRF. Is that not widely understood? If she wanted to be a free agent, her and Harry would have to remove themselves form the public purse, so to speak. Given that, she has responsibilities, obligations, rules etc etc etc that she is required to observe.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Meghan is an employee of the BRF.


This!!


----------



## PatsyCline

Clearblueskies said:


> This!!


This would suggest she was hired, which is a total misinterpretation of her situation. 

She’s a member of the royal family, not an employee. 

She’s in her situation because she fell in love with Harry. Similar to Melania ***** is First Lady because she’s married to *****. She’s making the best of the situation she’s been thrust into.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> She’s a member of the royal family, not an employee.


Nah, she made it very clear from the start that she intended to take on the "job" part of it with enthusiasm.  It's even more official because she and Harry run a foundation together.

I don't think Harry would have even married Meghan if she didn't want to be a partner to him on the "work" side as well.  I think that was a big part of her appeal to him.


----------



## limom

PatsyCline said:


> She’s in her situation because she fell in love with Harry. Similar to Melania ***** is First Lady because she’s married to *****. She’s making the best of the situation she’s been thrust into.


Don’t you think this thread is messy enough without bringing her into the discussion?


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Meghan is an employee of the BRF. Is that not widely understood? If she wanted to be a free agent, her and Harry would have to remove themselves form the public purse, so to speak. Given that, she has responsibilities, obligations, rules etc etc etc that she is required to observe.



As we continue to see, they want it both ways - the privilege of being an employee of the BRF with little of the responsibilities.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> This would suggest she was hired, which is a total misinterpretation of her situation.
> 
> She’s a member of the royal family, not an employee.
> 
> She’s in her situation because she fell in love with Harry. Similar to Melania ***** is First Lady because she’s married to *****. She’s making the best of the situation she’s been thrust into.


Nope.  If they want to be private citizens they can be, they’d have to give up the taxpayer funded benefits they currently receive via the Queen.  Princess Anne’s children are members of the RF but not on the payroll.  I can’t see Harry fending for himself like they do somehow.
It’s a public role, it’s a job.  Job for life in fact, many of the current working members of the family are well over retirement age.


----------



## Flatsy

There are lots and lots of professions where "you marry the man/woman, you also marry their job".  BRF is definitely one of them.

It might theoretically have been possible for Harry to have presented a fiancee to the public and also announced that she wanted to be a private citizen and take on no public duties, but that would be virtually unprecedented and their life would look a whole lot different than it does now.   That is clearly not what Meghan signed up for.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> There are lots and lots of professions where "you marry the man/woman, you also marry their job".  BRF is definitely one of them.
> 
> It might theoretically have been possible for Harry to have presented a fiancee to the public and also announced that she wanted to be a private citizen and take on no public duties, but that would be virtually unprecedented and their life would look a whole lot different than it does now.   That is clearly not what Meghan signed up for.


Vice Admiral Sir Timothy Lawrence, Lord Snowdon and Captain Mark Phillips springs to mind


----------



## PatsyCline

limom said:


> Don’t you think this thread is messy enough without bringing her into the discussion?


No criticism of Melania, just a comparison of someone who’s been thrust into the public spotlight because of who she’s married to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

Clearblueskies said:


> Nope.  If they want to be private citizens they can be, they’d have to give up the taxpayer funded benefits they currently receive via the Queen.  Princess Anne’s children are members of the RF but not on the payroll.  I can’t see Harry fending for himself like they do somehow.
> It’s a public role, it’s a job.  Job for life in fact, many of the current working members of the family are well over retirement





Clearblueskies said:


> Nope.  If they want to be private citizens they can be, they’d have to give up the taxpayer funded benefits they currently receive via the Queen.  Princess Anne’s children are members of the RF but not on the payroll.  I can’t see Harry fending for himself like they do somehow.
> It’s a public role, it’s a job.  Job for life in fact, many of the current working members of the family are well over retirement age.


You calling it a job and then twisting the logic to suit your bias doesn’t make it so.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> And they aren't going to change even if true and unspeakable revelations appear.
> 
> Denial isn't just a river in Egypt,


I swear @gracekelly  .. we have to be related somehow because, yet again, my husband uses that line so much, it's ridiculous (then again, he is a former Egyptologist, so I guess I have to give him some slack there)!!!


----------



## sdkitty

problem isn't whether you're criticizing Melania.  Bringing her up is controversial and political


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> You calling it a job and then twisting the logic to suit your bias doesn’t make it so.


I don’t appreciate the snide inference - you don’t understand the BRF and the way it works.  That’s all.


----------



## LittleStar88

It is very entertaining to watch some folks dig really deep to speculate and hypothesize on MM and her life. Some are even dipping into tinfoil hat territory (fake baby lol). Thanks for the pages and pages of giggles!



sdkitty said:


> problem isn't whether you're criticizing Melania.  Bringing her up is controversial and political



I think in the context it was not - more a matter of demonstrating when you marry someone public/high-profile, you are going along for a ride with them and sometimes that outcome is that you are also put on public display than a specific political commentary. 

That said, I am sure MM knew exactly what she was marrying into. Different from Melania who probably never expected her husband would run for President (and win!). Now Melania has to ride along for this one. MM Probably saw being in the public eye as appealing.

She may not see it as so appealing now... "_They don't make it easy!_"


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> It is very entertaining to watch some folks dig really deep to speculate and hypothesize on MM and her life. Some are even dipping into tinfoil hat territory (fake baby lol). Thanks for the pages and pages of giggles!
> 
> 
> 
> I think in the context it was not - more a matter of demonstrating when you marry someone public/high-profile, you are going along for a ride with them and sometimes that outcome is that you are also put on public display than a specific political commentary.
> 
> That said, I am sure MM knew exactly what she was marrying into. Different from Melania who probably never expected her husband would run for President (and win!). Now Melania has to ride along for this one. MM Probably saw being in the public eye as appealing.
> 
> She may not see it as so appealing now... "_They don't make it easy!_"


ok
I could say something about Melania here but it's not allowed.  see KWIM?


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> ok
> I could say something about Melania here but it's not allowed.  see KWIM?



Ahhhh... People get ... Triggered. Got it.


----------



## PatsyCline

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t appreciate the snide inference - you don’t understand the BRF and the way it works.  That’s all.


Nothing snide in my comment, you have a problem with the royal family and Meghan, and your bias shows through on all your comments.


----------



## Sharont2305

PatsyCline said:


> Nothing snide in my comment, you have a problem with the royal family and Meghan, and your bias shows through on all your comments.


I dont see any bias in any of her/his comments to be fair


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I dont see any bias in any of her/his comments to be fair


  It’s no wonder so few British members bother to post anymore.


----------



## PatsyCline

Sharont2305 said:


> I dont see any bias in any of her/his comments to be fair


Seriously??? Go back and read their comments. They're entitled to their opinion, but it's strongly anti-royal and anti-Meghan.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> Seriously??? Go back and read their comments. They're entitled to their opinion, but it's strongly anti-royal and anti-Meghan.


Not anti royal at all.  I’ve actually met the Queen and been a guest at other events at which the Royals were present, through my work.  Keep personal comments out of the thread please.


----------



## gracekelly

There is a reason why the royals refer to themselves as “The Firm.”  I am going to presume that The Firm considers itself under contract to the British people who foot the bill.  They obviously look upon what they do as a job and if you marry into the family the presumption is that you have taken a job with The Firm and enjoy the benefits of membership. If you don’t want to be a member then you aren’t forced, but I suspect you better come up with something real to do.  The late Lord Snowden was a respected photographer and Captain Phillips was in some  business dealing with horses.  Timothy Lawrence is a retired Naval officer and had also been an equerry to the Queen.   They earned their own living. Once again I will state that Prince Harry has a living  ALLOWANCE  FROM Prince Charles.   Prince Charles has also picked up the cost of many things for his son and wife. To my way of thinking that makes them beholden to him and the family business, i.e. The Firm.   So if the Firm has a code of conduct, then Firm members  should be trying to stick to it when performing “work” related duties.

I worked with my husband for decades  and our relationship was so professional that 97% of the patients had no idea that we were married   2% suspected and 1% actually knew.   That doesn’t mean we were frozen fish with each other. We found a balance at work and then could be completely different at home.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s no wonder so few British members bother to post anymore.


I'm British and I sometimes wonder why bother


----------



## doni

And it is not only the spouses. Harry himself could choose to opt out from royal work (and corresponding allowances). What, you can also do that if you are the heir or even the King (witness Edward VIII, another royal who married an American divorcee). Among Harry's contemporary royal sibling peers, Infanta Cristina of Spain for example opted out of all representative duties and financial allowances after refusing to break ties with her corrupt husband (even if she didn't renounce dynastic rights).  Others like Princess Madeleine of Sweden keep it at a minimum after choosing a life far away from the Kingdom. Bottom line is, it is a right but also a choice of Harry and Meghan to carry with this life, not an obligation notwithstanding a sense of duty that may be at play.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> Not anti royal at all.  I’ve actually met the Queen and been a guest at other events at which the Royals were present, through my work.  Keep personal comments out of the thread please.


Are you able to share what your work is? It's ok if you can't.  My aunt was a secretary to the Queen for 26 years - she has many secretaries, though. I don't think she was ever invited to events, but I'm not sure. I think she only interacted with the Queen a few times. She was employed as a letter-writer/responder, doing some of the Queen's correspondence on her behalf - the Queen doesn't actually write her own thank you letters and such, lol. She has a wonderful collection of royal stuff from her years of employment, but since she's my aunt, my cousins have all of it. I don't know the areas of London very well, but the Queen's staff are placed in regular condos/apartments around the city and work from home, and my aunt lived in housing that looked like stables that are very close to Harrods.


----------



## hockeygirl

LVSistinaMM said:


> My husband and I work at the same company. We are both in managerial positions, and during work events (event social ones) you will never ever see us lovey dovey or affectionate. He’s lucky to get any special acknowledgement in these situations. Or home situation is completely different and there is nothing wrong with how we act. It’s simply professional to act that way.
> 
> I don’t think there is anything wrong being affectionate with your partner, but don’t seem clingy during the times that you are attending an event representing the BRF.
> 
> Nothing wrong with the holding of the hands, is just arm clinging that I notice a lot with her. He’s there and he’s not leaving, Megs!  No worries! Lol



This was perfectly worded and exactly what I find to be a bit annoying at times about Harry and Meghan


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> Are you able to share what your work is? It's ok if you can't.  My aunt was a secretary to the Queen for 26 years - she has many secretaries, though. I don't think she was ever invited to events, but I'm not sure. I think she only interacted with the Queen a few times. She was employed as a letter-writer/responder, doing some of the Queen's correspondence on her behalf - the Queen doesn't actually write her own thank you letters and such, lol. She has a wonderful collection of royal stuff from her years of employment, but since she's my aunt, my cousins have all of it. I don't know the areas of London very well, but the Queen's staff are placed in regular condos/apartments around the city and work from home, and my aunt lived in housing that looked like stables that are very close to Harrods.


Wow, that sounds fascinating  My career is in Health, I’ve been a guest at Westminster Abbey and events in hospitals and college.  When I was younger my Mother ran an estate at which the Royals came regularly to shoot.


----------



## gracekelly

doni said:


> And it is not only the spouses. Harry himself could choose to opt out from royal work (and corresponding allowances). What, you can also do that if you are the heir or even the King (witness Edward VIII, another royal who married an American divorcee). Among Harry's contemporary royal sibling peers, Infanta Cristina of Spain for example opted out of all representative duties and financial allowances after refusing to break ties with her corrupt husband (even if she didn't renounce dynastic rights).  Others like Princess Madeleine of Sweden keep it at a minimum after choosing a life far away from the Kingdom. Bottom line is, it is a right but also a choice of Harry and Meghan to carry with this life, not an obligation notwithstanding a sense of duty that may be at play.



Or you have the Duke of Windsor who was in effect paid to stay away! Lol!They stuck him in the Bahamas as Governor General during WWII.   With good reason


----------



## doni

gracekelly said:


> Or you have the Duke of Windsor who was in effect paid to stay away! Lol!They stuck him in the Bahamas as Governor General during WWII.   With good reason


Well yes, as I said, Edward VIII. If a crowned King can step out, the second son of the Heir has to have it even easier.


----------



## LittleStar88

hockeygirl said:


> This was perfectly worded and exactly what I find to be a bit annoying at times about Harry and Meghan



Yeah, and I agree in a regular employment environment, but there is no secret that they are married. And part of their image is to appear as a loving couple. I think some people enjoy seeing them happy and in love. It is really nice to see in a world where generally there is so much anger and hate. It's not like they are making out and grabbing each other's butts or anything. 

I would like to think if the Queen did not approve how it represents the BRF, we would have seen a big decrease in the public displays. No?


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> Wow, that sounds fascinating  My career is in Health, I’ve been a guest at Westminster Abbey and events in hospitals and college.  When I was younger my Mother ran an estate at which the Royals came regularly to shoot.


You're very lucky. I think it would amazing to go to royal events! Not even to meet any royals, but just to be able to dress up and mingle with society people, and of course, use an amazing handbag.


----------



## zen1965

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm British and I sometimes wonder why bother


I fully understand. I am not British but continental European and often just lurk. The workings of the aristocracy are so far removed from what is written here at times. However, never mind how much insight one has, it is simply ignored or even gets discredited as untrue.


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> You're very lucky. I think it would amazing to go to royal events! Not even to meet any royals, but just to be able to dress up and mingle with society people, and of course, use an amazing handbag.


Thank you   I have been lucky and I loved it, getting really dressed up was a treat, but it was just once in a blue moon for me.  I do wonder if dressing up every week and being constantly on show gets wearing for the HRH’s.  I wonder if they long for a dull Monday morning at work sometimes and envy the rest of us our freedom and anonymity


----------



## limom

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s no wonder so few British members bother to post anymore.


----------



## Gal4Dior

LittleStar88 said:


> Yeah, and I agree in a regular employment environment, but there is no secret that they are married. And part of their image is to appear as a loving couple. I think some people enjoy seeing them happy and in love. It is really nice to see in a world where generally there is so much anger and hate. It's not like they are making out and grabbing each other's butts or anything.
> 
> I would like to think if the Queen did not approve how it represents the BRF, we would have seen a big decrease in the public displays. No?



I think the Queen does a fine job appearing to be in love with Prince Phillip for so many years. People don’t need to be constantly holding on to each other to prove they are a happy couple. Couples who are secure in what they have don’t have to IMHO. It’s just a plus and dependent on what each couple is comfortable with.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> I think the Queen does a fine job appearing to be in love with Prince Phillip for so many years. People don’t need to be constantly holding on to each other to prove they are a happy couple. Couples who are secure in what they have don’t have to IMHO. It’s just a plus and dependent on what each couple is comfortable with.



I think it is a comfort level, the Queen is a very different era the royals were different, now it is more relaxed and everything is scrutinized because of the internet.

I disagree that couples who show affection are insecure literally most of the present rulers have shown a physical link to the partner.

Probably because of the cameras and people, I don’t know how that every becomes normal.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> I think it is a comfort level, the Queen is a very different era the royals were different, now it is more relaxed and everything is scrutinized because of the internet.
> 
> I disagree that couples who show affection are insecure literally most of the present rulers have shown a physical link to the partner.
> 
> Probably because of the cameras and people, I don’t know how that every becomes normal.
> 
> View attachment 4516699
> View attachment 4516700
> View attachment 4516701
> View attachment 4516702
> View attachment 4516703
> View attachment 4516704
> View attachment 4516705
> View attachment 4516706
> View attachment 4516707
> View attachment 4516708
> View attachment 4516709
> View attachment 4516710


Thanks for these beautiful pictures!
!


----------



## LittleStar88

Oh but Kate & Will... LOL







Anyhow, I don't see what the big fuss is about. Charles & Camilla (their story probably blows what I am about to say out of the water, but...), Will & Kate are in line for the throne. Harry & Meghan are not. 

Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate... Held to a different expectation of decorum.

Harry & Meghan... Not so much. Let them be the fun, flirty, couple and enjoy both sets of expectations. Harry has never behaved conventionally for BRF standards anyhow, so why expect something different now?


----------



## PatsyCline

Clearblueskies said:


> Not anti royal at all.  I’ve actually met the Queen and been a guest at other events at which the Royals were present, through my work.  Keep personal comments out of the thread please.


I'll keep my 'personal' comments out, when you do the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> Are you able to share what your work is? It's ok if you can't.  My aunt was a secretary to the Queen for 26 years - she has many secretaries, though. I don't think she was ever invited to events, but I'm not sure. I think she only interacted with the Queen a few times. She was employed as a letter-writer/responder, doing some of the Queen's correspondence on her behalf - the Queen doesn't actually write her own thank you letters and such, lol. She has a wonderful collection of royal stuff from her years of employment, but since she's my aunt, my cousins have all of it. I don't know the areas of London very well, but the Queen's staff are placed in regular condos/apartments around the city and work from home, and my aunt lived in housing that looked like stables that are very close to Harrods.


That is so cool and interesting to know!

I think Harry is very energetic and wants to work, but he wants to work at what he likes.

It's like an office worker being paid to be in the office and work at a desk, but he's out coaching soccer to underprivileged children instead.  It's very commendable to give of his time, but he's paid to be in the office.

Well, the office worker would be fired, but Harry gets accolades.


----------



## bag-mania

Does it really matter how the royals touch each other? There are photos from the early years of Charles and Diana's marriage where they are touching and holding each other. They actually look loving and affectionate. 

And then there are the photos taken a few years later... 
Photos only capture a brief moment in time.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> If you don’t want to be a member then you aren’t forced, but I suspect you better come up with something real to do. The late Lord Snowden was a respected photographer and Captain Phillips was in some business dealing with horses. Timothy Lawrence is a retired Naval officer and had also been an equerry to the Queen. They earned their own living


I'm curious what the arrangement is with Jack Brooksbank?  He still technically has his own job, right?  He and Eugenie seem to have a very tenuous ground to stand on when it comes to deserving a royal residence.



doni said:


> Bottom line is, it is a right but also a choice of Harry and Meghan to carry with this life, not an obligation notwithstanding a sense of duty that may be at play.


I do think Harry feels a sense of duty, particularly to his grandmother.  He's mentioned not wanting to disappoint her.  He has always had the option to leave royal life.  But I think if he did make that choice, he would really feel like a failure and the disappointment of the family.  I think marrying Meghan gave him extra mojo to try to prove he's the opposite of that.  And in a somewhat competitive way too.



LittleStar88 said:


> Yeah, and I agree in a regular employment environment, but there is no secret that they are married. And part of their image is to appear as a loving couple. I think some people enjoy seeing them happy and in love. It is really nice to see in a world where generally there is so much anger and hate. It's not like they are making out and grabbing each other's butts or anything.


I think the public likes to see a little PDA, especially from the younger generation. It shows they are real people.  And I think they like it from QEII and Philip as well, but in keeping with the reserve of their generation.  I think it's safe to say nobody wants to see QEII's hand grazing Philip's butt.  Ever.

I'm not someone who thinks Harry and Meghan's PDA is inappropriate.  It just strikes me as very insecure.  The celebrity couples who slobber over each other the most on red carpets are also the quickest to divorce.


> I would like to think if the Queen did not approve how it represents the BRF, we would have seen a big decrease in the public displays. No?


I don't think there is any need or any desire from the Queen to put a stop to hand-holding.  But I disagree with the notion that anything that goes on must all be a-ok with the Queen since she hasn't put a stop to it.  I don't think the Queen is micro-managing Meghan's every movement. 

I think Meghan is being given space and support because the Queen doesn't want another Diana out there bitterly blabbing about how she was controlled and bossed around by The Firm.  But that means Meghan's also being allowed to make mistakes.  The way her baby shower was carried out was a mistake from beginning to end, and every media outlet reported that she received little to no pushback from The Firm about it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect the rules about minor public displays of affection will change much as everything else has as the current older generation passes on. I’m European but not British but I live in the commonwealth and my father was always chastising me for showing any PDAs with boyfriends or even my husband. There are still some extremely strongly held views about it for whatever reason.

And I also suspect that affection is important to Harry. He seemed really affected and lost after his mother died and it doesn’t sound like he had the best relationship with his father for a long time. I imagine finding someone to love has been tremendous for him and physical affection is something he is enjoying. I just don’t get the grabby vibe that everyone else does. But that’s just my opinion.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I'm curious what the arrangement is with Jack Brooksbank?  He still technically has his own job, right?  He and Eugenie seem to have a very tenuous ground to stand on when it comes to deserving a royal residence.
> 
> 
> I do think Harry feels a sense of duty, particularly to his grandmother.  He's mentioned not wanting to disappoint her.  He has always had the option to leave royal life.  But I think if he did make that choice, he would really feel like a failure and the disappointment of the family.  I think marrying Meghan gave him extra mojo to try to prove he's the opposite of that.  And in a somewhat competitive way too.
> 
> 
> I think the public likes to see a little PDA, especially from the younger generation. It shows they are real people.  And I think they like it from QEII and Philip as well, but in keeping with the reserve of their generation.  I think it's safe to say nobody wants to see QEII's hand grazing Philip's butt.  Ever.
> 
> I'm not someone who thinks Harry and Meghan's PDA is inappropriate.  It just strikes me as very insecure.  The celebrity couples who slobber over each other the most on red carpets are also the quickest to divorce.
> 
> I don't think there is any need or any desire from the Queen to put a stop to hand-holding.  But I disagree with the notion that anything that goes on must all be a-ok with the Queen since she hasn't put a stop to it.  I don't think the Queen is micro-managing Meghan's every movement.
> 
> I think Meghan is being given space and support because the Queen doesn't want another Diana out there bitterly blabbing about how she was controlled and bossed around by The Firm.  But that means Meghan's also being allowed to make mistakes.  The way her baby shower was carried out was a mistake from beginning to end, and every media outlet reported that she received little to no pushback from The Firm about it.


I doubt Meghan thinks the baby shower was a mistake.  That was her moment to show off all her big star celeb friends.  Never would have happened to the star of a basic cable TV series.  Just my opinion.


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> I think it is a comfort level, the Queen is a very different era the royals were different, now it is more relaxed and everything is scrutinized because of the internet.
> 
> I disagree that couples who show affection are insecure literally most of the present rulers have shown a physical link to the partner.
> 
> Probably because of the cameras and people, I don’t know how that every becomes normal.
> 
> View attachment 4516699
> View attachment 4516700
> View attachment 4516701
> View attachment 4516702
> View attachment 4516703
> View attachment 4516704
> View attachment 4516705
> View attachment 4516706
> View attachment 4516707
> View attachment 4516708
> View attachment 4516709
> View attachment 4516710


TO BE CLEAR I never said couples who were overly affectionate were insecure. Just saying there are plenty of couples WHO ARE SECURE who don’t need to prove their affection by clinging on to each other. There is no proof they are more or less in love than couples that do.

Hope that is clear to you.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> TO BE CLEAR I never said couples who were overly affectionate were insecure. Just saying there are plenty of couples WHO ARE SECURE who don’t need to prove their affection by clinging on to each other. There is no proof they are more or less in love than couples that do.
> 
> Hope that is clear to you.



Just to be clear, you can pm if you have a specific message for me, that way to keep the thread on topic.

And I would appreciate if you didn’t type in all caps, it is considered yelling at someone online where I’m from. 

Just to be clear to you.


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I doubt Meghan thinks the baby shower was a mistake.


I don't think she thinks the baby shower was a mistake either.  Except the "optics" since she made the State Department move their whole security operation from the front door to the back, even though they told her it was pointless.  (For those who say she has no say in what her security tells her to do - there's official documentation now that she was the one calling the shots with the State Department team.)


----------



## gracekelly

Saw a little story that claims Archie has tufts of ginger like hair.  That would be adorable!


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> Just to be clear, you can pm if you have a specific message for me, that way to keep the thread on topic.
> 
> And I would appreciate if you didn’t type in all caps, it is considered yelling at someone online where I’m from.
> 
> Just to be clear to you.



Ooh. Touchy much? I’m allowed to reply if you have misunderstood my statement. If you read it, it clearly doesn’t say I’m saying Meghan and Harry are insecure. Please don’t put words in my mouth. 

Also, I am on topic. I’m talking about Meghan and Harry. Not about you. Thanks!


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> I don't think she thinks the baby shower was a mistake either.  Except the "optics" since she made the State Department move their whole security operation from the front door to the back, even though they told her it was pointless.  (For those who say she has no say in what her security tells her to do - there's official documentation now that she was the one calling the shots with the State Department team.)


Careful, in this forum there may be pure outrage for that statement. Better come with receipts! Lol!

I am total agreement with the optics. Most of the time I see people disagree with the optics and they are not in anyway attacking H&M, but hey, I’m not anyone’s super fan so I could care less who they want to trash as long as I don’t know them.


----------



## rose60610

LVSistinaMM said:


> *Careful, in this forum there may be pure outrage for that statement. *Better come with receipts! Lol!
> 
> I am total agreement with the optics. Most of the time I see people disagree with the optics and they are not in anyway attacking H&M, but hey, I’m not anyone’s super fan so I could care less who they want to trash as long as I don’t know them.


----------



## myown

LVSistinaMM said:


> I think the Queen does a fine job appearing to be in love with Prince Phillip for so many years. People don’t need to be constantly holding on to each other to prove they are a happy couple. Couples who are secure in what they have don’t have to IMHO. It’s just a plus and dependent on what each couple is comfortable with.


I once read someone who constantly shows how in love they are and what a great couple they are, most likely don't have the strongest relationship. those who don't see the need to prove have a strong relationship


----------



## mdcx

myown said:


> I once read someone who constantly shows how in love they are and what a great couple they are, most likely don't have the strongest relationship. those who don't see the need to prove have a strong relationship


My theory is, if you are a celeb, never ever talk publicly about how happily married you are. It always seems to be followed by a horrible breakup.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maybe the ones who say she's too clingy, myself included, see more live footage than others? Others may have only seen the photos after the event and only come to their conclusion of her not being clingy through said photos.
A lot of important ceremonial things are shown live on our TV here in the UK (especially in the last few years of commemorating  WWl and WWll etc) so we see things as they happen, from them getting out of the car to them sitting down.
Plus, there's been a lot of segments on the news channels of their day to day engagements.
Obviously I can't speak for other countries coverage of them, only for mine and that is what I base my opinion on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe the ones who say she's too clingy, myself included, see more live footage than others? Others may have only seen the photos after the event and only come to their conclusion of her not being clingy through said photos.
> A lot of important ceremonial things are shown live on our TV here in the UK (especially in the last few years of commemorating  WWl and WWll etc) so we see things as they happen, from them getting out of the car to them sitting down.
> Plus, there's been a lot of segments on the news channels of their day to day engagements.
> Obviously I can't speak for other countries coverage of them, only for mine and that is what I base my opinion on.


could be. 
I hardly watch any video of them, I only see pictures. 
And of course I only see the ones they want us to see


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> Careful, in this forum there may be pure outrage for that statement. Better come with receipts! Lol!
> 
> I am total agreement with the optics. Most of the time I see people disagree with the optics and they are not in anyway attacking H&M, but hey, I’m not anyone’s super fan so I could care less who they want to trash as long as I don’t know them.



Having a different of opinion does not make anyone a super fan. 

It is interesting that the name calling comes from those who are critical of Harry and Meghan. 

If you don’t like them fine, you talk about optics but those who do like them and do not have problem are not worshipping them or super fans or having them on a pedestal. 

No one is saying you are a hater who is just jealous. 

Give everyone opinions the same respect. We are entitled to our perspective without the extra it comes from a place of ... super fan or hate.

Some internet etiquette, to help your point come across without being aggressive https://www.lifework.com/why-not-to-write-in-all-caps-1173242.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork




----------



## FreeSpirit71

The infighting in this thread is tiresome and boring.


----------



## LittleStar88

Lots of opinions on this thread... Everyone has one and no one is wrong. Let's just enjoy the banter and stop taking things so darn personally.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Flatsy said:


> I don't think she thinks the baby shower was a mistake either.  Except the "optics" since she made the State Department move their whole security operation from the front door to the back, even though they told her it was pointless.  (For those who say she has no say in what her security tells her to do - there's official documentation now that she was the one calling the shots with the State Department team.)




Lol, you mean me. And nope. Doesn’t change my opinion at all.  She isn’t calling the shots with her team.  She can certainly make requests but they are not going to do something if it is unsafe (and if they are RaSP and not private).  And I suspect there was a little theatre in this particular “VIP request”.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe the ones who say she's too clingy, myself included, see more live footage than others?


Totally agree! In photos, it does look like just some nice hand-holding.  But to me, when I see the video it looks deliberate and constant - so constant that it looks like it would be irritating to the two people involved, not enjoyable.  And definitely not spontaneous.  I feel the same way about the baby bump clutching.

A lot of people will disagree, but at the baby photo call, Meghan rubbing Harry's back as they walked away looked like it was done for the sake of the cameras.  Not that the affection was phony, I just don't think Meghan spontaneously felt like rubbing Harry's back because of her affection for him.  I think it was primarily for show, and probably was planned out ahead of time.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Totally agree! In photos, it does look like just some nice hand-holding.  But to me, when I see the video it looks deliberate and constant - so constant that it looks like it would be irritating to the two people involved, not enjoyable.  And definitely not spontaneous.  I feel the same way about the baby bump clutching.
> 
> A lot of people will disagree, but at the baby photo call, Meghan rubbing Harry's back as they walked away looked like it was done for the sake of the cameras.  Not that the affection was phony, I just don't think Meghan spontaneously felt like rubbing Harry's back because of her affection for him.  I think it was primarily for show, and probably was planned out ahead of time.


I was thinking the same about the back rubbing at the baby photo call but you said it more eloquently than I could've


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> Lol, you mean me. And nope. Doesn’t change my opinion at all. She isn’t calling the shots with her team. She can certainly make requests but they are not going to do something if it is unsafe (and if they are RaSP and not private).


I believe multiple people hold the opinion, so I was not thinking specifically of you.

I have never believed that Meghan passively took orders from her security and never had any input whatsoever, which is how the Wimbledon incident was portrayed (by Meghan herself via Omid Scobie as well).

The State Department incident showed that she is actively involved in the decision making involving her security plans.  In that case, her preferences were accommodated, even though it involved the whole security team changing locations for no good reason except that Meghan wanted to manipulate public opinion.  The change was security neutral - the back door was no more secure or private than the front, which is what they told her.  

If the back door had been LESS safe, I'm sure the State Department would have done their jobs and pushed back even more than they did.  They might have refused completely to comply.  But I've read enough about Presidents, their families, and the Secret Service to know that compromises are routine.

And I don't think Meghan's royal protection in England operates in a drastically different way.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Okay, but there are a few more complicating issues at play. Completely different circumstances. First off, her relationship with the State Dept is completely different than her relationship to RaSP.  Also, things function differently on foreign soil with other security entities.

So, let’s assume she traveled with her dedicated RaSP team to NYC. Here is how I suspect it played out-
She would say to RaSP “I don’t like the optics, can I leave out the other door.” RaSP would review the protocols for exit and determine if that works. If it is less secure then they would say no and that would be the end of it (unless she went rogue like ******* used to do).

Then I suspect she asked to make the request to the SD for optics. I have no doubt where the leak of the request came from.

The alternative, less cynical view is that RaSP has to be careful on foreign soil with foreign units. They cannot appear to be making orders.  So, it might have been perceived as more palatable to let MM make the request to the SD because she is not bound to follow SD protocol (just strongly advised to do it), she is American and it was a dumb request. So, why ruffle feathers with the request going unit to unit if RaSP doesn’t see it as necessary.

And I don’t really think we are that opposed. Compromise happens if it doesn’t impact risk factors. My point, up thread was, if a security team had made a risk assessment she is not going to be able to say “oh don’t be silly, let those nice people approach me and take pictures.” Or, “I don’t want to be bothered, can you bring on more staff to keep up a wider perimeter“ and it just happens as if they are a private civilian team  She isn’t a President (they aren’t supposed to be able to get away with it either but tougher when they are your ultimate boss), she doesn’t have that clout. And her team is going to make those decisions based upon risk.


----------



## Gal4Dior

myown said:


> I once read someone who constantly shows how in love they are and what a great couple they are, most likely don't have the strongest relationship. those who don't see the need to prove have a strong relationship



Yup, you understood my sentiments exactly. Whether or not H&M show more affection versus another couple doesn’t mean a thing to me either way. No one knows what really goes on behind closed doors. So many celebrities gush and show a lot of PDA and end up divorced within a year, so who am I to assume


buffym said:


> Having a different of opinion does not make anyone a super fan.
> 
> It is interesting that the name calling comes from those who are critical of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> If you don’t like them fine, you talk about optics but those who do like them and do not have problem are not worshipping them or super fans or having them on a pedestal.
> 
> No one is saying you are a hater who is just jealous.
> 
> Give everyone opinions the same respect. We are entitled to our perspective without the extra it comes from a place of ... super fan or hate.
> 
> Some internet etiquette, to help your point come across without being aggressive https://www.lifework.com/why-not-to-write-in-all-caps-1173242.


You really need to stop taking things so personally. Once again, I’m not talking about you! Super fan is name calling? Come on, really? If this bothers you, I can’t imagine how you deal with more important issues in real life.

Where is that emoji for beating a dead horse? Good god. This is my last post on this matter. Thanks!

Back to topic!!


----------



## Flatsy

A1Gypsy, that sounds like a lot of wild speculation about how things work.  Are you directly involved in security involving high-level dignitaries?

I'm drawing conclusions from specific, published information about the baby shower.


A1aGypsy said:


> Then I suspect she asked to make the request to the SD for optics. I have no doubt where the leak of the request came from.


It was not leaked by anyone.  The information came directly from the State Department's official report, which was obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made by The Daily Mail.  Direct quote: 





> "At approximately 1800, the RASP advance informed me that the VIP was requesting a meeting with both of us.  She stated a desire to depart the hotel out of the service door, the only other exit to the hotel located approximately 20 feet up the sidewalk from the main entrance where the press and onlookers were still set up.  I explained that we would need to move the vehicles up the street to line up on the door, thereby telegraphing our intent.  Furthermore, there were not barriers set up on that side and the press would be able to freely approach us on that side.  The VIP  explained that her intent was to change the literal optics of the departure, making it appear that she was at least attempting to sneak out of the hotel in photos rather than exiting through the main entrance and giving the potential impression that she was enjoying the media attention."


Lack of barriers allowing the press to approach freely means the option was less secure. The State Department informed Meghan of this, and did what she requested anyway.  And they were working in conjunction with the RASP.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Totally agree! In photos, it does look like just some nice hand-holding.  But to me, when I see the video it looks deliberate and constant - so constant that it looks like it would be irritating to the two people involved, not enjoyable.  And definitely not spontaneous.  I feel the same way about the baby bump clutching.
> 
> A lot of people will disagree, but at the baby photo call, Meghan rubbing Harry's back as they walked away looked like it was done for the sake of the cameras.  *Not that the affection was phony, I just don't think Meghan spontaneously felt like rubbing Harry's back because of her affection for him.  I think it was primarily for show, and probably was planned out ahead of time.*



I absolutely believe this was the case. It doesn’t make her a bad person, it just means she is very aware of the cameras.


----------



## bag-mania

LVSistinaMM said:


> Where is that emoji for beating a dead horse? Good god. This is my last post on this matter. Thanks!



   

Here it is! Now that I know it's still here I'm never letting it go again. It's the most useful forum emoji ever.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bag-mania said:


> Here it is! Now that I know it's still here I'm never letting it go again. It's the most useful forum emoji ever.


THANK YOU!! Now back to your regularly scheduled program!!  LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Flatsy said:


> A1Gypsy, that sounds like a lot of wild speculation about how things work.  Are you directly involved in security involving high-level dignitaries?
> 
> I'm drawing conclusions from specific, published information about the baby shower.
> 
> It was not leaked by anyone.  The information came directly from the State Department's official report, which was obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made by The Daily Mail.  Direct quote:
> Lack of barriers allowing the press to approach freely means the option was less secure. The State Department informed Meghan of this, and did what she requested anyway.  And they were working in conjunction with the RASP.


Aah, these pesky facts


----------



## Flatsy

LVSistinaMM said:


> I absolutely believe this was the case. It doesn’t make her a bad person, it just means she is very aware of the cameras.


It doesn't make her a bad person.  However, over the past year I feel like I've seen so many little things that make me feel like she is hyper concerned at all times about how she is perceived and how she needs to manipulate that perception.  Lots and lots of little things that confirm to me that she is controlling, perfectionist, and in need of everyone's admiration.

It gives me doubts about how happy she and Harry really are, and how happy they will be in the long run.  Because I don't think her needs are realistic or sustainable.  And they aren't being met right now while she's getting such a hard time from the press.


----------



## Sharont2305

From the BBC website

The Duchess of Sussex's old TV show Suits has made a cheeky quip about her new role as a royal.

Meghan shot to fame as lawyer Rachel Zane in the hit US legal drama, starring from its launch in 2011 until her final episode in 2018.

Rachel's on-screen husband Mike Ross, played by Patrick J Adams, also left, but returned for an episode of the new series and was asked how she's doing.

"If I told you how good, you probably wouldn't believe me," he replied. 

The TV show's official Twitter account continued the gag by tweeting: "Turns out Rachel is doing REALLY well."


----------



## A1aGypsy

Flatsy said:


> A1Gypsy, that sounds like a lot of wild speculation about how things work.  Are you directly involved in security involving high-level dignitaries?



Not directly, no. But I am indirectly involved so I understand the procedures (in my country, at least, and for certain foreign entities).  But I am not for a moment suggesting I was involved in either of these situations and I haven’t read all the documents.  Although, the “pesky facts” posted don't sway my opinion SGCW so don’t worry about that. 

In any event, I’m going to leave it at that. A continued back and forth feels like I am trying to win a debate or something and I was only trying to engage in a discussion / explain my own view.  If someone else doesn’t  share it, that’s fine.   I don’t have a horse in this race at all and this discussion gets so oddly personal all the time.


----------



## Swanky

Capt Obvious here again....
Discuss the celebs/royals in this forum and NOT the members.  It’s getting old getting reported posts all day every day.


----------



## Morgan R

Sharont2305 said:


> From the BBC website
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's old TV show Suits has made a cheeky quip about her new role as a royal.
> 
> Meghan shot to fame as lawyer Rachel Zane in the hit US legal drama, starring from its launch in 2011 until her final episode in 2018.
> 
> Rachel's on-screen husband Mike Ross, played by Patrick J Adams, also left, but returned for an episode of the new series and was asked how she's doing.
> 
> "If I told you how good, you probably wouldn't believe me," he replied.
> 
> The TV show's official Twitter account continued the gag by tweeting: "Turns out Rachel is doing REALLY well."


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

So, any new sightings of the illusive baby Archie? 


I think we may need a general royal gossip thread? There's just so much to discuss! OT but a tidbit to show what we're missing. When former French president Charles de Gaulle together with his wife visited the BRF in the 1960's de Gaulle's wife was asked what she was looking forward to most in her coming retirement. 

_“With great elaboration (as she didn’t speak much English) she replied: ‘A penis.’

“An awkward silence ensued for some time, until the Queen herself came to the rescue, and she said with a broad grin: ‘Ah, happiness’.”

This anecdote is said to be one of Prince Philip’s favourite stories._

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...oke-royal-family-charles-de-gaulle-royal-news


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> So, any new sightings of the illusive baby Archie?
> 
> 
> I think we may need a general royal gossip thread? There's just so much to discuss! OT but a tidbit to show what we're missing. When former French president Charles de Gaulle together with his wife visited the BRF in the 1960's de Gaulle's wife was asked what she was looking forward to most in her coming retirement.
> 
> _“With great elaboration (as she didn’t speak much English) she replied: ‘A penis.’
> 
> “An awkward silence ensued for some time, until the Queen herself came to the rescue, and she said with a broad grin: ‘Ah, happiness’.”
> 
> This anecdote is said to be one of Prince Philip’s favourite stories._
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...oke-royal-family-charles-de-gaulle-royal-news


The way you drop the "H" in the French language gets you in trouble sometimes hahaha!  Kudos to the quick witted Queen!

@SomethingGoodCanWork  Apparently Cosmo and People have the ginger hair stories.  Would love to see an updated picture of Archie.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The way you drop the "H" in the French language gets you in trouble sometimes hahaha!  Kudos to the quick witted Queen!
> 
> @SomethingGoodCanWork  Apparently Cosmo and People have the ginger hair stories.  Would love to see an updated picture of Archie.


I think the next time we see Archie will be on their Christmas card....... which no doubt will be in black and white. Hopefully it'll  be an up to date one and not a never seen before christening pic.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the next time we see Archie will be on their Christmas card....... which no doubt will be in black and white. Hopefully it'll  be an up to date one and not a never seen before christening pic.


Right and partially  funny.  Passive aggressive behavior if it is in black and white and we have to wait for color until then.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> The way you drop the "H" in the French language gets you in trouble sometimes hahaha!  Kudos to the quick witted Queen!
> 
> @SomethingGoodCanWork  Apparently Cosmo and People have the ginger hair stories.  Would love to see an updated picture of Archie.


I can just imagine Philip man-giggling to himself under a stiff upper lip when Madame de Gaulle said that 

About the alleged ginger: Pics or it didn't happen!    (To anyone taking umbrage at this:  )


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> It doesn't make her a bad person.  However, over the past year I feel like I've seen so many little things that make me feel like she is hyper concerned at all times about how she is perceived and how she needs to manipulate that perception.  Lots and lots of little things that confirm to me that she is controlling, perfectionist, and in need of everyone's admiration.
> 
> It gives me doubts about how happy she and Harry really are, and how happy they will be in the long run.  Because I don't think her needs are realistic or sustainable.  And they aren't being met right now while she's getting such a hard time from the press.



Maybe the hyper awareness is a by-product of her being under the most intense scrutiny of any woman in the world right now.  Literally every single thing she does is analyzed in order to find a critical angle. After she was spotted at the Polo match with Archie, a tabloid identified the blanket Archie was wrapped in, then sent someone to India to determine the blanket was made in a sweat shop and of course wrote an article criticizing Meghan about it. I don’t think most women could handle that level of scrutiny.

Despite the near comical level of scrutiny Meghan continues to do her job and has actually been more productive on maternity leave than certain other royals are who aren’t restricted.

I also don’t Meghan & Harry’s relationship is the one anyone should be worried about right now. The Cambridges body language signals trouble especially when Will can’t even fake affection for his wife on planned photoshoots intended to distract from his extramarital affair.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I can just imagine Philip man-giggling to himself under a stiff upper lip when Madame de Gaulle said that
> 
> About the alleged ginger: Pics or it didn't happen!    (To anyone taking umbrage at this:  )



I am not taking umbrage lol!  If you are going to put out that info you should be nice enough to back it up and don't give me that privacy nonsense.   You know that this last sentence will provoke someone, sorry, but if there is no picture then you are  toying  with the public  and doing it to keep yourself out there.  Just keep his hair color to yourself until the big reveal.

On another site, it was mentioned that the royal families of other countries routinely release picture of the children in prearranged photo ops.  The paps take the pix and that is that and leave them alone.  Many of these royals vacation in other countries or at resort locations in their own county.  They go out an about and do touristy things and people leave them alone.  Sometimes a photo is requested and taken by a fellow citizen and it is taken with no fuss.  As soon as a person says NO, that is the signal for attention to be paid.   

Yes, Phil is still getting a chuckle over that little bon mot.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> I am not taking umbrage lol!  If you are going to put out that info you should be nice enough to back it up and don't give me that privacy nonsense.   You know that this last sentence will provoke someone, sorry, but if there is no picture then you are  toying  with the public  and doing it to keep yourself out there.  Just keep his hair color to yourself until the big reveal.
> 
> On another site, it was mentioned that the royal families of other countries routinely release picture of the children in prearranged photo ops.  The paps take the pix and that is that and leave them alone.  Many of these royals vacation in other countries or at resort locations in their own county.  They go out an about and do touristy things and people leave them alone.  Sometimes a photo is requested and taken by a fellow citizen and it is taken with no fuss.  As soon as a person says NO, that is the signal for attention to be paid.
> 
> Yes, Phil is still getting a chuckle over that little bon mot.


It’s been done in the same way in the UK too.  For example William and Harry were left in peace at school and college, and the photographers were given photo ops at key stages such as first day of the school year, beg of holidays and so on.  Harry and Meghan have decided to do things differently however.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> On another site, it was mentioned that the royal families of other countries routinely release picture of the children in prearranged photo ops.  The paps take the pix and that is that and leave them alone.  Many of these royals vacation in other countries or at resort locations in their own county.  They go out an about and do touristy things and people leave them alone.  Sometimes a photo is requested and taken by a fellow citizen and it is taken with no fuss.  As soon as a person says NO, that is the signal for attention to be paid.
> 
> Yes, Phil is still getting a chuckle over that little bon mot.


That's been done here for years, going back to Charles, Diana and the boys, particularly when they went skiing. But, after the official photo opp, the press and paps still hounded them. 
After Diana died, an agreement was made that Charles still did the official opp with the boys then they were left alone. It really did work. Same when William went to University, photo opp then leave him alone. I think that worked about 90%, the odd photo would emerge but wasn't printed in the UK press. I must say, the British press were respectful of the boys privacy as they grew up after their mum died.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s been done in the same way in the UK too.  For example William and Harry were left in peace at school and college, and the photographers were given photo ops at key stages such as first day of the school year, beg of holidays and so on.  Harry and Meghan have decided to do things differently however.


Snap, lol


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> I am not taking umbrage lol!  If you are going to put out that info you should be nice enough to back it up and don't give me that privacy nonsense.   You know that this last sentence will provoke someone, sorry, but if there is no picture then you are  toying  with the public  and doing it to keep yourself out there.  Just keep his hair color to yourself until the big reveal.
> 
> On another site, it was mentioned that the royal families of other countries routinely release picture of the children in prearranged photo ops.  The paps take the pix and that is that and leave them alone.  Many of these royals vacation in other countries or at resort locations in their own county.  They go out an about and do touristy things and people leave them alone.  Sometimes a photo is requested and taken by a fellow citizen and it is taken with no fuss.  As soon as a person says NO, that is the signal for attention to be paid.
> 
> Yes, Phil is still getting a chuckle over that little bon mot.


The "umbrage" remark (I always find that word somewhat hilarious after some Hollywood actor used it in a particularly soap-boxy fashion  ) was in no way intended at you. I agree, what's the point of little tidbits about tufts of hair if there are no photos? It's not like Archie is a state secret. Or maybe he is?!  I need to check "the other forum" to see if they've dug up something more  

And yes, pre-arranged royal photo ops seem a much smarter tactic.


----------



## LittleStar88

Like any working woman, MM will be aware of her "brand" and adjust as needed to maintain it.

Where I work, I am majority very different than I am outside of work. I have a certain workplace brand to maintain, and I do what is needed to keep it that way. Meghan is just doing it at a whole other level with a world watching and pointing out her every mistake. For the legitimate missteps, I hope she adjusts accordingly. I do feel like many are just picking her apart for sport.


----------



## caramelize126

Flatsy said:


> It was not leaked by anyone.  The information came directly from the State Department's official report, which was obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made by The Daily Mail.  Direct quote:
> Lack of barriers allowing the press to approach freely means the option was less secure. The State Department informed Meghan of this, and did what she requested anyway.  And they were working in conjunction with the RASP.



Thanks for this! I kept looking for the actual FOIA'd documents, I didn't realize that it was just excerpts that had been published.

At that point, I don't think there is anything anyone could've done to fix the optics of that shower.  There are a ton of celebs in NYC and its pretty easy to lay low if you want. Whether it was Meghan or her "friends", every detail had already been leaked to the press.  There was an article,  I'll have to find the link, but it was a magazine editor saying that the magazines had all been told where the shower was going to be, who was going to be there, what the guests were getting as favors, etc. in advance so everyone would know where to show up. The companies for the favor items  (all Sponsored!) had mini press releases ready for the "scoop" on the items included.


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> Thanks for this! I kept looking for the actual FOIA'd documents, I didn't realize that it was just excerpts that had been published.
> 
> At that point, I don't think there is anything anyone could've done to fix the optics of that shower. There are a ton of celebs in NYC and its pretty easy to lay low if you want. Whether it was Meghan or her "friends", every detail had already been leaked to the press. There was an article, I'll have to find the link, but it was a magazine editor saying that the magazines had all been told where the shower was going to be, who was going to be there, what the guests were getting as favors, etc. in advance so everyone would know where to show up. The companies for the favor items (all Sponsored!) had mini press releases ready for the "scoop" on the items included.


You're welcome!  The Daily Mail's story has a scan of the original document (with many redacted areas).

When the Meghan's Mirror fan site got criticism from Meghan's fans for their coverage of the baby shower, they tweeted that they actually had access to much more detailed and specific information about the event logistics.  They said rather cryptically that they had reason to believe Meghan would not have a problem with them revealing them.  I would love to know exactly what connections Meghan's Mirror has because it's suspected their connections are almost direct.

The "Away" luggage giveaway definitely seemed like a sponsorship that was always intended to be publicized.


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> Thanks for this! I kept looking for the actual FOIA'd documents, I didn't realize that it was just excerpts that had been published.
> 
> At that point, I don't think there is anything anyone could've done to fix the optics of that shower.  There are a ton of celebs in NYC and its pretty easy to lay low if you want. Whether it was Meghan or her "friends", every detail had already been leaked to the press.  There was an article,  I'll have to find the link, but it was a magazine editor saying that the magazines had all been told where the shower was going to be, who was going to be there, what the guests were getting as favors, etc. in advance so everyone would know where to show up. The companies for the favor items  (all Sponsored!) had mini press releases ready for the "scoop" on the items included.


I didn’t know that.  I’m shocked actually


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The "umbrage" remark (I always find that word somewhat hilarious after some Hollywood actor used it in a particularly soap-boxy fashion  ) was in no way intended at you. I agree, what's the point of little tidbits about tufts of hair if there are no photos? It's not like Archie is a state secret. Or maybe he is?!  I need to check "the other forum" to see if they've dug up something more
> 
> And yes, pre-arranged royal photo ops seem a much smarter tactic.


No worries. I knew it was wasn’t directed at me. Too much paranoia around here. Lol!


----------



## caramelize126

Flatsy said:


> You're welcome!  The Daily Mail's story has a scan of the original document (with many redacted areas).
> 
> When the Meghan's Mirror fan site got criticism from Meghan's fans for their coverage of the baby shower, they tweeted that they actually had access to much more detailed and specific information about the event logistics.  They said rather cryptically that they had reason to believe Meghan would not have a problem with them revealing them.  I would love to know exactly what connections Meghan's Mirror has because it's suspected their connections are almost direct.
> 
> The "Away" luggage giveaway definitely seemed like a sponsorship that was always intended to be publicized.



ooh thats interesting! I didnt know that! I wonder what/who their connections are.  I know these tactics are totally normal in Hollywood so I wonder if Meghan has her own PR or assistants outside of the folks the palace employs? I can't imagine palace employees would be engaging in this nonsense. 

I think this is really the crux of why Meghan gets so much criticism.  The tactics that shes using to get attention are all great if you want to build a _brand_ and smart moves for a _celebrity_.  But this is not what the BRF is about.  The "brand" is the family and the monarchy, not yourself. IMO, her methods of trying to manipulate public perception of her is all backfiring because these are things that work in Hollywood, not the arena that she is in.

The Clooneys, and all of most of her high profile "friends" from the shower would not be friends with her if hadn't become a duchess. I think she is smart enough to understand this, but also smart enough to know how to use these connections to her advantage.


----------



## bag-mania

caramelize126 said:


> The Clooneys, and all of most of her high profile "friends" from the shower would not be friends with her if hadn't become a duchess. I think she is smart enough to understand this, but also smart enough to know how to use these connections to her advantage.



That is true. It's all about which people you can use and which ones are using you.


----------



## caramelize126

bag-mania said:


> That is true. It's all about which people you can use and which ones are using you.



Its unfortunate.

As awful as her father is now, I wonder if a part of the reason that she cut ties with him is because he longer fit her narrative. Shes mentioned in old interviews ( or maybe it was her friends that said it?)  that she spent most of her teenage years living with her father because he was alot more lenient. This man spent his lottery winnings on his children ( private school, college, etc. for Meghan). He obviously loved her. If he was still a the celebrated emmy winning lighting director that he once was, i wonder if their relationship would be different.

There is no denying that her father loves the attention and has done some awful things, but I dont think the apple has fallen far from the tree.


----------



## mrsinsyder

caramelize126 said:


> Its unfortunate.
> 
> As awful as her father is now, I wonder if a part of the reason that she cut ties with him is because he longer fit her narrative.



I think that's beyond obvious.


----------



## BagLovingMom

^^But wasn’t her dad supposed to walk her down the aisle? If being an integral part of a much anticipated royal wedding and a very personal moment isn’t being included in one’s narrative, then I can’t imagine what would be.


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> There is no denying that her father loves the attention and has done some awful things, but I dont think the apple has fallen far from the tree.


I give Meghan the benefit of the doubt when it comes to how she's handled her family since the wedding because they just seem to be relentlessly awful.  The father, half sister and half brother are all unforgivable.  But in terms of the apple not falling far from the tree, I do wonder what influence being raised in that family has had on her.  

Being raised in LA in the midst of the entertainment industry her whole life I think has a lot to do with her preoccupation with personal fame and the overvaluing of celebrities.  But not coincidentally, her two worst family members (father and half-sister) are also all about the entertainment industry and celebrities.


BagLovingMom said:


> ^^But wasn’t her dad supposed to walk her down the aisle? If being an integral part of a much anticipated royal wedding and a very personal moment isn’t being included in one’s narrative, then I can’t imagine what would be.


This is true.  However, in the two and a half years Meghan was with Harry prior to their wedding, she never introduced her father to him in person.  I think Markle said he had one phone call with Harry.  Meghan never introduced her father to any of her future family members either.  Other than phone calls, it's unclear how much in-person contact Meghan even had with her father during that time.  

It seems she wanted to fly him in for the wedding, have him play the part of the loving father in the pageant, and then....I guess send him back to Mexico and go back to not having much of anything to do with him?    That plan was at best a serious miscalculation.  

I keep reading about how Buckingham Palace wanted to handle Thomas Markle by "bringing him into the fold" and Meghan is the one who wanted to handle it her way, which has been to shut him out.  

For some reason, I'm always reminded of that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa is going to England to marry this rich, sophisticated British guy and her low class family does nothing but embarrass her at the wedding.  Except at the end of The Simpsons, Lisa broke it off with the British guy and chose her family because she loved them.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I have no dog in this fight but her father and step-sister are horrible people, and regardless of Meghan's other missteps she's well shot of them.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> For some reason, I'm always reminded of that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa is going to England to marry this rich, sophisticated British guy and her low class family does nothing but embarrass her at the wedding.  Except at the end of The Simpsons, Lisa broke it off with the British guy and chose her family because she loved them.



I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought of that episode of the Simpsons. A case of life imitating art. I think Meghan is embarrassed by her father and that’s why she cut him off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> I give Meghan the benefit of the doubt when it comes to how she's handled her family since the wedding because they just seem to be relentlessly awful.  The father, half sister and half brother are all unforgivable.  But in terms of the apple not falling far from the tree, I do wonder what influence being raised in that family has had on her.
> 
> Being raised in LA in the midst of the entertainment industry her whole life I think has a lot to do with her preoccupation with personal fame and the overvaluing of celebrities.  But not coincidentally, her two worst family members (father and half-sister) are also all about the entertainment industry and celebrities.
> 
> This is true.  However, in the two and a half years Meghan was with Harry prior to their wedding, she never introduced her father to him in person.  I think Markle said he had one phone call with Harry.  Meghan never introduced her father to any of her future family members either.  Other than phone calls, it's unclear how much in-person contact Meghan even had with her father during that time.
> 
> It seems she wanted to fly him in for the wedding, have him play the part of the loving father in the pageant, and then....I guess send him back to Mexico and go back to not having much of anything to do with him?    That plan was at best a serious miscalculation.
> 
> I keep reading about how Buckingham Palace wanted to handle Thomas Markle by "bringing him into the fold" and Meghan is the one who wanted to handle it her way, which has been to shut him out.
> 
> For some reason, I'm always reminded of that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa is going to England to marry this rich, sophisticated British guy and her low class family does nothing but embarrass her at the wedding.  Except at the end of The Simpsons, Lisa broke it off with the British guy and chose her family because she loved them.


What did Madonna say? All the world is a stage? Meghan is no dummy, she’s going maximize her connections, and use this role to her advantage, just as she did when finally landed on Suits. With each step, she’s set herself up for a comfortable life no matter what happens! On to the next! Upward and onward!


----------



## mdcx

I think Meghan is doing that old celeb trick of withholding info to drive up the price/interest. You know how celebs refuse to reveal the name of their child until they get a magazine cover or auction off their wedding pics? Same thing with pics of Archie.
Unfortunately this is not how things are done in the BRF.

One nice close up colour photo of them as a family all facing the cameras would do a world of good for her image. All the royal fans would appreciate it so much. Someday she might get it.


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> What did Madonna say? All the world is a stage? Meghan is no dummy, she’s going maximize her connections, and use this role to her advantage, just as she did when finally landed on Suits. With each step, she’s set herself up for a comfortable life no matter what happens! On to the next! Upward and onward!



Actually it was Shakespeare who said it in AS YOU LiKE, but point taken. 

I have trouble with the concept of her setting herself up as a brand. I’m not denying it, it is just that I don’t get it. Branding yourself implies a degree of independence. In today’s world independence means having money. Like it or not her current fame and funds are  from all things associated with her husband and his family. Take all that away and the clout they have and what is left?  An actress who is old by industry standards, a woman who tried to help people via charity work? Plenty of women have fallen into this category and were never heard from again.  The former wives of top and incredibly wealthy Hollywood moguls comes to mind. Lady Diana had a 40£ million divorce settlement, social position that she was born to, and many years of goodwill and sympathy and that’s how she survived to continue with charitable endeavors and human interests.  

In essence I don’t see her as a brand because she doesn’t have enough clout, money or fame on  her own    It’s all borrowed.


----------



## rose60610

Flatsy said:


> This is true. However, in the two and a half years Meghan was with Harry prior to their wedding, she never introduced her father to him in person. I think Markle said he had one phone call with Harry. Meghan never introduced her father to any of her future family members either. Other than phone calls, it's unclear how much in-person contact Meghan even had with her father during that time.
> 
> It seems she wanted to fly him in for the wedding, have him play the part of the loving father in the pageant, and then....I guess send him back to Mexico and go back to not having much of anything to do with him? That plan was at best a serious miscalculation.
> 
> I keep reading about how Buckingham Palace wanted to handle Thomas Markle by "bringing him into the fold" and Meghan is the one who wanted to handle it her way, which has been to shut him out.



OK.  Not that I want to *S A Y* anything, but I told my husband that I bet Charles will walk MM down the aisle. Of course he didn't care nor was he even aware that a royal wedding was even coming up, but when Chuck DID walk her at the 
50 yard line, I reminded DH that I predicted it! He replied that I do have a sixth sense about these things. He'd have said that regardless as he didn't say a thing when I turned on the TV at 3 AM to watch all the hoopla when William and Kate got married. I love all the pomp, and just love all the horses the Brits get decked out to have in the processions. 

But, yes, M's family has been more than trying, exception being her mom who appears to be a very classy and nice lady.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> OK.  Not that I want to *S A Y* anything, but I told my husband that I bet Charles will walk MM down the aisle. Of course he didn't care nor was he even aware that a royal wedding was even coming up, but when Chuck DID walk her at the
> 50 yard line, I reminded DH that I predicted it! He replied that I do have a sixth sense about these things. He'd have said that regardless as he didn't say a thing when I turned on the TV at 3 AM to watch all the hoopla when William and Kate got married. I love all the pomp, and just love all the horses the Brits get decked out to have in the processions.
> 
> But, yes, M's family has been more than trying, exception being her mom who appears to be a very classy and nice lady.


I never thought her father would go through with it. Too intimidating for him. Charles showed what a kind person he is and his walking her also communicated his acceptance of her into his family.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> Actually it was Shakespeare who said it in AS YOU LiKE, but point taken.
> 
> I have trouble with the concept of her setting herself up as a brand. I’m not denying it, it is just that I don’t get it. Branding yourself implies a degree of independence. In today’s world independence means having money. Like it or not her current fame and funds are  from all things associated with her husband and his family. Take all that away and the clout they have and what is left?  An actress who is old by industry standards, a woman who tried to help people via charity work? Plenty of women have fallen into this category and were never heard from again.  The former wives of top and incredibly wealthy Hollywood moguls comes to mind. Lady Diana had a 40£ million divorce settlement, social position that she was born to, and many years of goodwill and sympathy and that’s how she survived to continue with charitable endeavors and human interests.
> 
> In essence I don’t see her as a brand because she doesn’t have enough clout, money or fame on  her own    It’s all borrowed.



Thanks for the correction.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Meghan really didn’t have that’s much going for her if she never met Harry. She’s smart enough to know after her stint on Suits, roles would be few and bad far between, especially in her late 30s.

I truly believe her charitable efforts were out of the kindness of her heart, but also think it was very much motivated in cultivating her brand/image so she could stay relevant and in the public eye. Her blog is further proof that she knew how to keep hustling by branding herself as a lifestyle and fashion guru. 

People want to laud her for her charitable efforts, and I agree, it is very noteworthy. However, MANY celebrities get involved in causes and donate their time to volunteer and help those in need. 

With that marriage, the child, and possibly more children, even if her marriage with Harry didn’t work out long term (god forbid) she would be sitting pretty with plenty of endorsement deals and high fashion collaborations on top of being very well taken care of by the BRF as a mom to Harry’s kids. There would be no low rent Jenny Craig deals like Fergie coming her way. Her opportunities after divorce are even more promising than in marriage with all those BRF restrictions.

There is a reason why she got into Northwestern, and she’s using those same skills to play the game. Hats off to her for getting this far! It’s a combination of hard work and good luck!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> I give Meghan the benefit of the doubt when it comes to how she's handled her family since the wedding because they just seem to be relentlessly awful.  The father, half sister and half brother are all unforgivable.  But in terms of the apple not falling far from the tree, I do wonder what influence being raised in that family has had on her.
> 
> Being raised in LA in the midst of the entertainment industry her whole life I think has a lot to do with her preoccupation with personal fame and the overvaluing of celebrities.  But not coincidentally, her two worst family members (father and half-sister) are also all about the entertainment industry and celebrities.
> 
> This is true.  However, in the two and a half years Meghan was with Harry prior to their wedding, she never introduced her father to him in person.  I think Markle said he had one phone call with Harry.  Meghan never introduced her father to any of her future family members either.  Other than phone calls, it's unclear how much in-person contact Meghan even had with her father during that time.
> 
> It seems she wanted to fly him in for the wedding, have him play the part of the loving father in the pageant, and then....I guess send him back to Mexico and go back to not having much of anything to do with him?    That plan was at best a serious miscalculation.
> 
> I keep reading about how Buckingham Palace wanted to handle Thomas Markle by "bringing him into the fold" and Meghan is the one who wanted to handle it her way, which has been to shut him out.
> 
> For some reason, I'm always reminded of that episode of The Simpsons where Lisa is going to England to marry this rich, sophisticated British guy and her low class family does nothing but embarrass her at the wedding.  Except at the end of The Simpsons, Lisa broke it off with the British guy and chose her family because she loved them.


I also found it very odd that Harry had never met Thomas before the wedding.  All that jetting around and Harry never said - hey let’s find time to meet your old man?  Definitely, definitely not normal.  Thomas was featured in her blog a lot wasn’t he?  He did a lot for her when she was younger, and it’s clear he was very much part of her life growing up and as a young woman.
At the time of the wedding and with all the hooha about who was going to walk Meghan down the aisle I felt Thomas had been set up to fail.  She never wanted him there.  He failed to realise he was supposed to be part of her past and that his part had been played.  How inconvenient.  They could’ve easily rescued him from the mess he got himself into with the press and they could certainly have given him support and direction ahead of the engagement to prevent it all happening in the first place.


----------



## Tivo

LVSistinaMM said:


> Meghan really didn’t have that’s much going for her if she never met Harry. She’s smart enough to know after her stint on Suits, roles would be few and bad far between, especially in her late 30s.
> 
> I truly believe her charitable efforts were out of the kindness of her heart, but also think it was very much motivated in cultivating her brand/image so she could stay relevant and in the public eye. Her blog is further proof that she knew how to keep hustling by branding herself as a lifestyle and fashion guru.
> 
> People want to laud her for her charitable efforts, and I agree, it is very noteworthy. However, MANY celebrities get involved in causes and donate their time to volunteer and help those in need.
> 
> With that marriage, the child, and possibly more children, even if her marriage with Harry didn’t work out long term (god forbid) she would be sitting pretty with plenty of endorsement deals and high fashion collaborations on top of being very well taken care of by the BRF as a mom to Harry’s kids. There would be no low rent Jenny Craig deals like Fergie coming her way. Her opportunities after divorce are even more promising than in marriage with all those BRF restrictions.
> 
> There is a reason why she got into Northwestern, and she’s using those same skills to play the game. Hats off to her for getting this far! It’s a combination of hard work and good luck!


Yours is as close a statement to my perception of her that I’ve ever read. With one difference. Since the beginning I’ve believed she’s been a phony. She thought she could play the game but she wasn’t ready for the Maine Stage. Watching the early interviews she gave with Harry, I got the sense she wants people to see her as confident, poised, articulate and powerful. She talked a lot, as if she was really trying to impress with this carefully crafted image of herself. Unfortunately, for some people it gave off a whiff of smugness. I started side-eyeing her. I think this whole process has humbled her, and she’s learning to be herself in the public eye.
At this point if her charitable efforts are self-serving, or her connections and outreach to celebs are superficial, it doesn’t really matter. She seems to be weathering the storm and I can respect that.


----------



## Tivo

.


----------



## Tivo

Clearblueskies said:


> I also found it very odd that Harry had never met Thomas before the wedding.  All that jetting around and Harry never said - hey let’s find time to meet your old man?  Definitely, definitely not normal.  Thomas was featured in her blog a lot wasn’t he?  He did a lot for her when she was younger, and it’s clear he was very much part of her life growing up and as a young woman.
> At the time of the wedding and with all the hooha about who was going to walk Meghan down the aisle I felt Thomas had been set up to fail.  *She never wanted him there.  He failed to realise he was supposed to be part of her past and that his part had been played.  How inconvenient.  They could’ve easily rescued him from the mess he got himself into with the press and they could certainly have given him support and direction ahead of the engagement to prevent it all happening in the first place*.



You are assuming a lot here.
To buy your argument, I have to believe she and her dad were on good terms. Not everyone is on good terms with parents. We don’t know if their relationship was strained long before. Judging by the way her family behaves, something bad likely went down to fracture those relationships. They are way too comfortable with going below the belt and publicly humiliating her.
Trust was broken at some point before, and now it’s irreparable.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Clearblueskies said:


> I also found it very odd that Harry had never met Thomas before the wedding.  All that jetting around and Harry never said - hey let’s find time to meet your old man?  Definitely, definitely not normal.  Thomas was featured in her blog a lot wasn’t he?  He did a lot for her when she was younger, and it’s clear he was very much part of her life growing up and as a young woman.
> At the time of the wedding and with all the hooha about who was going to walk Meghan down the aisle I felt Thomas had been set up to fail.  She never wanted him there.  He failed to realise he was supposed to be part of her past and that his part had been played.  How inconvenient.  They could’ve easily rescued him from the mess he got himself into with the press and they could certainly have given him support and direction ahead of the engagement to prevent it all happening in the first place.



I agree Thomas was set up to fail....by his daughter Samantha.  By her own admission, she suggested he takes the pre-wedding photos (for a price of course).  Samantha got in their father’s head about Meghan.  I believe Meghan was Thomas’  favorite; being the baby and all.   I’m sure Meghan wanted her father to walk her down the aisle - I believe she loves her dad - also her wedding was on the world stage - I don’t think she expected this level of hate/discord from her family.  (Well maybe her sister.).

But Thomas and Samantha only care about one thing.......$$$$$$.   I would cut him off too if he sided with the sister that was out to destroy me.  Who wouldn’t stop speaking to the press about me; who constantly ask for money (probably in exchange for something); and who knows what else. 

If Thomas was a generally nice guy that made one mistake.  Yeah, I think the BRF would have rescued him.  But he’s someone that constantly would need to be “rescued.”


----------



## Welltraveled!

LittleStar88 said:


> It is very entertaining to watch some folks dig really deep to speculate and hypothesize on MM and her life. Some are even dipping into tinfoil hat territory (fake baby lol). Thanks for the pages and pages of giggles!



LOL!  TInfoil territory!  I’m going to use that going forward. When I read some of those pages, I thought I was in the wrong forum for a minute.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Welltraveled! said:


> I agree Thomas was set up to fail....by his daughter Samantha.  By her own admission, she suggested he takes the pre-wedding photos (for a price of course).  Samantha got in their father’s head about Meghan.  I believe Meghan was Thomas’  favorite; being the baby and all.   I’m sure Meghan wanted her father to walk her down the aisle - I believe she loves her dad - also her wedding was on the world stage - I don’t think she expected this level of hate/discord from her family.  (Well maybe her sister.).
> 
> But Thomas and Samantha only care about one thing.......$$$$$$.   I would cut him off too if he sided with the sister that was out to destroy me.  Who wouldn’t stop speaking to the press about me; who constantly ask for money (probably in exchange for something); and who knows what else.
> 
> If Thomas was a generally nice guy that made one mistake.  Yeah, I think the BRF would have rescued him.  But he’s someone that constantly would need to be “rescued.”


I read somewhere yesterday that he’s been turning down recent offers for paid interviews about Meghan.  I think he cuts rather a sad figure.  The sister is an altogether different story I grant you!


----------



## PatsyCline

mdcx said:


> I think Meghan is doing that old celeb trick of withholding info to drive up the price/interest. You know how celebs refuse to reveal the name of their child until they get a magazine cover or auction off their wedding pics? Same thing with pics of Archie.
> Unfortunately this is not how things are done in the BRF.
> 
> One nice close up colour photo of them as a family all facing the cameras would do a world of good for her image. All the royal fans would appreciate it so much. Someday she might get it.


Once again, where's your proof of this? You're making wild assumptions with no basis in fact for anything you say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Once again, where's your proof of this?


To quote mdcx, "*I think*".  She presented it as her opinion, not fact.  

It's hardly a new idea to believe that the Sussexes are employing a strategy in terms of how and when they release photos of Archie.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> To quote mdcx, "*I think*".  She presented it as her opinion, not fact.
> 
> It's hardly a new idea to believe that the Sussexes are employing a strategy in terms of how and when they release photos of Archie.


 And.....it’s a gossip thread, not the news


----------



## PatsyCline

Clearblueskies said:


> And.....it’s a gossip thread, not the news


X


----------



## chicaloca

PatsyCline said:


> Once again, where's your proof of this? You're making wild assumptions with no basis in fact for anything you say.



There is no proof and never will be. Meghan’s an actress so by default people think everything she does is “Hollywood”. They can’t conceive of the fact that as the only person of color in the Royal family during a time when White nationalism is on the rise, she and Harry are likely receiving near constant threats. A news reporter lost his job for comparing Archie to a chimp. A man was arrested for threatening  to kill Harry for marrying a Black woman. 

Claims of Hollywood-Style PR maneuvering with Archie make no logical sense. The Sussexes don’t need the money and currently get more attention worldwide than any other couple in the world right now.  A more logical idea is that Meghan & Harry love their baby and want to keep him safe at all cost. They most certainly want to protect him from the same type of  racially-motivated vitriol being heaped on
Meghan.

The whole, “Meghan wants attention” angle is tired.  We literally never see the woman when she’s not working.  She and Harry move stealthily both in and outside of the U.K so there are no frequent pap strolls.  We rarely get candid  photos of them. If Meghan is desperately seeking attention she’s going about it in an odd way.  People continually project characteristics onto her that have no basis in reality.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I never thought her father would go through with it. Too intimidating for him. Charles showed what a kind person he is and his walking her also communicated his acceptance of her into his family.


Well, I'm sure Charles is very kind, but the BRF had no choice but to volunteer someone to walk her down the aisle.  How would it look if they didn't.


chicaloca said:


> The whole, “Meghan wants attention” angle is tired.  We literally never see the woman when she’s not working.  She and Harry move stealthily both in and outside of the U.K so there are no frequent pap strolls.  We rarely get candid  photos of them. If Meghan is desperately seeking attention she’s going about it in an odd way.  People continually project characteristics onto her that have no basis in reality.


True, we don't get pap photos of them hopping on a private jet to Ibiza or travelling around the $43,300 a week Villa in Mustique.  We never see the good stuff.


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> Well, I'm sure Charles is very kind, but the BRF had no choice but to volunteer someone to walk her down the aisle.  How would it look if they didn't.
> 
> True, we don't get pap photos of them hopping on a private jet to Ibiza or travelling around the $43,300 a week Villa in Mustique.  We never see the good stuff.



Meghan was not in a Villa in Mustique, that is her in laws. Harry and her  are rumored to have traveled to Ibiza but the press doesn’t know where they stayed. The DM asked readers to contact them for info.


----------



## LuckyBitch

gracekelly said:


> Actually it was Shakespeare who said it in AS YOU LiKE, but point taken.
> 
> I have trouble with the concept of her setting herself up as a brand. I’m not denying it, it is just that I don’t get it. Branding yourself implies a degree of independence. In today’s world independence means having money. Like it or not her current fame and funds are  from all things associated with her husband and his family. Take all that away and the clout they have and what is left?  An actress who is old by industry standards, a woman who tried to help people via charity work? Plenty of women have fallen into this category and were never heard from again.  The former wives of top and incredibly wealthy Hollywood moguls comes to mind. Lady Diana had a 40£ million divorce settlement, social position that she was born to, and many years of goodwill and sympathy and that’s how she survived to continue with charitable endeavors and human interests.
> 
> In essence I don’t see her as a brand because she doesn’t have enough clout, money or fame on  her own    It’s all borrowed.


It's actually called AS YOU LIKE IT.


----------



## gracekelly

LuckyBitch said:


> It's actually called AS YOU LIKE IT.


Thanks left out the* IT i*n error.  Let me know if you want to nitpick anything else.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Well, I'm sure Charles is very kind, but the BRF had no choice but to volunteer someone to walk her down the aisle.  How would it look if they didn't.
> .



I don't think anyone had to walk her down the aisle.  She could have just walked herself or  her mother could have done it as well.  This was a second marriage. full bridal reagalia withstanding and she is a mature woman.  I think the entire idea of "being given away" is ridiculous in this day and age.


----------



## LuckyBitch

gracekelly said:


> Thanks left out the* IT i*n error.  Let me know if you want to knit pick anything else.


Okay, while we're at it... He also didn't "say" it, it's believed he wrote the pastoral comedy in 1599.


----------



## gracekelly

LuckyBitch said:


> Okay, while we're at it... He also didn't "say" it, it's believed he wrote the pastoral comedy in 1599.



Of course Shakespeare didn't say it, he just wrote it.    It was said by Jacques to Duke senior, Act II Scene VII  during the play.

Are we going to get into a whole other discussion as to whether Shakespeare wrote the plays and sonnets etc.  I wrote a paper on it, I would be happy to discuss.


----------



## Welltraveled!

chicaloca said:


> There is no proof and never will be. Meghan’s an actress so by default people think everything she does is “Hollywood”. They can’t conceive of the fact that as the only person of color in the Royal family during a time when White nationalism is on the rise, she and Harry are likely receiving near constant threats. A news reporter lost his job for comparing Archie to a chimp. A man was arrested for threatening  to kill Harry for marrying a Black woman.
> 
> Claims of Hollywood-Style PR maneuvering with Archie make no logical sense. The Sussexes don’t need the money and currently get more attention worldwide than any other couple in the world right now.  A more logical idea is that Meghan & Harry love their baby and want to keep him safe at all cost. They most certainly want to protect him from the same type of  racially-motivated vitriol being heaped on
> Meghan.
> 
> The whole, “Meghan wants attention” angle is tired.  We literally never see the woman when she’s not working.  She and Harry move stealthily both in and outside of the U.K so there are no frequent pap strolls.  We rarely get candid  photos of them. If Meghan is desperately seeking attention she’s going about it in an odd way.  People continually project characteristics onto her that have no basis in reality.




Exactly!


----------



## LuckyBitch

gracekelly said:


> I don't think anyone had to walk her down the aisle.  She could have just walked herself or  her mother could have done it as well.  This was a second marriage. full bridal reagalia withstanding and she is a mature woman.  I think the entire idea of "being given away" is ridiculous in this day and age.


It's called tradition.


----------



## limom

Interesting short article regarding the privacy situation:
https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...le-privacy-policies-breaking-royal-tradition/


----------



## limom

LuckyBitch said:


> It's called tradition.


I thought that she was this feminist icon/ non traditionalist yada, yada, yada.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LuckyBitch

limom said:


> I thought that she was this feminist icon/ non traditionalist yada, yada, yada.


One should possibly not believe the tripe writen by "gossips".


----------



## limom

LuckyBitch said:


> One should possibly not believe the tripe writen by "gossips".


I shall believe what suits me


----------



## Welltraveled!

PatsyCline said:


> Thank you so much. I thought only Meghan haters posted here.



I'm in this thread as well as the Cambridges.  The few that are overly critical of Meghan; are the opposite when it comes to Will/Kate.  Once I realize that I expect the negative comments about Meghan from those few.  

However, I think most like her or feel indifferent about her.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> I thought that she was this feminist icon/ non traditionalist yada, yada, yada.



Right.  Blazing new paths etc. A force for change. yada yada yada 

Seriously, I truly did want her to walk down the aisle herself or with her mother.  

As far as tradition goes, if you really want to go by the traditions for second marriages, then no white bridal outfit of a first time bride.  The tradition was that if a second marriage, then the bride is supposed to wear a pale color like blue, pink, gray etc.  No veil  Even the Queen mentioned this vis a vis the tiara dust-up.  She wondered why a tiara was necessary since this was a second wedding and strictly speaking, no veil.


----------



## LuckyBitch

limom said:


> I shall believe what suits me


This, most definitely, doesn't surprise me in the least.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I don't think anyone had to walk her down the aisle.  She could have just walked herself or  her mother could have done it as well.  This was a second marriage. full bridal reagalia withstanding and she is a mature woman.  I think the entire idea of "being given away" is ridiculous in this day and age.


Yes it is, but tell that to the BRF.


----------



## gracekelly

LuckyBitch said:


> One should possibly not believe the tripe writen by "gossips".


Since this is a gossip thread, then I guess none of us should believe anything that another poster has written here.  

*ATTENTION ALL POSTERS! * Do not believe a word of what your fellow gossips have written!  This thread is a work of pure fiction!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Yes it is, but tell that to the BRF.


I think that if the BRF had been consulted they would have suggested a quieter wedding without all the pomp and the bridal trappings of a first time bride, despite the fact that it was his first marriage.  For such a privacy loving  guy, this was anything but a private occasion.  

The only reason that they would agree to what took place is that it brought in tourist dollars and tourist interest.  The Royals know how to put on a fabulous show.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Never mind! LOL!!!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LuckyBitch said:


> This, most definitely, doesn't surprise me in the least.


If limom was in fact Meghan or Harry, there might actually be a point to such a post as yours on this thread. But as limom presumably is neither Meghan nor Harry, but just a tPF member giving her opinions on the topic of the thread, what is your point?


----------



## chicaloca

A real feminist does exactly what she wants for her wedding including wearing a white dress for a second wedding or having her father in law walk her down the aisle. There is nothing at all progressive about a woman ditching white for a second marriage.

Whether anyone feels Meghan deserved a royal wedding, expecting Prince Harry to do some drive-by courthouse wedding is somewhat ludicrous.  The wedding properly reflected his social standing.


----------



## PatsyCline

gracekelly said:


> Since this is a gossip thread, then I guess none of us should believe anything that another poster has written here.
> 
> *ATTENTION ALL POSTERS! * Do not believe a word of what your fellow gossips have written!  This thread is a work of pure fiction!


But why does it have to turn into a 'mean girls' thread? Talking about them doesn't necessarily mean criticising, or what has happened here on multiple occasions, blatant lying and making up stories?


----------



## PatsyCline

Welltraveled! said:


> I'm in this thread as well as the Cambridges.  The few that are overly critical of Meghan; are the opposite when it comes to Will/Kate.  Once I realize that I expect the negative comments about Meghan from those few.
> 
> However, I think most like her or feel indifferent about her.


I enjoy following her to see how she's coping with her new life. I personally think it's a tremendous challenge for someone not used to the traditions and pomp and ceremony of the Royal Family.


----------



## Welltraveled!

PatsyCline said:


> I enjoy following her to see how she's coping with her new life. I personally think it's a tremendous challenge for someone not used to the traditions and pomp and ceremony of the Royal Family.



I agree, outside of Princess Diana and Kate; I had no real interest in the BRF.  However, with Meghan being an American (so am I).  I pay closer attention to the BRF and England; because of her.  Granted she made some mistakes; but overall, she isn't doing a horrible job to adapting to her new life.


----------



## PatsyCline

Welltraveled! said:


> I agree, outside of Princess Diana and Kate; I had no real interest in the BRF.  However, with Meghan being an American (so am I).  I pay closer attention to the BRF and England; because of her.  Granted she made some mistakes; but overall, she isn't doing a horrible job to adapting to her new life.


I'm American too (with British on my mother's side). I often thought that both William and Harry might find it harder to find a wife to accept all the limitations and fishbowl existence that life as a Royal would be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Welltraveled! said:


> I agree, outside of Princess Diana and Kate; I had no real interest in the BRF.  However, with Meghan being an American (so am I).  I pay closer attention to the BRF and England; because of her.  Granted she made some mistakes; but overall, she isn't doing a horrible job to adapting to her new life.


What about the other 3 countries or do you only pay attention to England?


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Since when are you supposed to analyze other posters and post about who you like and who is a nitpicker, etc.?  The mods specifically said not to do that.  This thread is not for your opinions about other posters and your verdict on who is good and who is not. THis is one of the rudest things I have ever read on this board.





mrsinsyder said:


> The mods keep deleting things out of this thread and people don’t seem to be getting the hint.


THANK YOU BOTH!! ..


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> The only reason that they would agree to what took place is that it brought in tourist dollars and tourist interest.  The Royals know how to put on a fabulous show.


Boy, do they ever.  The best show.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> What about the other 3 countries or do you only pay attention to England?


I think some just forget to say United Kingdom, but I think they must mean it?


----------



## gracekelly

chicaloca said:


> *A real feminist does exactly what she wants for her wedding *including wearing a white dress for a second wedding or having her father in law walk her down the aisle. There is nothing at all progressive about a woman ditching white for a second marriage.
> 
> Whether anyone feels Meghan deserved a royal wedding, expecting Prince Harry to do some drive-by courthouse wedding is somewhat ludicrous.  The wedding properly reflected his social standing.



A real feminist would keep her maiden name and not go by her husband's title.  

He didn't really walk her down the aisle.  He escorted her from the transcept to the altar.  The nave of the cathedral is much longer and Princess Eugenie was walked by her father down the full nave to the altar.

Didn't think of a drive-by courthouse wedding.  Thanks for that!


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> And.....it’s a gossip thread, not the news





LuckyBitch said:


> One should possibly not believe the tripe writen by "gossips".






PatsyCline said:


> But why does it have to turn into a 'mean girls' thread? Talking about them doesn't necessarily mean criticising, or what has happened here on multiple occasions, blatant lying and making up stories?



I'm confused.  I thought this was a gossip thread, and then I am being told not to believe the tripe written by gossips.  It's a dilemma!!  
Where did mean girls come into the mix?


----------



## chicaloca

gracekelly said:


> A real feminist would keep her maiden name and not go by her husband's title.
> 
> He didn't really walk her down the aisle.  He escorted her from the transcept to the altar.  The nave of the cathedral is much longer and Princess Eugenie was walked by her father down the full nave to the altar.
> 
> Didn't think of a drive-by courthouse wedding.  Thanks for that!



A real feminist goes by whatever name she wants. Feminism is about having the same opportunities as men. There is no set of “feminist” rules governing women’s individual actions. 

Who cares how far Charles walked Meghan? That did not lessen the impact of the moment.


----------



## gracekelly

I guess the carbon footprint stories had no effect after the Ibiza trip.  They took a private plane to Nice for the weekend.


----------



## Morgan R

Harry, William, and Charles all talk about conservation but they also ride on private planes and helicopters but they have also been seen on regular airplanes. Members of the royal family have been criticized for essentially sometimes being "Do as I say not as I do" people. They can all be considered a bit hypocritical because we could really break down things various members of the royal family support but then they turn around and do the opposite of what they say.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Another vacay on another private jet 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9744378/meghan-markle-prince-harry-private-jet-french-riviera-ibiza/


----------



## Gal4Dior

buffym said:


> Is that not what you are doing with your post. I am entitled to my opinion which has been developed from interaction with posters who has singled me out, said I should calm down or called me a super fan.
> 
> As you say the rules are to ignore or report a post not.



Starting this pointless fight again, I see. I wasn’t talking about you. Please don’t take yourself this seriously. This is a gossip thread. Surely there are more important things to worry about in life than thinking you’ve been singled out as MM’s only super fan? Because you haven’t been. I assure you.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Another vacay on another private jet
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9744378/meghan-markle-prince-harry-private-jet-french-riviera-ibiza/


Hey guys, limit the amount of children you have because of the carbon footprint, but you should all knock yourselves out on multiple trips on the private jet! Why do I so badly want to tell Harry to STFU?

There is nothing wrong flying private, just don’t go around preaching about the environment because this is exactly what’s NOT to do if you care about the environment! Sheesh!


----------



## Gal4Dior

chicaloca said:


> A real feminist does exactly what she wants for her wedding including wearing a white dress for a second wedding or having her father in law walk her down the aisle. There is nothing at all progressive about a woman ditching white for a second marriage.
> 
> Whether anyone feels Meghan deserved a royal wedding, expecting Prince Harry to do some drive-by courthouse wedding is somewhat ludicrous.  The wedding properly reflected his social standing.


I don’t think anyone on this thread


chicaloca said:


> A real feminist does exactly what she wants for her wedding including wearing a white dress for a second wedding or having her father in law walk her down the aisle. There is nothing at all progressive about a woman ditching white for a second marriage.
> 
> Whether anyone feels Meghan deserved a royal wedding, expecting Prince Harry to do some drive-by courthouse wedding is somewhat ludicrous.  The wedding properly reflected his social standing.



I don’t think anyone expected Harry to be okay with a drive-by courthouse wedding?? That’s just the other extreme.


----------



## gracekelly

I guess her pushing in front of Harry was just her trying to be a force for change


----------



## PatsyCline

gracekelly said:


> I'm confused.  I thought this was a gossip thread, and then I am being told not to believe the tripe written by gossips.  It's a dilemma!!
> Where did mean girls come into the mix?


Sorry, mean girls is an American reference to a movie made years ago about high school girls in a clique and an outsider trying to fit in.

I guess for me, gossip is one thing, but making up stories and blatant misrepresentation of the facts goes beyond that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

gracekelly said:


> I guess her pushing in front of Harry was just her trying to ge a force for change



That clip looks decidedly altered.


----------



## PatsyCline

gracekelly said:


> I guess the carbon footprint stories had no effect after the Ibiza trip.  They took a private plane to Nice for the weekend.


I'm thinking for security reasons, and logistics, flying commercial isn't practical. Can you imagine the furore if people got bumped from a commercial flight so Harry, Meghan, Archie, security and maybe a nanny could catch a flight somewhere?


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> I guess her pushing in front of Harry was just her trying to be a force for change




Lol!! You did not just go there!


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> I guess her pushing in front of Harry was just her trying to be a force for change




This was before they were married, so I guess know grace period to adjust to the rules of royal life for Meghan.

I don’t think it was altered I see her trying to greet the person and bumps into Harry, she steps back, then Harry pushes her forward.

Which proves the point that some who criticize her will not even allow the idea that she needs an adjustment period, that and the Twitter handle calls Harry a dimwit. That person is completely not bias.

So she was in the process of being a force of change, since she hadn’t married Harry yet but she is the first biracial person to marry I. The BRF.


----------



## rose60610

Of course Harry and fam fly private, haven't you heard, we're told there are DEATH THREATS against them, white supremacy is on the rise, Meghan is in perpetual danger, Archie is already a karate expert in case his security detail gets sidetracked, and some ladies from the Purse Forum have it in for them. Their bodyguards from MI6 can't handle US!  Are you kidding? They need to fly private to spread the word about carbon footprints because it isn't like they can just post some You Tubes and slap up a website or something like everybody else does.


----------



## buffym

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol!! You did not just go there!



Yes, it seems the younger royals are not as fussed about protocol. Kate has greeted people before William except, Meghan was married, Lol


----------



## Gal4Dior

rose60610 said:


> Of course Harry and fam fly private, haven't you heard, we're told there are DEATH THREATS against them, white supremacy is on the rise, Meghan is in perpetual danger, Archie is already a karate expert in case his security detail gets sidetracked, and some ladies from the Purse Forum have it in for them. Their bodyguards from MI6 can't handle US!  Are you kidding? They need to fly private to spread the word about carbon footprints because it isn't like they can just post some You Tubes and slap up a website or something like everybody else does.


I am fairly certain H&M cry themselves to sleep thinking about us mere plebeians commenting on their lifestyle. I’m sure they were so depressed the entire time they were on that private jet on their way to the south of France...


----------



## Welltraveled!

Clearblueskies said:


> I read somewhere yesterday that he’s been turning down recent offers for paid interviews about Meghan.  I think he cuts rather a sad figure.  The sister is an altogether different story I grant you!




I hope Thomas is refusing interview offers.  Like I said before, I believe Meghan loves her dad and he loves her; but there’s some things you should never do as a parent.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Of course Harry and fam fly private, haven't you heard, we're told there are DEATH THREATS against them, white supremacy is on the rise, Meghan is in perpetual danger, Archie is already a karate expert in case his security detail gets sidetracked, and some ladies from the Purse Forum have it in for them. Their bodyguards from MI6 can't handle US!  Are you kidding? They need to fly private to spread the word about carbon footprints because it isn't like they can just post some You Tubes and slap up a website or something like everybody else does.



Never underestimate the ladies of tPF. We are definitely a force for change.  

This is sounding like an episode of  Mission Impossible   






LVSistinaMM said:


> I am fairly certain H&M cry themselves to sleep thinking about us mere plebeians commenting on their lifestyle. I’m sure they were so depressed the entire time they were on that private jet on their way to the south of France...



Yeah they thought about us plebes a lot.   Not to worry another vacay by private jet should make them feel better.  They should invite Jane Goodall to go with them


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Yes, it seems the younger royals are not as fussed about protocol. Kate has greeted people before William except, Meghan was married, Lol



I thought it was agreed to keep them in their thread and keep this for the H&M.  This continued need to compare the two couples is tiresome.


----------



## Gal4Dior

rose60610 said:


> Of course Harry and fam fly private, haven't you heard, we're told there are DEATH THREATS against them, white supremacy is on the rise, Meghan is in perpetual danger, Archie is already a karate expert in case his security detail gets sidetracked, and some ladies from the Purse Forum have it in for them. Their bodyguards from MI6 can't handle US!  Are you kidding? They need to fly private to spread the word about carbon footprints because it isn't like they can just post some You Tubes and slap up a website or something like everybody else does.


You forgot about the current intense backlash against gingers. Oh what, or what will Little Archie do with himself if he has red hair!? So many odds against them, I wonder how they sleep at night.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Another vacay on another private jet
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9744378/meghan-markle-prince-harry-private-jet-french-riviera-ibiza/


Oh dear 



LVSistinaMM said:


> Hey guys, limit the amount of children you have because of the carbon footprint, but you should all knock yourselves out on multiple trips on the private jet! Why do I so badly want to tell Harry to STFU?
> 
> There is nothing wrong flying private, just don’t go around preaching about the environment because this is exactly what’s NOT to do if you care about the environment! Sheesh!


He needs to get a grip if he expects to be taken seriously.



rose60610 said:


> Of course Harry and fam fly private, haven't you heard, we're told there are DEATH THREATS against them, white supremacy is on the rise, Meghan is in perpetual danger, Archie is already a karate expert in case his security detail gets sidetracked, and some ladies from the Purse Forum have it in for them. Their bodyguards from MI6 can't handle US!  Are you kidding? They need to fly private to spread the word about carbon footprints because it isn't like they can just post some You Tubes and slap up a website or something like everybody else does.


I know, it’s absurd.  Meanwhile the RF continue to do walkabouts and mix with the public.  Speeches are not given behind walls of bullet proof plastic. Normal life here bears no resemblance to either the Disneyfied version of BRF or the crazy Archie’s-in-danger version.  

Mixed messages though, will ruin Harry and Meghan's credibility.  After all a couple of years back, at this time of the year, Harry would’ve been on a grouse moor blasting birds out of the sky. And I hate to think what the carbon footprint of maintaining teams of polo ponies and transporting them around the globe looks like. If you’re going to be an eco warrior (and I believe we all should be) it’s not a pick and mix.  You need to do all you can and be consistent about it.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I guess her pushing in front of Harry was just her trying to be a force for change



This is another bug bear of mine


----------



## Sharont2305

Arriving in Nice.


----------



## chicaloca

Someone like Greta Thunberg is an eco-warrior. Meghan and Harry seem to have been randomly appointed this title based on a Vogue issue and an Instagram post?  Nothing about them scream rabid environmentalist. Neither of their platforms have ever centered directly around environmental issues. Meghan’s platform has always been primarily empowering women. The closest Harry comes to being an “eco-warrior” is his animal conservation work. The hysteria surrounding the private planes is completely manufactured and will be forgotten the moment their tour starts and the media has new pics to appease their seemingly  insatiable appetite for anything Sussex.



gracekelly said:


> I thought it was agreed to keep them in their thread and keep this for the H&M.  This continued need to compare the two couples is tiresome.



It is entirely relevant to bring up the Cambridges when pointing the out bias and hypocrisy that exists  between how their similar actions are viewed verses the Sussexes . The need to “not  compare the couples” only seems to arise when these hypocrisies are called out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> This was before they were married, so I guess know grace period to adjust to the rules of royal life for Meghan.
> 
> I don’t think it was altered I see her trying to greet the person and bumpsshe is the first biracial person to marry I. The BRF.





Sharont2305 said:


> Arriving in Nice.


Definitely do as I say, not do as I do with team Sussex


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> Definitely do as I say, not do as I do with team Sussex



I didn’t think PH said not to take a private jet? I missed that speech. It doesn’t bother me when royals or celebrities take private jets and have charities for climate change.

I see them using their platform to show their is a problem and make a conscious effort with dealing with the environment.

I don’t begrudge Harry this is his normal, his brother spoke at Davis conference in January about the environment he arrived on a private jet. His dad Prince Charles always flys privately, I do think the story of him flying his toothbrush over was excessive.

Interesting that they are flying royal type, yet they are criticized for doing what the other members of the family do.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> I think some just forget to say United Kingdom, but I think they must mean it?


Not even all Europeans know the difference between the UK, England and Great Britain. I often use England as an overall name of the UK. It's no offense, just easier. If I was from Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland I might beg to differ


----------



## marthastoo

buffym said:


> I didn’t think PH said not to take a private jet? I missed that speech. It doesn’t bother me when royals or celebrities take private jets and have charities for climate change.
> 
> I see them using their platform to show their is a problem and make a conscious effort with dealing with the environment.
> 
> I don’t begrudge Harry this is his normal, his brother spoke at Davis conference in January about the environment he arrived on a private jet. His dad Prince Charles always flys privately, I do think the story of him flying his toothbrush over was excessive.
> 
> Interesting that they are flying royal type, yet they are criticized for doing what the other members of the family do.



But, but, but Prince Harry said they wanted 2 children for sustainability reasons. THAT IS SOOOOOO PREACHY! How dare they!!!!!  Don't you know 2 kids = no privates jets ever?!?!

(Forget, of course, any couple has the right to choose the number of children they want for whatever reason they wish to cite_)_


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Not even all Europeans know the difference between the UK, England and Great Britain. I often use England as an overall name of the UK. It's no offense, just easier. If I was from Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland I might beg to differ


I am Welsh, lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> It is entirely relevant to bring up the Cambridges when pointing the out bias and hypocrisy that exists  between how their similar actions are viewed verses the Sussexes . The need to “not  compare the couples” only seems to arise when these hypocrisies are called out.



It’s not relevant because most of the posters in this thread aren’t talking about Will and Kate or the other royals, so no one knows what their opinions on them are. The straw man arguments are exhausting.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s not relevant because most of the posters in this thread aren’t talking about Will and Kate or the other royals, so no one knows what their opinions on them are. The straw man arguments are exhausting.


 Can’t think of anything to say in response to a valid point?  Chuck in something contentious about Andrew or Will & Kate, or “bias” aka racism - to derail the discussion   I ignore them   It’s only a gossip thread


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s not relevant because most of the posters in this thread aren’t talking about Will and Kate or the other royals, so no one knows what their opinions on them are. The straw man arguments are exhausting.





Clearblueskies said:


> Can’t think of anything to say in response to a valid point?  Chuck in something contentious about Andrew or Will & Kate, or “bias” aka racism - to derail the discussion   I ignore them   It’s only a gossip thread



It’s a gossip thread and we are entitled to our opinion. It is our argument, it is as relevant as because it is the poster opinion. You can disagree with it, but it is as valid because it a poster opinion.

Just like the fake babies, Meghan didn’t want her father to walk her down the aisle, or whatever else argument, it is an opinion.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> It’s a gossip thread and we are entitled to our opinion. It is our argument, it is as relevant as because it is the poster opinion. You can disagree with it, but it is as valid because it a poster opinion.
> 
> Just like the fake babies, Meghan didn’t want her father to walk her down the aisle, or whatever else argument, it is an opinion.


An Off Topic opinion here.  That’s the point.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> That clip looks decidedly altered.


For someone who professes to care so much about facts, it seems some minimal verification would be in order before posting an assertion like this.  

I was able to find the full length video of the event on youtube in a few short seconds.  The videos are exactly the same.  The youtube version is entitled "Royal BARGE" if you are interested.  However I would recommend watching it with the volume down as I believe the critical commentary will offend your ears.

I don't care about Meghan sometimes crossing paths with Harry while greeting people.  She's outgoing and she greets people enthusiastically.   But for people who think she should be more considerate of Harry, they have many other examples.  This was hardly an isolated incident.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> I'm thinking for security reasons, and logistics, flying commercial isn't practical. Can you imagine the furore if people got bumped from a commercial flight so Harry, Meghan, Archie, security and maybe a nanny could catch a flight somewhere?


I don't know why "flying commercial" is being automatically equated with "being a-holes who strongarm themselves onto First Class flights at the last minute and force already ticketed passengers off"?  Buying tickets on commercial flights does not entail "bumping" anyone else.

Logistically, it might not be possible for them to fly commercial 100% of the time.  But I would be much more understanding of their private jet trips if private jets were the exception rather than the rule.  I'm not sure if Harry and Meghan EVER fly commercial and they certainly could be doing so.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> There is no proof and never will be. Meghan’s an actress so by default people think everything she does is “Hollywood”. They can’t conceive of the fact that as the only person of color in the Royal family during a time when White nationalism is on the rise, she and Harry are likely receiving near constant threats. A news reporter lost his job for comparing Archie to a chimp. A man was arrested for threatening to kill Harry for marrying a Black woman.


"Near constant threats"?  And you know this how?  

The royal family all get threats, which is why they have security.  When people are arrested, most often the threats are revealed to be empty.  The crazy man who emailed Prince Andrew from a McDonald's to tell him he was going to blow up Meghan and Harry's wedding (because he thought the royal family was responsible for having him tortured in a Dutch prison) never intended to carry it out.  He is now in jail.  The white supremacist who posted a threatening image of Harry also had no actual plans to do anything else.  He, too, is now in prison.

According to the State Department official report on the baby shower, RASP didn't even think Meghan would need any additional security from the State Department for the event until the publicity got to be so big.  Per the information obtained by The Daily Mail: 





> DailyMail.com asked The State Department how much her protection cost during the short trip, but it didn't respond.
> 
> The Office of Intelligence and Threat Analysis said the chance of a terrorist attack against the Duchess of Sussex was low, but didn't rule out the possibility of harassment from an 'emotionally disturbed person'.
> 
> 'Many members of the royal family are very easily recognized personalities; therefore, they are attractive targets for those seeking notoriety', the document reads.
> 
> The Diplomatic Security Service also conducted a 'Protective Intelligence Review' assessing any threats that had been made online and any mention of the trips on news websites, social media or web forums.


You seem to be much more panicked about Meghan's safety than RASP or the State Department, and I think both of them know what they are doing.  The idea that Meghan lives in constant peril, more so than anyone else in the royal family, and that everything she does is hampered because her life is at extreme risk at all times, is unsupported.

When it comes to a potential "emotionally disturbed person", there are clearly some of those on the internet.  And I think Meghan is at just as much risk from the "fans" who are pathologically devoted to her as she is from the ones who hate her.  The fans who have taken it upon themselves to become Meghan's twitter army and harass any and all people who speak ill of Meghan (including royal reporters) are a scary bunch with a real lack of boundaries in terms of their one-way relationship with Meghan.


----------



## caramelize126

Flatsy said:


> I don't know why "flying commercial" is being automatically equated with "being a-holes who strongarm themselves onto First Class flights at the last minute and force already ticketed passengers off"?  Buying tickets on commercial flights does not entail "bumping" anyone else.
> 
> Logistically, it might not be possible for them to fly commercial 100% of the time.  But I would be much more understanding of their private jet trips if private jets were the exception rather than the rule.  I'm not sure if Harry and Meghan EVER fly commercial and they certainly could be doing so.




Personally, I don't really care that they're flying private. The family is wealthy on their own, I'd fly private too if I had that kind of cash! Given how much staff/security they have traveling with them, it may also just be less of hassle to just charter a plane.
The issue i have is that Harry insists on going on the record and *preaching* about minimizing the carbon footprint, going to less popular places so that we dont overburden these destinations, etc. and here he is- going to the South of France and Ibiza during high season on a private plane..  The rest of the BRF fly private quite frequently, they just don't talk about it or do things that draw attention to themselves. Its the hypocrisy that is upsetting people.

Also, I have also flown in and out of the Nice airport ( in August) a number of times and have never seen paps there.  They have a tarmac where the private planes come in and where you can take private helicopters to St Tropez;  I've never seen paps there either. Someone ( either their staff or H&M themselves) must have leaked  that they were going to be there.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LVSistinaMM said:


> Hey guys, limit the amount of children you have because of the carbon footprint, but you should all knock yourselves out on multiple trips on the private jet! Why do I so badly want to tell Harry to STFU?
> 
> There is nothing wrong flying private, just don’t go around preaching about the environment because this is exactly what’s NOT to do if you care about the environment! Sheesh!


It reminds me of Leonardo diCaprio and how preachy he got about the environment at all the awards shows he was at for several years. His acceptance speeches were never about thanking people but always about the environment. And then he'd be off to Cannes in a private jet for film screenings. He (and many other celebs doing the same) faced major backlash from the public - who, like H/M were saying one thing and doing another. So Leo and friends all switched out their limos and fancy cars for a Prius to show supporters they did really care. Now you have Prius cars pulling up to red carpets instead of limos. H/M need to cool the jet for a bit.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> I don't know why "flying commercial" is being automatically equated with "being a-holes who strongarm themselves onto First Class flights at the last minute and force already ticketed passengers off"?  Buying tickets on commercial flights does not entail "bumping" anyone else.
> 
> Logistically, it might not be possible for them to fly commercial 100% of the time.  But I would be much more understanding of their private jet trips if private jets were the exception rather than the rule.  I'm not sure if Harry and Meghan EVER fly commercial and they certainly could be doing so.


Megs has gone commercial a couple of times when flying solo since she was introduced as fiancé. I’m sure she has adequate security and the flight crew knew about the security measures beforehand. That’s proof enough that security is not an issue, at least for her. Harry on the other hand....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> When it comes to a potential "emotionally disturbed person", there are clearly some of those on the internet.  And I think Meghan is at just as much risk from the "fans" who are pathologically devoted to her as she is from the ones who hate her.  The fans who have taken it upon themselves to become Meghan's twitter army and harass any and all people who speak ill of Meghan (including royal reporters) are a scary bunch with a real lack of boundaries in terms of their one-way relationship with Meghan.



This.  How about the bots that are set up to respond whenever there is a criticism?  This is like a tempest in a teapot that is self propelled.  I do wonder who is in charge of all of this.  The PR people?  If they are so worried about optics, then they better have a chat with their clients and their speeches and travel habits.

And I agree. sorry to use that word tiresome again, responses referring to racism, comparisons to other members of the family or even royals from other countries, just show that there is no other argument for the poster to resort to.  The only place that I ever see racism brought up is on this thread.  Even the folks on an African-American site don't do this.  They have whole other arguments to use if they don't like what is going on with the Sussex duo. *Don't bother posting the excerpts from those disgusting sites as they were posted and deleted weeks ago*

I believe that Harry flew commercial a couple of months ago.  Charles has as well.  Granted, there are times when a private plan is the way to go and many times used for diplomatic trips.  Vacations to tourist destinations shouldn't require it and traveling with a baby isn't a reason either.  I think all of us have had to deal with the crying baby/child at some point in time when flying.  Book out the seats for privacy and be done with it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> This.  How about the bots that are set up to respond whenever there is a criticism?  This is like a tempest in a teapot that is self propelled.  I do wonder who is in charge of all of this.  The PR people?  If they are so worried about optics, then they better have a chat with their clients and their speeches and travel habits.
> 
> And I agree. sorry to use that word tiresome again, responses referring to racism, comparisons to other members of the family or even royals from other countries, just show that there is no other argument for the poster to resort to.  The only place that I ever see racism brought up is on this thread.  Even the folks on an African-American site don't do this.  They have whole other arguments to use if they don't like what is going on with the Sussex duo. *Don't bother posting the excerpts from those disgusting sites as they were posted and deleted weeks ago*
> 
> I believe that Harry flew commercial a couple of months ago.  Charles has as well.  Granted, there are times when a private plan is the way to go and many times used for diplomatic trips.  Vacations to tourist destinations shouldn't require it and traveling with a baby isn't a reason either.  I think all of us have had to deal with the crying baby/child at some point in time when flying.  Book out the seats for privacy and be done with it.



As a woman of color, the racism thing REALLY pisses me off. Are people racist against her? Sure. But a lot of us (POCs) also hoped she would be a great force for change (like she sold herself as) when she’s really just turned out to be more of the same old.


----------



## Flatsy

I'm most scared of the twitter people who give themselves handles like "King Archie's Godmother" and talk about how Archie is one day going to take his rightful place as King because he's who the people have chosen.  And they post on royal reporters' twitter feeds these creepy collages they have made of Meghan.

Even though many of them are scarily hostile (and some have been reported to the police), I think the royal reporters *love* all of the activity that is being brought to their twitter feeds.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> I'm most scared of the twitter people who give themselves handles like "King Archie's Godmother" and talk about how Archie is one day going to take his rightful place as King because he's who the people have chosen.  And they post on royal reporters' twitter feeds these creepy collages they have made of Meghan.
> 
> Even though many of them are scarily hostile (and some have been reported to the police), I think the royal reporters *love* all of the activity that is being brought to their twitter feeds.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> I'm most scared of the twitter people who give themselves handles like "King Archie's Godmother" and talk about how Archie is one day going to take his rightful place as King because he's who the people have chosen.  And they post on royal reporters' twitter feeds these creepy collages they have made of Meghan.
> 
> Even though many of them are scarily hostile (and some have been reported to the police), I think the royal reporters *love* all of the activity that is being brought to their twitter feeds.



That is pretty scary stuff.  Lots of deranged people out there.  Back when Prince George started school there was a woman who wanted  to kidnap him.  Thank goodness they caught onto her right away.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> *Don't bother posting the excerpts from those disgusting sites as they were posted and deleted weeks ago*


Is this a mod edit?


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Is this a mod edit?



Yes the posts were made and several days later they were deleted by the Mods.  Terrible nasty stuff and it made your eyes hurt to read it.  I don't know where the poster found it.  I had never seen it anywhere.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> As a woman of color, the racism thing REALLY pisses me off. Are people racist against her? Sure. But a lot of us (POCs) also hoped she would be a great force for change (like she sold herself as) when she’s really just turned out to be more of the same old.


interesting to hear your POV as a WOC.  From what I can surmise, most of the posters here who get so very emotional about Meghan are not WOC (can't be sure of course).....I just don't understand people who have tantrums when she is criticized - almost more than one would expect if they themselves were receiving the criticism.  these are apparently grown women


----------



## Swanky

Swanky said:


> Capt Obvious here again....
> Discuss the celebs/royals in this forum and NOT the members.  It’s getting old getting reported posts all day every day.



Mods still doing way too much clean up. 
Put people on Ignore User list if you can’t  control yourself.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> I'm most scared of the twitter people who give themselves handles like "King Archie's Godmother" and talk about how Archie is one day going to take his rightful place as King because he's who the people have chosen.  And they post on royal reporters' twitter feeds these creepy collages they have made of Meghan.
> 
> Even though many of them are scarily hostile (and some have been reported to the police), I think the royal reporters *love* all of the activity that is being brought to their twitter feeds.


Just like Bey's BeHive and Gaga's Monsters and all the other evangelist fans whose names I try really hard not to know... some people can get far too involved in a stranger's life.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I say this as someone who has worked in a field studying children for many years... how is this a three month old child??


----------



## gelbergirl

mrsinsyder said:


> I say this as someone who has worked in a field studying children for many years... how is this a three month old child??
> 
> View attachment 4519235



I have no kids, nor have I studied children for many years.
But I can say this is not a three month old child.
Who's kid is that?


----------



## lulilu

mrsinsyder said:


> I say this as someone who has worked in a field studying children for many years... how is this a three month old child??
> 
> View attachment 4519235





gelbergirl said:


> I have no kids, nor have I studied children for many years.
> But I can say this is not a three month old child.
> Who's kid is that?



I have 4 kids and have no idea what you are talking about.


Boy does this thread fly!  And I am trying to catch up with an edited "down" thread. lol

I never knew any member of the BRF flew commercial.  Interesting thought.  Flying solo it would be easy, but taking a family with a new baby for a week's vacation requires lots of stuff in my experience.  I would fly private if I could.  And it doesn't bother me that they do, even if they also promote green issues.

I know this was discussed yesterday or so, but I like to believe that Charles acted very kindly at the wedding.  I liked that M walked by herself and then with Charles.  Charles was also very solicitous of M's mom -- photos show him giving her his arm to leave the church and stand on the steps.  To me, this suggests that he was welcoming M to the family.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> I say this as someone who has worked in a field studying children for many years... how is this a three month old child??
> 
> View attachment 4519235


The photo surprised me, as well. I just held a baby the other day who was born May 1st: that little boy was nowhere near that size.

ETA I have no horse in any race on this page. Just agreeing that I was taken aback by the picture.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> I say this as someone who has worked in a field studying children for many years... how is this a three month old child??
> 
> View attachment 4519235


That was my first thought too. Not a newborn expert, but it looks very long for the claimed age. I don't necessarily think it's a doll, but it doesn't look quite right in the pic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> I say this as someone who has worked in a field studying children for many years... how is this a three month old child??
> 
> View attachment 4519235


Ohhh, I love a mystery/conspiracy theory.


----------



## stanfordmom

Flatsy said:


> I'm not sure if Harry and Meghan EVER fly commercial and they certainly could be doing so.



We know he has at least once from previous pics in this thread...



ccbaggirl89 said:


> Flying commercial back from polo in Rome.. a passenger took these and posted online. I think he ended up saying hello to her.
> 
> View attachment 4447657
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4447658


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I don't mind Meghan and I've always had a soft spot for Harry, but the private plane trips really need to be slowed down. By all of them,  Randy Andy as well whose conveniently timed trip has me raising my eyebrows.

You simply can't expect people to believe the Royals are relevant in any fashion when it looks like they're paying lip service to environmental issues.


----------



## Encore Hermes

Look at her hand and the position of her head to her shoulders. this photo is off


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Encore Hermes said:


> Look at her hand and the position of her head to her shoulders. this photo is off



It does look off.

In this one, Archie's size looks much more normal for his age.


----------



## Encore Hermes

It’s better, but her  hand still looks distorted to me and his right leg compared to his left. I understand the angle but it looks off to me 


FreeSpirit71 said:


> It does look off.
> 
> In this one, Archie's size looks much more normal for his age.


----------



## myown

I remember I was at a store when my boy was 5 weeks old. there was a lady asking what's his age and then she insisted that he must be at least 3 month old. 
He was always bigger than his age. when he was 11 month old the doctor said his size is at least 4 month prior. 
on saturday we met a kid that is exactly his age (same birthday. now 16 month). expect it was a girl. she was the size and weight he had when he was 8 month old.

not all babies have the same size! some are big for their age, some are small.
and my husband and I aren't giants. I am actually a short person. only the kid is huge.


----------



## myown

also I´d like to add: some clothes make kids appear older/bigger. the jumper looks too big for him, so maybe thats  distracting for you guys?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Encore Hermes said:


> Look at her hand and the position of her head to her shoulders. this photo is off


I honestly think it's just the angle, she's bending down over Archie and then the hat distorts the pic further. These pics also look like they were taken from very far away so not exactly detailed.



About the size of baby Archie though, I think the talk on some other forums is that Archie in fact is older, there were complications with the alleged surrogate and now in the midst of all that, Meghan is actually pregnant herself which could explain her current size and "disappearance" from public view.

Who knows. But a lot of this could have been avoided had H/M been more upfront and followed the usual protocol. And had Meghan not insisted on belly upstaging the bride at Eugenie's wedding. Meghan was what, one month pregnant at the time? Most people don't announce a pregnancy until after the first trimester.


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> About the size of baby Archie though, I think the talk on some other forums is that Archie in fact is older, there were complications with the alleged surrogate and now in the midst of all that, Meghan is actually pregnant herself which could explain her current size and "disappearance" from public view.
> .


I wondered if she was pregnant, _again_. 


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Who knows. But a lot of this could have been avoided had H/M been more upfront and followed the usual protocol. And had Meghan not insisted on belly upstaging the bride at Eugenie's wedding. Meghan was what, one month pregnant at the time? Most people don't announce a pregnancy until after the first trimester.


my grandma always says one should announce as soon as the doctor sees a heartbeat. at least announce it to family and close friends. if something happens, you want the people around you to be sensitive and there for you.


----------



## Jayne1

Has this been done in the BRF? Pretend pregnancies and such?

I haven't read anything about Meg. Now I have to go look for the theories.  lol


----------



## Flatsy

myown said:


> also I´d like to add: some clothes make kids appear older/bigger. the jumper looks too big for him, so maybe thats  distracting for you guys?


I think it's the little pants.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Has this been done in the BRF? Pretend pregnancies and such?
> 
> I haven't read anything about Meg. Now I have to go look for the theories.  lol


Oh the conspiracies run the whole gamut. From her being artificially inseminated in Toronto during a trip home to a weird pregnant lady who is in the background at all their appearances being the surrogate...


----------



## Swanky

I make giant babies lol
All outgrew infant car seat carriers by 6 mos old, my DD was 30# on her 1st bday!
I’m very petite, wasn’t easy carrying them around.


----------



## gracekelly

The theories are all out there. On a practical level I don’t see the Queen and Prince Philip agreeing to take a picture as they did if Archie’s wasn’t newly born.  They would be entering into a conspiracy and I don’t think they would do that. He’s just a big baby.

Two things though.  I wish she would put a hat on him when being outside and  MM where did you learn to hold a baby like that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

As much as I love a good excuse to don a tinfoil hat, I just can't buy into the fake baby theory. Just seems like way more work to sustain right out the gate than actually being pregnant, giving birth, and then toting around a kid.

Also - Never having had a kid and having little to no experience holding a baby (and never once changed a diaper), I would not really know the best way to hold a baby when exiting a car, plane, walking around. Seems like trying to lug around a sack of potatoes. And I am older than Meghan.

I guess you just carry them around the best way possible for that moment?


----------



## bag-mania

I love a good conspiracy too but this one doesn’t hold any water. Why would she need a surrogate? She got pregnant within only a few months of getting married. Even if it had turned out she wasn’t capable of having kids herself, wouldn’t they have waited longer to know for sure before they went the surrogate route?


----------



## Flatsy

Fake pregnancy/fake baby seems to be the go-to conspiracy theory of tumblr.  I thought it was played out with Benedict Cumberbatch, but I guess not.  Cumberbatch was also accused of pushing a doll around in a carriage and faking birth certificates, etc etc.  

I don't know why two people getting married and procreating together is so hard to believe.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> As much as I love a good excuse to don a tinfoil hat, I just can't buy into the fake baby theory. Just seems like way more work to sustain right out the gate than actually being pregnant, giving birth, and then toting around a kid.
> 
> Also - Never having had a kid and having little to no experience holding a baby (and never once changed a diaper), I would not really know the best way to hold a baby when exiting a car, plane, walking around. Seems like trying to lug around a sack of potatoes. And I am older than Meghan.
> 
> I guess you just carry them around the best way possible for that moment?


I would place a baby in a baby carrier appropriate to the baby’s size so I could hold on to the railing when getting on/off the plane. The idea of tripping or taking a misstep when carrying a child is frightening

I do find the theories to be pretty amusing and full of imagination, but what is the point of the duo doing this. What purpose would it serve. Eventually the true age would have to come out.  The family usually issues a birthday picture so what would they have to do?  Keep the lie going for the rest of his life?  It doesn’t make sense.


----------



## buffym

I don’t believe the Ibiza story, now with Nice. The press states they went to Ibiza but they don’t know where they stayed? I think the tabloids made up Ibiza to place them somewhere.


Meghan and Harry flew to Nice on a commercial flight for New Years Eve before marriage.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...markle-take-economy-flight-nice-new-year/amp/

Posters can believe their is racism the same way poster can say Archie isn’t a real baby because he is to big for a three months old. It is our opinion and with articles accusing Meghan of terrorism has formed my opinion. No other member of the BRF receive these type of articles.


----------



## Sharont2305

These fake pregnancy rumours are silly, didn't anyone actually look at her face during it. You can't fake a pregnancy face.


----------



## buffym

Meghan is a first time Mom and a royal. Royals seem to not using carriers with holding their child privately or officially.

Archie will probably be carried in Meghan’s arms next month.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The theories are all out there. On a practical level I don’t see the Queen and Prince Philip agreeing to take a picture as they did if Archie’s wasn’t newly born.  They would be entering into a conspiracy and I don’t think they would do that. He’s just a big baby.
> 
> Two things though.  I wish she would put a hat on him when being outside and  MM where did you learn to hold a baby like that?


that's funny
you'd think the nanny(s) would show her how to hold the baby


----------



## gracekelly

Is that a rule?  No carriers?  Where is this written so the public knows this?  Is this part of the Queen’s list of dos and don’ts?  Like wearing hosiery during public appearances?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> that's funny
> you'd think the nanny(s) would show her how to hold the baby



Wouldn’t that be overstepping for the nannies? They are employees first. I don’t think there is any way the nannies could tactfully broach the subject without coming off as knowing more than their employer,  which of course they do but it’s important not to make that obvious. This goes for any nanny, not just royal ones.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Is that a rule?  No carriers?  Where is this written so the public knows this?  Is this part of the Queen’s list of dos and don’ts?  Like wearing hosiery during public appearances?


Ha ha!


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Meghan is a first time Mom and a royal. Royals seem to not using carriers with holding their child privately or officially.
> 
> Archie will probably be carried in Meghan’s arms next month.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4519667
> View attachment 4519668
> View attachment 4519669
> View attachment 4519670


 
I knew this was coming. I cringed when she did this, but at least she was holding on to the railing.  He was older and she didn’t need two hands as he could support himself.

Please stop with the comparisons.  This is not an argument to prove a point.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Wouldn’t that be overstepping for the nannies? They are employees first. I don’t think there is any way the nannies could tactfully broach the subject without coming off as knowing more than their employer,  which of course they do but it’s important not to make that obvious. This goes for any nanny, not just royal ones.


I would think she would appreciate the help. It could be presented as a way to make it easier/more comfortable for her.
but of course I don't know her personality


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Wouldn’t that be overstepping for the nannies? They are employees first. I don’t think there is any way the nannies could tactfully broach the subject without coming off as knowing more than their employer,  which of course they do but it’s important not to make that obvious. This goes for any nanny, not just royal ones.


If they hired a trained nanny like one from the Norland school, then I think that 1: she would tell you how to hold the baby and 2. You would listen.

I thought that Doria took a baby class prior to the birth. I would think she was shown how to hold a child properly.  If  her daughter chose to ignore her advice that is another issue.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I would think she would appreciate the help. It could be presented as a way to make it easier/more comfortable for her.
> but of course I don't know her personality



It goes both ways though. Meghan could also observe how the nannies do it at any time if she was concerned about comfort. Presumably she has had friends with babies over the years and could have watched them. Or heck, her mom could have shown her when she came to see the baby. Mothers are usually good for offering advice even without being asked.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> If they hired a trained nanny like one from the Norland school, then I think that 1: she would tell you how to hold the baby and 2. You would listen.
> 
> I thought that Doria took a baby class prior to the birth. I would think she was shown how to hold a child properly.  If  her daughter chose to ignore her advice that is another issue.


well, the baby is big enough now that she's not going to do him any harm - just awkward......but with a newborn you have to be careful and hold them properly to not hurt the neck/head, right?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, the baby is big enough now that she's not going to do him any harm - just awkward......but with a newborn you have to be careful and hold them properly to not hurt the neck/head, right?


You still can do harm.   It takes up to two years for all the fontanelles of the cranium to close. There are several. 
https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002320.htm


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> You still can do harm.   It takes up to two years for all the fontanelles of the cranium to close. There are several.
> https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/002320.htm


thanks
I don't have kids so don't really know if the way she carries the baby is risky or not
But I still say she should be getting help from the nannies


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> These fake pregnancy rumours are silly, didn't anyone actually look at her face during it. You can't fake a pregnancy face.


I never saw a pregnancy face until after she gave birth, for some reason.  After the birth and when she posed for the cameras, she seemed to have water retention.  Even around the eyes.

Anyway,  Elton John complaining she will end of like Diana, with press intrusion and an early death is a huge stretch.  Meg doesn't have a constant need for attention and cameras and probably never calls the paps, unlike Diana who could hide if she really wanted to.

I think Meg has managed to stay very private as she seems to prefer.

Also, Elton saying they needed this peaceful break after a hectic year and their dedication to charity is a joke, right?  They're living the life of luxury and Harry made a few appearances. Elton John doesn't live in the real word either.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> It goes both ways though. Meghan could also observe how the nannies do it at any time if she was concerned about comfort. Presumably she has had friends with babies over the years and could have watched them. Or heck, her mom could have shown her when she came to see the baby. Mothers are usually good for offering advice even without being asked.


I think it's just natural.  No one has to tell a new mother to not hold a baby half way down their body.   Or that's what I always thought anyway.


----------



## threadbender

New Moms can be awkward and it has only been 3 months. Do I question some of her choices as far as how she holds him or the lack of hat, eh, he is fine. He is a good-sized baby, especially compared to the little one I was holding the other day (who is 5 days older than Archie) but that just means he is healthy! lol He looks older than 3 months to me but I am not an expert. He is well taken care of and thriving, obviously.
Not a big fan of Meghan and Harry. I do feel they are hypocrites but I am not going to bash them (much, anyway!). I read this thread for what it is supposed to be: gossip!


----------



## doloresmia

bag-mania said:


> It goes both ways though. Meghan could also observe how the nannies do it at any time if she was concerned about comfort. Presumably she has had friends with babies over the years and could have watched them. Or heck, her mom could have shown her when she came to see the baby. Mothers are usually good for offering advice even without being asked.



Lol! there are also plenty of people on the Internet to give her advice!


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Also, Elton saying they needed this peaceful break after a hectic year and their dedication to charity is a joke, right? They're living the life of luxury and Harry made a few appearances. Elton John doesn't live in the real word either.


Meghan and Harry are desperately in need of friends who will give them a reality check.  People like Elton John, George Clooney and the sycophantic makeup artist encouraging their non-stop pity party is not what they need.


----------



## rose60610

Goodness knows there's enough gossip to mine without the fake baby/surrogate/doll/whatever conspiracy. I think Meghan must pinch herself everyday to make sure she isn't dreaming that she's in the BRF and all it entails.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think she is holding him "celebrity style" if that makes sense? I think we've all seen pap photos of various celebrities holding their babies that way so that photographers can't get a pic of the face. I thought that at the polo match a few weeks ago. She looked awkward, as if she wasn't used to holding him that way, especially whilst standing up. She was probably used to holding him the way Harry had him on the first shoot, cradled in his arms. But that would, most probably given the paps better photos of his face.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she is holding him "celebrity style" if that makes sense? I think we've all seen pap photos of various celebrities holding their babies that way so that photographers can't get a pic of the face. I thought that at the polo match a few weeks ago. She looked awkward, as if she wasn't used to holding him that way, especially whilst standing up. She was probably used to holding him the way Harry had him on the first shoot, cradled in his arms. But that would, most probably given the paps better photos of his face.


Likely true, but here's what I don't get .. why the secrecy on showing his face?????


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I think it's just natural.  No one has to tell a new mother to not hold a baby half way down their body.   Or that's what I always thought anyway.



True. Even pet owners know how to support a puppy or kitten’s body.  Meghan  might not have those instincts.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> True. Even pet owners know how to support a puppy or kitten’s body.  Meghan  might not have those instincts.


Wait a little while, someone will soon be along here to tell us it wasn’t Meghan


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Wait a little while, someone will soon be along here to tell us it wasn’t Meghan



Good idea! Here, let me just get this ball rolling. The woman in the big hat was actually a decoy put in place for, um, security reasons, yeah, that's the ticket. The real Meghan and Archie were being safely transported by other means in order to confuse the paparazzi. The decoy was really an MI6 agent and she wasn't holding the "baby" correctly because she needed to leave her arms open and ready for action in case of attack by an obsessed fan. 

That was fun.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Good idea! Here, let me just get this ball rolling. The woman in the big hat was actually a decoy put in place for, um, security reasons, yeah, that's the ticket. The real Meghan and Archie were being safely transported by other means in order to confuse the paparazzi. The decoy was really an MI6 agent and she wasn't holding the "baby" correctly because she needed to leave her arms open and ready for action in case of attack by an obsessed fan.
> 
> That was fun.


Yeah ‘cause who wears a hat in a plane?  Got to be a cunning disguise.  They’re not getting anything past us though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Good idea! Here, let me just get this ball rolling. The woman in the big hat was actually a decoy put in place for, um, security reasons, yeah, that's the ticket. The real Meghan and Archie were being safely transported by other means in order to confuse the paparazzi. The decoy was really an MI6 agent and she wasn't holding the "baby" correctly because she needed to leave her arms open and ready for action in case of attack by an obsessed fan.
> 
> That was fun.


That wasn't a baby.  It was a grenade launcher in case there was a mega pap attack.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Likely true, but here's what I don't get .. why the secrecy on showing his face?????


i know.  it isn't as if someone is going to get close enough to him to kidnap him and they have protection people.    This whole secrecy thing just seems so attention getting, i.e. the less I show the more you want to know.  Throw out a couple of pictures and everyone will stop speculating.  The ginger hair story was just a tease IMO because there is no proof. From what I could see, Archie has hardly any hair anyway.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> True. Even pet owners know how to support a puppy or kitten’s body.  Meghan  might not have those instincts.


Ha! even animals instinctively know how to carry their offspring.  I have always been endlessly impressed at how my animals knew how to do this and nurture.


----------



## chicaloca

The British press has gone so far over top with the 4-5 negative stories a day that the story has now become about the media treatment of the Sussexes. I’m  not surprised major celebs are now calling them out. It is obvious the press is trying to deflect from the Royal Pedophile. 

This “scandal” will disappear in time for the same outlets to profit from pics of the Sussex fall tour.


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> The British press has gone so far over top with the 4-5 negative stories a day that the story has now become about the media treatment of the Sussexes. I’m  not surprised major celebs are now calling them out. It is obvious the press is trying to deflect from the Royal Pedophile.
> 
> This “scandal” will disappear in time for the same outlets to profit from pics of the Sussex fall tour.


I read an article about Lady Diana relatively recently, and we all know how the British Press (and others) were with her.  However, the article also had a quote by one of her closest advisers that noted that she knew that (to a certain extent) .. she had to provide them with pictures, information, etc. -- because otherwise, there becomes all this "speculation'.  While I understand Harry & Meghan want a certain amount of privacy, I also think that their behavior in being "so secret" .. is alas, just putting fuel to the fire.  This doesn't mean that they have to give the British press an 'open book', but it might behoove them to just provide a few more pictures, a chat .. whatever, to then just keep them out of their business for a bit!  Honestly, if I were a British citizen, I think I would start getting a little P.O.'d by their behavior ..


----------



## mdcx

Of course Megs and Harry have nannies! They are just not open about it like Kate and William are. Norland nannies wear uniforms and by all accounts their nannies are like members of the family.
As for hiding baby Archie's face, it's all about Meghan creating mystery/drama/interest imho. It would be very simple to pose for a clear family snap, people would say "Archie is so cute, he looks like Megs/Harry, lovely". The end.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> I read an article about Lady Diana relatively recently, and we all know how the British Press (and others) were with her.  However, the article also had a quote by one of her closest advisers that noted that she knew that (to a certain extent) .. she had to provide them with pictures, information, etc. -- because otherwise, there becomes all this "speculation'.  While I understand Harry & Meghan want a certain amount of privacy, I also think that their behavior in being "so secret" .. is alas, just putting fuel to the fire.  This doesn't mean that they have to give the British press an 'open book', but it might behoove them to just provide a few more pictures, a chat .. whatever, to then just keep them out of their business for a bit!  Honestly, if I were a British citizen, I think I would start getting a little P.O.'d by their behavior ..





mdcx said:


> Of course Megs and Harry have nannies! They are just not open about it like Kate and William are. Norland nannies wear uniforms and by all accounts their nannies are like members of the family.
> As for hiding baby Archie's face, it's all about Meghan creating mystery/drama/interest imho. It would be very simple to pose for a clear family snap, people would say "Archie is so cute, he looks like Megs/Harry, lovely". The end.


It’s petulant.  
Apparently they requested to move in to Windsor Castle after the marriage.  Queen said no.


----------



## chicaloca

CeeJay said:


> I read an article about Lady Diana relatively recently, and we all know how the British Press (and others) were with her.  However, the article also had a quote by one of her closest advisers that noted that she knew that (to a certain extent) .. she had to provide them with pictures, information, etc. -- because otherwise, there becomes all this "speculation'.  While I understand Harry & Meghan want a certain amount of privacy, I also think that their behavior in being "so secret" .. is alas, just putting fuel to the fire.  This doesn't mean that they have to give the British press an 'open book', but it might behoove them to just provide a few more pictures, a chat .. whatever, to then just keep them out of their business for a bit!  Honestly, if I were a British citizen, I think I would start getting a little P.O.'d by their behavior ..



Meghan and Harry have not demanded privacy for themselves. It is Archie they are looking to protect since he is an untitled baby.  Otherwise we see them at their scheduled events. We got a photo-op of Archie at Windsor shortly after his birth. Harry even came out to chat with the press about the birth.  We got Archie’s christening photos. We  got candids of Archie at the polo match. Why are people acting like they don’t know what Archie looks like?  we got very clear pics of his face. We got the same photos every other royal family member provided.  What else do people want from them? Do they expect access inside of Frogmore?

After the vitriol the press has unleashed on his wife Harry can be forgiven for never breaking bread with the British press.

 The Sussexes are right to focus on social media to control their narrative. Most people under 30 get their news from social media and are not checking on outlets like daily mail and other British sites. Only folks like us who still post on forums like this are reading traditional outlets. This is why the perception of Sussexes doesn’t match reality. The perception if you read traditional outlets is that the Sussexes are unpopular and everyone is angry at them. The reality is that the Sussexes are hugely popular and most don’t care about their planes. This will be evident when they go on tour.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s petulant.
> Apparently they requested to move in to Windsor Castle after the marriage.  Queen said no.


So she moved them into the servants quarters. At least they were renovated lol!  The worst part about Frogmore is that lack of privacy (how ironic for these two) and the proximity to the noise Heathrow and the need for the gazillion glazed windows.  Poor Archie will never get fresh air or play outside.  I bet they don't even want to live there.  

Speaking of Archie.  This hiding him from the public is going to turn him into a scared little boy.  George, Charlotte and Louis have been taught to wave and be friendly and not let crowds, people and photographers  scare them.  His parents have to ease up and allow him to learn to cope with the people who will want to see him.  All the children of EU royals are adept at this and have a relaxed attitude.  Better for their mental health.  Hopefully Harry will not drum the mantra about the evil press into the poor kid's head, because it won't bode well from him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Meghan and Harry have not demanded privacy for themselves. It is Archie they are looking to protect since he is an untitled baby.  Otherwise we see them at their scheduled events. We got a photo-op of Archie at Windsor shortly after his birth. Harry even came out to chat with the press about the birth.  We got Archie’s christening photos. We  got candids of Archie at the polo match. Why are people acting like they don’t know what Archie looks like?  we got very clear pics of his face. We got the same photos every other royal family member provided.  What else do people want from them? Do they expect access inside of Frogmore?
> 
> After the vitriol the press has unleashed on his wife Harry can be forgiven for never breaking bread with the British press.
> 
> The Sussexes are right to focus on social media to control their narrative. Most people under 30 get their news from social media and are not checking on outlets like daily mail and other British sites. Only folks like us who still post on forums like this are reading traditional outlets. This is why the perception of Sussexes doesn’t match reality. The perception if you read traditional outlets is that the Sussexes are unpopular and everyone is angry at them. The reality is that the Sussexes are hugely popular and most don’t care about their planes. This will be evident when they go on tour.


Their popularity at home is what really counts.  It’s taken a hit, and the reason is their baffling behaviour and cheesy self promotion.



gracekelly said:


> So she moved them into the servants quarters. At least they were renovated lol!  The worst part about Frogmore is that lack of privacy (how ironic for these two) and the proximity to the noise Heathrow and the need for the gazillion glazed windows.  Poor Archie will never get fresh air or play outside.  I bet they don't even want to live there.
> 
> Speaking of Archie.  This hiding him from the public is going to turn him into a scared little boy.  George, Charlotte and Louis have been taught to wave and be friendly and not let crowds, people and photographers  scare them.  His parents have to ease up and allow him to learn to cope with the people who will want to see him.  All the children of EU royals are adept at this and have a relaxed attitude.  Better for their mental health.  Hopefully Harry will not drum the mantra about the evil press into the poor kid's head, because it won't bode well from him.


I think you’re right.  It’s early days though.  We have to hope things will settle down and they get some good advice.


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s petulant.
> Apparently they requested to move in to Windsor Castle after the marriage. Queen said no.


When it was announced that Harry and Meghan were moving out of KP, the H&M apologists went on and on about how _of course_ a grown man can't live in an apartment next to his brother's!

But it's totally normal for a grown man to ask to move in with his grandma.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

TMZ article //  Instagram pic: 

Interesting that she found another Harry, who is still in the royal family.

"Cressida Bonas - Prince Harry's Ex - Is Engaged to a Different Harry with Royal Ties!
Cressida Bonas, who dated Prince Harry from 2012-2014 after they were introduced by Princess Eugenie, is now engaged to her boyfriend Harry Wentworth-Stanley.
“We getting married,” the couple announced in a selfie on his Instagram account, showing off her ring.
Cressida‘s new fiance is reportedly the stepson of George Mountbatten, who is in line to the throne and is a cousin of Queen Elizabeth, who is Prince Harry’s grandmother.
Cressida and Prince Harry stayed close and she even went to his wedding to Meghan Markle!"


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Cute! I like her ring from what I can see of it.


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> Meghan and Harry have not demanded privacy for themselves. It is Archie they are looking to protect since he is an untitled baby.  Otherwise we see them at their scheduled events. We got a photo-op of Archie at Windsor shortly after his birth. Harry even came out to chat with the press about the birth.  We got Archie’s christening photos. We  got candids of Archie at the polo match. Why are people acting like they don’t know what Archie looks like?  we got very clear pics of his face. We got the same photos every other royal family member provided.  What else do people want from them? Do they expect access inside of Frogmore?
> 
> After the vitriol the press has unleashed on his wife Harry can be forgiven for never breaking bread with the British press.
> 
> The Sussexes are right to focus on social media to control their narrative. Most people under 30 get their news from social media and are not checking on outlets like daily mail and other British sites. Only folks like us who still post on forums like this are reading traditional outlets. This is why the perception of Sussexes doesn’t match reality. The perception if you read traditional outlets is that the Sussexes are unpopular and everyone is angry at them. The reality is that the Sussexes are hugely popular and most don’t care about their planes. This will be evident when they go on tour.


Okey-dokey; it's pretty obvious that you don't like to hear anything that isn't 100% positive about Harry & Meghan, so just put me on IGNORE, 'kay?!?!


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> The Sussexes are right to focus on social media to control their narrative. Most people under 30 get their news from social media and are not checking on outlets like daily mail and other British sites. Only folks like us who still post on forums like this are reading traditional outlets.


I'm not sure why only people under 30 matter, or how you know what the demographics are of forum users and readers of traditional media, but whatever. 

The Daily Mail website gets 100 million unique visitors per month*; the Sussexroyal instagram has 9.3 million followers.  I don't think it's great media strategy for the Sussexes to focus their efforts solely on the 9 million people who, on the whole, probably already like them.

*This figure is as of 2013 when The Economist wrote an article about the Daily Mail's ever growing web dominance, so the figure is probably much larger now.  Since Meghan only reads The Economist, I'm sure she knows all about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Cressida and Prince Harry stayed close and she even went to his wedding to Meghan Markle!"


Did she?  I only remember Chelsy being there.

I'm not a fan of the ring.


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> TMZ article //  Instagram pic:
> 
> Interesting that she found another Harry, who is still in the royal family.
> 
> "Cressida Bonas - Prince Harry's Ex - Is Engaged to a Different Harry with Royal Ties!
> Cressida Bonas, who dated Prince Harry from 2012-2014 after they were introduced by Princess Eugenie, is now engaged to her boyfriend Harry Wentworth-Stanley.
> “We getting married,” the couple announced in a selfie on his Instagram account, showing off her ring.
> Cressida‘s new fiance is reportedly the stepson of George Mountbatten, who is in line to the throne and is a cousin of Queen Elizabeth, who is Prince Harry’s grandmother.
> Cressida and Prince Harry stayed close and she even went to his wedding to Meghan Markle!"



Nice looking couple; love that they are in Nantucket!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Elton's statement on the whole plane issue KILLS me. 

Basically saying "yes they traveled in a way that kills the environment but we threw money at it so that makes it better" is slacktivism at its absolute worst. It's more "we're rich so we don't have to be inconvenienced like the rest of the plebs" nonsense. He'd have been better off saying nothing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Nice looking couple; love that they are in Nantucket!!!


She looks thrilled that she didn't get stuck with the petulant man child.


----------



## Straight-Laced

ccbaggirl89 said:


> TMZ article //  Instagram pic:
> 
> Interesting that she found another Harry, who is still in the royal family.
> 
> "Cressida Bonas - Prince Harry's Ex - Is Engaged to a Different Harry with Royal Ties!
> Cressida Bonas, who dated Prince Harry from 2012-2014 after they were introduced by Princess Eugenie, is now engaged to her boyfriend Harry Wentworth-Stanley.
> “We getting married,” the couple announced in a selfie on his Instagram account, showing off her ring.
> Cressida‘s new fiance is reportedly the stepson of George Mountbatten, who is in line to the throne and is a cousin of Queen Elizabeth, who is Prince Harry’s grandmother.
> Cressida and Prince Harry stayed close and she even went to his wedding to Meghan Markle!"



Good for her! I like Cressida and I hope she's very happy with her Harry.
Although she's an actress too (and model and writer, etc) she's almost the polar opposite to Meghan. 
Globe trotting, celebrity loving Harry Wales is better suited to Meghan IMO.


----------



## mdcx

It probably annoyed Megs no end when she finally clicked that there are very rich and very connected aristos in the UK that don't have to put up with any of the public scrutiny that the BRF do. If only she had snagged one of those instead!
Cressida looks very happy.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> Elton's statement on the whole plane issue KILLS me.
> 
> Basically saying "yes they traveled in a way that kills the environment but we threw money at it so that makes it better" is slacktivism at its absolute worst. It's more "we're rich so we don't have to be inconvenienced like the rest of the plebs" nonsense. He'd have been better off saying nothing.


It was Elton's private plane so he had to justify it, I suppose.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Carbon Exchange is a rort. Emissions are emissions.  It doesn't change the pollution - it just makes people feel better about it.

I think Meghan and Harry really _do_ want to do good work, BUT they need to walk the walk otherwise it just sounds empty.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Okay, well Elton John now posting on a Twitter to defend Harry and Meghan for the private jet they took to Nice is just ridiculous. He’s mad at the media and public for accusing H&M being hypocritical because the private jet was “compensated” for and was thus deemed “carbon neutral?”

I’m so sick of another one of their glitterati friends trying to explain and get all huffy with people, because how is the public supposed to know? How would they be privy to it being “carbon neutral?” It was never disclosed?!?

If there is no transparency in the things they do, don’t expect the outcome to be good. EJ needs to shut up and sit down. 

If H&M want privacy and don’t want to be forthcoming with details, then expect the questioning because you are in the public eye. Period. That is what they signed up for. They need to work the system and stop complaining about it. They are no victims, they live a VERY comfortable life based on very little work in comparison.

I have no sympathy for them. Cue world’s smallest violin


----------



## Flatsy

"Greenwashing".

In the past 3 weeks alone, Harry has taken 6 private jet trips. The Sussexes could have cut out two of those trips if they'd just extended their Ibiza trip by two days and gone straight to Nice instead of flying back to London.  So incredibly wasteful.


----------



## threadbender

I don't understand how paying for carbon use helps the environment. If you are flying, you are flying. There is no little eraser to use when you pay x amount of money. I have read in places where "regular people" are supposed to limit their number of flights to 2 or less a year to reduce the carbon footprint. Guess the elite are using mine.


----------



## bag-mania

All Harry had to do was keep his mouth shut and go about his business. Nobody would be expecting him to give up private jets if he hadn’t gotten up on his high horse to lecture everyone about energy waste and carbon footprints. He brought it on himself.


----------



## TC1

Won't have more than 2 children because the environment can't support it, yet flies private 6 times in 3 weeks? So ridiculous. These people are  "do as I say, not as I do" entitled AF


----------



## Gal4Dior

Elton John and Ellen defending H&M? Who’s next? The pope?

Many people do a lot of great things every day without any recognition or thanks. I’m not digging this celebrities to the rescue deal, and I didn’t buy that people article where Meghan’s friends defended her, either.

This just adds fuel to the fire...


----------



## mdcx

I am starting to think that Meghan doesn't mind being painted as the victim.
Would love to hear Ellen or EJ weigh in on how it was someone else's fault that Meghan was surrounded by empty seats at Wimbledon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> So she moved them into the servants quarters. At least they were renovated lol!  The worst part about Frogmore is that lack of privacy (how ironic for these two) and the proximity to the noise Heathrow and the need for the gazillion glazed windows.  Poor Archie will never get fresh air or play outside.  I bet they don't even want to live there.
> 
> Speaking of Archie.  This hiding him from the public is going to turn him into a scared little boy.  George, Charlotte and Louis have been taught to wave and be friendly and not let crowds, people and photographers  scare them.  His parents have to ease up and allow him to learn to cope with the people who will want to see him.  All the children of EU royals are adept at this and have a relaxed attitude.  Better for their mental health.  Hopefully Harry will not drum the mantra about the evil press into the poor kid's head, because it won't bode well from him.


Actually, I think Frogmore Cottage is perfect for them because of the privacy. The gardens of  Frogmore House are only open to the public 3 days a year and the house is never open to the public. 
Agree with the noise of Heathrow nearby but I think if you live anywhere in and around London you're on a flightpath anyway, Heathrow, Gatwick, London City Airport, Luton and Stanstead.


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> TMZ article //  Instagram pic:
> 
> Interesting that she found another Harry, who is still in the royal family.
> 
> "Cressida Bonas - Prince Harry's Ex - Is Engaged to a Different Harry with Royal Ties!
> Cressida Bonas, who dated Prince Harry from 2012-2014 after they were introduced by Princess Eugenie, is now engaged to her boyfriend Harry Wentworth-Stanley.
> “We getting married,” the couple announced in a selfie on his Instagram account, showing off her ring.
> Cressida‘s new fiance is reportedly the stepson of George Mountbatten, who is in line to the throne and is a cousin of Queen Elizabeth, who is Prince Harry’s grandmother.
> Cressida and Prince Harry stayed close and she even went to his wedding to Meghan Markle!"



They look very happy, it’s nice to see


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> She looks thrilled that she didn't get stuck with the petulant man child.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LVSistinaMM said:


> [...]If H&M want privacy and don’t want to be forthcoming with details, then expect the questioning because you are in the public eye. Period. That is what they signed up for. They need to work the system and stop complaining about it. They are no victims, they live a VERY comfortable life based on very little work in comparison.
> 
> I have no sympathy for them.* Cue world’s smallest violin*








(I totally stole this from another forum. Thank you to Merleay!)


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> Two things though.  I wish she would put a hat on him when being outside and  MM where did you learn to hold a baby like that?


I hate when total strangers tell me to put a hat on my kid



gracekelly said:


> I would place a baby in a baby carrier appropriate to the baby’s size so I could hold on to the railing when getting on/off the plane. The idea of tripping or taking a misstep when carrying a child is frightening
> .


I was never able to carry a baby carrier with a baby in it. way too heavy. most of them weight around 2 kg, add the baby weight. and its pretty bulky.



buffym said:


> Meghan is a first time Mom and a royal. Royals seem to not using carriers with holding their child privately or officially.
> 
> Archie will probably be carried in Meghan’s arms next month.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4519667
> View attachment 4519668
> View attachment 4519669
> View attachment 4519670


----------



## myown

I love daily fails headline:
*Elton John reveals HE paid for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to fly to his £15m mansion in the south of France by private jet and made a 'carbon neutral' donation on their behalf as he defends the couple's two holidays in 11 days*
Wonder if they had also told us how much the hotel was when they'd stayed at one. 
_Breaking News: Dutches and Duke stayed at 22m$  hotel in Irland! _


----------



## doni

The Elton John thing really irks me, it implies it is okay to dirty the environment by flying as long as you can _afford_ both a private jet and to pay a 'carbon compensation' on top. What the hell?
If you have a private jet to travel and lend to friends, own it. Karl Lagerfeld, who refused to travel commercial, never made excuses or carbon-compensated. So un-pc but honest.
If you claim you care about the environment and in particular about the impact of air flight on it, don't own a private jet.
Simple.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not sure Karl Lagerfeld being an unrepentant polluter makes him any better. An arrogant a$$ maybe.

Yet another reason he earned his nickname of K***y Karl.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> I am starting to think that Meghan doesn't mind being painted as the victim.
> Would love to hear Ellen or EJ weigh in on how it was someone else's fault that Meghan was surrounded by empty seats at Wimbledon.


She doesn’t. Remember her saying “they don't make it easy”?


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> The Elton John thing really irks me, it implies it is okay to dirty the environment by flying as long as you can _afford_ both a private jet and to pay a 'carbon compensation' on top. What the hell?
> If you have a private jet to travel and lend to friends, own it. Karl Lagerfeld, who refused to travel commercial, never made excuses or carbon-compensated. So un-pc but honest.
> If you claim you care about the environment and in particular about the impact of air flight on it, don't own a private jet.
> Simple.


Then also don't own a private vehicle, take mass transit. But that's not going to happen for most people, simply because it's more convenient to take your own vehicle. No different with a private plane, just the access for most people isn't the same.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Then also don't own a private vehicle, take mass transit. But that's not going to happen for most people, simply because it's more convenient to take your own vehicle. No different with a private plane, just the access for most people isn't the same.


_"Climate change, is a humanitarian issue not a political one, and one where we’ve been far too slow in waking up to the issues and acting on the damaging impact our ways of living are having on the world. We now have the facts, the science, the technology and the ability to save not just our planet, but ourselves...Our world’s greatest assets are threatened every day and it is so important that we support local communities to safeguard every element of this incredible world.  Every forest, every river, every ocean, every coastline, every insect, every wild animal. Every blade of grass, every ray of sun and every rain drop is crucial to our survival.  It is all connected, we are all inter-connected."_ - Prince Harry


----------



## Jayne1

Ellen sympathizes with the royals. She just posted this.  She feels bad for them about getting attacked... because after all, they give speeches about the environment.


----------



## Flatsy

Yes, they are trying to make the world better primarily by socializing with celebrities.  I see an appearance on the Ellen show in their future.


----------



## doni

I think some celebs loose the sense of what down to earth means...


PatsyCline said:


> Then also don't own a private vehicle, take mass transit. But that's not going to happen for most people, simply because it's more convenient to take your own vehicle. No different with a private plane, just the access for most people isn't the same.



I wasn't talking about most people, but people who claim they want to use a position of power and enormous influence to press an environmental agenda and have friends who pay carbon compensation when they borrow private jets. That is very far away from most people.

Here where I live it is actually quite normal for people to question the use of an own vehicle against other less pollutant transport means (public, bikes, scooter, share cars, trains, feet..., I myself don't own a car since many many years). These are people who are not speakers for environmental causes.

I am not saying they shouldn't use private jets. If they have the money or the friends,that's up to them (incidentally, an air trip is like _hundreds _of equivalent car trips in terms of carbon emissions, so not the same at all). But to do holidays within Europe on a private jet and being a speaker for the environment and the lowering of carbon emissions? I don't think so. In my own personal opinion this is a major contradiction.


----------



## bag-mania

Celebrities expounding on issues comes off as being so condescending. I know some people believe that anything that might bring attention to a cause must be good. However, the truth is the attention they get is really on the celebrity and not the cause. I can't think of any time in my life where my opinion about a subject was changed because a royal, actor, singer or athlete used their fame platform to promote their views. And frankly, I wouldn't have much respect for anyone who only learned about issues when they heard someone famous talk about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Celebrities expounding on issues comes off as being so condescending. I know some people believe that anything that might bring attention to a cause must be good. However, the truth is the attention they get is really on the celebrity and not the cause. I can't think of any time in my life where my opinion about a subject was changed because a royal, actor, singer or athlete used their fame platform to promote their views. And frankly, I wouldn't have much respect for anyone who only learned about issues when they heard someone famous talk about it.



Agree.  And I think too many celebrities mistakenly believe that they have something intelligent to say.  Or that they are somehow so special that we should follow their beliefs.


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan Markle cherishes privacy sooooo much, she married the wrong guy.  She could have opted for a private wedding ceremony instead of one televised around the world complete with thousands of workers behind the scenes. 

I was about to say she wants it both ways: the fame, praise & adoration; and then the 180 flip: privacy on her terms. But I think she enjoys the 24/7 opulent gush gush of the whole royal lifestyle, figuring it saves her from any and all criticism. I think she's blindsided by: "Wha? not everyone worships each step on the ground I walk on? How dare anyone criticize ME, I'm married to Harry?" So she puts on the "I'd like some privacy please" crap because she's in over her head, wandering in a stupor of "but I thought every last soul on earth is supposed to adore me".  

Not to say there must be cameras in her face all the time, but for a person who made a good living in front of cameras, leveraging and basking in the fame it gave her, it's a little rich of her to want to now duck out of view. If she wants to duck out of view, then don't take a big ass plane on a several vacations when your baby is barely 3 months old.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

I hope they fly private for the remainder of their lives. Muhahahahahaha


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Yes, they are trying to make the world better primarily by socializing with celebrities.  I see an appearance on the Ellen show in their future.


now Pink is posting on Twitter defending them.  I'm thinking tweeting is just so easy, people who would not do a print interview and be quoted on things can just impulsively tweet......


----------



## daisychainz

I saw this online on MSN news.

>>>>>Pink is defending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Following criticism of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's private vacations, the 39-year-old singer took to Twitter to add her name to the list of celebrities who are speaking out in support of the couple.

A source recently told ET that the royals spent six days celebrating Meghan’s 38th birthday in Ibiza at a lavish private villa, arriving by private jet to steer clear of the paparazzi. Just last week, they boarded another private plane and headed to the south of France for a sun-soaked getaway.

"I'm happy to see people coming to the defense of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex," Pink wrote. "The way people treat her is the most public form of bullying I have seen in a while. It’s out of control."

"Let's all be a bit kinder, huh? Let's show our children that it's cool to be kind," added the mother of two, who has an 8-year-old daughter, Willow, and a 2-year-old son, Jameson, with husband Carey Hart.<<<<<

I do think personal comments about her (like on her looks and ethnicity are unkind), but is it really bullying to hold them accountable for standing by their own words? That is just the public calling them out on something and they can't take the heat right now.


----------



## PatsyCline

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan Markle cherishes privacy sooooo much, she married the wrong guy.  She could have opted for a private wedding ceremony instead of one televised around the world complete with thousands of workers behind the scenes.
> 
> I was about to say she wants it both ways: the fame, praise & adoration; and then the 180 flip: privacy on her terms. But I think she enjoys the 24/7 opulent gush gush of the whole royal lifestyle, figuring it saves her from any and all criticism. I think she's blindsided by: "Wha? not everyone worships each step on the ground I walk on? How dare anyone criticize ME, I'm married to Harry?" So she puts on the "I'd like some privacy please" crap because she's in over her head, wandering in a stupor of "but I thought every last soul on earth is supposed to adore me".
> 
> Not to say there must be cameras in her face all the time, but for a person who made a good living in front of cameras, leveraging and basking in the fame it gave her, it's a little rich of her to want to now duck out of view. If she wants to duck out of view, then don't take a big ass plane on a several vacations when your baby is barely 3 months old.


But you're assuming that any of this is Meghan's doing. If anything, I would think Prince Harry is the one with the aversion to their privacy being invaded, due to the way the press treated his mother.

I believe weddings in a church in Britain are a public event, and cannot be private. If they wanted privacy, they would have had to have a ceremony in a private chapel, which i believe they did for Archie's baptism.

What's your problem with them going on vacation? She's on 'maternity' leave from her royal duties, which will be ending soon, so it makes sense they're getting in some vacation time before she resumes her royal duties.


----------



## buffym

Meghan Markle Continues to Be Dragged in the Media While Another Royal Faces an Actual Scandal

And people aren't happy about it. 
It's been a major week as far as royal scandals go — and no, we're not talking about Meghan Markle's latest break in tradition. 
Queen Elizabeth's son, Prince Andrew, has long been linked to accused pedophile and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but after Epstein's arrest in July and his apparent suicide in jail over the weekend, the Duke of York's friendship with Epstein has come under much closer scrutiny. Last week, previously sealed court documents were released, revealing that Prince Andrew, in addition to allegedly having a relationship with an underage girl, was also accused of sexual assault. 

Still, you might not be as familiar with the details about the Duke of York as you might, say, the backlash against Meghan Markle's guest-edited Vogue cover. While Prince Andrew's scandal has been getting media coverage, the coverage hasn't been nearly as exhaustive as it has been anytime Meghan Markle has done anything, or has been suspected to have done something people deem offensive in some way. 

The Duchess of Sussex has slowly been stepping back into the spotlight after giving birth to baby Archie earlier this year (though she's still technically on maternity leave), and as she's come back into the public eye, so have her detractors. Since making public appearances, she's been roundly criticized for wearing jeans, the way she holds her child, and allegedly asking people not to take her photo during a private outing. People were angry because they thought she copied the Vogue cover she guest-edited (even though a layout of black-and-white grid photos isn't exactly an original, trademarked idea), they were angry because they thought she and Prince Harry issued a list of demands for their neighbors (a rumor that was debunked by Buckingham Palace) — we could go on and on. 

But while everyone was up in arms over the duchess supposedly not following royal protocol and conduct, Prince Andrew was being accused of arguably way more egregious behavior. It also doesn't help that Buckingham Palace put out a statement defending Prince Andrew in the whole debacle while largely remaining silent about the backlash Meghan Markle continues to face. 
“This relates to proceedings in the United States, to which The Duke of York is not a party," a Buckingham Palace spokesperson told NBC. "Any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors is categorically untrue.”
According to a report from Vanity Fair, Prince Andrew spent the days after the scandal broke in Balmoral, and the Queen was photographed going to church with him on Sunday — while courtiers at Balmoral have supposedly discreetly removed newspapers from the breakfast room at the estate to spare him any embarrassment.
The hypocrisy of getting up in arms about Meghan's supposed protocol-breaking behavior (like, having a baby shower) while ignoring another royal's alleged sex crimes hasn't been sitting well with a lot of people. 

And while Prince Andrew and the duchess are in two very different situations and criticism against them isn't mutually exclusive, some people are just hoping that the media shows Prince Andrew's scandal the same energy they give Meghan Markle when she does, well, anything. 

https://www.instyle.com/news/meghan-markle-prince-andrew-scandal


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> I think some celebs loose the sense of what down to earth means...
> 
> 
> I wasn't talking about most people, but people who claim they want to use a position of power and enormous influence to press an environmental agenda and have friends who pay carbon compensation when they borrow private jets. That is very far away from most people.
> 
> Here where I live it is actually quite normal for people to question the use of an own vehicle against other less pollutant transport means (public, bikes, scooter, share cars, trains, feet..., I myself don't own a car since many many years). These are people who are not speakers for environmental causes.
> 
> I am not saying they shouldn't use private jets. If they have the money or the friends,that's up to them (incidentally, an air trip is like _hundreds _of equivalent car trips in terms of carbon emissions, so not the same at all). But to do holidays within Europe on a private jet and being a speaker for the environment and the lowering of carbon emissions? I don't think so. In my own personal opinion this is a major contradiction.


But if someone is going to criticise someone for doing something, that person better be squeaky clean themselves.

A private jet flying the equivalent distance is much more fuel efficient than a commercial jet, just not when you compare the cost PER person. 

The Royals using a private jet, and some random rich person are two completely different scenarios. The security concerns for the Royals almost guarantee that a private jet will be recommended by their security personnel.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> The Royals using a private jet, and some random rich person are two completely different scenarios. The security concerns for the Royals almost guarantee that a private jet will be recommended by their security personnel.


This is completely untrue.  Yet again, you make these statements without any receipts and then accuse others of making up wild untruths.

See Town & Country article on how the royals travel. https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s.../queen-elizabeth-royal-family-travel-details/ 

Royals can and do fly commercial with no safety concerns. The Cambridges typically fly commercial to St. Lucia in order to access Mustique, and have flown EasyJets and Ryanair before. 

The sitting Prime Minister of England (David Cameron, at the time) not only flew commercial, but did so in economy.  There's no way the security concerns of Harry and Meghan outweigh those of a sitting prime minister.   Security is just a baseless excuse.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> A private jet flying the equivalent distance is much more fuel efficient than a commercial jet, just not when you compare the cost PER person.


Er, that adds up to that private jet being LESS fuel efficient.  It just uses less fuel in total than a commercial plane 
As for security concerns - the Queen regularly travels on an ordinary train, esp to Sandringham 
This thread


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> now Pink is posting on Twitter defending them.  I'm thinking tweeting is just so easy, people who would not do a print interview and be quoted on things can just impulsively tweet......


Yeah, in the same way that its easier to buy carbon offset than to stop doing something you fancy doing.  Work of a moment.


----------



## bag-mania

buffym said:


> Meghan Markle Continues to Be Dragged in the Media While Another Royal Faces an Actual Scandal
> 
> And people aren't happy about it.
> It's been a major week as far as royal scandals go — and no, we're not talking about Meghan Markle's latest break in tradition.
> Queen Elizabeth's son, Prince Andrew, has long been linked to accused pedophile and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but after Epstein's arrest in July and his apparent suicide in jail over the weekend, the Duke of York's friendship with Epstein has come under much closer scrutiny. Last week, previously sealed court documents were released, revealing that Prince Andrew, in addition to allegedly having a relationship with an underage girl, was also accused of sexual assault.
> 
> Still, you might not be as familiar with the details about the Duke of York as you might, say, the backlash against Meghan Markle's guest-edited Vogue cover. While Prince Andrew's scandal has been getting media coverage, the coverage hasn't been nearly as exhaustive as it has been anytime Meghan Markle has done anything, or has been suspected to have done something people deem offensive in some way.
> 
> https://www.instyle.com/news/meghan-markle-prince-andrew-scandal



Can you be surprised that all the talk is about Meghan and Harry? Ever since their engagement they are the new, shiny thing for the gossip media to play with. Nobody wants to gossip about old Andrew. I can assure you he was gossiped about plenty in his time, but that was over 30 years ago.

If he is a perv then he should absolutely be held accountable and that's a matter for the law. But it's unrealistic to expect the media to be interested in talking about him. He's as dull as dishwater and old news. Now if he is STILL having sex with underage girls then I expect the media to be all over him.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> This is completely untrue.  Yet again, you make these statements with any receipts and then accuse others of making up wild untruths.
> 
> See Town & Country article on how the royals travel. https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s.../queen-elizabeth-royal-family-travel-details/
> 
> Royals can and do fly commercial with no safety concerns. The Cambridges typically fly commercial to St. Lucia in order to access Mustique, and have flown EasyJets and Ryanair before.
> 
> The sitting Prime Minister of *England* (David Cameron, at the time) not only flew commercial, but did so in economy.  There's no way the security concerns of Harry and Meghan outweigh those of a sitting prime minister.   Security is just a baseless excuse.


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland lol


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland lol


Yeah, that too, LOL.


----------



## gracekelly

doni said:


> I think some celebs loose the sense of what down to earth means...
> 
> 
> I wasn't talking about most people, but people who claim they want to use a position of power and enormous influence to press an environmental agenda and have friends who pay carbon compensation when they borrow private jets. That is very far away from most people.
> 
> Here where I live it is actually quite normal for people to question the use of an own vehicle against other less pollutant transport means (public, bikes, scooter, share cars, trains, feet..., I myself don't own a car since many many years). These are people who are not speakers for environmental causes.
> 
> I am not saying they shouldn't use private jets. If they have the money or the friends,that's up to them (incidentally, an air trip is like _hundreds _of equivalent car trips in terms of carbon emissions, so not the same at all). But to do holidays within Europe on a private jet and being a speaker for the environment and the lowering of carbon emissions? I don't think so. In my own personal opinion this is a major contradiction.


. 

I will use my nephew as an example of people who have a platform and practice what they preach. He has his Ph.D in Public Health. His area is air and water quality. He does own a car, but does not use it when he can use his bicycle or take mass transit. He and his wife specifically purchased their home so she could walk to the train station to commute to work. He lectures and teaches at a major university on this subject and works with non profits as well.  His work effected a major change in the air quality of a large school system. His concerns about the environment and the effect of  climate change and air/water  pollution are real and he does what he can to help.  He’s a great guy and I am very proud of him!




lulilu said:


> Agree.  And I think too many celebrities mistakenly believe that they have something intelligent to say.  Or that they are somehow so special that we should follow their beliefs.



One of my pet peeves is just this. Most of the time they should keep their mouth shut because they just sound stupid

@myown  totally understand what you are objecting to with the sling carrier, but at times you are stuck with holding your child and  needing to move in a safe fashion. Re the hat, yes  it is obnoxious when strangers tell you to do something relating to your child. Where I live in S CA the sun has been getting more relentless every year due to climate change and the decrease in the ozone layer. Fair skinned people have a higher incidence of skin cancers and it has been on the rise even in the young, hence my concern. The climate in the south is France is pretty similar and if Archie is a ginger then care needs to be taken for him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Actually, I think Frogmore Cottage is perfect for them because of the privacy. The gardens of  Frogmore House are only open to the public 3 days a year and the house is never open to the public.
> Agree with the noise of Heathrow nearby but I think if you live anywhere in and around London you're on a flightpath anyway, Heathrow, Gatwick, London City Airport, Luton and Stanstead.



The problem was the Royal Household Golf Club staff parking lot. Meghan was afraid that folks parking in the lot could see into the cottage. She asked that the staff move their parking to another location, which unfortunately for them, was more than a mile walk to their workplace. I wouldn’t be too crazy about this situation myself and certainly understand her concern.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The problem was the Royal Household Golf Club staff parking lot. Meghan was afraid that folks parking in the lot could see into the cottage. She asked that the staff move their parking to another location, which unfortunately for them, was more than a mile walk to their workplace. I wouldn’t be too crazy about this situation myself and certainly understand her concern.


I don't know the details but I would think if people could see in it would be only from one side of the house?  rather than having staff walk a mile, maybe they could have closed the drapes on that side?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> .
> 
> I will use my nephew as an example of people who have a platform and practice what they preach. He has his Ph.D in Public Health. His area is air and water quality. He does own a car, but does not use it when he can use his bicycle or take mass transit. He and his wife specifically purchased their home so she could walk to the train station to commute to work. He lectures and teaches at a major university on this subject and works with non profits as well.  His work effected a major change in the air quality of a large school system. His concerns about the environment and the effect of  climate change and air/water  pollution are real and he does what he can to help.  He’s a great guy and I am very proud of him!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of my pet peeves is just this. Most of the time they should keep their mouth shut because they just sound stupid
> 
> @myown  totally understand what you are objecting to with the sling carrier, but at times you are stuck with holding your child and  needing to move in a safe fashion. Re the hat, yes  it is obnoxious when strangers tell you to do something relating to your child. Where I live in S CA the sun has been getting more relentless every year due to climate change and the decrease in the ozone layer. Fair skinned people have a higher incidence of skin cancers and it has been on the rise even in the young, hence my concern. The climate in the south is France is pretty similar and if Archie is a ginger then care needs to be taken for him.


your nephew sounds great 
yes, I'm one of those diagnosed with skin cancer.  I haven't sunbathed in years but the damage was likely caused when I was young.  I have fair Irish skin and I used to get burned all the time in my teens.  My mother warned me but I didn't listen.


----------



## doni

PatsyCline said:


> The Royals using a private jet, and some random rich person are two completely different scenarios. The security concerns for the Royals almost guarantee that a private jet will be recommended by their security personnel.



But in fact travelling commercial when on holidays (and sometimes when working) is the standard for royals in Europe, including the British royals...


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The problem was the Royal Household Golf Club staff parking lot. Meghan was afraid that folks parking in the lot could see into the cottage. She asked that the staff move their parking to another location, which unfortunately for them, was more than a mile walk to their workplace. I wouldn’t be too crazy about this situation myself and certainly understand her concern.


There seems to be a hedge and trees between the cottage and the car park, I can't see what her problem is. The car park is not too close, lol, they could put a 10 ft fence across the hedge.


----------



## bisbee

Most people have too much leisure time.  Just sayin’.  I, for one, am tired of reading these comments about Harry and Meghan.  All of the comments.  So...I will no longer visit this thread.


----------



## rose60610

From what I've read, the Frogmore renovations were 3 million $$ plus. And it didn't occur to anyone before about "parking lot views"?  And NOW the staff has to park over a mile away?  There are several other solutions: eliminate the Golf Club altogether. Plant more trees/hedges/whatever. Draw the curtains. Suck it up. They could buy a house somewhere else for themselves out of their own savings, oh the horror!  It isn't as though it's a public course, and people don't golf at night. Would the parking lot be kept for H & M's guests for when they entertained? Well....if so......wouldn't people from the lot be able to see into the house THEN?  Or is there a different area for guests to park? If so, then why couldn't staff use THAT lot? 

Oh the drama and hardships of being a royal. How ever do they do it?


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I don't know the details but I would think if people could see in it would be only from one side of the house?  rather than having staff walk a mile, maybe they could have closed the drapes on that side?


Or put up a row or three of dense trees... evergreens perhaps.  A Douglas Fir is one of the best trees to fight climate change. (Or an equivalent that does best in the UK.) Hey Harry, planting trees is an excellent tool in the fight to stave off global warming. You're interested in that right? 

All they really want is a partition to keep the spies out, but they can do good at the same time.


----------



## threadbender

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, in the same way that its easier to buy carbon offset than to stop doing something you fancy doing.  Work of a moment.


Please can someone explain this to me? I cannot figure out how paying for an "offset" changes what someone has done ie: creating a large carbon footprint. How does money take that away? I am so confused and/or naive. I am serious in this question.


----------



## rose60610

threadbender said:


> How does money take that away?



It doesn't. 

No matter how much $ gets redistributed in any fashion, no carbon gets taken away. 

I'm more disconcerted about plastics in the ocean and waterways. That's something people can assist in cleaning up. There are rivers in the world so full of garbage it's criminal. And the fashion industry also contributes to a lot of pollution from dyes, etc being dumped into waters. 

Elton John can fly anyone anywhere, including H&M, (or me), and he isn't offsetting the royal plane's emissions.


----------



## Clearblueskies

threadbender said:


> Please can someone explain this to me? I cannot figure out how paying for an "offset" changes what someone has done ie: creating a large carbon footprint. How does money take that away? I am so confused and/or naive. I am serious in this question.


Doesn’t make sense to me either.  I don’t believe contributing money to environmental carbon saving initiatives wipes out the effect of pollution caused.  It doesn’t.  It’s like thinking a habitat that’s been centuries or thousands of years in developing can be recreated by planting a couple of saplings.  Instagrammy lip service type nonsense.


----------



## Flatsy

threadbender said:


> Please can someone explain this to me? I cannot figure out how paying for an "offset" changes what someone has done ie: creating a large carbon footprint. How does money take that away? I am so confused and/or naive. I am serious in this question.


I believe the money is used to plant trees to make up for the carbon emissions of the jet.

It's like donating money to charity to make up for stabbing somebody.  You should donate money to charity anyway, and also not stab people.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> There seems to be a hedge and trees between the cottage and the car park, I can't see what her problem is. The car park is not too close, lol, they could put a 10 ft fence across the hedge.


I believe they did put in an application for plantings. The problem would also be that there is public access to the car park and peeps and paps could be up there with cameras with those lenses that can see the pores of your skin.   I have no draperies across any of my back windows and my house has all glass across the back.  I would never have bought it if I thought I had to drape it up for privacy.   I wouldn’t feel comfortable letting Archie play in the back garden if I felt there was no privacy.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Elton John can fly anyone anywhere, including H&M, (or me), and he isn't offsetting the royal plane's emissions.


He said he gave a donation.  I'd love to know the amount.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> Please can someone explain this to me? I cannot figure out how paying for an "offset" changes what someone has done ie: creating a large carbon footprint. How does money take that away? I am so confused and/or naive. I am serious in this question.



This is the knee jerk reaction for some people. When there is a problem, you must throw money at it. If that money didn't solve the problem, then you must throw more money at it. Politicians notoriously do this when they plan their budgets. 

We can't expect money to solve every problem.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> From what I've read, the Frogmore renovations were 3 million $$ plus. And it didn't occur to anyone before about "parking lot views"?  And NOW the staff has to park over a mile away?  There are several other solutions: eliminate the Golf Club altogether. Plant more trees/hedges/whatever. Draw the curtains. Suck it up. They could buy a house somewhere else for themselves out of their own savings, oh the horror!  It isn't as though it's a public course, and people don't golf at night. Would the parking lot be kept for H & M's guests for when they entertained? Well....if so......wouldn't people from the lot be able to see into the house THEN?  Or is there a different area for guests to park? If so, then why couldn't staff use THAT lot?
> 
> Oh the drama and hardships of being a royal. How ever do they do it?



This gets back to my original point about the cottage as a poor. choice for them to live. I think it had many negatives and I never understood it. Yes the cottage was in need of renovation  according to those in the know, but it might have been done for less money.  Given the amount spent, they could have had a new build on an estate with total privacy, but they didn’t want to be that far out from London according to reports.   

My guess is that one reason that Frogmore was chosen was that it is owned by The Queen’s Trust. It was not a gift nor could it be for that reason. It is not something the Queen can gift to anyone   The family wouldn’t have to carry the cost of the renovation, the public would. If they had a new build or renovated home elsewhere then the family would have to shoulder the cost and it probably would have been a gift and joint property in case of a future divorce.  Frogmore Cottage was a far less messy solution.  Given the fact that three out of four of the Queen’s children were divorced and that Prince Charles had to borrow money from his mother for the divorce settlement of 40 million given to Diana, it is not unrealistic to hypothesize that someone thought about this.


----------



## threadbender

Thanks to all. I guess the purchase of carbon credits is just another feel good ploy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

threadbender said:


> Thanks to all. I guess the purchase of carbon credits is just another feel good ploy.


It’s not a bad idea, but I admit it really bugs me - because it feels to me it’s used as a kind of get out jail free card.  I don’t think it’s that easy.


----------



## bag-mania

I would think moving the employee parking for their convenience could come back and bite them. All they need is for one handicapped or elderly employee to get injured while walking that mile. Or do they offer a shuttle every day to transport the workers back and forth, thereby increasing their carbon footprint even more?


----------



## threadbender

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s not a bad idea, but I admit it really bugs me - because it feels to me it’s used as a kind of get out jail free card.  I don’t think it’s that easy.


I don't see it as reducing anything. I simply see it as a way for people with money to assuage their conscience. You cannot erase the harm done. Just pay someone else not to do the same as you.

But, I did not mean to go OT. Sorry


----------



## rose60610

threadbender said:


> I don't see it as reducing anything. I simply see it as a way for people with money to assuage their conscience. You cannot erase the harm done. Just pay someone else not to do the same as you.
> 
> But, I did not mean to go OT. Sorry



This thread is notorious for going off topic so you're in the right place. Throwing money around to other countries for "carbon footprints" isn't assuaging any consciences, IMO, it's just to line pockets of corrupt recipients with a wink-wink.

Meghan did adopt shelter dogs in her past, so I'll give her that. Where are those dogs these days, anyway?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Meghan did adopt shelter dogs in her past, so I'll give her that. Where are those dogs these days, anyway?



She doesn't need a dog anymore, she has a baaaaby!!

Just a joke but don't you hate people who think that way? There are too many out there who get rid of the pet at the first sign of a child being born.

Anyway, as near as I can tell she gave away the dog she had in Toronto. Apparently she only adopted him in the first place because Ellen DeGeneres pushed her into it.


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> She doesn't need a dog anymore, she has a baaaaby!!
> 
> Just a joke but don't you hate people who think that way? There are too many out there who get rid of the pet at the first sign of a child being born.
> 
> Anyway, as near as I can tell she gave away the dog she had in Toronto. Apparently she only adopted him in the first place because Ellen DeGeneres pushed her into it.


Really? That is so sad. And, Ellen should not be guilting people into taking in animals. They should be loved and wanted.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> This is the knee jerk reaction for some people. When there is a problem, you must throw money at it. If that money didn't solve the problem, then you must throw more money at it. Politicians notoriously do this when they plan their budgets.
> 
> We can't expect money to solve every problem.


I wish I could like this post 1000x I'm so tired of the answer to climate change is money. Tell me where the money is going FIRST. I want solutions as much as the next person, but throwing money around isn't a PLAN.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> Really? That is so sad. And, Ellen should not be guilting people into taking in animals. They should be loved and wanted.



Just to be clear Meghan did bring over one rescue dog to England. Guy is the one she brought and he had the childrens' book about him. Bogart is the one she left behind.

ETA: There were reports last year that Harry and Meghan got a Labrador together. But nothing more about that dog. I don't know what her name was or if they still have her.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Just to be clear Meghan did bring over one rescue dog to England. Guy is the one she brought and he had the childrens' book about him. Bogart is the one she left behind.



I heard that too, she left Bogart behind as he was old or ill ( or both) and she thought the upheaval of the flight over here wouldn't do him any good.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I heard that too, she left Bogart behind as he was old or ill ( or both) and she thought the upheaval of the flight over here wouldn't do him any good.



Yeah, well that's the "official story," that Bogart was too old. When you look it up Meghan adopted him, at Ellen's insistence, in December of 2012. That's means Bogart was about 6 when Meghan moved to England, far from a senior citizen in canine terms.

Here's a photo from her Instagram with Bogart as a puppy.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, well that's the "official story," that Bogart was too old. When you look it up Meghan adopted him, at Ellen's insistence, in December of 2012. That's means Bogart was about 6 when Meghan moved to England, far from a senior citizen in canine terms.
> 
> Here's a photo from her Instagram with Bogart as a puppy.
> 
> View attachment 4520707


Ah, right, I didn't know that


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Can you be surprised that all the talk is about Meghan and Harry? Ever since their engagement they are the new, shiny thing for the gossip media to play with. Nobody wants to gossip about old Andrew. I can assure you he was gossiped about plenty in his time, but that was over 30 years ago.
> 
> If he is a perv then he should absolutely be held accountable and that's a matter for the law. But it's unrealistic to expect the media to be interested in talking about him. He's as dull as dishwater and old news. Now if he is STILL having sex with underage girls then I expect the media to be all over him.


This story needs to be front and centre, regardless of how many private planes Harry and Meghan took. 

Whether Andrew's activities are past or present, if true he needs to brought to justice. 

If true, he's far more than a "perv" - he's an abuser of young girls and part of a network of elite criminals.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> This story needs to be front and centre, regardless of how many private planes Harry and Meghan took.
> 
> Whether Andrew's activities are past or present, if true he needs to brought to justice.
> 
> If true, he's far more than a "perv" - he's an abuser of young girls and part of a network of elite criminals.



Is he being investigated? It isn't the job of the gossip media to prosecute Andrew. It's up to Britain's legal system should they care enough to pursue it.

Contrary to how they wish to be portrayed, the media, both news and gossip, is a business first. If there is interest in a story that will make that story profitable, they will knock themselves out trying to uncover it. If they are putting out feelers and not finding any truly scandal-worthy evidence they aren't going to bother working on it for long. That's just the way the business is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

rose60610 said:


> Meghan did adopt shelter dogs in her past, so I'll give her that. Where are those dogs these days, anyway?



She gave one away when she moved and the other got run over at the palace. Like almost every one else, discarded when she didn’t need them any more.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> She gave one away when she moved and the other got run over at the palace. Like almost every one else, discarded when she didn’t need them any more.


What? One of the doggies was run over? Now, I am sad over both of the pooches.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’ve side eyed her a lot over the one dog she left behind but the other dog that was run over didn’t die. He was at the wedding reception allegedly.


----------



## buffym

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people...avorite-adoptable-dog-finds-forever-home/amp/

We can’t take another dog before the baby as our hands are too full!” she said.
Yates added, “She has got dogs and they are an important part of her life and the family. They have the two dogs already and with the baby on the way, it might be a bit much that’s happening!”

Harry and Meghan have also gotten their own dog together. Although they are still keeping the pooch’s name hush-hush, Meghan did let it slip that the couple’s new dog is a “she.”


https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/meghan-markles-rescue-dog-ride-queen-elizabeth/story?id=55404056


----------



## bag-mania

Whatever happened to this dog they got last summer?

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Just Took the Next Step by Getting a New Dog*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have a new addition: a pup to share their lives, PEOPLE has confirmed.

The couple got the dog — believed to be a Labrador — in early summer, and the pooch has been joining them at their country getaway in the Cotswolds area and Nottingham Cottage at Kensington Palace in London, a source says.

Harry and Meghan’s new best friend will be a welcome addition to their rural walks. Dog lover Meghan, 37, had to leave one of her pets, Bogart, behind when she arrived in London from Toronto last November, when the couple got engaged. The rescue dog, a companion for Meghan’s Beagle Guy, was given to friends.

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-new-dog/


----------



## mdcx

Trains can be very comfortable in Europe and what a great way that would have been to promote a "greener" mode of transport. But then I also live somewhere where commuting via public transport is seen as the responsible choice, if possible. 

Obviously Megs and Harry are the newest cause celeb for Social Justice Warriors despite having done....nothing...to advance the cause in any substantial way.  

Everything that has happened so far, combined with the way Meghan's cast mates from Suits pranced their way into the wedding, acting up for the cameras (looking at you Sarah Rafferty), I would guess many gleeful conversations were had about how rich and powerful and glam Meghan's life post wedding would be. I sincerely doubt there were many conversation had about the huge responsibilities of the role, the loss of privacy, the rules and regulations on behaviour, dress etc. Meghan is here for the perks, that's how it seems to me.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Whatever happened to this dog they got last summer?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Just Took the Next Step by Getting a New Dog*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have a new addition: a pup to share their lives, PEOPLE has confirmed.
> 
> The couple got the dog — believed to be a Labrador — in early summer, and the pooch has been joining them at their country getaway in the Cotswolds area and Nottingham Cottage at Kensington Palace in London, a source says.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s new best friend will be a welcome addition to their rural walks. Dog lover Meghan, 37, had to leave one of her pets, Bogart, behind when she arrived in London from Toronto last November, when the couple got engaged. The rescue dog, a companion for Meghan’s Beagle Guy, was given to friends.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-new-dog/


Maybe Megs didn't like that it gave "commoners" walking their own dogs an excuse to make conversation?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> *Is he being investigated? It isn't the job of the gossip media to prosecute Andrew.* It's up to Britain's legal system should they care enough to pursue it.
> 
> Contrary to how they wish to be portrayed, the media, both news and gossip, is a business first. If there is interest in a story that will make that story profitable, they will knock themselves out trying to uncover it. If they are putting out feelers and not finding any truly scandal-worthy evidence they aren't going to bother working on it for long. That's just the way the business is.



If Andrew's story isn't worthy of a salacious gossip site like the Daily mail, Sun etc, then I don't know what is.

And those sites frequently indulge in allegations.

And those same sites have taken to "trial by media" with Harry and Meghan regarding.....basically every step they take (right or wrong, and regardless of my views on it). 

The BRF would love (and have tried) to smother the story on Andrew.  I don't care who's keeping the spotlight on him as long as this story isn't allowed to die.


----------



## buffym




----------



## Flatsy

For as much as people complain in this thread about lack of Andrew coverage, nobody has yet seen fit to open an Andrew thread on this forum and have a discussion about him, let alone keep the thread so active it's always at the tippy top of the page.

You guys don't actually care that much about Andrew.  And if you aren't interested, why do you expect the rest of the world to be?

The Daily Mail and the other tabloids are always going to be driven by traffic.  Unless you can honestly say that you click on as many or more Andrew stories than you do Harry/Meghan stories, only then do I think you have cause to complain that the media is not providing you with enough Andrew stories and too many Harry/Meghan stories.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> If Andrew's story isn't worthy of a salacious gossip site like the Daily mail, Sun etc, then I don't know what is.
> 
> And those sites frequently indulge in allegations.
> 
> And those same sites have taken to "trial by media" with Harry and Meghan regarding.....basically every step they take (right or wrong, and regardless of my views on it).
> 
> The BRF would love (and have tried) to smother the story on Andrew.  I don't care who's keeping the spotlight on him as long as this story isn't allowed to die.



Didn’t British media outlets report on it when the connection between Andrew and Epstein first came out? I thought they did. If they didn’t they certainly should.

New information has to surface for them to bother resurrecting the story. They are not going to repeat the same information if they have already reported it. Unfortunately, I think Epstein’s death has many of his associates breathing a sigh of relief these days.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> For as much as people complain in this thread about lack of Andrew coverage, nobody has yet seen fit to open an Andrew thread on this forum and have a discussion about him, let alone keep the thread so active it's always at the tippy top of the page.
> 
> You guys don't actually care that much about Andrew.  And if you aren't interested, why do you expect the rest of the world to be?
> 
> The Daily Mail and the other tabloids are always going to be driven by traffic.  Unless you can honestly say that you click on as many or more Andrew stories than you do Harry/Meghan stories, only then do I think you have cause to complain that the media is not providing you with enough Andrew stories and too many Harry/Meghan stories.


I think most people who have threads here are relatively young and beautiful.  Andrew doesn't fit either of these types.  Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but in this subforum I don't recall anyone having a thread just because they were involved in a scandal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


>



Are you presenting this as fact?  It’s just an opinion poll, 2,500 people were called on one day in August.



bag-mania said:


> Didn’t British media outlets report on it when the connection between Andrew and Epstein first came out? I thought they did. If they didn’t they certainly should.
> 
> New information has to surface for them to bother resurrecting the story. They are not going to repeat the same information if they have already reported it. Unfortunately, I think Epstein’s death has many of his associates breathing a sigh of relief these days.


It was reported extensively at the time, and it’s being reported again now.  Andrew lost a role he had representing the country internationally as a consequence.  Andrew isn’t the only former friend of Epstein but he’s the only one being brought up on this thread.  *****, *******...there’s a long list of people who hung out with Epstein that should be investigated.  It’s got nothing to do with the topic of this thread though.


----------



## Clearblueskies

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve side eyed her a lot over the one dog she left behind but the other dog that was run over didn’t die. He was at the wedding reception allegedly.


Me too, dogs are not disposable.  She should have kept them together IMO, and if the one she left behind was only 6 that’s no age at all.  It’s unclear what happened to the dog that came over here.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Me too, dogs are not disposable.  She should have kept them together IMO, and if the one she left behind was only 6 that’s no age at all. * It’s unclear what happened to the dog that came over here*.



All I could find about Guy was he had two broken legs at the end of 2017. I can’t find anything at all about the black Lab they adopted last summer.

Isn’t this another example of celebrity hypocrisy? Extolling the virtues of adopting rescue pets but giving your own adopted dog away when when it is inconvenient to take him with you when you move.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I think most people who have threads here are relatively young and beautiful. Andrew doesn't fit either of these types.


Yes, and the same is true for the tabloids.

If this were 1988 back when Andrew & Fergie were the Harry & Meghan of their day, this would be a lot different.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Bogart - the dog left behind in Canada or LA - was sick and couldn't fly.  I remembered reading about that or she mentioned it in an interview during their engagement.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Calling out the hypocrisy in the fact that they preach about the environment and tell people to not go to touristy places and reduce their carbon footprint (yet going to places like Ibiza and Nice by private plane - carbon credit or not) IS NOT BULLYING. Pink is another celebrity out of touch if she believes that news reports about this equates this to bullying.

No one is making them speak out about their environment so vocally and no one is twisting their arms to take these lavish trips that aren’t exactly environmentally friendly. They are actively making these choices; and thus, as grown people, they need to deal with the consequences without a bunch of celebrities coming to their rescue.


----------



## Gal4Dior

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan Markle cherishes privacy sooooo much, she married the wrong guy.  She could have opted for a private wedding ceremony instead of one televised around the world complete with thousands of workers behind the scenes.
> 
> I was about to say she wants it both ways: the fame, praise & adoration; and then the 180 flip: privacy on her terms. But I think she enjoys the 24/7 opulent gush gush of the whole royal lifestyle, figuring it saves her from any and all criticism. I think she's blindsided by: "Wha? not everyone worships each step on the ground I walk on? How dare anyone criticize ME, I'm married to Harry?" So she puts on the "I'd like some privacy please" crap because she's in over her head, wandering in a stupor of "but I thought every last soul on earth is supposed to adore me".
> 
> Not to say there must be cameras in her face all the time, but for a person who made a good living in front of cameras, leveraging and basking in the fame it gave her, it's a little rich of her to want to now duck out of view. If she wants to duck out of view, then don't take a big ass plane on a several vacations when your baby is barely 3 months old.


Harry just encourages this behavior and allows for this secrecy to continue to happen- only for it to blow up spectacularly in their faces. Yet, he still doesn’t learn.

I honestly think he thinks it’s them versus the world. It doesn’t need to be that hard, Harry. Not all people who questioned your pick of Meghan had some vendetta against her, you as a couple, or were jealous of your happiness. Meghan is not Diana, she is FAR more savvy than Diana ever was with real life experience to benefit her.


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> But in fact travelling commercial when on holidays (and sometimes when working) is the standard for royals in Europe, including the British royals...


Interesting. I would have thought it would be the opposite.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> My guess is that one reason that Frogmore was chosen was that it is owned by The Queen’s Trust. It was not a gift nor could it be for that reason. It is not something the Queen can gift to anyone   The family wouldn’t have to carry the cost of the renovation, the public would. If they had a new build or renovated home elsewhere then the family would have to shoulder the cost and it probably would have been a gift and joint property in case of a future divorce.  Frogmore Cottage was a far less messy solution.  Given the fact that three out of four of the Queen’s children were divorced and that Prince Charles had to borrow money from his mother for the divorce settlement of 40 million given to Diana, it is not unrealistic to hypothesize that someone thought about this.


Good points.

Speaking of Diana's 40 million, plus her own family money... she never left a cent to a charity, it all went to the boys.  Do they ever spend their own money or just borrow from Charles or the Queen or spend the publics money, I wonder.



threadbender said:


> I don't see it as reducing anything. I simply see it as a way for people with money to assuage their conscience. You cannot erase the harm done. Just pay someone else not to do the same as you.
> 
> But, I did not mean to go OT. Sorry


M and H get a bit boring sometimes, so going off topic is more interesting at those times, I think. And it's all in the family, anyway.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> If Andrew's story isn't worthy of a salacious gossip site like the Daily mail, Sun etc, then I don't know what is.
> The BRF would love (and have tried) to smother the story on Andrew.  I don't care who's keeping the spotlight on him as long as this story isn't allowed to die.


Agree!! 

Also, didn't Epstein pay off Fergies's substantial debts?  What was that about?


----------



## bag-mania

Welltraveled! said:


> Bogart - the dog left behind in Canada or LA - was sick and couldn't fly.  I remembered reading about that or she mentioned it in an interview during their engagement.



I can’t find anything online to indicate he was ever sick. If you can, please post it here. I found several instances where it claimed that Bogart was “too old” or that it was risky to take him abroad, despite the fact that he was only 6. Her other dog Guy presumably had to go through the same risks to travel.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Good points.
> 
> Speaking of Diana's 40 million, plus her own family money... she never left a cent to a charity, it all went to the boys.  Do they ever spend their own money or just borrow from Charles or the Queen or spend the publics money, I wonder..



William and Harry have a stipend from Charles. There is some rumor that Harry may be cut off from that as his name has been dropped from a list.   I suspect that Harry’s money is pretty well tied up so he may be getting investment income from it but it isn’t  enough to fund the lifestyle.   He may actually have to find something resembling a job.

Edit:  The Duke and Duchess of Sussex  are no longer listed on the Clarence House website and that is why it is thought that they will no longer receive funds from Prince Charles.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Agree!!
> 
> Also, didn't Epstein pay off Fergies's substantial debts?  What was that about?



Agree, also.  I read where Epstein gave Fergie 18K. So was that her "substantial debt"? Fifteen thousand is the current U.S. gift tax exclusion, so why 18K? If Fergie didn't have a lousy 18K to pay her own debt, is she selling paintings down by the river, too? Couldn't she sponge a few bucks off her daughters? Unless 18K was the amount Epstein gave to her, not to pay debts, but to shut her up about Andrew's behavior. She's been on the outs having aired dirty laundry about the BRF before, I'd imagine the tabloids would pay a heck of a lot more than 18K for Epstein info. The whole thing is beyond weird. And worth gossiping about. 

Guy the Beagle got his legs broken in 2017. Reportedly, he was at the wedding reception in 2018 eating dropped food off the floor. Apparently the doggie recovered. I could not find the cause of his broken legs. I wonder if that's going to end up happening to Andrew, waking up with two broken legs. Here in Chicago, those things happen once in a while.......bodyguards get distracted from time to time.......


----------



## TC1

Meghan's bff Jessica Mulroney (her twin son's were in the wedding party) just had to chime in on her IG about the private jet scandal, her post includes "shame on you, you racist bullies"
Hmmm, wow Jess. That's a reach
Of course Enews picked that story up right away.


----------



## rose60610

TC1 said:


> Meghan's bff Jessica Mulroney (her twin son's were in the wedding party) just had to chime in on her IG about the private jet scandal, her post includes "shame on you, you racist bullies"
> Hmmm, wow Jess. That's a reach



I'd like to know if it EVER, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever,  permissible to criticize or even mildly critique a "person of color" WITHOUT being labeled a "racist".  EVER????  Ever?????

Whenever a detractor of an ACTION of a "person of color" is automatically labeled "RACIST!", it denigrates the real struggle of minorities that face and deal with TRUE racism in their lives, employment, interactions with the public, with authority figures, in schools, etc.  It infantilizes minorities in that REAL struggle, and casts a negative light on the progress to true equality and the all dignity that minorities should have that anyone else gets.


----------



## Gal4Dior

TC1 said:


> Meghan's bff Jessica Mulroney (her twin son's were in the wedding party) just had to chime in on her IG about the private jet scandal, her post includes "shame on you, you racist bullies"
> Hmmm, wow Jess. That's a reach
> Of course Enews picked that story up right away.



Really? Hmm. So all those news articles about Harry using that private plane also constitutes bullying....for gingers? Lol! Jessica Mulroney is another nobody that became a somebody thanks to Megs. Now people will accuse me of being racist against Canadians.


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> Meghan's bff Jessica Mulroney (her twin son's were in the wedding party) just had to chime in on her IG about the private jet scandal, her post includes "shame on you, you racist bullies"
> Hmmm, wow Jess. That's a reach
> Of course Enews picked that story up right away.


Way to change the subject, Jessica  Brownstein. (I remember her when she was normal.) Her comment makes no sense.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> William and Harry have a stipend from Charles. There is some rumor that Harry may be cut off from that as his name has been dropped from a list.   I suspect that Harry’s money is pretty well tied up so he may be getting investment income from it but it isn’t  enough to fund the lifestyle.   He may actually have to find something resembling a j





gracekelly said:


> William and Harry have a stipend from Charles. There is some rumor that Harry may be cut off from that as his name has been dropped from a list.   I suspect that Harry’s money is pretty well tied up so he may be getting investment income from it but it isn’t  enough to fund the lifestyle.   He may actually have to find something resembling a job.


So he'll never need to spend his own money?

The thing is, they can live off the generosity of famous friends who like the connection to a charismatic royal couple. Like Elton handing over his private plane and home in France. There will always be someone who wants to supply them with whatever they need.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Funny, as I have said previously, I am not a big fan but, really have nothing against the couple. I read about them and it is interesting. Now, reading about their hypocrisy and their "friends" having to defend them, it is just odd. These are not 2 toddlers that need their mom or dad or sibling sticking up for them. They can own their own actions. smh Calling out the words bully and racist does nothing for their cause. jmho


----------



## PatsyCline

bag-mania said:


> I can’t find anything online to indicate he was ever sick. If you can, please post it here. I found several instances where it claimed that Bogart was “too old” or that it was risky to take him abroad, despite the fact that he was only 6. Her other dog Guy presumably had to go through the same risks to travel.


I seem to recall there was a children's book about one of Meghan's dogs. Riding with the Queen to the wedding, I believe.

Here it is...
https://www.amazon.com/His-Royal-Dogness-Guy-Beagle/dp/1982114622


----------



## mdcx

What the heck? Why on earth do some people attribute ALL criticism of Meghan to racism? To be frank, many people couldn't give a fig what race she is, it's her gauche behaviour that bothers them:


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> So he'll never need to spend his own money?
> 
> The thing is, they can live off the generosity of famous friends who like the connection to a charismatic royal couple. Like Elton handing over his private plane and home in France. There will always be someone who wants to supply them with whatever they need.



Where I come from that is called being a sponger a taker and a mooch.  That will dry up eventually as the ”friends” will disappear.   

He will have to spend some of his own money if there is no source of other income. 



mdcx said:


> What the heck? Why on earth do some people attribute ALL criticism of Meghan to racism? To be frank, many people couldn't give a fig what race she is, it's her gauche behaviour that bothers them:
> 
> View attachment 4521002



Why?  Because it is an easy catch all excuse.   It’s pretty lame and as you say it is the behavior and actions that people are objecting to.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> William and Harry have a stipend from Charles. There is some rumor that Harry may be cut off from that as his name has been dropped from a list.   I suspect that Harry’s money is pretty well tied up so he may be getting investment income from it but it isn’t  enough to fund the lifestyle.   He may actually have to find something resembling a job.
> 
> Edit:  The Duke and Duchess of Sussex  are no longer listed on the Clarence House website and that is why it is thought that they will no longer receive funds from Prince Charles.



I believe The Queen Mother left William and Harry £14m to share in her will in 2002, the bulk of which went  into a trust fund for Harry. He got the most as she knew William will eventually inherit the Duchy of Cornwall.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> William and Harry have a stipend from Charles. There is some rumor that Harry may be cut off from that as his name has been dropped from a list.   I suspect that Harry’s money is pretty well tied up so he may be getting investment income from it but it isn’t  enough to fund the lifestyle.   He may actually have to find something resembling a job.
> 
> Edit:  The Duke and Duchess of Sussex  are no longer listed on the Clarence House website and that is why it is thought that they will no longer receive funds from Prince Charles.


I think that’s just a recruitment website.


Sharont2305 said:


> I believe The Queen Mother left William and Harry £14m to share in her will in 2002, the bulk of which went  into a trust fund for Harry. He got the most as she knew William will eventually inherit the Duchy of Cornwall.


Harry inherited most of Diana’s money(for the reasons you gave).  He’s independently wealthy as I understand it.


----------



## doni

I find it very interesting, how the couple is falling into this celebrity  coping mechanism...

For royals, dismissal of criticism often comes from a place of entitlement (as in Harry dressing as a nazi). Not surprising because, well, royalty is all about entitlement. Otherwise, they are encouraged to take people’s criticism into account (as in Harry apologizing for dressing as a nazi), legitimacy deriving partly on popularity.

But here is the classic victimism: I am bullied because I am successful, pretty, rich... or even better, black, gay, different... that celebrities use to keep their self esteem up, which is understandable in the face of vicious media and internet behavior.

They thing is, even if that were true (and in some cases it would be), that does not settle the issue of whether the criticism is granted.

In a way it is a confortable way out for Harry (who cannot be whiter or more privileged male Caucasian). He doesn’t have to consider whether there is anything inherently wrong with signifying yourself as an eco warrior and environmental speaker, call out carbon emissions and ask normal people not to visit touristic destinations, and then, hardly days later, use two private jets in a week to go to Ibiza and Nice of all places...

Because it is all about his wife being black.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> What the heck? Why on earth do some people attribute ALL criticism of Meghan to racism? To be frank, many people couldn't give a fig what race she is, it's her gauche behaviour that bothers them:
> 
> View attachment 4521002



It's ridiculous isn't it?
If someone commented on something Meghan or Catherine was wearing "oh I dont think that colour suits her skin tone" other people would either agree or disagree if it was Catherine but if it was about Meghan the emphasise would be on the skin tone comment and that the commentator is deemed to be racist!
If it was said about a redhead, is that gingerist?
Like I said, it's getting ridiculous.


----------



## Welltraveled!

mdcx said:


> What the heck? Why on earth do some people attribute ALL criticism of Meghan to racism? To be frank, many people couldn't give a fig what race she is, it's her gauche behaviour that bothers them:
> 
> View attachment 4521002




I believe she’s literally only referring to the racists or individuals with racist/stereotypical like tendencies.  

However, there are individuals that purposely attack her due to her race.  If you or anyone else just genuinely dislike her because of her behavior.  The comment doesn’t apply to you.  

I do agree most people are bullying Meghan, which is a different subject matter all together.


----------



## mrsinsyder

For Meghan, of all people, to use the race card, is absurd to me. 

That is all.


----------



## Flatsy

I find the acute celebrity response to the private jet issue interesting.   I think it has a lot to do with the celebrities themselves not wanting their use of private jets questioned either, so better shut that private jet criticism down ASAP.  They've got weapons they can use to defend Meghan (bullying and racism) that most of them wouldn't be able to use on their own behalves, so they are going for it.


Welltraveled! said:


> If you or anyone else just genuinely dislike her because of her behavior. The comment doesn’t apply to you.


Not really, because the issue at hand is the Sussex's excessive and hypocritical use of private jets.  If the media are racist bullies for calling them out on that issue, then anyone who agrees with the media is also sharing in the "racist bully" accusation.


----------



## rose60610

mdcx said:


> What the heck? Why on earth do some people attribute ALL criticism of Meghan to racism?



There are plenty of people (and especially the Media) who whip out the ol' race card whenever ANY minority or partial minority faces criticism regardless if it is fully warranted.  It's beyond exhausting and slams the real struggles by real people.  But I think it's used by disingenuous connivers to promote a blanket narrative of perpetual victimhood for reasons beyond the scope of what's permissible for discussion in this forum.  

Which brings me to compare the criticism of Meghan vs the criticism that, say, the Kardashian's get. Anyone been on THAT thread? Talk about criticism and being drawn and quartered! How come the race card isn't whipped out a million times a day on THAT thread? The K sisters are women of color, aren't they? So why are their critics applauded and escape excoriation by race baiters?


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> The K sisters are women of color, aren't they? So why are their critics applauded and escape excoriation by race baiters?


The K sisters only _want_ to be women of colour.


----------



## caramelize126

Jayne1 said:


> The K sisters only _want_ to be women of colour.



To be fair, the K sisters are half- Armenian.  Is that not considered "of color"?  ( Not being snarky, genuinely asking what folks think! )


----------



## Jayne1

caramelize126 said:


> To be fair, the K sisters are half- Armenian.  Is that not considered "of color"?  ( Not being snarky, genuinely asking what folks think! )


I think Armenians are considered mostly Caucasian, but keep in mind that only 2 K sisters have an Armenian father. Then of course, the Jenners have Cait and Khloe has the hairdresser.

What's Meg up to today, I wonder. Still on that necessary luxury vacation so needed due to their stressful year of charity work?  Only saying that because that's what Elton John said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

caramelize126 said:


> To be fair, the K sisters are half- Armenian.  Is that not considered "of color"?  ( Not being snarky, genuinely asking what folks think! )



If Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can call herself a woman of color, and she does, and claims her criticism is caused by racism, and she does, then the K sisters are definitely "women of color".  

So why is it racist by some to criticize Markle but not the Kardashian's?


----------



## Welltraveled!

Flatsy said:


> Not really, because the issue at hand is the Sussex's excessive and hypocritical use of private jets.  If the media are racist bullies for calling them out on that issue, then anyone who agrees with the media is also sharing in the "racist bully" accusation.



Its about the person’s intent with the criticism.  If you are intentionally criticizing someone primarily  because of their race, sex, etc.  then you maybe considered racist or someone with a negative stereotypical thought process of that persons race, sex etc.

As for the news media, yes you may agree with their statement.  But you’re not agreeing from a position of Meghan’s race.  You’re agreeing because the STORY made a few good points.

However the reporters initial intent maybe discriminatory in nature and there’s the difference.


----------



## bag-mania

I'd like to take a moment to thank Harry and Meghan as well as all of our currently popular forum celebrities. Thanks to them, we have gone an entire month without a Kardashian or Jenner thread being commented on in Celebrity News and Gossip. Here's hoping it continues for another month and beyond.


----------



## Welltraveled!

rose60610 said:


> If Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can call herself a woman of color, and she does, and claims her criticism is caused by racism, and she does, then the K sisters are definitely "women of color".
> 
> So why is it racist by some to criticize Markle but not the Kardashian's?




AOC is Puerto Rican so in America will be apart of the Hispanic culture and deemed a WOC.

The K sisters are not WOC. They want to included in the WOC circle.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Wonder what Buckingham Palace thinks of this “Celebs to the Rescue” campaign on H&Ms behalf? Curious to see if celebutantes have ever flocked to defend anyone in the BRF before?


----------



## Welltraveled!

bag-mania said:


> I'd like to take a moment to thank Harry and Meghan as well as all of our currently popular forum celebrities. Thanks to them, we have gone an entire month without a Kardashian or Jenner thread being commented on in Celebrity News and Gossip. Here's hoping it continues for another month and beyond.



I doubt it will last that long.  Lol!


----------



## Welltraveled!

LVSistinaMM said:


> Wonder what Buckingham Palace thinks of this “Celebs to the Rescue” campaign on H&Ms behalf? Curious to see if celebutantes have ever flocked to defend anyone in the BRF before?




I have a vague memory that Princess Diana was defended.  But the internet wasn’t as prevalent then as it is now.


----------



## bag-mania

Welltraveled! said:


> I have a vague memory that Princess Diana was defended.  But the internet wasn’t as prevalent then as it is now.



Diana died before the internet really got going, at least in the way we think of it now. Back then it wasn't a thing for celebrities (and non-celebrities) to presume their opinion was so important that it must be announced to the world. I am sorry that has changed.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Does anyone feel the need to bump the K thread for farts and giggles?  Lol!

No....just me.....ok carry-on.


----------



## bag-mania

Welltraveled! said:


> Does anyone feel the need to bump the K thread for farts and giggles?  Lol!
> 
> No....just me.....ok carry-on.



Ha! It's like summoning a demon. Do it at your own risk.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> If Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez can call herself a woman of color, and she does, and claims her criticism is caused by racism, and she does, then the K sisters are definitely "women of color".
> 
> So why is it racist by some to criticize Markle but not the Kardashian's?


I don't think the Kardashians are WOC.  Their kids (except of Courtney's) are people of color (which I assume makes them very happy since they all go so far out of their way to only be with black men)


----------



## LittleStar88

Welltraveled! said:


> The K sisters are not WOC. They want to included in the WOC circle.



But they are half Armenian, which is not necessarily eurpoean white.....


----------



## Welltraveled!

LittleStar88 said:


> But they are half Armenian, which is not necessarily eurpoean white.....



Nor are they WOC.  They would be considered white.


----------



## LittleStar88

Welltraveled! said:


> Nor are they WOC.  They would be considered white.



So Armenians being part Turkish or Asianic doesn't count? 

Interesting article on this topic: https://ajammc.com/2017/08/29/armenian-whiteness-america/


----------



## Swanky

Hi, I'm back lol
Let's stick to discussing Harry and Meghan; not Epstein, Andrews, Kardashian's etc. . . 
Friendly reminder also to discuss the celebs/royals, not members, and to use the handy Ignore User tool!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## stanfordmom

To be fair, Jessica Mulroney was reposting and responding to a tweet specifically about racism.

I am sure there are many, many people (probably most on this thread) whose dislike of Meghan Markle has nothing to do with her race. But there is no doubt some of the negative reaction has been, and sadly will continue to be, based on racism.

I remember when a former USA FLOTUS wore a sleeveless dress and she was attacked for being inappropriate and disrespectful. The current FLOTUS wears similar dresses and these same critics are silent or actually praise her style. Is that racism? Or simply political hypocrisy? We don't know but I believe not to at least ask the question is dangerous.

I am Jewish. When I have an issue with someone I never assume they are anti semitic. But there are times when people have done or said things that make it clear they consider me "other" and that it makes a difference to them. I think history has proven it is a mistake to deny that truth.

It seems posters on this thread believe they are being accused so they get defensive but I think that automatic reaction misses the point and minimizes the issue. 

We won't know how much of a part it is playing in any particular situation or incident but I would hope we can all at least acknowledge that racism is real and should not be ignored.


----------



## stanfordmom

Sorry if I was off topic, I was typing so didn't see the moderator post until I had posted my comment.


----------



## Welltraveled!

stanfordmom said:


> Sorry if I was off topic, I was typing so didn't see the moderator post until I had posted my comment.



I saw your comment and Thank you for posting your thoughts.


----------



## Jayne1

I think we can talk about Randy Andy (his old nickname) because it's relevant to H and M.

The pro royalists (can I call them that?) in the UK are purposely calling attention to H and M in order to divert our attention from Andrew. So it's important to recognize that when Harry or Meg are overly criticized in the papers, there might be an ulterior motive. 

In this case, I do think they should understand their hypocrisy. I wonder if they're so far removed from the real world that it will fly over their heads.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> I'd like to take a moment to thank Harry and Meghan as well as all of our currently popular forum celebrities. Thanks to them, we have gone an entire month without a Kardashian or Jenner thread being commented on in Celebrity News and Gossip. Here's hoping it continues for another month and beyond.


Good times...


----------



## Flatsy

stanfordmom said:


> We won't know how much of a part it is playing in any particular situation or incident but I would hope we can all at least acknowledge that racism is real and should not be ignored.


The problem is, from Day 1 with Meghan, any non-worshipful opinion of her, no matter how trivial or unimportant, has been attacked by her ardent fans as racially motivated.  The refrain of "racist" has been repeated ad nauseum and I think has wiped out any possibility of a real discussion about the matter.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> The problem is, from Day 1 with Meghan, any non-worshipful opinion of her, no matter how trivial or unimportant, has been attacked by her ardent fans as racially motivated.  The refrain of "racist" has been repeated ad nauseum and I think has wiped out any possibility of a real discussion about the matter.


Exactly, there's a lot I haven't posted which have been my opinion of something she's done or worn that I didn't like/care for but the fear of my comment being picked up as being racist has made me not post it.
For the record, I do like her, at the beginning I thought she'd be good for Harry and the Royal Family. I kinda felt sorry for her as she really did not know what she was getting into, being a foreigner and not used to knowing how the RF work and its traditions etc. She's made a few mistakes, as expected, but despite all this business that's going on at the moment, I think she will be fine as long as she looks at others for guidance, someone like Sophie maybe, and that she listens.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> I think that’s just a recruitment website.
> 
> Harry inherited most of Diana’s money(for the reasons you gave).  He’s independently wealthy as I understand it.


William and Harry split the 40mil£ inheritance from Diana. That was her divorce settlement. 

Clarence House is a recruitment website. Some Royal watchers  think that the deletion of the Sussex name indicates a separation from Prince Charles and that includes the stipend. I don’t think anyone really knows at this point if that is true. It’s just a theory.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, there's a lot I haven't posted which have been my opinion of something she's done or worn that I didn't like/care for but the fear of my comment being picked up as being racist has made me not post it.
> For the record, I do like her, at the beginning I thought she'd be good for Harry and the Royal Family. I kinda felt sorry for her as she really did not know what she was getting into, being a foreigner and not used to knowing how the RF work and its traditions etc. She's made a few mistakes, as expected, but despite all this business that's going on at the moment, I think she will be fine as long as she looks at others for guidance, someone like Sophie maybe, and that she listens.


It’s Harry needs to listen and show less arrogance IMO   I don’t think his attitude is helping Meghan one bit.

Actually Andrew is an object lesson for Harry.  He was very much the uber glamorous, super popular second son, worlds most eligible etc etc in his day.  In civvy street he never really nailed a lasting role of substance for himself, and has failed to come to terms with becoming less important as the next generation took over. He has a reputation for being the most arrogant and pompous of the Queens children.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> William and Harry split the 40mil£ inheritance from Diana. That was her divorce settlement.
> 
> Clarence House is a recruitment website. Some Royal watchers  think that the deletion of the Sussex name indicates a separation from Prince Charles and that includes the stipend. I don’t think anyone really knows at this point if that is true. It’s just a theory.


No Harry received the bulk of Dianas estate, because she knew he wouldn’t have access to the resources that would come to William when he becomes Prince of Wales.
It’s a sign that Harry and Meghan intend to do their own recruitment, rather than using the palace processes.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s Harry needs to listen and show less arrogance IMO   I don’t think his attitude is helping Meghan one bit.
> 
> Actually Andrew is an object lesson for Harry.  He was very much the uber glamorous, super popular second son, worlds most eligible etc etc in his day.  In civvy street he never really nailed a lasting role of substance for himself, and has failed to come to terms with becoming less important as the next generation took over. He has a reputation for being the most arrogant and pompous of the Queens children.



Many consider Harry to be the REAL problem especially with the privacy issue. He found a willing accomplice in his wife.


----------



## Tamrin

mrsinsyder said:


> For Meghan, of all people, to use the race card, is absurd to me.
> 
> That is all.


How is "SHE" using the race card when she has not spoken? Everyone else is doing the talking her lovers and haters. The woman has not personally said a word.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Tamrin said:


> How is "SHE" using the race card when she has not spoken? Everyone else is doing the talking her lovers and haters. The woman has not personally said a word.


She does it through “friends” haven’t you heard?!


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s Harry needs to listen and show less arrogance IMO   I don’t think his attitude is helping Meghan one bit.
> 
> Actually Andrew is an object lesson for Harry.  He was very much the uber glamorous, super popular second son, worlds most eligible etc etc in his day.  In civvy street he never really nailed a lasting role of substance for himself, and has failed to come to terms with becoming less important as the next generation took over. He has a reputation for being the most arrogant and pompous of the Queens children.


Oh, I know all about Andrew, I'm British and of an age to remember his Randy Andy days. 
And yes, I agree with what you say about Harry, my point was about the perceived racist comments about Meghan by people innocently saying anything negative


----------



## Tamrin

gracekelly said:


> Many consider Harry to be the REAL problem especially with the privacy issue. He found a willing accomplice in his wife.


Accomplice in what? What crime are they committing? A friend lending a private plane? Taking commercial flights? Breathing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> No Harry received the bulk of Dianas estate, because she knew he wouldn’t have access to the resources that would come to William when he becomes Prince of Wales.
> It’s a sign that Harry and Meghan intend to do their own recruitment, rather than using the palace processes.


May I ask where you read this about the estate split?  I have never seen that written though it certainly is logical. 
As I indicated, it is merely a theory about about the stipend cut off.  I don’t think that Charles would do that as it dos seem pretty cruel to do without warning.


----------



## gracekelly

Tamrin said:


> Accomplice in what? What crime are they committing? A friend lending a private plane? Taking commercial flights? Breathing?


I was referring to the privacy issue. I didn’t mention the  private plans, but I doubt that she would object.  Did I mention the word crime?  I didn’t even call them hypocrites. 

XX


----------



## Tamrin

Clearblueskies said:


> She does it through “friends” haven’t you heard?!


Wow.. I guess.  Dayum. My friend gifted me some airpods yesterday. Dayum I am such an opportunist.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> No Harry received the bulk of Dianas estate, because she knew he wouldn’t have access to the resources that would come to William when he becomes Prince of Wales.
> It’s a sign that Harry and Meghan intend to do their own recruitment, rather than using the palace processes.


@gracekelly is correct, it was split equally for when they reached 25yo.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, I know all about Andrew, I'm British and of an age to remember his Randy Andy days.
> And yes, I agree with what you say about Harry, my point was about the perceived racist comments about Meghan by people innocently saying anything negative


Yes I know, I was reflecting on previous posts as well as yours 



gracekelly said:


> May I ask where you read this about the estate split?  I have never seen that written though it certainly is logical.
> As I indicated, it is merely a theory about about the stipend cut off.  I don’t think that Charles would do that as it dos seem pretty cruel to do without warning.


I remember this from a long time ago, after Diana’s death and when the boys were much younger.
As for the stipend, I have no idea for certain, but I think people are reading too much into an administrative decision around recruitment of staff to the Sussex household.  I agree with you, I can’t imagine Charles would suddenly make such a change, or why he would at this point.  Sounds like drama to me.


----------



## Tamrin

Clearblueskies said:


> Are you new here?


Does it matter? I am here. My opinions have no bearing on whether I am new or an old poster.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

The celebrities coming to the defense of Harry and Megan over the use of private aircraft are, in my opinion, mostly just covering their own a**s because they do it, as well.  What makes it so egregious for me isn't that anyone is flying private or taking vacations on mega yachts, it's that they vociferously advocate against the worlds carbon footprint.  Anyway you look at it, it hypocritical.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, there's a lot I haven't posted which have been my opinion of something she's done or worn that I didn't like/care for but the fear of my comment being picked up as being racist has made me not post it.
> For the record, I do like her, at the beginning I thought she'd be good for Harry and the Royal Family. I kinda felt sorry for her as she really did not know what she was getting into, being a foreigner and not used to knowing how the RF work and its traditions etc. She's made a few mistakes, as expected, but despite all this business that's going on at the moment, I think she will be fine as long as she looks at others for guidance, someone like Sophie maybe, and that she listens.


I started out liking her a lot and being very excited about Meghan and Harry too.  And I still have positive feelings for both of them, even though sometimes it's extremely difficult with her fans being so unpleasant and militant about demanding that she be worshiped.  

But Harry, in particular, I think needs an attitude adjustment right now.  He's been using charm to get away with a lot of stuff for a lot of years.  Meghan I think is in need of better guidance about both the nature of her job and about public relations - which Harry may very well be preventing her from getting because he's so overly sensitive and defensive about her ("what Meghan wants, Meghan gets").


----------



## chicaloca

I so so glad prominent people are speaking up and can see the underlying reason for the nearly 3 years long campaign of over-the-top criticism over nail polish, writing on bananas, closing a car door, editing a magazine ...etc.  The harassment didn’t even cease during her pregnancy which is  unprecedented. All the while they’ve been shielding their White male pedophile. The British press overplayed their hand and the whole world is watching.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Cavalier Girl said:


> The celebrities coming to the defense of Harry and Megan over the use of private aircraft are, in my opinion, mostly just covering their own a**s because they do it, as well.  What makes it so egregious for me isn't that anyone is flying private or taking vacations on mega yachts, it's that they vociferously advocate against the worlds carbon footprint.  Anyway you look at it, it hypocritical.


I think everyone here and elsewhere are right about this. But there's also another aspect, they are virtue signalling. "Look at us! Look _at us_ as we're defending the only not wholly white girl among us! Aren't we just so righteous and non-racist! Give us awards at our next society for mutual admiration virtue signaling camp! Let's jet there now!". 

I just find it funny in this context how quite a few black people don't like Meghan and make it very clear why, on public internet forums. But none of her elite and valiant defenders seem to pick up on that for some strange reason. Reality doesn't go well with virtue signalling.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I so so glad prominent people are speaking up and can see the underlying reason for the nearly 3 years long campaign of over-the-top criticism over nail polish, writing on bananas, closing a car door, editing a magazine ...etc.


"Three years" is the part that invalidates this claim to me.

The press coverage of Meghan took a very clear turn in November of 2018 and I agree there has been a pattern of negative press since then.  Three years?  No way.  One "Straight Out of Compton" headline does not mean the press has been against her from the beginning.  In fact, the press built her up to such great heights for so long that the hyperbole did her a disservice.  

Example: this "closing the car door" that is constantly being held up as an example of criticism.  It's a myth.  The press *loved *it when Meghan did that.  Here's the article from The Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-6209467/Meghan-closes-car-door-sends-Twitter-frenzy.html

Some adjectives from the article: "low-key" "humble" "down to earth".  "The simple gesture impressed royal commentators, with one noting it was a rarity to see a royal on duty closing their own car door."  "The Duchess of Sussex closing her own car door is yet another silent signal that she is going to be doing things her own way and helping adapt and progress the British monarchy,' he said."  Followed by dozens and dozens of tweets about how wonderful Meghan was for closing the door.  I don't think I've ever seen an article as gushy and snark-free in The Daily Mail in my entire life.

People who want to believe that Meghan has been persecuted from the beginning are going to remember events to suit that narrative.


----------



## stanfordmom

My daughter is vegan and always brings a reusable cup and straw to Starbucks. But she also wears leather shoes and to her father's endless frustration will forget to turn off the lights when she leaves a room. Is she a hypocrite? According to this thread I guess maybe she is. But I am glad she is doing what she can.

I guess I just don't understand the venom? People seem more upset about the possible overuse of the word "racism" than actual racism itself and more angry at celebrities (quell horreur!) talking about climate change than the condition of our planet. 

Someone posted earlier that this thread is like a Rorschach test...I wonder what it is about certain personalities that elicit such strong responses (both positive and negative)?


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> I so so glad prominent people are speaking up and can see the underlying reason for the nearly 3 years long campaign of over-the-top criticism over nail polish, writing on bananas, closing a car door, editing a magazine ...etc.  The harassment didn’t even cease during her pregnancy which is  unprecedented. All the while they’ve been shielding their White male pedophile. The British press overplayed their hand and the whole world is watching.


Nail polish, car door, banana messaging, fashion mag.  Yeah seismic issues.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> Nail polish, car door, banana messaging, fashion mag.  Yeah seismic issues.



Don’t forget she also caused famine and drought when she ate avocado toast, cradled her baby bump, wore a one-shoulder dress..etc.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Don’t forget she also caused famine and drought when she ate avocado toast, cradled her baby bump, wore a one-shoulder dress..etc.


The exaggeration doesn’t help Meghan.  I’m sure you genuinely want to support her, but it has the opposite effect.  It’s like the fairytale about the child crying wolf


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

chicaloca said:


> I so so glad prominent people are speaking up and can see the underlying reason for the nearly 3 years long campaign of over-the-top criticism over nail polish, writing on bananas, closing a car door, editing a magazine ...etc.  The harassment didn’t even cease during her pregnancy which is  unprecedented. All the while they’ve been shielding their White male pedophile. The British press overplayed their hand and the whole world is watching.



Prominent people?  That’s actually funny. Prominent is not the same as famous and semi-famous, which would be a more apt description of  some of her defenders.  Most of them are waiting for their payback and some are hoping to rub shoulders so they can stretch their 15 min of fame to 16 min. Not to mention her friends who want to expand their businesses by association. 


Omid Scobie is a toady. Paid to write only glowing and defensive things and it is hard to believe people like this about anything. He obviously doesn’t know how to count either as pointed out by @Flatsy 

Just scream racist when nothing else comes to mind. How original.


----------



## Tamrin

chicaloca said:


> I so so glad prominent people are speaking up and can see the underlying reason for the nearly 3 years long campaign of over-the-top criticism over nail polish, writing on bananas, closing a car door, editing a magazine ...etc.  The harassment didn’t even cease during her pregnancy which is  unprecedented. All the while they’ve been shielding their White male pedophile. The British press overplayed their hand and the whole world is watching.



The thing is to many Saying the N word or vocally saying you do not like a person of color because if their race is what qualifies as racism. What they refuse to acknowledge is the covert racism. I watched a documentary about racism in the UK and to the White Euros it did not exist when they would use words that were obviously racist and indicative  they harbor racists tendencies. I have seen it applied to MM.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> The exaggeration doesn’t help Meghan.  I’m sure you genuinely want to support her, but it has the opposite effect.  It’s like the fairytale about the child crying wolf



These were actual stories reported in media.  I’m glad you are acknowledging how ridiculous they are.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> Prominent people?  That’s actually funny. Prominent is not the same as famous and semi-famous, which would be a more apt description of  some of her defenders.  Most of them are waiting for their payback and some are hoping to rub shoulders so they can stretch their 15 min of fame to 16 min. Not to mention her friends who want to expand their businesses by association.
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie is a toady. Paid to write only glowing and defensive things and it is hard to believe people like this about anything. He obviously doesn’t know how to count either as pointed out by @Flatsy
> 
> Just scream racist when nothing else comes to mind. How original.


I had to google him


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> These were actual stories reported in media.  I’m glad you are acknowledging how ridiculous they are.


Oh please, I am of course referring to your exaggeration


----------



## chicaloca

Tamrin said:


> The thing is to many Saying the an word or vocally saying you do not like a person of color because if their race is what qualifies as racism. What they refuse to acknowledge is the covert racism. I watcher a documentary about racism in the UK and to the White Euros it did not exist when they would use words that were obviously racist and indicative  they harbor racists tendencies. I have seen it applied to MM.



Harry’s explanation of unconscious bias went over a lot of people’s heads.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh please, I am of course referring to your exaggeration



Every single thing I listed had a headline article criticizing Meghan including the avocado toast.


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


>



Hopefully it will be better than the collection she “designed” for Reitmans Dept store. That was a turkey.


----------



## gracekelly

chicaloca said:


> Harry’s explanation of unconscious bias went over a lot of people’s heads.



People aren’t as obtuse as you may think. Reading the posts here proves it.


----------



## chicaloca

Morgan R said:


>





Typical Meghan smiling, hard at work helping others all while people do nothing but criticize her every waking move.  She’s technically still on maternity leave. I hope her collection does well so Smartworks reaps the benefits.


----------



## gracekelly

To change the subject I would like a vote as to whether tPFers think that Master Archie will be a ginger .  Reminder we only have hearsay regarding this and no photographic proof.

I vote yes he will!


----------



## chicaloca

gracekelly said:


> Hopefully it will be better than the collection she “designed” for Reitmans Dept store. That was a turkey.



It’s a charity line so my only hope as a person with compassion and empathy is that the collection does well so as many women as possible benefit.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Every single thing I listed had a headline article criticizing Meghan including the avocado toast.


They’re just using her name to highlight a problem with a popular crop, I don’t understand why you’re being so literal about it and looking to be offended all the time.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> They’re just using her name to highlight a problem with a popular crop, I don’t understand why you’re being so literal about it and looking to be offended all the time.



Riiiiight. Unconscious bias indeed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Riiiiight. Unconscious bias indeed.


Nice.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> To change the subject I would like a vote as to whether tPFers think that Master Archie will be a ginger .  Reminder we only have hearsay regarding this and no photographic proof.
> 
> I vote yes he will!


I say yes too


----------



## bag-mania

chicaloca said:


> Every single thing I listed had a headline article criticizing Meghan including the avocado toast.



The Daily Mail is a tabloid-style publication that thrives due to its sensationalist style of writing. When you see one of their provoking headlines and you click to open the article, you are helping DM get paid. Literally every hit they get means more $$$$$ from their advertisers. You can't treat a tabloid as if it were a reliable news source.

I thought everyone understood this. They are equal opportunity bashers. Anyone famous is likely to get the exaggerated sensational headline. The Sun, National Enquirer, and TMZ also follow this business model.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> The Daily Mail is a tabloid-style publication that thrives due to its sensationalist style of writing. When you see one of their provoking headlines and you click to open the article, you are helping DM get paid. Literally every hit they get means more $$$$$ from their advertisers. You can't treat a tabloid as if it were a reliable news source.
> 
> I thought everyone understood this. They are equal opportunity bashers. Anyone famous is likely to get the exaggerated sensational headline. The Sun, National Enquirer, and TMZ also follow this business model.


You made this point much better than I


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> It’s a charity line so my only hope as a person with compassion and empathy is that the collection does well so as many women as possible benefit.


So the people here are unconsciously biased (aka racist), too dim to understand things Harry says, and we lack compassion and empathy.  Why are you even lowering yourself to speak to us?  It seems like our opinions shouldn't matter to you.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> So the people here are unconsciously biased (aka racist), too dim to understand things Harry says, and we lack compassion and empathy.  Why are you even lowering yourself to speak to us?  It seems like our opinions shouldn't matter to you.



I haven’t said anything like that specifically about people here???


----------



## Flatsy

Non-specifically, it certainly sounded like the insults you have thrown out in your last 4-5 posts were directed to the people in this thread.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> I haven’t said anything like that specifically about people here???


You specifically accused me.


----------



## JetSetGo!

Back to topic please. 

You don't like what someone has to say, put them on ignore. 

Even trolls need fed to live.


----------



## Jayne1

Morgan R said:


>



Was this filmed before or after giving birth. It's not like her to wear oversized boyfriend shirts like that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Was this filmed before or after giving birth. It's not like her to wear oversized boyfriend shirts like that.


Of course MM is the focus of the whole thing. They don’t even say who those other people are or what’s going on in that video.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Of course MM is the focus of the whole thing. They don’t even say who those other people are or what’s going on in that video.


It's definitely not a sneak peek of the collection because I couldn't see any of the clothes.   It's a sneak peak of Meghan being kind, warm, good natured and gracious towards unimportant nobodies.  (I'm assuming they are unimportant nobodies since they weren't worth identifying in any way.)  Seriously, three shots in a row of her hugging people?

It's a good project.  Her transparent PR tactics, as usual, are not.


----------



## Jayne1

She certainly knows how to do charming. We've seen those hand to face, huge smile kind of mannerisms before but she's so good!


----------



## chowlover2

Jayne1 said:


> She certainly knows how to do charming. We've seen those hand to face, huge smile kind of mannerisms before but she's so good!


She is an actress!


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> It's definitely not a sneak peek of the collection because I couldn't see any of the clothes.   It's a sneak peak of Meghan being kind, warm, good natured and gracious towards unimportant nobodies.  (I'm assuming they are unimportant nobodies since they weren't worth identifying in any way.)  Seriously, three shots in a row of her hugging people?
> 
> It's a good project.  Her transparent PR tactics, as usual, are not.


It was completely about nothing.

@Jayne1. I’m with ya on the hand to face and hair thing. She has a set of mannerisms that are as annoying  as the belly cradling was   She needs to take some acting lessons to expand the repertoire


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> She needs to take some acting lessons to expand the repertoire


Better if she just stops trying so hard to convince everybody of how wonderful she is.


----------



## gracekelly

Well this explains a few things to me. Turns out there is this 300 year old rule dating back to King George I 
called Sovereign Custody. Apparently the sovereign has total custody and control over the minor grandchildren and may control everything affecting their lives.  Wowza to that!  So if  the Queen wants Archie to eat meat or learn to hunt she could force the issue. Who knew?


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> Well this explains a few things to me. Turns out there is this 300 year old rule dating back to King George I
> called Sovereign Custody. Apparently the sovereign has total custody and control over the minor grandchildren and may control everything affecting their lives.  Wowza to that!  So if  the Queen wants Archie to eat meat or learn to hunt she could force the issue. Who knew?


WOW!


----------



## Hobbsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> This story needs to be front and centre, regardless of how many private planes Harry and Meghan took.
> 
> Whether Andrew's activities are past or present, if true he needs to brought to justice.
> 
> If true, he's far more than a "perv" - he's an abuser of young girls and part of a network of elite criminals.


Amen!! 30 years or 30 days ago, what difference? He needs to be brought to justice, not just swept under the rug. Hard to give a rat's back end how Megan holds her kid when Prince Andrew is a pedophile.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Hobbsy said:


> Amen!! 30 years or 30 days ago, what difference? He needs to be brought to justice, not just swept under the rug. Hard to give a rat's back end how Megan holds her kid when Prince Andrew is a pedophile.


People can care about multiple issues at once.


----------



## Hobbsy

mrsinsyder said:


> People can care about multiple issues at once.


One isn't really an issue though, is it?


----------



## mdcx

Meghan giggling like a schoolgirl in that SmartWorks video is so odd. Like, this is the same woman who cleared a section of Wimbledon.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Hobbsy said:


> One isn't really an issue though, is it?


You’re in a gossip thread on a purse forum, let’s not act like we can only discuss critical world crises here.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Hobbsy said:


> One isn't really an issue though, is it?




Agree.  How Meghan hold her baby isn't a issue.  I've seen people hold their children in one arm face down.  The baby isn't suffering or uncomfortable.


----------



## rose60610

Hobbsy said:


> One isn't really an issue though, is it?



This thread has more issues than Carter's got pills. How's that for an expression yanked out of times of yore? 

Sounds like the "Sovereign Custody" rule already has polo ponies lined up for Archie.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> This thread has more issues than Carter's got pills. How's that for an expression yanked out of times of yore?
> 
> Sounds like the "Sovereign Custody" rule already has polo ponies lined up for Archie.



I don't really think that the Sovereign Custody act will be strictly enforced, but like many grandparents, they might have something to say about where he is allowed to travel or go to school.  Diana was very firm that she wanted her boys to go to the types of schools that were the norm for a certain social status and where lifelong friends are made.  Prince Charles had a horrible experience at Gordonstoun and hated it and made no bones about it, so I think he was in full agreement.  All the old boy networks are made at these schools and the family might insist that Archie be sent to one if he is raised in GB.

Have to call those pills the Little Liver Pills hahahaha!


----------



## gracekelly

Oh my.  Cindy Adams has been around forever.  
https://pagesix.com/2019/08/21/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-may-relocate-to-africa/


----------



## Flatsy

If Meghan and Harry were to divorce, and I don't think it's a far-fetched possibility, I do think the royal family (including Harry) would want Archie and any other children Harry and Meghan have to remain in England and go to the usual upper crust schools.

But I don't know if Meghan would want to do the Diana thing and take up an apartment in one of the palaces.  She didn't make any allies at KP even with Harry by her side.  By herself I would imagine she'd feel quite isolated.  And without her patronages, she'd have to re-fashion a career for herself.  It would only be natural for her to want to go back to her home country and do her own thing.

I wonder if Harry and Meghan discussed this stuff prior to marriage and came to an agreement.  It probably would have been remiss of them not to.


----------



## chowlover2

Hardly a shock at this point.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Oh my.  Cindy Adams has been around forever.
> https://pagesix.com/2019/08/21/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-may-relocate-to-africa/


Thanks for the link! So happy Cindy Adams is still around.

This will be very interesting if it happens, but bad for us because there won't be much gossip.  Oh well, on to the next if it does.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

@Flatsy   I doubt that there is a pre-nup, though with one divorce under the bride's belt, and his wealth, it should have been considered.    Re children, if she wanted to leave the country it could be a problem.  No one wants to separate a mother from her children, but how could she stay? That Sovereign Custody could come into play.   If public opinion was against her because of divorce, I don't think she would be hired for any acting jobs because the producers would assume that no one wants to see her.  I think best case scenario would be the separate lives unless he really wants to remarry.  

@Jayne1   You're welcome!  I was a little surprised that Cindy put herself out there with this column.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> If Meghan and Harry were to divorce, and I don't think it's a far-fetched possibility, I do think the royal family (including Harry) would want Archie and any other children Harry and Meghan have to remain in England and go to the usual upper crust schools.
> 
> But I don't know if Meghan would want to do the Diana thing and take up an apartment in one of the palaces.  She didn't make any allies at KP even with Harry by her side.  By herself I would imagine she'd feel quite isolated.  And without her patronages, she'd have to re-fashion a career for herself.  It would only be natural for her to want to go back to her home country and do her own thing.
> 
> I wonder if Harry and Meghan discussed this stuff prior to marriage and came to an agreement.  It probably would have been remiss of them not to.



I’m quite certain she would stay and capitalize on a being a lifestyle blogger with a following and sponsorships bigger and better than anyone she could have ever imagined pre-Harry.

I think she would gladly accept an apartment provided by the royal family, because she could stay in close enough proximity to royalty that she would remain relevant enough maintain all her new celebrity friends, and she could jet set around with them freely without the restrictions of the BRF. It’s basically having the fame beyond her wildest dreams with the luxe life totally bankrolled.

She would be less of a press target, too, for all those who want to hate her for her taking Harry off the market. Harry would have moved on and so would she. As far as I see it, it’s a win, win for her. I doubt there is no conscious decision she has ever made in her adult life that didn’t have a better outcome than the previous. She’s way too smart to be used and abused by the BRF like Diana. She’s going to take advantage of everything she can.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> If public opinion was against her because of divorce, I don't think she would be hired for any acting jobs because the producers would assume that no one wants to see her.



Au contraire. If Meghan were to divorce, I'd think she'd be a hot item to book for acting gigs. That's how screwed up our country is.  Besides, the pay is good and she wouldn't want to end up like Fergie, taking 18K from an Epstein something character to pay the bills.  Considering the power of the Crown in keeping Andrew out of view to the extent that it has,  dispatching of Meghan would be nothing being that William's family is heir apparent to all. 

Me thinks Meghan is attempting to make one of the world's most prominent families a little more "woke", and is an abysmal failure at it.  Little Miss From Nowhere trying to influence hundreds of years of Royal Tradition? Surely one jests.  In my eyes, Harry is an over-protected naive little baby who fell under the spell of a gorgeous Hollywood trained actress who successfully jockeyed her way into The Royal Family, LOVED the cameras, cranked out Archie ASAP, now demands privacy (wonder why.....) is in over her head, and is probably trying like hell to crank out an Archie sibling.

On one hand, I have to give it her. She leveraged better than a Manhattan hedge fund manager. Dumb she ain't.

On the other, she may become disillusioned at not being idolized by the globe for her "woke" efforts. She'll keep trying, and Harry will be the "'Fredo guy" (google under Cuomo-Fredo).  When she realizes that she can't win, or The Crown dispatches of her, she'll come back to Hollywood if another filthy rich guy doesn't come along first.


----------



## Hobbsy

mrsinsyder said:


> You’re in a gossip thread on a purse forum, let’s not act like we can only discuss critical world crises here.


Never said you couldn't.


----------



## Hobbsy

rose60610 said:


> This thread has more issues than Carter's got pills. How's that for an expression yanked out of times of yore?
> 
> Sounds like the "Sovereign Custody" rule already has polo ponies lined up for Archie.


Lol, you're not kidding!!


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Well this explains a few things to me. Turns out there is this 300 year old rule dating back to King George I
> called Sovereign Custody. Apparently the sovereign has total custody and control over the minor grandchildren and may control everything affecting their lives.  Wowza to that!  So if  the Queen wants Archie to eat meat or learn to hunt she could force the issue. Who knew?


I knew that, this is why the Duchess of York never saw the girls on Christmas Day, only seeing them on TV attending church. I believe more recently she's been staying in a cottage with Andrew on the Sandringham Estate so she does see them now.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> If Meghan and Harry were to divorce, and I don't think it's a far-fetched possibility, I do think the royal family (including Harry) would want Archie and any other children Harry and Meghan have to remain in England and go to the usual upper crust schools.
> 
> But I don't know if Meghan would want to do the Diana thing and take up an apartment in one of the palaces.  She didn't make any allies at KP even with Harry by her side.  By herself I would imagine she'd feel quite isolated.  And without her patronages, she'd have to re-fashion a career for herself.  It would only be natural for her to want to go back to her home country and do her own thing.
> 
> I wonder if Harry and Meghan discussed this stuff prior to marriage and came to an agreement.  It probably would have been remiss of them not to.


I don’t know where Zara or any other of the Queen’s grandchildren went to school.  Archie is a long way from the succession, I don’t think it’ll be any big deal tbh, any more than it was for them.  It would be left for Meghan and Harry to decide between them.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'm ready for Meghan to be off maternity leave and back to making public appearances with Harry so that this thread returns to discussions about her fashion and the events they support instead of battling over hypothetical situations. Come back Meghan!  Come back! We need new pictures to critique!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm ready for Meghan to be off maternity leave and back to making public appearances with Harry so that this thread returns to discussions about her fashion and the events they support instead of battling over hypothetical situations. Come back Meghan!  Come back! We need new pictures to critique!


https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/meghan-markle-style.976069/page-79
You're welcome!


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> .
> 
> @myown  totally understand what you are objecting to with the sling carrier, but at times you are stuck with holding your child and  needing to move in a safe fashion. Re the hat, yes  it is obnoxious when strangers tell you to do something relating to your child. Where I live in S CA the sun has been getting more relentless every year due to climate change and the decrease in the ozone layer. Fair skinned people have a higher incidence of skin cancers and it has been on the rise even in the young, hence my concern. The climate in the south is France is pretty similar and if Archie is a ginger then care needs to be taken for him.


not sure what you mean with sling carrier, I never mentioned them . 
and to the hat: she left the plane and went into a car. they were outside for what? 10 secs? i think they can take the sun for 10 secs!


----------



## myown

djuna1 said:


> *At a Smart Works charity photoshoot on August 21, 2019 in London. *
> 
> Wearing a Frank & Eileen shirt and Stuart Weitzman 'Legend' pumps.
> 
> Tumblr


  I have seen these photos and thought they were old. I was sure on the video you could see a bump


----------



## chicaloca

While the over-the-top criticism of Meghan rages on she continues to have a positive impact.

@sussexroyal spotlighted Luminary Bakery today. Meghan featured them in her Vogue issue. The bakery has since experienced a huge uptick in social media followers and business. As a result they are hiring more staff.

They paid a sweet homage to Meghan with these cupcakes adorned with positive messages . Queue the outrage and pearl-clutching.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> She has a set of mannerisms that are as annoying  as the belly cradling was   She needs to take some acting lessons to expand the repertoire



She acts like a maniac with all the over-exaggerated laughing and tee-heeing. Nothing is that funny that you're spending hours continually doubled over laughing. I guess that's why her acting career never went past the D-list.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> She acts like a maniac with all the over-exaggerated laughing and tee-heeing. Nothing is that funny that you're spending hours continually doubled over laughing. I guess that's why her acting career never went past the D-list.


I think a body language analyst would have a field day with those (don’t smudge my lipstick) carefully choreographed hugs.  So fake.


----------



## LibbyRuth

She's trained to be expressive with her actions as an actress. She's aware that all eyes are on her when she's doing public events. Of course she's going to be expressive - you can't shake that out of a person overnight!  I don't see a lot of difference between her actions and the ways stars greet each other on Graham Norton.  It comes with the territory. Yes, other royals are not so expressive ... because they are not trained as actors.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

myown said:


> I have seen these photos and thought they were old. I was sure on the video you could see a bump


I thought so too, especially when her arm was crossed higher up over where a bump would be. I thought for certain these were old.


----------



## Welltraveled!

myown said:


> I have seen these photos and thought they were old. I was sure on the video you could see a





chicaloca said:


> While the over-the-top criticism of Meghan rages on she continues to have a positive impact.
> 
> @sussexroyal spotlighted Luminary Bakery today. Meghan featured them in her Vogue issue. The bakery has since experienced a huge uptick in social media followers and business. As a result they are hiring more staff.
> 
> They paid a sweet homage to Meghan with these cupcakes adorned with positive messages . Queue the outrage and pearl-clutching.



That was sweet.  Everyone needs encouragement during a tough time in their lives.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LibbyRuth said:


> She's trained to be expressive with her actions as an actress. She's aware that all eyes are on her when she's doing public events. Of course she's going to be expressive - you can't shake that out of a person overnight!  I don't see a lot of difference between her actions and the ways stars greet each other on Graham Norton.  It comes with the territory. Yes, other royals are not so expressive ... because they are not trained as actors.



Think about it other Royals are trained to a degree as actors as well.  They all have the same mannerisms, wave like this, smile like that, sit, stand, etc.  in other words proper protocol and conduct  for their station.  

Meghan to a degree is following suit, but her and Harry are genuine.  Even before Meghan everyone flocked to Harry because he is naturally genuine.

WK are relaxing more and more genuine now.  Kate is better at it than William though.


----------



## mdcx

It seems comments have been disabled on Meg and Harry's latest Insta post about...cupcakes.
This comment on their previous Insta post pretty much sums it up for me:


----------



## gracekelly

Great advice. We’ll see what happens.  Still waiting for a chat with the Queen  at Balmoral.   If they ever get there   A nice long drive up in the Prius  might be a good idea.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> It seems comments have been disabled on Meg and Harry's latest Insta post about...cupcakes.
> This comment on their previous Insta post pretty much sums it up for me:
> 
> View attachment 4522601


I checked out their Insta and boy, the comments were brutal on the second to last post. I wonder if they read most of them.


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> I checked out their Insta and boy, the comments were brutal on the second to last post. I wonder if they read most of them.


Yes they were. I didn't get to see any comments on the cupcake post before comments were turned off, but I imagine they were not pretty either.


----------



## threadbender

I am instagram-ignorant. lol I cannot figure out how to see comments but the one posted here was on point.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mdcx said:


> It seems comments have been disabled on Meg and Harry's latest Insta post about...cupcakes.
> This comment on their previous Insta post pretty much sums it up for me:
> 
> View attachment 4522601


This is eye roll worthy. Truly. They need to take a new direction. They both just sound like they are full of their own virtue...


----------



## mdcx

threadbender said:


> I am instagram-ignorant. lol I cannot figure out how to see comments but the one posted here was on point.


There are no comments on their cupcake post as they switched them off, but for this post -  
- you use the scroll wheel on your mouse to go down the screen of comments, and click on the + sign to open up more comments (on a desktop computer I should add).


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> There are no comments on their cupcake post as they switched them off, but for this post -
> - you use the scroll wheel on your mouse to go down the screen of comments, and click on the + sign to open up more comments (on a desktop computer I should add).



I will try it. I don't have a real mouse.


----------



## mdcx

I imagine Meghan's head is exploding over at Frogmore:


----------



## Morgan R

I don't think any of the royals including Harry and Meghan read the comments on Instagram or forms of social media. I think the people in charge of running their social media saw the comments though. Rather people dislike/like Harry and Meghan I can see why the comments were turned off for that specific post about  Luminary Bakery  but not the other post on Sussex Royal. The Luminary Bakery was created to help vulnerable women while also providing job skills, career support, mentoring, and coaching. People were being rude and trolling not just Harry & Meghan but also the bakery under a post that was meant be a spotlight for the bakery when Luminary Bakery did nothing wrong and so that was being disrespectful to the company.

I know I don't often read the comments under Sussex Royal I didn't often read the comments under posts about Harry and Meghan while they were still under the Kensington Palace Instagram because while there were positive comments there were also some comments that were pretty brutal and over some things that were truly non-issue while there were some comments that were threats, racist, xenophobic, etc. and that was before all the pile on of negative stories that happened after Harry and Meghan's tour last October which just added to there being more negative comments (I think the royal family is aware of the comments I'm referring to as the royal family had released social media community guidelines earlier this year even though they have had social media accounts for years: https://www.royal.uk/social-media-community-guidelines. Actually surprising to me guidelines weren't put in place before this year because the royal family has been known to receive threats and social media just makes it more obvious how many threats the royal family as a whole receive). I thought when the Sussex Royal Instagram opened the comments might be moderated or turned off just based on comments I've seen about Harry and but more so Meghan on the Kensington Palace Instagram and on the other various royal family social accounts but the comments surprisingly haven't been moderated or turned off aside from the Luminary Bakery post.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> It seems comments have been disabled on Meg and Harry's latest Insta post about...cupcakes.
> This comment on their previous Insta post pretty much sums it up for me:
> 
> View attachment 4522601


I thought the timing of that post on their Instagram account was awful coinciding as it did with the private plane trips.  It’s tone deaf. I’m not keen on these kind of inspirational messages at the best of times - they come across as platitudes and patronising.  But when everything H&M put out is so studied you’d think someone would spend some time thinking about it before pressing enter


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chicaloca said:


> While the over-the-top criticism of Meghan rages on she continues to have a positive impact.
> 
> @sussexroyal spotlighted Luminary Bakery today. Meghan featured them in her Vogue issue. The bakery has since experienced a huge uptick in social media followers and business. As a result they are hiring more staff.
> 
> They paid a sweet homage to Meghan with these cupcakes adorned with positive messages . Queue the outrage and pearl-clutching.


They forgot "Do as I say, not as I do" and "Don't be accountable, use an identity political card".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

It's amusing how anyone can seriously believe that someone with such high flying jetting influencer ambitions and such an evident preoccupation with how she comes across in media as Meghan, would not read what is written about her on the internet.


----------



## Welltraveled!

mdcx said:


> I imagine Meghan's head is exploding over at Frogmore:
> 
> View attachment 4522726




I doubt it.  The amount of people that are overly critical of her is small.

As someone said earlier The negative comments were made on the cupcakes post for a non-profit organization. Which was why it was turned off.


----------



## Welltraveled!

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's amusing how anyone can seriously believe that someone with such high flying jetting influencer ambitions and such an evident preoccupation with how she comes across in media as Meghan, would not read what is written about her on the internet.



Think about it *realistically*, she is a accomplished American actress and philanthropist of mixed raced  that married into clear a predominantly white BRF.  

 She doesn’t read about herself on the internet.


----------



## Welltraveled!

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> They forgot "Do as I say, not as I do" and "Don't be accountable, use an identity political card".



They never said or inferred that comment. They’re mission is to help give exposure to small nonprofits and they various causes in the world.

People on social media are so focused on criticizing HM, for their own personal agenda, they ignore the good HM influence has on helping these organizations.

Their  critics are such  sad and pathetic individuals - excluding tpf members - not trying to get banned.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought the timing of that post on their Instagram account was awful coinciding as it did with the private plane trips.  It’s tone deaf. I’m not keen on these kind of inspirational messages at the best of times - they come across as platitudes and patronising.  But when everything H&M put out is so studied you’d think someone would spend some time thinking about it before pressing enter



Their Instagram always post positive inspirational messages and I’m sure the posts are planned in advance.

If more people give constructive feedback they will course correct.  But majority of the comments are subpar and petty.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Morgan R said:


> I don't think any of the royals including Harry and Meghan read the comments on Instagram or forms of social media. I think the people in charge of running their social media saw the comments though. Rather people dislike/like Harry and Meghan I can see why the comments were turned off for that specific post about  Luminary Bakery  but not the other post on Sussex Royal. The Luminary Bakery was created to help vulnerable women while also providing job skills, career support, mentoring, and coaching. People were being rude and trolling not just Harry & Meghan but also the bakery under a post that was meant be a spotlight for the bakery when Luminary Bakery did nothing wrong and so that was being disrespectful to the company.
> 
> I know I don't often read the comments under Sussex Royal I didn't often read the comments under posts about Harry and Meghan while they were still under the Kensington Palace Instagram because while there were positive comments there were also some comments that were pretty brutal and over some things that were truly non-issue while there were some comments that were threats, racist, xenophobic, etc. and that was before all the pile on of negative stories that happened after Harry and Meghan's tour last October which just added to there being more negative comments (I think the royal family is aware of the comments I'm referring to as the royal family had released social media community guidelines earlier this year even though they have had social media accounts for years: https://www.royal.uk/social-media-community-guidelines. Actually surprising to me guidelines weren't put in place before this year because the royal family has been known to receive threats and social media just makes it more obvious how many threats the royal family as a whole receive). I thought when the Sussex Royal Instagram opened the comments might be moderated or turned off just based on comments I've seen about Harry and but more so Meghan on the Kensington Palace Instagram and on the other various royal family social accounts but the comments surprisingly haven't been moderated or turned off aside from the Luminary Bakery post.



Reposting for those that missed the point of the cupcake Instagram  post.


----------



## mdcx

Well obviously someone in Meghan's team had a reaction to the comments and made a decision to turn them off.
Comments are now turned back on for the cupcake post.

I think it's fair to assume that Meghan has a lot of sway over her and Harry's Insta account.

Are the Meghan fans among us able to hear any criticism of her? Do they really think Meghan has behaved in an ideal manner since her wedding and that there are no grounds at all to question her?
It does make me wonder what some people's acceptable of standard of behaviour is.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Someone definitely reads the Instagram comments because when they did that one where you nominate a person, any comment nominating Kate was deleted. I even tried it to see if it was true and my comment was gone within 3 minutes.


----------



## stanfordmom

I don’t consider myself a Meghan fan and believe her behavior can be criticized. 

What I don’t get is the vitriol about a social media post publicizing a bakery that aims to “empower women who have been the victims of violence, sex trafficking, been in the prison system or homeless, by teaching them how to bake. In addition to learning baking skills, they also offer education on food hygiene, money management and computer literacy, with many of the women getting jobs at the bakery or at other food establishments after they graduate.” https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-shines-spotlight-luminary-bakery/

How is that hurting anyone? Why are people so angry and bitter about an innocuous inspirational quote from Archbishop Tutu? I don’t understand the outrage.


----------



## Morgan R

mdcx said:


> Well obviously someone in Meghan's team had a reaction to the comments and made a decision to turn them off.
> Comments are now turned back on for the cupcake post.
> 
> I think it's fair to assume that Meghan has a lot of sway over her and Harry's Insta account.
> 
> Are the Meghan fans among us able to hear any criticism of her? Do they really think Meghan has behaved in an ideal manner since her wedding and that there are no grounds at all to question her?
> It does make me wonder what some people's acceptable of standard of behaviour is.




Just because someone is not overly critical of Meghan doesn't mean they are a fan, "stan", etc. of hers. She can be criticized but at the same time to me as someone that has paid attention the royal family long before Meghan was apart of it I can see that Meghan like others that married into the British Royal Family is getting talked about with the same ongoing narratives the British Media puts out there for anybody that marries into the royal family. You have some people that believe every story put out there (after I saw how consistent the narratives are I've never been one of those people that believe every story released). A lot of the things people are criticizing Meghan about are genuinely a continuation of what has been said for years (decades) about the various people that have married into the Royal family. I've mentioned before in this very thread (In this post: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...n-markle-thread.679793/page-387#post-32834819) how other people that have married into the family have been called "domineering"/"determined"/"angry"/"rude"/"bossy", accused of spending to much money on clothes, being the reason for why staff had quit, accused of making the royal person they married abandon their friends/change eating habits/change wardrobe, etc. (this is some of the same narratives that have been pushed onto Meghan throughout this past year since she has been married into the family and just a few years ago aspects of that British Media narrative was being pushed onto Kate as well). Diana was asked before in an interview she did with Charles about the rumors that were constantly a narrative pushed by the press which was constantly saying she was "domineering", "determined", and "was trying to change Charles" (you can see the video of Diana addressing this in an interview she did with Charles within the linked previous post of mine above). It just goes to show how consistent these narratives by the media are and why some choose not to believe every story or be overly critical.

Even if Harry talking about conservation/the environment recently but at the same time riding a private jet story is a more valid criticism it is happening after there have been a string of negative Harry and Meghan stories that have been happening from the British Media since it was rumored they were dating (so this has been 3 years of a mix of positive and negative stories with a pick up of negative stories that have been happening since their tour last October). So the private jet story while it could be seen as a more valid criticism is just getting put "in a vacuum" of another critical story on top of everything else that has been said about Harry and Meghan and this is happening after Meghan just got criticized earlier this month for guest editing British Vogue even though others in royal family members have been guest editors of various outlets (what got somewhat lost in all that criticism is that in her guest edit she did put a spotlight on her patronage Smartworks, designers in the Commonwealth, ethical/sustainable brands, and Luminary Bakery). I'm not saying every story written about Harry and Meghan needs to be positive because that is unrealistic and that doesn't need to happen either but there could be some balance in the reporting but that is unlikely to happen because everybody knows "sensational" stories keeps people's attention more than a positive story doesn't matter if it is true or not.

Another issue I think is that when it comes stories about Harry but more specifically Meghan you get sometimes that could've been something just been a neutral story becomes something completely overzealous/unnecessary (for example when Meghan got involved with the Hubb Community Kitchen at the Al Manaar Muslim Cultural Heritage Center that was a positive project at first then that got turn into negative/stereotypical story trying link the women of the kitchen to terrorist and yet that wasn't a story released when William and Harry visited that same center before). Like I said some of the stories were always expected because there are narratives that are always pushed onto anyone that marries into the family then other stories just sometimes go to far and that is an issue I think people have a problem with/take notice of. That is why I think people rather it be people online, Harry and Meghan's friends, or people they have worked with have often come to Harry and Meghan's defense.


----------



## mrsinsyder

stanfordmom said:


> I don’t consider myself a Meghan fan and believe her behavior can be criticized.
> 
> What I don’t get is the vitriol about a social media post publicizing a bakery that aims to “empower women who have been the victims of violence, sex trafficking, been in the prison system or homeless, by teaching them how to bake. In addition to learning baking skills, they also offer education on food hygiene, money management and computer literacy, with many of the women getting jobs at the bakery or at other food establishments after they graduate.” https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-shines-spotlight-luminary-bakery/
> 
> How is that hurting anyone? Why are people so angry and bitter about an innocuous inspirational quote from Archbishop Tutu? I don’t understand the outrage.



Because Meghan did everything to sell herself as the second coming of Ghandi and now it’s lazy instagram posts and $100k dresses. It’s basic slacktivism. 

I didn’t have any expectations for her. She created them for herself which, in turn, made a lot of us excited to see what she was going to do. IMO she was trying to hard to hook Harry that she sold herself as a huge humanitarian which she’s clearly not. She should have just been herself from the beginning.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Welltraveled! said:


> Think about it *realistically*, she is a accomplished American actress and philanthropist of mixed raced  that married into clear a predominantly white BRF.
> 
> She doesn’t read about herself on the internet.


I think yours may be one of the least realistic but rather most illogical assessments of the Meghan PR failure I've come across so far. 


Also, notice how I'm sticking to commenting on your opinion, not on you personally?


----------



## Welltraveled!

mdcx said:


> Well obviously someone in Meghan's team had a reaction to the comments and made a decision to turn them off.
> Comments are now turned back on for the cupcake post.
> 
> I think it's fair to assume that Meghan has a lot of sway over her and Harry's Insta account.
> 
> Are the Meghan fans among us able to hear any criticism of her? Do they really think Meghan has behaved in an ideal manner since her wedding and that there are no grounds at all to question her?
> It does make me wonder what some people's acceptable of standard of behaviour is.



I’m glad to hear the posts are turned backed on.  I take it you follow their Instagram?

One thing I noticed about HM is that they work together as a team.  Wives tend to influence their husbands to be better men.  She’s big on communication and I’m sure she discusses a lot with her husband for input.

I can’t  speak for others as for myself yes I can hear and take criticism of Meghan and Kate - I draw the line at Diana.  

I give Meghan the same amount of leeway that I gave Kate when she married into the family.  And let’s face it, prior to Marrying William; Kate had a 7 year Headstart.

Besides the Wimbledon debacle - what has Meghan REALLY done that wasn’t ideal? And to whose standards are we measuring her against?  Most comments about her are demeaning and petty.  Like cradling her baby bump?!?  

I have no issue with anyone questioning and criticizing Meghan.  That’s your right.  Like it’s my right to respond.  

But I will repeat what I was told numerous time.  If you don’t like what I have to say, use that ignore button.


----------



## stanfordmom

mrsinsyder said:


> Because Meghan did everything to sell herself as the second coming of Ghandi and now it’s lazy instagram posts and $100k dresses. It’s basic slacktivism.
> 
> I didn’t have any expectations for her. She created them for herself which, in turn, made a lot of us excited to see what she was going to do. IMO she was trying to hard to hook Harry that she sold herself as a huge humanitarian which she’s clearly not. She should have just been herself from the beginning.



Thanks for the reply! I apologize I don’t follow her closely enough to know but how did she “sell herself as the second coming of Ghandi”?


----------



## Welltraveled!

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think yours may be one of the least realistic but rather most illogical assessments of the Meghan PR failure I've come across so far.
> 
> 
> Also, notice how I'm sticking to commenting on your opinion, not on you personally?



You assumed that she reads about herself on the internet.  You nor I can say for certain.  It’s an assumption.  My assumption is based on what she has said numerous times.  Your assumption is based on you personal thoughts.

We agree on one thing - we find each other’s assessment of Meghan (and anything in relation to her) to be illogical and irrational. 

I never commented about you personally.  I don’t know you.  My comments are about your opinions.

And overall about Meghan’s obsessive negative critics as a whole.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

When calling out environmental hypocrisy is nothing but a cynical ploy
Zoe Williams

Ever since Al Gore first launched his climate crusade, the sight of any given public figure making the case for action, anywhere other than in their own home, has frequently been met with the following genre of response: if you care so much, how come you took a plane? If you didn’t take a plane, how much did the alternative cost? How much steel does a train use these days, anyway? Wouldn’t it be cheaper, ergo greener, not to go anywhere?

Recently the cacophony has become deafening. Take, for example, the case of Prince Harry and Meghan’s use of private jets, and what it says about their environmental credentials. Once we might have understood that the rich would say and do things in their own rich fashion, and it was worth it for those things to be done; now it seems wealth is used to discredit ethical arguments by the wealthy. Groups are disbarred from collective ambition because their privilege sets them outside the collective.

If we carry on like this, there will be no one left to do anything worth doing; even having the time for activism puts you in the zone of privilege because the “truly oppressed” don’t have that luxury. And so the principle is established: the ultimate political statement is the personal life, and personal acts can fatally undermine political claims.
We’ve been here before. The personal became the political in a 1970 essay by the US second-wave feminist Carol Hanisch. Her point was quite specific: she was responding to the argument that when women talked from personal experience – of abortion, domestic violence, unmeetable beauty standards, household drudgery, the whole suite of female oppression – it was “therapeutic” rather than political. There was a view, at that time, on the left and also in areas of feminism, that women’s consciousness-raising was fringe stuff, politically speaking. It wasn’t worthless but, belonging in the realm of personal experience, it was up to individuals to resolve at that level. There was another, less judgmental, view that these problems were all rooted in women’s social conditioning. At least that located oppression where it belonged, in society, but it still situated the solutions within the individual who ought, once her consciousness had been raised, to be able to slough off the conditioning that was oppressing her.

Hanisch’s counter-argument was basically a Marxist materialist one: if you want to understand how and why people are oppressed, you have to ask who benefits from their oppression. If you think it’s trivial who did the washing up and had their professional prospects dimmed as a result, you have to ask who didn’t do it. If you think women’s reproductive rights are a personal matter, you have to ask who gains societally from the power imbalance created from their restriction.

This analysis was exquisitely uncomfortable, because it left no respite: you couldn’t logically be domestically subjugated while publicly fighting for the emancipation of all. In the 1970s, in that spirit, it was virtually de rigueur for feminists to pursue strategic squalor (a memory: my first stepmother’s friends used to serve us squash out of used yoghurt pots, which themselves hadn’t been washed, in protest against needless washing up. It was truly a terrible time to be the child of a feminist if you liked squash).
The idea that “the personal is political” has always made demands that were exceptionally hard to live by. Yet what it emphatically never meant is what it has become: an injunction that until you are living perfectly, according to the values you espouse, you are a hypocrite and an irrelevance. There’s a logical impossibility at the heart of this new norm: to change society, you have to exist in it; yet to do so involves compromising with its imperfections, whereupon you supposedly become just a cog in its workings.
This erects an impossible barrier to entry: if you’re not Jesus (or perhaps Peter Tatchell), you’re not bona fide. Hanisch’s point, by contrast, was inclusive above all: if everything you experience is political then it is all part of the same struggle and the same solidarity.

Reflecting in 2006 on her original essay, Hanisch wrote: “It’s necessary that theories take their knocks in the real world, like everything else,” but that this one in particular had been turned on its head, deliberately misused. Some challenges were made in good faith. When Paula Rust, another second-wave feminist, wrote: “One’s personal choices reveal or reflect one’s personal politics; one should make personal choices that are consistent with one’s personal politics; personal life and personal politics are indistinguishable,” she was pushing at the limits of the idea. But that was in the context of sexuality within the movement – specifically, the extent to which one’s sexual and political orientation could and should align (much of her work was centred on the political flashpoints between lesbian and bisexual women).
Rust’s sentiment has been shifted far away from its time and place. It’s been re-appropriated in a cynical move to taint everyone, dampen any hope of change, poison every ambition. And this has been particularly corrosive to environmentalism, where the compromises that activists necessarily make take up more discursive energy than the crisis itself. This undermining of green politics needs to be named for what it is and resisted. Feminism had no deadline, it was a struggle that could move fast or slow according to passion, agility, the alignment of the stars. Environmentalism is all deadline: if those who oppose action can procrastinate by fixating on imponderables – which of us is sufficiently without sin? – then their victory will be total.

The answer is not to strive for greater individual perfection, but to return to that first materialist analysis: who benefits from climate inaction? Whose status is maintained by political inertia? Whose structures render personal efforts insufficient? Take the fight back to politics, where it belongs.
• Zoe Williams is a Guardian columnist

https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...cs?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true


----------



## lulilu

Am I the only one who just scrolls past these multi-paragraph, endless tomes?  (not pointing to anyone in particular)

Seriously, who has the time or psychic energy to read them?


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> Am I the only one who just scrolls past these multi-paragraph, endless tomes?  (not pointing to anyone in particular)
> 
> Seriously, who has the time or psychic energy to read them?


No you’re not 
TDDR (too dull didn’t read )


----------



## Welltraveled!

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone definitely reads the Instagram comments because when they did that one where you nominate a person, any comment nominating Kate was deleted. I even tried it to see if it was true and my comment was gone within 3 minutes.



In my experience, most organizations or whatever has a social media team.  So not surprising that the comments are read.


----------



## caramelize126

lulilu said:


> Am I the only one who just scrolls past these multi-paragraph, endless tomes?  (not pointing to anyone in particular)
> 
> Seriously, who has the time or psychic energy to read them?



It might be easier if posters include a brief summary for long articles. I’m sure most of us here don’t have the time, interest, attention spans, etc. to read these long multi- paragraph articles- especially when no context has been provided for what they are even about. 

With this whole PJ fiasco specifically, I actually think the heat should be focused  on Harry. It’s unfortunate that Meghan is getting dragged for comments ( and possibly even decisions) made by Harry. They are married so I understand that they are going to be criticized as a single unit. Is it possible that she didn’t know about the exact comments that Harry would be making at the google summit and in that Jane Goodall interview?

On the other hand, Harry used to take commercial flights all the time. Who knows where this need to exclusively fly private and hang out with Elton John came from


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

stanfordmom said:


> I don’t consider myself a Meghan fan and believe her behavior can be criticized.
> 
> What I don’t get is the vitriol about a social media post publicizing a bakery that aims to “empower women who have been the victims of violence, sex trafficking, been in the prison system or homeless, by teaching them how to bake. In addition to learning baking skills, they also offer education on food hygiene, money management and computer literacy, with many of the women getting jobs at the bakery or at other food establishments after they graduate.” https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-shines-spotlight-luminary-bakery/
> 
> How is that hurting anyone? Why are people so angry and bitter about an innocuous inspirational quote from Archbishop Tutu? I don’t understand the outrage.


Yes, of course. It's Desmond Tutu and his quotes, victims of violence and sex-trafficking, the homeless and helping getting the less fortunate back on their feet everyone criticizing H/M has an issue with.


----------



## bag-mania

caramelize126 said:


> With this whole PJ fiasco specifically, I actually think the heat should be focused  on Harry. It’s unfortunate that Meghan is getting dragged for comments ( and possibly even decisions) made by Harry. They are married so I understand that they are going to be criticized as a single unit. Is it possible that she didn’t know about the exact comments that Harry would be making at the google summit and in that Jane Goodall interview?
> 
> On the other hand, Harry used to take commercial flights all the time. Who knows where this need to exclusively fly private and hang out with Elton John came from



The heat should be on Harry since he's the one who made the comments. However, does anyone know if Harry was making environmental speeches before he met Meghan? If he decided to go all activist after meeting her then you have to open the door to the possibility of her influencing him. In that context they can be criticized as a unit.

Elton John was extremely fond of Diana. It's not surprising he feels protective towards her children. It's obvious he was trying to help but he may have made matters worse.


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> It might be easier if posters include a brief summary for long articles. I’m sure most of us here don’t have the time, interest, attention spans, etc. to read these long multi- paragraph articles- especially when no context has been provided for what they are even about.


I think half the time the poster hasn’t fully read it either - but it gets pounced upon with a cry of “Aha! now I’ve got the b&stards!!” as something to beat the people disagreeing with their POV over the head with.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I think half the time the poster hasn’t fully read it either - but it gets pounced upon with a cry of “Aha! now I’ve got the b&stards!!” as something to beat the people disagreeing with their POV over the head with.



It doesn't help that the recently linked article was an opinion piece. That writer's perception of the situation is no more credible than any of ours. It was only an opinion.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Welltraveled! said:


> You assumed that she reads about herself on the internet.  You nor I can say for certain.  It’s an assumption.  My assumption is based on what she has said numerous times.  Your assumption is based on you personal thoughts.
> 
> We agree on one thing - we find each other’s assessment of Meghan (and anything in relation to her) to be illogical and irrational.
> 
> I never commented about you personally.  I don’t know you.  My comments are about your opinions.
> 
> And overall about Meghan’s obsessive negative critics as a whole.





Welltraveled! said:


> Think about it *realistically*, she is a accomplished American actress and philanthropist of mixed raced  that married into clear a predominantly white BRF.
> 
> She doesn’t read about herself on the internet.


You clearly stated about Meghan in your post above, and I quote: "She doesn’t read about herself on the internet." Which while hinting at a remarkably personal insight in to the private life of Meghan, is not an assumption but clearly stated as fact.

I never said you commented about me personally, but yes, I was hinting at that rather sweeping statement you made of posters on the internet critical of Meghan. Which, as a last resort, is understandable but not a very convincing argument in making your case.

And realistically, there's still no connection between Meghan being an actress, bi-racial, an alleged philanthropist, married in to a European royal family and your adamant statement that she does not read about herself on the internet.


----------



## Flatsy

stanfordmom said:


> Thanks for the reply! I apologize I don’t follow her closely enough to know but how did she “sell herself as the second coming of Ghandi”?


Meghan has consistently used the words "activism" and "humanitarian" to describe herself and what she does, going to back to the engagement interview.    "Changing the world" and "forces for change" is a constantly repeated term bandied about in her projects.

There is a disconnect between her rhetoric and the actual celebrity activism type activities she and Harry engage in:  Vogue articles about other celebrity activists.  Movie premieres.  Speeches about climate change to groups of multi-millionaires and billionaires who have their private jets and yachts parked nearby.  Entertaining Ellen Degeneres to brainstorm about saving the wildlife.  Importing thousands of dollars worth of out of season flowers to practice flower arranging with celebrity pals, and then passing it off as a charitable activity by publicizing the donation of the flowers.

Meghan's working on some good projects.  Using her celebrity to spotlight and assist Smartworks, Luminary Bakery, the Grenfell Tower victims, the animal adoption charity - I think she is right on track with those projects and should continue in that direction - taking on new patronages and working hard to do whatever she can for them.  Regular royal work.

She needs to pull way, way back on constantly telling everyone Brand Sussex are world-changers.  She needs to let the work speak for itself.  Wait for others to congratulate her instead of constantly congratulating herself.  When doing a video about Smartworks, step back and let the video be about Smartworks instead of about her.

And if she cares as much about the work as she claims to, she should also minimize activities that distract from the work, like overspending on designer clothes and use of private jets.   That's incumbent upon all royals. Will and Kate are doing exactly what they are supposed to do by letting everyone know they make an effort to take budget commercial flights and attempt to keep their personal spending and wardrobe budgets under control.  

It is baffling me that Meghan doesn't seem to care about how her clothing spending reflects upon her, or that Harry doesn't seem to care about how his private jet usage reflects upon him.  It's just terrible PR on their parts.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> The heat should be on Harry since he's the one who made the comments. However, does anyone know if Harry was making environmental speeches before he met Meghan? If he decided to go all activist after meeting her then you have to open the door to the possibility of her influencing him. In that context they can be criticized as a unit.
> 
> Elton John was extremely fond of Diana. It's not surprising he feels protective towards her children. It's obvious he was trying to help but he may have made matters worse.


Diana ran hot and cold with all her friends. She famously froze people out on a whim and she and Elton were often fighting. Apparently they were not on good terms when she died, but he did get to sing at her funeral.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Diana ran hot and cold with all her friends. She famously froze people out on a whim and she and Elton were often fighting. Apparently they were not on good terms when she died, but he did get to sing at her funeral.



I have to disagree with you there. You have only to see the footage of Diana comforting Elton at Gianni Versace's funeral a month before she died to see they put their differences behind them. Gianni's murder reconciled them.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> There are no comments on their cupcake post as they switched them off, but for this post -
> - you use the scroll wheel on your mouse to go down the screen of comments, and click on the + sign to open up more comments (on a desktop computer I should add).



How ignorant do they think we are not to know this about Archbishop Tutu?  Seriously?  Anyone recall reading Cry the Beloved Country decades ago? And that was written before Tutu became known.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I have to disagree with you there. You have only to see the footage of Diana comforting Elton at Gianni Versace's funeral a month before she died to see they put their differences behind them. Gianni's murder reconciled them.


Yeah that's true. Not sure he was buying her sudden warm attitude at the funeral after freezing him out for so long, IIRC. But a sudden death (hers) makes people reconsider past greivances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Yeah that's true. Not sure he was buying her sudden warm attitude at the funeral after freezing him out for so long, IIRC. But a sudden death (hers) makes people reconsider past greivances.



Not sure what you have against Diana. She was not an angel but she was far from being a bad person. From her perspective she had a good reason for being mad at Elton and Gianni for awhile. Gianni put photos of Diana and her sons in his coffee table book without her knowledge. She was the one who would face backlash from the Queen because that book also contained lots of photos of semi-nude male models. So Diana may have frozen out people at various times but she had her reasons, even if no one else knew what they were.


----------



## stanfordmom

Flatsy said:


> Meghan has consistently used the words "activism" and "humanitarian" to describe herself and what she does, going to back to the engagement interview.    "Changing the world" and "forces for change" is a constantly repeated term bandied about in her projects.
> 
> There is a disconnect between her rhetoric and the actual celebrity activism type activities she and Harry engage in:  Vogue articles about other celebrity activists.  Movie premieres.  Speeches about climate change to groups of multi-millionaires and billionaires who have their private jets and yachts parked nearby.  Entertaining Ellen Degeneres to brainstorm about saving the wildlife.  Importing thousands of dollars worth of out of season flowers to practice flower arranging with celebrity pals, and then passing it off as a charitable activity by publicizing the donation of the flowers.
> 
> Meghan's working on some good projects.  Using her celebrity to spotlight and assist Smartworks, Luminary Bakery, the Grenfell Tower victims, the animal adoption charity - I think she is right on track with those projects and should continue in that direction - taking on new patronages and working hard to do whatever she can for them.  Regular royal work.
> 
> She needs to pull way, way back on constantly telling everyone Brand Sussex are world-changers.  She needs to let the work speak for itself.  Wait for others to congratulate her instead of constantly congratulating herself.  When doing a video about Smartworks, step back and let the video be about Smartworks instead of about her.
> 
> And if she cares as much about the work as she claims to, she should also minimize activities that distract from the work, like overspending on designer clothes and use of private jets.   That's incumbent upon all royals. Will and Kate are doing exactly what they are supposed to do by letting everyone know they make an effort to take budget commercial flights and attempt to keep their personal spending and wardrobe budgets under control.
> 
> It is baffling me that Meghan doesn't seem to care about how her clothing spending reflects upon her, or that Harry doesn't seem to care about how his private jet usage reflects upon him.  It's just terrible PR on their parts.



Thank you so much for the explanation!  So people believe she is hypocritical and phony?   

I guess just don't take it all personally. I don't feel like she is lecturing ME about the environment or insulting ME because she thinks I don't know who Desmond Tutu is.

Life is short (and getting shorter with all those private planes flying around ) and it takes a lot of energy to summon up the righteous "how dare she" indignation. I don't disagree with the causes and it seems she isn't hurting anyone other than her own reputation...?

But I get it, others feel quite strongly obviously so thanks for explaining. And no matter what you definitely have some great PR suggestions!


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> Am I the only one who just scrolls past these multi-paragraph, endless tomes?  (not pointing to anyone in particular)
> 
> Seriously, who has the time or psychic energy to read them?


NOPE .. same here, keep on scrolling DOWN!


----------



## Flatsy

stanfordmom said:


> I guess just don't take it all personally. I don't feel like she is lecturing ME about the environment or insulting ME because she thinks I don't know who Desmond Tutu is.


Same here (at least most of the time).  Inspirational quotes are pretty standard instagram content and it's perfectly fine.  It's not world-changing and it's not social media genius, but it's good filler.

I normally support climate change speeches, but I thought about it.  My summer vacation was one week long and involved me driving my fuel-efficient vehicle for two hours within my home state.  That's a pretty typical American vacation.  We don't vacation long, and we don't go far.  Big trips to exotic locations happen for most people once or twice in a lifetime. 

Meanwhile, Harry's getting together in a secret conference with billionaires to discuss the problem of us lesser folk being inspired by their selfies to take environmentally harmful vacations.  And then immediately embarks on a vacation more environmentally harmful than probably all of the vacations than I will take in my whole life. He takes a private jet to a resort for billionaires where the villas are 6,000-7,500 square feet, which is 10 times the size of my full-time home.   The condescension and hypocrisy of it is profound.

Harry and Meghan, with their platform, actually could have a shot at changing the world by really walking the walk on the environment.  Choose to live in a home with square footage appropriate to house a family of three/four - instead of five houses welded together.  Install solar panels instead of decor that is "just like Soho House but better".  Don't rip up and replace brand new carpets just because they got stained.  Take a family a vacation via public train.  Maintain a small wardrobe and re-wear clothing repeatedly and often. (Note: Harry already does this.)  Only drive or be driven in hybrid or electric vehicles.  Instead of popping over to Amsterdam on a plane for a brief event, make a remote appearance.   Show that living to the limits of your wealth is not necessary. There is a lot they could be doing via good example rather than just speechifying.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> Great advice. We’ll see what happens.  Still waiting for a chat with the Queen  at Balmoral.   *If they ever get there   A nice long drive up in the Prius  might be a good idea*.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Not sure what you have against Diana. She was not an angel but she was far from being a bad person. From her perspective she had a good reason for being mad at Elton and Gianni for awhile. Gianni put photos of Diana and her sons in his coffee table book without her knowledge. She was the one who would face backlash from the Queen because that book also contained lots of photos of semi-nude male models. So Diana may have frozen out people at various times but she had her reasons, even if no one else knew what they were.



True. I just watched *The Story of Diana *documentary on Netflix and they covered this.

Really worth watching.


----------



## marthastoo

gracekelly said:


> How ignorant do they think we are not to know this about Archbishop Tutu?  Seriously?  Anyone recall reading Cry the Beloved Country decades ago? And that was written before Tutu became known.


Seriously?  You're affronted because there's a blub about Bishop Tutu?  lolol 

Yeah, there really isn't anything she can do right.


----------



## Welltraveled!

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You clearly stated about Meghan in your post above, and I quote: "She doesn’t read about herself on the internet." Which while hinting at a remarkably personal insight in to the private life of Meghan, is not an assumption but clearly stated as fact.
> 
> I never said you commented about me personally, but yes, I was hinting at that rather sweeping statement you made of posters on the internet critical of Meghan. Which, as a last resort, is understandable but not a very convincing argument in making your case.
> 
> And realistically, there's still no connection between Meghan being an actress, bi-racial, an alleged philanthropist, married in to a European royal family and your adamant statement that she does not read about herself on the internet.



1st paragraph - Meghan has made statements that were similar to the fact she doesn’t read about herself on the internet.  

Is it true? Who knows!

2nd paragraph - I knew what you were hinting at....but it’s ok.  However I do enjoy debating with you.  

3rd paragraph-  my point was the media will find any narrative about the woman and turn it to something negative.  There was a lot of negative undertones to her as a person because she’s American or mixed-race or an actress, etc.  when I watched HM engagement interview I could tell the negativity affect her.  Which is probably why she stated or similar that she doesn’t google herself.


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> Seriously?  You're affronted because there's a blub about Bishop Tutu?  lolol
> 
> Yeah, there really isn't anything she can do right.



 I am affronted by the patronizing tone.  We're not all dimwits.

It has be stated that  she doesn't write her IG, but you are stating that she does.  If she doesn't then her IG person needs to rethink.


----------



## LittleStar88

I didn't know about the Bishop Tutu thing. Are all just supposed to know it by default? *shrugs*

Not being feisty. I am serious.

So I didn't see any problem with the IG post.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I didn't know about the Bishop Tutu thing. Are all just supposed to know it by default? *shrugs*
> 
> Not being feisty. I am serious.
> 
> So I didn't see any problem with the IG post.



Perhaps I am taking this for granted.  IMO this would be like asking about Martin Luther King.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Tutu


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps I am taking this for granted.  IMO this would be like asking about Martin Luther King.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Tutu


Yet again @gracekelly  .. we think the same; maybe it has something to do with one's age in that those much younger may not know as much about him as those who are older and remember him quite well?  Reminds me of that Youtube video with kids who have never seen/worked with a dial telephone!  Just hypothesizing ..


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Yet again @gracekelly  .. we think the same; maybe it has something to do with one's age in that those much younger may not know as much about him as those who are older and remember him quite well?  Reminds me of that Youtube video with kids who have never seen/worked with a dial telephone!  Just hypothesizing ..


They can't tell time on a regular clock either haha!  Tie shoelaces?  What is that?


----------



## caramelize126

I found this on another forum and thought i would share here.

 It look multiple attempts on the highest volume to hear. I still cant hear Charles' first statement. And it sounds like Will's "not allowed" was from a previous conversation. But Camilla's statements ( esp the "its so awkward") and her conversation with Will are pretty clear. Once you hear it, its hard to "unhear" it when you replay.

Video:


Source site: British Royal Family Gossip: Part 43
Recap from site:
_2:07, Charles turns all the way round to Meghan, and importantly, away from the Queen, to say "Just come back a bit". Meaning, (in pre-nineties upper class) 'Just stay back a bit" . He was trying to help her. But he felt she really needed some restraining, otherwise he would not have left the Queen waiting to the point where she directly turned her head behind her to see where he was at 2:09.

2:11 William says "Not allowed" - not barked, just said. After which Kate laughs widely at something Camilla's said to her

2:20-2:33 Camilla saying something lengthy and quiet to Kate which makes her again laugh widely

2:24 Camilla talking to Kate says "It's really worse of her" (werf? perhaps it's an acronym? but the "of her" is very clear) while pretending to be talking about the exhibition by pointing to it, to which Kate responds, with a wide smile, "It IS."

2:36- Camilla raises her eyebrows and put her hands behind her back to ask William a question

2:41 - William answers "She doesn't, no." Then, soft voice, "She wants the attention." To which Camilla responds with a wide grin. The William says "Wants to be seen in the pictures" To which Camilla responds "Ughhhmm"

2:44 The clapper sound for them all to head in immediately followed by Camilla saying "It's SO awkward." To which William replies "I know."
_


----------



## gracekelly

I thought these events were choreographed out ahead of time and everyone is told what to do, and where to stand.  Isn't that what was happening at 41 seconds into the video?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

I wonder if Meghan and Harry commiserate over the crappy lot they got in terms of siblings. I knew that the smear campaign on Meghan was coming from the Cambridge camp.

Now it is pretty much confirmed the Cambridges budget flight was a PR stunt. An empty plane was flown over 500 miles to pick them up and it was booked only Wednesday according to the airlines general manger — not well in advance as claimed by royal reporters.  The Cambridges deliberately tried to to undermine the Sussexes and were getting praise for an obvious stunt.  There really is no love lost between Will and Harry.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Now it is pretty much confirmed the Cambridges budget flight was a PR stunt. An empty plane was flown over 500 miles to pick them up and it was booked only Wednesday according to the airlines general manger — not well in advance as claimed by royal reporters.  The Cambridges deliberately tried to to undermine the Sussexes and were getting praise for an obvious stunt.  There really is no love lost between Will and Harry.


Running all over the internet to spread this misinformation, eh?  Conveniently not linking the article though, which says nothing of the kind. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...craft-123-miles-pick-Prince-William-Kate.html

After the Flybe airline boss found out William and Kate were going to be aboard the flight, he arranged without their knowledge to have a Flybe-brand plane with the company logo on it flown to Norwich Airport to make the flight.  This was so Flybe could get publicity off of William and Kate.  The article clearly says Will and Kate had nothing to do with it. 

This was a stunt on the part of Flybe, and it worked. Flybe got their name and photos of their logoed plane all over the covers of the UK tabloids. 

Sounds to me like this clears the Cambridges of the accusation that they were the ones who arranged the photo op.  It actually makes them the victims of the dreaded privacy invasion that is so horrific that the Sussexes have no choice but to fly private.

The story does not say when William and Kate *booked* the flight.  However, it sounds like the RASP kept their identities and protection plans secret from the airline until a few days prior to the flight....Probably precisely because of things like this happening.  Once the airline knew they would be aboard, word spread around like wildfire and secrecy seems to be one of the most important elements of royal security.


----------



## chicaloca

Even some of the royal  reporters called out the Cambridge PR stunt. It was way too obvious. After realizing how obvious it was they starting backtracking to blame the airline. 

Lainey has a good take on it and how William is biggest hypocrite of all.

https://www.laineygossip.com/did-ho...rcial-flight-headline-in-the-daily-mail/57380


----------



## gracekelly

chicaloca said:


> I wonder if Meghan and Harry commiserate over the crappy lot they got in terms of siblings. I knew that the smear campaign on Meghan was coming from the Cambridge camp.
> 
> Now it is pretty much confirmed the Cambridges budget flight was a PR stunt. An empty plane was flown over 500 miles to pick them up and it was booked only Wednesday according to the airlines general manger — not well in advance as claimed by royal reporters.  The Cambridges deliberately tried to to undermine the Sussexes and were getting praise for an obvious stunt.  There really is no love lost between Will and Harry.



The Cambridges don't have to smear them as they are doing a good job of tanking their reputation all by themselves.  Any PR stunt was done by the airline and did not involve the Cambridges.  Any company will not say no to free publicity so once they realized that they were  booked for  plane, they made their move. 



chicaloca said:


> Even some of the royal  reporters called out the Cambridge PR stunt. It was way too obvious. After realizing how obvious it was they starting backtracking to blame the airline.
> 
> Lainey has a good take on it and how William is biggest hypocrite of all.
> 
> https://www.laineygossip.com/did-ho...rcial-flight-headline-in-the-daily-mail/57380



Lainey is a paid  mouthpiece for Meghan and not to be taken seriously.  She is besties with the Mulroneys who certainly are MM supporters.  Elaine Lui has used her gossip column to make a nice living with personal appearances celebrity endorsements.  It behooves her to continue to look the other way and always see the sunshine whether it is there or not.

The royal reporters are more than likely wringing their hands because it this keeps up, there won't be a royal family to report on in future.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Even some of the royal reporters called out the Cambridge PR stunt.


Which royal reporters?  I was expecting them to and never saw it happen.


----------



## chicaloca

Lainey is actually a big Cambridge fan, more specifically a Kate fan. She has never been any sort of surrogate for Meghan - she was never in  Meghan’s friend circle.

And yes, the PR  flight was booked last minute to coincide with the press the Sussexes were getting. A Scottish paper actually got the scoop. The Daily Fail is trying clean up the mess by editorializing about what the Cambridges did and didn’t know. 



> General manager (commercial and operations) Roger Hage said: “*Following a call and details provided late evening on Wednesday as to members of the Royal Family having been booked onto the service, and that armed Royal Protection Officers would accompany the family on-board*, we elected, given this service is operated for Flybe by Eastern, to provide our own aircraft and crew, given the approvals and clearance required  to accommodate such.



If the flight was booked in advance the airline would have known all this before Wednesday especially with Security detail being necessary. They wouldn’t have had to fly in empty planes last minute.

The Cambridges are pathetic. They’d rather make being contrarian to the Sussexes their legacy instead of any actual work. Meanwhile the Sussexes legacy will be about actual charitable work (i.e. Sentable, Invictus, The Hubb Kitchen, Smartworks and more to
come with their Foundation).


----------



## Gal4Dior

Wow, some of these conspiracy theories are nutty. Cambridge’s out to get the Sussex’s! It’s another GOT! Lol


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> And yes, the PR flight was booked last minute to coincide with the press the Sussexes were getting. A Scottish paper actually got the scoop. The Daily Fail is trying clean up the mess by editorializing about what the Cambridges did and didn’t know.


The Scotsman and The Daily Mail articles are almost identical.  Neither says when the Sussexes booked their flight, only that word of it got around on Wednesday.

Either way:
1) The Cambridges flew commercial!  Good for them and good for the environment.  And smart.  With all of the heat the Sussexes were getting, it would be idiotic of them to put their own heads on the chopping block for no reason.
2) An airline took advantage of them for publicity and they were unaware of it. 

None of this makes Will and Kate the villains you so clearly want them to be.


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> Wow, some of these conspiracy theories are nutty. Cambridge’s our to get the Sussex’s! It’s another GOT! Lol



Really!  Where is Varys the Master of Whispers when you need him?!


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> They can't tell time on a regular clock either haha!  Tie shoelaces?  What is that?



Kind of rude, don’t you think? I’m not a kid.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Yet again @gracekelly  .. we think the same; maybe it has something to do with one's age in that those much younger may not know as much about him as those who are older and remember him quite well?  Reminds me of that Youtube video with kids who have never seen/worked with a dial telephone!  Just hypothesizing ..



Rude as well. Just because someone doesn’t know all the quotes means they are a kid.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LVSistinaMM said:


> Wow, some of these conspiracy theories are nutty. *Cambridge’s our to get the Sussex’s!* It’s another GOT! Lol




It's possible.  When you are dealing with naturally competitive people, like WK (probably more Will than Kate), anyone that is seen as a "threat" or the "favorite" becomes a target.  Because the competitive person does not want to be considered as "lesser than."  I see it all the time in Corporate America and other realms of life.  

Yes, I know WK will become King and Queen someday.....blah blah.....it doesn't matter with competitive people.  

However, I think Meghan is equally competitive and it's going to be a back and forth between the two families.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Welltraveled! said:


> It's possible.  When you are dealing with naturally competitive people, like WK (probably more Will than Kate), anyone that is seen as a "threat" or the "favorite" becomes a target.  Because the competitive person does not want to be considered as "lesser than."  I see it all the time in Corporate America and other realms of life.
> 
> Yes, I know WK will become King and Queen someday.....blah blah.....it doesn't matter with competitive people.
> 
> However, I think Meghan is equally competitive and it's going to be a back and forth between the two families.


Welp, I guess I’m gonna get my tinfoil hat...


----------



## mdcx

Meghan will continue Meghan-ing until such time as it doesn't work for her anymore. At the moment, I think she is getting what she craves most...attention. It doesn't seem to matter if it negative or positive attention.

Unfortunately she may never grasp that her position in the BRF is ,by its nature, to be subordinate to Kate and William and their children. While she doesn't grasp that, she will keep on her dramatic path, challenging the status quo.

It's fairly widely acknowledged that Omid Scobie and Lainey are both mouthpieces for Meghan. I'm sure they get something out of it, whether direct payment or just connections.


----------



## mdcx

Welltraveled! said:


> It's possible.  When you are dealing with naturally competitive people, like WK (probably more Will than Kate), anyone that is seen as a "threat" or the "favorite" becomes a target.  Because the competitive person does not want to be considered as "lesser than."  I see it all the time in Corporate America and other realms of life.
> 
> Yes, I know WK will become King and Queen someday.....blah blah.....it doesn't matter with competitive people.
> 
> However, I think Meghan is equally competitive and it's going to be a back and forth between the two families.


There is no competition. William is the heir to the throne. It was expected that Meghan would quickly grasp her position in the hierarchy i.e. _very low_, as wife of sixth in line, and would act accordingly. Instead she is making waves and trying to stand out. Exactly the opposite of what someone in her role should do. Another reason why Harry marrying a British aristo would have been a lot simpler all around.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

LVSistinaMM said:


> Welp, I guess I’m gonna get my tinfoil hat...



No worries, here you go: 






ETA:  LOL!!!


----------



## Gal4Dior

LittleStar88 said:


> Rude as well. Just because someone doesn’t know all the quotes means they are a kid.


I don’t think she meant it as an insult, it’s just reality. Sadly, it’s true. I cannot tell you how many times my junior employees have asked what I was referring to or who I was talking about. It’s not that they are stupid, it’s just that it may have not been relevant during their formative years.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Welltraveled! said:


> No worries, here you go:
> 
> View attachment 4523659


Crazy!!! Lol!


----------



## Welltraveled!

mdcx said:


> There is no competition. William is the heir to the throne. It was expected that Meghan would quickly grasp her position in the hierarchy i.e. _very low_, as wife of sixth in line, and would act accordingly. Instead she is making waves and trying to stand out. Exactly the opposite of what someone in her role should do. Another reason why Harry marrying a British aristo would have been a lot simpler all around.



I find it interesting with all the things that's posted on this thread.  No one notice a pattern between the Sussexs and Cambridges - it's a popularity contest.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LVSistinaMM said:


> Crazy!!! Lol!



I was just trying to show, although I may not agree with your opinions.  But I know how to have fun and laugh!


----------



## Flatsy

mdcx said:


> At the moment, I think she is getting what she craves most...attention. It doesn't seem to matter if it negative or positive attention.


I respectfully disagree.  I believe she's very unhappy now about the way things are going.  I think her #1 desire in life is for admiration on the biggest scale possible.  

I think she bought all the pre-wedding hype about how she was going to be the next Princess Di, and I think she doesn't understand why it didn't happen overnight, and why everybody doesn't automatically love her and everything she does.  For someone who is used to controlling her life and achieving her goals, that's got to be insanely frustrating.

I think she doesn't have the patience to just work and slowly earn people's respect over time, and that's why she (and she and Harry) are going to burn out fast.  When she and Harry got married, I thought it could go either way.  

Now that I see how things are playing out, I think they've got another four years. Two years until the marriage burns out +1 additional year of trying to make it work for the sake of the child(ren) +1 additional year of trying to keep it secret from the press.


----------



## bklner2014

Flatsy said:


> I respectfully disagree.  I believe she's very unhappy now about the way things are going.  I think her #1 desire in life is for admiration on the biggest scale possible.
> 
> I think she bought all the pre-wedding hype about how she was going to be the next Princess Di, and I think she doesn't understand why it didn't happen overnight, and why everybody doesn't automatically love her and everything she does.  For someone who is used to controlling her life and achieving her goals, that's got to be insanely frustrating.
> 
> I think she doesn't have the patience to just work and slowly earn people's respect over time, and that's why she (and she and Harry) are going to burn out fast.  When she and Harry got married, I thought it could go either way.
> 
> Now that I see how things are playing out, I think they've got another four years. *Two years until the marriage burns out +1 additional year of trying to make it work for the sake of the child(ren) +1 additional year of trying to keep it secret from the press.*



I am not pro or anti H&M, so have no skin in this game. But that's kind of mean, wishing ill of a couple's prospects for a long-lasting marriage.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Flatsy said:


> Now that I see how things are playing out, I think they've got another four years. Two years until the marriage burns out +1 additional year of trying to make it work for the sake of the child(ren) +1 additional year of trying to keep it secret from the press.



I don't agree with everything you say Flatsy.  But the above comment is in poor taste.  

I DISLIKE William; especially for cheating on Kate.  But I don't wish for them to divorce.


----------



## chowlover2

mdcx said:


> There is no competition. William is the heir to the throne. It was expected that Meghan would quickly grasp her position in the hierarchy i.e. _very low_, as wife of sixth in line, and would act accordingly. Instead she is making waves and trying to stand out. Exactly the opposite of what someone in her role should do. Another reason why Harry marrying a British aristo would have been a lot simpler all around.


I don’t think any British aristo would have him. Was it Chelsea Davies that he dated quite a long time? I’m sure he would have married her if she would have said yes. Being British she is far too aware of life in the royal fishbowl, it just wasn’t for her. Maybe another reason the wedding of M & H came about so quickly. Meghan would not have a chance to back out if she knew what lay ahead of her.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chicaloca said:


> I wonder if Meghan and Harry commiserate over the crappy lot they got in terms of siblings. I knew that the smear campaign on Meghan was coming from the Cambridge camp.
> 
> Now it is pretty much confirmed the Cambridges budget flight was a PR stunt. An empty plane was flown over 500 miles to pick them up and it was booked only Wednesday according to the airlines general manger — not well in advance as claimed by royal reporters.  The Cambridges deliberately tried to to undermine the Sussexes and were getting praise for an obvious stunt.  There really is no love lost between Will and Harry.


I agree with the last part of your assessment for sure. It definitely seems that the brothers/wives aren't that close. Such a shame, but I suppose it happens when siblings marry and move along.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of rude, don’t you think? I’m not a kid.



This wasn’t directed at you personally. 



LittleStar88 said:


> Rude as well. Just because someone doesn’t know all the quotes means they are a kid.



I apologize. I didn’t mean to sound this harsh.


----------



## mdcx

Flatsy said:


> I respectfully disagree.  I believe she's very unhappy now about the way things are going.  I think her #1 desire in life is for admiration on the biggest scale possible.
> 
> I think she bought all the pre-wedding hype about how she was going to be the next Princess Di, and I think she doesn't understand why it didn't happen overnight, and why everybody doesn't automatically love her and everything she does.  For someone who is used to controlling her life and achieving her goals, that's got to be insanely frustrating.
> 
> I think she doesn't have the patience to just work and slowly earn people's respect over time, and that's why she (and she and Harry) are going to burn out fast.  When she and Harry got married, I thought it could go either way.
> 
> Now that I see how things are playing out, I think they've got another four years. Two years until the marriage burns out +1 additional year of trying to make it work for the sake of the child(ren) +1 additional year of trying to keep it secret from the press.


I think you're probably right regards admiration vs. attention.
As far as the marriage, I too don't think it will last the long haul. Meghan's agenda seems pretty opposed to what is expected of someone in her role and ultimately I think it will cause too much friction.

It's hardly wishing ill will on a couple to speculate that their marriage may not survive the many obstacles in its path. I've seen a fair few relationships break up in my time and there are plenty of reg flags with this one.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Welltraveled! said:


> I don't agree with everything you say Flatsy.  But the above comment is in poor taste.
> 
> I DISLIKE William; especially for cheating on Kate.  But I don't wish for them to divorce.


Not sure if I’m thinking Flatsy is wishing them to fail, it’s rather more not seeing it lasting for a number of reasons. I don’t want to put words in her mouth though! I hate it when people do it to me.

My opinion is the same. No one wishes anyone divorce; however, I don’t see this union between H&M lasting the test of time and I’m allowed to have my opinion. 

As for W&K I don’t think they are madly in love; however, I do believe that both of them have come to accept their future roles and will power through, much as the Queen has rumored to have done in her marriage for the greater good of the crown.


----------



## threadbender

I do wonder if there is any chance of them leaving the Firm? Could they brand themselves in such a way to succeed more in the celebrity world than the BRF? I do not know enough to even have any opinion.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Welltraveled! said:


> I was just trying to show, although I may not agree with your opinions.  But I know how to have fun and laugh!


Yup, I most definitely do not agree with your opinions! Lol! Thanks for posting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> I respectfully disagree.  I believe she's very unhappy now about the way things are going.  *I think her #1 desire in life is for admiration on the biggest scale possible.  *
> 
> I think she bought all the pre-wedding hype about how she was going to be the next Princess Di, and I think she doesn't understand why it didn't happen overnight, and why everybody doesn't automatically love her and everything she does.  For someone who is used to controlling her life and achieving her goals, that's got to be insanely frustrating.
> 
> I think she doesn't have the patience to just work and slowly earn people's respect over time, and that's why she (and she and Harry) are going to burn out fast.  When she and Harry got married, I thought it could go either way.
> 
> Now that I see how things are playing out, I think they've got another four years. Two years until the marriage burns out +1 additional year of trying to make it work for the sake of the child(ren) +1 additional year of trying to keep it secret from the press.



I’ll go a step further and say she wants to feel important and powerful with famous friends so she can show her horrible family “See? I made it. People do love me! I am important!” She probably struggled with identity issues because of being estranged from them.

If she and Harry divorce I won’t fault her. It must be hard living in that cage. Hollywood is just waiting to embrace her anyway.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LVSistinaMM said:


> Not sure if I’m thinking Flatsy is wishing them to fail, it’s rather more not seeing it lasting for a number of reasons. I don’t want to put words in her mouth though! I hate it when people do it to me..




I understand why you defend comments of certain posters.  However, her statement implied a timeline to their potential divorce. 

Everyone is allowed an opinion on the state of anyone’s marriage.  But there is a difference between seeing red flags and doing a countdown on when a divorce will happen.

As long as HM has a strong foundation, they will weathered through this storm.  Most couples do.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Economy flight in 2018 but with a seating arrangement which repeated itself at Wimbledon this year. I'm sure a lot of plebs would enjoy traveling economy more if they had all the seats surrounding their own to themselves.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...han-markle-take-economy-flight-nice-new-year/
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'take economy flight to Nice for New Year celebrations'*
_Prince Harry whisked his fiancee, Meghan Markle, to the French Riviera for a New Year break, it has been claimed. The pair are said to have taken a scheduled, British Airways flight to Nice.

In a bid to avoid being spotted by other passengers, they boarded first and headed straight to the back of the plane, next to the rear toilets. They also took up three rows of economy seats, either side of the aisle, even though there were only themselves and three “edgy and nervous” bodyguards in their party, according to the Daily Mail._


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> I do wonder if there is any chance of them leaving the Firm? Could they brand themselves in such a way to succeed more in the celebrity world than the BRF? I do not know enough to even have any opinion.


Where'd these two be without being part of the Firm?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

This little work of art seems to be missing from this forum. It's from the Spectator where Jane Moir is continuing her criticism of H&M but also taking swipes at the likes of Ra*ndy Andy, Zara Tindall and Fergie. I agree completely with Moir about H&M squandering their public good-will capital. It's bordering on terrible twos toddler behaviour. ("Terrible Twos", new nickname?  )  
(Too much text below? Scroll on by. It's for those who don't like to click on links. It's been an issue on other threads. I don't mind personally, I just quick-skim through if I don't find the info pertinent.)


https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/08...harrys-behaviour-is-undermining-the-monarchy/
_Recent newspaper headlines and strident television bulletins will have made uncomfortable reading and viewing for the Queen during her annual holiday at Balmoral. Fresh revelations about the Duke of York’s friendship with the late Jeffrey Epstein are causing further embarrassment in a snowballing scandal that threatens to engulf her beleaguered second son.[...]

Meanwhile it has been revealed that a Hong Kong businessman has being paying fistfuls of dollars to willing royals for years. Dr Jonny Hon gives a £100,000 stipend to Zara Tindall to advise him on horse racing matters (‘it’s over there, the one with four legs’) and has given almost £300,000 to the Duchess of York for ‘marketing and promotion’ and being a non-executive director of his film company (‘pass me the paperclips’). In return he gets lots of lovely handshaking access to the Windsors — and he certainly seems pleased with his deal.[...]

The problem is that Harry and Meghan can’t have it both ways, and everyone can see that except them. Their refusal to choose between a taxpayer-funded life and a private life is at the root of all the current tensions and the endless disparaging headlines. The former life choice has behavioural constraints embodied by the Queen, while the latter offers the freedom they so crave; where they could jet anywhere on Air Caviar, refuse to name Archie’s godparents, spend the whole summer on a yacht with Beyoncé and Jay Z and guest edit glossy publications such as Vogue, while no one would bat an eye. Instead they insist upon this queasy middle ground, where they happily accept a £2.4 million taxpayer-funded revamp of Frogmore Cottage while living like A-list stars resentful of our good-natured interest in their wellbeing and their baby.[...]

‘We had a garden party to celebrate Harry and Meghan’s wedding,’ a Daily Mail reader wrote to me recently. ‘Now I wouldn’t go to the end of the street to see them.’ And it is clear that many feel the same way. Never in the course of royal history has so much public goodwill been squandered so quickly and so thoughtlessly, amid the suspicion that H&M are just not that interested in the dopes back home who paid for their £5,000 copper bath, their fixtures and their fittings. With important announcements such as Archie’s birth, always released at an hour that is most beneficial to the US morning media, their priorities towards attracting a more global and less critical audience are clear. Even American chat show host Ellen DeGeneres recently met with the Sussexes in England to ‘talk about their work on wildlife conservation’. The question is, does all this negativity mean that the royals could become an endangered species themselves?[...]
_


----------



## marthastoo

The Cambridges' flying commercial has nothing to do with trying to undermine the Sussexes.  It's called situational awareness.  The Sussexes get excoriated in the media for flying on a private jet (having more to do with  the perceived hypocrisy of Harry's recent comments about the environment than actually flying private, which happens frequently in the RF).  The Cambridges (as anyone with half a brain) realize flying private is toxic at this time, so decides to fly commercial.  Pretty simple and understandable.


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> However, her statement implied a timeline to their potential divorce.
> 
> Everyone is allowed an opinion on the state of anyone’s marriage. But there is a difference between seeing red flags and doing a countdown on when a divorce will happen.


Speculating about celebrity marriages and their longevity is nothing new and I have zero qualms about doing it.  I see all kinds of red flags, and I made my prediction.



> As long as HM has a strong foundation, they will weathered through this storm. Most couples do.


I don't think they have a strong foundation.

Quote from Harry in 2013: "If you find the right person and everything feels right, then it takes time, especially for myself and my brother. You ain't ever going to find someone who is going to jump into the position that it would hold.  Simple as that." 

Red flag that Harry found someone so eager to jump into the position.  He was dazzled by someone who appeared to be the perfect package and he ignored his own advice and rushed.

Neither Meghan nor Harry strike me as having the fortitude to weather storms for long.  Meghan has a long history of cutting and running.  Both of them are children of divorce (a big divorce predictor itself) who grew up without a model of how a healthy, long-term marriage works.  Meghan already has one divorce under her belt, which ups the chances significantly that marriage #2 will also fail.



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Where'd these two be without being part of the Firm?


Los Angeles.


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry attending the Rugby Football League Challenge Cup Final


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree speculating about celebrity marriages is the norm.  But there is a difference between speculating and creating a timeline (or hoping for) any couple potential demise.  I think it's a lack of respect for the institution of marriage.  Which unfortunately is the norm and quite sad.  Especially where there are children involved.

Speaking on HM, eh, agree to disagree.  Until the next debate! 





Flatsy said:


> Speculating about celebrity marriages and their longevity is nothing new and I have zero qualms about doing it.  I see all kinds of red flags, and I made my prediction.
> 
> 
> I don't think they have a strong foundation.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I so want someone to caption this.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Rude as well. Just because someone doesn’t know all the quotes means they are a kid.


Did I *SPECIFICALLY* say that about you?!?! .. NO, so you need to stop with the accusations of rudeness!  I merely stated that it is possible that younger folks would not know as much about him, that is all .. put people on IGNORE if you get so bothersome about someone not even accusing you!  Sheesh ..


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Speculating about celebrity marriages and their longevity is nothing new and I have zero qualms about doing it.  I see all kinds of red flags, and I made my prediction.
> 
> 
> I don't think they have a strong foundation.
> 
> Quote from Harry in 2013: "If you find the right person and everything feels right, then it takes time, especially for myself and my brother. You ain't ever going to find someone who is going to jump into the position that it would hold.  Simple as that."
> 
> Red flag that Harry found someone so eager to jump into the position.  He was dazzled by someone who appeared to be the perfect package and he ignored his own advice and rushed.
> 
> Neither Meghan nor Harry strike me as having the fortitude to weather storms for long.  Meghan has a long history of cutting and running.  Both of them are children of divorce (a big divorce predictor itself) who grew up without a model of how a healthy, long-term marriage works.  Meghan already has one divorce under her belt, which ups the chances significantly that marriage #2 will also fail.
> 
> 
> Los Angeles.


.. and let's not forget that "supposedly" the row between William and Harry started when William questioned Harry's decision to move so quickly with Meghan ..


----------



## Tivo

CeeJay said:


> .. and let's not forget that "supposedly" the row between William and Harry started when William questioned Harry's decision to move so quickly with Meghan ..


Hit dogs holler.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Nacho Figueras is a good friend.......


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Did I *SPECIFICALLY* say that about you?!?! .. NO, so you need to stop with the accusations of rudeness!  I merely stated that it is possible that younger folks would not know as much about him, that is all .. put people on IGNORE if you get so bothersome about someone not even accusing you!  Sheesh ..



Um, wow. No, but your comment piggybacked on another that quoted me. Younger, older... Not everyone knows it all so why even make the comments in the first place?

Back on topic...

It would be a big bummer if they divorced but I could see how it would play to her advantage. I wonder what their prenup looks like?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Welltraveled! said:


> Nacho Figueras is a good friend.......
> 
> 
> View attachment 4524156


With friends like these...  

H/M need straight talkers, not sycophants.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I love this quote about friendship.








SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> With friends like these...
> 
> H/M need straight talkers, not sycophants.


----------



## lulilu

I admit that I am a relative newcomer to the gossip forum, but have been reading this one as I enjoy reading about the BRF and all that.

But I am shocked to read all the comments predicting a divorce and what M will or won't do when that happens.  They barely just got married!  I must be missing something because nothing I've read indicates there are marital issues.  Seems as if people are jumping the gun here.


----------



## chicaloca

lulilu said:


> I admit that I am a relative newcomer to the gossip forum, but have been reading this one as I enjoy reading about the BRF and all that.
> 
> But I am shocked to read all the comments predicting a divorce and what M will or won't do when that happens.  They barely just got married!  I must be missing something because nothing I've read indicates there are marital issues.  Seems as if people are jumping the gun here.



Meghan and Harry are fine. The divorce talk is wishful thinking. They are well matched. Both are outgoing, personable and passionate philanthropists. It is no wonder other high profile people are drawn into their orbit and feel compelled speak out on their behalf.  Harry looks happier and more assured than he’s ever been.

Meghan and Harry are also both hands-on people who are extremely effective at getting results for their charitable initiatives which bodes well for their upcoming Foundation launch.

Leaving this pic here just because. Harry is definitely his mother’s son.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Welltraveled! said:


> I understand why you defend comments of certain posters.  However, her statement implied a timeline to their potential divorce.
> 
> Everyone is allowed an opinion on the state of anyone’s marriage.  But there is a difference between seeing red flags and doing a countdown on when a divorce will happen.
> 
> As long as HM has a strong foundation, they will weathered through this storm.  Most couples do.


Please do not think I am defending any poster. I just felt the content posted was not meant to interpret it. It doesn’t have to be a thing, or sides. This isn’t high school, right? I have no dog in this race. I’m just giving my two cents on this thread, because I can. Also, I don’t see any ill will, either, with the time frame, but that’s is just me.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This little work of art seems to be missing from this forum. It's from the Spectator where Jane Moir is continuing her criticism of H&M but also taking swipes at the likes of Ra*ndy Andy, Zara Tindall and Fergie. I agree completely with Moir about H&M squandering their public good-will capital. It's bordering on terrible twos toddler behaviour. ("Terrible Twos", new nickname?  )
> (Too much text below? Scroll on by. It's for those who don't like to click on links. It's been an issue on other threads. I don't mind personally, I just quick-skim through if I don't find the info pertinent.)
> View attachment 4523839
> 
> https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/08...harrys-behaviour-is-undermining-the-monarchy/
> _Recent newspaper headlines and strident television bulletins will have made uncomfortable reading and viewing for the Queen during her annual holiday at Balmoral. Fresh revelations about the Duke of York’s friendship with the late Jeffrey Epstein are causing further embarrassment in a snowballing scandal that threatens to engulf her beleaguered second son.[...]
> 
> Meanwhile it has been revealed that a Hong Kong businessman has being paying fistfuls of dollars to willing royals for years. Dr Jonny Hon gives a £100,000 stipend to Zara Tindall to advise him on horse racing matters (‘it’s over there, the one with four legs’) and has given almost £300,000 to the Duchess of York for ‘marketing and promotion’ and being a non-executive director of his film company (‘pass me the paperclips’). In return he gets lots of lovely handshaking access to the Windsors — and he certainly seems pleased with his deal.[...]
> 
> The problem is that Harry and Meghan can’t have it both ways, and everyone can see that except them. Their refusal to choose between a taxpayer-funded life and a private life is at the root of all the current tensions and the endless disparaging headlines. The former life choice has behavioural constraints embodied by the Queen, while the latter offers the freedom they so crave; where they could jet anywhere on Air Caviar, refuse to name Archie’s godparents, spend the whole summer on a yacht with Beyoncé and Jay Z and guest edit glossy publications such as Vogue, while no one would bat an eye. Instead they insist upon this queasy middle ground, where they happily accept a £2.4 million taxpayer-funded revamp of Frogmore Cottage while living like A-list stars resentful of our good-natured interest in their wellbeing and their baby.[...]
> 
> ‘We had a garden party to celebrate Harry and Meghan’s wedding,’ a Daily Mail reader wrote to me recently. ‘Now I wouldn’t go to the end of the street to see them.’ And it is clear that many feel the same way. Never in the course of royal history has so much public goodwill been squandered so quickly and so thoughtlessly, amid the suspicion that H&M are just not that interested in the dopes back home who paid for their £5,000 copper bath, their fixtures and their fittings. With important announcements such as Archie’s birth, always released at an hour that is most beneficial to the US morning media, their priorities towards attracting a more global and less critical audience are clear. Even American chat show host Ellen DeGeneres recently met with the Sussexes in England to ‘talk about their work on wildlife conservation’. The question is, does all this negativity mean that the royals could become an endangered species themselves?[...]_


Lol! This is pretty funny. There has been discussion as to whether it is Archie behind the visor. Actually I think it is


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> I so want someone to caption this.


Twins separated at birth.  Except he got all the tattoos that Granny wouldn't allow!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> Lol! This is pretty funny. There has been discussion as to whether it is Archie behind the visor. Actually I think it is


I saw suggestions it's Ran*dy Andy in jail


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I saw suggestions it's Ran*dy Andy in jail


I thought I saw red hair so it never occurred to me that it could be Andy.  Plus, I rather doubt that he will come close to being in jail.  He will just be labeled a sleazebag for life.


----------



## threadbender

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Where'd these two be without being part of the Firm?


That is kind of what I was asking. lol Would they be a popular, celebrity couple/family if they are not part of the BRF?


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...00-WEEK-seafront-seven-bed-mansion-Ibiza.html

They brought their own chef.  Dead.  

Actually I am upset that I wasn't invited to this amazing place.  I would rather stay here than Froggie Cottage any day of the week.  Plus, I wouldn't have to cook because of the chef.  Even if I wanted to play in the kitchen, there would be staff to clean up my mess.  Swim, have a massage, drink wine enjoy the seafood of S. France.  OOOOHHHH!  

This was a tough decision.  To be or not to be kind of decision.  Stay home or fly away in the private plane to make the dream complete and run the risk of having my eco warrior title taken away.  Just for a little slice of heaven?   Well, decide for yourself,


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> That is kind of what I was asking. lol Would they be a popular, celebrity couple/family if they are not part of the BRF?



MM could always try out for the Housewives of Beverly Hills.


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ted-help-rescue-Harry-Meghans-reputation.html

Fiona, good luck to you.  Going by the past employment histories of other folks, it doesn't look promising.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> Lol! This is pretty funny. There has been discussion as to whether it is Archie behind the visor. Actually I think it is


Hey! He’s a ginger!! Lol


----------



## momtok

LVSistinaMM said:


> Hey! He’s a ginger!! Lol



He's also posted on page "666" of this thread.    Amusing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

momtok said:


> He's also posted on page "666" of this thread.    Amusing.


----------



## chowlover2

momtok said:


> He's also posted on page "666" of this thread.    Amusing.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Another Update: A few days ago it was revealed that The Duke and Duchess have appointed Fiona Mcilwham as their Private Secretary, the most senior role in any Royal household (equivalent to the Chief of Staff ). Fiona will replace the departing Samantha Cohen, who has temporarily been covering the role and stayed on to help the Sussexes to find a long-term successor. .
. 
Samantha, who is Australian, has spent 17 years working for the Royal Family and was formerly one of the Queen's most trusted aides as ‘Assistant Private Secretary’ and ‘Communications Secretary’.
.
.
According to ITV, Fiona is Cambridge educated, top Foreign Office diplomat - she has worked there for 21 years. She is a “former British Ambassador to Albania and her biography on her social media pages describes herself as an "experienced British diplomat" who specialises in "European, international security, governance and post conflict issues". She held the position as one of the youngest British ambassadors when she was posted to Albania in 2009.
.
.
The Sussexes household is now an all female team. With Sara Latham as Communications Secretary, Heather Wong as Harry’s Assistant Private Secretary. The other female staff include two senior female press officers and a team of at least three female behind the scenes staff, including the Duke’s long-serving projects manager, Clara Madden (who handed Meghan the bouquet on her wedding day!


----------



## doloresmia

Reporting on annual YouGov poll


----------



## caramelize126

Welltraveled! said:


> View attachment 4524688
> 
> 
> Another Update: A few days ago it was revealed that The Duke and Duchess have appointed Fiona Mcilwham as their Private Secretary, the most senior role in any Royal household (equivalent to the Chief of Staff ). Fiona will replace the departing Samantha Cohen, who has temporarily been covering the role and stayed on to help the Sussexes to find a long-term successor. .
> .
> Samantha, who is Australian, has spent 17 years working for the Royal Family and was formerly one of the Queen's most trusted aides as ‘Assistant Private Secretary’ and ‘Communications Secretary’.
> . . .



As per companies house, Sara Latham has already resigned. Same with Natalie Campbell.. They only signed on with the foundation in July. The Sussex  are REALLY having trouble retaining staff. 
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/12077679/officers

Sara has worked in politics for years and worked with Hillary ******* during the 2016 elections. If she could get through the 2016 elections, but couldnt handle team sussex for more than a month... it really makes you wonder wth is going on there.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t understand why you would go from a political powerhouse position to assistant to a lesser royal. That makes no sense to me.


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> As per companies house, Sara Latham has already resigned. She only signed on with the foundation in July.


Sara Latham and Natalie Campbell are still serving in their original roles with the Sussexes.  They were acting as placeholders in the foundation until permanent employees were appointed, so now they are no longer doing double duty.

However I don't expect Sara Latham to be around too much longer.  Either she's terrible at her job or the Sussexes are not cooperative (could be a little from column A, a little from column B) because their PR is terrible.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> True. I just watched *The Story of Diana *documentary on Netflix and they covered this.
> Really worth watching.



Not only have I been watching Diana since she first appeared posing for the photographers, unintentionally, in a see-through skirt, I have watched every documentary and have found *The Story of Diana* a bit lacking.  I wonder if that's because it was made in partnership with People Magazine and they tend to do fluff.

Perhaps the Sussexes don't pay well enough for demanding work.  Maybe that's part of the reason they lose household staff?


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t understand why you would go from a political powerhouse position to assistant to a lesser royal. That makes no sense to me.


It does seem rather strange to me as well, but maybe more $$$$ -or- to have your name associated with the BRF!?!?  I just hope that H & M listen because the more articles I've been reading have been saying that the 2 of them just don't listen and simply want to do things "their way" (then resulting in the bad PR).  I think they could do great things, but they do need to be mindful of 'how' they do it!


----------



## Jayne1

Are H&M spending some summer vacation in Balmoral with the extended family... or not, and if not, why.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Are H&M spending some summer vacation in Balmoral with the extended family... or not, and if not, why.


It's curious that they haven't been yet, but the Queen will be there for another 4+ weeks, so they have time.  The Queen needs to have that walk down by the river with Meghan that the tabloids have been writing about, LOL.

It will be weird if they don't go.  For all of the talk about them going last summer, I don't think they were ever spotted?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Jayne1 said:


> Are H&M spending some summer vacation in Balmoral with the extended family... or not, and if not, why.


Curious about this, too.


----------



## mdcx

LVSistinaMM said:


> Curious about this, too.


Me also. Isn't their trip to Africa coming up very soon?


----------



## PatsyCline

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t understand why you would go from a political powerhouse position to assistant to a lesser royal. That makes no sense to me.


Less stress?


----------



## A1aGypsy

PatsyCline said:


> Less stress?



Oh yeah, sounds like a cake walk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

According to something called Cheetsheet in March of 2019: "the Duke and Duchess of Sussex hired Sara Latham, former senior advisor to Hillary ******* during the 2016 presidential campaign. Latham will report directly to Queen Elizabeth’s Communications Secretary, Donal McCabe. 

Maybe Latham doesn't like taking direction from QEII's Communications Secretary, or finds herself torn between the Crown vs the demands of M & H and can't win. McCabe would have veto power over anything Latham proposes, and rightly so.


----------



## buffym

Elizabeth Day: Meghan's just doing what comes naturally 

I’m in Los Angeles at the moment. I advise you to look away now if the casual smugness of that opening sentence was too much to bear. There is nothing worse than reading about someone else’s holiday when you’re not on one. It’s like scrolling through Instagram and being visually assaulted by a constant stream of painted toenails on sandy beaches when you’re on a rush-hour train watching rain beat against the windows.

But I haven’t just been wafting around drinking celery juice. No, I have been undertaking vital journalistic research: asking Americans what they think of the Duchess of Sussex – although, over here, she is still known as Meghan Markle, royal titles generally only being used when saying ‘Yasss queen!’ to emphasise something worthy of admiration.

I start by asking my friend Joan, a wildly successful television executive. ‘I think she’s fantastic,’ she replies, without missing a beat. Wherever I pose the question, the response is the same. Angelenos see Meghan as one of their own. She grew up here. Then she became an actress: a profession this city was built on. In LA, celebrity is not a negative thing; it is a way of life.

The fact that Meghan has chosen to use her celebrity as a platform to help others – from guest-editing British Vogue and filling the magazine with female change-makers, to setting up a crisis texting service for those with mental health issues – is seen as wholly commendable. Her marriage to Prince Harry is almost incidental. In truth, most people I spoke to thought that he was the one to have made an excellent match.

It strikes me that much of the criticism Meghan has faced in the UK springs from two sources. One is the pernicious idea that somehow her face doesn’t quite ‘fit’. The people who believe this might not think they are being racist. They might have inherited an innate, nameless discomfort bequeathed by generations of embedded prejudice. But – let’s be clear – it is racism.

The second criticism is that it’s all a bit… well…tacky. It’s that the royal family should, like a Victorian child, be seen and not heard. It’s astonishing to me that in 2019 we still expect our royals to behave as they would have done a century ago: opening new hospital wings, wearing conservative clothes and never once expressing a mildly controversial opinion. We expect them to offer up their children for photocalls and renovate their houses in ways that we think are appropriate because they benefit from our taxpayer money.

Meghan has given up her lucrative career and much of her privacy to marry a man she loves. In the process, she brings a starry glow to our most traditional national institution. Navigating the role would be fraught with difficulty for any of us, let alone an American who grew up in a city where it’s perfectly normal to aspire to fame.

Used effectively, fame can be a valuable currency. Kim Kardashian successfully lobbied the president to release a grandmother serving a life sentence from jail. Taylor Swift caused a voter registration spike after an Instagram post in which she encouraged teens to vote and endorsed two ******** candidates. Celebrity is power, whether you like it or not. You might wish it were otherwise – that nurses and teachers were better paid and wielded more influence than someone who was once on Suits. But this is the world we live in. Of all the members of the royal family, Meghan is the most equipped to deal with modern times. She has chosen to use her celebrity for good rather than to disappear meekly from view. Like my friend Joan says: fantastic. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/yo...p_twitter_share-top&__twitter_impression=true


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> Elizabeth Day: Meghan's just doing what comes naturally
> 
> I’m in Los Angeles at the moment. I advise you to look away now if the casual smugness of that opening sentence was too much to bear. There is nothing worse than reading about someone else’s holiday when you’re not on one. It’s like scrolling through Instagram and being visually assaulted by a constant stream of painted toenails on sandy beaches when you’re on a rush-hour train watching rain beat against the windows.
> 
> But I haven’t just been wafting around drinking celery juice. No, I have been undertaking vital journalistic research: asking Americans what they think of the Duchess of Sussex – although, over here, she is still known as Meghan Markle, royal titles generally only being used when saying ‘Yasss queen!’ to emphasise something worthy of admiration.
> 
> I start by asking my friend Joan, a wildly successful television executive. ‘I think she’s fantastic,’ she replies, without missing a beat. Wherever I pose the question, the response is the same. Angelenos see Meghan as one of their own. She grew up here. Then she became an actress: a profession this city was built on. In LA, celebrity is not a negative thing; it is a way of life.
> 
> The fact that Meghan has chosen to use her celebrity as a platform to help others – from guest-editing British Vogue and filling the magazine with female change-makers, to setting up a crisis texting service for those with mental health issues – is seen as wholly commendable. Her marriage to Prince Harry is almost incidental. In truth, most people I spoke to thought that he was the one to have made an excellent match.
> 
> It strikes me that much of the criticism Meghan has faced in the UK springs from two sources. One is the pernicious idea that somehow her face doesn’t quite ‘fit’. The people who believe this might not think they are being racist. They might have inherited an innate, nameless discomfort bequeathed by generations of embedded prejudice. But – let’s be clear – it is racism.
> 
> The second criticism is that it’s all a bit… well…tacky. It’s that the royal family should, like a Victorian child, be seen and not heard. It’s astonishing to me that in 2019 we still expect our royals to behave as they would have done a century ago: opening new hospital wings, wearing conservative clothes and never once expressing a mildly controversial opinion. We expect them to offer up their children for photocalls and renovate their houses in ways that we think are appropriate because they benefit from our taxpayer money.
> 
> Meghan has given up her lucrative career and much of her privacy to marry a man she loves. In the process, she brings a starry glow to our most traditional national institution. Navigating the role would be fraught with difficulty for any of us, let alone an American who grew up in a city where it’s perfectly normal to aspire to fame.
> 
> Used effectively, fame can be a valuable currency. Kim Kardashian successfully lobbied the president to release a grandmother serving a life sentence from jail. Taylor Swift caused a voter registration spike after an Instagram post in which she encouraged teens to vote and endorsed two ******** candidates. Celebrity is power, whether you like it or not. You might wish it were otherwise – that nurses and teachers were better paid and wielded more influence than someone who was once on Suits. But this is the world we live in. Of all the members of the royal family, Meghan is the most equipped to deal with modern times. She has chosen to use her celebrity for good rather than to disappear meekly from view. Like my friend Joan says: fantastic.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/yo...p_twitter_share-top&__twitter_impression=true


Well isn’t that sweet, she’s putting Meghan on a par with a Kardashian and a pop star.  Makes the point perfectly I’d say.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Clearblueskies said:


> Well isn’t that sweet, she’s putting Meghan on a par with a Kardashian and a pop star.  Makes the point perfectly I’d say.



Oh dear god. I qualify that as an insult, which says a lot because I live adjacent to and work in lovely Lala land.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LVSistinaMM said:


> Oh dear god. I qualify that as an insult, which says a lot because I live adjacent to and work in lovely Lala land.


It sums up not getting it.  Would anyone think to compare the Queen with someone like Ma Kardashian?  Of course not.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Elizabeth Day: Meghan's just doing what comes naturally
> 
> I’m in Los Angeles at the moment. I advise you to look away now if the casual smugness of that opening sentence was too much to bear. There is nothing worse than reading about someone else’s holiday when you’re not on one. It’s like scrolling through Instagram and being visually assaulted by a constant stream of painted toenails on sandy beaches when you’re on a rush-hour train watching rain beat against the windows.
> 
> But I haven’t just been wafting around drinking celery juice. No, I have been undertaking vital journalistic research: asking Americans what they think of the Duchess of Sussex – although, over here, she is still known as Meghan Markle, royal titles generally only being used when saying ‘Yasss queen!’ to emphasise something worthy of admiration.
> 
> I start by asking my friend Joan, a wildly successful television executive. ‘I think she’s fantastic,’ she replies, without missing a beat. Wherever I pose the question, the response is the same. Angelenos see Meghan as one of their own. She grew up here. Then she became an actress: a profession this city was built on. In LA, celebrity is not a negative thing; it is a way of life.
> 
> The fact that Meghan has chosen to use her celebrity as a platform to help others – from guest-editing British Vogue and filling the magazine with female change-makers, to setting up a crisis texting service for those with mental health issues – is seen as wholly commendable. Her marriage to Prince Harry is almost incidental. In truth, most people I spoke to thought that he was the one to have made an excellent match.
> 
> It strikes me that much of the criticism Meghan has faced in the UK springs from two sources. One is the pernicious idea that somehow her face doesn’t quite ‘fit’. The people who believe this might not think they are being racist. They might have inherited an innate, nameless discomfort bequeathed by generations of embedded prejudice. But – let’s be clear – it is racism.
> 
> The second criticism is that it’s all a bit… well…tacky. It’s that the royal family should, like a Victorian child, be seen and not heard. It’s astonishing to me that in 2019 we still expect our royals to behave as they would have done a century ago: opening new hospital wings, wearing conservative clothes and never once expressing a mildly controversial opinion. We expect them to offer up their children for photocalls and renovate their houses in ways that we think are appropriate because they benefit from our taxpayer money.
> 
> Meghan has given up her lucrative career and much of her privacy to marry a man she loves. In the process, she brings a starry glow to our most traditional national institution. Navigating the role would be fraught with difficulty for any of us, let alone an American who grew up in a city where it’s perfectly normal to aspire to fame.
> 
> Used effectively, fame can be a valuable currency. Kim Kardashian successfully lobbied the president to release a grandmother serving a life sentence from jail. Taylor Swift caused a voter registration spike after an Instagram post in which she encouraged teens to vote and endorsed two ******** candidates. Celebrity is power, whether you like it or not. You might wish it were otherwise – that nurses and teachers were better paid and wielded more influence than someone who was once on Suits. But this is the world we live in. Of all the members of the royal family, Meghan is the most equipped to deal with modern times. She has chosen to use her celebrity for good rather than to disappear meekly from view. Like my friend Joan says: fantastic.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/yo...p_twitter_share-top&__twitter_impression=true



This article got me at “lucrative career.”    The only celebrity she has is from her marriage. She was one step away from being unemployed and that was in Canada and not in LA. 

That will be the day when a Kardashian craves privacy. I live in LA and have witnessed their paps gathering because a K flunkie called them to tell them where the particular K would be showing up. Still waiting to get Kim’s result on the Bar exam. 






.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> This article got me at “lucrative career.”    The only celebrity she has is from her marriage. She was one step away from being unemployed and that was in Canada and not in LA.
> 
> That will be the day when a Kardashian craves privacy. I live in LA and have witnessed their paps gathering because a K flunkie called them to tell them where the particular K would be showing up. Still waiting to get Kim’s result on the Bar exam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Lucrative career? Seriously? That is quite a puff piece commissioned with some cash, I’m sure. Was she an working actress? Yes. Was her career lucrative? Hardly. She was a blip in the world of Hollywood until she started dating Harry. Just dating him catapulted her into heights of stardom she never could dream of! To say anything otherwise, would not serve the truth.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> Elizabeth Day: Meghan's just doing what comes naturally
> 
> I’m in Los Angeles at the moment. I advise you to look away now if the casual smugness of that opening sentence was too much to bear. There is nothing worse than reading about someone else’s holiday when you’re not on one. It’s like scrolling through Instagram and being visually assaulted by a constant stream of painted toenails on sandy beaches when you’re on a rush-hour train watching rain beat against the windows.
> 
> But I haven’t just been wafting around drinking celery juice. No, I have been undertaking vital journalistic research: asking Americans what they think of the Duchess of Sussex – although, over here, she is still known as Meghan Markle, royal titles generally only being used when saying ‘Yasss queen!’ to emphasise something worthy of admiration.
> 
> I start by asking my friend Joan, a wildly successful television executive. ‘I think she’s fantastic,’ she replies, without missing a beat. Wherever I pose the question, the response is the same. Angelenos see Meghan as one of their own. She grew up here. Then she became an actress: a profession this city was built on. In LA, celebrity is not a negative thing; it is a way of life.
> 
> The fact that Meghan has chosen to use her celebrity as a platform to help others – from guest-editing British Vogue and filling the magazine with female change-makers, to setting up a crisis texting service for those with mental health issues – is seen as wholly commendable. Her marriage to Prince Harry is almost incidental. In truth, most people I spoke to thought that he was the one to have made an excellent match.
> 
> It strikes me that much of the criticism Meghan has faced in the UK springs from two sources. One is the pernicious idea that somehow her face doesn’t quite ‘fit’. The people who believe this might not think they are being racist. They might have inherited an innate, nameless discomfort bequeathed by generations of embedded prejudice. But – let’s be clear – it is racism.
> 
> The second criticism is that it’s all a bit… well…tacky. It’s that the royal family should, like a Victorian child, be seen and not heard. It’s astonishing to me that in 2019 we still expect our royals to behave as they would have done a century ago: opening new hospital wings, wearing conservative clothes and never once expressing a mildly controversial opinion. We expect them to offer up their children for photocalls and renovate their houses in ways that we think are appropriate because they benefit from our taxpayer money.
> 
> Meghan has given up her lucrative career and much of her privacy to marry a man she loves. In the process, she brings a starry glow to our most traditional national institution. Navigating the role would be fraught with difficulty for any of us, let alone an American who grew up in a city where it’s perfectly normal to aspire to fame.
> 
> Used effectively, fame can be a valuable currency. Kim Kardashian successfully lobbied the president to release a grandmother serving a life sentence from jail. Taylor Swift caused a voter registration spike after an Instagram post in which she encouraged teens to vote and endorsed two ******** candidates. Celebrity is power, whether you like it or not. You might wish it were otherwise – that nurses and teachers were better paid and wielded more influence than someone who was once on Suits. But this is the world we live in. Of all the members of the royal family, Meghan is the most equipped to deal with modern times. Like my friend Joan says: fantastic.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/yo...p_twitter_share-top&__twitter_impression=true


A text as vapid and inane as the general public behaviour of the subject of this love bomb piece, and her prince in tow.

But absolutely. Do go on, sitting on your little islands of privilege, labeling critics as tacky backwards racists full of inherited, innate, embedded racism and prejudice not woke and "modern" enough to grasp the magnificent force for world change that is Meghan. Her PR is sure to pick up and prosper   Latham obviously learnt nothing from her earlier employment


----------



## MarieCurie

"This thread, WOW!"- Someone up-thread

Meghan should do a pap stroll with Angelina Jolie as they seem to be equally polarizing figures. I can just see all the heads rolling and calls for Meghan to be hung, drawn and quartered. The outrage from Piers Morgan alone would be enough to tear a rip through the space-time continuum.

*Note- *_Before anyone says it, I know Meghan is just a lowly tv actress who was one step away from being unemployed before getting her claws into Harry, and putting her name in the same sentence as the great Saint Angie, a successful movie star with a lucrative career, is akin to committing high treason. _


----------



## bag-mania

^Oh no, Meghan shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence because she's nowhere near as bad. Angelina is much, much more annoying. Hope this helps.


----------



## Gal4Dior

MarieCurie said:


> "This thread, WOW!"- Someone up-thread
> 
> Meghan should do a pap stroll with Angelina Jolie as they seem to be equally polarizing figures. I can just see all the heads rolling and calls for Meghan to be hung, drawn and quartered. The outrage from Piers Morgan alone would be enough to tear a rip through the space-time continuum.
> 
> *Note- *_Before anyone says it, I know Meghan is just a lowly tv actress who was one step away from being unemployed before getting her claws into Harry, and putting her name in the same sentence as the great Saint Angie, a successful movie star with a lucrative career, is akin to committing high treason. _


Angelina is hardly a Saint. She’s a nut job actually. I know she does great humanitarian work, but it doesn’t change that she’s a kook with tons of money and mouth/lips that simply need to stay closed.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> Well isn’t that sweet, she’s putting Meghan on a par with a Kardashian and a pop star.  Makes the point perfectly I’d say.





LVSistinaMM said:


> Oh dear god. I qualify that as an insult, which says a lot because I live adjacent to and work in lovely Lala land.





gracekelly said:


> This article got me at “lucrative career.”    The only celebrity she has is from her marriage. She was one step away from being unemployed and that was in Canada and not in LA.
> 
> That will be the day when a Kardashian craves privacy. I live in LA and have witnessed their paps gathering because a K flunkie called them to tell them where the particular K would be showing up. Still waiting to get Kim’s result on the Bar exam.
> .


Again @Clearblueskies , @LVSistinaMM  and @gracekelly  .. 100% with you on that!!!  Personally, *I would be enraged* if ANYONE ever said I was like any of the Kardashian/Jenner clan!  I'm in LA (_alas closer to those K-bombs since I'm in the Valley_) .. and have seen the bedlam of Paps when they go outside their homes.  A good friend of mine works for a very exclusive boutique in Calabasas Commons and the K's/J's shop there and the last time I was there, in comes Kylie .. snap, snap, pop, pop .. RIDICULOUS!  I hate having my picture taken to begin with, and did they even ask?!? .. NOPE!  I have issues with my eyesight, where bright sun and especially flash photography pretty much 'blinds' me for a good hour or more .. so I said 'STOP', but those stupid paps just kept on and thankfully, my friend brought me to the back of their store (bathroom) to get me out of that nonsense (_and yes - I had to wait for over 2 hours to get my "eyesight" back such that I could drive home_)!

Honestly, I NEVER knew who Meghan was until her engagement to Harry (_never watched Suits_).  Even a friend whose son played opposite to Meghan in a school play (_yes - she was in the Girl's School and he was in the Boy's school_) .. didn't know about Meghan being on Suits .. and yet, we live in LA!  So, this whole article is well .. questionable.  You want to talk to LA folks about Meghan, why not get more than 1 opinion and go to the "regular" people.  Frankly, I'm getting really tired of the "_you're racist if you don't like her_" quotes.  There are plenty of mixed-race marriages out here; I have a number of dear friends in those marriages .. so does that make them or myself racist?  Uggh .. STOP!


----------



## bag-mania

I think that article was a response to those who complained that most Daily Mail stories about Meghan are critical. This was a "see, we throw her a positive piece every once in a while" article.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Again @Clearblueskies , @LVSistinaMM  and @gracekelly  .. 100% with you on that!!!  Personally, *I would be enraged* if ANYONE ever said I was like any of the Kardashian/Jenner clan!  I'm in LA (_alas closer to those K-bombs since I'm in the Valley_) .. and have seen the bedlam of Paps when they go outside their homes.  A good friend of mine works for a very exclusive boutique in Calabasas Commons and the K's/J's shop there and the last time I was there, in comes Kylie .. snap, snap, pop, pop .. RIDICULOUS!  I hate having my picture taken to begin with, and did they even ask?!? .. NOPE!  I have issues with my eyesight, where bright sun and especially flash photography pretty much 'blinds' me for a good hour or more .. so I said 'STOP', but those stupid paps just kept on and thankfully, my friend brought me to the back of their store (bathroom) to get me out of that nonsense (_and yes - I had to wait for over 2 hours to get my "eyesight" back such that I could drive home_)!
> 
> *Honestly, I NEVER knew who Meghan was until her engagement to Harry (never watched Suits).  Even a friend whose son played opposite to Meghan in a school play (yes - she was in the Girl's School and he was in the Boy's school) .. didn't know about Meghan being on Suits .. and yet, we live in LA!  So, this whole article is well .. questionable.  You want to talk to LA folks about Meghan, why not get more than 1 opinion and go to the "regular" people.*  Frankly, I'm getting really tired of the "_you're racist if you don't like her_" quotes.  There are plenty of mixed-race marriages out here; I have a number of dear friends in those marriages .. so does that make them or myself racist?  Uggh .. STOP!



You aren't the only one.  How I never found Suits on cable is beyond me as I have gotten sucked into the ATT Uverse top package where all this crap resides!  Regular people don't even follow the REAL Royal family so why would they even follow her or know about her.  We ALL know in our rarified little universe here, but the rest of the world wouldn't know a thing except for People Magazine and the like.  Every time sales were low, People  stuck Lady Diana on the cover, even after she died.  They will do the same with the Harkles for as long as they are media fodder.

Her "celebrity" friends are going to start dropping like flies once they think their popularity by association is going down.   Her mother and Jessica M may be the only ones left.  Even Sir Elton will be off on tour with his private jet.

The latest is that MM is going to have a hen party the same weekend as the Cressida Bonus wedding.  It will be really interesting to see who* doesn't *show up.

@CeeJay  DH and I were treated to the mass of paps outside of a nail salon that was next to a restaurant that we were headed to. There must have been 25-30 of them, no exaggeration.   My DH had no clue who Khloe K was so it made it extra funny for me.  He was more interested in the RR convertible that she was driving.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> You aren't the only one.  How I never found Suits on cable is beyond me as I have gotten sucked into the ATT Uverse top package where all this crap resides!  Regular people don't even follow the REAL Royal family so why would they even follow her or know about her.  We ALL know in our rarified little universe here, but the rest of the world wouldn't know a thing except for People Magazine and the like.  Every time sales were low, People  stuck Lady Diana on the cover, even after she died.  They will do the same with the Harkles for as long as they are media fodder.
> 
> Her "celebrity" friends are going to start dropping like flies once they think their popularity by association is going down.   Her mother and Jessica M may be the only ones left.  Even Sir Elton will be off on tour with his private jet.
> 
> The latest is that MM is going to have a hen party the same weekend as the Cressida Bonus wedding.  It will be really interesting to see who* doesn't *show up.
> 
> @CeeJay  DH and I were treated to the mass of paps outside of a nail salon that was next to a restaurant that we were headed to. There must have been 25-30 of them, no exaggeration.   My DH had no clue who Khloe K was so it made it extra funny for me.  He was more interested in the RR convertible that she was driving.


What? .. I thought that the "Hen" Party was (_in essence_) the party for the *Bride-to-Be* .. at least that is what my Scot and Brit colleagues used to call in (_as in the men saying that the women were cackling like hens_) .. it is kind of funny from that perspective.  Plus, my god .. Harry's long-time ex - Chelsy Davy went to the wedding; my gosh .. it there some jealousy there on MM's part?  I thought I had read recently that Harry is planning on attending the wedding; they weren't sure about MM.  For all her "confidence" (_that we keep hearing about_), IMO .. if she doesn't go .. it makes me wonder, what is she so afraid of?   

Yeah, my husband HATES the Paps .. one time when we were coming out of a store in BH, some stupid photog thought that my husband was one of the actors on "The Office" show (_who knows why_)? .. and then next thing you know, there were around us like a bunch of flies.  My husband said "_WHO THE H@LL are you taking about_?" .. and then they realized that it was not him.  Thank god because otherwise I think my husband would have gotten into a brawl; he really does not like being surrounded!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Again @Clearblueskies , @LVSistinaMM  and @gracekelly  .. 100% with you on that!!!  Personally, *I would be enraged* if ANYONE ever said I was like any of the Kardashian/Jenner clan!  I'm in LA (_alas closer to those K-bombs since I'm in the Valley_) .. and have seen the bedlam of Paps when they go outside their homes.  A good friend of mine works for a very exclusive boutique in Calabasas Commons and the K's/J's shop there and the last time I was there, in comes Kylie .. snap, snap, pop, pop .. RIDICULOUS!  I hate having my picture taken to begin with, and did they even ask?!? .. NOPE!  I have issues with my eyesight, where bright sun and especially flash photography pretty much 'blinds' me for a good hour or more .. so I said 'STOP', but those stupid paps just kept on and thankfully, my friend brought me to the back of their store (bathroom) to get me out of that nonsense (_and yes - I had to wait for over 2 hours to get my "eyesight" back such that I could drive home_)!
> 
> Honestly, I NEVER knew who Meghan was until her engagement to Harry (_never watched Suits_).  Even a friend whose son played opposite to Meghan in a school play (_yes - she was in the Girl's School and he was in the Boy's school_) .. didn't know about Meghan being on Suits .. and yet, we live in LA!  So, this whole article is well .. questionable.  You want to talk to LA folks about Meghan, why not get more than 1 opinion and go to the "regular" people.  Frankly, I'm getting really tired of the "_you're racist if you don't like her_" quotes.  There are plenty of mixed-race marriages out here; I have a number of dear friends in those marriages .. so does that make them or myself racist?  Uggh .. STOP!


Agree, Meghan was far from a star or household name before she snagged Harry.  I was aware of Suits but had never watched it and never heard of her.  I don't hate her and I don't consider myself to be a racist.  I have nothing but love and respect for the Obamas and if the news subforum still existed anyone could see my views on Trayvon Martin's murder.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> What? .. I thought that the "Hen" Party was (_in essence_) the party for the *Bride-to-Be* .. at least that is what my Scot and Brit colleagues used to call in (_as in the men saying that the women were cackling like hens_) .. it is kind of funny from that perspective.  Plus, my god .. Harry's long-time ex - Chelsy Davy went to the wedding; my gosh .. it there some jealousy there on MM's part?  I thought I had read recently that Harry is planning on attending the wedding; they weren't sure about MM.  For all her "confidence" (_that we keep hearing about_), IMO .. if she doesn't go .. it makes me wonder, what is she so afraid of?
> 
> Yeah, my husband HATES the Paps .. one time when we were coming out of a store in BH, some stupid photog thought that my husband was one of the actors on "The Office" show (_who knows why_)? .. and then next thing you know, there were around us like a bunch of flies.  My husband said "_WHO THE H@LL are you taking about_?" .. and then they realized that it was not him.  Thank god because otherwise I think my husband would have gotten into a brawl; he really does not like being surrounded!



Sorry, I used the wrong term.  You are quite correct that a hen party in GB is for the bride and friends before the wedding.  I should have just called it a weekend with the girls


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Agree, Meghan was far from a star or household name before she snagged Harry.  I was aware of Suits but had never watched it and never heard of her.  I don't hate her and I don't consider myself to be a racist.  I have nothing but love and respect for the Obamas and if the news subforum still existed anyone could see my views on Trayvon Martin's murder.


As far as I can recall, there has NEVER been a post here that even hinted at racial bias towards her.  People may quote posts like that from other sources to prove that it exists, but not here.  No apologies necessary!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> As far as I can recall, there has NEVER been a post here that even hinted at racial bias towards her.  People may quote posts like that from other sources to prove that it exists, but not here.  No apologies necessary!


thanks.....not apologizing.  more like letting people who may think everyone who doesn't love Meghan is racist know where I stand


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> thanks.....not apologizing.  more like letting people who may think everyone who doesn't love Meghan is racist know where I stand


Never had a doubt.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> As far as I can recall, there has NEVER been a post here that even hinted at racial bias towards her.  People may quote posts like that from other sources to prove that it exists, but not here.  No apologies necessary!


Maybe not, but there were posts where I thought it was hinted that some here were biased.
That was how I read them and, no, I am not going back to find them. lol Too many pages to weed through!


----------



## CeeJay

threadbender said:


> Maybe not, but there were posts where I thought it was hinted that some here were biased.
> That was how I read them and, no, I am not going back to find them. lol Too many pages to weed through!


Yes, sadly .. I do recall some of that and it's unfortunate because as was just stated, I have never seen anything outright that has proven that to be the case!


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Again @Clearblueskies , @LVSistinaMM  and @gracekelly ...in comes Kylie .. snap, snap, pop, pop .. RIDICULOUS!  I hate having my picture taken to begin with, and did they even ask?!? .. NOPE!  I have issues with my eyesight, where bright sun and especially flash photography pretty much 'blinds' me for a good hour or more .. so I said 'STOP', but those stupid paps just kept on and thankfully, my friend brought me to the back of their store (bathroom) to get me out of that nonsense (_and yes - I had to wait for over 2 hours to get my "eyesight" back such that I could drive home_)!


So off topic, but do you get visual migraines or kaleidoscope, zig-zagging lines for about an hour or so?


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> Elizabeth Day: Meghan's just doing what comes naturally
> 
> I’m in Los Angeles at the moment. I advise you to look away now if the casual smugness of that opening sentence was too much to bear. There is nothing worse than reading about someone else’s holiday when you’re not on one. It’s like scrolling through Instagram and being visually assaulted by a constant stream of painted toenails on sandy beaches when you’re on a rush-hour train watching rain beat against the windows.
> 
> But I haven’t just been wafting around drinking celery juice. No, I have been undertaking vital journalistic research: asking Americans what they think of the Duchess of Sussex – although, over here, she is still known as Meghan Markle, royal titles generally only being used when saying ‘Yasss queen!’ to emphasise something worthy of admiration.
> 
> I start by asking my friend Joan, a wildly successful television executive. ‘I think she’s fantastic,’ she replies, without missing a beat. Wherever I pose the question, the response is the same. Angelenos see Meghan as one of their own. She grew up here. Then she became an actress: a profession this city was built on. In LA, celebrity is not a negative thing; it is a way of life.
> 
> The fact that Meghan has chosen to use her celebrity as a platform to help others – from guest-editing British Vogue and filling the magazine with female change-makers, to setting up a crisis texting service for those with mental health issues – is seen as wholly commendable. Her marriage to Prince Harry is almost incidental. In truth, most people I spoke to thought that he was the one to have made an excellent match.
> 
> It strikes me that much of the criticism Meghan has faced in the UK springs from two sources. One is the pernicious idea that somehow her face doesn’t quite ‘fit’. The people who believe this might not think they are being racist. They might have inherited an innate, nameless discomfort bequeathed by generations of embedded prejudice. But – let’s be clear – it is racism.
> 
> The second criticism is that it’s all a bit… well…tacky. It’s that the royal family should, like a Victorian child, be seen and not heard. It’s astonishing to me that in 2019 we still expect our royals to behave as they would have done a century ago: opening new hospital wings, wearing conservative clothes and never once expressing a mildly controversial opinion. We expect them to offer up their children for photocalls and renovate their houses in ways that we think are appropriate because they benefit from our taxpayer money.
> 
> Meghan has given up her lucrative career and much of her privacy to marry a man she loves. In the process, she brings a starry glow to our most traditional national institution. Navigating the role would be fraught with difficulty for any of us, let alone an American who grew up in a city where it’s perfectly normal to aspire to fame.
> 
> Used effectively, fame can be a valuable currency. Kim Kardashian successfully lobbied the president to release a grandmother serving a life sentence from jail. Taylor Swift caused a voter registration spike after an Instagram post in which she encouraged teens to vote and endorsed two ******** candidates. Celebrity is power, whether you like it or not. You might wish it were otherwise – that nurses and teachers were better paid and wielded more influence than someone who was once on Suits. But this is the world we live in. Of all the members of the royal family, Meghan is the most equipped to deal with modern times. She has chosen to use her celebrity for good rather than to disappear meekly from view. Like my friend Joan says: fantastic.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/yo...p_twitter_share-top&__twitter_impression=true


Somehow her face doesn’t quite ‘fit’... who ever said that?  That's just dumb. 

Also, saying she gave up her lucrative career is crazy.  Yes, she was on a TV show, but beautiful women like Meg, who are only moderately talented, tend to have a very quick shelf life in Hollywood.


----------



## mdcx

Regards Megan's work on Suits, to be honest it was a lot about how beautiful and slim she was. And every time I saw the show I thought _wow is that girl gorgeous_! I am not sure that she has actual acting skills beyond/without being beautiful and slim.
I am not sure if her face will ever return to pre-pregnancy slimness or her figure, and as all of us who have had kids know, even if you do return to the same number of the scale, often things don't look the same 

As far as Cressida's wedding, no doubt Harry will be invited, and it would be expected Meghan would make nice and come because she is now part of their posh aristo world where people just get along publicly at least. I don't know that Meghan will do that however as she seems a bit keen on "getting back" at people through various means - apparently she deliberately excluded Chelsy Davy from the evening party after the Harry-Meghan wedding.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> So off topic, but do you get visual migraines or kaleidoscope, zig-zagging lines for about an hour or so?


Yes .. it's really horrible when it happens, so imagine when I have to have a Photo ID taken!  Uggh ..


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Regards Megan's work on Suits, to be honest it was a lot about how beautiful and slim she was. And every time I saw the show I thought _wow is that girl gorgeous_! I am not sure that she has actual acting skills beyond/without being beautiful and slim.
> I am not sure if her face will ever return to pre-pregnancy slimness or her figure, and as all of us who have had kids know, even if you do return to the same number of the scale, often things don't look the same
> 
> As far as Cressida's wedding, no doubt Harry will be invited, and it would be expected Meghan would make nice and come because she is now part of their posh aristo world where people just get along publicly at least. I don't know that Meghan will do that however as she seems a bit keen on "getting back" at people through various means - apparently she deliberately excluded Chelsy Davy from the evening party after the Harry-Meghan wedding.


Really? .. again, why? .. I just DO NOT understand that!  I really kind of wonder if she feels insecure in her relationship with Harry, hence the clingy-ness that she seems to exhibit (kind of reminds me of Eddie Cibrian and LeAnn Rimes where she was so darn clingy with him).  To me, that does not show "confidence" ..


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Yes .. it's really horrible when it happens, so imagine when I have to have a Photo ID taken!  Uggh ..


That happens to me too.  A sudden bright light or a sudden sharp contrast.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> That happens to me too.  A sudden bright light or a sudden sharp contrast.


EXACTLY!! .. so let me ask you, when you were a kid, did your Eye Doctor put in a special liquid to enlarge your Pupils?  Apparently, those early drops permanently damaged your eyes and hence the issue (at least that is what my "special" Ophthalmologist told me a few years back when I had to go into the ER because of the problem (back in Boston).  It's really scary ..


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!! .. so let me ask you, when you were a kid, did your Eye Doctor put in a special liquid to enlarge your Pupils?  Apparently, those early drops permanently damaged your eyes and hence the issue (at least that is what my "special" Ophthalmologist told me a few years back when I had to go into the ER because of the problem (back in Boston).  It's really scary ..


Staying off topic, wow, really? My optometrist did that when I was young. I get aural migraines (only a few were severe but did cause some damage)(did go to ER a couple times but usually it was over by the time I got there & seen). Thank you for the information. It may explain them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!! .. so let me ask you, when you were a kid, did your Eye Doctor put in a special liquid to enlarge your Pupils?  Apparently, those early drops permanently damaged your eyes and hence the issue (at least that is what my "special" Ophthalmologist told me a few years back when I had to go into the ER because of the problem (back in Boston).  It's really scary ..


Yes, that's how they examined our eyes -- with those drops. Every few years I had to go.

Hope we see Meg soon so we have something to talk about!


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!! .. so let me ask you, when you were a kid, did your Eye Doctor put in a special liquid to enlarge your Pupils?  Apparently, those early drops permanently damaged your eyes and hence the issue (at least that is what my "special" Ophthalmologist told me a few years back when I had to go into the ER because of the problem (back in Boston).  It's really scary ..


This just happened to my BFF. They did an MRI and she sees the neurologist Thur.for the results. They thinks her problem is a medication she was on called Plaquenil. Even though she stopped the medication she has still had a couple of the aural migraines. Sometimes I wonder if Drs know much. In July I started Gabapentin for sciatic problems. I was outside gardening and wearing an 80 SPF. I look at my arms the next morning and I had developed purpura. They look like bruises, but can mean you have a very rare autoimmune disease. Contacted my Dr, it's a very, very rare side effect. I stopped taking them around July 4. As of yesterday I am still breaking out in very small blotches.I think these meds stay in your system much longer and do more damage than Drs know. I remember those eyedrops as a kid. Even putting sunglasses on your eyes still hurt when you left the office.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> As far as Cressida's wedding, no doubt Harry will be invited, and it would be expected Meghan would make nice and come because she is now part of their posh aristo world where people just get along publicly at least. I don't know that Meghan will do that however as she seems a bit keen on "getting back" at people through various means - apparently she deliberately excluded Chelsy Davy from the evening party after the Harry-Meghan wedding.


It will attract notice if she doesn’t go, and it would be pretty rude.  I really admired Chelsy Davy for attending Harry and Meghan’s wedding - she knew all the paps and TV cameras would be looking to get a “sad” shot of her and she still fronted up.  Took a lot of guts IMO.


----------



## minababe

so where is the thread for People who likes Harry and meghan?


----------



## Flatsy

minababe said:


> so where is the thread for People who likes Harry and meghan?


As far as I know, there aren't any forums on this board that are designated "fan" forums.  If you want to discuss them here, you have to be open to a mix of opinions.


----------



## bellebellebelle19

Flatsy said:


> As far as I know, there aren't any forums on this board that are designated "fan" forums.  If you want to discuss them here, you have to be open to a mix of opinions.


That's not true. They made one here on TPF for Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander after the arguing got ridiculous. I think they should do the same for Meghan and Harry - everyone would be a lot happier gossiping in peace.


----------



## daisychainz

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!! .. so let me ask you, when you were a kid, did your Eye Doctor put in a special liquid to enlarge your Pupils?  Apparently, those early drops permanently damaged your eyes and hence the issue (at least that is what my "special" Ophthalmologist told me a few years back when I had to go into the ER because of the problem (back in Boston).  It's really scary ..


Really? I'm supposed to get that done Friday (dilation) during an exam - maybe I'll opt out.


----------



## threadbender

bellebellebelle19 said:


> That's not true. They made one here on TPF for Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander after the arguing got ridiculous. I think they should do the same for Meghan and Harry - everyone would be a lot happier gossiping in peace.


I would imagine you could ask the mods about creating one.  If it is only for absolute fans, then I would guess  you want only positive feedback. My thing is, I don't necessarily dislike the couple but don't love them. I ask questions and make comments based on their actions. I guess that would be considered negative on a stan thread? If the mods allow you to do so, go for it.


----------



## momtok

threadbender said:


> I would imagine you could ask the mods about creating one.  If it is only for absolute fans, then I would guess  you want only positive feedback. My thing is, I don't necessarily dislike the couple but don't love them. I ask questions and make comments based on their actions. I guess that would be considered negative on a stan thread? If the mods allow you to do so, go for it.



That didn't really solve the problem for that discussion group either though, as the squabbling inched into the 'happy' thread as well.  Ironically, it was when I asked about the origins of that squabbling and received a reply from one of their group regulars, that I was first pointed toward a different site that's been mentioned here too. That was actually my first introduction.  It's been very educational though,  I'll grant that much.    Eh.

(later edit: ... Actually ... I'm trying to remember ... maybe I wasn't the one who asked? I do recall how confused I was, and I remember composing a direct message to someone because I just couldn't take the curiosity anymore. Well, whichever.  It was still very educational.)


----------



## bag-mania

Does activity for Meghan and Harry really warrant another thread being created? The only reason this thread gets as much attention as it does is the bickering.


----------



## kemilia

daisychainz said:


> Really? I'm supposed to get that done Friday (dilation) during an exam - maybe I'll opt out.


I know this eyeball talk is off topic but ... as a kid I had my eyes dilated with those drops, just awful. It was always in the winter (snow glare) so I would be in the backseat of the old huge Chevy covering my eyes, the pain was bad. And to add insult to injury, my parents then would drive further into the city to see the Christmas lights and store windows, which I could not see and was sad about. Took a full day for things to return to normal. I haven't had that done in years but last time I had the dilation done as an adult, it was way better and wore off in a couple of hours. Discuss the dilation thing thoroughly with your doctor first! My eyes are still super sensitive to bright light, I always have the largest sunglasses (and they get compliments too .


----------



## threadbender

momtok said:


> That didn't really solve the problem for that discussion group either though, as the squabbling inched into the 'happy' thread as well.  Ironically, it was when I asked about the origins of that squabbling and received a reply from one of their group regulars, that I was first pointed toward a different website that was also mentioned recently here too. That was actually my first introduction.  It was very educational though,  I'll grant that much.    Eh.


Yes, there were definitely posters that were passive aggressive in that thread, claiming not to be negative. It got old. I figure if I don't like what a poster has to say, I can scroll or ignore. It is not that difficult.  lol
I don't see this thread as all that bad but, I guess, it seems to be for some people.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Does activity for Meghan and Harry really warrant another thread being created? The only reason this thread gets as much attention as it does is the bickering.


This thread has replaced the KK thread & the KK "style" thread for the, umm, unpleasant comments, imo. Comparing MM's basically blah/normal designer clothing to KK's "omg, why would anyone wear that!" outfits and having the same reactions is kinda funny to me. I'm really looking forward to the SA trip--the outfits! The comments!


----------



## momtok

threadbender said:


> Yes, there were definitely posters that were passive aggressive in that thread, claiming not to be negative. It got old. I figure if I don't like what a poster has to say, I can scroll or ignore. It is not that difficult.  lol
> I don't see this thread as all that bad but, I guess, it seems to be for some people.



Oh I know, I've certainly had people on ignore too over the years.    And yes, it was exactly that passive aggressiveness you mentioned that really perplexed me, and why I finally just came out and asked.  That sent me down another rabbit hole, which very educational and eye-opening.

(later edit: ... Actually ... I'm trying to remember ... maybe I wasn't the one who asked? I do recall how confused I was, and I remember composing a direct message to someone because I just couldn't take the curiosity anymore. Well, whichever.  It was still very educational.)


----------



## LibbyRuth

I tend to question whether or not a gossip discussion board is the best place for a person who wants information about  a celebrity that is void of any opinion that the person does not hold. I know there are some people who want to express their views on Harry and Meghan without any sort of dissent.  Perhaps blogs are better in that case, as a person can turn off the comments?  I know there are people who don't mind discussion, but want it to only be with like minded people. Perhaps fan sites are better. To me, gossip is always about the positive and negative. So I kind of see dismay over dissenting points of view as being kind of like going to the beach and being disappointed that there is sand. 
I do truly believe that the reason for the negativity in this thread is that with Meghan on maternity leave, there has been MUCH less to talk about with them, which leads to the discussion being more about speculation over them than things they are actually doing. When she's back and they are giving more new material for discussion, I believe that the tone will balance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Isn't there already a Meghan "style" thread that is mostly about looking at pictures and admiring her clothes?  I haven't visited it recently, but there was no gossip or speculation in it the last time I was there, which is how it's supposed to be in a style thread.  Seems like a good place for cooing and squeeing about how great she is.

If a separate Meghan and Harry "love" thread is what it takes for people to stop constantly berating people for gossiping in a gossip thread, then maybe that's a good thing.  But if it's just a separate thread where gossip is still discussed, but only certain interpretations of that gossip are allowed, that seems silly.  And probably will involve even more fighting.


----------



## threadbender

momtok said:


> Oh I know, I've certainly had people on ignore too over the years.    And yes, it was exactly that passive aggressiveness you mentioned that really perplexed me, and why I finally just came out and asked.  That sent me down another rabbit hole, which very educational and eye-opening.
> 
> (later edit: ... Actually ... I'm trying to remember ... maybe I wasn't the one who asked? I do recall how confused I was, and I remember composing a direct message to someone because I just couldn't take the curiosity anymore. Well, whichever.  It was still very educational.)


I believe I had posted on there asking why the vitriol and, then, I left it pretty much. I see no need for anyone to be so negatively invested in a couple they do not know.
As I said, I am not a fan of M/H. I don't care enough. lol I enjoy reading about them and their activities. I looked forward to the baby. I call out some of their hypocrisy but, not just theirs. lol I would love for them to learn from their missteps and to shine on behalf of the BRF and themselves. In the end, neither one of them give two shakes about what I think. So, I am here to read and enjoy and, hopefully, drool over a sweet baby boy, some wonderful clothes, bags and jewels.


----------



## Swanky

"WE" did not create an extra thread for Fassbender/Vikander, someone else did.  I personally see zero need for more than 1 thread for any given person, to be honest it creates more work for mods as people still report and complain.
This is a gossip/news forum, it's not all positive nor all negative. . .  I think people just need a little perspective personally


----------



## threadbender

Swanky said:


> "WE" did not create an extra thread for Fassbender/Vikander, someone else did.  I personally see zero need for more than 1 thread for any given person, to be honest it creates more work for mods as people still report and complain.
> This is a gossip/news forum, it's not all positive nor all negative. . .  I think people just need a little perspective personally


I agree! I only said what I did because the idea was thrown out there. I do not think this thread is all that bad, comparatively. We are adults, we are on a gossip thread. There are bound to be differences of opinion. 
Thank you, Swanky and all of the mods for your hard work.


----------



## LittleStar88

I think some people here get confused about the difference between gossip and opinions. And the opinions are hella strong sometimes as folks get carried away.

There is no right or wrong _opinion_.It's ok to stay super invested in how you think, just don't try to make it a mission to convert minds. 

This thread is way more fun when people slow their roll.


----------



## CeeJay

threadbender said:


> I agree! I only said what I did because the idea was thrown out there. I do not think this thread is all that bad, comparatively. We are adults, we are on a gossip thread. There are bound to be differences of opinion.
> Thank you, Swanky and all of the mods for your hard work.


I agree .. my god, we are all adults .. and this constant discussion about the "negative" quotes, is really THEIR opinion and if they chose to IGNORE those comments, then please do!  Sheesh .. it reminds me of grammar school, do we have to turn off the lights just because there are others who do not share our opinions???


----------



## mdcx

So now I know why there is that weird Vikander/Fassbender A Loving Couple thread. Could never work that out, especially when I thought it was widely known that he is unfaithful.

As far as M/W, the ignore button makes reading this thread a breeze.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> So now I know why there is that weird Vikander/Fassbender A Loving Couple thread. Could never work that out, especially when I thought it was widely known that he is unfaithful.
> 
> As far as M/W, the ignore button makes reading this thread a breeze.


I also wondered about that. Three threads seems a little excessive


----------



## Morgane

Flatsy said:


> Running all over the internet to spread this misinformation, eh?  Conveniently not linking the article though, which says nothing of the kind. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...craft-123-miles-pick-Prince-William-Kate.html
> 
> After the Flybe airline boss found out William and Kate were going to be aboard the flight, he arranged without their knowledge to have a Flybe-brand plane with the company logo on it flown to Norwich Airport to make the flight.  This was so Flybe could get publicity off of William and Kate.  The article clearly says Will and Kate had nothing to do with it.
> 
> This was a stunt on the part of Flybe, and it worked. Flybe got their name and photos of their logoed plane all over the covers of the UK tabloids.
> 
> Sounds to me like this clears the Cambridges of the accusation that they were the ones who arranged the photo op.  It actually makes them the victims of the dreaded privacy invasion that is so horrific that the Sussexes have no choice but to fly private.
> 
> The story does not say when William and Kate *booked* the flight.  However, it sounds like the RASP kept their identities and protection plans secret from the airline until a few days prior to the flight....Probably precisely because of things like this happening.  Once the airline knew they would be aboard, word spread around like wildfire and secrecy seems to be one of the most important elements of royal security.


I see that CB's Kaiser has been on fire this week..



LVSistinaMM said:


> Wow, some of these conspiracy theories are nutty. Cambridge’s out to get the Sussex’s! It’s another GOT! Lol


Not kidding,I've also read comments about Carole Middleton as another Machiavelli in disguise acting behind the scenes against Meghan and Harry. .


----------



## MarieCurie

LVSistinaMM said:


> Angelina is hardly a Saint. She’s a nut job actually. I know she does great humanitarian work, but it doesn’t change that she’s a kook with tons of money and mouth/lips that simply need to stay closed.





bag-mania said:


> ^Oh no, Meghan shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence because she's nowhere near as bad. Angelina is much, much more annoying. Hope this helps.



I was just being sarcastic in the sense that this thread never fails to remind anyone who cares that Meghan was not a successful actress but rather still _relying on waiting tables and her world class calligraphy to make ends meet_ (sarcasm again hence the italics) before she met Harry. I've never watched Suits but I knew Meghan because of her work with UN Women (I'm in an incentives driven industry) and my child likes chopped junior and she was once a guest judge there.

Both comments actually prove my point about how both women are polarizing figures. They are just those people you look at and decide you like or don't like for whatever reason. Gossip and stories that come out in or against their favour or whatever they decide to do in full view of anyone who cares to see just deepens your like or dislike of them.

Both women have faults (they are human after all) but sometimes Meghan (trying to get back on topic) gets criticized for the most mundane things that even the deserved criticism (Wimbledon, her horrific writing, and jetgate to name some) just gets sucked into a vacuum. You'd swear she was the pedophile, the one endorsing the pedophile, or the one taking money for a shady position from a shady character (sorry to be off topic again).

In case you were wondering, which you were probably not, I like both women.


----------



## MarieCurie

sdkitty said:


> thanks.....not apologizing.  more like letting people who may think everyone who doesn't love Meghan is racist know where I stand


As a black woman who doesn't speak for all black women and who likes Meghan (yes, contrary to lipstick alley which has somehow become popular belief in this thread, there are black women who like Meghan) I have never thought anything you said to be racist, it's just an indication to your dislike or lack of love for her. That's it.


----------



## Flatsy

MarieCurie said:


> Both women have faults (they are human after all) but sometimes Meghan (trying to get back on topic) gets criticized for the most mundane things that even the deserved criticism (Wimbledon, her horrific writing, and jetgate to name some) just gets sucked into a vacuum. You'd swear she was the pedophile, the one endorsing the pedophile, or the one taking money for a shady position from a shady character (sorry to be off topic again).


LOL at the handwriting.  It's a tiny thing, but that's actually something that changed my understanding of her, and not in good way.  Someone who writes in that ridiculous way 100% of the time is not a secure person - that is someone who is always putting on a show.  An exhausting show.

Anyway, I agree that the volume of discussion about Meghan tends to make small things seem bigger than they are.   But I think it's her defenders who most of the time are the ones blowing the discussion out of proportion.

If someone says they find the bump cradling to be a bit much, it's not met with. "I think it's sweet when she does that, but agree to disagree."  It's met with, "How dare you try to exert control over what a woman does with her body!  This woman has been getting nothing but constant racist abuse for three years!  She can't even touch her own body without people abusing her!  This needs to stop!  [Pulls up "Straight Outta Compton" headline to prove point]"  And then it becomes a big debate.


----------



## sdkitty

MarieCurie said:


> As a black woman who doesn't speak for all black women and who likes Meghan (yes, contrary to lipstick alley which has somehow become popular belief in this thread, there are black women who like Meghan) I have never thought anything you said to be racist, it's just an indication to your dislike or lack of love for her. That's it.


thank you
lack of love would be pretty accurate
I don't hate her, just don't love her


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> LOL at the handwriting.  It's a tiny thing, but that's actually something that changed my understanding of her, and not in good way.  Someone who writes in that ridiculous way 100% of the time is not a secure person - that is someone who is always putting on a show.  An exhausting show.
> 
> Anyway, I agree that the volume of discussion about Meghan tends to make small things seem bigger than they are.   But I think it's her defenders who most of the time are the ones blowing the discussion out of proportion.
> 
> If someone says they find the bump cradling to be a bit much, it's not met with. "I think it's sweet when she does that, but agree to disagree."  It's met with, "How dare you try to exert control over what a woman does with her body!  This woman has been getting nothing but constant racist abuse for three years!  She can't even touch her own body without people abusing her!  This needs to stop!  [Pulls up "Straight Outta Compton" headline to prove point]"  And then it becomes a big debate.


does she write that way all the time?  most people these days don't really write that much.  we type on our phones or computers.  so if she writes that way for personal letters or thank you notes, I see nothing wrong with that.  my handwriting is ugly and illegible


----------



## Flatsy

I don't know whether she jots down things that way, but apparently she hand writes notes and letters often, and in order to write that way, she has to write very slowly.  I think it was at New Zealand House when she wrote one sentence in the guest book, it took so long she actually had to apologize for being so slow about it.   That multi-page letter she wrote to her father must have taken hours and hours just for the handwriting alone.  

It's one thing to cultivate nice handwriting, but if every note is a calligraphy project, that's insane to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I don't know whether she jots down things that way, but apparently she hand writes notes and letters often, and in order to write that way, she has to write very slowly.  I think it was at New Zealand House when she wrote one sentence in the guest book, it took so long she actually had to apologize for being so slow about it.   That multi-page letter she wrote to her father must have taken hours and hours just for the handwriting alone.
> 
> It's one thing to cultivate nice handwriting, but if every note is a calligraphy project, that's insane to me.


agree.....if she has to apologize for keeping people waiting, then I'm sure she could write in "normal" handwriting instead of calligraphy.....and a multi-page letter is different than a thank you note


----------



## Mimmy

I think it is rather lovely when someone writes letters or cards; definitely a vanishing art. I have a 12 year old nephew who writes letters to me. He will address the envelopes using a form of calligraphy. This is something that I really want to encourage as it is so rare. 

Meghan did write a message of condolence in a book of condolences after the shootings in New Zealand. She and Harry signed it. It is very brief so I can’t imagine that it took an inordinate amount of time to write it. I don’t know if this is the guest book being referred to. If it is, I recall this visit from Harry and Meghan as being well received.


----------



## Flatsy

Mimmy said:


> If it is, I recall this visit from Harry and Meghan as being well received.


Yes this is what I was referring to.  I do believe it was a well received visit.  I believe it was a lighthearted "apology" that she was taking so long, as in "ha ha don't rush me".  Nothing wrong with it, it's just weird when your writing style is so elaborate that you can't write out something simple without it taking a noticeably long period of time.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Flatsy said:


> Yes this is what I was referring to.  I do believe it was a well received visit.  I believe it was a lighthearted "apology" that she was taking so long, as in "ha ha don't rush me".  Nothing wrong with it, it's just weird when your writing style is so elaborate that you can't write out something simple without it taking a noticeably long period of time.



Considering whatever she writes may be viewed by the public.  I understand the elaborate handwriting in that case. 

Everyday life, unless that’s your writing style, I don’t think it’s necessary.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Mimmy said:


> I think it is rather lovely when someone writes letters or cards; definitely a vanishing art. I have a 12 year old nephew who writes letters to me. He will address the envelopes using a form of calligraphy. This is something that I really want to encourage as it is so rare.
> 
> Meghan did write a message of condolence in a book of condolences after the shootings in New Zealand. She and Harry signed it. It is very brief so I can’t imagine that it took an inordinate amount of time to write it. I don’t know if this is the guest book being referred to. If it is, I recall this visit from Harry and Meghan as being well received.



I agree.  When I was a teenager my grandmother and I would write each other monthly.  Memories....


----------



## Mimmy

Flatsy said:


> Yes this is what I was referring to.  I do believe it was a well received visit.  I believe it was a lighthearted "apology" that she was taking so long, as in "ha ha don't rush me".  Nothing wrong with it, it's just weird when your writing style is so elaborate that you can't write out something simple without it taking a noticeably long period of time.





Welltraveled! said:


> Considering whatever she writes may be viewed by the public.  I understand the elaborate handwriting in that case.
> 
> Everyday life, unless that’s your writing style, I don’t think it’s necessary.


Understood, and I respect differing opinions.

Meghan gets my support in this case. This was a book in which people were writing condolences after a mass shooting. I do not think people minded waiting a few extra minutes while she completed her message. I suspect they were grieving the loss of life.

If she uses calligraphy to write lists or short memos; agreed that’s a bit much.


----------



## Flatsy

Mimmy said:


> Meghan gets my support in this case. This was a book in which people were writing condolences after a mass shooting. I do not think people minded waiting a few extra minutes while she completed her message. I suspect they were grieving the loss of life.


You are blowing this way, way out of proportion.  I wasn't putting Meghan on trial, so your verdict is not necessary.  Meghan does not need "support".  I never implied that this constituted an incident, or that Meghan did something wrong in public that offended people.  Not everything is a criticism that needs to be defended!!!!!!!!

I was merely giving a known example of how it takes her a long-ass time to write things because of her handwriting. *That's all.*


----------



## Mimmy

Flatsy said:


> You are blowing this way, way out of proportion.  I wasn't putting Meghan on trial, so your verdict is not necessary.  Meghan does not need "support".  I never implied that this constituted an incident, or that Meghan did something wrong in public that offended people.  Not everything is a criticism that needs to be defended!!!!!!!!
> 
> I was merely giving a known example of how it takes her a long-ass time to write things because of her handwriting. *That's all.*


I’m sorry if I offended you @Flatsy. I think perhaps reading a post leaves a lot more to interpretation than if I had spoken my words directly to you. 

I thought that my response was fairly measured. I was merely trying to state my opinion.


----------



## doloresmia

Actual gossip alert

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-pub-lunch/amp/


----------



## mrsinsyder

doloresmia said:


> Actual gossip alert
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-pub-lunch/amp/


Interesting, so they didn't go to balmoral?


----------



## gracekelly

doloresmia said:


> Actual gossip alert
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-pub-lunch/amp/



Total fake.  PR opportunity if they even spent more than 30 seconds there.  This place is like 10 minutes from FroggieBottom.  Doubt that Harry was drinking ale as he gave up alcohol.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting, so they didn't go to balmoral?



So far there are no reports or sightings.  It would make sense for them to go this weekend as the Cambridge family went home yesterday.  Maybe they are taking the Prius.  I Googled it and it is a 9-10 hour drive from FroggieBottom to Balmoral.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Total fake. PR opportunity if they even spent more than 30 seconds there. This place is like 10 minutes from FroggieBottom. Doubt that Harry was drinking ale as he gave up alcohol.


The pub owner denied they were there. He might just be trying to defend their privacy.  But false sightings around Windsor are probably going to be pretty common.  Like that time Meghan supposedly walked her dog outside the Kensington Palace gates.


----------



## gracekelly

They had a "roast" lunch?  Roasted what?  Tofu?


----------



## gracekelly

The Vancouver Marine Mammal Rescue Center has named rescued seal pups Meghan Mackerel and Prince Herring in honor of the Sussex duo.

https://www.vancourier.com/news/the...re-making-waves-in-vancouver-video-1.23871893

Honestly I don't know about the use of the name mackerel.  In the Godfather, when they offed someone they said they were swimming with the fishes or the mackerels.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

This is great.  The charities they are highlighting are getting a great deal of worthwhile attention and donations, including one I donate to, Rafiki Mwema.

A lovely message from the children helped by BlinkNowOrg.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> They had a "roast" lunch?  Roasted what?  Tofu?


I love a traditional roast. Yummy


----------



## doloresmia

Flatsy said:


> The pub owner denied they were there. He might just be trying to defend their privacy.  But false sightings around Windsor are probably going to be pretty common.  Like that time Meghan supposedly walked her dog outside the Kensington Palace gates.


Would you share a link to the article? I only saw multiple articles of them being seen at the pub, no denials.


----------



## gracekelly

doloresmia said:


> Would you share a link to the article? I only saw multiple articles of them being seen at the pub, no denials.


I think it was in the  Express or Daily Mail


----------



## Gal4Dior

The Daily Fail. Was it some cheap PR stunt to indicate they are down to earth folks who just want privacy at their local pub? Good for them?  kind of weird no other people saw them at the pub but this one person? <shrugs> 

They can be fabulous, they just need to quiet down when the start thinking it’s ok to give life advice for the plebeians.


----------



## Flatsy

doloresmia said:


> Would you share a link to the article? I only saw multiple articles of them being seen at the pub, no denials.


https://news.yahoo.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-pub-110009209.



> _Yahoo UK_ contacted the Rose and Crown in Winkfield, who denied that a visit took place.


----------



## LibbyRuth

It would not surprise me at all if the pub owner would deny they've been there to protect their privacy rather than because they had not been there. I'd imagine that it's better to deny it than to come across like a business owner trying to cash in on the royals. That said, I also fully believe that LOTS of people around Windsor see a woman with long dark hair or a man with red hair and insist they saw Meghan and Harry when they didn't. So either is very possible!


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> It would not surprise me at all if the pub owner would deny they've been there to protect their privacy rather than because they had not been there. I'd imagine that it's better to deny it than to come across like a business owner trying to cash in on the royals. That said, I also fully believe that LOTS of people around Windsor see a woman with long dark hair or a man with red hair and insist they saw Meghan and Harry when they didn't. So either is very possible!


also if you want them to come again, better deny there have been there


----------



## chowlover2

myown said:


> also if you want them to come again, better deny there have been there


The Royal family is like Fight Club. Nobody talks about them!


----------



## Welltraveled!




----------



## Welltraveled!




----------



## mrsinsyder

“I’m shocked they want to move to Malibu,” said no one. I loved the comment on another thread saying they’d be fine if the queen cuts them off because they can live on Meghan’s money 

Are Meghan Markle and Prince Harry looking to move Malibu?


https://mol.im/a/7415377


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> They had a "roast" lunch?  Roasted what?  Tofu?





Sharont2305 said:


> I love a traditional roast. Yummy



My mother is British and always referred to our Sunday roast beef as simply having a roast for dinner.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> “I’m shocked they want to move to Malibu,” said no one. I loved the comment on another thread saying they’d be fine if the queen cuts them off because they can live on Meghan’s money
> 
> Are Meghan Markle and Prince Harry looking to move Malibu?
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7415377
> 
> View attachment 4530063


oh yes, I'm sure they could live a comparable on Meghan's money


----------



## Morgan R

The idea of that article by the Daily Fail doesn't even make sense and feels like just another article by the Daily Fail to try to make Harry and Meghan "Hollywood". Also theoretically even if Harry were "cut off" he does have money that was left to him by his mother Diana and his great-grandmother The Queen Mother.  So theoretically even if Harry  was "cut off" from the money he receives from the Duchy of Cornwall and money from the Sovereign Grant it isn't like they would just be living off Meghan's money considering Harry would also still have money from his mother and great-grandmother.

Also regarding that article Meghan hasn't actually lived regularly in California for nearly a decade because though she did have a house in Los Angeles she lived mostly in Toronto while filming Suits (which she started filming in 2010 and first started to air in 2011), then was balancing her time between Toronto and London while she was dating Harry, then she officially moved to London, and now she lives in Windsor. I highly doubt she is "home sick" for California when she actually hasn't lived there regularly in a few years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> My mother is British and always referred to our Sunday roast beef as simply having a roast for dinner.


Lovely. But roast can be any meat. I call it a roast.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> “I’m shocked they want to move to Malibu,” said no one. I loved the comment on another thread saying they’d be fine if the queen cuts them off because they can live on Meghan’s money
> 
> Are Meghan Markle and Prince Harry looking to move Malibu?
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7415377
> 
> View attachment 4530063


I saw this this morning and just had to laugh, not that H&M wouldn't necessarily want a place in California, but that they are stating that Kim Kardashian lives in Malibu?!?!? .. UH NO, she lives in CALABASAS, not Malibu!!!   See the map below .. 


.. so, yes .. Calabasas abuts the very top part of Malibu but you have to drive through a very windy Canyon to THEN get to the PCH (Pacific Coast Highway) .. and then drive up to Malibu!  What Malibu has going for it is that there are tons of properties that are hidden away, but .. last year (as many Californians saw) .. there was a massive Fire which destroyed many homes and it could happen again.  When we were first looking at properties, we were told to stay away from Calabases because it is very much a desert climate and oftentimes, that is where the fires start .. uh, NO THANKS!


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> My mother is British and always referred to our Sunday roast beef as simply having a roast for dinner.


Duh


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I saw this this morning and just had to laugh, not that H&M wouldn't necessarily want a place in California, but that they are stating that Kim Kardashian lives in Malibu?!?!? .. UH NO, she lives in CALABASAS, not Malibu!!!   See the map below ..
> View attachment 4530293
> 
> .. so, yes .. Calabasas abuts the very top part of Malibu but you have to drive through a very windy Canyon to THEN get to the PCH (Pacific Coast Highway) .. and then drive up to Malibu!  What Malibu has going for it is that there are tons of properties that are hidden away, but .. last year (as many Californians saw) .. there was a massive Fire which destroyed many homes and it could happen again.  When we were first looking at properties, we were told to stay away from Calabases because it is very much a desert climate and oftentimes, that is where the fires start .. uh, NO THANKS!


Higher homeowner insurance rates and that is why I stayed away from that area and surrounding areas like Bell Canyon.   I think KK primarily lives in her private jet going from place to place lol!


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Lovely. But roast can be any meat. I call it a roast.


Yup.   At the in-laws it was always roast beef or leg of lamb.  MIL was a stellar cook!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Duh


HA .. so, the Irish side of the family - "roast" was typically beef (_hence the reason why the French called the Brits "Le Boeuf"_), but the Italian side meant "Roast Chicken" .. either way, YUM!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA .. so, the Irish side of the family - "roast" was typically beef (_hence the reason why the French called the Brits "Le Boeuf"_), but the Italian side meant "Roast Chicken" .. either way, YUM!!!!!


MIL was 100% Irish!  And don’t forget two kinds of potatoes lol!

I always regretted that she never taught me how to carve the bone in leg of lamb. I know that DH inherited his surgical skill from her.

When my mother carved leg of lamb it looked like Freddy Kruger had paid a visit.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Higher homeowner insurance rates and that is why I stayed away from that area and surrounding areas like Bell Canyon.   I think KK primarily lives in her private jet going from place to place lol!


HA - no, unfortunately .. she (and many others) now go to Van Nuys since the Santa Monica Airport will close in the next few years.  Drives me freakin' nuts because, while they are supposed to fly a particular route in order to NOT fly over the houses, oftentimes you have some rogue pilot who cranks up that freakin' Lear Jet right over the neighborhoods near the Sepulveda Dam.  

But, totally hear 'ya on the other front .. we had looked at a property on the "Malibu" side of Topanga (pretty high up - very close to the top of Topanga), and we even stayed there for a bit (about a month), but it didn't take us long to realize that those ever present winds (not breezes) would be an issue if a fire occurred (plus we noticed the Fire Helicopters every day - in the am and pm).  When we spoke to the homeowner directly, she informed us that she had actually hooked up her pool as an additional water source and that it would wash over the house, just in case of a fire!  Holy cow!!!  Alas, she was at the end of the street and right next to the brush (so, lots of Coyotes - she lost all of her 3 cats), so we said "Nope - bye"!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA - no, unfortunately .. she (and many others) now go to Van Nuys since the Santa Monica Airport will close in the next few years.  Drives me freakin' nuts because, while they are supposed to fly a particular route in order to NOT fly over the houses, oftentimes you have some rogue pilot who cranks up that freakin' Lear Jet right over the neighborhoods near the Sepulveda Dam.
> 
> But, totally hear 'ya on the other front .. we had looked at a property on the "Malibu" side of Topanga (pretty high up - very close to the top of Topanga), and we even stayed there for a bit (about a month), but it didn't take us long to realize that those ever present winds (not breezes) would be an issue if a fire occurred (plus we noticed the Fire Helicopters every day - in the am and pm).  When we spoke to the homeowner directly, she informed us that she had actually hooked up her pool as an additional water source and that it would wash over the house, just in case of a fire!  Holy cow!!!  Alas, she was at the end of the street and right next to the brush (so, lots of Coyotes - she lost all of her 3 cats), so we said "Nope - bye"!



We have coyotes ALL the time. For the last two days one rather large one has decided to have a snooze on the back lawn and then poop on the pool decking. My DH just cleaned it up an hour ago. Animal control will do nothing!    

If true that the Sussex clan will move to Malibu, then Van Nuys will be their home airport. VN is rated as one of the busiest airports in the US!  Tons of private jet companies there.  We can run into MM at Gelson’s lol!  Ralph’s and Vons are too déclassé for her


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Thanks for the detailed LA map, CeeJay. I remember a particularly riveting Kardashian episode when some of them were at one of their houses and they were being chased by posses of humongous spiders. I couldn't believe there were that kind of spiders (Tarantulas I think?) in the LA area. I mean, it's so modern, so... so... I don't know un-spidery and Hollywoody  Shows you what I know about LA and California.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> MIL was 100% Irish!  And don’t forget two kinds of potatoes lol!
> 
> I always regretted that she never taught me how to carve the bone in leg of lamb. I know that DH inherited his surgical skill from her.
> 
> When my mother carved leg of lamb it looked like Freddy Kruger had paid a visit.


My father's "Irish" roots were sketchy at best, given that his mother's side of the family could trace their roots back to the Pilgrims (and they were not Irish)!  But, yes .. he sure did know how to cut a Roast and YES! .. Leg of Lamb .. YUMMMM!!!!  My mother (100% Italian) was such a disappointment to my Italian Grandmother who was a SUPERB Cook and my mother was absolutely HORRIFIC (as a matter of fact, my father ended up making all the Italian dishes and his Bolognese was superb!).  

Oh yes, the Potatoes .. ALWAYS preferred the Patate Arrosto (roasted potatoes) that my Italian Grandmother did in the juices from the Chicken Roast .. OMG!  My husband thought I was nuts when I would say how much I craved them .. UNTIL, our trip to go back to my Grandmother's Italian roots (towns) .. and when he had them?!?! .. he completely understood why I craved them so much!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> We have coyotes ALL the time. For the last two days one rather large one has decided to have a snooze on the back lawn and then poop on the pool decking. My DH just cleaned it up an hour ago. Animal control will do nothing!
> 
> If true that the Sussex clan will move to Malibu, then Van Nuys will be their home airport. VN is rated as one of the busiest airports in the US!  Tons of private jet companies there.  We can run into MM at Gelson’s lol!  Ralph’s and Vons are too déclassé for her


Same here, I usually get up early (thank you kitty cats) and see them strolling around the neighborhood .. so, imagine my surprise when I see some of the folks out strolling with their LITTLE dogs!!!  Can't even begin to tell you how many posts we have seen in our Nextdoor Neighbor website where a dog (or cat) has been snatched up!  Honestly, it really angers me because the dogs are supposed to be leashed and the folks should KNOW better!  Arrrrrgggghhhhh!!!  

Yes, do you go to the town meetings about VNY?  It gets worse by the day and frankly, when I'm in my pool, I DO NOT want some stinkin' Lear or Prop jet going right over me .. their flight path is NOT over my house and I DO report them especially when I can see their dayum tail #'s!


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Thanks for the detailed LA map, CeeJay. I remember a particularly riveting Kardashian episode when some of them were at one of their houses and they were being chased by posses of humongous spiders. I couldn't believe there were that kind of spiders (Tarantulas I think?) in the LA area. I mean, it's so modern, so... so... I don't know un-spidery and Hollywoody  Shows you what I know about LA and California.


Likely Tarantulas .. yup, Calabasas is desert because there is that mountain divide between the Pacific Ocean (Malibu) and that part of the world.  No way would I ever live in that area; it's also ungodly HOT (as Hell)!!!


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Thanks for the detailed LA map, CeeJay. I remember a particularly riveting Kardashian episode when some of them were at one of their houses and they were being chased by posses of humongous spiders. I couldn't believe there were that kind of spiders (Tarantulas I think?) in the LA area. I mean, it's so modern, so... so... I don't know un-spidery and Hollywoody  Shows you what I know about LA and California.





CeeJay said:


> Likely Tarantulas .. yup, Calabasas is desert because there is that mountain divide between the Pacific Ocean (Malibu) and that part of the world.  No way would I ever live in that area; it's also ungodly HOT (as Hell)!!!



On very rare occasions I have seen tarantulas. Once in my kitchen and once on my dining room. I wasn’t going to find out if they were old and slow or friendly. Death by Raid was the order of the day!

I will say that when we purchased our home eons ago, I was introduced to insects in the garden that I never knew existed.   There was one in particular that I called a land lobster because of the uncanny resemblance.   I do believe that somewhere in the chain of life they are related.   FYI it hasn’t stopped me from eating lobster haha!


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> My father's "Irish" roots were sketchy at best, given that his mother's side of the family could trace their roots back to the Pilgrims (and they were not Irish)!  But, yes .. he sure did know how to cut a Roast and YES! .. Leg of Lamb .. YUMMMM!!!!  My mother (100% Italian) was such a disappointment to my Italian Grandmother who was a SUPERB Cook and my mother was absolutely HORRIFIC (as a matter of fact, my father ended up making all the Italian dishes and his Bolognese was superb!).
> 
> Oh yes, the Potatoes .. ALWAYS preferred the Patate Arrosto (roasted potatoes) that my Italian Grandmother did in the juices from the Chicken Roast .. OMG!  My husband thought I was nuts when I would say how much I craved them .. UNTIL, our trip to go back to my Grandmother's Italian roots (towns) .. and when he had them?!?! .. he completely understood why I craved them so much!


It's the chicken schmaltz that makes them so good!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> On very rare occasions I have seen tarantulas. Once in my kitchen and once on my dining room. I wasn’t going to find out if they were old and slow or friendly. Death by Raid was the order of the day!
> 
> I will say that when we purchased our home eons ago, I was introduced to insects in the garden that I never knew existed.   There was one in particular that I called a land lobster because of the uncanny resemblance.   I do believe that somewhere in the chain of life they are related.   FYI it hasn’t stopped me from eating lobster haha!


Isn't that a scorpion?


----------



## CeeJay

chowlover2 said:


> Isn't that a scorpion?


Ooooooh - yes, you are likely 100% right about that!!!  Yikes!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> On very rare occasions I have seen tarantulas. Once in my kitchen and once on my dining room. I wasn’t going to find out if they were old and slow or friendly. Death by Raid was the order of the day!
> 
> I will say that when we purchased our home eons ago, I was introduced to insects in the garden that I never knew existed.   There was one in particular that I called a land lobster because of the uncanny resemblance.   I do believe that somewhere in the chain of life they are related.   FYI it hasn’t stopped me from eating lobster haha!


I'd absolutely freak if I found a tarantula in my kitchen.  I'm very spider phobic.  DH has seen black widows in his shop on our property.  We're in a desert or semi-desert area.  I found rattlesnake outside once and I've heard there are quite a few of them around.  And coyotes - but we've only spotted them twice in two years that we've been here.
At our old house, which was a much more dense neighborhood we saw lots of coyotes, including one chasing our cat up a tree in broad daylight.  Fortunately kitty was young and fast.


----------



## gracekelly

chowlover2 said:


> Isn't that a scorpion?


No. This actually looks like a lobster and moves rather slowly. I have see scorpions as well. Not the same. They have the pincers in common but the scorpion has the long tail.


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> No. This actually looks like a lobster and moves rather slowly. I have see scorpions as well. Not the same. They have the pincers in common but the scorpion has the long tail.


Either way


----------



## Welltraveled!

Getting back on topic.

I agree with your post and most thread regulars know (or should know) that daily mail article is just clickbait; and there’s no truth to it. 

HM, I suspect, due to the negative articles circulating is going to/or is currently cutting off the British media again.  

Something tells me there will be more click bait articles popping up.  





Morgan R said:


> The idea of that article by the Daily Fail doesn't even make sense and feels like just another article by the Daily Fail to try to make Harry and Meghan "Hollywood". Also theoretically even if Harry were "cut off" he does have money that was left to him by his mother Diana and his great-grandmother The Queen Mother.  So theoretically even if Harry  was "cut off" from the money he receives from the Duchy of Cornwall and money from the Sovereign Grant it isn't like they would just be living off Meghan's money considering Harry would also still have money from his mother and great-grandmother.
> 
> Also regarding that article Meghan hasn't actually lived regularly in California for nearly a decade because though she did have a house in Los Angeles she lived mostly in Toronto while filming Suits (which she started filming in 2010 and first started to air in 2011), then was balancing her time between Toronto and London while she was dating Harry, then she officially moved to London, and now she lives in Windsor. I highly doubt she is "home sick" for California when she actually hasn't lived there regularly in a few years.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> On very rare occasions I have seen tarantulas. Once in my kitchen and once on my dining room. I wasn’t going to find out if they were old and slow or friendly. Death by Raid was the order of the day!
> 
> I will say that when we purchased our home eons ago, I was introduced to insects in the garden that I never knew existed.   There was one in particular that I called a land lobster because of the uncanny resemblance.   I do believe that somewhere in the chain of life they are related.   FYI it hasn’t stopped me from eating lobster haha!


They are related. Lobsters and crabs are in the same phyla as insects. So it does gross me out sometimes when I think too much about it since I abhor insects!


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> They are related. Lobsters and crabs are in the same phyla as insects. So it does gross me out sometimes when I think too much about it since I abhor insects!


OK, I have one more for you.  Lawn shrimp.  Two years ago we had a great deal of rain.  The carpet in front of the family room sliding glass door got a bit wet. In the spring, I saw these tiny little things in that general location and I would just vacuum them up.  One day I was curious enough to see what they were and really  looked like and looked at them under magnification and subsequently did the research about them, and voila, lawn shrimp!  I am not sure how they found their way in as there is no lawn in that location, but there they were and they were gone never to return in a couple of weeks.  i still eat shrimp. hahahahaha!


----------



## caramelize126

Morgan R said:


> The idea of that article by the Daily Fail doesn't even make sense and feels like just another article by the Daily Fail to try to make Harry and Meghan "Hollywood". Also theoretically even if Harry were "cut off" he does have money that was left to him by his mother Diana and his great-grandmother The Queen Mother.  So theoretically even if Harry  was "cut off" from the money he receives from the Duchy of Cornwall and money from the Sovereign Grant it isn't like they would just be living off Meghan's money considering Harry would also still have money from his mother and great-grandmother.



Do any of the Duchies besides Lancaster and Cornwall provide income? Just wondering if there is a Duchy of Sussex that would provide income for Harry?
Also, not income related but, when Charles becomes king, will Harry become the Duke of York? Or is that Andrew's for life? This is all so confusing


----------



## Sharont2305

caramelize126 said:


> Do any of the Duchies besides Lancaster and Cornwall provide income? Just wondering if there is a Duchy of Sussex that would provide income for Harry?
> Also, not income related but, when Charles becomes king, will Harry become the Duke of York? Or is that Andrew's for life? This is all so confusing


It's Andrews for life. I'd imagine the Duke of Sussex will be Harry's for life too.


----------



## Morgan R

caramelize126 said:


> Do any of the Duchies besides Lancaster and Cornwall provide income? Just wondering if there is a Duchy of Sussex that would provide income for Harry?
> Also, not income related but, when Charles becomes king, will Harry become the Duke of York? Or is that Andrew's for life? This is all so confusing




No there aren't other duchies that provide income outside of the Duchy of Lancaster (holder is always the monarch) and Cornwall (holder is always the monarch's eldest heir). Other duchies don't provide income as Dukedoms often go through many years (sometimes centuries) of being extinct before they used again if they don't get inherited.  For example in Harry's case he became only the second Duke of Sussex in 2018. The first Duke of Sussex was Prince Augustus Frederick who was given the title in 1801 (he had the title until 1843 when he died) and the title was extinct all those years.

The Duke of York title will still be Andrew's title when Charles becomes King. When Andrew dies the title will again become extinct since he didn't have a son to inherit the title (the title could/will likely be used again though).


----------



## Sharont2305

The last Duke and Duchess of York were Quenn Elizabeth's parents, Prince Albert who became King GeorgeVl and Elizabeth (later known as The Queen Mother)


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chowlover2 said:


> Isn't that a scorpion?


Please, dear God, don't anybody get the idea of showing us a pic of this giant land dwelling lobster scorpion  I want to Google, but at the same time, I really don't 

There's a lot of seafood I don't eat anymore because of their obvious family bond to insects on land. Once you see the connection, you can't unsee it


----------



## LittleStar88

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Please, dear God, don't anybody get the idea of showing us a pic of this giant land dwelling lobster scorpion  I want to Google, but at the same time, I really don't
> 
> There's a lot of seafood I don't eat anymore because of their obvious family bond to insects on land. Once you see the connection, you can't unsee it



 Nooooo! No pictures. I can’t handle anything with an exoskeleton, land or water. And eating them is completely off the table (pun hehe).  They seriously freak me out.

I skipped some pages... but about her dad. I knew he was too quiet for too long... gigantic narcissist. I feel so bad for her being stuck with him as her father. My dad is also a narcissist and they are incredibly tough and exhausting to deal with. She must be so mortified by his behavior.


----------



## akoko

I actually feel quite sorry from her dad... Don't know what he has done that is so horrible to be completely cut off like that. Of
 course, I realise that there might be things we don't know. I'm just basing my comments on what has been published so far.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Please, dear God, don't anybody get the idea of showing us a pic of this giant land dwelling lobster scorpion  I want to Google, but at the same time, I really don't
> 
> There's a lot of seafood I don't eat anymore because of their obvious family bond to insects on land. Once you see the connection, you can't unsee it


I will eat lobster tails but not the whole lobster - because of the way it looks


----------



## sdkitty

akoko said:


> I actually feel quite sorry from her dad... Don't know what he has done that is so horrible to be completely cut off like that. Of
> course, I realise that there might be things we don't know. I'm just basing my comments on what has been published so far.


I think there are enough things we do know.....he's been a total embarrassment


----------



## buffym

Upcoming engagements


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> I saw this this morning and just had to laugh, not that H&M wouldn't necessarily want a place in California, but that they are stating that Kim Kardashian lives in Malibu?!?!? .. UH NO, she lives in CALABASAS, not Malibu!!!   See the map below ..
> View attachment 4530293
> 
> .. so, yes .. Calabasas abuts the very top part of Malibu but you have to drive through a very windy Canyon to THEN get to the PCH (Pacific Coast Highway) .. and then drive up to Malibu!  What Malibu has going for it is that there are tons of properties that are hidden away, but .. last year (as many Californians saw) .. there was a massive Fire which destroyed many homes and it could happen again.  When we were first looking at properties, we were told to stay away from Calabases because it is very much a desert climate and oftentimes, that is where the fires start .. uh, NO THANKS!


Thank you for this map, CeeJay! 

As I've mentioned before, I don't know where any of those celeb places are, it's all Hollywood to me, a dull celeb-free Midwesterner. When I watch MDLLA, I hear Josh  (both of them) say "the Canyon is bad!" then on the next show "the Canyon is good!" 

And I think they've both said that Calabasas is bad, but since the K Klan lives there, it must be somewhat nice (well, until they moved in).


----------



## mrsinsyder

akoko said:


> I actually feel quite sorry from her dad... Don't know what he has done that is so horrible to be completely cut off like that. Of
> course, I realise that there might be things we don't know. I'm just basing my comments on what has been published so far.


Agree... it's also VERY telling that she was daddy's little girl until she met Harry. Then she had to go and lie about how she paid for school. Why?


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Agree... it's also VERY telling that she was daddy's little girl until she met Harry. Then she had to go and lie about how she paid for school. Why?



Yes, it is very telling about the person her father is, he accepted money from tabloids and arranged photo shoots, and even admitted to ignoring Meghan’s phone calls when she was trying to find out was going on. It showed the type of person he truly is especially since in the last interview he states Archie isn’t the only grandchild he hasn’t seen. 

Maybe he should try to rebuild bridges with the non famous grandchildren first.


----------



## bisousx

The idea of his daughter coming into a huge lifestyle upgrade must have made Thomas (and Samantha) foam at the mouth and panic at how they could benefit from this as well.  Meghan probably drifted away from her siblings years ago after she became semi famous from her TV show (my guess is their claws started to come out but not at the level we’ve seen) But becoming Prince Harry’s wife is a whole entire different ball game. It’s just a sad and classic example of how people will change when money and fame is involved.


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> Yes, it is very telling about the person her father is, he accepted money from tabloids and arranged photo shoots, and even admitted to ignoring Meghan’s phone calls when she was trying to find out was going on. It showed the type of person he truly is especially since in the last interview he states Archie isn’t the only grandchild he hasn’t seen.
> 
> Maybe he should try to rebuild bridges with the non famous grandchildren first.


I'm not saying he isn't a sh-t person. But for her to flat out lie and say she struggled to pay for school when he paid is just... odd.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm not saying he isn't a sh-t person. But for her to flat out lie and say she struggled to pay for school when he paid is just... odd.


if she did that, it's more than odd.....phony and self-promoting - and lacking in appreciation for what her dad for her


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm not saying he isn't a sh-t person. But for her to flat out lie and say she struggled to pay for school when he paid is just... odd.



When did she say that and what does that have to do with his behavior?


----------



## akoko

I guess I don't think that warranties cutting him off completely from her life and her grandson. It seems to me very harsh and unforgiving.  It seemed like they had a very close relationship until recently.


----------



## akoko

mrsinsyder said:


> Agree... it's also VERY telling that she was daddy's little girl until she met Harry. Then she had to go and lie about how she paid for school. Why?


Yes, I find it very odd.


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> When did she say that and *what does that have to do with his behavior?*



So we look the other way for her bad behavior but not his? Got it. 

_When Meghan Markle discussed the challenges of paying for an education yesterday, she was speaking from experience.

"It was through scholarships, financial aid programs and work-study, where my earnings from a job on campus went directly towards my tuition, that I was able to attend university," she said. "And, without question, it was worth every effort."
_
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...markle-education-speech-fiji-full-transcript/


----------



## akoko

buffym said:


> Yes, it is very telling about the person her father is, he accepted money from tabloids and arranged photo shoots, and even admitted to ignoring Meghan’s phone calls when she was trying to find out was going on. It showed the type of person he truly is especially since in the last interview he states Archie isn’t the only grandchild he hasn’t seen.
> 
> Maybe he should try to rebuild bridges with the non famous grandchildren first.


Interesting. I hadn't realised that.


----------



## gracekelly

I have to admit that I am currently conflicted in my opinions regarding Thomas Markle. I do think he behaved badly in some past instances, but his daughter not being truthful about her college tuition and completely cutting him off is not very nice either. The man is trying to recoup some of his dignity.    I am still mystified at how Harry or Charles allowed this marriage to take place without meeting the bride’s father. How difficult would it have been to fly the man to GB for a week to meet him?  It could have been done nicely and quietly and Markle would have been more comfortable with the daunting idea of walking her down the aisle.  Someone didn’t want any of that to happen and at this point I would say it was his daughter’s decision to exclude him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

buffym said:


> Yes, it is very telling about the person her father is, he accepted money from tabloids and arranged photo shoots, and even admitted to ignoring Meghan’s phone calls when she was trying to find out was going on. It showed the type of person he truly is especially since in the last interview he states Archie isn’t the only grandchild he hasn’t seen.
> 
> Maybe he should try to rebuild bridges with the non famous grandchildren first.



I do wonder if her father regrets his actions.  It would have been more beneficial for him long-term to have a stable relationship with Meghan compared to what he has now.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I’m trying to understand.  You said that Thomas paid for Meghan’s education; but the below says that she did. When did Thomas make a statement that he paid for her education?



mrsinsyder said:


> So we look the other way for her bad behavior but not his? Got it.
> 
> _When Meghan Markle discussed the challenges of paying for an education yesterday, she was speaking from experience.
> 
> "It was through scholarships, financial aid programs and work-study, where my earnings from a job on campus went directly towards my tuition, that I was able to attend university," she said. "And, without question, it was worth every effort."
> _
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...markle-education-speech-fiji-full-transcript/


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> I’m trying to understand.  You said that Thomas paid for Meghan’s education; but the below says that she did. When did Thomas make a statement that he paid for her education?


 This has now been stated in interviews appearing in the DM, Mirror, Cosmopolitan, Town and Country, Fox News and other places.    Actually in October 2018, Thomas Markle, Jr. stated in an interview that his father paid for her education out of his 750k lottery winnings   I think the problem was that at the  time the family had such bad press that they were not believed.


----------



## Welltraveled!

akoko said:


> I guess I don't think that warranties cutting him off completely from her life and her grandson. It seems to me very harsh and unforgiving.  It seemed like they had a very close relationship until recently.



IMO, I think Samantha convinced their father that its more lucrative to work with the paps.  Meghan/Harry has a list of rules that he would have to abide by; and I don’t think that would have sat well with him.  

Meghan wrote him a letter asking to stop speaking to the media and he sold the letter. Even after Archie was born he continued to make statements to the press.  

Overall, it’s a sad situation, as a parent, I couldn’t do that to my child.


----------



## bisousx

Thomas Markle’s actions are abhorrent as a father - while forgiveness is always possible, it’s hard to heal when he’s constantly opening up new wounds.


----------



## gracekelly

Yes it is sad and they all behaved badly.   Things happen. I wasn’t speaking to my mother on my wedding day because the day before she was trying to get me to call off the wedding in a very backhanded way.   The wedding took place and the two of us never spoke of it again. Does it still cause me pain?  Yes it does, but you have to keep the relationship going because this is your parent.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yes it is sad and they all behaved badly.   Things happen. I wasn’t speaking to my mother on my wedding day because the day before she was trying to get me to call off the wedding in a very backhanded way.   The wedding took place and the two of us never spoke of it again. Does it still cause me pain?  Yes it does, but you have to keep the relationship going because this is your parent.


well it's good that your were able to forgive your mother but there are some things that are unforgivable


----------



## Welltraveled!

Thanks.

I did a quick search and it seems he admitted to paying for her college and have the bank statements to prove it.  Which is odd, that he didn’t provide said statements. But, eh, let’s see what happens, since he’s talking to the media again.  



gracekelly said:


> This has now been stated in interviews appearing in the DM, Mirror, Cosmopolitan, Town and Country, Fox News and other places.    Actually in October 2018, Thomas Markle, Jr. stated in an interview that his father paid for her education out of his 750k lottery winnings   I think the problem was that at the  time the family had such bad press that they were not believed.


----------



## sdkitty

Welltraveled! said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I did a quick search and it seems he admitted to paying for her college and have the bank statements to prove it.  Which is odd, that he didn’t provide said statements. But, eh, let’s see what happens, since he’s talking to the media again.


I found one store that he paid for her private school after winning the lottery....guess it's possible the did that and she paid for her college


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan never said she struggled to pay through school though. Plenty of college students do get scholarships, do receive financial aid, and do work-study even if tuition is paid for by their parents who are rich/well-off. Many of the people I went to school with in high school ended up going to the same university as me. Some of those students (including some of my friends) were from very rich families. Yet many of those people (not everyone obviously) still participated in work-study jobs because they wanted their own money, work-study jobs did fit with their class schedule, and/or it was some job experience before they graduated from the university. Even if Thomas did pay for tuition that doesn't mean Meghan still couldn't have gotten financial aid or scholarships either. I thought it was pretty standard for people that attend universities to be encouraged to receive some financial aid while in school then pay it back after you leave the university (paying monthly after you get out school) because it is one of the earliest things that show you can keep good credit (failing to pay messes up your credit score). Scholarships can also be received even with tuition paid and scholarships (that apply to your major and minor) can also be applied for even after you get into a university.

Thomas saying he paid tuition with Meghan saying she was getting scholarships, getting financial aid, and doing work-study isn't something that is an either/or situation where one situation had to happen while the other situation couldn't have happen. It is actually very possible that both aspects happened because it is  something that actually does happen with university students all the time. I was a university student not that long ago so the financial aspect of being university student is still very fresh information in my mind.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well it's good that your were able to forgive your mother but there are some things that are unforgivable


Lol!  I didn’t say I forgave her. I just decided to not spend the rest of our lives talking about it.  The closest she ever came to an apology was to say that she was sorry that she spent too much time helping my grandmother get dressed and didn’t  have time to help me.   I think that was just as well in the end.


----------



## Welltraveled!

gracekelly said:


> Yes it is sad and they all behaved badly.   Things happen. I wasn’t speaking to my mother on my wedding day because the day before she was trying to get me to call off the wedding in a very backhanded way.   The wedding took place and the two of us never spoke of it again. Does it still cause me pain?  Yes it does, but you have to keep the relationship going because this is your parent.



I’m glad you were able to work things out with your mother.  

My father put me in a situation where I had to stop speaking to him; for my own mental health sake.  Some people are just toxic and you can’t get passed or “get over” certain things.  

In relation to Meghan, Samantha is toxic.  Thomas......I don’t think he’s toxic......stupid......but not toxic.  Again, Thomas has to prove or undo his actions from the last  year with his daughter.  Then maybe she will include him in her life again.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I have to admit that I am currently conflicted in my opinions regarding Thomas Markle. I do think he behaved badly in some past instances, but his daughter not being truthful about her college tuition and completely cutting him off is not very nice either. The man is trying to recoup some of his dignity.    I am still mystified at how Harry or Charles allowed this marriage to take place without meeting the bride’s father. How difficult would it have been to fly the man to GB for a week to meet him?  It could have been done nicely and quietly and Markle would have been more comfortable with the daunting idea of walking her down the aisle.  Someone didn’t want any of that to happen and at this point I would say it was his daughter’s decision to exclude him.


So ... a very good friend of mine is in the Entertainment business (_more on the music side - but they have also been involved in TV, Movies, etc. - from a sound perspective_).  Okay, well .. their son (_and I believe I have mentioned this before_) was Meghan's counterpart in a play that they did in high school (_she went to the girl's school / he went to the counterpart boy's school_).  As such, they know the Markle family very well  .. especially her father.  They told me that he was very active in her life when she was in High School, driving her to/from school every day .. and that said he was a very nice man and genuine.  

Now, I know that things can change (_god knows, I saw that in my own family_), BUT .. I honestly don't get why Meghan is so intent on not letting her father (at least) see/meet her husband and grandchild.  I get that she was likely very hurt by him not attending the wedding; I don't really get the paid photo's etc. - were they THAT embarrassing that you never want to see a man who raised you for many years .. every again???   As much as I loathe Piers Morgan, his comments about Meghan essentially "dropping/ghosting" people who are no longer "useful" to her ascendance rings somewhat true.   I had an acquaintance (_no - will not call her a friend_) who was very much like that .. she was your "best friend" until you could no longer provide her with the "tools" to get ahead.  What was interesting was that her own sister warned me about her behavior, and sure enough .. needless to say, we are no longer friends and she knows that she cannot 'use' me in any way, shape or form.   *Basta così*!!!


----------



## gracekelly

Sending a picture of Archie would be nice


----------



## Aimee3

I think were Thomas to meet Archie and take photos with him, he, and especially Samantha, could not be trusted to not run to the tabloids with those photos or stories.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> So ... a very good friend of mine is in the Entertainment business (_more on the music side - but they have also been involved in TV, Movies, etc. - from a sound perspective_).  Okay, well .. their son (_and I believe I have mentioned this before_) was Meghan's counterpart in a play that they did in high school (_she went to the girl's school / he went to the counterpart boy's school_).  As such, they know the Markle family very well  .. especially her father.  They told me that he was very active in her life when she was in High School, driving her to/from school every day .. and that said he was a very nice man and genuine.
> 
> Now, I know that things can change (_god knows, I saw that in my own family_), BUT .. I honestly don't get why Meghan is so intent on not letting her father (at least) see/meet her husband and grandchild.  I get that she was likely very hurt by him not attending the wedding; I don't really get the paid photo's etc. - were they THAT embarrassing that you never want to see a man who raised you for many years .. every again???   As much as I loathe Piers Morgan, his comments about Meghan essentially "dropping/ghosting" people who are no longer "useful" to her ascendance rings somewhat true.   I had an acquaintance (_no - will not call her a friend_) who was very much like that .. she was your "best friend" until you could no longer provide her with the "tools" to get ahead.  What was interesting was that her own sister warned me about her behavior, and sure enough .. needless to say, we are no longer friends and she knows that she cannot 'use' me in any way, shape or form.   *Basta così*!!!





She sleeps with the fishes!

I knew a girl like this in high school and she ended up going to Northwestern haha!


----------



## CeeJay

Welltraveled! said:


> I’m glad you were able to work things out with your mother.
> 
> My father put me in a situation where I had to stop speaking to him; for my own mental health sake.  Some people are just toxic and you can’t get passed or “get over” certain things.
> 
> In relation to Meghan, Samantha is toxic.  Thomas......I don’t think he’s toxic......stupid......but not toxic.  Again, Thomas has to prove or undo his actions from the last  year with his daughter.  Then maybe she will include him in her life again.


*Oh man .. 100% agree!!!  *

I had to essentially "divorce" myself from my Father and we did not talk for years.  What he did to me was horrible .. and while one of my sisters (_closer to me in age_) understood why I did what I did, my oldest sister (_big-time Daddy's girl_) did not .. UNTIL .. he pulled a similar stunt with her.  We did chat before he passed, not that all was resolved .. but there was closure.  

I totally get why Meghan doesn't want to deal with Samantha, but Thomas .. well, at some point .. they should talk and resolve the issue once and for all.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> She sleeps with the fishes!
> 
> I knew a girl like this in high school and she ended up going to Northwestern haha!


HA HA HA .. this chick went to Parsons School of Design in NYC (Photography Major) .. lived in Greenwich Village, spent a year in Paris .. in other words, SPOILED AS HECK .. but man, she was a good actress in making you feel like you were "the best".  Uggh


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. this chick went to Parsons School of Design in NYC (Photography Major) .. lived in Greenwich Village, spent a year in Paris .. in other words, SPOILED AS HECK .. but man, she was a good actress in making you feel like you were "the best".  Uggh


Sounds like these two girls were a couple of phonies.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Agree... it's also VERY telling that she was daddy's little girl until she met Harry. Then she had to go and lie about how she paid for school. Why?


It was a better storyline, that’s why. This girl grew up better than I did in Southern California. I went to public school and got loans and scholarships for an excellent state college. I also worked part time just to pay expenses. It offends me that someone would spin a story of hard work that is extremely exaggerated. It’s a disservice to those who actually did or have to. 

I hate how some of the media paint her out as some disadvantaged youth who made it against all odds. Ridiculous, and far from the truth. Her even remotely continuing on that storing line opens up the door for that scrutiny and criticism.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> I have to admit that I am currently conflicted in my opinions regarding Thomas Markle. I do think he behaved badly in some past instances, but his daughter not being truthful about her college tuition and completely cutting him off is not very nice either. The man is trying to recoup some of his dignity.    I am still mystified at how Harry or Charles allowed this marriage to take place without meeting the bride’s father. How difficult would it have been to fly the man to GB for a week to meet him?  It could have been done nicely and quietly and Markle would have been more comfortable with the daunting idea of walking her down the aisle.  Someone didn’t want any of that to happen and at this point I would say it was his daughter’s decision to exclude him.


I think she had no choice but to cut him off if she wanted to save her place in the BRF. If she continued to involve him and his trash family I’m sure the Queen would have none of it.


----------



## akoko

LVSistinaMM said:


> I think she had no choice but to cut him off if she wanted to save her place in the BRF. If she continued to involve him and his trash family I’m sure the Queen would have none of it.


The royal family has been very forgiving to some of their own very bad behaviour. Obvious example is Fergie, who did some very embarrassing actions. However, it was gotten over. Although I seriously dislike that part of the royal family, I respect that Fergie was not thrown under the bus and that they seem to stick together and forgive. I come from a very close knit family and I do not understand cutting complete contact with your father, you raised you for years and with whom you seemed to have a good relation until that point - for a few mis-guided and embarrassing actions.


----------



## gracekelly

akoko said:


> The royal family has been very forgiving to some of their own very bad behaviour. Obvious example is Fergie, who did some very embarrassing actions. However, it was gotten over. Although I seriously dislike that part of the royal family, I respect that Fergie was not thrown under the bus and that they seem to stick together and forgive. I come from a very close knit family and I do not understand cutting complete contact with your father, you raised you for years and with whom you seemed to have a good relation until that point - for a few mis-guided and embarrassing actions.


Actually Fergie was thrown under the bus by Prince Phillip who was stated that he refused to be under the same roof with her. It took several years before she was allowed to visit Balmoral during summer.   I think the Queen is a bit more forgiving with tincture of time. Even Wallis Simpson made it back for a visit.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Actually Fergie was thrown under the bus by Prince Phillip who was stated that he refused to be under the same roof with her. It took several years before she was allowed to visit Balmoral during summer.   I think the Queen is a bit more forgiving with tincture of time. Even Wallis Simpson made it back for a visit.


Yeah, she was absolutely thrown under the bus. For years she didn't see Beatrice and Eugenie on Christmas day as they were at Sandringham. She only saw TV coverage of them. Its only recently she's apparently been staying in a cottage within the grounds of Sandringham, with Andrew I believe.


----------



## LittleStar88

Paid for catholic private high school, not college...

“Markle didn't lose all of his money from his friend's scam, however. He gave Tom Jr. money to start a flower shop, bought a car for his daughter Yvonne, and paid Meghan's tuition at a Catholic school with his winnings.”

https://www.businessinsider.com/megan-markle-father-won-lottery-spent-winnings-2018-4


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Paid for catholic private high school, not college...
> 
> “Markle didn't lose all of his money from his friend's scam, however. He gave Tom Jr. money to start a flower shop, bought a car for his daughter Yvonne, and paid Meghan's tuition at a Catholic school with his winnings.”
> 
> https://www.businessinsider.com/megan-markle-father-won-lottery-spent-winnings-2018-4



https://www.insider.com/meghan-markle-thomas-lied-college-tuition-baby-archie-harrison-2019-9
*Thomas Markle says Meghan is lying about paying her way through college as he paid 'every penny' of her tuition and has 'bank statements to prove it'*
https://flipboard.com/@cosmopolitan...F4Dg2A:a:16801122-95249081ca/cosmopolitan.com

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/r...arkle-lie-about-paying-for-college/ar-BBOS6bt

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...41/thomas-markle-paid-meghan-college-tuition/

https://www.inquisitr.com/5612295/thomas-markle-duchess-meghan-college-tuition/

This is getting boring.  If he says he has the receipts, and cancelled checks, then let him produce them.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

What an awful specimen of a father!    Sharing his winnings with his children like that- paying for their cars, business ventures, education etc. If anybody ever deserved to be ghosted Markled, Thomas Markle Sr. did.


----------



## minababe

she is doing everything right about her father. he doesn't deserve to be a part of her life anymore. she has to protect her Family. he is selling his own daughter to the press. how could you ever trust him again. I'm totally by her.
"but he is her father, he raised her"  can't help in those situations. enough is enough. btw she was living with her mom alone the most of her life, so I think her mom is the parent she always can count and did everything for meghan. not her dad.


----------



## myown

even if she lived with him, what counts is how he behaves now


----------



## Jayne1

I feel bad for her father.

He's digging such a hole for himself, but if Meg had included him from the start, if Harry insisted on flying out to meet him as a courtesy before the wedding, if they had just been polite with a quick introduction... But no, he was ignored and it's so disrespectful.

Okay, maybe not fly out to meet him, but Harry is personally a multimillionaire (from his inheritance) so he could have her father flown to him. But you know what I mean.

The mother is behaving appropriately, but it doesn't appear she has a close relationship with her daughter either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## akoko

gracekelly said:


> Actually Fergie was thrown under the bus by Prince Phillip who was stated that he refused to be under the same roof with her. It took several years before she was allowed to visit Balmoral during summer.   I think the Queen is a bit more forgiving with tincture of time. Even Wallis Simpson made it back for a visit.


I was referring to the comment about the royal family not allowing Meghan to keep contact with her father. I would not expect them to invite him over at Balmoral, but I would not think the Queen has requested such a thing.  I think it's Meghans' decision.


----------



## buffym

Duke of Sussex launched a sustainable travel initiative in the Netherlands today







One of the presenters wore the VB dress Meghan has


----------



## LittleStar88

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> What an awful specimen of a father!    Sharing his winnings with his children like that- paying for their cars, business ventures, education etc. If anybody ever deserved to be ghosted Markled, Thomas Markle Sr. did.



He is such a narcissist, though. If your father is publicly making your life kind of hellish by airing personal family stuff, acting like a complete ass and then whining about how he did this and that for her, it is easy to walk away.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> I feel bad for her father.
> 
> He's digging such a hole for himself, but if Meg had included him from the start, if Harry insisted on flying out to meet him as a courtesy before the wedding, if they had just been polite with a quick introduction... But no, he was ignored and it's so disrespectful.
> 
> Okay, maybe not fly out to meet him, but Harry is personally a multimillionaire (from his inheritance) so he could have her father flown to him. But you know what I mean.
> 
> The mother is behaving appropriately, but it doesn't appear she has a close relationship with her daughter either.



Yes, everyone is acting like he sold her used birth control packs from high school to the media.

He took a few dumb staged pictures thinking it would get them off his back and to make a little money. Meghan doesn't have an issue with her whiny makeup artist running off to the press when she wants him to. Give me a break.


----------



## bag-mania

Families are complicated. As outsiders looking in, we can only guess at what they are feeling. Our media-provided knowledge of Meghan and her father's relationship probably makes up about 1% of what information is actually there. Maybe they will work it out in a few years after all of the hype and newness of her being the Duchess has died down.


----------



## LittleStar88

It seems her dad is not financially well-off (and not completely mentally, either) - so every time the media comes along and dangles a paycheck, he opens his big mouth. One minute he is whining about how hard it is for him to not have a relationship with her, can't see the grandkid, Harry never came to see him, the next minute he is saying things about her publicly that do nothing more but prove why she distances himself... It is all _me, me, me_ with him. If a relationship mattered, he would not be taking this stuff public to the media.

Her mother's side of the family seems to be able to keep from talking... Her mom can't be the one and only family member that exists from that side?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LittleStar88 said:


> He is such a narcissist, though. If your father is publicly making your life kind of hellish by airing personal family stuff, acting like a complete ass and then whining about how he did this and that for her, it is easy to walk away.


He could be, true. But we don't know. But on the who's truly making Meghan's life hellish, you and I disagree.

She was allowed (with hubby's wholehearted agreement I'm sure) to mishandle everything pertaining to her father and that side of her family. I think he's simply served his purpose for her. I can't believe the BRF didn't take more control of the situation. I sense the Queen has a much too soft spot for Harry. I think it's been as much what Harry wants, Harry gets through the years and some damn good PR work as it's what Meghan wants, Meghan gets now.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> Duke of Sussex launched a sustainable travel initiative in the Netherlands today
> 
> View attachment 4531462
> View attachment 4531463
> View attachment 4531464
> View attachment 4531465
> 
> 
> One of the presenters wore the VB dress Meghan has
> 
> View attachment 4531467
> 
> View attachment 4531468


"sustainable travel initiative" 

What brilliant timing. He's just so not daft


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Her mother's side of the family seems to be able to keep from talking... Her mom can't be the one and only family member that exists from that side?



Her mother has three half siblings from her father's second marriage. None of them were invited to the wedding. There don't appear to be other relatives on Doria's side. 

On a happier note, when I looked that up I saw it was Doria's birthday yesterday.


----------



## Welltraveled!

And that’s the point!  He may have been a good father - back then; but his behavior since is questionable.



myown said:


> even if she lived with him, what counts is how he behaves now


----------



## sdkitty

from Huffpost
Harry says sometimes they need to use private jet for his family's safety.  Don't know if this will satisfy his critics.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-harry-address-private-plane_n_5d6e6524e4b011080454d703


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> from Huffpost
> Harry says sometimes they need to use private jet for his family's safety.  Don't know if this will satisfy his critics.
> 
> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-harry-address-private-plane_n_5d6e6524e4b011080454d703



It shows he is finally aware that people are judging him by his actions and that he can't get by with just mouthing the right-sounding words.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It shows he is finally aware that people are judging him by his actions and that he can't get by with just mouthing the right-sounding words.


hard to believe he wouldn't be aware


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> hard to believe he wouldn't be aware



I know but he has led an insulated life and he comes off as being fairly clueless in some ways. He's the guy who thought it would be good idea to wear a Nazi uniform to a party when he was 20 and should have known better, after all.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LittleStar88 said:


> It seems her dad is not financially well-off (and not completely mentally, either) - so every time the media comes along and dangles a paycheck, he opens his big mouth. One minute he is whining about how hard it is for him to not have a relationship with her, can't see the grandkid, Harry never came to see him, the next minute he is saying things about her publicly that do nothing more but prove why she distances himself... It is all _me, me, me_ with him. If a relationship mattered, he would not be taking this stuff public to the media.
> 
> Her mother's side of the family seems to be able to keep from talking... Her mom can't be the one and only family member that exists from that side?


I think she is? Someplace I read that Doria was an only child as well. So, if anything, very minimal family ties.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I know but he has led an insulated life and he comes off as being fairly clueless in some ways. He's the guy who thought it would be good idea to wear a Nazi uniform to a party when he was 20 and should have known better, after all.


yes that Nazi thing was very bad judgment but he was very young.  if he needs help noticing the public image thing, I'm pretty sure Meghan will be aware


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes that Nazi thing was very bad judgment but he was very young.  if he needs help noticing the public image thing, I'm pretty sure Meghan will be aware



I would have thought so as well, but recent events have shown otherwise. He wasn't flying on those private jets alone. Hopefully once she gets off of maternity leave she'll up her PR awareness.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I would have thought so as well, but recent events have shown otherwise. He wasn't flying on those private jets alone. Hopefully once she gets off of maternity leave she'll up her PR awareness.


Oh right.  I wasn't necessarily saying she is more sensitive but I think she'd be aware of the bad press once they have done something.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Duke of Sussex launched a sustainable travel initiative in the Netherlands today
> 
> View attachment 4531462
> View attachment 4531463
> View attachment 4531464
> View attachment 4531465
> 
> 
> One of the presenters wore the VB dress Meghan has
> 
> View attachment 4531467
> 
> View attachment 4531468



I guess I am the only person who thinks he totally sold himself out. What’s next?


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> I guess I am the only person who thinks he totally sold himself out. What’s next?


Nah.

The fact that he's launching this now just proves how obtuse they are.


----------



## Morgan R

sdkitty said:


> from Huffpost
> Harry says sometimes they need to use private jet for his family's safety.  Don't know if this will satisfy his critics.
> 
> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-harry-address-private-plane_n_5d6e6524e4b011080454d703



I would be surprised if that satisfies critics. Everybody knows the royals have always flew a combination of commercial flights, helicopters, and private jets. When a royal talks about conservation and then rides a helicopter but more so private jets they often get criticism (Prince Charles has in my opinion gotten the most criticism over the years for doing this). Honestly it seems like after years of the media dubbing Harry the "Party Prince" where more the stories would be about Harry's partying and less on his engagements people are starting to take notice about the causes Harry has long supported many of the same issues his father and brother support. Harry like his father and brother have been talking about conservation for years. After years of not being criticized for talking about the environment Harry is only recently getting criticized for talking about conservation but at the same time occasionally riding private jets.


With all the stories released throughout August what actually got lost in all those stories that was confirmed back in July the first projects under the Sussex Royal Foundation would be announced before the tour with projects being about conservation and protecting lions (https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/royal-family-environmentally-conscious-work-142044166.html - "The couple’s first projects for their charity foundation Sussex Royal, will reportedly focus on the conservation and protection of lions, and will be announced before their tour of Africa this autumn."). The Travalyst initiative is something that has been in the works for two years now behind the scenes now and involves the companies Booking.com, Ctrip, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor, and Visa. It wasn't a initiative Harry created and launching now just because he got criticism for riding private jets.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> ... It is all _me, me, me_ with him. If a relationship mattered, he would not be taking this stuff public to the media.


By all accounts, she was his favourite little girl. It can't be easy for a father, who apparently did many of the right things when she was growing up, to be shunned for bigger and better.


gracekelly said:


> I guess I am the only person who thinks he totally sold himself out. What’s next?


Agree.  What is this exactly?  A partnership between online travel firms and initiative features with Bookingdotcom, SkyScanner, CTrip, TripAdvisor and Visa?

So very regal of you, Duke.


----------



## Welltraveled!

What I think everyone is forgetting is that Thomas *continues* to speak to the press.  It’s one thing if all he committed were those earlier “sins” and never made those mistakes again. But he continues to speak to the press.  

Truthfully, I don’t think he wants to reconcile with his daughter.  Although, big picture, it would be advantageous for him. Heck his daughter into a family with wealth and connections.  He would have the best of everything and all he had to do was keep his mouth shut. 





mrsinsyder said:


> Yes, everyone is acting like he sold her used birth control packs from high school to the media.
> 
> He took a few dumb staged pictures thinking it would get them off his back and to make a little money. Meghan doesn't have an issue with her whiny makeup artist running off to the press when she wants him to. Give me a break.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Regarding the bold, that is a good point that is easily forgotten.  It does take time to create initiatives on any level. Probably, harder/longer when you have to build outside partnerships.  



Morgan R said:


> T*he Travalyst initiative is something that has been in the works for two years now *behind the scenes now and involves the companies Booking.com, Ctrip, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor, and Visa. It *wasn't a initiative Harry created and launching now just because he got criticism for riding private jets.*


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Nah.
> 
> The fact that he's launching this now just proves how obtuse they are.





Jayne1 said:


> By all accounts, she was his favourite little girl. It can't be easy for a father, who apparently did many of the right things when she was growing up, to be shunned for bigger and better.
> 
> Agree.  What is this exactly?  A partnership between online travel firms and initiative features with Bookingdotcom, SkyScanner, CTrip, TripAdvisor and Visa?
> 
> So very regal of you, Duke.



This pretty much sums up my thoughts.  They are merching themselves out.  I think this is a precursor to a move to the US and total break from the Royal Family. They are looking for $$$ to support themselves independently.  Fine, but they will lose whatever respect they had left.  I find it distasteful to use the titles given to Harry by birth and by marriage to do this.  It is up to the Queen to do something if this bothers her enough.  I think she should just cut them loose and let them sink or swim.

The thing that gets me is that MM supposedly signed on for the package when she married him.  By all observations now, that is not the case and she has had her own agenda all along.  Her PR firm marketed her before and during the engagement and they are now back to do clean up duty.  Let's see how it all shakes out.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I guess I am the only person who thinks he totally sold himself out. What’s next?


NOPE .. you are not; I was ALWAYS told "_don't preach something if you don't plan on adhering to it as well_"!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> This pretty much sums up my thoughts.  They are merching themselves out.  I think this is a precursor to a move to the US and total break from the Royal Family. They are looking for $$$ to support themselves independently.  Fine, but they will lose whatever respect they had left.  I find it distasteful to use the titles given to Harry by birth and by marriage to do this.  It is up to the Queen to do something if this bothers her enough.  I think she should just cut them loose and let them sink or swim.
> 
> The thing that gets me is that MM supposedly signed on for the package when she married him.  By all observations now, that is not the case and she has had her own agenda all along.  Her PR firm marketed her before and during the engagement and they are now back to do clean up duty.  Let's see how it all shakes out.


.. and talking about PR Firms (and yes .. from the Daily Fail) .. she hires a PR Firm that used to represent Harvey Weinstein and Michael Jackson .. *SERIOUSLY?!?!?* 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Hollywood-firm-Harvey-Weinstein-enlisted.html


----------



## Tivo

She seems really consumed with what people think of her.


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> By all accounts, she was his favourite little girl. It can't be easy for a father, who apparently did many of the right things when she was growing up, to be shunned for bigger and better.
> 
> Agree.  What is this exactly?  A partnership between online travel firms and initiative features with Bookingdotcom, SkyScanner, CTrip, TripAdvisor and Visa?
> 
> So very regal of you, Duke.





gracekelly said:


> This pretty much sums up my thoughts.  They are merching themselves out.  I think this is a precursor to a move to the US and total break from the Royal Family. They are looking for $$$ to support themselves independently.  Fine, but they will lose whatever respect they had left.  I find it distasteful to use the titles given to Harry by birth and by marriage to do this.  It is up to the Queen to do something if this bothers her enough.  I think she should just cut them loose and let them sink or swim.
> 
> The thing that gets me is that MM supposedly signed on for the package when she married him.  By all observations now, that is not the case and she has had her own agenda all along.  Her PR firm marketed her before and during the engagement and they are now back to do clean up duty.  Let's see how it all shakes out.



How is this any different than the formula his father has started and continue to use? 

Prince Charles works with global companies to support his foundation for example, Netflix. His new project is a clothes design out of his weeds. The royals literally sale towels with the Queen faces on it if that isn’t merchandising then what is?

Good that Harry and Meghan are trying to do something to help others whether it’s Smartworks or  Travelsty, there initiatives like the Prince’s trust are tangible.

https://people.com/royals/prince-ch...cial-button-sharing&__twitter_impression=true

Prince Charles Teams with Designers to Create Fashion Line Made Entirely of Weeds from His Garden


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> How is this any different than the formula his father has started and continue to use?
> 
> Prince Charles works with global companies to support his foundation for example, Netflix. His new project is a clothes design out of his weeds. The royals literally sale towels with the Queen faces on it if that isn’t merchandising then what is?
> 
> Good that Harry and Meghan are trying to do something to help others whether it’s Smartworks or  Travelsty, there initiatives like the Prince’s trust are tangible.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-ch...cial-button-sharing&__twitter_impression=true
> 
> Prince Charles Teams with Designers to Create Fashion Line Made Entirely of Weeds from His Garden



This is so off the rails that I will leave this discussion.  I am not trying to convince anyone, nor do am I here to be convinced.  I think this thread has truly turned into not seeing the forest for the trees.  The tunnel vision is frightening.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> By all accounts, she was his favourite little girl. It can't be easy for a father, who apparently did many of the right things when she was growing up, to be shunned for bigger and better.



I totally feel for him, I really do. But my father is so much like him that I guess I see things a little differently. A narcissist can make your life so difficult at best. He is old enough to know better than to whine, pout, blame, and moan and think he will get his way out of it. And then there are the things they do that you don't see - emails, letters, phone calls to you, other family, friends, etc...

I am sure we will never know what he has truly done to push her away. I personally believe his motivation is very selfish.


----------



## Welltraveled!

You beat me to it!   Most  “private foundations” are funded by big organizations, private equity firms and independent donations.  So it makes perfect sense that HM are networking with Google, booking.com, etc to help fund their foundation initiatives.  I’m sure WK are doing the same.  It makes good business sense and it’s helping whatever their individual initiatives are to make the world a better place. 




buffym said:


> How is this any different than the formula his father has started and continue to use?
> 
> Prince Charles works with global companies to support his foundation for example, Netflix. His new project is a clothes design out of his weeds. The royals literally sale towels with the Queen faces on it if that isn’t merchandising then what is?
> 
> Good that Harry and Meghan are trying to do something to help others whether it’s Smartworks or  Travelsty, there initiatives like the Prince’s trust are tangible.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-ch...cial-button-sharing&__twitter_impression=true
> 
> Prince Charles Teams with Designers to Create Fashion Line Made Entirely of Weeds from His Garden


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> This is so off the rails that I will leave this discussion.  I am not trying to convince anyone, nor do am I here to be convinced.  I think this thread has truly turned into not seeing the forest for the trees.  The tunnel vision is frightening.


PLEASE DO NOT LEAVE ME alone here ..


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I totally feel for him, I really do. But my father is so much like him that I guess I see things a little differently. A narcissist can make your life so difficult at best. He is old enough to know better than to whine, pout, blame, and moan and think he will get his way out of it. And then there are the things they do that you don't see - emails, letters, phone calls to you, other family, friends, etc...
> 
> I am sure we will never know what he has truly done to push her away. I personally believe his motivation is very selfish.


I hear what you are saying, had the same situation with my father .. BUT, in some respects .. I do understand him talking to the media if what she is saying is not truthful (he says he paid for her college and has the receipts to back up his claim).  I know that if someone accuses me of a falsehood, oh-boy .. they will get the backlash in triple-spades!!!  Bottom line, none of us REALLY know the truth!


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> .. and talking about PR Firms (and yes .. from the Daily Fail) .. she hires a PR Firm that used to represent Harvey Weinstein and Michael Jackson .. *SERIOUSLY?!?!?*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Hollywood-firm-Harvey-Weinstein-enlisted.html



The PR firm is for a specific project to introduce Travelsty to the US.


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> I hear what you are saying, had the same situation with my father .. BUT, in some respects .. I do understand him talking to the media if what she is saying is not truthful (he says he paid for her college and has the receipts to back up his claim).  I know that if someone accuses me of a falsehood, oh-boy .. they will get the backlash in triple-spades!!!  Bottom line, none of us REALLY know the truth!



Meghan was listed on the NW website as a work study alumni. Her father may have paid for parts of her education, but she also received aid. Her sorority and NWU confirmed her work study.


----------



## caramelize126

buffym said:


> The PR firm is for a specific project to introduce Travelsty to the US.




Is this really for the foundation though? Isn't that what Sara Latham was hired for? Sunshine Sachs is a crisis management firm. They were accused of hiring people to edit their client's wikipedia pages to make them sound more favorable a few years ago 
Posters on other forums are speculating that this PR firm was actually hired to repair Meghan and Harry's rep and will be written off as a foundation expense. Why on earth do they need a high powered _hollywood_ PR/Crisis mgmt for a _charity_?


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> Is this really for the foundation though? Isn't that what Sara Latham was hired for? Sunshine Sachs is a crisis management firm. They were accused of hiring people to edit their client's wikipedia pages to make them sound more favorable a few years ago
> Posters on almost all of the other forums are speculating that this PR firm was actually hired to repair Meghan and Harry's rep and will be written off as a foundation expense. Why on earth do they need a high powered _hollywood_ PR/Crisis mgmt for a _charity_?


.. and why a "Hollywood" PR firm; what . the UK doesn't have good PR Firms???  Supposedly, Sunshine Sachs was Meghan's PR Agent when she was on "Suits".


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...harles-sustainable-fashion-highgrove-nettles/

These folks are making something that you can hold in your hand and that comes from nature.  Thinking that you are improving the environment by taking a plane or staying at a resort that will make a donation to plant a tree is not quite the same. That is just a feel good and something to assuage your conscience.    Charles may have some pie in the sky ideas, and he is always criticizes for them, but he is thinking about the environment and how things can be translated into something  practical usage by people. Oh, AND his endeavors actually fund the numerous charities he supports.  No subterfuge and funneling off of  $$ to send to a PR firm(yes, Sunshine Sachs  I mean you)  so they can send their bots out to make people like him and/or undo some real foot in the mouth situations.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> .. and why a "Hollywood" PR firm; what . the UK doesn't have good PR Firms???  Supposedly, Sunshine Sachs was Meghan's PR Agent when she was on "Suits".


They were the firm hired to make her palatable to the British public prior and during the engagement.  Boy did they pull the wool over the eyes.


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> Is this really for the foundation though? Isn't that what Sara Latham was hired for? Sunshine Sachs is a crisis management firm. They were accused of hiring people to edit their client's wikipedia pages to make them sound more favorable a few years ago
> Posters on other forums are speculating that this PR firm was actually hired to repair Meghan and Harry's rep and will be written off as a foundation expense. Why on earth do they need a high powered _hollywood_ PR/Crisis mgmt for a _charity_?



I know a man that hired them to edit his Wiki page when it was written that he had questionable business dealing with China and the  communications business he ran.  It ended up in a lawsuit and that is what removed it.


----------



## caramelize126

CeeJay said:


> .. and why a "Hollywood" PR firm; what . the UK doesn't have good PR Firms???  Supposedly, Sunshine Sachs was Meghan's PR Agent when she was on "Suits".



Especially for something as uncomplicated and uncontroversial as a charitiable initiative. These two are truly out of touch with the reality of their current predicament.

In other news:
*Meghan Markle and Harry in row as petition calls to strip titles*
The petition to “reject” the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’ titles will now be discussed by Brighton & Hove City Council after the required number of signatures was reached. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...ouncil-petition-duke-duchess-sussex-royal/amp

I doubt that their titles will be stripped, but how humiliating that its come to this point.


----------



## buffym

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/...-travalyst.html#click=https://t.co/qldXQE1ViP

Prince Harry to Launch Green Travel Initiative
The Duke of Sussex is putting his popularity as a member of the British royal family behind a consortium devoted to sustainability in tourism.

Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, will lead a global sustainable travel initiative to bring companies, consumers and communities together, he announced on Tuesday in Amsterdam.

The initiative, called Travalyst, has been in the works for three years, Kensington Palace said. The duke began engaging in conversations with the travel industry in 2017, and the first official partnership meeting took place in January with a group of travel companies including Booking.com, Ctrip, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor and Visa, in hopes of making the tourism industry more environmentally responsible.

“Our world faces environmental challenges of unprecedented scope and scale,” the duke said on Tuesday. “From deforestation and the loss of biodiversity, to ocean plastics and poaching, the problems can sometimes seem too big to fix. These human-caused challenges often need a giant system shift to make a significant enough impact.”

Travalyst comes at a time when airlines and cruise companies, along with restaurant and hotel companies, are grappling with how to make the travel industry less damaging to the environment. It also comes weeks after the duke and his wife, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, came under fire for traveling on private jets, which have a greater relative carbon impact than commercial planes. The duke flew commercial to Amsterdam.

The consortium aims to educate people about sustainable travel, overtourism and make it easier for them to understand whether their own travels are helping or hurting the planet and who is benefiting from travel dollars.

“We want to make sustainability a priority across the entire travel experience,” said Gillian Tans, Booking.com’s chairwoman. “Another goal is how to minimize the environmental footprint of travel, and the other goal is to protect and preserve local environments, welfare and cultural heritage and help to improve the welfare of local people for the longer term.”

Increasingly, people expect travel companies to offer more sustainable options and want the money they spend on tourism to go back into the local communities they visit, and that’s where Travalyst will come in, the duke said.

“Sometimes when we appreciate the world’s beauty, we heighten its fragility,” he said. “It’s a paradox. But in our enthusiasm we can put great strain on the natural wonders we travel to see as well as the communities that call these places home.”

A number of travel companies have recently launched sustainability initiatives, including the hotel companies IHG and Marriott, both of which said they would ban small plastic bottles of bath and skin products. KLM, the Dutch airline, has run ads asking consumers to rethink their travel plans and perhaps skip a plane trip.

But this will be the first time a member of the British royal family has been involved. The duke previously has publicly supported mental health awareness, founded a charity to help children living with H.I.V. /AIDS and has spoken about environmental conservation projects across Africa.

“If you think about the duke,” Ms. Tans said, “for all his life he has been supporting conservation projects, and also he has traveled so much and has seen the connection between environmental damage, community struggles and tourism.”

She added that the duke’s passion for sustainable travel has been evident throughout the planning and organization of Travalyst.

On Saturday, the duke and duchess announced on Instagram that in the next few weeks they would be traveling to South Africa as a family and that the duke would visit Malawi, Botswana and Angola. In the post, the couple also called attention to 22 organizations, most of them local groups that work in conservation and local empowerment in countries including Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Kenya.

In the debate over whether travel is a net good or bad for the planet, the duke appears to come down on the side of good.

“If conducted responsibly, tourism can benefit communities for generations,” the duke said.

The United Nations World Tourism Organization said that in 2018, 1.4 billion people traveled internationally, and it estimates that 1.8 billion international trips will be taken annually by 2030. Since 2000, the number of trips taken annually by people around the world has more than doubled, according to the World Bank, and there is no sign of these numbers tapering off.

The U.N. estimates that in 10 years, the number of tourists visiting countries in emerging markets will reach 1 billion annually, making up 57 percent of all international trips globally. That is one of the reasons that Travalyst is focusing on the communities affected by travel.

"By harnessing the power of the private sector, Travalyst will complement some of the great work already being done by NGOs, activists, governments, and multilateral organizations across the world,” the duke said.


----------



## buffym

caramelize126 said:


> Especially for something as uncomplicated and uncontroversial as a charitiable initiative. These two are truly out of touch with the reality of their current predicament.
> 
> In other news:
> *Meghan Markle and Harry in row as petition calls to strip titles*
> The petition to “reject” the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’ titles will now be discussed by Brighton & Hove City Council after the required number of signatures was reached.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...ouncil-petition-duke-duchess-sussex-royal/amp
> 
> I doubt that their titles will be stripped, but how humiliating that its come to this point.



The petition is not just Harry and Meghan 

“The petition also targets the Royal Family as a whole.”

It’s not the first or probably last petition about the Royal Family.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...nt-passes-100000-signatures-a7429536.html?amp

It is probably less humiliating then sad like the petition to bar Meghan from royal duties in 2018.

https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/susse...from-having-a-role-in-the-royal-family-95943/

It had over 3,000 signatures.


----------



## loogirl

xx Sofa King rude


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

loogirl said:


> “Our world faces environmental challenges of unprecedented scope and scale,” the duke said on Tuesday. “From deforestation and the loss of biodiversity, to ocean plastics and poaching, the problems can sometimes seem too big to fix. These human-caused challenges often need a giant system shift to make a significant enough impact.”
> 
> *Bro can start by not taking several private jets in the span of a week.
> 
> Like COME ON. The defenders are here are out to lunch. He is literally giving speeches, launching initiatives crying that the environment and biodiversity is being lost, while doing nothing about it himself. *
> 
> Cue buffym with a 15 page post in defence of harry & meghan.



Everyone is entitled to an opinion.  There is a virus going around that causes delusions.  I hear it is worse than the measles.


----------



## LittleStar88

I totally see both sides. On one hand, I like when the famous folk use their mic for good and change and to bring awareness. On the other hand, you lose credibility when you visibly go against the very thing you preach.

I like Harry and Meghan. I really do. But they seem to have gotten themselves into a bit of a quagmire here with the private jets and such. They are doing it the rich people's way - just throw money at it (take a private jet and pay to offset emissions) and let it balance itself out. 

I hope they can figure this out and get it together.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> PLEASE DO NOT LEAVE ME alone here ..


I'm here


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jarvis, my love Only second to Titania McGrath in the Woke Olympics.

https://spectator.us/carbon-footprints-prince-harry-private-jet/
*We must reduce our carbon footprints so Prince Harry can still (occasionally) use his private jet
Come on plebs. Start doing your bit and stop being so disgustingly selfish*
Jarvis Dupont
I cannot tell you how delighted I am that Prince Harry has decided to become woke. Today he made a speech in which he highlighted the urgent need for us to cut down on unnecessary travel. Harry, his wife Meghan, and their royal entourage flew to Amsterdam (because going by sea would take too long), in order to attend the launch of an eco-tourism project. While there, Harry made an inspiring plea to the rest of the world to do everything we can to reduce our carbon footprints.

Harry was unfairly criticized at the event for his use of private jets. To this, he responded: ‘I came here by commercial. I spend 99 percent of my life traveling the world by commercial.’ Figures published by the royal household showed 207 trips last year were made by helicopter, and with a mere 56 flights on specially chartered planes. The helicopter trips were for short hops and cost a mere £15,000 ($18,128) each time. So, at a total of $3,752,496 in taxpayer’s money, this really was value-for-money. In evaluating the carbon footprint of a helicopter, a Bell 206 will use around 16 gallons of fuel to travel 58 miles, while a van would burn around five gallons to cover the same distance. So honestly, 207 journeys of say, 250 miles by helicopter, using a total of 14,276 gallons…  is the equivalent of one of us traveling 165,603‬ miles in a small pick-up truck. Given that the average UK driver travels approximately 8,000 miles per year… in order to offset the royal family’s annual helicopter carbon footprint, each year we should nominate one person to give up driving for 21 years. Hey presto! Problem solved. I don’t know what all the fuss is about. Obviously we’d also need to factor in the 56 chartered flights per year and given that a medium-sized jet consumes 233-336 gallons per hour, that person would more likely need to quit driving for 164 years (I’m thinking the ‘fuel debt’ could be passed down to future generations), but that’s a small price to pay for the comfort of a handful of people for one year. Especially if those people are educating us on how much the rest of us need to save fuel because saving the planet is incredibly important.

We could use the same method in the US to offset the carbon footprints of Hollywood stars. Why should they have to give up their luxuriously convenient lifestyles when preaching to us about saving the planet? Their lives are far too important. In my opinion, the lower classes very rarely contribute as much to society as Beyonce, Madonna, or James Franco. I say, the less significant a person’s job is, the less they should be allowed to travel. Makes sense. Every Hollywood and music industry star should have a person from the lower orders nominated each year using some kind of postal lottery to offset their personal carbon impact on the world. It would be an honor. Picture Garrett, a 24-year-old failed medical student. He works in Chick-fil-A. Now imagine the delight on Garrett’s face as he receives a letter in the mail one day telling him he has been twinned with Cher to be her official 2021 Carbon Footprint Offloader. Sure, he’ll never be allowed to drive a car for the rest of his life, his passport would be revoked and he’ll be forced to eat only food he grows himself on an allotment plot, but he will live this way in the knowledge that Cher can live her glamorous lifestyle while telling the rest of us to live more frugally for an entire 12-month period completely guilt free thanks to Garrett’s lifetime of sacrifice. A happy bonus of this is that if Cher lives for another 15 years, there will be 15 other Garretts, all dutifully living a blissfully pure carbon-neutral life which will surely be a comfort. They’ll never be able to actually meet each other of course, but they will know they are out there.

So, come on plebs. Start doing your bit and stop being so disgustingly selfish. We’ve a planet to save!


----------



## caramelize126

LittleStar88 said:


> I like Harry and Meghan. I really do. But they seem to have gotten themselves into a bit of a quagmire here with the private jets and such. They are doing it the rich people's way - *just throw money at it (take a private jet and pay to offset emissions) and let it balance itself out*.



Is the concept that they will partner with other companies that will donate money for carbon offset initiatives?

If so, this sounds a bit ridiculous and out of touch. I agree, they seem to feel that throwing money at it will make this go away.  They obviously still don't "get" it. He could've just apologized for coming off as a hypocrite. Instead he made excuses about this being for his family's security....which makes no sense. Will/Kate and their children can fly commercial, but its too dangerous for the 6th and 7th in line?

Also, shouldn't part of this be promoting tourism in your own country so that people don't need to get on a plane? Going to Ibiza, Nice, and hiring hollywood PR firms isnt helping.

This what this whole thing is in a nutshell: 
*We must reduce our carbon footprints so Prince Harry can still (occasionally) use his private jet*
Come on plebs. Start doing your bit and stop being so disgustingly selfish
https://spectator.us/carbon-footprints-prince-harry-private-jet/

I'm sure Sunshine Sachs with their fluff pieces and bots will be swooping in to undo this mess within the next few weeks.


----------



## caramelize126

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Jarvis, my love Only second to Titania McGrath in the Woke Olympics.
> 
> https://spectator.us/carbon-footprints-prince-harry-private-jet/
> *We must reduce our carbon footprints so Prince Harry can still (occasionally) use his private jet
> Come on plebs. Start doing your bit and stop being so disgustingly selfish*
> Jarvis Dupont



omgg great minds, i was just reading/posted abt this too!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Has everyone forgotten that Harry is also pretty much an idiot? It’s been well stated over the years that he’s not very bright and barely got through high school. Why would anyone care what he thinks? 

(And before you say “well xxy celebrity isn’t smart”... I didn’t say they were)


----------



## CeeJay

Welltraveled! said:


> You beat me to it!   Most  “private foundations” are funded by big organizations, private equity firms and independent donations.  So it makes perfect sense that HM are networking with Google, booking.com, etc to help fund their foundation initiatives.  I’m sure WK are doing the same.  It makes good business sense and it’s helping whatever their individual initiatives are to make the world a better place.


I have to disagree with one point (I used to work in Alternatives - Hedge, Private Equity & Real Estate) and many Private Equity firms are LOATHE to invest in funds where they will not get a good ROI in 3 years .. "Angel Money" (as we used to call it) .. is just not what they want to do given how much they lost in the early days of the Dot.com ventures.  A lot of the "angel money" nowadays is done via Crowdfunding and scenarios like that where the investor is really being more of a philanthropist as opposed to getting a return on their investment.  Given that Harry is BRF, I can see that scenario more so than Private Equity ..


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> Meghan was listed on the NW website as a work study alumni. Her father may have paid for parts of her education, but she also received aid. Her sorority and NWU confirmed her work study.


Okay .. Northwestern University in Boston also has a VERY robust work-study program, and yes .. the students match up with various employers that then hire them and they do get paid ... BUT, they are expected to work full-time and w/in the discipline that they are studying (e.g., Finance, Computer Science, etc.).  At that time, they do not attend any classes .. they are expected to fulfill their commitment and once done, they go back to the University to continue to take classes.  As such, the programs for these students is oftentimes 5 years (although you can also do 6 or even 7 - if you wish to also get an MBA). 

So, just because she was in a work-study program, but still graduated in 4 years .. kind of makes me think that indeed, her father continued to foot the 'big' bill (tuition) and that her work-study jobs was to fund the other stuff - e.g., books, food, etc.


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Jarvis, my love Only second to Titania McGrath in the Woke Olympics.
> 
> https://spectator.us/carbon-footprints-prince-harry-private-jet/
> *We must reduce our carbon footprints so Prince Harry can still (occasionally) use his private jet
> Come on plebs. Start doing your bit and stop being so disgustingly selfish*
> Jarvis Dupont
> I cannot tell you how delighted I am that Prince Harry has decided to become woke. Today he made a speech in which he highlighted the urgent need for us to cut down on unnecessary travel. Harry, his wife Meghan, and their royal entourage flew to Amsterdam (because going by sea would take too long), in order to attend the launch of an eco-tourism project. While there, Harry made an inspiring plea to the rest of the world to do everything we can to reduce our carbon footprints.
> 
> Harry was unfairly criticized at the event for his use of private jets. To this, he responded: ‘I came here by commercial. I spend 99 percent of my life traveling the world by commercial.’ Figures published by the royal household showed 207 trips last year were made by helicopter, and with a mere 56 flights on specially chartered planes. The helicopter trips were for short hops and cost a mere £15,000 ($18,128) each time. So, at a total of $3,752,496 in taxpayer’s money, this really was value-for-money. In evaluating the carbon footprint of a helicopter, a Bell 206 will use around 16 gallons of fuel to travel 58 miles, while a van would burn around five gallons to cover the same distance. So honestly, 207 journeys of say, 250 miles by helicopter, using a total of 14,276 gallons…  is the equivalent of one of us traveling 165,603‬ miles in a small pick-up truck. Given that the average UK driver travels approximately 8,000 miles per year… in order to offset the royal family’s annual helicopter carbon footprint, each year we should nominate one person to give up driving for 21 years. Hey presto! Problem solved. I don’t know what all the fuss is about. Obviously we’d also need to factor in the 56 chartered flights per year and given that a medium-sized jet consumes 233-336 gallons per hour, that person would more likely need to quit driving for 164 years (I’m thinking the ‘fuel debt’ could be passed down to future generations), but that’s a small price to pay for the comfort of a handful of people for one year. Especially if those people are educating us on how much the rest of us need to save fuel because saving the planet is incredibly important.
> 
> We could use the same method in the US to offset the carbon footprints of Hollywood stars. Why should they have to give up their luxuriously convenient lifestyles when preaching to us about saving the planet? Their lives are far too important. In my opinion, the lower classes very rarely contribute as much to society as Beyonce, Madonna, or James Franco. I say, the less significant a person’s job is, the less they should be allowed to travel. Makes sense. Every Hollywood and music industry star should have a person from the lower orders nominated each year using some kind of postal lottery to offset their personal carbon impact on the world. It would be an honor. Picture Garrett, a 24-year-old failed medical student. He works in Chick-fil-A. Now imagine the delight on Garrett’s face as he receives a letter in the mail one day telling him he has been twinned with Cher to be her official 2021 Carbon Footprint Offloader. Sure, he’ll never be allowed to drive a car for the rest of his life, his passport would be revoked and he’ll be forced to eat only food he grows himself on an allotment plot, but he will live this way in the knowledge that Cher can live her glamorous lifestyle while telling the rest of us to live more frugally for an entire 12-month period completely guilt free thanks to Garrett’s lifetime of sacrifice. A happy bonus of this is that if Cher lives for another 15 years, there will be 15 other Garretts, all dutifully living a blissfully pure carbon-neutral life which will surely be a comfort. They’ll never be able to actually meet each other of course, but they will know they are out there.
> 
> So, come on plebs. Start doing your bit and stop being so disgustingly selfish. We’ve a planet to save!





caramelize126 said:


> omgg great minds, i was just reading/posted abt this too!!



As soon as H&M "*practice what you preach*", then maybe people will believe them.  Similar to Gwyneth Paltrow and her Goop crap - preach, preach, preach -- yet, does she do it?!?!   Heck no!


----------



## Flatsy

Northwestern is expensive and based on Meghan's middle-class upbringing, it's likely parental contribution could not pay the whole thing, so I don't believe Thomas when he says he paid "every penny".  

And at the same time, you can't get full aid if you are a dependent of parents who can afford to contribute.  So Meghan was most likely being misleading when she implied that her education was all funded by "scholarships, financial aid and work-study".

Meghan has the advantage in this argument IMO because she didn't state outright that her parents didn't contribute to her education, even though she did exclude them and did exaggerate when painting the picture of pulling herself up by her bootstraps.


----------



## TC1

Harry saying the only fly private if there's an issue of safety. Pfffft you're 6th in line Harry, give it a rest. 
Will and George just flew TOGETHER, commercially (which is apparently a breach of protocol)


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Northwestern is expensive and based on Meghan's middle-class upbringing, it's likely parental contribution could not pay the whole thing, so I don't believe Thomas when he says he paid "every penny".
> 
> And at the same time, you can't get full aid if you are a dependent of parents who can afford to contribute.  So Meghan was most likely being misleading when she implied that her education was all funded by "scholarships, financial aid and work-study".
> 
> Meghan has the advantage in this argument IMO because she didn't state outright that her parents didn't contribute to her education, even though she did exclude them and did exaggerate when painting the picture of pulling herself up by her bootstraps.


Middle-class? .. hmmmm, not so sure about that given that Thomas was a TV Lighting and Director of Photography .. they don't get paid chump-change.  While Meghan was living in Woodland Hills (2 years when she was very young), they were not living in a crappy neighborhood (right by the Country Club? - uh, no).  When her parents split-up, yes .. the loft apartment Doria had in Mid-Wilshire may not have been as nice as the WH house, but apparently .. Meghan split her time with her parents for many years.  I agree with you @Flatsy  .. it was more likely the truth was a little stretched here.


----------



## doloresmia

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. Northwestern University in Boston also has a VERY robust work-study program, and yes .. the students match up with various employers that then hire them and they do get paid ... BUT, they are expected to work full-time and w/in the discipline that they are studying (e.g., Finance, Computer Science, etc.).  At that time, they do not attend any classes .. they are expected to fulfill their commitment and once done, they go back to the University to continue to take classes.  As such, the programs for these students is oftentimes 5 years (although you can also do 6 or even 7 - if you wish to also get an MBA).
> 
> So, just because she was in a work-study program, but still graduated in 4 years .. kind of makes me think that indeed, her father continued to foot the 'big' bill (tuition) and that her work-study jobs was to fund the other stuff - e.g., books, food, etc.



Just FYI, Northwest University, where Meghan went, is in Chicago area. Northeastern University is in Boston and has nothing to do with Meghan as far as I know. Boston is a North East city, hence the university name. Both great schools, not the same. Both very expensive private universities. Northeastern is known for its work study program, Northwest is not. Just adding a little fact to a gossip thread full of opinions.


----------



## CeeJay

doloresmia said:


> Just FYI, *Northwest University*, where Meghan went, is in Chicago area. Northeastern University is in Boston and has nothing to do with Meghan as far as I know. Boston is a North East city, hence the university name. Both great schools, not the same. Both very expensive private universities. Northeastern is known for its work study program, Northwest is not. Just adding a little fact to a gossip thread full of opinions.


Uh .. sorry ..*Northwest University* - as you said .. IS NOT in Chicago, but is in Kirkland, WA (_state_).  I am very well aware of Northeastern .. and that was definitely my fault (_donk_ - ) in saying Northwestern .. which is indeed in the Chicago area (_Evanston, IL_).  Had a very good friend attend Northwestern where she was a Music:  Voice & Opera major.  

In regards to to Boston!?!?! ,, lived there for over 20 years, so extremely familiar with that City .. and the Northeastern Campus was not far from where I worked (when at Harvard) and then in the Back Bay.  As a matter of fact, I oftentimes sponsored many of their work-study students in the Computer Science sector and then in the Financial Services arena when I moved over to the Business side.  So .. in regards to a "_gossip thread full of opinions_" .. hardly an opinion and I did admit my mistake re: Northwestern instead of Northeaster .. okay?!?!?!    Peace out ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

Um, so if you're sixth in line to the throne, you shouldn't have to worry about your or your family's safety?  Oh, ok.


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> Um, so if you're sixth in line to the throne, you shouldn't have to worry about your or your family's safety?  Oh, ok.


I’m sure my brothers worry about their families when they fly but that doesn’t mean they have to take private planes.   Time for the Sussex duo to come down to earth. If  the Cambridges can fly to Mustique or Balmoral on commercial I think they could handle it too. They’re not that special.


----------



## gracekelly

Figured out Harry's problem and why he is so blind. 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/09/03/health/poor-diet-blindness-scli-intl/index.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

doloresmia said:


> Just FYI, *Northwest University, where Meghan went,* is in Chicago area. Northeastern University is in Boston and has nothing to do with Meghan as far as I know. Boston is a North East city, hence the university name. Both great schools, not the same. Both very expensive private universities. Northeastern is known for its work study program, Northwest is not. Just adding a little fact to a gossip thread full of opinions.



Just FYI, Meghan went to Northwestern University.


----------



## Flatsy

TC1 said:


> Harry saying the only fly private if there's an issue of safety. Pfffft you're 6th in line Harry, give it a rest.


I think the Sussex's Hollywood PR crisis managers informed him that "protecting his family" is the only excuse that plays well with anybody.  

As for his "99%" figure, I'm reminded of the rumor that his school teachers had to do his schoolwork for him so he would pass because his math is clearly atrocious.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I think the Sussex's Hollywood PR crisis managers informed him that "protecting his family" is the only excuse that plays well with anybody.
> 
> As for his "99%" figure, I'm reminded of the rumor that his school teachers had to do his schoolwork for him so he would pass because his math is clearly atrocious.


Yeah, but IMO .. it doesn't play well because his brother (William) just took the family on vacation and they flew commercial!  C'mon .. I'm sure that the BRF has security regardless of flying commercial or private .. so have to kind of agree with the "pffffft"!!  LOL


----------



## FreeSpirit71

TC1 said:


> Harry saying the only fly private if there's an issue of safety. Pfffft you're 6th in line Harry, give it a rest.
> Will and George just flew TOGETHER, commercially (which is apparently a breach of protocol)


Harry had death threats against him when he served in the armed forces.  There are still groups out there who would see a Royal death as a coup.

They need to tone down the private planes but sometimes there are legit threats the public may  not be aware of at the time.

Not just Harry...all of them.


----------



## caramelize126

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, but IMO .. it doesn't play well because his brother (William) just took the family on vacation and they flew commercial!  C'mon .. I'm sure that the BRF has security regardless of flying commercial or private .. so have to kind of agree with the "pffffft"!!  LOL



Agreed. The whole thing is obnoxious.
Same with the PR/crisis management. If the Palace PR is good enough for Andrew ( and I think we can ALL agree that Andrew is the real royal in trouble), it’s crazy that Harry and meg think that the palace’s team isn’t good enough for them. The palace did such a good enough job of managing Harry’s reputation all these years. He was always made out to be the more likable of the 2 brothers. 

Hiring an American firm when they’re supposed to be representing GB is just the icing on the cake.


----------



## rose60610

Harry could well afford to grow up being the family playboy, and he was good at it. William grew up with the pressure of inheriting the throne, and he's towed the line well. All this gossip of William's supposed affair(s), I never read about any valid proof  that would stand up in court. A poster once called would-be paramours of William "chicken heads" who wouldn't bother Kate in the least. I agree with that, and love the term "chicken heads".  Like Kate has any worry in the world? 

I think Meghan wittingly latched onto an insecure royal and played him like a violin. Now what's with all these PR firms? These two have a problem. Pretty soon Archie will have is own PR. I guess the world was supposed to revolve around them and view their every thought as genius and life-changing. At this stage we'll probably be fed pictures of Meghan in clothes from Land's End being forced to visit orphanages and serving dinner at soup kitchens so we can be assured she didn't marry for money, fortune and fame. 

Good luck with that.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> Has everyone forgotten that Harry is also pretty much an idiot? It’s been well stated over the years that he’s not very bright and barely got through high school. Why would anyone care what he thinks?
> 
> (And before you say “well xxy celebrity isn’t smart”... I didn’t say they were)


Stupid people do not fly Apache helicopters. In either front or back seat.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> I’m sure my brothers worry about their families when they fly but that doesn’t mean they have to take private planes.   Time for the Sussex duo to come down to earth. If  the Cambridges can fly to Mustique or Balmoral on commercial I think they could handle it too. They’re not that special.



Harry and Meghan flew commercial to Nice last year. 

The couple also flew commercial to France for their New Year's Eve celebration with friends. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.in...prince-harry-meghan-markle-private-jet-2019-8

They fly publicly on tour too.

The Cambridges also fly privately with their kids and on tours.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...ek-attended-three-royal-engagements-year.html

William and Kate borrowed Duke of Westminster's private jet to fly to secret ski break at five-star Courchevel resort (well, Wills has worked 20 hours a week and done three royal engagements this year!)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/metro....e-jet-used-norway-much-will-cost-7279178/amp/

You can charter Kate Middleton and Prince William’s private jet used in Norway – and here’s how much it will cost


----------



## chowlover2

The Sussexes might as well shop for a home on their tour of Africa. The way things are going they are going to be exiled there shortly.


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes, everyone is acting like he sold her used birth control packs from high school to the media.
> 
> He took a few dumb staged pictures thinking it would get them off his back and to make a little money. Meghan doesn't have an issue with her whiny makeup artist running off to the press when she wants him to. Give me a break.


he did more than just the staged photos


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Her father is a toxic narcissist. Same with her half-sister. She's well rid of them both. He'd sell anything she said to him to the highest bidder - as he's done  _repeatedly_ in the past.

People are acting like the rest of the BRF are saints.  And these are the people Harry and Meghan are judged against? Please.

This family has more skeletons and missteps in the closet than the freaking Duggars.

M & H have made missteps and seriously misjudged Britain's current atmosphere but nothing worthy of this ridiculous level of bile.

Save that for the pedo being protected by his Mummy. The Queen is another one misjudging the reaction to THAT story.

In any case, I believe the monarchy is on the way out. Out of favour and out of touch.


----------



## mrsinsyder

PatsyCline said:


> Stupid people do not fly Apache helicopters. In either front or back seat.


I guess his teachers that had to do his school work were lying too. 

My husband is a helicopter pilot. I’ve known many of them over the years, and most of them are not great philosophers, I’ll leave it at that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess his teachers that had to do his school work were lying too.
> 
> My husband is a helicopter pilot. I’ve known many of them over the years, and most of them are not great philosophers, I’ll leave it at that.



 Oops - did you just shade your husband?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chowlover2 said:


> The Sussexes might as well shop for a home on their tour of Africa. The way things are going they are going to be exiled there shortly.


From what I've read, there is no way Meghan would settle for Africa. It's a prop for her. True, Africa is a huge and very varying continent, like all others, but it's a very real place imo. I'm sure California will suit her better. If she can get it. Because also from what I've read, the Sussex private economy can't handle Malibu real estate prices. But maybe this is where a real good slush fund / foundation could come in handy? Didn't Latham work on such ventures before?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Her father is a toxic narcissist. Same with her half-sister. She's well rid of them both. He'd sell anything she said to him to the highest bidder - as he's done  _repeatedly_ in the past.
> 
> People are acting like the rest of the BRF are saints.  And these are the people Harry and Meghan are judged against? Please.
> 
> This family has more skeletons and missteps in the closet than the freaking Duggars.
> 
> M & H have made missteps and seriously misjudged Britain's current atmosphere but nothing worthy of this ridiculous level of bile.
> 
> Save that for the pedo being protected by his Mummy. The Queen is another one misjudging the reaction to THAT story.
> 
> In any case, I believe the monarchy is on the way out. Out of favour and out of touch.


Why doesn't somebody, you for ex, start a general BRF gossip thread or simply a general royal gossip thread where Ran*dy Andy could be discussed? Or an Epstein thread? I'm sure there are lots of posters who'd love to discuss. Not so sure about forum owners and mods though.

I already follow discussions on this in lots of other media ( for ex https://www.mintpressnews.com/author/whitney-webb/  ) but these are by investigative journalists that go really deep in to every detail of the Epstein mess and his connections and I don't know if it'd be proper for a luxury fashion forum. As it concerns famous people, US presidents etc it'll probably derail very easily in to political mudslinging instead of truth seeking where the chips will fall where they may.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oops - did you just shade your husband?


Uhh... no? 

I said that because of him I know plenty of pilots. Your ability to do a job doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a genius.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *Why doesn't somebody, you for ex, *start a general BRF gossip thread or simply a general royal gossip thread where Ran*dy Andy could be discussed? Or an Epstein thread? I'm sure there are lots of posters who'd love to discuss. Not so sure about forum owners and mods though.
> 
> I already follow discussions on this in lots of other media ( for ex https://www.mintpressnews.com/author/whitney-webb/  ) but these are by investigative journalists that go really deep in to every detail of the Epstein mess and his connections and I don't know if it'd be proper for a luxury fashion forum. As it concerns famous people, US presidents etc it'll probably derail very easily in to political mudslinging instead of truth seeking where the chips will fall where they may.


 How about no?

My main focus is M & H and occasionally other royals will slide into the commentary.

Just because you don't like my pov doesn't mean I have to move along.

Press the Ignore if you so desire.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

FreeSpirit71 said:


> How about no?
> 
> My main focus is M & H and occasionally other royals will slide into the commentary.
> 
> Just because you don't like my pov doesn't mean I have to move along.
> 
> Press the Ignore if you so desire.


I think you misunderstood my meaning? Who said I don't like your point of view and that you should move along? I'd never tell anyone to do that. And thank you, but I haven't used the ignore button on anyone since becoming a member here so see no reason to start with you.

I merely suggested- with no snark what so ever- someone, like yourself, who seems to want to discuss Andrew, other members of the BRF and Epstein could start a new thread where this could be discussed more freely without complaints of being OT. Personally I enjoy the OT but some others don't. Also, I can't be bothered to start a new thread as I get my "fill" of the Epstein case from other more thorough sources that would most likely be considered too political to be allowed here. That's all.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Are they allowed to use the Palace PR?

The palace PR team  haven’t been useful this far.  Plus Randy Andy is the Queens son he will always get preferential treatment over Harry.  

I do agree they should have hired a British PR firm, if possible.





caramelize126 said:


> Agreed. The whole thing is obnoxious.
> Same with the PR/crisis management. If the Palace PR is good enough for Andrew ( and I think we can ALL agree that Andrew is the real royal in trouble), it’s crazy that Harry and meg think that the palace’s team isn’t good enough for them. The palace did such a good enough job of managing Harry’s reputation all these years. He was always made out to be the more likable of the 2 brothers.
> 
> Hiring an American firm when they’re supposed to be representing GB is just the icing on the cake.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess his teachers that had to do his school work were lying too.
> 
> My husband is a helicopter pilot. I’ve known many of them over the years, and most of them are not great philosophers, I’ll leave it at that.


Just because he wasn't a good student in high school, isn't a barometer for the rest of his life.


----------



## minababe

gracekelly said:


> I’m sure my brothers worry about their families when they fly but that doesn’t mean they have to take private planes.   Time for the Sussex duo to come down to earth. If  the Cambridges can fly to Mustique or Balmoral on commercial I think they could handle it too. They’re not that special.



I think most People don't want to see it but right now Harry and meghan are way more interesting to the press and public. they bring way more Money than the Cambridges. so i can understand what he is meaning when he says he has to protect his Family.
he doesn't want to have the mobile phones at their faces when they fly with Baby archie. that is one Point I totally understand.
the People should calm down. it's not like they always fly private and especially because so many People compare them to kate and William. they fly privat Jets and helicopter most of the time and just because they fly some cheap flights in really small planes ( so maybe that doesn't Count at all haha ) they are not better or different.

What I just don't like or begin to roll my eyes if People like Harry tell me, the normal People, we shouldn't fly too much and should not Forget the inviroment. trust me Harry, we have much more to do with the real world outside than you will ever have.
do your best in taking care and Support charities etc but don't tell People if it's ok to take a plane when they want to go on vacation.
thats my Point.


----------



## Flatsy

minababe said:


> People compare them to kate and William. they fly privat Jets and helicopter most of the time and just because they fly some cheap flights in really small planes ( so maybe that doesn't Count at all haha ) they are not better or different.


There were 44 passengers on the Cambridges' flight.  Stuffing 44 passengers into the smallest plane possible is the ideal environmental option.  Operating a bigger plane than needed is what hurts the environment.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Why doesn't somebody, you for ex, start a general BRF gossip thread or simply a general royal gossip thread where Ran*dy Andy could be discussed? Or an Epstein thread? I'm sure there are lots of posters who'd love to discuss. Not so sure about forum owners and mods though.
> 
> I already follow discussions on this in lots of other media ( for ex https://www.mintpressnews.com/author/whitney-webb/  ) but these are by investigative journalists that go really deep in to every detail of the Epstein mess and his connections and I don't know if it'd be proper for a luxury fashion forum. As it concerns famous people, US presidents etc it'll probably derail very easily in to political mudslinging instead of truth seeking where the chips will fall where they may.


Sketchy site.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess his teachers that had to do his school work were lying too.
> 
> My husband is a helicopter pilot. I’ve known many of them over the years, and most of them are not great philosophers, I’ll leave it at that.



I work with some really bright and gifted folks in tech with numerous patents who could not find their way out of a paper bag. You can be capable of one thing, but be a complete dolt when it comes to everything else.

I feel like Harry was at a crossroads before Meghan - either be party boy for life and be fairly useless in the eyes of the public, or get married and do all the things expected to be viewed with some seriousness. He chose the latter and is now trying to figure out how to do it. Meghan being an outsider to the BRF has probably made this path a little harder for him.

As mentioned, despite their mistakes, they don't deserve a lot of the negativity they are receiving.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> Uhh... no?
> 
> I said that because of him I know plenty of pilots. Your ability to do a job doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a genius.


No one said it does. But it also means that just because you failed in one aspect of your life, doesn't condemn you for the rest of it.

Harry flew and fought for his country, and risked his life.  Which is a lot more than the vast majority of people who criticise every aspect of his life.


----------



## buffym




----------



## doloresmia

mrsinsyder said:


> Just FYI, Meghan went to Northwestern University.



Yes, typo I meant the uni in Chicago area. Thanks so much


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

an Epstein thread would probably be too controversial with all the prominent people involved and would ultimately be shut down


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Sketchy site.


Why? I'd say Whitney is very on point. PM me if you'd like, as sdkitty pointed out above, an Epstein thread would probably not make it long here. Though a bit of it in a general royal gossip thread might.


----------



## daisychainz

TC1 said:


> Harry saying the only fly private if there's an issue of safety. Pfffft you're 6th in line Harry, give it a rest.
> Will and George just flew TOGETHER, commercially (which is apparently a breach of protocol)


I thought about that too. While it was nice to take a commercial flight in light of the Harry/Meghan mess, the entire Cambridge family was on that flight. So, if the plane went down, that entire family and two kings are wiped out. They are supposed to split up when flying for that reason. They made their own major faux pas.


----------



## daisychainz

caramelize126 said:


> Especially for something as uncomplicated and uncontroversial as a charitiable initiative. These two are truly out of touch with the reality of their current predicament.
> 
> In other news:
> *Meghan Markle and Harry in row as petition calls to strip titles*
> The petition to “reject” the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’ titles will now be discussed by Brighton & Hove City Council after the required number of signatures was reached.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...ouncil-petition-duke-duchess-sussex-royal/amp
> 
> I doubt that their titles will be stripped, but how humiliating that its come to this point.


I saw this on other sites as well, but wasn't sure how reliable the info was?


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I thought about that too. While it was nice to take a commercial flight in light of the Harry/Meghan mess, the entire Cambridge family was on that flight. So, if the plane went down, that entire family and two kings are wiped out. They are supposed to split up when flying for that reason. They made their own major faux pas.



I wouldn't call it a major faux pas. Fortunately there are very few plane crashes so their risk in traveling together is minimal.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn't call it a major faux pas. Fortunately there are very few plane crashes so their risk in traveling together is minimal.


It's not just a crash, but other passengers that could be a risk to them, too. Passengers go nuts these days too. Maybe they should stick to private planes, lol.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Why? I'd say Whitney is very on point. PM me if you'd like, as sdkitty pointed out above, an Epstein thread would probably not make it long here. Though a bit of it in a general royal gossip thread might.


I started one when he died and it was promptly closed. I was told it was too political (I strongly disagree but...)


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn't call it a major faux pas. Fortunately there are very few plane crashes so their risk in traveling together is minimal.


George is too far away from the throne for this to matter.   It's the heir, Prince Charles and his heir, Prince William who probably are advised not to fly together.  

There's no reason for a small boy to be separated from his father because some day in the distant future he might take over a throne that let's be honest, might not even exist by then.


----------



## mrsinsyder

There were some lunatics on twitter who think that George and William flying together will pave the way to Queen Meghan. I’m sure they praise her for her kindness right after talking about a whole family being killed in a tragedy.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> There were some lunatics on twitter who think that George and William flying together will pave the way to Queen Meghan. I’m sure they praise her for her kindness right after talking about a whole family being killed in a tragedy.


Not just twitter! I believe I saw this on many posts on Yahoo, too. She has many supporters in Yahoo forums.


----------



## TC1

Flatsy said:


> George is too far away from the throne for this to matter.   It's the heir, Prince Charles and his heir, Prince William who probably are advised not to fly together.
> 
> There's no reason for a small boy to be separated from his father because some day in the distant future he might take over a throne that let's be honest, might not even exist by then.


It is protocol though. Two direct heirs are not allowed to travel by plane together. Whether we think it's valid or not..isn't relevant. William must be okay with it though..they've done it numerous times.


----------



## bag-mania

I looked it up. It is an unwritten protocol and the Queen has the final say on when it can be broken and she has been lax about it for William and his family. 

Since the Queen has approved it, the Cambridges are not breaking protocol.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Why? I'd say Whitney is very on point. PM me if you'd like, as sdkitty pointed out above, an Epstein thread would probably not make it long here. Though a bit of it in a general royal gossip thread might.


I'd love an Epstein thread, since the whole thing is so dark and convoluted, I need someone to simplify things for me... but her whole site, not the Epstein stuff, is extremely biased and her agenda is so obvious.  She's not objective in the least.  I hit the back button stat.

As for Harry - I've noticed he started signing his writings with "The Duke" and I find that pretentious, if only because he wants to be seen as folksy and of the people.  I know he was born with the Prince title and he became the Duke of Sussex on his wedding day, but the more I see of Harry, the less I like him.  lol


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> There were some lunatics on twitter who think that George and William flying together will pave the way to Queen Meghan. I’m sure they praise her for her kindness right after talking about a whole family being killed in a tragedy.


That is disgusting!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> I'd love an Epstein thread, since the whole thing is so dark and convoluted, I need someone to simplify things for me... but her whole site, not the Epstein stuff, is extremely biased and her agenda is so obvious.  She's not objective in the least.  I hit the back button stat.
> 
> As for Harry - I've noticed he started signing his writings with "The Duke" and I find that pretentious, if only because he wants to be seen as folksy and of the people.  I know he was born with the Prince title and he became the Duke of Sussex on his wedding day, but the more I see of Harry, the less I like him.  lol


The truth isn't objective in the sense that we'll always like and agree with what we find. Any Epstein reporting is going to tread on somebody's toes. Countries, intelligence services of said countries, famous people and politicians and so on. Agendas are in the eye of the beholder. 

What you just said would go for the majority of mainstream media outlets in the EU and the US currently.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> As for Harry - I've noticed he started signing his writings with "The Duke" and I find that pretentious, if only because he wants to be seen as folksy and of the people. I know he was born with the Prince title and he became the Duke of Sussex on his wedding day, but the more I see of Harry, the less I like him. lol


That was such a weird way to sign off.  I think on Harry's alleged birthday message to Meghan (I don't think he actually uttered that generic message) they signed it "H" to be personal?  They don't seem to have made up their minds, but I think "The Duke" is the worst option.  It sounds like he's trying to be cool, like a gangster or a jazz singer or something.

"Harry" if they want to be informal or "The Duke of Sussex" if they want to be formal.


----------



## LittleStar88

I also didn't like "The Duke" thing very much.

Why do I get the impression they poured all of their royal grooming into William and not Harry? Seems he is being given totally free reign to do how he likes (as he seems to always have done with the shenanigans from his youth) versus do what people expect of someone from the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

When I hear "The Duke" I think of John Wayne. Damn I'm old!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I also didn't like "The Duke" thing very much.
> 
> Why do I get the impression they poured all of their royal grooming into William and not Harry? Seems he is being given totally free reign to do how he likes (as he seems to always have done with the shenanigans from his youth) versus do what people expect of someone from the BRF.


Supposedly, Harry was Prince Phillips favorite grandchild, and we all know how much the Queen loves her husband .. so, yeah, I think he's gotten away with a HECK of a lot more than William ever did!


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> When I hear "The Duke" I think of John Wayne. Damn I'm old!


Yes!  I remember that and that's what triggered my dislike of it, I think!


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The truth isn't objective in the sense that we'll always like and agree with what we find. Any Epstein reporting is going to tread on somebody's toes. Countries, intelligence services of said countries, famous people and politicians and so on. Agendas are in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> What you just said would go for the majority of mainstream media outlets in the EU and the US currently.


I don't want to agree or disagree with the news I read, I want objectivity and a non biased account. Her site is not that.  It's all one side, just a different side.  As long as her readers know that.

As for Harry, or sorry, The Duke... is The Sun a credible source?  They've got a page of his "heir miles" which is interesting.

FULL OF HOT HEIR
Prince Harry used private jets for 6 out of 10 flights since marrying Meghan Markle despite his claim he flies commercial 99% of the time
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9860166/prince-harry-private-jets-meghan/


----------



## mrsinsyder

The Sun is reporting they’ve refused the Queen’s invitation to go to Balmoral... this sounds like a juicy story.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9864469/meghan-harry-snub-queen-balmoral/



But he went to Ibiza and France? What are these two doing...


----------



## Morgan R

Jayne1 said:


> I don't want to agree or disagree with the news I read, I want objectivity and a non biased account. Her site is not that.  It's all one side, just a different side.  As long as her readers know that.
> 
> *As for Harry, or sorry, The Duke... is The Sun a credible source?  They've got a page of his "heir miles" which is interesting.
> 
> FULL OF HOT HEIR*
> *Prince Harry used private jets for 6 out of 10 flights since marrying Meghan Markle despite his claim he flies commercial 99% of the time*
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9860166/prince-harry-private-jets-meghan/



The Sun has never been considered the most credible website it has always been considered very much a British Tabloid. A lot of their articles are sensational and sometimes they leave out facts or facts are buried deep within the article.

This particular article though seems to purposefully not include some of Harry's commercial flights to make it seem as though Harry flies private more than he does commercial. Per the Royal Family website Court Circular (https://www.royal.uk/court-circular) you can see how royals travel to engagements in other countries.

A few more commercial flights Harry took that the article doesn't mention that are shown in the Court Circular show that Harry flew commercial flights more than the articles says he did. His trip to and from the Netherlands last July, his trip to and from Zambia last November, and his flight to and from the Netherlands this May were all commercial flights but not mentioned in the article.:

23 July 2018
*Kensington Palace*
The Duke of Sussex this morning departed from Heathrow Airport, London, for the Netherlands and was received upon arrival at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol by Mr. Nicholas Heath (Deputy Head of Mission, British Embassy in Amsterdam). His Royal Highness, Patron, Sentebale, this afternoon attended the International AIDS Conference, RAI Amsterdam, Europaplein 24, Amsterdam. The Duke of Sussex this evening attended a Reception given by Her Majesty's Ambassador to the Kingdom of the Netherlands (His Excellency the Hon. Peter Wilson) at Pakhuis de Zwijger, Amsterdam. Ms. Heather Wong and Mr. Jason Knauf are in attendance.

24 July 2018
*Kensington Palace*
The Duke of Sussex this morning attended the launch of the Menstar Coalition at the International AIDS Conference, RAI Amsterdam, Europaplein 24, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. His Royal Highness this afternoon arrived at Heathrow Airport, London, from the Netherlands. Ms. Heather Wong and Mr. Jason Knauf were in attendance.

25 November 2018
*Kensington Palace*
The Duke of Sussex this evening departed from Heathrow Airport, London, for Zambia.
Ms. Heather Wong is in attendance.

9 May 2019
*Kensington Palace*
The Duke of Sussex, Patron, Invictus Games Foundation, this morning departed Heathrow Airport, London, for the Netherlands.
His Royal Highness later attended an Invictus Games the Hague 2020 Open Training Session at Zuiderpark, the Hague.
The Duke of Sussex this afternoon attended the official launch of Invictus Games the Hague 2020 at Zuiderpark.
His Royal Highness afterwards attended an Invictus Games the Hague 2020 Reception for competitors at Restaurant Parkoers, Zuiderpark.
The Duke of Sussex later arrived at Heathrow Airport, London, from the Netherlands.
Ms. Heather Wong and Ms Sara Latham were in attendance.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> The Sun is reporting they’ve refused the Queen’s invitation to go to Balmoral... this sounds like a juicy story.
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9864469/meghan-harry-snub-queen-balmoral/
> View attachment 4532975
> 
> 
> But he went to Ibiza and France? What are these two doing...


From the Daily Mail
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed the Queen's invite to holiday with her at Balmoral because son Archie is too young to travel' - despite being taken on private jet to Ibiza*

If this is true I can’t imagine what they are thinking to turn down the Queen.  His being too young is ridiculous since he has already traveled out of the country twice. He eats, sleeps and poops and he can do that anyplace.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> From the Daily Mail
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed the Queen's invite to holiday with her at Balmoral because son Archie is too young to travel' - despite being taken on private jet to Ibiza*
> 
> If this is true I can’t imagine what they are thinking to turn down the Queen.  His being too young is ridiculous since he has already traveled out of the country twice. He eats, sleeps and poops and he can do that anyplace.



My guess is she actually never invited them and now they’re saving face.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> My guess is she actually never invited them and now they’re saving face.



Then it is a lie and what nerve to put out a story like this. I think that the palace won’t let this go unchallenged.   It is too much have of a slap at the Queen’s face to ignore.


----------



## threadbender

I wonder if this article/whatever is more accurate as far as the reason?
https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/me...radition/18b33fa3-af9a-46c7-a530-01a10f3675fe


ETA Mmmmm maybe all wrong. I read elsewhere there may not be any hunting.


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> I wonder if this article/whatever is more accurate as far as the reason?
> https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/me...radition/18b33fa3-af9a-46c7-a530-01a10f3675fe
> 
> 
> ETA Mmmmm maybe all wrong. I read elsewhere there may not be any hunting.


No hunting this year as there were not enough grouse.  That was published a while ago. . They all  went fly fishing.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> No hunting this year as there were not enough grouse.  That was published a while ago. . They all  went fly fishing.


I didn't stay on top of the Royal stuff. I feel kind of stupid now! lol


----------



## stanfordmom

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. Northwestern University in Boston also has a VERY robust work-study program, and yes .. the students match up with various employers that then hire them and they do get paid ... BUT, they are expected to work full-time and w/in the discipline that they are studying (e.g., Finance, Computer Science, etc.).  At that time, they do not attend any classes .. they are expected to fulfill their commitment and once done, they go back to the University to continue to take classes.  As such, the programs for these students is oftentimes 5 years (although you can also do 6 or even 7 - if you wish to also get an MBA).
> 
> So, just because she was in a work-study program, but still graduated in 4 years .. kind of makes me think that indeed, her father continued to foot the 'big' bill (tuition) and that her work-study jobs was to fund the other stuff - e.g., books, food, etc.



It seems you’re thinking of Northeastern (understandable since I believe you used to live in Boston?) but Meghan attended Northwestern in Evanston, Illinois which does not have the specialized co op program (except for students in Medill who do intern in journalism). Work study at Northwestern is a form of financial aid and usually consists of on campus jobs.

ETA...sorry I just realized you already noted the error!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

gracekelly said:


> From the Daily Mail
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed the Queen's invite to holiday with her at Balmoral because son Archie is too young to travel' - despite being taken on private jet to Ibiza*
> 
> If this is true I can’t imagine what they are thinking to turn down the Queen.  His being too young is ridiculous since he has already traveled out of the country twice. He eats, sleeps and poops and he can do that anyplace.



Perhaps they just don't want to deal with the tension. The queen cant be too pleased with their behavior over the past couple of months. There were various articles around about the "chat" the queen would be having with H&M  when they arrived to Balmoral...maybe they just dont want to hear it/deal with it.

There was a video floating around that was posted here a while ago where, if you listened with headphones, you could hear Camilla and Will having a not so nice conversation about Meghan. If the whole family feels the same way ( i believe Anne and some other family members are still at Balmoral), it may explain why they have decided not to go.

If this story is true, and they really plan to use the " Archie is too young excuse", they are essentially broadcasting to the world that there is major discord within the family. As much as Diana hated going to Balmoral, and had issues with various family members,  she always sucked it up for the sake of her kids. 

Cue another PR blunder...


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> From the Daily Mail
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed the Queen's invite to holiday with her at Balmoral because son Archie is too young to travel' - despite being taken on private jet to Ibiza*
> 
> If this is true I can’t imagine what they are thinking to turn down the Queen.  His being too young is ridiculous since he has already traveled out of the country twice. He eats, sleeps and poops and he can do that anyplace.


Also, it's not like they're sightseeing all day with a baby in a stroller. They're going from their house to another house to sit and relax. If they go for a walk on the grounds and the baby is sleeping, the nanny can look after him.


----------



## Jayne1

caramelize126 said:


> Perhaps they just don't want to deal with the tension. The queen cant be too pleased with their behavior over the past couple of months. There were various articles around about the "chat" the queen would be having with H&M  when they arrived to Balmoral...maybe they just dont want to hear it/deal with it.
> 
> There was a video floating around that was posted here a while ago where, if you listened with headphones, you could hear Camilla and Will having a not so nice conversation about Meghan. If the whole family feels the same way ( i believe Anne and some other family members are still at Balmoral), it may explain why they have decided not to go.
> 
> If this story is true, and they really plan to use the " Archie is too young excuse", they are essentially broadcasting to the world that there is major discord within the family. As much as Diana hated going to Balmoral, and had issues with various family members,  she always sucked it up for the sake of her kids.
> 
> Cue another PR blunder...


From what I remember, Diana only sucked it up at the beginning, but eventually stopped going entirely. She loved the city and Charles loved the country. What a mismatch with no compromise.


----------



## threadbender

I will say that, regardless if intentional or not, they are certainly keeping tongues a'waggin'.
I absolutely believe I know who wears the proverbial pants in the family. lol


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn't call it a major faux pas. Fortunately there are very few plane crashes so their risk in traveling together is minimal.


And the heir to the throne was not in the plane so the rule was followed. Charles and William would not travel together I believe.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> The Sun is reporting they’ve refused the Queen’s invitation to go to Balmoral... this sounds like a juicy story.
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9864469/meghan-harry-snub-queen-balmoral/
> View attachment 4532975
> 
> 
> But he went to Ibiza and France? What are these two doing...


And he's going to Africa!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not sure I'm picking up what The Sun is putting down.

It would be odd for them to avoid going to Balmoral. 

Interested to see how this plays out.


----------



## Chagall

I can’t help but think that a lot of Harry’s behavior is attention getting. It must be hard to be the spare, now many times removed, to stand in Williams shadow. Harry and Megan seem to be playing hard to get because they are simply not very important.


----------



## Morgan R

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not sure I'm picking up what The Sun is putting down.
> 
> It would be odd for them to avoid going to Balmoral.
> 
> Interested to see how this plays out.



The media has kept changing narrative about Harry and Meghan visiting Balmoral this summer. First it was Harry and Meghan were going to visit Balmoral some time during the summer to get advising from the Queen, then it was they were rescheduling their visit to avoid William and Kate, then it was "next week" is when they would be visiting, and now it is they aren't going/"Archie is to young"/"snubbing" the Queen. The media have never seemed to often know when which royal family members are going to visit Balmoral during the summers (unless they catch them taking a flight there) they just know various members of the royal family will show up but don't know for certain who will. The media were speculating when Harry and Megan might show up (never mentioning a specific date when they would) and made up a different story each week.

I personally think it is highly unlikely that they are trying to avoid seeing Queen Elizabeth II. Harry and Meghan already live very close to one of the residents Queen Elizabeth II often stays (Windsor Castle). Frogmore Cottage is literally down the road from Windsor Castle. If she was going to "advise" them like the media try to say she was they could visit her at WIndsor Castle or she could visit them at Frogmore Cottage. So it actually isn't the most surprising if they don't visit Balmoral but of course the media trying to make it a sensational story of them "snubbing" a visit to Balmoral when they could and likely do visit her when she stays at Windsor Castle.


----------



## lulilu

I read recently about something Harry said when he took a solo overnight trip somewhere.  He said he had gotten the best sleep he had in months.  Does this mean that both he and Meghan get up whenever Archie wakes in the night?  Does Meghan insist that Harry get up and "help" her every time to feed the baby?


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R said:


> So it actually isn't the most surprising if they don't visit Balmoral but of course the media trying to make it a sensational story of them "snubbing" a visit to Balmoral when they could and likely do visit her when she stays at Windsor Castle.


I agree that the media really doesn't have the scoop on *why* the Sussexes haven't been to Balmoral, but it is significant that they haven't gone.  It's not just any old visit.  It's a family tradition that is considered a mandatory obligation and the queen is not flexible about that stuff.  "Oh, we'll just have tea at Windsor instead."  No.  Diana hated Balmoral, but she still went.  

Either the Sussexes chose to duck out (which is a snub in that family) or they weren't invited, which would be a HUGE snub towards them.  I think the media is being kind to them by going with the former.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I read recently about something Harry said when he took a solo overnight trip somewhere.  He said he had gotten the best sleep he had in months.  Does this mean that both he and Meghan get up whenever Archie wakes in the night?  Does Meghan insist that Harry get up and "help" her every time to feed the baby?



They have highly trained nannies at their service. If either of them gets up to care for Archie it's because they want to. Maybe Archie is a crier and that's what he meant by not sleeping well.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Either the Sussexes chose to duck out (which is a snub in that family) or they weren't invited, which would be a HUGE snub towards them.  I think the media is being kind to them by going with the former.



There is a third option. The Queen may have allowed them the leeway of not visiting at this time. She has seemed to be somewhat indulgent towards Harry in the past.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> There is a third option. The Queen may have allowed them the leeway of not visiting at this time.


That's not a third option, that's the same as the Sussexes just saying they don't want to go.  The queen isn't "forcing* anybody to go.


----------



## bisbee

Flatsy said:


> That's not a third option, that's the same as the Sussexes just saying they don't want to go.  The queen isn't "forcing* anybody to go.


Sounds like a third option to me...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Boy, I am seeing articles about the Sussexes everywhere today. Everything from the hypocrisy of their private jet travel to the "snub" to people trying to decipher what Harry said in regards to this travel thing to the Archie is too young to travel BS to them having no clue and so on. This is not a good look for their PR. I mainly read the Royal news (?) here so seeing so much elsewhere surprised me.


----------



## buffym

Harry attend a military conference on mental healthcare, today.


----------



## rose60610

If Archie were "too young" to go to Balmoral, the Queen would not have invited them at all. The Firm would have and easily would have headed off any potential speculation. If there is truth to the rumor that the manufactured reason they're not going to Balmoral is due to Archie, then that's a sloppy desperate answer. Can't they just fake a head cold? Even a dope would know better. If that's the best response that multiple PR professionals could pull out of their arses, they need to be replaced. Ah, maybe M&H prefer to take Archie out of the country again since he's "too young" to go to Balmoral. That's something they would do, feigning confusion as to why people don't understand.


----------



## buffym

bag-mania said:


> There is a third option. The Queen may have allowed them the leeway of not visiting at this time. She has seemed to be somewhat indulgent towards Harry in the past.



Why can’t it be a third option, like Christmas with the royal family, the Queen let’s them choose. The Queen seems to have mellowed prior to Kate marrying in every Christmas was mandatory, but know the Cambridge’s get to decide to attend with the Royals or go with Kate’s family. The Queen may have given Harry a similar option.


----------



## bag-mania

The Queen is in her nineties. Having the great-grandchildren around has to be exhausting and disruptive at her age. If I were her I wouldn't be making their presence mandatory either, but that's just me.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The Queen is in her nineties. Having the great-grandchildren around has to be exhausting and disruptive at her age. If I were her I wouldn't be making their presence mandatory either, but that's just me.


Looks like Kate and Will's kids are pretty well behaved.  And if they became disruptive I'll bet a nanny could whisk them away for a time out.


----------



## doni

The Queen would never make a Summer vacation stay in Balmoral 'mandatory'. Instead, such a visit may be 'expected'. But I would not be sure that is even the case for H&M. It is different for William, because as future King it is advisable that he should be seen to reside for some periods of time in Scotland, that most critical of Kingdoms (and one that the Queen patently loves).
I can imagine Meghan would not be particularly thrilled to go to Balmoral, but I do not believe they would have given such an absurd excuse. In any event, why would it be so important? Have the media been keeping track whether, say, Princess Anne has missed any Balmoral vacation over the years? Doesn't seem so important to me.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> Boy, I am seeing articles about the Sussexes everywhere today. Everything from the hypocrisy of their private jet travel to the "snub" to people trying to decipher what Harry said in regards to this travel thing to the Archie is too young to travel BS to them having no clue and so on. This is not a good look for their PR. I mainly read the Royal news (?) here so seeing so much elsewhere surprised me.


And consider what's been paid for this "premier" PR management...


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The Queen is in her nineties. Having the great-grandchildren around has to be exhausting and disruptive at her age. If I were her I wouldn't be making their presence mandatory either, but that's just me.



Actually the ages of the Queen and Prince Phillip are the point to me.  They have less time on earth rather than more and they would surely love to spend time with the grandchildren.  It was wonderful this summer that the Wessex children were enjoying the fly fishing and carriage driving that are sports close to the hearts of their grandparents.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> And consider what's been paid for this "premier" PR management...


Out of the charitable foundation, no less.


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> I can imagine Meghan would not be particularly thrilled to go to Balmoral, but I do not believe they would have given such an absurd excuse.


Why do you say that? She's got the nanny or nannies with her and her husband for company. Balmoral is not a tiny cottage where they all, including the Queen, sit in one room and they all use the same small bathroom.  I read Balmoral has 775 rooms and 78 bathrooms. 

Why would she not want to go and explore the grounds -- it's the majestic Highlands!


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Why do you say that? She's got the nanny or nannies with her and her husband for company. Balmoral is not a tiny cottage where they all, including the Queen, sit in one room and they all use the same small bathroom.  I read Balmoral has 775 rooms and 78 bathrooms.
> 
> Why would she not want to go and explore the grounds -- it's the majestic Highlands!


wow, imagine the maintenance on all that?
are all those rooms open or are some closed off and not in use?


----------



## CeeJay

See, to me .. there is such hypocrisy in saying "Archie is to little" to go to Balmoral, yet .. they just took him on their vacations recently!!!   H&M need to THINK before they speak because it seems like they are just getting in more trouble every day!


----------



## hellosunshine

I'm not surprised at all that H&M have decided to skip going to Balmoral. The queen has done more to defend her disgusting son than safe guard a pregnant Meghan from the cruel media. If anything, I think the biggest snub was towards the British media becuz now they won't have any church photos or any made up stories to run about this event.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> I'm not surprised at all that H&M have decided to skip going to Balmoral. The queen has done more to defend her disgusting son than safe guard a pregnant Meghan from the cruel media. If anything, I think the biggest snub was towards the British media becuz now they won't have any church photos or any made up stories to run about this event.


really? 
what was the queen supposed to do for Meghan?  safe guard her?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> I'm not surprised at all that H&M have decided to skip going to Balmoral. The queen has done more to defend her disgusting son than safe guard a pregnant Meghan from the cruel media. If anything, I think the biggest snub was towards the British media becuz now they won't have any church photos or any made up stories to run about this event.



Was she under a physical threat?  Was someone going to kidnap her for ransom?  Slice open her womb and take the baby?  Feed her tea and crumpets until she said “no more!”   

What was the specific danger?


----------



## gracekelly

Here is the thing I don’t get. There has to be blowback one way or the other regarding these Balmoral stories no matter who put them out.   I don’t believe that even the British tabloids pull this stuff out of thin air.  There has to be leaks and hints. If truly a snub to the Queen I expect KP to say something.


----------



## piperdog

I've been thinking the same thing. I'm sure the BRF wants to keep their image light (e.g., Cambridge kids' first day of school) and their profile low right now because of Andrew. But the any version of the Balmoral stories looks bad for H&M. Either they blew off spending time with Harry's 90-something grandparents, or they weren't invited when the rest of the family publicly was. It's possible there's a third version that's exculpatory for them, but the Archie-is-too-young-to-travel narrative isn't going to cut it. If this weren't playing out in real time I'd think it was somehow the last step in the fancy-PR-firm vetting process. Good luck with your new clients Sunshine Sachs. They don't make it easy.


----------



## threadbender

It could be as simple as H/M don't care and just threw out an excuse they knew would not be acceptable. Maybe they are planning on stepping away. I have always considered Meghan as relatively bright and, you would think, image savvy. But, it appears her, or their, ego is writing a check that I am not sure their position/celebrity/fame can cash. Or, as I said, they don't care. Maybe they have decided to just do things the way they wish and to heck with protocols, manners and all of that sort of thing.
It isn't like they will ever be in want of anything they desire. Except, perhaps, the crown but, that was never in play, anyway.


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> It could be as simple as H/M don't care and just threw out an excuse they knew would not be acceptable. Maybe they are planning on stepping away. I have always considered Meghan as relatively bright and, you would think, image savvy. But, it appears her, or their, ego is writing a check that I am not sure their position/celebrity/fame can cash. Or, as I said, they don't care. Maybe they have decided to just do things the way they wish and to heck with protocols, manners and all of that sort of thing.
> It isn't like they will ever be in want of anything they desire. Except, perhaps, the crown but, that was never in play, anyway.


You can't make things up and not be expected to be called out on them.  I disagree that they will ever be in want of anything they desire.  There will always be something out of their grasp.


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> really?
> what was the queen supposed to do for Meghan? safe guard her?


The Queen tried to help with the Thomas Markle media situation, and Meghan explicitly rejected that help and insisted on handling it her way, despite Buckingham Palace telling her they knew what they were doing and were confident they could contain him.  So over a year later, Meghan continues to be dogged by her father in the media.

If Meghan's not willing to cooperate with BP, then the blame shouldn't be on BP.   All the fans said Kensington Palace was out to get Meghan and all of her media problems would be solved as soon as she was safely under the wing of BP.  And what's the first thing Meghan did when she got to BP?  Went rogue, arranged to have her friends talk to People Magazine, and then rather embarrassingly left BP in the position of having to announce she hadn't authorized the story when that was clearly untrue.  All for a story that did absolutely nothing to help her image, and definitely didn't help her relationship with the British press.

It's not BP's fault that Meghan believed her own hype about what a media relations genius she is and thought she could ***** the British media just by endlessly clutching her baby bump and cozying up to American media instead.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> You can't make things up and not be expected to be called out on them.  I disagree that they will ever be in want of anything they desire.  There will always be something out of their grasp.


That is true. Desire is ever-changing. They will never be in want for anything they need. 
That all said, I hope Archie is healthy and happy and thriving!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> You can't make things up and not be expected to be called out on them.  I disagree that they will ever be in want of anything they desire.  There will always be something out of their grasp.


Sometimes .. I just wonder (because there were supposed rumors about Meghan inquiring about a British man and liking Gingers), if Harry kinds of likes more of the 'celebrity' lifestyle as opposed to the 'Royal' lifestyle and of course for Meghan, it gives her an even higher step on the people & networking that she can do.  When I saw some of the folks who attended the wedding, seriously .. Oprah? .. when did that friendship happen .. or George Clooney & Amal.  Obviously, with Harry being who he is it makes sense that those folks would attend .. but let's say that Meghan met just an ordinary (wealthy) British bloke .. would those names have attended?  Who knows, maybe they want to just retreat .. although I know Harry loves Africa, I can't imagine Meghan being happy there for a long period of time .. California?!? .. yeah, I could see that!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> ...own hype about what a media relations genius she is and thought she could ***** the British media just by endlessly clutching her baby bump and cozying up to American media instead.



Amazing how someone who was never noticed by the media thought she was an expert in handling them


----------



## bag-mania

The way she handled her ex-husband was odd. He has said he was totally blindsided when she wanted a divorce. They had been together for several years before getting married but only managed to stay together for a year or two after marrying. To this day it sounds like he doesn't know why she dumped him.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Feed her tea and crumpets until she said “no more!”


Very good! lol


CeeJay said:


> Sometimes .. I just wonder (because there were supposed rumors about Meghan inquiring about a British man and liking Gingers), if Harry kinds of likes more of the 'celebrity' lifestyle as opposed to the 'Royal' lifestyle and of course for Meghan, it gives her an even higher step on the people & networking that she can do.  When I saw some of the folks who attended the wedding, seriously .. Oprah? .. when did that friendship happen .. or George Clooney & Amal.  Obviously, with Harry being who he is it makes sense that those folks would attend .. but let's say that Meghan met just an ordinary (wealthy) British bloke .. would those names have attended?  Who knows, maybe they want to just retreat .. although I know Harry loves Africa, I can't imagine Meghan being happy there for a long period of time .. California?!? .. yeah, I could see that!


I've always said Harry seems to want both worlds -- the celebrity world and the perks, money, access, fame and idolization of being a royal.

You can add Serena to the list of just recently becoming a friend.

I read that South Africans aren't even happy about a visit, apparently they don't want taxpayers to have to fund the cost of security.  Anyone know?


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Very good! lol
> 
> I've always said Harry seems to want both worlds -- the celebrity world and the perks, money, access, fame and idolization of being a royal.
> 
> You can add Serena to the list of just recently becoming a friend.
> 
> I read that South Africans aren't even happy about a visit, apparently they don't want taxpayers to have to fund the cost of security.  Anyone know?


Wouldn't it be the British taxpayer who would fund their trip? .. Brits on here? .. thoughts???


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> Wouldn't it be the British taxpayer who would fund their trip? .. Brits on here? .. thoughts???


I'm an Aussie, and no the country  they are touring also foots a portion of the bill.

It cost around $400,000 Australian dollars.


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> really?
> what was the queen supposed to do for Meghan?  safe guard her?



I think you know what I'm referring to but ok..



gracekelly said:


> Was she under a physical threat?  Was someone going to kidnap her for ransom?  Slice open her womb and take the baby?  Feed her tea and crumpets until she said “no more!”
> 
> What was the specific danger?



Is this a serious response? Becuz that's not the sorta of safety I was referring to but....


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm an Aussie, and no the country  they are touring also foots a portion of the bill.
> 
> It cost around $400,000 Australian dollars.


Yikes! .. and from what I recall, the ZA Rand is not strong, certainly a lot less than the GBP!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> Yikes! .. and from what I recall, the ZA Rand is not strong, certainly a lot less than the GBP!!!


True, but tbh the cost bothered only those who were always pro-Republic here. M & H's tour of Australia and the Pacific Islands was hugely successful.

There is however more talk now, with the OTHER scandal. Harry and Meghan's environmental PR mistakes are also getting wide exposure and not helping their case.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Wouldn't it be the British taxpayer who would fund their trip? .. Brits on here? .. thoughts???


Will and Kate took a private jet the last time they visited Canada.  That was at the British taxpayers expense, but the Mounties (RCMP) said they spent $2 million (CAD) on security for their 8 day visit and they only toured British Columbia and the Yukon. There are many other expenses as well, but security is the big one.

Princess Anne was here for 2 days and it was about  $140,000 and the Queen's last visit was almost 3 million CAD.

Canadians support the monarchy and part of that is paying for the costs of their visits. They don't come to Toronto very often though.  Just as well.  Traffic is bad enough.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Will and Kate took a private jet the last time they visited Canada.  That was at the British taxpayers expense, but the Mounties (RCMP) said they spent $2 million (CAD) on security for their 8 day visit and they only toured British Columbia and the Yukon. There are many other expenses as well, but security is the big one.
> 
> Princess Anne was here for 2 days and it was about  $140,000 and the Queen's last visit was almost 3 million CAD.
> 
> Canadians support the monarchy and part of that is paying for the costs of their visits. They don't come to Toronto very often though.  Just as well.  Traffic is bad enough.


HA .. trust me, I know about the traffic after living in Washington DC.  At the time, I worked on the Hill, but lived across the Potomac in Northern Virginia.  Well, when the President would chopper in or out, all traffic would be stopped .. simply ZERO movement.  Well, I can't even tell you how many freakin' times this occurred right at the height of the rush-hour; like .. YOU HAVE TO COME NOW????  After I don't know how many times, I said "that's it - I'm moving into the District NORTH of the White House" - which I did and never had the problem again!


----------



## CeeJay

Okay, okay .. I know it's the Daily Fail, *BUT* .. I truly hope that this is false .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...keeping-agent-lawyer-manager-acting-days.html


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Wouldn't it be the British taxpayer who would fund their trip? .. Brits on here? .. thoughts???



Local government always get stuck with the bill so the South Africans and the local police 
 will get stuck. The Brits will pay for the usual protection people that travel with them


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Okay, okay .. I know it's the Daily Fail, *BUT* .. I truly hope that this is false ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...keeping-agent-lawyer-manager-acting-days.html



I’m sure these people are more than happy to do this and get their 10%.   The palace is obviously worried that she might cut a deal that might prove embarrassing. I think they are in a state of shock and to use the British expression, feel this isn’t cricket. It’s like taking a job with a new employer and continuing to work with your old one even if you had a noncompete clause.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sorry, busy day and so behind on the gossip here. Is this true that Harry and Meghan officially declined the invite to Balmoral and will not be going? Or is it just rolling around the gossip mill?


----------



## gracekelly

New update on the Balmoral invite. Here is a theory that is floating around. Apparently there was an invite, but a disagreement regarding media coverage  having to do with the Cambridge children’s first day of school and the announcement of the Travalyst initiative.   The disagreement was serious enough to cause a disinvite to Balmoral. 

I am taking this with a grain of salt. The Travalyst announcement was yesterday and the school visit was today so what was the problem?  I don’t see the conflict. The only aspect of this that I could see is that this was discussed and decided weeks ago and  the school date was a fixed in stone date and couldn’t be changed

I’m going with the Sussex just not wanting to go to Balmoral.  Period.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Okay, okay .. I know it's the Daily Fail, *BUT* .. I truly hope that this is false ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...keeping-agent-lawyer-manager-acting-days.html


Has she forgotten that she was a few letters below D list before she met Harry? These folks weren’t helping her much back then


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> Okay, okay .. I know it's the Daily Fail, *BUT* .. I truly hope that this is false ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...keeping-agent-lawyer-manager-acting-days.html


I read it elsewhere too. Cannot remember where.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> New update on the Balmoral invite. Here is a theory that is floating around. Apparently there was an invite, but a disagreement regarding media coverage  having to do with the Cambridge children’s first day of school and the announcement of the Travalyst initiative.   The disagreement was serious enough to cause a disinvite to Balmoral.
> 
> I am taking this with a grain of salt. The Travalyst announcement was yesterday and the school visit was today so what was the problem?  I don’t see the conflict. The only aspect of this that I could see is that this was discussed and decided weeks ago and  the school date was a fixed in stone date and couldn’t be changed
> 
> I’m going with the Sussex just not wanting to go to Balmoral.  Period.



The reasons don't really matter. It is just a bad look. Period.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Has she forgotten that she was a few letters below D list before she met Harry? These folks weren’t helping her much back then


I know .. I do have to laugh when I read comments about her 'star quotient', because honestly .. I would say about 90% of the folks I know had no idea about the show, much less her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her attempt at looking like BFFs with the queen has failed epically. I wonder if this story irritated the palace enough to put out the “they're not coming” piece.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> I know .. I do have to laugh when I read comments about her 'star quotient', because honestly .. I would say about 90% of the folks I know had no idea about the show, much less her.


My favorite is her fans that say she made $500k per episode. 

Hoooooooookay.


----------



## Morgan R

mrsinsyder said:


> My favorite is her fans that say she made $500k per episode.
> 
> Hoooooooookay.



I've never seen anyone say that it is public knowledge that she made $50,000 per episode.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> My favorite is her fans that say she made $500k per episode.
> 
> Hoooooooookay.


Hahaha!  That and she is Hollywood Royalty and actually walked a red carpet. The only red carpet she walked was at a flooring store. 

You are so right, these guys did zip for her. She was one step away from being the hostess at boyfriend Cory’s restaurant because she was unemployed.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Has she forgotten that she was a few letters below D list before she met Harry? These folks weren’t helping her much back then


not now though.....any article you see about something celebs are involved with if there is a list of the celebs, she is at the top.  this morning it was the death of a fashion photographer peter lindbergh......he worked with many in the fashion world but of course, he did Meghan's Vogue issue and that was prominently featured in the news about his death.  There is apparently great interest in anything she does or wears (or at least the media thinks so).  Wonder if this will last.  I'm pretty sure she's wondering too and wanting to do whatever it takes to make it last.  Whatever baggage comes with this role, it is the role of a lifetime for her.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Her attempt at looking like BFFs with the queen has failed epically. I wonder if this story irritated the palace enough to put out the “they're not coming” piece.
> View attachment 4533779
> View attachment 4533778



I thought the Queen was baking MM a cake. I would love to see that cake.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Sorry, busy day and so behind on the gossip here. Is this true that Harry and Meghan officially declined the invite to Balmoral and will not be going? Or is it just rolling around the gossip mill?



I think the honest answer is no one really knows and yes it is rolling around the gossip mill. That mill is pretty darn busy!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Blind Gossip reporting the same thing....

When two celebrity families that traditionally vacation together suddenly decide to skip the gathering, you have to ask why.

Well, we found out that it is definitely not for the reason that is being given in public!

This has nothing to do with children being too young to travel.

OK, then, what does it have to do with?

There was an argument over one specific date. It was planned out for months that the focus of the day would be on [First Family] and the back to school photo.

[Second Family] decided that was the day they wanted to promote their own [venture], thus effectively splitting the media attention.

Oh, brother. Couldn’t [Second Family] simply have picked another date?

Absolutely, and therein lies the problem. [Second Family] behaves as if this is all a competition. They hoped that their photo would wind up atop the news and get more attention than the school photo.

What does all of this have to do with the vacation?

[The two families] had a row about it weeks ago and [Second family] were effectively dis-invited. No matter. The entire extended family thought it best for everyone not to have tension spoil a lovely holiday.

So, basically, Second Family is pretending that they were unable to go on the family vacation, but the truth is that they were unwelcome at the gathering.

It remains to be seen which family got more attention for the events in question.

Competition ON!


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Blind Gossip reporting the same thing....
> 
> When two celebrity families that traditionally vacation together suddenly decide to skip the gathering, you have to ask why.
> 
> Well, we found out that it is definitely not for the reason that is being given in public!
> 
> This has nothing to do with children being too young to travel.
> 
> OK, then, what does it have to do with?
> 
> There was an argument over one specific date. It was planned out for months that the focus of the day would be on [First Family] and the back to school photo.
> 
> [Second Family] decided that was the day they wanted to promote their own [venture], thus effectively splitting the media attention.
> 
> Oh, brother. Couldn’t [Second Family] simply have picked another date?
> 
> Absolutely, and therein lies the problem. [Second Family] behaves as if this is all a competition. They hoped that their photo would wind up atop the news and get more attention than the school photo.
> 
> What does all of this have to do with the vacation?
> 
> [The two families] had a row about it weeks ago and [Second family] were effectively dis-invited. No matter. The entire extended family thought it best for everyone not to have tension spoil a lovely holiday.
> 
> So, basically, Second Family is pretending that they were unable to go on the family vacation, but the truth is that they were unwelcome at the gathering.
> 
> It remains to be seen which family got more attention for the events in question.
> 
> Competition ON!


This doesn’t make total sense to me


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> This doesn’t make total sense to me


Really? I could see it because I feel like William is petty AF.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Really? I could see it because I feel like William is petty AF.


but would the queen allow him to disinvite harry?


----------



## Tivo

What was the photo op the Sussex were planning at the same time as the school photos?


----------



## Welltraveled!

mrsinsyder said:


> Really? I could see it because I feel like *William is petty AF*.



I agree 100%.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Peter Lindbergh - RIP




*sussexroyal*
*Verified*
Honouring the life and work of photographer Peter Lindbergh.

His work is revered globally for capturing the essence of a subject and promoting healthy ideals of beauty, eschewing photoshopping, and preferring natural beauty with minimal makeup.

The Duchess of Sussex had worked with Peter in the past and personally chose him to shoot the 15 women on the cover for the September issue of British Vogue, which she guest edited. There is no other photographer she considered to bring this meaningful project to life.
•
“Forces for Change” was the one of the esteemed photographer’s final published projects. He will be deeply missed.

Photo © @therealpeterlindbergh / © SussexRoyal


----------



## buffym

TC1 said:


> Harry saying the only fly private if there's an issue of safety. Pfffft you're 6th in line Harry, give it a rest.
> Will and George just flew TOGETHER, commercially (which is apparently a breach of protocol)





mrsinsyder said:


> There were some lunatics on twitter who think that George and William flying together will pave the way to Queen Meghan. I’m sure they praise her for her kindness right after talking about a whole family being killed in a tragedy.





gracekelly said:


> Why are you posting something like this.  It doesn't belong on this thread it is just nasty.  The thread is for gossip and this is not gossip.



In response to the post above. Harry said he flew sometimes privately for his family protection.

Also, if you don’t like my post you can ignore it or report it to the mods.


----------



## caramelize126

Agreed, this is terrible and does not belong here. Similar content was removed by the mods a few weeks ago.

Also, i read a few different royals gossip threads and havent seen this. I'm not sure if you are deliberately searching for things like this? But this is awful.


----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan and Harry prominently mentioned...

Inside the Cutthroat World of Royal Gossips

https://apple.news/AHkKPc8VvRXiHocmqkmpW_Q


----------



## PatsyCline

Why do people insist on taking a simple act and taking it to the extreme? All we know is they didn't visit Balmoral, that's it. 

There could be dozens of reasons why they didn't go, and until either they, or someone in the know says something, why the hysterical gossip?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

just a question regarding Balmoral:

are all royals going there over summer?
has Harry never missed a summer?
did Beatrice and Eugenie go?

Or is it more "Will&Kate go there each year it must be inevitable"?


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> Actually the ages of the Queen and Prince Phillip are the point to me.  They have less time on earth rather than more and they would surely love to spend time with the grandchildren.  It was wonderful this summer that the Wessex children were enjoying the fly fishing and carriage driving that are sports close to the hearts of their grandparents.


my grandma is 84 and to her birthdays she does not invite all the babies. this year she invited nobody with a kid younger than 5 years old. so I was not invited and the cousin that she regularly sees (I live 3 hours from them). she said she can't handle so many young children at once in her apartment anymore


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> wow, imagine the maintenance on all that?
> are all those rooms open or are some closed off and not in use?


also how big are those rooms? or are most more of a walk-through?


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> Why do you say that? She's got the nanny or nannies with her and her husband for company. Balmoral is not a tiny cottage where they all, including the Queen, sit in one room and they all use the same small bathroom.  I read Balmoral has 775 rooms and 78 bathrooms.
> 
> Why would she not want to go and explore the grounds -- it's the majestic Highlands!


You don’t have to convince me, I LOVE the Highlands. But my feeling (which counts for nothing) is that Malibu or Ibiza are more her scene than fly fishing or fox hunting under the rain.
It is like Queen Letizia, she so obviously hates the customary Mallorca royal holiday and avoids the regatas (the whole Spanish royal family is/was into sailing big time) like the plague. I think at those kind of occasions you feel more like the fish out of water.


----------



## stanfordmom

gracekelly said:


> You are so right, these guys did zip for her. She was one step away from being the hostess at boyfriend Cory’s restaurant because she was unemployed.



I thought she was on Suits until she got married?


----------



## Welltraveled!

Because there isn’t anything else to discuss in regards to the Sussex’s, truth be told.  But I’m sure someone will say, because it’s a “gossip” thread....blah blah.   I usually wait until someone says something interesting/logical and have a discussion on that point. 





PatsyCline said:


> Why do people insist on taking a simple act and taking it to the extreme? All we know is they didn't visit Balmoral, that's it.
> 
> There could be dozens of reasons why they didn't go, and until either they, or someone in the know says something, *why the hysterical gossip?*


----------



## gelbergirl

Anyone in the US get the September UK Vogue issue yet??  The one MM guest edited?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> I thought the Queen was baking MM a cake. I would love to see that cake.


      Not to mention little (or maybe not so little?) Archie. It's hard to tell  

I'm starting to "resent" this thread a little. I want to stay away, but at the same time the cornucopia of Sussex PR inanities  and the excellent commentary  draw me back in. 

Why are H/M doing this to themselves?! Are they on drugs? Someone on "the other forum" suggested that Meghan is playing out her own dysfunctional family history on to the BRF and yes, it's kind of starting to look that way. And it seems Harry is equally invested in reliving the past and using Meghan to do it. Or they're simply hustling for their presumptive Hollywood celeb lives.

F.*.s., even Camilla managed to turn things around.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I can agree with your statement.  Regardless if you’re a fan or critic the media knows there is a high interest in anything associated with Meghan.  Will this last?  No, people will lose interest; therefore the media will lose interest.  However she’s leveraging the current interest the media/fan/critic to accomplish whatever goals she has.  




sdkitty said:


> not now though.....any article you see about something celebs are involved with if there is a list of the celebs, she is at the top.  this morning it was the death of a fashion photographer peter lindbergh......he worked with many in the fashion world but of course, he did Meghan's Vogue issue and that was prominently featured in the news about his death.  There is apparently great interest in anything she does or wears (or at least the media thinks so).  Wonder if this will last.  I'm pretty sure she's wondering too and wanting to do whatever it takes to make it last.  Whatever baggage comes with this role, it is the role of a lifetime for her.


----------



## Welltraveled!

gelbergirl said:


> Anyone in the US get the September UK Vogue issue yet??  The one MM guest edited?



It was sold out everywhere here.  I was in London last week and picked up 2 copies.


----------



## myown

*Meghan Markle flies COMMERCIAL! Duchess jets out to New York on public flight to watch her friend Serena Williams play in the US Open in wake of private jet storm*
*








  -dm*


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> This was sent to the writer who wrote a piece saying Meghan was fine. So, I can only imagine the hate mail he and Meghan has received and why with Archie he wants to privately.
> 
> View attachment 4533796



This is disgusting. If true. People like Jussie Smollett have sort of taken the seriousness out of real hate crimes.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opini...ired-cut-video-chicago-fox-column/2950146002/


----------



## Mimmy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This is disgusting. If true. People like Jussie Smollett have sort of taken the seriousness out of real hate crimes.
> https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opini...ired-cut-video-chicago-fox-column/2950146002/


I would agree that this is disgusting. The story you have provided a link to is from February 2019, not sure of it’s relevance to this thread. I think that the Jussie Smollett incident has already been discussed elsewhere. 

Is the implication that the Elizabeth Day story is also false or could be? Is there supporting evidence for this?


----------



## Stansy

CeeJay said:


> Okay, okay .. I know it's the Daily Fail, *BUT* .. I truly hope that this is false ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...keeping-agent-lawyer-manager-acting-days.html



So her „special team“ consists of 3 male caucasian guys? Diversity much?


----------



## Morgan R

Buckingham Palace have released details about the Tour of Africa that will be taking place September 23rd through October 2nd


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

With friends like these... "Royal" commentator Omid Scobie does his best to help H/M dig themselves out of their hole  Does Harry not like his brother?

*Why Harry didn't want Archie's nanny wearing a uniform*
They have been central to royal children’s lives for decades and with both William and Harry having nannies for their own offspring, it seems the tradition will continue.


But while they may both have chosen to appoint nannies - as they had as children growing up - William and Harry appear to have different views when it comes to some aspects of the job, like uniform.

Yahoo UK’s ‘The Royal Box’ that when searching for their own nanny for Archie, Prince Harry had ruled out any kind of uniform.

“One of the things that Harry said was, ‘I don’t want a woman in a uniform around my child. This isn’t Mary Poppins, we’re going to have a normal household,” he says.
https://uk.style.yahoo.com/royal-na...YXQF69qIFnrb2qlBVLCTdhSDPF0YnD_Pvh3NhCexatpcE


----------



## mrsinsyder

Stansy said:


> So her „special team“ consists of 3 male caucasian guys? Diversity much?


Just like all her exes, her friends pre-2014, her sorority, etc.


----------



## rose60610

So Archie was "too young" to go to Balmoral for a few days, but he's matured greatly to spend almost a couple of weeks in Southern Africa. How quaint!

And the Elizabeth Day article in and of itself glowing over Meghan was the most vomit inducing piece of Meghan Love Fest blather anybody could have could have conjured up. For Day to say she'd written a "mildly supportive" article about Meghan, uh, no. I'm surprised she didn't say M walks on water and is worthy of having the Bible rewritten to include her in Holy Scripture. It's like if Day wrote about Kim Kardashian describing her as being intellectually compatible with Einstein and Hawking. I almost had to reach for a sick bag half way through it.

Oh! I have an idea! I'd like to send her some signed fruit with a message written with a thick point Sharpie on it that says: "You're Not That Special".


----------



## daisychainz

stanfordmom said:


> I thought she was on Suits until she got married?


No. She she left for good before their engagement was officially announced and barely had scenes in the show while they dated. She likely gave notice as soon as she was asked by Harry. Any episodes she was in were pretaped so it might have appeared she was still on the show during her engagement but she was long gone.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maybe the Queen doesn't care if they come to Balmoral or not? 

Given that she is getting up there in age, you would think they would want to go and spend time with her. 

Perhaps they are too busy now with the tour coming up - prep work and what not? But I am sure it is nothing they couldn't manage from Balmoral (we can all work remotely now while on vacation as needed).

Come on, Harry and Meghan, get it together!


----------



## TC1

Harry doesn't want the nanny to wear a uniform, okay but "I don't want a uniform around my child, this isn't Mary Poppins..we're going to have a normal household" I know the BRF are out of touch..but most "normal households" don't have staff catering to their every whim. Why does he say this stuff?  so obtuse lately.


----------



## TC1

myown said:


> *Meghan Markle flies COMMERCIAL! Duchess jets out to New York on public flight to watch her friend Serena Williams play in the US Open in wake of private jet storm*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -dm*


this is a commercial flight?


----------



## mrsinsyder

TC1 said:


> this is a commercial flight?


The pics are from the France trip. I guess they haven’t found pics of this commercial flight yet. 

Guess now we know why she ditched the Queen.


----------



## Welltraveled!

You and several others have mentioned the “too young” comment.  Was this written somewhere?



rose60610 said:


> So Archie was "too young" to go to Balmoral for a few days, but he's matured greatly to spend almost a couple of weeks in Southern Africa. How quaint..


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> ...  my feeling (which counts for nothing) is that Malibu or Ibiza are more her scene than fly fishing or fox hunting under the rain.


Agree, but I wonder why she doesn't try it just once before deciding it’s not her scene.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welltraveled! said:


> You and several others have mentioned the “too young” comment.  Was this written somewhere?


In every story about it.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> The pics are from the France trip. I guess they haven’t found pics of this commercial flight yet.


So much for the "they would be inundated with photographers if they fly commercial!" excuse.

I actually think it's tougher for paparazzi to get photos of royals on the big commercial flights that board from a terminal than it is to get photos of them boarding a private plane out at some small airport.


----------



## rose60610

TC1 said:


> Harry doesn't want the nanny to wear a uniform, okay but "I don't want a uniform around my child, this isn't Mary Poppins..we're going to have a normal household" I know the BRF are out of touch..but most "normal households" don't have staff catering to their every whim. Why does he say this stuff?  so obtuse lately.



...and don't spend 3 million+ to remodel so your house is 'livable" after your $50 million wedding. "Mary Poppins" may not live with them, but they're still pretty much in La-La Land.


----------



## bag-mania

So what kind of clothing should a nanny working for Harry wear? Should it be stylish designer apparel or is a no-name hoodie and sweatpants acceptable?


----------



## bag-mania

Welltraveled! said:


> You and several others have mentioned the “too young” comment.  Was this written somewhere?



Yes, it was reported by the Daily Mail, Telegraph, The Sun, and Entertainment Daily to name a few. They may all be taking it from the same source since the wording is identical.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Harry is making a (small) step towards being relatable to the average person, as it pertains to this.  Considering his and his circle upbringing.

I recall a few years ago the  Cambridge’s didn’t have a live-in staff in one of their homes.

So I give credit for progressively changing the dynamics of the norm for their circle.  



TC1 said:


> Harry doesn't want the nanny to wear a uniform, okay but "I don't want a uniform around my child, this isn't Mary Poppins..we're going to have a normal household" I know the BRF are out of touch..but most "normal households" don't have staff catering to their every whim. Why does he say this stuff?  so obtuse lately.


----------



## MarieCurie

Jayne1 said:


> Very good! lol
> 
> I've always said Harry seems to want both worlds -- the celebrity world and the perks, money, access, fame and idolization of being a royal.
> 
> You can add Serena to the list of just recently becoming a friend.
> 
> *I read that South Africans aren't even happy about a visit, apparently they don't want taxpayers to have to fund the cost of security.  Anyone know?*



Honestly, we haven't cared about the comings and goings of the royals for longer than I have been alive. It just doesn't make any major headlines, we've got too much going on. This comes from a Meghan "stan" who can't be bothered with the upcoming royal visit.

Edit: I believe Serena and Meghan have been friends for longer than she's been with Harry


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> Very good! lol
> 
> I've always said Harry seems to want both worlds -- the celebrity world and the perks, money, access, fame and idolization of being a royal.
> 
> You can add Serena to the list of just recently becoming a friend.
> 
> I read that South Africans aren't even happy about a visit, apparently they don't want taxpayers to have to fund the cost of security.  Anyone know?



Meghan has known Serena since 2010.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th.../meghan-markle-serena-williams-friendship/amp

There are pap pictures of them at events over the years.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Really? I could see it because I feel like William is petty AF.


See, I see it a little differently .. and it's likely due to the fact that I can 'relate' to be the "youngest of the family" (and always being told that even when in my 30's for cripes sakes!). 

William knows that he is going to be the future king, and it's likely that he has been schooled very differently than Harry who was always known as the 'spare'.  Now - in regards to that 'spare' title; it was so clear in my family that my oldest sister was "the beautiful, stylish/fashionable one" (definitely my Mother's favorite), my middle sister was the Dad's favorite (looked just like him and was just not the type to try to steal any thunder from the oldest sister) .. and then there was me.  Well, first of all, I'm considerably younger than my older sisters simply because I was the last attempt to have a son (to carry on my father's family name).  Well, 'lo and behold, I'm not a boy!!! .. but, I knew from a very early age that there was resentment on that front .. and so, what did I do? .. I figured out exactly HOW to get my parents attention and not always in the best way.  Knowing that my oldest sister was definitely not interested in education, that was #1 for me; secondly .. where she wanted to echo my Mother and her designer clothing, I was the slob/downtown "artsy" gal (and interestingly enough, I inherited my mother's artistic abilities).  Bottom line, Harry being the spare and now being with Meghan (who is definitely an Alpha type like me) .. makes for an interesting brew.  While William is likely held to more strict rules (protocol), Harry/Meghan are not going to follow suit and in some respects .. are kind of sticking their tongues out on William and other BRF folks.  I totally (kind of) get it ..


----------



## CeeJay

gelbergirl said:


> Anyone in the US get the September UK Vogue issue yet??  The one MM guest edited?


I have the September US issue and Taylor Swift was on the front, not a peep re: Meghan ..


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> So what kind of clothing should a nanny working for Harry wear? Should it be stylish designer apparel or is a no-name hoodie and sweatpants acceptable?



Perhaps "one size fits all" clothing since they seem to be going through employees.......then the nanny can leave them for the next nanny to recycle.  MH will be anticipating applause for "being green".  Surely some MH fanatic will write a glowing gush piece how it provides carbon credits for private jet use despite how much Archie spits up on them.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Mimmy said:


> I would agree that this is disgusting. The story you have provided a link to is from February 2019, not sure of it’s relevance to this thread. I think that the Jussie Smollett incident has already been discussed elsewhere.
> 
> Is the implication that the Elizabeth Day story is also false or could be? Is there supporting evidence for this?


Is there supporting evidence it's _true_? Is the ethnic background of whoever wrote and sent it actually known? The link I posted provides information and more links to three separately made collections of data on the prevalence of hate crime hoaxes. Hate crime hoaxes are- unfortunately- a big thing. 

So of course it's relevant, don't be disingenuous. 

This instant dismissing and many wishing to paint a harrowing narrative of the majority of criticism against H/M:s elite and entitled behaviour as "inherent prejudice and racism" is a most convenient cop-out and excuse. A behaviour that people of varying ethnic backgrounds equally have the ability to perceive just for what it is. No racism necessary.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Agree, but I wonder why she doesn't try it just once before deciding it’s not her scene.


fly fishing sounds fine but when it comes to hunting, I couldn't enjoy chasing cute little foxes and shooting them


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Is there supporting evidence it's _true_? Is the ethnic background of whoever wrote and sent it actually known? The link I posted provides information and more links to three separately made collections of data on the prevalence of hate crime hoaxes. Hate crime hoaxes are- unfortunately- a big thing.
> 
> So of course it's relevant, don't be disingenuous.
> 
> This instant dismissing and many wishing to paint a harrowing narrative of the majority of criticism against H/M:s elite and entitled behaviour as "inherent prejudice and racism" is a most convenient cop-out and excuse. A behaviour that people of varying ethnic backgrounds equally have the ability to perceive just for what it is. No racism necessary.


I think the tremendous amount of attention being given to Meghan comes for three reasons - she's American, an actress and a woman of color.  

I think her being bi-racial is a large part of it.  With all the excitement and adulation that brings, there are two sides to the coin.  There are going to be haters along with the fans.

I think she is enjoying her role and will be fine.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> Why are you posting something like this.  It doesn't belong on this thread it is just nasty.  The thread is for gossip and this is not gossip.


I don't agree with you here. It's part of the warts n' all discussion that is gossip and as we've discussed her text before, why not? It's vile whoever wrote it, just as Meghan stans wishing a most gruesome end to William and his family so "their queen" can take her rightful Commonwealth throne is vile. It's not pretty but it's interesting to see to what lengths (what I would assume are) adults go to in their adulation of perfect strangers, even including doxxing. Or whoever are behind it. We might be surprised if we knew the truth.


----------



## threadbender

Meghan flew to NY commercial to watch Serena Williams in the US Open. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nds-New-York-HOUR-LATE-flying-commercial.html


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> I think the tremendous amount of attention being given to Meghan comes for three reasons - she's American, an actress and a woman of color.
> 
> I think her being bi-racial is a large part of it.  With all the excitement and adulation that brings, there are two sides to the coin.  There are going to be haters along with the fans.
> 
> I think she is enjoying her role and will be fine.


I think there is another reason, as well. She/they appear to make a point of acting in a way to garner attention. I refuse to believe she is in any way naive in the ways of the press and BRF. She has been in Hollywood long enough to know how it all works, even if there are some differences across the pond. Meghan does what she wants and that is who she is. Obviously, Harry approves or they would not have married and started a family. He may be getting a kick out of poking the various bears. lol
I would love to see some Archie pictures, though.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I think the tremendous amount of attention being given to Meghan comes for three reasons - she's American, an actress and a woman of color.
> 
> I think her being bi-racial is a large part of it.  With all the excitement and adulation that brings, there are two sides to the coin.  There are going to be haters along with the fans.
> 
> I think she is enjoying her role and will be fine.


I honestly think Meghan being biracial is more of a thing for Americans than Europeans. I also think it was a huge mistake of them and their PR to take that particular narrative so to heart. Especially since you'd expect that certain members of that PR management should have learnt from earlier mistakes.



threadbender said:


> Meghan flew to NY commercial to watch Serena Williams in the US Open.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nds-New-York-HOUR-LATE-flying-commercial.html


I wonder if Serena invited her? I can't take credit for this but on "the other forum" (there was a discussion in the Meghan thread and posters there didn't seem to want visitors to mention them on other forums so I'm respecting that although I hate not crediting where crediting is due) someone asked this as tennis players are notoriously superstitious and Serena has lost the last two times Meghan came to watch her play. Anyhow. It'll be a golden opportunity for Meghan to bask in what should be Serena's attention


----------



## threadbender

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I honestly think Meghan being biracial is more of a thing for Americans than Europeans. I also think it was a huge mistake of them and their PR to take that particular narrative so to heart. Especially since you'd expect that certain members of that PR management should have learnt from earlier mistakes.
> 
> 
> I wonder if Serena invited her? I can't take credit for this but on "the other forum" (there was a discussion in the Meghan thread and posters there didn't seem to want visitors to mention them on other forums so I'm respecting that although I hate not crediting where crediting is due) someone asked this as tennis players are notoriously superstitious and Serena has lost the last two times Meghan came to watch her play. Anyhow. It'll be a golden opportunity for Meghan to bask in what should be Serena's attention



I honestly never think of Meghan as being bi-racial unless someone mentions it. It is more her actions that concern me.
I don't have any idea if Serena invited her or not but I did read there are some superstitious concerns.
I don't know what the "other forum" is but I have read it in a couple of places. Also, this was a last minute visit (obviously no one knew if Serena would win or not) so cannot blame it for the non-visit to Balmoral.
The nanny story is picking up steam too as a way to thumb noses at the WK.
I really wish HM would just stop. Do their jobs and do them well. Stop giving the press or anyone else so much ammunition.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> fly fishing sounds fine but when it comes to hunting, I couldn't enjoy chasing cute little foxes and shooting them


No, not hunting, yuck, can't believe they still do that... but I read they have picnics and hike and cook their own  meals and although it may not be her thing, you'd think she'd want to try being with the family for just one holiday.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> I honestly never think of Meghan as being bi-racial unless someone mentions it. It is more her actions that concern me.
> I don't have any idea if Serena invited her or not but I did read there are some superstitious concerns.
> I don't know what the "other forum" is but I have read it in a couple of places. Also, this was a last minute visit (obviously no one knew if Serena would win or not) so cannot blame it for the non-visit to Balmoral.
> The nanny story is picking up steam too as a way to thumb noses at the WK.
> I really wish HM would just stop. Do their jobs and do them well. Stop giving the press or anyone else so much ammunition.


(LSA.) They're really good at collecting the tea


----------



## Jayne1

The Post has an article about the superstitious thing, but they also mentioned this:

_As Page Six previously reported, sources said Markle’s trip to support close pal Williams is also a “PR stunt” to save face after a couple of scandals put her and husband Prince Harry in hot water this summer.

She put a no-photo ban into effect at Wimbledon and she and Harry took a private jet to Elton John’s house in France for a family vacation, despite being environmentalists. John later defended the couple and their right to privacy and safety._

https://pagesix.com/2019/09/06/sere...363.1878296292.1567792131-11143660.1563236107


----------



## marthastoo

Hate crime hoaxes are a big thing?    I guess it's big like voter fraud.


----------



## gracekelly

Things to do at Balmoral
Hike
Fish (catch and release if you wish)
Ride horses
Carriage driving 
Enjoying the beautiful scenery of Scotland. 
Walk in the gardens 
Read in the library created by Prince Albert. 

I would LOVE to spend time there. What’s not to like?


----------



## Rouge H

I’m in- when are we going GK?


----------



## mdcx

More Meghan drama:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...reak-internet-Meghan-Markle-told-PR-firm.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...keeping-agent-lawyer-manager-acting-days.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...-wrong-New-York-trip-trivial-bad-manners.html

She could just take it easy, do what she is expected to and enjoy all the luxuries that come with it whilst living a mostly private life, but no....


----------



## gracekelly

Rouge H said:


> I’m in- when are we going GK?


I’m packing right now so better hurry!


----------



## zen1965

Not going to Balmoral is a huge blunder. HUGE.
And now Meghan trundles off to NYC. Does she have any advisors? How tone deaf can one be?


----------



## Straight-Laced

H and M are losing goodwill at a cracking pace.


----------



## Straight-Laced

I’m intrigued by them not going to Balmoral.
I could understand that preparing for the Africa trip with a new baby/new mother situation _might_ be a reason for them not going, if only they hadn’t taken two OS holidays and Meghan hadn’t suddenly tripped off to the tennis. I know these breaks are holidays and Africa is work, so do they somehow count the visit to Balmoral as a work engagement and Meghan is on leave from work? As in no compulsory engagements while on maternity leave?
Was Prince Andrew in residence when they were expected and Meghan especially didn’t want proximity to him? Clutching at straws with that theory, I know.
Or maybe the Duke of E had some say in it, he (still) has a lot of authority in that family and has a famously low tolerance for dramas played out in public.
Enquiring minds and all that ... 
If the Sussexes were expected and they snubbed this important family get together in Archie’s first year - in the twilight years of the Duke and Q Elizabeth - just because they felt like it, then I’m truly perplexed.


----------



## Morgan R

Regarding Balmoral I don't think it is a matter of "they weren't invited"/"dis-invited",  "snubbing the invitation", etc. If you search for images of Harry at Balmoral pretty much all of the pictures are from the time he was a baby to the time he was a teenager (He and William were actually at Balmoral when they found out their mother died). It seems like you can barely find any pictures of Harry as an adult at Balmoral (there are articles over the years that said he would be going to visit Balmoral but there doesn't seem to be pictures showing proof that he did go when tabloids said he was going to). Harry actually often used to spend his August vacation time in Africa (often doing some work with his charity Sentebale). The only year recently that you can see Harry went to Balmoral was from him visiting in 2016 where was driving his cousin Eugenie to Crathie Kirk church and that seemed expected for him to be there that year because Queen Elizabeth II turned 90 that year so the entire royal family were attending pretty much everything for her that year. In comparison you can find pictures of Harry from pretty much every year attending Sandringham for Christmas. Christimas in Sandringham is obviously a far more expected visit because it is an actual holiday while Balmoral is an option during the royals vacation month in August.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Well I guess no one here actually knows the facts and some of us are speculating.
But the perception is that H & M are willing and able to go almost anywhere - with or without baby Archie - except to Balmoral with the family in August.


----------



## gelbergirl

gracekelly said:


> Things to do at Balmoral
> Hike
> Fish (catch and release if you wish)
> Ride horses
> Carriage driving
> Enjoying the beautiful scenery of Scotland.
> Walk in the gardens
> Read in the library created by Prince Albert.
> 
> I would LOVE to spend time there. What’s not to like?



I think I'd really like that too for a month.
I remembered reading many year ago that Diana hated it.
I think they have those formal cocktails, dinners each night as well.
Which doesn't start until the Queen Elizabeth enters the room.

I totally get why Queen Elizabeth loves it.  She ride her horses and do things and have a little bit of freedom and privacy, more relaxed time.


----------



## zen1965

The Windsors are all about tradition. In summer they spend time at Balmoral. If as an outsider you want to be accepted as a member of this close-knit family you do things as they do. If you do not like outdoorsy stuff, stiff upper lip and best foot forward. It is quite simple really.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Things to do at Balmoral
> Hike
> Fish (catch and release if you wish)
> Ride horses
> Carriage driving
> Enjoying the beautiful scenery of Scotland.
> Walk in the gardens
> Read in the library created by Prince Albert.
> 
> I would LOVE to spend time there. What’s not to like?


Sounds perfect!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gelbergirl said:


> I think I'd really like that too for a month.
> I remembered reading many year ago that Diana hated it.
> I think they have those formal cocktails, dinners each night as well.
> Which doesn't start until the Queen Elizabeth enters the room.
> 
> I totally get why Queen Elizabeth loves it.  She ride her horses and do things and have a little bit of freedom and privacy, more relaxed time.


Diana hated it because it was quiet countryside and camera free and she loved the city, shopping, daily massages and attention from the paps. I'm not making this up, I've followed Diana since she was a junior kindergarten assistant and she wasn't shy about letting the media, via her friends or just talking to her favourite journalists, in on her thoughts.

I read they cook their own meals and the Queen actually spends time in the kitchen so I don't think they have formal meals.  More to like about their summer vacation time!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Diana hated it because it was quiet countryside and camera free and she loved the city, shopping, daily massages and attention from the paps. I'm not making this up, I've followed Diana since she was a junior kindergarten assistant and she wasn't shy about letting the media, via her friends or just talking to her favourite journalists, in on her thoughts.
> 
> I read they cook their own meals and the Queen actually spends time in the kitchen so I don't think they have formal meals.  More to like about their summer vacation time!


Kind of like playing house. Phil barbecues and Liz does the washing up.


----------



## buffym

Straight-Laced said:


> Well I guess no one here actually knows the facts and some of us are speculating.
> But the perception is that H & M are willing and able to go almost anywhere - with or without baby Archie - except to Balmoral with the family in August.



How is that perception, if Harry didn’t attend before marrying Meghan why he should he attend after marrying. No one batted an eye last year about him not being at Balmoral, or the year before.


----------



## hellosunshine

Very excited to see Meghan today at the US Open match...I'm wondering how her hair, makeup, outfit will look!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I'm guessing she popped over to Canada, or will...


----------



## mrsinsyder

She's hanging with the commoners. I'm still amazed they can't see that flying halfway across the globe first-class for an event lasting a few hours is wildly out of touch, but I digress.

*Namaste! Meghan Markle took part in a public yoga class with SIXTY people in New York after arriving on a commercial flight to support Serena Williams at the US Open today*

*Meghan Markle took part in a public yoga class on Friday in a bid to shake off her jet lag shortly after arriving in New York City to watch pal Serena Williams*
*The Duchess of Sussex was seen heading into Modo Yoga with a friend in the trendy West Village neighborhood of Manhattan*
*Meghan, 38, joined a surprisingly full class of up to 60 people at the eco-conscious studio, which specializes in hot yoga classes*
*Despite an astounding 60 people being in the same small studio as one of the world's most famous women, a photo is yet to emerge of Meghan's session *
*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...public-yoga-class-SIXTY-people-Manhattan.html*


----------



## TC1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm guessing she popped over to Canada, or will...


Why?


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’ve heard that the dinners in Balmoral are formal as well and the days require upwards of five outfits changes and you don’t get to opt out of events to read a book. It sounds like everyone is forced to do what the Queen wants to do and that sounds exhausting. However, it would seem to have been a good choice for MM in the midst of the drama.

My (pure) speculation is that H&M were going to go this weekend to miss W&K and accommodate their recent events and then Williams ended up in the finals and MM decided to head to NYC instead. With Africa on the horizon, they are out of time for Balmoral so they came up with an excuse or the media did.


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> It sounds like everyone is forced to do what the Queen wants to do and that sounds exhausting.



I mean, you don't really marry into the royal family expecting to have lots of casual events


----------



## rose60610

I'm not sure how exhausting it'd be to keep up with someone who's 93 years old. The Queen gets around well, but she likely isn't running marathons. Whatever she does at 93,  30-somethings shouldn't have much of a problem keeping up.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I didn’t actually mean physically exhausting.  I meant it in the draining sense.  Although she sounds like she can give the young one’s a complete run for their money.  Going for long walks and sitting fireside reading a book sounds lovely. Being woken at the crack of dawn by the Queen with a trumpet, dressing for church, doing a large breakfast, being lead on a long walk around the property, having lunch, horse rides, hunting, fishing and running the dogs, a formal tea, cocktails, dress for dinner, dinner, parlour games and then scotch in the drawing room all while tightly surrounded by your in laws, with multiple outfit changes, formal processes to adhere to and remember and a tightly run schedule sounds... exhausting.

I was just surprised when I read about what they did up there. I envisioned a more laid back, casual approach. I’d be a mess trying to remember to curtsy to my grandmother in law in the morning lol.

But, again, as I said - she absolutely should have gone. Practiced her new stiff upper lip.


----------



## gelbergirl

I know she still rides horses & her mind is quite exercised by geopolitics.
Plus the bagpiper wakes them all up in the morning.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve heard that the dinners in Balmoral are formal as well and the days require upwards of five outfits changes and you don’t get to opt out of events to read a book. It sounds like everyone is forced to do what the Queen wants to do and that sounds exhausting. However, it would seem to have been a good choice for MM in the midst of the drama.


I didn't get a formal dinner impression when reading reputable magazines. It sounded more lax to me, but maybe not.
From Town&Country:

“Walks, picnics, dogs—a lot of dogs, there’s always dogs—and people coming in and out all the time,” Eugenie continued. “It’s a lovely base for Granny and Grandpa, for us to come and see them up there, where you just have room to breathe and run.”

While at Balmoral, the royals "act as normal people—to a point," Lord Lichfield, a former photographer for the family, said in 1972. "Lunch is always outdoors and they are outside every day going on expeditions."

Indeed, the Queen is knownto explore the grounds on horseback (or behind the wheel of a Range Rover). Prince Philip, on the other hand, likes to spend his time manning the grill.

And after dinner, Her Majesty even does dishes. "You think I’m joking, but I’m not,” Blair once revealed. “They put the gloves on and stick their hands in the sink. The Queen asks if you’ve finished, she stacks the plates up and goes off to the sink."

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/amp12001419/balmoral-castle-scotland/


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh man she’s in her element.




Doesn’t miss a single camera.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh man she’s in her element.
> 
> View attachment 4535084
> 
> 
> Doesn’t miss a single camera.
> 
> View attachment 4535088



Here are some more pictures, The camera didn’t catch her eye in these.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> She's hanging with the commoners. I'm still amazed they can't see that flying halfway across the globe first-class for an event lasting a few hours is wildly out of touch, but I digress.
> 
> *Namaste! Meghan Markle took part in a public yoga class with SIXTY people in New York after arriving on a commercial flight to support Serena Williams at the US Open today*


Way to keep a low profile. Maybe the yoga class offsets her carbon footprint somehow?


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## hellosunshine

For anyone that cares about Meghan's Fashion -- she's wearing a JCREW Denim Shirt Dress - On Sale $88


----------



## Welltraveled!

I have a dress similar to this.  It’s very cute.




hellosunshine said:


> For anyone that cares about Meghan's Fashion -- she's wearing a JCREW Denim Shirt Dress - On Sale $88
> View attachment 4535152


----------



## Welltraveled!

Anna knows she looks good all the time!


----------



## CeeJay

.. and alas, Serena lost!  Superstitions .. maybe Meghan should have stayed in the UK!


----------



## threadbender

I may not be Meghan's biggest fan. For the most part, I just like keeping up on the Royals etc. Lately, yeah, MM is not impressing me. But, she doesn't need to. I wish she would stop pushing so hard. But, that is their choice, and they are doing what they think is best.
That said, I feel really bad for her if this tweet is accurate.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Wow, that's just pathetic.  I imagine Serena's mother thinks Megan is distracting attention away from her daughter where it should be.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

threadbender said:


> I may not be Meghan's biggest fan. For the most part, I just like keeping up on the Royals etc. Lately, yeah, MM is not impressing me. But, she doesn't need to. I wish she would stop pushing so hard. But, that is their choice, and they are doing what they think is best.
> That said, I feel really bad for her if this tweet is accurate.



It looks like the mom is ignoring her 100%, but she's uber-focused on her daughter, so that's understandable. I'm sure they talked, but that probably wasn't a good time for a convo.


----------



## rose60610

Well of course Mrs. Williams is focused on her own daughter at the U.S. Open. If she won she'd be tying the record for number of Grand Slams won. I wonder if Meghan Poopsie understands how mom's attention to her daughter in a high pressure situation supersedes fawning over Duchess M.  

And the I wonder if the little J Crew denim number is supposed to make us think that M is just like one of us. Granted, she's worn plebeian clothes before, but leave it to her to think the Crew is offsetting the jet ride here. Oh how modest of her!


----------



## BagLovingMom

Lol, this thread took quite a turn post the wedding, who knew ?! I love Anna’s dress tho!


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Well of course Mrs. Williams is focused on her own daughter at the U.S. Open. If she won she'd be tying the record for number of Grand Slams won. I wonder if Meghan Poopsie understands how mom's attention to her daughter in a high pressure situation supersedes fawning over Duchess M.
> 
> And the I wonder if the little J Crew denim number is supposed to make us think that M is just like one of us. Granted, she's worn plebeian clothes before, but leave it to her to think the Crew is offsetting the jet ride here. Oh how modest of her!


LOL


----------



## Morgan R

Serena always has her friends, notable people, celebrities, other athletes, etc. at her matches and sitting in her players' box and occasionally she still sometimes loses to act like Meghan is the distraction is pointless. It is just like how pointless it is when I see so many sports fans blame the reason why Serena hasn't won a Grand Slam final since 2017 is because since 2017 she got married and had a child and they think that is a distraction that takes time away from her practicing as if she isn't suppose to have a life outside of tennis. People always try to blame the friends, family, and notable supporters of well known teams and athletes for loses when it is just a simple case of they tried their hardest but still sometimes they lose.

As a long time Serena fan as much as I want her to win every Finals she is in...it is also common knowledge that Serena is "notorious" for getting in her own head during some matches (Serena at one point saw a sports psychologist and could've continued doing that but she didn't). Sometimes in the Finals she will be playing great then start making "stupid" mistakes (she will start talking angrily to herself as if she made major errors when she literally makes the smallest mistakes) and sometimes is second guessing herself then she loses or she will she lose before she even it makes it to the Finals of a tennis tournament.


----------



## TC1

CeeJay said:


> .. and alas, Serena lost!  Superstitions .. maybe Meghan should have stayed in the UK!


But....YES BIANCA!! #SheTheNorth (sorry, we're proud)


----------



## gracekelly

I don't for a second think that MM had anything to do with Serena losing.  It was a very good match and I enjoyed watching it.  The torch has to pass at some point for all athletes.   Bianca played a great match and I was very impressed with her. 

I wished that she had worn something a bit more  exciting than a denim dress.  I know that many celebs think that wearing JCrew connects them to the little people, but considering that she has not been seen in a while, it would have been nice if she had come up with something more exciting like a pretty dress or cute skirt and blouse.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

Agree it’s not a particularly imaginative choice but I love denim shirt dresses and Meghan looked great - sleek, fit and well rested. The dress is consistent with her familiar casual and minimalist style.


----------



## megs0927

TC1 said:


> But....YES BIANCA!! #SheTheNorth (sorry, we're proud)



She is the first player in a long time to send that power right back to Serena!! Great match!


----------



## mdcx

Meghan quite often seems to chat away to people without them seeming to reply. It's one of the things that makes me wondered if she is in an altered state sometimes. Well, that and her very strange decision making about which events to attend or not etc etc.
I read a comment on another board that said, shockingly no photos of Meghan travelling to the US or at yoga etc have made their way into the public. Makes one wonder how all the "pap" photos of her before now got out...did she have something to do with them? It's not that hard to be completely private after all it seems.
And yes, I got the vibe that Serena's mum was not thrilled at the distraction.

ETA I wish she would let her natural hair texture/curl out. Based on the tennis pics I am not sure that whoever is in charge of her hair in the UK has her best interests at heart!


----------



## Lifeisgreat

threadbender said:


> I may not be Meghan's biggest fan. For the most part, I just like keeping up on the Royals etc. Lately, yeah, MM is not impressing me. But, she doesn't need to. I wish she would stop pushing so hard. But, that is their choice, and they are doing what they think is best.
> That said, I feel really bad for her if this tweet is accurate.




I feel like Banana Scribbler is really really reaching.  I can think of a bunch of scenarios I could read into that short video, some that would cast MM in a negative light, some that wouldn't.  The trouble is, like that tweeter, they'd all be speculation and imagination.  Not fact.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Serena’s mother isn’t some weak-minded woman who would think something like that.  She knows Serena would be focused on her game and not who is sitting in the box.   



Cavalier Girl said:


> Wow, that's just pathetic.  I imagine Serena's mother thinks Megan is distracting attention away from her daughter where it should be.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree with someone said upthread the tweet is reaching.  Oracene was nodding her head to whatever statement Meghan made. 



threadbender said:


> I may not be Meghan's biggest fan. For the most part, I just like keeping up on the Royals etc. Lately, yeah, MM is not impressing me. But, she doesn't need to. I wish she would stop pushing so hard. But, that is their choice, and they are doing what they think is best.
> That said, I feel really bad for her if this tweet is accurate.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I find your comment about her clothes interesting.  Considering when Kate does something similar she’s praised for it.  So what is the issue, exactly, with Meghan wearing something affordable?  




rose60610 said:


> And the I wonder if the little J Crew denim number is supposed to make us think that M is just like one of us. Granted, she's worn plebeian clothes before, but leave it to her to think the Crew is offsetting the jet ride here. Oh how modest of her!


----------



## Welltraveled!

I’m not surprised.  However I’ve been to other sites where they are brutal.  It’s pretty tame around these parts for the most part.  

Speaking in general terms, I find it interesting the individuals that dislike her follow the instagram page, google her, read articles about her, etc etc.  It’s like why are you spending your energy on someone you dislike?!  Especially, someone that most feel is a “celebrity.”   



BagLovingMom said:


> Lol, this thread took quite a turn post the wedding, who knew ?! I love Anna’s dress tho!


----------



## buffym

threadbender said:


> I may not be Meghan's biggest fan. For the most part, I just like keeping up on the Royals etc. Lately, yeah, MM is not impressing me. But, she doesn't need to. I wish she would stop pushing so hard. But, that is their choice, and they are doing what they think is best.
> That said, I feel really bad for her if this tweet is accurate.




If you dislike a person you hope others dislike them too, that is one of the things about Meghan I respect her ability to hold her head up high even though trash is slang at her.



Cavalier Girl said:


> Wow, that's just pathetic.  I imagine Serena's mother thinks Megan is distracting attention away from her daughter where it should be.



I doubt Serena’s mother is thinking Meghan is distracting her daughter, both Williams daughters place is in history. I believe Serena will win again before she retires, but it will take time, having her daughter took a physical toll, and now she has to get over her nerves. There’s a fourteen year gap between Tiger Woods wins of the Masters, yet he did it.

Her mother seemed more than happy to speak to Meghan and I doubt her mother would fake it.







BagLovingMom said:


> Lol, this thread took quite a turn post the wedding, who knew ?! I love Anna’s dress tho!



Yes, isn’t . It is unfortunate that some of the posters since the wedding no longer posts because of the new theme of the thread.


----------



## threadbender

Welltraveled! said:


> I’m not surprised.  However I’ve been to other sites where they are brutal.  It’s pretty tame around these parts for the most part.
> 
> Speaking in general terms, I find it interesting the individuals that dislike her follow the instagram page, google her, read articles about her, etc etc.  It’s like why are you spending your energy on someone you dislike?!  Especially, someone that most feel is a “celebrity.”


I don't know if I dislike Meghan. I am not that impressed by her. I did not know much about her prior to when she started dating Harry. I think I had seen her in a Hallmark movie. I don't follow her or look up anything. I have seen things shared on numerous sites.
I would like Harry, Meghan & Archie to have a happy life. Why wouldn't I? lol 
I do feel that, when marrying into the BRF, she should have been more aware of what is expected. However, she may have been well aware and she and Harry decided to make their own way. In some ways, she appears to be a bit arrogant and in others, simply focused or oblivious of how others view her actions. Bottom line is Harry and Meghan can do what they wish and deal with any consequences and/or benefits. They have only been married a year. lol
I do admit to wishing I could see pictures of Archie. I love babies!


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> I don't for a second think that MM had anything to do with Serena losing.  It was a very good match and I enjoyed watching it.  The torch has to pass at some point for all athletes.   Bianca played a great match and I was very impressed with her.
> 
> I wished that she had worn something a bit more  exciting than a denim dress.  I know that many celebs think that wearing JCrew connects them to the little people, but considering that she has not been seen in a while, it would have been nice if she had come up with something more exciting like a pretty dress or cute skirt and blouse.



She was seen in a Hugo Boss skirt and shirt two months ago, it is the same price point as JCrew. 

Meghan wore JCrew before marriage and has continued since, it maybe less connecting to the little people than I like the brand. Since she wore it prior to the BRF.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.to...8278/meghan-markle-jcrew-hatch-collaboration/


----------



## Welltraveled!

I think most people don’t feel anyway about her.  But when I go on their Instagram page or some fan page the vitriol directed at her is interesting.  Personally, I think HM are doing their own thing.  I think Charles/Queen give them a wide berth to do what they want; as long as it’s not determinental to the BRF.  However, I think, Charles/Queen will tell them to straighten up; if they go to far off courset



threadbender said:


> I don't know if I dislike Meghan. I am not that impressed by her. I did not know much about her prior to when she started dating Harry. I think I had seen her in a Hallmark movie. I don't follow her or look up anything. I have seen things shared on numerous sites.
> I would like Harry, Meghan & Archie to have a happy life. Why wouldn't I? lol
> I do feel that, when marrying into the BRF, she should have been more aware of what is expected. However, she may have been well aware and she and Harry decided to make their own way. In some ways, she appears to be a bit arrogant and in others, simply focused or oblivious of how others view her actions. Bottom line is Harry and Meghan can do what they wish and deal with any consequences and/or benefits. They have only been married a year. lol
> I do admit to wishing I could see pictures of Archie. I love babies!


----------



## hellosunshine

mdcx said:


> Meghan quite often seems to chat away to people without them seeming to reply. It's one of the things that makes me wondered if she is in an altered state sometimes.



I don't find this altered or strange at all - sometimes you'll turn to someone to talk and that person could be zoning out and in this particular case, Serena's mom was probably so focused/praying (as she's known to do) that she lost focus of her surroundings.


----------



## Morgan R

Welltraveled! said:


> I agree with someone said upthread the tweet is reaching.  Oracene was nodding her head to whatever statement Meghan made.



I've watched so many Venus and Serena matches over the year to know that Oracene is just always really zoned in whenever she watches Venus or Serena play tennis (which is funny in a way because Oracene has said in interviews before she "has had it" referring to watching Venus and Serena play). Whoever sits besides Oracene at tennis matches rather it be one of her daughters (Venus, Serena, Isha, or Lyndrea), Serena's husband, or one of her daughter's friends you will see her react just like she did in the video with Meghan (shaking her head along but doesn't say much to whoever is talking to her). Those that are fans of Venus and Serena know that Oracene has always been known for her serious demeanor...Venus or Serena can win a match and their mom will have little to no reaction (tennis commentators are always actually surprised when she does have a "major" reaction/isn't so serious like one time she was caught dancing along to music at one of Serena's matches but then got embarrassed/stopped dancing because she saw herself on the big screen within the tennis court  lol)


----------



## hellosunshine

Buckingham Palace has revealed the full itinerary of engagements for the ten-day trip—and announced that Archie will be making an appearance. 

With a full and varied itinerary, the royal couple is "eager to focus their energies on the great work being done in southern Africa." They will take on *35 engagements* together and separately, focusing on grassroots leadership, women’s rights, mental health, the environment, and HIV/AIDS.

Much of the trip will see Harry and Meghan working in their roles of President and Vice President of the The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, respectively, meeting young leaders to address socio-economic and environmental challenges.

Buckingham Palace also revealed new details about plans for Prince Harry’s poignant tribute to Princess Diana's legacy in raising awareness of the threat of landmines in Angola. On day five of the tour he will travel to the same spot in Huambo, Angola, that his late mother visited in 1997 to see how an area that was once a dangerous minefield is now a busy street with schools, shops, and houses. "Now, more than two decades later, humanitarian de-mining work continues and the Angolan government has made a significant financial commitment to clearing landmines from another large area important for conservation of Angola’s unique ecosystem," a palace statement reveals.

"Their Royal Highnesses are grateful for the opportunity to connect with those on the ground in southern Africa and to be inspired by the work being done and learn how they can be better supported," says a spokeswoman. Adds the couple in a new Instagram post, "We look forward to seeing you soon!"

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ry-meghan-archie-royal-tour-africa-itinerary/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

The Meghan Effect >>>


----------



## Flatsy

Affordable dress, commercial flight, mingling with regular people at yoga class, not clearing out the stands at the US Open for privacy.  It seems like Meghan is listening to her crisis managers, which is a good thing.



hellosunshine said:


> They will take on *35 engagements* together and separately,


Tours are a great chance for royals to bulk up their engagement counts.  I'm surprised they aren't stuffing in a few more because Harry's numbers this year are even more abysmal than usual.


----------



## skyqueen

I could care less about Harry/Meghan...I don't know them. They seem like big-time hypocrites! I remembered this thread and thought this article was interesting. Who knows if it's true???
https://pagesix.com/2019/09/07/roya...medium=site buttons&utm_campaign=site buttons


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> Affordable dress, commercial flight, mingling with regular people at yoga class, not clearing out the stands at the US Open for privacy.  It seems like Meghan is listening to her crisis managers, which is a good thing.
> 
> 
> Tours are a great chance for royals to bulk up their engagement counts.  I'm surprised they aren't stuffing in a few more because Harry's numbers this year are even more abysmal than usual.



Harry is 6th in line yet he is at 101 engagements as of week prior. His brother is at 130. That isn’t a huge gap for the difference in their rankings.


HM The Queen – 193 (193 – no change – 8.1%)
HRH The Duke of Edinburgh – 4 (4 – no change – 0.2%)
HRH The Prince of Wales – 370 (370 – no change – 15.6%)
HRH The Duchess of Cornwall – 181 (178 – up 3 – 7.6%)
HRH The Duke of Cambridge – 130 (126 – up 2 – 5.5%)
HRH The Duchess of Cambridge – 67 (67 – no change – 2.8%)
HRH The Duke of Sussex – 101 (99 – up 2 – 4.3%)
HRH The Duchess of Sussex – 38 (38 – no change – 1.6%)
HRH The Duke of York – 222 (218 – up 4 – 9.3%)

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...y-engagements-2019-a-45992-5.html#post2251133


----------



## sdkitty

skyqueen said:


> I could care less about Harry/Meghan...I don't know them. They seem like big-time hypocrites! I remembered this thread and thought this article was interesting. Who knows if it's true???
> https://pagesix.com/2019/09/07/royal-insiders-dish-on-prince-harry-and-meghans-summer-of-hell/?utm_source=email_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site buttons&utm_campaign=site buttons


Interesting article....tho page six is pretty trashy in general
Somehow Diana managed to be a style icon and still have the people love her.  They need to follow her example


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> Harry is 6th in line yet he is at 101 engagements as of week prior. His brother is at 130. That isn’t a huge gap for the difference in their rankings.


So what you are saying is that Harry doesn't even measure up to a brother who is consistently dragged for being "lazy" and "work-shy".


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> So what you are saying is that Harry doesn't even measure up to a brother who is consistently dragged for being "lazy" and "work-shy".


well, apparently his number is lower than his brother's, right?


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> So what you are saying is that Harry doesn't even measure up to a brother who is consistently dragged for being "lazy" and "work-shy".



You mean the brother who is the future king yes one can understand while people consider him lazy. The heir has 370 engagements and the 2nd in line has 130. 

Good for you noticing Harry has a different path hence him being number 6th. While William is number 2 - 130 yet is no one near his father numbers - 370.


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> Good for you noticing Harry has a different path hence him being number 6th.


Harry's on a "different path" because he's only sixth in line but he's blown away every year by Anne, Edward, Sophie, Andrew, and even the Duke of Gloucester, who are all far further away from the throne than he is.

William's numbers are terrible and he deserves to be dragged for it, but somehow Harry has conned people into thinking he's a hard worker, even though he never even keeps pace with his "lazy" brother.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

buffym said:


> I doubt Serena’s mother is thinking Meghan is distracting her daughter, both Williams daughters place is in history. I believe Serena will win again before she retires, but it will take time, having her daughter took a physical toll, and now she has to get over her nerves. There’s a fourteen year gap between Tiger Woods wins of the Masters, yet he did it.



You've misspoken.  I didn't say Megan was distracting Serena.  Little short of a meteor landing at her feet could do that.  I said her mother may be thinking Megan is distracting attention away from her daughter.....meaning the crowds attention.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Does it surprise anyone that Harry/Archie were not there in NY? We get the portrait of this loving couple and new mom, but she ups and leaves the country for a week/weekend completely alone... is that something that seems odd, or not? At least for her shower she was with several friends, but she didn't even seem to have a girlfriend she was in NY with, she was just totally alone.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Does it surprise anyone that Harry/Archie were not there in NY? We get the portrait of this loving couple and new mom, but she ups and leaves the country for a week/weekend completely alone... is that something that seems odd, or not? At least for her shower she was with several friends, but she didn't even seem to have a girlfriend she was in NY with, she was just totally alone.


A lot of moms wouldn't want to be separated from a very young baby but I guess everyone is different


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> Interesting article....tho page six is pretty trashy in general
> Somehow Diana managed to be a style icon and still have the people love her.  They need to follow her example


She wore British fashion up until she divorced and then went wild with French and Italian, but while she was married, she wore made in the UK... wonder if that helped her appeal.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Affordable dress, commercial flight, mingling with regular people at yoga class, not clearing out the stands at the US Open for privacy.  It seems like Meghan is listening to her crisis managers, which is a good thing.


I see it as she hired excellent PR people who are setting her on the right path.

How is it that she flew commercial and attended a huge NYC yoga class and not one photograph in this day and age when everyone has a phone out.  Unless there are photos?

Wouldn't it be funny if her PR people just said she flew commercial and attended a huge yoga class, while in reality she did no such thing, but people now think she's being humble.

Anyone see any photos of her arriving in NY?


----------



## threadbender

It does seem odd that there was a class of 60 and no one shared the info. But, it could be a class where everyone is a celeb so they don't blab or, perhaps everyone had to sign a NDA?
Regardless, her PR staff appears to be stepping up and/or she has recognized that she may want to do things a little differently.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Very odd indeed that there are no pictures at all. I think she was there a few days prior to see her team of business people, have a “facial” and whatever else. Is Archie on formula now or did that breast pump work overtime?

In retrospect I think that she was merching the yoga studio  as well as the JCrew.  JCrew has been in the toilet sales wise for quite a while. The long time designer left last year and things have not been good. I am being generous by saying that she is merching for them because I couldn’t possibly come up with another reason for her to wear a heavy denim shapeless unflattering  (to anyone) dress with a long sweater coat in over 80 F temperatures and NY humidity.    I would have been embarrassed to be sitting with Anna Wintour wearing these clothes unless I was being paid to do it 

The Kool Aid brigade should be here shortly to comment.


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> It does seem odd that there was a class of 60 and no one shared the info. But, it could be a class where everyone is a celeb so they don't blab or, perhaps everyone had to sign a NDA?
> Regardless, her PR staff appears to be stepping up and/or she has recognized that she may want to do things a little differently.


 Celebs  don’t go to classes of 60 even if they are all celebs. There wouldn’t be enough space in the room for their egos.


----------



## hellosunshine

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Does it surprise anyone that Harry/Archie were not there in NY? We get the portrait of this loving couple and new mom, but she ups and leaves the country for a week/weekend completely alone... is that something that seems odd, or not? At least for her shower she was with several friends, but she didn't even seem to have a girlfriend she was in NY with, she was just totally alone.



LOL, she was also in NY to surprise her makeup artist (the one who did her engagement, wedding makeup) with a small private birthday party. So, she wasn't alone nor did she go to NY for Serena only. She was among her friends.


----------



## A1aGypsy

If she is promoting J Crew I truly hope that Parliament goes after her. That is not acceptable from a public servant.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Very odd indeed that there are no pictures at all. I think she was there a few days prior to see her team of business people, have a “facial” and whatever else. Is Archie on formula now or did that breast pump work overtime?
> 
> In retrospect I think that she was merching the yoga studio  as well as the JCrew.  JCrew has been in the toilet sales wise for quite a while. The long time designer left last year and things have not been good. I am being generous by saying that she is merching for them because I couldn’t possibly come up with another reason for her to wear a heavy denim shapeless unflattering  (to anyone) dress with a long sweater coat in over 80 F temperatures and NY humidity.    I would have been embarrassed to be sitting with Anna Wintour wearing these clothes unless I was being paid to do it
> 
> The Kool Aid brigade should be here shortly to comment.


I think this was a class the used to attend before she moved to UK?   If so, maybe they all respected her privacy.  And if you're on the floor doing yoga how do you jump up and go get your phone for pics?  I'm sure there is a way but.....


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> LOL, she was also in NY to surprise her makeup artist (the one who did her engagement, wedding makeup) with a small private birthday party. So, she wasn't alone nor did she go to NY for Serena only. She was among her friends.
> 
> View attachment 4535719


I just saw her alone at the tennis match. Didn't know she also flew in for a party. That makes it much better and worthwhile.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I just saw her alone at the tennis match. Didn't know she also flew in for a party. That makes it much better and worthwhile.



She left a 4 month old to go to a BD party?  Flew across the Atlantic to do so. Gave the Queen the finger. to attend said party. Not a good call


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She left a 4 month old to go to a BD party?  Flew across the Atlantic to do so. Gave the Queen the finger. to attend said party. Not a good call


she doesn't have a strong maternal instinct?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think this was a class the used to attend before she moved to UK?   If so, maybe they all respected her privacy.  And if you're on the floor doing yoga how do you jump up and go get your phone for pics?  I'm sure there is a way but.....


 In Toronto. Same owner.  In NYC it is not called respecting your privacy, it is called ignoring you.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't have a strong maternal instinct?



That’s unfortunate if true.   Hope the new nanny is good at cuddling


----------



## Morgan R

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I just saw her alone at the tennis match. Didn't know she also flew in for a party. That makes it much better and worthwhile.



She wasn't  alone at the tennis match though Meghan was interacting with Serena's family and other people in Serena's players' box.

Meghan was actually seen leaving the US Open with Serena's sister Isha:


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> And if you're on the floor doing yoga how do you jump up and go get your phone for pics? I'm sure there is a way but.....


I don't have my phone on me when I'm in the middle of class.  If she slipped in after the class started and didn't linger at the end, that leaves little opportunity.

Also, while many people might  try to take a pic if they could do it totally undetected, that's usually not the case.  The idea that self-respecting people would have no shame and would get out their phones to take her picture in full view is not realistic.


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> She wasn't  alone at the tennis match though Meghan was interacting with Serena's family and other people in Serena's players' box.
> 
> Meghan was actually seen leaving the US Open with Serena's sister Isha:
> 
> View attachment 4535693



She looks differs from past pictures. That must be a protection officer with them


----------



## marthastoo

I thought the dress and sweater looked perfectly appropriate and good on her.  Not what I would wear, but absolutely in line with her aesthetic.   The notion she's getting paid by J Crew to wear their clothes is laughable.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I go to a modo studio and they are (at least at my studio) rabid about no phone in class. They also want you to stay in the studio once class starts although allow for emergency bathroom breaks. However, I imagine once they knew she was there they probably told people if they had to leave then to take their mat because they weren’t getting back in.




Flatsy said:


> Also, while many people might  try to take a pic if they could do it totally undetected, that's usually not the case.  The idea that self-respecting people would have no shame and would get out their phones to take her picture in full view is not realistic.



Sadly not the case anymore. I’ve seen people walk up within three feet of a celebrity and turn and take a selfie of themselves with the celebrity behind them. Or they jam their phone in the person’s face and take a picture.  Not a “hello” or “how are you doing” or “hey, would you mind if I took your picture?”. It’s like they don’t even see the other person as a human being. It’s awful and I’ve seen it happen so many times so it isn’t just one rude person. Cell phones are truly the demise of our society.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

I am glad to know those are the policies in those situations. I bet she was happy to be in a place where she didn't have to worry about angles or expressions and could just enjoy the moment.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> She left a 4 month old to go to a BD party?  Flew across the Atlantic to do so. Gave the Queen the finger. to attend said party. Not a good call



Listen, Harry should be commended for being such a capable and hands-on father to his son. Harry & Meghan are a team and when one of them needs to be somewhere, the other steps up and vice versa. I love this about their relationship. Also, this mom-shaming is a gross look.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Very odd indeed that there are no pictures at all. I think she was there a few days prior to see her team of business people, have a “facial” and whatever else. Is Archie on formula now or did that breast pump work overtime?
> 
> In retrospect I think that she was merching the yoga studio  as well as the JCrew.  JCrew has been in the toilet sales wise for quite a while. The long time designer left last year and things have not been good. I am being generous by saying that she is merching for them because I couldn’t possibly come up with another reason for her to wear a heavy denim shapeless unflattering  (to anyone) dress with a long sweater coat in over 80 F temperatures and NY humidity.    I would have been embarrassed to be sitting with Anna Wintour wearing these clothes unless I was being paid to do it
> 
> The Kool Aid brigade should be here shortly to comment.



Because she wanted too so was she merching JCREW the other previous time she wore it. What about Kate is she also, merchandising JCREW or is it just reserved for Meghan without any proof but less just put that out there.



A1aGypsy said:


> If she is promoting J Crew I truly hope that Parliament goes after her. That is not acceptable from a public servant.


Parliament isn’t going to go after her because a poster on the purseform accuses Meghan of merchandising without any proof except said poster dislikes Meghan.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Because she wanted too so was she merching JCREW the other previous time she wore it. What about Kate is she also, merchandising JCREW or is it just reserved for Meghan without any proof but less just put that out there.
> 
> 
> Parliament isn’t going to go after her because a poster on the purseform accuses Meghan of merchandising without any proof except said poster dislikes Meghan.


Kate is not paid to merch any company and I think you already knew that.

Don’t make assumptions about whom I like or dislike.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Listen, Harry should be commended for being such a capable and hands-on father to his son. Harry & Meghan are a team and when one of them needs to be somewhere, the other steps up and vice versa. I love this about their relationship. Also, this mom-shaming is a gross look.



A gross look that’s pretty funny.


----------



## A1aGypsy

buffym said:


> Parliament isn’t going to go after her because a poster on the purseform accuses Meghan of merchandising without any proof except said poster dislikes Meghan.



I’m sorry, who said they were?  I said “IF SHE IS promoting J Crew...” so yeah. If they find proof that she is, I hope they deal with it.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> She left a 4 month old to go to a BD party?  Flew across the Atlantic to do so. Gave the Queen the finger. to attend said party. Not a good call



It’s really sad how Archie has a father who seems capable of taking care of him for two days, yet people are complaining about Meghan not being their, it seems society has not moved on to equal parenting.

I didn’t know maternal instincts mean I must do everything. Maybe she should have did a William and Kate and leave your first born alone for week with his nanny and grandparents while you too go a private island.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> Kate is not paid to merch any company and I think you already knew that.



Well, Meghan isn't either. Yeah, she's working on a capsule collection w/ SmartWorks but all funds are going towards charity.


----------



## hellosunshine

I think it's funny how Harry left little Archie w/ Meghan for a few trips after his birth and no one said anything yet when Meghan takes a small 2-day trip to support two friends..somehow we find that people are judging her more harshly?! Are we still assuming that women must surrender their own identity when they give birth? Are we really stereotyping gender roles in 2019?! Like c'mon people...


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I
> Sadly not the case anymore. I’ve seen people walk up within three feet of a celebrity and turn and take a selfie of themselves with the celebrity behind them. Or they jam their phone in the person’s face and take a picture.  Not a “hello” or “how are you doing” or “hey, would you mind if I took your picture?”. It’s like they don’t even see the other person as a human being. It’s awful and I’ve seen it happen so many times so it isn’t just one rude person. Cell phones are truly the demise of our society.


*YES, YES, YES* .. I have seen that out here in LA and it is disgusting!!!  I think one of the major reasons why (when I have met a celebrity), they always talk to me ... and it's a "normal" conversation!  The reason?!? .. I never invade their privacy, never even have my phone out, I just treat them like just another person .. because, you know what? .. THEY ARE!!!   Now, that is not to say that I have not gotten the "don't you know WHO I am?" crap .. and that DOES NOT sit well with me, especially if the celebrity is being nasty and is expecting that they get preferential treatment over others.  I guess I somewhat learned this during my youth as my Dad was very closely connected in the political/diplomatic world when we lived in Connecticut, and as such, I would meet people that were well-known.  I just learned that they are just like the rest of us ..


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> She wore British fashion up until she divorced and then went wild with French and Italian, but while she was married, she wore made in the UK... wonder if that helped her appeal.


maybe.....I think a lot of it had to do with her activism....touching AIDS patients, walking near land mines......


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> I think it's funny how Harry left little Archie w/ Meghan for a few trips after his birth and no one said anything yet when Meghan takes a small 2-day trip to support two friends..somehow we find that people are judging her more harshly?! Are we still assuming that women must surrender their own identity when they give birth? Are we really stereotyping gender roles in 2019?! Like c'mon people...


Agree, but something just happens when you give birth.  This bonding thing happens that's so strong. I couldn't  leave mine, that's for sure.  Not for a commercial flight, if she really took a commercial flight, across the pond. 

But she does have the best nannies, I guess.


----------



## rose60610

I'm sure Harry is very capable of taking care of Archie ("Oh Nannies, what time did Archie wake up this morning?"). Plenty of women have to leave their babies in the care of others while they fulfill work obligations. Not that attending the U.S. Open and a birthday party was business related. The Firm will handle whatever fallout occurs and it will be interesting to see what they say. If anything. This upcoming Africa trip will provide much more fodder for comments on behavior, outfits, hair styles, accessories and, of course, missteps.


----------



## hellosunshine

Jayne1 said:


> Agree, but something just happens when you give birth.  This bonding thing happens that's so strong. I couldn't  leave mine, that's for sure.  Not for a commercial flight, if she really took a commercial flight, across the pond.
> 
> But she does have the best nannies, I guess.



But it's not like she's leaving little Archie two weeks after giving birth to him..he's almost 5 months old and he's being looked after by his father and a nanny.  He's totally fine. This outrage is a little ridiculous to be quite honest.


----------



## Welltraveled!

That may be due to Archie - waiting for the birth, getting adjusted to an infant, etc.  



Flatsy said:


> Tours are a great chance for royals to bulk up their engagement counts.  I'm surprised they aren't stuffing in a few more because *Harry's numbers this year are even more abysmal than usual.*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

What makes you think Archie isn’t in NY? Because they didn’t attend a yoga class/tennis with her doesn’t mean she’s traveling alone.  



ccbaggirl89 said:


> Does it surprise anyone that Harry/Archie were not there in NY? We get the portrait of this loving couple and new mom, but she ups and leaves the country for a week/weekend completely alone... is that something that seems odd, or not? At least for her shower she was with several friends, but she didn't even seem to have a girlfriend she was in NY with, she was just totally alone.


----------



## Welltraveled!

In America, most mothers return to work 12 weeks after giving birth.  Considering Archie is about 4 or 5 months now; it’s not uncommon for her to leave him alone with the nanny for a few hours.  



sdkitty said:


> A lot of moms wouldn't want to be separated from a very young baby but I guess everyone is different


----------



## sdkitty

Welltraveled! said:


> In America, most mothers return to work 12 weeks after giving birth.  Considering Archie is about 4 or 5 months now; it’s not uncommon for her to leave him alone with the nanny for a few hours.


its days not hours


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> Very odd indeed that there are no pictures at all. I think she was there a few days prior to see her team of business people, have a “facial” and whatever else. Is Archie on formula now or did that breast pump work overtime?
> 
> In retrospect I think that she was merching the yoga studio  as well as the JCrew.  JCrew has been in the toilet sales wise for quite a while. The long time designer left last year and things have not been good. I am being generous by saying that she is merching for them because I couldn’t possibly come up with another reason for her to wear a heavy denim shapeless unflattering  (to anyone) dress with a long sweater coat in over 80 F temperatures and NY humidity.    I would have been embarrassed to be sitting with Anna Wintour wearing these clothes unless I was being paid to do it
> 
> The Kool Aid brigade should be here shortly to comment.



I have that sweater coat, but I wear it with pants and a blouse. Not draped around my shoulders with that rather unflattering denim dress. The Meghan effect works, as that shapeless dress was soon sold out online by the end of the day. 

I don’t find her style all that special. She’s a basic B like me, except she’s fortunate enough to be naturally stunning and slim - which, I guess makes any paperbag of an item look 10 times better.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I think we can all agree. If she was going to promote a merchant.  It wouldn’t be J Crew.  



A1aGypsy said:


> If she is promoting J Crew I truly hope that Parliament goes after her. That is not acceptable from a public servant.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> A gross look that’s pretty funny.



Yeah, it's unbecoming, unattractive, unbefitting, and unflattering to judge her on this manner. Not a cute look.


----------



## Welltraveled!

How do you know Archie isn’t with her?  



sdkitty said:


> its days not hours


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> its days not hours



Yes, 2 days!! And she's already heading back today, if she didn't already take a red-eye flight back last night.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Welltraveled! said:


> What makes you think Archie isn’t in NY? Because they didn’t attend a yoga class/tennis with her doesn’t mean she’s traveling alone.


That's true, they could all be on vacation there together, who knows. Odd that if she flew commercial there are no pictures, though. You'd think that someone on a commercial flight or at the airport would have got a picture.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> But it's not like she's leaving little Archie two weeks after giving birth to him..he's almost 5 months old and he's being looked after by his father and a nanny.  He's totally fine. This outrage is a little ridiculous to be quite honest.


IMO .. (_based on what I've read on other forums, etc_.) .. the "outrage" that you speak of is more related to the fact that H&M said that  *1) * they were too busy planning their Africa engagements and  *2)*  Archie is too small to travel .. such that they did not go to Balmoral.  But then, Meghan flies across the pond to see a Tennis Match (_yes - understand that Serena is a good friend_).  It seems that a lot of the Brits (_because most of the negative comments were from Brits - not Americans_) were rather upset with this because they viewed it as H&M giving the Queen the 'middle finger'.  Just noting what I've read ..


----------



## Flatsy

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You'd think that someone on a commercial flight or at the airport would have got a picture.


Royals are escorted through private areas of the airport, board separately, and are often seated at the very front of First Class, where they are not accessible to the rest of the passengers.  

The photos I've seen of the Cambridges or Harry when they flew commercial were flights where they were mixed in with the rest of the passengers in general seating.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree to an extent. Some members of the BRF, for the most part, good at avoiding the public, blending in, etc.  Harry has been doing it for years.  



ccbaggirl89 said:


> That's true, they could all be on vacation there together, who knows. Odd that if she flew commercial there are no pictures, though. *You'd think that someone on a commercial flight or at the airport would have got a picture*.


----------



## redney

ccbaggirl89 said:


> *Does it surprise anyone that Harry/Archie were not there in NY? We get the portrait of this loving couple and new mom, but she ups and leaves the country for a week/weekend completely alone... is that something that seems odd, or not? *At least for her shower she was with several friends, but she didn't even seem to have a girlfriend she was in NY with, she was just totally alone.


No, not at all. It's nice for a new mom to get away for a little bit. Believe me I looked forward to a trip or outing with friends or by myself as a mom with an infant at home. We know the baby has a caregiver + his father at home, so why not?

I took a week long international business trip solo when I had an infant at home, and boy was it refreshing to be *myself* and not just the MOM person. Nice not to have any childcare responsibilities for a couple of days in a hotel and in work meetings. I also had the opportunity to take 2 weekend trips with friends (one for a bday celebration and one for a regular ole friends meet up) before my child turned 1. 

Am I a horrible mother with no maternal instincts too?  

Is this yet another thing to try to drag her for? Serious question...


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't have a strong maternal instinct?


LOL!  Oh that is funny! How could we possibly even guess at this - all because she took a trip without bringing baby? See my post about traveling alone/without baby as a new mom. It is a refreshing feeling and certainly doesn't point to whether anyone has a "maternal instinct" or not.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Yeah, it's unbecoming, unattractive, unbefitting, and unflattering to judge her on this manner. Not a cute look.


If what I post bothers you then feel free to ignore


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

Welltraveled! said:


> *In America, most mothers return to work 12 weeks after giving birth. Considering Archie is about 4 or 5 months now*; it’s not uncommon for her to leave him alone with the nanny for a few hours.





redney said:


> No, not at all. It's nice for a new mom to get away for a little bit. Believe me I looked forward to a trip or outing with friends or by myself as a mom with an infant at home. We know the baby has a caregiver + his father at home, so why not?
> 
> *I took a business trip solo when I had an infant at home, and boy was it refreshing to be *myself* and not just the MOM person. *Nice not to have any childcare responsibilities for a couple of days in a hotel and in work meetings. Am I a horrible person too?
> 
> *Is this yet another thing to try to drag her for?* Serious question...



I had to return to work when one of my kids was 8 weeks old and the others were 10 weeks old.  I had to because of certain responsibilities at work that couldn't be avoided.  And had to be out of town.  DH took over, along with some other help.  I guess this means I had no maternal instincts and was a terrible mother.

I cannot believe that people are seriously criticizing MM for taking a two day trip!  Is this the 1950s????  smdh


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> IMO .. (_based on what I've read on other forums, etc_.) .. the "outrage" that you speak of is more related to the fact that* H&M said that  1) they were too busy planning their Africa engagements *and  *2)*  Archie is too small to travel .. such that they did not go to Balmoral.  But then, Meghan flies across the pond to see a Tennis Match (_yes - understand that Serena is a good friend_).  It seems that a lot of the Brits (_because most of the negative comments were from Brits - not Americans_) were rather upset with this because they viewed it as H&M giving the Queen the 'middle finger'.  Just noting what I've read ..



That's pure speculation though. Did H & M actually say that?


----------



## shiba

Whether it is about MM or not, the mom shaming is pathetic. Way to beat your fellow women down. We don't need men to do that, we are quite capable of doing it ourselves - dammed no matter what.
BTW breast milk can be frozen, so a few days away is certainly not something to burn someone at the stake for.
Edit to add;
Had my friend been in a situation where she was competing to reach the greatest accomplishment of her career, I would have been there too.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree 100%!  It’s beyond pathetic and speaks to the woman’s character - or lack thereof - that can easily shame a mother.  Especially, for doing what millions of other mothers have done.  If the situation was reverse and mothers began to shame childless women; there would be an uproar. 





shiba said:


> Whether it is about MM or not, the mom shaming is pathetic. Way to beat your fellow women down. We don't need men to do that, we are quite capable of doing it ourselves - dammed if you do, dammed if you don't.
> BTW breast milk can be frozen, so a few days away is certainly not something to burn someone at the stake for.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Welltraveled! said:


> If the situation was reverse and mothers began to shame childless women; there would be an uproar.



So, I agree that commenting on her being away from her child isn’t the kindest thing to do but you completely lost me with the above comment. Why do you think it is childless woman who are the critical ones? A number have even self identified as mothers themselves...


----------



## Flatsy

lulilu said:


> I cannot believe that people are seriously criticizing MM for taking a two day trip! Is this the 1950s???? smdh


I don't care about Meghan leaving her baby, but why the sudden certainty that the trip is only two days?  From what I can tell, the press have not yet sussed out her current whereabouts or her departure.  They guessed correctly when they found out she was on her way to New York that she would be attending Serena's match, but I don't think anybody knows what else she had or has planned for the trip.


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> Yeah, it's unbecoming, unattractive, unbefitting, and unflattering to judge her on this manner. Not a cute look.



I don’t think anyone was “mom shaming” but even if they were, the name calling is unnecessary. X.



Flatsy said:


> Royals are escorted through private areas of the airport, board separately, and are often seated at the very front of First Class, where they are not accessible to the rest of the passengers.
> 
> The photos I've seen of the Cambridges or Harry when they flew commercial were flights where they were mixed in with the rest of the passengers in general seating.



But with all the bad press that they have been getting, isn’t it odd that they wouldn’t have released pictures of Meghan getting on a commercial flight to try to pacify the public? The secrecy makes the “she actually flew private” theory more believable.


----------



## sdkitty

buffym said:


> It’s really sad how Archie has a father who seems capable of taking care of him for two days, yet people are complaining about Meghan not being their, it seems society has not moved on to equal parenting.
> 
> I didn’t know maternal instincts mean I must do everything. Maybe she should have did a William and Kate and leave your first born alone for week with his nanny and grandparents while you too go a private island.


I said maybe she didn't have a strong maternal instinct.  Maybe I should have said as strong as some mothers.  because I know there are mothers who would not want to be separated from such a young baby.  but I'm sure Archie was well cared for in her absence.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I never said childless women are the critical ones.  To answer your question, appropriately I need to understand which part of my statement lead you to believe that I think “childless women” are the critical ones. 



A1aGypsy said:


> So, I agree that commenting on her being away from her child isn’t the kindest thing to do but you completely lost me with the above comment. Why do you think it is childless woman who are the critical ones? A number have even self identified as mothers themselves...


----------



## marthastoo

My favorite Meghan-hating mom shamers is Sarah Vine in the Daily Mail who cannot comprehend how a mom would ever leave her baby, casting aspersions on Meghan's fitness as a mom and her emotional ability to love a child as much as Sarah does. 

Of course, Sarah Vine was also the mom who left her 11 year old alone in a hotel room so she and her husband could party.  Poor kid was found at 1:30 am wandering around the hotel, wondering where mummy and daddy were.  lol


----------



## gracekelly

My goodness!  Mommy shaming?  Where did that come from?  None of us are idiotic enough to think that the baby was not well cared for. He has a full time nanny and a father and plenty of relatives that could be called upon for child advice if need be.   My personal feeling is that I would not want to leave a child that age to make such a long trip unless it was a family emergency, no matter who was at home with him. This wasn’t   a family emergency and Serena had plenty of her own family there to support her.  Calling this a poor judgment call on her part was not my  mommy shaming her. I think Harry can be thrown into the mix of this decision as well.  If folks want to shame me for feeling this way, then so be it.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

There are TWO parents.

Meghan isn't going it alone. Harry can look after his own child (and they have help) for 2-3 days while Meghan goes to support her friend.

Mountain out of a molehill.


----------



## rose60610

My guess: Archie's nannies are incredibly experienced and know advanced CPR.  Refer to the March 2019 issue of Town & Country magazine. Interesting article on training nannies for the Royals, oligarchs, etc. They even get training in security and anti-terrorism. And how to get children to eat their vegetables. I'm sure Archie is in great hands. 

Had HM not been under some criticisms for past faux pas, this trip wouldn't have gotten the attention it has.  It adds to the tone deafness these two seem to have.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

redney said:


> No, not at all. It's nice for a new mom to get away for a little bit. Believe me I looked forward to a trip or outing with friends or by myself as a mom with an infant at home. We know the baby has a caregiver + his father at home, so why not?
> 
> I took a week long international business trip solo when I had an infant at home, and boy was it refreshing to be *myself* and not just the MOM person. Nice not to have any childcare responsibilities for a couple of days in a hotel and in work meetings. I also had the opportunity to take 2 weekend trips with friends (one for a bday celebration and one for a regular ole friends meet up) before my child turned 1.
> 
> Am I a horrible mother with no maternal instincts too?
> 
> Is this yet another thing to try to drag her for? Serious question...


I can for sure see a new mom going away for a weekend close by, or within the same country, but going overseas seems like something less likely when you still have an infant. Not that Harry and a nanny can't handle it, but it's instinct to worry and want to be close, or within driving distance rather than a long flight. But, someone else mentioned that maybe Archie went, so who knows.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

lulilu said:


> I had to return to work when one of my kids was 8 weeks old and the others were 10 weeks old.  I had to because of certain responsibilities at work that couldn't be avoided.  And had to be out of town.  DH took over, along with some other help.  I guess this means I had no maternal instincts and was a terrible mother.
> 
> I cannot believe that people are seriously criticizing MM for taking a two day trip!  Is this the 1950s????  smdh


I assume your work was maybe 10 miles from your house, though? Not 6 hours away?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> My guess: Archie's nannies are incredibly experienced and know advanced CPR.  Refer to the March 2019 issue of Town & Country magazine. Interesting article on training nannies for the Royals, oligarchs, etc. They even get training in security and anti-terrorism. And how to get children to eat their vegetables. I'm sure Archie is in great hands.
> 
> Had HM not been under some criticisms for past faux pas, this trip wouldn't have gotten the attention it has.  It adds to the tone deafness these two seem to have.



You are describing a Norland nanny like Maria Borallo who is the Cambridge nanny. She has had that training. I don’t believe it was mentioned if the Sussex nanny is from Norland, or another nanny college or just a woman who has been a nanny for many years and has lots of practical experience.


----------



## caramelize126

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I can for sure see a new mom going away for a weekend close by, or within the same country, but going overseas seems like something less likely when you still have an infant. Not that Harry and a nanny can't handle it, but it's instinct to worry and want to be close, or within driving distance rather than a long flight. But, someone else mentioned that maybe Archie went, so who knows.



I also think that its weird that she felt that this was an appropriate time to travel for a leisure trip? The british media is livid and still talking about the money these two are wasting with private plane trips, and she picks up and goes to new york for a tennis match. I'm not sure if H&M are tone deaf or really just don't care. Since they have also decided to not go to balmoral, my money is on them two just being "over it".


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree.  Tomorrow, I have to deal with a handful of employees who - allegedly - “mom-shamed” a new mother.  What fun (being sarcastic) I will have tomorrow!  



hellosunshine said:


> Yeah, it's unbecoming, unattractive, unbefitting, and unflattering to judge her on this manner. Not a cute look.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Welltraveled! said:


> I never said childless women are the critical ones.  To answer your question, appropriately I need to understand which part of my statement lead you to believe that I think “childless women” are the critical ones.




You said, “if the situation was reversed and mothers began to shame childless women”. Suggesting the current situation is childless women shaming mothers.


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That's pure speculation though. Did H & M actually say that?


Can't remember where reading it, but it's not speculation .. it was mentioned that one of the reasons why H&M did not go to Balmoral was that they were very busy making arrangements for their Africa trip.  Honestly, that makes a lot more sense to me than the nonsense of Archie being too young to travel.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

caramelize126 said:


> I also think that its weird that she felt that this was an appropriate time to travel for a leisure trip? The british media is livid and still talking about the money these two are wasting with private plane trips, and she picks up and goes to new york for a tennis match. I'm not sure if H&M are tone deaf or really just don't care. Since they have also decided to not go to balmoral, my money is on them two just being "over it".


And it comes right before a major trip to Africa, for like 25 days? Seems like a month in another country is a vacation. Although someone will make the argument that attending lunches and dinners and photos ops in Africa will be extremely hard work and very difficult. She'll for sure need another vacation after Africa


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Yeah, it's unbecoming, unattractive, unbefitting, and unflattering to judge her on this manner. Not a cute look.


.. and here we go again; just put her on IGNORE if it bothers you so ..


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where reading it, but it's not speculation .. it was mentioned that one of the reasons why H&M did not go to Balmoral was that they were very busy making arrangements for their Africa trip.  Honestly, that makes a lot more sense to me than the nonsense of Archie being too young to travel.



Daily mail ran the story, I would take it as speculation because they have ran a lot of untrue stories. Harry and Meghan didn’t go to Balmoral last year so why are they expected this year, Harry rarely went to Balmoral in the Summer before being married so why now.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...-snubbing-Queen-declining-visit-Balmoral.html


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where reading it, but it's not speculation .. it was mentioned that one of the reasons why H&M did not go to Balmoral was that they were very busy making arrangements for their Africa trip.  Honestly, that makes a lot more sense to me than the nonsense of Archie being too young to travel.


You're right. I found the article via People, and it was repeated word for word elsewhere. 

However, the *rest* of the story in the exact same article is that they see the Queen more than the others as they are a 5-minute walk away when she's at Windsor.

I have no probs with people having opinions either way, but let's present all the facts and not handpick the ones that suit the bias.


----------



## caramelize126

buffym said:


> Daily mail ran the story, I would take it as speculation because they have ran a lot of untrue stories. Harry and Meghan didn’t go to Balmoral last year so why are they expected this year, Harry rarely went to Balmoral in the Summer before being married so why now.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...-snubbing-Queen-declining-visit-Balmoral.html



Although this makes sense, its still kinda odd. H&M are super conscious of the media and the public's perception of them.  The BRF in general is super conscious of how they are perceived by the public ( and rightly so).   With the recent backlash and speculation that the senior family members are on the outs with Meghan and Harry, why wouldnt they just go and show face to quiet the media? All this has done is give them more bad PR and added more fuel to the fire about discord amongst the family. 

Also, Harry may not have gone last year, but he did go every year as a child. Its supposed to be a way for the family to all get together and the cousins to spend time together. By 5-6 months, babies are no longer just a sleeping sack of potatoes. They could've at least gone just so that Archie could spend time and play with his cousins. I'm sure the older family members wouldve loved to see and spend time with the new baby.


----------



## buffym

caramelize126 said:


> Although this makes sense, its still kinda odd. H&M are super conscious of the media and the public's perception of them.  The BRF in general is super conscious of how they are perceived by the public ( and rightly so).   With the recent backlash and speculation that the senior family members are on the outs with Meghan and Harry, why wouldnt they just go and show face to quiet the media? All this has done is give them more bad PR and added more fuel to the fire about discord amongst the family.
> 
> Also, Harry may not have gone last year, but he did go every year as a child. Its supposed to be a way for the family to all get together and the cousins to spend time together. By 5-6 months, babies are no longer just a sleeping sack of potatoes. They could've at least gone just so that Archie could spend time and play with his cousins. I'm sure the older family members wouldve loved to see and spend time with the new baby.



There is time between being a child and Balmoral last year. My point is in adulthood Harry hasn’t been at Balmoral every summer. It hasn’t been his thing so I doubt the Queen would take it as a snub when he usually doesn’t go. Why would they need to go to Balmoral when they normally don’t go. 

I don’t believe the backlash is from the public, I think it’s from the tabloids. I’ve seen different people not interested in royals mention they think the media’s treatment of Meghan is out of line.


----------



## caramelize126

buffym said:


> There is time between being a child and Balmoral last year. My point is in adulthood Harry hasn’t been at Balmoral every summer. It hasn’t been his thing so I doubt the Queen would take it as a snub when he usually doesn’t go. Why would they need to go to Balmoral when they normally don’t go.
> 
> I don’t believe the backlash is from the public, I think it’s from the tabloids. I’ve seen different people not interested in royals mention they think the media’s treatment of Meghan is out of line.



Mm, I've spend alot of time in England this year. It's from the public as well. You can also see the comments on these stories and people are not happy.  The negative comments on the SR instagram are all being quickly deleted, which might be skewing the perception that its only tabloids. And the negative comments that I saw on instagram were all from normal people ( not weird bot-like stuff).  Are you in the US? I do think that the public perception of her is much better stateside than it is in the UK right now.

Another interesting story:
*Duchess of Sussex is crowned Britain's top social climber by society magazine Tatler as editors rule she has reached 'the pinnacle of the greasy pole'*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-social-climber-society-magazine-Tatler.html

Tatler is not the New York Times, but still a big society magazine where the editors and writers are part of the  same social set and circles that Harry and William grew up in. This is not good for Meghan or Harry, as this is really reflective of what the set that they grew up with and their (former) friends think of Meghan.

Before the brigade comes out, I just want to add that Tatler has been equally critical of Kate in the past and was one of the the first magazines to start making fun of Kate's new accent, even before her speech to whtever charity she was at was posted up on the internet for the rest of us to hear.


----------



## redney

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I can for sure see a new mom going away for a weekend close by, or within the same country, but going overseas seems like something less likely when you still have an infant. Not that Harry and a nanny can't handle it, but it's instinct to worry and want to be close, or within driving distance rather than a long flight. But, someone else mentioned that maybe Archie went, so who knows.


But no one can paint all moms of babies who travel with the same brush. You quoted my post on my international trip - 11 hour flight from the US West Coast to London plus a connection to my regional airport - and a few weekends away that were between 5-8 hours driving (1.5-2 hour flights), so the speed with which I could return home was hindered.

Did I worry on those trips? Oh for sure, but it was more about whether or not my husband and the caregiver we had would do "my routine" with baby or about the regular daily activities ("did she poop?:, etc) because I knew baby was fine and in good care. 

And maybe he did travel with her, as speculated.


----------



## Welltraveled!

A1aGypsy said:


> You said, “if the situation was reversed and mothers began to shame childless women”. Suggesting the current situation is childless women shaming mothers.



You’re reading too much into it.  Based on your previous statement, I assume you think I was referring to this thread.  I was speaking in general terms.  I don’t know who has children in this thread.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Not doubting the Tatler reference, but do you have a link? 

There's none on the DM story and it doesn't show up on a mobile search of the Tatler site.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Welltraveled! said:


> You’re reading too much into it.  Based on your previous statement, I assume you think I was referring to this thread.  I was speaking in general terms.  I don’t know who has children in this thread.



I’m not going to continue to go back and forth but i wasn’t assuming anything.  I just used the thread as an example. General or specific, I just don’t understand the suggestion that childless women are behind the criticism.


----------



## caramelize126

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Not doubting the Tatler reference, but do you have a link?
> 
> There's none on the DM story and it doesn't show up on a mobile search of the Tatler site.



Its supposed to be in the October issue of their print magazine. I'm currently in the US so unfortunately I dont have a access to it to scan and post. Hopefully one of our UK based members can post screenshots.


----------



## lulilu

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I assume your work was maybe 10 miles from your house, though? Not 6 hours away?



Most of the time, I was an hour+ away.  But I traveled all over the country, at least once a month.  And I would spend weeks at a time in different places when I needed to.  And traveled overseas.  It was just part of the job.  I knew the kids were in good hands, so I didn't have to worry -- I was lucky that way, for sure.  I guess my point is that, like many fathers, mothers have to be away as well for work.  And even though MM traveled to the US for a friend, I don't begrudge her a few days away from her son.  London-NYC is not all that far, really.  And I doubt she was gone all that long.


----------



## marthastoo

Of course Meghan would be "crowned" biggest social climber EVAH.  By definition, she is the top of the social pecking order as a woman can be in the UK (since Charles and William are already taken).  So even if Meghan was liked by society-types, which of course she never would be, she would be by definition, the ultimate social climber.  She is a non-aristocratic biracial American.  That's about as low as you go on the toff totem pole.


----------



## marthastoo

Tatler proclaiming Meghan the "Top Social Climber" like it's some great insult is hilarious to me as an American.    We have a very different ethos in the US - anyone can rise to the top through hard work or marriage.  lol


----------



## hellosunshine

caramelize126 said:


> I don’t think anyone was “mom shaming” but even if they were, the name calling is unnecessary. X.



I was not personally name-calling anyone..I was basically saying the words that was used to judge Meghan on this very personal choice was inappropiate to be quite honest. It's their life to live and we should be better than this.



ccbaggirl89 said:


> Although someone will make the argument that attending lunches and dinners and photos ops in Africa will be extremely hard work and very difficult. She'll for sure need another vacation after Africa



Well, these engagements are stressful, so if they decide to go on vacation afterwards, it'll be well-deserved.




CeeJay said:


> .. and here we go again; just put her on IGNORE if it bothers you so ..



Great, and they can do the same as well. 



buffym said:


> Daily mail ran the story, I would take it as speculation because they have ran a lot of untrue stories. Harry and Meghan didn’t go to Balmoral last year so why are they expected this year, Harry rarely went to Balmoral in the Summer before being married so why now.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...-snubbing-Queen-declining-visit-Balmoral.html



Yeah, as someone else has mentioned in this thread, Harry usually goes to Balmoral around the Christmas holiday season. 



caramelize126 said:


> Although this makes sense, its still kinda odd. H&M are super conscious of the media and the public's perception of them.



This thread can be so exhausting. One day people here are saying that Harry & Meghan should heed the criticisms from the media/public and then question why are they so unaware? Then in another post, the same circle of people..go off and make claims that Harry & Meghan are now "super conscious" or aware of the media circus. Goodness, pick a struggle.


----------



## Jayne1

Welltraveled! said:


> In America, most mothers return to work 12 weeks after giving birth.  Considering Archie is about 4 or 5 months now; it’s not uncommon for her to leave him alone with the nanny for a few hours.


More like a few days.


lulilu said:


> I had to return to work when one of my kids was 8 weeks old and the others were 10 weeks old.  I had to because of certain responsibilities at work that couldn't be avoided.  And had to be out of town.  DH took over, along with some other help.  I guess this means I had no maternal instincts and was a terrible mother.


You said you had to, you had responsibilities, of course you weren't in the wrong and are not a bad mother.  Who would think that.

Meg taking a non-stop flight is still 10 hours, if she really did fly commercial, and going to a tennis game and yoga class is not essential.  Wonder if she visited with her hair and derm while there.  Anyway, as stated she has the best nannies, so no one is worried for the baby.

She really needs to show up somewhere so we can change the subject and talk about her clothes and hair or something. lol


----------



## hellosunshine

Jeremy Vine shock claim Prince William is 'trashing' Prince Harry as brother feud grows 
https://emojipedia.org/eyes/
After chatting about the media coverage Meghan Markle had received in comparison to Kate Middleton yesterday, conversation quickly turned to the supposed “war” between the two brothers.

David was keen to find out who was responsible for the image portrayals the Duchess’ were receiving and asked his co-panelist Nina: “Why, do you think the palace is actually trying to control this?” 

“No I don’t think it’s the palace, I think it’s the war between Harry and Will and it’s Will’s side that’s briefing the press,” Nina explained. 

“Well that almost is the palace though!” host Jeremy commented in reference to Prince Harry being the future King of the palace. 

But Nina disagreed: “Not yet.” And Jeremy continued: “Oh no I agree, I think if you’re… be careful here because there are individuals involved who are doing William’s PR, but I think if you’re doing William’s PR the real shortcut to getting good publicity is to completely trash Harry!” 

“Oh absolutely,” 

https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/t...oyal-family-feud-Meghan-Markle-Kate-Middleton


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I'm not sure (I hope not, anyway) that this is coming from the Cambridges.    I *do* think that there is significantly less attention being paid to two other quite major stories in the BRF.  That is, the Turnip Toff rumoured scandal and Randy Andy.

*But* the reason for that could be:
*A)* whether people like Harry and Meghan or not, they all click on the articles about them.  Those clicks are money in the bank for places like the DM, The Sun. So, more articles = more $$$

*B)* Come what may, the BRF will be trying to smother those stories about Andrew.

*C)* Despite my own somewhat neutral, slightly M & H leaning views, there's zero doubt that Harry and Meghan are polarising figures at the moment.

*D)* Meghan and Harry really mucked up their timing with the environment speech then the private plane travel.  There's a ton of uncertainty in the UK at the moment regarding Brexit and what that will mean for job security, food shortages, rising prices and society in general.  All the royals travel by private plane at some point, there's no getting around that.  It looks like excess and hypocrisy in a time when people are pulling in their belts. But if they truly want to modernise they need to be more in touch with their people and the current mood.

In general I think Meghan could be good for the monarchy, because they are going to have to modernise at some stage or they risk becoming irrelevant (which is what a lot of commenters elsewhere are already saying). But it needs to be done slowly - I think she's rubbing the courtiers the wrong way and _they_ are the leakers of a lot of "inside" stories.

For me it's the sheer volume of articles with seemingly no focus elsewhere, where there are also issues that shouldn't be swept under the rug.  And a lot of these articles are just copy and pasting each other.  It's a never-ending cycle.


----------



## mdcx

Megs travel sans her new baby is fully optional. It is not required/advised in order to keep her job. She could have easily brought baby and nanny/nannies and/or hubby with her.
It seems ill advised given her current PR mess.
This comment about others in her yoga class in NYC smiling sweetly was bizarre. Who writes this tripe?:
The Duchess of Sussex and a friend headed to Modo Yoga, which offers hot yoga classes in an eco-conscious studio, in the West Village neighborhood of N.Y.C. The royal is in New York to see close friend Serena Williams play in the final of the US Open on Saturday.
Meghan, 38, joined a surprisingly full yoga class of up to 60 people on Friday.
“_There were lots of sweet, knowing smiles_” among some of the respectful patrons, a source tells PEOPLE.​


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> I see it as she hired excellent PR people who are setting her on the right path.
> 
> How is it that she flew commercial and attended a huge NYC yoga class and not one photograph in this day and age when everyone has a phone out.  Unless there are photos?
> 
> Wouldn't it be funny if her PR people just said she flew commercial and attended a huge yoga class, while in reality she did no such thing, but people now think she's being humble.
> 
> Anyone see any photos of her arriving in NY?


do you have your phone while doing yoga? 
I only did yoga a few times, but my phone was in my bag in a locker...

for the flight, maybe she flew business or even first class, doubt one would bother to take a picture in first class. 
and she could enter and exit the aircraft with a private shuttle..


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't have a strong maternal instinct?


wow this is harsh!

some new moms just need some time to breath. it is hard to go from all free and wild, with all the money and time to do what ever you want, to staying at home with a baby sucking on your breast, only sleeping on you, you are the only one to comfort the baby, not enough sleep, never a hot cp of coffee. I loved being at home, could not imagine going on holidays without my kid, but I understand all the moms, who just need a moment to breath


----------



## limom

myown said:


> wow this is harsh!
> 
> some new moms just need some time to breath. it is hard to go from all free and wild, with all the money and time to do what ever you want, to staying at home with a baby sucking on your breast, only sleeping on you, you are the only one to comfort the baby, not enough sleep, never a hot cp of coffee. I loved being at home, could not imagine going on holidays without my kid, but I understand all the moms, who just need a moment to breath


I doubt that Meagan has to struggle like regular mothers to take a shower or have a cup of coffee.
She has a nanny and most likely a nighttime baby nurse. 
With the political unrest in the U.K., it is in very bad taste for her to fly intercontinentally for a tennis match. Surely, they have cable at foggmore.
Plus whatever happened to conserving the environment?
As far as the yoga, until I see pics, it did not happen.
I don’t care how zen the people are, one would have taken a pic at the end of the session at the very least.


----------



## myown

limom said:


> I doubt that Meagan has to struggle like regular mothers to take a shower or have a cup of coffee.
> She has a nanny and most likely a nighttime baby nurse.
> With the political unrest in the U.K., it is in very bad taste for her to fly intercontinentally for a tennis match. Surely, they have cable at foggmore.
> Plus whatever happened to conserving the environment?
> As far as the yoga, until I see pics, it did not happen.
> I don’t care how zen the people are, one would have taken a pic at the end of the session at the very least.


So just because she has a nanny she isn’t allowed to have some me-time?!


----------



## LibbyRuth

There are private people who fly across the ocean for a party, or a meeting.  Meghan flew for a tennis match - big deal.  She was feeling homesick and this gave her an opportunity to be in her home country and with friends who she cares about. She was blasted for not attending Serena's wedding, and claims were made that it's a one way friendship with Serena always supporting her. Now she's shown up several times to support Serena, showing it's a two way friendship. I can understand criticism for private jets. I don't understand criticism for spending a weekend cheering on a friend.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> You are describing a Norland nanny like Maria Borallo who is the Cambridge nanny. She has had that training. I don’t believe it was mentioned if the Sussex nanny is from Norland, or another nanny college or just a woman who has been a nanny for many years and has lots of practical experience.


Considering Harry's rather condescending opinion on The Norland nanny type, I think we can assume the Sussex nanny is not a Norland nanny  

I would have loved a Norland nanny when my minime:s were babies, as my children are quite close in age.


----------



## stanfordmom

gracekelly said:


> I am being generous by saying that she is merching for them because I couldn’t possibly come up with another reason for her to wear a heavy denim shapeless unflattering  (to anyone) dress with a long sweater coat in over 80 F temperatures and NY humidity.
> 
> The Kool Aid brigade should be here shortly to comment.



I guess I’m here with my Kool Aid  because it was unseasonably cool in New York and not 80 degrees on Saturday.


----------



## doloresmia

stanfordmom said:


> I guess I’m here with my Kool Aid  because it was unseasonably cool in New York and not 80 degrees on Saturday.



I wear shirt dresses when I have a food baby and Meghan has a better excuse than i do given she looks like she is still carrying a little extra weight from birth. No shame in that either! I think she looks cute in that outfit and I want one. #notsponsored by jcrew


----------



## daisychainz

She makes so many awful decisions; there is no television in their new expensive cottage? Seems ridiculous to fly for a tennis game in America. I don't understand why she married into the royal family at all. I think she is hoping to ascend to some type of ultra-celebrity icon status and she thought that marriage into the royal family would accomplish that for her. She just comes across as a major phony and social climber, like her friends and family had all said she was. Gosh, that video of Serena's mom ignoring her was just super cringe.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> This comment about others in her yoga class in NYC smiling sweetly was bizarre. Who writes this tripe?:
> The Duchess of Sussex and a friend headed to Modo Yoga, which offers hot yoga classes in an eco-conscious studio, in the West Village neighborhood of N.Y.C. The royal is in New York to see close friend Serena Williams play in the final of the US Open on Saturday.
> Meghan, 38, joined a surprisingly full yoga class of up to 60 people on Friday.
> “_There were lots of sweet, knowing smiles_” among some of the respectful patrons, a source tells PEOPLE.​


That's exactly what made me think this whole yoga thing didn't happen.  Not that 60 plus people, including staff, didn't take a photo... but the way this article was written sounded like BS, which made me question the whole thing. Strike one for her new PR people.


limom said:


> I doubt that Meagan has to struggle like regular mothers to take a shower or have a cup of coffee.
> She has a nanny and most likely a nighttime baby nurse.
> With the political unrest in the U.K., it is in very bad taste for her to fly intercontinentally for a tennis match. Surely, they have cable at foggmore.
> Plus whatever happened to conserving the environment?
> As far as the yoga, until I see pics, it did not happen.
> I don’t care how zen the people are, one would have taken a pic at the end of the session at the very least.


Just to add, not a regular mom who has to find time to take a shower... not only does she have a nanny or two, she has people to do the housework we were desperate to do but couldn't.  Like doing the laundry and we know she has private assistants to help with business like stuff.

We can't compare ourselves to Meg, unless we're talking emotional stuff and that's different.  But not day to day work load stuff. She's in another world for that.


----------



## LittleStar88

Wow... Tough crowd here.

Maybe the Queen is indifferent to whether or not Meghan and Harry come to Balmoral?
Maybe Meghan paid for the flight and other misc travel expenses (hotel, food) from her own bank account (she had money to pay for this stuff before Harry - where is that money now)?

I work with a lot of women who have babies and come back to work within a few months of giving birth, then get assigned some kind of business trip. These trips are part of the job and where I live most households require both parents to work if you want to make it - so business travel for new moms happens (and my company pais to ship mother's milk for those mothers). Many have nannies and carry on with their jobs (leaving the kid for 12+ hours a day to go to work - gasp!) and adult lives while still being outstanding mothers.

Just because she is not locked in a room with the baby 24/7 doesn't make her a bad mother. Just because she wants to take a two-day break and leave her kid safe at home with very capable caretakers doesn't make her any less of a mother.

I am not a mother, but the moms I speak with have no major issue with taking a break from being mom to a drooling infant to have some adult time.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Ellen can see Archie but the British public can not? These two are just beyond PR redemption. Maybe Ellen should start paying their appanage. 
https://people.com/royals/ellen-degeneres-met-baby-archie-meghan-markle-prince-harry-visit/


----------



## LibbyRuth

LittleStar88 said:


> Wow... Tough crowd here.
> 
> Maybe the Queen is indifferent to whether or not Meghan and Harry come to Balmoral?
> Maybe Meghan paid for the flight and other misc travel expenses (hotel, food) from her own bank account (she had money to pay for this stuff before Harry - where is that money now)?
> 
> I work with a lot of women who have babies and come back to work within a few months of giving birth, then get assigned some kind of business trip. These trips are part of the job and where I live most households require both parents to work if you want to make it - so business travel for new moms happens (and my company pais to ship mother's milk for those mothers). Many have nannies and carry on with their jobs (leaving the kid for 12+ hours a day to go to work - gasp!) and adult lives while still being outstanding mothers.
> 
> Just because she is not locked in a room with the baby 24/7 doesn't make her a bad mother. Just because she wants to take a two-day break and leave her kid safe at home with very capable caretakers doesn't make her any less of a mother.
> 
> I am not a mother, but the moms I speak with have no major issue with taking a break from being mom to a drooling infant to have some adult time.


Well said.  IT's also worth noting that she and Harry were dating and she was still on Suits, both of them would make trips across the pond to visit for weekends.  Back then, it was considered romantic, so I'm not sure how now all the sudden it's opulent. A couple of months ago, I flew for a weekend to support some friends riding in a bike race. It's fairly common for people to fly for a weekend across the country to attend a wedding ... or see a friend performing in a play, or any other number of big events that happen in a person's life. Supportive friends and family show up to cheer loved ones on.  It's not opulent - it's kindness.


----------



## lulilu

LittleStar88 said:


> Wow... Tough crowd here.
> 
> Maybe the Queen is indifferent to whether or not Meghan and Harry come to Balmoral?
> Maybe Meghan paid for the flight and other misc travel expenses (hotel, food) from her own bank account (she had money to pay for this stuff before Harry - where is that money now)?
> 
> I work with a lot of women who have babies and come back to work within a few months of giving birth, then get assigned some kind of business trip. These trips are part of the job and where I live most households require both parents to work if you want to make it - so business travel for new moms happens (and my company pais to ship mother's milk for those mothers). Many have nannies and carry on with their jobs (leaving the kid for 12+ hours a day to go to work - gasp!) and adult lives while still being outstanding mothers.
> 
> Just because she is not locked in a room with the baby 24/7 doesn't make her a bad mother. Just because she wants to take a two-day break and leave her kid safe at home with very capable caretakers doesn't make her any less of a mother.
> 
> I am not a mother, but the moms I speak with have no major issue with taking a break from being mom to a drooling infant to have some adult time.



Thank you.


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe Meghan paid for the flight and other misc travel expenses (hotel, food) from her own bank account (she had money to pay for this stuff before Harry - where is that money now)?


Ah, the fairytale of Princess Meghan and her magical unlimited bank account.  She hasn't had an income for two years.  She used to have a mid-range TV salary and some small-time endorsements - much if not most of which would have been eaten up by taxes, agent, manager and her living expenses.  She did not appear to have a particularly frugal lifestyle prior to Harry.

And yet for the past two years, Meghan's fans have had her paying herself for everything from her $500k per year wardrobe to hundreds of thousands of dollars in home renovations.  Anything she's criticized for - "she could have paid for it herself".  Yeah, if she has access to a beanstalk and a sack of gold coins stolen from a giant.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> Ah, the fairytale of Princess Meghan and her magical unlimited bank account.  She hasn't had an income for two years.  She used to have a mid-range TV salary and some small-time endorsements - much if not most of which would have been eaten up by taxes, agent, manager and her living expenses.  She did not appear to have a particularly frugal lifestyle prior to Harry.
> 
> And yet for the past two years, Meghan's fans have had her paying herself for everything from her $500k per year wardrobe to hundreds of thousands of dollars in home renovations.  Anything she's criticized for - "she could have paid for it herself".  Yeah, if she has access to a beanstalk and a sack of gold coins stolen from a giant.



So she doesn't have a couple grand to fly from London to NYC, stay the night, and fly back?

No one here knows what is paid for by taxpayers and what is paid for out of the personal account of Meghan and Harry. Or if Serena paid for it. Or if British taxpayers paid for it. Regardless of who paid, I believe that Harry has a couple grand sitting around somewhere that is his personal money and not taxpayer money. She flew commercial, not private. This woman cannot do anything right?

I just feel like - as much as fans justify whatever it is she is up to - those who don't care for her will stretch and find fault with everything she does. She should just lock herself in a castle, put the baby in a zoo for all to see, and leave it at that.

EDIT - lock her in the zoo, also, since leaving the baby for any extended period makes her a bad mother.


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> Ah, the fairytale of Princess Meghan and her magical unlimited bank account.  She hasn't had an income for two years.  She used to have a mid-range TV salary and some small-time endorsements - much if not most of which would have been eaten up by taxes, agent, manager and her living expenses.  She did not appear to have a particularly frugal lifestyle prior to Harry.
> 
> And yet for the past two years, Meghan's fans have had her paying herself for everything from her $500k per year wardrobe to hundreds of thousands of dollars in home renovations.  Anything she's criticized for - "she could have paid for it herself".  Yeah, if she has access to a beanstalk and a sack of gold coins stolen from a giant.


Maybe you know, or maybe someone else does, but wouldn't she still get royalty payments for Suits? Since it had 9 years of airdates and is now on Netflix she would be entitled to all that money, wouldn't she? If the show replays on various networks and stuff? And any other fluff films she might have done, like Hallmark, if they show it again she benefits monetarily? Maybe she gives that up if she becomes a citizen of the UK. I have no idea.


----------



## daisychainz

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ellen can see Archie but the British public can not? These two are just beyond PR redemption. Maybe Ellen should start paying their appanage.
> https://people.com/royals/ellen-degeneres-met-baby-archie-meghan-markle-prince-harry-visit/


I remember when Ellen defended her a few weeks ago for flying private and I was like, that's a strange person to defend her. Now it all makes sense, lol. "They want to work on conservation work together?" Ellen, always been known for her conservation efforts here in the US!


----------



## Gal4Dior

This whole “Celebrities to Harry and Meghan’s rescue” is not a good look. How incredibly out of touch is it for their celebrity friends to school the rest of us plebes about what bullying is. Poor duke and Duchess...sheesh!

I used to enjoy Ellen, but this has really turned me off to her.


----------



## MarieCurie

redney said:


> No, not at all. It's nice for a new mom to get away for a little bit. Believe me I looked forward to a trip or outing with friends or by myself as a mom with an infant at home. We know the baby has a caregiver + his father at home, so why not?
> 
> I took a week long international business trip solo when I had an infant at home, and boy was it refreshing to be *myself* and not just the MOM person. Nice not to have any childcare responsibilities for a couple of days in a hotel and in work meetings. I also had the opportunity to take 2 weekend trips with friends (one for a bday celebration and one for a regular ole friends meet up) before my child turned 1.
> 
> Am I a horrible mother with no maternal instincts too?
> 
> Edited to add that I was one of those new moms with a night nurse and housekeeper
> 
> Is this yet another thing to try to drag her for? Serious question...


Thank you for making me feel human/normal. I had planned on going back to work when my baby was 8 weeks but I was done by the 4th week and went back when she was 6 weeks to the protests of my mom and mom-in-law but I was just over it. It felt good and "refreshing" to be back at work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

I really have no problem with them. Not a big fan but they are interesting. As I have said, I am more interested in Archie. lol
But, the problem is optics. How things look, in the day and age, matters. Image and perception mean something. I think they could do a much better job handling these things. But, if they do not care, why should I? Unless the Queen has issue with them (she is their boss, right?), then nothing has to change. Yes, the press/tabloids may have a lot to say but, at the end of the day, they and we don't matter.
If Harry, Archie and Meghan are happy in their family, cool. I am sure they could not care any less what strangers have to say about their way of life.


----------



## threadbender

MarieCurie said:


> Thank you for making me feel human/normal. I had planned on going back to work when my baby was 8 weeks but I was done by the 4th week and went back when she was 6 weeks to the protests of my mom and mom-in-law but I was just over it. It felt good and "refreshing" to be back at work.


I wish I had been like that! When I had my son, I went back after 9 weeks and cried every day for weeks!


----------



## hellosunshine

LittleStar88 said:


> Wow... Tough crowd here.
> 
> Maybe the Queen is indifferent to whether or not Meghan and Harry come to Balmoral?



Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the Sussexes live at Windsor now where the Queen also resides? They probably see her all the time...


----------



## threadbender

I thought they lived at Frogmore cottage. But, I don't stay on top of it all.


----------



## hellosunshine

marthastoo said:


> Of course Meghan would be "crowned" biggest social climber EVAH.  By definition, she is the top of the social pecking order as a woman can be in the UK (since Charles and William are already taken).



I notice people here often ascribe a negative tone to the term social-climbing, but I personally believe it's only a bad thing if you're close-minded to it's benefits. For many, it's just networking - one of the most underrated skills we all wish we had. The opposite of networking is well...not working lol.


----------



## hellosunshine

threadbender said:


> I thought they lived at Frogmore cottage. But, I don't stay on top of it all.



Frogmore Cottage is on the Windsor Castle grounds.


----------



## threadbender

hellosunshine said:


> Frogmore Cottage is on the Windsor Castle grounds.


See? I really don't keep up on things. I thought when you said Windsor, I thought you meant in the castle with the Queen. lol Sorry


----------



## hellosunshine

threadbender said:


> See? I really don't keep up on things. I thought when you said Windsor, I thought you meant in the castle with the Queen. lol Sorry



Haha, totally understandable and no need to apologize.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Ah, the fairytale of Princess Meghan and her magical unlimited bank account.  She hasn't had an income for two years.  She used to have a mid-range TV salary and some small-time endorsements - much if not most of which would have been eaten up by taxes, agent, manager and her living expenses.  She did not appear to have a particularly frugal lifestyle prior to Harry.
> 
> And yet for the past two years, Meghan's fans have had her paying herself for everything from her $500k per year wardrobe to hundreds of thousands of dollars in home renovations.  Anything she's criticized for - "she could have paid for it herself".  Yeah, if she has access to a beanstalk and a sack of gold coins stolen from a giant.


Totally agree -- but why is it that people talk about the funds Harry gets from his father and gifts from the Queen, yet it seems he never dips into his multi-million inheritance from his mother.

The money just sits in his account graining interest? Does he ever use his own money I wonder?

Mentioning this here because Meg should have access to H's bank account for additional shopping I should think.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LVSistinaMM said:


> I used to enjoy Ellen, but this has really turned me off to her.



Rumors have been abound for a long time about her being not-so-nice, so I certainly wouldn't want her coming to my side.


----------



## gracekelly

Last minute round trip fare from London to NY first class runs 10k+   Pretty steep.


----------



## hellosunshine

Ellen shares details about her visit w/ Meghan, Harry, and little Archie @0:50.

“They are two of the most compassionate people, they’re doing so much good for the world."
"I got to hold little Archie, I fed Archie.”


----------



## gracekelly

stanfordmom said:


> I guess I’m here with my Kool Aid  because it was unseasonably cool in New York and not 80 degrees on Saturday.


Inside the Ashe Stadium is always warmer. They tried to fix the AC but not too successful.  It was close to 90 F in there on Saturday


----------



## limom

myown said:


> So just because she has a nanny she isn’t allowed to have some me-time?!


Me time? Did not she just come back from two vacation back to back?
I am happy that I am not British, I would be pissed that I pay taxes to support lazy people.
Vive la guillotine!j/k


----------



## Welltraveled!

Truthfully we don’t know if Archie was with her or not.  Everyone is assuming She  traveled  without her baby.  



Jayne1 said:


> More like a few days


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Last minute round trip fare from London to NY first class runs 10k+   Pretty steep.



Did she fly first class? Did she buy last-minute? Did she possibly use air miles for it or credit from unused previous tickets? Did Serena buy it? Was it run through the tax money from the people or did she pay from her own account or from Harry's personal funds?

FWIW: Still cheaper and more environmentally-friendly than private jet.

Insert beating a dead horse emoji here


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> Inside the Ashe Stadium is always warmer. They tried to fix the AC but not too successful.  It was close to 90 F in there on Saturday



Well, at the end of the day, Meghan wasn't sweating. She looked comfortable and that's all that matters.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Did she fly first class? Did she buy last-minute? Did she possibly use air miles for it or credit from unused previous tickets? Did Serena buy it? Was it run through the tax money from the people or did she pay from her own account or from Harry's personal funds?
> 
> FWIW: Still cheaper and more environmentally-friendly than private jet.
> 
> Insert beating a dead horse emoji here


Just correcting the fare amount. It wasn’t 2k. All the rest is coming from you.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Well, at the end of the day, Meghan wasn't sweating. She looked comfortable and that's all that matters.


Did I say anything about her?  Just stating temps inside a notoriously hot stadium.


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> See? I really don't keep up on things. I thought when you said Windsor, I thought you meant in the castle with the Queen. lol Sorry



Windsor Castle is 1:9 miles from Frogmore cottage. Since this was servants quarters it is a nice walk in good weather or  a crappy walk in the rain at the end of a long work day. I think I would take a bicycle


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> I wish I had been like that! When I had my son, I went back after 9 weeks and cried every day for weeks!


Although some seem to prefer it, I feel very sorry for the many moms (and dads) who have to go back to work so early in the US (and other parts of the world), when they have babies. I would have cried too (I'd been a wreck), threadbender. Things in many parts of Europe are certainly different. (For now.)

But I have to say, that if the baby's safe and content, with a trusted person to care for the child, and mom and dad need to work- for whatever reason be it keeping up a career, finances- that's their business. Including Meghan's  

There's so much apparently never ending more to side-eye and eye-roll at her and her hubby for.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Just correcting the fare amount. It wasn’t 2k. All the rest is coming from you.



Was it confirmed that she flew first class at $10k? Just curious - I haven't been able to keep up with what is speculation and gossip and what is fact.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Was it confirmed that she flew first class at $10k? Just curious - I haven't been able to keep up with what is speculation and gossip and what is fact.


Business is 8k plus. You pick. Doubt it was an economy fare. The report was that she flew commercial and these are the fares.


----------



## limom

Welltraveled! said:


> Truthfully we don’t know if Archie was with her or not.  Everyone is assuming She  traveled  without her baby.[/QUOTE
> Great point. For all we know she was doing baby yoga with Archie.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Well, at the end of the day, Meghan wasn't sweating. She looked comfortable and that's all that matters.


Is your avatar Meghan?


----------



## hellosunshine

daisychainz said:


> Maybe you know, or maybe someone else does, but wouldn't she still get royalty payments for Suits? Since it had 9 years of airdates and is now on Netflix she would be entitled to all that money, wouldn't she? If the show replays on various networks and stuff? And any other fluff films she might have done, like Hallmark, if they show it again she benefits monetarily? Maybe she gives that up if she becomes a citizen of the UK. I have no idea.



Yes, she gets royalities. That's how hollyweird works. Also, because of her present popularity, Hallmark channel has been replaying a lot of her previous films with the channel but I digress.

Btw, I want to clarify that Meghan used to make $50,000 per episode on Suits or $450,000 yearly. She also earned another income from a Montreal-based clothing store called Reitmans for another six-figure salary plus a seven-figure salary sum from her films. 
https://fortune.com/2017/11/27/prince-harry-meghan-markle-net-worth/
https://www.investopedia.com/insigh...kles-finances-change-after-she-marries-harry/


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Business is 8k plus. You pick. Doubt it was an economy fare. The report was that she flew commercial and these are the fares.


The prices you quoted are the typical prices I've seen for fares.

But I'm not quite sure how this conversation got diverted into a "who is paying" conversation.  Few, if anyone, are discussing the expense of the trip.  The tabloids are not on a "Meghan is spending taxpayer money" tear.  This was a private trip and I don't see anybody saying Meghan's never allowed to go on personal trips to see her friends, and therefore the cost is her own concern.

I just think it's silly for fans to keep pretending that a whole long list of massive expenditures (like her $75k engagement portrait dress)  are going against what little, if any, money Meghan has leftover from when she worked.  Residuals and royalties are minor amounts.   

If I were Meghan, I would certainly be keeping the money I brought with me into the marriage safely in my own account.  She's not allowed to work, she should have her expenses paid for.


----------



## stanfordmom

gracekelly said:


> Inside the Ashe Stadium is always warmer. They tried to fix the AC but not too successful.  It was close to 90 F in there on Saturday



Since it was an unusually cool day and almost everyone sitting around Megan had long sleeves in the photos below I didn’t give the extra layer much thought. But my apologies it sounds like you were there so it must have been quite hot. I guess you could have used the kool aid then  (at the risk of aging myself with that commercial reference)! 

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-cheers-serena-williams-us-open-final-new-york/


----------



## gracekelly

stanfordmom said:


> Since it was an unusually cool day and almost everyone sitting around Megan had long sleeves in the photos below I didn’t give the extra layer much thought. But my apologies it sounds like you were there so it must have been quite hot. I guess you could have used the kool aid then  (at the risk of aging myself with that commercial reference)!
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-cheers-serena-williams-us-open-final-new-york/


 Lol!  Kool Aid is too sweet for me I leave that drink for the sugars


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ellen can see Archie but the British public can not? These two are just beyond PR redemption. Maybe Ellen should start paying their appanage.
> https://people.com/royals/ellen-degeneres-met-baby-archie-meghan-markle-prince-harry-visit/



You know, Ellen should have really kept her mouth shut about this because many people are already pissed off that they are not seeing any pictures of Archie .. NOT a good PR event whatsoever!



hellosunshine said:


> I notice people here often ascribe a negative tone to the term social-climbing, but I personally believe it's only a bad thing if you're close-minded to it's benefits. For many, it's just networking - one of the most underrated skills we all wish we had. The opposite of networking is well...not working lol.


I totally disagree .. what I have seen both in Corporate America and in those that 'became famous' .. is that these folks HAVE AN AGENDA .. and that is to either become famous -OR- move up that ladder AT THE EXPENSE of others.  In Corporate America, it has been someone (and sad to say it's oftentimes female colleagues) who throws others under the bus the minute they deem that person no longer 'useful' to them (and in some other cases - it's flat-out sleeping with the boss).  With the others wanting to become famous, the 'user' outright steals others ideas and say that they are their own .. and just uses those folks (stomping & climbing) .. then once no longer useful, they GHOST them.  I'm pretty good at judging people, and when I would see a 'social-climber', I could immediately tell .. and oftentimes, would NOT even give them the opportunity to 'USE' me .. because I worked extremely hard and DID NOT use others to move up the ladder.  As much as I loathe Piers Morgan, some things he said .. well, kind of ringed true for someone who is oftentimes called a 'social-climber'!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> You know, Ellen should have really kept her mouth shut about this because many people are already pissed off that they are not seeing any pictures of Archie .. NOT a good PR event whatsoever!
> 
> 
> I totally disagree .. what I have seen both in Corporate America and in those that 'became famous' .. is that these folks HAVE AN AGENDA .. and that is to either become famous -OR- move up that ladder AT THE EXPENSE of others.  In Corporate America, it has been someone (and sad to say it's oftentimes female colleagues) who throughs others under the bus the minute they deem that person no longer 'useful' to them (and in some other cases - it's flat-out sleeping with the boss).  With the others wanting to become famous, the 'user' outright steals others ideas and say that they are their own .. and just stomp and climb on anyone who can be useful and then GHOST them the minute that person is no longer useful.  I'm pretty good at judging people, and when I would see a 'social-climber', I could immediately tell .. and oftentimes, would even give them the opportunity to 'USE' me .. because I worked extremely hard and DID NOT use others to move up the ladder.  As much as I loathe Piers Morgan, some things he said .. well, kind of ringed true for someone who is oftentimes called a 'social-climber'!



+1

I have seen some of the WORST behavior from VP and above execs - especially when they are pushing their own trajectory upwards. 

I don't blame Meghan for her hustle to level up. I feel like her line of work at the time required it. But I don't think she shat on anyone in the process of her upward movement.

She had an agenda - good for her in succeeding without seemingly destroying people in the process.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> +1
> 
> I have seen some of the WORST behavior from VP and above execs - especially when they are pushing their own trajectory upwards.
> 
> I don't blame Meghan for her hustle to level up. I feel like her line of work at the time required it. But I don't think she shat on anyone in the process of her upward movement.
> 
> She had an agenda - good for her in succeeding without seemingly destroying people in the process.


Look, I get the hustle .. and I do hope that she didn't 'hurt' people on her climb, but even 'ghosting' folks is not a nice behavior and she certainly did that to my friend's son after their play was done and she realized that she was not going to be introduced to any famous musicians .. he WAS hurt by that behavior because as he told me "they had gotten close".  I know the 1 time it happened to me, my feelings were very hurt as well .. it's not fun being used!


----------



## Jayne1

I never cared for Ellen, well her show that is, but now I feel this speech about spending time with the royals comes across as more PR for some reason.


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> Look, I get the hustle .. and I do hope that she didn't 'hurt' people on her climb, but even 'ghosting' folks is not a nice behavior and she certainly did that to my friend's son after their play was done and she realized that she was not going to be introduced to any famous musicians .. he WAS hurt by that behavior because as he told me "they had gotten close".  I know the 1 time it happened to me, my feelings were very hurt as well .. it's not fun being used!


I am so sorry for the young man. He, unfortunately, learned a hard lesson. People are not always who you think they are. I hope he has mostly fond memories of the experience, though.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Look, I get the hustle .. and I do hope that she didn't 'hurt' people on her climb, but even 'ghosting' folks is not a nice behavior and she certainly did that to my friend's son after their play was done and she realized that she was not going to be introduced to any famous musicians .. he WAS hurt by that behavior because as he told me "they had gotten close".  I know the 1 time it happened to me, my feelings were very hurt as well .. it's not fun being used!



Ouch. I am sorry for you and your friend. 

I guess I am just so much of an introvert that I don't take people very seriously and don't notice when people leave me alone. Sucks to open up and get excited about a new friendship only to have them vanish, though..


----------



## threadbender

Jayne1 said:


> nm


I think it may be as simple as being a mid-level Royal is not enough. She could want the celebrity and fame of Diana, or similar. And, maybe not. lol But, that is what it looks like to me.


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> The prices you quoted are the typical prices I've seen for fares.
> 
> But I'm not quite sure how this conversation got diverted into a "who is paying" conversation.  Few, if anyone, are discussing the expense of the trip.  The tabloids are not on a "Meghan is spending taxpayer money" tear.  This was a private trip and I don't see anybody saying Meghan's never allowed to go on personal trips to see her friends, and therefore the cost is her own concern.
> 
> I just think it's silly for fans to keep pretending that a whole long list of massive expenditures (like her $75k engagement portrait dress)  are going against what little, if any, money Meghan has leftover from when she worked.  Residuals and royalties are minor amounts.
> 
> If I were Meghan, I would certainly be keeping the money I brought with me into the marriage safely in my own account.  She's not allowed to work, she should have her expenses paid for.



It’s about as silly as people saying she can’t afford... because I don’t believe Meghan has money from her critics. We don’t know how much her or Harry net worth. How much residual income from Suits, advertisements like being an Audi spokesperson, her clothing line that was in it’s 2nd season, her income from Tig, or even an investment she made. How much Harry is actually worth from his mother and the Queen Mother.

We are entitled to our POV if you want to believe she is broke and living beyond her means even without proof what her means are it is fine. But show the same respect for others.


----------



## gracekelly

Social climbing in English society is so looked down upon. How else can you maintain the class system lol! While things may have eased up, certain things will never change and you will get pegged. Your voice, your accent, dress hair etc. Tatler magazine definitely wants  to maintain the system   The magazine is all about society weddings and upper class match ups.  The article placing MM at the top of the greasy pole is just showing the spite that the people in Harry’s set have for her. The not adhering to the accepted seating at the dining table is just one aspect of this. This is a magazine that supports all aspects of the class system and supports the monarchy. All the comments that MM will modernize the monarchy are complete anathema to these folks and I think mostly because she is an American. They find it insulting that an American should be the one to do it as opposed to one of their own. They feel that their territory has been invaded by an arriviste from across the pond and they are fighting back. If the Sussex duo had settled quietly in and done everything that a Tatler reader would expect, then they would have left her alone.
Many years ago one of the Queen’s first cousins with a lofty title married a legal secretary from a simple, but respectable background. You never heard a peep out of her and she was rarely photographed. That is what the aforementioned folks were looking for in MM. 

These are just my observations.


----------



## threadbender

I have no problem with how she, or Harry, are paying for things. It is not my business, obviously.
As I said before, it is the optics, how her actions are perceived. Right now, she is in the center of attention. Eventually, that will stop. She and Harry will be fine.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Social climbing in English society is so looked down upon. How else can you maintain the class system lol! While things may have eased up, certain things will never change and you will get pegged. Your voice, your accent, dress hair etc. Tatler magazine definitely wants  to maintain the system   The magazine is all about society weddings and upper class match ups.  The article placing MM at the top of the greasy pole is just showing the spite that the people in Harry’s set have for her. The not adhering to the accepted seating at the dining table is just one aspect of this. This is a magazine that supports all aspects of the class system and supports the monarchy. All the comments that MM will modernize the monarchy are complete anathema to these folks and I think mostly because she is an American. They find it insulting that an American should be the one to do it as opposed to one of their own. They feel that their territory has been invaded by an arriviste from across the pond and they are fighting back. If the Sussex duo had settled quietly in and done everything that a Tatler reader would expect, then they would have left her alone.
> Many years ago one of the Queen’s first cousins with a lofty title married a legal secretary from a simple, but respectable background. You never heard a peep out of her and she was rarely photographed. That is what the aforementioned folks were looking for in MM.
> 
> These are just my observations.


I think your observations are correct, spot on


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> I have no problem with how she, or Harry, are paying for things. It is not my business, obviously.
> As I said before, it is the optics, how her actions are perceived. Right now, she is in the center of attention. Eventually, that will stop. She and Harry will be fine.


Except hiring a big PR Firm is usually done to keep your name out there and high profile. I think a lot depends upon how the Queen and Charles drive the opinion bus


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Business is 8k plus. You pick. Doubt it was an economy fare. The report was that she flew commercial and these are the fares.


I used to fly B-Class (via British Airways) when I was going back & forth from Boston to London .. it IS NOT cheap, even when a Company has a Corporate Account.  I'm assuming that Meghan flew First-Class and if you book late, oh-boy .. it's wicked pricey!


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> We are entitled to our POV if you want to believe she is broke and living beyond her means even without proof what her means are it is fine. But show the same respect for others.


Please don't mischaracterize my opinions.  I never said she was "broke and living beyond her means".

You seem to think the simple act of disagreeing with you shows a lack of respect.  I stated my case and how arrived at my conclusions.  If you are offended by reading it, put me on Ignore.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> Except hiring a big PR Firm is usually done to keep your name out there and high profile. I think a lot depends upon how the Queen and Charles drive the opinion bus


True. I guess what I mean is they will determine if they need to change their behavior or not. If they do become more "boring", the press may focus on different stories. I can see the negativity and celebrity hobnobbing getting old after awhile. 
If the PR firm is to create more buzz, well, then we know what the deal is. lol If it is to figure out a way to minimize the "outrage" etc, then we will see that too. I just don't see Meghan listening to most anyone. And, I see Harry as probably only listening to Meghan. The Queen may be the exception.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> .. and alas, Serena lost!  Superstitions .. maybe Meghan should have stayed in the UK!



Meghan has watched Serena play at the US Open in 2012, 2013, 2014...all times Serena has won. There is no superstitions. Serena just hasn't been playing her best after the birth of her daughter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan has watched Serena play at the US Open in 2012, 2013, 2014...all times Serena has won. There is no superstitions. Serena just hasn't been playing her best after the birth of her daughter.
> 
> View attachment 4536614


I was actually (somewhat) quoting what a lot of the British press were noting; I should have been more clear about that.  I agree with you, its been tough for Serena after the birth of her daughter .. I give her total props for continuing and I do hope that she gets to win some more grand slams!!!


----------



## hellosunshine

There's some weird politics surrounding this social-climbing title given to Meghan by Tatler Magazine. First of all, you'd think Kate's great friend over at Tatler would bestow such a title on Kate considering she nabbed the future king, right? Secondly, on Tatler's Instagram page..they referred to Meghan as being "underprivileged" and rose to the top. Hm, so Meghan is far from underprivileged. She's had a private school education her whole life. Before Harry, she had a successful acting career and engaged in a variety of charity work for the benefit of others. I don't understand the implication that she came from nothing?!

Either way, I don't consider the title a negative.


----------



## limom

Serena loosing has nothing to do with Meaghan. She is approaching. 40 and even the GOAT has her limits.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> There's some weird politics surrounding this social-climbing title given to Meghan by Tatler Magazine. First of all, you'd think Kate's great friend over at Tatler would bestow such a title on Kate considering she nabbed the future king, right? Secondly, on Tatler's Instagram page..they referred to Meghan as being "underprivileged" and rose to the top. Hm, so Meghan is far from underprivileged. She's had a private school education her whole life. Before Harry, she had a successful acting career and engaged in a variety of charity work for the benefit of others. I don't understand the implication that she came from nothing?!
> 
> Either way, I don't consider the title a negative.


oh, being a social climber is a positive thing? OK


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> oh, being a social climber is a positive thing? OK



Yes, as I've stated in my post #10594.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, as I've stated in my post #10594.


if you want to say that she is networking and not a social climber, then that's your opinion.  but to say that being  a social climber is positive, that is not generally accepted.  it's widely considered to be negative


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> The prices you quoted are the typical prices I've seen for fares.
> 
> But I'm not quite sure how this conversation got diverted into a "who is paying" conversation.  Few, if anyone, are discussing the expense of the trip.  The tabloids are not on a "Meghan is spending taxpayer money" tear.  This was a private trip and I don't see anybody saying Meghan's never allowed to go on personal trips to see her friends, and therefore the cost is her own concern.
> 
> I just think it's silly for fans to keep pretending that a whole long list of massive expenditures (like her $75k engagement portrait dress)  are going against what little, if any, money Meghan has leftover from when she worked.  Residuals and royalties are minor amounts.
> 
> If I were Meghan, I would certainly be keeping the money I brought with me into the marriage safely in my own account.  She's not allowed to work, she should have her expenses paid for.



I just think it's silly for fans to keep pretending that a whole long list of massive expenditures (like her $75k engagement portrait dress) are going against what little, if any, money Meghan has leftover from when she worked. Residuals and royalties are minor amounts. 

That is the part of your post I was specifically responding too.



Flatsy said:


> Please don't mischaracterize my opinions.  I never said she was "broke and living beyond her means".
> 
> You seem to think the simple act of disagreeing with you shows a lack of respect.  I stated my case and how arrived at my conclusions.  If you are offended by reading it, put me on Ignore.



You may want to follow your own advice.


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> if you want to say that she is networking and not a social climber, then that's your opinion.  but to say that being  a social climber is positive, that is not generally accepted.  it's widely considered to be negative



It's all about perspective. Co-mingling, networking, or placing yourself in situations where you can level up in life is not something to be ashamed of. I think it's smart. Hell, even rich people do it to become even MORE rich/powerful. Look at Nicky Hilton marrying into and becoming a Rothschild.


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


> There's some weird politics surrounding this social-climbing title given to Meghan by Tatler Magazine. First of all, you'd think Kate's great friend over at Tatler would bestow such a title on Kate considering she nabbed the future king, right? Secondly, on Tatler's Instagram page..they referred to Meghan as being "underprivileged" and rose to the top. Hm, so Meghan is far from underprivileged. She's had a private school education her whole life. Before Harry, she had a successful acting career and engaged in a variety of charity work for the benefit of others. I don't understand the implication that she came from nothing?!
> 
> Either way, I don't consider the title a negative.



Maybe Tatler considers anything below the BRF/their social circle as being _underprivileged_


----------



## LittleStar88

Social climber, networking, co-mingling, rubbing elbows... All the same. The difference is in how you execute it and what you do with it once you start to move up.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> There's some weird politics surrounding this social-climbing title given to Meghan by Tatler Magazine. First of all, you'd think Kate's great friend over at Tatler would bestow such a title on Kate considering she nabbed the future king, right? Secondly, on Tatler's Instagram page..they referred to Meghan as being "underprivileged" and rose to the top. Hm, so Meghan is far from underprivileged. She's had a private school education her whole life. Before Harry, she had a successful acting career and engaged in a variety of charity work for the benefit of others. I don't understand the implication that she came from nothing?!
> 
> Either way, I don't consider the title a negative.



This is the height of snark from them. Making  her lower thatn she was results in making her climb all the more greater. This is just snob journalism and pandering to their readership. BTW a few years ago they weren’t t any kinder to Kate.  One of the truly interesting aspects of English society is where your family money comes from.   Obviously inherited is the best. If money came from trade or business it was considered déclassé and that is what happened with the Middletons.  There  were not sufficient generations to cleanse the stain of their entrepreneurial success  so when William and Kate became a couple all the claws came out.  They used to make fun of Kate’s mother and her job as a flight attendant.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> It's all about perspective. Co-mingling, networking, or placing yourself in situations where you can level up in life is not something to be ashamed of. I think it's smart. Hell, even rich people do it to become even MORE rich/powerful. Look at Nicky Hilton marrying into and becoming a Rothschild.


I don’t think  Nicky Hilton qualifies as a social climber.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe Tatler considers anything below the BRF/their social circle as being _underprivileged_


HaHa!  I think you are on the right track!


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think  Nicky Hilton qualifies as a social climber.



I think she counts because she married into old money. Her status is certainly higher now that she's married a Rothschild.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> I think she counts because she married into old money. Her status is certainly higher now that she's married a Rothschild.


Well true that the Rothschild money is older, and you could say she married “up” but she hardly was the daughter is a supermarket clerk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think  Nicky Hilton qualifies as a social climber.



From a US standpoint, I didn't think Nicki Hilton had any climbing to do and probably ran in some of the same circles as people with more money and status.

Now that you mention it, I can imagine the desire to go onward and upward, even if you are already pretty close to the top.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> Well true that the Rothschild money is older, and you could say she married “up” but she hardly was the daughter is a supermarket clerk.



No one is implying that she's the daughter of a supermarket clerk. But as you've said, money from trade or business (Hilton Hotels) is considered déclassé...


----------



## hellosunshine

LittleStar88 said:


> Now that you mention it, I can imagine the desire to go onward and upward, even if you are already pretty close to the top.



Yes, no matter where you stand in society whether it's socially or financially..if there's a chance to level up...anyone with a sane mind would take the opportunity.  I don't think it's anything to be ashamed of.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> No one is implying that she's the daughter of a supermarket clerk. But as you've said, money from trade or business (Hilton Hotels) is considered déclassé...


 
I said that was true in the opinion of the British upper classes of new money. The Middletons had made their fortune 5 Minutes ago according to their standards. . I don’t think that being an heiress to the Hilton Hotel empire qualifies in this instance. She grew up very privileged and as noted by @LittleStar88 she ran in the same social circles.


----------



## stanfordmom

From a "society" standpoint the Rothschilds are definitely a step up from the Hiltons.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> I said that was true in the opinion of the British upper classes of new money. The Middletons had made their fortune 5 Minutes ago according to their standards. . I don’t think that being an heiress to the Hilton Hotel empire qualifies in this instance. She grew up very privileged and as noted by @LittleStar88 she ran in the same social circles.



I disagree. The Hiltons are American Royalty trash which is why Paris, Nicky, Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Nicole Richie, and the god-awful Kardashians all partied and hang out w/ each other.

Anyways, this thread needs to circle back to staying on topic, so let's agree to disagree.


----------



## gracekelly

Wow!  Trash?  Never put her the same category as those people. You can’t pick your relatives as Meghan has learned

Sadly I could say that the Queen of England was the Queen of England and you would find a way to disagree.   Ignore my posts


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


> Paris, Nicky, Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Nicole Richie, and the god-awful Kardashians all partied and hang out w/ each other.



I feel this sudden urge to put on a Juicy track suit...

I think Kim Kardashian was only invited along back then to fetch stuff for Paris and do her bidding (personal assistant).


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  Trash?  Never put her the same category as those people. You can’t pick your relatives as Meghan has learned
> 
> Sadly I could say that the Queen of England was the Queen of England and you would find a way to disagree.   Ignore my posts


Actually, there isn't a Queen of England as such.... Im off to hide now, lol


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Actually, there isn't a Queen of England as such.... Im off to hide now, lol


Yes but you can say that haha!


----------



## limom

hellosunshine said:


> No one is implying that she's the daughter of a supermarket clerk. But as you've said, money from trade or business (Hilton Hotels) is considered déclassé...


Do you know where the Rothschild’s money come from?
One would think that we are in the 1800 and not the 2019.
This conversation is funny to me.


----------



## hellosunshine

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not sure (I hope not, anyway) that this is coming from the Cambridges.


----------



## marthastoo

I'm confused about why some people on this thread don't believe Meghan attended a yoga class.  1.) Why is that something to lie about and 2.) is going to a yoga class something desirable?  I'm pretty sure she does yoga regularly.  If she did or didn't go to yoga ... who cares?  Do some people just think she lies about everything, is that it?  I'm confused.


----------



## LittleStar88

I guess that gossip would explain why Harry and Meghan have hired the PR firm... ??

If William is truly behind this, how does Harry not know/suspect?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

marthastoo said:


> I'm confused about why some people on this thread don't believe Meghan attended a yoga class.  1.) Why is that something to lie about and 2.) is going to a yoga class something desirable?  I'm pretty sure she does yoga regularly.  If she did or didn't go to yoga ... who cares?  Do some people just think she lies about everything, is that it?  I'm confused.


I believe she went. But honestly, whoever wrote the saccharine text on it needs to put the brakes on. It's oversell.

I think her PR go overboard as a reaction to the negative stories, but they need to reign it in.

They need to report on her activities without the flowery prose. 

I like Meghan and Harry but whoever is doing their PR at the moment needs to reassess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

marthastoo said:


> I'm confused about why some people on this thread don't believe Meghan attended a yoga class.  1.) Why is that something to lie about and 2.) is going to a yoga class something desirable?  I'm pretty sure she does yoga regularly.  If she did or didn't go to yoga ... who cares?  Do some people just think she lies about everything, is that it?  I'm confused.



Because they literally just lied about going to a pub? They do this to themselves.


----------



## caramelize126

gracekelly said:


> Social climbing in English society is so looked down upon. How else can you maintain the class system lol! While things may have eased up, certain things will never change and you will get pegged. Your voice, your accent, dress hair etc. Tatler magazaine definitely wants  to maintain the system   The magazine is all about society weddings and upper class match ups.  The article placing MM at the top of the greasy pole is just showing the spite that the people in Harry’s set have for her. The not adhering to the accepted seating at the dining table is just one aspect of this. This is a magazine that supports all aspects of the class system and supports the monarchy. *All the comments that MM will modernize the monarchy are complete anathema to these folks and I think mostly because she is an American. They find it insulting that an American should be the one to do it as opposed to one of their own. They feel that their territory has been invaded by an arriviste from across the pond and they are fighting back. If the Sussex duo had settled quietly in and done everything that a Tatler reader would expect, then they would have left her alone.
> Many years ago one of the Queen’s first cousins with a lofty title married a legal secretary from a simple, but respectable background. You never heard a peep out of her and she was rarely photographed. That is what the aforementioned folks were looking for in MM. *
> 
> These are just my observations.



THIS! They should've done as Charles did after he married Camilla. They were very conscious of not shoving her down people's throats. She was HATED by the British, but the public's perception of Camilla has greatly improved over the years. Slow and steady wins the race. They shouldve just laid low when they realized that the media was turning on them instead of going on this crazy PR crusade.



threadbender said:


> I have no problem with how she, or Harry, are paying for things. It is not my business, obviously.
> As I said before, it is the optics, how her actions are perceived. Right now, she is in the center of attention. Eventually, that will stop. She and Harry will be fine.



I agree. In the light of the renewed brexit drama, people are now more than ever questioning the utility of the monarchy. Optics are everything and Meghan and Harry wanting to lead their fabulous celebrity lives are just giving anti-monarchists more ammunition. They are not "modernizing" the monarchy as much as they are contributing to its downfall.

But maybe they dont care. It does seem like Meghan and her American PR/ business team are more concerned with her *global* image rather than what the British think.  Its very strange.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Putting The topic of Meghan aside,  it’s not the social climbing/networking that people have issues with.   It’s the tactics that used to climb that ladder that people have issues with.

I’ve seen social climbers/networkers become successful without pulling anyone else down.  



sdkitty said:


> if you want to say that she is networking and not a social climber, then that's your opinion.  but to say that being  a social climber is positive, that is not generally accepted.  it's widely considered to be negative


----------



## Welltraveled!

I didn’t know they said that about Kate.  I’m going to look that up.  Thanks 



gracekelly said:


> This is the height of snark from them. Making  her lower thatn she was results in making her climb all the more greater. This is just snob journalism and pandering to their readership. BTW a few years ago they weren’t t any kinder to Kate.  One of the truly interesting aspects of English society is where your family money comes from.   Obviously inherited is the best. If money came from trade or business it was considered déclassé and that is what happened with the Middletons.  There  were not sufficient generations to cleanse the stain of their entrepreneurial success  so when William and Kate became a couple all the claws came out.  They used to make fun of Kate’s mother and her job as a flight attendant.


----------



## caramelize126

Welltraveled! said:


> Putting The topic of Meghan aside,  it’s not the social climbing/networking that people have issues with.   It’s the tactics that used to climb that ladder that people have issues with.
> 
> I’ve seen social climbers/networkers become successful without pulling anyone else down.



This is true. Meghan wasnt a huge successful A-list actress before meeting Harry and there are plenty who think that she is stepping on the monarchy in her quest for fame. Whether the Palace is treading carefully because of Andrew or bc they have never dealt with anything quite like this, I'm not sure. But last two women to get out of hand ( Fergie, Diana) were eventually cut loose. Diana was able to gain the public's support, but I do not believe Meghan has the same clout to be able to achieve that.


----------



## Welltraveled!

But that’s just it, A “social climber” is usually strategic about their decisions.  Stepping on the BRF, would be detrimental to her family.  She needs the relationship with them to accomplish their goals and keep their children well connected. 

As of right now, I believe Charles/Queen are signing off on some of their activities.  Which is why I don’t think Charles/Queen are entirely bothered by what they do.  However negative press isnt acceptable to them, IMO.




caramelize126 said:


> This is true. Meghan wasnt a huge successful A-list actress before meeting Harry and there are plenty who think that she is stepping on the monarchy in her quest for fame. Whether the Palace is treading carefully because of Andrew or bc they have never dealt with anything quite like this, I'm not sure. But last two women to get out of hand ( Fergie, Diana) were eventually cut loose. Diana was able to gain the public's support, but I do not believe Meghan has the same clout to be able to achieve that.


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> This is true. Meghan wasnt a huge successful A-list actress before meeting Harry and there are plenty who think that she is stepping on the monarchy in her quest for fame. Whether the Palace is treading carefully because of Andrew or bc they have never dealt with anything quite like this, I'm not sure. But last two women to get out of hand ( Fergie, Diana) were eventually cut loose. Diana was able to gain the public's support, but I do not believe Meghan has the same clout to be able to achieve that.


we'll see....maybe if Harry is enough like his mother and if Meghan gets on board with the good works.....


----------



## Welltraveled!

Actually I find it interesting they hired an American PR firm for Travelsty.  I wondered if it was due to A. No British firm wanting the assignment or B. They didn’t want to take the chance of the future King interfering.



LittleStar88 said:


> I guess that gossip would explain why Harry and Meghan have hired the PR firm... ??
> 
> If William is truly behind this, how does Harry not know/suspect?


----------



## LittleStar88

Welltraveled! said:


> Actually I find it interesting they hired an American PR firm for Travelsty.  I wondered if it was due to A. No British firm wanting the assignment or B. They didn’t want to take the chance of the future King interfering.



Good point - a US firm has the freedom to operate as they need/like. Giving more control to Harry and Meghan.


----------



## limom

What is Travelsty exactly?


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> What is Travelsty exactly?


_*Whispers* _a sham so they can funnel money out of the foundation.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> _*Whispers* _a sham so they can funnel money out of the foundation.


It is such an unfortunate name.
Travelsty/travesty. Only the L.


----------



## threadbender

Welltraveled! said:


> Actually I find it interesting they hired an American PR firm for Travelsty.  I wondered if it was due to A. No British firm wanting the assignment or B. They didn’t want to take the chance of the future King interfering.


For a minute, I swear I thought you put "Travesty". lol

I think Meghan wants to be as popular as Diana, the People's Princess. But, times, communication, media etc have all changed in the past 20+ years. She needs to slow down and let things change a little more organically. not looking thirsty or having an agenda. 
Enjoy her family and breathe. Love that little boy. Appreciate her loving husband, her beautiful home and the opportunities she has. Think things through before jumping in. 
And.......show me some Archie!!!! If he is half as cute as George, Charlotte and Louis, he will be adorable!!! OK, I know I am greedy but I just love babies.


----------



## threadbender

limom said:


> It is such an unfortunate name.
> Travelsty/travesty. Only the L.


GMTA!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> It is such an unfortunate name.
> Travelsty/travesty. Only the L.


Lol it’s really Travalyst but I liked travelsty.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

marthastoo said:


> I'm confused about why some people on this thread don't believe Meghan attended a yoga class.  1.) Why is that something to lie about and 2.) is going to a yoga class something desirable?  I'm pretty sure she does yoga regularly.  If she did or didn't go to yoga ... who cares?  Do some people just think she lies about everything, is that it?  I'm confused.


Meg hasn't said a word, as far as we know.  Someone put it out there, probably her PR people, that she attended a yoga class and not a soul took a photo.  Walking in, walking out.  Nothing.

Who knows.  But if anyone is questioning anything, it's not whether she lied, since she never stated she did.  It's whether her PR people are lying.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol it’s really Travalyst but I liked travelsty.




https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a28896115/prince-harry-travalyst-explained/
So the prince and princess are becoming travel agents for the eco conscious crowd?
Such a weird concept.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4536693
> 
> View attachment 4536694


Yes, of course. Because H/M themselves have nothing to do with the veritable deluge of negative coverage they are receiving  

Btw, speaking of trying to steer the narrative, there's a kind of scorched earth blind item I saw discussed on another forum (lsa) where the only BRF:s not getting dished on are Charles, Camilla- and Meghan. Implying William is not the rightful heir etc. I wonder who put that info out?


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a28896115/prince-harry-travalyst-explained/
> So the prince and princess are becoming travel agents for the eco conscious crowd?
> Such a weird concept.


No one:
Literally no one:
Sussexes: here’s a travel program!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

marthastoo said:


> I'm confused about why some people on this thread don't believe Meghan attended a yoga class.  1.) Why is that something to lie about and 2.) is going to a yoga class something desirable?  I'm pretty sure she does yoga regularly.  If she did or didn't go to yoga ... who cares?  Do some people just think she lies about everything, is that it?  I'm confused.


I once was pretty OK at yoga. Pre kids. Like at the front of the class OK (please nobody deny me my miniscule moment of self celebratory tPF glory here  It's but a distant memory now). I'm no expert, but Meghan does not move about like somebody who does yoga regularly. Or any kind of exercise regularly, tbh. Doria does, though.

I suppose the thinking is that Meghan is promoting that particular yoga studio for pay. Pay for play.


----------



## limom

Apparently, she is promoting mini-mini jewelry as well.
https://www.instyle.com/news/meghan...90919&utm_medium=email&utm_source=instyle.com
Willis got fabulous Cartier Jewelry, she gets mini-mini.
Times are tough for the monarchy, nowadays.


----------



## mdcx

Megs being called a social climber by Tatler really is the kiss of death. It means people (aristos) are gossiping and laughing about her obvious attempts to try and make things happen.
Cressida really would have made a better go of it - look wistfully, naturally pretty. Stay quiet. Bow down to Kate.  Melt into the background and occasionally be lauded by the UK press for her beauty/lovely kids/charitable works etc.

Meghan "thinks who she is". It is not the way things are done in the UK.  It's almost sad, but then you have to remind yourself that she has all the resources on earth at her fingertips to advise her about protocol, hierarchy, status, royal vs. celebrity behaviour, dress, perception, dealing with her messy family situation blah blah blah and she chooses to do the opposite in every case.


----------



## hellosunshine

marthastoo said:


> I'm confused about why some people on this thread don't believe Meghan attended a yoga class.  1.) Why is that something to lie about and 2.) is going to a yoga class something desirable?  I'm pretty sure she does yoga regularly.  If she did or didn't go to yoga ... who cares?  Do some people just think she lies about everything, is that it?  I'm confused.



Well, there were no photos that were leaked, so some people are hesitant to believe that any of it happened.

Anyways, I think there's been no photos this time around becuz Harry & Meghan are no longer under KP. I've read on another forum that KP leaked to the press last time when Meghan traveled for the baby shower and they basically followed her security or protective team to her hotel and the baby shower.


----------



## marthastoo

ooooh... sick burn! Being called a social climber!  Meghan might as well not leave the house anymore with that moniker.


----------



## hellosunshine

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm no expert, but Meghan does not move about like somebody who does yoga regularly. Or any kind of exercise regularly, tbh. Doria does, though.



Doria is literally a yoga instructor and pre-Harry, Meghan was photographed going to and from yoga classes. Just google Meghan Markle yoga and you'd see lol.


----------



## mdcx

marthastoo said:


> ooooh... sick burn! Being called a social climber!  Meghan might as well not leave the house anymore with that moniker.


It probably depends whether you want to be part of aristocratic society in the UK or whether you want to be a celebrity in the US. 
As Meghan seems to want the latter more, it probably doesn't matter to her that she is shutting herself out of the former.


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> _*Whispers* _a sham so they can funnel money out of the foundation.



oooh! The _other thread _was talking about this. I understand that they are writing Sunshine Sach's services off as an expense for the foundation, even though the company is providing services to H&M for their own PR crises, but honestly I didnt totally get the stuff with with trademark. Someone said that its a very clever way to launder money, but can someone with a business background explain?
These are paraphrased, but the info is all from the other thread:
MWX is the company that owns the Travalyst trademark and is a private company with share capital. MWX is own by one LLC- the Sussex Foundation. It is also associated to MM Global, owned by Rachel Markle. Also recently reactivated was FrimFram INC (Which owns the trademark to The Tig...which is still listed as active) and owned by Rachel Markle. The theory is that because MWX is associated with an american company,  any business done with Travalyst or its associated partners puts money into an American account bypassing British laws?

Travalyst has for-profit collaborates. So when it fully launches, will they get kickbacks from all of these companies for every person who books a trip through the website?


----------



## mdcx

Can someone explain this for the dum-dums like me - is Meghan setting up private companies to make money? I thought that was rule number 1 about being Royal - you can't do that.


----------



## hellosunshine

LittleStar88 said:


> I guess that gossip would explain why Harry and Meghan have hired the PR firm... ??
> 
> If William is truly behind this, how does Harry not know/suspect?



I think Harry knows it's his brother. The first wise decision he made was to leave KP. The second has been to separate from the palace staff, Kate&Wills, tabloid or royal reporters, and Meghan's toxic half family. I think the most disappointing betrayal (..yes a betrayal) has been her father. He's always so eager to sell her to the highest bidder. And I'm certain that someone within KP is in liaison with TM becuz last week when he commented on the private jet debacle (which he had nothing to do with) was very clear-cut and evident. He's even adapted all the weird terminology that KP and british media has been using. Someone is feeding him info..


----------



## hellosunshine

So, Meghan and Harry are officially in the Guinness World Record Books -


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Which is widely practice by the rich.



mrsinsyder said:


> _*Whispers* _a sham so they can funnel money out of the foundation.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Can someone explain this for the dum-dums like me - is Meghan setting up private companies to make money? I thought that was rule number 1 about being Royal - you can't do that.


It looks like MWX was set up as a holding company.  MMGlobal and FrimFram Inc. are California Corporations with a PO in Beverly Hills..    As long as you pay the yearly Fee to the State  of $800 for each corporation and go through the motions of filing a tax return even if there is no income, that is all that is required.  If you have income in the Corp at the end of the Corp year then you have to pay tax.  There are ways to zero out the Corp and pay no tax.  Actors like to incorporate themselves as a way to put away retirement money or have corporations own properties so they can insulate themselves and her residual checks may have been going to one of these as well.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a28896115/prince-harry-travalyst-explained/
> So the prince and princess are becoming travel agents for the eco conscious crowd?
> Such a weird concept.


Travalyst was founded in partnership with Booking.com, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor, Visa and Ctrip.  Every time you get directed to them off the travalyst site they all make $$ and they kick back to travelyst for the click.  Even if you don't pick an ecofriendly  vacay site, they still make money.


----------



## gracekelly

That click money from the Travalyst site has to get someplace, and I am guessing that it must be to MWX, which will then dole it out.  Don't know if the expenses are being paid out of MWX or the Trust and/or if MWX is funding the Trust.


----------



## caramelize126

gracekelly said:


> Travalyst was founded in partnership with Booking.com, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor, Visa and Ctrip.  Every time you get directed to them off the travalyst site they all make $$ and they kick back to travelyst for the click.  Even if you don't pick an ecofriendly  vacay site, they still make money.



And the kickbacks go to MWX which can then be funneled to MM Global? How is this allowed??


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> And the kickbacks go to MWX which can then be funneled to MM Global? How is this allowed??


I don't think that they are getting kicked back to MM Global. MM Global is a CA Corp and going to be used for different things i believe,   MWX is a whole other thing because it owns the trademarked name of Travalyst and the name itself can be licensed for use in other places and that will make them some real money. aside from the click money.  The Trust owns MWX and ultimately they will get the money.  How the money is then distributed out of the Trust after expenses is up to the trustees.  Depends how much is left.  Many charities have very little left after fancy exec. salaries and expenses.  There is a website that shows this info on the major charities and it was pretty shocking to read how little is actually given out of some of them.  I don't think the information will be public until the Trust files the first return.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> Doria is literally a yoga instructor and pre-Harry, Meghan was photographed going to and from yoga classes. Just google Meghan Markle yoga and you'd see lol.


You were right. I was wrong. As proven below 


And look! Finally a pic of Archie 


(both pics https://www.newidea.com.au/unbelievable-photos-show-harry-and-meghan-practicing-pregnancy-yoga )

Only joking, people.

I admit, hellosunshine, although she's not yoga spectacular because to me that takes more of less of an ego, you were right. On this one


----------



## gracekelly

https://pagesix.com/2019/09/09/serena-williams-takes-in-trolls-with-daughter-after-us-open-loss/

According to this it sounds like Meghan went home on Sunday morning.


----------



## buffym

Margaret Atwood was interviewed by the Sunday Times and she answered a question about Meghan, it’s a subscription article.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ve-and-loss-ahead-of-new-book-the-testaments-


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> Doria is literally a yoga instructor and pre-Harry, Meghan was photographed going to and from yoga classes. Just google Meghan Markle yoga and you'd see lol.


Yes, lots of photos of Meg when she lived in Toronto, walking with her yoga mat.  

Not related to yoga, but her winter style was so good!  The jackets, the hats... loved seeing what she was wearing.  Nothing fancy, just really nice.


----------



## hellosunshine

buffym said:


> Margaret Atwood was interviewed by the Sunday Times and she answered a question about Meghan, it’s a subscription article.
> 
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ve-and-loss-ahead-of-new-book-the-testaments-
> 
> View attachment 4536905



That's very interesting.. "The game is to see if you can get them to crack".
With the non-stop hit pieces on them...I believe this. Sad.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Megs being called a social climber by Tatler really is the kiss of death. It means people (aristos) are gossiping and laughing about her obvious attempts to try and make things happen.
> Cressida really would have made a better go of it - look wistfully, naturally pretty. Stay quiet. Bow down to Kate.  Melt into the background and occasionally be lauded by the UK press for her beauty/lovely kids/charitable works etc.
> 
> Meghan "thinks who she is". It is not the way things are done in the UK.  It's almost sad, but then you have to remind yourself that she has all the resources on earth at her fingertips to advise her about protocol, hierarchy, status, royal vs. celebrity behaviour, dress, perception, dealing with her messy family situation blah blah blah and she chooses to do the opposite in every case.


In a nutshell, Royal v Celebrity behaviour. You can't do the latter in th BRF.


----------



## buffym

Darren Lewis: The relentless Meghan Markle witch-hunt must stop

The woman can barely breathe without being taken down for a supposed lack of class or consideration

I’d count myself among the many people none too keen on the Royals lecturing us on one thing and doing another.

I’d place myself in the camp of the critics calling out celebs for urging us to save the planet then jetting here, there and everywhere on their jollies.


Where I tap out is the relentless, unedifying hounding of Meghan Markle simply for, well, being Meghan Markle.

The woman can barely breathe without being taken down for a supposed lack of class or consideration, or accused of having ulterior motives.
We get it. Meghan has married into a family where being left alone simply isn’t an option.

The Royals belong to the people, our taxes fund their lifestyle, yada, yada yada.
This, though, is beyond the pale. She and Prince Harry can’t politely decline an invitation to visit the Queen at Balmoral – it has to be seen as a snub.

Meghan can’t jump on a plane to support her friend Serena Williams in the US Open Final – it has to be seen as a rejection of her duties as a mother.

What father, this one included, can’t be alone with the kids while his wife has some much-needed time to herself? (didn’t Prince William and Kate Middleton leave George with a nanny as they toured the Maldives five years ago?)

Meghan can’t guest edit Vogue. It is seen as getting above her station. Yet, didn’t Prince Charles edit Country Life? Didn’t Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, guest edit the Huffington Post website?
Meghan and Harry couldn’t even announce their pregnancy news last year without being accused of insensitivity for announcing it on Infant Loss Remembrance Day.

Meghan is the woman, remember, for whom the depiction of her son as a monkey wasn’t even accepted by some as being racially offensive.

Footballer Raheem Sterling would probably have read the various attempts to justify it with a wry smile.
Meghan’s critics deny they are driven by race. Many just do not like her and that’s fine.

But they have their heads in the sand if they refuse to accept that the rest of us see it for what it is – a witch-hunt.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-ne...meghan-19914949.amp?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## limom

Besides the horrible racist attacks, it is very much in line with acceptable criticism.
It really is beyond dumb and arrogant for them to think that they are beyond criticisms. 
They are supposed to be role models. He was born into it and greatly benefited from his birth, she willingly married into this institution at over 35, she knew exactly what she got into,
I absolutely do not feel sorry whatsoever for her or him.
Give me a break. We all get evaluated on our job career, she is no exception, imo.
She knows what is expected of her, is it too demanding to fulfill her obligations?
Oh, she is now being compared to a lobster? Please, cry me a river.
those so called celebrities are truly beyond clueless and self serving.
The Sussex looks very much in love, they have a new healthy baby boy , get to travel all over the world, do a bit of charities here and there while never having to worry about how to provide for themselves and wearing Dior non stop?
Where do I sign up?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Besides the horrible racist attacks, it is very much in line with acceptable criticism.
> It really is beyond dumb and arrogant for them to think that they are beyond criticisms.
> They are supposed to be role models. He was born into it and greatly benefited from his birth, she willingly married into this institution at over 35, she knew exactly what she got into,
> I absolutely do not feel sorry whatsoever for her or him.
> Give me a break. We all get evaluated on our job career, she is no exception, imo.
> She knows what is expected of her, is it too demanding to fulfill her obligations?
> Oh, she is now being compared to a lobster? Please, cry me a river.
> those so called celebrities are truly beyond clueless and self serving.
> The Sussex looks very much in love, they have a new healthy baby boy , get to travel all over the world, do a bit of charities here and there while never having to worry about how to provide for themselves and wearing Dior non stop?
> Where do I sign up?


To be fair, I really don't think she know exactly what she was letting herself into. I hope she can turn this around. She needs to look at how being a member of this family really is and tow the party line so to speak.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MarieCurie

threadbender said:


> I wish I had been like that! When I had my son, I went back after 9 weeks and cried every day for weeks!


And I felt like a terrible mother for feeling that way because society has a certain expectation of how a mother should act and feel. I've come to realise that there is no motherhood Olympics and this parenting thing is not a one size fits all. Your experience is as valid as mine which is also as valid as someone else's experience


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> I used to fly B-Class (via British Airways) when I was going back & forth from Boston to London .. it IS NOT cheap, even when a Company has a Corporate Account.  I'm assuming that Meghan flew First-Class and if you book late, oh-boy .. it's wicked pricey!


really? i just flew business fra-mia for less than 2.000€ in march. booked in february. with Lufthansa


----------



## LittleStar88

buffym said:


> Margaret Atwood was interviewed by the Sunday Times and she answered a question about Meghan, it’s a subscription article.
> 
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ve-and-loss-ahead-of-new-book-the-testaments-
> 
> View attachment 4536905



I feel like this is spot-on. And it is a very sad thing. Taking down a woman for sport... This is why, despite some of the missteps, I support her. I don't think it is reasonable or right to tear other women down and pick them apart for no real reason.


----------



## LittleStar88

myown said:


> really? i just flew business fra-mia for less than 2.000€ in march. booked in february. with Lufthansa



While prices tend to be crazy for business class and first class, you can get reasonable deals for premium seating. 

I upgraded from coach to first class flying Berlin to SFO non-stop for $400 upon arriving to the airport. There are a lot of different variables. And then most frequent travelers I know use their miles to upgrade. Timing and luck.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> That's very interesting.. "The game is to see if you can get them to crack".
> With the non-stop hit pieces on them...I believe this. Sad.





buffym said:


> Darren Lewis: The relentless Meghan Markle witch-hunt must stop
> 
> The woman can barely breathe without being taken down for a supposed lack of class or consideration
> 
> I’d count myself among the many people none too keen on the Royals lecturing us on one thing and doing another.
> 
> I’d place myself in the camp of the critics calling out celebs for urging us to save the planet then jetting here, there and everywhere on their jollies.
> 
> 
> Where I tap out is the relentless, unedifying hounding of Meghan Markle simply for, well, being Meghan Markle.
> 
> The woman can barely breathe without being taken down for a supposed lack of class or consideration, or accused of having ulterior motives.
> We get it. Meghan has married into a family where being left alone simply isn’t an option.
> 
> The Royals belong to the people, our taxes fund their lifestyle, yada, yada yada.
> This, though, is beyond the pale. She and Prince Harry can’t politely decline an invitation to visit the Queen at Balmoral – it has to be seen as a snub.
> 
> Meghan can’t jump on a plane to support her friend Serena Williams in the US Open Final – it has to be seen as a rejection of her duties as a mother.
> 
> What father, this one included, can’t be alone with the kids while his wife has some much-needed time to herself? (didn’t Prince William and Kate Middleton leave George with a nanny as they toured the Maldives five years ago?)
> 
> Meghan can’t guest edit Vogue. It is seen as getting above her station. Yet, didn’t Prince Charles edit Country Life? Didn’t Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, guest edit the Huffington Post website?
> Meghan and Harry couldn’t even announce their pregnancy news last year without being accused of insensitivity for announcing it on Infant Loss Remembrance Day.
> 
> Meghan is the woman, remember, for whom the depiction of her son as a monkey wasn’t even accepted by some as being racially offensive.
> 
> Footballer Raheem Sterling would probably have read the various attempts to justify it with a wry smile.
> Meghan’s critics deny they are driven by race. Many just do not like her and that’s fine.
> 
> But they have their heads in the sand if they refuse to accept that the rest of us see it for what it is – a witch-hunt.
> 
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-ne...meghan-19914949.amp?__twitter_impression=true





LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like this is spot-on. And it is a very sad thing. Taking down a woman for sport... This is why, despite some of the missteps, I support her. I don't think it is reasonable or right to tear other women down and pick them apart for no real reason.


You've made Harry take out his tiny violin again!


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> While prices tend to be crazy for business class and first class, you can get reasonable deals for premium seating.
> 
> I upgraded from coach to first class flying Berlin to SFO non-stop for $400 upon arriving to the airport. There are a lot of different variables. And then most frequent travelers I know use their miles to upgrade. Timing and luck.


I doubt the royals bargain shop


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> While prices tend to be crazy for business class and first class, you can get reasonable deals for premium seating.
> 
> I upgraded from coach to first class flying Berlin to SFO non-stop for $400 upon arriving to the airport. There are a lot of different variables. And then most frequent travelers I know use their miles to upgrade. Timing and luck.


I doubt the royals bargain shop


----------



## mrsinsyder

When you come into a gossip thread and see celebrities being picked apart


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I doubt the royals bargain shop


No, didn't you hear that Meghan possibly used her airlines miles to travel


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I doubt the royals bargain shop



I don't even think Meghan herself (not any other royal) is sitting down to book this. An assistant is doing it. Maybe the assistant looks for the best fare, maybe not.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't even think Meghan herself (not any other royal) is sitting down to book this. An assistant is doing it. Maybe the assistant looks for the best fare, maybe not.


I'm sure she has an assistant to book the flight.  Maybe they look for a good fare.  But I doubt she goes to the airport and asks for an upgrade   I'm sure she had this experience in her past though


----------



## minababe

it's just gossip again by a **** newspaper like the sun. why everyone believes those stories here .. so weird.
they never told anyone archie is too Young to travel. that would make no sense at all.

maybe they already visited the queen. nobody knows. everyone act like they knew everything about them but it's all only gossip. they reported already that they were there some weeks ago, than at meghans birthday. now they don't want to go... it's ridicilous.

can't wait for the africa tour to start.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I doubt the royals bargain shop


Some do, lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

minababe said:


> it's just gossip again



In a gossip thread, wow, so crazy.


----------



## minababe

mrsinsyder said:


> In a gossip thread, wow, so crazy.



lol you know what I mean.
if People claiming here what the hell meghan and Harry do or what they are thinking. but it's nothing confirmed or proofed. just a lie from the gossip newspaper. but some People get angry here and see the fault by Harry and meghan. lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

minababe said:


> lol you know what I mean.
> if People claiming here what the hell meghan and Harry do or what they are thinking. but it's nothing confirmed or proofed. just a lie from the gossip newspaper. but some People get angry here and see the fault by Harry and meghan. lol.


seems to me the only people who get angry or emotional here are the Meghan fans....rest of us may criticize but don't really get angry (not me anyway)


----------



## caramelize126

minababe said:


> lol you know what I mean.
> if People claiming here what the hell meghan and Harry do or what they are thinking. but it's nothing confirmed or proofed. just a lie from the gossip newspaper. but some People get angry here and see the fault by Harry and meghan. lol.



Just because its not confirmed does not necessarily make it an outright lie. We don't know which is true and which isnt, which is why we gossip about it .  There is very little news which the palace will actually respond to/comment on. And even thats sometimes a lie. The palace told us that there was no discord amongst the Sussex' and Cambridges. We clearly know now that this is not true. I think if you only want to read confirmed news, you'd have to go to a news website ( WaPo, NYT, BBC, etc.) not a gossip thread on a luxury handbag forum.



sdkitty said:


> seems to me the only people who get angry or emotional here are the Meghan fans....rest of us may criticize but don't really get angry (not me anyway)



Agree... I feel like when we do post "gossip",  fans get angry, defensive, post longggg articles to deflect and take the focus away on anything negative, etc. which just ends up derailing the thread.


----------



## lulilu

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I once was pretty OK at yoga. Pre kids. Like at the front of the class OK (please nobody deny me my miniscule moment of self celebratory tPF glory here  It's but a distant memory now). I'm no expert, but Meghan does not move about like somebody who does yoga regularly. Or any kind of exercise regularly, tbh. Doria does, though.
> *
> I suppose the thinking is that Meghan is promoting that particular yoga studio for pay. Pay for play.*



I read (not claiming it's gospel) that Meghan's friend owns the yoga studio, and that she stayed at the friend's home while she was in NYC.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I read (not claiming it's gospel) that Meghan's friend owns the yoga studio, and that she stayed at the friend's home while she was in NYC.


that could make sense....she hosted Meghan and Meghan returns the favor by giving her studio a huge exposure.  It must be heady to go from being a B-list cable tv actress to being arguably the most famous and talked-about woman in the world


----------



## hellosunshine

limom said:


> They are supposed to be role models. He was born into it and greatly benefited from his birth, she willingly married into this institution at over 35, *she knew exactly what she got into,
> I absolutely do not feel sorry whatsoever for her or him*.
> She knows what is expected of her, is it too demanding to fulfill her obligations?



First of all, I think people should stop assuming that Meghan understood every aspect of what she was signing up for. She likely understood what would be required of her but at the end of the day, she took a wild leap into the unknown. Secondly, Meghan is doing very well in her new role because for many years prior, I've read that aristocrats plus the media privately gossiped that no one would marry Harry. They said no woman wanted to lose her independence while some aristocrats quietly whispered that their girls would never take an inferior position to Kate, the commoner. Now, some of this outrage from the media and this _supposed_ bitter feud between Will & Kate vs Harry & Meghan is that Meghan has shown that if you're smart, there's no limitations to what you can accomplish within your designated role. Meghan recognized that she didn't need to box herself in. Many just assumed by marrying Harry, any future spouse would be silenced & pushed to the back behind their future consort. Meghan becoming such a huge phenomenon has irked a lot of people and to add insult to injury, Meghan hasn't been interested nor longing for acceptance within those social circles. She's doing her own thing and it looks like Harry, Charles, and the Queen are giving her a wide latitude to do so.


----------



## hellosunshine

*The Duke of Sussex arrives at the Guildhall in London for the Invictus Games 5th Anniversary Reception






*


----------



## hellosunshine

#FavouriteInvictusMoment

Today marks the 5 year anniversary of the #InvictusGames! These games have made it possible for thousands of wounded and injured servicemen and women to use the power of sport to rehabilitate themselves and those around them, while inspiring people all over the world.
•
“Thank you to everyone who has played a part in the Invictus movement, from you the competitors and your families, to the thousands of volunteers and supporters - you have all guarded the Invictus spirit, while creating a wider understanding and respect for those who serve their country at home or abroad. Thank you for the inspiration, thank you for the laughs and thank you for the memories! I’m so proud of everything we’ve achieved together. Once served always serving!” - The Duke of Sussex

The @WeAreInvictusGames was founded by The Duke of Sussex in 2014 after he saw the power of sport in recovery while visiting the warrior games in Colorado Springs USA. The Duke was so moved by what he witnessed, he felt inspired to expand this concept on a global scale. Since then this non profit organisation has staged games in London Orlando Toronto and Sydney and next year’s games will be held in The Hague in May 2020.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I will say this. For all the nonsense that these two may be causing currently the Invictus Games is a great initiative. I have a friend who came back from a theatre with PTSD as a result of what went on over there. The IGs has been an absolute life line for him and I admire H for supporting them.


----------



## bag-mania

That denim J. Crew dress Meghan wore to the US Open is sold out. People are reselling them on eBay for double the retail price.


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> really? i just flew business fra-mia for less than 2.000€ in march. booked in february. with Lufthansa


international!
Was that a Domestic European flight? .. if so, yes .. it's a LOT cheaper than flying internationally!!!  When I had to fly last minute from Boston to CDG (Paris) .. the B-Class ticket was $12,000!!!!!  Both the Hotels and Airlines run "patterns" every day based on historical data and trending .. that's why you can look one day at a price and then the next day, it's totally different.  In some cases (especially with the larger Hotel chains), the rates can change w/in hours.  My niece's husband is in the Hotel business (Revenue Manager) as was my niece, so they told me about this (in addition, I did a project many years ago when I had my own management consulting business for Hilton .. and it was challenging to say the least).  The Airline business; found out about their patterns when working at Bain & Company.  Bottom line, and I tell EVERYONE I know who wants to travel for leisure .. BOOK EARLY and try to (if possible) avoid peak times (for instance, going to Europe from the US in Fall is a lot cheaper than in the summer)!


----------



## BeautyAddict58

Frankfurt-Miami - international, not domestic.


----------



## Morgane

.


----------



## redney

Booking early and avoiding major travel times is common knowledge to seasoned travelers, LOL.

Case in point: I recently flew business class US to India (via HKG) on a major US carrier for $13K, yet have flown the same route, same carrier, also business class for $6,700 during another month of the year. :kayneshrug:

Anyway, back to topic!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> While prices tend to be crazy for business class and first class, you can get reasonable deals for premium seating.
> 
> I upgraded from coach to first class flying Berlin to SFO non-stop for $400 upon arriving to the airport. There are a lot of different variables. And then most frequent travelers I know use their miles to upgrade. Timing and luck.


100% correct!!! .. if you are a frequent flyer, you can use points to upgrade and/or if you are a Premier customer, oftentimes you can upgrade at a discounted rate.  I was such a regular on British Airways and Air France that that Flight Attendants knew me pretty well (which also has its good points)!!   However, sometimes companies are so stupid in that they oftentimes use outside Travel Agencies who have deals with various Airlines & Hotels .. oftentimes, not the cheapest.  I had to HOUND my company to allow me to travel to Paris via Air France versus having to fly BA (Boston -> Heathrow -> CDG)!!!  I also had to hound them about using Virgin America and Virgin Atlantic because their prices were a lot cheaper!  I'm sure the BRF always flies BA ..


----------



## CeeJay

minababe said:


> lol you know what I mean.
> if People claiming here what the hell meghan and Harry do or what they are thinking. but it's nothing confirmed or proofed. just a lie from the gossip newspaper. but some People get angry here and see the fault by Harry and meghan. lol.


.. and LIKEWISE, some people "*get angry*" (_your words_) when they feel any 'negative' comment/remark is made about Harry & Meghan.  Also, don't assume that the information is always from some gossip rag .. please put people on IGNORE if their comments upset you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Some do, lol


The King and Queen of the Netherlands were photographed shopping at The Container Store a few weeks ago and people ate it up with a spoon.  Not only do royals bargain shop, it is great publicity for them when they do.  The opposite (overspending on luxury items) does not go over well.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> The King and Queen of the Netherlands were photographed shopping at The Container Store a few weeks ago and people ate it up with a spoon.  Not only do royals bargain shop, it is great publicity for them when they do.  The opposite (overspending on luxury items) does not go over well.


Absolutely, and people can't seem to grasp that they actually do do normal things.


----------



## hellosunshine

So, Meghan's maternity leave is coming to an end on Thursday but it certainly wasn't a break..

-May 6th, Meghan gave birth to Archie
-May 8th, Archie was introduced to the world w/ a press conference at Windsor Castle
-later that same afternoon Archie met the Queen and private press photos were taken of the meeting
-June 8th, Meghan accompanied Harry to Trooping the Colour
-June 29th, Meghan made a surprise appearance w/ Harry to the First Major League Baseball Game in Europe
-July 4th, Meghan stepped out to support Serena Williams at Wimbledon
-July 6th, Archie was baptized in a private ceremony
-July 10th, Meghan watched Harry play in a charity polo match
-July 13th, Meghan stepped out w/ Kate & Pippa to watch Serena Williams play at Wimbledon finals
-July 14, Meghan and Harry attended the Lion King premiere in support of their conservation work

Harry has made several appearances sans Meghan but she's also been working behind the scenes guest editing British Vogue, planning itinerary for the African tour + future engagements that are coming up in October, and curating her workwear capsule collection for SmartWorks.

Amazing!


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, and people can't seem to grasp that they actually do do normal things.


True, I get a kick out of seeing the queen driving herself.


----------



## caramelize126

gracekelly said:


> I don't think that they are getting kicked back to MM Global. MM Global is a CA Corp and going to be used for different things i believe,   MWX is a whole other thing because it owns the trademarked name of Travalyst and the name itself can be licensed for use in other places and that will make them some real money. aside from the click money.  The Trust owns MWX and ultimately they will get the money.  How the money is then distributed out of the Trust after expenses is up to the trustees.  Depends how much is left.  Many charities have very little left after fancy exec. salaries and expenses.  There is a website that shows this info on the major charities and it was pretty shocking to read how little is actually given out of some of them.  I don't think the information will be public until the Trust files the first return.



Does the Cambridge foundation/other royal foundations also function like this? This sounds like a potentially shady set up.


----------



## limom

First she was called a social climber and now the Duchess of Excess, this has not been a good month for Meagan.
Hopefully, the Africa’s trip turns the tide around.
https://airmail.news/issues/2019-9-7/it-was-a-royal-pain-of-a-week-for


----------



## caramelize126

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but personally I would consider the bolded items below personal not work-related. Doesnt sound super tiring or taxing to me...
I would also argue that the July 14 appearance was also a personal non-work related outing since the money donated by disney to their charity likely went towards their _personal_ Sunshine Sachs bill 



hellosunshine said:


> So, Meghan's maternity leave is coming to an end on Thursday but it certainly wasn't a break..
> 
> -*May 6th, Meghan gave birth to Archie*
> -May 8th, Archie was introduced to the world w/ a press conference at Windsor Castle
> -*later that same afternoon Archie met the Queen and* private press photos were taken of the meeting
> -June 8th, Meghan accompanied Harry to Trooping the Colour
> -June 29th, Meghan made a surprise appearance w/ Harry to the First Major League Baseball Game in Europe
> *-July 4th, Meghan stepped out to support Serena Williams at Wimbledon
> -July 6th, Archie was baptized in a private ceremony
> -July 10th, Meghan watched Harry play in a charity polo match
> -July 13th, Meghan stepped out w/ Kate & Pippa to watch Serena Williams play at Wimbledon finals*
> _*-July 14, Meghan and Harry attended the Lion King premiere in support of their conservation work*_
> 
> Harry has made several appearances sans Meghan but she's also been working behind the scenes guest editing British Vogue, planning itinerary for the African tour + future engagements that are coming up in October, and curating her workwear capsule collection for SmartWorks.
> 
> Amazing!


----------



## rose60610

I don't begrudge Meghan or anybody who's wealthy or has a wealthy willing spouse for spending exorbitant amounts for clothes, airfare, whatever. If they have the means and spend accordingly, who cares? It's when they get on a soapbox telling others what they should do when they themselves don't follow through. If token commercial flights are taken or cheap clothes are worn solely as PR moves to impress the masses, it looks like pandering. 
The Walton family can shop at Walmart all day long, that's not pandering. 
Prince William said QEII often checks rooms to turn off lights, I can see that. Fun fact: she drove an ambulance during WWII, learned mechanics and could change tires. She's lived through history. She's a tough bird. 
Meghan's PR people have their work cut out. Watch for Archie to make appearances to leverage Meghan's image. I hope the kid gets a salary. He going to earn it.


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> Does the Cambridge foundation/other royal foundations also function like this? This sounds like a potentially shady set up.



I tend to doubt it.  William is very careful.


----------



## hellosunshine

caramelize126 said:


> Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but personally I would consider the bolded items below personal not work-related. *Doesnt sound super tiring or taxing to me...*



Haha, the portion that I've bolded from your comment is just too funny becuz in these three months that Meghan has been on maternity leave, Meghan and Kate have had the same amount of participatory engagements and Kate isn't even on maternity leave or anything.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> So, Meghan's maternity leave is coming to an end on Thursday but it certainly wasn't a break..
> 
> -May 6th, Meghan gave birth to Archie
> -May 8th, Archie was introduced to the world w/ a press conference at Windsor Castle
> -later that same afternoon Archie met the Queen and private press photos were taken of the meeting
> -June 8th, Meghan accompanied Harry to Trooping the Colour
> -June 29th, Meghan made a surprise appearance w/ Harry to the First Major League Baseball Game in Europe
> -July 4th, Meghan stepped out to support Serena Williams at Wimbledon
> -July 6th, Archie was baptized in a private ceremony
> -July 10th, Meghan watched Harry play in a charity polo match
> -July 13th, Meghan stepped out w/ Kate & Pippa to watch Serena Williams play at Wimbledon finals
> -July 14, Meghan and Harry attended the Lion King premiere in support of their conservation work
> 
> Harry has made several appearances sans Meghan but she's also been working behind the scenes guest editing British Vogue, planning itinerary for the African tour + future engagements that are coming up in October, and curating her workwear capsule collection for SmartWorks.
> 
> Amazing!


Sounds exhausting... j/k


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> Haha, the portion that I've bolded from your comment is just too funny becuz in these three months that Meghan has been on maternity leave, Meghan and Kate have had the same amount of participatory engagements and Kate isn't even on maternity leave or anything.



I didn't think anyone mentioned anything about Kate' having an exhausting schedule? So why are we comparing the two of them?

I feel like the whole "Why do we need to bring kate down to make meghan look better" conversation has been said over and over again. This had stopped for a while, but since you're back now, i guess its starting up again? You seem to be the only one here intent on continuing the comparisons.


----------



## buffym

More from IG Anniversary, love IG and I liked Harry’s tie it is very Fall and he looked so happy, but his bald spot is unfortunately getting bigger. I wished male royals would do something about it.







https://pbs.twimg.com/ext_tw_video_...pu/img/LaSX0VEswWWhTZ6W?format=jpg&name=large


----------



## Welltraveled!

Consider for a moment, if there are any questionable aspect (financial or otherwise) of HM foundation that Charles/Queen wouldn't know about it?  That they wouldn't put a stop to it?  Or cover it up?

Any (potential) exposure of foul play from any of the BRF foundations would have a tumbling effect on the entire. BRF.  I daresay, in that regards, all the foundations may have a similar  setup and is well protected from any potential issues.  



caramelize126 said:


> Does the Cambridge foundation/other royal foundations also function like this? This sounds like a potentially shady set up.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Sounds exhausting... j/k


I know, what an incredibly hard worker!  Hanging out with celebrities at movie premieres, tennis matches & baseball games.  Having her baby christened.  Making an appearance at a family event.  The working mothers of the world should be in awe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> The King and Queen of the Netherlands were photographed shopping at The Container Store a few weeks ago and people ate it up with a spoon.  Not only do royals bargain shop, it is great publicity for them when they do.  The opposite (overspending on luxury items) does not go over well.



The King and Queen are European royals less known in the US. 

The probably have the best of both worlds. They can fly over on a private jet because their people do not care about their royals flying privately, they can walk the streets in their country’s because the public respects the royal family privacy and strict pap laws. 

It isn’t a fair comparison the scrutiny is higher for the BRF.


----------



## caramelize126

Welltraveled! said:


> Consider for a moment, if there are any questionable aspect (financial or otherwise) of HM foundation that Charles/Queen wouldn't know about it?  That they wouldn't put a stop to it?  Or cover it up?
> 
> Any (potential) exposure of foul play from any of the BRF foundations would have a tumbling effect on the entire. BRF.  I daresay, in that regards, all the foundations may have a similar  setup and is well protected from any potential issues.



There was a story YEARS ago about William and Harry using the funds from one of the charities that they had on partying, bikes, etc. The story was talked about briefly but then quickly sweeped away and no one talked about it again. Maybe it wasnt true?  But maybe it was true and the firm took care of it ( similar to how the UK media isnt discussing William's rumored affair)?  I remember it being in a big newspaper but unfortunately, dont remember which one. Does anyone remember this? Who knows if it was true or not, but it does make you wonder.

My background isnt in business, so I am genuinely curious to hear what reason there would be for having another entity ( MWX- a private company with share capital) owning the trademark instead of the foundation themselves. And what reason there would be for having a MM's company out of california also being associated?


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> I didn't think anyone mentioned anything about Kate' having an exhausting schedule? So why are we comparing the two of them?
> 
> I feel like the whole "Why do we need to bring kate down to make meghan look better" conversation has been said over and over again. This had stopped for a while, but since you're back now, i guess its starting up again? You seem to be the only one here intent on continuing the comparisons.



Thank you. Plus I looked up Kate’s calendar. Looks like she had about 20 engagements. Three small children at home counts for nothing?  Considering how well behaved and socialized her children are, it would appear that they are getting a lot of mommy/ daddy time and attention.


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> The King and Queen are European royals less known in the US.
> 
> The probably have the best of both worlds. They can fly over on a private jet because their people do not care about their royals flying privately, they can walk the streets in their country’s because the public respects the royal family privacy and strict pap laws.
> 
> It isn’t a fair comparison the scrutiny is higher for the BRF.


Kate's ability to shop in budget stores (and regular grocery stores as well) is not related to her being Dutch, so I'm not sure what your point is here except to contradict me just for the hell of it.

And the Dutch royals fly commercial - with the king himself often guest co-piloting as he is an active pilot.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> Kate's ability to shop in budget stores (and regular grocery stores as well) is not related to her being Dutch, *so I'm not sure what your point is here except to contradict me just for the hell of it.*
> 
> And the Dutch royals fly commercial - with the king himself often guest co-piloting as he is an active pilot.


Didn’t one of our thread contributors run into Kate grocery shopping?  

The answer to your comment in the first paragraph is.......you bet.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Haha, the portion that I've bolded from your comment is just too funny becuz in these three months that Meghan has been on maternity leave, Meghan and Kate have had the same amount of participatory engagements and Kate isn't even on maternity leave or anything.


Does Meghan have 2 other children that she is also caring for and one that is very young?  Why do you feel the constant need to compare these two?!?!  Basta Cosi ..


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> There was a story YEARS ago about William and Harry using the funds from one of the charities that they had on partying, bikes, etc. The story was talked about briefly but then quickly sweeped away and no one talked about it again. Maybe it wasnt true?  But maybe it was true and the firm took care of it ( similar to how the UK media isnt discussing William's rumored affair)?  I remember it being in a big newspaper but unfortunately, dont remember which one. Does anyone remember this? Who knows if it was true or not, but it does make you wonder.
> 
> My background isnt in business, so I am genuinely curious to hear what reason there would be for having another entity ( MWX- a private company with share capital) owning the trademark instead of the foundation themselves. And what reason there would be for having a MM's company out of california also being associated?


When you are setting up a fund, one of the questions always asked (Anti-Money Laundering) is if the fund/investment is for a "particular" person in a government entity (not the same as the Government - let's say the Government of Singapore setting up a fund - that is okay).  As someone (especially in the Alternative Investments world) will tell you, every year .. all executives HAD TO TAKE and PASS the AML test .. because, yes .. things would change.  That is likely why you do not see the Investment under the Sussex Foundation, but instead .. a "holding" company (they have a board of directors and other folks whose responsibility is to get multiple investors interested in investing in the 'partnership').  If it was just H&M, then potentially there could be issues (the UK used to have a excellent Moody's & S&P rating .. not so much anymore because of Brexit).


----------



## Morgane

This thread moves fast!



Flatsy said:


> I know, what an incredibly hard worker!  Hanging out with celebrities at movie premieres, tennis matches & baseball games.  Having her baby christened.  Making an appearance at a family event.  The working mothers of the world should be in awe.







hellosunshine said:


> Haha, the portion that I've bolded from your comment is just too funny becuz in these three months that Meghan has been on maternity leave, Meghan and Kate have had the same amount of participatory engagements and Kate isn't even on maternity leave or anything.


Didn't Meghan go in "maternity leave" (well,the royal version of it..)  in  March?   I'm pretty sure it's what I read. Kate has the Wimbledon patronage,so her attendance serves another purpose too. It's not just to watch friends playing. But,really,nothing of what they do is "work",whether it's  Wimbledon,attending a film premiere,some anniversary celebration,or a photo shoot.. I'd reserve the word "amazing" for something else,tbh.



caramelize126 said:


> oooh! The _other thread _was talking about this*. I understand that they are writing Sunshine Sach's services off as an expense for the foundation, even though the company is providing services to H&M for their own PR crises, but honestly I didnt totally get the stuff with with trademark. *Someone said that its a very clever way to launder money, but can someone with a business background explain?
> These are paraphrased, but the info is all from the other thread:
> MWX is the company that owns the Travalyst trademark and is a private company with share capital. MWX is own by one LLC- the Sussex Foundation. It is also associated to MM Global, owned by Rachel Markle. Also recently reactivated was FrimFram INC (Which owns the trademark to The Tig...which is still listed as active) and owned by Rachel Markle. The theory is that because MWX is associated with an american company,  any business done with Travalyst or its associated partners puts money into an American account bypassing British laws?
> 
> Travalyst has for-profit collaborates. So when it fully launches, will they get kickbacks from all of these companies for every person who books a trip through the website?


I don't understand what (in concrete) his eco-travel project is about,honestly.
Anyway,Sunshine Sachs has also handled the Vogue launch,according to other sources that I've seen being quoted here a few pages ago:
I also hope for her that the "I want to break the internet" bit is made up because it's a bit cringey..
But it's interesting that the rollout of her Vogue guest-edited issue was overseen by them. It was a quite aggressive PR push in my opinion,to the point that I noticed a quick ovesaturation of "stories" about it. And it's not surprising because their tactics are notoriously aggressive.
These are the same people who manipulated the press to undermine the reputation of Ambra Battilana,the model who accused Weinstein four years ago.
At the time I didn't even know HW hired them, and I remember that I noticed the obvious attempts to dismiss her,running old stories involving the Italian ex PM Berlusconi.
On a more lighthearted note,now that it's public knowledge they're using their firm,I don't even want to imagine the type of conspiracy theories every time there's a particular story about them or other members of the family (his brother..)




LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan and Harry prominently mentioned...
> 
> Inside the Cutthroat World of Royal Gossips
> 
> https://apple.news/AHkKPc8VvRXiHocmqkmpW_Q


This was an interesting read,thanks! This bit..


> Every afternoon in London, as morning dawns on the East Coast, a barrage of online abuse begins anew, one editor complains. “Anything that you write about Harry and Meghan that is seen to be at all critical unleashes a load of Twitter trolls,” agrees Dampier. “It can become quite nasty.”


It sounds  like a horror film plot.. I thought  the hysteria of the Pattinson-Stewart/Cumberbatch fandoms could never be topped. I was wrong.


----------



## Morgane

Jayne1 said:


> Meg hasn't said a word, as far as we know.  Someone put it out there, probably her PR people, that she attended a yoga class and not a soul took a photo.  Walking in, walking out.  Nothing.
> 
> Who knows.  But if anyone is questioning anything, it's not whether she lied, since she never stated she did.  It's whether her PR people are lying.


That yoga story does look like something purposely leaked by her team.  The fact that it comes from People is also a bit like of a
dead giveaway.

I think that leaving or not leaving her baby at home shouldn't be the focus of the discussion.  She's obviously entitled to some time for herself,like every mother.
Everyone also knows that the baby has a father and the best care.
But if we're talking about the optics after the whole media hoopla of this summer,a better "damage control" would have been staying at home (if that was also the reason),because they really don't need to offer "material" to the press every week. Some days ago even the Guardian that doesn't really care about the monarchy as a topic of interest, had an op-ed that was pretty much about the endless noise around them.
BTW,has the daily mail run some incendiary headline like "Duchess of Sussex  roots AGAINST (capital letters,of course ) a Commonwealth player"?
Jokes aside, being seen greeting Bianca Andreescu would have been  easy good PR for her. Correct me,if there're other videos,pics. I've just seen what was posted here.   Harry and  Meghan are  Commonwealth ambassadors or something like that,right?




hellosunshine said:


> Meghan becoming such a huge phenomenon has irked a lot of people and to add insult to injury, Meghan hasn't been interested nor longing for acceptance within those social circles. She's doing her own thing and it looks like Harry, Charles, and the Queen are giving her a wide latitude to do so.


Right now Meghan is click bait for the tabloid press,which isn't that much different from what Kate used to be around her pre- and post-wedding days. Kate has also been stalked by paps for years,so there were also that type of coverage too. What is happening is that the click bait switched from the mostly "positive" coverage before her wedding (PR-driven or not),to their current press. If we exclude the headlines and attacks that are vicious just to fuel clicks, we can't deny that they're also offering opportunities for some type of criticism on a silver platter. I'm always perplexed whenever I see someone like  Lainey  repeating how Meghan is outsmarting everyone with her great  Hollywood PR game. I don't see it,tbh.




limom said:


> Besides the horrible racist attacks, it is very much in line with acceptable criticism.
> It really is beyond dumb and arrogant for them to think that they are beyond criticisms.
> They are supposed to be role models. He was born into it and greatly benefited from his birth, she willingly married into this institution at over 35, she knew exactly what she got into,
> I absolutely do not feel sorry whatsoever for her or him.
> Give me a break. We all get evaluated on our job career, she is no exception, imo.
> She knows what is expected of her, is it too demanding to fulfill her obligations?
> Oh, she is now being compared to a lobster? Please, cry me a river.
> those so called celebrities are truly beyond clueless and self serving.
> The Sussex looks very much in love, they have a new healthy baby boy , get to travel all over the world, do a bit of charities here and there while never having to worry about how to provide for themselves and wearing Dior non stop?
> Where do I sign up?


 I don't even pay  attention to every bit of news about them,but judging by their recent coverage,some  criticism (excluding obviously the more vicious attacks)  makes sense,because it's really not clear what they want to be.
Their current press is evidently a mix of  factors like clickbait,more or less reliable leaks from people who work with them, and of course,their own actions and some poorly timed decisions.
I doubt his brother is  pointing a gun at them..
But I also think there's a quite aggressive PR push on their part in some instances.
For the poster asking why people can't decide if they are aware or not of their  image,it's blatantly evident to me that they care a lot about what they call "their brand" and they're very aware of their image  (off and on camera,above all Meghan, because of her background),but I'm not convinced they care or still care about the "context" (the infamous "optics",how the British people may perceive them),which is why I can't really see her/them as the PR experts that some people still say they are.
Now they're evidently pandering to an  American audience. That Marie Claire  article  already made the point about them announcing things to maximize the exposition in the United States. The fact that it's now common knowledge that they're using alternate American teams of managers,lawyers and a PR firm like Sunshine Sachs to handle their public relations is giving it more credit.
How these "plans" can go along with the fact that they owe their visibility and position to a British taxpayer-funded instituition is, in my opinion,the question mark.

I also think it's delusional to think that William and a few staff members (who are in any case lower in the "food chain" compared to the senior aides that I guess advise his father and the queen)are responsible for the sheer volume of negative or slightly negative  press that goes from tabloids to news outlets like the Times, the left-wing  Independent,Guardian (Guardian that rarely covers the monarchy).
It's not just "tabloid gossip" manoevreud by a couple of persons with a shady agenda.
The whole  private jet hypocrisy thing was pretty much everywhere.
The Guardian and Independent hardly cover "royal gossip" AFAIK.
These are just examples of articles that were published recently (really quick Google search):
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/meghans-american-pr-advisers-dont-understand-royalty-x5zvcmkn0

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...nce-entitled-are-royally-irritating-2hhdmft8b

This one is quite funny and IMO quite spot on:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/aug/31/harry-meghan-learn-to-be-boring


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> So, Meghan's maternity leave is coming to an end on Thursday but it certainly wasn't a break..
> 
> -May 6th, Meghan gave birth to Archie
> -May 8th, Archie was introduced to the world w/ a press conference at Windsor Castle
> -later that same afternoon Archie met the Queen and private press photos were taken of the meeting
> -June 8th, Meghan accompanied Harry to Trooping the Colour
> -June 29th, Meghan made a surprise appearance w/ Harry to the First Major League Baseball Game in Europe
> -July 4th, Meghan stepped out to support Serena Williams at Wimbledon
> -July 6th, Archie was baptized in a private ceremony
> -July 10th, Meghan watched Harry play in a charity polo match
> -July 13th, Meghan stepped out w/ Kate & Pippa to watch Serena Williams play at Wimbledon finals
> -July 14, Meghan and Harry attended the Lion King premiere in support of their conservation work
> 
> Harry has made several appearances sans Meghan but she's also been working behind the scenes guest editing British Vogue, planning itinerary for the African tour + future engagements that are coming up in October, and curating her workwear capsule collection for SmartWorks.
> 
> Amazing!


And she did 14+ hour days at least 4x a week for Suits for 6 years.. that was work compared to what she's doing now. This list, in all honesty, is a bunch of nothing. Watching someone play polo?! WHOA! Seriously hard. Stepping out for tennis?! Posing for some pictures after the baby was born. Wow, she needs a medal. I'll assume this post is a joke and just


----------



## marthastoo

lulilu said:


> Am I the only one who just scrolls past these multi-paragraph, endless tomes?  (not pointing to anyone in particular)
> 
> Seriously, who has the time or psychic energy to read them?



Indeed.


----------



## Flatsy

Morgane said:


> I'm always perplexed whenever I see someone like Lainey repeating how Meghan is outsmarting everyone with her great Hollywood PR game. I don't see it,tbh.


It cracks me up whenever Lainey goes on and on admiring Meghan's "flexing".  If the purpose of "flexing" is getting yourself into the press every day and not caring whether the coverage is good or bad a la a Kardashian, then maybe the flexing is paying off.  I would think the goal of good PR would be to minimize negative coverage and generate lots of positive coverage and that's not happening.



Morgane said:


> For the poster asking why people can't decide if they are aware or not of their image,it's blatantly evident to me that they care a lot about what they call "their brand" and they're very aware of their image (off and on camera,above all Meghan, because of her background),but I'm not convinced they care or still care about the "context" (the infamous "optics",how the British people may perceive them),


A lot of Harry and Meghan's projects lately remind me of this video:     "We've got to dooooooo something."  A lot of posturing, not much substance.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> Does Meghan have 2 other children that she is also caring for and one that is very young?  Why do you feel the constant need to compare these two?!?!  Basta Cosi ..



Two of her children are now in grade school from 9-3 while the other is taken care of by a nanny.

Listen, I just think they should do more..I mean if you read comments on their Instagram, their own fans are begging them to do more work and I'll leave this at that.




Morgane said:


> Didn't Meghan go in "maternity leave" (well,the royal version of it..)  in  March?   I'm pretty sure it's what I read. Kate has the Wimbledon patronage,so her attendance serves another purpose too. It's not just to watch friends playing. But,really,nothing of what they do is "work",whether it's  Wimbledon,attending a film premiere,some anniversary celebration,or a photo shoot.. I'd reserve the word "amazing" for something else,tbh.



Meghan went on maternity leave end of March. And yes, Kate is a patron of Wimbledon but I believe that one day where Meghan accompanied her..it was part of a combined engagement together since the Sussexes also posted about it.




ccbaggirl89 said:


> And she did 14+ hour days at least 4x a week for Suits for 6 years.. that was work compared to what she's doing now. This list, in all honesty, is a bunch of nothing. Watching someone play polo?! WHOA! Seriously hard.



Dismiss it as you want but that one polo match is when we got to see little Archie and it made the press and fans alike very excited. Meghan could've very easily hid away (as Kate usually does) after giving birth but didn't.

Also, understand that she was working on her British Vogue piece, the SmartWorks capsule collection, and preparing for their Africa Tour.


----------



## hellosunshine

+ MORE PHOTOS of The Duke of Sussex Attending Reception at the Guildhall


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Thank you. Plus I looked up Kate’s calendar. Looks like she had about 20 engagements. Three small children at home counts for nothing?  Considering how well behaved and socialized her children are, it would appear that they are getting a lot of mommy/ daddy time and attention.



You made this post, yet happily quoted Flatsy. The rule should go both ways Kate shouldn’t be brought for posts about Meghan.



Flatsy said:


> Kate's ability to shop in budget stores (and regular grocery stores as well) is not related to her being Dutch, so I'm not sure what your point is here except to contradict me just for the hell of it.
> 
> 
> 
> And the Dutch royals fly commercial - with the king himself often guest co-piloting as he is an active pilot.



The Dutch royals fly privately, there are pap pictures of them in Argentina leaving a private plane. The King flying a commercial flight to keep up with his pilot license is not the same as flying with his family to Argentina or to the villa in Greece on a private plane.

It is easier for the Dutch royals to go out in about in the NYC, they are under less scrutiny than the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

I really wish there were not comparisons between WK and MH. But, it seems to be prevalent everywhere.
lol I just realized I put WK and MH. William first in their relationship and Meghan first in theirs. Not sure what that says about me!


----------



## threadbender

buffym said:


> You made this post, yet happily quoted Flatsy. The rule should go both ways Kate shouldn’t be brought for posts about Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> The Dutch royals fly privately, there are pap pictures of them in Argentina leaving a private plane. The King flying a commercial flight to keep up with his pilot license is not the same as flying with his family to Argentina or to the villa in Greece on a private plane.
> 
> It is easier for the Dutch royals to go out in about in the NYC, they are under less scrutiny than the BRF.


Are the Dutch royals reprimanding the public in regards to carbon emissions etc? I think that is the issue with MH. But, I don't follow many other royals, I admit.


----------



## hellosunshine

There will always be comparisons...people should get used to it.


----------



## buffym

Flatsy said:


> The King and Queen of the Netherlands were photographed shopping at The Container Store a few weeks ago and people ate it up with a spoon.  Not only do royals bargain shop, it is great publicity for them when they do.  The opposite (overspending on luxury items) does not go over well.





threadbender said:


> Are the Dutch royals reprimanding the public in regards to carbon emissions etc? I think that is the issue with MH. But, I don't follow many other royals, I admit.



My post was in response to the posters quote above. 

Which is the Dutch royals are less scrutinized than the BRF. The Dutch royals were photographed shopping on holiday, yet there are rarely if any pap pictures in the Netherlands.


----------



## zen1965

buffym said:


> The King and Queen are European royals less known in the US.
> 
> The probably have the best of both worlds. They can fly over on a private jet because their people do not care about their royals flying privately, they can walk the streets in their country’s because the public respects the royal family privacy and strict pap laws.
> 
> It isn’t a fair comparison the scrutiny is higher for the BRF.



I daresay European royals could not care less how well known they are in the US.
Your statement that their people do not care about their spending (e.g. flying privately) is simply false.

The rabid British gutter press of course is something else and to that extent does not an equivalent on the European continent.


----------



## buffym

zen1965 said:


> I daresay European royals could not care less how well known they are in the US.
> Your statement that their people do not care about their spending (e.g. flying privately) is simply false.
> 
> The rabid British gutter press of course is something else and to that extent does not an equivalent on the European continent.



You misunderstood me because what you just quoted  is what I said in my post.

The European press rarely questions their royal families vacations, the Danish royals went to Burning Man this past year and  Princess Mette- Marit attended the Met Gala, yet the media in their countries do not focus on their private time.

My statement was saying European  royals can walk around America with more freedom because they are lesser known in the US and their countries media behaves differently than the U.K.


----------



## threadbender

The Dutch Royals are not "in your face" about things and then hypocritical, as far as I could see. They do their jobs and, do them well. 

Let's face it, Harry and Meghan are not wallflowers and never will be. They will be watched and written about. Harry has lived with it his whole life. Meghan may not have known the intensity but she was far more prepared than many would be. We keep saying it is how they are representing themselves and their "optics" that are driving the frenzy. Once there is a rhythm to their activities, it may calm down. It may not if they decide to do things that draw attention. Whichever, it will be planned.

And, I am gonna keep saying it. I wanna see Archie!!! I love babies!


----------



## doni

buffym said:


> My post was in response to the posters quote above.
> 
> Which is the Dutch royals are less scrutinized than the BRF. The Dutch royals were photographed shopping on holiday, yet there are rarely if any pap pictures in the Netherlands.


How many pap pictures have you seen of the Queen?

In any monarchy, secondary royals are always more open bait that the actual monarchs.
It is true that in the UK things changed with the Diana situation, even if it is also true that the British media is traditionally meaner than others in Europe but not only in respect of the Royal family.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Didn’t one of our thread contributors run into Kate grocery shopping?
> 
> The answer to your comment in the first paragraph is.......you bet.


That'd be me, frequently and privately.
And hubby's friend worked with William


----------



## doni

buffym said:


> The European press rarely questions their royal families vacations, the Danish royals went to Burning Man this past year and  Princess Mette- Marit attended the Met Gala, yet the media in their countries do not focus on their private time.
> 
> My statement was saying European  royals can walk around America with more freedom because they are lesser known in the US and their countries media behaves differently than the U.K.



Totally agree on the second count, that’s why many go to study in the US and have the time of their lives there and in more than one case meet their spouses while abroad.

But on the European press not questioning royal vacations... If your read Spanish I can pass you hundreds of articles in the Spanish media this Summer doing exactly that. The current monarchs insist in taking vacations abroad in Summer without revealing where they go, which is _always_ badly received and criticized by the press, Plus this year they chose to disappear in the middle of a political crisis. I tell you, the media were on fire.

I do think that the focus on Meghan is excessive and bordering the obsessive and the criticism vicious and in many cases plainly absurd. They will get bored of her eventually (unless there is drama).
But I also think that a lot of the outrage in the US towards her treatment comes from misunderstandings and wrong assumptions on her current role and situation. The judgement is often as if she was a celebrity paying for her fame. But in a monarchy, citizens have a right to certain expectations, and royals, who serve their citizens in a literal sense, need to respond to those expectations. It is a different concept.


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> But I also think that a lot of the outrage in the US towards her treatment comes from misunderstandings and wrong assumptions on her current role and situation. The judgement is often as if she was a celebrity paying for her fame. But in a monarchy, citizens have a right to certain expectations, and royals, who serve their citizens in a literal sense, need to respond to those expectations. It is a different concept.


I totally agree on this, and she needs to remember she is now a Royal, not a celebrity in the usual sense. And people need to realise this also..... Beyonce I'm looking at you lol, the "my princess" and the hug was excessive in my opinion.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Sharont2305 said:


> *I totally agree on this, and she needs to remember she is now a Royal, not a celebrity in the usual sense. *And people need to realise this also..... Beyonce I'm looking at you lol, the "my princess" and the hug was excessive in my opinion.


Yes, and shouldn't Harry a Royal by birth be leading on this?  Couldn't he have guided Meghan once they decided to marry to together set the tone for the Sussex style of Royal celebrity?  I think he's let them both down in this regard, and in retrospect I'm not that surprised. He sometimes comes across as a headstrong man-child (which kind of works for him) and he clearly loves the global celebrity life while enjoying the privileges of his Royal birthright.
Anyway, it's early days relatively speaking and it's been a whirlwind since the two of them met. If Harry's going to step up he needs to do it soon and take some sound advice from family and trusted advisors (though not Sir Elton, etc ) but people who want the best for them and the BRF and who'll help steer them into calmer water.  Better move than employing PR crisis teams IMO.


----------



## Sharont2305

Straight-Laced said:


> Yes, and shouldn't Harry a Royal by birth be leading on this?  Couldn't he have guided Meghan once they decided to marry to together set the tone for the Sussex style of Royal celebrity?  I think he's let them both down in this regard, and in retrospect I'm not that surprised. He sometimes comes across as a headstrong man-child (which kind of works for him) and he clearly loves the global celebrity life while enjoying the privileges of his Royal birthright.
> Anyway, it's early days relatively speaking and it's been a whirlwind since the two of them met. If Harry's going to step up he needs to do it soon and take some sound advice from family and trusted advisors (though not Sir Elton, etc ) but people who want the best for them and the BRF and who'll help steer them into calmer water.  Better move than employing PR crisis teams IMO.


We'll said, totally agree. I'm disappointed in him


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> We'll said, totally agree. I'm disappointed in him



Could that indicate where he is in terms of his diminishing role?  It has to be tough when you go from being viewed as an equal with your brother who is a future king to seeing his role elevated while you are pushed a little bit out of the spotlight. Married life and adulthood has to be odd for "the spare" because it means becoming a secondary royal. Perhaps Harry is more irritated by that reality than anyone wants to believe, and thought a great perk of marrying Meghan would be keeping the spotlight?


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Could that indicate where he is in terms of his diminishing role?  It has to be tough when you go from being viewed as an equal with your brother who is a future king to seeing his role elevated while you are pushed a little bit out of the spotlight. Married life and adulthood has to be odd for "the spare" because it means becoming a secondary royal. Perhaps Harry is more irritated by that reality than anyone wants to believe, and thought a great perk of marrying Meghan would be keeping the spotlight?


You might be right but, as far as diminishing role goes, at the moment he is the Monarchs grandson, just like the other 7 are. All equal, I'm not forgetting Williams more senior future.
Whenever it happens, one day he will be the son of a Monarch therefore catapulting him more "senior" to the cousins, and again I know the Cambridge children are above him in line of succession. I'm talking about him being a working Royal, the kids are not. So, until William is King and the Cambridge Children are grown up and are working Royals, Harry will be "senior" and shouldn't be acting like a celebrity.

Hope that made sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

doni said:


> Totally agree on the second count, that’s why many go to study in the US and have the time of their lives there and in more than one case meet their spouses while abroad.
> 
> But on the European press not questioning royal vacations... If your read Spanish I can pass you hundreds of articles in the Spanish media this Summer doing exactly that. The current monarchs insist in taking vacations abroad in Summer without revealing where they go, which is _always_ badly received and criticized by the press, Plus this year they chose to disappear in the middle of a political crisis. I tell you, the media were on fire.
> 
> I do think that the focus on Meghan is excessive and bordering the obsessive and the criticism vicious and in many cases plainly absurd. They will get bored of her eventually (unless there is drama).
> But I also think that a lot of the outrage in the US towards her treatment comes from misunderstandings and wrong assumptions on her current role and situation. The judgement is often as if she was a celebrity paying for her fame. But in a monarchy, citizens have a right to certain expectations, and royals, who serve their citizens in a literal sense, need to respond to those expectations. It is a different concept.



Yes, I’m aware of Spain I should of said except with it, I feel the Spanish media can be awful to the Spanish Queen, but the point of my post was the poster mentioned the Dutch royals and I was stating they were in a different position than the BRF, the contrast was not the same.

Some of the POV from the US is that Meghan like the Queen of Spain is judged harshly by the press compared to other members of the royal family not the public doesn’t have to criticize the royals, but if you criticize the royal spouse than criticize the royal by birth and the criticism is rarely equal.

Also, when Meghan isn’t seen the press still turn articles about her so I think it is less her than them.

Example, today’s Express,


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> international!
> Was that a Domestic European flight? .. if so, yes .. it's a LOT cheaper than flying internationally!!!  When I had to fly last minute from Boston to CDG (Paris) .. the B-Class ticket was $12,000!!!!!  Both the Hotels and Airlines run "patterns" every day based on historical data and trending .. that's why you can look one day at a price and then the next day, it's totally different.  In some cases (especially with the larger Hotel chains), the rates can change w/in hours.  My niece's husband is in the Hotel business (Revenue Manager) as was my niece, so they told me about this (in addition, I did a project many years ago when I had my own management consulting business for Hilton .. and it was challenging to say the least).  The Airline business; found out about their patterns when working at Bain & Company.  Bottom line, and I tell EVERYONE I know who wants to travel for leisure .. BOOK EARLY and try to (if possible) avoid peak times (for instance, going to Europe from the US in Fall is a lot cheaper than in the summer)!


fra-mia means frankfurt (germany) - miami (usa)


----------



## Flatsy

doni said:


> But in a monarchy, citizens have a right to certain expectations, and royals, who serve their citizens in a literal sense, need to respond to those expectations. It is a different concept.


Back when Charles and Diana got married, they honeymooned in the UK and aboard the royal yacht, which Diana hated, because vacationing abroad (and therefore promoting tourism abroad) would have been a no-no.  And they posed for photos for the British public.

Compared to that, things have eased up a lot for the current generation.  They honeymooned wherever they wanted and it was generally agreed upon that they deserved privacy.

But I don't think it's wrong that they should still be expected first and foremost to show that they are working hard for the UK and that's where their first priority should be.  They don't deserve the money and the palaces and all the rest of the perks just for being celebrities.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> There will always be comparisons...people should get used to it.


You just aren't making relevant comparisons.  Throwing in "but Kate's lazy" every time people fail to be in sufficient awe of what Meghan's doing does nothing to bolster your case for how great Meghan is.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> You might be right but, as far as diminishing role goes, at the moment he is the Monarchs grandson, just like the other 7 are. All equal, I'm not forgetting Williams more senior future.
> Whenever it happens, one day he will be the son of a Monarch therefore catapulting him more "senior" to the cousins, and again I know the Cambridge children are above him in line of succession. I'm talking about him being a working Royal, the kids are not. So, until William is King and the Cambridge Children are grown up and are working Royals, Harry will be "senior" and shouldn't be acting like a celebrity.
> 
> Hope that made sense.



It does make sense -  I was speaking more in terms of perception than actual official stature. You're right that he's one of many who are equal as the monarch's grandchildren. But unofficially, William and Harry got more attention than the others because they were the future king's sons. As they grew, William had a higher stature as third in line. Harry was kept in the fold when he was single - that changed when he got married because William no longer had to "look after him" at events (and I am saying that not as an actual care taker, but because it was very normal for William Kate and Harry to arrive at things together so Harry was not alone).  So unofficially, he's now gone to being just one of the grandchildren, while his brother is the special grandchild.


----------



## minababe

hellosunshine said:


> So, Meghan's maternity leave is coming to an end on Thursday but it certainly wasn't a break..
> 
> -May 6th, Meghan gave birth to Archie
> -May 8th, Archie was introduced to the world w/ a press conference at Windsor Castle
> -later that same afternoon Archie met the Queen and private press photos were taken of the meeting
> -June 8th, Meghan accompanied Harry to Trooping the Colour
> -June 29th, Meghan made a surprise appearance w/ Harry to the First Major League Baseball Game in Europe
> -July 4th, Meghan stepped out to support Serena Williams at Wimbledon
> -July 6th, Archie was baptized in a private ceremony
> -July 10th, Meghan watched Harry play in a charity polo match
> -July 13th, Meghan stepped out w/ Kate & Pippa to watch Serena Williams play at Wimbledon finals
> -July 14, Meghan and Harry attended the Lion King premiere in support of their conservation work
> 
> Harry has made several appearances sans Meghan but she's also been working behind the scenes guest editing British Vogue, planning itinerary for the African tour + future engagements that are coming up in October, and curating her workwear capsule collection for SmartWorks.
> 
> Amazing!



she was really busy and hard working through that time. she is def not the lean back type.


----------



## minababe

CeeJay said:


> international!
> Was that a Domestic European flight? .. if so, yes .. it's a LOT cheaper than flying internationally!!!  When I had to fly last minute from Boston to CDG (Paris) .. the B-Class ticket was $12,000!!!!!  Both the Hotels and Airlines run "patterns" every day based on historical data and trending .. that's why you can look one day at a price and then the next day, it's totally different.  In some cases (especially with the larger Hotel chains), the rates can change w/in hours.  My niece's husband is in the Hotel business (Revenue Manager) as was my niece, so they told me about this (in addition, I did a project many years ago when I had my own management consulting business for Hilton .. and it was challenging to say the least).  The Airline business; found out about their patterns when working at Bain & Company.  Bottom line, and I tell EVERYONE I know who wants to travel for leisure .. BOOK EARLY and try to (if possible) avoid peak times (for instance, going to Europe from the US in Fall is a lot cheaper than in the summer)!



lol
domestic european flight? what should that be
Than you call Europe a country?! International flights are Spain - Italy.
domestic flights are Rom - Milano for expample ..


----------



## daisychainz

Straight-Laced said:


> Yes, and shouldn't Harry a Royal by birth be leading on this?  Couldn't he have guided Meghan once they decided to marry to together set the tone for the Sussex style of Royal celebrity?  I think he's let them both down in this regard, and in retrospect I'm not that surprised. He sometimes comes across as a headstrong man-child (which kind of works for him) and he clearly loves the global celebrity life while enjoying the privileges of his Royal birthright.
> Anyway, it's early days relatively speaking and it's been a whirlwind since the two of them met. If Harry's going to step up he needs to do it soon and take some sound advice from family and trusted advisors (though not Sir Elton, etc ) but people who want the best for them and the BRF and who'll help steer them into calmer water.  Better move than employing PR crisis teams IMO.


I agree. Just because he's royal though doesn't mean he helped her out, or that he is a good teacher for her. It was always the impression that Harry shunned royalty to some extent, so why would he school Meghan to be prim and proper. Or, maybe he thought she'd make close friends with other female royals and take guidance from them, or just learn on the fly. I think Harry just let her alone except for basics, and it's turning out not so great for their royal look. I don't think he'll step up as neither really seems to care about being royal, but just having the association and benefits. I realize she's American and her roots are there but she married into THE most British family in the land, so I think jetting over to the USA too often and keeping those connections will continue to hurt her image and not help it. Want to visit with Serena and have parties with your hairdresser - have them over to Frogmore instead. She should be showing the British people she actually wants to be there.


----------



## buffym

Harry at the BCG Charity Event today


----------



## bag-mania

Straight-Laced said:


> Yes, and shouldn't Harry a Royal by birth be leading on this?  Couldn't he have guided Meghan once they decided to marry to together set the tone for the Sussex style of Royal celebrity?  I think he's let them both down in this regard, and in retrospect I'm not that surprised. He sometimes comes across as a headstrong man-child (which kind of works for him) and he clearly loves the global celebrity life while enjoying the privileges of his Royal birthright.
> Anyway, it's early days relatively speaking and it's been a whirlwind since the two of them met. If Harry's going to step up he needs to do it soon and take some sound advice from family and trusted advisors (though not Sir Elton, etc ) but people who want the best for them and the BRF and who'll help steer them into calmer water.  Better move than employing PR crisis teams IMO.



You may be assuming a lot by believing Meghan would want to be guided. She has the stronger personality and I think her wishes prevail, at least from what we have seen so far.

I've said this before, but Harry has always been drawn to celebrities. Most of his exes were actresses, models, and singers. So I don't think he's inclined to try to toe the protocol line any more than he absolutely has to.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> Could that indicate where he is in terms of his diminishing role?  It has to be tough when you go from being viewed as an equal with your brother who is a future king to seeing his role elevated while you are pushed a little bit out of the spotlight. Married life and adulthood has to be odd for "the spare" because it means becoming a secondary royal. Perhaps Harry is more irritated by that reality than anyone wants to believe, and thought a great perk of marrying Meghan would be keeping the spotlight?


I can see where he might be a bit jealous of William.  But that "should" be balanced by all the freedom he has and will have in his life compared to his brother.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> It does make sense -  I was speaking more in terms of perception than actual official stature. You're right that he's one of many who are equal as the monarch's grandchildren. But unofficially, William and Harry got more attention than the others because they were the future king's sons. As they grew, William had a higher stature as third in line. Harry was kept in the fold when he was single - that changed when he got married because William no longer had to "look after him" at events (and I am saying that not as an actual care taker, but because it was very normal for William Kate and Harry to arrive at things together so Harry was not alone).  So unofficially, he's now gone to being just one of the grandchildren, while his brother is the special grandchild.


not relevant to the British people's perception of whether they work hard enough but from the POV of how well known and loved they are (including in the US), being Diana's sons is also important


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> not relevant to the British people's perception of whether they work hard enough but from the POV of how well known and loved they are (including in the US), being Diana's sons is also important


Yes, and the fact that he will be the son of a monarch one day.


----------



## CeeJay

minababe said:


> lol
> domestic european flight? what should that be
> Than you call Europe a country?! International flights are Spain - Italy.
> domestic flights are Rom - Milano for expample ..


Well, what was the point of the Euro .. hmmmm, to create a more 'centralized' Europe? 

Don't know how much you've flown from US <-> Europe, but when you fly into a major European hub (_for example - Heathrow or CDG_), the inter-European flights are described as "Domestic European".  If you want to argue the point, then maybe you should discuss this with *British Airways*, *Air France*, *KLM*, *Lufthansa*, *Aer Lingus*, *Virgin Atlantic*, *Alitalia* .. and many of the others that I used when flying from the US <-> Europe.  I also lived in Europe (_London, Edinburgh and Paris_) for some time, so it's not like I'm ignorant.  @minababe .. you seem to have an issue with me so please, just put me on IGNORE!


----------



## hellosunshine

Prince Harry closed a £1 BILLION UK Sterling government bond trade - known as Gilts. One of the largest trades in the market over the past 5 years. @*BGCCharityDay *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> You just aren't making relevant comparisons.  Throwing in "but Kate's lazy" every time people fail to be in sufficient awe of what Meghan's doing does nothing to bolster your case for how great Meghan is.



Oh, I think it's very relevant especially when speaking on terms of engagements or things based on facts. I see people here discussing blind items, quoting stories from the DailyFail, and other reporting like it's all somehow factual. If we can discuss or gossip on those things then we can also discuss and make comparisons on a variety of different topics. Let people be.

Furthermore, I've never said Kate's lazy but I think it's interesting that fans of the Cambridges are begging KP to increase the schedule of William & kate now that 2 kids are in grade school for majority of the day and one is being cared for by a full time nanny.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, I think it's very relevant especially when speaking on terms of engagements or things based on facts. I see people here discussing blind items, quoting stories from the DailyFail, and other reporting like it's all somehow factual. If we can discuss or gossip on those things then we can also discuss and make comparisons on a variety of different topics. Let people be.
> 
> Furthermore, I've never said Kate's lazy but I think it's interesting that fans of the Cambridges are begging KP to increase the schedule of William & kate now that 2 kids are in grade school for majority of the day and one is being cared for by a full time nanny.


Some of it might be factual


----------



## Welltraveled!

Good for him.  The charities could definitely benefit from this.



hellosunshine said:


> Prince Harry closed a £1 BILLION UK Sterling government bond trade - known as Gilts. One of the largest trades in the market over the past 5 years. @*BGCCharityDay *


----------



## hellosunshine

Haha, the insanity -

Meghan steps out to support friends - " Omg, how dare she leave her baby! Does she have no maternal instincts?!"

Meghan goes out with Harry - "She wants attention"

Meghan rests at home - "....but where's Meghan?"


----------



## rose60610

It looks bad from the standpoint that M could leave the fam and the country to watch her friend play tennis in the U.S., but not be at the Invictus event (being held in London) on its 5th Anniversary. Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't. Hmmm. Another "let them eat cake" moment is how many would take it. How much is the PR firm getting paid?


----------



## LibbyRuth

She's still on maternity leave for a day right?  And Harry has gone to other Invictus events on his own - just like she has gone to things for her patronages on her own. 
With a newborn, their going to things separately actually makes sense. Over the weekend, Harry was with Archie (with assistance) and Meghan went somewhere. Now Harry goes to work, and Meghan is home with Archie (with assistance). Seems rather normal for parents of a newborn.


----------



## hellosunshine

rose60610 said:


> It looks bad from the standpoint that M could leave the fam and the country to watch her friend play tennis in the U.S., but not be at the Invictus event (being held in London) on its 5th Anniversary. Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't. Hmmm. Another "let them eat cake" moment is how many would take it. How much is the PR firm getting paid?



Wow, what an awful thing to say. The Invictus Games means so much to Harry. He has worked incredibly hard to make the event what it is today. Meghan likely stayed behind so Harry could bask in and celebrate his success and the media couldn't even wait to publish an article to make it about her.


----------



## pukasonqo

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t
If MM turned up she then could be described ad stealing H’s thunder, bad mother for leaving little A home (twice, the trauma!)...ah, the missed opportunities for the tabloids
MM is like the british version of AJ, they both are very polarising


----------



## Welltraveled!

It makes good PR sense for Meghan to be absent.  Harry started the Invictus games so he should *CONTINUE *to be the face of the games.  Meghan would have been a media distraction which would have taken the focus away from this great event.  

This is Harry's time to shine for all the effort he put into the Invictus games (before and during Meghan) for the last 5 years.  His wife is allowing him to be great and bask in the moment!  



rose60610 said:


> It looks bad from the standpoint that M could leave the fam and the country to watch her friend play tennis in the U.S., but not be at the Invictus event (being held in London) on its 5th Anniversary. *Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't. *Hmmm. Another "let them eat cake" moment is how many would take it. How much is the PR firm getting paid?


----------



## daisychainz

rose60610 said:


> It looks bad from the standpoint that M could leave the fam and the country to watch her friend play tennis in the U.S., but not be at the Invictus event (being held in London) on its 5th Anniversary. Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't. Hmmm. Another "let them eat cake" moment is how many would take it. How much is the PR firm getting paid?


No kidding. Especially since they met via the Invictus Games, right? Maybe if the games had more celebrity attendees she'd have made time.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> No kidding. Especially since they met via the Invictus Games, right? Maybe if the games had more celebrity attendees she'd have made time.


Oh sure, that makes a lot of sense. Because she gave up a Hollywood career to marry Harry only so that she could meet celebrities. Sure . Got it.


----------



## Welltraveled!

True statement.  I will definitely say this - thanks to their fans, trash media and critics - that Meghan and Harry will continue to be relevant for the next few years at least.   



pukasonqo said:


> Damned if you do, damned if you don’t
> If MM turned up she then could be described ad stealing H’s thunder, bad mother for leaving little A home (twice, the trauma!)...ah, the missed opportunities for the tabloids
> MM is like the british version of AJ, they both are very polarising


----------



## Flatsy

In this case, Invictus is Harry's patronage, not a joint project, so Meghan should not be expected to tag along on all of his engagements related to Invictus, any more than Harry should be expected to show up at Meghan's Smartworks photo shoots.

But no one should be holding their breath waiting for The Daily Mail to stop stirring s***.  That's what they do.


rose60610 said:


> Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't. Hmmm. Another "let them eat cake" moment is how many would take it.


I do think it will be a good idea when Meghan is finished with maternity leave to make sure she's seen doing more engagements among the common people to balance out the more fun, celebrity stuff.  Even though she's been on maternity leave, she was willing to ditch maternity leave every time celebrities were involved - from the Vogue issue to The Lion King premiere to Wimbledon, and the list goes on.  

So that's all she's been seen doing for the past 6 months - and she knows how important "optics" are.    If she wants people to stop thinking she's all about celebrities and social climbing, she needs to get some new images out there of her shaking hands with kids and stuff.  The tour will help.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> Oh sure, that makes a lot of sense. Because she gave up a Hollywood career to marry Harry only so that she could meet celebrities. Sure . Got it.


She gave up a D-list acting job and now gets to meet A-listers she'd never have had the chance to even be in a room with otherwise. If some A-listers came to Invictus events, you better believe MM would attend.


----------



## hellosunshine

rose60610 said:


> Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't.



Meghan attends tennis games for a friend, Serena Williams. You don't see her attending any other matches. Do you?

Secondly, I'm confused on what celebrity hobnobbing that she's done? Wasn't the Lion King premier her first celebrity premiere with Harry?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Welltraveled! said:


> It makes good PR sense for Meghan to be absent.  Harry started the Invictus games so he should *CONTINUE *to be the face of the games.  Meghan would have been a media distraction which would have taken the focus away from this great event.
> 
> This is Harry's time to shine for all the effort he put into the Invictus games (before and during Meghan) for the last 5 years.  His wife is allowing him to be great and bask in the moment!



I was going to say this same thing - why should she go and distract from the true meaning and spirit of the event? All of the press would be about Meghan, and no thought about the event, the charity, or those it is intended for.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan attends tennis games for a friend, Serena Williams. You don't see her attending any other matches. Do you?
> 
> Secondly, I'm confused on what celebrity hobnobbing that she's done? Wasn't the Lion King premier her first celebrity premiere with Harry?


I don't follow her closely but I am aware she's made friends with the Clooneys.  And yesterdays news was something about her and Ellen working together.  Do you think as an actress in Suits she'd have been friends with George and Amal?


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Secondly, I'm confused on what celebrity hobnobbing that she's done? Wasn't the Lion King premier her first celebrity premiere with Harry?


Please.  Her own baby shower was almost as star studded as that premiere.

What celebrities have we heard about her hobnobbing with in the past few months? George, Amal, Elton, Gayle, Serena, Beyonce, Pharell, Oprah, Ellen, Portia, Michelle, Salma, Jameela.  No last names are even necessary.   I'm sure you've got multiple reasons why none of those "count".  But the truth is, she spends a lot of time with celebrities, both when she's able to befriend them and when she's able to connect with them through "work", such as it is.


----------



## buffym

Some more pictures of Harry today


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> She gave up a D-list acting job and now gets to meet A-listers she'd never have had the chance to even be in a room with otherwise. If some A-listers came to Invictus events, you better believe MM would attend.



So why did she attend so many of the events prior to Archie being born? Did it take her THAT many events to realize celebrities didn’t go?


----------



## A1aGypsy

I find it amazing that MM went from being star struck because Ellen threw a “you should take that dog home” over her shoulder at her (which Ellen did not remember) to marrying a Prince and suddenly Ellen is falling all over herself to get a wedding invite and then a visit with the elusive Archie WHICH SHE GETS and then promptly turns around and tells everyone and their mother about SEEING ARCHIE! FEEDING ARCHIE!! HOLDING ARCHIE!!!  

What a waste of time. Go to a paediatric oncology unit and donate the money from your flight. Bring awareness to the needs of those units instead of this.

These people are all gross. All of them.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I find it amazing that MM went from being star struck because Ellen threw a “you should take that dog home” over her shoulder at her (which Ellen did not remember) to marrying a Prince and suddenly Ellen is falling all over herself to get a wedding invite and then a visit with the elusive Archie WHICH SHE GETS and then promptly turns around and tells everyone and their mother about SEEING ARCHIE! FEEDING ARCHIE!! HOLDING ARCHIE!!!
> 
> What a waste of time. Go to a paediatric oncology unit and donate the money from your flight. Bring awareness to the needs of those units instead of this.
> 
> These people are all gross. All of them.


you'd think ellen with her tv show and all her products she's selling, etc. would be secure enough that she wouldn't be falling all over herself over this stuff.....


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> I don't follow her closely but I am aware she's made friends with the Clooneys.  And yesterdays news was something about her and Ellen working together.  Do you think as an actress in Suits she'd have been friends with George and Amal?



The Clooneys are incredibly opportunistic couple. I've noticed that they tend to extend goodwill and/or befriend people new to powerful roles. I'm not least bit surprised that they've reached out to Meghan & Harry considering their new status as a power couple. It's what the Clooneys do.

Secondly, Ellen is befriending them in the hope that they can work together in their conservation work in Rwanda (Ellen) and Botswana (Harry+Meghan). This is a friendship with mutual benefits of spreading good work.




Flatsy said:


> Please.  Her own baby shower was almost as star studded as that premiere.
> 
> What celebrities have we heard about her hobnobbing with in the past few months? George, Amal, Elton, Gayle, Serena, Beyonce, Pharell, Oprah, Ellen, Portia, Michelle, Salma, Jameela.  No last names are even necessary.   I'm sure you've got multiple reasons why none of those "count".  But the truth is, she spends a lot of time with celebrities, both when she's able to befriend them and when she's able to connect with them through "work", such as it is.


 
Ok so....

1. Serena and Meghan have been friends prior to her becoming a Duchess.

2. Elton John used to be great friends w/ Princess Diana and has always had an affinity for Harry. In turn, he has grown to like his wife. Big deal.

3. Pharell met them at the Lion King premiere and he's said that he admires the significance of their relationship. He's basically a fanboy.

Anyway, the rest of the people that you've mentioned were either in her British Vogue edit and she's admired them or they were invited to her baby shower which was organized by Serena Williams. I doubt Meghan had much say on the invitations and she certainly wasn't going to deny all the goodwill gestures from Hollywood. I believe these connections will help with many future charity work.


----------



## mrsinsyder

“Hollywood career.”

Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> The Clooneys are incredibly opportunistic couple. I've noticed that they tend to extend goodwill and/or befriend people new to powerful roles. I'm not least bit surprised that they've reached out to Meghan & Harry considering their new status as a power couple. It's what the Clooneys do.
> 
> Secondly, Ellen is befriending them in the hope that they can work together in their conservation work in Rwanda (Ellen) and Botswana (Harry+Meghan). This is a friendship with mutual benefits of spreading good work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so....
> 
> 1. Serena and Meghan have been friends prior to her becoming a Duchess.
> 
> 2. Elton John used to be great friends w/ Princess Diana and has always had an affinity for Harry. In turn, he has grown to like his wife. Big deal.
> 
> 3. Pharell met them at the Lion King premiere and he's said that he admires the significance of their relationship. He's basically a fanboy.
> 
> Anyway, the rest of the people that you've mentioned were either in her British Vogue edit and she's admired them or they were invited to her baby shower which was organized by Serena Williams. I doubt Meghan had much say on the invitations and she certainly wasn't going to deny all the goodwill gestures from Hollywood. I believe these connections will help with many future charity work.


yes, as you are saying yourself, with the exception of Serena, these people were not interested in her before she found Harry


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> “Hollywood career.”
> 
> Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).


I think it was perhaps a "Toronto career"


----------



## A1aGypsy

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think it was perhaps a "Toronto career"



You say that like it’s a bad thing! Hollywood North, Baby!


----------



## Welltraveled!

Everyone are at different levels when it comes to their career/fields.  I've had people tell me they are in the business field; but their the receptionist, for example.  

So, yes, Meghan had a "Hollywood career" was she an A-lister - no! Did Suits give her more exposure - Yes!  Was she on her way to becoming an A-Lister - Who knows!  

However, like most people working in their chosen career she was networking to climb that ladder a little more.  I don't begrudge her for that - every working person should be doing the same thing.  



mrsinsyder said:


> “Hollywood career.”
> 
> Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> “Hollywood career.”
> 
> Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).



No one's saying she's Cate Blanchett here. Meghan was very fortunate. She had a sucessful career. She wasn't broke or destitute. This isn't supposed to be about the quality of red carpets she's walked. That would be a little ridiculous.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> “Hollywood career.”
> 
> Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).



Meghan had a presence, yes marrying Harry was a step up but she attended events before him.

Pre Harry

Elton John’s event



Un



Hunger Games Premiere



Jason Williams Show



BCG Charity Day NYC which her husband did today


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

You're probably right.  I like the Suits series; but I wasn't interested in any of the celebrities outside of the show.

However, the issue some people have with Meghan is that "an actress" was able to go from "B-list Actress" to Royalty.  Never mind, the in-between - because no one cares about the process to improve oneself.  And because she now is a Royal, people are interested in her - for their own personal reasons.  



sdkitty said:


> yes, as you are saying yourself, with the exception of Serena, these people were not interested in her before she found Harry


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> yes, as you are saying yourself, with the exception of Serena, these people were not interested in her before she found Harry



Ok, but they are very supportive of her now. They like her and it's a good thing. Becoming friends with people of influence is a positive as it helps to promote your agenda or charity work. Together, you can meet mutual goals and support each others charitable causes.


----------



## hellosunshine

@buffym coming through with the receipts!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> @buffym coming through with the receipts!!


 
In a 15ish year career. Consider me put in my place!

Also don’t forget she went to a Golden Globes pre-party once.

Y’all act so proud of her but try so hard to make her something she wasn’t.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> In a 15ish year career. Consider me put in my place!
> 
> Also don’t forget she went to a Golden Globes pre-party once.



Haha! Hey, you've got a good sense of humor about this!


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Haha! Hey, you've got a good sense of humor about this!


Lol despite everything it’s really not that serious.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Well we can all agree on the following:


Meghan wasn't an A-list actress
Marrying Harry was - unexpected - upgrade for her
Due to her marriage, celebrities, politicians and Royals want to "rub elbows" with her
Thanks to her fans/critics/trash media - she is getting attention/exposure - which also benefits her charities


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think it was perhaps a "Toronto career"





A1aGypsy said:


> You say that like it’s a bad thing! Hollywood North, Baby!


Funny!  That's right, we've been Hollywood North since the 70s.   I'm laughing but it's true. 

But it was a cable show not a lot of people watched.  Me included.  I would never have heard of her if it weren't for that Reitman's commercial she did here.


----------



## Straight-Laced

daisychainz said:


> I agree.* Just because he's royal though doesn't mean he helped her out, or that he is a good teacher for her. It was always the impression that Harry shunned royalty to some extent, so why would he school Meghan to be prim and proper.* Or, maybe he thought she'd make close friends with other female royals and take guidance from them, or just learn on the fly. I think Harry just let her alone except for basics, and it's turning out not so great for their royal look. I don't think he'll step up as neither really seems to care about being royal, but just having the association and benefits. I realize she's American and her roots are there but she married into THE most British family in the land, so I think jetting over to the USA too often and keeping those connections will continue to hurt her image and not help it. Want to visit with Serena and have parties with your hairdresser - have them over to Frogmore instead. She should be showing the British people she actually wants to be there.


Agree with some parts of your post but I didn't say that Harry did coach her or even that he could.  
And I don't know how you concluded that guiding someone outside of Harry's world of Royalty, GB and the Commonwealth into the intricacies of becoming a member of the BRF through marriage means schooling someone to be 'prim and proper'. 
To me the guidance is about giving some healthy perspective from the inside and from lived experience about obligations, responsibilities and expectations.  But possibly this is beyond Harry for a number of reasons, including those you mentioned.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> In a 15ish year career. Consider me put in my place!
> 
> Also don’t forget she went to a Golden Globes pre-party once.
> 
> Y’all act so proud of her but try so hard to make her something she wasn’t.



I don’t believe anyone is trying to make Meghan into someone’s she is not. They poster asked about the red carpet events she attended pre Harry and those of some of them.

Meghan has risen in fame and stature since her marriage, but she had a life pre Harry and achievements. She wasn’t a movie star but she had her own level of fame.


----------



## Morgane

hellosunshine said:


> Dismiss it as you want but that one polo match is when we got to see little Archie and it made the press and fans alike very excited. *Meghan could've very easily hid away (as Kate usually does) after giving birth *but didn't.


I actually remember that last summer I've seen on this forum  pics of Kate  wearing a sundress that I liked (she still had her postpartum weight),and she was sitting on the grass with her children. It was probably in occasion of a polo match or something like that.



LibbyRuth said:


> Could that indicate where he is in terms of his diminishing role?  It has to be tough when you go from being viewed as an equal with your brother who is a future king to seeing his role elevated while you are pushed a little bit out of the spotlight. Married life and adulthood has to be odd for "the spare" because it means becoming a secondary royal. Perhaps Harry is more irritated by that reality than anyone wants to believe, *and thought a great perk of marrying Meghan would be keeping the spotlight?*


We can't say there's shortage of attention..
But that may be the reason why the role of secondary royal may be problematic for him,and it's probably at the root of the alleged  problems with his brother.  
I assume they're also being funded in different ways,so that may have factored too when they had to separate their "offices".



Straight-Laced said:


> Yes, and shouldn't Harry a Royal by birth be leading on this?  Couldn't he have guided Meghan once they decided to marry to together set the tone for the Sussex style of Royal celebrity?  I think he's let them both down in this regard, and in retrospect I'm not that surprised. *He sometimes comes across as a headstrong man-child (which kind of works for him) *and he clearly loves the global celebrity life while enjoying the privileges of his Royal birthright.
> Anyway, it's early days relatively speaking and it's been a whirlwind since the two of them met. If Harry's going to step up he needs to do it soon and take some sound advice from family and trusted advisors (though not Sir Elton, etc ) but people who want the best for them and the BRF and who'll help steer them into calmer water.  Better move than employing PR crisis teams IMO.


This reminds me of this hilarious gif I once saw on dlisted:





 Does anyone know the context?


----------



## Morgane

rose60610 said:


> It looks bad from the standpoint that M could leave the fam and the country to watch her friend play tennis in the U.S., but not be at the Invictus event (being held in London) on its 5th Anniversary. Celebrities and tennis get the nod, wounded warriors and amputees don't. Hmmm. *Another "let them eat cake" moment is how many would take it. *How much is the PR firm getting paid?


Thinking about it,did the daily mail run a "let them eat (cup)cakes" headline when she posted that pic of the inspirational cupcakes? I wouldn't be surprised..
Jokes aside,they want to underline exactly that. But I agree that it's fine if they don't show up together at every event that deal with their more personal initiatives.



hellosunshine said:


> Ok, but they are very supportive of her now. They like her and it's a good thing. *Becoming friends with people of influence is a positive as it helps to promote your agenda or charity work.* Together, you can meet mutual goals and support each others charitable causes.


And it's also good for self-promotion and a bit of attention seeking. It's why the PR around these statements,personal show of support (Ellen, Gayle King,Elton,George Clooney) sometimes  looks manifactured,and it gives a "transactional friendship" vibe.
Let's not pretend that if Hillary *******  (whose ex collaborator now works with Meghan and Harry) suddenly posts on instagram about her capsule collection,people can't connect the dots.


----------



## zen1965

CeeJay said:


> Well, what was the point of the Euro .. hmmmm, to create a more 'centralized' Europe?
> 
> Don't know how much you've flown from US <-> Europe, but when you fly into a major European hub (_for example - Heathrow or CDG_), the inter-European flights are described as "Domestic European".  If you want to argue the point, then maybe you should discuss this with *British Airways*, *Air France*, *KLM*, *Lufthansa*, *Aer Lingus*, *Virgin Atlantic*, *Alitalia* .. and many of the others that I used when flying from the US <-> Europe.  I also lived in Europe (_London, Edinburgh and Paris_) for some time, so it's not like I'm ignorant.  @minababe .. you seem to have an issue with me so please, just put me on IGNORE!



Within the Schengen area there are no immigration controls. There are numerous political and economic reasons for that - however, I would not call the overarching objective centralisation.
Anyway, domestic flights are only within-country, and no airline descibes inter-European flights as domestic (the term domestic European makes no sense). There are domestic, inter-European,and international flights. In case that is of relevance, I have travelled and lived all over the world and have been to more airports and on more flights than I care for.
I think Europeans in general do not appreciate to be all lumped together by U.S. Americans. TBH my hackles went up when I read your initial post about domestic European flights. I chose not to comment to avoid toing and froing. Minababe‘s statements were accurate. The tone they were delivered in left something to be desired for IMHO.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> Ok, but they are very supportive of her now. They like her and it's a good thing. Becoming friends with people of influence is a positive as it helps to promote your agenda or charity work. Together, you can meet mutual goals and support each others charitable causes.


Support or shade? Hmm, it's hard to tell here where Serena is commenting on her dear friend Meghan (thanks "the other forum") :
https://ve.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_pxo1wjVVid1y6sfsh.mp4


----------



## buffym

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...charity-clothes-collection-available-buy.html

Smart works capsule collection is on already on sale. The prices range from 19 pounds to 150 pounds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

I really wonder what people would have said, if Meghan was just an unknown actress-to-be who still needs to do "model"-jobs for her living 
or if she was just a normal woman from Toronto with a job at any office


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

So, one item donated for every item bought during the sale, a sale which lasts all of two weeks?


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


>



I like how her hair is pulled back in the third picture


----------



## caramelize126

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Support or shade? Hmm, it's hard to tell here where Serena is commenting on her dear friend Meghan (thanks "the other forum") :
> https://ve.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_pxo1wjVVid1y6sfsh.mp4



This is so cringy to watch. She sounds like someone forced her to say it.  TBH, if my "friend" came in and stole the attention on my big day, I would be pretty upset too. The clip of Megs at the beginning is also a big LOL...shes definitely milking it for the camera. 



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> So, one item donated for every item bought during the sale, a sale which lasts all of two weeks?


WHY isnt anyone else talking about this?! Sounds like GREAT PR! Two weeks is nothing and just sounds like an easy way to be able to brag about everything selling out!
Also, is it really all this hoopla for 5 pieces?! 

In other news, i think SS is really reining them in. The strategy is probably to lay low until people start to forget about everything that happened over the summer. By the time the SA tour starts, people would have forgotten and megs can reemerge as her pre-wedding Diana 2.0 self. Viola!


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry visiting The Rugby Football Union All Schools Programme at Lealands High School


----------



## Morgan R

Meghan attending the launch of the Smart Works Smart Set capsule collection


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Meghan attending the launch of the Smartworks Smart Set capsule collection
> 
> 
> View attachment 4538958
> View attachment 4538957


She looks good


----------



## Flatsy

Meghan looks good and I prefer the length of those pants on her than on the model.  Capris can be difficult to pull off in an office and are difficult to pair with shoes if you are not a high heel wearer.


caramelize126 said:


> WHY isnt anyone else talking about this?! Sounds like GREAT PR! Two weeks is nothing and just sounds like an easy way to be able to brag about everything selling out!  Also, is it really all this hoopla for 5 pieces?!


Yeah, I was under the impression this was going to be an ongoing partnership, not a one-time sale.  It's still good advertising for the charity.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Meghan looks good and I prefer the length of those pants on her than on the model.  Capris can be difficult to pull off in an office and are difficult to pair with shoes if you are not a high heel wearer.
> 
> Yeah, I was under the impression this was going to be an ongoing partnership, not a one-time sale.  It's still good advertising for the charity.


I thought capri pants were slim trousers that come to above the ankle, worn better with flat shoes.


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> I really wonder what people would have said, if Meghan was just an unknown actress-to-be who still needs to do "model"-jobs for her living
> or if she was just a normal woman from Toronto with a job at any office


If she was a woman working at an office but everyone called her the second best CEO after Jeff Bezos we’d roll our eyes too. 

No one begrudges her for being a small time actress. It becomes silly when people suggest she was a major Hollywood player.


----------



## LittleStar88

I think it is a great and creative effort with Smartworks. A good way to test the waters with this kind of partnership. If it is a hit, they can do another. Even if it helps just a few women get ahead, it is a win in my book.

Also, Meghan looks great.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought capri pants were slim trousers that come to above the ankle, worn better with flat shoes.


Yes, she’s wearing ankle length pants.  

Everything fits at least. Good for her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welp. Maybe next she can do a hairbrush collab.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan looks amazing. It appears that she's in no rush to lose the extra baby weight.

Btw, everything she's wearing sans bracelets and shoes are from this collection with SmartWorks. I've looked at the full collection and it's all super stellar. Congrats Meghan!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> So, one item donated for every item bought during the sale, a sale which lasts all of two weeks?



It's a one-for-one model. One purchase helps another woman to receive the exact same piece as you purchased. 

Below, Meghan explains why she decided to go with this model --


----------



## buffym

caramelize126 said:


> This is so cringy to watch. She sounds like someone forced her to say it.  TBH, if my "friend" came in and stole the attention on my big day, I would be pretty upset too. The clip of Megs at the beginning is also a big LOL...shes definitely milking it for the camera.
> 
> 
> WHY isnt anyone else talking about this?! Sounds like GREAT PR! Two weeks is nothing and just sounds like an easy way to be able to brag about everything selling out!
> Also, is it really all this hoopla for 5 pieces?!
> 
> In other news, i think SS is really reining them in. The strategy is probably to lay low until people start to forget about everything that happened over the summer. By the time the SA tour starts, people would have forgotten and megs can reemerge as her pre-wedding Diana 2.0 self. Viola!



The two weeks sounds reasonable since some of the pieces have sold out. The John Lewis bag sold out this morning.

I don’t think they are being reigned in since Harry worked three days this week, Meghan today and the tour starts in a week.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So I went to the website... in the fine print, only certain colors of certain items are being donated.
https://www.marksandspencer.com/crepe-shift-dress/p/p60277644?prevPage=srp
_Buy this dress in blue or black and we’ll donate one to Smart Works

_

TOMS has done this model for years... 1:1 is not going to break a company.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> So I went to the website... in the fine print, only certain colors of certain items are being donated.
> https://www.marksandspencer.com/crepe-shift-dress/p/p60277644?prevPage=srp
> _Buy this dress in blue or black and we’ll donate one to Smart Works
> 
> _
> 
> TOMS has done this model for years... 1:1 is not going to break a company.



I wonder how those decisions were made. Someone thought black or blue would be appropriate for a professional environment but the bright red would be too much?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So I went to the website... in the fine print, only certain colors of certain items are being donated.
> https://www.marksandspencer.com/crepe-shift-dress/p/p60277644?prevPage=srp
> *Buy this dress in blue or black and we’ll donate one to Smart Works*



Yes, because the charity needs more professional colors. It's a one-for-one model. Meghan explains in the clip, that each time she visited SmartWorks, she had to work around lilac blazers and other fun colors. She's trying to collect professional attire in professional colors.


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how those decisions were made. Someone thought black or blue would be appropriate for a professional environment but the bright red would be too much?



No. If anyone wanted color..it was there. As she mentions in the clip that I linked, she came across 27 lilac blazers that were donated while more professional colors were very limited.


----------



## Flatsy

I don't like the one-for-one scheme.  They should just have assessed the needs of the charity and had the designers supply the charity with what they need.  The free advertising and corresponding sales of the collection in M&S should be more than enough to offset the designers' extra production costs.  These aren't expensive clothes and the Smartworks operation is not that big.   

There shouldn't be a need for all of these limited-time-only, fine-print conditions.   It seems like the designers are benefiting greatly from the free advertising, with items already selling out, but there are way too many limits on what they actually have to give to the charity.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> I don't like the one-for-one scheme.  They should just have assessed the needs of the charity and had the designers supply the charity with what they need.  The free advertising and corresponding sales of the collection in M&S should be more than enough to offset the designers' extra production costs.  These aren't expensive clothes and the Smartworks operation is not that big.
> 
> There shouldn't be a need for all of these limited-time-only, fine-print conditions.   It seems like the designers are benefiting greatly from the free advertising, with items already selling out, but there are way too many limits on what they actually have to give to the charity.



Exactly, it's more branding and merching hidden as charity. As someone who works for a charity in the team that handles stuff like this... the company is making way more from it than they're 'spending.'


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, because the charity needs more professional colors. It's a one-for-one model. Meghan explains in the clip, that each time she visited SmartWorks, she had to work around lilac blazers and other fun colors. She's trying to collect professional attire in professional colors.


So they could have donated a black or blue dress for every red one sold, then?
See how easy that was...


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So they could have donated a black or blue dress for every red one sold, then?
> See how easy that was...



Hello?! Not trying to be rude but what's not being understood about...ONE-FOR-ONE model?!

Furthermore, we don't know the full specifics or differences between the sale of red, black, or blue dress but let's go ahead and spin this great event into something negative. Meghan literally explained that she was wanting to add more professional colors to the charity but ok.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> ello?! Not trying to be rude but what's not being understood about...ONE-FOR-ONE model?!


LOL not trying to be rude.  

One dress = one dress, regardless of the color.

When I learned math, I wasn't taught 2+2 = 4 unless one of the 2's is red and the other one is blue.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> LOL not trying to be rude.
> 
> One dress = one dress, regardless of the color.
> 
> When I learned math, I wasn't taught 2+2 = 4 unless one of the 2's is red and the other one is blue.



Yes, I'm not trying to be rude and I was being clear beforehand as to not come off that way. I don't need your condescension. Thank you.

The model that you're advocating for is YOUR model. Meghan picked hers. And it's pretty simple...

1 blue dress sold = 1 blue dress given
1 black dress sold = 1 black dress given

If they wanted a red dress, the color was probably already being donated in large volume (like those colored blazers she mentions). Afterall, she would know more than any of us here, what the charity needs and doesn't need.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> So why did she attend so many of the events prior to Archie being born? Did it take her THAT many events to realize celebrities didn’t go?


Are you talking like while engaged to Harry, or while newly married? In both those cases she was probably doing her best to impress a new man and his family. She was also trying to build goodwill with people of the commonwealth, as I see it. Once she got pregnant and had the baby, the goodwill gestures become less necessary as her position becomes more secure; she can be more herself and do what she wants. We'll just have to see what the future holds for Sarah 2.0.


----------



## TC1

Who would ever want a Lilac Blazer?.


----------



## mrsinsyder

TC1 said:


> Who would ever want a Lilac Blazer?.


TBH I'd rather have that than this snooze-fest. I can get a cheaper white shirt at Brooks Brothers.

Also the dresses, pants, and blazer have already been sold by those companies for some time. They're not even new?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> “Hollywood career.”
> 
> Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).


Hot girl, lol, that reminded me that in an interview the creator/writer of Suits gave (Aaron Korsh), he said Meghan was hired because he needed someone to fill the role of a "hot girl" on the show. I think he did allow her character to evolve a lot from there, but she really has no significant acting resume beyond Suits. I don't think Meghan gave up much tbh. Now Grace Kelly - darn, she gave up a full-fledged Hollywood/Oscar career, she must have really been in love.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> Hot girl, lol, that reminded me that in an interview the creator/writer of Suits gave (Aaron Korsh), he said Meghan was hired because he needed someone to fill the role of a "hot girl" on the show. I think he did allow her character to evolve a lot from there, but she really has no significant acting resume beyond Suits. I don't think Meghan gave up much tbh. Now Grace Kelly - darn, she gave up a full-fledged Hollywood/Oscar career, she must have really been in love.


or really wanted to be a princess - agree she was a Big Star


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> ... and the Smartworks operation is not that big.


Which may explain the limited run and 1 for 1 arrangement. Let them test it and see how sustainable the program would be for this particular business. Bottom line - the intent behind this effort is all good and lots of people benefit.

Toms has been around for a long time, so they are likely in a different position to do this kind of arrangement long-term. Too many variables to compare the two.

Regarding the limited colors... Remember, the women receiving these items are not in a fortunate position to pick and choose their professional attire. This is intended to give them a smart starting point for their professional wardrobe. Basics can be built upon. I would rather have one basic black dress I could wear several different ways rather than one lilac blazer that goes with little to nothing.


----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> No. If anyone wanted color..it was there. As she mentions in the clip that I linked, she came across 27 lilac blazers that were donated while more professional colors were very limited.


That's interesting. Was there a restriction on the age of the clothes that could be donated?


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought capri pants were slim trousers that come to above the ankle, worn better with flat shoes.


Capris do come much higher up, and look good with flats, or heels, or wedges


----------



## hellosunshine

*How Duchess Meghan Brought the Smart Works Fashion Collection to Life*

When John Lewis head of womenswear Jo Bennett received a call from an unknown number one late January afternoon, the last person she expected on the line was the newest member of the royal family. But the Duchess of Sussex was on a mission: To bring together four of Britain’s leading affordable fashion brands to create a capsule collection of workwear, to be sold on a one-for-one basis in the name of Smart Works.

The idea was born just after Meghan became patron of the organization, which empowers disadvantaged women with the right tools and clothes to get back into the work place, at the start of the year. After listening to clients who wanted to feel comfortable and confident, *the Duchess realized that while there’s never a shortage of donations (including items from her own wardrobe), Smart Works' stock didn’t always feature every size, or classic, key staples needed to anchor an outfit. Meghan pitched the idea for a collection to the Smart Works team, including executives Juliet Hughes-Hallett and Kate Stephens, and it was an instant hit. “She wanted the basics of a capsule collection to always be available,” a source tells BAZAAR. “Pieces that were more mix and match-able rather than just one new outfit.*

*“She brought it to life immediately,” the source adds. “After consulting with Smart Works about their needs, she contacted bosses from each of the brands directly—cold calls!”*

Read the rest of the article here - https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a29018292/meghan-markle-smart-works-explained/


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Regarding the limited colors... Remember, the women receiving these items are not in a fortunate position to pick and choose their professional attire. This is intended to give them a smart starting point for their professional wardrobe. Basics can be built upon. I would rather have one basic black dress I could wear several different ways rather than one lilac blazer that goes with little to nothing.


I agree the charity wants and needs basic colors. (A red dress is about as useless to some people as a lilac blazer.)  That's always been clear about this project. It just seems like the designers and M&S are fine-printing certain colors so they can profit more from the sale while minimizing what they are obligated to donate.  I doubt most shoppers will be as observant as mrssnyder and realize their purchase is not actually resulting in a charitable donation as expected.

The charity is going to benefit no matter what.  But it seems like this is setup for M&S and the designers to benefit even more than the charity.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> Capris do come much higher up, and look good with flats, or heels, or wedges


Ive always preferred capris with flats


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan's SmartSet Wardrobe Collection in the SmartWorks Headquarters - looks so professional!


----------



## caramelize126

Flatsy said:


> I don't like the one-for-one scheme.  They should just have assessed the needs of the charity and had the designers supply the charity with what they need.  The free advertising and corresponding sales of the collection in M&S should be more than enough to offset the designers' extra production costs.  These aren't expensive clothes and the Smartworks operation is not that big.
> 
> There shouldn't be a need for all of these limited-time-only, fine-print conditions.   It seems like the designers are benefiting greatly from the free advertising, with items already selling out, but there are way too many limits on what they actually have to give to the charity.



I agree, the model doesn't really make much sense. Theres no reason why a black/blue dress can't be donated if another color dress is bought. One dress = one dress. Why does the color matter?

I'm sure there are plenty of people purchasing and not realizing that their purchase is not going towards the donation. Theres some advertising for Smartworks, but beyond that, it doesnt seem like they will be benefiting much, especially if the donations are only for purchases made within the first two weeks? This just comes off as so disingenuous. 
Does anyone know how many dresses were made for purchase? If theres only 100 dresses, is that it? Will it be restocked within the 2 week limit?


----------



## Welltraveled!

I was going to say something similar.  I would purchase something but I donate my time and clothes to Dress for Success.

But I love organizations that assist/train women for the workforce.



LittleStar88 said:


> I think it is a great and creative effort with Smartworks. A good way to test the waters with this kind of partnership. If it is a hit, they can do another. Even if it helps just a few women get ahead, it is a win in my book.
> 
> Also, Meghan looks great.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I love the spirit of this initiative, but just not into this collection...it’s like a target collection with a crazy high price for a basic white shirt and suit. I don’t even pay $125 for basic white shirt.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Another good point.  During interviews  these women will be judged by what they wear.  The rule of thumb for interviewing is professional neutral colors navy, black grays.  Of course there’s exceptions in the color pallet and also industry.  But when interviewing go with the neutral colors.  

You can wear bright colors after you get the job.



LittleStar88 said:


> Which may explain the limited run and 1 for 1 arrangement. Let them test it and see how sustainable the program would be for this particular business. Bottom line - the intent behind this effort is all good and lots of people benefit.
> 
> Toms has been around for a long time, so they are likely in a different position to do this kind of arrangement long-term. Too many variables to compare the two.
> 
> Regarding the limited colors... Remember, the women receiving these items are not in a fortunate position to pick and choose their professional attire. This is intended to give them a smart starting point for their professional wardrobe. Basics can be built upon. I would rather have one basic black dress I could wear several different ways rather than one lilac blazer that goes with little to nothing.


----------



## hellosunshine

caramelize126 said:


> I agree, the model doesn't really make much sense. Theres no reason why a black/blue dress can't be donated if another color dress is bought. One dress = one dress. Why does the color matter?
> 
> I'm sure there are plenty of people purchasing and not realizing that their purchase is not going towards the donation. Theres some advertising for Smartworks, but beyond that, it doesnt seem like they will be benefiting much, especially if the donations are only for purchases made within the first two weeks? This just comes off as so disingenuous.
> Does anyone know how many dresses were made for purchase? If theres only 100 dresses, is that it? Will it be restocked within the 2 week limit?



Color matters because they probably do not need to add another red dress to the stock that already exists. Per the Harpers' Bazaar article, Meghan has been working on this collection for the last 8 months. She's visited SmartWorks multiple times, both in public and private capacity. I'm sure there is reason to the decisions that were made. 

Also, for anyone that feels the companies involved are benefitting far more than the charity..I disagree. I'm not going to say that the companies involved aren't benefitting from the publicity plus the sale of one item but the charity is also benefitting equally. They are receiving one free garment and worldwide coverage. It's a one-for-one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Let us never forget when the patron saint of affordable workwear threw a "Sayonara Zara" party where she gave away all her cheap clothes after securing the bag.

Meghan Markle, back when she was just a mere up-and-coming actress, celebrated her newly rich status by throwing a very special party for herself, _Vanity Fair _reports. A Hollywood source told the outlet that the celebration was "unofficially billed as a 'Sayonara Zara' party," and that Meghan "gave away the lower-priced clothes in her closet to her guests."

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a25740851/meghan-markle-sayonara-zara-party/


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp. Maybe next she can do a hairbrush collab.
> 
> View attachment 4539009


mrsinsyder: I love your posts! Always makes me smile!

Her hair is pretty dated and unflattering. I’m thinking, maybe a crisp-looking bob?


----------



## mrsinsyder

jehaga said:


> mrsinsyder: I love your posts! Always makes me smile!
> 
> Her hair is pretty dated and unflattering. I’m thinking, maybe a crisp-looking bob?



Haha, thank you 

I agree - Kate finally ditched the dated, heavy hair. Meghan's today looked like some kind of extensions, maybe? The top layer of her hair is a lot shorter than the wavy pieces that hang down.


----------



## CeeJay

zen1965 said:


> Within the Schengen area there are no immigration controls. There are numerous political and economic reasons for that - however, I would not call the overarching objective centralisation.
> Anyway, domestic flights are only within-country, and no airline descibes inter-European flights as domestic (the term domestic European makes no sense). There are domestic, inter-European,and international flights. In case that is of relevance, I have travelled and lived all over the world and have been to more airports and on more flights than I care for.
> I think Europeans in general do not appreciate to be all lumped together by U.S. Americans. TBH my hackles went up when I read your initial post about domestic European flights. I chose not to comment to avoid toing and froing. Minababe‘s statements were accurate. The tone they were delivered in left something to be desired for IMHO.



Hmmmmm .. then I wonder if the airlines told me that because I hold a US Passport?  

In regards to Europeans not wanting to be lumped together .. *100% accurate*!  I actually had to chuckle to myself because when I was in London, my British colleagues would complain about the colleagues from Scotland.  When in Edinburgh, my Scottish colleagues would complain about the Brits.  When in Dublin, the Irish would complain about both the Brits and the Scots .. so I remember a conversation when I asked both an Irish and Scottish colleague .. "_do you hate each other_"?  They said "_well - kinda .. but we agree on the fact that we both hate the British_" .. we all just howled in laughter after that conversation. 

Meanwhile, when working in France .. my god, don't even get me started on how they hate the Brits and likewise, the Brits hate the French.  The only country that I've seen that doesn't openly say they hate the other countries is Italy (that doesn't mean that they don't dislike other Europeans .. they are not fond of the Germans given that the Nazi troops came into some towns and rounded up the Men .. and then shot them.  

Growing up in a more European household (_my mother was Italian_), we were advised very early on .. how "not" to act when in a foreign country.  No xenophobia here .. in fact, I EMBRACE traveling to the less well-known destinations to learn about the people, their history, their food .. their different culture!  Alas, I have seen the "ugly American" and frankly, it disturbs me!  Loud, "walking large" (_as they told me .. American are used to more wide-open spaces_), expecting things be done the American way (_well then .. why travel to a foreign country_?), expecting the Europeans to speak/understand American English (_uggh - learn at least the basics_!), not dressing appropriately (S_t. Peters Basilica in Rome - expecting to go inside when you are dressed in a ratty T-shirt, shorts, ratty sandals/sneakers and the baseball cap worn backwards - UGGH_).  Honestly, both my husband and I can spot that ugly American very easily and we avoid them like the plague!  

I appreciate the fact that you were kind enough not to let your hackles take over!!


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Let us never forget when the patron saint of affordable workwear threw a "Sayonara Zara" party where she gave away all her cheap clothes after securing the bag.
> 
> Meghan Markle, back when she was just a mere up-and-coming actress, celebrated her newly rich status by throwing a very special party for herself, _Vanity Fair _reports. A Hollywood source told the outlet that the celebration was "unofficially billed as a 'Sayonara Zara' party," and that Meghan "gave away the lower-priced clothes in her closet to her guests."
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a25740851/meghan-markle-sayonara-zara-party/



LOL, this article is too funny. Meghan has literally worn H&M and ASOS post-marriage. "Sayonara Zara"....HAHAHAHA


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> I actually had to chuckle to myself because when I was in London, my British colleagues would complain about the colleagues from Scotland.  When in Edinburgh, my Scottish colleagues would complain about the Brits.  When in Dublin, the Irish would complain about both the Brits and the Scots .. so I remember a conversation when I asked both an Irish and Scottish colleague .. "_do you hate each other_"?  They said "_well - kinda .. but we agree on the fact that we both hate the British_" .. we all just howled in laughter after that conversation


Erm, can you edit your wording please? Change the word British to English, then you and your colleagues would be correct. We are ALL British. Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England is in Britain, therefore we are, I repeat, British.
Thank you.
And yes, it is perceived that the English hate the Scots, Welsh and Irish.
The Scots, Welsh and Irish hate the English. 
The Scots, Welsh and Irish love each other.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how those decisions were made. Someone thought black or blue would be appropriate for a professional environment but the bright red would be too much?


It depends on the industry in which you work .. for instance, I worked in Financial Services which is very conservative.  Well, I am NOT that type and when I dared to wear a beautiful Cherry Red Silk blouse with my Navy suit (blazer with Gold buttons), I was taken aside and told that the Red blouse was inappropriate and not to ever wear it in the office again!  WTF?!?!?!  

Needless to say, I was constantly pushing that envelope and it got to the point where I got H/R involved because I was being harassed about my clothing .. whilst my job performance was stellar!  I'm a Pisces and yes, one side is very analytical .. but the other side is very artistic and yes, my clothing expressed that.  Now, if I was visiting a client (or one coming into our office) .. then yes, I would dress more conservatively .. but over time as I moved up the ladder, my position on my clothing and jewelry (and yes - I love my jewelry and I design/make it) was that they could eff themselves because I knew I was good at my job!


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> I love the spirit of this initiative, but just not into this collection...it’s like a target collection with a crazy high price for a basic white shirt and suit. I don’t even pay $125 for basic white shirt.



Exactly. I don’t understand the pricing on the shirt or the pants and jacket. Too expensive for pieces that you could find anywhere for less. The collection is a little too basic and a colored blouse would have helped and a few accessories. The point of a capsule collection is the ability to take the basic pieces and extend their wearability. 

Meghan wore the clothes very well and looked lovely  I think a less expensive pair of shoes and belt would have been more appropriate given the spirit of the initiative.   Her jewelry was perfect for the outfit and livened it up and I would have liked to see something similar offered so the look could be replicated with the collection clothing.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Erm, can you edit your wording please? Change the word British to English, then you and your colleagues would be correct. We are ALL British. Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England is in Britain, therefore we are, I repeat, British.
> Thank you.
> And yes, it is perceived that the English hate the Scots, Welsh and Irish.
> The Scots, Welsh and Irish hate the English.
> The Scots, Welsh and Irish love each other.


Okey-dokey .. I stand corrected, sorry that this upset you .. sheesh!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. then I wonder if the airlines told me that because I hold a US Passport?
> 
> In regards to Europeans not wanting to be lumped together .. *100% accurate*!  I actually had to chuckle to myself because when I was in London, my British colleagues would complain about the colleagues from Scotland.  When in Edinburgh, my Scottish colleagues would complain about the Brits.  When in Dublin, the Irish would complain about both the Brits and the Scots .. so I remember a conversation when I asked both an Irish and Scottish colleague .. "_do you hate each other_"?  They said "_well - kinda .. but we agree on the fact that we both hate the British_" .. we all just howled in laughter after that conversation.
> 
> Meanwhile, when working in France .. my god, don't even get me started on how they hate the Brits and likewise, the Brits hate the French.  The only country that I've seen that doesn't openly say they hate the other countries is Italy (that doesn't mean that they don't dislike other Europeans .. they are not fond of the Germans given that the Nazi troops came into some towns and rounded up the Men .. and then shot them.
> 
> Growing up in a more European household (_my mother was Italian_), we were advised very early on .. how "not" to act when in a foreign country.  No xenophobia here .. in fact, I EMBRACE traveling to the less well-known destinations to learn about the people, their history, their food .. their different culture!  Alas, I have seen the "ugly American" and frankly, it disturbs me!  Loud, "walking large" (_as they told me .. American are used to more wide-open spaces_), expecting things be done the American way (_well then .. why travel to a foreign country_?), expecting the Europeans to speak/understand American English (_uggh - learn at least the basics_!), not dressing appropriately (S_t. Peters Basilica in Rome - expecting to go inside when you are dressed in a ratty T-shirt, shorts, ratty sandals/sneakers and the baseball cap worn backwards - UGGH_).  Honestly, both my husband and I can spot that ugly American very easily and we avoid them like the plague!
> 
> I appreciate the fact that you were kind enough not to let your hackles take over!!


I grew up with an Irish mother and she talked quite a bit about the Irish and English not having any love for each other


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Okey-dokey .. I stand corrected, sorry that this upset you .. sheesh!


No problem, didn't upset me, just pointing it out.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> or really wanted to be a princess - agree she was a Big Star


Really wanted to be a princess I think.  She always looked sad to me. Yes, she was a very good actress and gave up a lot although she probably didn't think so at the time.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> And yes, it is perceived that the English hate the Scots, Welsh and Irish.
> The Scots, Welsh and Irish hate the English.
> *The Scots, Welsh and Irish love each other.*


"Love each other" -- But what about the peace walls in Northern Ireland?

Asking because although you're not in Ireland, you've probably got a better understanding being a Brit...


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> "Love each other" -- But what about the peace walls in Northern Ireland?
> 
> Asking because although you're not in Ireland, you've probably got a better understanding being a Brit...


All I can say about that is that we are Celts.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> Let us never forget when the patron saint of affordable workwear threw a "Sayonara Zara" party where she gave away all her cheap clothes after securing the bag.
> 
> Meghan Markle, back when she was just a mere up-and-coming actress, celebrated her newly rich status by throwing a very special party for herself, _Vanity Fair _reports. A Hollywood source told the outlet that the celebration was "unofficially billed as a 'Sayonara Zara' party," and that Meghan "gave away the lower-priced clothes in her closet to her guests."
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a25740851/meghan-markle-sayonara-zara-party/


"the patron saint of affordable workwear" 

What a difference a change of job and significant other can make for your work wear opportunities 
https://www.allure.com/story/meghan-markle-most-expensive-royal-wardrobe

*Meghan Markle Had the Most Expensive Royal Wardrobe in 2018 — By a Landslide*
_Being a duchess isn't cheap.
BY CHRISTOPHER ROSA
January 7, 2019
Meghan Markle had a ton of major fashion moments in 2018, so it's no surprise she had the most expensive royal wardrobe of the year. This tidbit comes from the royal fashion blog UFO No More("UFO" standing for "Unidentified Fashion Object," naturally), which added up all the new items that the 13 royal women — including Markle, Kate Middleton, and Princess Eugenie — added to their closets last year. The Duchess of Sussex had the priciest duds by a landslide, with her new purchases reportedly adding up to $508,258. This number includes her Cartier Reflection wedding bracelet and earrings, but not her custom Givenchy wedding gown (perhaps because it's a one-off piece she's not expected to re-wear).

By contrast, Middleton's new clothes in 2018 reportedly cost $85,097, a mere fraction to Markle's wardrobe. Even less than that is what the newly-married Princess Eugenie spent on fashion: $39,818 (this also doesn't include her wedding gown).

But let's keep some perspective, shall we? Spending nearly $40,000 on clothes in a year is still luxe. Just because your wardrobe price tag isn't in the six figures doesn't mean you aren't chic. Maybe Princess Eugenie just loves a good bargain or coupon and we all know Kate Middleton loves a good outfit repeat._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "the patron saint of affordable workwear"
> 
> What a difference a change of job and significant other can make for your work wear opportunities
> https://www.allure.com/story/meghan-markle-most-expensive-royal-wardrobe
> 
> *Meghan Markle Had the Most Expensive Royal Wardrobe in 2018 — By a Landslide*
> _Being a duchess isn't cheap.
> BY CHRISTOPHER ROSA
> January 7, 2019
> Meghan Markle had a ton of major fashion moments in 2018, so it's no surprise she had the most expensive royal wardrobe of the year. This tidbit comes from the royal fashion blog UFO No More("UFO" standing for "Unidentified Fashion Object," naturally), which added up all the new items that the 13 royal women — including Markle, Kate Middleton, and Princess Eugenie — added to their closets last year. The Duchess of Sussex had the priciest duds by a landslide, with her new purchases reportedly adding up to $508,258. This number includes her Cartier Reflection wedding bracelet and earrings, but not her custom Givenchy wedding gown (perhaps because it's a one-off piece she's not expected to re-wear).
> 
> By contrast, Middleton's new clothes in 2018 reportedly cost $85,097, a mere fraction to Markle's wardrobe. Even less than that is what the newly-married Princess Eugenie spent on fashion: $39,818 (this also doesn't include her wedding gown).
> 
> But let's keep some perspective, shall we? Spending nearly $40,000 on clothes in a year is still luxe. Just because your wardrobe price tag isn't in the six figures doesn't mean you aren't chic. Maybe Princess Eugenie just loves a good bargain or coupon and we all know Kate Middleton loves a good outfit repeat._


I'm not British but I'd say this isn't going to go over well with the British people


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I'm not British but I'd say this isn't going to go over well with the British people


Yep, that and the ridiculous remodeling of the cottage. It will not end well.
How can she be so entitled so early in the game?
This would be the time to win people’s affection, not alienating them.
As far as the capsule, it is ok. A bit overpriced for a simple white shirt imo.
Why is the dress so cheap? Is it 100% polyester?
As far as one dress for one dress, if they sell mostly size 10, does it mean that all the people in other sizes are out of luck?


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Yep, that and the ridiculous remodeling of the cottage. It will not end well.
> How can she be so entitled so early in the game?
> This would be the time to win people’s affection, not alienating them.
> As far as the capsule, it is ok. A bit overpriced for a simple white shirt imo.
> Why is the dress so cheap? Is it 100% polyester?
> As far as one dress for one dress, if they sell mostly size 10, does it mean that all the people in other sizes are out of luck?


IMO she probably feels she has hit the jackpot....maybe when she first married Harry there wasn't so much backlash.  Maybe now that they're being criticized they will be more aware and back off some of this OT spending
I take any gossip including sources who are supposedly friends with a grain of salt.  but maybe the thing about Harry saying "what Meghan wants Meghan gets" was true


----------



## marthastoo

Really?  Allure's going to count the Cartier earrings and bracelet that was reportedly a gift from Charles worth about $350,000 in that total?


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## momtok

^^^


----------



## bag-mania

This was the look on my face when I realized Meghan's bracelet cost more than my house.


----------



## MarieCurie

mrsinsyder said:


> So they could have donated a black or blue dress for every red one sold, then?
> See how easy that was...


I think it's because the 1:1 model only applies to the smart set capsule collection and the red/pink dress is not part of the collection, only the blue and black dresses are. I suspect that (I could be wrong though) M&S used a dress they already had and just added blue and black versions of it, could they have moved the red/pink dress to a different purchase link or created a different one for blue and black dresses?Yes, that goes without saying


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> This was the look on my face when I realized Meghan's bracelet cost more than my house.


The Manolos and Lauren belt  cost more than some spend on clothing in a year.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I saw that she's going to wear the pieces on tour, but by then, the charity portion will be over


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> Really? Allure's going to count the Cartier earrings and bracelet that was reportedly a gift from Charles worth about $350,000 in that total?


Allure got it from UFO No More, who tally clothing and jewelry worn for the first time.  Without the jewelry, Meghan's total for the year was still $286k, almost three times as much as the second biggest royal spender on the list (Crown Princess Mary) who was not done the favor of having her jewelry "not count".


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> This was the look on my face when I realized Meghan's bracelet cost more than my house.


she deserves it for being the most fabulous human being


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


>


is this just some random woman she's hugging?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


>


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> is this just some random woman she's hugging?



It’s the co- founder of SmartWorks, Smartworks was founded in 2013, it has grown to seven locations in six years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


>


Maybe the lady’s hands were ladened with heavy items so she was unable to reciprocate the hearty, almost aggressive, hug.


----------



## mrsinsyder

jehaga said:


> Maybe the lady’s hands were ladened with heavy items so she was unable to reciprocate the hearty, almost aggressive, hug.


It was just a funny gif ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## jehaga

jehaga said:


> Maybe the lady’s hands were ladened with heavy items so she was unable to reciprocate the hearty, almost aggressive, hug.


Nvm. Didn’t see the rest of the videos that followed. Bear hugs all around.


----------



## caramelize126

x


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


>


So funny. Meghan really doesn't get the British way of things at all. That poor lady is dying.

I don't understand the black dress of her collection at all, it looks so flimsy and not the most professional thing you could come up with.


----------



## Welltraveled!

thank you @hellosunshine 

View attachment 4539476

View attachment 4539477

View attachment 4539478

View attachment 4539479


----------



## Welltraveled!

They just need something to complain about.  I say this all the time.  But I find it interesting the critics spend so much time to the point of obsessiveness about a woman they don’t like.  



marthastoo said:


> Really?  Allure's going to count the Cartier earrings and bracelet that was reportedly a gift from Charles worth about $350,000 in that total?


----------



## Welltraveled!

Oh wow!  Great initiative, this will definitely help the organization grow.  




buffym said:


> It’s the co- founder of SmartWorks, Smartworks was founded in 2013, it has grown to seven locations in six years.
> View attachment 4539483


----------



## minababe

mrsinsyder said:


> “Hollywood career.”
> 
> Please show me all the red carpets she walked as the star of such feature films as “Dater’s Handbook” (Hallmark) and “A Lot Like Love” (in her feature role as “hot girl”).



thats a big issue here for many-
why trying to make her Career smaller than it was?
suits is a global famous tv Show. it was watched by millions of People. she played her role for 7 years. 7 Seasons. it's a huge success on tv and netflix.

in 2019 you are way more famous with a tv Show on netflix than with a movie in Cinema. just saying. all the big Hollywood actors trying to get their feet into netflix, prime and co Shows.

if you don't ever watched this Show or don't like it, it's your fault not meghans, so don't try to bring things down because you just don't care.


----------



## doni

jehaga said:


> Maybe the lady’s hands were ladened with heavy items so she was unable to reciprocate the hearty, almost aggressive, hug.


Maybe she is British and not used to being hugged by strangers no matter how royal they are


----------



## MarieCurie

limom said:


> Yep, that and the ridiculous remodeling of the cottage. It will not end well.
> How can she be so entitled so early in the game?
> This would be the time to win people’s affection, not alienating them.
> As far as the capsule, it is ok. A bit overpriced for a simple white shirt imo.
> Why is the dress so cheap? Is it 100% polyester?
> *As far as one dress for one dress, if they sell mostly size 10, does it mean that all the people in other sizes are out of luck?*



That's the only thing I've been wondering about regarding the initiative: how will the sizes be donated. Will the same size as purchased be donated? Is it a voucher? etc etc

Other than that, I think the capsule makes sense and the prices are in keeping with the "normal" prices of each retailer. The shirt is from Nisha Nonoo who's shirts retail at $185



Flatsy said:


> Allure got it from UFO No More, who tally clothing and jewelry worn for the first time.  Without the jewelry, Meghan's total for the year was still $286k, almost three times as much as the second biggest royal spender on the list (Crown Princess Mary) *who was not done the favor of having her jewelry "not count"*.


UFO No more said the only reason they would not tally those specific items would be because they are gifts, not jewelry. So the rest of her jewelry was tallied and if she had received clothing as gifts, "she would have been done the favour of having them not count." $286k on clothing is lot no matter what cost per item might have been, especially for a public servant (royals are public servants right?). I think this is one of those instances where criticism was deserved but it just gets lost in this crazy vault of_ Meghan is a D-list she-devil who was waiting tables at hooters to make ends meet and the world is burning up because of her devilish bump cupping, baby abandoning, jean dress wearing ways_


----------



## Flatsy

minababe said:


> in 2019 you are way more famous with a tv Show on netflix than with a movie in Cinema. just saying. all the big Hollywood actors trying to get their feet into netflix, prime and co Shows.
> 
> if you don't ever watched this Show or don't like it, it's your fault not meghans,


I guess Harry should be condemned too because he'd never heard of her either.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> I guess Harry should be condemned too because he'd never heard of her either.


Brilliant


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Meghan attending the launch of the Smart Works Smart Set capsule collection
> 
> 
> View attachment 4538958
> View attachment 4538957


 no second baby in the making


----------



## FreeSpirit71

limom said:


> *Yep, that and the ridiculous remodeling of the cottage.* It will not end well.
> How can she be so entitled so early in the game?
> This would be the time to win people’s affection, not alienating them.
> As far as the capsule, it is ok. A bit overpriced for a simple white shirt imo.
> Why is the dress so cheap? Is it 100% polyester?
> As far as one dress for one dress, if they sell mostly size 10, does it mean that all the people in other sizes are out of luck?


Huh? Let's take a look at the BRF renovation costs using ACTUAL figures.

Why are H & M being given a hard time when other royals are spending far more?

https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes...-costs-compared-meghan-markle-kate-middleton/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Huh? Let's take a look at the BRF renovation costs using ACTUAL figures.
> 
> Why are H & M being given a hard time when other royals are spending far more?
> 
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes...-costs-compared-meghan-markle-kate-middleton/


No worry, it is just as bad taste for the Cambridge.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...le-prince-harry-frogmore-cottage-renovations/
Cottage is a misnomer as it is a pretty large and old house.


----------



## hellosunshine

+MORE Photos Released from Yesterday


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Toulouse

Sharont2305 said:


> Erm, can you edit your wording please? Change the word British to English, then you and your colleagues would be correct. We are ALL British. Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England is in Britain, therefore we are, I repeat, British.
> Thank you.
> And yes, it is perceived that the English hate the Scots, Welsh and Irish.
> The Scots, Welsh and Irish hate the English.
> The Scots, Welsh and Irish love each other.



If we really want to get technical, Northern Ireland is part of the UK but it is not part of Britain. But I agree with your overall point — the Welsh, Scots and Irish all hate the English. With good reason, frankly, based on their shared history.


----------



## daisychainz

jehaga said:


> mrsinsyder: I love your posts! Always makes me smile!
> 
> Her hair is pretty dated and unflattering. I’m thinking, maybe a crisp-looking bob?


A center part rarely works for women, it's very aging. Just a slight shift in her part either side would be better. At least it's not tied back, but it doesn't look good so flat to her head in the crown area.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Wow! $369 million for Buckingham palace!  I get it’s a palace but wow!  



FreeSpirit71 said:


> Huh? Let's take a look at the BRF renovation costs using ACTUAL figures.
> 
> Why are H & M being given a hard time when other royals are spending far more?
> 
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/homes...-costs-compared-meghan-markle-kate-middleton/


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Why are H & M being given a hard time when other royals are spending far more?


I agree the press harped on Meghan and Harry's renovations longer than they did on others, but a few things:
1. Meghan and Harry's renovation wasn't totally complete when the 2.4 million figure was released.  The final figure will be more and it won't be known until next year.
2. A lot of the residences on that list (including Kensington Palace) are large palaces that require general maintenance on a large scale.  William and Kate's "renovation" also included things like repaving of the KP driveways, and they took heat for that despite it being palace upkeep necessary for all of the inhabitants and staff.  As a house that is a single family residence only, Frogmore Cottage renovations should cost significantly less than any of the other properties on that list.

I don't have a problem with the Frogmore renovations.  The publicly funded portion all sounded necessary to me.  But it's not an accurate comparison to say, "But look how much more money the queen spent repairing _all of Buckingham Palace_."


----------



## mrsinsyder

I am dead with the shade in this article. Why lie about how she met Meghan? Why is EVERYTHING about MM so convoluted?

_"We met at a lunch in Miami during Art Basel,” she said (then murmured, “I think this is all pretty well documented”). “And we sat down and we started, actually, right from the get-go, talking about a shared passion for equality, women’s empowerment and our love of dogs.”

*Pressed about the plausibility of two strangers at Art Basel *——

“Well, we were at a lunch.”

—— of two strangers at a lunch at Art Basel spontaneously declaring their love for equality, Ms. Nonoo said, “Well, we got there pretty quickly, I’ll tell you that much!”

*Could context explain how pleasantries veered to equality? Asked what the party was for *——

“Well, it was a — it was a seated lunch.”

—— Ms. Nonoo said she could not “remember exactly,” but suggested, “I guess if you’re sitting next to somebody at a seated lunch, there’s an opportunity to, kind of, get a little deeper than at a cocktail party or something where you’re, like, standing and your feet hurt and you’re like, ‘Ooh, ooh, where am I going next so my feet aren’t hurting anymore?’” She and Ms. Markle, she said, “were introduced through a mutual, very close friend.”

Ms. Nonoo dated this occurrence to around “eight years ago,” though a 2015 post attributed to Ms. Markle on her deleted lifestyle website, The Tig (accessible via archive), recounted that the two had met the previous December. (“And by ‘met,’ I mean danced the night away and sipped cocktails with,’” Ms. Markle wrote, describing Ms. Nonoo as “the kind of woman you instantly adore.”)

Photos captured in Miami in 2014, sold through Getty Images, reveal that both women attended a nighttime beach party of which one host was the founder of Soho House. (Soho House’s London location is the rumored site of Prince Harry and Ms. Markle’s first date.)_

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/style/misha-nonoo-meghan-markle.html


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> I am dead with the shade in this article. Why lie about how she met Meghan? Why is EVERYTHING about MM so convoluted?
> 
> _"We met at a lunch in Miami during Art Basel,” she said (then murmured, “I think this is all pretty well documented”). “And we sat down and we started, actually, right from the get-go, talking about a shared passion for equality, women’s empowerment and our love of dogs.”
> 
> *Pressed about the plausibility of two strangers at Art Basel *——
> 
> “Well, we were at a lunch.”
> 
> —— of two strangers at a lunch at Art Basel spontaneously declaring their love for equality, Ms. Nonoo said, “Well, we got there pretty quickly, I’ll tell you that much!”
> 
> *Could context explain how pleasantries veered to equality? Asked what the party was for *——
> 
> “Well, it was a — it was a seated lunch.”
> 
> —— Ms. Nonoo said she could not “remember exactly,” but suggested, “I guess if you’re sitting next to somebody at a seated lunch, there’s an opportunity to, kind of, get a little deeper than at a cocktail party or something where you’re, like, standing and your feet hurt and you’re like, ‘Ooh, ooh, where am I going next so my feet aren’t hurting anymore?’” She and Ms. Markle, she said, “were introduced through a mutual, very close friend.”
> 
> Ms. Nonoo dated this occurrence to around “eight years ago,” though a 2015 post attributed to Ms. Markle on her deleted lifestyle website, The Tig (accessible via archive), recounted that the two had met the previous December. (“And by ‘met,’ I mean danced the night away and sipped cocktails with,’” Ms. Markle wrote, describing Ms. Nonoo as “the kind of woman you instantly adore.”)
> 
> Photos captured in Miami in 2014, sold through Getty Images, reveal that both women attended a nighttime beach party of which one host was the founder of Soho House. (Soho House’s London location is the rumored site of Prince Harry and Ms. Markle’s first date.)_
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/style/misha-nonoo-meghan-markle.html


She is trying to become a designer, so if she looks like a close, personal friend of MM, then it looks like MM is giving her opportunities because she's a friend. If they pretend to be in the same "equality" circle it looks like they have some shared interest they bonded over other than drinks at nightclubs. I think it's more to protect her own image than lie for MM? That's how I read it. I was very surprised to see her name included with the capsule collection, she was picked for obvious reasons.


----------



## jehaga

doni said:


> Maybe she is British and not used to being hugged by strangers no matter how royal they are


Hugged and shaken for good measure


----------



## bag-mania

It is weird that after all this time there still seems to be a dispute over who introduced Meghan to Harry. In the NYT article mrsinsider posted it indicates Misha Nonoo may have done it. Over the years others who have been named as possibilities are Jessica Mulroney, Violet von Westenholz, and Markus Anderson. Is how Harry and Meghan met really that much of a mystery?


----------



## Welltraveled!

She sounded more bothered that she is asked questions that any newbie reporter should know the answer to; if they bothered to research it.  

 I really don’t see any shade from Nonoo.  



mrsinsyder said:


> I am dead with the shade in this article. Why lie about how she met Meghan? Why is EVERYTHING about MM so convoluted?
> 
> _"We met at a lunch in Miami during Art Basel,” she said (then murmured, “I think this is all pretty well documented”). “And we sat down and we started, actually, right from the get-go, talking about a shared passion for equality, women’s empowerment and our love of dogs.”
> 
> *Pressed about the plausibility of two strangers at Art Basel *——
> 
> “Well, we were at a lunch.”
> 
> —— of two strangers at a lunch at Art Basel spontaneously declaring their love for equality, Ms. Nonoo said, “Well, we got there pretty quickly, I’ll tell you that much!”
> 
> *Could context explain how pleasantries veered to equality? Asked what the party was for *——
> 
> “Well, it was a — it was a seated lunch.”
> 
> —— Ms. Nonoo said she could not “remember exactly,” but suggested, “I guess if you’re sitting next to somebody at a seated lunch, there’s an opportunity to, kind of, get a little deeper than at a cocktail party or something where you’re, like, standing and your feet hurt and you’re like, ‘Ooh, ooh, where am I going next so my feet aren’t hurting anymore?’” She and Ms. Markle, she said, “were introduced through a mutual, very close friend.”
> 
> Ms. Nonoo dated this occurrence to around “eight years ago,” though a 2015 post attributed to Ms. Markle on her deleted lifestyle website, The Tig (accessible via archive), recounted that the two had met the previous December. (“And by ‘met,’ I mean danced the night away and sipped cocktails with,’” Ms. Markle wrote, describing Ms. Nonoo as “the kind of woman you instantly adore.”)
> 
> Photos captured in Miami in 2014, sold through Getty Images, reveal that both women attended a nighttime beach party of which one host was the founder of Soho House. (Soho House’s London location is the rumored site of Prince Harry and Ms. Markle’s first date.)_
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/style/misha-nonoo-meghan-markle.html


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> It is weird that after all this time there still seems to be a dispute over who introduced Meghan to Harry. In the NYT article mrsinsider posted it indicates Misha Nonoo may have done it. Over the years others who have been named as possibilities are Jessica Mulroney, Violet von Westenholz, and Markus Anderson. Is how Harry and Meghan met really that much of a mystery?


Yes and the when. Even the couple have given different dates for that. I think this has to do with the fact that she was still in a relationship with Cory the chef.


----------



## Welltraveled!

HM never stated who introduced them.  In their first interview together they said they’re keeping the person name private to protect them or something like that.  

It’s only mysterious to the media; because of clicks and $$&&&.

I don’t think anyone else cares.  





bag-mania said:


> It is weird that after all this time there still seems to be a dispute over who introduced Meghan to Harry. In the NYT article mrsinsider posted it indicates Misha Nonoo may have done it. Over the years others who have been named as possibilities are Jessica Mulroney, Violet von Westenholz, and Markus Anderson. Is how Harry and Meghan met really that much of a mystery?


----------



## caramelize126

bag-mania said:


> It is weird that after all this time there still seems to be a dispute over who introduced Meghan to Harry. In the NYT article mrsinsider posted it indicates Misha Nonoo may have done it. Over the years others who have been named as possibilities are Jessica Mulroney, Violet von Westenholz, and Markus Anderson. Is how Harry and Meghan met really that much of a mystery?



I dont understand the secrecy either. It only fuels the rumors that them meeting was more strategic and contrived than they are claiming.
edit- i think GraceKelly is right! There were pictures on TMZ of meghan and cory earlier that summer looking cozy together. I think she was still with him when she met and started dating harry. nothing to do with "privacy": https://www.tmz.com/2018/11/25/meghan-markle-kissing-ex-boyfriend-cory-vitiello-before-prince-harry/

Also interesting- Isabel May, the head of communications at Burberry, has been revealed on Katie Nichol's twitter as one of Archie's godmothers. Now i am thinking that they may not have wanted to reveal the godparents names not bc of "privacy" but because they knew that that people would question it.  Isabel is a new friend, that she met through the soho circuit. Its pretty telling that Meghan didnt have any other friends from growing up or just old friends in general that she wanted to ask...
 with all of the secrecy from everyone, it really does make you wonder if Meghan meeting harry was planned out and now meghan is helping those friends ( misha with the collection, isabel as a "royal" godmother, etc.)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7460293/Is-Isabel-Archies-godmother.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welltraveled! said:


> She sounded more bothered that she is asked questions that any newbie reporter should know the answer to; if they bothered to research it.
> 
> I really don’t see any shade from Nonoo.


Shade from the author. She calls Nonoo a liar towards the end.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Shade from the author. She calls Nonoo a liar towards the end.



  That is pretty strong and unless she had something to back it up her editor would have pulled it. You need two sources in responsible journalism.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I doubt it.  Even the daily fail says HM met a few weeks after she and Corey has broken up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...-hunky-chef-Meghan-Markle-nearly-married.html





gracekelly said:


> Yes and the when. Even the couple have given different dates for that. I think this has to do with the fact that she was still in a relationship with Cory the chef.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Nonoo said 2015 and the article states 2014.  It’s only a year difference.  However both the journalist and Nonoo confirmed that she and Meghan knew each other for over 5 years.



gracekelly said:


> That is pretty strong and unless she had something to back it up her editor would have pulled it. You need two sources in responsible journalism.


----------



## caramelize126

Welltraveled! said:


> View attachment 4539925
> 
> 
> I doubt it.  Even the daily fail says HM met a few weeks after she and Corey has broken up.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...-hunky-chef-Meghan-Markle-nearly-married.html



when this article first came out, there were comments from various people claiming to know the couple stating that Cory didnt want to damage his reputation by starting a war with her in the tabloids and has stayed silent, but that the relationships did overlap; Those comments have all been deleted and it looks like those same people commented again saying that their comments were deleted. We'll never know what the truth is...its obviously all speculation. But it does make you wonder why everyone is being so secretive about the timing of things.

Cory is pretty well known in Toronto and he seems like a nice guy. If this is true, I feel bad for him.


----------



## Welltraveled!

If true, it’s not uncommon for men and women to have a friend introduced them or similar.  I’m sure most people in this thread has done it or experienced it at least once in their lives.  

But I get it, there is a desire  in this thread to feed the Meghan is a social climber.  

Heck most royal marriages were strategic alliances in nature.  



caramelize126 said:


> I dont understand the secrecy either. *It only fuels the rumors that them meeting was more strategic and contrived* than they are


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Shade from the author. She calls Nonoo a liar towards the end.



Can you please cite where she's called a liar? Like I want to actually see the word..liar..anywhere within that article. Please & Thank you.


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> If true, it’s not uncommon for men and women to have a friend introduced them or similar.  I’m sure most people in this thread has done it or experienced it at least once in their lives.
> 
> But I get it, there is a desire  in this thread to feed the Meghan is a social climber.
> 
> Heck most royal marriages were strategic alliances in nature.



This marriage was royal  and strategic?


----------



## Welltraveled!

There may have been some overlap.  Probably ending one relationship to start dating someone else.  

Obviously Corey and Meghan weren’t meant to be.  I wouldn’t feel bad for someone that is in, hopefully, a blissfully happily marriage.   



caramelize126 said:


> when this article first came out, there were comments from various people claiming to know the couple stating that Cory didnt want to damage his reputation by starting a war with her in the tabloids and has stayed silent, but that the relationships did overlap; Those comments have all been deleted and it looks like those same people commented again saying that their comments were deleted. We'll never know what the truth is...its obviously all speculation. But it does make you wonder why everyone is being so secretive about the timing of things.
> 
> Cory is pretty well known in Toronto and he seems like a nice guy. If this is true, I feel bad for him.


----------



## hellosunshine

*How the Cambridges and Sussexes have upped their social media game*

And William and Kate are not the only ones, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex set up the *Sussex Royal Instagram account* in April, following the split from their joint office with the Cambridges. They currently have 9.4 million followers – and counting.


Each month, the couple choose a different theme and follow accounts associated with it. For September, they’ve highlighted organisations working around Africa, in conjunction with their tour later this month. Shining a spotlight on smaller charities in this way has had a huge impact for them, in more ways than one. 

*Tiny Tickers, a national charity working to improve the early detection and care of babies with serious heart conditions, were one of the 15 charities to be followed by Sussex Royal in August. Katie Lawson, Head of Fundraising & Communications, tells HELLO!: "In the week immediately after the announcement we raised £1,009, purely through individual donations from the general public. We don't even raise that in a month normally. And within hours, we saw a huge increase in social media activity – including new followers and thousands of comments and post shares.  *


*“We have now doubled our Instagram following thanks to the Sussex Royal announcement. The Sunday before the announcement we had 1700 followers - we're now approaching 3400.*


*“For a very small charity, with only five members of staff, this kind of exposure will make a huge difference. The awareness it provides is a wonderful way to raise our profile, highlighting the work we're doing for babies with serious heart conditions. This will undoubtedly help save many lives."*

*Little Village, a London-based baby bank, which provides clothes, toys and equipment for infants and children up to the age of five, was one of the charities Harry and Meghan chose to feature on their Instagram account. The couple asked their followers to consider supporting the organisation, in response to the #GlobalSussexBabyShower social media campaign.*


*Sophia Parker, CEO and Founder of Little Village tells HELLO!: “The Global Sussex Baby Shower was incredible - we had messages, presents and financial gifts from well-wishers across the globe. The extra publicity we’ve received has also lead to support from big companies like Pampers and Maclaren, who have both provided us with donations to help even more families. *

*“Since being highlighted on Instagram, Little Village’s Instagram followers have gone up from 1000 to 7000. This matters because it means even more people are aware of our work, and that of the 100 other baby banks across the UK. Our Twitter and Facebook followers have also gone up, and the engagement rates of our Twitter feed have gone through the roof, thanks to the online support of the ‘Sussex Squad’!*

“Harry and Meghan have rightly recognised the reach of their massive platform to share their interests and causes.* They don’t only share photos of themselves at their engagements, but photos of the charities they champion and the moments that are important to them* — which keeps their efforts in their followers’ feeds more regularly.

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...ridges-sussexes-upped-social-media-platforms/


----------



## Welltraveled!

Royal yes.  Strategic for whoever it benefits.  Which by Harry’s definition it was ideal for him and I will say for Meghan as well.  

I hate to do the comparison,  but both brothers married “commoners” by Royal standards.  And based on what we know about Kate  and how she got Will and the allegations in this thread that Meghan did something similar.  both women strategically aligned themselves to marry Royals.  Smart move on both accounts.  

So if HM marriage isn't considered Royal the same goes for  WK.



gracekelly said:


> This marriage was royal  and strategic?


----------



## hellosunshine

Welltraveled! said:


> Obviously Corey and Meghan weren’t meant to be.  I wouldn’t feel bad for someone that is in, hopefully, a blissfully happily marriage.



I don't think he even cares as he's moved on. He's currently in a relationship and has a child.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> +MORE Photos Released from Yesterday
> 
> View attachment 4539817
> 
> View attachment 4539818





caramelize126 said:


> I dont understand the secrecy either. It only fuels the rumors that them meeting was more strategic and contrived than they are claiming.
> edit- i think GraceKelly is right! There were pictures on TMZ of meghan and cory earlier that summer looking cozy together. I think she was still with him when she met and started dating harry. nothing to do with "privacy": https://www.tmz.com/2018/11/25/meghan-markle-kissing-ex-boyfriend-cory-vitiello-before-prince-harry/
> 
> Also interesting- Isabel May, the head of communications at Burberry, has been revealed on Katie Nichol's twitter as one of Archie's godmothers. Now i am thinking that they may not have wanted to reveal the godparents names not bc of "privacy" but because they knew that that people would question it.  Isabel is a new friend, that she met through the soho circuit. Its pretty telling that Meghan didnt have any other friends from growing up or just old friends in general that she wanted to ask...
> with all of the secrecy from everyone, it really does make you wonder if Meghan meeting harry was planned out and now meghan is helping those friends ( misha with the collection, isabel as a "royal" godmother, etc.)
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7460293/Is-Isabel-Archies-godmother.html





mrsinsyder said:


> I am dead with the shade in this article. Why lie about how she met Meghan? Why is EVERYTHING about MM so convoluted?
> 
> _"We met at a lunch in Miami during Art Basel,” she said (then murmured, “I think this is all pretty well documented”). “And we sat down and we started, actually, right from the get-go, talking about a shared passion for equality, women’s empowerment and our love of dogs.”
> 
> *Pressed about the plausibility of two strangers at Art Basel *——
> 
> “Well, we were at a lunch.”
> 
> —— of two strangers at a lunch at Art Basel spontaneously declaring their love for equality, Ms. Nonoo said, “Well, we got there pretty quickly, I’ll tell you that much!”
> 
> *Could context explain how pleasantries veered to equality? Asked what the party was for *——
> 
> “Well, it was a — it was a seated lunch.”
> 
> —— Ms. Nonoo said she could not “remember exactly,” but suggested, “I guess if you’re sitting next to somebody at a seated lunch, there’s an opportunity to, kind of, get a little deeper than at a cocktail party or something where you’re, like, standing and your feet hurt and you’re like, ‘Ooh, ooh, where am I going next so my feet aren’t hurting anymore?’” She and Ms. Markle, she said, “were introduced through a mutual, very close friend.”
> 
> Ms. Nonoo dated this occurrence to around “eight years ago,” though a 2015 post attributed to Ms. Markle on her deleted lifestyle website, The Tig (accessible via archive), recounted that the two had met the previous December. (“And by ‘met,’ I mean danced the night away and sipped cocktails with,’” Ms. Markle wrote, describing Ms. Nonoo as “the kind of woman you instantly adore.”)
> 
> Photos captured in Miami in 2014, sold through Getty Images, reveal that both women attended a nighttime beach party of which one host was the founder of Soho House. (Soho House’s London location is the rumored site of Prince Harry and Ms. Markle’s first date.)_
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/12/style/misha-nonoo-meghan-markle.html


What a lot of _totally_ unexpected  publicity for Meghan's dear friend Nonoo and her made to order white shirt. What luck.

The Soho House conspiracy theory?! Never!    That NY Times piece you posted snippets from, mrsinsyder, was pretty revealing as is some other info coming to light on other forums. If I were part of the BRF I'd actually be worried about Harry.


----------



## Welltraveled!

True.  Women tend be dramatic with things like this.  Men quickly find a replacement.



hellosunshine said:


> I don't think he even cares as he's moved on. He's currently in a relationship and has a child.


----------



## caramelize126

Welltraveled! said:


> If true, it’s not uncommon for men and women to have a friend introduced them or similar.  I’m sure most people in this thread has done it or experienced it at least once in their lives.
> 
> But I get it, there is a desire  in this thread to feed the Meghan is a social climber.
> 
> Heck most royal marriages were strategic alliances in nature.



I think that unless you are from another royal family, anyone marrying in is technically a "social climber" or upwardly mobile-  this includes Kate, Fergie, Diana ( her father was an earl but princess of wales was definitely a step up), etc.
Its human nature and i don't fault anyone's hustle.. In all of these situations, there _may_ have been love, but there was _definitely_ a desire to move up. I dont think theres any denying that. Meghan met Harry through a friend. Whether or not the steps to get there were deliberate is up for debate and would obviously just be speculation

The problem is what these ladies do when they get to the "top". For the most part, Meghan, with her hollywood PR tactics, has brought much of this criticism upon herself and done more to _separate_ herself from her new family:
The writing on the bananas, constantly interrupting Harry to speak during the engagement interview, basically announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding, the ridiculously tacky baby shower, crying "privacy" for archie, private planes, etc. Her love for _attention_ has brought her this criticism.  Sure she hasnt had as much time as Kate to adjust. But knowing how not to act like an a**hole should be common sense and has nothing to do with protocol. Having a nickname of "tungsten" is not necessarily a compliment.

There was alot of support for her in the beginning, but its become clear that she wants nothing to do with the royal family and their ways. This is why people ( at least in britain) think that she was more interested in how this relationship would elevate her. But I'm an american, so i know that her image stateside is much different than what it is in the UK right now. I think that might be contributing to some of the confusion about why she is so disliked by some of the posters here.  FWIW,  Kate was also called a social climber for the first few years of her marriage. She was able to get past that by quietly doing the exact opposite of what meghan is doing now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

This is great news!  I love how small charities are benefiting from their association with HM.  I wish more influential people would work with smaller grassroots organizations.  Smaller organizations tend to be more honest and committed to their mission and values.





hellosunshine said:


> *How the Cambridges and Sussexes have upped their social media game*
> 
> And William and Kate are not the only ones, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex set up the *Sussex Royal Instagram account* in April, following the split from their joint office with the Cambridges. They currently have 9.4 million followers – and counting.
> 
> 
> Each month, the couple choose a different theme and follow accounts associated with it. For September, they’ve highlighted organisations working around Africa, in conjunction with their tour later this month. Shining a spotlight on smaller charities in this way has had a huge impact for them, in more ways than one.
> 
> *Tiny Tickers, a national charity working to improve the early detection and care of babies with serious heart conditions, were one of the 15 charities to be followed by Sussex Royal in August. Katie Lawson, Head of Fundraising & Communications, tells HELLO!: "In the week immediately after the announcement we raised £1,009, purely through individual donations from the general public. We don't even raise that in a month normally. And within hours, we saw a huge increase in social media activity – including new followers and thousands of comments and post shares.  *
> 
> 
> *“We have now doubled our Instagram following thanks to the Sussex Royal announcement. The Sunday before the announcement we had 1700 followers - we're now approaching 3400.*
> 
> 
> *“For a very small charity, with only five members of staff, this kind of exposure will make a huge difference. The awareness it provides is a wonderful way to raise our profile, highlighting the work we're doing for babies with serious heart conditions. This will undoubtedly help save many lives."*
> 
> *Little Village, a London-based baby bank, which provides clothes, toys and equipment for infants and children up to the age of five, was one of the charities Harry and Meghan chose to feature on their Instagram account. The couple asked their followers to consider supporting the organisation, in response to the #GlobalSussexBabyShower social media campaign.*
> 
> 
> *Sophia Parker, CEO and Founder of Little Village tells HELLO!: “The Global Sussex Baby Shower was incredible - we had messages, presents and financial gifts from well-wishers across the globe. The extra publicity we’ve received has also lead to support from big companies like Pampers and Maclaren, who have both provided us with donations to help even more families. *
> 
> *“Since being highlighted on Instagram, Little Village’s Instagram followers have gone up from 1000 to 7000. This matters because it means even more people are aware of our work, and that of the 100 other baby banks across the UK. Our Twitter and Facebook followers have also gone up, and the engagement rates of our Twitter feed have gone through the roof, thanks to the online support of the ‘Sussex Squad’!*
> 
> “Harry and Meghan have rightly recognised the reach of their massive platform to share their interests and causes.* They don’t only share photos of themselves at their engagements, but photos of the charities they champion and the moments that are important to them* — which keeps their efforts in their followers’ feeds more regularly.
> 
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...ridges-sussexes-upped-social-media-platforms/


----------



## Welltraveled!

I was speaking in generalities about the nature of  men and women in relationships.

However everyone isn’t “gutted” if they were cheated on or left for someone else.  It really depends on the person and the relationship.  Sometimes having a boyfriend cheat on you so you can move on is ideal.  




caramelize126 said:


> If this is directed towards me, thats pretty rude. I would think anyone regardless of gender would be gutted if they were cheated on or left for someone else. Theres nothing "dramatic" about it..


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> True.  Women tend be dramatic with things like this.  Men quickly find a replacement.


I don't care about this Cory dude at all, but the sweeping generalization that women have emotions and men don't is a very damaging and outdated stereotype.


----------



## gracekelly

None of these marriages were royal.  Lady Diana came from the aristocracy and that was as close as it got.

Cory was  more concerned about his reputation as he lives in Toronto and is a businessman.  He was smart enough to realize that badmouthing MM would not score brownie points for him.  Plus he was a gentleman and knew how to keep to his lip buttoned. Did he appreciate it if she was indeed dating another man when he thought they were in a serious relationship?  I doubt it.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Men do have emotions; they are human after all.  But men do tend to move on quicker then women.  



Flatsy said:


> I don't care about this Cory dude at all, but the sweeping generalization that women have emotions and men don't is a very damaging and outdated stereotype.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree.  I respect him for it.  But he’s married with a child.  He is with hopefully the love of his life.  That’s all that matters now.



gracekelly said:


> Cory was  more concerned about his reputation as he lives in Toronto and is a businessman.  He was smart enough to realize that badmouthing MM would not score brownie points for him.  Plus he was a gentleman and knew how to keep to his lip buttoned. Did he appreciate it if she was indeed dating another man when he thought they were in a serious relationship?  I doubt it.


----------



## buffym

caramelize126 said:


> I think that unless you are from another royal family, anyone marrying in is technically a "social climber" or upwardly mobile-  this includes Kate, Fergie, Diana ( her father was an earl but princess of wales was definitely a step up), etc.
> Its human nature and i don't fault anyone's hustle.. In all of these situations, there _may_ have been love, but there was _definitely_ a desire to move up. I dont think theres any denying that. Meghan met Harry through a friend. Whether or not the steps to get there were deliberate is up for debate and would obviously just be speculation
> 
> The problem is what these ladies do when they get to the "top". For the most part, Meghan, with her hollywood PR tactics, has brought much of this criticism upon herself and done more to _separate_ herself from her new family:
> The writing on the bananas, constantly interrupting Harry to speak during the engagement interview, basically announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding, the ridiculously tacky baby shower, crying "privacy" for archie, private planes, etc. Her love for _attention_ has brought her this criticism.  Sure she hasnt had as much time as Kate to adjust. But knowing how not to act like an a**hole should be common sense and has nothing to do with protocol. Having a nickname of "tungsten" is not necessarily a compliment.
> 
> There was alot of support for her in the beginning, but its become clear that she wants nothing to do with the royal family and their ways. This is why people ( at least in britain) think that she was more interested in how this relationship would elevate her. But I'm an american, so i know that her image stateside is much different than what it is in the UK right now. I think that might be contributing to some of the confusion about why she is so disliked by some of the posters here.  FWIW,  Kate was also called a social climber for the first few years of her marriage. She was able to get past that by quietly doing the exact opposite of what meghan is doing now.



Meghan’s charities have copied the writing on the bananas which should count for something since that is her job.

She didn’t announce at Eugenie’s wedding, it said people who were seeing them since the announcement congratulated the couple.

She seems to me to make mistakes and is growing but if you constantly bring up old articles to say why you dislike her then she’s not the issue.

Especially if you only believe negative articles and comments at the bottom of the article.


----------



## CeeJay

Welltraveled! said:


> They just need something to complain about.  I say this all the time.  But I find it interesting the critics spend so much time to the point of obsessiveness about a woman they don’t like.


.. and likewise, for those that spend so much time (to the point of obsessiveness) about a woman they clearly adore!  Just sayin' ..


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> She didn’t announce at Eugenie’s wedding, it said people who were seeing them since the announcement congratulated the couple.


Nope.  Reports said news of the pregnancy got around to the bulk of the royal family when Meghan showed up at Eugenie's wedding in a maternity coat that was about as subtle as a "Baby On Board" tee shirt. 

The very pro-Sussex Harper's Bazaar attempted to defend Meghan and Harry by saying that certain royals (the Queen and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Camilla, and Jack and Eugenie) knew ahead of time, and the wedding was their first opportunity to congratulate them in person. Harper's didn't know whether Will and Kate knew in advance.  But even Harper's Bazaar didn't say that Meghan and Harry didn't share the news with others when they were at the wedding.  

I'm sure word would have spread very quickly, and I doubt Meghan and Harry would have lied to family members in person before announcing it to the world 72 hours later.


----------



## Welltraveled!

We’re just responding to the lies, half-truths and ridiculous comments etc etc that is said about her.....which comes from her critics. 

Granted some things said in this thread is warranted.  But it’s a little excessive.

Otherwise this thread wouldn’t be as long as it is. 

But hey we balance each other.



CeeJay said:


> .. and likewise, for those that spend so much time (to the point of obsessiveness) about a woman they clearly adore!  Just sayin' ..


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> I dont understand the secrecy either. It only fuels the rumors that them meeting was more strategic and contrived than they are claiming.
> edit- i think GraceKelly is right! There were pictures on TMZ of meghan and cory earlier that summer looking cozy together. I think she was still with him when she met and started dating harry. nothing to do with "privacy": https://www.tmz.com/2018/11/25/meghan-markle-kissing-ex-boyfriend-cory-vitiello-before-prince-harry/
> 
> Also interesting- Isabel May, the head of communications at Burberry, has been revealed on Katie Nichol's twitter as one of Archie's godmothers. Now i am thinking that they may not have wanted to reveal the godparents names not bc of "privacy" but because they knew that that people would question it.  Isabel is a new friend, that she met through the soho circuit. Its pretty telling that Meghan didnt have any other friends from growing up or just old friends in general that she wanted to ask...
> with all of the secrecy from everyone, it really does make you wonder if Meghan meeting harry was planned out and now meghan is helping those friends ( misha with the collection, isabel as a "royal" godmother, etc.)
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7460293/Is-Isabel-Archies-godmother.html


Can't remember where I read it, but there were some accusations being made that Meghan sought out to meet Harry; that during her stint on Suits and some trips to the UK (one of them meeting the loathsome Piers Morgan), Meghan made it known to friends that she wanted to meet a wealthy Englishman and preferably a "Ginger".


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but there were some accusations being made that Meghan sought out to meet Harry; that during her stint on Suits and some trips to the UK (one of them meeting the loathsome Piers Morgan), Meghan made it known to friends that she wanted to meet a wealthy Englishman and preferably a "Ginger".



That or something similar would be the only reason I can imagine for the mystery surrounding how they first met. Saying she sought him out makes for a much less romantic story than saying they were introduced "by a friend."


----------



## CeeJay

Welltraveled! said:


> We’re just responding to the lies, half-truths and ridiculous comments etc etc that is said about her.....which comes from her critics.
> 
> Granted some things said in this thread is warranted.  But it’s a little excessive.
> 
> Otherwise this thread wouldn’t be as long as it is.


Well, see .. to me, that's part of the problem .. what is truly lies, half-truths, etc.?  Why the secrecy? .. unless (_like the Kardashians_), that's the intent to GET people to talk about them .. which is going to bring about both positive and negative comments.  Mind you, some of the negative stuff about Meghan has been just AWFUL, I will give you that .. but I just wish they went about things a little differently (_not to say that they should allow themselves to be photographed/filmed 24x7_)!   I wish I remember WHERE I read the comments made by Paul Burrell (_Princess Diana's butler_) about her interaction(s) with the Press .. because it was really the perfect way to deal with the media and one that he suggested that Harry & Meghan should think about.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Meghan and Harry endearing themselves further to their British subjects and British media   Go Sunshine Sachs!
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/9924662/meghan-markle-prince-harry-interview-gayle-king/

_*ROYAL REVELATIONS * by Tom Wootton/The Sun_
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry could do tell-all interview with US star Gayle King*
_AFTER a string of recent high-profile PR disasters, one would assume the Duke and Duchess Of Sussex might return to more traditional publicity opportunities in the near future. But one of Meghan’s new and influential friends is doing all she can to make sure that’s not what happens.

I’ve discovered that American broadcaster Gayle King is actively lobbying Meghan to sit down with her for a tell-all joint interview with Prince Harry. And Oprah Winfrey’s best friend seems to be in prime position to secure such a chat. After being introduced by the US chat show queen, Meghan and Gayle have started to communicate regularly.

Gayle – the host of breakfast TV show CBS This Morning – attended the Duchess’ star-studded baby shower in New York and then went on TV to defend her over claims it was extravagant. Then she was invited for a meeting with Meghan at Windsor just days before she gave birth. Gayle was in the UK to film a US TV special about the couple, called Meghan And Harry Plus One, which saw the Duchess accused of approving guests who she knew would say positive things about working with her.

Put it this way, Gayle – one of the most famous American news anchors – is certainly a high- profile ally.
Any interview would likely be set up by Sunshine Sachs, the US crisis PR specialists who I revealed have been privately advising Meghan for some time and now officially look after the publicity for their new foundation Sussex Royal. However, the couple would face criticism from the UK media if they chose to grant such a major interview to a US broadcaster any time soon. But as we have seen many times before, this is a couple determined to throw out royal precedent and do things their way._


----------



## buffym

bag-mania said:


> That or something similar would be the only reason I can imagine for the mystery surrounding how they first met. Saying she sought him out makes for a much less romantic story than saying they were introduced "by a friend."



Meghan wanted the person who introduced them privacy protected, they didn’t stutter on high they met. 

Meghan was in Mexico when Harry was in Canada before they met. She was posting on Tig and IG during the Summer, their time table matches her social media post. Before Wimbledon Meghan was constantly posting after Wimbledon and until the tabloids announced Meghan started posting sporadically.

Plus, since some people quote Piers Morgan, she was still talking to Piers until Wimbledon, which fits her meeting Harry and no longer associating with Piers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> .. and likewise, for those that spend so much time (to the point of obsessiveness) about a woman they clearly adore!  Just sayin' ..



There is much to admire in Meghan and I'll always believe that a lot of the criticism has been unfair. Everyone is entitled to feel how they want though....


----------



## buffym

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan and Harry endearing themselves further to their British subjects and British media   Go Sunshine Sachs!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/9924662/meghan-markle-prince-harry-interview-gayle-king/
> 
> _*ROYAL REVELATIONS * by Tom Wootton/The Sun_
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry could do tell-all interview with US star Gayle King*
> _AFTER a string of recent high-profile PR disasters, one would assume the Duke and Duchess Of Sussex might return to more traditional publicity opportunities in the near future. But one of Meghan’s new and influential friends is doing all she can to make sure that’s not what happens.
> 
> I’ve discovered that American broadcaster Gayle King is actively lobbying Meghan to sit down with her for a tell-all joint interview with Prince Harry. And Oprah Winfrey’s best friend seems to be in prime position to secure such a chat. After being introduced by the US chat show queen, Meghan and Gayle have started to communicate regularly.
> 
> Gayle – the host of breakfast TV show CBS This Morning – attended the Duchess’ star-studded baby shower in New York and then went on TV to defend her over claims it was extravagant. Then she was invited for a meeting with Meghan at Windsor just days before she gave birth. Gayle was in the UK to film a US TV special about the couple, called Meghan And Harry Plus One, which saw the Duchess accused of approving guests who she knew would say positive things about working with her.
> 
> Put it this way, Gayle – one of the most famous American news anchors – is certainly a high- profile ally.
> Any interview would likely be set up by Sunshine Sachs, the US crisis PR specialists who I revealed have been privately advising Meghan for some time and now officially look after the publicity for their new foundation Sussex Royal. However, the couple would face criticism from the UK media if they chose to grant such a major interview to a US broadcaster any time soon. But as we have seen many times before, this is a couple determined to throw out royal precedent and do things their way._



The Sun ran the same article in May stating Harry and Meghan was going to apart of the special. Then the said Meghan approved the guests, BP denied it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mi...gham-palace-denies-meghan-markle-16164144.amp


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> Then the said Meghan approved the guests, BP denied it.


I believe the Sun that Meghan personally authorized her friends (Janina and Daniel) to speak to her friend Gayle for that special.  I 100% believe it.  And I think BP's denial made them and Meghan look foolish.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> The Sun ran the same article in May stating Harry and Meghan was going to apart of the special. Then the said Meghan approved the guests, BP denied it.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mi...gham-palace-denies-meghan-markle-16164144.amp


Or maybe Meghan forgot to run her first plans for US media domination by BP and they found out and put a stop to it? She seems more emboldened now, for some reason. These goings-on are quite intriguing  

I don't think I've been this celeb drama mesmerised since LeeAnn and Eddie screwed over Brandi or Halle went all reverse bunny boiler over Gabriel.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan and Harry endearing themselves further to their British subjects and British media   Go Sunshine Sachs!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/9924662/meghan-markle-prince-harry-interview-gayle-king/
> 
> _*ROYAL REVELATIONS * by Tom Wootton/The Sun_
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry could do tell-all interview with US star Gayle King*
> _AFTER a string of recent high-profile PR disasters, one would assume the Duke and Duchess Of Sussex might return to more traditional publicity opportunities in the near future. But one of Meghan’s new and influential friends is doing all she can to make sure that’s not what happens.
> 
> I’ve discovered that American broadcaster Gayle King is actively lobbying Meghan to sit down with her for a tell-all joint interview with Prince Harry. And Oprah Winfrey’s best friend seems to be in prime position to secure such a chat. After being introduced by the US chat show queen, Meghan and Gayle have started to communicate regularly.
> 
> Gayle – the host of breakfast TV show CBS This Morning – attended the Duchess’ star-studded baby shower in New York and then went on TV to defend her over claims it was extravagant. Then she was invited for a meeting with Meghan at Windsor just days before she gave birth. Gayle was in the UK to film a US TV special about the couple, called Meghan And Harry Plus One, which saw the Duchess accused of approving guests who she knew would say positive things about working with her.
> 
> Put it this way, Gayle – one of the most famous American news anchors – is certainly a high- profile ally.
> Any interview would likely be set up by Sunshine Sachs, the US crisis PR specialists who I revealed have been privately advising Meghan for some time and now officially look after the publicity for their new foundation Sussex Royal. However, the couple would face criticism from the UK media if they chose to grant such a major interview to a US broadcaster any time soon. But as we have seen many times before, this is a couple determined to throw out royal precedent and do things their way._



Oh NO!  Heavy black eyeliner and mascara and weepy eyes.  Reminds me of the Diana interview. Nothing like drama and close-ups on TV.   The difference is that Lady Diana was divorced when she did it and MM will still be in the family so I wonder it the suits will allow it.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> It is weird that after all this time there still seems to be a dispute over who introduced Meghan to Harry. In the NYT article mrsinsider posted it indicates Misha Nonoo may have done it. Over the years others who have been named as possibilities are Jessica Mulroney, Violet von Westenholz, and Markus Anderson. Is how Harry and Meghan met really that much of a mystery?


Not Jessica Mulroney.  She only wishes she ran in those circles but I guess in a way, now she does.

The rumour here in Toronto was that Meg was dating Cory Vitiello, a very cute and well known chef. He was working some big, fancy event which Meg attended (being the networker she is) and Harry was there. 

So, apparently she met Harry while still involved with Cory. Although Markus Anderson may have had some input, he's an intriguing character.


----------



## mdcx

It seems like every chance Megs gets to endear herself to the British public, she rows the opposite direction.
Just staying put in England, being out and about with Archie, showing up at some low level (for her) public engagements that are not about her, and acting like she understands the English sensibility would go a long way.

All this business with aligning herself with America, American media, talk of buying a house in Malibu etc is not helping her. She is supposed to be English now, that was my understanding after the wedding.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Some, if not most of the things said about them are from the media.....not the sources.  They would have to do a sit-down interview to swift through what's truth or "gossip."  

The Kardashians, spread their own good or bad gossip.  It has been "rumored" for years that they feed information to TMZ.   HM doesn't have to work that hard; the media is doing it for them.

Hopefully, this new PR firm will help change their image/damage control.  We will see.

However, Ceejay you made some valid points.  



CeeJay said:


> Well, see .. to me, that's part of the problem .. what is truly lies, half-truths, etc.?  Why the secrecy? .. unless (_like the Kardashians_), that's the intent to GET people to talk about them .. which is going to bring about both positive and negative comments.  Mind you, some of the negative stuff about Meghan has been just AWFUL, I will give you that .. but I just wish they went about things a little differently (_not to say that they should allow themselves to be photographed/filmed 24x7_)!   I wish I remember WHERE I read the comments made by Paul Burrell (_Princess Diana's butler_) about her interaction(s) with the Press .. because it was really the perfect way to deal with the media and one that he suggested that Harry & Meghan should think about.


----------



## gracekelly

If the object was to keep their names out there front and center, it is working.  The question is whether it is positive or negative.  Depending on what you are doing, it may not matter.  OK for celebs, not necessarily OK for Royal Family members.  Despite what some may believe, they are not one and the same.


----------



## hellosunshine

mdcx said:


> It seems like every chance Megs gets to endear herself to the British public, she rows the opposite direction.
> Just staying put in England, being out and about with Archie, showing up at some low level (for her) public engagements that are not about her, and acting like she understands the English sensibility would go a long way.



First of all, she's in England 90% of the time. Secondly, Meghan and Harry have already made clear that Archie will be seen at their discretion. There's literally no reason she should be "out and about" with Archie right now. He's not even old enough to go to a playground. As a five month old baby, Archie is on a eat, sleep, and poop schedule. Thirdly, why low level public engagements? Also, I'd like to add that none of her previous engagements have been about her except for her baby shower and the small chance that she's supporting a friend or her husband?

Anyways, I have to wonder if some of you guys wish you could relegate Meghan to the back of the room..so she goes unnoticed. It must bother some people that she's shining so bright...front and center.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> First of all, she's in England 90% of the time. Secondly, Meghan and Harry have already made clear that Archie will be seen at their discretion. There's literally no reason she should be "out and about" with Archie right now. He's not even old enough to go to a playground. As a five month old baby, Archie is on a eat, sleep, and poop schedule. Thirdly, why low level public engagements? Also, I'd like to add that none of her previous engagements have been about her except for her baby shower and the small chance that she's supporting a friend or her husband?
> 
> Anyways, I have to wonder if some of you guys wish you could relegate Meghan to the back of the room..so she goes unnoticed. It must bother some people that she's shining so bright...front and center.


But she isn’t shining bright? She is getting tons of negative attention. And her attempts at being the centre of attention are obvious and lame. 

This odd need to defend and make excuses for everything she does is bizarre.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> First of all, she's in England 90% of the time. Secondly, Meghan and Harry have already made clear that Archie will be seen at their discretion. There's literally no reason she should be "out and about" with Archie right now. He's not even old enough to go to a playground. As a five month old baby, Archie is on a eat, sleep, and poop schedule. Thirdly, why low level public engagements? Also, I'd like to add that none of her previous engagements have been about her except for her baby shower and the small chance that she's supporting a friend or her husband?
> 
> Anyways, I have to wonder if some of you guys wish you could relegate Meghan to the back of the room..so she goes unnoticed. It must bother some people that she's shining so bright...front and center.


Hey, hellosunshine! I maybe "know" you, don't I? Genius light bulb moment here after seeing your siggy every day now for a couple of weeks  From the Bal forum? I just can't place you for some reason. That logo manic ogre Gvasalia made me drift away from my first bag brand love so I don't really post there anymore.


----------



## buffym

Meh-gan said:


> But she isn’t shining bright? She is getting tons of negative attention. And her attempts at being the centre of attention are obvious and lame.
> 
> This odd need to defend and make excuses for everything she does is bizarre.



That works two ways, people are entitled to their POV, if you think she’s lame doesn’t mean everyone. One could say your whole post is bizarre, but you are entitled to your opinion as much as others.

The Smartworks collection is selling out, so again not everyone thinks she’s lame.

No one forces the public the come out and support, like the Lion King premiere were people told her and Harry they were doing a great job.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meh-gan said:


> This odd need to defend and make excuses for everything she does is bizarre.



Yeah, well on the opposite side, it's also rather bizarre to constantly criticize her on every minuscule thing. I know some of ya'll dislike Meghan (judging solely from your comments) and you'd love it if you could run amok in this thread, saying whatever crazy thing you'd like...totally uncontested, right? That would be boring...



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Hey, hellosunshine! I maybe "know" you, don't I? Genius light bulb moment here after seeing your siggy every day now for a couple of weeks  From the Bal forum? I just can't place you for some reason. That logo manic ogre Gvasalia made me drift away from my first bag brand love so I don't really post there anymore.



YES! Omg, hi! I used to be a huge fan of Balenciaga bags albeit not anymore. I used to be such a collector, at one point I wanted to collect all the colors like a bag of Skittles. Haha. Anyway, I agree that the current designs are not too great but I don't care either way because I still own so many older bags/colors that I rotate...I would sell all my Balenciaga bags but they have terrible resale value and I just can't part with them so cheap. What about you? Do you still own Balenciaga in your collection?


----------



## caramelize126

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but there were some accusations being made that Meghan sought out to meet Harry; that during her stint on Suits and some trips to the UK (one of them meeting the loathsome Piers Morgan), Meghan made it known to friends that she wanted to meet a wealthy Englishman and preferably a "Ginger".



She was hanging out with Millie Macintosh and that whole Made in Chelsea crew pre-Harry. I think the rumors were that she was trying to land a spot on MIC a la Stephanie Pratt because London seemed like an easier place to get into/succeed vs hollywood. And most of the Made in Chelsea cast members were seriously wealthy, it wouldve been a good crowd to get in with if thats what she was looking for. Spencer Matthews from MIC is Pippa Middleton's brother-in-law.
Of course, I'm not sure if this is actually true, but there are pictures of her out and about with various MIC cast members.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Bb


----------



## myown

Flatsy said:


> Nope.  Reports said news of the pregnancy got around to the bulk of the royal family when Meghan showed up at Eugenie's wedding in a maternity coat that was about as subtle as a "Baby On Board" tee shirt.
> 
> The very pro-Sussex Harper's Bazaar attempted to defend Meghan and Harry by saying that certain royals (the Queen and Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Camilla, and Jack and Eugenie) knew ahead of time, and the wedding was their first opportunity to congratulate them in person. Harper's didn't know whether Will and Kate knew in advance.  But even Harper's Bazaar didn't say that Meghan and Harry didn't share the news with others when they were at the wedding.
> 
> I'm sure word would have spread very quickly, and I doubt Meghan and Harry would have lied to family members in person before announcing it to the world 72 hours later.


I still don’t understand what’s so much wrong with announcing at a wedding. I did too. But that’s far from upstaging the newlywed couple! It’s not like people stop celebrating the wedding and start doing a babyshower


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but there were some accusations being made that Meghan sought out to meet Harry; that during her stint on Suits and some trips to the UK (one of them meeting the loathsome Piers Morgan), Meghan made it known to friends that she wanted to meet a wealthy Englishman and preferably a "Ginger".


I thought Harry was after her since he saw her on suits


----------



## MarieCurie

Flatsy said:


> I guess Harry should be condemned too because he'd never heard of her either.


To be fair Harry is not going around reminding everyone who cares to listen that he didn't know her before they met (did he say that or are we just making an assumption he didn't?) and she was one season away from scratching down garbage cans had he not rescued her and given her star power


----------



## myown

myown said:


> I still don’t understand what’s so much wrong with announcing at a wedding. I did too. But that’s far from upstaging the newlywed couple! It’s not like people stop celebrating the wedding and start doing a babyshower


okay. I understand this: https://www.boredpanda.com/bridesmaid-wedding-engagement-announcement-pregnancy-revenge/


----------



## lulilu

myown said:


> I still don’t understand what’s so much wrong with announcing at a wedding. I did too. But that’s far from upstaging the newlywed couple! It’s not like people stop celebrating the wedding and start doing a babyshower



Disagree.  I immediately noticed her obvious "showing" her tummy (which could not have been that big IRL at that point) with her choice of clothing at the wedding -- it seemed intended to signal pregnancy or at least cause people to wonder.  How can that not take away from Eugenie being the center of attention?  Especially bad, given that Eugenie had to delay her wedding to accommodate MH's wedding plans.


----------



## myown

lulilu said:


> Disagree.  I immediately noticed her obvious "showing" her tummy (which could not have been that big IRL at that point) with her choice of clothing at the wedding -- it seemed intended to signal pregnancy or at least cause people to wonder.  How can that not take away from Eugenie being the center of attention?  Especially bad, given that Eugenie had to delay her wedding to accommodate MH's wedding plans.


people/media would have speculated with whatever she has worn. they even speculated prior HMs wedding. And I remember reading here how clever of Meghan to cover up in church to stop the media taking pictures of her belly. 
I meant taking away the attention of the attendees at the party. or the close family. I'm sure they love HMs announcement, but that didn't took the focus off of Eugenie


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think it is just generally accepted to be bad form to make any kind of announcement at someone else’s wedding. It shifts and divides the attention. And celebration.

However, in this situation it feels even more selfish. This pregnancy was a BIG DEAL. And, as someone else noted E had to move her wedding date so they could get married. And she clearly wanted her day in the spotlight because she had a public wedding. (I suspect E&B have always felt a bit shoved aside in the royal family and, given how much bullying from the press they have received I’m sure it meant something to be treated like a princess for a day).  You know this announcement is going to cause hoopla. Let the girl have her day.

And the royals have weird rules about announcements. Princess Anne wasn’t allowed to announce her engagement until after Prince Andrew was born, I think. 

It just starting to feel like the royals have rules for things to keep matters low key and and to prevent the appearance of conflict or spotlight splitting and MM is doing what she wants to stay front and centre, completely in the face of them.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Nothings wrong with it, if asked.

Due to the timing of Meghan announcing the pregnancy to the world and Eugenie's wedding.  Some people assumed that she made the announcement at the wedding.  

I think if asked she may have admitted it.  But I doubt she did some announcement.



myown said:


> I still don’t understand what’s so much wrong with announcing at a wedding. I did too. But that’s far from upstaging the newlywed couple! It’s not like people stop celebrating the wedding and start doing a babyshower


----------



## Welltraveled!

No she was showing before the wedding.  At one event she purposely wore a ruffle skirt or dress to hide her stomach.  

But that dress she wore to Eugenie’s wedding was horrible.



lulilu said:


> Disagree.  I immediately noticed her obvious "showing" her tummy (which could not have been that big IRL at that point) with her choice of clothing at the wedding -- it seemed intended to signal pregnancy or at least cause people to wonder.  How can that not take away from Eugenie being the center of attention?  Especially bad, given that Eugenie had to delay her wedding to accommodate MH's wedding plans.


----------



## Meh-gan

myown said:


> people/media would have speculated with whatever she has worn. they even speculated prior HMs wedding. And I remember reading here how clever of Meghan to cover up in church to stop the media taking pictures of her belly.
> I meant taking away the attention of the attendees at the party. or the close family. I'm sure they love HMs announcement, but that didn't took the focus off of Eugenie



It’s bad manners and bad taste. Tacky. You can announce your pregnancy on ANY other day than someone’s wedding. Why did you do it at all if you think it doesn’t take attention away from the married couple? You literally make pregnancy announcements to GET attention for your pregnancy. Otherwise both you and Meghan would have kept your mouth’s shut and waited til the next day.


----------



## marthastoo

People, the snarky b*tching and defense team needs to slow down.  I don't read for two days and literally have to devote 40 minutes to catch up.


----------



## LittleStar88

marthastoo said:


> People, the snarky b*tching and defense team needs to slow down.  I don't read for two days and literally have to devote 40 minutes to catch up.



I’ll skip several pages and not miss a thing!


----------



## marthastoo

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ll skip several pages and not miss a thing!


'
Too true!


----------



## bag-princess

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ll skip several pages and not miss a thing!




exactly!!!   it is the same old thing day after day!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

So true!  Lol!  I avoid reading long paragraphs too. 



LittleStar88 said:


> I’ll skip several pages and not miss a thing!


----------



## Welltraveled!

Read the last 3 pages and you’re all caught up.

Lol! 



marthastoo said:


> People, the snarky b*tching and defense team needs to slow down.  I don't read for two days and literally have to devote 40 minutes to catch up.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lulilu said:


> Disagree.  I immediately noticed her obvious "showing" her tummy (which could not have been that big IRL at that point) with her choice of clothing at the wedding -- it seemed intended to signal pregnancy or at least cause people to wonder.  How can that not take away from Eugenie being the center of attention?  Especially bad, given that Eugenie had to delay her wedding to accommodate MH's wedding plans.


She was wearing a maternity coat with a fetus the size of a blueberry and people will still make excuses.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> She was wearing a maternity coat with a fetus the size of a blueberry and people will still make excuses.



I don't know why people are complaining. This thread is going epic. Let's break the internets!


----------



## bellebellebelle19

What is a maternity coat? She was just wearing Givenchy lol. She didn't even look pregnant.

And even if it were a maternity coat, it seems like Eugenie cared way less than Meghan anti-fans  https://www.popsugar.com/celebrity/Meghan-Markle-Friends-Princess-Eugenie-45590973/amp


----------



## Flatsy

MarieCurie said:


> To be fair Harry is not going around reminding everyone who cares to listen that he didn't know her before they met (did he say that or are we just making an assumption he didn't?) and she was one season away from scratching down garbage cans had he not rescued her and given her star power


Harry was honest and said in his engagement interview that he'd never heard of her and had never heard of the show Suits either.  Here, that's considered epic slander. 

And Harry did not act like there was something wrong with HIM for not knowing who she was.  Unlike in this thread, where I've now been told repeatedly that Meghan was nothing less than an international superstar, that Suits is watched by every single person under the age of 30 around the world, and that me not having heard of her means I am old and "it's my own fault".


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Harry was honest and said in his engagement interview that he'd never heard of her and had never heard of the show Suits either.  Here, that's considered epic slander.
> 
> And Harry did not act like there was something wrong with HIM for not knowing who she was.  Unlike in this thread, where I've now been told repeatedly that Meghan was nothing less than an international superstar, that Suits is watched by every single person under the age of 30 around the world, and that me not having heard of her means I am old and "it's my own fault".


----------



## hellosunshine

People keep rehashing the most mundane of topics over and over again here. Who cares about where they met, when they met, who introduced them, or the technicalities of how news of her pregnancy was found out within their extended family. Also, why do certain people constantly want to argue about her fame or success? So what, Harry didn't know who she was...does that somehow imply that she had absolutely no career? Does that invalidate everything? At the end of the day, Meghan and Harry are so far removed from these topics right now...they've since gotten engaged, married, got pregnant, and delivered a child...yet we're still discussing the beginnings of their relationship like it somehow matters right now......


----------



## Flatsy

If you don't care about what's being discussed, feel free to scroll past.


hellosunshine said:


> So what, Harry didn't know who she was...does that somehow imply that she had absolutely no career? Does that invalidate everything?


The whole point here is that many people, if not most of the world, had not heard of Meghan before she got involved with Harry, and that's including Harry himself.  It's her fans who for some reason take that simple fact and turn it into an effort to tear her down and "invalidate everything".  Meghan's extremely famous now.  Why the need to pretend as if she was a Beyonce-level star before?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> If you don't care about what's being discussed, feel free to scroll past.
> 
> The whole point here is that many people, if not most of the world, had not heard of Meghan before she got involved with Harry, and that's including Harry himself.  It's her fans who for some reason take that simple fact and turn it into an effort to tear her down and "invalidate everything".  Meghan's extremely famous now.  Why the need to pretend as if she was a Beyonce-level star before?



So talking about Meghan in this thread doesn't make sense, but spending all kinds of time on Kate does?

Hoooookay.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> People keep rehashing the most mundane of topics over and over again here. Who cares about where they met, when they met, who introduced them, or the technicalities of how news of her pregnancy was found out within their extended family. Also, why do certain people constantly want to argue about her fame or success? So what, Harry didn't know who she was...does that somehow imply that she had absolutely no career? Does that invalidate everything? At the end of the day, Meghan and Harry are so far removed from these topics right now...they've since gotten engaged, married, got pregnant, and delivered a child...yet we're still discussing the beginnings of their relationship like it somehow matters right now......


Because people like you so worship her and exaggerate her success that there is backlash IMO.  As someone else said, she is world famous now but she was not before Harry.  To say different is just not true.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I was thinking this morning, I wonder how 'empowering' the labor conditions are for a 2/$24 dress. 

So I check the M&S site and no mention of where it's produced. 

Alas.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> I was thinking this morning, I wonder how 'empowering' the labor conditions are for a 2/$24 dress.
> 
> So I check the M&S site and no mention of where it's produced.
> 
> Alas.


No idea where the particular clothes are made but https://corporate.marksandspencer.com/sustainability/clothing-and-home/supplier-management

https://interactivemap.marksandspen...e3d3ccdf022&tagsPIDs=5aa6a3a8c6fe1dab103dd082


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> She was hanging out with Millie Macintosh and that whole Made in Chelsea crew pre-Harry. I think the rumors were that she was trying to land a spot on MIC a la Stephanie Pratt because London seemed like an easier place to get into/succeed vs hollywood. And most of the Made in Chelsea cast members were seriously wealthy, it wouldve been a good crowd to get in with if thats what she was looking for. Spencer Matthews from MIC is Pippa Middleton's brother-in-law.
> Of course, I'm not sure if this is actually true, but there are pictures of her out and about with various MIC cast members.



BOOM .. that's it!  A Brit friend of mine out here in LA, she is the one who pointed me to that gossip line (and article)!


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> The whole point here is that many people, if not most of the world, had not heard of Meghan before she got involved with Harry, and that's including Harry himself.  It's her fans who for some reason take that simple fact and turn it into an effort to tear her down and "invalidate everything".  Meghan's extremely famous now.  Why the need to pretend as if she was a Beyonce-level star before?



Ok, so you're saying many people hadn't heard of her but there's also many people who have. Suits may not have been on NBC, ABC, or CBS but on USA Network. The channel is big enough to have their own UpFronts much like NBC, ABC, or CBS. 

Anyway, as you say..Meghan is extremely famous now..so let's move forward?



sdkitty said:


> Because people like you so worship her and exaggerate her success that there is backlash IMO.  As someone else said, she is world famous now but she was not before Harry.  To say different is just not true.



I'm not exaggerating nor do I worship her. I just do not believe she was irrelevant as some of you like to think. She was no Beyonce...no one here is saying that. Furthermore, anyone that marries into the BRF will naturally elevate in status and public exposure.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Anyway, to move along....

I'm reading that Meghan + Harry may deny the press from photographing the family at the air strip after landing in South Africa. The press is naturally very upset (no money to be made off the photos). It's what they deserve tbh lol.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Ok, so you're saying many people hadn't heard of her but there's also many people who have.


Which is why I said *many *and not, "Nobody had ever heard of Meghan ever."  She was on a TV show with viewership in the multi-millions.  Nobody's denying that, but you keep arguing as if they are.



hellosunshine said:


> Anyway, as you say..Meghan is extremely famous now..so let's move forward?


It's lovely how you come back to have the last word and then decree it's time to move on.

I'll talk about what I feel like.  Topics die when people lose interest and stop responding.  So if you are finished with this topic, then my best advice is for *you* to move on.


----------



## LittleStar88

I had no clue who she was whatsoever when it broke that she was dating Harry. But she seemed nice, genuine, and she and Harry seemed to be on the same page with regards to interests and lifestyle. She seemed to be an appropriate match.

I do agree she was a C list actress (Megan WHO?) but I respect her determination and hustle. If she and Harry want to be Duke and Duchess of Hollywood, more power to them.

As for when she appeared pregnant... if she felt better in more forgiving clothing, I don’t blame her for more forgiving wastelines in the early stages. Shoot, I eat one burrito and look like I’m 6 months along... and she is a tiny thing and more apt to show earlier.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Anyways........I did like that bag and was going to purchase it before it sold out.   I work in Corporate America and need a good reliable everyday bag.  I thought about buying the LV Neverfull; but I really don't want to put my laptop in it.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I picked up two copies when I was in London last week.  But B&N will have UK Vogue available in the States.


----------



## Welltraveled!

@hellosunshine I LOVE British humor!!


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> People keep rehashing the most mundane of topics over and over again here. Who cares about where they met, when they met, who introduced them, or the technicalities of how news of her pregnancy was found out within their extended family. Also, why do certain people constantly want to argue about her fame or success? So what, Harry didn't know who she was...does that somehow imply that she had absolutely no career? Does that invalidate everything? At the end of the day, Meghan and Harry are so far removed from these topics right now...they've since gotten engaged, married, got pregnant, and delivered a child...yet we're still discussing the beginnings of their relationship like it somehow matters right now......


I'm sorry @hellosunshine , and I'm not trying to be mean here .. but I have to honestly say that I had to chuckle at this because when you say "_who cares_", well .. very obviously .. *you do*!  Why do you say "_certain people constinently want to argue about her fame or success?_" .. when we aren't arguing about it .. but just merely stating various POV's based on what we've read (_is it true/not true - *who knows*?_).  As I stated before, I believe (_and yes - this is my opinion_) that the reason why the "re-hashing" keeps on going on is because .. *NO ONE* seems to know exactly what did occur and as such, it becomes fodder for speculation, etc.  I don't get the secrecy, I honestly don't .. and alas, whether one likes it or not, speculation oftentimes does not always take a positive spin. 

So, in regards to 'moving on'; not sure folks will ever do so with many of the questions .. just kind of stating it is what it is ..


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> I'm reading that Meghan + Harry may deny the press from photographing the family at the air strip after landing in South Africa. The press is naturally very upset (no money to be made off the photos).


You do realize that most of the media doesn't operate as a non-profit enterprise?  Making money is why they exist, just like every other capitalist venture?  Why should they be invited along to cover a royal tour and then be prevented from doing what they were invited to do, which is photograph and write about it?

Royals don't invite the press along on their tours out of the goodness of their hearts.  They want and need the press to cover their work.  It sounds like the Sussexes are planning to do the same thing they did last time, which is micromanage and antagonize the press for no good reason, and then continue complaining about how hostile the press is to them in return.

And it sounds like this is an effort to control "the optics" of them disembarking another private plane.


----------



## gracekelly

If this is a diplomat. mission to Africa, then I don’t think they can ban the press from taking photographs. Having press around on these junkets is SRO. However, if this was a truly private visit, theycould go there quietly and avoid the press.   I think the former is the case and the later is not so I would suggest that the simplest thing to do is leave the child back in England and then no brouhaha with pictures and the press. Everyone goes about their assigned tasks and that is the end of it.


----------



## mdcx

Did anyone honestly know who MM was unless they watched Suits? I certainly didn't until I watched a few episodes, and even then it was her beauty that inspired me to look up "who plays Rachel Zane on Suits" not her amazing acting ability. 
I mean 'Suits' ratings were not great - highest audience number in the 4 million range per episode, dropping to 1 million in later seasons. Compare that to 'Friends', with an average of 30 million viewers and a high of around 50 million.
Once I stopped watching 'Suits' I never saw MM in anything else. She's no Jen Anniston.

If they do keep Archie away from the cameras on this tour that will be a real shame. Feel for all the older people who feel 'entitled' in a nice way to get some pics of the lovely royal baby and are being denied.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

gracekelly said:


> If this is a diplomat. mission to Africa, then I don’t think they can ban the press from taking photographs. Having press around on these junkets is SRO. However, if this was a truly private visit, theycould go there quietly and avoid the press.   I think the former is the case and the later is not so I would suggest that the simplest thing to do is leave the child back in England and then no brouhaha with pictures and the press. Everyone goes about their assigned tasks and that is the end of it.



Honestly, I would take this as only a rumour until it happens.

Criticism where it's warranted but a lot of these stories etc have failed to materialise as fact.

If their other tours are a guide then H & M will give the press quite a bit of access. 

I can't blame them though for feeling off about "journalism" like the DM and Sun  who've printed some terrible stuff and given air time to her father and step-sister.

But the press corp will get good access I think.


----------



## Flatsy

I don't think they need to have Archie photographed, but they always go about this in such a stupid way.  They went out of their way to emphasize Archie's presence on this tour by announcing they would be conducting the tour "as a family" and Harry was so excited to introduce his wife and son to South Africa.  That's because they want everybody to squee about what an adorable family they are.  

But it sounds like they are now going to turn around and block pictures of Archie in as conspicuous a way as possible.  

There are ways to protect Archie's privacy without making a big issue out of it.  Meghan and Harry could do the usual public arrival, pose for pictures so the press can do their "Harry and Meghan have arrived!" stories, and then have a nanny quietly carry Archie off of the plane away from view of the cameras.



FreeSpirit71 said:


> Criticism where it's warranted but a lot of these stories etc have failed to materialise as fact.


This is true.


----------



## marthastoo

I honestly don't understand the obsession about how famous MM was before she met Harry.  Why does that matter?  She was a moderately successful working actress on a cable tv show. Ok, so what?


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> I don't think they need to have Archie photographed, but they always go about this in such a stupid way.  They went out of their way to emphasize Archie's presence on this tour by announcing they would be conducting the tour "as a family" and Harry was so excited to introduce his wife and son to South Africa.  That's because they want everybody to squee about what an adorable family they are.
> 
> But it sounds like they are now going to turn around and block pictures of Archie in as conspicuous a way as possible.
> 
> There are ways to protect Archie's privacy without making a big issue out of it.  Meghan and Harry could do the usual public arrival, pose for pictures so the press can do their "Harry and Meghan have arrived!" stories, and then have a nanny quietly carry Archie off of the plane away from view of the cameras.
> 
> 
> This is true.



Don’t see it that way. If they take him to Africa the local citizens will be extremely disappointed not to get a picture of Archie.   They will be insulted if they feel that he is being snuck off the plane. Better to leave him at home. My understanding was that S Africa was paying for their flight there and it was commercial and not a private plane.


----------



## mdcx

My feeling is, if they give the press a few nice uncomplicated snaps of them as a family, let everyone see Archie, people will be happy and move on. They do, somewhat, have an obligation to provide pictures of Archie to their public. Don't they get this? I thought it was pretty commonly understood by the BRF that a certain number of pictures of them are part of the job.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> My feeling is, if they give the press a few nice uncomplicated snaps of them as a family, let everyone see Archie, people will be happy and move on. They do, somewhat, have an obligation to provide pictures of Archie to their public. Don't they get this? I thought it was pretty commonly understood by the BRF that a certain number of pictures of them are part of the job.


I agree with this. You take money from the public purse and you have to pay the piper.   This entire secrecy thing has taken on a life of its own. No one is suggesting that a camera be trained on his crib 24/7. A few pix would keep the hounds at bay.


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> I honestly don't understand the obsession about how famous MM was before she met Harry.  Why does that matter?  She was a moderately successful working actress on a cable tv show. Ok, so what?


I agree with the “so what.”  And that’s all she was.  And to answer @mdcx I had no idea who she was prior to her dating him.


----------



## Straight-Laced

I think they've been kind of 'saving' Archie for the big Africa reveal.  A gift to Africa.

He's not just any new Royal baby but an especially significant Royal baby for Africa, with special meaning.  And Meghan and Harry both love Africa.    

And then afterwards Archie will return to enjoy his infancy at Frogmore Cottage in privacy, although probably slightly less guarded from public observation than before.

That's my prediction, FWIW


----------



## Grande Latte

I think I must be the odd one out. I have no need to see pictures of baby Archie. He's an infant, leave him alone!


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Morgan R

Previously unseen picture of Harry, Meghan, and Archie from Archie's Christening


----------



## Traminer

Are you still "wild about Harry"?

I am not any more ...


----------



## Sharont2305

Lovely picture


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> Lovely picture




Great choice of photo.  It was taken at Harry and Meghan's wedding.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Great choice of photo.  It was taken at Harry and Meghan's wedding.


Yes, I know, great choice from KP. To me it says that despite all the rumours of a rift, there really isn't one... at least on William's s part. Or could it? 
They could have easily posted a pic of them as boys but chose this instead.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, I know, great choice from KP. To me it says that despite all the rumours of a rift, there really isn't one... at least on William's s part. Or could it?
> They could have easily posted a pic of them as boys but chose this instead.


I don't know, but the SussexRoyal account included a lovely photo of the brothers as well on Harry's birthday collage.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I don't know, but the SussexRoyal account included a lovely photo of the brothers as well on Harry's birthday collage.


Yes, but I thought the significance of the KP one was that its one from Harry and Meghan's wedding. The "rift" is supposedly about William thinking the wedding was too quick. Again, there are plenty of photos they could have chosen of them as kids and as adults.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, but I thought the significance of the KP one was that its one from Harry and Meghan's wedding. The "rift" is supposedly about William thinking the wedding was too quick. Again, there are plenty of photos they could have chosen of them as kids and as adults.


I would like to think it was chosen because it was a happy moment for them both, and not because of anything petty.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I would like to think it was chosen because it was a happy moment for them both, and not because of anything petty.


Exactly. Totally agree


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, but I thought the significance of the KP one was that its one from Harry and Meghan's wedding. The "rift" is supposedly about William thinking the wedding was too quick. Again, there are plenty of photos they could have chosen of them as kids and as adults.


The use of this particular picture out of all the pictures they could have used smacks of propaganda to me. I don’t know if there is a rift between them or not, but they are aware of the rumor and this picture is attempting to dispel it. My experience is that where there is smoke there is fire. All the rumors about trouble between Charles and Diana that were denied for years turned out to be true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Regardless of a rift or not.  They’re still brothers and their relationship, outside looking in, had always been a loving one.




Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, I know, great choice from KP. To me it says that despite all the rumours of a rift, there really isn't one... at least on William's s part. Or could it?
> They could have easily posted a pic of them as boys but chose this instead.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I like this collage of Harry and highlights of his life.

My God Archie looks just like his father when he was a baby.



Morgan R said:


>


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Straight-Laced said:


> I think they've been kind of 'saving' Archie for the big Africa reveal.  A gift to Africa.
> 
> He's not just any new Royal baby but an especially significant Royal baby for Africa, with special meaning.  And Meghan and Harry both love Africa.
> 
> And then afterwards Archie will return to enjoy his infancy at Frogmore Cottage in privacy, although probably slightly less guarded from public observation than before.
> 
> That's my prediction, FWIW


A gift to Africa? I hope H/M and their PR are not spinning the Africa trip that way. Because that would be quite the slap in the face of British tax-payers who weren't deemed good enough to be properly introduced to Archie first, as well as the Africans of the countries H/M are visiting in general. Africa has enough babies of its own, of which some- speaking of special meaning, are actual African royal babies. But yay, Meghan's baby is the baby to ***** them all.



I haven't seen any proof so far that Meghan loves Africa except for as a prop for her "humanitarian" self brand building/aggrandising. 

As made evident by the latest sussexroyal Instagram birthday wish for Harry, somebody's surprisingly gotten through to them PR wise. And they're complying, I'm sure, not because of any sudden heartfelt wish to share anything with the commoners but because they have probably been "spoken to" or given an ultimatum.


----------



## buffym

Archie is a little cutie, I really liked Meghan’s hat.


----------



## limom

buffym said:


> Archie is a little cutie, I really liked Meghan’s hat.
> 
> View attachment 4541158


Agree babies make everything better!
Wth is that business with Archie being the gift to Africa?
It has to be bologna, right?


----------



## Sharont2305

Welltraveled! said:


> Regardless of a rift or not.  They’re still brothers and their relationship, outside looking in, had always been a loving one.


Absolutely. It's lovely to see


----------



## Straight-Laced

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> A gift to Africa? I hope H/M and their PR are not spinning the Africa trip that way. Because that would be quite the slap in the face of British tax-payers who weren't deemed good enough to be properly introduced to Archie first, as well as the Africans of the countries H/M are visiting in general. Africa has enough babies of its own, of which some- speaking of special meaning, are actual African royal babies. But yay, Meghan's baby is the baby to ***** them all.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't seen any proof so far that Meghan loves Africa except for as a prop for her "humanitarian" self brand building/aggrandising.
> 
> As made evident by the latest sussexroyal Instagram birthday wish for Harry, somebody's surprisingly gotten through to them PR wise. And they're complying, I'm sure, not because of any sudden heartfelt wish to share anything with the commoners but because they have probably been "spoken to" or given an ultimatum.



That’s quite a leap for you to suggest that the Sussex PR might be spinning the trip to Africa that way. 
I said it was MY prediction (FWIW) based on things specific to their relationship with Africa and the timing of the trip in Archie’s life. 
And I think it would be noted and appreciated in the African countries they’re visiting, which is part of the Royal work they do. 
Maybe they’ll share some family photos of the three of them on their way out of the UK? That would be nice to see but if they don’t I’m not sure that British taxpayers would overwhelmingly feel that was an insult to them, or a slap in the face as you put it. 
If Archie was first shared more openly on a trip to the US then yes, definitely, but Africa not so much.
The Commonwealth does have something of a family vibe to it, hard to explain though.


----------



## Straight-Laced

limom said:


> Wth is that business with Archie being the gift to Africa?
> It has to be bologna, right?



Sheesh! Just a comment I made in a recent post. 
Not fact, not presented as fact, not even gossip, just chat and personal opinion


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Straight-Laced said:


> That’s quite a leap for you to suggest that the Sussex PR might be spinning the trip to Africa that way.
> I said it was MY prediction (FWIW) based on things specific to their relationship with Africa and the timing of the trip in Archie’s life.
> And I think it would be noted and appreciated in the African countries they’re visiting, which is part of the Royal work they do.
> Maybe they’ll share some family photos of the three of them on their way out of the UK? That would be nice to see but if they don’t I’m not sure that British taxpayers would overwhelmingly feel that was an insult to them, or a slap in the face as you put it.
> If Archie was first shared more openly on a trip to the US then yes, definitely, but Africa not so much.
> The Commonwealth does have something of a family vibe to it, hard to explain though.


I have sudden visions of Meghan in Western luxury designer clothes but with some quaint African accessory for the added touch of authenticity, high upon a mountain cliff somewhere in southern Africa holding up Archie to the rising sun and to the delight of the duly impressed African peoples gathered beneath on the savannah, singing: Naaants Aaarchie! (ok, zulu is not my best language ).

Actually, when I reread your post just now, esp this _"I think they've been kind of 'saving' Archie for the big Africa reveal. A gift to Africa. He's not just any new Royal baby but an especially significant Royal baby for Africa, with special meaning."_ I thought maybe I missed some great snark but I see from your latest post I didn't.

With this couple and their PR, and their shared sense of the Sussexes' somewhat exaggerated world importance, it wouldn't be that much of a leap. But just for the sake of it, I didn't write that Sussex PR might be spinning it that way yet, but that I hope they are not. The only way the part of the British public who want to see Archie would not complain about Archie being properly introduced first in Africa, is more likely due to their fear of being labeled racist for such an unspeakable wrong-think.


Speaking of the Commonwealth being so important to the Sussexes. Has either of them mentioned Bahamas recently? Meghan was in the US doing hot yoga, watching tennis and handing out cupcakes to friends during the aftermath of hurricane Dorian if I recall correctly. Any caring sentiments for the people of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas uttered?

(Straight-Laced, I'm not posting all of this to you specifically, but generally. You brought up some interesting points.)


----------



## Sharont2305

Introducing Archie to the world in Africa. Is it really any different to the way we were introduced to George in Australia? I seem to recall the only time we saw George prior to that was his newborn , christening footage and photos and maybe a Christmas one. I think he was 8 or 9 months in Australia when we really saw him.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, I’m part of the Commonwealth. There are no warm fuzzy Commonwealth feelings that I know about


----------



## ccbaggirl89

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> A gift to Africa? I hope H/M and their PR are not spinning the Africa trip that way. Because that would be quite the slap in the face of British tax-payers who weren't deemed good enough to be properly introduced to Archie first, as well as the Africans of the countries H/M are visiting in general. Africa has enough babies of its own, of which some- speaking of special meaning, are actual African royal babies. But yay, Meghan's baby is the baby to ***** them all.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't seen any proof so far that Meghan loves Africa except for as a prop for her "humanitarian" self brand building/aggrandising.
> 
> As made evident by the latest sussexroyal Instagram birthday wish for Harry, somebody's surprisingly gotten through to them PR wise. And they're complying, I'm sure, not because of any sudden heartfelt wish to share anything with the commoners but because they have probably been "spoken to" or given an ultimatum.


I have a feeling Archie might make his grand debut in Africa, perhaps because the regular British tabloid reporters that M/H dislike won't be there to cover them, and Meghan will claim some deep love for Africa and its people. It's not a slap against the British people if Archie goes unveiled all over Africa, but a slap against the British press. I'm sure Archie will be seen during the tour. I am just looking forward to all her amazing outfits and hairstyles.


----------



## buffym

Vogue has a great collection of Prince George’s pictures.

https://www.vogue.co.uk/gallery/prince-george-of-cambridge-photos-album?page=7&amp=

He was not seen in public a lot prior to the Tour in the Commonwealth 
1 - July 23 released from the hospital 
2- August 19 at grandparents house
3 - October at Christening 
4 - March the following year for Mother’s Day

And then he was introduced in Australia and New Zealand. So four times, Archie who is 7th in line seems to be following suit. 

If they showed Archie more people would criticize them for trying to take the spotlight and not protecting him from the media.

Archie has three public photos it fits his position in the royal family.

1. Public introduction after birth
2. Christening 
3. Polo Match


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> Vogue has a great collection of Prince George’s pictures.
> 
> https://www.vogue.co.uk/gallery/prince-george-of-cambridge-photos-album?page=7&amp=
> 
> He was not seen in public a lot prior to the Tour in the Commonwealth
> 1 - July 23 released from the hospital
> 2- August 19 at grandparents house
> 3 - October at Christening
> 4 - March the following year for Mother’s Day
> 
> And then he was introduced in Australia and New Zealand. So four times, Archie who is 7th in line seems to be following suit.
> 
> If they showed Archie more people would criticize them for trying to take the spotlight and not protecting him from the media.
> 
> Archie has three public photos it fits his position in the royal family.
> 
> 1. Public introduction after birth
> 2. Christening
> 3. Polo Match


Yeah, and George was 8 months, Archie will be 5 months so an earlier "1st Royal engagement" for him


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I have sudden visions of Meghan in Western luxury designer clothes but with some quaint African accessory for the added touch of authenticity, high upon a mountain cliff somewhere in southern Africa holding up Archie to the rising sun and to the delight of the duly impressed African peoples gathered beneath on the savannah, singing: Naaants Aaarchie! (ok, zulu is not my best language ).
> 
> Actually, when I reread your post just now, esp this _"I think they've been kind of 'saving' Archie for the big Africa reveal. A gift to Africa. He's not just any new Royal baby but an especially significant Royal baby for Africa, with special meaning."_ I thought maybe I missed some great snark but I see from your latest post I didn't.
> 
> With this couple and their PR, and their shared sense of the Sussexes' somewhat exaggerated world importance, it wouldn't be that much of a leap. But just for the sake of it, I didn't write that Sussex PR might be spinning it that way yet, but that I hope they are not. The only way the part of the British public who want to see Archie would not complain about Archie being properly introduced first in Africa, is more likely due to their fear of being labeled racist for such an unspeakable wrong-think.
> 
> 
> Speaking of the Commonwealth being so important to the Sussexes. Has either of them mentioned Bahamas recently? Meghan was in the US doing hot yoga, watching tennis and handing out cupcakes to friends during the aftermath of hurricane Dorian if I recall correctly. Any caring sentiments for the people of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas uttered?
> 
> (Straight-Laced, I'm not posting all of this to you specifically, but generally. You brought up some interesting points.)


Everyone has been strangely silent about the Bahamas and thank you for mentioning this.  The place has been battered so many times that they all obviously want to forget about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I have a feeling Archie might make his grand debut in Africa, perhaps because the regular British tabloid reporters that M/H dislike won't be there to cover them, and Meghan will claim some deep love for Africa and its people. It's not a slap against the British people if Archie goes unveiled all over Africa, but a slap against the British press. I'm sure Archie will be seen during the tour. I am just looking forward to all her amazing outfits and hairstyles.


I don't see it as a slap against the press.  I do see it as a slap against the people.  The tabloids want to sell papers and they know that the curiosity about Archie has grown because people make comments about his not being seen at all.  The press is there to give the people what they want, and so far the people have been disappointed.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Traminer said:


> Are you still "wild about Harry"?
> 
> I am not any more ...


I second that. He’s truly showing his colors that at 35, he’s still acts like a spoiled child. I wanted to believe that when he married Meghan he was coming into his own, but if this is any indication of what’s ahead, I’ll be greatly disappointed.

I don’t need any “celebrity” telling me how many kids I should be having and where to vacation when they are flying around in private jets with carbon footprints paid for by their celeb friends. Everything of late has been so eye roll worthy.


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> I second that. He’s truly showing his colors that at 35, he’s still acts like a spoiled child. I wanted to believe that when he married Meghan he was coming into his own, but if this is any indication of what’s ahead, I’ll be greatly disappointed.
> 
> I don’t need any “celebrity” telling me how many kids I should be having and where to vacation when they flying around in private jets with carbon footprints paid by their celeb friends. Everything of late has been so eye roll worthy.



Don't you realize that you are not woke or intelligent enough to make these decisions? hahahahahahaha!


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> Don't you realize that you are not woke or intelligent enough to make these decisions? hahahahahahaha!


Lol! Yes, I should have known. I am such a silly ill  informed commoner flying cattle class on commercial flights, wanting to go to tourist destinations because god knows I may not be able to take my private jet or whip out by first class or business class tickets to travel anytime I please. At least I’m doing my part by being childless! Thanks, Harry!!


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol! Yes, I should have known. I am such a silly ill  informed commoner flying cattle class on commercial flights, wanting to go to tourist destinations because god knows I may not be able to take my private jet or whip out by first class or business class tickets to travel anytime I please. At least I’m doing my part by being childless! Thanks, Harry!!



What would we do if we didn't have folks like them to think for us?

I have a great new thought.  My DH informed me that modern society, in general, has been contributing to the downfall of the planet by using electricity!    Electricity give off sulphur hexafluride which is a potent greenhouse gas.  I really need to know if Prince Harry realizes this.  Since he has been kind enough to lecture, barefooted of course, about what we are doing to destroy the environment, this should have been taken into consideration during the remodel of Frogmore.  I would love to hear his solution as to provide light, heat, AC etc because I don't have a clue and am not woke and will continue to be a slave to the LA Dept of Water and Power.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Straight-Laced said:


> Sheesh! Just a comment I made in a recent post.
> Not fact, not presented as fact, not even gossip, just chat and personal opinion


Don’t you know everything in this thread has to be cited (unless it’s Pro-MM) and simple figures of speech are only intended literally.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> What would we do if we didn't have folks like them to think for us?
> 
> I have a great new thought.  My DH informed me that modern society, in general, have been contributing to the downfall of the planet by using electricity!    Electricity give off sulphur hexafluride which is a potent greenhouse gas.  I really need to know if Prince Harry realizes this.  Since he has been kind enough to lecture, barefooted of course, about what we are doing to destroy the environment, this should have been taken into consideration during the remodel of Frogmore.  I would love to hear his solution as to provide light, heat, AC etc because I don't have a clue and am not woke and will continue to be a slave to the LA Dept of Water and Power.


HA HA HA HA .. GMTA (Great Minds Think Alike) .. I was waiting for the LADWP comment!!!!!    Just got my bill and   !!!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA HA .. GMTA (Great Minds Think Alike) .. I was waiting for the LADWP comment!!!!!    Just got my bill and   !!!


Yup.  My bill is so outrageous, but I expected it.  I wanted my green lawn and not to have any more trees die, plus staying cool is nice lol!  Those LADWP bast*rds need to stop paying themselves so much money and stop using the money as a slush fund for the city.  They certainly aren't using it to remedy the homeless population problem.

Back to topic.  Happy Birthday Harry!  May you have better growth of your scalp hair in the coming year!


----------



## stanfordmom

I'm a little confused, is this when Harry was lecturing us all about the number of children we have or am I missing something...?

https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/prince-harry-jane-goodall-september-2019-issue 
*
PH: It does make it different. I think, weirdly, because of the people that I’ve met and the places that I’ve been fortunate enough to go to, I’ve always had a connection and a love for nature. I view it differently now, without question. But I’ve always wanted to try and ensure that, even before having a child and hoping to have children…*

JG: Not too many! [Laughs]

*PH: Two, maximum! But I’ve always thought: this place is borrowed. And, surely, being as intelligent as we all are, or as evolved as we all are supposed to be, we should be able to leave something better behind for the next generation.*

JG: But, in fact, we’ve stolen their future. Not all of it. But we’ve got to try and pay a little of it back. And get together to try and heal some of the harm, and at least slow down climate change.


----------



## PatsyCline

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> A gift to Africa? I hope H/M and their PR are not spinning the Africa trip that way. Because that would be quite the slap in the face of British tax-payers who weren't deemed good enough to be properly introduced to Archie first, as well as the Africans of the countries H/M are visiting in general. Africa has enough babies of its own, of which some- speaking of special meaning, are actual African royal babies. But yay, Meghan's baby is the baby to ***** them all.
> I haven't seen any proof so far that Meghan loves Africa except for as a prop for her "humanitarian" self brand building/aggrandising.


The concept of 'if it's important to Harry, it becomes important to Meghan' never dawned on you? Lots of spouses and partners support their significant others in what they're passionate about.


----------



## LuckyBitch

Straight-Laced said:


> Sheesh! Just a comment I made in a recent post.
> Not fact, not presented as fact, not even gossip, just chat and personal opinion


If it's not fact, not presented as fact, not even gossip, just chat and personal opinion, why post it at all?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

PatsyCline said:


> The concept of 'if it's important to Harry, it becomes important to Meghan' never dawned on you? Lots of spouses and partners support their significant others in what they're passionate about.


In their case, no. But the concept of "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" certainly has


----------



## marthastoo

stanfordmom said:


> I'm a little confused, is this when Harry was lecturing us all about the number of children we have or am I missing something...?
> 
> https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/prince-harry-jane-goodall-september-2019-issue
> *
> PH: It does make it different. I think, weirdly, because of the people that I’ve met and the places that I’ve been fortunate enough to go to, I’ve always had a connection and a love for nature. I view it differently now, without question. But I’ve always wanted to try and ensure that, even before having a child and hoping to have children…*
> 
> JG: Not too many! [Laughs]
> 
> *PH: Two, maximum! But I’ve always thought: this place is borrowed. And, surely, being as intelligent as we all are, or as evolved as we all are supposed to be, we should be able to leave something better behind for the next generation.*
> 
> JG: But, in fact, we’ve stolen their future. Not all of it. But we’ve got to try and pay a little of it back. And get together to try and heal some of the harm, and at least slow down climate change.



Of course, at no time did Harry say people should have 2 children or less.  He said he was going to only have 2 children and gave the reason why.  People have been extrapolating what they want to believe about both him and Meghan ever since she showed up on the scene.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## jehaga

Morgan R said:


>



Interesting, no picture of Charles’s face (those might be his legs in the middle picture on the top row).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jehaga

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> A gift to Africa? I hope H/M and their PR are not spinning the Africa trip that way. Because that would be quite the slap in the face of British tax-payers who weren't deemed good enough to be properly introduced to Archie first, as well as the Africans of the countries H/M are visiting in general. Africa has enough babies of its own, of which some- speaking of special meaning, are actual African royal babies. But yay, Meghan's baby is the baby to ***** them all.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't seen any proof so far that Meghan loves Africa except for as a prop for her "humanitarian" self brand building/aggrandising.
> 
> As made evident by the latest sussexroyal Instagram birthday wish for Harry, somebody's surprisingly gotten through to them PR wise. And they're complying, I'm sure, not because of any sudden heartfelt wish to share anything with the commoners but because they have probably been "spoken to" or given an ultimatum.


Delightfully stated! I mean, it would make slightly more sense if Harry had married someone like Lupita Nyong’o. Archie, if anything, should be a “gift” to America (do we even want him and the baggage he comes with?)!


----------



## mrsinsyder

jehaga said:


> (do we even want him and the baggage he comes with?)!


No


----------



## PatsyCline

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> In their case, no. But the concept of "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" certainly has


What has she 'wanted' that she shouldn't have gotten, in your humble opinion?

Never heard of the expression 'happy wife, happy life'?


----------



## Tivo

Meghan is truly an awful writer. It makes me cringe.


----------



## myown

jehaga said:


> Interesting, no picture of Charles’s face (those might be his legs in the middle picture on the top row).


noticed that, too. they should have added a photo of him, Charles and camilla.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jehaga said:


> Interesting, no picture of Charles’s face (those might be his legs in the middle picture on the top row).


Maybe even more interesting, none of Harry with the queen.


----------



## minababe

so when will be the africa tour start?? this week or next?
cant wait to see Family Sussex on the road again.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

myown said:


> noticed that, too. they should have added a photo of him, Charles and camilla.


In a montage where Diana also appeared? The boys may be fine with Camilla now, but they have tact enough not to do that.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

PatsyCline said:


> What has she 'wanted' that she shouldn't have gotten, in your humble opinion?
> 
> *Never heard of the expression 'happy wife, happy life'?*


Not pertaining to people on the taxpayers' bob, no. But granted, following your and the Sussexes' obviously shared relationship wisdom has proven a great success for Harry and Meghan so far  


(Your first question doesn't make sense in connection with what I posted.)


----------



## PatsyCline

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Not pertaining to people on the taxpayers' bob, no. But granted, following your and the Sussexes' obviously shared relationship wisdom has proven a great success for Harry and Meghan so far
> 
> 
> (Your first question doesn't make sense in connection with what I posted.)





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Not pertaining to people on the taxpayers' bob, no. But granted, following your and the Sussexes' obviously shared relationship wisdom has proven a great success for Harry and Meghan so far
> 
> 
> (Your first question doesn't make sense in connection with what I posted.)


I asked what exactly has Meghan gotten, because you stated "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" somehow inferring that she's getting things she's not supposed to. I simply asked for clarification of what in particular you believe she's 'gotten' that she shouldn't have.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

PatsyCline said:


> I asked what exactly has Meghan gotten, because you stated "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" somehow inferring that she's getting things she's not supposed to. I simply asked for clarification of what in particular you believe she's 'gotten' that she shouldn't have.


I think you're confusing me with prince Harry, Meghan's husband. I never said what you're quoting me quoting, Harry did.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9930192/meghan-markle-fashion-launch-kate-middleton/
*Meghan Markle owes success of Smart Works charity fashion launch to sister-in-law Kate Middleton*
BEAMING in a smart white shirt and black trousers, Meghan’s slickly managed return to work was a welcome contrast to the PR disasters that have lately been dogging her and Prince Harry.

And many think she has sister-in-law Kate to thank — as she looks to bury their differences and learn from the woman best placed to help her.

The Duchess, who was promoting her Smart Works charity fashion range at John Lewis’s flagship store in central London, was like the Meghan of old as she gave a ten-minute unscripted speech about girl power that went down a storm with fans gathered outside.

One well-placed source revealed: “Meghan accepts that she had lost her way and lost her mojo. She knows she needs to take radical action to get the public back on board and allow people to fall for her again just like they did when she started dating Harry.

“Kate is a huge inspiration, as she has provided a princess masterclass since she married William, and Meghan realises she has a lot to learn from her.

“Kate has been constantly graceful and elegant — flawless, actually — and has an intuition for how ordinary British people think and feel about things, which Meghan has struggled to grasp.
“Meghan knows her reputation has taken a battering and she has made big mistakes, but she is convinced she can turn it round.

“From now on we will see a very different Duchess of Sussex — one that is much more humble and considerate. One that is more like Kate, basically.”

Meghan was once seen as the next People’s Princess after Diana, whose earrings she wore at the John Lewis event on Thursday.

A TV actress with a stellar band of A-list friends, the 38-year-old was a breath of fresh air for the stuffy royals when she met Harry, who turns 35 today, three years ago.
The public were immediately taken by her megawatt smile, easy-going charm and glamorous wardrobe.

She could not put a foot wrong as her spontaneous nature saw her warmly embrace fans and break protocol, such as opening her own car door.

Not even divorce from film producer Trevor Engelson nor a fallout with her family in the States took the shine off.

But cracks started to appear before her wedding last year.
There were rumours Meghan was barking orders, losing her temper with staff and acting so out of hand she made Kate cry and had to be spoken to by the Queen.

Aides left in droves and insiders gossiped of a bitter falling out between Wills and Harry, apparently sparked by Meghan.

The newlyweds upped sticks and moved from Kensington Palace, where they had been neighbours with Wills and Kate.

And the couples’ formally separated their staff and charity foundation, ending a partnership dubbed the Fab Four.
Meghan and Harry seemed to make matters worse by lavishing £2.4million on refurbishing their new home, Frogmore Cottage near Windsor Castle, insisting baby Archie had a behind-closed-doors christening and restricting photos of him.

Taking four private jets in 11 days while lecturing the public about climate change did not go down well, either.

And when the couple stated they would have a maximum of two children as more would damage the environment, some saw it as a swipe at Wills and Kate, both 37, who have three.

As Meghan and Harry’s reputation crumbled, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s continued to soar.[...]


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The Sun. Could there *be* a more biased source aside from the DM?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The Sun. Could there *be* a more biased source aside from the DM?


Sunshine Sachs, Meghan's PR firm?


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan & Harry are going to be prolific in their reach and the number of people they help through the Sussex Foundation. I appreciate the quiet work they put in behind the scenes. You don’t hear for months on end how keen they are to work. Harry and Meghan just get the work done. 

Meghan would make a brilliant project coordinator. I’m extremely impressed with how she conceives of ideas, identifies the people and resources that are needed, then coordinates everything to create initiatives that have tangible benefits. She did it for the Grenfell cookbook and basically cold-called all the companies involved with the Smartworks initiative.

The Vogue guest edit was not only great promotion for the Smartworks line  but many of the featured charities in the issue are still reaping benefits in donations and social media traffic. Through one guest editing project Meghan amplified her impact to help over a dozen charities. That she accomplished everything while on maternity leave is a testament to her drive, passion and work ethnic. I’m sure all of her patronages are thrilled to have someone who doesn’t just show up
for photo ops. In under under 3 years in the royal family Meghan has had a measurable impact while I still have no idea what the other duchess stands for after 10 years. 

 If the monarchy ended today Meghan and Harry would be in the best position to thrive in the aftermath because if their genuine desire to help others.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Sunshine Sachs, Meghan's PR firm?


Right. But the truth is somewhere in the middle. Extremes of either bias rub me the wrong way.

The Sun and DM will always get a side-eye from me. 

Good for pics and not much else, least of all - grammar.

That article is trash.


----------



## Sharont2305

minababe said:


> so when will be the africa tour start?? this week or next?
> cant wait to see Family Sussex on the road again.


Sunday or monday


----------



## mrsinsyder

I wish the gossip policing in this thread would stop 

https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-guest-judge-on-rupauls-drag-race-uk

_Meghan Markle wanted to break the Internet – and she just might do that, with the news that she is mulling an invitation to appear as a guest judge on the UK version of hit reality show RuPaul’s Drag Race.

The out-there rumours have been given a credible boost today, with star RuPaul confirming to prestigious British publication The Sunday Times that he has issued an invitation for the American-born Duchess to appear on the show...

RuPaul says he initially wanted Meghan to appear on the first series of the British edition of the show, but her advanced pregnancy at the time of filming made that impossible.

Now he suggests an appearance is a possibility for a future episode, and rumour has it she's considering the gig if she can do it on her own terms. 
_


----------



## chicaloca

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9930192/meghan-markle-fashion-launch-kate-middleton/
> *Meghan Markle owes success of Smart Works charity fashion launch to sister-in-law Kate Middleton*
> BEAMING in a smart white shirt and black trousers, Meghan’s slickly managed return to work was a welcome contrast to the PR disasters that have lately been dogging her and Prince Harry.
> 
> And many think she has sister-in-law Kate to thank — as she looks to bury their differences and learn from the woman best placed to help her.
> 
> The Duchess, who was promoting her Smart Works charity fashion range at John Lewis’s flagship store in central London, was like the Meghan of old as she gave a ten-minute unscripted speech about girl power that went down a storm with fans gathered outside.
> 
> One well-placed source revealed: “Meghan accepts that she had lost her way and lost her mojo. She knows she needs to take radical action to get the public back on board and allow people to fall for her again just like they did when she started dating Harry.
> 
> “Kate is a huge inspiration, as she has provided a princess masterclass since she married William, and Meghan realises she has a lot to learn from her.
> 
> “Kate has been constantly graceful and elegant — flawless, actually — and has an intuition for how ordinary British people think and feel about things, which Meghan has struggled to grasp.
> “Meghan knows her reputation has taken a battering and she has made big mistakes, but she is convinced she can turn it round.
> 
> “From now on we will see a very different Duchess of Sussex — one that is much more humble and considerate. One that is more like Kate, basically.”
> 
> Meghan was once seen as the next People’s Princess after Diana, whose earrings she wore at the John Lewis event on Thursday.
> 
> A TV actress with a stellar band of A-list friends, the 38-year-old was a breath of fresh air for the stuffy royals when she met Harry, who turns 35 today, three years ago.
> The public were immediately taken by her megawatt smile, easy-going charm and glamorous wardrobe.
> 
> She could not put a foot wrong as her spontaneous nature saw her warmly embrace fans and break protocol, such as opening her own car door.
> 
> Not even divorce from film producer Trevor Engelson nor a fallout with her family in the States took the shine off.
> 
> But cracks started to appear before her wedding last year.
> There were rumours Meghan was barking orders, losing her temper with staff and acting so out of hand she made Kate cry and had to be spoken to by the Queen.
> 
> Aides left in droves and insiders gossiped of a bitter falling out between Wills and Harry, apparently sparked by Meghan.
> 
> The newlyweds upped sticks and moved from Kensington Palace, where they had been neighbours with Wills and Kate.
> 
> And the couples’ formally separated their staff and charity foundation, ending a partnership dubbed the Fab Four.
> Meghan and Harry seemed to make matters worse by lavishing £2.4million on refurbishing their new home, Frogmore Cottage near Windsor Castle, insisting baby Archie had a behind-closed-doors christening and restricting photos of him.
> 
> Taking four private jets in 11 days while lecturing the public about climate change did not go down well, either.
> 
> And when the couple stated they would have a maximum of two children as more would damage the environment, some saw it as a swipe at Wills and Kate, both 37, who have three.
> 
> As Meghan and Harry’s reputation crumbled, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s continued to soar.[...]



This article reads like bad fan fiction. Unfortunately for the authors of these fever dreams put to words, the reality does not match their fiction.

It’s interesting Cambridges current good will and value to the press seems to lie in being perceived as contrarian to the Sussexes. As a result they have to constantly be aware of the Sussexes in order to know what moves to make (I.e. staging pap walks for commercial flights).

By contrast the Sussexes value lies in their passion, charisma and work ethnic. They operate independently of the Cambridges — and the press — and likely could care less what the Cambridges or the media say and do. The Sussexes have the better recipes for success and longevity because they rely on their work ethic and actual testimonials from the thousands of people they impact and not false media narratives from a fickle press.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sorry...New Idea isn't known as No Idea in Australia for nothing.

I'm an Aussie and I can tell you that mag has been successfully sued numerous times - basically because they are full of BS.

That's not gossip policing - that's a fact.

What's more this is the mag that in 2008, revealed details that Prince Harry was with the British army serving in Afghanistan, in breach of an agreement with the major news organisations.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That's not gossip policing - that's a fact.



Can you provide a list of sources that we're allowed to discuss here?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> Can you provide a list of sources that we're allowed to discuss here?


No need for the snark.
I just get tired of people only posting bottom-feeding tabloid slander.

Feel free to post - and I'll feel free to have my opinion about it.

Cheers.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I just get tired of people only posting bottom-feeding tabloid slander.



Why is an article about Ru-Paul inviting her to be on his show slander?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> Why is an article about Ru-Paul inviting her to be on his show slander?


I was referring to more than that one article which I'm sure you know.  

But New Idea have a very well-earned terrible rep in Australia and New Zealand.


----------



## PatsyCline

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think you're confusing me with prince Harry, Meghan's husband. I never said what you're quoting me quoting, Harry did.


Ah, OK that makes sense.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> Meghan & Harry are going to be prolific in their reach and the number of people they help through the Sussex Foundation. I appreciate the quiet work they put in behind the scenes. You don’t hear for months on end how keen they are to work. Harry and Meghan just get the work done.
> 
> Meghan would make a brilliant project coordinator. I’m extremely impressed with how she conceives of ideas, identifies the people and resources that are needed, then coordinates everything to create initiatives that have tangible benefits. She did it for the Grenfell cookbook and basically cold-called all the companies involved with the Smartworks initiative.
> 
> The Vogue guest edit was not only great promotion for the Smartworks line  but many of the featured charities in the issue are still reaping benefits in donations and social media traffic. Through one guest editing project Meghan amplified her impact to help over a dozen charities. That she accomplished everything while on maternity leave is a testament to her drive, passion and work ethnic. I’m sure all of her patronages are thrilled to have someone who doesn’t just show up
> for photo ops. In under under 3 years in the royal family Meghan has had a measurable impact while I still have no idea what the other duchess stands for after 10 years.
> 
> If the monarchy ended today Meghan and Harry would be in the best position to thrive in the aftermath because if their genuine desire to help others.


under three years in the royal family?  yes, well under - it's been less than a year and-a-half.  I don't know how you think you know all about what she is doing behind the scenes (or what others may be doing on her behalf).


----------



## Welltraveled!

During their engagement Meghan stated that she was working behind the scenes.  It was mentioned during a panel with the 4 of them.  So more so up to 3 years give or take.  

Either way, I have to admit I like the fact Meghan continued her work ethic. 




sdkitty said:


> under three years in the royal family?  yes, well under - it's been less than a year and-a-half.  I don't know how you think you know all about what she is doing behind the scenes (or what others may be doing on her behalf).


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> During their engagement Meghan stated that she was working behind the scenes.


I am so sick of Meghan bragging about the constant work she is doing behind the scenes.  It's not so "secret" and "quiet" when she keeps announcing it on Instagram or talking about it in interviews.  

Meghan and Harry even had a source tell the media that the reason they didn't go to Balmoral is because they were "working through most of August".  Give me a friggin break.

Proof is in the pudding.  If they present good projects, great.  They don't get extra credit for doing the preparation work that's going to be required for all projects done by all royals.  

The two of them really have a good con job going - keep the engagement count low, participate mostly in fun engagements, but keep a steady drumbeat going of announcing how hard and how constantly they are working "behind the scenes".


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I am so sick of Meghan bragging about the constant work she is doing behind the scenes.  It's not so "secret" and "quiet" when she keeps announcing it on Instagram or talking about it in interviews.
> 
> Meghan and Harry even had a source tell the media that the reason they didn't go to Balmoral is because they were "working through most of August".  Give me a friggin break.
> 
> Proof is in the pudding.  If they present good projects, great.  They don't get extra credit for doing the preparation work that's going to be required for all projects done by all royals.




1) There’s no bragging about the Sussexes work behind the scenes. We don’t even know about their work until it’s completed and only during promotion do we find out they’ve been working on their projects for months. Even then we mostly know about their work ethic because the people they collaborate talk about it. 

2) I don’t get the complaints about the number of events for the Sussexes. Meghan has been pregnant for most of the year and has technically been on maternity leave. Harry should have been on paternity leave but has still made appearances. Even while pregnant
Meghan managed to complete two major initiatives. Before getting pregnant Meghan and Harry did appearances and whole tour.

On one hand you’re claiming they aren’t working enough (despite being new parents) but on the other you complain they shouldn’t talk about the work they do which would then lead to you claiming they don’t do anything. Quite the paradox. 



> The two of them really have a good con job going - keep the engagement count low, participate mostly in fun engagements, but keep a steady drumbeat going of announcing how hard and how constantly they are working "behind the scenes".



You just described the Cambridges. They weren’t called Work-Shy Will and Duchess Doolittle for nothing.


----------



## chicaloca

sdkitty said:


> under three years in the royal family?  yes, well under - it's been less than a year and-a-half.  I *don't know how you think you know all about what she is doing behind the scenes (or what others may be doing on her behalf).*



Maybe because the people who run the charities (Hubb kitchen and Smartworks) spoke about Meghan’s work behind the scenes??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

To change the subject a bit, is there any truth to the possibility of the Sussex moving abroad or is it just another unfounded rumor?


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> 1) There’s no bragging about the Sussexes work behind the scenes. We don’t even know about their work until it’s completed and only during promotion do we find out they’ve been working on their projects for months. Even then we mostly know about their work ethic because the people they collaborate talk about it.
> 
> 2) I don’t get the complaints about the number of events for the Sussexes. Meghan has been pregnant for most of the year and has technically been on maternity leave. Harry should have been on paternity leave but has still made appearances. Even while pregnant
> Meghan managed to complete two major initiatives. Before getting pregnant Meghan and Harry did appearances and whole tour.
> 
> On one hand you’re claiming they aren’t working enough (despite being new parents) but on the other you complain they shouldn’t talk about the work they do which would then lead to you claiming they don’t do anything. Quite the paradox.
> 
> 
> 
> You just described the Cambridges. They weren’t called Work-Shy Will and Duchess Doolittle for nothing.


Here we go again, comparing Kate and Will unfavorably to the magnificent Meghan


----------



## Welltraveled!

Flatsy, from  what I observed they don’t discuss anything their working on until 90days or less when the project is ready to be launch.  Half the time no one knows which project their working on.  

But so far, all of their work has been a success.

Their few announcements help drive traffic and probably money to the non-profits.  Which I think is a good thing.  




Flatsy said:


> I am so sick of Meghan bragging about the constant work she is doing behind the scenes.  It's not so "secret" and "quiet" when she keeps announcing it on Instagram or talking about it in interviews.
> 
> Meghan and Harry even had a source tell the media that the reason they didn't go to Balmoral is because they were "working through most of August".  Give me a friggin break.
> 
> Proof is in the pudding.  If they present good projects, great.  They don't get extra credit for doing the preparation work that's going to be required for all projects done by all royals.
> 
> The two of them really have a good con job going - keep the engagement count low, participate mostly in fun engagements, but keep a steady drumbeat going of announcing how hard and how constantly they are working "behind the scenes".


----------



## Welltraveled!

Let’s be honest.  When it comes to work ethic and productivity the Cambridge’s are on the losing side....not only compared to HM....but to most of the Royal family.

I’m speaking as someone that likes Kate.  



sdkitty said:


> Here we go again, comparing Kate and Will unfavorably to the magnificent Meghan


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Maybe because the people who run the charities (Hubb kitchen and Smartworks) spoke about Meghan’s work behind the scenes??


For some reason, Meghan's fans heard about the necessary visits and preparation Meghan had to do for her new patronage, the Hubb Kitchen, and ran wild with the idea that she puts in extraordinary amounts of "behind the scenes" work that other royals who take on new patronages and put together projects don't do.  

Maybe that's where Meghan got the idea that it was a good idea to keep talking and talking and talking about all the hard work she's doing in private so that will "count".  Meghan wrote about 5 times in her Vogue issue that she'd been working for 8 whole months on the issue.  Meghan wrote on Instagram about all the visits she'd been "quietly" making to Smartworks. 

If she wants credit for these projects, it goes without saying that she actually did a little bit of legwork beforehand and didn't just show up the day of the announcement to take all the credit after doing nothing.  OF COURSE she visited Hubb to get to know her patronage.  OF COURSE she made a few phone calls for the Vogue issue.  OF COURSE she met with Smartworks.  

I have never thought Meghan was unenthusiastic or uninvolved with her new patronages, but the more she touts all of her secret hard work, the more I think this is a lot of hot air and hype.


----------



## LittleStar88

chicaloca said:


> Before getting pregnant Meghan and Harry did appearances and whole tour.
> ******************************************
> You just described the Cambridges. They weren’t called Work-Shy Will and Duchess Doolittle for nothing.



She was pregnant while on tour - that had to be rough!

DYING at the Work-Shy Will and Duchess Doolittle comment   (And I like Will and Kate)


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> You just described the Cambridges. They weren’t called Work-Shy Will and Duchess Doolittle for nothing.


I agree the Cambridges don't do much, but at least they don't keep announcing that they are doing all kinds of "secret" work that we just don't know about in order to make it sound like they are frantically busy.  The project is the project.  The engagement is the engagement.  The work or lack of work should be evident from that.

In due time when Meghan and Harry don't have the excuse of being new or being on maternity leave, we'll see if they actually ramp up the engagements and the patronages, or if they just continue doing  projects here and there and then publicly claim it as 8 whole months of work.

I was confident in the beginning that Meghan was really going to take off running, and while she is doing some good work, I'm seeing now what a large component of hype and self-marketing is involved.


----------



## chicaloca

sdkitty said:


> Here we go again, comparing Kate and Will unfavorably to the magnificent Meghan



Any time someone  complains about the Sussex work ethic it’s a ripe opportunity to bring up their peers who get no such complaints despite doing less.  

Meghan is indeed magnificent. Two major initiatives under her belt while on maternity leave is nothing to sneeze at. I can’t wait to see what else she has coming up.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> I agree the Cambridges don't do much, but at least they don't keep announcing that they are doing all kinds of "secret" work that we just don't know about in order to make it sound like they are frantically busy.  The project is the project.  The engagement is the engagement.  The work or lack of work should be evident from that.
> 
> In due time when Meghan and Harry don't have the excuse of being new or being on maternity leave, we'll see if they actually ramp up the engagements and the patronages, or if they just continue doing  projects here and there and then publicly claim it as 8 whole months of work.
> 
> I was confident in the beginning that Meghan was really going to take off running, and while she is doing some good work, I'm seeing now what a large component of hype and self-marketing is involved.



Maybe it is an American thing? All of the criticism that she does nothing compels her to mention that she is doing stuff that no one sees in order to give the impression that she is busy.

EDIT: Not saying she is NOT busy - I believe she is and appears more hands-on than Will and Kate (because she mentions the behind the scenes work - Kate/Will do not say these things).

Personally I believe they have people doing the heavy lifting for these events and the royals show up for the most part as needed for meetings, input, and the actual event. I don't believe they are sitting down and project-managing all of the details


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> Let’s be honest. When it comes to work ethic and productivity the Cambridge’s are on the losing side....not only compared to HM....but to most of the Royal family.


Will has outdone Harry on engagements year after year after year.  That's a fact.  The only thing Harry has beaten Will at is hyping up his projects so it seems like he's doing a whole lot of work, when he's actually doing less then his "lazy" brother.

I don't mind people calling out the Cambridges for not doing much, but I object to the inaccurate assertion that the Sussexes are outdoing them, just because they market themselves louder.


----------



## TC1

chicaloca said:


> Any time someone  complains about the Sussex work ethic it’s a ripe opportunity to bring up their peers who get no such complaints despite doing less.
> 
> Meghan is indeed magnificent. Two major initiatives under her belt while on maternity leave is nothing to sneeze at. I can’t wait to see what else she has coming up.


Meghan herself doesn't come up with these initiatives. She has a full team that weighs in and decides what's the best 'look" for her. She then just does what she's told. Granted, she has input..but it's not like she's at home swamped in start up paperwork.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> it’s a ripe opportunity to bring up their peers who get no such complaints despite doing less.


Will and Kate are getting "no such complaints"?  LOL.  You yourself just brought up how they earned *nicknames* based on their lack of work.


----------



## chicaloca

The only time you find out about the Sussexes behind- the-scenes work is during the launch and promotion. That’s it. They don’t announce a project then spend months before release doing photo ops, talking about how keen they are and how hard they are working like with Kate’s garden thing.  The Sussexes roll out a complete project, provide the details, then get back to work. 

The media who supposedly knows the inner workings of a Sussex PR meeting had no idea about the Hubb cookbook or Smartworks initiative until they were ready for launch because the Sussexes don’t talk about what they’re going to do. They just do it.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> Will and Kate are getting "no such complaints"?  LOL.  You yourself just brought up how they earned *nicknames* based on their lack of work.



They were called those names before Meghan
came. Now mysteriously they “haven’t put a foot wrong”.


----------



## chicaloca

TC1 said:


> Meghan herself doesn't come up with thee initiatives. She has a full team that weighs in and decides what's the best 'look" for her. She then just does what she's told. Granted, she has input..but it's not like she's at home swamped in start up paperwork.




According to the personnel at Smartworks and The Hubb Meghan met with them, assessed their needs, then proposed and implemented her ideas. I’m inclined to believe the words of  people who actually worked with Meghan rather than speculation on a forum. 

If you need further proof look at the work Meghan did in Canada prior to meeting Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

LOL


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> According to the personnel at Smartworks and The Hubb Meghan met with them, assessed their needs, then proposed and implemented her ideas. I’m inclined to believe the words of  people who actually worked with Meghan rather than speculation on a forum.
> 
> If you need further proof look at the work Meghan did in Canada prior to meeting Harry.


and since you believe she is "magnificent" you will believe anything positive that's said about her....I just don't get the OT love for her.  she's fine.  I don't hate her but I don't love her or admire her so very much


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Sunshine Sachs, Meghan's PR firm?


Absolutely. Trying to make things better with a giant apologia.


----------



## CAH

I've always believed that the Queen is allowing Will and Kate to be a family before he has to step up and be king - something she was denied because of the early death of her father.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe it is an American thing? All of the criticism that she does nothing compels her to mention that she is doing stuff that no one sees in order to give the impression that she is busy.
> 
> EDIT: Not saying she is NOT busy - I believe she is and appears more hands-on than Will and Kate (because she mentions the behind the scenes work - Kate/Will do not say these things).
> 
> Personally I believe they have people doing the heavy lifting for these events and the royals show up for the most part as needed for meetings, input, and the actual event. I don't believe they are sitting down and project-managing all of the details


I think the opposite, William and Catherine do a lot of behind the scenes work on a lot of their projects, as do other Royals. They just don't let it be known that they are doing it, and certainly don't turn up on the day to take the glory.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think the issue with Meghan is that there is a significant element of self-promotion and entitlement that still exists in MM’s behaviour that is foreign to public service and being a royal. 

I don’t know if that is a by product of her former life or a defensive response to the bad press that she has received. I do hope that she will become comfortable enough to fade out of the day in day out limelight and just focus on her endeavours. The charities should be the focus. Not how much she is doing for them.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> According to the personnel at Smartworks and The Hubb Meghan *met with them, assessed their needs, then proposed and implemented her ideas.* I’m inclined to believe the words of people who actually worked with Meghan rather than speculation on a forum.


So that's what qualifies as "magnificent"?  That sounds like exactly how things are supposed to go when a royal takes on a new patronage.   I believe she's doing a good job so far with a few of her patronages.  But she doesn't have very many patronages yet, and has yet to do much with some of her others.  

(More recently, Hubb made a comment to Meghan on social media that that they "missed her", indicating they haven't seen her in a while.  Sounded kind of hinty that they would like more of her attention again.)

I'm going to wait to sing the high praises of Meghan's "magnificence" until she's achieved a little more than she has so far.


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> I think the issue with Meghan is that there is a significant element of self-promotion and entitlement that still exists in MM’s behaviour that is foreign to public service and being a royal.
> 
> I don’t know if that is a by product of her former life or a defensive response to the bad press that she has received. I do hope that she will become comfortable enough to fade out of the day in day out limelight and just focus on her endeavours. The charities should be the focus. Not how much she is doing for them.


There are some people that are natural born self promoters and I think she is one of them. She did a good enough job of it to make the marriage happen and convince his family. This is ok if if you really want to be a part of the family, but at the moment it doesn't appear that way.   I use a large grain of salt when hearing about how hard someone is working to make something happen. That usually tells me that they are working harder at telling me than actually doing the work.


----------



## LuckyBitch

Welltraveled! said:


> Flatsy, from  what I observed they don’t discuss anything their working on until 90days or less when the project is ready to be launch.  Half the time no one knows which project their working on.
> 
> But so far, all of their work has been a success.
> 
> Their few announcements help drive traffic and probably money to the non-profits.  Which I think is a good thing.


Maybe you should put them on "ignore"...


----------



## Flatsy

I'll contribute something positive about Meghan.  A friend's cousin interviewed her for Good Housekeeping a few years ago.  I believe it was 2016.  She was already dating Harry at the time, but it wasn't known to the public.  Friend's cousin raves about how lovely she is and how much she enjoyed interviewing her.  She has nothing but nice things to say.

This information comes as no surprise because I think it's pretty obvious that Meghan is someone who makes a good impression on the people she meets.


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> but if you have ever talked to folks who have worked with Oprah or Ellen DeGeneres or Elton John?!? .. well, let me tell you .. you get a *VERY DIFFERENT* picture of these people and *NOT* in a good way at all. Oprah and Ellen in particular, are *MASTERS* of making others think that they are such wonderful, warm, charitable people (_and yes - there have been certain actions as such_) .. BUT ..


I think Ellen's notorious at this point for being a nasty, nasty person behind the scenes and I've read innumerable stories from people who worked for her what a horrible experience that was.   Based on the big-time celebrities who go on her show and love fest with her, you'd think she was the nicest woman on earth and that is definitely not the case.

I wouldn't put much of any stock into the opinions of celebrities who have superficial, transactional relationships with her, such as Ellen.  (I think Gayle, the Obamas, the Clooneys, and Oprah all fall somewhere on that spectrum.)  Serena probably knows her a little better and mercifully refrains from engaging in a lot of hyperbole about her.


----------



## buffym

A1aGypsy said:


> I think the issue with Meghan is that there is a significant element of self-promotion and entitlement that still exists in MM’s behaviour that is foreign to public service and being a royal.
> 
> I don’t know if that is a by product of her former life or a defensive response to the bad press that she has received. I do hope that she will become comfortable enough to fade out of the day in day out limelight and just focus on her endeavours. The charities should be the focus. Not how much she is doing for them.



With certain things, Kate launched a new project over a year ago, Broken Britain, right before Meghan editor with Hubb.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...ity-campaign-help-disadvantaged-children.html

She’s also the ambassador for nursing 2020 and again, what project or work.

https://www.aol.com/article/enterta...TpVQA5R6eRxR4_Fkzw3wnPKsLLF432gFwTYgTaa0IXUML


The Royal Foundation did a good job with Shout, Harry has done a great job with IG, and I like to Meghan does announce project until they are completed.

The gardens Kate designed this year showed her interest, hopefully she will pick up the other projects she announced.


----------



## buffym

The BBC I player take on the criticism on Meghan.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

buffym said:


> The BBC I player take on the criticism on Meghan.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Place who on ignore?



LuckyBitch said:


> Maybe you should put them on "ignore"...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!




----------



## Welltraveled!




----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> The BBC I player take on the criticism on Meghan.



It not th BBC iplayer per se. Its a programme called The Mash Report. BBC iplayer is a catch up service if you miss a programme on TV.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Oh no, this thread has been "carefully curated"  See what I did there?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Turns out it's what Meghan _and_ _Doria_ want. I'm sure PR management, spin and damage control on the world stage are Doria's very special yogini powers. Ffs. Somebody just tell these two over entitled Sussex ingrates to get with the taxpayer funded program or go their own-paid way.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...er-mum-doria-ragland-prince-harry-news-latest
*Meghan Markle betrayed: The ONE person Meghan and Harry still trust - 'incredibly wise'*
_MEGHAN MARKLE is reportedly struggling to find advisers she can confide in, with only her “hard as nails” mother, Doria Ragland, earning the Duke and Duchess’s trust._

_LA-based Doria, 62, is available to both Meghan and Harry throughout the day to listen to their woes and dole out advice. A royal source told the Mail on Sunday Doria has helped with everything from staff issues to living arrangements. The source said: “People think Doria is hippy-dippy and chilled out because she’s a yoga instructor._

_“But, like any mother, she’s hard as nails when it comes to protecting her daughter._

_“Harry adores Doria and thinks she’s incredibly wise._

_“These days, the Sussexes trust very, very few people even in their own respective families.”_

_They also claimed it was Doria who decided to fire one of the three nannies Archie has had. Doria has her “fingerprints are all over several major decisions the Duke and Duchess have made in recent months”, the source claimed. The Mail added she is “well on the way to becoming Meghan’s only trusted adviser”._

_Stories about Meghan’s working style have done the rounds for months after four of her senior aides quit. Kensington Palace staff supposedly resigned due to Meghan’s “demanding” and “diva-like” behaviour. Meghan has been known to send emails at all hours of the night and morning, they said, and has shouted at staff before. These tales have lead to some calling her “Hurricane Meghan”, or “Duchess Difficult”._

_Last November, Meghan’s PA Melissa Touabti quit after six months amid reports she’d been reduced to tears. Weeks later the couple’s private secretary Samantha Cohen resigned after 17 years with the royals. In January Meghan’s female bodyguard departed after six months. Assistant private secretaries Amy Pickerall and Heather Wong left in quick succession._

_Buckingham Palace said it does not comment on staff hiring._


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Just my opinion, but Doria didn't come over that way at all, from what little we've seen of her.


----------



## MarieCurie

Flatsy said:


> Harry was honest and said in his engagement interview that he'd never heard of her and had never heard of the show Suits either.  Here, that's considered epic slander.
> 
> And Harry did not act like there was something wrong with HIM for not knowing who she was.  Unlike in this thread, where I've now been told repeatedly that Meghan was nothing less than an international superstar, that Suits is watched by every single person under the age of 30 around the world, and that me not having heard of her means I am old and "it's my own fault".


Point taken. It's just that my experience in this thread has been the opposite of yours, maybe that speaks to my bias as I read the context of the person you paraphrased as being along the lines of how some comments have insinuated that Meghan was down and out. Hence the sarcastic sweeping statements I've been making regarding Meghan's career. Just because we don't know of someone it doesn't diminish what they did while we didn't know them and this has been a constant when Meghan's career has been discussed in this thread, give or take a few of commenters who just leave it at: "I did not know her before Harry."

Meghan was definitely not an international superstar but lets not pretend like she was "5 minutes away from being a waitress at her ex-boyfriend's restaurant." I had also never heard of suits and I was under 30 when it started, but I knew Meghan only because of the industry I'm involved in and my child's obsession with chopped junior.


----------



## MarieCurie

buffym said:


> The BBC I player take on the criticism on Meghan.



"Poor man`s Medusa"


----------



## Flatsy

MarieCurie said:


> I read the context of the person you paraphrased as being along the lines of how some comments have insinuated that Meghan was down and out. Hence the sarcastic sweeping statements I've been making regarding Meghan's career. Just because we don't know of someone it doesn't diminish what they did while we didn't know them and this has been a constant when Meghan's career has been discussed in this thread,


I disagree that the comments about Meghan being down and out/unemployed characterize the whole thread.  I think two people, at most, have made remarks like that. It's definitely not a constant.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Turns out it's what Meghan _and_ _Doria_ want. I'm sure PR management, spin and damage control on the world stage are Doria's very special yogini powers. Ffs. Somebody just tell these two over entitled Sussex ingrates to get with the taxpayer funded program or go their own-paid way.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...er-mum-doria-ragland-prince-harry-news-latest
> *Meghan Markle betrayed: The ONE person Meghan and Harry still trust - 'incredibly wise'*
> _MEGHAN MARKLE is reportedly struggling to find advisers she can confide in, with only her “hard as nails” mother, Doria Ragland, earning the Duke and Duchess’s trust._
> 
> _LA-based Doria, 62, is available to both Meghan and Harry throughout the day to listen to their woes and dole out advice. A royal source told the Mail on Sunday Doria has helped with everything from staff issues to living arrangements. The source said: “People think Doria is hippy-dippy and chilled out because she’s a yoga instructor._
> 
> _“But, like any mother, she’s hard as nails when it comes to protecting her daughter._
> 
> _“Harry adores Doria and thinks she’s incredibly wise._
> 
> _“These days, the Sussexes trust very, very few people even in their own respective families.”_
> 
> _They also claimed it was Doria who decided to fire one of the three nannies Archie has had. Doria has her “fingerprints are all over several major decisions the Duke and Duchess have made in recent months”, the source claimed. The Mail added she is “well on the way to becoming Meghan’s only trusted adviser”._
> 
> _Stories about Meghan’s working style have done the rounds for months after four of her senior aides quit. Kensington Palace staff supposedly resigned due to Meghan’s “demanding” and “diva-like” behaviour. Meghan has been known to send emails at all hours of the night and morning, they said, and has shouted at staff before. These tales have lead to some calling her “Hurricane Meghan”, or “Duchess Difficult”._
> 
> _Last November, Meghan’s PA Melissa Touabti quit after six months amid reports she’d been reduced to tears. Weeks later the couple’s private secretary Samantha Cohen resigned after 17 years with the royals. In January Meghan’s female bodyguard departed after six months. Assistant private secretaries Amy Pickerall and Heather Wong left in quick succession._
> 
> _Buckingham Palace said it does not comment on staff hiring._



That story sounds fabricated. Doria isn't even there, is she?


----------



## LittleStar88

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Turns out it's what Meghan _and_ _Doria_ want. I'm sure PR management, spin and damage control on the world stage are Doria's very special yogini powers. Ffs. Somebody just tell these two over entitled Sussex ingrates to get with the taxpayer funded program or go their own-paid way.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...er-mum-doria-ragland-prince-harry-news-latest
> *Meghan Markle betrayed: The ONE person Meghan and Harry still trust - 'incredibly wise'*
> _MEGHAN MARKLE is reportedly struggling to find advisers she can confide in, with only her “hard as nails” mother, Doria Ragland, earning the Duke and Duchess’s trust._
> 
> _LA-based Doria, 62, is available to both Meghan and Harry throughout the day to listen to their woes and dole out advice. A royal source told the Mail on Sunday Doria has helped with everything from staff issues to living arrangements. The source said: “People think Doria is hippy-dippy and chilled out because she’s a yoga instructor._
> 
> _“But, like any mother, she’s hard as nails when it comes to protecting her daughter._
> 
> _“Harry adores Doria and thinks she’s incredibly wise._
> 
> _“These days, the Sussexes trust very, very few people even in their own respective families.”_
> 
> _They also claimed it was Doria who decided to fire one of the three nannies Archie has had. Doria has her “fingerprints are all over several major decisions the Duke and Duchess have made in recent months”, the source claimed. The Mail added she is “well on the way to becoming Meghan’s only trusted adviser”._
> 
> _Stories about Meghan’s working style have done the rounds for months after four of her senior aides quit. Kensington Palace staff supposedly resigned due to Meghan’s “demanding” and “diva-like” behaviour. Meghan has been known to send emails at all hours of the night and morning, they said, and has shouted at staff before. These tales have lead to some calling her “Hurricane Meghan”, or “Duchess Difficult”._
> 
> _Last November, Meghan’s PA Melissa Touabti quit after six months amid reports she’d been reduced to tears. Weeks later the couple’s private secretary Samantha Cohen resigned after 17 years with the royals. In January Meghan’s female bodyguard departed after six months. Assistant private secretaries Amy Pickerall and Heather Wong left in quick succession._
> 
> _Buckingham Palace said it does not comment on staff hiring._



Hippy-dippy  

This whole article is garbage. Thank goodness they can trust Doria. At least Meghan has one family member who isn't trying to screw her somehow. 

I seriously doubt Doria has had any control over staffing. My impression of her is that she is a graceful, stoic, and loving mother who I am sure lends a trustworthy and caring ear (as a mother should).


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> According to the personnel at Smartworks and The Hubb Meghan met with them, assessed their needs, then proposed and implemented her ideas. I’m inclined to believe the words of  people who actually worked with Meghan rather than speculation on a forum.
> 
> If you need further proof look at the work Meghan did in Canada prior to meeting Harry.


Not being rude -- but what work?  I'm in Toronto, know people who worked on her show, don't live that far from her former home, read the newspapers... but don't know exactly what she did? She was seen with her yoga matt, looking really cute in her winter hat and boots, she gave a lot of interviews, shilled for a clothing company, posed for photos with the BF... what work though? Her acting work?



Sharont2305 said:


> I think the opposite, William and Catherine do a lot of behind the scenes work on a lot of their projects, as do other Royals. They just don't let it be known that they are doing it, and certainly don't turn up on the day to take the glory.


Again, not being rude -- everyone mentions Kate's gardening.  Do you think she's really out there digging in the dirt and getting filthy?  Do you think she actually does the gardening?  Or just poses for photos promoting it?


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Not being rude -- but what work?  I'm in Toronto, know people who worked on her show, don't live that far from her former home, read the newspapers... but don't know exactly what she did? She was seen with her yoga matt, looking really cute in her winter hat and boots, she gave a lot of interviews, shilled for a clothing company, posed for photos with the BF... what work though? Her acting work?
> 
> 
> Again, not being rude -- everyone mentions Kate's gardening.  Do you think she's really out there digging in the dirt and getting filthy?  Do you think she actually does the gardening?  Or just poses for photos promoting it?


Answering your 3 questions, yes, yes and no.


----------



## gracekelly

MarieCurie said:


> Point taken. It's just that my experience in this thread has been the opposite of yours, maybe that speaks to my bias as I read the context of the person you paraphrased as being along the lines of how some comments have insinuated that Meghan was down and out. Hence the sarcastic sweeping statements I've been making regarding Meghan's career. Just because we don't know of someone it doesn't diminish what they did while we didn't know them and this has been a constant when Meghan's career has been discussed in this thread, give or take a few of commenters who just leave it at: "I did not know her before Harry."
> 
> Meghan was definitely not an international superstar but lets not pretend like she was "5 minutes away from being a waitress at her ex-boyfriend's restaurant." I had also never heard of suits and I was under 30 when it started, but I knew Meghan only because of the industry I'm involved in and my child's obsession with chopped junior.



Gosh I hate being misquoted. I said she was one step away from being a HOSTESS in Cory’s restaurant, not a WAITRESS.

I think it is beyond low and cheesy to place the blame on Doria. That really smacks of desperation.  If this is SS idea of good PR I would fire them.


----------



## Lubina

LittleStar88 said:


> Hippy-dippy
> 
> This whole article is garbage. Thank goodness they can trust Doria. At least Meghan has one family member who isn't trying to screw her somehow.
> 
> I seriously doubt Doria has had any control over staffing. My impression of her is that she is a graceful, stoic, and loving mother who I am sure lends a trustworthy and caring ear (as a mother should).



 Agreed. Also, either their secretary Samantha Cohen gave 9 months notice or "reporters" were wrong that she was leaving in December 2018.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...e-south-africa-visit-women-empowerment-focus/

In South Africa, Meghan Markle Will Turn Her Attention to Women's Empowerment
On her first royal visit to the country, the Duchess of Sussex is making a statement with her schedule of events.
by VICTORIA MURPHY
*SEP 15, 2019*

It is no surprise, then, that these issues feature highly on the agenda for the Duchess of Sussex throughout the itinerary of her trip to South Africa, which begins later this month.

“Through her Patronages, the Duchess will be working with organisations to promote women’s education, health, entrepreneurship and leadership,” *the Sussexes’ private secretary Samantha Cohen said as she announced details of the 10-day visit.* She continued, sharing that the duchess is “particularly looking forward” to learning from “inspirational women in the region.”..

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-africa-tour-details-archie/
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce New Details of Upcoming Africa Tour with Archie
September 06, 2019 08:32 AM

At a briefing at Buckingham Palace on Friday morning, the couple’s private secretary Samantha Cohen told reporters *that “not only will this visit serve as an opportunity for the Duke and Duchess to highlight many of the causes they have been involved with for many years, it will demonstrate a modern UK-Africa partnership in action.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Gosh I hate being misquoted. I said she was one step away from being a HOSTESS in Cory’s restaurant, not a WAITRESS.
> 
> I think it is beyond low and cheesy to place the blame on Doria. That really smacks of desperation.  If this is SS idea of good PR I would fire them.


well, hostess is a whole different story 
LOL


----------



## chicaloca

Jayne1 said:


> Not being rude -- but what work?  I'm in Toronto, know people who worked on her show, don't live that far from her former home, read the newspapers... but don't know exactly what she did? She was seen with her yoga matt, looking really cute in her winter hat and boots, she gave a lot of interviews, shilled for a clothing company, posed for photos with the BF... what work though? Her acting work?


Edited because I re-read your post and realized you meant her charity work. I will be back to further edit.z


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, hostess is a whole different story
> LOL


 It certainly is!  As a hostess she gets to wear  clothes from her Reitman’s collection.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> It certainly is!  As a hostess she gets to wear  clothes from her Reitman’s collection.


Go grace!


----------



## CeeJay

I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but .. I see a lot more of her father in her than people would like to admit.  Like him, it appears as though she has a huge need to be "front & center and in-the-news" .. sound familiar?  Doria, while certainly having a hand in guiding her daughter, is perfectly fine being way behind the scenes .. you rarely see pictures of her in the rags and if you do, it's something pretty simple .. like going to a yoga class or walking her dogs.  Thomas (and alas - Samantha) love to be the center of attention and hate to say it, but I see that in Meghan.  I don't think she is the type of person who would ever be content being the 'silent' and behind-the-scenes royal person and in some respects, I think Harry is the same.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but .. I see a lot more of her father in her than people would like to admit.  Like him, it appears as though she has a huge need to be "front & center and in-the-news" .. sound familiar?  Doria, while certainly having a hand in guiding her daughter, is perfectly fine being way behind the scenes .. you rarely see pictures of her in the rags and if you do, it's something pretty simple .. like going to a yoga class or walking her dogs.  Thomas (and alas - Samantha) love to be the center of attention and hate to say it, but I see that in Meghan.  I don't think she is the type of person who would ever be content being the 'silent' and behind-the-scenes royal person and in some respects, I think Harry is the same.


Yep, she's no wallflower


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> It certainly is!  As a hostess she gets to wear  clothes from her Reitman’s collection.


" dead "


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, she's no wallflower


I just REALLY hope that she utilizes that for really good things; I certainly think she's capable of doing that, but the two of them need to tone down certain aspects .. Lady Diana had to learn too and she then became very successful at dealing with the media!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but .. I see a lot more of her father in her than people would like to admit.  Like him, it appears as though she has a huge need to be "front & center and in-the-news" .. sound familiar?  Doria, while certainly having a hand in guiding her daughter, is perfectly fine being way behind the scenes .. you rarely see pictures of her in the rags and if you do, it's something pretty simple .. like going to a yoga class or walking her dogs.  Thomas (and alas - Samantha) love to be the center of attention and hate to say it, but I see that in Meghan.  I don't think she is the type of person who would ever be content being the 'silent' and behind-the-scenes royal person and in some respects, I think Harry is the same.



Difference is what she is doing with that need (versus her father). I am totally ok with her needing to be front and center while promoting good charities and promoting positive initiatives for women. Probably not an uncommon drive for anyone in the public light.

What is her dad doing? Sitting on his butt and whining about what he isn't getting. I have yet to see him do or say anything that will benefit anyone but him.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> Difference is what she is doing with that need (versus her father). I am totally ok with her needing to be front and center while promoting good charities and promoting positive initiatives for women. Probably not an uncommon drive for anyone in the public light.
> 
> What is her dad doing? Sitting on his butt and whining about what he isn't getting. I have yet to see him do or say anything that will benefit anyone but him.


I know you're right, but I keep remembering how in her blog and in TV interviews, she lovingly thanked him and talked about his generosity towards her growing up and how wonderful a father he was... and I just can't figure out a way to be mad at him now.

I don't even remember her thanking her mom, though she must have done so. It was always the father in the business.


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, she's no wallflower


The funny part is, by marrying Harry she was supposed to become a wallflower of sorts. Yes, very rich and connected and royal etc but still, blend in and shut up basically.  I thought everyone knew this is what the role demanded, up until Meghan entered the scene.
It's a fundamental kind of difference I think, in the view of Meghan by Americans vs. the rest of the world. 
Americans seem to view Meghan as a fierce individual who has the right to "shake things up" and her voice will not be silenced blah blah. Basically the opposite of what the royal family demands.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Obviously, someone(s) in the BRF didn't want a wallflower.  I suspect all if not most of their projects are approved by the higher ups, prior to implementation.  

 I'm genuinely curious about the viewpoint from those that are part of the British commonwealth.   As I understand it, the taxpayers pay for the "upkeep" of the BRF.  However, it seems some if not most of the public/taxpayers rather that the BRF is seen and not heard.  Why is that?  Is it due to traditional ideology?  



mdcx said:


> The funny part is, by marrying Harry she was supposed to become a wallflower of sorts. Yes, very rich and connected and royal etc but still, blend in and shut up basically.  I thought everyone knew this is what the role demanded, up until Meghan entered the scene.
> It's a fundamental kind of difference I think, in the view of Meghan by Americans vs. the rest of the world.
> Americans seem to view Meghan as a fierce individual who has the right to "shake things up" and her voice will not be silenced blah blah. Basically the opposite of what the royal family demands.



I was the same way at first - with the initial photos.  However, when he continued with the media incidents; my viewpoint change.  Because I begin to wonder how can a parent do that to their child.  Especially when she has made it clear pre-Harry that she love(d?) her father. 



Jayne1 said:


> I know you're right, but I keep remembering how in her blog and in TV interviews, she lovingly thanked him and talked about his generosity towards her growing up and how wonderful a father he was... and I just can't figure out a way to be mad at him now.
> 
> I don't even remember her thanking her mom, though she must have done so. It was always the father in the business.



I agree with your assessment of Meghan wanting to be front and center.  But it appears, she channel that energy into helping others.  Her father and sister do not.  



CeeJay said:


> I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but .. I see a lot more of her father in her than people would like to admit.  Like him, it appears as though she has a huge need to be "front & center and in-the-news" .. sound familiar?  Doria, while certainly having a hand in guiding her daughter, is perfectly fine being way behind the scenes .. you rarely see pictures of her in the rags and if you do, it's something pretty simple .. like going to a yoga class or walking her dogs.  Thomas (and alas - Samantha) love to be the center of attention and hate to say it, but I see that in Meghan.  I don't think she is the type of person who would ever be content being the 'silent' and behind-the-scenes royal person and in some respects, I think Harry is the same.


----------



## Welltraveled!

_https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/l...r-oprah-apple-tv-mental-health-series-1200852

SEPTEMBER 16, 2019 11:01am PT by Rick Porter
*Oprah Winfrey-Prince Harry Apple Docuseries Assembles Creative Team*

'Daily Show' veteran Kahane Cooperman will serve as showrunner on the mental health series, and Dawn Porter and Asif Kapadia will direct and executive produce._





Apple's docuseries about mental health, executive produced by Oprah Winfrey and Prince Harry, has found key members for its creative team.

_Daily Show_ veteran Kahane Cooperman will serve as showrunner on the as-yet untitled series, and Dawn Porter (_Trapped, Gideon's Army_) and Asif Kapadia (_Amy, Senna_) will direct episodes. All three will serve as executive producers. Winfrey's Harpo Productions has also tapped RadicalMedia as its creative and production partner on the show; the company's Jon Kamen and Dave Sirulnick will also exec produce along with Winfrey and Prince Harry.

The docuseries, which will air on the Apple TV+ streaming platform that is set to launch in November, aims to break down the stigma and shame that surrounds mental health. The project was announced in March at Apple's unveiling of TV+, and Prince Harry, who has been an advocate for mental health issues, joined Winfrey on the effort shortly thereafter.

Cooperman was a co-executive producer of _The Daily Show With Jon Stewart_, was director and executive producer of Sundance's four-hour doc _Cold Blooded: The Clutter Family Murders_ (also from RadicalMedia) and helmed the Oscar-nominated short documentary _Joe's Violin_. She currently is at work on a feature doc about kindness and decency in America with RadicalMedia's John Hoffman.

Porter has directed and produced _Gideon's Army_ for HBO, the Peabody Award-winning _Trapped_ and RadicalMedia and Netflix's docuseries _Bobby Kennedy for President_. She also is working on a documentary about Congressman John Lewis for CNN Films.

Kapadia won an Oscar in 2016 for _Amy_, his documentary about late singer Amy Winehouse, and earned a BAFTA for 2010's _Senna_, a doc about late Formula One driver Ayrton Senna. _Diego Maradona_, a portrait of the Argentine soccer legend, is set to premiere Oct. 1 on HBO.

Apple TV+ is set to launch Nov. 1 with a handful of series, including the Jennifer Aniston-Reese Witherspoon drama _The Morning Show_, the space-race drama _For All Mankind_ and the genre play _See_, starring Jason Momoa and Alfre Woodard. A premiere date for the mental health docuseries hasn't been set.


----------



## mdcx

Welltraveled! said:


> Obviously, someone(s) in the BRF didn't want a wallflower.  I suspect all if not most of their projects are approved by the higher ups, prior to implementation.
> 
> I'm genuinely curious about the viewpoint from those that are part of the British commonwealth.   As I understand it, the taxpayers pay for the "upkeep" of the BRF.  However, it seems some if not most of the public/taxpayers rather that the BRF is seen and not heard.  Why is that?  Is it due to traditional ideology?
> 
> 
> 
> I was the same way at first - with the initial photos.  However, when he continued with the media incidents; my viewpoint change.  Because I begin to wonder how can a parent do that to their child.  Especially when she has made it clear pre-Harry that she love(d?) her father.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with your assessment of Meghan wanting to be front and center.  But it appears, she channel that energy into helping others.  Her father and sister do not.


There is a concept called 'Noblesse Oblige' which can explain it. Basically, when you are in such a position of power, wealth, influence due to an accident of birth/marriage, you need to act with decorum and not flash it about or try to maximise your return so to speak. Think about the "small people", think about your public, do good for your fellow man without seeking even more attention than you already have and will have for the rest of your life. Be warm and gracious about your incredible good fortune. Don't rub it in people's faces by flashing cash, or pushing your privilege to the limits knowing that it will be very hard, if not impossible for people to say no (e.g. Wimbledon seats).


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> I know you're right, but I keep remembering how in her blog and in TV interviews, she lovingly thanked him and talked about his generosity towards her growing up and how wonderful a father he was... and I just can't figure out a way to be mad at him now.
> 
> I don't even remember her thanking her mom, though she must have done so. It was always the father in the business.



Before Prince Harry, Meghan’s dad wasn’t courted by the press. He made a deal with the paps even though Harry and Meghan asked for his privacy and he continues to give interviews.

Meghan talked about her mother on Tig, made Instagram posts, and took her mother with her when she spoke at the UN. 

I believe, the focus of Meghan’s father than her mother has more to do with the press. They because that focus on him because he gives them stories.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140626050902/http://thetig.com/love-letter/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> The funny part is, by marrying Harry she was supposed to become a wallflower of sorts. Yes, very rich and connected and royal etc but still, blend in and shut up basically.  I thought everyone knew this is what the role demanded, up until Meghan entered the scene.
> It's a fundamental kind of difference I think, in the view of Meghan by Americans vs. the rest of the world.
> Americans seem to view Meghan as a fierce individual who has the right to "shake things up" and her voice will not be silenced blah blah. Basically the opposite of what the royal family demands.


I think you hit the nail on the head there. She's had some celebrity status before Harry, I'm one of the ones who hadn't heard of her or Suits as I don't think it was shown here in the UK, so she was used to being in the spotlight of sorts. Then she is thrust into mega stardom by marriage but seems to think, in my opinion, that it's on a same level as mega Hollywood stardom and that she can shake things up as you say....
Unfortunately for her, it's all about the Monarch, keeping with centuries old traditions etc, keeping the people happy and for you to not stick out like a sore thumb.
She's a bit player in a large production and not a leading lady.
And I like Meghan, she could be good for the BRF, she just needs advice from the right people. Sophie would be a good one to start with.


----------



## doni

Welltraveled! said:


> As I understand it, the taxpayers pay for the "upkeep" of the BRF.  However, it seems some if not most of the public/taxpayers rather that the BRF is seen and not heard.  Why is that?  Is it due to traditional ideology?
> .



I think a source of misunderstandings is that some, perhaps more so in non monarchic countries such as the US, seem to understand that the job of a royal family is the support of good causes.

That is not the case at all. Their main job is to represent their country and in doing so the fulfill a function that in other places is fulfilled by either an elected President (as in the US or France) or by a representative one (as in most non-monarchy European countries).
In representing their country, aside from protocol and so on, one of the main things they do is to support national business, economy and cultural heritage. That is usually the objetive of overseas trips.

Then another function is to be the keepers of tradition. In doing so the add cohesiveness to the State they represent. In places like the UK, where the monarchy has been reigning uninterrupted for centuries, that role is very strong. They tie everything together around the country’s constitution (which in the UK is not even written down) by means of both the institutional functions they are entrusted with and their own behavior and actions as observed by their subdits/citizens.

Now, important as all these roles are, the fact is nowadays there is no real power and the exercise of the above functions still leaves royals with plenty of free time. And so that time is spent on charity work which is a good way to support the case for their usefulness. But indeed this is something they are expected to do in an extremely neutral manner, so as not to interfere with their representative functions (and from that perspective, the less said the safer). Plus they are also expected to behave in a non-chalant, servicial and modest way, given that they are no Bill Gates, devoting their hard earn money to philanthropy.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Looks like Harry and Meghan really did go to that pub with Archie.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Looks like Harry and Meghan really did go to that pub with Archie.



I, for one, didn't doubt it, lol.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I see Sunshine Sachs got the wheels turning.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Looks like Harry and Meghan really did go to that pub with Archie.



glad Harry is still allowed to have a couple of pints


----------



## A1aGypsy

To add to doni’s post, they are also expected to act as public servants. Public service means being extremely careful that you do not, and are not seen to potentially be benefitting off your role as a public servant. There is extensive legislation about what a public servant can and cannot do. Depending on where in the Commonwealth they live, generally a lowly person working in the public sector is expected to behaviour at all times in an appropriate manner, is not permitted to accept gifts, have any sort of side businesses, have friendships with suppliers, only provide volunteer work / charitable donation to acceptable places, have public political views and a host of other things.  And, depending on what level you are, breaching these obligations can be cause for dismissal or prosecution and jail.

So, when a royal, who is the ultimate public servant in terms of reliance on the public purse, seems to intentionally run afoul of the rules, it can get the hackles up of the people who are held to the rules and also the public, who are responsible for the funds that keep the royals in the position of wealth and power that they are.

We have rules for a reason. They prevent corruption. MM now has a very influential role and that should not be abused.

I should also add that I have no doubt this is a HUGE adjustment for someone who’s career has been completely the opposite - fighting for the spotlight. As I have said before, couple that with the climate difference, moving away from friends and family, the press and living in an old cottage (yes yes, I know - renovated) I would be throwing in the towel at this point. Good on her for sticking through it.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Looks like Harry and Meghan really did go to that pub with Archie.



Wait, so now some blurry photos are published?  After the pub denied the whole thing. This has the flowery writing of People magazine, which makes me suspicious.

Happily for the curious, there is the 4 month old baby propped up by the nanny, with his head held high.

More importantly, where exactly did Meg change that diaper?  In the bathroom?  If so, how would the spy know?  Or on the table, beside the roast beef dinner?

Point is, I'm not buying this.


----------



## TC1

Jayne1 said:


> Wait, so now some blurry photos are published?  After the pub denied the whole thing. This has the flowery writing of People magazine, which makes me suspicious.
> 
> Happily for the curious, there is the 4 month old baby propped up by the nanny, with his head held high.
> 
> More importantly, where exactly did Meg change that diaper?  In the bathroom?  If so, how would the spy know?  Or on the table, beside the roast beef dinner?
> 
> Point is, I'm not buying this.


I don't think this is them? They have look a likes do this stuff all the time. Doesn't look like Harry to me.


----------



## Gal4Dior

This pub story has been so expertly timed...


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> This pub story has been so expertly timed...


well if they really wanted to be relatable to the "regular folks" they might have been better off going out without the nanny


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> well if they really wanted to be relatable to the "regular folks" they might have been better off going out without the nanny


Just two plebes having a roast dinner at their local pub...with security. Lol


----------



## limom

“instead of taking in a cricket or football (soccer) match on the telly ... we're told Archie kept pretty damn quiet for the 2 hours the family was there. Not a single peep outta the little guy -- even when Mom changed his nappy, (that's what they call diapers).”
This makes no sense. Are we supposed to believe that the duchess change the diaper in public view?
Come on now TMZ , do better.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> “instead of taking in a cricket or football (soccer) match on the telly ... we're told Archie kept pretty damn quiet for the 2 hours the family was there. Not a single peep outta the little guy -- even when Mom changed his nappy, (that's what they call diapers).”
> This makes no sense. Are we supposed to believe that the duchess change the diaper in public view?
> Come on now TMZ , do better.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I have no doubt she changed the diaper in public at the booth. I also have no doubt this was done intentionally to cause a “just one of us!” public feeling.  And then the pub owner thought he was doing them a favour and protecting their privacy by denying it all, throwing a wrench in the whole thing.

Poor Sussexs. They can’t win for losing lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I have no doubt she changed the diaper in public at the booth. I also have no doubt this was done intentionally to cause a “just one of us!” public feeling.  And then the pub owner thought he was doing them a favour and protecting their privacy by denying it all, throwing a wrench in the whole thing.
> 
> Poor Sussexs. They can’t win for losing lol.


in addition to the privacy issue wouldn't this be a sanitary issue?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> “instead of taking in a cricket or football (soccer) match on the telly ... we're told Archie kept pretty damn quiet for the 2 hours the family was there. Not a single peep outta the little guy -- even when Mom changed his nappy, (that's what they call diapers).”
> This makes no sense. Are we supposed to believe that the duchess change the diaper in public view?
> Come on now TMZ , do better.


We do have facilities here to do nappy changes, ie the bathroom. All public places have them. 
Maybe she asked someone where the facilities were?


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> We do have facilities here to do nappy changes, ie the bathroom. All public places have them.
> Maybe she asked someone where the facilities were?


if she was going to change the diapers herself then why bring nanny?  maybe so they could eat w/o interruption from the pesky baby


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> if she was going to change the diapers herself then why bring nanny?  maybe so they could eat w/o interruption from the pesky baby


Possibly, or treating her to a meal maybe? Or maybe Meghan actually does it too


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Possibly, or treating her to a meal maybe? Or maybe Meghan actually does it too



When I visited my mother I always took her caregiver with us when we went out for a meal. It is the right  thing to do unless the caregiver/nanny prefers to have some alone time without baby and family.   That being said, I am a little suspicious of the timing of these pictures.


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> I have no doubt she changed the diaper in public at the booth. I also have no doubt this was done intentionally to cause a “just one of us!” public feeling.


That’s nasty for anyone to do.


----------



## bag-mania

That pub lunch supposedly took place at the end of August. Why is this news nearly three weeks later?


----------



## A1aGypsy

mrsinsyder said:


> That’s nasty for anyone to do.



Yes. But it happens around here a lot. “The Baby is sleeping, I’m not going to wake him up to go into a germy bathroom to change him. No one will care!” On the booth with a blanket covering the bits but still. Eww.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That pub lunch supposedly took place at the end of August. Why is this news nearly three weeks later?



Apparently a poster found the metadata/ date stamp on another forum which shows the pictures were taken yesterday. Only six people in the pub as all were the Sussex party. .  The consensus is that the pictures were taken before it opened or at the time of opening.


----------



## limom

Unless, things changed drastically since I were changing diapers, I have never changed a sleeping baby.
For what? He is sleeping happy.
As far as changing the baby in a restaurant in front of everyone?
For fuc£sake. People are trying to eat a meal. It is a hard no for me.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> I'm sorry @hellosunshine , and I'm not trying to be mean here .. but I have to honestly say that I had to chuckle at this because when you say "_who cares_", well .. very obviously .. *you do*!  Why do you say "_certain people constinently want to argue about her fame or success?_" .. when we aren't arguing about it .. but just merely stating various POV's based on what we've read (_is it true/not true - *who knows*?_).
> 
> So, in regards to 'moving on'; not sure folks will ever do so with many of the questions .. just kind of stating it is what it is ..



Sorry for the late reply but I've been busy the last few days and am just now catching up with posts.

Anyway, I've tried reading your post 3 times and it makes absolutely no sense. You must've confused me with someone who wanted to talk about Meghan's career pre-Harry at ad nauseam because I've wanted nothing less than to move on from it. What I do comment on and often dislike are the implications that she was destitute and basically had nothing pre-Harry. She had a career, a successful blog, a collaboration with a major Canadian clothing company, and a spokesperson with UN Women. These are facts.




Flatsy said:


> You do realize that most of the media doesn't operate as a non-profit enterprise?  Making money is why they exist, just like every other capitalist venture?  Why should they be invited along to cover a royal tour and then be prevented from doing what they were invited to do, which is photograph and write about it?



There's obviously going to be press coverage of the tour. The rumor is that the press won't photograph the family upon arrival to South Africa as they're exiting the plane. 



Flatsy said:


> I don't think they need to have Archie photographed, but they always go about this in such a stupid way.  They went out of their way to emphasize Archie's presence on this tour by announcing they would be conducting the tour "as a family" and Harry was so excited to introduce his wife and son to South Africa.  That's because they want everybody to squee about what an adorable family they are.
> 
> But it sounds like they are now going to turn around and block pictures of Archie in as conspicuous a way as possible.



They've already confirmed that Archie will make an appearance at one of their engagements on the tour. It's merely a rumor that there will be no photos upon arrrival to South Africa (as in on the airport tarmac).



gracekelly said:


> Don’t see it that way. If they take him to Africa the local citizens will be extremely disappointed not to get a picture of Archie.   They will be insulted if they feel that he is being snuck off the plane. Better to leave him at home. My understanding was that S Africa was paying for their flight there and it was commercial and not a private plane.



The Duke & Duchess of Sussex have already confirmed that Archie will make a special appearance to one of their engagements on the tour. The rumor is in reference to airport photos.



mdcx said:


> My feeling is, if they give the press a few nice uncomplicated snaps of them as a family, let everyone see Archie, people will be happy and move on. They do, somewhat, have an obligation to provide pictures of Archie to their public. Don't they get this? I thought it was pretty commonly understood by the BRF that a certain number of pictures of them are part of the job.



No, the press are not entitled to that. I wish people would grasp that they (as parents) control when and where their child will be seen just as the Cambridges do. They've asked for privacy and normalcy for their child just as the Cambridges have. Is that difficult to understand?




Straight-Laced said:


> I think they've been kind of 'saving' Archie for the big Africa reveal.  A gift to Africa.
> 
> *He's not just any new Royal baby but an especially significant Royal baby for Africa, with special meaning.*  And Meghan and Harry both love Africa.



I'm really trying to understand the "with special meaning" part but is it because Archie is 1/4 Black?


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Apparently a poster found the metadata/ date stamp on another forum which shows the pictures were taken yesterday. Only six people in the pub as all were the Sussex party. .  The consensus is that the pictures were taken before it opened or at the time of opening.


Pubs are really quiet when they open, gets busier about 1pmish, plus it was a Tuesday. 
TMZ, very lazy on them using practically the same report as I've previously seen with new pictures.


----------



## hellosunshine

* BBC apologises to Prince Harry over ‘race traitor’ image *



The BBC has apologised for failing to warn the Duke of Sussex before broadcasting and publishing online an image from a neo-Nazi social media group that called him a “race traitor” and depicted the royal with a gun pointed at his head.

The image, published on BBC Online and broadcast on News at 10, was a stylised collage from an online post on a far-right platform, which also included blood splatter and a swastika, and was captioned: “See ya later race traitor. #racetraitor.”

It raised “serious security concerns” for Prince Harry and “caused his family great distress specifically while his wife was nearly five months pregnant”, a spokesperson for the duke told the Guardian.

Harry’s spokesperson said: “His Royal Highness welcomes the letter from the BBC relating to the shocking image published by BBC News last year as part of a report on the activities of a British neo-Nazi group with links in the US. 

“His Royal Highness raised the issue with Ofcom about the rebroadcasting of this racist image due to his concerns that hateful and dangerous propaganda had been spread globally by the world’s most important public service broadcaster. Due to the credibility of the BBC, their choice to publicise this material created an open door for all other media to reproduce it.”

While welcoming the BBC’s apology, Harry did not agree with the decision to broadcast the image. “His Royal Highness maintains that instead of reproducing the image and giving a platform to something that would have only been seen by a few, it should have been described so that others would not potentially be influenced by such an inflammatory image,” the spokesperson said.

A BBC source said: “This was an important piece of journalism which led to the arrest, conviction and imprisonment of two members of a neo-Nazi group. The image of the Duke of Sussex was included to show the abhorrent nature of their behaviour and Ofcom has subsequently concluded that there was a clear editorial rationale for using the image which, in the context of the news report, was considered unlikely to incite crime.


“Naturally we regret the distress caused and we apologised for failing to warn Kensington Palace in advance that it was to be published.”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...gises-to-prince-harry-over-race-traitor-image


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Apparently a poster found the metadata/ date stamp on another forum which shows the pictures were taken yesterday. Only six people in the pub as all were the Sussex party. .  The consensus is that the pictures were taken before it opened or at the time of opening.



TMZ didn't say the pub visit took place recently. They deliberately didn't mention the day the photos were taken but they did call it "Archie's first pub outing." So either this is the same pub lunch People reported last month or else they frequent this pub a lot.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Sorry for the late reply but I've been busy the last few days and am just now catching up with posts.
> 
> Anyway, I've tried reading your post 3 times and it makes absolutely no sense. You must've confused me with someone who wanted to talk about Meghan's career pre-Harry at ad nauseam because I've wanted nothing less than to move on from it. What I do comment on and often dislike are the implications that she was destitute and basically had nothing pre-Harry. She had a career, a successful blog, a collaboration with a major Canadian clothing company, and a spokesperson with UN Women. These are facts.



No, it made sense in context to what you had posted .. for some reason, you didn't "get it" .. so, just forget it and let's move on .. 'kay?!?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> No, it made sense in context to what you had posted .. for some reason, you didn't "get it" .. so, just forget it and let's move on .. 'kay?!?!



It would make sense if what you wrote was concise. At the end of the day, that response couldn't have been directed towards me considering the content. But sure...let's move on.


----------



## mrsinsyder

How could anyone who wears a Nazi uniform be considered a race traitor?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> How could anyone who wears a Nazi uniform be considered a race traitor?



What do you mean? Are you referring to Harry here or the people arrested?


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> What do you mean? Are you referring to Harry here or the people arrested?


Harry dressing up as nazi officer I assume.

You know, I read he wasn't the sharpest guy, but not knowing his family's history was shocking.

Anyway, his antics were from long ago.


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> This makes no sense. Are we supposed to believe that the duchess change the diaper in public view?
> Come on now TMZ , do better.


Can you imagine exposing the royal peen in public?  lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> What do you mean? Are you referring to Harry here or the people arrested?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> TMZ didn't say the pub visit took place recently. They deliberately didn't mention the day the photos were taken but they did call it "Archie's first pub outing." So either this is the same pub lunch People reported last month or else they frequent this pub a lot.


It may be a different pub but it was yesterday inany event. Photo op set up by SS most likely


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> TMZ didn't say the pub visit took place recently. They deliberately didn't mention the day the photos were taken but they did call it "Archie's first pub outing." So either this is the same pub lunch People reported last month or else they frequent this pub a lot.


In the report it did state  "a few Sundays ago" but someone said the pictures were from yesterday


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4543722


While being young can excuse quite a bit, with his family history, it was truly, truly an unfortunate choice of costume.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> It may be a different pub but it was yesterday inany event. Photo op set up by SS most likely


Looks like it is the same pub


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> Can you imagine exposing the royal peen in public?  lol





So did it specifically say the baby was changed in public (on a table, in a booth, etc.)? Or is that just speculation?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> It may be a different pub but it was yesterday inany event. Photo op set up by SS most likely



It's the same pub, The Rose & Crown. They went there on the weekend of August 24–25. Who is saying the photos are new? It was covered last month by several outlets like this one:

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-pub-lunch/


----------



## Flatsy

I don't think it was a setup, but I don't know how much longer they are going to be able to go to this pub if every visits keeps being publicized.  Tourism is up at Windsor because of their wedding (and, to a lesser extent, Eugenie's) and now I think tourists will be stopping by this pub hoping to run into them.

That blonde woman is definitely not the same nanny as before.  Have they moved on to nanny #4 or was she just another servant brought along to help with the baby?  Either way, the inability to have lunch as a family without the presence of a nanny does not exactly jibe with the hype about how they are so down to earth and Meghan does every single thing herself without any help.

Heck, going by their PR, I don't know why they would even be eating at a restaurant.  Every single day,  Meghan pulls up vegetables herself from her curated organic vegetable garden, wipes the dirt from her own gardening togs when she comes inside, gets out a few of the groceries she purchased herself out of her refrigerator (just like the refrigerators they have at Soho House "only better"!), and then with the skills of a professional chef, she personally whips up a healthy and delicious meal for her family.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> Either way, the inability to have lunch as a family without the presence of a nanny does not exactly jibe with the hype about how they are so down to earth and Meghan does every single thing herself without any help.



Most people I know with kids have a nanny, and in some cases the nanny goes with them on family outings. These people are down-to-earth, just overworked and overburdened with demanding jobs and crazy multiple-kid schedules and an extra set of hands and eyes goes a long way. I am guessing it is not common in many places, but if you can afford the help... Why not? 

As for this situation with a baby, probably not necessary but not knowing the full scope of their day it may have been something they wanted to do on the way to/from something else they had planned as part of the day (nanny included).


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> It's the same pub, The Rose & Crown. They went there on the weekend of August 24–25. Who is saying the photos are new? It was covered last month by several outlets like this one:
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-archie-pub-lunch/


The date stamp is showing in the metadata of the picture


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Staged for two benefits:
Makes them look normal
Makes it look like people are invading their privacy so they need private jets, etc.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> The date stamp is showing in the metadata of the picture



If that is true then they had two pub lunches at the same place three weeks apart. That wouldn't be unusual if they like the place, but they can't both be "Archie's first pub outing." Maybe the first lunch didn't garner enough attention?


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> If that is true then they had two pub lunches at the same place three weeks apart. That wouldn't be unusual if they like the place, but they can't both be "Archie's first pub outing." Maybe the first lunch didn't garner enough attention?


I think TMZ think that these photos are from the first outing that was leaked


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4543722





limom said:


> While being young can excuse quite a bit, with his family history, it was truly, truly an unfortunate choice of costume.



Not only was it an unfortunate choice but it was also poorly timed as he wore the costume, two weeks before Holocaust Memorial Day. He apologized within days of the public condemnation in 2005.


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> While being young can excuse quite a bit, with his family history, it was truly, truly an unfortunate choice of costume.


Exactly.  Life was so difficult during the war.  Rationing, bombing, air raid shelters, children evacuated.  George VI and Elizabeth stayed in London during the Blitz.  They wouldn't evacuate to Canada. Their popularity was huge because of that.  And dopey Harry dresses as a Nazi to go to a party.


LittleStar88 said:


> So did it specifically say the baby was changed in public (on a table, in a booth, etc.)? Or is that just speculation?


Yes, the article said she did normal things like change the baby's diaper.  So of course we all want to know where...


----------



## marthastoo

Nothing amuses me more than the rampant speculations as fact and proclamations of x, y, and z about stuff that makes no sense.

Just waiting for someone to say Meghan posted the neo-nazi graphic to create sympathy for her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Maybe the mods can start a “Celebrity News and Facts only” forum where speculation is not allowed and each post requires a bibliography.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Heck, if I'm _paying_ for a nanny *HE*  must follow us everywhere. 

But I agree with you littlestar; my friend has her nanny with them on family outings and some trips as well.  I never thought anything about it.  If you can afford it.....have at it. 




LittleStar88 said:


> Most people I know with kids have a nanny, and in some cases the nanny goes with them on family outings. These people are down-to-earth, just overworked and overburdened with demanding jobs and crazy multiple-kid schedules and an extra set of hands and eyes goes a long way. I am guessing it is not common in many places, but if you can afford the help... Why not?
> 
> As for this situation with a baby, probably not necessary but not knowing the full scope of their day it may have been something they wanted to do on the way to/from something else they had planned as part of the day (nanny included).


----------



## hellosunshine

Traminer said:


> Are you still "wild about Harry"?
> 
> I am not any more ...





LVSistinaMM said:


> I second that. He’s truly showing his colors that at 35, he’s still acts like a spoiled child.
> 
> I don’t need any “celebrity” telling me how many kids I should be having and where to vacation when they are flying around in private jets with carbon footprints paid for by their celeb friends. Everything of late has been so eye roll worthy.



You're entitled to not be "wild" about Harry _anymore_. You must not be a fan of William as well because both brothers are promoting the same shtick. One just seems to get a bigger backlash against him than the other.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So we’re back to Will and Kate again...


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I think TMZ think that these photos are from the first outing that was leaked






date stamp say 9/17/2019


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, the only problem with that is that, depending on how they blurred the faces,  it could register as a new photo and change the meta data.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> Lady Diana had to learn too and she then became very successful at dealing with the media!



I, sincerely hope Meghan & Harry never engage with the media the way Diana did. I've read that she used to invite royal reporters over, have tea, chit chat/flatter them, and then persuade them to not write something in exchange for another story that she'd provide. They mercilessly took advantage of her. She was surrounded by people who sold her out as well. Honestly, I know many don't agree with how Meghan & Harry are handling the media but this is the way to do it. Cut them off and make them work for coverage. All exclusives right now (outside of Instagram posts) are being given to American media outlets and until British media starts sorting itself out..it'll likely continue this way. 



buffym said:


> I believe, the focus of Meghan’s father than her mother has more to do with the press. They because that focus on him because he gives them stories.



Yep, and it's why the press keeps pushing for Meghan to "forgive" her father & half-sister. They know that this duo will sell any info on Meghan.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So we’re back to Will and Kate again...



Yeah, let's be fair....


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> Yeah, let's be fair....



Okay then. Did you make that collage? Because to “be fair” you have to remove, at least the bottom right article. I’m not a fan of Will / Kate (kids are cute though) but even I know it was debunked that they were at Camp Google.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay then. Did you make that little collage? Because to “be fair” you have to remove, at least the bottom right article. I’m not a fan of Will / Kate (kids are cute though) but even I know it was debunked that they were at Camp Google.



.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yup

ETA: Well now this doesn’t make sense. It was in response to “it says Google Camp?”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lmaooooo


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 4543871
> 
> 
> date stamp say 9/17/2019


I think that indicates the date it was posted to their site?, not necessarily the date it took place. Interesting photos


----------



## mdcx

It definitely looks like the pub was not open to the public and that the two guys in the foreground are security. Not sure how successful this is as an attempt to make Meghan seem "relatable". Harry seems happy though.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> It definitely looks like the pub was not open to the public and that the two guys in the foreground are security. Not sure how successful this is as an attempt to make Meghan seem "relatable". Harry seems happy though.


Like I said, pubs can be a lot quieter around noon, especially weekdays. We've literally had a pub to ourselves lots of times


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> I know you're right, but I keep remembering how in her blog and in TV interviews, she lovingly thanked him and talked about his generosity towards her growing up and how wonderful a father he was... and I just can't figure out a way to be mad at him now.
> 
> I don't even remember her thanking her mom, though she must have done so. It was always the father in the business.


maybe they had a good relationship back then, but what would you do, if your father turned out this way? she wanted him walking her down the aisle, but he found better PR for himself. and then everything went down the gutter. 
even through they had a good relationship when she was younger, what matters is how he acts and behaves now.
Maybe she wasn't that close to her mother back then, but she turned out supportive. who knows. 
but from all we have seen I'm totally with her. just change "father" with "uncle", would you let your uncle do that to you? then why your father?


----------



## hellosunshine

This is so cute!  The Duke & Duchess of Sussex are sending lovely cards to people who wrote to KP on behalf of Archie's baptism.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Victoria Beckham mentions the Duchess of Sussex for Oct' 2019 Glamour Magazine Interview*




Unlike many brands, Victoria Beckham actually gave back to the LGBTQ+ community, with 25% of the proceeds of the T-shirt sales benefiting the Albert Kennedy Trust, a voluntary organisation in England that helps LGBTQ+ young people who are homeless, in a housing crisis or living in a hostile environment.

“I have always been about embracing who you are, supporting others, not being judgemental, treating others how you want to be treated,” she continues. “Sometimes it’s just the fundamental basics. Women supporting women is key. I liked what Meghan Markle said at the [British] Fashion Awards, that it used to be cool to be cruel, and now it’s cool to be kind. Kindness was always at the core of Girl Power.”

https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/victoria-beckham-glamour-magazine-aw19


----------



## mrsinsyder

They’ve arrived for Nonoo’s wedding

Meghan Markle's BFF Misha Nonoo to marry in star-studded wedding


https://mol.im/a/7481557


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Harry dressing up as nazi officer I assume.
> 
> You know, I read he wasn't the sharpest guy, but not knowing his family's history was shocking.
> 
> Anyway, his antics were from long ago.



It’s not just knowing the family history. Perhaps he was absent from school the days that WWII was covered. Pretty hard not to turn on the TV or movies, even if you never crack a book, and not see info pertinent to the subject.   I doubt the teachers at Eton we’re too pleased to see this.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> They’ve arrived for Nonoo’s wedding
> 
> Meghan Markle's BFF Misha Nonoo to marry in star-studded wedding
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7481557


Archie is home with the nanny again. Pretty soon he will start calling her mommy.


----------



## zinacef

hellosunshine said:


> This is so cute!  The Duke & Duchess of Sussex are sending lovely cards to people who wrote to KP on behalf of Archie's baptism.
> 
> View attachment 4544159
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOTE
> is this yours?  Did you get it from a regular mail like a regular mail ?  Lucky you!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

gracekelly said:


> Archie is home with the nanny again. Pretty soon he will start calling her mommy.



The Queen and Prince Phillip left two children under 5yrs old at home for six _months_ when they went on tour.

Archie is at least young enough not to have it affect him if they are gone and back in a few days.

William and Kate will also be leaving all three of their children at home when they tour Pakistan  for a week.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The Queen and Prince Phillip left two children under 5yrs old at home for six _months_ when they went on tour.
> 
> Archie is at least young enough not to have it affect him if they are gone and back in a few days.
> 
> William and Kate will also be leaving all three of their children at home when they tour Pakistan  for a week.


I heard or read somewhere that Charles was very much deprived of attention from his mother, not only absence but she was not at all affectionate.  That is one area where Diana outshined her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

sdkitty said:


> I heard or read somewhere that Charles was very much deprived of attention from his mother, not only absence but she was not at all affectionate.  That is one area where Diana outshined her


I agree. This is another area where Diana broke protocol for a reason.

My point is this isn't out of character for the royals, and with Archie it's never been more than a few days.


----------



## hellosunshine

zinacef said:


> is this yours? Did you get it from a regular mail like a regular mail ? Lucky you!



I wish! It was sent to a member on a Sussex forum that I frequent and yeah, they said they received it through regular snail mail.


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> I heard or read somewhere that Charles was very much deprived of attention from his mother, not only absence but she was not at all affectionate.  That is one area where Diana outshined her


He was packed off to boarding school asap, and his childhood was definitely not filled with affection and warmth:
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/the-isolating-boarding-school-days-of-prince-charles
Perhaps another reason he picked Diana - she would obviously be a warm loving mother.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> He was packed off to boarding school asap, and his childhood was definitely not filled with affection and warmth:
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/the-isolating-boarding-school-days-of-prince-charles
> Perhaps another reason he picked Diana - she would obviously be a warm loving mother.


as I recall there was at least one (probably more) incident when the queen shook his hand instead of hugging or kissing him


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Exactly.  Life was so difficult during the war.  Rationing, bombing, air raid shelters, children evacuated.  George VI and Elizabeth stayed in London during the Blitz.  They wouldn't evacuate to Canada. Their popularity was huge because of that.  And dopey Harry dresses as a Nazi to go to a party.
> 
> Yes, the article said she did normal things like change the baby's diaper.  So of course we all want to know where...



Not to mention his gg uncle 'who would be king' and his beloved Mrs.

It may have happened a long time ago and when he was young but anyone in his position would have to be really stupid or completely callas. And then the "dangers of unconscious bias" speech. I guess he should know then.


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> He was packed off to boarding school asap, and his childhood was definitely not filled with affection and warmth:
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2017/03/the-isolating-boarding-school-days-of-prince-charles
> Perhaps another reason he picked Diana - she would obviously be a warm loving mother.



He (and Camila) prob. picked young Diana because they thought she'd put up and shut up like most young brides of her breeding and background.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> He (and Camila) prob. picked young Diana because they thought she'd put up and shut up like most young brides of her breeding and background.


got that wrong


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> He (and Camila) prob. picked young Diana because they thought she'd put up and shut up like most young brides of her breeding and background.


I think Cam approved, but it was his granny and her lady in waiting, Lady Fermoy, Diana's grandmother who did the original brainstorming.


----------



## gracekelly

Let's all agree that child rearing, even for the royals, has changed over the years.  Children used to say hello to mummy at tea time for a quality 10 minutes and then it was back to the nursery with nanny.
 Even earlier than that, there were the wet nurses who kept the children of the gentry for up to a year until they were weaned.  This is all medieval compared to how children are raised today.  I realize that the people of the Commonwealth would love to see the children, but honestly, I think they should be left at home until they are older, however, my opinion has not been solicited by the royal family


----------



## buffym

BBC apologises to Prince Harry over ‘race traitor’ image
Broadcaster says it should have warned Duke of Sussex before publishing neo-Nazi material

Caroline Davies

The BBC has apologised for failing to warn the Duke of Sussex before broadcasting and publishing online an image from a neo-Nazi social media group that called him a “race traitor” and depicted the royal with a gun pointed at his head.
The image, published on BBC Online and broadcast on News at 10, was a stylised collage from an online post on a far-right platform, which also included blood splatter and a swastika, and was captioned: “See ya later race traitor. #racetraitor.”
It raised “serious security concerns” for Prince Harry and “caused his family great distress specifically while his wife was nearly five months pregnant”, a spokesperson for the duke told the Guardian.

Both the BBC internally and the broadcasting watchdog Ofcom rejected a complaint by the duke, ruling that the use of the image in a report about the activities of the group was clearly in the public interest. However, the BBC has now apologised for not warning the Duke and Duchess of Sussex before broadcast and online publication in December last year.
The corporation said it recognised that “before publishing seriously offensive material we need to be vigilant in balancing the impact on individuals against the wider good which may be served by publication”.
In a letter to Harry, the BBC also said it had committed to strengthen its guidance on the use of content that poses risk of offence to the individual portrayed.
Harry’s spokesperson said: “His Royal Highness welcomes the letter from the BBC relating to the shocking image published by BBC News last year as part of a report on the activities of a British neo-Nazi group with links in the US.

His Royal Highness raised the issue with Ofcom about the rebroadcasting of this racist image due to his concerns that hateful and dangerous propaganda had been spread globally by the world’s most important public service broadcaster. Due to the credibility of the BBC, their choice to publicise this material created an open door for all other media to reproduce it.”
While welcoming the BBC’s apology, Harry did not agree with the decision to broadcast the image. “His Royal Highness maintains that instead of reproducing the image and giving a platform to something that would have only been seen by a few, it should have been described so that others would not potentially be influenced by such an inflammatory image,” the spokesperson said.
The BBC Online article, which investigated the activities of Sonnenkrieg Division, reported: “One image suggests that Prince Harry should be shot for marrying someone of mixed race and exclaims ‘see ya later race traitor’.” The BBC reduced the size of the image online the following day, and removed it two days later. The corporation said the image had been removed because public interest in the article had reduced.

Harry was the only person to complain to Ofcom about the issue.
After the BBC report, Michal Szewczuk, 19, from Leeds, who created the image, was sentenced to four years and three months in a young offender institution, after pleading guilty to two counts of encouraging terrorism and five counts of possession of terrorist material, including the White Resister Manual and an al-Qaida training manual.
Oskar Dunn-Koczorowski, 18, from Chiswick, west London, who admitted two counts of encouraging terrorism, was sentenced to an 18-month detention and training order.

The duke had complained to the BBC that publication of the image fell “below the generally accepted standards as to harmful and offensive material” and there was insufficient justification to warrant the publishing of the image, given that it had been created by the group to incite criminal action.
The BBC did not uphold the complaint, maintaining publication was in the public interest. Ofcom also did not uphold the complaint, ruling there was “clear public interest” in conveying “clearly and impactfully the offensive nature of the group’s messages” and that it was editorially justified.
Harry later discussed his concerns with the BBC’s director general, Tony Hall.

Prince Harry has spoken out on racism on several occasions. In an unprecedented statement when news of his relationship with Meghan Markle became public, he criticised “racial overtones” in reporting. Earlier this year he said “unconscious bias” passed from generation to generation could lead to racist behaviour in people who do not believe they are racist.
An Ofcom spokesperson said: “This image was highly offensive, but in our opinion, its inclusion in the article was editorially justified as it was used to condemn and illustrate the racist group’s activities, which was in the public interest.”
A BBC source said: “This was an important piece of journalism which led to the arrest, conviction and imprisonment of two members of a neo-Nazi group. The image of the Duke of Sussex was included to show the abhorrent nature of their behaviour and Ofcom has subsequently concluded that there was a clear editorial rationale for using the image which, in the context of the news report, was considered unlikely to incite crime.

“Naturally we regret the distress caused and we apologised for failing to warn Kensington Palace in advance that it was to be published.”

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news...-race-traitor-image?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## PatsyCline

People magazine article with Meghan's TV dad Wendall Pierce.
https://people.com/royals/wendell-p...bout-characters-engagement-ring-on-suits-set/


----------



## mdcx

A social media ban at Nonoo's wedding - say it ain't so!
_We’re told there is a social media ban at the glitzy bash — mostly due to the appearance of the Sussexes, who flew to Italy on a commercial plane without 5-month-old Archie following the row over their use of private jet for trips this summer.
https://pagesix.com/2019/09/19/mish...th-dinner-at-one-of-romes-oldest-restaurants/_​


----------



## LibbyRuth

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The Queen and Prince Phillip left two children under 5yrs old at home for six _months_ when they went on tour.
> 
> Archie is at least young enough not to have it affect him if they are gone and back in a few days.
> 
> William and Kate will also be leaving all three of their children at home when they tour Pakistan  for a week.


Amen.  Ask any child under 10 what he or she remembers about being 5 months old.  I'd be shocked if he or she truly remembers anything.  Same is actually true if you ask a kid about remembering being 3.  It's okay to be away for a weekend at Archie's age.  What really matters is being ever present from when he's around 11 through adulthood.


----------



## mrsinsyder

How do they manage to keep flying commercial without a single photo being taken?


----------



## Welltraveled!

I like Wendell.  He’s a funny guy.



PatsyCline said:


> People magazine article with Meghan's TV dad Wendall Pierce.
> https://people.com/royals/wendell-p...bout-characters-engagement-ring-on-suits-set/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Journalist talk.  Sorry but not sorry.




buffym said:


> BBC apologises to Prince Harry over ‘race traitor’ image
> Broadcaster says it should have warned Duke of Sussex before publishing neo-Nazi material
> 
> Caroline Davies
> 
> The BBC has apologised for failing to warn the Duke of Sussex before broadcasting and publishing online an image from a neo-Nazi social media group that called him a “race traitor” and depicted the royal with a gun pointed at his head.
> The image, published on BBC Online and broadcast on News at 10, was a stylised collage from an online post on a far-right platform, which also included blood splatter and a swastika, and was captioned: “See ya later race traitor. #racetraitor.”
> It raised “serious security concerns” for Prince Harry and “caused his family great distress specifically while his wife was nearly five months pregnant”, a spokesperson for the duke told the Guardian.
> 
> Both the BBC internally and the broadcasting watchdog Ofcom rejected a complaint by the duke, ruling that the use of the image in a report about the activities of the group was clearly in the public interest. However, the BBC has now apologised for not warning the Duke and Duchess of Sussex before broadcast and online publication in December last year.
> The corporation said it recognised that “before publishing seriously offensive material we need to be vigilant in balancing the impact on individuals against the wider good which may be served by publication”.
> In a letter to Harry, the BBC also said it had committed to strengthen its guidance on the use of content that poses risk of offence to the individual portrayed.
> Harry’s spokesperson said: “His Royal Highness welcomes the letter from the BBC relating to the shocking image published by BBC News last year as part of a report on the activities of a British neo-Nazi group with links in the US.
> 
> His Royal Highness raised the issue with Ofcom about the rebroadcasting of this racist image due to his concerns that hateful and dangerous propaganda had been spread globally by the world’s most important public service broadcaster. Due to the credibility of the BBC, their choice to publicise this material created an open door for all other media to reproduce it.”
> While welcoming the BBC’s apology, Harry did not agree with the decision to broadcast the image. “His Royal Highness maintains that instead of reproducing the image and giving a platform to something that would have only been seen by a few, it should have been described so that others would not potentially be influenced by such an inflammatory image,” the spokesperson said.
> The BBC Online article, which investigated the activities of Sonnenkrieg Division, reported: “One image suggests that Prince Harry should be shot for marrying someone of mixed race and exclaims ‘see ya later race traitor’.” The BBC reduced the size of the image online the following day, and removed it two days later. The corporation said the image had been removed because public interest in the article had reduced.
> 
> Harry was the only person to complain to Ofcom about the issue.
> After the BBC report, Michal Szewczuk, 19, from Leeds, who created the image, was sentenced to four years and three months in a young offender institution, after pleading guilty to two counts of encouraging terrorism and five counts of possession of terrorist material, including the White Resister Manual and an al-Qaida training manual.
> Oskar Dunn-Koczorowski, 18, from Chiswick, west London, who admitted two counts of encouraging terrorism, was sentenced to an 18-month detention and training order.
> 
> The duke had complained to the BBC that publication of the image fell “below the generally accepted standards as to harmful and offensive material” and there was insufficient justification to warrant the publishing of the image, given that it had been created by the group to incite criminal action.
> The BBC did not uphold the complaint, maintaining publication was in the public interest. Ofcom also did not uphold the complaint, ruling there was “clear public interest” in conveying “clearly and impactfully the offensive nature of the group’s messages” and that it was editorially justified.
> Harry later discussed his concerns with the BBC’s director general, Tony Hall.
> 
> Prince Harry has spoken out on racism on several occasions. In an unprecedented statement when news of his relationship with Meghan Markle became public, he criticised “racial overtones” in reporting. Earlier this year he said “unconscious bias” passed from generation to generation could lead to racist behaviour in people who do not believe they are racist.
> An Ofcom spokesperson said: “This image was highly offensive, but in our opinion, its inclusion in the article was editorially justified as it was used to condemn and illustrate the racist group’s activities, which was in the public interest.”
> A BBC source said: “This was an important piece of journalism which led to the arrest, conviction and imprisonment of two members of a neo-Nazi group. The image of the Duke of Sussex was included to show the abhorrent nature of their behaviour and Ofcom has subsequently concluded that there was a clear editorial rationale for using the image which, in the context of the news report, was considered unlikely to incite crime.
> 
> “Naturally we regret the distress caused and we apologised for failing to warn Kensington Palace in advance that it was to be published.”
> 
> https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news...-race-traitor-image?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## Welltraveled!

That is so sad to hear.  I understand protocol and all that.  But my child will always know they are loved.

I wonder how that affected him as an adult?



sdkitty said:


> as I recall there was at least one (probably more) incident when the queen shook his hand instead of hugging or kissing him


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> How do they manage to keep flying commercial without a single photo being taken?


Security, I would imagine. I've read they board first, and if they keep a low profile, most passengers wouldn't even notice they're on board.


----------



## PatsyCline

Welltraveled! said:


> I like Wendell.  He’s a funny guy.


I saw a clip with him, talking about the first time Harry visited the set. Wendall wasn't there that day, and questioned whether it was really Harry or not. The person told Wendall that Harry had arrived in a helicopter!


----------



## Flatsy

It sounds like the private jet criticism successfully got the Sussexes to start practicing what they preach a little bit and fly commercial more frequently.  Excellent job by the media.  They deserved the criticism.  With their sycophantic celebrity friends telling them everything they do is wonderful, it sometimes takes the media to keep them accountable.


----------



## hellosunshine

Chelsea Handler


----------



## daisychainz

PatsyCline said:


> People magazine article with Meghan's TV dad Wendall Pierce.
> https://people.com/royals/wendell-p...bout-characters-engagement-ring-on-suits-set/


Was he at the wedding? I never saw a photo of him there with all the other cast.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> Amen.  Ask any child under 10 what he or she remembers about being 5 months old.  I'd be shocked if he or she truly remembers anything.  Same is actually true if you ask a kid about remembering being 3.  It's okay to be away for a weekend at Archie's age.  What really matters is being ever present from when he's around 11 through adulthood.


agree it's unlikely an infant will remember anything.  they need to be nurtured though.  and even if we don't remember much about being three years old I think it matters how we are treated at an early age.  I'm sure there are great nannies who can provide wonderful care but to say that it's not important for parents to be present before a kid is 11 .....

.If you want your child to be bonded with you and not the servants I think you'd start way before that.  I know you said "ever present" but anyway....


----------



## LibbyRuth

sdkitty said:


> agree it's unlikely an infant will remember anything.  they need to be nurtured though.  and even if we don't remember much about being three years old I think it matters how we are treated at an early age.  I'm sure there are great nannies who can provide wonderful care but to say that it's not important for parents to be present before a kid is 11 .....
> 
> .If you want your child to be bonded with you and not the servants I think you'd start way before that.  I know you said "ever present" but anyway....


I agree with you. But in this case, we are talking about Harry and Meghan being away from the baby for a weekend. Reports indicate that they have been very hands on with him. So  I think it's reasonable to believe that Archie is bonding with his parents, is nurtured and protected by his nanny, and is overall growing up in a healthy manner so far. My point in my comment about memories before 11 is that often times parents beat themselves up for being away, and others beat them up for not doing things in a certain way when all in all it does not matter to the degree that people get beat up over it.


----------



## Welltraveled!

True.  That’s probably why we don’t photos of celebrities on planes. However I could’ve sworn that I’ve seen Gaga on my flight from LA once.



PatsyCline said:


> Security, I would imagine. I've read they board first, and if they keep a low profile, most passengers wouldn't even notice they're on board.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Chelsea Handler
> 
> View attachment 4544857
> 
> 
> View attachment 4544859


really?  now quoting Chelsea Handler who most people here detest?  OK....so she prefers Harry.  Wow


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree with you. But in this case, we are talking about Harry and Meghan being away from the baby for a weekend. Reports indicate that they have been very hands on with him. So  I think it's reasonable to believe that Archie is bonding with his parents, is nurtured and protected by his nanny, and is overall growing up in a healthy manner so far. My point in my comment about memories before 11 is that often times parents beat themselves up for being away, and others beat them up for not doing things in a certain way when all in all it does not matter to the degree that people get beat up over it.


point taken.  I don't care if they leave the baby with the nanny for a weekend.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I still detest Chelsea.  But she does crack some good jokes at times.  



sdkitty said:


> really?  now quoting Chelsea Handler who most people here detest?  OK....so she prefers Harry.  Wow


----------



## daisychainz

Flatsy said:


> It sounds like the private jet criticism successfully got the Sussexes to start practicing what they preach a little bit and fly commercial more frequently.  Excellent job by the media.  They deserved the criticism.  With their sycophantic celebrity friends telling them everything they do is wonderful, it sometimes takes the media to keep them accountable.


Not just the media but people on public forums, too. They received a lot of negativity recently. I don't believe for a moment that they (and other celebrities) do not read online comments and then adjust some things.


----------



## sdkitty

Welltraveled! said:


> I still detest Chelsea.  But she does crack some good jokes at times.


I actually kinda like her but I'm in the minority here on that I think


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> really?  now quoting Chelsea Handler who most people here detest?  *OK....so she prefers Harry.  Wow*



Lol, when you gotta pick between the brothers...everyone loves Harry.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Lol, when you gotta pick between the brothers...everyone loves Harry.


has has aged better.  so far....will see how it goes longer term


----------



## doni

Welltraveled! said:


> That is so sad to hear.  I understand protocol and all that.  But my child will always know they are loved.
> 
> I wonder how that affected him as an adult?


I don’t think there was anything special to it at all. Meaning that all kids of his generation of a certain social background would have been treated the same including everyone he went to school with. It was not about being royal but about being posh .


----------



## gracekelly

Given that the Italians in particular the Romans invented the word paparazzi,  I would love to know how there are no pictures of them arriving at the airport. I still think it was a large group of wedding guests flying together on a private plane hired by the bride/groom.  If you want to call that commercial, fine, but it wasn’t a large carrier.


----------



## LibbyRuth

gracekelly said:


> Given that the Italians in particular the Romans invented the word paparazzi,  I would love to know how there are no pictures of them arriving at the airport. I still think it was a large group of wedding guests flying together on a private plane hired by the bride/groom.  If you want to call that commercial, fine, but it wasn’t a large carrier.



I'm willing to bet that similar to LAX and other large international airports, the Rome airport offers a private VIP entrance / exit.  While airports offer such a service to VIPs, some choose to forego it, because paparazzi pics are a great way to get publicity.  For the most part, when you see paparazzi pics at an airport, even when the subject is looking annoyed, it's been set up and is not just the subject being bombarded.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the wedding of Michael Hess and Misha Nonoo


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I don’t think there was anything special to it at all. Meaning that all kids of his generation of a certain social background would have been treated the same including everyone he went to school with. It was not about being royal but about being posh .


whatever the reason he was a little boy and I believe as an adult he spoke about it saying it was hurtful

even with all the hard feelings between him and diana, I'll be he appreciated her as a mother to his sons


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> Archie is home with the nanny again. Pretty soon he will start calling her mommy.


----------



## hellosunshine

Morgan R said:


> Attending the wedding of Michael Hess and Misha Nonoo
> 
> View attachment 4544964



They are such a beautiful couple!


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> Chelsea Handler
> 
> View attachment 4544857
> 
> 
> View attachment 4544859



Let's be honest. Chelsea Handler isn't going to turn down a drink, it doesn't matter who offers it.


----------



## CeeJay

PatsyCline said:


> Security, I would imagine. I've read they board first, and if they keep a low profile, most passengers wouldn't even notice they're on board.


Yes .. I remember flying BA from Heathrow back to Boston and the Diplomats were boarded first; only reason why I knew this is because we were all in the 1st Class room in the Airport and we started talking about the restaurants in Boston!



LibbyRuth said:


> I'm willing to bet that similar to LAX and other large international airports, the Rome airport offers a private VIP entrance / exit.  While airports offer such a service to VIPs, some choose to forego it, because paparazzi pics are a great way to get publicity.  For the most part, when you see paparazzi pics at an airport, even when the subject is looking annoyed, it's been set up and is not just the subject being bombarded.


HA HA HA .. at Fiumicino?!?!   Have you ever been? .. it's one of the WORST Airports ever and the Italian immigration agents are the most lax I have EVER seen!  Hence the reason why Italy had such issues with Terrorists entering the country (and still do)!  If I have to fly to Italy, I NEVER fly to Fiumicino .. EVER!  I usually take Air France to CDG and then get on a flight to Italy .. either Bologna (which is a wonderful Airport), Firenze or Ciampino which is a lot closer into the City of Rome!



bag-mania said:


> Let's be honest. Chelsea Handler isn't going to turn down a drink, it doesn't matter who offers it.


*BAM!!!!!   100% nailed that! * I used to think she was funny, but she has done some stuff that has really made me question her; not a real fan!


----------



## LibbyRuth

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. at Fiumicino?!?!   Have you ever been? .. it's one of the WORST Airports ever and the Italian immigration agents are the most lax I have EVER seen!  Hence the reason why Italy had such issues with Terrorists entering the country (and still do)!  If I have to fly to Italy, I NEVER fly to Fiumicino .. EVER!  I usually take Air France to CDG and then get on a flight to Italy .. either Bologna (which is a wonderful Airport), Firenze or Ciampino which is a lot closer into the City of Rome!


Yes, I have been there. Multiple times. I'd agree it's a terrible airport, but even terrible airports have special treatment for VIPs.  See: LaGuardia.  Turns out differing opinions are not always born of ignorance. But thanks for the travel tips!


----------



## buffym

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...hie-first-donation/?__twitter_impression=true

Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan Secretly Donate to Build Mozambique Swimming Pool in Archie's Name
Archie gets involved with his first ever charitable endeavor—helping marine conservation charity Love The Oceans teach local children how to swim.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan Secretly Donate to Build Mozambique Swimming Pool in Archie's Name*

_Archie gets involved with his first ever charitable endeavor—helping marine conservation charity Love The Oceans teach local children how to swim._




With two active philanthropists for parents, it's no surprise that five-month-old Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is starting his charitable efforts young.

_BAZAAR.com_ can exclusively confirm the Duke and Duchess of Sussex donated in the name of their son to help realize an ambitious project: *Building a swimming pool in Guinjata Bay, Mozambique, to teach locals to swim. The resort town is home to one of the most picturesque coastlines in the world, but the area has seen an average of 12 drownings a year that could easily be avoided if local children*—many of whom grow up to be fishermen—were taught how to swim and be safe in open waters. At present, 90 percent of the local population is unable to swim.

Adam Knight, a swim coach and partner with marine conservation non-profit Love the Oceans, had been running a JustGiving.com fundraiser for almost a month and was still £4,350 ($5,440) away from their target of £5,000 ($6,250). _BAZAAR_ understands that Duchess Meghan came across the page after browsing their most recent Instagram posts and wanted to help them reach their goal.

Knight tells _BAZAAR.com_ that staff were "blown away" by the donation when it appeared in mid-August, but were unsure of who the mystery donor—simply named "Archie HMW"—was. Some wondered whether it was from the Sussexes after the couple pledged support for the charity on their Instagram account in August. "I said to my colleague, 'That has to be Harry and Meghan,'" Knight says. "We made some calls and were able to verify that it was from them, which is just incredible. Without that donation and support this would not be happening."

Thanks to Archie’s donation, next August will see the charity’s efforts go further with the opening of the successfully-funded swimming pool. The venue will provide a safe space to train, and means that local children won’t need to pile on the back of a truck for a 45-minute off-road drive to use a local diving resort’s pool, which is often not available anyway. "Having our own pool means we'll be able to double the amount of swimming lessons and also help create paying jobs for the teachers we've trained," explains Knight. "Swimming isn’t just a skill that ensures the safety of children and adults in the surrounding areas. It also provides employment opportunities in an area that thrives on marine eco-tourism and scuba diving trips, but has so many living below the poverty line."

He adds, "Now that we’re able to go ahead with this, we will all be thinking of Archie when we open the pool next August. What started out as a passion project is now transforming a community and beyond."


https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a29146087/meghan-harry-archie-first-donation/


----------



## limom

What does marine conservation have to do with teaching kids to swim?
In anycase, it is a nice gesture. Bazaar greatly exaggerated in the title. It was a 5 K donation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...hie-first-donation/?__twitter_impression=true
> 
> Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan *Secretly *Donate to Build Mozambique Swimming Pool in Archie's Name
> Archie gets involved with his first ever charitable endeavor—helping marine conservation charity Love The Oceans teach local children how to swim.


I don't think that words means what they think it means.


----------



## CeeJay

LibbyRuth said:


> Yes, I have been there. Multiple times. I'd agree it's a terrible airport, but even terrible airports have special treatment for VIPs.  See: LaGuardia.  *Turns out differing opinions are not always born of ignorance*. But thanks for the travel tips!


I'm going to try to take that comment with a _grain of salt _as I'm hoping that it wasn't meant to imply my ignorance ..


----------



## CeeJay

Morgan R said:


> Attending the wedding of Michael Hess and Misha Nonoo
> 
> View attachment 4544964


So much for the social media ban!!


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> I don't think that words means what they think it means.



The Sussex's donated funds privately. The charity wondered if the donation came from them and reached out to various people for confirmation. When they received their confirmation, the charity decided to share with the press.


----------



## limom

hellosunshine said:


> The Sussex's donated funds privately. The charity wondered if the donation came from them and reached out to various people for confirmation. When they received their confirmation, the charity decided to share with the press.


If it was meant to be a secret, the Sussex could have donated anonymously.
The writer obviously does not grasp the meaning of the word. “Secretly”


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> The Sussex's donated funds privately. The charity wondered if the donation came from them and reached out to various people for confirmation. When they received their confirmation, the charity decided to share with the press.


I work for a charity. If you want to give money anonymously, it's very easy to do and is done frequently.


----------



## hellosunshine

limom said:


> If it was meant to be a secret, the Sussex could have donated anonymously.
> The writer obviously does not grasp the meaning of the word. “Secretly”



It was secretly. Anyone can title a donation as "Archie HMW", it was only after reaching out to different sources, did the charity finally receive a confirmation that the donation came from the Sussex's. What would you have preferred, upon receiving the question that Harry & Meghan deny it?


----------



## LittleStar88

And don't they need permission to share who donates? Maybe that varies by country?

Nice PR for the Sussex family! They should have just made the donation publicly and went along with a nice little press release.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> And don't they need permission to share who donates? Maybe that varies by country?
> 
> Nice PR for the Sussex family! They should have just made the donation publicly and went along with a nice little press release.


It’s very, very poor form and borderline unethical to release donor information if they want to be private. We’ve had some very famous donors who we never speak of. It’s more Sussex shenanigans.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s very, very poor form and borderline unethical to release donor information if they want to be private. We’ve had some very famous donors who we never speak of. It’s more Sussex shenanigans.



Transparent stunt. I am sure the donation was made with the right intent, but if it was also part of a PR stunt, they should stop using the PR firm.


----------



## limom

Who knew the word  »secretly » had a different meaning:


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> Transparent stunt. I am sure the donation was made with the right intent, but if it was also part of a PR stunt, they should stop using the PR firm.


Exactly. I’d give them a lot more credit if they’d just own the stuff they try and pull.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> It was secretly. Anyone can title a donation as "Archie HMW", it was only after reaching out to different sources, did the charity finally receive a confirmation that the donation came from the Sussex's. What would you have preferred, upon receiving the question that Harry & Meghan deny it?



There is no one else on this planet who is going to donate a swimming pool and name it after baby Archie.


----------



## Flatsy

Any exclusive story about the Sussexes in Harper's Bazaar comes directly from the Sussexes.  We already knew that.  

Like the Harper's exclusive about Meghan's birthday and the charity shop that baked her cake, this story is also providing a charity with good publicity.  

They could have highlighted this charity and project on their instagram, but they clearly want the story to be about their generosity and get the word out that they are "secretly" donating their own money to charity.


----------



## hellosunshine

LittleStar88 said:


> I am sure the donation was made with the right intent, but if it was also part of a PR stunt, they should stop using the PR firm.



If anyone feels it was a "pr stunt" then that's fine...but I'm 1000% in support of charities receiving some extra press, if needed. Little Village, one of Meghan's charities..was able to receive support from big corporations like Pampers through extra publicity. Who's to say something similar isn't happening here?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> There is no one else on this planet who is going to donate a swimming pool and name it after baby Archie.



They didn't donate a whole pool. They closed the gap in funds that the charity needed. Secondly, many people have been donating under Archie's name for the Global Sussex Baby Shower. It's probably why the charity felt the need to confirm whether it was the Sussex's or not.


----------



## Clearblueskies

OMG a “secret” donation towards a pool in Africa just a few days before a tour to...er....hang on...oh yeah...Africa, that’s suddenly all over the press??  This is pretty low - nothing to do with charity, and everything to do with ghastly attention seeking and self aggrandisement.
Anonymous donations are very easily made - anonymously.  It’s simple.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> A social media ban at Nonoo's wedding - say it ain't so!
> _We’re told there is a social media ban at the glitzy bash — mostly due to the appearance of the Sussexes, who flew to Italy on a commercial plane without 5-month-old Archie following the row over their use of private jet for trips this summer.
> https://pagesix.com/2019/09/19/mish...th-dinner-at-one-of-romes-oldest-restaurants/_​


Well, if the wedding photos end up in Hello, OK! or Vogue, we'll know that they sold the pictures and didn't want anyone to give away the details with their own shots on Instagram.

This couple does not need the money, but I can see Nonoo wanting to curate the story and post only the images that she feels suits her brand.


hellosunshine said:


> *Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan Secretly Donate to Build Mozambique Swimming Pool in Archie's Name*
> 
> _Archie gets involved with his first ever charitable endeavor—helping marine conservation charity Love The Oceans teach local children how to swim._
> 
> View attachment 4544998
> 
> 
> With two active philanthropists for parents, it's no surprise that five-month-old Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is starting his charitable efforts young.
> 
> _BAZAAR.com_ can exclusively confirm the Duke and Duchess of Sussex donated in the name of their son to help realize an ambitious project: *Building a swimming pool in Guinjata Bay, Mozambique, to teach locals to swim. The resort town is home to one of the most picturesque coastlines in the world, but the area has seen an average of 12 drownings a year that could easily be avoided if local children*—many of whom grow up to be fishermen—were taught how to swim and be safe in open waters. At present, 90 percent of the local population is unable to swim.
> 
> Adam Knight, a swim coach and partner with marine conservation non-profit Love the Oceans, had been running a JustGiving.com fundraiser for almost a month and was still £4,350 ($5,440) away from their target of £5,000 ($6,250). _BAZAAR_ understands that Duchess Meghan came across the page after browsing their most recent Instagram posts and wanted to help them reach their goal.
> 
> Knight tells _BAZAAR.com_ that staff were "blown away" by the donation when it appeared in mid-August, but were unsure of who the mystery donor—simply named "Archie HMW"—was. Some wondered whether it was from the Sussexes after the couple pledged support for the charity on their Instagram account in August. "I said to my colleague, 'That has to be Harry and Meghan,'" Knight says. "We made some calls and were able to verify that it was from them, which is just incredible. Without that donation and support this would not be happening."
> 
> Thanks to Archie’s donation, next August will see the charity’s efforts go further with the opening of the successfully-funded swimming pool. The venue will provide a safe space to train, and means that local children won’t need to pile on the back of a truck for a 45-minute off-road drive to use a local diving resort’s pool, which is often not available anyway. "Having our own pool means we'll be able to double the amount of swimming lessons and also help create paying jobs for the teachers we've trained," explains Knight. "Swimming isn’t just a skill that ensures the safety of children and adults in the surrounding areas. It also provides employment opportunities in an area that thrives on marine eco-tourism and scuba diving trips, but has so many living below the poverty line."
> 
> He adds, "Now that we’re able to go ahead with this, we will all be thinking of Archie when we open the pool next August. What started out as a passion project is now transforming a community and beyond."
> 
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a29146087/meghan-harry-archie-first-donation/


Considering he is a multi-millionaire several times over, with no mortgage or day to day expenses, I can see him wanting to keep a donation of 5K a secret.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> They didn't donate a whole pool. They closed the gap in funds that the charity needed. Secondly, many people have been donating under Archie's name for the Global Sussex Baby Shower. It's probably why the charity felt the need to confirm whether it was the Sussex's or not.



Okaaaay, I suppose their not-so-secret donation is less tacky than having Harry and Meghan run around waving a banner announcing "Yay us!" But not much.


----------



## Sharont2305

On a lighter note, guests at a romantic wedding in Italy...... baby announcement in January.


----------



## limom

She wore  a black Valentino dress at the Italian wedding
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...friend-Misha-Nonoos-wedding-BLACK-outfit.html


----------



## Sharont2305

Just incase you haven't seen it, I posted this on another thread. 
I'd love to see this in movement, looks etheral


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> Just incase you haven't seen it, I posted this on another thread.
> I'd love to see this in movement, looks etheral



Love this!


----------



## mrsinsyder

They’re so relatable I can’t handle it! Almost $14k for an event that isn’t even public. Woof.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maybe it's from Rent the Runway?

Any chance it was loaned/borrowed? 

I need to see a better shot of her in the dress. Not so sure about it...


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> Just incase you haven't seen it, I posted this on another thread.
> I'd love to see this in movement, looks etheral



Gorgeous dress.


----------



## prettyprincess

mrsinsyder said:


> *They’re so relatable I can’t handle it!* Almost $14k for an event that isn’t even public. Woof.
> 
> View attachment 4545212


Haha! What’s the point of being a princess if you can’t dress in princess attire! If it were me, I’d be in a crown 24/7, throwing gold coins at the crowd.


----------



## mrsinsyder

prettyprincess said:


> Haha! What’s the point of being a princess if you can’t dress in princess attire! If it were me, I’d be in a crown 24/7, throwing gold coins at the crowd.


That didn’t work very well for Marie Antoinette


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> There is no one else on this planet who is going to donate a swimming pool and name it after baby Archie.



Could be....


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Just incase you haven't seen it, I posted this on another thread.
> I'd love to see this in movement, looks etheral


Looks like a night gown.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Beautiful outfit.  I’m glad she is using their clothing budget on beautiful pieces.




mrsinsyder said:


> They’re so relatable I can’t handle it! Almost $14k for an event that isn’t even public. Woof.
> 
> View attachment 4545212


----------



## Straight-Laced

*https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...s-africa-tour-save-their-reputation-fhnh8xckw September 21*
*Can Prince Harry and Meghan’s Africa tour save their reputation?*
The royal couple have faced questions about their marriage and relationship, and goodwill towards them is faltering. Valentine Low asks what went wrong

It is early autumn. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are about to embark on an important overseas tour. To mark the occasion, The Times has written an article telling how the duchess has been both a hit with the public and a breath of fresh air for the royal family, providing a sometimes unwieldy institution with new energy and ideas.

No, not this autumn: not this tour. That piece was written a year ago, when Meghan was pregnant with Archie and the couple had just embarked on a tour of Australia.

Next week, with the four-month-old Archie in tow, they will be embarking on a tour of South Africa, with Harry also taking in trips to Angola, Botswana and Malawi.

Two tours, 12 months apart, and how much has changed in that time. When Harry and Meghan got marriedin May last year the couple were riding on a wave of popularity. Despite the unfortunate headlines over her father’s failure to attend the wedding, huge amounts of goodwill were extended towards Meghan.

Since then much of that goodwill has evaporated. The couple have been subjected to a barrage of criticism, from their use of private jets to the duchess’s guest editorship of Vogue.

How has it got to this in such a short space of time? Penny Junor, the royal biographer, said: “Things have gone really wrong for them. Everybody loved them. Now people are just disappointed.”

Although there had been some critical stories in the papers before Australia, the rot really began to set in last November. There were reports of a row over which tiara Meghan would wear for the wedding, of the departure of members of staff, of a rift between the duchesses of Sussex and Cambridge. According to one account, a bridesmaid dress fitting attended by both Meghan and Kate saw the latter reduced to tears.

Much of it could, perhaps, be dismissed as media tittle-tattle. As Dickie Arbiter, a former palace press secretary, said: “The media is always looking out for stories.”

But the stories were not all wrong. Meghan did not go down well with everyone at the palace. It is understood that at least one intimate of the Queen “cannot stand” Meghan. Whenever her name comes up, the unnamed aide “grimaces”.

What the Queen thinks is not known.

According to Junor, it started to go seriously wrong around the time of Archie’s birth, when the couple refused to say which hospital he was due to be born in. “They were not playing the game of allowing people to hang around outside the hospital and wait for the birth, those things that crazy people like to do while the rest of us are happy to watch it on telly.”

Another royal expert, who asked to remain anonymous but who has close links inside Buckingham Palace, said that the couple were wrong to refuse to divulge the names of Archie’s godparents. “It is ludicrous. The moral mentors of an heir to the throne should be a matter of public record.”

It did not help, Junor said, that that all happened around the time that news emerged of the £2.4 million of taxpayers’ money being spent on Frogmore Cottage. But while that was bad timing, their fractured public image reflects a fundamental truth about the couple. “Harry has spent his whole life trying to be normal, trying to be one of us. She has spent her whole life trying to be a superstar, and to stop being normal.”


Omid Scobie, royal editor of Harper’s Bazaar, argues that while the private jet episode did them no good, many of the stories that played so well in the media — the birth arrangements, the godparents — do not necessarily resonate with the public. “The general public does not really care one way or another.”

Arbiter says that the couple remain far more popular in the country at large than some tabloids would suggest.

Even he, however, has his criticisms, arguing that the mistake they make is to think that anything they do that is not an official engagement is private. It is not, he says: whenever they are in public, even if they are doing something private, they are representing the Queen.

That means that taking a private jet on holiday to the south of Francewas a mistake. “As a member of the royal family you have to lead by example,” he said. “The airlines are very good at dealing with VIPs. They get on last, and get off first, and they sit at the front and don’t get hassled by anybody.”

Junor nurtures a hope that the couple will regain the popularity which is theirs for the asking: “On paper they are fantastic,” she said. “They have got everything going for them. If they just started behaving like members of the royal family and not like Hollywood A-listers, they can turn it around.”

A few days ago The Sun, a newspaper that has been very critical of Meghan, wrote a complimentary piece about her appearance at a Smart Works charity launch, an event which many agree saw the duchess at her best: focused, energised, dynamic. Her speech about female empowerment, it said, “went down a storm”.

Scobie says that next week’s African tour will see them at their best. “It is all about the work for them. A royal tour is a time to flex their philanthropic muscles, and to remind people what they are all about.”


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> They’re so relatable I can’t handle it! Almost $14k for an event that isn’t even public. Woof.
> 
> View attachment 4545212


I don't understand this at all - she will likely never wear this dress again. It is black, which me being old fashioned, is not suitable to wear to a wedding. It is enormously expensive.
She had such an opportunity to wear something beautiful, pretty and moderately expensive and people would have responded well to it. Like I've said, every chance she gets she chooses to go for "star" rather than "well-liked minor royal".


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> I don't understand this at all - she will likely never wear this dress again. It is black, which me being old fashioned, is not suitable to wear to a wedding. It is enormously expensive.
> She had such an opportunity to wear something beautiful, pretty and moderately expensive and people would have responded well to it. Like I've said, every chance she gets she chooses to go for "star" rather than "well-liked minor royal".


In addition to the fact that being over the top at someone else’s wedding is beyond tacky.


----------



## Morgan R

Multiple women who attended the wedding were wearing black.  According to many reports regarding the wedding it had a theme. The theme was based on the movie _La Dolce Vita. _What Meghan was wearing fit the theme of the wedding.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Straight-Laced said:


> *https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...s-africa-tour-save-their-reputation-fhnh8xckw September 21*
> *Can Prince Harry and Meghan’s Africa tour save their reputation?*



Interesting, thanks for posting. For me this quote nailed it:* “Harry has spent his whole life trying to be normal, trying to be one of us. She has spent her whole life trying to be a superstar, and to stop being normal.”*


----------



## prettyprincess

mrsinsyder said:


> In addition to the fact that being over the top at someone else’s wedding is beyond tacky.



Most likely the designer sent it to her to wear. Also, why is it tacky to dress your best at someone’s wedding? I’m asking sincerely, because I don’t understand the concept of wanting your guests to dress down for your special occasion. How I view it is when people put thought and effort into their appearance it shows respect. Idk, I WANT people coming dressed like they’re going to the Oscars. It’s more fun that way.


----------



## mrsinsyder

prettyprincess said:


> Most likely the designer sent it to her to wear. Also, why is it tacky to dress your best at someone’s wedding? I’m asking sincerely, because I don’t understand the concept of wanting your guests to dress down for your special occasion. How I view it is when people put thought and effort into their appearance it shows respect. Idk, I WANT people coming dressed like they’re going to the Oscars. It’s more fun that way.


There’s a big difference between dressing down and a $15,000 dress.

It’s also been well established that they can’t take clothes for free.


----------



## Gal4Dior

$13,500 for that Valentino dress and it’s sold out at Bergdorfs!! It looks like it is customized because the picture on the BG website was completely sheer, almost scandalous. It appears she had it modified with a black slip underneath.

I wonder who paid for that dress...Prince Charles??


----------



## buffym

Meghan and Harry arriving to the wedding.



It was nice for Meghan to connect the charity to Princess Charlene foundation


----------



## buffym

limom said:


> What does marine conservation have to do with teaching kids to swim?
> In anycase, it is a nice gesture. Bazaar greatly exaggerated in the title. It was a 5 K donation.



Here’s an article about marine eco tourism, it is a job that most people who have can swim. Not a lot of tourist are going to get on a boat or take a tour that involves reefs and other bodies or water when the tour guide can not swim.

This helps expands the job opportunities.

https://blog.nationalgeographic.org...lth-of-the-oceans-goes-well-beyond-fisheries/


----------



## Jayne1

Morgan R said:


> Multiple women who attended the wedding were wearing black.  According to many reports regarding the wedding it had a theme. The theme was based on the movie _La Dolce Vita. _What Meghan was wearing fit the theme of the wedding.


Yes, the theme for the whole weekend is Fellini’s La Dolce Vita.  Everyone (mostly the women, I guess) have to dress from the era.


----------



## bag-mania

Cosmopolitan said:


> Interesting, thanks for posting. For me this quote nailed it:* “Harry has spent his whole life trying to be normal, trying to be one of us. She has spent her whole life trying to be a superstar, and to stop being normal.”*



I’m not sure I entirely agree with the author about Harry. Most of the women he liked to date worked in the entertainment industry in some capacity. He seems to be attracted to that lifestyle. That’s not exactly normal by most people’s definition.


----------



## prettyprincess

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a big difference between dressing down and a $15,000 dress.
> 
> It’s also been well established that they can’t take clothes for free.



The designers may not be gifting her the pieces, but they lend her (or her stylist) things for sure. Thats common, its good business. I bet this gown will be sold out soon. 
If you were offered couture you wouldn’t wear it? She’s scrutinized on a global scale, of course she wants to look beautiful. And she does


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> The designers may not be gifting her the pieces, but they lend her (or her stylist) things for sure. Thats common, its good business. I bet this gown will be sold out soon.
> If you were offered couture you wouldn’t wear it? She’s scrutinized on a global scale, of course she wants to look beautiful. And she does


Probably goes back to the whole concept of behaving appropriately for her role, rather than taking whatever she can get and accepting whatever she is offered even if may not be received well by her public.
A more modest dress would have been a good choice in this case.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> Multiple women who attended the wedding were wearing black.  According to many reports regarding the wedding it had a theme. The theme was based on the movie _La Dolce Vita. _What Meghan was wearing fit the theme of the wedding.



I was curious enough to look up the stills from the movie. Lots of black dresses. I don’t know what the bride was thinking when she picked this theme.


----------



## mdcx

Her previous wedding sounds equally over the top:
Lana Del Rey played at their grand 2012 wedding, which took place at the 16th-century Forte di Sant’Andrea in Venice, Italy, and ended with a garden party on the roof of Peggy Guggenheim’s museum. Guests at the three-day nuptials — described by W as “equal parts James Bond, Great Gatsby and English-schoolboy high jinks” — included James Middleton (Kate and Pippa’s brother), Matthew Mellon, and Eugenie and her sister, Princess Beatrice.
https://pagesix.com/2016/10/02/wild...marriage/?_ga=1.64415081.770003392.1450632683​


----------



## prettyprincess

mdcx said:


> Probably goes back to the whole concept of behaving appropriately for her role, rather than taking whatever she can get and accepting whatever she is offered even if may not be received well by her public.
> A more modest dress would have been a good choice in this case.



Modest? Did you see the venue? Her gown was perfectly appropriate for the occasion. Everyone else is dressed similarly. Why should she be the dowdy one? To please a public that will never be pleased? 
She’s young and beautiful and she should be allowed to enjoy that.


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> Modest? Did you see the venue? Her gown was perfectly appropriate for the occasion. Everyone else is dressed similarly. Why should she be the dowdy one? To please a public that will never be pleased?
> She’s young and beautiful and she should be allowed to enjoy that.


In this case I meant modest in terms of cost.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I’ve been to weddings where some of the guests wore Jeans and a T-Shirt.  I hate when people dress down for a wedding.  Especially if the wedding is themed.  How hard is it to put on a dress or rent a tux?!

Anyways, Nonoo is a fashion designer I would assume their guest would know to dress appropriately.  




prettyprincess said:


> Most likely the designer sent it to her to wear. Also, why is it tacky to dress your best at someone’s wedding? I’m asking sincerely, because I don’t understand the concept of wanting your guests to dress down for your special occasion. How I view it is when people put thought and effort into their appearance it shows respect. Idk, I WANT people coming dressed like they’re going to the Oscars. It’s more fun that way.


----------



## Straight-Laced

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure I entirely agree with the author about Harry. Most of the women he liked to date worked in the entertainment industry in some capacity. He seems to be attracted to that lifestyle. That’s not exactly normal by most people’s definition.



I think Harry wants to have it all - celebrity superstardom, Royal privileges and then also to be seen as just a ‘normal’ relatable kind of guy


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> I’ve been to weddings where some of the guests wore Jeans and a T-Shirt.  I hate when people dress down for a wedding.  Especially if the wedding is themed.  How hard is it to put on a dress or rent a tux?!
> 
> Anyways, Nonoo is a fashion designer I would assume their guest would know to dress appropriately.


I went to a wedding where the bridesmaids and mothers of  bride and groom wore black. It was awful and creepy and looked like a funeral procession when they walked down the aisle.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> I think Harry wants to have it all - celebrity superstardom, Royal privileges and then also to be seen as just a ‘normal’ relatable kind of guy


I think you’re right, and that’s not working for him at the moment.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

LVSistinaMM said:


> $13,500 for that Valentino dress and it’s sold out at Bergdorfs!! It looks like it is customized because the picture on the BG website was completely sheer, almost scandalous. It appears she had it modified with a black slip underneath.
> 
> I wonder who paid for that dress...Prince Charles??



They can't accept gifts, but it's very well known they get designer items *heavily* discounted due to the fact that items sell out once it's been seen on Meghan or Kate.

The designer is really the one who benefits.


----------



## Gal4Dior

FreeSpirit71 said:


> They can't accept gifts, but it's very well known they get designer items *heavily* discounted due to the fact that items sell out once it's been seen on Meghan or Kate.
> 
> The designer is really the one who benefits.


Well, explains why I was told by an Aquazzura sales manager that they just sent a bunch of shoes to Meghan about a year ago. They certainly know who helps sell their brand! I’m guilty of buying a couple of pairs because Meghan wore them!


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> Just incase you haven't seen it, I posted this on another thread.
> I'd love to see this in movement, looks etheral


Thanks for sharing this!!! Couldn't ell what it looked like in the few pics taken by paps. From the pap pics I've seen, didn't seem flattering on her.


----------



## VickyB

I wonder what Meghan will wear to Nonoo's third wedding in Italy?


----------



## LittleStar88

Interesting article about how the royals fly commercial...

https://apple.news/AWETj0vjWRs6hsZp2cA658Q


----------



## Grande Latte

I don't like black at weddings. I really can't stand it. As much as I like that Valentino dress, I wish it were a different color.

On the other hand, I thought Ivanka was the best dressed. She looked very "Gatsby". The color is perfect with her blonde hair. Very La Dolce Vita.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Grande Latte said:


> I don't like black at weddings. I really can't stand it. As much as I like that Valentino dress, I wish it were a different color.
> 
> On the other hand, I thought Ivanka was the best dressed. She looked very "Gatsby". The color is perfect with her blonde hair. Very La Dolce Vita.
> 
> View attachment 4545512


I thought Ivanka looked lovely, this colour is beautiful on her.  Her hair looks great at this length too, it really suits her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## stanfordmom

So interesting, it must be geographical...wearing black to weddings is very common in New York while champagne is definitely taboo since it’s become a fashionable color for bridal gowns.


----------



## Jayne1

prettyprincess said:


> Most likely the designer sent it to her to wear. Also, why is it tacky to dress your best at someone’s wedding? I’m asking sincerely, because I don’t understand the concept of wanting your guests to dress down for your special occasion. How I view it is when people put thought and effort into their appearance it shows respect. Idk, I WANT people coming dressed like they’re going to the Oscars. It’s more fun that way.


They’re not allowed to borrow clothes.  

They are supposed to pay (funded by Charles) and not accept free clothes either 

Meg wears expensive clothes and it is possible that she’s doing something she’s not supposed to do.


----------



## bisbee

Jayne1 said:


> They’re not allowed to borrow clothes.
> 
> They are supposed to pay (funded by Charles) and not accept free clothes either
> 
> Meg wears expensive clothes and it is possible that she’s doing something she’s not supposed to do.


Is this written anywhere, or is it accepted as the way the Royals are supposed to behave?

It seems to me that if Meghan were breaking important rules, something would have been done.  If it were that important, I really can’t imagine that she and Harry are powerful enough to ignore a serious reprimand, if one had been given.


----------



## marthastoo

It seems I'm in the minority, but I personally didn't like the dress/jumpsuit.  Maybe it looks amazing in person - who knows.  But this discussion about how it's too expensive or too black or not modest or unrewearable ...   This is a private event of the wedding of a friend. The Sussexes both have money.  Charles reportedly picks up the clothing tab for his D-I-Ls.  In any event, she can wear what she wants to a private wedding.  She also does not wear over the top expensive and flashy formalwear.  In fact, most of the time I am underwhelmed by her evening choices.  She generally sticks to plain, simple, dare I say boring?  Of course, I am more a fan of Queen Max-style royalwear.  And who cares if she never wears this dress(jumpsuit) again.  Honestly, it would not really be appropriate for any kind of formal royal duty occasion anyway. But the knives that come out any.time.she's.in.the news.  It's exhausting.  If she wore a H&M - omg, what a phony PR stunt.  If she wore a plain dress - gawd, she's such a dowdy dresser.  If she wears an "expensive" dress - who paid for that?!


----------



## mrsinsyder

bisbee said:


> Is this written anywhere, or is it accepted as the way the Royals are supposed to behave?
> 
> It seems to me that if Meghan were breaking important rules, something would have been done.  If it were that important, I really can’t imagine that she and Harry are powerful enough to ignore a serious reprimand, if one had been given.


Are you expecting them to throw her in jail? Of course not. She can break rules left and right and it’s doubtful anything will actually happen. 

They’re not supposed to accept things for free because they are public servants and accepting gifts throws off the balance of power and shows favoritism for a family that is supposed to be consistently neutral.  Even “loaning” something has a value attached to it.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Grande Latte said:


> I don't like black at weddings. I really can't stand it. As much as I like that Valentino dress, I wish it were a different color.
> 
> On the other hand, I thought Ivanka was the best dressed. She looked very "Gatsby". The color is perfect with her blonde hair. Very La Dolce Vita.
> 
> View attachment 4545512


I'm reluctant to admit this, because I can't stand these two, but Ivanka is beautiful and particularly so, in this dress.


----------



## Sharont2305

If they are sent things by designers then they keep and pay for what they want and send the rest back.


----------



## A1aGypsy

it is actually codified, And they could get in trouble if they were discovered accepting any favours. However, Parliament is a tad busy right now with other things.

That being said, I suspect they are paying for these things and not accepting them outright for free. That would be silly.  But who knows.

This is an older version of it. I don’t know if this is current or has been updated. But it still boils down to: public servants cannot accept gifts that might make them appear indebted.

https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/gifts_policy_2003.pdf


----------



## stanfordmom

marthastoo said:


> But the knives that come out any.time.she's.in.the news.  It's exhausting.  If she wore a H&M - omg, what a phony PR stunt.  If she wore a plain dress - gawd, she's such a dowdy dresser.  If she wears an "expensive" dress - who paid for that?!



THANK YOU!!!

I am kind of intrigued by MM (mostly because I went to Northwestern and my son and his girlfriend obsessively watched Suits for awhile). I also like Kate Middleton and felt such compassion toward Diana. 

I definitely don't consider myself a stan....but I find I am almost compelled to defend her since this thread can be so vicious. 

It reminds me of another woman who was recently a public figure. There was such a "HOW DARE SHE" mentality...how dare she wear something sleeveless, how dare she wear J Crew, how dare she wear something expensive...to a certain group of people she could do nothing right, ever. 

This feels the same. And now I am realizing there may be some crossover in critics.

Such a shame, it IS exhausting to read and it must be even more so to summon up such outrage all the time.


----------



## Welltraveled!

You pretty much summed up my thoughts.  The only reason why I defend when warranted is when the viciousness becomes to much.  

But some like to troll this thread and stir the pot.  



stanfordmom said:


> THANK YOU!!!
> 
> I am kind of intrigued by MM (mostly because I went to Northwestern and my son and his girlfriend obsessively watched Suits for awhile). I also like Kate Middleton and felt such compassion toward Diana.
> 
> I definitely don't consider myself a stan....but I find I am almost compelled to defend her since this thread can be so vicious.
> 
> It reminds me of another woman who was recently a public figure. There was such a "HOW DARE SHE" mentality...how dare she wear something sleeveless, how dare she wear J Crew, how dare she wear something expensive...to a certain group of people she could do nothing right, ever.
> 
> This feels the same. And now I am realizing there may be some crossover in critics.
> 
> Such a shame, it IS exhausting to read and it must be even more so to summon up such outrage all the time.


----------



## mrsinsyder

stanfordmom said:


> THANK YOU!!!
> 
> I am kind of intrigued by MM (mostly because I went to Northwestern and my son and his girlfriend obsessively watched Suits for awhile). I also like Kate Middleton and felt such compassion toward Diana.
> 
> I definitely don't consider myself a stan....but I find I am almost compelled to defend her since this thread can be so vicious.
> 
> It reminds me of another woman who was recently a public figure. There was such a "HOW DARE SHE" mentality...how dare she wear something sleeveless, how dare she wear J Crew, how dare she wear something expensive...to a certain group of people she could do nothing right, ever.
> 
> This feels the same. And now I am realizing there may be some crossover in critics.
> 
> Such a shame, it IS exhausting to read and it must be even more so to summon up such outrage all the time.



I adore Michelle *****. I have no idea why you’d go there with a comparison, but do you.


----------



## hellosunshine

Straight-Laced said:


> I think Harry wants to have it all - celebrity superstardom, Royal privileges and then also to be seen as just a ‘normal’ relatable kind of guy



There's nothing wrong with anything that you've mentioned here. Celebrities, socialites, and people in public office..they all enjoy parties where they can hobnob with guests equally as famous/successful but afterwards, they still brush their teeth and crawl into bed as we all do.


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> There's nothing wrong with anything that you've mentioned here. Celebrities, socialites, and people in public office..they all enjoy parties where they can hobnob with guests equally as famous/successful but afterwards, they still brush their teeth and crawl into bed as we all do.



Not a fair statement.  Many people in public office steer clear of the “celebrity scene” or being seen in social situations “hobnobbing” lest it reflects poorly on them, their office and the Country, State / Province / Territory or County they represent.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Are you expecting them to throw her in jail? Of course not. She can break rules left and right and it’s doubtful anything will actually happen.



That's because she's not doing anything wrong. If she was, the Queen would've pulled the plug on it. Secondly, a lot of these "protocols" are old and outdated.

Also, for anyone that has an issue with Meghan wearing black to a wedding..know that Eugenie was also present at this wedding and wore a black dress.


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> Not a fair statement.  Many people in public office steer clear of the “celebrity scene” or being seen in social situations “hobnobbing” lest it reflects poorly on them, their office and the Country, State / Province / Territory or County they represent.



It's a fair statement and I was referring more to state dinners. But wait a minute, are you implying here that Meghan did something wrong by attending her friends wedding?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> It's a fair statement and I was referring more to state dinners. But wait a minute, are you implying here that Meghan did something wrong by attending her friends wedding?



No, you were responding directly to a quote about Harry, not state dinners. And I was speaking to your generalized comment about public office. Please don’t twist what I am saying.


----------



## Gal4Dior

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm reluctant to admit this, because I can't stand these two, but Ivanka is beautiful and particularly so, in this dress.


ITA. It pains me to agree with that statement. She looks phenomenal.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I don’t understand why asking how she paid for her dress is all of sudden being equating to bullying or hating on her on this thread. I would ask the same of Kate. 13k is a lot. She’s a figure partially funded by the public purse. Of course I would ask! It’s not like these people are Bey or JLo who buy, borrow, and wear whatever the heck they want because it’s their own darn money!


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Secondly, a lot of these "protocols" are old and outdated.



But still valid within the BRF


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> But still valid within the BRF


Someone call the Queen and tell her an MM fan on purse forum decided what’s relevant and what’s not.


----------



## buffym

A1aGypsy said:


> Not a fair statement.  Many people in public office steer clear of the “celebrity scene” or being seen in social situations “hobnobbing” lest it reflects poorly on them, their office and the Country, State / Province / Territory or County they represent.



Yes, but Harry is royal and the BRF particularly hang out with celebrities. Prince Charles has asked Amal Clooney to be an ambassador for the Prince’s trust. Rodger Federer have an interview about play dates with his kids and Prince George. 

Yet, Harry and Meghan are the only two criticized for doing what other members are the BRF do.


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> But still valid within the BRF



Diana, Kate, Meghan and countless others have broken one protocol or another in their lifetime...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Now that they’re done schmoozing with the oil tycoon, I hope they can get back to telling us to be conservationists.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Now that they’re done schmoozing with the oil tycoon, I hope they can get back to telling us to be conservationists.



Yeah, because we can't EVER be friends with people that have different beliefs or opinions than our own. Vegans, or people on plant-based diets can't ever be friends with meat-eaters, right? LOL!!!


----------



## stanfordmom

mrsinsyder said:


> I adore Michelle *****. I have no idea why you’d go there with a comparison, but do you.



No worries if it doesn't apply to you personally...it's my opinion that in some cases the criticsm seems similar. 

But happy to agree to agree on Michelle *****


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Now that they’re done schmoozing with the oil tycoon, I hope they can get back to telling us to be conservationists.


Don’t worry, I’m sure they are just “surface” friends for glitterati purposes.  Much like Ellen and Elton and Michelle *****. Before people get their panties in a wad, I joke, because I DON’T know them!


----------



## CeeJay

Welltraveled! said:


> I’ve been to weddings where some of the guests wore *Jeans and a T-Shirt*.  I hate when people dress down for a wedding.  Especially if the wedding is themed.  How hard is it to put on a dress or rent a tux?!
> 
> Anyways, Nonoo is a fashion designer I would assume their guest would know to dress appropriately.


*Right?!!?!* .. I was SHOCKED when attending my Husband's niece's wedding in Napa and even though the invitation CLEARLY said "Formal Dress", there were some friends of their's from San Francisco that had shorts and t-shirts on .. OMG!!!  I thought at first they were other guests at the hotel and/or staff, and when they said "oh no -  we're here for the wedding" .. my mouth just dropped.  WOW!


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> I think Harry wants to have it all - celebrity superstardom, Royal privileges and then also to be seen as just a ‘normal’ relatable kind of guy


You know, I've been thinking about this a lot lately, trying to tell myself that "no - that can't be .." but it just seems as of late that Harry is so desperate to be "in the news" every day which makes me wonder if being told "you're the spare" all of his life has somehow made him kind of pissed off and so now he wants every opportunity to show-up his brother??!!?!  .. and I've said this before as well, I do believe that Meghan REALLY wants that publicity, it's been what she has wanted all her life!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I went to a wedding where the bridesmaids and mothers of  bride and groom wore black. It was awful and creepy and looked like a funeral procession when they walked down the aisle.


My husband and I coined the term "*10 Meatball Wedding*" after attending a major-league Mafia wedding in the greater Boston area (_although the Bride was from Rhode Island and let's just say that they have always had a reputation of a Mafia haven_).  Anyhow, you think Black is bad .. try *RED*, from head to toe!  Yup, a Tomato-ish Red Bridesmaid dress, worn with Red stockings (_a different Red_) and then Red shoes (_yes - another different Red_).  Well, for someone like me who absolutely ADORES the color Red, I almost wanted to puke .. especially at the fact that all the Reds were different shades!  In addition to the Spaghetti & Meat-a-Ball dinner (_family-style with the rudest wait-staff ever - kind of the Carla type on Cheers_) .. that wedding got the "*10 Meatballs*" (_and that's how we rate weddings now_)! - HA!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

stanfordmom said:


> So interesting, it must be geographical...wearing black to weddings is very common in New York while champagne is definitely taboo since it’s become a fashionable color for bridal gowns.


Same here in S. Cal.  I have worn black several times.  Black gown or black cocktail dress.  I did go to a "white" wedding" where all were asked to wear white, and if you couldn't guess this was the sister of the girl with the black wedding!  Their poor father had two weddings in one summer.  June for the white wedding and August for the black wedding.  The white wedding was much prettier and the other so funereal.  The June is still married and the August went sour after 18 months. 

@CeeJay I do recall several years ago when crimson wedding dresses became a fad for a short while.  I think it started when Zac Posen made one for his sister. This was more of an E. Coast thing I think.    The picture was in the NY Times and it was strapless and pretty.  Head to toe tomato is a whole other issue!  At least they didn't have to worry about sauce stains!

Wanted to add that we went to a formal wedding at the Bel Air Country Club and some friends of the bride arrived late for the reception and they were wearing shorts and tee shirts!  I thought it was rude.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

stanfordmom said:


> THANK YOU!!!
> 
> I am kind of intrigued by MM (mostly because I went to Northwestern and my son and his girlfriend obsessively watched Suits for awhile). I also like Kate Middleton and felt such compassion toward Diana.
> 
> I definitely don't consider myself a stan....but I find I am almost compelled to defend her since this thread can be so vicious.
> 
> It reminds me of another woman who was recently a public figure. There was such a "HOW DARE SHE" mentality...how dare she wear something sleeveless, how dare she wear J Crew, how dare she wear something expensive...to a certain group of people she could do nothing right, ever.
> 
> This feels the same. And now I am realizing there may be some crossover in critics.
> 
> Such a shame, it IS exhausting to read and it must be even more so to summon up such outrage all the time.



Oh, you've noticed the crossover too?


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> I was curious enough to look up the stills from the movie. Lots of black dresses. I don’t know what the bride was thinking when she picked this theme.



I actually thought that when I posted this last night, it would put an end to MM wearing a black dress to the wedding and how terrible it was debate  .  Guess what?  The bride basically was asking for this by stating that the theme was La Dolce Vita!!  MM and Princess E or B I forget which, was following the dress code as well and so was Karlie Kloss who came the closest to wearing Anita Ekberg's dress in the movie.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

stanfordmom said:


> [...]It reminds me of another woman who was recently a public figure. There was such a "HOW DARE SHE" mentality...how dare she wear something sleeveless, how dare she wear J Crew, how dare she wear something expensive...to a certain group of people she could do nothing right, ever.
> 
> This feels the same. And now I am realizing there may be some crossover in critics.
> 
> Such a shame, it IS exhausting to read and it must be even more so to summon up such outrage all the time.


The same could be said for Melania. Or doesn't anti slavic sentiment count?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Same here in S. Cal.  I have worn black several times.  Black gown or black cocktail dress.  I did go to a "white" wedding" where all were asked to wear white, and if you couldn't guess this was the sister of the girl with the black wedding!  Their poor father had two weddings in one summer.  June for the white wedding and August for the black wedding.  The white wedding was much prettier and the other so funereal.  The June is still married and the August went sour after 18 months.
> 
> @CeeJay I do recall several years ago when crimson wedding dresses became a fad for a short while.  I think it started when Zac Posen made one for his sister. This was more of an E. Coast thing I think.    The picture was in the NY Times and it was strapless and pretty.  Head to toe tomato is a whole other issue!  *At least they didn't have to worry about sauce stains!*
> 
> Wanted to add that we went to a formal wedding at the Bel Air Country Club and some friends of the bride arrived late for the reception and they were wearing shorts and tee shirts!  I thought it was rude.



OMG .. LMAO, *classic* .. I MUST tell my husband that!!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4545840


Wait a second!  This sounds like what the black housekeeper character said to the little white girl she cared for in the movie The Help.  They should give credit to the movie writer!


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Wait a second!  This sounds like what the black housekeeper character said to the little white girl she cared for in the movie The Help.  They should give credit to the movie writer!


_Waits for someone to say MM wrote that book and just let someone else take credit. _


----------



## stanfordmom

gracekelly said:


> I do recall several years ago when crimson wedding dresses became a fad for a short while.  I think it started when Zac Posen made one for his sister. This was more of an E. Coast thing I think.    The picture was in the NY Times and it was strapless and pretty.  Head to toe tomato is a whole other issue!  At least they didn't have to worry about sauce stains!



That was a dress!!!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Grande Latte said:


> I don't like black at weddings. I really can't stand it. As much as I like that Valentino dress, I wish it were a different color.
> 
> On the other hand, I thought Ivanka was the best dressed. She looked very "Gatsby". The color is perfect with her blonde hair. Very La Dolce Vita.
> 
> View attachment 4545512


Wow, she looks like a movie star, just gorgeous and beautifully put together. I like the cufflinks on her husband, lol, very patriotic of him.


----------



## buffym

https://amp.theguardian.com/fashion...le-criticism-racist?__twitter_impression=true

Vogue’s Edward Enninful: ‘Was the criticism of Meghan Markle racist? Some of it, yes’
The editor on his collaboration with Markle, the culture war that followed – and proving his critics wrong

Afua Hirsch
Sat 21 Sep 2019 09.00 BST

If you have ever wondered how it feels to have your magazine guest-edited by the world’s most-watched royal, here is a rough guide. Travel to Kensington Palace alone, in secret, many months before publication. Agree a plan over mint tea. Assign said royal a code name, known only to your innermost circle, and distract the rest of your staff by having them work on a completely different issue. (This may be used later, or even written off as a loss leader; it’s a price worth paying for the impact the project will have.)


For Edward Enninful, who morphed from Vogue editor to covert agent when the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, expressed an interest in guest-editing his magazine, the deception was the hardest part. “Every single day we were having secret meetings in my office,” Enninful tells me, speaking on the phone a fortnight after the magazine reached newsstands. “We were just grateful for each day that went by without a leak.”
There were no royal visits to Vogue House (too much of a giveaway) but Enninful and Markle kept in touch by phone, email and through meetings at Kensington Palace. “When the magazine came out, I spoke to everybody we’d kept in the dark, explaining that it wasn’t personal,” he says. “But I understood that the fewer people who knew, the better. For the people in the know, they couldn’t even tell their partners. Having to keep it quiet like that didn’t compare to anything I’d done before.”
When the time came, the final proof pages of the magazine had to be transported from Vogue HQ to the printers face down. But perhaps the most challenging step in the process came afterwards – when Enninful revealed his secret to the world, and the culture war began.
Enninful and Markle’s collaboration, the cover of which was a grid of 15 women jointly selected as “Forces For Change”, quickly became a proxy battle about modern, diverse Britain. Its ferocity was not something the editor saw coming. “I was so engrossed in these women, and in the magazine,” he tells me. “We were not trying to create an issue that was shocking – we were shining a light on incredible women, some who are not famous at all.”

The September Vogue, which Markle has described as having her “thumbprint” all over it, reportedly sold out in just two weeks, and is currently being auctioned for more than five times its £3.99 cover price on eBay. The very fact of its publication became a news story around the world, generating interest and an audience that went far beyond Vogue’s usual constituency. “For a magazine like Vogue to still cause a debate, especially at a time when it’s supposed to be ‘the end of magazines’ – it’s pretty incredible,” Enninful says. “I just can’t believe that so many people wanted to talk about it. That’s what magazines did best when we were growing up, back in the day.”

But the backlash was equally loud. Markle was, according to critics, being unduly political, “divisive” for celebrating transgender women, and “leftwing” for supporting progressive causes. One entertainment writer even professed to know the inner thoughts of the monarch, claiming: “The Queen will think this is an absolutely idiotic, ridiculous decision, as do I.”
After the dust settled, Markle’s noisiest rightwing critics – Melanie Phillips and Sarah Vine among them– moved on to their next target, leaving only the trolling dregs. “Was the criticism racist? Some of it, yeah,” Enninful says. “Actually it was more than racism,” he adds. “I thought it was personal – attacking someone you don’t know, attacking her.”
The double standard at work was hard to ignore. While Enninful and Markle’s collaboration prompted sneers, Prince Charles’s two-time guest editorship of Country Life magazine, and stints by Prince Harry at Radio 4’s Today programme and Kate Middleton at Huffington Post, had been quietly praised at the time. Many of the criticisms aimed at Markle – she was branded “uppity” for assuming the role, and accused of being “anti-white” for focusing on diversity – are familiar tropes aimed at people of colour who enter white spaces and fail to seek white approval, or who celebrate their heritage and diversity.
 At 13 I arrive, with big glasses and afro. I don’t know anything about England. At 16 I’m modelling. At 18 I’m editing
Enninful says that Markle’s first email to him proposing a collaboration – which he describes as being signed somewhat cryptically with a single “M” – suggested that they would have “lots in common”. And it’s true that, besides their shared love of fashion, literature and photography, both have experienced controversy simply for daring to occupy the space they are in. While Markle’s entry to the royal family prompted endless comment – much of it openly hostile – about her biracial heritage, self-made career and feminist values, Enninful’s appointment was also regarded as provocative: the first Vogue editor in the magazine’s 103-year history to represent a departure from white, female privilege. This 47-year-old, gay, state-school-educated Ghanaian immigrant is, it’s fair to say, a serial offender when it comes to the crime of editing while being black.
***
Enninful and I sit down for the first time six weeks before publication of the Markle issue, in his bright and uncluttered office, high up in Vogue House. Although the pages I’m about to see being finalised are the product of the Duchess of Sussex’s editorship, I don’t know that yet; the cover and letter she has written to readers have been quietly left aside. Instead, at Enninful’s desk, his own life story is laid out before me in pictures, as told through a sample of old i-D magazines, spanning a period of 20 years.

“This is where it all started for me,” Enninful says, as we examine photographs of his first modelling shoot in 1988: a sultry-looking teenager rocks a grungy camel hat and coat, shirt nonchalantly tied around his waist. It’s an intriguing glimpse into the earliest phase of Enninful’s fashion career, just days after he was spotted by Simon Foxton, a stylist for i-D magazine. At 16, Enninful oozes all the edgy cool and quirk of a London teen, despite having arrived in the UK only a few years earlier. His father, CK Enninful, a major in the Ghanaian military, had moved with his wife and six children to London in 1985, and his mother, Grace, a seamstress, was on her way to becoming a fashion force herself.

“When we lived in Ghana, my mother had been busy making clothes for everyone in high society,” Enninful tells me, proudly. “But once we got to London it went to another level. I was her favourite – a sensitive creature, the gay one. We were always sketching together, and I learned how to construct clothes.”
It’s an origin story that is an irresistible departure from that of the stereotypical British Vogue editor: a larger-than-life seamstress whirring away at a seemingly endless production of figure-hugging outfits in bright lace, cotton and wax prints with her youngest son at her side, immersed in a world of hooks and eyelets, peplums and sleeves. Enninful’s mother, he says, gave him his love and instinct for style. “I learned my sense of colours from her. I learned to build characters. We would ask: ‘What kind of woman wears this dress?’” he explains. “I think that’s what’s made me a bit different from other stylists. I have to know the woman, put her in a location, know her character, her inner life. If I don’t have a character, I can’t style.”
After being spotted by Foxton and shooting his first commercial, Enninful rose quickly through the ranks of i-D magazine, becoming Foxton’s assistant and then, remarkably, fashion director at just 18. Founded in 1980 by former British Vogue art director Terry Jones and his wife Tricia, i-D had by then established itself as the home of alternative style, nurturing new talent and treating street culture as serious fashion. Enninful had stumbled into the perfect home.

.... the rest of the article goes into Enninful background and appointment at Vogue.

One of the last paragraphs,

Meanwhile, it is the editions with a strong Enninful stamp that seem to have fared best on the newsstand; last year’s September issue featuring Rihanna, and his Ariana Grande cover last July came close to selling out; the Markle Forces For Change edition overtook the previous September issue after just 12 days on sale. Perhaps this is an endorsement of Enninful’s approach, which is unapologetically crowd-pleasing. “For the covers, we just figure out who represents the zeitgeist – women we love who are making some kind of a statement, and women who are having an impact on culture,” he says. “What links the cover images is a sense of classicism, modernity, and a certain throwback aspect.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Yawn


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Yawn


I don't have the patience.  Racism is the default answer whenever things aren't going as planned.  This guy is lucky he still has his job and he may not for much longer.  He was on the way out and MM saved his butt by wanting to do this issue.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think it is absolutely a fair statement to say “some” of the criticism of Markle is grounded in racism. It’s ridiculous to think, in our current climate, that there are not people absolutely horrified that a grandchild of the Queen is 1/4 African American. It is also equally ridiculous to paint all those who criticize her with the same racist brush.

I also applaud her for including transgendered women in the issue. That was an important addition that also would draw trolls. And I think it was sound to keep herself off the front cover.  And I think the gossip that she threw shade at Kate is silly. It WOULD be boastful to put herself in the mix with a cover specifically labelled: “influential people”.

I just think all the hype about the sneaking around and her involvement and the “back stage” pictures was / is a bit much. I don’t know about all of that.


----------



## buffym

After one week, Smartworks has enough clothes to help for a year.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting use of completely vague language. To avoid saying how many units it actually includes?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Those Charles genes...


----------



## Straight-Laced

gracekelly said:


> Same here in S. Cal.  I have worn black several times.  Black gown or black cocktail dress.  I did go to a "white" wedding" where all were asked to wear white, and if you couldn't guess this was the sister of the girl with the black wedding!  Their poor father had two weddings in one summer.  June for the white wedding and August for the black wedding.  The white wedding was much prettier and the other so funereal.  The June is still married and the August went sour after 18 months.
> 
> @CeeJay I do recall several years ago when crimson wedding dresses became a fad for a short while.  I think it started when Zac Posen made one for his sister. This was more of an E. Coast thing I think.    The picture was in the NY Times and it was strapless and pretty.  Head to toe tomato is a whole other issue!  At least they didn't have to worry about sauce stains!
> 
> Wanted to add that we went to a formal wedding at the Bel Air Country Club and some friends of the bride arrived late for the reception and they were wearing shorts and tee shirts!  I thought it was rude.


Re red wedding gowns, does anyone else remember Paula Yates and Bob Geldof’s wedding photo back in the early 80s? Somewhat iconic shot of a celebrity wedding.
Paula the Scarlet Bride with a tattoo on her upper arm ... George Michael in the wedding party.
After a while the marriage didn’t work (Train Wreck!) but the red gown was memorable.


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it is absolutely a fair statement to say “some” of the criticism of Markle is grounded in racism. It’s ridiculous to think, in our current climate, that there are not people absolutely horrified that a grandchild of the Queen is 1/4 African American. It is also equally ridiculous to paint all those who criticize her with the same racist brush.
> 
> I also applaud her for including transgendered women in the issue. That was an important addition that also would draw trolls. And I think it was sound to keep herself off the front cover.  And I think the gossip that she threw shade at Kate is silly. It WOULD be boastful to put herself in the mix with a cover specifically labelled: “influential people”.
> 
> I just think all the hype about the sneaking around and her involvement and the “back stage” pictures was / is a bit much. I don’t know about all of that.



I'm sure that is true about racism, but when it gets used as an excuse all the time, it starts to fall on deaf ears.


----------



## Sharont2305

Straight-Laced said:


> Re red wedding gowns, does anyone else else remember Paula Yates and Bob Geldof’s wedding photo back in the early 80s? Somewhat iconic shot of a celebrity wedding.
> Paula the Scarlet Bride with a tattoo on her upper arm ... George Michael in the wedding party.
> After a while the marriage didn’t work (Train Wreck!) but the red gown was memorable.


Oh yes! It was stunning. Simon le Bon gave her away


----------



## Straight-Laced

CeeJay said:


> You know, I've been thinking about this a lot lately, trying to tell myself that "no - that can't be .." but it just seems as of late that Harry is so desperate to be "in the news" every day which makes me wonder if being told "you're the spare" all of his life has somehow made him kind of pissed off and so now he wants every opportunity to show-up his brother??!!?!  .. and I've said this before as well, I do believe that Meghan REALLY wants that publicity, it's been what she has wanted all her life!


Yes, Meghan has achieved more than most fame hungry kids from LA could ever imagine - One Name Fame !!

As for Harry, always a sense of defiance and cool rebel Royal in his attitude but now with Meghan and some very fabulous new friends agree there does seem to be some payback playing out and sticking the middle finger up at his brother the future King - look at me I may not be in the A Team BRF style but look at all the really cool stuff this ex -second-in-line to the throne gets to do while you’re stuck with the boring crap ... for the REST OF YOUR LIFE! !


----------



## prettyprincess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Wow, she looks like a movie star, just gorgeous and beautifully put together. I like the cufflinks on her husband, lol, very patriotic of him.


I’m sorry, but they’re so cringey. Can we not taint this thread with them.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes! It was stunning. Simon le Bon gave her away



Thank you for finding it! 
I’m glad I’m not the only one to remember. 
Still an awesome photo


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes! It was stunning. Simon le Bon gave her away


Best dressed person in this picture is wearing the kilt.


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> Yes, Meghan has achieved more than most fame hungry kids from LA could ever imagine - One Name Fame !!
> 
> As for Harry, always a sense of defiance and cool rebel Royal in his attitude but now with Meghan and some very fabulous new friends agree there does seem to be some payback playing out and sticking the middle finger up at his brother the future King - look at me I may not be in the A Team BRF style but look at all the really cool stuff this ex -second-in-line to the throne gets to do while you’re stuck with the boring crap ... for the REST OF YOUR LIFE! !


Princess Margaret led quite the wild, jet setting life while her sister was "stuck with the boring crap" to use your words!  lol


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Best dressed person in this picture is wearing the kilt.


Midge Ure, Ultravox


----------



## Straight-Laced

Clearblueskies said:


> I think you’re right, and that’s not working for him at the moment.


Person to person, or in a small group such as disabled athletes and war vets, he probably comes across as the same genuine,  charming, knockabout Prince of old.
It's just the perception of his entitlement to having it all and the prickliness he now seems to exhibit sometimes, not all of which can be sheeted home to being protective of his wife, more like protective of his new way of life with her.
And some of us have a bias against the posturing global celebrity crowd generally, so we don't like to see him in with that lot !


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Those Charles genes...
> 
> View attachment 4545925


Oh yikes!!


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> Oh yikes!!


Yup  I thought the story was that he was going to get hair plugs before the wedding.  He really is so young, but you can't fight the genes with this.


----------



## PamK

marthastoo said:


> Oh, you've noticed the crossover too?


----------



## chowlover2

The baldness is from Diana's side of the family, not Charles. The female carries the baldness gene.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> Yup  I thought the story was that he was going to get hair plugs before the wedding.  He really is so young, but you can't fight the genes with this.


My sister's 3 boys are all bald(ing) and have been since their teens. My son has a full head of hair just like mine.  Interesting how it goes sometimes. I know it is supposed to be from the female side of the family but her ex is bald too.


----------



## bag-mania

chowlover2 said:


> The baldness is from Diana's side of the family, not Charles. The female carries the baldness gene.



In recent years I’ve heard that that has been determined to be a myth.  

Diana‘s dad had a full head of hair, although I remember him having a receding hairline by the time he died. But he didn’t have the big round bald patch in the center of the head like William and Harry have.


----------



## chowlover2

My BFF brother is balding, his son has a lot of hair and he is 36.


----------



## pukasonqo

mrsinsyder said:


> _Waits for someone to say MM wrote that book and just let someone else take credit. _


that would be quite stupid, i know (or hope) you are being facetious about stans crediting MM for the sun rising


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> there does seem to be some payback playing out and sticking the middle finger up at his brother the future King - look at me I may not be in the A Team BRF style but look at all the really cool stuff this ex -second-in-line to the throne gets to do while you’re stuck with the boring crap ... for the REST OF YOUR LIFE! !


I’ve been thinking there’s some latent sibling jealousy playing out   It must be hard growing up and being second in everything, but I hope they reconcile.


bag-mania said:


> In recent years I’ve heard that that has been determined to be a myth.
> 
> Diana‘s dad had a full head of hair, although I remember him having a receding hairline by the time he died. But he didn’t have the big round bald patch in the center of the head like William and Harry have.


 I think Earl Spencer (Diana’s brother) has also kept his hair, hasn’t he?


----------



## mrsinsyder

pukasonqo said:


> that would be quite stupid, i know (or hope) you are being facetious about stans crediting MM for the sun rising


....


----------



## A1aGypsy

This thread is so bizarre sometimes.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> This thread is so bizarre sometimes.


You're not wrong lol.


----------



## daisychainz

limom said:


> View attachment 4545176
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She wore  a black Valentino dress at the Italian wedding
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...friend-Misha-Nonoos-wedding-BLACK-outfit.html


I don't like this dress unless the person is stick thin. Why would you want to add extra pounds with the billowy effect? I saw Melania ***** wearing a very similar green one a few days back and it made her look much fuller too. I think clothing should make a woman and her body type look better, this effect doesn't. The sparkles are nice. Black to a wedding is weird, but MM misses the mark so much with clothes it's not surprising. I saw Katy Perry, Gayle King, etc they all wore very vibrant colors. And it's kind of a no-no for Nonoo  to have such a lavish second wedding... I'd be embarrassed to reinvite my guests to the same place just a few years later for redo with a new guy.


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> This thread is so bizarre sometimes.


Opening a quote notification from this thread is like opening a suitcase you found on the side of the interstate.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Opening a quote notification from this thread is like opening a suitcase you found on the side of the interstate.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Opening a quote notification from this thread is like opening a suitcase you found on the side of the interstate.


Or like opening Forrest Gumps box of chocolates


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes! It was stunning. Simon le Bon gave her away


WOW .. they ALL look fabulous!!!  That's what I love about British and Scottish weddings; the fact that the men always look fabulous .. and don't get me started on the Kilts ..  THEM!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> Or like opening Forrest Gumps box of chocolates


Hoping for a peanut butter cup but it’s usually full of mystery nougat.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Best dressed person in this picture is wearing the kilt.


I swear, I'm beginning to think that we are sisters from another mister!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I swear, I'm beginning to think that we are sisters from another mister!!!!


And I have a real THING for bagpipes!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. they ALL look fabulous!!!  That's what I love about British and Scottish weddings; the fact that the men always look fabulous .. and don't get me started on the Kilts ..  THEM!!!


Every single one of them epitomises the music scene at that time, all music royalty. What a picture!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> And I have a real THING for bagpipes!


OH-MY-GOD .. again, me too!!!  When I was working in Edinburgh, I begged one of my colleagues to take me to one of their Scottish Highland Dance competitions (she used to be a competitor) and the Bagpipes/Drums contests!!!  I had the best time, but the Scottish weather can be a bear (especially in the Fall) .. so, it would be sunny, then cloudy, then start raining, then snowing, and then .. boom, back to the sun!  Needless to say, I learned after the 1st time that I needed to be fitted head to toe for all kinds of weather in a single day when outside!


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Every single one of them epitomises the music scene at that time, all music royalty. What a picture!


.. and I'm sure Paula knew them all .. she did have a reputation.  However, it's very sad that after the death of Michael Hutchence (I was a huge fan) .. she went back to using and ultimately died of a drug overdose.  I read recently that their daughter (Hutchence & Paula's) is pretty much on her own in a very small flat in London .. and apparently, she didn't get any inheritance from Michael's estate.  She seemed happy to be on her own though ..


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> OH-MY-GOD .. again, me too!!!  When I was working in Edinburgh, I begged one of my colleagues to take me to one of their Scottish Highland Dance competitions (she used to be a competitor) and the Bagpipes/Drums contests!!!  I had the best time, but the Scottish weather can be a bear (especially in the Fall) .. so, it would be sunny, then cloudy, then start raining, then snowing, and then .. boom, back to the sun!  Needless to say, I learned after the 1st time that I needed to be fitted head to toe for all kinds of weather in a single day when outside!



I went to one!  The Royal Edinburgh Military Tatoo!  It was beyond fabulous and I was in hog heaven!  we were there in August and the weather was perfect.  We were there for the Glorious Twelfth and had grouse for dinner prior to going.  I think I am still picking the buckshot out of my teeth.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> .. and I'm sure Paula knew them all .. she did have a reputation.  However, it's very sad that after the death of Michael Hutchence (I was a huge fan) .. she went back to using and ultimately died of a drug overdose.  I read recently that their daughter (Hutchence & Paula's) is pretty much on her own in a very small flat in London .. and apparently, she didn't get any inheritance from Michael's estate.  She seemed happy to be on her own though ..


I thought that Sir Bob Geldorf took her in and raised her with her half sisters.  All those girls have over the top names.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> .. and I'm sure Paula knew them all .. she did have a reputation.  However, it's very sad that after the death of Michael Hutchence (I was a huge fan) .. she went back to using and ultimately died of a drug overdose.  I read recently that their daughter (Hutchence & Paula's) is pretty much on her own in a very small flat in London .. and apparently, she didn't get any inheritance from Michael's estate.  She seemed happy to be on her own though ..


I think she's fine, Bob has brought her up as his own which is very commendable of him. He won't let her down I'm sure. 
Anyway, back on topic, the Royal tour starts tomorrow


----------



## gracekelly

Looking forward to some Archie sightings.


----------



## Swanky

Yes, back to topic please!


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> Those Charles genes...
> 
> View attachment 4545925


Do they have Rogaine over There?


----------



## mrsinsyder

She’s bringing Archie’s used clothing to give away on the tour? Wut??? Why do they insist on doing the strangest things...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9979195/meghan-markle-news-archie-royal-tour-baby-clothes/


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s bringing Archie’s used clothing to give away on the tour? Wut??? Why do they insist on doing the strangest things...
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/9979195/meghan-markle-news-archie-royal-tour-baby-clothes/


I doubt they will do any such thing. It would cause an uproar. Anything that belonged to Archie a) may be considered to belong to the BRF and b) if not, items left there would likely be taken and sold. 
Now, taking blankets and clothes and so on, that is a nice thought. But, actual items that belonged to Archie, no, not a good idea.


----------



## Morgane

threadbender said:


> I doubt they will do any such thing. It would cause an uproar. Anything that belonged to Archie a) may be considered to belong to the BRF and b) if not, items left there would likely be taken and sold.
> Now, taking blankets and clothes and so on, that is a nice thought. But, actual items that belonged to Archie, no, not a good idea.


Giving second hand clothes would come across as patronizing  and condescending. They  need to be careful with the optics,above all considering the colonial history of their family and country.


----------



## gracekelly

I think a donation of money to a fund would have been in better taste.  The items they are bringing may have been things sent in by well wishers and they are most likely brand new.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Morgane said:


> Giving second hand clothes would come across as patronizing  and condescending. They  need to be careful with the optics,above all considering the colonial history of their family and country.


Especially since she just made a speech mildly insulting second hand clothing donations...

But yes, I agree that the implications of “Africa needs secondhand clothes” is awful. Especially if you look at the donated clothes industry and how it creates tons of waste on the continent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

More on those gifts in The Times today, according to 'a source' -

Valentine Low in Cape Town reporting for The Times 23 September :
"The duchess will donate some of the gifts that have been given to her four-month-old son, Archie, to township children. She is expected to hand over colouring books, pens and baby clothes when she visits Mothers2mothers in Johannesburg, a charity that trains women with HIV as health workers.
A source said: “The duke and duchess were inundated with gifts for baby Archie from organisations and the general public. They were incredibly grateful but one little baby can only wear so many clothes and he’s growing fast. So the duchess decided to bring a number of his presents to hand on to South African children and families most in need.”


----------



## gracekelly

Straight-Laced said:


> More on those gifts in The Times today, according to 'a source' -
> 
> Valentine Low in Cape Town reporting for The Times 23 September :
> "The duchess will donate some of the gifts that have been given to her four-month-old son, Archie, to township children. She is expected to hand over colouring books, pens and baby clothes when she visits Mothers2mothers in Johannesburg, a charity that trains women with HIV as health workers.
> A source said: “The duke and duchess were inundated with gifts for baby Archie from organisations and the general public. *They were incredibly grateful but one little baby can only wear so many clothes and he’s growing fast. *So the duchess decided to bring a number of his presents to hand on to South African children and families most in need.”



That puts a nicer spin on it.


----------



## threadbender

Morgane said:


> Giving second hand clothes would come across as patronizing  and condescending. They  need to be careful with the optics,above all considering the colonial history of their family and country.



I didn't even think of that!

Also, depending on what the items are, even if brand new, they may not be appropriate there. Personally, if I gave someone a gift, I might be a bit insulted. However, folks sending things to Archie have to know there would be no way they would use everything.

I really think this was a bad move. Good intentions, possibly but, not thought through.


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> I didn't even think of that!
> 
> Also, depending on what the items are, even if brand new, they may not be appropriate there. Personally, if I gave someone a gift, I might be a bit insulted. However, folks sending things to Archie have to know there would be no way they would use everything.
> 
> I really think this was a bad move. Good intentions, possibly but, not thought through.



We all will see how it plays out and how the folks in South Africa feel about it. Going by comments in their local newspapers, many don't want them to visit at this time for a variety of reasons and none are personal to MM & Harry.


----------



## mrsinsyder

threadbender said:


> I didn't even think of that!
> 
> Also, depending on what the items are, even if brand new, they may not be appropriate there. Personally, if I gave someone a gift, I might be a bit insulted. However, folks sending things to Archie have to know there would be no way they would use everything.
> 
> I really think this was a bad move. Good intentions, possibly but, not thought through.



Agree, I’m trying to see the good but it reeks of PR. Give the stuff quietly to needy people in the UK...


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> We all will see how it plays out and how the folks in South Africa feel about it. Going by comments in their local newspapers, many don't want them to visit at this time for a variety of reasons and *none are personal to MM & Harry.*


Yet some stans will take it personally on their behalf.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I don’t understand why every gesture has to be blown up into such a big deal.  In a single not so deft stroke of hapless PR they p*ss off the people lovingly sending them gifts AND their hosts.  Nice one!  
I think pretty much every mother donates or hands on baby clothes - I mean what kid ever stays the same size long enough to wear them out? As visitors from a first world country they really need to be sensitive to how this looks, and yes, there are plenty of needy families back home.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Straight-Laced said:


> More on those gifts in The Times today, according to 'a source' -
> 
> Valentine Low in Cape Town reporting for The Times 23 September :
> "The duchess will donate some of the gifts that have been given to her four-month-old son, Archie, to township children. She is expected to hand over colouring books, pens and baby clothes when she visits Mothers2mothers in Johannesburg, a charity that trains women with HIV as health workers.
> A source said: “The duke and duchess were inundated with gifts for baby Archie from organisations and the general public. They were incredibly grateful but one little baby can only wear so many clothes and he’s growing fast. So the duchess decided to bring a number of his presents to hand on to South African children and families most in need.”


You know what, guys, if it's in a larger quantity that will make a bit of a difference to the day to day of these kids and their moms, I think it's a good thing to bring new toys, clothes etc and donate these.

But the problem is, why did Meghan/Sunshine Sachs feel the need to make it public beforehand? It's not that big of a deal at all. It could have just been done as a kind quiet gesture and if the organisation receiving these things felt it was worth to talk to the press about afterwards, they could and would have.

And at the same time there are lots of moms and children in GB who could have used the items as well. But it wouldn't make for the same PR optics, I guess. Nor the same "saviour" points.

I'm just sensing we can look forward to lots of PR photos with a simpering and look how caring duchess handing out teddies and crayons while hugging African children. And to add one of my personal points of contention, not any of the many poor white SA children that the world media refuses to write about, but black SA children. Because "saviour" optics.

SA is a complete mess. I don't understand why H/M are even going there at such a time. It's just too tone deaf to be allowed on the level that they and their PR are supposed to be on.


----------



## Sharont2305

They've arrived
I love her shoes


----------



## mdcx

Omg, I see Archie!


----------



## doni

I think it is a nice gesture to donate the gifts received. People in official positions do this all the time. In fact, in many cases they are actually required to donate when refusing the gift would be unpolite.

Indeed it is such a standard thing one may wonder the wisdom of publicizing it.

Plus in this specific case I think it is legitimate to question the way the donation is done. First the idea of transporting these gifts (many of which would have already traveled many miles to get to them) across the world, is that necessary?.

Second, and more importantly in the context of an official trip to Africa is the issue that currently that continent is literally _inundated_ with clothes from the West and Asia. There is no one, none, so poor in Africa (let alone a richer country like South Africa) that they do not own more T-shirts and jeans that they need... This is causing a multitude of problems. From the environmental impact of the waste, to the dismantlement of the local textile industry (which has occurred rapidly and is truly devastating for local economies) and the disappearance of traditional crafts and skills. Not to show awareness for this feels extremely tone-deaf.

They could have waited for a Christmas and give away the gifts to sick kids in British hospitals. But maybe that felt too traditional for them? I think they are being very ill advised by their team. Pity.


----------



## minababe

Sharont2305 said:


> They've arrived
> I love her shoes



yay finally !!!

love her outift and of Course her coat! she still has the best coats.
can't wait for her Outfits in the next couple of days!
Archie is too cute !!


----------



## myown

"


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> "



All coincidental. I'm sure


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> All coincidental. I'm sure


 agree
but Kate does that too, all the time. people seem to love it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MarieCurie

Sharont2305 said:


> They've arrived
> I love her shoes


I always forget how windy and cool Cape Town can be until I get there. Gauteng is currently warm, albeit windy but warm.

I think I've said this before somewhere in the thread, but South Africans in general don't care about the royal family. As someone living in South Africa and being exposed to South African news on a daily basis, there has not been much coverage of their visit apart from one of those btw pieces at the end of a news program. Speaking of which, our public broadcaster used one of those btw spots to go around Cape Town asking people what they thought about the visit and it was mostly met with "really? they are coming? Oh well, I hope you enjoy CT it is a beautiful city" and one guy who was basically all of us "I don't give a f**k, if it doesn't pay my bills, I don't care."


----------



## buffym

First engagement


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> agree
> but Kate does that too, all the time. people seem to love it


But_ that_ is different


----------



## myown

good point!


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But_ that_ is different


----------



## myown

buffym said:


> First engagement
> View attachment 4547312


more

































  - DM


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> agree
> but Kate does that too, all the time. people seem to love it


It's so damn creepy!


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> All coincidental. I'm sure


Well planned in advance.

Just last week, Meg used the baby Harry in his hat photo for her birthday message to Harry. I thought it was an odd choice of photo at the time because Diana looked so glum but we can see now Meg wanted to have the hat fresh in our minds.

I feel so manipulated. lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

Literally every face in the background


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan looks lovely. Her dress is very flattering — and already sold out I’ve read. She and Harry exude the type of warmth that can’t be faked. I love seeing their interactions with ordinary people.


----------



## Sharont2305

Love the dress, shoes not so much.


----------



## daisychainz

Oh my gosh, I saw Archie's face in that pic!! And MM looks nice in her dress. I'm living in an alternate reality today.


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> Oh my gosh, I saw Archie's face in that pic!! And MM looks nice in her dress. I'm living in an alternate reality today.



I like the dress, but I think it's a terrible choice for her - it doesn't flatter her torso area at all. But I'm proud of her for not wearing couture.


----------



## mrsinsyder

People were confused as to why she chose the glum image of Diana on the upper left for this collage... guess now we know why.


----------



## meluvs2shop

They are so cute together! Why do I feel she’ll get pregnant again soon! Lol


----------



## limom

meluvs2shop said:


> They are so cute together! Why do I feel she’ll get pregnant again soon! Lol


I think that she might be pregnant already.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> I think that she might be pregnant already.


either that or she's still carrying weight from Archie....if she's pregnant now, that would be really fast


----------



## threadbender

Really like her dress. It looks comfortable.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> I think that she might be pregnant already.


I'd agree except she's not pawing all over her stomach.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> either that or she's still carrying weight from Archie....if she's pregnant now, that would be really fast


4 months after getting birth, I still had a tummy but it was lower.
It seems to me that she is full all over.
She looks pregnant to me.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I'd agree except she's not pawing all over her stomach.


that's funny....maybe they're not ready to share the news yet (if she is pregnant).  Personally I wouldn't tell anyone until at least three months (I'm superstitious)


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> I'd agree except she's not pawing all over her stomach.


Give her some time.
She did the bonnet today, the stomach rubbing later.


----------



## sdkitty

Meghan tells south africans she's there for them as a WOC
from Huffpost:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-prince-harry-south-africa_n_5d88ba53e4b0849d472cb803


----------



## mrsinsyder

This dress is better.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> This dress is better.
> 
> View attachment 4547469


pretty and she's using the skinny legs to her advantage with those shoes


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sunshine Sachs is keeping her in line today, re-wearing a dress and everything. She must be dying to busy out some Givenchy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> Meghan tells south africans she's there for them as a WOC
> from Huffpost:
> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-prince-harry-south-africa_n_5d88ba53e4b0849d472cb803


Ok, sounds nice, but what does it really mean?  It’s like woke word soup a lot of the time IMO.  I guess I’m just a cynic


----------



## Jayne1

They come on so strong with the huge grins, like trained performers ready for their closeups. 

Everyone around them is normal.


----------



## beantownSugar

Clearblueskies said:


> Ok, sounds nice, but what does it really mean?  It’s like woke word soup a lot of the time IMO.  I guess I’m just a cynic


It means that oftentimes it is easier to receive a message from someone like you; I am sure the women there appreciated her saying that. And I say that as a woman of color - it's not woke word soup.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Ok, sounds nice, but what does it really mean?  It’s like woke word soup a lot of the time IMO.  I guess I’m just a cynic


Someone who is white passing saying that to a group of black women in a country where racism is a huge issue is a bad move IMO. 

I’m biracial but also white passing and would never speak like that. You have to have some self awareness.


----------



## beantownSugar

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone who is white passing saying that to a group of black women in a country where racism is a huge issue is a bad move IMO.
> 
> I’m biracial but also white passing and would never speak like that. You have to have some self awareness.


Just because she is white passing does not take away how she identifies on her own - as a woman of color. Not black, not white.

You're not free to push your views onto anyone else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

beantownSugar said:


> You're not free to push your views onto anyone else.


Good thing I didn’t do that then


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Sunshine Sachs is keeping her in line today, re-wearing a dress and everything. She must be dying to busy out some Givenchy.



Meghan has reworn before so I doubt it is Sachs since they were not working with them their first tour.


----------



## Clearblueskies

beantownSugar said:


> It means that oftentimes it is easier to receive a message from someone like you; I am sure the women there appreciated her saying that. And I say that as a woman of color - it's not woke word soup.


It’s my opinion, and I made that clear in my post.  You’re entitled to yours.


----------



## buffym

More pictures from the walk about


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> They come on so strong with the huge grins, like trained performers ready for their closeups.
> 
> Everyone around them is normal.


They look a little baffled to me.  H&M look nice tho’


----------



## Jayne1

beantownSugar said:


> Just because she is white passing does not take away how she identifies on her own - as a woman of color. Not black, not white.
> 
> You're not free to push your views onto anyone else.


She said she identifies as white and pledged to a white sorority, etc. Friends, other than Serena, a very famous person, are white.  Boyfriends and husbands - white... this is the first time I heard her say this!

Hope this is not offensive.  She fascinates me and if you want to educate me, please be kind.


----------



## BagLovingMom

When did she say she identifies  as white ??? Everything I’ve read is that she identifies as what she is - biracial.


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> She said she identifies as white and pledged to a white sorority, etc. Friends, other than Serena, a very famous person, are white.  Boyfriends and husbands - white... this is the first time I heard her say this!
> 
> Hope this is not offensive.  She fascinates me and if you want to educate me, please be kind.



Meghan has never said she is white, she has said she is biracial.

t. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/amp26855/more-than-an-other/


----------



## Welltraveled!

Meghan identified as both. In my experience, and speaking as someone who has a lot of mixed race friends/family members, including having a mixed race child myself.  more often than not, they identify as both.  Now some do tend to lean towards one ethnic group more so than the other.  

Here’s a snippet of the article.   The link for the complete read is below.

She begins by explaining that, her whole life, she has been asked ''What are you?'.

When she tells them she's an actress among other things, they say:

''Right, but what are you? Where are your parents from?''

''I knew it was coming, I always do. While I could say Pennsylvania and Ohio, and continue this proverbial two-step, I instead give them what they're after: 'My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I'm half black and half white.'''



She then talks about the adversity she faced even as a young child.

''In the seventh grade...there was a mandatory census I had to complete in my English class – you had to check one of the boxes to indicate your ethnicity: white, black, Hispanic or Asian. There I was (my curly hair, my freckled face, my pale skin, my mixed race) looking down at these boxes, not wanting to mess up, but not knowing what to do. You could only choose one, but that would be to choose one parent over the other – and one half of myself over the other. My teacher told me to check the box for Caucasian. 'Because that's how you look, Meghan,' she said. I put down my pen.'' She said.

She explains how being biracial affected her career.

''I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job.''

Meghan then goes on to talk about when she was cast in Suits, the perfect role. Then the role of her father went to black actor Wendell Pierce and racism reared it's ugly head once again.

''I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America.''





https://www.her.ie/celeb/meghan-markle-pens-important-essay-about-racism-and-online-abuse-323955





Jayne1 said:


> She said she identifies as white and pledged to a white sorority, etc. Friends, other than Serena, a very famous person, are white.  Boyfriends and husbands - white... this is the first time I heard her say this!
> 
> Hope this is not offensive.  She fascinates me and if you want to educate me, please be kind.


----------



## Welltraveled!

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone who is white passing saying that to a group of black women in a country where racism is a huge issue is a bad move IMO.
> 
> I’m biracial but also white passing and would never speak like that. You have to have some self awareness.



I don’t think so.  Meghan, never hid the fact that she is half black.  She was never ashamed or tried to hide her black mother.  All of this is general public knowledge.  So Blacks/Africans may look at her and see another (half) black woman.  So what she has to say may be more acceptable to them.  

Of course, there are exceptions.......


----------



## Welltraveled!

My favorite pics thus far.  I love seeing Royals with babies/children.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> I like the dress, but I think it's a terrible choice for her - it doesn't flatter her torso area at all. But I'm proud of her for not wearing couture.
> 
> View attachment 4547443


Yes. Don’t know why she keeps doing these dresses with belts that are worn so high. There are other better options out there for her post partum figure.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> This dress is better.
> 
> View attachment 4547469


They look very nice here. This dress is pretty and the color is lovely.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone who is white passing saying that to a group of black women in a country where racism is a huge issue is a bad move IMO.
> 
> I’m biracial but also white passing and would never speak like that. You have to have some self awareness.


A friend from Kenya told me a long time ago that Africans laugh at American blacks when they call themselves “black “ because to their way of thinking blacks in the US are not black. Too much mixed up blood over the centuries in their opinion.  I’m sure the people listening to her speech appreciate what she is saying, but I wonder what they are really thinking. Hope I am not offending anyone with this comment as that is not my intention.


----------



## Welltraveled!

MarieCurie said:


> .....one guy who was basically all of us "I don't give a f**k, if it doesn't pay my bills, I don't care."



LOL!!!   This was so hilarious!  I think that’s how most people really feel!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> Meghan has reworn before so I doubt it is Sachs since they were not working with them their first tour.
> 
> View attachment 4547515
> View attachment 4547516


Love this dress!


----------



## Welltraveled!

meluvs2shop said:


> They are so cute together! Why do I feel she’ll get pregnant again soon! Lol



I think she’s carrying weight from Archie.  I bet she’ll wait until Archie is at least one.


----------



## gracekelly

BagLovingMom said:


> When did she say she identifies  as white ??? Everything I’ve read is that she identifies as what she is - biracial.


Agree.  I think the comments about her being white identifying come from other quarters.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> A friend from Kenya told me a long time ago that Africans laugh at American blacks when they call themselves “black “ because to their way of thinking blacks in the US are not black. Too much mixed up blood over the centuries in their opinion.  I’m sure the people listening to her speech appreciate what she is saying, but I wonder what they are really thinking. Hope I am not offending anyone with this comment as that is not my intention.



Yeah, like I said, as a biracial person I’d never compare my experience to that of someone who is black. I look white, so for the most part, people treat me like a white person. I’m not getting pulled over for no reason or getting followed around in expensive stores or dealing with other racist sh-t so even though I’m biracial, I won’t act like I own those experiences.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Haha!!  I love it when Harry _tries_ to dance!


----------



## Welltraveled!

More stills of both of them dancing....


----------



## Welltraveled!

Awwwww.  Cute!   Big thumbs up to men who are attentive to their women!


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Welltraveled!

about Archie....


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> either that or she's still carrying weight from Archie....if she's pregnant now, that would be really fast


Took me way more than 5 month to get my flat belly back


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> She said she identifies as white and pledged to a white sorority, etc. Friends, other than Serena, a very famous person, are white.  Boyfriends and husbands - white... this is the first time I heard her say this!
> 
> Hope this is not offensive.  She fascinates me and if you want to educate me, please be kind.


What?? When the dating got public DM was only bringing articles about her talking about being black.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Five nannies, a sleep expert, a baby masseuse, a dietitian and nutritionist, and multiple pediatricians?  Y'all tell me again what hands on parents they are. And I know there will be stretching left and right to justify this, but no healthy four-month old needs that many people minding him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Five nannies, a sleep expert, a baby masseuse, a dietitian and nutritionist, and multiple pediatricians?  Y'all tell me again what hands on parents they are. And I know there will be stretching left and right to justify this, but no healthy four-month old needs that many people minding him.
> 
> View attachment 4547672


 Surely this can’t be true?


----------



## LibbyRuth

mrsinsyder said:


> Five nannies, a sleep expert, a baby masseuse, a dietitian and nutritionist, and multiple pediatricians?  Y'all tell me again what hands on parents they are. And I know there will be stretching left and right to justify this, but no healthy four-month old needs that many people minding him.
> 
> View attachment 4547672



I'm calling BS on that Woman's Day!


----------



## Flatsy

Is that Australian Woman's Day by any chance?  Those Australian gossip rags get the prize for printing the wildest rumors.  Nobody seems to pay them much attention though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Five nannies, a sleep expert, a baby masseuse, a dietitian and nutritionist, and multiple pediatricians?  Y'all tell me again what hands on parents they are. And I know there will be stretching left and right to justify this, but no healthy four-month old needs that many people minding him.
> 
> View attachment 4547672


What???  The story was that they were paying for their nanny and her hairdresser out of their own pockets. There might be a nursemaid to spell the nanny.   I think this article is a bit exaggerated.  I DO think that they have doubles on the protection people because they are going to be in separate countries for several days.


----------



## MarieCurie

beantownSugar said:


> It means that oftentimes it is easier to receive a message from someone like you; I am sure the women there appreciated her saying that. And I say that as a woman of color - it's not woke word soup.


Thank you!

It seems like they were very well received in Nyanga and I'm glad they mentioned gender based violence as, I hate to admit this, we have a problem and unfortunately we forget until another beautiful popular young woman is killed even though countless others are killed everyday. So the conversation needs to be ongoing.

She looks great in the blue dress and I'm jealous they got to eat or sample (hopefully) all those wonderful Cape Malay dishes at the District Six Museum


----------



## gracekelly

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm calling BS on that Woman's Day!



Could be from AU.   I have the feeling that Woman's Day mag in the US (and that is if it still exists) wouldn't print something like this.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Oh gosh, some of these articles are getting funnier by the day.  

A sleep expert!   Baby masseuse!  LOL!!!   




mrsinsyder said:


> Five nannies, a sleep expert, a baby masseuse, a dietitian and nutritionist, and multiple pediatricians?  Y'all tell me again what hands on parents they are. And I know there will be stretching left and right to justify this, but no healthy four-month old needs that many people minding him.
> 
> View attachment 4547672


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> More stills of both of them dancing....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4547619
> View attachment 4547620
> View attachment 4547621
> View attachment 4547622


Love what the dancers are wearing.


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> Oh gosh, some of these articles are getting funnier by the day.
> 
> A sleep expert!   Baby masseuse!  LOL!!!


This is when you know that there is some serious leg pulling going on.


----------



## MarieCurie

gracekelly said:


> A friend from *Kenya *told me a long time ago that Africans laugh at American blacks when they call themselves “black “ because to their way of thinking blacks in the US are not black. Too much mixed up blood over the centuries in their opinion.  I’m sure the people listening to her speech appreciate what she is saying, but I wonder what they are really thinking. Hope I am not offending anyone with this comment as that is not my intention.



Was he or she talking about Kenyans or all Africans? The people listening to her speech are South Africans and we have different experiences to Kenyans, who have different experiences to Nigerians, who have different experiences to Zimbabweans etc etc


----------



## gracekelly

MarieCurie said:


> Was he or she talking about Kenyans or all Africans? The people listening to her speech are South Africans and we have different experiences to Kenyans, who have different experiences to Nigerians, who have different experiences to Zimbabweans etc etc



He is from Kenya and grew up there and came here for university.  I thought at the time that he was making a  comment that this was the general view of most Africans towards blacks in the US.


----------



## MarieCurie

gracekelly said:


> Love what the dancers are wearing.


The wrap/skirt cloth is Swati and the beads are Xhosa


----------



## gracekelly

MarieCurie said:


> The wrap/skirt cloth is Swati and the beads are Xhosa


Thanks!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Morgane said:


> Giving second hand clothes would come across as patronizing  and condescending. They  need to be careful with the optics,above all considering the colonial history of their family and country.


Just to add a point on how difficult demographics in SA are: The Bantu who now make up the largest part of South Africa's population are also colonisers. They displaced the First Nations of SA, the Khoikoi and San peoples for over centuries before the Dutch arrived in SA.

The majority of Bantus don't consider the Khoisans black but coloured and- despite the Khoisans being First Nation peoples, as having no claim to any land.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Welltraveled! said:


> More stills of both of them dancing....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4547619
> View attachment 4547620
> View attachment 4547621
> View attachment 4547622


I think this is the first pic I've seen of Meghan with a genuine expression. She looks lovely in these pics. 

But to keep true to form, she stole Kate or Pippa's shoes!


----------



## threadbender

Love some of the photos and vids. They look like they are enjoying themselves.


----------



## BagLovingMom

gracekelly said:


> A friend from Kenya told me a long time ago that Africans laugh at American blacks when they call themselves “black “ because to their way of thinking blacks in the US are not black. Too much mixed up blood over the centuries in their opinion.  I’m sure the people listening to her speech appreciate what she is saying, but I wonder what they are really thinking. Hope I am not offending anyone with this comment as that is not my intention.



Ha yes indeed. My dad is Nigerian, so I grew up knowing very well the perspective of Black Africans on Black Americans. Looking forward to this Royal Tour !


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Flatsy said:


> Is that Australian Woman's Day by any chance?  Those Australian gossip rags get the prize for printing the wildest rumors.  Nobody seems to pay them much attention though.


Yep. Unfortunately both Woman's Day and New Idea (known as No Idea) here  are notoriously loose with facts.

They've both been successfully sued numerous times when they've really crossed lines.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> What???  The story was that they were paying for their nanny and her hairdresser out of their own pockets. There might be a nursemaid to spell the nanny.   I think this article is a bit exaggerated.  I DO think that they have doubles on the protection people because they are going to be in separate countries for several days.


I read there was a team of 13 with them, which includes the nanny and hairdresser that they are paying themselves


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> What?? When the dating got public DM was only bringing articles about her talking about being black.


My impression is that Meghan is a bi-race opportunist. She uses whatever she thinks gives her the best narrative and optics in a particular given situation. 

What is that card called that actor's in the US use? The Actors' Guild card? I'm sure I've seen a pic of Meghan's card on the net where she ticked herself off as white. Not black or bi-racial, but white, to be very precise.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> He is from Kenya and grew up there and came here for university.  I thought at the time that he was making a  comment that this was the general view of most Africans towards blacks in the US.


Political correctness is not huge in Africa, generally speaking


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> My impression is that Meghan is a bi-race opportunist. She uses whatever she thinks gives her the best narrative and optics in a particular given situation.
> 
> What is that card called that actor's in the US use? The Actors' Guild card? I'm sure I've seen a pic of Meghan's card on the net where she ticked herself off as white. Not black or bi-racial, but white, to be very precise.



She also said she wears certain colors when she wants to appear more ethnic (paraphrasing for the nitpickers).


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> I read there was a team of 13 with them, which includes the nanny and hairdresser that they are paying themselves


Paying themselves meaning from his father’s allowance or from his huge inheritance, I wonder.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Meghan identifies as biracial, *always* has and has said so many times.  Just one example below.


> But here's what happens: they smile and nod politely, maybe even chuckle, before getting to their point, 'Right, but what are you? Where are your parents from?' I knew it was coming, I always do. While I could say Pennsylvania and Ohio, and continue this proverbial two-step, I instead give them what they're after: 'My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I'm half black and half white.'



From the same article



> To describe something as being black and white means it is clearly defined. Yet when your ethnicity is black and white, the dichotomy is not that clear. In fact, it creates a grey area. Being biracial paints a blurred line that is equal parts staggering and illuminating. When I was asked by ELLE to share my story, I'll be honest, I was scared. It's easy to talk about which make-up I prefer, my favourite scene I've filmed, the rigmarole of 'a day in the life' and how much green juice I consume before a requisite Pilates class. And while I have dipped my toes into this on thetig.com, sharing small vignettes of my experiences as a biracial woman, today I am choosing to be braver, to go a bit deeper, and to share a much larger picture of that with you.



She delves more into it as well.

https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Paying themselves meaning from his father’s allowance or from his huge inheritance, I wonder.


Oh Jayne, stop it with the impertinent third degree!    Let's all just enjoy being lulled in to Sunshine Sachs' carefully curated Sussex PR spin bliss


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## LittleStar88

Looks like they are having a great time! Going to enjoy all of the photos and updates to come!


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> She also said she wears certain colors when she wants to appear more ethnic (paraphrasing for the nitpickers).


that's interesting
she's no dummy that's for sure


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Five nannies, a sleep expert, a baby masseuse, a dietitian and nutritionist, and multiple pediatricians?  Y'all tell me again what hands on parents they are. And I know there will be stretching left and right to justify this, but no healthy four-month old needs that many people minding him.
> 
> View attachment 4547672


Town and country has info on the 13 people entourage 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.to...le-prince-harry-royal-tour-africa-2019-staff/

The final two people in the entourage are a nanny for Archie who will look after the royal baby when both parents are carrying out engagements in Cape Town and Johannesburg, and Meghan’s hairdresser, who is being paid for privately. When the duchess went to Australia and New Zealand she traveled with stylist George Northwood who also did her hair for her evening wedding reception last May.


----------



## Flatsy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> What is that card called that actor's in the US use? The Actors' Guild card? I'm sure I've seen a pic of Meghan's card on the net where she ticked herself off as white. Not black or bi-racial, but white, to be very precise.


I wouldn't blame her for that.  Actors present themselves as what casting directors want them to be. It's a sad fact that a lot of casting calls are sent out specifically for white actors, even when the part doesn't require it.    (Example: The Hunger Games casting call for Katniss specified a white actress, even though it's implied in the book that Katniss is multiracial.)  

Checking off the box for "white" would open a lot of parts to her that she would automatically be out of consideration for if she checked off "black" even though she's capable of playing either one.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Just saw live images on the news here of them on tour. They both look wonderful.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Oh Jayne, stop it with the impertinent third degree!    Let's all just enjoy being lulled in to Sunshine Sachs' carefully curated Sussex PR spin bliss



Yup!  Drinking the Kool Aid today.hahahahahaha!


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> She also said she wears certain colors when she wants to appear more ethnic (paraphrasing for the nitpickers).



I don't know about ethnic, but when heads of state and spouses visit other countries, they often try to reference the favored colors of the country they are visiting in their dress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

Jayne1 said:


> She said she identifies as white and pledged to a white sorority, etc. Friends, other than Serena, a very famous person, are white.  Boyfriends and husbands - white... this is the first time I heard her say this!
> 
> Hope this is not offensive.  She fascinates me and if you want to educate me, please be kind.



Please cite where Meghan has said she identifies as white.  

Guess what?  There is no such thing as a white sorority.  Because if a sorority only accepted white women, that sorority would cease to exist.  And because one has white friends, or white boyfriends or white husband doesn't mean you're white.  It means you have white friends, white boyfriends, white husbands.


----------



## buffym

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> My impression is that Meghan is a bi-race opportunist. She uses whatever she thinks gives her the best narrative and optics in a particular given situation.
> 
> What is that card called that actor's in the US use? The Actors' Guild card? I'm sure I've seen a pic of Meghan's card on the net where she ticked herself off as white. Not black or bi-racial, but white, to be very precise.


----------



## marthastoo

MarieCurie said:


> Was he or she talking about Kenyans or all Africans? The people listening to her speech are South Africans and we have different experiences to Kenyans, who have different experiences to Nigerians, who have different experiences to Zimbabweans etc etc


At any rate, so someone from Africa is saying black Americans aren't black?  Mmm ok.  *insert giant eyeroll*

I like how people feel like that they can police who can call themselves black, or whatever racial identity.  Africans have a very different experience than African Americans.  In here in America, it's all about how the individual identifies him/herself.  Not if some random person in Africa (or on a purse message board) feels someone is black enough.


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> Ok, sounds nice, but what does it really mean? It’s like woke word soup a lot of the time IMO. I guess I’m just a cynic


LOL - yes, some of her past speeches could aptly be described as a "woke word soup".  Maybe she's getting better though because I could follow this one.

The thing is, she's not actually there to DO anything for the people she's addressing.  She has to be vague about the "necessary actions" the President is taking to stop gender violence because it's political.  So she was just there to acknowledge them and express her support and I think she did a good job of that. 

Royal work is superficial, and I think she's a relatively superficial person, so in that way I've always thought she's a good fit for the job.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marthastoo said:


> Guess what?  There is no such thing as a white sorority.  Because if a sorority only accepted white women, that sorority would cease to exist.



No?

https://www.theroot.com/white-sorority-under-investigation-for-making-racist-re-1829245698

https://dbknews.com/2019/05/06/gree...l-assault-umd-racism-swarthmore-bigotry-hate/

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/09/19/segregated-sororities-not-limited-alabama-experts-say

When I went to college in the south, we had many sororities that didn't accept minorities. It wasn't in writing, they just didn't accept anyone who was a person of color. I lived this experience so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

















and so on and so on


----------



## mrsinsyder

Anyway she looked a little Spongebob-ish this morning and her comments were a little condescending but she did pretty well today. They may be working on some image rehab after all.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I’m genuine curious.  You said that you lived this experience.  What does that mean exactly?  Did you join a sorority?



mrsinsyder said:


> No?
> 
> https://www.theroot.com/white-sorority-under-investigation-for-making-racist-re-1829245698
> 
> https://dbknews.com/2019/05/06/gree...l-assault-umd-racism-swarthmore-bigotry-hate/
> 
> https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/09/19/segregated-sororities-not-limited-alabama-experts-say
> 
> When I went to college in the south, we had many sororities that didn't accept minorities. It wasn't in writing, they just didn't accept anyone who was a person of color. *I lived this experience so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and so on and so on


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> At any rate, so someone from Africa is saying black Americans aren't black?  Mmm ok.  *insert giant eyeroll*
> 
> I like how people feel like that they can police who can call themselves black, or whatever racial identity.  Africans have a very different experience than African Americans.  In here in America, it's all about how the individual identifies him/herself.  Not if some random person in Africa (or on a purse message board) feels someone is black enough.



Are you misquoting me?  If so you are being unnecessarily insulting.  This man was entitled to his opinion.Why don't you put me on your ignore list?


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan has always identified as bi-racial and has never hidden or shied away from any aspect of of her identity. To say otherwise is an outright lie. There seems to be a lot of lies and speculation based  “unconscious bias” being passed off as truths where Meghan is concerned. The constant looking for negativity where there isn’t any gets really old after a while.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

FreeSpirit71 said:


>



The wedges are nice - look like the pair Kate is always in?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welltraveled! said:


> I’m genuine curious.  You said that you lived this experience.  What does that mean exactly?  Did you join a sorority?


I did not. It was well known which were "white" and which weren't, and the ones that allowed minorities were considered lesser. (For example, Chi Omega's nickname was "*C*h-nks *O*K" because they allowed Asian members. Phi Mu was called Phi Moo for allowing overweight women). Greek life doesn't just discriminate based on race... it's about looks, weight, socioeconomic status, etc. My roommate rushed and it was suggested she lose a few pounds and get a nose job, and try again next year. We had a fraternity kicked off campus for setting the Jewish fraternity next door to it on fire and chanting 'burn Jews burn.'

Greek life in Alabama was only formally desegregated in 2013. In 2013, there were 10 black women in Alabama sororities. TEN.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Looks like it's actually much worse for men. SMH.

_As of January 2018, African-American men make up *0.8* percent of traditionally white fraternities in IFC. African-Americans currently make up a little over *10 *percent of the student body population._


----------



## Lubina

marthastoo said:


> At any rate, so someone from Africa is saying black Americans aren't black?  Mmm ok.  *insert giant eyeroll*
> 
> I like how people feel like that they can police who can call themselves black, or whatever racial identity.  Africans have a very different experience than African Americans.  In here in America, it's all about how the individual identifies him/herself.  Not if some random person in Africa (or on a purse message board) feels someone is black enough.



And then backtrack as if it's not them but someone else's opinion that would not have been proffered had they not put out that the opinion of 1 represents all or the collective. True colors are really showing in this thread.


----------



## buffym

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The wedges are nice - look like the pair Kate is always in?



Meghan wore these in Australia last year.


----------



## meluvs2shop

She has gorgeous hair. Is it all hers?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Swanky

Swanky said:


> Yes, back to topic please!


And again


----------



## mdcx

I have to say Meghan looks really good in the latest photos. It's like she actually listened to some advice about how to dress. I hope she continues on this path.


----------



## gracekelly

The consular reception should bring out the fancy dress.   Looking forward to some pictures.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Jayne1 said:


> Paying themselves meaning from his father’s allowance or from his huge inheritance, I wonder.


But isn’t his inheritance his money ?and  I know Meghan was no Meryl Streep (not many actresses are ) but she wasn’t destitute upon marriage to Harry either. The comments in this thread remind me of comments about Mrs. ***** upon becoming First Lady. People (and I’m not naming anyone in particular) made it sound like she barely had money or know how to put together an inauguration outfit when in reality, she is an Harvard educated attorney. I love TPF and it’s diversity of opinions but I do feel there is some serious, to say the least, unconscious bias in this thread about Meghan . Anyways back to the Style threads for me!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

gracekelly said:


> I don't know about ethnic, but when heads of state and spouses visit other countries, they often try to reference the favored colors of the country they are visiting in their dress.


Yes, it's not to appear more ethnic  but as you said, to pay tribute to the country being visited.  Many of the royal ladies do this, and the men sometimes with a nod in the colours of their ties.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Yes, it's not to appear more ethnic  but as you said, to pay tribute to the country being visited.  Many of the royal ladies do this, and the men sometimes with a nod in the colours of their ties.


This was before Harry, she said in an interview something to the effect of how she could appear to be a different race by wearing different colors.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> This was before Harry, she said in an interview something to the effect of how she could appear to be a different race by wearing different colors.


Do you have a link for that? Would be interested to read the full quote and context.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Do you have a link for that? Would be interested to read the full quote and context.



"Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster."

https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> "Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster."
> 
> https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/


I see.  That's her addressing how she's seen in her _industry_ though, and the way she's overcome it. Not how she perceives herself.

It's not unlike how many actresses morph into what they think a director is looking for when they go for an audition.

Many Latino's, and biracial people and other minorities are cast as other roles, sometimes wrongly due to casting decisions.  It can also be one of the only ways to get continuous work.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I see.  That's her addressing how she's seen in her _industry_ though, and the way she's overcome it. Not how she perceives herself.



I didn't say it was or wasn't how she perceives herself, I just shared what she said            ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> I didn't say it was or wasn't how she perceives herself, I just shared what she said            ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


That's cool. I just wanted to see the context


----------



## Morgane

.


----------



## Morgane

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Meghan identifies as biracial, *always* has and has said so many times.  Just one example below.
> 
> 
> From the same article
> 
> 
> 
> She delves more into it as well.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-culture/news/a26855/more-than-an-other/


It's not relevant to this discussion,but reading that article,it really becomes noticeable how Meghan tends to repeat the same phrases,buzz words.
The "let's be braver and go deeper" bit was in her Vogue editor's letter too,and
talking about it,the PR machine that went into overdrive about "Meghan going deep"  actually made her guest-edited  issue more "controversial" and "progressive" than what it was (giving it a lot of publicity too). Like,I expected big op-eds, a four-page interview with Michelle ***** (that  was simply a short Q&A),and something  more from her capsule collection too,to be honest.
It also emphasized even more a certain lecturing tone,that was IMO the focus of a more justified criticism.



Flatsy said:


> LOL - yes, some of her past speeches could aptly be described as a "woke word soup".  Maybe she's getting better though because I could follow this one.
> 
> The thing is, she's not actually there to DO anything for the people she's addressing.  She has to be vague about the "necessary actions" the President is taking to stop gender violence because it's political.  So she was just there to acknowledge them and express her support and I think she did a good job of that.
> 
> Royal work is superficial, and I think she's a relatively superficial person, so in that way I've always thought she's a good fit for the job.


Exactly. For example,some of the causes associated with the women chosen for the Vogue cover are objectively close to the political left. But gender equality, LGBT rights,environmental issues become political issues if they are addressed at the roots,which is something royals can't do,and I doubt they have the skills to do it in any case. 
Who was on the cover, if some women were chosen because of their connections or celebrity status  doesn't matter in the end,because everything is addressed  superficially.


----------



## mrsinsyder

The media is on overdrive lately.

https://www.ibtimes.com/prince-harr...queen-elizabeth-approves-plans-source-2831174

_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will reportedly adopt twin girls soon. The Duchess of Sussex is the one who brought up the idea to the Duke of Sussex.

A source recently told New Idea that the “Suits” alum has always wanted to have a big family with Prince Harry. Markle wants to have biological children, but she also wants to adopt twin girls.

“Meghan and Harry spoke about their love of children and wanting to adopt one day,  in the early days of dating, with Meghan insisting she wanted to adopt children as well as have her own biologically,” the source said.

The source also said that Markle and Prince Harry have consulted with Queen Elizabeth II regarding their plan, and she is on board with it. Markle’s mom, Doria Ragland, is also open to the idea of giving two children in need a permanent home.

According to the publication, the children that the royal couple will be adopting has links to Prince Harry’s charity, Sentebale’s Mamohato Children’s Centre in Lesotho. The charity supports disadvantaged and orphaned children.

A source also said that Prince Harry and Markle have been coordinating with an adoption agency regarding their plans to adopt. The royal couple is aware that adoption requites a lengthy process, but they are hopeful that their twin girls will be with them early next year.

The publication also said that an announcement from the Buckingham Palace regarding the adoption is imminent. But until this happens, such claims need to be taken with a grain of salt.

Even though Prince Harry and Markle are compassionate and loving individuals, they have not openly talked about adoption. The royal couple also has the ability to have more than one biological child, and this may be easier for them instead of adopting twin girls.

Prince Harry and Markle just welcomed their son, Archie, on May 6. And it may still too soon for them to have another child, more so two children._


----------



## Jayne1

BagLovingMom said:


> But isn’t his inheritance his money ?and  I know Meghan was no Meryl Streep (not many actresses are ) but she wasn’t destitute upon marriage to Harry either. The comments in this thread remind me of comments about Mrs. ***** upon becoming First Lady. People (and I’m not naming anyone in particular) made it sound like she barely had money or know how to put together an inauguration outfit when in reality, she is an Harvard educated attorney. I love TPF and it’s diversity of opinions but I do feel there is some serious, to say the least, unconscious bias in this thread about Meghan . Anyways back to the Style threads for me!


No, that's exactly what I meant.  His multi million inheritance is his money and Meg made a lot too.

So, when it is reported that they spent their own money, I'm always curious if that means they withdraw from what Charles gives them to live the royal life, or they actually dipped into their private multi-million bank account.

I keep asking if Harry dips into his inheritance or if the public pays for everything.

Don't know how MO got into this discussion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Oh Jayne, stop it with the impertinent third degree!    Let's all just enjoy being lulled in to Sunshine Sachs' carefully curated Sussex PR spin bliss




I'm a bit preoccupied as to whether the family spend their own money.  Some have quite a lot. Or is that how the rich stay rich.

Not the Queen, she's very frugal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Morgane said:


> It's not relevant to this discussion,but reading that article,it really becomes noticeable how Meghan tends to repeat the same phrases,buzz words.
> The "let's be braver and go deeper" bit was in her Vogue editor's letter too,and
> talking about it,the PR machine that went into overdrive about "Meghan going deep"  actually made her guest-edited  issue more "controversial" and "progressive" than what it was (giving it a lot of publicity too). Like,I expected big op-eds, a four-page interview with Michelle ***** (that  was simply a short Q&A),and something  more from her capsule collection too,to be honest.
> It also emphasized even more a certain lecturing tone,that was IMO the focus of a more justified criticism.
> 
> 
> Exactly. For example,some of the causes associated with the women chosen for the Vogue cover are objectively close to the political left. But gender equality, LGBT rights,environmental issues become political issues if they are addressed at the roots,which is something royals can't do,and I doubt they have the skills to do it in any case.
> Who was on the cover, if some women were chosen because of their connections or celebrity status  doesn't matter in the end,because everything is addressed  superficially.


Well put. I’m not sure when you really examine it that it amounts to more than pretty words and nice pictures.  
Royals can’t get involved in politics, particularly the politics of foreign countries and have a lifestyle of privilege that’s so far distanced from everyone else’s daily experience - that “I’m with you” could sound very hollow.


----------



## doni

Will adopted children have dynastic rights I wonder? Guess not? There will be quite a few legal issues I imagine actually... Find it fascinating.


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry and Meghan travelled to Monwabisi Beach, on the outskirts of Cape Town, to learn about the work of Waves For Change, which helps vulnerable children from township and challenging communities through the power of surfing. 

They will also hear about the Lunchbox Fund, one of four charities to benefit from public donations made following the birth of their son Archie, who has joined his parents in South Africa for his first official royal tour.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## FreeSpirit71

Lovely interview. Harry's passion for mental illness issues and mental health is really evident.

I loved the informal nature of the chat and how they reflected each other's points.

Infectious energy from Prince Hot Ginge.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


>



Interesting that they've flown 2 Range Rovers over from here to SA. I've never seen that before, or I've never noticed.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The denim jacket is her own (a favourite apparently) by Madewell from 2017 and the shirt and pants are both from SmartSet.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


> Interesting that they've flown 2 Range Rovers over from here to SA. I've never seen that before, or I've never noticed.


It might be part of the security team's requirements for travel in SA. They might be modified for the BRF.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Why can’t she dress herself properly?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think she looks great. It was a more casual, informal event.

That angle was captured out of *how* many shots taken?

The kids and other attendees were all dressed in jeans, tees and sneakers.

She (and Harry) looked appropriate to me.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her shirt isn't buttoned. I'm not sure what that has to do with angles but I know, she can literally do no wrong.


----------



## chicaloca

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think she looks great. It was a more casual, informal event.
> 
> *That angle was captured out of how many shots taken?*
> 
> The kids and other attendees were all dressed in jeans, tees and sneakers.
> 
> She (and Harry) looked appropriate to me.




There are literally hundreds of shots of Meghan at this event. I can’t imagine combing through all of them to find one shot for the purpose of criticism. That level of obsessiveness escapes my understanding.

I’ve said this before but no one upholds patriarchy better than women. The policing of women’s attire in order to shame them is something that needs to be left in the past.


----------



## mdcx

Her shirt has the top 3 buttons undone. When she is wearing the crossbody bag, that holds the shirt shut, but without it, well, her shirt is open from her bra line up. I suspect she is not used to her larger bosom and doesn't always know how much it is on display.
It's a bit different wearing a daringly unbuttoned blouse when you are relatively flat chested and slim than when you are a bit bigger up top.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So we can "uphold the patriarchy" by insulting Kendall Jenner or Olivia Munn or Kylie Jenner or other various celebs but not MM.

Got it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> Her shirt isn't buttoned. I'm not sure what that has to do with angles but I know, *she can literally do no wrong*.


Sure she can - and has. I think Meghan has made a few missteps. I just don't happen to think this is one of them or that in a sea of positive feeling at this event, her shirt is that big a deal.

Even Diana got caught out with a bad angle and some sunlight.

*kanyeshrug*


----------



## Sharont2305

As I was watching it live it did cross my mind how long it would take for the wind to "reveal" her cleavage, lol..


----------



## Grande Latte

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The denim jacket is her own (a favourite apparently) by Madewell from 2017 and the shirt and pants are both from SmartSet.



Thank you for the ID on the denim jacket. I've been searching high and low for the perfect fit. I think her canvas tote is Madewell too.


----------



## Grande Latte

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It might be part of the security team's requirements for travel in SA. They might be modified for the BRF.


It is part of security protocol. Presidents flow in their transportation fleet every time they travel.


----------



## Sharont2305

Grande Latte said:


> It is part of security protocol. Presidents flow in their transportation fleet every time they travel.


I know that, but I don't recall seeing it with our RF before.


----------



## Sharont2305

Arriving at Auwal Mosque


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## mrsinsyder

Why sexy hair in a mosque? Why did she leave half her head uncovered? Why aren't her arms covered?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

^Have you ever been to a mosque in Africa? I have - North Africa to be exact.

My hair looked like this, and my arms were "uncovered" (though past elbow). Not all mosques are hardline strict.  As long as one is dressed modestly and to what is acceptable for that mosque, that's what's important.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Why sexy hair in a mosque? Why did she leave half her head uncovered? Why aren't her arms covered?
> 
> View attachment 4548303



She looks very pretty.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> ^Have you ever been to a mosque in Africa? I have - North Africa to be exact.
> 
> My hair looked like this, and my arms were "uncovered" (though past elbow). Not all mosques are hardline strict.  As long as one is dressed modestly and to what is acceptable for that mosque, that's what's important.


I have.

She's on a world stage. She can do better.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> Why sexy hair in a mosque? Why did she leave half her head uncovered? Why aren't her arms covered?
> 
> View attachment 4548303


Hot mess comes to mind with this picture.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> I have.
> 
> She's on a world stage. She can do better.



No one there seemed to be offended.

Diana, why the sexy hair half uncovered?


----------



## buffym

More pictures from today, Meghan looks very pretty and her and Harry look at ease.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> No one there seemed to be offended.
> 
> Diana, why the sexy hair half uncovered?
> 
> View attachment 4548347


Oh, I missed where Diana needed to be brought into this


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> Why can’t she dress herself properly?
> 
> View attachment 4548247


I wonder if the shirt unbuttoned itself.

Some cheaply made garments don’t have large enough buttons for the button hole, or the button hole isn't stiff enough to hold the button, so the buttons won’t stay buttoned especially around the bust line.

I mean, who doesn’t button up the third button when you’re trying to appear respectable.

I blame the quality of the garment.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Jayne1 said:


> No, that's exactly what I meant.  His multi million inheritance is his money and Meg made a lot too.
> 
> So, when it is reported that they spent their own money, I'm always curious if that means they withdraw from what Charles gives them to live the royal life, or they actually dipped into their private multi-million bank account.
> 
> I keep asking if Harry dips into his inheritance or if the public pays for everything.
> 
> Don't know how MO got into this discussion.


Got it ! MO was added because I added her as part of my opinion....In a thread that contains as bizarrely random references as this one, Fair to say that  MO Is actually more relevant to the thread than most of what’s in here lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if the shirt unbuttoned itself.
> 
> Some cheaply made garments don’t have large enough buttons for the button hole, or the button hole isn't stiff enough to hold the button. The shirt may not have been made for a proper bust line.
> 
> I mean, who doesn’t button up the third button when you’re trying to appear respectable.
> 
> I blame the quality of the garment.


HOW DARE YOU, this is a Mischa Nonoo exclusive from her Capsule Collection! It is _flawless_.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> No one there seemed to be offended.
> 
> Diana, why the sexy hair half uncovered?
> 
> View attachment 4548347


Diana was always doing something that pissed people off. No one thought of her as a saint at the time, save for many young women who identified with her struggles. 

Other than that, she got a lot of criticism too.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh, I missed where Diana needed to be brought into this


 
LOL I missed where we can only pick on Meghan for doing what others have done before.


----------



## LibbyRuth

LittleStar88 said:


> No one there seemed to be offended.
> 
> Diana, why the sexy hair half uncovered?
> 
> View attachment 4548347


Looking at those pictures, compared to the pics of Meghan today, it looks like this is another example on the  trip of Meghan giving a nod to Diana in the color of the dress she chose to wear.  I think it's classy and very cool the way that both Kate and Meghan find so many ways to give nods to Diana in their fashion for significant public appearances.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if the shirt unbuttoned itself.
> 
> Some cheaply made garments don’t have large enough buttons for the button hole, or the button hole isn't stiff enough to hold the button, so the buttons won’t stay buttoned especially around the bust line.
> 
> I mean, who doesn’t button up the third button when you’re trying to appear respectable.
> 
> I blame the quality of the garment.


Yeah, I agree.  I don't think she would have exposed her beige nursing bra on purpose.

And I think it's great that she's wearing more down to earth clothing for this tour, including re-wearing the Smart Set clothing.  

It's neither policing women's bodies, upholding the patriarchy, nor launching a conservative anti-Michelle *****-style attack to say that Meghan has not dressed appropriately on several occasions in the past.  Specifically, wearing $5,000 designer outfits to charities dedicated to helping impoverished women was a bit tone deaf.  Wearing a $75,000 gown for her engagement photos was ill advised.  And the list goes on.

She and Harry appear to have either learned from past mistakes or started listening to advisers on a lot of these issues because they are doing better in a lot of ways.


----------



## limom

She looks disheveled. Nothing wrong with that but she represents the BRF.
Perhaps she needs a professional dresser?


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Diana was always doing something that pissed people off. No one thought of her as a saint at the time, save for many young women who identified with her struggles.
> 
> Other than that, she got a lot of criticism too.


Agreed.  She wasn't a saint until she died.   People seem to forget that.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> She looks disheveled. Nothing wrong with that but she represents the BRF.
> Perhaps she needs a professional dresser?



I believe she's deliberately dressing casually in order to appear more relatable. The clothes are fine but getting caught in a photo with her bra cup showing was unfortunate.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> She looks disheveled. Nothing wrong with that but she represents the BRF.
> Perhaps she needs a professional dresser?



Exactly! You can look relaxed but still polished. A neat bun isn't hard to do. Check the mirror before you leave the house. But she always has to push push push the envelope and ends up falling flat.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I believe she's deliberately dressing casually in order to appear more relatable. The clothes are fine but getting caught in a photo with her bra cup showing was unfortunate.


some of the clothes are not pressed. Especially him, it is disrespectful, imo.
The public is here to see Royalty, not a hot mess.
I simply do not get it.
She travels  with a professional hairstylist and ends up looking like she was caught in a tornado?
Wtf?


----------



## daisychainz

limom said:


> some of the clothes are not pressed. Especially him, it is disrespectful, imo.
> The public is here to see Royalty, not a hot mess.
> I simply do not get it.
> She travels  with a professional hairstylist and ends up looking like she was caught in a tornado?
> Wtf?


i had my laugh for today, that's funny


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> A neat bun isn't hard to do.


I got so sick of those messy buns she was wearing prior to the wedding, and I absolutely hated that she had those two strands of her hair hanging in her face during the wedding.  

And then after the wedding, she started doing nothing but neat buns, and while I much prefer neat buns, I started to miss the messy ones, LOL.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> some of the clothes are not pressed. Especially him, it is disrespectful, imo.
> The public is here to see Royalty, not a hot mess.
> I simply do not get it.
> She travels  with a professional hairstylist and ends up looking like she was caught in a tornado?
> Wtf?



I'm considering the possible circumstances. Maybe they had been on the go all day with various events, ceremonies, etc. Add humidity to that and it wouldn't take much to wrinkle up that pale gray jacket.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

BagLovingMom said:


> Got it ! MO was added because I added her as part of my opinion....In a thread that contains as bizarrely random references as this one, Fair to say that  MO Is actually more relevant to the thread than most of what’s in here lol


Thanks for the reply!



mrsinsyder said:


> HOW DARE YOU, this is a Mischa Nonoo exclusive from her Capsule Collection! It is _flawless_.


That blouse looks difficult to wear, doesn't it? When she wears it, I can see the straining in the bust line.

Mischa Nonoo didn't put much thought into this shirt, it appears.  Not as much thought as I bet went into her relaxed and classic boyfriend shirt that sells for a lot more money.  The Capsule Collection garment looks like an afterthought.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks for the reply!
> 
> 
> That blouse looks difficult to wear, doesn't it? When she wears it, I can see the straining in the bust line.
> 
> Mischa Nonoo didn't put much thought into this shirt, it appears.  Not as much thought as I bet went into her relaxed and classic boyfriend shirt that sells for a lot more money.  The Capsule Collection garment looks like an afterthought.


She’s definitely wearing it intentionally unbuttoned low, for some reason. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## buffym




----------



## Sharont2305

Delete


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s definitely wearing it intentionally unbuttoned low, for some reason. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> 
> View attachment 4548447


Okay, you're right.  I tried to defend her...


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, the flower in the hair is a bit cutesy for a woman in her late 30s. I am willing to retract that statement should photos emerge of her receiving the flower from an adorable child and she was wearing it to show how much she liked it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Okay, the flower in the hair is a bit cutesy for a woman in her late 30s. I am willing to retract that statement should photos emerge of her receiving the flower from an adorable child and she was wearing it to show how much she liked it.


I figured someone gave it to her.....don't know if it was a child or not.  hard to just toss something away when it's given to you


----------



## zen1965

Harry looks manic in almost every frame. Too much of everything. 
My opinion. So no, I do not require 287 photo proofs of Will, Kate, Diana, and the Pope looking manic as well.


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> Harry looks manic in almost every frame. Too much of every



I want to keep loving Harry....I'll always remember when he was just a little boy and he decided he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket.  I don't think anything can take that away but have to agree, he does seem like maybe he's trying too hard here


----------



## sdkitty

BagLovingMom said:


> Got it ! MO was added because I added her as part of my opinion....In a thread that contains as bizarrely random references as this one, Fair to say that  MO Is actually more relevant to the thread than most of what’s in here lol


I understand where you're coming from but I hold Michelle ***** is such high esteem that I don't think she belongs in this discussion.


----------



## buffym

Harry and Meghan at the British High Commission


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Okay, the flower in the hair is a bit cutesy for a woman in her late 30s. I am willing to retract that statement should photos emerge of her receiving the flower from an adorable child and she was wearing it to show how much she liked it.


I like it, it makes her face prettier.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Jayne1 said:


> I *wonder if the shirt unbuttoned itself.*
> 
> Some cheaply made garments don’t have large enough buttons for the button hole, or the button hole isn't stiff enough to hold the button, so the buttons won’t stay buttoned especially around the bust line.
> 
> I mean, who doesn’t button up the third button when you’re trying to appear respectable.
> 
> I blame the quality of the garment.



 I hate when that happens!

Some expensive made shirts unbutton on their own as well.  Even if you’re wearing the correct size and tried on said shirt in the store.   

Now I just wear a tank top underneath, so if it unbuttons it unbuttons.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LittleStar88 said:


> LOL I missed where we can only pick on Meghan for doing what others have done before.



Good point!  I find it interesting posters have issues with Meghan paying homage to her late MIL.  I think it’s respectful.  I’m sure Harry appreciates it.


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> I want to keep loving Harry....I'll always remember when he was just a little boy and he decided he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket.  I don't think anything can take that away but have to agree, he does seem like maybe he's trying too hard here


Yes, I also remember him walking behind his mother‘s coffin and the flower arrangement „Mummy“ next to it. But then the Nazi costume, the Vegas mess, the hunting in conservation areas, and the list goes on - never mind the recent eco warrior blunders. I suppose my patience  ran low a while ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

bag-mania said:


> Okay, the flower in the hair is a bit cutesy for a woman in her late 30s. I am willing to retract that statement should photos emerge of her receiving the flower from an adorable child and she was wearing it to show how much she liked it.



Eh, a child could have done it.  Either way, it looks cute on her.  Truthfully, despite a women’s age a flower behind the ear  always brighten up the face in my opinion.


----------



## buffym

Some more from the reception


----------



## BagLovingMom

sdkitty said:


> I understand where you're coming from but I hold Michelle ***** is such high esteem that I don't think she belongs in this discussion.


I understand where you’re coming from too, but like everyone else here, I was sharing my opinion. MO was part of that opinion.


----------



## daisychainz

buffym said:


> Some more from the reception
> View attachment 4548508
> View attachment 4548509


This is a nice picture of her. This outfit is a repeat one? It's a good idea to make her wear some outfits a few times, whoever is suggesting that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

zen1965 said:


> Harry looks manic in almost every frame. Too much of everything.
> My opinion. So no, I do not require 287 photo proofs of Will, Kate, Diana, and the Pope looking manic as well.


Lmaooo I love you


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> This is a nice picture of her. This outfit is a repeat one? It's a good idea to make her wear some outfits a few times, whoever is suggesting that.


Yes, she wore it in Australia last October, with the wedges she wore yesterday


----------



## Flatsy

It's like she just brought her suitcase along from the last tour, LOL.  It's good to see her re-wearing things.


BagLovingMom said:


> I understand where you’re coming from too, but like everyone else here, I was sharing my opinion. MO was part of that opinion.


I left the original Michelle ***** comment alone because analyzing and debating public opinions towards MO is an entirely different topic and it's a big topic.  It's not fair to throw your opinion about MO out there when the people you are speaking to are not in a position where they can respond to it.

I also think that throwing out accusations about people's political affiliations based on your perception of their opinions about Meghan is also not fair and not something that should be done in this thread.  For one thing, I think you have it dead wrong in jumping to the conclusion that people who are critical of Meghan are conservative and/or dislike MO.  But nobody here should have to refute that in order to justify their opinions about Meghan.  

These threads are not supposed to be political.  Inserting political opinions/accusations into the thread under the premise that it's "your opinion" is bringing politics into the discussion where it doesn't belong.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Interesting that they've flown 2 Range Rovers over from here to SA. I've never seen that before, or I've never noticed.


Perhaps  they are amoured vehicles and/or belong to the consulate.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps  they are amoured vehicles and/or belong to the consulate.


Possibly, but the number plates are British.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if the shirt unbuttoned itself.
> 
> Some cheaply made garments don’t have large enough buttons for the button hole, or the button hole isn't stiff enough to hold the button, so the buttons won’t stay buttoned especially around the bust line.
> 
> I mean, who doesn’t button up the third button when you’re trying to appear respectable.
> 
> I blame the quality of the garment.


This is the type of thing that a dresser is helpful with. Weights in the skirts and wearing a slip. Remember the early picture of Diana with the see through skirt?  I do feel for all these women who have to live with this unrelenting scrutiny.   One small error gets turned into a cause celebre


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> HOW DARE YOU, this is a Mischa Nonoo exclusive from her Capsule Collection! It is _flawless_.


Haha!  Well darn it Misha get those button holes done properly! It’s not a cheap shirt by any means!


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> ^Have you ever been to a mosque in Africa? I have - North Africa to be exact.
> 
> My hair looked like this, and my arms were "uncovered" (though past elbow). Not all mosques are hardline strict.  As long as one is dressed modestly and to what is acceptable for that mosque, that's what's important.


Interesting, was it in Morocco by any chance .. as they are less strict, cannot say the same in other North African countries (Egypt).  My head had to be covered almost completely and no bare arms, no bare legs (I actually wore an ankle boot with my long dress).  But, you are right .. it really depends on the type of Mosque you are visiting.


----------



## LuckyBitch

sdkitty said:


> I want to keep loving Harry....I'll always remember when he was just a little boy and he decided he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket.  I don't think anything can take that away but have to agree, he does seem like maybe he's trying too hard here



Keep loving him, he's a good one even if he is, at the moment in this new situation, possibly trying too hard. However I doubt very much that "he decided" he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket...


----------



## myown

chicaloca said:


> There are literally hundreds of shots of Meghan at this event. I can’t imagine combing through all of them to find one shot for the purpose of criticism. That level of obsessiveness escapes my understanding.
> .


isn't that exactly how tabloids work?


----------



## sdkitty

LuckyBitch said:


> Keep loving him, he's a good one even if he is, at the moment in this new situation, possibly trying too hard. However I doubt very much that "he decided" he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket...


IDK.  I recall hearing that he did want to and when he told his grandfather, Philip said he would walk with him.  I like the story


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> I do feel for all these women who have to live with this unrelenting scrutiny. One small error gets turned into a cause celebre


This is true - people still talk about the tag that was in Meghan's dress last tour.  Stuff like that happens.

I'm seeing more and more photos of the event and her bra is showing in 25-50% of the photos I'm seeing.  It's not a big deal as far as I'm concerned.  (My bra has peeked out a couple of times today.  I hiked up my shirt and moved on with my life.)  But this is definitely not the case of Meghan haters poring over hundreds and hundreds of photos to find the ONE photo where something is wrong.


----------



## VickyB

I think she is pregnant.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm guessing that particular shirt doesn't have any top buttons? The photo with her sunglasses hanging down nearly to her belly just looks bad.


----------



## myown

VickyB said:


> I think she is pregnant.


i´m torn between myself needed almost one year to lose all the baby weight and she must be pregnant again  (and playing with us if we notice)


----------



## bag-mania

I'd be surprised if she's pregnant again. Especially after this Harper's Bazaar article about how busy she is with one baby. This is undoubtedly another tone-deaf moment. Trying to commiserate with the locals about childcare when she has several servants specifically devoted to tending to baby Archie for her. 


*Meghan Markle Says Her and Prince Harry's "Plate Is Full" with Baby Archie*
Feeling overwhelmed with parental love and responsibility is a universal experience for all new parents. DuchessMeghan testified to that sentiment today while speaking to locals in Cape Town, South Africa.

During a visit to the home of local resident Shamiela Samodien in Bo-Kaap, a colorful neighborhood in the South African city, the duchess spoke about her and Prince Harry's newfound role as parents. "Our plate is full with a five-month-old at the moment," Meghan told the locals. "It's so busy!"

Baby Archie has joined the duke and duchess during their royal tour. However, he has yet to make an appearance.

After the visit, Samodien, a chef who lives in Cape Town, told _BAZAAR.com,_ "They're both proud parents, very happy and have good energy. They are caring people and it shows in the work they do. They spoke about Archie and how he has been very comfortable since arriving and they said he's a very good boy. You could see how happy they were."

Earlier in the day, Harry and Meghan visited Auwal Mosque, the oldest and first mosque built in South Africa. There, they met with faith leaders, including Imam Sheikh Ismail Londt and Muslim community leader Mohamed Groenwald.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a29208263/meghan-markle-plate-is-full-baby-archie/


----------



## Flatsy

I wish that Meghan and Harry had sought a title for Archie, because in the absence of one, the press gave him their own title and call him "Baby Archie" 100% of the time.  That's getting old fast.


----------



## buffym

daisychainz said:


> This is a nice picture of her. This outfit is a repeat one? It's a good idea to make her wear some outfits a few times, whoever is suggesting that.



Meghan has reworn outfits since their engagement. A few examples,


----------



## limom

She should wear navy blue more often. It is a very good color on her, imho.


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> Meghan has reworn outfits since their engagement. A few examples,
> 
> View attachment 4548622
> View attachment 4548623
> View attachment 4548624
> View attachment 4548625
> View attachment 4548626


Eeeegahds .. a NY Yankees cap on a LA girl?!! .. for shame!!  LOL


----------



## lulilu

LuckyBitch said:


> Keep loving him, he's a good one even if he is, at the moment in this new situation, possibly trying too hard. However I doubt very much that "he decided" he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket...





sdkitty said:


> IDK.  I recall hearing that he did want to and when he told his grandfather, Philip said he would walk with him.  I like the story



I just read the it was Prince Phillip who urged the boys to walk with the casket, saying he would walk with them, along with their father.  He was so young, I doubt he had the idea to walk with his mother's casket.  It was very touching in any event.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> I wish that Meghan and Harry had sought a title for Archie, because in the absence of one, the press gave him their own title and call him "Baby Archie" 100% of the time.  That's getting old fast.



Hopefully they won't still be calling him Baby Archie when he is a teenager


----------



## bag-mania

He won't be baby Archie forever. Soon he'll be toddler Archie, then transition into preschool Archie, followed by kid Archie. 

Watch out for adolescent Archie! Puberty is going to make him a pain to be around.


----------



## BagLovingMom

Flatsy said:


> It's like she just brought her suitcase along from the last tour, LOL.  It's good to see her re-wearing things.
> 
> I left the original Michelle ***** comment alone because analyzing and debating public opinions towards MO is an entirely different topic and it's a big topic.  It's not fair to throw your opinion about MO out there when the people you are speaking to are not in a position where they can respond to it.
> 
> I also think that throwing out accusations about people's political affiliations based on your perception of their opinions about Meghan is also not fair and not something that should be done in this thread.  For one thing, I think you have it dead wrong in jumping to the conclusion that people who are critical of Meghan are conservative and/or dislike MO.  But nobody here should have to refute that in order to justify their opinions about Meghan.
> 
> These threads are not supposed to be political.  Inserting political opinions/accusations into the thread under the premise that it's "your opinion" is bringing politics into the discussion where it doesn't belong.


My comment wasn’t political at all. The point of my comment was that people made assumptions about MO as a woman of color. IMO people make similar  assumptions about Meghan as a woman of color. I too am a woman of color, I identify with these women and know assumptions made about myself. There’s nothing political about that.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> He won't be baby Archie forever. Soon he'll be toddler Archie, then transition into preschool Archie, followed by kid Archie.
> 
> Watch out for adolescent Archie! Puberty is going to make him a pain to be around.



If he is anything like his dad was, they are going to have one heck of a teenager!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I figured someone gave it to her.....don't know if it was a child or not.  hard to just toss something away when it's given to you


The Queen and her offspring have people behind them to hand the flowers to.  Do Meg and Harry have handlers on this trip, I wonder. 

The flower looks pretty, I think. 


sdkitty said:


> I want to keep loving Harry....I'll always remember when he was just a little boy and he decided he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket.  I don't think anything can take that away but have to agree, he does seem like maybe he's trying too hard here


I heard interviews with Harry where he said he was kinda forced to walk behind, even though he was so young and he seems to be holding a grudge about it, to this day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

FreeSpirit71 said:


> ^Have you ever been to a mosque in Africa? I have - North Africa to be exact.
> 
> My hair looked like this, and my arms were "uncovered" (though past elbow). Not all mosques are hardline strict.  As long as one is dressed modestly and to what is acceptable for that mosque, that's what's important.





mrsinsyder said:


> I have.
> 
> She's on a world stage. She can do better.


Why cover her hair at all? SA is not a muslim country.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Why cover her hair at all? SA is not a muslim country.


She was in a mosque.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> Interesting, was it in Morocco by any chance .. as they are less strict, cannot say the same in other North African countries (Egypt).  My head had to be covered almost completely and no bare arms, no bare legs (I actually wore an ankle boot with my long dress).  But, you are right .. it really depends on the type of Mosque you are visiting.


I have been to Morocco, but no this was in Tunisia. But agree, it can vary. I dressed modestly, but not dissimiliar to Meghan.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> As I was watching it live it did cross my mind how long it would take for the wind to "reveal" her cleavage, lol..


I think she's been in the entertainment industry too long. It's probably second nature to always dress like you're merching yourself of the next role. It was no mistake, I'm sure.


----------



## zen1965

When visiting religous sites it is best to do as the locals do (or similar to how they do). I think her attire was culturally by & large appropriate. I was more surprised to see them walking up to the Mosque holding hands (never seen this in neither sub-Saharan countries nor North African ones). Then again, I guess, PDA at almost all times is their trademark.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s definitely wearing it intentionally unbuttoned low, for some reason. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> 
> View attachment 4548447


I think Diana wore shirts with sunglasses like this? I've seen comparison pics on "the other forum".


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> She was in a mosque.


I guess we'll just disagree on this. In a Muslim country, yes, I do agree, you follow the traditions. But in non Muslim countries no. Then everyone follows the majority law, no matter the non majority religion. Head dress optional even at places of worship. No exceptions.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I guess we'll just disagree on this. In a Muslim country, yes, I do agree, you follow the traditions. But in non Muslim countries no. Then everyone follows the majority law, no matter the non majority religion. Head dress optional even at places of worship. No exceptions.


What? When you go into a house of worship, you do whatever that religion requires. Most mosques wouldn’t even let her inside if her head wasn’t covered.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Parents hire help (nanny/daycare/relative/friends/whoever) to assist with their babies all the time.  This isn’t new; nor is it a indicator that a parent(s) isn’t hands on with their child(ren) because they have help. 

ETA:  I wish I hired a nanny for the price I paid for daycare.  It was darn near $1300/per month for a infant!




bag-mania said:


> I'd be surprised if she's pregnant again. Especially after this Harper's Bazaar article about how busy she is with one baby. This is undoubtedly another tone-deaf moment. Trying to commiserate with the locals about childcare when she has several servants specifically devoted to tending to baby Archie for her.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle Says Her and Prince Harry's "Plate Is Full" with Baby Archie*
> Feeling overwhelmed with parental love and responsibility is a universal experience for all new parents. DuchessMeghan testified to that sentiment today while speaking to locals in Cape Town, South Africa.
> 
> During a visit to the home of local resident Shamiela Samodien in Bo-Kaap, a colorful neighborhood in the South African city, the duchess spoke about her and Prince Harry's newfound role as parents. "Our plate is full with a five-month-old at the moment," Meghan told the locals. "It's so busy!"
> 
> Baby Archie has joined the duke and duchess during their royal tour. However, he has yet to make an appearance.
> 
> After the visit, Samodien, a chef who lives in Cape Town, told _BAZAAR.com,_ "They're both proud parents, very happy and have good energy. They are caring people and it shows in the work they do. They spoke about Archie and how he has been very comfortable since arriving and they said he's a very good boy. You could see how happy they were."
> 
> Earlier in the day, Harry and Meghan visited Auwal Mosque, the oldest and first mosque built in South Africa. There, they met with faith leaders, including Imam Sheikh Ismail Londt and Muslim community leader Mohamed Groenwald.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a29208263/meghan-markle-plate-is-full-baby-archie/


----------



## sdkitty

LuckyBitch said:


> Keep loving him, he's a good one even if he is, at the moment in this new situation, possibly trying too hard. However I doubt very much that "he decided" he wanted to walk behind his mother's casket...


that's they way I recall it was reported.....of course I wasn't there


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> What? When you go into a house of worship, you do whatever that religion requires. Most mosques wouldn’t even let her inside if her head wasn’t covered.


In a house of worship in a country adhering to the same laws as that particular religion, again, I agree. As guests of or minorities in other countries with other traditions, no. The laws of that society take precedens. Or should. But in the progressive era we're in many seem hell-bent on throwing away their liberties for a badge of wokeness.

The hypocrisy and mental gymnastics of Western "feminists" like Meghan and some of her "forces for change" covering their heads to the demands of the patriarchies of non Western cultures never fail to "amuse" me. Especially as many women- and a woman lawyer who defended them, - in Iran for ex are currently in jail for peacefully protesting being forced to cover their heads in public. We're not even talking places of worship here but just taking a walk down a public street with the wind in your loose hair. A freedom many in the West seem to be taking just a little bit too much for granted.

I guess Meghan's loose hair and head cover was some kind of "feminist" attempt at "look, I'm not really submitting"


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> In a house of worship in a country adhering to the same laws as that particular religion, again, I agree. As guests of or minorities in other countries with other traditions, no. The laws of that society take precedens. Or should. But in the progressive era we're in many seem hell-bent on throwing away their liberties for a badge of wokeness.
> 
> The hypocrisy and mental gymnastics of Western "feminists" like Meghan and some of her "forces for change" covering their heads to the demands of the patriarchies of non Western cultures never fail to "amuse" me. Especially as many women- and a woman lawyer who defended them, - in Iran for ex are currently in jail for peacefully protesting being forced to cover their heads in public. We're not even talking places of worship here but just taking a walk down a public street with the wind in your loose hair. A freedom many in the West seem to be taking just a little bit too much for granted.
> 
> I guess Meghan's loose hair and head cover was some kind of "feminist" attempt at "look, I'm not really submitting"


or maybe she just wanted to look pretty


----------



## Welltraveled!

Here’s the full shot of the photo from a few pages back.  It seems a few of the women hair were left out underneath their scarf.


----------



## Welltraveled!




----------



## Welltraveled!

My fav photos on their Day 2 tour.  I wonder what was said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> or maybe she just wanted to look pretty


----------



## chicaloca

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> In a house of worship in a country adhering to the same laws as that particular religion, again, I agree. As guests of or minorities in other countries with other traditions, no. The laws of that society take precedens. Or should. But in the progressive era we're in many seem hell-bent on throwing away their liberties for a badge of wokeness.
> 
> The hypocrisy and mental gymnastics of Western "feminists" like Meghan and some of her "forces for change" covering their heads to the demands of the patriarchies of non Western cultures never fail to "amuse" me. Especially as many women- and a woman lawyer who defended them, - in Iran for ex are currently in jail for peacefully protesting being forced to cover their heads in public. We're not even talking places of worship here but just taking a walk down a public street with the wind in your loose hair. A freedom many in the West seem to be taking just a little bit too much for granted.
> 
> I guess Meghan's loose hair and head cover was some kind of "feminist" attempt at "look, I'm not really submitting"



Not every Muslim woman views the head coverings as oppressive. While its true some are forced to wear it, many more wear the hijab by choice. This excerpt best articulates what I’m trying to say:

_Some women wear hijab because they don’t have a choice—their culture or family mandates it. In many Muslim countries, wearing hijab is the law. But, often, Muslim women cover their heads and faces because they choose to. Their modesty is an expression of their religious conviction and devotion to God. This is a brief introduction to the most common styles of hijab around the world.
_
To me it’s no different than orthodox Christian women who wear modest clothes by choice. 
_
_


----------



## mdcx

There are some Muslim countries where the head covering is more like a loosely draped scarf and the hair can peek out the front. A lot of Persian women where I live wear it this way and it does look very pretty.
Kudos to Meghan for not deliberately flouting convention so far on this trip! I am a little bit surprised.


----------



## Jayne1

Welltraveled! said:


> View attachment 4548822


I’ve said before I’m so impressed with her ability to keep a smile on her face although sometimes it hurts to look at because of the effort it looks like it takes. 

This is an example where I think she’s trying really hard to keep her smile on. 

I don’t envy this part of the job, as much fun as a trip can be, it’s still work when you’re being constantly observed.


----------



## marthastoo

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Sure she can - and has. I think Meghan has made a few missteps. I just don't happen to think this is one of them or that in a sea of positive feeling at this event, her shirt is that big a deal.
> 
> Even Diana got caught out with a bad angle and some sunlight.
> 
> *kanyeshrug*


It's not like it was a really windy day and her dress flew up and exposed her thong.  lol


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> or maybe she just wanted to look pretty



I'm sure a combination of her acting years + knowing that you are being constantly photographed and under constant scrutiny, can't say I blame her.

Photos from the Mosque visit - she has this look on her face that says, "I know they're taking my picture... ... ... And pose... ... "


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


>


That's the face I was describing.  Trying so hard to keep a pleasant look on her face.  You can see the effort in her eyes.

The Queen doesn't try to smile all the time.  Nor does Anne. But Will, Kate and Meg do.  Is it for the critics so they don't look glum?


----------



## prettyprincess

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I guess we'll just disagree on this. In a Muslim country, yes, I do agree, you follow the traditions. But in non Muslim countries no. Then everyone follows the majority law, no matter the non majority religion. Head dress optional even at places of worship. No exceptions.



That’s being intentionally subversive. If you walk into a mosque, you should dress conservatively and cover your head. Same rules apply at the Vatican. When I was in Rome there were dress code signs for tourists. No shorts, no sleeveless shirts, nothing indecent or provocative. Same with synagogues, because I think conservative Jewish women are required to cover their hair as well. Meghan is being very respectful here, and it shows class.


----------



## LuckyBitch

Jayne1 said:


> The Queen and her offspring have people behind them to hand the flowers to.  Do Meg and Harry have handlers on this trip, I wonder.
> 
> The flower looks pretty, I think.
> 
> I heard interviews with Harry where he said he was kinda forced to walk behind, even though he was so young and he seems to be holding a grudge about it, to this day.


Yes, I don't think either boys had a say in the matter...


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> What? When you go into a house of worship, you do whatever that religion requires. Most mosques wouldn’t even let her inside if her head wasn’t covered.


Exactly. When I've gone into places of worship in Greece. Italy, France, Spain, USA and here in the UK, I always cover up my shoulders and not wear anything short. It's about respect.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly. When I've gone into places of worship in Greece. Italy, France, Spain, USA and here in the UK, I always cover up my shoulders and not wear anything short. It's about respect.


as for christians it's more a "come as you are" in Germany


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> as for christians it's more a "come as you are" in Germany


A lot of people are like that here too.
This is the way I was brought up, so it's stuck.
Like someone upthread said about the Vatican, I've seen dress code signs outside churches, mainly Greece, Spain and Italy.


----------



## myown

okay, I need to ask now. Who is that Piers Morgan guy and why is he allowed to make all these nasty comments and why tf do we pay attention to it? is he a royal insider?


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> A lot of people are like that here too.
> This is the way I was brought up, so it's stuck.
> Like someone upthread said about the Vatican, I've seen dress code signs outside churches, mainly Greece, Spain and Italy.


I need to pay more attention to that in other countries next time! (I never visit churches etc, that's why I never paid attention)


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> That's the face I was describing.  Trying so hard to keep a pleasant look on her face.  You can see the effort in her eyes.
> 
> The Queen doesn't try to smile all the time.  Nor does Anne. But Will, Kate and Meg do.  Is it for the critics so they don't look glum?


I know what you mean with Meghan, she does the little flutter of her lashes too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

There's a new story on their Insta. They are both walking with Archie and he is *adorable*.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## FreeSpirit71

^It's slightly longer on the SussexRoyal insta.

NVM. I can see the longer version got posted


----------



## Morgan R

Prince Harry and Meghan with their son Archie meeting Archbishop Desmond Tutu and his daughter Thandeka at the Desmond & Leah Tutu Legacy Foundation








	

		
			
		

		
	
 ]


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## Morgan R

More pictures Prince Harry and Meghan with their son Archie meeting Archbishop Desmond Tutu and his daughter Thandeka at the Desmond & Leah Tutu Legacy Foundation


----------



## Clearblueskies

Haha I like the way he’s zeroed in on the cakes!


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh, he's adorable


----------



## limom

Do I peak red hair?
He looks just like the prince, imho.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## mdcx

Archie is so lovely and I have to say Meghan looks like she is comfortable holding him and she is well dressed for the occasion. Full marks!


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## buffym

He looks like Harry, but Meghan and Harry have similar features so I see Meghan’s features too.


----------



## buffym

Meghan meeting women in tech


----------



## bag-princess

A closer pic of Archie  looking like his daddy’s mini-me!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Nice rewear of budget friendly items to date! Even if not exactly executed perfectly, it’s still better than the $13,000k Valentino number at a celeb wedding. I guess Sunshine Sachs has done an excellent job so far keeping fashion and jewelry mostly sustainable, local artisan, and available to the masses.

Also, there is no better PR than a baby. Archie should have been showed off long ago to help with H&M previous missteps. That ridiculous excuse of Archie being too young to travel to Balmoral but young enough to visit SA, still seems odd, but whatever, the baby’s cuteness is wearing me down. Lol!


----------



## bag-princess




----------



## mrsinsyder

Bless those Mountbatten genes are strong.


----------



## bisbee

LVSistinaMM said:


> Nice rewear of budget friendly items to date! Even if not exactly executed perfectly, it’s still better than the $13,000k Valentino number at a celeb wedding. I guess Sunshine Sachs has done an excellent job so far keeping fashion and jewelry mostly sustainable, local artisan, and available to the masses.
> 
> Also, there is no better PR than a baby. Archie should have been showed off long ago to help with H&M previous missteps. That ridiculous excuse of Archie being too young to travel to Balmoral but young enough to visit SA, still seems odd, but whatever, the baby’s cuteness is wearing me down. Lol!



I could be wrong, but I don’t recall seeing more than a quick glimpse of each of Kate and William’s children when they were younger than 4 months old.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## mrsinsyder

bisbee said:


> I could be wrong, but I don’t recall seeing more than a quick glimpse of each of Kate and William’s children when they were younger than 4 months old.


Didn't they stand outside the hospital and present each one for like, a million photos?


----------



## LibbyRuth

bisbee said:


> I could be wrong, but I don’t recall seeing more than a quick glimpse of each of Kate and William’s children when they were younger than 4 months old.


I think that's accurate. However, Prince George went to Australia with William and Kate when he was about 8 months old, and I"m not sure I see a great deal of difference between 4 months and 8 months. I remember baby William going on a trip with Charles and Diana too.  I think it's a fairly common way for them to allow the public to see a bit of a royal baby. Also notable that they tend to do it with a first born, but not with subsequent children where the older child would also be subject to more exposure.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## LittleStar88

buffym said:


> He looks like Harry, but Meghan and Harry have similar features so I see Meghan’s features too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4549320



These photos and videos made my day! Archie is a doll! Meghan looks lovely - the dress and hair and everything are on point! Everyone so happy... What a wonderfully warm and joyful moment!


----------



## buffym

More pictures from the tech meeting, Meghan first wore this jumpsuit while pregnant and with Vogue.


----------



## daisychainz

Finally the baby!! Looks very much like Harry from what I see.


----------



## Jayne1

Is the baby only 4 months?


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Is the baby only 4 months?



Closer to five months, but still he's a big baby.


----------



## Aimee3

Jayne1 said:


> Is the baby only 4 months?


A week shy of 5 months.  Both his parents are tall so I don’t see anything unusual.


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> A week shy of 5 months.  Both his parents are tall so I don’t see anything unusual.


Not talking about the height, although Meg seems shorter than 5'5" without her heels.  I saw her once in Toronto, in flat (but gorgeous) boots and she looked shorter to me...  Anyway back to the baby... he just seems so sturdy for a 4 month old.  Or 5.  I guess I can't remember when mine were that age.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jcnc

Loving the SA photos. Meghan looks so "in her element" and dressed up great! Looks like she really thrives in public limelight (and nothing wrong with that!!) But some of her actions do feel like PR stunts.. Like so many people had already predicted that Meghan wil debut Archie during her SA tour and thats exactly what she did. He is a CUTIE but the PR angels feels odd on royals and more acceptable for celebs IMO


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think it was easy to predict Archie would be debuted during the SA tour because it's a royal tradition.  William debuted in Australia when Charles and Diana made a trip there when he was a baby. George followed suit going to Australia with his parents when he was a baby. So tradition said that it was highly likely Meghan and Harry would follow suit and do the same.  I don't see that as Hollywood PR.  I see it as a BRF tradition.  We'll see in time if the visit with Bishop Tutu will be Archie's only public outing, or if he'll follow the tradition of having a play time photo op where the public can adore on a baby being a baby like William and George had.


----------



## bag-mania

The line between royalty and celebrity is becoming thinner with each generation. The main difference is less dignity.


----------



## CAH

The difference though is we got to see pictures of Charles and William before they went on tour.  With Archie we were told everything about him was private, then lo and behold here they are showing him off in Africa.  I don't have a problem with him being seen, but it does seem like slap in the face to the British public that they weren't allowed to see him.


----------



## LibbyRuth

CAH said:


> The difference though is we got to see pictures of Charles and William before they went on tour.  With Archie we were told everything about him was private, then lo and behold here they are showing him off in Africa.  I don't have a problem with him being seen, but it does seem like slap in the face to the British public that they weren't allowed to see him.



I didn't realize there was a block on the photos being available in Britain.


----------



## Clearblueskies

There wasn’t a block, but they made an awful lot of fuss about privacy, causing will they won’t they stories in the press - tedious stuff.  In the end it’s been no different to the other royal kids - a photo shortly after the birth, a photo at the christening, photos on tour.  It didn’t need a fuss  I really don’t get why they do it.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> The line between royalty and celebrity is becoming thinner with each generation. The main difference is less dignity.


Well said!


----------



## LittleStar88

Clearblueskies said:


> There wasn’t a block, but they made an awful lot of fuss about privacy, causing will they won’t they stories in the press - tedious stuff.  In the end it’s been no different to the other royal kids - a photo shortly after the birth, a photo at the christening, photos on tour.  It didn’t need a fuss  I really don’t get why they do it.



I think the media was making a bigger deal of it, actually. I don't feel like I have been deprived of Archie photos. He was a drooling meatloaf for the first several months, and now he is being included in the tour looking like a little cutie. There's time to take him out for public appearances, but let the kid have some kind of private life and not be put on display on demand.


----------



## prettyprincess

They are a darling little family!! 
Off topic, I wish she’d show us her skincare routine
 She’s always glowing!


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the media was making a bigger deal of it, actually. I don't feel like I have been deprived of Archie photos. He was a drooling meatloaf for the first several months, and now he is being included in the tour looking like a little cutie. There's time to take him out for public appearances, but let the kid have some kind of private life and not be put on display on demand.


I don’t disagree, but he’s been no more and no less on show than any of the other royal babies, that’s my point.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the media was making a bigger deal of it, actually. I don't feel like I have been deprived of Archie photos. He was a drooling meatloaf for the first several months, and now he is being included in the tour looking like a little cutie. There's time to take him out for public appearances, but let the kid have some kind of private life and not be put on display on demand.


This really isn't any different to what the Cambridges did with George, we saw him properly at 8 months old in Australia, Archie is shy on 5 months. 
Yes, the media made it more of an issue than it needed to be.


----------



## chicaloca

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the media was making a bigger deal of it, actually. I don't feel like I have been deprived of Archie photos. He was a drooling meatloaf for the first several months, and now he is being included in the tour looking like a little cutie. There's time to take him out for public appearances, but let the kid have some kind of private life and not be put on display on demand.



I agree. Archie has never been hidden. We’ve seen more of him than we did of future king George at the same age. Archie is only 5 months old. What do people want from him? Why do people feel such entitlement to the seventh in line to the throne? 

What the Sussexes did do —and I respect them for it — is to protect all the people connected with Archie (I.e. the birth team, his godparents) from media intrusion. Everyone connected with the Sussexes - specifically Meghan — has been targeted by tabloids and hounded for info about her. Also I’m sure the Sussexes didn’t want a repeat of the nurse from the Cambridge birth team who killed herself after being tricked by a radio station into divulging info about the birth.

 The tabloids are angry that they have not been able to exploit  or monetize Archie’s birth so they manufactured the false “privacy” narrative. The Sussexes have not made any extraordinary demands for privacy.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> Why do people feel such entitlement to the seventh in line to the throne?



Because the public financially supports them, I'd guess.

_Yes I know Meghan has her own money. Yes I know Harry has his own money. Yes I know they get money from Prince Charles. Yes I know the monarchy supports tourism. _


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Because the public financially supports them, I'd guess.
> 
> _Yes I know Meghan has her own money. Yes I know Harry has his own money. Yes I know they get money from Prince Charles. Yes I know the monarchy supports tourism. _


Exactly.  And not so much fake news as dodgy PR to my mind, that whipped up the press  I’m hoping they’ve turned a corner.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> He looks like Harry, but Meghan and Harry have similar features so I see Meghan’s features too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4549320


Great picture. Glad to see Harry looking sharp in a suit. Archie is adorable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> Nice rewear of budget friendly items to date! Even if not exactly executed perfectly, it’s still better than the $13,000k Valentino number at a celeb wedding. I guess Sunshine Sachs has done an excellent job so far keeping fashion and jewelry mostly sustainable, local artisan, and available to the masses.
> 
> Also, there is no better PR than a baby. Archie should have been showed off long ago to help with H&M previous missteps. That ridiculous excuse of Archie being too young to travel to Balmoral but young enough to visit SA, still seems odd, but whatever, the baby’s cuteness is wearing me down. Lol!



Why couldn’t  they have shown him off in England?


----------



## A1aGypsy

prettyprincess said:


> They are a darling little family!!
> Off topic, I wish she’d show us her skincare routine
> She’s always glowing!



Look on People.com. Nearly every time I go there they are click baiting her skincare regime. She blogged about it before getting married.


----------



## chicaloca

LVSistinaMM said:


> Also, there is no better PR than a baby. Archie should have been showed off long ago to help with H&M previous missteps. That ridiculous excuse of Archie being too young to travel to Balmoral but young enough to visit SA, still seems odd, but whatever, the baby’s cuteness is wearing me down. Lol!



I’m sorry this is s perfect example of tabloid stories being treated as facts. Harry hasn’t been to Balmoral in years.  The press falsely claimed the Sussexes were going then made up the “Archie’s too young” story to save face when they didn’t turn up. The Sussexes live down the road from the Queen. They probably see her every weekend. You are absolutely right that it would be ridiculous to claim Archie was too young for Balmoral but not South Africa. The question then becomes, why believe something so ridiculous? 

Also, perhaps they didn’t “show Archie off” earlier because they don’t view their baby as a PR prop?  He’s their son who they clearly adore and want to protect like most parents do.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Why couldn’t  they have shown him off in England?



Because they were going to try and sell photos of him but they knew it would get messy so they changed their minds.


----------



## threadbender

Archie is the spitting image of Harry! What a cutie! Meghan looks like she is at ease and enjoying herself. 
I just love babies!


----------



## LittleStar88

chicaloca said:


> I agree. Archie has never been hidden. We’ve seen more of him than we did of future king George at the same age. Archie is only 5 months old. What do people want from him? Why do people feel such entitlement to the seventh in line to the throne?
> 
> What the Sussexes did do —and I respect them for it — is to protect all the people connected with Archie (I.e. the birth team, his godparents) from media intrusion. Everyone connected with the Sussexes - specifically Meghan — has been targeted by tabloids and hounded for info about her. Also I’m sure the Sussexes didn’t want a repeat of the nurse from the Cambridge birth team who killed herself after being tricked by a radio station into divulging info about the birth.
> 
> The tabloids are angry that they have not been able to exploit  or monetize Archie’s birth so they manufactured the false “privacy” narrative. The Sussexes have not made any extraordinary demands for privacy.



When presented in this light, I have to give props to Meghan and Harry for protecting the people involved in their lives by taking the brunt of the negative press.

I totally forgot about that nurse. So awful and I hope that stunt still haunts the team involved in orchestrating it.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Because they were going to try and sell photos of him but they knew it would get messy so they changed their minds.


They don't sell photos


----------



## gracekelly

Sigh.  I think the privacy thing  got out of hand and showing him in SA also makes me think it a bit hypocritical. If they wanted total privacy they should have left him home. Otherwise they could have taken a nice clear shot of him at the pub. The public would have loved it. Waiting for the SA trip just smacks as a publicity grab from SS.

Waiting  for the sugar attack.


----------



## MarieCurie

marthastoo said:


> At any rate, so someone from Africa is saying black Americans aren't black?  Mmm ok.  *insert giant eyeroll*
> 
> I like how people feel like that they can police who can call themselves black, or whatever racial identity.  Africans have a very different experience than African Americans.  In here in America, it's all about how the individual identifies him/herself.  Not if some random person in Africa (or on a purse message board) feels someone is black enough.



I agree with you, I was just having a: "Africa is not a country" moment


----------



## MarieCurie

This thread though


----------



## LibbyRuth

Clearblueskies said:


> There wasn’t a block, but they made an awful lot of fuss about privacy, causing will they won’t they stories in the press - tedious stuff.  In the end it’s been no different to the other royal kids - a photo shortly after the birth, a photo at the christening, photos on tour.  It didn’t need a fuss  I really don’t get why they do it.


That's why I said I was curious as to whether or not there'd be a play date type photo op with Archie on this trip. If there is, I agree with you that it's been no different.  If there is not, then to me it says they are finding a balance and compromise between privacy and duty.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Sigh.  I think the privacy thing  got out of hand and showing him in SA also makes me think it a bit hypocritical. If they wanted total privacy they should have left him home. Otherwise they could have taken a nice clear shot of him at the pub. The public would have loved it. Waiting for the SA trip just smacks as a publicity grab from SS.
> 
> Waiting  for the sugar attack.


They can have all the privacy demands they want, they'd just need to just renounce their titles and stop living high off the public dime.

It'll never happen.


----------



## mrsinsyder

South Africa's version of #bananagate... ME TOO cookies


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chicaloca said:


> Not every Muslim woman views the head coverings as oppressive. While its true some are forced to wear it, many more wear the hijab by choice. This excerpt best articulates what I’m trying to say:
> 
> _Some women wear hijab because they don’t have a choice—their culture or family mandates it. In many Muslim countries, wearing hijab is the law. But, often, Muslim women cover their heads and faces because they choose to. Their modesty is an expression of their religious conviction and devotion to God. This is a brief introduction to the most common styles of hijab around the world.
> _
> To me it’s no different than orthodox Christian women who wear modest clothes by choice.





prettyprincess said:


> That’s being intentionally subversive. If you walk into a mosque, you should dress conservatively and cover your head. Same rules apply at the Vatican. When I was in Rome there were dress code signs for tourists. No shorts, no sleeveless shirts, nothing indecent or provocative. Same with synagogues, because I think conservative Jewish women are required to cover their hair as well. Meghan is being very respectful here, and it shows class.





Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly. When I've gone into places of worship in Greece. Italy, France, Spain, USA and here in the UK, I always cover up my shoulders and not wear anything short. It's about respect.





Sharont2305 said:


> A lot of people are like that here too.
> This is the way I was brought up, so it's stuck.
> Like someone upthread said about the Vatican, I've seen dress code signs outside churches, mainly Greece, Spain and Italy.


Comparing Islam to modern day Catholicism is not quite the same, now is it? If this was the Middle Ages and during the Inquisition, I’d agree, but at this point in time it’s rather disingenuous to compare Catholics and other Christians to Muslims. Especially from a feminist point of view. Feminists like Meghan and other progressives supporting and even joining forces with groups advocating for sharia laws in the West (like forced concealing of heads and bodies for women, female genital mutilation and the beating and killing of gays to name but a few) spilling far outside of the confines of places of worship, is just another triumph of the gymnastics of woke moral relativism. Speaking of which; of course Spanish, Greek and Italian churches can ask visitors to adhere to a particular dress code in their own countries. I’m not questioning Muslims’ rights to follow their laws in their countries.

It’s just so much safer protesting and disrespecting Christians, isn’t it? The Met Gala 2018 was another such peak hypocrisy moment. Imagine a Muslim version of that spectacle. No, I can’t either. Glaringly, for the woke, certain groups are more equal than others. Why aren’t Christians afforded the same courtesy and respect as certain other religions demand and get, I wonder? Don’t overexert yourselves, people. Because maybe it’s not the religion per se that’s being disrespected but the actual peoples who make up the majority of Christians in the West.

Common courtesy, dress code and showing general respect by not looking like a female or male thot at a workplace, place of worship, school etc is one thing. But being singled out and forced to cover your head or whole body is quite another. What the Muslim world and others do in this and other regards I might not agree with, but it is their business and the West’s and others’ meddling in their affairs has had catastrophic consequences for both Muslims and the West. But in the West, where we are by no means perfect either, we should non the less be afforded the same courtesy by Muslims visiting or living here just as we should give when visiting their countries. West’s secular laws should prevail in the West and women singled out for forced covering of their heads at any location in our societies is not supported by our laws.

But maybe allowing religions in the West that demand women conceal themselves, stay at the back of the congregation behind a fence or a wall segregated from men or are forbidden to even enter a mosque is just another amazing win for feminists. So.Much.Winning.Yay.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...-only-the-same-was-true-for-the-10020259.html

Harry and Meghan visiting a mosque in non-Muslim SA is them sending a clear woke statement. How many Khoisan peoples have they visited or are planning to visit during this trip?


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Sigh.  I think the privacy thing  got out of hand and showing him in SA also makes me think it a bit hypocritical. If they wanted total privacy they should have left him home. Otherwise they could have taken a nice clear shot of him at the pub. The public would have loved it. Waiting for the SA trip just smacks as a publicity grab from SS.
> 
> Waiting  for the sugar attack.



I think public moments versus private moments... Let them have a meal out without having to hold up Archie in The Lion King style. Public tour, good time to roll out the kid.

Yes, they are owned by the public, but even they deserve a moment out as a family to try to do some kind of normal outing without feeling obligated to roll the baby out for public display every time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Why couldn’t  they have shown him off in England?



The U.K. is bigger than England. Or the same reason Prince George attended a play date in Australia and not in the UK.


----------



## LuckyBitch

mrsinsyder said:


> Because the public financially supports them, I'd guess.
> 
> _Yes I know Meghan has her own money. Yes I know Harry has his own money. Yes I know they get money from Prince Charles. Yes I know the monarchy supports tourism. _



They're royalty, that's the way it goes.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> South Africa's version of #bananagate... ME TOO cookies
> 
> View attachment 4549641


There are no words. I am sorry but this is so wrong.


----------



## LibbyRuth

threadbender said:


> There are no words. I am sorry but this is so wrong.



They are cookies being served with Bishop Desmond Tutu as the host.  Can't we just give him a pass for having a pretty solid record on human rights issues and call it a day?


----------



## threadbender

LibbyRuth said:


> They are cookies being served with Bishop Desmond Tutu as the host.  Can't we just give him a pass for having a pretty solid record on human rights issues and call it a day?


Sure. I guess it just seems, to me, to make light of such a serious issue. I had a an instant reaction. 
jmho


----------



## Morgan R

**


----------



## Sharont2305

My only "complaint" about today is that we didn't see Archie being held by Harry.


----------



## Gal4Dior

That jumpsuit from Everlane is comfy but not flattering on a person with a problem area right in the middle. I have issues with my middle and I couldn’t justify $130 US for a jumpsuit that made me look heavier in the middle when I tried it on.

It isn’t her best choice of item to wear while still carrying pregnancy weight, it emphasizes the wrong places. That Club Monaco number in white and blue was perfection, though!


----------



## limom

LibbyRuth said:


> They are cookies being served with Bishop Desmond Tutu as the host.  Can't we just give him a pass for having a pretty solid record on human rights issues and call it a day?


Why can’t there be just regular cookies with plain frosting?
The world is getting tackier and tackier...
I doubt very much that it the Bishop’s idea but those involved with that crap are morons, imo.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> South Africa's version of #bananagate... ME TOO cookies
> 
> View attachment 4549641



 Everybody wants to spread awareness through "snack food social media" these days.


----------



## buffym

Archie was wearing H&M


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> Why can’t there be just regular cookies with plain frosting?
> The world is getting tackier and tackier...
> I doubt very much that it the Bishop’s idea but those involved with that crap are morons, imo.


Nothing says “sorry you had your life ruined by sexual violence” like a me too cookie.


----------



## LibbyRuth

limom said:


> Why can’t there be just regular cookies with plain frosting?
> The world is getting tackier and tackier...
> I doubt very much that it the Bishop’s idea but those involved with that crap are morons, imo.


I'm guessing the answer to that question is hidden in the same cavern as my question about why people have to nitpick every tiny detail and get upset about the silliest thing is located. A baker with a talent for decorating cookies and cakes made some sweets to be on display when a Duke and Duchess visited a man who has contributed a ton to the world in the name of human rights.  In my book, that's the end of the story.  No need to analyze further.


----------



## limom

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm guessing the answer to that question is hidden in the same cavern as my question about why people have to nitpick every tiny detail and get upset about the silliest thing is located. A baker with a talent for decorating cookies and cakes made some sweets to be on display when a Duke and Duchess visited a man who has contributed a ton to the world in the name of human rights.  In my book, that's the end of the story.  No need to analyze further.


A baker with talent?
Please. Don’t insult talented bakers out there.
That decorating is purely juvenile.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> A baker with talent?
> Please. Don’t insult talented bakers out there.
> That decorating is purely juvenile.


Don't even bother, they can literally do nothing wrong. Ever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

mrsinsyder said:


> Don't even bother, they can literally do nothing wrong. Ever.



Bakers?  I've seen some make some mistakes.  Or do you mean Harry and Meghan?  They can do wrong - I've commented in this thread at times when I thought they did.  But I don't think they decorated the cookies and cakes.  They've been quite busy on this tour.


----------



## buffym

limom said:


> A baker with talent?
> Please. Don’t insult talented bakers out there.
> That decorating is purely juvenile.





mrsinsyder said:


> Don't even bother, they can literally do nothing wrong. Ever.



Meghan and Harry were not in charge of the cookies, it was the Archbishop.


----------



## Chrysalids

gracekelly said:


> Sigh.  I think the privacy thing  got out of hand and showing him in SA also makes me think it a bit hypocritical. If they wanted total privacy they should have left him home. Otherwise they could have taken a nice clear shot of him at the pub. The public would have loved it. Waiting for the SA trip just smacks as a publicity grab from SS.


So what? Like all parents, they are choosing when and where they will share images of their child. They choose an official event. If they showed Archie at every private event you would be complaining that all they want is publicity. And better sugar than sour.


----------



## bag-princess

LibbyRuth said:


> *Bakers?  I've seen some make some mistakes. * Or do you mean Harry and Meghan?  They can do wrong - I've commented in this thread at times when I thought they did.  But I don't think they decorated the cookies and cakes.  They've been quite busy on this tour.


----------



## marthastoo

Baby Archie is A.DOR.A.BLE.  What a big boy!  And he seemed so good-natured.  (I do remember someone snickering that the baby Meghan was holding at the polo game couldn't possibly be 3 month old Archie.)


----------



## chicaloca

limom said:


> Why can’t there be just regular cookies with plain frosting?
> The world is getting tackier and tackier...
> I doubt very much that it the Bishop’s idea but those involved with that crap are morons, imo.



Why can’t people write on their cookies without. someone getting bent out of shape about it? Who is being hurt by this? Someone will eat those delicious looking cookies and life will go on.

People have been writing messages on baked goods forever yet the moment someone writes something other than “Happy Birthday” it suddenly represents a breakdown of societal standards? Writing an empowering message on a cookie makes someone a moron? seriously?

The world is getting more and more uptight and ridiculous.


----------



## chicaloca

Chrysalids said:


> So what? Like all parents, they are choosing when and where they will share images of their child. They choose an official event. If they showed Archie at every private event you would be complaining that all they want is publicity. And better sugar than sour.



The bar is always moving. People complained that they were “hiding” Archie. They bring Archie out and the complaints are now that Archie is being shown in Africa instead of the U.K.. There is a contingent that will never ever be satisfied with anything the Sussexes do because their hatred of this couple is not actually about the Sussexes actions but is rooted in something more insidious.


----------



## marthastoo

chicaloca said:


> Why can’t people write on their cookies without. someone getting bent out of shape about it? Who is being hurt by this? Someone will eat those delicious looking cookies and life will go on.
> 
> People have been writing messages on baked goods forever yet the moment someone writes something other than “Happy Birthday” it suddenly represents a breakdown of societal standards? Writing an empowering message on a cookie makes someone a moron? seriously?
> 
> The world is getting more and more uptight and ridiculous.


No longer does one just disagrees with another, or has a differing opinion from another.  It's really a hallmark of how our current society has devolved that if someone has a different opinion, that person is a "moron."


----------



## Welltraveled!

chicaloca said:


> Also I’m sure the Sussexes didn’t want a repeat of the nurse from the Cambridge birth team who killed herself after being tricked by a radio station into divulging info about the birth.



OMGosh!!! I forgot all about that.  I didn't think it was true.


----------



## marthastoo

chicaloca said:


> The bar is always moving. People complained that they were “hiding” Archie. They bring Archie out and the complaints are now that Archie is being shown in Africa instead of the U.K.. There is a contingent that will never ever be satisfied with anything the Sussexes do because their hatred of this couple is not actually about the Sussexes actions but is rooted in something more insidious.


After reading the comments on this thread, there are some people for whom literally nothing Meghan does is right.  I am certain that if Archie was out and photographed constantly from birth, those same people would be complaining about what a publicity whore Meghan was.  Wait, they already say that.


----------



## A1aGypsy

marthastoo said:


> No longer does one just disagrees with another, or has a differing opinion from another.  It's really a hallmark of how our current society has devolved that if someone has a different opinion, that person is a "moron."



Or a snarky bi*tchy defence team....  



marthastoo said:


> People, the snarky b*tching and defense team needs to slow down.  I don't read for two days and literally have to devote 40 minutes to catch up.


----------



## mdcx

Basically, if Meghan rolled Archie out for a cute pic like that every six months, everyone would be happy imo.

ETA I have realised I care way more about Archie than Megs or Harry


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> Basically, if Meghan rolled Archie out for a cute pic like that every six months, everyone would be happy imo.



Doubt it, since people literally complained about the cookies served at the engagement and blamed Meghan and Harry for it.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> The U.K. is bigger than England. Or the same reason Prince George attended a play date in Australia and not in the UK.



I beg your pardon for not stating Great Britain instead of England .  As for the rest. I think you know what I meant.  Why aren't you ignoring me?


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I think public moments versus private moments... Let them have a meal out without having to hold up Archie in The Lion King style. Public tour, good time to roll out the kid.
> 
> Yes, they are owned by the public, but even they deserve a moment out as a family to try to do some kind of normal outing without feeling obligated to roll the baby out for public display every time.


That was not a visit to have a meal.  It was a publicity moment and a tease at showing Archie.  All it did was engender more bad publicity and annoy people.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chrysalids said:


> So what? Like all parents, they are choosing when and where they will share images of their child. They choose an official event. If they showed Archie at every private event you would be complaining that all they want is publicity. And better sugar than sour.


One event in Great Britain would have made the tax payers  happy.  Too much to ask?


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> The bar is always moving. People complained that they were “hiding” Archie. They bring Archie out and the complaints are now that Archie is being shown in Africa instead of the U.K.. There is a contingent that will never ever be satisfied with anything the Sussexes do because their hatred of this couple is not actually about the Sussexes actions but is rooted in *something more insidious*.


You've mentioned this more than a few times; what exactly? .. racism? .. jealousy? .. because frankly, I do not recall anyone on this thread saying anything that would invoke that comment and honestly, I for one am getting tired of it!  I certainly have never said that I hated Meghan or Harry; have some of their actions been missteps? .. yes, I think so.  As I've said before, I truly hope that she can (in her position) help out on various charities that support women in need .. but I do also think that H&M need to be mindful not to blur the lines too much re: BRF and "Celebrity".  It appears as though this trip is helping greatly; let's hope that it continues!!!


----------



## Jayne1

Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?

My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.

Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?
> 
> My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.
> 
> Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.
> View attachment 4549932


This to me is a combo of Meghan's face as she is finally realising what she signed up for (BRF duties), and them both being shattered from exhaustion.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?
> 
> My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.
> 
> Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.
> View attachment 4549932


They had nothing but water??? .. heck, in certain countries, you can't drink the 'regular' water and heaven forbid, you have to be careful of the ice-cubes too!!!  Seems odd to me that they would not partake in any of the foods there, I would assume that they are not eating the 'regular' fare as cooked by the locals but something that a Chef familiar with the cuisine would make - no???


----------



## mdcx

Is the issue that there is no food in front of them? From the pic it looks like the meal/afternoon tea is just beginning though?


----------



## Welltraveled!

They look like two people about to take a drink of water.  What face do you make when you about to take a drink?



Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?
> 
> My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.
> 
> Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.
> View attachment 4549932


----------



## Gal4Dior

It just appears they are caught “off” instead of “on” during the millions of photos taken, it must be exhausting to be “on” all the time.

Meghan is far better at it being “on” for the cameras than Harry, and she is considered a pro when compared to Will and Kate. Kate has been caught looking sullen at times. Probably her resting normal face, but gosh, to be under the limelight so much and not be a pro like Meghan from her Hollywood years, it must be hard. 

Meghan is good a manufacturing a persona, that’s what she had to do all those years struggling to climb that ladder in Hollywood. Hopefully it will be put to good use with proper PR direction.


----------



## Welltraveled!

The dinner (lunch?) was at this woman's home.  THere's a food - maybe appetizers -spread behind her.











CeeJay said:


> They had nothing but water??? .. heck, in certain countries, you can't drink the 'regular' water and heaven forbid, you have to be careful of the ice-cubes too!!!  Seems odd to me that they would not partake in any of the foods there, I would assume that they are not eating the 'regular' fare as cooked by the locals but something that a Chef familiar with the cuisine would make - no???


----------



## Welltraveled!

My fav photos of Archie.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

For those wondering... Meghan did not appear in the Suits series finale but her images did. They used about 4 scenes she was in and inserted those with flashback sequences. It was the first time her image has appeared on the show since she left. Her co-stars and producer have also been posting many unseen pics of her through the years these past few days, so if that interests you, look around their instagrams for private throwback pics.


----------



## Welltraveled!

After the mothers2mothers event.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> I beg your pardon for not stating Great Britain instead of England .  As for the rest. I think you know what I meant.  Why aren't you ignoring me?



The same reason you responded to my post. Archie was at a polo match a month after being born. 

George attended a play group in Australia, not in the U.K. Besides polo Prince George next event in the U.K. was ToC, so why would Harry and Meghan break tradition. 

Prince William was seen crawling in Australia not the U.K.

Prince George attended a play group in Australia not the U.K.

Princess Charlotte attended a play group in Canada, not the U.K.


----------



## Welltraveled!

My above picture was from this.


----------



## Welltraveled!

What a cute little girl.  I'm glad she met Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?
> 
> My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.
> 
> Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.
> View attachment 4549932



I think they were unaware they were still  being photographed. They had stopped posing.


----------



## gracekelly

buffym said:


> The same reason you responded to my post. Archie was at a polo match a month after being born.
> 
> George attended a play group in Australia, not in the U.K. Besides polo Prince George next event in the U.K. was ToC, so why would Harry and Meghan break tradition.
> 
> Prince William was seen crawling in Australia not the U.K.
> 
> Prince George attended a play group in Australia not the U.K.
> 
> Princess Charlotte attended a play group in Canada, not the U.K.


Apparently delving into minutiae makes you happy. I had no idea that any of these events ever took place. Somehow my life went forward without knowing. 

How  all of this was brought up as an answer to a comment I made is beyond me. Don’t bother answering because I’m not interested.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> Doubt it, since people literally complained about the cookies served at the engagement and blamed Meghan and Harry for it.


No one blamed Harry and Meghan for the insta-worthy cookies


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## myown

sorry if it's been posted and I missed it.

she donated some of Archies old clothes







_(...) Meghan also brought clothes, books and other items given to Archie as gifts after his birth, including a babygrow that is now too small for the five-month-old.
They included two tiny white vests, one bearing the words The Future and another with the Invictus Games logo.
'Here's a few little things that I thought would be helpful,' she said, holding them up one by one. 'The Future. And he's outgrown his Invictus one,' she laughed. 
After accepting a gift of a framed photograph of women helped by the organisation, she told her hosts: 'I just thought that, in the spirit of community, what's so nice is to be able to share some of the things that we have at home as well. 
'And so we can obviously make sure everything you need is provided for you, but we've brought some of the things that my friends and I used for our kids and Archie, that don't fit anymore.' 
-DM_


----------



## chicaloca

LVSistinaMM said:


> Meghan is good a manufacturing a persona, that’s what she had to do all those years struggling to climb that ladder in Hollywood. Hopefully it will be put to good use with proper PR direction.



I’m sorry but this is such an tired and baseless assumption. Just because actors create characters onscreen that does not mean their entire life and personality off camera is an act as is constantly being implied with Meghan. Everything from her friendliness to her public speaking and charity work has been attributed to her “acting”. Someone actually said Meghan  did charity to get famous because obviously the first thing people seeking fame do is join the Peace Corp.

Just because someone is an actor does not mean they are good public speakers or can be personable off camera. Many actors are actually mean, shy or socially awkward when not working.


----------



## bag-princess

chicaloca said:


> I’m sorry but *this is such an tired and baseless assumption*. Just because actors create characters onscreen that does not mean their entire life and personality off camera is an act as is constantly being implied with Meghan. Everything from her friendliness to her public speaking and charity work has been attributed to her “acting”. Someone actually said Meghan  did charity to get famous *because obviously the first thing people seeking fame do is join the Peace Corp.*
> 
> Just because someone is an actor does not mean they are good public speakers or can be personable off camera. Many actors are actually mean, shy or socially awkward when not working.


----------



## buffym

Harry, today; Meghan’s engagement is embargoed until later.


----------



## buffym

gracekelly said:


> Why couldn’t  they have shown him off in England?


 



gracekelly said:


> That was not a visit to have a meal.  It was a publicity moment and a tease at showing Archie.  All it did was engender more bad publicity and annoy people.





gracekelly said:


> Apparently delving into minutiae makes you happy. I had no idea that any of these events ever took place. Somehow my life went forward without knowing.
> 
> How  all of this was brought up as an answer to a comment I made is beyond me. Don’t bother answering because I’m not interested.



This was brought up by your above post.  

Hope it will you some perceptive on how the BRF have been doing things.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?
> 
> My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.
> 
> Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.
> View attachment 4549932


it's just a moment......I don't feel I can glean anything from it except maybe they can't be smiling all the time


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Someone actually said Meghan  did charity to get famous because obviously the first thing people seeking fame do is join the Peace Corp.


When was it that Meghan was an anonymous Peace Corps worker?  I missed that period of her life.  

I believe I am the "someone" you are referring to and what I *actually* said is that she used charity work as one part of her actress persona.   Giving speeches at the UN, getting photographed in Princess Diana garb among children in Africa, and befriending and posing for photos with Serena Williams at charity events is the type of charity work Meghan was doing.  Not the Peace Corps.  All of that charity work Meghan did boosted her profile and helped her network among a higher echelon of people. 

Meghan's former agent talked about it and said it the best: "*She wanted to be recognised as a humanitarian."*  And the crucial word there is _recognised_.


----------



## daisychainz

ccbaggirl89 said:


> For those wondering... Meghan did not appear in the Suits series finale but her images did. They used about 4 scenes she was in and inserted those with flashback sequences. It was the first time her image has appeared on the show since she left. Her co-stars and producer have also been posting many unseen pics of her through the years these past few days, so if that interests you, look around their instagrams for private throwback pics.


My sisters and I cried like babies watching it!!!! She totally deserved to be included and it was done so beautifully. She looks so different then and now! It's like I am looking at a different person these days.


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Found this on Instagram.  What's your take?
> 
> My take is that they were concerned about eating foods they are not accustomed to - food that could give them a bad tummy, preventing them from performing (I see their visit as a kind of performance, always on for the cameras) and were reluctant to eat too much.
> 
> Either that, or it was a long day and they were exhausted.
> View attachment 4549932



The photo is literally capturing one second of a moment as they are swallowing water and setting their glasses down. Can't pull much context from it.


----------



## Grande Latte

Love Archie. He's so cute, looks just like dad with a little bit of Meghan.

Love Meghan in smart, professional outfits. White shirt, black jumpsuit,...etc. She looks like she can run a corporation or a non-profit or anything she sets her mind on. 

Is it me, or has Harry lost weight?


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> When was it that Meghan was an anonymous Peace Corps worker?  I missed that period of her life.
> 
> I believe I am the "someone" you are referring to and what I *actually* said is that she used charity work as one part of her actress persona.   Giving speeches at the UN, getting photographed in Princess Diana garb among children in Africa, and befriending and posing for photos with Serena Williams at charity events is the type of charity work Meghan was doing.  Not the Peace Corps.  All of that charity work Meghan did boosted her profile and helped her network among a higher echelon of people.
> 
> Meghan's former agent talked about it and said it the best: "*She wanted to be recognised as a humanitarian."*  And the crucial word there is _recognised_.



I didn’t say Meghan was in the Peace Corp. Surely you understand sarcasm and hyperbole?

Considering how people look down on the profession of acting — this forum is a perfect example — it is entirely understandable many charity-minded actors prefer to be recognized as humanitarians. It does not mean they are “using charity for fame”.  It is usually their fame that allows them to increase the scope of their charity. A lot of people heavily involved with charity like Meghan view the charity as their real job and the paid job as a means to an end that allows them to do more charity. 

No one who isn’t genuinely compassionate would devote such a large part of their life — most of it off camera — to helping other people. Charity can be hard work - it’s not all glamourous. Meghan regularly worked at a soup
kitchen in Toronto and even arranged for the leftover food from The Suits set to be given to that shelter. You cannot fake that type of compassion. I can’t imagine how much time Meghan has put in over the course of her life considering she started as a child. 

People cannot criticize Meghan’s actual charitable endeavors so the next step is to criticize and question her motivations. Until Meghan, I’ve seen never someone face this level of criticism for their long term philantrophy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Flatsy said:


> When was it that Meghan was an anonymous Peace Corps worker?  I missed that period of her life.
> 
> I believe I am the "someone" you are referring to and what I *actually* said is that she used charity work as one part of her actress persona.   Giving speeches at the UN, getting photographed in Princess Diana garb among children in Africa, and befriending and posing for photos with Serena Williams at charity events is the type of charity work Meghan was doing.  Not the Peace Corps.  All of that charity work Meghan did boosted her profile and helped her network among a higher echelon of people.
> 
> Meghan's former agent talked about it and said it the best: "*She wanted to be recognised as a humanitarian."*  And the crucial word there is _recognised_.


So you mean because she can somewhat benefit from something she can’t really be true?


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> No one who isn’t genuinely compassionate would devote such a large part of their life — most of it off camera — to helping other people. Charity can be hard work - it’s not all glamourous. Meghan regularly worked at a soup
> kitchen in Toronto and even arranged for the leftover food from The Suits set to be given to that shelter.


I'd love to know what Toronto soup kitchen she worked in, having known the people who run them and never hearing of this myself.

Meg did have quite the life here in Toronto, she was very active in the social scene and knew how to manoeuvre around in the best circles, what clubs to join, where to hang and eat and party.  It was very impressive in retrospect!! Charming, beautiful and ambitious.  But soup kitchens?  When did she have the time.

I'm talking real life, not PR stuff where you pad your resume.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> No one who isn’t genuinely compassionate would devote such a large part of their life — most of it off camera — to helping other people. Charity can be hard work - it’s not all glamourous. Meghan regularly worked at a soup kitchen in Toronto and even arranged for the leftover food from The Suits set to be given to that shelter.


Off camera, and yet publicized in detail because how else would you know about it?  Just like the transparent "anonymous" donation which yielded an entire article in Harper's Bazaar about Meghan and Harry's generosity.  I don't believe that Meghan does any charity grunt work that she doesn't make sure is publicized in one way or another.

I believe that ego and recognition is a large part of what drives her, which is not unusual for celebrities.  Bono has done a lot of humanitarian work and also has an ego the size of a large planet.   I think Meghan aspires to be glorified in the same way as Princess Diana, and you don't achieve that type of sainthood without playing the part of the compassionate humanitarian.


----------



## Gal4Dior

chicaloca said:


> I’m sorry but this is such an tired and baseless assumption. Just because actors create characters onscreen that does not mean their entire life and personality off camera is an act as is constantly being implied with Meghan. Everything from her friendliness to her public speaking and charity work has been attributed to her “acting”. Someone actually said Meghan  did charity to get famous because obviously the first thing people seeking fame do is join the Peace Corp.
> 
> Just because someone is an actor does not mean they are good public speakers or can be personable off camera. Many actors are actually mean, shy or socially awkward when not working.


Sorry, but it sounds like your assessment of how actors are, are quite tired and baseless, as well. Where is the proof? Do you know this actors/actresses well? If you have an issue with someone bringing up Meghan getting famous due to charity, you are free to give them your tired and baseless opinions, as well.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> Off camera, and yet publicized in detail because how else would you know about it?  Just like the transparent "anonymous" donation which yielded an entire article in Harper's Bazaar about Meghan and Harry's generosity.  I don't believe that Meghan does any charity grunt work that she doesn't make sure is publicized in one way or another.
> 
> I believe that ego and recognition is a large part of what drives her, which is not unusual for celebrities.  Bono has done a lot of humanitarian work and also has an ego the size of a large planet.   I think Meghan aspires to be glorified in the same way as Princess Diana, and you don't achieve that type of sainthood without playing the part of the compassionate humanitarian.




No one knew about Meghan’s soup kitchen work until after her engagement to Harry when the press went up Canada to harass everyone who might have known her. Most of what we know of Meghan’s charity is due to the organizations who employed her or the press digging for info about her post-engagement.

Also:

1) Your belief that her “ego drives her” is baseless speculation based on whatever biases you hold about her. 

2) Meghan’s charity work over the past decade is proven fact.

Which of the two do you suppose has a more positive impact on society? Actual charity or criticizing someone for doing charity?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> When was it that Meghan was an anonymous Peace Corps worker?  I missed that period of her life.
> 
> I believe I am the "someone" you are referring to and what I *actually* said is that she used charity work as one part of her actress persona.   Giving speeches at the UN, getting photographed in Princess Diana garb among children in Africa, and befriending and posing for photos with Serena Williams at charity events is the type of charity work Meghan was doing.  Not the Peace Corps.  All of that charity work Meghan did boosted her profile and helped her network among a higher echelon of people.
> 
> Meghan's former agent talked about it and said it the best: "*She wanted to be recognised as a humanitarian."*  And the crucial word there is _recognised_.


----------



## Flatsy

In terms of Meghan "being accused of acting"....There have been many, many occasions where I think Meghan came off as phony and putting on an act.  It started with the engagement interview, which I chalked up to nerves at the time, but it continued.   I mean, she's got a "work laugh" that I've seen her do in public several times now and doesn't resemble a genuine laugh at all.  (Harry says something, Meghan tosses her head back and does a camera-ready laugh, then rubs his arm.)

Her speeches are getting better, but the hallmark of a lot of her speeches is the facial expressionizing that is too much, the dramatic pauses that are too long, the high-gravitas delivery of words that are mostly empty.  It doesn't come off as natural to me, it comes off like a performance, and there are definitely acting tools coming in to play.

It's fine if some people think she's totally genuine at all times.  It's not something that can be proven or disproven.  But it's also fine for people to feel that she comes across as phony to them without that feeling being chalked up to "something more insidious".


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Which of the two do you suppose has a more positive impact on society? Actual charity or criticizing someone for doing charity?


Which do you suppose has a more positive impact on society?  Actual charity or criticizing people on the internet who don't like Meghan Markle?


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


>


hopefully she had sincere interest in the humanitarian causes she worked on (as well as wanting recognition).  whatever her strategy (if that's what it was) she was Very Successful


----------



## buffym

More from today’s engagement


----------



## mrsinsyder

With all the bending and stretching to make excuses for MM, I’m surprised this isn’t a yoga class she’s secretly shown up to.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> With all the bending and stretching to make excuses for MM, I’m surprised this isn’t a yoga class she’s secretly shown up to.



That’s what makes forums interesting. The different perspectives. The people who have nothing positive to say, and will even post old articles to criticize again. Yet, post every day about Meghan. 

Then there is a small group of people in middle who make even posts some criticism and some positivity. Or the people who like Meghan and doesn’t see all of the negativity.


----------



## Meh-gan

chicaloca said:


> No one knew about Meghan’s soup kitchen work until after her engagement to Harry when the press went up Canada to harass everyone who might have known her. Most of what we know of Meghan’s charity is due to the organizations who employed her or the press digging for info about her post-engagement.
> 
> Also:
> 
> 1) Your belief that her “ego drives her” is baseless speculation based on whatever biases you hold about her.
> 
> 2) Meghan’s charity work over the past decade is proven fact.
> 
> Which of the two do you suppose has a more positive impact on society? Actual charity or criticizing someone for doing charity?



You also have no proof that she isn’t driven by her ego. You have no proof that she is the person you are defending ad nauseum on here. You don’t know her or her ambitions/motivations. 

All you can do is what every other person on this thread can do - look at her actions and interpret them - it’s a GOSSIP thread. You choose to see a selfless humanitarian. Others see her differently. Your own bias frames your perception of her as well. 

So stop. 

Also the Me Too cookies were gross AF and sorry but people have been dragged and canceled for less I don’t care if the host was Desmond Tutu.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Grande Latte said:


> Is it me, or has Harry lost weight?


I noticed too, I think he has.  He’s quite skinny atm.



chicaloca said:


> No one knew about Meghan’s soup kitchen work until after her engagement to Harry when the press went up Canada to harass everyone who might have known her. Most of what we know of Meghan’s charity is due to the organizations who employed her or the press digging for info about her post-engagement.
> 
> Also:
> 
> 1) Your belief that her “ego drives her” is baseless speculation based on whatever biases you hold about her.
> 
> 2) Meghan’s charity work over the past decade is proven fact.
> 
> Which of the two do you suppose has a more positive impact on society? Actual charity or criticizing someone for doing charity?


This is a gossip thread on a handbag chat forum.  It doesn’t matter  and we’re all free to give an opinion within tpf rules. If someone is annoying you, put them on ignore



Meh-gan said:


> You also have no proof that she isn’t driven by her ego. You have no proof that she is the person you are defending ad nauseum on here. You don’t know her or her ambitions/motivations.
> 
> All you can do is what every other person on this thread can do - look at her actions and interpret them - it’s a GOSSIP thread. You choose to see a selfless humanitarian. Others see her differently. Your own bias frames your perception of her as well.
> 
> So stop.
> 
> Also the Me Too cookies were gross AF and sorry but people have been dragged and canceled for less I don’t care if the host was Desmond Tutu.


Exactly, none of us really KNOW what they’re thinking or what motivates them and its perfectly ok to speculate - it’s gossip!


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> *That’s what makes forums interesting. The different perspectives*. The people who have nothing positive to say, and will even post old articles to criticize again. Yet, post every day about Meghan.
> 
> Then there is a small group of people in middle who make even posts some criticism and some positivity. Or the people who like Meghan and doesn’t see all of the negativity.


Your initial comment is great; yes .. *different perspectives* .. but then you get into the "_nothing positive to say and criticize_ .."; and why even mention the "_other groups_" ?  If you recognize that there are different perspectives, then why do you then need to criticize them .. that's not keeping in line with your initial comment .. why can't we just leave it as the "different perpectives" .. period!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-princess

mrsinsyder said:


> With all the bending and stretching to make excuses for MM, I’m surprised this isn’t a yoga class she’s secretly shown up to.




with all the bending and stretching to accuse her of having phony laughs and putting on acts for the public - i am surprised this isn't a group of contortionists the way people tie themselves into knots accusing her of being phoney!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I will say this about her time in Canada, she seemed to embrace it. Wearing smallish Canadian designers to events, never complaining about the weather and generally embracing Toronto. Maybe she got paid or free clothing from the designers but, it still was a big boost to some small companies.


----------



## redney

bag-princess said:


> with all the bending and stretching to accuse her of having phony laughs and putting on acts for the public - i am surprised this isn't a group of contortionists the way people tie themselves into knots accusing her of being phoney!


Good god, yes!


----------



## Flatsy

bag-princess said:


> with all the bending and stretching to accuse her of having phony laughs and putting on acts for the public - i am surprised this isn't a group of contortionists the way people tie themselves into knots accusing her of being phoney!


No bending in knots whatsoever.  I could have just said, "I think she's a phony" and left it that.  Perfectly legitimate opinion, and one that is shared by many.

But as this is a discussion board, that seems kind of pointless, so I went into detail about how I formed that opinion.  If you don't want to read it, "Ignore"....


----------



## Flatsy

Meh-gan said:


> Also the Me Too cookies were gross AF and sorry but people have been dragged and canceled for less I don’t care if the host was Desmond Tutu.


I don't think it's a big deal and I don't blame Desmond Tutu.  However, it's unfortunate that "writing slogans on food" is something that is proliferating around Meghan.  It is cheapening, and it's stupid.  

And it appears that people are doing it now to make Meghan feel better about her little banana publicity stunt that didn't go over well.  That should just be left in the past.  None of these things are supposed to be about Meghan.


----------



## bag-princess

Flatsy said:


> No bending in knots whatsoever.  I could have just said, "I think she's a phony" and left it that.  Perfectly legitimate opinion, and one that is shared by many.
> 
> But as this is a discussion board, that seems kind of pointless, so I went into detail about how I formed that opinion. * If you don't want to read it, "Ignore"....*



that works both ways


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> Your initial comment is great; yes .. *different perspectives* .. but then you get into the "_nothing positive to say and criticize_ .."; and why even mention the "_other groups_" ?  If you recognize that there are different perspectives, then why do you then need to criticize them .. that's not keeping in line with your initial comment .. why can't we just leave it as the "different perpectives" .. period!



I answered it in my post, the three groups. 

But, your picking my post to respond to and not the poster who constantly posts negatively and criticizes posters for posting positively-  is kind of the point.


----------



## bag-mania

Most of the cookies had generic messages on them like: Love, Freedom, Peace, and Hope. For some reason just a few of them on the bottom plate had specific group messages like Me too and Enough is Enough. It does make you wonder who ordered them that way. The bakery would have made them the way they were ordered by the customer.


----------



## A1aGypsy

It could easily be that they asked for cookies with “messages of empowerment” and the baker took that and ran with it. It’s a really dumb choice but I’m sure it is a consequence of not thinking vs too much thinking.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> I will say this about her time in Canada, she seemed to embrace it. Wearing smallish Canadian designers to events, never complaining about the weather and generally embracing Toronto. Maybe she got paid or free clothing from the designers but, it still was a big boost to some small companies.


Agree.  It was. Dating Canadians, best friend Canadians... I've said this before, but she looked so cool walking down the street with her sunnies, boots and yoga matt tucked under her arm. I really like her street style... never to be seen again because of her new royal role.

As you know, she was seen in society pages of magazines, originally because of her celebrity Canadian friends and then she developed a reputation on her own.  She had that Reitmans collaboration and the commercials that ran on TV, "Oh my gosh, it's Megan Markle!" so she was known.

All this to say, if she worked in soup kitchens, she would have been recognized.  A beautiful, vivacious woman in a soup kitchen?  Someone would have said something.


----------



## Vlad

PSA inc.

This thread gets a lot more reports on a daily basis than I personally can tolerate.

A word to y'all, please. Kindly stop with the constant confrontations. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the royals being debated, but please also don't forget you are conversing with other humans in here and it's ok to disagree. If things don't cool down in here, I may just lock it for a while to let the tempers cool off.

Worst case, use the ignore list. She's your friend. Thanks!


----------



## gracekelly

delete  because it is not worth the effort


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh Vlad. It was a good solid effort. ❤️


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> I answered it in my post, the three groups.
> 
> But, your picking my post to respond to and not the poster who constantly posts negatively and criticizes posters for posting positively-  is kind of the point.


Well, I guess we do indeed have different perspectives .. let's just leave it at that, 'kay???


----------



## CeeJay

Vlad said:


> PSA inc.
> 
> This thread gets a lot more reports on a daily basis than I personally can tolerate.
> 
> A word to y'all, please. Kindly stop with the constant confrontations. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the royals being debated, but please also don't forget you are conversing with other humans in here and it's ok to disagree. If things don't cool down in here, I may just lock it for a while to let the tempers cool off.
> 
> Worst case, use the ignore list. She's your friend. Thanks!


You know what Vlad, I have to agree with you on closing this thread for a bit .. frankly, I'm tired of the name-calling and other personal attacks that have occurred.  In addition, I also think (and yes this is my opinion) that the Mods on this thread appear to favor one side over the other and that is not what a Mod should do .. they need to be 100% impartial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

This is a  *GOSSIP thread.*  Interesting read.

https://howardfeldman.co.za/duke-and-duchess-of-sussex-on-tour-south-africa/
*Duke and Duchess of Sussex On Tour: South Africa*

Posted on Sep 25, 2019 by Howard - Latest News







I am trying to muster all the positive energy I am able, and to get on board with the excitement about Royal’s visiting South Africa. But I am failing dismally. Harry and Meghan Markle have only been in the Cape for the last three days but somehow it feels much, much longer. I am exhausted by the amount of footage. And I am not even in Cape Town. 

At time of writing, 7 babies had been publicly kissed, 4 moms hugged, and 27 tears shed. On no less than 5 separate occasions Meghan has been recorded spontaneously breaking free from her discussion, stopping the cavalcade or interrupting an interview to rush to the side of a rather poorly looking South African. All these numbers are fiction, but that’s what it feels like to me. If I have to see another burst of maternal spontaneity from the Meghan, I might throw up. 

I happen to like the royals in general. I have watched the Crown and Dianna and might even have cried when the Queen of Hearts died tragically in a tunnel beneath Paris. Like many, I was hoping that she would have found her happily for ever after. So connected am I, that I often find myself humming the tune of Candle in the Wind when a melancholic mood overwhelms me. I have no other explanation as to why I would possibly do that. 

It’s not like I am a massive Elton John fan.

I really want desperately to glow in the warmth of their royal rays and want so badly to feel touched by the darn down- to-earthiness of them all. But I can’t seem to manage. Because all I see is a meticulously staged public relations exercise, conceived by the couple’s agency and acted out by a ginger man and his actress wife. 

I hate myself for it. I really do. I don’t want to see that the emperors have no clothes. I want them dressed in their finest of finery, tiara and all, so that we can all carry on pretending that they are not naked. Or worse than naked, because it cannot only be me who thinks that Megan looks like she shopped for this trip at Mr Price’s End of Range sale. Either that or her bags didn’t arrive on the commercial flight they were forced by their publicist to take, and so she had to stop at The Blue Route Mall in False Bay to pick up something to wear, before her real bag could be located. 

The alternative is that Meghan is appallingly patronising in that she seems to think that she has to dress down for us. She seems of the view that South Africans will only connect to her if she dresses poorly.  Like we don’t know or deserve better. She forgets that we are the people who birthed Evita Bezuidenhout and Bonang; who might well have spoilt us for all other queens. 

The couple have been called out on their apparent hypocrisy. The British media have lambasted them for being quite happy to fly on a series of private jets whilst lecturing the world about carbon footprints and the environment. Until today, they were quite willing to showcase other peoples’ babies whilst theirs remains safely out of sight. That is until the meeting with the Archbishop, when they could maximise Archie’s first photo opportunity. 

To add to the absurdity of it all, yesterday’s British Daily Mail described how Harry told an 18 year old he chatted to in a mosque in Bo Kaap,  Cape Town that he sometimes feels so “overwhelmed” by problems of the world that he “Struggles to get out of bed.” He actually said that. I would love to have seen the expression on the kid’s face when he heard those words. He had to have thought that Harry was pulling his leg. More so, I would love to have heard the language and dialogue that played through his mind. Could Harry really have thought that the 18 year old would feel sympathy for the poor Prince? I could see him imagining Prince Harry, at Frogmore Cottage, in his bed of crisp Egyptian cotton tormented by the burden of it all.

 I am certain that the 18 year old must have rushed home to tell his family that they need to be grateful for all they have, and everything that they don’t. Because it could always be worse. They could after all, be a British Royal. And I am certain that they nodded their heads sagely and whispered, “There but for the grace of God, go I.” or “Us” Or “Ons” 

I have written books on positivity. I write articles on it incessantly. I love the heart warming stories that connect us as South Africans and as citizens of the world. But even I have my limits. And this royal parade is just one staged managed step too far. Even for this nauseated optimist.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

buffym said:


> More from today’s engagement
> 
> View attachment 4550352
> View attachment 4550353
> View attachment 4550354
> View attachment 4550355
> View attachment 4550356


I think Harry looks good here. Africa obviously agrees with him.


----------



## buffym

This is from an editor in Cape Town talking about the tour.

OPINION | Behind the headlines – When the royals came to town
  09:47 26/09/2019   Herman Eloff
Herman Eloff, lifestyle editor at News24, reveals what happens behind the scenes when royalty comes knocking.

The Cape Town leg of the Royal Sussex Tour in South Africa ended on Wednesday afternoon and although I can describe in detail every item of clothing the duke and duchess wore, every word they spoke, and even how they smelled (sweet like jasmine) I never got to be in the same room as them.
But that's my job. I cover base camp while reporters cover the field.

It's late in the evening on Heritage Day and outside the giant glass windows of Media24's modern office building, it is already night time. I did not even notice the sun go down as I scurried to curate stories, selecting photos, picking footage for a video, writing and rewriting headlines, intros, blurbs and captions, adding credits and checking facts – all at a speed faster than the internet connection that seems to always find the most ill-timed moment to leave me hanging.

.....

Every photo, every video, every story that comes in speaks of Harry and Meghan's energy, friendliness, and their genuine interest in listening to others. And then there is the massive boom in tourism which is expected as the royal couple's unforgettable trip is publicised across the globe.

A quick glance at the live numbers streaming in and it's clear we're doing something right as we're having the biggest traffic day of the month and the numbers are spiking.

A check-in on Twitter, after a carefully moderated social media post with a carefully selected photo goes out, reveals the first comment: "Who cares?" I look at the numbers as they roll in – thousands at a time.

A second comment pops up: "Nobody wants to read this." I look at the charts again. The numbers are now climbing so fast and high that I take a screenshot and save it on my phone. I want to share it with the team later because I'm so proud of them. They've been offering up lunch breaks, sleep and personal time because they're committed to their jobs.

I close Twitter.

Instead I glance at the numbers again. Is all this hard work for nothing? I keep my eye on the numbers waiting for an answer.

The digits start to dance - fast, slow, then fast, faster, before they spin too fast to keep up. I take a sip of my coffee.

(A special thanks to Bashiera Parker, Aljoscha Kohlstock, Aletta Harrison, and Jerusha Sukhdeo-Raath for all their support and hard work.)

https://m.news24.com/Columnists/Gue...6?hootPostID=e72e81547f569ea3e735c183c513c0d4


----------



## FreeSpirit71

@Vlad I would hate to see the thread shut down. I come for news on the couple and chat.

It shouldn't come to that. But lots of regular members *are* staying away/refraining from comment due to thread infighting, that's true.


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> @Vlad I would hate to see the thread shut down. I come for news on the couple and chat.
> 
> It shouldn't come to that. But lots of regular members *are* staying away/refraining from comment due to thread infighting, that's true.


I didn't say that it should be shut down permanently, just temporarily .. to "keep the peace" so to speak.  Sorry to hear that others are staying away, but in some respects, I can understand that .. we all have our own lives/battles to deal with (well - maybe I'm talking about myself here).  @FreeSpirit71 .. I always appreciate your commentary; it is well-thought-out and thoughtful!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> I didn't say that it should be shut down permanently, just temporarily .. to "keep the peace" so to speak.  Sorry to hear that others are staying away, but in some respects, I can understand that .. we all have our own lives/battles to deal with (well - maybe I'm talking about myself here).  @FreeSpirit71 .. I *always appreciate your commentary; it is well-thought-out and thoughtful!*


Thanks Ceejay. Back at you, doll.


----------



## LittleStar88

Vlad said:


> PSA inc.
> 
> This thread gets a lot more reports on a daily basis than I personally can tolerate.
> 
> A word to y'all, please. Kindly stop with the constant confrontations. I appreciate your enthusiasm for the royals being debated, but please also don't forget you are conversing with other humans in here and it's ok to disagree. If things don't cool down in here, I may just lock it for a while to let the tempers cool off.
> 
> Worst case, use the ignore list. She's your friend. Thanks!



Please don't close the thread. Just block the confrontational people. Don't ruin it for those who can control themselves.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Please don't close the thread. Just block the confrontational people. Don't ruin it for those who can control themselves.


----------



## zen1965

I guess categorising someone as confrontational depends largely on one‘s perspective.
I for one would be quite horrified about selective censorship.


----------



## chicaloca

Duplicate


----------



## chicaloca

Duplicate.


----------



## Kodi325

maybe just a "royal mod"? heh, it has a ring to it. lol

Kodi-


----------



## chicaloca

Here is Michelle ***** thanking her friend Meghan for her support. A while back someone inexplicably accused Meghan of lying about having lunch with Michelle in her Vogue article. It is clear Meghan and Michelle know each other so the idea of them having lunch should not be considered out of the realm of possibility. It is still not clear to me why this type of mistrust of Meghan exists but it honestly seems very irrational at this point.


----------



## Welltraveled!

LittleStar88 said:


> Please don't close the thread. Just block the confrontational people. Don't ruin it for those who can control themselves.



I agree 100%.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

zen1965 said:


> I guess categorising someone as confrontational depends largely on one‘s perspective.
> I for one would be quite horrified about selective censorship.



I understand your perspective.  Selective censorship, IME, happens all the time on forums.   But I understand the need to block/remove/censor certain people.   IMO, it's like some people have this whole different type of personality online.  Makes me wonder what they are like in real life?

Anyway back on topic!


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> You know what Vlad, I have to agree with you on closing this thread for a bit .. frankly, I'm tired of the name-calling and other personal attacks that have occurred.  In addition, I also think (and yes this is my opinion) that the Mods on this thread appear to favor one side over the other and that is not what a Mod should do .. they need to be 100% impartial.


Agree. I’m tired of being told what I can and can’t post and what sources are and aren’t acceptable. I thought the mods had asked folks to stop policing but I guess it wasn’t heard.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I'm sure Harry loved it!


----------



## Welltraveled!

Love the note from Michelle *****.  It shows the respect she has Meghan and the work she puts in for the various charities. 



chicaloca said:


> Here is Michelle ***** thanking her friend Meghan for her support. A while back someone inexplicably accused Meghan of lying about having lunch with Michelle in her Vogue article. It is clear Meghan and Michelle know each other so the idea of them having lunch should not be considered out of the realm of possibility. It is still not clear to me why this type of mistrust of Meghan exists but it honestly seems very irrational at this point.


----------



## lulilu

Did anyone read that Meghan calls Archie "Bubba?"


----------



## Welltraveled!

lulilu said:


> Did anyone read that Meghan calls Archie "Bubba?"



Nothing towards you lullu.

As an FYI - Bubba can be used as a term of endearment.  I figure I put it out there; before this thread goes down the usual rabbit hole.

I listened to the video. I don't know if she's calling him bubba I think she's purposely mispronouncing the word baby.   Either way she says it to evoke an emotional reaction from Archie; such as laughter.  Most parents say certain words their baby likes to hear.

I would say "hey" to my child and it was the funniest thing in the world to her.  I have no idea why.  But whatever gets the baby to laugh; I'm here for it.

Sorry I don't know why I can't embed articles anymore. 

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a29240798/meghan-markle-archie-nickname-bubba/


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Agree. I’m tired of being told what I can and can’t post and what sources are and aren’t acceptable. I thought the mods had asked folks to stop policing but I guess it wasn’t heard.


What I don’t understand are those who dish it, but can’t take it...and then report. Don’t come for someone personally and not expect someone to defend themselves.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Which do you suppose has a more positive impact on society?  Actual charity or criticizing people on the internet who don't like Meghan Markle?


Dang! Where is the emoji for dropping the mic? Lol! You just made me want to head straight to a soup kitchen and do some charity work instead of reading this thread!


----------



## lulilu

Welltraveled! said:


> Nothing towards you lullu.
> 
> As an FYI - Bubba can be used as a term of endearment.  I figure I put it out there; before this thread goes down the usual rabbit hole.
> 
> I listened to the video. I don't know if she's calling him bubba I think she's purposely mispronouncing the word baby.   Either way she says it to evoke an emotional reaction from Archie; such as laughter.  Most parents say certain words their baby likes to hear.
> 
> I would say "hey" to my child and it was the funniest thing in the world to her.  I have no idea why.  But whatever gets the baby to laugh; I'm here for it.
> 
> Sorry I don't know why I can't embed articles anymore.
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a29240798/meghan-markle-archie-nickname-bubba/



I only read about it—the article said she called him it a couple of times.  I understand it is kind of a popular baby nickname.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I only read about it—the article said she called him it a couple of times.  I understand it is kind of a popular baby nickname.



I think it is an awful nickname .  I thought he would have red hair and they would call him Red, and even that isn't so great, but better than Bubba.  For the moment I would prefer to just call him Cutie,  because he is!


----------



## Welltraveled!

Awwww cute!


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> I think it is an awful nickname .  I thought he would have red hair and they would call him Red, and even that isn't so great, but better than Bubba.  For the moment I would prefer to just call him Cutie,  because he is!



if they were in oz and archie was a redhead they could call him “bluey”


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Just like his mother...


----------



## myown

Welltraveled! said:


> Nothing towards you lullu.
> 
> As an FYI - Bubba can be used as a term of endearment.  I figure I put it out there; before this thread goes down the usual rabbit hole.
> 
> I listened to the video. I don't know if she's calling him bubba I think she's purposely mispronouncing the word baby.   Either way she says it to evoke an emotional reaction from Archie; such as laughter.  Most parents say certain words their baby likes to hear.
> 
> I would say "hey" to my child and it was the funniest thing in the world to her.  I have no idea why.  But whatever gets the baby to laugh; I'm here for it.
> 
> Sorry I don't know why I can't embed articles anymore.
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a29240798/meghan-markle-archie-nickname-bubba/


is bubba a real nickname at all? I thought that's also some kind of Australian slang for baby


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> I think it is an awful nickname .  I thought he would have red hair and they would call him Red, and even that isn't so great, but better than Bubba.  For the moment I would prefer to just call him Cutie,  because he is!


as a non native speaker - why is bubba awful?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

Enjoying following this thread photos for this trip, thx for all the photos!


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> is bubba a real nickname at all? I thought that's also some kind of Australian slang for baby


I think it's quite popular here, I've known lots who call their babies bubba as well as obviously using their real name so the baby doesn't get confused lol


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Just like his mother...



I had goosebumps when I saw these pics


----------



## Gal4Dior

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Just like his mother...



This PR moment/visit was magic. Well done Sunshine Sachs, well done! They, for the most part on this trip, are doing a excellent job telling lovely heartwarming stories that will hopefully improve some goodwill that was lost over the last few weeks for this couple.  Hope to see this continue.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think this is far more than Sunshine Sachs. Just as the blame for missteps has been laid squarely at the Sussex's feet,  so should praise for this. 

This _means_ something to Harry. A way to honour his mother, the path she led forward in her charity work and shared with them when they were young boys, and the one he has picked for himself in his own great work with his charities as well.


----------



## chicaloca

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think this is far more than Sunshine Sachs. Just as the blame for missteps has been laid squarely at the Sussex's feet,  so should praise for this.
> 
> This _means_ something to Harry. A way to honour his mother, the path she led forward in her charity work and shared with them when they were young boys, and the one he has picked for himself in his own great work with his charities as well.



I agree. It’s highly insensitive to chalk up this moment to PR when he is honoring his deceased mother.

Sunshine Sachs is not the Sussexes personal PR. Sunshine was hired specifically for the rollout of the Travelyst initiative and the Sussex Foundation in the U.S.. Their personal PR director continues to be Sara Latham.

I’m not sure why people are trying to perpetuate this  “PR rehab” lie started by trash tabloids  like the Daily Fail. The Sussexes remain as popular as ever. They were trending all of the world on social media and the adoring crowds they are meeting in Africa can serve as further testament.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

@chicaloca bear in mind I'm not saying the Sussex's are perfect nor trying to start an argument with people.

I am not on any "side".

In this instance, however I believe this came from Harry and is 100% authentic.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> @chicaloca I believe this came from Harry and is 100% authentic.


I agree, and I also think this has been on the cards from Harry for years, pre Meghan, for whenever an African tour was going to be planned.


----------



## chicaloca

FreeSpirit71 said:


> @chicaloca bear in mind I'm not saying the Sussex's are perfect nor trying to start an argument with people.
> .



Neither am I.  I feel like sometimes  the need  people have to diss the Sussexes borders on insensitivity particularly with regard to their baby.

I’ve also noticed that lies about the Sussexes  have been going unchecked.  Sussex fans have been scared off due to the incessant negativity here,  if I happen to catch these lies, I will call them out.


----------



## Welltraveled!

myown said:


> is bubba a real nickname at all? I thought that's also some kind of Australian slang for baby




Yeah in the states.  Primarily in the south is where I heard it.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I’ve also noticed that lies about the Sussexes have been going unchecked. Sussex fans have been scared off due to the incessant negativity here, if I happen to catch these lies, I will call them out.


I would say a good deal of the negativity in this thread is because of self-appointed Sussex lie-catchers persistently accusing other posters of lying, "biases" and having an "insidious" agenda.  What you call "lies" I say are often straw men that you have created because you don't want to tolerate any opinions that don't match your own.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> I would say a good deal of the negativity in this thread is because of self-appointed Sussex lie-catchers persistently accusing other posters of lying, "biases" and having an "insidious" agenda.  What you call "lies" I say are often straw men that you have created because you don't want to tolerate any opinions that don't match your own.


Anything they don’t want to believe is a lie, and anything pro-Sussex is immediately fact. It’s so ridiculous that a gossip thread is treated like a doctoral dissertation where a works cited page is required. It’s also funny that some of the folks on their high horses have no problems calling other celebrity women ugly or untalented or any other number of unflattering things. 

I guess threats to start arguments over anything that isn’t agreed with is ok too, though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## LittleStar88

Absolutely love seeing Harry following in his mother's footsteps in the minefield. Very touching.

Off topic: IMHO - Makes me sad to see some people making a sport of coming to this thread to tear down Meghan and Harry, tear apart each other, people having to make big disclaimers before posting for fear of being pounced upon. It is the freaking internet for crying out loud. If you can't handle the interwebz  and control yourself when it comes to differing opinions, go find another hobby please.

There is a difference between constructive criticism of their actions and passive-aggressive behavior towards one another on this forum. Very disappointing to see.

Back to the program... When is Meghan's next appearance? I can't wait to see what she is wearing next!


----------



## buffym

Pictures of the town built which was land mines in 1997 when Diana visited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

I wonder why MM isn't traveling outside of Cape Town. They didn't even visit a single township.


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> I wonder why MM isn't traveling outside of Cape Town. They didn't even visit a single township.



Maybe safety concerns?


----------



## daisychainz

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe safety concerns?


Probably. But that's where the charity is, you know? In the townships and areas outside the city. Cape Town is the Beverly Hills of S.A. At least Harry is getting out there.


----------



## Morgan R

LittleStar88 said:


> Back to the program... When is Meghan's next appearance? I can't wait to see what she is wearing next!



Meghan had a “Women in Public Service” breakfast at the Residence of the British High Commissioner in Cape Town on September 26th there is an embargo on photos and reporting from the engagement that I believe is supposed to be lifted after Harry finishes his solo engagements in Angola and Malawi. Meghan's next engagements are on October 1st in Johannesburg.


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> Pictures of the town built which was land mines in 1997 when Diana visited.
> 
> View attachment 4551023
> View attachment 4551024


And maybe in about 25 years we will see Archie where Harry is now.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> Meghan had a “Women in Public Service” breakfast at the Residence of the British High Commissioner in Cape Town on September 26th there is an embargo on photos and reporting from the engagement that I believe is supposed to be lifted after Harry finishes his solo engagements in Malawi


That's good, so to make the focus all on Harry and the work of the Halo Trust. I'm pleased about that. Good stuff.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> Anything they don’t want to believe is a lie, and anything pro-Sussex is immediately fact. It’s so ridiculous that a gossip thread is treated like a doctoral dissertation where a works cited page is required. It’s also funny that some of the folks on their high horses have no problems calling other celebrity women ugly or untalented or any other number of unflattering things.
> 
> I guess threats to start arguments over anything that isn’t agreed with is ok too, though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


But there's the exact opposite also. Anything bad about the two of them is instantly the truth. Some people take the simplest thing, and then stretch it to the most ridiculous ending.


----------



## Welltraveled!

The most honest opinion yet.  Sadly, not everyone is mature or enlightened enough to conduct themselves as adults in forums.

as there will always be a few to purposely stir the pot or act with bully like tendencies  towards others And then play victim. 





LittleStar88 said:


> Off topic: IMHO - Makes me sad to see some people making a sport of coming to this thread to tear down Meghan and Harry, tear apart each other, people having to make big disclaimers before posting for fear of being pounced upon. It is the freaking internet for crying out loud. If you can't handle the interwebz  and control yourself when it comes to differing opinions, go find another hobby please.
> 
> There is a difference between constructive criticism of their actions and passive-aggressive behavior towards one another on this forum. Very disappointing to see.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I wonder what’s going through his head to walk the same path as his mom.  

If it was for me, I think it would be a surreal experience.



buffym said:


> Pictures of the town built which was land mines in 1997 when Diana visited.
> 
> View attachment 4551023
> View attachment 4551024


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Anything bad about the two of them is instantly the truth. Some people take the simplest thing, and then stretch it to the most ridiculous ending.


And if you feel that's the case, what's the problem with just letting it go?  

I'll give an example.  I think the Sussex's tour has been going really well, and I thought some of the criticisms in this thread the past few days were nitpicky.  For example, I  thought Meghan's mosque outfit was fine and appropriate.  So I just scrolled past that whole discussion and didn't comment.  Later, I saw a Meghan fan instagram that had a real problem with what she wore to the mosque (and the PDA with Harry) and felt the need to post about it.  And that's when I realized that the criticism wasn't necessarily just people griping about Meghan because she can do no right in their eyes.  It was a reminder that just because I don't share the opinion, doesn't mean it doesn't have validity for other people.

What never fails to make me angry is when people make overt or covert accusations of racism against other posters (now coded as "biases" or "unconscious bias") or make other attacks and snide remarks on their motivations and personal characters.  Nobody here has enough information to make those accusations.  Attacking people's motives in order to win the argument because you couldn't force them to agree with your opinion is very lame.

This Sussex Squad/Meyhive mentality where people think they have a moral obligation to go around badgering and attacking people on the internet (or disproving "lies") in the name of defending Meghan and Harry is a really messed up mentality.   What is the tragedy of a few people on the Purseforum thinking Meghan might be a little bit of a phony?  If she's not, well good for her.  None of us here knows her personally, and none of us here has a stake in her real life - and that includes people who sometimes act like she's a beloved member of their own family.


----------



## Gal4Dior

chicaloca said:


> I agree. It’s highly insensitive to chalk up this moment to PR when he is honoring his deceased mother.
> 
> Sunshine Sachs is not the Sussexes personal PR. Sunshine was hired specifically for the rollout of the Travelyst initiative and the Sussex Foundation in the U.S.. Their personal PR director continues to be Sara Latham.
> 
> I’m not sure why people are trying to perpetuate this  “PR rehab” lie started by trash tabloids  like the Daily Fail. The Sussexes remain as popular as ever. They were trending all of the world on social media and the adoring crowds they are meeting in Africa can serve as further testament.


For Christ sakes. There is a photo that shows him in the exact place and in the same gear where Diana walked in. You think that shot was picked by happen stance? It was carefully selected to appeal to all our little hearts who loved Diana. 

Stop putting words in people’s mouths. I never said it Harry was not genuine. I can have an opinion without people dog piling over it calling me insensitive.


----------



## Sharont2305

Welltraveled! said:


> I wonder what’s going through his head to walk the same path as his mom.
> 
> If it was for me, I think it would be a surreal experience.


Where she walked is now a town, but I get what you mean. He is visiting that town I believe. 
But he walks her path all the time, every time I see William and Harry walk down the aisle of Westminster Abbey I always wonder what they're thinking, if it's about walking behind their mums coffin


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> For Christ sakes. There is a photo that shows him in the exact place and in the same gear where Diana walked in. You think that shot was picked by happen stance? It was carefully selected to appeal to all our little hearts who loved Diana.
> 
> Stop putting words in people’s mouths. I never said it Harry was not genuine. I can have an opinion without people dog piling over it calling me insensitive.


It's not the same place exactly. Where she walked is now a town.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> I would say a good deal of the negativity in this thread is because of self-appointed Sussex lie-catchers persistently accusing other posters of lying, "biases" and having an "insidious" agenda.  What you call "lies" I say are often straw men that you have created because you don't want to tolerate any opinions that don't match your own.


I agree, so far I’ve been told my opinions are tired and baseless and I’m insensitive to have the opinion I have over a Royal? Really? If this type of gossip thread fodder generates such ridiculous venom from people, how do they cope in real life with real problems?


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> I agree, so far I’ve been told my opinions are tired and baseless and I’m insensitive to have the opinion I have over a Royal? Really? If this type of gossip thread fodder generates such ridiculous venom from people, how do they cope in real life with real problems?


Hear hear


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Sharont2305 said:


> It's not the same place exactly. Where she walked is now a town.


I read that he was walking on the same road that his mother did, but it’s now a town, but it’s in the same area where Diana visited and photographed.


----------



## Sharont2305

LVSistinaMM said:


> I read that he was walking on the same road that his mother did, but it’s now a town, but it’s in the same area where Diana visited and photographed.


The photo of him in all the gear is not the same path she walked. When you said exact place, I understood you to mean the very same path.
I know it's the same town, where she walked is now a bustling community. 
Sorry if I got my wires crossed


----------



## Jayne1

Welltraveled! said:


> I wonder what’s going through his head to walk the same path as his mom.
> 
> If it was for me, I think it would be a surreal experience.


I read that path she walked on is now a busy street. But I get the symbolism with Harry walking down that busy street.


----------



## Flatsy

The shot of Harry in the Halo gear was most definitely meant to be a call back to Diana.  For the purpose of reminding people that landmines are still a problem and that this is something people should still care about, that's great.  

Evoking Diana's memory is tricky territory though.  If it's done too often or appears to be self-serving, then he's going to get called out for it.  

I do think this is genuine, and Harry has spoken specifically about this being an issue he wanted to carry on with in his mother's memory.


----------



## buffym

Welltraveled! said:


> I wonder what’s going through his head to walk the same path as his mom.
> 
> If it was for me, I think it would be a surreal experience.



Yes, the then and now. His mother and his age in 1997 and now his life. She was only a year older then him when she died and she made the visit to the land mines months prior.


----------



## buffym

Harry opens the Orthopaedic Centre renamed after his mother.


----------



## chicaloca

daisychainz said:


> Probably. But that's where the charity is, you know? In the townships and areas outside the city. Cape Town is the Beverly Hills of S.A. At least Harry is getting out there.



Harry can “get out there” because Meghan is  caring for their 5 month old who’s possibly breast-feeding. They have a nanny but Meghan seems hands  on with Archie and maybe doesn’t want to leave  her baby without a least one of its parents.


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> as a non native speaker - why is bubba awful?



In some places in the US  it has an unpleasant connotation and association  with a certain type of person. I prefer not to see it hung on an innocent baby


----------



## Sharont2305

chicaloca said:


> Harry can “get out there” because Meghan is  caring for their 5 month old who’s possibly breast-feeding. They have a nanny but Meghan seems hands  on with Archie and maybe doesn’t want to leave  her baby without a least one of its parents.


I read that it was deemed unsafe to take Archie to Botswana, Malawi and Angola. Why? I've no idea.


----------



## redney

gracekelly said:


> In some places in the US  it has an unpleasant connotation and association  with a certain type of person. I prefer not to see it hung on an innocent baby


Ahh yes, it is regional in the U.S. I call my elementary-school aged daughter "bubba" and "bubs" in addition to other nickname terms of endearment. Never thought of it in that stereotype where I live.


----------



## chicaloca

Sharont2305 said:


> I read that it was deemed unsafe to take Archie to Botswana, Malawi and Angola. Why? I've no idea.



I don’t think it’s safety so much as the logistics of traveling with a 5 month old. I feel exhausted thinking about it.


----------



## TC1

Exhausting indeed.


----------



## Sharont2305

chicaloca said:


> I don’t think it’s safety so much as the logistics of traveling with a 5 month old. I feel exhausted thinking about it.


True, could be either, like I said, it's what I read


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> And if you feel that's the case, what's the problem with just letting it go?
> 
> I'll give an example.  I think the Sussex's tour has been going really well, and I thought some of the criticisms in this thread the past few days were nitpicky.  For example, I  thought Meghan's mosque outfit was fine and appropriate.  So I just scrolled past that whole discussion and didn't comment.  Later, I saw a Meghan fan instagram that had a real problem with what she wore to the mosque (and the PDA with Harry) and felt the need to post about it.  And that's when I realized that the criticism wasn't necessarily just people griping about Meghan because she can do no right in their eyes.  It was a reminder that just because I don't share the opinion, doesn't mean it doesn't have validity for other people.
> 
> What never fails to make me angry is when people make overt or covert accusations of racism against other posters (now coded as "biases" or "unconscious bias") or make other attacks and snide remarks on their motivations and personal characters.  Nobody here has enough information to make those accusations.  Attacking people's motives in order to win the argument because you couldn't force them to agree with your opinion is very lame.
> 
> This Sussex Squad/Meyhive mentality where people think they have a moral obligation to go around badgering and attacking people on the internet (or disproving "lies") in the name of defending Meghan and Harry is a really messed up mentality.   What is the tragedy of a few people on the Purseforum thinking Meghan might be a little bit of a phony?  If she's not, well good for her.  None of us here knows her personally, and none of us here has a stake in her real life - and that includes people who sometimes act like she's a beloved member of their own family.



+1 Let it go. It is inconvenient to skip five pages and still the same nonsensical back-and-forth. Opinions are like a-holes - everyone has one. We all know minds won't get changed no matter what crazy wall of text evidence is presented. Let the haters hate and the lovers love and exercise that ignore button for those who really get under your skin!


----------



## LittleStar88

Is Bubba supposed to mean something? I am in the US, and it has no negative associations as far as I can tell...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

LVSistinaMM said:


> For Christ sakes. There is a photo that shows him in the exact place and in the same gear where Diana walked in. You think that shot was picked by happen stance? It was carefully selected to appeal to all our little hearts who loved Diana.
> 
> Stop putting words in people’s mouths. I never said it Harry was not genuine. I can have an opinion without people dog piling over it calling me insensitive.



Here is exactly what you wrote:

_



			This PR moment/visit was magic. Well done Sunshine Sachs, well done! They, for the most part on this trip, are doing a excellent job telling lovely heartwarming stories that will hopefully improve some goodwill that was lost over the last few weeks for this couple. Hope to see this continue.
		
Click to expand...

_
What had to be an emotional moment for Harry is attributed to a PR company that has nothing to do with this tour.  It is further implied the moment was part of some (fictional) image rehab rather than a son paying homage to his mother. I personally found this to be a rather  insensitive take on Harry’s journey. 

No one is obligated to like the Sussexes. I just think the vitriol goes too far sometimes.


----------



## redney

LittleStar88 said:


> Is Bubba supposed to mean something? I am in the US, and it has no negative associations as far as I can tell...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubba

It can indicate several things per the wiki entry, including a term of endearment. Another stereotype it references is the uneducated, low economic status, redneck from the Southern parts of the US.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Is Bubba supposed to mean something? I am in the US, and it has no negative associations as far as I can tell...


Mostly in the South


----------



## Vlad

Time to give this thread a rest. Clearly, my words fell on deaf ears and the reports of infighting continues. See y'all on Monday with a set of fresh eyes and calmed nerves.


----------



## Vlad

Welcome back, perhaps we can now play nicely in here? I sincerely hope so!


----------



## prettyprincess

Vlad said:


> Welcome back, perhaps we can now play nicely in here? I sincerely hope so!






I wouldn’t hold my breath lol.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Well, just when I thought that tour of Africa went great for them, Harry drops that bomb of a letter that sort of poops on their good press. I don’t get it, he may be right about some press getting out of hand, but I can hardly equate Meghan to Diana.

Meghan was a grown woman with her own career prior to joining the BRF.  Diana was duped as young and naive woman into the lifestyle, and it was all a fantasy thanks to Camilla and Charles.

And why the letter now? They were #winning and hitting it out of the park on this state visit. Why not let sleeping dogs lie? Also, this was not a statement on BRF letterhead and on their own website page? Does that mean it didn’t need to be vetted by BP since it’s a “private” lawsuit with “private” funds?


----------



## bag-mania

He loves his wife and he is protective of her. Anyone can  understand that. His mistake is letting the media know that they get to him.  Rather than getting them to ease up, it will probably have the opposite effect.


----------



## Gal4Dior

bag-mania said:


> He loves his wife and he is protective of her. Anyone can  understand that. His mistake is letting the media know that they get to him.  Rather than getting them to ease up, it will probably have the opposite effect.


Harry has always seemed to wear his heart on his sleeve, but this is not the BRF way. It’s always a stiff upper lip and he’s just thrown up his feelings publicly and now everyone knows just how to make him tick. I think you are right, they will come back two-fold...it will get ugly before it gets better.


----------



## buffym

It is probably already ugly.  Harry May use his father’s lawsuit as a benchmark and to stop the DM from republishing the letter.

I think it shouldn’t be ignored. People have cited the DM and Sun’s articles as true or examples of Meghan’s characters. When the articles aren’t true. I except there are probably a lot of lawsuits going on it just takes time.

The Sun has had to apologized to the Sussex about another untrue story.

https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/prin...acy-complaint-against-sun-parking-ban-splash/


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

It seems like a massive waste of time and money for them to fight silly tabloid stories about where their staff are allowed to park their cars?


----------



## Jayne1

I don't understand his problem.  Things were progressing nicely in Africa.  He said he believes in media freedom but only want nice things said about them?


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> I don't understand his problem.  Things were progressing nicely in Africa.  He said he believes in media freedom but only want nice things said about them?



There is middle ground. The press has made up straight lies, people quote those lies as calling Meghan a diva.  The articles they have sued have been ones that cross the line. 

The Sun stating Meghan and Harry made a rules and gave it to the residents.

The article saying Meghan told people where they could park.

The article publishing helicopter pictures that zoomed into Meghan and Harry’s home.

This isn’t about being nice, but not crossing the line to maliciousness.

Meghan has a case because of copyright infringement. The owner of the letter owns the copyright, the DM violated it by publishing the letter without her consent.

Prince Charles won his case using copyright infringement.


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> Meghan has a case because of copyright infringement. The owner of the letter owns the copyright, the DM violated it by publishing the letter without her consent.
> 
> Prince Charles won his case using copyright infringement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4555044


Does that mean when you send a letter to another person, you still own that letter?  Does the recipient not own the letter?  Or do they both now own the letter?


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> Does that mean when you send a letter to another person, you still own that letter?  Does the recipient not own the letter?  Or do they both now own the letter?



This is from a media lawyer.

The sender owns the copyright- the words and the receiver owns the physical letter, the paper.






It is mentioned Meghan tried to work it out with the DM before she sued.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Knowing her father, makes you wonder why she sent the letter to begin with.


----------



## zen1965

Did they visit a township after all?


----------



## mdcx

Oh my goodness, Meghan was just getting back on side with her reasonably low-key and appropriate behaviour in South Africa. Then they drop this bomb?

I read a theory that stirring up all of this public sympathy about Meghan's supposed vilification in the UK press is part of the Sussex's master plan to be allowed to go and live in the United States. So they can escape the haters blah blah.

Both of them really seem a bit unhinged to my eye. They seriously need to seek some advice on how to handle themselves pronto. Or else resign from their paid positions in the BRF.


----------



## MarieCurie

zen1965 said:


> Did they visit a township after all?



Nyanga on day 1 and Monwabisi beach in Khayelitsha (a township) on day 2


----------



## FreeSpirit71

LVSistinaMM said:


> Harry has always seemed to wear his heart on his sleeve, *but this is not the BRF* way. It’s always a stiff upper lip and he’s just thrown up his feelings publicly and now everyone knows just how to make him tick. I think you are right, they will come back two-fold...it will get ugly before it gets better.


Beg to differ. Many royals have sued the press.

William and Kate did it and won in 2017 against French mag Closer for topless pics taken of Kate.

I'm sure their lawyers went over it with a fine tooth comb before progressing, and that they have a strong case against the violation.

*Here's many more examples:
Including one that involves publishing a private letter, setting precedent*.



> The year before (1987), The Sun made a payment to charity and apologised to the Queen after publishing a letter from her and Prince Philip about Prince Edward's decision to leave the Royal Marines


.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1503361/The-stories-that-made-the-Royal-Family-sue.html


----------



## Gal4Dior

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Beg to differ. Many royals have sued the press.
> 
> William and Kate did it and won in 2017 against French mag Closer for topless pics taken of Kate.
> 
> I'm sure their lawyers went over it with a fine tooth comb before progressing, and that they have a strong case against the violation.
> 
> *Here's many more examples:
> Including one that involves publishing a private letter, setting precedent*.
> 
> .
> 
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1503361/The-stories-that-made-the-Royal-Family-sue.html


Topless photos taken when they were in a private resort is a clear violation, whether you are in the BRF or not.

I would assume H&M’s lawyers would have a solid a case before suing, but a trashy disloyal dad selling out his daughter with a letter sent to him is completely different than nude photos. They didn’t steal the letter, her loser dad sold it to them. He is every bit as guilty in this whole bad press debacle of hers. As well as her other trash half siblings. Just my humble opinion.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The topless photo's aren't the only examples cited.

But you do you.


----------



## Gal4Dior

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The topless photo's aren't the only examples cited.
> 
> But you do you.


Touché


----------



## Clearblueskies

LVSistinaMM said:


> Well, just when I thought that tour of Africa went great for them, Harry drops that bomb of a letter that sort of poops on their good press. I don’t get it, he may be right about some press getting out of hand, but I can hardly equate Meghan to Diana.
> 
> Meghan was a grown woman with her own career prior to joining the BRF.  Diana was duped as young and naive woman into the lifestyle, and it was all a fantasy thanks to Camilla and Charles.
> 
> And why the letter now? They were #winning and hitting it out of the park on this state visit. Why not let sleeping dogs lie? Also, this was not a statement on BRF letterhead and on their own website page? Does that mean it didn’t need to be vetted by BP since it’s a “private” lawsuit with “private” funds?


I don’t understand the timing, and I don’t understand why he’s made such a statement.  They could have sued without making a drama and been dignified about it.  This is like adding petrol to a bonfire.


Jayne1 said:


> I don't understand his problem.  Things were progressing nicely in Africa.  He said he believes in media freedom but only want nice things said about them?


You’ve summed it up, that’s exactly what he thinks he’s entitled to.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t understand the timing, and I don’t understand why he’s made such a statement.  They could have sued without making a drama and been dignified about it.  This is like adding petrol to a bonfire.
> 
> You’ve summed it up, that’s exactly what he thinks he’s entitled to.


Agree there were so many good feels from this recent trip, so the timing is just strange. He has every right to sue, but his statement alludes to something way beyond just a letter. It almost makes me wonder, what else is next for them?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LVSistinaMM said:


> Topless photos taken when they were in a private resort is a clear violation, whether you are in the BRF or not.
> 
> I would assume H&M’s lawyers would have a solid a case before suing, but a trashy disloyal dad selling out his daughter with a letter sent to him is completely different than nude photos. They didn’t steal the letter, her loser dad sold it to them. He is every bit as guilty in this whole bad press debacle of hers. As well as her other trash half siblings. Just my humble opinion.


Weren't Meghan's "loser" friends discussing the details of this letter all over the media as well at the time? It seems that letter was written for the sole purpose of being made public.


I'm getting a bit tired of the vilification of Meghan's dad, who seems to have done everything he could for her. Too much, in fact. He obviously took care of her, when her mom didn't. Meghan lauded him up until the end of her blog, before marrying. And comes the wedding, he's ghosted for not being presentable enough? And proceeds to have heart complications. From the stress and a broken heart, I'm sure. As I understand it, Harry didn't even bother to go visit Markle in person, despite primarily inviting Markle to the wedding.


Somebody on another forum suggested the lawsuit is all about diversion. Very interesting development in this saga.


----------



## Gal4Dior

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Weren't Meghan's "loser" friends discussing the details of this letter all over the media as well at the time? It seems that letter was written for the sole purpose of being made public.
> 
> 
> I'm getting a bit tired of the vilification of Meghan's dad, who seems to have done everything he could for her. Too much, in fact. He obviously took care of her, when her mom didn't. Meghan lauded him up until the end of her blog, before marrying. And comes the wedding, he's ghosted for not being presentable enough? And proceeds to have heart complications. From the stress and a broken heart, I'm sure. As I understand it, Harry didn't even bother to go visit Markle in person, despite primarily inviting Markle to the wedding.
> 
> 
> Somebody on another forum suggested the lawsuit is all about diversion. Very interesting development in this saga.



I am now strongly thinking it is very much a diversion. The publication of this letter happened long ago, why the heck sue now? Also, the bad press and “lies” was about Harry, too, as he has made some bonehead moves recently. Painting Meghan as a victim like this will sure spark a nasty fight between them and the press.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Does that mean when you send a letter to another person, you still own that letter?  Does the recipient not own the letter?  Or do they both now own the letter?


I think, that laws are different in the US compared to the UK. In the UK the sender has the copyrights of the letter while the receiver owns the letter? So for publishing rights both writer and receiver/owner have to approve?

US: Wasn't someone previously working for Madonna, selling letters, written by Madonna to Tupac? I think Madonna couldn't do anything about it as the seller owns the letters?

Hopefully someone more law savvy than me can explain.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## mdcx

Another thing I read is that perhaps Harry and/or Meghan are not 100% well in some capacity. And this may be affecting their decision making. It certainly seems like some reckless decisions are being made.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I mean....


----------



## buffym

More pictures from the Tembisa Township 

They were visiting Yes4youthza to see the employment work with the youth.






I really liked her jewelry this trip.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So Meghan writes a letter she knows will be shared...
Has her thirsty friends leak info about it...
And when her dad shares it to contradict the lies from her friends, they sue the media. 

I see.


----------



## buffym

Meghan and Harry with Grace Mandala. She’s wearing the dress she wore to Mandala’s exhibit in London.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## mrsinsyder

I'm willing to bet this spectacularly backfires on them. The best thing the media could do would be to ignore them totally; these two would shrivel up and wilt away with no attention.

They continue to want their cake and eat it too.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> So Meghan writes a letter she knows will be shared...
> Has her thirsty friends leak info about it...
> And when her dad shares it to contradict the lies from her friends, they sue the media.
> I see.


It did seem, at the time, like a trap that she had set for her father to see if he would go to the press with the letter.  Now it seems like it was a trap for the tabloids as well to see if they would publish it.

It was a private letter and I think Daily Mail clearly violated her copyright by publishing scans of the bulk of the letter.  It's a legitimate lawsuit, and I don't begrudge royals for suing when their rights have been legitimately violated.  

The car park thing, on the other hand, was petty.  If their new strategy is to aggressively litigate everything they don't like, I don't think that's a good use of their time.    Their work on the Africa tour was well received and so was Meghan's Smartworks project.  Keeping up the good work seems to me like a better way of winning people's hearts than engaging in ongoing litigation against the tabloids.


----------



## chicaloca

I was so glad to hear the Sussexes are taking a stand against the vile British tabloids. The level of harassment Meghan is receiving is unprecedented. That so much of it occurred during her pregnancy is unconscionable.

I suspect the lawsuit announcement was timed to coincide with the tour to illustrate how the negative press correlates with Meghan’s absence from the spotlight. When she’s not available suddenly the negative stories appear. I was alarmed to see the negativity escalate during her maternity leave. The UK press has an insatiable demand for Meghan and essentially penalize her when they can’t get access.

The media’s job is to be objective so the fact that they are accurately reporting how wildly successful the Sussex tour is does not mean the Sussexes should absolve them of their ongoing  smear campaign against Meghan which will likely resume once again when she is absent from the spotlight.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Another thing I read is that perhaps Harry and/or Meghan are not 100% well in some capacity. And this may be affecting their decision making. It certainly seems like some reckless decisions are being made.



They are just fine. They are only doing what many others before them have tried to do and failed, they want to control the media's narrative about them. It won't work of course. 

In her day Diana learned through trial and error how to finesse the gossip media to at least get her version of events out there. She did this by allowing certain reporters limited access to her. By offering the media _something,_ she had some say in what was written about her. As it turns out, it was a brilliant strategy.


----------



## chicaloca

A few of facts about the Daily Mail:

It has been deemed the most unreliable UK paper with more  violations of press standards than the next three papers combined.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/tabloidcorrections.wordpress.com/2018/01/02/statistics-show-that-daily-mail-was-by-far-the-most-unreliable-uk-paper-in-2017/


 Wikipedia has banned the Daily Mail as a source due to it’s unreliability.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/02/wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source.


Additionally Google downgraded The DM in their search engine due to its unreliability. As a result traffic to the DM fell over 50%


This is why I cannot take seriously anything posted about Meghan from the Daily Mail and wish more forums would ban their content. 

Being targeted by an unscrupulous outlet like the Daily Fail in particular has likely been a nightmare for Meghan and Harry.  Harry is absolutely right that the UK press has commoditized Meghan. They have determined that bashing Meghan is a lucrative a cash cow. The Fail in particular  churns out multiple negative articles a day encouraging their racist, xenophobic  reader base to post the most vile comments while The Fail collects money from all the clicks. 

There is no reason their should be more negative articles about Meghan than the Resident Royal Pedophile.  What the UK press is essentially doing is online bullying. I really hope the Sussexes win their lawsuit.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Apparently H&M and the Mail have been mediating this since February (and the website was created in March). Mail wouldn't back down so I'm curious to see how this goes.


----------



## MarieCurie

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I mean....



Mind. Blown



buffym said:


> More pictures from the Tembisa Township
> 
> They were visiting Yes4youthza to see the employment work with the youth.
> 
> View attachment 4555223
> View attachment 4555224
> View attachment 4555226
> 
> 
> I really liked her jewelry this trip.



I really like this look. She looks amazing!



buffym said:


> Meghan and Harry with Grace Mandala. She’s wearing the dress she wore to Mandala’s exhibit in London.
> 
> View attachment 4555275
> View attachment 4555276
> View attachment 4555277



Mrs Mandela looks great, I haven't seen her in a while. I like Meghan's messy bun and wisps here


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Apparently H&M and the Mail have been mediating this since February (and the website was created in March). Mail wouldn't back down so I'm curious to see how this goes.


Interesting.  Which website?  Daily Mail's site has been around for a lot longer than March.

If The Daily Mail is fighting it this hard, they must believe they have legal grounds.  I think the issue is that the Sussexes are making it about more than just the copyrighted letter and making it about The Daily Mail's coverage in general.

Everybody knows The Daily Mail is a sleazy tabloid, but royals can't sue over general tabloid coverage that they don't like.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Interesting.  *Which website? * Daily Mail's site has been around for a lot longer than March.
> 
> If The Daily Mail is fighting it this hard, they must believe they have legal grounds.  I think the issue is that the Sussexes are making it about more than just the copyrighted letter and making it about The Daily Mail's coverage in general.
> 
> Everybody knows The Daily Mail is a sleazy tabloid, but royals can't sue over general tabloid coverage that they don't like.


The site M&H posted their letter on.

_Domain name:
sussexofficial.uk

Registrar:
GoDaddy.com, LLC. [Tag = GODADDY]
URL: http://uk.godaddy.com

Relevant dates:
Registered on: 14-Mar-2019
Expiry date: 14-Mar-2021
Last updated: 14-Mar-2019_


----------



## Flatsy

A couple of days ago, the New York Post reported what has already been mentioned elsewhere in the media - that the orchestration of the Africa tour was done in consultation with Sunshine Sachs: https://pagesix.com/2019/09/28/the-sneaky-ways-meghan-markle-is-fixing-her-tarnished-image/



> It has been a carefully crafted campaign, with the Duchess of Sussex sitting on the floor with fellow moms, hugging impoverished kids, wearing “old” clothes — even leaving her $140,000 engagement ring at home.
> 
> Sources told The Post she is being advised on the image repair by close pals, including friend Keleigh Thomas Morgan and others at Sunshine Sachs, an LA firm known for celebrity crisis management.
> 
> “Meghan knew she needed help, [so] she reached out to a very few trusted people, including Keleigh,” said a close Meghan insider. “She has a few girlfriends in the UK who are extremely well-versed in British media.”
> 
> (Sunshine Sachs told The Post that the company has been hired only to help with Harry and Meghan’s charitable Sussex Foundation.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

daisychainz said:


> Probably. But that's where the charity is, you know? In the townships and areas outside the city. Cape Town is the Beverly Hills of S.A. At least Harry is getting out there.


Absolutely right about Cape Town being the Beverly Hills of SA. When I was there it was amazing how up to date and very modern CT was. They had the latest of everything and were equal or ahead of many modern cities world wide. It’s an entirely different picture to, Zimbabwe for example. If they love Africa, a trip there would open their eyes. Cape Town is Africa ‘light’ lol.


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> Probably. But that's where the charity is, you know? In the townships and areas outside the city. Cape Town is the Beverly Hills of S.A. At least Harry is getting out there.



There are photos on twitter showing that the small townships put up fences and trees and paving for them (him?) while down the street everything is dilapidated.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm getting a bit tired of the vilification of Meghan's dad, who seems to have done everything he could for her. Too much, in fact. He obviously took care of her, when her mom didn't. Meghan lauded him up until the end of her blog, before marrying. And comes the wedding, he's ghosted for not being presentable enough? And proceeds to have heart complications. From the stress and a broken heart, I'm sure. As I understand it, Harry didn't even bother to go visit Markle in person, despite primarily inviting Markle to the wedding.


I agree and still think he must be mystified and heartbroken. Maybe never involving him and not introducing him to Harry before they got married was a mistake.  Keep him closer and he'd have been happy or at least she could keep an eye on him.


----------



## threadbender

I just want to say, regardless of anything else, seeing Archie was flippin' awesome! He looks like a happy, healthy Harry clone. lol
The letter stuff, I don't get. I always thought that when you give someone something, ie; a letter, a photo, a voice mail, whatever communication, that it belonged to the receiver to do what they will. So, I am learning things.
If Meghan had leaked portions to her friends, how does it work? Would they be in trouble too? Or, is it only the press? I guess, I can see it. Friends are not "gaining" by sharing but the press would be. However, I can see some issues with that too. I am going in circles in my head with this. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
I have forgotten, are they heading back to the UK, or going elsewhere now?


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm willing to bet this spectacularly backfires on them. The best thing the media could do would be to ignore them totally; these two would shrivel up and wilt away with no attention.
> 
> They continue to want their cake and eat it too.


I agree, it’s almost as if negative attention is better than none?  



Flatsy said:


> A couple of days ago, the New York Post reported what has already been mentioned elsewhere in the media - that the orchestration of the Africa tour was done in consultation with Sunshine Sachs: https://pagesix.com/2019/09/28/the-sneaky-ways-meghan-markle-is-fixing-her-tarnished-image/


Hmm - we’ll for me the hugging got ridiculous, no innocent passerby was safe! 



Jayne1 said:


> I agree and still think he must be mystified and heartbroken. Maybe never involving him and not introducing him to Harry before they got married was a mistake.  Keep him closer and he'd have been happy or at least she could keep an eye on him.


I agree.  They managed it badly.  Imagine watching the grandson you’ve never been allowed to see being shown off to various celebs.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I thought there was a court case where one of Charles’ letters to Camilla gotten out.  I have a vague memory about it being “I want to be your tampon” comment was from.  




FreeSpirit71 said:


> The topless photo's aren't the only examples cited.
> 
> But you do you.





FreeSpirit71 said:


> Beg to differ. Many royals have sued the press.
> 
> William and Kate did it and won in 2017 against French mag Closer for topless pics taken of Kate.
> 
> I'm sure their lawyers went over it with a fine tooth comb before progressing, and that they have a strong case against the violation.
> 
> *Here's many more examples:
> Including one that involves publishing a private letter, setting precedent*.
> 
> .
> 
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1503361/The-stories-that-made-the-Royal-Family-sue.html


----------



## sdkitty

I don't begrudge Harry having a family but I'm starting to think I liked him better when he was single


----------



## bag-mania

Welltraveled! said:


> I thought there was a court case where one of Charles’ letters to Camilla gotten out.  I have a vague memory about it being “I want to be your tampon” comment was from.



Yes, that was quite the humiliating reveal. We can all agree that Charles' love talk leaves much to be desired.


----------



## Flatsy

Archie's a cutie.

I believe UK copyright law is similar if not dentical to US law.  Meghan owns the words that she wrote as a piece of publishable writing, the same as if she wrote a poem, essay or book.  That does not make it confidential.  She just owns the rights to publish the words.

Thomas Markle owns the physical letter that was sent to him.  He can sell the letter, he can destroy it, he can show it to anyone he wants to show it to, and he can tell anyone he wants about the information it contains.

Markle had the right to give the letter to The Daily Mail and The Daily Mail had the right to publish the information contained in the letter.  They could have described every thought and every paragraph in detail.  They also could have quoted directly from the letter.  There is just a limit on how much they can directly quote.  In the US, the rule is that the quotes would be what you would read "in the context of a book review".

The Daily Mail published scans of almost the whole letter, which seems like a pretty clear copyright violation.


----------



## kemilia

Welltraveled! said:


> I thought there was a court case where one of Charles’ letters to Camilla gotten out.  I have a vague memory about it being “I want to be your tampon” comment was from.


Oh yeah, I remember the tampon comment, grossed me out.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> I just want to say, regardless of anything else, seeing Archie was flippin' awesome! He looks like a happy, healthy Harry clone. lol
> The letter stuff, I don't get. I always thought that when you give someone something, ie; a letter, a photo, a voice mail, whatever communication, that it belonged to the receiver to do what they will. So, I am learning things.
> If Meghan had leaked portions to her friends, how does it work? Would they be in trouble too? Or, is it only the press? I guess, I can see it. Friends are not "gaining" by sharing but the press would be. However, I can see some issues with that too. I am going in circles in my head with this. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
> I have forgotten, are they heading back to the UK, or going elsewhere now?


Agree about Archie, he looks like a cute and happy baby 

Although not particularly attached to either of his parents? Or they too him? Well, we don't know about Harry as he seems to never get to hold Archie when Meghan's around, at least in public.


I read that because DM only published snippets of the letter, the Sussexes don't have a case as compared to if DM had published the whole thing?

Also, some seem to still confuse this gossip thread for the style thread. I'd never go on Meghan's style thread and discuss what we're discussing here. But just as on the other gossip threads, this is a gossip thread, not the blind adoration thread.


ETA: I see Flatsy responded before me about the letter. And probably more correctly than me.


----------



## Jayne1

Welltraveled! said:


> I thought there was a court case where one of Charles’ letters to Camilla gotten out.  I have a vague memory about it being “I want to be your tampon” comment was from.


I think that was a bugged phone conversation, nothing in writing.


----------



## Flatsy

The Guardian has an interesting summary of the issues involved in the lawsuit: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/02/why-is-meghan-suing-the-mail-on-sunday



> Judges have been increasingly willing to find against the media in privacy cases. Meghan’s lawyers are likely to argue that there was no legitimate public interest in publishing the letter. If the MoS loses the case it could have wider implications for all journalists who want to report on leaked private documents.





> *What is unusual about this case?*
> Meghan has broken with protocol by employing the libel lawyers Schillings, a company which delights in its reputation as an attack dog that works aggressively on behalf of its clients against journalists.
> 
> The couple have been willing to break with royal convention, hiring external PRs and refusing to agree to tabloids sharing pictures of their child. They say they will use private funds to bring the proceedings, which were announced at the end of the couple’s overseas trip to South Africa, overshadowing their other announcements.





> Now, social media and a broader collapse of trust in newspapers means Meghan and Harry can use the same tactics used by politicians to rally their supporters against critical media outlets. However, while readers publicly say they can be disgusted with stories about the couple, articles about them often dominate the most-read sections of news websites – giving tabloids a strong incentive to keep writing about Meghan.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> A couple of days ago, the New York Post reported what has already been mentioned elsewhere in the media - that the orchestration of the Africa tour was done in consultation with Sunshine Sachs: https://pagesix.com/2019/09/28/the-sneaky-ways-meghan-markle-is-fixing-her-tarnished-image/



*Sunshine Sachs told The Post that the company has been hired only to help with Harry and Meghan’s charitable Sussex Foundation.*

Right in that very article Sunshine Sachs clearly says they are only helping with the rollout of the Sussex Royal Foundation. They are not managing the Sussex personal PR image — that would be Sara Latham.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, it’s almost as if negative attention is better than none?
> 
> 
> Hmm - we’ll for me the hugging got ridiculous, no innocent passerby was safe!
> 
> 
> I agree.  They managed it badly.  Imagine watching the grandson you’ve never been allowed to see being shown off to various celebs.



Thomas has other grandkids by his  other children that he has never seen so he should be used to the “pain” by now. 

Imagine having your father, stage paparazzi photos for money, claim to have a heart attack near your wedding day so another man had to walk you down the aisle, then not return your urgent calls of concern but instead only communicate to TMZ ( by his own admission), insult your new husband and his family, continue to sell stories and your and your personal pictures and letters to the tabloids. 

I’m sure Meghan loves her father but there is absolutely no way she can trust this man around her baby. Thomas’s first wife seems to agree having said he was abusive and warning Meghan to keep Baby Archie away from him. All of Thomas’s kids save Meghan have major issues.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Thomas has other grandkids by his  other children that he has never seen so he should be used to the “pain” by now.
> 
> Imagine having your father, stage paparazzi photos for money, claim to have a heart attack near your wedding day so another man had to walk you down the aisle, then not return your urgent calls of concern but instead only communicate to TMZ ( by his own admission), insult your new husband and his family, continue to sell stories and your and your personal pictures and letters to the tabloids.
> 
> I’m sure Meghan loves her father but there is absolutely no way she can trust this man around her baby. Thomas’s first wife seems to agree having said he was abusive and warning Meghan to keep Baby Archie away from him. All of Thomas’s kids save Meghan have major issues.


So one minute he’s a mainstay in her blog, and the next minute he’s a child abuser?!   I don’t think so.  He made a bad mistake, in part because they didn’t bother to meet him and prepare properly for the wedding.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> I think that was a bugged phone conversation, nothing in writing.


You’re right. It was, I remember it unfortunately


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> So one minute he’s a mainstay in her blog, and the next minute he’s a child abuser?!   I don’t think so.  He made a bad mistake, in part because they didn’t bother to meet him and prepare properly for the wedding.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan has said, on multiple occasions, that she doesn't read news stories about her.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> *Sunshine Sachs told The Post that the company has been hired only to help with Harry and Meghan’s charitable Sussex Foundation.*
> 
> Right in that very article Sunshine Sachs clearly says they are only helping with the rollout of the Sussex Royal Foundation.


You can choose to believe that if you want.  Others can choose to believe the multiple media outlets in the US and the UK who have reported that Harry and Meghan are getting generalized PR advice from Sunshine Sachs as well.  Neither one is proven fact.

Some of us noticed the abrupt change in PR tactics that the Sussexes adopted for this tour prior to the NY Post writing about it, and the recent addition of Sunshine Sachs to their payroll is a logical explanation.


----------



## zen1965

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4555548
> View attachment 4555549


Thank you for posting this. Quite shocking. 
I pity her father despite his ill-advised moves.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4555548
> View attachment 4555549






Flatsy said:


> You can choose to believe that if you want.  Others can choose to believe the multiple media outlets in the US and the UK who have reported that Harry and Meghan are getting generalized PR advice from Sunshine Sachs as well.  Neither one is proven fact.
> 
> Some of us noticed the abrupt change in PR tactics that the Sussexes adopted for this tour prior to the NY Post writing about it, and the recent addition of Sunshine Sachs to their payroll is a logical explanation.



I believe it because it came straight from the horses mouth. Sunshine Saks themselves  has stated exactly what their role with the Sussexes is and it is not personal PR. Sara Latham is still employed as their personal PR rep. PR for a company is completely different than individual PR.


The Sussexes have not changed anything about their tour other than now having an Instagram to post exclusive  content. They are not a acting any different than they did before. Meghan dresses based on the surroundings and the occasion. Last year was her first tour their were no outfits to recycle versus now.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4555548
> View attachment 4555549




It’s too bad Thomas spoiled his  relationship with his daughter by selling her out to tabloids. Meghan’s letter outlined the ways he could get back into her life and see Archie but then he kept talking to tabloids, insulting her and her husband then he sold the letter so......


----------



## Welltraveled!

It’s in bad taste to compare or give a perception that he’s a child abuser. Even as a joke.  He’s a lot of things but he’s not that.  

anyways, Thomas and Meghan relationship diminished over the last few years.  It happens both feel justified in their stance on the issues and that’s that.

however sometimes distance eventually heal all wounds.  Let’s see what happens as the years progress.








Clearblueskies said:


> So one minute he’s a mainstay in her blog, and the next minute he’s a child abuser?!   I don’t think so.  He made a bad mistake, in part because they didn’t bother to meet him and prepare properly for the wedding.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Welltraveled! said:


> It’s in bad taste to compare or give a perception that he’s a child abuser. Even as a joke.  He’s a lot of things but he’s not that.


I’m glad that’s something you agree with me on.  If you’d read the post properly you’d have seen it was not my suggestion that Archie would be unsafe around Thomas, but that of the poster I quoted.


----------



## bag-mania

chicaloca said:


> I believe it because it came straight from the horses mouth. Sunshine Saks themselves  has stated exactly what their role with the Sussexes is and it is not personal PR. Sara Latham is still employed as their personal PR rep. PR for a company is completely different than individual PR.



Good PR people know they are working for their client first, not for the random media outlets who contact them with questions. Sunshine Saks is under no obligation to be entirely forthcoming in what exactly they do for their clients. We will never know everything.


----------



## Tivo

They aren’t suing the Daily Mail. They’re suing ‘The Mail on Sunday’


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> The media’s job is to be objective so the fact that they are accurately reporting how wildly successful the Sussex tour is does not mean the Sussexes should absolve them of their ongoing  smear campaign against Meghan which will likely resume once again when she is absent from the spotlight.


God, I wish what you are saying is true, but alas .. it is not, just look at Fox News in the US.  Sad to say but "fake news" is extremely prevalent nowadays and let's face it, Daily Fail and the Sun have never truly been known for their 'accuracy'!


----------



## daisychainz

threadbender said:


> I just want to say, regardless of anything else, seeing Archie was flippin' awesome! He looks like a happy, healthy Harry clone. lol
> The letter stuff, I don't get. I always thought that when you give someone something, ie; a letter, a photo, a voice mail, whatever communication, that it belonged to the receiver to do what they will. So, I am learning things.
> If Meghan had leaked portions to her friends, how does it work? Would they be in trouble too? Or, is it only the press? I guess, I can see it. Friends are not "gaining" by sharing but the press would be. However, I can see some issues with that too. I am going in circles in my head with this. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
> I have forgotten, are they heading back to the UK, or going elsewhere now?


That's my understanding, too. If you give me a letter, card, and so on, then it's mine to sell or publish or do whatever I want. I didn't read what is exactly going on, but it said something about being edited, so maybe the paper altered it before publication?


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> Absolutely right about Cape Town being the Beverly Hills of SA. When I was there it was amazing how up to date and very modern CT was. They had the latest of everything and were equal or ahead of many modern cities world wide. It’s an entirely different picture to, Zimbabwe for example. If they love Africa, a trip there would open their eyes. Cape Town is Africa ‘light’ lol.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  I loved Cape Town and if I ever had to move to South Africa, that would be the place that I would pick.  NOT the case for Johannesburg, but alas .. that is where the majority of Financial Services companies are and that's the business I'm in.  I was in Harare ZIM briefly and while it was 'nice', it was certainly NOT Cape Town and the stories I have heard from many current and former ZIM inhabitants were frightening (especially those that lost everything and had to flee to South Africa)!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muchstuff

Welltraveled! said:


> I thought there was a court case where one of Charles’ letters to Camilla gotten out.  I have a vague memory about it being “I want to be your tampon” comment was from.


Or was that a phone call?


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> It’s too bad Thomas spoiled his  relationship with his daughter by selling her out to tabloids. Meghan’s letter outlined the ways he could get back into her life and see Archie but then he kept talking to tabloids, insulting her and her husband then he sold the letter so......


Lol


----------



## threadbender

daisychainz said:


> That's my understanding, too. If you give me a letter, card, and so on, then it's mine to sell or publish or do whatever I want. I didn't read what is exactly going on, but it said something about being edited, so maybe the paper altered it before publication?


That is what I thought. I see things like postcards, photos, letters, autographs for sale often. In the end, who owns what? The words, the image, the paper, the thought? Interesting.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I think that was a bugged phone conversation, nothing in writing.


Yes, I remember hearing it


----------



## jenjen1964

CeeJay said:


> God, I wish what you are saying is true, but alas .. it is not, just look at Fox News in the US.  Sad to say but "fake news" is extremely prevalent nowadays and let's face it, Daily Fail and the Sun have never truly been known for their 'accuracy'!


CNN et. al. aren't exactly shining examples of objectivity either.


----------



## Flatsy

threadbender said:


> That is what I thought. I see things like postcards, photos, letters, autographs for sale often. In the end, who owns what? The words, the image, the paper, the thought? Interesting.


Thomas Markle owns the piece of paper.  Meghan owns the right to publish her words.  Publish is the key word.  She doesn't own the thoughts she expressed in the letter, which can be passed along and paraphrased and even directly quoted in print, but within limits.



daisychainz said:


> I didn't read what is exactly going on, but it said something about being edited, so maybe the paper altered it before publication?


There appear to be two issues.

One issue is that the Mail published a substantial part of Meghan's words - almost the whole letter - thereby violating the copyright Meghan automatically holds on her own writing.  I think The Mail is going to argue that they only published excerpts and that there is no clear limit on how big the excerpts can be before they start violating copyright.  I also think the Mail will argue that they should be granted the benefit of the doubt on that dispute under freedom of the press regarding a public figure.

The second issue as stated in Harry's letter is that the Mail intentionally excerpted the letter in a misleading way and that the portions of the letter they chose to leave out contradicted the story they wrote about Meghan.  I'm not clear on whether this is going to be part of the lawsuit or just something Harry brought up in his letter.  Without a specific example, it's hard to judge.  What Harry and Meghan might view as misleading/lies, others might definitely not view that way.

But it's a weird dual argument - the Mail published too much of the letter, but on the other hand, they didn't publish enough of it.  Meghan and Harry don't have the right to make editorial decisions on behalf of the Mail in terms of what they want to cover and what they don't.

I thought the portions of the letter published by the Mail vindicated Meghan and disproved everything Thomas Markle had been saying to the media for months about how Meghan "ghosted" him.


----------



## mrsinsyder

jenjen1964 said:


> CNN et. al. aren't exactly shining examples of objectivity either.


Can we not


----------



## bag-mania

There is no such thing as an unbiased media outlet. Let's just get that truth out there right now.


----------



## daisychainz

Suing the press really seems like a waste of energy for any public figure tbh. Celebs cannot contain the press or control a narrative, as much as they might try to. They sometimes win and get a settlement/apology, but that doesn't actually stop future reporting on them. And it's out there... it's not like the public can un-see what is already published. Make frenemies with the reporters.


----------



## CeeJay

jenjen1964 said:


> CNN et. al. aren't exactly shining examples of objectivity either.


I was not attempting to be "political" in my statement; please .. let's leave it at that and move on .. okay?


----------



## Jayne1

Tivo said:


> They aren’t suing the Daily Mail. They’re suing ‘The Mail on Sunday’


Yes, I read that.  They are sister publications, published in the same building and share the same owner but very different in approach. The Mail on Sunday might be more credible?  Any Brits know?


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> Suing the press really seems like a waste of energy for any public figure tbh. Celebs cannot contain the press or control a narrative, as much as they might try to. They sometimes win and get a settlement/apology, but that doesn't actually stop future reporting on them. And it's out there... it's not like the public can un-see what is already published. Make frenemies with the reporters.



Maybe it is just as much to disrupt the media's "credibility" more than anything else?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> I was not attempting to be "political" in my statement; please .. let's leave it at that and move on .. okay?


Come on guys, jenjen1964 made an absolutely fair point, considering  Not just because I happen to agree with her


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

This is glorious!  

_*Harry and Meghan’s war on press freedom *by Brendan O'Neill_
_Harry’s statement about the tabloids is an ugly, elitist act of monarchical privilege._
https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/02/harry-and-meghans-war-on-press-freedom/

_There is a striking irony in The Harry and Meghan Show. This pair present themselves as a new kind of royal: chilled out, PC, green, more likely to visit a Peckham radio station run by struggling youths than a cake-making charity run by women with blue-rinsed helmet hair. And yet scrape away their chilled, chatty veneer and what we have here are two of the most elitist and snobby royals in the Windsor household. And that’s saying something.

Consider Prince Harry’s outrageous statement about the tabloid press, published yesterday. Its censoriousness and elitism are staggering. It echoes the pre-1960s period in which the monarchy arrogantly assumed it could bully the media into telling only happy, agreeable stories about royal personages. It drips with contempt for the tabloid press in particular. Harry describes Meghan as ‘one of the latest victims of [the] British tabloid press’, which apparently pumps out ‘relentless propaganda’ that is designed to ‘manipulate you, the reader’. Oh gracious prince, please save us gullible plebs from manipulation by evil newspapers! What a pompous ass he is.

Harry issued the statement to coincide with legal action that Meghan is taking against the Mail on Sunday for ‘unlawfully’ publishing the ‘contents of a private letter’. This pertains to the Mail on Sunday’s publication in February of a handwritten letter Meghan sent to her estranged father, Thomas Markle. This is a deeply disturbing legal action. It poses a very serious threat to the freedom of the press. Reading Harry’s statement and some of the gushing coverage of it from the tabloid-hating liberal elite, you could be forgiven for thinking that hacks from the Mail on Sunday got hold of the letter by sinister, criminal means. Not so. The letter was given to the newspaper by Meghan’s father._

_In her letter, Meghan pleads with her father to stop selling stories to the press. Mr Markle then gave the letter itself to the press – to the Mail on Sunday. If newspapers are to be reprimanded or punished for publishing documents freely given to them by the owners of those documents, that will represent a devastating blow for press freedom. It is astonishing and highly ill-advised that the Sussexes are taking this action; it suggests that in certain quarters of the royal family there lingers a pre-modern disdain for the right of mere mortals and cheap newspapers to question royal personages.

That is the most ill-advised aspect of Harry’s statement. He makes it patently clear that while the legal action relates to one incident only – the Mail on Sunday’s publication of Meghan’s letter – the true driver behind the action is a broader royalist frustration with the behaviour of the apparently low press. The statement goes on and on about the tabloid press’s ‘ruthless campaign’ against Meghan, their ‘false and malicious’ stories and criticisms, their ‘continual misrepresentations’, all of which can only be described as ‘bullying’ – and ‘It is for this reason we are taking legal action…’ (my emphasis).

Think about that. What Harry is saying is that his wife is taking legal action against one newspaper over one incident, but she is doing so with the broader aim of effectively reprimanding an overly critical tabloid media. This is pretty unprecedented, and deeply worrying. What Harry refers to as tabloid ‘bullying’ is really just strong, colourful criticism. Criticism of Harry and Meghan’s lifestyles, of their hypocrisy (remember when they lectured us about the environment and then flew around on private jets?), of their PC nonsense, of their extravagance. This legal action seems designed to send a message that such heated coverage is unacceptable. Who do these people think they are?

This is the return of the pre-1960s monarchy. Of a monarchy that presumed it could influence what the newspapers were allowed to publish. Of a monarchy so distant from everyday life and so cut off from the principles of freedom and open debate that it believes it can lecture the press – the ‘low press’ in particular – about their behaviour and their output. Behind the velvet glove of the younger PC royals there lurks the iron fist of that old-world monarchism that presumed the right to live free of the barbs and insults of the mob. Harry and Meghan might use the PC language of victimhood to assert their monarchical privilege – describing themselves as victims of bullying and racism – but the impact is the same as when earlier royals asserted their God-given right never to be criticised by the lower orders: people are shamed for daring to ridicule the royals._

_Sorry, no. The age of deference is over. This is something everyone really needs to get into their heads. From the Remoaners wondering why stupid voters won’t obey ‘the experts’ to Harry and Meghan squirming at the Mail or the Sun for mocking their eco-hypocrisy and their PC posturing – they all need to understand that the era of bowing and scraping is gone. Harry and Meghan are fair game for criticism and ridicule. If you are going to be a woke royal who spouts eco-pieties from the pulpit of Vogue magazine and then takes a private jet to lounge about in Elton John’s house in France, you’re going to get a lot of flak. Suck it up._


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Come on guys, jenjen1964 made an absolutely fair point, considering  Not just because I happen to agree with her


.. notice that I did not dispute what she wrote, but I think getting into a discussion about any news outlet nowadays will get "political" .. and *I'm simply NOT going to go there* .. c'mon @SomethingGoodCanWork , you know me better than that!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> .. notice that I did not dispute what she wrote, but I think getting into a discussion about any news outlet nowadays will get "political" .. and *I'm simply NOT going to go there* .. c'mon @SomethingGoodCanWork , you know me better than that!


I do Bal Queen , but I saw jenjen's point too.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This is glorious!
> 
> _*Harry and Meghan’s war on press freedom *by Brendan O'Neill_
> _Harry’s statement about the tabloids is an ugly, elitist act of monarchical privilege._
> https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/10/02/harry-and-meghans-war-on-press-freedom/
> 
> _There is a striking irony in The Harry and Meghan Show. This pair present themselves as a new kind of royal: chilled out, PC, green, more likely to visit a Peckham radio station run by struggling youths than a cake-making charity run by women with blue-rinsed helmet hair. And yet scrape away their chilled, chatty veneer and what we have here are two of the most elitist and snobby royals in the Windsor household. And that’s saying something.
> 
> Consider Prince Harry’s outrageous statement about the tabloid press, published yesterday. Its censoriousness and elitism are staggering. It echoes the pre-1960s period in which the monarchy arrogantly assumed it could bully the media into telling only happy, agreeable stories about royal personages. It drips with contempt for the tabloid press in particular. Harry describes Meghan as ‘one of the latest victims of [the] British tabloid press’, which apparently pumps out ‘relentless propaganda’ that is designed to ‘manipulate you, the reader’. Oh gracious prince, please save us gullible plebs from manipulation by evil newspapers! What a pompous ass he is.
> 
> Harry issued the statement to coincide with legal action that Meghan is taking against the Mail on Sunday for ‘unlawfully’ publishing the ‘contents of a private letter’. This pertains to the Mail on Sunday’s publication in February of a handwritten letter Meghan sent to her estranged father, Thomas Markle. This is a deeply disturbing legal action. It poses a very serious threat to the freedom of the press. Reading Harry’s statement and some of the gushing coverage of it from the tabloid-hating liberal elite, you could be forgiven for thinking that hacks from the Mail on Sunday got hold of the letter by sinister, criminal means. Not so. The letter was given to the newspaper by Meghan’s father._
> 
> _In her letter, Meghan pleads with her father to stop selling stories to the press. Mr Markle then gave the letter itself to the press – to the Mail on Sunday. If newspapers are to be reprimanded or punished for publishing documents freely given to them by the owners of those documents, that will represent a devastating blow for press freedom. It is astonishing and highly ill-advised that the Sussexes are taking this action; it suggests that in certain quarters of the royal family there lingers a pre-modern disdain for the right of mere mortals and cheap newspapers to question royal personages.
> 
> That is the most ill-advised aspect of Harry’s statement. He makes it patently clear that while the legal action relates to one incident only – the Mail on Sunday’s publication of Meghan’s letter – the true driver behind the action is a broader royalist frustration with the behaviour of the apparently low press. The statement goes on and on about the tabloid press’s ‘ruthless campaign’ against Meghan, their ‘false and malicious’ stories and criticisms, their ‘continual misrepresentations’, all of which can only be described as ‘bullying’ – and ‘It is for this reason we are taking legal action…’ (my emphasis).
> 
> Think about that. What Harry is saying is that his wife is taking legal action against one newspaper over one incident, but she is doing so with the broader aim of effectively reprimanding an overly critical tabloid media. This is pretty unprecedented, and deeply worrying. What Harry refers to as tabloid ‘bullying’ is really just strong, colourful criticism. Criticism of Harry and Meghan’s lifestyles, of their hypocrisy (remember when they lectured us about the environment and then flew around on private jets?), of their PC nonsense, of their extravagance. This legal action seems designed to send a message that such heated coverage is unacceptable. Who do these people think they are?
> 
> This is the return of the pre-1960s monarchy. Of a monarchy that presumed it could influence what the newspapers were allowed to publish. Of a monarchy so distant from everyday life and so cut off from the principles of freedom and open debate that it believes it can lecture the press – the ‘low press’ in particular – about their behaviour and their output. Behind the velvet glove of the younger PC royals there lurks the iron fist of that old-world monarchism that presumed the right to live free of the barbs and insults of the mob. Harry and Meghan might use the PC language of victimhood to assert their monarchical privilege – describing themselves as victims of bullying and racism – but the impact is the same as when earlier royals asserted their God-given right never to be criticised by the lower orders: people are shamed for daring to ridicule the royals._
> 
> _Sorry, no. The age of deference is over. This is something everyone really needs to get into their heads. From the Remoaners wondering why stupid voters won’t obey ‘the experts’ to Harry and Meghan squirming at the Mail or the Sun for mocking their eco-hypocrisy and their PC posturing – they all need to understand that the era of bowing and scraping is gone. Harry and Meghan are fair game for criticism and ridicule. If you are going to be a woke royal who spouts eco-pieties from the pulpit of Vogue magazine and then takes a private jet to lounge about in Elton John’s house in France, you’re going to get a lot of flak. Suck it up._


Sums it all up! Harry and Meg, take note. Learn something.


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> Sums it all up! Harry and Meg, take note. Learn something.


You’re forgetting one small thing. The British courts have already ruled on this issue. What the Daily Mail did was against the law.


----------



## mrsinsyder

PatsyCline said:


> You’re forgetting one small thing. The British courts have already ruled on this issue. What the Daily Mail did was against the law.


If it was clear they’d broken the law they’d have likely settled over the last seven months. 

Agree with the article @SomethingGoodCanWork posted. The crying from these absurdly privileged people is just appalling. Like MM and her “they don’t make it easy” comment. Who doesn’t? The public who goes to work every day and pays taxes so you can have bronze tubs and Dior caftans? GTFO with your nonsense.


----------



## PatsyCline

mrsinsyder said:


> If it was clear they’d broken the law they’d have likely settled over the last seven months.
> 
> Agree with the article @SomethingGoodCanWork posted. The crying from these absurdly privileged people is just appalling. Like MM and her “they don’t make it easy” comment. Who doesn’t? The public who goes to work every day and pays taxes so you can have bronze tubs and Dior caftans? GTFO with your nonsense.


Lots of people bluster when confronted, now that the lawsuit has been filed, we’ll see how it gets settled.


----------



## chicaloca

Welltraveled! said:


> It’s in bad taste to compare or give a perception that he’s a child abuser. Even as a joke.  He’s a lot of things but he’s not that.
> 
> anyways, Thomas and Meghan relationship diminished over the last few years.  It happens both feel justified in their stance on the issues and that’s that.
> 
> however sometimes distance eventually heal all wounds.  Let’s see what happens as the years progress.



Thomas’s first wife spoke about his abusive behavior. Thomas kids from his next marriage ( Meghan’s step-siblings Samantha & Thomas Jr)  came to live with her at one point due to his abuse.

I’m inclined to believe her since Samantha’s own kids were taken from her due to neglect and Thomas Jr was arrested for domestic violence.

If Thomas wants to see his grandkids maybe he should start with the ones on the same continent as himself.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-dad-must-never-15026800#comments-section










how to play dnd online


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> Thomas’s first wife spoke about his abusive behavior. Thomas kids from his next marriage ( Meghan’s step-siblings Samantha & Thomas Jr)  came to live with her at one point due to his abuse.
> 
> I’m inclined to believe her since Samantha’s own kids were taken from her due to neglect and Thomas Jr was arrested for domestic violence.
> 
> If Thomas wants to see his grandkids maybe he should start with the ones on the same continent as himself.
> 
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-dad-must-never-15026800#comments-section
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> how to play dnd online


But that's not really his point, if this is true. 

Meghan has always talked about her wonderful, kind, generous, thoughtful father and that's the issue. So we have to take her at her word. If she talked about his neglect and abuse, no one would feel a bit bad for him.


----------



## chicaloca

Some nice pics from the tour.

This little girl will never forget this moment. She later spoke of how positive Meghan made her feel.


Archie seems like such a happy baby!




What an amazing moment!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> But that's not really his point, if this is true.
> 
> Meghan has always talked about her wonderful, kind, generous, thoughtful father and that's the issue. So we have to take her at her word. If she talked about his neglect and abuse, no one would feel a bit bad for him.


Yeah, I guess in 2016 when Meghan was heaping praise on her dad none of this applied


----------



## chicaloca

Jayne1 said:


> But that's not really his point, if this is true.
> 
> Meghan has always talked about her wonderful, kind, generous, thoughtful father and that's the issue. So we have to take her at her word. If she talked about his neglect and abuse, no one would feel a bit bad for him.



I didn’t say Meghan’s estrangement from her dad was due to abuse.  I pointed that Thomas’s ex wife warned Meghan not to trust him again due to his being abusive to her ( the wife).

I have no sympathy for a man who would sell his daughter out the way Thomas did. What’s sad is that Meghan clearly wanted him to walk her down the aisle.  She had enough faith in him to have KP release that official statement that he would be walking her down the aisle then he started his shenanigans. The burden is always on the parent to look out for their child regardless of age and Thomas failed Meghan at one of the biggest moments of her life. I think selling her letter was the point of no return. That she had to write a letter because she couldn’t  trust him over phone spoke volumes.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah, I guess in 2016 when Meghan was heaping praise on her dad none of this applied



I think it applied up until he humiliated her on the eve her wedding and failed to show up to walk her down the aisle. Then he started a lucrative relationship with the same British tabloids that continue to heap racist abuse on her.

I like how Meghan is supposed to constantly defer to Thomas’s past behavior and completely ignore how he’s treating her and her husband in the present.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> You’re forgetting one small thing. The British courts have already ruled on this issue. What the Daily Mail did was against the law.


Meghan just filed the suit.  No court has yet ruled on anything relating to it.  It is still to be determined whether or not the court interprets that the Mail violated the law. 

To be clear, this is the article at issue: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html

I thought that the Mail published more of the actual letter. I thought I remembered more of Meghan's ridiculous handwriting.  What is on the site now is only one image of the actual letter (only the salutation and first sentence.)  The rest are pulled quotes that are printed in a font that resembles handwriting, but is not the actual letter.  

The Mail article says it was last updated on 2/16/19.  Unless the Mail went in and altered the evidence without time stamping it (unlikely with litigation pending), what the article contains may very well be within the law.  They are allowed to report on the contents of the letter and they are allowed to pull individual quotes from it and publish them.  So Meghan and Harry's case may not be as strong as I thought it was based on my memory.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> I think it applied up until he humiliated her on the eve her wedding and failed to show up to walk her down the aisle. Then he started a lucrative relationship with the same British tabloids that continue to heap racist abuse on her.
> 
> I like how Meghan is supposed to constantly defer to Thomas’s past behavior and completely ignore how he’s treating her and her husband in the present.


So up until that she was okay with him being abusive, as you said he is. I see.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> If it was clear they’d broken the law they’d have likely settled over the last seven months.
> 
> Agree with the article @SomethingGoodCanWork posted. The crying from these absurdly privileged people is just appalling. Like MM and her “they don’t make it easy” comment. Who doesn’t? The public who goes to work every day and pays taxes so you can have bronze tubs and Dior caftans? GTFO with your nonsense.


Wasn't there an attempt at settling? I'm sure I read about it. If the Mail felt they didn't need to settle out of court it doesn't look too promising for H/M to win this in court either. 

I'm experiencing second hand embarrassment for them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Wasn't there an attempt at settling? I'm sure I read about it. If the Mail felt they didn't need to settle out of court it doesn't look too promising for H/M to win this in court either.
> 
> I'm experiencing second hand embarrassment for them.


Yes, it’s been being mediated since February.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

The royal-friendly Town and Country has a lot to say about the lawsuit: https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...ce-harry-lawsuit-statement-reporter-reaction/



> Among the 80 journalists accredited to travel to cover the visit was _The Times_’s long-standing royal correspondent Valentine Low, who wrote the paper’s front page story today about the legal proceedings from Johannesburg. (_The Times _is a venerable daily newspaper.) Describing Harry’s statement as “astonishing,” Low added that it “appeared to tar all the royal media with the same brush and certainly tarred all the tabloid royal media with the same brush when in fact specifically in this instance it is an argument that he’s got with the _Mail on Sunday_.”
> 
> Low also shared how the timing of the statement meant that his paper cut a story about the royal tour to make way for a big piece on the legal proceedings and that he was no longer able to travel to write about the couple meeting the President Ramaphosa because he needed to dedicate more time to writing about the legal story. “It has completely overshadowed the tour,” he said.
> 
> This was a sentiment echoed by many of the journalists on the trip. Palace sources said that the timing was based on “specific legal advice,” but many were still confused about why this meant the announcement had to come when it did. ITV’s Royal Editor Chris Ship relayed how his network cut an “emotional” story about gender-based violence from its 10 p.m. bulletin to make way for a piece about Harry and Meghan’s relationship with the press. “All the good work that they’ve done previously—and let’s be clear, they’ve done a lot of good work and they’ve had a lot of good publicity—and I just feel like it’s ending on a sour note,” says Ship.


It really is inscrutable why the Sussexes chose to step on the final few days of good media coverage of their own tour and displace it with controversy.

The story also points out that the Sussex Official website seems to exist entirely to host Harry's statement and is not affiliated with Buckingham Palace or any other official royal entity, which makes one wonder how much support Harry and Meghan have for this course of action.


----------



## mdcx

I do think Harry is not making sensible decisions here. Whether that is due to being not quite right upstairs, or being pushed into a frenzy of outrage by Meghan, who knows. But he is burning some bridges.
Kate and William must do some eyebrow raising when they read the news.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Flatsy said:


> Thomas Markle owns the piece of paper.  Meghan owns the right to publish her words.  Publish is the key word.  She doesn't own the thoughts she expressed in the letter, which can be passed along and paraphrased and even directly quoted in print, but within limits.
> 
> 
> There appear to be two issues.
> 
> One issue is that the Mail published a substantial part of Meghan's words - almost the whole letter - thereby violating the copyright Meghan automatically holds on her own writing.  I think The Mail is going to argue that they only published excerpts and that there is no clear limit on how big the excerpts can be before they start violating copyright.  I also think the Mail will argue that they should be granted the benefit of the doubt on that dispute under freedom of the press regarding a public figure.
> 
> The second issue as stated in Harry's letter is that the Mail intentionally excerpted the letter in a misleading way and that the portions of the letter they chose to leave out contradicted the story they wrote about Meghan.  I'm not clear on whether this is going to be part of the lawsuit or just something Harry brought up in his letter.  Without a specific example, it's hard to judge.  What Harry and Meghan might view as misleading/lies, others might definitely not view that way.
> 
> But it's a weird dual argument - the Mail published too much of the letter, but on the other hand, they didn't publish enough of it.  Meghan and Harry don't have the right to make editorial decisions on behalf of the Mail in terms of what they want to cover and what they don't.
> 
> I thought the portions of the letter published by the Mail vindicated Meghan and disproved everything Thomas Markle had been saying to the media for months about how Meghan "ghosted" him.



When I read that story and portions of that letter, I felt it only reflected poorly on her father. I don’t see how it reflected poorly on Meghan, as Harry is indicating in his statement.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Not surprisingly, his dad not brother knew this was coming. 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10055044/prince-harry-william-charles-press-rant-meghan-markle/


----------



## Flatsy

LVSistinaMM said:


> When I read that story and portions of that letter, I felt it only reflected poorly on her father. I don’t see how it reflected poorly on Meghan, as Harry is indicating in his statement.


Me too.  I thought everything they published from the letter vindicated Meghan and proved her father was lying - and it shut him up for a good long time.   I don't think there's anything the Mail could have written in the article that Harry and Meghan would not have had a problem with.


----------



## Welltraveled!

88


----------



## A1aGypsy

The only thing I will say is that just because someone posts positive statements about a parent does not mean that parent is not abusive. Relationships with abusive parents are difficult and not always obvious to those on the outside. The child might be trying to hide the abuse because they are embarrassed or scared. The child might be hopeful that they relationship will change if only they heap praise on the parent. The child might feel that they only need to love the parent more and the parent will stop being abusive. The child might just want to pretend this isn’t their life.

And the child doesn’t have to actually still be a kid to do any or all of those things. Adults do it as well.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  I loved Cape Town and if I ever had to move to South Africa, that would be the place that I would pick.  NOT the case for Johannesburg, but alas .. that is where the majority of Financial Services companies are and that's the business I'm in.  I was in Harare ZIM briefly and while it was 'nice', it was certainly NOT Cape Town and the stories I have heard from many current and former ZIM inhabitants were frightening (especially those that lost everything and had to flee to South Africa)!


I grew up in the former Rhodesia in Borrowdale outside  Salisbury (Harare). It was way out in the middle of nowhere but now is a suburb of Harare. It is a terrible shame that such a beautiful country has such troubling politics.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

It's a shame that Harry's letter is now completely overshadowing their trip and the good will they seemed to be generating. They even took Archie out of hiding, but this certainly takes away from the last few days. I was shocked when I read his letter - he comes across as a pompous you know what. One step forward two steps back for this twosome, again.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chagall said:


> I grew up in the former Rhodesia in Borrowdale outside  Salisbury (Harare). It was way out in the middle of nowhere but now is a suburb of Harare. It is a terrible shame that such a beautiful country has such troubling politics.


I spent a short time travelling in Zimbabwe before things went completely bad, and hands down it was then the most beautiful place I’ve ever been to. A tragedy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> What’s sad is that Meghan clearly wanted him to walk her down the aisle.


I don’t think she did.  Harry’s never met her father, I find it very odd she never introduced them, not even during the engagement.  Harry came out with that line, about Meghan not having a family of her own, because that’s what she told him!  I think she thought she could drop them all, like she dropped the husband and the live in boyfriend.



ccbaggirl89 said:


> It's a shame that Harry's letter is now completely overshadowing their trip and the good will they seemed to be generating. They even took Archie out of hiding, but this certainly takes away from the last few days. I was shocked when I read his letter - he comes across as a pompous you know what. One step forward two steps back for this twosome, again.


He’s created a whole new bad story, which now completely overshadows the tour


----------



## threadbender

Funny. It appears similar thoughts are posted in many places. 

*"It is stunning to me that he decided to do this just as he was finally getting back some good will."*
on another board I stopped at, most of which has nothing to do with the BRF.
Also, talk of Latham and Wong as well as statements that Harry did not consult with Charles or William prior to the "letter".
His timing certainly was not well chosen.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

A1aGypsy said:


> The only thing I will say is that just because someone posts positive statements about a parent does not mean that parent is not abusive. Relationships with abusive parents are difficult and not always obvious to those on the outside. The child might be trying to hide the abuse because they are embarrassed or scared. The child might be hopeful that they relationship will change if only they heap praise on the parent. The child might feel that they only need to love the parent more and the parent will stop being abusive. The child might just want to pretend this isn’t their life.
> 
> And the child doesn’t have to actually still be a kid to do any or all of those things. Adults do it as well.


This could be, but it's also not unheard of that men who were not good parents the first time around (when young) will compensate for that by being overly doting dads later on in their lives with a second (or third and on) brood. While still neglecting their children from earlier relationships. Meghan was obviously her dad's princess. Which could explain some of her current entitled behaviour. _Prince_ Harry, well, another obvious  

If someone's truly suffered at the hands of a very abusive parent as a child, which seems the way the Sussex spin is going now, they most likely will not praise that parent in such a way as Meghan has praised her dad, and keep doing so well in to middle-aged adulthood.


----------



## chicaloca

A perfect example of how the media flagrantly lies to perpetuate false narratives about Meghan. Scheduled staff departures have been attributed to Meghan being “difficult” yet these aides turn up to support Meghan or end up staying longer.

Samantha Cohen supposedly “quit” last year because Meghan was “difficult” yet remained through 2019 and was part of the Africa tour









Amy Pickerell also supposedly quit due to Difficult Meghan but turned up as an enthusiastic supporter at Meghan’s Smartworks launch




 



imghost


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

To me this is such erratic and drama queen-y bahaviour by the Sussexes, fighting a war seemingly impossible for them to win. Do they think they have some kind of smut on others in the BRF and therefore are expecting the BRF to comply and assist? As in blackmail? Or as in everyone be damned, we don't care who collaterally gets dragged into to this righteous battle of ours? Is Meghan the Trojan horse helping "forces for change" take down the British monarchy from within? And what about Andy? It's obvious he- and others- are allegedly enjoying a very undeserved respit from more meticulous media scrutiny during all of this. Him walking his daughters down the isle is a b***y farce in that respect. 

It'll be very interesting to see how the queen, Charles etc handle all this. Somebody needs to take the wheel away from whomever is steering right now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

I would love to see Meghan resurrect this initiative from her time as a World Vision ambassador in Canada. It has her trademark grassroots approach to fundraising. She basically taught Rwandan children to paint with watercolors then brought the paintings back to Canada to raise money for a New water source in their community. 


https://www.newswire.ca/news-releas...brings-clean-water-to-children-573331001.html


TORONTO, March 24, 2016 /CNW/ - On World Water Day, March 22, hope-filled paintings created by students in Rwanda raised enough money to help World Vision build a well. The paintings were the focus of the Watercolour Project event, hosted by actor and activist Meghan Markle at LUMAS gallery in Toronto.









World Vision was also proud to announce Meghan Markle is a newly appointed Global Ambassador for the organization.

Markle travelled to Rwanda last month with World Vision to see first-hand the importance of clean water. While visiting a school in the Gasabo region of the country she taught students to paint with watercolours, using water from a newly installed pipeline in their community. The students created pictures based on their hopes and futures, which are now brighter because of the recent access to clean water. The painting session was captured by photographer Gabor Jurina.

Markle brought the paintings back to Canada to share the student artists' stories and raise enough money to support additional water projects with World Vision.












The Watercolour Project was helmed by advertising agency KBS.  The event was attended by more than 60 guests. In total $15,000 was raised at the event, enough to help World Vision build a new source of water for an entire community.


----------



## chicaloca

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> To me this is such erratic and drama queen-y bahaviour by the Sussexes, fighting a war seemingly impossible for them to win. Do they think they have some kind of smut on others in the BRF and therefore are expecting the BRF to comply and assist? As in blackmail? Or as in everyone be damned, we don't care who collaterally gets dragged into to this righteous battle of ours? Is Meghan the Trojan horse helping "forces for change" take down the British monarchy from within? And what about Andy? It's obvious he- and others- are allegedly enjoying a very undeserved respit from more meticulous media scrutiny during all of this. Him walking his daughters down the isle is a b***y farce in that respect.
> 
> It'll be very interesting to see how the queen, Charles etc handle all this. Somebody needs to take the wheel away from whomever is steering right now.



It’s a simple copyright lawsuit. That’s all. Most of the legal copyright experts I’ve read believe Meghan has a strong case.


----------



## A1aGypsy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If someone's truly suffered at the hands of a very abusive parent as a child, which seems the way the Sussex spin is going now, they most likely will not praise that parent in such a way as Meghan has praised her dad, and keep doing so well in to middle-aged adulthood.



Unfortunately, I can tell you that is categorically untrue.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If someone's truly suffered at the hands of a very abusive parent as a child, which seems _the way the Sussex spin is going now.._.



It's funny how anything even slightly negative must be quoted using at least 3 approved news sources, but now stans have just completely manufactured the idea that her father was abusive to her, despite no evidence of such, and are just running with it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

mrsinsyder said:


> It's funny how anything even slightly negative must be quoted using at least 3 approved news sources, but now stans have just completely manufactured the idea that her father was abusive to her, despite no evidence of such, and are just running with it.



I’m not sure if that is directed at me, but I have absolutely no idea what their relationship was or is like. I find it crazy making when people make sweeping general statements of “fact” (someone who was abused by a parent wouldn’t act that way!) without a shred of a basis and it doesn’t matter to me if you are pro or con Meghan.  I find it a bit nuts than you can hate someone this much that you don’t know and you can defend someone this much that you don’t know. Equal opportunity bonkers.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> It's funny how anything even slightly negative must be quoted using at least 3 approved news sources, but now stans have just completely manufactured the idea that her father was abusive to her, despite no evidence of such, and are just running with it.



Meghan has never said she was abused by her father.

The topic of his abuse was brought up in relation to his first wife and children.


----------



## mrsinsyder

The mask is slipping, and the media are going for the jugular. Seems to me he got frustrated because he had no idea how to answer her question 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-reprimands-Sky-News-reporter-Malawi.html

Prince Harry scolded a TV journalist for asking him a question during his visit to a health clinic in Malawi, it emerged today.

Sky News royal reporter Rhiannon Mills asked the Duke of Sussex an unscheduled question as he got into a car after a visit to the Mauwa Health Centre on Tuesday.

Harry, 35, had told a group of young people to 'hold on to your dreams' while talking to them as he visited the clinic during his ten-day tour of southern Africa. 

But as he was being led away into a waiting vehicle by palace officials, Ms Mills asked him: 'That short conversation, what do you hope to achieve through it?

He replied: 'What? Ask them', pointing back towards the hospital – but the reporter added: 'Is that why it's important for you to come and talk to them?'

Harry appeared to become frustrated with Ms Mills and gestured for her to move away from him as he got into the car, saying: 'Rhiannon, don't behave like this.'


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> The mask is slipping, and the media are going for the jugular. Seems to me he got frustrated because he had no idea how to answer her question
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-reprimands-Sky-News-reporter-Malawi.html
> 
> Prince Harry scolded a TV journalist for asking him a question during his visit to a health clinic in Malawi, it emerged today.
> 
> Sky News royal reporter Rhiannon Mills asked the Duke of Sussex an unscheduled question as he got into a car after a visit to the Mauwa Health Centre on Tuesday.
> 
> Harry, 35, had told a group of young people to 'hold on to your dreams' while talking to them as he visited the clinic during his ten-day tour of southern Africa.
> 
> But as he was being led away into a waiting vehicle by palace officials, Ms Mills asked him: 'That short conversation, what do you hope to achieve through it?
> 
> He replied: 'What? Ask them', pointing back towards the hospital – but the reporter added: 'Is that why it's important for you to come and talk to them?'
> 
> Harry appeared to become frustrated with Ms Mills and gestured for her to move away from him as he got into the car, saying: 'Rhiannon, don't behave like this.'



...Or more like he sensed her condescension and responded accordingly.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> ...Or more like he sensed her condescension and responded accordingly.



I appreciate your attempts at prodding but I'm not going to bite


----------



## LittleStar88

RE: Her dad. I tend to side with Meghan with regards to her father. Her father and my dad - a total narcissist, is the same age, and my dad's actions mirrors hers in so many ways. When things are going his way, it's fine. But the minute one little thing happens that he disagrees with and all heck breaks loose and the BS and manipulations begin. I've actually had to cut my father out for a time because of the psychological games.

I feel sorry for her dad in that he is a mess and can't control himself and is on a mission to get what he wants, and will cause a lot of grief and headaches in the process.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sorry. In response to the Harry article: But you just cannot behave like that in his position. I agree with whomever said BP may need to put some verbs in some sentences at this point. It’s turning into a bit of a disaster for everyone.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> ...Or more like he sensed her condescension and responded accordingly.


Sensing condescension?  I assume you mean to defend him, but this makes him sound like an even bigger prima donna than the article does.

If Harry is unable to deal civilly with the royal reporters who are there to cover his tour and ask him questions to help him get his message out, than he really does need to get out of royal work entirely. 

He was lucky any of the traveling press were still willing to ask him on-topic questions about the engagement after he dropped a much juicier story on them.


----------



## chicaloca

chicaloca said:


> ...Or more like he sensed her condescension and responded accordingly.




I’m not “prodding” you and not looking for any “bite”. I’m responding to what you posted with my own opinion.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> ...Or more like he sensed her condescension and responded accordingly.


that's a stretch


----------



## chicaloca

The tour was a resounding success. The goal of the tour is not to please the press but to connect with the people and the Sussexes did that in spades. A common theme from people who met the Sussexes were how down to earth they were. They did not act like they were above the people which went a long way in improving the perception of the British royals.





Meghan Redefined What it Means to be a Royal During the Africa Tour




> Meghan had been married, succeeded as an actress and been an outspoken activist, most notably on women's rights. She was already defined, so her challenge was how to step up to her new royal career while staying true to what she represented before.
> 
> Over the last 10 days, supported by her husband, Prince Harry, she proved how she was able to do that, and in a very powerful way.






> Rather than downplaying her very regular upbringing, the Duchess of Sussex is making a virtue of it. She's continuing to fight the battle for equality she has always fought and she's picking out elements of her life to make her more relatable. She's doing the same for the royal family because none of her in-laws have the same experience.
> 
> To connect with people in South Africa, a country she had never visited before, is no mean feat and that message has resonated around the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> that's a stretch


I think you said you're in the US? Are you sure you're not British?


----------



## TC1

Harry is used to being coddled and given a pat on the back any time he does something for a charity..he's not used to questions that haven't been carefully curated to make him look like a saint.
Standing there and spouting off a few words is what he does.


----------



## chicaloca

More lovely tour images


----------



## Clearblueskies

Harry’s behaviour is bizarre.  He sounded like complete jerk in the way he spoke to that female journalist. Has he forgotten he’s in SA representing the Queen and the UK?  It’s turning into a national embarrassment.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm calling BS on the whole "Thomas Markle was abusive" theory. There is zero evidence of it. That Mirror article had quotes attributed to his ex-wife that were obviously written by the British tabloid writer. You can tell by their use of British slang. Using "pram" when an American would say "carriage." Using "mum" instead of "mom." Even if, for some reason, you believe every word written in the tabloid's article, he wasn't abusive. Even that article doesn't say he was abusive.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

A1aGypsy said:


> Unfortunately, I can tell you that is categorically untrue.


I was specifically referencing Meghan's behaviour in this case. Not every person's who's suffered abuse by their parents. Meghan's no delicate flower or she wouldn't be in the position she's in. So I doubt she wrote all of that praise of her dad because he was abusive to her. She may have used him for all we know.

Also, we don't know the personal history of most posters here. Their experience of and behaviour after being abused may have been very different to what you equally categorically am stating. Not everyone wants to divulge that kind of personal info publicly, just to make a point.


----------



## chicaloca

Placing and hand on the elbow during the handshake is a traditional sign of respect for elders. Meghan was very thoughtful in greeting elders this way throughout the tour.


----------



## mrsinsyder

They're so down to earth she couldn't even trust wearing her engagement ring around the unwashed masses


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> I'm calling BS on the whole "Thomas Markle was abusive" theory. There is zero evidence of it.


As far as I'm concerned, he's a horrible person who is selfish, manipulative, attention-seeking and a grifter.  Meghan is better off without him and so is Archie IMO.  But tagging him "abusive" is a huge stretch.

An ex-wife who divorced him 44 years ago doesn't like him and says he yelled at her when they argued and he sometimes drank too much?  Yeah, that explains the divorce.  I wouldn't say it's good evidence that he's abusive and has been for the past 44 years.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> Sensing condescension?  I assume you mean to defend him, but this makes him sound like an even bigger prima donna than the article does.
> 
> If Harry is unable to deal civilly with the royal reporters who are there to cover his tour and ask him questions to help him get his message out, than he really does need to get out of royal work entirely.
> 
> He was lucky any of the traveling press were still willing to ask him on-topic questions about the engagement after he dropped a much juicier story on them.


 Absolutely.  Apparently all the positive stories about the tour were scratched and replaced by coverage of Harry’s statement   Even the broadsheets are critical.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> An ex-wife who divorced him 44 years ago doesn't like him and says he yelled at her when they argued and he sometimes drank too much?  Yeah, that explains the divorce.  I wouldn't say it's good evidence that he's abusive and has been for the past 44 years.



Yeah, they got together when she was 19 and he was 20 and they only married because she was pregnant. It's not a shock that that wasn't the recipe for a successful marriage.


----------



## Toulouse

Flatsy said:


> Sensing condescension?  I assume you mean to defend him, but this makes him sound like an even bigger prima donna than the article does.
> 
> If Harry is unable to deal civilly with the royal reporters who are there to cover his tour and ask him questions to help him get his message out, than he really does need to get out of royal work entirely.
> 
> He was lucky any of the traveling press were still willing to ask him on-topic questions about the engagement after he dropped a much juicier story on them.



He certainly could have responded better (and I imagine he has been prepped many, many times in the past on how to respond to a question such as this), but it was a condescending question. The interactions during these royal tours are inherently superficial due to the limited time allowed. The real difference is made assuming he continues to maintain an active relationship with the NGO and those he met when he’s back home. Let’s hope he does.


----------



## A1aGypsy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I was specifically referencing Meghan's behaviour in this case. Not every person's who's suffered abuse by their parents. Meghan's no delicate flower or she wouldn't be in the position she's in. So I doubt she wrote all of that praise of her dad because he was abusive to her. She may have used him for all we know.
> 
> Also, we don't know the personal history of most posters here. Their experience of and behaviour after being abused may have been very different to what you equally categorically am stating. Not everyone wants to divulge that kind of personal info publicly, just to make a point.



I entirely agree with almost everything you say here (except for assumptions about MM because I don’t know her or her motivations - strong people can react differently to parental alienation as well). And the fact that you don’t know the personal situations of people around here is why I challenged you.  I wholeheartedly agree you don’t know what people have been through or what they are taking from your post.

I think our difficulty is that you have made some  generalized statements as if they are fact (someone who was abused would not act in this fashion). And then clarify you were actually making a specific reference. If you are opining about Markle then have at it. But suggesting something generally is a different matter and can be damaging to people reading it.  Glad we are on the same page.


----------



## bag-mania

Why is anyone talking as if Meghan was abused? Nobody has ever said she was. Meghan certainly never has.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Why is anyone talking as if Meghan was abused? Nobody has ever said she was. Meghan certainly never has.


It's just an effort to shut down those people who think Meghan is being too harsh with her father.   Making him out to be a known abuser who shouldn't be allowed near children makes everything much more clear cut and leaves little room to question Meghan's decision to cut him off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> It's just an effort to shut down those people who think Meghan is being too harsh with her father.   Making him out to be a known abuser who shouldn't be allowed near children makes everything much more clear cut and leaves little room to question Meghan's decision to cut him off.



Yes and abuse is a hot button issue for many people. It is irresponsible (even on a web forum) to try to pass off wild speculation as if it were fact. People forget that in their fervor to make their case.


----------



## MarieCurie

chicaloca said:


> ...Or more like he sensed her condescension and responded accordingly.


Nah. I think that was just his inner brat coming up for air....


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> They're so down to earth she couldn't even trust wearing her engagement ring around the unwashed masses


Unfortunately her decision not to wear her ring did come off this way to me also.


----------



## MarieCurie

Clearblueskies said:


> Absolutely.  *Apparently all the positive stories about the tour were scratched and replaced by coverage of Harry’s statement*   Even the broadsheets are critical.



I think this wouldn't have mattered in the end because their 1st tour was also considered a "resounding success" but shortly after the tour was over it was back to business as usual with all the "Meghan is the most horrible person to ever horrible." In my opinion, they can't win either way so they might as well do what they, or what he believes in this case, is right. I read the letter today and my takeaway is that Harry is not looking to curry favour with the press, he is just doing what he believes is right. I also don't get where the notion that he is alienating the public is coming from because he even thanks the public for their support in the letter. What he's doing though, is telling the tabs to go take a piss and he's not hiding that. Will it backfire? I think the probability of that happening is almost even with the probability of William not becoming King: highly likely. That's just my opinion. 

H&M having nothing to lose though because they are dammed either way. William has a lot more to lose so if what is being reported about him being blindsided by the letter is true, it's a low blow but it's not the first the brothers would have done that to each other so


----------



## bag-mania

MarieCurie said:


> Will it backfire? I think the probability of that happening is almost even with the probability of William not becoming King: highly likely. That's just my opinion.



You're saying you don't believe William will ever be king. I must have missed something. What are you basing that on?


----------



## MarieCurie

bag-mania said:


> You're saying you don't believe William will ever be king. I must have missed something. What are you basing that on?


On my unreliable feeling that the Royal Family could be considered outdated enough to get rid of in 20-30 years time when it's his turn to become King


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> You're saying you don't believe William will ever be king. I must have missed something. What are you basing that on?





MarieCurie said:


> On my unreliable feeling that the Royal Family could be considered outdated enough to get rid of in 20-30 years time when it's his turn to become King


I cannot imagine William will not be king.  William and Kate are popular here in the UK.  I think what’s most likely is that the financial support for the extended royal family will be extensively trimmed, and they will be expected to support themselves.


----------



## mrsinsyder

There is a blind item out that she was being paid for smaller events in SA while Harry was off doing his own thing. Interesting.


----------



## Jayne1

I read that, Beyonce style, they did a documentary of the tour and will be releasing behind the scenes footage of everything the media didn't cover.  

That means that Harry's walk among the mines (mines that are long gone) and which he has done twice before on separate occasions will be featured.  I wondered why he did that walk again.  Now we know.

Is this the Oprah special or another doc, I wonder.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> There is a blind item out that she was being paid for smaller events in SA while Harry was off doing his own thing. Interesting.


I think if this were true, it would not be coming out in blind item form.  It would be covered by the media like Zara Tindall's "consulting" salary. 

I think I saw this blind item on Crazy Days and Nights.  I don't believe anything I read on CDAN about the "alliterate former actress".  CDAN is known to publish whatever is submitted to them.  Celebrities with zealous internet critics (Michael Fassbender/Alicia Vikander, Benedict Cumberbatch, and now Meghan) have items continuously submitted about them, and it's basically just what the critics want to hear.  

I think Blind Gossip is known to do the same thing, but the stuff on Blind Gossip seems to be spread around less.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> I read that, Beyonce style, they did a documentary of the tour and will be releasing behind the scenes footage of everything the media didn't cover.


No doubt Meghan's secret and private visit to honor the murdered Cape Town student will be included.

The Sussexes certainly know how to hype up every bit of work they do.


----------



## Morgan R

The person doing the documentary is Tom Bradby who has worked with both William and Harry before and is considered one of the few media people that William and Harry have long been known to be acquaintances with. Tom did William and Kate's engagement interview and he has done two documentaries with Harry before for ITV. Tom was a guest at the wedding of William & Kate as well as the wedding of Harry & Meghan.


Tom Bradby's previous documentaries with Prince Harry


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> The mask is slipping, and the media are going for the jugular. Seems to me he got frustrated because he had no idea how to answer her question
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-reprimands-Sky-News-reporter-Malawi.html
> 
> Prince Harry scolded a TV journalist for asking him a question during his visit to a health clinic in Malawi, it emerged today.
> 
> Sky News royal reporter Rhiannon Mills asked the Duke of Sussex an *unscheduled question* as he got into a car after a visit to the Mauwa Health Centre on Tuesday.
> 
> Harry, 35, had told a group of young people to 'hold on to your dreams' while talking to them as he visited the clinic during his ten-day tour of southern Africa.
> 
> But as he was being led away into a waiting vehicle by palace officials, Ms Mills asked him: 'That short conversation, what do you hope to achieve through it?
> 
> He replied: 'What? Ask them', pointing back towards the hospital – but the reporter added: 'Is that why it's important for you to come and talk to them?'
> 
> Harry appeared to become frustrated with Ms Mills and gestured for her to move away from him as he got into the car, saying: 'Rhiannon, don't behave like this.'


When I read this article, the thing that struck out most to me was what I bolded above "*unscheduled question*" .. huh????  So, does this mean that the reporters have to provide H&M with the questions that would be asked beforehand???  If so .. *WOW* .. this is EXACTLY what used to happen in Corporate America .. where the CEO had to be provided the 'questions' beforehand such that during the Company-wide meeting, he/she could answer "said" questions.  That used to really piss me off because quite honestly, someone in that position (_and I am including the BRF here_) .. should be able to speak to questions *extemporaneously*!  They tout themselves as "speaking from the heart" .. hmmm, really .. if questions need to be provided to them beforehand?!?!?


----------



## bag-mania

MarieCurie said:


> On my unreliable feeling that the Royal Family could be considered outdated enough to get rid of in 20-30 years time when it's his turn to become King



Oh, okay. I thought I missed a William scandal. 

Personally, I think the royal family will be around for generations to come. The people appear to love them, as well as all the tradition, pomp and pageantry.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Why is anyone talking as if Meghan was abused? Nobody has ever said she was. Meghan certainly never has.


Okay .. have to jump in here, because I think I've said before that I have a dear friend who knows (_and worked with Thomas Markle in the past_).  This friend is honest to a fault (_one of the reasons why we are good friends - as I am the same way_), and I asked her about her opinion on Meghan's relationship with her Father.  Now, before I continue with this, one of the other reasons why we are close friends is because we both grew up in families that were very eff'd up (_especially our fathers_) .. so I know that she would sense if there was truly a problem.  Her response was that Thomas treated Meghan like a Princess; that he was ALWAYS there for her and that in some respects, she thought that Meghan got "_too much_" from her father to the point that she had a tendency to 'use' people and once she was done with you, poof ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jenjen1964

CeeJay said:


> I was not attempting to be "political" in my statement; please .. let's leave it at that and move on .. okay?


Wasn't trying to give Vlad more of a headache than this thread already does, just pointing it out, no worries.


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. have to jump in here, because I think I've said before that I have a dear friend who knows (_and worked with Thomas Markle in the past_).  This friend is honest to a fault (_one of the reasons why we are good friends - as I am the same way_), and I asked her about her opinion on Meghan's relationship with her Father.  Now, before I continue with this, one of the other reasons why we are close friends is because we both grew up in families that were very eff'd up (_especially our fathers_) .. so I know that she would sense if there was truly a problem.  Her response was that Thomas treated Meghan like a Princess; that he was ALWAYS there for her and that in some respects, she thought that Meghan got "_too much_" from her father to the point that she had a tendency to 'use' people and once she was done with you, poof ..


I have always wondered why it is that Harry and the BRF did not meet him when they were engaged. Was there any official explanation? I mean, seriously, most people would meet their future in-laws prior to getting married. The whole situation seems odd. Yes, I know her father made some stupid moves but, I am talking about earlier on. Just curious.


----------



## daisychainz

threadbender said:


> I have always wondered why it is that Harry and the BRF did not meet him when they were engaged. Was there any official explanation? I mean, seriously, most people would meet their future in-laws prior to getting married. The whole situation seems odd. Yes, I know her father made some stupid moves but, I am talking about earlier on. Just curious.


It's next level crazy, that a royal wouldn't meet all family members before a marriage. Asking for TROUBLE, even in regular marriages, lol. I thought they said there was a phone call with her father but no actual f2f meeting? I think they said he was "in Mexico" -- although not sure how that's an issue with someone with access to a passport and private planes.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

A1aGypsy said:


> I entirely agree with almost everything you say here (except for assumptions about MM because I don’t know her or her motivations - strong people can react differently to parental alienation as well). And the fact that you don’t know the personal situations of people around here is why I challenged you.  I wholeheartedly agree you don’t know what people have been through or what they are taking from your post.
> 
> I think our difficulty is that you have made some  generalized statements as if they are fact (someone who was abused would not act in this fashion). And then clarify you were actually making a specific reference. If you are opining about Markle then have at it. But suggesting something generally is a different matter and can be damaging to people reading it.  Glad we are on the same page.


The only difficulty here is that you seem to think you can opine generalised statements as facts but I can not. My experience is simply different than yours. Of course I'm talking about Meghan and again, I don't think her behaviour, of lauding her "abuser" for years on social media as the world's best dad, is normal for abuse victims generally. Unless, in her case, she's the victim of parental overindulgence, which, yes, is a form of abuse if it hampers a child's ability as an adult to deal with the real world outside of the overindulgence. But it's a bit of a "luxury" abuse compared to what countless others suffer through, and more often a bigger pain for those having to deal with said- and quite often entitled- victim of overindulgence. Case in point, Meghan. 

It's well-timed spin. And a slap in the face of those who've suffered through real abuse, neglect and abandonment and who have to struggle with the consequences day to day without Meghan's in comparison endless resources to resolve such issues should she have them. 

I'm not threatening someone or advocating the committing of crimes. I am not responsible for how other (presumably) adults react to my mere opinions or even facts given with receipts. To suggest this, sounds to me more like someone demanding people who say things this someone doesn't like to hear, should not be allowed to speak.


----------



## CeeJay

jenjen1964 said:


> Wasn't trying to give Vlad more of a headache than this thread already does, just pointing it out, no worries.


Yes .. no worries!!!


----------



## Flatsy

daisychainz said:


> I think they said he was "in Mexico" -- although not sure how that's an issue with someone with access to a passport and private planes.


That's exactly what Thomas Markle said, LOL.  He portrayed it as Harry never bothering to go meet him despite having the ability to easily do so.  But I don't consider Markle a reliable and accurate source.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Nope. I’m not saying you shouldn’t have an opinion or shouldn’t speak. And sure, we may have had completely different experiences. But I engaged you on a general level solely to provide a counter view and point out that those who study victim response suggest you cannot accurately predict what did (or did not happen) based upon a victim’s reaction.  And you have to be careful with that kind of statement because someone here may have gone through it and be questioning their own actions. 

Had I understood you were talking about her specifically, then I wouldn’t have engaged you at all. I have no idea what has gone on or not gone on with her and people can speculate as they like.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> *I have always wondered why it is that Harry and the BRF did not meet him when they were engaged.* Was there any official explanation? I mean, seriously, most people would meet their future in-laws prior to getting married. The whole situation seems odd. Yes, I know her father made some stupid moves but, I am talking about earlier on. Just curious.



Because it would have gone over about as well as this meeting of father and future son-in-law. And Meghan did not want the embarrassment.


----------



## LittleStar88

threadbender said:


> I have always wondered why it is that Harry and the BRF did not meet him when they were engaged. Was there any official explanation? I mean, seriously, most people would meet their future in-laws prior to getting married. The whole situation seems odd. Yes, I know her father made some stupid moves but, I am talking about earlier on. Just curious.



Possibly because her father's health did not support him being able to fly anywhere?
Also - keep in mind that many places in Mexico are not safe to travel to any longer, so I can see why they wouldn't want to go to him.


----------



## threadbender

Thank you, all. I never would have imagined not meeting beforehand. I do understand families have disconnects. But, I would have thought they would have had some sort of meeting. It is too bad. I am glad Meghan's mother was involved. I hope she has been able to spend time with her grandson. Perhaps, eventually, his grandfather and mother will make amends. 
Archie sure is a cutie!!! Looks just like Harry; it is almost uncanny! Yes, I know most babies look like the father. It is just so cool. I just love babies!


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Also - keep in mind that many places in Mexico are not safe to travel to any longer, so I can see why they wouldn't want to go to him.


I know several Americans who have retired to Mexico, and they live in very safe, very nice communities.  Most of their neighbors are also American retirees.  The entire nation of Mexico is not unsafe for travel, only certain areas. 

Rosarito, Mexico where Thomas Markle lives is not one of Mexico's no-go zones.  It is a resort town heavily touristed by Californians and surfers.  It's not an unsafe place to live or visit.


----------



## caramelize126

chicaloca said:


> . All of Thomas’s kids *save Meghan *have major issues.


 lol.. i dont think anyone knows this for sure...



Flatsy said:


> Meghan just filed the suit.  No court has yet ruled on anything relating to it.  It is still to be determined whether or not the court interprets that the Mail violated the law.
> 
> To be clear, this is the article at issue: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-true-tragedy-Meghan-Markles-rift-father.html
> 
> I thought that the Mail published more of the actual letter. I thought I remembered more of Meghan's ridiculous handwriting.  What is on the site now is only one image of the actual letter (only the salutation and first sentence.)  The rest are pulled quotes that are printed in a font that resembles handwriting, but is not the actual letter.
> 
> The Mail article says it was last updated on 2/16/19.  Unless the Mail went in and altered the evidence without time stamping it (unlikely with litigation pending), what the article contains may very well be within the law.  They are allowed to report on the contents of the letter and they are allowed to pull individual quotes from it and publish them.  So Meghan and Harry's case may not be as strong as I thought it was based on my memory.



I remember reading the full letter too and it did appear to support Meghan's stance. Was it people.com that posted it? I think it was around the time when meghan's friends were speaking to the media on her behalf..



LittleStar88 said:


> Possibly because her father's health did not support him being able to fly anywhere?
> Also - keep in mind that many places in Mexico are not safe to travel to any longer, so I can see why they wouldn't want to go to him.



I dont think anyone expected her father to fly to the UK. But why couldnt Harry and Meg just fly out to Mexico? Or offered to meet him in California? Its not like they have crazy hectic lives ( or real jobs..) where they couldnt find time over a 2 year span to make a short trip.

Also, i believe her father lives in Rosarito, Mexico in Baja which is a huge resort area. No safety issues.

Edit- Flatsy- you beat me to it!


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> Possibly because her father's health did not support him being able to fly anywhere?
> Also - keep in mind that many places in Mexico are not safe to travel to any longer, so I can see why they wouldn't want to go to him.


That’s IF he was in Mexico and it’s not like Harry doesn’t have the money to fly the father to Toronto or to fly himself to CA to meet him. Harry doesn’t have a 9-5 job that keeps him tied to a desk and he has money to go where he wants. No excuses for the guy. 

I’m going with embarrassment. Talking up her wonderful father in interviews is one thing but meeting in real life is another, I’m guessing.


----------



## Sharont2305

MarieCurie said:


> On my unreliable feeling that the Royal Family could be considered outdated enough to get rid of in 20-30 years time when it's his turn to become King


Given the ages of the Queen and Prince Charles William might even be King within the next 5 years!


----------



## chicaloca

Jayne1 said:


> That’s IF he was in Mexico and it’s not like Harry doesn’t have the money to fly the father to Toronto or to fly himself to CA to meet him. Harry doesn’t have a 9-5 job that keeps him tied to a desk and he has money to go where he wants. No excuses for the guy.
> 
> I’m going with embarrassment. Talking up her wonderful father in interviews is one thing but meeting in real life is another, I’m guessing.



I don’t believe that Meghan would have had the palace issue an official announcement that Thomas would be walking her down the aisle if he embarrassed her. She clearly wanted her father to walk her down the aisle. By Thomas’s own account he wasn’t at the wedding because of his own decision not to go. 

Ironically Thomas embarrassed Meghan by not showing. The palace had to send out an updated announcement that Charles would be walking her after Thomas claimed a heart attack then was spotted at McDonalds a day or so after he supposedly was in the hospital. By Thomas’s own admission he wouldn’t answer Meghan’s calls because he was “ashamed” of himself for the paid paparazzi photos. That was when he started communicating via TMZ. 

Also why is everyone acting like Thomas is a child? He’s a grown man. He shouldn’t  need another adult to get him on a plane to his daughter’s wedding. This is his daughter’s freaking wedding. He had one job as a dad. A team was sent to accompany Thomas to the U.K. (per Meghan's letter) but apparently he wouldn’t meet them. I find it odd — and somewhat telling — that Meghan is being held responsible for his actions especially since he has been outed as a liar. That’s privilege for you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Not sure if that was directed at me. I was simply stating that prior to the wedding, it was odd for Harry not to have met Thomas. Not assigning any fault to anyone. No idea what happened as far as him not going to the wedding. But, was glad Doria was there. She looked lovely and seems like a really nice woman. I hope she is getting the opportunity to go and see Harry, Meghan and Archie.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> I know several Americans who have retired to Mexico, and they live in very safe, very nice communities.  Most of their neighbors are also American retirees.  The entire nation of Mexico is not unsafe for travel, only certain areas.
> 
> Rosarito, Mexico where Thomas Markle lives is not one of Mexico's no-go zones.  It is a resort town heavily touristed by Californians and surfers.  It's not an unsafe place to live or visit.



Yes, I have a brother-in-law who lives part-time in Cancun. The actual community is nice, but risky to go anywhere outside of it.

I used to spend quite a lot of time in BC MX and drove around a lot by myself from San Diego to La Fonda. We would camp on the beach and surf. Back then it was ok if you were staying in a group and on toll roads, but there was some risk if you ventured off. 

It would be way too risky to do this now. Especially as an American with the current climate between US and MX and abundance of gang activity along the border and into northern BC.


----------



## threadbender

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, I have a brother-in-law who lives part-time in Cancun. The actual community is nice, but risky to go anywhere outside of it.
> 
> I used to spend quite a lot of time in BC MX and drove around a lot by myself from San Diego to La Fonda. We would camp on the beach and surf. Back then it was ok if you were staying in a group and on toll roads, but there was some risk if you ventured off.
> 
> It would be way too risky to do this now. Especially as an American with the current climate between US and MX and abundance of gang activity along the border and into northern BC.


Awww, memories.
I miss the days of deciding on a whim to go to Rosarita or Calafia, Puerto Nuevo for lobster. Camping on the beach or staying in a crappy little hotel or renting a place at Calafia. Now, I don't think I would even try. I am grateful I lived in SD when I did.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> Also why is everyone acting like Thomas is a child? He’s a grown man. He shouldn’t  need another adult to get him on a plane to his daughter’s wedding. This is his daughter’s freaking wedding. He had one job as a dad. A team was sent to accompany Thomas to the U.K. (per Meghan's letter) but apparently he wouldn’t meet them. I find it odd — and somewhat telling — that Meghan is being held responsible for his actions especially since he has been outed as a liar. That’s privilege for you.


We were discussing that it was odd Harry didn't make the effort to meet her father before the wedding, before the engagement even, but certainly after... since he has the money to fly there or fly the father to him.

No one said Thomas needed help getting to the UK.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe Thomas didn't want to meet Harry face to face?  Harry could have made the attempt; but if Thomas refused to meet him.  That's on Thomas.

I'm inclined to believe, unless proven wrong, that Thomas didn't want to meet Harry prior to the engagement.  If Harry had snubbed him, Thomas  would have sold that story to the tabloids. 



Jayne1 said:


> We were discussing that it was odd Harry didn't make the effort to meet her father before the wedding, before the engagement even, but certainly after... since he has the money to fly there or fly the father to him.
> 
> No one said Thomas needed help getting to the UK.


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> I'm inclined to believe, unless proven wrong, that Thomas didn't want to meet Harry prior to the engagement. If Harry had snubbed him, *Thomas would have sold that story to the tabloids*.


He did. _“I’ve still never met my son-in-law. Why couldn’t Prince Harry have got on a plane and flown to see me to ask for her hand? He obviously has no problem getting on private jets. If he wants to come and see me on a private jet, there’s an airport near here in Tijuana, and San Diego is just over the border. There are dozens of commercial flights from England to San Diego and Los Angeles every day.” _

Adult children bring their partners to meet their parents, not the other way around.  The burden is not on an elderly man with health problems to travel to meet his daughter's latest partner. 

Given Thomas Markle's love of the spotlight, I find it extremely implausible that he would turn down a visit from his daughter's royal fiance/one of the world's biggest celebrities.


----------



## mdcx

Speculation from me that Megs did not bring Harry to meet her dad because she was afraid that something might come out or be on display that might cause Harry to get cold feet and break the engagement. Her carefully crafted identity that drew him in might not match with what he saw/heard on meeting her Dad.

Another thought - all those shirt-dresses she wore in Africa - that was designed so that all the mags could print these "Meghan's signature shirtdress" stories, right? It seems calculated.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-inspired-shirtdress-amazon/


----------



## LittleStar88

threadbender said:


> Awww, memories.
> I miss the days of deciding on a whim to go to Rosarita or Calafia, Puerto Nuevo for lobster. Camping on the beach or staying in a crappy little hotel or renting a place at Calafia. Now, I don't think I would even try. I am grateful I lived in SD when I did.



The food was soooo good and fresh down there! I'm glad you got to experience it.


----------



## chicaloca

mdcx said:


> .
> 
> Another thought - all those shirt-dresses she wore in Africa - that was designed so that all the mags could print these "Meghan's signature shirtdress" stories, right? It seems calculated.
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-inspired-shirtdress-amazon/



I read that she wore them because button tops are more convenient to wear when breast-feeding than pullovers. That sounds more plausible to me than Meghan trying to make shirt dresses happen,

Does _everything_ Meghan does have to be given an ulterior motive?


----------



## Welltraveled!

But he says that now.  Thomas didn't say that then; so it's still  unclear to me if he wanted to meet Harry in the beginning between the engagement to marriage phase. I assume so, considering he was going to walk his daughter down the aisle.  But who really knows, what happened at that time. 

I do agree adult children bring their fiancé to meet the parents.  But the parents should be _receptive_ to meeting the fiance.  If not, and trust me on this one, it's awkward for everyone at dinner. 



Flatsy said:


> He did. _“I’ve still never met my son-in-law. Why couldn’t Prince Harry have got on a plane and flown to see me to ask for her hand? He obviously has no problem getting on private jets. If he wants to come and see me on a private jet, there’s an airport near here in Tijuana, and San Diego is just over the border. There are dozens of commercial flights from England to San Diego and Los Angeles every day.” _
> 
> Adult children bring their partners to meet their parents, not the other way around.  The burden is not on an elderly man with health problems to travel to meet his daughter's latest partner.
> 
> Given Thomas Markle's love of the spotlight, I find it extremely implausible that he would turn down a visit from his daughter's royal fiance/one of the world's biggest celebrities.


----------



## chicaloca

Welltraveled! said:


> But he says that now.  Thomas didn't say that then; so it's still  unclear to me if he wanted to meet Harry in the beginning between the engagement to marriage phase. I assume so, considering he was going to walk his daughter down the aisle.  But who really knows, what happened at that time.
> 
> I do agree adult children bring their fiancé to meet the parents.  But the parents should be _receptive_ to meeting the fiance.  If not, and trust me on this one, it's awkward for everyone at dinner.




The fact Thomas is living alone in Mexico away from his children and grandchildren is a red flag for me that he is very difficult person or possibly anti-social. It’s hard to get someone like that to accept visitors — or leave the house sometimes.  People tend to move closer to family when they get older. I think Thomas is estranged from most of his family though which is why he hasn’t seen any of his grandkids.

I think Meghan's attempt to get him to walk her down the aisle was doomed from the start. I don’t believe Thomas wanted to fly to London ( maybe he hates flying?). I don’t think he had heart surgery. At least not the kind serous enough for you to be walking into McDonald’s in a couple of days. He needed a very extreme excuse to get out of walking his daughter down the aisle and a heart attack was his Hail Mary.

I believe his own words that he was ashamed of himself but he took it out on his daughter in the worst possible way at the worst possible moment.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Thomas Markle and the rest of his brood was sketchy at best when H&M were dating. Her dad, with rumored health and mental health issues, dressed like a slob (from what I saw in pap photos) and had rumored money issues is definitely not a sort of person I would want to bring around me if I were marry into any upper crust family, let alone the friggin’ BRF!

Yes, technically if Harry loves her, he would accept her along with her messed up family, but man, I see him as a total liability. I would have done the same thing and just had him fly out and walk me down the aisle, and only because it was tradition.

If I somehow landed a prince, a BRF prince, those would be some high stakes! I would not risk any exposure with the likes of Thomas Markle.

Is it cold of me to say that? Yes, but it’s the darn truth. If moving up in the world was my MO, I would do it in a hot second. Can’t fault that calculated hustle. It does seem super odd that she claimed her father was the best father and lauded him repeatedly prior to the engagement. It speaks volumes to me that it was a complete 180 when the deal was about to be sealed.


----------



## chicaloca

LVSistinaMM said:


> If I somehow landed a prince, a BRF prince, those would be some high stakes! I would not risk any exposure with the likes of Thomas Markle.
> 
> Is it cold of me to say that? Yes, but it’s the darn truth. If moving up in the world was my MO, I would do it in a hot second. Can’t fault that calculated hustle. It does seem super odd that she claimed her father was the best father and lauded him repeatedly prior to the engagement. *It speaks volumes to me that it was a complete 180 when the deal was about to be sealed.*



Meghan’s communication with her dad didn’t stop until he stood her up for her wedding, wouldn’t take her calls, then began his paid relationship with the tabloids. To date she has not spoken ill of her father so I don’t see how she did a 180. All we know of the current state their relationship is from her leaked letter where she says he broke her heart. She also told him what he could do to get their relationship back on track which was to stop talking with tabloids. Of course he violated that many times over then demanded a photo op with Harry and Archie for the tabloids. 

I don’t think any woman advocating for Thomas would be okay with their own father acting this way on the eve of their wedding, selling their personal artifacts to a tabloid or publicly insulting their new husband and in-laws. Meghan has been dehumanized to the point where her feelings have been rendered  inconsequential. Why do people expect her to grin and bear this treatment?


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> The fact Thomas is living alone in Mexico away from his children and grandchildren is a red flag for me that he is very difficult person or possibly anti-social. It’s hard to get someone like that to accept visitors — or leave the house sometimes.  People tend to move closer to family when they get older. I think Thomas is estranged from most of his family though which is why he hasn’t seen any of his grandkids.
> 
> I think Meghan's attempt to get him to walk her down the aisle was doomed from the start. I don’t believe Thomas wanted to fly to London ( maybe he hates flying?). I don’t think he had heart surgery. At least not the kind serous enough for you to be walking into McDonald’s in a couple of days. He needed a very extreme excuse to get out of walking his daughter down the aisle and a heart attack was his Hail Mary.
> 
> I believe his own words that he was ashamed of himself but he took it out on his daughter in the worst possible way at the worst possible moment.


It was doomed because it was so half hearted on her part.  Harry could and should have met Thomas prior to the wedding, there are no reasonable excuses other than that she wasn’t keen for it happen.  It’s not as if it were a simple wedding in a small country church - it was an event being televised to millions across the world - and he was being expected to play an active role in it.  It’s unbelievable when you think about it.  She airbrushes her past from her life every time she moves on.  I find that very strange - apparently the first husband is still non-plussed as to why the marriage ended.
The excuses for Meghan’s behaviour keep coming, but labelling him as unsafe around Archie or red flagging him for living a quiet life (doesn’t Doria?) are deeply distasteful and sound increasingly desperate.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


> The person doing the documentary is Tom Bradby who has worked with both William and Harry before and is considered one of the few media people that William and Harry have long been known to be acquaintances with. Tom did William and Kate's engagement interview and he has done two documentaries with Harry before for ITV. Tom was a guest at the wedding of William & Kate as well as the wedding of Harry & Meghan.
> 
> 
> Tom Bradby's previous documentaries with Prince Harry



Yeah, these types of documentaries after a Royal tour aren't new in the UK. They're always done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah, I guess in 2016 when Meghan was heaping praise on her dad none of this applied


people here keep on talking that Meghan changed. That she changed her point of view, that she was all daddy's girl and now suing him. 
But it is the Dad who changed. 
He changed from being the lovely, caring dad to the fame hunting, selling his daughter, father. 
People keep searching the fault on Meghans side, but she wanted him in her live. He decided to make money out of her instead of walking her down the aisle and keep his mouth shut.


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. have to jump in here, because I think I've said before that I have a dear friend who knows (_and worked with Thomas Markle in the past_).  This friend is honest to a fault (_one of the reasons why we are good friends - as I am the same way_), and I asked her about her opinion on Meghan's relationship with her Father.  Now, before I continue with this, one of the other reasons why we are close friends is because we both grew up in families that were very eff'd up (_especially our fathers_) .. so I know that she would sense if there was truly a problem.  Her response was that Thomas treated Meghan like a Princess; that he was ALWAYS there for her and that in some respects, she thought that Meghan got "_too much_" from her father to the point that she had a tendency to 'use' people and once she was done with you, poof ..


well people would say the same about me and my father, but our relationship is broken, too.


----------



## Straight-Laced

This is from The Times yesterday, a day after Harry delivered his heated speech about the tabloid press. Extracts about Harry and the way he deals with the travelling media and Meghan sticking to the script 'like a politician'.

ROYAL FAMILY
*Prince Harry and Meghan round off tour of southern Africa
Valentine Low*
October 3 2019, 12:00am, The Times


_*The duchess was an immaculate performer in front of the media, but the duke found it difficult to hide his disdain*_

It was not so much a tale of two cities, as a tale of two townships. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s tour of southern Africa began and ended in two townships, both highlighted as an example of the struggles faced by the disadvantaged in South Africa, and the opportunities that are opening up for them.

But what a difference nine days makes. When they arrived in Nyanga, the Cape Town township that has the reputation of being the murder capital of South Africa, there was music, and singing, and a memorable speech from the duchess in which she spoke to the audience “as a woman of colour and as your sister”. On the way out, Harryand Meghan danced with performers who had been entertaining them: it could not have been a happier occasion.

Today, on the last day of their tour, they were in Tembisa, a township outside Johannesburg. While Meghan smiled dutifully, ever the immaculate performer, and Harry did his best to act upbeat when he delivered a speech summing up his love of Africa, there was no hiding the fact that he looked tired and strained. As he arrived, he scowled at the assembled British media pack, just as he has done so many times before on other tours. It was, in short, back to the bad old days.

The difference, of course, was the statement Harry had released the night before attacking the tabloid press in coruscating terms. Suddenly the mood had changed. What had been a successful tour for the couple, with positive headlines and extensive coverage on the television news bulletins, was suddenly infused with an air of rancour. Buckingham Palace aides appeared embarrassed by the row, and asked members of the press if they were all right.

It was not meant to be like this. For until Harry chose to make his attack, the tour had been remarkable for the way it had revamped the way the royals conduct themselves on overseas visits.

Usually on tour the royal family member carries out a succession of engagements, attends the odd formal occasion, and makes a speech or two. If the accompanying media pack were lucky, they might get a minute with the royal in front of the television camera to ask a question.

It is a rare occurrence, and something that Queen has never done in her life.

On this tour, however, Meghan and Harry, under the tutelage of their communications secretary, Sara Latham, a former White House aide who has worked for Hillary *******, have torn up the rulebook.

The couple have given a succession of interviews, sometimes almost daily, which they have used to push out their messages, whether on climate change, female empowerment or gender-based violence.

It has been a proactive, slickly co-ordinated campaign that has left little to chance. The broadcasters are told what topics to ask questions on, and none would be so foolish as to venture a question on another topic: they know that they would never be given another chance if they did.

And, as The Times found out when it conducted a rare pooled interview with the duchess on behalf of the British newspapers, the question does not actually matter.

The Times asked the duchess about violence against women, with a second question about the impact Meghan has had in South Africa as a woman of colour. Like a politician, she ignored the question that had been asked, and said what she had come to say anyway.

Not that it mattered: the encounter was captured on camera, and the soundbites travelled round the world — just as the palace wanted. It would, after all, be a mistake to think that the intended audience was only in South Africa and the UK. In palace eyes Harry and Meghan are a global brand, and the US audience is as important as that in the UK, if not more so.

As for the new spirit of glasnost surrounding Harry and Meghan, it did not extend to friendly relations with the media. The select group of reporters, photographers and camera crews who spent five days flying round Africa with Harry — at vast expense — in a trio of small planes said that despite the intimacy of their travel arrangements, Harry all but ignored them apart from when he was being interviewed.

On the day that Harry released his statement there were signs that he was feeling the pressure. When a television reporter had the effrontery to ask him an unscheduled but otherwise harmless question, he reacted angerly and palace officials were dispatched to tell everyone that such lèse-majesté would not be tolerated.

His statement about the tabloids, however intemperate it may appear to some, and entirely reasonable to others, has been a long time in the planning. Harry and Meghan have long been furious about what they say was the “grooming and exploitation” of her father, Thomas Markle, by the tabloid press before and after their wedding last year.

Editors were asked to stay away from him. Instead, according to royal sources, tabloid reporters and photographers moved in next door to him and sought to cultivate him to the point where he became a regular source of stories.

One source who knows Harry well said: “Harry and Meghan have taken it very badly — she has had to stay silent through all of it and he has felt like it’s a repeat of what happened to his mother . . . it was shocking behaviour by the press.”

This week was not the first time that Harry, who is passionately loyal to and defensive of Meghan, has criticised the media over their treatment of her. In November 2016, shortly after their relationship became public, he issued a strongly worded plea asking for the media to leave her alone, warning: “This is not a game.”

It was a phrase that would resurface in Tuesday night’s statement, in which he said: “For these select media this is a game, and one that we have been unwilling to play from the start.”

Just how much damage has been done by Harry’s outburst remains to be seen. In the US, where he and, in particular, Meghan, are seen as the victims of an intrusive and racist media, it will probably go down well.

And while the tabloids are feeling bruised and resentful about suffering the fallout from a legal dispute between the duke and one Sunday newspaper, they are used to being the subject of Harry’s scorn.

As someone who knows him well said, he is incapable of distinguishing between different sections of the media: if one paper has behaved badly, in his eye they are all villains.

As for Harry, a mercurial figure, he soon recovered his spirit. By the end of the township visit he was laughing and joking with the audience. At a later engagement he was described by one observer as positively perky.

The damage he has done to his own reputation may, however, take longer to recover.


----------



## MarieCurie

chicaloca said:


> Meghan’s communication with her dad didn’t stop until he stood her up for her wedding, wouldn’t take her calls, then began his paid relationship with the tabloids. To date she has not spoken ill of her father so I don’t see how she did a 180. All we know of the current state their relationship is from her leaked letter where she says he broke her heart. She also told him what he could do to get their relationship back on track which was to stop talking with tabloids. Of course he violated that many times over then demanded a photo op with Harry and Archie for the tabloids.
> 
> I don’t think any woman advocating for Thomas would be okay with their own father acting this way on the eve of their wedding, selling their personal artifacts to a tabloid or publicly insulting their new husband and in-laws. Meghan has been dehumanized to the point where her feelings have been rendered  inconsequential. Why do people expect her to grin and bear this treatment?



And why are we forgetting that Thomas didn't even show up to her 1st wedding? Clearly their relationship was not where we can say Meghan did a 180. Her gushing about her father might have been her attempt at making things ok. When Harry and Meghan's pda was discussed there were a couple of posters who said the need to be affectionate in public might be a sign of something wrong in the relationship. Why can't that be the case with her dad? Or have the goal posts moved again? What about her dad's accountability for his own actions or is he more deserving of excuses than Meghan is, even though he is the parent here?

Clearly there was a relationship breakdown before Meghan even met Harry and we can only speculate who was wholly, partially, or mostly responsible for that. But if I were to judge by what we have witnessed publicly; Thomas is definately not this poor character who has been cut out of Meghan's life because she decided he was not good enough for her new life.


----------



## chicaloca

_What had been a successful tour for the couple, with positive headlines and extensive coverage on the television news bulletins, was suddenly infused with an air of rancour._

So the successful tour is no longer a success because the media got their feelings hurt? What a perfect illustration of how objectivity does not exist in the press.


_ For until Harry chose to make his attack, the tour had been remarkable for the way it had revamped the way the royals conduct themselves on overseas visits._

It seems like this would not have been changed by a letter???

_On this tour, however, Meghan and Harry, under the tutelage of their communications secretary, Sara Latham, a former White House aide who has worked for Hillary *******, have torn up the rulebook._

Note - Sunshine Sachs is not their rep. Just like I said — It’s Sara Latham


_Harry all but ignored them apart from when he was being interviewed._

That sounds like what’s supposed to happen? Their job is to report the news and interview the subject. The subject isn’t obligated to make themselves available outside of that. So the press expects to be BFFs with the Sussexes despite slandering Meghan at every turn? Do they expect to be BFFs with other royals  or are the Sussexes the only ones they expect to be so accessible?

_Harry and Meghan have long been furious about what they say was the “grooming and exploitation” of her father, Thomas Markle, by the tabloid press before and after their wedding last year.

Editors were asked to stay away from him. Instead, according to royal sources, tabloid reporters and photographers moved in next door to him and sought to cultivate him to the point where he became a regular source of stories._

This is just appalling.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> This is from The Times yesterday, a day after Harry delivered his heated speech about the tabloid press. Extracts about Harry and the way he deals with the travelling media and Meghan sticking to the script 'like a politician'.
> 
> ROYAL FAMILY
> *Prince Harry and Meghan round off tour of southern Africa
> Valentine Low*
> October 3 2019, 12:00am, The Times
> View attachment 4557117
> 
> _*The duchess was an immaculate performer in front of the media, but the duke found it difficult to hide his disdain*_
> 
> It was not so much a tale of two cities, as a tale of two townships. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s tour of southern Africa began and ended in two townships, both highlighted as an example of the struggles faced by the disadvantaged in South Africa, and the opportunities that are opening up for them.
> 
> But what a difference nine days makes. When they arrived in Nyanga, the Cape Town township that has the reputation of being the murder capital of South Africa, there was music, and singing, and a memorable speech from the duchess in which she spoke to the audience “as a woman of colour and as your sister”. On the way out, Harryand Meghan danced with performers who had been entertaining them: it could not have been a happier occasion.
> 
> Today, on the last day of their tour, they were in Tembisa, a township outside Johannesburg. While Meghan smiled dutifully, ever the immaculate performer, and Harry did his best to act upbeat when he delivered a speech summing up his love of Africa, there was no hiding the fact that he looked tired and strained. As he arrived, he scowled at the assembled British media pack, just as he has done so many times before on other tours. It was, in short, back to the bad old days.
> 
> The difference, of course, was the statement Harry had released the night before attacking the tabloid press in coruscating terms. Suddenly the mood had changed. What had been a successful tour for the couple, with positive headlines and extensive coverage on the television news bulletins, was suddenly infused with an air of rancour. Buckingham Palace aides appeared embarrassed by the row, and asked members of the press if they were all right.
> 
> It was not meant to be like this. For until Harry chose to make his attack, the tour had been remarkable for the way it had revamped the way the royals conduct themselves on overseas visits.
> 
> Usually on tour the royal family member carries out a succession of engagements, attends the odd formal occasion, and makes a speech or two. If the accompanying media pack were lucky, they might get a minute with the royal in front of the television camera to ask a question.
> 
> It is a rare occurrence, and something that Queen has never done in her life.
> 
> On this tour, however, Meghan and Harry, under the tutelage of their communications secretary, Sara Latham, a former White House aide who has worked for Hillary *******, have torn up the rulebook.
> 
> The couple have given a succession of interviews, sometimes almost daily, which they have used to push out their messages, whether on climate change, female empowerment or gender-based violence.
> 
> It has been a proactive, slickly co-ordinated campaign that has left little to chance. The broadcasters are told what topics to ask questions on, and none would be so foolish as to venture a question on another topic: they know that they would never be given another chance if they did.
> 
> And, as The Times found out when it conducted a rare pooled interview with the duchess on behalf of the British newspapers, the question does not actually matter.
> 
> The Times asked the duchess about violence against women, with a second question about the impact Meghan has had in South Africa as a woman of colour. Like a politician, she ignored the question that had been asked, and said what she had come to say anyway.
> 
> Not that it mattered: the encounter was captured on camera, and the soundbites travelled round the world — just as the palace wanted. It would, after all, be a mistake to think that the intended audience was only in South Africa and the UK. In palace eyes Harry and Meghan are a global brand, and the US audience is as important as that in the UK, if not more so.
> 
> As for the new spirit of glasnost surrounding Harry and Meghan, it did not extend to friendly relations with the media. The select group of reporters, photographers and camera crews who spent five days flying round Africa with Harry — at vast expense — in a trio of small planes said that despite the intimacy of their travel arrangements, Harry all but ignored them apart from when he was being interviewed.
> 
> On the day that Harry released his statement there were signs that he was feeling the pressure. When a television reporter had the effrontery to ask him an unscheduled but otherwise harmless question, he reacted angerly and palace officials were dispatched to tell everyone that such lèse-majesté would not be tolerated.
> 
> His statement about the tabloids, however intemperate it may appear to some, and entirely reasonable to others, has been a long time in the planning. Harry and Meghan have long been furious about what they say was the “grooming and exploitation” of her father, Thomas Markle, by the tabloid press before and after their wedding last year.
> 
> Editors were asked to stay away from him. Instead, according to royal sources, tabloid reporters and photographers moved in next door to him and sought to cultivate him to the point where he became a regular source of stories.
> 
> One source who knows Harry well said: “Harry and Meghan have taken it very badly — she has had to stay silent through all of it and he has felt like it’s a repeat of what happened to his mother . . . it was shocking behaviour by the press.”
> 
> This week was not the first time that Harry, who is passionately loyal to and defensive of Meghan, has criticised the media over their treatment of her. In November 2016, shortly after their relationship became public, he issued a strongly worded plea asking for the media to leave her alone, warning: “This is not a game.”
> 
> It was a phrase that would resurface in Tuesday night’s statement, in which he said: “For these select media this is a game, and one that we have been unwilling to play from the start.”
> 
> Just how much damage has been done by Harry’s outburst remains to be seen. In the US, where he and, in particular, Meghan, are seen as the victims of an intrusive and racist media, it will probably go down well.
> 
> And while the tabloids are feeling bruised and resentful about suffering the fallout from a legal dispute between the duke and one Sunday newspaper, they are used to being the subject of Harry’s scorn.
> 
> As someone who knows him well said, he is incapable of distinguishing between different sections of the media: if one paper has behaved badly, in his eye they are all villains.
> 
> As for Harry, a mercurial figure, he soon recovered his spirit. By the end of the township visit he was laughing and joking with the audience. At a later engagement he was described by one observer as positively perky.
> 
> The damage he has done to his own reputation may, however, take longer to recover.


If they felt her father was being exploited why didn’t they come to his aid?  I don’t get it.  They get on best with people that don’t know them seems to me.  
I heard yesterday that since Meghan is still a US citizen they’ll have to pay tax to the US govt on her money AND his.  Perhaps that’s why he’s in such a foul mood!  I wonder if this includes property they’ve been given which the UK taxpayer stumped up for?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> If they felt her father was being exploited why didn’t they come to his aid?  I don’t get it.  They get on best with people that don’t know them seems to me.
> I heard yesterday that since Meghan is still a US citizen they’ll have to pay tax to the US govt on her money AND his.  Perhaps that’s why he’s in such a foul mood!  I wonder if this includes property they’ve been given which the UK taxpayer stumped up for?


Also, If Meghan's been so aware of what a loose cannon her dad is and just pretending for years everything between them was hunky-dory, shouldn't she and the BRF have tried to be more professional in handling him from the start? With all of those "grey men" to aid with the upkeep of the public's royal perception, why didn't anyone try to nip that PR fail in the bud? It makes no sense.


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> people here keep on talking that Meghan changed. That she changed her point of view, that she was all daddy's girl and now suing him.
> But it is the Dad who changed.
> He changed from being the lovely, caring dad to the fame hunting, selling his daughter, father.
> People keep searching the fault on Meghans side, but she wanted him in her live. He decided to make money out of her instead of walking her down the aisle and keep his mouth shut.


I’m pretty sure he was married to his first wife (where he was supposedly abusive) long before he was talking to the tabloids.


----------



## Flatsy

> The Times asked the duchess about violence against women, with a second question about the impact Meghan has had in South Africa as a woman of colour. Like a politician, she ignored the question that had been asked, and said what she had come to say anyway.


This is very smart of her, and exactly what Harry should have done when that Rhiannon woman asked him the question about his engagement, instead of looking for a reason to pick a fight (on camera!).



> As for the new spirit of glasnost surrounding Harry and Meghan, it did not extend to friendly relations with the media. The select group of reporters, photographers and camera crews who spent five days flying round Africa with Harry — at vast expense — in a trio of small planes said that despite the intimacy of their travel arrangements, Harry all but ignored them apart from when he was being interviewed.


No surprise.  This is 300 members of the press that he treats with antipathy and with no appreciation for their work, but still expects nothing but positive coverage from them. 



> When a television reporter had the effrontery to ask him an unscheduled but otherwise harmless question, he reacted angerly and palace officials were dispatched to tell everyone that such lèse-majesté would not be tolerated.


This is just plain spoiled.



> Harry and Meghan have long been furious about what they say was the “grooming and exploitation” of her father, Thomas Markle, by the tabloid press before and after their wedding last year.
> 
> Editors were asked to stay away from him. Instead, according to royal sources, tabloid reporters and photographers moved in next door to him and sought to cultivate him to the point where he became a regular source of stories.


I understand why they are mad and frustrated about her father's media campaign.  But it is unreasonable to think they could dictate to the media to stay away from her father after he brought so much messiness and scandal in the lead up to the big wedding.  He did legitimately headline-making things, and it was natural for the media to pursue him.  It was the father's decision to talk (and talk and talk and talk) instead of being loyal and decent.



> As someone who knows him well said, he is incapable of distinguishing between different sections of the media: if one paper has behaved badly, in his eye they are all villains.


Yup, and this is a big problem.  Dealing with the press is part of his job and he needs to learn how to do it effectively, instead of constantly stewing in his grievances and lashing out.  

As mentioned here previously, Diana knew how to work the media and it involves both reward and punishment.  Harry just wants the punishment part.  The only royal reporter Meghan and Harry seem to have a good relationship with is Omid Scobie, and he is a 100% sycophantic mouthpiece.   I think they expect nothing less at all times, and they aren't entitled to that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

*THE Duchess of Sussex may face claims she invaded her OWN privacy if her newspaper fight ends in court.*

Meghan is suing The Mail on Sunday for publishing a highly personal letter she wrote to her  estranged father.

But it is suggested she put it in the public domain herself by telling friends about it and giving them the nod to go public.

The pals then briefed journalists at celebrity magazine People, with one of them going into details about the letter.

And, if the Duchess is called as a witness in court, she may have to swear on oath she did not give her friends permission to discuss the letter.

Meghan, 38, and husband Harry, 35, launched their legal fight on Tuesday with a wild rant against press intrusion.

*CLAIMS WILL BE FOUGHT*
Her lawyers filed papers claiming publishing the letter to her father, Thomas, 75, was a breach of copyright, infringed her privacy and was a breach of the Data Protection Act.

But The Mail on Sunday is fighting the case, which some royal watchers have criticised as ill-judged and ill-timed.

In court, privacy arguments could centre on the People story in February when five pals were cleared to give Meghan’s side of her  fall-out with Thomas.

One refers to the letter, saying she asked him to stop victimising her through the media.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10063097/meghan-markle-invaded-own-privacy-claims/


----------



## A1aGypsy

threadbender said:


> Awww, memories.
> I miss the days of deciding on a whim to go to Rosarita or Calafia, Puerto Nuevo for lobster. Camping on the beach or staying in a crappy little hotel or renting a place at Calafia. Now, I don't think I would even try. I am grateful I lived in SD when I did.



This sounds LOVELY


----------



## Flatsy

I laughed out loud when I saw the headline about Meghan invading her own privacy.  

But this may be correct.  I think the Mail's case is going to center around the idea that she's a person of significant public interest, and therefore the publication of the letter was a legitimate public story.   She's a royal so that's always going to be the media's go-to when it comes to their right to cover them.

And I do believe that she is the one who made the letter public knowledge by having her friends tell People Magazine about it.  If she has to testify under oath and admit that she did authorize her friends to talk about it, that will directly contradict the statement by Buckingham Palace saying that she had nothing to do with the article.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I had the same thought about this law suit. It’s a terrible idea and will likely expose all the backroom negotiating that she has been doing to influence her reputation. Honestly, I ask with only a bit of sarcasm, what on earth is granny doing? Even if he is her pet, even if they have been dogged unfairly, even if everything is true - there is a much better way to handle this. This is rapidly turning into a dumpster fire.

As for the whole “meet the parents” thing - I don’t get the sense that the BRF really cares about in laws. Seems to me the view is, you marry us and your family can go away now.


----------



## daisychainz

chicaloca said:


> The fact Thomas is living alone in Mexico away from his children and grandchildren is a red flag for me that he is very difficult person or possibly anti-social. It’s hard to get someone like that to accept visitors — or leave the house sometimes.  People tend to move closer to family when they get older. I think Thomas is estranged from most of his family though which is why he hasn’t seen any of his grandkids.
> 
> I think Meghan's attempt to get him to walk her down the aisle was doomed from the start. I don’t believe Thomas wanted to fly to London ( maybe he hates flying?). I don’t think he had heart surgery. At least not the kind serous enough for you to be walking into McDonald’s in a couple of days. He needed a very extreme excuse to get out of walking his daughter down the aisle and a heart attack was his Hail Mary.
> 
> I believe his own words that he was ashamed of himself but he took it out on his daughter in the worst possible way at the worst possible moment.


And the fact Doria is living alone in Los Angeles away from her only child and grandchild ... is that a red flag that she is a very difficult person or possibly anti-social?


----------



## LittleStar88

I am enjoying all of your theories! 

I think it is really, really difficult to speculate on her relationship with her dad unless you have had a similar relationship with a narcissistic parent. They can be a real roller coaster ride. One minute things are fine and the next they explode and become completely unreasonable and unmanageable despite all attempts to smooth things over. It gets worse as they get older. You simply cannot negotiate or reason with them when they are in their narcissistic state. It is exhausting and can really have a destructive effect which is why many people cut from their life a narcissistic parent.

The relationship with the press is going to be a challenge. I get that their style and approach differs greatly from Will, Kate... But it may be time to take a page out of their book for a while to calm the frenzy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> I had the same thought about this law suit. It’s a terrible idea and will likely expose all the backroom negotiating that she has been doing to influence her reputation.


One of the drawbacks of a lawsuit is that Meghan might have to testify about lots of personal things she probably doesn't want public.  It was already mentioned that everything that's happened with her father is probably going to be delved into.  The Mail said they are going to fight.



> As for the whole “meet the parents” thing - I don’t get the sense that the BRF really cares about in laws. Seems to me the view is, you marry us and your family can go away now.


There were stories that Buckingham Palace wanted to take charge of the Thomas Markle situation by "bringing him into the fold" and "keeping him close" like they did with Kate's embarrassing uncle.  Not that they cared about him, but I guess they know how to keep loose cannons in line with access and perks.  Meghan apparently rejected that solution and insisted on handling it her own way.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> There were stories that Buckingham Palace wanted to take charge of the Thomas Markle situation by "bringing him into the fold" and "keeping him close" like they did with Kate's embarrassing uncle.  Not that they cared about him, but I guess they know how to keep loose cannons in line with access and perks.  *Meghan apparently rejected that solution and insisted on handling it her own way.*



Eek. She really should have known better...!


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> Honestly, I ask with only a bit of sarcasm, *what on earth is granny doing? *Even if he is her pet, even if they have been dogged unfairly, even if everything is true - there is a much better way to handle this. This is rapidly turning into a dumpster fire.
> 
> As for the whole “meet the parents” thing - I don’t get the sense that the BRF really cares about in laws. Seems to me the view is, you marry us and your family can go away now.



The Queen doesn't have time for that foolishness. Her 35-year-old grandson has to step up and handle his own business. I give her credit for letting him sink or swim, it's the only way he will learn.


----------



## Clearblueskies

A1aGypsy said:


> I had the same thought about this law suit. It’s a terrible idea and will likely expose all the backroom negotiating that she has been doing to influence her reputation. Honestly, I ask with only a bit of sarcasm, what on earth is granny doing? Even if he is her pet, even if they have been dogged unfairly, even if everything is true - there is a much better way to handle this. This is rapidly turning into a dumpster fire.
> 
> As for the whole “meet the parents” thing - I don’t get the sense that the BRF really cares about in laws. Seems to me the view is, you marry us and your family can go away now.


I think this court case could get very messy indeed.  But I don’t see how it can be handled better if the principals keep overruling their advisors and blindsiding senior members of the Royal Family.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> You're saying you don't believe William will ever be king. I must have missed something. What are you basing that on?


I'm curious too....Charles won't be king until he's at least in his 70's.  add 20 years to that and william


Clearblueskies said:


> I think this court case could get very messy indeed.  But I don’t see how it can be handled better if the principals keep overruling their advisors and blindsiding senior members of the Royal Family.


I'll bet it it looks like its going to get messy for the duchess the lawyers will find a way to settle it


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> I'm curious too....Charles won't be king until he's at least in his 70's.  add 20 years to that and william
> 
> I'll bet it it looks like its going to get messy for the duchess they lawyers will find a way to settle it


Charles is 70!


----------



## Flatsy

My theory is that the longer the Queen and Prince Charles live, the better it is for the monarchy.  If Charles is still King at age 90, that's going to be good for William and Kate.  I think what people like about the monarchy is the safety, security, comfort, steadfastness, and tradition.  I think that people are comforted by the fact that the Queen is a zillion years old and still holding fast in Buckingham Palace.

When the time comes for Charles to be King, he will be a kindly old man who has been around everyone's whole life.  No reason to go through the trouble of overthrowing him just because decades ago he went through a messy divorce.

Likewise, I think the longer William and Kate have to become entrenched in the public consciousness, the more people will accept them on the throne.  A couple of young whippersnappers taking over the throne seems like a much shakier proposition to me.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Charles is 70!


that was strange....I started that post about charles and abandoned it.  It came up when I posted this morning about Meghan.  anyway, yes, Charles is 70 and not getting the "job" yet.  assuming he survives long enough and the queen doesn't live past her 90's, he will be king in his 70's.....so maybe William would be king in his 60's


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> that was strange....I started that post about charles and abandoned it.  It came up when I posted this morning about Meghan.  anyway, yes, Charles is 70 and not getting the "job" yet.  assuming he survives long enough and the queen doesn't live past her 90's, he will be king in his 70's.....so maybe William would be king in his 60's


It’s happened to me before, you can delete stuff and for some reason it comes back!


----------



## bag-mania

That family is blessed with a long life span. The Queen's mother lived to be 101 and Elizabeth appears to be doing well at 93.

Elizabeth was only 26 when she took the throne. Her grandchildren are all older than that. Charles will definitely be a short-timer compared to his mother.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I am enjoying all of your theories!
> 
> I think it is really, really difficult to speculate on her relationship with her dad unless you have had a similar relationship with a narcissistic parent. They can be a real roller coaster ride. One minute things are fine and the next they explode and become completely unreasonable and unmanageable despite all attempts to smooth things over. It gets worse as they get older. You simply cannot negotiate or reason with them when they are in their narcissistic state. It is exhausting and can really have a destructive effect which is why many people cut from their life a narcissistic parent.
> 
> The relationship with the press is going to be a challenge. I get that their style and approach differs greatly from Will, Kate... But it may be time to take a page out of their book for a while to calm the frenzy.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOO true; this was my father big-time.  But, it also somewhat explains Thomas' need to "defend" myself .. hear me out.  When I would expose the crap that my father pulled, he would then go into overdrive to "explain" HIS SITUATION to all that heard my side of the story .. this is not unusual.  Even when I had the "paperwork", he still told stories .. and alas, my father was very good at that.  Most folks really didn't know him (even my oldest sister) .. UNTIL he pulled a similar stunt on them .. and ONLY at that time would they say to me "WOW - you were right!".  I'm not saying by any means that Thomas was correct in his actions; it just seems to me that he might be that type of person.


----------



## threadbender

Clearblueskies said:


> If they felt her father was being exploited why didn’t they come to his aid?  I don’t get it.  They get on best with people that don’t know them seems to me.
> I heard yesterday that since Meghan is still a US citizen they’ll have to pay tax to the US govt on her money AND his.  Perhaps that’s why hel’s in such a foul mood!  I wonder if this includes property they’ve been given which the UK taxpayer stumped up for?



I imagine they have tax accountants who make sure that only income earned in the US or taxable by the US, will be taxed. I doubt he is concerned about that. If you pay taxes in another country, that amount should be deducted from your US amount. Been a long while since I dealt with that sort of thing and, they certainly were not millionaires!I don't think they even consider any tax consequence of anything. lol


----------



## threadbender

A1aGypsy said:


> This sounds LOVELY


It was! Just up and go to Baja whenever we wanted. Margaritas, music, sunsets, it was great. And then there were bars like Papas and Beer where things were nuts and we loved it all. Man, I miss those days.

Sorry for being OT


----------



## threadbender

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s happened to me before, you can delete stuff and for some reason it comes back!



Happens to me all the time! I have to make sure to delete but still post something. Even a day later, it will be there! lol


----------



## Flatsy

I don't think Meghan and Harry need to worry about US taxes.  I don't think the IRS is going to create an international incident to try to squeeze a few bucks out of a member of the British royal family who likely has little, if anything, that qualifies as taxable income.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> _It was doomed because it was so half hearted on her part.  Harry could and should have met Thomas prior to the wedding, there are no reasonable excuses other than that she wasn’t keen for it happen.  It’s not as if it were a simple wedding in a small country church - it was an event being televised to millions across the world - and he was being expected to play an active role in it.  It’s unbelievable when you think about it._



We have no idea whether Thomas not meeting Harry was due to his own reluctance or behavior.  Once again Thomas is being treated like a child with no agency. If he wanted to meet Harry he could have made it happen on his end as well. Planes go both ways. Since he was already hitting Meghan up for money I’m she would have paid for the tickets.



> She airbrushes her past from her life every time she moves on. I find that very strange - apparently the first husband is still non-plussed as to why the marriage ended.



what does this even mean?What has  Meghan airbrushed from her life?  Don’t we all move on from past relationships? Meghan’s first marriage ended when she had to move to Toronto for “Suits” full time. Neither her husband or ex-boyfriend have anything bad to say about Meghan. Her first husband has moved on and married an heiress.

_



			The excuses for Meghan’s behaviour keep coming, but labelling him as unsafe around Archie or red flagging him for living a quiet life (doesn’t Doria?) are deeply distasteful and sound increasingly desperate.
		
Click to expand...

_
The excuses for Thomas’s behavior keep coming. I believe his first wife account of his a abusive behavior because she has no reason to lie and his children apart from Meghan all have issues with child neglect and domestic abuse which they likely learned from him.  Does living living a quiet life mean talking to tabloids for money and being alienated from
almost his entire family save the daughter who —like Thomas — is eager to financially capitalize off Meghan via tabloids?

What dictates that Thomas feelings come before meghan’s, his actions are her responsibility, and that she must endure whatever he dishes out to her even if it compromises the safety of her husband and baby?


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I don't think Meghan and Harry need to worry about US taxes.  I don't think the IRS is going to create an international incident to try to squeeze a few bucks out of a member of the British royal family who likely has little, if anything, that qualifies as taxable income.



Suits ran for more than 5 years and went into syndication. Meghan made $50,000 per episode ($500,000 per year). Meghan would get residuals from that. If she had any real estate or investment income that would be subject to taxes too.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Just in time for the weekend  (courtesy of Laser L. at LSA, I have to add) 

https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...ry-sues-the-sun-and-mirror-in-war-on-tabloids

*PRINCE Harry is suing the UK tabloid papers of both Rupert Murdoch and their industry rivals Mirror Group Newspapers for allegedly hacking his phone, Byline Investigates can exclusively reveal.*
_
In a major escalation of his war on Fleet Street, the 35-year-old Duke of Sussex filed documents at the High Court in London last Friday, September 27, via his lawyers *******s LLP alleging both news groups misused his private information for stories.

It raises for the first time the possibility of a serving member of the Royal family entering the witness box in trials against some of the most powerful media organisations in the world._


----------



## chicaloca

daisychainz said:


> And the fact Doria is living alone in Los Angeles away from her only child and grandchild ... is that a red flag that she is a very difficult person or possibly anti-social?



Doria doesn’t have any history of abusing a prior spouse. She also isn’t estranged from her daughter and grandchild nor is she selling her daughter out to the tabloids. She’s gainfully employed and just ran a marathon for charity. So no, she doesn’t have any red flags.


----------



## Flatsy

A retired, 73 year old man with heart problems is supposed to travel thousands of miles to meet his daughter's boyfriend/fiance instead of the other way around?  That's not how "meeting the parents" works in any families I know. 



chicaloca said:


> The excuses for Thomas’s behavior keep coming. I believe his first wife account of his a abusive behavior because she has no reason to lie and his children apart from Meghan all have issues with child neglect and domestic abuse which they likely learned from him.


Thomas's ex-wife made the rounds of multiple tabloids to tell her sensational story.  It's quite possible she was paid to do so.  When former friends of Meghan have talked to the tabloids about her (such as Ninaki Priddy), they are considered to have no credibility.  Why is that not true of the ex-wife?  There is clearly a different standard applied when someone has something bad to say about Meghan.

Either way, what the ex-wife said did not point to Thomas being someone who poses danger to children by being in their presence.  And I'm someone who thinks he's terrible and that Meghan should keep herself and her child away from him.  But not because he's abusive in the way you are implying.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> If they felt her father was being exploited why didn’t they come to his aid?  I don’t get it.  They get on best with people that don’t know them seems to me.
> I heard yesterday that since Meghan is still a US citizen they’ll have to pay tax to the US govt on her money AND his.  Perhaps that’s why he’s in such a foul mood!  I wonder if this includes property they’ve been given which the UK taxpayer stumped up for?



How about If Thomas loved his daughter and a tabloid came knocking he could have simply said “Sorry I’m not going to sell out my daughter?” This is the absolute simplest solution.Thomas then takes accountability for his behavior like an adult and his daughter doesn’t have to bribe and babysit him to act like a normal loving  father.


----------



## chicaloca

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Just in time for the weekend  (courtesy of Laser L. at LSA, I have to add)
> 
> https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...ry-sues-the-sun-and-mirror-in-war-on-tabloids
> 
> *PRINCE Harry is suing the UK tabloid papers of both Rupert Murdoch and their industry rivals Mirror Group Newspapers for allegedly hacking his phone, Byline Investigates can exclusively reveal.*
> _
> In a major escalation of his war on Fleet Street, the 35-year-old Duke of Sussex filed documents at the High Court in London last Friday, September 27, via his lawyers *******s LLP alleging both news groups misused his private information for stories.
> 
> It raises for the first time the possibility of a serving member of the Royal family entering the witness box in trials against some of the most powerful media organisations in the world._



Wow. So should Harry have just let  phone hacking  slide since the tour was successful and all?

The Sussex lawyers have been building their case for months. I think there will be a settlement.


----------



## threadbender

This is such a shame. The Africa visit was such a positive and, seemingly, happy event. Why could they not wait even a week longer to go after the press?
Harry is looking, to some, as heroic and protective but, mostly, he is coming across as headstrong and entitled.
I really would like to see this little family succeed and be happy. Being in the BRF is a job. Just do your job or find something else you prefer to do. They could leave. They have enough money to work for their foundations and live a life they choose. So, they need to decide what is best for them.


----------



## bag-mania

It will be open season on the Sussexes. If they think they had problems before, wait until the tabloids and especially the legitimate media responds to what they will perceive as a Harry and Meghan war on journalism. Both of the them had better lead squeaky clean lives because there will be plenty more writers out there digging for dirt, past and present.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> A retired, 73 year old man with heart problems is supposed to travel thousands of miles to meet his daughter's boyfriend/fiance instead of the other way around?  That's not how "meeting the parents" works in any families I know.
> 
> 
> Thomas's ex-wife made the rounds of multiple tabloids to tell her sensational story.  It's quite possible she was paid to do so.  When former friends of Meghan have talked to the tabloids about her (such as Ninaki Priddy), they are considered to have no credibility.  Why is that not true of the ex-wife?  There is clearly a different standard applied when someone has something bad to say about Meghan.
> 
> Either way, what the ex-wife said did not point to Thomas being someone who poses danger to children by being in their presence.  And I'm someone who thinks he's terrible and that Meghan should keep herself and her child away from him.  But not because he's abusive in the way you are implying.


Yep, whatever anyone thinks of him (or H&M) it’s not right to fling child abuse accusations around.  It’s extrapolating things much too far.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> A retired, 73 year old man with heart problems is supposed to travel thousands of miles to meet his daughter's boyfriend/fiance instead of the other way around?  That's not how "meeting the parents" works in any families I know.
> 
> Thomas's ex-wife made the rounds of multiple tabloids to tell her sensational story.  It's quite possible she was paid to do so.  When former friends of Meghan have talked to the tabloids about her (such as Ninaki Priddy), they are considered to have no credibility.  Why is that not true of the ex-wife?  *There is clearly a different standard applied when someone has something bad to say about Meghan*.



That's how this whole thread goes. Anything critical of Meghan has to be sourced while any random positive comments can just be pulled out of the air. And yeah, I'm sure Thomas could have just knocked on the palace gates and met with Harry at his leisure 

Doria should be teaching this yoga class on how to bend and stretch to make excuses for anything Meghan does.


----------



## chicaloca

bag-mania said:


> It will be open season on the Sussexes. If they think they had problems before, wait until the tabloids and especially the legitimate media responds to what they will perceive as a Harry and Meghan war on journalism. Both of the them had better lead squeaky clean lives because there will be plenty more writers out there digging for dirt, past and present.




Meghan has already been thoroughly vetted by the media and sold out by anyone who had the ability. The media has already harassed her family, friends, ex-neighbors and coworkers. They’ve got nothing on her. She’ll be fine.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I can't wait for the yachting stories to drop


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Just in time for the weekend  (courtesy of Laser L. at LSA, I have to add)
> 
> https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...ry-sues-the-sun-and-mirror-in-war-on-tabloids
> 
> *PRINCE Harry is suing the UK tabloid papers of both Rupert Murdoch and their industry rivals Mirror Group Newspapers for allegedly hacking his phone, Byline Investigates can exclusively reveal.*
> _
> In a major escalation of his war on Fleet Street, the 35-year-old Duke of Sussex filed documents at the High Court in London last Friday, September 27, via his lawyers *******s LLP alleging both news groups misused his private information for stories.
> 
> It raises for the first time the possibility of a serving member of the Royal family entering the witness box in trials against some of the most powerful media organisations in the world._


Filed the same day, but under a different law firm and with no crazy manifesto posted for the world to see.

Looks like one was filed as a distraction for the real story and they're trying to get out in front of something  I'm here for it.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> That's how this whole thread goes. Anything critical of Meghan has to be sourced while any random positive comments can just be pulled out of the air.
> .





mrsinsyder said:


> I can't wait for the yachting stories to drop



There’s an irony in the second comment coming coming after  the first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Suits ran for more than 5 years and went into syndication. Meghan made $50,000 per episode ($500,000 per year). Meghan would get residuals from that. If she had any real estate or investment income that would be subject to taxes too.


The discussion was about the compensation Meghan gets as a member of the royal family in the form of things like home renovation, clothing, etc.  I don't think the IRS is going to attempt to go after that and portray it as taxable income.  I believe Meghan will file her taxes with the help of expert accountants and the IRS will accept her filing the way it is.   

Even adding Suits money and the royal compensation together makes Meghan the type of big fish the IRS would find it worthwhile to quibble with.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> There’s an irony in the second comment coming coming after  the first.


Still not taking your bait, but you can keep at it if you'd like


----------



## chicaloca

If Piers Morgan is involved the the lawsuit then the offense pre-dates Harry’s marriage to Meghan.

I wonder if Piers’s obvious obsession with Meghan will now be have to be muzzled.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I wonder if Piers’s obvious obsession with Meghan will now be have to be muzzled.


As in a legal muzzle?  In what way would a lawsuit about phone hacking take away the right of a TV personality to give his opinions about a celebrity?


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan and Harry will be in the best position to capitalize post-monarchy and might actually be better off.  They have established goodwill and popularity beyond the UK that will serve them well if they leave the firm.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> As in a legal muzzle?  In what way would a lawsuit about phone hacking take away the right of a TV personality to give his opinions about a celebrity?



If Piers is named in the lawsuit I’m sure his employer may want him to keep his mouth shut so as not to incriminate himself or give any lawsuit further ammunition.


----------



## Flatsy

Piers will probably be advised by his lawyers not to address the phone hacking allegation which dates back 20 years.  I don't think this will intimidate him into piping down with his opinions about Meghan - although retaliation for those opinions was probably at the forefront of Harry's mind when he filed the suit.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> Piers will probably be advised by his lawyers not to address the phone hacking allegation which dates back 20 years.  I don't think this will intimidate him into piping down with his opinions about Meghan - although retaliation for those opinions was probably at the forefront of Harry's mind when he filed the suit.


I’m puzzled about this.  Is Harry really dragging out a 20 year old story, or is it a new hacking accusation?  Or is a distraction from something we don’t know about?


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> Meghan and Harry will be in the best position to capitalize post-monarchy and might actually be better off.  They have established goodwill and popularity beyond the UK that will serve them well if they leave the firm.


I don't think she will want to give up her "princess" status 
she worked too hard for it


----------



## bag-mania

chicaloca said:


> Meghan has already been thoroughly vetted by the media and sold out by anyone who had the ability. The media has already harassed her family, friends, ex-neighbors and coworkers. They’ve got nothing on her. She’ll be fine.



Never say never. The teenage boyfriend she lost her virginity to might want to make a few bucks. There is always something unpleasant that can be revealed if the people looking for it are motivated enough.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Never say never. The teenage boyfriend she lost her virginity to might want to make a few bucks. There is always something unpleasant that can be revealed if the people looking for it are motivated enough.


How ridiculous for anyone to suggest we know everything about Meghan and everything that's left is only good stories.

There's already a report about "Meghan's Mirror" ramping up and some receipts about how they know which designer she's wearing so quickly 

It's the cover-up that nails you, not always the crime.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> I don't think she will want to give up her "princess" status
> she worked too hard for it


Harry won’t leave the shelter of the Royal Family, not in a million years, although at this rate they might boot him out


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry won’t leave the shelter of the Royal Family, not in a million years, although at this rate they might boot him out


Nope. If they _really_ wanted all the privacy and freedom they claim, this is exactly what they would have done. But living off the public dime is way too appealing. Suits residuals don't buy a lot of $90,000 Dior muumuus.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Nope. If they _really_ wanted all the privacy and freedom they claim, this is exactly what they would have done. But living off the public dime is way too appealing. Suits residuals don't buy a lot of $90,000 Dior muumuus.


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m puzzled about this. Is Harry really dragging out a 20 year old story, or is it a new hacking accusation? Or is a distraction from something we don’t know about?


Not new.  He's dredging up alleged phone hacking from a period of time 15-20 years ago for the purpose of retaliating against Piers Morgan (then-editor of a Rupert Murdoch owned publication) for not liking his wife. 

Harry let other celebrities put themselves on the line back in 2004 to put an end to the hacking and put News of the World out of business. Now 15 years later, he suddenly remembered he forgot to get his own damages.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Now 15 years later, he suddenly remembered he forgot to get his own damages.



The press have something he's trying to hide.


----------



## threadbender

I guess I don't get it.
IMHO, it would not be that difficult to gain positive press. Heck, they were, for the most part, receiving kudos on this trip. Yeah, a couple of hiccups but, really, for the most part, it was a nice, great optics-friendly tour. Archie is a hit. Come on, he is adorable. So, why break out the big stick and swing?
If nothing  else, the timing is really poorly chosen. And, going after an old story does make one wonder what the real story is. Not clever.
I just don't get it. lol Enjoy the ride! Help your causes, spend time with your family, ignore those you don't care for. If necessary, be polite and carry on. But, temper tantrums or being vengeful doesn't reflect well. And, it simply gives them the attention they want. Does it really matter what threadbender in Podunk USA thinks of you? No, of course not. When the angry responses stop, then it isn't fun any more.
Don't get me wrong. I will defend my family, if necessary. But, I would come up with a better strategy in their shoes.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> The press have something he's trying to hide.


I don't think so.  This lawsuit will most likely require him to make public the private information that was obtained via phone hacking.  So he will actually be spilling personal information on himself.  But he was so young back then, I don't think there's anything juicy to be revealed.  Certainly not anything that people would still care about in 2019.

He's just dredging it up as a way to attack Piers Morgan.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> I don't think so.  This lawsuit will most likely require him to make public the private information that was obtained via phone hacking.  So he will actually be spilling personal information on himself.  But he was so young back then, I don't think there's anything juicy to be revealed.  Certainly not anything that people would still care about in 2019.
> 
> He's just dredging it up as a way to attack Piers Morgan.


There's some more details out - DailyMail is saying that the time frame of the hacking he's alleging in this suit is unknown - the wording is all over the place?

_Prince Harry, 35, filed papers at the High Court, Buckingham Palace today confirmed.  

A royal source confirmed Harry had filed the documents 'regarding the illegal interception of voicemail messages' but could not comment further.  

It is not yet known when the duke's allegations date from as the details of his claim have not yet been made public._


----------



## threadbender

Just making the target bigger. I am beginning to think they enjoy the negative attention.


----------



## A1aGypsy

So... who actually leaves any voice mails nowadays, much less juicy ones? And why is Harry speaking for MM? Does she not have a voice? 

Dumpster. Fire.


----------



## Flatsy

threadbender said:


> Just making the target bigger. I am beginning to think they enjoy the negative attention.


I don't know, but I've got friends IRL who exist in a constant state of drama.  Always battling somebody, always threatening legal action against doctors/dentists/mechanics/neighbors that have wronged them, always having turbulent relationships with loved ones, family, friends.   They tell me their side and I'm always thinking to myself, "Yeeeeah, technically....But is this worth it?"

Harry and Meghan do remind me of those people.  And there is always someone else to pin the blame on if you are so inclined, but it's the two of them who are constantly surrounded by the drama cloud.


----------



## threadbender

I can understand a bit why Harry wants to defend his wife. That said, Meghan has always been portrayed as an extremely strong woman who can handle her own battles. I imagine they decided that it would be better accepted if he is seen as being the defender and not putting Meghan into the line of fire. And, if the latest is indeed about a rather ancient event, it doesn't concern her anyway.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm thinking the lawsuit is not so much about rehashing an ancient event as it is about serving as a warning to the media about future stories they may wish to report. The tabloids need to decide whether their stories are worth paying their lawyers to battle a litigious prince.


----------



## threadbender

Wonder how much the BRF knew about all of this. And, who are the other parties in the voice mail?
I hope he has thought this all through, carefully. When someone goes to court, often, the core issue is minor in comparison to everything that comes out in discovery and depositions. Once out of the bottle......
However, I would imagine his legal counsel has figured all of that out and has determined that it will be fine.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> Suits ran for more than 5 years and went into syndication. Meghan made $50,000 per episode ($500,000 per year). Meghan would get residuals from that. If she had any real estate or investment income that would be subject to taxes too.





chicaloca said:


> Meghan has already been thoroughly vetted by the media and sold out by anyone who had the ability. The media has already harassed her family, friends, ex-neighbors and coworkers. They’ve got nothing on her. She’ll be fine.


How do you know all this? Sincerely curious.  You state things as facts, you even know her salary, so I assume they are facts and not just opinions.  Do you mind telling us where you get your information from?

Again, I'm not being snarky, just questioning -- would love to know.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> The discussion was about the compensation Meghan gets as a member of the royal family in the form of things like home renovation, clothing, etc.  I don't think the IRS is going to attempt to go after that and portray it as taxable income.  I believe Meghan will file her taxes with the help of expert accountants and the IRS will accept her filing the way it is.
> 
> Even adding Suits money and the royal compensation together makes Meghan the type of big fish the IRS would find it worthwhile to quibble with.



The IRS can get their grubby little hands on all sorts of stuff where Meghan and the baby are concerned. 

*https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/08/uk/meghan-harry-royal-baby-us-tax-intl-gbr/index.html*

When will she officially no longer be a US citizen?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Never say never. The teenage boyfriend she lost her virginity to might want to make a few bucks. There is always something unpleasant that can be revealed if the people looking for it are motivated enough.


The latest conspiracy theory is that H&M (well, mostly Meg) have something much bigger to hide and they are preemptively tossing out lawsuits to keep the more interesting, but private thing from coming out.

It's just a letter or video, but something someone sold, is the latest guess.


----------



## threadbender

Jayne1 said:


> The latest conspiracy theory is that H&M (well, mostly Meg) have something much bigger to hide and they are preemptively tossing out lawsuits to keep the more interesting, but private thing from coming out.
> 
> It's just a letter or video, but something someone sold, is the latest guess.



It would behoove them to look more sympathetic than being a bull in a china shop. Or, they should release the info themselves and spin it. If it is the case that there is some "bombshell" out there. I hate that word, by the way. lol


----------



## caramelize126

If this is the nonsense that they are choosing to go after with litigation ( ancient voicemails, car park instructions,etc.) it makes me wonder if there must be some truth in everything else is that has bit by bit chipped and ruined their reputation as of late. Or else, why wouldn’t they choose to go after those stories? Does make you wonder if this is all a distraction to cover something much much juicier....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

chicaloca said:


> Meghan and Harry will be in the best position to capitalize post-monarchy and might actually be better off.  They have established goodwill and popularity beyond the UK that will serve them well if they leave the firm.



Lol not sure where you live but they are not the most popular in England right now... their only choice would be to come to America where their PR has a lot of more control of the stories being released and they can live like the famous celebrities they seem to aspire to.


----------



## Clearblueskies

You know what?  They are so fortunate, they have every privilege going, are blessed with good health, and a new baby.  Life’s too short to waste time chasing old grudges and wallowing in bitterness.  Too short to chase fame for that matter.  I don’t know what Harry’s trying to achieve here or whether there really is something that’s being masked by all this litigation, but what a waste.


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> Lol not sure where you live but they are not the most popular in England right now... their only choice would be to come to America where their PR has a lot of more control of the stories being released and they can live like the famous celebrities they seem to aspire to.


You’re not kidding


----------



## bag-mania

This thread aside, does the average person follow what Harry and Meghan are doing? I never hear about them outside of here.


----------



## LittleStar88

I wonder if the press is having a really adverse affect on them personally - stressful to deal with. And I suppose Harry's experience watching what happened with his mother may have left a deep impression on him in a way that makes him sensitive to it and more reactive than someone without that experience.

Not to say the way they are handling it is better. I feel like it is just taking a stick to a hornet's nest and will push the press to be more persistent.

I've seen it mentioned - maybe quietly continuing about their business and with a stiff upper lip would garner better results. Weather it and keep moving forward without giving a reaction to it. Eventually the lack of attention may cause the press to move on to someone else.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> This thread aside, does the average person follow what Harry and Meghan are doing? I never hear about them outside of here.


They’re in the British press everyday for something or other, and now the court case is headline news.  I wish it were otherwise.


----------



## caramelize126

LittleStar88 said:


> I wonder if the press is having a really adverse affect on them personally - stressful to deal with. And I suppose Harry's experience watching what happened with his mother may have left a deep impression on him in a way that makes him sensitive to it and more reactive than someone without that experience.
> 
> Not to say the way they are handling it is better. I feel like it is just taking a stick to a hornet's nest and will push the press to be more persistent.
> 
> I've seen it mentioned - maybe quietly continuing about their business and with a stiff upper lip would garner better results. Weather it and keep moving forward without giving a reaction to it. Eventually the lack of attention may cause the press to move on to someone else.



I think it would be hard for anyone to ignore it. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is effecting them emotionally and maybe even putting a strain on their marriage. I think the problem is that they seem to be inviting a lot of the negative press themselves. They hired a PR company to put out positive stories, delete negative comments, etc. As a previous poster stated, this is just adding fuel to fire and increasing the dramatics. The royals have in the past kept a stiff upper lip and moved on. The stories fizzle eventually. But M&H are trying to play a game that they really can’t win.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I don't know, but I've got friends IRL who exist in a constant state of drama.  Always battling somebody, always threatening legal action against doctors/dentists/mechanics/neighbors that have wronged them, always having turbulent relationships with loved ones, family, friends.   They tell me their side and I'm always thinking to myself, "Yeeeeah, technically....But is this worth it?"
> 
> Harry and Meghan do remind me of those people.  And there is always someone else to pin the blame on if you are so inclined, but it's the two of them who are constantly surrounded by the drama cloud.


I have a friend like that.  sometimes I wonder if it makes her feel important to retain an attorney (even to sue someone who has no assets)


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> I wonder if the press is having a really adverse affect on them personally - stressful to deal with. And I suppose Harry's experience watching what happened with his mother may have left a deep impression on him in a way that makes him sensitive to it and more reactive than someone without that experience.
> 
> Not to say the way they are handling it is better. I feel like it is just taking a stick to a hornet's nest and will push the press to be more persistent.
> 
> I've seen it mentioned - maybe quietly continuing about their business and with a stiff upper lip would garner better results. Weather it and keep moving forward without giving a reaction to it. Eventually the lack of attention may cause the press to move on to someone else.


Diana brought most of that on herself, always calling the paps and telling them where she was going to be.  Even in Paris... posing on that yacht for them.  She said she hated the press and manipulated them at the same time. Surely Harry realizes how complicit his mother was? 

I'm saying this because I don't think he realizes she was no innocent victim. I think he's a bit screwed up that way.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan Markle vs the Tabloid Mob



> Markle’s ascendance was an inspiration to many black girls and women. Yet the duchess has acquired a virulent mob of media detractors, who provide a megaphone for attacks from estranged relatives, snipe at such non-offenses as Markle cradling her baby bump, and single her out for the luxurious lifestyle she married into — though she hardly invented British royalty and its costly trappings.
> 
> Perhaps a Department of Meghan Studies will someday ponder why Markle is endlessly jeered for things that win other royals applause, like wearing one-shoulder gowns and jewels, and expensive parties and vacations. Or explain how, after tabloid reports that Markle has brought discord into the royal family, the British monarchy remains strangely intact.



Perfect summary



> ]The trip was a reminder that the Meghan-and-Harry love story has put a modern face on British royalty and Britain’s long history of race-based colonial exploitation. In dismantling this image, Britain has far more to lose than the Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Opinion pieces are just that...


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Diana brought most of that on herself, always calling the paps and telling them where she was going to be.  Even in Paris... posing on that yacht for them.  She said she hated the press and manipulated them at the same time. Surely Harry realizes how complicit his mother was?
> 
> I'm saying this because I don't think he realizes she was no innocent victim. I think he's a bit screwed up that way.


understandable he would be screwed up considering the age at which his mother died.  I'm sure it left a huge mark


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> Diana brought most of that on herself, always calling the paps and telling them where she was going to be.  Even in Paris... posing on that yacht for them.  She said she hated the press and manipulated them at the same time. Surely Harry realizes how complicit his mother was?
> 
> I'm saying this because I don't think he realizes she was no innocent victim. I think he's a bit screwed up that way.



He has had far from a "normal" life and definitely not typical life experiences. Almost like being the "spare heir" resulted in less guidance after his mom passed and they simply looked the other way a lot of the time (got the pass that Will did not). I can imagine being born into the BRF + losing mom at a young age + privileges that few have access to = messed-up sense of reality and entitlement.

Maybe these later in life lessons will help to recalibrate that.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Diana brought most of that on herself, always calling the paps and telling them where she was going to be.  Even in Paris... posing on that yacht for them.  She said she hated the press and manipulated them at the same time. Surely Harry realizes how complicit his mother was?
> 
> I'm saying this because I don't think he realizes she was no innocent victim. I think he's a bit screwed up that way.



You really seem to strongly dislike Diana. I know when famous people die young they tend to be overly glorified for a time. And then, inevitably, there is a backlash against that person which goes way beyond anything they deserved. Diana was not a heroine, but she certainly wasn't a neurotic villain either. It is common for authors to write biographies several years after a famous person dies and then exaggerate events in order to sell more books. Everything people claim to know about Diana these days comes from such biographies. It works for the authors because dead people cannot sue them.


----------



## buffym

I wish them the best in their lawsuit. Hopefully more people will start suing the U.K. press. Their is a unnecessary vicious. I really hope Gareth Thomas would sue the newspaper that told his parents he had HIV. Public figures should be questioned but no one should be bullied.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.





A take on the timing of the lawsuits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> He has had far from a "normal" life and definitely not typical life experiences. Almost like being the "spare heir" resulted in less guidance after his mom passed and they simply looked the other way a lot of the time (got the pass that Will did not). I can imagine being born into the BRF + losing mom at a young age + privileges that few have access to = messed-up sense of reality and entitlement.
> 
> Maybe these later in life lessons will help to recalibrate that.


Good points and I like that stiff upper lip suggestion you made earlier - which is what I expect from the old guard.  Doesn't the palace usually not respond to rumours and gossip.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> You really seem to strongly dislike Diana. I know when famous people die young they tend to be overly glorified for a time. And then, inevitably, there is a backlash against that person which goes way beyond anything they deserved. Diana was not a heroine, but she certainly wasn't a neurotic villain either. It is common for authors to write biographies several years after a famous person dies and then exaggerate events in order to sell more books. Everything people claim to know about Diana these days comes from such biographies. It works for the authors because dead people cannot sue them.



Strongly dislike? No. Watched her erratic behaviour over the years?  Yes.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Strongly dislike? No. Watched her erratic behaviour over the years?  Yes.



I think a number of us watched her over the years. Personally, I didn’t take away such a negative image.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> I wish them the best in their lawsuit. Hopefully more people will start suing the U.K. press. Their is a unnecessary vicious. I really hope Gareth Thomas would sue the newspaper that told his parents he had HIV. Public figures should be questioned but no one should be bullied.
> 
> It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
> 
> View attachment 4557723
> View attachment 4557724
> 
> 
> A take on the timing of the lawsuits.
> 
> View attachment 4557725


These polls are not statistically significant.  2241 people were surveyed on the first survey quoted here, of whom 470 were definitely supportive.


----------



## chicaloca

buffym said:


> I wish them the best in their lawsuit. Hopefully more people will start suing the U.K. press. Their is a unnecessary vicious. I really hope Gareth Thomas would sue the newspaper that told his parents he had HIV. Public figures should be questioned but no one should be bullied.
> 
> It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
> 
> View attachment 4557723
> View attachment 4557724
> 
> 
> A take on the timing of the lawsuits.
> 
> View attachment 4557725



Harry and Meghan’s popularity remains high despite the false media narratives. I’m glad the public can see what a raw deal Meghan gets. I saw a poll that most people support their lawsuits. No one’s private letters should be published without consent nor should people’s phones be tapped in the name of news. 

I hope Sussexes will focus telling their own stories through Instagram. I enjoy their informative content without any negative spin or slander. 

This montage is beautiful as is the rousing music.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Opinion pieces are just that...


I feel we’re all being sucked into an “OMG it’s sooo awful for them” pit of weirdness when actually - they have it really, really good.  Let’s get back to reality here.  Wind back 12 months - they were riding on a crest of popularity following the wedding, and they’ve messed it up.  So the press will be critical of mistakes, big deal - address them, stop whining, learn, move on.


----------



## mdcx

Harry and Megs pop up quite regularly on magazine covers here in Australia. Lots of public interest in and goodwill towards the BRF here. Which is why Harry going on the attack seems so off.

Would not be surprised to hear rumours of a super-injunction involving H and M next, where the press are not only forbidden from talking about something, but forbidden from talking about it being forbidden


----------



## Welltraveled!

bag-mania said:


> This thread aside, does the average person follow what Harry and Meghan are doing? I never hear about them outside of here.



Not In my circle.  I only hear about them by forums or instagram.


----------



## threadbender

Welltraveled! said:


> Not In my circle.  I only hear about them by forums or instagram.


What is interesting to me is that I do read about them in quite a number of forums. Of all sorts. Not just gossip ones. I was somewhat shocked to read about them on a couple of news sites/forums. The comments were interesting.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> I feel we’re all being sucked into an “OMG it’s sooo awful for them” pit of weirdness when actually - they have it really, really good.  Let’s get back to reality here.  Wind back 12 months - they were riding on a crest of popularity following the wedding, and they’ve messed it up.  So the press will be critical of mistakes, big deal - address them, stop whining, learn, move on.


Yup. I reserve my sympathy for the homeless, the ill, refugees in camps, etc. I’m not crying over privileged royalty who have a small set of rules to play by and they’re set for life.


----------



## chicaloca

The smear campaign against Meghan started right after the success of their Oceania tour. Perhaps the announcement of the current lawsuit was timed to pre-empt a new post-tour smear. Harry astutely noted that the positive press for Meghan only exists when she is visible for public appearances and the press can get pics of her. The positivity magically disappears when the Sussexes retreat from the spotlight and Meghan is inaccessible.


----------



## Kodi325

mrsinsyder said:


> Yup. I reserve my sympathy for the homeless, the ill, refugees in camps, etc. I’m not crying over privileged royalty who have a small set of rules to play by and they’re set for life.


i don't disagree, but being set for life really allows for endless new ways to suffer. some cages are larger than others i suppose. 

Kodi-


----------



## Clearblueskies

Yeah right.  And Instagram.  Where everyone’s forever on holiday and the sun always shines, is not where I look for the news.


mrsinsyder said:


> Yup. I reserve my sympathy for the homeless, the ill, refugees in camps, etc. I’m not crying over privileged royalty who have a small set of rules to play by and they’re set for life.


----------



## threadbender

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah right.  And Instagram.  Where everyone’s forever on holiday and the sun always shines, is not where I look for the news.


Truly. More filters than a Starbucks.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

They are now suing more papers/media people?

"After revealing that Harry was pursuing legal action on Tuesday (October 1) for alleged misuse of private information, Buckingham Palace confirmed on Friday (October 4) that claims have been filed on behalf of the Duke of Sussex against News UK (The Sun‘s owner) and MGN (former The Mirror owner) for alleged illegal interception of voicemails."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

Can't help thinking of this :  "Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel"   Mark Twain


----------



## Grande Latte

Straight-Laced said:


> Can't help thinking of this :  "Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel"   Mark Twain



Totally agree. In modern, not so fancy English by Kylie Kardashian, it is "you can't win the Internet. You can't win press". Same idea.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Clearblueskies said:


> I feel we’re all being sucked into an “OMG it’s sooo awful for them” pit of weirdness when actually - they have it really, really good.  Let’s get back to reality here.  Wind back 12 months - they were riding on a crest of popularity following the wedding, and they’ve messed it up.  So the press will be critical of mistakes, big deal - address them, stop whining, learn, move on.


I agree, Harry and Meghan live at the top of the world, they have an access all areas, high security clearance life that Elton, Oprah and co could only dream of. Invitations to everything everywhere, and still young and fertile lol! Archie's the ultimate celebrity name to drop right now (yes Ellen, we do know you were one of the very first people from the 'outside world' to have a personal audience with wee Archie Mountbatten-Windsor OMG!!)
But their life isn't perfect, because no one's is.  Yes, they have some gilded cage challenges and then there's Harry's early trauma (which evidently is still a live issue).  At least they have all the comforts money and connections could ever bring.
And if the press has overstepped in these two instances we'll find out in due course. 
Interesting times! Popcorn emoji please


----------



## Straight-Laced

caramelize126 said:


> I think it would be hard for anyone to ignore it. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is effecting them emotionally and maybe even putting a strain on their marriage. I think the problem is that they seem to be inviting a lot of the negative press themselves. *They hired a PR company to put out positive stories, delete negative comments, etc. As a previous poster stated, this is just adding fuel to fire and increasing the dramatics. *The royals have in the past kept a stiff upper lip and moved on. The stories fizzle eventually. But M&H are trying to play a game that they really can’t win.


Yes and the British press like 'taking the Mickey' out of the Royals, it's part of what they do.  Harry in particular takes himself so seriously nowadays.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Jayne1 said:


> Diana brought most of that on herself, always calling the paps and telling them where she was going to be.  Even in Paris... posing on that yacht for them.  She said she hated the press and manipulated them at the same time. Surely Harry realizes how complicit his mother was?
> 
> I'm saying this because I don't think he realizes she was no innocent victim. I think he's a bit screwed up that way.


Harry sees his mother as a victim of the press and feels very intensely about it.  It's been noted many times that Harry doesn't only blame the press for stalking, harassing and chasing his beloved mother to her death, he's also haunted by images in his mind of her dying in the back of that car in the tunnel while photographers watched on and took photos ...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08...parazzi-for-photographing-dying-diana/8847758

Also I don't think he's screwed up but actually suffered severe trauma in his childhood that he still struggles to deal with sometimes.


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> Harry sees his mother as a victim of the press and feels very intensely about it.  It's been noted many times that Harry doesn't only blame the press for stalking, harassing and chasing his beloved mother to her death, he's also haunted by images in his mind of her dying in the back of that car in the tunnel while photographers watched on and took photos ...
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08...parazzi-for-photographing-dying-diana/8847758
> 
> Also I don't think he's screwed up but actually suffered severe trauma in his childhood that he still struggles to deal with sometimes.


Also he said he blew his mother off when she last called because he wanted to play with his cousins (something along those lines) so I can imagine the guilt. Although a perfectly fair thing to do... he was a child and didn't know it would be the last time.

I think he still has a lot of anger in him about lots of things.  Will can focus on being King one day and I think he stays more grounded.


----------



## myown

Flatsy said:


> As in a legal muzzle?  In what way would a lawsuit about phone hacking take away the right of a TV personality to give his opinions about a celebrity?


As a non British/American person, please someone tell me who the piers Morgan guy is and why he is so important to some posters here


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> How do you know all this? Sincerely curious.  You state things as facts, you even know her salary, so I assume they are facts and not just opinions.  Do you mind telling us where you get your information from?
> 
> Again, I'm not being snarky, just questioning -- would love to know.


Hollywood salary is mostly open to know for everyone. 
usually you can google the salary of most actors/actresses


----------



## MarieCurie

bag-mania said:


> Oh, okay. I thought I missed a William scandal.
> 
> Personally, I think the royal family will be around for generations to come. The people appear to love them, as well as all the tradition, pomp and pageantry.



Nah, the ghost of Rose is dead and has been successfully buried

Your thought could very well hold more water than mine because I thought we (South Africans) didn't care much about the royal family. I guess I was fooled because they were very well recieved and Meghan in particular seems to be very popular over here. 



Sharont2305 said:


> Given the ages of the Queen and Prince Charles William might even be King within the next 5 years!



Not if Charles is drinking whatever the Queen is drinking!


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Given the ages of the Queen and Prince Charles William might even be King within the next 5 years!


I hope not!


----------



## Sharont2305

MarieCurie said:


> Nah, the ghost of Rose is dead and has been successfully buried
> 
> Your thought could very well hold more water than mine because I thought we (South Africans) didn't care much about the royal family. I guess I was fooled because they were very well recieved and Meghan in particular seems to be very popular over here.
> 
> 
> 
> *Not if Charles is drinking whatever the Queen is drinking![*/QUOTE]



Hence why I said might lol


----------



## bag-mania

myown said:


> As a non British/American person, please someone tell me who the piers Morgan guy is and why he is so important to some posters here



He’s a tabloid journalist who has been particularly critical of Harry and Meghan. 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan


----------



## chicaloca

This is super tacky of the Middletons. Why don’t they use Louis or George’s names in their advertising? The Sussexes declined official royal merchandise for Archie so I can’t imagine they want his name attached to cheap party favors, 

The Middletons use Archie’s name to promote party products.




picture upload


----------



## Flatsy

myown said:


> As a non British/American person, please someone tell me who the piers Morgan guy is and why he is so important to some posters here


Piers Morgan used to be editor many years ago of the British tabloid The Daily Mirror, which is one of the publications Harry is suing for phone hacking.  Now he's a general TV personality, both in the US (he replaced Larry King for a few years on CNN) but mostly in Britain again (he hosts the morning program Good Morning Britain).  He's a big blowhard who likes to express confrontational opinions on twitter and on TV.

Meghan befriended Piers Morgan via social media when she was on Suits.  She messaged him that she was "a big fan".  They corresponded over social media for a period of time and she sent him advance copies of Suits episodes because he watched the show.  When Meghan went to Britain, she met up with Piers for drinks and tweeted about what a nice time she had with her friend.  

Later on the same trip, Meghan met Harry and immediately ghosted Piers and has never communicated with him again.  Piers now hates Meghan, and says she's a social climber who pretended to be his friend in order to get on his show, and then discarded him when she got involved with someone more important.  Piers now routinely denounces Meghan on his show and in opinion pieces he sometimes writes for The Daily Mail.


----------



## bag-mania

chicaloca said:


> This is super tacky of the Middletons. Why don’t they use Louis or George’s names in their advertising? The Sussexes declined official royal merchandise for Archie so I can’t imagine they want his name attached to cheap party favors,
> 
> The Middletons use Archie’s name to promote party products.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> picture upload



Geez, don’t overreact to every tabloid headline. As is often the case a little research shows things aren’t really the way they are being presented. First off, they do use the name George on their cake photos, as well as James, their own son. You also seem to be forgetting how Prince George told a woman that he was called Archie at the beginning of the year, months before H&M’s baby Archie was born. This was reported at that time. As it happens he was with Carole Middleton when he said it. So it’s more likely to have been inspired by what her grandson George said.

But a second string tabloid wanted to get all the Harry and Meghan fans panties in a twist so here we are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Piers Morgan used to be editor many years ago of the British tabloid The Daily Mirror, which is one of the publications Harry is suing for phone hacking.  Now he's a general TV personality, both in the US (he replaced Larry King for a few years on CNN) but mostly in Britain again (he hosts the morning program Good Morning Britain).  He's a big blowhard who likes to express confrontational opinions on twitter and on TV.
> 
> Meghan befriended Piers Morgan via social media when she was on Suits.  She messaged him that she was "a big fan".  They corresponded over social media for a period of time and she sent him advance copies of Suits episodes because he watched the show.  When Meghan went to Britain, she met up with Piers for drinks and tweeted about what a nice time she had with her friend.
> 
> Later on the same trip, Meghan met Harry and immediately ghosted Piers and has never communicated with him again.  Piers now hates Meghan, and says she's a social climber who pretended to be his friend in order to get on his show, and then discarded him when she got involved with someone more important.  Piers now routinely denounces Meghan on his show and in opinion pieces he sometimes writes for The Daily Mail.


I know Piers is widely viewed as pretty creepy but reading this, I does seem Meghan used him.  He was good enough for her until she found her prince


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> I don't know, but I've got friends IRL who exist in a constant state of drama.  Always battling somebody, always threatening legal action against doctors/dentists/mechanics/neighbors that have wronged them, always having turbulent relationships with loved ones, family, friends.   They tell me their side and I'm always thinking to myself, "Yeeeeah, technically....But is this worth it?"
> 
> Harry and Meghan do remind me of those people.  And there is always someone else to pin the blame on if you are so inclined, but it's the two of them who are constantly surrounded by the drama cloud.


I do think Harry and Meghan seek constant drama and attention. There isn’t one royal who hasn’t been vilified in a big way by the press at one time or another. They just keep their heads down and keep doing their work. They don’t comment. Harry has Diana’s need for constant attention I am afraid.


----------



## Lifeisgreat

sdkitty said:


> I know Piers is widely viewed as pretty creepy but reading this, I does seem Meghan used him.  He was good enough for her until she found her prince



Certainly possible.  Also possible that once she began seeing Harry, whose entire family has been on the receiving end of Morgan's vileness, she was helped to see what effect he has on those he decides are worthy of his disdain.  Not sure what she should have done at that point, but perhaps telling her friend Piers that she was conflicted by his treatment of her boyfriend and his family would have been worse than ghosting him.


----------



## myown

Flatsy said:


> Piers Morgan used to be editor many years ago of the British tabloid The Daily Mirror, which is one of the publications Harry is suing for phone hacking.  Now he's a general TV personality, both in the US (he replaced Larry King for a few years on CNN) but mostly in Britain again (he hosts the morning program Good Morning Britain).  He's a big blowhard who likes to express confrontational opinions on twitter and on TV.
> 
> Meghan befriended Piers Morgan via social media when she was on Suits.  She messaged him that she was "a big fan".  They corresponded over social media for a period of time and she sent him advance copies of Suits episodes because he watched the show.  When Meghan went to Britain, she met up with Piers for drinks and tweeted about what a nice time she had with her friend.
> 
> Later on the same trip, Meghan met Harry and immediately ghosted Piers and has never communicated with him again.  Piers now hates Meghan, and says she's a social climber who pretended to be his friend in order to get on his show, and then discarded him when she got involved with someone more important.  Piers now routinely denounces Meghan on his show and in opinion pieces he sometimes writes for The Daily Mail.


Thanks a lot!


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> I know Piers is widely viewed as pretty creepy but reading this, I does seem Meghan used him.  He was good enough for her until she found her prince


I wonder what Harry said that she ghosted him


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> I do think Harry and Meghan seek constant drama and attention. There isn’t one royal who hasn’t been vilified in a big way by the press at one time or another. They just keep their heads down and keep doing their work. They don’t comment. Harry has Diana’s need for constant attention I am afraid.


I think Meghan’s adoring all the attention, but whilst she’s having the time of her life, Harry is struggling with it IMO.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> This is super tacky of the Middletons. Why don’t they use Louis or George’s names in their advertising?


If such a petty and misleading article were written about Meghan - or, God forbid, her sainted mother - there would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth about the evil press and their vile hate campaign.  But when it's an opportunity to score a point on Kate, then suddenly it's all good.

If this inconsequential story about what junk the Middletons stock in their party supply store is truly worthy of discussion, it belongs in the Kate thread.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chagall said:


> I do think Harry and Meghan seek constant drama and attention. There isn’t one royal who hasn’t been vilified in a big way by the press at one time or another. They just keep their heads down and keep doing their work. They don’t comment. Harry has Diana’s need for constant attention I am afraid.


I don't know about Harry, exactly, but he sure married someone who has.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> Geez, don’t overreact to every tabloid headline. As is often the case a little research shows things aren’t really the way they are being presented. First off, they do use the name George on their cake photos, as well as James, their own son. You also seem to be forgetting how Prince George told a woman that he was called Archie at the beginning of the year, months before H&M’s baby Archie was born. This was reported at that time. As it happens he was with Carole Middleton when he said it. So it’s more likely to have been inspired by what her grandson George said.
> 
> But a second string tabloid wanted to get all the Harry and Meghan fans panties in a twist so here we are.


Thank you for the info. I forgot W&K:s oldest son used to call himself Archie. Months _before_ H&M:s son was even born...

Now who are the villains?!


----------



## myown

Clearblueskies said:


> I think Meghan’s adoring all the attention, but whilst she’s having the time of her life, Harry is struggling with it IMO.


Somehow I think it’s Harry who seeks the attention and does anything for articles

to me it feels like he married Meghan because he knew she will bring attention to him.


----------



## Chagall

myown said:


> Somehow I think it’s Harry who seeks the attention and does anything for articles


Even if it is Meghan who is the main drama queen Harry chose to jump in with both feet in going after the press like he has. I tend to think it’s both of them that desire the attention.


----------



## LuckyBitch

bag-mania said:


> This thread aside, does the average person follow what Harry and Meghan are doing? I never hear about them outside of here.



I've come to think of this thread as a parallel world which has absolutely nothing to do with reality.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

This thread inspired me to have a look at the tv-series The Windsors. And it's hilarious. They're all good but I think so far Wills, Charles, the York girls, Camilla, "Puppha" and Harry stand out. Looking forward to Anne and Meghan joining in the second series.


----------



## threadbender

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This thread inspired me to have a look at the tv-series The Windsors. And it's hilarious. They're all good but I think so far Wills, Charles, the York girls, Camilla, "Puppha" and Harry stand out. Looking forward to Anne and Meghan joining in the second series.


Darn, I don't have Netflix.


----------



## buffym

Someone stole the ribbon Meghan signed, hopefully they will return it and try not to sell it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

That is a shame.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> If such a petty and misleading article were written about Meghan - or, God forbid, her sainted mother - there would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth about the evil press and their vile hate campaign.


Speaking of her mother... I read she also calls the paps for a fee. Not much because there is minimal interest, but it makes sense when we see photos of her walking to the store or running a marathon.

She’s not important enough to have a pap stalk her daily routine so when we see a dog walk, it’s because she notified them of her availability.

Before anyone yells at me, _they all do it, _so no reason for her mom to not want to make some extra money a month too.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of her mother... I read she also calls the paps for a fee. Not much because there is minimal interest, but it makes sense when we see photos of her walking to the store or running a marathon.
> 
> She’s not important enough to have a pap stalk her daily routine so when we see a dog walk, it’s because she notified them of her availability.
> 
> Before anyone yells at me, _they all do it, _so no reason for her mom to not want to make some extra money a month too.


hard for me to imagine someone paying her for a picture


----------



## mrsinsyder

Saw this coming...


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Saw this coming...
> 
> View attachment 4558600


probably no excuse.....

Harry's branch of the royal family is almost turning into some sort of reality show.....sad


----------



## Tivo

Who cares if she “ghosted” Piers Morgan? He needs to be ghosted.

Sure, she’s a social climber. We know this. So is just about all of Hollywood.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> Saw this coming...
> 
> View attachment 4558600


No one could see _that _coming... 

How do H&M think they are going to come out on top in the public's eyes fighting a poorly 75-year old man who is after all her once doting dad who paid for her education and at least one of her weddings if I remember correctly, before he was abandoned by her unceremoniously and in public?  Unless Thomas Markle is proven to be an abusive monster, H&M are going to look like proper elder abusers when DM are finished with them.


----------



## mdcx

Harry and Megs hire firm known for super-injunctions rather than the normal firm used by BRF:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ruit-attack-dog-lawyers-used-rich-famous.html

I am starting to think Meghan was somehow orchestrated by Wills and Kate in order to make them look like lovely, kind, perfect saints because she certainly is having that effect!


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> No one could see _that _coming...
> 
> How do H&M think they are going to come out on top in the public's eyes fighting a poorly 75-year old man who is after all her once doting dad who paid for her education and at least one of her weddings if I remember correctly, before he was abandoned by her unceremoniously and in public?  Unless Thomas Markle is proven to be an abusive monster, H&M are going to look like proper elder abusers when DM are finished with them.


thomas markle is no saint but harry is losing cred IMO......I'd bet the queen would have told him to keep a stiff upper lip or something to that effect


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if the end goal is a super-injunction that forbids the press from mentioning Meghan Markle's family? Obviously she doesn't want them to stop mentioning her, but if her Dad and siblings could just go away that would suit her fine.
Even though the press are not supposed to talk about the existence of super injunctions, that does come out and then people get very curious about what they are trying to hide e.g. Ryan Giggs.


----------



## threadbender

That is the thing. Thomas Markle seemed to have faded away for the most part. The negative press recently was due to H&M's own actions. Then, the Africa tour appeared to be a happy one with positive optics. Archie is a cutie and things seemed to be going pretty smoothly with an occasional minor hiccup. 
Then, Harry goes all David Banner and a PR tsunami begins. Why?


----------



## mdcx

threadbender said:


> That is the thing. Thomas Markle seemed to have faded away for the most part. The negative press recently was due to H&M's own actions. Then, the Africa tour appeared to be a happy one with positive optics. Archie is a cutie and things seemed to be going pretty smoothly with an occasional minor hiccup.
> Then, Harry goes all David Banner and a PR tsunami begins. Why?


Yes exactly. It was all looking like it was turning a corner and Meghan had taken herself down a few pegs and got to grips with the role. She even showed Archie! People were starting to feel that maybe she was a bit okay again.
Perhaps that's what got to her? The idea that she had "given in" and did what the BRF wanted/expected. She may be someone who is only content with drama and lots of attention be it good or bad.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> Harry and Megs hire firm known for super-injunctions rather than the normal firm used by BRF:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ruit-attack-dog-lawyers-used-rich-famous.html
> 
> I am starting to think Meghan was somehow orchestrated by Wills and Kate in order to make them look like lovely, kind, perfect saints because she certainly is having that effect!


Yes, I've always suspected Kate is the true evil genius behind all of this    Honestly, Kate looks to be the kind of person you could entrust both your kids and grandparents with. Sophie too. 

All that royal know-how at her disposal but I guess Meghan knew better.


----------



## Morgan R

Thomas shouldn't have gone back to the Mail on Sunday. A take a way from that new article beyond the headline is that Thomas tried to call Meghan in front of a Mail on Sunday reporter. Why was he calling his daughter in the presence of a reporter? That makes it seem like Thomas and the Mail on Sunday were trying to have a record (possibly a recording) of their conversation. Quote from the new article with Thomas "It was also falsely stated that he never tried to contact Meghan after her wedding. Mr Markle showed this newspaper texts proving he had subsequently attempted to contact his daughter multiple times on the only number he has for her; a number from which both she and Prince Harry texted him in the run-up to the wedding.He called that number in the presence of a reporter from the MoS but an automatic voice recording said the line was ‘restricted or unavailable’."

The People article from earlier this year was literally bait for Thomas to sell the letter (because he has shown he will sell his daughter out). Thomas kept doing interviews saying Meghan didn't contact him that letter prove she did. But him also giving the letter to the Mail on Sunday is a copyright issue. People at the time were calling it Hollywood PR for the People article to happen and I said then this is Royals PR which could lead to legal ramifications (which it did because now there is a lawsuit).Will quote myself from February earlier this year from this very thread (quote came from with this post of mine: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...n-markle-thread.679793/page-410#post-32905084) when the People article happen and Thomas gave Mail on Sunday the letter.:
"Thomas releasing the letter one of the friends purposefully made the point to mention in the People article is Thomas "taking the bait" and falling for one of the Royals PR moves and actually helps give validation to the People article. Thomas leaking the letter can actually cause legal ramification for him and the Daily Fail. Under UK law, Meghan owns the copyright of the handwritten letter (though Thomas has sold pictures and notes from Meghan before at the time she wrote the notes and was in the pictures it was years before she was a member of the royal family). An article released today made note (even though the information was known) of how royals have taken legal action on numerous occasions in recent history to prevent the publication of personal details and have sued for breach of copyright (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...ed-letter-duchess-sussex-could-provoke-legal/)."


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> I wonder if the end goal is a super-injunction that forbids the press from mentioning Meghan Markle's family? Obviously she doesn't want them to stop mentioning her, but if her Dad and siblings could just go away that would suit her fine.
> Even though the press are not supposed to talk about the existence of super injunctions, that does come out and then people get very curious about what they are trying to hide e.g. Ryan Giggs.


On other forums they're discussing if H&M are trying to shut up both the press and the public discussing them unfavourably on social media.



mdcx said:


> Yes exactly. It was all looking like it was turning a corner and Meghan had taken herself down a few pegs and got to grips with the role. She even showed Archie! People were starting to feel that maybe she was a bit okay again.
> Perhaps that's what got to her? The idea that she had "given in" and did what the BRF wanted/expected. She may be someone who is only content with drama and lots of attention be it good or bad.


I think it was all for show and to manipulate the public's perception of them. I really think they are both that shortsighted and so above it all that they think a short trip to Africa acting all humanitarian on camera would erase any earlier bad publicity. This trip to SA was used as a launching pad for their own latest media drama (which was also most likely timed by them and their PR for maximum media exposure) taking away the focus totally from all the issues in Southern Africa they are supposedly so concerned about.

Oh, you and your babies have HIV? Here! Have two of Archie's used onesies with empowering messages and hear me quip some platitudes    The *horrific* levels of violence in SA be damned, Meghan and Harry's unparallelled suffering should of course take precedence.

No one was expecting them to solve the problems of SA. But I _was_ expecting them to show some deference until they had at least left the country.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of her mother... I read she also calls the paps for a fee. Not much because there is minimal interest, but it makes sense when we see photos of her walking to the store or running a marathon.
> 
> She’s not important enough to have a pap stalk her daily routine so when we see a dog walk, it’s because she notified them of her availability.
> 
> Before anyone yells at me, _they all do it, _so no reason for her mom to not want to make some extra money a month too.



Not everyone that the paps take pictures of calls them. Doris gone on with her daily life. I don’t see her actions as media hunger. 

As you said it is little media interest so why would the paps come if she called.

Plus, the press would love to announce Meghan’s mother set of pap pictures. They announced it about Thomas, especially since KP asked the tabloids to leave him alone.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> hard for me to imagine someone paying her for a picture


That's why I said it was reported she gets very little.  But something is better than nothing, I guess.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> I am starting to think Meghan was somehow orchestrated by Wills and Kate in order to make them look like lovely, kind, perfect saints because she certainly is having that effect!


I was just thinking how much I admire Kate and I never liked her that much before.  

That, and Andrew must be thrilled all this is going on.


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of her mother... I read she also calls the paps for a fee. Not much because there is minimal interest, but it makes sense when we see photos of her walking to the store or running a marathon.
> 
> She’s not important enough to have a pap stalk her daily routine so when we see a dog walk, it’s because she notified them of her availability.
> 
> Before anyone yells at me, _they all do it, _so no reason for her mom to not want to make some extra money a month too.


I thought it like the papps hanging around, no celeb in sight so let’s photograph that Markle mother coming this way, at least a picture

lol


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I wonder if the end goal is a super-injunction that forbids the press from mentioning Meghan Markle's family? Obviously she doesn't want them to stop mentioning her, but if her Dad and siblings could just go away that would suit her fine.
> Even though the press are not supposed to talk about the existence of super injunctions, that does come out and then people get very curious about what they are trying to hide e.g. Ryan Giggs.


A super injunction??  About what I wonder?  Makes me think there really might be something simmering in the background that hasn’t yet come out.  



threadbender said:


> That is the thing. Thomas Markle seemed to have faded away for the most part. The negative press recently was due to H&M's own actions. Then, the Africa tour appeared to be a happy one with positive optics. Archie is a cutie and things seemed to be going pretty smoothly with an occasional minor hiccup.
> Then, Harry goes all David Banner and a PR tsunami begins. Why?


It looks like overkill and the timing is a misjudgement.   The more I see of Harry doing things his way, the less of a likeable person he seems to be.


----------



## Straight-Laced

I think Harry is a very imperious man who would like to have all critical media shut down.
Media people he likes : Omid Scobie, Oprah and Ellen de Generes.  In other words,  sycophants and/or members of the rich gang who endlessly back slap one another and cheer each other on.

I also think he may have ongoing trauma problems relating to his mother's death.


----------



## doni

I cannot phantom why on earth would they choose to do this in the wake of a successful trip or who can be advising them... They are now getting such bad press across serious media all over Europe, let alone the tabloids... 
It is almost as if they relish the hate... In one way, I guess when things gets so vicious it allows you to ignore reasoned and legitimate criticism. If one can label the coverage as abusive, racist, irrational, excessive... it becomes easier to ignore it completely as a whole, so that concerns over things like the private jet trips or lavish baby showers are dismissed as just part of this abusive media campaign...


----------



## myown

I don’t think the only get negative press. Some even write its brave to not just ignore and fighting for their right


----------



## buffym

Not every UK paper is against the lawsuit. Harry isn’t asking for good press or trying to control the press he’s just saying don’t break the law.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork




----------



## mrsinsyder

Glad to see Daily Mail isn’t backing down. I hope they expose all her shenanigans and backdoor deals they make with the press.


----------



## buffym

If Harry and Meghan wins, it will interesting to see how the DM will deal with it. 

Harry is using the strategy his father used to win his case with his case.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Glad to see Daily Mail isn’t backing down. I hope they expose all her shenanigans and backdoor deals they make with the press.
> 
> View attachment 4558969
> View attachment 4558968


Oh no, I’d forgotten about the hand warmer and scented candles stories  there was quite a lot of cringe inducing stuff coming out from her friends wasn’t there?  I also remember the one about Doria’s supposed invite to Christmas, which was supposed to prompt an invitation I think.


----------



## Flatsy

Tivo said:


> Who cares if she “ghosted” Piers Morgan? He needs to be ghosted.
> 
> Sure, she’s a social climber. We know this. So is just about all of Hollywood.


Piers cares, which is why it's a problem for Meghan and Harry.  I don't feel sorry for Piers at all, and I doubt many people do, but it was very unwise to blatantly snub a person who has a daily morning show on which he routinely spouts his opinions about royals.  She made her bed on this one.


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R said:


> Thomas shouldn't have gone back to the Mail on Sunday. A take a way from that new article beyond the headline is that Thomas tried to call Meghan in front of a Mail on Sunday reporter. Why was he calling his daughter in the presence of a reporter? That makes it seem like Thomas and the Mail on Sunday were trying to have a record (possibly a recording) of their conversation.


It's believed that the Mail's defense is going to be that Meghan's friends (likely authorized by Meghan herself) made the letter a matter of public interest when they discussed it with People Magazine.  There's also the matter of Thomas claiming that Meghan's friends misrepresented the content of the letter, and therefore he had the right to defend himself. The Mail basically got Thomas to lay out their case for them. 

From what I read, Thomas showed the Mail his cell phone that contained a string of text messages from Meghan and Harry from before they cut off contact with him.  He then attempted to call that number in the Mail's presence, and it was a blocked number.  This was not done for the purpose of recording a phone call.  It was done to demonstrate that what Meghan wrote in the letter about how he hasn't tried to contact her and her "number hasn't changed" was false.  

I don't trust Thomas Markle, but I don't know how he really could have faked that one. 

I wonder if the Mail can make the case that Meghan's letter was written with the intention of it being published, because it clearly was.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> I think Harry is a very imperious man who would like to have all critical media shut down.
> Media people he likes : Omid Scobie, Oprah and Ellen de Generes.  In other words,  sycophants and/or members of the rich gang who endlessly back slap one another and cheer each other on.


What is exactly going on with Ellen and why is she always sticking up for them...


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

One could also say that Meghan's five friends breached Thomas Markle's privacy by making some of the content of a letter written to him public, while he had up until then kept silent about it.

@Jayne1 , don't they all share PR management somehow?


----------



## CeeJay

Man-oh-man, this is just looking more & more like a major sh!t-show!  Like some of the rest of you, I don't know why they just don't carry on .. stiff-upper lip and all that.


----------



## threadbender

So, let's say they win the suit. What will it accomplish? Money? Eh Privacy? LOL!!!!! Better stories? Oh, I cannot even breathe, laughing so hard!
I just don't get it. This non-story was back in the dust bins and has been brought back out. So much good press just waiting to come out and they decide to pick an old scab (sorry).
If the press is gagged, stories will still be released, and shared, one way or another. It is just the way it is right now. 
It would be so easy for H&M to become the IT couple, the beloved royals, the celebrity du jour. I am confused.


----------



## buffym

threadbender said:


> So, let's say they win the suit. What will it accomplish? Money? Eh Privacy? LOL!!!!! Better stories? Oh, I cannot even breathe, laughing so hard!
> I just don't get it. This non-story was back in the dust bins and has been brought back out. So much good press just waiting to come out and they decide to pick an old scab (sorry).
> If the press is gagged, stories will still be released, and shared, one way or another. It is just the way it is right now.
> It would be so easy for H&M to become the IT couple, the beloved royals, the celebrity du jour. I am confused.



They aren’t seeking to gag the press or positive or. That is why they picked a time when it was positive press so no one can say it was in response to bad press. 

It will mean no one else can sell letters or emails from them without their agreement. 

Each lawsuit is about the press doing something illegal, the hacking into voicemails or publishing Meghan’s letter she sent to her father. 

It crossed the line.


----------



## mrsinsyder

threadbender said:


> So, let's say they win the suit. What will it accomplish? Money? Eh Privacy? LOL!!!!! Better stories? Oh, I cannot even breathe, laughing so hard!
> I just don't get it. This non-story was back in the dust bins and has been brought back out. So much good press just waiting to come out and they decide to pick an old scab (sorry).
> If the press is gagged, stories will still be released, and shared, one way or another. It is just the way it is right now.
> It would be so easy for H&M to become the IT couple, the beloved royals, the celebrity du jour. I am confused.


ThEy’Re MaKiNg A sTaTeMeNT and dOiNg tHiNgS ThEiR wAy


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> They aren’t seeking to gag the press or positive or. That is why they picked a time when it was positive press so no one can say it was in response to bad press.
> 
> It will mean no one else can sell letters or emails from them without their agreement.
> 
> Each lawsuit is about the press doing something illegal, the hacking into voicemails or publishing Meghan’s letter she sent to her father.
> 
> It crossed the line.


What about her friends talking to US and People Magazines in the states? .. supposedly that was sanctioned by Meghan.  Doesn't that somewhat "_cross the line_" too?  Sorry, but I just don't think she can have it one way .. and as much as I'm not trying to defend Thomas, I know if someone accused me falsely (_as he is stating - and again .. we don't have the facts per se_), I know that I would *FOR SURE defend myself*!  To me, it just smells like H&M only want "glowing press" and they aren't really helping their cause right now.  There are 2 sides to every story .. just saying!


----------



## Flatsy

I've read that Harry and Meghan were waiting for the opportunity for one of the tabloids to do something they could take to court.  A "slam dunk".  The publishing of the letter was it.  This isn't really about copyright or hacking from 20 years ago, it's about punishing the press for not being nice enough to Meghan.  



threadbender said:


> So, let's say they win the suit. What will it accomplish? Money? Eh Privacy? LOL!!!!! Better stories? Oh, I cannot even breathe, laughing so hard!


As the Guardian said, M&H may win the battle, but it's extremely unlikely they will win the war by going down this path.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I've read that Harry and Meghan were waiting for the opportunity for one of the tabloids to do something they could take to court.  A "slam dunk".  The publishing of the letter was it.  This isn't really about copyright or hacking from 20 years ago, it's about punishing the press for not being nice enough to Meghan.
> 
> 
> As the Guardian said, M&H may win the battle, but it's extremely unlikely they will win the war by going down this path.


From what I've read about the Law Firm that they have engaged, while they have had some very high-profile successful cases, they have also had some very high-profile EPIC failures.  

At the end of the day, what is their objective .. truly??  That is what I would like to know; is it going to forever stop the 'negative' press (perceived or not) .. uh, I don't think so.  If anything, the negative press may go into overdrive .. just don't see a good resolution on this.


----------



## Flatsy

I'd really like to read about how Harry's family feels about this.  There seems to be no sign so far that anybody in the family is supporting them on this.  I wonder how much contact Harry and Meghan have even had with the family since Trooping the Colour, which was 4 months ago.  None that's known publicly, I believe.

I thought Harry's remark in his manifesto that they really need the public's support might have been because they have very little from the people around them.


----------



## mdcx

I would say the BRF are deeply concerned about what’s going on with H and M but probably staying silent out of respect/horror.

This is all starting to look very Fergie’s toe sucking incident.


----------



## mrsinsyder

IMO Harry’s family distancing themselves from this is exactly what Meghan is aiming for. Then it’s the “us against the world” thing. He’s going to wind up in an isolated place...


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> IMO Harry’s family distancing themselves from this is exactly what Meghan is aiming for. Then it’s the “us against the world” thing. He’s going to wind up in an isolated place...


she may want to be an icon like Diana (who sadly has that status partly due to her untimely death) but may end up being more like the Duchess of Windsor.......
time will tell


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> @Jayne1 , don't they all share PR management somehow?


No idea.  Does anyone know?

Is Piers sweating?  He may be up for the fight:


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I'd really like to read about how Harry's family feels about this.  There seems to be no sign so far that anybody in the family is supporting them on this.  I wonder how much contact Harry and Meghan have even had with the family since Trooping the Colour, which was 4 months ago.  None that's known publicly, I believe.
> 
> I thought Harry's remark in his manifesto that they really need the public's support might have been because they have very little from the people around them.


they are probably wishing he'd behave more like a royal
and he is probably wishing they would come out and accuse everyone who doesn't love his bride of being racist


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym




----------



## mrsinsyder

Their bots are so creepy


----------



## Flatsy

Every Mind Matters sounds like a good cause, but that video looks like an ad for the Church of Scientology.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan's bit sounds like an commercial for the latest anti anxiety meds (starts at 0:27)


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> What about her friends talking to US and People Magazines in the states? .. supposedly that was sanctioned by Meghan.  Doesn't that somewhat "_cross the line_" too?  Sorry, but I just don't think she can have it one way .. and as much as I'm not trying to defend Thomas, I know if someone accused me falsely (_as he is stating - and again .. we don't have the facts per se_), I know that I would *FOR SURE defend myself*!  To me, it just smells like H&M only want "glowing press" and they aren't really helping their cause right now.  There are 2 sides to every story .. just saying!



Thomas words are why I don’t feel sorry for him.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/ce...thomas-markle-good-morning-britain-interview/

"We talked about the plans and lot and I got advice on how to deal with the press, mostly. Meghan was putting together fittings for me, to make suits for me, shoe sizes. Actually it was all done in sort of secret, they would arrange for me to show up in Los Angeles or in Beverley Hills under different names to get a fitting."

Markle also said he was advised by Meghan and Harry not to speak to the press as it just "encourages them more.”

"Most part of it was, 'Don’t speak to the press.' The rest of the things were just be careful. But they were very emphatic about not giving any information to the press or talking to them, because it just encourages them more. So none the less, that’s what I tried to do."

This was a presentation to me to change my image because for the last year photographs of me were always derogatory. They would take pictures of my hand grabbing the beer, they’d take pictures of me getting in my car, taking the garbage out, they’d take pictures of me buying a toilet and making a big deal out of it. They took all kinds of pictures making me look negative. So I thought this would be a nice way of me improving my look. Well obviously that all went to hell. And I feel bad about it, I apologised for it and that’s all I can do. I can't do much beyond that. That was a mistake.

"I didn’t do this for money, I did this to change my image. For one whole year I was presented as a hermit hiding out in Mexico. I was looking to change my image and obviously that was a mistake that went wrong.

I spoke to them both and I apologised. I realised it was a serious mistake. But hard to take it back... They were very forgiving, it wasn’t that difficult. Both Harry and Meghan were very forgiving about it."

WHY HE DIDN'T ATTEND THE WEDDING

"Meghan said, 'Everything is ready for you. Harry said I have got one of my military friends to take care of you when you are here.' It was all set up. It was fine… Everything was booked.

"I couldn’t get over the fact that that had happened, all that stuff was working on me. I’ve got a bit of a heart condition. This pushed me a little further, I had heart palpitations and I had to drive at two in the morning to a hospital, they sent me to another little hospital and then they sent me to a bigger hospital and I had a heart attack.

"The hospital stabilised me… and after about a day and half in that hospital I said I felt better and I said I want to check out now because I want to go to the wedding... and I was fine, I felt really good until I got back home. I talked to Harry and Meghan, we were still set up to go, I was going to go the next day or the day after... at that stage I started getting heart palpitations and chest pains and I said I have to cancel. It’s because I didn’t take care of the heart problem before, so I had to get a friend to take me back to the hospital across the border in the States where I was told that my condition was very bad and they had to operate and I had heart surgery."

They were disappointed, Meghan cried I'm sure, she did cry. And they both said: 'Take care of yourself, we're worried about you' and that the important thing was that I get better."


----------



## buffym

She asked him to not talk to the press so he decides to give an interview at the paps pictures. 

I don’t see a victim, the paps pictures set up I could see mis guided but then going to do an interview after it says it was intentional and he wants fame.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> Their bots are so creepy
> 
> View attachment 4559364


I love the British accents!  

In the video, Meg has a bit of that creaky voice - focal fry, so popular among a certain generation.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Their bots are so creepy
> 
> View attachment 4559364



Just because someone likes Meghan and Harry does not make them a bot.

And extreme viewpoints can be found on either side.


----------



## mrsinsyder

That has nothing to do with what I posted but ok I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Straight-Laced

Jayne1 said:


> I love the British accents!
> 
> In the video, Meg has a bit of that creaky voice - focal fry, so popular among a certain generation.


Brilliant. Thanks for the info on vocal fry, I'd never heard of the term.  I've certainly heard it in certain women's voices though.
To me it always sounds fake and cultivated.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Archie is such a beautiful baby. His eyes are amazing.


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> She asked him to not talk to the press so he decides to give an interview at the paps pictures.
> 
> I don’t see a victim, the paps pictures set up I could see mis guided but then going to do an interview after it says it was intentional and he wants fame.


Well, as someone who also suffers from Heart Palpitations and have had to go to the hospital .. I can certainly understand that.  What you are kind of forgetting here, is that alas (and unfortunately) .. US healthcare is such that they try to get you out of that hospital as quickly as possible.  Heck, my husband had a stroke .. yet, after 1 day .. poof .. he was out of the hospital. 

Look .. bottom line, he has done some stupid stuff and has made missteps, but honestly .. so have H&M and just dragging this through the mud yet again IMO .. serves what purpose?  If she is truly the person that she states that she is and let's say that something bad (like her father dying) does happen to him, would she not feel any remorse?  If she is as her friends state, then she may indeed be remorseful if something like that happens  -OR-  maybe she won't be and then .. how true have her friends been?  I had 'divorced' my father before he passed, but I have to say that I am remorseful that we didn't get to work (at least) some things out before his death.


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> Well, as someone who also suffers from Heart Palpitations and have had to go to the hospital .. I can certainly understand that.  What you are kind of forgetting here, is that alas (and unfortunately) .. US healthcare is such that they try to get you out of that hospital as quickly as possible.  Heck, my husband had a stroke .. yet, after 1 day .. poof .. he was out of the hospital.
> 
> Look .. bottom line, he has done some stupid stuff and has made missteps, but honestly .. so have H&M and just dragging this through the mud yet again IMO .. serves what purpose?  If she is truly the person that she states that she is and let's say that something bad (like her father dying) does happen to him, would she not feel any remorse?  If she is as her friends state, then she may indeed be remorseful if something like that happens  -OR-  maybe she won't be and then .. how true have her friends been?  I had 'divorced' my father before he passed, but I have to say that I am remorseful that we didn't get to work (at least) some things out before his death.



You are entitled to your viewpoint. Mine is Meghan is entitled to ending a toxic relationship. Her father did an interview after she forgave for speaking to the press. He then did another interview trying to call her old phone number while a reporter was their.

I don’t think she has to continue putting up with it. She asked him to stop speaking to the press he is choosing to continue.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Their bots are so creepy
> 
> View attachment 4559364





buffym said:


> Just because someone likes Meghan and Harry does not make them a bot.
> 
> And extreme viewpoints can be found on either side.
> View attachment 4559417





mrsinsyder said:


> That has nothing to do with what I posted but ok I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



I was responding to your post above. I took the bots as the positive quotes. I posted a non positive post stating that both sides can take it too far.

It is okay if you didn’t understand.


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> I was responding to your post above. I took the bots as the positive quotes. I posted a non positive post stating that both sides can take it too far.
> 
> It is okay if you didn’t understand.


Wow, you really got me with a random two week old quote about Markus Anderson that has literally nothing to do with bots or with anything else I said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

I didn't realise Markus Anderson was such a big part of Meghan's brand...um, er...life:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...important-man-life-Canadian-confidant-41.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> I didn't realise Markus Anderson was such a big part of Meghan's brand...um, er...life:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...important-man-life-Canadian-confidant-41.html


Yeah. He was her Soho house connection to rich men. 

It’s almost like they have a word for that (and I don’t mean networking)


----------



## Clearblueskies

.


buffym said:


> You are entitled to your viewpoint. Mine is Meghan is entitled to ending a toxic relationship. Her father did an interview after she forgave for speaking to the press. He then did another interview trying to call her old phone number while a reporter was their.
> 
> I don’t think she has to continue putting up with it. She asked him to stop speaking to the press he is choosing to continue.


This is ancient news now.  At what point are H&M going to stop poking at that sore?  Thomas had quietened down, and now it’s all noise again.  I’m sick of all of them quite frankly.  Harry and Meghan making a big deal of this when there are so many real problems in the world is just ugh 



mdcx said:


> I didn't realise Markus Anderson was such a big part of Meghan's brand...um, er...life:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...important-man-life-Canadian-confidant-41.html


You see I’d never heard of this guy till today.  Who is he?!  Why does she need a fixer?  This demonstrates how throwing a tantrum in public because you decide to be permanently offended about something that happened over a year ago, is like opening Pandora’s box.  So now I’m thinking how many other creepy hangers-on are there?


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, you really got me with a random two week old quote about Markus Anderson that has literally nothing to do with bots or with anything else I said.





mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah. He was her Soho house connection to rich men.
> 
> It’s almost like they have a word for that (and I don’t mean networking)



Different view points, my post was showed a negative bit that accused Meghan of cheating. Even though it is two weeks old.

I didn’t think it was a time limit, especially since you quoted a story from the DM from March 2019- seven months old.
Different perspectives


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah. He was her Soho house connection to rich men.
> 
> It’s almost like they have a word for that (and I don’t mean networking)


Oh, behave!


----------



## zen1965

Fassbender reloaded.
Handbags are not on their minds.
On topic: That Anderson chap is handsome.


----------



## mrsinsyder

zen1965 said:


> That Anderson chap is handsome.



He is. Confused as to why anyone would think he Archie’s father.


----------



## MarieCurie

Flatsy said:


> Every Mind Matters sounds like a good cause, but that video looks like an ad for the Church of Scientology.




Now I'm off to google Church of Scientology ads


----------



## mrsinsyder

Why was my post about bot accounts removed?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Anyway, here’s a link detailing that many of those Twitter accounts are designed just for stanning Meghan and Harry. Maybe with a works cited it won’t be removed this time 

https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/

As the head of digital at 89up, a European consulting firm that has done social media research for a ground-breaking British parliamentary committee investigation into disinformation and fake news, he was the right person to see if there really was anything suspicious in the Meghan Markle Twitter community. His findings were first reported in the _Telegraph_ by Camilla Tominey and Hannah Furness, the paper’s royal correspondent. Tominey, a veteran royal reporter, has been the focus of what 89up called an “orchestrated attack by this network” he discovered.

89up found “1,103 highly-connected Twitter accounts in a network who share content about the Duchess of Sussex obsessively.” While very few of those accounts appear to be entirely automated—classic bot accounts—Feldberg’s report found that “many have unusual features, suggesting there could be collusion or automation behind some of the accounts.” Many appear to be cyborgs—part-automated, part-human accounts that automatically retweet like-minded messages and also respond to keywords and phrases. One person could run multiple cyborg accounts, making it hard for a casual user to separate real from fake accounts.

“I have witnessed what amounts to be roving Twitter gangs that find a tweet/blog post about Meghan and kind of rally the troops and stoke up the fires and suddenly you have a hail storm of abuse flowing at you,” explains Jane Barr, who runs the From Berkshire to Buckingham fashion site, which focuses on Kate. “For me, it is very frustrating to write a nuanced analysis and have people just take a black-and-white interpretation and run wild with it.”


----------



## LittleStar88

buffym said:


> You are entitled to your viewpoint. Mine is Meghan is entitled to ending a toxic relationship. Her father did an interview after she forgave for speaking to the press. He then did another interview trying to call her old phone number while a reporter was their.
> 
> I don’t think she has to continue putting up with it. She asked him to stop speaking to the press he is choosing to continue.



Yeah, he seems like the type who, despite all the best judgment, will do anything for anyone willing to give him attention (bonus incentives when money is involved). Typical narcissist.


----------



## LittleStar88

Despite all of the little things people may not like about the video, I am 100% for *anything* that brings awareness to mental illness/self-care and empowers people to find hope or support when they are down. I just can't pick on it. At all.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Anyway, here’s a link detailing that many of those Twitter accounts are designed just for stanning Meghan and Harry. Maybe with a works cited it won’t be removed this time
> 
> https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/
> 
> As the head of digital at 89up, a European consulting firm that has done social media research for a ground-breaking British parliamentary committee investigation into disinformation and fake news, he was the right person to see if there really was anything suspicious in the Meghan Markle Twitter community. His findings were first reported in the _Telegraph_ by Camilla Tominey and Hannah Furness, the paper’s royal correspondent. Tominey, a veteran royal reporter, has been the focus of what 89up called an “orchestrated attack by this network” he discovered.
> 
> 89up found “1,103 highly-connected Twitter accounts in a network who share content about the Duchess of Sussex obsessively.” While very few of those accounts appear to be entirely automated—classic bot accounts—Feldberg’s report found that “many have unusual features, suggesting there could be collusion or automation behind some of the accounts.” Many appear to be cyborgs—part-automated, part-human accounts that automatically retweet like-minded messages and also respond to keywords and phrases. One person could run multiple cyborg accounts, making it hard for a casual user to separate real from fake accounts.
> 
> “I have witnessed what amounts to be roving Twitter gangs that find a tweet/blog post about Meghan and kind of rally the troops and stoke up the fires and suddenly you have a hail storm of abuse flowing at you,” explains Jane Barr, who runs the From Berkshire to Buckingham fashion site, which focuses on Kate. “For me, it is very frustrating to write a nuanced analysis and have people just take a black-and-white interpretation and run wild with it.”


The Twitterstorming / instagram stuff gives me the creeps, I avoid it all.  I’d never heard the term fandom pre-tpf.  Tbh I don’t understand the level of fascination with the British Royal family, and why some people who’ve never so much as been to the UK can get so heated about it.  As a Briton I have to say when I first came across this thread I found it baffling (occasionally annoying ) and funny at the same time


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> The Twitterstorming / instagram stuff gives me the creeps, I avoid it all.  I’d never heard the term fandom pre-tpf.  Tbh I don’t understand the level of fascination with the British Royal family, and why some people who’ve never so much as been to the UK can get so heated about it.  As a Briton I have to say when I first came across this thread I found it baffling (occasionally annoying ) and funny at the same time


Fandoms have even invaded the corporate workplace, lol. Just last week I got a work conference schedule and maybe 12 of the 100 workshops were about using fandoms to build your career and create more interesting projects at work and home. I'm part of 2 online fandoms and I have to say it's really awesome to be able to talk/interact with people who are super passionate about the same thing as you are. I like them because very little fighting goes on in the fandoms, since you all love the same thing equally.


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> awesome to be able to talk/interact with people who are super passionate about the same thing as you are. I like them because very little fighting goes on in the fandoms, since you all love the same thing equally.


I can see what you mean and how that could be helpful   But it’s been more a case of tribes going to war when it comes to Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan etc., which is definitely not a positive development.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> The Twitterstorming / instagram stuff gives me the creeps, I avoid it all.  I’d never heard the term fandom pre-tpf.  Tbh I don’t understand the level of fascination with the British Royal family, and why some people who’ve never so much as been to the UK can get so heated about it.  As a Briton I have to say when I first came across this thread I found it baffling (occasionally annoying ) and funny at the same time



I agree it's a bit weird. I blame it on the bizarre team mentality that is prevalent in our culture. Everyone chooses sides in everything these days, whether it is sports teams, political parties, and now even individual celebrities. They become rabid fans for their chosen side and haters for the others.

For some reason Harry and Meghan have become one side and Will and Kate have become the opposite. It's ridiculous because they are the same. They are both royal and privileged. They are much more alike than they are different.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I agree it's a bit weird. I blame it on the bizarre team mentality that is prevalent in our culture. Everyone chooses sides in everything these days, whether it is sports teams, political parties, and now even individual celebrities. They become rabid fans for their chosen side and haters for the others.
> 
> For some reason Harry and Meghan have become one side and Will and Kate have become the opposite. It's ridiculous because they are the same. They are both royal and privileged. They are much more alike than they are different.



I call it modern tribalism. And these Tribes war with each other on the internet with words


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> He is. Confused as to why anyone would think he Archie’s father.


I can't join in about him being handsome though, I think he looks creepy and has got that "I'm too sexy for my looove, so sexy it hurts" look.

Which makes it very fitting for me to delight you all with this video and a little private tidbit. A relative once gave my toddlers a singing hamster toy that was dressed in a pink bathrobe or something and sang the chorus of this


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...e/news-story/ba06ce9aad3ffc365958729ff423306d
*‘Modern day royalty’: Photo that proves Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have made a big mistake*
_One picture snapped by a sports fan has accidentally revealed the glaring flaw in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s game plan.

Meet Kevin James. He’s 49 and is an avid Norwich City football fan. Over the weekend he, along with his friend Phil, went along to cheer on his beloved team and unwittingly waded into the royal orbit. It just so happens that the other sports fans sitting behind him, though there to barrack for Aston Villa, were none other than the Cambridges, aka the second, third and fourth-in-line to the throne plus the beaming, effervescent Duchess of Cambridge.

Imagine Kevin’s surprise to see the family cheerfully take in the match in a shockingly low-key fashion, simply slipping in and out of their seats just before the crowds did at halftime and the final whistle. So unobtrusive was their presence that Kevin told his local paper that it was hard to tell which of their extended group were simply mates and which were protection officers.

It was all very easygoing and publicity catnip: Senior members of the royal family out and about, surrounded by the Queen’s subjects AND with zero fanfare? Could you possibly conjure a more beguiling image of modern day royalty?_





_All of which stands in direct contrast to Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s approach to their public life. In the last week, the couple has essentially declared war on the British press, launching two legal broadsides targeting Fleet Street behemoths, with Harry penning an extraordinary and emotional statement about what he perceived as the bullying behaviour of the media.

(There was also the drama that happened in Angola when a Sky News reporter had the temerity to ask the Duke a question about his work in the former war-torn country. His dismissive reply made headlines around the world.)

Let’s not forget Meghan’s controversial Wimbledon outing in July with her bodyguard telling fans that she was there in a private capacity and insisting they not take selfies (which no one was even trying to do, as it turns out). The fact that 40-odd seats were left empty around Meghan, whether at the organisers’ behest or the Duchess’ is unknown, only made her approach to the being out surrounded by Her Majesty’s citizens even more antagonistic. (As opposed to Kevin’s shots — Kate and Wills barely seem to care a jot that a bushy-bearded stranger is taking their photo.)_




_The wariness with which the couple has approached their time in public perhaps reached its zenith when they refused to reveal any of baby Archie’s godparents. (Tell me this: Have the press ever relentlessly pursued George, Charlotte or Louis’ godparents? In fact, most people would be hard-pressed to even name any of the aristocratic chums corralled to take responsibility for the wee royals’ spiritual wellbeing.)

Essentially, the dynamic between the Sussexes’ and outside world has largely been an antagonistic and suspicious one. It is not hard to take the view that they seem to perceive every jaunt beyond their front gates as if they are entering hostile, foreign territory.

The question that they and we have struggled to answer is, just how much of their lives should they be expected to share? On one hand, they enjoy wildly privileged lives, essentially funded by the British population. On the other, they are quite a few rungs down the royal ladder meaning that aside from some terrible disaster, there is no chance that Harry will ever assume the throne, therefore they are entitled to live lives without too much nosy intrusion.

However, what Kevin James and his selfies have proven is that it is not a binary decision. They don’t have to either hole up in Frogmore Cottage and conduct their family life under the sort of security blackout normally associated with the witness protection program. Nor do they have to demeaningly bare every facet of their life to a fascinated nation.

Instead what Wills and Kate (and Kevin) have astutely demonstrated this weekend is that there is a middle path. That is of acceptance and the underlying notion of respect. They acknowledge the intense interest in their family by sharing snippets and the public in turn is largely respectful.

Consider this: Kate goes to the supermarket and does the shop regularly. Both parents do the school run. George and Kate have tennis lessons and play dates with school friends. They must also do things like go to the dentist, buy new shoes and in Kate’s case, enjoy an occasional manicure slash intensive stress-busting facial. Yet, has anyone ever sold a surreptitious iPhone shot to a tabloid of Kate waiting to get a Brazilian? Has a tennis devotee ever dished on how bored Kate looks (I’m guessing) while her kids butcher their backhand?

Nope.
That’s because Kate and Wills’ approach seems to be that they place trust in the public to do the right thing and mostly leave them alone when they are not ‘on duty’.

This approach has thus far proven to be wildly successful, allowing the Cambridges’ the maximum amount of privacy and normalcy they could hope for given the exceptional position they hold.

Harry and Meghan, their beef with the media aside, should try being even a small bit less mistrustful and hostile towards the (non-press) world beyond the Frogmore Cottage hedge. There is every chance it will allow them to enjoy a far more normal life with Archie and who knows? I reckon he would love to go to a football match in a few years._

_Daniela Elser is a royal expert and freelance writer with 15 years’ experience who has written for some of Australia’s best print and digital media brands._


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Vlad / Swanky - Is their a "spoiler alert function" on tPF? It would help both in providing whole articles for those not wanting to visit certain sites/click links and those who don't want to have to scroll past walls of text.


----------



## buffym

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle statement: are you guilty of gaslighting the royal couple?
https://www.stylist.co.uk/opinion/p...lighting/307250/amp?__twitter_impression=true

The response to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s unprecedented lawsuit has been mostly positive, with the exception of some disappointing social media backlash. But there’s a dark subtext to  some of those Twitter comments…
Imagine an octopus, eight legs and all, trying to play a game of Twister with itself. That’s the best way to comprehend the relationship between the royal family and the press.

Kings and Queens of England have always needed the media to serve as their mouthpiece. Newspapers, radio, television and, now, social media, forms the conduit through which the royal family’s messages about their work are shared to the world. But the fourth estate is its own beast, an industry that prides itself on objectivity and truthfulness. It can’t be controlled – this is where the octopus and all those twisted, tangled eight legs comes into play. The press won’t merely report on what the royal family tells it to. It wants to tell the stories that are in what it believes to be the public’s interest.

Because of these competing objectives, the press and the royal family have often come to blows, most frequently in more recent decades. Usually, the royal family will stay silent on any conjecture and gossip printed in the media. (A notable and necessary exception was the royal family’s commentary on reports about the nature of the friendship between Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein.) 

Sometimes, they will hit back – as Prince Harry did when he first began dating Meghan Markle in 2016, asking the media to give the new couple their deserved space. Very occasionally they will recourse to legal action, as the Queen has done when she sued The Sun (for printing the contents of her Christmas speech) and as Kate Middleton did when she sued tabloids for publishing images of her sunbathing topless in France.

Last night, Prince Harry wrote an impassioned, explosive statement on his and wife Meghan’s website detailing the Duchess of Sussex’s intention to file legal proceedings against the Mail on Sunday and its parent company for publishing and, reportedly manipulating, a private letter. 

“There comes a point when the only thing to do is to stand up to this behaviour, because it destroys people and destroys lives,” Harry wrote in his statement. “Put simply, it is bullying, which scares and silences people. We all know this isn’t acceptable, at any level. We won’t and can’t believe in a world where there is no accountability for this.”

On the whole, the response to Harry’s statement has been positive. Celebrities including Ellen DeGeneres, Jameela Jamil and Matt Haig have shared their support for Harry and Meghan’s move. But there have been some, including notable Meghan Markle troll Piers Morgan who have criticised the lawsuit.

“I’ve never read a more savage attack on the press than this one by Harry/Meghan,” Morgan wrote on Twitter. “Nor a more disingenuous one. They’ve had the praise and criticism their behaviour has warranted. They talk of bullying but this is their attempt to bully the press into fawning sycophancy.”

Morgan’s comments have been echoed by some on social media – the dank and swampy corner of the culture where, outside the tabloids, the majority of Meghan abuse has thrived. (A study released in March noted that some of the 5,600 abusive and racist messages shared about Meghan were posted from just 20 accounts.) 

“If the Sussexes can’t stand the heat in the kitchen, they are more than welcome to leave,” one Twitter user wrote in response to Harry’s statement. “Princess Bea gets engaged, the Markles don’t get any attention that day so they sue the media,” another wrote, perhaps forgetting that the couple is in the middle of a highly-publicised royal tour in South Africa. “Harry and Meghan are really negatively affecting the royal family image,” wrote another. “This lawsuit against [the Mail on Sunday] is silly and just about their ego!”

Nobody, not even members of the royal family, is above criticism in the media. But what these responses to Meghan and Harry’s statement prove is that some corners of the public steadfastly refuse to take the couple’s words at face value. Meghan and Harry have repeatedly – breaking with tradition – detailed how spurious tabloid coverage impacts their mental health. They have made their feelings clear about how dangerous they find some strains of tabloid coverage. Anyone who now downplays the impact of that media coverage or continues to say that Harry and Meghan need to ‘toughen up’ is gaslighting them. Plain and simple.

Celebrities or public figures who complain about press intrusion are always, always met with this kind of response. You signed up for it, people say, you wanted to be rich and famous. With this great power comes the great responsibility of exposing the underbelly of your life for all to see.

But just because this is the way it has always been doesn’t mean that this is the way it should be. In recent years we have finally witnessed the dismantling of dangerous tabloid media culture that conceives of the lives of celebrities as their gleeful playground.

You might remember in February 2018 that Hugh Grant settled his lawsuit against the Mirror Group newspapers for a reported six figure sum. The actor was suing for damages after his phone was hacked between the years 1998 and 2009 by newspapers under the editorship of Piers Morgan (remember him?) and Richard Wallace at the Daily Mirror and Tina Weaver at the Sunday Mirror. 

It was not Grant’s first suit against a newspaper. In 2011 he took legal action against News of the World for hacking his phone and won. More than 40 celebrities, including Steve Coogan and Sadie Frost have settled claims against media companies for having their phones hacked. 

Elsewhere in the world, celebrities including Tom Cruise, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt and Rebel Wilson have all sued tabloid media for defamation. Cruise settled for an undisclosed sum; Wilson and Jolie and Pitt won their cases.

Yes, in the past those in the public eye have had to grit their teeth and bare the ignomy of press intrusion. But that was then and this is now. As Harry himself noted in this statement, we live in a world of the endless 24/7 news cycle. As private citizens we are mere tourists in this news cycle; public figures live in it. 

“Though we have continued to put on a brave face – as so many of you can relate to – I cannot begin to describe how painful it has been,” Harry wrote in his statement. No other occupation in the world requires its employees to withstand lies simply because it is part of the job description. So why do we ask it of celebrities?

There will be some who believe that this lawsuit is an attack on press freedoms and the freedom of speech. This argument doesn’t wash, just as how the argument that celebrities deserve to have their privacy invaded because their lives are ours for the raking doesn’t wash. The kind of press freedoms that Meghan’s lawsuit is attacking is the press freedom to, as Harry put it, “purposely misle[a]d you by strategically omitting select paragraphs, specific sentences, and even singular words to mask the lies they had perpetuated for over a year.” 

If, as Meghan’s lawsuit against the Mail on Sunday claims, this media group has published “false and deliberately derogatory stories” about her and Prince Harry, then why do they deserve their press freedoms protected in the first place? (The Mail on Sunday have denied any wrongdoing in a statement that reads: “The Mail on Sunday stands by the story it published and will be defending this case vigorously. Specifically, we categorically deny that the Duchess’s letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning.”)

No one among us is labouring under the misapprehension that this lawsuit will end the tabloid tirade and the online abuse against Meghan and Prince Harry. A statement from the royal family earlier this year couldn’t end the online abuse against them. Harry begging the press to leave them alone in 2016 couldn’t end the tabloid obsession with them. There’s a very real chance that this lawsuit will, as Harry’s statement predicts, only exacerbate the tabloid media’s fixation with the royal couple.

If that happens, well, that’s on the media and not on Meghan and Harry. The Sussexes have made their position about the tenor of this particular vein of media coverage blisteringly clear. They find it “painful”; it is causing them “private suffering”. Harry even likened the treatment of Meghan to the treatment of his mother Diana. “My deepest fear is history repeating itself,” he wrote. “I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person.” 

Harry and Meghan believe that this kind of “destructive” reportage is abusive. They are willing to put their money where their mouth is and sue any publication that continues to write about them in this manner. Now, anyone who tells them to get over themselves and grin and bear it isn’t just contributing to this cycle of abuse. They’re gaslighting them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *‘Modern day royalty’: Photo that proves Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have made a big mistake*



This article was SO spot on. If H&M would stop insisting on their own celebrity, they’d be able to have the “privacy” they (don’t) want. It’s also incredibly savvy of the Cambridges to take every Sussex mistake and make themselves look better in the days that follow. 

It’s amazing that the second, third, and fourth in line to the throne can be among the public, but a D list cable TV actress can’t.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Yikes.


----------



## mdcx

All I keep thinking is - imagine if Harry had married Cressida or someone similar. All we would be seeing is pretty pictures of Cressida at various society weddings now and then, rumours of pregnancy and the occasional photo of Wills, Kate, Harry and Cressida doing things together because of course they would be friends.

The current reality seems all so dumpster fire in comparison


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> Yikes.
> 
> View attachment 4560096


Wow. What is Meghan's goal? Obviously to isolate Harry so she has control over him or can influence him to her ends. But what are they? At first i assumed it would be moving to LA, now not so sure.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Wow. What is Meghan's goal? Obviously to isolate Harry so she has control over him or can influence him to her ends. But what are they? At first i assumed it would be moving to LA, now not so sure.


IMO it’s to gain victimization and the “look, the BRF doesn’t support us” narrative. 

I’d say it’s sad what’s happening to Harry but I think he’s just as desperate for this as she is.


----------



## threadbender

I am starting to believe it is as simple as needing attention and drama, as was mentioned in another post. Perhaps Meghan does see herself as another Diana and Harry sees her as needing to be protected and defended. I thought having Archie would have changed the priorities and, maybe they believe this is for his benefit, as well.
It just seems so over the top and preventable. I find it sad.


----------



## mrsinsyder

threadbender said:


> I am starting to believe it is as simple as needing attention and drama, as was mentioned in another post. Perhaps Meghan does see herself as another Diana and Harry sees her as needing to be protected and defended. I thought having Archie would have changed the priorities and, maybe they believe this is for his benefit, as well.
> It just seems so over the top and preventable. I find it sad.


I truly think Meghan thinks she’s bigger than the royal family, and just fitting in and doing her duties would put her as second (or third) fiddle to the heirs and she can’t have that.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I truly think Meghan thinks she’s bigger than the royal family, and just fitting in and doing her duties would put her as second (or third) fiddle to the heirs and she can’t have that.


she'd probably be satisfied to be as iconic as Diana, but agree, she probably doesn't want to play second fiddle to her SIL


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Wow. What is Meghan's goal? Obviously to isolate Harry so she has control over him or can influence him to her ends. But what are they? At first i assumed it would be moving to LA, now not so sure.


He no longer has the comradeship the army gave him (a period of his life when he seemed genuinely happy). And he’s isolated from his friends, and family, even his brother is cut off.  I’m thinking this is more damaging to his mental health than any cr*p the tabloids can chuck at him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

threadbender said:


> I am starting to believe it is as simple as needing attention and drama, as was mentioned in another post. Perhaps Meghan does see herself as another Diana and Harry sees her as needing to be protected and defended. I thought having Archie would have changed the priorities and, maybe they believe this is for his benefit, as well.
> It just seems so over the top and preventable. I find it sad.


I’m sure she sees herself as a new Diana.  Its my belief she’s very impatient and frustrated that the public aren’t just slotting her in to the vacancy.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m sure she sees herself as a new Diana.  Its my belief she’s very impatient and frustrated that the public aren’t just slotting her in to the vacancy.


I agree with you. No one can be the next Diana.


----------



## mdcx

Well, this is some bizarre logic - because the media reacted well to H&M’s “good” behaviour on the Africa tour, this was the last straw for them so they released the legal action.. huh? From a new story in _Grazia_:

So what had prompted the move? ‘Harry and Meghan are kept briefed throughout the tour on how the public is responding,’ says our source. ‘So they were aware of how positively the media was depicting them. After a year of stinging criticism, such a turnaround was the last straw; they found it grossly hypocritical and felt that they had to speak out.’​ETA: https://graziadaily.co.uk/life/in-the-news/meghan-harry-legal-reaction/


----------



## buffym

Next engagement for the couple


----------



## buffym

mdcx said:


> Well, this is some bizarre logic - because the media reacted well to H&M’s “good” behaviour on the Africa tour, this was the last straw for them so they released the legal action.. huh? From a new story in _Grazia_:
> 
> So what had prompted the move? ‘Harry and Meghan are kept briefed throughout the tour on how the public is responding,’ says our source. ‘So they were aware of how positively the media was depicting them. After a year of stinging criticism, such a turnaround was the last straw; they found it grossly hypocritical and felt that they had to speak out.’​ETA: https://graziadaily.co.uk/life/in-the-news/meghan-harry-legal-reaction/



Royal legal action against press was timed to pick where case heard
Legal advice prompted the Sussexes to accelerate the filing of claims

Some other thoughts the laws against publications are getting ready to change.





https://amp.ft.com/content/90507c1e-e84c-11e9-85f4-d00e5018f061?__twitter_impression=true

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s flurry of legal claims against Britain’s tabloid press were rushed out late last month with the aim of bringing the cases before judges seen as more privacy-friendly, according to people briefed on the matter.

...

Insiders said one of the main triggers for the legal action was in fact a set of revisions to procedures at London’s High Court, which from October 1 change the division where lawsuits relating to the media are filed.

Had they waited longer, the Duke and Duchess may have had to issue their claims at the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court. Some lawyers see the specialist media judges there as more open to the arguments of publishers than the Chancery Division, the venue for recent high-profile privacy and phone hacking cases.

Legal advice on the implications of the changes prompted the Sussexes to accelerate the filing of claims that were months in the making. All three claims were initiated in the Chancery Division in the week before the October 1 deadline.
....
Unlike the Duchess’ case against the Mail on Sunday, no details of the claim or public statement accompanied the filing of the lawsuits, suggesting they were not intended to be seen as a further escalation of a legal war with Fleet Street. The filings were revealed by the Byline Investigates website.

Caroline Kean, a lawyer at Wiggin who specialises in media litigation, said it was “no coincidence” that claims were issued by the Sussexes “just before the civil procedure rules were changed”.


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...e/news-story/ba06ce9aad3ffc365958729ff423306d
> *‘Modern day royalty’: Photo that proves Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have made a big mistake*
> _One picture snapped by a sports fan has accidentally revealed the glaring flaw in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s game plan.
> 
> Meet Kevin James. He’s 49 and is an avid Norwich City football fan. Over the weekend he, along with his friend Phil, went along to cheer on his beloved team and unwittingly waded into the royal orbit. It just so happens that the other sports fans sitting behind him, though there to barrack for Aston Villa, were none other than the Cambridges, aka the second, third and fourth-in-line to the throne plus the beaming, effervescent Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Imagine Kevin’s surprise to see the family cheerfully take in the match in a shockingly low-key fashion, simply slipping in and out of their seats just before the crowds did at halftime and the final whistle. So unobtrusive was their presence that Kevin told his local paper that it was hard to tell which of their extended group were simply mates and which were protection officers.
> 
> It was all very easygoing and publicity catnip: Senior members of the royal family out and about, surrounded by the Queen’s subjects AND with zero fanfare? Could you possibly conjure a more beguiling image of modern day royalty?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _All of which stands in direct contrast to Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s approach to their public life. In the last week, the couple has essentially declared war on the British press, launching two legal broadsides targeting Fleet Street behemoths, with Harry penning an extraordinary and emotional statement about what he perceived as the bullying behaviour of the media.
> 
> (There was also the drama that happened in Angola when a Sky News reporter had the temerity to ask the Duke a question about his work in the former war-torn country. His dismissive reply made headlines around the world.)
> 
> Let’s not forget Meghan’s controversial Wimbledon outing in July with her bodyguard telling fans that she was there in a private capacity and insisting they not take selfies (which no one was even trying to do, as it turns out). The fact that 40-odd seats were left empty around Meghan, whether at the organisers’ behest or the Duchess’ is unknown, only made her approach to the being out surrounded by Her Majesty’s citizens even more antagonistic. (As opposed to Kevin’s shots — Kate and Wills barely seem to care a jot that a bushy-bearded stranger is taking their photo.)_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The wariness with which the couple has approached their time in public perhaps reached its zenith when they refused to reveal any of baby Archie’s godparents. (Tell me this: Have the press ever relentlessly pursued George, Charlotte or Louis’ godparents? In fact, most people would be hard-pressed to even name any of the aristocratic chums corralled to take responsibility for the wee royals’ spiritual wellbeing.)
> 
> Essentially, the dynamic between the Sussexes’ and outside world has largely been an antagonistic and suspicious one. It is not hard to take the view that they seem to perceive every jaunt beyond their front gates as if they are entering hostile, foreign territory.
> 
> The question that they and we have struggled to answer is, just how much of their lives should they be expected to share? On one hand, they enjoy wildly privileged lives, essentially funded by the British population. On the other, they are quite a few rungs down the royal ladder meaning that aside from some terrible disaster, there is no chance that Harry will ever assume the throne, therefore they are entitled to live lives without too much nosy intrusion.
> 
> However, what Kevin James and his selfies have proven is that it is not a binary decision. They don’t have to either hole up in Frogmore Cottage and conduct their family life under the sort of security blackout normally associated with the witness protection program. Nor do they have to demeaningly bare every facet of their life to a fascinated nation.
> 
> Instead what Wills and Kate (and Kevin) have astutely demonstrated this weekend is that there is a middle path. That is of acceptance and the underlying notion of respect. They acknowledge the intense interest in their family by sharing snippets and the public in turn is largely respectful.
> 
> Consider this: Kate goes to the supermarket and does the shop regularly. Both parents do the school run. George and Kate have tennis lessons and play dates with school friends. They must also do things like go to the dentist, buy new shoes and in Kate’s case, enjoy an occasional manicure slash intensive stress-busting facial. Yet, has anyone ever sold a surreptitious iPhone shot to a tabloid of Kate waiting to get a Brazilian? Has a tennis devotee ever dished on how bored Kate looks (I’m guessing) while her kids butcher their backhand?
> 
> Nope.
> That’s because Kate and Wills’ approach seems to be that they place trust in the public to do the right thing and mostly leave them alone when they are not ‘on duty’.
> 
> This approach has thus far proven to be wildly successful, allowing the Cambridges’ the maximum amount of privacy and normalcy they could hope for given the exceptional position they hold.
> 
> Harry and Meghan, their beef with the media aside, should try being even a small bit less mistrustful and hostile towards the (non-press) world beyond the Frogmore Cottage hedge. There is every chance it will allow them to enjoy a far more normal life with Archie and who knows? I reckon he would love to go to a football match in a few years._
> 
> _Daniela Elser is a royal expert and freelance writer with 15 years’ experience who has written for some of Australia’s best print and digital media brands._



that selfie Kevin made is really rude.
Ask for a picture or don't take one.


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> This article was SO spot on. If H&M would stop insisting on their own celebrity, they’d be able to have the “privacy” they (don’t) want. It’s also incredibly savvy of the Cambridges to take every Sussex mistake and make themselves look better in the days that follow.
> 
> It’s amazing that the second, third, and fourth in line to the throne can be among the public, but a D list cable TV actress can’t.


can we please stop with "D list cable TV actress"


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Yikes.
> 
> View attachment 4560096


Charles and the boys have never been close?


----------



## Meh-gan

myown said:


> can we please stop with "D list cable TV actress"


What would you prefer? I mean she wasn’t super well known - here locally in Toronto she was known as that tv actress who was in Reitman commercials. 

Earlier someone posted a charity event she did back in those days - and back then she could only attract under 20 guests to the event. The vision some on here have of her as this A-list tv star really isn’t accurate. 

She wasn’t a household name at all.


----------



## myown

Meh-gan said:


> What would you prefer?


What I prefer instead of catcalling? Meghan


----------



## PatsyCline

Meh-gan said:


> What would you prefer? I mean she wasn’t super well known - here locally in Toronto she was known as that tv actress who was in Reitman commercials.
> 
> Earlier someone posted a charity event she did back in those days - and back then she could only attract under 20 guests to the event. The vision some on here have of her as this A-list tv star really isn’t accurate.
> 
> She wasn’t a household name at all.


Considering the vast majority of actors never make a living out of acting, I would think she did quite well for herself, all things considered.


----------



## PatsyCline

According to IMDB, she had 31 separate credits of acting jobs, so not bad.


----------



## Swanky

Reminder to add members that annoy you to the Ignore User list!


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> can we please stop with "D list cable TV actress"


Are you a moderator?


----------



## LittleStar88

myown said:


> can we please stop with "D list cable TV actress"



It comes off as passive-aggressive to post it knowing it will poke, prod, and invoke a reaction.

True she was no Angelina Jolie-type A-List hollywood big time actress but she has since moved on to bigger and better things, no?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m sure she sees herself as a new Diana.  Its my belief she’s very impatient and frustrated that the public aren’t just slotting her in to the vacancy.


The thing is, I think she wants to be who Diana was _*post-BRF*_: jet-setting humanitarian and hanging on yachts and with Versace. She'd have done herself a favor to realize that Diana's time in the BRF was spent miserable. Now that she sees the family constrains and public backlash aren't allowing the behavior she wants, she has to pull away from it all.


----------



## daisychainz

LittleStar88 said:


> It comes off as passive-aggressive to post it knowing it will poke, prod, and invoke a reaction.
> 
> True she was no Angelina Jolie-type A-List hollywood big time actress but she has since moved on to bigger and better things, no?


I was just thinking the other day, does MM regret her choice. She was able to be a celeb and do whatever she wanted, and she traded that for her current life, which doesn't seem all that fairytale or magical. Not sure it was an upgrade at all, which is why other women passed on it.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree with you. No one can be the next Diana.


I have no idea that Meghan wants to be the next Diana (although it may have well be the only clear reference she had going into this...) but in any event, the point surely is, Diana did not become what she did (just) because of her charisma but because of her position and story. If instead of marrying the heir a virgin only to divorce and give up queenhood once she found out he was with a woman twice her age, Diana had married Prince Edward in her 30s and lived happy ever after I doubt she would be that iconic...


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I was just thinking the other day, does MM regret her choice. She was able to be a celeb and do whatever she wanted, and she traded that for her current life, which doesn't seem all that fairytale or magical. Not sure it was an upgrade at all, which is why other women passed on it.



I doubt she regrets it at all. She wanted to be world famous and being married to Harry made her that. If she wanted to live a fairly quiet, normal life she could have stayed with her first husband.


----------



## Flatsy

mdcx said:


> Well, this is some bizarre logic - because the media reacted well to H&M’s “good” behaviour on the Africa tour, this was the last straw for them so they released the legal action.. huh? From a new story in _Grazia_:


That's because they won't admit that they play a role in their press coverage.  They want to act as if the press just decides at will whether it's time for good press or bad press.  

The press has been responding well when they are doing good work, whether it's on the Africa tour or Meghan launching the Smartworks collections.  The press did not respond well when they were spending the summer flying around on private jets, being diva-ish at Wimbledon, or being fussy and controlling about their son's christening.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I doubt she regrets it at all. She wanted to be world famous and being married to Harry made her that. If she wanted to live a fairly quiet, normal life she could have stayed with her first husband.


agree....if at her age her biggest success was co-starring (or playing a supporting role?) in a cable tv series most people never watched, I think it's pretty fair to assume she would never be an A-list celeb via her acting career.  Now she is world famous, rich, a household name, and friends with A-list celebs.  She probably has moments where she doesn't like her current situation but I doubt she has regrets about marrying Harry.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> agree....if at her age her biggest success was co-starring (or playing a supporting role?) in a cable tv series most people never watched, I think it's pretty fair to assume she would never be an A-list celeb via her acting career.  Now she is world famous, rich, a household name, and friends with A-list celebs.  She probably has moments where she doesn't like her current situation but I doubt she has regrets about marrying Harry.


Agreed, but I wonder if she wishes she could start over again from the day after the wedding?


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> that selfie Kevin made is really rude.
> Ask for a picture or don't take one.


Candid photographs of the famous are meat and drink to gossip threads like this one.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Agreed, but I wonder if she wishes she could start over again from the day after the wedding?


and do what?  behave more like a royal?  not have the celeb baby shower?


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> What I prefer instead of catcalling? Meghan


Be careful .. it was this type of behavior that had Vlad shut this thread down; none of us have the right to berate another TPF'r just because of a differing opinion.


----------



## Swanky

If you're not discussing the celeb/royal then you're likely causing drama in this thread.  And tbh, it's legit mind-blowing
I know FOR SURE some people are racking up numerous warnings, and will be banned soon, several have earned temp banning already.  
I can't believe people get so pressed over celebs, I really can't, the sheer number of reported posts from this thread all day, everyday, is astounding.

*Keeping it basic:  discuss the celeb NOT the members.*


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> and do what? behave more like a royal? not have the celeb baby shower?


I don't think fixing their problems would be a matter of doing one or two things differently.  It would be a matter of them changing who they are.  The egos, the drama, the stubbornness, the quest for international glory, the insistence on getting what they see as their fair share within the royal family, the refusal to take good advice, the need for private jet trips and a lavish designer wardrobe regardless of how it looks, the ongoing petulance with the press culminating in the ill-advised decision to go to war...It's all one huge problem.  

The Sussexes could be in such a different place right now if they were truly humble people whose goals were just have a happy life together with their child(ren) and make some positive contributions to charity and the royal family.  They aren't about that at all.  They are all about doing things on a grand scale.  They want to be huge celebrities.  They want to mingle among the famous and powerful.  They want to be recognized for "changing the world".  Meghan wants to be a fashion icon.  And they are willing to alienate friends and family who they think are standing in the way of their quest for glory.

I wouldn't have thought any of this when they got married, but that's the picture I'm seeing now.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> and do what?  behave more like a royal?  not have the celeb baby shower?


Maybe play it a little more cool, I don’t know   The “Fab Four” didn’t last long, it might’ve been a help to them both if it had.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I don't think fixing their problems would be a matter of doing one or two things differently.  It would be a matter of them changing who they are.  The egos, the drama, the stubbornness, the quest for international glory, the insistence on getting what they see as their fair share within the royal family, the refusal to take good advice, the need for private jet trips and a lavish designer wardrobe regardless of how it looks, the ongoing petulance with the press culminating in the ill-advised decision to go to war...It's all one huge problem.
> 
> The Sussexes could be in such a different place right now if they were truly humble people whose goals were just have a happy life together with their child(ren) and make some positive contributions to charity and the royal family.  They aren't about that at all.  They are all about doing things on a grand scale.  They want to be huge celebrities.  They want to mingle among the famous and powerful.  They want to be recognized for "changing the world".  Meghan wants to be a fashion icon.  And they are willing to alienate friends and family who they think are standing in the way of their quest for glory.
> 
> I wouldn't have thought any of this when they got married, but that's the picture I'm seeing now.


100% agree with you on this!  In some respects, I've been thinking _did Harry resent the fact that he was always known as the 'spare' and as such, is wanting the adulation that more of a celebrity would have_?   I can somewhat see Meghan buying into that ..


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> I don't think fixing their problems would be a matter of doing one or two things differently.  It would be a matter of them changing who they are.  The egos, the drama, the stubbornness, the quest for international glory, the insistence on getting what they see as their fair share within the royal family, the refusal to take good advice, the need for private jet trips and a lavish designer wardrobe regardless of how it looks, the ongoing petulance with the press culminating in the ill-advised decision to go to war...It's all one huge problem.
> 
> The Sussexes could be in such a different place right now if they were truly humble people whose goals were just have a happy life together with their child(ren) and make some positive contributions to charity and the royal family.  They aren't about that at all.  They are all about doing things on a grand scale.  They want to be huge celebrities.  They want to mingle among the famous and powerful.  They want to be recognized for "changing the world".  Meghan wants to be a fashion icon.  And they are willing to alienate friends and family who they think are standing in the way of their quest for glory.
> 
> I wouldn't have thought any of this when they got married, but that's the picture I'm seeing now.


Me neither, the wedding was a high point, but I think I feel much the same way about them now.  Is fame really so wonderful?  I don’t know that it is, it certainly wasn’t for Diana, and I think it cost her the chance to marry the heart surgeon she was so in love with


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

daisychainz said:


> I was just thinking the other day, does MM regret her choice. She was able to be a celeb and do whatever she wanted, and she traded that for her current life, which doesn't seem all that fairytale or magical. Not sure it was an upgrade at all, which is why other women passed on it.


I don't think she regrets it in the least. Oh, there may be a moment here and there but, no. She is a celebrity, one at the top of the heap. I am sure she knows what she wants and will do what it takes. And, Harry is there, supporting her. I have no doubt that she believes when all is said and done, she will be revered and respected as Diana was.


----------



## rose60610

Seems Markle has some image rehab to do. It boggles the mind that a foreign newbie into the BRF felt entitled and empowered to take hundreds of years of tradition by storm to "woke it" overnight. At first when she was accused of doing so, I thought people were reading too much into her actions. Now it seems she's fallen into the trap of playing the victim as a thoughtful way of getting back at her detractors whose "crime" was not worshipping everything she said and did. To up her image, she needs to trot out Archie much more often, and make it sound like she's the one who cleans up baby spit and changes the diapers. That way she'll be sooooo relatable. Especially if she wears J Crew and Zara. And doesn't whine. So much.


----------



## threadbender

buffym said:


> Royal legal action against press was timed to pick where case heard
> Legal advice prompted the Sussexes to accelerate the filing of claims
> 
> Some other thoughts the laws against publications are getting ready to change.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4560349
> 
> 
> https://amp.ft.com/content/90507c1e-e84c-11e9-85f4-d00e5018f061?__twitter_impression=true
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s flurry of legal claims against Britain’s tabloid press were rushed out late last month with the aim of bringing the cases before judges seen as more privacy-friendly, according to people briefed on the matter.
> 
> ...
> 
> Insiders said one of the main triggers for the legal action was in fact a set of revisions to procedures at London’s High Court, which from October 1 change the division where lawsuits relating to the media are filed.
> 
> Had they waited longer, the Duke and Duchess may have had to issue their claims at the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court. Some lawyers see the specialist media judges there as more open to the arguments of publishers than the Chancery Division, the venue for recent high-profile privacy and phone hacking cases.
> 
> Legal advice on the implications of the changes prompted the Sussexes to accelerate the filing of claims that were months in the making. All three claims were initiated in the Chancery Division in the week before the October 1 deadline.
> ....
> Unlike the Duchess’ case against the Mail on Sunday, no details of the claim or public statement accompanied the filing of the lawsuits, suggesting they were not intended to be seen as a further escalation of a legal war with Fleet Street. The filings were revealed by the Byline Investigates website.
> 
> Caroline Kean, a lawyer at Wiggin who specialises in media litigation, said it was “no coincidence” that claims were issued by the Sussexes “just before the civil procedure rules were changed”.


Kind of like "judge shopping" here. Makes sense. 
But, the other stories saying it was a last straw thing seems to indicate differently.
Same outcome either way.


----------



## Flatsy

rose60610 said:


> To up her image, she needs to trot out Archie much more often, and make it sound like she's the one who cleans up baby spit and changes the diapers. That way she'll be sooooo relatable. Especially if she wears J Crew and Zara. And doesn't whine. So much.


"Konichiwa Zara" instead of "Sayonara Zara", LOL.

I'd say her friends have done an excellent job getting the word out to the media about how "hands on" she is with Archie and portraying her as having very little domestic help.  Her dropping to the press that she needed to rush away from an engagement because "it's feed time" didn't hurt.


----------



## bag-mania

I don't know what extreme level of media love Harry and Meghan expect. Some in the media absolutely adore her and are constantly singing her praises. Hence this rather pointless Harper's Bazaar article describing her as "Too Cute" as she plays with a photo filter. 

*Meghan Markle's Reaction to Trying on Flower Crown Filters During the Royal Tour Is Too Cute*

Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry had an eventful, 10-day royal tour of southern Africa, and we're still reliving all the unforgettable moments.

Luckily, for fans who have already seen every photo of Meghan, Harry, and baby Archie on tour, one very generous Instagram user has some secret footage to share.

The founder of hair street culture platform OwnURcrown, Nikiwe Dlova, met with Meghan on the last day of the royal tour and caught the sweet interaction on camera. In fact, Dlova even got Meghan to try out OwnURcrown, which resulted in the duchess trial-ing some seriously chic filters.




Captioning the adorable video, Dlova wrote, "Lastly she owned her crown with our Instagram filter we collaborated on with @will.hurt and @maxwellmutanda  she loved it!! When she looked away she realized it was the same headpiece I was holding! This is an experience I will never forget!!! Thank you again @southernafricaarts—you can try the filter on my bio."

Dlova also discussed meeting the Duchess of Sussex, captioning her photo of the incredible moment, "A royal handshake."

Meghan Markle may no longer be on Instagram, but Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is, and her filter game is seriously strong.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...meghan-markle-royal-tour-flower-crown-filter/


----------



## Flatsy

The words "sweet" "cute" and "adorable" are the words most often used for the Sussexes by the US fluff press.  Harper's Bazaar, Cosmopolitan and People produce a steady stream of those articles where they just squee about everything they do.  I'm sure Harry and Meghan wish that was the type of coverage they got at home.


----------



## threadbender

Flatsy said:


> The words "sweet" "cute" and "adorable" are the words most often used for the Sussexes by the US fluff press.  Harper's Bazaar, Cosmopolitan and People produce a steady stream of those articles where they just squee about everything they do.  I'm sure Harry and Meghan wish that was the type of coverage they got at home.


One would think they would prefer adjectives like strong, generous, compassionate, dynamic, confident, straight-forward, independent.....the list goes on. Sweet. cute and adorable sound like a stuffed animal on a little girl's bed.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## bag-mania

*“He Basically Hates the Press”: Prince Harry’s Battle Against the Media Has Only Begun*
The Sussexes aren’t just taking several tabloids to court; they’re aiming to reinvent the relationship between royals and the press.

The Sussexes are taking no prisoners in their feud with Fleet Street. Last week, Prince Harry sent shock waves through the British newspaper industry when it was announced that he is reportedly taking legal action against the _Sun_ and the _Daily Mirror_ over “the alleged illegal interception of voice-mail messages,” most likely the phone-hacking scandal that went public in 2011. The surprise news came just days after Harry issued a powerful statement on the Sussexes’ newly created website announcing that his wife, Meghan Markle, is taking the _Mail on Sunday_ to court for breach of copyright and misuse of private information, after they printed a private letter Meghan wrote to her estranged father after her wedding.

The news, which came on the penultimate day of the couple’s tour of South Africa, was a “bombshell” for reporters covering the tour, as well as some of the couple’s aides, who were completely taken aback by the news, and the timing in particular, coming off the back of an official tour on behalf of the Queen that was funded by the British government.

But for Harry and Meghan, it is all part of a carefully considered plan to circumvent the traditional press machine and rewrite the rules of how royals interact with the media. According to royal insiders, Harry and Meghan don’t just plan to take on the tabloids in court; they are on a mission to redefine how the press operates—and they have a secret weapon to aid their mission.

Enter 26-year-old David Watkins, a former employee at Burberry who was hired by the couple this past summer to help run their Instagram account and who is transforming coverage of the Sussexes. “For them, the future is Instagram over the press,” said a source. “They are reaching a global audience that’s more than the broadsheets and tabloids combined, and crucially presenting themselves the way _they_ want to. As far as Harry is concerned, it’s a way of cutting out the mainstream press, which is very convenient because he basically hates the press.”

The source continued, “Whether they win or lose the case, Harry’s intent on paying the press back for what they did to his mother, the endless scrutiny into his private life, and now their vendetta against Meghan. This is payback time, as far as Harry is concerned.”

Even before his relationship with Meghan began, Harry was rumored to have plans to phase out royal reporters and photographers by taking control of his own image via social media. In private, the prince would gleefully predict how the royal rat pack’s (the term given to royal reporters and photographers) days were numbered because “social media is the future.”

And in his passionate statement last week, Harry made his feelings about the British press clear. He referred to months of abuse his wife has suffered at the hands of the press, claiming that he has been, until now, a “silent witness.” While Meghan has previously said she does not read tabloids, Harry does, and he even reportedly reads the comments.

So while they wage their war with the press, Instagram remains their plan for the future, and the reason they hired a full-time social media manager. Scooping the press with breaking news and exclusive pictures and footage on Instagram, the Sussexes have started using their own social platform to circumvent more traditional press and P.R. It‘s a method already favored by many celebrities, and even Donald *****, who seems to prefer a tweet to an official White House press conference.

The couple announced the birth of their son to the world on Instagram, and during their recent tour in South Africa, reporters on the ground were given a heads-up that Archie would be meeting Archbishop Desmond Tutu, but were asked to adhere to an embargo. Within moments, though, Harry and Meghan had shared footage of Archie—his first public appearance since his christening—to their Instagram Story.

“The fact that there was an embargo was ludicrous,” said one royal reporter. “They were meant to agree to an embargo on a story that the Sussexes were streaming to millions of people online. Suffice to say, the reporters broke the embargo on their Twitter feeds and hit send on the story.”

Veteran royal photographers have also privately complained that Harry and Meghan are making them “redundant” by using their own photographers and excluding them from some engagements. “At the root of all this is their plan to shake things up,” the royal source added. “Harry is not afraid to take the media on. He feels like he has nothing to lose.”

Harry and Meghan are not the first royals to push back against the tabloids, but this is already an unusually public battle. The Queen, who has returned from her summer holiday in Balmoral, is said to have concerns about what could potentially be a very public trial. For Meghan’s case against the _Mail,_ it could even lead to her coming face-to-face with her father in court. With Prince Charles and Prince William also yet to publicly support Harry and Meghan’s efforts to take on the media, it’s possible that the Sussexes will have to face this fight alone.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/10/prince-harry-meghan-markle-media-battle


----------



## mrsinsyder

Do they not understand that the relationship with the press is probably one of the main reasons they even still exist? Smh.


----------



## threadbender

I think this makes them appear to be attention-seeking and petty, entitled and short-sighted. My opinion, of course. This is akin to telling your boss to screw off. The press is part of the job. Don't like it, quit. Then, they can do as they please. True, they would still deal with the press but on their own terms. Right now, they represent the BRF and appear to have no respect for any of it.
I would love to know what the other royals think of all of this.


----------



## bag-mania

bag-mania said:


> “At the root of all this is their plan to shake things up,” the royal source added. *“Harry is not afraid to take the media on. He feels like he has nothing to lose.”*
> 
> Harry and Meghan are not the first royals to push back against the tabloids, but this is already an unusually public battle. *The Queen, who has returned from her summer holiday in Balmoral, is said to have concerns about what could potentially be a very public trial. *For Meghan’s case against the _Mail,_ it could even lead to her coming face-to-face with her father in court. With Prince Charles and Prince William also yet to publicly support Harry and Meghan’s efforts to take on the media, it’s possible that the Sussexes will have to face this fight alone.



Harry is mistaken. He has quite a lot to lose. If it is true the Queen has "concerns" Harry may be muzzled very soon or find himself on the outside looking in.


----------



## daisychainz

I hope that William and Kate continue to stay quiet, and very far away from whatever is going on with Harry and Meghan and their press wars.


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> Harry is mistaken. He has quite a lot to lose. If it is true the Queen has "concerns" Harry may be muzzled very soon or find himself on the outside looking in.


That would say a lot considering it is commonly thought that Harry is the favorite of the grandchildren.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> That would say a lot considering it is commonly thought that Harry is the favorite of the grandchildren.



That would explain why she appears to be indulgent of him asserting himself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> I hope that William and Kate continue to stay quiet, and very far away from whatever is going on with Harry and Meghan and their press wars.


They will. They’ve been playing the game especially well lately.


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> That would say a lot considering it is commonly thought that Harry is the favorite of the grandchildren.


he can be a favorite but if he goes too far, he could be a bit less of a favorite (IMO)


----------



## mdcx

Good luck to them if this is their attitude. To be honest, outside of being Diana’s second son, brother of the future King, Harry is not that important in the scheme of things.
Once all the royal reporters go away at their request, they may find a rather limited number of people care about Harry and Meghan, Influencers.


----------



## CeeJay

threadbender said:


> That would say a lot considering it is commonly thought that Harry is the favorite of the grandchildren.


Yes, I've heard that as well, but I think that was because he was a "cheeky monkey" and loved his military service (_and we all know that Prince Phillip is/was very much a military stalwart_)!   

Based on that article, it pretty much confirms what some of us have said - e.g., that H&M want to absolutely control the narrative about themselves .. and it MUST be positive!  Yikes, why do I feel that this is going to backfire on them big-time?   Don't disagree that Social Media is oftentimes the means in which some folks view the world, but I would say that many of the older folks don't.  In addition, aren't many of the attacks on them happening via Social Media?  Who is going to prevent a Piers Morgan "look-alike" on a Social Media site?


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> Good luck to them if this is their attitude. To be honest, outside of being Diana’s second son, brother of the future King, Harry is not that important in the scheme of things.
> Once all the royal reporters go away at their request, they may find a rather limited number of people care about Harry and Meghan, Influencers.


I think they would still have many celebrity friends and the US press will dote on them. But, some perks could become fewer and far between. Hey, if they prefer the Hollywood celebrity press and social media, they may want to consider that they are fickle and not always kind. 
Honestly, in the grand scheme of things, well, they can do what they wish. It is a shame that they are not concentrating more on the causes they care about rather than this kerfuffle. But, they have their own lives and can choose how they live them.
I keep thinking how positive things were in Africa and the momentum was there. Too bad.


----------



## Jayne1

threadbender said:


> I think they would still have many celebrity friends and the US press will dote on them. But, some perks could become fewer and far between.


Remember how Fergie was a big deal in the US, even after the divorce.

She would go on talk shows and people would fawn over her and ask about the BRF, as if she had insider information.

I can see them having celebrity friends in the US... would Ellen still care though?


----------



## mrsinsyder

It just gets better. From one attention seeker to another.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I...


----------



## Hobbsy

I hope they power on and win! Media is scum of the earth, not one out there telling the truth.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> I...


Yeah because bananas and Sharpies go together like ... 
I don’t know who the joke is on here but good luck to them.
Love wearing yellow so I’m in. Sending out a ray of sunshine on the 10th ☀️


----------



## PatsyCline

threadbender said:


> I think this makes them appear to be attention-seeking and petty, entitled and short-sighted. My opinion, of course. This is akin to telling your boss to screw off. The press is part of the job. Don't like it, quit. Then, they can do as they please. True, they would still deal with the press but on their own terms. Right now, they represent the BRF and appear to have no respect for any of it.
> I would love to know what the other royals think of all of this.


I wonder how anyone would feel if a loved one was hounded by the press night and day, and ended up dead partially because of the harassment by the press?

Sure the press has it's job to do, but there's the mainstream press, and then there's the tabloid press. Hacking into someone's voicemail is illegal and unethical.

Harry is simply doing something I'm sure he feels he couldn't do for his mother. Protect her from the tabloid press.


----------



## Sharont2305

Interesting... Harry "it's like looking in the mirror" 
Just waiting for people to actually believe that's his actual door bell sound.....


----------



## zen1965

Oh, great. Another celeb!
I am beginning to feel that everybody would be better off If they just moved to Malibu and lived in the land of friendly press.


----------



## mrsinsyder

zen1965 said:


> Oh, great. Another celeb!
> I am beginning to feel that everybody would be better off If they just moved to Malibu and lived in the land of friendly press.


Their end goal is definitely becoming more clear. Soho spice can be the celeb she never would have been and Harry can give the RF the middle finger. I wonder how she feels knowing none of their new friends would have even looked in her direction prior to the her meeting Harry.


----------



## Clearblueskies

zen1965 said:


> Oh, great. Another celeb!
> I am beginning to feel that everybody would be better off If they just moved to Malibu and lived in the land of friendly press.


I thought exactly the same thing. Another celeb, and another “tease” on insta 
The recent Spectator article on Meghan was an interesting read, they call Meghan the Princess of Woke


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Interesting... Harry "it's like looking in the mirror"
> Just waiting for people to actually believe that's his actual door bell sound.....



Or that he answers the door.....


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought exactly the same thing. Another celeb, and another “tease” on insta
> The recent Spectator article on Meghan was an interesting read, they call Meghan the Princess of Woke


Woke and Joke


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Interesting point brought up at another forum:
Why is there no interaction between uncle Harry and William and Kate's kids? Has there ever been any interaction recorded? Harry is hugging children all across Southern Africa but never his own brother's children?


And personally, I couldn't help but notice Meghan's lack of interaction with her own baby son during the _Meghan and Harry do South Africa_ PR & movie making tour. Just constantly fiddling with Archie to distract from the fact that there was no real signs of bonding between the two at all. Even less so between Harry and Archie. We didn't even get to see Harry carry his own son. No nuzzling, no real eye contact or familiarity. They looked more like extended family or acquaintances.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> Or that he answers the door.....


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Or that he answers the door.....


Yeah, Where's the butler? *rolls eyes


----------



## PatsyCline

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, Where's the butler? *rolls eyes


Maybe they don't have a butler??


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Interesting point brought up at another forum:
> Why is there no interaction between uncle Harry and William and Kate's kids? Has there ever been any interaction recorded? Harry is hugging children all across Southern Africa but never his own brother's children?
> 
> 
> And personally, I couldn't help but notice Meghan's lack of interaction with her own baby son during the _Meghan and Harry do South Africa_ PR & movie making tour. Just constantly fiddling with Archie to distract from the fact that there was no real signs of bonding between the two at all. Even less so between Harry and Archie. We didn't even get to see Harry carry his own son. No nuzzling, no real eye contact or familiarity. They looked more like extended family or acquaintances.


I've noticed that too. It first caught my eye when they did those family photos and Camilla is like pulling Charlotte away from MM. Interesting.


----------



## lulilu

mrsinsyder said:


> Their end goal is definitely becoming more clear. *Soho spice* can be the celeb she never would have been and Harry can give the RF the middle finger. I wonder how she feels knowing none of their new friends would have even looked in her direction prior to the her meeting Harry.





Clearblueskies said:


> I thought exactly the same thing. Another celeb, and another “tease” on insta
> The recent Spectator article on Meghan was an interesting read, they call Meghan the *Princess of Woke*





mrsinsyder said:


> W*oke and Joke*



Another blog I read has a rule against insulting nicknames.  It makes for much more pleasant reading.


----------



## Sharont2305

PatsyCline said:


> Maybe they don't have a butler??


That's the point I was making, people would assume they have one, hence the eye roll.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> Another blog I read has a rule against insulting nicknames.  It makes for much more pleasant reading.


If you don’t like reading my posts, put me on your ignore list.


----------



## Welltraveled!

mrsinsyder said:


> Woke and Joke



Are you using the word woke in a condescending manner?  If so why?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welltraveled! said:


> Are you using the word woke in a condescending manner?


Nope.


----------



## threadbender

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Interesting point brought up at another forum:
> Why is there no interaction between uncle Harry and William and Kate's kids? Has there ever been any interaction recorded? Harry is hugging children all across Southern Africa but never his own brother's children?
> 
> 
> And personally, I couldn't help but notice Meghan's lack of interaction with her own baby son during the _Meghan and Harry do South Africa_ PR & movie making tour. Just constantly fiddling with Archie to distract from the fact that there was no real signs of bonding between the two at all. Even less so between Harry and Archie. We didn't even get to see Harry carry his own son. No nuzzling, no real eye contact or familiarity. They looked more like extended family or acquaintances.


I thought there seemed to be some bonding between them and Archie. At minimum he was smiling and seemed happy. If they were not interacting with him, I don't know if he would have been that at ease. I hope I am right. I think that little boy is just a cutie pie and he deserves to have parents that will adore him.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Their end goal is definitely becoming more clear. Soho spice can be the celeb she never would have been and Harry can give the RF the middle finger. I wonder how she feels knowing none of their new friends would have even looked in her direction prior to the her meeting Harry.


I doubt she would let that bother her.  The point is she did snag him and now she is royalty.


----------



## bag-mania

At this point I'm assuming there is normal bonding between them. Until Archie is old enough to walk and display his personality, there's only so much interaction that can be captured on camera other than Meghan holding him. Little babies like him don't do much other than look cute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

KP hasn’t updated it’s website. It is using Meghan’s initiative on its page.



These were pictures from the tour I didn’t see to later.


----------



## sdkitty

Hobbsy said:


> I hope they power on and win! Media is scum of the earth, not one out there telling the truth.


you are saying that about all media?  I find that offensive


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> Their end goal is definitely becoming more clear. Soho spice can be the celeb she never would have been and Harry can give the RF the middle finger. *I wonder how she feels knowing none of their new friends would have even looked in her direction prior to the her meeting Harry.*



Im thinking everyone realized that at the star studded baby shower. I dont think she cares though. This was the end goal.


----------



## Swanky

Seriously gonna need y'all to stop trying to moderate one another. . .


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Woke and Joke



Maybe it is more like Wake and Bake?


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> Im thinking everyone realized that at the star studded baby shower. I dont think she cares though. This was the end goal.


If H&M think that a move to California would put them in the 'right' light, boy .. then they are SO wrong!  LA is the worst place for Paps, they are everywhere .. it's like they crawl out of the woodwork and bushes!  One time the HB and I were in Beverly Hills and for some odd reason a pap appears out of nowhere thinking that the HB is some celebrity and all of a sudden .. there is a swarm around us!  It scared the heck out of me!  Think about all the times that the paps have flown helicopters over celebs weddings and other events? .. if they think privacy in the UK is bad, sure ... come out to LA and see how bad it really can be!!!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

This would be a great look after spending all those public dollars on the haunted frogmore house.
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...y-meghan-markle-considering-moving-to-canada/

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Allegedly Considering Moving to Canada With Baby Archie*

In case you haven't noticed, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are facing a lot of hostility from the British press and public right now. After finally moving past the controversy that came from their private jet usage, Harry and Meghan began their tour of Africa, and for the most part, it was well received! But just as Meghan and Harry were finishing up their tour, Harry dropped a very public letter that is allegedly causing problems.

Harry released a statement announcing that he will be taking legal action against _Daily Mail,_ _Mail on Sunday_, _Daily Mirror_ and _The Sun_'s publishers. While it seemed like a power move to protect Meghan against bullying in the tabloids, it may have backfired because Harry allegedly did not consult a single person with royal duties about his plan.

Now, relationships between Harry and the people in the royal cabinet are reportedly suffering as a result. In fact, things have become so bad that a new source says Meghan and Harry are considering moving overseas—to Canada, to be exact. “Meghan and Harry have considered moving to Canada, as it’s part of the Commonwealth,” a source told _Us Weekly. _Relocation is technically an option, and “Meghan and Harry are considering it for the future,” the source added.

This report comes after _Daily Express_ royal correspondent Richard Palmer claimed that Meghan and Harry have no support from their royal relatives or house attendants. “Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment,” Richard tweeted. “Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves.”

Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves.

Hopefully Meghan and Harry can repair their relationships with the people in their royal inner circle. If not, Meghan will at least know her way around the Canadian terrain—she did live in Toronto while filming_ Suits_, after all!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh come on. First Africa (that turned out to be a tour), the the US and now Canada? At some random time in the future. Uh huh. 

The 24 hr news cycle has killed journalism.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> This would be a great look after spending all those public dollars on the haunted frogmore house.
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...y-meghan-markle-considering-moving-to-canada/
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Allegedly Considering Moving to Canada With Baby Archie*
> 
> In case you haven't noticed, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are facing a lot of hostility from the British press and public right now. After finally moving past the controversy that came from their private jet usage, Harry and Meghan began their tour of Africa, and for the most part, it was well received! But just as Meghan and Harry were finishing up their tour, Harry dropped a very public letter that is allegedly causing problems.
> 
> Harry released a statement announcing that he will be taking legal action against _Daily Mail,_ _Mail on Sunday_, _Daily Mirror_ and _The Sun_'s publishers. While it seemed like a power move to protect Meghan against bullying in the tabloids, it may have backfired because Harry allegedly did not consult a single person with royal duties about his plan.
> 
> Now, relationships between Harry and the people in the royal cabinet are reportedly suffering as a result. In fact, things have become so bad that a new source says Meghan and Harry are considering moving overseas—to Canada, to be exact. “Meghan and Harry have considered moving to Canada, as it’s part of the Commonwealth,” a source told _Us Weekly. _Relocation is technically an option, and “Meghan and Harry are considering it for the future,” the source added.
> 
> This report comes after _Daily Express_ royal correspondent Richard Palmer claimed that Meghan and Harry have no support from their royal relatives or house attendants. “Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment,” Richard tweeted. “Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves.”
> 
> Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves.
> 
> Hopefully Meghan and Harry can repair their relationships with the people in their royal inner circle. If not, Meghan will at least know her way around the Canadian terrain—she did live in Toronto while filming_ Suits_, after all!


Well, it was Winston Churchill that said "_those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it_" .. seems like they might just be going the path of the Duke of Windsor and Wallis Simpson ..


----------



## bag-mania

You gotta love the "unnamed sources." Without them we wouldn't get our wackiest stories. Maybe we could give them some credibility if any of these stories actually had a quote with a real name attached to it.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> You gotta love the "unnamed sources." Without them we wouldn't get our wackiest stories. Maybe we could give them some credibility if any of these stories actually had a quote with a real name attached to it.


Yes but having the source named as ‘PR agency contracted by Meghan Markle’ in each story may be a tad embarrassing.


----------



## daisychainz

I could definitely see Canada as a better option for them than America - part of the Commonwealth, close to NYC and star events, a shorter flight to all of Europe, and maybe since she was in Suits all those years the Canadian press will like her and write nice things. I wonder if it'd ever really happen. Maybe if they have another child it could happen, because they'll want to hide far from the media.


----------



## justwatchin

This thread is something else but I can’t look away.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Yes but having the source named as ‘PR agency contracted by Meghan Markle’ in each story may be a tad embarrassing.


It's a PR agency called Funshine Fachs...


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...orking-against-william-kate-middleton-2842088

*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Accused Of Working Against William, Kate Middleton*
By Catherine Armecin 
10/08/19 AT 11:26 PM

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are accused of working against Prince William and Kate Middleton after making this move.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have been dragged into the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s controversies. Markle’s fans accused Prince William and Middleton of being the ones behind the criticism against the new parents.

However, this time, some netizens felt that it was Prince Harry and Markle who plotted against Prince William and Middleton by upsetting the media ahead of the future king and queen’s Pakistan tour after they finished their South Africa tour.

“The Queen will be furious that H&M are setting out to upset and alienate the media just before William's sensitive tour of Pakistan. H&M are actively working against William and Kate, which is serious,” one netizen wrote on Twitter.

“They really are working against the future heir and have been for some time and no one does anything to stop it??” a different user added.

Prince Harry and Markle’s trip to South Africa went smoothly. Many even said that it was a huge success days before it ended. However, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex shocked royal fans when they announced that they had filed a lawsuit against Mail on Sunday for publishing Markle’s private letter and editing it. 

Days after that Prince Harry filed another lawsuit against The Sun and The Mirror. Many felt that Prince Harry and Markle are declaring war against the press.

Prior to this, Markle’s fans expressed their disappointment in the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge for not speaking up to defend Markle from her bashers. The supporters of the former “Suits” star said that Prince William and Middleton enjoyed the bashing their sister-in-law received because they benefited from it.

“The Cambridge fandom honestly makes me sick. The reason Willy and Duchess dolittle haven’t spoken out against the hatred Meghan is facing is because it makes them look better! They seriously thrive on it and you can tell,” one netizen wrote.

Just recently, Prince William and Middleton officially sealed their charity split from Prince Harry and Markle by removing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from the website of the Royal Foundation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Ed Sheehan will be at the WellChild tomorrow. Harry and him made a cute and cornet skit.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I wonder why he filmed it at Eugenie's house


----------



## CeeJay

Seems like all these Celebs get to see/meet Archie as opposed to the British public getting to see pictures of him outside of a tour.  If I was a Brit and knew my tax dollars were funding these two, I think I would be pretty pissed by now ..


----------



## buffym

CeeJay said:


> Seems like all these Celebs get to see/meet Archie as opposed to the British public getting to see pictures of him outside of a tour.  If I was a Brit and knew my tax dollars were funding these two, I think I would be pretty pissed by now ..



That is normal for the BRF,when the kids are little you don’t see them.

Prince George wasn’t really seen until his parents did a tour in Australia.
1. A photocall after birth
2. A picture Kate’s dad took where you could see him
3. A christening picture- 1st real picture where his face wasn’t squashed 
4. A picture where he was turned to the side 

As the children get older, they attend events.


----------



## Straight-Laced

sdkitty said:


> you are saying that about all media?  I find that offensive


It's OK, when Harry and Meghan become duke and duchess of Special city NK only Truth will be produced and everything will be much more Pleasant and no one will be offended


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> It's OK, when Harry and Meghan become duke and duchess of Special city NK only Truth will be produced and everything will be much more Pleasant and no one will be offended


what?


----------



## Straight-Laced

sdkitty said:


> what?


Sorry if I was being too abstract and silly.  Yes free media in the free world has some drawbacks and sometimes oversteps the mark but the original post quoted was so over the top in criticising the media ('scum ... no one telling the truth') that I was imagining the Sussex duo in an alternative,  non ********ic place where there is no free media with divergent opinions and points of view and only one truth.


----------



## threadbender

What happens if the press just decides they are too much work and stop covering them at all? Surely, there are plenty of celebrities, non throne bound royals, business moguls, influencers, politicians and so on that can be photographed, fawned over, criticized, written about, tweeted about, spoken of such that they would not be missed that much. There comes a point where "thou doest protest too much" comes into play and gets boring. Just sayin'

PS Yes, I know this is unlikely. They are in the celebrity stratosphere so......


----------



## Grande Latte

CeeJay said:


> Well, it was Winston Churchill that said "_those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it_" .. seems like they might just be going the path of the Duke of Windsor and Wallis Simpson ..



Yes. History repeats itself. So best to know as much as possible and don't make the same mistakes. You share wise quotes. Thank you.


----------



## Sharont2305

World Mental Health Day


----------



## buffym

Nice crowd for Harry’s visit today on World Mental Health Day.


----------



## jblended

Things that make you go _hmmm_..
https://blindgossip.com/homemade-controversy/#more-99347


----------



## buffym

More from Harry’s engagement today.


----------



## mrsinsyder

jblended said:


> Things that make you go _hmmm_..
> https://blindgossip.com/homemade-controversy/#more-99347


I saw that. I stand by my statement that this was all done to prevent something they know the media has from getting out. 

To that end, the sex tape thing is so passé. I get that for the RF it’s a big deal but. Meh.


----------



## mrsinsyder

More outlets are reporting this now...
*Meghan Markle may have leaked the contents of her own letter even before her dad gave it to the Mail on Sunday*


*Meghan Markle has been accused of leaking the contents of the private letter she wrote to her father even before it was published by the Mail On Sunday.*
*The Duchess of Sussex is suing the publication over the misuse of private information, infringement of copyright, and breach of the Data Protection Act 2008 after it published excerpts from the letter earlier this year. *
*However, an anonymous friend of the royal quoted the letter during an interview with People magazine back in February.*
*The friend said: "She's like, 'Dad. I'm so heartbroken. I love you, I have one father. Please stop victimizing me through the media so we can repair our relationship.'"*
*Markle "could be asked to swear on oath" whether she orchestrated the interview, The Mirror reports.*
*However, legal expert Michael Sweeney told Insider this would be unlikely to negatively impact Markle's chances of winning her lawsuit.*
*https://www.insider.com/meghan-markle-mail-on-sunday-lawsuit-letter-thomas-markle-people-2019-10*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Harry does not look well. Something is off with him.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Harry does not look well. Something is off with him.


He looks a mess. But he kinda always has.


----------



## LittleStar88

Straight-Laced said:


> It's OK, when Harry and Meghan become duke and duchess of Special city NK only Truth will be produced and everything will be much more Pleasant and no one will be offended



 Can someone please explain??


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Can someone please explain??


she explained in post 12436


----------



## Clearblueskies

jblended said:


> Things that make you go _hmmm_..
> https://blindgossip.com/homemade-controversy/#more-99347


 Oh dear.



mrsinsyder said:


> He looks a mess. But he kinda always has.


He looks scruffy, it’s starting to look affected


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> This would be a great look after spending all those public dollars on the haunted frogmore house.
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...y-meghan-markle-considering-moving-to-canada/
> 
> Would like to hear more about Frogmore Cottage being haunted?!
> 
> 
> 
> mrsinsyder said:
> 
> 
> 
> He looks a mess. But he kinda always has.
> 
> 
> 
> He looks exhausted and stressed, naturally since there's a baby at home, plus he felt this an opportune time to take on the Fleet Street giants for who knows what end...
Click to expand...


----------



## mrsinsyder

cafecreme15 said:


> Would like to hear more about Frogmore Cottage being haunted?!



Frogmore has a graveyard and mausoleum (where Wallis is, naturally lol)

https://www.bustle.com/p/meghan-mar...ttage-has-reportedly-haunted-grounds-16990063


----------



## buffym

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...tingham/?viewas=amp&__twitter_impression=true

A brave teenager, who has had several operations to remove a brain tumour, has received a private voicemail from the Duchess of Sussex. Aleyna Genc, 14, was taken aside by the Duke of Sussex, 35, during his visit to Nottingham Academy on Thursday so he could show her the special message from Meghan.  

Nottingham is one of Harry’s and Meghan’s first visits.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## sdkitty

buffym said:


> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...tingham/?viewas=amp&__twitter_impression=true
> 
> A brave teenager, who has had several operations to remove a brain tumour, has received a private voicemail from the Duchess of Sussex. Aleyna Genc, 14, was taken aside by the Duke of Sussex, 35, during his visit to Nottingham Academy on Thursday so he could show her the special message from Meghan.
> 
> Nottingham is one of Harry’s and Meghan’s first visits.



that's nice
would be even nicer if it wasn't publicized


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> that's nice
> would be ever nicer if it wasn't publicized


Just like the ribbon signing.

But then what would be the point?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> I saw that. I stand by my statement that this was all done to prevent something they know the media has from getting out.
> 
> To that end, the sex tape thing is so passé. I get that for the RF it’s a big deal but. Meh.


Yes, agree, unless criminal activities involved, who in these times would care? I doubt even the BRF would be that bothered. If it's Meghan (for some reason I don't think it is, there is something else going on causing the sue 'em all mania) it's her business.

I'm against shaming people for consenting adult sexuality kept in private. Just as I'm equally against someone doxxing/outing others which if it's Meghan, may be the case here. Besides, there's so much more tax subsidised inanity to clutch our pearls at with this couple.

And it's a Sussex family tradition anyway, started by Harry in Vegas


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Straight-Laced said:


> Sorry if I was being too abstract and silly.  Yes free media in the free world has some drawbacks and sometimes oversteps the mark but the original post quoted was so over the top in criticising the media ('scum ... no one telling the truth') that I was imagining the Sussex duo in an alternative,  non ********ic place where there is no free media with divergent opinions and points of view and only one truth.


No, it was very on point. I think with this couple it's just really easy for the sarcasm to get lost because reality trumps it every time


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> that's nice
> would be even nicer if it wasn't publicized



I don’t understand how Harry could have handled it differently. The young lady was there and he spoke to her and she spoke to the PA. 

What was he supposed to do ignore her or tell her not to speak to the press?


----------



## bag-mania

It’s all so simple folks!

Press fawning over Harry and Meghan = Good

Press critical of Harry and Meghan = Bad


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> No, it was very on point. I think with this couple it's just really easy for the sarcasm to get lost because reality trumps it every time


Well I maintain that it’s a weak example of satire but thanks for getting it


----------



## sdkitty

I know a lot of young people get their news from FB or Instagram but this war against the media just makes Harry look bitter and mean to me.  I'm officially over him.  
From Vanity Fair
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...ampaign=VF_RW_101019&utm_term=VYF_Royal_Watch


----------



## Jayne1

Meg is too smart to do a sex tape. That's my assumption.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Meg is too smart to do a sex tape. That's my assumption.



Meghan as we know her today is too smart. But 15 or 20 years ago, who knows? In the post-Harvey Weinstein era we’ve learned many young actresses did things they didn’t want to for the sake of their careers. Nothing surprises me anymore.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Meghan as we know her today is too smart. But 15 or 20 years ago, who knows? In the post-Harvey Weinstein era we’ve learned many young actresses did things they didn’t want to for the sake of their careers. Nothing surprises me anymore.


that's what I was thinking....I saw Vanessa Williams on a talk show recently
She said her mother warned her not to take nude pics when she was a teenager.  And those of us old enough to remember know what happened with that....


----------



## mdcx

I would assume there's some kind of casting couch situation in Meghan's past. Whether that involved racy pics etc who knows.


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> I would assume there's some kind of casting couch situation in Meghan's past. Whether that involved racy pics etc who knows.


Thing is, in the environment now, she would be considered a victim so why not get ahead of it? If, indeed, this is what the potential problem is. I seriously doubt it, honestly.
I feel like Harry has hated the press since Diana died, and he is having the opportunity to act on it now. Meghan encourages the activism against them and is, likely, reveling in the limelight. I don't think either one has considered the potential pitfalls.
I hope I am all wrong. lol I think Archie deserves to have a happy family with both of his parents enjoying life.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’d rather see them expose her merching than her sex faces.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> I’d rather see them expose her merching than her sex faces.


What merching?  I've read she does, but I don't know what or who she gets money from... ?


----------



## Hobbsy

sdkitty said:


> you are saying that about all media?  I find that offensive


All media.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> What merching?  I've read she does, but I don't know what or who she gets money from... ?


There’s a website called Meghan’s Mirror that her team is likely behind... they’ve been caught posting items for sale that she wore before she wears them, and often lists “what she wore” within minutes of her appearances (even for items like plain tee shirts that are indistinguishable between brands). 
There was also speculation that she’s been caught wearing clothes with tags on them because they’re later resold through the Mulroney-stylist connection. 

and this was one of the more recent allegations:


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> I don’t understand how Harry could have handled it differently. The young lady was there and he spoke to her and she spoke to the PA.
> 
> What was he supposed to do ignore her or tell her not to speak to the press?


It would have been a very simple matter to arrange a private meeting with the family - he’s not exactly short on resources or people to arrange it for him.  Tacky IMO.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a website called Meghan’s Mirror that her team is likely behind... they’ve been caught posting items for sale that she wore before she wears them, and often lists “what she wore” within minutes of her appearances (even for items like plain tee shirts that are indistinguishable between brands).
> There was also speculation that she’s been caught wearing clothes with tags on them because they’re later resold through the Mulroney-stylist connection.
> 
> and this was one of the more recent allegations:
> View attachment 4562600



The group behind Meghan’s Mirror runs What Would Kate Do? It predates Meghan marrying Harry. So it is hard for her team to be behind something that was around before she started to date a royal.


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> The group behind Meghan’s Mirror runs What Would Kate Do? It predates Meghan marrying Harry. So it is hard for her team to be behind something that was around before she started to date a royal.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4562637
> View attachment 4562638


Ok? That doesn’t mean her team doesn’t tell them what she’s wearing so that she gets kickbacks from the companies.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I still can’t understand why they use these ridiculous emoji bots.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Ok? That doesn’t mean her team doesn’t tell them what she’s wearing so that she gets kickbacks from the companies.



That is officially the royal family policies to tell what the Duchesses are wearing. It’s how the press knows as soon as they get out of the car.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Whatever you say. Whatever will stop you from arguing with every single post I make. Meghan will make a lovely future queen of the entire world.

It’s my opinion that she receives kickbacks from the makers of the things she wears. I’ve seen enough conclusive info that leads me to believe this. This is my opinion and there’s no need to bend over backwards trying to change my mind.


----------



## Flatsy

Merching is such a vague accusation, and I don't know what it means either.

I do know that Meghan's Mirror quickly identifies clothing Meghan is wearing in her personal time, which is not something that the palace announces.  For example, they identified a vintage De La Renta coat she wore at her baby shower and knew where she got it online.  Meghan's Mirror has also hinted via twitter that they have an indirect connection to Meghan that made them privy to a lot of details about the shower, and they felt confident that Meghan was ok with that information being public (even though the site made the decision not to share everything.)  That was a little strange.


----------



## Flatsy

This People Magazine story about Meghan's "A" necklace struck me and I'm surprised it got no attention from the people who believe she merches: https://people.com/royals/all-about-meghan-markles-meaningful-gold-necklace-to-honor-son-archie/



> The British-born jeweler, who runs her company from a small workshop in Sydney, had long admired Meghan’s style. So when a friend of hers working alongside both Meghan and Prince Harry at the Invictus Games in Sydney offered to pass on a gift to Meghan, Swann jumped at the chance. She sent a gold necklace with the initials “H” and “M” on it, which has yet to be worn in public. When little Archie arrived, she sent the same piece again, this time with an “A” charm and a personal note of congratulations.
> 
> “I explained how each necklace is made to order, with no wastage of gold and a little about my small company. I never expected to hear anything back or for her to wear it!”
> 
> When the news spread that the stylish royal mom was wearing her $410 necklace, sales surged and her website struggled to keep up with demand.


She helped support a British designer's business, and that's part of her job.  I do not think she got a kickback.  But I thought she wasn't supposed to accept gifts?  That's over $1,200 of jewelry that she indirectly asked a designer to send to her as a "gift".

Jessica Mulroney and her husband were notably at the Invictus Games in Sydney in a work capacity.  Probably Jessica who requested the gift?  I know a lot of people believe that Jessica is somehow involved in this as the go-between with designers.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Flatsy said:


> Merching is such a vague accusation, and I don't know what it means either.
> 
> I do know that Meghan's Mirror quickly identifies clothing Meghan is wearing in her personal time, which is not something that the palace announces.  For example, they identified a vintage De La Renta coat she wore at her baby shower and knew where she got it online.  Meghan's Mirror has also hinted via twitter that they have an indirect connection to Meghan that made them privy to a lot of details about the shower, and they felt confident that Meghan was ok with that information being public (even though the site made the decision not to share everything.)  That was a little strange.



Given how often on this forum I see people ID clothes that celebrities are wearing very quickly, I'm on the side of believing some people just know fashion and have a skill for identifying designers. Everything does not have to be a PR announcement. Though it makes total sense that for some occasions ,the palace would choose to do it.


----------



## buffym

Tom Bradby is a royal favorite. He interviewed William and Kate for their engagement. He also made a documentary about Harry in Africa in 2016.


----------



## bag-mania

For the guy who wants everyone to be "green" Harry sure wants to visit lots of places.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Aren't Moving to Canada, But Want to Have Extended Trips in More Countries*





Karwai Tang/WireImage

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are not relocating to Canada.

Amid rumors that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are considering a move to Canada following their royal tour of Africa, a source close to the royals tells ET that is simply not the case. 

However, the source says, the couple is "looking very seriously at spending extended periods of time in Commonwealth countries in their role as Commonwealth Ambassadors."

While, according to the source, "the where, when, how of it all has yet to be decided," locations including Africa, Canada, Australia and the Caribbean are all in consideration for the duke and duchess' upcoming travels.

"They will start in Africa or the Caribbean where Harry has spent lots of time, probably Africa first because that’s nearest to his heart," the source notes. "Australia and Canada are the two big ones, but they want to spend time where the need is more obvious and therefore Southern Africa is more likely."

Prior to the arrival of their son, 5-month-old Archie, rumors swirled that the couple was planning to relocate to Africa for two to six months after Meghan gave birth.

"While details would naturally be formalized over time, with Harry and Meghan's role as President and Vice President, respectively, of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust, any relocation for an extended period of time would be an opportunity for them to work in their already established humanitarian roles," a source told ET in April, adding that any extended overseas posting wouldn't happen before 2020.

"The idea is it's really a step beyond the traditional royal visit; an opportunity to have some roots and time in a place, so that [they] can focus more in-depth and interact in the community as [U.K.] Ambassadors," the source added.

Watch the video below for more on the couple's recent tour of Africa.

https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...anada-but-want-to-have-extended-trips-in-more


----------



## TC1

"ambassadors" = "all expenses paid"


----------



## chicaloca

Color me surprised that the media that has monetized Meghan by churning out dozens of negative clickbait articles weekly is livid that one of their own is being sued. I also appreciate the amount of willful obtuseness and deflection in declaring the Sussexes are trying to “silence criticism.” Nope. They are fighting to to not have their phones hacked, their personal letters published without consent. If the Sussexes can stop the press from bullying Meghan at every turn I’m sure that would be icing on the cake. 


Make no mistake, the press treatment of Meghan is like a group schoolgirls spreading daily lies about a girl they don’t like with the purpose of getting the rest of the school to hate her. It’s bullying plain and simple and the type that girls have killed themselves over. Bullying should not be sanctioned via malicious gossip masquerading as news.


----------



## chicaloca

I don’t know much about Harry’s class action suit but I think The Mail will settle with Meghan out of court since they won’t be able to justify violating her copyright or explain how publishing her private letter was in any way relevant to the public’s interests.


I also don’t think they want to have their reporter Caroline Graham on the stand explaining why she moved in next to Thomas in Mexico and by her own admission spent 3 months “gaining his trust.” I shudder to think what lengths this woman went to in order “to gain trust”. They look awfully cozy in some pics.

What was she hoping to gain by moving next door to a Royal’s parent? Did they tap Thomas’s phone? It certainly would explain the pressure they were trying to put on Meghan to call Thomas via “poor Thomas” articles. It explains why Meghan had to correspond by letter — not that it helped. I would love for this woman to take the stand in court but can’t see The Mail letting this get to trial.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> For the guy who wants everyone to be "green" Harry sure wants to visit lots of places.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Aren't Moving to Canada, But Want to Have Extended Trips in More Countries*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karwai Tang/WireImage
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are not relocating to Canada.
> 
> Amid rumors that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are considering a move to Canada following their royal tour of Africa, a source close to the royals tells ET that is simply not the case.
> 
> However, the source says, the couple is "looking very seriously at spending extended periods of time in Commonwealth countries in their role as Commonwealth Ambassadors."
> 
> While, according to the source, "the where, when, how of it all has yet to be decided," locations including Africa, Canada, Australia and the Caribbean are all in consideration for the duke and duchess' upcoming travels.
> 
> "They will start in Africa or the Caribbean where Harry has spent lots of time, probably Africa first because that’s nearest to his heart," the source notes. "Australia and Canada are the two big ones, but they want to spend time where the need is more obvious and therefore Southern Africa is more likely."
> 
> Prior to the arrival of their son, 5-month-old Archie, rumors swirled that the couple was planning to relocate to Africa for two to six months after Meghan gave birth.
> 
> "While details would naturally be formalized over time, with Harry and Meghan's role as President and Vice President, respectively, of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust, any relocation for an extended period of time would be an opportunity for them to work in their already established humanitarian roles," a source told ET in April, adding that any extended overseas posting wouldn't happen before 2020.
> 
> "The idea is it's really a step beyond the traditional royal visit; an opportunity to have some roots and time in a place, so that [they] can focus more in-depth and interact in the community as [U.K.] Ambassadors," the source added.
> 
> Watch the video below for more on the couple's recent tour of Africa.
> 
> https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...anada-but-want-to-have-extended-trips-in-more


Ambassadors of Woke 

I think the plan is to let Wills and Kate have that little insignificant island in the North Sea while the rightful heirs H&M take over the rest of the Commonwealth.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ambassadors of Woke
> 
> I think the plan is to let Wills and Kate have that little insignificant island in the North Sea while the rightful heirs H&M take over the rest of the Commonwealth.


The Duchess of Woke would do well to read up on the family she married into.


----------



## bag-mania

chicaloca said:


> I don’t know much about Harry’s class action suit but I think The Mail will settle with Meghan out of court since they won’t be able to justify violating her copyright or explain how publishing her private letter was in any way relevant to the public’s interests.
> 
> I also don’t think they want to have their reporter Caroline Graham on the stand explaining why she moved in next to Thomas in Mexico and by her own admission spent 3 months “gaining his trust.” I shudder to think what lengths this woman went to in order “to gain trust”. They look awfully cozy in some pics.



Meghan's lawsuit isn't a class action suit, not unless there are dozens of other duchesses out there the DM has offended. You are implying that the reporter must have engaged in some sort of relationship with Thomas in order to get him to talk. I'm sure that wasn't necessary but it is funny to think about. 

Here's some photos of Meghan and her dad in happier times, like her first wedding day, courtesy of the Daily Mail of course.





https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-secret-MONTHS-never-intended-share-it.html


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> Color me surprised that the media that has monetized Meghan by churning out dozens of negative clickbait articles weekly is livid that one of their own is being sued. I also appreciate the amount of willful obtuseness and deflection in declaring the Sussexes are trying to “silence criticism.” Nope. They are fighting to to not have their phones hacked, their personal letters published without consent. If the Sussexes can stop the press from bullying Meghan at every turn I’m sure that would be icing on the cake.


.. and what about her friends talking to various "rag" publications in the US (_People, US Magazine, etc_.) about said letter?  That is already a point of contention in regards to H&M taking legal action.  She can't say it's "okay" for her friends to make certain passages "public" and then go after other media for showing things .. to me, it's one and the same.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a website called Meghan’s Mirror that her team is likely behind... they’ve been caught posting items for sale that she wore before she wears them, and often lists “what she wore” within minutes of her appearances (even for items like plain tee shirts that are indistinguishable between brands).
> There was also speculation that she’s been caught wearing clothes with tags on them because they’re later resold through the Mulroney-stylist connection.
> 
> and this was one of the more recent allegations:
> View attachment 4562600


Thanks!  The private lunch was in SA, right?  I remember reading about that lunch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> .. and what about her friends talking to various "rag" publications in the US (_People, US Magazine, etc_.) about said letter?  That is already a point of contention in regards to H&M taking legal action.  She can't say it's "okay" for her friends to make certain passages "public" and then go after other media for showing things .. to me, it's one and the same.


That is what I don't understand. However, I know nothing about UK law so .....
Heck, I still don't understand how when I give something to someone, they are not allowed to share it if they wish.It no longer belongs to me.


----------



## threadbender

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks!  The private lunch was in SA, right?  I remember reading about that lunch.


Wow! Really? I hope that money went to help the people in SA.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Meghan's lawsuit isn't a class action suit, not unless there are dozens of other duchesses out there the DM has offended. You are implying that the reporter must have engaged in some sort of relationship with Thomas in order to get him to talk. I'm sure that wasn't necessary but it is funny to think about.
> 
> Here's some photos of Meghan and her dad in happier times, like her first wedding day, courtesy of the Daily Mail of course.
> 
> View attachment 4562911
> View attachment 4562912
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-secret-MONTHS-never-intended-share-it.html


I thought some posters here said her dad didn't bother going to her first wedding as well?  Yet, in the picture, he's in Jamaica with her... ?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks!  The private lunch was in SA, right?  I remember reading about that lunch.


Yea


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I don’t know much about Harry’s class action suit but I think The Mail will settle with Meghan out of court since they won’t be able to justify violating her copyright or explain how publishing her private letter was in any way relevant to the public’s interests.


I think the reason the Mail hasn't settled is because Harry and Meghan are looking for much more than a fine and apology.  They probably want a super injunction related to Meghan's family at a minimum.  

Whatever tactics the Mail used (cozying up to Thomas Markle for exclusives would actually be one of the nicest tabloid tactics ever!) they have absolutely nothing to lose in terms of reputation. 

The only person here with someone to lose is Meghan.  She and Harry may not realize that, but the media seems to.  Meghan may have to testify that she intentionally laid a trap for both her father and the tabloids by having her friends talk about the letter to People Magazine.  This will mean that she and Buckingham Palace lied when they denied that she didn't authorize her friends to speak to People Magazine.  (Royal family lying to the public = newsworthy.)

This will also expose that she engaged in a Machiavellian sort of media manipulation.  Her fans may think it's great, but I don't think the public will agree.  That will be seen as devious and phony.  I don't think that will help her reputation at all.

The testimony may also delve into her relationship with her father and the truthfulness of what she wrote in the letter.  There are so many ways she risks embarrassment with her testimony, even if it's just the Mail's lawyers making accusations and insinuations.

As for what Meghan and Harry stand to gain if they win - probably just an apology and a fine that won't matter to the Mail one bit.   Maybe a super injunction in relation to her father - which is a story that the media had already mostly exhausted until Meghan and Harry revived it.  They don't stand to gain a lot.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> I thought some posters here said her dad didn't bother going to her first wedding as well? Yet, in the picture, he's in Jamaica with her... ?


The rumor that he wasn't invited/didn't attend her first wedding was debunked a long time ago.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> I thought some posters here said her dad didn't bother going to her first wedding as well?  Yet, in the picture, he's in Jamaica with her... ?


Yes, I remember that as well .. so, it appears that he was there ..


----------



## bag-mania

The "he didn't go to her first wedding" rumor gives some credibility towards his claim that he just wants to get his side of the story out there. How else could he prove he wasn't the monster dad who skipped both of his daughter's weddings unless he provided the photo?

I wonder if the Daily Mail will bring him over to testify in court. It would be within their rights to have him there as part of their defense. Someone pass the popcorn, Meghan could be seeing her dad again!.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a website called Meghan’s Mirror that her team is likely behind... they’ve been caught posting items for sale that she wore before she wears them, and often lists “what she wore” within minutes of her appearances (even for items like plain tee shirts that are indistinguishable between brands).
> There was also speculation that she’s been caught wearing clothes with tags on them because they’re later resold through the Mulroney-stylist connection.
> 
> and this was one of the more recent allegations:
> View attachment 4562600


I really hope this isn’t true, if it is it’s disgraceful.  Selling contacts etc., well we’ve got Fergie for that regrettably, and one is more than enough


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> The "he didn't go to her first wedding" rumor gives some credibility towards his claim that he just wants to get his side of the story out there. How else could he prove he wasn't the monster dad who skipped both of his daughter's weddings unless he provided the photo?
> 
> I wonder if the Daily Mail will bring him over to testify in court. It would be within their rights to have him there as part of their defense. Someone pass the popcorn, Meghan could be seeing her dad again!.


They could not force it, could they? I guess it could be by video.

I simply do not see what Harry and Meghan really gain by all of this.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> They could not force it, could they? I guess it could be by video.
> 
> I simply do not see what Harry and Meghan really gain by all of this.



No, they can't force him to go. I think he'd probably want to avoid it at all costs. 

As to what they have to gain, they want the support of the public. Play it up to the people that they are being victimized, ensure their sympathy. All celebrities have a love/hate relationship with the media. They want more of the happy, lovefest puff pieces like the womens' magazines give them, not those snarky articles the tabloids write about them.


----------



## mdcx

I am starting to think Meghan just wants to be (more) famous, no matter the cost.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I am starting to think Meghan just wants to be (more) famous, no matter the cost.


IDK how much more famous she can be.  She's a household name.  Maybe she can be more beloved by the teeming masses


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> IDK how much more famous she can be.  She's a household name.  Maybe she can be more beloved by the teeming masses


She wants to be famous enough to stand on her own two feet once she ditches Prince Ginge...


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> She wants to be famous enough to stand on her own two feet once she ditches Prince Ginge...


Yeah, good luck with that .. all she needs to look at is what happened to Fergie once she and Prince Andrew separated ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, good luck with that .. all she needs to look at is what happened to Fergie once she and Prince Andrew separated ..


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...tingham/?viewas=amp&__twitter_impression=true
> 
> A brave teenager, who has had several operations to remove a brain tumour, has received a private voicemail from the Duchess of Sussex. Aleyna Genc, 14, was taken aside by the Duke of Sussex, 35, during his visit to Nottingham Academy on Thursday so he could show her the special message from Meghan.
> 
> Nottingham is one of Harry’s and Meghan’s first visits.




hopefully Megz won’t sue her for talking to the press


----------



## mrsinsyder

GOING SOLO
Prince Harry’s War on the Media Leaves Him Isolated in the Royal Family

Tom Sykes

Published 10.11.19 4:45AM ET 

Photo Illustration by Sarah Rogers/The Daily Beast/Photos Getty

They are not known as “the Firm” for nothing. The royal family sticks together, especially when it comes to the press.

But The Daily Beast understands that some members of the family—including the Queen, Prince William, and Prince Charles—are uneasy about Prince Harry’s “unilateral” actions, including his and wife Meghan Markle's recent two-pronged attack on the press.

Publicly there has been no expression of support for Harry or Meghan from his family over their recent challenges to the press.

HIGH STAKES

Prince Harry Launches War on U.K. Tabloids—and Piers Morgan

Tom Sykes, Lachlan Cartwright, Tim Teeman

Behind palace walls it is believed that senior royals, including Harry’s grandmother, father, and brother—with whom he has had a difficult relationship since marrying Meghan—are dismayed not just by his actions but also by the fact he did not seek their advice or act in accordance with general royal precedents of discretion.

“It’s a unilateral action by him, but it is so reputationally damaging for all of them,” said one source. “Can you really imagine the Queen allowing Prince Harry to go into court and say this piece? What if he then loses? I just can’t see her allowing it.”

The writer Penny Junor, who has written multiple biographies of the royals including a biography of Harry, said Harry’s public statements were unlikely to find favor with his father.

“I can’t think that the family would ever cut him off,” she said, “But I also don’t think they will be pleased about this, mainly because they will be worried it won’t be doing Harry any good. 

“Prince Charles once told me he had stopped reading the papers because reading the lies that were printed about him made him want to fire off a letter correcting them. But, he said, if you do that about one lie, you have to do it about every single one from then on, because otherwise, if you don’t react, it might be deemed true. 

“This all smacks to me of Harry acting on his own. This is not the sort of statement that any member of the royal family has ever uttered before.”

“You have to let everything go. That was his policy.”

Asked if there was a risk of Harry becoming separated from his family, Junor said, “I think it has already happened. This all smacks to me of Harry acting on his own. This is not the sort of statement that any member of the royal family has ever uttered before.”

The attacks on what Harry called the “lies” of the British tabloid media have also left his press team, who were not consulted or given input into the statements, embarrassed and “feeling useless,” a source says.

Some journalists have even been breaking the code of omertà that usually attends on relations between the press office and the royals, writing, for example, about the evident embarrassment of the Sussex press team in recent days.

Valentine Low of The Times reported, for example, that aides were “visibly embarrassed” by the outburst and added the pointed note that, “Neither Sara Latham, the couple’s communications secretary, nor Samantha Cohen, their private secretary, is believed to have had any input into the statement.”

Cohen is due to depart Team Sussex in the next few days and there is widespread speculation that there may be a new spate of resignations at Harry and Meghan’s office, with many staff increasingly feeling that as well as finding Meghan and Harry difficult to work for, they also have no real responsibility, are not asked for input, and are not valued when it comes to big decisions. 

Advisers who got wind of the impending announcement are said to have urged Harry to desist from overshadowing his own tour of Southern Africa by announcing legal action against the Mail on Sunday over its publication of part of a letter sent by Meghan to her estranged father, Thomas Markle. He declined to take their advice.

It emerged this week that the curious timing of Harry’s statement was prompted by a technical change in court rules. The FT reported that by filing the claim when they did, the Sussexes were able to beat a rule change and ensure the case would be heard in the Chancery Division of the High Court, which is noted for regularly finding against newspapers.

Harry is said to be unrepentant, insisting that he doesn’t need to pander to the press, and refusing to acknowledge that a solitary Instagram account might not be enough to counter alienating the entire U.K. media.

That Instagram account was back in the news on Thursday after Harry published a short film, to promote World Mental Health Day, which showed him and Ed Sheeran spoofing on the concept of a support group for ginger-haired people. 

The clip seems likely to be the first big piece of content masterminded by newly hired social media managerDavid Watkins, 26, who joined Team Sussex earlier this year from fashion house Burberry, on a salary of just $36,000 per annum.

It was a slightly odd piece of film, tonally speaking—stilted, with a central gag that was not particularly funny. It doesn’t help that some experts genuinely do believe that redheads are discriminated against quite widely, and while Prince Harry and Ed Sheeran may be able to laugh off such teasing, you might not find the gag quite so funny if you’re a kid currently being picked on on account of your hair color—which might, erm, negatively impact your mental health.

One can’t help wondering what the Queen, who got roped into an earlier Harry video promoting the Invictus Games, must have made of it.

It’s hard to imagine that Harry’s social team wouldn’t have sought the approval of Buckingham Palace before posting, but it’s equally hard to imagine HM being OK with a doorbell ringing out the national anthem for comedic kitschy effect. Harry’s team and the palace declined to comment on whether the Queen’s approval had been sought.

“If they choose to continue instead the strategy of confrontation, Harry and Meghan should beware. They will annoy and distance themselves from their own family, who fear above all public contempt.”

That post, therefore, approved or not, is in a small way emblematic of the risks of the new strategy that Harry appears to be wedded to. 

There is a way back for Harry and Meghan. There will always be, given the enormous reservoir of public affection for Diana’s son. 

The problem is, it involves a retreat and “playing the game,” trading access for positive coverage, being nice to and flattering the members of the press corps a little.

If they choose to continue instead the strategy of confrontation, Harry and Meghan should beware. They will annoy and distance themselves from their own family, who fear above all public contempt.

And the British newspapers may be weak, weaker than they have ever been, but they can still inflict a nasty bite. 

Tom Sykes


----------



## mdcx

Tom Sykes is sister to Plum Sykes, who is very much connected into Anna Wintour and Vogue. Overall an aristo family that you really wouldn't want to get offside of if you were attempting to get in with British society. Oh well.


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> Tom Sykes is sister to Plum Sykes, who is very much connected into Anna Wintour and Vogue. Overall an aristo family that you really wouldn't want to get offside of if you were attempting to get in with British society. Oh well.


I thought Meghan and Anna Wintour were tight.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> Tom Sykes is sister to Plum Sykes, who is very much connected into Anna Wintour and Vogue. Overall an aristo family that you really wouldn't want to get offside of if you were attempting to get in with British society. Oh well.


I used to like Plum Sykes when she first arrived in NYC, decades ago, working for Vogue and her column was all about how high maintenance the NYers were, compared to the British girls.

Then she adapted to the NY way and wasn't interesting anymore. Sorry for going off topic.

So, what do H&M, especially M, have planned in the near future?  What should we expect?


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> GOING SOLO
> Prince Harry’s War on the Media Leaves Him Isolated in the Royal Family
> 
> Tom Sykes
> 
> Published 10.11.19 4:45AM ET
> 
> Photo Illustration by Sarah Rogers/The Daily Beast/Photos Getty
> 
> They are not known as “the Firm” for nothing. The royal family sticks together, especially when it comes to the press.
> 
> But The Daily Beast understands that some members of the family—including the Queen, Prince William, and Prince Charles—are uneasy about Prince Harry’s “unilateral” actions, including his and wife Meghan Markle's recent two-pronged attack on the press.
> 
> Publicly there has been no expression of support for Harry or Meghan from his family over their recent challenges to the press.
> 
> HIGH STAKES
> 
> Prince Harry Launches War on U.K. Tabloids—and Piers Morgan
> 
> Tom Sykes, Lachlan Cartwright, Tim Teeman
> 
> Behind palace walls it is believed that senior royals, including Harry’s grandmother, father, and brother—with whom he has had a difficult relationship since marrying Meghan—are dismayed not just by his actions but also by the fact he did not seek their advice or act in accordance with general royal precedents of discretion.
> 
> “It’s a unilateral action by him, but it is so reputationally damaging for all of them,” said one source. “Can you really imagine the Queen allowing Prince Harry to go into court and say this piece? What if he then loses? I just can’t see her allowing it.”
> 
> The writer Penny Junor, who has written multiple biographies of the royals including a biography of Harry, said Harry’s public statements were unlikely to find favor with his father.
> 
> “I can’t think that the family would ever cut him off,” she said, “But I also don’t think they will be pleased about this, mainly because they will be worried it won’t be doing Harry any good.
> 
> “Prince Charles once told me he had stopped reading the papers because reading the lies that were printed about him made him want to fire off a letter correcting them. But, he said, if you do that about one lie, you have to do it about every single one from then on, because otherwise, if you don’t react, it might be deemed true.
> 
> “This all smacks to me of Harry acting on his own. This is not the sort of statement that any member of the royal family has ever uttered before.”
> 
> “You have to let everything go. That was his policy.”
> 
> Asked if there was a risk of Harry becoming separated from his family, Junor said, “I think it has already happened. This all smacks to me of Harry acting on his own. This is not the sort of statement that any member of the royal family has ever uttered before.”
> 
> The attacks on what Harry called the “lies” of the British tabloid media have also left his press team, who were not consulted or given input into the statements, embarrassed and “feeling useless,” a source says.
> 
> Some journalists have even been breaking the code of omertà that usually attends on relations between the press office and the royals, writing, for example, about the evident embarrassment of the Sussex press team in recent days.
> 
> Valentine Low of The Times reported, for example, that aides were “visibly embarrassed” by the outburst and added the pointed note that, “Neither Sara Latham, the couple’s communications secretary, nor Samantha Cohen, their private secretary, is believed to have had any input into the statement.”
> 
> Cohen is due to depart Team Sussex in the next few days and there is widespread speculation that there may be a new spate of resignations at Harry and Meghan’s office, with many staff increasingly feeling that as well as finding Meghan and Harry difficult to work for, they also have no real responsibility, are not asked for input, and are not valued when it comes to big decisions.
> 
> Advisers who got wind of the impending announcement are said to have urged Harry to desist from overshadowing his own tour of Southern Africa by announcing legal action against the Mail on Sunday over its publication of part of a letter sent by Meghan to her estranged father, Thomas Markle. He declined to take their advice.
> 
> It emerged this week that the curious timing of Harry’s statement was prompted by a technical change in court rules. The FT reported that by filing the claim when they did, the Sussexes were able to beat a rule change and ensure the case would be heard in the Chancery Division of the High Court, which is noted for regularly finding against newspapers.
> 
> Harry is said to be unrepentant, insisting that he doesn’t need to pander to the press, and refusing to acknowledge that a solitary Instagram account might not be enough to counter alienating the entire U.K. media.
> 
> That Instagram account was back in the news on Thursday after Harry published a short film, to promote World Mental Health Day, which showed him and Ed Sheeran spoofing on the concept of a support group for ginger-haired people.
> 
> The clip seems likely to be the first big piece of content masterminded by newly hired social media managerDavid Watkins, 26, who joined Team Sussex earlier this year from fashion house Burberry, on a salary of just $36,000 per annum.
> 
> It was a slightly odd piece of film, tonally speaking—stilted, with a central gag that was not particularly funny. It doesn’t help that some experts genuinely do believe that redheads are discriminated against quite widely, and while Prince Harry and Ed Sheeran may be able to laugh off such teasing, you might not find the gag quite so funny if you’re a kid currently being picked on on account of your hair color—which might, erm, negatively impact your mental health.
> 
> One can’t help wondering what the Queen, who got roped into an earlier Harry video promoting the Invictus Games, must have made of it.
> 
> It’s hard to imagine that Harry’s social team wouldn’t have sought the approval of Buckingham Palace before posting, but it’s equally hard to imagine HM being OK with a doorbell ringing out the national anthem for comedic kitschy effect. Harry’s team and the palace declined to comment on whether the Queen’s approval had been sought.
> 
> “If they choose to continue instead the strategy of confrontation, Harry and Meghan should beware. They will annoy and distance themselves from their own family, who fear above all public contempt.”
> 
> That post, therefore, approved or not, is in a small way emblematic of the risks of the new strategy that Harry appears to be wedded to.
> 
> There is a way back for Harry and Meghan. There will always be, given the enormous reservoir of public affection for Diana’s son.
> 
> The problem is, it involves a retreat and “playing the game,” trading access for positive coverage, being nice to and flattering the members of the press corps a little.
> 
> If they choose to continue instead the strategy of confrontation, Harry and Meghan should beware. They will annoy and distance themselves from their own family, who fear above all public contempt.
> 
> And the British newspapers may be weak, weaker than they have ever been, but they can still inflict a nasty bite.
> 
> Tom Sykes


If this is correct it sounds like Harry is being extraordinarily arrogant.  And another thing - people do get discriminated against / have a tough time over having red hair.  It’s not a joke!


----------



## buffym

The Markle Sparkle: When will we let Meghan shine?
Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle was always going to polarise the British public upon marrying into the royal family.

Like her wedding day being splashed across screens globally and her dress sparking a new wave in bridal fashion, this was to be inevitable.

However, the Duchess has faced a barrage of scrutiny for her work, her style, her mannerisms, her choice to close a car door, for celebrating the impending birth of her child, the accessibility the public has to said child and so on and so forth.

In fact, is there anything she hasn’t been criticised for?

It’s no secret Meghan has been hurled with criticism unmatched by that directed at her sister-in-law Kate Middleton. So let’s delve into some of the recurring vitriol directed at the British Royal Family’s newest Duchess and why – despite the ongoing scrutiny – she might be the best thing to happen to the House of Windsor in years.

BRITISH VOGUE GUEST EDITORSHIP 

Earlier this month, it was officially announced that The Duchess of Sussex would be the guest Editor-in-Chief of British Vogue’s September issue.

For context, the September issue is typically the most coveted, prestigious edition of any fashion magazine’s calendar year.

Allegedly Meghan was offered the cover along with a spread but turned this down to instead highlight women she believes are ‘forces for change.’

These women include Greta Thunberg, Adwoa Aboh and Jacinda Ardern and were selected to highlight the influential, important work of women globally.

Many took issue with Meghan being involved in a project perceived as being reserved for celebrities, not a territory for members of a royal family.

It seems we’ve all forgotten that this same publication – British Vogue – celebrated its 100th anniversary by splashing Duchess of Cambridge Catherine Middleton across its cover.

This isn’t to criticise the shoot and accompanying article, but it’s important to highlight the contrasting commentary surrounding each Duchess’ involvement with the magazine.

Catherine was overwhelmingly praised for her feature and willingness to let Vogue into the life of a royal family member.

While Meghan was also mostly lauded for her efforts in the September issue, loud disapproval and negative commentary overshadowed this in many respects.

Of particular significance, Meghan is not the first royal to guest edit a publication. Prince Charles, the future King of England, and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, have both guest edited previous publications, further highlighting the hypocrisy surrounding criticism of Meghan and her involvement with the September edition.

Let’s not forget that prior to her marriage to Prince Harry, she curated her own lifestyle website – The Tig – and has a knack for editing and creating informative, eloquently written texts for her audience.

British Vogue is merely an extension of this that is more suited to her new role. 


WEARING THE COLOUR BLACK (AND OTHER SARTORIAL CHOICES)

Women are often criticised for their clothing choices and those in the public eye are especially exposed to commentary and analysis of these choices.

Every woman to marry into the royal family has experienced this: The Duchess of Cambridge with her too-short dresses, Lady Diana with her cleavage-heavy necklines, and the Duchess of York for dressing too big for her figure.

Meghan has continually attracted similar criticism for her decision to wear the colour black.

Typically, black is reserved for periods of mourning or reverence. It is, according to some ‘experts,’ a colour the royal family aren’t to wear on social occasions or to be utilised as a frequent colour choice for engagements.

Each time Meghan has worn black she has faced backlash labelling her as a protocol breaker, a tradition renouncer, a sartorial nightmare.

Not to mention, on occasions where she’s opted for an off-the-shoulder dress the entire world acts as though a it’s crime against humanity.

It’s as though any excuse to pile onto a woman who has entered into a completely different world – still learning the new expectations of her – will be taken advantage of.

WHAT ABOUT WALLIS SIMPSON?

The Duchess isn’t the first American to marry into the British royal family. In fact, she isn’t even the first female divorcee to marry a prince either.

Duchess of Windsor Wallis Simpson married former Prince of Wales Edward VIII in 1937, sparking a mass family feud and the abdication of the then-king.

Divorcees were forbidden from marrying a royal and an American Queen Consort was unheard of. 80 years later, formerly married Californian actress Meghan was to be married to Prince Harry. 

Many fans and extremely conservative commentators often refer to Meghan by the term ‘Wallis’ and rarely utter her real name. This can be identified as a derogatory term for the Duchess due to the Edward and Wallis connotations, namely their widely discussed Nazi sympathiser attitudes during World War II.

Like Meghan, one of Wallis’ favoured designers was coincidentally Hubert de Givenchy. This tid-bit has been fixated on by the anti-Meghan agenda.

Comparison to Wallis was to be expected and the Queen’s progressive decision to approve a union with a divorcee is also noteworthy.

But, the relentless efforts to draw similarities between Meghan and Wallis and the use of the latter’s name as a derogatory term for the Duchess of Sussex are antics that only add to the list of vitriol this new royal has been subjected to through no wrongdoing of her own.

At the end of the day, Meghan isn’t a Nazi sympathiser and Harry hasn’t renounced his family to marry his bride, rendering the Wallis comparisons redundant.

SOCIAL MEDIA FEUDS

Keyboard warriors are a societal scrounge the royal family had previously been immune to.

Yes, there have been the occasional rude or undesirable comment was made but the royal family were never confronted with the torrents of concerning online comments experienced in the celebrity sphere.

That is until online accounts began pinning Prince William and Catherine against Prince Harry and Meghan against one another.

While this isn’t unusual behaviour in popular culture – Twilight’s Edwards versus Jacob and DC’s Batman versus Superman spring to mind – yet these often-unforgiving comparisons are of a different ilk.

The comments from accounts pledging their ‘support’ for the Cambridge family often feature undertones of racism, sexism and superiority complexes when addressing Sussex fan pages or replying to news coverage of Meghan.

Conversely, pages in ‘support’ of the Sussex family regularly attack Catherine for her wrinkles, her ‘lack of a voice,’ and her upper-class background.

Across the board, substandard language is a given yet the backlash towards the Duchess of Sussex is almost always underscored by sexist or racist tones and the language utilised is downright vile.

THE SILVER LINING

This article may paint a grim picture of the future for the Duchess of Sussex. However, she is undeniably the best thing to have happened to the royal family in years.

Meghan is the most relatable woman in the entire family and is the best representative of a modern woman.

This modern woman has a voice, is self-sufficient, cares about her fellow women and is actively involved in trying – little by little – to make improve society.

Whether through her feminist, environmental or racial advocacy, Meghan is a Duchess we can all embrace and view as a beacon of light for the future of the monarchy. Some will find this terrifying but most will find it an exciting prospect.

In order to unleash the potential of the unconventional Duchess, it’s time the traditionalists took off the blinkers and shifted the focus away from traditions of the past to embrace the royal of the future.

Image by Rachael Sharman

http://postup.com.au/markle-sparkle/


----------



## MarieCurie

bag-mania said:


> Meghan's lawsuit isn't a class action suit, not unless there are dozens of other duchesses out there the DM has offended. You are implying that the reporter must have engaged in some sort of relationship with Thomas in order to get him to talk. I'm sure that wasn't necessary but it is funny to think about.
> 
> Here's some photos of Meghan and her dad in happier times, like her first wedding day, courtesy of the Daily Mail of course.
> 
> View attachment 4562911
> View attachment 4562912
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-secret-MONTHS-never-intended-share-it.html





Jayne1 said:


> I thought some posters here said her dad didn't bother going to her first wedding as well?  Yet, in the picture, he's in Jamaica with her... ?





Flatsy said:


> The rumor that he wasn't invited/didn't attend her first wedding was debunked a long time ago.



That was me, and I based it on that one rumor/story that I heard about a year ago and now it turns out to have been debunked. Apologies Mr Markle. I should have kept near Chimamamda's warning about the danger of a single story


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> The Markle Sparkle: When will we let Meghan shine?
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle was always going to polarise the British public upon marrying into the royal family.
> 
> Like her wedding day being splashed across screens globally and her dress sparking a new wave in bridal fashion, this was to be inevitable.
> 
> However, the Duchess has faced a barrage of scrutiny for her work, her style, her mannerisms, her choice to close a car door, for celebrating the impending birth of her child, the accessibility the public has to said child and so on and so forth.
> 
> In fact, is there anything she hasn’t been criticised for?
> 
> It’s no secret Meghan has been hurled with criticism unmatched by that directed at her sister-in-law Kate Middleton. So let’s delve into some of the recurring vitriol directed at the British Royal Family’s newest Duchess and why – despite the ongoing scrutiny – she might be the best thing to happen to the House of Windsor in years.
> 
> BRITISH VOGUE GUEST EDITORSHIP
> 
> Earlier this month, it was officially announced that The Duchess of Sussex would be the guest Editor-in-Chief of British Vogue’s September issue.
> 
> For context, the September issue is typically the most coveted, prestigious edition of any fashion magazine’s calendar year.
> 
> Allegedly Meghan was offered the cover along with a spread but turned this down to instead highlight women she believes are ‘forces for change.’
> 
> These women include Greta Thunberg, Adwoa Aboh and Jacinda Ardern and were selected to highlight the influential, important work of women globally.
> 
> Many took issue with Meghan being involved in a project perceived as being reserved for celebrities, not a territory for members of a royal family.
> 
> It seems we’ve all forgotten that this same publication – British Vogue – celebrated its 100th anniversary by splashing Duchess of Cambridge Catherine Middleton across its cover.
> 
> This isn’t to criticise the shoot and accompanying article, but it’s important to highlight the contrasting commentary surrounding each Duchess’ involvement with the magazine.
> 
> Catherine was overwhelmingly praised for her feature and willingness to let Vogue into the life of a royal family member.
> 
> While Meghan was also mostly lauded for her efforts in the September issue, loud disapproval and negative commentary overshadowed this in many respects.
> 
> Of particular significance, Meghan is not the first royal to guest edit a publication. Prince Charles, the future King of England, and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, have both guest edited previous publications, further highlighting the hypocrisy surrounding criticism of Meghan and her involvement with the September edition.
> 
> Let’s not forget that prior to her marriage to Prince Harry, she curated her own lifestyle website – The Tig – and has a knack for editing and creating informative, eloquently written texts for her audience.
> 
> British Vogue is merely an extension of this that is more suited to her new role.
> 
> 
> WEARING THE COLOUR BLACK (AND OTHER SARTORIAL CHOICES)
> 
> Women are often criticised for their clothing choices and those in the public eye are especially exposed to commentary and analysis of these choices.
> 
> Every woman to marry into the royal family has experienced this: The Duchess of Cambridge with her too-short dresses, Lady Diana with her cleavage-heavy necklines, and the Duchess of York for dressing too big for her figure.
> 
> Meghan has continually attracted similar criticism for her decision to wear the colour black.
> 
> Typically, black is reserved for periods of mourning or reverence. It is, according to some ‘experts,’ a colour the royal family aren’t to wear on social occasions or to be utilised as a frequent colour choice for engagements.
> 
> Each time Meghan has worn black she has faced backlash labelling her as a protocol breaker, a tradition renouncer, a sartorial nightmare.
> 
> Not to mention, on occasions where she’s opted for an off-the-shoulder dress the entire world acts as though a it’s crime against humanity.
> 
> It’s as though any excuse to pile onto a woman who has entered into a completely different world – still learning the new expectations of her – will be taken advantage of.
> 
> WHAT ABOUT WALLIS SIMPSON?
> 
> The Duchess isn’t the first American to marry into the British royal family. In fact, she isn’t even the first female divorcee to marry a prince either.
> 
> Duchess of Windsor Wallis Simpson married former Prince of Wales Edward VIII in 1937, sparking a mass family feud and the abdication of the then-king.
> 
> Divorcees were forbidden from marrying a royal and an American Queen Consort was unheard of. 80 years later, formerly married Californian actress Meghan was to be married to Prince Harry.
> 
> Many fans and extremely conservative commentators often refer to Meghan by the term ‘Wallis’ and rarely utter her real name. This can be identified as a derogatory term for the Duchess due to the Edward and Wallis connotations, namely their widely discussed Nazi sympathiser attitudes during World War II.
> 
> Like Meghan, one of Wallis’ favoured designers was coincidentally Hubert de Givenchy. This tid-bit has been fixated on by the anti-Meghan agenda.
> 
> Comparison to Wallis was to be expected and the Queen’s progressive decision to approve a union with a divorcee is also noteworthy.
> 
> But, the relentless efforts to draw similarities between Meghan and Wallis and the use of the latter’s name as a derogatory term for the Duchess of Sussex are antics that only add to the list of vitriol this new royal has been subjected to through no wrongdoing of her own.
> 
> At the end of the day, Meghan isn’t a Nazi sympathiser and Harry hasn’t renounced his family to marry his bride, rendering the Wallis comparisons redundant.
> 
> SOCIAL MEDIA FEUDS
> 
> Keyboard warriors are a societal scrounge the royal family had previously been immune to.
> 
> Yes, there have been the occasional rude or undesirable comment was made but the royal family were never confronted with the torrents of concerning online comments experienced in the celebrity sphere.
> 
> That is until online accounts began pinning Prince William and Catherine against Prince Harry and Meghan against one another.
> 
> While this isn’t unusual behaviour in popular culture – Twilight’s Edwards versus Jacob and DC’s Batman versus Superman spring to mind – yet these often-unforgiving comparisons are of a different ilk.
> 
> The comments from accounts pledging their ‘support’ for the Cambridge family often feature undertones of racism, sexism and superiority complexes when addressing Sussex fan pages or replying to news coverage of Meghan.
> 
> Conversely, pages in ‘support’ of the Sussex family regularly attack Catherine for her wrinkles, her ‘lack of a voice,’ and her upper-class background.
> 
> Across the board, substandard language is a given yet the backlash towards the Duchess of Sussex is almost always underscored by sexist or racist tones and the language utilised is downright vile.
> 
> THE SILVER LINING
> 
> This article may paint a grim picture of the future for the Duchess of Sussex. However, she is undeniably the best thing to have happened to the royal family in years.
> 
> Meghan is the most relatable woman in the entire family and is the best representative of a modern woman.
> 
> This modern woman has a voice, is self-sufficient, cares about her fellow women and is actively involved in trying – little by little – to make improve society.
> 
> Whether through her feminist, environmental or racial advocacy, Meghan is a Duchess we can all embrace and view as a beacon of light for the future of the monarchy. Some will find this terrifying but most will find it an exciting prospect.
> 
> In order to unleash the potential of the unconventional Duchess, it’s time the traditionalists took off the blinkers and shifted the focus away from traditions of the past to embrace the royal of the future.
> 
> Image by Rachael Sharman
> 
> http://postup.com.au/markle-sparkle/



This reads like a blog post from a fan site.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> If this is correct it sounds like Harry is being extraordinarily arrogant.  And another thing - people do get discriminated against / have a tough time over having red hair.  It’s not a joke!


it's true that redheads - esp boys - get teased.  but that used to be pretty normal - not a tragedy though maybe painful for the boys in question.
Agree, Harry is coming off as arrogant these days.  It's a shame.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> This reads like a blog post from a fan site.


That’s basically what it is, I had a look at the site.  You pay a sub and post your stuff.


----------



## Clearblueskies

MarieCurie said:


> That was me, and I based it on that one rumor/story that I heard about a year ago and now it turns out to have been debunked. Apologies Mr Markle. I should have kept near Chimamamda's warning about the danger of a single story


We were all misled about this I think.  Poor Thomas as it turns out.
But so much gets posted here as “fact” that simply isn’t.  I mean for example, did anyone ever read any criticism of Meghan for closing a car door??  Seriously?  It was commented on at the time for being sweet and charming.  But the “criticism” (that never was) keeps being dragged on about time and time again as if it’s fact, and is repeated so often it gets a life of its own.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> This reads like a blog post from a fan site.



The link is attached in my post, it is an Australian site.

I may have missed where it violates the forum rules since blind items are posted as proof and screenshots of tweets with hearts as signs of bots. 

I believe we are entitled to our perspective if it disagrees with your views that is okay. It’s the internet.


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> I think the reason the Mail hasn't settled is because Harry and Meghan are looking for much more than a fine and apology.  They probably want a super injunction related to Meghan's family at a minimum.
> 
> Whatever tactics the Mail used (cozying up to Thomas Markle for exclusives would actually be one of the nicest tabloid tactics ever!) they have absolutely nothing to lose in terms of reputation.
> 
> The only person here with someone to lose is Meghan.  She and Harry may not realize that, but the media seems to.  Meghan may have to testify that she intentionally laid a trap for both her father and the tabloids by having her friends talk about the letter to People Magazine.  This will mean that she and Buckingham Palace lied when they denied that she didn't authorize her friends to speak to People Magazine.  (Royal family lying to the public = newsworthy.)
> 
> This will also expose that she engaged in a Machiavellian sort of media manipulation.  Her fans may think it's great, but I don't think the public will agree.  That will be seen as devious and phony.  I don't think that will help her reputation at all.
> 
> The testimony may also delve into her relationship with her father and the truthfulness of what she wrote in the letter.  There are so many ways she risks embarrassment with her testimony, even if it's just the Mail's lawyers making accusations and insinuations.
> 
> As for what Meghan and Harry stand to gain if they win - probably just an apology and a fine that won't matter to the Mail one bit.   Maybe a super injunction in relation to her father - which is a story that the media had already mostly exhausted until Meghan and Harry revived it.  They don't stand to gain a lot.



Meghan filed a copyright lawsuit. All she has to demonstrate is that the Mail published her copyrighted letter without permission. The contents of the letter don’t matter. She could have written a haiku. Would she be called to the stand to testify that sunsets really are beautiful as written in the haiku? Probably not. Meghan does not need to prove the truth of her thoughts in a private correspondence that never should have been published. It’s wishful thinking that anything more than an intellectual property battle will happen in court. 

The reporter who cozied up to Thomas might be needed to establish chain of custody of the letter and how it was edited. If Meghan wrote the letter because she feared her father’s correspondence was being monitored then the Mail just handed her the case on a silver platter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> We were all misled about this I think.  Poor Thomas as it turns out.
> But so much gets posted here as “fact” that simply isn’t.  I mean for example, did anyone ever read any criticism of Meghan for closing a car door??  Seriously?  It was commented on at the time for being sweet and charming.  But the “criticism” (that never was) keeps being dragged on about time and time again as if it’s fact, and is repeated so often it gets a life of its own.



There was mixed reactions about the closing of the car door. The press and Twitter users made a big deal about it.

Some linked the closing of her door was expressing a political opinion.

“Last week Markle also parted with protocol by closing her own car door at the launch of a charity cookbook.

As a member of the royal family, Markle is not supposed to express her political opinions, but many of her actions are interpreted as expressions of exactly that.”

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/26/6519...g-her-own-car-door-excites-social-media-users


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.va...markle-shutting-car-door-twitter-reaction/amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.tr.../meghan-markle-closes-own-car-door?source=dam


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Meghan filed a copyright lawsuit. All she has to demonstrate is that the Mail published her copyrighted letter without permission. The contents of the letter don’t matter.


From everything I have read, this is not the case at all.  There seems to be a consensus that Meghan will ultimately win, but the Mail will get to present their defense (likely involving the People Magazine article) and that Meghan will likely have to testify.  Good article from The Guardian: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex may win the battle but lose the war. https://www.theguardian.com/media/c...06/duke-duchess-sussex-mail-on-sunday-lawsuit



chicaloca said:


> It’s wishful thinking that anything more than an intellectual property battle will happen in court.


It's wishful thinking that the case will immediately be decided in Meghan's favor without the Mail getting to present a defense.  



chicaloca said:


> The reporter who cozied up to Thomas might be needed to establish chain of custody of the letter and how it was edited.


This is a non-issue.  The Mail is obviously still has Thomas Markle on their side and therefore can likely produce the letter itself in its entirety.  Meghan labeled the pages (first page says 1/5) so it would be obvious if anything was missing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> There was mixed reactions about the closing of the car door. The press and Twitter users made a big deal about it.
> 
> Some linked the closing of her door was expressing a political opinion.
> 
> “Last week Markle also parted with protocol by closing her own car door at the launch of a charity cookbook.
> 
> As a member of the royal family, Markle is not supposed to express her political opinions, but many of her actions are interpreted as expressions of exactly that.”
> 
> https://www.npr.org/2018/09/26/6519...g-her-own-car-door-excites-social-media-users
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.va...markle-shutting-car-door-twitter-reaction/amp
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.travelandleisure.com/travel-news/meghan-markle-closes-own-car-door?source=dam
> 
> View attachment 4563586


Every little thing is not a “breach of royal protocol”.  Why the obsession about protocol?  A breach of protocol is issuing an incendiary statement without reference to, or giving warning to, both the Monarch and your father and brother.  That’s a breach of protocol and a breach of trust.   No wonder they aren’t supporting him.  
And you don’t have to search very hard to find people on Twitter who will confidently tell you the world is flat and the moon landings were faked   Pardon me if I exercise a little scepticism


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Every little thing is not a “breach of royal protocol”.  Why the obsession about protocol?  A breach of protocol is issuing an incendiary statement without reference to, or giving warning to, both the Monarch and your father and brother.  That’s a breach of protocol and a breach of trust.   No wonder they aren’t supporting him.
> And you don’t have to search very hard to find people on Twitter who will confidently tell you the world is flat and the moon landings were faked   Pardon me if I exercise a little scepticism



Plus... the door closing thing was a safety issue. They close their doors as part of safety protocol... but of course it had to be made into a feminist statement


----------



## gracekelly

threadbender said:


> I thought Meghan and Anna Wintour were tight.


Anna Wintour and the Queen are tighter and if push comes to shove, Anna will go with the greater power, and that’s the Queen


----------



## mrsinsyder

Swanky said:


> Reminder to add members that annoy you to the Ignore User list!


Bears repeating.


----------



## gracekelly

British copyright statutes have a section called Fair Dealing.   Wondering if this will be the defense that the Daily Mail uses to defend their actions in printing excerpts of the letter.   They used quotes of the letter to report Thomas Markles’s reaction to his portrayal as a father.

s30.—*Criticism, review, quotation and news reporting* Fair dealing with a work for the purpose of quotation, criticism or review, or news reporting does not infringe copyright in the work, provided it is accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement, and provided the work has been made available to the public.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> provided the work has been made available to the public.


This is probably the crucial phrase though - it was a private letter.  Fair Dealing would apply to quoting of published books and documents.


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> And another thing - people do get discriminated against / have a tough time over having red hair.  It’s not a joke!


But in the UK, it is so common to be a ginger. Such a silly thing to discriminate against! Especially because there are many gorgeous red heads out there.


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> We were all misled about this I think.  Poor Thomas as it turns out.
> But so much gets posted here as “fact” that simply isn’t.  I mean for example, did anyone ever read any criticism of Meghan for closing a car door??  Seriously?  It was commented on at the time for being sweet and charming.  But the “criticism” (that never was) keeps being dragged on about time and time again as if it’s fact, and is repeated so often it gets a life of its own.



I was responding to your post, that there was no criticism. There was criticism, the tweet was an example of the criticism masked as breaches of protocol.

Your views do not have to be pardoned, we are entitled to our opinions. 



Clearblueskies said:


> Every little thing is not a “breach of royal protocol”.  Why the obsession about protocol?  A breach of protocol is issuing an incendiary statement without reference to, or giving warning to, both the Monarch and your father and brother.  That’s a breach of protocol and a breach of trust.   No wonder they aren’t supporting him.
> And you don’t have to search very hard to find people on Twitter who will confidently tell you the world is flat and the moon landings were faked   Pardon me if I exercise a little scepticism


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> I was responding to your post, that there was no criticism. There was criticism, the tweet was an example of the criticism masked as breaches of protocol.
> 
> Your views do not have to be pardoned, we are entitled to our opinions.


Lol


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> This is probably the crucial phrase though - it was a private letter.  Fair Dealing would apply to quoting of published books and documents.


Good Point. I wonder if they can say it was referred to in the People article.  The lawyers  are so good  at twisting everything lol!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Flatsy said:


> This is probably the crucial phrase though - it was a private letter.  Fair Dealing would apply to quoting of published books and documents.


I wonder if that applies if Meghan's friends discussed the contents of the letter in detail with People?

Piers Morgan hinted at the fact in one of his pieces on H&M that he also works for People (or if it was on his Twitter? I just know I saw he wrote this himself), which could be taken as a "warning" to H&M that he has evidence on how those friends interviews in People came about.


----------



## gracekelly

It has been crickets on the DM regarding reporting on the royals. I think they will take this to court. Nothing happens til it happens.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It has been crickets on the DM regarding reporting on the royals. I think they will take this to court. Nothing happens til it happens.


will be interesting to see how this plays out.  I don't think Harry or Meghan are going to want to be seen/heard in court (but I could be wrong)
and if it came to that and the queen knew of it, I think that's when she would step in and tell them to put a stop to it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> will be interesting to see how this plays out.  I don't think Harry or Meghan are going to want to be seen/heard in court (but I could be wrong)
> and if it came to that and the queen knew of it, I think that's when she would step in and tell them to put a stop to it


But, would they?


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute--Harry was/is discriminated against due to having red hair? I hope the royal family has enough resources to help him overcome the enormous amount of discrimination he's been victim of over the years. What an uphill battle it must be. A more insurmountable hardship I cannot imagine--a royal heir, Duke of Sussex, lifelong sufferer of discrimination. However can he achieve any kind of enjoyable life with at least some margin of comfort?


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> But, would they?


I'm not Royal expert but I think if she told harry in no certain terms (i.e. gave him an order) he would do what she wanted.  I doubt she has done this yet


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute--Harry was/is discriminated against due to having red hair? I hope the royal family has enough resources to help him overcome the enormous amount of discrimination he's been victim of over the years. What an uphill battle it must be. A more insurmountable hardship I cannot imagine--a royal heir, Duke of Sussex, lifelong sufferer of discrimination. However can he achieve any kind of enjoyable life with at least some margin of comfort?


----------



## mrsinsyder

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute--Harry was/is discriminated against due to having red hair? I hope the royal family has enough resources to help him overcome the enormous amount of discrimination he's been victim of over the years. What an uphill battle it must be. A more insurmountable hardship I cannot imagine--a royal heir, Duke of Sussex, lifelong sufferer of discrimination. However can he achieve any kind of enjoyable life with at least some margin of comfort?


----------



## threadbender

I have a funny feeling they are not appreciating all of the ridicule and mocking that could be heading their way. I am not on a lot of social media but I am thinking the memes are already out there. Or, the jokes. "what does Meghan Markle carry in her purse?" "How many PR firms does it take to create an Instagram post?"
This really bums me out. I was hoping for a happy Harry marriage and family. Instead they seem so distracted by nonsense rather than their sweet little family.


----------



## Flatsy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I wonder if that applies if Meghan's friends discussed the contents of the letter in detail with People?


Copyright doesn't mean the letter is confidential.  Copyright has to do with the right to publish the specific words exactly as the author wrote them.  Publish means to print those exact words in a newspaper, book or online.


----------



## threadbender

Flatsy said:


> Copyright doesn't mean the letter is confidential.  Copyright has to do with the right to publish the specific words exactly as the author wrote them.  Publish means to print those exact words in a newspaper, book or online.


So, if a friend read the letter to the reporter for People and the magazine published some of the quotes, how does that work? Would they have to have express permission from Meghan if they were not literally seeing the prose and thus were only "quoting" the friend? Is it different than having the paper letter and publishing portions?
Also, if the friends knew what was in the letter, was it by Meghan simply sharing her thoughts or did they see what she had written? I mean, did she send them a copy too? 
I am confused.


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> I have a funny feeling they are not appreciating all of the ridicule and mocking that could be heading their way. I am not on a lot of social media but I am thinking the memes are already out there. Or, the jokes. "what does Meghan Markle carry in her purse?" "How many PR firms does it take to create an Instagram post?"
> This really bums me out. I was hoping for a happy Harry marriage and family. Instead they seem so distracted by nonsense rather than their sweet little family.


Right.  I know there are some people who think this whole legal thing with Harry is a sign that he loves his wife.  But IDK.....to me it is causing doubts about their true motivations.  Is this a love marriage?  or something else?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> So, if a friend read the letter to the reporter for People and the magazine published some of the quotes, how does that work? Would they have to have express permission from Meghan if they were not literally seeing the prose and thus were only "quoting" the friend? Is it different than having the paper letter and publishing portions?
> Also, if the friends knew what was in the letter, was it by Meghan simply sharing her thoughts or did they see what she had written? I mean, did she send them a copy too?
> I am confused.


It'd be interesting if said "friends" would have to testify in court about why and under what conditions they talked to People. And to know what details People have about the agreement to publish these friends' quotes from the letter.

Btw, I saw the Windsor episode today where Meghan and Harry marry and some scenes were LOL hilarious, like when Harry proposes but I can't find that scene on YT. If you get a chance to watch it, do! Every actor is excellent. 
I don't know if you can use this link to see the wedding episode?
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-windsors/on-demand/68069-001


And something extra from Eugenie and Beatrice:
"A fascinating fact about these hats is that they're actually called... fascinators"


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> Right.  I know there are some people who think this whole legal thing with Harry is a sign that he loves his wife.  But IDK.....to me it is causing doubts about their true motivations.  Is this a love marriage?  or something else?



when you’ve got a D-list actress who dreamed of being on the A-list and the spare who was second in everything you’ve got the recipe for the most attention seeking duo ever.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> when you’ve got a D-list actress who dreamed of being on the A-list and the spare who was second in everything you’ve got the recipe for the most attention seeking duo ever.


sadly.  hope there is some real love there though.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> sadly.  hope there is some real love there though.


I don’t doubt that they saw something in one another.


----------



## threadbender

n/m I am not su


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It'd be interesting if said "friends" would have to testify in court about why and under what conditions they talked to People. And to know what details People have about the agreement to publish these friends' quotes from the letter.
> 
> Btw, I saw the Windsor episode today where Meghan and Harry marry and some scenes were LOL hilarious, like when Harry proposes but I can't find that scene on YT. If you get a chance to watch it, do! Every actor is excellent.
> I don't know if you can use this link to see the wedding episode?
> https://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-windsors/on-demand/68069-001
> 
> 
> And something extra from Eugenie and Beatrice:
> "A fascinating fact about these hats is that they're actually called... fascinators"



I registered and then it says I cannot access it in my area. lol I may see if it is on youtube


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> I may have missed where it violates the forum rules since blind items are posted as proof and screenshots of tweets with hearts as signs of bots.
> 
> I believe we are entitled to our perspective if it disagrees with your views that is okay. It’s the internet.



Yikes! If you could please show me the post where I said you’re not allowed to post something or that you were violating rules, I’d be happy to edit it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> n/m I am not su
> 
> I registered and then it says I cannot access it in my area. lol I may see if it is on youtube


The whole episode isn't but a clip of it is and a trailer.


Fergs:"If I'm not dancing to Level 42, then what the h*ell am I?!"


----------



## momtok

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The whole episode isn't but a clip of it is and a trailer.
> 
> 
> Fergs:"If I'm not dancing to Level 42, then what the h*ell am I?!"




What dropped my jaw in that picture was actually the priest.  I know it's not, but the actor really resembles Paul Eddington (aka Jerry Leadbetter, aka Prime MInister, aka St. Mary Mead's vicar in the Hickson Miss Marples).


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> when you’ve got a D-list actress who dreamed of being on the A-list and the spare who was second in everything you’ve got the recipe for the most attention seeking duo ever.


.. and from what I know from my friends that knew Meghan during her early years, she definitely always wanted to be the center of attention!


----------



## chicaloca

> As you know, she was seen in society pages of magazines, originally because of her celebrity Canadian friends and then she developed a reputation on her own.  She had that Reitmans collaboration and the commercials that ran on TV, "Oh my gosh, it's Megan Markle!" so she was known.
> 
> 
> All this to say, if she worked in soup kitchens, she would have been recognized.  A beautiful, vivacious woman in a soup kitchen?  Someone would have said something.




Beautiful, vivacious Meghan did indeed work in St Felix Centre  soup kitchen in Toronto. The executive director of the kitchen talks about it this news segment. She not only volunteered there, but brought other Suits cast members and arranged for food from the Suits set to be brought in.


https://mobile.twitter.com/stfelixcentre/status/994979886757396480



If her charity work is publicized she’s accused of using charity to get attention but if it isn’t officially publicized then there is disbelief that she did the charitable work.  It’s a convenient catch 22 which raises the bar to a position permanently out of reach.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and from what I know from my friends that knew Meghan during her early years, she definitely always wanted to be the center of attention!


now she has succeeded (probably beyond her wildest dreams) and she and her husband are complaining.  boo hoo


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> Beautiful, vivacious Meghan did indeed work in St Felix Centre  soup kitchen in Toronto. The executive director of the kitchen talks about it this news segment. She not only volunteered there, but brought other Suits cast members and arranged for food from the Suits set to be brought in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If her charity work is publicized she’s accused of using charity to get attention but if it isn’t officially publicized then there is disbelief that she did the charitable work.  It’s a convenient catch 22 which raises the bar to a position permanently out of reach.



Hmmmm .. I have to somewhat side-eye this; this was where GMA was there and filmed her at this place?  Okay - but what about any time that she was there without the TV Camera rolling?  It just seems odd to me that no one in these Soup Kitchens would never have taken a picture of her .. especially if she was a well-known commodity in Toronto at that time.


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. I have to somewhat side-eye this; this was where GMA was there and filmed her at this place?  Okay - but what about any time that she was there without the TV Camera rolling?  It just seems odd to me that no one in these Soup Kitchens would never have taken a picture of her .. especially if she was a well-known commodity in Toronto at that time.



She just wasn’t that big a deal here. Sorry fans. I’m in Toronto. Local chefs and like local TV news people were more well known and recognizable than MM.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Meh-gan said:


> She just wasn’t that big a deal here. Sorry fans. I’m in Toronto. Local chefs and like local TV news people were more well known and recognizable than MM.


A general question for all here. I’m curious how she got the Reitman’s ad campaign. Is this a result of the Tig, her relationship with Jessica Mulroney, or was it after she started dating Harry? TBH I never heard or knew of her until that Vanity Fair magazine cover and that was after she had been dating Harry for awhile.


----------



## eunaddict

I haven't gone far back enough to look but this video really puts me off "the People's prince".



"Such a short conversation, what can you hope to achieve of it?"

"What? Ask them."

Could he have come off as any less interested or knowledgeable in issues that are purportedly near and dear to his heart? There are so many quick 1-2 sentence responses that would have been infinitely better, even a vague one liner about "gaining better insight and understanding" would have went over better. But that incredulousness in his voice and the flippant "Ask them." is so many levels of dismissive and wrong.


----------



## bag-mania

^You know I’m going to give him a pass on that one. It was rude but it’s obvious she was trying to provoke him a bit with that “short conversation” comment. He recognized what she was doing and he wasn’t going to play the game. It would’ve been better if he had been patient and held his temper but I can see why he didn’t. Reporters can be annoying as hell.


----------



## Meh-gan

LVSistinaMM said:


> A general question for all here. I’m curious how she got the Reitman’s ad campaign. Is this a result of the Tig, her relationship with Jessica Mulroney, or was it after she started dating Harry? TBH I never heard or knew of her until that Vanity Fair magazine cover and that was after she had been dating Harry for awhile.



Who cares really.  It’s Reitman’s, no one shops there anyway except our grandmas. It’s not like this was some big score for her - plus, most people now don’t even have cable and wouldn’t have seen the commercials anyway. 

As for timelines I have no clue because I didn’t even know anything about her til she showed up with Harry. People pointed out her Reitman’s connection to me after that - oh isn’t that the chick from the Reitman’s ads on the TTC etc.


----------



## Morgan R

bag-mania said:


> ^You know I’m going to give him a pass on that one. It was rude but it’s obvious she was trying to provoke him a bit with that “short conversation” comment. He recognized what she was doing and he wasn’t going to play the game. It would’ve been better if he had been patient and held his temper but I can see why he didn’t. Reporters can be annoying as hell.



I think Harry's reaction was what it was because royal reporters aren't suppose to act like paparazzi which is what that royal reporter came across as acting like. She was asking Harry a question as he was getting in his car to leave his engagement and she re-positions herself even closer to the car to see if she can get in a question and an answer out of Harry. At engagements royal reporters might get pooled one-on-one interviews (doesn't happen all the time) and they are meant to cover engagements from somewhat of a distance. If a royal is the one that approaches them and interacts with them first that is a difference but the royal reporters aren't meant to act like paparazzi who will go out their way to get questions in or get pictures/videos taken.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

eunaddict said:


> I haven't gone far back enough to look but this video really puts me off "the People's prince".
> 
> 
> 
> "Such a short conversation, what can you hope to achieve of it?"
> 
> "What? Ask them."
> 
> Could he have come off as any less interested or knowledgeable in issues that are purportedly near and dear to his heart? There are so many quick 1-2 sentence responses that would have been infinitely better, even a vague one liner about "gaining better insight and understanding" would have went over better. But that incredulousness in his voice and the flippant "Ask them." is so many levels of dismissive and wrong.



His attitude reminds me of someone. But who... Ah!


----------



## Straight-Laced

On the Africa tour Harry was asked an unscheduled question by a television reporter. He answered gracelessly.  
He typically treats all the British media - royal reporters or others - as if they're paparazzi. 
She was out of line according to the strict media guidelines surrounding the tour (and Palace officials complained) but he could have done better without much effort. The optics weren't great for him.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Just walking straight to the car and pretending he didn't hear her would have been the better move.  If she was asking a question when she was not supposed to, there would have been no issue if he'd just not acknowledged it.
I think you're absolutely right about him mistakenly thinking of all press as paparazzi. It's totally understandable that he has a resentment towards stalkerazi press due to his mother's experience and the circumstances of her death. But he seems to have lost the memory that more legitimate press gave a lot of coverage to the causes that mattered to her, and allowed her to put them on the map.  The picture he reenacted of visiting the mine field - that's iconic because of the press.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Promo from the documentary that is airing Sunday.



Screenshots of Harry holding Archie


----------



## mrsinsyder

**
*US report: Prince Harry's tears as Meghan Markle reveals she is pregnant again*
Exciting news for royal fans the world over
10 OCT2019


Meghan Markle is said to be expecting her second child with husband Prince Harry, according to a US report. And he has a highly emotional reaction to the news! 

“Those closest to her are convinced she’s pregnant again!” a royal insider told _Life & Style_.

“No one expected it to happen so quickly, but both Harry and Meghan have been vocal about not wanting to wait around, especially given her age,” they added.

Meghan is now 38 and sources say, motherhood is everything she ever wanted.

“Having Archie changed her whole outlook on life. While Meghan didn’t expect to take motherhood so well, it’s hard not to with Archie – he’s adorable in every way,” they added.

The Duchess is also displaying signs of pregnancy and is ‘avoiding alcohol, craving fries and chocolate’ which are foods she apparently doesn’t eat.

Charlotte and George are, they want the same for Archie’.

If it is a girl, they are said to be thinking of calling her Elizabeth like Harry’s grandmother the Queen or Oliver if it’s a boy.

They are also hoping the news will help mend the rift between Harry’s brother William and wife Kate.

“There’s no doubt another child will heal the family rift and bring them closer together,” adds the source.

The palace has yet to respond to _Life & Style_’s report.


----------



## mrsinsyder

The media seem to be making a point of taking their gloves off with wild stories like this now.
For the record, I usually pop when i squat down too 
*Meghan Markle’s Pregnancy Questioned; Duchess’ Stomach Made Popping Sound After Squat [VIDEO]*
By Catherine Armecin 
10/13/19 AT 9:08 PM

Meghan Markle’s pregnancy was questioned again after a clip of the duchess making a squat and producing a popping sound resurfaced.

A clip of Markle squatting and standing during a royal engagement while she was pregnant was shared on YouTube. In the video, there was a noticeable sound when she stood up, prompting the netizens to believe that she was wearing a moonbump.

“You can literally see that thing pop back out and get bigger when she stands up!!! This is bizarre,” one commented.

“Holy moly, watch the bump pop out and make that noise! She looks down and touches it as it pops out. People need to see this. Never mind squatting in heels with your knees closed. That’s actually not possible after the 4th month, no matter how much yoga you do. The uterus won’t allow it,” a different user opined.

Prince Harry and Markle are already expecting their second baby. One netizen even claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make the announcement in the run-up to Princess Beatrice’s royal wedding as a revenge.

Royal fans questioned Princess Beatrice’s engagement announcement because it happened while the couple was doing their tour in South Africa. Markle’s fans felt that Princess Eugenie’s sister stole the Sussexes’ thunder.

However, some royal fans reacted to Markle’s rumored second pregnancy, saying that she never got pregnant. Many netizens claimed that Markle was never pregnant, implying that she never carried Archie in her womb. One insisted that the duchess was only wearing a fake baby bump and padding, so she would look bigger. Another also referred to the same video mentioned above when Markle squatted and stood up so easily. 

“This was the moment I knew Meghan Markle was not pregnant . As a mother  of 3 children all now grown there is no way I could have bent down like that in my 9th month and have gotten up so quickly  this is what sealed the deal for me,” the netizen wrote.

https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...tomach-made-popping-sound-after-squat-2845229


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> The media seem to be making a point of taking their gloves off with wild stories like this now.
> For the record, I usually pop when i squat down too
> *Meghan Markle’s Pregnancy Questioned; Duchess’ Stomach Made Popping Sound After Squat [VIDEO]*
> By Catherine Armecin
> 10/13/19 AT 9:08 PM
> 
> Meghan Markle’s pregnancy was questioned again after a clip of the duchess making a squat and producing a popping sound resurfaced.
> 
> A clip of Markle squatting and standing during a royal engagement while she was pregnant was shared on YouTube. In the video, there was a noticeable sound when she stood up, prompting the netizens to believe that she was wearing a moonbump.
> 
> “You can literally see that thing pop back out and get bigger when she stands up!!! This is bizarre,” one commented.
> 
> “Holy moly, watch the bump pop out and make that noise! She looks down and touches it as it pops out. People need to see this. Never mind squatting in heels with your knees closed. That’s actually not possible after the 4th month, no matter how much yoga you do. The uterus won’t allow it,” a different user opined.
> 
> Prince Harry and Markle are already expecting their second baby. One netizen even claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make the announcement in the run-up to Princess Beatrice’s royal wedding as a revenge.
> 
> Royal fans questioned Princess Beatrice’s engagement announcement because it happened while the couple was doing their tour in South Africa. Markle’s fans felt that Princess Eugenie’s sister stole the Sussexes’ thunder.
> 
> However, some royal fans reacted to Markle’s rumored second pregnancy, saying that she never got pregnant. Many netizens claimed that Markle was never pregnant, implying that she never carried Archie in her womb. One insisted that the duchess was only wearing a fake baby bump and padding, so she would look bigger. Another also referred to the same video mentioned above when Markle squatted and stood up so easily.
> 
> “This was the moment I knew Meghan Markle was not pregnant . As a mother  of 3 children all now grown there is no way I could have bent down like that in my 9th month and have gotten up so quickly  this is what sealed the deal for me,” the netizen wrote.
> 
> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...tomach-made-popping-sound-after-squat-2845229


I was sitting cross-legged and got up with no issue all the time when I was 8 1/2 months pregnant. Heck, the day I had him, I was able to touch my toes and do pretty much anything.


----------



## A1aGypsy

“Your uterus wouldn’t allow it.” 

If Catherine Armecin is a real person, I’m not sure how she looks at herself in the mornings.  That’s sound solid journalism there. Real contribution to society.


----------



## Jayne1

I've seen a few of Meg's 'deflating' stomach when sitting (just like Beyonce) gifs.  Also one fascinating jiggling big bump when she walked. But that's old news now, I guess.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> The media seem to be making a point of taking their gloves off with wild stories like this now.
> For the record, I usually pop when i squat down too
> *Meghan Markle’s Pregnancy Questioned; Duchess’ Stomach Made Popping Sound After Squat [VIDEO]*
> By Catherine Armecin
> 10/13/19 AT 9:08 PM
> 
> Meghan Markle’s pregnancy was questioned again after a clip of the duchess making a squat and producing a popping sound resurfaced.
> 
> A clip of Markle squatting and standing during a royal engagement while she was pregnant was shared on YouTube. In the video, there was a noticeable sound when she stood up, prompting the netizens to believe that she was wearing a moonbump.
> 
> “You can literally see that thing pop back out and get bigger when she stands up!!! This is bizarre,” one commented.
> 
> “Holy moly, watch the bump pop out and make that noise! She looks down and touches it as it pops out. People need to see this. Never mind squatting in heels with your knees closed. That’s actually not possible after the 4th month, no matter how much yoga you do. The uterus won’t allow it,” a different user opined.
> 
> Prince Harry and Markle are already expecting their second baby. One netizen even claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make the announcement in the run-up to Princess Beatrice’s royal wedding as a revenge.
> 
> Royal fans questioned Princess Beatrice’s engagement announcement because it happened while the couple was doing their tour in South Africa. Markle’s fans felt that Princess Eugenie’s sister stole the Sussexes’ thunder.
> 
> However, some royal fans reacted to Markle’s rumored second pregnancy, saying that she never got pregnant. Many netizens claimed that Markle was never pregnant, implying that she never carried Archie in her womb. One insisted that the duchess was only wearing a fake baby bump and padding, so she would look bigger. Another also referred to the same video mentioned above when Markle squatted and stood up so easily.
> 
> “This was the moment I knew Meghan Markle was not pregnant . As a mother  of 3 children all now grown there is no way I could have bent down like that in my 9th month and have gotten up so quickly  this is what sealed the deal for me,” the netizen wrote.
> 
> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...tomach-made-popping-sound-after-squat-2845229


This beats reading the real news about what's going on in the world


----------



## Jbizzybeetle

Just saw a photo cover of Harry, Meghan and Archie on a grocery stand mag: first thought on that young royal’s look—that’s the Queen staring back at me!


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> The media seem to be making a point of taking their gloves off with wild stories like this now.
> For the record, I usually pop when i squat down too
> *Meghan Markle’s Pregnancy Questioned; Duchess’ Stomach Made Popping Sound After Squat [VIDEO]*
> By Catherine Armecin
> 10/13/19 AT 9:08 PM
> 
> Meghan Markle’s pregnancy was questioned again after a clip of the duchess making a squat and producing a popping sound resurfaced.
> 
> A clip of Markle squatting and standing during a royal engagement while she was pregnant was shared on YouTube. In the video, there was a noticeable sound when she stood up, prompting the netizens to believe that she was wearing a moonbump.
> 
> “You can literally see that thing pop back out and get bigger when she stands up!!! This is bizarre,” one commented.
> 
> “Holy moly, watch the bump pop out and make that noise! She looks down and touches it as it pops out. People need to see this. Never mind squatting in heels with your knees closed. That’s actually not possible after the 4th month, no matter how much yoga you do. The uterus won’t allow it,” a different user opined.
> 
> Prince Harry and Markle are already expecting their second baby. One netizen even claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make the announcement in the run-up to Princess Beatrice’s royal wedding as a revenge.
> 
> Royal fans questioned Princess Beatrice’s engagement announcement because it happened while the couple was doing their tour in South Africa. Markle’s fans felt that Princess Eugenie’s sister stole the Sussexes’ thunder.
> 
> However, some royal fans reacted to Markle’s rumored second pregnancy, saying that she never got pregnant. Many netizens claimed that Markle was never pregnant, implying that she never carried Archie in her womb. One insisted that the duchess was only wearing a fake baby bump and padding, so she would look bigger. Another also referred to the same video mentioned above when Markle squatted and stood up so easily.
> 
> “This was the moment I knew Meghan Markle was not pregnant . As a mother  of 3 children all now grown there is no way I could have bent down like that in my 9th month and have gotten up so quickly  this is what sealed the deal for me,” the netizen wrote.
> 
> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...tomach-made-popping-sound-after-squat-2845229


Archie always looks like a prop that they haven’t gotten used to yet, the way those two hold and handle him. Maybe MM needs more acting classes.


----------



## mrsinsyder

jehaga said:


> Archie always looks like a prop that they haven’t gotten used to yet, the way those two hold and handle him. Maybe MM needs more acting classes.


You clearly haven't read this thread. She basically walks among the finest actors of our generation. Did you not remember this classic piece?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> I was sitting cross-legged and got up with no issue all the time when I was 8 1/2 months pregnant. Heck, the day I had him, I was able to touch my toes and do pretty much anything.


I don't remember ever squatting with knees together at any time during any of my third trimesters, it would have been physically impossible. Knees very much apart, yes, but together would have been too uncomfortable. My uterus wouldn't have allowed it!  But seriously, it would have been impossible.

 But then, Meghan is a force for change, so I guess she found a way


----------



## threadbender

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't remember ever squatting with knees together at any time during any of my third trimesters, it would have been physically impossible. Knees very much apart, yes, but together would have been too uncomfortable. My uterus wouldn't have allowed it!  But seriously, it would have been impossible.
> 
> But then, Meghan is a force for change, so I guess she found a way


I don't remember, honestly, over 25 years ago, but seriously, I had no problems doing pretty much anything. And, I did gain a lot of baby weight. I admit I cannot recall squatting per se but I do remember my best friend, who was also pregnant, being so envious of how easily I did things. By the time she was 4 or 5 months along, she needed help with everything.

ETA This is only my personal experience. I have no idea what Meghan could or could not do. As you know, I am not a big fan, except of Archie. lol I think she and Harry have made some serious tactical errors in their war to win whatever they are trying to win. I was simply saying that people were amazed at what I could do.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't remember ever squatting with knees together at any time during any of my third trimesters, it would have been physically impossible. Knees very much apart, yes, but together would have been too uncomfortable. My uterus wouldn't have allowed it!  But seriously, it would have been impossible.
> 
> But then, Meghan is a force for change, so I guess she found a way


Lol my coworker was pregnant basically the exact time as MM and she'd always see her on the news stories and try to re-enact her movements... after about 3 months in, she couldn't do any of them.


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> You clearly haven't read this thread. She basically walks among the finest actors of our generation. Did you not remember this classic piece?


If nothing, she’s at least really good at arm clutching!


----------



## pukasonqo

threadbender said:


> I don't remember, honestly, over 25 years ago, but seriously, I had no problems doing pretty much anything. And, I did gain a lot of baby weight. I admit I cannot recall squatting per se but I do remember my best friend, who was also pregnant, being so envious of how easily I did things. By the time she was 4 or 5 months along, she needed help with everything.
> 
> ETA This is only my personal experience. I have no idea what Meghan could or could not do. As you know, I am not a big fan, except of Archie. lol I think she and Harry have made some serious tactical errors in their war to win whatever they are trying to win. I was simply saying that people were amazed at what I could do.


Every woman is different, I was attending dance classes until a week before my second baby was born so I probs could do things that other pregnant women couldn’t do.
On the other hand, apparently women in my country (Peru) worked the fields until giving birth.
Everywoman is different, our bodies adapt to pregnancy in different ways so judging one pregnant woman based on our own experience proves nothing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

jehaga said:


> If nothing, she’s at least really good at arm clutching!


OT but that cat in your avatar is gorgeous.....looks like a big boy


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> I don't remember, honestly, over 25 years ago, but seriously, I had no problems doing pretty much anything. And, I did gain a lot of baby weight. I admit I cannot recall squatting per se but I do remember my best friend, who was also pregnant, being so envious of how easily I did things. By the time she was 4 or 5 months along, she needed help with everything.
> 
> ETA This is only my personal experience. I have no idea what Meghan could or could not do. As you know, I am not a big fan, except of Archie. lol I think she and Harry have made some serious tactical errors in their war to win whatever they are trying to win. I was simply saying that people were amazed at what I could do.


I'm sorry if I was unclear, threadbender, I wasn't questioning you at all- or that a lot of women can move and exercise as usual throughout their pregnancies.

But even though there are a lot of pics and films out there of heavily pregnant women doing crazy things like very heavy weightlifting and pole dancing a quick search of pregnancy and squatting showed no other pics of third trimester women squatting with their knees together. None. Meghan is truly unique!


----------



## jehaga

sdkitty said:


> OT but that cat in your avatar is gorgeous.....looks like a big boy


Thank you! But she’s just a tiny one at a little over ten pounds. She does have a big personality though! I admire your avatar as well.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan Markle’s pregnancy was questioned again after a clip of the duchess making a squat and producing a popping sound resurfaced.


I blame my inner five-year-old, but I thought they were going to say she farted


----------



## Straight-Laced

LittleStar88 said:


> I blame my inner five-year-old, but I thought they were going to say she farted


Duchesses don’t fart, although occasionally they may produce ‘popping sounds’


----------



## LittleStar88

Straight-Laced said:


> Duchesses don’t fart, although occasionally they may produce ‘popping sounds’





“Popping sounds” = polite British way of saying passing gas?


----------



## berrydiva

I see this thread is still just as miserable.


----------



## berrydiva

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm sorry if I was unclear, threadbender, I wasn't questioning you at all- or that a lot of women can move and exercise as usual throughout their pregnancies.
> 
> But even though there are a lot of pics and films out there of heavily pregnant women doing crazy things like very heavy weightlifting and pole dancing a quick search of pregnancy and squatting showed no other pics of third trimester women squatting with their knees together. None. Meghan is truly unique!


This is silly. I was fully able to squat knees together while pregnant. Keeping up with exercise while pregnant helps a lot. But carry on with the misery....


----------



## mrsinsyder

I see the wife of the Soho House founder is cashing in on the kickbacks...
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...meghan-markle-prince-harry-hire-kirsty-young/


----------



## Morgan R

Attending the WellChild Awards


----------



## lanasyogamama

How old is Archie? I feel like she may be pregnant again.


----------



## caramelize126

lanasyogamama said:


> How old is Archie? I feel like she may be pregnant again.



How many of us saw this coming JUST as W&K go on their tour? SMH


----------



## myown

lanasyogamama said:


> How old is Archie? I feel like she may be pregnant again.


5 month


----------



## LittleStar88

I like to think she is just embracing body positivity and not freaking out about carrying some post-baby weight. 

But if she is pregnant, awesome! Unfortunately at her age the clock is ticking so if they want another they need to get on with it. Think what you like about them, they seem to make great, loving parents. Their kids will be provided with everything they need to have a great life and promising futures.


----------



## mrsinsyder

caramelize126 said:


> LOL. How many of us saw this coming JUST as W&K go on their tour? SMH


I STG I cannot believe she is stomach grabbing again. _dead_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also can someone please show her that arms go IN the coat. She looks so sloppy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> “Popping sounds” = polite British way of saying passing gas?


Haha   Hands up the person that’s never made a popping sound at in inconvenient moment!



caramelize126 said:


> LOL. How many of us saw this coming JUST as W&K go on their tour? SMH


Good grief, she simply can’t bear not being the centre of attention can she?!


----------



## CeeJay

WOW .. if she is pregnant again because most OB/GYN doctors do not advise getting pregnant so quickly after giving birth, the recommendation is to wait at least 18 months.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Also can someone please show her that arms go IN the coat. She looks so sloppy.


I have to agree with this.  If she wanted to wear a shawl, she should have worn a shawl.  Since she wore a coat, she should wear it properly and try to look put together.  There's no reason everyone needs to look at the lining of her outer wear. 

These attempts to be casual and down to earth and call-me-Meg-not-your-royal-highness aren't working for me.  If royalty don't want to act or dress like royalty then I don't see what the point is of them existing.


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> LOL. How many of us saw this coming JUST as W&K go on their tour? SMH



hmm....I don't think many women hold their bellies like that if they're not pregnant


----------



## lanasyogamama

myown said:


> 5 month



thanks. 



LittleStar88 said:


> I like to think she is just embracing body positivity and not freaking out about carrying some post-baby weight.
> 
> But if she is pregnant, awesome! Unfortunately at her age the clock is ticking so if they want another they need to get on with it. Think what you like about them, they seem to make great, loving parents. Their kids will be provided with everything they need to have a great life and promising futures.



Yes, it’s just her age that makes me think they could have another quickly.


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. if she is pregnant again because most OB/GYN doctors do not advise getting pregnant so quickly after giving birth, the recommendation is to wait at least 18 months.


Never heard of that rule ‍♀️


----------



## bag-mania

caramelize126 said:


> LOL. How many of us saw this coming JUST as W&K go on their tour? SMH



Oh joy, are we going to be treated to months of belly cradling again? Because being a month or two (at most) pregnant requires a protective hand at all times. Or is it because the miracle of pregnancy is just as wonder-inducing the second time around?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Oh joy, are we going to be treated to months of belly cradling again? Because being a month or two (at most) pregnant requires a protective hand at all times. Or is it because the miracle of pregnancy is just as wonder-inducing the second time around?


Lmao she knows exactly what she's doing; it's amazing people can still defend this nonsense and believe them when they cry PRIVACY. She's wearing a tight dress with her coat flicked open and cradling her belly. AGAIN.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Oh joy, are we going to be treated to months of belly cradling again? Because being a month or two (at most) pregnant requires a protective hand at all times. Or is it because the miracle of pregnancy is just as wonder


And today’s the day she finally chooses to confirm in public that Archie has red hair   Bad timing, again


----------



## bag-mania

This is the sort of puff piece Harry and Meghan adore from the media, courtesy of an entertainment magazine not a tabloid. They were attending an event honoring gravely ill children but this is what People magazine took away from it. Archie is in a playgroup! 

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ld-archie-to-his-first-playgroup-he-loved-it/


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> I see the wife of the Soho House founder is cashing in on the kickbacks...
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...meghan-markle-prince-harry-hire-kirsty-young/
> View attachment 4565448



shady shady shady.


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> Never heard of that rule ‍♀️


Do a Google or other Search, what you will see is noted below.  My sister was a NICU Nurse, and she always used to say this as well since oftentimes, the preemmies that she dealt with were because the woman had the babies too close together! : 

*KEY POINTS*

It's best to wait at least 18 months (1½ years) between giving birth and getting pregnant again. 


Too little time between pregnancies increases your risk of premature birth. The shorter the time between pregnancies, the higher your risk.


Premature babies are more likely to have health problems than babies born on time.


Your body needs time to fully recover from your last pregnancy before it’s ready for your next pregnancy.


Use birth control until you’re ready to get pregnant again. Examples of birth control include IUDs, implants, the pill and condoms.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> This is the sort of puff piece Harry and Meghan adore from the media, courtesy of an entertainment magazine not a tabloid. They were attending an event honoring gravely ill children but this is what People magazine took away from it. Archie is in a playgroup!
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ld-archie-to-his-first-playgroup-he-loved-it/


That’s awful when I think about it.  Yeah, shame about your kid, but yay, ours is doing great   Totally self obsessed couple.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s awful when I think about it.  Yeah, shame about your kid, but yay, ours is doing great   Totally self obsessed couple.



The way I see it we have to blame the media companies involved. They are pandering to a readership who only want happy, fun things to read that they don't have to think too hard about. That's how you get a story about a 5-month-old's first playgroup being presented to us as if it were news. There are plenty of people out there who call themselves journalists but only a fraction of them are producing anything of worth. Most are writing the media version of fast food, cheap and without substance.

If Harry and Meghan can take advantage of that, well I can't really blame them. It makes sense in a self-promoting way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Wow, shocker- Meghan wears a too tight green dress and cradles her belly to detract attention from Kate who just appeared in Pakistan looking impeccable in a ...... green dress.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> If Harry and Meghan can take advantage of that, well I can't really blame them. It makes sense in a self-promoting way.


This People Magazine fluff is what Meghan and Harry want the British press to be.  They want to be fawned over with their baby, and then have the press report how cute and sweet it all is.   So far, they have been more than happy to drop quotes about Archie that they know will make the American press squee.  

It is self promoting, and that's ok.  They can take the good press whenever they can get it.  People Magazine just gets way too syrupy.  Another quote from a Meghan friend about how phenomenal she is at motherhood, just like she is at everything!  Not only is she a perfect mom, but she's also "chill and relaxed" about it at the same time.  Enough with these friends.


----------



## Lounorada

I can't stand this trend where women don't put their arms in the sleeves of coats/jackets. There was a period of time not that long ago when the Kardashian women never put their arms in a coat, I never rolled my eyes so much.
It looks pretentious and ridiculous.

Good for her if she's carrying a bit of weight after giving birth and isn't in a rush to lose it, that should be the norm in society. Although, to me it doesn't look like natural weight, it looks like artifical padding, kinda lumpy looking  Very weird.


----------



## Flatsy

Lounorada said:


> I can't stand this trend where women don't put their arms in the sleeves of coats/jackets. There was a period of time not that long ago when the Kardashian women never put their arms in a coat, I never rolled my eyes so much.


It reminds me of when I was in elementary school and it was trendy to pull down your coat so it was around your arms.  Just wear the coat!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> I can't stand this trend where women don't put their arms in the sleeves of coats/jackets. There was a period of time not that long ago when the Kardashian women never put their arms in a coat, I never rolled my eyes so much.
> It looks pretentious and ridiculous.
> 
> Good for her if she's carrying a bit of weight after giving birth and isn't in a rush to lose it, that should be the norm in society. Although, to me it doesn't look like natural weight, it looks like artifical padding, kinda lumpy looking  Very weird.


I blame Melania 
Wearing a heavy coat indoors looks silly - take it off for goodness sake, everyone else is in their shirtsleeves


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

berrydiva said:


> This is silly. I was fully able to squat knees together while pregnant. Keeping up with exercise while pregnant helps a lot. But carry on with the misery....


Deep squatting with knees together in high heels at nine months pregnant...  I’m as impressed and convinced by you as I am by Meghan the Immaculate.

But thank you for being a force for change and shining a light on our misery


----------



## CeeJay

Actually, you can blame the Europeans (_especially the Italians_) for this.  My Italian uncle, when he would come to visit us in the US, ALWAYS wore his coat this way (the arms not inside).  I asked him why and he said "_well, that way I can slip it on and off much more easily_" .. oh, okay!   Not that you see it as much today, but I can tell you that I can immediately spot a European when I see it (that and usually their sunglasses or glasses .. and especially their shoes (_oftentimes impeccable_)!

However, look at this NY Post article .. kinda funny! https://nypost.com/2015/09/16/stop-draping-your-coat-over-your-shoulders-you-look-like-an-idiot/


----------



## Sharont2305

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-prince-harry-breaks-down-20587385


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-prince-harry-breaks-down-20587385


not sure I get it......did he break down at the thought of how fortunate he is to have a healthy child?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> Also can someone please show her that arms go IN the coat. She looks so sloppy.


At least this way nobody can accuse her of pulling her coat to the sides to expose the Sussex bump 2.0 at every opportunity 



mdcx said:


> View attachment 4565778
> 
> Wow, shocker- Meghan wears a too tight green dress and cradles her belly to detract attention from Kate who just appeared in Pakistan looking impeccable in a ...... green dress.


Kate (and William) is looking spectacular and very appropriate in Pakistan. I see in the pics here Meghan isn't the only one feeling the influence but even Harry looks to have been inspired enough to don an actual suit. Bravo.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> I blame Melania
> Wearing a heavy coat indoors looks silly - take it off for goodness sake, everyone else is in their shirtsleeves


Melania is just one of those lucky beings that look stunning in what ever they put on, and one of the few who can pull the coat draped over the shoulders statement off. She's got the height and the attitude. In my opinion, of course, but I'm biased because I like Melania.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> not sure I get it......did he break down at the thought of how fortunate he is to have a healthy child?


Yes


----------



## marthastoo

I feel my belly when I'm wearing something tight and I feel fat.  lol  Until we hear reports that she's actually preggers, let's just postpone the "OMG ... THE BELLY-CRADLING!!!! NOOOOOOO!!!!!" 
The fit of the dress is not ideal.  She needed to wait until she lost 5 more lbs before rewearing that one.  As for the color, I'm not convinced Meghan was rubbing her hands together cackling with glee, looking over her wardrobe, saying "What color is Catherine wearing?  I shall steal her thunder by wearing the same shade!  Muhahahahah!!!!"

First of all, Catherine already wore about 5 outfits in the same time period Meghan wore her one dress.  Secondly, does anyone think Catherine's wardrobe choices was disclosed to Meghan?  Or do people  seriously think Meghan sat around until the Cambridge's press photos appeared and Meghan snatched a green dress off the hanger and dashed off to her appearance?


----------



## mdcx

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Deep squatting with knees together in high heels at nine months pregnant...  I’m as impressed and convinced by you as I am by Meghan the Immaculate.
> 
> But thank you for being a force for change and shining a light on our misery


At six months I was having real back problems and pelvic pain to the point that sitting in my office chair was difficult. Squatting would have been a real joy!
As for Megs, yes I think she's that petty.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So over the top. Although he’s a better actor than she is at this point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Harry needs help of some kind imho.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m starting to wonder if all these outfit re-wears are not because of choice but because of necessity...


----------



## Straight-Laced

Meghan looked great at the WellChild event.  Draping an overcoat over the shoulders gives a dramatic, cape- like flourish to the coat and Meghan has worn coats and blazers in that way on a few occasions.

I do think Harry appears to be over-emotional and unwell.  I suffered severe childhood trauma and I always have to manage it like a chronic illness, because it has ongoing effects. Mid life pressures may overwhelm someone vulnerable and bring the return of symptoms.
If so he should withdraw from public life for a while and spend time with his family and do a reduced workload for as long as necessary away from the spotlight so he can restore and recover with help.
His emotions are running high and it seems he's being triggered by various things, media being one of them. I'm sure there are other frustrations not so obvious.

Just my two cents from observing Harry over the last little while and knowing his personal history...


----------



## Flatsy

Straight-Laced said:


> I do think Harry appears to be over-emotional and unwell.


I haven't been on board with this so far, but I agree now.  Healthy people can get emotional about the well being of their children (or of children in general) without completely breaking down in public.  Harry telling people at an engagement that he gets so upset about the state of the world that he has difficulty getting out of bed in the morning is just straight up depression.

(I disagree that reduced workload is the answer because I contend that none of the royals work all that hard.  He had a couple of months off in the summer like the rest of the family and he's coming back from that like this.)


----------



## buffym

berrydiva said:


> I see this thread is still just as miserable.



Not everyone is here to criticize.

Some pictures not posted yet. Harry is really good with kids.







Harry’s speech, he is very empathetic


----------



## rose60610

I thought from Day One after the wedding MM would be pregnant ASAP, and then again ASAP. She can't not cradle her belly after all the cradling of the first one. 

She cradled it so much I wouldn't be surprised if she had callouses all over.  Like "Oooh lookie ME! I'm not only pregnant but carrying a royal!  So I'll rub it in as many faces as I possibly can! Rub rub rub rub rub!!!!!"  

Good call on those who noticed the new cradling episode. 

Let's take guesses on baby names. After "Archie", hmmmm.... boy: Bart? Percival? ALFIE!  girl:  Aria, Abigail...


----------



## myown

Lounorada said:


> Good for her if she's carrying a bit of weight after giving birth and isn't in a rush to lose it, that should be the norm in society. Although, to me it doesn't look like natural weight, it looks like artifical padding, kinda lumpy looking  Very weird.


It’s looking unnatural to you, because an after baby body is totally off shape. 
i wasn’t aware how much off shape until I had my baby.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> I haven't been on board with this so far, but I agree now.  Healthy people can get emotional about the well being of their children (or of children in general) without completely breaking down in public.  Harry telling people at an engagement that he gets so upset about the state of the world that he has difficulty getting out of bed in the morning is just straight up depression.
> 
> (I disagree that reduced workload is the answer because I contend that none of the royals work all that hard.  He had a couple of months off in the summer like the rest of the family and he's coming back from that like this.)


He is overwrought that’s for sure


----------



## hellosunshine

Harry & Meghan are a joy! Loved that Meghan re-wore her engagement interview dress. She looks beautiful.







Harry took a dig at himself lol Cute that the girl nodded "yes, you can have some of my hair"


----------



## buffym

The scarf detail on her clutch is chic.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

@hellosunshine  Hi sunshine, I hope you saw my apology a few weeks back, I thought you would understand I was joking and that I was making a bit of fun at all of us here. I was trying to post a reveal with lots of pics on another thread and this thread kept notifying like mad and I felt like this- 


and I think wasn't the only one  Anyway, didn't mean to single you out or be rude to you personally.


----------



## Lounorada

myown said:


> It’s looking unnatural to you, because an after baby body is totally off shape.
> i wasn’t aware how much off shape until I had my baby.


No, her stomach area looked unnatural (IMO) in that green dress because it looks as if she's wearing some ill-fitting shapewear or padding or something underneath which doesn't help when the dress appears to be 1 or 2 sizes too small on her.
I'm not talking about how her stomach is shaped after a baby, I get that all women experience different body changes, you missed my point entirely.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lounorada said:


> No, her stomach area looked unnatural (IMO) in that green dress because it looks as if she's wearing some ill-fitting shapewear or padding or something underneath which doesn't help when the dress appears to be 1 or 2 sizes too small on her.
> I'm not talking about how her stomach is shaped after a baby, I get that all women experience different body changes, you missed my point entirely.


There’s a photo of them from the back where you can really see it doesn’t fit at all. There’s no way she’s re-wearing this of her own choice.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I agree, I can’t imagine that anyone that has had access to the clothes and tailoring that she has would feel comfortable in a dress that fits like that.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a photo of them from the back where you can really see it doesn’t fit at all. There’s no way she’s re-wearing this of her own choice.
> 
> View attachment 4566421


not sure what you're saying.....someone else decided she should wear it?  none of her clothes are fitting?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree, I can’t imagine that anyone that has had access to the clothes and tailoring that she has would feel comfortable in a dress that fits like that.



If I put it on and it fit me like that, I would immediately take it off and find something more forgiving and flattering. I can't imagine she is comfortable. Maybe just making a point that she is re-wearing dresses?

She knows she is going to be photographed at all angles so why take the chance of looking bad in photos?


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a photo of them from the back where you can really see it doesn’t fit at all. There’s no way she’s re-wearing this of her own choice.
> 
> View attachment 4566421



That looks uncomfortable.

The petty side of me thinks that she might have worn a tighter dress and gone on with all the belly cradling to get some attention. Or maybe she just likes the dress ( its a great color!). Or given all of the negative stories about how much shes spending, she may have been advised to start recycling. notice how most of the tabloids are talking about 1) the recycling of the dress 2) harrys crying / laughing? speech. Good PR for them i suppose. But if she wanted to be comfortable, she couldve reworn a flowy-er dress. She has plenty of flowy dresses she has worn in the past...


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> not sure what you're saying.....someone else decided she should wear it?  none of her clothes are fitting?


That she’s either cut off from buying expensive new clothes or someone is telling her to rewear stuff to be relatable.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> That she’s either cut off from buying expensive new clothes or someone is telling her to rewear stuff to be relatable.


ok.....I do like the color of that dress......maybe if she is pregnant again she wants to show her bump


----------



## A1aGypsy

Seems awfully early to me to be pregnant again. If I were betting, I would say she knew she was being photographed and said something to someone about being hungry (hence the belly touch) knowing what it would look like.  But that’s just pure speculation.

I also don’t think she looks terrible in the dress. It’s much tighter than would be appropriate for other royals but she seems permitted to follow different rules.  And her backside looks good.


----------



## caramelize126

sdkitty said:


> ok.....I do like the color of that dress......*maybe if she is pregnant again she wants to show her bump*



I cannot imagine that H&M werent warned about any shenanigans while W&K are on tour. The entire BRF is on overdrive right now given both theirs and britain's current predicament... but if shes pregnant, she really just couldnt help herself 

Lots of people online speculating that the video of harry is actually him laughing and not crying. perhaps at the irony that she might be pregnant again and no one knows, like last time. I cant really tell though. any thoughts on this?


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> I cannot imagine that H&M werent warned about any shenanigans while W&K are on tour. The entire BRF is on overdrive right now given both theirs and britain's current predicament... but if shes pregnant, she really just couldnt help herself
> 
> Lots of people online speculating that the video of harry is actually him laughing and not crying. perhaps at the irony that she might be pregnant again and no one knows, like last time. I cant really tell though. any thoughts on this?


I just looked at the video.  Harry does look like he got choked up, not a full ugly cry but not laughing.  Seems like just thinking about Meghan being pregnant got to him....IDK


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> I also don’t think she looks terrible in the dress. It’s much tighter than would be appropriate for other royals but she seems permitted to follow different rules.



It was just an odd choice to me. She wore a $90,000 couture Dior gown to a dinner party at a house and wears an office dress to an evening fundraising event. Plus if it's cold enough for a coat, why a sleeveless dress?


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> Seems awfully early to me to be pregnant again. If I were betting, I would say she knew she was being photographed and said something to someone about being hungry (hence the belly touch) knowing what it would look like.  But that’s just pure speculation.
> 
> I also don’t think she looks terrible in the dress. It’s much tighter than would be appropriate for other royals but she seems permitted to follow different rules.  And her backside looks good.


It's possible they weren't really trying to get pregnant again but weren't using precautions either and it just happened quickly.  I don't know if she's pregnant but still say I don't think it's common for women to touch their bellies like that if they're not pregnant (esp someone who knows she's being photographed all the time)


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a photo of them from the back where you can really see it doesn’t fit at all. There’s no way she’s re-wearing this of her own choice.
> 
> View attachment 4566421


That dress looks so uncomfortably tight


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Actually, you can blame the Europeans (_especially the Italians_) for this.  My Italian uncle, when he would come to visit us in the US, ALWAYS wore his coat this way (the arms not inside).  I asked him why and he said "_well, that way I can slip it on and off much more easily_" .. oh, okay!   Not that you see it as much today, but I can tell you that I can immediately spot a European when I see it (that and usually their sunglasses or glasses .. and especially their shoes (_oftentimes impeccable_)!


I always think of this image when I see a coat draped over the shoulders...


----------



## buffym

Meghan rewears clothes often some times it works well and other times, not. She seems someone who has always been thin so most of the time clothes will fit but her body has changed and so it is an adjustment that it may look to tight.

Good rewears 
	

		
			
		

		
	








Some with fit issues, I think the change may not have fully hit her, or the size is only temporary so she sticks with favorites 
	

		
			
		

		
	








Some fit issues, pregnancy was new to her


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> Some pictures not posted yet. Harry is really good with kids.
> 
> View attachment 4566100
> View attachment 4566101
> View attachment 4566102
> View attachment 4566103


He's probably great with children, but to look at some photo ops that are very staged, with cameras in their faces, one can't really assume if someone is good with children, just because they are smiling.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> He's probably great with children, but to look at some photo ops that are very staged, with cameras in their faces, one can't really assume if someone is good with children, just because they are smiling.


Like how he led this girl over


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> Some fit issues, pregnancy was new to her
> View attachment 4566623
> View attachment 4566624



She comes off as very aware of her clothing choices so I can't accept that she was ok to wear something that looked and likely felt way too tight just because she had a belly. 

Once you put something on (and then look in the mirror), you know right away that it is not a good fit. Baby, big lunch, etc. - all the same. 

I can't imagine being pregnant and look (and probably feel) like 20 pounds of sausage in a 10 pound casing.

I am beginning to believe she needs a new clothing advisor and a good tailor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

She looks good in neutral colors.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> She comes off as very aware of her clothing choices so I can't accept that she was ok to wear something that looked and likely felt way too tight just because she had a belly.
> 
> Once you put something on (and then look in the mirror), you know right away that it is not a good fit. Baby, big lunch, etc. - all the same.
> 
> I can't imagine being pregnant and look (and probably feel) like 20 pounds of sausage in a 10 pound casing.
> 
> I am beginning to believe she needs a new clothing advisor and a good tailor.


funny how that quote was attributed to me.....I didn't say anything about fit issues


----------



## CeeJay

buffym said:


> Meghan rewears clothes often some times it works well and other times, not. She seems someone who has always been thin so most of the time clothes will fit but her body has changed and so it is an adjustment that it may look to tight.
> 
> Good rewears
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4566612
> View attachment 4566613
> View attachment 4566614
> View attachment 4566615
> View attachment 4566616
> 
> 
> Some with fit issues, I think the change may not have fully hit her, or the size is only temporary so she sticks with favorites
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4566618
> View attachment 4566619
> View attachment 4566620
> View attachment 4566621
> View attachment 4566622
> 
> 
> Some fit issues, pregnancy was new to her
> View attachment 4566623
> View attachment 4566624


Yes, you've posted this in the past .. thanks!


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s a photo of them from the back where you can really see it doesn’t fit at all. There’s no way she’s re-wearing this of her own choice.
> 
> View attachment 4566421


Oh dear no. She has some slamming curves post baby, but this is not the way to showcase them!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> Harry & Meghan are a joy! Loved that Meghan re-wore her engagement interview dress. She looks beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 4566359
> 
> 
> View attachment 4566360
> 
> 
> Harry took a dig at himself lol Cute that the girl nodded "yes, you can have some of my hair"
> View attachment 4566361


Meghan's affected mannerisms are so annoying


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan's affected mannerisms are so annoying


overacting?  maybe she needs a new director


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I just looked at the video.  Harry does look like he got choked up, not a full ugly cry but not laughing.  Seems like just thinking about Meghan being pregnant got to him....IDK


I feel for Harry here. Before I had kids mainly animals who were sick or suffering had this effect on me but after having my own kids I'm the same about kids who are sick or hurting. It wasn't that I didn't care about kids before, of course I did, but something inside you just changes.

I think Harry met some very ill children and their families here and that's difficult to deal with. But, I agree with others here, he definitely doesn't seem 100% stable right now, talking about not wanting to get out of bed in the morning, looking disheveled doing representation etc.


----------



## Clearblueskies

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan's affected mannerisms are so annoying





sdkitty said:


> overacting?  maybe she needs a new director


I think the slow motion really shows up what bugs me most about this couple - Meghan is behaving very unnaturally, preening constantly, and Harry is all forced jollity.  It strikes a very false note.  I just can’t reconcile snarling Harry with this super-happy Harry or the overly emoting Harry.  I wish they’d both just tone it down several notches and be natural.

And I’m thinking that everyone (especially his wife) needs to stop pressing Harry’s Diana button, it’s not good for him.  He’s not his mother and I bet Diana wouldn’t want him to be, I think she’d want him to be himself.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I feel for Harry here. Before I had kids mainly animals who were sick or suffering had this effect on me but after having my own kids I'm the same about kids who are sick or hurting. It wasn't that I didn't care about kids before, of course I did, but something inside you just changes.
> 
> I think Harry met some very ill children and their families here and that's difficult to deal with. But, I agree with others here, he definitely doesn't seem 100% stable right now, talking about not wanting to get out of bed in the morning, looking disheveled doing representation etc.


I re-watched too, it's a really odd mannerism. It's like he catches himself laughing then cries? It's weird, like everything else they do.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Yes, you've posted this in the past .. thanks!


Lest we think she burns everything she owns after she wears it.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> I think the slow motion really shows up what bugs me most about this couple - Meghan is behaving very unnaturally, preening constantly, and Harry is all forced jollity.  It strikes a very false note.  I just can’t reconcile snarling Harry with this super-happy Harry or the overly emoting Harry.  I wish they’d both just tone it down several notches and be natural.
> 
> And I’m thinking that everyone (especially his wife) needs to stop pressing Harry’s Diana button, it’s not good for him.  He’s not his mother and I bet Diana wouldn’t want him to be, I think she’d want him to be himself.


Well, when my mother had her manic episodes (and trust me - I know mental illness first hand), she would have moments where she was giddy happy and then all of a sudden .. the crash.  The entire family recognized it and we knew what the outcome would be, yet another hospitalization and round of various drugs .. etc.  I do hope that Harry is seeking help if, in fact, he is having episodes like this .. it did worry me that he made that comment about not wanting to get up out of bed, especially now being a parent!  Meghan needs to help him, and by that .. being second fiddle for a bit such that he can sort himself out, playing the "Diana" role will not help him one bit!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> I re-watched too, it's a really odd mannerism. It's like he catches himself laughing then cries? It's weird, like everything else they do.


Do you have a link to the video, please? This thread is moving so fast I can't find it or maybe it wasn't even posted here.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Do you have a link to the video, please? This thread is moving so fast I can't find it or maybe it wasn't even posted here.


I don't think I saw it here. Here's a short gif


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Found it. Harry looks genuinely moved to tears here. A lot of men don't cry easily, especially in public, so maybe that's why he sounds a bit funny, trying very hard not to cry?

https://www.elle.com/2f384aab-e944-46e9-b2d1-41eabd86c387
(Couldn't embed it for some reason.)

ETA:


----------



## mdcx

I don’t think Harry is 100% stable whether due to CPTSD, depression/mania, stress etc.
Meghan’s effusive hugging of strangers is very much not the British way of things. It does make one wonder if it is more for photo ops.
Wearing the way too tight dress again was a statement. Of what, I’m not sure. But Meghan does not strike me as someone who likes being told what to do e.g “behave while Kate and Will are on tour”.
There were plenty of other wardrobe options available to her but she chose a dress that looked like it was about to explode at the seams.
Nothing is accidental when you are talking about a person with multiple PR reps.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> funny how that quote was attributed to me.....I didn't say anything about fit issues



Sorry! It came through as such in your post. Anyhow, comment still relative, sans quoting you.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I don’t think Harry is 100% stable whether due to CPTSD, depression/mania, stress etc.
> Meghan’s effusive hugging of strangers is very much not the British way of things. It does make one wonder if it is more for photo ops.
> Wearing the way too tight dress again was a statement. Of what, I’m not sure. But Meghan does not strike me as someone who likes being told what to do e.g “behave while Kate and Will are on tour”.
> There were plenty of other wardrobe options available to her but she chose a dress that looked like it was about to explode at the seams.
> Nothing is accidental when you are talking about a person with multiple PR reps.


HA .. that's for sure, my Irish relatives would recoil back if I went to hug them; I learned my lesson very early on from them (_however, on the Italian side of the family, hugging was expected_)!!


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> That she’s either cut off from buying expensive new clothes or someone is telling her to rewear stuff to be relatable.



Her body has been in transition for a year from pregnancy to post-partum. She may not want to invest in new pieces when her body size hasn’t stabilized and/or she may be planning to be pregnant again soon. Since Meghan goes for classic separates she has a stable of very nice basics to pull from.

Meghan’s a grown up so I think she wears what she wants. The Sussexes are not poor so I doubt money is an issue.


----------



## justwatchin

sdkitty said:


> It's possible they weren't really trying to get pregnant again but weren't using precautions either and it just happened quickly.  I don't know if she's pregnant but still say I don't think it's common for women to touch their bellies like that if they're not pregnant (esp someone who knows she's being photographed all the time)


I got the impression she didn’t know what to do with her belly. Maybe because she was self-conscious? I don’t remember cradling my belly when pregnant but then I wasn’t in the public eye.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> She may not want to invest in new pieces when her body size hasn’t stabilized and/or she may be planning to be pregnant again soon.L.


Yeah, I’m sure thrifty Meghan with her $90,000 couture gowns and private jets and $200,000 baby shower would hate to invest in a new dress. Unless you mean like the one she wore to the Lion King premiere or Nonoo’s wedding.


----------



## chicaloca

bag-mania said:


> This thread is the gift that just keeps on giving.
> 
> Even when I have nothing to say I find myself checking it three or four times a day. It has become my favorite guilty pleasure.



I feel the  opposite and don’t come here as much. For me a guilty pleasure is cookie dough ice cream — not online bullying.  There’s such a high level of negativity and vitriol to the point that actual fans of the Sussexes have been put off posting here. 

While I get these forums aren’t meant to be fan forums  I don’t  think they should be serving as “hate” forums.


----------



## buffym

Jayne1 said:


> He's probably great with children, but to look at some photo ops that are very staged, with cameras in their faces, one can't really assume if someone is good with children, just because they are smiling.



I think Harry are good with kids if you don’t agree that’s fine.



CeeJay said:


> Yes, you've posted this in the past .. thanks!



You’re welcome


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA .. that's for sure, my Irish relatives would recoil back if I went to hug them; I learned my lesson very early on from them (_however, on the Italian side of the family, hugging was expected_)!!


that's funny
I'm also Irish and Italian.  What I remember from my childhood on the Italian side was I had to kiss the relatives (like it or not)....not hugging so much.  I guess the Irish side wasn't demonstrative but I never really thought about it


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> I feel the  opposite and don’t come here as much. For me a guilty pleasure is cookie dough ice cream — not online bullying.  There’s such a high level of negativity and vitriol to the point that actual fans of the Sussexes have been put off posting here.
> 
> While I get these forums aren’t meant to be fan forums  I don’t  think they should be serving as “hate” forums.


criticism isn't the same as hate


----------



## marthastoo

chicaloca said:


> I feel the  opposite and don’t come here as much. For me a guilty pleasure is cookie dough ice cream — not online bullying.  There’s such a high level of negativity and vitriol to the point that actual fans of the Sussexes have been put off posting here.
> 
> While I get these forums aren’t meant to be fan forums  I don’t  think they should be serving as “hate” forums.


This thread was a guilty pleasure at one time.  The incessant negativity and crazy comments (entering tin-hat wearing territory) made me just click ignore like it was going out of style.  The problem now is that I have no idea what's being discussed because I'm only seeing 1/2 of the thread.


----------



## bag-mania

chicaloca said:


> While I get these forums aren’t meant to be fan forums  I don’t  think they should be serving as “hate” forums.



Like every other celebrity who has a thread in this subforum there will be members who love them and others who don't. Both sides tend to be vocal. There's no reason to take it seriously. There are probably some famous people you don't like.


----------



## Jayne1

buffym said:


> I think Harry are good with kids if you don’t agree that’s fine.


That's not what I wrote.  I said I'm sure he is.  I also said it's best not to assume anything from looking at photo ops.  Very staged photo ops.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> I feel the  opposite and don’t come here as much. For me a guilty pleasure is cookie dough ice cream — not online bullying.  There’s such a high level of negativity and vitriol to the point that actual fans of the Sussexes have been put off posting here.
> 
> While I get these forums aren’t meant to be fan forums  I don’t  think they should be serving as “hate” forums.


I don't see the hate per se.  I think many of us really liked Harry and we're starting to see, or think we are seeing, what he really is like.

Even after the nazi thing, partying, abysmal royal thing and drug use, many still thought he was a great guy, but he's showing us too much of himself and we're not caring for it.


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> I don't see the hate per se.  I think many of us really liked Harry and we're starting to see, or think we are seeing, what he really is like.
> 
> Even after the nazi thing, partying, abysmal royal thing and drug use, many still thought he was a great guy, but he's showing us too much of himself and we're not caring for it.


He showed us who he was quite awhile ago but we ignored the red flags .


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> He showed us who he was quite awhile ago but we ignored the red flags .


He’s a spoiled petulant man child who got through high school only because people did his work for him. 

Now he thinks the world needs him to educate all of us about whatever whim he’s on that day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Even after the nazi thing, partying, abysmal royal thing and drug use, many still thought he was a great guy, but he's showing us too much of himself and we're not caring for it.


I still think he's mostly a good guy, even though he has charmed his way through life and gotten away with a lot of youthful shenanigans because of it.  

I think he's just on a bad path right now where he's alienated himself from people he used to be close to (notably his family and certain close friends) and is not listening to people who would be offering good advice.  He's decided various groups of people are out to get him and Meghan, so he's adopted a "you and me against the world" mentality which is unhealthy and destructive.

Maybe they will turn things around, it just appears more and more that Meghan and Harry together do not bring out the best in each other.

I found this Shallon Lester video interesting and I think she probably hit the nail on the head.  

I'm not saying this woman has any sort of expertise and she's probably an idiot, but I think she's right that Meghan validated the part of Harry that felt he was living in his brother's shadow and not getting all the things he deserves.  And now he's going for what he thinks is rightfully his and lashing out at anyone who stands in the way, with Meghan's encouragement.  This report that Meghan tells Harry constantly "Your mother would be proud of you" when he does things sounds so emotionally manipulative.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mdcx said:


> I don’t think Harry is 100% stable whether due to CPTSD, depression/mania, stress etc.
> Meghan’s effusive hugging of strangers is very much not the British way of things. It does make one wonder if it is more for photo ops.


Yes Meghan's a hugger but Harry is too, even before Meghan.

Anecdote I heard from star wheelchair athlete Dylan Alcott (who's had organised meetings with Harry three times, most recently with Meghan last year). Each time in preparation for the meeting Palace officials have told Dylan that there's _no protocol with Harry, just courtesy.  But definitely no touching_.  And so the first thing Harry does on meeting Dylan is grab him, pull him close, and generally hug him and touch him on the arm, back or shoulder throughout the meetings, doing that kind of very effusive touch-feely thing. Apparently 'everyone' who meets Harry finds that out, according to Dylan.

But compare Harry to William and Charles in this respect and they're chalk and cheese.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah, I’m sure thrifty Meghan with her $90,000 couture gowns and private jets and $200,000 baby shower would hate to invest in a new dress. Unless you mean like the one she wore to the Lion King premiere or Nonoo’s wedding.


$200,000 baby shower? .. I thought it was $500,000?!?!   Either way, way too over-the-top IMO!


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7581357/Im-huge-admirer-Harry-sorry-tears-place.html

*I'm a huge admirer of Harry... but, sorry, those tears were out of place: From the Mail's Mind Doctor, who has supported the Prince on mental health awareness, a provocative personal view *
By Dr Max Pemberton For The Daily Mail17:09 EDT 16 Oct 2019 , updated 17:48 EDT 16 


*Duke of Sussex shed tears during his speech at the WellChild Awards, London*
*Dr Max Pemberton says Prince Harry made an uncharacteristic faux pas *
*The NHS psychiatrist argues the Royal took the spotlight from the audience*
*Author Henrietta Spink was moved by Prince Harry's compassion and empathy*
By speaking so openly about his struggles with mental health following the death of his mother Diana, Prince Harry has achieved more in a couple of years than decades of campaigning ever could.

Those of us who work in this field owe him, his brother William and sister-in-law Kate an enormous debt for taking one of the least glamorous and most neglected health issues and making it ‘OK’ to admit to problems.

Their stance has inspired tens of thousands to seek help. So I am a devoted Harry fan.

However, when I watched the clip of him struggling to hold back tears at the WellChild Awards in London on Tuesday night, I felt uneasy. I think he got it wrong on this occasion.


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> I feel the  opposite and don’t come here as much. For me a guilty pleasure is cookie dough ice cream — not online bullying.  There’s such a high level of negativity and vitriol to the point that actual fans of the Sussexes have been put off posting here.
> 
> While I get these forums aren’t meant to be fan forums  I don’t  think they should be serving as “hate” forums.


That is your perception; I do not recall anyone on this forum saying they "hated" Meghan and/or Harry.  Have they voiced displeasure in certain aspects, yes .. but unfortunately some view any non-glowing, 100% positive, etc. - in other words, any criticism as being negative and therefore - hateful?  Either way, either side .. should be able to say what they want, but saying that someone who feels differently than you .. that they "hate" them?  Sorry .. nope, not buying it!


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

I don’t understand why Meghan and Harry are being singled out for their spending without context. Was Kate and Williams’ kids shower a lot cheaper? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I don’t understand why Meghan and Harry are being singled out for their spending without context. Was Kate and Williams’ kids shower a lot cheaper?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


They didn’t have a shower lol


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

I wonder if it is because it is an American tradition rather than British. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7581357/Im-huge-admirer-Harry-sorry-tears-place.html
> 
> *I'm a huge admirer of Harry... but, sorry, those tears were out of place: From the Mail's Mind Doctor, who has supported the Prince on mental health awareness, a provocative personal view *
> By Dr Max Pemberton For The Daily Mail17:09 EDT 16 Oct 2019 , updated 17:48 EDT 16
> 
> 
> *Duke of Sussex shed tears during his speech at the WellChild Awards, London*
> *Dr Max Pemberton says Prince Harry made an uncharacteristic faux pas *
> *The NHS psychiatrist argues the Royal took the spotlight from the audience*
> *Author Henrietta Spink was moved by Prince Harry's compassion and empathy*
> By speaking so openly about his struggles with mental health following the death of his mother Diana, Prince Harry has achieved more in a couple of years than decades of campaigning ever could.
> 
> Those of us who work in this field owe him, his brother William and sister-in-law Kate an enormous debt for taking one of the least glamorous and most neglected health issues and making it ‘OK’ to admit to problems.
> 
> Their stance has inspired tens of thousands to seek help. So I am a devoted Harry fan.
> 
> However, when I watched the clip of him struggling to hold back tears at the WellChild Awards in London on Tuesday night, I felt uneasy. I think he got it wrong on this occasion.


Could be attention-seeking, or it could be he's in a mental crisis of his own and we're all witnessing it. He- and the article, admit he's struggled, so perhaps he's currently struggling.


----------



## threadbender

Chagall said:


> He showed us who he was quite awhile ago but we ignored the red flags .


True but he wasn't quite so loud about it previously. Not sure I am stating that well.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I especially loved the part where they gave all the guests sponsored (merched) freebies. I’m sure Gayle and Serena couldn’t otherwise afford a $300 suitcase.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

I lived in South Kensington about a decade ago and they are very anti American in London society no matter who you are. They are an insular bunch but the anti American sentiment is much worse in the continent ie germany or France. 

I think it is important that Meghan keeps some of her identity for her child. It is kinda sad there is so much speculation on Harry’s mental state . Perhaps he just had enough bs from the press.  I don’t think she understands that royal family is treated like a spectacle in the UK from young to old. It is just tradition. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> I especially loved the part where they gave all the guests sponsored (merched) freebies. I’m sure Gayle and Serena couldn’t otherwise afford a $300 suitcase.
> 
> View attachment 4566916


.. and this is a VERY HOLLYWOOD thing to do, think about the "gifts" that the Emmy and Oscar candidates get (_which they now have to declare on their taxes_)!!!  On a flight back to LA (_from Boston_), the woman seated next to me admired my Jewelry (_which I do design and make_), and she told me how I should 'donate' it to the celebs to get it in the press and since the Oscars were coming up, I should consider it!  WHAT???  .. I told her "_listen lady, consider me the Hermes of the Jewelry world, I will not give these folks anything for free, especially since they can freakin' afford it_"!!!  Kind of pissed me off ..


----------



## CeeJay

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I lived in South Kensington about a decade ago and they are very anti American in London society no matter who you are. They are an insular bunch but the anti American sentiment is much worse in the continent ie germany or France.
> 
> I think it is important that Meghan keeps some of her identity for her child. It is kinda sad there is so much speculation on Harry’s mental state . Perhaps he just had enough bs from the press.  I don’t think she understands that royal family is treated like a spectacle in the UK from young to old. It is just tradition.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hmmm .. I never saw that when living in London; yes .. they thought some of the things I did were odd, but I did not get the snobbery, but then again, I don't take any sh!te (_to use their word_)!  Paris was a little different; they believe there is a right way and wrong way, so just to be "safe" .. I would ask my French colleagues "_puis-je avoir vos conseils_" .. and voila, they were as nice to me as can be!


----------



## Hobbsy

CeeJay said:


> Wow, that was not nice .. remember the warning we all got from Vlad and Swanky?  Let's keep it nice!


Not nice? Truth hurts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7581357/Im-huge-admirer-Harry-sorry-tears-place.html
> 
> *I'm a huge admirer of Harry... but, sorry, those tears were out of place: From the Mail's Mind Doctor, who has supported the Prince on mental health awareness, a provocative personal view *
> By Dr Max Pemberton For The Daily Mail17:09 EDT 16 Oct 2019 , updated 17:48 EDT 16
> 
> 
> *Duke of Sussex shed tears during his speech at the WellChild Awards, London*
> *Dr Max Pemberton says Prince Harry made an uncharacteristic faux pas *
> *The NHS psychiatrist argues the Royal took the spotlight from the audience*


This is why he probably should step back right now. 
He’s too raw and I’m sure a lot of people are noticing that things aren’t quite right with Harry, for whatever reason.


----------



## Vlad

Hobbsy said:


> Not nice? Truth hurts.



So does a thread ban.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

CeeJay said:


> Hmmm .. I never saw that when living in London; yes .. they thought some of the things I did were odd, but I did not get the snobbery, but then again, I don't take any sh!te (_to use their word_)!  Paris was a little different; they believe there is a right way and wrong way, so just to be "safe" .. I would ask my French colleagues "_puis-je avoir vos conseils_" .. and voila, they were as nice to me as can be!



When I say anti American I want to say they think you are out of place bc of your “American” ways.  Americans are seen as silly, emotional, and fake. This seems very familiar as how the tabloids describe Meghan. 

They can like you personally esp once you become part of the gang. You can be accepted BUT not your silly American values or what they perceive to be “American”. Kinda like how the rest of the country perceives Hollywood. If you are in entertainment, it is hard to get away from that stigma outside of LA and NYC. I’m curious if Meghan was treated like this. I worked at Portcullis House/ Westminster for a now notorious MP.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lulu212121

theamericanchinadoll said:


> When I say anti American I want to say they think you are out of place bc of your “American” ways.  Americans are seen as silly, emotional, and fake. This seems very familiar as how the tabloids describe Meghan.
> 
> They can like you personally esp once you become part of the gang. You can be accepted BUT not your silly American values or what they perceive to be “American”. Kinda like how the rest of the country perceives Hollywood. If you are in entertainment, it is hard to get away from that stigma outside of LA and NYC. I’m curious if Meghan was treated like this. I worked at Portcullis House/ Westminster for a now notorious MP.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's insightful. Thank you for sharing.


----------



## CeeJay

theamericanchinadoll said:


> When I say anti American I want to say they think you are out of place bc of your “American” ways.  Americans are seen as silly, emotional, and fake. This seems very familiar as how the tabloids describe Meghan.
> 
> They can like you personally esp once you become part of the gang. You can be accepted BUT not your silly American values or what they perceive to be “American”. Kinda like how the rest of the country perceives Hollywood. If you are in entertainment, it is hard to get away from that stigma outside of LA and NYC. I’m curious if Meghan was treated like this. I worked at Portcullis House/ Westminster for a now notorious MP.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Oh, I know exactly what you are talking about having experienced it, but then again .. one of the interesting things that one of my English colleagues told me (_he was married to an American and grew up "on the wrong side of the tracks" as he would say_), was that the 'real' reason why many Brits hated Americans is because we would not adhere to the "class system".  So, in saying that .. yes, I can see that in Meghan and that may be why some of the press is so hard on her.  Good point!


----------



## Vlad

I will continue to liberally applying thread bans to those individuals going forward that can't handle themselves like respectful adults. I am tired of the constant infighting and name-calling. Kindly behave yourselves.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I know exactly what you are talking about having experienced it, but then again .. one of the interesting things that one of my English colleagues told me (_he was married to an American and grew up "on the wrong side of the tracks" as he would say_), was that the 'real' reason why many Brits hated Americans is because we would not adhere to the "class system".  So, in saying that .. yes, I can see that in Meghan and that may be why some of the press is so hard on her.  Good point!



Omg yes! I still have a lot of friends in London but when they we’re dating they seemed to care about titles which I don’t get.  Personally, I don’t care who your granddaddy married and what his values were. People from different parts of London are very different just like any city.  South Kensington, where I lived, was very old London so you have a bunch of people with land and title but no money.  However, they have a way of life that is more about preservation of wealth than growth which is very much against what you see represented by Hollywood.  People in other parts of London were much more down to earth. 

Also people in the continent didn’t seem to care nearly as much since it has mostly been abolished.


----------



## buffym

Duchess Meghan Reveals Archie Attended His First Playgroup
She and Prince Harry also dished that their son is "definitely" a redhead.

Duchess Meghan has revealed that her and Prince Harry's five-month-old son, Archie, attended his first playgroup in Windsor earlier today.

As the royal couple chatted to young winners at the annual WellChild Awards in central London, Meghan told one of the brave winners: “I just took Archie for his first [playgroup] class. It was a lot of fun. He loved it.”

Harry and Meghan spoke to Milly Sutherland, 11, and her mom Angela, 50, in a reception for winners of the inspiring awards at the Royal Lancaster hotel in central London. Angela tells BAZAAR.com of her conversation with the duchess, “She said they had loads of fun together. She said it was really good fun.”
....

Milly also told Harry she was appearing in a pantomime production of Aladdin and told him, “You could be the genie. I’ll paint you blue.”

Harry replied, “So I’ll be blue with ginger hair – that’ll look nice!”

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a29476483/meghan-markle-archie-playgroup/


----------



## bag-mania

I hate to think an honest emotional reaction from Harry indicates possible mental illness. He may be the sort of guy who feels things deeply. Men like him hide their feelings most of the time to avoid ridicule but occasionally it overwhelms them. I thought it was kind of sweet in an awkward way. The only reason to see it in a negative light would be if I thought he was faking it, but I don’t think he was.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> I hate to think an honest emotional reaction from Harry indicates possible mental illness. He may be the sort of guy who feels things deeply. Men like him hide their feelings most of the time to avoid ridicule but occasionally it overwhelms them. I thought it was kind of sweet in an awkward way. The only reason to see it in a negative light would be if I thought he was faking it, but I don’t think he was.


It’s not his honesty that is at issue imo, but his emotional instability. He does not seem on an even keel.


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> One thing to note is why people are attacking Meghan and Harry.  It is a bit hypocritical when no one gave Kate and Will a hard time for suing the French Tabloid for her topless photos.



IMO it's not hypocritical because it's not the same at all. Using a long lens to spy on someone and violate their body isn't the same as your dad defending himself after you have your friends go smear him to the tabloids. Had someone done the topless photo thing to Meg, I'd be first in line cheering her on to go after the tabs.


----------



## Flatsy

theamericanchinadoll said:


> One thing to note is why people are attacking Meghan and Harry. It is a bit hypocritical when no one gave Kate and Will a hard time for suing the French Tabloid for her topless photos.


I recall nothing but support for Meghan and Harry suing the people who flew a helicopter over their house to take photos of them in their home, which they did with no drama.  The all-out war they have taken on against the media - based on a trap they set exactly for that purpose - is quite different.



> People who dislike Meghan are going to be the same kind of people who already have great disdain for Hollywood and everything she represents.


I think it's a mistake to make broad generalizations about the beliefs of people who like/dislike/have mixed feelings about Meghan.  Your personal assistant does not represent everyone.



> I think Meghan challenges Harry to be a more. One can’t say same that Kate has that effect on William. Obviously one can’t incur wrath when you have no opinions and the biggest statements you’ve made is bringing back pleats. Social impact doesn’t happen with different shades of sheath dresses.


Royalty is not supposed to be about making big statements and "social impact".  They are not political activists.  To think this is what they are supposed to be doing is a complete misunderstanding of what their job is.

Kate and William's tour showed them at their best, doing *exactly* what they are supposed to be doing as royals.  They spread goodwill in a commonwealth country.  They looked incredibly regal and represented the monarchy with grace and dignity.  They did nothing but express respect for the host country in a variety of ways, including how they behaved and how they dressed.   They did not make the trip all about themselves, and definitely did not drop any media bombs related to their personal grievances that overshadowed the purpose of the trip.

Over the past couple of years, I've seen both William and Kate get dramatically better at giving speeches.  William has gotten much better at expressing himself verbally in general.  I've seen him discuss some very sensitive topics at engagements and he did so very delicately and successfully.  I don't know if a wife's job is to "push" her husband, but Kate seems to be doing a good job of supporting William as he grows in his role, all while raising 3 kids.

Meghan may "push" Harry to be more outspoken about causes, but she also seems to push him in a lot of bad ways - such as to break away from his family and friends and to go to war with the media on her behalf.  There are heaps of negativity and drama in Harry's life that weren't there 3 years ago before he met Meghan and I don't think that's a good thing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Royalty is not supposed to be about making big statements and "social impact".  They are not political activists.  To think this is what they are supposed to be doing is a complete misunderstanding of what their job is.


Yep. It's why they've been allowed to continue existing despite being largely pointless. It's almost important to note that royalty is not expected to rub their wealth in the faces of the people - hence the $200,000 baby shower being in such poor taste. People know they're insanely wealthy, but it does them no good to flaunt it all the time. I was surprised to see Kate even wearing a Chanel bag last week.

With Will and Kate, you have no idea if they're liberal or conservative or woke or asleep and it's kinda nice that way. Otherwise you alienate half your country.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Flatsy said:


> I recall nothing but support for Meghan and Harry suing the people who flew a helicopter over their house to take photos of them in their home, which they did with no drama.  The all-out war they have taken on against the media - based on a trap they set exactly for that purpose - is quite different.
> 
> 
> I think it's a mistake to make broad generalizations about the beliefs of people who like/dislike/have mixed feelings about Meghan.  Your personal assistant does not represent everyone.
> 
> 
> Royalty is not supposed to be about making big statements and "social impact".  They are not political activists.  To think this is what they are supposed to be doing is a complete misunderstanding of what their job is.
> 
> Kate and William's tour showed them at their best, doing *exactly* what they are supposed to be doing as royals.  They spread goodwill in a commonwealth country.  They looked incredibly regal and represented the monarchy with grace and dignity.  They did nothing but express respect for the host country in a variety of ways, including how they behaved and how they dressed.   They did not make the trip all about themselves, and definitely did not drop any media bombs related to their personal grievances that overshadowed the purpose of the trip.
> 
> Over the past couple of years, I've seen both William and Kate get dramatically better at giving speeches.  William has gotten much better at expressing himself verbally in general.  I've seen him discuss some very sensitive topics at engagements and he did so very delicately and successfully.  I don't know if a wife's job is to "push" her husband, but Kate seems to be doing a good job of supporting William as he grows in his role, all while raising 3 kids.
> 
> Meghan may "push" Harry to be more outspoken about causes, but she also seems to push him in a lot of bad ways - such as to break away from his family and friends and to go to war with the media on her behalf.  There are heaps of negativity and drama in Harry's life that weren't there 3 years ago before he met Meghan and I don't think that's a good thing.



You are right about not making broad generalizations about people because not everyone will fit into that mold but I’ve seen the celebrity bashing frequently and sometimes deserved but some quite unfair. 

 I have a different opinion on the role of the royal family. Princess Diana didn’t adhere to traditional roles and used her position to push for social change ie her work in Africa and breaking the aids stigma. As a public figure you have a lot of power to do good other than looking like a wallflower. The role of royals have changed greatly from Elisabeth’s coronation to Diana and even more so now. W&K doesn’t wanna rock the boat which is fine. They are milk toast.  

Having been at some of these press events I can tell you the longer and more exposed you are, the more comfortable giving speeches but it doesn’t mean it is less staged. You just appear more natural at it like any skill one picks up. 

As for Meghan pushing Harry away from family and friends, why should he continue those relationships if they are toxic? The Queen and Charles seems supportive of Meghan. Why would the rest matter?

One thing I do wish H&M could do is to attempt to unite/ bridge the right and left rather than playing defense with this media war.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> .. and this is a VERY HOLLYWOOD thing to do, think about the "gifts" that the Emmy and Oscar candidates get (_which they now have to declare on their taxes_)!!!  On a flight back to LA (_from Boston_), the woman seated next to me admired my Jewelry (_which I do design and make_), and she told me how I should 'donate' it to the celebs to get it in the press and since the Oscars were coming up, I should consider it!  WHAT???  .. I told her "_listen lady, consider me the Hermes of the Jewelry world, I will not give these folks anything for free, especially since they can freakin' afford it_"!!!  Kind of pissed me off ..



Ha! I know a woman who orchestrates these giveaways for celebs. I understand why they are given away ("ooh lookie there! my stuff was featured in a giveaway to the stars!) but it nauseates me that there are entire gifting lounges for these people who either give it to their staff/family/friends and could otherwise afford to buy it - while the common folk need to pay for it. Gag me.

RE: Meghan and Harry. I agree with what some have said - Harry has some deep running issues/trauma associated with his upbringing and life events. It makes me feel sad for him. The BRF probably somewhat gave up on him a while ago and have decided to just let him do his thing (he always has anyway).

I was a stan for them for a while. On the surface most of what they do is nice. But following this thread and digging deeper/analyzing the details and I am beginning to give them a bit of a side-eye.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I don’t understand why Meghan and Harry are being singled out for their spending without context. Was Kate and Williams’ kids shower a lot cheaper?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I don't know anything about Kate's shower.  Meghan flew to NY and had her shower with celeb friends.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I have no issues with an independent approach that pushes for social change. It’s the manipulation of the role to further self promotion, status and exposure that does not sit right with me.


----------



## rose60610

If you can't beat'em, woke'em!  And if you can't woke'em, they're obviously torch-bearing, sub-standard haters, blinded by wrong taste, incapable of independent thought, driven by far extremist deep dark forces, threatened by.....who?People whose "oh-so-open-minded" mantra are the one and absolutely positively only correct view immune from criticism? I'm going to wear something with pleats just to make a statement and demonstrate to the world that I can be as woke as any tiara wearing, private jet riding, VIP wanna-be-so-did-marry-royal+Archie=done. And it's going to fit. Even though I don't have a multi hundred thousand dollar clothing allowance and private tailors.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> With Will and Kate, you have no idea if they're liberal or conservative or woke or asleep and it's kinda nice that way. Otherwise you alienate half your country.


The same could be said about the Queen herself. She has "no opinions".  That's 100% intentional and she wouldn't regard it as an insult, but as a sign of a job well done.  The most headline-making thing the Queen did this year was help plant a tree.  People aren't looking to the monarchy for political activism, but for steadiness and tradition.  

Will and Kate are one day supposed to be taking that over.  Other than needing to majorly pick up the pace when it comes to workload, they appear to be on the right track.  I can't say the same for Harry.



theamericanchinadoll said:


> I have a different opinion on the role of the royal family. Princess Diana didn’t adhere to traditional roles and used her position to push for social change ie her work in Africa and breaking the aids stigma.


Diana's work in Africa was after she was divorced and stripped of her royal duties, and it was highly controversial at the time.  Parliament was debating whether she should still get public funding when she was advocating for laws to ban landmines.   If Harry and Meghan are going to delve into politcal causes, they should expect controversy as well.  It's not compatible with being an active representative of the monarchy.   

Not that they shouldn't be doing humanitarian work.  But I don't think too many people are looking for them to "transform the monarchy" by behaving like Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, but with tiaras and castles.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

A1aGypsy said:


> I have no issues with an independent approach that pushes for social change. It’s the manipulation of the role to further self promotion, status and exposure that does not sit right with me.



I completely agree with this. But I was under the impression she was painted this way by the media turning her every move into self promotion when she is trying to do good. I am making this statement in good faith. Not sure what specific incidents has been said.  I think it is easy to say a celebrity is self promotional as that is the Hollywood stereotype but I’d be interested in seeing the evidence.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> It’s not his honesty that is at issue imo, but his emotional instability. He does not seem on an even keel.



I wonder if part of it is we've never seen him as the focus of attention until he got married. He may always have had a mercurial temperament but it hasn't been caught on camera until now. Maybe I missed other examples of him not being on an even keel, but the tearing up for a few seconds wasn't a red flag. What else has he done that is of concern?


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Maybe I missed other examples of him not being on an even keel, but the tearing up for a few seconds wasn't a red flag. What else has he done that is of concern?


I agree that tearing up during a speech about sick children would not be a red flag on its own.  I see it as a red flag because it comes on the heels of him saying that he has difficulty getting out of bed in the morning because he's overwhelmed about the problems in the world.  That is not healthy.  It's not a sign of his devotion to humanitarianism, it's just a sign of depression.

Combined with losing his cool with a reporter, probably not being on good terms with his family, and taking on a court battle with the press, I don't think his emotions seem to be on an even keel right now.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I agree that tearing up during a speech about sick children would not be a red flag on its own.  I see it as a red flag because it comes on the heels of him saying that he has difficulty getting out of bed in the morning because he's overwhelmed about the problems in the world.  That is not healthy.  It's not a sign of his devotion to humanitarianism, it's just a sign of depression.
> 
> Combined with losing his cool with a reporter, probably not being on good terms with his family, and taking on a court battle with the press, I don't think his emotions seem to be on an even keel right now.



I didn't take his getting out of bed comment literally. I thought he was exaggerating to make the point that he worries about the world. Maybe he does worry or maybe he wants us to think he does. His snarkiness with the reporter didn't bother me because I thought she was insinuating that his "short" comments really didn't have any effect on the people, which was a veiled insult. And let's face it, his speech probably didn't have any effect and that's why Harry was pissed off.


----------



## Clearblueskies

theamericanchinadoll said:


> The role of royals have changed greatly from Elisabeth’s coronation to Diana and even more so now. W&K doesn’t wanna rock the boat which is fine.


No, you are mistaken, the role of the Royal Family has not changed.  They are apolitical - they have absolutely no political mandate and they don’t favour or represent one section of the populace over another.  And why, (simply because someone is born into or marries into the Royal Family), should anyone assume they have the right skills, intellectual capability or qualifications to start paddling about in political or scientific issues in any case?


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Flatsy said:


> The same could be said about the Queen herself. She has "no opinions".  That's 100% intentional and she wouldn't regard it as an insult, but as a sign of a job well done.  The most headline-making thing the Queen did this year was help plant a tree.  People aren't looking to the monarchy for political activism, but for steadiness and tradition.
> 
> Will and Kate are one day supposed to be taking that over.  Other than needing to majorly pick up the pace when it comes to workload, they appear to be on the right track.  I can't say the same for Harry.
> 
> 
> Diana's work in Africa was after she was divorced and stripped of her royal duties, and it was highly controversial at the time.  Parliament was debating whether she should still get public funding when she was advocating for laws to ban landmines.   If Harry and Meghan are going to delve into politcal causes, they should expect controversy as well.  It's not compatible with being an active representative of the monarchy.
> 
> Not that they shouldn't be doing humanitarian work.  But I don't think too many people are looking for them to "transform the monarchy" by behaving like Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, but with tiaras and castles.



I do think you are right in that having an opinion as a royal monarch might mean the dissolution of it altogether in times like these. H&M aren’t going to sit on the throne so perhaps they are less limited by their ability to have an opinion and affect positive change. Of course this wouldn’t sit well with W&K.  


It seems quite clear to me that W&K lean left center in how their relationships had been with the past two US presidents. I think they are just less vocal about it than H&M.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if part of it is we've never seen him as the focus of attention until he got married. He may always have had a mercurial temperament but it hasn't been caught on camera until now. Maybe I missed other examples of him not being on an even keel, but the tearing up for a few seconds wasn't a red flag. What else has he done that is of concern?


I think this is true, he’s been sheltered.  And when he was a young tearaway in his teens and early 20s and making himself extremely unpopular in the pubs around Highgrove, it was all hushed up by his father.


----------



## Flatsy

theamericanchinadoll said:


> It seems quite clear to me that W&K lean left center in how their relationships had been with the past two US presidents. I think they are just less vocal about it than H&M.


And all of the younger generation have been supportive of gay youth and things that could be deemed liberal/progressive.  I just think W&K are approaching it in a more conventionally royal way, whereas Meghan and Harry do things primarily via celebrity channels like Vogue, celebrities, and the Google summit.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-mania said:


> I hate to think an honest emotional reaction from Harry indicates possible mental illness. He may be the sort of guy who feels things deeply. Men like him hide their feelings most of the time to avoid ridicule but occasionally it overwhelms them. I thought it was kind of sweet in an awkward way. The only reason to see it in a negative light would be if I thought he was faking it, but I don’t think he was.


You have to look at his behavior as a whole and add this into the mix. His tears in this single instance aren't indicative of anything, but his recent behaviors all grouped together show *something*. If nothing else he's super stressed.


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You have to look at his behavior as a whole and add this into the mix. His tears in this single instance aren't indicative of anything, but his recent behaviors all grouped together show *something*. If nothing else he's super stressed.


He will never have to worry about meeting the rent or making the mortgage payments. Saving for retirement will never be a concern for Harry. Most of his needs are looked after by other people. He can purchase anything he wants and go on holiday whenever or wherever he wants. If he is stressed by this life he is privileged to be leading, then it’s a darn good thing he is not trying to cope with the real world.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chagall said:


> He will never have to worry about meeting the rent or making the mortgage payments. Saving for retirement will never be a concern for Harry. Most of his needs are looked after by other people. He can purchase anything he wants and go on holiday whenever or wherever he wants. If he is stressed by this life he is privileged to be leading, then it’s a darn good thing he is not trying to cope with the real world.



100%! He has spent his life in a bubble and no preparation for the cruel realities of the real world that most have to live through. I'm sure this has contributed to some of how he is now...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> 100%! He has spent his life in a bubble and no preparation for the cruel realities of the real world that most have to live through. I'm sure this has contributed to some of how he is now...


on the other hand, to be fair, he does have things to cope with that we don't - -like people taking photos of the holes in the bottom of his shoes.  there are probably times where he wishes he could be a "regular" person


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> on the other hand, to be fair, he does have things to cope with that we don't - -like people taking photos of the holes in the bottom of his shoes.  there are probably times where he wishes he could be a "regular" person



True. The grass is always greener! Unfortunately for him he did not choose the family he was born into. 
Will has done a great job of sucking it up and making the best of it. Unfortunately for Harry somehow along the way he didn't receive or be receptive to the proper guidance to help him/give him the tools needed to manage through it. I am sure to some extent it has to do with Will being in line for the throne and Harry not.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> I agree that tearing up during a speech about sick children would not be a red flag on its own.  I see it as a red flag because it comes on the heels of him saying that he has difficulty getting out of bed in the morning because he's overwhelmed about the problems in the world.  That is not healthy.  It's not a sign of his devotion to humanitarianism, it's just a sign of depression.


The thing is, he teared up talking about his own child, who we assume is very healthy, while talking to a group representing children with severe illnesses.


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> No, you are mistaken, the role of the Royal Family has not changed.  They are apolitical - they have absolutely no political mandate and they don’t favour or represent one section of the populace over another.  And why, (simply because someone is born into or marries into the Royal Family), should anyone assume they have the right skills, intellectual capability or qualifications to start paddling about in political or scientific issues in any case?


Agree.

They better be apolitical.  The royals are not known for being the smartest tools in the shed and even though they went to some good schools, I don't think any of them were academic enough to get in on merit.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> on the other hand, to be fair, he does have things to cope with that we don't - -like people taking photos of the holes in the bottom of his shoes.  there are probably times where he wishes he could be a "regular" person


Yes a real person who dosen’t have the luxury of worrying about the soles of his shoes being photographed. He wouldn’t have this luxury because he would be too busy worrying about how he was going to pay for Archies university education.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> True. The grass is always greener! Unfortunately for him he did not choose the family he was born into.
> Will has done a great job of sucking it up and making the best of it. Unfortunately for Harry somehow along the way he didn't receive or be receptive to the proper guidance to help him/give him the tools needed to manage through it. I am sure to some extent it has to do with Will being in line for the throne and Harry not.


When he and William were children their mum famously said about their future "I don't worry about William, he'll be fine. It's Harry I worry about"


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> When he and William were children their mum famously said about their future "I don't worry about William, he'll be fine. It's Harry I worry about"


interesting.....we can only guess what she meant - his temperament?


----------



## chicaloca

Can we please stop insinuating that men who dare to emote are exhibiting signs of mental illness?

A red flag for mental illness is emoting without actual cause — not reacting to situations that would cause normal people to emote.

Filing a lawsuit for possibly having his phones tapped does not make Harry mentally unstable. It actually takes some mental clarity and a resolve for action that someone truly clinically depressed may find hard to muster.

Snapping at a clearly condescending reporter who regularly trashes his wife doesn’t mean he’s mentally unstable. It could mean he’s fed up up with this particular reporter who, honestly, is quite vile in her treatment of Meghan

Tearing up talking about his wife and child is not some red flag for mental instability. It’s symptomatic of him actually loving his wife and child.

To think any of the above instances, alone or in totality constitutes some sort of mental crises to me only demonstrates a lack of understanding or even a trivialization of mental illness.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> interesting.....we can only guess what she meant - his temperament?


From what I remember of their childhood it was William who was always getting into trouble. They called him ‘basher’ Wills because he was always hitting kids at school. Harry was the quiet ‘good’ little boy back then lol.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Tearing up talking about his wife and child is not some red flag for mental instability. It’s symptomatic of him actually loving his wife and child.


He didn't tear up.  He broke down, could not continue with his speech, and someone nearby felt obliged to comfort him.  Tearing up is not uncommon, but having an emotional breakdown onstage in public is not something people do simply because they love their family.

If it were an isolated incident, I would chalk it up to momentary overflowing of emotion, considering that there were amidst sick children.  But the comment Harry made weeks ago about having difficulty getting out of bed was absolutely a red flag for depression.  Depressed does not necessarily mean non-functional.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Filing a lawsuit for possibly having his phones tapped does not make Harry mentally unstable..


The phones scandal (iirc it’s going back awhile) was about the News of the World newspaper picking up voicemail messages left on celebs phones by exploiting the fact that the message pick up code had been left as the manufacturers default.  They weren’t tapping in to live calls.


----------



## Morgan R

“Harry & Meghan: An African Journey" is airing on Sunday October 20th at 9 PM BST on ITV and Wednesday October 23rd at 10PM ET on ABC


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> They better be apolitical. The royals are not known for being the smartest tools in the shed and even though they went to some good schools, I don't think any of them were academic enough to get in on merit.


Those inbred Windsor genes are not the best.

Royals do well when they show that they are there to listen and learn.  Asking questions and letting other people talk goes over very well.  Meghan sometimes has a particularly bad habit of talking, talking, talking as if she's an expert on a lot of things.  I would describe it as expounding very often, and I think that's something she needs to pull back on.  Many people think she and Harry come off as lecturing, and I can often see why.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> He didn't tear up.  He broke down, could not continue with his speech, and someone nearby felt obliged to comfort him.  Tearing up is not uncommon, but having an emotional breakdown onstage in public is not something people do simply because they love their family.
> 
> If it were an isolated incident, I would chalk it up to momentary overflowing of emotion, considering that there were amidst sick children.  But the comment Harry made weeks ago about having difficulty getting out of bed was absolutely a red flag for depression.  Depressed does not necessarily mean non-functional.



Exactly. it's just as ridiculous to say he definitely doesn't have mental illness than to say that he definitely does. But IMO saying his behavior has thrown up some red flags seems well within reason. 
IMO
IMO
IMO


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Filing a lawsuit for possibly having his phones tapped does not make Harry mentally unstable.


Occupying one's time and energy with a lawsuit over things that happened two decades ago, with little to nothing to gain, seems like a poor life choice to me.  I don't call that "mentally unstable".   

I would think that a guy who is barely out of his newlywed year, who has a young baby, would want to be focused on enjoying his life and his family - not reviving battles from 20 years ago, possibly for the purpose of getting some tiny vindication on behalf of his dead mother.  His actions don't strike me as the actions of a guy who is happy with life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LuckyBitch

LittleStar88 said:


> 100%! He has spent his life in a bubble and no preparation for the cruel realities of the real world that most have to live through. I'm sure this has contributed to some of how he is now...[/QUOTE
> As a child of 12  he had to face walking behind the coffin his dead mother was in and will spend the rest of his life missing her. I think that falls under the category "cruel realities of the real world". Don't you?


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Chagall said:


> From what I remember of their childhood it was William who was always getting into trouble. They called him ‘basher’ Wills because he was always hitting kids at school. Harry was the quiet ‘good’ little boy back then lol.



That’s funny! You’d think the opposite now


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Ha! I know a woman who orchestrates these giveaways for celebs. I understand why they are given away ("ooh lookie there! my stuff was featured in a giveaway to the stars!) but it nauseates me that there are entire gifting lounges for these people who either give it to their staff/family/friends and could otherwise afford to buy it - while the common folk need to pay for it. Gag me.


Uggh, right?!?!!  .. I have a friend who I've known for years who has a very exclusive Jewelry Gallery in the Pacific Palisades, so she deals with a lot of celebs.  The stories she tells me .. UFB; these are folks that can afford the jewelry they want and yet, they want it for wholesale or 'market value'!  I can tell you, as a Metalsmith myself, the cost of gold (_which continues to go up & up_), the diamonds but mostly the labor are what factor into the wholesale cost .. that's not even what I paid at market!  Then, you have to mark that up as well, because you need to replace your goods (_metals, gemstones, etc_.) .. and then, the gallery ends up adding their 50 to 60%!  So, when you get a celeb DEMANDING to have an item at your cost?!?! .. seriously? .. NO EFFIN' WAY!  How am I supposed to pay for my house, my meals, my kitties care, etc.?  Totally rankles my chains!


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> The phones scandal (iirc it’s going back awhile) was about the News of the World newspaper picking up voicemail messages left on celebs phones by exploiting the fact that the message pick up code had been left as the manufacturers default. They weren’t tapping in to live calls.


Yes, phone hacking, not phone tapping.  Still illegal, of course.  I remember that terrible story of the family whose daughter had been kidnapped.  The family kept leaving messages on her cell phone, and the police thought she was still alive because she was checking the messages.  It turned out it was The News of the World checking the messages.  Just awful.  The poor family were maintaining false hope that she was alive when it turned out she'd already been killed.

As noted in a post several pages back, Kate's phone was hacked over 150 times, more than any other royal's.  (Compared to Harry's 9.)  It was illegal, it was a violation of privacy, and Kate would have every right to file a lawsuit over it.  But she's clearly left it in the past and gotten on with her life.  I don't think she's spending a lot of time caring that the press found out Prince William calls her "Babykins".  She's enjoying her life and her kids, and probably enjoying the very successful royal tour - not stomping all over it with an unnecessary lawsuit.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> When he and William were children their mum famously said about their future "I don't worry about William, he'll be fine. It's Harry I worry about"


I think that was because she knew Will would always have back up and support due to the fact that he will be king one day.  Lots of structure for the guy and lots of advise and counsel.

Harry on the other hand, could flounder, since he was only a spare.  Kind of reminds me of Princess Margaret who led a empty, frivolous life.

isn't that why Harry got more inherited money from the Queen Mum?  Will wouldn't be needing it.

Not that Harry spends his own millions, but whatever.


----------



## threadbender

If Harry is indeed having some emotional upheavals, I hope he is able to get some help and support. I would imagine his wife would encourage that. He has a little boy to raise and love and needs to be healthy.
I would also think his grandmother and father are concerned. Not only as a royal, but as family. I understand it is a multi-faceted circumstance.
I don't understand the lawsuit regarding events from many years ago but, I guess we will see what happens. The timing was suspect but, again, I don't know the whys and wherefores.
The unfortunate optics can be dismissed if the couple/family goes forward with a different attitude. However, that may not be what they want to accomplish. Eventually, their agenda will come out and it will go from there.
In the meantime, I hope they enjoy their little boy and smile, for real.


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> Can we please stop insinuating that men who dare to emote are exhibiting signs of mental illness?
> 
> A red flag for mental illness is emoting without actual cause — not reacting to situations that would cause normal people to emote.
> 
> Filing a lawsuit for possibly having his phones tapped does not make Harry mentally unstable. It actually takes some mental clarity and a resolve for action that someone truly clinically depressed may find hard to muster.
> 
> Snapping at a clearly condescending reporter who regularly trashes his wife doesn’t mean he’s mentally unstable. It could mean he’s fed up up with this particular reporter who, honestly, is quite vile in her treatment of Meghan
> 
> Tearing up talking about his wife and child is not some red flag for mental instability. It’s symptomatic of him actually loving his wife and child.
> 
> To think any of the above instances, alone or in totality constitutes some sort of mental crises to me only demonstrates a lack of understanding or even a trivialization of mental illness.


I wouldn't assume that some of us don't know first hand about Mental Illness and its effect not only on the person, but the family and future generations.  My mother was institutionalized for a good deal of my childhood and I have seen it pass down to other certain family members, some in a mild form and others .. more serious.  Thank god that the stigma is less so nowadays, and that the medications are better .. but the individual affected must be willing to go through treatment and if necessary TAKE the medication.  I can tell you that many of the LA homeless are definitely in need of help with mental illnesses; alas, oftentimes they refuse to take the medications.


----------



## CeeJay

Morgan R said:


> “Harry & Meghan: An African Journey" is airing on Sunday October 20th at 9 PM BST on ITV and Wednesday October 23rd at 10PM ET on ABC



"*Their life in the spotlight*"? .. does anyone else think that really isn't what this should be about?


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I think that was because she knew Will would always have back up and support due to the fact that he will be king one day.  Lots of structure for the guy and lots of advise and counsel.
> 
> Harry on the other hand, could flounder, since he was only a spare.  Kind of reminds me of Princess Margaret who led a empty, frivolous life.
> 
> isn't that why Harry got more inherited money from the Queen Mum?  Will wouldn't be needing it.
> 
> Not that Harry spends his own millions, but whatever.


Exactly what you said, she was worried what path he'd take once grown up.


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> "*Their life in the spotlight*"? .. does anyone else think that really isn't what this should be about?


Nope!  Absolutely not.  But I sure do want to see what they say.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> "*Their life in the spotlight*"? .. does anyone else think that really isn't what this should be about?


I
thought
they
wanted
privacy


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> I
> thought
> they
> wanted
> privacy


Not that I think they chose that "title", but yes .. it just makes things very confusing!  The title should have been more along the lines of "their work on their African Trip", something like that!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Not that I think they chose that "title", but yes .. it just makes things very confusing!  The title should have been more along the lines of "their work on their African Trip", something like that!



Yeah, you have to blame whoever writes the Twitter posts for Good Morning America for that. It goes to show the difference in how the UK and US media views Harry and Meghan. The UK media has certain expectations for them that they are not meeting. The US media has zero expectations. If they show up somewhere looking pretty and doing nice things like other celebrities then that's enough.


----------



## Lodpah

Flatsy said:


> He didn't tear up.  He broke down, could not continue with his speech, and someone nearby felt obliged to comfort him.  Tearing up is not uncommon, but having an emotional breakdown onstage in public is not something people do simply because they love their family.
> 
> If it were an isolated incident, I would chalk it up to momentary overflowing of emotion, considering that there were amidst sick children.  But the comment Harry made weeks ago about having difficulty getting out of bed was absolutely a red flag for depression.  Depressed does not necessarily mean non-functional.



I’ve seen this in people. They are so overwhelmed whether it’s negative or positive but my opinion (which no one should really care) is this: Harry made a tremendous mistake, he’s stuck, and can’t get out of it. It’s all overwhelming. All you have to do is look at the pictures at the Jamaica wedding and it’s clear. I think Meghan has isolated him or encapsulated him from everyone who means the world to him that he can’t express himself. He’s hurting and she’s winning. She obviously seems to be an NPD. Every pic I see of her is looking at the camera.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lodpah said:


> I’ve seen this in people. They are so overwhelmed whether it’s negative or positive but my opinion (which no one should really care) is this: Harry made a tremendous mistake, he’s stuck, and can’t get out of it. It’s all overwhelming. All you have to do is look at the pictures at the Jamaica wedding and it’s clear. I think Meghan has isolated him or encapsulated him from everyone who means the world to him that he can’t express himself. He’s hurting and she’s winning. She obviously seems to be an NPD. Every pic I see of her is looking at the camera.



There have been rumors for a while that not long after the wedding he was in South Africa telling friends he’d made a mistake. Interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> There have been rumors for a while that not long after the wedding he was in South Africa telling friends he’d made a mistake. Interesting.


Yes she trapped him. She told everyone she didn’t know who he was when she met him on that blind date. Did she live up a tree, under a rock, or on the moon. Who does she think she is kidding.


----------



## Straight-Laced

In today's Times, more on Harry's mental health from the Africa TV documentary :
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/prince-harry-haunted-by-every-camera-click-cn9psnmv8
*Prince Harry haunted by every camera click*
_Valentine Low
October 18 2019, 12:01am, 
The Times_

Every camera flash and every click of a shutter reminds the Duke of Sussex of his mother’s death in a car crash while she was being pursued by paparazzi 22 years ago.

Prince Harry was 12 when Diana, Princess of Wales, was killed in the accident in Paris. He has now described how the tragedy haunts him, even with the passage of time.

He says that her death is “a wound that festers” and adds: “Everything that I do reminds me of her.”

The duke’s frank confession of the emotional turmoil he suffers comes in an ITV documentary filmed during his recent tour of southern Africa. In a trailer released last night, Tom Bradby, the ITV journalist who is a long- standing friend of the duke since his days as a royal correspondent, says in a voice-over: “It was a fascinating journey in all kinds of ways, uplifting in parts but also sobering as I gradually took in the pressure and stress he is carrying around with him, particularly surrounding the death of his mother.”

In an interview Bradby, the anchor for News at Ten, asks Harry: “Do you feel at peace in a way yet? Or is it still a sort of wound that festers?”

Harry replies: “I think probably a wound that festers. I think being part of this family, in this role, in this job, every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash it takes me straight back so in that respect it’s the worst reminder of her life as opposed to the best.

“Being here now 22 years later trying to finish what she started will be incredibly emotional but everything that I do reminds me of her. But as I said with the role, with the job and the sort of pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff, unfortunately.”

Bradby says that the Duchess of Sussex, who went with Harry to South Africa along with their baby son Archie, also felt the pressure. He says in his voice-over: “His great fear now is that his wife is subject to the same pressures as his mother was. Later in the programme I was to speak to Meghan too about the difficulties of living life in the spotlight.”

The duke’s tormented relationship with the media was highlighted on the penultimate day of their tour when he released a statement accusing the tabloid press of having waged a ruthless campaign against his wife. Evoking memories of his mother, he said that the “press pack” had vilified Meghan “almost daily for the past nine months” and that she was falling victim to “the same powerful forces” as Diana.

Shortly after that statement, which announced that the duchess was suing The Mail on Sunday over publication of a personal letter to her father, Thomas Markle, it emerged that Harry was suing the owners of The Sun, who also own The Times, and of The Daily Mirror over phone hacking. He has lodged papers at the High Court over the illegal interception of voicemail messages.


The duke has previously told how the emotional scars of Diana’s death led him to seek counselling. “I can safely say that losing my mum at the age of 12, and therefore shutting down all of my emotions for the last 20 years, has had a quite serious effect on not only my personal life but my work as well,” he told The Daily Telegraph in 2017.

“I have probably been very close to a breakdown on numerous occasions when all sorts of grief and sorts of lies and misconceptions and everything are coming to you from every angle.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> Yes she trapped him. She told everyone she didn’t know who he was when she met him on that blind date. Did she live up a tree, under a rock, or on the moon. Who does she think she is kidding.



Things like this are why I can’t with her. Why did she have to act like she had no idea who he was? Yet she idolized Diana? Come onnnnnn


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Yahoo News

"Prince Harry gave a rare interview during his recent trip to Africa and he opened up about the death of his mom, Princess Diana.

The 35-year-old royal said that his mom’s death is a “wound that festers.”

“I think [of] being part of this family, in this role, in this job every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash,” Harry continued while talking about the media’s impact on his life. “It takes me straight back, so in that respect it’s the worst reminder of her life as opposed to the best.”

Diana died in 1997 in a car crash while being followed by paparazzi.

“Being here now 22 years later, trying to finish what she started will be incredibly emotional but everything that I do reminds me of her,” Harry added. “But as I said, with the role, with the job, and the sort of the pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff usually.”

The ITV special Harry & Meghan: An African Journey will air in the U.S. on Wednesday, October 23 at 10pm on ABC."


----------



## Lodpah

mrsinsyder said:


> There have been rumors for a while that not long after the wedding he was in South Africa telling friends he’d made a mistake. Interesting.


I honestly and sincerely believe Meghan is feeding his insecurities. The way she clings, holds and be territorial with him is frankly horrific on his psych.  She knows it. I fear for him.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Things like this are why I can’t with her. Why did she have to act like she had no idea who he was? Yet she idolized Diana? Come onnnnnn


She is an extremely ambitious person. I would not be surprised if she set it up to meet him. I had better stay away from this thread lol.  I’m starting to sound so cynical.​


----------



## buffym

Chagall said:


> Yes she trapped him. She told everyone she didn’t know who he was when she met him on that blind date. Did she live up a tree, under a rock, or on the moon. Who does she think she is kidding.





mrsinsyder said:


> Things like this are why I can’t with her. Why did she have to act like she had no idea who he was? Yet she idolized Diana? Come onnnnnn



This is the transcripts from the engagement interview 

‘Markle: It’s so interesting because we talk about it now and even then, you know, because I’m from the States, you don’t grow up with the same understanding of the royal family. While I now understand very clearly there is a global interest there, I didn’t know much about him and so the only thing that I had asked her when she said she wanted to set us up was — I had one question.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.c...le-engaged-bbc-interview-transcript/?amp=true

She never said she didn’t know who Harry is, she said she didn’t know much about him.

Unless you are a royal watcher and even then it depends on what publications you believe, you aren’t going to know much about the BRF.


----------



## threadbender

I am so confused. I don't understand the motive behind any of this.

These are 2 affluent, relatively intelligent, attractive, celebrated people. They married and have a beautiful little boy. Why are they focused on the negatives and not the joy of their lives? 
I understand that Harry might have some issues but, why is he not getting help? One would think the BRF would be stepping in to "handle" things. 
If necessary, they could go to the Queen and request a sabbatical. Or, is fame and glory more important than a happy family?
I feel sad for what could be. But, hopeful that it may be.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> She is an extremely ambitious person. I would not be surprised if she set it up to meet him. I had better stay away from this thread lol.  I’m starting to sound so cynical.​


And it’s ok if she did! Just be honest about it.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> And it’s ok if she did! Just be honest about it.


Exactly!


----------



## Meh-gan

Chagall said:


> Exactly!


I’m pretty sure she orchestrated the meeting - Harry was quoted as saying his perfect woman was MM on Suits. She OBVIOUSLY heard about it and put the wheels in motion to meet him.


----------



## Chagall

Meh-gan said:


> I’m pretty sure she orchestrated the meeting - Harry was quoted as saying his perfect woman was MM on Suits. She OBVIOUSLY heard about it and put the wheels in motion to meet him.


I am sure she did. Not that there is anything wrong with that.


----------



## Meh-gan

Chagall said:


> I am sure she did. Not that there is anything wrong with that.


I mean what could possibly go wrong? He was idolizing a character she played on a show but married someone else. But that’s none of my business LOL


----------



## mdcx

Based on that interview above I feel pretty confident that Harry has PTSD from his mother's death. If camera clicks are that triggering to him, he really need to be getting help and possibly withdrawing from public life for his own health.

Meghan increasingly looks like someone who is leveraging Harry for her own ends - financial security, fame, get all that squared away before either Harry cracks it and is withdrawn from public life by his handlers, or Wills becomes King.
She certainly made it her business to connect into London society via her friends at Soho house. So, meeting Harry was very unlikely to have been accidental.

I have no problem with people making it their goal to marry well, everyone knows that Carole Middleton orchestrated the whole Kate goes to the same university at Wills, grooms herself into the perfect wife etc. But Kate actually has the goods to fulfil the role and seems like a lovely person with a lovely family who are all very committed to her being successful in the role, so no one really has an issue with it. She also is not in there squaring away her end with business deals and merching and brand building.


----------



## mdcx

It's a bit sad to read that old interview when everything was still fresh and hopeful. He does say in it though that he didn't know who Meghan was before meeting her.
And it says that he talked to her dad a couple times on the phone but hadn't had the chance to meet him yet.
She makes a slightly telling comment here (source):

_Prince Harry: … and together, as I said, there is a hell of a lot of stuff and work that needs doing. At the moment, for us, it is going to be making sure our relationship is put first. Both of us have passions for wanting to make change, change for good. With lots of young people running around the Commonwealth, that’s where we are going to spend most of our time hopefully.

Markle: It was really one of the first things we connected on. It was one of the first things we started talking about when we met was just the different things we wanted to do in the world and how passionate we were about seeing change. *I think that was what got date two in the books probably (laughs).
*_​To me, it's reasonably obvious that she told him what he wanted to hear in order to secure the bag, so to speak. And played into his paranoia/concern about the media. Lots of cozy nights in alone together, away from the paps etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

^ Yeah Harry got played. 
I hoped it might work out despite that, but there’s altogether too much drama around them.


----------



## bisousx

Idk, I kinda wanna give Harry the benefit of the doubt. He’s a big boy and (hopefully) isn’t feeble minded enough to get swindled by a con woman like the narratives are leaning towards now... maybe all the drama surrounding these two have more to do with their rash and poor choices rather than Harry’s newly found mental illness? FWIW, I find them equally slightly obnoxious now. I don’t think he regrets marrying Meghan, at least not yet. Harry knew exactly what he was getting himself into and if he’s not in tune enough at his age to decipher who’s using him and who genuinely loves him, then I’d chalk it up to more poor decision making... not witchcraft.


----------



## marthastoo

Meh-gan said:


> I’m pretty sure she orchestrated the meeting - Harry was quoted as saying his perfect woman was MM on Suits. She OBVIOUSLY heard about it and put the wheels in motion to meet him.



Where did he say this?  He stated quite clearly in their engagement interview that he never heard of Meghan or of Suits before their first date.  

I just reread the engagement interview and I'm going to repeat what I thought the first time.  Meghan has a long history of social activism (cue Nickelodeon video of 11 year old Meghan's early feminist views) and while no one can truly know what they talked about and connected about on the first date, I'm going to go with what they both said.  Which was their social activism.  Don't know how that is getting Harry "played."


----------



## Straight-Laced

^ No evidence of witchcraft that I've seen! 
I don't think Harry knew quite what he was getting with marriage to Meghan.  Married too fast (still infatuated) and should have found a way to meet her father, who is manipulative and in contact then with the whacky Samantha so difficult, but it was unwise not to.  
Harry's mental illness not newly found, he was damaged and vulnerable to some stresses - PTSD/CPTSD (or something similar) is like that.  He's not feeble minded but Meghan's smarter, mentally much stronger and probably manipulative ... she's very strategic anyway, and he's not.  Not everything can go according to plan though. 
And I don't think he regrets marrying Meghan, he loves her, he's in a huddle with her and still looking for outside reasons for all the angst and drama instead of looking at his own choices and how he's living and working.  He should adjust for his own needs (and health and happiness) calm things down a bit and not demand that everything be the way he/they want it.
Meghan seems pretty happy though apart from some negative media, some of which she's dealing with through legal means.


----------



## Meh-gan

marthastoo said:


> Where did he say this?  He stated quite clearly in their engagement interview that he never heard of Meghan or of Suits before their first date.
> 
> I just reread the engagement interview and I'm going to repeat what I thought the first time.  Meghan has a long history of social activism (cue Nickelodeon video of 11 year old Meghan's early feminist views) and while no one can truly know what they talked about and connected about on the first date, I'm going to go with what they both said.  Which was their social activism.  Don't know how that is getting Harry "played."



It was reported here in Canada before they started dating. Like as a gossip/celeb thing. A tidbit on the radio or in a blog I think. It was well before they met. Then they started dating and I was like interesting. 

I mean MM pretty much made up that she “didnt know much about harry” and she clearly did. He can act like their romance came out of nowhere too


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chagall said:


> Yes she trapped him. She told everyone she didn’t know who he was when she met him on that blind date. Did she live up a tree, under a rock, or on the moon. Who does she think she is kidding.


I got the examples from "the other forum" (thanks guys, you are really good). Just added links and receipts myself per demand of those here who are a bit more smitten by Ms. Markle's manipulative tactics than some of the rest of us, who find her claims that she'd never heard of prince Harry before marrying him a tad odd:

Meghan went to Buckingham Palace as a teen in 1996  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5126431/Meghan-Markle-Buckingham-Palace-aged-15.html

In 2014 wrote about Kate on The Tig (Meghan's own blog) https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/...leton-the-tig-blog-post-royalty-a4129556.html
_"According to Glamour, in a 2014 post on the now-archived blog, Meghan interviewed Princess Alia Al-Senussi, a descendant of the Libyan royal family, where they discussed an obsession with royalty carrying into adulthood. 
"Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power. For those of you unfamiliar with the '80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man, and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength. We're definitely not talking about Cinderella here," Markle wrote. "Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate."_

Posed for a magazine in 2014 holding a copy of said magazine with Kate Middleton on the cover

Was asked in 2015 by Hello magazine "William or Harry?" (I couldn't link the interview clip but here's a link to teh article: https://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalt...n-markle-chooses-prince-harry-hello-exclusive

Climbed socially very specifically in the direction of people close to Harry (for ex Misha Nonoo, Violet von Westenholtz, Soho House)
2014





1996


----------



## mrsinsyder

Straight-Laced said:


> Meghan seems pretty happy though apart from some negative media, some of which she's dealing with through legal means.


Of course she is. Time isn't kind to most female actresses minus the very top of the crowd, and as Suits wound down she'd have slid off the D-list into obscurity.


----------



## bisbee

I guess those who go back to the engagement of these two adults after they have married and had a child don’t have much going on in their lives. 

I understand speculation about their statements and actions, but why go back there?  It seems there is enough to comment on in the present day!


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Sharont2305

I don't get why her posing in front of Buckingham Palace is significant (not to people on here but other places I've read) Come on, how many of us who have been to London hasn't done that? It's a major touristy landmark. We've all done the touristy thing in any major city. Harry doesn't live there, he never has. Even the Queen doesn't live there permanently, it's classed as the "office" and Windsor is classed as home.
It'd be different if Meghan had sought him out at that age and taken pictures of him or attended engagements as he got older and she was in the crowd. I do believe her when she said she didn't know much about him.


----------



## Meh-gan

marthastoo said:


> Where did he say this?  He stated quite clearly in their engagement interview that he never heard of Meghan or of Suits before their first date.
> 
> I just reread the engagement interview and I'm going to repeat what I thought the first time.  Meghan has a long history of social activism (cue Nickelodeon video of 11 year old Meghan's early feminist views) and while no one can truly know what they talked about and connected about on the first date, I'm going to go with what they both said.  Which was their social activism.  Don't know how that is getting Harry "played."



Here is an article about him liking her character: 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.gra.../news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-ideal-woman/

Sources say he watched Suits and his ideal woman was her Rachel character. I mean I think we can all agree their engagement interview was not all genuine and was carefully orchestrated etc but legit both of them denying they knew of each other is so lame lol


----------



## PatsyCline

Meh-gan said:


> Here is an article about him liking her character:
> 
> https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.gra.../news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-ideal-woman/
> 
> Sources say he watched Suits and his ideal woman was her Rachel character. I mean I think we can all agree their engagement interview was not all genuine and was carefully orchestrated etc but legit both of them denying they knew of each other is so lame lol


Once again, from an unnamed source, not from Prince Harry.


----------



## LittleStar88

My two cents...

Harry needs to take a break for a while and get some support for his PTSD. He is old enough to remove himself if the spotlight is causing too much pain and stress for him. Meghan can tow the line on her own without him and have all of the spotlight. If he is feeling this triggered by photos and press, time to put his foot down and get some help. I am certain his family and the Queen will understand.

Meghan may or may not have known who Harry was. I honestly can't believe she had no idea whatsoever. BUT... If their common interests aligned and they get along well then so be it. We have no idea of knowing what their life is like behind closed doors. I can't imagine she is such a monster as to force Harry to be doing things/public appearances - he is a grown man and can make his own decisions. It may be possible she wants to do these things and he chooses to do them alongside her so she is not by herself (protective of her). They both should recognize these situations may be too much for him and they should tone it down a notch. You can't win against the press and media, so better to lay low and give them little to pick apart and talk about. You can't push for change and do things that attract attention and not expect the press to run with it.

There have got to be people who can step in and help coach them on how to emotionally handle this lifestyle. I really hope Harry is not cruising for a breakdown.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4568090



The video was heartbreaking. I think people forget Meghan is a human being.

The media has created an alternate persona of Meghan that is basically a mashup of stereotypes of actresses ( attention-seeking demanding diva) and black women (“aggressive”, “angry”) as of have created a cash cow of generating articles based on this persona.

Prior to marrying Harry, you can’t find anyone from co-workers to fans with a bad thing to say about Meghan. This soft-spoken, hard-working, polite woman  moves to England and suddenly we are to believe she is a diva screaming about emerald tiaras. We are also to believe Meghan — the only royal who is truly working class and self-made — is more entitled than all the Royals who’ve never had to work a day in their lives?

I hope people more carefully consider how their mean words do have an impact on the human beings they’re directed against. Amid all the concern-trolling over Harry’s mental well-being I hope the same people are as concerned about Meghan and how the rumors and lies they gleefully spread from tabloids impacts her mental health.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

PatsyCline said:


> Once again, from an unnamed source, not from Prince Harry.



Exactly,  if you notice all the “reports” are from unnamed sources.  Just like how his “family and friends” don’t approve.  Who are these people?  Is there a name? No?  Perhaps then it is speculation. 

It is entirely feasible if his family and friends want to publicly distance themselves from them because they are such a contentious couple. Privately, I doubt anyone would be forsaken unless they were toxic to their relationship.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

chicaloca said:


> The video was heartbreaking. I think people forget Meghan is a human being.
> 
> The media has created an alternate persona of Meghan that is basically a mashup of stereotypes of actresses ( attention-seeking demanding diva) and black women (“aggressive”, “angry”) as of have created a cash cow of generating articles based on this persona.
> 
> Prior to marrying Harry, you can’t find anyone from co-workers to fans with a bad thing to say about Meghan. This soft-spoken, hard-working, polite woman  moves to England and suddenly we are to believe she is a diva screaming about emerald tiaras. We are also to believe Meghan — the only royal who is truly working class and self-made — is more entitled than all the Royals who’ve never had to work a day in their lives?
> 
> I hope people more carefully consider how their mean words do have an impact on the human beings they’re directed against. Amid all the concern-trolling over Harry’s mental well-being I hope the same people are as concerned about Meghan and how the rumors and lies they gleefully spread from tabloids impacts her mental health.



Well said.


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Someone mentioned how political my previous comment is but I think that is exactly what Meghan is, a political threat, because she is biracial, feminist, and a celebrity.  I can’t think which box she doesn’t check.  She is a package of everything hated by right wing media. Of course people would eat up rumors cooked by the tabloids. It is a bit sad how easily manipulated readers are in indulging in these negative narratives.


Putting people in a box just because they don't like what Meghan does is ridiculous. I'm a liberal person of color and I'm not a Meghan fan. I guess that doesn't fit into the narrative so people ignore the fact that we actually do exist.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Prior to marrying Harry, no one was asking anyone about Meghan 

it's a joke don't feel required to scour the internet looking for pre-Harry stories


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Harry needs to take a break for a while and get some support for his PTSD. He is old enough to remove himself if the spotlight is causing too much pain and stress for him. Meghan can tow the line on her own without him and have all of the spotlight. If he is feeling this triggered by photos and press, time to put his foot down and get some help.


I think it's possible the reason why this is all at the surface is because Harry is in the midst of therapy to work through it and so the wound is open.  He's a mental health advocate and he's spoken about getting therapy, so I don't think he would ignore the resources he knows are available.

Otherwise, I agree that the way he described what is going on with him is very serious.  His interview absolutely confirmed that he is in emotional and mental turmoil right now.   Being triggered by camera clicks and feeling constantly transported back to his mother's death 22 years ago is not part of a normal grieving process.   It happens to be very incompatible with the job he and his wife have, and stepping away for a while might be best.

I haven't watched the Meghan video yet, but it was always inevitable that Harry's princess was going to have to deal with some rough press.  Instead of helping her rise above it, I think Harry's issues are probably making it all worse.


----------



## sdkitty

theamericanchinadoll said:


> This thread is the reason why I think the tabloids are so damaging.
> I think Meghans step sister would be quite proud of her accomplishment to tear her apart.  Much of the criticisms here are narratives crafted by the media and people love eating any sinister detail—truth or fiction.  Meghan is manipulative and Harry is conveniently mentally ill.  This description is historically commonplace for interracial relationships.  The person of color is always painted as a biblical eve: manipulative, “bewitching” with sweet words, and preying on a naive / weak/ feeble minded boy.  Fundamentally if you scrutinize the wording, these assumptions come from racial and gender stereotyping.  The other half comes from bashing entertainment industry.
> 
> Having friends in entertainment, networking is incredibly important to getting your next job.  Everything in entertainment is project based and you get invited or not based on who you know and what you’ve been working on. The soho house is a place for where creative types meet and networking is kinda the point.  Networking and sharing ideas is a huge part of getting recruited for a project.  She is doing what anyone in her position would be doing to secure a job as an actress, but now she is a manipulative social climber because she is successful.
> 
> I do agree that suing the media seems shortsighted because it leaves a target on your back. It probably is better to be dull like W&K to lay low until the current populist movement dies down.  H&M marriage is at the center of what far right movement despise and fear.  Fighting back and sharing your perspective like they will in their upcoming documentary is very “American”.  Putting yourself out there is a way to get further attacked in this bifurcated political climate.   They certainly have more faith in people that I do.
> 
> Someone mentioned how political my previous comment is but I think that is exactly what Meghan is, a political threat, because she is biracial, feminist, and a celebrity.  I can’t think which box she doesn’t check.  She is a package of everything hated by right wing media. Of course people would eat up rumors cooked by the tabloids. It is a bit sad how easily manipulated readers are in indulging in these negative narratives.



so Will and Kate are dull because they do their job and behave appropriately?  For the record, I am far from right wing


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan has said in the past she doesn't read any stories about herself. I'm curious to know what aspect of the press has made her "not OK."

I think the realization that she can't do whatever she wants without blowback is what's so challenging for her (and him). I'm sure they'd be "ok" if no one cared that they flew private jets and bought copper tubs and had extravagant parties. 

As I've said multiple times, my opinion is that moving off into private life seems to be the best solution for them, for so many reasons. They can spend as they wish, politicize their foundation, and be as private as needed. But since this means cutting the purse strings, I doubt it will happen. They have to choose what they value most, I guess.


----------



## Vlad

This thread is not about your various political views, it's about the celebs. Keep it that way.


----------



## sdkitty

if Harry is triggered by flashing camera bulbs and Meghan loves the fame, are they at cross-purposes?


----------



## bag-mania

Meh-gan said:


> I’m pretty sure she orchestrated the meeting - Harry was quoted as saying his perfect woman was MM on Suits. She OBVIOUSLY heard about it and put the wheels in motion to meet him.



It could be that Harry arranged to meet her. He had dated other actresses in his past and he found a way to be introduced to them. That actually makes the most sense to me. It also explains why there are several people who have been speculated to be the "friend" who introduced them but nobody has ever claimed to have done it. Wealthy, famous men meet beautiful women who catch their eye that way all the time. But it makes for an unromantic first meeting story to say your prince husband sent an employee to procure a date with you.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

sdkitty said:


> so Will and Kate are dull because they do their job and behave appropriately?  For the record, I am far from right wing



In context of that post being dull isn’t a bad thing right now.  Having no opinion is exactly where H&M probably ought to be.  




mrsinsyder said:


> As I've said multiple times, my opinion is that moving off into private life seems to be the best solution for them, for so many reasons. They can spend as they wish, politicize their foundation, and be as private as needed. But since this means cutting the purse strings, I doubt it will happen. They have to choose what they value most, I guess.





I completely agree with this assessment they should try to lead a private. Their current path is an uphill battle.  Especially telling their side of the story is certainly not going to make the media frenzy go always but rather flame it.


----------



## Jayne1

I've mentioned this before -- but the rumour here in Toronto was that Meg attended some fancy event her celebrity chef boyfriend was catering and that's how she met him. 

Maybe the reason no one has claimed to have introduced them is because no one did?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> It could be that Harry arranged to meet her. He had dated other actresses in his past and he found a way to be introduced to them. That actually makes the most sense to me. It also explains why there are several people who have been speculated to be the "friend" who introduced them but nobody has ever claimed to have done it. Wealthy, famous men meet beautiful women who catch their eye that way all the time. But it makes for an unromantic first meeting story to say your prince husband sent an employee to procure a date with you.


There's been mumblings for a while that Harry wasn't having an easy time finding someone who wanted to marry him. He dated a lot of women who had enough clout and money in their own families, and the rumors were that the added stress or marrying a royal wasn't appealing to them.

Sometimes I think about things would be if he'd married Rihanna  imagine the looks she'd be serving us!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> I've mentioned this before -- but the rumour here in Toronto was that Meg attended some fancy event her celebrity chef boyfriend was catering and that's how she met him.
> 
> Maybe the reason no one has claimed to have introduced them is because no one did?


I've heard this also, that the reason the "meeting" is so hush hush is because her relationships overlapped a good bit. Play messy games, win messy prizes.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan has said in the past she doesn't read any stories about herself. I'm curious to know what aspect of the press has made her "not OK."
> 
> I think the realization that she can't do whatever she wants without blowback is what's so challenging for her (and him). I'm sure they'd be "ok" if no one cared that they flew private jets and bought copper tubs and had extravagant parties.
> 
> As I've said multiple times, my opinion is that moving off into private life seems to be the best solution for them, for so many reasons. They can spend as they wish, politicize their foundation, and be as private as needed. But since this means cutting the purse strings, I doubt it will happen. They have to choose what they value most, I guess.


I'd like to have a copper tub 
and I agree with a lot of what they expouse.....I just don't like all the whining and the accusations that anyone who doesn't revere Meghan is racist


----------



## hellosunshine

This ITV interview has all the hallmarks of Princess Diana's Panorama Interview w/ Martin Bashir. I have a feeling that there might be an announcement soon w/ Prince Harry abdicating w/ Meghan and him taking on a more private life. In all honesty, I hope Harry is brave enough to do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

hellosunshine said:


> This ITV interview has all the hallmarks of Princess Diana's Panorama Interview w/ Martin Bashir. I have a feeling that there might be an announcement soon w/ Prince Harry abdicating w/ Meghan and him taking on a more private life. In all honesty, I hope Harry is brave enough to do it.


Abdicating???? He isn't king!!!


----------



## Mrs.Z

I’m sure her transition has been difficult but hasn’t anyone advised them to just stop talking, the “woe is me” nonsense is lost on people who have real problems in life and the war with the press will be lost, the press are mean to everyone at some point and they never go away!


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> I think the realization that she can't do whatever she wants without blowback is what's so challenging for her (and him). I'm sure they'd be "ok" if no one cared that they flew private jets and bought copper tubs and had extravagant parties.


I remember people thinking it was great that Harry was marrying an actress because she'd be used to the press, but she'd never experienced any sort of critical press before.  And I think it's even worse for her because she always wanted to be famous.  Being famous -> being loved.  Becoming ultra famous but not being universally loved is a slap in the face I don't think she was expecting and I think is particularly hard for her to handle.  Based on some of the things she does and how her friends talk about her, I think she has a real need to be constantly admired and told that she's extraordinary.

They have gotten a variety of press:  fawning admiration (especially at first), mean criticism (picking on how she holds Archie), unnecessary stupid criticism (wearing jeans to Wimbledon), criticism with a kernel of truth that was exaggerated all out of proportion (the banana stunt).    And then there are some of the behind-the-scenes rumors, some of which may not be true and others which I think are (such as being on bad terms with the Cambridges).

But they have also gotten some well deserved criticism.  If any other celebrity had pulled that diva stuff at Wimbledon - having to have an entire section of the stadium to herself and having her security tell people not to take photos - nobody would hesitate to say that the celebrity needed to get their head out of their ass.  Because it's Meghan, it's not her fault, it wasn't her decision, it was necessary and/or it didn't even happen.

Harry looked like a total prat getting a pedicure and boarding a private jet to go give a barefoot speech to a bunch of billionaires about climate change and sustainable travel.  And his defense was pure BS.

There are things they deserve to get called out for by the press, and I don't think they will ever be ok with that.  I think they will see themselves as victims no matter what.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sure her transition has been difficult but hasn’t anyone advised them to just stop talking, the “woe is me” nonsense is lost on people who have real problems in life and the war with the press will be lost, the press are mean to everyone at some point and they never go away!


Exactly - do they not remember the bad press around what she said to Pharell? Everyone isn't mean to you "just because." The public reacts to you because they support the vast majority of your lifestyle. 

The fact is, we all go through things. Lots of people lose their parents at young ages. Lots of people are estranged from their families. And lots of people go through these things without the miles of privilege that this family has. Literal royalty whining about how hard their lives are just makes me want to gag. It's so insufferable.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> This ITV interview has all the hallmarks of Princess Diana's Panorama Interview w/ Martin Bashir. I have a feeling that there might be an announcement soon w/ Prince Harry abdicating w/ Meghan and him taking on a more private life. In all honesty, I hope Harry is brave enough to do it.


Me too.  He’s been an activist for all of 5 minutes and it clearly disagrees with him.  



elvisfan4life said:


> Abdicating???? He isn't king!!!


Ah yes  a fact!  Lovely!



Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sure her transition has been difficult but hasn’t anyone advised them to just stop talking, the “woe is me” nonsense is lost on people who have real problems in life and the war with the press will be lost, the press are mean to everyone at some point and they never go away!


Absolutely.  He needs to stop feeding the press headlines that’ll hang over him (and his son too btw) for years to come.


----------



## hellosunshine

elvisfan4life said:


> Abdicating???? He isn't king!!!



True, but isn't he still sixth in line? I believe he'll reliquinish and/or forgo his role within the royal family.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> True, but isn't he still sixth in line? I believe he'll reliquinish and/or forgo his role within the royal family.



I can't imagine that ever happening. Being royal is his identity and now it is hers. Without it, who are they? Just a couple of wealthy people who suddenly can't get their celebrity friends to take their calls anymore.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Being royal is his identity and now it is hers. Without it, who are they? Just a couple of wealthy people who suddenly can't get their celebrity friends to take their calls anymore.


If they quit, I think they will stay very famous and in demand for a few years.  But without the royal framework around them, the fame will fade.  They will also need to figure out how to generate income and whatever they do will likely cheapen whatever royal mystique they bring with them.  I don't think either one of them wants to live within the means of Harry's inheritance. 

I'm not seeing them quitting.  The may not like the press, but otherwise they have it very, very good and I don't think they want to give royal life up.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Truthfully I think it will happen once his brother becomes King.  



hellosunshine said:


> This ITV interview has all the hallmarks of Princess Diana's Panorama Interview w/ Martin Bashir. I have a feeling that there might be an announcement soon w/ Prince Harry abdicating w/ Meghan and him taking on a more private life. In all honesty, I hope Harry is brave enough to do it.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> If they quit, I think they will stay very famous and in demand for a few years.  But without the royal framework around them, the fame will fade.  They will also need to figure out how to generate income and whatever they do will likely cheapen whatever royal mystique they bring with them.  I don't think either one of them wants to live within the means of Harry's inheritance.
> 
> I'm not seeing them quitting.  The may not like the press, but otherwise they have it very, very good and I don't think they want to give royal life up.



I can't see them settling into a quiet life because they both like the attention too much. Perhaps a reality show in the future?


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan is trending on Twitter (w/ 2 Hashtags)-- It's wonderful to see that the general public thankfully supports her...the vocal minority on the other hand is a different story...


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> I can't imagine that ever happening. Being royal is his identity and now it is hers. Without it, who are they? Just a couple of wealthy people who suddenly can't get their celebrity friends to take their calls anymore.



I disagree, the title is very confining. Without it, many great opportunities would open up. It would give for wider latitude to take on projects that otherwise wouldn't be "royal" per say. No more limitations, the world is their oyster.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> I disagree, the title is very confining. Without it, many great opportunities would open up. It would give for wider latitude to take on projects that otherwise wouldn't be "royal" per say. No more limitations, the world is their oyster.



What sort of projects? Who is going to be knocking down their door requesting the help of the former prince and his wife who gave up the title because they couldn't take the stress? They are only famous because he has the title.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Not all the tweets are positive tho


----------



## buffym

Harry attended a conference on faith and mental health.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Meghan has an engagement next week, she was a One World Ambassador before she married Harry


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> Harry attended a conference on faith and mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4568262
> View attachment 4568263
> View attachment 4568264
> View attachment 4568265


Look how he’s dressed compared to everyone else there.  He’s scruffy, and I think it’s very arrogant.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan is trending on Twitter (w/ 2 Hashtags)-- It's wonderful to see that the general public thankfully supports her...the vocal minority on the other hand is a different story...
> 
> View attachment 4568237


I fully support her. I support her to stay at home and raise her child. I support the two of them making public statements that will NOT  embarrass them (climate change and private planes)   I support her efforts to help those less fortunate, but in a quiet manner. I support her to help her husband seek counseling so that he can finally come to grips with his mother’s death after 20 years. I support her wanting to grow vegetables in  her new garden and I support the use of her new BBQ even though the smoke will pollute the atmosphere. I’ m not a hypocrite, I love using my BBQ even though it looks like I am burning down LA when I use it.  I support her study of how to best contribute to the Windsor-Mountbatten family and fulfill the public duties required to earn the love and trust of the British people.    I support her study of Queen Elizabeth as a role model in how the job gets done continuously for 67 years and four children with never a complaint or a day off.


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> I fully support her. I support her to stay at home and raise her child. I support the two of them making public statements that will NOT  embarrass them (climate change and private planes)   I support her efforts to help those less fortunate, but in a quiet manner. I support her to help her husband seek counseling so that he can finally come to grips with his mother’s death after 20 years. I support her wanting to grow vegetables in  her new garden and I support the use of her new BBQ even though the smoke will pollute the atmosphere. I’ m not a hypocrite, I love using my BBQ even though it looks like I am burning down LA when I use it.  I support her study of how to best contribute to the Windsor-Mountbatten family and fulfill the public duties required to earn the love and trust of the British people.    I support her study of Queen Elizabeth as a role model in how the job gets done continuously for 67 years and four children with never a complaint or a day off.


Yes the queen did a fine job on the throne for 67 years. As far as parenting her four children I’m not so sure she wasn’t a bit lacking. There sure have been a lot of divorces and scandals.


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> Yes the queen did a fine job on the throne for 67 years. As far as parenting her four children I’m not so sure she wasn’t a bit lacking. There sure have been a lot of divorces and scandals.


The point is that she gave birth to four children. How they  turned out is another subject and not currently under discussion


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> The point is that she gave birth to four children. How they  turned out is another subject and not currently under discussion


It’s a free forum. Who decides what’s under discussion?


----------



## LittleStar88

Would it make sense to assume that, when Will becomes King, Harry's role will expand (should he stay in royal life)?


----------



## Flatsy

I'm genuinely curious as to who Meghan is referring to when she says nobody asks whether she's ok.  She's clearly got lots of friends and a husband talking to her much of the time about how she is because they have all felt the need to go to the press about it.

Is she talking about the extended royal family?  Is she talking about the press not asking her about how she feels?  I doubt that would be on the table as a topic of discussion for the press.  Or is it just kind of a general whine about feeling like nobody cares about her?



bag-mania said:


> What sort of projects? Who is going to be knocking down their door requesting the help of the former prince and his wife who gave up the title because they couldn't take the stress? They are only famous because he has the title.


Only famous because of the title and with almost no marketable skills, unless Meghan wants to go back to acting/lifestyling and Harry wants to teach recreational flying (although with his academic skills, I don't know if he'd be capable of teaching the mathematical stuff to anyone else).


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> It’s a free forum. Who decides what’s under discussion?


If you would like to discuss how the Queen’s children turned out, you can start a new thread  This thread is about H&M


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Would it make sense to assume that, when Will becomes King, Harry's role will expand (should he stay in royal life)?


It would be a fair assumption, but since he already has three children to help out, there might not be that much for him to do.  I guess it really depends on how long Charles is King and all their respective ages at the time.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> If they quit, I think they will stay very famous and in demand for a few years.  But without the royal framework around them, the fame will fade.  They will also need to figure out how to generate income and whatever they do will likely cheapen whatever royal mystique they bring with them.  I don't think either one of them wants to live within the means of Harry's inheritance.
> 
> I'm not seeing them quitting.  The may not like the press, but otherwise they have it very, very good and I don't think they want to give royal life up.


100% totally agree with this; just remember what happened with Fergie (_although - yes, different circumstances_).  Especially if they came to the US (California), there would be a time where they would be fawned over, but .. at the end of the day .. as you said, it would diminish over time.  Alas, I think Harry would like to (and maybe should) remove himself for a bit to get better; unfortunately, I do not see Meghan wanting that .. she seems like to like the camera and flashes!  If she really loves him, she should support him and let him take the time that he needs to heal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> Would it make sense to assume that, when Will becomes King, Harry's role will expand (should he stay in royal life)?


George and Charlotte will most likely be coming of age by the time William comes to the throne.
And thinking about it why would William want someone who seems set on undermining him to have a bigger role?  It’s no coincidence that H&M offer tearful interviews to the “hated press” just now to detract from a very successful tour of Pakistan by Will and Kate.


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> If you would like to discuss how the Queen’s children turned out, you can start a new thread


Then why was there mention of the queen at all in this thread if she is not to be discussed?


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Would it make sense to assume that, when Will becomes King, Harry's role will expand (should he stay in royal life)?


I think everyone assumes that once the older generations are gone, Harry's generation are all going to be expected to crank out the engagements like Edward and Anne do now.  It's not really an expanded role, it's just a lot more work.  And William will be expected to take on the bulk of the work as monarch.  I have a hard time even imagining it.  For any of them.

But presuming that William eventually takes the throne, he's going to be in charge of the whole family and that will include Harry.  If they can't even get along now, I have no idea how that's going to work.


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> Then why was there mention of the queen at all in this thread if she is not to be discussed?


The Queen was referenced as a role model to help Meghan with her role as a Royal. I fully support Meghan in that study


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I fully support her. I support her to stay at home and raise her child. I support the two of them making public statements that will NOT  embarrass them (climate change and private planes)   I support her efforts to help those less fortunate, but in a quiet manner. I support her to help her husband seek counseling so that he can finally come to grips with his mother’s death after 20 years. I support her wanting to grow vegetables in  her new garden and I support the use of her new BBQ even though the smoke will pollute the atmosphere. I’ m not a hypocrite, *I love using my BBQ even though it looks like I am burning down LA when I use it.*  I support her study of how to best contribute to the Windsor-Mountbatten family and fulfill the public duties required to earn the love and trust of the British people.    I support her study of Queen Elizabeth as a role model in how the job gets done continuously for 67 years and four children with never a complaint or a day off.


Or, you could send me smoke signals from your end of Encino to mine!   HA HA HA


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I'm genuinely curious as to *who Meghan is referring to when she says nobody asks whether she's ok*.  She's clearly got lots of friends and a husband talking to her much of the time about how she is because they have all felt the need to go to the press about it.
> 
> Is she talking about the extended royal family?  Is she talking about the press not asking her about how she feels?  I doubt that would be on the table as a topic of discussion for the press.  Or is it just kind of a general whine about feeling like nobody cares about her?
> 
> 
> Only famous because of the title and with almost no marketable skills, unless Meghan wants to go back to acting/lifestyling and Harry wants to teach recreational flying (although with his academic skills, I don't know if he'd be capable of teaching the mathematical stuff to anyone else).


But, but, wait .. don't they want to be "private"??? .. so, yet again, somewhat contradictory for her to say that - no?


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Or is it just kind of a general whine about feeling like nobody cares about her?



Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner.


----------



## threadbender

Flatsy said:


> I'm genuinely curious as to who Meghan is referring to when she says nobody asks whether she's ok.  She's clearly got lots of friends and a husband talking to her much of the time about how she is because they have all felt the need to go to the press about it.
> 
> Is she talking about the extended royal family?  Is she talking about the press not asking her about how she feels?  I doubt that would be on the table as a topic of discussion for the press.  Or is it just kind of a general whine about feeling like nobody cares about her?
> 
> 
> Only famous because of the title and with almost no marketable skills, unless Meghan wants to go back to acting/lifestyling and Harry wants to teach recreational flying (although with his academic skills, I don't know if he'd be capable of teaching the mathematical stuff to anyone else).


I was wondering the same thing. She has friends. Why would strangers ask how she feels? I am guessing she is railing on the royals. Maybe she expects the Queen to ring up and ask her about her day?


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> If they quit, I think they will stay very famous and in demand for a few years.  But without the royal framework around them, the fame will fade.  They will also need to figure out how to generate income and whatever they do will likely cheapen whatever royal mystique they bring with them.  I don't think either one of them wants to live within the means of Harry's inheritance.
> 
> I'm not seeing them quitting.  The may not like the press, but otherwise they have it very, very good and I don't think they want to give royal life up.



I could see it going either way. They might be able to make a go of it if they convinced the media/public he gave it all up out of luuurve. But it could also turn ugly if it played out that Meghan convinced him to give it up. Then she would be painted as the villain.

ETA: Who are we kidding? She would be blamed if he gave up the title.


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> The Queen was referenced as a role model to help Meghan with her role as a Royal. I fully support Meghan in that study


Surely part of her job as a Royal is to do a good job of raising the Royal children successfully.


----------



## LuckyBitch

Truthfully?? 



Welltraveled! said:


> Truthfully I think it will happen once his brother becomes King.


----------



## Flatsy

Meghan may not have much in the way of family to support her (and Harry's hope that the royal family was going to become "the family she never had" doesn't appear to have panned out either) but she's got a support system.  She's got Harry, her mother, and lots of friends.   She's got a whole big staff taking care of all of her needs and probably treating her pretty nicely since she's royalty and all.  I'm sure when she's working on things like the Vogue issue, people are being kind to her and saying "How are you?"   

I just don't know who Meghan thinks is falling down on the job in terms of stepping in to discuss her feelings with her.


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> I could see it going either way. They might be able to make a go of it if they convinced the media/public he gave it all up out of luuurve. But it could also turn ugly if it played out that Meghan convinced him to give it up. Then she would be painted as the villain.
> 
> ETA: Who are we kidding? She would be blamed if he gave up the title.


Yes, because Diana's son would never do it without coercion. lol Let's face it, many believe she was basically a goddess of goodness. Harry is protected by that image. I don't think Meghan wants to be considered a Yoko.
Maybe they need to sit down and listen to some guidance from experts.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> Meghan may not have much in the way of family to support her (and Harry's hope that the royal family was going to become "the family she never had" doesn't appear to have panned out either) but she's got a support system.  *She's got Harry, her mother, and lots of friends.  * She's got a whole big staff taking care of all of her needs and probably treating her pretty nicely since she's royalty and all.  I'm sure when she's working on things like the Vogue issue, people are being kind to her and saying "How are you?"
> 
> I just don't know who Meghan thinks is falling down on the job in terms of stepping in to discuss her feelings with her.



I think their opinions are the only ones she should care about and the only ones which should matter to her. 

Could it be less of "_no one is asking how I am feeling_" and more towards "n_o one is considering how this makes me feel_"? The intense spotlight and negativity towards her may not be something she was prepared for nor expected and probably not something she is emotionally equipped to handle.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> Yes, because Diana's son would never do it without coercion. lol Let's face it, many believe she was basically a goddess of goodness. Harry is protected by that image. I don't think Meghan wants to be considered a Yoko.
> Maybe they need to sit down and listen to some guidance from experts.



I don't think there's a chance in hell of him giving up the title. And I'm not sure Meghan would stick around if he did.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> I'm genuinely curious as to who Meghan is referring to when she says nobody asks whether she's ok.  She's clearly got lots of friends and a husband talking to her much of the time about how she is because they have all felt the need to go to the press about it.
> 
> Is she talking about the extended royal family?  Is she talking about the press not asking her about how she feels?  I doubt that would be on the table as a topic of discussion for the press.  Or is it just kind of a general whine about feeling like nobody cares about her?


I think it's the deafening silence on the part of the whole royal family.  Not one person gave a supporting statement about H&M's plight, their lawsuits, their complaints.

I wonder if that will be discussed on the doc that is airing in the UK this weekend. When is it airing across the pond?  I'm not watching though. I don't like one sided docs.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I think their opinions are the only ones she should care about and the only ones which should matter to her.
> 
> Could it be less of "_no one is asking how I am feeling_" and more towards "n_o one is considering how this makes me feel_"? The intense spotlight and negativity towards her may not be something she was prepared for nor expected and probably not something she is emotionally equipped to handle.


100% agree, if she expected 100% adulation from the masses, then boy-oh-boy, she had no idea what she was getting into (_and hence the reason why many of Harry's former girlfriends backed out of their relationship with him_ - _remember, Chelsy Davy mentioned that very specifically .. that the media attention would be too much for her_).  Well, she should get some guidance on it and tout-suite!


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Could it be less of "_no one is asking how I am feeling_" and more towards "n_o one is considering how this makes me feel_"?


Yes, that makes sense that it was a question of how it's impacting her.  

I find it interesting that she phrased it as a direct question, as if the press is supposed to be communicating with her on that level.  She and Harry have such a distant and antagonistic relationship with the press, and the antagonism is coming largely from the side of the guy who is triggered by camera clicks.  

If they could try to establish a better relationship with the press, maybe they could have the type of back and forth Meghan is imagining.  Harry used to treat the press like fellow human beings (having drinks with them, etc.) and he often got that back from them.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> I think it's the deafening silence on the part of the whole royal family. Not one person gave a supporting statement about H&M's plight, their lawsuits, their complaints.


The Daily Beast said the rest of the family is unhappy that Harry is waging war against the press because even though Harry and Meghan think they can thrive entirely on social media "the rest of the family still thinks they need the press".

If Harry and Meghan are acting totally in their own self interests without worrying about how it affects the rest of the family, and if they are going to act in violation of everyone else's wishes, then they aren't going to get any support back from the family.  Nor do they deserve it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry says every camera flash takes him back to Diana's death*






Prince Harry spoke to ITV's Tom Bradby about the "festering wound" left by Princess Diana's death.
London (CNN)Prince Harry has said that every camera flash takes him "straight back" to the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in 1997.

In an interview with ITV's Tom Bradby, the Duke of Sussex described the emotional toll of living in the spotlight.

When asked if he feels at peace yet about the death of Diana 22 years ago, the duke -- who was 12 years old at the time -- admitted that his grief was still a "wound that festers."

"I think being part of this family, in this role and this job, every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back.

"So in that respect, it's the worst reminder of her life as opposed to the best," he told Bradby.

The interview is part of a documentary for UK broadcaster ITV, filmed during the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's recent tour of Africa.

During the 10-day trip, Harry, who is sixth in line to the British throne, retraced his mother's steps in Angola as she walked through a former minefield -- just months before she died in a car crash in Paris.

Entitled "Harry and Meghan: An African Journey," the one-hour documentary sees the prince tell Bradby: "Being here now, 22 years later, trying to finish what she started, will be incredibly emotional. But everything I do reminds me of her. But as I said, with the role, with the job and the sort of the pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff, unfortunately." The documentary will be aired on ITV at 9 p.m. (4 p.m. ET) on Sunday.

The prince made global headlines while in Africa when he published a deeply personal statement criticizing the UK's tabloid press for conducting what he called a "ruthless campaign" against his wife, Meghan.

Issued on a specially created website on October 1, the statement described "relentless propaganda," with Harry saying his wife had become "one of the latest victims of a British tabloid press that wages campaigns against individuals with no thought to the consequences."

Announcing plans to take legal action against sections of the British press, he said his "deepest fear is history repeating itself."

"I've seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces," he said in the statement.

In another clip from the documentary, Meghan talked about the pressure she faces as a newlywed new mother in the glare of the media spotlight.

"Not many people have asked if I'm OK," she told Bradby. "But it's a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes."

Asked whether that meant that she was "not really OK," and whether "it has really been a struggle," Meghan replied simply: "Yes."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/europe/harry-camera-flash-gbr-scli-intl/index.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

So that’s why they made sure they were at a movie premiere. Gtfo


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> So that’s why they made sure they were at a movie premiere. Gtfo




Now, clearly that was some form of immersive therapy. Flashing cameras make him feel terrible so they went to where they would find the most paparazzi and flashing cameras possible.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't get why her posing in front of Buckingham Palace is significant (not to people on here but other places I've read) Come on, how many of us who have been to London hasn't done that? It's a major touristy landmark. We've all done the touristy thing in any major city. Harry doesn't live there, he never has. Even the Queen doesn't live there permanently, it's classed as the "office" and Windsor is classed as home.
> It'd be different if Meghan had sought him out at that age and taken pictures of him or attended engagements as he got older and she was in the crowd. I do believe her when she said she didn't know much about him.


I'm not from London but I've lived in London. I never posed in front of Buckingham Palace  

Meghan apparently had a big obsession with the BRF according to former friends and family members going so far as to collecting books on the BRF, as a child. And as we all now know, what Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Ergo Meghan got Harry.

It's the ridiculousness of trying to paint some kind of fairy-tale encounter of how they met like complete strangers by sheer happenstance under the aligned stars when at least one of them hustled to meet the other and they were set up by their Soho whatevers


----------



## threadbender

If it is that traumatic, get help to deal with it or, quit. At least, they have the resources where they have choices. Sounds to me like Meghan is just feeding into his issues about his mother being "tormented" by the press, the press she courted. I admired Diana but know she was not the perfect angel so many see her as. I think her death was awful and preventable. But, I also see that she had a part in how the press treated her. Much as her son and daughter-in-law do.

I am sorry but it has been stated and shown, even on this thread, that these two entitled, wealthy, privileged people have had plenty of opportunity to create a positive, encouraging relationship with the press. But, that would lack drama. And, they certainly do not want to be small side notes in the media. So, either fix it or forget it but don't whine to me about me "not asking if you are OK".


----------



## hellosunshine

Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if that will be discussed on the doc that is airing in the UK this weekend. When is it airing across the pond?  I'm not watching though. I don't like one sided docs.



It'll air on Wednesday October 23rd at 10pm EST on ABC.


----------



## Flatsy

They are starting to remind me more and more of JFK Jr and Carolyn Bessette.  She hated the press and paparazzi and she wallowed in that.  JFK Jr. was crazy about her and played her knight in shining armor and protector.  Like Harry, he felt guilty and was extremely frustrated that he wasn't able to do anything except occasionally get hostile towards the paparazzi.

But after three years, he was sick of trying to be knight in shining armor.  He felt like she was blaming him for her problems, and he was sick of it.  By many accounts, they were rapidly reaching the end of the line when they died.  

It's not possible to sustain that type of drama for too long.


----------



## hellosunshine

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's the ridiculousness of trying to paint some kind of fairy-tale encounter of how they met like complete strangers by sheer happenstance under the aligned stars when at least one of them hustled to meet the other and they were set up by their Soho whatevers



I, personally find this incredibly romantic..to see your destiny with someone and then to seek them out? That's very flattering. Also, in most relationships one person usually does the courting so...


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So that’s why they made sure they were at a movie premiere. Gtfo



He attended on behalf of organizations doing work for conservation efforts, not what you're implying here.


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


> I, personally find this incredibly romantic..to see your destiny with someone and then to seek them out? That's very flattering. Also, in most relationships one person usually does the courting so...



It is either incredibly flattering. Or incredibly creepy.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> They are starting to remind me more and more of JFK Jr and Carolyn Bessette.  She hated the press and paparazzi and she wallowed in that.  JFK Jr. was crazy about her and played her knight in shining armor and protector.  Like Harry, he felt guilty and was extremely frustrated that he wasn't able to do anything except occasionally get hostile towards the paparazzi.
> 
> But after three years, he was sick of trying to be knight in shining armor.  He felt like she was blaming him for her problems, and he was sick of it.  By many accounts, they were rapidly reaching the end of the line when they died.
> 
> It's not possible to sustain that type of drama for too long.[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Flatsy said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are starting to remind me more and more of JFK Jr and Carolyn Bessette.  She hated the press and paparazzi and she wallowed in that.  JFK Jr. was crazy about her and played her knight in shining armor and protector.  Like Harry, he felt guilty and was extremely frustrated that he wasn't able to do anything except occasionally get hostile towards the paparazzi.
> 
> But after three years, he was sick of trying to be knight in shining armor.  He felt like she was blaming him for her problems, and he was sick of it.  By many accounts, they were rapidly reaching the end of the line when they died.
> 
> It's not possible to sustain that type of drama for too long.
> 
> 
> 
> i think Carolyn sincerely hated the press and the attention. I think Megan loves any attention of any kind.
Click to expand...


----------



## mdcx

The “not many people ask if I’m okay” statement was an attempt to throw Kate under the bus imo.
I imagine K&W realised pretty quickly that M’s need for attention/validation/pity was endless and decided to put a boundary up.
If I was Kate, it would be hard to trust Meghan and I imagine Kate gave it her best in the beginning in terms of trying to be a mentor and friend.

Some people’s identity is all about drama and being a victim and Meghan has realised that’s what gets her the most attention. She will never act again so this is her only outlet to get that need for attention met imo .

Obviously she could just quietly and modestly behave and do her job but I don’t think that is quite enough for her.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Lemme guest.  You’re the resident grammar police?  



LuckyBitch said:


> Truthfully??


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> He attended on behalf of organizations doing work for conservation efforts, not what you're implying here.


What exactly am I implying?


----------



## Welltraveled!

I don’t think her comment was directed solely to them .  If I had to hazard a guess I think she was referring to their entire immediate family in general. 

Her statement proves if I’m correct there maybe some discord in the family.  



mdcx said:


> The “not many people ask if I’m okay” statement was an attempt to throw Kate under the bus imo.
> I imagine K&W realised pretty quickly that M’s need for attention/validation/pity was endless and decided to put a boundary up.
> If I was Kate, it would be hard to trust Meghan and I imagine Kate gave it her best in the beginning in terms of trying to be a mentor and friend.
> 
> Some people’s identity is all about drama and being a victim and Meghan has realised that’s what gets her the most attention. She will never act again so this is her only outlet to get that need for attention met imo .
> 
> Obviously she could just quietly and modestly behave and do her job but I don’t think that is quite enough for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

LittleStar88 said:


> It is either incredibly flattering. Or incredibly creepy.



Lol!  It’s not that uncommon for a man or woman to seek out their preferred mate. 

A general statement, I do find it very sexist when a woman seeks out a man she’s “social climbing” or trying to “better her lot in life.”   But if a man does the same thing he’s usually patted on the back or making strategic moves.

it’s so hard being a woman!  <sigh>


----------



## mrsinsyder

I doubt Kate is checking on Megz after she leaked made up stories about Will having an affair.  

*for anyone who’s gonna reply and say I’m wrong, you don’t know that she didn’t


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> They are starting to remind me more and more of JFK Jr and Carolyn Bessette.  She hated the press and paparazzi and she wallowed in that.  JFK Jr. was crazy about her and played her knight in shining armor and protector.  Like Harry, he felt guilty and was extremely frustrated that he wasn't able to do anything except occasionally get hostile towards the paparazzi.
> 
> But after three years, he was sick of trying to be knight in shining armor.  He felt like she was blaming him for her problems, and he was sick of it.  By many accounts, they were rapidly reaching the end of the line when they died.
> 
> It's not possible to sustain that type of drama for too long.


But Caroline was not an actress.  She was a private citizen.  Big difference IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> But Caroline was not an actress.  She was a private citizen.  Big difference IMO.



She was a publicist for Calvin Klein and she worked with and met celebrities in that regard. So it's not like she was entirely outside the realm of celebrities, she just wasn't considered one herself before she married.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She was a publicist for Calvin Klein and she worked with and met celebrities in that regard. So it's not like she was entirely outside the realm of celebrities, she just wasn't considered one herself before she married.


yes but I never got the idea she sought to be a "star" (though of course John was American royalty; but he was so attractive.  I think while his being a Kennedy was certainly a big part of his persona, he was a super attractive guy aside from that.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> It'll air on Wednesday October 23rd at 10pm EST on ABC.


Thanks. Will you watch?


----------



## Welltraveled!

Why do you think Meghan leaked it?  



mrsinsyder said:


> I doubt Kate is checking on Megz after she leaked made up stories about Will having an affair.
> 
> **for anyone who’s gonna reply and say I’m wrong, you don’t know that she didn’t[*/QUOTE]


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes but I never got the idea she sought to be a "star" (though of course John was American royalty; but he was so attractive.  I think while his being a Kennedy was certainly a big part of his persona, he was a super attractive guy aside from that.



The man was incredibly hot, but you can't underestimate how much the Kennedy angle had appeal for her. When you marry someone famous you get lots of benefits out of it. You also lose your privacy. It's a tradeoff.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> I doubt Kate is checking on Megz after she leaked made up stories about Will having an affair.
> 
> *for anyone who’s gonna reply and say I’m wrong, you don’t know that she didn’t


It's widely rumoured it was the Cholmondely's or someone in their circle who leaked it. 

Those particular Toff's have more money and power in Norfolk than even the BRF, though they generally tow the line as tradition and historical roles demand.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Welltraveled! said:


> Lol!  It’s not that uncommon for a man or woman to seek out their preferred mate.
> 
> A general statement, I do find it very sexist when a woman seeks out a man she’s “social climbing” or trying to “better her lot in life.”   But if a man does the same thing he’s usually patted on the back or making strategic moves.
> 
> *it’s so hard being a woman!  *<sigh>


They don't make it easy


----------



## LittleStar88

Welltraveled! said:


> Lol!  It’s not that uncommon for a man or woman to seek out their preferred mate.
> 
> A general statement, I do find it very sexist when a woman seeks out a man she’s “social climbing” or trying to “better her lot in life.”   But if a man does the same thing he’s usually patted on the back or making strategic moves.
> 
> it’s so hard being a woman!  <sigh>



I think it is great for men and women to seek an ideal mate in general and not settle. But to hone in on one specific person and niggle away until you can land a date/life with that one person, a little creepy on the front end of that journey (male or female). 

I don't think that is what Meghan did specifically, but to the comment in general context.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> yes but I never got the idea she sought to be a "star" (though of course John was American royalty; but he was so attractive.  I think while his being a Kennedy was certainly a big part of his persona, he was a super attractive guy aside from that.


Carolyn was genuinely disturbed and upset by the constant attention from the press. I get the feeling that Megan enjoys and seeks the attention.


----------



## mrsinsyder

This should have been easy to see coming when Harry was releasing statements asking him to leave his girlfriend alone and M was doing the cover of Vanity Fair saying she was wild about Harry


----------



## mrsinsyder

I won’t post it here because it has a curse word but Gary Janetti is killing me.


----------



## mdcx

I'm quite surprised by how heavily Meghan's American supporters on Twitter rely on racism as being the reason people don't like Meghan.
Maybe it's because the rest of the world is more multi-cultural and we are "allowed" to dislike the behaviour of non-white people without it being 100% attributed to racism? It seems like a very shallow, one size fits all answer to any criticism of Meghan's behaviour.

To me Meghan reminds me of Louise Linton - clueless and offensive public behaviour not in line with her station.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's widely rumoured it was the Cholmondely's or someone in their circle who leaked it.
> 
> Those particular Toff's have more money and power in Norfolk than even the BRF, though they generally tow the line as tradition and historical roles demand.


HA - haven't heard the "toff's" comment since my days back in London!!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Offensive public behaviour? How so?

This general attitude that people who have wealth and/or fame can't have or speak about mental health and depression is a very dangerous one.

We are all human. I believe Harry may be seeking help already but the current  situation with the press can't be helping and may, indeed be the reason he has chosen to take legal action.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry says every camera flash takes him back to Diana's death*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry spoke to ITV's Tom Bradby about the "festering wound" left by Princess Diana's death.
> London (CNN)Prince Harry has said that every camera flash takes him "straight back" to the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in 1997.
> 
> In an interview with ITV's Tom Bradby, the Duke of Sussex described the emotional toll of living in the spotlight.
> 
> When asked if he feels at peace yet about the death of Diana 22 years ago, the duke -- who was 12 years old at the time -- admitted that his grief was still a "wound that festers."
> 
> "I think being part of this family, in this role and this job, every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back.
> 
> "So in that respect, it's the worst reminder of her life as opposed to the best," he told Bradby.
> 
> The interview is part of a documentary for UK broadcaster ITV, filmed during the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's recent tour of Africa.
> 
> During the 10-day trip, Harry, who is sixth in line to the British throne, retraced his mother's steps in Angola as she walked through a former minefield -- just months before she died in a car crash in Paris.
> 
> Entitled "Harry and Meghan: An African Journey," the one-hour documentary sees the prince tell Bradby: "Being here now, 22 years later, trying to finish what she started, will be incredibly emotional. But everything I do reminds me of her. But as I said, with the role, with the job and the sort of the pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff, unfortunately." The documentary will be aired on ITV at 9 p.m. (4 p.m. ET) on Sunday.
> 
> The prince made global headlines while in Africa when he published a deeply personal statement criticizing the UK's tabloid press for conducting what he called a "ruthless campaign" against his wife, Meghan.
> 
> Issued on a specially created website on October 1, the statement described "relentless propaganda," with Harry saying his wife had become "one of the latest victims of a British tabloid press that wages campaigns against individuals with no thought to the consequences."
> 
> Announcing plans to take legal action against sections of the British press, he said his "deepest fear is history repeating itself."
> 
> "I've seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces," he said in the statement.
> 
> In another clip from the documentary, Meghan talked about the pressure she faces as a newlywed new mother in the glare of the media spotlight.
> 
> "Not many people have asked if I'm OK," she told Bradby. "But it's a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes."
> 
> Asked whether that meant that she was "not really OK," and whether "it has really been a struggle," Meghan replied simply: "Yes."
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/europe/harry-camera-flash-gbr-scli-intl/index.html


Does anyone else view the timing on this to be somewhat suspect - e.g., taking away from W&K's tour?  Why can't they just leave this be until after the tour is completed?


----------



## mrsinsyder

I find it offensive to have $200k baby showers while a lot of the UK lives paycheck to paycheck. _Butthatsjustme_.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else view the timing on this to be somewhat suspect - e.g., taking away from W&K's tour?  Why can't they just leave this be until after the tour is completed?


It’s obvious and you’re not the only one calling it out. Don’t forget Meghan’s weepy movie clip from today.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s obvious and you’re not the only one calling it out. Don’t forget Meghan’s weepy movie clip from today.


I just saw that! I couldn't believe it. Hamming it up something wicked.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also like... who is supposed to be asking her if she’s ok?
Serena?
Jessica M?
Misha Nonoo?
The press they don’t want to speak to?
Gary Busey? 
Someone from this thread?
Amal Clooney?
Will and Kate?


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Offensive public behaviour? How so?
> 
> This general attitude that people who have wealth and/or fame can't have or speak about mental health and depression is a very dangerous one.
> 
> We are all human. I believe Harry may be seeking help already but the current  situation with the press can't be helping and may, indeed be the reason he has chosen to take legal action.


In some respects, if (in fact) he is seeking treatment, wouldn't that be great to talk about it .. get it out there, because I believe that one of the items that they are stressing is the 'stigma' of mental illness and that one should not be afraid to talk about it.  Knowing from personal experience, talking from the heart to others who know the experience as well, well .. it just means more.  Not sure if the BRF would "allow" that though, not sure about that.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> In some respects, if (in fact) he is seeking treatment, wouldn't that be great to talk about it .. get it out there, because I believe that one of the items that they are stressing is the 'stigma' of mental illness and that one should not be afraid to talk about it.  Knowing from personal experience, talking from the heart to others who know the experience as well, well .. it just means more.  Not sure if the BRF would "allow" that though, not sure about that.


If he did, he'd be torn down again, just as Meghan has with her recent comment that _she_ may be struggling.

There is no "win" in some quarters for either of them, no matter what the cirmcunstances


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> If he did, he'd be torn down again, just as Meghan has with her recent comment that _she_ may be struggling.
> 
> There is no "win" in some quarters for either of them, no matter what the cirmcunstances


That is really unfortunate; honestly, it might just be better for the both of them to retreat out of the spotlight for a bit and heal themselves, after all .. they have a young little boy who needs them .. just focus on the family for the time being!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> That is really unfortunate; honestly, it might just be better for the both of them to retreat out of the spotlight for a bit and heal themselves, after all .. they have a young little boy who needs them .. just focus on the family for the time being!


I agree with this. I think they both want to get out there and do pro-active work as social justice seems to be a shared passion. 

But she is a relatively new Mum, and even with the help they undoubtedly have, it can be a major adjustment.  Some down time could be good for the family.

But I can even see the press spin on *that* for miles. "Queen lays down law to Sussexes. Told to reign in engagements"

If anyone from the DM or Sun is reading I'm claiming copyright on the title...lol.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I thought he has said he is in treatment?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

A1aGypsy said:


> I thought he has said he is in treatment?


He may have. I might have missed that.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else view the timing on this to be somewhat suspect - e.g., taking away from W&K's tour?  Why can't they just leave this be until after the tour is completed?



I don’t believe Harry and Meghan  have any say in when the TV show about their trip will air. Even if they did, I doubt it would even occur to them to consider what William and Kate were doing. This was a promotional interview to entice as many viewers as possible to watch their show. If the Africa trip show gets stellar ratings they will be asked to make more programs. Maybe they will get a series, “Traveling the World With Harry and Meghan.”


----------



## Lodpah

Edited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

I can agree with the bold, if it's unwanted attention and if the person is creepy about it.  Had a few of those experiences.  

But overall, I'm more of a if both parties are TRULY in love and want to be together.  I'm happy for you.  



LittleStar88 said:


> I think it is great for men and women to seek an ideal mate in general and not settle. B*ut to hone in on one specific person and niggle away until you can land a date/life with that one person, a little creepy on the front end of that journey (male or female). *
> 
> I don't think that is what Meghan did specifically, but to the comment in general context.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe Harry and Meghan  have any say in when the TV show about their trip will air. Even if they did, I doubt it would even occur to them to consider what William and Kate were doing. This was a promotional interview to entice as many viewers as possible to watch their show. If the Africa trip show gets stellar ratings they will be asked to make more programs. Maybe they will get a series, “Traveling the World With Harry and Meghan.”


The producer is one of Harry’s best friends. I’m sure they have total control.

Edit to clarify he’s the interviewer and not the credited producer. I’ve thankfully been rescued from a significant faux pas.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> The producer is one of Harry’s best friends. I’m sure they have total control.



no, the guy doesn't decide that..the network does. There's a circle of people who'd make this sorta decision and Harry + Meghan are far removed.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> The producer is one of Harry’s best friends. I’m sure they have total control.



Wouldn’t it be the network that determines the timeslot? But you’re right a well-known producer could have a lot of influence.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else view the timing on this to be somewhat suspect - e.g., taking away from W&K's tour?  Why can't they just leave this be until after the tour is completed?



Their tour has been over since the evening of the 17th. They've spent the early morning hours of the 18th traveling back. There's no attention to take away..


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> no, the guy doesn't decide that..the network does. There's a circle of people who'd make this sorta decision and Harry + Meghan are far removed.


Can you share how you have such factual information about this project?


----------



## Welltraveled!

LOL!!!   I appreciate the laugh, I had a horrible day at work.  Thank you!  



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> They don't make it easy


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> I doubt Kate is checking on Megz after she leaked made up stories about Will having an affair.
> 
> *for anyone who’s gonna reply and say I’m wrong, you don’t know that she didn’t



That's funny because I feel like most decisions lately by Will & Kate has been in direct response to Meghan & Harry. It kinda feels like the Cambridges do actively check on and mimic the Sussex's but


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> The producer is one of Harry’s best friends. I’m sure they have total control.



Which one  if you don't mind me asking?

Executive Producer Chris Shaw for ITN Productions,  David Sloan - Senior Executive Producer or Matt Lombardi at ABC News?


----------



## mrsinsyder

The Cambridges will be king and queen one day while the other fall further down the succession line. I’m sure they’re feeling okay.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Which one  if you don't mind me asking?
> 
> Executive Producer Chris Shaw for ITN Productions,  David Sloan - Senior Executive Producer or Matt Lombardi at ABC News?



Tom Bradby, though I’m sure you know that and are pointing out that I used the wrong word to describe his role


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> Tom Bradby, though I’m sure you know that and are pointing out that I used the wrong word to describe his role


No need for the snarky eyeroll. 

I genuinely didn't know. And hadn't heard his name.

Half of what is messed up with this thread is the lack of grey area where discussion or questions can be asked without the b*tchy retort.

Thank you for your answer.


----------



## mrsinsyder

_Sudden prominence _
No one told AOC that Megz was an internationally famous actress I guess.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Can you share how you have such factual information about this project?



That's just how things are generally handled in the media. Documentaries, movies, tv shows, etc are usually recorded of "talent" and once everything is wrapped, "talent" no longer has control of anything relating to the release. The network, studio, etc decides.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Documentaries, movies, tv shows, etc are usually recorded of "talent" and once everything is wrapped, "talent" no longer has control of anything relating to the release.


Meghan and Harry were not hired talent.  They are two very sought-after and powerful people who had no need to participate in a documentary without having control over both the content and the manner and time it would be released.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

The show was undoubtedly fast-tracked through the editing and production process to deliver it within a short time. I think it’s been much less than a month. Maybe they worried interest would wane or maybe it wasn’t a particularly difficult show to put together.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think it's wrong  to suggest Harry and Meghan and the BRF don't have a say in the final output. 

It's neither good nor bad - it just is.

The reality is anyone with a whiff of pulling power, be it a big actor or Royal family member would have some input.

It's all PR (what is the entire BRF these days but an exercise in PR and continuing national pride in history and the influence of the BRF?).


----------



## bag-mania

I think the show itself will be like one big love letter to Harry and Meghan.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> I think the show itself will be like one big love letter to Harry and Meghan.



For sure. But it will be the same tone as all the other specials that the BRF take part in and are approved.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> For sure. But it will be the same tone as all the other specials that the BRF take part in and are approved.



Then we can also expect one about Will and Kate’s trip when they get back?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Then we can also expect one about Will and Kate’s trip when they get back?


Well I wouldn't know obviously, but it does seem like there's a push by the BRF to get the younger royals out there in the Commonwealth.

For those who can't get out in person to see them, a special certainly reaches more people, particularly in the Commonwealth country visited.

But again...I don't know. It might happen? Just speculation.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Then we can also expect one about Will and Kate’s trip when they get back?


I’m sure it would be equally fluffy but it would be so aesthetically pleasing.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m sure it would be equally fluffy but it would be so aesthetically pleasing.


I doubt I’ll watch either one but I’ll be right here reading everyone’s opinion who does.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan needn’t worry. Members of the American media are more than willing to kiss up to her in ways the British media never will. They make her sound like such a victim. From Harper’s Bazaar:


*Fans Rally Behind Her with the Trending Hashtag, #WeLoveYouMeghan*
Supporters stand behind the duchess with encouraging messages on social media.

Today, Meghan Markle's fans got a rare look at the duchess's unfiltered, vulnerable side when footage from a new interview circulated online. 

In the video—a snippet from the upcoming ITV documentary, Harry & Meghan: An African Journey—Meghan openly discusses the pressures of the royal spotlight, and how she struggled with intense public scrutiny while she was pregnant with her and Prince Harry's son, Archie. 

"Any woman, especially when they're pregnant, you're really vulnerable. So, that was made really challenging," she said during the clip, looking visibly upset. "And, then when you have a newborn, and especially as a woman, it's a lot. So, you add this on top of just trying to be a new mom or trying to be a newlywed."

She also thanked her interviewer, ITV's Tom Bradby, for asking how she was doing. "I guess also thank you for asking because not many people have asked if I'm okay, but it's a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes," she said. 

Fans were moved. Viewers spoke out on Twitter, saying they were upset to see the duchess struggling and condemning the critics and tabloids who caused her to feel this way. The hashtag, #WeLoveYouMeghan began to circulate, after author Greg Hogben encouraged his followers to start posting the phrase to show support. 

Thanks to the duchess's loyal fans in the U.S., the hashtag became the number two trending topic in the country on Twitter this afternoon. Participants praised Meghan's strength and applauded her for being honest enough to admit that she's struggling. Others called out her racist and misogynist detractors. Mothers who experienced postpartum depression understood what it's like to be vulnerable after giving birth, and women of color related to her feeling criticized and ostracized.

Read more: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...e-interview-weloveyoumeghan-trending-hashtag/


----------



## Welltraveled!

I get the point you're trying to make.  But I find your statement to be ignorant of racism in America; and it belittles the experiences of those who dealt with racism.  I find it interesting there are individuals who are more bothered or concern with the word racist/racism; and ignore the behaviors (and their actions) that define those words.  If anyone dislike Meghan because of her character so be it. However, I don't see a problem for anyone calling out racist/sterotypical comments or tweets.  



mdcx said:


> I'm quite surprised by how heavily Meghan's American supporters on Twitter rely on racism as being the reason people don't like Meghan.
> Maybe it's because the rest of the world is more multi-cultural and we are "allowed" to dislike the behaviour of non-white people without it being 100% attributed to racism? It seems like a very shallow, one size fits all answer to any criticism of Meghan's behaviour.
> 
> To me Meghan reminds me of Louise Linton - clueless and offensive public behaviour not in line with her station.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mrsinsyder said:


> Also like... who is supposed to be asking her if she’s ok?
> Serena?
> Jessica M?
> Misha Nonoo?
> The press they don’t want to speak to?
> Gary Busey?
> Someone from this thread?
> Amal Clooney?
> Will and Kate?


Piers Morgan...


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> That's funny because I feel like most decisions lately by Will & Kate has been in direct response to Meghan & Harry. It kinda feels like the Cambridges do actively check on and mimic the Sussex's but


That’s laughable, it really is.  Harry and Meghan are a mess at the moment, there’s no other word for it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Those particular Toff's have more money and power in Norfolk than even the BRF, though they generally tow the line as tradition and historical roles demand.


No that isn’t correct.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Wouldn’t it be the network that determines the timeslot? But you’re right a well-known producer could have a lot of influence.


Yes, and these types of programmes have usually been shown about 3 weeks after a tour ends. Plus, the date of its showing was announced over 2 weeks ago


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Then we can also expect one about Will and Kate’s trip when they get back?


We usually do get a documentary after they have done a Royal tour


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Welltraveled! said:


> LOL!!!   I appreciate the laugh, I had a horrible day at work.  Thank you!


And thank you for being a good sport 

I do agree in principle with what you wrote.



mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4568541
> 
> 
> _Sudden prominence _
> No one told AOC that Megz was an internationally famous actress I guess.


I'm itching to reply to this a propos AOC, Meghan's new partner in woke, but I don't want to bring on the Wrath of Vlad so I'll behave  



LVSistinaMM said:


> Piers Morgan...


  
(I'm wishing for a crying and laughing emoji - I need it for this thread and the "Just because it's designer doesn't mean it's good WTH" thread).


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Good going, Sussexes, getting on the good side of the royal aides and the Cambridges  Is everyone sure _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey_ is not a mockumentary?

_"A teaser clip released from the documentary today shows emotional Meghan opening up about how royal life has been a "struggle", especially with being a new mum. She fights back tears, saying: "Look, any woman especially when they are pregnant you’re really vulnerable and so that was made really challenging, and then when you have a newborn – you know…_

_"And especially as a woman, it’s a lot. So you add this on top of just trying to be a new mom or trying to be a newlywed it’s, well…
"And, also thank you for asking, because not many people have asked if I’m OK. But it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes."
_
This woman said this while visiting South Africa where she was meeting with women and children with HIV, living in poverty and constant fear of being a victim of horrific crime and next to nil possibility of bettering their lot? In a country where the data for sexual violence against and murder of women and children are some of the worst in the world. And after telling them how she's "their sister", "I'm here with you, I'm here for you" and handing out some used onesies, she unceremoniously left them in their townships to go back to her ivory tower with her prince in tow to continue their tax funded existence with their top nannies and security guards? 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...-s-tour-say-baffled-royal-aides-a4265061.html
*ROYAL ROW 
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interviews overshadow Kate and William’s Pakistan tour, say ‘baffled’ aides*
_PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle's emotional ITV interview has "overshadowed" William and Kate's tour in Pakistan, royal sources claim. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have both given candid interviews as part of the upcoming ITV documentary, Harry and Meghan: An African Journey.
But according to the Evening Standard's Robert Jobson, the decision to release teaser clips while Kate and Wills are on a four-day tour in Pakistan has “baffled and infuriated” aides.

One senior figure told the newspaper: "This move has certainly overshadowed the Pakistan visit and what has been achieved here during the last few days, as well as a lot of work by an awful lot of dedicated people here on the ground as well as back home for months.”
According to the Standard, there is a decades-long unwritten rule that members of the royal family do not overshadow official overseas visits by more senior royals. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have now left Lahore after an official four-day tour of Pakistan.
_
*ROYAL DOCUMENTARY*
_ITV News presenter Tom Bradby followed Meghan, Harry and five-month-old Archie throughout their African tour last month. A teaser clip released from the documentary today shows emotional Meghan opening up about how royal life has been a "struggle", especially with being a new mum. She fights back tears, saying: "Look, any woman especially when they are pregnant you’re really vulnerable and so that was made really challenging, and then when you have a newborn – you know…
_
*'IT'S A STRUGGLE'*
_"And especially as a woman, it’s a lot. So you add this on top of just trying to be a new mom or trying to be a newlywed it’s, well…
"And, also thank you for asking, because not many people have asked if I’m OK. But it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes."
Tom asks her directly if it is fair to say that it has been a struggle, and looking emotional, Meghan replies: "Yes."
The hour-long documentary features interviews with the royal couple as well as an insight into their work, and how they’re balancing public and private life._


----------



## mrsinsyder

It’s crazy to act like this was all unplanned coincidence. That documentary was ready to go crazy fast - they could have easily waited another week or two.

It’s obvious that from Harry’s side at least, this is all a competition now. Yikes.


----------



## rose60610

I have an idea!  (reaching for Sharpie)

Why don't all us H&M thread contributors sign and send an e-card to Duchess Meghan ASKING HER IF SHE'S OK? 

Each of us could also tell her how much we care. There are a lot of us, so she'll no longer feel like she's all alone out there. We could convey all the heartfelt sentiments in this thread so she will no longer feel forgotten!


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s crazy to act like this was all unplanned coincidence. That documentary was ready to go crazy fast - they could have easily waited another week or two.
> 
> It’s obvious that from Harry’s side at least, this is all a competition now. Yikes.


Well, they learned from their mother. Diana  was an expert at diverting attention away from Charles.

Especially when the marriage went from bad to worse, she really amped up the diversion by calling the paps and showing up in high fashion dresses when she knew specifically he was attending some boring, less interesting event.

Her children are using the same tactics.


----------



## Meh-gan

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Good going, Sussexes, getting on the good side of the royal aides and the Cambridges  Is everyone sure _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey_ is not a mockumentary?
> 
> _"A teaser clip released from the documentary today shows emotional Meghan opening up about how royal life has been a "struggle", especially with being a new mum. She fights back tears, saying: "Look, any woman especially when they are pregnant you’re really vulnerable and so that was made really challenging, and then when you have a newborn – you know…_
> 
> _"And especially as a woman, it’s a lot. So you add this on top of just trying to be a new mom or trying to be a newlywed it’s, well…
> "And, also thank you for asking, because not many people have asked if I’m OK. But it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes."
> _
> This woman said this while visiting South Africa where she was meeting with women and children with HIV, living in poverty and constant fear of being a victim of horrific crime and next to nil possibility of bettering their lot? In a country where the data for sexual violence against and murder of women and children are some of the worst in the world. And after telling them how she's "their sister", "I'm here with you, I'm here for you" and handing out some used onesies, she unceremoniously left them in their townships to go back to her ivory tower with her prince in tow to continue their tax funded existence with their top nannies and security guards?
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...-s-tour-say-baffled-royal-aides-a4265061.html
> *ROYAL ROW
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interviews overshadow Kate and William’s Pakistan tour, say ‘baffled’ aides*
> _PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle's emotional ITV interview has "overshadowed" William and Kate's tour in Pakistan, royal sources claim. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have both given candid interviews as part of the upcoming ITV documentary, Harry and Meghan: An African Journey.
> But according to the Evening Standard's Robert Jobson, the decision to release teaser clips while Kate and Wills are on a four-day tour in Pakistan has “baffled and infuriated” aides.
> 
> One senior figure told the newspaper: "This move has certainly overshadowed the Pakistan visit and what has been achieved here during the last few days, as well as a lot of work by an awful lot of dedicated people here on the ground as well as back home for months.”
> According to the Standard, there is a decades-long unwritten rule that members of the royal family do not overshadow official overseas visits by more senior royals. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have now left Lahore after an official four-day tour of Pakistan.
> _
> *ROYAL DOCUMENTARY*
> _ITV News presenter Tom Bradby followed Meghan, Harry and five-month-old Archie throughout their African tour last month. A teaser clip released from the documentary today shows emotional Meghan opening up about how royal life has been a "struggle", especially with being a new mum. She fights back tears, saying: "Look, any woman especially when they are pregnant you’re really vulnerable and so that was made really challenging, and then when you have a newborn – you know…
> _
> *'IT'S A STRUGGLE'*
> _"And especially as a woman, it’s a lot. So you add this on top of just trying to be a new mom or trying to be a newlywed it’s, well…
> "And, also thank you for asking, because not many people have asked if I’m OK. But it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes."
> Tom asks her directly if it is fair to say that it has been a struggle, and looking emotional, Meghan replies: "Yes."
> The hour-long documentary features interviews with the royal couple as well as an insight into their work, and how they’re balancing public and private life._


So gross. Is being a new mom hard for everyone, of course it is. But she cannot compare her experience to those less fortunate she has a whole staff devoted to caring for her child. 

I mean she is there giving speeches, going on trips, attending tennis matches while someone else watches her baby. She is given plenty of freedom to have a break from a young baby when lots of new moms will never have the opportunity.  It’s in poor taste to claim victimhood all the time. 

She needs to stop.


----------



## caramelize126

There are people in South Africa fearing for their lives. I’m not trying to undermine what mental health issues H&M might be going through, but this was absolutely not the time/place to be crying about their problems.



LittleStar88 said:


> I think their opinions are the only ones she should care about and the only ones which should matter to her.
> 
> Could it be less of "_no one is asking how I am feeling_" and more towards "n_o one is considering how this makes me feel_"? The intense spotlight and negativity towards her may not be something she was prepared for nor expected and probably not something she is emotionally equipped to handle.



I hate doing the comparisons between Meghan and Kate, but if you go back, IMO Kate had it a lot worse than Megs. Things started to settle down after Kate had kids but does anyone remember those videos of the crowds of paps waiting outside Kates work to get footage and running after her? Every single day. There was a photographer who said he was following Kate in the rain because he wanted footage of her falling. The awful things that they said about Kate’s family. And these awful things weren’t just from the press- They were from their upper crust circles too- both Will and Harry's friends. This was all around her. 

I don’t think Kate’s image really improved until after Meghan came into the picture and people either 1) saw the contrast between their behaviors and/or 2) found another target in Meghan. 

Meghan and Harry have cut off everyone who has any sort of criticism towards them. And we really don’t have paps following Meghan around in her every day life. I have yet to see her pap’d waking around in Windsor or going to the gym.  Meghan obviously has Harry who I think has tried to protect her. Kate didn’t seem to have that in Will.

I really think that Harry is somewhat to blame. He was either delusional in thinking that Meghan would be loved by all right off the bat or just didn’t tell her how this new role would change her life. Kate, Sophie, Fergie all went through this. The difference this that these women stepped back and decided to lay low when the coverage was bad. Meg’s and Harry’s method of trying to attract more attention is just going to backfire IMO.



mdcx said:


> The “not many people ask if I’m okay” statement was an attempt to throw Kate under the bus imo.
> I imagine K&W realised pretty quickly that M’s need for attention/validation/pity was endless and decided to put a boundary up.
> If I was Kate, it would be hard to trust Meghan and I imagine Kate gave it her best in the beginning in terms of trying to be a mentor and friend.
> 
> Some people’s identity is all about drama and being a victim and Meghan has realised that’s what gets her the most attention. She will never act again so this is her only outlet to get that need for attention met imo .
> 
> Obviously she could just quietly and modestly behave and do her job but I don’t think that is quite enough for her.





mrsinsyder said:


> I doubt Kate is checking on Megz after she leaked made up stories about Will having an affair.
> 
> *for anyone who’s gonna reply and say I’m wrong, you don’t know that she didn’t



Kate recently abruptly fired one of her top assistants- I think her name was Sophie? The rumors are that Sophie was leaking information and this was verified when W&K gave her fake info and saw that it was leaked. The rumors also say that she was leaking to Meghan. Whether or not this aspect is true, Idk. But I do believe the firing out of nowhere and supplying fake info trick ( that Will reportedly used to use when we was younger) was due to her leaking personal family issues.


----------



## caramelize126

Meh-gan said:


> So gross. Is being a new mom hard for everyone, of course it is. But she cannot compare her experience to those less fortunate she has a whole staff devoted to caring for her child.



This. And don’t forget she’s complaining about the struggles of being a newlywed.
The media is being very kind by not bringing up that this may be her 3rd go around. She should be used to “being a newlywed”.

*** before the flames start- Im referring to the stories  that the first marriage to Joe Giuliano was annulled.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Actors and actresses do require tons of attention to survive, so Meghan is no different. She never received bad press on Suits because very few people ever reported on her or Suits. This is really her first introduction to negative press, and she obviously cannot handle anything less than adoration. Maybe she'll get nominated for acting in the documentary.


----------



## chicaloca

caramelize126 said:


> This. And don’t forget she’s complaining about the struggles of being a newlywed.
> The media is being very kind by not bringing up that this is her 3rd go around. She should be used to “being a newlywed”.
> 
> *** before the flames start- I believe that the first marriage to Joe Giuliano that was annulled counts. Not gonna argue about this.




Perhaps the media - while flawed- is not dumb enough to report every conspiracy theory invented by the nutso Megxit Brigade on twitter and tumblr as truth.

Meghan has only married once. She has been thoroughly vetted by the media and royal family so any additional marriage would have been gleefully reported by all the tabloids who are happy to smear her.


----------



## chicaloca

Meghan’s clip really opened up a dialogue on women’s mental health in a way all the recent PSAs haven’t. Nearly every major publication around the world has run the clip because it resonates. Admitting that she’s not okay has opened a floodgate.

 I’ve seen so many social media posts from celebs and regular people alike applauding Meghan for admitting she’s not okay and not pretending to be some superwoman. A lot of women can relate to feeling adrift after pregnancy and not having anyone ask if they’re okay. That she was subject to so much media abuse both during an after her pregnancy was clearly very hard for Meghan. No wonder Harry decided to take action. 


I think the Royal family could do more to support Meghan. I saw an interview recently where a younger Harry spoke out against the media treatment of Kate. William who is supposedly a mental health and anti-bullying advocate  has been awfully quiet which makes me believe the royal reporters who flagged him as being behind the Meghan smear campaign.


Meghan shouldn’t have to remind people that she’s human and has feelings but I’m glad she did. It will be interesting to see how the UK media proceeds from here. Will the smears continue with the whole world watching?


----------



## mrsinsyder

caramelize126 said:


> This. And don’t forget she’s complaining about the struggles of being a newlywed.
> The media is being very kind by not bringing up that this may be her 3rd go around. She should be used to “being a newlywed”.
> 
> *** before the flames start- Im
> referring to the stories  that the first marriage to Joe Giuliano was annulled.


Oh you in danger girl


----------



## rose60610

caramelize126 said:


> This. And don’t forget she’s complaining about the struggles of being a newlywed.
> The media is being very kind by not bringing up that this may be her 3rd go around. She should be used to “being a newlywed”.
> 
> *** before the flames start- Im
> referring to the stories  that the first marriage to Joe Giuliano was annulled.



Great observation.


----------



## threadbender

Perpetual victim is not a good look.


----------



## caramelize126

chicaloca said:


> Perhaps the media - while flawed- is not dumb enough to report every conspiracy theory invented the nutso Megxit Brigade on twitter and tumblr as truth.
> 
> Meghan has only married once. She has been thoroughly vetted by the media and royal family so any additional marriage would have been gleefully reported by all the tabloids who are happy to smear her.



Actually these rumors were reported in the tabloids- at least in London. Its not hard to get records expunged- i know this because i have done it for myself ( not marriage related LOL but very easy process in the US!)

Given what stories H&M have decided to sue the press for ( one about parking and the other about a hacked phone from 10+ years ago) I'm inclined to believe that some of these stories are more true than we think. Its been widely reported that M and her team were handing out injunctions like candy to get the media to stop saying things they didnt want said. Injunctions are not the same as having someone stop due to libel.



mrsinsyder said:


> Oh you in danger girl



Just "shining a light"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Actors and actresses do require tons of attention to survive, so Meghan is no different. She never received bad press on Suits because very few people ever reported on her or Suits. This is really her first introduction to negative press, and she obviously cannot handle anything less than adoration. Maybe she'll get nominated for acting in the documentary.



To be fair, its probably also very difficult to have the postitive press and adoration and then have it taken away from you. Harry was very well liked and I think there was alot of great coverage for Megs when they were dating and first married

What H&M fail to recognize is that its their OWN behaviors that caused this shift. They shouldve stayed under the BRF's PR instead of going rogue.


----------



## zen1965

Both of them need a reality check. Alas, they won‘t get it.
Why would it be such a struggle to be newlywed? Isn‘t that one of the best times in your marriage?
This pity-me narrative is uncalled for and not becoming at all.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chicaloca said:


> Meghan’s clip really opened up a dialogue on women’s mental health in a way all the recent PSAs haven’t. Nearly every major publication around the world has run the clip because it resonates. Admitting that she’s not okay has opened a floodgate.
> 
> I’ve seen so many social media posts from celebs and regular people alike applauding Meghan for admitting she’s not okay and not pretending to be some superwoman. A lot of women can relate to feeling adrift after pregnancy and not having anyone ask if they’re okay. That she was subject to so much media abuse both during an after her pregnancy was clearly very hard for Meghan. No wonder Harry decided to take action.
> 
> 
> I think the Royal family could do more to support Meghan. I saw an interview recently where a younger Harry spoke out against the media treatment of Kate. William who is supposedly a mental health and anti-bullying advocate  has been awfully quiet which makes me believe the royal reporters who flagged him as being behind the Meghan smear campaign.
> 
> 
> Meghan shouldn’t have to remind people that she’s human and has feelings but I’m glad she did. It will be interesting to see how the UK media proceeds from here. Will the smears continue with the whole world watching?


This is precious. The entitled caring for the entitled 

It's not surprising the William/Kate angle is being abused. Because yes, this Sussex pity party film is not just to further paint the plebs as callous, racist bullies for not letting Meghan force her world changing woke supremacy on them, but also directly aimed at the Cambridges trying to make them responsible for this wholly unavoidable PR wreck the Sussexes have caused all by  themselves due to their own hubris and entitlement. It's quite pathetic.

Mothers, fathers and others are struggling through their day to day day after day all over the world and in most cases under far far less privileged circumstances than the Sussexes. She just has no shame. Neither does her hubby.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

rose60610 said:


> I have an idea!  (reaching for Sharpie)
> 
> Why don't all us H&M thread contributors sign and send an e-card to Duchess Meghan ASKING HER IF SHE'S OK?
> 
> Each of us could also tell her how much we care. There are a lot of us, so she'll no longer feel like she's all alone out there. We could convey all the heartfelt sentiments in this thread so she will no longer feel forgotten!


Like this?


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This is precious. The entitled caring for the entitled
> 
> It's not surprising the William/Kate angle is being abused. Because yes, this Sussex pity party film is not just to further paint the plebs as callous, racist bullies for not letting Meghan force her world changing woke supremacy on them, but also directly aimed at the Cambridges trying to make them responsible for this wholly unavoidable PR wreck the Sussexes have caused all by  themselves due to their own hubris and entitlement. It's quite pathetic.
> 
> Mothers, fathers and others are struggling through their day to day day after day all over the world and in most cases under far far less privileged circumstances than the Sussexes. She just has no shame. Neither does her hubby.


Really.  Imagine the adjustments Grace Kelly (who was truly a huge star) had to make becoming a princess in a country with a very different culture.  Of course there was no social media back then but anyway.....Boo hoo.  I don't even have an issue with the "woke" stuff; just don't want to hear her complaining about getting what she wanted.


----------



## threadbender

I think that if I believed all of this as being actual perceptions of their plight, I might have more empathy. But, I don't. Initially, I was all about being happy for Harry that he found someone to love and marry and so on.  I gave Meghan props for going into a whole new world for her husband.
As time passed, though, it seems it is more and more a theater production designed to convince the audience that these two lovers are fighting demons, side by side, but will prevail due to their "wokeness" or whatever. Some of the audience is not buying the story and thus, they attack the critics as boorish bigots and ignorant idiots. They need to revisit the script and make some changes. Or, the show will close with little fanfare.
I am bummed because I looked forward to watching this little family. A young woman, a young man and their baby, making a wonderful life for themselves. They have every advantage and seem to be squandering them.
Maybe it is time for the Queen to stage an intervention of sorts.
I really would love to see this turn around and see them happy and thriving. Not, miserable and whining.


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> This. And don’t forget she’s complaining about the struggles of being a newlywed.
> The media is being very kind by not bringing up that this may be her 3rd go around. She should be used to “being a newlywed”.
> 
> *** before the flames start- Im referring to the stories  that the first marriage to Joe Giuliano was annulled.


So she’s really been married 3 times?  Wow I thought that was just a rumour 



zen1965 said:


> Both of them need a reality check. Alas, they won‘t get it.
> Why would it be such a struggle to be newlywed? Isn‘t that one of the best times in your marriage?
> This pity-me narrative is uncalled for and not becoming at all.


It should be a very happy time   It is for most of us, and we have mortgages to worry about!  I wonder if Harry has ever seen an electricity bill, or had to remember to fill the car with petrol?  God help them when they get old and wrinkly.



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Like this?
> View attachment 4568906


Genius


----------



## rose60610

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Like this?
> View attachment 4568906



Priceless. Spot on perfection.


----------



## Clearblueskies

threadbender said:


> I think that if I believed all of this as being actual perceptions of their plight, I might have more empathy. But, I don't. Initially, I was all about being happy for Harry that he found someone to love and marry and so on.  I gave Meghan props for going into a whole new world for her husband.
> As time passed, though, it seems it is more and more a theater production designed to convince the audience that these two lovers are fighting demons, side by side, but will prevail due to their "wokeness" or whatever. Some of the audience is not buying the story and thus, they attack the critics as boorish bigots and ignorant idiots. They need to revisit the script and make some changes. Or, the show will close with little fanfare.
> I am bummed because I looked forward to watching this little family. A young woman, a young man and their baby, making a wonderful life for themselves. They have every advantage and seem to be squandering them.
> Maybe it is time for the Queen to stage an intervention of sorts.
> I really would love to see this turn around and see them happy and thriving. Not, miserable and whining.


They have whipped the drama and rhetoric up to such a pitch it’s hard to see how they can climb back down.  They need to take time out, and change their approach - mend fences etc, but for the life of me I can’t see Meghan being happy to spend a single second out of the headlines.  The pity thing won’t work in the UK.  Nobody’s going to buy poor me from a prince and his very expensively housed wifey.


----------



## Morgan R

Welltraveled! said:


> I get the point you're trying to make.  But I find your statement to be ignorant of racism in America; and it belittles the experiences of those who dealt with racism.  I find it interesting there are individuals who are more bothered or concern with the word racist/racism; and ignore the behaviors (and their actions) that define those words.  If anyone dislike Meghan because of her character so be it. However, I don't see a problem for anyone calling out racist/stereotypical comments or tweets.



I think it is quite valid that many people can see some underlining narratives (it would naive to act like some of the articles about Meghan don't have some underlining narratives) and people will call out/have called out the hypocrisy that there is when it comes to some articles written about Meghan vs. what is written about other members of the royal family. No one is saying Harry or Meghan are above criticism but some of the criticism I've seen over some of the smallest  things are baffling to me. I've read certain headlines before when it regards Harry and more so Meghan and just say to myself "this clearly is to get an reaction out of people". Many might not read the full article but just the headline along with a subheadline which are clearly made to "pack a punch" and clearly geared to make the reader come to a certain conclusion.

A lot of the stories about Meghan's so-called "behavior" are stories that have long been attached to many that have married into the royal family and now they are being attached to Meghan. The British Tabloids have long attached the narrative that anyone who marries (but especially the women that marry into the family) as "domineering", "determined", "angry", "rude", "bossy", "attention seeking", and/or more. Some people believe every story as fact while others don't...people see what they want to see and everybody can/will see everything differently. Like for me I've always felt there is this ongoing continuation of the same negative narrative by the British tabloids because they feel that is a way gain access to royals because clearly the royal family as a whole thrive off positive coverage (i.e gaining access to royals means these tabloid reporters can/have made money from royal biographies and become "experts" when it comes to giving commentary on royals/they will do this commentary on international news programs. In return they will give whatever royal some consistent positive coverage).

I have posted this before but I've always said it just goes to show you how consistent the British Tabloids are. They will try to diminish the character of the people who marry into the royal family (more specifically the women) and how it comes across as a way to gain access.

Quote I saw shared from some royal biography about Diana. It literally shows how consistent the narratives the British Tabloids push regarding the people who marry into the royal family. Diana was accused of spending to much money on clothes, being the reason for why staff had quit, and also accused of making Charles abandon his friends/change his eating habits/change his wardrobe. These are all the same things Meghan has been accused of doing when it comes to the British Tabloids who have kept complaining about how they haven't had access to Meghan beyond the covering of engagements (Worth  mentioning it is now public knowledge that Diana would later "court" the press/allow them access to her in an attempt to change the coverage of what the tabloids said about her) :




Diana was even asked about those rumors that were constantly a narrative pushed by the press which constantly said she was "domineering", "determined", and "was trying to change Charles":


----------



## sdkitty

Morgan R said:


> I think it is quite valid that many people can see some underlining narratives (it would naive to act like some of the articles about Meghan don't have some underlining narratives) and people will call out/have called out the hypocrisy that there is when it comes to some articles written about Meghan vs. what is written about other members of the royal family. No one is saying Harry or Meghan are above criticism but some of the criticism I've seen over some of the smallest  things are baffling to me. I've read certain headlines before when it regards Harry and more so Meghan and just say to myself "this clearly is to get an reaction out of people". Many might not read the full article but just the headline along with a subheadline which are clearly made to "pack a punch" and clearly geared to make the reader come to a certain conclusion.
> 
> A lot of the stories about Meghan's so-called "behavior" are stories that have long been attached to many that have married into the royal family and now they are being attached to Meghan. The British Tabloids have long attached the narrative that anyone who marries (but especially the women that marry into the family) as "domineering", "determined", "angry", "rude", "bossy", "attention seeking", and/or more. Some people believe every story as fact while others don't...people see what they want to see and everybody can/will see everything differently. Like for me I've always felt there is this ongoing continuation of the same negative narrative by the British tabloids because they feel that is a way gain access to royals because clearly the royal family as a whole thrive off positive coverage (i.e gaining access to royals means these tabloid reporters can/have made money from royal biographies and become "experts" when it comes to giving commentary on royals/they will do this commentary on international news programs. In return they will give whatever royal some consistent positive coverage).
> 
> I have posted this before but I've always said it just goes to show you how consistent the British Tabloids are. They will try to diminish the character of the people who marry into the royal family (more specifically the women) and how it comes across as a way to gain access.
> 
> Quote I saw shared from some royal biography about Diana. It literally shows how consistent the narratives the British Tabloids push regarding the people who marry into the royal family. Diana was accused of spending to much money on clothes, being the reason for why staff had quit, and also accused of making Charles abandon his friends/change his eating habits/change his wardrobe. These are all the same things Meghan has been accused of doing when it comes to the British Tabloids who have kept complaining about how they haven't had access to Meghan beyond the covering of engagements (Worth  mentioning it is now public knowledge that Diana would later "court" the press/allow them access to her in an attempt to change the coverage of what the tabloids said about her) :
> 
> View attachment 4568497
> 
> 
> Diana was even asked about those rumors that were constantly a narrative pushed by the press which constantly said she was "domineering", "determined", and "was trying to change Charles":



This may all be correct but still doesn't justify her and Harry whining about how hard their life is IMO


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> Genius





rose60610 said:


> Priceless. Spot on perfection.


Thank you, dears, but credit for the original and I agree genius idea must go to L* B* on "the other forum". I just added a touch of calligraphy


----------



## mrsinsyder

Why is the royal family responsible for protecting Meghan when she threw her dad to the press wolves without a second thought? Is one person more deserving of certain treatment than another? That’s not very “kind.”


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> This may all be correct but still doesn't justify her and Harry whining about how hard their life is IMO


Since the British press was consistent, they should have been prepared. Ride it out. Play it smart.


----------



## Meh-gan

chicaloca said:


> Meghan’s clip really opened up a dialogue on women’s mental health in a way all the recent PSAs haven’t. Nearly every major publication around the world has run the clip because it resonates. Admitting that she’s not okay has opened a floodgate.
> 
> I’ve seen so many social media posts from celebs and regular people alike applauding Meghan for admitting she’s not okay and not pretending to be some superwoman. A lot of women can relate to feeling adrift after pregnancy and not having anyone ask if they’re okay. That she was subject to so much media abuse both during an after her pregnancy was clearly very hard for Meghan. No wonder Harry decided to take action.
> 
> 
> I think the Royal family could do more to support Meghan. I saw an interview recently where a younger Harry spoke out against the media treatment of Kate. William who is supposedly a mental health and anti-bullying advocate  has been awfully quiet which makes me believe the royal reporters who flagged him as being behind the Meghan smear campaign.
> 
> 
> Meghan shouldn’t have to remind people that she’s human and has feelings but I’m glad she did. It will be interesting to see how the UK media proceeds from here. Will the smears continue with the whole world watching?


 
The attention she knew she would get is why she is talking about it. She knew she would be applauded for talking about her “struggles” by her celeb friends and insta followers. Playing up her victim hood is her whole thing. And you are playing right into it. 

Omg! Very brave! Much honesty. She had the courage to speak up about it etc etc etc. She speaks up about her woke agenda constantly she has NO issues speaking up ever. This was yet another calculated move.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meh-gan said:


> The attention she knew she would get is why she is talking about it. She knew she would be applauded for talking about her “struggles” by her celeb friends and insta followers. Playing up her victim hood is her whole thing. And you are playing right into it.
> 
> Omg! Very brave! Much honesty. She had the courage to speak up about it etc etc etc. She speaks up about her woke agenda constantly she has NO issues speaking up ever. This was yet another calculated move.


Classic narcissist moves.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> This may all be correct but still doesn't justify her and Harry whining about how hard their life is IMO





Gracilan said:


> Go on convincing yourselves.


Of what?


----------



## hellosunshine

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Like this?
> View attachment 4568906



My opinion, but I think this is not very nice. I'm not policing anyone here (that's for the moderators and Vlad to deal with) but I sincerely wish that WE could do without the mocking nicknames (Soho Spice, Woke & Joke, etc) and any other rather petty commentary that makes this thread lack any sort of civility.


----------



## jehaga

Why would anyone hate or envy someone who is so pathetic?


----------



## mrsinsyder

jehaga said:


> Why would anyone hate or envy someone who is so pathetic?


Some people think that being rich and famous is enough to make others jealous. To be honest I wouldn’t want any part of M2’s life and do not envy her in the least.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Some people think that being rich and famous is enough to make others jealous. To be honest I wouldn’t want any part of M2’s life and do not envy her in the least.


I couldn't do it either - but I wouldn't mind the cooper tub 
what is M2 reference?


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I couldn't do it either - but I wouldn't mind the cooper tub
> what is M2 reference?


MM


----------



## Jayne1

Is Meg saying that her friends (Jess, Misha Nonoo, Priyanka Chopra, Markus Anderson, Serena Williams and so on) aren't asking about her happiness and well being? What about Oprah and Gail and Amal?  Her mother?

Is she saying her friends don't care?

Who does she want to ask her if she's okay?  Strangers?  The media? Her Insta followers? The Queen?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Is Meg saying that her friends (Jess, Misha Nonoo, Priyanka Chopra, Markus Anderson, Serena Williams and so on) aren't asking about her happiness and well being? What about Oprah and Gail and Amal?  Her mother?
> 
> Is she saying her friends don't care?
> 
> Who does she want to ask her if she's okay?  Strangers?  The media? Her Insta followers? The Queen?


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> Perpetual victim is not a good look.



She needs to decide once and for all which one of her personas she wants to portray publicly. Is she the strong, empowered woman who offers encouragement to all those poor women who are trod upon in the world? Or is she the frail, sad woman who cannot bear to be criticized in the media and who needs her man (a prince, no less) to protect her by filing lawsuits on her behalf rather than sticking up for herself? Because she’s really sending mixed signals about who she actually is.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> My opinion, but I think this is not very nice. I'm not policing anyone here (that's for the moderators and Vlad to deal with) but I sincerely wish that WE could do without the mocking nicknames (Soho Spice, Woke & Joke, etc) and any other rather petty commentary that makes this thread lack any sort of civility.


But, by virtue of what you are saying here, you are in fact .. somewhat "policing".  If it bothers you, then just put the individual(s) on IGNORE!


----------



## sdkitty

I just saw the video of her "poor me-ing" on TV.  Really?  If you're gonna complain about how not enough people are asking about your well-being, you could at least add a caveat that you realize how fortunate you are and that there are MANY people in the world who are really suffering.

This is the behavior of a woke person?

but apparently she succeeded in getting a lot of sympathy on social media.  good job


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I just saw the video of her "poor me-ing" on TV.  Really?  If you're gonna complain about how not enough people are asking about your well-being, l you could at least add a caveat that you realize how fortunate you are and that there are MANY people in the world who are really suffering.
> 
> This is the behavior of a woke person?
> 
> but apparently she succeeded in getting a lot of sympathy on social media.  good job


It depends on where you look; the comments on the Daily Fail were not at all favorable to her ..


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> She needs to decide once and for all which one of her personas she wants to portray publicly. Is she the strong, empowered woman who offers encouragement to all those poor women who are trod upon in the world? Or is she the frail, sad woman who cannot bear to be criticized in the media and who needs her man (a prince, no less) to protect her by filing lawsuits on her behalf rather than sticking up for herself? Because she’s really sending mixed signals about who she actually is.


She’s the centre of attention.  I think that’s all that matters to her.


----------



## Chagall

You would think with a new marriage, a new baby and important things like her charity work she would be too busy for all this nonsense. Why is she so hyper aware of everyone’s opinion of her. She frankly shouldn’t care. Her priorities are not even slightly in order.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> You would think with a new marriage, a new baby and important things like her charity work she would be too busy for all this nonsense. Why is she so hyper aware of everyone’s opinion of her. She frankly shouldn’t care. Her priorities are not even slightly in order.


Especially for someone who says she doesn’t read anything about herself, only business magazines


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Especially for someone who says she doesn’t read anything about herself, only business magazines


Yea right. And I’ve got some swamp land in Florida I’d like to sell you.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> ​Yea right. And I’ve got some swamp land in Florida I’d like to sell you.


Only if there’s a Soho House there.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Only if there’s a Soho House there.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> You would think with a new marriage, a new baby and important things like her charity work she would be too busy for all this nonsense. Why is she so hyper aware of everyone’s opinion of her. She frankly shouldn’t care. Her priorities are not even slightly in order.


I agree 100%; frankly .. she's starting to resemble her father re: seeking constant attention!  For someone who supposedly is so smart, did she honestly think that marrying into the BRF was going to be easy?  I think it would behoove the 2 of them take a break from the media and concentrate on themselves and their adorable little boy!


----------



## Meh-gan

chicaloca said:


> Meghan’s clip really opened up a dialogue on women’s mental health in a way all the recent PSAs haven’t. Nearly every major publication around the world has run the clip because it resonates. Admitting that she’s not okay has opened a floodgate.
> 
> I’ve seen so many social media posts from celebs and regular people alike applauding Meghan for admitting she’s not okay and not pretending to be some superwoman. A lot of women can relate to feeling adrift after pregnancy and not having anyone ask if they’re okay. That she was subject to so much media abuse both during an after her pregnancy was clearly very hard for Meghan. No wonder Harry decided to take action.
> 
> 
> I think the Royal family could do more to support Meghan. I saw an interview recently where a younger Harry spoke out against the media treatment of Kate. William who is supposedly a mental health and anti-bullying advocate  has been awfully quiet which makes me believe the royal reporters who flagged him as being behind the Meghan smear campaign.
> 
> 
> Meghan shouldn’t have to remind people that she’s human and has feelings but I’m glad she did. It will be interesting to see how the UK media proceeds from here. Will the smears continue with the whole world watching?



Also, isn’t the Tom Bradby guy their friend and part of developing the documentary? Him asking this question was totally set up as was her reaction and response. It was a dramatic scene the two of them planned in advance - they probably wrote the dialogue as well in advance. 

The woman is almost 40 years old and acting like a hot mess with wrinkly wardrobe to match.


----------



## Lounorada

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Actors and actresses do require tons of attention to survive, so Meghan is no different. She never received bad press on Suits because very few people ever reported on her or Suits. This is really her first introduction to negative press, and she obviously cannot handle anything less than adoration. *Maybe she'll get nominated for acting in the documentary*.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> It depends on where you look; the comments on the Daily Fail were not at all favorable to her ..


well I hope she reads some critical comments and realizes what a fool she has made of herself.  There are people in other parts of the world being driven from their homes, starving, dying (not to mention poor people in Great Britain).  And she's complaining she has to put up with some criticism while she lives in luxury with servants at her beck and call?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> well I hope she reads some critical comments and realizes what a fool she has made of herself.  There are people in other parts of the world being driven from their homes, starving, dying (not to mention poor people in Great Britain).  And she's complaining she has to put up with some criticism while she lives in luxury with servants at her beck and call?


EXACTLY!!!!  Heck, I doubt very much that they saw the truly gritty parts of South Africa .. yes, they likely heard the stories, etc., so one would think that after a trip like that and hearing those stories, they would both be a little more contrite .. honestly, I just don't get the two of them right now.  I was very happy initially to hear the news of their engagement (_even though, I must admit I had no idea who Meghan was - never watched Suits_), watched the wedding .. truly had hopes for the 2 of them .. but now, not so much.  As I've said before, they should both take a big step back and re-assess .. take care of Archie and (maybe) listen to sound advice from those more in the know (media-wise).


----------



## Lounorada

threadbender said:


> Perpetual victim is not a good look.


This.

My opinion of these two has deteriorated rapidly since they got married because of their huge joint ego, shady shenanigans and constant 'woe is me'/ we have had it so much worse than everyone else' behaviour and I don't voice my opinions about them on here usually as it seems to be forbidden to be less than positive about them, but i'm gonna make a point-
I read a comment by someone today on another forum whcih rang so true to me, where they said you don't really know what narcissism is really like until you experience the behaviour of a narcissist in your own life. So damn true.

A few years ago I had come to realise my now ex-boss was an extreme narcissist. There were many bad elements to her as a person, but one of the stand-out things about her was the perpetual victim act. If she made a bad decision, failed at something, an idea of hers wasn't successful, someone said something (true) about her that she didn't like etc. she'd always try and blame someone else or twist the truth to play the victim to the point where you kept thinking 'how does she even think people believe this crap, it's her own fault?!'
Because of being witness to her crap on a daily basis for 3 years, it's much easier for me to identify a narcissistic person and playing a 'perpetual victim' screams of narcissistic behaviour to me and the second I heard Meghan say those words in the interview clip 'thank you for asking because not many people have asked if i'm ok', I didn't feel an ounce of sympathy for her performace and I knew I was right to guess that she could be a narcissist. I had heard my ex-boss utter those almost identical words a few times when she was seeking sympathy, and got it, for one of her (many) ridiculous victimized dramas. She was exhausting to be around and this whole spectacle is equally exhausting to watch.
Right now, the best thing would be for H&M to disappear out of sight for a while, stop talking, actually listen to the good advice of royal staff on how to do things and stop reading articles and comments about themselves online, but none of that will happen because their huge joint ego won't let it.
Attention, glowing commentary about them and sympathy is life for them... how could anyone not give them all three constantly?

Sorry for the extended paragraph, I usually scroll past these long posts!
Aaaand I'm out of here...


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> This.
> 
> My opinion of these two has deteriorated rapidly since they got married because of their huge joint ego, shady shenanigans and constant 'woe is me'/ we have had it so much worse than everyone else' behaviour and I don't voice my opinions about them on here usually as it seems to be forbidden to be less than positive about them, but i'm gonna make a point-
> I read a comment by someone today on another forum whcih rang so true to me, where they said you don't really know what narcissism is really like until you experience the behaviour of a narcissist in your own life. So damn true.
> 
> A few years ago I had come to realise my now ex-boss was an extreme narcissist. There were many bad elements to her as a person, but one of the stand-out things about her was the perpetual victim act. If she made a bad decision, failed at something, an idea of hers wasn't successful, someone said something (true) about her that she didn't like etc. she'd always try and blame someone else or twist the truth to play the victim to the point where you kept thinking 'how does she even think people believe this crap, it's her own fault?!'
> Because of being witness to her crap on a daily basis for 3 years, it's much easier for me to identify a narcissistic person and playing a 'perpetual victim' screams of narcissistic behaviour to me and the second I heard Meghan say those words in the interview clip 'thank you for asking because not many people have asked if i'm ok', I didn't feel an ounce of sympathy for her performace and I knew I was right to guess that she could be a narcissist. I had heard my ex-boss utter those almost identical words a few times when she was seeking sympathy, and got it, for one of her (many) ridiculous victimized dramas. She was exhausting to be around and this whole spectacle is equally exhausting to watch.
> Right now, the best thing would be for H&M to disappear out of sight for a while, stop talking, actually listen to the good advice of royal staff on how to do things and stop reading articles and comments about themselves online, but none of that will happen because their huge joint ego won't let it.
> Attention, glowing commentary about them and sympathy is life for them... how could anyone not give them all three constantly?
> 
> Sorry for the extended paragraph, I usually scroll past these long posts!
> Aaaand I'm out of here...


Pretty much the same thing I said before; she is resembling her father .. "woe is me" and everyone was saying he's a classic narcissist .. well, blood is thicker than water!!


----------



## CeeJay

Gee .. do 'ya think that they could be reading our comments on TPF?!?!   
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eghan-Markle-plan-six-weeks-royal-duties.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Gee .. do 'ya think that they could be reading our comments on TPF?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eghan-Markle-plan-six-weeks-royal-duties.html


Byeeeeeeeee


----------



## mrsinsyder

But really... did those ten days of work exhaust them so much they need six weeks off? Wow. And the stans say they work soooo hard


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Gee .. do 'ya think that they could be reading our comments on TPF?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eghan-Markle-plan-six-weeks-royal-duties.html



Ooooo! Daily Mail slipped this little nugget in there. I wonder if it’s true Meghan and Harry are coming to LA.

“It is understood they will fly to Los Angeles next month to spend the Thanksgiving holiday with Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland.“


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Ooooo! Daily Mail slipped this little nugget in there. I wonder if it’s true Meghan and Harry are coming to LA.
> 
> “It is understood they will fly to Los Angeles next month to spend the Thanksgiving holiday with Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland.“


I can’t. She’s gonna be pap strolling her little heart out.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Ooooo! Daily Mail slipped this little nugget in there. I wonder if it’s true Meghan and Harry are coming to LA.
> 
> “It is understood they will fly to Los Angeles next month to spend the Thanksgiving holiday with Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland.“


Yeah, good luck with the papparazzi out here in LA!!!!  Harry will probably want to rush back to the UK after an episode with these folks and their swarm mentality!


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m shocked to see that apparently M2 said they are “existing and not living” in this documentary.
So existing includes:

$90,000 gowns
Private jets for vacation and flying across the ocean for a tennis match
Staying with Elton John
Flying your range rovers to another continent with you
Going to movie premieres
And so on
I wonder how all the people with terminal illness or in refugee camps or who are homeless or who struggle to make ends meet would feel to read that.

link to article that is so cringeworthy it’s not even worth copying: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ry-shows-they-can-only-take-so-much-06bg2ml7c


----------



## threadbender

I was talking to a friend of mine today. I literally asked her if she was OK. You see, she was diagnosed with breast cancer last week and is scheduled for surgery this week. Yeah, I am her friend and I care about her so, I asked. Just a little perspective.

ETA Sorry for going OT and I understand if my post is removed.


----------



## Lodpah

https://www.google.com/amp/s/harrym...ding-partially-responsible-for-this-mess/amp/

Pics say it best.


----------



## hellosunshine

I, sometimes wonder when people go off and list all these “expenses” relating to Meghan and Harry..do you ever pause to think whether other royals have engaged in similar things in the past or are we applying some weird tally to only them.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> I, sometimes wonder when people go off and list all these “expenses” relating to Meghan and Harry..do you ever pause to think whether other royals have engaged in similar things in the past or are we applying some weird tally to only them.


We’re talking about Meghan and Harry because that’s who the thread is about. There are other threads for other royals if you’d like to discuss them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

She looks like a sweetheart here.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> We’re talking about Meghan and Harry because that’s who the thread is about. There are other threads for other royals if you’d like to discuss them.



The Queen, Kate, William, and other members of the royal family are frequently brought up by others in this thread when it's convenient to their narrative yet when it doesn't exactly fit a perceived train of thought..we're told "This is a Meghan & Harry thread". Well....it'd be great if others followed this _supposed_ rule.


----------



## mrsinsyder

They all spend stupid amounts of money on stupid wasteful things. Yet, they don’t all complain that they’re persecuted and “only existing.” 

Good enough?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> They all spend stupid amounts of money on stupid wasteful things. *Yet, they don’t all complain that they’re persecuted and “only existing.” *



What does this even mean?


----------



## Lodpah

This is crazy. It's like the stans who give money to Kylie Jenner to get her to billionaire status quick, or the people who donate to Kanye West. I see homeless people every day, I mean Meghan just went to Africa and saw or maybe did not see poverty at it is worse and she compares her suffering with them? Meghan is her wildest nightmare as a royal will not even experience the suffering of the people she supposedly supports. All she does is give them platitudes. That is all she gives them.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## jehaga

hellosunshine said:


> What does this even mean?


This means that ALL royalty in this day and age are mere frivolity and exist purely by the good graces of their people. So, IMHO, MM should never be complaining PUBLICLY as she is now “royalty.” To do so is disgraceful and crass.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> I, sometimes wonder when people go off and list all these “expenses” relating to Meghan and Harry..do you ever pause to think whether other royals have engaged in similar things in the past or are we applying some weird tally to only them.



Because we don't see or hear the other royals going on national television complaining about how hard their lives are. They said they were "existing but not living". They have really gone off the deep end if they think a prince and princess complaining about how hard life is and how mean people are is going to gain them any sympathy.

Why do the same videos keep getting posted over and over again? Is it just to show the different tweets?


----------



## mrsinsyder

caramelize126 said:


> Why do the same videos keep getting posted over and over again? Is it just to show the different tweets?


I was wondering the same thing.


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> Why do the same videos keep getting posted over and over again? Is it just to show the different tweets?


Post 'em while you can.  When that "existing not living" **** hits the papers, a lot of that sympathy is going to dry right up.


----------



## threadbender

Well, the folks on twitter certainly worship them so, guess the strategy is working. Some tweets made  me queasy. lol


----------



## caramelize126

Lodpah said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/harrym...ding-partially-responsible-for-this-mess/amp/
> 
> Pics say it best.



Thanks for this!! So many gems on this site


----------



## hellosunshine

jehaga said:


> So, IMHO, MM should never be complaining PUBLICLY as she is now “royalty.” To do so is disgraceful and crass.



I disagree. Royals can and have complained publicly before. There's nothing disgraceful nor crass about it.

Btw, royalty doesn't need to be in quotations..she is a part of the royal family.



caramelize126 said:


> Why do the same videos keep getting posted over and over again? Is it just to show the different tweets?



The commentary within the tweets are different. One of them is a Anti-Bullying Campaign that was established in the memory of Diana, Princess of Wales.



Flatsy said:


> Post 'em while you can.  When that "existing not living" **** hits the papers, a lot of that sympathy is going to dry right up.



It'll dry up for those that already had little sympathy for Meghan but it's fine because she's got her army of supporters.


----------



## Welltraveled!

The statement in general doesn’t mean material items.  It usually refers to well-being, inner peace, fulfillment in life, self-reflection.

I hear people from all walks of life make that statement.  





mrsinsyder said:


> I’m shocked to see that apparently M2 said they are “existing and not living” in this documentary.
> So existing includes:
> 
> $90,000 gowns
> Private jets for vacation and flying across the ocean for a tennis match
> Staying with Elton John
> Flying your range rovers to another continent with you
> Going to movie premieres
> And so on
> I wonder how all the people with terminal illness or in refugee camps or who are homeless or who struggle to make ends meet would feel to read that.
> 
> link to article that is so cringeworthy it’s not even worth copying: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ry-shows-they-can-only-take-so-much-06bg2ml7c


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Gee .. do 'ya think that they could be reading our comments on TPF?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eghan-Markle-plan-six-weeks-royal-duties.html


Maybe an intensive therapy program at one of the luxury treatment centers like Resilience in West LA?  Small luxury facility and does family therapy.  Sounds perfect.  Apparently narcissistic personality disorder, trauma and stress disorders  and postpartum depression are on the list of treated issues there.  Sounds perfect and they can spend Thanksgiving with Doria.


----------



## hellosunshine

As I've said earlier this week, I do believe there will be an announcement of some sort in regards to Meghan and Harry leaving the Royal Family. The article below, somewhat affirms my suspicions...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a69b74d6-f1ea-11e9-836f-5a5fc3a0e5a5

We shall see but I, for one am very supportive of that decision.


----------



## marthastoo

Meh-gan said:


> Here is an article about him liking her character:
> 
> https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.gra.../news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-ideal-woman/
> 
> Sources say he watched Suits and his ideal woman was her Rachel character. I mean I think we can all agree their engagement interview was not all genuine and was carefully orchestrated etc but legit both of them denying they knew of each other is so lame lol


That "article" was laughable.   Tabloids print ridiculous crap based on conversations with "sources" and people believe it,  line, hook and sinker.  I particularly like how those who like to disparage Meghan's acting roles call her a D- lister one step away from waiting catering gigs believe that Prince Harry obsessively watched this same obscure American cable show that no one watched and dreamed up his perfect mate on Meghan's character.  Lololol


----------



## Welltraveled!

Your comment was a little all over the place.  Are you trying to say the rich/privileged shouldn’t complain about their lot in life? 

I may be wrong, but I haven’t seen anything suggesting that she compared her suffering to theirs. 



Lodpah said:


> This is crazy. It's like the stans who give money to Kylie Jenner to get her to billionaire status quick, or the people who donate to Kanye West. I see homeless people every day, I mean Meghan just went to Africa and saw or maybe did not see poverty at it is worse and she compares her suffering with them? Meghan is her wildest nightmare as a royal will not even experience the suffering of the people she supposedly supports. All she does is give them platitudes. That is all she gives them.


----------



## marthastoo

It's kind of funny because I was thinking a couple of weeks ago about the viciousness on this thread and Meghan's mental state. While I have not had it,  many of my friends have suffered from  post partum depression. I couldn't even imagine having that and reading the vitriol that's out there. Not saying Meghan has it,  but even if she didn't, it takes an incredibly strong person to shrug hate like this off.  I know about 30 people will jump on this comment and say Meghan signed up for this,  etc. but I disagree.  Marrying a public figure and member of the royal family does not mean you deserve the off the charts animosity she has been receiving.  While some may say she caused all hate directed toward get, I simply disagree. There's been downright unhinged comments and theories about her that began on day one - before day one, actually.


----------



## mdcx

Interesting comment on the Daily Mail. Wonder if there is any truth in this:
	

		
			
		

		
	




ETA This conversation with Meghan's former BFF touches on the above rumour as well imo:
‘The way she handled it, Trevor definitely had the rug pulled out from under him. He was hurt.’

Meghan reportedly began dating dashing celebrity chef Cory Vitiello who also lives in Toronto, in 2014, a few months after her separation from Trevor.

‘I tried to get details from her, but she wouldn’t tell me. *What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan.* I think everybody who knew them both was in shock.
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threa...y-childhood-friend-and-maid-of-honor.1340234/​


----------



## LiquoriceNeroli

marthastoo said:


> That "article" was laughable.   Tabloids print ridiculous crap based on conversations with "sources" and people believe it,  line, hook and sinker.  I particularly like how those who like to disparage Meghan's acting roles call her a D- lister one step away from waiting catering gigs believe that Prince Harry obsessively watched this same obscure American cable show that no one watched and dreamed up his perfect mate on Meghan's character.  Lololol



I disagree that no one was watching that Suits series. It can considered as a "minor" series, but we can't say no one was watching it. I remember some French colleagues watching it in 2012 ! But obviously, it was nowhere as famous as Game of Thrones (which would be absolutely a red light for any actress wanting to join the BRF !). 

In regards to the crap of the tabloids, well I say it is the lot of glossy magazines in general. And not only Meghan is concerned by articles heard on the grapevine. Even politics article are sometimes made of rumors. 
But "studying" the case of Harry and Meghan, and in general the BRF, makes us reflect on the "fourth power" and what the PR campaigns are made of.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> This.
> 
> My opinion of these two has deteriorated rapidly since they got married because of their huge joint ego, shady shenanigans and constant 'woe is me'/ we have had it so much worse than everyone else' behaviour and I don't voice my opinions about them on here usually as it seems to be forbidden to be less than positive about them, but i'm gonna make a point-
> I read a comment by someone today on another forum whcih rang so true to me, where they said you don't really know what narcissism is really like until you experience the behaviour of a narcissist in your own life. So damn true.
> 
> A few years ago I had come to realise my now ex-boss was an extreme narcissist. There were many bad elements to her as a person, but one of the stand-out things about her was the perpetual victim act. If she made a bad decision, failed at something, an idea of hers wasn't successful, someone said something (true) about her that she didn't like etc. she'd always try and blame someone else or twist the truth to play the victim to the point where you kept thinking 'how does she even think people believe this crap, it's her own fault?!'
> Because of being witness to her crap on a daily basis for 3 years, it's much easier for me to identify a narcissistic person and playing a 'perpetual victim' screams of narcissistic behaviour to me and the second I heard Meghan say those words in the interview clip 'thank you for asking because not many people have asked if i'm ok', I didn't feel an ounce of sympathy for her performace and I knew I was right to guess that she could be a narcissist. I had heard my ex-boss utter those almost identical words a few times when she was seeking sympathy, and got it, for one of her (many) ridiculous victimized dramas. She was exhausting to be around and this whole spectacle is equally exhausting to watch.
> Right now, the best thing would be for H&M to disappear out of sight for a while, stop talking, actually listen to the good advice of royal staff on how to do things and stop reading articles and comments about themselves online, but none of that will happen because their huge joint ego won't let it.
> Attention, glowing commentary about them and sympathy is life for them... how could anyone not give them all three constantly?
> 
> Sorry for the extended paragraph, I usually scroll past these long posts!


You’re so right about this.  I’ve had experience of a narcissist in my immediate family.  It attunes your senses somehow, and I can spot the behaviour very quickly as a consequence of that experience.  I think Meghan is displaying many narcissistic behaviours. 



hellosunshine said:


> it's fine because she's got her army of supporters.


She had a huge wave of support at the time of her marriage.  It’s her behaviour since that time that’s causing all her problems.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shoesanddresses

hellosunshine said:


> I, sometimes wonder when people go off and list all these “expenses” relating to Meghan and Harry..do you ever pause to think whether other royals have engaged in similar things in the past or are we applying some weird tally to only them.



I don't see any of the other royals going on about how hard they have it though, I think that's the issue here.


----------



## jehaga

Lodpah said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/harrym...ding-partially-responsible-for-this-mess/amp/
> 
> Pics say it best.


Thank you! Very interesting blog!


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

hellosunshine said:


> I disagree. Royals can and have complained publicly before. There's nothing disgraceful nor crass about it.
> Btw, royalty doesn't need to be in quotations..she is a part of the royal family.
> The commentary within the tweets are different. One of them is a Anti-Bullying Campaign that was established in the memory of Diana, Princess of Wales.
> t'll dry up for those that already had little sympathy for Meghan but it's fine because she's got her army of supporters.



All of this. And, I really don't get why people feel the need to jump on her and belittle and downplay her own feelings on her own experience. Meghan says she is unhappy, why can't people just accept it, instead of shrieking 'how dare she say she's unhappy??!!?!' Why not just accept it and move on instead of vilifying her even more? No one here has had her experience, so it's not really fair to downplay it. Disclaimer: yes I know this is a 'gossip and opinion' thread, but all I'm saying is a little understanding, for anyone in any position, isn't a bad thing.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> While I have not had it, many of my friends have suffered from post partum depression. I couldn't even imagine having that and reading the vitriol that's out there.


I considered that Meghan might have postpartum depression because the other things she's now quoted as saying in the documentary are way, way out of proportion to her situation.  If a near-newlywed with a healthy new baby and a new house and a private jet whisking her around to luxury vacation spots thinks she is only "existing not living" and that she's not sure she can cope with her life, that would indicate major depression.  This "vitriol" does not cause that.

But then why is Harry mirroring her?  Why is he wallowing in it with her?  Postpartum depression is something you treat.  If they were saying that Meghan's dealing with some postpartum depression and needs everyone to back off of her for a while, that's very different than the two of them acting like life in general is utterly miserable.  They are just sounding insanely spoiled and narcissistic.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m wondering if the six week hiatus may be for someone to go into treatment. Señora Soho has a public appearance on 10/22, so it may not even be true at all.


----------



## buffym

Shoesanddresses said:


> I don't see any of the other royals going on about how hard they have it though, I think that's the issue here.



Other royals have talked about their struggles.

Kate for instance 





William when he sued the tabloids


----------



## chicaloca

Lodpah said:


> This is crazy. It's like the stans who give money to Kylie Jenner to get her to billionaire status quick, or the people who donate to Kanye West. I see homeless people every day, I mean Meghan just went to Africa and saw or maybe did not see poverty at it is worse and she compares her suffering with them? Meghan is her wildest nightmare as a royal will not even experience the suffering of the people she supposedly supports. All she does is give them platitudes. That is all she gives them.



This line of thinking is beyond insensitive not to mention rather ignorant.

It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. You can be empathetic to the plight others while simultaneously dealing with your own problems. The idea that none of us can react to
anything going on in our own lives as long as someone else has it worse is ludicrous. By this measure no one would ever be able to emote or express anything other than happiness without condemnation because there is always someone worse off than you.

Also are people really still under the illusion that material wealth equates to happiness and positive mental health?  Wealthy people commit suicide every day. Material wealth is not going to ease the pain of being publicly bullied and harassed for nearly 3 years straight. Wealth also would not insulate someone from developing mental illness or postpartum depression.


----------



## chicaloca

buffym said:


> Other royals have talked about their struggles.
> 
> Kate for instance
> 
> View attachment 4569548
> View attachment 4569549
> 
> 
> William when he sued the tabloids
> 
> View attachment 4569550




This is a consistent issue I see with people’s treatment of Meghan. They instantly  condemn her for doing things that other royals before her have done. It only reveals their hypocrisy and unconscious bias.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree.  I think people forgot or choose to forget that there isn’t a price tag on your mental well being.   And no one can tell you what your triggers are.

That’s why I applaud William and Harry for discussing their tragedy in life and how it affected them mentally.

 I have read statements where people said they should get over the death of their mother.  

Sad.



Babydoll Chanel said:


> All of this. And, I really don't get why people feel the need to jump on her and belittle and downplay her own feelings on her own experience. Meghan says she is unhappy, why can't people just accept it, instead of shrieking 'how dare she say she's unhappy??!!?!' Why not just accept it and move on instead of vilifying her even more? No one here has had her experience, so it's not really fair to downplay it. Disclaimer: yes I know this is a 'gossip and opinion' thread, but all I'm saying is a little understanding, for anyone in any position, isn't a bad thing.


----------



## chicaloca

jehaga said:


> This means that ALL royalty in this day and age are mere frivolity and exist purely by the good graces of their people. So, IMHO, MM should never be complaining PUBLICLY as she is now “royalty.” To do so is disgraceful and crass.



I guess prince Charles and the Cambridges  are disgraceful and crass since they have publicly complained. Meghan apparently has good company.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> I guess prince Charles and the Cambridges are disgraceful and crass since they have publicly complained. Meghan apparently has good company.


Harry's "complained"/discussed his problems in public many times before too and has always been applauded for it.

This media blitz and lawsuit frenzy is unprecedented.  Taking over an entire one-hour televised documentary to cry and tell the world that their life is unbearable is also unprecedented.  Unless you count Diana clearing the air after the divorce, although it's starting to sound like these two are outdoing her on the self-pity front, which is saying something.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> [/ATTACH]
> 
> ETA This conversation with Meghan's former BFF touches on the above rumour as well imo:
> ‘The way she handled it, Trevor definitely had the rug pulled out from under him. He was hurt.’
> 
> Meghan reportedly began dating dashing celebrity chef Cory Vitiello who also lives in Toronto, in 2014, a few months after her separation from Trevor.
> 
> ‘I tried to get details from her, but she wouldn’t tell me. *What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan.* I think everybody who knew them both was in shock.​


Thanks, I’d never read that interview. Not surprised to hear her say that even after just one season on Suits Meghan’s demeanor and affect seemed to be changing into something phony.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sorry, with so much access to wealth, healthcare, and all the help (physically and emotionally), they are in a position to ensure they are surrounded by supportive and caring people and can access the best care for their mental and emotional well-being. No shame in a little Zoloft. 

I just can’t stan for them anymore with this pity party/parade. People have much harder lives and it’s asking a lot at this point


----------



## Sharont2305

chicaloca said:


> Also are people really still under the illusion that material wealth equates to happiness and positive mental health?  Wealthy people commit suicide every day. Material wealth is not going to ease the pain of being publicly bullied and harassed for nearly 3 years straight. Wealth also would not insulate someone from developing mental illness or postpartum depression.


This is a conversation I have with my hubby every time we hear of someone famous, wealthy or both has committed suicide. 
He says "why, with all that money, cars, homes etc, would they do it?" it's like knocking my head against a brick wall when I've tried to explain what you've just said.


----------



## Grande Latte

Not trying to make light of mental illness. But if you or your loved one suffers from it, it would be best to stay away from all the media attention for a while and concentrate on your own wellbeing, plus they could spend more time with friends and family and the newborn. It doesn't make sense to court media constantly and want peace at the same time. I don't see how this back and forth will do anyone any good.

And really, if you shy away from the press long enough, eventually the newness wears off and they move onto someone else. This is just how the beast works. 

Good luck.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Welltraveled!

Unless I missed it.  They never said they’re not utilizing resources around them. 

You can have the ideal life and still suffer from some form of depression.  I see it in my circle. 




LittleStar88 said:


> Sorry, with so much access to wealth, healthcare, and all the help (physically and emotionally), they are in a position to ensure they are surrounded by supportive and caring people and can access the best care for their mental and emotional well-being. No shame in a little Zoloft.
> 
> I just can’t stan for them anymore with this pity party/parade. People have much harder lives and it’s asking a lot at this point


----------



## ccbaggirl89

"Prince Harry & Meghan Markle to Take Break for Royal Duties & Bring Archie to United States!

The Royal Family is coming to America!

It is being reported that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will soon be taking a break from public life and their royal duties to travel to the United States, The Sunday Times reports.

According to the publication, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be taking a six-week sabbatical for “family time” starting next month until the Christmas holiday.

Prince Harry and Meghan plan on spending their break in both the United Kingdom and the United States. This will mark the first time 5-month-old son Archie will visit America!

The family is expected to celebrate Thanksgiving with Meghan‘s mother Doria Ragland at her home in California, and Christmas with Queen Elizabeth and the rest of the royal family in England.

The royal couple’s break comes after Prince Harry slammed the British tabloids over their “ruthless” campaign against Meghan.

If you missed it, Meghan admitted in a candid interview that she is “struggling” to adjust to life as a royal."
article: https://www.eonline.com/news/108450...e-sabbatical-and-bring-baby-archie-to-the-u-s


----------



## buffym

LittleStar88 said:


> Sorry, with so much access to wealth, healthcare, and all the help (physically and emotionally), they are in a position to ensure they are surrounded by supportive and caring people and can access the best care for their mental and emotional well-being. No shame in a little Zoloft.
> 
> I just can’t stan for them anymore with this pity party/parade. People have much harder lives and it’s asking a lot at this point



You don’t have to be a stan to have empathy. Harry and Meghan are mentioning their struggles which other members of the royal families have mentioned, also. They are saying this is what I’m dealing with it doesn’t mean other they are minimizing others. It can be inclusive, Harry and Meghan doing charity work while also dealing with their problems.




Grande Latte said:


> Not trying to make light of mental illness. But if you or your loved one suffers from it, it would be best to stay away from all the media attention for a while and concentrate on your own wellbeing, plus they could spend more time with friends and family and the newborn. It doesn't make sense to court media constantly and want peace at the same time. I don't see how this back and forth will do anyone any good.
> 
> And really, if you shy away from the press long enough, eventually the newness wears off and they move onto someone else. This is just how the beast works.
> 
> Good luck.



Not always, for example Malia ***** has given an interview or courts the press but the tabloids still run stories about her.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...uharson-seen-enjoying-brunch-Ojai-resort.html


----------



## chicaloca

Welltraveled! said:


> Unless I missed it.  They never said they’re not utilizing resources around them.
> 
> You can have the ideal life and still suffer from some form of depression.  I see it in my circle.




I agree. Plus I don’t think the Sussexes want pity. They were asked questions and answered honestly which is why Meghan, in particular,
 is being applauded. 

Some of the comments in this thread perfectly illustrate why people suffer in silence. I couldn’t imagine approaching a supposed friend about depression and being told to shut up because there are people starving in another country or people with cancer.


----------



## chicaloca

Grande Latte said:


> Not trying to make light of mental illness. But if you or your loved one suffers from it, it would be best to stay away from all the media attention for a while and concentrate on your own wellbeing, plus they could spend more time with friends and family and the newborn. It doesn't make sense to court media constantly and want peace at the same time. I don't see how this back and forth will do anyone any good.
> 
> And really, if you shy away from the press long enough, eventually the newness wears off and they move onto someone else. This is just how the beast works.
> 
> Good luck.



Meghan was on maternity leave and out of site for several months this year yet the negative articles were still being churned out daily. Harry pointed this out in his statement. There is no escape for her which makes it particularly difficult. Meghan can’t take a break from the media. The media needs to take a break from her.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

threadbender said:


> I was talking to a friend of mine today. I literally asked her if she was OK. You see, she was diagnosed with breast cancer last week and is scheduled for surgery this week. Yeah, I am her friend and I care about her so, I asked. Just a little perspective.
> 
> ETA Sorry for going OT and I understand if my post is removed.


I don't think Meghan wasn't asked - that seems extreme, as she'd be accusing her entire friend circle and mother of not caring at all. It's not realistic that not a single friend would ask "how are you doing." She was directing the comment "thanks for asking" to a reporter. She wants the reporters and press to treat her ok/kind/with kid gloves. Her gripe is with the media and how they seemingly don't care about her.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Which is why I’m glad there’s a dialogue to discuss mental health.  

I wish people online are more open to the discussions. 



chicaloca said:


> I agree. Plus I don’t think the Sussexes want pity. They were asked questions and answered honestly which is why Meghan, in particular,
> is being applauded.
> 
> Some of the comments in this thread perfectly illustrate why people suffer in silence. I couldn’t imagine approaching a supposed friend about depression and being told to shut up because there are people starving in another country or people with cancer.


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Plus I don’t think the Sussexes want pity. They were asked questions and answered honestly which is why Meghan, in particular, is being applauded.


Meghan was begging for pity as soon as soon as she walked toward the camera with her sad face already in place.  She wasn't randomly asked a question.  

I would say the Sussexes have a number of motivations for choosing to extensively discuss their personal problems in a TV documentary.  Seeking pity is one of the big ones.  Trying to get people on their side as they battle a number of different people in their lives (likely including some family members) is another.  I think they also want to pre-emptively justify their decision to do more of whatever they want going forward (move to the US, take lengthy sabbaticals, only work on what they want to work on).


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> Meghan was begging for pity as soon as soon as she walked toward the camera with her sad face already in place.  She wasn't randomly asked a question.
> 
> I would say the Sussexes have a number of motivations for choosing to extensively discuss their personal problems in a TV documentary.  Seeking pity is one of the big ones.  Trying to get people on their side as they battle a number of different people in their lives (likely including some family members) is another.  I think they also want to pre-emptively justify their decision to do more of whatever they want going forward (move to the US, take lengthy sabbaticals, only work on what they want to work on).


Agree.  Her sad face was already in place and since she's an actress, I cannot help but watch to see the acting.  Which I do when _any_ actress or actor emotes in an interview.

The difference with Kate though is that she said it after the fact and it didn't appear she was asking for anything.  It was more of a statement and Meg seems to be manipulating something somehow.

If she has been down since marriage and birth, then all those constantly smiling photos, brave face and all were very convincing.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That was a big boo hoo face for sure! 

I wonder where they’ll live in Cali!


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.  Her sad face was already in place and since she's an actress, I cannot help but watch to see the acting.  Which I do when _any_ actress or actor emotes in an interview.
> 
> The difference with Kate though is that she said it after the fact and it didn't appear she was asking for anything.  It was more of a statement and Meg seems to be manipulating something somehow.
> 
> If she has been down since marriage and birth, then all those constantly smiling photos, brave face and all were very convincing.


Meghan is trying to balance her love of the spotlight with her good intentions deep down, imo. But her love of the spotlight gets the best of her and her good intentions get the back seat.


----------



## Tivo

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Prince Harry & Meghan Markle to Take Break for Royal Duties & Bring Archie to United States!
> 
> The Royal Family is coming to America!
> 
> It is being reported that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will soon be taking a break from public life and their royal duties to travel to the United States, The Sunday Times reports.
> 
> According to the publication, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be taking a six-week sabbatical for “family time” starting next month until the Christmas holiday.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan plan on spending their break in both the United Kingdom and the United States. This will mark the first time 5-month-old son Archie will visit America!
> 
> The family is expected to celebrate Thanksgiving with Meghan‘s mother Doria Ragland at her home in California, and Christmas with Queen Elizabeth and the rest of the royal family in England.
> 
> The royal couple’s break comes after Prince Harry slammed the British tabloids over their “ruthless” campaign against Meghan.
> 
> If you missed it, Meghan admitted in a candid interview that she is “struggling” to adjust to life as a royal."
> article: https://www.eonline.com/news/108450...e-sabbatical-and-bring-baby-archie-to-the-u-s


I think Meghan feels more famous and beloved in the US. I bet it won’t be long before she’s “acting” again.


----------



## jehaga

chicaloca said:


> I guess prince Charles and the Cambridges  are disgraceful and crass since they have publicly complained. Meghan apparently has good company.


Most definitely.

They should always keep in mind, “What would the Queen do?”

Disgraceful and crass don’t have to be permanent.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Agree. Her sad face was already in place and since she's an actress, I cannot help but watch to see the acting. Which I do when _any_ actress or actor emotes in an interview.


She even took off most of the makeup she'd worn to an engagement earlier in the day so her face would have that natural/youthful/vulnerable look that goes better with the lip biting.


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> She even took off most of the makeup she'd worn to an engagement earlier in the day so her face would have that natural/youthful/vulnerable look that goes better with the lip biting.


She seems very calculating, but it always feels like she’s a step behind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.  Her sad face was already in place and since she's an actress, I cannot help but watch to see the acting.  Which I do when _any_ actress or actor emotes in an interview.
> 
> The difference with Kate though is that she said it after the fact and it didn't appear she was asking for anything.  It was more of a statement and Meg seems to be manipulating something somehow.
> 
> If she has been down since marriage and birth, then all those constantly smiling photos, brave face and all were very convincing.



 Meghan “seems calculating” or she “seems manipulative”. This seems like unconscious bias.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> This line of thinking is beyond insensitive not to mention rather ignorant.
> 
> It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. You can be empathetic to the plight others while simultaneously dealing with your own problems. The idea that none of us can react to
> anything going on in our own lives as long as someone else has it worse is ludicrous. By this measure no one would ever be able to emote or express anything other than happiness without condemnation because there is always someone worse off than you.
> 
> Also are people really still under the illusion that material wealth equates to happiness and positive mental health?  Wealthy people commit suicide every day. Material wealth is not going to ease the pain of being publicly bullied and harassed for nearly 3 years straight. Wealth also would not insulate someone from developing mental illness or postpartum depression.





ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Prince Harry & Meghan Markle to Take Break for Royal Duties & Bring Archie to United States!
> 
> The Royal Family is coming to America!
> 
> It is being reported that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will soon be taking a break from public life and their royal duties to travel to the United States, The Sunday Times reports.
> 
> According to the publication, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be taking a six-week sabbatical for “family time” starting next month until the Christmas holiday.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan plan on spending their break in both the United Kingdom and the United States. This will mark the first time 5-month-old son Archie will visit America!
> 
> The family is expected to celebrate Thanksgiving with Meghan‘s mother Doria Ragland at her home in California, and Christmas with Queen Elizabeth and the rest of the royal family in England.
> 
> The royal couple’s break comes after Prince Harry slammed the British tabloids over their “ruthless” campaign against Meghan.
> 
> If you missed it, Meghan admitted in a candid interview that she is “struggling” to adjust to life as a royal."
> article: https://www.eonline.com/news/108450...e-sabbatical-and-bring-baby-archie-to-the-u-s



If it's true that they are coming to the US, I wonder if they will find a way to avoid publicity.  It can be done I think

I stand by my statement that if Meghan is going to share with the world how sad she is she should at the same time acknowledge how privileged she is.  The whole excitement about her marrying Harry was the idea of a fairy tale come true for an American bi-racial woman.  So now she has that.  It's not perfect.  But if she presents herself as a humanitarian, how can she complain about her life in light of what others are experiencing?


----------



## TC1

I find it very difficult to drum up sympathy for a couple with all the resources in the world at their immediate disposal.
Heck I've been trying to get my teeenager into therapy (at her request) for MONTHS. I doubt Megs or Harry would be on a 3 month waitlist 
Exisiting not living, GTFOH


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> If it's true that they are coming to the US, I wonder if they will find a way to avoid publicity.  It can be done I think
> 
> I stand by my statement that if Meghan is going to share with the world how sad she is she should at the same time acknowledge how privileged she is.  The whole excitement about her marrying Harry was the idea of a fairy tale come true for an American bi-racial woman.  So now she has that.  It's not perfect.  But if she presents herself as a humanitarian, how can she complain about her life in light of what others are experiencing?


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> I find it very difficult to drum up sympathy for a couple with all the resources in the world at their immediate disposal.
> Heck I've been trying to get my teeenager into therapy (at her request) for MONTHS. I doubt Megs or Harry would be on a 3 month waitlist
> Exisiting not living, GTFOH


sorry your daughter is having problems.  hope she gets the help she needs.  We all here on TPF are privileged compared to many.  But the royals are Way More privileged than most people in the world.  And while they surely can have issues, they need to never forget how much better off they are.  Even more so IMO for Meghan who was a mature woman of 38 when she took on this role (unlike Harry who was born into it and had no choice)


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> But if she presents herself as a humanitarian, how can she complain about her life in light of what others are experiencing?


And it's not about the material wealth.  There are so many things about Meghan and Harry's life that they should be enjoying.  They recently got married and are presumably in love.  They are both in good health.  They just had a cute, healthy baby.  They profess to be passionate about the work they are doing.  They are getting to nest in a new home.  They are given lots of free time to enjoy life.  They get to travel to whatever interesting places they want.  There's little more to ask for in life.  To describe that as "existing not living" is incredibly offensive, and only someone incredibly spoiled would have the audacity to say it.

I know a guy in a nursing home whose body doesn't work at all except for some movement in his right arm.  He lies in bed all day waiting for someone to change the channel on the TV and change his diapers.  His favorite food that the nursing home serves is soup, but he can only have it if a visitor happens to be there to feed it to him.  He feeds himself sandwiches with his right arm because nursing home staff don't help patients eat.  His wife visits a few times a week, but has to work to pay for his care.  That has been his life for years and likely will be for years to come.  I call *that *"existing not living".  And he doesn't spend his time complaining about it either, by the way.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> And it's not about the material wealth.  There are so many things about Meghan and Harry's life that they should be enjoying.  They recently got married and are presumably in love.  They are both in good health.  They just had a cute, healthy baby.  They profess to be passionate about the work they are doing.  They are getting to nest in a new home.  They are given lots of free time to enjoy life.  They get to travel to whatever interesting places they want.  There's little more to ask for in life.  To describe that as "existing not living" is incredibly offensive, and only someone incredibly spoiled would have the audacity to say it.
> 
> I know a guy in a nursing home whose body doesn't work at all except for some movement in his right arm.  He lies in bed all day waiting for someone to change the channel on the TV and change his diapers.  His favorite food that the nursing home serves is soup, but he can only have it if a visitor happens to be there to feed it to him.  He feeds himself sandwiches with his right arm because nursing home staff don't help patients eat.  His wife visits a few times a week, but has to work to pay for his care.  That has been his life for years and likely will be for years to come.  I call *that *"existing not living".  And he doesn't spend his time complaining about it either, by the way.


that is truly tragic - for him and for his wife


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> Meghan “seems calculating” or she “seems manipulative”. This seems like unconscious bias.


Yes, I got a manipulative vibe -- how is that unconscious bias?  Just curious...


----------



## hellosunshine

In the spirit of "I don't want to read about her struggles. She lives a privileged life. Kate and other royals never complained about MOTHERHOOD or ANYTHING. They've never made such public comments!" Well, let's discuss...

Kate has a live-in nanny and lives in a 21 room wing of a palace which was renovated to the tune of 4.2 million pounds. She is blessed to have a close knit family. Her parents and friends live in the UK. She doesn't have a sociopathic sister running to her hate groups to trash her.

And yet, HERE IS WHAT CATHERINE, the newly canonized saint by the British media, has said time and time again about HER STRUGGLES with motherhood...











She opened up about the pressures of life in the spotlight and even mentioned WILLIAM'S STRUGGLES WITH FATHERHOOD. Now, this is a woman who has a nanny in her home 24/7 and her parents are a phone call away.







Meghan has a nanny during the weekdays but she/he doesn't live at Frogmore Cottage. Her mom lives an ocean away. Her family is the most psychotic bunch of people anyone could have had the misfortune of being related to. Her father has colluded with Piers Morgan, a man who abhors her very existence.

She has been trashed, lied about, bullied, body shamed, mommy shamed, and etc. The Daily Fail alone published 451 articles about Meghan in May 2019: NONE OF THEM WERE POSITIVE. NONE OF THEM HAD A POSITVE COMMENT IN THE REPLY SECTION. Look how differently she's covered!



The lot of her "haters" want to strip ALL of her humanity. I think it's so indicative of some people's character, or lack thereof, to call her measured responses to Tom Bradby's questions as a COMPLAINT. This woman is scared to finish her own sentences because she knows in your eyes, she is devoid of humanity!

She should NEVER aknowledge having had a hard time with the British media yet EVERY SINGLE THING SHE DOES is smeared: from eating avocados to wearing a one shoulder gown. Oddly, in the same token, she's required to give these same soul-less bunch of critics unfettered access to her life, right?! 







"She's an actress. She lives a good life". Well, so did countless other celebrities that have committed suicide. Being an actor or actress doesn't preclude you from HURT and pain.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> In the spirit of "I don't want to read about her struggles. She lives a privileged life. Kate and other royals never complained about MOTHERHOOD or ANYTHING. They've never made such public comments!"


Nobody has said this.  It's easy to refute an argument when it's just a straw man you came up with yourself.


----------



## Lodpah

chicaloca said:


> This line of thinking is beyond insensitive not to mention rather ignorant.
> 
> It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. You can be empathetic to the plight others while simultaneously dealing with your own problems. The idea that none of us can react to
> anything going on in our own lives as long as someone else has it worse is ludicrous. By this measure no one would ever be able to emote or express anything other than happiness without condemnation because there is always someone worse off than you.
> 
> Also are people really still under the illusion that material wealth equates to happiness and positive mental health?  Wealthy people commit suicide every day. Material wealth is not going to ease the pain of being publicly bullied and harassed for nearly 3 years straight. Wealth also would not insulate someone from developing mental illness or postpartum depression.


No it’s not insensitive. She comes across as manipulative. Her actions speak louder than words. She wants her cake and to eat it too. She knows exactly what she is doing. Mental problems are real life. If she has mental issues then she needs to take a step back and heal herself and her husband. She and Harry did this calculated move to ALWAYS have drama to ensure that the spotlight is on them, whether good or bad. The Queen just six days ago made her speech to Parliament addressing serious issues and along comes the drama queen to take the spotlight off that or deflect it towards her.

When I watched the Trooping of the Colors the BBC made one tiny remark about Meghan’s appearance and then immediately focused on the children of Prince William and Kate and it seemed that Meghan seem perturbed at the minuscule mention of her and seemed to be talking to herself. Princess Anne seemed to know what Meghan is about she actually nudged  her to her position. The curious thing was Meghan seemed to be talking to herself. 

Anyway people who have dealt with mental issues in their family and have gone to therapy with them seem to be able to spot fake and real.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> No it’s not insensitive. She comes across as manipulative. Her actions speak louder than words. She wants her cake and to eat it too. She knows exactly what she is doing. Mental problems are real life. If she has mental issues then she needs to take a step back and heal herself and her husband. She and Harry did this calculated move to ALWAYS have drama to ensure that the spotlight is on them, whether good or bad. The Queen just six days ago made her speech to Parliament addressing serious issues and along comes the drama queen to take the spotlight off that or deflect it towards her.
> 
> When I watched the Trooping of the Colors the BBC made one tiny remark about Meghan’s appearance and then immediately focused on the children of Prince William and Kate and it seemed that Meghan seem perturbed at the minuscule mention of her and seemed to be talking to herself. Princess Anne seemed to know what Meghan is about she actually nudged  her to her position. The curious thing was Meghan seemed to be talking to herself.
> 
> Anyway people who have dealt with mental issues in their family and have gone to therapy with them seem to be able to spot fake and real.


worth mentioning (as you did) that Britain has some very serious issues going on right now


----------



## Tivo

Lodpah said:


> No it’s not insensitive. She comes across as manipulative. Her actions speak louder than words. She wants her cake and to eat it too. She knows exactly what she is doing. Mental problems are real life. If she has mental issues then she needs to take a step back and heal herself and her husband. She and Harry did this calculated move to ALWAYS have drama to ensure that the spotlight is on them, whether good or bad. The Queen just six days ago made her speech to Parliament addressing serious issues and along comes the drama queen to take the spotlight off that or deflect it towards her.
> 
> When I watched the Trooping of the Colors the BBC made one tiny remark about Meghan’s appearance and then immediately focused on the children of Prince William and Kate and it seemed that Meghan seem perturbed at the minuscule mention of her and seemed to be talking to herself. Princess Anne seemed to know what Meghan is about she actually nudged  her to her position. The curious thing was Meghan seemed to be talking to herself.
> 
> Anyway people who have dealt with mental issues in their family and have gone to therapy with them seem to be able to spot fake and real.


I’d believe Meghan has high anxiety. One of those people who believe if they “just do one more thing,” they can “fix” something. Controlling behavior, self-absorbed...Similar to Bethenny Frankel. Although not nearly as bad as Bethenny.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> worth mentioning (as you did) that Britain has some very serious issues going on right now


Yes, the Queen seemed very serious addressing prison reform, mental health, victims of crime, economy and so much more. I nearly teared up at her graciousness and her supporting her people’s votes. 
British people are polite and have a stiff upper lip but they call as it is. 

When Prince Harry did not attend the military anniversary and instead went to to the opening of Lion King that was a breach of protocol. The Royals are at the grace of the people and PH should have put his foot down at gone there instead.


----------



## PurseUOut

Flatsy said:


> And it's not about the material wealth.  There are so many things about Meghan and Harry's life that they should be enjoying.  They recently got married and are presumably in love.  They are both in good health.  They just had a cute, healthy baby.  They profess to be passionate about the work they are doing.  They are getting to nest in a new home.  They are given lots of free time to enjoy life.  They get to travel to whatever interesting places they want.  There's little more to ask for in life.  To describe that as "existing not living" is incredibly offensive, and only someone incredibly spoiled would have the audacity to say it.
> 
> I know a guy in a nursing home whose body doesn't work at all except for some movement in his right arm.  He lies in bed all day waiting for someone to change the channel on the TV and change his diapers.  His favorite food that the nursing home serves is soup, but he can only have it if a visitor happens to be there to feed it to him.  He feeds himself sandwiches with his right arm because nursing home staff don't help patients eat.  His wife visits a few times a week, but has to work to pay for his care.  That has been his life for years and likely will be for years to come.  I call *that *"existing not living".  And he doesn't spend his time complaining about it either, by the way.



That’s horrible. Although I fail to understand whenever the question of “privilege” comes up, the comparative example is always the extreme case; What about the “starving children in Africa” or “paraplegics”? 

I am black, female, solidly middle class, average HHI, average attractiveness, student loan debt, etc. Im a much more comparable example of “relative” privilege and even I have sympathy for Meghan. I would never, ever trade my life for hers. It seems completely lonely, isolating, and not worth the “perks” she gets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

All I can think now is how they have alienated their staff with all their complaints. Presumably they have maids, cooks, laundresses, ladies in waiting type people who are all privvy to their most intimate secrets. Launching into this attack on everyone probably seems a bit rich to their employees.

Also as someone with lifelong major depression - stability, routine, therapy, a quiet life, “taking it easy”, boundaries, trusted friends and family - all of these help manage it.
ETA: and medication of course.

Constant attention seeking, a very public life and dramatic relationships are like the opposite of what helps imo.


----------



## Lodpah

chicaloca said:


> This line of thinking is beyond insensitive not to mention rather ignorant.
> 
> It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. You can be empathetic to the plight others while simultaneously dealing with your own problems. The idea that none of us can react to
> anything going on in our own lives as long as someone else has it worse is ludicrous. By this measure no one would ever be able to emote or express anything other than happiness without condemnation because there is always someone worse off than you.
> 
> Also are people really still under the illusion that material wealth equates to happiness and positive mental health?  Wealthy people commit suicide every day. Material wealth is not going to ease the pain of being publicly bullied and harassed for nearly 3 years straight. Wealth also would not insulate someone from developing mental illness or postpartum depression.



In addition I know what mental health issues are. The day you cut the rope of your daughter’s neck because she hung her self and you don’t know if she is going to survive and be brain damaged or not then come talk to me about mental health. I probably am going through PTSD and was given medication to deal with it. I threw it away as I need to be strong to help her through what she is going through. 

Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible.  If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.

Sorry for the long post but I deal with mental health issues all day long, 24/7 with my daughter.


----------



## Flatsy

PurseUOut said:


> Although I fail to understand whenever the question of “privilege” comes up, the comparative example is always the extreme case; What about the “starving children in Africa” or “paraplegics”?


For me, when I see extreme suffering, it puts my own life in perspective and whatever things may not be perfect about it, I realize they aren't so bad and feel grateful for what I have.  

Meghan was in the middle of a trip in which she witnessed all sorts of extreme suffering, and carved out time to participate in a documentary that largely pulls focus away from all of that in order to discuss how miserable HER life is.  I think it's the exact opposite of gaining perspective.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> In addition I know what mental health issues are. The day you cut the rope of your daughter’s neck because she hung her self and you don’t know if she is going to survive and be brain damaged or not then come talk to me about mental health. I probably am going through PTSD and was given medication to deal with it. I threw it away as I need to be strong to help her through what she is going through.
> 
> Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible.  If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.
> 
> Sorry for the long post but I deal with mental health issues all day long, 24/7 with my daughter.


Off topic but please consult with your physician/therapist/counsellor asap. Choosing to not take prescribed medication for a diagnosed mental health condition is dangerous. Been there done that.
I am sorry for what you are going through.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> In addition I know what mental health issues are. The day you cut the rope of your daughter’s neck because she hung her self and you don’t know if she is going to survive and be brain damaged or not then come talk to me about mental health. I probably am going through PTSD and was given medication to deal with it. I threw it away as I need to be strong to help her through what she is going through.
> 
> Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible.  If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.
> 
> Sorry for the long post but I deal with mental health issues all day long, 24/7 with my daughter.


So sorry for what you're going through.  Hope you and your daughter both come out of this OK.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> Off topic but please consult with your physician/therapist/counsellor asap. Choosing to not take prescribed medication for a diagnosed mental health condition is dangerous. Been there done that.
> I am sorry for what you are going through.


Thanks. I’ve talked to someone and I can’t be hampered with medication as I need to be there for her. I have hubby to rely on and he relies on me too plus a family network.


----------



## caramelize126

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I got a manipulative vibe -- how is that* unconscious bias*?  Just curious...



I am curious as well. I am sick and tired of these new phrases popping up on this forum, perhaps "unconsciously", accusing other posters of veiled racism. There are MANY women of color on this thread, including myself. Its absolutely insulting.



hellosunshine said:


> In the spirit of "I don't want to read about her struggles. She lives a privileged life. Kate and other royals never complained about MOTHERHOOD or ANYTHING. They've never made such public comments!" Well, let's discuss...
> 
> Kate has a live-in nanny and lives in a 21 room wing of a palace which was renovated to the tune of 4.2 million pounds. She is blessed to have a close knit family. Her parents and friends live in the UK. She doesn't have a sociopathic sister running to her hate groups to trash her.
> 
> And yet, HERE IS WHAT CATHERINE, the newly canonized saint by the British media, has said time and time again about HER STRUGGLES with motherhood...
> 
> View attachment 4569853
> 
> View attachment 4569854
> 
> View attachment 4569852
> 
> View attachment 4569855
> 
> 
> 
> She opened up about the pressures of life in the spotlight and even mentioned WILLIAM'S STRUGGLES WITH FATHERHOOD. Now, this is a woman who has a nanny in her home 24/7 and her parents are a phone call away.
> 
> View attachment 4569858
> 
> View attachment 4569859
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan has a nanny during the weekdays but she/he doesn't live at Frogmore Cottage. Her mom lives an ocean away. Her family is the most psychotic bunch of people anyone could have had the misfortune of being related to. Her father has colluded with Piers Morgan, a man who abhors her very existence.
> 
> She has been trashed, lied about, bullied, body shamed, mommy shamed, and etc. The Daily Fail alone published 451 articles about Meghan in May 2019: NONE OF THEM WERE POSITIVE. NONE OF THEM HAD A POSITVE COMMENT IN THE REPLY SECTION. Look how differently she's covered!
> 
> View attachment 4569860
> 
> The lot of her "haters" want to strip ALL of her humanity. I think it's so indicative of some people's character, or lack thereof, to call her measured responses to Tom Bradby's questions as a COMPLAINT. This woman is scared to finish her own sentences because she knows in your eyes, she is devoid of humanity!
> 
> She should NEVER aknowledge having had a hard time with the British media yet EVERY SINGLE THING SHE DOES is smeared: from eating avocados to wearing a one shoulder gown. Oddly, in the same token, she's required to give these same soul-less bunch of critics unfettered access to her life, right?!
> 
> View attachment 4569861
> 
> View attachment 4569862
> 
> 
> 
> "She's an actress. She lives a good life". Well, so did countless other celebrities that have committed suicide. Being an actor or actress doesn't preclude you from HURT and pain.



Post-partum depression is a very real thing, I dont think anyone is denying that. But Harry and Meghan were on this SA trip *on behalf of the queen and representing the monarchy.* This was not the Harry & Meghan Show. This trip and this documentary were not the time nor the place for them to be complaining about their own issues. They easily could have arranged another interview in partnership with their mental health charities- that would've been a much more appropriate venue.
It would insulting to imply that these questions came from the interviewer with no input from the Sussex team. They knew exactly what they were doing.

They brought many of these issues upon themselves. The public isnt stupid. If the press is mean ( which is the real issue here), STOP CALLING THEM.  Have noone to call to check on you? Dont isolate your friends and family. Meghans side of the family with the exception of her mother might be a mess, but what about Harry's side? What about their friends? Everything is going haywire? Listen to the experts youve hired. Dont like the rules? Stop playing the game and relinquish your titles. Its not rocket science.


----------



## buffym

Lodpah said:


> In addition I know what mental health issues are. The day you cut the rope of your daughter’s neck because she hung her self and you don’t know if she is going to survive and be brain damaged or not then come talk to me about mental health. I probably am going through PTSD and was given medication to deal with it. I threw it away as I need to be strong to help her through what she is going through.
> 
> Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible.  If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.
> 
> Sorry for the long post but I deal with mental health issues all day long, 24/7 with my daughter.



How is this Meghan’s fault, no one has the right to minimize anyone else issue. She was asked how she is doing. It is her story to tell and she has that right.


----------



## buffym

caramelize126 said:


> I am curious as well. I am sick and tired of these new phrases popping up on this forum, perhaps "unconsciously", accusing other posters of veiled racism. There are MANY women of color on this thread, including myself, and many who previously supported this couple. Its absolutely insulting.
> 
> 
> 
> Post-partum depression is a very real thing, I dont think anyone is denying that. But Harry and Meghan were on this SA trip *on behalf of the queen and representing the monarchy.* This was not the Harry & Meghan Show. This trip and this documentary were not the time nor the place for them to be complaining about their own issues. They easily could have arranged another interview in partnership with their mental health charities- that would've been a much more appropriate venue.
> It would insulting to imply that these questions came from the interviewer with no input from the Sussex team. They knew exactly what they were doing.
> 
> They brought many of these issues upon themselves. The public isnt stupid. If the press is mean ( which is the real issue here), STOP CALLING THEM.  Have noone to call to check on you? Dont isolate your friends and family. Meghans side of the family with the exception of her mother might be a mess, but what about Harry's side? What about their friends? Everything is going haywire? Listen to the experts youve hired. Its not rocket science.



When do they call them? Meghan was on maternity leave yet the press was still writing about her. No one forced the royal reporters to go to any event the Sussex’s are at. The royal reporters want to bully the Sussex’s and the Sussex’s have every right to speak up for themselves.


----------



## A1aGypsy

buffym said:


> How is this Meghan’s fault, no one has the right to minimize anyone else issue. She was asked how she is doing. It is her story to tell and she has that right.



I’m sorry to be blunt but this doesn’t reflect amazingly on you. Did you read her post? Seems lacking in compassion (and perhaps perspective) is an issue beyond the British press.


----------



## Lodpah

buffym said:


> How is this Meghan’s fault, no one has the right to minimize anyone else issue. She was asked how she is doing. It is her story to tell and she has that right.


I never said it was her fault.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I agree with your statement.  I think the average person want to *dictate* what someone that is rich/privileged and seem to have it all - on the outside; mental health *should be.*  People forget that depression (or anything in that realm) does not care about the color of your skin, financial status, how many friends you have, or your life experiences.  When you experience depression; it is a on-going battle within yourself to keep it at bay - or overcome it.   And God help those that can't overcome it. 



chicaloca said:


> Also are people really still under the illusion that material wealth equates to happiness and positive mental health?  Wealthy people commit suicide every day. Material wealth is not going to ease the pain of being publicly bullied and harassed for nearly 3 years straight. Wealth also would not insulate someone from developing mental illness or postpartum depression.


----------



## meluvs2shop

This thread is like a good tennis match starring Serena Williams!


----------



## caramelize126

buffym said:


> When do they call them? Meghan was on maternity leave yet the press was still writing about her. No one forced the royal reporters to go to any event the Sussex’s are at. The royal reporters want to bully the Sussex’s and the Sussex’s have every right to speak up for themselves.



The press knew about Meghan's baby shower and were instructed on where to show up and at what time. I believe these were revealed in the FOIA'd documents.  They cant be upset that they were criticized for an OTT baby shower when they themselves revealed the location, costs, sponsors, etc

Meghans Mirror confirmed that they were given the information on where/when Meghan would be during this most recent NY trip.

There were private events that MM had scheduled in SA where a photographer was unexpectedly brought along and the pictures made their way to the press. These are just a few examples and have been discussed in detail on this thread.



Welltraveled! said:


> I agree with your statement.  I think the average person want to *dictate* what someone that is rich/privileged and seem to have it all - on the outside; mental health *should be.*  People forget that depression (or anything in that realm) does not care about the color of your skin, financial status, how many friends you have, or your life experiences.  When you experience depression; it is a on-going battle within yourself to keep it at bay - or overcome it.   And God help those that can't overcome it.



Absolutely.  I dont think the outrage is that she is feeling this way. Its human nature and perhaps anyone would buckle under the spotlight, pressure, etc. The issue is with the forum on which this was presented to the world. A documentary about the work you are doing on behalf of the Queen is not the space to be airing your grievances about how awful people are and how sad you feel. That would be akin to someone on the news talking about how they had a terrible day instead of reporting on the robbery that occurred downtown. This is their JOB, not a fun side thing.

Regardless, its good that they have decided to take the time off.  It;ll be interesting to see what the next move will be. Some are speculating that they may "split their time" b/w the US and UK to be able to stay on the royal payroll.


----------



## Sharont2305

So, what did we think about the documentary.
The brothers don't see as much of each other as they're very busy but they love each other and will be there for the other.
Meghan calls Harry H
Her American friends were happy for her and Harry but her British friends warned her about marrying him and what came with it, the British press.
She really did not know what she was letting herself in for.
Logistically, Africa isn't on the radar to move to, according to Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

^^ very wise, caramelize.


----------



## buffym

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m sorry to be blunt but this doesn’t reflect amazingly on you. Did you read her post? Seems lacking in compassion (and perhaps perspective) is an issue beyond the British press.



I did read her post and this is the what I was responding to, 

“Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible. If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.”

Compassion and perspective can go hand and hand while stating your pain does not give you the right to disregards others.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Most of you will not like my comment.  And if you're sensitive, please ignore or skip over.

I don't care if you like Meghan or any member of the royal family, celebrity - whatever.  But I find it REVOLTING that some individuals are comparing or rating their mental health struggles against  others.  It's in the same realm.  IF you truly struggled with depression (or similar) you would know its like a festering wound that becomes a poisonous infection if left untreated.  It's worse when you're dealing with people who minimize or lack empathy for your condition. 

I applaud ANYONE - regardless of their station in life - who can BRAVELY state - I suffer with X.  I'm dealing with X and they go seek help.


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> I applaud ANYONE - regardless of their station in life - who can BRAVELY state - I suffer with X.


Neither Harry nor Meghan have stated this, so this seems rather irrelevant.  The documentary has now aired and all they did was blame their problems on the press and tabloids.  Not depression or mental illness.


----------



## mrsinsyder

meluvs2shop said:


> This thread is like a good tennis match starring Serena Williams!


Can you clear a box for me to watch it so I don’t have the poors breathing on me?


----------



## Welltraveled!

We can disagree if the documentary was the ideal "platform" to make such a statement.  I don't care about that.

However, my comment was directed towards those that are mocking or belittling her statement.  



caramelize126 said:


> Absolutely.  I dont think the outrage is that she is feeling this way. Its human nature and perhaps anyone would buckle under the spotlight, pressure, etc. The issue is with the forum on which this was presented to the world. A documentary about the work you are doing on behalf of the Queen is not the space to be airing your grievances about how awful people are and how sad you feel. That would be akin to someone on the news talking about how they had a terrible day instead of reporting on the robbery that occurred downtown. This is their JOB, not a fun side thing.
> 
> Regardless, its good that they have decided to take the time off.  It;ll be interesting to see what the next move will be. Some are speculating that they may "split their time" b/w the US and UK to be able to stay on the royal payroll.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Flatsy said:


> Neither Harry nor Meghan have stated this, so this seems rather irrelevant.  The documentary has now aired and all they did was blame their problems on the press and tabloids.  Not depression or mental illness.



I wasn't referencing them; my comment was a general statement about the behaviors/statements of certain posters in this thread.  Which is why my first sentence was: , "I don't care if you like Meghan or any member of the royal family, celebrity - whatever."


----------



## buffym

Meghan said, “The biggest thing that I know is that I never thought it would be easy, but I thought it would be fair. And that’s the part that’s really hard to reconcile.”

There is nothing fair about her treatment. People are constantly saying Kate went do the same thing- when? When was Kate’s sons called a monkey, or Kate accused of funding terrorism?

Why is it okay for Kate to give interviews saying she was lonely and motherhood is hard but Meghan can’t.

The tabloids cross the line


----------



## sdkitty

buffym said:


> Meghan said, “The biggest thing that I know is that I never thought it would be easy, but I thought it would be fair. And that’s the part that’s really hard to reconcile.”
> 
> There is nothing fair about her treatment. People are constantly saying Kate went do the same thing- when? When was Kate’s sons called a monkey, or Kate accused of funding terrorism?
> 
> Why is it okay for Kate to give interviews saying she was lonely and motherhood is hard but Meghan can’t.
> 
> The tabloids cross the line
> View attachment 4569988


I don't think the examples you cite were in the tabloids (monkey thing) but from nasty people on the Internet


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Nobody has said this.  It's easy to refute an argument when it's just a straw man you came up with yourself.



LOL! There are many posts where people have made references, comparisons, and name-dropped Kate and other "royals". Furthermore, my point was that Kate was allowed to talk about her struggles and nobody told her to get over it. Nobody told her she was privileged and she has no reason to voice concerns. Nobody told her to shut up. 



caramelize126 said:


> The press knew about Meghan's baby shower and were instructed on where to show up and at what time. I believe these were revealed in the FOIA'd documents.  They cant be upset that they were criticized for an OTT baby shower when they themselves revealed the location, costs, sponsors, etc
> 
> Meghans Mirror confirmed that they were given the information on where/when Meghan would be during this most recent NY trip.



The press knew about her baby shower because there was a leak by Kensington Palace. I always find it rather fascinating that since Harry & Meghan left Kensington and fell under the umbrella of Buckingham Palace..there's been no leaks. Wonder why?! It's rather obvious.

Meghans Mirror? Wait, are you talking about the most recent New York trip where we got no photos of her arrival, departure, or her general movement as she attended a birthday party, yoga studio, and etc?! Oh yes, she totally tipped off the media..that's why we've got paparazzi photos...oh wait...


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> So, what did we think about the documentary.
> The brothers don't see as much of each other as they're very busy but they love each other and will be there for the other.
> Meghan calls Harry H
> Her American friends were happy for her and Harry but her British friends warned her about marrying him and what came with it, the British press.
> She really did not know what she was letting herself in for.
> Logistically, Africa isn't on the radar to move to, according to Harry


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> LOL! There are many posts where people have made references, comparisons, and name-dropped Kate and other "royals". Furthermore, my point was that Kate was allowed to talk about her struggles and nobody told her to get over it. Nobody told her she was privileged and she has no reason to voice concerns. Nobody told her to shut up.
> 
> The press knew about her baby shower because there was a leak by Kensington Palace. I always find it rather fascinating that since Harry & Meghan left Kensington and fell under the umbrella of Buckingham Palace..there's been no leaks. Wonder why?! It's rather obvious.
> 
> Meghans Mirror? Wait, are you talking about the most recent New York trip where we got no photos of her arrival, departure, or her general movement as she attended a birthday party, yoga studio, and etc?! Oh yes, she totally tipped off the media..that's why we've got paparazzi photos...oh wait...



You're right- apologies! The site was notified for the first NY trip-


----------



## Chagall

Oops sent by mistake.


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> In addition I know what mental health issues are. The day you cut the rope of your daughter’s neck because she hung her self and you don’t know if she is going to survive and be brain damaged or not then come talk to me about mental health. I probably am going through PTSD and was given medication to deal with it. I threw it away as I need to be strong to help her through what she is going through.
> 
> Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible.  If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.
> 
> Sorry for the long post but I deal with mental health issues all day long, 24/7 with my daughter.


(((hugs)))


hellosunshine said:


> LOL! There are many posts where people have made references, comparisons, and name-dropped Kate and other "royals". Furthermore, my point was that Kate was allowed to talk about her struggles and nobody told her to get over it. Nobody told her she was privileged and she has no reason to voice concerns. Nobody told her to shut up.


The difference is that Kate said so after the fact and it was a statement... not a plea like Meg's comment sounded. Mostly it sounds like she's not happy being in the BRF.  She's just surviving being in the BRF.

Good thing they're going on sabbatical.  They must need the rest after working so hard this year.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

"Meghan's Mirror"?  Sounds like a legit source.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

sdkitty said:


> I don't think the examples you cite were in the tabloids (monkey thing) but from nasty people on the Internet



The screenshot is copies from tabloids.
 More examples, 
Royal wedding: How Meghan Markle’s flowers may have put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...iddleton-children-princess-charlotte-news/amp

Kitchen supported by Meghan's cookbook is housed inside mosque 'which has links to 19 terror suspects including Jihadi John'

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...les-charity-cookbook-links-19-terrorists.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

I keep having to check if I’m in the Kate and William thread or not...


----------



## FreeSpirit71

It's right to call out glaring differences in tone and wording in media articles on the two couples.

Some stories are intertwined, there's no getting around it.

Looking at the other thread, I see few comments policing when H & M are mentioned. Curious.


----------



## Mrs.Z

buffym said:


> Meghan said, “The biggest thing that I know is that I never thought it would be easy, but I thought it would be fair. And that’s the part that’s really hard to reconcile.”
> 
> There is nothing fair about her treatment. People are constantly saying Kate went do the same thing- when? When was Kate’s sons called a monkey, or Kate accused of funding terrorism?
> 
> Why is it okay for Kate to give interviews saying she was lonely and motherhood is hard but Meghan can’t.
> 
> The tabloids cross the line
> View attachment 4569988


Life is not fair....most people grasp this prior to their late 30s


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> Life is not fair....most people grasp this prior to their late 30s


What 'celeb' has seriously ever thought the media would be fair?


----------



## Flatsy

Mrs.Z said:


> Life is not fair....most people grasp this prior to their late 30s


Meghan says was naive.  It's hard to believe anyone would be so naive that they think the tabloids only print what's true and fair.  And hard to believe that Harry didn't mention during their courtship that his mom had a little bit of a problem with the tabloids, and this might be something she should be prepared for.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I've noticed Harry has spoked about his mother's death a lot lately but never mentions her driver who was drunk (three times past the legal limit). Is he limited from discussing that piece?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Meghan says was naive.  It's hard to believe anyone would be so naive that they think the tabloids only print what's true and fair.  And hard to believe that Harry didn't mention during their courtship that his mom had a little bit of a problem with the tabloids, and this might be something she should be prepared for.


In an interview with her (ex) best friend of 31 years, Meghan told the friend about her divorce from Trevor because she was afraid the media was going to get ahold of it. So she was aware back then, then forgot?


----------



## CeeJay

chicaloca said:


> Meghan “seems calculating” or she “seems manipulative”. This seems like unconscious bias.


*WOW* .. why don't you just say what you mean .. and isn't this the reason why Vlad shut this thread down before?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think the driver was definitely a factor, a major one.

I think Harry, and a lot of people really, focus on the paparazzi because the harassment of Diana in her final weeks, was at hysterical levels - leading Diana's group to make other arrangements that fateful night.

That the driver was at the hotel bar prior to leaving should have not only raised  red flags, but he should have been stopped from driving.

A perfect storm for tragedy.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

What is the rift between Kate and Meghan? Is there one or is it fabricated?


----------



## buffym

Mrs.Z said:


> Life is not fair....most people grasp this prior to their late 30s



I don’t know was always taught to set boundaries. I. e if you give them an inch they will take a mile. I think with tabloids, when they didn’t do anything the tabloids was continuously crossing the line.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

theamericanchinadoll said:


> What is the rift between Kate and Meghan? Is there one or is it fabricated?


I don't believe there is a rift between the women. 

It leans more towards something going on with the brothers. Harry as much as alluded to it, in the doco.


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> What is the rift between Kate and Meghan? Is there one or is it fabricated?


Meghan yelling at Charlotte and making Kate cry at the dress fitting.

I guess she never asked if Charlotte was ok


----------



## bag-mania

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Tabloids were never intended to be a news source. Nobody should quote one solely to represent their position in a discussion, whether positive or negative. Tabloids are meant to be entertainment only. Even when they have actual facts to report they will always present them in the most provoking, inflammatory way possible. That is the business. It’s something celebrities have endured for decades. Eventually they will move on to writing wacky articles about someone else, whoever is currently popular. I believe most people understand that and they don’t believe the exaggerated hyperbole. Meghan and Harry should understand that as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Let them move to the States. Let them split their time between the US and UK. Parts of South Africa would be a great choice for them. Just don’t let them come up here. I would resent even one penny going to their upkeep or security.


----------



## Aimee3

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think the driver was definitely a factor, a major one.
> 
> I think Harry, and a lot of people really, focus on the paparazzi because the harassment of Diana in her final weeks, was at hysterical levels - leading Diana's group to make other arrangements that fateful night.
> 
> That the driver was at the hotel bar prior to leaving should have not only raised  red flags, but he should have been stopped from driving.
> 
> A perfect storm for tragedy.


There were/still are conspiracy rumors about that accident and I thought I heard that someone slipped something into the driver’s drink, but they never tested for those kind of drugs.


----------



## marthastoo

bag-mania said:


> I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Tabloids were never intended to be a news source. Nobody should quote one solely to represent their position in a discussion, whether positive or negative. Tabloids are meant to be entertainment only. Even when they have actual facts to report they will always present them in the most provoking, inflammatory way possible. That is the business. It’s something celebrities have endured for decades. Eventually they will move on to writing wacky articles about someone else, whoever is currently popular.* I believe most people understand that and they don’t believe the exaggerated hyperbole. *Meghan and Harry should understand that as well.


Um, you have been reading this thread, right?    People not only believe and quote stories from the rags, but the comments in the comment section of said tabloids.  "Well, it must be true - I read it in the comment section!"


----------



## mrsinsyder

For everyone saying Kate isn't scrutinized, the DM is running an article about how much her tour clothing cost as well.


----------



## Aimee3

mrsinsyder said:


> For everyone saying Kate isn't scrutinized, the DM is running an article about how much her tour clothing cost as well.


If they’re going to scrutinize Meghan’s wardrobe costs, then they should for Kate’s as well.  Is there anywhere that Kate can wear the Pakistan clothes again?


----------



## Lodpah

mrsinsyder said:


> I've noticed Harry has spoked about his mother's death a lot lately but never mentions her driver who was drunk (three times past the legal limit). Is he limited from discussing that piece?



Interesting info about Henri Paul, the driver. He was the head of security for the hotel, the Ritz, that Dodi's father owned, Mohamed-al-Fayed. Henri Paul was the driver that Mohamed-al-Fayed only trusted to drive his son. He also drove for other celebrities. Henri Paul was known to sell information to tabloids about the hotel guests by meeting them at Harry's Bar at the rue Dauno. 

There was a book I read and it's highly informative as the book not only dwells on the aspect of Princess Diana (it's part of a collective on international affairs). The author, Gordon Thomas, was a journalist investigator who was like the go-to person for international affairs and actually interviewed the father, when Dodi's father was spending millions of pounds to try to prove his theory about about the deaths of Princess Diana and his son. Of course I'm not turning this into a conspiracy theory. 

Apparently, Henri Paul was being recruited by the Mossad to be an informer for political reasons of the guests in the hotel and they even did a psychological profile on him, but they backed off when Princess Diana died, thus the person they were recruiting also died.  The subsequent bent the Mossad came up with was that Henri Paul was actually a drunk, unpredictable and pill popper, who would fire maids and staff on a whim, one minute angry, the next minute affable. The gist of the investigation that Gordon Thomas did was that Henri Paul was becoming unhinged and the weight of what he had been doing could have driven him to be reckless. 

Like I said the book was not only about Princess Diana but a substantial amount of the book focused on the recruitment, psychological profile of the driver, Henri Paul and the insane amount of money, Dodi's father spent trying to find answers to his son's death.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Aimee3 said:


> If they’re going to scrutinize Meghan’s wardrobe costs, then they should for Kate’s as well.  Is there anywhere that Kate can wear the Pakistan clothes again?


Why couldn’t she? They’re not costumes, millions of women wear those outfits every day.


----------



## mdcx

Blimey:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7594059/JAN-MOIR-reviews-Harry-Meghan-African-Journey.html

ETA best comment:


----------



## Flatsy

Aimee3 said:


> If they’re going to scrutinize Meghan’s wardrobe costs, then they should for Kate’s as well. Is there anywhere that Kate can wear the Pakistan clothes again?


Yeah, clothing scrutiny is routine for all of them.

Kate wore three dresses, several coats that are in her normal style, and several pairs of pants.  I think she'll wear almost everything again except the shalwar kameez, which were inexpensive.  And she was smart because her jewelry, shoes and bags were almost dirt cheap.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Blimey:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7594059/JAN-MOIR-reviews-Harry-Meghan-African-Journey.html


Dragged. 

I’m privileged, but nowhere near their level, and can’t imagine going to a country with so many people struggling and thinking I’m anything less than fully blessed by my lot in life. I just can’t.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan yelling at Charlotte and making Kate cry at the dress fitting.
> 
> I guess she never asked if Charlotte was ok



If someone yelled at my child, I wouldn’t cry. I would say something to indicate they shouldn’t do that. If the reports is that she cried.. it sounds a bit made up. Who cries when someone bullies your kid? You get mad.  Why is Kate always the victim in the press?


----------



## PurseUOut

Flatsy said:


> For me, when I see extreme suffering, it puts my own life in perspective and whatever things may not be perfect about it, I realize they aren't so bad and feel grateful for what I have.
> 
> Meghan was in the middle of a trip in which she witnessed all sorts of extreme suffering, and carved out time to participate in a documentary that largely pulls focus away from all of that in order to discuss how miserable HER life is.  I think it's the exact opposite of gaining perspective.



She's drawing attention to her own troubles by answering a question she was asked? She didn't belabor on or ask for sympathy - but merely expressing the challenges (often in one-word answers) she is facing being a new mother, newlywed amongst intense and unfair media scrutiny.  She was even gracious enough to thank the interviewer for asking if she was OK. But because she is privileged she has to tough it out and supress her feelings because - Africa, world suffering, etc. If she lied or downplayed her unhappiness people would say she was being fake/phony. She can never win.


----------



## Aimee3

mrsinsyder said:


> Why couldn’t she? They’re not costumes, millions of women wear those outfits every day.


The long dresses with matching pants aren’t what I see women wearing in the US nor London nor even Kate wearing except during this trip to Pakistan.


----------



## Flatsy

Aimee3 said:


> The long dresses with matching pants aren’t what I see women wearing in the US nor London nor even Kate wearing except during this trip to Pakistan.


She can wear the dresses without the pants and wear the pants with regular shirts.  Did you really not know that's possible?



PurseUOut said:


> She's drawing attention to her own troubles by answering a question she was asked? She didn't belabor on or ask for sympathy - but merely expressing the challenges (often in one-word answers) she is facing being a new mother, newlywed amongst intense and unfair media scrutiny. She was even gracious enough to thank the interviewer for asking if she was OK.


The whole interview was arranged so she could say what she wanted to say.  Meghan has never done a personal interview since the engagement, and there's no reason why she had to do this one.  She chose to.   

And thanking him for asking her if she was ok - implying that the rest of the media don't - is disingenuous since the rest of the media has zero access to her and certainly isn't allowed to ask her personal questions about her state of mind.


----------



## Tivo

buffym said:


> *Meghan said, “The biggest thing that I know is that I never thought it would be easy, but I thought it would be fair.* And that’s the part that’s really hard to reconcile.”
> 
> There is nothing fair about her treatment. People are constantly saying Kate went do the same thing- when? When was Kate’s sons called a monkey, or Kate accused of funding terrorism?
> 
> Why is it okay for Kate to give interviews saying she was lonely and motherhood is hard but Meghan can’t.
> 
> The tabloids cross the line
> View attachment 4569988


I’m sorry, but this is the stuff I just can’t with her. What bubble is she living in that she thought her treatment would be “fair?”
Does she not understand the real world? I’m guessing she’s finally getting her wake up call and she doesn’t know no how to process it. It makes me roll my eyes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> I've noticed Harry has spoked about his mother's death a lot lately but never mentions her driver who was drunk (three times past the legal limit). Is he limited from discussing that piece?


I always think about that.  The fact that she called the paps to tell them she would be in France and where she was staying, that she trusted this new BF with her life, that she didn't wear a seatbelt, that she wouldn't just stop and pose for a photo which often appeases the paps and there's no reason to chase like it's a game...

The crash was tragic, I still remember where I was and that I was watching the news as it was being reported and it was so shocking and unbelievable... and we didn't want it to be so, but Harry certainly can't just blame the paps, can he?


----------



## lulu212121

buffym said:


> How is this Meghan’s fault, no one has the right to minimize anyone else issue. She was asked how she is doing. It is her story to tell and she has that right.


Who asked her how she was doing? I never heard the interviewer ask. 
ETA I've only seen the clip that was released.


----------



## A1aGypsy

There were many contributing factors for certain and I know you really do not like Diana but there is no way those paps should have been behaving the way they were. And there is no way they should have taken pictures of her as she died. 

That was a dark day for media.


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> If someone yelled at my child, I wouldn’t cry. I would say something to indicate they shouldn’t do that. If the reports is that she cried.. it sounds a bit made up. Who cries when someone bullies your kid? You get mad.  Why is Kate always the victim in the press?



There are pages and pages in this thread about vulnerable Harry crying when talking about his kid but post-partum Kate crying when someone is mean to her kid seems far fetched? I see.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

marthastoo said:


> Um, you have been reading this thread, right?    People not only believe and quote stories from the rags, but the comments in the comment section of said tabloids.  "Well, it must be true - I read it in the comment section!"



 That is exactly it. Most people are here to pick apart anything negative Meghan said or done.  I think a lot of it is hating Meghan who doesn’t fit the mold and rise to that kind of privilege/status. She is too outspoken, careless, calculating, self-promotional.  Every move Meghan makes would be seen as self serving or malicious. Even if she was some of these things, the assessment is quite one dimensional.  Real people aren’t like that. So yeah I gather some of the commenters are getting most of their info from tabloids .


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mrsinsyder said:


> There are pages and pages in this thread about vulnerable Harry crying when talking about his kid but post-partum Kate crying when someone is mean to her kid seems far fetched? I see.



Saying something to a child vs the barrage of criticisms H&M faced cant even be compared.  When Harry cries it is mental illness, when Kate cries it is post partum in depression.  Hm.... doesn’t add up bc it is made up.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> There were many contributing factors for certain and I know you really do not like Diana but there is no way those paps should have been behaving the way they were. And there is no way they should have taken pictures of her as she died.
> 
> That was a dark day for media.


I just said it was tragic and we didn't want to believe it or for it to be true... no need to assume what I feel.


----------



## A1aGypsy

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Saying something to a child vs the barrage of criticisms H&M faced cant even be compared.  When Harry cries it is mental illness, when Kate cries it is post partum in depression.  Hm.... doesn’t add up bc it is made up.



I’m just trying to follow. Post partum and depression are mental illnesses?


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m just trying to follow. Post partum and depression are mental illnesses?



You are right but the way they are perceived is quite different.  Harry’s mental disease is inherent whereas Kate situational.  Harry is mentally unstable whereas Kate cries Bc she had a baby. Mental illnesses are not accepted equally.

One thing I do appreciate what all four royals have done is work on breaking mental illness stigmas


----------



## A1aGypsy

Jayne1 said:


> I just said it was tragic and we didn't want to believe it or for it to be true... no need to assume what I feel.



Not assuming at all and didn’t mean it critically (though god knows it’s this thread). It seemed to be a neutral position regardless of what you thought of her was my point.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m just trying to follow. Post partum and depression are mental illnesses?



Yes, they are defined as such in the mental health and medical community.


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Interesting info about Henri Paul, the driver. He was the head of security for the hotel, the Ritz, that Dodi's father owned, Mohamed-al-Fayed. Henri Paul was the driver that Mohamed-al-Fayed only trusted to drive his son. He also drove for other celebrities. Henri Paul was known to sell information to tabloids about the hotel guests by meeting them at Harry's Bar at the rue Dauno.
> 
> There was a book I read and it's highly informative as the book not only dwells on the aspect of Princess Diana (it's part of a collective on international affairs). The author, Gordon Thomas, was a journalist investigator who was like the go-to person for international affairs and actually interviewed the father, when Dodi's father was spending millions of pounds to try to prove his theory about about the deaths of Princess Diana and his son. Of course I'm not turning this into a conspiracy theory.
> 
> Apparently, Henri Paul was being recruited by the Mossad to be an informer for political reasons of the guests in the hotel and they even did a psychological profile on him, but they backed off when Princess Diana died, thus the person they were recruiting also died.  The subsequent bent the Mossad came up with was that Henri Paul was actually a drunk, unpredictable and pill popper, who would fire maids and staff on a whim, one minute angry, the next minute affable. The gist of the investigation that Gordon Thomas did was that Henri Paul was becoming unhinged and the weight of what he had been doing could have driven him to be reckless.
> 
> Like I said the book was not only about Princess Diana but a substantial amount of the book focused on the recruitment, psychological profile of the driver, Henri Paul and the insane amount of money, Dodi's father spent trying to find answers to his son's death.


With all the money Mohamed Al-Fayed spent on trying to find out what really happened, you'd think he'd be able to find a definitive answer.  So many oddities surrounding that night.


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I think a lot of it is hating Meghan who doesn’t fit the mold and rise to that kind of privilege/status.



Serious question - what is the mold she's supposed to fit in? Harry has dated all kinds of women AFAIK.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting - she says re: tabloids, "I'm American, we don't have that here."


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mrsinsyder said:


> Serious question - what is the mold she's supposed to fit in? Harry has dated all kinds of women AFAIK.



I don’t think the mold is who Harry dated in the past but the mold expected of royal family by people of the U.K.  — essentially someone like Queen Elisabeth. I would say Kate resembles her far more than Meghan.  Firm but neutral.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting - she says re: tabloids, "I'm American, we don't have that here."



Are you saying Meghan said this? Or someone on this thread? 

The British tabloids is quite different from what you see here in America.  It is much more pervasive there.
ETA: although I am not sure what it is like outside of London


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Kate wore three dresses, several coats that are in her normal style, and several pairs of pants.  I think she'll wear almost everything again except the shalwar kameez, which were inexpensive.  And she was smart because her jewelry, shoes and bags were almost dirt cheap.



Maybe, you weren't aware but Kate's entire wardrobe for the 5 day, 4 night tour cost $13,947!
Her arrival outfit alone was $1,450 with $530 shoes. Tunics that cost $2,789. Reception Dress that cost $4,060 with $663 heels. Earrings that cost $6,137. A coat for $753. 

I, personally believe the cost of her wardrobe was excessive and ridiculous considering the scope of the tour.


----------



## mrsinsyder

*Meghan Markle's Lavish Morocco Wardrobe Includes $120K Dior Gown [PHOTOS]*
By Micah Ong 
03/01/19 AT 7:09 AM


Meghan Markle's clothing during her and Prince Harry's Morocco tour reportedly amounts to over $100,000.

Daily Mail reported that the pregnant Duchess of Sussex wore clothing totaling to over £110,000 ($145,655) when she and Prince Harry toured Morocco on behalf of Queen Elizabeth. This apparently doesn't include an unidentified pair of diamond earrings that is estimated to be priced at £110,700.89 ($146,511).

The most expensive piece she wore during the three-day trip in the north African country was reportedly a custom Dior gown, according to the outlet. The kaftan-style dress from the luxury fashion house is reportedly worth a whopping £90,000 ($119,114).


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Are you saying Meghan said this? Or someone on this thread?


Meghan says this in the interview.


----------



## hellosunshine

British Media just cannot help themselves. In the video below, Prince Harry commented on his relationship with his brother and the rumors surrounding a rift -



What does the media decide to print tomorrow?


----------



## hellosunshine

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Are you saying Meghan said this? Or someone on this thread?
> 
> The British tabloids is quite different from what you see here in America.  It is much more pervasive there.





She basically commented on the difference of how tabloids are regarding in the UK vs in the US. In the UK, they are consumed as "news" for some while in the US, our tabloids are considered a joke and are typically never taken seriously.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

The daily mail is as reliable as the enquirer and one of the tabloids H&M are suing.  The various McQueen is pretty similar to Dior.  Kate’s wardrobe from the first year of her marriage were mostly McQueen. Kate wore Nizam of Hyderabad necklace that is worth millions. 

If you add borrowed jewelry to any black tie event outfit, it could be easily over $100k. Why is it such a spectacle? From what I remembered, Kate and Williams vacation venues were reported to be outlandish. Why focus so hard on Meghan’s outfit?


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

hellosunshine said:


> She basically commented on the difference of how tabloids are regarding in the UK vs in the US. In the UK, they are consumed as "news" for some while in the US, our tabloids are considered a joke and are typically never taken seriously.




I used to go to work every morning taking the underground in London and everyone is reading the papers. Celebrity gossip news is typically mixed in with all news, which is a main difference.  The newspapers are everywhere and freely available. You don’t see this in major US cities like Nyc or La.

It is quite smart to mix it up to generate revenue. I think the reason why Meghan is the center of British tabloids is because gossip esp controversial people sells. The entire purpose is to entice those rumors and their goal is for people to eat it up. Much like the ppl on this thread.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> She's drawing attention to her own troubles by answering a question she was asked? She didn't belabor on or ask for sympathy - but merely expressing the challenges (often in one-word answers) she is facing being a new mother, newlywed amongst intense and unfair media scrutiny.  She was even gracious enough to thank the interviewer for asking if she was OK. But because she is privileged she has to tough it out and supress her feelings because - Africa, world suffering, etc. If she lied or downplayed her unhappiness people would say she was being fake/phony. She can never win.


but not gracious enough to acknowledge that her problems are nothing compared to some other people's?


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Why focus so hard on Meghan’s outfit?



Because this thread is about Meghan. I'm sure the Kate thread would be open to discussing her outfit costs. Kate's $500 shoes and such don't seem that crazy to me, I have shoes that cost that and I'm nowhere near royalty rich. Kate and Meghan are also at very different places in the royal family and comparing them seems pointless. I don't care that much about what Meghan spends on her clothes (besides that Dior monstrosity), I'm usually just disappointed in how badly she wears them.


----------



## Flatsy

theamericanchinadoll said:


> The daily mail is as reliable as the enquirer and one of the tabloids H&M are suing. The various McQueen is pretty similar to Dior. Kate’s wardrobe from the first year of her marriage were mostly McQueen. Kate wore Nizam of Hyderabad necklace that is worth millions.
> 
> If you add borrowed jewelry to any black tie event outfit, it could be easily over $100k. Why is it such a spectacle? From what I remembered, Kate and Williams vacation venues were reported to be outlandish. Why focus so hard on Meghan’s outfit?


Why are you not objecting to the totally off-topic calculation of Kate's wardrobe that was brought into this thread for the sole purpose of expressing outrage?  Why were you not pointing out that those calculations were unreliable?


----------



## PurseUOut

Flatsy said:


> She can wear the dresses without the pants and wear the pants with regular shirts.  Did you really not know that's possible?
> 
> 
> The whole interview was arranged so she could say what she wanted to say.  Meghan has never done a personal interview since the engagement, and there's no reason why she had to do this one.  She chose to.
> 
> And thanking him for asking her if she was ok - implying that the rest of the media don't - is disingenuous since the rest of the media has zero access to her and certainly isn't allowed to ask her personal questions about her state of mind.



In one paragraph you say she offers the media zero access to her, but now that she does grant a personal interview and lets the media in it's a problem that she is opening up and talking about her own struggles? Which is it?


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> Because this thread is about Meghan. I'm sure the Kate thread would be open to discussing her outfit costs. Kate's $500 shoes and such don't seem that crazy to me, I have shoes that cost that and I'm nowhere near royalty rich. Kate and Meghan are also at very different places in the royal family and comparing them seems pointless. I don't care that much about what Meghan spends on her clothes (besides that Dior monstrosity), I'm usually just disappointed in how badly she wears them.



Thank you! They always look like they just rolled out of bed. Harry's suits are always wrinkled and Meghan used to dress way better than she does now. Her SA mosque gettup was just lazy and came off as disrespectful.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mrsinsyder said:


> I don't care that much about what Meghan spends on her clothes (besides that Dior monstrosity), I'm usually just disappointed in how badly she wears them.



I do have to agree. Her outfits do not fit well but i wonder if it is intentional. Is she trying to present a more relaxed personality? It almost seem too poor fitting for it to be unintentional. 

Meghan’s outfits prior to her wedding were much better.


----------



## mrsinsyder

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Meghan’s outfits prior to her wedding were much better.



Totally agree.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Flatsy said:


> Why are you not objecting to the totally off-topic calculation of Kate's wardrobe that was brought into this thread for the sole purpose of expressing outrage?  Why were you not pointing out that those calculations were unreliable?



Because the daily mail has a vested interest in portraying a malicious Meghan bc it sells.  Obviously an outlandish slander: abusing tax dollars would be a pretty easy one.


----------



## PurseUOut

sdkitty said:


> but not gracious enough to acknowledge that her problems are nothing compared to some other people's?



Did Kate or William do so? Or is it called "opening up" when it's them. Why are they allowed to have personal vulnerabilities and struggles without putting a disclaimer on their privilege unlike Meghan, who has to be grateful in the face of being ripped apart by the media?

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...e-middleton-motherhood-family-action-charity/

https://www.thecut.com/2019/01/kate-middleton-motherhood-pressures-struggle.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/14/prince-william-struggled-fatherhood-kate-reveals/


----------



## Flatsy

PurseUOut said:


> In one paragraph you say she offers the media zero access to her, but now that she does grant a personal interview and lets the media in it's a problem that she is opening up and talking about her own struggles? Which is it?


There's no contradiction to what I said.  Meghan complained that the media doesn't ask her how she is, but she's only ever given one member of the media access to her to do so, and that's a friend she and Harry pre-authorized to specifically ask her that question.  It's disingenuous of Meghan to act like she has the type of relationship with the media in which they could be asking her how she is and choose not to.


----------



## rose60610

hellosunshine said:


> Maybe, you weren't aware but Kate's entire wardrobe for the 5 day, 4 night tour cost $13,947!
> Her arrival outfit alone was $1,450 with $530 shoes. Tunics that cost $2,789. Reception Dress that cost $4,060 with $663 heels. Earrings that cost $6,137. A coat for $753.
> 
> I, personally believe the cost of her wardrobe was excessive and ridiculous considering the scope of the tour.



Even I have worn clothes in a five day stretch that could add up to 14K, and I'm light years from being royalty.  And nobody asked ME if I was OK, either. But I'm over it now. I have coping skills.


----------



## jehaga

It would be selfish to expect someone at level 10 to feel much compassion or regard for someone at level 2 or 3. 



buffym said:


> Compassion and perspective can go hand and hand while stating your pain does not give you the right to disregards others.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> She basically commented on the difference of how tabloids are regarding in the UK vs in the US. In the UK, they are consumed as "news" for some while in the US, our tabloids are considered a joke and are typically never taken seriously.



Okay, so if they are a joke, then why is she having her friends talking to them (People Magazine).  Sometimes, I get the sense that she doesn’t always remember things from the past.


----------



## hellosunshine

rose60610 said:


> Even I have worn clothes in a five day stretch that could add up to 14K, and I'm light years from being royalty.  And nobody asked ME if I was OK, either. But I'm over it now. I have coping skills.



Good for you!

Anyway, to the many that are downplaying Kate's wardrobe costs, I hope you are equally as indifferent to Meghan's future wardrobe.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

I like Archie’s photos on her recent trip to Africa. He seemed very happy, and hope the press doesn’t hound him like Meghan. It would be shameful if they attack Archie.


----------



## jehaga

hellosunshine said:


> Maybe, you weren't aware but Kate's entire wardrobe for the 5 day, 4 night tour cost $13,947!
> Her arrival outfit alone was $1,450 with $530 shoes. Tunics that cost $2,789. Reception Dress that cost $4,060 with $663 heels. Earrings that cost $6,137. A coat for $753.
> 
> I, personally believe the cost of her wardrobe was excessive and ridiculous considering the scope of the tour.


$14k? For some members on this forum, that’s a slow Wednesday shopping at Neiman Marcus.


----------



## mdcx

Oh ffs, someone in Meghan’s role is not supposed to “open up”about how hard it is to be her. She’s supposed to graciously accept all the public scrutiny, do her job, give the public some nice pics of Archie, dress appropriately, spend appropriately, be demure, sweet, caring, respectful blah blah. 
If she did all the UK public would think she was an alright sort of girl and everything would be fine.
It is not done for a royal to behave like Meghan is. If she wants pity, celebrity, to be able to say/do whatever pops into her head with no consequences, be a private citizen.

There’s good reasons why no one else rushed to marry Harry - it’s a tough gig. And people had a lot of sympathy for Meghan at the beginning, but she’s kind of extinguished that by acting so entitled.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

This is an Australian news segment and panel discussion on one of the major networks, on the subject.

I really love Gretel Killeen's take on it, in general. It's a good, fiesty discussion.

“Some people give themselves the illusion of movement & progress in their lives by pulling other people back”. - Gretel Killeen


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Okay, so if they are a joke, then why is she having her friends talking to them (People Magazine).  Sometimes, I get the sense that she doesn’t always remember things from the past.



Ah well, magazines like People and Us Weekly aren’t technically like the tabloids. They are entertainment magazines marketed towards readers who love celebrities and want to read happy, nice stories about them. They are never critical because they don’t want to lose their access to the celebrities. I’m sure Meghan wishes all of the media would be like People.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mdcx said:


> Oh ffs, someone in Meghan’s role is not supposed to “open up”about how hard it is to be her. She’s supposed to graciously accept all the public scrutiny, do her job, give the public some nice pics of Archie, dress appropriately, spend appropriately, be demure, sweet, caring, respectful blah blah.
> If she did all the UK public would think she was an alright sort of girl and everything would be fine.
> It is not done for a royal to behave like Meghan is. If she wants pity, celebrity, to be able to say/do whatever pops into her head with no consequences, be a private citizen.
> 
> There’s good reasons why no one else rushed to marry Harry - it’s a tough gig. And people had a lot of sympathy for Meghan at the beginning, but she’s kind of extinguished that by acting so entitled.



I think part of the reason Meghan behaves this way was because how a Harry felt her mom was treated.  He wanted to make sure Meghan doesn’t take that same path that made her mom so miserable


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Regarding Harry's comments about moving to the continent of Africa, somewhere like South Africa, Cape Town for a rough example - I can appreciate his comments here.  It wouldn't work.  And it really shouldn't be considered - there is already so much disparity - though much progress has been made - between the white populations and others.

It would be too close an echo of colonialism, and the life they would need to live would be even more protected and viewed as privileged.

I think both he and Meghan love the continent, and that Harry should continue his good works there (even increase them), but a move doesn't seem feasible in reality.


----------



## gracekelly

jehaga said:


> $14k? For some members on this forum, that’s a slow Wednesday shopping at Neiman Marcus.



This is true.  

I decided to delete the rest of my post because the aggravation associated with potential responses is not worth it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

buffym said:


> How is this Meghan’s fault, no one has the right to minimize anyone else issue. She was asked how she is doing. It is her story to tell and she has that right.



She was asked by their friend or close media collaborator for the documentary - this was NOT a spontaneous question. I think a little logic would help here. This didn’t come out of nowhere and was completely staged - if you can’t see this then LOL 

The dialogue would have been written and rehearsed earlier as well most likely.


----------



## Meh-gan

mrsinsyder said:


> Can you clear a box for me to watch it so I don’t have the poors breathing on me?
> View attachment 4569987



Uh I thought the stans said her clearing out the section was fake news! Lmao


----------



## Grande Latte

mdcx said:


> Oh ffs, someone in Meghan’s role is not supposed to “open up”about how hard it is to be her. She’s supposed to graciously accept all the public scrutiny, do her job, give the public some nice pics of Archie, dress appropriately, spend appropriately, be demure, sweet, caring, respectful blah blah.
> If she did all the UK public would think she was an alright sort of girl and everything would be fine.
> It is not done for a royal to behave like Meghan is. If she wants pity, celebrity, to be able to say/do whatever pops into her head with no consequences, be a private citizen.
> 
> There’s good reasons why no one else rushed to marry Harry - it’s a tough gig. And people had a lot of sympathy for Meghan at the beginning, but she’s kind of extinguished that by acting so entitled.



Totally agree. You can't have the royal life without the disadvantages. It's a package deal. Be gracious about it. Most people are struggling in this world and without the perks.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Prior to the wedding, it seemed there was a lot of talk about the future of the monarchy, Charles’ plans for a stripped down amount of family members as “working royals”, the queen’s age, and talk of her stepping back a bit.  

I had thought that perhaps the quick wedding was Harry wanting to be more legitimate (as a grown-up) and take on more (royal) duties and responsibilities to be of service to his grandparents, to help ease their minds about transitions.  My thoughts aren’t coming together right, sorry. 

Sadly, that doesn’t seem to be the case.


----------



## VickyB

Grande Latte said:


> Totally agree. You can't have the royal life without the disadvantages. It's a package deal. Be gracious about it. Most people are struggling in this world and without the perks.



ITA.  Also, Ginge and Cringe are becoming insufferable. They have no clue how ridiculous, self-indulgent,  and out of touch they often sound and act. Hypocrites too.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I love the narrative that if they don't like it, then just leave the Royal Family, go to some far-flung part of the world etc.  As if all these articles, attention and the microscopic media focus on them will just stop, or ease off.







It didn't when she was on maternity leave, and it won't if they do it some other way.

These articles by outlets who obviously have no love for them, and have an issue with facts, are making money (and *lots* of it) off the backs of the Sussex's.  The headlines alone guarantee click-bait bucks - the more salacious the better, apparently.

Anyone who thinks this is an option for them, really needs to have another look -whichever side of the argument you're on - these websites are making _megabucks_ off them - and they will send "reporters" (<I find it hard to address some of these grammar-deficient people as true journo's) to any corner of the globe to keep up with what is going on with Harry and Meghan.

It. Won't. Stop.  

So something, somewhere needs to change.


----------



## threadbender

I think it could stop. Become boring. Don't purposely stir things up. Yes, do the work and do it well. But, just be dull. Nice clothes, worn well, appropriate footwear and outerwear. Be aware of your own actions. Be predictable. Be genuine but not over the top.
None of that appears to appeal to MH. And, that is fine. Maybe they would be happier in Hollywood amongst the celebrities there.As someone else said, ask Beyonce for advice there. There are so many famous people that, while MH are international celebrities, there are many celebrities in LA. And, apparently everyone there adores their princess so it might work.
Another approach is to embrace the so-called bully press. Smile at them, meet with them, share the typical parts of your day.
If the press thinks there is no story yeah, they might make something up but after a while it is too much work and there is always another scandal somewhere.
jmho


----------



## mdcx

threadbender said:


> I think it could stop. Become boring. Don't purposely stir things up. Yes, do the work and do it well. But, just be dull. Nice clothes, worn well, appropriate footwear and outerwear. Be aware of your own actions. Be predictable. Be genuine but not over the top.
> None of that appears to appeal to MH. And, that is fine. Maybe they would be happier in Hollywood amongst the celebrities there.As someone else said, ask Beyonce for advice there. There are so many famous people that, while MH are international celebrities, there are many famous folks in LA. And, apparently everyone there adores their princess so it might work.
> Another approach is to embrace the so-called bully press. Smile at them, meet with them, share the typical parts of your day.
> If the press thinks there is no story yeah, they might make something up but after a while it is too much work and there is always another scandal somewhere.
> jmho


Yes. Be Sophie Wessex #2 and they will soon lose interest. 
In some ways I think this is Meghan's dream come true - the press hanging on her every word. Does she care that it is largely negative coverage? I don't know that she does, despite her protestations.
What would really grind her gears imo is being ignored. So I doubt she will "settle in" to the role any time soon.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

chicaloca said:


> Some of the comments in this thread perfectly illustrate why people suffer in silence. I couldn’t imagine approaching a supposed friend about depression and being told to shut up because there are people starving in another country or people with cancer.



I know, right? Like what does one thing have to do with the other?


----------



## threadbender

Babydoll Chanel said:


> I know, right? Like what does one thing have to do with the other?


I apologized for my post being OT. My point was the irony in my asking my friend, my friend, mind you, someone I have a closer personal relationship with, if she was OK. Simply struck me that I was asking my dear, sweet close almost-sister friend, a question that Meghan expected from whom, I am not sure but appeared to want it from someone public. I would imagine, as I do, that she also has close personal friends who would ask her that question and am surprised they didn't. But, I am not her friend or confidant so, sorry, I didn't ask.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> (((hugs)))
> 
> The difference is that Kate said so after the fact and it was a statement... not a plea like Meg's comment sounded. Mostly it sounds like she's not happy being in the BRF.  She's just surviving being in the BRF.
> 
> Good thing they're going on sabbatical.  They must need the rest after working so hard this year.


I believe what Catherine said was part of a speech she gave and not, as some posters have said, an interview.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

hellosunshine said:


> In the spirit of "I don't want to read about her struggles. She lives a privileged life. Kate and other royals never complained about MOTHERHOOD or ANYTHING. They've never made such public comments!" Well, let's discuss...
> 
> Kate has a live-in nanny and lives in a 21 room wing of a palace which was renovated to the tune of 4.2 million pounds. She is blessed to have a close knit family. Her parents and friends live in the UK. She doesn't have a sociopathic sister running to her hate groups to trash her.
> 
> And yet, HERE IS WHAT CATHERINE, the newly canonized saint by the British media, has said time and time again about HER STRUGGLES with motherhood...
> 
> View attachment 4569853
> 
> View attachment 4569854
> 
> View attachment 4569852
> 
> View attachment 4569855
> 
> 
> 
> She opened up about the pressures of life in the spotlight and even mentioned WILLIAM'S STRUGGLES WITH FATHERHOOD. Now, this is a woman who has a nanny in her home 24/7 and her parents are a phone call away.
> 
> View attachment 4569858
> 
> View attachment 4569859
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan has a nanny during the weekdays but she/he doesn't live at Frogmore Cottage. Her mom lives an ocean away. Her family is the most psychotic bunch of people anyone could have had the misfortune of being related to. Her father has colluded with Piers Morgan, a man who abhors her very existence.
> 
> She has been trashed, lied about, bullied, body shamed, mommy shamed, and etc. The Daily Fail alone published 451 articles about Meghan in May 2019: NONE OF THEM WERE POSITIVE. NONE OF THEM HAD A POSITVE COMMENT IN THE REPLY SECTION. Look how differently she's covered!
> 
> View attachment 4569860
> 
> The lot of her "haters" want to strip ALL of her humanity. I think it's so indicative of some people's character, or lack thereof, to call her measured responses to Tom Bradby's questions as a COMPLAINT. This woman is scared to finish her own sentences because she knows in your eyes, she is devoid of humanity!
> 
> She should NEVER aknowledge having had a hard time with the British media yet EVERY SINGLE THING SHE DOES is smeared: from eating avocados to wearing a one shoulder gown. Oddly, in the same token, she's required to give these same soul-less bunch of critics unfettered access to her life, right?!
> 
> View attachment 4569861
> 
> View attachment 4569862
> 
> 
> 
> "She's an actress. She lives a good life". Well, so did countless other celebrities that have committed suicide. Being an actor or actress doesn't preclude you from HURT and pain.



Good post which shows the disgusting bias of the DM. But hey, what do you except from a trashy racist tabloid? They were one of the few tabloids who were very supportive of Nazi policies back in the day.


----------



## Sharont2305

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Are you saying Meghan said this? Or someone on this thread?
> 
> The British tabloids is quite different from what you see here in America.  It is much more pervasive there.
> ETA: although I am not sure what it is like outside of London


Meghan said this in the documentary. 
Tabloids cover more than just London


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

buffym said:


> Meghan said, “The biggest thing that I know is that I never thought it would be easy, but I thought it would be fair. And that’s the part that’s really hard to reconcile.”
> 
> There is nothing fair about her treatment. People are constantly saying Kate went do the same thing- when? When was Kate’s sons called a monkey, or Kate accused of funding terrorism?
> 
> Why is it okay for Kate to give interviews saying she was lonely and motherhood is hard but Meghan can’t.
> 
> The tabloids cross the line
> View attachment 4569988



Wow!!


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Oh ffs, someone in Meghan’s role is not supposed to “open up”about how hard it is to be her. She’s supposed to graciously accept all the public scrutiny, do her job, give the public some nice pics of Archie, dress appropriately, spend appropriately, be demure, sweet, caring, respectful blah blah.
> If she did all the UK public would think she was an alright sort of girl and everything would be fine.
> It is not done for a royal to behave like Meghan is. If she wants pity, celebrity, to be able to say/do whatever pops into her head with no consequences, be a private citizen.
> 
> There’s good reasons why no one else rushed to marry Harry - it’s a tough gig. And people had a lot of sympathy for Meghan at the beginning, but she’s kind of extinguished that by acting so entitled.


Spot on with everything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicaloca

threadbender said:


> . *Simply struck me that I was asking my dear, sweet close almost-sister friend, a question that Meghan expected from whom, I am not sure but appeared to want it from someone public. I would imagine, as I do, that she also has close personal friends who would ask her that question and am surprised they didn't. *But, I am not her friend or confidant so, sorry, I didn't ask.



All Meghan said was that not many people had asked if she was ok. Who Meghan expected to ask her, exactly how many people, and who specifically has asked was not stated so how could you conclude that her close friends didn’t ask her?


----------



## chicaloca

Flatsy said:


> There's no contradiction to what I said.  *Meghan complained that the media doesn't ask *her how she is, but she's only ever given one member of the media access to her to do so, and that's a friend she and Harry pre-authorized to specifically ask her that question.  It's disingenuous of Meghan to act like she has the type of relationship with the media in which they could be asking her how she is and choose not to.



Meghan didn’t say she expected the media to ask how she was doing. This is completely fabricated.


----------



## mdcx

Unfortunately I feel like there is a bit of truth in this comment:




https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...tml?ico=amp-comments-viewall#comments-7594213


----------



## chicaloca

hellosunshine said:


> In the spirit of "I don't want to read about her struggles. She lives a privileged life. Kate and other royals never complained about MOTHERHOOD or ANYTHING. They've never made such public comments!" Well, let's discuss...
> 
> Kate has a live-in nanny and lives in a 21 room wing of a palace which was renovated to the tune of 4.2 million pounds. She is blessed to have a close knit family. Her parents and friends live in the UK. She doesn't have a sociopathic sister running to her hate groups to trash her.
> 
> And yet, HERE IS WHAT CATHERINE, the newly canonized saint by the British media, has said time and time again about HER STRUGGLES with motherhood...
> 
> View attachment 4569853
> 
> View attachment 4569854
> 
> View attachment 4569852
> 
> View attachment 4569855
> 
> 
> 
> She opened up about the pressures of life in the spotlight and even mentioned WILLIAM'S STRUGGLES WITH FATHERHOOD. Now, this is a woman who has a nanny in her home 24/7 and her parents are a phone call away.
> 
> View attachment 4569858
> 
> View attachment 4569859
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan has a nanny during the weekdays but she/he doesn't live at Frogmore Cottage. Her mom lives an ocean away. Her family is the most psychotic bunch of people anyone could have had the misfortune of being related to. Her father has colluded with Piers Morgan, a man who abhors her very existence.
> 
> She has been trashed, lied about, bullied, body shamed, mommy shamed, and etc. The Daily Fail alone published 451 articles about Meghan in May 2019: NONE OF THEM WERE POSITIVE. NONE OF THEM HAD A POSITVE COMMENT IN THE REPLY SECTION. Look how differently she's covered!
> 
> View attachment 4569860
> 
> The lot of her "haters" want to strip ALL of her humanity. I think it's so indicative of some people's character, or lack thereof, to call her measured responses to Tom Bradby's questions as a COMPLAINT. This woman is scared to finish her own sentences because she knows in your eyes, she is devoid of humanity!
> 
> She should NEVER aknowledge having had a hard time with the British media yet EVERY SINGLE THING SHE DOES is smeared: from eating avocados to wearing a one shoulder gown. Oddly, in the same token, she's required to give these same soul-less bunch of critics unfettered access to her life, right?!
> 
> View attachment 4569861
> 
> View attachment 4569862
> 
> 
> 
> "She's an actress. She lives a good life". Well, so did countless other celebrities that have committed suicide. Being an actor or actress doesn't preclude you from HURT and pain.



well said!

The British tabloid made an industry out of Meghan with clickbait negative articles that have  basically dehumanized her. I’m glad Harry spoke up for his wife.


----------



## chicaloca

Lodpah said:


> l
> 
> Meghan making a mockery of true mental health to appease her appetite for fame is beyond incomprehensible.  If she cares for humanity so much when she starts at her own house aka her family then I’ll be sympathetic.
> 
> Sorry for the long post but I deal with mental health issues all day long, 24/7 with my daughter.



Meghan hasn’t spoken about mental health. her forte is women’s issues. She was asked about her life and she answered honestly. I’m not sure how that constitutes mockery of mental health? Also why would she need to discuss her mental health for fame when she’s already famous worldwide and the most googled woman in the world?  

Mental health is not an Olympics where a person  should have to prove their pain is greater than someone else’s in order to be allowed to process it without judgement. Our individual mental health issues do not negate the pain of what someone else is going through.


----------



## chicaloca

The documentary made it clear how much Harry and Meghan love each other. There is such a clear respect for one another. I can’t wait for the launch of their foundation.

because there’s not enough pics in this thread:

Harry the Gentleman:


----------



## Chagall

chicaloca said:


> The documentary made it clear how much Harry and Meghan love each other. There is such a clear respect for one another. I can’t wait for the launch of their foundation.
> 
> because there’s not enough pics in this thread:
> 
> Harry the Gentleman:


Some of the most gentlemanly men are terrible abusers behind closed doors where nobody can see them. This is obviously not the case with ‘H’ but by the same token these pictures prove nothing.


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> Even I have worn clothes in a five day stretch that could add up to 14K, and I'm light years from being royalty.  And nobody asked ME if I was OK, either. But I'm over it now. I have coping skills.



are you ok?


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> Totally agree.


 I still think about all the time the Roland Mouret clover dress she wore in navy on the eve of her wedding - might be my favorite thing I’ve ever seen her wear! And still want that dress for myself!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Duchess Meghan's  interview 'damaging' for royals, claims expert 

https://mol.im/a/7595725https://mol.im/a/7595725


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> Meghan didn’t say she expected the media to ask how she was doing. This is completely fabricated.


It's not "fabricated".  She was deliberately vague about who she was claiming is neglecting her wellbeing by not asking how she is, so it has to be inferred.  She may have meant her husband, but that's unlikely.  Since almost all of Meghan and Harry's complaints are directed at the media, I'm going with that.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> I believe what Catherine said was part of a speech she gave and not, as some posters have said, an interview.


I think her speeches and statements on being a mother also have come with the caveat that she knows she's in a privileged situation compared to many others.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I listened to the interview since it was on CNN this morning. This is one of her better acting jobs, maybe she’d have made it to a Lifetime movie recurring role if she’d done this earlier. 

She reminded me a bit of Elizabeth Holmes (who, as many may remember, was hailed as an incredible force for change too).


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Anyway, to the many that are downplaying Kate's wardrobe costs, I hope you are equally as indifferent to Meghan's future wardrobe.


Likewise, I will remember your decree that $14,000 is a totally unacceptable level of spending for 5 days packed with engagements, since Meghan routinely drops that much on 1-2 outfits.


----------



## buffym

Tivo said:


> I’m sorry, but this is the stuff I just can’t with her. What bubble is she living in that she thought her treatment would be “fair?”
> Does she not understand the real world? I’m guessing she’s finally getting her wake up call and she doesn’t know no how to process it. It makes me roll my eyes.



I don’t see it as a bubble, the press has lowered itself with dealing with her. Having to read your kid is a monkey, having your poisonous wedding flowers, doing charity work funds terrorism, or eating avocados funds gorilla war fare. 

That is what she is talking about and that is not standard, she’s the only royal wife that has had those stories.



lulu212121 said:


> Who asked her how she was doing? I never heard the interviewer ask.
> ETA I've only seen the clip that was released.



The documentary is on YouTube.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think her speeches and statements on being a mother also have come with the caveat that she knows she's in a privileged situation compared to many others.


Royals admitting that they have experienced feelings and struggles while empathizing with and trying to help people with similar struggles is generally a good thing.

It's a joke to pretend this is what Meghan and Harry were doing in their documentary.  They were complaining about their own problems, and their own problems only.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle's Lavish Morocco Wardrobe Includes $120K Dior Gown [PHOTOS]*
> By Micah Ong
> 03/01/19 AT 7:09 AM
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's clothing during her and Prince Harry's Morocco tour reportedly amounts to over $100,000.
> 
> Daily Mail reported that the pregnant Duchess of Sussex wore clothing totaling to over £110,000 ($145,655) when she and Prince Harry toured Morocco on behalf of Queen Elizabeth. This apparently doesn't include an unidentified pair of diamond earrings that is estimated to be priced at £110,700.89 ($146,511).
> 
> The most expensive piece she wore during the three-day trip in the north African country was reportedly a custom Dior gown, according to the outlet. The kaftan-style dress from the luxury fashion house is reportedly worth a whopping £90,000 ($119,114).



Meghan is on her third royal tour, the prices have gotten lower.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...-tour-style-clothes-pictures-prince-harry/amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.va...markle-south-africa-tour-wardrobe-message/amp

Which is inline, the more royal work the more clothes to use from.

“The Duchess packed approximately 30 outfits for the 10-day tour, where she often changed twice in one day. But it was far from extravagant: Her tour wardrobe reportedly cost roughly £4,000, “


----------



## buffym

Sharont2305 said:


> I believe what Catherine said was part of a speech she gave and not, as some posters have said, an interview.



It has been in just speeches, it hasn’t been just one time. Kate has spoken on different occasions how lonely and hard motherhood is.


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It. Won't. Stop.
> 
> So something, somewhere needs to change.


I think there are ways for Meghan and Harry to pull back the level of publicity, but it would be a gradual process.  And they want what they want right now now now.  

I agree with Meghan's statement that it's important to be happy and to thrive.  But it's unrealistic to expect to never have to ride out any difficult periods.  Although it feels like an eternity, Meghan and Harry have only been married for a little over a year.  She and Harry should have been prepared that things would be a little tumultuous in the first few years.  There were plenty of examples of that for them to learn from.

Meghan has had an unusually rough ride in the press, but I was surprised that they seem to be almost ready to throw in the towel in one way or another.  Harry should be worried right now about Meghan's history of dropping people and moving on when she's not fully happy, because she doesn't seem willing to tough anything out.


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> are you ok?



Yes, thank you!! I know at least somebody cares!!! I feel better!! 
Now where did I leave my chauffeured Bentley? Oh never mind, my bodyguards will escort me to it so I can get to the studio to publicly lament about all the inconveniences and struggles that I find myself in that common folk don't appreciate. You know, the media can really get to me sometimes. But it's the caring people, like you, that make my existence brighter!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Harry should be worried right now about Meghan's history of dropping people and moving on when she's not fully happy, because she doesn't seem willing to tough anything out.



Exactly. Maybe more people would be asking her if she was OK if she hadn't left them all in the dust.


----------



## Sharont2305

buffym said:


> It has been in just speeches, it hasn’t been just one time. Kate has spoken on different occasions how lonely and hard motherhood is.
> 
> View attachment 4570352


Yes, but not directly to a reporter like Meghan


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

mrsinsyder said:


> Exactly. Maybe more people would be asking her if she was OK if she hadn't left them all in the dust.



Asking this question in good faith, who else are these people M abandoned? Other than her deranged family?


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50128683

*Prince William 'worried' about Harry after ITV interview*

Prince William is concerned for his brother Harry and his wife Meghan after the couple said they were struggling, a Palace source has told the BBC.

The Duke of Cambridge is said to be "worried" about Prince Harry and hopes he and Meghan "are all right" after the admission in an ITV documentary.

The Palace source added that there was a view the couple were "in a fragile place".

Kensington Palace had no comment on the ITV film, which aired on Sunday.

The documentary followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their tour of southern Africa earlier this month.

In interviews, the couple both said they were struggling with the intense scrutiny from elements of the British tabloid press.
*...*


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> I listened to the interview since it was on CNN this morning. This is one of her better acting jobs, maybe she’d have made it to a Lifetime movie recurring role if she’d done this earlier.
> 
> She reminded me a bit of Elizabeth Holmes (who, as many may remember, was hailed as an incredible force for change too).


YES!!! I also get the Elizabeth Holmes vibes and have so from the start of this crazy story. It's eerie how these two women remind me of one another. The doe eyeing at men hustling expertise, the something is totally off red flags. Didn't anyone else see how baby Archie was handled during the Tutu meeting in SA? I'll see if I can find a clip again, but Meghan pushed him in the chest at one point and looked really irritated with the little one.

I had the same reaction watching a Holmes documentary some time ago as I do when watching Meghan emote and affect. Your senses just go "Warning! Warning!" Reminds me of Gary Larson's "How Nature says, "Don't touch." Well vaguely  but those who also see this in Meghan and Holmes probably know what I'm getting at.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> YES!!! I also get the Elizabeth Holmes vibes and have so from the start of this crazy story. It's eerie how these two women remind me of one another. The doe eyeing at men hustling expertise, the something is totally off red flags. Didn't anyone else see how baby Archie was handled during the Tutu meeting in SA? I'll see if I can find a clip again, but Meghan pushed him in the chest at one point and looked really irritated with the little one.


Even the fake-sounding deeper voice and her speech patterns. Yikes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s so funny that there is an Elizabeth Holmes with a very popular insta @eholmes about royals, and she’s mentioned how often she gets confused for “that” Elizabeth Holmes.


----------



## Jayne1

threadbender said:


> I think it could stop. Become boring. Don't purposely stir things up. Yes, do the work and do it well. But, just be dull. Nice clothes, worn well, appropriate footwear and outerwear. Be aware of your own actions. Be predictable. Be genuine but not over the top.


Exactly.  Be like Anne, Princess Royal, with nicer clothes.


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> I think it could stop. Become boring. Don't purposely stir things up. Yes, do the work and do it well. But, just be dull. Nice clothes, worn well, appropriate footwear and outerwear. Be aware of your own actions. Be predictable. Be genuine but not over the top.
> None of that appears to appeal to MH. And, that is fine. Maybe they would be happier in Hollywood amongst the celebrities there.As someone else said, ask Beyonce for advice there. There are so many famous people that, while MH are international celebrities, there are many celebrities in LA. And, apparently everyone there adores their princess so it might work.
> Another approach is to embrace the so-called bully press. Smile at them, meet with them, share the typical parts of your day.
> If the press thinks there is no story yeah, they might make something up but after a while it is too much work and there is always another scandal somewhere.
> jmho


right.....I don't see Amal Clooney complaining about being stalked.  To be fair, H&M have to have a higher profile due to royal duties but Amal is in public when she works and does get photographed. As stated, just be a bit more boring, less controversial.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Exactly.  Be like Anne, Princess Royal, with nicer clothes.


and hair and makeup


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> Duchess Meghan's  interview 'damaging' for royals, claims expert
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7595725


I don't think we need an expert to tell us that airing (royal) dirty laundry is a bad thing, lol. These two need to just go away and regroup.


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4570301
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...tml?ico=amp-comments-viewall#comments-7594213


Creepy.


----------



## jehaga

Chagall said:


> Some of the most gentlemanly men are terrible abusers behind closed doors where nobody can see them. This is obviously not the case with ‘H’ but by the same token these pictures prove nothing.


“H”. How utterly clever and original!

“Harry” is easier to say than “H”. And the way she giggled when she revealed that nickname was so annoyingly affected. 

H is looking more and more like someone with Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## sdkitty

jehaga said:


> “H”. How utterly clever and original!
> 
> “Harry” is easier to say than “H”. And the way she giggled when she revealed that nickname was so annoyingly affected.
> 
> H is looking more and more like someone with Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## Jayne1

chicaloca said:


> The documentary made it clear how much Harry and Meghan love each other. There is such a clear respect for one another. I can’t wait for the launch of their foundation.
> 
> because there’s not enough pics in this thread:
> 
> Harry the Gentleman:


Yes, he was brought up with good manners and helping Meg on with her coat can make sure no ungraceful photos of her holding her coat, slipping one arm through the arm hole and then reaching behind her back to find the other arm hole... no, too awkward, Harry needs to hold the coat.

Also, I've noticed he always holds her hand and looks down on the ground when she's wearing spiky heels.  Can you imagine the photos if she stumbles? No, he has to help manoeuvre her way in high heels


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Likewise, I will remember your decree that $14,000 is a totally unacceptable level of spending for 5 days packed with engagements, since Meghan routinely drops that much on 1-2 outfits.



Of course, I didn't expect anything less...my point flew right over your head!  
Moving on....


----------



## lanasyogamama

jehaga said:


> “H”. How utterly clever and original!
> 
> “Harry” is easier to say than “H”. And the way she giggled when she revealed that nickname was so annoyingly affected.
> 
> H is looking more and more like someone with Stockholm Syndrome.



I actually really dislike it when a woman calls a man by a different name then he had been called his whole life. 

It makes me feel like they are trying to either change him into a different person, or distance him from his family. At least that’s how it has seemed for me in real life when the name thing happened.


----------



## hellosunshine

lanasyogamama said:


> I actually really dislike it when a woman calls a man by a different name then he had been called his whole life.
> 
> It makes me feel like they are trying to either change him into a different person, or distance him from his family. At least that’s how it has seemed for me in real life when the name thing happened.



It's a nickname given to him by his wife. In my life, I've witnessed and/or overheard countless couples refer to each other with cute, little nicknames. You're over analyzing the situation.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> It's a nickname given to him by his wife. In my life, I've witnessed and/or overheard countless couples refer to each other with cute, little nicknames. You're over analyzing the situation.


we're all entitled to our opinions here


----------



## youngster

It's unfortunate and I think an example of their joint, poor decision making that in the middle of their tour of struggling, third world countries, they decide to draw the focus away from the issues they were sent there to highlight, by filing lawsuits against the press and giving speeches and doing interviews complaining about how mean people are being to them. There was no need to overshadow the tour with lawsuits, speeches, interviews and this documentary. 

They both seem so swept up in their narrative of their misery that they can't see the forest for the trees. Their lives are difficult, so challenging, they are not "thriving, just surviving", to paraphrase Meghan.  As if they are just barely making their rent payment each month and can just keep food on the table, instead of being incredibly privileged, with unlimited wealth, with a full staff of people to take care of them, their baby, and their houses round the clock.  I have no idea why they think this would cause an outpouring of sympathy from the British public.

I think the Queen and Charles need to sit these two down and have a nice long chat.  They need to go away for awhile, six months or a year, and get their heads on straight and figure out if they can live within the basic rules of the family, carry out their duties calmly and consistently, and ignore the press.  It's basically worked for all the other members of the family for decades.


----------



## bag-mania

Some couples bring out the best in each other. They give each other strength. These two do not do that. They both seem greatly diminished from who they were a year ago. The media isn’t responsible for that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-mania said:


> Some couples bring out the best in each other. They give each other strength. These two do not do that. They both seem greatly diminished from who they were a year ago. The media isn’t responsible for that.


I actually do see them as giving each other strength. Having a partner that loves and supports you can reinforce/strengthen bad habits as easily as good ones. It could be that 'H" has always wanted to wage war against the press and Meghan has given him the strength to stand up and do it - and his family didn't allow it before. They have obviously gone downhill superfast in terms of who they were individually, but as a couple they could actually be quite strong. It becomes an an us against the world mentality.


----------



## maryg1

CeeJay said:


> Actually, you can blame the Europeans (_especially the Italians_) for this.  My Italian uncle, when he would come to visit us in the US, ALWAYS wore his coat this way (the arms not inside).  I asked him why and he said "_well, that way I can slip it on and off much more easily_" .. oh, okay!   Not that you see it as much today, but I can tell you that I can immediately spot a European when I see it (that and usually their sunglasses or glasses .. and especially their shoes (_oftentimes impeccable_)!
> 
> However, look at this NY Post article .. kinda funny! https://nypost.com/2015/09/16/stop-draping-your-coat-over-your-shoulders-you-look-like-an-idiot/


I’ve never worn a coat that way, but I always wear my sunglasses, even in Winter!


----------



## Meh-gan

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I love the narrative that if they don't like it, then just leave the Royal Family, go to some far-flung part of the world etc.  As if all these articles, attention and the microscopic media focus on them will just stop, or ease off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It didn't when she was on maternity leave, and it won't if they do it some other way.
> 
> These articles by outlets who obviously have no love for them, and have an issue with facts, are making money (and *lots* of it) off the backs of the Sussex's.  The headlines alone guarantee click-bait bucks - the more salacious the better, apparently.
> 
> Anyone who thinks this is an option for them, really needs to have another look -whichever side of the argument you're on - these websites are making _megabucks_ off them - and they will send "reporters" (<I find it hard to address some of these grammar-deficient people as true journo's) to any corner of the globe to keep up with what is going on with Harry and Meghan.
> 
> It. Won't. Stop.
> 
> So something, somewhere needs to change.



They make money off them because they ARE royals. If they stop that and don’t attend royal events and be seen in tiaras etc they won’t get the attention a regular royal would get. They aren’t royal, no one would care much anymore after awhile. 

The press makes money now because there was a royal wedding, a newborn, early days of marriage. The novelty wears off even if they stayed royal. 

It wouldn’t stop in reality because they wouldn’t keep out of the spotlight after leaving the royal fam. They would be on red carpets and hamming it up with celebs. Don’t get it twisted and try to argue they want a life away from the spotlight - they don’t.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> They need to go away for awhile, six months or a year, and get their heads on straight and figure out if they can live within the basic rules of the family, carry out their duties calmly and consistently, and ignore the press. It's basically worked for all the other members of the family for decades.


Amen!  

There's just SO. MUCH.DRAMA.  

If they really believe that the drawbacks of royal life are such that they can't thrive and be happy, it's possible for them to make some clear-headed decisions to change their situation.  Maybe that means withdrawing from royal life completely and maybe it doesn't.  But filing out lawsuits, issuing manifestos, crying on TV - none of that is going to lessen the drama in their lives.


----------



## jehaga

lanasyogamama said:


> I actually really dislike it when a woman calls a man by a different name then he had been called his whole life.
> 
> It makes me feel like they are trying to either change him into a different person, or distance him from his family. At least that’s how it has seemed for me in real life when the name thing happened.


Have you ever read “The Two Mrs. Grenvilles” by Dominick Dunne? The main character in the book (based on real life events) renames her newly “caught” husband. It was a bid at total control.
That’s what I thought of when I watched that clip of MM. 

Also, there’s almost nothing more annoying than a grown woman acting coy and precious.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Amen!
> 
> There's just SO. MUCH.DRAMA.
> 
> If they really believe that the drawbacks of royal life are such that they can't thrive and be happy, it's possible for them to make some clear-headed decisions to change their situation.  Maybe that means withdrawing from royal life completely and maybe it doesn't.  But filing out lawsuits, issuing manifestos, crying on TV - none of that is going to lessen the drama in their lives.


AMEN three-fold!!

I’m hoping that their trip to the US will get them some clarity, but I am concerned about the fact that they will be in the thick of the paparazzi out here which can be fierce .. it will be telling to see what happens.


----------



## Flatsy

Meh-gan said:


> It wouldn’t stop in reality because they wouldn’t keep out of the spotlight after leaving the royal fam. They would be on red carpets and hamming it up with celebs. Don’t get it twisted and try to argue they want a life away from the spotlight - they don’t.


True.  Is there really anybody who believes they want to get out of the spotlight?  If they step away from the royal family, I think everyone's expecting them just to change venue to the US where the media is friendlier.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan's makeup artist commented on this lovely video made in support of Meghan- (love it!)


----------



## jehaga

youngster said:


> It's unfortunate and I think an example of their joint, poor decision making that in the middle of their tour of struggling, third world countries, they decide to draw the focus away from the issues they were sent there to highlight, by filing lawsuits against the press and giving speeches and doing interviews complaining about how mean people are being to them. There was no need to overshadow the tour with lawsuits, speeches, interviews and this documentary.
> 
> They both seem so swept up in their narrative of their misery that they can't see the forest for the trees. Their lives are difficult, so challenging, they are not "thriving, just surviving", to paraphrase Meghan.  As if they are just barely making their rent payment each month and can just keep food on the table, instead of being incredibly privileged, with unlimited wealth, with a full staff of people to take care of them, their baby, and their houses round the clock.  I have no idea why they think this would cause an outpouring of sympathy from the British public.
> 
> I think the Queen and Charles need to sit these two down and have a nice long chat.  They need to go away for awhile, six months or a year, and get their heads on straight and figure out if they can live within the basic rules of the family, carry out their duties calmly and consistently, and ignore the press.  It's basically worked for all the other members of the family for decades.



“Not Thrivin’! Just Survivin‘!” Her fans should make this their official slogan!


----------



## jehaga

hellosunshine said:


> It's a nickname given to him by his wife. In my life, I've witnessed and/or overheard countless couples refer to each other with cute, little nicknames. You're over analyzing the situation.


Isn’t that why we’re all here, to over-analyze a person whose existence has absolutely no bearing on our own lives? It’s all in the name of good escapist fun.


----------



## Tivo

buffym said:


> I don’t see it as a bubble, the press has lowered itself with dealing with her. Having to read your kid is a monkey, having your poisonous wedding flowers, doing charity work funds terrorism, or eating avocados funds gorilla war fare.
> 
> That is what she is talking about and that is not standard, she’s the only royal wife that has had those stories.
> 
> 
> 
> The documentary is on YouTube.



The British Press has been low and viewed as such for as long as I can remember. It was not going to be fair and it would eat her alive. Many people said this.
But Meghan wanted to be in the Royal Family. So here it is. This is what she wanted.
The Daily Mail was hounding her and writing viciously about her when it was only “rumored” they were dating...just a few months in. Look up the articles. Meanwhile she was making suggestive Instagram posts hinting at Harry here and there. She wanted to tell the world but didn’t come out and say, all the while getting shade thrown at her in the articles, and getting roasted in the comments section.

It was obvious she was getting in way over her head, so this idea that she thought coverage would be fair is so far from reality. She’s in the world of celebrity where anything you say and do can and will be used against you. How could she possibly think it would be fair.

Throw in the racial implications and it’s a time bomb. I wonder if because she’s been so fair skinned and has very Caucasian features, with mostly Caucasian friends and exes, if she’s every really understood how unfair racism is. How ugly and unrelenting it can be. Because that’s the world you live in as a person of color. It’s always around the corner and ready to bite. That’s the “wake up call” I’m talking about.
Just because Sally and Maggie aren’t racist, doesn’t mean Gene, Mary, Tom and Dan aren’t. And while S&M have the privilege of not witnessing it, POC is still dealing with Gene, Mary, Tom and Dan nonstop.

Meghan needs to learn to let some things go, instead of fighting it all the time. She needs and wants to hear accolades, and all she’s letting in is negativity because it’s easy to become obsessed when you’re researching yourself nonstop. Checking to see if the tide is turning.

She’s inexperienced with handling the spotlight and it shows. She needs to stop reacting and just build a life focused on the good. But I think she wants to move back to the states and live as a celebrity and move in those circles.


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> AMEN three-fold!!
> 
> I’m hoping that their trip to the US will get them some clarity, but I am concerned about the fact that they will be in the thick of the paparazzi out here which can be fierce .. it will be telling to see what happens.


The paps in LA will be loving on them, though, so I don't think it will bother them. They will be with their friends and be happy and carefree.


----------



## mrsinsyder

jehaga said:


> “Not Thrivin’! Just Survivin‘!” Her fans should make this their official slogan!


They don't want to admit she said it though.


----------



## CeeJay

maryg1 said:


> I’ve never worn a coat that way, but I always wear my sunglasses, even in Winter!


Same here, although I have to admit when I'm at home, I sometimes drape my "house sweater" over my shoulders, but outside the house? .. no way!  Sunglasses are a must for me all year long!


----------



## buffym

Tivo said:


> The British Press has been low and viewed as such for as long as I can remember. It was not going to be fair and it would eat her alive. Many people said this.
> But Meghan wanted to be in the Royal Family. So here it is. This is what she wanted.
> The Daily Mail was hounding her and writing viciously about her when it was only “rumored” they were dating...just a few months in. Look up the articles. Meanwhile she was making suggestive Instagram posts hinting at Harry here and there. She wanted to tell the world but didn’t come out and say, all the while getting shade thrown at her in the articles, and getting roasted in the comments section.
> 
> It was obvious she was getting in way over her head, so this idea that she thought coverage would be fair is so far from reality. She’s in the world of celebrity where anything you say and do can and will be used against you. How could she possibly think it would be fair.
> 
> Throw in the racial implications and it’s a time bomb. I wonder if because she’s been so fair skinned and has very Caucasian features, with mostly Caucasian friends and exes, if she’s every really understood how unfair racism is. How ugly and unrelenting it can be. Because that’s the world you live in as a person of color. It’s always around the corner and ready to bite.
> Just because Sally and Maggie aren’t racist, doesn’t mean Gene, Mary, Tom and Dan aren’t. And while S&M have the privilege of not witnessing it, POC is still dealing with Gene, Mary, Tom and Dan nonstop.
> 
> Meghan needs to learn to let some things go, instead of fighting it all the time. She needs and wants to hear accolades, and all she’s letting in is negativity because it’s easy to become obsessed when you’re researching yourself nonstop. Checking to see if the tide is turning.
> 
> She’s inexperienced with handling the spotlight and it shows. She needs to stop reacting and just build a life focused on the good. But I think she wants to move back to the states and live as a celebrity and move in those circles.



Agree to disagree, I think it is hard to let things go when people are attacking your child and the press are gleefully repeating it. Meghan was quit during maternity leave yet the press didn’t leave her alone. 



threadbender said:


> The paps in LA will be loving on them, though, so I don't think it will bother them. They will be with their friends and be happy and carefree.



I wonder if this is even true, the reporter who broke it was the same one who said Meghan and Harry were moving to Africa and that turned to be false.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> True.  Is there really anybody who believes they want to get out of the spotlight?  If they step away from the royal family, I think everyone's expecting them just to change venue to the US where the media is friendlier.


Media is friendlier? .. heck no, think about how many celebrities have filed lawsuits and/or assaulted the papparazzi out here!!!  Like I said before, that time that some jerk pap thought my husband was a celeb on "The Office" show, I was shocked at how quickly they surrounded us and started flashing away.  I have issues with camera lights to begin with, and besides not even being able to move, I was pretty much blinded for a few hours after that event!  I think NYC is better; not as many .. but out here, you constantly see them!


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> It's unfortunate and I think an example of their joint, poor decision making that in the middle of their tour of struggling, third world countries, they decide to draw the focus away from the issues they were sent there to highlight, by filing lawsuits against the press and giving speeches and doing interviews complaining about how mean people are being to them. There was no need to overshadow the tour with lawsuits, speeches, interviews and this documentary.
> 
> They both seem so swept up in their narrative of their misery that they can't see the forest for the trees. Their lives are difficult, so challenging, they are not "thriving, just surviving", to paraphrase Meghan.  As if they are just barely making their rent payment each month and can just keep food on the table, instead of being incredibly privileged, with unlimited wealth, with a full staff of people to take care of them, their baby, and their houses round the clock.  I have no idea why they think this would cause an outpouring of sympathy from the British public.
> 
> I think the Queen and Charles need to sit these two down and have a nice long chat.  They need to go away for awhile, six months or a year, and get their heads on straight and figure out if they can live within the basic rules of the family, carry out their duties calmly and consistently, and ignore the press.  It's basically worked for all the other members of the family for decades.



This. 100%. They really do need a time out to step back, assess the true nature of their lives, and embrace an attitude of gratitude. You would think going to third world countries, seeing the poor in your own country, and knowing most of the world has it much worse than you do would wake them up.

Look at some of the actresses who have had some bad press in the past and they've kept their heads up and carried on. The more you act like they are getting to you, the more they will continue.


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> Media is friendlier? .. heck no, think about how many celebrities have filed lawsuits and/or assaulted the papparazzi out here!!! Like I said before, that time that some jerk pap thought my husband was a celeb on "The Office" show, I was shocked at how quickly they surrounded us and started flashing away. I have issues with camera lights to begin with, and besides not even being able to move, I was pretty much blinded for a few hours after that event! I think NYC is better; not as many .. but out here, you constantly see them!


They would be trading off what they have in the UK (unpleasant criticism, but lots of protection from the paparazzi) to the US (fawning articles, but paparazzi who will be all over them).  

And will they stop complaining?  I don't think so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

LittleStar88 said:


> This. 100%. They really do need a time out to step back, assess the true nature of their lives, and embrace an attitude of gratitude. You would think going to third world countries, seeing the poor in your own country, and knowing most of the world has it much worse than you do would wake them up.
> 
> Look at some of the actresses who have had some bad press in the past and they've kept their heads up and carried on. The more you act like they are getting to you, the more they will continue.


Perfectly said! I don't doubt that Meghan is feeling overwhelmed and that the press is starting to get to her, but they would both do well to put it in perspective. I think instead of complaining to the media that her life is such a struggle, she should channel that toward something positive which also makes a subtle yet clear statement, such as working with an anti-bullying charity. Though I'm sure her feelings are valid and she is entitled to them, NO ONE who has ever lived in the real world would be able to sympathize with her perceived plight.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

LittleStar88 said:


> . The more you act like they are getting to you, the more they will continue.



Yep!  I agree. If their goal is to stop the harassment from the press, they need to retreat until this all blows over.  Their course of action is very bold and will backfire.  I do like Meghan but I don’t agree with how they handled it.  The more she and Harry speaks, the more they material she give the press to malign.  For example, the “no one has asked” comment was really her thanking the reporter who seemed sympathetic.  Having seen the clip, the comment wasn’t a big deal but now it is a click bait on a bunch of newsfeeds.  Instead, people are overreacting to it and painting her conceited.   This certainly isn’t the first time that a phrase is taken out of context to attack someone.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> AMEN three-fold!!
> 
> I’m hoping that their trip to the US will get them some clarity, but I am concerned about the fact that they will be in the thick of the *paparazzi out here *which can be fierce .. it will be telling to see what happens.



But Meghan said we don’t have  that out here?


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

lanasyogamama said:


> But Meghan said we don’t have  that out here?



Did she say tabloid or paparazzi?


----------



## LittleStar88

I wonder if it is true they will come to Los Angeles. I've seen this popping up in the news throughout the weekend.

In the event they do, I am sure her dad will make lots of noise about how they are soooo close but won't come for a visit. They should have a contingency plan for all of the troublemakers on her paternal side of the family in the event they do come to the US for a while


----------



## Sharont2305

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Did she say tabloid or paparazzi?


Tabloid


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Sharont2305 said:


> Tabloid



That’s what I thought. The British tabloids is different from the Us but ultimately report the same stuff kinda like page six in the New York post. 


I can’t blame Meghan for not speaking to her dads side of the family.  They seem horrible, envious, and complete embarrassment who never cared for her at all.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> I think the Queen and Charles need to sit these two down and have a nice long chat.  They need to go away for awhile, six months or a year, and get their heads on straight and figure out if they can live within the basic rules of the family, carry out their duties calmly and consistently, and ignore the press.  It's basically worked for all the other members of the family for decades.


I think it should be Philip. He was so vocal about not liking Fergie and Diana because they loved drawing attention to themselves and not attracting attention to the work and the firm. 

 He’d be scary and maybe they’d listen. lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> I think it should be Philip. He was so vocal about not liking Fergie and Diana because they loved drawing attention to themselves and not attracting attention to the work and the firm.
> 
> He’d be scary and maybe they’d listen. lol


Until the two Wokes leak to the press that he’s unfair to them because he’s an old racist.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I think it should be Philip. He was so vocal about not liking Fergie and Diana because they loved drawing attention to themselves and not attracting attention to the work and the firm.
> 
> He’d be scary and maybe they’d listen. lol



Philip isn’t as scary as he was 30 years ago. If it’s anyone it should be Charles. But I don’t think anyone should school them. They aren’t kids. They already know what they are supposed to be doing and if they reject that and they screw up their lives that’s their choice. They have distanced themselves from the others so I think the family is letting them swim on their own.


----------



## threadbender

Jayne1 said:


> I think it should be Philip. He was so vocal about not liking Fergie and Diana because they loved drawing attention to themselves and not attracting attention to the work and the firm.
> 
> He’d be scary and maybe they’d listen. lol


I had a super long post all ready and lost it! lol About the 4th time it has happened. Guess I need to write in a document then paste it.
Not sure they will listen to Phillip.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Philip isn’t as scary as he was 30 years ago. If it’s anyone it should be Charles. But I don’t think anyone should school them. They aren’t kids. They already know what they are supposed to be doing and if they reject that and they screw up their lives that’s their choice. They have distanced themselves from the others so I think the family is letting them *swim* *sink* on their own.



Fixed it for you ..


----------



## threadbender

I have stated before that I was really happy for Harry when they got engaged. I thought it was the beginning of a terrific chapter in his life. He was getting married, have his own family apart from William and Charles and the Queen. Perhaps, have children and be happy.
The cracks started to show prior to the wedding. The thing with her Dad, well, hey, family can be complicated, right? But, it was odd that the only member of her family who attended was her mother. 
After the wedding, they seemed OK. Yes, there were a few hiccups but then, she was pregnant! Yeah, a baby to look forward to. Yes, she seemed pretty self-absorbed but between hormones, a new country, her body changing, OK,.
Baby Archie! Yes! A healthy, baby boy whose birth and other events were shrouded in secrecy. Well, it is their son, so their choice.
Oh boy, hypocrisy central at the Google camp. That was really a bad decision. Then, other celebrities defending them. eeeks
Africa. A nice tour, they looked happy and Archie was there! Yes!!! Sweet baby boy!
Then, the ****storm hit. A perfect storm. Lawsuits, crying on camera, tweets declaring how bullied they are, surviving not living. Absolutely no self-awareness. Embracing victimhood. The opposite of woke.
I realize many believe they have done nothing wrong or to be criticized for. Others believe they are purposely undermining the Firm. Still others, that they are just that oblivious. Not my call.
MH may want to sit down and decide what it is they want and then do it. 
If they wish to be part of the BRF and keep that job, then follow protocols or discuss changes with their boss, not the press or their celebrity friends.
If they choose to leave the Firm, they have options. I mean, it is not like they have to worry about money. They can do any number of things to bring voice to their passions. They can move to the US and raise Archie near his maternal grandmother, be close to their celebrity pals and so on.
I hope they can come up with a plan that is satisfying to them.


----------



## bag-mania

What could the older generation tell them? Some version of how they should suck it up and not let the media get to them and, above all, do not show weakness.

They have already gone beyond that with their pity party interview and their “protect me” lawsuit.


----------



## zen1965

This is turning into such a circus.
She married a member of the British royal family. People across the pond twittering up a storm in her support is pointless. It will neither endear her to the British public nor the Firm. Unless both of them radically change their approach, they will not live this down. Rather sad, really.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

If you think about it it is their job to be in the public eye. It’s their day to day job. If they need to work on personal issues, do what most people do, take personal or sick leave and deal with it. You can complain to Human Resources about your problems, unfair treatment but know the rules, Human Resources is not your friend. They work for management. Yes I’m making an analogy here but the rules are the same.


----------



## threadbender

zen1965 said:


> This is turning into such a circus.
> She married a member of the British royal family. People across the pond twittering up a storm in her support is pointless. It will neither endear her to the British public nor the Firm. Unless both of them radically change their approach, they will not live this down. Rather sad, really.


It really is sad


----------



## buffym

zen1965 said:


> This is turning into such a circus.
> She married a member of the British royal family. People across the pond twittering up a storm in her support is pointless. It will neither endear her to the British public nor the Firm. Unless both of them radically change their approach, they will not live this down. Rather sad, really.



But, where is the criticism coming from, this thread is critical but how many posters are from the UK or Commonwealth.

Meghan has an engagement, I expect the people their do not have as negative viewpoint as some may think.

I’ve seen tweets and support from people in the UK not just America.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Prince William is ‘worried’ about the Sussexes, he thinks they’re ‘in a fragile place’*




As always, if you want to spend an afternoon getting angry at the state of the Windsors, look no further than our royal archives. Start with Prince Harry and Meghan’s South Pacific tour last year and notice how the stories around the Sussexes changed dramatically after what was a very successful tour for two of the most popular royal figures. That was the beginning of what became a year-long smear campaign in which Meghan could do nothing right, and members of the British press were devoting endless column spaces to everything from how she held her baby bump to what she wore to Wimbledon.

The question was always WHY the sudden confluence of smears and WHO was behind it. Some say the racist press was just being racist and ugly. Some said Charles was behind it all, the man behind the curtain. Others say that William was the one willfully shoving Harry and Meghan under the bus whenever possible. I believe it’s “all of the above” – after studying the careful wording of many of the tabloids’ reports, I believe that there are people in Buckingham Palace, Clarence House _and_ Kensington Palace all trying to _“put the Sussexes in their place.”_ We later learned (through rumors and second-hand sources) that William was happily pushing stories about Meghan and Harry to keep the focus off of the Rose Hanbury story too. So…given Harry and Meghan’s recent comments and their general air of sadness, what do you make of this?



> Prince William is concerned for his brother Harry and his wife Meghan after the couple said they were struggling, a Palace source has told the BBC. The Duke of Cambridge is said to be “worried” about Prince Harry and hopes he and Meghan “are alright” following the admission in an ITV documentary.
> 
> The Palace source added that there was a view the couple were “in a fragile place”.
> 
> Kensington Palace had no comment on the ITV film, which aired on Sunday. The documentary followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their tour of southern Africa earlier this month. In interviews, the couple both said they were struggling with the intense scrutiny by elements of the British tabloid press.



Note the source… the BBC. Not the Daily Mail, not the Sun. Jason Knauf or someone like that was sent out to say that William is “worried” about Harry and Meghan… after he spent months egging on the smear campaign to deflect from Rose Hanbury. As he posed for budget airline photos as Harry and Meghan were being slammed every day for their private plane flights. As William tried to convince his family that Harry and Meghan need to be exiled to the African continent. This is textbook gaslighting. But… maybe it’s also a sign that William’s people are telling him that he can’t remain silent on the Sussex issue anymore. He’ll have to make a show of public support for Harry AND Meghan, even if it is just for show and even if he continues to gleefully throw them under the bus whenever possible.


https://www.celebitchy.com/639124/p...sussexes_he_thinks_theyre_in_a_fragile_place/

(FYI - The comment section under this article is quite interesting).


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> *Prince William is ‘worried’ about the Sussexes, he thinks they’re ‘in a fragile place’*
> 
> View attachment 4570658
> 
> 
> As always, if you want to spend an afternoon getting angry at the state of the Windsors, look no further than our royal archives. Start with Prince Harry and Meghan’s South Pacific tour last year and notice how the stories around the Sussexes changed dramatically after what was a very successful tour for two of the most popular royal figures. That was the beginning of what became a year-long smear campaign in which Meghan could do nothing right, and members of the British press were devoting endless column spaces to everything from how she held her baby bump to what she wore to Wimbledon.
> 
> The question was always WHY the sudden confluence of smears and WHO was behind it. Some say the racist press was just being racist and ugly. Some said Charles was behind it all, the man behind the curtain. Others say that William was the one willfully shoving Harry and Meghan under the bus whenever possible. I believe it’s “all of the above” – after studying the careful wording of many of the tabloids’ reports, I believe that there are people in Buckingham Palace, Clarence House _and_ Kensington Palace all trying to _“put the Sussexes in their place.”_ We later learned (through rumors and second-hand sources) that William was happily pushing stories about Meghan and Harry to keep the focus off of the Rose Hanbury story too. So…given Harry and Meghan’s recent comments and their general air of sadness, what do you make of this?
> 
> 
> 
> Note the source… the BBC. Not the Daily Mail, not the Sun. Jason Knauf or someone like that was sent out to say that William is “worried” about Harry and Meghan… after he spent months egging on the smear campaign to deflect from Rose Hanbury. As he posed for budget airline photos as Harry and Meghan were being slammed every day for their private plane flights. As William tried to convince his family that Harry and Meghan need to be exiled to the African continent. This is textbook gaslighting. But… maybe it’s also a sign that William’s people are telling him that he can’t remain silent on the Sussex issue anymore. He’ll have to make a show of public support for Harry AND Meghan, even if it is just for show and even if he continues to gleefully throw them under the bus whenever possible.
> 
> 
> https://www.celebitchy.com/639124/p...sussexes_he_thinks_theyre_in_a_fragile_place/
> 
> (FYI - The comment section under this article is quite interesting).


source celebitchy.com?
must all be factual


----------



## Clearblueskies

zen1965 said:


> This is turning into such a circus.
> She married a member of the British royal family. People across the pond twittering up a storm in her support is pointless. It will neither endear her to the British public nor the Firm. Unless both of them radically change their approach, they will not live this down. Rather sad, really.


Couldn’t agree more.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> (FYI - The comment section under this article is quite interesting).


The comments under a Cele****** article are never interesting.  That site is essentially a Meghan fan club now.  Any comments not in line with the fan club mentality are deleted, and the posters are either put on moderation or banned.

But it's nice that Meghan has one forum that supports her because I don't think there are any others.


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> source celebrity *****y.com?
> must all be factual



It's gossip commentary. Same as Lainey Gossip, Perez Hilton, etc.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

hellosunshine said:


> *Prince William is ‘worried’ about the Sussexes, he thinks they’re ‘in a fragile place’*
> 
> View attachment 4570658
> 
> 
> As always, if you want to spend an afternoon getting angry at the state of the Windsors, look no further than our royal archives. Start with Prince Harry and Meghan’s South Pacific tour last year and notice how the stories around the Sussexes changed dramatically after what was a very successful tour for two of the most popular royal figures. That was the beginning of what became a year-long smear campaign in which Meghan could do nothing right, and members of the British press were devoting endless column spaces to everything from how she held her baby bump to what she wore to Wimbledon.
> 
> The question was always WHY the sudden confluence of smears and WHO was behind it. Some say the racist press was just being racist and ugly. Some said Charles was behind it all, the man behind the curtain. Others say that William was the one willfully shoving Harry and Meghan under the bus whenever possible. I believe it’s “all of the above” – after studying the careful wording of many of the tabloids’ reports, I believe that there are people in Buckingham Palace, Clarence House _and_ Kensington Palace all trying to _“put the Sussexes in their place.”_ We later learned (through rumors and second-hand sources) that William was happily pushing stories about Meghan and Harry to keep the focus off of the Rose Hanbury story too. So…given Harry and Meghan’s recent comments and their general air of sadness, what do you make of this?
> 
> 
> 
> Note the source… the BBC. Not the Daily Mail, not the Sun. Jason Knauf or someone like that was sent out to say that William is “worried” about Harry and Meghan… after he spent months egging on the smear campaign to deflect from Rose Hanbury. As he posed for budget airline photos as Harry and Meghan were being slammed every day for their private plane flights. As William tried to convince his family that Harry and Meghan need to be exiled to the African continent. This is textbook gaslighting. But… maybe it’s also a sign that William’s people are telling him that he can’t remain silent on the Sussex issue anymore. He’ll have to make a show of public support for Harry AND Meghan, even if it is just for show and even if he continues to gleefully throw them under the bus whenever possible.
> 
> 
> https://www.celebitchy.com/639124/p...sussexes_he_thinks_theyre_in_a_fragile_place/
> 
> (FYI - The comment section under this article is quite interesting).




If true that is pretty insane. I also want to say that most crazy things you read in tabloids are either crazy conspiratorial, or b*tchy.  It sells.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> But, where is the criticism coming from, this thread is critical but how many posters are from the UK or Commonwealth.


We are here, you just don’t want to listen


----------



## hellosunshine

theamericanchinadoll said:


> If true that is pretty insane.



I, believe in "Where there's smoke, there's fire". Or my other favorite "You cannot hide injustice. ... *What's done in the dark will come* to *light*". 

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan won't always be around to cover that families indiscretions. If any of the rumors are true, it'll all come out...someday.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

It was mentioned numerous times here that MH could return to America and be a normal celebrity bc the royals are different! This is very inaccurate. The royal family in Britain if anything are just like the ones here.  There is a lot of scrutiny, criticism, judgment that you saw with Fergie and Diana.  It is similar treatment you see here with celebrity like Jen Aniston.  People are quite cruel everywhere and never change.


----------



## Clearblueskies

^ Like the truth around an annulled marriage for instance


----------



## CeeJay

theamericanchinadoll said:


> That’s what I thought. The British tabloids is different from the Us but ultimately report the same stuff kinda like page six in the New York post.
> 
> 
> I can’t blame Meghan for not speaking to her dads side of the family.  They seem horrible, envious, and complete embarrassment who never cared for her at all.


Sorry, but not accurate .. as I've said before, friends of mine know the Markle family (especially her Dad) very well (they are in the Music/Sound industry).  Meghan was the counterpart to their son's play when they were both in High School, so in addition, they knew her quite well.  Every one in that family said that Thomas did everything for Meghan, as a matter of fact, maybe too much .. such that it became an expectation that others drop everything for her.  As a matter of fact, they told me that Meghan requested that she get to meet some of their more famous music partners, and they didn't do that because oftentimes, they had contracts with the musicians and/or Production companies which prohibited them from "introducing" them to others outside the business.  Once Meghan saw that she wasn't going to meet anyone, and the play was over, she ghosted their son BIG-TIME!  Frankly, he told me that he was very hurt as they became somewhat close (honestly, I think he may have had a bit of a crush on her).


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

CeeJay said:


> Sorry, but not accurate .. as I've said before, friends of mine know the Markle family (especially her Dad) very well (they are in the Music/Sound industry).  Meghan was the counterpart to their son's play when they were both in High School, so in addition, they knew her quite well.  Every one in that family said that Thomas did everything for Meghan, as a matter of fact, maybe too much .. such that it became an expectation that others drop everything for her.  As a matter of fact, they told me that Meghan requested that she get to meet some of their more famous music partners, and they didn't do that because oftentimes, they had contracts with the musicians and/or Production companies which prohibited them from "introducing" them to others outside the business.  Once Meghan saw that she wasn't going to meet anyone, and the play was over, she ghosted their son BIG-TIME!  Frankly, he told me that he was very hurt as they became somewhat close (honestly, I think he may have had a bit of a crush on her).




You are getting this from her father and his friends.  I have disagreeable members of my extended family and their friend who would say anything.  I’m sure they also come across to some as great people but it doesn’t mean they always tell the truth but actions speak louder than words. I think the fact her dad gone to the press so much is really fueling the fire against his daughter.

Edit: I’m not saying Meghan isn’t a climber bc you see a lot of that in many network intensive industries. I just think what her dad and stepsister did was quite unforgivable


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> We are here, you just don’t want to listen


Agreed, I have looked on plenty of UK sites .. and quite honestly, the vitriol seen on those sites way exceeds what I have seen on US sites .. I guess it just depends on where you are looking!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Not buying that headline attributed to William.  Looks more like saving face than him actually being worried.  But...must get it to the press that he's worried because there has to be _some_ kind of response, right?

This has been going on since the successful tour of the South Pacific and he's now just aware of it? No.

Both sides really need to work on their PR because that's not believable in the slightest.


----------



## CeeJay

theamericanchinadoll said:


> You are getting this from her father and his friends.  I have disagreeable members of my extended family and their friend who would say anything.  I’m sure they also come across to some as great people but it doesn’t mean they always tell the truth but actions speak louder than words. I think the fact her dad gone to the press so much is really fueling the fire against his daughter.
> 
> Edit: I’m not saying Meghan isn’t a climber bc you see a lot of that in many network intensive industries. I just think what her dad and stepsister did was quite unforgivable


No, as I said .. MY friends (who I am very close to) knew both Thomas and Meghan (_they once worked with Thomas when they were working on some Sound Production project_).  Their son was in the play with Meghan, they were both the leads.  This isn't 2nd or 3rd-hand, and I 100% implicitly believe them because they are not the type of people to disparage anyone unless they feel it is justified (_and even that, oftentimes they will say nothing if they don't like the person_)!  The only reason why this came to light was because my friend and her husband were very upset with some of the early comments about Thomas.  Look, did he screw up? .. yes, but they also said that he was a very devoted father to his daughter and that he was a nice man.


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Not buying that headline attributed to William.  Looks more like saving face than him actually being worried.  But...must get it to the press that he's worried because there has to be _some_ kind of response, right?
> 
> This has been going on since the successful tour of the South Pacific and he's now just aware of it? No.
> 
> Both sides really need to work on their PR because that's not believable in the slightest.


Agreed; as you stated before .. something happened between William and Harry (not their wives IMO) and we'll likely never know the truth.  It is unfortunate though, but I also thought that Harry's comments about their "different paths" .. well, I think that it could have been worded better because in some respects (and yes - in some tabloids), there were remarks about Harry appearing to be jealous as William will be King one day (if the monarchy is still put - HA)!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CeeJay said:


> Agreed; as you stated before .. something happened between William and Harry (not their wives IMO) and we'll likely never know the truth.  It is unfortunate though, but I also thought that Harry's comments about their "different paths" .. well, I think that it could have been worded better because in some respects (and yes - in some tabloids), there were remarks about Harry appearing to be jealous as William will be King one day (if the monarchy is still put - HA)!



I think Harry was just being honest, which is apparently not allowed.  I mean the speculation was already there, same with Meghan feeling pressured - they both just put a definitive answer to both of those questions. Of course they knew what questions might be asked and were prepared for it (no rocket scientist required to figure that out) but I feel like maybe they thought it was time to just answer those questions.

Whatever is going on, agreed, is between the brothers.  But I don't think Harry wants to be King, not at all.  I think he just wants to be Harry and have his charity work etc which he is definitely devoted to - you can see real joy when he's doing that.  It does seem like the "second" always has a rougher ride with figuring out their identity though.


----------



## Sophisticatted

He might not want to be king, but he also might not want to be “second fiddle”.  In some ways, he’s lucky that there are only the two of them.  It ensures his importance and involvement in the firm.  If he wants to be important and involved.

If he doesn’t, then he’s lucky his father has already made statements about wanting a stripped down working royal family.

Switching topics, the way they hold Archie reminds me a bit of how my son wanted to be held.  My son has a lot of sensory issues (my son actually has autism).  My son also had colic in the beginning.  Should their son have any sensory issues, it could be that they are extra stressed managing his needs.  I’m not saying that Archie has any problems, just noting that the way they hold him is very similar to the way my child with sensory issues *needed* to be held.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> *Prince William is ‘worried’ about the Sussexes, he thinks they’re ‘in a fragile place’*
> 
> View attachment 4570658



Oh the photoshop lol!



zen1965 said:


> This is turning into such a circus.
> She married a member of the British royal family. People across the pond twittering up a storm in her support is pointless. It will neither endear her to the British public nor the Firm. Unless both of them radically change their approach, they will not live this down. Rather sad, really.


Very sad.  In their position as British Royals, they really can’t have it both ways - they can’t have very public, celebrity-oriented jet-set  lives and also the “very very private, away from the flashing bulbs and negative comments” lives -  they actually can’t have much of their *own* lives, because they are fulfilling a role, as mentioned above. It’s their job.

 I think a big part of the problem is that Meghan is American -  being an American and marrying Prince Harry is her worst crime in the minds of the British people, IMO, not her race or past profession (I’m American and married to a dual-citizenship Brit, so I know  ).

Also, Meghan thought she could come in and rework the British family to her tune - it simply doesn’t work that way.

And being *American* and trying to retool the British Monarchy to her design - no bueno - it just fuels the disgust of the British - so so wrong on so many levels.

 Harry is not an innocent here either. I think (knowingly or not) he was looking for someone to be a rebel with - someone who gives him an excuse to  be the rebel and make a fuss (can you imagine always being known as the ”spare??”) - that’s his “MO,” the advantage he has over his brother - he doesn’t “have to” follow the rules. 

Time to check in with “HR,” take a little downtime and create a game plan.


----------



## PatsyCline

CeeJay said:


> No, as I said .. MY friends (who I am very close to) knew both Thomas and Meghan (_they once worked with Thomas when they were working on some Sound Production project_).  Their son was in the play with Meghan, they were both the leads.  This isn't 2nd or 3rd-hand, and I 100% implicitly believe them because they are not the type of people to disparage anyone unless they feel it is justified (_and even that, oftentimes they will say nothing if they don't like the person_)!  The only reason why this came to light was because my friend and her husband were very upset with some of the early comments about Thomas.  Look, did he screw up? .. yes, but they also said that he was a very devoted father to his daughter and that he was a nice man.


That all may be true, but his actions since they've gotten engaged have been terrible.  And it isn't one or two missteps, it's deliberate actions to either profit from the relationship or to harm it.

And the actions aren't over a short period of time, but over the course of 18+ months.

I can't understand his logic, because unless he never wants a relationship again with her, or see his grandchild, I just don't understand what he's doing.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Katel said:


> View attachment 4570735
> 
> 
> I think a big part of the problem is that Meghan is American -  being an American and marrying Prince Harry is her worst crime in the minds of the British people, IMO, not her race or past profession (I’m American and married to a dual-citizenship Brit, so I know  ).
> 
> And being *American* and trying to retool the British Monarchy to her design - no bueno - it just fuels the disgust of the British - so so wrong on so many levels.
> 
> Harry is not an innocent here either. I think (knowingly or not) he was looking for someone to be a rebel with - someone who gives him an excuse to  be the rebel and make a fuss (can you imagine always being known as the ”spare??”) - that’s his “MO,” the advantage he has over his brother - he doesn’t “have to” follow the rules.
> 
> Time to check in with “HR,” take a little downtime and create a game plan.



I agree the biggest problem is because she is an American and I mentioned this somewhere above. Americans don’t understand or respect British royal rules. This is how many of them see Americans. But I also agree that Harry wasn’t much into them either otherwise he would have picked someone else. 

However, I definitely think they find her disagreeable Bc she is biracial. There is definitely some good old fashion racism there.


----------



## caramelize126

PatsyCline said:


> That all may be true, but his actions since they've gotten engaged have been terrible.  And it isn't one or two missteps, it's deliberate actions to either profit from the relationship or to harm it.
> 
> And the actions aren't over a short period of time, but over the course of 18+ months.
> 
> I can't understand his logic, because unless he never wants a relationship again with her, or see his grandchild, I just don't understand what he's doing.



Mm playing devil's advocate here and want to preface by saying that i dont have any skin in this game. Samantha might be absolutely deplorable, but i have some sympathy for thomas markle.  The attached picture is from the first thanksgiving after she met Harry- so Nov 2016. I think its safe to assume that MM's relationship with her father was ok- or at least cordial ( at a minimum) at this point.  The staging of the pap pictures didnt happen until a couple of months before her wedding- so Spring of 2018. that gave Meghan close to 2 years where she couldve introduced her father to Harry.  *So why didnt she? *

This article has some interesting information about the timing of everything ( with receipts).  Seems pretty deliberate and like he was set up to fail from the beginning*.  https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/07/07/thomas-markle-senior-vs-rachel-markle/*


----------



## mrsinsyder

If those Instagram posts hadn’t been made, her fans would swear Thomas wasn’t a part of her life for a long time.


----------



## PatsyCline

caramelize126 said:


> Mm playing devil's advocate here and want to preface by saying that i dont have any skin in this game. Samantha might be absolutely deplorable, but i have some sympathy for thomas markle.  The attached picture is from the first thanksgiving after she met Harry- so Nov 2016. I think its safe to assume that MM's relationship with her father was ok- or at least cordial ( at a minimum) at this point.  The staging of the pap pictures didnt happen until a couple of months before her wedding- so Spring of 2018. that gave Meghan close to 2 years where she couldve introduced her father to Harry.  *So why didnt she? *
> 
> This article has some interesting information about the timing of everything ( with receipts).  Seems pretty deliberate and like he was set up to fail from the beginning*.  https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/07/07/thomas-markle-senior-vs-rachel-markle/*


The key word is introduce. I believe Harry had conversations with Thomas on the phone, but getting the two of them together was probably much harder. 
With her dad living in Mexico, it’s not like Harry could just pop in and have tea. 
Same with her dad, I doubt he could fly at short notice and visit him. 
Should they have, most likely. I wonder if someone in the Royal family should have taken the time to explain the do’s and don’ts to him.


----------



## Jayne1

PatsyCline said:


> The key word is introduce. I believe Harry had conversations with Thomas on the phone, but getting the two of them together was probably much harder.
> With her dad living in Mexico, it’s not like Harry could just pop in and have tea.
> Same with her dad, I doubt he could fly at short notice and visit him.
> Should they have, most likely. I wonder if someone in the Royal family should have taken the time to explain the do’s and don’ts to him.


Short notice?  They had two years.

Anyway, I think the BRF _needs_ Meg.  Takes the focus off Andrew.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

caramelize126 said:


> Mm playing devil's advocate here and want to preface by saying that i dont have any skin in this game. Samantha might be absolutely deplorable, but i have some sympathy for thomas markle.  The attached picture is from the first thanksgiving after she met Harry- so Nov 2016. I think its safe to assume that MM's relationship with her father was ok- or at least cordial ( at a minimum) at this point.  The staging of the pap pictures didnt happen until a couple of months before her wedding- so Spring of 2018. that gave Meghan close to 2 years where she couldve introduced her father to Harry.  *So why didnt she? *
> 
> This article has some interesting information about the timing of everything ( with receipts).  Seems pretty deliberate and like he was set up to fail from the beginning*.  https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/07/07/thomas-markle-senior-vs-rachel-markle/*


According to that article we should be asking Thomas if he's okay. That's a pretty evil plan for her to be in on, if true.


----------



## caramelize126

PatsyCline said:


> The key word is introduce. I believe Harry had conversations with Thomas on the phone, but getting the two of them together was probably much harder.
> With her dad living in Mexico, it’s not like Harry could just pop in and have tea.
> Same with her dad, I doubt he could fly at short notice and visit him.
> Should they have, most likely. I wonder if someone in the Royal family should have taken the time to explain the do’s and don’ts to him.



Meghan made plenty of trips back to the US in those 2 years. She couldn’t stop and visit her dad? Meet him in California? Send him a ticket like they did with Doria? Thomas was retired so time was not an issue. Meghan and Harry have money, so that wasn’t an issue either. Why wasn’t he given the same treatment as her mother? He raised her and by all accounts she grew up primarily under her fathers care. So what gives?

The tickets were never booked, the suit was never tailored. I know this has been discussed at length on this thread but I really don’t think she ever had any intentions of including him in her new life.

Also I totally agree that someone should’ve explained the rules to him. But who was supposed to do that? Who’s responsibility should it have been to even arrange that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

caramelize126 said:


> Meghan made plenty of trips back to the US in those 2 years. She couldn’t stop and visit her dad? Meet him in California? Send him a ticket like they did with Doria? Thomas was retired so time was not an issue. Meghan and Harry have money, so that wasn’t an issue either. Why wasn’t he given the same treatment as her mother? He raised her and by all accounts she grew up primarily under her fathers care. So what gives?
> 
> The tickets were never booked, the suit was never tailored. I know this has been discussed at length on this thread but I really don’t think she ever had any intentions of including him in her new life.


I was referring to her father and Harry meeting. 
I believe Thomas lives in a small community off the beaten track, so it isn’t a matter of flying in and seeing him. 
They should have got the two of them together, regardless, I agree.


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> Short notice?  They had two years.
> 
> Anyway, I think the BRF _needs_ Meg.  Takes the focus off Andrew.


Oh my, that’s another topic entirely.


----------



## eunaddict

theamericanchinadoll said:


> . But I also agree that Harry wasn’t much into them either otherwise he would have picked someone else.



Oh, but he did. Or at the very least, there are plenty of rumours that he tried before with both Cressida and Chelsy - both of whom were approved by the Firm, both of whom Kate connected better with and other family, like Eugenie, were closer to. 

I *think* Chelsy's breakup with him was particularly hard for him to take, they broke up what...2010/2011? And he spent 2011-2012 partying, cumulating in those famous photos from Las Vegas in 2012 and that was the same period of time he came out and talked about wanting to leave the family business for a normal life - quite possibly because Chelsy's biggest issue was not wanting anything to do with the intense scrutiny of the royal family. 

I think he did try really hard with previous relationships (in terms of heading in the direction of marriage) with both women but they chose to walk away instead, whereas Meghan want(ed) that sort of fame and obsession.


----------



## Lodpah

I was perusing some news sites and I read two silly comments. One, alluding the fact that MM was always holding her stomach during pregnancy make sure her prosthetic wouldn’t shift, and 2) the 6-week sabbatical from the public was directly from the Palace.

Seriously, where do people come up with this?


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> Mm playing devil's advocate here and want to preface by saying that i dont have any skin in this game. Samantha might be absolutely deplorable, but i have some sympathy for thomas markle.  The attached picture is from the first thanksgiving after she met Harry- so Nov 2016. I think its safe to assume that MM's relationship with her father was ok- or at least cordial ( at a minimum) at this point.  The staging of the pap pictures didnt happen until a couple of months before her wedding- so Spring of 2018. that gave Meghan close to 2 years where she couldve introduced her father to Harry.  *So why didnt she? *
> 
> This article has some interesting information about the timing of everything ( with receipts).  Seems pretty deliberate and like he was set up to fail from the beginning*.  https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2019/07/07/thomas-markle-senior-vs-rachel-markle/*


I’ve always believed she never wanted Thomas at the wedding.  If we go with the “no smoke without fire” theory espoused on this thread, there’s undoubtedly some truth at the heart of this article, and as the reason why she never let him meet Harry.  And there was the “no family” at the time of the engagement which struck me as very peculiar at the time.  Perhaps she realised Harry would get cold feet.


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> Meghan made plenty of trips back to the US in those 2 years. She couldn’t stop and visit her dad? Meet him in California? Send him a ticket like they did with Doria? Thomas was retired so time was not an issue. Meghan and Harry have money, so that wasn’t an issue either. Why wasn’t he given the same treatment as her mother? He raised her and by all accounts she grew up primarily under her fathers care. So what gives?
> 
> The tickets were never booked, the suit was never tailored. I know this has been discussed at length on this thread but I really don’t think she ever had any intentions of including him in her new life.
> 
> Also I totally agree that someone should’ve explained the rules to him. But who was supposed to do that? Who’s responsibility should it have been to even arrange that?


When you consider how meticulously ever other aspect of the wedding was planned, it was weird that all the stuff around her father and mother was so vague and uncertain.  Even her mother only hopped on a plane a day or so before the wedding.


----------



## Clearblueskies

theamericanchinadoll said:


> However, I definitely think they find her disagreeable Bc she is biracial. There is definitely some good old fashion racism there.


I’m sure that’s the case for some people, because racism is a problem here as well as in your country.  But the majority of us were happy to see them marry and looking forward to seeing Harry settled.   I increasingly don’t like what I’ve seen of Harry and Meghan in the last 18 months.  I think Harry has married a narcissist, and he’s shown himself up as being arrogant and entitled.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

This is a very good, balanced article by a royal reporter.

It shows both sides, the conundrum and storm this documentary has thrown the BRF (particularly the Queen) into, but also trying to find the balance for Harry and Meghan going forward.

How does it play out if the tone of the press doesn't change? These are two people with a lot of drive and definite ideas about their work.

And the Queen isn't likely not to have them as working royals.

I found it thought provoking. Others might too.

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...n/news-story/042d92e22c073ff7f64fbf02c299f60a


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> Agreed; as you stated before .. something happened between William and Harry (not their wives IMO) and we'll likely never know the truth.  It is unfortunate though, but I also thought that Harry's comments about their "different paths" .. well, I think that it could have been worded better because in some respects (and yes - in some tabloids), there were remarks about Harry appearing to be jealous as William will be King one day (if the monarchy is still put - HA)!


Harry shouldn't have commented publicly on his brother, forcing William's hand. He should have dealt with it privately. Like an adult would do, but I have doubts about Harry on that particular account. This just confirms further that Harry couldn't care less if the BRF including his supposedly beloved granny goes down with him and his force for change wife. Or the effect this could have on British society in already politically tense times.

I wish William hadn't commented, but waited for the Sussexes to make another underhanded move further down in to their self dug abyss of pretense woe. The Sussexes and their PR really are the absolute pits. I don't know how anyone can not see that they know what they're doing and have an agenda.


Also CeeJay, thanks for bringing in a different perspective on Thomas Markle. He may be problematic, but he seems to have done everything possible for his daughter, resulting in a much too strong sense of princessial hubris and entitlement in her.

The way the Sussexes and their PR have mishandled Thomas Markle is so questionable to me because there are a lot of people out here who've had to contend with some really shi**tty parental neglect and abuse, and you do not play around with such accusations. Meghan's earlier and current behaviour is just not adding up to the father being the- or the only- bad player in this mess of a spin.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

Interesting.


----------



## doni

PatsyCline said:


> The key word is introduce. I believe Harry had conversations with Thomas on the phone, but getting the two of them together was probably much harder.
> With her dad living in Mexico, it’s not like Harry could just pop in and have tea.
> Same with her dad, I doubt he could fly at short notice and visit him.
> Should they have, most likely. I wonder if someone in the Royal family should have taken the time to explain the do’s and don’ts to him.


Are you serious? (genuine question).
I know plenty of couples with parents across the oceans who have managed to be introduced to each others families prior to a wedding. I have also married a foreigner, and the thought of meeting his parents on my wedding day would have been beyond bizarre... But maybe royal families have less resources? Or are less used to travelling? Or their weddings are less imposing or complicated that mine was? Or are less in the spotlight that I am? Who knows...

I liked Meghan. I am even one of those apparently scarce souls who watched Suits (and my boy has decided to study law because of the show ). I had nothing whatsoever against her, but at this point I am looking at this whole vaudeville in amazement. So much for stiff-upper-lip.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> I believe Thomas lives in a small community off the beaten track, so it isn’t a matter of flying in and seeing him.


He doesn't live off the beaten track.  He lives a 3-hour drive from Los Angeles, where Harry and Meghan were visiting regularly during the two years they were jetting around the world and never visiting him.  

They could have easily driven down to see him, or invited him up to see them.  Markle went to Los Angeles multiple times for fittings for his royal wedding clothing, and those 2016 Thanksgiving instagrams were probably taken in Los Angeles.  It does not appear to be an inaccessible place to him.


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> Are you serious? (genuine question).
> I know plenty of couples with parents across the oceans who have managed to be introduced to each others families prior to a wedding. I have also married a foreigner, and the thought of meeting his parents on my wedding day would have been beyond bizarre... But maybe royal families have less resources? Or are less used to travelling? Or their weddings are less imposing or complicated that mine was? Or are less in the spotlight that I am? Who knows...
> 
> I liked Meghan. I am even one of those apparently scarce souls who watched Suits (and my boy has decided to study law because of the show ). I had nothing whatsoever against her, but at this point I am looking at this whole vaudeville in amazement. So much for stiff-upper-lip.


Yes, but your situation is completely different than there's. I'm not saying that they couldn't have, but for Harry to jet off to Mexico, take transportation to visit Thomas probably would have been a logistical and security nightmare.

It would have been far easier, IMO to have Thomas fly to England and visit, but once again, he's not close to an airport, and I don't know if his health would have allowed him to travel there.

None of that though, justifies leaking private letters, or taking money for interviews and photographs.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Soho Spice has an engagement today, curious to see what happens.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> I'm not saying that they couldn't have, but for Harry to jet off to Mexico, take transportation to visit Thomas probably would have been a logistical and security nightmare.


People love to invent "security nightmares" for Harry and Meghan.   Harry's been traveling to the furthest reaches of the world for his entire adulthood and "security nightmares" have never been an issue for him.

But it's not applicable because as I said, Thomas Markle lives 3 hours from Los Angeles.   Harry was flying into LAX anyway to see Meghan.  Markle is also less than an hour from San Diego, which has a major, safe international airport with tons of direct flights to London.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Using their official Insta to make political leaning posts   ... also posing with someone who wore blackface isn't terribly woke. 
*Meghan Markle shares a photo with Justin Trudeau taken at the 2016 One Young World Summit as he's re-elected as Canadian PM*

*Meghan Markle, 38, shared a photo of herself with Canadian PM Justin Trudeau*
*The snap was taken at the One Young World summit in Ottowa in 2016 *
*Post was shared on Instagram hours after Mr Trudeau was re-elected as PM *
*Tonight Meghan will attend the 2019 One Young World summit in London  *
The Duchess of Sussex shared a throwback photo of Justin Trudeau hours after he was re-elected as Prime Minister of Canada.

The snap shows Meghan, 38, chatting to Mr Trudeau, 47, at the One Young World summit in Ottowa in 2016.

Then starring in US legal drama Suits, Meghan attended the conference to deliver a speech to a group of global young leaders.

Tonight she will attend the official opening of the 2019 One Young World summit at London's Royal Albert Hall. It marks her first public outing since the explosive ITV documentary was aired on Sunday night.

*




*


----------



## Chagall

If MM was mostly raised by her father, and he did the hard work that that would entail, why was Doria given such preferred treatment. While I don’t condone some of Thomas Markles behavior, I can certainly see why he might have been angry. Sometimes when we are angry our decision making can be clouded, and the decisions we make at that time are not the wisest.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Lodpah said:


> I was perusing some news sites and I read two silly comments. One, alluding the fact that MM was always holding her stomach during pregnancy make sure her prosthetic wouldn’t shift, and 2) the 6-week sabbatical from the public was directly from the Palace.
> 
> Seriously, where do people come up with this?



The fake pregnancy is ridiculous but I could absolutely see BP yanking the chain and benching them for a while. This runs the risk of destabilizing the monarchy  during a turbulent time when they do not need a light shone on any excess. Quite frankly, my only response to that is “what took so long?”


----------



## doni

PatsyCline said:


> Yes, but your situation is completely different than there's. I'm not saying that they couldn't have, but for Harry to jet off to Mexico, take transportation to visit Thomas probably would have been a logistical and security nightmare.
> .



Mmm, no, it wouldn't have been actually. Harry has traveled to one million exotic places on holiday, many more remote than Mexico. The point I made is, it is actually far easier for him than for a majority of mortals (including me) to go meet a parent abroad.

I am not justifying anything MM's father has done and have no one idea of what's going on. I am just saying that it is indeed quite bizarre that in years of engagement, one does not meet the father in law prior to the wedding, let alone a royal wedding...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> If MM was mostly raised by her father, and he did the hard work that that would entail, why was Doria given such preferred treatment. While I don’t condone some of Thomas Markles behavior, I can certainly see why he might have been angry. Sometimes when we are angry our decision making can be clouded, and the decisions we make at that time are not the wisest.



It seems that Doria fits the narrative better.


----------



## caramelize126

Chagall said:


> If MM was mostly raised by her father, and he did the hard work that that would entail, why was Doria given such preferred treatment. While I don’t condone some of Thomas Markles behavior, I can certainly see why he might have been angry. Sometimes when we are angry our decision making can be clouded, and the decisions we make at that time are not the wisest.



And he admitted that the staging of the pap pics was a mistake. Everything he has done after that point, he claims to have done it to defend himself against what the press was saying. I think Samantha’s nonsense might have muddled Thomas’s credibility to the public. But if he really was just trying to defend himself, I don’t really blame him. He’s a 75 year old man who has taken more harsh criticism on an international scale than anyone his age should have to endure. And he presented evidence lf two heart attacks after that. I can’t help but feel bad for him. Maybe it was the stress of the situation or the sadness of losing his daughter.

Also want to note he lives in Baja which is not by any stretch a remote location.



mrsinsyder said:


> It seems that Doria fits the narrative better.



Agree. Doria is more presentable than Thomas. Maybe if Thomas was better about his appearance or was still in successful job, or living in a nice LA mansion, things would be different. 

Also interesting that no other family members were invited.  What happened to Thomas’s brother who helped MM get a job at the embassy?he must’ve been a foriegn service officer- so educated and living off a government pension right now. Wonder why he didn’t make the cut.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m sure that’s the case for some people, because racism is a problem here as well as in your country.  But the majority of us were happy to see them marry and looking forward to seeing Harry settled.   I increasingly don’t like what I’ve seen of Harry and Meghan in the last 18 months.  I think Harry has married a narcissist, and he’s shown himself up as being arrogant and entitled.



This is not completely accurate. Attacks on H’s gf began before we knew her identity. It intensified a ton learning she is American. Arrogant, narcissistic, and entitled are American stereotypes perpetuated by British Tabloids.


----------



## LittleStar88

Has anyone considered that perhaps Meghan's dad made planning a meeting extremely difficult? He seems very stubborn and pig-headed and I can imagine him making all sorts of challenges to any plans. 

He may also have health issues that prevent him from handling a long flight abroad.

That said, San Diego is a short drive from where he lives, and a couple of hours south of Los Angeles. It would have been entirely possible for a meeting to be arranged in San Diego without the public knowing about it. Provided that *all parties* were willing participants.


----------



## Flatsy

caramelize126 said:


> What happened to Thomas’s brother who helped MM get a job at the embassy?he must’ve been a foriegn service officer- so educated and living off a government pension right now. Wonder why he didn’t make the cut.


Because he was no longer of use to her?

There were also people in Doria's family who were on good terms with Meghan who didn't understand why they weren't worthy of an invitation either.  I think it was an uncle (?) who subsequently spoke to the Daily Mail about it, having been silent about her up to that point.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Has anyone considered that perhaps Meghan's dad made planning a meeting extremely difficult? He seems very stubborn and pig-headed and I can imagine him making all sorts of challenges to any plans.
> 
> He may also have health issues that prevent him from handling a long flight abroad.
> 
> That said, San Diego is a short drive from where he lives, and a couple of hours south of Los Angeles. It would have been entirely possible for a meeting to be arranged in San Diego without the public knowing about it. Provided that *all parties* were willing participants.



Thomas has been repeatedly portrayed by the media as if he were a blustering buffoon but I am now doubting that is accurate. If he had refused to see them back then wouldn't Meghan and Harry's PR team have reported they made efforts to visit him and he declined? That would have put a stop to the whole "never met dad" story.


----------



## Flatsy

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Arrogant, narcissistic, and entitled are American stereotypes perpetuated by British Tabloids.


But if the shoe fits...

A "source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" gave an exclusive to CNN today: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/euro...iam-british-royals-source-gbr-intl/index.html

_The source added that the institution around the British royal family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple* who, they said, have single-handedly modernized the monarchy.*_

Single-handedly modernized the monarchy!  They both have their heads up their own rear ends.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m sure that’s the case for some people, because racism is a problem here as well as in your country.  But the majority of us were happy to see them marry and looking forward to seeing Harry settled.   I increasingly don’t like what I’ve seen of Harry and Meghan in the last 18 months.  I think Harry has married a narcissist, and he’s shown himself up as being arrogant and entitled.



This is not completely accurate. Attacks on H’s gf began before we knew her identity. It intensified a ton learning she is American. Arrogant, narcissistic, and entitled are American stereotypes perpetuated by British Tabloids.

Edit: posted this before reading last comment. It feels too coincidental that Megan fits all the America. stereotypes


----------



## Clearblueskies

theamericanchinadoll said:


> This is not completely accurate. Attacks on H’s gf began before we knew her identity. It intensified a ton learning she is American. Arrogant, narcissistic, and entitled are American stereotypes perpetuated by British Tabloids.


I have no idea what you mean by this statement.  The post of mine which you’re quoting is an entirely accurate reflection of my own opinion of Meghan (who I was unaware of until the engagement) and Harry (not an American btw).  Perhaps you shouldn’t jump on comments without reading them fully. 




Flatsy said:


> But if the shoe fits...
> 
> A "source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" gave an exclusive to CNN today: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/euro...iam-british-royals-source-gbr-intl/index.html
> 
> _The source added that the institution around the British royal family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple* who, they said, have single-handedly modernized the monarchy.*_
> 
> Single-handedly modernized the monarchy!  They both have their heads up their own rear ends.


Oh good grief.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> But if the shoe fits...
> 
> A "source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" gave an exclusive to CNN today: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/euro...iam-british-royals-source-gbr-intl/index.html
> 
> _The source added that the institution around the British royal family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple* who, they said, have single-handedly modernized the monarchy.*_
> 
> Single-handedly modernized the monarchy!  They both have their heads up their own rear ends.


If anyone modernized (or at least changed) the monarchy, it was Diana.  We all saw how the queen had to come to terms with how to handle her funeral.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> But if the shoe fits...
> 
> A "source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" gave an exclusive to CNN today: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/euro...iam-british-royals-source-gbr-intl/index.html
> 
> _The source added that the institution around the British royal family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple* who, they said, have single-handedly modernized the monarchy.*_
> 
> Single-handedly modernized the monarchy!  They both have their heads up their own rear ends.



Ugh, CNN has fallen so far. The line between news media and tabloid media has never been thinner. I can't believe the entire article hinges on "A source close to...." Journalists, do your damn job and provide legitimate sources or don't write it!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

I was also excited about Harry and Meghan's marriage.  I thought there were a lot of promising things about her (such as her enthusiasm and willingness to work).  I thought there were some other qualities that could either be an asset or a drawback (such as her strong desire to be famous through whatever means available to her, whether it was acting or lifestyle blogging).  

I also saw some red flags - I thought she was a little phony in her engagement interview, and I also thought it was not a good sign that she parted on very bad terms with a former best friend right around the time she became famous.

But I didn't know how any of that would turn out, and I was really interested in watching it unfold.  I never expected it to be so close to imploding less than a year and a half later.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> But if the shoe fits...
> 
> A "*source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex*" gave an exclusive to CNN today: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/euro...iam-british-royals-source-gbr-intl/index.html
> 
> _The source added that the institution around the British royal family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple* who, they said, have single-handedly modernized the monarchy.*_
> 
> Single-handedly modernized the monarchy!  They both have their heads up their own rear ends.


I'm picturing Meghan wearing this


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> I can't believe the entire article hinges on "A source close to...." Journalists, do your damn job and provide legitimate sources or don't write it!


Just because they don't name the source doesn't mean the source isn't legitimate.  There are a lot of things that people will only reveal if they can remain anonymous. In this case, it appears that Meghan and Harry want to get out this message without saying it on the record themselves.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Just because they don't name the source doesn't mean the source isn't legitimate.  There are a lot of things that people will only reveal if they can remain anonymous. In this case, it appears that Meghan and Harry want to get out this message *without saying it on the record* themselves.



It was their publicist then. They could have named that individual if they hadn't filled it with self-congratulatory comments like "single-handedly modernized the monarchy."


----------



## mrsinsyder

It's also worth noting that Meg's friends haven't been the only ones left in the dust with this new relationship.

Tom Inskip got Markle'd also


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> Mmm, no, it wouldn't have been actually. Harry has traveled to one million exotic places on holiday, many more remote than Mexico. The point I made is, it is actually far easier for him than for a majority of mortals (including me) to go meet a parent abroad.
> 
> I am not justifying anything MM's father has done and have no one idea of what's going on. I am just saying that it is indeed quite bizarre that in years of engagement, one does not meet the father in law prior to the wedding, let alone a royal wedding...


True, but those trips take weeks if not months to prepare.

Should they have met, I agree.


----------



## bag-mania

We all know Harry would do anything Meghan wants. If she had wanted him to meet her dad he would absolutely have made it happen. I'll come right out and say she didn't want it.


----------



## youngster

I think she is in shock at how quickly she has lost control of her public image.  Before Harry, she was in the public eye, a little bit famous, if you watched the show she was on.  At that time, she was in charge of it all . . . her career, her image, her photos, her instagram, her message.  She was actively seeking publicity and making sure it all fit together and raised her public profile and number of followers.  But, she was in charge and nobody in the press likely cared enough to write much, if anything, negative or critical about her. 

All of a sudden, there she is, a member of the BRF.  Everyone assumes she knows how to handle the press and media and, what's more important, she thinks she can handle the press and media because she was handling them, in her small pond.  But, I don't think she understood, and may still not understand, the difference between being an A list celebrity and a working member of the BRF.  

Her comment that she's tried, really tried, the British stiff upper lip thing and it's not working for her was revealing. (I am very curious as to how this statement went over in the UK.) But, the bottom line is that it has only been a few months of negative articles after a ton of great press. So much of the negativity could just be ignored as it's relatively small stuff that would blow over.  Her personality though, maybe it's the actress fragile ego thing, might not be cut out for the life and the lack of control over her public image.  Harry, too, I'm wondering about him as well.  The two of them seem to bring out the fragility in each other.


----------



## bag-mania

The problem with their "us against the world" mentality is the world will win every time. They cannot change the media environment, it's far too vast. They have to adapt and find a way to work at improving their image. Unfortunately their little war against the tabloids will likely have the opposite effect from what they wanted.


----------



## buffym

Where did the US against the world come into play. 

Meghan and Harry aren’t asking for favorable press. They are asking for the press to not continually break the law. Don’t hack phones, don’t publish letters if the it is in legal in the UK, etc don’t publish pictures of helicopter images zoom into their homes.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The problem with their "us against the world" mentality is the world will win every time. They cannot change the media environment, it's far too vast. They have to adapt and find a way to work at improving their image. Unfortunately their little war against the tabloids will likely have the opposite effect from what they wanted.



Yes, whatever war this is will not be a win for them. Whether it is against the press or the family, they are not big enough or strong enough and they are naive to think that they can win. Fans on Twitter are not going to do it.   If anything, more public opinion has turned against them as people are viewing them as being unrealistic and immature to believe that their personal problems are bigger than what the everyday person experiences.  I see each of them as bringing out the worst in the other’s personalities.   Perhaps that means they are well suited for each other.   Taking their personal issues public is not exactly what the Royal family is known for and if they continue on this path, their links to the family will be be very tenuous .  The likelihood of them becoming this generations Duke/Duchess of Windsor is looming large.


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> Her comment that she's tried, really tried, the British stiff upper lip thing and it's not working for her was revealing. (I am very curious as to how this statement went over in the UK.) But, the bottom line is that it has only been a few months of negative articles after a ton of great press. So much of the negativity could just be ignored as it's relatively small stuff that would blow over. Her personality though, maybe it's the actress fragile ego thing, might not be cut out for the life and the lack of control over her public image.


Can I get another Amen!

I agree with her that stiff upper lipping through one's life is not a good idea, but that doesn't mean one should never tough out any difficult situations ever.   An adjustment period of a few *years* should have been expected by the Sussexes.  So far, they have tried no other tactics for dealing with the British press except blatant hostility and overt antagonism.

There were reports last year that Meghan was extremely frustrated by the palace's refusal to let her speak up for herself in response to the tabloids.  I don't think she's capable of letting anything go.  Harry has also been described as extremely "thin skinned" when it comes to the press.   They might not be suited to the job if that's going to be the case.  

This was an interesting quote from a BBC podcast.  It's from one of the journalists who was on the plane with the Sussexes on their first royal tour, and he talked about how Harry went out of his way to let them know how much he hated them. 


> “When I did the royal tour – their tour - to Australia and New Zealand, you know we’d all asked, would we get a bit of access to them?  And there was well, you’ll be on the plane won’t you.  I'm sure you'll get something there.  And they came to the back of the plane for two and a half minutes at the end of a 16 day tour…and were incredibly rude as the first comment.  I mean, he was.  I won't say what it was, but it was *incredibly* rude.  And you just think…why?"


The press had been overall very, very nice to the Sussexes up to the point.  It was after the tour that stories started coming out about a couple of bridezilla incidents leading up to the wedding, and about how Meghan was not popular with palace staff.  I don't think it's a coincidence.

The podcast also talked about how Harry always goes out of his way to make sure the press covering his engagements know how much he hates them.  He glares and scowls at them in the press pen, he intentionally turns his body so it's difficult for them to get good pictures.  *They are there to publicize his engagements.   *He thinks that's how he can behave, but still expects the press to treat him nicely in return.  

He's a spoiled brat, and I think he's encouraging Meghan to be the same when it comes to the press.


----------



## lulu212121

bag-mania said:


> We all know Harry would do anything Meghan wants. If she had wanted him to meet her dad he would absolutely have made it happen. I'll come right out and say she didn't want it.


That is simply what it comes down to. Well said! Too many weak excuses have been given.


----------



## lulu212121

Flatsy said:


> Can I get another Amen!
> 
> I agree with her that stiff upper lipping through one's life is not a good idea, but that doesn't mean one should never tough out any difficult situations ever.   An adjustment period of a few *years* should have been expected by the Sussexes.  So far, they have tried no other tactics for dealing with the British press except blatant hostility and overt antagonism.
> 
> There were reports last year that Meghan was extremely frustrated by the palace's refusal to let her speak up for herself in response to the tabloids.  I don't think she's capable of letting anything go.  Harry has also been described as extremely "thin skinned" when it comes to the press.   They might not be suited to the job if that's going to be the case.
> 
> This was an interesting quote from a BBC podcast.  It's from one of the journalists who was on the plane with the Sussexes on their first royal tour, and he talked about how Harry went out of his way to let them know how much he hated them.
> 
> The press had been overall very, very nice to the Sussexes up to the point.  It was after the tour that stories started coming out about a couple of bridezilla incidents leading up to the wedding, and about how Meghan was not popular with palace staff.  I don't think it's a coincidence.
> 
> The podcast also talked about how Harry always goes out of his way to make sure the press covering his engagements know how much he hates them.  He glares and scowls at them in the press pen, he intentionally turns his body so it's difficult for them to get good pictures.  *They are there to publicize his engagements.   *He thinks that's how he can behave, but still expects the press to treat him nicely in return.
> 
> He's a spoiled brat, and I think he's encouraging Meghan to be the same when it comes to the press.


That explains the timeline of the press turning on them and why.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Can I get another Amen!
> 
> I agree with her that stiff upper lipping through one's life is not a good idea, but that doesn't mean one should never tough out any difficult situations ever.   An adjustment period of a few *years* should have been expected by the Sussexes.  So far, they have tried no other tactics for dealing with the British press except blatant hostility and overt antagonism.
> 
> There were reports last year that Meghan was extremely frustrated by the palace's refusal to let her speak up for herself in response to the tabloids.  I don't think she's capable of letting anything go.  Harry has also been described as extremely "thin skinned" when it comes to the press.   They might not be suited to the job if that's going to be the case.
> 
> This was an interesting quote from a BBC podcast.  It's from one of the journalists who was on the plane with the Sussexes on their first royal tour, and he talked about how Harry went out of his way to let them know how much he hated them.
> 
> The press had been overall very, very nice to the Sussexes up to the point.  It was after the tour that stories started coming out about a couple of bridezilla incidents leading up to the wedding, and about how Meghan was not popular with palace staff.  I don't think it's a coincidence.
> 
> The podcast also talked about how Harry always goes out of his way to make sure the press covering his engagements know how much he hates them.  He glares and scowls at them in the press pen, he intentionally turns his body so it's difficult for them to get good pictures.  *They are there to publicize his engagements.   *He thinks that's how he can behave, but still expects the press to treat him nicely in return.
> 
> He's a spoiled brat, and I think he's encouraging Meghan to be the same when it comes to the press.


Harry is becoming less likable by the day
It would be a shame if he went from being that sweet red haired boy to a petulant grumpy man


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Wendy Williams on her show 10/22, about Meghan not knowing how life would be.

“Yes you did. You knew exactly what you were doing,” Wendy responded. “And I applaud her plot-ation on the royal situation. But please, don’t try to garner sympathy from us. You knew what you were doing.”

Wendy then said Meghan‘s British friends were probably actually “some hating ass girlfriend…Or Meghan‘s lying to try and get sympathy, for us to give her sympathy.”

“Harry and Meghan have nothing to lose by moving to America. Why not? Move to America and live part time in Africa like you want to do,” Wendy continued. “You have to still go back to England. Have a place in all three places. Have a mansion in Malibu, a big hut — I’ve never been to Africa, I don’t know — a big hotel or wherever you’re gonna live in Africa and then have your royal palace place in England.”

“I like them, but her there’s something about her, you know what I’m saying?” Wendy added. “And you know what girl, Meghan, Meghan don’t be surprised at the paparazzi are everywhere. Of course, because you’re now a royal. They weren’t following you when you were on ‘Suits,’ we didn’t even know who you were except when you came for employment here at Wendy and wanted to be one of our runway models.”

“Meghan, nobody feels sorry for you. You knew what you were signing up for girl!” Wendy concluded.

http://www.justjared.com/2019/10/22/wendy-williams-slams-meghan-markle-nobody-feels-sorry-for-you/


----------



## Flatsy

buffym said:


> Meghan and Harry aren’t asking for favorable press. They are asking for the press to not continually break the law. Don’t hack phones, don’t publish letters if the it is in legal in the UK, etc don’t publish pictures of helicopter images zoom into their homes.


That's not what Meghan said at all.

Meghan objected to the press coverage not being "fair". She objected to the press still being "allowed" to print things even after they've been "told it's not true".  And she said if she ever did anything wrong, she'd admit it.
1. I doubt Meghan's idea of what's fair will ever match the media's, and I think there's good reason why public figures don't get a say in what the press writes about them and whether they deem it "fair".

2.  If the press weren't allowed to print anything the palace tells them isn't true, the palace can just deny everything they don't like.  Buckingham Palace has issued at least one denial on Meghan's behalf (that she didn't authorize her friends to talk to People Magazine) of something I believe was true.

3. I doubt Meghan thinks she was wrong to fly on private jets all summer, or wrong to occupy an entire section of a Wimbledon stadium by herself, or wrong to let her security go around telling people to stop taking photos of her.   I doubt she thinks she was wrong when she pushed for an emerald tiara and was rebuked by the queen (a story Dan Wootten reiterated yesterday and is sticking by).  The press should be allowed to hold royals accountable, whether or not they themselves think they did anything wrong.


----------



## bag-mania

buffym said:


> Where did the US against the world come into play.



Because they filed the lawsuit without doing BP the courtesy of letting them know about it. It seems clear they didn't ask for approval before they did it. Without his family's support they are on their own.


----------



## Tivo

The only thing I feel sorry for MM about is her horrible family on her dad’s side.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> That's not what Meghan said at all.
> 
> Meghan objected to the press coverage not being "fair". She objected to the press still being "allowed" to print things even after they've been "told it's not true".  And she said if she ever did anything wrong, she'd admit it.
> 1. I doubt Meghan's idea of what's fair will ever match the media's, and I think there's good reason why public figures don't get a say in what the press writes about them and whether they deem it "fair".
> 
> 2.  If the press weren't allowed to print anything the palace tells them isn't true, the palace can just deny everything they don't like.  Buckingham Palace has issued at least one denial on Meghan's behalf (that she didn't authorize her friends to talk to People Magazine) of something I believe was true.
> 
> 3. I doubt Meghan thinks she was wrong to fly on private jets all summer, or wrong to occupy an entire section of a Wimbledon stadium by herself, or wrong to let her security go around telling people to stop taking photos of her.   I doubt she thinks she was wrong when she pushed for an emerald tiara and was rebuked by the queen (a story Dan Wootten reiterated yesterday and is sticking by).  The press should be allowed to hold royals accountable, whether or not they themselves think they did anything wrong.



When I complained about things not being fair, my dad would do this:


----------



## youngster

Harry blames the press for his mother's death.  I sympathize with him, I truly feel for the little boy that he was. But, he could as easily blame "the public" with their voracious appetite for everything Diana, especially at that time, at the height of her beauty with sympathy running high after the divorce from Charles.  It's the public's interest in Diana that made those photos so valuable.

Diana also had a love/hate relationship with the press.  She used them too, she leaked stories, provided off the record quotes, gave her famous interviews, made sure she had her photo taken sitting by herself in front of the Taj Mahal, etc.  She might still be alive had she simply walked out of that restaurant that night in Paris, through the front door (instead of going out the back door), paused for the cameras with the new boyfriend, smiled, and let them take a few pictures.  Then, got in her car, put on her seat belt, and had the driver drive at a legal speed instead of trying to get away from the photographers who were following them.  (Of course, I have no idea what it is like to be under that level of scrutiny for years so maybe her actions seemed reasonable to her at the time.)

"The press" though, is an easy target for Harry, someone to focus all his rage and pain on.  But, demonizing them, making an enemy of them, is not a wise move in the long run.  They aren't likely to provide him with much sympathetic coverage for a long time.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Harry blames the press for his mother's death.  I sympathize with him, I truly feel for the little boy that he was. But, he could as easily blame "the public" with their voracious appetite for everything Diana, especially at that time, at the height of her beauty with sympathy running high after the divorce from Charles.  It's the public's interest in Diana that made those photos so valuable.
> 
> Diana also had a love/hate relationship with the press.  She used them too, she leaked stories, provided off the record quotes, gave her famous interviews, made sure she had her photo taken sitting by herself in front of the Taj Mahal, etc.  She might still be alive had she simply walked out of that restaurant that night in Paris, through the front door (instead of going out the back door), paused for the cameras with the new boyfriend, smiled, and let them take a few pictures.  Then, got in her car, put on her seat belt, and had the driver drive at a legal speed instead of trying to get away from the photographers who were following them.  (Of course, I have no idea what it is like to be under that level of scrutiny for years so maybe her actions seemed reasonable to her at the time.)
> 
> "The press" though, is an easy target for Harry, someone to focus all his rage and pain on.  But, demonizing them, making an enemy of them, is not a wise move in the long run.  They aren't likely to provide him with much sympathetic coverage for a long time.


and don't forget along with the high speed chase the driver was under the influence of alcohol
Not that Harry has to be rational about this but that is the reality


----------



## bag-mania

You know it isn't that the tabloid media ever stopped writing negative stories about the other royals. It's just nobody pays attention to them anymore. There's an article today about how lonely Prince Charles looks on his Japan trip because Camilla wouldn't go with him, supposedly she has a fear of flying. If that was written about the younger generation it would be cause for countless speculations. Since it's Charles and Camilla, it's meh, who cares?


----------



## gracekelly

Golly guys, I’m sorry. I just can’t keep feeling sorry for him and his continual references to her death.  This happened 20 years ago. We all have had sad things happen. My father died just as suddenly as Diana though not in an an accident. It took me a long time to get past it, and though it still makes me sad that he died so young, I function and get through life.   Perhaps my working life of helping others in distress aided me in working it out. His charity work with Invictus should help do the same. The point is now is the time to get past it. He has the joy  of a new life with his son and a helpmate.    Don’t live an angry life


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> You know it isn't that the tabloid media ever stopped writing negative stories about the other royals. It's just nobody pays attention to them anymore. There's an article today about how lonely Prince Charles looks on his Japan trip because Camilla wouldn't go with him, supposedly she has a fear of flying. If that was written about the younger generation it would be cause for countless speculations. Since it's Charles and Camilla, it's meh, who cares?


I saw that. I don’t blame her. Very long trip to stay two days.   Charles will survive it.


----------



## CAH

I think it's more like Charles is thinking how much longer he has to wait.  He looked the same way at the Opening of Parliament.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I'm not going to respond to the political part of this because I'm not allowed


I see your point. But my post is not political, I'm just pointing out the bias of the Sussexes and their team. Whether anyone agrees with them or not, there's no hesitating about it, they are not politically neutral. They have an agenda, and a lot of help pushing it. On the taxpayers money.

All of which I personally find highly improper and deceitful, considering current circumstances.


----------



## buffym

bag-mania said:


> Because they filed the lawsuit without doing BP the courtesy of letting them know about it. It seems clear they didn't ask for approval before they did it. Without his family's support they are on their own.



Agree to disagree, the source is the same who said Harry and Meghan were moving to Africa so I find it less reliable. 

Meghan is at One Young World. Purple is a good color for her.



1st wear


----------



## PatsyCline

bag-mania said:


> The problem with their "us against the world" mentality is the world will win every time. They cannot change the media environment, it's far too vast. They have to adapt and find a way to work at improving their image. Unfortunately their little war against the tabloids will likely have the opposite effect from what they wanted.


But at a certain point when the media crosses the line, and hacking into voicemails and printing private correspondence is illegal, they have to do something.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

I liked the red shoes better, but they went with the coat and that would be a bad repeat so the navy ones are ok, I guess (I just HATE navy anything). She does look best in strong colors, imo.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gracekelly said:


> Golly guys, I’m sorry. I just can’t keep feeling sorry for him and his continual references to her death.  This happened 20 years ago. We all have had sad things happen. My father died just as suddenly as Diana though not in an an accident. It took me a long time to get past it, and though it still makes me sad that he died so young, I function and get through life.   Perhaps my working life of helping others in distress aided me in working it out. His charity work with Invictus should help do the same. The point is now is the time to get past it. He has the joy  of a new life with his son and a helpmate.    Don’t live an angry life


And it's not like he was the only one the death affected - William lost his mother the exact same way. So, why is Harry so wrapped up in the grief and blame? Likely William is too, but has handled it better somehow, or received proper help.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> But at a certain point when the media crosses the line, and hacking into voicemails and printing private correspondence is illegal, they have to do something.


Harry's voicemail was hacked in 2004.  The Leveson Inquiry put an end to celebrity voicemail hacking, and put The News of the World out of business.  The editor of The Mirror was fired.  I hardly see the urgent need to "do something" 15 years later.

As for the copyright violation, it's a legitimate lawsuit.  But almost everyone believes that she set a trap for her father and the press with that later - even making its existence known via People Magazine after her father sat on the letter for 5 months.  It was said Harry and Meghan were waiting for something they could take legal action on - a "slam dunk" and the letter was it.  They filed the lawsuit not because their backs were against the wall over copyright infringement, but to retaliate for all of the stories that are being written about them that they don't like.


----------



## bag-mania

PatsyCline said:


> But at a certain point when the media crosses the line, and hacking into voicemails and printing private correspondence is illegal, they have to do something.



As Flatsy mentioned, the hacking happened over 15 years ago. If it really bothered him he would have addressed it long before now. No, this is all about Meghan. Look at his exact wording, “I have been a silent witness to her private suffering for too long. To stand back and do nothing would be contrary to everything we believe in.” Meghan is displeased with her treatment by the media and she wants Harry to fix it.


----------



## hellosunshine

I love, love the styling of Meghan's hair at this event. Fun fact - but the styling of the front of her hair is called "curtain bangs" and they're highly popular right now.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4571334
> 
> View attachment 4571335


This looks better on her than all of those belted dresses.  I don't mind the navy shoes with this at all.


----------



## youngster

ccbaggirl89 said:


> And it's not like he was the only one the death affected - William lost his mother the exact same way. So, why is Harry so wrapped up in the grief and blame? Likely William is too, but has handled it better somehow, or received proper help.



i've always thought that perhaps Will, being just that little bit older, had a clearer picture of his mum, maybe not quite the rose colored lense that Harry views her through.  Don't get me wrong, I always liked Diana but I don't think she was a saint by any stretch and she could be extremely immature and volatile.


----------



## Mrs.Z

hellosunshine said:


> I love, love the styling of Meghan's hair at this event. Fun fact - but the styling of the front of her hair is called "curtain bangs" and they're highly popular right now.


Interesting, I love it except for the fact that it’s entirely blocking one side of her face.  

I love the purple and blue!


----------



## Blyen

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4571334
> 
> View attachment 4571335



I saw another bunch of pictures from the event,and if this is not the face of someone who's been reprimanded then I don't know what it is lol.
I've never seen such a genuinely defeated expression in her eyes before.In each picture I've seen she looks deflated,and it doesn't strike me as acting for once.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> *I hardly see the urgent need to "do something" 15 years later.*



I, believe I read somewhere that Harry has been able to attain some new evidence that he previously did not have, which is why he's going forward with this right now. Futhermore, Princess Diana’s former lover James Hewitt and her butler Paul Burrell have joined Harry in suing Piers Morgan's Daily Mirror. It seems that Harry is being assisted by people with more knowledge of that time which is great.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## FreeSpirit71

Jewel colours really suit her. She looks great in the purple. Lovely choice.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4571361


Yeah she looks like she really wants her privacy.

Her face is like the cat that got the cream. I guess that’s what existing looks like.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah she looks like she really wants her privacy.
> 
> Her face is like the cat that got the cream. I guess that’s what existing looks like.



Huh? This is a public event?! An event where Meghan's been a two-time global counselor with this organization. She last worked with them in 2014 and 2016.


----------



## Jayne1

That's very Hollywood hair.  I don't understand her at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> That's very Hollywood hair.  I don't understand her at all.


It’s called the _just existing blowout. _


----------



## CeeJay

It will be very interesting to see what happens when they come to LA for their visit, whether they sit back and relax or attend any celeb events.  @gracekelly .. hopefully, no trips to the Valley!!!


----------



## chicaloca

I can’t believe I even have to point this out. People process grief differently. There’s no “right” way to grieve and no timetable for when your pain should end or your grief ended. It’s callous to suggest someone should be over the death of their mother because _you’re_ over their grieving.

Harry’s lawsuit is not just about his mother. He has a wife with whom he is deeply in love. She is being attacked in a similar fashion to his mother. Harry wants to get closure for his mom, protect his wife, and stop the press from treating anyone else the same way. Judging from the people coming on board the same class action lawsuit, he’s not the only one fed up with the trashy British media.


----------



## Sophisticatted

youngster said:


> i've always thought that perhaps Will, being just that little bit older, had a clearer picture of his mum, maybe not quite the rose colored lense that Harry views her through.  Don't get me wrong, I always liked Diana but I don't think she was a saint by any stretch and she could be extremely immature and volatile.



I’ve often had that thought, as well.  Based on interviews Diana gave, it seems as if William May have been a bit parentified.  She often spoke of crying in the bathroom, while he told her he didn’t want to be sad, and slipping tissues for her underneath the door.  Also, I have heard he has (or had) issues with his father, and I think he probably feels/has felt, that if his father could have been a bit more caring towards Diana, a lot of stressors and tragedy could possibly have been avoided.

As an adult, he has less time and patience for it.  I think part of the mental illness campaign is his personal desire for it to be *dealt with* in a non-stigmatized way.


----------



## hellosunshine

PatsyCline said:


> *It would have been far easier, IMO to have Thomas fly to England and visit, but once again, he's not close to an airport, and I don't know if his health would have allowed him to travel there.*



You're correct, the easiest plan would've been to have Thomas fly to England. I remember reading articles around the time, that Thomas had in fact spoken with Harry and they had arranged for him to come to the wedding by organizing for someone to collect him. An aide was sent to his home but he absolutely refused to get in the car. It was noted around the time that while Harry took care of Thomas' travel arrangements, Meghan was to work on sourcing suits for him in the UK. He ended up lying about the first heart attack, so he wouldn't have to attend the wedding but was photographed two days later at a local KFC restaurant when he was supposed to be hospitalized. 

All in all, I kinda wish more people understood that Thomas hasn't always been "father of the year". He may have supported Meghan for some years of her life but overall their relationship has always been very strained. Honestly, I think the guy has some serious relationship issues. He's estranged from his other two children, has never bothered to meet his two eldest grandchildren, and is estranged from three other adult grandchildren.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chicaloca said:


> I can’t believe I even have to point this out. People process grief differently. There’s no “right” way to grieve and no timetable for when your pain should end or your grief ended. It’s callous to suggest someone should be over the death of their mother because _you’re_ over their grieving.
> 
> Harry’s lawsuit is not just about his mother. He has a wife with whom he is deeply in love. She is being attacked in a similar fashion to his mother. Harry wants to get closure for his mom, protect his wife, and stop the press from treating anyone else the same way. Judging from the people coming on board the same class action lawsuit, he’s not the only one fed up with the trashy British media.


Grief is part of a process though, a healthy individual will move through stages. It's the stages of grief that will take different times for different people. Some move through the stages faster than others, but remaining in one stage too long is where the problem comes in. It seems Harry is stuck in a particular stage of grief - maybe anger? His mom is dead, she no longer needs closure of any sort. Fighting for Meghan as a result of what happened to his mom - that doesn't sound like someone who has processed his past and worked through stages. I agree he isn't over it yet and that's the issue. He's living in the past and in an unhealthy place.


----------



## mrsinsyder

How has her relationship with her dad “always been strained”?


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> I’ve often had that thought, as well.  Based on interviews Diana gave, it seems as if William May have been a bit parentified.  She often spoke of crying in the bathroom, while he told her he didn’t want to be sad, and slipping tissues for her underneath the door.  Also, I have heard he has (or had) issues with his father, and *I think he probably feels/has felt, that if his father could have been a bit more caring towards Diana, a lot of stressors and tragedy could possibly have been avoided.*



Well, of course. If Charles hadn't kept Camilla as his side piece virtually the whole marriage, maybe Diana wouldn't have felt as many "stressors."


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s called the _just existing blowout. _


with extensions I'll bet


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> All in all, I kinda wish more people understood that Thomas hasn't always been "father of the year". *He may have supported Meghan for some years of her life but overall their relationship has always been very strained*. Honestly, I think the guy has some serious relationship issues. He's estranged from his other two children, has never bothered to meet his two eldest grandchildren, and is estranged from three other adult grandchildren.


.. and you know this HOW?  I guess my friends that knew Thomas and Meghan are wrong then?   From their perspective, she was a flat-out "Daddy's girl" and he indulged her A LOT!  In some respects, I see similarities in their characters -- e.g., narcissistic tendencies.


----------



## mdcx

Oh goodness. Megs hug attack on poor commoner curtseying:


----------



## chicaloca

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Grief is part of a process though, a healthy individual will move through stages. It's the stages of grief that will take different times for different people. Some move through the stages faster than others, but remaining in one stage too long is where the problem comes in. It seems Harry is stuck in a particular stage of grief - maybe anger? His mom is dead, she no longer needs closure of any sort. Fighting for Meghan as a result of what happened to his mom - that doesn't sound like someone who has processed his past and worked through stages. I agree he isn't over it yet and that's the issue. He's living in the past and in an unhealthy place.



There’s no timetable for the stages of grief any more than there is for the grief itself. Despite his grief Harry is not crippled by it and clearly able to be productive and have a normal life with lots of friends and now a wife and child. He’s certainly more productive than his supposedly “non-grieving” brother. The only reason we know Harry is grieving is because he told us. 

The closure brought by the lawsuit would be for himself. He was too young to sue back in the day and plus he has the added incentive of a wife to protect.


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> You're correct, the easiest plan would've been to have Thomas fly to England. I remember reading articles around the time, that Thomas had in fact spoken with Harry and they had arranged for him to come to the wedding by organizing for someone to collect him. An aide was sent to his home but he absolutely refused to get in the car. It was noted around the time that while Harry took care of Thomas' travel arrangements, Meghan was to work on sourcing suits for him in the UK. He ended up lying about the first heart attack, so he wouldn't have to attend the wedding but was photographed two days later at a local KFC restaurant when he was supposed to be hospitalized.
> 
> All in all, I kinda wish more people understood that Thomas hasn't always been "father of the year". He may have supported Meghan for some years of her life but overall their relationship has always been very strained. Honestly, I think the guy has some serious relationship issues. He's estranged from his other two children, has never bothered to meet his two eldest grandchildren, and is estranged from three other adult grandchildren.



 The accusations that he faked his heart attack came from a "source close to meghan": 
https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a22462937/thomas-markle-heart-attack-rumor/
https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...d-heart-surgery-to-skip-royal-wedding-report/

Thomas provided his medical bills to the daily mail to prove he hadnt been faking it:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-conclusively-not-one-TWO-heart-attacks.html

At the end only Meghan and her dad know the truth. Everything else is speculation. IMO, the items noted by the blogger in the link posted yesterday seem more logical:

*He also mentioned that an aide was escorting him to London; well, first Harry didn’t have many aides and why would he need to be escorted? Doria hopped on a plane by herself and then was met when she arrived. Harry doesn’t have aides to spare (not now if any) for such tasks besides the cost would be ridiculous. Was that what Thomas was told, or what he was told to say?*​This was a royal wedding that would be watched by millions around the world. He wouldve started getting fitted for suits months before. The outrage over the staged pap pics didnt get really bad until until the video footage was released which was only one week or two prior to the wedding. So what was happening in between that the engagement and the wedding date?


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> There’s no timetable for the stages of grief any more than there is for the grief itself. Despite his grief Harry is not crippled by it and clearly able to be productive and have a normal life with lots of friends and now a wife and child. He’s certainly more productive than his supposedly “non-grieving” brother. The only reason we know Harry is grieving is because he told us.
> 
> The closure brought by the lawsuit would be for himself. He was too young to sue back in the day and plus he has the added incentive of a wife to protect.


here we go again with knocking Will.....do you have something credible to show Harry is more productive?


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


> All in all, I kinda wish more people understood that Thomas hasn't always been "father of the year". He may have supported Meghan for some years of her life but overall their relationship has always been very strained. Honestly, I think the guy has some serious relationship issues. He's estranged from his other two children, has never bothered to meet his two eldest grandchildren, and is estranged from three other adult grandchildren.





CeeJay said:


> .. and you know this HOW?  I guess my friends that knew Thomas and Meghan are wrong then?   From their perspective, she was a flat-out "Daddy's girl" and he indulged her A LOT!  In some respects, I see similarities in their characters -- e.g., narcissistic tendencies.



Theres plenty of evidence that they had a good relationship. And the fact that @CeeJay  knows people that know MM that support this-  there doesn't seem to be any reason for anyone to lie. Its not like this information effects any of us _personally_.

Alot of the drama in this thread might be placated if people specified that their opinions were _opinions/heresay/speculation _ instead of stating them as factual evidence.  No one has any way of knowing without hearing straight from the horses mouth that "their relationship has always been strained".

Edited for clarity**


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Oh goodness. Megs hug attack on poor commoner curtseying:



Poor woman   There’s something very vain IMO about seeing Meghan “breaking the rules” when she knows full well the other person cannot.  It’s the ultimate snobbery.



caramelize126 said:


> I think theres plenty of evidence that they had a good relationship. And the fact that you know people that know them that supports this-  there doesnt seem to be any reason for anyone to lie.
> 
> Alot of the drama in this thread might be placated if people specified that their opinions were _opinions/heresay/speculation _ instead of stating them as factual evidence.  No one has any way of knowing without hearing straight from the horses mouth that "their relationship has always been strained".


I find it weird when people talk as if they can read minds, or as if they know them personally.


----------



## zen1965

I really do not see how Harry is or ever has been more productive than Wills. Being a productive royal involves more than just showing up at events that interest you personally (e.g. Invictus Games or Lion King premiers). If you want to heap praise on productive British royals turn to QII, the Princess Royal, and the DoE (before his retirement at the age of 97(!)). 
Both, William and Harry, have rather abysmal attendance records when it comes to partaking in events that are not particularly close to their respective hearts.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Poor woman   There’s something very vain IMO about seeing Meghan “breaking the rules” when she knows full well the other person cannot.  It’s the ultimate snobbery.



It's tacky and gross. Then again it would be a cold day in he-l before I curtseyed to Soho Spice or "H."


----------



## zen1965

Oh. And just for the record. In European aristo circles Harry has always been known as a non-too-bright, entitled individual.
First-hand knowledge, not hearsay.


----------



## caramelize126

sdkitty said:


> here we go again with knocking Will.....do you have something credible to show Harry is more productive?



I actually wonder if The queen deliberately didnt pile H & W with engagements so that they could enjoy this time. Charles has plenty of siblings to share the workload, but once theyre all gone, it'll just be Harry and Will.  I'm guessing that all of the engagements that  the queen and all of her children do right now would end up being split between them two instead of the 6-7 that it is now? thats a lot. and I think Harry would only be involved if the monarchy isnt slimmed down to just the heir and their children?


----------



## CeeJay

caramelize126 said:


> Theres plenty of evidence that they had a good relationship. And the fact that @CeeJay  knows people that know MM that support this-  there doesn't seem to be any reason for anyone to lie. Its not like this information effects any of us _personally_.
> 
> Alot of the drama in this thread might be placated if people specified that their opinions were _opinions/heresay/speculation _ instead of stating them as factual evidence.  No one has any way of knowing without hearing straight from the horses mouth that "their relationship has always been strained".
> 
> Edited for clarity**


Thank you!  IMO .. I think a good part of the reason that Thomas didn't attend was likely because Meghan was embarrassed by him; he's certainly not BRF material if you think about it.  In addition, I also think that Meghan would have thought that .. "well, if Dad comes, then the other family members (especially Samantha - who is a mess) would want to as well".  I would assume to say that each one of us likely has some relative that is not a favorite for whatever reason, but the continuing 'story' just makes no sense to me.  Yes, Doria looked wonderful and she does seem like a serene lady, but everything else going on is not (IMO) going to stop the "unfair" commentary.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> It's tacky and gross. Then again it would be a cold day in he-l before I curtseyed to Soho Spice or "H."


are people supposed to curtsey for her?  or just for the queen?
Is it against protocol for her to touch or hug people?
I personally don't really like strangers hugging me....one acquaintance has decided he needs to do this whenever he sees me and it annoys me to no end.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It's tacky and gross. Then again it would be a cold day in he-l before I curtseyed to Soho Spice or "H."


It’s just good manners to show respect - on both sides.  She’s just so silly, I can’t even


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> are people supposed to curtsey for her?  or just for the queen?
> Is it against protocol for her to touch or hug people?
> I personally don't really like strangers hugging me....one acquaintance has decided he needs to do this whenever he sees me and it annoys me to no end.


I'm admittedly not a hugger either but her hugging everyone seems so over the top and it's just not always appropriate or professional.


----------



## gracekelly

chicaloca said:


> There’s no timetable for the stages of grief any more than there is for the grief itself. Despite his grief Harry is not crippled by it and clearly able to be productive and have a normal life with lots of friends and now a wife and child. He’s certainly more productive than his supposedly “non-grieving” brother. The only reason we know Harry is grieving is because he told us.
> 
> The closure brought by the lawsuit would be for himself. He was too young to sue back in the day and plus he has the added incentive of a wife to protect.


Clearly he is crippled by it.  He told a little boy in Africa that sometime he doesn't even want to get out of bed int he morning.  He has dropped his friends. He is in the process of dropping his family. He is now embroiled in lawsuits.  What is normal about any of this?  I wouldn't call his brother non productive since he just returned from an overseas trip.  I can't even imagine how you reached that conclusion.

And BTW, there is a time table re grief.   There is a point where professional help is required, and clearly he needs more than he has received in the past.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> are people supposed to curtsey for her?  or just for the queen?
> Is it against protocol for her to touch or hug people?
> I personally don't really like strangers hugging me....one acquaintance has decided he needs to do this whenever he sees me and it annoys me to no end.


Yes you would normally curtesy, and people are briefed beforehand on what’s expected when they are due to be meeting a member of the royal family.  Meghan made the poor woman look clumsy through no fault of her own, it makes me cross 
I don’t like strangers hugging me either.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Is it against protocol for her to touch or hug people?
> I personally don't really like strangers hugging me....one acquaintance has decided he needs to do this whenever he sees me and it annoys me to no end.



The irony is it made Meghan look like the clueless American who doesn't understand royal customs (even after all these months). And I bet she was afraid her father would commit a blunder like this if he had attended the wedding.


----------



## CeeJay

Does anyone else get the sense that Meghan wasn't provided with any "training" re: protocol, etc.?   -OR-  is it that she just ignores it and wants to do things "her way" (my opinion is the latter, but sometimes I truly wonder).  That poor woman, she looked so embarrassed!


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Clearly he is crippled by it.  He told a little boy in Africa that sometime he doesn't even want to get out of bed int he morning.  He has dropped his friends. He is in the process of dropping his family. He is now embroiled in lawsuits.  What is normal about any of this?  I wouldn't call his brother non productive since he just returned from an overseas trip.  I can't even imagine how you reached that conclusion.
> 
> And BTW, there is a time table re grief.   There is a point where professional help is required, and clearly he needs more than he has received in the past.


Agree - I would never suggest the pain from his mother's death should go away or anything of the sort, but with the circumstances, it's very possible something like PTS or a more significant problem may be attached to his loss. Twenty years is a very long time to be crippled by something, and it sounds like it continues to impede his day to day life.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else get the sense that Meghan wasn't provided with any "training" re: protocol, etc.?   -OR-  is it that she just ignores it and wants to do things "her way" (my opinion is the latter, but sometimes I truly wonder).  That poor woman, she looked so embarrassed!


I can't imagine no one clued her in on protocol.....agree, she more likely thinks her way is the best way


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else get the sense that Meghan wasn't provided with any "training" re: protocol, etc.?   -OR-  is it that she just ignores it and wants to do things "her way" (my opinion is the latter, but sometimes I truly wonder).  That poor woman, she looked so embarrassed!


She does it intentionally, I’m sure of it.


----------



## Flatsy

Harry's more productive at creating drama, filing ill-advised lawsuits and generally blowing up his life, but that's all.


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> are people supposed to curtsey for her?  or just for the queen?
> Is it against protocol for her to touch or hug people?
> I personally don't really like strangers hugging me....one acquaintance has decided he needs to do this whenever he sees me and it annoys me to no end.


If you are a working royal you would/should always give someone the chance to curtsey/bow before trying to shake hands or even...gasp....hug them uninvited.
The poor woman, she’d probably been waiting her whole life for the moment to show off her curtsey and it got snaffled.

I know when I was at school, all the girls learned how to curtsey as Prince Edward was coming to visit the school. Just on the off chance we came face to face with him.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> If you are a working royal you would/should always give someone the chance to curtsey/bow before trying to shake hands or even...gasp....hug them uninvited.
> The poor woman, she’d probably been waiting her whole life for the moment to show off her curtsey and it got snaffled.
> 
> I know when I was at school, all the girls learned how to curtsey as Prince Edward was coming to visit the school. Just on the off chance we came face to face with him.


I can understand where maybe she feels she's being more "********ic" or "human" or something by not standing on ceremony.  But her hugs are kinda OT


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> She does it intentionally, I’m sure of it.



There have been so many repeats of the same mistake that it must be intentional.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else get the sense that Meghan wasn't provided with any "training" re: protocol, etc.?   -OR-  is it that she just ignores it and wants to do things "her way" (my opinion is the latter, but sometimes I truly wonder).  That poor woman, she looked so embarrassed!


I think she was provided training initially?, and those trainers reportedly called her difficult. So her training was likely cut short. She's gone rogue at this point, doing whatever she wants.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think she was provided training initially?, and those trainers reportedly called her difficult. So her training was likely cut short. She's gone rogue at this point, doing whatever she wants.


wonder what the queen is thinking.  as much as she tries to be open-minded, she is in her 90's and used to things being done in a certain way


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> I can understand where maybe she feels she's being more "********ic" or "human" or something by not standing on ceremony.  But her hugs are kinda OT


I think it comes of as disrespectful, in terms of she is not allowing subjects to express their deference to her and by extension deference to the Queen and the whole BRF.

After viewing the latest pics of Megs “glowing” with cascading curls(wiglet?), cheesy grin etc, I have to say her “performance” on the ITV docu with lank hair, sadface and defeated posture looks increasingly like her best acting job to date.
Also, no eternity ring. Does Harry pick up the vibes she is do subtly laying down?
I am feeling a “separation” announcement is imminent.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> I am feeling a “separation” announcement is imminent.



Oh, I think we’re still years away from that. It wouldn’t surprise me that it happens, just not for awhile. 

She would lose all her super fans if she dumped Harry. I think she’s smart enough to know that public sympathy would not be with her in a break up.


----------



## mdcx

I tend to think she’s setting him up to look like a mental wreck, such that it would be “sensible” for them to live seperate lives but not divorce. He remains in UK getting intensive therapy the rest of his days, she flits around the US because “it’s a more stable environment for Archie”.


----------



## youngster

chicaloca said:


> Harry’s lawsuit is not just about his mother. He has a wife with whom he is deeply in love. *She is being attacked in a similar fashion to his mother.* Harry wants to get closure for his mom, protect his wife, and stop the press from treating anyone else the same way. Judging from the people coming on board the same class action lawsuit, he’s not the only one fed up with the trashy British media.



It's interesting that Harry sees these as "attacks" on Meghan as opposed to the reporting of facts and the natural consequences of their own decisions.  The "trashy tabloids" didn't tell the two of them to spend $2+ million GBP in taxpayer money on their house remodeling, fly private jets while lecturing the common folk about climate change, guard the names of Archie's godparents as if it were a secret worthy of MI6, order the box at Wimbledon emptied out, choose to attend a movie premier instead of a memorial service, and so on.  They should be embarrassed by some of their choices and decisions, step back, and reflect.  Learn from their mistakes.  Instead, Harry doubles down, files lawsuits, and starts making speeches and giving teary interviews about how everyone is being so mean.  

And, honestly, Diana was a media darling for the most part.  She had quite the love/hate relationship with the press and totally used them when it was to her benefit and to create public sympathy, which she generally received, given Charles' behavior with Camilla.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Has there been ANY celeb who gets only positive press? None that I can think of.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Has there been ANY celeb who gets only positive press? None that I can think of.


THANK YOU!!!


----------



## buffym

caramelize126 said:


> Theres plenty of evidence that they had a good relationship. And the fact that @CeeJay  knows people that know MM that support this-  there doesn't seem to be any reason for anyone to lie. Its not like this information effects any of us _personally_.
> 
> Alot of the drama in this thread might be placated if people specified that their opinions were _opinions/heresay/speculation _ instead of stating them as factual evidence.  No one has any way of knowing without hearing straight from the horses mouth that "their relationship has always been strained".
> 
> Edited for clarity**



Thomas also said Meghan set fittings for him and she talked to him until his GMB interview. She was upset when he canceled on them. Some clarity from his month.

They were speaking after the pap photos, Meghan stop after GMB.

When asked whether he had been involved in all the wedding plans, Thomas Markle replied that "Meghan was putting together fittings for me and things to make suits for me, shoes sizes . . ."

And of course, it was all a big secret: "They arranged for me to show up in LA and Beverly Hills under a different name to get a fitting and things like that."

Press

"For the most part it was always 'don't speak to the press,'" he said. "The rest of things were just 'be careful,' but they were very emphatic about not giving any info to the press or talking to them because it just encourages them more."

After the pap photos

"I spoke to them both and I apologized. I realized it was a serious mistake, but it's hard to take it back," explained Mr. Markle. Regarding this important conversation, he added that "It wasn't that difficult. Both Harry and Meghan were very forgiving about it."

Visiting before his surgery 

When asked whether Meghan had offered to go and see him before the wedding, Mr. Markle explained that "they talked about that and I suggested that I'd be able to have a surgery. I'd be recovering, I'd be fine, and you know . . . I couldn't go, and I said 'worry about the wedding and then please go a honeymoon' because they had been tied into this for months."

Thomas told Good Morning Britain that Harry and Meghan were "disappointed" upon learning he wouldn't be able to make the wedding, which he ended up watching from a "little B&B place" that a friend found for him where he could recover after the heart attack away from the media and paparazzi.

"They were disappointed, but they both said — and Meghan cried, I'm sure, she did cry — and they both said, 'Take care of yourself. We're really worried about you.' They said the important thing is that I get better," Thomas said.

Being a footnote in history 
Of Meghan, he noted: "She was so beautiful walking down that aisle and so proud and so gorgeous. I was very proud. I couldn't have seen a better moment in my life. I was very upset that it wasn't me, but the whole world was watching my daughter. I was very happy. And now the unfortunate thing for me now is that I'm a footnote in one of the greatest moments in history rather than the dad walking her down the aisle.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ho...lls-staged-paparazzi-photos-a-mistake-1120830


----------



## buffym

Some more pictures from this evening and she will host a round table later this week.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

I find it interesting that the "six week hiatus" thing also mentions their return at Christmas. Trying to force the Queen into a Sandringham invite? 

I can only hope for another scarfing.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

So the same people who said they need to go and rethink the way they're handling things, are now critically needling them because they're taking a six-week sabbatical.

Right. Got it.

Also, I take any "insider" knowledge of anyone..posted either here or other sites with a gigantic serving of salt. It's as much hearsay as anything else.

The justification of Thomas Markle's behaviour and scheming (he literally earned money, not once but numerous times, by selling out Meghan and Harry) continues to astound.


----------



## mrsinsyder

They said they're going away for family time, they didn't say they're going away to think about things and regroup. Whoever they is.


----------



## hellosunshine

youngster said:


> It's interesting that Harry sees these as "attacks" on Meghan as opposed to the reporting of facts and the natural consequences of their own decisions.  The "trashy tabloids" didn't tell the two of them to spend $2+ million GBP in taxpayer money on their house remodeling, fly private jets while lecturing the common folk about climate change



*“I never thought this would be easy but I thought it would be fair. And that is the part that is hard to reconcile,”* - Meghan, Duchess of Sussex


----------



## CeeJay

I can only assume that you are referring to me regarding “inside” knowledge?!  Let me be clear here, my knowledge of Thomas and Meghan is from many years back and under no circumstances do I justify his behavior at present .. but I stand 100+ percent by what I have stated.  I live in LA, and while it is a big city, you would be surprised at the connections made out here.  Sorry, but kind of offended here ..


----------



## CeeJay

.. and, to add .. my friends family WAS contacted by the media repeatedly, and they refused to make any comments .. 100% applaud them on that!


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> *“I never thought this would be easy but I thought it would be fair. And that is the part that is hard to reconcile,”* - Meghan, Duchess of Sussex
> 
> View attachment 4571586
> 
> View attachment 4571587



Oookay, but aren’t some of those tabloid attacks on Charles and K/W for hypocrisy? So, kind of defeating the argument that MM is uniquely unfairly targeted by the press?


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> So the same people who said they need to go and rethink the way they're handling things, are now critically needling them because they're taking a six-week sabbatical.
> 
> Right. Got it.


I'm sick of hearing how hard they work when nothing, up to and including now, has demonstrated they even work as hard as the rest of the family.  The article I read discussing the sabbatical said they have a jam-packed schedule full of engagements through November and indicated the break was partially needed because of how_ tired _they are. Puh-lease.

When they didn't go to Balmoral, they had their sources tell the press it was partially because "they worked through most of August" which is pure BS.  They didn't work in August.  They private jetted to Elton John's house, private jetted back to the UK for one day, private jetted to Ibiza for a week, and then spent the rest of August doing little of anything, just like the rest of the family.

Do they need a sabbatical?  Yes.  Maybe longer than 6 weeks.  But at the end of the year, when you look at the 6 months of maternity leave, the almost two month of summer vacation, the 6 week sabbatical - and then probably another month for Christmas and New Year's?  It won't be a year marked by a lot of work for the Sussexes, and it's long overdue that they tone down that hype.


----------



## gracekelly

Using the residences other royals to justify the spending on Frogmore is really not necessary.  It should be noted that the pictures of the residences posted belong to the Queen, the Prince of Wales who will be King one day, and Prince William who will be both at different points in time.  Prince Harry will never be any of the above. These people are in a whole other category than the Sussex.  One is  a ruler and two will be rulers.   His father offered to build him a country estate home, but he rejected it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if the 6 week sabbatical was imposed for any of the possible reasons: intensive therapy, intensive retraining for behavior becoming a royal, a total time out with orders to lay extremely low/NOT appear in public/the press (the worst punishment for narcissists).


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> I can only assume that you are referring to me regarding “inside” knowledge?!  Let me be clear here, my knowledge of Thomas and Meghan is from many years back and under no circumstances do I justify his behavior at present .. but I stand 100+ percent by what I have stated.  I live in LA, and while it is a big city, you would be surprised at the connections made out here.  Sorry, but kind of offended here ..


Don't stress it... anything that doesn't fit the narrative is doubted with a quickness while anything pro-Sussex is spouted off as a fact even though they rarely are.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if the 6 week sabbatical was imposed for any of the possible reasons: intensive therapy, intensive retraining for behavior becoming a royal, a total time out with orders to lay extremely low/NOT appear in public/the press (the worst punishment for narcissists).


I wonder what they'd have to have been threatened with for this to happen. Being cut off from the purse?

If they're cut off from the press I have no doubt we'll see M2 and Archie "casually shopping" and drinking some green juice at some shop that will give her kickbacks on the side.


----------



## gracekelly

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if the 6 week sabbatical was imposed for any of the possible reasons: intensive therapy, intensive retraining for behavior becoming a royal, a total time out with orders to lay extremely low/NOT appear in public/the press (the worst punishment for narcissists).


I think it is basically a cooling off period.  I think you will still see tweets and insta from them.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> I wonder what they'd have to have been threatened with for this to happen. Being cut off from the purse?
> 
> If they're cut off from the press I have no doubt we'll see M2 and Archie "casually shopping" and drinking some green juice at some shop that will give her kickbacks on the side.


I don't think they can "cut them off" from the press.  It might be strongly suggested that they not make public comments.


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> I can only assume that you are referring to me regarding “inside” knowledge?! Let me be clear here, my knowledge of Thomas and Meghan is from many years back and under no circumstances do I justify his behavior at present .. but I stand 100+ percent by what I have stated. I live in LA, and while it is a big city, you would be surprised at the connections made out here. Sorry, but kind of offended here ..


I think it was an interesting story and I'm glad you shared it.  I have never, ever gotten the impression that you were telling this story to justify Thomas Markle's current behavior or portray him as a fantastic guy.  The story is essentially that he spoiled Meghan in her youth.  That's all I took from it.  

The story is not at all out of line with what's on the record about the Markle family.   What doesn't jibe is the idea that he has been a raging, violent, abusive monster for all of Meghan's life and that's why Meghan isn't on good terms with him now.  There's no evidence for that except it's what some people want to believe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

They do need a break because in that doco Harry basically said that he’s not fit for work ( can’t deal with cameras at all and I take that to mean cameras at movie premieres etc, etc as well ) so he needs to take a break to consider his future employment options within the Firm or outside of it and/or his options for sorting out that trauma.  Wife and child go with to keep the family together.
But then they need to get back to work or become private citizens who pay their own way.


----------



## glamourous1098

_Has there been ANY celeb who gets only positive press? None that I can think of._


Tom Hanks.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

gracekelly said:


> Using the residences other royals to justify the spending on Frogmore is really not necessary.  It should be noted that the pictures of the residences posted belong to the Queen, the Prince of Wales who will be King one day, and Prince William who will be both at different points in time.  Prince Harry will never be any of the above. These people are in a whole other category than the Sussex.  One is  a ruler and two will be rulers.   His father offered to build him a country estate home, but he rejected it.


It needs to be put against other royals because their spending on Frogmore is in line with them. Including those of Edward and Andrew.

As well as the other "lesser" royals whose apartments and other homes were remodeled specifically for them, at similar expense.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Flatsy said:


> I'm sick of hearing how hard they work when nothing, up to and including now, has demonstrated they even work as hard as the rest of the family.  The article I read discussing the sabbatical said they have a jam-packed schedule full of engagements through November and indicated the break was partially needed because of how_ tired _they are. Puh-lease.
> 
> When they didn't go to Balmoral, they had their sources tell the press it was partially because "they worked through most of August" which is pure BS.  They didn't work in August.  They private jetted to Elton John's house, private jetted back to the UK for one day, private jetted to Ibiza for a week, and then spent the rest of August doing little of anything, just like the rest of the family.
> 
> Do they need a sabbatical?  Yes.  Maybe longer than 6 weeks.  But at the end of the year, when you look at the 6 months of maternity leave, the almost two month of summer vacation, the 6 week sabbatical - and then probably another month for Christmas and New Year's?  It won't be a year marked by a lot of work for the Sussexes, and it's long overdue that they tone down that hype.



Adding maternity leave to that tally is a bit much.


----------



## bag-mania

glamourous1098 said:


> _Has there been ANY celeb who gets only positive press? None that I can think of._
> 
> 
> Tom Hanks.



That’s true. Tom Hanks is squeaky clean by celebrity standards. Although he did marry his second wife hot on the heels of divorcing his first. I seem to recall there were tabloid rumors there may have been some overlap between them. Of course that was a long time ago and not even particularly scandalous for Hollywood.


----------



## Flatsy

There was a little bit of bad press for Tom Hanks way, way back in the day.  Nothing terrible, but there was overlap between his first marriage and his second.  He successfully tap danced around that.

ETA: There definitely was overlap between his marriages.  He started dating Rita Wilson in 1985 and divorced Samantha Lewes in 1987.  He said he and Samantha were separated at the time, which is always dubious, and back in the 80s it was taboo to date while still married.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Add Keanu too


----------



## ccbaggirl89

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It needs to be put against other royals because their spending on Frogmore is in line with them. Including those of Edward and Andrew.
> 
> As well as the other "lesser" royals whose apartments and other homes were remodeled specifically for them, at similar expense.


But aren't those royals living in their homes? Harry and Meghan spent a whole lot considering they have been on vacay quite a lot since their marriage and they plan to be absent from their residence for 6 weeks again now.


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> Oookay, but aren’t some of those tabloid attacks on Charles and K/W for hypocrisy? So, kind of defeating the argument that MM is uniquely unfairly targeted by the press?



Tabloids acknowledging the cost of Charles and the Cambridges' renovations without the same level of hysteria and vitriol that the Sussexs' receive is NOT the same. 



gracekelly said:


> Using the residences other royals to justify the spending on Frogmore is really not necessary.  It should be noted that the pictures of the residences posted belong to the Queen, the Prince of Wales who will be King one day, and Prince William who will be both at different points in time.  Prince Harry will never be any of the above.



Well, renovations for the Duke and Duchess of Kent and The Duke of Yorks' Lodge cost more.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Tabloids acknowledging the cost of Charles and the Cambridges' renovations without the same level of hysteria and vitriol that the Sussexs' receive is NOT the same.


In 2014, the Daily Mail published the same vitriolic headlines about "Kate's" renovation as they did about "Meghan's".  Screenshots have already been posted in this thread.  The press went on for over a year about every last detail of that renovation, blaming Kate for her excess.  Sussex fans are more than happy to continue throwing stones at Kate for putting in a family kitchen instead of using the existing catering kitchen that was designed for formal banquets.

I didn't have a problem with the Frogmore renovation, but it is hypocritical to get angry about the press coverage of Meghan and Harry's renovation, but be on board with condemning Kate (or any other royal) for the same thing.


----------



## lulilu

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine no one clued her in on protocol.....agree, she more likely thinks her way is the best way



I read somewhere that curtseys are not appropriate unless Harry or William is with their wife?.


----------



## Grande Latte

MM is planning a move back to the United States, and is bringing Archie with her. With or without Harry. Maybe after the sabbatical, Harry will come out and announce he's decided to uproot his family to LA. Or maybe after the sabbatical and eventually they decide to go separate ways. Nothing will surprise me. 

MM does whatever she wants, the royal family can't control her.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I read somewhere that curtseys are not appropriate unless Harry or William is with their wife?.


There is an Order of Precedence, which determines who has to  curtsy to whom.  The Queen updated it a couple of years ago.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> In 2014, the Daily Mail published the same vitriolic headlines about "Kate's" renovation as they did about "Meghan's".  Screenshots have already been posted in this thread.  The press went on for over a year about every last detail of that renovation, blaming Kate for her excess.  Sussex fans are more than happy to continue throwing stones at Kate for putting in a family kitchen instead of using the existing catering kitchen that was designed for formal banquets.
> 
> I didn't have a problem with the Frogmore renovation, but it is hypocritical to get angry about the press coverage of Meghan and Harry's renovation, but be on board with condemning Kate (or any other royal) for the same thing.



Any time that public money is spent on anything, someone is going to be unhappy.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Flatsy said:


> In 2014, the Daily Mail published the same vitriolic headlines about "Kate's" renovation as they did about "Meghan's".  Screenshots have already been posted in this thread.  The press went on for over a year about every last detail of that renovation, blaming Kate for her excess.  Sussex fans are more than happy to continue throwing stones at Kate for putting in a family kitchen instead of using the existing catering kitchen that was designed for formal banquets.
> 
> I didn't have a problem with the Frogmore renovation, but it is hypocritical to get angry about the press coverage of Meghan and Harry's renovation, but be on board with condemning Kate (or any other royal) for the same thing.



I think we are on the same page here.  In truth, in these times - and I can see particularly for the people of Great Britain (I'm in the Commonwealth but it's not the same) at the moment, any of these spends on renovation can rub people the wrong way.

I guess it all comes down to - and will come down to in the future, is if the institution of the monarchy is deemed to be worth it to the British people.  A lot of these residences are also historical to Britain so again, the upkeep of them is required in some way.  To the extent that some of them have been renovated?  I don't know - we'll probably never get a real look inside them.  

Edward and Sophie remodelled Bagshot Park extensively as well to the tune of 3 million pounds.  

It's royal-wide, not just the Cambridges, and not just the Sussexes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## buffym

Grande Latte said:


> MM is planning a move back to the United States, and is bringing Archie with her. With or without Harry. Maybe after the sabbatical, Harry will come out and announce he's decided to uproot his family to LA. Or maybe after the sabbatical and eventually they decide to go separate ways. Nothing will surprise me.
> 
> MM does whatever she wants, the royal family can't control her.



Meghan not Harry said they are taking a break, so I wonder what is going to happen if they continue to work and not go to the US like the press wants.


----------



## gracekelly

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think we are on the same page here.  In truth, in these times - and I can see particularly for the people of Great Britain (I'm in the Commonwealth but it's not the same) at the moment, any of these spends on renovation can rub people the wrong way.
> 
> I guess it all comes down to - and will come down to in the future, is if the institution of the monarchy is deemed to be worth it to the British people.  A lot of these residences are also historical to Britain so again, the upkeep of them is required in some way.  To the extent that some of them have been renovated?  I don't know - we'll probably never get a real look inside them.
> 
> Edward and Sophie remodelled Bagshot Park extensively as well to the tune of 3 million pounds.
> 
> It's royal-wide, not just the Cambridges, and not just the Sussexes.



Yes the upkeep on some of these place is staggering.  The death duties as well for many families with large estates.  They don't open their homes to the public because they are being neighborly, they charge admission to make money to help keep the place up.  I have been to private events at stately homes in England and Scotland that are rented out for conferences and dinners etc.  The family usually has a whole other wing of the house where they live day to day when they are in residence.  Even Blenheim Palace has been rented for very upscale weddings aside from the usual tours of the  place.  When the nobles went looking for American heiresses in the 1800-1900's it was for the money to renovate these "piles."   I think we common folk are astounded at the numbers to get the work done on these places and it is hard for us to relate to what has to be done to these old buildings.


----------



## Flatsy

Grande Latte said:


> MM is planning a move back to the United States, and is bringing Archie with her. With or without Harry. Maybe after the sabbatical, Harry will come out and announce he's decided to uproot his family to LA. Or maybe after the sabbatical and eventually they decide to go separate ways. Nothing will surprise me.


If things are shaky and Meghan and/or Harry are starting to think ahead about protecting their own interests in the event of a divorce, Harry has a lot to lose by establishing residence in the US.   

If they divorce while California residents, Meghan's going to have the upper hand in terms of being allowed to stay there with Archie permanently.  I don't think Harry is going to want to continue living in LA as a divorcee, just like I don't think Meghan will want to have anything to do with London anymore if they divorce.  But I think they both love their kid and will want to be near him, so one of them is going to have to bite the bullet.

The royal family is never, EVER going to try to exert the Queen's legal right to Archie.  They'd be through if they did that.  But it could be a messy custody negotiation.


----------



## caramelize126

ccbaggirl89 said:


> But aren't those royals living in their homes? Harry and Meghan spent a whole lot considering they have been on vacay quite a lot since their marriage and they plan to be absent from their residence for 6 weeks again now.



With the huge media interest, it’s shocking to me that there are no pap pics of them going about their daily routine. No pics of them going in and out of frogmore. No pictures of them walking around Windsor except those staged pub pics. I would not be surprised if they had a residence elsewhere. And if they do, I’m curious how much that cost.


----------



## mdcx

I have to say, this has all gotten spectacularly messy in a short amount of time. I knew MM would cause problems but didn't think it would be quite this much drama so soon.
I predict a seperate living situation, followed some years later by a divorce. She already has some good material from Harry's own mouth about his mental heath struggles.


----------



## caramelize126

mdcx said:


> I have to say, this has all gotten spectacularly messy in a short amount of time. I knew MM would cause problems but didn't think it would be quite this much drama so soon.
> I predict a seperate living situation, followed some years later by a divorce. She already has some good material from Harry's own mouth about his mental heath struggles.



This is going to be messy. It’s appears as if every relationship MM has becomes disfunctional. Harry is really all she has left and even this appears to be going south now. No family, no childhood friends, seemingly no recent friends either ( at least none close enough to ask if she’s “ok”). Where are Serena, Amal, and Priyanka? The common denominator seems to be MM


----------



## Grande Latte

Flatsy said:


> If things are shaky and Meghan and/or Harry are starting to think ahead about protecting their own interests in the event of a divorce, Harry has a lot to lose by establishing residence in the US.
> 
> If they divorce while California residents, Meghan's going to have the upper hand in terms of being allowed to stay there with Archie permanently.  I don't think Harry is going to want to continue living in LA as a divorcee, just like I don't think Meghan will want to have anything to do with London anymore if they divorce.  But I think they both love their kid and will want to be near him, so one of them is going to have to bite the bullet.
> 
> The royal family is never, EVER going to try to exert the Queen's legal right to Archie.  They'd be through if they did that.  But it could be a messy custody negotiation.



This LA trip isn't so innocent imo. 6 weeks is a lot of time. Time to find lawyers, look at real estate, establish new relations,...etc. Meanwhile I hope Harry doesn't drink, talk too loud, or do anything to irritate MM in case she pulls a "Angelina-and-Brad-Pitt-on-a-private-plane" kind of scheme on American soil. The Royal Family won't be able to protect Harry then. Harry's on his own now.


----------



## Lodpah

Remember when Sir Paul McCartney married Heather Mills? The beautiful, mine activist? Everyone was so happy and applauded the marriage? Well it turned out badly. Meghan is like her. We all know people like her, in high school and/or college. Like someone said Meghan’s been around the block a few times. Sometimes I wonder why do I even comment on here. She just gives off a strange and not good vibe and I’ve been around on the earth long enough to at least be discerning and wary. I like the British monarchy and love tradition so maybe that’s it and I adore Queen Elizabeth.

When General Eisenhower was presenting the invasion of Normandy plans to Queen Elizabeth and Monty was giving the side eye to Eisenhower, Queen Elizabeth jumped up and applauded the plan, knowing her country might either be annihilated or saved. She refused to be separated from her people. What a classy and awesome woman so I suppose I want to see her not have to deal with an impudent and disrespectful . . . I’ll leave at that.


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah she looks like she really wants her privacy.
> 
> Her face is like the cat that got the cream. I guess that’s what existing looks like.


All that adulation for an ex-Deal or No Deal briefcase model. She done good.


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm admittedly not a hugger either but her hugging everyone seems so over the top and it's just not always appropriate or professional.


And she doubles down on her hugs by hugging even harder and longer.


mrsinsyder said:


> Add Keanu too


LOVE Keanu.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Remember when Sir Paul McCartney married Heather Mills? The beautiful, mine activist? Everyone was so happy and applauded the marriage? Well it turned out badly. Meghan is like her. We all know people like her, in high school and/or college. Like someone said Meghan’s been around the block a few times. Sometimes I wonder why do I even comment on here. She just gives off a strange and not good vibe and I’ve been around on the earth long enough to at least be discerning and wary. I like the British monarchy and love tradition so maybe that’s it and I adore Queen Elizabeth.
> *When General Eisenhower was presenting the invasion of Normandy plans to Queen Elizabeth and Monty was giving the side eye to Eisenhower, Queen Elizabeth jumped up and applauded the plan, knowing her country might either be annihilated or saved. She refused to be separated from her people. What a classy and awesome woman so I suppose I want to see her not have to deal with an impudent and disrespectful . . . I’ll leave at that*.


That was her mother.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> I read somewhere that curtseys are not appropriate unless Harry or William is with their wife?.


That related to a discussion about when and which of the other royals had to curtsey to MM.



caramelize126 said:


> With the huge media interest, it’s shocking to me that there are no pap pics of them going about their daily routine. No pics of them going in and out of frogmore. No pictures of them walking around Windsor except those staged pub pics.


This!  And yet we keep being told the press are relentless in their pursuit


----------



## jblended

I have to ask because I don't usually follow these documentaries, but as I'm watching theirs now I'm struck by how leading the questions are from the journalist; Is that the norm for these types of documentaries?
I know these questions and answers would have been prepared in advance, but still, they're all leading questions, and he's literally setting it up so the answers make for great soundbites.  Not exactly good journalism there. Well, good on him for getting soundbites but rubbish "journalism" in terms of being impartial.


----------



## mdcx

jblended said:


> I have to ask because I don't usually follow these documentaries, but as I'm watching theirs now I'm struck by how leading the questions are from the journalist; Is that the norm for these types of documentaries?
> I know these questions and answers would have been prepared in advance, but still, they're all leading questions, and he's literally setting it up so the answers make for great soundbites.  Not exactly good journalism there. Well, good on him for getting soundbites but rubbish "journalism" in terms of being impartial.


The interviewer is Harry's good friend, so yes, a very softball affair.


----------



## Clearblueskies

The framed photo of Meghan and “H” that’s been on the Queens side table in the audience room since their wedding, was absent yesterday when she received the High Commissioner for Grenada


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> The framed photo of Meghan and “H” that’s been on the Queens side table in the audience room since their wedding, was absent yesterday when she received the High Commissioner for Grenada


All they had to do was follow a few rules, lay low and do a bit of charity work. Just smile and wave at the cameras and keep their mouthes shut. They would have been the most loved couple on the planet while living an extremely privileged life, but that wasn’t enough for them.


----------



## jblended

Now that I've watched the entire documentary, the only thought that comes to mind with them is 'The Drama Triangle'. I've never seen such an _obvious _display of that cycle.
Meghan is playing Victim, Harry is the Hero and everyone else is alternating for the role of Persecutors  (Press/ BRF/ Meg's family/ General public). 
I've read that they're getting psychological support; if that's true, I'm surprised that they don't seem to know that they're perfectly enacting and perpetuating this 'drama triangle' cycle. Any therapist would have pointed that out immediately. Though, perhaps they don't get therapy and aren't aware because they're in the midst of the drama, so they can't see the forest for the trees.
What an exhausting way to live.


----------



## Meh-gan

mdcx said:


> The interviewer is Harry's good friend, so yes, a very softball affair.



And the stans keep insisting MM was “just asked a question” out of nowhere and that the whole staged performance was genuine and spontaneous. LMAO.


----------



## Jayne1

jblended said:


> I have to ask because I don't usually follow these documentaries, but as I'm watching theirs now I'm struck by how leading the questions are from the journalist; Is that the norm for these types of documentaries?
> I know these questions and answers would have been prepared in advance, but still, they're all leading questions, and he's literally setting it up so the answers make for great soundbites.  Not exactly good journalism there. Well, good on him for getting soundbites but rubbish "journalism" in terms of being impartial.


That's why I gave up on watching.  Leading, softball questions.


----------



## lanasyogamama

What’s all this talk of a separation? Have you SEEN how she looks at him?!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

lulilu said:


> I read somewhere that curtseys are not appropriate unless Harry or William is with their wife?.


I think that is the royal-to-royal rule? When general public meets a royal they can pretty much do anything, there is no set protocol except on what to call the queen. Common sense should dictate you wouldn't hug them, but I think even that has been done to the queen at times. The woman on the stage was being respectful and a curtsey was ok from her, or even a handshake would have been good.


----------



## daisychainz

jblended said:


> I have to ask because I don't usually follow these documentaries, but as I'm watching theirs now I'm struck by how leading the questions are from the journalist; Is that the norm for these types of documentaries?
> I know these questions and answers would have been prepared in advance, but still, they're all leading questions, and he's literally setting it up so the answers make for great soundbites.  Not exactly good journalism there. Well, good on him for getting soundbites but rubbish "journalism" in terms of being impartial.


He is a personal friend of Harry and was at the wedding - that is what I read. So, not impartial at all!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Clearblueskies said:


> Poor woman  There’s something very vain IMO about seeing Meghan “breaking the rules” when she knows full well the other person cannot. It’s the ultimate snobbery.



I see this differently.  Keeping in mind that I'm an American, I see a young woman who's embracing someone she knows well.  An outburst of affection, but I doubt there was any intention of "snobbery."


----------



## daisychainz

Cavalier Girl said:


> I see this differently.  Keeping in mind that I'm an American, I see a young woman who's embracing someone she knows well.  An outburst of affection, but I doubt there was any intention of "snobbery."


I don't see snobbery either, but she was racing across the stage so fast she didn't have time to see the woman would curtsy for her. She embarrassed the woman and looked foolish herself. Going around hugging everyone at warp speed is bizarre - lots of people hate being touched and hugged like that, even when you know the person. Meghan needs some guidance on how to go on stage and meet people professionally. She does not have to give up warmth and affection - what about a hand touch or something less invasive.


----------



## TC1

Wendy Williams said on her show yesterday "Meghan Markle, no one feels sorry for you..you knew what you were getting into" 
I feel like that pretty much sums up a lot of people's views on this. Mine included.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Lodpah said:


> When General Eisenhower was presenting the invasion of Normandy plans to Queen Elizabeth and Monty was giving the side eye to Eisenhower, Queen Elizabeth jumped up and applauded the plan, knowing her country might either be annihilated or saved. She refused to be separated from her people. What a classy and awesome woman so I suppose I want to see her not have to deal with an impudent and disrespectful . . . I’ll leave at that.



Just an historical note,  Queen Elizabeth was a princess during World War II.


----------



## Toulouse

Flatsy said:


> Harry's voicemail was hacked in 2004.  The Leveson Inquiry put an end to celebrity voicemail hacking, and put The News of the World out of business.  The editor of The Mirror was fired.  I hardly see the urgent need to "do something" 15 years later.
> 
> As for the copyright violation, it's a legitimate lawsuit.  But almost everyone believes that she set a trap for her father and the press with that later - even making its existence known via People Magazine after her father sat on the letter for 5 months.  It was said Harry and Meghan were waiting for something they could take legal action on - a "slam dunk" and the letter was it.  They filed the lawsuit not because their backs were against the wall over copyright infringement, but to retaliate for all of the stories that are being written about them that they don't like.



I haven’t been following the hacking allegations closely, but is it possible this suit is related to more recent events of which the public is unaware? Otherwise a statute of limitations would likely bar their lawsuit for such an old claim and there wouldn’t be any point in even filing the paperwork, as it would be dismissed immediately (at least in the US).


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> I have to ask because I don't usually follow these documentaries, but as I'm watching theirs now I'm struck by how leading the questions are from the journalist; Is that the norm for these types of documentaries?
> I know these questions and answers would have been prepared in advance, but still, they're all leading questions, and he's literally setting it up so the answers make for great soundbites.  Not exactly good journalism there. Well, good on him for getting soundbites but rubbish "journalism" in terms of being impartial.


I thought it was on tonight?  Not that I'm dying to watch it right away but probably will at some point


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think that is the royal-to-royal rule? When general public meets a royal they can pretty much do anything, there is no set protocol except on what to call the queen. Common sense should dictate you wouldn't hug them, but I think even that has been done to the queen at times. The woman on the stage was being respectful and a curtsey was ok from her, or even a handshake would have been good.


but if it's the queen then everyone must curtsey?  I recall celebs who have met her talking about it


----------



## sdkitty

Meh-gan said:


> And the stans keep insisting MM was “just asked a question” out of nowhere and that the whole staged performance was genuine and spontaneous. LMAO.


guess I need to see her acting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Remember when Sir Paul McCartney married Heather Mills? The beautiful, mine activist? Everyone was so happy and applauded the marriage? Well it turned out badly. Meghan is like her. We all know people like her, in high school and/or college. Like someone said Meghan’s been around the block a few times. Sometimes I wonder why do I even comment on here. She just gives off a strange and not good vibe and I’ve been around on the earth long enough to at least be discerning and wary. I like the British monarchy and love tradition so maybe that’s it and I adore Queen Elizabeth.
> 
> When General Eisenhower was presenting the invasion of Normandy plans to Queen Elizabeth and Monty was giving the side eye to Eisenhower, Queen Elizabeth jumped up and applauded the plan, knowing her country might either be annihilated or saved. She refused to be separated from her people. What a classy and awesome woman so I suppose I want to see her not have to deal with an impudent and disrespectful . . . I’ll leave at that.


I recall Heather being exposed as basically a grifter.  was that only after the marriage?


----------



## jblended

sdkitty said:


> I thought it was on tonight?  Not that I'm dying to watch it right away but probably will at some point



I watched it on Youtube.


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> I watched it on Youtube.


guess I'm old.  I was planning to record it


----------



## LibbyRuth

sdkitty said:


> I thought it was on tonight?  Not that I'm dying to watch it right away but probably will at some point


It's airing tonight in the US, but has already aired in Britain.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Wendy Williams said on her show yesterday "Meghan Markle, no one feels sorry for you..you knew what you were getting into"
> I feel like that pretty much sums up a lot of people's views on this. Mine included.


yes, as I (and others) have said, she was a grown woman, not a young bride like Diana (and a very ambitious one by all accounts)


----------



## Sharont2305

Cavalier Girl said:


> Just an historical note,  Queen Elizabeth was a princess during World War II.


Yes, and it was The Queen Mother who said that she couldn't look the East End, which was heavily bombed, in the eye (if they'd left.)


----------



## youngster

I actually don't see Harry and Meghan heading toward a separation any time soon. They do appear to love each other, even if they do also seem to bring out the fragility in one another.  Harry is looking like the worst version of himself (combative, highly entitled, rather clueless), but he is likely going to fight for the marriage to work so that Archie doesn't have divorced parents.  

They may be perfect for one another in their mutual dysfunction. If they decide they can't handle daily royal life, they might become a sort of modern era Duke and Duchess of Windsor, drifting between continents and hanging about with their celebrity "friends".


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I recall Heather being exposed as basically a grifter.  was that only after the marriage?



Yes, Heather was basically a b*tch but was able to hide it for a time. She also got pregnant as fast as she could. Paul had had such a smooth wonderful marriage with Linda I think he assumed all marriages could be like that. He found out how wrong he was. I don't believe Meghan is that bad or at least I hope not!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I actually don't see Harry and Meghan heading toward a separation any time soon. They do appear to love each other, even if they do also seem to bring out the fragility in one another.  Harry is looking like the worst version of himself (combative, highly entitled, rather clueless), but he is likely going to fight for the marriage to work so that Archie doesn't have divorced parents.
> 
> They may be perfect for one another in their mutual dysfunction. If they decide they can't handle daily royal life, they might become a sort of modern era Duke and Duchess of Windsor, drifting between continents and hanging about with their celebrity "friends".


I think she would still be ahead of the game with that life compared to being a single mom, former B-list actress.  Look at Fergie.  She had some success with Weight Watchers, making friends with Oprah, etc. but you don't hear much about her anymore.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I think she would still be ahead of the game with that life compared to being a single mom, former B-list actress.  Look at Fergie.  She had some success with Weight Watchers, making friends with Oprah, etc. but you don't hear much about her anymore.



Yes, I agree, there is little upside for Meghan in a divorce.  She'd likely have to sign a massive NDA in order to get the settlement that she would want.  Then what?  She's close to 40.  She might get a few novelty roles in Hollywood for a time.  A few talk show appearances where she really can't discuss anything about the royal family and it would seem totally hypocritical if she did, given all the fuss about privacy.  I think she'll hang on to Harry for decades.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think she would still be ahead of the game with that life compared to being a single mom, former B-list actress.  Look at Fergie.  She had some success with Weight Watchers, making friends with Oprah, etc. but you don't hear much about her anymore.



I always liked Fergie. She seems like the most fun to hang out with out of the whole clan by far.
This was my favorite Twitter post about her arrival at H&M's wedding.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Yes, I agree, there is little upside for Meghan in a divorce.  She'd likely have to sign a massive NDA in order to get the settlement that she would want.  Then what?  She's close to 40.  She might get a few novelty roles in Hollywood for a time.  A few talk show appearances where she really can't discuss anything about the royal family and it would seem totally hypocritical if she did, given all the fuss about privacy.  I think she'll hang on to Harry for decades.


again, back to Fergie....divorced and still living with andrew


----------



## lulilu

In all the videos and photos I've seen, H&M seem in love.  I don't understand all the talk of divorce, separation etc.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> again, back to Fergie....divorced and still living with andrew



She moved in when her daughters were still underage and living there. To be fair it's an enormous 30 room estate and she splits her time between there and another place in Switzerland. It's possible they rarely see each other.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> In all the videos and photos I've seen, H&M seem in love.  I don't understand all the talk of divorce, separation etc.



I think it's premature too. It will likely be very obvious if the marriage becomes strained.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Cavalier Girl said:


> Just an historical note,  Queen Elizabeth was a princess during World War II.


Yes you correct, Queen Mother Elizabeth.


----------



## Flatsy

lulilu said:


> In all the videos and photos I've seen, H&M seem in love.  I don't understand all the talk of divorce, separation etc.


They engage in a lot of PDA, but I've seen plenty of celebrities who paw each other in public and announce a divorce a week later.

Meghan is saying her life is miserable.  She puts on a very different face in public.  If you went by her smiley public face, she acts like the happiest, most carefree person in the world.  So the fact that she still makes doe-eyes and smiles at Harry - I don't know how much that can be trusted in terms of judging the quality of their relationship.

The Sussexes have made it clear that they are really unhappy and that they don't know what their future holds.  I think leaving the royal family would be their first step, but I don't see the marriage lasting long after that.  Harry might be willing to do it for the sake of his wife because I think he really wants to make it work, but I don't think he wants to turn his back on his family, his country, and his duty.

And if the Sussexes leave the royal family, I think they will find themselves still unhappy.  I think their lack of happiness, that they are blaming on everyone else, is much more about the two of them.


----------



## caramelize126

youngster said:


> Yes, I agree, there is little upside for Meghan in a divorce.  She'd likely have to sign a massive NDA in order to get the settlement that she would want.  Then what?  She's close to 40.  She might get a few novelty roles in Hollywood for a time.  A few talk show appearances where she really can't discuss anything about the royal family and it would seem totally hypocritical if she did, given all the fuss about privacy.  I think she'll hang on to Harry for decades.



I dont think she would get any sort of substantial settlement. Harry has no money except for what Diana left him. He had full access to that trust once he turned 30. It was reported to be about 10 million pounds. Who knows if there is anything left. As far as I know, his only other income is an "allowance" from his father. Does he get anything for his 10 years in the military?

Diana only lucked out because Charles was PoW and had a huge income from the Cornwall duchy. No such luck with Harry. Literally the same situation as Fergie and Andrew. Anyone know what Fergie got?


----------



## caramelize126

Clearblueskies said:


> Poor woman   There’s something very vain IMO about seeing Meghan “breaking the rules” when she knows full well the other person cannot.  It’s the ultimate snobbery.



My first impression was that she had done this to "show" everyone how down to earth she is.  Either way, its hasnt  seemed to go over well with anyone lol. Lots of comments online similar to what you have stated above.


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> I dont think she would get any sort of substantial settlement. Harry has no money except for what Diana left him. He had full access to that trust once he turned 30. It was reported to be about 10 million pounds. Who knows if there is anything left. As far as I know, his only other income is an "allowance" from his father. Does he get anything for his 10 years in the military?
> 
> Diana only lucked out because Charles was PoW and had a huge income from the Cornwall duchy. No such luck with Harry. Literally the same situation as Fergie and Andrew. Anyone know what Fergie got?


Actually at the time Charles borrowed money  from the Queen.   He might have been cash poor at the time or it was already allocated for expenses.


----------



## youngster

caramelize126 said:


> Diana only lucked out because Charles was PoW and had a huge income from the Cornwall duchy. No such luck with Harry. Literally the same situation as Fergie and Andrew. *Anyone know what Fergie got?*



Not enough, because she tried to sell access to Andrew when she was on the verge of bankruptcy about 10 years ago.  That's why the Weight Watchers deal too.

This is what Sarah reportedly got in her divorce:
_Ferguson reportedly agreed to be paid $20,000 a year from the royal family and given $660,000 to buy a new house. In addition, she is said to have received around $1.8 million to start trust funds for Beatrice and Eugenie as well as another $462,000 in cash and an agreement that Prince Andrew would pay for their daughters’ education._


----------



## bag-mania

caramelize126 said:


> My first impression was that *she had done this to "show" everyone how down to earth she is*.  Either way, its hasnt  seemed to go over well with anyone lol. Lots of comments online similar to what you have stated above.



I think you're right. I doubt she put much thought into it other than showing enthusiasm and affection would be perceived as her being genuine. Like Meghan just can't contain herself because she's so full of love.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Actually at the time Charles borrowed money from the Queen. He might have been cash poor at the time or it was already allocated for expenses.


Yes, the Queen dug into her private bank account to pay Diana off.

I don't know whether Charles took anything from the Duchy for the divorce.  It's not truly his, and it's supposed to be for his expenses.  I think this is one of those cases where the family wanted everyone to know they were fixing the mess "with private funds".


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> I think you're right. I doubt she put much thought into it other than showing enthusiasm and affection would be perceived as her being genuine. Like Meghan just can't contain herself because she's so full of love.


That's certainly what the hugging is about.

Typically, when one female royal needs to curtsy to another, the higher-ranked female royal receiving the curtsy will put both arms on the person's shoulders as a way of saying "you don't need to do that".  And then they turn the move into a hug.  You'll see it when princesses from different countries greet one another and are very close in age or rank.  

Meghan caught herself and seemed to remember the shoulder move, but only after the encounter had gotten awkward.

Also, the woman isn't another royal, she's a subject.  Meghan could have just accepted the curtsy and then gone in for a hug.


----------



## hellosunshine

Where are the peole who routinely scream about this being a "Meghan & Harry thread"? Why are we discussing Fergie at length in here? Can we get back on topic?!


----------



## caramelize126

youngster said:


> Not enough, because she tried to sell access to Andrew when she was on the verge of bankruptcy about 10 years ago.  That's why the Weight Watchers deal too.
> 
> This is what Sarah reportedly got in her divorce:
> _Ferguson reportedly agreed to be paid $20,000 a year from the royal family and given $660,000 to buy a new house. In addition, she is said to have received around $1.8 million to start trust funds for Beatrice and Eugenie as well as another $462,000 in cash and an agreement that Prince Andrew would pay for their daughters’ education._



Sounds like chump change compared to Diana


----------



## Sharont2305

caramelize126 said:


> Sounds like chump change compared to Diana


Probably because of her higher rank, she would have been Queen eventually had there been no divorce, plus a mother to a future King.


----------



## hellosunshine

*James Blunt says ‘vitriol’ against Meghan Markle and Prince Harry is ‘leaning on bullying’*

*

*

*James Blunt has condemned the “vitriolic” press coverage of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, saying it is “leaning on bullying”.*


*On Wednesday morning, the singer appeared on ITV’s Good Morning Britain, where he spoke about his relationship with the royal couple.*


*Blunt, who attended Meghan and Prince Harry‘s wedding in May 2018, expressed his opposition to the way the pair are often portrayed in the media.*

*“I do know them, I might have spoken briefly about it,” the musician said.*


*“What I think I can see is that they seem to be on the cover of the newspapers a lot and it seems to be vitriolic quite a lot of the time.”*

*Blunt added that he met Prince Harry while serving in the army.*


*“He’s a very nice man, a really phenomenal soldier, who does a lot of work for other people, for charities, for veterans, for Sentebale charity, for children in Africa, and I think under great scrutiny they seem to try a lot for other people,” he said.*


*“So the vitriol seems a bit like leaning on bullying to me.”*

*During his appearance on Good Morning Britain, Blunt also opened up about his father’s ill health.*


*The singer explained that his father needs a new kidney, revealing that he is not a match.*


*
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...arry-gmb-interview-royal-family-a9167341.html
*


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> That's certainly what the hugging is about.
> 
> Typically, when one female royal needs to curtsy to another, the higher-ranked female royal receiving the curtsy will put both arms on the person's shoulders as a way of saying "you don't need to do that".  And then they turn the move into a hug.  You'll see it when princesses from different countries greet one another and are very close in age or rank.
> 
> Meghan caught herself and seemed to remember the shoulder move, but only after the encounter had gotten awkward.
> 
> Also, the woman isn't another royal, she's a subject.  Meghan could have just accepted the curtsy and then gone in for a hug.



Personally, if I were meeting a royal, I want the whole experience - do the curtsy and all... Would it be unreasonable to assume that most want and expect the same?


----------



## daisychainz

lulilu said:


> In all the videos and photos I've seen, H&M seem in love.  I don't understand all the talk of divorce, separation etc.


They seem in love just like they seem like happy people, and then they come on tv and say they are just existing. They have been showing up at appearances looking happy but hiding unhappiness. They could be super happy or super unhappy, but do you think all the current stress and scrutiny they are under makes for a happy and loving marriage? They (likely) have marriage troubles right now, which is a bit sad for them because they are barely into the marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## joyeaux

CeeJay said:


> Does anyone else get the sense that Meghan wasn't provided with any "training" re: protocol, etc.?   -OR-  is it that she just ignores it and wants to do things "her way" (my opinion is the latter, but sometimes I truly wonder).  That poor woman, she looked so embarrassed!



I listen to a podcast (not the BBC one mentioned earlier, this is by the Mirror) that’s also hosted by some legitimate royal reporters (I.e., the ones invited on the tours, with long-standing, good relationship with them, not the piranhas). They seem to be objective and covered H and M’s engagement and wedding really enthusiastically. But you can tell lately they’re disillusioned. The way Archie’s birth was handled, for example, really screwed over a lot of people... the host said they’d sat outside for days waiting for an announcement, only to find out when they were told she was “in labor” it was a big ruse, baby has been here for hours, sorry, no story. Go home. Time and money had been spent and was lost by the people that  make their (legitimate) living reporting on the family. 

One other thing the male host said is that they _“simply don’t listen to the advice they’re given.”  _He said that senior advisors have told him many times that their guidance/advice to H an M consistently goes unheeded. 

I’m also one that started out a Meghan fan and was loving the idea of Harry finding true love and her adding her intellect and modernity to the BRF. But IMO it’s asking a lot of the British public—who quite literally hand over a portion of their hard-earned paychecks to fund various aspects of the royal’s lives—to empathize. It’s actually that “not living” statement that irked me; a babymoon to Morocco, a luxury getaway with the baby to Ibiza... would certainly fall under the “living” category to me.

I am NOT saying I think their lives are perfect, and I think their pain is very real. But I think both of them come from a jaded perspective (hers growing up in the cray that is Hollywood, and he being... well, born). To air it out publicly like that, and in a way that was very contrived/deliberate, seems almost manipulative to me.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Meghan Markle graces Tatler cover after magazine calls her ‘social climber of the year’*




The Duchess of Sussex will grace the cover of Tatler just weeks after the magazine dubbed her ‘social climber of the year’. 

Meghan, 38, will appear on the front cover of the magazine’s 310th anniversary edition, released on October 31. In the image, taken in 2015 to accompany an interview for Canadian website Bay Street Bull, the duchess can be seen staring straight at the camera with her hair scraped back. 

The special issue will feature a nationwide poll on the country’s opinion of Meghan, with four different writers each also expressing their views. Richard Dennen, Editor-in-Chief of Tatler, said it had been ‘fascinating’ seeing how the ‘cast of characters’ changed with each anniversary edition.

He explained: ‘Dynasties rise and fall, new money sashays in, celebrities of the day dazzle. ‘As the Duchess of Sussex knows well, every generation has its struggles – but it’s always cool to be on the right side of history.’ 

He added: ‘I think the Duchess of Sussex is fabulous. I love that she is independent and not afraid of doing things her own way. ‘I like her fashion choices, which are chic, sophisticated and grown-up, and the way she is bringing a breath of California cool to the drab and dusty corridors of the old guard.’ Meghan was named ‘social climber of the year’ by Tatler in September, with the magazine stating that she had reached the ‘pinnacle of the greasy pole’.

The article described the duchess as a ‘Ralph & Russo-clad beacon of change (who) has found a role that suits her to perfection’. They added that she was a ‘tungsten toughie’ who could ‘drag the royal family into the 21st centurty’.

However, the author noted that she was not quite a ‘rags-to-riches tale’ due to her private education and her dad, Thomas Markle, having previously won an Emmy for lighting direction.

Nonetheless, she beat Commons Speaker John Bercow and model Jerry Hall to be crowned the winner by the magazine. With her new cover, Meghan is following in Prince Harry’s footsteps, after he graced the front of Tatler in 2012, when the magazine named him man of the year.


https://metro.co.uk/2019/10/23/megh...-magazine-calls-social-climber-year-10971183/


----------



## CeeJay

"*Social Climber of the Year*"?!?! .. WOW, I guess there are different connotations for that term in the US versus the UK.  I would not be happy if that term was applied to me ..


----------



## daisychainz

CeeJay said:


> "*Social Climber of the Year*"?!?! .. WOW, I guess there are different connotations for that term in the US versus the UK.  I would not be happy if that term was applied to me ..


Agree!, that is a very negative statement in the USA.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> "*Social Climber of the Year*"?!?! .. WOW, I guess there are different connotations for that term in the US versus the UK.  I would not be happy if that term was applied to me ..


Yeah I wouldn't be touting this as a win.


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> Agree!, that is a very negative statement in the USA.


It’s not a compliment in the uk either


----------



## jess236

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s called the _just existing blowout. _


----------



## Lodpah

One sad thing about all this is Samantha Markle is getting credence for what she supposedly ‘warned’ people. I do find SM a horrible person.

I read a sad comment that even though MM did that interview and she has a right to say what she said, the fact the  interview was in Malawi where little girls are kidnapped and raped for their virginity by sickos who think they will cure someone with aids is even more tragic. A time and place for everything.  Most people have changed their minds. A PR firm well based in the UK might have been a better choice for them.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and you know this HOW?  I guess my friends that knew Thomas and Meghan are wrong then?   From their perspective, she was a flat-out "Daddy's girl" and he indulged her A LOT!  In some respects, I see similarities in their characters -- e.g., narcissistic tendencies.


Wonder if that can be inherited


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> Agree!, that is a very negative statement in the USA.





mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah I wouldn't be touting this as a win.



I would be MORTIFIED if that was ever put into print about me!!!  I am a strong believer of doing things on your own to prove your talents/merit .. "social climbing" is (IMO) someone who just uses people to their advantage and then 'moves on' (ghost) them after you have done something for them.  I know people like this, and let's just say that I admit I may not have known it at first, but once I do, they are NO FRIEND of mine .. period!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Wonder if that can be inherited


I've never thought of it as an "inherited" trait but more one that is "taught" by someone who themselves have the same trait!  Just my opinion ..


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> *Meghan Markle graces Tatler cover after magazine calls her ‘social climber of the year’*
> 
> View attachment 4572086
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will grace the cover of Tatler just weeks after the magazine dubbed her ‘social climber of the year’.
> 
> Meghan, 38, will appear on the front cover of the magazine’s 310th anniversary edition, released on October 31. In the image, taken in 2015 to accompany an interview for Canadian website Bay Street Bull, the duchess can be seen staring straight at the camera with her hair scraped back.
> 
> The special issue will feature a nationwide poll on the country’s opinion of Meghan, with four different writers each also expressing their views. Richard Dennen, Editor-in-Chief of Tatler, said it had been ‘fascinating’ seeing how the ‘cast of characters’ changed with each anniversary edition.
> 
> He explained: ‘Dynasties rise and fall, new money sashays in, celebrities of the day dazzle. ‘As the Duchess of Sussex knows well, every generation has its struggles – but it’s always cool to be on the right side of history.’
> 
> He added: ‘I think the Duchess of Sussex is fabulous. I love that she is independent and not afraid of doing things her own way. ‘I like her fashion choices, which are chic, sophisticated and grown-up, and the way she is bringing a breath of California cool to the drab and dusty corridors of the old guard.’ Meghan was named ‘social climber of the year’ by Tatler in September, with the magazine stating that she had reached the ‘pinnacle of the greasy pole’.
> 
> The article described the duchess as a ‘Ralph & Russo-clad beacon of change (who) has found a role that suits her to perfection’. They added that she was a ‘tungsten toughie’ who could ‘drag the royal family into the 21st centurty’.
> 
> However, the author noted that she was not quite a ‘rags-to-riches tale’ due to her private education and her dad, Thomas Markle, having previously won an Emmy for lighting direction.
> 
> Nonetheless, she beat Commons Speaker John Bercow and model Jerry Hall to be crowned the winner by the magazine. With her new cover, Meghan is following in Prince Harry’s footsteps, after he graced the front of Tatler in 2012, when the magazine named him man of the year.
> 
> 
> https://metro.co.uk/2019/10/23/megh...-magazine-calls-social-climber-year-10971183/


Anyone know if a copy would be available in the US?? Would also be very interested in reading the other stories they tease on the cover!


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> I've never thought of it as an "inherited" trait but more one that is "taught" by someone who themselves have the same trait! Just my opinion ..


Exactly.  Thomas Markle is attention-seeking, hubristic, manipulative, and plays the victim.  And I think all of the apples in that family fell close to the tree.


----------



## bag-mania

"However, the author noted that she was not quite a ‘rags-to-riches tale’ due to her private education and her dad, Thomas Markle, having previously won an Emmy for lighting direction."

Hey, who knew Thomas won an Emmy? That's one more than Meghan.


----------



## jess236

*Wendy Williams Has No Sympathy For Meghan Markle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKh3l6TkuLI*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I think you're right. I doubt she put much thought into it other than showing enthusiasm and affection would be perceived as her being genuine. Like Meghan just can't contain herself because she's so full of love.


I thought she was hugging the person like she hadn't seen her in 10 years.  It was a bit too much and really not appropriate.


----------



## caramelize126

cafecreme15 said:


> Anyone know if a copy would be available in the US?? Would also be very interested in reading the other stories they tease on the cover!



You can! Barnes and Noble still sells Tatler


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> *James Blunt says ‘vitriol’ against Meghan Markle and Prince Harry is ‘leaning on bullying’*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4572065
> *
> 
> *James Blunt has condemned the “vitriolic” press coverage of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, saying it is “leaning on bullying”.*
> 
> 
> *On Wednesday morning, the singer appeared on ITV’s Good Morning Britain, where he spoke about his relationship with the royal couple.*
> 
> 
> *Blunt, who attended Meghan and Prince Harry‘s wedding in May 2018, expressed his opposition to the way the pair are often portrayed in the media.*
> 
> *“I do know them, I might have spoken briefly about it,” the musician said.*
> 
> 
> *“What I think I can see is that they seem to be on the cover of the newspapers a lot and it seems to be vitriolic quite a lot of the time.”*
> 
> *Blunt added that he met Prince Harry while serving in the army.*
> 
> 
> *“He’s a very nice man, a really phenomenal soldier, who does a lot of work for other people, for charities, for veterans, for Sentebale charity, for children in Africa, and I think under great scrutiny they seem to try a lot for other people,” he said.*
> 
> 
> *“So the vitriol seems a bit like leaning on bullying to me.”*
> 
> *During his appearance on Good Morning Britain, Blunt also opened up about his father’s ill health.*
> 
> 
> *The singer explained that his father needs a new kidney, revealing that he is not a match.*
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...arry-gmb-interview-royal-family-a9167341.html*


James Blunt was a real soldier and a Captain in the Life Guards and the Blues and Royals deployed with NATO to Kosovo.   He comes from a military family and is married to Sofia Wellesley the granddaughter of the eighth Duke of Wellington.  I think he is being polite and covering for a fellow offiicer because he appreciates the work that Harry does with vets. I don't think their service records are comparable.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/03/royalsandthemedia.pressandpublishing


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> *Meghan Markle graces Tatler cover after magazine calls her ‘social climber of the year’*
> 
> View attachment 4572086
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will grace the cover of Tatler just weeks after the magazine dubbed her ‘social climber of the year’.
> 
> Meghan, 38, will appear on the front cover of the magazine’s 310th anniversary edition, released on October 31. In the image, taken in 2015 to accompany an interview for Canadian website Bay Street Bull, the duchess can be seen staring straight at the camera with her hair scraped back.
> 
> The special issue will feature a nationwide poll on the country’s opinion of Meghan, with four different writers each also expressing their views. Richard Dennen, Editor-in-Chief of Tatler, said it had been ‘fascinating’ seeing how the ‘cast of characters’ changed with each anniversary edition.
> 
> He explained: ‘Dynasties rise and fall, new money sashays in, celebrities of the day dazzle. ‘As the Duchess of Sussex knows well, every generation has its struggles – but it’s always cool to be on the right side of history.’
> 
> He added: ‘I think the Duchess of Sussex is fabulous. I love that she is independent and not afraid of doing things her own way. ‘I like her fashion choices, which are chic, sophisticated and grown-up, and the way she is bringing a breath of California cool to the drab and dusty corridors of the old guard.’ Meghan was named ‘social climber of the year’ by Tatler in September, with the magazine stating that she had reached the ‘pinnacle of the greasy pole’.
> 
> The article described the duchess as a ‘Ralph & Russo-clad beacon of change (who) has found a role that suits her to perfection’. They added that she was a ‘tungsten toughie’ who could ‘drag the royal family into the 21st centurty’.
> 
> However, the author noted that she was not quite a ‘rags-to-riches tale’ due to her private education and her dad, Thomas Markle, having previously won an Emmy for lighting direction.
> 
> Nonetheless, she beat Commons Speaker John Bercow and model Jerry Hall to be crowned the winner by the magazine. With her new cover, Meghan is following in Prince Harry’s footsteps, after he graced the front of Tatler in 2012, when the magazine named him man of the year.
> 
> 
> https://metro.co.uk/2019/10/23/megh...-magazine-calls-social-climber-year-10971183/


It's not a compliment.


----------



## CeeJay

cafecreme15 said:


> Anyone know if a copy would be available in the US?? Would also be very interested in reading the other stories they tease on the cover!


Yes, I go to a bookstore or Newsstand that carries International Magazines .. I usually buy Tatler around the holidays ..


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> "However, the author noted that she was not quite a ‘rags-to-riches tale’ due to her private education and her dad, Thomas Markle, having previously won an Emmy for lighting direction."
> 
> Hey, who knew Thomas won an Emmy? That's one more than Meghan.


I did; again .. one of the things told to me by my friends that knew the family well years ago ..


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> One sad thing about all this is Samantha Markle is getting credence for what she supposedly ‘warned’ people. I do find SM a horrible person.
> 
> I read a sad comment that even though MM did that interview and she has a right to say what she said, the fact the  interview was in Malawi where little girls are kidnapped and raped for their virginity by sickos who think they will cure someone with aids is even more tragic. A time and place for everything.  Most people have changed their minds. A PR firm well based in the UK might have been a better choice for them.


The little girls are most often sold because the family is desperate for money.  So sad all the way around.


----------



## jehaga

caramelize126 said:


> I dont think she would get any sort of substantial settlement. Harry has no money except for what Diana left him. He had full access to that trust once he turned 30. It was reported to be about 10 million pounds. Who knows if there is anything left. As far as I know, his only other income is an "allowance" from his father. Does he get anything for his 10 years in the military?
> 
> Diana only lucked out because Charles was PoW and had a huge income from the Cornwall duchy. No such luck with Harry. Literally the same situation as Fergie and Andrew. Anyone know what Fergie got?


I think MM set her sights on the wrong man! She should’ve gone after Jeff Bezos.


----------



## gracekelly

jehaga said:


> I think MM set her sights on the wrong man! She should’ve gone after Jeff Bezos.


hahahahahaha!  He hasn't married the current one yet, there is still hope for MM


----------



## jehaga

gracekelly said:


> hahahahahaha!  He hasn't married the current one yet, there is still hope for MM


Virtually high fiving you right now!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> hahahahahaha!  He hasn't married the current one yet, there is still hope for MM


.. and that current one (should something happen - e.g., divorce) .. she will take him to the bank big-time, not like his former wife!


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> James Blunt was a real soldier and a Captain in the Life Guards and the Blues and Royals deployed with NATO to Kosovo.   He comes from a military family and is married to Sofia Wellesley the granddaughter of the eighth Duke of Wellington.  I think he is being polite and covering for a fellow offiicer because he appreciates the work that Harry does with vets. I don't think their service records are comparable.
> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/03/royalsandthemedia.pressandpublishing


He also stood guard over the coffin of HM The Queen Mother when she was Lying in State in 2002.


----------



## jehaga

CeeJay said:


> .. and that current one (should something happen - e.g., divorce) .. she will take him to the bank big-time, not like his former wife!


MacKenzie got 38 billion. I’m guessing if he were to remarry, that won’t happen again.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> James Blunt was a real soldier and a Captain in the Life Guards and the Blues and Royals deployed with NATO to Kosovo.   He comes from a military family and is married to Sofia Wellesley the granddaughter of the eighth Duke of Wellington.  I think he is being polite and covering for a fellow offiicer because he appreciates the work that Harry does with vets.* I don't think their service records are comparable.*
> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/03/royalsandthemedia.pressandpublishing



No one was comparing their service records. James, himself literally said that about Harry. You can watch the segment from Good Morning Britain, below.


----------



## CeeJay

jehaga said:


> MacKenzie got 38 billion. I’m guessing if he were to remarry, that won’t happen again.


Oh, I know .. but to think about it, that is chump change for him!  For what he did to her, I would have asked QUITE a bit more!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

If James Blunt feels the need to express these sentiments - fine. Do I care, though? Not one bit.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> I would be MORTIFIED if that was ever put into print about me!!!  I am a strong believer of doing things on your own to prove your talents/merit .. "social climbing" is (IMO) someone who just uses people to their advantage and then 'moves on' (ghost) them after you have done something for them.  I know people like this, and let's just say that I admit I may not have known it at first, but once I do, they are NO FRIEND of mine .. period!


Yep! A wise saying: don’t step on people on the way up you will meet them on your way down. I try to follow that sage.


----------



## LittleStar88

joyeaux said:


> I listen to a podcast (not the BBC one mentioned earlier, this is by the Mirror) that’s also hosted by some legitimate royal reporters (I.e., the ones invited on the tours, with long-standing, good relationship with them, not the piranhas). They seem to be objective and covered H and M’s engagement and wedding really enthusiastically. But you can tell lately they’re disillusioned. The way Archie’s birth was handled, for example, really screwed over a lot of people... the host said they’d sat outside for days waiting for an announcement, only to find out when they were told she was “in labor” it was a big ruse, baby has been here for hours, sorry, no story. Go home. Time and money had been spent and was lost by the people that  make their (legitimate) living reporting on the family.
> 
> One other thing the male host said is that they _“simply don’t listen to the advice they’re given.”  _He said that senior advisors have told him many times that their guidance/advice to H an M consistently goes unheeded.
> 
> I’m also one that started out a Meghan fan and was loving the idea of Harry finding true love and her adding her intellect and modernity to the BRF. But IMO it’s asking a lot of the British public—who quite literally hand over a portion of their hard-earned paychecks to fund various aspects of the royal’s lives—to empathize. It’s actually that “not living” statement that irked me; a babymoon to Morocco, a luxury getaway with the baby to Ibiza... would certainly fall under the “living” category to me.
> 
> I am NOT saying I think their lives are perfect, and I think their pain is very real. But I think both of them come from a jaded perspective (hers growing up in the cray that is Hollywood, and he being... well, born). To air it out publicly like that, and in a way that was very contrived/deliberate, seems almost manipulative to me.



They are acting like two spoiled, petulant children. I hope they can figure it out and move away from this kind of stuff.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> He also stood guard over the coffin of HM The Queen Mother when she was Lying in State in 2002.



The reason I mentioned his service was because of the article in the Guardian.  To me, it was a real eye opener.  Blunt was doing his country and NATO a service and his life was in peril as he was in active engagements.  If I were he, I would have to swallow hard before making the comments he did and only make them if I was asked to and only for my fellow vets.


----------



## bag-mania

This is an interesting examination of the situation from the BBC, not a tabloid.

*Princes Harry and William: 'An irreparably changed relationship'*

As the dust settles on the most revealing royal interviews since Princess Diana spoke to the BBC in 1995, this is still the reality that Harry and Meghan, and the rest of the Royal Family, have to live with.

Maybe this was a moment of release for Harry and Meghan, a chance to tell the world about their unhappiness - the pressure she has felt under, his anger at what he sees as a concerted newspaper campaign against his wife, his struggles with his mental health, the lack of support she feels she's had from the rest of the Palace.

Maybe this was a bid for public sympathy, an attempt to circumvent the filter of the newspapers that Harry so despises.

But what's baffling is what the couple thought they would achieve in the medium term. This looks like a triumph of tactics over strategy.

The cameras and flashbulbs won't disappear now that Harry has said that they remind him of the worst side of his mother's life.

The newspaper columnists who have poured bile over the duke and duchess for so many months aren't going to change their ways because Meghan says that Britain's best-selling newspapers have not been fair.

And the scrutiny of the couple - which has revealed some degree of say-one-thing, do-another - is not going to go away. In fact, it will probably increase.

Because these interviews are a double-edged sword. They give the participants a pretty clear run at putting their case to the public. But they give the couple's critics an open goal too.

How can Harry and Meghan now call for privacy and restraint on issues like his mental health or her well-being when they have gone on national television and discussed them both with a friendly interviewer?

It's why every experienced royal adviser consulted about this would have urged extreme caution, to say the very least.

And it's why there was such concern about the interview in other parts of the Royal Family.

The BBC was told by a well-placed source that William was "furious" with Harry. A source close to Prince William said that that was not his understanding. But whatever the immediate response, there will also have been bafflement.

One of the ways the brothers have diverged is in their attitude to the media. William understands that the newspapers and broadcasters are a hugely important part of getting the message out.

Harry cannot get over his loathing for the people and institutions he blames for the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. He seeps anger at the press, in particular the best-selling newspapers.

The relationship between William and Harry is irreparably changed. And the odds are, given the splitting of households and the charitable foundation, the establishment of separate diary and communications staff, relations will sour further.

It's how it goes when you have different staffs and different objectives. They rub up against each other.

Two days after the interview aired the Sussexes struck back - an unnamed source speaking for or close to the clearly unhappy couple spoke to CNN.

Alongside suggestions that the fuss over the interview was confected came an attack on the Palace and a slight to the Royal Family that will have come from one of their closest staff.

*'Echoes of Diana-Charles years'*
The source told CNN "that the institution around the British Royal Family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple".

The source said that Harry and Meghan "have single-handedly modernized the monarchy."

The BBC has repeatedly asked to speak to the couple's communications secretary, Sara Latham, but has had no response.

A friend of Ms Latham told the BBC that the comments defending Harry and Meghan, and criticising the Palace, did not come from her.

Briefing wars are rarely won. They trudge humiliatingly on, each side dipping a little lower with every response. And the Monarchy dips with them. The echoes of the unhappy Diana-Charles years are loud, and getting louder.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50154033


----------



## mdcx

I was thinking the other day that MM was probably angling for a hookup like KatharineMcPhee ended up with - same age, similar careers, but KP married to a wealthy much older man in entertainment. She gets to flit around doing whatever the heck she likes, living in the lap of luxury, enjoying the David Foster connection when she wants some attention. No annoying “duties” or “responsibilities” or “decorum”.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> This is an interesting examination of the situation from the BBC, not a tabloid.
> 
> *Princes Harry and William: 'An irreparably changed relationship'*
> 
> As the dust settles on the most revealing royal interviews since Princess Diana spoke to the BBC in 1995, this is still the reality that Harry and Meghan, and the rest of the Royal Family, have to live with.
> 
> Maybe this was a moment of release for Harry and Meghan, a chance to tell the world about their unhappiness - the pressure she has felt under, his anger at what he sees as a concerted newspaper campaign against his wife, his struggles with his mental health, the lack of support she feels she's had from the rest of the Palace.
> 
> Maybe this was a bid for public sympathy, an attempt to circumvent the filter of the newspapers that Harry so despises.
> 
> But what's baffling is what the couple thought they would achieve in the medium term. This looks like a triumph of tactics over strategy.
> 
> The cameras and flashbulbs won't disappear now that Harry has said that they remind him of the worst side of his mother's life.
> 
> The newspaper columnists who have poured bile over the duke and duchess for so many months aren't going to change their ways because Meghan says that Britain's best-selling newspapers have not been fair.
> 
> And the scrutiny of the couple - which has revealed some degree of say-one-thing, do-another - is not going to go away. In fact, it will probably increase.
> 
> Because these interviews are a double-edged sword. They give the participants a pretty clear run at putting their case to the public. But they give the couple's critics an open goal too.
> 
> How can Harry and Meghan now call for privacy and restraint on issues like his mental health or her well-being when they have gone on national television and discussed them both with a friendly interviewer?
> 
> It's why every experienced royal adviser consulted about this would have urged extreme caution, to say the very least.
> 
> And it's why there was such concern about the interview in other parts of the Royal Family.
> 
> The BBC was told by a well-placed source that William was "furious" with Harry. A source close to Prince William said that that was not his understanding. But whatever the immediate response, there will also have been bafflement.
> 
> One of the ways the brothers have diverged is in their attitude to the media. William understands that the newspapers and broadcasters are a hugely important part of getting the message out.
> 
> Harry cannot get over his loathing for the people and institutions he blames for the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. He seeps anger at the press, in particular the best-selling newspapers.
> 
> The relationship between William and Harry is irreparably changed. And the odds are, given the splitting of households and the charitable foundation, the establishment of separate diary and communications staff, relations will sour further.
> 
> It's how it goes when you have different staffs and different objectives. They rub up against each other.
> 
> Two days after the interview aired the Sussexes struck back - an unnamed source speaking for or close to the clearly unhappy couple spoke to CNN.
> 
> Alongside suggestions that the fuss over the interview was confected came an attack on the Palace and a slight to the Royal Family that will have come from one of their closest staff.
> 
> *'Echoes of Diana-Charles years'*
> The source told CNN "that the institution around the British Royal Family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple".
> 
> The source said that Harry and Meghan "have single-handedly modernized the monarchy."
> 
> The BBC has repeatedly asked to speak to the couple's communications secretary, Sara Latham, but has had no response.
> 
> A friend of Ms Latham told the BBC that the comments defending Harry and Meghan, and criticising the Palace, did not come from her.
> 
> Briefing wars are rarely won. They trudge humiliatingly on, each side dipping a little lower with every response. And the Monarchy dips with them. The echoes of the unhappy Diana-Charles years are loud, and getting louder.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50154033


Oof. The British way of saying “dumpster fire”.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> This is an interesting examination of the situation from the BBC, not a tabloid.
> 
> *Princes Harry and William: 'An irreparably changed relationship'*
> 
> As the dust settles on the most revealing royal interviews since Princess Diana spoke to the BBC in 1995, this is still the reality that Harry and Meghan, and the rest of the Royal Family, have to live with.
> 
> Maybe this was a moment of release for Harry and Meghan, a chance to tell the world about their unhappiness - the pressure she has felt under, his anger at what he sees as a concerted newspaper campaign against his wife, his struggles with his mental health, the lack of support she feels she's had from the rest of the Palace.
> 
> Maybe this was a bid for public sympathy, an attempt to circumvent the filter of the newspapers that Harry so despises.
> 
> But what's baffling is what the couple thought they would achieve in the medium term. This looks like a triumph of tactics over strategy.
> 
> The cameras and flashbulbs won't disappear now that Harry has said that they remind him of the worst side of his mother's life.
> 
> The newspaper columnists who have poured bile over the duke and duchess for so many months aren't going to change their ways because Meghan says that Britain's best-selling newspapers have not been fair.
> 
> And the scrutiny of the couple - which has revealed some degree of say-one-thing, do-another - is not going to go away. In fact, it will probably increase.
> 
> Because these interviews are a double-edged sword. They give the participants a pretty clear run at putting their case to the public. But they give the couple's critics an open goal too.
> 
> How can Harry and Meghan now call for privacy and restraint on issues like his mental health or her well-being when they have gone on national television and discussed them both with a friendly interviewer?
> 
> It's why every experienced royal adviser consulted about this would have urged extreme caution, to say the very least.
> 
> And it's why there was such concern about the interview in other parts of the Royal Family.
> 
> The BBC was told by a well-placed source that William was "furious" with Harry. A source close to Prince William said that that was not his understanding. But whatever the immediate response, there will also have been bafflement.
> 
> One of the ways the brothers have diverged is in their attitude to the media. William understands that the newspapers and broadcasters are a hugely important part of getting the message out.
> 
> Harry cannot get over his loathing for the people and institutions he blames for the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales. He seeps anger at the press, in particular the best-selling newspapers.
> 
> The relationship between William and Harry is irreparably changed. And the odds are, given the splitting of households and the charitable foundation, the establishment of separate diary and communications staff, relations will sour further.
> 
> It's how it goes when you have different staffs and different objectives. They rub up against each other.
> 
> Two days after the interview aired the Sussexes struck back - an unnamed source speaking for or close to the clearly unhappy couple spoke to CNN.
> 
> Alongside suggestions that the fuss over the interview was confected came an attack on the Palace and a slight to the Royal Family that will have come from one of their closest staff.
> 
> *'Echoes of Diana-Charles years'*
> The source told CNN "that the institution around the British Royal Family is full of people afraid of and inexperienced at how to best help harness and deploy the value of the royal couple".
> 
> The source said that Harry and Meghan "have single-handedly modernized the monarchy."
> 
> The BBC has repeatedly asked to speak to the couple's communications secretary, Sara Latham, but has had no response.
> 
> A friend of Ms Latham told the BBC that the comments defending Harry and Meghan, and criticising the Palace, did not come from her.
> 
> Briefing wars are rarely won. They trudge humiliatingly on, each side dipping a little lower with every response. And the Monarchy dips with them. The echoes of the unhappy Diana-Charles years are loud, and getting louder.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50154033


WOW .. but this seems to speak to what was reported before, that no matter how much advice H&M were given, they simply would not listen.  I sure hope that this does not take on the same path as the Diana <-> Charles situation, because IMO .. H&M will lose support even more so than now .. especially w/in the BRF.  Gosh - what a mess!


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I know .. but to think about it, that is chump change for him!  For what he did to her, I would have asked QUITE a bit more!


I read she was alongside JB from the inception of Amazon and she was a major contributor to the success of it.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I've never thought of it as an "inherited" trait but more one that is "taught" by someone who themselves have the same trait!  Just my opinion ..


probably right....OT but the reason I thought of it was most recent episode of This Is US Randall's daughter has serious anxiety issues, which he has and his father also had.......narcissism is a different issue


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Where are the peole who routinely scream about this being a "Meghan & Harry thread"? Why are we discussing Fergie at length in here? Can we get back on topic?!


Fergie came up as a comparison to Meghan....not really that OT IMO


----------



## mrsinsyder

Has their six weeks started yet?

DM is full of stories on them today. The queen deleting their photo is my favorite


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Has their six weeks started yet?
> 
> DM is full of stories on them today. The queen deleting their photo is my favorite


Why do I see a repeat of the Queen's 1992 holiday speech/video where she refers to the year as the "annus horribilis"?  Queue up the article I just found .. https://www.ibtimes.com/why-queen-elizabeth-feels-2019-another-annus-horribilis-monarchy-2852040


----------



## Lodpah

She’s existing.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> Not enough, because she tried to sell access to Andrew when she was on the verge of bankruptcy about 10 years ago.  That's why the Weight Watchers deal too.
> 
> This is what Sarah reportedly got in her divorce:
> _Ferguson reportedly agreed to be paid $20,000 a year from the royal family and given $660,000 to buy a new house. In addition, she is said to have received around $1.8 million to start trust funds for Beatrice and Eugenie as well as another $462,000 in cash and an agreement that Prince Andrew would pay for their daughters’ education._


True -- not enough for spendthrift Fergie who accepted money from Epstein to pay off her debts.  Although she didn't have to pay rent or a mortgage, nor money towards her children's upbringing, so why was she in so much debt...

Why did Tatler use such an old photo -- anyone have any ideas?  She's stunning in that photo, looking straight into the camera, but it's not recent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think if they don’t “toe the line” once their 6 weeks is up, they will be cut off.  I don’t see the palace putting up with this long term.  They did themselves no favors separating households.  It just makes their ousting that much easier.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Why do I see a repeat of the Queen's 1992 holiday speech/video where she refers to the year as the "annus horribilis"?  Queue up the article I just found .. https://www.ibtimes.com/why-queen-elizabeth-feels-2019-another-annus-horribilis-monarchy-2852040


Brexit alone is horrible, then add Meghan and the business with Andrew.....horrible indeed


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 4572163
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She’s existing.


Wasn't this from the Tom Inskip wedding where there were some folks saying that Harry ignored MM?  I thought I saw some of these photos on this thread, no?


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> "*Social Climber of the Year*"?!?! .. WOW, I guess there are different connotations for that term in the US versus the UK.  I would not be happy if that term was applied to me ..





daisychainz said:


> Agree!, that is a very negative statement in the USA.





mrsinsyder said:


> Yeah I wouldn't be touting this as a win.





Clearblueskies said:


> It’s not a compliment in the uk either





CeeJay said:


> I would be MORTIFIED if that was ever put into print about me!!!





gracekelly said:


> It's not a compliment.




Of course, it's not a compliment and I wasn't trying to tout it as such. I usually post any new articles I come across relating to the Duke & Duchess of Sussex since it's a *NEWS* and gossip subforum. 

Anyway, I've noticed that Tatler has an interesting history with the Duchess of Sussex. Many can remember that around, September of last year, Tatler crowned Meghan as "top social climber" and referring to her rise as "how the underprivileged have soared". It was an absolutely unkind thing to say.




Then, around May 2019 they profiled Princess Beatrice and within the first paragraph they took a swipe at Meghan and Harry. 






So, why the constant digs you maybe asking? Well, early 2018 Tatler got a new editor-in-chief, Richard Dennen. Richard Dennen went to school with William and Kate, he's even gone on holidays with Kate a couple of times. His connection to Kate is intriguing, but what I find more interesting was an interview he gave with the Evening Standard right after he was hired....




In it, he admitted to only meeting Prince Harry once and being obsessed with Meghan Markle....




He even went so far as to say that *"Tina Brown had Princess Di, and I have Meghan Markle!" *Which seems kind of interesting to say. But then the article goes on to say this...

That Richard Dennen is also obsessed with his *"best friend" Philippa Cadogan*, who also works at Tatler now.




After some reading, I realized that Philippa Cadogan's father is Viscount Chelsea or Charles Cadogan, 8th Earl of Cadogan. Last year, she was even spotlighted in Tatler with an article titled "hot young players on the social scene". 



*(In the above photo, Philippa Cadogan and Richard Dennen)*

Back in late 2015, Philippa Cadogan was also being profiled as the "top pick for the eligible red-head" i.e. Prince Harry.







Now, it is interesting that Richard Dennen's supposed "best friend" was once the most favoured girl for Harry to date. Anyway, take this for what you want to believe but it's an awfully small world, isn't it?


----------



## CeeJay

Well, just like the Town & Country Magazine here in the States, Tatler has never really been about those "less privileged"!


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Well, just like the Town & Country Magazine here in the States, Tatler has never really been about those "less privileged"!



Right. Tatler isn’t going to like anyone who isn’t born aristo. But that was a lot of sleuthing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also these days I doubt anyone is sorry they missed out on Harry. Most are probably happy they dodged a wild bullet.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> Wasn't this from the Tom Inskip wedding where there were some folks saying that Harry ignored MM?  I thought I saw some of these photos on this thread, no?


Yes it was, from the source I grabbed the picture from.


----------



## mdcx

Well, that’s clever Tatler - to title it ‘The Meghan Issue’ which I’m sure is how all the dramas around Megs are being referred to in many circles.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...r-star-Tatlers-310th-anniversary-edition.html


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4572190
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that’s clever Tatler - to title it ‘The Meghan Issue’ which I’m sure is how all the dramas around Megs are being referred to in many circles.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...r-star-Tatlers-310th-anniversary-edition.html


Her makeup on the cover is nice.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4572190
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that’s clever Tatler - to title it ‘The Meghan Issue’ which I’m sure is how all the dramas around Megs are being referred to in many circles.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...r-star-Tatlers-310th-anniversary-edition.html


The words on the cover are curious. 
High drama
Bachelors
Last of the it girls


----------



## hellosunshine

The popularity of the Sussexes is "nose-diving" while that of the Cambridges is "soaring" yet they have Meghan on their cover? Why?

Well....




While anything relating to Meghan seems to sell...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4572222
> 
> 
> The popularity of the Sussexes is "nose-diving" while that of the Cambridges is "soaring" yet they have Meghan on their cover? Why?
> 
> Well....
> 
> View attachment 4572225
> 
> 
> While anything relating to Meghan seems to sell...
> 
> View attachment 4572248


Magazine covers and articles are completed 6 months in advance, or more.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> While anything relating to Meghan seems to sell...


Because people slow down to look at car accidents.


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://nypost.com/2019/10/23/save-the-tears-meghan-markle/
*Save the tears, Meghan Markle *
By Jane Ridley

October 23, 2019 | 7:26pm | Updated 

Enlarge Image






In one of the opening scenes of tonight’s ABC documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey,” the Duchess of Sussex addresses young girls in Nyanga, a township in Cape Town known as one of the most dangerous places in South Africa.

The teens take boxing lessons to fend off men who rape them without fear of punishment.

“While I’m here as a member of the royal family, I stand here before you as a mother, a wife, a woman, as a woman of color and as your sister,” Meghan Markle tells the group.

Later in the film, her husband, Prince Harry, repeats the famous minefield walk his mother, Princess Diana, completed in Angola. He meets kids whose legs have been blown off by the cruel explosives.

It’s against the wretched backdrop of this war-torn continent that Markle tells sympathetic British interviewer Tom Bradby that she’s: “existing, not living.”  She thanks him for asking how she is, because “not many people have asked if I’m OK.”

Few viewers would fail to be moved by Meghan’s struggles as a new mom in the spotlight, but did the Sussexes ever stop and think that their tour might not be the right time or place to whine about their plight?

Something’s a bit off when you’re bemoaning your lot as a member of the royal family while championing worthy causes such as the rights of poverty-stricken women and children.

After touching footage of Harry reading stories to underprivileged students, Markle fights back tears. She opens up that she “had no idea” the depth of scrutiny she would face after becoming his wife.

She says: “When I first met my now-husband, my friends were really happy because I was happy, but my British friends said to me, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’”

Some of it will be spent in LA. Better Harry and Meghan get the private therapy they need among the California palms than the banyans of South Africa.

_Harry & Meghan: An African Journey airs tonight, at 10 p.m. EST, on ABC._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10199...d-meghan-markle-cancelled-prince-charles/amp/

ROYAL CRISIS 
*Prince Charles’ fury at Harry and Wills feud – and being ‘let down’ when Meghan Markle cancelled on him*
EXCLUSIVE

Dan Wootton, Executive Editor

23 Oct 2019, 22:00
Updated: 23 Oct 2019, 22:37
*PRINCE Charles is “absolutely furious” a growing row between Prince Harry and the rest of the Royal Family has undermined his work overseas as well as his own TV documentary.*

Royal sources have also told The Sun that the Prince of Wales is worried about his youngest son in the same way he used to fear for his ex-wife Princess Diana.









Charles is adamant he has supported Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and was let down when his daughter-in-law, 38, cancelled a meeting with him at the last minute.

However the future king — who yesterday dropped in on the Welsh rugby team in Tokyo — will continue to defend them publicly.

The biggest crisis to hit the monarchy in years has snowballed since Harry confirmed a feud with his brother William in Sunday night’s bombshell documentary.

In the ITV show Meghan also slammed the British stiff upper lip tradition as “damaging”, prompting sources close to William to suggest the couple are “fragile”.

We can reveal the Queen wants Harry, 35, and William, 37, to rise above their issues and focus on their strong family ties.

The monarch remains close to Harry given they both live on the Windsor estate. But she does not want to be dragged into the mess and is deferring to Charles, 70, to help bring her grandsons back together.

However, it was not helped by the briefing from sources close to Harry and Meghan that claimed they have single-handedly modernised the institution.

Some took it as a direct attack on the Queen — and were furious that it completely overshadowed Charles’ work overseas, as well as William and Kate’s.

A royal source revealed: “The Prince of Wales is very busy at the moment touring Japan, including a visit with the Welsh rugby team. But the point is that this whole kerfuffle has completely undermined the work he is doing, just as it undermined the work Prince William and Kate were doing in Pakistan.

This is a documentary about his life’s work and it really meant a lot to him. It’s been completely and utterly annihilated, all because these two think they’ve reinvented the wheel.

Anonymous Source
“To do it to your brother is one thing. To do it to your father and paymaster is a completely different matter altogether.”

Staff at Clarence House are also said to be disappointed that the two-part ITV programme Prince Charles: Inside the Duchy of Cornwall - which starts tonight - has been virtually ignored.

The source explained: “This is a documentary about his life’s work and it really meant a lot to him. It’s been completely and utterly annihilated, all because these two think they’ve reinvented the wheel.”

Yesterday The Sun revealed Harry strongly disputed claims by William that he is “fragile”. He believes he and Meghan have not received the same level of support from the royal institution.

Sources stressed Charles shares William’s very real concern for Harry. One said: “Charles is worrying about Harry in the same way he did Diana. Publicly he will defend his son.”

Charles has welcomed Meghan - who he walked down the aisle on her wedding day - to the family with open arms, the insiders insist.

The source said: “It’s a real shame that Harry and Meghan didn’t go to Balmoral. That’s where the family talk about these things. There has also been at least one occasion when Charles invited Meghan to an event, she accepted and then didn’t turn up.

"You can’t do that. When the Royal Family send you an invitation you go, short of dying. There’s no reason why you shouldn’t be there.”


----------



## hellosunshine

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Magazine covers and articles are completed 6 months in advance, or more.



That's usually because there needs to be time to accommodate the scheduling of the photographer, stylists, permits need to be secured for shooting locations, and several rounds of production editing. None of that happened here. In fact, they used a very old photoshoot of hers, so this could've been thrown together in much less time.




FYI, in terms of editing...they basically only photoshopped out her earrings.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Love will help Harry and Meghan avoid fate of Charles and Di, ex-butler says*



NEW YORK (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle are well placed to ride out the media storm around them and avoid the pitfalls that tore apart his parents, Charles and Diana, for the simplest of reasons, Diana’s former butler said: They love each other.

Paul Burrell, a longtime royal servant who became Princess Diana’s personal assistant and confidante, has watched as Harry has pushed back against media intrusion and sought to protect his wife, the American-born, biracial Duchess of Sussex.



> “They (Charles and Diana) didn’t have what Harry and Meghan have,” Burrell told Reuters on Wednesday. “They didn’t have love. And they (Harry and Meghan) love each other. It’s quite obvious when you see them together.”



Harry’s parents, Charles, the Prince of Wales, and Diana, divorced in 1996 after 15 years of largely unhappy marriage, and his mother was killed in a 1997 road accident while being chased by paparazzi.

Burrell, 61, has become a frequent commentator on Diana and the royal family since leaving the palace after Diana’s death, and was in New York promoting a documentary at a contentious time for Prince Harry.

*Harry, 35, said in a recently aired ITV interview that he would “not be bullied into playing a game that killed my mum.” He and Meghan are also taking legal action against media groups to protect their privacy. 
*
“Harry said that (he and William) are on different paths. I know what he means by that. William and Kate have a map in front of them. They’re headed for monarchy,” *Burrell said, adding that the Queen and Charles have left Harry to find his way. 
*
*“There’s no guidance. There’s no support. There’s no rulebook,” Burrell said. *

To escape the glare, Harry and Meghan are considering buying a home in California, British media have said.

“I hope we don’t lose Harry and Meghan (to California) because they are a tremendous asset to the royal family, and to Britain,” Burrell said.
*
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...f-charles-and-di-ex-butler-says-idUSKBN1X22UQ*


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh Paul.


----------



## mdcx

There are some choice comments on the Tatler Insta:


----------



## caramelize126

I don’t think this is positive “popularity”. The magazine covers and press appears to be no different than what’s going on in this thread: it’s a trainwreck you just can’t look away from.
And even more shocking that this is what the BRF has become. Might be in history books some day, folks! The beginning of the end...


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> *Love will help Harry and Meghan avoid fate of Charles and Di, ex-butler says*
> 
> View attachment 4572269
> 
> NEW YORK (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle are well placed to ride out the media storm around them and avoid the pitfalls that tore apart his parents, Charles and Diana, for the simplest of reasons, Diana’s former butler said: They love each other.
> 
> Paul Burrell, a longtime royal servant who became Princess Diana’s personal assistant and confidante, has watched as Harry has pushed back against media intrusion and sought to protect his wife, the American-born, biracial Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> Harry’s parents, Charles, the Prince of Wales, and Diana, divorced in 1996 after 15 years of largely unhappy marriage, and his mother was killed in a 1997 road accident while being chased by paparazzi.
> 
> Burrell, 61, has become a frequent commentator on Diana and the royal family since leaving the palace after Diana’s death, and was in New York promoting a documentary at a contentious time for Prince Harry.
> 
> *Harry, 35, said in a recently aired ITV interview that he would “not be bullied into playing a game that killed my mum.” He and Meghan are also taking legal action against media groups to protect their privacy.
> *
> “Harry said that (he and William) are on different paths. I know what he means by that. William and Kate have a map in front of them. They’re headed for monarchy,” *Burrell said, adding that the Queen and Charles have left Harry to find his way.
> *
> *“There’s no guidance. There’s no support. There’s no rulebook,” Burrell said. *
> 
> To escape the glare, Harry and Meghan are considering buying a home in California, British media have said.
> 
> “I hope we don’t lose Harry and Meghan (to California) because they are a tremendous asset to the royal family, and to Britain,” Burrell said.
> *
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...f-charles-and-di-ex-butler-says-idUSKBN1X22UQ*


As I said before, their time here in LA will be telling.  If their plan is to hang out with various celebrities, then I do not think that will go over well.  Maybe they should study history (Duke & Duchess of Windsor) since it was Winston Churchill who said “those who fail to study are doomed to repeat it”.


----------



## lulu212121

mrsinsyder said:


> Because people slow down to look at car accidents.


This! It's why I keep tuning in.


----------



## Sophisticatted

A question for those who know about these things better than I:  is Harry completely out of the military?  

I mean would it be possible for him to return to military life, possibly someplace like Canada, where he really wouldn’t be in danger but could maybe live with his family on a base?


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> A question for those who know about these things better than I:  is Harry completely out of the military?
> 
> I mean would it be possible for him to return to military life, possibly someplace like Canada, where he really wouldn’t be in danger but could maybe live with his family on a base?



From what I can tell he served for 10 years and left in 2015. I can’t see him wanting to go back even if he could.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Thanks.  I thought it might be something that could be devised as a “purgatory” for the couple, where he would have a job with routine and structure and she would be kept out of the spotlight for the most part.  Her job would be to be a military wife, raise Archie, support Harry.  Just a curious speculation on my part.


----------



## rose60610

I'm now watching the documentary (recorded it) and I can barely stomach it. DH advises I fast forward through the commercials but I tell him I can take only so much at a time.  

Between M's lip biting and H's hurried speech and lack of eye contact, this documentary is lame. M had difficulty answering "How has this past year been for you?" then finally went into "Poor me" mode.  To answer that way in light of all the things The Crown provides for her makes me want to reach for a sick bag. 

I feel for the native people who must have spent hours and hours rehearsing their welcomes.  Anytime they were asked something they described M&H in glowing terms. They have far more class than M&H do. Can you imagine your honored Royal guest slamming HER "existence" while you're wondering when you might get your next meal? 

I started out liking M during the wedding ceremony hoopla. When the press started saying some negative things I shrugged them off figuring all celebrities get their share. Well...not...any...more...  M&H are so clueless it hurts.  

A couple of days ago, about 40 pages back, a poster stated something like "it looks like H has Stockholm Syndrome".  I see that now, too. And, I'm sorry, but to me Harry is using his mother's memory and legacy to promote himself, as though he's grasping for straws to elevate his own failing image. 

Please don't judge me so harshly. I'm only existing.  Would you AT LEAST be fair? If you're not worshipping the ground I walk on, then you're probably just not woke enough. It's exhausting work, you know, woking people, after my Crown-supplied-and-paid-hired-help does everything for me except write my speeches about how The Crown can become more woke.  It's not fair! The Crown should also write my speeches about kicking its' own rear end! Don't they know who I AM?


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The reason I mentioned his service was because of the article in the Guardian.  To me, it was a real eye opener.  Blunt was doing his country and NATO a service and his life was in peril as he was in active engagements.  If I were he, I would have to swallow hard before making the comments he did and only make them if I was asked to and only for my fellow vets.


Oh, I know you did


----------



## Clearblueskies

caramelize126 said:


> I don’t think this is positive “popularity”. The magazine covers and press appears to be no different than what’s going on in this thread: it’s a trainwreck you just can’t look away from.
> And even more shocking that this is what the BRF has become. Might be in history books some day, folks! The beginning of the end...


The institution is far bigger than the people in it.  That’s the point which Meghan in her silly egotism completely fails to grasp.  It’s why the monarchy has lasted for centuries and still continues today.  
There’s an advert on UK tv at the moment (I cant remember what for) in which a couple meet at a restaurant for a first date and in a quick conversation run through every stage of their relationship through to their parting.  I’m reminded of it watching these two clowns - who would have thought they could so comprehensively stuff things up in such a short time.


----------



## chowlover2

Word is Oprah has invited them for Thanksgiving. That is more up Meghan’s alley than dinner with Doria.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

chowlover2 said:


> Word is Oprah has invited them for Thanksgiving. That is more up Meghan’s alley than dinner with Doria.


Bad choice, it's things like this they should stop doing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chowlover2 said:


> Word is Oprah has invited them for Thanksgiving. That is more up Meghan’s alley than dinner with Doria.


Perhaps Meghan will pick up some chat show tips for the next phase of her career


----------



## doni

CeeJay said:


> As I said before, their time here in LA will be telling.  If their plan is to hang out with various celebrities, then I do not think that will go over well.  Maybe they should study history (Duke & Duchess of Windsor) since it was Winston Churchill who said “those who fail to study are doomed to repeat it”.


Well, many would argue that those two didn’t have a bad life at all...
But the thing is, that Meghan seems to want to become an activist, philanthropist or whatever you call it more than anything else and since her childhood, so I don’t think she’d be satisfied with a life of glamour and celebrity outings...
It is true that Diana played a big role even (and specially) after separating from Charles. But she was always going to be a (future) King’s mother and that’s very different from Meghan’s situation, which is much more comparable to Fergie. But I don’t think that’s how she sees herself.


----------



## mdcx

Could it get any worse?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...tml?ico=amp-comments-viewall#comments-7608469


----------



## CAH

Charles didn't give a damn about Diana.  He did nothing to help her with any of her problems when they were married, and he sure isn't helping Harry with his mental issues.  I think he just wants it swept under the rug - pretend it doesn't exist.  That's his way about everything.

Personally, I think with H & M, everything came so fast - the engagement, marriage, baby.  They had no time to be newlyweds and just enjoy each other.  If I were them, I'd take these six weeks and just be a family.


----------



## LibbyRuth

doni said:


> Well, many would argue that those two didn’t have a bad life at all...
> But the thing is, that Meghan seems to want to become an activist, philanthropist or whatever you call it more than anything else and since her childhood, so I don’t think she’d be satisfied with a life of glamour and celebrity outings...
> It is true that Diana played a big role even (and specially) after separating from Charles. But she was always going to be a (future) King’s mother and that’s very different from Meghan’s situation, which is much more comparable to Fergie. But I don’t think that’s how she sees herself.


If she truly wants to be an activist and philanthropist (as opposed to having the image of one) shouldn't step one have been to take the opportunity of a documentary about her trip to Africa to put a focus on the stories of the people she visited and the plight of people she met INSTEAD of her own emotions?  Amal Clooney recently did an interview with Nadia Murad to spread awareness about atrocities committed by ISIS and the need to try them for war crimes. In the interview, there was no mention at all of Amal's famous husband, her fashion, rumors of troubles in her marriage, etc.  Amal was laser focused on Nadia Murad's experiences, and the things that can be accomplished by trying ISIS  for crimes. To me, that's how you use fame to be an activist and philanthropist.  Harry and Meghan removed themselves from such standing by making a documentary all about them instead of the places they visited.


----------



## hellosunshine

Tom Bradby, who worked to produce ITV's documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_ during the tour, spoke with ABC about how he viewed the royal couple.

"I suppose I just told the story that was in front of me, really," Bradby said during the interview. "Anything like this is always storytelling, as you know. *And I went intending to make a documentary that was always gonna be about their work in Africa and then a little bit about where they are at in life. And I knew that everything wasn't entirely rosy behind the scenes." *According to Bradby, the couple's pain was palpable. "I think the reality I found was just a couple that just seemed a bit bruised and vulnerable,"


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Could it get any worse?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...tml?ico=amp-comments-viewall#comments-7608469


"Meghan is unhappy too..."

Until she's the center of adoration


----------



## rose60610

If there was a chart that measured clueless-ness, M&H would be off it.

If being clueless were an Olympic sport, M&H would tie for gold medal.

They should approach Kate Middleton's parents who own a party supply store, buy it and turn it into the Pity Party Store.  They could sell little bottles of M's tears, hankies, and banners that say "They Don't Make it Easy" and "Ask Me if I'M OK".   They'd open subsidiary stores in third world countries and not comprehend the irony.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> "Meghan is unhappy too..."
> 
> Until she's the center of adoration


And she CAN wear colours apart from the black and navy!!


----------



## PatsyCline

TC1 said:


> Wendy Williams said on her show yesterday "Meghan Markle, no one feels sorry for you..you knew what you were getting into"
> I feel like that pretty much sums up a lot of people's views on this. Mine included.


So you’re saying if you married an abusive spouse, you shouldn’t be able to complain about it?


----------



## mrsinsyder

PatsyCline said:


> So you’re saying if you married an abusive spouse, you shouldn’t be able to complain about it?


Where did the poster say that?


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> So you’re saying if you married an abusive spouse, you shouldn’t be able to complain about it?


Are you saying Harry is an abusive spouse?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Are you saying Harry is an abusive spouse?


I was wondering the same thing!


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> A question for those who know about these things better than I:  is Harry completely out of the military?
> 
> I mean would it be possible for him to return to military life, possibly someplace like Canada, where he really wouldn’t be in danger but could maybe live with his family on a base?


I'm sure meghan would be happier on a military base


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> If she truly wants to be an activist and philanthropist (as opposed to having the image of one) shouldn't step one have been to take the opportunity of a documentary about her trip to Africa to put a focus on the stories of the people she visited and the plight of people she met INSTEAD of her own emotions?  Amal Clooney recently did an interview with Nadia Murad to spread awareness about atrocities committed by ISIS and the need to try them for war crimes. In the interview, there was no mention at all of Amal's famous husband, her fashion, rumors of troubles in her marriage, etc.  Amal was laser focused on Nadia Murad's experiences, and the things that can be accomplished by trying ISIS  for crimes. To me, that's how you use fame to be an activist and philanthropist.  Harry and Meghan removed themselves from such standing by making a documentary all about them instead of the places they visited.


agree totally
I was listening closely to what they said.  Harry did acknowledge that other people had challenges as he did.  Meghan made it all about herself.  Not a word about all the privilege she is enjoying.  Even when prompted with the interviewer saying people say you're a royal, etc.  STILL she whined that it wasn't fair.  Is it fair that girls in one of the countries she was visiting are regularly raped?  that one of the countries is the fourth poorest in the world?  
I'm sure she's had some challenges but IMO she has no right to complain w/o acknowledging that they are nothing compared to what many others face.  
And, as you said, doing this on a show that was supposed to be about their Africa visit.  Disgusting.
Yes, Amal should give her some advice.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Our family wasted an hour of our lives on the documentary(?) last night. It was interesting how truly self absorbed they both seem. She worked 3 days from what I saw, if that is work. And her parting words "I have my husband and baby" really tell us they have zero family support right now. I fully agree with the comment in this thread that Harry is consumed by his mother's legacy and name-dropping her and her causes to get some traction for his own failing life. I don't know that these two can fix what is going on; the negativity she showed by saying the British are damaged by holding in emotions... was she talking about her new family or just the British people in general? I think the piece was supposed to help them get sympathy and it has backfired horribly.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Our family wasted an hour of our lives on the documentary(?) last night. It was interesting how truly self absorbed they both seem. She worked 3 days from what I saw, if that is work. And her parting words "I have my husband and baby" really tell us they have zero family support right now. I fully agree with the comment in this thread that Harry is consumed by his mother's legacy and name-dropping her and her causes to get some traction for his own failing life. I don't know that these two can fix what is going on; the negativity she showed by saying the British are damaged by holding in emotions... was she talking about her new family or just the British people in general? I think the piece was supposed to help them get sympathy and it has backfired horribly.


yes, as someone said it's like a train wreck....I had to watch
Her comment at the end that  she has her husband ("H") and baby - poor Meghan.


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure meghan would be happier on a military base


Truth. 

Could anyone honestly imagine Meghan just being happy living anonymously with her husband and baby and fulfilling her humanitarian passions?  Because she's never been a social climber, right?  She never cared about the money or fame, she only cared that Harry was kind, right?  She's got millions and millions of her own money and doesn't need the royal family to pay for anything, right?  

If all of the scrutiny and criticism went away completely and they went off to live normal lives - all of their needs fulfilled, but none of the fame and royal perks - they should be happy since that's all they profess to care about.  I don't think anyone could say with a straight face that they think Meghan would be happy with that life - or would even stick around to try.


----------



## jehaga

LibbyRuth said:


> If she truly wants to be an activist and philanthropist (as opposed to having the image of one) shouldn't step one have been to take the opportunity of a documentary about her trip to Africa to put a focus on the stories of the people she visited and the plight of people she met INSTEAD of her own emotions?  Amal Clooney recently did an interview with Nadia Murad to spread awareness about atrocities committed by ISIS and the need to try them for war crimes. In the interview, there was no mention at all of Amal's famous husband, her fashion, rumors of troubles in her marriage, etc.  Amal was laser focused on Nadia Murad's experiences, and the things that can be accomplished by trying ISIS  for crimes. To me, that's how you use fame to be an activist and philanthropist.  Harry and Meghan removed themselves from such standing by making a documentary all about them instead of the places they visited.



Well put—“the image of one.” MM doesn’t have what it takes to be a true philanthropist (IMHO IMHO).

Also, Amal seems crazy intelligent whereas MM seems...not?


----------



## jblended

I randomly remembered that Harry didn't really get to speak throughout the documentary, apart from when he was alone. When they were interviewed together, she answered for him and spoke over him. There was one time he started to answer a question and she pulled him away because she'd heard a cue for her to get on stage, but the way she literally pulled him away from Bradby was abrupt and it stopped Harry mid-sentence.

From what I noticed, Harry actually only spoke of his experience when he was alone. How odd is that?
I'm sure she didn't mean to hog the whole documentary- perhaps it's the way it was edited that gave this impression- but, she came off as really arrogant as a result of this. To me, at least, it seems like she's forgotten he is Harry, grandson of the Queen, and she seems to think her voice is more important somehow.

Before anyone jumps on me, this is simply what I noticed and felt. Sorry if it offends any of her fans, it's just my opinion.


----------



## sdkitty

jehaga said:


> Well put—“the image of one.” MM doesn’t have what it takes to be a true philanthropist (IMHO IMHO).
> 
> Also, Amal seems crazy intelligent whereas MM seems...not?


I don't think she has the same kind of intelligence as Amal but she must be cunning.  she's a Very high achieving social climber.  that takes some strategy


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> "Meghan is unhappy too..."
> 
> Until she's the center of adoration


Is this even a thing, a royal walking down an aisle like a culty motivational speaker?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

jblended said:


> I randomly remembered that Harry didn't really get to speak throughout the documentary, apart from when he was alone. When they were interviewed together, she answered for him and spoke over him. There was one time he started to answer a question and she pulled him away because she'd heard a cue for her to get on stage, but the way she literally pulled him away from Bradby was abrupt and it stopped Harry mid-sentence.
> 
> From what I noticed, Harry actually only spoke of his experience when he was alone. How odd is that?
> I'm sure she didn't mean to hog the whole documentary- perhaps it's the way it was edited that gave this impression- but, she came off as really arrogant as a result of this. To me, at least, it seems like she's forgotten he is Harry, grandson of the Queen, and she seems to think her voice is more important somehow.
> 
> Before anyone jumps on me, this is simply what I noticed and felt. Sorry if it offends any of her fans, it's just my opinion.


We noticed the same thing. I think Harry isn't a confident speaker and defers to her, since she does have the acting/public background. I know Harry has A LOT of experience but it comes across jumbled and rambling at times. It's very noticeable that she does a majority of the talking for them.


----------



## lulu212121

PatsyCline said:


> So you’re saying if you married an abusive spouse, you shouldn’t be able to complain about it?


What?


----------



## Flatsy

I noticed the same thing jblended noticed - at one point, he was trying to talk and she continually talked over him and then cut him off so she could take over.  And then when he finally got to talk again, she cut him off completely and pulled him away because it was time for them to make their entrance.

When Harry was on his own and able to talk to the documentarian without her interrupting him, he did ramble, but he delivered a lot more substance than she did IMO.   She uses a lot of buzzwords, but often just says superficial things that don't mean much.

And I couldn't be more tired of her talking about doing her work "on the ground".


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> "Meghan is unhappy too..."
> 
> Until she's the center of adoration


Hard to believe this is the same person who is so unhappy with her life.


----------



## bag-mania

CAH said:


> Charles didn't give a damn about Diana.  He did nothing to help her with any of her problems when they were married, and he sure isn't helping Harry with his mental issues.  I think he just wants it swept under the rug - pretend it doesn't exist.  That's his way about everything.



Yes, thank you! Charles was unsympathetic as a young man and I'm not buying the reinvented "kindly old man" image these days. I don't think anyone believes he was as involved with his sons' lives as he should have been.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jblended said:


> I randomly remembered that Harry didn't really get to speak throughout the documentary, apart from when he was alone. When they were interviewed together, she answered for him and spoke over him. There was one time he started to answer a question and she pulled him away because she'd heard a cue for her to get on stage, but the way she literally pulled him away from Bradby was abrupt and it stopped Harry mid-sentence.
> 
> From what I noticed, Harry actually only spoke of his experience when he was alone. How odd is that?
> I'm sure she didn't mean to hog the whole documentary- perhaps it's the way it was edited that gave this impression- but, she came off as really arrogant as a result of this. To me, at least, it seems like she's forgotten he is Harry, grandson of the Queen, and she seems to think her voice is more important somehow.
> 
> Before anyone jumps on me, this is simply what I noticed and felt. Sorry if it offends any of her fans, it's just my opinion.


She’s talked over him ever since the engagement interview


----------



## hellosunshine

TC1 said:


> Wendy Williams said on her show yesterday "Meghan Markle, no one feels sorry for you..you knew what you were getting into"
> I feel like that pretty much sums up a lot of people's views on this. Mine included.



Whenever I hear "Well, she knew what she was getting into" in regards to Meghan, I think of the below moments -






Honestly, God bless those who "knew what they were getting into" and still dared to love and try anyway. You are heroes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Whenever I hear "Well, she knew what she was getting into" in regards to Meghan, I think of the below moments -
> 
> View attachment 4572820
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, God bless those who "knew what they were getting into" and still dared to love and try anyway. You are heroes.


You don’t seriously think Meghan’s “troubles” are on a par with those examples?  Some perspective needs applying


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Whenever I hear "Well, she knew what she was getting into" in regards to Meghan, I think of the below moments -
> 
> View attachment 4572820
> 
> 
> Honestly, God bless those who "knew what they were getting into" and still dared to love and try anyway. You are heroes.



Cancer and miscarriages are the same as having the media be "mean" to you?


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> You don’t seriously think Meghan’s “troubles” are on a par with those examples?  Some perspective needs applying





mrsinsyder said:


> Cancer and miscarriages are the same as having the media be "mean" to you?



No, not saying that. I'm simply commenting on the notion that "she knew what she was getting into". People take brave, leaps of faith everyday while blind to what's on the other side. We shouldn't judge so harshly..that's all. My opinion btw.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> yes, as someone said it's like a train wreck....I had to watch
> Her comment at the end that  she has her husband ("H") and baby - poor Meghan.


What about her mother?


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Whenever I hear "Well, she knew what she was getting into" in regards to Meghan, I think of the below moments -
> 
> View attachment 4572820
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, God bless those who "knew what they were getting into" and still dared to love and try anyway. You are heroes.


these analogies are insulting to people who have REAL problems


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> What about her mother?


guess she forgot about her


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> these analogies are insulting to people who have REAL problems



Sorry, you feel that way. Not trying to insult anyone. 
I've already explained what I was responding to a few posts above.


----------



## TC1

PatsyCline said:


> So you’re saying if you married an abusive spouse, you shouldn’t be able to complain about it?


Absolutely not. Please don't put words in my mouth over a Wendy Williams quote


----------



## hellosunshine

*Meghan Markle’s Close Friend Reacts To Emotional Documentary: “She Can Come Up From This”*



Daniel Martin, Markle's Close Friend and Makeup Artist was on CBS This Morning today.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Here’s a theory   Do you think if the Queen had just let Meghan have the $odding emerald tiara that all of this might not have happened?!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> *Meghan Markle’s Close Friend Reacts To Emotional Documentary: “She Can Come Up From This”*
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Martin, Markle's Close Friend and Makeup Artist was on CBS This Morning today.



This is about as unbiased as the man doing the documentary. Daniel is sitting in front of Gayle King, Oprah's BFFFFF. If she wants positive press she should definitely stick with giving interviews to only CBS and all-things associated with Oprah and Gayle.


----------



## Swanky

Another friendly reminder.... everyone’s entitled to their own opinions. Be respectful and discuss the royals, not the members.


----------



## mrsinsyder

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This is about as unbiased as the man doing the documentary. Daniel is sitting in front of Gayle King, Oprah's BFFFFF. If she wants positive press she should definitely stick with giving interviews to only CBS and all-things associated with Oprah and Gayle.


Daniel Martin is a ridiculous hanger-on. He was the one who shared avocado toast and pics from the baby shower and assorted other garbage to make sure he's hitched to her wagon.


----------



## zen1965

LibbyRuth said:


> If she truly wants to be an activist and philanthropist (as opposed to having the image of one) shouldn't step one have been to take the opportunity of a documentary about her trip to Africa to put a focus on the stories of the people she visited and the plight of people she met INSTEAD of her own emotions?  Amal Clooney recently did an interview with Nadia Murad to spread awareness about atrocities committed by ISIS and the need to try them for war crimes. In the interview, there was no mention at all of Amal's famous husband, her fashion, rumors of troubles in her marriage, etc.  Amal was laser focused on Nadia Murad's experiences, and the things that can be accomplished by trying ISIS  for crimes. To me, that's how you use fame to be an activist and philanthropist.  Harry and Meghan removed themselves from such standing by making a documentary all about them instead of the places they visited.


+1000
This all day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Our family wasted an hour of our lives on the documentary(?) last night. It was interesting how truly self absorbed they both seem. She worked 3 days from what I saw, if that is work. And her parting words "I have my husband and baby" really tell us they have zero family support right now. I fully agree with the comment in this thread that Harry is consumed by his mother's legacy and name-dropping her and her causes to get some traction for his own failing life. I don't know that these two can fix what is going on; the negativity she showed by saying the British are damaged by holding in emotions... was she talking about her new family or just the British people in general? I think the piece was supposed to help them get sympathy and it has backfired horribly.


your whole family watched?  I couldn't have gotten my DH to watch if I paid him


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> Here’s a theory   Do you think if the Queen had just let Meghan have the $odding emerald tiara that all of this might not have happened?!


I remember People Magazine reporting early on that Meghan was having a hard time dealing with all the new rules of being royal.  They said when Kate encounters a rule she doesn't like, she accepts it and figures out a way around it, whereas Meghan was  questioning and pushing back on a lot of things.  And that was really early on.  

I think the tiara was only the beginning of the 18 months of stubbornness and pushback.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I remember People Magazine reporting early on that Meghan was having a hard time dealing with all the new rules of being royal.  They said when Kate encounters a rule she doesn't like, she accepts it and figures out a way around it, whereas Meghan was  questioning and pushing back on a lot of things.  And that was really early on.
> 
> I think the tiara was only the beginning of the 18 months of stubbornness and pushback.


Kate grew up with the culture so I can see where it would be easier for her to accept the rules.  But pushing back on an institution like this seems pretty futile IMO


----------



## mrsinsyder

I wonder if Meghan came in thinking, that like the Kardashians, any press is good press.


----------



## PatsyCline

TC1 said:


> Absolutely not. Please don't put words in my mouth over a Wendy Williams quote


The quote which you absolutely agreed with?


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I wonder if Meghan came in thinking, that like the Kardashians, any press is good press.


who knows what she thought? my guess is she knew her acting career was limited and Harry was her ticket to fame and wealth beyond her wildest dreams.  hopefully she also loves him.  I don't pretend to be able to surmise that by her on camera behavior


----------



## ccbaggirl89

sdkitty said:


> your whole family watched?  I couldn't have gotten my DH to watch if I paid him


"We stayed up late for this?" - general consensus


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Tom Bradby, who worked to produce ITV's documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_ during the tour, spoke with ABC about how he viewed the royal couple.
> 
> "I suppose I just told the story that was in front of me, really," Bradby said during the interview. "Anything like this is always storytelling, as you know. *And I went intending to make a documentary that was always gonna be about their work in Africa and then a little bit about where they are at in life. And I knew that everything wasn't entirely rosy behind the scenes." *According to Bradby, the couple's pain was palpable. "I think the reality I found was just a couple that just seemed a bit bruised and vulnerable,"



I think that what Bradby did was very self serving. Instead of sticking to the subject matter of the AfricaN tour, he turned this into a gossip piece.   Not nice, Tom.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think that what Brady did was very self serving. Instead of sticking to the subject matter of the AfricaN tour, he turned this into a gossip piece.   Not nice, Tom.


not nice to the Africans but I don't think Meghan and Harry minded


----------



## sdkitty

Harry was saying in that interview that flashing cameras were a trigger for him.  And he seems to blame the paps chasing Diana for her death.  But I'm not sure how that correlates to his wife.  Her issue seems to be having hurt feelings about what's written about her - not having paps chase her.

So he is protecting his family - but from something different?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> not nice to the Africans but I don't think Meghan and Harry minded


I hope that none of the nice people who turned out to see them ever view this documentary. It clearly was not about  Africa and was just a PR vehicle for the two of them and mostly for her.  It was lovely to see the enthusiasm and the local folk did their part. The school children all scrubbed up and bright in their uniforms were adorable. What a pity that this tour turned out to be a farce and not about them at all. 

Harry looked a whole lot better, and spoke better in the old clips of his past tours. What a changed person.


----------



## kemilia

Clearblueskies said:


> She’s talked over him ever since the engagement interview


I was just going to say this. I remember seeing the e-video and her clutching his hand/arm and thinking "hold on tight, you don't want to lose this whale." At that time I chalked it up to being super excited with H and being engaged.


----------



## CeeJay

chowlover2 said:


> Word is Oprah has invited them for Thanksgiving. That is more up Meghan’s alley than dinner with Doria.


.. and it begins (their time in LA); just what I hoped they would not do ..


----------



## bag-mania

*Save the tears, Meghan Markle*






In one of the opening scenes of Wednesday’s ABC documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey,” the Duchess of Sussex addresses young girls in Nyanga, a township in Cape Town known as one of the most dangerous places in South Africa.

The teens take boxing lessons to fend off men who rape them without fear of punishment.

“While I’m here as a member of the royal family, I stand here before you as a mother, a wife, a woman, as a woman of color and as your sister,” Meghan Markle tells the group.

Later in the film, her husband, Prince Harry, repeats the famous minefield walk his mother, Princess Diana, completed in Angola. He meets kids whose legs have been blown off by the cruel explosives.

It’s against the wretched backdrop of this war-torn continent that Markle tells sympathetic British interviewer Tom Bradby that she’s “existing, not living.” She thanks him for asking how she is, because “not many people have asked if I’m OK.”

Few viewers would fail to be moved by Meghan’s struggles as a new mom in the spotlight, but did the Sussexes ever stop and think that their tour might not be the right time or place to whine about their plight?

Something’s off when you’re bemoaning your lot as a VIP while championing worthy causes such as the rights of poverty-stricken women and children.

After touching footage of Harry reading stories to underprivileged students, Markle fights back tears. She opens up that she “had no idea” of the depth of scrutiny she would face after becoming his wife.

She says: “When I first met my now-husband, my friends were really happy because I was happy, but my British friends said to me, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’”

The 38-year-old former actress reveals it didn’t make “any sense” and that she “didn’t get it.” She blames naiveté.

Well, I’m with her there. For someone who spent her entire life wanting to be famous, and got famous, and then REALLY famous, Markle seems naïve about what fame means.

Any fifth-grader who has ever Googled Princess Diana, Princess Margaret or Wallis Simpson seems to know what she doesn’t.

Whether Harry and Meghan decide the pressure is too much and retire from public life remains to be seen. In the meantime, they are about to enjoy a six-week hiatus from their royal duties — a period which one British TV correspondent in the UK has termed “medical leave.”

Some of it will be spent in LA. Better Harry and Meghan get the private therapy they need among the California palms than the banyans of South Africa.

https://nypost.com/2019/10/23/save-the-tears-meghan-markle/


----------



## CeeJay

CeeJay said:


> .. and it begins (their time in LA); just what I hoped they would not do ..


I sincerely hope that (ever the opportunist Oprah) doesn't turn this into a "special" .. having Meghan, Harry, Doria and of course Gayle King at this event .. to then air to the US public.  Instead, H&M should just be as low-key as possible and seek the help they both seriously need ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

PatsyCline said:


> The quote which you absolutely agreed with?


I agreed with a quote that said she knew what she was getting into. Nothing to do with an abusive husband. Stop quoting me. Swanky reminded us to discuss H&M..I suggest you do that, I am.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I hope that none of the nice people who turned out to see them ever view this documentary. It clearly was not about  Africa and was just a PR vehicle for the two of them and mostly for her.  It was lovely to see the enthusiasm and the local folk did their part. The school children all scrubbed up and bright in their uniforms were adorable. What a pity that this tour turned out to be a farce and not about them at all.
> 
> Harry looked a whole lot better, and spoke better in the old clips of his past tours. What a changed person.


AMEN!!! .. I have zero desire to view this "woe is me" documentary, when knowing of people cast out of their homes (Zimbabwe) and other atrocities that my South African colleagues told me first-hand.  What should have been all about the issues they were discussing/attending to, the whole "woe is me" overshadowed everything else IMO.  Shame ..


----------



## jehaga

hellosunshine said:


> Whenever I hear "Well, she knew what she was getting into" in regards to Meghan, I think of the below moments -
> 
> View attachment 4572820
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, God bless those who "knew what they were getting into" and still dared to love and try anyway. You are heroes.


Aside from the maudlin analogy, MM KNEW that H’s mother had a very messy life and an untimely death, with almost every moment documented by the media.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4572976


some sort of fan site?


----------



## hellosunshine

*Meghan Markle Claims Mail Suppressed Key Parts of her Letter to her Father About his 'Exploitation by UK Tabloid Media'*




*In her legal action against the Sunday tabloid for publishing a private letter to her father, the Duchess of Sussex claims it deliberately omitted her warnings to him about the British press.*
_
The Mail on Sunday omitted warnings given by Meghan Markle to her reportedly estranged father about the British tabloid press exploiting him in a letter it published which is at the centre of an explosive legal dispute between the duchess and the newspaper.

The Duchess of Sussex is suing the Mail on Sunday’s parent company Associated Newspapers, claiming that it unlawfully published a private letter which she wrote to her father Thomas Markle, who lives in Mexico.

According to reports in the British tabloids over the past year, Prince Harry’s wife is estranged from her father, who did not attend her royal wedding and sold staged photographs to paparazzi of him trying on wedding suits ahead of the marriage last May. Since their relationship reportedly deteriorated, Mr Markle has given a number of interviews to the British tabloids about his daughter. 
*
*
In a statement announcing the legal action and condemning the press’ treatment of his American wife, Prince Harry claimed that the Mail on Sunday had “purposely misled” readers “by strategically omitting select paragraphs, specific sentences, and even singular words to mask the lies they had perpetuated for over a year”.

In its front page splash in February, the Mail on Sunday declared: Thomas Markle reveals* full content* of letter written to him by daughter Meghan.

*However, in the particulars of the Duchess’ claim – lodged at the High Court by her lawyers Schillings on 11 October and seen by Byline Investigates – it is alleged that the Mail on Sunday “chose to deliberately omit or suppress parts of the letter in a highly misleading and dishonest manner, including even cutting out words in the middle of a sentence or whole sentences out of a paragraph.” 


The Duchess alleges that the Sunday tabloid intended to “deceive the public” by stating that it was disclosing the “full content” of the “five-page letter”.*

The legal document also reproduced two pages of the letter with the published sections blurred and the unused parts redacted:




While the Mail on Sunday has categorically denied that the Duchess’s letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning, the legal document also suggests that some of the passages omitted “which amount to almost half the letter, were removed as they demonstrate the [Duchess’] kindness and concern about the UK tabloid media exploiting her father, and did not fit the [Mail on Sunday‘s] narrative.”.

Furthermore, the Duchess of Sussex claims that Associated Newspapers has an “obvious agenda of publishing intrusive or offensive stories… intended to portray her in a false and damaging light”. 

Examples of articles which have been a part of this agenda, cited by the Duchess and published by Mail Online include:

Harry’s girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed – so will he be dropping by for tea?

Kitchen supported by Meghan’s cookbook is housed inside mosque ‘which has links to 19 terror suspects including Jihadi John‘

How Meghan Markle’s Australian aide Samantha ‘the Panther’ Cohen rose from a Brisbane home to Buckingham Palace – before becoming the second aide to walk out on the ‘difficult Duchess‘

How Meghan’s favourite avocado snack – beloved of all millennials – is fuelling human rights abuses, drought and murder.

https://bylinetimes.com/2019/10/24/...r-about-his-exploitation-by-uk-tabloid-media/
*

*_


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I sincerely hope that (ever the opportunist Oprah) doesn't turn this into a "special" .. having Meghan, Harry, Doria and of course Gayle King at this event .. to then air to the US public.  Instead, H&M should just be as low-key as possible and seek the help they both seriously need ..



Will be very hard for them to justify doing public-type things (inevitably with paparazzi/photogs running along behind) when they were whining that it is all too much. Curious to see how this all plays out if they are truly coming to CA.


----------



## rose60610

I'll have to suffer the consequences for breaking the Sussexes Pledge.  OK. I'm over it.


----------



## chowlover2

Their 1 hr pity party aired last night and came in dead last for their time period. I don't think anyone in the US wants the ingrates either.


----------



## youngster

My understanding is that it was Thomas Markle who provided the portions of the letter to the Daily Mail.  He has said he did it in order to defend himself after her friends gave their interview to People Magazine in which one of them mentioned the letter she wrote to her dad. So, clearly Meghan discussed the letter with others and one of them discussed it with People Magazine, basically putting it out there in the public domain. That might be a problem for her in this court case.  Not a lawyer, so I don't know. Also, did she actually take the proactive step of copyrighting a private letter to her Dad lol?  If it was his property, I think he has the right to do with it as he wants. Should be interesting to see what happens with the court case.


----------



## Meh-gan

mrsinsyder said:


> "Meghan is unhappy too..."
> 
> Until she's the center of adoration


That giant wrinkle/fold under her boob is unfortunate. People are saying this was a good look but it looked sloppy and not chic - hair a giant blanket over her face. She just doesn’t look royal, always so messy.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meh-gan said:


> That giant wrinkle/fold under her boob is unfortunate. People are saying this was a good look but it looked sloppy and not chic - hair a giant blanket over her face. She just doesn’t look royal, always so messy.



Agree. For an attractive woman who has money at her disposal, she always gets it wrong. I hate the dirty self tanner look too.


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> What's a matter? You don't like your post twisted, or otherwise misinterpreted to what you want? You just had a tiny sample of what Harry & Meghan go through every day.
> 
> You agreed that Meghan deserved everything she was getting, because she knew what she was getting into. I simply took your statement and expanded on it, to show how ridiculous your statement was.


Let’s all shed a tear for MM and H and all that they “go through every day”. 

STOP


----------



## mdcx

I missed this story first time around, this was back when I thought that all the critical stories about Meghan were just made up 
It's about Meghan being reprimanded by Kate for the way Meghan spoke to Kate's staff:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/7870884/furious-kate-middleton-meghan-markle/
It really does explain the coolness between them, as this action would have made it very clear to Kate that Meghan was in no way ready to join the BRF, and also that she had no idea what her "station" was in relation to Kate and that this would cause dramas later on.

It's mentioned in this new Sun article 
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10207357/meghan-markles-prince-charles-tensions/ which is very


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> *Meghan Markle Claims Mail Suppressed Key Parts of her Letter to her Father About his 'Exploitation by UK Tabloid Media'*
> 
> View attachment 4573006
> 
> 
> *In her legal action against the Sunday tabloid for publishing a private letter to her father, the Duchess of Sussex claims it deliberately omitted her warnings to him about the British press.*
> _
> The Mail on Sunday omitted warnings given by Meghan Markle to her reportedly estranged father about the British tabloid press exploiting him in a letter it published which is at the centre of an explosive legal dispute between the duchess and the newspaper.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is suing the Mail on Sunday’s parent company Associated Newspapers, claiming that it unlawfully published a private letter which she wrote to her father Thomas Markle, who lives in Mexico.
> 
> According to reports in the British tabloids over the past year, Prince Harry’s wife is estranged from her father, who did not attend her royal wedding and sold staged photographs to paparazzi of him trying on wedding suits ahead of the marriage last May. Since their relationship reportedly deteriorated, Mr Markle has given a number of interviews to the British tabloids about his daughter.
> 
> 
> In a statement announcing the legal action and condemning the press’ treatment of his American wife, Prince Harry claimed that the Mail on Sunday had “purposely misled” readers “by strategically omitting select paragraphs, specific sentences, and even singular words to mask the lies they had perpetuated for over a year”.
> 
> In its front page splash in February, the Mail on Sunday declared: Thomas Markle reveals* full content* of letter written to him by daughter Meghan.
> 
> *However, in the particulars of the Duchess’ claim – lodged at the High Court by her lawyers Schillings on 11 October and seen by Byline Investigates – it is alleged that the Mail on Sunday “chose to deliberately omit or suppress parts of the letter in a highly misleading and dishonest manner, including even cutting out words in the middle of a sentence or whole sentences out of a paragraph.” *
> 
> 
> *The Duchess alleges that the Sunday tabloid intended to “deceive the public” by stating that it was disclosing the “full content” of the “five-page letter”.*
> 
> The legal document also reproduced two pages of the letter with the published sections blurred and the unused parts redacted:
> 
> View attachment 4573010
> 
> 
> While the Mail on Sunday has categorically denied that the Duchess’s letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning, the legal document also suggests that some of the passages omitted “which amount to almost half the letter, were removed as they demonstrate the [Duchess’] kindness and concern about the UK tabloid media exploiting her father, and did not fit the [Mail on Sunday‘s] narrative.”.
> 
> Furthermore, the Duchess of Sussex claims that Associated Newspapers has an “obvious agenda of publishing intrusive or offensive stories… intended to portray her in a false and damaging light”.
> 
> Examples of articles which have been a part of this agenda, cited by the Duchess and published by Mail Online include:
> 
> Harry’s girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed – so will he be dropping by for tea?
> 
> Kitchen supported by Meghan’s cookbook is housed inside mosque ‘which has links to 19 terror suspects including Jihadi John‘
> 
> How Meghan Markle’s Australian aide Samantha ‘the Panther’ Cohen rose from a Brisbane home to Buckingham Palace – before becoming the second aide to walk out on the ‘difficult Duchess‘
> 
> How Meghan’s favourite avocado snack – beloved of all millennials – is fuelling human rights abuses, drought and murder.
> 
> https://bylinetimes.com/2019/10/24/...r-about-his-exploitation-by-uk-tabloid-media/
> 
> _



Who’s ever heard of this publication? As near as I can tell it was spawned from a journalism blog created by crowdfunding. Not exactly a news source. It makes the British tabloids look credible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

PatsyCline said:


> So you’re saying if you married an abusive spouse, you shouldn’t be able to complain about it?



If anything, I think Meghan is showing signs of being an abusive spouse. She has isolated him from his friends and his family. She won't even let the man speak anymore. That documentary was the Meghan show.  There were rumors that she is constantly bringing up how his family treated his mother and how he is smarter than them, hence the "M&H are modernizing the monarchy" mess. This is emotional manipulation- playing up his insecurities and egging him on. I had never heard of any rifts b/w Harry and Will before Meghan came into the picture.

Havent we all seen that friend where her boyfriend convinces her to cut off her friends and family until she has no one. And when she finally wants to leave, she has no where to go. How is this situation any different? Who, besides Meghan, is still in Harry's corner?


----------



## caramelize126

bag-mania said:


> Who’s ever heard of this publication? As near as I can tell it was spawned from a journalism blog created by crowdfunding. Not exactly a news source. It makes the British tabloids look credible.



It also appears that she made a copy of the letter?  Who does that? That just further supports the theory that she sent her father that letter and had her friends talk to People magazine to BAIT her father into speaking to media. And now she can cry about her father defaming her.


----------



## hellosunshine

chowlover2 said:


> Their 1 hr pity party aired last night and came in dead last for their time period. I don't think anyone in the US wants the ingrates either.



Actually, ABC overall was in fourth place (8pm-11pm) for the entire evening; however the ratings/viewership during the Meghan and Harry special was higher for that timeslot than it usually is for a Wednesday night. 

They got 3.3 million viewers.

https://www.thewrap.com/prince-harry-meghan-markle-africa-special-abc-world-series-game-2-fox/


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> Who’s ever heard of this publication? As near as I can tell it was spawned from a journalism blog created by crowdfunding. Not exactly a news source. It makes the British tabloids look credible.



It's an investigative blog that is following the lawsuit. It's primarily run by lawyers who have had access to the court documents.


----------



## hellosunshine

*House Sussex: Auxiliary Troops*
*

*

PEOPLE posted a story yesterday about how Prince Harry and Meghan Markle “are not going through the traditional route of using people from within the household". And by “household” they mean the royal household. Given what we’ve seen recently with the leaks coming from those viper courtiers, this is not a surprise. It’s also not new news – but we’ll get to that in a minute. Stay with me here because there are a few interesting threads to pick at. 

According to PEOPLE:



> _“The royal couple are taking a stand against their negative treatment in the media — and seeking help outside of the royal household from lawyers, friends and PR professionals in the U.S.”_



This morning, Meghan’s friend and makeup artist, Daniel Martin, appeared on _CBS This Morning_ to give his reaction to what Harry and Meghan said about the British tabloids and their mental health in the documentary_ Harry & Meghan: An African Journey, _which aired in the UK on ITV on Sunday and last night on ABC in North America. Daniel doesn’t say anything scandalous or incendiary – it’s more a show of support from someone in her inner circle. Daniel is joined by Tina Brown but there’s someone else you should be paying attention to: 



Gayle King. Remember, Gayle King was in London ahead of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor’s birth. She made a private visit to Harry and Meghan at Frogmore Cottage and then CBS cameras were given an exclusive position when Harry and Meghan presented Archie for the first time at Windsor Castle. This is what members of the British media were most upset about at the time because there were only two cameras and one reporter there asking questions, instead of the huge pack of press usually invited to hang out outside the hospital wing when Prince William and Kate present their babies. That one of them was American was taken as a major insult. Before that, of course, Gayle was seen arriving at Meghan’s baby shower in New York and her best friend is Oprah Winfrey who attended the wedding. 

This tells us a couple of things: first, that Daniel is not speaking out of turn – if he’s on Gayle’s show, it very likely means that the Sussexes knew about it. Which supports PEOPLE’s story yesterday about the Sussexes engaging with professionals outside of the royal household…because they don’t trust the people in the royal household not to sell them out to the British press. 

As mentioned off the top of this post though, the fact that Harry and Meghan have American representation has been out there for a while. Back in September, the Sun reported that Meghan’s been working with PR firm Sunshine Sachs. The story was slanted, describing Sunshine Sachs as a crisis management company whose former clients include Harvey Weinstein and Michael Jackson. First of all, Meghan was working with Sunshine Sachs when she was acting and the firm also represents Leonardo DiCaprio, Justin Timberlake, and Lin-Manuel Miranda, and Keleigh Thomas Morgan, Meghan’s personal publicist, also represents, among others, Natalie Portman and …Jennifer Lopez! The way the Sun made it sound, Meghan was signing up with a company that only takes money from perverts. Unrelated to perverts, here’s an op-ed in The Herald from today arguing that Prince Andrew should be interviewed by police. I just thought I should mention that and that was the only place in this article I could put it, you know? 

Anyway, back to the Sun and their story about Meghan Markle and Sunshine Sachs – that was reported by Dan Wootton, the reporter who came down hard on Meghan for guest-editing British Vogue. There was an interesting little detail about Dan that was included in the Popbitch newsletter back in August that’s worth tucking into your gossip folder on background and reference, especially in light of recent events:



> _It was curious seeing Dan Wootton give Meghan Markle both barrels this week. You'd think he'd be a little more friendly, given that he's such good pals with Wills and Kate's press secretary..._



All week I’ve been writing about how the Sussexes don’t trust the courtiers and the palace staff and the leaks coming from palace sources to the British tabloids seem to be throwing Harry and Meghan under the bus. Harry and William aren’t as close as they have been. All of these dots are connecting, right?

https://www.laineygossip.com/seeking-help-outside-of-the-royal-household/58838


----------



## mrsinsyder

Are they really using this loser makeup artist as their publicity stan? Good lord.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also Lainey is another friend of Meghan’s. So.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh look, just when you think the H&M story can’t sink any lower, the media went and found Samantha to ask her opinion on the TV special. Spoiler alert: she’s still bitter towards her sister although I can’t argue with what she’s saying here.


*Meghan Markle's Sister Says She Knew What She Was Doing Marrying Harry and Facing Scutiny*
Meghan Markle’s Sister Has No Sympathy for Duchess
Meghan Markle is getting zero sympathy from her estranged sister following Wednesday night’s airing of the ITV special on the royals.

Samantha Markle watched the anticipated documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey," which highlighted Meghan and Prince Harry's struggles under the scrutiny of the British tabloids.

“I think it is really ludicrous that someone who is escorted around the world by millions of dollars worth of security on private jets as a millionaire could ever complain about anything,” Samantha told Inside Edition.

And she took particular issue with Meghan admitting she is not OK.

“For her to have the audacity to say something like, ‘It is nice to know if someone wants to know if I am OK.’ I thought, ‘Wow, did you ever ask dad if he was OK during two heart attacks?'” Samantha said.

When asked about the fact that some think Samantha is being mean to her younger half-sister, she said, “Telling the truth is not being mean.”

Viewers were shocked to hear that some of the duchess’ friends didn't think she should marry Prince Harry because of the scrutiny that comes with being part of the royal family. But Samantha claimed "she knew exactly what she was doing, so, hey you got what you wanted.”

In the documentary, viewers caught some of the best footage of Archie. It was also one of the first times Samantha had seen her nephew.

“He is adorable,” she said. “He looks like Harry.”

https://www.insideedition.com/megha...doing-marrying-harry-and-facing-scutiny-56879


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4572976


LOL.  Cults do love having their members sign and recite pledges.


----------



## PatsyCline

caramelize126 said:


> If anything, I think Meghan is showing signs of being an abusive spouse. She has isolated him from his friends and his family. She won't even let the man speak anymore. That documentary was the Meghan show.  There were rumors that she is constantly bringing up how his family treated his mother and how he is smarter than them, hence the "M&H are modernizing the monarchy" mess. This is emotional manipulation- playing up his insecurities and egging him on. I had never heard of any rifts b/w Harry and Will before Meghan came into the picture.
> 
> Havent we all seen that friend where her boyfriend convinces her to cut off her friends and family until she has no one. And when she finally wants to leave, she has no where to go. How is this situation any different? Who, besides Meghan, is still in Harry's corner?


Assuming you’re correct, what are your professional qualifications for making that analysis?

How does her moving to his country, having no relatives within 5000 miles of her for support translate into her isolating him from his family? She uprooted her entire life to move to Britain to live with Harry and his family. 

Let’s see, her closest relative, her mom Doria is a 12 hour plane ride from Meghan. 

For Harry, his father is probably a 1-2 hour car ride from tHarry. 
You refer to rumours as fact. 

I watched the show last night and didn’t see any evidence of her cutting Harry off when the two of them were together.


----------



## mrsinsyder

PatsyCline said:


> Assuming you’re correct, what are your professional qualifications for making that analysis?
> 
> How does her moving to his country, having no relatives within 5000 miles of her for support translate into her isolating him from his family? She uprooted her entire life to move to Britain to live with Harry and his family.
> 
> Let’s see, her closest relative, her mom Doria is a 12 hour plane ride from Meghan.
> 
> For Harry, his father is probably a 1-2 hour car ride from tHarry.
> You refer to rumours as fact.
> 
> I watched the show last night and didn’t see any evidence of her cutting Harry off when the two of them were together.


This is a gossip thread. I wasn’t aware personal qualifications were needed to make observations?


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> My understanding is that it was Thomas Markle who provided the portions of the letter to the Daily Mail.  He has said he did it in order to defend himself after her friends gave their interview to People Magazine in which one of them mentioned the letter she wrote to her dad. So, clearly Meghan discussed the letter with others and one of them discussed it with People Magazine, basically putting it out there in the public domain. That might be a problem for her in this court case.  Not a lawyer, so I don't know. Also, did she actually take the proactive step of copyrighting a private letter to her Dad lol?  If it was his property, I think he has the right to do with it as he wants. Should be interesting to see what happens with the court case.


So let me get this straight. Meghan told her friends and these five friends got together and said, let's go to People and have an interview? This takes coordination and intent to discuss the letter. I'm not a lawyer but if there are lawyers on this site I wonder if any of them can chime in. 

This sounds like it was planned.  How else can it be? Do these friends know each other?


----------



## mdcx

PatsyCline said:


> Assuming you’re correct, what are your professional qualifications for making that analysis?
> 
> How does her moving to his country, having no relatives within 5000 miles of her for support translate into her isolating him from his family? She uprooted her entire life to move to Britain to live with Harry and his family.
> 
> Let’s see, her closest relative, her mom Doria is a 12 hour plane ride from Meghan.
> 
> For Harry, his father is probably a 1-2 hour car ride from tHarry.
> You refer to rumours as fact.
> 
> I watched the show last night and didn’t see any evidence of her cutting Harry off when the two of them were together.


She moved to UK, sure. But since her entering the picture, a number of Harry’s friends/family have been alienated from him.
You hardly need to be a professional to see the blindingly obvious.


----------



## Lodpah

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4572976


In other words, it's Kumbaya and hold hands because H&M can never do wrong. These two are in the public eye so there will be criticisms.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> She moved to UK, sure. But since her entering the picture, a number of Harry’s friends/family have been alienated from him.
> You hardly need to be a professional to see the blindingly obvious.


So true. How many of us if we had family members or friends suddenly get cut off from us? Wouldn't we worry? Wouldn't we think something is not right? I can see maybe a few people from family and friends? It seems like she cut off the whole tribe, except her mom who pops up only when needed.  This whole situation is bewildering.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> So let me get this straight. Meghan told her friends and these five friends got together and said, let's go to People and have an interview? This takes coordination and intent to discuss the letter. I'm not a lawyer but if there are lawyers on this site I wonder if any of them can chime in.
> 
> This sounds like it was planned.  How else can it be? Do these friends know each other?


Yes, totally that's what happened imo.
My guesses:
Benita Litt, Jess Mulroney, Sarah Rafferty, Abigail Spencer, plus another BFF of the moment.
All were coached to tell sweet, sympathetic tales of Megs. All five had apparently visited her at FrogCott.


----------



## mdcx

I feel like Megs has a private office somewhere, filled with charts and plans for her eventual world domination e.g.


----------



## Lodpah

hellosunshine said:


> Of course, it's not a compliment and I wasn't trying to tout it as such. I usually post any new articles I come across relating to the Duke & Duchess of Sussex since it's a *NEWS* and gossip subforum.
> 
> Anyway, I've noticed that Tatler has an interesting history with the Duchess of Sussex. Many can remember that around, September of last year, Tatler crowned Meghan as "top social climber" and referring to her rise as "how the underprivileged have soared". It was an absolutely unkind thing to say.
> 
> View attachment 4572168
> 
> 
> Then, around May 2019 they profiled Princess Beatrice and within the first paragraph they took a swipe at Meghan and Harry.
> 
> View attachment 4572171
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, why the constant digs you maybe asking? Well, early 2018 Tatler got a new editor-in-chief, Richard Dennen. Richard Dennen went to school with William and Kate, he's even gone on holidays with Kate a couple of times. His connection to Kate is intriguing, but what I find more interesting was an interview he gave with the Evening Standard right after he was hired....
> 
> View attachment 4572158
> 
> 
> In it, he admitted to only meeting Prince Harry once and being obsessed with Meghan Markle....
> 
> View attachment 4572159
> 
> 
> He even went so far as to say that *"Tina Brown had Princess Di, and I have Meghan Markle!" *Which seems kind of interesting to say. But then the article goes on to say this...
> 
> That Richard Dennen is also obsessed with his *"best friend" Philippa Cadogan*, who also works at Tatler now.
> 
> View attachment 4572160
> 
> 
> After some reading, I realized that Philippa Cadogan's father is Viscount Chelsea or Charles Cadogan, 8th Earl of Cadogan. Last year, she was even spotlighted in Tatler with an article titled "hot young players on the social scene".
> 
> View attachment 4572162
> 
> *(In the above photo, Philippa Cadogan and Richard Dennen)*
> 
> Back in late 2015, Philippa Cadogan was also being profiled as the "top pick for the eligible red-head" i.e. Prince Harry.
> 
> View attachment 4572164
> 
> 
> View attachment 4572165
> 
> 
> Now, it is interesting that Richard Dennen's supposed "best friend" was once the most favoured girl for Harry to date. Anyway, take this for what you want to believe but it's an awfully small world, isn't it?





mdcx said:


> Yes, totally that's what happened imo.
> My guesses:
> Benita Litt, Jess Mulroney, Sarah Rafferty, Abigail Spencer, plus another BFF of the moment.
> All were coached to tell sweet, sympathetic tales of Megs. All five had apparently visited her at FrogCott.



Makes sense. From what I read about Meghan her friends seem tightlipped except that make up dude. Meghan's consent had to be obtained for them to go to the press and discuss this. I mean MM must think people are incredibly stupid or she is so vain to think that she can outplay this game. Mind boggling. Think about it, all these women must lead pretty busy lives, so they drop whatever they are doing, and do this interview. 




mdcx said:


> Yes, totally that's what happened imo.
> My guesses:
> Benita Litt, Jess Mulroney, Sarah Rafferty, Abigail Spencer, plus another BFF of the moment.
> All were coached to tell sweet, sympathetic tales of Megs. All five had apparently visited her at FrogCott.


----------



## Lodpah

I looked at Harry's pictures in  progression . . . my opinion is and it's only my opinion he is being abused. There I said it. I believe he's being abused mentally.  When he had that outburst I remembered someone who held everything in due to mental and verbal abuse and once out in public, once asked a question this person let the floodgates out but the good news is the more that person let it out . . . that person got stronger and stronger.

I wish I could find that post from a couple of days back someone posted about Meghan's agenda and her friendship with the most elite celebrities and thinks there something there. If anyone sees and remembers that post please let know who the writer was because I want to read it.

Don't ever underestimate some women who are power hungry. They might seem demure out in public, but behind closed doors . . . oh man they can be vicious.

I have a gift of discernment and sometimes I hate it because I fight with myself but Meghan gives all kinds of sinister vibe to me and I won't apologize and take back what I said because it is my experience.

She reminds me of Leona Helmley 2.0. Joan Crawford, Lucille Ball.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

I think this thread is slowly devolving into a nonsensical bash like National Enquirer, the BRF-Meghan and Harry edition.  Does any comment add value or just more of the same?


----------



## Lodpah

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I think this thread is slowly devolving into a nonsensical bash like National Enquirer, the BRF-Meghan and Harry edition.  Does any comment add value or just more of the same?



Although National Enquirer is vile, ask  some First Amendment rights attorneys what they think about that magazine. They tend to be outlandish in their reporting but there’s some truth in them, couched in with their outlandish claims.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Lodpah said:


> Although National Enquirer is vile, ask  some First Amendment rights attorneys what they think about that magazine. They tend to be outlandish in their reporting but there’s some truth in them, couched in with their outlandish claims.




You know what people say about opinions- every @$$ has one.  That is my opinion of most tabloids.  Not to be taken too seriously, unless horrendously malicious. This is why I don’t read bottom feeder tabloids Enquirer/ Daily Mail. I read People because they tend to stick to more facts than fiction. 

The truth of the matter for any relationship is that the more different your backgrounds are the harder it is to make it work.  But the truth is dull, and no would would care.

Edit: since you mentioned the first amendment, I’d thought you should know British libel laws are very different in High Court.


----------



## lulu212121

What's stopping you? You can offer something to change the narrative.


----------



## caramelize126

PatsyCline said:


> Assuming you’re correct, what are your professional qualifications for making that analysis?
> 
> How does her moving to his country, having no relatives within 5000 miles of her for support translate into her isolating him from his family? She uprooted her entire life to move to Britain to live with Harry and his family.
> 
> Let’s see, her closest relative, her mom Doria is a 12 hour plane ride from Meghan.
> 
> For Harry, his father is probably a 1-2 hour car ride from tHarry.
> You refer to rumours as fact.
> 
> I watched the show last night and didn’t see any evidence of her cutting Harry off when the two of them were together.



Meghan dominated both the engagement interview and the documentary, i think several other posters have posted similar observations.

And what does distance have to do with anything?  Makes no difference if you dont talk to any of your relatives anyways.

It has been widely reported that Harry has cut off many of friends, including some that he grew up with. He has now admitted to having a rift with his brother. A rift that as far as know, did not exist prior to Meghan entering the picture. I also find it hard to believe that a royal staffer would have commented/alluded to how the Queen and Charles feel if this "rift" was only limited to the brothers. So distance is irrelevant if they are, as many are assuming, no longer on speaking terms.

So again, who does Harry have left in his corner besides Meghan?


----------



## Lodpah

theamericanchinadoll said:


> You know what people say about opinions- every @$$ has one.  That is my opinion of most tabloids.  Not to be taken too seriously, unless horrendously malicious. This is why I don’t read bottom feeder tabloids Enquirer/ Daily Mail. I read People because they tend to stick to more facts than fiction.
> 
> The truth of the matter for any relationship is that the more different your backgrounds are the harder it is to make it work.  But the truth is dull, and no would would care.
> 
> Edit: since you mentioned the first amendment, I’d thought you should know British libel laws are very different in High Court.


Because nowadays we have to preface everything with in my opinion, my belief etc.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

lulu212121 said:


> What's stopping you? You can offer something to change the narrative.



There is no narrative to change. People’s minds or at least on this thread is made up. Most come to bash anything HM by directly referencing trashy tabloids.  Either you read it or you don’t.


----------



## caramelize126

theamericanchinadoll said:


> There is no narrative to change. People’s minds or at least on this thread is made up. Most come to bash anything HM by directly referencing trashy tabloids.  Either you read it or you don’t.



Could the same then not also be said for the M&H supporters who keep referencing opinion pieces to support their stance?

This seems to be implying that people are unable to think for themselves and blindly believing what the tabloids say. 
Many of the recent pages have been criticism/opinions/observations based on what was *directly **seen* from their own documentary, and both theirs and recent BRF statements to the media.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

caramelize126 said:


> Could the same then not also be said for the M&H supporters who keep referencing opinion pieces to support their stance?
> 
> This seems to be implying that people are unable to think for themselves and blindly believing what the tabloids say.
> Many of the recent pages have been criticism/opinions/observations based on what was *directly **seen* from their own documentary, and both theirs and recent BRF statements to the media.



That’s a bit naive to call it direct.  Unless you are from a different planet, you’ve already went into that documentary with all the tabloid conspiracies.  It is easy to have a prejudiced opinion and quick to draw conclusions accordingly. 


This is especially true since these rumors align with existing social prejudices about a biracial American Actress as an arrogant, self absorbed, manipulative, disrespectful, social climber. Half the crap is what you say about most of Hollywood the other half is what the entire world think of Americans.   Meghan is the perfect storm of every detestable quality one can have given ones vocation and nationality. And Harry’s some broken victim bs.  I don’t believe in perfect coincidence because real people aren’t that flat.


----------



## Lodpah

theamericanchinadoll said:


> You know what people say about opinions- every @$$ has one.  That is my opinion of most tabloids.  Not to be taken too seriously, unless horrendously malicious. This is why I don’t read bottom feeder tabloids Enquirer/ Daily Mail. I read People because they tend to stick to more facts than fiction.
> 
> The truth of the matter for any relationship is that the more different your backgrounds are the harder it is to make it work.  But the truth is dull, and no would would care.
> 
> Edit: since you mentioned the first amendment, I’d thought you should know British libel laws are very different in High Court.



Positive traits about Meghan
1. She’s Stunning - can’t take that away from her.
2. She’s ambitious 

3. She has her charities - good works

4. She has a mesmerizing affect on some people

5. She’s a go getter and she gets what she’s after 

6. She’s clearly focused 

7. She’s got her agenda, whatever it may be, and she’s tenacious getting it fulfilled.

So yes she’s got some traits some find outstanding and commendable.


----------



## rose60610

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I think this thread is slowly devolving into a nonsensical bash like National Enquirer, the BRF-Meghan and Harry edition.  Does any comment add value or just more of the same?



"Not that there's anything wrong with that". 

Never in a million years did I ever think I'd get sucked into some kind of gossip rag giz. Maybe because I never watched any soap opera longer than 3 minutes, the real life story of an American D List actress from a horrific family actually  marrying the Royal Firm's eventual King's brother HAS gotten my attention.

If I had a daughter who was in the position where M is now, you can bet your bippy she'd have some appreciation for The Firm without feeling she must woke it for the sake of what humankind SHOULD BE IN HER LIKENESS. She wouldn't be a dopey smiley wallflower either, but a woman of compassion for Others and recognizing that she is in a position to empower Others, with access to immense resources to do just that, unavailable to most. Not alligator tears begging for global pity for marrying into one of most powerful and richest families in the world. And I don't have to read any trashy tabloids to surmise that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Lodpah said:


> Positive traits about Meghan
> 1. She’s Stunning - can’t take that away from her.
> 2. She’s ambitious
> 
> 3. She has her charities - good works
> 
> 4. She has a mesmerizing affect on some people
> 
> 5. She’s a go getter and she gets what she’s after
> 
> 6. She’s clearly focused
> 
> 7. She’s got her agenda, whatever it may be, and she’s tenacious getting it fulfilled.
> 
> So yes she’s got some traits some find outstanding and commendable.



I appreciate that you are mentioning this but no one reading the tabloids will care about these qualities.  Regular new outlets are already having a hard time titling their click baits. Good news doesn’t really stir up any emotion and therefore less eyeballs and sales.


----------



## Lodpah

theamericanchinadoll said:


> I appreciate that you are mentioning this but no one reading the tabloids will care about these qualities.  Regular new outlets are already having a hard time titling their click baits. Good news doesn’t really stir up any emotion and therefore less eyeballs and sales.


True but likewise all of our knowledge are usually from the same source. Each person draws their own conclusion based on how they perceive it, at least that’s what I read. Now, some people trust their intuition and facts from the media and interviews.


----------



## PatsyCline

caramelize126 said:


> Meghan dominated both the engagement interview and the documentary, i think several other posters have posted similar observations.
> 
> And what does distance have to do with anything?  Makes no difference if you dont talk to any of your relatives anyways.
> 
> It has been widely reported that Harry has cut off many of friends, including some that he grew up with. He has now admitted to having a rift with his brother. A rift that as far as know, did not exist prior to Meghan entering the picture. I also find it hard to believe that a royal staffer would have commented/alluded to how the Queen and Charles feel if this "rift" was only limited to the brothers. So distance is irrelevant if they are, as many are assuming, no longer on speaking terms.
> 
> So again, who does Harry have left in his corner besides Meghan?


I don't know how your family dynamic works, but phone calls and facetime are a poor substitute for actual face to face meetings.

What 'widely reported'? By tabloids? Hardly paragons of journalistic integrity.

The 'rift' that you seem to think, Harry said they are at different points in their life now. William's life is much more set up for him than Harry's is. William will be king, and there are certain paths already laid out for him. Harry's is not. The Queen has helped to define some of those roles by passing on royal patronages to Harry and Meghan that she had.

Of course Harry's relationship with his brother has changed since he got married and has a family of his own. Doesn't mean it's worse, just different.

Same with friends, how many of us have the same friends and relationships when we were single, as we do when we're married?

Relationships evolve with time, some survive and some don't.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> I don't know how your family dynamic works, but phone calls and facetime are a poor substitute for actual face to face meetings.
> 
> What 'widely reported'? By tabloids? Hardly paragons of journalistic integrity.
> 
> The 'rift' that you seem to think, Harry said they are at different points in their life now. William's life is much more set up for him than Harry's is. William will be king, and there are certain paths already laid out for him. Harry's is not. The Queen has helped to define some of those roles by passing on royal patronages to Harry and Meghan that she had.
> 
> Of course Harry's relationship with his brother has changed since he got married and has a family of his own. Doesn't mean it's worse, just different.
> 
> Same with friends, how many of us have the same friends and relationships when we were single, as we do when we're married?
> 
> Relationships evolve with time, some survive and some don't.


Except that his relationship with his brother is worse - Harry has said so.  Many people have lifelong friends.  Most people don’t cut all their friends and family off when they get married.


----------



## gelbergirl

I wonder what Prince Charles reactions are to all of this.


----------



## PewPew

As one might have expected, MM’s sister Samantha has given a reaction interview to the documentary. I don’t want to link to tabloids, but SM’s original interview was with U.S. Inside Edition & the story has been picked up in various papers under headlines like “Why didn’t you ask if Dad was OK after 2 heart attacks?” 

Obviously there is bad blood between the sisters, but Sussex camp has to have expected this response (and generally does not address anything SM says)


----------



## Tivo

Based solely off this nonstop need to “punish” the press, and garner more sympathy...Meghan seems exhausting.

I doubt she will ever wise up and just stop playing victim...which means the press will never stop trolling her. They WANT her to keep this up, because eventually the public will tire of hearing about her. Meghan is picking the wrong battles and needs to take a break from the internet.


----------



## duna

zen1965 said:


> Oh. And just for the record. In European aristo circles Harry has always been known as a non-too-bright, entitled individual.
> First-hand knowledge, not hearsay.



For this reason I think he's totally manipulated by Meghan. She's the strong one of the two. But what I don't understand, unless she's "non too-bright" aswell, did she think marrying into the most important royal family in the world would just make her a duchess and she could do what she wanted as she did before?? Ridiculous!

This marriage won't last long, that's for sure. I thought it since day 1.


----------



## buffym

Meghan at the round table today.

Burgundy is a great color on her.


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> Has there been ANY celeb who gets only positive press? None that I can think of.



I think most of the BRF gets positive press, actually.


----------



## Grande Latte

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder what Prince Charles reactions are to all of this.



I don't think he has any. Really I don't. Unless Camilla has any and shares them with him. The perhaps he will have some. Hahaha.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Clearblueskies said:


> Except that his relationship with his brother is worse - Harry has said so.  Many people have lifelong friends.  Most people don’t cut all their friends and family off when they get married.


My brother got married and that was pretty much the last we've heard from him. He's not abused, lol. Just in a marriage with a very controlling/bossy woman. It just takes a strong partner over a weaker one and its rather easy to sway someone away from family/friends and convince them only the partner has their best interests at heart. It happened slowly and then he was pretty much gone from us within a year and a half. We talk to him rarely now. My brother also has mental illness - not saying Harry has anything major, but not being of a completely right mind would make it far easier to accomplish the separation. I agree most people won't do this - other factors are in play, and I believe it'd be Harry having issues of some sort.


----------



## Grande Latte

Change "he" to "she".


----------



## duna

All this makes me appreciate Kate MUCH more than I used to


----------



## caramelize126

PatsyCline said:


> What 'widely reported'? By tabloids? Hardly paragons of journalistic integrity.



The rift between harry and his friends has been reported in Tatler. Tatler is written for the aristo crowd by the aristo crowd. Before Kate and Will got married, they were often the first to talk about the "doors to manual" jokes, how she barely had a job for years after she graduated college so that she could make herself available for Will, etc.  It would be damaging for them to lie because the people reading Tatler are already in those circles and know whats going on. But obviously, thats just my opinion and everyone is entitled to think what they want.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

caramelize126 said:


> .



One of Rose’s response was so inflammatory to me , it was deleted by the admin but yes she is definitely the victim. But remind you that there are a lot worse said on this thread not just about Meghan but between members.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

caramelize126 said:


> This is probably one of the rudest things I've read on this thread. We are discussing *H/M*. There is no reason to attack another poster because you don't agree with them.



Where was your comment when she hurled crazy inflammatory accusations at me? Just because I don’t share your views on Meghan? This thread has always been one sided which is why you don’t have many dissenting opinions.


----------



## Fasikity




----------



## Fasikity

Prince Herry's emotional moment


----------



## caramelize126

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Where was your comment when she hurled crazy inflammatory accusations at me? Just because I don’t share your views on Meghan? This thread has always been one sided which is why you don’t have many dissenting opinions.



I honestly didn't see it. It may have been removed before i logged on this morning.

Alot of us have been here a long time and i dont remember the last thread that had this much vitriol, its kinda crazy. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, I feel like the tone was very different. People have switched sides as time has gone on. And people from both sides have stopped posting or left all together because they didnt want to deal with the drama.

Its funny because alot of us interact or used to interact on other threads in this forum. I used to be a lurker in the bal thread and would love @hellosunshine and @CeeJay 's posts ( Hiii ladies!!). Alot of us also used to hang out in the real housewives threads. So I hope that just because we all dont agree on one topic (here) that we can still be open minded enough to be nice to each other. And this isnt just directed at you, this is just in general to everyone. I think everyone needs to cool it lol.


----------



## LittleStar88

The Meghan Show is getting exhausting. I really just wanted her to look pretty, wear cute outfits, represent that Monarchy well, and do lots of good things to benefit the less fortunate/give back to the people selflessly. Instead she is making it about her. All about her.

It truly does make me appreciate Kate that much more. I don't think it is asking a lot of her to carry on with grace and dignity, and manage the personal stuff behind closed doors _despite what the tabloids say about her_. You get what you give and what you put out there. She has been gifted a life of really amazing opportunities and she is acting like an ungrateful brat. 

I don't believe for a second that she was not told what she is truly getting into and what is truly expected of her by marrying into the BRF, but I do think she was smug enough to think she can come in and do as she likes right out of the gate. She should have given it some time - do the job for a bit, follow the examples put forth to her (Kate, protocol, etc) and after some time find some places where she can have some flexibility to make small changes and see what the feedback might be. Maybe Harry has some accountability for this? He does seem interested in encouraging her to some degree.

If I wandered the office and complained about how no one is asking how I am doing or started a new job and did 100% how I felt things should be done right out the gatge, people would not have a favorable opinion of me.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> The Meghan Show is getting exhausting. I really just wanted her to look pretty, wear cute outfits, represent that Monarchy well, and do lots of good things to benefit the less fortunate/give back to the people selflessly. Instead she is making it about her. All about her.
> 
> It truly does make me appreciate Kate that much more. I don't think it is asking a lot of her to carry on with grace and dignity, and manage the personal stuff behind closed doors _despite what the tabloids say about her_. You get what you give and what you put out there. She has been gifted a life of really amazing opportunities and she is acting like an ungrateful brat.
> 
> I don't believe for a second that she was not told what she is truly getting into and what is truly expected of her by marrying into the BRF, but I do think she was smug enough to think she can come in and do as she likes right out of the gate. She should have given it some time - do the job for a bit, follow the examples put forth to her (Kate, protocol, etc) and after some time find some places where she can have some flexibility to make small changes and see what the feedback might be. Maybe Harry has some accountability for this? He does seem interested in encouraging her to some degree.
> 
> If I wandered the office and complained about how no one is asking how I am doing or started a new job and did 100% how I felt things should be done right out the gatge, people would not have a favorable opinion of me.


Meghan should have listened to Michelle ***** IMO


----------



## rose60610

theamericanchinadoll said:


> Where was your comment when she hurled crazy inflammatory accusations at me? Just because I don’t share your views on Meghan? This thread has always been one sided which is why you don’t have many dissenting opinions.




I responded to a lengthy rant of yours about racism and a certain political party that came out of nowhere. I simply stated those topics were not allowed, not in a "hurled crazy" way. The Mod deleted those two posts. 

This is a gossip thread. With good old fashioned bashing (oops, I mean observations) about a new Royal who demands pity, while wearing nice clothes and shoes in general. Whether she has hair extensions is another lightening rod issue for us to ponder. I'm the one who suggested we all sign an e-card asking her if "she's OK" since she feels neglected. We only want what's best for her. Which at this point is to at least pretend to be a little more grateful about her lot in life and less pity-seeking. I believe we all do agree on one thing: that she looks best in jewel tones and not pastels.


----------



## Sharont2305

caramelize126 said:


> The rift between harry and his friends has been reported in Tatler. Tatler is written for the aristo crowd by the aristo crowd. Before Kate and Will got married, they were often the first to talk about the "doors to manual" jokes, how she barely had a job for years after she graduated college so that she could make herself available for Will, etc.  It would be damaging for them to lie because the people reading Tatler are already in those circles and know whats going on. But obviously, thats just my opinion and everyone is entitled to think what they want.


She didn't go to college, she went to University. Two very different educational establishments here..... 
But I do agree with you.


----------



## caramelize126

rose60610 said:


> I believe we all do agree on one thing: that she looks best in jewel tones and not pastels.



And clothes that do not require ironing. Harry on the other hand looks like he just rolled out of bed. At least its not the grey suit again.

This is why I don't believe the stories that they sent an aide to go help Thomas and bring him to the UK. They dont even have an aide to iron their clothes. Who do they have to send across the atlantic???


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't believe for a second that she was not told what she is truly getting into and what is truly expected of her by marrying into the BRF, but I do think she was smug enough to think she can come in and do as she likes right out of the gate. She should have given it some time - do the job for a bit, follow the examples put forth to her (Kate, protocol, etc) and after some time find some places where she can have some flexibility to make small changes and see what the feedback might be. Maybe Harry has some accountability for this? He does seem interested in encouraging her to some degree.


She definitely had zero time to actually get a taste of what royal life and work entailed and decide whether or not it was something she wanted to commit to for the rest of her life.   I think she and Harry were overly confident that she would be able to jump right in and ace the situation.

I wonder whether she and Harry talked beforehand about the possibility of opting out of royal life if it turned out she didn't like it.  Because Harry did talk during the engagement about "the job" side of it, and it seemed to me like he never considered the possibility of marrying someone who wasn't on board with taking on the job.

Now that leaving royal life seems like a real option for them, I wonder if that's something he'd wind up resenting her for.


----------



## Jayne1

Fasikity said:


> Prince Herry's emotional moment



How much can he milk this? Yes, it was tragic for him (and his brother) but why does he keep bringing it up?  Fine to talk about his sadness with friends and family, but always to the press?

Like the way he walked that land mine that isn't a land mine anymore, 3 times, in case anyone didn't understand the retracing the first time.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> She didn't go to college, she went to University. Two very different educational establishments here.....
> But I do agree with you.


University and college are two very different establishments in Canada too.  So, Kate went to a university?


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> University and college are two very different establishments in Canada too.  So, Kate went to a university?


Yes, St Andrews, where she met William . (Here in the UK University is higher than a College)


----------



## youngster

Flatsy said:


> She definitely had zero time to actually get a taste of what royal life and work entailed and decide whether or not it was something she wanted to commit to for the rest of her life.   I think she and Harry were overly confident that she would be able to jump right in and ace the situation.



I've wondered too, why she didn't move to the UK for a year or two and dated Harry to see how she would like living in London, interacting with the family, the tabloid coverage and all of it.  But, this is where I can understand her POV.  That would have required her to give up her job on that TV show, move to a foreign country, and take a risk that the relationship would work.  Who knows, maybe one of them would have second thoughts and then where would she be? Harry could easily move on with his life. He'd still be Prince Harry. For her, getting close to 40, having to move back to the U.S. and trying to restart her acting career would not at all be an attractive proposition, so I can understand that she would push for a commitment and a fairly quick marriage, especially with her baby clock ticking.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I looked at Harry's pictures in  progression . . . my opinion is and it's only my opinion he is being abused. There I said it. I believe he's being abused mentally.  When he had that outburst I remembered someone who held everything in due to mental and verbal abuse and once out in public, once asked a question this person let the floodgates out but the good news is the more that person let it out . . . that person got stronger and stronger.
> 
> I wish I could find that post from a couple of days back someone posted about Meghan's agenda and her friendship with the most elite celebrities and thinks there something there. If anyone sees and remembers that post please let know who the writer was because I want to read it.
> 
> Don't ever underestimate some women who are power hungry. They might seem demure out in public, but behind closed doors . . . oh man they can be vicious.
> 
> I have a gift of discernment and sometimes I hate it because I fight with myself but Meghan gives all kinds of sinister vibe to me and I won't apologize and take back what I said because it is my experience.
> ey 2.0. Joan Crawford, Lucille Ball.


aww, we love Lucy


----------



## sdkitty

theamericanchinadoll said:


> You know what people say about opinions- every @$$ has one.  That is my opinion of most tabloids.  Not to be taken too seriously, unless horrendously malicious. This is why I don’t read bottom feeder tabloids Enquirer/ Daily Mail. I read People because they tend to stick to more facts than fiction.
> 
> The truth of the matter for any relationship is that the more different your backgrounds are the harder it is to make it work.  But the truth is dull, and no would would care.
> 
> Edit: since you mentioned the first amendment, I’d thought you should know British libel laws are very different in High Court.


People magazine mostly contains fluff pieces, not lies but nothing substantive.....fine if that's what you want


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

caramelize126 said:


> I honestly didn't see it. It may have been removed before i logged on this morning.
> 
> Alot of us have been here a long time and i dont remember the last thread that had this much vitriol, its kinda crazy. If you go back to the beginning of the thread, I feel like the tone was very different. People have switched sides as time has gone on. And people from both sides have stopped posting or left all together because they didnt want to deal with the drama.
> 
> Its funny because alot of us interact or used to interact on other threads in this forum. I used to be a lurker in the bal thread and would love @hellosunshine and @CeeJay 's posts ( Hiii ladies!!). Alot of us also used to hang out in the real housewives threads. So I hope that just because we all dont agree on one topic (here) that we can still be open minded enough to be nice to each other. And this isnt just directed at you, this is just in general to everyone. I think everyone needs to cool it lol.




I completely agree.  I enjoy the housewives thread and think it is quite fun.  I tend to agree there with the general consensus on those threads. 

The HM relationship challenges so much existing social values. It touched on hot topics that are part of current events outside of the royal family. Some of the criticism about her are rooted in hatred that isn’t particular about her but what she represents, the feelings it evokes and the assumptions start to snowball.


----------



## lulilu

Jayne1 said:


> University and college are two very different establishments in Canada too.  So, Kate went to a university?





Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, St Andrews, where she met William . (Here in the UK University is higher than a College)



In the US, a university is not 'better" than a college.  Colleges only award baccalaureate degrees; universities do as well, but also award advanced degrees, i.e., masters and doctorates.  So for undergrad, they are the same.  There are many highly-regarded colleges in the US.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> She definitely had zero time to actually get a taste of what royal life and work entailed and decide whether or not it was something she wanted to commit to for the rest of her life.   I think she and Harry were overly confident that she would be able to jump right in and ace the situation.
> 
> I wonder whether she and Harry talked beforehand about the possibility of opting out of royal life if it turned out she didn't like it.  Because Harry did talk during the engagement about "the job" side of it, and it seemed to me like he never considered the possibility of marrying someone who wasn't on board with taking on the job.
> 
> Now that leaving royal life seems like a real option for them, I wonder if that's something he'd wind up resenting her for.



Interesting point. His last relationship(s) ended because the royal life was not ideal for the ladies, so maybe he didn't want to chance losing Meghan, rushed into it, and made that assumption with the option to walk away from it all rather than lose out on having a wife and family? 

Depending upon what is best for him and his mental health, he may not resent her for it but rather be grateful to have the excuse to opt out?


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> In the US, a university is not 'better" than a college.  Colleges only award baccalaureate degrees; universities do as well, but also award advanced degrees, i.e., masters and doctorates.  So for undergrad, they are the same.  There are many highly-regarded colleges in the US.


I understand, just pointing out a University is higher than a College (transatlantic differences) lol


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Interesting point. His last relationship(s) ended because the royal life was not ideal for the ladies, so maybe he didn't want to chance losing Meghan, rushed into it, and made that assumption with the option to walk away from it all rather than lose out on having a wife and family?
> 
> Depending upon what is best for him and his mental health, he may not resent her for it but rather be grateful to have the excuse to opt out?


I don't see them opting out.  She was rather convincing with her performance on that TV show but they just won't have lasting relevance and private citizens.  I don't see it happening.  Time will tell


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I've wondered too, why she didn't move to the UK for a year or two and dated Harry to see how she would like living in London, interacting with the family, the tabloid coverage and all of it.  But, this is where I can understand her POV.  That would have required her to give up her job on that TV show, move to a foreign country, and take a risk that the relationship would work.  Who knows, maybe one of them would have second thoughts and then where would she be? Harry could easily move on with his life. He'd still be Prince Harry. For her, getting close to 40, having to move back to the U.S. and trying to restart her acting career would not at all be an attractive proposition, so I can understand that she would push for a commitment and a fairly quick marriage, especially with her baby clock ticking.



I think it's obvious she wanted to lock him down quickly. She is certainly capable of waiting for marriage. She and Trevor dated/lived together for 7 years before marrying. She had no interest in having a baby then, maybe because of her acting career. Then they divorced 2 years later and she became involved with the chef.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I think it's obvious she wanted to lock him down quickly. She is certainly capable of waiting for marriage. She and Trevor dated/lived together for 7 years before marrying. She had no interest in having a baby then, maybe because of her acting career. Then they divorced 2 years later and she became involved with the chef.



Oh yes, for sure, she wanted to lock him down before moving to the UK. Huge risk for her otherwise.  Harry too was getting older. He looked around, realized he was approaching 35, and knew what happened to his father who also delayed marriage and found no one left in his age range to marry.  All the women in Harry's circle either didn't appeal to him or didn't want the job. So, Meghan.  She's pretty, photogenic, in theory familiar with the media and press, willing to take on the job and they likely glossed over the tough stuff.

It's really unfortunate that Meghan's family is so horrible (other than Doria who seems like a lovely lady) because Harry would have benefited enormously from having his own set of Middleton in-laws.  Smart, graceful, tactful, incredibly discreet, loving and available to help out.  They seem such a huge stabilizing force and positive influence in Will and Kate's lives and their grandchildren's lives. Harry could really use that.  I'm not sure how close he is to Charles now, who has such a massively busy schedule of his own, and I don't see him ever calling up Camilla for a chat and heart-to-heart lol.


----------



## buffym

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder what Prince Charles reactions are to all of this.



Here’s a interview from Prince Charles and the press.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Oh yes, for sure, she wanted to lock him down before moving to the UK. Huge risk for her otherwise.  Harry too was getting older. He looked around, realized he was approaching 35, and knew what happened to his father who also delayed marriage and found no one left in his age range to marry.  All the women in Harry's circle either didn't appeal to him or didn't want the job. So, Meghan.  She's pretty, photogenic, in theory familiar with the media and press, willing to take on the job and they likely glossed over the tough stuff.
> 
> It's really unfortunate that Meghan's family is so horrible (other than Doria who seems like a lovely lady) because Harry would have benefited enormously from having his own set of Middleton in-laws.  Smart, graceful, tactful, incredibly discreet, loving and available to help out.  They seem such a huge stabilizing force and positive influence in Will and Kate's lives and their grandchildren's lives. Harry could really use that.  I'm not sure how close he is to Charles now, who has such a massively busy schedule of his own, and I don't see him ever calling up Camilla for a chat and heart-to-heart lol.



Even if Meghan had a wonderful family they would be too far away to have much influence. Plus Harry and Meghan seem determined to do it their own way, for better or worse.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

youngster said:


> Oh yes, for sure, she wanted to lock him down before moving to the UK. Huge risk for her otherwise.  Harry too was getting older. He looked around, realized he was approaching 35, and knew what happened to his father who also delayed marriage and found no one left in his age range to marry.  All the women in Harry's circle either didn't appeal to him or didn't want the job. So, Meghan.  She's pretty, photogenic, in theory familiar with the media and press, willing to take on the job and they likely glossed over the tough stuff.
> 
> It's really unfortunate that Meghan's family is so horrible (other than Doria who seems like a lovely lady) because Harry would have benefited enormously from having his own set of Middleton in-laws.  Smart, graceful, tactful, incredibly discreet, loving and available to help out.  They seem such a huge stabilizing force and positive influence in Will and Kate's lives and their grandchildren's lives. Harry could really use that.  I'm not sure how close he is to Charles now, who has such a massively busy schedule of his own, and I don't see him ever calling up Camilla for a chat and heart-to-heart lol.


I remember when William and Kate officially announced their engagement, that William said a major draw to Kate was her loving and close family. Agree that Harry could have definitely benefited from that type of relationship with an in-law family, too.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I remember when William and Kate officially announced their engagement, that William said a major draw to Kate was her loving and close family. Agree that Harry could have definitely benefited from that type of relationship with an in-law family, too.


even without the support part, just having a "presentable" family who could have showed up at the wedding would have been a plus


----------



## A1aGypsy

I just hope he and his brother can pull it together, regardless of who is at fault. 

Remember how adorable he and Kate used to be?  Purse mischief. I get that you can’t be a third wheel forever but it would be great to see them sort it out so the cousins could be close at least.


----------



## bag-mania

So today it's all about the messy bun. Way to go Vanity Fair. 

*Meghan Markle Resurrects the Messy Bun with a Twist at a One Young World Summit Event*
Prince Harry drove his wife to the Windsor Castle event in his electric car—and joined in the conversation about gender equality.






Ever since Meghan Markle began her relationship with Prince Harry about three years ago, a messy bun has been one of her signature style elements. It probably takes more effort than a sleeker bun would—those front tendrils don’t just fall like that—but it makes her seem a little laid back, capturing her California-girl-turned-princess vibe perfectly. On Thursday morning, Meghan attended an event for the One Young World Summit at Windsor Castle wearing a maroon sweater and matching Hugo Boss leather skirt, augmenting the bun slightly with Jackie O–style volume at the crown.

The event was focused on gender equality, and Meghan arrived in Harry’s electric Audi E-Tron. According to the _Daily Mail,_ she thanked her husband for joining her at the event. “In terms of gender equality, which is something I have championed for a long time, I think that conversation can't happen without men being a part of it,” she said. “So for this reason it made complete sense to let him join today—so thank you for letting him crash the party.”

Meghan and Harry were part of a roundtable that also included Mark Tewksbury, Canada’s first openly gay Olympic gold medalist; Rossana Bee, a social media influencer; Lebogang Bogopane, a South African domestic violence activist; and youth leaders who represented various Commonwealth countries, including Bangladesh, Nigeria, Iraq, South Africa, and Malawi, where Harry visited on a solo excursion last month during his and Meghan’s tour of southern Africa. Harry was wearing a pin that represents the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, the organization he presides over. (Meghan is its Vice President.)

It’s the second public event Meghan has attended as a part of the One Young World Summit, representing the organization that she has worked with since before she met Harry. “I think we're all aware that One Young World has been very important to me for several years and now being vice president of QCT, it just felt like the perfect medley,” she said during the roundtable. At the opening ceremony on Tuesday, she took to the stage with other luminaries—and had a bit of a mishap when she hugged the organization’s co-founder Kate Robertson.

Recently, Meghan has been putting more effort into rewearing her outfits, emphasizing the affordable, and toning down some of the spectacular gowns she wore throughout her pregnancy, though Friday’s berry look appears to be new. That being said, it does have one royal connection. On Thursday, Queen Letizia of Spain wore an identical skirt at a trade-promotion event in Seoul.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/10/meghan-markle-messy-bun-one-young-world-summit-event


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Co-dependent. 
Did they leave separately like they did at their last event?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> People magazine mostly contains fluff pieces, not lies but nothing substantive.....fine if that's what you want


A Jewelry colleague (who used to write for the Financial Times and then People Magazine) told me that she left People because she felt she couldn't write "honestly" about certain celebs.  It's not a favorite of mine ..


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## youngster

She looks nice and happy and relaxed. I would say thriving.  I'm not a fan of the messy bun though.  

Btw, where is Doria in all this?  Meghan and she may be talking every day for all I know but still, I'd have been on a plane the next day if one of my kids was saying on TV that life had become such a struggle.  I'd have invited myself for a couple of weeks at least, just to be there and talk and help out with the baby.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Harry looks miserable ...


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, St Andrews, where she met William . (Here in the UK University is higher than a College)


Yes, in Canada a college is not on the same level as a university.

I read the royals do not go to Cambridge or Oxford because they don't have the grades and universities like these don't let them in simply because they are royal.  I'm impressed they keep their standards so high... although I think Charles managed to use his title to get in somewhere where he shouldn't have been.


----------



## sdkitty

elvisfan4life said:


> Harry looks miserable ...


I thought she looked like she was having a very good time and he looked like he was tagging along


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> She looks nice and happy and relaxed. I would say thriving.  I'm not a fan of the messy bun though.
> 
> Btw, where is Doria in all this?  Meghan and she may be talking every day for all I know but still, I'd have been on a plane the next day if one of my kids was saying on TV that life had become such a struggle.  I'd have invited myself for a couple of weeks at least, just to be there and talk and help out with the baby.



I like the burgundy color on her. Agree on the hairstyle - so many other things can be done with that lovely hair.

I had not even thought about Doria in this regard. Seems that maybe they are close, but not _drop everything and fly across the pond to "be there"_ close. Maybe not having a two-parent household when she was young left her with an independent streak - she lived in Canada, traveled around, did her own thing - and her mom adjusted to that distance a long time ago?


----------



## bag-mania

Let's have some fun. Caption this photo!
I'll start: "Where the hell did I go wrong?"


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I like the burgundy color on her. Agree on the hairstyle - so many other things can be done with that lovely hair.
> 
> I had not even thought about Doria in this regard. Seems that maybe they are close, but not _drop everything and fly across the pond to "be there"_ close. Maybe not having a two-parent household when she was young left her with an independent streak - she lived in Canada, traveled around, did her own thing - and her mom adjusted to that distance a long time ago?


and the mom has a job?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> and the mom has a job?


Yes, her mother used to be a Social Worker, but left around the time that Meghan and Harry made the marriage announcement.  I believe that she is a Yoga Instructor somewhere here in LA.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Btw, where is Doria in all this?  Meghan and she may be talking every day for all I know but still, I'd have been on a plane the next day if one of my kids was saying on TV that life had become such a struggle.  I'd have invited myself for a couple of weeks at least, just to be there and talk and help out with the baby.



What could she do? It's not like Meghan is facing a horrible illness or a traumatic event. She has received some bad press. Her daughter is nearly 40 and I bet she's always been overdramatic. Doria is smart to stay far away from it IMO.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> What could she do? It's not like Meghan is facing a horrible illness or a traumatic event. She has received some bad press. Her daughter is nearly 40 and I bet she's always been overdramatic. Doria is smart to stay far away from it IMO.


Yeah, Doria strikes me as a pretty smart cookie.


----------



## hellosunshine

New Instagram Post -


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, Doria strikes me as a pretty smart cookie.


She strikes me as the type who does not like Drama .. the "drama" Meghan has, she gets from her father ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> What could she do? It's not like Meghan is facing a horrible illness or a traumatic event. She has received some bad press. Her daughter is nearly 40 and I bet she's always been overdramatic. Doria is smart to stay far away from it IMO.



What could she do? Visit and be supportive but that's what I would do for one of my kids if they were going through a tough time, even if they were pushing 40. Reach out, go visit, talk. But, as you said, she may not want to get sucked into the drama or has seen enough of it in Meghan's life to stay far away.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> What could she do? Visit and be supportive but that's what I would do for one of my kids if they were going through a tough time, even if they were pushing 40. Reach out, go visit, talk. But, as you said, she may not want to get sucked into the drama or has seen enough of it in Meghan's life to stay far away.


and maybe Meghan doesn't want her there.  not every mother and daughter are close.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> What could she do? Visit and be supportive but that's what I would do for one of my kids if they were going through a tough time, even if they were pushing 40. Reach out, go visit, talk. But, as you said, she may not want to get sucked into the drama or has seen enough of it in Meghan's life to stay far away.



There are ways of being supportive without dropping everything and showing up on the doorstep. Having an extra person in the house is always more work, not less. And if there is any marital strain going on between them, having the mother-in-law turn up for an uninvited visit would make matters worse.


----------



## Hobbsy

buffym said:


> Meghan at the round table today.
> 
> Burgundy is a great color on her.
> View attachment 4573431
> View attachment 4573432
> View attachment 4573433
> View attachment 4573434


They both look nice.


----------



## gelbergirl

bag-mania said:


> So today it's all about the messy bun. Way to go Vanity Fair.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Resurrects the Messy Bun with a Twist at a One Young World Summit Event*
> Prince Harry drove his wife to the Windsor Castle event in his electric car—and joined in the conversation about gender equality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever since Meghan Markle began her relationship with Prince Harry about three years ago, a messy bun has been one of her signature style elements. It probably takes more effort than a sleeker bun would—those front tendrils don’t just fall like that—but it makes her seem a little laid back, capturing her California-girl-turned-princess vibe perfectly. On Thursday morning, Meghan attended an event for the One Young World Summit at Windsor Castle wearing a maroon sweater and matching Hugo Boss leather skirt, augmenting the bun slightly with Jackie O–style volume at the crown.
> 
> The event was focused on gender equality, and Meghan arrived in Harry’s electric Audi E-Tron. According to the _Daily Mail,_ she thanked her husband for joining her at the event. “In terms of gender equality, which is something I have championed for a long time, I think that conversation can't happen without men being a part of it,” she said. “So for this reason it made complete sense to let him join today—so thank you for letting him crash the party.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry were part of a roundtable that also included Mark Tewksbury, Canada’s first openly gay Olympic gold medalist; Rossana Bee, a social media influencer; Lebogang Bogopane, a South African domestic violence activist; and youth leaders who represented various Commonwealth countries, including Bangladesh, Nigeria, Iraq, South Africa, and Malawi, where Harry visited on a solo excursion last month during his and Meghan’s tour of southern Africa. Harry was wearing a pin that represents the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, the organization he presides over. (Meghan is its Vice President.)
> 
> It’s the second public event Meghan has attended as a part of the One Young World Summit, representing the organization that she has worked with since before she met Harry. “I think we're all aware that One Young World has been very important to me for several years and now being vice president of QCT, it just felt like the perfect medley,” she said during the roundtable. At the opening ceremony on Tuesday, she took to the stage with other luminaries—and had a bit of a mishap when she hugged the organization’s co-founder Kate Robertson.
> 
> Recently, Meghan has been putting more effort into rewearing her outfits, emphasizing the affordable, and toning down some of the spectacular gowns she wore throughout her pregnancy, though Friday’s berry look appears to be new. That being said, it does have one royal connection. On Thursday, Queen Letizia of Spain wore an identical skirt at a trade-promotion event in Seoul.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/10/meghan-markle-messy-bun-one-young-world-summit-event



It looks EXTRA messy!!  LOL
#TeamMessyBun


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> and maybe Meghan doesn't want her there.  not every mother and daughter are close.


I really admired Doria’s dignity during the wedding. It could not have been easy being the only member of Megan’s family to be there. To essentially be alone. It’s funny though, I sense a real ‘coolness’ coming from her. Don’t know why, or the reason for it, just a feeling. Maybe Megan’s relationship with her mother isn’t the greatest either, we just don’t know. Especially if she was primarily raised by her father.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4573999
> 
> Let's have some fun. Caption this photo!
> I'll start: "Where the hell did I go wrong?"








_Would she get upset if I told her I hated her hair?_


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> _Would she get upset if I told her I hated her hair?_



_Is she wearing a bumpit?_


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> _Would she get upset if I told her I hated her hair?_


"*Hmmmm .. too bad I didn't have more hair; I wonder if she would like a man bun?*"


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> "*Hmmmm .. too bad I didn't have more hair; I wonder if she would like a man bun?*"



Easily solved!  Get some hair extensions from the hair dresser  your wife uses.


----------



## hellosunshine

Prince Harry joined Meghan Markle at Windsor Castle to discuss gender equality with The Queen's Commonwealth Trust and One Young World. 

Participants included impactful young leaders from around the world who are leading projects and ventures that support gender equality and inclusion in countries including South Africa, Nigeria, Iraq, Malawi and Bangladesh. 

The discussion covered how these young leaders are driving meaningful change for empowering women.


----------



## jehaga

Currently bingeing on “Big Little Lies.” Harry and Zoe Kravitz would have made a great couple.


----------



## mdcx

I have to say, the outfit is not super suitable. Her cleavage may not be showing 100% but you can definitely see that underneath her sweater, breast tissue is overflowing out of her bra - the cup runneth over. For any normal person, not a problem. For a royal, not something that would get signed off by the wardrobe mistress, so to speak.
The hair is very "had a romp before rushing to work", not sure how that made it out the door either.
Also noticed she is wearing her "Cali cool" rings on the left hand. Is this is another sign to say FU to her handlers? Haven't noticed her wearing all that Jen Meyer style stuff lately.
As for Harry, the poor lad. He looks more like a lost soul every time.


----------



## caramelize126

hellosunshine said:


>




Harry looks heavily medicated.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Easily solved!  Get some hair extensions from the hair dresser  your wife uses.


   !!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I have to say, the outfit is not super suitable. Her cleavage may not be showing 100% but you can definitely see that underneath her sweater, breast tissue is overflowing out of her bra - the cup runneth over. For any normal person, not a problem. For a royal, not something that would get signed off by the wardrobe mistress, so to speak.
> The hair is very "had a romp before rushing to work", not sure how that made it out the door either.
> Also noticed she is wearing her "Cali cool" rings on the left hand. Is this is another sign to say FU to her handlers? Haven't noticed her wearing all that Jen Meyer style stuff lately.
> As for Harry, the poor lad. He looks more like a lost soul every time.
> 
> View attachment 4574142


What about her Pippa Small pieces?!?! .. she has quite a few of them and they ARE NOT inexpensive (well - for that matter, neither is Jennifer Meyer's jewelry)!!


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4573999
> 
> Let's have some fun. Caption this photo!
> I'll start: "Where the hell did I go wrong?"





_"Or do I want whipped cream on my Frappuccino?"_


----------



## rose60610

"I should have listened to Will, Dad, and Grandma. How do I get out of this? And keep Archie? What if Archie has a sibling on the way? Oh well, it was nice while it lasted. The firm will protect me. I'll have to lay low for a while. But most people are on my side. I can't take this anymore. I tried my best to be a woker to make my wife happy.  Nobody sees it our way, except other wokers. And I thought those eight people were really great. They made me feel like I could be more than The Spare. Turns out I was just being used. I see that now. Grandma saw it all along. She's been through a lot and can see through everybody. I hope she's still around to vet my next wife. She can spot a phony the second she's them. Dad? Not so much, but better than nothing. Will will know what to do. I need guidance. And a hairbrush. And God knows, a new PR firm."


----------



## chicaloca

I feel like I’m reading a high school burn book or something.

Anyhoo...Meghan looked beautiful today. I love that Harry came with her. They are making it very clear that despite whatever narratives are being put out by the press they are a supportive team who love each other and will continue to speak on human rights issues. It’s also cool that Meghan is able to continue working with organizations she was affiliated with before becoming a royal.



This is an interesting tidbit from their courtship. Harry bought some artwork and had it divided in two so he could keep one half and Meghan the other. It is believed Meghan is carrying the gift in the last pic of their Botswana trip.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I should bring my husband to my work meetings. 

oh wait, that would be weird.


----------



## White Orchid

Love that last photo of her.   She has the prettiest smile.


buffym said:


> Meghan at the round table today.
> 
> Burgundy is a great color on her.
> View attachment 4573431
> View attachment 4573432
> View attachment 4573433
> View attachment 4573434


----------



## Meh-gan

Her hair is always a messsssss. The strands over her ears and the messy tendrils are just sloppy.


----------



## buffym

White Orchid said:


> Love that last photo of her.   She has the prettiest smile.



Yes, Meghan is very photogenic.







Harry has an engagement next week.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> I have to say, the outfit is not super suitable. Her cleavage may not be showing 100% but you can definitely see that underneath her sweater, breast tissue is overflowing out of her bra - the cup runneth over. For any normal person, not a problem. For a royal, not something that would get signed off by the wardrobe mistress, so to speak.
> The hair is very "had a romp before rushing to work", not sure how that made it out the door either.
> Also noticed she is wearing her "Cali cool" rings on the left hand. Is this is another sign to say FU to her handlers? Haven't noticed her wearing all that Jen Meyer style stuff lately.
> As for Harry, the poor lad. He looks more like a lost soul every time.
> 
> View attachment 4574142


Does the Queen have a thing about rings? I've never noticed on the royal women before, but is it just supposed to be engagement/marriage band and nothing else?


----------



## cafecreme15

buffym said:


> Meghan at the round table today.
> 
> Burgundy is a great color on her.
> View attachment 4573431
> View attachment 4573432
> View attachment 4573433
> View attachment 4573434


Very reminiscent of the green blouse on green leather skirt from the Ireland tour. Loved that look, and love this one too.


----------



## Hobbsy

Love her look today,  the messy bun is cool. Whoever thinks Harry looks medicated or frazzled must be looking at different pictures than I've seen?


----------



## mcb100

Meghan looks happy, Harry looks a little tired though. I do like her clothes and shoes a lot, I even like the messy bun, although I have to be honest and say that the hair and clothes are not really what I would think that a member of the royal family is supposed to wear lol.

Also I want to add that there has been drama before with her family and stuff written about her in the tabloids....I'm sure it isn't easy but I wish that she would not publicly get very worked up over things. If people write mean things about you, prove them wrong. I get the impression a lot of times that she is trying to throw it back in everyone's faces (and the press) "you're wrong about me." Take the high road, don't give a response, and prove people wrong through your actions and helping good causes.

I'm probably gonna get some backlash for my post, but that's my opinion currently.


----------



## mdcx

I speculate Megs hair is giving her issues at the moment because she is not up to date on her keratin straightening - I assume because she is still pumping/breastfeeding and the process is very chemical heavy.
Or perhaps she’s waiting to get it done back in LA. I would guess she will get a few cosmetic “touch ups” while there.


----------



## mdcx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Does the Queen have a thing about rings? I've never noticed on the royal women before, but is it just supposed to be engagement/marriage band and nothing else?


I think it’s just that a “boho” vibe with ring stacks or lots of random rings is not the norm for BRF public appearances, the look is traditionally fairly conservative. But Megs is “shining a light” on LA style for them I guess.


----------



## Lodpah

PewPew said:


> As one might have expected, MM’s sister Samantha has given a reaction interview to the documentary. I don’t want to link to tabloids, but SM’s original interview was with U.S. Inside Edition & the story has been picked up in various papers under headlines like “Why didn’t you ask if Dad was OK after 2 heart attacks?”
> 
> Obviously there is bad blood between the sisters, but Sussex camp has to have expected this response (and generally does not address anything SM says)


Samantha must be feeling vindicated. Too lazy to upload but that graduation picture of her and Meghan is crazy. Meghan totally takes over the picture, behind and all. I still don’t care for Samantha tho but she did warn everyone. Sometimes the crazy ones really, really do tell the truth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

(2) of Meghan's Former Movie Co-Stars -

Gregg Sulkin was in 2015's Anti-Social:



Kristoffer Polaha was in 2016's Daters' Handbook:



"New Levels, New Devils" Love it!


----------



## Clearblueskies

^ “She’s changed history”  
What a stupid thing to say.  Who is he anyway, another wannabe airhead actor?  Pretty women marrying rich and powerful men is nothing new.  These sort of over the top plaudits show how superficial all these people are.  Coming on the back of a tour of South Africa - I find it all very shallow.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> I feel like I’m reading a high school burn book or something.
> 
> Anyhoo...Meghan looked beautiful today. I love that Harry came with her. They are making it very clear that despite whatever narratives are being put out by the press they are a supportive team who love each other and will continue to speak on human rights issues. It’s also cool that Meghan is able to continue working with organizations she was affiliated with before becoming a royal.
> 
> 
> 
> This is an interesting tidbit from their courtship. Harry bought some artwork and had it divided in two so he could keep one half and Meghan the other. It is believed Meghan is carrying the gift in the last pic of their Botswana trip.


It’s funny how long ago that feels


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> ^ “She’s changed history”
> What a stupid thing to say.  Who is he anyway, another wannabe airhead actor?  Pretty women marrying rich and powerful men is nothing new.  These sort of over the top plaudits show how superficial all these people are.  Coming on the back of a tour of South Africa - I find it all very shallow.



Oh, really?! I hadn't realized that Meghan wasn't the first bi-racial woman to marry into the BRF? Can you please name the others?


----------



## PatsyCline

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, really?! I hadn't realized that Meghan wasn't the first bi-racial woman to marry into the BRF? Can you please name the others?


Queen Charlotte, wife of George III.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, really?! I hadn't realized that Meghan wasn't the first bi-racial woman to marry into the BRF? Can you please name the others?


No she wasn’t the first.  It’s already been discussed at length on this thread.  And my comment wasn’t about race either.
I’m tired of being jumped on on this thread.  It’s perfectly legitimate to be critical of Meghan’s actions and conduct, and critical of the saccharine praise heaped on her by people wanting a place on the fame bandwagon.


----------



## mdcx

I hope people are not viewing Meghan’s marrying into the BRF as some kind of achievement. It’s really .... not. How she conducts herself in her royal role could be a source of pride though.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m tired of being jumped on on this thread.


Same. When are the constant argumentative replies enough?


----------



## Aqua01

mdcx said:


> I hope people are not viewing Meghan’s marrying into the BRF as some kind of achievement. It’s really .... not. *How she conducts herself in her royal role could be a source of pride though*.


But unfortunately, as we all can see.........


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Samantha must be feeling vindicated. Too lazy to upload but that graduation picture of her and Meghan is crazy. Meghan totally takes over the picture, behind and all. I still don’t care for Samantha tho but she did warn everyone. Sometimes the crazy ones really, really do tell the truth.



I bet Samantha feels like the sister in _Ferris Bueller‘s Day Off_. The only person who sees the reality while everybody else is deceived by the charm.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> No she wasn’t the first.  It’s already been discussed at length on this thread.  And my comment wasn’t about race either.
> I’m tired of being jumped on on this thread.  It’s perfectly legitimate to be critical of Meghan’s actions and conduct, and critical of the saccharine praise heaped on her by people wanting a place on the fame bandwagon.



Oop, and it only took..what?! 258 years for another mixed-race woman to marry into the BRF. Anyway, as the second mixed-race woman, Meghan has that signficiance and honor.

BTW, I wasn't jumping on you. I was asking a question. Sorry, you felt otherwise.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan being allowed to marry into the BRF is more a statement on how un-important Harry is than anything about her. I doubt will would have married a twice married D-list American actress.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan being allowed to marry into the BRF is more a statement on how un-important Harry is than anything about her. I doubt will would have married a *twice* married D-list American actress.



Twice?


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Oop, and it only took..what?! 258 years for another mixed-race woman to marry into the BRF. Anyway, as the second mixed-race woman, Meghan has that signficiance and honor.
> 
> BTW, I wasn't jumping on you. I was asking a question. Sorry, you felt otherwise.


You jumped on my post with a snarky remark about race.  My post wasn’t about her mixed race - but it’s as if Meghan’s skin colour is the only thing worthy of note to you  
I’ll remind you, you don’t know me, and you don’t know my race.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I hope people are not viewing Meghan’s marrying into the BRF as some kind of achievement. It’s really .... not. How she conducts herself in her royal role could be a source of pride though.


Very true.  And people need to remember the history - it’s only in the last few generations that Royals have married commoners.  Royal offspring were always married off for political and strategic reasons - usually to other European Royal houses, or to powerful families in their own countries.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> You jumped on my post with a snarky remark about race.  My post wasn’t about her mixed race - but it’s as if Meghan’s skin colour is the only thing worthy of note to you
> I’ll remind you, you don’t know me, and you don’t know my race.



I interpreted it as race. You interpreted my question to you as an attack or that I "jumped on you". On the internet, you can't discern tone and we certainly can't read each others' minds.

Furthermore, I don't appreciate the "I'll remind you, you don't know me, and you don't know my race"..I don't have to know you nor do I care to. I apologized if you felt "jumped on"...please move on.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> I interrupted it as race. You interrupted my question to you as an attack or that I "jumped on you". On the internet, you can't discern tone and we certainly can't read each others' minds.
> 
> Furthermore, I don't appreciate the "I'll remind you, you don't know me, and you don't know my race"..I don't have to know you nor do I care to. I apologized if you felt "jumped on"...please move on.


I suggest you use the ignore function and ignore my posts.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> I *interrupted* it as race. You *interrupted *my question to you as an attack or that I "jumped on you". On the internet, you can't discern tone and we certainly can't read each others' minds.
> 
> Furthermore, I don't appreciate the "I'll remind you, you don't know me, and you don't know my race"..I don't have to know you nor do I care to. I apologized if you felt "jumped on"...please move on.


Did you mean interpreted?


----------



## Hobbsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan being allowed to marry into the BRF is more a statement on how un-important Harry is than anything about her. I doubt will would have married a twice married D-list American actress.


Harry is unimportant?! Wow, if you feel that way you wouldn't like anyone he would marry. And who cares who Will "would" have married?! He would cheat on her anyway?


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> Did you mean interpreted?



Yes, darn autocorrect lol.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Hobbsy said:


> Harry is unimportant?! Wow, if you feel that way you wouldn't like anyone he would marry. And who cares who Will "would" have married?! He would cheat on her anyway?


Whoever married William will be queen one day this it matters


----------



## Toby93

Hobbsy said:


> Harry is unimportant?! Wow, if you feel that way you wouldn't like anyone he would marry. And who cares who Will "would" have married?! He would cheat on her anyway?


Why would you think he would cheat on whomever he married?


----------



## Toby93

mdcx said:


> I have to say, the outfit is not super suitable. Her cleavage may not be showing 100% but you can definitely see that underneath her sweater, breast tissue is overflowing out of her bra - the cup runneth over. For any normal person, not a problem. For a royal, not something that would get signed off by the wardrobe mistress, so to speak.
> The hair is very "had a romp before rushing to work", not sure how that made it out the door either.
> Also noticed she is wearing her "Cali cool" rings on the left hand. Is this is another sign to say FU to her handlers? Haven't noticed her wearing all that Jen Meyer style stuff lately.
> As for Harry, the poor lad. He looks more like a lost soul every time.
> 
> View attachment 4574142


The sweater is very inappropriate and that hair   If she brushes it once out her eyes, she touches it at least 10 times in less than 5 min??


----------



## mrsinsyder

Hobbsy said:


> Harry is unimportant?!



Yes, that is what I wrote. Welcome back.


----------



## Hobbsy

elvisfan4life said:


> Whoever married William will be queen one day this it matters


Having a title is more important than having a loving, faithful husband? Not to me.


----------



## Hobbsy

Toby93 said:


> Why would you think he would cheat on whomever he married?


He cheated/cheats on Kate. Don't "they" say, once a cheater always a cheater?


----------



## Hobbsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes, that is what I wrote. Welcome back.


Thank you! It's funny that something so unimportant takes up so much space in some people's heads.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Toby93 said:


> Why would you think he would cheat on whomever he married?


It’s a silly rumor started by Meghan’s camp that has never been proven in any way. The fact that Soho Spice will never be Queen Soho Spice is the one thing they feel helpless about so it’s a way to bring Will and Kate down a peg. Even more interesting since the timelines show a lot of overlap with Meghan’s relationships ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Aqua01

Hobbsy said:


> He cheated/cheats on Kate. Don't "they" say, once a cheater always a cheater?


How do you _know_ Will cheated on Kate? And how do you _know_ Harry didnt/doesn't cheat on Meghan? Do you live under their bed to know?
Or did any of them tell you personally ?


----------



## Hobbsy

Aqua01 said:


> How do you _know_ Will cheated on Kate? And how do you _know_ Harry didnt/doesn't cheat on Meghan? Do you live under their bed to know?
> Or did any of them tell you personally ?


Yes, and yes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aqua01

Hobbsy said:


> Thank you! It's funny that something so unimportant takes up so much space in some people's heads.


Yours included?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s a silly rumor started by Meghan’s camp that has never been proven in any way. The fact that Soho Spice will never be Queen Soho Spice is the one thing they feel helpless about so it’s a way to bring Will and Kate down a peg. Even more interesting since the timelines show a lot of overlap with Meghan’s relationships ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



Actually, no. This particular rumor has legs. Earlier this year, when his affair was trending on twitter, several royal reporters confirmed it then backtracked into weird denials. Also, my memory is alittle foggy but didn't William come under some heat back in 2017 for gyrating and seductively dancing with several women on a boys trip to the Swiss Alps? I remember it was a big deal because he skipped a major ceremony with the Queen and other royals to celebrate Commonwealth Day and Kate had to release a comment saying "she was disappointed in his behavior".


----------



## Aqua01

Hobbsy said:


> Yes, and yes.


Proof?


----------



## Hobbsy

Toby93 said:


> Why would you think he would cheat on whomever he married?





Aqua01 said:


> Yours included?


About a half, possibly an hour in a slow week. Every hour of every day? No.


----------



## Hobbsy

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s a silly rumor started by Meghan’s camp that has never been proven in any way. The fact that Soho Spice will never be Queen Soho Spice is the one thing they feel helpless about so it’s a way to bring Will and Kate down a peg. Even more interesting since the timelines show a lot of overlap with Meghan’s relationships ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Gosh, those nasty rumors. They sure get spread around in here huh?


----------



## Hobbsy

Aqua01 said:


> Proof?


Of course!


----------



## Aqua01

Hobbsy said:


> Of course!


Waiting.....


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s a silly rumor started by Meghan’s camp that has never been proven in any way. The fact that Soho Spice will never be Queen Soho Spice is the one thing they feel helpless about so it’s a way to bring Will and Kate down a peg. Even more interesting since the timelines show a lot of overlap with Meghan’s relationships ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


The chef was toast as soon as a possible date with Harry came into range.  And prior to that the second husband was dumped as soon as she got the suits job.  She sent the rings back in the post can you believe.


----------



## sdkitty

Hobbsy said:


> Having a title is more important than having a loving, faithful husband? Not to me.


I think Meghan saw a lot more in Harry than a loving faithful husband (hopefully that figured in as well)


----------



## TC1

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes, that is what I wrote. Welcome back.


Agreed. Harry has been referred to as a "spare" his whole life. That doesn't really scream importance.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, really?! I hadn't realized that Meghan wasn't the first bi-racial woman to marry into the BRF? Can you please name the others?


Even if she was the first this isn’t history changing. Maybe if she was the first bi-racial queen of England or something or the first female leader of a country who hasn’t had one before - those things are historical. MM being a duchess is nothing historical.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> Oop, and it only took..what?! 258 years for another mixed-race woman to marry into the BRF. Anyway, as the second mixed-race woman, Meghan has that signficiance and honor.
> 
> BTW, I wasn't jumping on you. I was asking a question. Sorry, you felt otherwise.


I know you want to think she is significant in history but she isn’t. Marrying into the royal family isn’t an achievement worthy of much. There are actual woman making history every day and achieving greatness, making advancements etc and becoming leaders. Let’s focus on them when using words like changing history.


----------



## Sharont2305

Meh-gan said:


> Even if she was the first this isn’t history changing. Maybe if she was the first bi-racial queen of England or something or the first female leader of a country who hasn’t had one before - those things are historical. MM being a duchess is nothing historical.


We'll, having a queen of England would be historic, seeing that there never has been one.


----------



## rose60610

I just got another Bed Bath and Beyond 20% off coupon in the mail today.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not exactly tempted to spend it on the (I'm not kidding)  $300 Royal Doulton Royal Wedding Day Figurine featuring M&H. Besides, it's out of stock online. So some people bought it? Even at $240 with the discount I'm still not tempted.


----------



## mrsinsyder

rose60610 said:


> I just got another Bed Bath and Beyond 20% off coupon in the mail today.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not exactly tempted to spend it on the (I'm not kidding)  $300 Royal Doulton Royal Wedding Day Figurine featuring M&H. Besides, it's out of stock online. So some people bought it? Even at $240 with the discount I'm still not tempted.



they look nice here


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle Resurrects the Messy Bun with a Twist at a One Young World Summit Event*
> Prince Harry drove his wife to the Windsor Castle event in his electric car—and joined in the conversation about gender equality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever since Meghan Markle began her relationship with Prince Harry about three years ago, a messy bun has been one of her signature style elements. It probably takes more effort than a sleeker bun would—those front tendrils don’t just fall like that—but it makes her seem a little laid back, capturing her California-girl-turned-princess vibe perfectly. On Thursday morning, Meghan attended an event for the One Young World Summit at Windsor Castle wearing a maroon sweater and matching Hugo Boss leather skirt, augmenting the bun slightly with Jackie O–style volume at the crown.
> 
> The event was focused on gender equality, and Meghan arrived in Harry’s electric Audi E-Tron. According to the _Daily Mail,_ she thanked her husband for joining her at the event. “In terms of gender equality, which is something I have championed for a long time, I think that conversation can't happen without men being a part of it,” she said. “So for this reason it made complete sense to let him join today—so thank you for letting him crash the party.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry were part of a roundtable that also included Mark Tewksbury, Canada’s first openly gay Olympic gold medalist; Rossana Bee, a social media influencer; Lebogang Bogopane, a South African domestic violence activist; and youth leaders who represented various Commonwealth countries, including Bangladesh, Nigeria, Iraq, South Africa, and Malawi, where Harry visited on a solo excursion last month during his and Meghan’s tour of southern Africa. Harry was wearing a pin that represents the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, the organization he presides over. (Meghan is its Vice President.)
> 
> It’s the second public event Meghan has attended as a part of the One Young World Summit, representing the organization that she has worked with since before she met Harry. “I think we're all aware that One Young World has been very important to me for several years and now being vice president of QCT, it just felt like the perfect medley,” she said during the roundtable. At the opening ceremony on Tuesday, she took to the stage with other luminaries—and had a bit of a mishap when she hugged the organization’s co-founder Kate Robertson.
> 
> Recently, Meghan has been putting more effort into rewearing her outfits, emphasizing the affordable, and toning down some of the spectacular gowns she wore throughout her pregnancy, though Friday’s berry look appears to be new. That being said, it does have one royal connection. On Thursday, Queen Letizia of Spain wore an identical skirt at a trade-promotion event in Seoul.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/10/meghan-markle-messy-bun-one-young-world-summit-event
> So today it's all about the messy bun. Way to go Vanity Fair.



This is all they could say about her? Her hair? Mortifying. I can just hear the Firm asking themselves “what was he thinking?”


----------



## A1aGypsy

Standing in line at the grocery store I was surveying the tabloids and about half of them were beautiful pictures of Kate in Pakistan and the other half were Meghan looking angry or disheveled with headlines like: “the fight to end all fights” and “no one has asked if I’m okay” or “Meghan’s leaving the monarchy”. And I just couldn’t help but think, “geez girl, i used to really have sympathy but this is now all on you.” How to run something into a ditch.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I just got another Bed Bath and Beyond 20% off coupon in the mail today.  I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not exactly tempted to spend it on the (I'm not kidding)  $300 Royal Doulton Royal Wedding Day Figurine featuring M&H. Besides, it's out of stock online. So some people bought it? Even at $240 with the discount I'm still not tempted.


wonder if some people think it will increase in value....other than that, I can't see it.....but then again there are probably some on this thread who would buy that item


----------



## sdkitty

Meh-gan said:


> I know you want to think she is significant in history but she isn’t. Marrying into the royal family isn’t an achievement worthy of much. There are actual woman making history every day and achieving greatness, making advancements etc and becoming leaders. Let’s focus on them when using words like changing history.


how about being the first bi-racial, actress, divorcee? (oh, an a Yank)


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> Standing in line at the grocery store I was surveying the tabloids and about half of them were beautiful pictures of Kate in Pakistan and the other half were Meghan looking angry or disheveled with headlines like: “the fight to end all fights” and “no one has asked if I’m okay” or “Meghan’s leaving the monarchy”. And I just couldn’t help but think, “geez girl, i used to really have sympathy but this is now all on you.” How to run something into a ditch.


I have heard a lot of celebs who support/sympathize with Meghan - most recently Julie Andrews and Whoopi Goldberg on WWHL this past week.
I guess maybe they identify with her more than those of us who have to work at more tedious jobs and live "regular" lives


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> they look nice here
> View attachment 4574650


They actually do; Royal Doulton makes such nice stuff, not surprised


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> We'll, having a queen of England would be historic, seeing that there never has been one.


*HUH???* .. what about the "Virgin Queen" - one of the greatest, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary who proceeded her?


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> *HUH???* .. what about the "Virgin Queen" - one of the greatest, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary who proceeded her?



Queen Elizabeth the Second of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Op
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth the Second of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith


EXACTLY .. and she was smart as heck and got Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!  Also, forgot .. Queen Victoria!! 

Sheesh .. do some people not study history (_alas - I admit it is a favorite pastime for me - especially Ancient Roman history since my husband was also an Egyptologist_).


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan being allowed to marry into the BRF is more a statement on how un-important Harry is than anything about her. I doubt will would have married a twice married D-list American actress.



I don’t see how Harry is unimportant when so many people are commenting on his life. When people  are not important I don’t comment in threads about them.

But, this is the internet and I guess people show how important Harry is by criticizing rather than ignoring. 

Harry was allowed to marry Meghan because there wasn’t a legitimate reason for them to not marry.

Meghan was divorced but so is three of the Queen’s children. 

Nothing in Meghan’s background makes her inappropriate.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect her point is that there has been no Queen of ENGLAND.


----------



## buffym

Toby93 said:


> Why would you think he would cheat on whomever he married?





Aqua01 said:


> How do you _know_ Will cheated on Kate? And how do you _know_ Harry didnt/doesn't cheat on Meghan? Do you live under their bed to know?
> Or did any of them tell you personally ?





Aqua01 said:


> Proof?



It’s the internet the poster doesn’t have to have proof. The same way there is no proof Meghan cheated on he ex with Harry. It is what you choose to believe.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY .. and she was smart as heck and got Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!  Also, forgot .. Queen Victoria!!
> 
> Sheesh .. do some people not study history (_alas - I admit it is a favorite pastime for me - especially Ancient Roman history since my husband was also an Egyptologist_).


Queen Victoria was also Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (there was no Northern Ireland then, Ireland didn't split till later)


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> I suspect her point is that there has been no Queen of ENGLAND.


Exactly, thank you!!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, thank you!!


we Americans have grown up hearing the expression "queen of England"
so we forget (or are ignorant) that there's more than England involved


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY .. and she was smart as heck and got Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!  Also, forgot .. Queen Victoria!!
> 
> Sheesh .. do some people not study history (_alas - I admit it is a favorite pastime for me - especially Ancient Roman history since my husband was also an Egyptologist_).


Can I ask what did Queen Elizabeth the Second do to get "Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!"


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Can I ask what did Queen Elizabeth the Second do to get "Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!"


Off topic, but .. Spain was the economic power at the time that Queen Elizabeth took the throne.  Queen Mary had been married to Philip II of Spain (_remember, Queen Mary wanted the country to be Catholic not Protestant_).  After Mary's death, Philip of Spain asked Elizabeth for her hand in marriage, and she said 'NO'.  

At this time, England was not in a good economic state, so what did Queen Elizabeth do? .. she looked the other way as the English Sailors preyed on Spanish ships, plundering them for New World treasures, to raid and sink treasure ships (especially on the Spanish Main, the West African coast and the eastern coasts of the Americas.  Therefore, Piracy (_previously only tacitly sanctioned_), turned into an economic and military strategy.  The English navy was reborn and some of the most dangerous Pirates became national heroes.  

Well, eventually the Spanish tired of the relentless English piracy and still smarting over the slights and insults (_not to mention religious reasons_) Philip II of Spain raised an armada unlike the world had ever seen.  Tens of thousands of soldiers and sailors, cannons and cavalry, in a fleet of ships set to invade the English and depose Queen Elizabeth.  Well, the "invicinble" Armada never even made it to the English shores, because the English had adapted their ships (_for the Piracy_) to be swift and new means of attack .. such that the English completely and rapidly decimated the Spanish fleet.  *The defeat of the Armada marked the end of Spanish sea dominance and a new landscape of European power and the beginning of Britain's commercial empire*.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Off topic, but .. Spain was the economic power at the time that Queen Elizabeth took the throne.  Queen Mary had been married to Philip II of Spain (_remember, Queen Mary wanted the country to be Catholic not Protestant_).  After Mary's death, Philip of Spain asked Elizabeth for her hand in marriage, and she said 'NO'.
> 
> At this time, England was not in a good economic state, so what did Queen Elizabeth do? .. she looked the other way as the English Sailors preyed on Spanish ships, plundering them for New World treasures, to raid and sink treasure ships (especially on the Spanish Main, the West African coast and the eastern coasts of the Americas.  Therefore, Piracy (_previously only tacitly sanctioned_), turned into an economic and military strategy.  The English navy was reborn and some of the most dangerous Pirates became national heroes.
> 
> Well, eventually the Spanish tired of the relentless English piracy and still smarting over the slights and insults (_not to mention religious reasons_) Philip II of Spain raised an armada unlike the world had ever seen.  Tens of thousands of soldiers and sailors, cannons and cavalry, in a fleet of ships set to invade the English and depose Queen Elizabeth.  Well, the "invicinble" Armada never even made it to the English shores, because the English had adapted their ships (_for the Piracy_) to be swift and new means of attack .. such that the English completely and rapidly decimated the Spanish fleet.  *The defeat of the Armada marked the end of Spanish sea dominance and a new landscape of European power and the beginning of Britain's commercial empire*.


Okay, but like I asked, what does Queen Elizabeth the Second have to do with it?


----------



## Aqua01

buffym said:


> It’s the internet the poster doesn’t have to have proof. The same way there is no proof Meghan cheated on he ex with Harry. It is what you choose to believe.


Except she said she did.... . 
No one ever said they have proof Meghan cheated on Harry.


----------



## Meh-gan

sdkitty said:


> how about being the first bi-racial, actress, divorcee? (oh, an a Yank)


None of those things are historically significant ...


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Okay, but like I asked, what does Queen Elizabeth the Second have to do with it?



I feel like the annoying kid in class waving her hand in the air going “Pick meeeeee, I know, pick meeeeeeee” lol


----------



## CeeJay

Just putting this out there .. and I'm not surprised one bit as this is exactly the type of person my friend (_who knows the Markle family well_) told me about .. she always wanted to be the center of attention.  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Can I ask what did Queen Elizabeth the Second do to get "Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!"


Okay .. I see you had Queen Elizabeth II, and I was referring to Queen Elizabeth I (daughter of Henry VIII).  Sorry for the mistake .. (me bad)!!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Just putting this out there .. and I'm not surprised one bit as this is exactly the type of person my friend (_who knows the Markle family well_) told me about .. she always wanted to be the center of attention.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html


That actually doesn't surprise me at all


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. I see you had Queen Elizabeth II, and I was referring to Queen Elizabeth I (daughter of Henry VIII).  Sorry for the mistake .. (me bad)!!


Lol no problem, I thought maybe I'd missed something during my history A Levels.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol no problem, I thought maybe I'd missed something during my history A Levels.


HA - nope, very unlikely .. Europeans always know more about their history, as do many who are in the New England part of the US (especially in Boston re: Revolutionary War)!  But in other parts of the US - whoa, I feel like I'm speaking Greek!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA - nope, very unlikely .. Europeans always know more about their history, as do many who are in the New England part of the US (especially in Boston re: Revolutionary War)!  But in other parts of the US - whoa, I feel like I'm speaking Greek!


That's how I feel here sometimes too, though my Greek is Welsh, hence why I'm passionate about reminding or correcting people gently that the UK isn't England. 
I'll shut up now, lol


----------



## hellosunshine

*When we tell Meghan Markle to suck it up, what does that say about us?*

Meghan Markle’s crimes against the British monarchy have been mounting steadily ever since she got that funny American bishop to officiate at her wedding to Prince Harry, and then wore blue jeans to Wimbledon – a breach of Royal protocol rarely seen since Henry VIII invented a new church so he could marry his mistress, before going on to order her execution.



We must know our history in order to avoid repeating it, and perhaps Meghan should have brushed up on the Tudor period before she married her prince. According to a documentary previewed this week, the American actress’s British friends warned her about the dangers of princess-dom.

These days they don’t literally kill you, of course, they just slowly strangle your soul, the tabloids pecking you to psychological oblivion because you wore an off-shoulder frock to an important dressage event, or something.

As a quick catch-up for those whose personal priorities don’t include an interest in princessly manicures, Markle has been criticised in the British tabloids and beyond for transgressions including, but not limited to: giving a toast at her own wedding, not parading her baby for the paparazzi immediately following his birth, wearing too much makeup, carrying her handbag the wrong way, holding hands with her husband in public, accepting a ride on Elton John’s private jet, and yes, for painting her nails a dark colour instead of the discreet nude shade centuries of Royal tradition demands.

Probably my favourite part of the egregious media coverage of Markle is the fact that she is always referred to by the 1950s-era epithet “divorcee”, and we are reminded how edgy it is for a royal to marry one. No one ever mentions the fact that the divorcee is marrying into a family that literally invented divorce back in the 1530s, before turning it into a bloodsport in the 1990s.

As her critics are at desperate pains to point out, it is true that no one has ever openly and publicly criticised Markle for her race. That has only happened, torrentially, on social media and the internet. And those things are pretty easy to avoid, right?

I digress. Meghan’s latest treasonous act was to appear in the afore-mentioned documentary, titled _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey, _and answer honestly a question about how she was coping with the onslaught of negative media coverage, coinciding with her new motherhood.

She responded in a muted way, by agreeing it was fair to say she was “not okay”, and admitting it had taken its toll on her privately. She also made the uncontroversial point that having a new baby is a vulnerable period anyway, for any woman.

Oh, but she is so privileged, came the cry. How dare she complain? She has staff, dresses, jewels and many more houses than she requires. She has her own custom-built yoga studio.

This argument might be easier to buy if it wasn’t made by the same people (and tabloid papers) who also bellow their disapproval when non-privileged people – the poor, refugees, welfare-dependent people, for example – pipe up about the hardships they endure.

It quickly becomes obvious that it is not the hardships people quibble with, so much, it is the piping up they dislike.

And that says something interesting about what we expect of women in general, and of new mothers in particular.

The same rich vein was tapped by my own employer this week, when _The Age_ published a sexist Michael Leunig cartoon depicting a mother so absorbed with looking at Instagram on her phone that her baby falls out of the pram “unseen and alone”. The cartoon outraged mothers and the people who support them.

It doesn’t matter if you’re in a palace or pushing a pram alone along St Kilda Road. Any woman who has experienced the isolation and sleep deprivation that comes with a baby knows that for a society that publicly lauds the sacred nature of motherhood, we can be terribly cruel to mothers themselves.

I have noticed that in all of the coverage of Meghan’s silly, self-indulgent feelings, no one seems to dispute they truly exist. Most people with a pulse can understand why a new mother might feel a little vulnerable when in a strange land, subjected to constant nasty press and marooned in a gilded palace-machine with frosty in-laws, no real friends and a bunch of staff who are probably spying on you.

It is not the feelings, it is the talking about the feelings that makes people uncomfortable, and angry. Isn’t that odd? And what does that say about us?

A common argument made in the backlash against the #metoo movement is that women have taken it “too far” by complaining about physical or verbal infractions which make them uncomfortable but which do not amount to criminal conduct.

Nobody can dispute that a hand on a leg or a tasteless sexual joke might make a woman feel bad. The problem is that she now has license to publicly call it out.

The transferral of that discomfort – from the person experiencing it, to the person or systems causing it – is apparently too subversive to bear.

What those people are saying, essentially is, yes, you are uncomfortable, or anxious, or sad or distressed. But we want you to endure it silently.

This is a beautifully conservative position, because it enables the status quo to continue. You will receive no prize for guessing who benefits from that.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe...t-does-that-say-about-us-20191025-p534a1.html


----------



## sdkitty

Meh-gan said:


> None of those things are historically significant ...


I was being facetious


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CeeJay said:


> Just putting this out there .. and I'm not surprised one bit as this is exactly the type of person my friend (_who knows the Markle family well_) told me about .. she always wanted to be the center of attention.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html


These stories were also talked about when they got engaged - that she was determined for many years to meet someone from England. Much of what people said about her has really started to come out as true. She is definitely a manipulator but I just don't see her as being smart enough or powerful enough to tumble the entire monarchy, lol. She'll just be a headache for them until she is gone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> These stories were also talked about when they got engaged - that she was determined for many years to meet someone from England. Much of what people said about her has really started to come out as true. She is definitely a manipulator but I just don't see her as being smart enough or powerful enough to tumble the entire monarchy, lol. She'll just be a headache for them until she is gone.


agree she will be a headache....don't really think she's going anywhere though


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Just putting this out there .. and I'm not surprised one bit as this is exactly the type of person my friend (_who knows the Markle family well_) told me about .. she always wanted to be the center of attention.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html



Yikes. There’s a real theme with her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Buckingham Palace hits back at anonymous adviser to Harry and Meghan

https://mol.im/a/7617371


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Just putting this out there .. and I'm not surprised one bit as this is exactly the type of person my friend (_who knows the Markle family well_) told me about .. she always wanted to be the center of attention.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html


interesting


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> These stories were also talked about when they got engaged - that she was determined for many years to meet someone from England. Much of what people said about her has really started to come out as true. She is definitely a manipulator but I just don't see her as being smart enough or powerful enough to tumble the entire monarchy, lol. She'll just be a headache for them until she is gone.


reading all this makes me think that while it's understandable they wanted to hurry and have a child due to her age, it's also a great way to nail Harry down


----------



## jehaga

hellosunshine said:


> Oop, and it only took..what?! 258 years for another mixed-race woman to marry into the BRF. Anyway, as the second mixed-race woman, Meghan has that signficiance and honor.
> 
> BTW, I wasn't jumping on you. I was asking a question. Sorry, you felt otherwise.


It’s of significance and honor for a non-white to marry a white? I don’t even know what to say to that...


----------



## PatsyCline

jehaga said:


> It’s of significance and honor for a non-white to marry a white? I don’t even know what to say to that...


Only because some people are making it one.
Meghan's problem for some is she isn't British aristocracy, isn't British, is American, and is bi-racial.

Kate had a bit of the same problem, not being from British aristocracy, she was at first considered 'too common'.


----------



## mdcx

Daily Mail comment:


----------



## Straight-Laced

october 27 2019, 12:01am, the sunday times  camilla long
_It’s taken Prince Charles 30 years to learn how to play the royal game. Just saying, Harry..._

"By far the most fascinating royal documentary last week was the hour devoted to Prince Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall on Thursday. I know, I know — I use the term “fascinating” loosely: it wasn’t interesting at all. But that was the point. Its purpose was to put you so far into a deep and satisfying luxury goods coma that you’d find yourself congratulating him for overcoming his immense setbacks as a poor, benighted prince and for raking in as much as £21m a year to line his own pockets via “heritage vegetables” and woke gin.

You’d begin to fall in love with the funny old heritage vegetable himself, for treating his tenants with such quaint kindness and generosity, giving them jobs and showering them individually with gifts and cheques, like George III, who showed astonishing “knowledge of even the lowliest appointments”, to quote Pitt in the play. It turns out that if you live on his land and you suffer any difficulties, Charles will personally send you a countess (in this case the Countess of Arran) to discuss your mental health problems. Twenty minutes into the programme, I was fully ready to give up my life attacking the royals in London and move to Bodmin to deliver lambs as part of his hilarious personal “passion project”.

It reminded me how the monarchy doesn’t modernise by being modern — it modernises by telling us how very, very old it is again and again. It’s Prince Charles staring meatily at the horizon mumbling about “squirrels” and working the land “in his spare time” (yes — I even believed this), not attending some gender-equality round-table or defending one’s use of private jets or explaining how one’s life has been ruined by cameras while staring down the barrel of an actual camera.

It’s not that I don’t feel sorry for Harry and Meghan, or that I don’t sympathise with some of their feelings. But their lack of savvy gets worse by the second. The unsubtle way in which they clatter out their messages — if by “modernising the monarchy” they mean turning it into a disposable and crass neophyte circus of overshare, then, yeah, Preach’n’Leech definitely managed that one with their Africa documentary last Sunday. Do we really need their level of truth-telling and searing honesty?

On Tuesday, someone close to the couple — possibly Meghan’s American PR guru — had the further stupidity to telephone CNN to explain that not only had they “single-handedly modernised the royal family”, the royal family itself was surrounded by “afraid” and “inexperienced” flunkies who had no idea how to “deploy and harness the value” of the royal couple. I like to think that it was at this point the Queen decided to ask a courtier to remove the picture of Meghan and Harry that had been sitting in pride of place in her room at Buckingham Palace, because as an out-of-touch, fusty, timid old grandmother, she clearly has no idea how to deploy devastating PR messages.

The Queen has always felt it is better to show — or as she might put it, shew — rather than tell. She knows that the clothes, the tours, the gush — none of it bears a single second’s scrutiny.

Apply any level of critical thought to what the Queen does, for example, and you immediately turn her into a cheap heritage toy we’d rather pretend she wasn’t. Screw up enough royal tours and it’s barely a second before people start asking how much it costs to fly Harry and Meghan and their Range Rover over to Cape Town for nine days. Tell everyone you’re taking “six weeks off” and people will automatically say: well, when were you last “on”? (Answer: never.) It’s almost as if it’s a relationship that has to go sour regularly in order for all the clauses of the contract to be fulfilled.

In the end, the clever ones simply give up and invent ludicrous light entertainment personas as a distraction, an act of prolonged dishonesty in which they get to make self-promoting documentaries, as long as we can say awful things about those documentaries in return. Admittedly, it’s taken Charles some time to work out quite how facile people’s tastes are, but now here he is playing this cartoonishly humble, unrecognisably twinkly Old Man of Lochnagar, surrounded by women prostrating themselves tearfully or choking out specially penned poems.

It is only at a distance of 30 years he can remind us that he was actually right about, say, organic farming (do you remember how much people attacked him?). Harry may have to wait just as long to get his own hotheaded and unpalatable message across."


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> october 27 2019, 12:01am, the sunday times  camilla long
> _It’s taken Prince Charles 30 years to learn how to play the royal game. Just saying, Harry..._
> 
> "By far the most fascinating royal documentary last week was the hour devoted to Prince Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall on Thursday. I know, I know — I use the term “fascinating” loosely: it wasn’t interesting at all. But that was the point. Its purpose was to put you so far into a deep and satisfying luxury goods coma that you’d find yourself congratulating him for overcoming his immense setbacks as a poor, benighted prince and for raking in as much as £21m a year to line his own pockets via “heritage vegetables” and woke gin.
> 
> You’d begin to fall in love with the funny old heritage vegetable himself, for treating his tenants with such quaint kindness and generosity, giving them jobs and showering them individually with gifts and cheques, like George III, who showed astonishing “knowledge of even the lowliest appointments”, to quote Pitt in the play. It turns out that if you live on his land and you suffer any difficulties, Charles will personally send you a countess (in this case the Countess of Arran) to discuss your mental health problems. Twenty minutes into the programme, I was fully ready to give up my life attacking the royals in London and move to Bodmin to deliver lambs as part of his hilarious personal “passion project”.
> 
> It reminded me how the monarchy doesn’t modernise by being modern — it modernises by telling us how very, very old it is again and again. It’s Prince Charles staring meatily at the horizon mumbling about “squirrels” and working the land “in his spare time” (yes — I even believed this), not attending some gender-equality round-table or defending one’s use of private jets or explaining how one’s life has been ruined by cameras while staring down the barrel of an actual camera.
> 
> It’s not that I don’t feel sorry for Harry and Meghan, or that I don’t sympathise with some of their feelings. But their lack of savvy gets worse by the second. The unsubtle way in which they clatter out their messages — if by “modernising the monarchy” they mean turning it into a disposable and crass neophyte circus of overshare, then, yeah, Preach’n’Leech definitely managed that one with their Africa documentary last Sunday. Do we really need their level of truth-telling and searing honesty?
> 
> On Tuesday, someone close to the couple — possibly Meghan’s American PR guru — had the further stupidity to telephone CNN to explain that not only had they “single-handedly modernised the royal family”, the royal family itself was surrounded by “afraid” and “inexperienced” flunkies who had no idea how to “deploy and harness the value” of the royal couple. I like to think that it was at this point the Queen decided to ask a courtier to remove the picture of Meghan and Harry that had been sitting in pride of place in her room at Buckingham Palace, because as an out-of-touch, fusty, timid old grandmother, she clearly has no idea how to deploy devastating PR messages.
> 
> The Queen has always felt it is better to show — or as she might put it, shew — rather than tell. She knows that the clothes, the tours, the gush — none of it bears a single second’s scrutiny.
> 
> Apply any level of critical thought to what the Queen does, for example, and you immediately turn her into a cheap heritage toy we’d rather pretend she wasn’t. Screw up enough royal tours and it’s barely a second before people start asking how much it costs to fly Harry and Meghan and their Range Rover over to Cape Town for nine days. Tell everyone you’re taking “six weeks off” and people will automatically say: well, when were you last “on”? (Answer: never.) It’s almost as if it’s a relationship that has to go sour regularly in order for all the clauses of the contract to be fulfilled.
> 
> In the end, the clever ones simply give up and invent ludicrous light entertainment personas as a distraction, an act of prolonged dishonesty in which they get to make self-promoting documentaries, as long as we can say awful things about those documentaries in return. Admittedly, it’s taken Charles some time to work out quite how facile people’s tastes are, but now here he is playing this cartoonishly humble, unrecognisably twinkly Old Man of Lochnagar, surrounded by women prostrating themselves tearfully or choking out specially penned poems.
> 
> It is only at a distance of 30 years he can remind us that he was actually right about, say, organic farming (do you remember how much people attacked him?). Harry may have to wait just as long to get his own hotheaded and unpalatable message across."


Every time I read that quote about “single-handedly changing the monarchy” I wonder how it is that 2 people can single-handedly do anything?  But perhaps Meghan is referring to herself again


----------



## Chagall

jehaga said:


> It’s of significance and honor for a non-white to marry a white? I don’t even know what to say to that...


What an offensive statement!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Clearblueskies said:


> Every time I read that quote about “single-handedly changing the monarchy” I wonder how it is that 2 people can single-handedly do anything?  But perhaps Meghan is referring to herself again


Yes, apparently Meghan’s doing the modernising with one hand tied behind her back


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Can I ask what did Queen Elizabeth the Second do to get "Great Britain back on it's feet economically (_especially after the Spanish Armada_)!!!"



LOL, I think she means Queen Elisabeth the First


----------



## duna

I have only just found this thread so I haven't read it all, but I honestly don't understand why some people make it a racial problem: it isn't.......Meghan could be blue, green, or any other colour of the rainbow and it wouldn't make any difference. It's about her charachter and how she behaves, nothing else!


----------



## doni

I think it is disingenuous to believe that there is not a racial issue. Only a few days ago, a very established royal commentarist in a major newspaper in Spain wrote that she was showing off Archie to flaunt how he was very white... It is so disgusting but a lot of commentary is less blatant and still tinted by racism.

At the same time, I find equally racist to infer that she cannot be criticized because of her race, as in any possible criticism she gets being automatically equaled to racism. Surely anyone, white, black or green can get things wrong.

I personally think a lot of the vile has to do with her being an outsider/American. If she was a bottle blond blue-eyed bimbo with a Texan accent, she would have been picked up the same, if not more.

And a lot of the blacklash comes from how the are handling things, i.e., badly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

For the sake of historical accuracy, there is no proof that Queen Charlotte was of mixed race heritage.  The 13th C. ancestress in question came 15 generations before Charlotte, and there is no proof the ancestress was ethnically black - a historian 300+ years after the ancestress' birth said she was a Moor, but that is the tenuous claim.  Fifteen generations is a pretty long time for any supposed mixed race traits to be evident.


----------



## Chagall

I don’t think the backlash against Megan has very little to do with racism, but rather to do with her behavior. She is a narcissist and their mode of operation is first to isolate their victim, and then to install doubts about their thinking process. This sudden vocalized upset over Diana May have subtly been planted in Harry's head by Meghan. Also now there is a problem with the brother he has always been close to. The only thing that has changed in all of this is Meghan. Suddenly we see Harry completely unravel and that happens when in a relationship with a narcissist.


----------



## A1aGypsy

This:

 “I like to think that it was at this point the Queen decided to ask a courtier to remove the picture of Meghan and Harry that had been sitting in pride of place in her room at Buckingham Palace, because as an out-of-touch, fusty, timid old grandmother, she clearly has no idea how to deploy devastating PR messages.”

Is amazing.


----------



## jblended

A1aGypsy said:


> This:
> 
> “I like to think that it was at this point the Queen decided to ask a courtier to remove the picture of Meghan and Harry that had been sitting in pride of place in her room at Buckingham Palace, because as an out-of-touch, fusty, timid old grandmother, she clearly has no idea how to deploy devastating PR messages.”
> 
> Is amazing.


Seconded! Made me laugh so hard!


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> october 27 2019, 12:01am, the sunday times  camilla long
> _It’s taken Prince Charles 30 years to learn how to play the royal game. Just saying, Harry..._
> 
> "By far the most fascinating royal documentary last week was the hour devoted to Prince Charles and the Duchy of Cornwall on Thursday. I know, I know — I use the term “fascinating” loosely: it wasn’t interesting at all. But that was the point. Its purpose was to put you so far into a deep and satisfying luxury goods coma that you’d find yourself congratulating him for overcoming his immense setbacks as a poor, benighted prince and for raking in as much as £21m a year to line his own pockets via “heritage vegetables” and woke gin.
> 
> You’d begin to fall in love with the funny old heritage vegetable himself, for treating his tenants with such quaint kindness and generosity, giving them jobs and showering them individually with gifts and cheques, like George III, who showed astonishing “knowledge of even the lowliest appointments”, to quote Pitt in the play. It turns out that if you live on his land and you suffer any difficulties, Charles will personally send you a countess (in this case the Countess of Arran) to discuss your mental health problems. Twenty minutes into the programme, I was fully ready to give up my life attacking the royals in London and move to Bodmin to deliver lambs as part of his hilarious personal “passion project”.
> 
> It reminded me how the monarchy doesn’t modernise by being modern — it modernises by telling us how very, very old it is again and again. It’s Prince Charles staring meatily at the horizon mumbling about “squirrels” and working the land “in his spare time” (yes — I even believed this), not attending some gender-equality round-table or defending one’s use of private jets or explaining how one’s life has been ruined by cameras while staring down the barrel of an actual camera.
> 
> It’s not that I don’t feel sorry for Harry and Meghan, or that I don’t sympathise with some of their feelings. But their lack of savvy gets worse by the second. The unsubtle way in which they clatter out their messages — if by “modernising the monarchy” they mean turning it into a disposable and crass neophyte circus of overshare, then, yeah, Preach’n’Leech definitely managed that one with their Africa documentary last Sunday. Do we really need their level of truth-telling and searing honesty?
> 
> On Tuesday, someone close to the couple — possibly Meghan’s American PR guru — had the further stupidity to telephone CNN to explain that not only had they “single-handedly modernised the royal family”, the royal family itself was surrounded by “afraid” and “inexperienced” flunkies who had no idea how to “deploy and harness the value” of the royal couple. I like to think that it was at this point the Queen decided to ask a courtier to remove the picture of Meghan and Harry that had been sitting in pride of place in her room at Buckingham Palace, because as an out-of-touch, fusty, timid old grandmother, she clearly has no idea how to deploy devastating PR messages.
> 
> The Queen has always felt it is better to show — or as she might put it, shew — rather than tell. She knows that the clothes, the tours, the gush — none of it bears a single second’s scrutiny.
> 
> Apply any level of critical thought to what the Queen does, for example, and you immediately turn her into a cheap heritage toy we’d rather pretend she wasn’t. Screw up enough royal tours and it’s barely a second before people start asking how much it costs to fly Harry and Meghan and their Range Rover over to Cape Town for nine days. Tell everyone you’re taking “six weeks off” and people will automatically say: well, when were you last “on”? (Answer: never.) It’s almost as if it’s a relationship that has to go sour regularly in order for all the clauses of the contract to be fulfilled.
> 
> In the end, the clever ones simply give up and invent ludicrous light entertainment personas as a distraction, an act of prolonged dishonesty in which they get to make self-promoting documentaries, as long as we can say awful things about those documentaries in return. Admittedly, it’s taken Charles some time to work out quite how facile people’s tastes are, but now here he is playing this cartoonishly humble, unrecognisably twinkly Old Man of Lochnagar, surrounded by women prostrating themselves tearfully or choking out specially penned poems.
> 
> It is only at a distance of 30 years he can remind us that he was actually right about, say, organic farming (do you remember how much people attacked him?). Harry may have to wait just as long to get his own hotheaded and unpalatable message across."


Good one!


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I think it is disingenuous to believe that there is not a racial issue. Only a few days ago, a very established royal commentarist in a major newspaper in Spain wrote that she was showing off Archie to flaunt how he was very white... It is so disgusting but a lot of commentary is less blatant and still tinted by racism.
> 
> At the same time, I find equally racist to infer that she cannot be criticized because of her race, as in any possible criticism she gets being automatically equaled to racism. Surely anyone, white, black or green can get things wrong.
> 
> I personally think a lot of the vile has to do with her being an outsider/American. If she was a bottle blond blue-eyed bimbo with a Texan accent, she would have been picked up the same, if not more.
> 
> And a lot of the blacklash comes from how the are handling things, i.e., badly.



yes, being bi-racial is part of who she is just as being royal is who "H" is.  but as you say, they are bringing on most of the criticism themselves


----------



## jehaga

Chagall said:


> What an offensive statement!


That’s what I thought as well. I was outraged.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Daily Mail comment:
> 
> View attachment 4575037


I don't think her "relevance" would endure for very long if she split with "H"


----------



## hellosunshine

jehaga said:


> It’s of significance and honor for a non-white to marry a white? I don’t even know what to say to that...



That is not what I meant but go ahead and assume that if you'd like.


----------



## bag-mania

*The night Meghan Markle begged me to get her IN the tabloids: The Duchess of Sussex spoke movingly about the pressures of the media spotlight, but as KATIE HIND reveals, she wasn't always so reticent*

Watching the Duchess of Sussex cut such a wounded figure as she spoke on TV last weekend, with her eyes wide and brimming with tears, made me recall an evening spent in her company at a rooftop bar in London.

At the time, Meghan Markle was largely unknown outside the US, despite her starring role in the American TV drama Suits. Keen to make a name in Britain, her UK publicist had all but begged me – then a showbusiness journalist for a red-top newspaper – to meet the actress for a drink.

To be honest, I’d never heard of Meghan or Suits, but reluctantly agreed – even though I’d been rather looking forward to putting my feet up in front of the TV.

But here I was on a windswept November night in 2013 sharing a bottle of prosecco with Prince Harry’s future wife, both of us shivering beneath an outdoor heater. It soon became clear that Meghan was determined to raise her profile – even if it was with an inconsequential 80-word piece tagged on to the end of my weekly column.

We got on well, so much so that she canvassed my opinion on whether she should go on a date with the footballer Ashley Cole who was then, as now, not exactly a man blessed with ‘woke’ sensibilities. All in all, she seemed grateful that I was helping. We even hugged.

It was with this in mind that I watched her interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby last weekend. It might sound difficult to understand, she explained, but the forensic, unrelenting UK media attention came as a surprise. ‘I had no idea,’ she insisted.

She went on to tell Bradby that as an American she ‘very naively’ didn’t know about tabloids and ‘didn’t get it’.

Back in 2013 we met at the Sanctum Soho, a five-star hotel popular with celebrities. I was greeted at 8pm by a woman with long, dark brown, wavy hair, wrapped up in a smart, but not particularly expensive-looking black winter coat, dark jeans and a pair of stiletto boots. She introduced herself as Meghan. Recalling how I had ruined a pair of cherished gold shoes at my 30th birthday party at the same venue two years earlier, I warned Meghan about getting her heels caught between the decking.

We sat at a corner table – thankfully beside a heater – and opposite a jacuzzi that we joked would receive little attention on such a chilly night. She struck me as pretty, but unremarkably so, until she flashed her transformative Hollywood smile. She was softly spoken, kind and eager to chat. Pouring me some of the venue’s house prosecco into a plastic champagne flute, I sensed an eagerness to make me her friend.

It wouldn’t be unkind to say that my previous work with her UK publicist, Neil Ransome, had involved some less than stellar celebrities – far more likely to have appeared on Reality TV than Hollywood red carpets.

During my years as a showbiz journalist, I’ve been inundated with requests from agents and publicists to meet their ‘new client’ – all too often a desperado determined to have their 15 minutes of fame. Such meetings are often tiresome.

But this client, Meghan, was not for giving up. In order to make that rooftop meeting happen, the persistent Mr Ransome contacted me several times, and, I later learned, had similarly pestered every other Fleet Street showbiz reporter. When I was obviously proving reluctant, he eventually resorted to getting a mutual friend, a former journalist turned publicist, to give me a nudge. She said we could go together, make a night of it and promised the prosecco would flow. Their determination – with or without Meghan’s encouragement – to get me to a meeting was obvious.

At the time, I was the Showbusiness Editor and columnist for the Sunday People, a newspaper whose circulation and status put me a fair way down the pecking order of British tabloid journalists with whom an American star might wish to ingratiate themselves. But Meghan betrayed no hint of feeling short-changed that night.

Clearly, networking was something at which she excelled.

Either she didn’t realise she was doing it or – more likely in my view – she had it down to a fine art.

At the time, she just seemed like a normal woman. She wasn’t starry, but polite and as interested in me as I was in her.

We spoke about her childhood in Los Angeles and she confided that she had recently been through a divorce from Hollywood movie producer Trevor Engelson.

I recall her looking down as she spoke about how hard it was, but that it was for the best.

Her mood brightened as we enjoyed another glass of fizz. After establishing we were the same age, we began to bond over how hard it is to find a boyfriend.

We moaned and swapped some war stories – hers mostly about her divorce – before she retrieved her iPhone 5 from her designer handbag. She looked somewhat pleased with herself, gleeful, hopeful. ‘Do you know this guy, Ashley Cole?’ she asked. ‘He follows me on Twitter and keeps trying to talk to me. He’s trying really hard.’

I knew Ashley only too well – both from meeting him in person a few times and from covering the twists and turns of his romance, marriage and divorce from the singer Cheryl Tweedy.

That night, as Meghan worked to secure coverage in a national newspaper, I saved her from the fate of becoming Mr Cole’s girlfriend. Having spent much of my career reporting on the ups and mostly downs of his marriage to Cheryl, I felt it was the sisterly thing to do to pass on my plentiful knowledge of how he had repeatedly cheated on his wife. Following their split, several women came forward to tell their stories.

Meghan looked disappointed, giving me an inkling that she liked him, or at least the idea of him. At the time, the Chelsea and England star was hailed as the best left-back in the world and regular fodder for the tabloids. I can recall looking at her downcast face and feeling bad that I had crushed her dream of becoming a WAG.

We spent much of the remainder of the night talking about English men, how much she liked them and how much she loved London.

She was staying in Soho House, the members’ club where her Canadian friend Markus Anderson works as a consultant. It is said that Anderson introduced Meghan to friends including Amal and George Clooney and Jessica Mulroney, who reportedly became her stylist.

The prosecco flowed until 11pm when Meghan called it a night. We said our goodbyes, exchanging more hugs as we wished one another luck with our respective hunts for The One.

My friend and I finished the third bottle of prosecco we’d all started, and Meghan’s grateful PR team picked up the tab. It was worth it for them and for her. Meghan got all of six inches in my gossip column (the story being Ashley’s pursuit of her).

But her profile-raising efforts didn’t end there.

The following week she was at it again, riding the publicity carousel in London for all she was worth. First she was pictured at a red-carpet event on the arm of an eligible male model – an old PR ruse designed to set tongues wagging.

Later there was a charity gala dinner at which she helped hand out prizes. It was on this occasion that she reportedly asked TV personality and former WAG Lizzie Cundy: ‘Do you know any famous guys? I’m single and I really love English men.’

The whistlestop London tour also involved attending the premiere of a film she had no part in.

It isn’t easy to reconcile the Meghan who appeared so at ease talking candidly with a tabloid journalist she had never previously met with the Duchess on our screens last weekend who spoke of her hatred for the British tabloids. Had contempt hidden behind the hugs on that rooftop bar six years ago? Did her smiles really mask a snarl of disgust?

Or is it that, as the Duchess of Sussex, she no longer needs the gossip column coverage that plain Meghan Markle once craved?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

jehaga said:


> That’s what I thought as well. I was outraged.



I think she meant purely in the context of the BRF, where there haven't exactly been that many spouses of color. Also, take a look at the Daily Mail's constant harping of Meghan the first mixed race woman to marry into the family for real outrage.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Nooooo


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Nooooo
> 
> View attachment 4576036


How I feel about this depends on who they are expecting to pick up the security cost, better not be the good old British taxpayer


----------



## gelbergirl

mrsinsyder said:


> Nooooo
> 
> View attachment 4576036



maybe Charles and William want him out and only back for special occasions


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> How I feel about this depends on who they are expecting to pick up the security cost, better not be the good old British taxpayer


I think now we know why their “foundation” was incorporated in the US. Let the money siphoning begin.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I think now we know why their “foundation” was incorporated in the US. Let the money siphoning begin.


Meghan retained her US agent didn’t she?  I feel a little sorry for Harry, but he’s been a fool.  But on the plus side Sammy can pop round for tea


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan retained her US agent didn’t she?  I feel a little sorry for Harry, but he’s been a fool.  But on the plus side Sammy can pop round for tea



Don’t feel too sorry for him. He enjoys the celebrity lifestyle immensely. Without all the royal restrictions I can see him taking to living in LA like a duck to water.


----------



## daisychainz

I saw this morning in the news that Harry/MM will be at the Remembrance Day ceremony on Nov. 10, so I guess the America trip will come after that and maybe be from Nov. 12- Dec. 20?? I read that they scheduled multiple interviews with Oprah and were invited (with Doria) to share Thanksgiving with Oprah. Oprah and Harry are working together on a new film/documentary about mental health so I think Oprah (and probably Gayle King) will be in a lot of their photo ops. With all of the mental health involvement Harry is definitely trying to tell us something about himself; I feel like he is being open about the fact he has something and has been for years.


----------



## mrsinsyder

All of this Oprah stuff is going to make things even worse. A lot worse.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> All of this Oprah stuff is going to make things even worse. A lot worse.


I feel like I’m watching something stuck on fast forward


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Don’t feel too sorry for him. He enjoys the celebrity lifestyle immensely. Without all the royal restrictions I can see him taking to living in LA like a duck to water.


I think (because he’s never known anything else) he doesn’t realise the extent of the privilege he’d be turning his back on.  Comes a point when you take a certain path that you can’t go back though.


----------



## Grande Latte

Clearblueskies said:


> How I feel about this depends on who they are expecting to pick up the security cost, better not be the good old British taxpayer



Don't expect the Americans to pick up the tab. 
Here in America, we pay for our own lifestyles.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I think (because he’s never known anything else) he doesn’t realise the extent of the privilege he’d be turning his back on.  Comes a point when you take a certain path that you can’t go back though.


I agree, plus the certain amount of protection he gets just by being in the BRF, and by that I don't mean the protection officers, I mean the bubble of his heritage.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree, plus the certain amount of protection he gets just by being in the BRF, and by that I don't mean the protection officers, I mean the bubble of his heritage.


That’s what I mean - he has “I don’t care how much money you have - money can’t buy it” privilege and access.


----------



## sdkitty

they have a lot of notoriety right now and I expect it could last for a while but not as long as what comes with the British monarchy.  It's possible that Harry, having never known anything else, takes it for granted.  But I doubt Meghan does.  She may try to get a bunch of publicity and more stans by hooking up with Oprah and Gayle but I doubt they're going to give up their position as royals.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> *The night Meghan Markle begged me to get her IN the tabloids: The Duchess of Sussex spoke movingly about the pressures of the media spotlight, but as KATIE HIND reveals, she wasn't always so reticent*
> 
> Watching the Duchess of Sussex cut such a wounded figure as she spoke on TV last weekend, with her eyes wide and brimming with tears, made me recall an evening spent in her company at a rooftop bar in London.
> 
> At the time, Meghan Markle was largely unknown outside the US, despite her starring role in the American TV drama Suits. Keen to make a name in Britain, her UK publicist had all but begged me – then a showbusiness journalist for a red-top newspaper – to meet the actress for a drink.
> 
> To be honest, I’d never heard of Meghan or Suits, but reluctantly agreed – even though I’d been rather looking forward to putting my feet up in front of the TV.
> 
> But here I was on a windswept November night in 2013 sharing a bottle of prosecco with Prince Harry’s future wife, both of us shivering beneath an outdoor heater. It soon became clear that Meghan was determined to raise her profile – even if it was with an inconsequential 80-word piece tagged on to the end of my weekly column.
> 
> We got on well, so much so that she canvassed my opinion on whether she should go on a date with the footballer Ashley Cole who was then, as now, not exactly a man blessed with ‘woke’ sensibilities. All in all, she seemed grateful that I was helping. We even hugged.
> 
> It was with this in mind that I watched her interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby last weekend. It might sound difficult to understand, she explained, but the forensic, unrelenting UK media attention came as a surprise. ‘I had no idea,’ she insisted.
> 
> She went on to tell Bradby that as an American she ‘very naively’ didn’t know about tabloids and ‘didn’t get it’.
> 
> Back in 2013 we met at the Sanctum Soho, a five-star hotel popular with celebrities. I was greeted at 8pm by a woman with long, dark brown, wavy hair, wrapped up in a smart, but not particularly expensive-looking black winter coat, dark jeans and a pair of stiletto boots. She introduced herself as Meghan. Recalling how I had ruined a pair of cherished gold shoes at my 30th birthday party at the same venue two years earlier, I warned Meghan about getting her heels caught between the decking.
> 
> We sat at a corner table – thankfully beside a heater – and opposite a jacuzzi that we joked would receive little attention on such a chilly night. She struck me as pretty, but unremarkably so, until she flashed her transformative Hollywood smile. She was softly spoken, kind and eager to chat. Pouring me some of the venue’s house prosecco into a plastic champagne flute, I sensed an eagerness to make me her friend.
> 
> It wouldn’t be unkind to say that my previous work with her UK publicist, Neil Ransome, had involved some less than stellar celebrities – far more likely to have appeared on Reality TV than Hollywood red carpets.
> 
> During my years as a showbiz journalist, I’ve been inundated with requests from agents and publicists to meet their ‘new client’ – all too often a desperado determined to have their 15 minutes of fame. Such meetings are often tiresome.
> 
> But this client, Meghan, was not for giving up. In order to make that rooftop meeting happen, the persistent Mr Ransome contacted me several times, and, I later learned, had similarly pestered every other Fleet Street showbiz reporter. When I was obviously proving reluctant, he eventually resorted to getting a mutual friend, a former journalist turned publicist, to give me a nudge. She said we could go together, make a night of it and promised the prosecco would flow. Their determination – with or without Meghan’s encouragement – to get me to a meeting was obvious.
> 
> At the time, I was the Showbusiness Editor and columnist for the Sunday People, a newspaper whose circulation and status put me a fair way down the pecking order of British tabloid journalists with whom an American star might wish to ingratiate themselves. But Meghan betrayed no hint of feeling short-changed that night.
> 
> Clearly, networking was something at which she excelled.
> 
> Either she didn’t realise she was doing it or – more likely in my view – she had it down to a fine art.
> 
> At the time, she just seemed like a normal woman. She wasn’t starry, but polite and as interested in me as I was in her.
> 
> We spoke about her childhood in Los Angeles and she confided that she had recently been through a divorce from Hollywood movie producer Trevor Engelson.
> 
> I recall her looking down as she spoke about how hard it was, but that it was for the best.
> 
> Her mood brightened as we enjoyed another glass of fizz. After establishing we were the same age, we began to bond over how hard it is to find a boyfriend.
> 
> We moaned and swapped some war stories – hers mostly about her divorce – before she retrieved her iPhone 5 from her designer handbag. She looked somewhat pleased with herself, gleeful, hopeful. ‘Do you know this guy, Ashley Cole?’ she asked. ‘He follows me on Twitter and keeps trying to talk to me. He’s trying really hard.’
> 
> I knew Ashley only too well – both from meeting him in person a few times and from covering the twists and turns of his romance, marriage and divorce from the singer Cheryl Tweedy.
> 
> That night, as Meghan worked to secure coverage in a national newspaper, I saved her from the fate of becoming Mr Cole’s girlfriend. Having spent much of my career reporting on the ups and mostly downs of his marriage to Cheryl, I felt it was the sisterly thing to do to pass on my plentiful knowledge of how he had repeatedly cheated on his wife. Following their split, several women came forward to tell their stories.
> 
> Meghan looked disappointed, giving me an inkling that she liked him, or at least the idea of him. At the time, the Chelsea and England star was hailed as the best left-back in the world and regular fodder for the tabloids. I can recall looking at her downcast face and feeling bad that I had crushed her dream of becoming a WAG.
> 
> We spent much of the remainder of the night talking about English men, how much she liked them and how much she loved London.
> 
> She was staying in Soho House, the members’ club where her Canadian friend Markus Anderson works as a consultant. It is said that Anderson introduced Meghan to friends including Amal and George Clooney and Jessica Mulroney, who reportedly became her stylist.
> 
> The prosecco flowed until 11pm when Meghan called it a night. We said our goodbyes, exchanging more hugs as we wished one another luck with our respective hunts for The One.
> 
> My friend and I finished the third bottle of prosecco we’d all started, and Meghan’s grateful PR team picked up the tab. It was worth it for them and for her. Meghan got all of six inches in my gossip column (the story being Ashley’s pursuit of her).
> 
> But her profile-raising efforts didn’t end there.
> 
> The following week she was at it again, riding the publicity carousel in London for all she was worth. First she was pictured at a red-carpet event on the arm of an eligible male model – an old PR ruse designed to set tongues wagging.
> 
> Later there was a charity gala dinner at which she helped hand out prizes. It was on this occasion that she reportedly asked TV personality and former WAG Lizzie Cundy: ‘Do you know any famous guys? I’m single and I really love English men.’
> 
> The whistlestop London tour also involved attending the premiere of a film she had no part in.
> 
> It isn’t easy to reconcile the Meghan who appeared so at ease talking candidly with a tabloid journalist she had never previously met with the Duchess on our screens last weekend who spoke of her hatred for the British tabloids. Had contempt hidden behind the hugs on that rooftop bar six years ago? Did her smiles really mask a snarl of disgust?
> 
> Or is it that, as the Duchess of Sussex, she no longer needs the gossip column coverage that plain Meghan Markle once craved?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html


This is Meg in a nutshell. Right down to her gorgeous veneers, which transformed her smile.

Oh well, good for her for being so tenacious. Harry, although not mentioned in this article, sounds like a patsy.


----------



## mrsinsyder

*Keep a stiff upper lip when all about you are losing theirs, and you won’t be a Yank, my son*
jeremy clarkson







When ***** came to Londonshire in 2016, he put on a serious face and told us that we’d better stay in the EU or else. And I remember being so incensed that my nose swelled up and my teeth moved about. Because how dare he come here and lecture us on what we should and shouldn’t do.

Last week, it happened again. Meghan, Prince Harry’s wife, went on television to tell us that instead of keeping a stiff upper lip and bottling up our feelings, we should vomit them out in a torrent of snot and tear-stained, shoulder-heaving sobs.

Well now, look, Meghan. That might work for you, because you are an American and programmed to weep and wail at every little thing, but we are programmed to do the exact opposite.

This was evidenced at Wimbledon in 1981, when John McEnroe had his famous “You cannot be serious” meltdown. American viewers heard nothing of the tantrum because they had five excitable commentators, all shouting over one another as they speculated on what kind of punishment the emerging champion was likely to receive. British viewers, on the other hand, heard everything McEnroe had to say. And only when he told officials they were the “pits of the world” did our commentators see fit to interject with a quiet harrumph.

Dan Maskell was a master of this. All sorts of mayhem could be happening around him and all we ever got was, “Oh, I say”. He had the stiff upper lip. His son died in a plane crash. His wife drowned. But he did not bleat about these things. He filed them away in his head and got on with his life, best foot forward. Because he was British and that’s what we do.

A year after the McEnroe match, a British Airways jumbo jet on a night flight over the Indian Ocean roared at 500mph into a cloud of volcanic ash that wasn’t visible on radar. Moments later, all four engines stopped.

Now we all know, of course, about Captain Sully — Chesley Sullenberger — and his Hudson River landing, and all those Mercury astronauts with the right stuff, so I’m not going to say a US pilot would have run up and down the aisle, screaming: “We’re all doing to die.”

But I’m willing to bet he wouldn’t have been quite as calm as Eric Moody, the BA chap, who announced to passengers: “Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get it under control. I trust you are not in too much distress.”

Think about that. He’s doing maths in his head and working out that a fully laden Boeing 747-200 has a glide ratio of 15 to one, meaning it can cover 15 miles for every mile it drops. So, at 37,000ft, he had 105 miles to work out why the engines had stopped and how best to restart them. But despite all this, he didn’t panic and, crucially, he didn’t forget his manners. I’m willing to bet, in fact, that if Alan Sugar had been on board, Moody would even have started his announcement by saying: “My lord, ladies and gentlemen . . .”

A lot of this calmness has to do with the classical education boys received in the public-school system. Pupils were taught that if they took a lead from the Spartans, who loved a bit of discipline and self-sacrifice, they’d be able to cope more easily with freezing dormitories, the unwanted attentions of slobbery mouthed geography teachers and the regular beatings from sixth-formers.

Then, after chapel, they learnt about the Hellenistic philosophy of stoicism and how it could be found in Hamlet, Rudyard Kipling, the teachings of Marcus Aurelius and, best of all, in the short poem Invictus: “In the fell clutch of circumstance / I have not winced nor cried aloud. / Under the bludgeonings of chance / My head is bloody, but unbow’d.”

To be honest, we liked the Boy’s Own sound of all that. If your best foot is blown off in a battle, you promote the other one and hop on. And you most definitely do not finish a game of bowls early just because the Spanish have sent an armada. That would be poor form.

Put it like this. If Captain “Titus” Oates had been an American rather than an Old Etonian, we can be fairly certain he would not have left the tent saying he “may be some time”. He’d have laid there, screaming and begging for his mother and some counselling. He’d have told his tent-mates not to judge him and written in his diary how he’d bravely sobbed and drooled to the bitter end.

Of course, the British are capable of shedding a tear or two. We cried at the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales. Well, I did. We cried when Winston Churchill died. And we cried when they buried Lord Nelson. But we don’t cry when our neighbour’s dog dies or because of something on the news. We may be upset, but we then employ a phrase not used anywhere else in the world. We “get a grip”. Not being able to get a grip is like being really fat. It’s the sign of a weak mind. It’s an indicator that you aren’t able to control yourself and that you may be French.

I don’t mind Meghan having the need to open a window to her soul every five minutes. But she can’t tell me to do the same thing, because I’m not made that way. It’d be like going to Germany and ordering them to be funny. Or telling the Japanese that blondes have more fun. Or insisting that bees stop making a buzzing noise when they fly.

Let’s not forget what happened when Morgan Piers went to America and lectured them on gun ownership. They put a flea in his ear and sent him packing, and now he has to earn a living from behind a veil of orange make-up on breakfast TV. If Ms Meghan doesn’t learn a lesson from that sorry tale, she may well end up in exactly the same boat.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I don't see Harry as a Patsy.  I think he's a guy who didn't fully think out a decision and is dealing with the consequences.  If any bit of that article is accurate, then I think it's safe to say that Meghan's claims when they got married that she didn't follow the royal family and didn't really know much about Harry were false. But that still leaves a question as to whether she told Harry the same, or if it was a story crafted by PR to make their story seem all the more magical. For all we know when they first met, Meghan may have raved about how much she admired his mother and that may have been what did it for him.  
Harry had enough of his own PR problems in his younger years that I could see where he'd see the appeal of playing the PR game to craft a image that was needed instead of being sincere about who he is. Meghan can turn out to be more driven and determined than she claimed to be, and Harry can still have known what he was getting into.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't see Harry as a Patsy.  I think he's a guy who didn't fully think out a decision and is dealing with the consequences.  If any bit of that article is accurate, then I think it's safe to say that Meghan's claims when they got married that she didn't follow the royal family and didn't really know much about Harry were false. But that still leaves a question as to whether she told Harry the same, or if it was a story crafted by PR to make their story seem all the more magical. For all we know when they first met, Meghan may have raved about how much she admired his mother and that may have been what did it for him.
> Harry had enough of his own PR problems in his younger years that I could see where he'd see the appeal of playing the PR game to craft a image that was needed instead of being sincere about who he is. Meghan can turn out to be more driven and determined than she claimed to be, and Harry can still have known what he was getting into.


I don't know if he's a patsy but I'd say she is more sly and he is possibly a bit naive and maybe lacking common sense.  That business with the nazi uniform was dumb even for a young man.


----------



## gracekelly

Grande Latte said:


> Don't expect the Americans to pick up the tab.
> Here in America, we pay for our own lifestyles.


Boy have you got that right. We don’t have enough police in LA as it is and don’t have the resources to babysit these two.  With all the  fires things are even worse as far as what it is costing the taxpayers.  They are plenty of private security firms here so if they want to hire them they are welcome to do so.  In reality plenty of high profile people go about their business here and we see them around doing normal. things just like the Duchess iof Cambridge at the store buying Halloween costumes for the children.  People give them a look and perhaps take the surreptitious picture of them, but that is usually it.  If the British govt thinks they need security they can pay for the protection men to be here, but I really doubt that they will get our law enforcement, FBI or Secret Service to provide protection.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

I really hope they stay low profile while in L.A., and not give interviews to Oprah or whoever, because it would only damage them.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, I wouldn’t count on them not getting American law enforcement’s attention. Letting a Royal go unattended or personally protected and risk something happening isn’t generally how things work in the US.  There are protocols.


----------



## sdkitty

I've raised this before but since most of what I see/hear about them is here at the PF, I find it kind of interesting when I hear stuff elsewhere.  Most of what I hear on the media (radio/TV, which are guess are for old folks) is supportive of Meghan.
the other day I was listening to Sirius XM radio.  A couple of entertainment people were talking along with a news person, Dan Rather.  They were all saying they liked her but Dan Rather did speak up about people who are truly less fortunate.  One example he used was someone like a welder who gets up at 4:30 am to go to work. 

 Similar thing happened on the View.  They were all sympathizing with Meghan dealing with the stress of being a new mother.  Joy Behar (older like dan rather) spoke up about the hardships of real or regular people who don't have a team of nannies. 
So I don't really have a point to this I guess except that depending on where they look, they may feel the world is for them or against them.  I'm pretty sure that in terms of the US, they think having Oprah on their friend list will be a win.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> How I feel about this depends on who they are expecting to pick up the security cost, better not be the good old British taxpayer


From what I understand, when the BRF is visiting a different nation, both Britain and the other Nation (US) pick up the security tab.  Other than that, the US folks would not be paying for them to live here .. if that is what they decide.  I think that this has been her plan all along, use the BRF "high-society" status to further herself in the US.  Should be interesting .. and if they think that they can eliminate the papparazzi here?! .. THINK AGAIN!


----------



## mrsinsyder

The US paid for security during her pap walk, I mean baby shower.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> From what I understand, when the BRF is visiting a different nation, both Britain and the other Nation (US) pick up the security tab.  Other than that, the US folks would not be paying for them to live here .. if that is what they decide.  I think that this has been her plan all along, use the BRF "high-society" status to further herself in the US.  Should be interesting .. and if they think that they can eliminate the papparazzi here?! .. THINK AGAIN!


Living somewhere else is very different from a formal visit though.  I can just imagine the fuss here if the taxpayer were to be expected to fund a celeb lifestyle for them in the US   I think it’s unlikely to happen unless they leave the RF and become self supporting.  
This is probably just another teaser from Meghan’s PR team to keep the headlines coming


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I've raised this before but since most of what I see/hear about them is here at the PF, I find it kind of interesting when I hear stuff elsewhere.  Most of what I hear on the media (radio/TV, which are guess are for old folks) is supportive of Meghan.
> the other day I was listening to Sirius XM radio.  A couple of entertainment people were talking along with a news person, Dan Rather.  They were all saying they liked her but Dan Rather did speak up about people who are truly less fortunate.  One example he used was someone like a welder who gets up at 4:30 am to go to work.
> 
> Similar thing happened on the View.  They were all sympathizing with Meghan dealing with the stress of being a new mother.  Joy Behar (older like dan rather) spoke up about the hardships of real or regular people who don't have a team of nannies.
> So I don't really have a point to this I guess except that depending on where they look, they may feel the world is for them or against them.  I'm pretty sure that in terms of the US, they think having Oprah on their friend list will be a win.


Oprah is still popular in the US, but trust me .. she has a whole different side of her that I have been told by folks who have worked for her in the past.  What irritates me, is that she sometimes becomes the 'fawning fool' over certain people, and let's face it, H&M will greatly help her profile and her friend Gayle King (who at one time was a local Anchor in Hartford, CT - when I lived there, so trust me .. she has benefited GREATLY from her relationship with Oprah). 

I think it depends on whether or not they start showing up at various "Hollywood" events and if Meghan starts buying very expensive items to wear to said events.  Sadly, many designers here (especially in the Jewelry biz) will either "loan out" or outright give items to the celebs such that they can get pictures of their work in various magazines (Irene Neuwirth does this big-time - her work is nothing special and is WICKED expensive)!  H&M of course, will live in a community where they don't see the "raw" part of LA (the homeless issue is EPIC out here - and many of the fires are unfortunately, set by them).  We'll see ..


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> Living somewhere else is very different from a formal visit though.  I can just imagine the fuss here if the taxpayer were to be expected to fund a celeb lifestyle for them in the US   I think it’s unlikely to happen unless they leave the RF and become self supporting.
> This is probably just another teaser from Meghan’s PR team to keep the headlines coming


Oh, I agree .. I would be pretty darn PO'd if my tax-paying $$$ (pounds) went to funding an LA 'celeb' lifestyle!!


----------



## bag-mania

When you’re famous enough the money will be handed to you. Speaking engagements, book deals, award presentations, there is oodles of money to be made by those two if they aren’t afraid to pimp themselves out a bit. And you can bet they aren’t.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> When you’re famous enough the money will be handed to you. Speaking engagements, book deals, award presentations, there is oodles of money to be made by those two if they aren’t afraid to pimp themselves out a bit. And you can bet they aren’t.


agree
but how long will that money train run?  few years?  then what?  they live off his inheritance?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Oprah is still popular in the US, but trust me .. she has a whole different side of her that I have been told by folks who have worked for her in the past.  What irritates me, is that she sometimes becomes the 'fawning fool' over certain people, and let's face it, H&M will greatly help her profile and her friend Gayle King (who at one time was a local Anchor in Hartford, CT - when I lived there, so trust me .. she has benefited GREATLY from her relationship with Oprah).
> 
> I think it depends on whether or not they start showing up at various "Hollywood" events and if Meghan starts buying very expensive items to wear to said events.  Sadly, many designers here (especially in the Jewelry biz) will either "loan out" or outright give items to the celebs such that they can get pictures of their work in various magazines (Irene Neuwirth does this big-time - her work is nothing special and is WICKED expensive)!  H&M of course, will live in a community where they don't see the "raw" part of LA (the homeless issue is EPIC out here - and many of the fires are unfortunately, set by them).  We'll see ..


sorry to hear that about Oprah not being so nice.....I have to defend Gayle a bit here.  She was in Oprah's shadow for many years - accompanying her on events, trips, etc.  Her own real success has just come about the last few years.  So really she was mainly known as Opah's BFF for a Long Time before she got the CBS job.  Once she got that job she seems to have built on it with her own talent (or personality).


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m beginning to believe the rumors that what she really wanted was to move into the Queen’s residence near Frogmore.  I think she wanted to be presented as the Queen’s FAVORITE grand-daughter-in-law.  She’s like a brat throwing a huge temper tantrum, refusing to really settle in at what she was offered (Frogmore Cottage) because it was not what she REALLY wanted.  Who cares how much money was spent on its’ refurbishment to customize it just for her and her family.  Ugh!

I now bet that her Daddy issues at the wedding were her design so somebody like Charles or Will would be pressed into service.  Thus, “making history” and making her seem more a part of the family than any other “outsider”.

I imagine them moving to the Malibu Colony gated community.  That seems like what she wants to be her brand, and it offers access to the type of people she wants to rub elbows with.


----------



## daisychainz

maryg1 said:


> I really hope they stay low profile while in L.A., and not give interviews to Oprah or whoever, because it would only damage them.


Oprah is a sure thing. They are working together already so it's expected they'll be meeting up. Whether that morphs into sit-downs and tv interviews... we have to wait with great anticipation!


----------



## LuckyBitch

mrsinsyder said:


> *Keep a stiff upper lip when all about you are losing theirs, and you won’t be a Yank, my son*
> jeremy clarkson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When ***** came to Londonshire in 2016, he put on a serious face and told us that we’d better stay in the EU or else. And I remember being so incensed that my nose swelled up and my teeth moved about. Because how dare he come here and lecture us on what we should and shouldn’t do.
> 
> Last week, it happened again. Meghan, Prince Harry’s wife, went on television to tell us that instead of keeping a stiff upper lip and bottling up our feelings, we should vomit them out in a torrent of snot and tear-stained, shoulder-heaving sobs.
> 
> Well now, look, Meghan. That might work for you, because you are an American and programmed to weep and wail at every little thing, but we are programmed to do the exact opposite.
> 
> This was evidenced at Wimbledon in 1981, when John McEnroe had his famous “You cannot be serious” meltdown. American viewers heard nothing of the tantrum because they had five excitable commentators, all shouting over one another as they speculated on what kind of punishment the emerging champion was likely to receive. British viewers, on the other hand, heard everything McEnroe had to say. And only when he told officials they were the “pits of the world” did our commentators see fit to interject with a quiet harrumph.
> 
> Dan Maskell was a master of this. All sorts of mayhem could be happening around him and all we ever got was, “Oh, I say”. He had the stiff upper lip. His son died in a plane crash. His wife drowned. But he did not bleat about these things. He filed them away in his head and got on with his life, best foot forward. Because he was British and that’s what we do.
> 
> A year after the McEnroe match, a British Airways jumbo jet on a night flight over the Indian Ocean roared at 500mph into a cloud of volcanic ash that wasn’t visible on radar. Moments later, all four engines stopped.
> 
> Now we all know, of course, about Captain Sully — Chesley Sullenberger — and his Hudson River landing, and all those Mercury astronauts with the right stuff, so I’m not going to say a US pilot would have run up and down the aisle, screaming: “We’re all doing to die.”
> 
> But I’m willing to bet he wouldn’t have been quite as calm as Eric Moody, the BA chap, who announced to passengers: “Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get it under control. I trust you are not in too much distress.”
> 
> Think about that. He’s doing maths in his head and working out that a fully laden Boeing 747-200 has a glide ratio of 15 to one, meaning it can cover 15 miles for every mile it drops. So, at 37,000ft, he had 105 miles to work out why the engines had stopped and how best to restart them. But despite all this, he didn’t panic and, crucially, he didn’t forget his manners. I’m willing to bet, in fact, that if Alan Sugar had been on board, Moody would even have started his announcement by saying: “My lord, ladies and gentlemen . . .”
> 
> A lot of this calmness has to do with the classical education boys received in the public-school system. Pupils were taught that if they took a lead from the Spartans, who loved a bit of discipline and self-sacrifice, they’d be able to cope more easily with freezing dormitories, the unwanted attentions of slobbery mouthed geography teachers and the regular beatings from sixth-formers.
> 
> Then, after chapel, they learnt about the Hellenistic philosophy of stoicism and how it could be found in Hamlet, Rudyard Kipling, the teachings of Marcus Aurelius and, best of all, in the short poem Invictus: “In the fell clutch of circumstance / I have not winced nor cried aloud. / Under the bludgeonings of chance / My head is bloody, but unbow’d.”
> 
> To be honest, we liked the Boy’s Own sound of all that. If your best foot is blown off in a battle, you promote the other one and hop on. And you most definitely do not finish a game of bowls early just because the Spanish have sent an armada. That would be poor form.
> 
> Put it like this. If Captain “Titus” Oates had been an American rather than an Old Etonian, we can be fairly certain he would not have left the tent saying he “may be some time”. He’d have laid there, screaming and begging for his mother and some counselling. He’d have told his tent-mates not to judge him and written in his diary how he’d bravely sobbed and drooled to the bitter end.
> 
> Of course, the British are capable of shedding a tear or two. We cried at the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales. Well, I did. We cried when Winston Churchill died. And we cried when they buried Lord Nelson. But we don’t cry when our neighbour’s dog dies or because of something on the news. We may be upset, but we then employ a phrase not used anywhere else in the world. We “get a grip”. Not being able to get a grip is like being really fat. It’s the sign of a weak mind. It’s an indicator that you aren’t able to control yourself and that you may be French.
> 
> I don’t mind Meghan having the need to open a window to her soul every five minutes. But she can’t tell me to do the same thing, because I’m not made that way. It’d be like going to Germany and ordering them to be funny. Or telling the Japanese that blondes have more fun. Or insisting that bees stop making a buzzing noise when they fly.
> 
> Let’s not forget what happened when Morgan Piers went to America and lectured them on gun ownership. They put a flea in his ear and sent him packing, and now he has to earn a living from behind a veil of orange make-up on breakfast TV. If Ms Meghan doesn’t learn a lesson from that sorry tale, she may well end up in exactly the same boat.



Best thing I've read on this forum. And yes, I'm British and very proud of it.


----------



## Grande Latte

At this rate of insanity, I can see H&M doing reality TV to supplement income. Something like "Real Royals of UK in Los Angeles" and have filming crews following them around. Yeah,  and how would this help with Harry healing from the loss of his mother. It' s all a scheme.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Grande Latte said:


> At this rate of insanity, I can see H&M doing reality TV to supplement income. Something like "Real Royals of UK in Los Angeles" and have filming crews following them around. Yeah,  and how would this help with Harry healing from the loss of his mother. It' s all a scheme.


maybe they need to get in touch with Andy Cohen and get a deal with Bravo


----------



## mdcx

Harry will be put out once he realises that all the invisible “smoothing the way” that occurs in the UK just because he is BRF, does not carry over to LA.
People openly gawking at him and trying to take selfies, yelling his name, having to mix in with public and gasp .... wait in lines. I don’t think he will last long without his buffer zone of royal privilege, or without the very respectful and subdued behaviour of the Brits and Commonwealth subjects.
This is assuming all of his protection officers, servants, courtiers, drivers, doctors etc don’t follow him to the US. And I can’t see him fronting the cost to replicate his UK bubble in LA.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Oprah is still popular in the US, but trust me .. she has a whole different side of her that I have been told by folks who have worked for her in the past.  What irritates me, is that she sometimes becomes the 'fawning fool' over certain people, and let's face it, H&M will greatly help her profile and her friend Gayle King (who at one time was a local Anchor in Hartford, CT - when I lived there, so trust me .. she has benefited GREATLY from her relationship with Oprah).
> 
> I think it depends on whether or not they start showing up at various "Hollywood" events and if Meghan starts buying very expensive items to wear to said events.  Sadly, many designers here (especially in the Jewelry biz) will either "loan out" or outright give items to the celebs such that they can get pictures of their work in various magazines (Irene Neuwirth does this big-time - her work is nothing special and is WICKED expensive)!  H&M of course, will live in a community where they don't see the "raw" part of LA (the homeless issue is EPIC out here - and many of the fires are unfortunately, set by them).  We'll see ..


I have heard this about Oprah for years, that she can be a real b***h and is often quite rude to her fans.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> I have heard this about Oprah for years, that she can be a real b***h and is often quite rude to her fans.


Their new BFF Ellen has had these rumors for years. I’ve heard she’s an absolutely awful person.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Their new BFF Ellen has had these rumors for years. I’ve heard she’s an absolutely awful person.


I have been hearing this about her since the nineties, it’s nothing new for sure.


----------



## Chagall

If Oprah is close to M&H then ‘like attracts like’. Birds of a feather flock together, etc. etc. They deserve each other.


----------



## daisychainz

This is the Oprah/Harry announcement about their show. It was announced a while ago. It also involves Apple, so maybe a trip to the Bay Area, too? 
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...ah-apple-tv-mental-health-documentary-series/


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> If Oprah is close to M&H then ‘like attracts like’. Birds of a feather flock together, etc. etc. They deserve each other.


I’ll give Oprah credit where it’s due, she worked her arse off to get where she is. I don’t see these two spoiled brats having much in common with her, at the end of the day. Oprah will use them to maintain some relevance to the younger generation then toss them out when she’s done.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> sorry to hear that about Oprah not being so nice.....I have to defend Gayle a bit here.  She was in Oprah's shadow for many years - accompanying her on events, trips, etc.  Her own real success has just come about the last few years.  So really she was mainly known as Opah's BFF for a Long Time before she got the CBS job.  Once she got that job she seems to have built on it with her own talent (or personality).


I kinda like Gayle, she seems to be Oprah without the over the top adoration and fawning, which can go to anyone's head.

Anyway, about the building on her own talent, I read that it helps to get an anchor/news job when you are connected to a famous person.  (Jenna Bush, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, Chris Wallace and so on.) It's almost a prerequisite because even though they may be good at their jobs, so are hundreds of others who cannot get in the door.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I kinda like Gayle, she seems to be Oprah without the over the top adoration and fawning.
> 
> Anyway, about the building on her own talent, I read that it helps to get an anchor/news job when you are connected to a famous person.  (Jenna Bush, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, Chris Wallace and so on.) It's almost a prerequisite because even though they may be good at their jobs, so are hundreds of others who cannot get in the door.


agree but she and oprah were bffs for 30+ years before she got that job


----------



## daisychainz

Jayne1 said:


> I kinda like Gayle, she seems to be Oprah without the over the top adoration and fawning, which can go to anyone's head.
> 
> Anyway, about the building on her own talent, I read that it helps to get an anchor/news job when you are connected to a famous person.  (Jenna Bush, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, Chris Wallace and so on.) It's almost a prerequisite because even though they may be good at their jobs, so are hundreds of others who cannot get in the door.


When William and Kate married the NBC station in US pursued Pippa really fierce. She went for test interviews and shoots in NY with palace aides, but someone at NBC spoke out and said they just couldn't hire her because she was horrible at reporting. And the palace was against it, too. So, she definitely could have got in because of a more famous connection.


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> When William and Kate married the NBC station in US pursued Pippa really fierce. She went for test interviews and shoots in NY with palace aides, but someone at NBC spoke out and said they just couldn't hire her because she was horrible at reporting. And the palace was against it, too. So, she definitely could have got in because of a more famous connection.


Yes, and Pippa got that book deal for a really cringe-worthy effort, or lack of effort, so it does help to have a name.

Makes me appreciate Meg, who had no real help save for Markus, but she had to do the work once he got her the introductions.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ll give Oprah credit where it’s due, she worked her arse off to get where she is. I don’t see these two spoiled brats having much in common with her, at the end of the day. Oprah will use them to maintain some relevance to the younger generation then toss them out when she’s done.


Yes, she did .. BUT, let me tell you .. once she became popular, the nasty side of her came out BIG-TIME.  Just like Martha Stewart, she used and stepped on a lot of toes, took credit for work done by others, etc. -- sadly, a common story of women who make it up to the top (not all - but sadly, a good percentage).


----------



## Katel

mrsinsyder said:


> *Keep a stiff upper lip when all about you are losing theirs, and you won’t be a Yank, my son*
> jeremy clarkson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When ***** came to Londonshire in 2016, he put on a serious face and told us that we’d better stay in the EU or else. And I remember being so incensed that my nose swelled up and my teeth moved about. Because how dare he come here and lecture us on what we should and shouldn’t do.
> 
> Last week, it happened again. Meghan, Prince Harry’s wife, went on television to tell us that instead of keeping a stiff upper lip and bottling up our feelings, we should vomit them out in a torrent of snot and tear-stained, shoulder-heaving sobs.
> 
> Well now, look, Meghan. That might work for you, because you are an American and programmed to weep and wail at every little thing, but we are programmed to do the exact opposite.
> 
> This was evidenced at Wimbledon in 1981, when John McEnroe had his famous “You cannot be serious” meltdown. American viewers heard nothing of the tantrum because they had five excitable commentators, all shouting over one another as they speculated on what kind of punishment the emerging champion was likely to receive. British viewers, on the other hand, heard everything McEnroe had to say. And only when he told officials they were the “pits of the world” did our commentators see fit to interject with a quiet harrumph.
> 
> Dan Maskell was a master of this. All sorts of mayhem could be happening around him and all we ever got was, “Oh, I say”. He had the stiff upper lip. His son died in a plane crash. His wife drowned. But he did not bleat about these things. He filed them away in his head and got on with his life, best foot forward. Because he was British and that’s what we do.
> 
> A year after the McEnroe match, a British Airways jumbo jet on a night flight over the Indian Ocean roared at 500mph into a cloud of volcanic ash that wasn’t visible on radar. Moments later, all four engines stopped.
> 
> Now we all know, of course, about Captain Sully — Chesley Sullenberger — and his Hudson River landing, and all those Mercury astronauts with the right stuff, so I’m not going to say a US pilot would have run up and down the aisle, screaming: “We’re all doing to die.”
> 
> But I’m willing to bet he wouldn’t have been quite as calm as Eric Moody, the BA chap, who announced to passengers: “Ladies and gentlemen, this is your captain speaking. We have a small problem. All four engines have stopped. We are doing our damnedest to get it under control. I trust you are not in too much distress.”
> 
> Think about that. He’s doing maths in his head and working out that a fully laden Boeing 747-200 has a glide ratio of 15 to one, meaning it can cover 15 miles for every mile it drops. So, at 37,000ft, he had 105 miles to work out why the engines had stopped and how best to restart them. But despite all this, he didn’t panic and, crucially, he didn’t forget his manners. I’m willing to bet, in fact, that if Alan Sugar had been on board, Moody would even have started his announcement by saying: “My lord, ladies and gentlemen . . .”
> 
> A lot of this calmness has to do with the classical education boys received in the public-school system. Pupils were taught that if they took a lead from the Spartans, who loved a bit of discipline and self-sacrifice, they’d be able to cope more easily with freezing dormitories, the unwanted attentions of slobbery mouthed geography teachers and the regular beatings from sixth-formers.
> 
> Then, after chapel, they learnt about the Hellenistic philosophy of stoicism and how it could be found in Hamlet, Rudyard Kipling, the teachings of Marcus Aurelius and, best of all, in the short poem Invictus: “In the fell clutch of circumstance / I have not winced nor cried aloud. / Under the bludgeonings of chance / My head is bloody, but unbow’d.”
> 
> To be honest, we liked the Boy’s Own sound of all that. If your best foot is blown off in a battle, you promote the other one and hop on. And you most definitely do not finish a game of bowls early just because the Spanish have sent an armada. That would be poor form.
> 
> Put it like this. If Captain “Titus” Oates had been an American rather than an Old Etonian, we can be fairly certain he would not have left the tent saying he “may be some time”. He’d have laid there, screaming and begging for his mother and some counselling. He’d have told his tent-mates not to judge him and written in his diary how he’d bravely sobbed and drooled to the bitter end.
> 
> Of course, the British are capable of shedding a tear or two. We cried at the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales. Well, I did. We cried when Winston Churchill died. And we cried when they buried Lord Nelson. But we don’t cry when our neighbour’s dog dies or because of something on the news. We may be upset, but we then employ a phrase not used anywhere else in the world. We “get a grip”. Not being able to get a grip is like being really fat. It’s the sign of a weak mind. It’s an indicator that you aren’t able to control yourself and that you may be French.
> 
> I don’t mind Meghan having the need to open a window to her soul every five minutes. But she can’t tell me to do the same thing, because I’m not made that way. It’d be like going to Germany and ordering them to be funny. Or telling the Japanese that blondes have more fun. Or insisting that bees stop making a buzzing noise when they fly.
> 
> Let’s not forget what happened when Morgan Piers went to America and lectured them on gun ownership. They put a flea in his ear and sent him packing, and now he has to earn a living from behind a veil of orange make-up on breakfast TV. If Ms Meghan doesn’t learn a lesson from that sorry tale, she may well end up in exactly the same boat.


Very sadly, the American decline into their “feelings” (well, some of us  ) has been only quite recent.  America was built on “stiff upper lip.”


----------



## Katel

^^ also this is hysterical - isn’t this the chap that got fired for losing his temper and punching out staff, more than once (on Top Gear)?  Quite the stiff lip, Jeremy lol.
https://www.businessinsider.com/report-top-gear-host-jeremy-clarkson-will-be-fired-by-the-bbc-2015-3


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

Yeah ... moving to L.A. is really the move of people who want to live quiet lives without being stalked by tabloids & paparazzi. lmaoooo. 

And yeah, I doubt the BRF is funding their lives out there with tax payer $. So good luck to them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Bob Iger gave their “foundation” a significant gift already. I’m sure that won’t go to funding their new life.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I'm no Samantha fan but seriously? LMAO I swear.

*Meghan Markle's sister Samantha investigated by police as partner says 'heads will roll'*
*MEGHAN MARKLE’s estranged half-sister Samantha is at the centre of a police probe into cyber-bullying, one officer claimed.*
By ALICE SCARSI
PUBLISHED: 10:46, Sun, Oct 27, 2019 | UPDATED: 11:44, Sun, Oct 27, 2019

“Samantha Markle is aware of this allegation.

“She has not been arrested.

“This is an ongoing case and I cannot speculate on a timeline yet or make any other comment.”

The complaints come from several countries including Canada and the US, according to one source reported in the Sunday People. 







They said: “The allegations relate to numerous internet platforms and include complaints from at least four countries, including the UK, Canada and Sweden.

“It is a large and widespread investigation and is likely to be a long process.

“The investigation is still at an early stage.”

The 54-year-old daughter of Thomas Markle Snr has allegedly written multiple controversial messages about Meghan and Prince Harry on online platforms. 

READ MORE: Princess Diana’s former sister-in-law came to Meghan’s aid






At this stage, it is not clear which messages have sparked the complaints and there is no suggestion the probe was triggered by a request from members of the Royal Family.

But Ms Markle’s partner, Mark Phillips promised to put up a fight after news of the police probe broke.

He said: “Whoever wants an investigation against me and Sam, well they are likely to end up in jail for five years for filing a false police report.

“We’re not doing any cyber-bullying, other than retaliating. 






“Heads will roll in the end.”

This comes just a week after the bombshell ITV documentary aired, where both Meghan and Harry voiced their worries and struggle over living under the relentless media scrutiny.

In a heartfelt interview with Tom Bradby, who filmed Harry & Meghan: An African Journey, Meghan said it has been difficult for her to cope with public scrutiny as a new mother and newlywed.

Asked by Mr Bradby about the “impact on your physical and mental health of all the pressure that you clearly feel under”, she said: “I would say - look, any woman, especially when they are pregnant, you are really vulnerable and so that was made really challenging. 






“And then when you have a newborn, you know?

“And especially as a woman it’s really, it’s really a lot.”

Meghan added “not many people” have asked her in the past months whether she was truly okay. 






Her sister Mrs Markle lashed out at the Duchess for this statement branding her a hypocrite and saying she couldn’t believe Meghan would have the “audacity” to make such a remark after not checking in on their father after, she said, her recent health scares.

Speaking to US news organisation Inside Edition, Mrs Markle said: “I thought: ‘Wow, did you ever ask dad if he was okay during two heart attacks?’

“I think it is really ludicrous that someone who is escorted around the world by millions of dollars worth of security on private jets as a millionaire could ever complain about anything.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

it's crazy how much she looks like Sam in old pics


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ll give Oprah credit where it’s due, she worked her arse off to get where she is. I don’t see these two spoiled brats having much in common with her, at the end of the day. Oprah will use them to maintain some relevance to the younger generation then toss them out when she’s done.


I agree that Oprah was a very hard worker. What she has in common with Harry and Meghan is that I don’t think they are particularly nice people, and all three certainly court the adoration of the masses.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Alright, which one of you is Samantha?


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> it's crazy how much she looks like Sam in old pics


That is someone that people have to curtsy too?


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> I kinda like Gayle, she seems to be Oprah without the over the top adoration and fawning, which can go to anyone's head.
> 
> Anyway, about the building on her own talent, I read that it helps to get an anchor/news job when you are connected to a famous person.  (Jenna Bush, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, Chris Wallace and so on.) It's almost a prerequisite because even though they may be good at their jobs, so are hundreds of others who cannot get in the door.


All I can say is that Gayle definitely upped her game from when she was the Anchor and good for her!!!   100% totally agree with you about the fact that she's more of a straight-shooter than Oprah, and for someone who is a journalist, that is what is more important to me.  The "fawning" that Oprah does just makes me sick, especially after hearing the truly dreadful stories of how she has dealt with people who worked for her (have a very close friend that was treated horribly by Oprah and then one day, when she tried to correct Oprah on a photo shoot .. Oprah said "you're fired" - what????)


----------



## mrsinsyder

The poor things. They really are just existing. Flying around the world to watch a soccer game? What suffering. Thank goodness they have a break coming up from all these challenges.

*Prince Harry reveals he will fly to Japan to watch England’s World Cup Final against South Africa on Saturday before taking time off to celebrate Thanksgiving in the US with wife Meghan Markle*

*Duke of Sussex is patron of the Rugby Football Union, England's governing body*
*England beat New Zealand 19-7 on the weekend to take them through to the final*
*National side is aiming for its second World Cup win this weekend in Yokohama *
By RORY TINGLE FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 15:45 EDT, 28 October 2019 | UPDATED: 18:23 EDT, 28 October 2019 

Prince Harry will fly to Japan to watch England play South Africa in the final of the Rugby World Cup, Buckingham Palace announced today. 

The Duke of Sussex, 35, is patron of the Rugby Football Union and has regularly attended England games in the past. 

He was seen celebrating with coach Sir Clive Woodward after England's last World Cup win in 2003, and will be hoping the side can repeat the feat in Yokohama on Saturday.






Harry also attended the last World Cup final, at Twickenham in 2015, where he presented the Webb Ellis Cup trophy to New Zealand captain Richie McCaw. 

The side were knocked out of this year's competition on Saturday by a dynamic England team that triumphed 19-7. 

South Africa ground out a 19-16 semi-final victory over Wales in a turgid set-piece contest dominated by box-kicks.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...nds-World-Cup-Final-against-South-Africa.html


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> Very sadly, the American decline into their “feelings” (well, some of us  ) has been only quite recent.  America was built on “stiff upper lip.”


I can tell you from my experience as a Yank working in London (_and Edinburgh - not so much Dublin or Glasgow_), my British colleagues definitely felt that I was much more "emotional" .. which used to make me laugh at times.  They did not like confrontation (_which I find ironic given the Uk Parliament and how they openly argue, etc_.) and they really didn't want to hear about "_your horrible day_" and especially "_if you didn't feel well_"!!!  I learned to keep my mouth shut on those things, but the confrontation "issue" was more along the lines of saying "_I'm not ASKING you to do it, I'm TELLING you to do it_" .. which is what I had to do because I was responsible for the project and we had a very difficult Dutch client who my Brit colleagues absolutely hated (_but if we didn't meet deadlines, there were financial reprocussions_)!


----------



## jcnc

jehaga said:


> Well put—“the image of one.” MM doesn’t have what it takes to be a true philanthropist (IMHO IMHO).
> 
> Also, Amal seems crazy intelligent whereas MM seems...not?


Crazy thought.. if Harry was married to someone like Amal, wgat would that have been likr?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is he flying private to Japan?


----------



## Flatsy

lanasyogamama said:


> Is he flying private to Japan?


Yes, because he will do whatever he needs to do to protect his family!

Also, it's a long flight, and private is more comfortable.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

jcnc said:


> Crazy thought.. if Harry was married to someone like Amal, wgat would that have been likr?


It sounded from their engagement interview that Harry thought he was getting a partner who was interested in working and tackling social issues and projects... maybe he wanted an Amal-type and got... Meghan.


----------



## PewPew

Clearblueskies said:


> I think *(because he’s never known anything else) he doesn’t realise the extent of the privilege he’d be turning his back on*.  Comes a point when you take a certain path that you can’t go back though.



I wonder if the BRF try to use Harry’s Great-Great uncle Edward as a cautionary tale?

In recent weeks, I’ve been reflecting more on King Edward VIII, who also didn’t seem to realize what he was giving up to abdicate & marry Wallis Simpson. (Even before meeting Wallis, he was said to be disillusioned with the restrictions of Royal life, so Wallis may have been at the right place & time). Post-marriage the couple was in exile from England for a long time, & He mistakenly expected his brother and then QE2 to allow his return sooner. While the couple were still celebrities abroad, they also incurred unglamorous debts.

There’s a famous American interview in their later years in which Wallis frequently looks annoyed with Edward, who looked defeated, though he still seemed fond of her.

I’ve always thought he would have reconsidered the abdication and marriage if he knew how life would turn out...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

PewPew said:


> I wonder if the RBF will try to use Harry’s Great-Great uncle Edward as a cautionary tale?
> 
> In recent weeks, I’ve been reflecting more on King Edward VIII, who also didn’t seem to realize what he was giving up to abdicate & marry Wallis Simpson. (Even before meeting Wallis, he was said to be disillusioned with the restrictions of Royal life, so Wallis may have been at the right place & time). Post-marriage the couple was in exile from England for a long time, & He mistakenly expected his brother and then QE2 to allow his return sooner. While the couple were still celebrities abroad, they also incurred unglamorous debts.
> 
> There’s a famous American interview in their later years in which Wallis frequently looks annoyed with Edward, who looked defeated, though he still seemed fond of her.
> 
> I’ve always thought he would have reconsidered the abdication and marriage if he knew how life would turn out...


From what I have read on Wallis life, Edward was the smitten one. She was happy to remain his mistress, as she never thought he would really abdicate. When he set the abdication rolling, she had to marry him or be even more hated than she already was. Edward was always more in love with Wallis than she was with him.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> The poor things. They really are just existing. Flying around the world to watch a soccer game? What suffering. Thank goodness they have a break coming up from all these challenges.
> 
> *Prince Harry reveals he will fly to Japan to watch England’s World Cup Final against South Africa on Saturday before taking time off to celebrate Thanksgiving in the US with wife Meghan Markle*
> 
> *Duke of Sussex is patron of the Rugby Football Union, England's governing body*
> *England beat New Zealand 19-7 on the weekend to take them through to the final*
> *National side is aiming for its second World Cup win this weekend in Yokohama *
> By RORY TINGLE FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 15:45 EDT, 28 October 2019 | UPDATED: 18:23 EDT, 28 October 2019
> 
> Prince Harry will fly to Japan to watch England play South Africa in the final of the Rugby World Cup, Buckingham Palace announced today.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 35, is patron of the Rugby Football Union and has regularly attended England games in the past.
> 
> He was seen celebrating with coach Sir Clive Woodward after England's last World Cup win in 2003, and will be hoping the side can repeat the feat in Yokohama on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry also attended the last World Cup final, at Twickenham in 2015, where he presented the Webb Ellis Cup trophy to New Zealand captain Richie McCaw.
> 
> The side were knocked out of this year's competition on Saturday by a dynamic England team that triumphed 19-7.
> 
> South Africa ground out a 19-16 semi-final victory over Wales in a turgid set-piece contest dominated by box-kicks.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...nds-World-Cup-Final-against-South-Africa.html


It's Rugby, not football (soccer) and as Patron of the England Rugby Union (it says that in the article) its kind of expected he'd attend important games like this one.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Yes, she did .. BUT, let me tell you .. once she became popular, the nasty side of her came out BIG-TIME.  Just like Martha Stewart, she used and stepped on a lot of toes, took credit for work done by others, etc. -- *sadly, a common story of women who make it up to the top (not all - but sadly, a good percentage*).



Men too, that's how people learn


----------



## papertiger

Katel said:


> ^^ also this is hysterical - isn’t this the chap that got fired for losing his temper and punching out staff, more than once (on Top Gear)?  Quite the stiff lip, Jeremy lol.
> https://www.businessinsider.com/report-top-gear-host-jeremy-clarkson-will-be-fired-by-the-bbc-2015-3



The man is hideous and oafish in every way.


----------



## papertiger

PewPew said:


> I wonder if the BRF try to use Harry’s Great-Great uncle Edward as a cautionary tale?
> 
> In recent weeks, I’ve been reflecting more on King Edward VIII, who also didn’t seem to realize what he was giving up to abdicate & marry Wallis Simpson. (Even before meeting Wallis, he was said to be disillusioned with the restrictions of Royal life, so Wallis may have been at the right place & time). Post-marriage the couple was in exile from England for a long time, & He mistakenly expected his brother and then QE2 to allow his return sooner. While the couple were still celebrities abroad, they also incurred unglamorous debts.
> 
> There’s a famous American interview in their later years in which Wallis frequently looks annoyed with Edward, who looked defeated, though he still seemed fond of her.
> 
> I’ve always thought he would have reconsidered the abdication and marriage if he knew how life would turn out...



We (the Great British public) are are pleased he married Wallis, abdicated and left. Thank you Wallis.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> The poor things. They really are just existing. Flying around the world to watch a soccer game? What suffering. Thank goodness they have a break coming up from all these challenges.
> 
> *Prince Harry reveals he will fly to Japan to watch England’s World Cup Final against South Africa on Saturday before taking time off to celebrate Thanksgiving in the US with wife Meghan Markle*
> 
> *Duke of Sussex is patron of the Rugby Football Union, England's governing body*
> *England beat New Zealand 19-7 on the weekend to take them through to the final*
> *National side is aiming for its second World Cup win this weekend in Yokohama *
> By RORY TINGLE FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 15:45 EDT, 28 October 2019 | UPDATED: 18:23 EDT, 28 October 2019
> 
> Prince Harry will fly to Japan to watch England play South Africa in the final of the Rugby World Cup, Buckingham Palace announced today.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 35, is patron of the Rugby Football Union and has regularly attended England games in the past.
> 
> He was seen celebrating with coach Sir Clive Woodward after England's last World Cup win in 2003, and will be hoping the side can repeat the feat in Yokohama on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry also attended the last World Cup final, at Twickenham in 2015, where he presented the Webb Ellis Cup trophy to New Zealand captain Richie McCaw.
> 
> The side were knocked out of this year's competition on Saturday by a dynamic England team that triumphed 19-7.
> 
> South Africa ground out a 19-16 semi-final victory over Wales in a turgid set-piece contest dominated by box-kicks.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/s...nds-World-Cup-Final-against-South-Africa.html


Harry has been patron of the RFU for some years.  It would be bad if he didn’t go, especially as England have made it through to the final.  Rugby is a far superior game to football (IMO of course).


Sharont2305 said:


> It's Rugby, not football (soccer) and as Patron of the England Rugby Union (it says that in the article) its kind of expected he'd attend important games like this one.


Yes, exactly - there’d be a whole slew of critical stories if he didn’t show up.  
And hard luck Wales  I was hoping they’d be in the final too!!


----------



## doni

mrsinsyder said:


> The poor things. They really are just existing. Flying around the world to watch a soccer game? What suffering. Thank goodness they have a break coming up from all these challenges.
> l


Not soccer, rugby! And of course is huge. This is what royals are for 

I just don’t see the Edward parallelisms, he was a reigning King, Harry is the brother of a heir who already has ample descendency. Not the same at all. Many siblings of royals don’t participate of royal work. Witness Princess Madeleine of a Sweden who lives in the US, or the Spanish infantas... The trend is for European royal families going for smaller outfits anyway and by the time William is king his kids may well be grown ups with their own kids, plenty to go around. Harry was well loved and very popular in the U.K., but in the end, it is not the end of the world if he opts out...


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry has been patron of the RFU for some years.  It would be bad if he didn’t go, especially as England have made it through to the final.  Rugby is a far superior game to football (IMO of course).
> 
> Yes, exactly - there’d be a whole slew of critical stories if he didn’t show up.
> And hard luck Wales  I was hoping they’d be in the final too!!


Me too, then William could have gone with him as Patron of the Wales Rugby Union.
IMO, no one should be knocking Harry for going to Japan, and this is coming from a Welsh woman


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Me too, then William could have gone with him as Patron of the Wales Rugby Union.
> IMO, no one should be knocking Harry for going to Japan, and this is coming from a Welsh woman


Well, while I don’t knock him for flying to Japan for a sporting event, I hardly view this as work. For many people this would be a very exciting recreational event. Even the trip of a life time. I would call this ‘living the high life’ not merely existing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> Me too, then William could have gone with him as Patron of the Wales Rugby Union.
> IMO, no one should be knocking Harry for going to Japan, and this is coming from a Welsh woman


As @Chagall said, no knocking him, just expressing my incredulity at their continued whining when these are the things they have to do for "work."


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chagall said:


> Well, while I don’t knock him for flying to Japan for a sporting event, I hardly view this as work. For many people this would be a very exciting recreational event. Even the trip of a life time. I would call this ‘living the high life’ not merely existing.


For a member of the royal family though, it's work.  Here are some of the differences.  For the many people who would see it as a very exciting recreational event - they can wear whatever they want to the event and it won't matter.  For a royal going there for work, there are rules about how he must dress.  For people going as a recreational event, they can sit with who they please, talk to who they want and ignore those who annoy them. For a royal, there will be a check list of people who must be greeted and annoying or not, he'll have to remain engaged in conversation pretending to love every moment of it. For people going for a recreational event, if they wake up feeling sick and can't imagine sitting through the event, they can sell their tickets on like and chalk it up to bad timing. For a royal, a doctor will come in to give some quick treatment to buck up and go anyway because people are expecting him. For people going as a recreational event, if something else comes up in life that they'd much rather do than going to the event, they can make that choice. For a royal, it's tough luck - miss whatever is happening, you're going.
No doubt about it - it's easier work than working in a factory, transporting heavy equipment, walking through horrible weather to deliver mail, having human waste thrown at you as a caregiver in a mental facility, working in a coal mine, being shot at as a police officer or any other host of tough jobs. It's easier than that work, it pays better too. But the number of people eligible to do it is very very limited and Harry happens to have the qualifications.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> maybe they need to get in touch with Andy Cohen and get a deal with Bravo


Andy's probably already looking into this--seriously!


----------



## mrsinsyder

LibbyRuth said:


> For a member of the royal family though, it's work.  Here are some of the differences.  For the many people who would see it as a very exciting recreational event - they can wear whatever they want to the event and it won't matter.  For a royal going there for work, *there are rules about how he must dress*.  For people going as a recreational event, they can sit with who they please, talk to who they want and ignore those who annoy them. For a royal, there will *be a check list of people who must be greeted and annoying or not, he'll have to remain engaged in conversation pretending to love every moment of it*. For people going for a recreational event, if they wake up feeling sick and can't imagine sitting through the event, they can sell their tickets on like and chalk it up to bad timing. For a royal, a doctor will come in to give some quick treatment to* buck up and go anyway because people are expecting him*. For people going as a recreational event, if something else comes up in life that they'd much rather do than going to the event, they can make that choice. For a royal, it's tough luck - *miss whatever is happening, you're going*.
> No doubt about it - it's easier work than working in a factory, transporting heavy equipment, walking through horrible weather to deliver mail, having human waste thrown at you as a caregiver in a mental facility, working in a coal mine, being shot at as a police officer or any other host of tough jobs. It's easier than that work, it pays better too. But the number of people eligible to do it is very very limited and Harry happens to have the qualifications.


LOL, I was going to say, everything you're describing sounds like normal things one is expected to do at work anyway


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> For a royal, a doctor will come in to give some quick treatment to buck up and go anyway because people are expecting him. .


I really need a doctor like that


----------



## Chagall

LibbyRuth said:


> For a member of the royal family though, it's work.  Here are some of the differences.  For the many people who would see it as a very exciting recreational event - they can wear whatever they want to the event and it won't matter.  For a royal going there for work, there are rules about how he must dress.  For people going as a recreational event, they can sit with who they please, talk to who they want and ignore those who annoy them. For a royal, there will be a check list of people who must be greeted and annoying or not, he'll have to remain engaged in conversation pretending to love every moment of it. For people going for a recreational event, if they wake up feeling sick and can't imagine sitting through the event, they can sell their tickets on like and chalk it up to bad timing. For a royal, a doctor will come in to give some quick treatment to buck up and go anyway because people are expecting him. For people going as a recreational event, if something else comes up in life that they'd much rather do than going to the event, they can make that choice. For a royal, it's tough luck - miss whatever is happening, you're going.
> No doubt about it - it's easier work than working in a factory, transporting heavy equipment, walking through horrible weather to deliver mail, having human waste thrown at you as a caregiver in a mental facility, working in a coal mine, being shot at as a police officer or any other host of tough jobs. It's easier than that work, it pays better too. But the number of people eligible to do it is very very limited and Harry happens to have the qualifications.


A lot of what you mentioned is evident in all things you do in life to some degree. All I can say is ‘poor boo boo’.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Chagall said:


> A lot of what you mentioned is evident in all things you do in life to some degree. All I can say is ‘poor boo boo’.


agree. that's called being a grown up


----------



## LittleStar88

LibbyRuth said:


> For a member of the royal family though, it's work.  Here are some of the differences.  For the many people who would see it as a very exciting recreational event - they can wear whatever they want to the event and it won't matter.  For a royal going there for work, there are rules about how he must dress.  For people going as a recreational event, they can sit with who they please, talk to who they want and ignore those who annoy them. For a royal, there will be a check list of people who must be greeted and annoying or not, he'll have to remain engaged in conversation pretending to love every moment of it. For people going for a recreational event, if they wake up feeling sick and can't imagine sitting through the event, they can sell their tickets on like and chalk it up to bad timing. For a royal, a doctor will come in to give some quick treatment to buck up and go anyway because people are expecting him. For people going as a recreational event, if something else comes up in life that they'd much rather do than going to the event, they can make that choice. For a royal, it's tough luck - miss whatever is happening, you're going.
> No doubt about it - it's easier work than working in a factory, transporting heavy equipment, walking through horrible weather to deliver mail, having human waste thrown at you as a caregiver in a mental facility, working in a coal mine, being shot at as a police officer or any other host of tough jobs. It's easier than that work, it pays better too. But the number of people eligible to do it is very very limited and Harry happens to have the qualifications.



I am 100% happy to go as his proxy

Harry has been living his life in a bubble. Protected, so many things done for him, etc. So now that he has to put his big boy pants on and start adulting, it is proving to be a challenge to get started on dealing with the realities of that this late into his 30's.

They both seem too fragile to manage the responsibilities, benefits, and drawbacks of the BRF lifestyle, so maybe it would be a good idea for them to find something else to do with their lives. No one wants to hear them whining about how hard their life of comfort and privilege is for them.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chagall said:


> A lot of what you mentioned is evident in all things you do in life to some degree. All I can say is ‘poor boo boo’.


It's all a matter of degree.  If I choose not to wear panty hose with my dress to a family wedding, my grandmother may give the side eye but I won't be reprimanded in serious ways. If I've got a head cold I have to work through it, but if I have the flu and feel miserable I get to take a sick day. Yes, there are some of the things I've listed that other people would go through to. But it's not mandated to the same degree.
I mean really - if it's all the same and that's  job that pays better and is easier than your own, go get that job.



LittleStar88 said:


> I am 100% happy to go as his proxy
> 
> Harry has been living his life in a bubble. Protected, so many things done for him, etc. So now that he has to put his big boy pants on and start adulting, it is proving to be a challenge to get started on dealing with the realities of that this late into his 30's.
> 
> They both seem too fragile to manage the responsibilities, benefits, and drawbacks of the BRF lifestyle, so maybe it would be a good idea for them to find something else to do with their lives. No one wants to hear them whining about how hard their life of comfort and privilege is for them.



I wrote the post you replied to in response to criticism over Harry attending a rugby match which seemed to overlook it's his job - not recreation. So I'm not clear on how comments that he's too fragile to manage his responsibilities plays in to that.  He's being slammed for living up to his responsibilities ... and the counter to that is that he is too fragile to live up to his responsibilities.  Seems to me both can't be true.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LibbyRuth said:


> I mean really - if it's all the same and that's a job that pays better and is easier than your own, go get that job.


Go be a prince?


----------



## Aqua01

LibbyRuth said:


> No doubt about it - it's easier work than working in a factory, transporting heavy equipment, walking through horrible weather to deliver mail, having human waste thrown at you as a caregiver in a mental facility, working in a coal mine, being shot at as a police officer or any other host of tough jobs. It's easier than that work, it pays better too.


No kidding! 
My heart bleeds for Harry and his wife for merely existing.


----------



## LittleStar88

LibbyRuth said:


> I wrote the post you replied to in response to criticism over Harry attending a rugby match which seemed to overlook it's his job - not recreation. So I'm not clear on how comments that he's too fragile to manage his responsibilities plays in to that.  He's being slammed for living up to his responsibilities ... and the counter to that is that he is too fragile to live up to his responsibilities.  Seems to me both can't be true.



*They* are fragile and need to take time off from their duties is what it appears to me. Can't take the press, can't take the photographers... Not this one instance regarding rugby, but the overall storyline that is happening here with them.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LibbyRuth said:


> For a member of the royal family though, it's work.  Here are some of the differences.  For the many people who would see it as a very exciting recreational event - they can wear whatever they want to the event and it won't matter.  For a royal going there for work, there are rules about how he must dress.  For people going as a recreational event, they can sit with who they please, talk to who they want and ignore those who annoy them. For a royal, there will be a check list of people who must be greeted and annoying or not, he'll have to remain engaged in conversation pretending to love every moment of it. For people going for a recreational event, if they wake up feeling sick and can't imagine sitting through the event, they can sell their tickets on like and chalk it up to bad timing. For a royal, a doctor will come in to give some quick treatment to buck up and go anyway because people are expecting him. For people going as a recreational event, if something else comes up in life that they'd much rather do than going to the event, they can make that choice. For a royal, it's tough luck - miss whatever is happening, you're going.
> No doubt about it - it's easier work than working in a factory, transporting heavy equipment, walking through horrible weather to deliver mail, having human waste thrown at you as a caregiver in a mental facility, working in a coal mine, being shot at as a police officer or any other host of tough jobs. It's easier than that work, it pays better too. But the number of people eligible to do it is very very limited and Harry happens to have the qualifications.


I’d love to see this rulebook that everyone’s always referring to  and when you consider what Harry’s been turning up in recently, I think it’s a safe bet (other than when in uniform) that he’s usually wearing what he wants.
Harry also chose Beyonce over duty when he opted out of the memorial event he should’ve attended as patron and went to the premiere instead


----------



## mrsinsyder

Kate acting appropriately and not whining in public...

*Kate Middleton 'is doing her best' to 'patch things up in private' with Meghan Markle after the Duchess admitted her struggles in ITV documentary, royal expert claims*

*The Duchess of Cambridge, 37, feels sorry for Meghan, 38, says Phil Dampier*
*Mother-of-three wants to 'patch things up in private', according to royal expert*
*Meghan said she was 'not OK' in the ITV's Meghan and Harry: An African Journey*
By JESSICA GREEN FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 07:32 EDT, 29 October 2019 

The Duchess of Cambridge 'is doing her best' to try and reach out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle following their emotional documentary, a royal expert claims.

Kate, 37, reportedly feels sorry for the new mother, 38, who admitted she was 'not OK' in the ITV programme Meghan and Harry: An African Journey.

The mother-of-three wants to 'patch things up in private' after Harry, 35, refused to dismiss reports of a rift with his brother, Prince William, instead saying that they are on 'different paths' and have 'good days and bad days'.

Speaking to the Express, author and former royal correspondent Phil Dampier said: 'Behind the scenes I’m told Kate is doing her best to bring everyone together and help Meghan. 

'None of them want to let the Queen down, so Kate is trying to patch things up in private.

'I’m told she has reached out to Meghan and spoken to her on the phone. Kate feels sorry for her and knows that Meghan is struggling.'

During a one-on-one interview in the documentary, mother-of-one Meghan admitted to feeling vulnerable and spoke of the difficulty in coping with intense tabloid interest. 

Meghan said: 'I never thought that this would be easy, but I thought it would be fair and that's the part that's really hard to reconcile.

'I've said for a long time to H – that's what I call him – it is not enough to just survive something. That's not the point of life. You've got to thrive and feel happy.

She added: 'I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip. I tried, I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging.' 

In the documentary, aired earlier this month, the Duke of Sussex acknowledged the deepening tensions between himself and William following months of speculation about the state of the brothers' relationship. 

Palace aides had repeatedly denied reports of a rift between the Sussexes and the Cambridges, who had once been championed as the Royal family's 'Fab Four'.

But when asked how much of the speculation was true, Harry pointedly refused to deny a falling out. 

He told presenter Tom Bradby: 'Part of this role, part of this job and this family being under the pressure it is under, inevitably stuff happens.

'But look, we are brothers, we will always be brothers. We are certainly on different paths at the moment but I will always be there for him and, as I know, he will always be there for me.

'We don't see each other as much as we used to because we are so busy but I love him dearly and the majority of stuff is created out of nothing. As brothers, you have good days, you have bad days.' 

Harry and Meghan are set to fly to the US in November, along with their son Archie, so they can take a six-week break and spend time with Meghan's mother Doria Ragland. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ince-Harry-Meghan-Markle.html#article-7625383


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Kate acting appropriately and not whining in public...
> 
> *Kate Middleton 'is doing her best' to 'patch things up in private' with Meghan Markle after the Duchess admitted her struggles in ITV documentary, royal expert claims*
> 
> *The Duchess of Cambridge, 37, feels sorry for Meghan, 38, says Phil Dampier*
> *Mother-of-three wants to 'patch things up in private', according to royal expert*
> *Meghan said she was 'not OK' in the ITV's Meghan and Harry: An African Journey*
> By JESSICA GREEN FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 07:32 EDT, 29 October 2019
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge 'is doing her best' to try and reach out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle following their emotional documentary, a royal expert claims.
> 
> Kate, 37, reportedly feels sorry for the new mother, 38, who admitted she was 'not OK' in the ITV programme Meghan and Harry: An African Journey.
> 
> The mother-of-three wants to 'patch things up in private' after Harry, 35, refused to dismiss reports of a rift with his brother, Prince William, instead saying that they are on 'different paths' and have 'good days and bad days'.
> 
> Speaking to the Express, author and former royal correspondent Phil Dampier said: 'Behind the scenes I’m told Kate is doing her best to bring everyone together and help Meghan.
> 
> 'None of them want to let the Queen down, so Kate is trying to patch things up in private.
> 
> 'I’m told she has reached out to Meghan and spoken to her on the phone. Kate feels sorry for her and knows that Meghan is struggling.'
> 
> During a one-on-one interview in the documentary, mother-of-one Meghan admitted to feeling vulnerable and spoke of the difficulty in coping with intense tabloid interest.
> 
> Meghan said: 'I never thought that this would be easy, but I thought it would be fair and that's the part that's really hard to reconcile.
> 
> 'I've said for a long time to H – that's what I call him – it is not enough to just survive something. That's not the point of life. You've got to thrive and feel happy.
> 
> She added: 'I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip. I tried, I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging.'
> 
> In the documentary, aired earlier this month, the Duke of Sussex acknowledged the deepening tensions between himself and William following months of speculation about the state of the brothers' relationship.
> 
> Palace aides had repeatedly denied reports of a rift between the Sussexes and the Cambridges, who had once been championed as the Royal family's 'Fab Four'.
> 
> But when asked how much of the speculation was true, Harry pointedly refused to deny a falling out.
> 
> He told presenter Tom Bradby: 'Part of this role, part of this job and this family being under the pressure it is under, inevitably stuff happens.
> 
> 'But look, we are brothers, we will always be brothers. We are certainly on different paths at the moment but I will always be there for him and, as I know, he will always be there for me.
> 
> 'We don't see each other as much as we used to because we are so busy but I love him dearly and the majority of stuff is created out of nothing. As brothers, you have good days, you have bad days.'
> 
> Harry and Meghan are set to fly to the US in November, along with their son Archie, so they can take a six-week break and spend time with Meghan's mother Doria Ragland.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ince-Harry-Meghan-Markle.html#article-7625383


Most couples with a small baby would not be in a position to take a six week break.  Maybe she can live and not just exist for six weeks.  Boo hoo.
Even her dad who is shown no respect worked for a living.


----------



## bag-princess

mrsinsyder said:


> Kate acting appropriately and not whining in public...




  Oh y’all are really trying it!


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> Most couples with a small baby would not be in a position to take a six week break.  Maybe she can live and not just exist for six weeks.  Boo hoo.
> Even her dad who is shown no respect worked for a living.



Maybe she needs to adjust her attitude and expectations when it comes to her life?

I work my arse off, so do most people I know. I would love to have a six week break where I didn't have to worry about bills and income or work (I work on vacation as do most others I know - so no breaks from the daily grind). 

And on that note, I am happy to trade places with her. She can come do my job and deal with a variety of stress and hair-on-fire moments. I will do hers and I can have access to cute outfits, people to make my meals and clean my house, pay my bills from a tub of money, and occasionally show up somewhere to look cute, smile, and shake hands/give out free hugs, and maybe give a speech.

I think she has forgotten where she may have came from and what real life is like. Good for her to have carved out a situation that can support her princess mindset.

I will be happy to re-evaluate my opinion of her once she realizes how good she has it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-princess said:


> Oh y’all are really trying it!


Can you clarify?


----------



## buffym

Harry met with the UK competitors for Invictus.


----------



## buffym

Female MPs wrote a letter of support for Meghan.


----------



## buffym

.

Just saw it posted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

The pattern of a narcissist relationship:
-the narcissist targets someone that has something they need. Status etc. the targeted person usually is vulnerable in some way or another.
-the narcissist ‘love bombs’ the target by giving them excessive attention and admiration.
-they move the relationship along at a fast pace that isn’t prudent or normal.
-they push for a fast commitment.
-once they have secured the target they start to ‘gaslight’ them into doubting the elements in their life, their relationships etc.
-gradually they isolate the victim from all their support network.
-they manipulate the victim to relocate geographically.
Once the narcissist has gotten all they required from the victim they then discard them.
Time will tell however I see a pattern here.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> The pattern of a narcissist relationship:
> -the narcissist targets someone that has something they need. Status etc. the targeted person usually is vulnerable in some way or another.
> -the narcissist ‘love bombs’ the target by giving them excessive attention and admiration.
> -they move the relationship along at a fast pace that isn’t prudent or normal.
> -they push for a fast commitment.
> -once they have secured the target they start to ‘gaslight’ them into doubting the elements in their life, their relationships etc.
> -gradually they isolate the victim from all their support network.
> -they manipulate the victim to relocate geographically.
> Once the narcissist has gotten all they required from the victim they then discard them.
> Time will tell however I see a pattern here.


Interesting theory but I think if she discards him she becomes irrelevant....so I doubt that will happen
How many post-divorce interviews would Oprah want with her?


----------



## piperdog

buffym said:


> Female MPs wrote a letter of support for Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 4577145


How shocking that a group of politicians take a stand against press stories that are "distasteful".  Hmm, where else have I been seeing attacks on a press that dare to publish items that people in power (such as members of the BRF, or politicians in the UK or even the  US) may not like?


----------



## mrsinsyder

buffym said:


> Female MPs wrote a letter of support for Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 4577145


Ridiculous.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> Interesting theory but I think if she discards him she becomes irrelevant....so I doubt that will happen
> How many post-divorce interviews would Oprah want with her?


There is a pattern to these relationships that seldom deviate. She has hit all the milestones so far. She now has huge notoriety that will never ever go away no matter what happens in the long run.. And there is certainly a life beyond Oprah and the like.​


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> There is a pattern to these relationships that seldom deviate. She has hit all the milestones so far. She now has huge notoriety that will never ever go away no matter what happens in the long run.. And there is certainly a life beyond Oprah and the like.​


IDK......yes she has notoriety but would it be long lasting if she wasn't a royal anymore?  I guess we'll see what happens.  for now, they have our attention


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> IDK......yes she has notoriety but would it be long lasting if she wasn't a royal anymore?  I guess we'll see what happens.  for now, they have our attention


Yes, I agree, they certainly got our attention.


----------



## PatsyCline

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she needs to adjust her attitude and expectations when it comes to her life?
> 
> I work my arse off, so do most people I know. I would love to have a six week break where I didn't have to worry about bills and income or work (I work on vacation as do most others I know - so no breaks from the daily grind).
> 
> And on that note, I am happy to trade places with her. She can come do my job and deal with a variety of stress and hair-on-fire moments. I will do hers and I can have access to cute outfits, people to make my meals and clean my house, pay my bills from a tub of money, and occasionally show up somewhere to look cute, smile, and shake hands/give out free hugs, and maybe give a speech.
> 
> I think she has forgotten where she may have came from and what real life is like. Good for her to have carved out a situation that can support her princess mindset.
> 
> I will be happy to re-evaluate my opinion of her once she realizes how good she has it.


OK, start posting your daily outfits so people can criticize every little aspect of them. Don’t forget to give us the names of your relatives so we can find out all the little things you’ve done, then we can micro analysis every point, and then tell you you were wrong about it. 
Let us know what you do every day so we can tell you whatever you did, it was wrong and why you should have done it differently. 

And don’t forget, the entire world will be watching everything you do, just waiting for any misstep.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> OK, start posting your daily outfits so people can criticize every little aspect of them. Don’t forget to give us the names of your relatives so we can find out all the little things you’ve done, then we can micro analysis every point, and then tell you you were wrong about it.
> Let us know what you do every day so we can tell you whatever you did, it was wrong and why you should have done it differently.
> 
> And don’t forget, the entire world will be watching everything you do, just waiting for any misstep.


If you can tell us what she wore yesterday you might have a point.  But we’ve seen nothing, no pap photos, nothing, since her last public appearance.  So much of this victimhood is a figment, the rest is their own making.  Hence the frustration.


----------



## sdkitty

PatsyCline said:


> OK, start posting your daily outfits so people can criticize every little aspect of them. Don’t forget to give us the names of your relatives so we can find out all the little things you’ve done, then we can micro analysis every point, and then tell you you were wrong about it.
> Let us know what you do every day so we can tell you whatever you did, it was wrong and why you should have done it differently.
> 
> And don’t forget, the entire world will be watching everything you do, just waiting for any misstep.


so maybe there is a price for what she wanted....she now has a life of extreme privilege....sorry it's Not Fair....boo hoo


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

PatsyCline said:


> OK, start posting your daily outfits so people can criticize every little aspect of them. Don’t forget to give us the names of your relatives so we can find out all the little things you’ve done, then we can micro analysis every point, and then tell you you were wrong about it.
> Let us know what you do every day so we can tell you whatever you did, it was wrong and why you should have done it differently.
> 
> And don’t forget, the entire world will be watching everything you do, just waiting for any misstep.



And calling her baby a half monkey, calling her a 'black taint', telling her and her mother to go live in the zoo, etc etc. Saying your husband has 'jungle fever' that's why he is with you. Like it or not, deny it or not, racism plays a huge role in the dehumanization and othering of Meghan. Folks are pissed that a woman of color snagged HRH.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sigh.


----------



## daisychainz

LittleStar88 said:


> I am 100% happy to go as his proxy
> 
> Harry has been living his life in a bubble. Protected, so many things done for him, etc. So now that he has to put his big boy pants on and start adulting, it is proving to be a challenge to get started on dealing with the realities of that this late into his 30's.
> 
> They both seem too fragile to manage the responsibilities, benefits, and drawbacks of the BRF lifestyle, so maybe it would be a good idea for them to find something else to do with their lives. No one wants to hear them whining about how hard their life of comfort and privilege is for them.


Maybe Archie will help Harry mature - there is generally a turnaround with men once they become fathers. They (mostly) grow up and get responsible. There's still a bit of hope!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Babydoll Chanel said:


> And calling her baby a half monkey, calling her a 'black taint', telling her and her mother to go live in the zoo, etc etc. Saying your husband has 'jungle fever' that's why he is with you. Like it or not, deny it or not, racism plays a huge role in the dehumanization and othering of Meghan. Folks are pissed that a woman of color snagged HRH.


Please give us your sources


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> OK, start posting your daily outfits so people can criticize every little aspect of them. Don’t forget to give us the names of your relatives so we can find out all the little things you’ve done, then we can micro analysis every point, and then tell you you were wrong about it.
> Let us know what you do every day so we can tell you whatever you did, it was wrong and why you should have done it differently.


This is what being famous is about, and Meghan is someone whose biggest goal for 20+ years prior to meeting Harry was to be as famous as possible.  It seems that at some point during those two decades she should have thought about the downsides of fame and how she would handle it if she ever achieved it.  Most famous people talk about detaching and compartmentalizing that public side in order to be able to enjoy private life.  Meghan and Harry seem to be completely unable and unwilling to try that.

Meghan's had a rough time in the press and commiserating with their loved ones and figuring out a healthy way to deal with it would be in order.  Instead, she and Harry have alienated themselves from family, gone rogue with the most antagonistic and pointless plan for dealing with the press possible, and decided to complain to the public about how tough they have it.  It's hard to sympathize with them when they make such terrible choices.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

Time will tell if I'm wrong, but there's a big part of me that thinks that Meghan is actually not that miserable.  I think that she's actually living - not just existing.  The article from the gossip columnist about meeting her years ago shows that Meghan is very astute at the PR game and building an image. There are stars who do an effective job of winning over loyalty from their fans by whining about the hardships of their lives.  Jennifer Aniston and Taylor Swift come to mind as two examples who've mastered it. I think it's entirely possible that Meghan knows what she signed up for and is enjoying it - but wants to distinguish herself as more popular than Kate and other royals and is using this to try to win the favor of the public.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> This is what being famous is about, and Meghan is someone whose biggest goal for 20+ years prior to meeting Harry was to be as famous as possible.  It seems that at some point during those two decades she should have thought about the downsides of fame and how she would handle it if she ever achieved it.  Most famous people talk about detaching and compartmentalizing that public side in order to be able to enjoy private life.  Meghan and Harry seem to be completely unable and unwilling to try that.
> 
> Meghan's had a rough time in the press and commiserating with their loved ones and figuring out a healthy way to deal with it would be in order.  Instead, she and Harry have alienated themselves from family, gone rogue with the most antagonistic and pointless plan for dealing with the press possible, and decided to complain to the public about how tough they have it.  It's hard to sympathize with them when they make such terrible choices.


If this was a PR move it was an ill advised one. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot. Megan has to be tough, or rather very strong, to get the fame she has accumulated to date. How could she possibly think that the public would buy her sad little misunderstood flower act. As far as Harry is concerned, not so wild about him anymore either.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chagall said:


> If this was a PR move it was an ill advised one. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot. Megan has to be tough, or rather very strong, to get the fame she has accumulated to date. How could she possibly think that the public would buy her sad little misunderstood flower act. As far as Harry is concerned, not so wild about him anymore either.


A lot of the public has.  I've heard discussions on several talk shows where they've talked about how brave she was to buck the system and admit how hard it is.  I've been called cold and heartless on other discussion boards for saying she should have kept her mouth shut and allowed the doc to be about Africa. She won deeper loyalty from some fans for what they did.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LibbyRuth said:


> Time will tell if I'm wrong, but there's a big part of me that thinks that Meghan is actually not that miserable.  I think that she's actually living - not just existing.  The article from the gossip columnist about meeting her years ago shows that Meghan is very astute at the PR game and building an image. There are stars who do an effective job of winning over loyalty from their fans by whining about the hardships of their lives.  Jennifer Aniston and Taylor Swift come to mind as two examples who've mastered it. I think it's entirely possible that Meghan knows what she signed up for and is enjoying it - but wants to distinguish herself as more popular than Kate and other royals and is using this to try to win the favor of the public.


I'd say with certainty you're correct. She's loving it but has to act like she isn't because her preening out in public has been poorly received. Now she has to paint herself as the victim.

I think the only shock was that people don't love her as much as she thought they would - she expected adoration and curtsies from the masses.

This is a woman who spent her whole adult life bending over backwards and forwards to get famous. She knew exactly what it was and it was exactly what she wanted.


----------



## cafecreme15

LibbyRuth said:


> A lot of the public has.  I've heard discussions on several talk shows where they've talked about how brave she was to buck the system and admit how hard it is.  I've been called cold and heartless on other discussion boards for saying she should have kept her mouth shut and allowed the doc to be about Africa. She won deeper loyalty from some fans for what they did.


It seems to me like this plan has further endeared her already-existing fans to her, but has done her no favors in gaining her any new ones.


----------



## buffym

piperdog said:


> How shocking that a group of politicians take a stand against press stories that are "distasteful".  Hmm, where else have I been seeing attacks on a press that dare to publish items that people in power (such as members of the BRF, or politicians in the UK or even the  US) may not like?



It doesn’t matter if it is distasteful, it matters if it is illegal which is what the Sussex’s are seeking legal means to stop.


----------



## sdkitty

Babydoll Chanel said:


> And calling her baby a half monkey, calling her a 'black taint', telling her and her mother to go live in the zoo, etc etc. Saying your husband has 'jungle fever' that's why he is with you. Like it or not, deny it or not, racism plays a huge role in the dehumanization and othering of Meghan. Folks are pissed that a woman of color snagged HRH.


those are extreme examples - I assume from the dark web.  I think she has enough admiration elsewhere to offset the "unfair" criticism she has gotten.  I don't know if Harry decided on his own that she was being picked on or if she convinced him.  but seems with his history it would not have been hard for her to do so.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

sdkitty said:


> those are extreme examples - I assume from the dark web.  I think she has enough admiration elsewhere to offset the "unfair" criticism she has gotten.  I don't know if Harry decided on his own that she was being picked on or if she convinced him.  but seems with his history it would not have been hard for her to do so.



Na, from:
1) Katie Hopkins, who said some unsavory things.
2) UKIP leader's fiancee. 
3) A DM article. 
4) Every *single *article on Meghan has countless comments, whether it's tabloid or whether it's a proper webzine, and many mention her race. 
5) Camilla Toomey from The Telegraph called her out for not having 'enough white women' on the Vogue cover she edited.


----------



## CeeJay

Babydoll Chanel said:


> Na, from:
> 1) Katie Hopkins, who said some unsavory things.
> 2) UKIP leader's fiancee.
> 3) A DM article.
> 4) Every *single *article on Meghan has countless comments, whether it's tabloid or whether it's a proper webzine, and many mention her race.
> 5) Camilla Toomey from The Telegraph called her out for not having 'enough white women' on the Vogue cover she edited.


Okay .. personally, I have never seen any of the above .. but more importantly, I HAVE NEVER seen a single TPF member call her anything like this .. and as such, can we just accept that .. yes, there is stuff out there but do we have to bring up that "conversation" here?


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> Time will tell if I'm wrong, but there's a big part of me that thinks that Meghan is actually not that miserable.  I think that she's actually living - not just existing.  The article from the gossip columnist about meeting her years ago shows that Meghan is very astute at the PR game and building an image. There are stars who do an effective job of winning over loyalty from their fans by whining about the hardships of their lives.  Jennifer Aniston and Taylor Swift come to mind as two examples who've mastered it. I think it's entirely possible that Meghan knows what she signed up for and is enjoying it - but wants to distinguish herself as more popular than Kate and other royals and is using this to try to win the favor of the public.


Your examples are great! I can totally see that in Swift and Aniston. And, Swift did disappear for about 9 months to a year when her press got increasingly negative and critical. She came back slightly different and now it's on the upswing for her again. Time off can work.


----------



## Jayne1

Babydoll Chanel said:


> And calling her baby a half monkey, calling her a 'black taint', telling her and her mother to go live in the zoo, etc etc. Saying your husband has 'jungle fever' that's why he is with you. Like it or not, deny it or not, racism plays a huge role in the dehumanization and othering of Meghan. Folks are pissed that a woman of color snagged HRH.


What in the world are you reading.  I like checking out Meg stories and never see anything like that.  I hope you aren't giving more clicks to stuff like this.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. personally, I have never seen any of the above .. but more importantly, I HAVE NEVER seen a single TPF member call her anything like this .. and as such, can we just accept that .. yes, there is stuff out there but do we have to bring up that "conversation" here?


To add, as a person of color I am disgusted at repeated insinuations that anyone who dislikes Meghan does so because of her race. It's so out of line and it's unfortunate that it's allowed to continue in a thread where no racist remarks have been made. Just because someone is reading trash elsewhere on the internet, doesn't mean the views are shared here.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> Time will tell if I'm wrong, but there's a big part of me that thinks that Meghan is actually not that miserable.  I think that she's actually living - not just existing.  The article from the gossip columnist about meeting her years ago shows that Meghan is very astute at the PR game and building an image. There are stars who do an effective job of winning over loyalty from their fans by whining about the hardships of their lives.  Jennifer Aniston and Taylor Swift come to mind as two examples who've mastered it. I think it's entirely possible that Meghan knows what she signed up for and is enjoying it - but wants to distinguish herself as more popular than Kate and other royals and is using this to try to win the favor of the public.


Let her try sitting at a desk answering other people's phones or worse - cleaning other people's houses or working on a factory line.  Then ask her if she is just existing


----------



## LuckyBitch

I will be happy to re-evaluate my opinion of her once she realizes how good she has it.[/QUOTE]

Oh, goody. We'll look forward to that...


----------



## bag-mania

Any negative articles about Meghan have been more than counterbalanced by the adoring, fluffy articles that appear about her every day. For example this "article" from _People_ , which in reality is very thinly veiled advertisement for the jewelry designer. Meghan wears two new gold rings to an event and this writer absolutely gushes about it being a symbol of positive change! It's only jewelry for crying out loud. 

*The Special Meaning Behind Meghan Markle's Two New Gold Rings!*
Meghan Markle is letting her jewelry do the talking!

Stepping out in a striking red monochromatic look on Friday to attend a meeting with the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and One Young World in Windsor, Meghan accessorized with two new gold rings from Vargas Goteo, a jewelry brand raising awareness of endangered animals.

“To see my work out there and on such a remarkable woman really is a dream come true,” Alex Prijic Smith, founder of the Canadian jewelry line, tells PEOPLE. “Meghan always exudes ease and elegance, refinement and a freshness in everything she steps out in — I loved what she wore!”

The Montreal-based brand, which was founded by Prijic Smith in 2010, is a contemporary sustainably sourced jewelry line whose mission is to create “statement pieces that start a conversation about conservation.” From elephants to manta rays, the designs are not only inspired by endangered wildlife, but a percentage of profits are donated directly to charities helping in that field.

With Meghan’s Manta Kiss Ring (which retails for either $180 or $600 depending on whether she went for the gold-plated or solid gold version), a percentage of proceeds are donated to the Manta Trust.

“Our Manta collection supports the Manta Trust, a U.K based charity whose global work focuses on ray and marine habitat research and conservation,” explains the jeweler, who also supports the plights of rhinos, sharks and the coral reef through her collections.

Meghan also wore the High Seas Bow Knot Ring in gold vermeil, which retails for $180. The jeweler says she has no idea how or where Meghan purchased the pieces but she couldn’t be happier. “I’m so proud that with gained visibility, comes increased support of the conservation organizations we support.”

It’s the not the first time that Meghan has chosen her jewelry to highlight a charitable cause. The royal mom has worn ethical jewelry brand Pippa Small on many occasions, including a pair of gold earrings made by the Turquoise Mountain Foundation, an Afghanistan-based charity. She has also worn sustainable lab-grown diamonds by Kimai and owns several pieces by i+i Jewellery, which donates 10% of all profits to a charity in India that helps free women and children from sex slavery.

“I think it’s apparent when eco-socio awareness runs deep, and Meghan is a shining example of that,” says Prijic Smith, who says sales have been steadily growing since Friday and so far over $300 have been raised for the Manta Trust. “Whether in her actions, her words, or her choice of brands, she stays true to shining a light on the value of compassion and efforts made to create positive change.”
https://people.com/royals/the-special-meaning-behind-meghan-markles-two-new-gold-rings/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Any negative articles about Meghan have been more than counterbalanced by the adoring, fluffy articles that appear about her every day. For example this "article" from _People_ , which in reality is very thinly veiled advertisement for the jewelry designer. Meghan wears two new gold rings to an event and this writer absolutely gushes about it being a symbol of positive change! It's only jewelry for crying out loud.
> 
> *The Special Meaning Behind Meghan Markle's Two New Gold Rings!*
> Meghan Markle is letting her jewelry do the talking!
> 
> Stepping out in a striking red monochromatic look on Friday to attend a meeting with the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and One Young World in Windsor, Meghan accessorized with two new gold rings from Vargas Goteo, a jewelry brand raising awareness of endangered animals.
> 
> “To see my work out there and on such a remarkable woman really is a dream come true,” Alex Prijic Smith, founder of the Canadian jewelry line, tells PEOPLE. “Meghan always exudes ease and elegance, refinement and a freshness in everything she steps out in — I loved what she wore!”
> 
> The Montreal-based brand, which was founded by Prijic Smith in 2010, is a contemporary sustainably sourced jewelry line whose mission is to create “statement pieces that start a conversation about conservation.” From elephants to manta rays, the designs are not only inspired by endangered wildlife, but a percentage of profits are donated directly to charities helping in that field.
> 
> With Meghan’s Manta Kiss Ring (which retails for either $180 or $600 depending on whether she went for the gold-plated or solid gold version), a percentage of proceeds are donated to the Manta Trust.
> 
> “Our Manta collection supports the Manta Trust, a U.K based charity whose global work focuses on ray and marine habitat research and conservation,” explains the jeweler, who also supports the plights of rhinos, sharks and the coral reef through her collections.
> 
> Meghan also wore the High Seas Bow Knot Ring in gold vermeil, which retails for $180. The jeweler says she has no idea how or where Meghan purchased the pieces but she couldn’t be happier. “I’m so proud that with gained visibility, comes increased support of the conservation organizations we support.”
> 
> It’s the not the first time that Meghan has chosen her jewelry to highlight a charitable cause. The royal mom has worn ethical jewelry brand Pippa Small on many occasions, including a pair of gold earrings made by the Turquoise Mountain Foundation, an Afghanistan-based charity. She has also worn sustainable lab-grown diamonds by Kimai and owns several pieces by i+i Jewellery, which donates 10% of all profits to a charity in India that helps free women and children from sex slavery.
> 
> “I think it’s apparent when eco-socio awareness runs deep, and Meghan is a shining example of that,” says Prijic Smith, who says sales have been steadily growing since Friday and so far over $300 have been raised for the Manta Trust. “Whether in her actions, her words, or her choice of brands, she stays true to shining a light on the value of compassion and efforts made to create positive change.”
> https://people.com/royals/the-special-meaning-behind-meghan-markles-two-new-gold-rings/


yes, she's a saint for wearing those rings


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, she's a saint for wearing those rings



Yes, it's a pity most of us lesser women don't have the guts to wear cute gold rings to raise awareness! Shame on us. Shame on us all!


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Yes, it's a pity most of us lesser women don't have the guts to wear cute gold rings to raise awareness! Shame on us. Shame on us all!


All hail Meghan of the House Soho, the First of Her Name, The Unburnt, Queen of the Thumb Rings, Harry and the First Men, Queen of Bespoke Muumuus, Duchess of the Great Frogmore, Protector of the Messy Updos, Breaker of Traditions and Mother of Wokeness.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Queen of Bespoke Muumuus


----------



## daisychainz

I guess there are royal pregnancy betting pools that gain traction with reliable info? They are saying reliable sources claim a second pregnancy announcement will come soon, and MM has been re-wearing her maternity clothes like the purple dress, shirt dress, and striped one from Australia. What do you think? I think maybe that would make sense, that they would be away from the UK to make the announcement, if true.

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a29621445/meghan-markle-pregnant-second-baby-speculation/


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> To add, as a person of color I am disgusted at repeated insinuations that anyone who dislikes Meghan does so because of her race. It's so out of line and it's unfortunate that it's allowed to continue in a thread where no racist remarks have been made. Just because someone is reading trash elsewhere on the internet, doesn't mean the views are shared here.


*THANK YOU!!! *.. 100% agree with you on this, I'm really tired of reading this on this thread!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Any negative articles about Meghan have been more than counterbalanced by the adoring, fluffy articles that appear about her every day. For example this "article" from _People_ , which in reality is very thinly veiled advertisement for the jewelry designer. Meghan wears two new gold rings to an event and this writer absolutely gushes about it being a symbol of positive change! It's only jewelry for crying out loud.
> 
> *The Special Meaning Behind Meghan Markle's Two New Gold Rings!*
> Meghan Markle is letting her jewelry do the talking!
> 
> Stepping out in a striking red monochromatic look on Friday to attend a meeting with the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and One Young World in Windsor, Meghan accessorized with two new gold rings from Vargas Goteo, a jewelry brand raising awareness of endangered animals.
> 
> “To see my work out there and on such a remarkable woman really is a dream come true,” Alex Prijic Smith, founder of the Canadian jewelry line, tells PEOPLE. “Meghan always exudes ease and elegance, refinement and a freshness in everything she steps out in — I loved what she wore!”
> 
> The Montreal-based brand, which was founded by Prijic Smith in 2010, is a contemporary sustainably sourced jewelry line whose mission is to create “statement pieces that start a conversation about conservation.” From elephants to manta rays, the designs are not only inspired by endangered wildlife, but a percentage of profits are donated directly to charities helping in that field.
> 
> With Meghan’s Manta Kiss Ring (which retails for either $180 or $600 depending on whether she went for the gold-plated or solid gold version), a percentage of proceeds are donated to the Manta Trust.
> 
> “Our Manta collection supports the Manta Trust, a U.K based charity whose global work focuses on ray and marine habitat research and conservation,” explains the jeweler, who also supports the plights of rhinos, sharks and the coral reef through her collections.
> 
> Meghan also wore the High Seas Bow Knot Ring in gold vermeil, which retails for $180. The jeweler says she has no idea how or where Meghan purchased the pieces but she couldn’t be happier. “I’m so proud that with gained visibility, comes increased support of the conservation organizations we support.”
> 
> It’s the not the first time that Meghan has chosen her jewelry to highlight a charitable cause. The royal mom has worn ethical jewelry brand Pippa Small on many occasions, including a pair of gold earrings made by the Turquoise Mountain Foundation, an Afghanistan-based charity. She has also worn sustainable lab-grown diamonds by Kimai and owns several pieces by i+i Jewellery, which donates 10% of all profits to a charity in India that helps free women and children from sex slavery.
> 
> “I think it’s apparent when eco-socio awareness runs deep, and Meghan is a shining example of that,” says Prijic Smith, who says sales have been steadily growing since Friday and so far over $300 have been raised for the Manta Trust. “Whether in her actions, her words, or her choice of brands, she stays true to shining a light on the value of compassion and efforts made to create positive change.”
> https://people.com/royals/the-special-meaning-behind-meghan-markles-two-new-gold-rings/


.. and how much you want to bet that these pieces were "gifted" to her exactly for them to get the press about it?!?!?!  See it all the time in many US magazines, and you know what .. he is not the first to be doing this, quite to the contrary.  For instance, the LA artist Beth Yorn (_company name = Elizabeth Bell Jewelry_) who makes her *OWN jewelry* has been doing sustainable (_recycled gold, etc._) Jewelry with the same theme for years .. yet, since she wants to retain the artisanry behind her line, it is not manufactured and I bet the Canadian brand is.  Pippa Small is the same .. while her work is "manufactured", it is done so in India and other parts of the work to provide the natives with work to help with their families.  There is a new book out (_already on my husband's Christmas list - for me_) .. called - Bejeweled: The World of Ethical Jewelry by Kyle Roderick.


----------



## myown

LittleStar88 said:


> I am 100% happy to go as his proxy
> 
> Harry has been living his life in a bubble. Protected, so many things done for him, etc. So now that he has to put his big boy pants on and start adulting, it is proving to be a challenge to get started on dealing with the realities of that this late into his 30's.
> 
> They both seem too fragile to manage the responsibilities, benefits, and drawbacks of the BRF lifestyle, so maybe it would be a good idea for them to find something else to do with their lives. No one wants to hear them whining about how hard their life of comfort and privilege is for them.


I think this fragile thing and talking about how hard things are is part of _heads together  _


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> All hail Meghan of the House Soho, the First of Her Name, The Unburnt, Queen of the Thumb Rings, Harry and the First Men, Queen of Bespoke Muumuus, Duchess of the Great Frogmore, Protector of the Messy Updos, Breaker of Traditions and Mother of Wokeness.


     .. LOVE THIS!!!


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> Most couples with a small baby would not be in a position to take a six week break.  Maybe she can live and not just exist for six weeks.  Boo hoo.
> Even her dad who is shown no respect worked for a living.


most people, or even all, in Europe take at least 6 weeks off after birth.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

myown said:


> most people, or even all, in Europe take at least 6 weeks off after birth.



Umm, she already did that and more.  This is additional time "off."


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> most people, or even all, in Europe take at least 6 weeks off after birth.


Yes, in Norway .. the mother typically gets an entire year (sometimes more) off and the Father also gets paternity leave.  The US has the most pathetic system where, in some cases, your time off is based strictly on your length of service at the company.!


----------



## myown

Cavalier Girl said:


> Umm, she already did that and more.  This is additional time "off."


that's not really uncommon in Europe to be honest

I took/take 2 years off. My husband took twice 1 month. that's how most people i know do it. some eben take 3 years off or more. it's even not that uncommon in uk


----------



## doni

myown said:


> most people, or even all, in Europe take at least 6 weeks off after birth.


But not the couple at the same time, it is one or the other (for parental leave after the end of maternity leave)...


----------



## myown

doni said:


> But not the couple at the same time, it is one or the other (for parental leave after the end of maternity leave)...


maybe that depends on the country you live in. we took at the same time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Well this reads as a story direct from Meghan’s PR team if I ever saw one. Designed to either shame Kate or bait her into responding:


----------



## bag-mania

I love how _Vanity Fair_ has created a new subheading called "Royal Psychology" for these articles. There is apparently a dispute between the tabloids over whether Kate reached out or not. It is mind-boggling that this is an issue. Some poor writers actually have to put time into thinking about this for their jobs. 

*So Did Kate Middleton Reach Out to Meghan Markle Or What?*
After a whirlwind October that saw her travel to Pakistan in style with Prince William and still find time to hang out with Camilla Cabello, you would expect Kate Middleton to take it easy for a while. And in some ways, she is—the *Mirror reported that she was shopping for Halloween costumes at mass-market retailer Sainsbury’s last week, and reports say the Cambridges will celebrate at Anmer Hall. But royal drama is at high tide after last week’s documentary, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle opened up about the impact their battle with the press is having on their emotional states. It’s leaving the tabloids speculating about what’s going on for Kate in particular. Can we figure out what Kate did after hearing about Meghan and Harry’s true feelings?

So far, the results are mixed, with some saying that Kate has reached out to Meghan specifically and others saying she is keeping her distance. On Monday, a royal insider told _In Touch_ that Kate is “keeping herself out of the situation,” adding that “Kate has enough on her plate looking after three kids and fulfilling royal duties. She barely has a moment to herself and tries to avoid drama and conflict at all costs.” That being said, the source said she does sympathize with Meghan’s plight.

On Tuesday morning, the _Daily Express_ quoted a royal reporter who claimed nearly the opposite. Phil Daunier, who last was a part of the narrative when he slammed Harry and Meghan after the doc aired, said, “Behind the scenes I’m told Kate is doing her best to bring everyone together and help Meghan,” he said. “None of them want to let the Queen down so Kate is trying to patch things up in private.” According to Daunier, Kate and Meghan had a conversation. “I’m told she has reached out to Meghan and spoken to her on the phone. Kate feels sorry for her and knows that Meghan is struggling.”

There could be an innocent explanation for the discrepancy here: the truth is somewhere in the middle. It's always hard to know what people are saying behind closed doors when they aren’t in the habit of saying it to each other. In last week’s _People_ cover story, writer Penny Junor discussed the royal family’s communication style. “It is a strange family and not one that has supported one another very well," she said. “They don’t praise one another and never call each other up just to say, ‘That was a great speech.’”

In their story, _People_ quoted a source who claims Prince William reached out to Harry after watching the documentary. (The _Daily Mail_ said they did not know if he watched in advance of its official airing.) “Watching that, it would be hard not to have compassion and want to check in and see if they’re okay,” the anonymous insider told the magazine. “That’s a very human reaction.”

So far this mostly sounds like Kate and Meghan and William and Harry are behaving like what they are: old millennials. It’s as though Meghan and Harry posted about having a tough time on Facebook, and to reassure them, Kate and William just slid into the DMs, rather than making a big deal about it. Kate has also spoken about the stress she has felt as a mother, so it stands to reason that she might even have some advice to share.

Regardless of how Kate is feeling about the latest royal drama, the show must go on. The two couples are both planning on attending the traditional cathedral ceremony for Remembrance Sunday this weekend, and last year’s event was a source of plenty of smiling group photos, even as they announced plans to split their charities and households. After their customary two minutes of silence, they’ll have plenty of time to address anything they didn’t already touch on in their group chat.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/10/kate-middleton-and-meghan-markle-documentary-tabloids


----------



## Meh-gan

daisychainz said:


> I guess there are royal pregnancy betting pools that gain traction with reliable info? They are saying reliable sources claim a second pregnancy announcement will come soon, and MM has been re-wearing her maternity clothes like the purple dress, shirt dress, and striped one from Australia. What do you think? I think maybe that would make sense, that they would be away from the UK to make the announcement, if true.
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a29621445/meghan-markle-pregnant-second-baby-speculation/



Who gets pregnant that soon after having a kid on purpose? It’s not even advised by doctors. Her baby is what? 5 months if she announces it soon she got pregnant at 2 months into having a newborn? 

I think she is strategically wearing these clothes so there will be pregnancy rumours and because she is still carrying extra weight around the middle. Which is of course perfectly normal - many people arent stick thin and flat tummy 5 months after having a baby.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I love how _Vanity Fair_ has created a new subheading called "Royal Psychology" for these articles. There is apparently a dispute between the tabloids over whether Kate reached out or not. It is mind-boggling that this is an issue. Some poor writers actually have to put time into thinking about this for their jobs.
> 
> *So Did Kate Middleton Reach Out to Meghan Markle Or What?*
> After a whirlwind October that saw her travel to Pakistan in style with Prince William and still find time to hang out with Camilla Cabello, you would expect Kate Middleton to take it easy for a while. And in some ways, she is—the *Mirror reported that she was shopping for Halloween costumes at mass-market retailer Sainsbury’s last week, and reports say the Cambridges will celebrate at Anmer Hall. But royal drama is at high tide after last week’s documentary, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle opened up about the impact their battle with the press is having on their emotional states. It’s leaving the tabloids speculating about what’s going on for Kate in particular. Can we figure out what Kate did after hearing about Meghan and Harry’s true feelings?
> 
> So far, the results are mixed, with some saying that Kate has reached out to Meghan specifically and others saying she is keeping her distance. On Monday, a royal insider told _In Touch_ that Kate is “keeping herself out of the situation,” adding that “Kate has enough on her plate looking after three kids and fulfilling royal duties. She barely has a moment to herself and tries to avoid drama and conflict at all costs.” That being said, the source said she does sympathize with Meghan’s plight.
> 
> On Tuesday morning, the _Daily Express_ quoted a royal reporter who claimed nearly the opposite. Phil Daunier, who last was a part of the narrative when he slammed Harry and Meghan after the doc aired, said, “Behind the scenes I’m told Kate is doing her best to bring everyone together and help Meghan,” he said. “None of them want to let the Queen down so Kate is trying to patch things up in private.” According to Daunier, Kate and Meghan had a conversation. “I’m told she has reached out to Meghan and spoken to her on the phone. Kate feels sorry for her and knows that Meghan is struggling.”
> 
> There could be an innocent explanation for the discrepancy here: the truth is somewhere in the middle. It's always hard to know what people are saying behind closed doors when they aren’t in the habit of saying it to each other. In last week’s _People_ cover story, writer Penny Junor discussed the royal family’s communication style. “It is a strange family and not one that has supported one another very well," she said. “They don’t praise one another and never call each other up just to say, ‘That was a great speech.’”
> 
> In their story, _People_ quoted a source who claims Prince William reached out to Harry after watching the documentary. (The _Daily Mail_ said they did not know if he watched in advance of its official airing.) “Watching that, it would be hard not to have compassion and want to check in and see if they’re okay,” the anonymous insider told the magazine. “That’s a very human reaction.”
> 
> So far this mostly sounds like Kate and Meghan and William and Harry are behaving like what they are: old millennials. It’s as though Meghan and Harry posted about having a tough time on Facebook, and to reassure them, Kate and William just slid into the DMs, rather than making a big deal about it. Kate has also spoken about the stress she has felt as a mother, so it stands to reason that she might even have some advice to share.
> 
> Regardless of how Kate is feeling about the latest royal drama, the show must go on. The two couples are both planning on attending the traditional cathedral ceremony for Remembrance Sunday this weekend, and last year’s event was a source of plenty of smiling group photos, even as they announced plans to split their charities and households. After their customary two minutes of silence, they’ll have plenty of time to address anything they didn’t already touch on in their group chat.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/10/kate-middleton-and-meghan-markle-documentary-tabloids


You know, I have to say (IMO) .. that I kind of feel sorry for Kate here because I believe that the beef is between the brothers and they should sort it out.  If Kate reaching out is more along the lines of how to "deal" with the BRF and their traditions, etc. - okay, but why do I feel as though Meghan wouldn't listen anyhow?  It's kind of like .. okay you 2 "man-up" and sort it out - sheesh!


----------



## hellosunshine

Today, at the launch of Team U.K. our Patron, The Duke of Sussex, greeted the 65-strong Invictus UK team of wounded, injured and sick (WIS) Service personnel. More than 30% are still serving and 89% have never competed at an Invictus Game before.


----------



## hellosunshine

*MPs sign letter to Duchess of Sussex calling out 'outdated, colonial undertones' in reporting about her*

*

*
*

*


A group of 72 MPs have written a letter of solidarity to the Duchess of Sussex over what they call the "outdated, colonial undertones" to many of the newspaper stories about her.

The Members of Parliament, who are all female, say they are from "all political persuasions" and have signed a public letter to Meghan because they want to take a stand against the "distasteful and misleading nature" of some of the media coverage about her since she got engaged to Prince Harry in 2017.

They told the duchess the stories published have, on occasions, represented an "invasion of your privacy" and, as women in public life, they wrote that they share an understanding of the "abuse and intimidation" which is often used to disparage their work.

Often, the MPs write, the national media has been seeking to "tear women down for no apparent reason".

The letter originated from the Labour MP, Holly Lynch, but she has encouraged dozens of her colleagues from Labour and Conservative benches to become signatories.

Ms Lynch said: "Women MPs from all political parties have put aside our differences to stand in solidarity with the Duchess of Sussex today and are sending her this open letter."

It follows the ITV documentary earlier this month in which Meghan told ITV News presenter Tom Bradby she has been struggling to adapt to life in the royal family.

The duchess told the programme the intense tabloid coverage, which she hadn't expected, has not been fair.

The Assistant Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, Angela Williams, retweeted the letter from Ms Lynch and said it was "very powerful" and showed "ladies in public life" were "standing shoulder to shoulder to support one another".

 The letter was also shared on Twitter by Meghan's close friend Jessica Mulroney who wrote: "This is what I'm talking about", along with a heart emoji.

The Canadian stylist has been vocal in her support of the Duchess in the past, recently hitting out at the royals' critics, calling them "racist bullies".

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-29...d-colonial-undertones-in-reporting-about-her/


----------



## mrsinsyder

Is this the same article that was posted earlier?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Is this the same article that was posted earlier?



I found a larger frame of the actual letter (for those that want to read it) along with an article. A twitter screengrab was the only thing posted earlier.


----------



## bellecate

mrsinsyder said:


> All hail Meghan of the House Soho, the First of Her Name, The Unburnt, Queen of the Thumb Rings, Harry and the First Men, Queen of Bespoke Muumuus, Duchess of the Great Frogmore, Protector of the Messy Updos, Breaker of Traditions and Mother of Wokeness.



Thank you. This is great!


----------



## hellosunshine

Instagram Posts on Prince Harry's engagement today --


----------



## ccbaggirl89

daisychainz said:


> I guess there are royal pregnancy betting pools that gain traction with reliable info? They are saying reliable sources claim a second pregnancy announcement will come soon, and MM has been re-wearing her maternity clothes like the purple dress, shirt dress, and striped one from Australia. What do you think? I think maybe that would make sense, that they would be away from the UK to make the announcement, if true.
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a29621445/meghan-markle-pregnant-second-baby-speculation/



She'll probably announce a pregnancy at Beatrice's wedding, whenever that is.


----------



## caramelize126

Babydoll Chanel said:


> And calling her baby a half monkey, calling her a 'black taint', telling her and her mother to go live in the zoo, etc etc. Saying your husband has 'jungle fever' that's why he is with you. Like it or not, deny it or not, racism plays a huge role in the dehumanization and othering of Meghan. Folks are pissed that a woman of color snagged HRH.



This is low hanging fruit for her fans. 

The hate she gets on this thread has always always always been supported by the poster’s *behavioral* observations of Meghan. The only people who insist on constantly bringing up these horrible racist comments are her fans. 

A poster previously posted these screenshots of some of the articles you are referencing. These were all tabloids that were completely unheard of and obscure. You would only find them if you were looking for them. So sick of people bringing up the “unconscious bias” just because they have nothing else to say to support their views.


----------



## caramelize126

mrsinsyder said:


> To add, as a person of color I am disgusted at repeated insinuations that anyone who dislikes Meghan does so because of her race. It's so out of line and it's unfortunate that it's allowed to continue in a thread where no racist remarks have been made. Just because someone is reading trash elsewhere on the internet, doesn't mean the views are shared here.



This!!!


----------



## HavPlenty

The hate this woman gets is ridiculous.


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess with the Kate rumors is that Kate is leaving it alone.  Will might have reached out to Harry.  I doubt anybody is reaching out to Megan.  I think they have her number, and they are not about to be sucked into the drama tornado.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

CeeJay said:


> .. and how much you want to bet that these pieces were "gifted" to her exactly for them to get the press about it?!?!?!  See it all the time in many US magazines, and you know what .. he is not the first to be doing this, quite to the contrary.  For instance, the LA artist Beth Yorn (_company name = Elizabeth Bell Jewelry_) who makes her *OWN jewelry* has been doing sustainable (_recycled gold, etc._) Jewelry with the same theme for years .. yet, since she wants to retain the artisanry behind her line, it is not manufactured and I bet the Canadian brand is.  Pippa Small is the same .. while her work is "manufactured", it is done so in India and other parts of the work to provide the natives with work to help with their families.  There is a new book out (_already on my husband's Christmas list - for me_) .. called - Bejeweled: The World of Ethical Jewelry by Kyle Roderick.



Yes and Pippa Small has a longstanding connection with the BRF because of the Prince Charles sponsored Pippa Small Turquoise Mountain Foundation which was established about 10 years before Meghan came onto the scene.
https://turquoisemountain.org

I'm going to take a look at that book - thanks for the tip!


----------



## buffym

It is nice that Cory’s mother responded with a tweet of support for Meghan.


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> *MPs sign letter to Duchess of Sussex calling out 'outdated, colonial undertones' in reporting about her*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4577338
> *
> *
> View attachment 4577339
> *
> 
> 
> A group of 72 MPs have written a letter of solidarity to the Duchess of Sussex over what they call the "outdated, colonial undertones" to many of the newspaper stories about her.
> 
> The Members of Parliament, who are all female, say they are from "all political persuasions" and have signed a public letter to Meghan because they want to take a stand against the "distasteful and misleading nature" of some of the media coverage about her since she got engaged to Prince Harry in 2017.
> 
> They told the duchess the stories published have, on occasions, represented an "invasion of your privacy" and, as women in public life, they wrote that they share an understanding of the "abuse and intimidation" which is often used to disparage their work.
> 
> Often, the MPs write, the national media has been seeking to "tear women down for no apparent reason".
> 
> The letter originated from the Labour MP, Holly Lynch, but she has encouraged dozens of her colleagues from Labour and Conservative benches to become signatories.
> 
> Ms Lynch said: "Women MPs from all political parties have put aside our differences to stand in solidarity with the Duchess of Sussex today and are sending her this open letter."
> 
> It follows the ITV documentary earlier this month in which Meghan told ITV News presenter Tom Bradby she has been struggling to adapt to life in the royal family.
> 
> The duchess told the programme the intense tabloid coverage, which she hadn't expected, has not been fair.
> 
> The Assistant Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, Angela Williams, retweeted the letter from Ms Lynch and said it was "very powerful" and showed "ladies in public life" were "standing shoulder to shoulder to support one another".
> 
> The letter was also shared on Twitter by Meghan's close friend Jessica Mulroney who wrote: "This is what I'm talking about", along with a heart emoji.
> 
> The Canadian stylist has been vocal in her support of the Duchess in the past, recently hitting out at the royals' critics, calling them "racist bullies".
> 
> https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-29...d-colonial-undertones-in-reporting-about-her/


Jessica Mulroney is an air head. The comments about Meghan are not racist. They are comments about her behavior. Period!!!


----------



## Grande Latte

Chagall said:


> The pattern of a narcissist relationship:
> -the narcissist targets someone that has something they need. Status etc. the targeted person usually is vulnerable in some way or another.
> -the narcissist ‘love bombs’ the target by giving them excessive attention and admiration.
> -they move the relationship along at a fast pace that isn’t prudent or normal.
> -they push for a fast commitment.
> -once they have secured the target they start to ‘gaslight’ them into doubting the elements in their life, their relationships etc.
> -gradually they isolate the victim from all their support network.
> -they manipulate the victim to relocate geographically.
> Once the narcissist has gotten all they required from the victim they then discard them.
> Time will tell however I see a pattern here.


I agree. Meghan's history with men already shows these traits, and it is the same with Harry. He's in the being devalued phase. Whether he gets discarded depends on whether she finds a new target or not. But either way, once you're suckered into the storm, it's tremendous pain and self doubt. And to the people who say, have you seen the way she looks at him?...That's called "love-bombing". It's a very, very powerful weapon.

Many rich and powerful men love being with a royal. It adds a certain prestige to their wealth. No doubt Meghan's value has already gone up and I wouldn't be surprised if some billionaire in America falls in love with her. There are lots in the technology field.

All of the above is all my conjecture of course. But what is true is a man newly wed to the love of his life, and just had a baby, and is living the top life shouldn't have lost so much weight, gets all emotional in front of the press, and starts suing a bunch of people. He should be happy. At least in this early period of his marriage. Something's not right.

I know I will get so much **** for posting this, but I feel so sorry for Harry. Just hope he has the smarts, the strength, and the support he needs to come out the other side. Good luck.


----------



## Chagall

Grande Latte said:


> I agree. Meghan's history with men already shows these traits, and it is the same with Harry. He's in the being devalued phase. Whether he gets discarded depends on whether she finds a new target or not. But either way, once you're suckered into the storm, it's tremendous pain and self doubt.
> 
> Many rich and powerful men love being with a royal. It adds a certain prestige to their wealth. No doubt Meghan's value has already gone up and I wouldn't be surprised if some billionaire in America falls in love with her. There are lots in the technology field.
> 
> All of the above is all my conjecture of course. But what is true is a man newly wed to the love of his life, and just had a baby, and is living the top life shouldn't have lost so much weight, gets all emotional in front of the press, and starts suing a bunch of people. He should be happy. At least in this early period of his marriage. Something's not right.


I absolutely agree with you. Their existence together mirrors how narcissistic relationships play out, even to the geographic relocation. It’s too volatile at too early a stage in their marriage.


----------



## buffym

Chagall said:


> Jessica Mulroney is an air head. The comments about Meghan are not racist. They are comments about her behavior. Period!!!



Jessica posted what was written by the MPs. They can find some of the press coverage racist. The same way some say Meghan has used her ex’s yet her ex’s mother states she doesn’t deserve the negative coverage.


----------



## chicaloca

buffym said:


> It is nice that Cory’s mother responded with a tweet of support for Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4577504





mdcx said:


> Well this reads as a story direct from Meghan’s PR team if I ever saw one. Designed to either shame Kate or bait her into responding:
> 
> View attachment 4577253



Why would Meghan’s PR be planting stories with the publication she’s suing? The Mail on Sunday and Daily Mail are the same company. That would make no logical or legal sense whatsoever.

Why would Meghan be planting stories at all with any UK tabloid when they have their knives out for her and would likely publicize any attempt by her to plant info?

I’m wondering at what point will some of these false narratives will be abandoned? I mean, how nonsensical does a completely imagined scenario need before the towel is thrown in?


----------



## HavPlenty

chicaloca said:


> This is categorically false. Meghan is a polite, consummate professional. You cannot cite any confirmed public behavior that makes her worthy of the level  of vitriol spewed in this thread. Aside from appearances she is out of sight so there is no opportunity for anyone to observe her behavior outside of her job responsibilities.
> 
> The hate is based unconfirmed reports of her behavior from “palace sources” made up by unreputable tabloids that are constantly cited in this thread as sources. Many of these tabloid writers also older white traditionalists who can barely hide their prejudice in their articles. The hate is also based on characteristics projected onto Meghan due to bias. Historically Black women who exhibit confidence or intelligence beyond their white peers are labeled “arrogant or uppity”. Black women who challenge the authority or opinions of whites or do not act subservient are branded “combative”, “aggressive” or “angry” no matter how polite or soft-spoken they may be.
> 
> People of color know racism when it presents itself whether overt or subtle. Racism isn’t just about the N-word. It’s about all the micro-aggressions and biases. People can look at how Meghan is treated compared to her peers. They
> can see when she is condemned for doing the exact same things her white counterparts get praised for. They can recognize some the racially loaded terminology used when discussing her and the dog whistling by reporters designed  to raise the hackles of their equally racist readers.
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Meghan’s PR be planting stories with the publication she’s suing? The Mail on Sunday and Daily Mail are the same company. That would make no logical or legal sense whatsoever.
> 
> Why would Meghan be planting stories at all with any UK tabloid when they have their knives out for her and would likely publicize any attempt by her to plant info?
> 
> I’m wondering at what point will some of these false narratives will be abandoned? I mean, how nonsensical does a completely imagined scenario need before the towel is thrown in?


Thank you. I can't believe what I'm reading in this thread.


----------



## chicaloca

buffym said:


> It is nice that Cory’s mother responded with a tweet of support for Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4577504



That’s odd since supposedly Meghan is a “narcissist”  who isolates men from their families. Cory himself had nothing but nice things to say about Meghan when interviewed. Meghan must be the nicest narcissist ever.


----------



## Lodpah

You hit it on the nail. They are ‘nice’ to point of nauseating.


----------



## Lodpah

HavPlenty said:


> The hate this woman gets is ridiculous.


It’s not hate.


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> All hail Meghan of the House Soho, the First of Her Name, The Unburnt, Queen of the Thumb Rings, Harry and the First Men, Queen of Bespoke Muumuus, Duchess of the Great Frogmore, Protector of the Messy Updos, Breaker of Traditions and Mother of Wokeness.


I’m expecting her dragons to spew fire on this blasphemous thread any moment.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

mrsinsyder said:


> To add, as a person of color I am disgusted at repeated insinuations that anyone who dislikes Meghan does so because of her race. It's so out of line and it's unfortunate that it's allowed to continue in a thread where no racist remarks have been made. Just because someone is reading trash elsewhere on the internet, doesn't mean the views are shared here.



'Someone' isn't reading trash - I stated my sources. They are from the oft-quoted on here comments section in the DM. Like it or not, racism against Meghan exists. it may not be mentioned in this thread, nor it *may* not be a reason why people dislike her, but it exists. Pointing out that it exists is not out of line. Acknowledging that it does exist is important, in general. And, I am a person of color myself.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> It is nice that Cory’s mother responded with a tweet of support for Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4577504


Will someone please tell me why I should give a da** about what somebody’s (never heard of him) mother thinks?  
Will we get an opinion from his schoolteacher next?


Babydoll Chanel said:


> 'Someone' isn't reading trash - I stated my sources. They are from the oft-quoted on here comments section in the DM. Like it or not, racism against Meghan exists. it may not be mentioned in this thread, nor it *may* not be a reason why people dislike her, but it exists. Pointing out that it exists is not out of line. Acknowledging that it does exist is important, in general. And, I am a person of color myself.


Find a post where ANYONE on this thread has said racism doesn’t exist   If you regularly read the comments section in the Daily Mail you are bound to find some, however that doesn’t mean that criticism of Meghan’s behaviour is invalid, nor should being a WOC make her immune from criticism.  The Sussexes were flying high at the time of their wedding - everything that’s happened since is entirely down to their conduct.  They've messed up.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> That’s odd since supposedly Meghan is a “narcissist”  who isolates men from their families. Cory himself had nothing but nice things to say about Meghan when interviewed. Meghan must be the nicest narcissist ever.


Narcissists are usually very charming and charismatic individuals.  It’s what makes them so devastating.  The person targeted will be going through hell and everyone around them won’t believe there’s a problem.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

hellosunshine said:


> *MPs sign letter to Duchess of Sussex calling out 'outdated, colonial undertones' in reporting about her*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4577338
> *
> *
> View attachment 4577339
> *
> 
> 
> A group of 72 MPs have written a letter of solidarity to the Duchess of Sussex over what they call the "outdated, colonial undertones" to many of the newspaper stories about her.
> 
> The Members of Parliament, who are all female, say they are from "all political persuasions" and have signed a public letter to Meghan because they want to take a stand against the "distasteful and misleading nature" of some of the media coverage about her since she got engaged to Prince Harry in 2017.
> 
> They told the duchess the stories published have, on occasions, represented an "invasion of your privacy" and, as women in public life, they wrote that they share an understanding of the "abuse and intimidation" which is often used to disparage their work.
> 
> Often, the MPs write, the national media has been seeking to "tear women down for no apparent reason".
> 
> The letter originated from the Labour MP, Holly Lynch, but she has encouraged dozens of her colleagues from Labour and Conservative benches to become signatories.
> 
> Ms Lynch said: "Women MPs from all political parties have put aside our differences to stand in solidarity with the Duchess of Sussex today and are sending her this open letter."
> 
> It follows the ITV documentary earlier this month in which Meghan told ITV News presenter Tom Bradby she has been struggling to adapt to life in the royal family.
> 
> The duchess told the programme the intense tabloid coverage, which she hadn't expected, has not been fair.
> 
> The Assistant Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, Angela Williams, retweeted the letter from Ms Lynch and said it was "very powerful" and showed "ladies in public life" were "standing shoulder to shoulder to support one another".
> 
> The letter was also shared on Twitter by Meghan's close friend Jessica Mulroney who wrote: "This is what I'm talking about", along with a heart emoji.
> 
> The Canadian stylist has been vocal in her support of the Duchess in the past, recently hitting out at the royals' critics, calling them "racist bullies".
> 
> https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-29...d-colonial-undertones-in-reporting-about-her/



But did any of them ask her how she was doing? Because not enough people do that.


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> Will someone please tell me why I should give a da** about what somebody’s (never heard of him) mother thinks?
> Will we get an opinion from his schoolteacher next?
> 
> Find a post where ANYONE on this thread has said racism doesn’t exist   If you regularly read the comments section in the Daily Mail you are bound to find some, however that doesn’t mean that criticism of Meghan’s behaviour is invalid, nor should being a WOC make her immune from criticism.  The Sussexes were flying high at the time of their wedding - everything that’s happened since is entirely down to their conduct.  They've messed up.



Because I doubt Cory’s mother would speak a nicely about Meghan if she cheated on Cory or used him as some used.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> Narcissists are usually very charming and charismatic individuals.  It’s what makes them so devastating.  The person targeted will be going through hell and everyone around them won’t believe there’s a problem.


So true. The targeted person will become rattled and unglued. The narcissist will seem like the nicest person in the world, charming everybody, but gradually they ‘destroy’ their target. Very often the ‘grumpy’ target will appear to be the problem and the ‘narc’ the wonderful person.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> Because I doubt Cory’s mother would speak a nicely about Meghan if she cheated on Cory or used him as some used.


I was being facetious- because these c list American celebs are not known in Europe.  But I googled him and realised I know him as “the chef”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sunshine Sachs is busy trying to force Kate’s hand. This is a dumb game they’re playing.


----------



## Welltraveled!

From a instagram page............Women MPs (Member of Parliament) from most of the political parties have put aside their differences to stand in solidarity with our Duchess for ‘taking a stand against the often distasteful and misleading nature’ of some newspaper stories about her. They’ve sent her an open letter today, which has been signed by them all - it was organised by Holly Lynch.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Is anyone actually reading the thread or are pro-Sussex articles just being dropped off over and over again?


----------



## Welltraveled!

Chagall said:


> Jessica Mulroney is an air head. The comments about Meghan are not racist. They are comments about her behavior. Period!!!



Jessica is an airhead for calling out individuals that are ACTUALLY demonstrating racist like tendencies or comments?   Interesting......

I say it again.   Individuals are more concern about being called a racist then objectively looking at their behavior.


----------



## Welltraveled!

mrsinsyder said:


> Is anyone actually reading the thread or are pro-Sussex articles just being dropped off over and over again?




Anti-Sussex articles/comments are repeated sometimes as well.  It happens in threads.  Not the end of the world; just scroll pass the repeats.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Parliament has better things to worry about. They should be embarrassed for wasting their ink on such trivial nonsense. The Queen must be face-palming over this all day long. The government threatening the press over being mean to a D-list actress is a bad, bad, very bad look.

Funny that no letters like this were sent when Kate was harassed and stalked by the paparazzi for years (to an _actually_ criminal level). I guess whining about it publicly and Lifetime-level on camera acting goes a long way.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> Jessica Mulroney is an air head.



Meghan owes her come-up to Jessica (and also a decent sum of money). Jessica isn't ready to abandon her cash cow, even though it feels like she's been Markled already.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I was being facetious- because these c list American celebs are not known in Europe.  But I googled him and realised I know him as “the chef”



Cory is unknown in the US too. Only Canadians knew who he was. 

I don't understand why an ex-boyfriend's mother's opinion is relevant. She probably met Mehgan a few times at most in the two years she dated her son. Most grown men don't share the details of their relationships with their mothers. Getting Cory's opinion, or better yet Trevor's would be more telling about who Meghan is IMO.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Is anyone actually reading the thread or are pro-Sussex articles just being dropped off over and over again?



haha sometimes I have to skip several pages of the same back-and-forth (insert beating a dead horse emoji here) so I miss some things.

Narcissists - Unless you know one or have studied them as part of research then you have no idea the kind of manipulation they are capable of.

Racism - I am sure there are people who don't like Meghan based solely on the color of her skin. Those people exist everywhere unfortunately. No one here has disputed that, but no one here has contributed to that mindset. Criticism of Meghan has come out of collective observations.

I really, really liked Meghan for a while. But since she has had the baby she has struggled in a way that is not flattering to her image. 

Any chance some of this behavior from her could be post-partum related? 

I also agree with what some have said regarding the short courtship they had relative to the lifestyle. Seems maybe Harry and the BRF did not get enough of a chance to get to know who she truly is. And she did not get enough of a chance to understand the lifestyle before diving in (blinded by fame and spotlight).


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Parliament has better things to worry about. They should be embarrassed for wasting their ink on such trivial nonsense. The Queen must be face-palming over this all day long. The government threatening the press over being mean to a D-list actress is a bad, bad, very bad look.
> 
> Funny that no letters like this were sent when Kate was harassed and stalked by the paparazzi for years (to an _actually_ criminal level). I guess whining about it publicly and Lifetime-level on camera acting goes a long way.


They’re worried they’ll be out of a job this time next month - trying hard to be “relevant” 



mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan owes her come-up to Jessica (and also a decent sum of money). Jessica isn't ready to abandon her cash cow, even though it feels like she's been Markled already.


Is she being ghosted?



bag-mania said:


> Cory is unknown in the US too. Only Canadians knew who he was.
> 
> I don't understand why an ex-boyfriend's mother's opinion is relevant. She probably met Mehgan a few times at most in the two years she dated her son. Most grown men don't share the details of their relationships with their mothers. Getting Cory's opinion, or better yet Trevor's would be more telling about who Meghan is IMO.


It would indeed.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Is she being ghosted?


It's felt like it. I think she knows too many of Meghan's skeletons to get fully Markled.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan owes her come-up to Jessica (and also a decent sum of money). Jessica isn't ready to abandon her cash cow, even though it feels like she's been Markled already.


Markled


----------



## Sophisticatted

One line I found interesting in that Women MPs statement was the one about “getting on with our very important work”.  

It almost seems like a subliminal message to Megan to me.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> Parliament has better things to worry about. They should be embarrassed for wasting their ink on such trivial nonsense. The Queen must be face-palming over this all day long. The government threatening the press over being mean to a D-list actress is a bad, bad, very bad look.
> 
> Funny that no letters like this were sent when Kate was harassed and stalked by the paparazzi for years (to an _actually_ criminal level). I guess whining about it publicly and Lifetime-level on camera acting goes a long way.


It is a bad look. And do any of these women know her? Placing your support behind a cause is great but placing it behind a person you don't know can be problematic.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> Will someone please tell me why I should give a da** about what somebody’s (never heard of him) mother thinks?
> Will we get an opinion from his schoolteacher next?
> 
> Find a post where ANYONE on this thread has said racism doesn’t exist   If you regularly read the comments section in the Daily Mail you are bound to find some, however that doesn’t mean that criticism of Meghan’s behaviour is invalid, nor should being a WOC make her immune from criticism.  The Sussexes were flying high at the time of their wedding - everything that’s happened since is entirely down to their conduct.  They've messed up.


I don’t know why people don’t get this. Anybody in any group can behave in an unacceptable way. It’s our god given right as human beings.   When somebody  does behave poorly we can comment on it without it being in anyway racist. I like a lot of things about Meghan. She’s very pretty. I even like her approach to dressing which is classy casual. Even the messy bun. I find starched in place perfection to be boring. What I don’t like is phonies and users. I have a strong feeling Megan is both those things.​


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mrsinsyder

I see she’s going to milk every cent of these. I’m shocked these accomplished women would even care to talk to Soho.


----------



## doni

I cannot even express how inappropriate I find this.
She looks like a little girl who got a call from her favorite Disney Chanel star, that MP does.
I don't think this is what Parliament is for.
With all the trouble the UK is going through too, at Parliament, right now...
Are MPs now going to be held accountable each time they don't speak up for someone who's being vilified by the press?
Plus, as a feminist woman that I am, I find this is the kind of stuff that does not benefit women causes at all...


----------



## bag-mania

Politicians are always ready to jump on to the popular cause. They must have weighed the benefits of their supporting Meghan and determined it would be good for them. Is anyone really surprised by that?


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> I cannot even express how inappropriate I find this.
> She looks like a little girl who got a call from her favorite Disney Chanel star, that MP does.
> I don't think this is what Parliament is for.
> With all the trouble the UK is going through too, at Parliament, right now...
> Are MPs now going to be held accountable each time they don't speak up for someone who's being vilified by the press?
> Plus, as a feminist woman that I am, I find this is the kind of stuff that does not benefit women causes at all...


They all shout “yes I agree, I’m absolutely outraged!” whilst hurriedly reading up on the small print of whatever they just signed up to - much like some aspects of this thread


----------



## eunaddict

Chagall said:


> There is a pattern to these relationships that seldom deviate. She has hit all the milestones so far. She now has huge notoriety that will never ever go away no matter what happens in the long run.. And there is certainly a life beyond Oprah and the like.​



There is another pattern she's following. 
----

And if nothing else, Di and Fergie proved that there is life post-divorce from the Company.


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> And if nothing else, Di and Fergie proved that there is life post-divorce from the Company.



It's hard to say. Diana only lived for one year after her divorce so we don't know how that would have played out over time. Fergie was disparaged by the media for years after divorcing (and even before) and she still is to some degree. If public opinion is with Harry at the time of a divorce I can see Meghan quickly becoming very uninteresting, especially to her celebrity "friends."


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> There is another pattern she's following.
> ----
> 
> And if nothing else, Di and Fergie proved that there is life post-divorce from the Company.


Diana became iconic, partly due to her untimely death.  Meghan does have a lot of attention right now.  I still say she would lose a lot of it in time if she divorced Harry or if they left the monarchy


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> It's felt like it. I think she knows too many of Meghan's skeletons to get fully Markled.


Agree.  

I walked past one of Cory's (the chef) restaurants on the weekend (he has a few now) and couldn't help thinking he must have some stories to tell, if he wished to speak, which he doesn't.

So... about Jessica.... she too must have so many stories. I wonder if they will ever get out.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Diana became iconic, partly due to her untimely death.  Meghan does have a lot of attention right now.  *I still say she would lose a lot of it in time if she divorced Harry or if they left the monarchy*



She would absolutely be blamed if Harry left the monarchy. In all honesty there is no reason for him to leave unless he did it for her. But I think it's a moot point because I don't see him being stupid enough to give it all up.


----------



## muchstuff

bag-mania said:


> Cory is unknown in the US too. Only Canadians knew who he was.
> 
> I don't understand why an ex-boyfriend's mother's opinion is relevant. She probably met Mehgan a few times at most in the two years she dated her son. Most grown men don't share the details of their relationships with their mothers. Getting Cory's opinion, or better yet Trevor's would be more telling about who Meghan is IMO.


I’m Canadian and I’ve never heard of him...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Instagram Posts on Prince Harry's engagement today --



Okay .. the 2nd picture here .. is that guy putting up the 2 fingers over Harry's head?!?!?! .. because, here in the US .. that denotes to "dunce"!  So, is that guy slamming Harry or is it just a 'regular' gesture?


----------



## maryg1

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. the 2nd picture here .. is that guy putting up the 2 fingers over Harry's head?!?!?! .. because, here in the US .. that denotes to "dunce"!  So, is that guy slamming Harry or is it just a 'regular' gesture?


I think it stands for a V of Victory


----------



## gracekelly

I thought I read that Cory gave up the restaurant and went into the catering business. Either way he is not going to say anything bad about anyone unless they didn’t pay their bill because it isn’t good for business. His mother was probably asked to say something nice and was flattered into it. I mean who would solicit her opinion about MM except her nosey neighbors other than a PR firm.
The British MP’s are getting raked in the DM comments.   Apparently the one she called stands a good chance of not being re-elected so this letter may just backfire on her. Plus, MM put herself in the position of speaking with a politician and even though it was to say thanks, she is not supposed to do this. The MP used this to advance herself and that is just the reason why  members of the Royal family are not supposed to get involved with anything political.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> The British MP’s are getting raked in the DM comments.   Apparently the one she called stands a good chance of not being re-elected so this letter may just backfire on her. Plus, MM put herself in the position of speaking with a politician and even though it was to say thanks, she is not supposed to do this. The MP used this to advance herself and that is just the reason why  members of the Royal family are not supposed to get involved with anything political.


They’re all busy networking each other over


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. the 2nd picture here .. is that guy putting up the 2 fingers over Harry's head?!?!?! .. because, here in the US .. that denotes to "dunce"!  So, is that guy slamming Harry or is it just a 'regular' gesture?



I don't know if most people see it that way. I'm in the US and I always thought it was something you did as a prank, to mess up the shot without the person knowing it.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I don't know if most people see it that way. I'm in the US and I always thought it was something you did as a prank, to mess up the shot without the person knowing it.



Yeah, bunny ears, just like Beatrice did in one of her engagement photos.
Or like someone posted V for victory (a la Winston Churchill)
Or Peace. 
If it was the other way, with the back of your hand facing out, now that's rude, lol


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, bunny ears, just like Beatrice did in one of her engagement photos.
> Or like someone posted V for victory (a la Winston Churchill)
> Or Peace.
> If it was the other way, with the back of your hand facing out, now that's rude, lol


*THANK YOU!!!!! *.. do you know how many celebrities do that here in the US and have no clue that they are saying "F U" in other cultures!??!?!!?!!   It drives me nuts and when I see someone do that, I tell them what it means to the Brits (_I know you are Welsh_) and why they did that (_I'm sure you know the story_).


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I don't know if most people see it that way. I'm in the US and I always thought it was something you did as a prank, to mess up the shot without the person knowing it.


Hmmmm .. maybe it's regional then because where I grew up, if you did that .. you were (_yes - pulling a prank_) but also denoting the individual as a dunce, dummy, idiot or a loser.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> *THANK YOU!!!!! *.. do you know how many celebrities do that here in the US and have no clue that they are saying "F U" in other cultures!??!?!!?!!   It drives me nuts and when I see someone do that, I tell them what it means to the Brits (_I know you are Welsh_) and why they did that (_I'm sure you know the story_).


Oh, I know, I see a lot of American celebrities do it and think don't you dare do that over here!
Not that I've seen her do it ever, but I hope Harry has told Meghan what it means, ha ha. Now That would be interesting.
Lol, I'm British too, just don't call me English, lol. Think I'll go and hide now.........


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, I know, I see a lot of American celebrities do it and think don't you dare do that over here!
> Not that I've seen her do it ever, but I hope Harry has told Meghan what it means, ha ha. Now That would be interesting.
> Lol, I'm British too, just don't call me English, lol. Think I'll go and hide now.........


Long live the memory of Owain Glyndŵr!


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Long live the memory of Owain Glyndŵr!


Ir gâd!!!


----------



## mdcx

OT but in terms of Wales, Hinterland is an amazing show.
On topic, that MP obviously subscribes to the “women supporting women, feminism means women can’t criticise moms” type blather.
In time she may regret blindly supporting Megs.


----------



## gracekelly

They may be women, but they are politicians so they really only support themselves. Now that is true gender equality lol!


----------



## rose60610

At first I thought the MP's supporting MM was some kind of spoof. I couldn't believe it was real. How embarrassing. Isn't it actually insulting to MM, like infantilizing her, "poor little poopsie doopsie gets picked on, boo hoo hoo".  She's 38 years old, not 12. For MM to thank them is like begging them to come to her rescue when she gets criticized again. Doesn't she have the entire Royal Firm as back up if things really get out of hand? Nasty press coverage comes with the territory, especially if your own missteps cause it. Now there have been people who extremely  seldom received criticism from a nauseatingly fawning media, and then there are people so excoriated by the media that it makes M's criticisms look like a slobbering love fest. At what point will somebody tell M to just suck it up?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> At first I thought the MP's supporting MM was some kind of spoof. I couldn't believe it was real. How embarrassing. Isn't it actually insulting to MM, like infantilizing her, "poor little poopsie doopsie gets picked on, boo hoo hoo".  She's 38 years old, not 12. For MM to thank them is like begging them to come to her rescue when she gets criticized again. Doesn't she have the entire Royal Firm as back up if things really get out of hand? Nasty press coverage comes with the territory, especially if your own missteps cause it. Now there have been people who extremely  seldom received criticism from a nauseatingly fawning media, and then there are people so excoriated by the media that it makes M's criticisms look like a slobbering love fest. At what point will somebody tell M to just suck it up?


really.....I may be biased (as most of us are one way or the other) but I found her big deer eyes in that performance on TV to be just that - a performance.  Just my opinion.  As you say, she is not a little girl.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> At first I thought the MP's supporting MM was some kind of spoof. I couldn't believe it was real. How embarrassing. Isn't it actually insulting to MM, like infantilizing her, "poor little poopsie doopsie gets picked on, boo hoo hoo".  She's 38 years old, not 12. For MM to thank them is like begging them to come to her rescue when she gets criticized again. Doesn't she have the entire Royal Firm as back up if things really get out of hand? Nasty press coverage comes with the territory, especially if your own missteps cause it. Now there have been people who extremely  seldom received criticism from a nauseatingly fawning media, and then there are people so excoriated by the media that it makes M's criticisms look like a slobbering love fest. At what point will somebody tell M to just suck it up?


Well, isn't that what Kate just did (someone posted the link before in this thread) ..


----------



## mrsinsyder

Uh oh. What is happening?




Prince Harry and his renegade wife, Meghan, threw a tantrum and reportedly threatened to quit the Royal Family during a bitter confrontation with the Queen, insiders said.


But if the pair were hoping the 93-year-old monarch would beg them to stay, they were flat-out wrong, RadarOnline.com has learned.

“Her Majesty called their bluff. She told them that she was delighted with their decision and couldn’t wait for them to leave,” a high-level palace courtier told Radar.

But that wasn’t the Queen’s only payback for the “divisive” couple, who committed the cardinal sin of dissing royal life in public.

The source claims she “stripped them of their royal titles, their newly renovated home, Frogmore Cottage — and about $15 million in financial support.


----------



## mrsinsyder

*CHEERIO! PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN QUIT THE ROYAL FAMILY *
*Queen Elizabeth happy to bid the two goodbye after shocking interview.*
OCTOBER 30, 2019 @ 6:47AM
*Prince Harry* and his renegade wife, *Meghan*, threw a tantrum and quit Britain’s royal family during a bitter confrontation with *Queen Elizabeth*, insiders said.

But if the pair were hoping the 93-year-old monarch would beg them to stay, they were flat-out wrong, RadarOnline.com has learned.

“Her Majesty called their bluff! She told them that she was delighted with their decision and couldn’t wait for them to leave,” a high-level palace courtier revealed.

But that wasn’t the queen’s only payback for the “divisive” couple who committed the cardinal sin of dissing royal lifein public.

“She stripped them of their royal titles, their newly renovated home, Frogmore Cottage — and about $15 million in financial support!” said the source. “Then the queen removed a photo of the couple that had a prominent spot in her audience room in Buckingham Palace. Meghan’s royal fairy tale just exploded in her face.”

As Radar previously reported, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “horrified” the queen and senior royals by giving emotionally raw interviews for the TV documentary _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey_ during their official visit there with six-month-old Archie in September.

Harry went too far by confirming his feud with William, 37, that the palace has worked tirelessly to downplay, said sources. The once-inseparable brothers have “good days” and “bad days” and “don’t see each other as much as we used to,” Harry confessed.

“They spilled their guts like no royal since *Princess Diana*’s shocking ‘There were three of us in this marriage’ TV interview in 1995 about *Prince Charles*’ cheating with *Camilla Parker Bowles,*” noted a senior palace source. “But they came across as whiners and hypocrites — and Her Majesty was outraged.”

“She called the couple to her private quarters immediately after the documentary aired,” continued the senior palace source. “In a shocking showdown, she told them to ‘get a grip’ and stop claiming they’d single-handedly modernized the monarchy. She told Meghan it might be okay to be so open in hippy-dippy Hollywood, but royals keep their private feelings just that — private.”

The monarch also called the TV production the couple’s “biggest mistake,” said the source.

“Instead of apologizing and begging forgiveness, Harry and Meghan dug their heels in, insisting they wanted out of the royal fishbowl,” said the palace aide, noting, “They demanded a six-week break to chill out — and see what America has to offer them.”

“Her Majesty exploded! I’m told she retorted, ‘Six weeks? You can make it permanent!’” revealed the aide. “She said everyone, including herself, had bent over backwards to help Meghan adjust to royal life. And if they couldn’t cope, she’d be delighted to see them go — for good!”

“Meghan clearly masterminded this publicity stunt — and the queen retaliated,” added the source.

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan did not respond to requests for comment.


----------



## Katel

CeeJay said:


> Well, isn't that what Kate just did (someone posted the link before in this thread) ..



I think this is damage control for Kate as they move this “dynamic duo” out of the scene. (“she did all she could for Meghan, etc.”)



mrsinsyder said:


> *CHEERIO! PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN QUIT THE ROYAL FAMILY *
> *Queen Elizabeth happy to bid the two goodbye after shocking interview.*
> OCTOBER 30, 2019 @ 6:47AM
> *Prince Harry* and his renegade wife, *Meghan*, threw a tantrum and quit Britain’s royal family during a bitter confrontation with *Queen Elizabeth*, insiders said.
> 
> But if the pair were hoping the 93-year-old monarch would beg them to stay, they were flat-out wrong, RadarOnline.com has learned.
> 
> “Her Majesty called their bluff! She told them that she was delighted with their decision and couldn’t wait for them to leave,” a high-level palace courtier revealed.
> 
> But that wasn’t the queen’s only payback for the “divisive” couple who committed the cardinal sin of dissing royal lifein public.
> 
> “She stripped them of their royal titles, their newly renovated home, Frogmore Cottage — and about $15 million in financial support!” said the source. “Then the queen removed a photo of the couple that had a prominent spot in her audience room in Buckingham Palace. Meghan’s royal fairy tale just exploded in her face.”
> 
> As Radar previously reported, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “horrified” the queen and senior royals by giving emotionally raw interviews for the TV documentary _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey_ during their official visit there with six-month-old Archie in September.
> 
> Harry went too far by confirming his feud with William, 37, that the palace has worked tirelessly to downplay, said sources. The once-inseparable brothers have “good days” and “bad days” and “don’t see each other as much as we used to,” Harry confessed.
> 
> “They spilled their guts like no royal since *Princess Diana*’s shocking ‘There were three of us in this marriage’ TV interview in 1995 about *Prince Charles*’ cheating with *Camilla Parker Bowles,*” noted a senior palace source. “But they came across as whiners and hypocrites — and Her Majesty was outraged.”
> 
> “She called the couple to her private quarters immediately after the documentary aired,” continued the senior palace source. “In a shocking showdown, she told them to ‘get a grip’ and stop claiming they’d single-handedly modernized the monarchy. She told Meghan it might be okay to be so open in hippy-dippy Hollywood, but royals keep their private feelings just that — private.”
> 
> The monarch also called the TV production the couple’s “biggest mistake,” said the source.
> 
> “Instead of apologizing and begging forgiveness, Harry and Meghan dug their heels in, insisting they wanted out of the royal fishbowl,” said the palace aide, noting, “They demanded a six-week break to chill out — and see what America has to offer them.”
> 
> “Her Majesty exploded! I’m told she retorted, ‘Six weeks? You can make it permanent!’” revealed the aide. “She said everyone, including herself, had bent over backwards to help Meghan adjust to royal life. And if they couldn’t cope, she’d be delighted to see them go — for good!”
> 
> “Meghan clearly masterminded this publicity stunt — and the queen retaliated,” added the source.
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan did not respond to requests for comment.



 After that horrific public display of whining and complaining - masked as an interview of their tour of Africa no less - I thought the Queen might just tell them to take a seat or scram...someone here mentioned how she’d never seen pictures of Megz looking so dead around the eyes and defeated (one of the first appearances after the TV interview), and that really rang true - she looked like she had been scolded and I thought “yes, Your Majesty - tell em how it is!”


----------



## Katel

Blyen said:


> I saw another bunch of pictures from the event,and if this is not the face of someone who's been reprimanded then I don't know what it is lol.
> I've never seen such a genuinely defeated expression in her eyes before.In each picture I've seen she looks deflated,and it doesn't strike me as acting for once.


^^^this
 Wonder how much (if any) of these stories are true ...
We’ll have to wait and see just what is what.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Katel said:


> ^^^this
> Wonder how much (if any) of these stories are true ...
> We’ll have to wait and see just what is what.



It’s so over the top that part of me thinks there has to be some truth for them to even come up with something so extreme. Interesting to see where this ends.


----------



## pukasonqo

Katel said:


> ^^^this
> Wonder how much (if any) of these stories are true ...
> We’ll have to wait and see just what is what.


Interesting, behaving as a self entitled fool will get you expelled from “the Family” but having your pics taken w underage girls and being friends w Epstein gets you...what?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting, it’s already being reported on other big gossip sites.


----------



## lulilu

This story of M&H being "fired" by the Queen was published this morning by Radar.


----------



## mdcx

I’m sure the Queen was horrified. I read somewhere that she decreed that Meghan was now not allowed on the grounds of Buckingham Palace without Harry, which is why he weirdly accompanied her to that women’s empowerment event.
I’m sure there is high drama behind the scenes.


----------



## eunaddict

pukasonqo said:


> Interesting, behaving as a self entitled fool will get you expelled from “the Family” but having your pics taken w underage girls and being friends w Epstein gets you...what?



Well, that's favouritism for you. Andrew always was the P&E's favourite.

And let's be honest, it is a bit weird (and very convenient) how the man at the center of the entire scandal is no longer around to talk about the scandal. My SO has his money on the Americans, my bet is on the BRF. But also, Andrew is keeping a very low profile these days, not courting the media and drama...I assume in some circles, that counts for something.



---
ETA: Please quit, please quit. Neither will survive long in the real world without the financial support of a nation (and I have popcorn ready).


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I thought I read that Cory gave up the restaurant and went into the catering business. Either way he is not going to say anything bad about anyone unless they didn’t pay their bill because it isn’t good for business. His mother was probably asked to say something nice and was flattered into it. I mean who would solicit her opinion about MM except her nosey neighbors other than a PR firm.
> The British MP’s are getting raked in the DM comments.   Apparently the one she called stands a good chance of not being re-elected so this letter may just backfire on her. Plus, MM put herself in the position of speaking with a politician and even though it was to say thanks, she is not supposed to do this. The MP used this to advance herself and that is just the reason why  members of the Royal family are not supposed to get involved with anything political.


He still has the rotisserie restaurants.



eunaddict said:


> Well, that's favouritism for you. Andrew always was the P&E's favourite.


I've always read Andrew is the Queen's favourite (because the rumours may be true?) but I don't think Andrew is Philip's favourite, if the rumours are true.


----------



## Sophisticatted

While it seems sensational, I’m inclined to believe it.  It has been said that the Queen ordered the divorce (and paid for the settlement) after Diana gave the TV interview.

If the Buckingham Palace ban without Harry is true, I think it sends a strong message that he will always be family (and welcome as such) but the same is not true for her.

God save the Queen!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

MM made a mistake by calling the MP - is she that daft? Mixing the royals with politics ... I think she needs to be banished to another country for sure. Probably her worst mistake to date imo. Hmmm... maybe she called to thank them for doing it at her bequest.


----------



## pixiejenna

I’m starting to think that there’s some truth to them leaving the royal family since multiple sources are now reporting it. It seemed like speculation initially because they’re taking a 6 week break. I don’t know how well they’ll manage if they’re not on the royal payroll and have to work to support themselves. I hate to say it but I could see then turning to reality TV and then headed to splitsville shortly after. The real question is if they’re cut loose and get divorced will they let Harry come back working for the crown?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

All I can say is that this is quite a circus. I would love to know who actually started this rumor chain, which does get props for the sheer audacity of it. Someone wants to see how far they can push for some type of response.   Get you popcorn ready for the drama

I haven’t seen this on any of the newspaper sites. . They are not sticking their necks out quite yet.


----------



## jblended

I don't know if there is truth to this new story that the Queen has asked them to quit royal life. The quotes being used and the manner in which this discussion is being reported make me think it's being sensationalized. One outlet put it out and the rest are running with it, but how accurate was the initial reporting? It's so click-baity that it's hard to take it seriously.
I can't picture HM losing her temper and speaking these words. It's just not the way she conducts herself. She seems to always be composed and careful with her choice of words even when extremely angry, and she certainly takes strong, decisive actions but never with an outburst accompanying it (at least, not that I can remember).


----------



## Straight-Laced

In the aftermath of the messy Africa tour and the whiny poor, poor pitiful me documentary, who could blame the Queen for not wanting this immature couple to represent her?


----------



## Chagall

jblended said:


> I don't know if there is truth to this new story that the Queen has asked them to quit royal life. The quotes being used and the manner in which this discussion is being reported make me think it's being sensationalized. One outlet put it out and the rest are running with it, but how accurate was the initial reporting? It's so click-baity that it's hard to take it seriously.
> I can't picture HM losing her temper and speaking these words. It's just not the way she conducts herself. She seems to always be composed and careful with her choice of words even when extremely angry, and she certainly takes strong, decisive actions but never with an outburst accompanying it (at least, not that I can remember).


This whole thing is becoming very hard to believe. This is not the way the queen conducts herself. Even someone who wants attention to the degree MM does would have to have serious mental issues to make her marriage and existence in TRF such a circus. And so quickly. They have not been married long. I do see signs of this behaviors in Thomas Markle so I suppose this may be happening, but I’m not buying it yet. If it is true, pass the popcorn, you couldn’t make this stuff up.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jblended said:


> I don't know if there is truth to this new story that the Queen has asked them to quit royal life. The quotes being used and the manner in which this discussion is being reported make me think it's being sensationalized. One outlet put it out and the rest are running with it, but how accurate was the initial reporting? It's so click-baity that it's hard to take it seriously.
> I can't picture HM losing her temper and speaking these words. It's just not the way she conducts herself. She seems to always be composed and careful with her choice of words even when extremely angry, and she certainly takes strong, decisive actions but never with an outburst accompanying it (at least, not that I can remember).


I agree, I can’t believe this is a true representation.  But I’m sure there’s been a meeting, and I can imagine Harry being read the riot act.  Deservedly so.  I think putting about that they’d “single-handedly modernised the monarchy” would have deeply hurt the Queen after the lifetime of service she’s given the country, and setting personal matters over a royal tour would be unthinkable to her.  They’ve also tried to steal the limelight from the Prince of Wales documentary about his life’s work and the Cambridge’s tour of Pakistan.  The RF simply don’t compete with each other in this way.  They will have had a stiff talking to I’m sure.


----------



## Blyen

Katel said:


> ^^^this
> Wonder how much (if any) of these stories are true ...
> We’ll have to wait and see just what is what.


It was just an obvious difference to me, compared to the previous appearance they made after the interview aired, so I do believe something happened and they got served with some kind of ultimatum. She still didn't look completely like herself at the round table engagement, but still looked better, so maybe they are working on mending things?


----------



## CAH

Charles has never liked it when the spotlight is taken off him.  Remember right after he married Diana and everyone wanted to be on her side of the rope and he threw one of his hissy fits and began sulking like child.  So I have no doubts that he's doing the same now instead of trying to get to the bottom of the problems Harry is having.


----------



## LibbyRuth

jblended said:


> I don't know if there is truth to this new story that the Queen has asked them to quit royal life. The quotes being used and the manner in which this discussion is being reported make me think it's being sensationalized. One outlet put it out and the rest are running with it, but how accurate was the initial reporting? It's so click-baity that it's hard to take it seriously.
> I can't picture HM losing her temper and speaking these words. It's just not the way she conducts herself. She seems to always be composed and careful with her choice of words even when extremely angry, and she certainly takes strong, decisive actions but never with an outburst accompanying it (at least, not that I can remember).



Somewhere in the timeline of their marriage, there's no doubt been some false reporting in terms of the Queen's view of them.  Right after their wedding, such a huge deal was made about how much the Queen liked Meghan.  There were the photos of the Queen riding in the car with Meghan's dog ... and the Queen taking Meghan with her on an engagement much earlier than she'd done such a thing with Kate after William and Kate got married.  Add to that the reports that were given frequently of Harry being one of if not the favorite of the Queen's grandchildren.  Now if you take into account the circling of the wagons around Andrew being explained by saying Andrew is her favorite son, then it just does not compute that Harry would go from favorite grandson with this new wife the Queen adores and is promoting to firing them and pushing them out of the family so quickly. If taking advantage of underage sex trafficking victims is forgivable for one of the Queen's favorites, then surely whining about life in a documentary is forgivable.


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> And let's be honest, it is a bit weird (and very convenient) how the man at the center of the entire scandal is no longer around to talk about the scandal. My SO has his money on the Americans, my bet is on the BRF.



I think everyone knows Epstein was murdered. There are so many wealthy and/or famous men who associated with him that it would be the world's toughest murder mystery to figure out who arranged the hit since they all benefitted from his being silenced. I'm sure the right people have been paid off to ensure nobody ever looks into it too hard. It will likely remain a "suicide."


----------



## LittleStar88

Darn. I was so hopeful for these two - and for Harry - when they first got together. Everything was playing out so nicely and they seemed to be a good fit. I was hoping Harry wouldn't be the third wheel/spare heir forever and this was his chance.

Could it be...
Harry was used to being in the lesser spotlight as third wheel and now all of this attention is making him feel triggered?
Meghan is also a narcissist like her father and is in denial?
These two bring out the worst or the fragility in one another and then they feel justified to make a bunch of noise about their perceived unfairness? Spoiled brats?
Harry seems to have gotten a later start in life with regards to maturity and this may be the BRF taking the training wheels off of his life and letting him/them make decisions for themselves - big life lessons?

Meghan lost me completely when she started complaining about fairness. Sorry honey, life isn't always fair. Sometimes you have to figure out how to roll with the punches. You wanted fame and spotlight? Well, here it is! Adapt and learn how to take the good with the bad. In exchange you are getting a life of privilege and having just about everything handed to you.

I just can't with the whining. Life is soooo much harder for the majority of the world and it is insulting to the people who struggle majorly every single day just to keep food on the table, roof over their heads, to hear Meghan complain. Bye Felicia!


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> All I can say is that this is quite a circus. I would love to know who actually started this rumor chain, which does get props for the sheer audacity of it. Someone wants to see how far they can push for some type of response.   Get you popcorn ready for the drama
> 
> I haven’t seen this on any of the newspaper sites. . They are not sticking their necks out quite yet.



I am not surprised the tabloids would respond in this way. For all intents and purposes Harry and Meghan declared war on the media with their little lawsuit. Were they naive enough to believe the media wouldn't strike back? It will likely get worse for them. They can't sue for each and every fabricated story.


----------



## A1aGypsy

interesting that a lot of the articles about them being thrown out seem to have been removed. The Toronto Sun one, for example, now leads to their home page.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> These two bring out the worst or the fragility in one another and then they feel justified to make a bunch of noise about their perceived unfairness? Spoiled brats?



At the moment this is the one I'm going with. Though some of the other things you listed may be contributors.


----------



## daisychainz

This couple is 100% being lectured by various family members and likely provided with options, but kicking them out seems sensationalized. I don't think the Queen is leading too much anymore - she is probably leaving it to Charles these days, which is why it's all a giant mess.


----------



## TC1

I can see it now...Megs and H leave the monarchy behind. She tried to ressurect her acting career and H gets a job at Trader Joe's


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

pixiejenna said:


> I’m starting to think that there’s some truth to them leaving the royal family since multiple sources are now reporting it. It seemed like speculation initially because they’re taking a 6 week break. I don’t know how well they’ll manage if they’re not on the royal payroll and have to work to support themselves. I hate to say it but I could see then turning to reality TV and then headed to splitsville shortly after. The real question is if they’re cut loose and get divorced will they let Harry come back working for the crown?


I've always been a big "where there's smoke, there's fire" believer. And never more so than with the H&M saga, I'm sitting back with some popcorn and watching the show.


----------



## LittleStar88

TC1 said:


> I can see it now...Megs and H leave the monarchy behind. She tried to ressurect her acting career and H gets a job at Trader Joe's



Haha! I do hear that Trader Joe's is a great place to work - they treat their employees well! Costco is another. He would make a great greeter/membership checker...


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> I can see it now...Megs and H leave the monarchy behind. She tried to ressurect her acting career and H gets a job at Trader Joe's



It would be a great thing for Harry to work some place where he could make real friends, not like the people who have kissed up to him his entire life because he's royalty. The only thing is I don't see him wanting to work that hard for very long. Maybe he could have an _Undercover Boss_ experience where he could be disguised and get to work at Trader Joe's for a week.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I think everyone knows Epstein was murdered. There are so many wealthy and/or famous men who associated with him that it would be the world's toughest murder mystery to figure out who arranged the hit since they all benefitted from his being silenced. I'm sure the right people have been paid off to ensure nobody ever looks into it too hard. It will likely remain a "suicide."


I think this has already been mentioned in this thread but all this H&M drama could be just a smoke screen to make us look at them rather than the Prince Andrew/Epstein mess. 

Long time ago, on the Kim K thread, the ladies learned to carefully look her over for new PS when she did something over the top nutty, like, what are we NOT supposed to be looking at while gasping at her lady bits nearly hanging out of that outfit?

Though with Epstein's "suicide" Andrew and all the others are probably breathing very easily now so no need for any "look over here, not there!" shenanigans. But the Queen did replace the H&M pic so maybe?


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> Well, that's favouritism for you. Andrew always was the P&E's favourite.
> 
> And let's be honest, it is a bit weird (and very convenient) how the man at the center of the entire scandal is no longer around to talk about the scandal. My SO has his money on the Americans, my bet is on the BRF. But also, Andrew is keeping a very low profile these days, not courting the media and drama...I assume in some circles, that counts for something.
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> ETA: Please quit, please quit. Neither will survive long in the real world without the financial support of a nation (and I have popcorn ready).


Agree......Andy was a bad boy but he did it more or less in private and is not going on TV crying about being mistreated


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> I am not surprised the tabloids would respond in this way. For all intents and purposes Harry and Meghan declared war on the media with their little lawsuit. Were they naive enough to believe the media wouldn't strike back? It will likely get worse for them. They can't sue for each and every fabricated story.


I saw an interview with Boy George this week where he was asked what he thought of the Harry and Meghan drama with the tabloids and he said he thought that suing them was a huge mistake.  His advice was to ignore it and accept it as the price of fame - that by suing they were beating a hornets nest and would draw more attention and more bad stories.


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-claim-sisterly-solidarity-Meghan-Markle.html

What’s this? On Tuesday, a group of 72 female MPs, the great majority of them Labour, issued an open letter of solidarity with a leading member of the Royal Family.

In normal circumstances, no one would be more delighted than me, since the signatories include hard-Left Labour frontbenchers such as Diane Abbott and Angela Rayner. Not the sort of people you would expect to have a picture of the Queen hanging on their wall.

But it turns out the letter is not a welcome airing of monarchist sentiment from women who might not usually be the first to jump to the aid of a member of the Royal Family.

No, it is an expression of support for the Duchess of Sussex. The MPs assert that some very beastly things have been done to her by the wicked Press.

For example, newspapers have ‘cast aspersions on her character’ and published ‘distasteful and misleading’ stories ‘concerning you [that’s Meghan], your character and your family’.

Unfortunately, in what is admittedly a short letter whose leading signatory is the Labour MP Holly Lynch, not a single instance of the media’s alleged persecution of the Duchess is produced.

Wouldn’t it have been helpful if the missive had at least hinted at what is meant by the charge that newspapers are ‘seeking to tear down a woman for no apparent reason’?

If only one illustration of what sounds like bullying bordering on intimidation had been cited, we would at least have the basis for a sensible debate. But nothing whatsoever is offered.

This did not prevent Meghan from telephoning Ms Lynch yesterday to thank her for her support. According to the MP, she was ‘pleased to have seen that letter’.

There is one wild and unsubstantiated accusation in it which tops all the others. It is that ‘some of these stories’ — naturally, no examples are given — have ‘outdated, colonial undertones’.

Is this a suggestion that there is an element of anti-Americanism in the supposed hounding of Meghan by the vicious media? After all, the country of her birth, the United States, was once a colony.

It’s possible, I suppose, but I think the MPs are getting at something else. They are implying, without quite daring to say as much, that news-papers’ criticisms of the Duchess of Sussex are partly motivated by racism.

Of all the smears in this ill-conceived epistle of nonsense, this is easily the most outrageous — and also potentially the most damaging. What could lower the Press more in public esteem than the insinuation that it has a secret racist agenda against Meghan?

It’s rot. And dangerous, politically driven rot at that. I have read countless articles about the Duchess in the mainstream media, and I haven’t come across a single example of anything remotely resembling racism in the faintest sense.

If the MPs can dig up one shred of evidence to support their disgraceful innuendo, they should produce it forthwith. But, of course, they can’t — because it doesn’t exist.

What they would very probably do, if forced to defend their idiocy, is to say that while there are no instances of racism to be found in Press coverage, it nonetheless underlies all the criticisms that are made of Meghan.

In other words, if newspapers grumble about the hundreds of thousands of pounds spent on Meghan’s six-day ‘baby shower’ trip to New York earlier in the year (flying there and back by private jet), that is a clear case of racism.

When some in the media express surprise that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should conceal the names of the godparents of Archie, who is seventh in line to the throne, that is another appalling manifestation of racism.

And if columnists harrumphed after Harry delivered a lecture about the perils of global warming before he and Meghan took four journeys by private jet in 11 days, it was, of course, another expression of sublimated racism.

Could anything be madder? Harry and Meghan are immensely privileged people in receipt of considerable public funds. For example, their home, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, was refurbished at a cost of more than £2.4 million of taxpayers’ money.

But it would appear that whatever inconsistencies the Duke and Duchess may display, the Press is enjoined to stay schtum for fear of being accused of the worst form of bigotry.

Such is the debased level of public debate in modern Britain. We are not talking about louts name-calling on a street corner but Members of Parliament (four of them in the Shadow Cabinet) who might be expected to show discrimination, intelligence and discernment.

Let me add that I wish Harry himself would supply chapter and verse when lashing newspapers. He recently accused them of running ‘knowingly false and malicious stories’ and other such excesses without offering a single example. But he hasn’t — at least, not yet — accused them of racism.

So what we have here are insidious and baseless accusations circulated by a group of female MPs. I don’t doubt that there is at least a smidgen of sisterly affection for the Duchess.

But the deeper motivation behind the letter is, of course, political. As I say, most signatories are Labour. And it is Jeremy Corbyn’s intention to bring newspapers under a measure of state control.

Although details have not yet been revealed, the Labour leader spoke four years ago of the need for a ‘multiplicity of ownership’ in the Press. That might imply confiscation.

Last year he warned news-papers that ‘change is coming’. A Labour administration could set in train a second Leveson Inquiry into newspapers. He has questioned Press freedom by claiming titles are ‘controlled by billionaire tax exiles’.

The motives of many of the signatories of Holly Lynch’s letter should be partly interpreted in this light. If the Press is to be curbed, it is necessary to demonstrate that it has overstepped the bounds of decency and ignored people’s privacy.

But, as I’ve argued, the women MPs have shown no such thing. They have made charges without foundation — without, indeed, bothering to adduce any evidence at all. Their cunning purpose is to disseminate the idea that newspapers are not to be trusted, and so should be regulated.

*How a handful of female Tory MPs could have been caught up in such a devious plot is bewildering, though it seems that some were astute enough to smell a rat, and refused to sign.*

It is even more regrettable that Meghan should have thanked Holly Lynch for her support. *She has done what no member of the Royal Family should ever do by entering the political arena — whether deliberately or inadvertently I can’t say — and given comfort to the enemies of a free Press.*

Prince Harry is taking legal action against two national newspapers, and Meghan is suing the Daily Mail’s sister paper, the Mail on Sunday. The rights and wrongs of these cases need not concern us here.

What should concern us, though, is the possibility that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex might foolishly broaden their battle with the Press and line up with Labour MPs intent on undermining its freedoms.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I think this has already been mentioned in this thread but all *this H&M drama could be just a smoke screen to make us look at them rather than the Prince Andrew/Epstein mess. *
> 
> Though with Epstein's "suicide" Andrew and all the others are probably breathing very easily now so no need for any "look over here, not there!" shenanigans. But the Queen did replace the H&M pic so maybe?



I'm always up for a good conspiracy theory but I don't believe this one will gain any traction. It's not just Andrew who has been conveniently forgotten. The whole Epstein scandal seems to have fallen off the news cycle and it is unlikely to be resurrected. The lawsuits against the estate will go on, but other criminal prosecutions? Unlikely. I don't doubt some opportunistic authors are busily writing about it as we speak, but they won't have anything to go on other than speculation and extreme rumors meant to sell their books. The truth is Andrew is too old to interest the gossip media anymore. They want the fresh and new to provide scandals for readers of their own generation, that's where Harry and Meghan come in.


----------



## mrsinsyder

She's doing the same thing she had her friends do with People magazine and her father's letter. It's incredible people are falling for this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Holly-Lynch.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small

*Labour MP Holly Lynch reveals that Meghan Markle admitted 'being in a lonely place' during a 'touching' phone call to thank her for writing an open letter of support signed by 72 female politicians*

*Meghan Markle called Labour MP Holly Lynch to thank her for writing open letter*
*They discussed the public eye often being 'a lonely place' in 'touching call' *
*72 MPs signed the letter to the Duchess of Sussex, spearheaded by Holly Lynch*
*The women said they 'stand with' Meghan Markle and related to her experience*
*Comes as Prince Harry said he would be taking legal action against publishers*
Labour MP Holly Lynch has revealed how she discussed the public eye being 'a lonely place for women' during a phone call with Meghan Markle this week.

Meghan personally phoned Ms Lynch, MP for Halifax in West Yorkshire, to thank her for writing an open letter that 72 female politicians signed to support her over negative coverage of the Duchess. 

The MP admitted she was 'touched' to hear from her, and told how Meghan, 38, was remaining positive and channeling the negative energy into turning attitudes around.

Politicians including Diane Abbott and Jess Phillips wrote to the Duchess of Sussex, saying they 'stand with' her and relate to her experience.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> She's doing the same thing she had her friends do with People magazine and her father's letter. It's incredible people are falling for this.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Holly-Lynch.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small
> 
> *Labour MP Holly Lynch reveals that Meghan Markle admitted 'being in a lonely place' during a 'touching' phone call to thank her for writing an open letter of support signed by 72 female politicians*
> 
> *Meghan Markle called Labour MP Holly Lynch to thank her for writing open letter*
> *They discussed the public eye often being 'a lonely place' in 'touching call' *
> *72 MPs signed the letter to the Duchess of Sussex, spearheaded by Holly Lynch*
> *The women said they 'stand with' Meghan Markle and related to her experience*
> *Comes as Prince Harry said he would be taking legal action against publishers*
> Labour MP Holly Lynch has revealed how she discussed the public eye being 'a lonely place for women' during a phone call with Meghan Markle this week.
> 
> Meghan personally phoned Ms Lynch, MP for Halifax in West Yorkshire, to thank her for writing an open letter that 72 female politicians signed to support her over negative coverage of the Duchess.
> 
> The MP admitted she was 'touched' to hear from her, and told how Meghan, 38, was remaining positive and channeling the negative energy into turning attitudes around.
> 
> Politicians including Diane Abbott and Jess Phillips wrote to the Duchess of Sussex, saying they 'stand with' her and relate to her experience.


Maybe sly Meghan is being naive and getting herself into something she really doesn't totally comprehend hers


----------



## myown

Has anyone seen what they wrote on instagram? I call that a pregnancy announcement


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> Has anyone seen what they wrote on Facebook? I call that a pregnancy announcement


They have Facebook?


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> They have Facebook?


Instagram sorry


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> Instagram sorry


Oh god. Please no.


----------



## daisychainz

The bettors are saying she is pregnant, and that message is meant to be coy. Like, why not just say Archie? For two people who dislike media they don't seem to dislike media.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

myown said:


> Has anyone seen what they wrote on instagram? I call that a pregnancy announcement


And now on top of everything else she may be pregnant. This just gets better and better. But they wouldn’t announcement it unless they were at someone’s engagement party or wedding would they.


----------



## myown

*"Happy Halloween! 
•
“Wishing you all a safe and fun Halloween from our family (and our little pumpkin ) to yours!” - TRH

This time last year The Duke and Duchess attended a special effects workshop while on their royal tour in New Zealand!"
*


----------



## bag-mania

myown said:


> Has anyone seen what they wrote on instagram? I call that a pregnancy announcement



What was the message?

ETA: ^Oops, I see you posted it. Archie is the little pumpkin I'm sure.


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> The bettors are saying she is pregnant, and that message is meant to be coy. Like, why not just say Archie? For two people who dislike media they don't seem to dislike media.


This is exactly why I can't with their "oh we're so coy and don't understand media" bullshet.


----------



## myown

bag-mania said:


> What was the message?


posted above. 
how do I add the instagram-post here?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> What was the message?


“Wishing you all a safe and fun Halloween from our family (and our little pumpkin ) to yours!” - TRH


----------



## bag-mania

myown said:


> posted above.
> how do I add the instagram-post here?





mrsinsyder said:


> “Wishing you all a safe and fun Halloween from our family (and our little pumpkin ) to yours!” - TRH



This is spoon-feeding sweetness to their fans. I'm not going to give them credit for thinking it could be interpreted as a new pregnancy. Do they even write their own Instagram posts? This might be the work of a social media intern.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow they are really determined to give the BRF the finger. The SHADE.

*‘Family Is Going to Be Very Important’ for Meghan Markle Around the Holidays, Says Source*
*“It will be nice for them to be around people that love them," a source tells PEOPLE*

As Meghan Markle and Prince Harry prepare for their upcoming six-week break with son Archie, spending time together as a family will be top priority.

Although the palace is not commenting on how the young family will spend the break, they will likely visit Meghan’s hometown of Los Angeles, where her mom Doria Ragland, a yoga instructor and social worker, lives.

“This is Archie’s first Thanksgiving,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue, “and family is going to be very important for Meghan for the holidays.”

“This would also be Harry’s first Thanksgiving in the States,” adds the source. “It will be nice for them to be around people that love them and have him understand her traditions too.”

Harry and Meghan recently gave fans a rare glimpse of their royal lives in the ITV documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_ — including both the happiness and the hardships.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> This is spoon-feeding sweetness to their fans. I'm not going to give them credit for thinking it could be interpreted as a new pregnancy. Do they even write their own Instagram posts? This might be the work of a social media intern.


Who they do have BTW .. they hired a Social Media guy who used to work for one of the fashion brands - Gucci perhaps???


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow they are really determined to give the BRF the finger. The SHADE.
> 
> *‘Family Is Going to Be Very Important’ for Meghan Markle Around the Holidays, Says Source*
> *“It will be nice for them to be around people that love them," a source tells PEOPLE*
> 
> As Meghan Markle and Prince Harry prepare for their upcoming six-week break with son Archie, spending time together as a family will be top priority.
> 
> Although the palace is not commenting on how the young family will spend the break, they will likely visit Meghan’s hometown of Los Angeles, where her mom Doria Ragland, a yoga instructor and social worker, lives.
> 
> “This is Archie’s first Thanksgiving,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue, “and family is going to be very important for Meghan for the holidays.”
> 
> “This would also be Harry’s first Thanksgiving in the States,” adds the source. “It will be nice for them to be around people that love them and have him understand her traditions too.”
> 
> Harry and Meghan recently gave fans a rare glimpse of their royal lives in the ITV documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_ — including both the happiness and the hardships.


But, but, but .. WAIT .. what about Oprah and Gayle, and .. Ellen, and .. her Toronto "family"?????  I call BS; this will be a media show for sure .. uggh!  I keep on saying that their time out here in LA will be very interesting and likely telling ..


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> But, but, but .. WAIT .. what about Oprah and Gayle, and .. Ellen, and .. her Toronto "family"?????  I call BS; this will be a media show for sure .. uggh!  I keep on saying that their time out here in LA will be very interesting and likely telling ..



Haha! Was coming to say the same thing. 

If they do come to the US, her dad is going to resurface and make a ton of noise. They did not think any of this through.

Maybe they just want to come to CA, get high every day, and hang out with celebs.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> But, but, but .. WAIT .. what about Oprah and Gayle, and .. Ellen, and .. her Toronto "family"?????  I call BS; this will be a media show for sure .. uggh!  I keep on saying that their time out here in LA will be very interesting and likely telling ..



I hear you. What does the "Family is going to be very important" line mean? Are they going to see any family besides Doria? They will be very near to Thomas while they are in LA but somehow I doubt they will fit in any plans to visit him during their six week break. You can bet Oprah and Ellen will be cuddling Archie way before his maternal grandfather gets a chance.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> You can bet Oprah and Ellen will be cuddling Archie way before his maternal grandfather gets a chance.



As much of a jerk as her dad may seem, this made me cringe a little. The man deserves to meet his grandson no matter what is going on between them. This may be the one and only time I side with her dad.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> I hear you. What does the "Family is going to be very important" line mean? Are they going to see any family besides Doria? They will be very near to Thomas while they are in LA but somehow I doubt they will fit in any plans to visit him during their six week break. You can bet Oprah and Ellen will be cuddling Archie way before his maternal grandfather gets a chance.


Right... what family? They all got Markle’d.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Haha! Was coming to say the same thing.
> 
> If they do come to the US, her dad is going to resurface and make a ton of noise. They did not think any of this through.
> 
> Maybe they just want to come to CA, get high every day, and hang out with celebs.


You betcha; Thomas for sure will likely say something and you know what??!! .. as much as people are saying what a narcissist he is, well .. your daughter takes after you!  How much you want to be that Samantha is going to be all over this as well .. oh boy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> You betcha; Thomas for sure will likely say something and you know what??!! .. as much as people are saying what a narcissist he is, well .. your daughter takes after you!  How much you want to be that Samantha is going to be all over this as well .. oh boy!



I tend to agree!! Imagine her coming to the US - she and Harry still represent the BRF and the grace and compassion the BRF should stand for - and NOT allow her dad the opportunity to meet his grandson.

It's the right thing to do - put your s**t aside and allow the man to meet his grandson at least once before he dies. How will it look if they do not do this? Worst that comes out of it is no change. Best is they figure out their issues and repair the relationship.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> I tend to agree!! Imagine her coming to the US - she and Harry still represent the BRF and the grace and compassion the BRF should stand for - and NOT allow her dad the opportunity to meet his grandson.
> 
> It's the right thing to do - put your s**t aside and allow the man to meet his grandson at least once before he dies. How will it look if they do not do this? Worst that comes out of it is no change. Best is they figure out their issues and repair the relationship.


I'm not really a fan of her dad, but you'd think with Harry losing his mom (especially after not taking her phone call), that he'd understand extending some compassion for the things you can't undo later.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm not really a fan of her dad, but you'd think with Harry losing his mom (especially after not taking her phone call), that he'd understand extending some compassion for the things you can't undo later.


Yeah, he's done some crap for sure .. but let me tell you, there are worse fathers out there (_like mine who forged my signature and my mothers to get my Grandmother's trust fund $$$ to give to his "girlfriend" while still married to my mother_) .. honestly, I just don't really get it with their "relationship".  According to my friend who knew the family very well when Meghan was a teenager, her father did EVERYTHING for her and that also meant he spent some serious cash on her!  Yes, her mother seems like a very classy lady, but sheesh .. he is still your father and should get the opportunity to meet his grandson .. but just make sure there is no media around (_yet - it wouldn't surprise me to see pictures of them with Doria, Oprah, Ellen, etc_.) .. UFB!


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I tend to agree!! Imagine her coming to the US - she and Harry still represent the BRF and the grace and compassion the BRF should stand for - and NOT allow her dad the opportunity to meet his grandson.
> 
> It's the right thing to do - put your s**t aside and allow the man to meet his grandson at least once before he dies. How will it look if they do not do this? Worst that comes out of it is no change. Best is they figure out their issues and repair the relationship.



Obviously they can't show up at his modest home in Mexico. The tabloids would likely be staking it out anyway. The smartest thing they could do is send a car for Thomas and take him somewhere where he could see his daughter and meet his grandson (and his son-in-law) privately. Whether that will happen or not depends on whether Meghan actually wants it to happen. I'm guessing she doesn't.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> Right... what family? They all got Markle’d.


Is Markle'd the new ghosted?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I hear you. What does the "Family is going to be very important" line mean? Are they going to see any family besides Doria? They will be very near to Thomas while they are in LA but somehow I doubt they will fit in any plans to visit him during their six week break. You can bet Oprah and Ellen will be cuddling Archie way before his maternal grandfather gets a chance.


somehow I don't see Oprah cuddling a baby....maybe cooing at him


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Obviously they can't show up at his modest home in Mexico. The tabloids would likely be staking it out anyway. The smartest thing they could do is send a car for Thomas and take him somewhere where he could see his daughter and meet his grandson (and his son-in-law) privately. Whether that will happen or not depends on whether Meghan actually wants it to happen. I'm guessing she doesn't.


I agree; she probably doesn't
I find it interesting that she only has one relative who was "good enough" to come to the wedding.  I'm not close with my extended family but if I were marrying a prince I'm sure I could have gotten a few relatives to come to the party.  The royals must have thought this was odd.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I want them to make this six week break a break.  Take the family break, and give us a break.  Find some dignity ffs.  But it’s not going to happen is it?


----------



## Swanky

Omg please sweet baby Jesus go quiet for 6 weeks!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> somehow I don't see Oprah cuddling a baby....maybe cooing at him


Totally agree on that!


----------



## CeeJay

Swanky said:


> View attachment 4579303
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omg please sweet baby Jesus go quiet for 6 weeks!


https://tenor.com/view/jackie-hysterical-laughing-mila-kunis-gif-4674808


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> I want them to make this six week break a break.  Take the family break, and give us a break.  Find some dignity ffs.  But it’s not going to happen is it?


A narcissist leaving the spotlight?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> somehow I don't see Oprah cuddling a baby....maybe cooing at him



It depends on whether there are cameras on her at the time.


----------



## mdcx

Clearblueskies said:


> I want them to make this six week break a break.  Take the family break, and give us a break.  Find some dignity ffs.  But it’s not going to happen is it?


Dignity? How dare you? Dignity does not get one column inches in the Daily Mail! 
And family time in the US is now important - I thought the BRF were the fam she never had? This is one twisty-turny narrative of woe...


----------



## bag-mania

It's a six week break from doing their royal duties, like showing up at charity events and receptions. They are not going into seclusion. They will be doing what THEY want to do. If that means partying all night long with Hollywood celebrities or staying on a billionaire's yacht, well so be it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

bag-mania said:


> It's a six week break from doing their royal duties, like showing up at charity events and receptions. They are not going into seclusion. They will be doing what THEY want to do. If that means partying all night long with Hollywood celebrities or staying on a billionaire's yacht, well so be it.


But there better not be cameras there because Harry’s allergic


----------



## bag-mania

Straight-Laced said:


> But there better not be cameras there because Harry’s allergic



His allergy is situational I believe. 
He'll be fine as long as the US media continues to play nice and write glowing, complimentary stories.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> somehow I don't see Oprah cuddling a baby....maybe cooing at him



Maybe he will be Thanksgiving dinner? 

(Disclaimer: That was a JOKE and I do not condone eating babies, but Oprah might thrive on the souls of the young so...)


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe he will be Thanksgiving dinner?
> 
> (Disclaimer: That was a JOKE and I do not condone eating babies, but Oprah might thrive on the souls of the young so...)


ha


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> It's a six week break from doing their royal duties, like showing up at charity events and receptions. They are not going into seclusion. They will be doing what THEY want to do. If that means partying all night long with Hollywood celebrities or staying on a billionaire's yacht, well so be it.



And they weren't back for that long after maternity leave... How nice to be able to afford to take LOA, then come back and show up to a few things, then take another leave...


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> And they weren't back for that long after maternity leave... How nice to be able to afford to take LOA, then come back and show up to a few things, then take another leave...


well you know when you have such a hard life you need a lot of breaks....I can identify


----------



## Straight-Laced

You know Oprah should do a Thomas and Meghan Reunion show while Meghan’s in LA.
It would be awesome. Tears and laughter and more tears  ...
And Harry would be the surprise guest (meet the son-in-law in prime time!) with Archie. I’m tearing up just thinking about it


----------



## mrsinsyder

Straight-Laced said:


> You know Oprah should do a Thomas and Meghan Reunion show while Meghan’s in LA.
> It would be awesome. Tears and laughter and more tears  ...
> And Harry would be the surprise guest (meet the son-in-law in prime time!) with Archie. I’m tearing up just thinking about it


Only if they roll Samantha in as the surprise guest.


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> You know Oprah should do a Thomas and Meghan Reunion show while Meghan’s in LA.
> It would be awesome. Tears and laughter and more tears  ...
> And Harry would be the surprise guest (meet the son-in-law in prime time!) with Archie. I’m tearing up just thinking about it


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> Only if they roll Samantha in as the surprise guest.


Yes please, Samantha too 
She would wheel in and complete the circle, or whatever it is they’ve got going there.

Meanwhile, back at the Palace ...


----------



## LittleStar88

Straight-Laced said:


> You know Oprah should do a Thomas and Meghan Reunion show while Meghan’s in LA.
> It would be awesome. Tears and laughter and more tears  ...
> And Harry would be the surprise guest (meet the son-in-law in prime time!) with Archie. I’m tearing up just thinking about it



This sounds like it will go from Oprah to Maury Povich really fast...


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> You know Oprah should do a Thomas and Meghan Reunion show while Meghan’s in LA.
> It would be awesome. Tears and laughter and more tears  ...
> And Harry would be the surprise guest (meet the son-in-law in prime time!) with Archie. I’m tearing up just thinking about it


----------



## mrsinsyder

Funny how during the engagement the royal family was the “family she never had” and now they’re running off to the US to spend time with the “family that loves them.”

Can they even keep up with their own nonsense anymore?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh look, this is already a mess


----------



## mrsinsyder

Another PR piece.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

The comments on this thread are much funnier than the anything from the Sussex today.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mrsinsyder

She bonded with the trafficking survivors and domestic violence survivors over how she too is only existing and not living.


----------



## bag-mania

Straight-Laced said:


> You know Oprah should do a Thomas and Meghan Reunion show while Meghan’s in LA.
> It would be awesome. Tears and laughter and more tears  ...
> And Harry would be the surprise guest (meet the son-in-law in prime time!) with Archie. I’m tearing up just thinking about it



I want to see this! I would also like Barbara Walters to come out of retirement and do one of her interview specials with them. She always had the reputation for being able to make celebrities cry. Of course with Meghan and Harry that wouldn’t be very hard.


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4579462
> 
> View attachment 4579463
> 
> View attachment 4579464
> 
> View attachment 4579465
> 
> View attachment 4579467
> 
> View attachment 4579468


The best thing Meghan can do to get through this is to keep doing engagements with her charities and start speaking through her actions and not her words. One would have thought this would have been obvious from the get-go to her.


----------



## PatsyCline

Straight-Laced said:


> Yes please, Samantha too
> She would wheel in and complete the circle, or whatever it is they’ve got going there.
> 
> Meanwhile, back at the Palace ...


Oh good Lord, sounds like something Jerry Springer would do!


----------



## Straight-Laced

bag-mania said:


> I want to see this! I would also like Barbara Walters to come out of retirement and do one of her interview specials with them. She always had the reputation for being able to make celebrities cry. Of course with Meghan and Harry that wouldn’t be very hard.


Yes, too easy for Barbara Walters. Harry and Meghan are probably welling up somewhere right now even.

But it could be excellent with Oprah nonetheless. 
I’m seeing Meghan’s composed but emotional face (actors can do that) start to make unwanted twitching movements as she hears - from a distance and out of sight still - the familiar sounds of a mobility chair squeaky wheel as the ‘surprise’ Markle family reunion special guest is about to be introduced ... 
And that entrepreneurial young lad who makes the funny cigarettes ... Markle Sparkle or something?  He’s a talent. 
Not to mention the main game of Harry getting to know Thomas and vice versa, and perhaps comparing stories ... Oh la.
Good times!


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## buffym

cafecreme15 said:


> The best thing Meghan can do to get through this is to keep doing engagements with her charities and start speaking through her actions and not her words. One would have thought this would have been obvious from the get-go to her.



Meghan has been working but the press lies. The mail mis quoted Harper Bazaar. It lied about what happened, that is why Meghan and Harry are legal actions.

The press is stating events happened, they Sussex’s are being criticized for things they didn’t do.

Harper’s Bazaar article https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ynch-press-attacks/?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## doni

That Holly Lynch MP seems a childish brat, oh dear, the politicians of the social media age...
What I cannot understand for the life of me is how she convinced 70 MPs to sign, unless most of them are **********s who can spot a good chance to damage monarchy when they see it...


----------



## chicaloca

cafecreme15 said:


> The best thing Meghan can do to get through this is to keep doing engagements with her charities and start speaking through her actions and not her words. One would have thought this would have been obvious from the get-go to her.




The ITV documentary was her first candid interview since the engagement interview with Harry. The Telegraph interview will mark her third candid interview in three years.  Meghan isn’t speaking that much outside of promoting her charities and official engagements.


----------



## cafecreme15

buffym said:


> Meghan has been working but the press lies. The mail mis quoted Harper Bazaar. It lied about what happened, that is why Meghan and Harry are legal actions.
> 
> The press is stating events happened, they Sussex’s are being criticized for things they didn’t do.
> 
> Harper’s Bazaar article https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ynch-press-attacks/?__twitter_impression=true
> 
> View attachment 4579632





chicaloca said:


> The ITV documentary was her first candid interview since the engagement interview with Harry. The Telegraph interview will mark her third candid interview in three years.  Meghan isn’t speaking that much outside of promoting her charities and official engagements.


You’re both correct that she doesn’t really speak that much. But as someone not new to the spotlight, she should know that anything she says that is remotely negative or complain-y (or really anything at all) is going to be twisted and printed over and over again, and that any word she says will get a million times more press coverage than any run of the mill charity appearance. So to the extent she can, it would be better for her to channel her internal feelings of negativity and turn them into something positive for others, like I said earlier - eg don’t complain that the media isn’t being fair to you - go work with an anti bullying charity and go into schools, etc. In other words - model the behavior you want to see as best you can and get on with it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Meghan tells her friends and connections what she wants said.  Since she came on the scene we’ve had nothing but “sources close to” and “friends of” reporting, and constant drip drip rumouring.  She’s also behind the Instagram account.


----------



## chicaloca

cafecreme15 said:


> You’re both correct that she doesn’t really speak that much. But as someone not new to the spotlight, she should know that anything she says that is remotely negative or complain-y (or really anything at all) is going to be twisted and printed over and over again, and that any word she says will get a million times more press coverage than any run of the mill charity appearance. *So to the extent she can, it would be better for her to channel her internal feelings of negativity and turn them into something positive for others,* like I said earlier - eg don’t complain that the media isn’t being fair to you - go work with an anti bullying charity and go into schools, etc. In other words - model the behavior you want to see as best you can and get on with it.



I’m sorry but the Sussexes and Cambridges are 
spearheading a major mental Health campaign part of which encourages people to talk openly about their mental health. Why should we not expect them to talk openly about their own mental health and whatever factors are contributing to it? 

Also Meghan has been channeling her energy into positive charity work for nearly two decades. If that isn’t apparent it’s likely because you are fixated on the same tabloid narratives that ignore her charity work and are the main negative contributors  to her mental health.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan tells her friends and connections what she wants said.  Since she came on the scene we’ve had nothing but “sources close to” and “friends of” reporting, and constant drip drip rumouring.  She’s also behind the Instagram account.




Every tabloid story about every famous person Is from “sources close to” or some anonymous person. This is not the same as hearing directing from the person themselves. 

Meghan doesn’t need to silence herself. The simple solution for anyone tired of hearing from Meghan is to stop googling her, stalking her Instagram and posting all day on forums about her. 

Also, the Sussexes have a digital team managing their Instagram like all the other royals. I doubt Meghan is sitting around editing video clips and writing captions. A lot of delusional people have convinced themselves Meghan is running the Sussexroyal Instagram and post abusive messages to her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicaloca said:


> Every tabloid story about every famous person Is from “sources close to” or some anonymous person. This is not the same as hearing directing from the person themselves.
> 
> Meghan doesn’t need to silence herself. The simple solution for anyone tired of hearing from Meghan is to stop googling her, stalking her Instagram and posting all day on forums about her.
> 
> Also, the Sussexes have a digital team managing their Instagram like all the other royals. I doubt Meghan is sitting around editing video clips and writing captions. A lot of delusional people have convinced themselves Meghan is running the Sussexroyal Instagram and post abusive messages to her.


There’s no need to be so aggressive, all viewpoints are allowed here.  NB. Some of us are in different time zones.
And as I’ve said before, please add me to your ignore list if you don’t like reading my posts.


----------



## Aqua01

chicaloca said:


> *Meghan doesn’t need to silence herself*. The simple solution for anyone tired of hearing from Meghan is to stop googling her, stalking her Instagram and posting all day on forums about her.


And neither does any member in this thread. I may be sick and tired of hearing about this narcissistic person and then be sick and tired of being sick and tired, but I reserve the right to be entertained by her antics, and say WHATEVER I damn well please about her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> The simple solution for anyone tired of hearing from Meghan is to stop googling her, stalking her Instagram and posting all day on forums about her.



Or not.


----------



## LittleStar88

chicaloca said:


> I’m sorry but the Sussexes and Cambridges are
> spearheading a major mental Health campaign part of which encourages people to talk openly about their mental health. Why should we not expect them to talk openly about their own mental health and whatever factors are contributing to it?
> 
> Also Meghan has been channeling her energy into positive charity work for nearly two decades. If that isn’t apparent it’s likely because you are fixated on the same tabloid narratives that ignore her charity work and are the main negative contributors  to her mental health.



BUT... She could have framed it differently. Instead of _*no one is asking me how I feel*_ and *I am just existing*, she could have said_ it has been a challenge to adjust to married life, my new role, and becoming a first-time mother all within a short period of time, but I am surrounding myself with people who support me and making sure to take good care of myself_. I would have had a lot more sympathy for her had she framed it differently.

She seems to have little awareness of how these comments appear to those on the outside with real life struggles. So many famous folks in the spotlight who have to endure some really negative press - she should talk to Oprah, Michelle *****, Ellen, on how they manage the negativity (maybe just don't read the tabloids and go about your business with a smile?).


----------



## daisychainz

chicaloca said:


> Every tabloid story about every famous person Is from “sources close to” or some anonymous person. This is not the same as hearing directing from the person themselves.
> 
> Meghan doesn’t need to silence herself. The simple solution for anyone tired of hearing from Meghan is to stop googling her, stalking her Instagram and posting all day on forums about her.
> 
> Also, the Sussexes have a digital team managing their Instagram like all the other royals. I doubt Meghan is sitting around editing video clips and writing captions. A lot of delusional people have convinced themselves Meghan is running the Sussexroyal Instagram and post abusive messages to her.


The digital team is likely Meghan and Harry. Remember she ran two websites/blogs - the Twig, Fig, whatever it was called and then the anonymous one about Hollywood. She's very good at social media and if she isn't sitting there writing posts herself you better believe she's 100% controlling it and is the leader of that team. MM and Harry cannot control the written press, so that Instagram account is the only outlet they have to post positive stories.


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> The digital team is likely Meghan and Harry. Remember she ran two websites/blogs - the Twig, Fig, whatever it was called and then the anonymous one about Hollywood. She's very good at social media and if she isn't sitting there writing posts herself you better believe she's 100% controlling it and is the leader of that team. MM and Harry cannot control the written press, so that Instagram account is the only outlet they have to post positive stories.


----------



## chicaloca

daisychainz said:


> The digital team is likely Meghan and Harry. Remember she ran two websites/blogs - the Twig, Fig, whatever it was called and then the anonymous one about Hollywood. She's very good at social media and if she isn't sitting there writing posts herself you better believe she's 100% controlling it and is the leader of that team. MM and Harry cannot control the written press, so that Instagram account is the only outlet they have to post positive stories.



I’m  sure the digital media specialist the  Sussexes hired (David Watkins) handles the actual running of their Instagram. How is it that Harry and Meghan were somehow filming themselves and editing the videos and photos and cutting music in real time during their 10 day South Africa tour if they didn’t have someone running their account?


----------



## daisychainz

chicaloca said:


> I’m  sure the digital media specialist the  Sussexes hired (David Watkins) handles the actual running of their Instagram. How is it that Harry and Meghan were somehow filming themselves and editing the videos and photos and cutting music in real time during their 10 day South Africa tour if they didn’t have someone running their account?


They have additional help, you're right.


----------



## mrsinsyder

*OPENING UP, AGAIN*
*Meghan Markle Breaches Royal Protocol with One-on-One Newspaper Interview*
Just how will the retired army officers who, in popular imagination at least, make up the readership of British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, respond to Meghan’s therapy talk?

Meghan Markle has given an interview to the right-wing, Brexit-loving, fiercely traditional British newspaper _The Daily Telegraph_, in which she talks about the importance of vulnerability and speaks a great deal of therapy language that is unlikely to endear her to that newspaper’s natural readership. 

In her interview with _The Telegraph_, which counts Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson among its star contributors and has been one of Donald *****’s few broadsheet U.K. cheerleaders, Meghan allows reporter Bryony Gordon to transcribe her thoughts while she pays a visit to a charity bakery which offers help to disadvantaged women.

*It’s worth noting that doing such a piece is a major breach of royal protocol: Prince William and Kate Middleton have a strict rule to never give one-on-one newspaper interviews, the Queen has never give one and Prince Charles has only done so on rare occasions.*

The encounter took place at the Luminary Bakery, a bakery that aims to empower disadvantaged women through training and employment opportunities in the baking world.

Gordon describes how one of the women she meets, a victim of child exploitation, has recently had a business card printed as she prepares to set up her own catering company thanks to the support of Luminary Bakery, which Meghan featured in her guest-edited issue of _Vogue_. 

In scenes unlikely to warm the heart of _The Telegraph’s_ core readership, often caricatured as retired army officers in the English shires, Meghan tells the group of women: “One of the things I have realised since being here is that people have an expectation when I’m coming somewhere, so I’m like, let’s just be really relaxed, keep everyone nice and chilled, because at the end of the day we’re all just women. We all have a story to tell, and I feel honoured that I am getting to hear yours.”

Having listened to the harrowing story of one of the women, Giselle, Meghan asks her: “When was the first moment you thought, “This is going to change me, on the inside? When you realised that this was not just about learning to bake, that there was another element to it?””

“It was the moment when the girls around me told me that it was OK for me to be hurt,” says Giselle. “That it was ok for me to show them that I was hurt, and that I was struggling.”

“They gave you permission, right?” asks Meghan.

Giselle, we are assured, “nods her head vigorously, smiling,” in response to this suggestion.

One wonders what the readers of _The Telegraph_, the spiritual home of the Stiff Upper Lip she so reviles, must be making of it all. After all in just the last few weeks they have been treated to several long pieces on  what a spoilt brat Meghan is, how her and Harry really need to pull their socks up and decide if they want to be real royals and how Meghan is putting Harry in a terribly awkward spot by forcing him to put his relationship with her before his solemn duty to the nation.

Undeterred, Meghan ploughs on, moving on to a discussion of the importance of vulnerability saying; “I was talking about this with someone the other day. We get into this habit of wanting things done immediately nowadays. There’s a culture of instant gratification, of the instant fix. But we aren’t mechanical objects that need to be fixed. You’re a wounded creature that needs to be healed, and that takes time. And that’s what I love about this place. It gives you the support to heal.”


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> *OPENING UP, AGAIN*
> *Meghan Markle Breaches Royal Protocol with One-on-One Newspaper Interview*
> Just how will the retired army officers who, in popular imagination at least, make up the readership of British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, respond to Meghan’s therapy talk?
> 
> Meghan Markle has given an interview to the right-wing, Brexit-loving, fiercely traditional British newspaper _The Daily Telegraph_, in which she talks about the importance of vulnerability and speaks a great deal of therapy language that is unlikely to endear her to that newspaper’s natural readership.
> 
> In her interview with _The Telegraph_, which counts Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson among its star contributors and has been one of Donald *****’s few broadsheet U.K. cheerleaders, Meghan allows reporter Bryony Gordon to transcribe her thoughts while she pays a visit to a charity bakery which offers help to disadvantaged women.
> 
> *It’s worth noting that doing such a piece is a major breach of royal protocol: Prince William and Kate Middleton have a strict rule to never give one-on-one newspaper interviews, the Queen has never give one and Prince Charles has only done so on rare occasions.*
> 
> The encounter took place at the Luminary Bakery, a bakery that aims to empower disadvantaged women through training and employment opportunities in the baking world.
> 
> Gordon describes how one of the women she meets, a victim of child exploitation, has recently had a business card printed as she prepares to set up her own catering company thanks to the support of Luminary Bakery, which Meghan featured in her guest-edited issue of _Vogue_.
> 
> In scenes unlikely to warm the heart of _The Telegraph’s_ core readership, often caricatured as retired army officers in the English shires, Meghan tells the group of women: “One of the things I have realised since being here is that people have an expectation when I’m coming somewhere, so I’m like, let’s just be really relaxed, keep everyone nice and chilled, because at the end of the day we’re all just women. We all have a story to tell, and I feel honoured that I am getting to hear yours.”
> 
> Having listened to the harrowing story of one of the women, Giselle, Meghan asks her: “When was the first moment you thought, “This is going to change me, on the inside? When you realised that this was not just about learning to bake, that there was another element to it?””
> 
> “It was the moment when the girls around me told me that it was OK for me to be hurt,” says Giselle. “That it was ok for me to show them that I was hurt, and that I was struggling.”
> 
> “They gave you permission, right?” asks Meghan.
> 
> Giselle, we are assured, “nods her head vigorously, smiling,” in response to this suggestion.
> 
> One wonders what the readers of _The Telegraph_, the spiritual home of the Stiff Upper Lip she so reviles, must be making of it all. After all in just the last few weeks they have been treated to several long pieces on  what a spoilt brat Meghan is, how her and Harry really need to pull their socks up and decide if they want to be real royals and how Meghan is putting Harry in a terribly awkward spot by forcing him to put his relationship with her before his solemn duty to the nation.
> 
> Undeterred, Meghan ploughs on, moving on to a discussion of the importance of vulnerability saying; “I was talking about this with someone the other day. We get into this habit of wanting things done immediately nowadays. There’s a culture of instant gratification, of the instant fix. But we aren’t mechanical objects that need to be fixed. You’re a wounded creature that needs to be healed, and that takes time. And that’s what I love about this place. It gives you the support to heal.”


Sigh.  When does the 6 weeks start?


----------



## bag-mania

Which tabloid is that article from? They do a double-down by criticizing both Meghan as well as their competitor _The Telegraph_ and it's readers.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Which tabloid is that article from? They do a double-down by criticizing both Meghan as well as their competitor _The Telegraph_ and it's readers.


Daily Beast
https://www.thedailybeast.com/megha...-protocol-with-one-on-one-newspaper-interview


----------



## cafecreme15

LittleStar88 said:


> BUT... She could have framed it differently. Instead of _*no one is asking me how I feel*_ and *I am just existing*, she could have said_ it has been a challenge to adjust to married life, my new role, and becoming a first-time mother all within a short period of time, but I am surrounding myself with people who support me and making sure to take good care of myself_. I would have had a lot more sympathy for her had she framed it differently.
> 
> She seems to have little awareness of how these comments appear to those on the outside with real life struggles. So many famous folks in the spotlight who have to endure some really negative press - she should talk to Oprah, Michelle *****, Ellen, on how they manage the negativity (maybe just don't read the tabloids and go about your business with a smile?).


My point exactly - thank you. She will get picked apart no matter what she does, comes with the territory for her, fortunately or unfortunately. What she can do is think through as to how she can add as little fuel to the fire as possible.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Daily Beast
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/megha...-protocol-with-one-on-one-newspaper-interview



Ah, that's an American tabloid. There goes my theory that the US publications were all going too easy on her.


----------



## sdkitty

chicaloca said:


> The ITV documentary was her first candid interview since the engagement interview with Harry. The Telegraph interview will mark her third candid interview in three years.  Meghan isn’t speaking that much outside of promoting her charities and official engagements.


well she did enough damage with that one tv show


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Ah, that's an American tabloid. There goes my theory that the US publications were all going too easy on her.



I think they (US tabloids) really have been going easy on her. All positive/supportive angles. But I think collectively it is a challenge to listen to someone in a place of tremendous privilege and opportunity complain about how hard their life is and they are just existing. Folks will only buy into that for so long...


----------



## Flatsy

chicaloca said:


> The ITV documentary was her first candid interview since the engagement interview with Harry. The Telegraph interview will mark her third candid interview in three years.


Although it feels like an eternity, it's only been two years, not three.  And she did a cover story for Vanity Fair as well. Compare that to the number of personal interviews the Queen or anybody else in the family has done during that time.  

She talks about herself constantly.  She wants to be a movie star who does interviews about herself and her feelings and I think she's going to continue doing it.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I think they (US tabloids) really have been going easy on her. All positive/supportive angles. But I think collectively it is a challenge to listen to someone in a place of tremendous privilege and opportunity complain about how hard their life is and they are just existing. Folks will only buy into that for so long...



Yes, she comes across as being a whiner who is already out-of-touch with regular people despite only being two years from being "regular" herself. I think she believed everyone would love her. Some of the criticism she gets is nit-picky but that's the price she must pay for the fame she wanted so badly.


----------



## LittleStar88

I am beginning to feel as though she is not really ready for fame and spotlight (which she has seemed to want so badly). The fantasy of it in her head may have been much better than the reality it is turning out to be, and she seems ill-prepared to handle it. 

I think she and Harry would be happy to be wealthy, non-working socialites who just hang out, show up at fancy events occasionally, maybe go give a speech for a giving back kind of event, and essentially just swan about through life.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I've started to notice that her language is always very negative, with a focus on her piece in 'fixing' whatever woes there are. Is this just a narcissist thing? It would be nice to hear her talk about the positives instead of so much focus on being broken, etc.


----------



## cafecreme15

LittleStar88 said:


> I am beginning to feel as though she is not really ready for fame and spotlight (which she has seemed to want so badly). The fantasy of it in her head may have been much better than the reality it is turning out to be, and she seems ill-prepared to handle it.
> 
> I think she and Harry would be happy to be wealthy, non-working socialites who just hang out, show up at fancy events occasionally, maybe go give a speech for a giving back kind of event, and essentially just swan about through life.


Wouldn't we all


----------



## Clearblueskies

The visit to the bakery earlier this week was described as private, but today it’s being reported on all the news channels with photos and accompanying gushy extracts from insta.  I don’t get why someone behaves like this.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I've started to notice that her language is always very negative, with a focus on her piece in 'fixing' whatever woes there are. Is this just a narcissist thing? It would be nice to hear her talk about the positives instead of so much focus on being broken, etc.


I noticed this too.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I think she and Harry would be happy to be wealthy, non-working socialites who just hang out, show up at fancy events occasionally, maybe go give a speech for a giving back kind of event, and essentially just swan about through life.



But isn't that what their life is already like for the most part?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> But isn't that what their life is already like for the most part?


Basically... they just don't want people to say "mean" things about them doing it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I should have said, they want to _be wealthy, non-working socialites who just hang out, show up at fancy events occasionally, maybe go give a speech for a giving back kind of event, and essentially just swan about through life _while the taxpayers pay for it and don't complain about funding their lifestyle.


----------



## chicaloca

Clearblueskies said:


> The visit to the bakery earlier this week was described as private, but today it’s being reported on all the news channels with photos and accompanying gushy extracts from insta.  I don’t get why someone behaves like this.



A private royal event just means it wasn’t on their official calendar of scheduled events — not that no coverage is allowed. The whole point of royals making these appearances is to bring attention to whatever cause they’re supporting so I don’t see why would it be a problem that Meghan got a lot press coverage.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> But isn't that what their life is already like for the most part?


Hehehe - yes! I feel like complaining about things just makes them sound spoiled and entitled.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Hehehe - yes! I feel like complaining about things just makes them sound spoiled and entitled.


sorry to keep repeating myself but if only she would qualify her whining by saying even though she has some problems, they are Nothing compared to what many others have - like starving for example.  Just acknowledge that you have an Extremely Privileged life.


----------



## chicaloca

mrsinsyder said:


> *OPENING UP, AGAIN*
> *Meghan Markle Breaches Royal Protocol with One-on-One Newspaper Interview*
> Just how will the retired army officers who, in popular imagination at least, make up the readership of British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, respond to Meghan’s therapy talk?
> 
> Meghan Markle has given an interview to the right-wing, Brexit-loving, fiercely traditional British newspaper _The Daily Telegraph_, in which she talks about the importance of vulnerability and speaks a great deal of therapy language that is unlikely to endear her to that newspaper’s natural readership.
> 
> In her interview with _The Telegraph_, which counts Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson among its star contributors and has been one of Donald *****’s few broadsheet U.K. cheerleaders, Meghan allows reporter Bryony Gordon to transcribe her thoughts while she pays a visit to a charity bakery which offers help to disadvantaged women.
> 
> *It’s worth noting that doing such a piece is a major breach of royal protocol: Prince William and Kate Middleton have a strict rule to never give one-on-one newspaper interviews, the Queen has never give one and Prince Charles has only done so on rare occasions.*
> 
> The encounter took place at the Luminary Bakery, a bakery that aims to empower disadvantaged women through training and employment opportunities in the baking world.
> 
> Gordon describes how one of the women she meets, a victim of child exploitation, has recently had a business card printed as she prepares to set up her own catering company thanks to the support of Luminary Bakery, which Meghan featured in her guest-edited issue of _Vogue_.
> 
> In scenes unlikely to warm the heart of _The Telegraph’s_ core readership, often caricatured as retired army officers in the English shires, Meghan tells the group of women: “One of the things I have realised since being here is that people have an expectation when I’m coming somewhere, so I’m like, let’s just be really relaxed, keep everyone nice and chilled, because at the end of the day we’re all just women. We all have a story to tell, and I feel honoured that I am getting to hear yours.”
> 
> Having listened to the harrowing story of one of the women, Giselle, Meghan asks her: “When was the first moment you thought, “This is going to change me, on the inside? When you realised that this was not just about learning to bake, that there was another element to it?””
> 
> “It was the moment when the girls around me told me that it was OK for me to be hurt,” says Giselle. “That it was ok for me to show them that I was hurt, and that I was struggling.”
> 
> “They gave you permission, right?” asks Meghan.
> 
> Giselle, we are assured, “nods her head vigorously, smiling,” in response to this suggestion.
> 
> One wonders what the readers of _The Telegraph_, the spiritual home of the Stiff Upper Lip she so reviles, must be making of it all. After all in just the last few weeks they have been treated to several long pieces on  what a spoilt brat Meghan is, how her and Harry really need to pull their socks up and decide if they want to be real royals and how Meghan is putting Harry in a terribly awkward spot by forcing him to put his relationship with her before his solemn duty to the nation.
> 
> Undeterred, Meghan ploughs on, moving on to a discussion of the importance of vulnerability saying; “I was talking about this with someone the other day. We get into this habit of wanting things done immediately nowadays. There’s a culture of instant gratification, of the instant fix. But we aren’t mechanical objects that need to be fixed. You’re a wounded creature that needs to be healed, and that takes time. And that’s what I love about this place. It gives you the support to heal.”




Is there some kind of law that every charitable endeavor or appearance by Meghan must be accompanied by a think piece criticizing her for it? I mean, she is literally being criticized for a charity appearance which only illustrates how over-the-top negative the U.K. press is towards her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> and have both created successful grassroots initiatives that have lasting impact.


It's incredible that you can ascertain that after two years or so.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> sorry to keep repeating myself but if only she would quality her whining by saying even though she has some problems, they are Nothing compared to what many others have - like starving for example.  Just acknowledge that you have an Extremely Privileged life.


It bears repeating.  William and Harry have both spoken as adults about the private visits Diana used to take them on to show them the lives of other people less privileged than they.  None of that ever made it into the press at the time, but clearly she understood how important it was that they have that perspective.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicaloca said:


> Is there some kind of law that every charitable endeavor or appearance by Meghan must be accompanied by a think piece criticizing her for it? I mean, she is literally being criticized for a charity appearance *which only illustrates how over-the-top negative the U.K. press is towards her.*



The article you quoted is from the a US source, not the UK. It seems like there's a rush to make assumptions that support the victimization of Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I think they (US tabloids) really have been going easy on her. All positive/supportive angles. But I think collectively it is a challenge to listen to someone in a place of tremendous privilege and opportunity complain about how hard their life is and they are just existing. Folks will only buy into that for so long...


I agree, BUT .. the US Tabloids can be just as bad/nasty if they want to .. there are many more besides People Magazine!


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Uh oh. What is happening?
> 
> View attachment 4578339
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and his renegade wife, Meghan, threw a tantrum and reportedly threatened to quit the Royal Family during a bitter confrontation with the Queen, insiders said.
> 
> The source claims she “stripped them of their royal titles, their newly renovated home, Frogmore Cottage — and about $15 million in financial support.





mrsinsyder said:


> *CHEERIO! PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN QUIT THE ROYAL FAMILY *
> *Queen Elizabeth happy to bid the two goodbye after shocking interview.*
> OCTOBER 30, 2019 @ 6:47AM
> *Prince Harry* and his renegade wife, *Meghan*, threw a tantrum and quit Britain’s royal family during a bitter confrontation with *Queen Elizabeth*, insiders said.



It's interesting that the Queen is apparently "disappointed" and stripping Harry & Meghan of their titles, money, and kicking them out yet she's given that same grandson a special message to deliver on her behalf...

"During his 24-hours in Tokyo, Harry will deliver the following message from the Queen to the @*EnglandRugby* team ahead of the #*RugbyWorldCup19* final:"


----------



## Mrs.Z

According to Meghan we are all just wounded creatures that need to be healed and that takes time.  

I’m sorry why does she continue doing interviews?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sorry why does she continue doing interviews?


Narcissist who desperately seeks attention.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I agree, BUT .. the US Tabloids can be just as bad/nasty if they want to .. there are many more besides People Magazine!



I expect we will get to see that once they arrive in the US. The US magazines have mostly been fluff pieces for people (Americans) who don't have much of an investment in the BRF goings on.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Narcissist who desperately seeks attention.


she didn't do all that networking just to be a homebody


----------



## PatsyCline

hellosunshine said:


> It's interesting that the Queen is apparently "disappointed" and stripping Harry & Meghan of their titles, money, and kicking them out yet she's given that same grandson a special message to deliver on her behalf...
> 
> "During his 24-hours in Tokyo, Harry will deliver the following message from the Queen to the @*EnglandRugby* team ahead of the #*RugbyWorldCup19* final:"



The Queen 'might' be able to strip titles, but the money Harry inherited from his mother, and grandmother are his. And that fortune is in the 8 figure range.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I agree, BUT .. the US Tabloids can be just as bad/nasty if they want to .. there are many more besides People Magazine!


I don't see a lot of tabloids (unless you count the Daily Beast).  But from what I've seen online and on the TV talk shows, she seems to get mostly positive coverage in the US (so far anyway).....that could change


----------



## sdkitty

PatsyCline said:


> The Queen 'might' be able to strip titles, but the money Harry inherited from his mother, and grandmother are his. And that fortune is in the 8 figure range.


I could imagine jet-setters going through that kind of money


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a29664334/royal-family-disappointed-harry-meghan-daily-mail/

*The Royal Family Is Reportedly "Disappointed" in Harry and Meghan for Suing the Press*
Nov 1, 2019








Earlier this month, Meghan Markle sued _The Daily Mail_ for publishing her private handwritten correspondence, and Prince Harry's subsequent statement explained that the couple was taking action now because "I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces." There's been rumors that the rest of Harry's family isn't necessarily on board with these actions, and now it's confirmed: Even the Queen (allegedly) disapproves.

Royal correspondent of the _Daily Express_ Richard Palmer had tweeted out in early October that the British royal family was, quietly, upset with the Sussexes. "Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves," he wrote.

"Obviously, if that changes it will be a story but at the moment the Sussexes appear out on a limb. Whatever the merits of their various legal actions, they didn’t inform their family that Harry was going to release that inflammatory statement."

Now, a month has passed, and apparently it's just as true now as it was then. "This rather bald statement of the facts remains true 25 days later, as far as I can tell. While there is concern for Harry and Meghan’s mental health, their attitude has disappointed the Queen and other members of the Royal Family, according to several sources."

That...is so depressing, I won't lie. I can certainly understand Harry's position of trying to protect his family, even when it goes to (what some might say is) an extreme degree.

Here's the tweet:

Richard Palmer
✔@RoyalReporter
_This rather bald statement of the facts remains true 25 days later, as far as I can tell. While there is concern for Harry and Meghan’s mental health, their attitude has disappointed the Queen and other members of the Royal Family, according to several sources. https://twitter.com/royalreporter/status/1181329299955163136 …_

Richard Palmer
✔@RoyalReporter
_Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves._

https://twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1190205959383265280
WOW.


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> The digital team is likely Meghan and Harry. Remember she ran two websites/blogs - the Twig, Fig, whatever it was called and then the anonymous one about Hollywood. She's very good at social media and if she isn't sitting there writing posts herself you better believe she's 100% controlling it and is the leader of that team. MM and Harry cannot control the written press, so that Instagram account is the only outlet they have to post positive stories.


Yes, Meg is very social media savvy and she seems to think on-line engagement is a very modern approach to keeping in touch with the little people and most importantly, letting them know she's working and busy.

Not a traditional way for the BRF to appear, but they are trying to modernize the monarchy.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> She looked nice at her last event. Her hair is so pretty!


Her hair is so much longer, I assumed it was extensions or a weave...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a29664334/royal-family-disappointed-harry-meghan-daily-mail/
> 
> *The Royal Family Is Reportedly "Disappointed" in Harry and Meghan for Suing the Press*
> Nov 1, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Earlier this month, Meghan Markle sued _The Daily Mail_ for publishing her private handwritten correspondence, and Prince Harry's subsequent statement explained that the couple was taking action now because "I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces." There's been rumors that the rest of Harry's family isn't necessarily on board with these actions, and now it's confirmed: Even the Queen (allegedly) disapproves.
> 
> Royal correspondent of the _Daily Express_ Richard Palmer had tweeted out in early October that the British royal family was, quietly, upset with the Sussexes. "Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves," he wrote.
> 
> "Obviously, if that changes it will be a story but at the moment the Sussexes appear out on a limb. Whatever the merits of their various legal actions, they didn’t inform their family that Harry was going to release that inflammatory statement."
> 
> Now, a month has passed, and apparently it's just as true now as it was then. "This rather bald statement of the facts remains true 25 days later, as far as I can tell. While there is concern for Harry and Meghan’s mental health, their attitude has disappointed the Queen and other members of the Royal Family, according to several sources."
> 
> That...is so depressing, I won't lie. I can certainly understand Harry's position of trying to protect his family, even when it goes to (what some might say is) an extreme degree.
> 
> Here's the tweet:
> 
> Richard Palmer
> ✔@RoyalReporter
> _This rather bald statement of the facts remains true 25 days later, as far as I can tell. While there is concern for Harry and Meghan’s mental health, their attitude has disappointed the Queen and other members of the Royal Family, according to several sources. https://twitter.com/royalreporter/status/1181329299955163136 …_
> 
> Richard Palmer
> ✔@RoyalReporter
> _Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves._
> 
> WOW.


That’s quite a look she’s giving him!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I could imagine jet-setters going through that kind of money


.. and California IS NOT cheap, especially if you want to live in the more "exclusive" neighborhoods (Beverly Hills, Malibu, etc.)!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> Her hair is so much longer, I assumed it was extensions or a weave...


Probably is, but still pretty (even with extensions, my hair would not look as great). Also, saying something nice about her


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> .. and California IS NOT cheap, especially if you want to live in the more "exclusive" neighborhoods (Beverly Hills, Malibu, etc.)!!!



Even the Bay Area is insane. Over 1 million for a cracker box.


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a29664334/royal-family-disappointed-harry-meghan-daily-mail/
> 
> *The Royal Family Is Reportedly "Disappointed" in Harry and Meghan for Suing the Press*
> Nov 1, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Earlier this month, Meghan Markle sued _The Daily Mail_ for publishing her private handwritten correspondence, and Prince Harry's subsequent statement explained that the couple was taking action now because "I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces." There's been rumors that the rest of Harry's family isn't necessarily on board with these actions, and now it's confirmed: Even the Queen (allegedly) disapproves.
> 
> Royal correspondent of the _Daily Express_ Richard Palmer had tweeted out in early October that the British royal family was, quietly, upset with the Sussexes. "Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves," he wrote.
> 
> "Obviously, if that changes it will be a story but at the moment the Sussexes appear out on a limb. Whatever the merits of their various legal actions, they didn’t inform their family that Harry was going to release that inflammatory statement."
> 
> Now, a month has passed, and apparently it's just as true now as it was then. "This rather bald statement of the facts remains true 25 days later, as far as I can tell. While there is concern for Harry and Meghan’s mental health, their attitude has disappointed the Queen and other members of the Royal Family, according to several sources."
> 
> That...is so depressing, I won't lie. I can certainly understand Harry's position of trying to protect his family, even when it goes to (what some might say is) an extreme degree.
> 
> Here's the tweet:
> 
> Richard Palmer
> ✔@RoyalReporter
> _This rather bald statement of the facts remains true 25 days later, as far as I can tell. While there is concern for Harry and Meghan’s mental health, their attitude has disappointed the Queen and other members of the Royal Family, according to several sources. https://twitter.com/royalreporter/status/1181329299955163136 …_
> 
> Richard Palmer
> ✔@RoyalReporter
> _Nobody in the Royal Family or the Royal Household is supporting Harry and Meghan at the moment. Even the couple’s aides seem embarrassed by their actions. William, who dropped his brother like a ton of hot bricks earlier this year, and Charles have distanced themselves._
> 
> WOW.


Not the main point obviously but I find this phrase "and now it's confirmed: Even the Queen (allegedly) disapproves" to be particularly funny.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Even the Bay Area is insane. Over 1 million for a cracker box.


RIGHT?!? .. but I can't see them in SF especially since she's from the LA area.  While I love SF for many reasons, there is a reason why they call it "Fog City" (but it is AMAZING to see it roll out in the AM and then roll back in in the PM .. just fascinated me)!!!


----------



## hellosunshine

*Kate Middleton Steps Up to Help Meghan Markle—and Herself*
*

*

_The flurry of stories this week suggesting that Kate Middleton has been lending her support to Meghan Markle hint that Kate and Prince William may be cozying up to the media._

This week, well-briefed royal reporters floated a series of stories that suggested that Kate Middleton had telephoned Meghan Markle to offer her support and encouragement as she battled with a slew of negativity and criticism in the wake of their astonishingly candid ITV documentary.

Speaking to the _Daily Express_, royal author Phil Dampier said: “Behind the scenes I’m told Kate is doing her best to bring everyone together and help Meghan. None of them want to let the Queen down so Kate is trying to patch things up in private.

“I’m told she has reached out to Meghan and spoken to her on the phone. Kate feels sorry for her and knows that Meghan is struggling.”

That Kate should be willing to help out her fellow princess comes as no surprise. 

That Kate should be willing for a veteran royal writer to be tipped off to that fact represents an interesting inflection point in the royal family's communications strategy.

Observant followers of the history of the young royals might recall a time when Kate Middleton and Prince William explicitly shunned the press.

Their paranoia extended to smuggling baby George in and out of royal palaces, hiding away in a remote cottage in Wales for several years, and culminated in the absurdity of keeping the name of their dog a secret.

This turned out, unsurprisingly, to be counterproductive. The royal press pack love nothing more than a challenge, and each time the palace primly declared a birthday party, anniversary or, er, animal’s name, “private” they set about finding out the details with an absurdity that matched the original injunction in its intensity.

Indeed, although it was ultimately a kid they encountered on a school visit who asked Kate, “What’s your dog called?” (to which, suddenly cognizant of the absurdity of her embargo, Kate replied, “Lupo”) rumors persist that the innocent child was put up to it by a mother who was herself in communication with curious members of the press.

And guess what followed this strategy of deliberately denying a few tidbits to a small number of journalists?

Correct: Years of bad press. 

The overarching narrative, easily developed (and now being deployed against Harry and Meghan) was that Kate and William were lazy scroungers living high on the hog while refusing to do their proper royal duty.

(It is her experience of this phase of her life that Kate is believed to have shared to help rally Meghan, reportedly telling her that all royals have “bad patches.”)

The reality of course, was that the press were furious they were being denied access, and were taking it out on William and Kate the only way they could.

Enter Harry and Meghan, and at first everything went well. They kindly tipped us off to their first Christmas plans, Harry talked candidly about his feelings, and many welcomed Meghan’s consideration toward the media; she would for example frequently pose for photos, and get out of the car on the photographers’ side.

Even Harry started to snarl a little less at the media pen some of the time.

On the eve of Harry and Meghan’s wedding, even after all the drama with Thomas Markle being exposed by the _Mail on Sunday_ for staging photos, Harry and William took to the streets of Windsor in a surprise walkabout that wasn’t a surprise to the media who had been tipped off in advance.

Sighs of relief were being widely heaved. Seasoned communicator Meghan was here to teach Harry how to interact with the media and the promise of a new accommodation hove into view.



> “For Kate and William, the rise of Harry and Meghan had provided some interesting tensions. The focus of attention was taken completely off them—but having apparently campaigned for a lower profile for years, it turned out they didn’t much like being also-rans when it actually happened”



And then, in the name of the privacy of an unborn child, Harry and Meghan collapsed the new arrangement with a confrontational decision to not tell the media where the baby was being born, and a cack-handed execution of the post-birth media which included not giving clear pictures of the baby to the media while releasing an image of his foot on Instagram.

For Kate and William, the rise of Harry and Meghan had provided some interesting tensions. The focus of attention was taken completely off them—but having apparently campaigned for a lower profile for years, it turned out they didn’t much like being also-rans when it actually happened.

William shares with his father a powerful jealous streak and he, in particular, found his new lower profile hard to take. There were persistent rumors that he became angered by diary clashes which pitched him and his wife directly against Harry and Meghan for media attention, because Harry and Meghan, the exciting and glamorous new kids on the block, won the popularity contest every time.

The shunting off of Harry and Meghan to Windsor was, some say, driven as much by William as it was by Harry.

A taste of obscurity seems to have alerted William and Kate to what’s at stake: it was interesting to note that this summer, as Harry and Meghan’s star fell, more than a hint of co-operation with the media began to emerge from the now-solo occupants of Kensington Palace.

While Meghan and Harry were being slammed for flying privately to exotic European locations, Kate, William and their kids were pictured getting off a budget flight on the tarmac of a wind-blown Scottish airport. Fortunately a press photographer was perfectly located to snap the happy picture.

When Meghan and Harry gave their bombshell interviews to ITV in which they implicitly attacked William and Kate and other royals for not supporting them, William and Kate were quick to show they would not take such abuse in silence, briefing back that William was “concerned” for his “fragile” brother in a tit-for-tat that recalled the war waged in the media by their parents. 

Kate even showed off her down-to-earth credentials by being spotted shopping for Halloween outfits for her kids in a local supermarket.

And then this week, the flurry of stories about how Meghan had received encouraging phone calls from Kate: Dampier said: “Catherine has told Meghan that every royal—including herself—goes through a bad patch with the press but the important thing is to learn by mistakes, move on and get through it.”

Kensington Palace did not reply to The Daily Beast when we made a request for comment on whether Kate has been in touch with Meghan, but the chances are, this is a narrative they are happy to let run a little while longer. 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/kate-middleton-steps-up-to-help-meghan-markleand-herself?ref=author


----------



## mrsinsyder

I thought Meghan was doing awesome? Why would she need help?

The William jealousy thing is so silly. One of them will be king and one of them will go further and further into obscurity and tabloid bylines. I’m sure Will isn’t worried.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mdcx

Narcissists like to poke and prod at people’s weaknesses and wounds, not build them up. The last thing they want is their “victims”....um....friends/family to become strong and independent. Because then of course they will see through the BS and leave.
It’s a pretty cheap shot imo for M to visit abused people and dig into their pain as a way to get their allegiance.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> It's interesting that the Queen is apparently "disappointed" and stripping Harry & Meghan of their titles, money, and kicking them out yet she's given that same grandson a special message to deliver on her behalf...
> 
> "During his 24-hours in Tokyo, Harry will deliver the following message from the Queen to the @*EnglandRugby* team ahead of the #*RugbyWorldCup19* final



Because she knows he’s not capable of making a speech on his own so she wrote it for him.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> I thought Meghan was doing awesome? Why would she need help?



She doesn't need help. However, many are finding the timing of this new narrative of Kate "helping" or "offering advice to Meghan" rather intriguing. The exact timing of her so called support is right when Meghan is receiving so much love and public support. Kate's gesture at _this_ particular moment just seems so self-serving. She seemed happy to stay silent as the hate was at it's peak during Meghan's pregnancy so


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Because she knows he’s not capable of making a speech on his own so she wrote it for him.



Haha! Wow, thanks for the hearty laugh.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> She doesn't need help. However, many are finding the timing of this new narrative of Kate "helping" or "offering advice to Meghan" rather intriguing. The exact timing of her so called support is right when Meghan is receiving so much love and public support. Kate's gesture at _this_ particular moment just seems so self-serving. She seemed happy to stay silent as the hate was at it's peak during Meghan's pregnancy so


It’s a fake story made up by Sunshine Sachs so I wouldn’t worry about it too much anyway.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Haha! Wow, thanks for the hearty laugh.


You’re so welcome!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Just to comment that I have a short attention span on this thread.  These ultra long posts, *from anybody,  *just encourage me to keep scrolling and not read.  It is a form of shouting and counterproductive to whatever point you are trying to make.

Until a person comes out and is quoted directly in the media about what they have or have not done or said, I am not believing anything.  It's very easy to say so and so reached out etc., especially with this mob because there is no way to prove it. Too many unnamed sources.   Lots of false flags being waved out there.


----------



## mrsinsyder

It’s interesting to see that two Radar online stories with unnamed sources were posted and one was dismissed as nonsense and the other is posted as fact.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Because she knows he’s not capable of making a speech on his own so she wrote it for him.


Royals often do this


----------



## Mrs.Z

Radar online is 100% garbage


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Because she knows he’s not capable of making a speech on his own so she wrote it for him.


The Queen is still the monarch, I think it’s a subtle reminder to H to ask him to deliver the message in this way.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s a fake story made up by Sunshine Sachs so I wouldn’t worry about it too much anyway.


I have no time for this Kate v Meghan stuff, it’s just too silly.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow more tweets that show... nothing. Why can’t she be disappointed in him and unhappy with him yet still ask him to deliver her message? They’re not exclusive to each other. It’s not like she’s so upset she’s going to fly to Japan and jump out in front of him


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow more tweets that show... nothing. Why can’t she be disappointed in him and unhappy with him yet still ask him to deliver her message? They’re not exclusive to each other. It’s not like she’s so upset she’s going to fly to Japan and jump out in front of him


He’s being put in his place.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> I have no time for this Kate v Meghan stuff, it’s just too silly.


What is really ridiculous about this is that nothing will change for Kate. She is married to a future King and produced a future King.  She can sit back and eat her popcorn and do nothing, which exactly what I think she is doing.  I have no belief that she has done anything regarding MM.  I 'm sure she has her private thoughts, but she doesn't strike me as the type of person to share and broadcast them.  She doesn't need to.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow more tweets that show... nothing. Why can’t she be disappointed in him and unhappy with him yet still ask him to deliver her message? They’re not exclusive to each other. It’s not like she’s so upset she’s going to fly to Japan and jump out in front of him


He's being sent on an errand and to say a few words.  That is it.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow more tweets that show... nothing. Why can’t she be disappointed in him and unhappy with him yet still ask him to deliver her message? They’re not exclusive to each other. It’s not like she’s so upset she’s going to fly to Japan and jump out in front of him



Well, because this particular royal reporter keeps claiming (w/ "supposed" inside sources) that Prince Harry and Meghan have "embarrassed" the whole royal family or the firm. Why would the Queen ask Prince Harry to speak on her behalf?!


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> What is really ridiculous about this is that nothing will change for Kate. She is married to a future King and produced a future King.  She can sit back and eat her popcorn and do nothing, which exactly what I think she is doing.  I have no belief that she has done anything regarding MM.  I 'm sure she has her private thoughts, but she doesn't strike me as the type of person to share and broadcast them.  She doesn't need to.


Exactly... but Kate being married to a King is something Meghan fans can’t change and it drives them nuts. I agree that I doubt Kate cares at all (Meghan didn’t even approach her with Archie at the outdoor thing they were both at). There’s no reason for Meghan to be on Kate’s radar.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Well, because this particular royal reporter keeps claiming (w/ "supposed" inside sources) that Prince Harry and Meghan have "embarrassed" the whole royal family or the firm. Why would the Queen ask Prince Harry to speak on her behalf?!


Its his job.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Well, because this particular royal reporter keeps claiming (w/ "supposed" inside sources) that Prince Harry and Meghan have "embarrassed" the whole royal family or the firm. Why would the Queen ask Prince Harry to speak on her behalf?!



Probably because one has nothing to do with the other. He’s reading a few sentences from her. It’s not that big.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Well, because this particular royal reporter keeps claiming (w/ "supposed" inside sources) that Prince Harry and Meghan have "embarrassed" the whole royal family or the firm. Why would the Queen ask Prince Harry to speak on her behalf?!





gracekelly said:


> He's being sent on an errand and to say a few words.  That is it.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> Its his job.





mrsinsyder said:


> Probably because one has nothing to do with the other. He’s reading a few sentences from her. It’s not that big.



So, as discussed here earlier - when Harry & Meghan's photo was removed from the sitting area of Buckingham Palace that apparently supported the idea that the Queen is disappointed with them yet when statements are released saying "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing. Yeah, that totally makes a lot of sense! /insert sarcasm.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> She doesn't need help. However, many are finding the timing of this new narrative of Kate "helping" or "offering advice to Meghan" rather intriguing. The exact timing of her so called support is right when Meghan is receiving so much love and public support. Kate's gesture at _this_ particular moment just seems so self-serving. She seemed happy to stay silent as the hate was at it's peak during Meghan's pregnancy so


how long ago was it that she said with those big doe eyes that things were hard for her and thanks for asking?
so now she doesn't need help?
which is it?  things are hard?  or she doesn't need help?


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> So, as discussed here earlier - when Harry & Meghan's photo was removed from the sitting area of Buckingham Palace that apparently supported the idea that the Queen is disappointed with them yet when statements are released saying "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing. Yeah, that totally makes a lot of sense! /insert sarcasm.


No need for sarcasm.  He’s patron of the RFU. It’s his duty to be there.  If Wales had beaten SA to get to the final William would have been going also.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> So, as discussed here earlier - when Harry & Meghan's photo was removed from the sitting area of Buckingham Palace that apparently supported the idea that the Queen is disappointed with them yet when statements are released saying "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing. Yeah, that totally makes a lot of sense! /insert sarcasm.


What is the big deal?  The sporting event was not exactly planned for as other events are.  TQ wasn't going to go, she wasn't going to send Andrew so he could be booed, and William and Charles were prescheduled to do something else,I doubt the females in the family were interested so why not send Harry?  He shows up, enjoys watching the game and says a few words.  Plus he gets to eat some really good sushi.  Sounds like a win-win to me.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> So, as discussed here earlier - when Harry & Meghan's photo was removed from the sitting area of Buckingham Palace that apparently supported the idea that the Queen is disappointed with them yet when statements are released saying "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing. Yeah, that totally makes a lot of sense! /insert sarcasm.



Andrew is still out and about doing stuff... Fergie still does stuff with them... Sophie is the queen’s favorite... all people who have embarrassed the queen at some point. The queen doesn’t seem to be a big fan of making public changes very rapidly.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing.


Unless (until) Harry and Meghan renounce their titles and leave the royal family, they continue to work.  They are the queen's representatives at every engagement they do.  That doesn't mean the queen or the rest of the family are happy right now with them or their attitudes.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> What is the big deal?  The sporting event was not exactly planned for as other events are.  TQ wasn't going to go, she wasn't going to send Andrew so he could be booed, and William and Charles were prescheduled to do something else,I doubt the females in the family were interested so why not send Harry?  He shows up, enjoys watching the game and says a few words.  Plus he gets to eat some really good sushi.  Sounds like a win-win to me.


Harry has to go because the England team are in the final, and Harry is patron of the English Rugby Football Union.  I don’t think there are even speeches, he’s just passing on a message to the team.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> What is the big deal?



We will continue to argue until you declare that the Queen is actually going to abdicate the throne to Meghan and she will forever rule with a kingdom of wokeness.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> We will continue to argue until you declare that the Queen is actually going to abdicate the throne to Meghan and she will forever rule with a kingdom of wokeness.




Do I have that power to declare that the Queen will abdicate?  Hmmm....I need to woke up!


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry has to go because the England team are in the final, and Harry is patron of the English Rugby Football Union.  I don’t think there are even speeches, he’s just passing on a message to the team.


I like my idea that he will get to eat really good sushi.  I loved going to Japan and would love to go back.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> I like my idea that he will get to eat really good sushi.  I loved going to Japan and would love to go back.


I haven’t been, it’s top of my list of places to visit soon


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> She doesn't need help. However, many are finding the timing of this new narrative of Kate "helping" or "offering advice to Meghan" rather intriguing. The exact timing of her so called support is right when Meghan is receiving so much love and public support. Kate's gesture at _this_ particular moment just seems so self-serving. She seemed happy to stay silent as the hate was at it's peak during Meghan's pregnancy so


Do you really believe Kate is making a gesture? Kate doesn't need to do anything. She's British, trained 100% in her role, ascending to be a queen (maybe, if Meghan and Harry don't topple the monarchy), has a staff that supports her and doesn't quit... not sure that she would really care one iota about Meghan. She needs Meghan for what? Nothing at all. It'd be nice if she did care, but this is probably about as true as every fan claiming Meghan is loved worldwide.


----------



## hellosunshine

+More Photos from Telegraph


----------



## mrsinsyder

The Meghan Kate story reminds me of when Doria was getting an invite to Balmoral.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?!? .. but I can't see them in SF especially since she's from the LA area.  While I love SF for many reasons, there is a reason why they call it "Fog City" (but it is AMAZING to see it roll out in the AM and then roll back in in the PM .. just fascinated me)!!!



I can only imagine the fuss they would receive here. I am ok with them not coming 

Meghan wants to be close to her friends in LA. And her mom. I just can't wrap my head around the logic behind taking a time out to get away from all the press and photographers to... Going to LA where there is TMZ and a zillion photographers lurking about 

Why even run away at all? 

On another note... Maybe I have missed some of the discussion about her family?

We know her mom. Her dad and her half-siblings. Who else do we know of? Why haven't we heard anything from people who knew her or the family along the way from young child through high school? You sometimes hear about the guy/girl who went to elementary school with so-and-so famous person and some kind of anecdote about them, or little peek into who they are, what the family was like on the daily, etc...


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Just to comment that I have a short attention span on this thread.  These ultra long posts, *from anybody,  *just encourage me to keep scrolling and not read.  It is a form of shouting and counterproductive to whatever point you are trying to make.



THIS! I like the snackable posts... Zero attention span club.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> how long ago was it that she said with those big doe eyes that things were hard for her and thanks for asking?
> so now she doesn't need help?
> which is it?  things are hard?  or she doesn't need help?



Both - she can also play martyr.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I can only imagine the fuss they would receive here. I am ok with them not coming
> 
> Meghan wants to be close to her friends in LA. And her mom. I just can't wrap my head around the logic behind taking a time out to get away from all the press and photographers to... Going to LA where there is TMZ and a zillion photographers lurking about
> 
> Why even run away at all?
> 
> On another note... Maybe I have missed some of the discussion about her family?
> 
> We know her mom. Her dad and her half-siblings. Who else do we know of? Why haven't we heard anything from people who knew her or the family along the way from young child through high school? You sometimes hear about the guy/girl who went to elementary school with so-and-so famous person and some kind of anecdote about them, or little peek into who they are, what the family was like on the daily, etc...



Those people will sneak out of the woodwork when things really get bad to say nasty things.  That's what always happens with high profile people.  As for family, who knows?  They certainly were not at the wedding.  There were a few comments from Doria's side, but mostly they have been silent.  Samantha and Thomas, Jr. have been the loudest.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Those people will sneak out of the woodwork when things really get bad to say nasty things.  That's what always happens with high profile people.  As for family, who knows?  They certainly were not at the wedding.  There were a few comments from Doria's side, but mostly they have been silent.  Samantha and Thomas, Jr. have been the loudest.


She even Markle’d the uncle(?) who got her the internship at the embassy in Buenos Aires.


----------



## jehaga

sdkitty said:


> I could imagine jet-setters going through that kind of money


8 figures, even at the upper end, would make them paupers in their orbit. I doubt MM is going to settle for that kind of crumbs.


----------



## Meh-gan

chicaloca said:


> I’m  sure the digital media specialist the  Sussexes hired (David Watkins) handles the actual running of their Instagram. How is it that Harry and Meghan were somehow filming themselves and editing the videos and photos and cutting music in real time during their 10 day South Africa tour if they didn’t have someone running their account?


You do realize they can have ultimate control and approve every video clip and post copy even with support staff to execute it.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Those people will sneak out of the woodwork when things really get bad to say nasty things.  That's what always happens with high profile people.  As for family, who knows?  They certainly were not at the wedding.  There were a few comments from Doria's side, but mostly they have been silent.  Samantha and Thomas, Jr. have been the loudest.


True, but believe me when the engagement story came out, the press started doing their homework on Meghan and did, in fact, contact many who knew her in her earlier days.  Some just chose to remain silent and not contribute because they have their own families and businesses to look after here in LA and did not want to be named as a "source".


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> True, but believe me when the engagement story came out, the press started doing their homework on Meghan and did, in fact, contact many who knew her in her earlier days.  Some just chose to remain silent and not contribute because they have their own families and businesses to look after here in LA and did not want to be named as a "source".


There’s also been a blind item floating around about “clean up” and signing of NDAs that the BRF did to protect them in the past, but won’t be doing going forward. This is going to play out in epic fashion.


----------



## Lodpah

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow more tweets that show... nothing. Why can’t she be disappointed in him and unhappy with him yet still ask him to deliver her message? They’re not exclusive to each other. It’s not like she’s so upset she’s going to fly to Japan and jump out in front of him


Lol the Queen basically said ‘here is what you say’ if that does not speak volumes!

The Queen May be old but she’s not daft or stupid. She knows what Meghan is about. I’m sure she has a file on her by MI6.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s also been a blind item floating around about “clean up” and signing of NDAs that the BRF did to protect them in the past, but won’t be doing going forward. This is going to play out in epic fashion.


They definitely have power to quash things.  I was trying to look up Harry's past drunken brawls lol!  Found one covered by the DM.  When I clicked on it. it wasn't there and obviously had been removed. Other instances are still out there like the time he was totally rude to the pub owner and people in the pub and the owner threw him out and banned him.  His admitted cannabis use and how his father sent him to rehab.    I am currently questioning the robotic soldiers who sat with the TV  host the day of the wedding and waxed lyrical about Harry and his time in Afghanistan.  Now that it has come out that it was all a PR exercise for the family and he was never in any danger or had any real responsibility, I question what these men had to say.  I don't think anything about his service would have been questioned if it was not for the current state of opinion regarding him.  He opened up his own can of worms when he was lecturing the world how to live and then followed it up with the PP trips, and his continual referencing his mother and her death and how it still affects him.  He Is off the rails and with no protection, what will happen is a question mark.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> Well, because this particular royal reporter keeps claiming (w/ "supposed" inside sources) that Prince Harry and Meghan have "embarrassed" the whole royal family or the firm. Why would the Queen ask Prince Harry to speak on her behalf?!


Just sticking to the script as he should always do.


hellosunshine said:


> +More Photos from Telegraph
> 
> View attachment 4580115
> 
> View attachment 4580116


Weird photo.  Meg looks pretty as she usually does, but the rest of the women are slightly out of focus, some even blurry and none of them are lit as well as Meg. Did the photographer do that on purpose?


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> Just sticking to the script as he should always do.
> 
> Weird photo.  Meg looks pretty as she usually does, but the rest of the women are slightly out of focus, some even blurry and none of them are lit as well as Meg. Did the photographer do that on purpose?


It’s Meghan’s own photographer I believe. Not an official BP engagement but one she arranged, so no public press.


----------



## hellosunshine

Wonderful news for SmartWorks!


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> Just sticking to the script as he should always do.
> 
> Weird photo.  Meg looks pretty as she usually does, but the rest of the women are slightly out of focus, some even blurry and none of them are lit as well as Meg. Did the photographer do that on purpose?


I think so, the photos from the event are all flattering photos of the star, ie Meghan


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

Perhaps she's just raising awareness to the cause, as is her job as a public figure. Just like Diana did and others in the RF continue to do on every engagement. But then I forget Meghan is a narcissistic,  horrible human being who just manipulates and is selfish to the core, sooo.... 

Point is, everyone in her position and job has their photos taken by a private photographer. That's how awareness is raised on social causes. And no, I'm not being argumentative, just adding my own 2 cents, as we all do here *shrug*


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> So, as discussed here earlier - when Harry & Meghan's photo was removed from the sitting area of Buckingham Palace that apparently supported the idea that the Queen is disappointed with them yet when statements are released saying "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing. Yeah, that totally makes a lot of sense! /insert sarcasm.


Re the photo on the table, I don't think it means anything, it's gotten changed frequently. It's no big deal.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> So, as discussed here earlier - when Harry & Meghan's photo was removed from the sitting area of Buckingham Palace that apparently supported the idea that the Queen is disappointed with them yet when statements are released saying "Prince Harry and Meghan have disappointed and embarrassed the royal family" and the Queen goes on to have her "embarrassing" grandson to represent her...it's no big deal. That just means absolutely nothing. Yeah, that totally makes a lot of sense! /insert sarcasm.


Re the photo on the table, I don't think it means anything, it's gotten changed frequently. It's no big deal.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> No need for sarcasm.  He’s patron of the RFU. It’s his duty to be there.  If Wales had beaten SA to get to the final William would have been going also.


Yes, and Princess Anne would have gone too as Patron of the Scotland Rugby Union had Scotland got to the final.
This is no biggie really, like I think it was you who earlier said its his job. And a message from The Queen would have been given to Anne and William too to read on her hehalf. 
Rugby is a big deal here in the UK isn't it, something non British (on here) should now understand and be aware of.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, and Princess Anne would have gone too as Patron of the Scotland Rugby Union had Scotland got to the final.
> This is no biggie really, like I think it was you who earlier said its his job. And a message from The Queen would have been given to Anne and William too to read on her hehalf.
> Rugby is a big deal here in the UK isn't it, something non British (on here) should now understand and be aware of.


It is  are you watching?


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> It is  are you watching?


No, lol


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> No, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


>


I am now, lol 9-15. Oh dear


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I am now, lol 9-15. Oh dear


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, and Princess Anne would have gone too as Patron of the Scotland Rugby Union had Scotland got to the final.
> This is no biggie really, like I think it was you who earlier said its his job. And a message from The Queen would have been given to Anne and William too to read on her hehalf.
> Rugby is a big deal here in the UK isn't it, something non British (on here) should now understand and be aware of.



I'm currently watching at a British pub with my lovely British friends


----------



## doni

Also watching. With my South African beastie. Sorry England! 
(I have no interest I have to admit so surfing the net while they all shout )


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Also watching. With my South African beastie. Sorry England!
> (I have no interest I have to admit so surfing the net while they all shout )


Ah well


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Ah well


Bad luck.


----------



## mdcx

So will Megs
A. Use this as an opportunity to take the p-$$ out of Harry and all Britons ala “England was in the final last night, not that anyone noticed....”
or
B. Use this as an opportunity to dig deep into the psyche of all the poor ‘wounded creatures that watched their team lose?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> So will Megs
> A. Use this as an opportunity to take the p-$$ out of Harry and all Britons ala “England was in the final last night, not that anyone noticed....”
> or
> B. Use this as an opportunity to dig deep into the psyche of all the poor ‘wounded creatures that watched their team lose?


Not ALL Britons please, but I get what you mean


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> Just sticking to the script as he should always do.
> 
> Weird photo.  Meg looks pretty as she usually does, but the rest of the women are slightly out of focus, some even blurry and none of them are lit as well as Meg. Did the photographer do that on purpose?


Depending on the amount of available light, the photographer might have had to use a shallow depth of field, which affects how much of the photo is in focus in front and behind what you're focusing on.

Nothing sinister about that. Low light conditions means you need to a larger aperture on the lens, which causes a shallow depth of field.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


>



Poor thing, just out there existing. And I mean Harry, not the Paralympic athletes.


----------



## buffym

Harry meeting with Paralympic’s hopefuls 
	

		
			
		

		
	







Harry at the Rugby World Cup


----------



## mrsinsyder

How does he do it? I can’t imagine getting through the day living such a hard life. I hope those men asked if he’s okay.


----------



## LittleStar88

PatsyCline said:


> Depending on the amount of available light, the photographer might have had to use a shallow depth of field, which affects how much of the photo is in focus in front and behind what you're focusing on.
> 
> Nothing sinister about that. Low light conditions means you need to a larger aperture on the lens, which causes a shallow depth of field.



I am a photographer and the lighting did not require such a narrow field of focus though


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lol how embarrassing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Cressida has on her best “I dodged that bullet” face


----------



## Jayne1

PatsyCline said:


> Depending on the amount of available light, the photographer might have had to use a shallow depth of field, which affects how much of the photo is in focus in front and behind what you're focusing on.
> 
> Nothing sinister about that. Low light conditions means you need to a larger aperture on the lens, which causes a shallow depth of field.


Lousy photographer if he couldn’t figure out a way to get a pleasing group shot. 

Meg is like the glowing star in the middle of drab human beings. That’s insulting.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> How does he do it? I can’t imagine getting through the day living such a hard life. I hope those men asked if he’s okay.
> 
> View attachment 4580386


He actually looks very smiley and happy in the pics. Perhaps because his wife is back home...?


----------



## mrsinsyder

ccbaggirl89 said:


> He actually looks very smiley and happy in the pics. Perhaps because his wife is back home...?


He always looks happier and more put together when they’re separate. Odd.


----------



## PatsyCline

Jayne1 said:


> Lousy photographer if he couldn’t figure out a way to get a pleasing group shot.
> 
> Meg is like the glowing star in the middle of drab human beings. That’s insulting.


That’s not true. Sometimes there’s only so much a photographer can do with the available light. 

You can use a flash, but sometimes that’s intrusive and annoying.


----------



## PatsyCline

LittleStar88 said:


> I am a photographer and the lighting did not require such a narrow field of focus though


Unless you know what camera was used, you can’t make that statement. 

A photographer would know that.


----------



## Annawakes

mrsinsyder said:


> Cressida has on her best “I dodged that bullet” face
> 
> View attachment 4580423


I think she’s so pretty


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

ccbaggirl89 said:


> He actually looks very smiley and happy in the pics. Perhaps because his wife is back home...?


 I was thinking the same thing. That he looked quite relaxed and comfortable.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Cressida has on her best “I dodged that bullet” face
> 
> View attachment 4580423


Personally, I think if he'd married Cressida or Chelsy things would have been a lot different


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> So will Megs
> A. Use this as an opportunity to take the p-$$ out of Harry and all Britons ala “England was in the final last night, not that anyone noticed....”
> or
> B. Use this as an opportunity to dig deep into the psyche of all the poor ‘wounded creatures that watched their team lose?



I certainly feel broken. And the weather is hidious. DH said SA couldn't read the script. I'm off to bake...


----------



## mrsinsyder

With their track record, these two should avoid sporting events for teams they support.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Personally, I think if he'd married Cressida or Chelsy things would have been a lot different


I'm sure 
There is a lot more attention to Meghan because she's American/bi-racial/actress


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure
> There is a lot more attention to Meghan because she's American/bi-racial/actress


Exactly.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly.


maybe his next wife will be British


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure
> There is a lot more attention to Meghan because she's American/bi-racial/actress


And because she courts it too


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> And because she courts it too


she does
but the marriage was considered a big deal - oh forgot - she is a divorcee (more than once?)


----------



## papertiger

I hope they both get it together and have a great marige, wherever they choose to live. 

They both need to change their behavior and thinking though because the world and media will push back if they don't.


----------



## cafecreme15

Annawakes said:


> I think she’s so pretty


She is! Does anyone know if she’s married to someone else now?


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> She is! Does anyone know if she’s married to someone else now?


Recently engaged I think?


----------



## Mrs.Z

cafecreme15 said:


> She is! Does anyone know if she’s married to someone else now?


Yes, she’s engaged to a total cutie, will find pic......


----------



## Mrs.Z

Pic from his IG via the Telegraph


----------



## cafecreme15

Mrs.Z said:


> Pic from his IG via the Telegraph


Thank you for finding! She’s a real natural beauty. (Not that Meghan isn’t - not comparing here - just stating!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

cafecreme15 said:


> Thank you for finding! She’s a real natural beauty. (Not that Meghan isn’t - not comparing here - just stating!)


That's exactly what I was going to say -- a natural beauty. I think those are her own teeth too. No artifice.  Wow.

Also agree -- Meg is beautiful too, very photogenic.  So, not comparing, just stating.


----------



## nova_girl

mrsinsyder said:


> With their track record, these two should avoid sporting events for teams they support.



Yes! Meghan, please stay far away from Serena's matches!


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> That's exactly what I was going to say -- a natural beauty. I think those are her own teeth too. No artifice.  Wow.
> 
> Also agree -- Meg is beautiful too, very photogenic.  So, not comparing, just stating.


Agreed! I wish I were even a quarter as photogenic as Meghan is!


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## duna

Mrs.Z said:


> Pic from his IG via the Telegraph



Excuse my ignorance but who are these two??


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> Excuse my ignorance but who are these two??


Harry's ex-gf and her fiancee


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lol Ashley Cole said keep me out of your mess...


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol Ashley Cole said keep me out of your mess...
> 
> View attachment 4581348
> View attachment 4581349
> View attachment 4581350


Oh dear, perhaps he’ll sue her for the invasion of his privacy


----------



## pukasonqo

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol Ashley Cole said keep me out of your mess...
> 
> View attachment 4581348
> View attachment 4581349
> View attachment 4581350



I thought that was said by some publicist that met MM when she first landed in London and that MM was sort of on the fence about seeing him (the interview is here some pages back)


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh dear, perhaps he’ll sue her for the invasion of his privacy


I think the more Meghan talks, the more other people will feel ok about talking about her, if that makes sense.


----------



## mrsinsyder

All roads lead back to...


----------



## duna

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think the more Meghan talks, the more other people will feel ok about talking about her, if that makes sense.



I agree, she and Harry had better stop talking as whatever they say backlashes against them!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I agree, she and Harry had better stop talking as whatever they say backlashes against them!


I doubt they can stop
She didn't marry him to be a quiet, unnoticed person (IMO)


----------



## mrsinsyder

mrsinsyder said:


> All roads lead back to...
> 
> View attachment 4581479


To add to this, there’s a rumor that the bakery paid the Sussex foundation for this new publicity. The bakery has a CEO who is LA based, and the foundation head is the Soho owner’s wife. 

what are these two up to???


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> To add to this, there’s a rumor that the bakery paid the Sussex foundation for this new publicity. The bakery has a CEO who is LA based, and the foundation head is the Soho owner’s wife.
> 
> what are these two up to???


doesn't sound right.  but you did say it's a rumor


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> doesn't sound right.  but you did say it's a rumor


Back to my "where there's smoke, there's fire" outlook on this stuff.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> Back to my "where there's smoke, there's fire" outlook on this stuff.


Somehow I don't think they spend that much time baking anything at Soho House.  More like they cook up deals there.


----------



## mrsinsyder

kemilia said:


> Back to my "where there's smoke, there's fire" outlook on this stuff.


Too many coincidences.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Comment on the Africa documentary ...


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> I doubt they can stop
> She didn't marry him to be a quiet, unnoticed person (IMO)



I agree with you, but the more they talk the more bad press they get, the more they complain about it, so.....are they stupid, masochistic or both??


----------



## Mimmy

Straight-Laced said:


> View attachment 4581752
> 
> Comment on the Africa documentary ...


I realize that this is a comic but I find this to be very culturally insensitive.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mimmy said:


> I realize that this is a comic but I find this to be very culturally insensitive.


I think it’s intended as a comment about the cliched approach the West takes to viewing and “rescuing” Africa as well as a comment on the insensitive bleatings of the Sussexes.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> I agree with you, but the more they talk the more bad press they get, the more they complain about it, so.....are they stupid, masochistic or both??



They are naïvely ignorant. They actually believed their lawsuit might slow down the bad press. In reality they were fanning the flames.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> They are naïvely ignorant. They actually believed their lawsuit might slow down the bad press. In reality they were fanning the flames.


Yeppers.


----------



## kemilia

Mimmy said:


> I realize that this is a comic but I find this to be very culturally insensitive.


I totally agree.

Living in the States, I see tons of political cartoons daily and I view this cartoon as really wrong.

Bash the Royals all you want but do not cartoon-ize the African citizens.


----------



## queennadine

mrsinsyder said:


> I've started to notice that her language is always very negative, with a focus on her piece in 'fixing' whatever woes there are. Is this just a narcissist thing? It would be nice to hear her talk about the positives instead of so much focus on being broken, etc.



THIS! Everything she does is tied to changing something to her way, which she naturally thinks is better.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> To add to this, there’s a rumor that the bakery paid the Sussex foundation for this new publicity. The bakery has a CEO who is LA based, and the foundation head is the Soho owner’s wife.
> 
> what are these two up to???


It's the same bakery that made her birthday cake, so there is some ongoing association. Maybe a new branch is opening in Los Angeles and Meghan will be at the ribbon cutting.


----------



## cafecreme15

Mimmy said:


> I realize that this is a comic but I find this to be very culturally insensitive.


Quite right. I get their point but it's done in poor taste.


----------



## LittleStar88

PatsyCline said:


> Unless you know what camera was used, you can’t make that statement.
> 
> A photographer would know that.



LOL plenty of light there whether it be a DSLR or iPhone (or Android). Plus, photoshop...


----------



## LibbyRuth

kemilia said:


> I totally agree.
> 
> Living in the States, I see tons of political cartoons daily and I view this cartoon as really wrong.
> 
> Bash the Royals all you want but do not cartoon-ize the African citizens.



I interpreted it totally different.  I interpreted it to make a statement about what has bugged me about that documentary - that Harry and Meghan made themselves out to be the victims instead of using it to shine a light on real problems that people are facing. I saw it as a diss on Harry and Meghan, and respect to the African citizens whose challenges were overlooked and forgotten by the complaints that no one asks how Meghan is doing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

LibbyRuth said:


> I interpreted it totally different.  I interpreted it to make a statement about what has bugged me about that documentary - that Harry and Meghan made themselves out to be the victims instead of using it to shine a light on real problems that people are facing. I saw it as a diss on Harry and Meghan, and respect to the African citizens whose challenges were overlooked and forgotten by the complaints that no one asks how Meghan is doing.


I also saw it as a statement about the colonization of African countries by the BRF... like they came in and pillaged and now they're using them for a photo op.


----------



## mrsinsyder

This seems healthy.

*Meghan Markle confronted Prince Harry after Duke spotted with forbidden item, says expert*
*MEGHAN MARKLE confronted Prince Harry upon his return from a "flying visit" to Japan after he was spotted holding an item the Duchess of Sussex does not like, royal commentator Neil Sean jokingly suggested.*

Meghan Markle spent the weekend at home with son Archie as Prince Harry jetted off to Japan to show his support England players during the rugby final against South Africa. Royal commentator Neil Sean suggested the Duchess of Sussex may have confronted her husband upon his return after the expert claimed to have spotted the Duke holding a bottle of beer – despite Meghan asking Harry to stop drinking after she fell pregnant. Speaking to The Today Show, Mr Sean said: "Prince Harry was over there for a flying visit to Japan and he was there spurring them on.
"I saw him holding, let me tell you, a bottle of beer so I don’t know how that’s going to go when he gets home to Meghan.

"Apparently, he doesn’t drink anymore, as all boys say."

The Duchess of Sussex was reported to have asked Harry to refrain from drinking alcohol after discovering they were expecting their son last year.

Royal sourced claimed in January Meghan wanted her husband to take on a healthier lifestyle – including spending more time exercising.


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-andrew-public-popularity-polls-meghan-markle

*Meghan Markle and Prince Andrew dubbed 'most unpopular' in royal family in new poll*
*ONLY Prince Andrew is more unpopular than Meghan Markle in the royal family, a new poll has suggested.*


----------



## Lodpah

Coming from a tribal background it’s highly offensive. I remember when certain groups of people would come to our islands we would have to do little dances, smile, and like the Santa Clauses they were, the older people would just smile and smirk in their own way, like we’ve been having babies and going right back to work and you come in your ‘color’ glory and make us feel inadequate? No, we will smile and dance and once you leave we go back home to our huts and go on our way. Who the hell do they think they are? 

Now the real people are the ones on the ground who put in water wells, help our people with agriculture, the mercy doctors and other active NGOs who came not with platitudes but came with intent to do good and did good. GTFO out of here H&M.


----------



## CeeJay

Let me first preface this by saying that I CANNOT STAND this man, but .. for him to be voted above Meghan Markle in *London's 100 most influential people *says a lot!!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-beating-leading-Londoners-poll.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> This seems healthy.
> 
> *Meghan Markle confronted Prince Harry after Duke spotted with forbidden item, says expert*
> *MEGHAN MARKLE confronted Prince Harry upon his return from a "flying visit" to Japan after he was spotted holding an item the Duchess of Sussex does not like, royal commentator Neil Sean jokingly suggested.*
> 
> Meghan Markle spent the weekend at home with son Archie as Prince Harry jetted off to Japan to show his support England players during the rugby final against South Africa. Royal commentator Neil Sean suggested the Duchess of Sussex may have confronted her husband upon his return after the expert claimed to have spotted the Duke holding a bottle of beer – despite Meghan asking Harry to stop drinking after she fell pregnant. Speaking to The Today Show, Mr Sean said: "Prince Harry was over there for a flying visit to Japan and he was there spurring them on.
> "I saw him holding, let me tell you, a bottle of beer so I don’t know how that’s going to go when he gets home to Meghan.
> 
> "Apparently, he doesn’t drink anymore, as all boys say."
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was reported to have asked Harry to refrain from drinking alcohol after discovering they were expecting their son last year.
> 
> Royal sourced claimed in January Meghan wanted her husband to take on a healthier lifestyle – including spending more time exercising.


No wonder he looked cheerful in Japan 


CeeJay said:


> Let me first preface this by saying that I CANNOT STAND this man, but .. for him to be voted above Meghan Markle in *London's 100 most influential people *says a lot!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-beating-leading-Londoners-poll.html


This has to sting  and Victoria Beckham won’t be too chuffed either


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Back to my "where there's smoke, there's fire" outlook on this stuff.


well if it is true that would be illegal


CeeJay said:


> Let me first preface this by saying that I CANNOT STAND this man, but .. for him to be voted above Meghan Markle in *London's 100 most influential people *says a lot!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-beating-leading-Londoners-poll.html


just goes to show there is no accounting for taste


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> This seems healthy.
> 
> *Meghan Markle confronted Prince Harry after Duke spotted with forbidden item, says expert*
> *MEGHAN MARKLE confronted Prince Harry upon his return from a "flying visit" to Japan after he was spotted holding an item the Duchess of Sussex does not like, royal commentator Neil Sean jokingly suggested.*
> 
> Meghan Markle spent the weekend at home with son Archie as Prince Harry jetted off to Japan to show his support England players during the rugby final against South Africa. Royal commentator Neil Sean suggested the Duchess of Sussex may have confronted her husband upon his return after the expert claimed to have spotted the Duke holding a bottle of beer – despite Meghan asking Harry to stop drinking after she fell pregnant. Speaking to The Today Show, Mr Sean said: "Prince Harry was over there for a flying visit to Japan and he was there spurring them on.
> "I saw him holding, let me tell you, a bottle of beer so I don’t know how that’s going to go when he gets home to Meghan.
> 
> "Apparently, he doesn’t drink anymore, as all boys say."
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was reported to have asked Harry to refrain from drinking alcohol after discovering they were expecting their son last year.
> 
> Royal sourced claimed in January Meghan wanted her husband to take on a healthier lifestyle – including spending more time exercising.


since he is not pregnant I see no reason why he can't have a beer - unless she thinks he's an alcoholic


----------



## Lodpah

I also want to add that she talks about female empowerment? Meghan has no idea the women where I’m from are more empowered than she could ever dream of. Sorry not sorry but the women where I’m from are strong, each culture had their own way for thousands of years you don’t come in and talk about empowerment to women who have no idea of she’s talking about. Not everyone wants to live in a gilded cage.

If she can back up the attack on telling other cultures what “empowerment” means to a woman  who lives topless, gives birth to her child her children and raises them well and is happy and content, of course it’s hard work, then maybe we will listen. It’s not like they can just put on heels and a dress and say ok I’m going corporate.

The NGOs at least go there, and teach us how to live a better life by teaching a better way by UTILIZING what our environment has to offer.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> This seems healthy.
> 
> *Meghan Markle confronted Prince Harry after Duke spotted with forbidden item, says expert*
> *MEGHAN MARKLE confronted Prince Harry upon his return from a "flying visit" to Japan after he was spotted holding an item the Duchess of Sussex does not like, royal commentator Neil Sean jokingly suggested.*
> 
> Meghan Markle spent the weekend at home with son Archie as Prince Harry jetted off to Japan to show his support England players during the rugby final against South Africa. Royal commentator Neil Sean suggested the Duchess of Sussex may have confronted her husband upon his return after the expert claimed to have spotted the Duke holding a bottle of beer – despite Meghan asking Harry to stop drinking after she fell pregnant. Speaking to The Today Show, Mr Sean said: "Prince Harry was over there for a flying visit to Japan and he was there spurring them on.
> "I saw him holding, let me tell you, a bottle of beer so I don’t know how that’s going to go when he gets home to Meghan.
> 
> "Apparently, he doesn’t drink anymore, as all boys say."
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was reported to have asked Harry to refrain from drinking alcohol after discovering they were expecting their son last year.
> 
> Royal sourced claimed in January Meghan wanted her husband to take on a healthier lifestyle – including spending more time exercising.



This may not even be true, but it serves the dual purpose of making Meghan seem insanely controlling while depicting Harry as being totally p-whipped. The tabloids are striking back unmercifully. Hilarious!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> This may not even be true, but it serves the dual purpose of making Meghan seem insanely controlling while depicting Harry as being totally p-whipped. The tabloids are striking back unmercifully. Hilarious!


Yeah, this one doesn't really make sense to me .. after all, Piers constant complaint about her "ghosting" him was after then had drinks together in London and I doubt it was non-Alcoholic!  I get her not drinking while she is pregnant and breast-feeding (makes sense), but to have Harry not be able to have something .. boy, that is very controlling.  What is she going to do, tell the Queen that she can't have her 2 Gin & Tonic's late in the day (or was that her mother)?


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, this one doesn't really make sense to me .. after all, Piers constant complaint about her "ghosting" him was after then had drinks together in London and I doubt it was non-Alcoholic!  I get her not drinking while she is pregnant and breast-feeding (makes sense), but to have Harry not be able to have something .. boy, that is very controlling.  What is she going to do, tell the Queen that she can't have her 2 Gin & Tonic's late in the day (or was that her mother)?


He showed up to that one event in South Africa looking hungover as hell so maybe it started then...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

So Meghan has been busy! She texted Ellen about guests to have on. One would think Duchess Meg would want her BFFs to not spread this sort of thing, but Ellen is the one who gave the whole story. Guess Meg doesn't mind her famous friends talking about their text sessions.

*"Ellen DeGeneres reveals Meghan Markle texted her to tell her about a 'great' viral dance duo - prompting the host to invite them on her show"  *
The links to the story are everywhere, but here's one: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-texted-tell-great-viral-dance-duo.html

Meg is a talent scout - who knew?! Anyone think she'll do the Ellen show with the hubs?


----------



## rose60610

As time goes on, Meghan seems to just keep digging herself into a pity/desperation hole.  Does somebody want to ask her* if she's OK? *Is Ellen her last resort life line?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> since he is not pregnant I see no reason why he can't have a beer - unless she thinks he's an alcoholic


He has had a drinking problem since he was a teen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

How come sources such as trashy tabloids who hate Meghan and are the ones she's suing, are now looked on as believable, truthful sources?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Babydoll Chanel said:


> How come sources such as trashy tabloids who hate Meghan and are the ones she's suing, are now looked on as believable, truthful sources?


Meghan’s not suing the Mail because it lied, she’s unhappy they printed parts of a letter she wrote, because she fancies it made her look bad.  It’s reasonable to assume, based on what we’ve seen to date, that if they’d gushed about her all the time the way Ellen does she wouldn’t have a problem with it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Anyone think she'll do the Ellen show with the hubs?


I bet she’s already picked out the outfit


----------



## LittleStar88

If they were smart, they would lay low while in the US. No TV appearances, no dining at _see and be seen_ restaurants, nothing. Be quiet, have your break, and don't give the press anything to talk about.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> If they were smart, they would lay low while in the US. No TV appearances, no dining at _see and be seen_ restaurants, nothing. Be quiet, have your break, and don't give the press anything to talk about.



That will never happen. They will be selective but they will want to be seen and fussed over. I'm sure there are places Meghan always wished to be included in when she lived there that will welcome her with open arms now. That is the hypocrisy of fame. As a couple they are a curious hybrid of royalty and Hollywood, as famous as movie stars but with royal status. That will play well in superficial LA.

I am assuming they will spend most of their time in LA. Has anyone heard any differently?


----------



## Meh-gan

Babydoll Chanel said:


> How come sources such as trashy tabloids who hate Meghan and are the ones she's suing, are now looked on as believable, truthful sources?


The same way trashy tabloids that love Meghan are considered truthful, believable sources.


----------



## daisychainz

LittleStar88 said:


> If they were smart, they would lay low while in the US. No TV appearances, no dining at _see and be seen_ restaurants, nothing. Be quiet, have your break, and don't give the press anything to talk about.


This would for sure be the best for them, but there is no way I believe it will happen. The temptation to mingle with real stars will be too great. I don't know what they will do but I bet it'll be photo ops at celebrity "charity" events to make it look like they are doing activism. I don't think we will see them on talk shows, but I think they will be giving interviews for programs that we'll see later as documentaries. And I do think TMZ will be all over them!


----------



## Mrs.Z

LittleStar88 said:


> If they were smart, they would lay low while in the US. No TV appearances, no dining at _see and be seen_ restaurants, nothing. Be quiet, have your break, and don't give the press anything to talk about.


If it becomes baby shower 2.0 it’s not going to play well for them.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> That will never happen. They will be selective but they will want to be seen and fussed over. I'm sure there are places Meghan always wished to be included in when she lived there that will welcome her with open arms now. That is the hypocrisy of fame. As a couple they are a curious hybrid of royalty and Hollywood, as famous as movie stars but with royal status. That will play well in superficial LA.
> 
> I am assuming they will spend most of their time in LA. Has anyone heard any differently?


I have not seen any reports other than LA, but I am guessing some days will be spent in NY, perhaps before/after some time in LA? 
I do not think Doria will be a factor in the trip at all - perhaps not even for Thanksgiving. I picture Meghan on Skid Row serving up turkey to homeless people instead.


----------



## LittleStar88

Does anyone thing the British press/tabloids will follow them here? Seems the temptation would be too great for them not to, and they probably won't have the same restrictions in the US...?


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I have not seen any reports other than LA, but I am guessing some days will be spent in NY, perhaps before/after some time in LA?
> *I do not think Doria will be a factor in the trip at all - perhaps not even for Thanksgiving.* I picture Meghan on Skid Row serving up turkey to homeless people instead.



Maybe Doria can be included as a +1 for a Thanksgiving shindig at Oprah's or Ellen's house.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Does anyone thing the British press/tabloids will follow them here? Seems the temptation would be too great for them not to, and they probably won't have the same restrictions in the US...?



I'm pretty sure the best known British tabloids already have reporters here who collect their Hollywood gossip. They may hire some extra stringers as well to cover the visit.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Doria can be included as a +1 for a Thanksgiving shindig at Oprah's or Ellen's house.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Doria can be included as a +1 for a Thanksgiving shindig at Oprah's or Ellen's house.


They can be the second version of the “family she never had.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Camilla will be babysitting them at an event on Thursday. That should be interesting.

I'm sure MM is practicing her sad doe eyes as we speak.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> If they were smart, they would lay low while in the US. No TV appearances, no dining at _see and be seen_ restaurants, nothing. Be quiet, have your break, and don't give the press anything to talk about.


There's already a rumor being reported on multiple sources that they're planning a second documentary and a TV crew will be following them through America.

I can't.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> There's already a rumor being reported on multiple sources that they're planning a second documentary and a TV crew will be following them through America.
> 
> I can't.


Oh no, surely not.  I hope not, this is becoming ridiculous.


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> *Camilla will be babysitting them* at an event on Thursday. That should be interesting.
> 
> I'm sure MM is practicing her sad doe eyes as we speak.



Have they fired their umpteenth nanny??? Wouldn't be surprised.....


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> Have they fired their umpteenth nanny??? Wouldn't be surprised.....



She means Camilla will be babysitting Harry and Meghan at an event, not Archie.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> She means Camilla will be babysitting Harry and Meghan at an event, not Archie.



Ohhh sorry, I didn't get it, lol!


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> Ohhh sorry, I didn't get it, lol!



That's okay. It will be a remembrance ceremony. I don't think there will be any drama at such a somber occasion.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That's okay. It will be a remembrance ceremony. I don't think there will be any drama at such a somber occasion.


They aren’t taking any chances and that is why Camilla is babysitting them. There could be some weeping on cue though.


----------



## A1aGypsy

It might be that Camilla loses her cool and brings a wreath squarely down on his head.

I cannot imagine that she and Charlie are too thrilled that Harry is repeatedly invoking his mother’s name and her struggle whilst they are just poised and ready to take over and have worked so hard to rehab their imagine and have some people come around to their relationship.


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> It might be that Camilla loses her cool and brings a wreath squarely down on his head.
> 
> I cannot imagine that she and Charlie are too thrilled that Harry is repeatedly invoking his mother’s name and her struggle whilst they are just poised and ready to take over and have worked so hard to rehab their imagine and have some people come around to their relationship.



I cannot imagine Camilla reprimanding him. Harry outranks her doesn't he? She may have to walk behind him.


----------



## daisychainz

Without Charles, it should be Harry, Meghan and then Camilla? Perhaps Camilla will be first, just out of respect for her age and future rank? If Meghan is before Camilla it will be another headline: Meghan Demands to Enter Before Camilla at Remembrance Day Ceremony!


----------



## A1aGypsy

bag-mania said:


> I cannot imagine Camilla reprimanding him. Harry outranks her doesn't he? She may have to walk behind him.



I was just kidding. I don’t actually think she will start throwing flowers at a remembrance ceremony... as much as she may want to.


----------



## CAH

I don't think Harry gives a damn about Camilla after what she did to his mother.  He might play nice in public but I have the feeling he's never warmed up to her.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Exactly. That’s my point.  It makes for an interesting combination.


----------



## bag-mania

CAH said:


> I don't think Harry gives a damn about Camilla after what she did to his mother.  He might play nice in public but I have the feeling he's never warmed up to her.



Yeah, I don't think either son is fond of Camilla, although they always seem polite and show respect to her publicly for their father. They certainly never saw Camilla as being a maternal figure.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> There's already a rumor being reported on multiple sources that they're planning a second documentary and a TV crew will be following them through America.
> 
> I can't.



Really they are losing credibility by doing that. Maybe testing the waters in the US to have some kind of socialite lifestyle in the US and leave the BRF life behind?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

CAH said:


> I don't think Harry gives a damn about Camilla after what she did to his mother.  He might play nice in public but I have the feeling he's never warmed up to her.


I disagree. For Harry and William, I don't  think it's judged as a "Camilla or Diana" kind of thing like most of the public looks at it. While both of them continue to carry great respect and affection for their mom, it can't be forgotten that they also carry great respect and love for their dad. Over  time, they have seen that Camilla makes their dad happy. Loving children who care for for their parents want to see their parents happy.  No question, Camilla has a history with their mom that is not pretty.  But she's got a longer history now, and a more recent history, as a loving partner and companion to their dad.  Reports say that seeing their dads happiness helped solidify William and Harry's relationship with Camilla, and I believe that.


----------



## daisychainz

There was an ABC reporter's video leaked today about Epstein and she (Amy Robach) talks about how the royal family was pressuring reporters to drop the story.

"the palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways. We were so afraid we wouldn't be able to interview Kate and Will, so I think that had also quashed the story.”

It just makes me believe there is A LOT of info. about Meghan out there and the reason no former friends have come forward about her is because of threats. It also makes me wonder how Harry and Meghan can feel confident suing media outlets when their family does everything to exercise control over the media?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/abc-news-jeffrey-epstein-amy-robach-buckingham-palace-173025977.html


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> It also makes me wonder how Harry and Meghan can feel confident suing media outlets when their family does everything to exercise control over the media?



Aren't they doing the same thing though? They are trying to control the media through their lawsuit. The royal family doesn't have any real influence over the media other than refusing access to themselves. 

If a news outlet had any actual evidence of Prince Andrew with young girls via Epstein, believe me, they would never hold it back because of some toothless threat to withhold interviews with Will and Kate. News of that sucker would be all over the place! They just don't have the proof, which is different than saying it never happened.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Aren't they doing the same thing though? They are trying to control the media through their lawsuit. The royal family doesn't have any real influence over the media other than refusing access to themselves.
> 
> If a news outlet had any actual evidence of Prince Andrew with young girls via Epstein, believe me, they would never hold it back because of some toothless threat to withhold interviews with Will and Kate. News of that sucker would be all over the place! They just don't have the proof, which is different than saying it never happened.


Yes, Meghan ad Harry are trying to control the media. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear! The article does say ABC had evidence. *“It was unbelievable what we had" - from Robach. *Just like Rowan Farrow had evidence for years and NBC kept killing his stories. Stories with evidence get squashed all the time for political/financial reasons. The reach and damage the royals can do to a person or outlet must be far more than not allowing an interview with Will and Kate.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Yes, Meghan ad Harry are trying to control the media. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear! The article does say ABC had evidence. *“It was unbelievable what we had" - from Robach. *Just like Rowan Farrow had evidence for years and NBC kept killing his stories. Stories with evidence get squashed all the time for political/financial reasons. The reach and damage the royals can do to a person or outlet must be far more than not allowing an interview with Will and Kate.



Really? I wonder what the BRF could do. Their power is almost entirely symbolic and I can't see them having anything that a US news media outlet could be threatened by. Now, maybe if they had proof of some network exec's sexual misdeeds, but that sort of mudslinging would be far beneath their dignity level.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Really? I wonder what the BRF could do. Their power is almost entirely symbolic and I can't see them having anything that a US news media outlet could be threatened by. Now, maybe if they had proof of some network exec's sexual misdeeds, but that sort of mudslinging would be far beneath their dignity level.


I don't think their power is just symbolic at all! They have associations with celebrities, world leaders, fashion and so on. Just a simple thing like Meghan giving her attention to that bakery - that place will make millions now. They can reward friendships and favors with contracts and visibility for a person or organization. Many of media outlets are intertwined worldwide - people are in bed with each other in ways we can't even know. Makes me miserable to think about it, lol. #cynic


----------



## Lodpah

daisychainz said:


> I don't think their power is just symbolic at all! They have associations with celebrities, world leaders, fashion and so on. Just a simple thing like Meghan giving her attention to that bakery - that place will make millions now. They can reward friendships and favors with contracts and visibility for a person or organization. Many of media outlets are intertwined worldwide - people are in bed with each other in ways we can't even know. Makes me miserable to think about it, lol. #cynic


interesting.


----------



## LittleStar88

There will be little to nothing they can do about the media in the US. But it also seems like they are given more favorable coverage in the US. Will be looking forward to whether or not that will change once they are here - and that will rely heavily on what they do with themselves here.

I really wish we knew how the BRF feels about all of this needing to run away after doing little "work" because the press and cameras and questions. Only to come to the US and possibly court the press and outings with cameras flashing everywhere. Must be slightly insulting for all they have done to make their lives moderately sufferable at home.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan did it again. Usurped Prince Charles’ special to air tomorrow by announcing that she will give birth in America. Sorry too lazy to upload the link. She is definitely defiant to anything royal. Can’t wait till she goes the way of Fergie.


----------



## bag-mania

^I won't believe it until I hear it announced from multiple sources. If every pregnancy rumor about her was true she would have 100 babies by now.


----------



## LittleStar88

Lodpah said:


> Meghan did it again. Usurped Prince Charles’ special to air tomorrow by announcing that she will give birth in America. Sorry too lazy to upload the link. She is definitely defiant to anything royal. Can’t wait till she goes the way of Fergie.



Fergie became the Duchess of Pork.
Meghan become the Duchess of ???

I saw this article also - Marie Claire UK via my Apple News feed.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> ^I won't believe it until I hear it announced from multiple sources. If every pregnancy rumor about her was true she would have 100 babies by now.


There was actually a recent photo of her coyly touching her belly, again.


----------



## LittleStar88

Here is the article:
_And according to a new report, Harry and Meghan may decide to have their second child in LA as the former Suits star found her first pregnancy ‘incredibly lonely’ because she was so far away from her loved ones.


An insider told new! magazine: ‘Meghan already told pals that when she comes to deliver her next baby, she’d like to do it in LA where she was born and bred._

Read more at https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/...e-second-child-usa-673249#kK9VUihUmA2lmlDM.99


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> Fergie became the Duchess of Pork.
> Meghan become the Duchess of ???
> 
> I saw this article also - Marie Claire UK via my Apple News feed.


Duchess of Imperious or Imperium?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> There was actually a recent photo of her coyly touching her belly, again.



Oh, that Meghan and her belly cradling! She does love the attention and the speculation.



LittleStar88 said:


> Here is the article:
> _And according to a new report, Harry and Meghan may decide to have their second child in LA *as the former Suits star found her first pregnancy ‘incredibly lonely’ because she was so far away from her loved ones.*
> 
> An insider told new! magazine: ‘Meghan already told pals that when she comes to deliver her next baby, she’d like to do it in LA where she was born and bred._
> 
> Read more at https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/...e-second-child-usa-673249#kK9VUihUmA2lmlDM.99



What loved ones? She appears to be estranged from her relatives except for Doria, and it doesn't sound like she saw her all that much even before the marriage. Maybe she means her celebrity friends, like Serena and Ellen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Fergie became the Duchess of Pork.
> Meghan becomes the *NO LONGER A Duchess*
> 
> I saw this article also - Marie Claire UK via my Apple News feed.


Fixed it for you .. she is really tempting fate and I've been reading more and more articles about how much she is hated in the UK!  I think I said this before, but apparently, the Queen has told Charles to 'take over' the family issues .. I think there is going to be just so much he can take!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Fixed it for you .. she is really tempting fate and I've been reading more and more articles about how much she is hated in the UK!  I think I said this before, but apparently, the Queen has told Charles to 'take over' the family issues .. I think there is going to be just so much he can take!



I can't wrap my head around how he could "fix" this. I guess just let them be their own undoing and be there for Harry post-divorce?

No matter how infatuated he is by Meghan right now, I cannot imagine him moving to the US and leaving the BRF. He hasn't known any different and it may be difficult for him this late in his life. He may have little role now in the BRF, but moving here and leaving may result in having no purpose. Unless it will be paid-per-speech/appearance kind of gig?


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> Here is the article:
> _And according to a new report, Harry and Meghan may decide to have their second child in LA as the former Suits star found her first pregnancy ‘incredibly lonely’ because she was so far away from her loved ones.
> 
> 
> An insider told new! magazine: ‘Meghan already told pals that when she comes to deliver her next baby, she’d like to do it in LA where she was born and bred._
> 
> Read more at https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/...e-second-child-usa-673249#kK9VUihUmA2lmlDM.99


But the BRF was the family she never had?


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> But the BRF was the family she never had?


HA - that's right!!!  So, let's just say that she does come to LA (baby or not) .. and then her "friends" (all celebs) are here to "support" her, blah blah blah .. in my opinion, that will major-league back fire on her because then people are going to think "did she just marry Prine Harry to move up the 'celeb' ranks?"


----------



## jehaga

LittleStar88 said:


> Fergie became the Duchess of Pork.
> Meghan become the Duchess of ???
> 
> I saw this article also - Marie Claire UK via my Apple News feed.


The only thing I can come up with is Duchess of Excess


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> HA - that's right!!!  So, let's just say that she does come to LA (baby or not) .. and then her "friends" (all celebs) are here to "support" her, blah blah blah .. in my opinion, that will major-league back fire on her because then people are going to think *"did she just marry Prine Harry to move up the 'celeb' ranks?"*



You mean there are people who don't already think that?

The situation reminds me of the girl who falls for the guy in the band because he's cool and he plays in a band. They get married. Then the first thing she wants him to do is quit the band because it's taking his time away from her and she's jealous of the attention it gives him. 

It never goes well when one spouse tries to force a change on the other.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> But the BRF was the family she never had?



This! Seeing how the BRF rallied around her to make her feel welcomed and comfortable and... loved. She does and says things that must feel like a slap in the face.


----------



## Straight-Laced

They can be titled the Duke and Duchess of La La Land if they move ‘home’ to California


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan’s uncle who got her the embassy job is speaking out about being Markle’d. Guess DM isn’t backing down.

Notice that he’d never gone to the press before but didn’t get a wedding invite either...

Meghan Markle's uncle says he 'doubts' he'll hear from her again

https://mol.im/a/7652987


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> Fixed it for you .. she is really tempting fate and I've been reading more and more articles about how much she is hated in the UK!  I think I said this before, but apparently, the Queen has told Charles to 'take over' the family issues .. I think there is going to be just so much he can take!


I wouldn’t put it so strongly, I think a lot of/most people are disappointed.  And we don’t tend to be much impressed with people that cover themselves in self-praise over here - you get the pi** taken out of you, and that’s what’s happening in the press.



LittleStar88 said:


> I can't wrap my head around how he could "fix" this. I guess just let them be their own undoing and be there for Harry post-divorce?
> 
> No matter how infatuated he is by Meghan right now, I cannot imagine him moving to the US and leaving the BRF. He hasn't known any different and it may be difficult for him this late in his life. He may have little role now in the BRF, but moving here and leaving may result in having no purpose. Unless it will be paid-per-speech/appearance kind of gig?


I can’t imagine Harry leaving the Royal Family permanently, he’d be lost.  If Meghan moves back to the US, I think it will be on her own. 



mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan’s uncle who got her the embassy job is speaking out about being Markle’d. Guess DM isn’t backing down.
> 
> Notice that he’d never gone to the press before but didn’t get a wedding invite either...
> 
> Meghan Markle's uncle says he 'doubts' he'll hear from her again
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7652987


She has more family than most people it seems, and yet seems to be estranged from pretty much all of them! That’s quite an achievement.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan’s uncle who got her the embassy job is speaking out about being Markle’d. Guess DM isn’t backing down.
> 
> Notice that he’d never gone to the press before but didn’t get a wedding invite either...
> 
> Meghan Markle's uncle says he 'doubts' he'll hear from her again
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7652987


That's terrible. She really does seem to leave people behind once they are of no use.


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Morgan R

Visiting Westminster Abbey's Field Of Remembrance


----------



## Clearblueskies

^^^ No PR hype here whatsoever.  British tots never leave home without a perfectly tied nosegay in case of one of those surprise royal visits


----------



## mrsinsyder

Showed up to their event today looking a sloppy mess. I wish someone would burn those saggy boots she wears.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

They are a photogenic couple, you have to give them that. This is the kind of event they do well, meet people, interact with kids, attend a ceremony, and no speeches telling everyone what they should be doing.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> They are a photogenic couple, you have to give them that. This is the kind of event they do well, meet people, interact with kids, attend a ceremony, and no speeches telling everyone what they should be doing.


Agreed! No fuss no muss today - as it should be.


----------



## Jayne1

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 4584550
> View attachment 4584578
> View attachment 4584576
> View attachment 4584559
> View attachment 4584563
> View attachment 4584551
> View attachment 4584555
> View attachment 4584552
> View attachment 4584581


 
Surprised their neighbours in Windsor... with their personal photographers in tow trying to show how wonderful they are by appearing with the masses.


----------



## LittleStar88

Morgan R said:


> Visiting Westminster Abbey's Field Of Remembrance
> 
> View attachment 4584583



She looks beautiful here. So very photogenic. But personally I do not like the big, bulky robe/jacket with skinny belt. The jacket looks a little too small and the skinny belt doesn't work with it.


----------



## rose60610

Finally, at the Field of Remembrance ceremony, her hair is decent. I hate the messy ponytail with stupid wisps look. A stiffer boot would have been a better choice than the slouchy one for this event. I guess she wanted some element in her outfit that looks laid back in a failed effort to hide her control freak tendencies.  Save the slouchy boots for a casual outing.


----------



## LittleStar88

I agree about the boots, also. They are very last season and don't look polished. They look dated.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her makeup looks great. I don't love the bathrobe or the belt... they make no sense together. I really wish she'd just go for something simple, sleek, and tailored.


----------



## buffym

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan’s uncle who got her the embassy job is speaking out about being Markle’d. Guess DM isn’t backing down.
> 
> Notice that he’d never gone to the press before but didn’t get a wedding invite either...
> 
> Meghan Markle's uncle says he 'doubts' he'll hear from her again
> 
> https://mol.im/a/7652987



Her uncle has gone to the press before.

He also states he doesn’t talk to his brother or attend Meghan’s first marriage 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mi...eghan-markles-uncle-reveals-deep-13100204.amp


----------



## bisousx

This is one thing I’m team Megan on: her family drama.

I also have a large family and can easily see how they would’ve treated Megan to push her away years ago. On the surface, she appears to be the most (and only?) attractive one in the family, well educated and an actress to boot. Not hard to see how a relative can be jealous of her good life. I never read that her family says they miss her or they love her - only that they feel she owes them an invite to the wedding and that she’s ignored them.

Well, relationships can be quite simple at times. Just because you are related doesn’t mean you are owed anything. If you want to be close to your relatives, make an effort and be kind so you’ll be thought of as the nice relative - long before they become famous or successful. I have way too many catty, snarky relatives whom I’ve had to Markle for my own happiness.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Jayne1 said:


> Surprised their neighbours in Windsor... with their personal photographers in tow trying to show how wonderful they are by appearing with the masses.



Well it is kind of their job ... To me, slamming them for having photographers in tow when they make an appearance is kind of like slamming Taylor Swift for having a microphone when she performs to make sure people pay attention to her singing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bisousx said:


> This is one thing I’m team Megan on: her family drama.
> 
> I also have a large family and can easily see how they would’ve treated Megan to push her away years ago. On the surface, she appears to be the most (and only?) attractive one in the family, well educated and an actress to boot. Not hard to see how a relative can be jealous of her good life. I never read that her family says they miss her or they love her - only that they feel she owes them an invite to the wedding and that she’s ignored them.
> 
> Well, relationships can be quite simple at times. Just because you are related doesn’t mean you are owed anything. If you want to be close to your relatives, make an effort and be kind so you’ll be thought of as the nice relative - long before they become famous or successful. I have way too many catty, snarky relatives whom I’ve had to Markle for my own happiness.


This relative was a diplomat, who leveraged his connections to get her a job with the embassy in Argentina. It's not like he crawled out of the woodwork.


----------



## bisousx

mrsinsyder said:


> This relative was a diplomat, who leveraged his connections to get her a job with the embassy in Argentina. It's not like he crawled out of the woodwork.



I read the article and my opinion is the same regardless of his career - if family members don't do their part to keep in touch and be likable then it doesn't matter what favors they did in the past. He wouldn't be complaining if she didn't become famous.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Her makeup looks great. I don't love the bathrobe or the belt... they make no sense together. I really wish she'd just go for something simple, sleek, and tailored.



I hate to compare, but Kate really has mastered the formal coat look.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I read the article and my opinion is the same regardless of his career - if family members don't do their part to keep in touch and be likable then it doesn't matter what favors they did in the past. *He wouldn't be complaining if she didn't become famous.*



We wouldn’t know about it if she wasn’t famous. We have no idea whether her relatives tried to keep in touch before or after her marriage or whether Meghan has ever made any attempt to keep in touch with them. Every family has a jerk or two in it but it’s highly unlikely all of her family is reprehensible. Meghan thinking they don’t make the cut as far as status and wealth seems more possible. That doesn’t mean they are all bad people, just that they are of no further use to her.


----------



## duna

LittleStar88 said:


> Here is the article:
> _And according to a new report, Harry and Meghan may decide to have their second child in LA as the former Suits star found her first pregnancy ‘incredibly lonely’ because she was so far away from her loved ones.
> 
> 
> An insider told new! magazine: ‘*Meghan already told pals that when she comes to deliver her next baby, she’d like to do it in LA where she was born and bred.*_
> 
> Read more at https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/...e-second-child-usa-673249#kK9VUihUmA2lmlDM.99



This is ridiculous: if she really IS pregnant she should give birth in the UK where every other Royal child has been born! 

She really should have got together with a footballer, Ashley Cole or any other, and would have been the perfect WAG!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

rose60610 said:


> I guess she wanted some element in her outfit that looks laid back in a failed effort to hide her control freak tendencies. Save the slouchy boots for a casual outing.


This really made me laugh. 

I do think she tries to send the message with her clothing that she's more fashionable, more interesting, and more laid back than just a_ regular _duchess.


mrsinsyder said:


> Her makeup looks great. I don't love the bathrobe or the belt... they make no sense together. I really wish she'd just go for something simple, sleek, and tailored.


Wardrobe is one of the many areas where Meghan needs to just embrace her role and stop trying to innovate.  There are many other European princesses and queens she can look to who have mastered the formula for successfully dressing as a royal. 

You have hit the nail on the head - the key words are simple and tailored.  A plain coat or dress that fits perfectly is going to look far better than a bunchy coat made out of weird material with a mismatched belt thrown on top of it.


----------



## pixiejenna

The coat belt combination make her look like she’s pregnant again.


----------



## mrsinsyder

pixiejenna said:


> The coat belt combination make her look like she’s pregnant again.


I'm sure that was the point. Why could she let the day be about anything but herself?


----------



## buffym

Meghan has a beautiful face.




As for the belted coat, it comes across as her style pre baby and she is still carrying some baby weight so the belted look is not the best for her new frame.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Showed up to their event today looking a sloppy mess. I wish someone would burn those saggy boots she wears.


100% agree; really??? .. that coat and those boots are not looking good at all!


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> Meghan has a beautiful face.
> 
> View attachment 4584878
> 
> 
> As for the belted coat, it comes across as her style pre baby and she is still carrying some baby weight so the belted look is not the best for her new frame.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4584879
> View attachment 4584880
> View attachment 4584881


She has a pretty face that’s true.  But it doesn’t mean she’s a nice person.


----------



## buffym

bag-mania said:


> We wouldn’t know about it if she wasn’t famous. We have no idea whether her relatives tried to keep in touch before or after her marriage or whether Meghan has ever made any attempt to keep in touch with them. Every family has a jerk or two in it but it’s highly unlikely all of her family is reprehensible. Meghan thinking they don’t make the cut as far as status and wealth seems more possible. That doesn’t mean they are all bad people, just that they are of no further use to her.



But we don’t know, the uncle is telling his side. The uncle that doesn’t talk to her father or attended her first wedding. What if she stop talking to him when he fell out with her father years ago?

Meghan pre Harry would talk about family members and it is the ones who aren’t talking to the tabloids now. 

She would post pictures and talk about her niece that hasn’t talked to the DM.



The biggest thing with her family is they admitted that they haven’t talked to her in years - pre Harry so why should start talking to them when she is with Harry.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> We wouldn’t know about it if she wasn’t famous. We have no idea whether her relatives tried to keep in touch before or after her marriage or whether Meghan has ever made any attempt to keep in touch with them. Every family has a jerk or two in it but it’s highly unlikely all of her family is reprehensible. Meghan thinking they don’t make the cut as far as status and wealth seems more possible. That doesn’t mean they are all bad people, just that they are of no further use to her.


In addition, I have to think that the rumors (_as well as my friend telling me how Meghan 'ghosted' her son after she realized that she wasn't going to be able to meet any musicians_) .. that once she's done with you, then she just moves on .. are there for a reason!


----------



## buffym

Clearblueskies said:


> She has a pretty face that’s true.  But it doesn’t mean she’s a nice person.



You are entitled to your opinion. Mine is I think Meghan is fine, I don’t believe she is a manipulative person- I think she is learning a new role and making mistakes that comes with. I like strong willed people and I believe you can know your worth and it doesn’t make you a narcissistic.


----------



## Clearblueskies

buffym said:


> You are entitled to your opinion. Mine is I think Meghan is fine, I don’t believe she is a manipulative person- I think she is learning a new role and making mistakes that comes with. I like strong willed people and I believe you can know your worth and it doesn’t make you a narcissistic.


We can agree to disagree


----------



## mrsinsyder

It's actually a nice coat. Somehow she makes pretty things always look... terrible. She doesn't dress for her body type at all.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> It's actually a nice coat. Somehow she makes pretty things always look... terrible. She doesn't dress for her body type at all.
> 
> View attachment 4584894



Maybe she should have bought the coat for the size she is, not smaller size? Because it looks too small on her.


----------



## chowlover2

I love the hat and coat, but the coat is far too bulky on her frame.


----------



## Taimi

She definitely looks like she’s pregnant with that coat and the placement of the belt. And if she is, she totally showed it to the public with that outfit.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> It's actually a nice coat. Somehow she makes pretty things always look... terrible. She doesn't dress for her body type at all.
> 
> View attachment 4584894


It is a bulky material and unless you are a size minus one, it is not flattering.  Don't care for the hat for this occasion and it is too flat for her.  What has she done to her face?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

There seems to be a conscious effort to screw up a look.  From various ill fitting coats to certain dresses. The first time I saw this was in her engagement photo with the white coat. She was standing askew, also wore the coat askew and the ankle straps on the shoes stuck way out. At the time I thought 'why would she do that'? She also has a way of standing awkwardly at other times, this latest ceremony included. Does she think she's more relatable by slouching? I thought she looked wonderful on her wedding day, no weird poses or oddly fitting stuff so you know it's possible for her. I totally agree with previous comments that she wants to get tongues wagging "is she or isn't she pregnant again"? Maybe she thinks the press will be nicer toward her if she can make them gossip about a possible baby #2.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chowlover2 said:


> I love the hat and coat, but the coat is far too bulky on her frame.


The whole look is bulky - she should have had one "big" thing with a sleek look to finish it. Big hair, big coat, big boots, it's way too overwhelming.


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> The whole look is bulky - she should have had one "big" thing with a sleek look to finish it. Big hair, big coat, big boots, it's way too overwhelming.



She needs a new stylist. On the other hand I can't see her current stylist promoting many of her looks and M just strikes out her wardrobe looks on her own. It'd be different if she were good at it, but all too often we see: A swing and a miss!


----------



## hellosunshine

Photos by: 
https://twitter.com/ChrisJack_Getty


----------



## hellosunshine

► The Duke and Duchess of Sussex surprised military families for coffee in Windsor ahead of Remembrance Day.


----------



## hellosunshine

Britain's Duchess of Sussex, Meghan, made her first visit to Westminster Abbey's Field of Remembrance on Thursday joining her husband Prince Harry in planting a memorial cross ahead of Remembrance Sunday this weekend. 

The event honouring Britain's war dead has been held in the Abbey grounds since November 1928, when only two tribute crosses were planted.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## jcnc

lanasyogamama said:


> I hate to compare, but Kate really has mastered the formal coat look.


I was about to say so.. and she gets criticized for not being experimental and Meghan for not being traditional/ classic.. its a tough balance


----------



## Jayne1

LibbyRuth said:


> Well it is kind of their job ... To me, slamming them for having photographers in tow when they make an appearance is kind of like slamming Taylor Swift for having a microphone when she performs to make sure people pay attention to her singing.


I only slammed Swift when she did her daily pap walks around her NYC apartment, not for singing on stage... but as for M&H, I think it's great they do surprise visits, but bringing their own photographers slightly lessens the importance and feels more like when celebs visit the pumpkin patch in LA.

Will and Kate do it too, but it never feels forced.  And I don't even like them that much, but to me, they come across as more proper.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> I really wish she'd just go for something simple, sleek, and tailored.


But then she'll look like Kate.  lol


----------



## mdcx

She looks like a child deliberately trying to concentrate on being “respectful” imo.
The hair, coat and boots don’t make the BRF appearance grade to me.
More PR from Myka Meier in the Daily Mail I see.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Jayne1 said:


> I only slammed Swift when she did her daily pap walks around her NYC apartment, not for singing on stage... but as for M&H, I think it's great they do surprise visits, but bringing their own photographers slightly lessens the importance and feels more like when celebs visit the pumpkin patch in LA.
> 
> Will and Kate do it too, but it never feels forced.  And I don't even like them that much, but to me, they come across as more proper.


I was not speaking specifically of you or anyone else commenting on Taylor Swift - it was an analogy.  Their job as royals includes surprise visits.  They don't do them as a quiet way to help people, they do them because it's their job. Part of that job is bringing publicity to the groups they visit, and photographers are an effective way to bring publicity. 

I think the reason why Will and Kate doing visits does not feel as forced is because they also don't whine and complain about how hard it is to be royal. When Harry and Meghan first got married, Meghan seemed more natural doing the visits too. But once they put it out there that Harry is tortured by the clicking of cameras and Meghan tell us how painful it is to talk to people who don't ask how she's doing ... then everything they do is viewed through the filter they put out there.


----------



## hellosunshine

> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex honoured Britain's war dead today during a poignant ceremony at the Field of Remembrance outside Westminster Abbey at which Meghan was making her first appearance.
> 
> *The pair took the time to chat to Elizabeth Herschel, 96, who proudly wore the Second World War medals of her husband Stanley, a former Royal Engineer, and her own medals from her time with the Auxiliary Territorial Service.
> 
> “Mrs Herschel, from Newcastle, spoke to Prince Harry and offered him some advice after his recent public issues, saying: 'I told him you can't pick your family, but you can pick your friends, and he said 'I will remember that'.”*


----------



## Jayne1

LibbyRuth said:


> I was not speaking specifically of you or anyone else commenting on Taylor Swift - it was an analogy.  Their job as royals includes surprise visits.  They don't do them as a quiet way to help people, they do them because it's their job. Part of that job is bringing publicity to the groups they visit, and photographers are an effective way to bring publicity.
> 
> I think the reason why Will and Kate doing visits does not feel as forced is because they also don't whine and complain about how hard it is to be royal. When Harry and Meghan first got married, Meghan seemed more natural doing the visits too. But once they put it out there that Harry is tortured by the clicking of cameras and Meghan tell us how painful it is to talk to people who don't ask how she's doing ... then everything they do is viewed through the filter they put out there.


Oh, I knew you weren't speaking specifically to me about Swift.  I should have clarified that.... although I used to side eye her daily pap walks.  lol  So, I didn't take your comment personally, although I made it seem that way.  Sorry!

Yes, there's something about W&K who just seem to get on with things. I never used to think that, but it's now how M&H look in comparison.


----------



## jehaga

There’s something about her that’s just not genuine, no matter how hard she acts. 

You can take the C/D actress out of Hollywood, but you can’t—well, you guys know the rest.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

@0:30 on Archie
@0:36 Meghan playing telephone, haha!


----------



## lulilu

pixiejenna said:


> The coat belt combination make her look like she’s pregnant again.





mrsinsyder said:


> I'm sure that was the point. Why could she let the day be about anything but herself?



I think she looks pregnant and is deliberately doing so with that coat.  Reminds me of the coat she wore to Bea's wedding.

There is another photo in the past couple of days of her in a white shirt and black pants/skirt.  Sideways shot.  She looks thick around the waist.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lulilu said:


> I think she looks pregnant and is deliberately doing so with that coat.  Reminds me of the coat she wore to Bea's wedding.
> 
> There is another photo in the past couple of days of her in a white shirt and black pants/skirt.  Sideways shot.  She looks thick around the waist.


I really hope she’s not using a remembrance event to get everyone talking about a pregnancy. If that’s the case, she’s beyond saving.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> Photos by:
> https://twitter.com/ChrisJack_Getty
> View attachment 4584994
> 
> View attachment 4584995
> 
> View attachment 4584996


I actually like the fascinator a lot. It looks like velvet, perhaps?
Found it - velvet, $1700.
https://www.harrods.com/en-gb/phili...h-veil-p000000000006465717?bcid=1468510895325


----------



## Meh-gan

rose60610 said:


> Finally, at the Field of Remembrance ceremony, her hair is decent. I hate the messy ponytail with stupid wisps look. A stiffer boot would have been a better choice than the slouchy one for this event. I guess she wanted some element in her outfit that looks laid back in a failed effort to hide her control freak tendencies.  Save the slouchy boots for a casual outing.



What? Her hair looks gross - she needs a cut badly, all frayed, dry ends and so sloppy - look at it from the back. Mess.


----------



## Meh-gan

mrsinsyder said:


> I really hope she’s not using a remembrance event to get everyone talking about a pregnancy. If that’s the case, she’s beyond saving.



I mean, she is clearly doing that if she isn’t pregnant.


----------



## Meh-gan

buffym said:


> But we don’t know, the uncle is telling his side. The uncle that doesn’t talk to her father or attended her first wedding. What if she stop talking to him when he fell out with her father years ago?
> 
> Meghan pre Harry would talk about family members and it is the ones who aren’t talking to the tabloids now.
> 
> She would post pictures and talk about her niece that hasn’t talked to the DM.
> View attachment 4584891
> 
> 
> The biggest thing with her family is they admitted that they haven’t talked to her in years - pre Harry so why should start talking to them when she is with Harry.


She talked about her dad Pre Harry. On her blog etc. So I am not getting your point here. Only people who she talked about pre Harry don’t go to the media - her dad clearly did.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I really hope she’s not using a remembrance event to get everyone talking about a pregnancy. If that’s the case, she’s beyond saving.


Pregnant or not she’s clearly trying to stoke the rumours - there’s no reason to wear a coat so small it doesn’t cover her stomach unless she wants to get people talking.  Meghan is only happy when the attention is on her it seems.  I don’t think she even cares whether it’s good or bad, so long as she’s the centre of attention.  It’s the weirdest thing, seeing it play out in public.
And when you think the event she’s at is all about the sacrifice those men and women made to keep us free.  There are no words, frankly.  I don’t know how Harry and Meghan can hold their head up.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Clearblueskies said:


> Pregnant or not she’s clearly trying to stoke the rumours - there’s no reason to wear a coat so small it doesn’t cover her stomach unless she wants to get people talking.  Meghan is only happy when the attention is on her it seems.  I don’t think she even cares whether it’s good or bad, so long as she’s the centre of attention.  It’s the weirdest thing, seeing it play out in public.
> And when you think the event she’s at is all about the sacrifice those men and women made to keep us free.  There are no words, frankly.  I don’t know how Harry and Meghan can hold their head up.



I don't think it's entirely uncommon when a woman is adjusting to a new body shape to make some mistakes with ill-fitting clothes. There was a lot of talk right before Meghan gave birth really pushing for her to not use any of the tricks that women in the public eye use to cover how long it can take a body to take it's old shape after pregnancy. Meghan gave some hints that she heard the message and would show it. Not every woman return to her "original" body shape after giving birth, regardless of how much work is done. Meghan may be one of those - and her mindset towards clothes may not have yet adjusted to her new shape. I think it's quite normal for a woman to think that  certain cut always looks good on her - and then to see some pictures with a new shape and realize it doesn't anymore.
Now Meghan has access to stylists who can help her see it, so that's another thing entirely. I also agree with you that she enjoys attention, so it's quite possible that she's doing it on purpose to stoke rumors.  Heck, it's also quite possible that she is in fact pregnant again. Lots of things are possible - I just don't think any one of them is clearly what it is.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't think it's entirely uncommon when a woman is adjusting to a new body shape to make some mistakes with ill-fitting clothes. There was a lot of talk right before Meghan gave birth really pushing for her to not use any of the tricks that women in the public eye use to cover how long it can take a body to take it's old shape after pregnancy. Meghan gave some hints that she heard the message and would show it. Not every woman return to her "original" body shape after giving birth, regardless of how much work is done. Meghan may be one of those - and her mindset towards clothes may not have yet adjusted to her new shape. I think it's quite normal for a woman to think that  certain cut always looks good on her - and then to see some pictures with a new shape and realize it doesn't anymore.
> Now Meghan has access to stylists who can help her see it, so that's another thing entirely. I also agree with you that she enjoys attention, so it's quite possible that she's doing it on purpose to stoke rumors.  Heck, it's also quite possible that she is in fact pregnant again. Lots of things are possible - I just don't think any one of them is clearly what it is.


I think she knows exactly what she’s doing.


----------



## buffym

Meh-gan said:


> She talked about her dad Pre Harry. On her blog etc. So I am not getting your point here. Only people who she talked about pre Harry don’t go to the media - her dad clearly did.



I was discussing her uncle in the post. 

Her uncle is talking to the press that he wasn’t invited to Meghan’s wedding with Harry but the uncle wasn’t invited to Meghan’s first wedding. So it was likely Meghan stop talking to the uncle before Harry because the uncle stated he doesn’t talk to Meghan’s father.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## daisychainz

Meghan looked nice I thought. She has looked so much worse in the past. I saw a lot of effort in the hair and color selections. The makeup was super heavy, but I'll give her a thumbs up. Where is Camilla? I thought they would be together with her?


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> Meghan looked nice I thought. She has looked so much worse in the past. I saw a lot of effort in the hair and color selections. The makeup was super heavy, but I'll give her a thumbs up. Where is Camilla? I thought they would be together with her?


She had a bad cold apparently.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> She had a bad cold apparently.



Good thing she didn't go then. As brutal as the media is with fashion and behavior I can only imagine what they would do with photos of a royal caught blowing her nose.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> She had a bad cold apparently.


I think it was a chest infection


----------



## lulilu

Meh-gan said:


> What? Her hair looks gross - she needs a cut badly, all frayed, dry ends and so sloppy - look at it from the back. Mess.



The dress or skirt/blouse looks ill-fitting and rumpled.


----------



## daisychainz

Meh-gan said:


> What? Her hair looks gross - she needs a cut badly, all frayed, dry ends and so sloppy - look at it from the back. Mess.


It is certainly in contrast to the full and bouncy, healthy-looking curls from the ceremony yesterday. She obviously makes use of pieces and extensions.


----------



## kemilia

daisychainz said:


> It is certainly in contrast to the full and bouncy, healthy-looking curls from the ceremony yesterday. She obviously makes use of pieces and extensions.


I've read that Kate also uses extra hair pieces sometimes and she has shampoo-commercial type hair.


----------



## daisychainz

kemilia said:


> I've read that Kate also uses extra hair pieces sometimes and she has shampoo-commercial type hair.


Me too. It's so common nowadays. It makes it hard to tell what's real/fake anymore Meghan does look better with the help - the look yesterday SUITed her, lol


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> Me too. It's so common nowadays. It makes it hard to tell what's real/fake anymore Meghan does look better with the help - the look yesterday SUITed her, lol


It makes it really really tough for hair dressers!  They've always had to deal with customers bringing in pictures of what they want to look like when the models hair thickness and texture is totally different from their own. Now, they get those pics and have to respond not just saying "your hair doesn't have the natural wave the model does" but also "Okay, here are the six pieces I will need to sell you. You'll need to come in every few weeks for me to redo them."


----------



## hellosunshine

More and more photos from yesterdays' event are getting released by photographers and wow....


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> She had a bad cold apparently.



.....maybe it was a really mild cold......can't take chances!


----------



## rose60610

Meh-gan said:


> What? Her hair looks gross - she needs a cut badly, all frayed, dry ends and so sloppy - look at it from the back. Mess.



Well then that's triple saying something. I was talking about the ceremony at Westminster Abbey, in the other photos her hair was super awful. I was thinking that at Westminster her hair was better than usual. But you're right, it was still a little messy.  I'll give her benefit of a doubt, maybe it was windy.  On second look, nothing was blowing around and nobody else look disheveled. Oh well, I tried. The rest of her look missed the mark.


----------



## Grande Latte

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't think it's entirely uncommon when a woman is adjusting to a new body shape to make some mistakes with ill-fitting clothes. There was a lot of talk right before Meghan gave birth really pushing for her to not use any of the tricks that women in the public eye use to cover how long it can take a body to take it's old shape after pregnancy. Meghan gave some hints that she heard the message and would show it. Not every woman return to her "original" body shape after giving birth, regardless of how much work is done. Meghan may be one of those - and her mindset towards clothes may not have yet adjusted to her new shape. I think it's quite normal for a woman to think that  certain cut always looks good on her - and then to see some pictures with a new shape and realize it doesn't anymore.
> Now Meghan has access to stylists who can help her see it, so that's another thing entirely. I also agree with you that she enjoys attention, so it's quite possible that she's doing it on purpose to stoke rumors.  Heck, it's also quite possible that she is in fact pregnant again. Lots of things are possible - I just don't think any one of them is clearly what it is.



I agree. I'm speculating that she's having a really hard time getting her original body back and it's hurting her self image. Which explains why we see her in ill fitted outfits, when she can obviously afford brand new wardrobe.


----------



## queennadine

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: she seems to put more effort into her hair and make post wedding, than she ever did on her wedding day.


----------



## jehaga

The way she gazes at Harry is nauseating. No one looks at their husband that way every chance they get (in public). Harry, on the other hand, has the eyes of  a man full of regret and dread. He has dug himself into a deep hole and cannot figure out a way to get out. So sad.

Many years ago, when Kate and William first married, Harry always appeared happy in pictures with them.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> More and more...
> View attachment 4585816





This is such a beautiful movie poster!  Let’s guess the name of the movie/caption...how about “The American Girl and her Golden Goose” or “ The syrupy fake adoration poured out of her eyes as her Prince stared awkwardly ahead” or “‘I’ve got you now,’ said the spider to the fly.”


----------



## Katel

mrsinsyder said:


> She had a bad cold apparently.


“Apparently” hahaha
She wasn’t going to get within 5 feet of them...they’re probably top on her hit list right now.


----------



## muchstuff

Katel said:


> View attachment 4585987
> 
> This is such a beautiful movie poster!  Let’s guess the name of the movie/caption...how about “The American Girl and her Golden Goose” or “ The syrupy fake adoration poured out of her eyes as her Prince stared awkwardly ahead” or “‘I’ve got you now,’ said the spider to the fly.”



I have absolutely no dog in this fight, neither pro nor con either couple, but I wish Meghan would just stop ACTING for awhile...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

I had the highest hopes for these two -I was rooting for them big time - I thought their marriage might breathe new life into the Royal Family - but you cannot come from a culture (especially America - egads-the Revolutionary War, what?) into a culture with centuries-old traditions and try to change it radically in a few months. It’s rude, disrespectful and  plain not smart. 
 It’s very very sad... it does seem to be an ongoing train wreck that gets worse and worse.


----------



## Jayne1

jehaga said:


> The way she gazes at Harry is nauseating. No one looks at their husband that way every chance they get (in public).


It was a Nancy Reagan thing -- never stopped gazing into her husbands's eyes. For photos especially.

Meg, on the other hand, always looks like she's acting, although come to think of it, Nancy Reagan was an actress too.


----------



## Meh-gan

jehaga said:


> The way she gazes at Harry is nauseating. No one looks at their husband that way every chance they get (in public). Harry, on the other hand, has the eyes of  a man full of regret and dread. He has dug himself into a deep hole and cannot figure out a way to get out. So sad.
> 
> Many years ago, when Kate and William first married, Harry always appeared happy in pictures with them.


It’s so OTT and fake. Like stop putting on a show all the time. If you notice a lot of the time he isn’t even looking at her lol. I’m not entirely sure he is here either.


----------



## rose60610

Katel said:


> View attachment 4585987
> 
> This is such a beautiful movie poster!  Let’s guess the name of the movie/caption...how about “The American Girl and her Golden Goose” or “ The syrupy fake adoration poured out of her eyes as her Prince stared awkwardly ahead” or “‘I’ve got you now,’ said the spider to the fly.”



How about "Checkmate! There's no way The Crown can win now.......I got the ring and Archie. And a crapload of woke causes".


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> It was a Nancy Reagan thing -- never stopped gazing into her husbands's eyes. For photos especially.
> 
> Meg, on the other hand, always looks like she's acting, although come to think of it, Nancy Reagan was an actress too.


.. yes, another D-list one at that!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Katel said:


> View attachment 4585987
> 
> This is such a beautiful movie poster!  Let’s guess the name of the movie/caption...how about “The American Girl and her Golden Goose” or “ The syrupy fake adoration poured out of her eyes as her Prince stared awkwardly ahead” or “‘I’ve got you now,’ said the spider to the fly.”


This image has been cropped or photoshopped or something hasn’t it??


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> More and more photos from yesterdays' event are getting released by photographers and wow....
> 
> View attachment 4585816





Clearblueskies said:


> This image has been cropped or photoshopped or something hasn’t it??



If you’re asking me, I have no idea - I am responding to hellosunshine’s post #14505, pg 967


----------



## Clearblueskies

Katel said:


> If you’re asking me, I have no idea - I am responding to hellosunshine’s post #14505, pg 967


I know you were, the image looks odd to me.  As if it’s been altered.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending The Annual Royal British Legion Festival Of Remembrance


----------



## CeeJay

Morgan R said:


> Attending The Annual Royal British Legion Festival Of Remembrance
> 
> View attachment 4586703
> View attachment 4586704
> View attachment 4586701


Is she wearing blue shoes with a Black dress?  Why?


----------



## Mrs.Z

CeeJay said:


> Is she wearing blue shoes with a Black dress?  Why?


Ha....I thought the same thing...to match Harry’s suit?????


----------



## Sharont2305

After she's sat through her 2nd Festival of Remembrance maybe, just maybe she won't be so bothered about people not asking if she's okay.


----------



## Morgan R

CeeJay said:


> Is she wearing blue shoes with a Black dress?  Why?





Mrs.Z said:


> Ha....I thought the same thing...to match Harry’s suit?????



When the royal family attend engagements together their outfits often coordinate.

At the Festival of Remembrance, Meghan and Camilla were both wearing black dresses and navy shoes while Kate wore a Navy dress with black shoes. Likewise Prince Harry and Prince William are both wearing a tie that is maroon and navy. Prince Harry, Prince William, and Prince Charles are all wearing navy suits.


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Gorgeous dress, although it’s not the most flattering on her. Her hair and makeup and skin look great, she’s glowing! Harry looks sharp.


----------



## Katel

Morgan R said:


> Attending The Annual Royal British Legion Festival Of Remembrance
> 
> View attachment 4586703
> View attachment 4586704
> View attachment 4586701





Now Harry is cradling his belly?!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CuTe_ClAsSy said:


> Gorgeous dress, although it’s not the most flattering on her. Her hair and makeup and skin look great, she’s glowing! Harry looks sharp.


Too much bare skin on show for this type of occasion.


----------



## Katel

Clearblueskies said:


> I know you were, the image looks odd to me.  As if it’s been altered.


Haha I know what you mean... maybe that’s why I thought it looked so corny...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Too much bare skin on show for this type of occasion.


I think so too, but a high neckline on this dress would’ve made her look frumpy.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I think so too, but a high neckline on this dress would’ve made her look frumpy.


Agree, a simpler skirt would have been better too. 
I like the dress, for a different occasion though.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Morgan R said:


> Likewise Prince Harry and Prince William are both wearing a tie that is maroon and navy.


That’s their Guards regimental tie.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Is she wearing blue shoes with a Black dress?  Why?


I actually like the blue shoes with the black dress - maybe because those are my favorite colors


----------



## Gal4Dior

She looks pregnant in that dress. It’s a lovely dress, though...


----------



## Katel

The “double cradle,” incorporating the new “high, adapted” cradle.
(Will stop now )


----------



## Jayne1

From Getty images -- the whole family attended the Festival of Remembrance.  Meg has that smile plastered on her face.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> View attachment 4586999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The “double cradle,” incorporating the new “high, adapted” cradle.
> (Will stop now )


she does look pregnant when she holds her hand like that.....could be baby weight though


----------



## pixiejenna

Na I don’t think it’s left over baby weight I think she’s pregnant again. Wearing ill fitting coats that she can’t close, the last few coat less outfits seemed to show a bigger stomach than before, and the constant hand in front of her stomach bit(which she did 24/7 in her first pregnancy) is why I don’t believe it’s baby weight she hasn’t lost yet. Now she’s just waiting for a wedding to announce it, when is princess Beatrice getting married?


----------



## chowlover2

The dress is far too matronly on her, it looks like something Oprah would wear. Maybe she pulled a Scarlett O'Hara and had it made from the royal curtains? 
She really needs to start wearing stockings, she looks so unpolished from the rest of the ladies.


----------



## mrsinsyder

The poppy is almost touching her skin. Why can’t she ever get it right??


----------



## mdcx

The hair is good. I’m sure she would have been advised to wear pantyhose but chose not to, and the neckline is not appropriate.
One day she may grasp that no one cares whether she looks “frumpy” or “hot” at these formal events, but whether she looks appropriate.


----------



## mdcx

Also I’m beginning to think there is some truth to the rumours about how Meghan kept herself so slim before marriage. Rumours that may explain why she has that odd concave area towards the tip of her nose. Apparently she gets that fixed with a “liquid nose job”.
I predict she’ll slim down radically the minute they hit LA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> Also I’m beginning to think there is some truth to the rumours about how Meghan kept herself so slim before marriage. Rumours that may explain why she has that odd concave area towards the tip of her nose. Apparently she gets that fixed with a “liquid nose job”.
> I predict she’ll slim down radically the minute they hit LA.


What are the rumours?

I remember seeing photos of her smoking, but I think she may have given it up. I have no reason to think that, I’m just assuming.


----------



## pixiejenna

What are the rumors to how she stayed so slim?  I never heard of a liquid nose job I had to google it and it does seem to make a difference but it’s only temporary. As you age how will the skin around your eyes look after having fillers stretch it out?


----------



## chowlover2

Jayne1 said:


> What are the rumours?
> 
> I remember seeing photos of her smoking, but I think she may have given it up. I have no reason to think that, I’m just assuming.


I would assume cocaine, but maybe Adderal? If you use enough coke you can cause major sinus damage.
What is it with the Brits mixing black and navy? I just saw a pic of Camilla from the same function, and she is wearing a black dress and stockings and navy heels.


----------



## Chagall

Katel said:


> View attachment 4586919
> 
> Now Harry is cradling his belly?!?


Why did she wear such a low neckline to a very sober event. The poppy looks like it was thrown on without any thought to proper placement.


----------



## queennadine

That dress is not flattering whatsoever, yikes. Also thinking the preggo rumors may be true. She looks bigger now than she did post-partum. (And this is coming from someone 6.5 months after having my LO.)


----------



## ccbaggirl89

She looks pregnant. She's walking around with her hand attached to her stomach again.


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> Also I’m beginning to think there is some truth to the rumours about how Meghan kept herself so slim before marriage. Rumours that may explain why she has that odd concave area towards the tip of her nose. Apparently she gets that fixed with a “liquid nose job”.
> I predict she’ll slim down radically the minute they hit LA.


She is not 20 anymore and body changes. My guess is because she’s not that young anymore her body won’t bounce back 
It’s not her genes. 
She needs to learn to dress for her body shape and she’ll look great again


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She looks pregnant. She's walking around with her hand attached to her stomach again.


Either she is pregnant or wants us to think she is. I guess we will find out at the next wedding she attends.


----------



## Morgan R

Attending Remembrance Sunday Service at The Cenotaph


----------



## mrsinsyder

I can’t see the whole thing but I feel like she did ok today. Her outfit mostly fits, she covered up her chest, no sexy hair. Her makeup is dated and heavy and the hat/belt is a little off but for her this is pretty good.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her friends have to quit. Wasn’t Archie too young to travel to Balmoral *after* this??


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Her friends have to quit. Wasn’t Archie too young to travel to Balmoral *after* this??
> View attachment 4587465


Did they ever say that or did the media came up with Archie being too young?


----------



## Morgan R

myown said:


> Did they ever say that or did the media came up with Archie being too young?



The media came up with it and it was being repeated as if Harry and Meghan were the ones that said it.

Harry has never been one of the royal family members that has visited Balmoral much as an adult. The most recent picture of Harry at Balmoral is September 2016 (2016 was the year Queen Elizabeth II turned 90 so the members of the royal family were pretty much attending/visiting everything for her that year). Prior to 2016 the most recent pictures of him at Balmoral were when he was teenager.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Her friends have to quit. Wasn’t Archie too young to travel to Balmoral *after* this??
> View attachment 4587465


Why can’t her friends (if that’s what they truly are) just be discreet for once?  My friends don’t blab my business to all and sundry.  What’s the matter with these people?


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I can’t see the whole thing but I feel like she did ok today. Her outfit mostly fits, she covered up her chest, no sexy hair. Her makeup is dated and heavy and the hat/belt is a little off but for her this is pretty good.
> View attachment 4587460


The coat is better, but I hate the hat.  It looks like something Princess Anne would go for.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marthastoo

Chagall said:


> Either she is pregnant or wants us to think she is. I guess we will find out at the next wedding she attends.


Or, she's just still holding on to her baby weight.  Many women (myself included) just permanently become thicker in the waist after having children.


----------



## Chagall

marthastoo said:


> Or, she's just still holding on to her baby weight.  Many women (myself included) just permanently become thicker in the waist after having children.


I am sure she is carrying extra baby weight, however why do some pictures show her cradling her stomach like she did  with her first pregnancy. Surely she could stop herself from doing that. Unless she is stirring up pregnancy rumors.


----------



## marthastoo

I'm sure glad I don't have photographers follow me around.  I often touch my belly, especially if I'm feeling fat.  Like I need to remind myself "I really need to lose weight!"


----------



## myown

Chagall said:


> I am sure she is carrying extra baby weight, however why do some pictures show her cradling her stomach like she did  with her first pregnancy. Surely she could stop herself from doing that. Unless she is stirring up pregnancy rumors.


my guess is she feels insecure in her "bigger" body and that´s some kind of hiding


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Why can’t her friends (if that’s what they truly are) just be discreet for once?  My friends don’t blab my business to all and sundry.  What’s the matter with these people?


I know! They need to stfu, it's not helping.
William and Catherine have famous friends too but you never hear them blabbing to the press.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> I can’t see the whole thing but I feel like she did ok today. Her outfit mostly fits, she covered up her chest, no sexy hair. Her makeup is dated and heavy and the hat/belt is a little off but for her this is pretty good.
> View attachment 4587460


I feel like Meg got the hard word call from someone higher up:
“Madam will wear her hair back today, she will be covered to the collarbone, she will wear a full hat, stockings, closed shoes and a closed coat just in case madam thinks it wise to wear a dreadfully ill fitting dress...”
MM’s wardrobe choices are often a big old FU to her advisors imo, like technically I followed the rules, but check out my bare legs/ bare chest/ mismatched shoes/too tight clothes/ soap opera hair etc.


----------



## A1aGypsy

mdcx said:


> I feel like Meg got the hard word call from someone higher up:
> “Madam will wear her hair back today, she will be covered to the collarbone, she will wear a full hat, stockings, closed shoes and a closed coat just in case madam thinks it wise to wear a dreadfully ill fitting dress...”
> MM’s wardrobe choices are often a big old FU to her advisors imo, like technically I followed the rules, but check out my bare legs/ bare chest/ mismatched shoes/too tight clothes/ soap opera hair etc.



So Meghan responded with “okay, then I will dress as Carmen Santiago, international woman of mystery!”


----------



## Chagall

Katel said:


> View attachment 4585987
> 
> This is such a beautiful movie poster!  Let’s guess the name of the movie/caption...how about “The American Girl and her Golden Goose” or “ The syrupy fake adoration poured out of her eyes as her Prince stared awkwardly ahead” or “‘I’ve got you now,’ said the spider to the fly.”


Too much PDA. She is trying too hard to make a point. The more someone try’s to prove a point, the less likely it is to be true.


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> Her friends have to quit. Wasn’t Archie too young to travel to Balmoral *after* this??
> View attachment 4587465


The first woman to ever travel with an infant! So brave and strong! Oh wait...


----------



## mrsinsyder

cafecreme15 said:


> The first woman to ever travel with an infant! So brave and strong! Oh wait...


Didn’t they also try to imply she flew commercial for this? Hahahahahahahaha sure no one would have noticed her with an infant


----------



## Clearblueskies

A1aGypsy said:


> So Meghan responded with “okay, then I will dress as Carmen Santiago, international woman of mystery!”


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> my guess is she feels insecure in her "bigger" body and that´s some kind of hiding


I carry my excess weight in my tummy area and I certainly don't place my hands there to show everyone - "here it is, the big belly".  Either she's pregnant or she is strange IMO


----------



## doni

I cannot put my finger on it but I find something off with this look... Don’t know, maybe it is the wide brim hat with the hair all pulled back like that, looks a bit strange...  With such a hat you need to show some hair, an ellaborate do, a fringe... this could have been the ocasión for one of those low buns of her


----------



## doni

The inspiration? But Diana looks so much better because of the hair and, crucially, the earrings.
Sometimes it is in the details...


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> I carry my excess weight in my tummy area and I certainly don't place my hands there to show everyone - "here it is, the big belly".  Either she's pregnant or she is strange IMO


Then I’m strange, too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Morgan R said:


> Attending Remembrance Sunday Service at The Cenotaph
> 
> View attachment 4587417
> View attachment 4587414
> View attachment 4587416
> View attachment 4587399
> View attachment 4587398
> View attachment 4587418





mdcx said:


> I feel like Meg got the hard word call from someone higher up:
> “Madam will wear her hair back today, she will be covered to the collarbone, she will wear a full hat, stockings, closed shoes and a closed coat just in case madam thinks it wise to wear a dreadfully ill fitting dress...”
> MM’s wardrobe choices are often a big old FU to her advisors imo, like technically I followed the rules, but check out my bare legs/ bare chest/ mismatched shoes/too tight clothes/ soap opera hair etc.



Yes, I think she did get a memo about all of that, plus that it’s not an event for her  and it’s not appropriate to smile all the time as it is a remembrance of somber sacrifice.... she really does seem out of touch with reality.
 Did they give her Minders?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Her friends have to quit. Wasn’t Archie too young to travel to Balmoral *after* this??
> View attachment 4587465



I find it rather telling they were able to hide this kind of big news for weeks, in fact until Serena told the press. So maybe one can have privacy after all if one doesn't deliberately hold their face or stomach into any camera around.


----------



## jehaga

Katel said:


> Yes, I think she did get a memo about all of that, plus that it’s not an event for her  and it’s not appropriate to smile all the time as it is a remembrance of somber sacrifice.... she really does seem out of touch with reality.
> Did they give her Minders?


That seems to be the same smile she fixes on whenever she’s out with the rest of the family for an important event in which she is not the “star.” It looks bitter, haughty, condescending, smug, etc. She gives off the vibe that attending the event is an imposition and a waste of her time.

Also, a comment from the DM article with Serena Williams reminded us that previously Serena had talked about MM leaving her baby back home to go to NY and how she herself wouldn’t have been able to leave her daughter. So, what gives?


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I carry my excess weight in my tummy area and I certainly don't place my hands there to show everyone - "here it is, the big belly".  Either she's pregnant or she is strange IMO


She is very odd. As weird as the wind.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

doni said:


> The inspiration? But Diana looks so much better because of the hair and, crucially, the earrings.
> Sometimes it is in the details...
> 
> View attachment 4587603


Here's a side-by-side from USA Today to add-on from your post.


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Here's a side-by-side from USA Today to add-on from your post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4587699


Diana had impeccable style. When you realize how long ago that was, it’s amazing that she still looks so perfectly put together and stylish today.


----------



## marthastoo

I thought Meghan looked good - nothing to complain about her clothes.  Her makeup in particular looked fab, as it has for the past couple of appearances.  The hat isn't my favorite style, but it's fine.  Her facial expression is also appropriate - appropriately somber like everyone else.  I fail to see the insidious or condescending underlying motivations in her expression.  She looks like I do in my drivers license where you are not allowed to smile, but you don't want your DL photo to look like a mug shot.


----------



## gracekelly

I don't believe that she took Archie to NYC.  She didn't stay that long and there is proof that she stayed at a hotel with crib etc.  Plus she would have had to have the nanny with her to watch Archie when she went to the game.  If she stayed at Misha N's place, no baby things.  I don't know why they are pushing this story and Serena shouldn't have been roped into it.


----------



## mdcx

And doesn’t that make it ten times more insulting that she didn’t take Archie to see the Queen at Balmoral?
Or maybe that’s the intent of this story, another FU to the BRF.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that the "did she or didn't she" aspect of the story of her trip to New York illustrates how unfair critics are to new moms.  We know that right after Archie was born, Harry made some quick trips for the Invictus games. There was no discussion at all about what was happening with Archie while he was away ... it was assume that he was with Meghan. And yet, when Meghan goes away months later, it's an issue. I think there are conflicting claims that he made the trip and did not make the trip because we put such unrealistic and unreasonable expectations on new moms that she'd get blasted either way. It truly doesn't matter. Perhaps she decided to bring him as to not interrupt breast feeding. Perhaps she decided not to bring him because it was a long trip and she could use the rest, and Harry could use the one on one time with the baby. Either one is legit, and yet there are entirely too many people who seem to be outraged that she'd dare do soemething different from what each of them would do.


----------



## doni

LibbyRuth said:


> I think that the "did she or didn't she" aspect of the story of her trip to New York illustrates how unfair critics are to new moms.  We know that right after Archie was born, Harry made some quick trips for the Invictus games. There was no discussion at all about what was happening with Archie while he was away ... it was assume that he was with Meghan. And yet, when Meghan goes away months later, it's an issue. I think there are conflicting claims that he made the trip and did not make the trip because we put such unrealistic and unreasonable expectations on new moms that she'd get blasted either way. It truly doesn't matter. Perhaps she decided to bring him as to not interrupt breast feeding. Perhaps she decided not to bring him because it was a long trip and she could use the rest, and Harry could use the one on one time with the baby. Either one is legit, and yet there are entirely too many people who seem to be outraged that she'd dare do soemething different from what each of them would do.


Couldn’t agree more. And that’s what I found disturbing of Serena’s comments, the implication that if she had travelled without the baby it would have been if not wrong somewhat less commendable or not an option...  What does it matter?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Well Serena has certainly faced her own share of unfair critiques on time she gives to her job vs he daughter. So perhaps she was motivated by trying to protect her.


----------



## LittleStar88

I think she looks great. Finally! I was sort of dreading what she would wear but someone said something to her and she listened. My only nit is that she should have worn earrings. Even a simple stud. Something.

I like this photo


----------



## queennadine

The look on her face in that photo seems like she’s been reprimanded and she’s not pleased about it.


----------



## LittleStar88

queennadine said:


> The look on her face in that photo seems like she’s been reprimanded and she’s not pleased about it.



Maybe no one asked her how she’s doing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bklner2014

queennadine said:


> The look on her face in that photo seems like she’s been reprimanded and she’s not pleased about it.


In these photos only the Queen looks cheerful! Everyone else looks pretty serious. [Edit: Sorry, I am not sure if they are at the same event.]
https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...ine-kate-thread.642321/page-837#post-33434537


----------



## Jayne1

I like what she's wearing for a somber occasion.

I think it's the belts she wears almost empire waist style that makes us think she's pregnant again.


----------



## muchstuff

Chagall said:


> Diana had impeccable style. When you realize how long ago that was, it’s amazing that she still looks so perfectly put together and stylish today.


Not amazing at all really, women were stylish and put together in Diana’s day, it wasn’t that long ago. Take a look at pics from the forties if you want to see some really polished looks!


----------



## Chagall

muchstuff said:


> Not amazing at all really, women were stylish and put together in Diana’s day, it wasn’t that long ago. Take a look at pics from the forties if you want to see some really polished looks!


That’s a very collective statement. I can assure you that not everyone was put together back in the 1990’s. Why do you think she stood out from everyone then.


----------



## muchstuff

Chagall said:


> That’s a very collective statement. I can assure you that not everyone was put together back in the 1990’s. Why do you think she stood out from everyone then.


Merely pointing our that it shouldn’t be surprising that women twenty odd years ago could have a great sense of style. Diana stood out because she often wore couture from some very famous designers. She wasn’t the only one.


----------



## bisbee

queennadine said:


> The look on her face in that photo seems like she’s been reprimanded and she’s not pleased about it.


Really?  You can read all of that from her expression?


----------



## Welltraveled!

Melanie_O said:


> She seems to put more effort into her hair and make post-wedding, than she ever did on her wedding day.



I sorta agree with this.  More often than not she looks the same. unless there’s an event or something that requires her to “glam” up more for it.


----------



## myown

i liked her wedding makeup. 
I think it´s strange when someone glams up so much on their wedding day, you hardly recognize them. 
her make up on her wedding day was flawless and natural


----------



## LibbyRuth

myown said:


> i liked her wedding makeup.
> I think it´s strange when someone glams up so much on their wedding day, you hardly recognize them.
> her make up on her wedding day was flawless and natural


I agree with you, and I think that was very intentional.  She knew all eyes would be on her, and wanted to use the moment to make a statement that beauty can be found without a massive glam squad, airbrushing and a suitcase full of hair pieces.


----------



## Welltraveled!

bisbee said:


> Really?  You can read all of that from her expression?



Funny.  I thought the same thing.  

I think everyone.....except Will.... looked great.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bisbee said:


> Really?  You can read all of that from her expression?


Well I thought so too - she definitely looks pi**ed off.  But this is just a gossip thread.....


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Well I thought so too - she definitely looks pi**ed off.  But this is just a gossip thread.....


She looked pi**ed off cos she was on the "inferior" balcony.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I don't think an emotion can be detected from a single picture. Video - maybe.  But a picture - it captures a tiny moment in time that could reflect anger, happiness, or a sneeze coming on.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> She looked pi**ed off cos she was on the "inferior" balcony.


Yup, exactly that!  and at the Albert Hall too.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't think an emotion can be detected from a single picture. Video - maybe.  But a picture - it captures a tiny moment in time that could reflect anger, happiness, or a sneeze coming on.


But you can interpret her thoughts based on a picture of her makeup??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

After that interview, I suspect things would be a bit chilly in the wings waiting to head out onto those balconies, especially with Harry down tending to his wreath. I don’t imagine it was a humdinger of a time for her.


----------



## cafecreme15

A1aGypsy said:


> After that interview, I suspect things would be a bit chilly in the wings waiting to head out onto those balconies, especially with Harry down tending to his wreath. I don’t imagine it was a humdinger of a time for her.


You'd think that Meghan would have taken situations such as the one you pose into account before deciding to do the interview, but had she actually thought through the implications, I doubt she would have done it at all. What I wouldn't have given to be a fly on that wall...


----------



## LibbyRuth

Clearblueskies said:


> But you can interpret her thoughts based on a picture of her makeup??


Are you referring to my comment about her wedding hair and makeup?  No, I did not base what I said merely on a picture. I based it on what she looked like that day - pictures and videos - and what people close to her said about what she'd indicated she wanted her look for the day to be - including her makeup artist who gave interviews after the day. I was also clear in saying that it was my thought, and not a declaration of Meghan's feelings.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LibbyRuth said:


> Are you referring to my comment about her wedding hair and makeup?  No, I did not base what I said merely on a picture. I based it on what she looked like that day - pictures and videos - and what people close to her said about what she'd indicated she wanted her look for the day to be - including her makeup artist who gave interviews after the day. I was also clear in saying that it was my thought, and not a declaration of Meghan's feelings.


I’m in the uk.  I watched the festival of remembrance and the ceremony at the cenotaph.  
The thread gets tedious when members keep commenting on the correctness or not of each other’s comments and opinions IMO.  It’s a gossip thread.  Everyone thinks what they think, and that’s ok.


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


> She looked pi**ed off cos she was on the "inferior" balcony.



You could say she was in the "inferior" balcony, I was also looking at the whole pecking order and rank and file system of it all. All the men wore 1 poppy, QEII wore 5 poppies on her coat and dress, Kate wore 1 ceramic poppy on her coat and 3 poppies on her dress, Camilla wore 3 poppies on her coat and 1 ceramic poppy on her dress, Princess Anne wore 3 poppies; and Meghan was in the 1 Poppy Club, stationed behind Boris Johnson and his hotsie totsie girlfriend. M seemed lucky to even be in the same section with the rest.  Judging from the poppy count, those High Up the Ladder and in the Inner Sanctum wore 3 while the Queen had five, almost like stars on generals.

Oh well, maybe Meghan can rule the 1 Poppy Club and commiserate with all the other inconsequential heirs. They can grumble and snivel to one another about how rough they have it, the inconveniences of castle renovations, and ask each other if they're OK. At least she could be front and center of all the attention. After all, nobody suffers more than she does.


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> The look on her face in that photo seems like she’s been reprimanded and she’s not pleased about it.


maybe she's thinking "wait, I'm the Hollywood star; how did this British woman out-do me so spectacularly?"


----------



## CeeJay

Yes, I know .. it's the Daily Fail, but I don't think I've seen an article like this and, well .. it's somewhat telling in some respects .. especially the "keep calm and carry on"!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7672057/The-Queen-fan-unflappable-Kate-Middleton.html


----------



## LibbyRuth

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m in the uk.  I watched the festival of remembrance and the ceremony at the cenotaph.
> The thread gets tedious when members keep commenting on the correctness or not of each other’s comments and opinions IMO.  It’s a gossip thread.  Everyone thinks what they think, and that’s ok.


I think the best way to keep it from being tedious is not not participate in the correctness.  I expressed my opinion, much like you did.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LibbyRuth said:


> I think the best way to keep it from being tedious is not not participate in the correctness.  I expressed my opinion, much like you did.


Let’s do do that then


----------



## jehaga

MM is an actress so all of her facial expressions in public are calibrated and intentional, particularly  when there are multiple pictures of the exact same expression. She most definitely intends to convey her displeasure and ennui on that balcony.

She is really showing the world her lack of class.

Oh, wait. Forgot: IMO IMO IMO.


----------



## CeeJay

According to this DM article, the Hello! magazine noted that Meghan and Harry might stay with Doria for the Christmas holidays!  So, it seems as though they've gone from "the family that Meghan never had" .. to now (somewhat) giving the Queen a "slap" for not attending her annual Sandringham festivities!  JMO .. why do I think this will ultimately not play out well for H&M?  In addition, are they going to stay in a "fancy" hotel the entire time of their visit?  : 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-Christmas-Doria-Hello-magazine-reports.html


----------



## Flatsy

If they do indeed stay through Christmas, I don't think they will ever really come back.  I think that would mean they are moving there.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> According to this DM article, the Hello! magazine noted that Meghan and Harry might stay with Doria for the Christmas holidays!  So, it seems as though they've gone from "the family that Meghan never had" .. to now (somewhat) giving the Queen a "slap" for not attending her annual Sandringham festivities!  JMO .. why do I think this will ultimately not play out well for H&M?  In addition, are they going to stay in a "fancy" hotel the entire time of their visit?  :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-Christmas-Doria-Hello-magazine-reports.html


I doubt doria has room for them and their staff....I would guess they would rent a house.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I doubt doria has room for them and their staff....I would guess they would rent a house.


Yes, for sure .. as far as renting a house for just a month or so, that may prove to be more difficult.  Many that lease houses want a minimum of at least 6 months and they are going to charge a premium for that!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Yes, for sure .. as far as renting a house for just a month or so, that may prove to be more difficult.  Many that lease houses want a minimum of at least 6 months and they are going to charge a premium for that!


They move in with Ellen.  She has lots of room and lots of houses


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> They move in with Ellen.  She has lots of room and lots of houses


HA HA HA .. true, true .. but I think that if they did, there would be a LOT of commentary on that!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. true, true .. but I think that if they did, there would be a LOT of commentary on that!


Yes, and most of it will be negative


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, for sure .. as far as renting a house for just a month or so, that may prove to be more difficult.  Many that lease houses want a minimum of at least 6 months and they are going to charge a premium for that!


well, now that they have so many very prominent friends, maybe someone can help them find a home that's vacant for a month.....I think Oprah has a huge estate near Santa Barbara but I guess they would require the main house - not a guest cottage


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> They move in with Ellen.  She has lots of room and lots of houses


Exactly.  Or a penthouse suite somewhere.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, and most of it will be negative


100% agree; if they decide to go the "Hollywood Celeb" route, I really think people will not take it well at all!


----------



## Chagall

muchstuff said:


> Merely pointing our that it shouldn’t be surprising that women twenty odd years ago could have a great sense of style. Diana stood out because she often wore couture from some very famous designers. She wasn’t the only one.


No she wasn’t the only one then and certainly just as many people today wear couture designers. Many of the people then and today wear these clothes and don’t look particularly good in them. They don’t have the flair or sense of style that Diana had. She also looked very good in casual clothing as well. Again, this is not true of everyone, then or now.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, now that they have so many very prominent friends, maybe someone can help then find a home that's vacant for a month.....I think Oprah has a huge estate near Santa Barbara but I guess the would require the main house - not a guest cottage


They can stay in Oprah's tea house.  Yes, that is a double entendre.


----------



## marthastoo

I'm sure that's exactly what Meghan was thinking.


----------



## rose60610

Aren't H&M's entourage of staff dedicated to serving them, vs spending even more time cleaning a rental home? Prestigious hotels are normally accustomed to dealing with VIPS in terms of security, etc. Well, on second thought, high end homes in exclusive neighborhoods cater to security issues too. Maybe Royals travel with all their help staff to clean up regardless where they stay and don't allow regular (non-vetted) hotel cleaning staff to enter their rooms.  

A couple of years ago I visited Manhattan and wanted to go into The Plaza for lunch. Nobody could enter The Plaza at that time because some grand Poobah from the Middle East rented the whole entire hotel for his entourage for the duration of his stay. I always wondered how much his bill must have been.


----------



## mdcx

Hah, Megs is not going to be bunking down at Doria’s with a shared bathroom and other horrifying accoutrements of the pleb class!
I’m sure there are luxury Air BnB type places in LA well equipped for hosting visiting stahs
There will be some reason she can’t return to live full-time in Britain imo. And hey, she can just run her charity from LA!


----------



## queennadine

bisbee said:


> Really?  You can read all of that from her expression?



_Seemed _ like it to me. We obviously don’t know.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Hah, Megs is not going to be bunking down at Doria’s with a shared bathroom and other horrifying accoutrements of the pleb class!
> I’m sure there are luxury Air BnB type places in LA well equipped for hosting visiting stahs
> There will be some reason she can’t return to live full-time in Britain imo. And hey, she can just run her charity from LA!


Maybe they can ship over the copper bathtub along with the Range Rover?


----------



## muchstuff

Chagall said:


> No she wasn’t the only one then and certainly just as many people today wear couture designers. Many of the people then and today wear these clothes and don’t look particularly good in them. They don’t have the flair or sense of style that Diana had. She also looked very good in casual clothing as well. Again, this is not true of everyone, then or now.


Just to be clear, I was never suggesting that everyone in any decade wore couture well and were well-styled. I was simply pointing out that there were women in past decades who did so as the original comment seemed to imply that it was surprising how stylish Diana was for her time. That was the impression I took away from it anyway, I’m sorry that I commented at all . This thread though...


----------



## Jayne1

LadyGran said:


> Most likely due to Diana’s ballet training, she moved with grace and poise which means that _she_ wore the clothes, they did not wear her. [Of course, she did indeed have plenty of ‘misses’.]


I think her wedding dress was a huge miss, even then it looked so messy and winkled, her hair was droopy... but now, looking back?  The look didn't improve with time.


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> According to this DM article, the Hello! magazine noted that Meghan and Harry might stay with Doria for the Christmas holidays!  So, it seems as though they've gone from "the family that Meghan never had" .. to now (somewhat) giving the Queen a "slap" for not attending her annual Sandringham festivities!  JMO .. why do I think this will ultimately not play out well for H&M?  In addition, are they going to stay in a "fancy" hotel the entire time of their visit?  :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-Christmas-Doria-Hello-magazine-reports.html


who knows if this is true


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

muchstuff said:


> Just to be clear, I was never suggesting that everyone in any decade wore couture well and were well-styled. I was simply pointing out that there were women in past decades who did so as the original comment seemed to imply that it was surprising how stylish Diana was for her time. That was the impression I took away from it anyway, I’m sorry that I commented at all . This thread though...


Not only how stylish she was for her time, which of course we know she was, but how her style transcended time. Not to difficult a concept to grasp.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> Not only how stylish she was for her time, which of course we know she was, but how her style transcended time. Not to difficult a concept to grasp.


Yes, you look at some outfits and think they look good and stylish but look very of its time. Others look as though you could wear them now, because they looked classic.
Ive even thought Catherine would look great in some of them, particularly the evening gowns.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, you look at some outfits and think they look good and stylish but look very of its time. Others look as though you could wear them now, because they looked classic.
> Ive even thought Catherine would look great in some of them, particularly the evening gowns.


 I don’t know how Diana managed to make so many of her outfits timeless. Some other pictures of people from the nineties looked so dated. Her evening gowns were gorgeous. I agree I could definitely see Kate wearing them today.


----------



## daisychainz

CeeJay said:


> According to this DM article, the Hello! magazine noted that Meghan and Harry might stay with Doria for the Christmas holidays!  So, it seems as though they've gone from "the family that Meghan never had" .. to now (somewhat) giving the Queen a "slap" for not attending her annual Sandringham festivities!  JMO .. why do I think this will ultimately not play out well for H&M?  In addition, are they going to stay in a "fancy" hotel the entire time of their visit?  :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-Christmas-Doria-Hello-magazine-reports.html


I think they will stay in a combination of approved diplomatic hotels and properties owned by celebrities, like Elton John loaned them a place and George Clooney loans out his homes to friends. They will not be in Los Angeles the whole time, all the articles say "US" so that likely will mean a combination of NY/LA and maybe even other places. Doria will be a blip on their visit unless they use her for some nice publicity shots - she is a handy excuse for their forced time off. All imo


----------



## myown

It really would not be a nice way to treat the BRF, the queen, if they stayed away over Christmas. Doria was invited last year, they really tried to include Meghan and her mother, tried to make her feel welcome. Kinda seems like a slap in their face if these Christmas stories are true.
Also isn’t Christmas with the queen like something they actually can’t turn down? 

-IMO


----------



## LittleStar88

myown said:


> It really would not be a nice way to treat the BRF, the queen, if they stayed away over Christmas. Doria was invited last year, they really tried to include Meghan and her mother, tried to make her feel welcome. Kinda seems like a slap in their face if these Christmas stories are true.
> Also isn’t Christmas with the queen like something they actually can’t turn down?
> 
> -IMO



I don't understand why they would want to turn her down for Christmas.

Part of the fun of getting married and having extended families is getting to figure out how to timeshare yourself at the holidays. It isn't about you (Meghan), it is about doing the right thing by the entire family. Now that they have Archie, they have a bit of an obligation to turn up and do time with Queen and UK family. It is stressful and it is exhausting, but that's what it is like to be an adult. Fulfill the expectations both families may have... IMHO ...


----------



## LibbyRuth

Well if you marry into the royal family, it's not really about figuring out how to timeshare yourself ... it's about duty, and Meghan and Harry knew that before they said I do. That being said, right now, any discussion of where they'd be for Christmas is speculation, and based on the number of incorrect reports that she's pregnant, they are moving to Africa, they are being fired from the BRF, etc that have been false, I don't think it's worth reacting to quite yet.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> Well if you marry into the royal family, it's not really about figuring out how to timeshare yourself ... *it's about duty, and Meghan and Harry knew that before they said I do.* That being said, right now, any discussion of where they'd be for Christmas is speculation, and based on the number of incorrect reports that she's pregnant, they are moving to Africa, they are being fired from the BRF, etc that have been false, I don't think it's worth reacting to quite yet.



Harry knew but I don't believe Meghan fully understood or appreciated what duty truly meant. In fairness I'm sure no woman would until she was fully immersed in it.


----------



## Sharont2305

Looks to me it's another "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" moment isn't it?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Looks to me it's another "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" moment isn't it?


I think so


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't understand why they would want to turn her down for Christmas.
> 
> Part of the fun of getting married and having extended families is getting to figure out how to timeshare yourself at the holidays. It isn't about you (Meghan), it is about doing the right thing by the entire family. Now that they have Archie, they have a bit of an obligation to turn up and do time with Queen and UK family. It is stressful and it is exhausting, but that's what it is like to be an adult. Fulfill the expectations both families may have... IMHO ...


If they’d turned up for Scotland in the summer you could think well, fair enough.  But to refuse both looks rather churlish.  [IMO obvs.]


----------



## Sharont2305

Sandringham at Christmas is NOT something you refuse, I don't even think the family gets an invite, it's expected you attend.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> If they’d turned up for Scotland in the summer you could think well, fair enough.  But to refuse both looks rather churlish.  [IMO obvs.]


Yes it would be churlish for sure. From what I have read, she followed the royal family closely growing up. Don’t tell me she dosen’t have a pretty good idea of BRF tradition and what would be expected of her. I know just from standing in the check out line.


----------



## bag-mania

Prince Albert offered Harry some sound advice about the media  "ignore it and move on."

*Prince Albert 'Sympathized' with Prince Harry: 'Do What You Have to Do to Ensure Your Privacy'*
"Sometimes you just have to ignore it and move on," the Monaco royal tells PEOPLE

Prince Albert understands Prince Harry‘s complaints about media coverage and has offered some personal advice, the Monaco royal tells PEOPLE in an exclusive new interview.

Acknowledging Harry’s legal action and candid comments in a recent documentary, Albert tells PEOPLE, “I completely understand his reasons.”

Attending the World Cup Rugby final in Japan on November 2, Albert met briefly with Harry in private, where he says he expressed “my support and my sympathy.”

“He has said he feels ‘bullied,’ and I can understand and sympathized with him over that,” says Monaco’s sovereign, 61. At the same time, he adds, “We didn’t talk about it that much, because we talked about environment-related issues — and the rugby too — but I sympathized with him, saying, ‘Just do what you have to do to ensure your privacy.’ “

Stressing “it wasn’t a long conversation, though,” he explains the counsel he offered expressed his own belief that “sometimes you just have to ignore it and move on. Sometimes you can ignore whoever is out there that’s being too inquisitive or too hard on you.”




The best thing, suggests the prince — who has previously applauded Harry and Meghan’s media relations — “is not to pay attention.”

The royal dad maintains, “you have to protect your personal life, your family and their intimacy as much as possible, whenever possible. Especially when you’re a public figure with appearances to attend. Of course, that’s harder to do than to say.

“And it’s especially difficult with the British press, which is so inquisitive, so harsh. Not only on the royal family but on other celebrities and other public figures as well.”

Discussing the couple with PEOPLE in July 2017, Albert expressed his admiration and concern.

“Bringing anyone into royal circles is a pretty tough act,” he said at the time. “Especially in the British royal family, which is scrutinized by the press as no one’s been. ” At the time, he said “the couple seem to be having a good deal of success so far,” he said, though cautioning “sooner or later, [they would] have to face the full onslaught.”

https://people.com/royals/prince-al...o-what-you-have-to-do-to-ensure-your-privacy/


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan is trying to woke the Queen, it could provoke a little irritation among her peerage and subjects (IMO). But isn't that what being woke is about? You're enlightening people and forcing them to adopt YOUR views, but only for their own good, of course.  YOU cannot adopt OTHERS' views, because other people are simply dead wrong, end of discussion, so they have to shut up and take it. What does Meghan owe a family who gave her a 50 Million Dollar Wedding and a lifetime of royal privilege, anyway? She's only existing. I hope she's OK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> I don’t know how Diana managed to make so many of her outfits timeless. Some other pictures of people from the nineties looked so dated. Her evening gowns were gorgeous.



Because, IMO, viewing them at the time... they weren't that special.  Yes, she looked great in them because of her height, broad shoulders and slim hips, she looked fabulous in clothes... but the clothes she picked for the most part (not always!) were more timeless, but not trendy, unique and fabulous.  Nothing you would see on a red carpet.

So, timeless outfits look good with time. IMO.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Prince Albert offered Harry some sound advice about the media  "ignore it and move on."
> 
> *Prince Albert 'Sympathized' with Prince Harry: 'Do What You Have to Do to Ensure Your Privacy'*
> "Sometimes you just have to ignore it and move on," the Monaco royal tells PEOPLE
> 
> Prince Albert understands Prince Harry‘s complaints about media coverage and has offered some personal advice, the Monaco royal tells PEOPLE in an exclusive new interview.
> 
> Acknowledging Harry’s legal action and candid comments in a recent documentary, Albert tells PEOPLE, “I completely understand his reasons.”
> 
> Attending the World Cup Rugby final in Japan on November 2, Albert met briefly with Harry in private, where he says he expressed “my support and my sympathy.”
> 
> “He has said he feels ‘bullied,’ and I can understand and sympathized with him over that,” says Monaco’s sovereign, 61. At the same time, he adds, “We didn’t talk about it that much, because we talked about environment-related issues — and the rugby too — but I sympathized with him, saying, ‘Just do what you have to do to ensure your privacy.’ “
> 
> Stressing “it wasn’t a long conversation, though,” he explains the counsel he offered expressed his own belief that “sometimes you just have to ignore it and move on. Sometimes you can ignore whoever is out there that’s being too inquisitive or too hard on you.”
> 
> View attachment 4589043
> 
> 
> The best thing, suggests the prince — who has previously applauded Harry and Meghan’s media relations — “is not to pay attention.”
> 
> The royal dad maintains, “you have to protect your personal life, your family and their intimacy as much as possible, whenever possible. Especially when you’re a public figure with appearances to attend. Of course, that’s harder to do than to say.
> 
> “And it’s especially difficult with the British press, which is so inquisitive, so harsh. Not only on the royal family but on other celebrities and other public figures as well.”
> 
> Discussing the couple with PEOPLE in July 2017, Albert expressed his admiration and concern.
> 
> “Bringing anyone into royal circles is a pretty tough act,” he said at the time. “Especially in the British royal family, which is scrutinized by the press as no one’s been. ” At the time, he said “the couple seem to be having a good deal of success so far,” he said, though cautioning “sooner or later, [they would] have to face the full onslaught.”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-al...o-what-you-have-to-do-to-ensure-your-privacy/


Oh Albert, you have your own skeletons, I can see why you love and are able to ignore the little people's opinions.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> Harry knew but I don't believe Meghan fully understood or appreciated what duty truly meant. In fairness I'm sure no woman would until she was fully immersed in it.



If she didn't, it's because she's either naive or not very smart, and I can't say I'd offer a lot of sympathy for it.  I've never dated a member of the royal family ... heck I've never dated anyone whose been anywhere near the orbit of the royal family, and I understand that when a person marries into that family you join that family and there is no pulling together of two family traditions. Kate understood it when she married in to it. In all honesty, I think that Meghan understands it too.  As I said before, I won't slam her for trying to get out of Christmas with the Queen until we know for a fact that she's not celebrating Christmas with the Queen.


----------



## Tivo

LibbyRuth said:


> If she didn't, it's because she's either naive or not very smart, and I can't say I'd offer a lot of sympathy for it.  I've never dated a member of the royal family ... heck I've never dated anyone whose been anywhere near the orbit of the royal family, and I understand that when a person marries into that family you join that family and there is no pulling together of two family traditions. Kate understood it when she married in to it. In all honesty, I think that Meghan understands it too.  As I said before, I won't slam her for trying to get out of Christmas with the Queen until we know for a fact that she's not celebrating Christmas with the Queen.


Meghan was looking for fame. I honestly don’t believe she thought about joining BRF as anything  more than a way to increase her profile. She seems like an incredibly silly woman to me at this point.


----------



## bag-mania

So now Hillary ******* feels the need to defend Meghan. 

I won't post the text since she is a former political figure but here's the link for those interested. Her opinion basically declares all criticism of Meghan as being racist. Suffice it to say Hillary is 100% pro-Meghan.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...nt-meghan-duchess-sussex-heartbreaking-wrong/


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> So now Hillary ******* feels the need to defend Meghan.
> 
> I won't post the text since she is a former political figure but here's the link for those interested. Her opinion basically declares all criticism of Meghan as being racist. Suffice it to say Hillary is 100% pro-Meghan.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...nt-meghan-duchess-sussex-heartbreaking-wrong/


She’s flogging a book.  She has opinions on a lot of things to do with this country apparently.  No connection between the two of course  #callmeacynic


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> So now Hillary ******* feels the need to defend Meghan.
> 
> I won't post the text since she is a former political figure but here's the link for those interested. Her opinion basically declares all criticism of Meghan as being racist. Suffice it to say Hillary is 100% pro-Meghan.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...nt-meghan-duchess-sussex-heartbreaking-wrong/



Oh please! Why am I not surprised? For some people criticism is NEVER EVER one's fault, the world is out to get them, they've done no wrong. How dare anyone think otherwise? You're never allowed to disagree. If you don't agree you're obviously a bla bla bla. You must believe them. Because they said so. Some people are true vomit inducers. You know, both of them have large foundations. Maybe they can merge them and become The Mega Woke Foundation for Self Pitying Gazzillionaires Who Got Most of Their Money From Other People and Spend Their Lives Feeling Sorry For Themselves . But I meant that in a nice way.


----------



## mdcx

Imo once they get on that plane to the US, it’s the beginning of the end.
A home will be secured in LA for Meghan, the financials will be hammered out, Harry will be advised his services are no longer required etc.


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> Imo once they get on that plane to the US, it’s the beginning of the end.
> A home will be secured in LA for Meghan, the financials will be hammered out, Harry will be advised his services are no longer required etc.


Fingers crossed!

Then “H” can go back to being Harry again and restart the process of finding a wife befitting to the position, this time heeding the advice of those with his best interest at heart.

But this would be OK only if MM relinquishes majority custody of Archie so that he could be brought up under royal tutelage.


----------



## Tivo

I don’t think Harry can live comfortably away from his family. This all must be ripping him up.
Meghan has no problem cutting people off - including her family, regardless of whether it was deserved. I don’t think this will get any easier for them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

"The family she never had..."

HARRY'S NO-HO-HO 
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry choose not to join the Queen for Christmas at Sandringham leaving Her Majesty ‘hurt’*

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle will not join the Queen for Christmas.

They have chosen to spend baby Archie’s first festive season away from Sandringham.






The Sussexes could stay at home in Windsor or travel abroad to be with Meghan’s mum Doria Ragland.

A source said that the couple — parents to six-month-old Archie — “needed to recharge their batteries”.


But their decision will do little to heal the rifts that have opened up with the rest of the Royal Family.

The couple are taking a six-week break after Sunday when Harry, 35, attends a Royal Albert Hall event.

It was thought they would spend Thanksgiving in the US with Doria, 63, and return for Christmas at Sandringham.

But they informed Her Majesty, 93, they will not be joining her and Prince Philip, 98.


A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”

Harry has always spent Christmas at the Queen’s Norfolk home, except for 2012 when he was in Afghanistan — and for the past two years he has been joined by Meghan, 38.

*'QUITE STRESSFUL'*
Royal biographer Ingrid Seward said: “Christmas at Sandringham can be quite stressful so perhaps they don’t want to go with Archie at such a young age.

“Having said that, Sandringham has played host to many many children through the ages and is well set up for them.

“I think it’s sad they don’t want to be part of the family gathering, particularly now the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are in their dotage.

“The Queen might be a little hurt but she’s far too gracious to ever let it show or be known.”

Meghan and Harry also skipped the royals’ annual holiday in Balmoral this year.

Ms Seward added: “It does seem to be nothing to do with Archie and to do with their own personal feelings.”

Ex-US actress Meghan revealed in an ITV interview this year how the “British stiff upper lip” was “damaging” — causing concern among royals.

One insider said: “That’s the very essence of this family.”

Harry also admitted he and William were on “different paths”.


----------



## jcnc

mrsinsyder said:


> "The family she never had..."
> 
> HARRY'S NO-HO-HO
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry choose not to join the Queen for Christmas at Sandringham leaving Her Majesty ‘hurt’*
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle will not join the Queen for Christmas.
> 
> They have chosen to spend baby Archie’s first festive season away from Sandringham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes could stay at home in Windsor or travel abroad to be with Meghan’s mum Doria Ragland.
> 
> A source said that the couple — parents to six-month-old Archie — “needed to recharge their batteries”.
> 
> 
> But their decision will do little to heal the rifts that have opened up with the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple are taking a six-week break after Sunday when Harry, 35, attends a Royal Albert Hall event.
> 
> It was thought they would spend Thanksgiving in the US with Doria, 63, and return for Christmas at Sandringham.
> 
> But they informed Her Majesty, 93, they will not be joining her and Prince Philip, 98.
> 
> 
> A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”
> 
> Harry has always spent Christmas at the Queen’s Norfolk home, except for 2012 when he was in Afghanistan — and for the past two years he has been joined by Meghan, 38.
> 
> *'QUITE STRESSFUL'*
> Royal biographer Ingrid Seward said: “Christmas at Sandringham can be quite stressful so perhaps they don’t want to go with Archie at such a young age.
> 
> “Having said that, Sandringham has played host to many many children through the ages and is well set up for them.
> 
> “I think it’s sad they don’t want to be part of the family gathering, particularly now the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are in their dotage.
> 
> “The Queen might be a little hurt but she’s far too gracious to ever let it show or be known.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry also skipped the royals’ annual holiday in Balmoral this year.
> 
> Ms Seward added: “It does seem to be nothing to do with Archie and to do with their own personal feelings.”
> 
> Ex-US actress Meghan revealed in an ITV interview this year how the “British stiff upper lip” was “damaging” — causing concern among royals.
> 
> One insider said: “That’s the very essence of this family.”
> 
> Harry also admitted he and William were on “different paths”.


Oh that’s just too sad.. but expected, i guess. I always thought Harry was close to his family but....


----------



## mrsinsyder

LadyGran said:


> Only my speculation — this sounds a lot like rehab for Harry.


I also wouldn't be surprised if they've been excluded and are trying to get in front of the story.

I never believed that Doria was invited last year. I think MMs people released that to force the Queen's hand and it failed.


----------



## V0N1B2

mrsinsyder said:


> "The family she never had..."
> 
> HARRY'S NO-HO-HO
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry choose not to join the Queen for Christmas at Sandringham leaving Her Majesty ‘hurt’*
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle will not join the Queen for Christmas.
> 
> They have chosen to spend baby Archie’s first festive season away from Sandringham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes could stay at home in Windsor or travel abroad to be with Meghan’s mum Doria Ragland.
> 
> A source said that the couple — parents to six-month-old Archie — “needed to recharge their batteries”.
> 
> 
> But their decision will do little to heal the rifts that have opened up with the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple are taking a six-week break after Sunday when Harry, 35, attends a Royal Albert Hall event.
> 
> It was thought they would spend Thanksgiving in the US with Doria, 63, and return for Christmas at Sandringham.
> 
> But they informed Her Majesty, 93, they will not be joining her and Prince Philip, 98.
> 
> 
> A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”
> 
> Harry has always spent Christmas at the Queen’s Norfolk home, except for 2012 when he was in Afghanistan — and for the past two years he has been joined by Meghan, 38.
> 
> *'QUITE STRESSFUL'*
> Royal biographer Ingrid Seward said: “Christmas at Sandringham can be quite stressful so perhaps they don’t want to go with Archie at such a young age.
> 
> “Having said that, Sandringham has played host to many many children through the ages and is well set up for them.
> 
> “I think it’s sad they don’t want to be part of the family gathering, particularly now the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are in their dotage.
> 
> “The Queen might be a little hurt but she’s far too gracious to ever let it show or be known.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry also skipped the royals’ annual holiday in Balmoral this year.
> 
> Ms Seward added: “It does seem to be nothing to do with Archie and to do with their own personal feelings.”
> 
> Ex-US actress Meghan revealed in an ITV interview this year how the “British stiff upper lip” was “damaging” — causing concern among royals.
> 
> One insider said: “That’s the very essence of this family.”
> 
> Harry also admitted he and William were on “different paths”.


If this is true, it’s really unfortunate. At our Remembrance Day service yesterday, we sang God Save The Queen to mark the end of the ceremony. I thought to myself ‘is this the last year we’ll be singing this version?’    I certainly hope not, but she isn’t getting any younger. Neither is Prince Phillip. To deny Archie’s grandparents their first Christmas with him is incredibly selfish. I’m pretty sure Megan’s only relative could fly over for the holidays. Frogmore has a spare room, no?
I hope Harry doesn’t regret this.

*oh and uh.... IMO


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> If this is true, it’s really unfortunate. At our Remembrance Day service yesterday, we sang God Save The Queen to mark the end of the ceremony. I thought to myself ‘is this the last year we’ll be singing this version?’    I certainly hope not, but she isn’t getting any younger. Neither is Prince Phillip. To deny Archie’s grandparents their first Christmas with him is incredibly selfish. I’m pretty sure Megan’s only relative could fly over for the holidays. Frogmore has a spare room, no?
> I hope Harry doesn’t regret this.
> 
> *oh and uh.... IMO



This is really sad.  I wonder if they are putting this out now to force QEII to invite Doria and then they will all show up.  I don't think the Queen likes to be pushed around and she didn't fall for that last year.  If they stay in the US then it speaks volumes at how low things have gotten.  The grandparents are not going to be around forever and at their  age, anything can happen.  I wish they would leave Archie out of this mess.  He is a baby and won't know where the heck he is and  wherever he is, the nanny will be with him.  

@Tivo  I agree that he won't be comfortable away from the family only because the family is giving him "work" things to do and appearances to make.  If he walks away all of that will cease.  Sure, he could set himself up with a speaker's bureau and make good money talking about climate change (if anyone will take him seriously now) or whatever other subject the bookers think will be a draw, but I'm not sure he is smart enough to do this.  I don't think he has the required background for the former, and the latter would likely be speaking on royal tittle tattle/gossip.  I doubt he will write a book and go on tour with it. I don't think he will last here long term,  Once the glow is gone, he will be gone.

Re the rumors that he is going to rehab in the US..maybe, but I really don't think so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

LadyGran said:


> From Richard Palmer’s Twitter —
> Confusion yesterday over remarks by Serena Williams which were misinterpreted and run by web and some print journalists, apparently without further checks. Palace sources state categorically that Meghan did not take Archie with her to New York when she went to see Serena play.
> 
> =====
> Who wants some popcorn and wine?


Meghan better buckle up.


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> *I also wouldn't be surprised if they've been excluded and are trying to get in front of the story.*
> 
> 
> That's what I was thinking too. Sounds like they've made themselves into personae non gratae. Wow, and it isn't like their destination excuse is nearby, they have to go to another continent just to try to make it look good. This also prevents a public royal confrontation at Christmas.
> 
> Well, in defense of H&M, here's a cut paste from an online article:
> 
> "Each year, the royal family gathers on Christmas Eve at Sandringham Estate, Queen Elizabeth’s country home...Family members sneak down to place their gifts on tables in the red drawing room. Then the festivities kick off at 6 p.m. sharp. The only rule? The gifts must be funny. “Resident jokester Prince Philip ‘supervises the proceedings’ and tells the rest of the fam when it’s time to open their ‘cheap and cheerful’ gifts,” (_omitted )_........Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle seem to have avoided that pitfall and were well-aware of the royal family’s penchant for gag gifts. Before Markle started dating Prince Harry, Kate gifted him a “grow-your-own-girlfriend” kit, the _Daily Mail_ reports. Meghan also rose to the occasion during her first royal Christmas last year. She gave the Queen a singing hamster on a string—much to the delight of Her Majesty’s beloved corgis."
> 
> So.......OK, how can Meghan, or anyone, top a singing hamster? Maybe it's just as well M&H are headed out of town.
> 
> On another note, remember the gossip about of Meghan appearing to pretend to hide a bump and holding her hands over her belly, including at a veterans memorial ceremony of all places? Was that all a show to get tongues wagging to make people think everything was going just great and to quash rumors of an angry Crown? There's very little I'd put past them.
> 
> My popcorn and wine are ready.


----------



## rose60610

errrr, technical difficulty. Scratch post #14671.

  I also think M&H were trying to get ahead of the story.


----------



## bag-mania

LadyGran said:


> From Richard Palmer’s Twitter —
> Confusion yesterday over remarks by Serena Williams which were misinterpreted and run by web and some print journalists, apparently without further checks. Palace sources state categorically that Meghan did not take Archie with her to New York when she went to see Serena play.
> 
> =====
> Who wants some popcorn and wine?



Serena’s words could have been misunderstood. Her quote was “She flew all the way with a newborn to see me play in New York and flew all the way back that night...”  Maybe “with a newborn” could be interpreted to mean that Meghan had a newborn but decided to come support Serena anyway, not that she brought the baby with her.


----------



## muchstuff

Chagall said:


> Not only how stylish she was for her time, which of course we know she was, but how her style transcended time. Not to difficult a concept to grasp.


If that last comment was meant as a personal dig it was uncalled for.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> I also wouldn't be surprised if they've been excluded and are trying to get in front of the story.
> 
> I never believed that Doria was invited last year. I think MMs people released that to force the Queen's hand and it failed.


I thought that Doria’s invite last year was proved to be false!?!?!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

V0N1B2 said:


> If this is true, it’s really unfortunate. At our Remembrance Day service yesterday, we sang God Save The Queen to mark the end of the ceremony. I thought to myself ‘is this the last year we’ll be singing this version?’    I certainly hope not, but she isn’t getting any younger. Neither is Prince Phillip. To deny Archie’s grandparents their first Christmas with him is incredibly selfish. I’m pretty sure Megan’s only relative could fly over for the holidays. Frogmore has a spare room, no?
> I hope Harry doesn’t regret this.
> 
> *oh and uh.... IMO


Meghan doesn't have just one relative. She has one relative she's willing to acknowledge. There is also another grandparent that has never even met the child. That's selfish.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> "The family she never had..."
> 
> HARRY'S NO-HO-HO
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry choose not to join the Queen for Christmas at Sandringham leaving Her Majesty ‘hurt’*
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle will not join the Queen for Christmas.
> 
> They have chosen to spend baby Archie’s first festive season away from Sandringham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes could stay at home in Windsor or travel abroad to be with Meghan’s mum Doria Ragland.
> 
> A source said that the couple — parents to six-month-old Archie — “needed to recharge their batteries”.
> 
> 
> But their decision will do little to heal the rifts that have opened up with the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple are taking a six-week break after Sunday when Harry, 35, attends a Royal Albert Hall event.
> 
> It was thought they would spend Thanksgiving in the US with Doria, 63, and return for Christmas at Sandringham.
> 
> But they informed Her Majesty, 93, they will not be joining her and Prince Philip, 98.
> 
> 
> A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”
> 
> Harry has always spent Christmas at the Queen’s Norfolk home, except for 2012 when he was in Afghanistan — and for the past two years he has been joined by Meghan, 38.
> 
> *'QUITE STRESSFUL'*
> Royal biographer Ingrid Seward said: “Christmas at Sandringham can be quite stressful so perhaps they don’t want to go with Archie at such a young age.
> 
> “Having said that, Sandringham has played host to many many children through the ages and is well set up for them.
> 
> “I think it’s sad they don’t want to be part of the family gathering, particularly now the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are in their dotage.
> 
> “The Queen might be a little hurt but she’s far too gracious to ever let it show or be known.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry also skipped the royals’ annual holiday in Balmoral this year.
> 
> Ms Seward added: “It does seem to be nothing to do with Archie and to do with their own personal feelings.”
> 
> Ex-US actress Meghan revealed in an ITV interview this year how the “British stiff upper lip” was “damaging” — causing concern among royals.
> 
> One insider said: “That’s the very essence of this family.”
> 
> Harry also admitted he and William were on “different paths”.


This is really sad.  Meghan now has Harry isolated from his family.  It’s straight out of the narcissists handbook. 



V0N1B2 said:


> If this is true, it’s really unfortunate. At our Remembrance Day service yesterday, we sang God Save The Queen to mark the end of the ceremony. I thought to myself ‘is this the last year we’ll be singing this version?’    I certainly hope not, but she isn’t getting any younger. Neither is Prince Phillip. To deny Archie’s grandparents their first Christmas with him is incredibly selfish. I’m pretty sure Megan’s only relative could fly over for the holidays. Frogmore has a spare room, no?
> I hope Harry doesn’t regret this.
> 
> *oh and uh.... IMO


I’ve thought the same about the Queen, plus Phillips health hasn’t been good this year.  I always enjoy seeing the young cousins together, they seem so well bonded and it will be a shame if Archie doesn’t grow up as part of all that.  
Harry already carries regret at the way he parted with his mother - history may repeat itself in his relationship with his grandparents I think.



CeeJay said:


> I thought that Doria’s invite last year was proved to be false!?!?!


It was a ploy, aimed at forcing the Queens hand, to show how extra special her new DIL was.  It didn’t come off.


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> "The family she never had..."
> 
> HARRY'S NO-HO-HO
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry choose not to join the Queen for Christmas at Sandringham leaving Her Majesty ‘hurt’*
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle will not join the Queen for Christmas.
> 
> They have chosen to spend baby Archie’s first festive season away from Sandringham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes could stay at home in Windsor or travel abroad to be with Meghan’s mum Doria Ragland.
> 
> A source said that the couple — parents to six-month-old Archie — “needed to recharge their batteries”.
> 
> 
> But their decision will do little to heal the rifts that have opened up with the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple are taking a six-week break after Sunday when Harry, 35, attends a Royal Albert Hall event.
> 
> It was thought they would spend Thanksgiving in the US with Doria, 63, and return for Christmas at Sandringham.
> 
> But they informed Her Majesty, 93, they will not be joining her and Prince Philip, 98.
> 
> 
> A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”
> 
> Harry has always spent Christmas at the Queen’s Norfolk home, except for 2012 when he was in Afghanistan — and for the past two years he has been joined by Meghan, 38.
> 
> *'QUITE STRESSFUL'*
> Royal biographer Ingrid Seward said: “Christmas at Sandringham can be quite stressful so perhaps they don’t want to go with Archie at such a young age.
> 
> “Having said that, Sandringham has played host to many many children through the ages and is well set up for them.
> 
> “I think it’s sad they don’t want to be part of the family gathering, particularly now the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are in their dotage.
> 
> “The Queen might be a little hurt but she’s far too gracious to ever let it show or be known.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry also skipped the royals’ annual holiday in Balmoral this year.
> 
> Ms Seward added: “It does seem to be nothing to do with Archie and to do with their own personal feelings.”
> 
> Ex-US actress Meghan revealed in an ITV interview this year how the “British stiff upper lip” was “damaging” — causing concern among royals.
> 
> One insider said: “That’s the very essence of this family.”
> 
> Harry also admitted he and William were on “different paths”.


Would the palace confirm something like that? A private getaway and a familyduty?


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> I thought that Doria’s invite last year was proved to be false!?!?!


Oh it was? 
Kinda feel stupid now that I believed those stories 

just proves we shouldn’t believe everything that’s written


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> Serena’s words could have been misunderstood. Her quote was “She flew all the way with a newborn to see me play in New York and flew all the way back that night...”  Maybe “with a newborn” could be interpreted to mean that Meghan had a newborn but decided to come support Serena anyway, not that she brought the baby with her.


That makes sense, as if she had taken the baby with her she would have not felt the need to come on back the same night...


----------



## Chagall

doni said:


> That makes sense, as if she had taken the baby with her she would have not felt the need to come on back the same night...


She wouldn’t have taken the baby with her I don’t think. She has the luxury of a nanny  to leave him with at home.


----------



## Chagall

Tivo said:


> I don’t think Harry can live comfortably away from his family. This all must be ripping him up.
> Meghan has no problem cutting people off - including her family, regardless of whether it was deserved. I don’t think this will get any easier for them.


The number one thing a narcissist does is to isolate their victim. When they are isolated from family and friends they are under the complete control of the ‘narc’ with nowhere to turn for support. This usually occurs gradually but in the case of Harry it has happened very quickly. I feel sorry for him in this regard.


----------



## Welltraveled!

myown said:


> Oh it was?
> Kinda feel stupid now that I believed those stories
> 
> just proves we shouldn’t believe everything that’s written



Agreed.   these anonymous sources could be the Gardner for all we know.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> She wouldn’t have taken the baby with her I don’t think. She has the luxury of a nanny  to leave him with at home.


And his father


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> And his father


I haven’t been able to get it clear in my mind how hands on Harry really is.


----------



## Chagall

I also think they have constant help with child care for Archie.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> I thought that Doria’s invite last year was proved to be false!?!?!


Probably! I can’t keep their lies straight.


----------



## daisychainz

Meghan dumps her friends. She dumps her family. She dumped the boyfriend for Harry. She can't get along with her dad. She can't get along with staff. She can't get along with her sister. She can't get along with the media. Before Meghan, Harry *seemed* to get along with everyone. I wouldn't want her at my annual Christmas party either. I feel like I'm watching 90 day fiance episodes with these two and the drama.


----------



## LittleStar88

It didn't occur to me that Harry's grandparents are getting way up there in age and time with them is limited. You would think they both see this and prioritize making the most of time that is left, create memories. Doria can fly out and if not invited to some things, then oh well - plenty of other things to do (and what would she be doing solo in the US anyhow).

I truly hope they are just having a major meltdown and can't handle life and need to run away, and not because of what Meghan wants...


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Meghan dumps her friends. She dumps her family. She dumped the boyfriend for Harry. She can't get along with her dad. She can't get along with staff. She can't get along with her sister. She can't get along with the media. Before Meghan, Harry *seemed* to get along with everyone. I wouldn't want her at my annual Christmas party either. I feel like I'm watching 90 day fiance episodes with these two and the drama.



Let's not forget the brutal way she dumped her first husband. She had been with him for a total of nine years, seven while dating and two married. Reportedly she ended their marriage out of the blue, by mailing her engagement and wedding rings back to him. She was working on Suits in Toronto and he lived in LA at that time. She had moved on and she was done with him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Let's not forget the brutal way she dumped her first husband. She had been with him for a total of nine years, seven while dating and two married. Reportedly she ended their marriage out of the blue, by mailing her engagement and wedding rings back to him. She was working on Suits in Toronto and he lived in LA at that time. She had moved on and she was done with him.


Well, never mind the people - what about the dogs?   Who dumps their dogs?!


----------



## myown

bag-mania said:


> Let's not forget the brutal way she dumped her first husband. She had been with him for a total of nine years, seven while dating and two married. Reportedly she ended their marriage out of the blue, by mailing her engagement and wedding rings back to him. She was working on Suits in Toronto and he lived in LA at that time. She had moved on and she was done with him.


But this sounds like a story where is more behind than we know.


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> "The family she never had..."
> 
> HARRY'S NO-HO-HO
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry choose not to join the Queen for Christmas at Sandringham leaving Her Majesty ‘hurt’*
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle will not join the Queen for Christmas.
> 
> They have chosen to spend baby Archie’s first festive season away from Sandringham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes could stay at home in Windsor or travel abroad to be with Meghan’s mum Doria Ragland.
> 
> A source said that the couple — parents to six-month-old Archie — “needed to recharge their batteries”.
> 
> 
> But their decision will do little to heal the rifts that have opened up with the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple are taking a six-week break after Sunday when Harry, 35, attends a Royal Albert Hall event.
> 
> It was thought they would spend Thanksgiving in the US with Doria, 63, and return for Christmas at Sandringham.
> 
> But they informed Her Majesty, 93, they will not be joining her and Prince Philip, 98.
> 
> 
> A royal source said: “They need some time away to recharge and decide their plans for next year.”
> 
> Harry has always spent Christmas at the Queen’s Norfolk home, except for 2012 when he was in Afghanistan — and for the past two years he has been joined by Meghan, 38.
> 
> *'QUITE STRESSFUL'*
> Royal biographer Ingrid Seward said: “Christmas at Sandringham can be quite stressful so perhaps they don’t want to go with Archie at such a young age.
> 
> “Having said that, Sandringham has played host to many many children through the ages and is well set up for them.
> 
> “I think it’s sad they don’t want to be part of the family gathering, particularly now the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh are in their dotage.
> 
> “The Queen might be a little hurt but she’s far too gracious to ever let it show or be known.”
> 
> Meghan and Harry also skipped the royals’ annual holiday in Balmoral this year.
> 
> Ms Seward added: “It does seem to be nothing to do with Archie and to do with their own personal feelings.”
> 
> Ex-US actress Meghan revealed in an ITV interview this year how the “British stiff upper lip” was “damaging” — causing concern among royals.
> 
> One insider said: “That’s the very essence of this family.”
> 
> Harry also admitted he and William were on “different paths”.



This is very sad.....


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Well, never mind the people - what about the dogs?   Who dumps their dogs?!



You're a woman after my own heart. People who dump their pets are the lowest of the low! 

She adopted that first dog to schmooze up to Ellen. Then the dogs she got with Harry were the token "we're playing family" pets. They were quickly pushed aside in favor of the real prize, having a baby with Harry and locking herself to him forever.


----------



## duna

Looking back to when H&M got engaged a family friend, who is close to royal circles, told me she was a horrible person, at the time I didn't think much about it, she seemed nice and they looked happy together.....Now I understand!


----------



## doni

There you go, being at war in Afganistan and being married to Meghan are apparently situations that have things in common.
(mean, I know, don't mean it badly but really, cannot phantom how on earth they come to these decisions if it is true they want the media to leave them alone...)


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> Well, never mind the people - what about the dogs?   Who dumps their dogs?!


Omg! Yes!! That is the worst  Forgot she did that.


----------



## Luvluxx098

She is perfectly entitled to see her friends play tennis and leave the kid with his father. If others would make a different choice, then that’s their choice. But I do feel she is missing a great opportunity to stay home and make a great thanksgiving dinner for her new family, at home, and make connections that way. And use her cooking skills. Truly that is what someone invested in their future and it’s happiness would choose. It’s not as glamorous as other options, but real family work rarely is. That’s all.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> You're a woman after my own heart. People who dump their pets are the lowest of the low!
> 
> She adopted that first dog to schmooze up to Ellen. Then the dogs she got with Harry were the token "we're playing family" pets. They were quickly pushed aside in favor of the real prize, having a baby with Harry and locking herself to him forever.


I could never do it, and hearing about it made me feel very differently about Meghan.  I once had a cat that was driving me crazy, and I mentioned it to a friend who had cats of her own.  She said “well dump him somewhere”   I was staggered by that and dumped her instead!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> It didn't occur to me that Harry's grandparents are getting way up there in age and time with them is limited. You would think they both see this and prioritize making the most of time that is left, create memories. Doria can fly out and if not invited to some things, then oh well - plenty of other things to do (and what would she be doing solo in the US anyhow).
> 
> I truly hope they are just having a major meltdown and can't handle life and need to run away, and not because of what Meghan wants...



THIS!!!!! .. Doria can fly over for the holidays, and heck .. I'm sure Frogmore Cottage has plenty of room for her!!!  I really had high hopes for H&M and now, WOW .. I actually feel sorry for Harry!  I wonder if Will saw the narcissism in Meghan and that was why he tried to pull Harry aside and tell him that he should wait longer to marry her.  What a mess!


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> Well, never mind the people - what about the dogs?   Who dumps their dogs?!


That is so true. Hell would freeze over before I abandoned my precious shepherd. That to me is extremely callous and cruel.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I honestly thought the Christmas rumor would turn out to be unfounded, it seemed so unbelievable. That’s really crazy.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> THIS!!!!! .. Doria can fly over for the holidays, and heck .. I'm sure Frogmore Cottage has plenty of room for her!!!  I really had high hopes for H&M and now, WOW .. I actually feel sorry for Harry!  I wonder if Will saw the narcissism in Meghan and that was why he tried to pull Harry aside and tell him that he should wait longer to marry her.  What a mess!


It really is a mess. It’s like a soap opera, and it is happening so quickly. I agree, perhaps William could see through her and wanted to warn his brother.


----------



## LittleStar88

Luvluxx098 said:


> She is perfectly entitled to see her friends play tennis and leave the kid with his father. If others would make a different choice, then that’s their choice. But I do feel she is missing a great opportunity to stay home and make a great thanksgiving dinner for her new family, at home, and make connections that way. And use her cooking skills. Truly that is what someone invested in their future and it’s happiness would choose. It’s not as glamorous as other options, but real family work rarely is. That’s all.



Maybe she is more interested in her own happiness and desires than what is ultimately best overall for her family and doing the right thing by them? I get that the holidays can be a challenge, especially with family here and there, but you figure it out and make it work.

It's not all about her anymore. Maybe she has not yet received that memo?


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I could never do it, and hearing about it made me feel very differently about Meghan.  I once had a cat that was driving me crazy, and I mentioned it to a friend who had cats of her own.  She said “well dump him somewhere”   I was staggered by that and dumped her instead!


OT but reminds me - I had a neighbor who was basically a cat hoarder.  One of her cats (a sweet black male) got attached to me.  One day I came home from a trip and she told me she had all his teeth pulled.  Turned out he had an immune disease.  She paid for one more vet visit and then said "there's only so much you can do for a cat like that"
I took over his care and he lived a few more years on Prednisone.  But I never forgot she said "a cat like that"


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Let's not forget the brutal way she dumped her first husband. She had been with him for a total of nine years, seven while dating and two married. Reportedly she ended their marriage out of the blue, by mailing her engagement and wedding rings back to him. She was working on Suits in Toronto and he lived in LA at that time. She had moved on and she was done with him.


do we know if this is true?


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe she thinks the royal family haven’t been supportive enough of her and she’s convinced Harry of that as well. Or, maybe it’s the old “we spent the last two Christmases with your family so this year we’re doing what I want.” And we all know what Meghan wants, she gets.


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> Well, never mind the people - what about the dogs?   Who dumps their dogs?!


She only dumped one dog of the two she had in Toronto.  Her PR said the dog was too old to travel but in fact, it wasn't an old dog at all.  (This from the rescue people who got her the dog.)  Probably went to a friend?  Probably a better home...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> do we know if this is true?



That’s all I could find. Trevor has been maintaining his privacy and wisely not talking. Officially, the strain of having a long distance relationship was too much for the marriage to survive, but there’s likely more to it.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> Doria can fly out and if not invited to some things, then oh well - plenty of other things to do (and what would she be doing solo in the US anyhow).


Oh exactly.  I assume Harry might pay for the flight? Then she gets there and spends whatever time Meg allows with the baby and for the rest of the vacation, she travels around sightseeing, visiting London, dining out, seeing a play or two.

Come to think of it, I hope she brings a friend and they go sightseeing together.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> She only dumped one dog of the two she had in Toronto.  Her PR said the dog was too old to travel but in fact, it wasn't an old dog at all.  (This from the rescue people who got her the dog.)  Probably went to a friend?  Probably a better home...


as I recall the dog did go to a friend


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she is more interested in her own happiness and desires than what is ultimately best overall for her family and doing the right thing by them? I get that the holidays can be a challenge, especially with family here and there, but you figure it out and make it work.
> 
> It's not all about her anymore. Maybe she has not yet received that memo?


I wonder if she and Harry are having trouble playing second fiddle to Will and Kate.  If so that's ridiculous.  Meghan is a household name.  She has all kinds of new and important friends.  This should be her dream come true.


----------



## kemilia

Chagall said:


> That is so true. Hell would freeze over before I abandoned my precious shepherd. That to me is extremely callous and cruel.


I was as ok with her as I could be with someone I don't personally know and probably never will. Until the stories came out about her dogs.

Both were rescues, one "had" to be left behind with "friends" because he was too old to travel (I'm pretty sure her relationship with Prince Harry would have gotten her dogs cushier travel treatment than most dogs) and then the one she did bring with wound up with a broken leg in his new home country. And both dogs no longer are with each other, who were buddies.

You do not dump your dogs, but as others have pointed out, she seems to leave the old behind for the new.


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she and Harry are having trouble playing second fiddle to Will and Kate.  If so that's ridiculous.  Meghan is a household name.  She has all kinds of new and important friends.  This should be her dream come true.


If she were wise she would be playing the long game with Kate and Will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

Clearblueskies said:


> Well, never mind the people - what about the dogs?   Who dumps their dogs?!


Wait...when did she dumped the dogs? Do we have proof? Where do they live now? Oh dear...deciding to leave my dogs would be the most heartbreaking event in my life, I can’t even think about it without crying


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> That’s all I could find. Trevor has been maintaining his privacy and wisely not talking. Officially, the strain of having a long distance relationship was too much for the marriage to survive, but there’s likely more to it.


Yes, he has been very wise in keeping mum about Meghan and the divorce; however, it was a FORMER friend of Meghan's who spilled the beans re: how Meghan 'informed' Trevor of the dissolution of their marriage!


----------



## Chagall

kemilia said:


> I was as ok with her as I could be with someone I don't personally know and probably never will. Until the stories came out about her dogs.
> 
> Both were rescues, one "had" to be left behind with "friends" because he was too old to travel (I'm pretty sure her relationship with Prince Harry would have gotten her dogs cushier travel treatment than most dogs) and then the one she did bring with wound up with a broken leg in his new home country. And both dogs no longer are with each other, who were buddies.
> 
> You do not dump your dogs, but as others have pointed out, she seems to leave the old behind for the new.


I hate what she did to her dogs. The old dog could have been sedated for the trip. This would have been far less stressful for him than being abandoned by his owner, and have no idea why. It was heartbreaking what she did and shows how callous she can be. Dogs are so attached to their owners, and so loyal.


----------



## myown

bag-mania said:


> Maybe she thinks the royal family haven’t been supportive enough of her and she’s convinced Harry of that as well. Or, maybe it’s the old “we spent the last two Christmases with your family so this year we’re doing what I want.” And we all know what Meghan wants, she gets.


Or maybe Harry is happy to have a strong woman on his side and now he can spend more time aboard and have an „excuse“. as much as we know he was Never close to his father


----------



## LibbyRuth

If the Sun story is true and Harry and Meghan skipping the Queens Christmas is actually their plan, it bothers me for more reasons that what has been mentioned here so far.  I don't think it should be forgotten that the Christmas when Harry and Meghan were engaged before they were married, the family bucked tradition and invited Meghan to come for Christmas.  From what I remember that was a huge deal - even Kate didn't get that treatment in all the years that she was with William before they got married.  If the family was that accommodating to her, for her to a few years later return the favor by staying away for whatever reason is just rude.


----------



## cafecreme15

Elizabeth Holmes just reminded us that Kate and Will spent Christmas with her family in 2012 and 2016.

Edited to add that while H+M’s not going to Sandringham is not unprecedented, all the smoke around the status of their relationship with the rest of the royal family makes the timing seem pretty suspicious.


----------



## Morgan R

Buckingham Palace have confirmed that Harry and Meghan will spend Christmas with Doria


----------



## sdkitty

I'm gonna take a huge leap and say Meghan, who has achieved more than the could have dreamed of in terms of fame and wealth, is very sad because the media are racists.  So she needs her Mommy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

maryg1 said:


> Wait...when did she dumped the dogs? Do we have proof? Where do they live now? Oh dear...deciding to leave my dogs would be the most heartbreaking event in my life, I can’t even think about it without crying


It was when she came over to the UK.  As I understand it, she left one behind and brought the other here.  But that dog met with an accident, (all was rather vague), and his whereabouts now?  Don’t know - no pictures and no further mention of him.  Splitting them up was as bad as getting rid of them IMO.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she and Harry are having trouble playing second fiddle to Will and Kate.  If so that's ridiculous.  Meghan is a household name.  She has all kinds of new and important friends.  This should be her dream come true.



She should put more energy into making a happy family and home life and not worry about what Will and Kate are doing (or anyone else for that matter).


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> I hate what she did to her dogs. The old dog could have been sedated for the trip. This would have been far less stressful for him than being abandoned by his owner, and have no idea why. It was heartbreaking what she did and shows how callous she can be. Dogs are so attached to their owners, and so loyal.



The "old" dog was only 6, not old at all. He could certainly have been brought to England if Meghan had wanted him. I think she loves to get the credit and praise in the media for adopting rescues but she doesn't want the work and responsibility of actually caring for them and loving them.


----------



## jcnc

bag-mania said:


> You're a woman after my own heart. People who dump their pets are the lowest of the low!
> 
> She adopted that first dog to schmooze up to Ellen. Then the dogs she got with Harry were the token "we're playing family" pets. They were quickly pushed aside in favor of the real prize, having a baby with Harry and locking herself to him forever.


She has dogs ?!?! I have never see any pics of her with her pet(s) . Surprising cus most celebs love to post adorable pics of their pets/ with their pets ALL THE TIME


----------



## bag-mania

jcnc said:


> She has dogs ?!?! I have never see any pics of her with her pet(s) . Surprising cus most celebs love to post adorable pics of their pets/ with their pets ALL THE TIME



She used to post a lot photos of her with the dogs before Harry and in their first year together. There are even two children's books about Guy the Beagle (starring Meghan, of course). Although where Guy is today is anyone's guess. He hasn't been seen publicly in awhile.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> The "old" dog was only 6, not old at all. He could certainly have been brought to England if Meghan had wanted him. I think she loves to get the credit and praise in the media for adopting rescues but she doesn't want the work and responsibility of actually caring for them and loving them.


My dog is seven and I don’t consider him to be old at all. In dog years that is middle aged. It would absolutely break his heart if I abandoned him. He has been by my side since he was 8 weeks old.


----------



## mdcx

After reading this I am confused, think theres a bit of PR spin in there that Doria may come to UK for Christmas, don't see that happening :
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ONT-spending-Christmas-Queen-Sandringham.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Chagall said:


> My dog is seven and I don’t consider him to be old at all. In dog years that is middle aged. It would absolutely break his heart if I abandoned him. He has been by my side since he was 8 weeks old.


Mine just turned 15. He's old. 6/7 is still quite young, depending on breed. Not sure how she considered hers an old dog? Probably just an excuse.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> After reading this I am confused, think theres a bit of PR spin in there that Doria may come to UK for Christmas, don't see that happening :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ONT-spending-Christmas-Queen-Sandringham.html


I know, saw that too .. I’m confused!


----------



## lanasyogamama

cafecreme15 said:


> Elizabeth Holmes just reminded us that Kate and Will spent Christmas with her family in 2012 and 2016.
> 
> 
> Edited to add that while H+M’s not going to Sandringham is not unprecedented, all the smoke around the status of their relationship with the rest of the royal family makes the timing seem pretty suspicious.


I agree. With all the drama, the timing is bad.


----------



## Flatsy

Morgan R said:


> Buckingham Palace have confirmed that Harry and Meghan will spend Christmas with Doria
> View attachment 4589866


Wow! I'm shocked Buckingham Palace felt the need to issue a statement and say it's all cool.  As the saying goes, Buckingham Palace never bothers to deny something unless it's true.

It's totally understandable that Harry and Meghan (or Will and Kate) would want to alternate holidays with their respective families, but the timing of this makes this seem like that's not what this is about.  Presumably, they are planning to spend a substantial amount of time in Los Angeles prior to Christmas, and are planning to spend another major holiday (Thanksgiving) with Meghan's mother.  

Them staying in LA through Christmas seems like they want a lengthy vacation from Harry's family and don't want to be part of any of his family celebrations.  

I do not think they were disinvited from Christmas, but I think they are aware that their presence would be as welcome as a fart.


----------



## kemilia

maryg1 said:


> Wait...when did she dumped the dogs? Do we have proof? Where do they live now? Oh dear...deciding to leave my dogs would be the most heartbreaking event in my life, I can’t even think about it without crying


There were numerous stories about this. One is with her (maybe, who really knows) and the older one was left with friends. 

To split up two buddy dogs is so sad--I know--I adopted Mom and Daughter rescue dogs and when they were reunited (apart for 2 weeks) it was nuts/crazy! I cried they were so happy to see each other and cuddle again.

I could never leave my little pack behind (our town has a disaster plan in place to keep dogs with their people if something awful happens--too many people have said "we're not leaving our pets!). But then we're not being woo'd by a Prince ...


----------



## Katel

Flatsy said:


> Wow! I'm shocked Buckingham Palace felt the need to issue a statement and say it's all cool.  As the saying goes, Buckingham Palace never bothers to deny something unless it's true.
> 
> It's totally understandable that Harry and Meghan (or Will and Kate) would want to alternate holidays with their respective families, but the timing of this makes this seem like that's not what this is about.  Presumably, they are planning to spend a substantial amount of time in Los Angeles prior to Christmas, and are planning to spend another major holiday (Thanksgiving) with Meghan's mother.
> 
> Them staying in LA through Christmas seems like they want a lengthy vacation from Harry's family and don't want to be part of any of his family celebrations.
> *
> I do not think they were disinvited from Christmas, but I think they are aware that their presence would be as welcome as a fart*.



“I do not think they were disinvited from Christmas, but I think they are aware that their presence would be as welcome as a fart.”
^haha THIS...
 My guess is it’s less HM’s call and more the RF’s call - that they “would not mind if they did not attend.”


----------



## lazeny

Wait, what? She left her dog? Okay I don't like her anymore. 

I didn't have any strong opinion about her apart from she's pretty and has charming freckles, and the chicken legs but she can't really do anything about that. But leaving her dog and splitting dog pals? How you treat animals, it shows a lot about her personality. Has she been a dog lover ever since or did she just joined a trend where rescuing dogs is cool? Because as a life long dog lover, you try your best that you don't separate dog pals. And you certainly shouldn't leave a dog behind for a guy. Is the dog she left behind a breed that's banned in the UK? Because that's the only thing I can think of and still, come on. 





bag-mania said:


> You're a woman after my own heart. People who dump their pets are the lowest of the low!
> 
> She adopted that first dog to schmooze up to Ellen. Then the dogs she got with Harry were the token "we're playing family" pets. They were quickly pushed aside in favor of the real prize, having a baby with Harry and locking herself to him forever.


----------



## k5ml3k

lazeny said:


> Wait, what? She left her dog? Okay I don't like her anymore.
> 
> I didn't have any strong opinion about her apart from she's pretty and has charming freckles, and the chicken legs but she can't really do anything about that. But leaving her dog and splitting dog pals? How you treat animals, it shows a lot about her personality. Has she been a dog lover ever since or did she just joined a trend where rescuing dogs is cool? Because as a life long dog lover, you try your best that you don't separate dog pals. And you certainly shouldn't leave a dog behind for a guy. Is the dog she left behind a breed that's banned in the UK? Because that's the only thing I can think of and still, come on.



Yep, never really care either way about her but that, makes her much less likable. 100% agree that the way you treat animals says a lot about you as a person... *SMDH*


----------



## Lodpah

k5ml3k said:


> Yep, never really care either way about her but that, makes her much less likable. 100% agree that the way you treat animals says a lot about you as a person... *SMDH*


I have 4 dogs. When my daughter took her dog to Italy to study we brought him home. One dog is blind and not well really but to abandon him is like cutting off an arm. She’s an evil, narcissistic and self absorbed. . . She rescued these dogs only to abandon them is so outrageous.

She probably flies first it business class and dogs are allowed in cabin.


----------



## pixiejenna

I think it’s really unfortunate that they are planning to spend Christmas in the US. Given the age of the Queen and the Duke I feel like spending the holidays with them would be priority. Like many have mentioned Doria could very easily travel to the UK if she wanted to spend the holidays with them. So what if she doesn’t get I invited to every event they have, it’s not the end of the world. Based on the amount of time planned to spend here it really comes off as they’re planning to relocate. If something happens and the Queen passes Harry will regret not spending her last holidays with her. I think it will be enough for him to have a meltdown.


----------



## bag-mania

lazeny said:


> Wait, what? She left her dog? Okay I don't like her anymore.
> 
> I didn't have any strong opinion about her apart from she's pretty and has charming freckles, and the chicken legs but she can't really do anything about that. But leaving her dog and splitting dog pals? How you treat animals, it shows a lot about her personality. Has she been a dog lover ever since or did she just joined a trend where rescuing dogs is cool? Because as a life long dog lover, you try your best that you don't separate dog pals. And you certainly shouldn't leave a dog behind for a guy. Is the dog she left behind a breed that's banned in the UK? Because that's the only thing I can think of and still, come on.



No, he wasn’t a banned breed. He was a Lab mix. If you Google “Meghan Markle’s dog Bogart” you can find photos of him. She only adopted him because Ellen DeGeneres pushed her to and she didn’t have the nerve to say no.


----------



## lazeny

I can't really get over the dog issue so I googled it. From what I read, she got strong armed by Ellen and Portia to adopt the dog. She named him Bogart. He's her first dog. She seems to think he's a Lab-Shepherd mix. About middle aged/senior and she was advised that Bogart may not handle the travel very well because of his age, and might have problems with UK's strict guidelines with transporting a dog of his age and size. 

Which is stupid imho. She's marrying a prince, dude is wealthy and influential. People from much less means are able to bring rescue dogs from war torn countries, developing countries and countries who have dog meat festivals all over across the globe. I'm sure there are ways for Bogart to travel safely. 

It seems to me, and this is just conjecture, that bringing Bogart has become an inconvenience and she decided to leave the dog with friends. So much for "meaning the absolute world" to her.

Okay rant over.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

"Meghan in a royal hell of her own making": Self-styled victims of ‘Sudden Prominence Syndrome’
Just an article from an Asia (non-gossip) news site. https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/article/hold-meghan-locked-in-a-royal-hell-of-her-own-making/


----------



## rose60610

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Meghan in a royal hell of her own making": Self-styled victims of ‘Sudden Prominence Syndrome’
> Just an article from an Asia (non-gossip) news site. https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/article/hold-meghan-locked-in-a-royal-hell-of-her-own-making/



Great article. Thanks for posting. I love the "comment" section where one stated "I wonder what would make her happy" to which another replied: "Replacing the Queen".  (ouch).  This article really took her to the proverbial wood shed.


----------



## jehaga

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Meghan in a royal hell of her own making": Self-styled victims of ‘Sudden Prominence Syndrome’
> Just an article from an Asia (non-gossip) news site. https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/article/hold-meghan-locked-in-a-royal-hell-of-her-own-making/


This article mentions almost everything that has been discussed in this thread. Fantastic! Thank you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Plussizegirl

I suppose QEll and the DOE and the rest of the family are rather happy that H&M won't show up for Chrismas because they don't like so much drama.


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Meghan in a royal hell of her own making": Self-styled victims of ‘Sudden Prominence Syndrome’
> Just an article from an Asia (non-gossip) news site. https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/article/hold-meghan-locked-in-a-royal-hell-of-her-own-making/


Interesting read, thanks for posting.  They hit the nail on the head.


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Meghan in a royal hell of her own making": Self-styled victims of ‘Sudden Prominence Syndrome’
> Just an article from an Asia (non-gossip) news site. https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/10/article/hold-meghan-locked-in-a-royal-hell-of-her-own-making/


Thank you for posting this article. As other members have said, it sums up everything that has been discussed in this thread. It seems to be a sad state of affairs for anyone connected to MM.


----------



## doni

As far as I know she hasn’t talked about the dog herself. Yes, she left him behind but the rest is speculation. We don’t know what kind of problems the dog may have had whatever his age, and considering how much she had been traveling at the time and how much time she was already spending in the UK, it is perfectly possible if not likely that the dog was  more attached to another person than to her... I want to think that she did what was best for the dog.

The Buckingham Palace announcement is pretty strange. Yes, the Cambridges have spent Christmas with her family, but there is no suggestion that the Sussex will spend Christmas with her family/mother. Sounds to me they may spend it on their own, possibly in the UK, and that is not quite the same thing... Plus in the current situation, all the media attention, all the speculation around family rifts, and having not been in the Summer royal vacation, it is just not a wise choice whatever way you look at it...

But I guess going to Christmas mass with a smile in your face and pretending you are having fun with your extended family would be just too much of stiff upper lip and hence ‘not healthy’


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## mdcx

This comment sums it up nicely imo:


----------



## gelbergirl

I wonder when they'll get to LA and how much time they'll spend there.
I can not wait for all the photos out of that trip.  And who they'll be seen with at dinners, maybe walking out of a gym(?), (Starbucks???)
The paparazzi are probably preparing and appreciating the lead time H&M have given them.


----------



## Clearblueskies

If they’re not going to Sandringham because they need time out of the spotlight, well, so be it.  But I really hope it doesn’t mean we’re going to be treated to lots of carefully crafted *Megan and Harry at the soup kitchen* photo ops.


----------



## Flatsy

doni said:


> The Buckingham Palace announcement is pretty strange. Yes, the Cambridges have spent Christmas with her family, but there is no suggestion that the Sussex will spend Christmas with her family/mother. Sounds to me they may spend it on their own, possibly in the UK, and that is not quite the same thing...


The BP announcement said specifically that they will be spending Christmas with her mother, Doria Ragland.  But the announcement didn't say *where* they will be spending Christmas except that it won't be Sandringham.


----------



## daisychainz

jehaga said:


> This article mentions almost everything that has been discussed in this thread. Fantastic! Thank you!


Exactly. Many people see her the same, worldwide.


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree. With all the drama, the timing is bad.



I like how they displace the responsibility for how they are being perceived on everyone else except for themselves.

Fly Doria out, go have Christmas with Queen and fam, and smile and look gracious. It is a blip on the radar of life. Come to the US another (more appropriate) time.


----------



## Sharont2305

beantownSugar said:


> It makes no sense to expect Meghan & Harry to spend every holiday with Elizabeth II. People get married and split holidays + want to start their own family traditions. Anyone can die any day regardless of age and I trust Harry is more aware of his grandparents’ health than the keyboard warriors sitting at home commenting here - it’s ridiculous to expect them to spend every holiday there.


It doesn't work like that with the BRF though, it's expected they are at Sandringham for Christmas, then on Boxing Day they spend with their spouses family


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> It doesn't work like that with the BRF though, it's expected they are at Sandringham for Christmas, then on Boxing Day they shre with the spouses family


Yeah, she hasn’t married Joe Bloggs down the road, or an anonymous billionaire.  H&M have been gifted an extraordinarily privileged lifestyle, and it comes with some obligations and expectations.


----------



## bag-mania

You all stop wanting them to stay in England for Christmas. Personally, I am looking forward to watching the wacky Hollywood Holiday Adventures of Harry and Meghan. I expect lots of celebrity party activity and staged PR videos of them helping the needy. Do not take that away from me! December can be a cold, dark month and we can all use a laugh.


----------



## LittleStar88

beantownSugar said:


> It makes no sense to expect Meghan & Harry to spend every holiday with Elizabeth II. People get married and split holidays + want to start their own family traditions. Anyone can die any day regardless of age and I trust Harry is more aware of his grandparents’ health than the keyboard warriors sitting at home commenting here - it’s ridiculous to expect them to spend every holiday there.



As a stand-alone comment with no context, perhaps.

What is being overlooked here is that:

QEII and DoE are waaaay up there in age. Holidays with everyone together are special moments to be captured - not just a basic every day afternoon tea with the queen.

Not prioritizing what is best for the overall family. I am sure the Queen would enjoy Archie's first Christmas and family photos of them all together - possibly for the last time.

I am certain Doria would be more than welcome to fly across the pond to be there as well.

Lots of mumblings about how H & M are being perceived within the family and if they want to do the minimum to temper that, they can show up and smile for the cameras.

This is the BRF, not average Joe Smith family. The expectations and optics are waaaaay different.

Disclaimer: IMHO for the above lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## the_black_tie_diyer

> "Even when you died
> Oh the press still hounded you
> All the papers had to say
> Was that Marilyn was found in the nude" - Elton John, Bernie Taupin


----------



## gelbergirl

I think they all do the walk to Christmas church service too.


----------



## gelbergirl

The Queen has 11 grandchildren & 8 great grandchildren , do they all show??


----------



## rose60610

beantownSugar said:


> It makes no sense to expect Meghan & Harry to spend every holiday with Elizabeth II. People get married and split holidays + want to start their own family traditions. Anyone can die any day regardless of age and I trust Harry is more aware of his grandparents’ health than the keyboard warriors sitting at home commenting here - it’s ridiculous to expect them to spend every holiday there.



What you say is very true. Anyone can die any day regardless of age. QEII's mother lived to age 101. QEII herself is currently 93 and is sharp as a tack, Philip is 98, basically youngsters! They could easily live to 110. What a hardship and a pesky nuisance it is to have to spend Christmas with an elderly couple who provided you with a virtual royal life of luxury, a 50 million dollar wedding, a "cottage" which needed millions in renovations to make it "livable", staff, security,  drivers, private school education, designer wardrobes, a lifetime of royal privilege, you know, the basics. Meghan called this "not living, only existing" when she was actually IN Africa surrounded by people who simply would like a meal. One could interpret that to be somewhat tone deaf, and maybe just a little bit ungrateful.

The article which talked about "Sudden Prominence Syndrome" nailed it perfectly to describe those who can't get enough of the spotlight when the attention is fawning and favorable, and then go into meltdown when coverage becomes critical, cry and demand sympathy on how they're VICTIMS of the attention (they once craved and begged for). 

In today's world where optics matter and their optics aren't optimal, to not spend this particular Christmas with the Queen is another example of how they're perceived to be flabbergasted that the world doesn't revolve around them. Perhaps they think that if they "resist" enough, the world will eventually bow down to them and bask in their glorious greatness. Which means Meghan will cry "victim" and demand sympathy until we become woke enough to see that she is the one who's suffering, not anyone else. I don't care how many soup kitchen photo ops her handlers prop her up in, in her mind it is SHE who's suffering and not the people whose trays she's ladling food into.


----------



## rose60610

gelbergirl said:


> The Queen has 11 grandchildren & 8 great grandchildren , do they all show??



Most of them are not the ones who have a current image crisis. Maybe to M&H, it's the rest of the world who has a problem and all their actions are to be applauded, not questioned.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> You all stop wanting them to stay in England for Christmas. Personally, I am looking forward to watching the wacky Hollywood Holiday Adventures of Harry and Meghan. I expect lots of celebrity party activity and staged PR videos of them helping the needy. Do not take that away from me! December can be a cold, dark month and we can all use a laugh.



You have a strong point there.


----------



## A1aGypsy

You cannot tell me it’s a coincidence that the first day they all spend together in a long while is the same day that Harry phones QEII to announce they aren’t coming for Christmas. 

Leads me to suspect something happened on the way out to the balconies. Ie. their concerns about existing weren’t met with enough sympathy or something was said. Otherwise, why would he wait to phone?

I had so much sympathy for this girl initially and she has just squandered all the good will.  While I can completely understand it would be offensive to tell you mother you cannot spend Christmas with her, it wasn’t like you were going in blind. 

Gawd how embarrassing for BP to have to address this.


----------



## myown

I just kinda feel sorry for the nanny. It’s well knows they don’t make a furtune working for the BRF. And now she can’t spend her Christmas with her family and probably has to nanny


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> The Queen has 11 grandchildren & 8 great grandchildren , do they all show??


11 Grandchildren? No, she has 8.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gelbergirl said:


> The Queen has 11 grandchildren & 8 great grandchildren , do they all show??


8 grandchildren I think.  William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, Peter, Louise and James, and 8 great grandchildren.  Most of them show up, most of the time - but not all the time it’s true.  It is about the optics this year as others have said, and media-savvy as they are M&H know this.


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> I just kinda feel sorry for the nanny. It’s well knows they don’t make a furtune working for the BRF. And now she can’t spend her Christmas with her family and probably has to nanny


But they make a fortune when they move on, because of the RF on their CV


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> It is about the optics this year as others have said, and media-savvy as they are M&H know this.



I think it is their savviness about the media that inspires the visit. They already know the British media don't think much of them. On the other hand, the American media can't get enough of gushing over even the most superficial efforts on their part. This visit is a free pass. Everything they do while here will be glorified. They can wallow in the adoration they believe they deserve.


----------



## Jayne1

jehaga said:


> This article mentions almost everything that has been discussed in this thread. Fantastic! Thank you!


Yes, almost like the writer did their homework here.  lol


----------



## Welltraveled!

Didn’t Will and Kate spend a few Christmas’s with her parents?

I recall reading about it a few years ago.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think it is their savviness about the media that inspires the visit. They already know the British media don't think much of them. On the other hand, the American media can't get enough of gushing over even the most superficial efforts on their part. This visit is a free pass. Everything they do while here will be glorified. They can wallow in the adoration they believe they deserve.


I agree the American media seems to love them.  But what about people like us who are Americans and don't look at them through this rose colored lens?  Will that eventually filter through into American media?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Welltraveled! said:


> Didn’t Will and Kate spend a few Christmas’s with her parents?
> 
> I recall reading about it a few years ago.


Yes, they have, and they get along with their family.  They pitch up for the majority of RF events with good grace, and do no whining.  Nor do their friends or family.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> No, he wasn’t a banned breed. He was a Lab mix. If you Google “Meghan Markle’s dog Bogart” you can find photos of him. She only adopted him because Ellen DeGeneres pushed her to and she didn’t have the nerve to say no.


You’re right. Only short nosed dogs can’t fly.


----------



## Lodpah

lazeny said:


> I can't really get over the dog issue so I googled it. From what I read, she got strong armed by Ellen and Portia to adopt the dog. She named him Bogart. He's her first dog. She seems to think he's a Lab-Shepherd mix. About middle aged/senior and she was advised that Bogart may not handle the travel very well because of his age, and might have problems with UK's strict guidelines with transporting a dog of his age and size.
> 
> Which is stupid imho. She's marrying a prince, dude is wealthy and influential. People from much less means are able to bring rescue dogs from war torn countries, developing countries and countries who have dog meat festivals all over across the globe. I'm sure there are ways for Bogart to travel safely.
> 
> It seems to me, and this is just conjecture, that bringing Bogart has become an inconvenience and she decided to leave the dog with friends. So much for "meaning the absolute world" to her.
> 
> Okay rant over.


There are three countries with strict guidelines to bring animals in. Great Britain, Hawaii and Guam. All she needed to do is get a titer test, their rabies shot and a clearance from a vet. It takes about 6 months so her excuse is non valid IMHO.


----------



## Lodpah

What I think the reason MM does not want to be around the royals is because it would make her uncomfortable knowing they probably don’t like her anymore.


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> There are three countries with strict guidelines to bring animals in. Great Britain, Hawaii and Guam. All she needed to do is get a titer test, their rabies shot and a clearance from a vet. It takes about 6 months so her excuse is non valid IMHO.



Right.

If people can bring in horses to GB from around the world for horse racing and horse shows, what's the big deal about a dog? Especially if your husband is part of the RF. Not enough connections and resources?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I agree the American media seems to love them.  But what about people like us who are Americans and don't look at them through this rose colored lens?  Will that eventually filter through into American media?



Most Americans are not aware of controversy surrounding them. I would never have known what they were doing if not for this thread. They aren't on the average person's radar here. The article about “Sudden Prominence” syndrome hit the nail on the head. The US news media is agenda-driven and will use the visit in that context, while the US gossip media will be happy enough to post pretty photos of Harry and Meghan at whatever celebrity event they visit while they are here.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Right.
> 
> If people can bring in horses to GB from around the world for horse racing and horse shows, what's the big deal about a dog? Especially if your husband is part of the RF. Not enough connections and resources?


Obviously (to me) the dog wasn't a priority.  Wonder why she brought the other dog.  And whether she is paying it any attention.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> Obviously (to me) the dog wasn't a priority.  Wonder why she brought the other dog.  And whether she is paying it any attention.


It got hit by a car soon after she moved in. It was loose and unsupervised.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Obviously (to me) the dog wasn't a priority.  Wonder why she brought the other dog.  And whether she is paying it any attention.



I have been unable to find anything about Guy the Beagle from this year. He has fallen off the face of the earth. Nor has there been any mention of the black Lab Harry and Meghan supposedly adopted a year ago in August. I think that one was shuttled off somewhere the moment the pregnancy was announced.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> It got hit by a car soon after she moved in. It was loose and unsupervised.



Did he die? That's what happened to Bill *******'s dog Buddy years ago. Take care of your pets or don't have them!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Most Americans are not aware of controversy surrounding them. I would never have known what they were doing if not for this thread. They aren't on the average person's radar here. The article about “Sudden Prominence” syndrome hit the nail on the head. The US news media is agenda-driven and will use the visit in that context, while the US gossip media will be happy enough to post pretty photos of Harry and Meghan at whatever celebrity event they visit while they are here.


agree...most of what I "know" about them is from here.  They do show up on the Internet though (news of their not spending Christmas with the Royals, etc)


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Did he die? That's what happened to Bill *******'s dog Buddy years ago. Take care of your pets or don't have them!


Two of his legs were broken. I'd heard rumors he was euthanized but I'm not sure. He's never been seen again and then they got a new dog so....


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> Two of his legs were broken. I'd heard rumors he was euthanized but I'm not sure. He's never been seen again and then they got a new dog so....


Oh no, that's horrible! I hadn't heard of this accident. He got struck by a car in London or in Windsor? I would imagine Windsor would make the most sense since Kensington palace is entirely gated.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Two of his legs were broken. I'd heard rumors he was euthanized but I'm not sure. He's never been seen again and then they got a new dog so....



Well, crap. They didn't include that part of the story in Guy's children's book. Just another in a long list of reasons not to like them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh no, that's horrible! I hadn't heard of this accident. He got struck by a car in London or in Windsor? I would imagine Windsor would make the most sense since Kensington palace is entirely gated.


It was inside the gates, someone driving around the palace grounds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Did he die? That's what happened to Bill *******'s dog Buddy years ago. Take care of your pets or don't have them!





mrsinsyder said:


> Two of his legs were broken. I'd heard rumors he was euthanized but I'm not sure. He's never been seen again and then they got a new dog so....


It wasn’t reported- not heard anything of either Guy or the new dog (other than some noise about them not revealing its name).


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> What I think the reason MM does not want to be around the royals is because it would make her uncomfortable knowing they probably don’t like her anymore.



Rather safe assumption. AND--since this is a gossip thread--maybe the Crown kindly suggested she get a breath of fresh air. On another continent. 

It must pain her that she hasn't woked them enough, so she needs to woke harder! I don't think she's done woking. Something tells me the American slimy Media will come to her rescue and vilify 66+ million Brits for not worshipping the ground she walks on. And she'll become even more woked stoked.


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> It was inside the gates, someone driving around the palace grounds.


Truly terrible. I feel for whoever happened to be driving the car.


----------



## LittleStar88

gelbergirl said:


> The Queen has 11 grandchildren & 8 great grandchildren , do they all show??



Wasn't Harry one of her favorites, and hasn't she had a very close relationship with him from childhood to recently??


----------



## beantownSugar

A great article:  https://thenewdaily.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/2019/11/14/meghan-harry-christmas/

“This decision is in line with precedent set previously by other members of the Royal Family, and has the support of Her Majesty The Queen.”

The precedent? The Queen’s other grandchildren including Zara Tindall and her brother Peter Phillips have celebrated with the in-laws because, 21st century.


----------



## bag-mania

It will be interesting to see what their Christmas is like. Are they going to spend the day with Doria in her home? Are they going to be at some fancy, expensive resort and Doria will be invited to join them? They are coming as high-profile visitors with all that that entails as far as security and paparazzi. I'll be shocked if they actually have a quiet Christmas alone with Meghan's mom.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> I'll be shocked if they actually have a quiet Christmas alone with Meghan's mom.


Me too.  I have a feeling Oprah and one of her massive estates is going to be involved in one or both of their upcoming holidays.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Me too.  I have a feeling Oprah and one of her massive estates is going to be involved in one or both of their upcoming holidays.



Yes and it will be worth it if Oprah orchestrates a Meghan/Thomas reconciliation show. The ratings would fly through the roof!


----------



## LibbyRuth

rose60610 said:


> What you say is very true. Anyone can die any day regardless of age. QEII's mother lived to age 101. QEII herself is currently 93 and is sharp as a tack, Philip is 98, basically youngsters! They could easily live to 110. What a hardship and a pesky nuisance it is to have to spend Christmas with an elderly couple who provided you with a virtual royal life of luxury, a 50 million dollar wedding, a "cottage" which needed millions in renovations to make it "livable", staff, security,  drivers, private school education, designer wardrobes, a lifetime of royal privilege, you know, the basics. Meghan called this "not living, only existing" when she was actually IN Africa surrounded by people who simply would like a meal. One could interpret that to be somewhat tone deaf, and maybe just a little bit ungrateful.
> 
> The article which talked about "Sudden Prominence Syndrome" nailed it perfectly to describe those who can't get enough of the spotlight when the attention is fawning and favorable, and then go into meltdown when coverage becomes critical, cry and demand sympathy on how they're VICTIMS of the attention (they once craved and begged for).
> 
> In today's world where optics matter and their optics aren't optimal, to not spend this particular Christmas with the Queen is another example of how they're perceived to be flabbergasted that the world doesn't revolve around them. Perhaps they think that if they "resist" enough, the world will eventually bow down to them and bask in their glorious greatness. Which means Meghan will cry "victim" and demand sympathy until we become woke enough to see that she is the one who's suffering, not anyone else. I don't care how many soup kitchen photo ops her handlers prop her up in, in her mind it is SHE who's suffering and not the people whose trays she's ladling food into.



Well said.  My first thought when I read the Sudden Prominence Syndrome piece was that it reminded me of young women who decide to have a baby so that "someone will love me", and then discover that having a baby is not all fun and it's an awful lot of work to feel a little love. But you touch on another truism of htat piece which is not wanting to accept the consequences of their actions.  
I'm beginning to think that in Meghan's mind (and perhaps Harry's), she was going to be this bold and exciting new Duchess who refused the traditions and old way of doing things, and received the cheers and accolades of the British people and the rest of the world for being the one to truly modernize the monarch.  But of course, not everyone is begging for the monarch to be modernized ... and people who effectively transform an institution usually do so by understanding first why things are doing as they are. So the reality of the vision she imagined for her life is that the things she thought would modernize weren't that enthusiastic to modernize.  Just like a new mom wanting a baby to love her has to also deal with dirty diapers non stop feedings and unexplaned tears, Meghan has to deal with people who are not enthusiastic about a lack of respect for tradition.


----------



## bellecate

Lodpah said:


> What I think the reason MM does not want to be around the royals is because it would make her uncomfortable knowing they probably don’t like her anymore.


IMO, I think she likes being the top of the pecking order and in that setting she would be lowest person there.


----------



## mdcx

beantownSugar said:


> A great article:  https://thenewdaily.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/2019/11/14/meghan-harry-christmas/
> 
> “This decision is in line with precedent set previously by other members of the Royal Family, and has the support of Her Majesty The Queen.”
> 
> The precedent? The Queen’s other grandchildren including Zara Tindall and her brother Peter Phillips have celebrated with the in-laws because, 21st century.


This year is not the year for MM to reject the BRF at Christmas. Not after the debacle of Wimbledon, the documentary, the lawsuit.
Showing up to the family Christmas with her head down, doing everything right snd being humble might have done something to save her public image in the UK.
Individualism might be an acceptable approach in the US but in MM’s case she is now a small cog in the BRF machine and needs to do her job.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> This year is not the year for MM to reject the BRF at Christmas. Not after the debacle of Wimbledon, the documentary, the lawsuit.
> *Showing up to the family Christmas with her head down, doing everything right snd being humble might have done something to save her public image in the UK.*
> Individualism might be an acceptable approach in the US but in MM’s case she is now a small cog in the BRF machine and needs to do her job.



To do that would be admitting they may have made mistakes and they would never do that. They are both too proud and stubborn. They are deep in "victim mode" and feeling sorry for themselves.


----------



## jehaga

beantownSugar said:


> It makes no sense to expect Meghan & Harry to spend every holiday with Elizabeth II. People get married and split holidays + want to start their own family traditions. Anyone can die any day regardless of age and I trust Harry is more aware of his grandparents’ health than the keyboard warriors sitting at home commenting here - it’s ridiculous to expect them to spend every holiday there.


The British Royal Family, or any royal family, is not just some annoying in-laws one can take or leave. If one doesn’t like the inherent traditions entailed with royalty, one may announce a break a la Edward VIII. Otherwise, one should appreciate, treasure and respect the history of the “Family” that one chose to marry into.

No other royal-by-marriage is currently causing such unnecessary drama.  But oh-so-much fodder for this hungry “keyboard warrior”!


----------



## jehaga

Lodpah said:


> What I think the reason MM does not want to be around the royals is because it would make her uncomfortable knowing they probably don’t like her anymore.


And she won’t be the center of attention.


----------



## Lodpah

Does anyone see the pattern here with MM? She dumps her entire family and I believe her mom is just a prop then now she is alienating Harry from friends and family. Come on, all the excuses people make for her when the evidence is out there.

She’s so desperate for attention from A Listers but it seems some of them are shying away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jehaga

LadyGran said:


> So, yesterday, Hillary gave Archie and Meghan a cuddle.
> OMG.  How stupid do they think we are!
> 
> H&M are such a boorish and boring couple.


^ ^ ^ ^ ^

‘Honestly, she’s not even bothering to disguise her agenda anymore. Just divorce Harry and be done with it!

Didn’t someone mention earlier that one of her goals is to be president?


----------



## pixiejenna

Meh she’s sticking around until she has baby #2 . I also don’t see Harry giving up his title/lifestyle because he’s never had to do real work and I don’t see him starting any time soon. I also don’t see him doing well without the support of his entire family.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LadyGran said:


> So, yesterday, Hillary gave Archie and Meghan a cuddle.
> OMG.  How stupid do they think we are!
> 
> H&M are such a boorish and boring couple.


This is her being out of the public eye? Inviting Hillary over for tea and cuddles? I can’t.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> It wasn’t reported- not heard anything of either Guy or the new dog (other than some noise about them not revealing its name).


There was a report in the beginning of how  Megan and the Queen bonded over their love of dogs. I liked Megan because of that. Now I realize Megan was probably acting then and the story was false PR.


----------



## Chagall

A true narcissist, and I really am beginning to believe Megan fits the bill, thrives on attention. Any attention will do, preferably positive but negative attention is good too. As long as the spotlight is on them they get the ‘fuel’ that is necessary for them to survive. They don’t feel shame, guilt empathy or remorse and are incapable of true love. In most cases the victim is not believed because of the ‘narcs’ charming behavior in front of the outside world which does not match their behavior behind closed doors.  The victim is usually perceived to be the problem. The constant chaos the ‘narc’ creates is hard for people to believe. In the case of Harry and Megan it played out so publicly that we believe.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> This year is not the year for MM to reject the BRF at Christmas. Not after the debacle of Wimbledon, the documentary, the lawsuit.
> Showing up to the family Christmas with her head down, doing everything right snd being humble might have done something to save her public image in the UK.
> Individualism might be an acceptable approach in the US but in MM’s case she is now a small cog in the BRF machine and needs to do her job.


I think, perhaps, they were asked not to come. Being there would add media drama and the rest of the family members actually seem to be doing a good job of staying out of it all. Charles/Camilla and William/Kate seem to be getting favorable attention. Perhaps the Queen and her family want MM and Harry to stay away. I don't believe MM and Harry decided not to attend on their own. imo


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chagall said:


> There was a report in the beginning of how  Megan and the Queen bonded over their love of dogs. I liked Megan because of that. Now I realize Megan was probably acting then and the story was false PR.



And "as a proud rescue dog owner", Meghan is also royal patron of Mayhew, the animal rescue and adoption charity :
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...meghan-markle-mayhew-animal-charity-foreword/


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chagall said:


> A true narcissist, and I really am beginning to believe Megan fits the bill, thrives on attention. Any attention will do, preferably positive but negative attention is good too. As long as the spotlight is on them they get the ‘fuel’ that is necessary for them to survive. They don’t feel shame, guilt empathy or remorse and are incapable of true love. In most cases the victim is not believed because of the ‘narcs’ charming behavior in front of the outside world which does not match their behavior behind closed doors.  The victim is usually perceived to be the problem. The constant chaos the ‘narc’ creates is hard for people to believe. In the case of Harry and Megan it played out so publicly that we believe.


I grew up inside this kind of family dynamic, with a damaged, emotionally dependent father and a horribly narcissistic mother.  Everything is very twisted and the endless lies and deceptions are mind-boggling. 
Children in these families don't have an easy time of it, no matter how wealthy and connected their self-absorbed parents are.  
So even though his parents are present in his life I do hope that Archie has others around him a lot of the time (ideally kin or very old friends) people who are kind, calm, stable, normal and caring,  unlike the passing parade of celebrity folk who seem to drop in to visit his parents from time to time.


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> I grew up inside this kind of family dynamic, with a damaged, emotionally dependent father and a horribly narcissistic mother.  Everything is very twisted and the endless lies and deceptions are mind-boggling.
> Children in these families don't have an easy time of it, no matter how wealthy and connected their self-absorbed parents are.
> So even though his parents are present in his life I do hope that Archie has others around him a lot of the time (ideally kin or very old friends) people who are kind, calm, stable, normal and caring,  unlike the passing parade of celebrity folk who seem to drop in to visit his parents from time to time.


I think the hardest part for a victim of narcissistic abuse is living with the constant non ending deception and lies. Everything about them is at least a partial lie.


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> And "as a proud rescue dog owner", Meghan is also royal patron of Mayhew, the animal rescue and adoption charity :
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...meghan-markle-mayhew-animal-charity-foreword/


The queen is a true horse and dog lover, and has been all her life. I think Megan, judging by how she treats her own dogs, is a patron for publicity.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think, perhaps, they were asked not to come. Being there would add media drama and the rest of the family members actually seem to be doing a good job of staying out of it all. Charles/Camilla and William/Kate seem to be getting favorable attention. Perhaps the Queen and her family want MM and Harry to stay away. I don't believe MM and Harry decided not to attend on their own. imo


So are you saying the belief was that with their not coming, there'd be no drama?  Because the pages of discussion over them not going on this thread is evidence that's not the case.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LadyGran said:


> So, yesterday, Hillary gave Archie and Meghan a cuddle.
> OMG.  How stupid do they think we are!
> 
> H&M are such a boorish and boring couple.


Why is it that we even know about this??  There’s no reason and no need for this meeting to be public knowledge.  It should have been kept private, however a “source” has briefed the press.  If Meghan were sincere about wanting less press attention she would stop peddling silly stories aimed at flattering herself. 
I loathe these cheap celeb bff friendships where people are just latching on to each other to boost their fame and profile.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LibbyRuth said:


> So are you saying the belief was that with their not coming, there'd be no drama?  Because the pages of discussion over them not going on this thread is evidence that's not the case.


Their absence will help cut down on media stories. You can't have a "William and Kate walk out of Christmas Eve dinner when Meghan demands more gifts" story if the world knows they aren't there.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Their absence will help cut down on media stories. You can't have a "William and Kate walk out of Christmas Eve dinner when Meghan demands more gifts" story if the world knows they aren't there.


Sure. But there's certainly been fuel thrown on the fire now by the palace announcing they won't be there.  Which is worse - bad press in mid-November when everyone is talking about it? Or bad press on Christmas day when most people are so busy focused on their own celebrations they are not gossiping about others.
I don't think this decision has anything to do with PR.  I think it's either Meghan flexing her muscle and influence on Harry's life, or the BRF giving Harry a Rumspringa of sorts so he can figure out his future.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LibbyRuth said:


> Sure. But there's certainly been fuel thrown on the fire now by the palace announcing they won't be there.  Which is worse - bad press in mid-November when everyone is talking about it? Or bad press on Christmas day when most people are so busy focused on their own celebrations they are not gossiping about others.
> I don't think this decision has anything to do with PR.  I think it's either Meghan flexing her muscle and influence on Harry's life, or the BRF giving Harry a Rumspringa of sorts so he can figure out his future.


I’m sure this is coming from the Sussexes, not the RF.  The way a narcissist sees things is that they are punishing you.  Whether it’s by depriving you of their presence, or refusing contact, it’s the worst thing they think they can do to you.  Meghan has quite the track record in ghosting people who have *offended* her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m sure this is coming from the Sussexes, not the RF.  The way a narcissist sees things is that they are punishing you.  Whether it’s by depriving you of their presence, or refusing contact, it’s the worst thing they think they can do to you.  Meghan has quite the track record in ghosting people who have *offended* her.



^^^ if this is true, Megan is ghosting the Queen of England ...
who is the monarch of the Realm, 93, her husband‘s grandmother, and her son’s great grandmother ...begin to wrap your mind around that level of wokeness.


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think, perhaps, they were asked not to come. Being there would add media drama and the rest of the family members actually seem to be doing a good job of staying out of it all. Charles/Camilla and William/Kate seem to be getting favorable attention. Perhaps the Queen and her family want MM and Harry to stay away. I don't believe MM and Harry decided not to attend on their own. imo



If they were asked not to come it would be all over the media, released by close "sources" of course. There would be an interview where Meghan would be making big, sad doe eyes and wondering why the family doesn't include her. She wouldn't miss such a victim opportunity. No, I'm betting this is 100% a Meghan and Harry decision.


----------



## LittleStar88

Straight-Laced said:


> I grew up inside this kind of family dynamic, with a damaged, emotionally dependent father and a horribly narcissistic mother.  Everything is very twisted and the endless lies and deceptions are mind-boggling.
> Children in these families don't have an easy time of it, no matter how wealthy and connected their self-absorbed parents are.
> So even though his parents are present in his life I do hope that Archie has others around him a lot of the time (ideally kin or very old friends) people who are kind, calm, stable, normal and caring,  unlike the passing parade of celebrity folk who seem to drop in to visit his parents from time to time.



I had the opposite - emotionally dependent mother and horribly stubborn and narcissistic father. I think unless you have had exposure to this kind of family situation, you really don't get the true depth of damage a narcissist can do. And honestly that narcissistic trait can pass on (as it seems to have from her father to her).

It takes a ton of work to undo it, and she seems content to cruise along in the same spirit as her father.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> This is her being out of the public eye? Inviting Hillary over for tea and cuddles? I can’t.



This isn't even her first time reaching out to Hillary. According to this article:

"Markle wrote a letter to ******* when she was just 11 years old asking her to help amend a sexist advertisement for dishwater soap — something that sparked her activism for gender equality."

https://www.businessinsider.com/hil...more-cottage-baby-archie-prince-harry-2019-11


----------



## A1aGypsy

Who knows what happened. They could have attempted a power play move trying to force an invite for her mom and said: “we won’t be coming if she cannot.” And BP responding with “so sorry you won’t be there.”


----------



## daisychainz

LadyGran said:


> So, yesterday, Hillary gave Archie and Meghan a cuddle.
> OMG.  How stupid do they think we are!
> 
> H&M are such a boorish and boring couple.


They are saying Meghan hosted Hilary private and Harry was not there. I wonder if he purposely did not participate so he was not associated with politics. Did Diana or Kate host political figures alone - is this normal or not.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> They are saying Meghan hosted Hilary private and Harry was not there. I wonder if he purposely did not participate so he was not associated with politics. Did Diana or Kate host political figures alone - is this normal or not.


I don't think that meeting with HRC would fall in the category of political involvement that the royals stay away from. After all, HRC is not running for anything, so the meeting could not even be mis-read as an endorsement. They can visit with and meet with people involved in politics - they just are not supposed to come out and take political stands. It would have been inappropriate for Meghan to share the meeting from the Sussex instagram account with a statement saying that HRC is a great and respected woman and it's a crying shame that she is not the president of the US. But they can be friendly.


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> Two of his legs were broken. I'd heard rumors he was euthanized but I'm not sure. He's never been seen again and then they got a new dog so....


Oh geez, that's sad.


----------



## kemilia

pixiejenna said:


> Meh she’s sticking around until she has baby #2 . I also don’t see Harry giving up his title/lifestyle because he’s never had to do real work and I don’t see him starting any time soon. I also don’t see him doing well without the support of his entire family.


Nah, he's not getting a job driving for Amazon or working at Home Depot any time soon.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> They are saying Meghan hosted Hilary private *and Harry was not there*. I wonder if he purposely did not participate so he was not associated with politics. Did Diana or Kate host political figures alone - is this normal or not.



There are conflicting reports on that. Some are saying Harry joined them, others are claiming he wasn't there. I agree with what was said earlier, if the meeting was truly meant to be secret we wouldn't know about it. They wanted this made public.


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> They are saying Meghan hosted Hilary private and Harry was not there. I wonder if he purposely did not participate so he was not associated with politics. Did Diana or Kate host political figures alone - is this normal or not.


It’s not at all normal for the Royal Family to make known their political views.  They stay out of politics for reasons that have been discussed here many times - the Queen is impartial as Head of State no matter who’s in government here, or who comes over for official visits.
Meanwhile Meghan made a big deal of not meeting ***** when he came here on official visit, and makes a super supportive fuss over ******* and *****.  At the same time as Hilary is mulling over running again?  It’s not ok.


----------



## Clearblueskies

kemilia said:


> Nah, he's not getting a job driving for Amazon or working at Home Depot any time soon.


He’d be asking for too many holidays  they won’t want him!


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> if the meeting was truly meant to be secret we wouldn't know about it. They wanted this made public.



As usual. It's gotten so transparent now. Meghan can fly across the globe without anyone seeing her but can't have a visitor to their isolated Frogmore? Please.


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> I grew up inside this kind of family dynamic, with a damaged, emotionally dependent father and a horribly narcissistic mother.  Everything is very twisted and the endless lies and deceptions are mind-boggling.
> Children in these families don't have an easy time of it, no matter how wealthy and connected their self-absorbed parents are.
> So even though his parents are present in his life I do hope that Archie has others around him a lot of the time (ideally kin or very old friends) people who are kind, calm, stable, normal and caring,  unlike the passing parade of celebrity folk who seem to drop in to visit his parents from time to time.


The danger of being raised by a narcissist is that there is a high likelihood that you will marry one. Their behavior feels comfortable and familiar to you as it was all you knew growing up. They wear their narcissist mask when you first meet them and someone raised by a narc isn’t equipped to see the red flags of what lurks behind the mask. I don’t know if Charles or Diana were narcissists, but they prey on the emotionally vulnerable as well. Harry is showing himself to be this.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> This isn't even her first time reaching out to Hillary. According to this article:
> 
> "Markle wrote a letter to ******* when she was just 11 years old asking her to help amend a sexist advertisement for dishwater soap — something that sparked her activism for gender equality."
> 
> https://www.businessinsider.com/hil...more-cottage-baby-archie-prince-harry-2019-11



She has gotten so much mileage out of this story!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> Nah, he's not getting a job driving for Amazon or working at Home Depot any time soon.



If he can't handle his life and the way it is *now*, I can't even imagine him having to work 50 - 60+ hours per week doing actual hard work and navigating the stress and politics in a work or office environment.

No matter what happens, I feel like he will always keep his family just close enough to fall back into in the event things go sideways with Meghan.


----------



## jehaga

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s not at all normal for the Royal Family to make known their political views.  They stay out of politics for reasons that have been discussed here many times - the Queen is impartial as Head of State no matter who’s in government here, or who comes over for official visits.
> Meanwhile Meghan made a big deal of not meeting ***** when he came here on official visit, and makes a super supportive fuss over ******* and *****.  At the same time as Hilary is mulling over running again?  It’s not ok.


Think of the uproar there would be if she had a visit from Laura Bush.

She is a representative of the RF, yet they can do nothing about her despicable behavior. Imagine the level of frustration they are all experiencing over their “Meghan” problem right now.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> She has gotten so much mileage out of this story!



She wants to make sure we know she has always been an activist.


----------



## LibbyRuth

jehaga said:


> Imagine the uproar there would be if she had a visit from Laura Bush.
> 
> She is a representative of the RF, yet they can do nothing about her despicable behavior. Imagine the level of frustration they are all experiencing over their “Meghan” problem right now.



Why would there be uproar?


----------



## mrsinsyder

The whole thing is super long but someone got a hold of her court filing:

· *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “splashed out £5,000” on a copper bathtub.
*The truth:* No such bath exists.

· *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “forked out £500k” on soundproofing to block out the noise of planes
*The truth*: No such soundproofing exists.

· *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess installed a “yoga studio”.
*The truth*: There is no yoga studio.

· *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built an “orangery”.
*The truth: *No such orangery exists.

· *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a tennis court.
*The truth:* They did not build a tennis court.

· *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a “guest wing” for her mother to stay in when she visited.
*The truth:* This does not exist – and the claim is completely untrue.

*“The true position is that the Claimant has a long history of looking after her father’s welfare and trying to find solutions to any health problems… she did provide extensive financial support for him, as well as act as primary caregiver for her grandmother… her father did not telephone her to explain that he was not coming to her wedding… her team in Los Angeles did provide him with continued support for which he had expressed gratitude… she had reached out to him prior to the wedding and sought to protect him, as well as to ensure that he would be able to come to the wedding… she did not ignore him afterwards.”*

https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...pjebpd6i?format=amp&__twitter_impression=true


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> Why would there be uproar?



I think she means the media would be highly critical of such a visit. Since the media is majority liberal they gave the visit of a ******** former First Lady a glowing review (at least here in the US). That would not be the case if it were a ********** former First Lady visiting Meghan. We are straying into politics again, which is easy to do when politicians are visiting the subject of the thread.


----------



## jehaga

LibbyRuth said:


> Why would there be uproar?


Ellen DeGeneres sat next to George Bush during a ball game and Hollywood went into meltdown mode.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> The whole thing is super long but someone got a hold of her court filing:
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “splashed out £5,000” on a copper bathtub.
> *The truth:* No such bath exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “forked out £500k” on soundproofing to block out the noise of planes
> *The truth*: No such soundproofing exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess installed a “yoga studio”.
> *The truth*: There is no yoga studio.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built an “orangery”.
> *The truth: *No such orangery exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a tennis court.
> *The truth:* They did not build a tennis court.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a “guest wing” for her mother to stay in when she visited.
> *The truth:* This does not exist – and the claim is completely untrue.
> 
> *“The true position is that the Claimant has a long history of looking after her father’s welfare and trying to find solutions to any health problems… she did provide extensive financial support for him, as well as act as primary caregiver for her grandmother… her father did not telephone her to explain that he was not coming to her wedding… her team in Los Angeles did provide him with continued support for which he had expressed gratitude… she had reached out to him prior to the wedding and sought to protect him, as well as to ensure that he would be able to come to the wedding… she did not ignore him afterwards.”*
> 
> https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...pjebpd6i?format=amp&__twitter_impression=true


How grubby it at all is


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> How grubby it at all is


Their need to control the narrative is pathetic. 

Someone should tell MM the dislike of her isn’t because of bathtubs.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> I think she means the media would be highly critical of such a visit. Since the media is majority liberal they gave the visit of a ******** former First Lady a glowing review (at least here in the US). That would not be the case if it were a ********** former First Lady visiting Meghan. We are straying into politics again, which is easy to do when politicians are visiting the subject of the thread.



Gotcha.  Of course, Laura Bush was married to a politician - not one herself.


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> They are saying Meghan hosted Hilary private and Harry was not there. I wonder if he purposely did not participate so he was not associated with politics. Did Diana or Kate host political figures alone - is this normal or not.


if hillary thinks being meghan's friend will be helpful to her, she may be mistaken......don't know if she is thinking of running .....oops politics....expect visit from mods soon


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> The whole thing is super long but someone got a hold of her court filing:
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “splashed out £5,000” on a copper bathtub.
> *The truth:* No such bath exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “forked out £500k” on soundproofing to block out the noise of planes
> *The truth*: No such soundproofing exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess installed a “yoga studio”.
> *The truth*: There is no yoga studio.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built an “orangery”.
> *The truth: *No such orangery exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a tennis court.
> *The truth:* They did not build a tennis court.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a “guest wing” for her mother to stay in when she visited.
> *The truth:* This does not exist – and the claim is completely untrue.
> 
> *“The true position is that the Claimant has a long history of looking after her father’s welfare and trying to find solutions to any health problems… she did provide extensive financial support for him, as well as act as primary caregiver for her grandmother… her father did not telephone her to explain that he was not coming to her wedding… her team in Los Angeles did provide him with continued support for which he had expressed gratitude… she had reached out to him prior to the wedding and sought to protect him, as well as to ensure that he would be able to come to the wedding… she did not ignore him afterwards.”*
> 
> https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...pjebpd6i?format=amp&__twitter_impression=true


These headlines seem like such petty things to be concerned about. These are the examples that they hope will help them win the letter case?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> if hillary thinks being meghan's friend will be helpful to her, she may be mistaken......don't know if she is thinking of running .....oops politics....expect visit from mods soon



Hillary sees the situation the way most Americans (those not reading this board) see it. To the casual observer it looks like Meghan is being unfairly criticized, and to some extent that is true, what with fabricated tales of buying copper bathtubs and such. Hillary's explanation of the Meghan controversy comes down to the kneejerk reaction of saying it is all about sexism and racism.

Hillary was in the UK to plug the new book she wrote with her daughter. She and Meghan got lots of media attention and good PR (and Hillary possibly got book sales) from the visit. From one self-promoter to another, it was a win-win for both of them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hillary sees the situation the way most Americans (those not reading this board) see it. To the casual observer it looks like Meghan is being unfairly criticized, and to some extent that is true, what with fabricated tales of buying copper bathtubs and such. Hillary's explanation of the Meghan controversy comes down to the kneejerk reaction of saying it is all about sexism and racism.
> 
> Hillary was in the UK to plug the new book she wrote with her daughter. She and Meghan got lots of media attention and good PR (and Hillary possibly got book sales) from the visit. From one self-promoter to another, it was a win-win for both of them.


maybe meghan is thinking US politics could be a backup plan for her


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe meghan is thinking US politics could be a backup plan for her



I'm trying to imagine her as a duchess Congresswoman or Senator. She would have to represent California because no other state would take her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm trying to imagine her as a duchess Congresswoman or Senator. She would have to represent California because no other state would take her.


well she started very young being interested in causes.......I wouldn't be surprised......well, I would be surprised if she gave up on the royal gig.  but if she did, then I would not be surprised if she ran for office


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> The whole thing is super long but someone got a hold of her court filing:
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “splashed out £5,000” on a copper bathtub.
> *The truth:* No such bath exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “forked out £500k” on soundproofing to block out the noise of planes
> *The truth*: No such soundproofing exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess installed a “yoga studio”.
> *The truth*: There is no yoga studio.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built an “orangery”.
> *The truth: *No such orangery exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a tennis court.
> *The truth:* They did not build a tennis court.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a “guest wing” for her mother to stay in when she visited.
> *The truth:* This does not exist – and the claim is completely untrue.
> 
> *“The true position is that the Claimant has a long history of looking after her father’s welfare and trying to find solutions to any health problems… she did provide extensive financial support for him, as well as act as primary caregiver for her grandmother… her father did not telephone her to explain that he was not coming to her wedding… her team in Los Angeles did provide him with continued support for which he had expressed gratitude… she had reached out to him prior to the wedding and sought to protect him, as well as to ensure that he would be able to come to the wedding… she did not ignore him afterwards.”*
> 
> https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...pjebpd6i?format=amp&__twitter_impression=true


What DID they spend that reno money on?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> if hillary thinks being meghan's friend will be helpful to her, she may be mistaken......don't know if she is thinking of running .....oops politics....expect visit from mods soon


HRC keeps referencing the racist angle. Visiting MM plays into this.   She thinks this will help her if she runs for something again.  Ol' Hil is dead meat as far as her party is concerned.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> What DID they spend that reno money on?



Well, it sure wasn't spent to provide a safe environment for their dogs.


----------



## Chagall

LittleStar88 said:


> She has gotten so much mileage out of this story!


Apparently it was a class project. I wonder if her classmates are still reaping the benefits.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> Apparently it was a class project. I wonder if her classmates are still reaping the benefits.


?? Really


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> HRC keeps referencing the racist angle. Visiting MM plays into this.   She thinks this will help her if she runs for something again.  Ol' Hil is dead meat as far as her party is concerned.


Hilary has that all wrong. The backlash against MM is not racist. The backlash is against her behavior period. Yep, HRC is milking this for sure. Sickening!


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> ?? Really


Apparently the class were shown commercials and asked their reactions. Don’t know if they all wrote letters or not but watching the commercials was a class project.


----------



## mdcx

MM is reminding me a little of the volatile ladies of RHONJ with the details of that lawsuit.
Every normal person: “just ignore it, she’s not worth it, get your purse and go home now!”
MM: “what did you say? I heard that. How dare you? You’ve always had beef with me. H, hold my wig and you over there, let’s get ready to rumble!”


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> Apparently the class were shown commercials and asked their reactions. Don’t know if they all wrote letters or not but watching the commercials was a class project.


----------



## Flatsy

daisychainz said:


> These headlines seem like such petty things to be concerned about. These are the examples that they hope will help them win the letter case?


Harry and Meghan should take the sound advice offered to Harry last week by Prince Albert of Monaco which was essentially: Yes, the media sucks and you have my sympathies.  But you also need to learn to let it go.

It sounds like Meghan is using this as her opportunity to "clap back" at every inaccurate detail- like she's wanted to from the beginning, but which Buckingham Palace wisely prevented her from doing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> Apparently the class were shown commercials and asked their reactions. Don’t know if they all wrote letters or not but watching the commercials was a class project.


They did. This story is soooo not portrayed accurately. But I don’t see her suing to correct this one...


----------



## LittleStar88

mdcx said:


> MM is reminding me a little of the volatile ladies of RHONJ with the details of that lawsuit.
> Every normal person: “just ignore it, she’s not worth it, get your purse and go home now!”
> MM: “what did you say? I heard that. How dare you? You’ve always had beef with me. H, hold my wig and you over there, let’s get ready to rumble!”



Would love to watch her get drunk, throw tables, and have a sobbing breakdown because none of them asked how she is doing.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I had the opposite - emotionally dependent mother and horribly stubborn and narcissistic father. I think unless you have had exposure to this kind of family situation, you really don't get the true depth of damage a narcissist can do. And *honestly that narcissistic trait can pass on (as it seems to have from her father to her*).
> 
> It takes a ton of work to undo it, and she seems content to cruise along in the same spirit as her father.


Let's face it, it is many times a "learned" behavior but she also has the 'acting' down pat ..


----------



## TangerineKandy

mdcx said:


> OT but in terms of Wales, Hinterland is an amazing show.
> On topic, that MP obviously subscribes to the “women supporting women, feminism means women can’t criticise moms” type blather.
> In time she may regret blindly supporting Megs.


I LOVE Hinterland!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> What DID they spend that reno money on?


Good question!  If not on a yoga studio and a spare bedroom, then where did it go?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Good question!  If not on a yoga studio and a spare bedroom, then where did it go?


Even totally rewiring, replastering, new floors, plumbing etc. over 2 million?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> Good question!  If not on a yoga studio and a spare bedroom, then where did it go?


Security stuff?


----------



## elvisfan4life

pixiejenna said:


> I think it’s really unfortunate that they are planning to spend Christmas in the US. Given the age of the Queen and the Duke I feel like spending the holidays with them would be priority. Like many have mentioned Doria could very easily travel to the UK if she wanted to spend the holidays with them. So what if she doesn’t get I invited to every event they have, it’s not the end of the world. Based on the amount of time planned to spend here it really comes off as they’re planning to relocate. If something happens and the Queen passes Harry will regret not spending her last holidays with her. I think it will be enough for him to have a meltdown.


Harry is a different man since he met Megan... His grandfather is 98 this may be his.last opportunity to share Christmas with him ...the old Harry would be there in a heartbeat .....so sad his.loss. Personally him and Megan could live on another planet let alone another country no loss to us at all


----------



## bag-princess

pixiejenna said:


> I think it’s really unfortunate that they are planning to spend Christmas in the US. Given the age of the Queen and the Duke I feel like spending the holidays with them would be priority.* Like many have mentioned Doria could very easily travel to the UK if she wanted to spend the holidays with them.* So what if she doesn’t get I invited to every event they have, it’s not the end of the world. Based on the amount of time planned to spend here it really comes off as they’re planning to relocate. If something happens and the Queen passes Harry will regret not spending her last holidays with her. I think it will be enough for him to have a meltdown.




why are you trying to make this about her??? maybe she isn't because harry and meghan do not want to spend the holiday's there with the royal family and WANT to go spend them with her mother instead. 




Chagall said:


> I just saw this comment and take offense to it. Referring to the people who post in this thread as ‘keyboard warriors’ is uncalled for. *The vast majority of the posts are intelligent, often researched, and well thought out.*




oh boy!


----------



## elvisfan4life

Clearblueskies said:


> 8 grandchildren I think.  William, Harry, Beatrice, Eugenie, Zara, Peter, Louise and James, and 8 great grandchildren.  Most of them show up, most of the time - but not all the time it’s true.  It is about the optics this year as others have said, and media-savvy as they are M&H know this.


the Queen mentioned in a documentary how important her Christmas traditions are.to her down to having the two youngest grandchildren and her great grandchildren all together to dress the tree with family heirloom decorations each year ...there have been fabulous pictures of her with the youngest family members ...like when Zara little girl snatched her handbag!!! Shame Archie won't be joining them


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Even totally rewiring, replastering, new floors, plumbing etc. over 2 million?


so no copper tub?
I liked that idea


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> The whole thing is super long but someone got a hold of her court filing:
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “splashed out £5,000” on a copper bathtub.
> *The truth:* No such bath exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess “forked out £500k” on soundproofing to block out the noise of planes
> *The truth*: No such soundproofing exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess installed a “yoga studio”.
> *The truth*: There is no yoga studio.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built an “orangery”.
> *The truth: *No such orangery exists.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a tennis court.
> *The truth:* They did not build a tennis court.
> 
> · *The claim:* The Duke and Duchess built a “guest wing” for her mother to stay in when she visited.
> *The truth:* This does not exist – and the claim is completely untrue.
> 
> *“The true position is that the Claimant has a long history of looking after her father’s welfare and trying to find solutions to any health problems… she did provide extensive financial support for him, as well as act as primary caregiver for her grandmother… her father did not telephone her to explain that he was not coming to her wedding… her team in Los Angeles did provide him with continued support for which he had expressed gratitude… she had reached out to him prior to the wedding and sought to protect him, as well as to ensure that he would be able to come to the wedding… she did not ignore him afterwards.”*
> 
> https://www.bylineinvestigates.com/...pjebpd6i?format=amp&__twitter_impression=true




Good grief. Next thing you know she'll be trying to convince us she only eats generic cat food, and as soon as Archie can walk he's going to get a paper route. And then they'll fly private jet to Mallorca to get away from it all.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Good grief. Next thing you know she'll be trying to convince us she only eats generic cat food, and as soon as Archie can walk he's going to get a paper route. And then they'll fly private jet to Mallorca to get away from it all.


I don't much care about their remodel.  Of course, I'm American so it's not coming out out my taxes.  I don't have a problem with her politics or "wokeness".  I just wish she would stop feeling sorry for herself.  And I used to think Harry was sweet.  Now he's trying to be tough and I'm not liking him so much.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> so no copper tub?
> I liked that idea


As I don’t have to polish it, I’m good with it. Doing my copper cookware is my limit lol!


----------



## Sharont2305

Da iawn Gareth


----------



## Straight-Laced

LittleStar88 said:


> I had the opposite - emotionally dependent mother and horribly stubborn and narcissistic father. I think unless you have had exposure to this kind of family situation, you really don't get the true depth of damage a narcissist can do. And honestly that narcissistic trait can pass on (as it seems to have from her father to her).
> 
> It takes a ton of work to undo it, and she seems content to cruise along in the same spirit as her father.


Why would Meghan feel the need to change?  She's been very successful and keeps moving onward and upward.  Her narcissism and related enormous self confidence has delivered for her.  She's left many behind, some feeling very used and abused no doubt, but I can't see her spending any time regretting the things she's left behind after her use for them has passed ... and by 'things' I mean family members, dogs ...
I don't believe many successful narcissists seek therapy - it's those hurt by narcissists who spend time and money on therapists (and I've had LOTS of therapy).
Wishing you well LittleStar!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chagall said:


> The queen is a true horse and dog lover, and has been all her life. I think Megan, judging by how she treats her own dogs, is a patron for publicity.


Oh I agree! The link to Mayhew was just a reminder that Meghan had used her 'relatable experience' as a rescue dog Mom when her patronages were chosen. But the outcome for her rescue dogs is questionable, to say the least.
Some might even call them props


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> Why would Meghan feel the need to change?  She's been very successful and keeps moving onward and upward.  Her narcissism and related enormous self confidence has delivered for her.  She's left many behind, some feeling very used and abused no doubt, but I can't see her spending any time regretting the things she's left behind after her use for them has passed ... and by 'things' I mean family members, dogs ...
> I don't believe many successful narcissists seek therapy - it's those hurt by narcissists who spend time and money on therapists (and I've had LOTS of therapy).
> Wishing you well LittleStar!!


That is so true. One of the gages of a narcissist is by the pain and suffering of the people around them. The ‘narcs’ know exactly the effect of their behavior on others. It is calculated and done deliberately. If they do seek therapy, usually because they are forced to, they then proceed to lie, manipulate and trick the therapist. They have stopped giving therapy to prisoners because they only use the information to hone their skills to better hurt people. They never change ever. They don’t want to. Their narcissism has gotten them exactly what they wanted.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chagall said:


> That is so true. One of the gages of a narcissist is by the pain and suffering of the people around them. The ‘narcs’ know exactly the effect of their behavior on others. It is calculated and done deliberately. If they do seek therapy, usually because they are forced to, they then proceed to lie, manipulate and trick the therapist. They have stopped giving therapy to prisoners because they only use the information to hone their skills to better hurt people. They never change ever. They don’t want to. Their narcissism has gotten them exactly what they wanted.


You know I think they will change, so long as there’s something in it for them  
(and there are negatives consequences for them if they don’t change).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

Straight-Laced said:


> News regarding Prince Andrew/Epstein is being followed closely in the major papers and news services (and has been for some months e.g. front pages of The Times UK, The Telegraph etc, etc) but not so much on this thread, for obvious reasons i.e it's a news and gossip thread about Harry and Meghan.
> I'm sure many of us are able to keep reasonably up to date with both H & M dramas and Prince Andrew's news and don't need to be told that H & M drama is contrived to provide cover for Prince A, because it's not.
> H & M do indeed create drama, and Prince Andrew's past activities are not being ignored.



I just read the Queen did not know about the Prince Andrew interview until afterwards, and she was not amused!


----------



## Straight-Laced

gelbergirl said:


> I just read the Queen did not know about the Prince Andrew interview until afterwards, and she was not amused!


Maybe you could start a dedicated Prince Andrew thread for exactly that topic.


----------



## lulilu

gelbergirl said:


> I just read the Queen did not know about the Prince Andrew interview until afterwards, and she was not amused!


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> You know I think they will change, so long as there’s something in it for them
> (and there are negatives consequences for them if they don’t change).


They never change. If they are a true narcissist they will remain that way their entire life. As a means to an end they may act out ‘changing’  and put on their nice person mask. Once they have achieved what they appeared to change for, they will, sadly, revert to their true selves.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gelbergirl said:


> I just read the Queen did not know about the Prince Andrew interview until afterwards, and she was not amused!


The interview sounds like it was a total disaster.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> IDK why he's doing interviews
> I don't think they are being pilloried


Why in the world did he do this interview? He must be totally clueless!


----------



## rose60610

Mrs.Z said:


> The interview sounds like it was a total disaster.



It's in the Financial Times. Andrew's version is on the flimsy side but he was skillful at sounding like "you can believe me or not" knowing the burden of proof is difficult to show.  At no point did he look for any kind of sympathy. I think he was coached pretty good.


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Oh I agree! The link to Mayhew was just a reminder that Meghan had used her 'relatable experience' as a rescue dog Mom when her patronages were chosen. But the outcome for her rescue dogs is questionable, to say the least.
> Some might even call them props


Interesting you point out how different she is from the queen - true animal lover vs one who (maybe) uses dogs as props.  I was listening to someone (writer or producer of The Crown) talking about the queen and he said she was actually a shy, retiring woman - again very different from Meghan.  I would think she would be finding Meghan and Harry's antics trying.


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> Interesting you point out how different she is from the queen - true animal lover vs one who (maybe) uses dogs as props.  I was listening to someone (writer or producer of The Crown) talking about the queen and he said she was actually a shy, retiring woman - again very different from Meghan.  I would think she would be finding Meghan and Harry's antics trying.


I can imagine the Queen thinking to herself “and when did someone ask if I was okay?”


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> I just read the Queen did not know about the Prince Andrew interview until afterwards, and she was not amused!


makes sense to me.  I wouldn't think she would approve of this dumb decision


----------



## keodi

LadyGran said:


> What if Albert was really giving Harry tips on living separate lives?
> *He and Charlene seemed to have accomplished this successfully.  *
> What to do if the pesky press intrude?  Sue!


very interesting, I watched a documentary on the princely family and those two gave me weird vibes....


----------



## sdkitty

keodi said:


> very interesting, I watched a documentary on the princely family and those two gave me weird vibes....


whether you want to see it as true love or domination, I think Harry is under Meghan's spell - at least for now


----------



## jblended

Has this blind item been posted?
https://blindgossip.com/the-enemy-diaries/


----------



## LibbyRuth

jblended said:


> Has this blind item been posted?
> https://blindgossip.com/the-enemy-diaries/


Assuming the "family" in the blind gossip has a lot of power and a lot of staff, why wouldn't they just assign someone the task of stealing the journal so they can destroy it?


----------



## jblended

*shrug*
Firstly, we don't know if there is truth to this story (although I personally feel it fits in with her behaviour thus far, and as such could be true, but what do I know?)

As to why they haven't gotten rid of it...
Is it a written journal or electronic one?
How many copies are there?
Who has those backups?
Do they want to respect her right to privacy and just convince her not to release it instead of intervening?
What would Harry think if they stole and destroyed it?
What drama would she create in the press if they took it?

Above all, I honestly think they want to keep Harry on their side and don't want to create a bigger rift within the family, so they're 'managing' the situation by limiting how much information she has access to instead of taking conclusive steps that may tear the family apart.

But all of this is my conjecture. *shrug*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lifeisgreat

We all have narcissistic tendencies.  It's a continuum. True narcissism is quite rare.  We're not practitioners (that I know of) and should take some care throwing around these terms.


----------



## bag-mania

How would the family know about her keeping “highly detailed diaries?”  If the diaries are real it implies Meghan is playing a devious long game and providing herself with insurance in case the marriage doesn’t work out. On the other hand I can see Harry having loose lips and telling her everything about everybody. She may not even need to write it down.


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> How would the family know about her keeping “highly detailed diaries?”  If the diaries are real it implies Meghan is playing a devious long game and providing herself with insurance in case the marriage doesn’t work out. *On the other hand I can see Harry having loose lips and telling her everything about everybody. She may not even need to write it down*.




this killed me!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

jblended said:


> *shrug*
> Firstly, we don't know if there is truth to this story (although I personally feel it fits in with her behaviour thus far, and as such could be true, but what do I know?)
> 
> As to why they haven't gotten rid of it...
> Is it a written journal or electronic one?
> How many copies are there?
> Who has those backups?
> Do they want to respect her right to privacy and just convince her not to release it instead of intervening?
> What would Harry think if they stole and destroyed it?
> What drama would she create in the press if they took it?
> 
> Above all, I honestly think they want to keep Harry on their side and don't want to create a bigger rift within the family, so they're 'managing' the situation by limiting how much information she has access to instead of taking conclusive steps that may tear the family apart.
> 
> But all of this is my conjecture. *shrug*


Based on what we’ve seen it wouldn’t surprise me if there was some truth in this.  And she made a copy of the letter she sent her father  I found that rather odd.


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> And she made a copy of the letter she sent her father  I found that rather odd.


She was laying a trap with that letter from the very beginning.  She wanted her father to bring the letter to the tabloids to prove his betrayal of her once and for all.  She wanted the contents of the letter to be published and clearly wrote it with that in mind.  She wanted the tabloids to publish the letter without her permission so she could sue them.  It was all incredibly calculating on her part.

I don't need a blind item to tell me that she's protecting her own interests by keeping a diary.  Whether it's to do a Panaroma-style interview, write a tell-all book or just negotiate a divorce settlement, I think she will be prepared.


----------



## Flatsy

Lifeisgreat said:


> We all have narcissistic tendencies.  It's a continuum. True narcissism is quite rare.  We're not practitioners (that I know of) and should take some care throwing around these terms.


I used to think this term was being thrown around too loosely until I Googled a couple of lists of narcissist traits and found that she fit so many of them to a tee.  I do believe narcissism is at the root of all of her difficulties - from believing she's not being treated well enough by the people around her, to her inability to tolerate criticism, to her history of broken relationships, to her excessive touting of her own achievements, to her role in alienating her partner from his friends and family, to her apparent belief that she deserves nothing but the finest in life (designer clothes, private jets) and owes no apologies for it.  

I could go on and on and on.  No one here can provide a professional diagnosis, but going by what we see of her, I think an excellent case can be made to support the belief that she's a narcissist.


----------



## green.bee

An up to date and "highly detailed" diary may be handy when she decides to write a memoir.


----------



## Sharont2305

I would have thought that any divorce would have a tight knit clause that she wouldn't do a tell all.... at a hefty settlement obviously.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> I would have thought that any divorce would have a tight knit clause that she wouldn't do a tell all.... at a hefty settlement obviously.


She has to agree to it.  They can't force her to sign away her right to write about her experiences.  She will be entitled to a financial settlement. If the royal family aren't being as generous as she wants, she can choose to fight for it in court and still retain her right to publish what will undoubtedly be a best-selling book.  And it would make her look like even more of a victim if the royal family fights her over the settlement. 

I think a divorce is a potential lose-lose-lose situation for the royal family and there  is nothing they can do about it.  The only thing that could have been done to prevent it was listening to William's advice and taking more time in the courtship to make sure Meghan was really cut out for the life of a princess, and truly dedicated to the good of the family, which I don't think she is at all.


----------



## Toulouse

Flatsy said:


> She has to agree to it.  They can't force her to sign away her right to write about her experiences.  She will be entitled to a financial settlement. If the royal family aren't being as generous as she wants, she can choose to fight for it in court and still retain her right to publish what will undoubtedly be a best-selling book.  And it would make her look like even more of a victim if the royal family fights her over the settlement.
> 
> I think a divorce is a potential lose-lose-lose situation for the royal family and there  is nothing they can do about it.  The only thing that could have been done to prevent it was listening to William's advice and taking more time in the courtship to make sure Meghan was really cut out for the life of a princess, and truly dedicated to the good of the family, which I don't think she is at all.



They actually can — assuming she signed a prenup with a non-disclosure agreement.


----------



## sdkitty

Toulouse said:


> They actually can — assuming she signed a prenup with a non-disclosure agreement.


but can any legal agreement potentially be broken?


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan wouldn’t come out of the marriage being very popular I don’t think. The divorce would probably be ugly and she would be labeled a gold digger for sure. Unless Harry does something bizarre he would likely have most of the sympathy.

Writing a tell-all wouldn’t make her so welcome should she want to head back to the US to hang out with her celebrity friends. Most of them have a skeleton or two in the closet and they’ll keep anyone at arm’s length who can’t be trusted.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wouldn’t come out of the marriage being very popular I don’t think. The divorce would probably be ugly and she would be labeled a gold digger for sure. Unless Harry does something bizarre he would likely have most of the sympathy.
> 
> Writing a tell-all wouldn’t make her so welcome should she want to head back to the US to hang out with her celebrity friends. Most of them have a skeleton or two in the closet and they’ll keep anyone at arm’s length who can’t be trusted.


I don't know about that.  the press here is still very nice to her.  in any case I don't think she's going to give up this gig.  unless she is truly that unhappy and maybe thinks she has a chance to go into politics.  time will tell


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't know about that.  the press here is still very nice to her.  in any case I don't think she's going to give up this gig.  unless she is truly that unhappy and maybe thinks she has a chance to go into politics.  time will tell



I don’t see her letting go of it either unless she and Harry come to despise each other and she is miserable. As for the press, they could turn on her at the drop of a hat. They aren’t known for loyalty.  

I don’t see her as a politician for some reason. Maybe she would be an advocate or activist for whatever causes she feels would  give her the most attention.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I don’t see her letting go of it either unless she and Harry come to despise each other and she is miserable. As for the press, they could turn on her at the drop of a hat. They aren’t known for loyalty.
> 
> I don’t see her as a politician for some reason. Maybe she would be an advocate or activist for whatever causes she feels would  give her the most attention.


I think she'll aim to be like Angelina Jolie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> to make sure Meghan was really cut out for the life of a princess



Good thing she'll never be one


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> but can any legal agreement potentially be broken?


Prenups are not legally binding in the UK. Many wealthy celebrities don't even bother with them for that reason.  The UK courts are very likely to disregard a prenup, especially if it is the woman challenging it.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Good thing she'll never be one


True


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wouldn’t come out of the marriage being very popular I don’t think. The divorce would probably be ugly and she would be labeled a gold digger for sure. Unless Harry does something bizarre he would likely have most of the sympathy.


Harry is going to be hard to demonize in a divorce.  He isn't Prince Charles keeping a Camilla on the side. He seems to be trying his very hardest to do whatever he can to support his wife, including turning his back on his family for her.   

Meghan has yet to really catch on with the public, and is known as a social climber with bad relationships with both her own family and the family she married into.  I don't think she will fare well in a divorce from a public sympathy standpoint.


----------



## mdcx

Sad to think of Harry possibly being encouraged into his darkest moods and/or drink in order that he starts “unburdening” himself to M. One of the narcissists in my life used this approach to gather “material”, later to be used as leverage.


----------



## Flatsy

mdcx said:


> Sad to think of Harry possibly being encouraged into his darkest moods and/or drink in order that he starts “unburdening” himself to M. One of the narcissists in my life used this approach to gather “material”, later to be used as leverage.


I don't think so.  The tabloids keep saying Meghan encourages him not to drink and to take care of himself and meditate/do yoga.  I do think Harry bought into Meghan's healthier lifestyle, and that's probably one of the ways he feels that she takes care of him and his wellbeing.


----------



## hellosunshine

* Meghan Markle is officially 2019's most searched-for fashion influencer *
_
Her outfits sparked, on average, a 216% increase in searches for similar pieces_

From her penchant for a belted shirt dress, to a love of brands from her home country of Canada, Meghan Markle knows what works for her and wears it well.

Fashion search platform Lyst just released its Year in Fashion 2019 Report, which revealed 38-year-old Markle to be the Internet's most searched-for “influencer” of 2019.

The report analyses queries, page views and sales metrics across six million fashion products from over 12,000 online stores, alongside the global media coverage and social media mentions generated by the year's biggest brands and trends.

The report revealed that in 2019, Markle’s stylish ensembles sparked, on average, a 216 per cent increase in searches for similar pieces.

It was during her and Prince Harry’s Royal Tour of South Africa that her sartorial influence was at its peak.




The Club Monaco dress she wore to meet Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, sold out in less than 24 hours, following a 570 per cent spike in Internet searches after she donned the ensemble.

And then on day seven of the Royal Tour, Markle hosted a private breakfast to discuss the issue of gender-based violence in the nation and for the occasion, and wore a monochrome midi skirt from American brand, J.Crew.

Following this, Internet searches for the brand, which was founded in 1947, increased by 102%.

Not only this, but searches for her favourite style of shirt dresses, increased by 45% over a month, after she wore five different iterations of the style in Africa.

*https://www.standard.co.uk/fashion/...rnet-s-most-indemand-influencer-a4289441.html
*


----------



## Chagall

Lifeisgreat said:


> We all have narcissistic tendencies.  It's a continuum. True narcissism is quite rare.  We're not practitioners (that I know of) and should take some care throwing around these terms.


With a population of 326 million the US, for example, has a ratio of 6% of its people with NPD. That’s 19,560,000 people with this disorder. Although the percentage may be low it equates a lot of people. I have very close knowledge of a diagnosed narcissist and am very well versed on this condition and am not ‘throwing around’ anything!


----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> * Meghan Markle is officially 2019's most searched-for fashion influencer *
> _
> Her outfits sparked, on average, a 216% increase in searches for similar pieces_
> 
> From her penchant for a belted shirt dress, to a love of brands from her home country of Canada, Meghan Markle knows what works for her and wears it well.
> 
> Fashion search platform Lyst just released its Year in Fashion 2019 Report, which revealed 38-year-old Markle to be the Internet's most searched-for “influencer” of 2019.
> 
> The report analyses queries, page views and sales metrics across six million fashion products from over 12,000 online stores, alongside the global media coverage and social media mentions generated by the year's biggest brands and trends.
> 
> The report revealed that in 2019, Markle’s stylish ensembles sparked, on average, a 216 per cent increase in searches for similar pieces.
> 
> It was during her and Prince Harry’s Royal Tour of South Africa that her sartorial influence was at its peak.
> 
> View attachment 4594721
> 
> 
> The Club Monaco dress she wore to meet Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, sold out in less than 24 hours, following a 570 per cent spike in Internet searches after she donned the ensemble.
> 
> And then on day seven of the Royal Tour, Markle hosted a private breakfast to discuss the issue of gender-based violence in the nation and for the occasion, and wore a monochrome midi skirt from American brand, J.Crew.
> 
> Following this, Internet searches for the brand, which was founded in 1947, increased by 102%.
> 
> Not only this, but searches for her favourite style of shirt dresses, increased by 45% over a month, after she wore five different iterations of the style in Africa.
> 
> *https://www.standard.co.uk/fashion/...rnet-s-most-indemand-influencer-a4289441.html*


Almost every one of the top 10 in this list are all very eccentric dressers - Cardi B, Lizzo, Billy Porter, Zendaya, Kylie Jenner - I don't think topping this list makes her a fashion icon of any sort, lol. These people are generally fashion weirdos. I'd say lots of tweens are looking her up her clothes, they do seem more affordable than what most royalty/celebs wear.


----------



## Flatsy

Good or bad, Meghan gets so much publicity that whatever she wears will be seen by many, many women.  I don't think she looked very good on most of the tour, and looked downright disheveled and sloppy a few times.  Tom and Lorenzo wrote some excellent blog posts about how she really needed to step up her fashion game.   But she wore a lot of accessible, mass-market pieces that are easily purchasable, so I'm not surprised all of the publicity resulted in a lot of searches for those items.


----------



## daisychainz

I wonder if mass market pieces present an issue for royals. I don't follow many royals, but don't they often steer towards more expensive clothing and clothing from their own countries to make sure it's ethically made? I wonder if that's a consideration when selecting clothing pieces from JCrew and etc. Easily accessible is mass marketed, which often translates to cheap prices because of unfair labor. Not that I'm caring too much - I shop sweatpants from Walmart


----------



## jehaga

There’s just something unnatural about the way she holds Archie.


----------



## bag-mania

jehaga said:


> There’s just something unnatural about the way she holds Archie.



I agree, but at least she's improved from those first few months.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that when they are in public, she is putting more thought into how Archie is viewed - either trying to allow him to be seen or shielding him from view - than she is just holding him.


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> I agree, but at least she's improved from those first few months.



I think Meghan has always held her child well, afterall Prince Harry was also held in a similar manner by Diana. Only difference is that Archie seems to be more finicky and moves around more.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

jehaga said:


> There’s just something unnatural about the way she holds Archie.


I agree.  Most people hold their baby on their hip, with the crook of their arm supporting the baby’s bottom.  She holds him directly in front, which looks weird.  It’s also way more tiring that way.  I can’t imagine holding him that way for more than a few minutes without getting tired.

Unless she normally wears a baby carrier, and Archie is used to being in front like that?  Maybe that’s why.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> I think Meghan has always held her child well, afterall Prince Harry was also held in a similar manner by Diana. Only difference is that Archie seems to be more finicky and moves around more.
> 
> View attachment 4595056



Well of course it's going to look better when you crop out everything except his head. Here are two more from the very same day.


----------



## rose60610

While I'm probably not among Meghan's top five fans, I'll cut her slack on how she carries Archie. Maybe he's a really squirmy baby. If so, once he starts walking he could well zoom about very, very fast.


----------



## LibbyRuth

rose60610 said:


> While I'm probably not among Meghan's top five fans, I'll cut her slack on how she carries Archie. Maybe he's a really squirmy baby. If so, once he starts walking he could well zoom about very, very fast.


Fair point. I will also add that there have only been a couple of times we've seen her carrying him, and anyone whose spent time around a baby knows that in certain situations - if a baby is asleep and has to be moved or something like that - we end up doing what we have to do to maintain a baby's mood. The pics that were snapped at the polo match looked to me like he may have fallen asleep and she was trying to keep him in a certain position where he was happy. The pics in South Africa were a specific photo op occasion meant to showcase Archie.  So we may not have seen her holding him in a normal mom situation.


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> Well of course it's going to look better when you crop out everything except his head. Here are two more from the very same day.
> 
> View attachment 4595075
> 
> View attachment 4595074



I still see nothing wrong with how she holds Archie. Your photos only show that Archie is always anchored in the same position but as I've said earlier..he appears to be a very fussy and active baby.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> I still see nothing wrong with how she holds Archie. Your photos only show that Archie is always anchored in the same position but as I've said earlier..he appears to be a very fussy and active baby.



Hey, I acknowledged she's better now. Those shots show she had a period of awkwardness while she was figuring out what worked for her.


----------



## myown

Annawakes said:


> I agree.  Most people hold their baby on their hip, with the crook of their arm supporting the baby’s bottom.  She holds him directly in front, which looks weird.  It’s also way more tiring that way.  I can’t imagine holding him that way for more than a few minutes without getting tired.
> 
> Unless she normally wears a baby carrier, and Archie is used to being in front like that?  Maybe that’s why.


I still wear my 1.5 year old on front of me. Like when we used a carrier, but we don’t use it anymore. He is so used to that, so he feels lighter and easier to hold to me ‍♀️ just today he refused to walk and I needed to carry him, I tried it on the hip side but it felt so uncomfortable


----------



## LibbyRuth

I knew a woman who had 4 kids in six years.  At some point in that window of carrying kids around for so long, she developed back problems and was told a key reason for it was how she'd contorted her spine by shifting the same hip out so often carrying a kid. So if you can find the comfort carrying a baby on your front rather than a hip it can be better for your back.  Perhaps her yoga teaching mother had taught her that.


----------



## Jayne1

green.bee said:


> An up to date and "highly detailed" diary may be handy when she decides to write a memoir.


Or she can follow in Diana's footsteps and record tapes (okay, not on a cassette like Diana did) deliver them to Andrew Morton, to transcribe the tapes as material for her book. 

There are ways to get around having one's story get out, I would think.


----------



## rose60610

daisychainz said:


> Almost every one of the top 10 in this list are all very eccentric dressers - Cardi B, Lizzo, Billy Porter, Zendaya, Kylie Jenner - I don't think topping this list makes her a fashion icon of any sort, lol. *These people are generally fashion weirdos.* I'd say lots of tweens are looking her up her clothes, they do seem more affordable than what most royalty/celebs wear.



Agreed! It's noteworthy that it's largely the low priced clothes that get sold out. The high end clothes/shoes that Michelle *****, Melania ***** and other high profile women wore often sold out even when items were priced at thousands of dollars.


----------



## Flatsy

Jayne1 said:


> Or she can follow in Diana's footsteps and record tapes (okay, not on a cassette like Diana did) deliver them to Andrew Morton, to transcribe the tapes as material for her book.


Meghan wouldn't make any money from that. 

Diana really just wanted to tell her story so everyone would know how she was done wrong.  I think Meghan would be doing so for both the money and the launching of her post-divorce celebrity career.


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> I think Meghan has always held her child well, afterall Prince Harry was also held in a similar manner by Diana. Only difference is that Archie seems to be more finicky and moves around more.
> 
> View attachment 4595056


Say what you want about Diana, she was a natural around children. She was not without her flaws but that kind of warmth cannot be faked.


----------



## mdcx

Chagall said:


> Say what you want about Diana, she was a natural around children. She was not without her flaws but that kind of warmth cannot be faked.


I think that’s why people loved her so much, she just seemed fundamentally kind. Still makes me sad remembering the day she died.

On topic - M and H are on break now right? I wonder when they will pop up in LA?


----------



## lazeny

rose60610 said:


> While I'm probably not among Meghan's top five fans, I'll cut her slack on how she carries Archie. Maybe he's a really squirmy baby. If so, once he starts walking he could well zoom about very, very fast.



I agree. I have an ott squirmy clingy baby boy and I probably held him in weird positions just so I wouldn't drop him. My kid loves looking everywhere but insist on clinging to my neck and shoulders. My husband even dropped him when he put him on his hip and my dog was running around. Babies will do baby things, lol.


----------



## Murphy47

bag-mania said:


> I agree, but at least she's improved from those first few months.



She doesn’t do it that often. She’s not comfortable with him. At this age, most mothers can carry the baby around and all its gear and drag a toddler besides.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

mdcx said:


> On topic - M and H are on break now right? I wonder when they will pop up in LA?



they’re very quiet this week!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Hey, I acknowledged she's better now. Those shots show she had a period of awkwardness while she was figuring out what worked for her.



She probably is better now at holding Archie,......and ......when she has periods of awkwardness in general, she goes all in! 

Including when she isn't going to Grandma Windsor's for Christmas and forces us to speculate why. Could she be trying to avoid being with the Uncle Andrew and his family who supports this tarnished Prince? Bbbbbbbbbut then that would fly in the face of her inviting I-support-Bill Hillary to her house to coo at Archie. Oh darn! I was looking to give her an out in light of all the missteps she's taken. But that didn't work. Hmmm. Maybe the Royal Fam suggested she go elsewhere (and offered to pack her bags). Now isn't that saying something: "Meggie, you've screwed up plenty that we'd rather carve the ham with Andrew than with you. The dumb dolt's rumors can't be iron clad proven (Epstein got whacked) but Meggie you were on TV saying you weren't living, only existing. We're sorry you're not living well enough, oh well, we tried. Beginning with your 50 million dollar wedding, exotic trips on private planes, life of luxury, all living expenses paid. Had we known we could have done more before you attempted to throw us under the bus. We've survived bigger issues than you, trust us. Visit Mom, Oprah, Ellen, anybody but us."


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> She probably is better now at holding Archie,......and ......when she has periods of awkwardness in general, she goes all in!
> 
> Including when she isn't going to Grandma Windsor's for Christmas and forces us to speculate why. Could she be trying to avoid being with the Uncle Andrew and his family who supports this tarnished Prince? Bbbbbbbbbut then that would fly in the face of her inviting I-support-Bill Hillary to her house to coo at Archie. Oh darn! I was looking to give her an out in light of all the missteps she's taken. But that didn't work. Hmmm. Maybe the Royal Fam suggested she go elsewhere (and offered to pack her bags). Now isn't that saying something: "Meggie, you've screwed up plenty that we'd rather carve the ham with Andrew than with you. The dumb dolt's rumors can't be iron clad proven (Epstein got whacked) but Meggie you were on TV saying you weren't living, only existing. We're sorry you're not living well enough, oh well, we tried. Beginning with your 50 million dollar wedding, exotic trips on private planes, life of luxury, all living expenses paid. Had we known we could have done more before you attempted to throw us under the bus. We've survived bigger issues than you, trust us. Visit Mom, Oprah, Ellen, anybody but us."


----------



## daisychainz

Has anyone from the US noticed that Meghan's famous words are close to the Kaiser slogan? I was watching tv last night and it reminded me that Kaiser always reminds us via television that "we believe everybody deserves the right to thrive." Maybe she's friends with Alison Janney


----------



## sdkitty

Murphy47 said:


> She doesn’t do it that often. She’s not comfortable with him. At this age, most mothers can carry the baby around and all its gear and drag a toddler besides.


most mothers are FT.......wonder how much care she give the baby vs the nannies


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4595723



SNAAA-aark? I was trying to be nice, trying to think of excuses for Meghan. None came to me yet, doesn't mean there aren't any.  It's not MY fault she's irredeemable. I just hope she's OK.


----------



## Sterntalerli

OT: just got the news that andres “retired”


----------



## Sterntalerli

Sterntalerli said:


> OT: just got the news that andres “retired”


*Andrew


----------



## sdkitty

Sterntalerli said:


> *Andrew


only thing I'm finding is he faces call to retire - not that he has actually said he will?


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> only thing I'm finding is he faces call to retire - not that he has actually said he will?


He's said he will step back "for the foreseeable future".
https://news.sky.com/story/prince-andrew-steps-back-from-public-duties-11865854


----------



## Chagall

cafecreme15 said:


> He's said he will step back "for the foreseeable future".
> https://news.sky.com/story/prince-andrew-steps-back-from-public-duties-11865854


Andrew is being laundered.


----------



## cafecreme15

Chagall said:


> Andrew is being laundered.


Seems like the rumors were true that the Queen was NOT pleased with the interview he did.


----------



## jcnc

cafecreme15 said:


> Seems like the rumors were true that the Queen was NOT pleased with the interview he did.


I can see why. That interview was a disaster


----------



## bag-mania

Lest we forget all about them amidst the Andrew saga, _People_ wants to remind us that Harry and Meghan are still feeling isolated. Poor babies, let the pity party commence! 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Relationship with Royal Family Remains Tense After Documentary*
Those close to the couple say both Meghan and Harry struggle with ongoing feelings of isolation from the rest of the family

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s emotionally wrenching ITV documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_, which was filmed during their royal tour in Africa, did little to quell rumors of tension within the royal family. In fact, when Harry acknowledged that he and Prince William are “certainly on different paths at the moment”—it became clear that the unity of the “Fab Four” (Harry, Meghan, William and Kate Middleton) was always more fairy tale than reality.

Those close to the couple say both Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, struggle with ongoing feelings of isolation from the rest of the family, with Harry’s friend Tom Bradby—who interviewed the couple for the documentary—describing them as “bruised and vulnerable.”

Following their candid revelations in the October special, in which Meghan bared her pain at being a new mom in the spotlight and Harry admitted his desperation to protect his family from constant tabloid scrutiny, a source says “eyes are open” about their emotional distress, but the relationship between the couple and the rest of the royal family has not grown any closer as a result.

“There hasn’t been this complete 180,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s cover story. “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”

https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...royal-family-remains-tense-after-documentary/


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Lest we forget all about them amidst the Andrew saga, _People_ wants to remind us that Harry and Meghan are still feeling isolated. Poor babies, let the pity party commence!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Relationship with Royal Family Remains Tense After Documentary*
> Those close to the couple say both Meghan and Harry struggle with ongoing feelings of isolation from the rest of the family
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s emotionally wrenching ITV documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_, which was filmed during their royal tour in Africa, did little to quell rumors of tension within the royal family. In fact, when Harry acknowledged that he and Prince William are “certainly on different paths at the moment”—it became clear that the unity of the “Fab Four” (Harry, Meghan, William and Kate Middleton) was always more fairy tale than reality.
> 
> Those close to the couple say both Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, struggle with ongoing feelings of isolation from the rest of the family, with Harry’s friend Tom Bradby—who interviewed the couple for the documentary—describing them as “bruised and vulnerable.”
> 
> Following their candid revelations in the October special, in which Meghan bared her pain at being a new mom in the spotlight and Harry admitted his desperation to protect his family from constant tabloid scrutiny, a source says “eyes are open” about their emotional distress, but the relationship between the couple and the rest of the royal family has not grown any closer as a result.
> 
> “There hasn’t been this complete 180,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s cover story. “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...royal-family-remains-tense-after-documentary/


boo hoo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> boo hoo



Exactly. I especially like this quote, “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”

Of course, Harry and Meghan could always try reaching out to the family themselves. But no, everyone else must come to them, because they are oh so woeful and sad.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Exactly. I especially like this quote, “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”
> 
> Of course, Harry and Meghan could always try reaching out to the family themselves. But no, everyone else must come to them, because they are oh so woeful and sad.


they created all the drama with the tv thing....then they announced they were going to the US....now they're isolated?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they created all the drama with the tv thing....then they announced they were going to the US....now they're isolated?



It must kill them to know that with the Andrew thing blowing up, nobody is caring about whether their widdle feelings are hurt.


----------



## Mrs.Z

“Those close to the couple” need to STOP TALKING.....am literally sick of seeing daily articles about their feelings


----------



## rose60610

I'm wondering if Meghan thought she could look into a live camera, complain about the "mean media", the difficulty of motherhood (with nannies, etc), how hard she has it, and assumed the Crown would come rushing to her in profound sympathy to see how they could "make it up" to her.  Her honeymoon is definitely over, perhaps she took for granted that the fawning media attention she initially received would continue forever and The Crown's job was to make sure it did and have her back at all times. When it didn't, she had no clue what to do other than whip out the "poor me" garbage. All this "existing" is exhausting. In retrospect, maybe throwing the Royal Family under the bus wasn't such a smart move. Is it too late to enroll in Charm School? It may be for HER...


----------



## hellosunshine

*The backlash Meghan Markle received for deciding to miss Christmas with the Queen is just another example of the double standards she's up against



*

The Duchess of Sussex is being criticized after announcing that she plans to spend Christmas with her mother, Doria Ragland, instead of Queen Elizabeth II.
Despite a Buckingham Palace representative saying that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's decision "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen," they were still accused of "snubbing" the monarch.
However, the duke and duchess are not the first royals to make their own plans for the holiday season, Joe Little, a royal commentator, told Insider.
"The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent Christmas 2016 with her family in Berkshire, so what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have planned for this Christmas is absolutely no different," he said.
Piers Morgan suggested that the only reason Markle would want to spend time with her mother and not the Queen would be to escape the British press.
In 2012 — the same year that Middleton first missed Christmas at Sandringham — the duchess was involved in her own battle with the press.
The reaction to Markle's holiday plans is yet another example of the double standards placed on the duchess.
Meghan Markle is again being blasted by critics who say she's "snubbing" Queen Elizabeth II by choosing to spend Christmas with her mother instead of the royal family.

And a Buckingham Palace representative's statement that the couple "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen" hasn't stopped royal-watchers from criticizing the decision.

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are looking forward to extended family time towards the end of this month," the representative said.




"Having spent the last two Christmases at Sandringham, Their Royal Highnesses will spend the holiday this year, as a new family, with the Duchess' mother Doria Ragland.

"This decision is in line with precedent set previously by other members of the Royal Family, and has the support of Her Majesty the Queen."

While the move may seem newsworthy, it's not uncommon for royals to make other plans for the festive period, despite what recent headlines would suggest.

*Will and Kate have skipped Christmas several times*

Even though Prince Harry and Markle aren't the first royals to miss Christmas, headlines have ranged from calling the pair "sulky" to saying they're "snubbing" the Queen.

Joe Little, a royal commentator, said this wasn't a fair depiction of their decision.

"The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent Christmas 2016 with her family in Berkshire, so what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have planned for this Christmas is absolutely no different," Little, the managing editor of Majesty magazine, told Insider.

"No snub to the Queen or anything like that. Pretty much everything about them at the moment is being sensationalized by the media."

Prince William and Kate Middleton have alternated spending Christmas at Sandringham and with the Middleton family. The first time they did this, in 2012 — the year after the duchess married into the family — headlines were far more neutral than the ones now describing Harry and Markle's plans.

"William and Kate miss Queen's Christmas, choosing to spend it with Middletons," The Telegraph wrote in December 2012.

"Find out why Prince William and Kate won't be spending Christmas at Sandringham this year," Hello magazine wrote in 2016.

Both articles said the couple chose to have a more private Christmas — thus not partaking in the famously photographed walk to church with the royal family — so they could spend time with Middleton's parents, Carole and Michael.

Meanwhile, this week's headlines suggested that Markle's reason for wanting to spend Christmas with her mother and not the Queen is to escape the press.

*Markle is consistently criticized for doing the same things Middleton is praised for*

Piers Morgan wrote in his column for the Mail Online: "If Harry and Meghan don't want negative press, they should stop behaving like whiny spoiled brats and do their damn duty — and they can start by spending Christmas with the Queen."

"Barely a week goes by now without them filing lawsuits attacking press freedom, weeping TV tears about the dreadful intrusion they have to endure, or firing off angry directives to newspapers," Morgan said.

In October, Markle announced plans to sue the Mail on Sunday alleging misuse of private information, infringement of copyright, and breach of the Data Protection Act of 2018 after the newspaper published extracts from a letter she sent to her father, Thomas Markle, earlier this year.

Documents filed by the duchess' lawyers accused the newspaper of publishing fabricated stories — including false details about her relationship with her mother, her baby shower, and the renovations to her Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor — as part of a three-year campaign against her.

Meanwhile, Harry has taken legal action against the owners of The Sun and the Daily Mirror "regarding the illegal interception of voicemail messages," a Buckingham Palace representative said.

William and Middleton have also been involved in legal battles with the press. Closer magazine published topless photos of Middleton on its cover in 2012, resulting in a lawsuit that was settled in 2017, when the couple won $118,000 in damages.

Though the photos were published in 2012, the same year Middleton first missed Christmas with the royals, news articles did not cite this as a factor.

This isn't the first time Markle has been criticized for doing something that Middleton has been praised for. For example, headlines accused Markle of seeking attention by cradling her pregnant belly, while others said Middleton was glowing when she did the same thing.

Last year, an InStyle headline accused Markle of breaking protocol for wearing wedges because the Queen "isn't a fan" of that type of shoe. When Middleton wore them this summer, the same publication said she made them "the most versatile shoes of the summer."

*Christmas isn't the only private time Harry and Markle spend with the Queen*

Kristen Meinzer, a royal commentator who previously told Insider that these double standards could be a result of racism, said royal-watchers were commenting only on what they see playing out in the public eye.

Harry and Markle have a relationship with the Queen behind closed doors — something people seem to forget when making these assumptions, Meinzer told Insider.

"Meghan and Harry have spent the last two Christmases with Harry's side of the family, and while I'm sure it's been wonderful, it's also meant that Meghan has had to be separated from her family for the past two holiday seasons," she said.

"I'm so happy that this year Meghan will be able to celebrate with her mother.

"As for the inevitable criticism being thrown Meghan's way from the naysayers and tabloid press, I'd remind people: Kate and William have also skipped the Queen's festivities at Sandringham.

"And let's remember: Christmas isn't the only time that Harry and Meghan get to see the Queen in a private setting. She and Prince Philip are their neighbors every weekend and also during the spring, when they're in their second home in Windsor."

https://www.insider.com/meghan-mark...hristmas-queen-sandringham-criticized-2019-11


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> *The backlash Meghan Markle received for deciding to miss Christmas with the Queen is just another example of the double standards she's up against
> 
> View attachment 4595968
> 
> *
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is being criticized after announcing that she plans to spend Christmas with her mother, Doria Ragland, instead of Queen Elizabeth II.
> Despite a Buckingham Palace representative saying that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's decision "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen," they were still accused of "snubbing" the monarch.
> However, the duke and duchess are not the first royals to make their own plans for the holiday season, Joe Little, a royal commentator, told Insider.
> "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent Christmas 2016 with her family in Berkshire, so what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have planned for this Christmas is absolutely no different," he said.
> Piers Morgan suggested that the only reason Markle would want to spend time with her mother and not the Queen would be to escape the British press.
> In 2012 — the same year that Middleton first missed Christmas at Sandringham — the duchess was involved in her own battle with the press.
> The reaction to Markle's holiday plans is yet another example of the double standards placed on the duchess.
> Meghan Markle is again being blasted by critics who say she's "snubbing" Queen Elizabeth II by choosing to spend Christmas with her mother instead of the royal family.
> 
> And a Buckingham Palace representative's statement that the couple "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen" hasn't stopped royal-watchers from criticizing the decision.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are looking forward to extended family time towards the end of this month," the representative said.
> 
> View attachment 4595969
> 
> 
> "Having spent the last two Christmases at Sandringham, Their Royal Highnesses will spend the holiday this year, as a new family, with the Duchess' mother Doria Ragland.
> 
> "This decision is in line with precedent set previously by other members of the Royal Family, and has the support of Her Majesty the Queen."
> 
> While the move may seem newsworthy, it's not uncommon for royals to make other plans for the festive period, despite what recent headlines would suggest.
> 
> *Will and Kate have skipped Christmas several times*
> 
> Even though Prince Harry and Markle aren't the first royals to miss Christmas, headlines have ranged from calling the pair "sulky" to saying they're "snubbing" the Queen.
> 
> Joe Little, a royal commentator, said this wasn't a fair depiction of their decision.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent Christmas 2016 with her family in Berkshire, so what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have planned for this Christmas is absolutely no different," Little, the managing editor of Majesty magazine, told Insider.
> 
> "No snub to the Queen or anything like that. Pretty much everything about them at the moment is being sensationalized by the media."
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton have alternated spending Christmas at Sandringham and with the Middleton family. The first time they did this, in 2012 — the year after the duchess married into the family — headlines were far more neutral than the ones now describing Harry and Markle's plans.
> 
> "William and Kate miss Queen's Christmas, choosing to spend it with Middletons," The Telegraph wrote in December 2012.
> 
> "Find out why Prince William and Kate won't be spending Christmas at Sandringham this year," Hello magazine wrote in 2016.
> 
> Both articles said the couple chose to have a more private Christmas — thus not partaking in the famously photographed walk to church with the royal family — so they could spend time with Middleton's parents, Carole and Michael.
> 
> Meanwhile, this week's headlines suggested that Markle's reason for wanting to spend Christmas with her mother and not the Queen is to escape the press.
> 
> *Markle is consistently criticized for doing the same things Middleton is praised for*
> 
> Piers Morgan wrote in his column for the Mail Online: "If Harry and Meghan don't want negative press, they should stop behaving like whiny spoiled brats and do their damn duty — and they can start by spending Christmas with the Queen."
> 
> "Barely a week goes by now without them filing lawsuits attacking press freedom, weeping TV tears about the dreadful intrusion they have to endure, or firing off angry directives to newspapers," Morgan said.
> 
> In October, Markle announced plans to sue the Mail on Sunday alleging misuse of private information, infringement of copyright, and breach of the Data Protection Act of 2018 after the newspaper published extracts from a letter she sent to her father, Thomas Markle, earlier this year.
> 
> Documents filed by the duchess' lawyers accused the newspaper of publishing fabricated stories — including false details about her relationship with her mother, her baby shower, and the renovations to her Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor — as part of a three-year campaign against her.
> 
> Meanwhile, Harry has taken legal action against the owners of The Sun and the Daily Mirror "regarding the illegal interception of voicemail messages," a Buckingham Palace representative said.
> 
> William and Middleton have also been involved in legal battles with the press. Closer magazine published topless photos of Middleton on its cover in 2012, resulting in a lawsuit that was settled in 2017, when the couple won $118,000 in damages.
> 
> Though the photos were published in 2012, the same year Middleton first missed Christmas with the royals, news articles did not cite this as a factor.
> 
> This isn't the first time Markle has been criticized for doing something that Middleton has been praised for. For example, headlines accused Markle of seeking attention by cradling her pregnant belly, while others said Middleton was glowing when she did the same thing.
> 
> Last year, an InStyle headline accused Markle of breaking protocol for wearing wedges because the Queen "isn't a fan" of that type of shoe. When Middleton wore them this summer, the same publication said she made them "the most versatile shoes of the summer."
> 
> *Christmas isn't the only private time Harry and Markle spend with the Queen*
> 
> Kristen Meinzer, a royal commentator who previously told Insider that these double standards could be a result of racism, said royal-watchers were commenting only on what they see playing out in the public eye.
> 
> Harry and Markle have a relationship with the Queen behind closed doors — something people seem to forget when making these assumptions, Meinzer told Insider.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry have spent the last two Christmases with Harry's side of the family, and while I'm sure it's been wonderful, it's also meant that Meghan has had to be separated from her family for the past two holiday seasons," she said.
> 
> "I'm so happy that this year Meghan will be able to celebrate with her mother.
> 
> "As for the inevitable criticism being thrown Meghan's way from the naysayers and tabloid press, I'd remind people: Kate and William have also skipped the Queen's festivities at Sandringham.
> 
> "And let's remember: Christmas isn't the only time that Harry and Meghan get to see the Queen in a private setting. She and Prince Philip are their neighbors every weekend and also during the spring, when they're in their second home in Windsor."
> 
> https://www.insider.com/meghan-mark...hristmas-queen-sandringham-criticized-2019-11


I'm so impressed with this propaganda


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> they created all the drama with the tv thing....then they announced they were going to the US....now they're isolated?


It’s just one drama after the other with them and nothing real has really happened to cause it. They have a need for constant attention.


----------



## Chagall

cafecreme15 said:


> He's said he will step back "for the foreseeable future".
> https://news.sky.com/story/prince-andrew-steps-back-from-public-duties-11865854


It’s funny that now he has been implicated he is having sudden onset remorse. And how ‘noble’ of him step back from his duties. A concerted effort is being made to clean up his image.


----------



## Chagall

The poor queen. She certainly has had to go through a lot of strife with her children. Mistresses, divorces, highly strung and problematic daughters in-law, and now her grandchildren.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Sussex Fans Launch Touching Campaign to Plant 10,000 Trees in Harry’s and Meghan’s Names*
_The #SussexGreatForest initiative will also see supporters and Sussex Squad members from around the world donate to four conservation charities.


_

_When the Sussexes toured Africa in the fall, Prince Harry made sure he put global conservation front and center. “Conservation used to be a specialist area, driven by science,” he said in September. “But now it is fundamental to our survival and we must overcome greed, apathy, and selfishness if we are to make real progress.”

It’s a theme that the Duke of Sussex has continued to make a priority—and his words have been heard loud and clear by fans of the couple around the world. In fact, so inspired by Harry’s efforts, a group of Sussex supporters have launched a grassroots campaign that aims to see 10,000 trees planted and donated around the world in Harry’s, Meghan’s, and Archie’s names.

Announced on Universal Children’s Day, November 20, the #SussexGreatForest campaign aims to honor Harry and Meghan’s commitment to conservation, and safeguarding the environment for future generations. The first trees have already been planted.

Last month, children at The Gopie School in Malawi’s southern region planted 20 fruit trees on their campus as part of a learning module organized by the Sussex Great Forest campaign, which will see the students plant a further 50 saplings before the end of the year as they learn about how to care for trees and the environment.

The ambitious project, which has been spearheaded by a group of 12 Sussex Squad supporters, has also selected four charities for well-wishers to plant trees in the Sussexes’ names (from $1 to $10 per tree). The U.K.-based Tree Sisters is a female network of nature lovers, leaders, activists, daughters, and mothers working to inspire a wide diversity of women to help crowd-fund tropical reforestation. U.S. nonprofit One Tree Planted focuses on planting trees around the world. Britain’s International Tree Foundation is one of world’s oldest tree-planting programs and is involved in initiatives in more than 30 countries. And Kenya’s indigenous Green Belt Movement organization, which was founded by Nobel Peace Prize winner Wangari Maathai, works to engage women in planting trees, empower communities, and help protect critical watersheds.

Organizer Erica Sanders tells BAZAAR.com that the #SussexGreatForest initiative, which launches ahead of National Tree Week in the U.K., follows in the footsteps of Harry’s #LookingUp social media campaign, which he launched with National Geographic to highlight the importance of conservation and his work on the Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy campaign (which has seen 53 Commonwealth countries dedicate indigenous forest for conservation or commit to planting trees to combat climate change).

“This is a global issue that needs global support and we are a global network of people,” she says. “This is our way of giving back to the world and telling Harry, ‘We heard you.’ There are 12 of us in different countries working together online to make this campaign a success, each focusing on different elements, tree plantings, talking to charities, building up the social media platforms. Our aim is big, but the support is strong.”

Indeed. In the weeks leading up to Archie’s May 6 birth this year, a group of Duchess Meghan fans banded together to create the #GlobalSussexBabyShower social media campaign, which saw thousands of donations made to three charities from supporters in more than 72 countries.

New York–based spokeswoman Rita Anne Wallace adds, “We are inspired by the passion Prince Harry has shown for the environment, Meghan for uplifting women—who are the beneficiaries of some of the organizations we’ve chosen—as well as by young people like Greta Thunberg who are clamoring for us adults to do something to change the world we pass down to them.”

Although #SussexGreatForest is just in its first day, the campaign, which will run until Archie’s first birthday next year, has already seen trees planted by well-wishers across the world, including South Africa, Jamaica, Canada, the United Kingdom, and France. Mother KL Menns is one of many donors and says she hopes her offering will give back to a local community that has embraced her and her daughter since arriving in Lithuania as an immigrant. “Its fruits will be used to make wonderful essential oils and extracts and life-giving seeds,” she says. “In this way, giving is a cycle from earth to community and back to earth.”

California-based Sanders adds that they hope the campaign will also demonstrate just how strong support for the couple continues to be. “We started talking about this in July, but it was the couple’s recent tour of southern Africa that really had us switch gears,” she says. “Not only did we want to counter the biased, negative reporting from some of the British media, we also wanted to show our support in an impactful way. I think Meghan said it best herself when she said, ‘Hashtags are not enough’ to bring about real change. So here we are.”
_
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb.../meghan-markle-prince-harry-fans-plant-trees/
_
_
*
*


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> The poor queen. She certainly has had to go through a lot of strife with her children  (divorces etc), daughters in-laws, and now her grandchildren.



It goes to show that even if you're a Queen you can't control what your relatives do. I think she finds her enjoyment where she can. Like here, I just discovered she stills rides regularly. Pretty amazing for being 93!


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> It goes to show that even if you're a Queen you can't control what your relatives do. I think she finds her enjoyment where she can. Like here, I just discovered she stills rides regularly. Pretty amazing for being 93!
> 
> View attachment 4596000


That is amazing that she still rides at 93. Being active is probably one of the reasons for her long life.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Lest we forget all about them amidst the Andrew saga, _People_ wants to remind us that Harry and Meghan are still feeling isolated. Poor babies, let the pity party commence!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Relationship with Royal Family Remains Tense After Documentary*
> Those close to the couple say both Meghan and Harry struggle with ongoing feelings of isolation from the rest of the family
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s emotionally wrenching ITV documentary _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey_, which was filmed during their royal tour in Africa, did little to quell rumors of tension within the royal family. In fact, when Harry acknowledged that he and Prince William are “certainly on different paths at the moment”—it became clear that the unity of the “Fab Four” (Harry, Meghan, William and Kate Middleton) was always more fairy tale than reality.
> 
> Those close to the couple say both Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, struggle with ongoing feelings of isolation from the rest of the family, with Harry’s friend Tom Bradby—who interviewed the couple for the documentary—describing them as “bruised and vulnerable.”
> 
> Following their candid revelations in the October special, in which Meghan bared her pain at being a new mom in the spotlight and Harry admitted his desperation to protect his family from constant tabloid scrutiny, a source says “eyes are open” about their emotional distress, but the relationship between the couple and the rest of the royal family has not grown any closer as a result.
> 
> “There hasn’t been this complete 180,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s cover story. “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...royal-family-remains-tense-after-documentary/


They really need to send a memo to their nearest and dearest to STFU.
Seriously, do they not see the writing on the wall? They could be the next ones making the “stepping down from public duties for the foreseeable future” statement ala Andrew.


----------



## Jayne1

I read their PR people had all the negative and critical comments scrubbed from their Instagram account. Anyone want to check?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> *Sussex Fans Launch Touching Campaign to Plant 10,000 Trees in Harry’s and Meghan’s Names*


How many private jets does that cancel out? Nice of them to let their fans pay for it.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> How many private jets does that cancel out? Nice of them to let their fans pay for it.



Hey, at least they have fans who are charitable enough to do grassroots campaigns that are impactful. First it was, #GlobalSussexBabyShower which was an enormous success and now they're beginning this project. I'm certain fans of other couples will _someday_ get inspired to pay it forward.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> The #SussexGreatForest initiative will also see supporters and Sussex Squad members from around the world donate to four conservation charities.


The Sussex Squad plants trees, but still spend the majority of their time being detestable online terrorists, threatening people over twitter and spreading nasty rumors about anyone they deem an enemy of a couple they are scarily obsessed with.  

I hope nobody else's fans try to be like the Sussex Squad.  They can't make up for the nastiness they spread by planting trees.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Hey, at least they have fans who are charitable enough to do grassroots campaigns that are impactful. First it was, #GlobalSussexBabyShower which was an enormous success and now they're beginning this project. I'm certain fans of other couples will _someday_ get inspired to pay it forward.



I work for a charity, volunteer at the humane society every weekend, sit on two nonprofit boards, and lead a women’s philanthropy group in my city. But that’s nothing compared to some hashtagging slacktivism


----------



## mrsinsyder

This does seem typical of their hypocritical selves though. Live it up at any expense and let the little people clean it up behind you. They have more in common with Andrew’s behavior than one might think. The rules don’t apply to them.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> *but still spend the majority of their time being detestable online terrorists, threatening people over twitter and spreading nasty rumors  *



That's funny because I've only ever seen the opposite.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> That's funny because I've only ever seen the opposite. This thread itself is a good example.


As far as I know, no one in this thread has ever sent a death threat to a royal reporter's family or encouraged the rest of their gang to do the same.   Nor are people here organizing one another to gang up on the social media accounts of people they deem enemies to report them as "racist" and have them deleted.  (Unless there are members of the Sussex Squad here, in which case, those people probably have done that.  But with their pals on twitter, not here.)


----------



## rose60610

So somebody wants to plant 10,000 trees in the name of The Sussex. Well, goody for them. They could do it anonymously.  Oh wait......that's not the way it works when you're only existing, not living. The bourgeoisie must be pummeled into gratitude and wokeness that The Sussex are a global force for unselfish giving even if it means their  works must be crammed down our throats. It's for our own good. I'm so grateful. Almost makes me a Meghan-stan. Almost. On second thought.....maybe not quite just yet. I guess I just have to get more woke!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Right out of the narcissist's handbook.

*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s relationship with the royals hasn’t changed, pal claims: ‘They don’t speak’*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are still struggling with feelings of isolation from the rest of the royal family, even after speaking out in a shocking documentary.

In October, the couple revealed how the negative press attention has hurt their family for the ITV special “Harry & Meghan: An African Journey,” which follows their royal tour in southern Africa. It was then where Harry, 35, admitted that he and his older brother Prince William are “certainly on different paths at the moment.”

“There hasn’t been this complete 180,” a source close to the couple told People magazine for this week’s cover story. “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”

The source claimed “eyes are open” about the emotional distress the pair is enduring, but the relationship between the couple and the rest of the royal family hasn’t grown closer following their candid revelations.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royals-dont-speak


----------



## lanasyogamama

They need to stop complaining!!


----------



## LittleStar88

I really don't get the isolation angle. Seems like they are isolating themselves and then blaming everyone else for the reactions they're receiving to it. 

Both seem emotionally immature and unable to handle the responsibilities of their current lives. Harry I can understand given he has probably been managed differently from the average person and a little sheltered from a lot of things in life and not given the same grooming for adulthood as the average person.

Meghan I just think is a master manipulator at this point, and Harry is easy for her to direct.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> “There hasn’t been this complete 180,” a source close to the couple told People magazine for this week’s cover story. “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”
> 
> The source claimed “eyes are open” about the emotional distress the pair is enduring, but the relationship between the couple and the rest of the royal family hasn’t grown closer following their candid revelations.


I had a family member like this.  She expected the rest of the family to constantly call and visit HER, but wouldn't do the same in return.  And none of the phone calls and visits were ever enough for her.  The rest of the family was perpetually in her bad graces for neglecting her. 

Relationships are two way streets.  Both sides need to put in effort. If the Sussexes were to claim that they text family members and their texts are never returned, or they make phone calls and no one ever has time to talk to them, then they have legitimate reason to complain.   Did Harry's cousins cut him off from the Whatsapp group chat that he said they use to keep in touch?   What about Her Maj supposedly driving herself over to Frogmore constantly to visit - that counts for nothing either?

Harry and Meghan are acting like a pair of narcissists who demand attention and play the victim when that attention is not enough for them (and it never is).  Harry didn't used to behave this way with his family until Meghan came along.  And we know she has a hotline to People Magazine, so I believe it is her feeding this story to People, criticizing his family yet again.   

If they really wanted a good relationship with his family, they would not keep criticizing them repeatedly in public.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Harry and Meghan are acting like a pair of narcissists who demand attention and play the victim when that attention is not enough for them (and it never is).  *Harry didn't used to behave this way with his family until Meghan came along.  *And we know she has a hotline to People Magazine, so I believe it is her feeding this story to People, criticizing his family yet again.
> 
> If they really wanted a good relationship with his family, they would not keep criticizing them repeatedly in public.



That is an important point. I bet we all know someone who changed when they married because the new spouse took control. Meghan ought to know that offending their meal ticket isn't a good idea.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Meghan ought to know that offending their meal ticket isn't a good idea.


I think the end game here is to have an excuse to leave the family.  The money will follow - whether it's via a payoff to get the Sussexes out of the royal family's hair, or whether it's a divorce settlement.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I think the end game here is to have an excuse to leave the family.  The moey will follow - whether it's via a payoff to get the Sussexes out of the royal family's hair, or whether it's a divorce settlement.



maybe....but if they leave the royal family they won't be nearly as interesting in the long run


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I think the end game here is to have an excuse to leave the family.  The money will follow - whether it's via a payoff to get the Sussexes out of the royal family's hair, or whether it's a divorce settlement.



You know I still believe she wants it to work out. She loves the glamour, the deference, and the special perks that come with being royalty. I'm hoping she loves Harry. If she had only wanted a rich husband I'm sure she could have found one.

If they could find a way to keep a lower profile, do their engagements without whining about their feelings or lecturing others on what they should be doing, they might just be able get through it. Although filing those lawsuits was like waving a red flag in front of a bull. They pretty much threw down a challenge to the gossip media.


----------



## jblended

bag-mania said:


> If she had only wanted a rich husband I'm sure she could have found one.


But not one who would have given her a title, or given her a royal child. She aimed high and somehow landed even higher.
I wanted so badly for them to work out. He seems unhappy, she says she's unhappy. All I see now is that she used him to gain infamy, and it cost him his joy.
I hope they sort it out, partly because of his grandmother's age and partly because they now have a child. The way it's going, I don't see any resolution. Such a shame. Nobody should be this unhappy in the first years of married life (and hopefully not after, but especially not at the start).


----------



## TC1

I hope Meghan reaches out to Andrew and asks if he's ok. He seems to be having a hard time *snicker*


----------



## bag-mania

jblended said:


> But not one who would have given her a title, or given her a royal child. She aimed high and somehow landed even higher.
> I wanted so badly for them to work out. He seems unhappy, she says she's unhappy. All I see now is that she used him to gain infamy, and it cost him his joy.
> I hope they sort it out, partly because of his grandmother's age and partly because they now have a child. The way it's going, I don't see any resolution. Such a shame. Nobody should be this unhappy in the first years of married life (and hopefully not after, but especially not at the start).



She has to be careful not to overplay her hand. She would be vilified in a divorce. She might end up being the next Fergie.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> You know I still believe she wants it to work out. She loves the glamour, the deference, and the special perks that come with being royalty.


She loves the social perks that exist in the celebrity world, not the ones that exist in Harry's upper crust English social circle, which she does not want to be part of.

I think their ideal would be to hobnob with celebrities, live wherever they want, spend as much money as they want without being criticized, travel to luxury resorts via private jet without being criticized, and "work" on only what they want, when they want, without the Mail or Piers Morgan being allowed to comment on it.   They want all that, and still be called HRH, still have people bow and curtsy to them, and still ride around in royal carriages waving to people a few times a year.  In other words, they want to be Hollywood celebrities with all the perks of being royal on top of it.

And I think they believe if they continue manipulating public sympathy by portraying themselves as victims, they will be able to get their way and have concessions made for them to be allowed to live how they want.  I think that's the plan for now.  It just won't happen.


----------



## sdkitty

she is obviously very shrewd when it comes to networking....maybe not as smart as she thinks she is when it comes to PR


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## piperdog

Flatsy said:


> She loves the social perks that exist in the celebrity world, not the ones that exist in Harry's upper crust English social circle, which she does not want to be part of.
> 
> I think their ideal would be to hobnob with celebrities, live wherever they want, spend as much money as they want without being criticized, travel to luxury resorts via private jet without being criticized, and "work" on only what they want, when they want, without the Mail or Piers Morgan being allowed to comment on it.   They want all that, and still be called HRH, still have people bow and curtsy to them, and still ride around in royal carriages waving to people a few times a year.  In other words, they want to be Hollywood celebrities with all the perks of being royal on top of it.
> 
> And I think they believe if they continue manipulating public sympathy by portraying themselves as victims, they will be able to get their way and have concessions made for them to be allowed to live how they want.  I think that's the plan for now.  It just won't happen.


I agree with all of this. Not only do they want it all, but they seem to think they deserve it all. I think they've fallen into the trap of believing their own PR whether it's completely accurate or not.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Right out of the narcissist's handbook.
> 
> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s relationship with the royals hasn’t changed, pal claims: ‘They don’t speak’*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are still struggling with feelings of isolation from the rest of the royal family, even after speaking out in a shocking documentary.
> 
> In October, the couple revealed how the negative press attention has hurt their family for the ITV special “Harry & Meghan: An African Journey,” which follows their royal tour in southern Africa. It was then where Harry, 35, admitted that he and his older brother Prince William are “certainly on different paths at the moment.”
> 
> “There hasn’t been this complete 180,” a source close to the couple told People magazine for this week’s cover story. “Nothing has changed. They don’t speak, no one is checking in, no one is texting.”
> 
> The source claimed “eyes are open” about the emotional distress the pair is enduring, but the relationship between the couple and the rest of the royal family hasn’t grown closer following their candid revelations.
> 
> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-royals-dont-speak


Meghan’s probably the only person on the planet jealous of the attention Prince Andrew’s getting.  Can’t resist piping up and reminding everyone how bad she’s having it


----------



## Chagall

TC1 said:


> I hope Meghan reaches out to Andrew and asks if he's ok. He seems to be having a hard time *snicker*


----------



## CeeJay

I'm just so tired of the two of them right now, and given what has just happened to Andrew, these two should keep their mouths shut and "carry on" (_supposedly, Charles met with the Queen and even though it is purported that Andrew was her "favorite son", Charles insisted that the Queen tell Andrew to relinquish his royal duties_) ..


----------



## bag-mania

I would love to know who is the source on Meghan who continually comes up with narratives to feed to _People _magazine. Today we get to be told how Meghan was a "fully formed person" while Kate was merely a college student when they met their future husbands. The PR company must be knocking themselves out to come up with a new angle every day. 


*Meghan Markle Is 'Very Aware That Kate Will Be Queen' — But They Are 'Pitted Against Each Other'*
Amid shifts in power, past hurts and ongoing strain, Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Prince William and Kate Middleton are on “different paths now,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s cover story.

Despite “some competitiveness” between William and Harry, sources insist there is no competition between their wives.

“Meghan is very aware that Kate will be Queen; their roles are very clear,” the source says. However, there is also little common ground. “Meghan doesn’t fit the mold, while Kate was groomed for this,” says the source, who adds that Meghan was a “fully formed person” when she joined the royal family, while Kate was still in college when she met fellow student William.

“What’s challenging is when they are pitted against each other,” says the source. “That’s been challenging to both of them. Meghan has her life, Kate has hers.”

For both royal mothers, life revolves around their children.

“It’s very much still about taking care of him and putting family first,” a friend says of Meghan, Harry and their 6-month-old son Archie. Meanwhile, Kate and William are busy parenting Prince George, 6, Princess Charlotte, 4, and 1 1⁄2-year-old Prince Louis. But even there the difference in styles is evident.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...queen-but-they-are-pitted-against-each-other/
“William and Kate toe the line, maybe because they have to, but Harry and Meghan are saying no—no to releasing the names of Archie’s godparents, no to saying where Meghan gave birth,” says the friend. “They are trying to carve out a different sort of public life and reset the rules.”

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...queen-but-they-are-pitted-against-each-other/


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> she is obviously very shrewd when it comes to networking....maybe not as smart as she thinks she is when it comes to PR


Especially Royal PR


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I would love to know who is the source on Meghan who continually comes up with narratives to feed to _People _magazine. Today we get to be told how *Meghan was a "fully formed person*" while Kate was merely a college student when they met their future husbands. The PR company must be knocking themselves out to come up with a new angle every day.


This (bolded) is really nasty to Kate!  This should be .. a *"fully formed NARCISSIST" *!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I would love to know who is the source on Meghan who continually comes up with narratives to feed to _People _magazine. Today we get to be told how Meghan was a "fully formed person" while Kate was merely a college student when they met their future husbands. The PR company must be knocking themselves out to come up with a new angle every day.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is 'Very Aware That Kate Will Be Queen' — But They Are 'Pitted Against Each Other'*
> Amid shifts in power, past hurts and ongoing strain, Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Prince William and Kate Middleton are on “different paths now,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s cover story.
> 
> Despite “some competitiveness” between William and Harry, sources insist there is no competition between their wives.
> 
> “Meghan is very aware that Kate will be Queen; their roles are very clear,” the source says. However, there is also little common ground. “Meghan doesn’t fit the mold, while Kate was groomed for this,” says the source, who adds that Meghan was a “fully formed person” when she joined the royal family, while Kate was still in college when she met fellow student William.
> 
> “What’s challenging is when they are pitted against each other,” says the source. “That’s been challenging to both of them. Meghan has her life, Kate has hers.”
> 
> For both royal mothers, life revolves around their children.
> 
> “It’s very much still about taking care of him and putting family first,” a friend says of Meghan, Harry and their 6-month-old son Archie. Meanwhile, Kate and William are busy parenting Prince George, 6, Princess Charlotte, 4, and 1 1⁄2-year-old Prince Louis. But even there the difference in styles is evident.
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...queen-but-they-are-pitted-against-each-other/
> “William and Kate toe the line, maybe because they have to, but Harry and Meghan are saying no—no to releasing the names of Archie’s godparents, no to saying where Meghan gave birth,” says the friend. “They are trying to carve out a different sort of public life and reset the rules.”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...queen-but-they-are-pitted-against-each-other/


The source has to be Meghan surely


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## piperdog

CeeJay said:


> This (bolded) is really nasty to Kate!  This should be .. a *"fully formed NARCISSIST" *!!!


The bolded is really nasty to EVERYONE who met their spouse while still in college/university or at that age range. But as long as it make Meg look good...


----------



## LibbyRuth

I understand the gist of what is being said about Meghan in the "fully formed" comment, and can't say I disagree with it.  It's a very different and more difficult adjustment to go from being an adult with total independence and doing what you wish to being married vs going more quickly from the guidance and oversight of your parents home into marriage. Add to that the element of "duty" that comes with marrying into the royal family and it would be a more dramatic transition.
All that said ... Meghan could have known what she was getting into as a "fully formed woman". It's been said over and over because it's true - it would have been wise for her and Harry to take their time. The BRF was incredibly welcoming to Meghan in helping her make the adjustment into joining their family.  Had she and Harry chosen to take a few years of her living in London, going out on some engagements with him, I think the family would have found a way to make it work.  She could have gotten her feet wet, make sure she can handle the life, and THEN gotten married. But they didn't want to.  Reports are that family members encouraged that ... William is said to have encouraged that.  But they decided they knew better and nothing could come between their love.
People reap what they sow ... even fully formed women.


----------



## Flatsy

Oh yeah, no feud at all, it's just that they have nothing in common except having the same job, being married into the same family, living their lives in the public eye, and raising young children at the exact same time.  What on earth would they have to talk about? 

This "being on different paths" stuff is absolute nonsense.  Just because William will be king one day and Harry won't, doesn't mean the two couples have nothing in common, nor does it mean that there is some big obstacle in the way of them being friendly to one another as family members.   They don't get along because Harry is married to a narcissist who wants Harry to be at odds with his family so she can be his only support.

And Meghan being "fully formed".  That means...she can't ever compromise?  Be cooperative?  Get along with people?  Ever accept that there are drawbacks to every lifestyle and every job that one chooses?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Flatsy said:


> And Meghan being "fully formed".  That means...she can't ever compromise?  Be cooperative?  Get along with people?  Ever accept that there are drawbacks to every lifestyle and every job that one chooses?



I think there's a very high likelihood that it means that when Meghan and Harry were first married, Meghan would complain to Kate about how strict things were, and instead of coming on board, Kate would politely tell her it's the way things are and Meghan didn't like that.


----------



## Flatsy

People Magazine said from the beginning that Kate accepts, but finds a way around things she doesn't like, whereas Meghan was pushing back and questioning from the start.  Kate's method is much smarter and much more effective.

But what that says to me that either no one properly prepared Meghan for what would be expected of her, or she made everyone think she intended to be cooperative and then once the honeymoon was over, wasn't.


----------



## mdcx

I think Megs imagined being in the BRF would turn her into one of the Ecclestone sisters - rich rich rich, flitting between London and LA, attention, pretty clothes, beauty treatments, servants.
Instead she is basically an employee of an “old fashioned” British company and has to follow rules and ask permission.


----------



## mdcx

Flatsy said:


> People Magazine said from the beginning that Kate accepts, but finds a way around things she doesn't like, whereas Meghan was pushing back and questioning from the start.  Kate's method is much smarter and much more effective.
> 
> But what that says to me that either no one properly prepared Meghan for what would be expected of her, or she made everyone think she intended to be cooperative and then once the honeymoon was over, wasn't.


Kate follows the rules and earns respect so probably gets a little leeway.
Imo MM did as you suggested - acted the part, always knowing that once the bag was secured she would go rogue.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> I think Megs imagined being in the BRF would turn her into one of the Ecclestone sisters - rich rich rich, flitting between London and LA, attention, pretty clothes, beauty treatments, servants.
> Instead she is basically an employee of an “old fashioned” British company and has to follow rules and ask permission.


I think that the BRF being an old fashioned British family is what many people like about them. It gives people a sense of continuity and solidness that is uncommon in today’s world. These values were not important to Meghan.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> I think Megs imagined being in the BRF would turn her into one of the Ecclestone sisters - rich rich rich, flitting between London and LA, attention, pretty clothes, beauty treatments, servants.
> Instead she is basically an employee of an “old fashioned” British company and has to follow rules and ask permission.


Exactly this. Absolutely.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly this. Absolutely.


well she did get a large part of it......she is now one of the most famous women in the world with access to pretty much all the beautiful designer goods she wants, a beautiful home, a child, a husband who apparently adores her......now if she could just shut up and stop complaining


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> well she did get a large part of it......she is now one of the most famous women in the world with access to pretty much all the beautiful designer goods she wants, a beautiful home, a child, a husband who apparently adores her......now if she could just shut up and stop complaining


And respect the family and traditions/protocol she's married into.


----------



## Chagall

At the time of the blitz, during the Second World War, the Royal Family didn’t flee to safety. They stayed in Buckingham Palace through the entire bombing. This gave the British people a great sense of moral. Buckingham Palace took nine direct hits. That is  true ‘British Steele’. And they didn’t do this to be asked how they were.


----------



## marthastoo

mdcx said:


> I think Megs imagined being in the BRF would turn her into one of the Ecclestone sisters - rich rich rich, flitting between London and LA, attention, pretty clothes, beauty treatments, servants.
> Instead she is basically an employee of an “old fashioned” British company and has to follow rules and ask permission.


Why on earth would Meghan think that?  Yes, that's exactly what the BRF has long been known for - giant closet tours, jetting between London and LA, tacky designer clothing.  The only thing I'll concede is servants.  Yes, she probably thought sh'd be getting servants.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> At the time of the blitz, during the Second World War, the Royal Family didn’t flee to safety. They stayed in Buckingham Palace through the entire bombing. This gave the British people a great sense of moral. Buckingham Palace took nine direct hits. That is  true ‘British Steele’. And they didn’t do this to be asked how they were.


The Queen Mother famously decided to stay as she said that she couldn't look the East End (of London) in the eye if they'd left. The East End bore the brunt of the hits.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> The Queen Mother famously decided to stay as she said that she couldn't look the East End (of London) in the eye if they'd left. The East End bore the brunt of the hits.


The queen mother was an extremely  feisty lady.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

WOW, the comments on DM regarding the 'rift' with the BRF and H&M are definitely not on their side!!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Editorial from The Times today, the second time this week calling for a slimmed down royal family following Prince A's disgrace and mentioning (for the second time) Harry and Meghan being part of a problem that needs to be attended to by 'Shadow King' Charles, ASAP.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/the-times-view-on-prince-charles-shadow-king-9r70b602v
*The Times view on Prince Charles: Shadow King*
*The heir to the throne should step up and help control his wayward family*


"These have been a dark few days for the royal family. Prince Andrew’s association with a convicted sex offender has brought shame upon him but also raised questions about the functioning of the wider institution of the monarchy. The prince’s decision to be interviewed on _Newsnight _about his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein was a grievous error of judgment, which, if Buckingham Palace were operating effectively, should never have been sanctioned. Quite clearly urgent reform of the royal household is needed. The Queen, despite her extraordinary sense of duty and her durability, cannot do it alone. It is time for the Prince of Wales to play a more decisive role.

Part of the problem lies in the proliferation of minor royals who continue to live off the public purse. There are too many of them. Other European monarchies have long since slimmed down. Britain’s royal family has resisted. Of course some of those minor royals have already set an excellent example of how to conduct themselves. Princess Anne, for example, is relatively thrifty and works hard for public causes. She also rightly turned down royal titles for her children, who now earn their own livings.

Nonetheless others have, as Prince Andrew put it, “let the side down”. His own conduct was a source of controversy even before the Epstein scandal forced his withdrawal from public life. Questions have long been asked about his lifestyle and how he funds it. In his former role as a trade envoy, he was notorious for his rudeness and pomposity. His insistence on a full royal wedding for his daughter Eugenie, with the security bill met by taxpayers, was considered excessive.

Nor do minor royals have to descend to the behaviour of Prince Andrew to embarrass the institution. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have squandered some of the goodwill that accompanied the start of their marriage by presuming to lecture the public on environmental issues while taking private jets. Meanwhile the couple’s decision to give a television interview in which Prince Harry drew attention to a rift with his brother, Prince William, and his wife appeared to criticise the royal family for not showing sufficient care for her wellbeing was another error of judgment. The duchess’s decision to sue a newspaper over the publication of a letter leaked by her father has all the makings of a further PR mistake.

The reality is that these factors are evidence that the Queen’s control over the firm is weakening. In the past she was able to retain a strong grip on her family with the help of a succession of effective private secretaries. Yet it seems that since her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt was forced out in 2017 after a turf war with the Prince of Wales’s household, the royal family has been increasingly rudderless. The Times reported this week that royal households are left to operate in their “own silos”, regardless of the impact on the institution.

This needs to change. The first priority is to slim down. Those outside the immediate line of succession should be relieved of royal duties along with access to the sovereign grant, the fund of public money that supports these roles. The monarchy also needs a firmer grip at the centre. With the Queen getting well into her nineties, this can only come from Prince Charles. Although he has faced his own share of scandals, he has already taken on a greater role and can do more, in effect acting as a king-in-waiting. He is an advocate of modernising and streamlining the royal family and it was he who was said to have urged the Queen to remove Andrew from public life. He should now take another step forward, obviously with the support of the monarch, and help to create a more modest royal family."


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> WOW, the comments on DM regarding the 'rift' with the BRF and H&M are definitely not on their side!!!


Wow, almost six thousand comments!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...tml?ico=amp-comments-viewall#comments-7710195


----------



## lanasyogamama

Straight-Laced said:


> Editorial from The Times today, the second time this week calling for a slimmed down royal family following Prince A's disgrace and mentioning (for the second time) Harry and Meghan being part of a problem that needs to be attended to by 'Shadow King' Charles, ASAP.
> 
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/the-times-view-on-prince-charles-shadow-king-9r70b602v
> *The Times view on Prince Charles: Shadow King*
> *The heir to the throne should step up and help control his wayward family*
> 
> 
> "These have been a dark few days for the royal family. Prince Andrew’s association with a convicted sex offender has brought shame upon him but also raised questions about the functioning of the wider institution of the monarchy. The prince’s decision to be interviewed on _Newsnight _about his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein was a grievous error of judgment, which, if Buckingham Palace were operating effectively, should never have been sanctioned. Quite clearly urgent reform of the royal household is needed. The Queen, despite her extraordinary sense of duty and her durability, cannot do it alone. It is time for the Prince of Wales to play a more decisive role.
> 
> Part of the problem lies in the proliferation of minor royals who continue to live off the public purse. There are too many of them. Other European monarchies have long since slimmed down. Britain’s royal family has resisted. Of course some of those minor royals have already set an excellent example of how to conduct themselves. Princess Anne, for example, is relatively thrifty and works hard for public causes. She also rightly turned down royal titles for her children, who now earn their own livings.
> 
> Nonetheless others have, as Prince Andrew put it, “let the side down”. His own conduct was a source of controversy even before the Epstein scandal forced his withdrawal from public life. Questions have long been asked about his lifestyle and how he funds it. In his former role as a trade envoy, he was notorious for his rudeness and pomposity. His insistence on a full royal wedding for his daughter Eugenie, with the security bill met by taxpayers, was considered excessive.
> 
> Nor do minor royals have to descend to the behaviour of Prince Andrew to embarrass the institution. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have squandered some of the goodwill that accompanied the start of their marriage by presuming to lecture the public on environmental issues while taking private jets. Meanwhile the couple’s decision to give a television interview in which Prince Harry drew attention to a rift with his brother, Prince William, and his wife appeared to criticise the royal family for not showing sufficient care for her wellbeing was another error of judgment. The duchess’s decision to sue a newspaper over the publication of a letter leaked by her father has all the makings of a further PR mistake.
> 
> The reality is that these factors are evidence that the Queen’s control over the firm is weakening. In the past she was able to retain a strong grip on her family with the help of a succession of effective private secretaries. Yet it seems that since her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt was forced out in 2017 after a turf war with the Prince of Wales’s household, the royal family has been increasingly rudderless. The Times reported this week that royal households are left to operate in their “own silos”, regardless of the impact on the institution.
> 
> This needs to change. The first priority is to slim down. Those outside the immediate line of succession should be relieved of royal duties along with access to the sovereign grant, the fund of public money that supports these roles. The monarchy also needs a firmer grip at the centre. With the Queen getting well into her nineties, this can only come from Prince Charles. Although he has faced his own share of scandals, he has already taken on a greater role and can do more, in effect acting as a king-in-waiting. He is an advocate of modernising and streamlining the royal family and it was he who was said to have urged the Queen to remove Andrew from public life. He should now take another step forward, obviously with the support of the monarch, and help to create a more modest royal family."



That article is really clear and well written.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Right out of the narcissist's handbook.
> 
> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s relationship with the royals hasn’t changed, pal claims: ‘They don’t speak’*



Articles like this are dishonest and overdramatized. I doubt Meghan and Harry are too concerned on whether the family is speaking to them or not. I mean, the Queen has seen Prince Philip twice since the beginning of September and they've spent their 72nd Wedding Anniversary apart. And to make matters more interesting, Prince Philip has been spending all his time in a cottage on the Sandringham estate since 2017. Members in this family are not as close as the public believes, so I doubt Meghan and Harry are complaining about lack of conversation..as not speaking/seeing each other would just be on par with the usual within the family.


----------



## rose60610

After 72 years they might be up for a breather.  Philip is 98, recently had a hip replacement, has been in and out of the hospital in the last few years, and I don't blame him for hitting the Sandringham couch with a bowl of chips. We've seen quotes from Harry and William about going through "a patch" .  Meghan joins the brood and goes on a woke mission. She started out favorably, now the public sentiment isn't exactly glowing and gushing. How often she and the others share crumpets is up for speculation. I speculate they're not knitting tea cozies for one another.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Articles like this are dishonest and overdramatized. I doubt Meghan and Harry are too concerned on whether the family is speaking to them or not. I mean, the Queen has seen Prince Philip twice since the beginning of September and they've spent their 72nd Wedding Anniversary apart. And to make matters more interesting, Prince Philip has been spending all his time in a cottage on the Sandringham estate since 2017. Members in this family are not as close as the public believes,


People Magazine is the last publication in the world that would be dishonest about Meghan and Harry.  They are extremely kind towards celebrities and almost always have the cooperation of those celebrities when they write articles.  Meghan started this when she went on international television to complain about people not asking her how she is, and People is merely following up on it (and I believe with Meghan's cooperation).

The relationship between an extremely elderly married couple who have been married for 72 years is not representative of the relationships between everyone else in the family.  Maybe you don't know many couples who have been married for many decades, but separate beds and separate bedrooms get to be extremely common when people get very elderly, and particularly when they have intrusive health problems.  The difference between Phillip and Elizabeth and most other couples is that they can afford multiple residences rather than just multiple bedrooms.


----------



## hellosunshine

rose60610 said:


> After 72 years they might be up for a breather.  Philip is 98, recently had a hip replacement, has been in and out of the hospital in the last few years, and I don't blame him for hitting the Sandringham couch with a bowl of chips.



But this could be Prince Phillip's last year on earth. Why wouldn't the Queen find it important to spend more time with him? She has time to go horse-back riding but can't bring herself to visit her husband? Huh? Weren't posted articles saying that family is important to the Queen and for that reason the Sussexs' received  backlash for skipping Sandringham celebrations with the family? It's kinda ridiculous that this non-story continues to be spun throughout the media when Buckingham Palace has already commented saying that Meghan and Harry's decision "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen".


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> People Magazine is the last publication in the world that would be dishonest about Meghan and Harry.  They are extremely kind towards celebrities and almost always have the cooperation of those celebrities when they write articles.  Meghan started this when she went on international television to complain about people not asking her how she is, and People is merely following up on it (and I believe with Meghan's cooperation).
> 
> The relationship between an extremely elderly married couple who have been married for 72 years is not representative of the relationships between everyone else in the family.  Maybe you don't know many couples who have been married for many decades, but separate beds and separate bedrooms get to be extremely common when people get very elderly, and particularly when they have intrusive health problems.  The difference between Phillip and Elizabeth and most other couples is that they can afford multiple residences rather than just multiple bedrooms.


I think the longevity of the relationship tells us all we need to know.  If Harry and Meghan make it past year 5 I’d be very surprised.  Long term commitment doesn’t seem to be Meghan’s thing basing assumptions on her track record, and I’ve never seen Harry look as miserable as he has this year.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> But this could be Prince Phillip's last year on earth. Why wouldn't the Queen find it important to spend more time with him? She has time to go horse-back riding but can't bring herself to visit her husband?


How do you know she doesn't?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> How do you know she doesn't?


Good point.  The Queen, thankfully knows the importance of keeping personal matters private.


----------



## sdkitty

I watched a recent interview on Amanpour and Company with Dickie Arbiter and Afua Hirsch.  Brits may be familiar with these two.  I was not.  Apparently Mr. Arbiter used to work for the queen and Ms Hirsch is a writer.
The main subject was Prince Andrew but Meghan and Harry came up.  They showed a clip from Meghan's sad declaration and Afua expressed how hard it would be for someone from a different culture to adapt to the royal family.  She was very sympathetic but said the tv show had backfired on Meghan with the press.
Ms. Hirsch happens to be a WOC.  That may influence her view of Meghan IMO.  
https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-a...er-afua-hirsch-on-prince-andrews-resignation/


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> But this could be Prince Phillip's last year on earth. Why wouldn't the Queen find it important to spend more time with him? She has time to go horse-back riding but can't bring herself to visit her husband? Huh? Weren't posted articles saying that family is important to the Queen and for that reason the Sussexs' received  backlash for skipping Sandringham celebrations with the family? It's kinda ridiculous that this non-story continues to be spun throughout the media when Buckingham Palace has already commented saying that Meghan and Harry's decision "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen".


Huh? .. how do YOU know that she doesn't visit her husband???


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> How do you know she doesn't?





Clearblueskies said:


> Good point.  The Queen, thankfully knows the importance of keeping personal matters private.



Exactly.  The public doesn't get reports of everything these people do on an hourly basis.  They also may be more tech savvy than we realize and use Facetime as well.  The Prince is retired and having him pop up too often would have people asking why he isn't making more appearances. The guy worked into his 90's which is a lot more than most people are able to do!! Truthfully at his age, staying away from people is the safest thing for him to stay healthy.


----------



## CeeJay

WOW .. this was surprising to me that William and Harry have had "issues" for some time!  Again, the comments seem to be more that this "issue" was started by Meghan's presence on the scene .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...y-lot-hurt-unresolved-issues-says-friend.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. this was surprising to me that William and Harry have had "issues" for some time!  Again, the comments seem to be more that this "issue" was started by Meghan's presence on the scene ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...y-lot-hurt-unresolved-issues-says-friend.html


Sibling rivalry plus one on track to be King and other not seems pretty normal.  I've not seen The Crown (yet) but heard someone saying the queen's sister, Margaret, felt she should be queen.  So that rivalry may have been one-sided but anyway....Could be this was always there with Harry but marriage made him more independent from his brother.


----------



## PewPew

> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s relationship with the royals hasn’t changed, pal claims: ‘They don’t speak’*



It’s hard to imagine how things would instantly reverse, even if the family weren’t the BRF. We can’t know if H&M told family members they felt isolated & neglected before going public, but we all know people who criticize their family/friends publically (say by venting to friends or on social media). 
Even when you deeply care for such people, reaching out is tricky:
1) because they feel you’re not genuine b/c “you’re only reaching out b/c I went public / you were shamed”, and
2) if someone has already criticized you publicly, it’s natural to expect that anything you say or do may be weaponized and used against you publicly.


----------



## LibbyRuth

sdkitty said:


> Sibling rivalry plus one on track to be King and other not seems pretty normal.  I've not seen The Crown (yet) but heard someone saying the queen's sister, Margaret, felt she should be queen.  So that rivalry may have been one-sided but anyway....Could be this was always there with Harry but marriage made him more independent from his brother.


I've heard that about Margaret - but I also heard Helena Bonham Carter this week while promoting playing her on the crown say that when she talked to friends of Margaret's prepping for the role, they told her that she was never bothered with not being Queen, she was bothered by being short. It's really hard to tell how much the talk of "my sibling is getting all this power that I'm not" is from actual reports of people in the know, and how much is from what people project based on what they think would be the case. All that said - in all the talk about Charles wanting to downsize the royals when he becomes King, perhaps Harry is seeing the writing on the wall and it's a bigger issue than merely not being king.


----------



## Jayne1

marthastoo said:


> Why on earth would Meghan think that?  Yes, that's exactly what the BRF has long been known for - giant closet tours, jetting between London and LA, tacky designer clothing.  The only thing I'll concede is servants.  Yes, she probably thought sh'd be getting servants.


Margaret had a lifestyle like that though.  I remember the photos in the magazines. Hobnobbing with celebrities and artists, jet setting around, dressed in pricey garments and jewels.  A bit of a useless life, but it was allowed, it seems.


----------



## Sharont2305

Re Charles wanting to downsize the family, I've always assumed it would include Harry, his wife and child(ren) after all, even though he's not a direct heir, he will be a son of the monarch.
Also, as the brothers have always been close, even after William married Catherine, I really did think that once William is King there would, in effect, be 2 kings. Obviously not literally but Harry being even more of a confidante if that makes sense.
Obviously that's gone out of the window now with recent happenings.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Margaret had a lifestyle like that though.  I remember the photos in the magazines. Hobnobbing with celebrities and artists, jet setting around, dressed in pricey garments and jewels.  A bit of a useless life, but it was allowed, it seems.


Hmmm.  Maybe Meghan would like the life Margaret had. Being adored, travel, couture clothes etc.


----------



## hellosunshine

Well, the reporter who said Meghan and Harry were shunned and received zero support from the royal family after their ITV interview and is now peddling the Sandringham snub narrative has tweeted that the Queen has met Philip twice since September and they've spent their recent anniversary apart. The mans' tweets are usually disseminated through various media publications as true with little hesitation or reservations by readers. So, if you're inclined to believed his previous narratives..why not this?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm.  Maybe Meghan would like the life Margaret had. Being adored, travel, couture clothes etc.


Maybe *THAT* was what she was thinking when she hooked up with Harry?!?!?!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Maybe *THAT* was what she was thinking when she hooked up with Harry?!?!?!


I don’t give her the credit of knowing the family history. If she knew about the family she would have a better idea of what her job within it would be.


----------



## queennadine

All conjecture obviously, but I have a feeling that Elizabeth cut Margaret some slack and allowed to be somewhat of a party jet-setter for a couple of reasons: 1. they weren't really supposed to be the 'royal family' until their uncle abdicated and I think that put their entire family into a whirlspin and 2. the guilt over not allowing her to marry Peter Townsend.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> I don’t give her the credit of knowing the family history. If she knew about the family she would have a better idea of what her job within it would be.


I’m thinking she assumed it wouldn’t matter, as it was going to be all about Meghan Markle.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m thinking she assumed it wouldn’t matter, as it was going to be all about Meghan Markle.


Megan Markle is many things but I don’t think she is a fool. I think she knew exactly what was expected of her and decided she didn’t care. Any casual bystander knows the basics of the deportment of the RF, and she had reportedly been fascinated with them since her childhood.


----------



## jehaga

sdkitty said:


> Sibling rivalry plus one on track to be King and other not seems pretty normal.  I've not seen The Crown (yet) but heard someone saying the queen's sister, Margaret, felt she should be queen.  So that rivalry may have been one-sided but anyway....Could be this was always there with Harry but marriage made him more independent from his brother.


Love “The Crown”!

It didn’t seem like Harry had any issues at all with William and Kate until MM came on the scene. Old pictures of Harry with William and Kate were always very pleasant to look at because they looked like they genuinely enjoyed each other’s company.

MM poisoned Harry’s relationships with almost everyone in the RF. IMO.


----------



## papertiger

hellosunshine said:


> But this could be Prince Phillip's last year on earth. Why wouldn't the Queen find it important to spend more time with him? She has time to go horse-back riding but can't bring herself to visit her husband? Huh? Weren't posted articles saying that family is important to the Queen and for that reason the Sussexs' received  backlash for skipping Sandringham celebrations with the family? It's kinda ridiculous that this non-story continues to be spun throughout the media when Buckingham Palace has already commented saying that Meghan and Harry's decision "has the support of Her Majesty the Queen".



Riding is the Queen's exercise. She rides most days and has access to (her) many horses nearly wherever she goes .


----------



## rose60610

I don't think anybody expects the Queen to hover over Prince Philip 24/7 ready to administer mouth to mouth at any moment. It's unlikely that the RF gathers for dinner every night like the Walton's (reference: the 1970's TV show) but Christmas is a big deal. Those not attending invite speculation on just how deep they are in the dog house. Past non-attendees were not under the PR disaster that the Sussex created for themselves. And the Sus' are deeeeep in the doghouse. Of course the Palace has "OK'd" them not coming, they'd say that regardless. Unlike Meghan, they are experts at the stiff upper lip and appearing gracious, even if they are seething inside. Like a previous poster said, the RF stayed in Buckingham Palace while it got bombed nine times during WWII instead of fleeing to a safe space. It's just as well that Meghan visits Oprah and Ellen over Christmas, that's much more her style. She should visit Disney Land while she's at it. Maybe Cinderella could teach her how to be a Princess that people actually like.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> I don't think anybody expects the Queen to hover over Prince Philip 24/7 ready to administer mouth to mouth at any moment. It's unlikely that the RF gathers for dinner every night like the Walton's (reference: the 1970's TV show) but Christmas is a big deal. Those not attending invite speculation on just how deep they are in the dog house. Past non-attendees were not under the PR disaster that the Sussex created for themselves. And the Sus' are deeeeep in the doghouse. Of course the Palace has "OK'd" them not coming, they'd say that regardless. Unlike Meghan, they are experts at the stiff upper lip and appearing gracious, even if they are seething inside. Like a previous poster said, the RF stayed in Buckingham Palace while it got bombed nine times during WWII instead of fleeing to a safe space. It's just as well that Meghan visits Oprah and Ellen over Christmas, that's much more her style. She should visit Disney Land while she's at it. Maybe Cinderella could teach her how to be a Princess that people actually like.


That is a very clever assessment of what is going on.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Philip has retired and is in poor health.  I don’t blame him for wanting to spend some peaceful time in the Norfolk countryside away from it all.  But the Queen is still working, and keeping up with everything that goes with being monarch - she sees this as her God-given duty.  She’s therefore obliged to be in London - or nearby in Windsor.  It’s got nothing to do with not caring about family.  Holidays (Balmoral/Sandringham) are a big deal.  Sussexes ducking out, is a big deal.  If Harry and Meghan keep this up the question will soon be asked - in a slimmed down Monarchy, would they be missed?  Answer, probably not.


----------



## hellosunshine

papertiger said:


> Riding is the Queen's exercise. She rides most days and has access to (her) many horses nearly wherever she goes .



That's exactly it. She makes it a point to get to the stables and "exercise" but doesn't see it equally as important to visit her husband. The Queen has every convenience and assistance ready if she commands it. Anyway, my overall argument was that this family isn't as particularly close as the public believes. They all sorta manage their offices, ask permission when needed, and go about their days. All this drama surrounding the Sussexs' is often overdramatized for headlines and sales.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> That's exactly it. She makes it a point to get to the stables and "exercise" but doesn't see it equally as important to visit her husband. The Queen has every convenience and assistance ready if she commands it. Anyway, my overall argument was that this family isn't as particularly close as the public believes. They all sorta manage their offices, ask permission when needed, and go about their days. All this drama surrounding the Sussexs' is often overdramatized for headlines and sales.


as someone else said already, we don't know everything she does....she may visit her husband every day or every other day or whatever.....would not be photographed; he is ailing


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> as someone else said already, we don't know everything she does....she may visit her husband every day or every other day or whatever.....would not be photographed; he is ailing


Exactly.  Some people seem to think that if you’re not constantly draped all over your husband, or gazing with open eyed adoration into his eyes, and documenting every carefully posed moment for the squad on insta.....then it’s not real love....


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Exactly.  Some people seem to think that if you’re not constantly draped all over your husband, or gazing with open eyed adoration into his eyes, and documenting every carefully posed moment for the squad on insta.....then it’s not real love....


right
and they are in their 90's so....


----------



## maryg1

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm.  Maybe Meghan would like the life Margaret had. Being adored, travel, couture clothes etc.


When I think about Margaret I don’t imagine her as a happy and satisfied woman, I really don’t envy her


----------



## Lodpah

Someone took the time to put this together. Watch 1:10 pm.





Sums it all up.


----------



## CeeJay

This is just sad; how many people she has left behind .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hares-rare-photos-previous-Thanksgivings.html


----------



## hellosunshine

Lodpah said:


> Someone took the time to put this together. Watch 1:10 pm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sums it all up.




All I see is Prince Harry talking with a guy, Meghan approaches the man and Harry, her presence interrupts the conversation, guy greets Meghan but continues on with his story/convo, Meghan likely finds that she can't follow along in said conversation and it would require a re-telling, so she lets them to continue talking and she finds someone else to chat with me. I fail to see anything nefarious here.


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Someone took the time to put this together. Watch 1:10 pm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sums it all up.



There are lots of awkward moments, but it seems really hard to walk into a room of strangers and smile, smile , smile, all the while making polite, small talk.

She's trying really hard, you can tell.  Did Sophie, Countess of Wessex, try so hard to be likeable at the beginning, with a constant Hollywood smile, or did she just show up and do the work required of her.  I don't remember feeling awkward for a newly royal Sophie.


----------



## Jayne1

queennadine said:


> All conjecture obviously, but I have a feeling that Elizabeth cut Margaret some slack and allowed to be somewhat of a party jet-setter for a couple of reasons: 1. they weren't really supposed to be the 'royal family' until their uncle abdicated and I think that put their entire family into a whirlspin and 2. the guilt over not allowing her to marry Peter Townsend.


True, but Margaret was allowed to marry Townsend, she just had to give up her royal title and income do so and she wasn't about to let go of the perks of royal life for love.

I don't remember her doing much royal work either, I just remember her extravagant lifestyle in the photo magazines.


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> *as someone else said already, we don't know everything she does..*..she may visit her husband every day or every other day or whatever.....would not be photographed; he is ailing


'


well if this can be said for the queen then it can be said for megan too!  although it doesn't stop the many daily posts that assume to know everything she is thinking,feeling or doing! 



hellosunshine said:


> All I see is Prince Harry talking with a guy, Meghan approaches the man and Harry, her presence interrupts the conversation, guy greets Meghan but continues on with his story/convo, Meghan likely finds that she can't follow along in said conversation and it would require a re-telling, so she lets them to continue talking and she finds someone else to chat with me. *I fail to see anything nefarious here.*



exactly!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> This is just sad; how many people she has left behind ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hares-rare-photos-previous-Thanksgivings.html


I wonder why this uncle wasn't at the wedding


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> '
> 
> 
> well if this can be said for the queen then it can be said for megan too!  although it doesn't stop the many daily posts that assume to know everything she is thinking,feeling or doing!
> 
> 
> 
> exactly!!


so it's ok to criticize two 90-something people who have been married for over 70 years and speculate about their marriage (while he is in very poor health)?  this is the same as "picking on" Meghan for flying on a private jet?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Someone took the time to put this together. Watch 1:10 pm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sums it all up.



i felt sorry for her.  This isn't so easy.  She WAS NOT a big Hollywood star who was used to crowds outside of a movie opening or red carpet.  She had no experience at how to do this.  The other thing is that many people were present just to see Harry and didn't really care about her being there.  I think sessions with courtiers are really necessary to understand and learn how to do this.  Surely they offered to help.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> True, but Margaret was allowed to marry Townsend, she just had to give up her royal title and income do so and she wasn't about to let go of the perks of royal life for love.
> 
> I don't remember her doing much royal work either, I just remember her extravagant lifestyle in the photo magazines.


Interestingly, there were stories recently that things had cooled down considerably between Townsend and the Princess.  The were apart for a while and absence did not work in favor of the relationship.  She might have been relieved that she was given a way out and didn't have to go through with it.  85% of the relationship might have been rebellion on her part.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> so it's ok to criticize two 90-something people who have been married for over 70 years and speculate about their marriage (while he is in very poor health)?  this is the same as "picking on" Meghan for flying on a private jet?


There is always a big human factor in situations like this.  He may not want her to see him failing and she might not want to see him failing.  It is very painful for both.  I do recall very well the night of her Diamond Jubilee celebration in 2012.  The Prince was taken ill after their sail on the Thames and could not be present with her and she looked extremely unhappy as much as she tried to hide it.  I think she is taking his failing health very hard and her family's shenanigans aren't helping.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> There is always a big human factor in situations like this.  He may not want her to see him failing and she might not want to see him failing.  It is very painful for both.  I do recall very well the night of her Diamond Jubilee celebration in 2012.  The Prince was taken ill after their sail on the Thames and could not be present with her and she looked extremely unhappy as much as she tried to hide it.  I think she is taking his failing health very hard and her family's shenanigans aren't helping.


yes, I imagine he may be nearing the end and from what I understand she really loves him


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> yes, I imagine he may be nearing the end and from what I understand she really loves him


.. and hence the reason why H&M [*IMO*] should get over their damn selves and see the Queen and Prince Phillip (_possibly_) at Christmas time!!!   They can visit CA at any time, and/or have Thanksgiving with Doria and then go to Sandringham for Christmas .. still don't really understand why they are not going (_other than being selfish_)!!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

CeeJay said:


> .. and hence the reason why H&M [*IMO*] should get over their damn selves and see the Queen and Prince Phillip (_possibly_) at Christmas time!!!   They can visit CA at any time, and/or have Thanksgiving with Doria and then go to Sandringham for Christmas .. still don't really understand why they are not going (_other than being selfish_)!!!


Yes and they should have gone to Balmoral this year for the same reason - possibly nearing the end for the Duke and Archie's first year.  They must be Meghan's preferences, and therefore Harry's because what Meghan wants Meghan gets ...  unless the Blind about the BRF keeping them away for privacy is correct...
I wonder how often Harry's family see Archie?


----------



## Sharont2305

Straight-Laced said:


> Yes and they should have gone to Balmoral this year for the same reason - possibly nearing the end for the Duke and Archie's first year.  They must be Meghan's preferences, and therefore Harry's because what Meghan wants Meghan gets ...  unless the Blind about the BRF keeping them away for privacy is correct...
> I wonder how often Harry's family see Archie?


I wonder how close Archie will be to his Cambridge cousins. Somehow I can't see him being as close to them as the Tindell and Phillips children are.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder how close Archie will be to his Cambridge cousins. Somehow I can't see him being as close to them as the Tindell and Phillips children are.


It will be such a shame if Archie doesn’t grow up alongside his cousins just because the tensions between his parents and his Cambridge uncle and aunt keep them apart.


----------



## eunaddict

https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity-news/queen-prince-harry-meghan-markle-668143

Well, this is interesting.


----------



## Welltraveled!

offline it’s deplorable. But online as proof in this thread alone every little thing in their lives is fair game.  




sdkitty said:


> so it's ok to criticize two 90-something people who have been married for over 70 years and speculate about their marriage (while he is in very poor health)?  this is the same as "picking on" Meghan for flying on a private jet?


----------



## Tivo

eunaddict said:


> https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity-news/queen-prince-harry-meghan-markle-668143
> Well, this is interesting.





She’s probably just tired of those questions because that’s likely all anyone asks about these days. I don’t see this as a big deal.


----------



## marthastoo

eunaddict said:


> https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/celebrity-news/queen-prince-harry-meghan-markle-668143
> 
> Well, this is interesting.


Wait - the Sussexes are verboten but her maj is game to talk abut Prince Andrew?  

Ok


----------



## bag-princess

sdkitty said:


> so it's ok to criticize two 90-something people who have been married for over 70 years and speculate about their marriage (while he is in very poor health)?  this is the same as "picking on" Meghan for flying on a private jet?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Welltraveled! said:


> offline it’s deplorable. But online as proof in this thread alone every little thing in their lives is fair game.


If they didn’t keep PR-ing every little thing in their lives, and every little complaint they have concerning their pampered life there’d be less to comment on.


----------



## A1aGypsy

So, someone gains an audience with the Queen and they want to waste their time attempting to talk about her private affairs? SMH. This society.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I’m calling BS on the Marie Claire article. That last line tells me the whole thing was made up. 

“The source continued: ‘Naturally, it’s informal rather than any official policy and there’s no suggestion the Queen is even aware.’”


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> Wait - the Sussexes are verboten but her maj is game to talk abut Prince Andrew?
> 
> Ok


The tweet this article is based on was from months ago before Andrew was a real issue.  But even so, nobody makes casual chit chat with a woman about her son being a criminal pedophile.  I don't think anyone needs to be told not to ask about that.  

A woman whose grandson recently got married and made her a great-grandmother again - that *should *be a pleasant topic of conversation for her, but because of all the Sussex drama, it's not.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Clearblueskies said:


> If they didn’t keep PR-ing every little thing in their lives, and every little complaint they have concerning their pampered life there’d be less to comment on.



I don't think any member of the Royal family "PR(-ing) every little thing in their lives" but posters like to comment or conjure up things.  

It comes with being in the public eye.  It's sometimes cruel or beneficial.  

I'm done with this topic; no need to respond.


----------



## myown

Lodpah said:


> Someone took the time to put this together. Watch 1:10 pm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sums it all up.



Kinda feel sorry for her that some people dislike her so much, they even make nasty videos

in most videos she looks insecure


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> All I see is Prince Harry talking with a guy, Meghan approaches the man and Harry, her presence interrupts the conversation, guy greets Meghan but continues on with his story/convo, Meghan likely finds that she can't follow along in said conversation and it would require a re-telling, so she lets them to continue talking and she finds someone else to chat with me. I fail to see anything nefarious here.


Also how strange of Harry to leave her all by her own. What would the video say then? „Meghan standing alone, no one wants to talk to her“?! Other Szenario someone told her to go there introduce herself for nice picture or something. Then she didn’t know what to do and talked to someone else. 

I watched a little more of these videos and sometimes it looks like harry left her on her own. She still has to learn so much and Harry should Guide her better


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> Also how strange of Harry to leave her all by her own. What would the video say then? „Meghan standing alone, no one wants to talk to her“?! Other Szenario someone told her to go there introduce herself for nice picture or something. Then she didn’t know what to do and talked to someone else.
> 
> I watched a little more of these videos and sometimes it looks like harry left her on her own. She still has to learn so much and Harry should Guide her better


I think he is assuming that she knows what to do.  It is one thing to give people lessons in how to deal with strangers and it is another to implement the lessons when needed.  Princess Anne was interviewed in an article decades ago and she said that it is on the job training, so all I can conclude is that with time, most people learn what to do and become more comfortable doing it. Or not, in which case they stay home and realize that they married into the wrong job.


----------



## CeeJay

I certainly hope that Meghan doesn't 'use' Archie as the collateral re: being with the BRF!  I've seen this before, where the mother/father use the child to punish others .. in other words, they will say "well, you can't see my son until you do .." .. that would be horrible for Archie!


----------



## Mrs.Z

myown said:


> Also how strange of Harry to leave her all by her own. What would the video say then? „Meghan standing alone, no one wants to talk to her“?! Other Szenario someone told her to go there introduce herself for nice picture or something. Then she didn’t know what to do and talked to someone else.
> 
> I watched a little more of these videos and sometimes it looks like harry left her on her own. She still has to learn so much and Harry should Guide her better


I thought the same thing, Harry has been doing this his whole life...he can’t help her out?  

Also, sometimes she seems to be trying too hard, it’s impossible to win everyone over with chit chat, let things happen more naturally.


----------



## sdkitty

have to admit I didn't watch the video.  but with her huge success in social networking I'd think she has plenty of social skills.....I guess anyone can have an awkward moment but seems she'd be better than most at these things


----------



## bag-mania

I could only watch a few minutes of those videos before I lost interest. Whoever made them must have spent many hours watching and analyzing footage of Meghan. I find that fact so disturbing I can’t bring myself to care about whatever point she was trying to make.


----------



## PewPew

Jayne1 said:


> Did Sophie, Countess of Wessex, try so hard to be likeable at the beginning, with a constant Hollywood smile, or did she just show up and do the work required of her.  I don't remember feeling awkward for a newly royal Sophie.



Sophie’s 1999 marriage had a rocky start in a few ways (mentioned below), but the transition was made easier by the fact she’d dated Edward for 6 years, and was said to have had a good relationship with QE2 and BRF long before marriage. She also had been in Public Relations & had her own firm, so she knew how to carry herself in public.

As for the “rough days”—-
-She wasn’t known outside of England until her engagement & she got some unfair international press comparing her person & style to to Diana, the other famously royal blonde with short hair.
-Topless photos of her & a work colleague were published a month before her wedding. The publication was blasted by the prime minister & eventually apologized. (Sophie & Edward didn’t sue, but there may have been a settlement)
-Sophie was secretly taped by work connections speaking unflatteringly about some of the BRF and the prime minister’s wife. She publicly issued letters of apology. After this, Sophie and Edward withdrew from their businesses & went to work full time for the BRF
-Sophie had emergency surgery for an ectopic first pregnancy & had a dangerous placental abruption with her daughter, who was born early. The press & public really seem to give the family space and privacy after this period.

Obviously the photos & taped convos might have been harder to get past in the era of social media, but Sophie & Edward have really kept their head down and committed to moving forward.  In the last 15 yrs, she’s carried herself in a dignified manner & done a wonderful job representing the BRF and various causes, so people don’t associate her & Edward with scandal.


----------



## Jayne1

PewPew said:


> Sophie’s 1999 marriage had a rocky start in a few ways (mentioned below), but the transition was made easier by the fact she’d dated Edward for 6 years, and was said to have had a good relationship with QE2 and BRF long before marriage. She also had been in Public Relations & had her own firm, so she knew how to carry herself in public.
> 
> As for the “rough days”—-
> -She wasn’t really known outside of England until her engagement & she got some unfair press comparing her person & style to to Diana, another famous blonde with short hair.
> -Topless photos of her & a work colleague were published a month before her wedding. The publication was blasted by the prime minister & eventually apologized. (Sophie & Edward didn’t sue, but there may have been a settlement
> -Sophie was secretly taped by work connections speaking unflatteringly about some of the BRF and the prime minister’s wife. She publicly issued letters of apology. After this, Sophie and Edward withdrew from their businesses & went to work full time for the BRF
> -Sophie had emergency surgery for an ectopic first pregnancy & had a dangerous placental abruption with her daughter, who was born early. The press & public really seem to give the family space and privacy after this period.
> 
> Obviously the photos & taped convos might have been harder to get past in the era of social media, but Sophie & Edward have really kept their head down and committed to moving forward.  In the last 15 yrs, she’s carried herself in a dignified manner & done a wonderful job representing the BRF and various causes that people really don’t associate her & Edward with scandal.


Sophie was here in Toronto last week and you wouldn't know it.  

She does her job quietly and respectfully, doesn't dress flashy and that's that.  No huge Hollywood smiles and hugs for the camera lens.  

She visited a hospital here, where she is a patron, and took part in a surgery demonstration. The staff was happy, the patients she visited were happy and no drama... just the way it should be.  Low key.


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> I think he is assuming that she knows what to do.  It is one thing to give people lessons in how to deal with strangers and it is another to implement the lessons when needed.  Princess Anne was interviewed in an article decades ago and she said that it is on the job training, so all I can conclude is that with time, most people learn what to do and become more comfortable doing it. Or not, in which case they stay home and realize that they married into the wrong job.


But Meghan hasn’t had a lot of training


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> I certainly hope that Meghan doesn't 'use' Archie as the collateral re: being with the BRF!  I've seen this before, where the mother/father use the child to punish others .. in other words, they will say "well, you can't see my son until you do .." .. that would be horrible for Archie!


She’s using him like this against her father


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> But Meghan hasn’t had a lot of training


The fact is all we can do is speculate. We have no idea what training she did or didn’t have. Or if she listened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Meghan likely underwent some "training" for her royal role, it's hard for me to think that the RF would have thrown her to the wolves with no preparation. That said, of course she'd naturally have some bumps along the way, but she has gone OUT of her way to woke the masses and even complain on TV about her royal lot in life. As if the global public was supposed to respond in unison with an outpouring show of sympathy for all the royal trappings and lifestyle she married (clawed her way) into. Then that was met with backlash (surprise!). Then Hillary ******* comes along to interject herself into the fray and blames it all on racism, just like the ol' playbook dictates. Of course that does work for some Media darlings so why wouldn't Meghan assume she has a seat at the same table? She finds out the hard way she is not invited to that party. Christmas in California to the rescue! Oprah! Ellen! Laughs!  Sorry, Meghan, you're clueless.


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> have to admit I didn't watch the video.  but with her huge success in social networking I'd think she has plenty of social skills.....I guess anyone can have an awkward moment but seems she'd be better than most at these things


I didn't really watch most of those videos either.  She's outgoing and willing to walk up to people and introduce herself and make chit chat.  I think those are assets in a job that calls for her to make chit chat with strangers on a regular basis.  It's good that she's able to fend for herself in public without Harry by her side every single moment.

Sometimes I think she comes on way too strong and acts like she's an expert who needs to enlighten everyone with her wisdom on topics she is definitely not an expert on.  She also cuts Harry off on a regular basis so she can take the floor  - starting with their engagement interview in which Harry had to playfully tell her that *he* was the one being asked the question.  But that's a separate matter.


----------



## bag-mania

There's a fine line between being perceived as being very confident and being very pushy. Meghan crosses back and forth over that line.

Despite the media insisting that Harry and Meghan would be coming to the US for Thanksgiving, so far there is no sign that that is happening. Yet another reason to distrust the news/gossip media. They don't care if what they say is correct, only that you click on their article and keep that advertising money coming in.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Despite the media insisting that Harry and Meghan would be coming to the US for Thanksgiving, so far there is no sign that that is happening. Yet another reason to distrust the news/gossip media.


Nobody knows where they are right now.  They could be in the US.  I think the flight to California is too long for their precious selves to fly commercial, so I think they will fly private and just go out of their way to keep it secret - which they have done successfully in the past when they wanted to.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Nobody knows where they are right now.  They could be in the US.  I think the flight to California is too long for their precious selves to fly commercial, so I think they will fly private and just go out of their way to keep it secret - which they have done successfully in the past when they wanted to.



Time will tell. While I can imagine them enjoying an opulent Thanksgiving dinner with some celebrity after spending a much-photographed morning helping out at a homeless shelter, I'm not sure it will go that way. Since it has been announced they won't be going to Buckingham Palace for Christmas, I bet they wait a little longer before coming to the US. I'd be surprised if they want to spend their entire six week break here. 

For all we know they could be sunning themselves this week on some billionaire's yacht while worrying about the state of the environment.


----------



## A1aGypsy

You know what? Who cares where they are. They are keeping it low key. Lesson one - check.


----------



## Flatsy

I'm probably in the minority, but I think they intend to keep their entire break secret.  I don't believe they are planning pap strolls.  I think they are planning to hang out with celebrities 24/7, but we won't hear about it later.

I don't think their problem has ever been needing attention every single day.  They want to be able to go on vacation and turn off the publicity at will.  It's just when they want to turn the attention back on, they want it BIG.  They want to "break the internet".  They want to be recognized as "single handedly modernizing the monarchy".  And they want universal praise and no criticism.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> I'm probably in the minority, but I think they intend to keep their entire break secret.  I don't believe they are planning pap strolls.  I think they are planning to hang out with celebrities 24/7, but we won't hear about it later.
> 
> I don't think their problem has ever been needing attention every single day.  They want to be able to go on vacation and turn off the publicity at will.  It's just when they want to turn the attention back on, they want it BIG.  They want to "break the internet".  They want to be recognized as "single handedly modernizing the monarchy".  And they want universal praise and no criticism.



I have also thought this... but impossible to avoid the paparazzi in Los Angeles. Once they get a whiff, the jig is up.


----------



## bag-mania

Yeah, if they are in LA it will be known. It seems like TMZ always has someone monitoring which celebrities are going in and out of the airport. And the British media have been watching like hawks for any movement from them.


----------



## rose60610

Flatsy said:


> I'm probably in the minority, but I think they intend to keep their entire break secret.  I don't believe they are planning pap strolls.  I think they are planning to hang out with celebrities 24/7, but we won't hear about it later.
> 
> I don't think their problem has ever been needing attention every single day.  They want to be able to go on vacation and turn off the publicity at will.  It's just when they want to turn the attention back on, they want it BIG.  They want to "break the internet".  They want to be recognized as "single handedly modernizing the monarchy".  And they want universal praise and no criticism.



To a large extent I agree. However, it seems as though they (OR SHE) believed they could control all reporting of themselves. When they discovered it didn't work that way, out comes the "woe is me" garbage and that back fired. They're still in the works of learning when media can be utterly cruel when you don't even deserve it vs when you DO deserve it.  Look, the RF can look opon  1,000 years of history and observe how they're in today's position. Along comes D-List Meghan from a dysfunctional family from nowhere out to woke everybody and can't fathom why she rubs the wrong way.  Archie was her anchor baby to the RF who apparently can't do enough for her, even after her 50 million dollar wedding and four million dollar Frogmore renovation. I just hope Harry has a good divorce lawyer. He's going to need it.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> To a large extent I agree. However, it seems as though they (OR SHE) believed they could control all reporting of themselves. When they discovered it didn't work that way, out comes the "woe is me" garbage and that back fired. They're still in the works of learning when media can be utterly cruel when you don't even deserve it vs when you DO deserve it.  Look, the RF can look opon  1,000 years of history and observe how they're in today's position. Along comes D-List Meghan from a dysfunctional family from nowhere out to woke everybody and can't fathom why she rubs the wrong way.  Archie was her anchor baby to the RF who apparently can't do enough for her, even after her 50 million dollar wedding and four million dollar Frogmore renovation. I just hope Harry has a good divorce lawyer. He's going to need it.


On point, Meghan needs to realize that the Monarchy will protect the Crown no matter what,   Prince Harry and Meghan will find themselves “posted” to somewhere they don’t want to go. She’s acting like Wallis Simpson and Harry is a acting like his uncle, pay me to go away but let me keep all the trappings of wealth and fame.

She has no clue of all the people who run the Monarchy and THEY will reign them in when the time is right. Like I wrote previously the Queen has a sense of humor by placing them at Frogmore, where Wallis Simpson is buried.


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> To a large extent I agree. However, it seems as though they (OR SHE) believed they could control all reporting of themselves. When they discovered it didn't work that way, out comes the "woe is me" garbage and that back fired. They're still in the works of learning when media can be utterly cruel when you don't even deserve it vs when you DO deserve it.  Look, the RF can look opon  1,000 years of history and observe how they're in today's position. Along comes D-List Meghan from a dysfunctional family from nowhere out to woke everybody and can't fathom why she rubs the wrong way.  Archie was her anchor baby to the RF who apparently can't do enough for her, even after her 50 million dollar wedding and four million dollar Frogmore renovation. I just hope Harry has a good divorce lawyer. He's going to need it.


I agree to a point but as far as Harry needing a divorce lawyer because he wants a divorce, I am not so sure. He seems to be completely smitten with her. In the case of Charles and Diana, the problem was between them, not extended family members or the outside world. Charles habitually and happily threw Diana under the bus. Harry has really stuck his neck out defending Megan. If there is a divorce it will be her that files, not love struck Harry..


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I agree to a point but as far as Harry needing a divorce lawyer because he wants a divorce, I am not so sure. He seems to be completely smitten with her. In the case of Charles and Diana, the problem was between them, not extended family members or the outside world. Charles habitually and happily threw Diana under the bus. Harry has really stuck his neck out defending Megan. If there is a divorce it will be her that files, not love struck Harry..


yes, unless things change over the years.....for now, I agree she's got him


----------



## bag-mania

The latest rumor is that Meghan is going to fly Doria over to join her for Thanksgiving. We'll see if that actually happens. The random guessing by the media has not been very accurate so far.


----------



## LibbyRuth

LittleStar88 said:


> I have also thought this... but impossible to avoid the paparazzi in Los Angeles. Once they get a whiff, the jig is up.


That's actually not true.  LA is very well set up to either get pap attention or not, depending on what you desire.  There are spots that are known to be paparazzi areas - certain restaurants, certain groceries, etc. When stars want to have their "just like us" moments, they know which Whole Foods to go to and load their own groceries in their cars. When they want to announce a new relationship or let it be known they are in talks for a new project, they know which restaurants to go and not have the valet pull up their car until they walk out of the restaurant.  LAX is the same - there is a VIP entrance/exit for avoiding the paparazzi. Anyone who wants to be photographed will forego that for the regular entrance with a tip from a publicist of what time a flight arrives. 
So if they were mindful of where they went, avoiding the paparazzi heavy places, they could privately visit with friend with ease.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I agree to a point but as far as Harry needing a divorce lawyer because he wants a divorce, I am not so sure. He seems to be completely smitten with her. In the case of Charles and Diana, the problem was between them, not extended family members or the outside world. Charles habitually and happily threw Diana under the bus. Harry has really stuck his neck out defending Megan. If there is a divorce it will be her that files, not love struck Harry..


Things can change though; it was thought that the Duke of Windsor tired of Wallis towards the end ..


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> yes, unless things change over the years.....for now, I agree she's got him


I also in all honesty do not see Megan filing for divorce either. She would be giving up way too much. She seems to have the best of both worlds. Married to a prince and hob nobbing with celebrities as well. As far as being an actress, I had never heard of her before she snagged Harry. Harry may have an epiphany at some point, but I can’t see it happening, at least not for a very long time. She would have to do something really terrible to shake him out of his trance.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Things can change though; it was thought that the Duke of Windsor tired of Wallis towards the end ..


Lol!  I thought she’s was bored of him even before the wedding day!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Lol!  I thought she’s was bored of him even before the wedding day!


but look at all the jewelry she accumulated 
I think she was a dominatrix


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> On point, Meghan needs to realize that the Monarchy will protect the Crown no matter what,   Prince Harry and Meghan will find themselves “posted” to somewhere they don’t want to go. She’s acting like Wallis Simpson and Harry is a acting like his uncle, pay me to go away but let me keep all the trappings of wealth and fame.


LIke Wallis and the Duke being moved to the Bahamas because of their strong German sympathies.


CeeJay said:


> Things can change though; it was thought that the Duke of Windsor tired of Wallis towards the end ..


I thought it was she who tired of him and quickly too.


----------



## daisychainz

Chagall said:


> I agree to a point but as far as Harry needing a divorce lawyer because he wants a divorce, I am not so sure. He seems to be completely smitten with her. In the case of Charles and Diana, the problem was between them, not extended family members or the outside world. Charles habitually and happily threw Diana under the bus. Harry has really stuck his neck out defending Megan. If there is a divorce it will be her that files, not love struck Harry..


I agree. She seems to give up on people and move on more readily. And she has a divorce behind her already.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> but look at all the jewelry she accumulated
> I think she was a dominatrix


I read she was horrible to him, really vile.


----------



## Flatsy

Chagall said:


> Harry may have an epiphany at some point, but I can’t see it happening, at least not for a very long time. She would have to do something really terrible to shake him out of his trance.


I've said before, they remind me of JFK, Jr and Carolyn Bessette.  JFK, Jr was also incredibly smitten.  He also tried to be the knight in shining armor, tried to make his wife happy, tried to defend her from the paparazzi.  He reached the end of his rope after 3 years.  He was sick of the misery and the complaining and the blame.  

He wanted her to just* try to be happy*.  I think his epiphany, if there was one, was that she wasn't willing to do so.  (And I think there were other factors at work with Carolyn, such as depression.)  But I could see Harry arriving at the same place if he realizes that she's never going to try to be happy with their life and all that goes along with it.   Narcissists thrive on constant drama, but most other people can't live with it long term.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, if they are in LA it will be known. It seems like TMZ always has someone monitoring which celebrities are going in and out of the airport. And the British media have been watching like hawks for any movement from them.


That's why when celebrities want to travel undetected, they use different airports.  There are tons of airports within 2 hours of LA that aren't monitored by the paparazzi.  Likewise, they can drive a few hours in the UK to use a different airport than the one the media expects them to use based on their previous travel.  Filing a flight plan at the last minute and leaving in the middle of the night also works.


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> Lol!  I thought she’s was bored of him even before the wedding day!


There's a great show on Amazon called the " Secret Letters of Wallis Simpson." The letters were found in 2008 and had been sent to Edward Simpson during the abdication crisis. Edward was Wallis' true love and she thought she would be returning to him when the Duke tired of her. That never happened and when David abdicated she had to marry him. It wasn't what she wanted to do, she knew she had to do so. I found the documentary riveting and was strangely more sympathetic to Wallis. I really think she turned out to be a convenient scapegoat for the whole BRF. If she followed her heart she would have returned to her ex-husband and David would never have abdicated. History would have changed dramatically..


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> I've said before, they remind me of JFK, Jr and Carolyn Bessette.  JFK, Jr was also incredibly smitten.  He also tried to be the knight in shining armor, tried to make his wife happy, tried to defend her from the paparazzi.  He reached the end of his rope after 3 years.  He was sick of the misery and the complaining and the blame.
> 
> He wanted her to just* try to be happy*.  I think his epiphany, if there was one, was that she wasn't willing to do so.  (And I think there were other factors at work with Carolyn, such as depression.)  But I could see Harry arriving at the same place if he realizes that she's never going to try to be happy with their life and all that goes along with it.   Narcissists thrive on constant drama, but most other people can't live with it long term.


I think Carolyn had mental health problems and drug problems if you can believe what you read. I don’t think she had narcissist traits, but was really struggling with the media attention and the pressure from being Johns wife. Narcissists love attention. Preferably positive but if not then negative attention will do. As long as the spotlight is on them. They need this for their narcissistic ‘fuel’.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> I think Carolyn had mental health problems and drug problems if you can believe what you read. I don’t think she had narcissist traits, but was really struggling with the media attention and the pressure from being Johns wife. Narcissists love attention. Preferably positive but if not then negative attention will do. As long as the spotlight is on them. They need this for their narcissistic ‘fuel’.



I always thought Carolyn Bessette had that ice queen quality to her, like nothing could ever quite make her happy. Don't know how true that was, but that's the impression she gave off IMO.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I always thought Carolyn Bessette had that ice queen quality to her, like nothing could ever quite make her happy. Don't know how true that was, but that's the impression she gave off IMO.


Quite to the contrary, those that worked with her at Calvin Klein said she was a very 'warm' person and she was, after all, in his Media department, so she knew about Publicity.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Quite to the contrary, those that worked with her at Calvin Klein said she was a very 'warm' person and she was, after all, in his Media department, so she knew about Publicity.


I heard also that she was a very warm fun loving person. She was genuinely struggling with all the media attention. Unlike Megan she didn’t want the attention.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Quite to the contrary, those that worked with her at Calvin Klein said she was a very 'warm' person and she was, after all, in his Media department, so she knew about Publicity.



Really? I hadn't heard that. I remember anyone JFK Jr. dated got put under the microscope by the tabloids, very much like the royals in that regard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Quite to the contrary, those that worked with her at Calvin Klein said she was a very 'warm' person and she was, after all, in his Media department, so she knew about Publicity.


I thought they were just the most elegant couple.  Her so-simple wedding gown was everything to me.  As as the chapel they got married in.  I believe she was a very poised woman but was not used to the scrutiny she got after marrying John and wasn't looking for it.


----------



## Flatsy

Chagall said:


> I think Carolyn had mental health problems and drug problems if you can believe what you read. I don’t think she had narcissist traits, but was really struggling with the media attention and the pressure from being Johns wife.


I think she was depressed, and I think that was true before the wedding.  Carole Radziwill in her book implied that anti-depressants and birth control pills had killed her libido, which kind of indirectly confirmed the rumors that John and Carolyn's love life wasn't so great.

I'm not so sure the media attention was truly the problem, even though that's what she fixated on as the source of her problems.  One of John's friends who wrote a book said he and his wife went out to dinner with John and Carolyn and as soon as they exited the apartment, Carolyn sat down on the curb and cried.  She said it was because of the paparazzi.  There were no paparazzi around at the time, and everyone had to stand there and comfort her and John's friend kind of thought she was being overdramatic.

I think Carolyn may have had some narcissist qualities, and being a victim of the paparazzi was something she used for attention from her husband and friends.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> I think she was depressed, and I think that was true before the wedding.  Carole Radziwill in her book implied that anti-depressants and birth control pills had killed her libido, which kind of indirectly confirmed the rumors that John and Carolyn's love life wasn't so great.
> 
> I'm not so sure the media attention was truly the problem, even though that's what she fixated on as the source of her problems.  One of John's friends who wrote a book said he and his wife went out to dinner with John and Carolyn and as soon as they exited the apartment, Carolyn sat down on the curb and cried.  She said it was because of the paparazzi.  There were no paparazzi around at the time, and everyone had to stand there and comfort her and John's friend kind of thought she was being overdramatic.
> 
> I think Carolyn may have had some narcissist qualities, and being a victim of the paparazzi was something she used for attention from her husband and friends.


I am probably one of the few people on earth who was not a fan of CBK.  One of the reasons they were late for that last plane trip was because she was having her nails done and kept changing the color of the polish.  She couldn't  find a pink that suited her.  I didn't think her style was that extra fabulous. It was pretty classic, and I am not knocking that, but I don't think it was that unusual and  not all that different from many other woman in fashion in NY.  

Back to the thread topic!  Things sure are quiet for these two.  @Flatsy  I think you may be right about the under the radar visit here.


----------



## Jayne1

chowlover2 said:


> . I really think she turned out to be a convenient scapegoat for the whole BRF. If she followed her heart she would have returned to her ex-husband and David would never have abdicated. History would have changed dramatically..


For the worse!  He was an incredibly flawed man and a Nazi sympathizer to boot. She did the world a favour.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I am probably one of the few people on earth who was not a fan of CBK.  One of the reasons they were late for that last plane trip was because she was having her nails done and kept changing the color of the polish.  She couldn't  find a pink that suited her.


I loved her style and beauty and you're the first person to repeat what I read about her insistence on getting the right shade of pedicure polish to match her dress.  I read it was a lilac colour that she kept changing, but really, no one mentions that, ever. It's really an important factor in the plane leaving so late.


----------



## chowlover2

Jayne1 said:


> For the worse!  He was an incredibly flawed man and a Nazi sympathizer to boot. She did the world a favour.


He was so sympathetic to the Nazis because they told him they would reinstate him to the throne. I think they were just using him, but who knows?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I am probably one of the few people on earth who was not a fan of CBK.  One of the reasons they were late for that last plane trip was because she was having her nails done and kept changing the color of the polish.  She couldn't  find a pink that suited her.  I didn't think her style was that extra fabulous. It was pretty classic, and I am not knocking that, but I don't think it was that unusual and  not all that different from many other woman in fashion in NY.
> 
> Back to the thread topic!  Things sure are quiet for these two.  @Flatsy  I think you may be right about the under the radar visit here.



I never heard about the nail polish before. I heard that they were late because she insisted on waiting for her sister and by the time she got there it was almost dark. I didn’t like CBK either.


----------



## zen1965

John should not have not have flown at night. He paid for his misjudgement dearly. Great shame.
I always pitied Ann Freeman who lost two daughters and supposedly was not treated well by the Kennedy family in the aftermath.
Anyway, I hope Harry and wife are using this break to heal and soothe their bruised souls to start living again, not just existing. Poor darlings.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I thought they were just the most elegant couple.  Her so-simple wedding gown was everything to me.  As as the chapel they got married in.  I believe she was a very poised woman but was not used to the scrutiny she got after marrying John and wasn't looking for it.


I absolutely loved her wedding dress and the way she wore her hair. She was a very elegant woman. She also kept her make up very minimal as this really suited her.


----------



## Chagall

zen1965 said:


> John should not have not have flown at night. He paid for his misjudgement dearly. Great shame.
> I always pitied Ann Freeman who lost two daughters and supposedly was not treated well by the Kennedy family in the aftermath.
> Anyway, I hope Harry and wife are using this break to heal and soothe their bruised souls to start living again, not just existing. Poor darlings.


I don’t know the real reason they were late leaving that night but it really dosen’t matter.  The bottom line was that John shouldn’t have flown. He didn’t have many flying hours behind him and visibility was poor. The Kennedy men sometimes thought they were invincible.


----------



## Flatsy

Chagall said:


> The bottom line was that John shouldn’t have flown. He didn’t have many flying hours behind him and visibility was poor.


100%.  It had nothing to do with nail polish or Carolyn's sister being late.  The weather conditions were way beyond John's capabilities as a pilot.  Other pilots at the airport that night were cancelling their flights and warned John about how bad the fog was.  John made the terrible decision to try to fly through the fog and haze and darkness, even though he didn't have the instrument training to do so.  

The FAA believes he got panicked and disoriented in the fog.  He tried to pull up the nose of the plane, but forgot to level his wings first, so the plane wound up corkscrewing downwards into the ocean.  It would have been a terrifying flight for his passengers.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> 100%.  It had nothing to do with nail polish or Carolyn's sister being late.  The weather conditions were way beyond John's capabilities as a pilot.  Other pilots at the airport that night were cancelling their flights and warned John about how bad the fog was.  John made the terrible decision to try to fly through the fog and haze and darkness, even though he didn't have the instrument training to do so.
> 
> The FAA believes he got panicked and disoriented in the fog.  He tried to pull up the nose of the plane, but forgot to level his wings first, so the plane wound up corkscrewing downwards into the ocean.  It would have been a terrifying flight for his passengers.


Agree. John made a reckless decision and based on his relative lack of flying experience and the bad weather conditions it is hard to fathom. The outcome was so tragic. There are delays in travel all the time and they are not a reason to make unsafe decisions. We certainly can’t blame Carolyn for what happened.


----------



## rose60610

I didn't follow the JFK Jr and CBK story much other than concur that JFK Jr was in general a big risk taker. Perhaps we should get back to thinking of ways we can help Meghan. I mean, we here on PF are extremely generous, providing advice for FREE when you know she's (OK, not really, The Crown) is dishing out scads of money for the worthless and useless ill-advising PR team she has now. If only she had been following OUR advice she wouldn't be so steeped in the current septic pit of her own making, bumbling about in badly tailored clothes, woking where woking wasn't wanted, carrying Archie like a slippery grocery bag, complaining about landing the world's richest and most glamorous meal ticket or begging for sympathy because she has a life of unimaginable luxury at her fingertips. Following is an excerpt from Cosmopolitan. She really needs our help now. Kate is doing the NATO heavy lifting while William, H&M have been dispatched elsewhere. Coincidence? Don't think so. Good thinking on the Crown's part, don't allow Meghan to try to woke NATO. Divert William at the same time so it doesn't look so choreographed. (We're not supposed to see through it, so just play along.)


".....But next week, when Buckingham Palace plays host to a large-scale royal event, only Kate Middleton will be there out of the 'Fab Four'. Prince William, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will all be absent from the occasion - but for different reasons.
On Tuesday 3 December, the royal family will welcome NATO leaders, their partners and delegations to a reception at Buckingham Palace to mark 70 years of the NATO alliance. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation alliance is a military agreement between 29 North American and European countries, who will all gather together for the celebration in London next week.
The Queen will be hosting the event, along with Prince Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall. Also on the list from the royal family is the Duchess of Cambridge, the Queen's youngest son Edward (the Earl of Wessex), Princess Anne, and some of Queen Elizabeth's cousins.
So what's Prince William's excuse? And what about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle - where will they be at?
Prince William will be otherwise engaged on a mini overseas tour when the NATO event takes place. The Duke of Cambridge will be making an official visit to Kuwait and Oman at the request of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office between 1-4 December, meaning he is very much unavailable.
Harry and Meghan, on the other hand, aren't on official business at the time of the NATO reception. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have taken a leave of absence of royal duties for the last six weeks of the year to enable them to spend some quality family time with their young son, Archie...."


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Agree. John made a reckless decision and based on his relative lack of flying experience and the bad weather conditions it is hard to fathom. The outcome was so tragic. There are delays in travel all the time and they are not a reason to make unsafe decisions. We certainly can’t blame Carolyn for what happened.


yes, he made a very costly mistake....loved him though.....they way he tried to live a normal life, bicycling around NYC.....and so handsome....RIP


----------



## Sharont2305

..... and what a two years it's been!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> ..... and what a two years it's been!



Seems like it's been half a lifetime rather than 2 years!


----------



## Flatsy

Harry complained that whenever Meghan takes time off, the media continues writing about her.

So, during their extremely heavily publicized 6-week break, the Sussexes choose to release a never-before-seen wedding photo?   That will guarantee a round of publicity from every major media outlet in the US and UK.  At a time when they have told the world they want peace and privacy.

Proving yet again that they do want attention and publicity at all times - they just want to control it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Seems like they are closing ranks, and demonstrating that, even without William present, they are putting their full faith (and DIL favoritism) in Kate.  This is a signal.  A BIG one.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Seems like they are closing ranks, and demonstrating that, even without William present, they are putting their full faith (and DIL favoritism) in Kate.  This is a signal.  A BIG one.


OT but is that a baby and a cat on your avatar?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> Harry complained that whenever Meghan takes time off, the media continues writing about her.
> 
> So, during their extremely heavily publicized 6-week break, the Sussexes choose to release a never-before-seen wedding photo?   That will guarantee a round of publicity from every major media outlet in the US and UK.  At a time when they have told the world they want peace and privacy.
> 
> Proving yet again that they do want attention and publicity at all times - they just want to control it.


Exactly


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> OT but is that a baby and a cat on your avatar?



Yes.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Yes.


sweet
that cat looks huge


----------



## kemilia

chowlover2 said:


> There's a great show on Amazon called the " Secret Letters of Wallis Simpson." The letters were found in 2008 and had been sent to Edward Simpson during the abdication crisis. Edward was Wallis' true love and she thought she would be returning to him when the Duke tired of her. That never happened and when David abdicated she had to marry him. It wasn't what she wanted to do, she knew she had to do so. I found the documentary riveting and was strangely more sympathetic to Wallis. I really think she turned out to be a convenient scapegoat for the whole BRF. If she followed her heart she would have returned to her ex-husband and David would never have abdicated. History would have changed dramatically..


Thanks for the recommendation. Now that I'm done with the Crown, I can continue my royal binging.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> ..... and what a two years it's been!




Oh look, they want to make sure we don't forget about them while they're on hiatus. Who else thinks they are spending their break working on Baby #2? She's 38 and they've hinted they want another one.


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> I don’t know the real reason they were late leaving that night but it really dosen’t matter.  The bottom line was that John shouldn’t have flown. He didn’t have many flying hours behind him and visibility was poor. The Kennedy men sometimes thought they were invincible.


Exactly and I also read that he really never had the proper instruction for that particular plane.  It was very telling that when his mother was alive, she wouldn't allow him to go for his pilot's license.  I think she realized that he didn't study hard enough with certain things, like all the times he failed the Bar exam.

Meanwhile...... back on the farm.....Where the heck are they?  Who knows, by the time they resurface, Archie may be running in a 5k.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I am probably one of the few people on earth who was not a fan of CBK.  One of the reasons they were late for that last plane trip was because she was having her nails done and kept changing the color of the polish.  She couldn't  find a pink that suited her.  I didn't think her style was that extra fabulous. It was pretty classic, and I am not knocking that, but I don't think it was that unusual and  not all that different from many other woman in fashion in NY.
> 
> Back to the thread topic!  Things sure are quiet for these two.  @Flatsy  I think you may be right about the under the radar visit here.


CBK was the quintessential Connecticut Greenwich preppie; the style that I revolted from when growing up in Connecticut!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> CBK was the quintessential Connecticut Greenwich preppie; the style that I revolted from when growing up in Connecticut!


I know she worked for Calvin Klein, but Ralph Lauren might have been an even better fit lol!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I know she worked for Calvin Klein, but Ralph Lauren might have been an even better fit lol!


Again .. GMTA (*G*reat *M*inds *T*hink *A*like)!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> Exactly and I also read that he really never had the proper instruction for that particular plane.  It was very telling that when his mother was alive, she wouldn't allow him to go for his pilot's license.  I think she realized that he didn't study hard enough with certain things, like all the times he failed the Bar exam.



All the college scandal stuff recently made me wonder if JFK had someone take his bar exam in the end.


----------



## Swanky

Let's try and stick to topic please


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Well, it appears that Prince Charles will be dealing with all the 'family' issues very soon .. makes me wonder if he will take H&M aside and have a 'chat' with them.  Supposedly, he has been pretty pissed that the 2 of them continued to make 'news' when the highlight should have been on Prince Charles and the trips that he made for the Crown.  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...repares-leadership-Royals-Queen-turns-95.html


----------



## bag-mania

What can Charles do? They already know what is expected of them and so far they've done their own thing. Nothing Charles says will change their minds if they believe they know best. They have not done anything bad enough to be cut off completely like Andrew. 

I thought this six week break was essentially a kiddie "time out" for them to think about how they've handled themselves.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Well, it appears that Prince Charles will be dealing with all the 'family' issues very soon .. makes me wonder if he will take H&M aside and have a 'chat' with them.  Supposedly, he has been pretty pissed that the 2 of them continued to make 'news' when the highlight should have been on Prince Charles and the trips that he made for the Crown.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...repares-leadership-Royals-Queen-turns-95.html


Poor Chaz--he was second fiddle while Diana was alive and now the H&M show is stealing his thunder!


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> All the college scandal stuff recently made me wonder if JFK had someone take his bar exam in the end.


You know, now that you mention it...  it could be!


kemilia said:


> Poor Chaz--he was second fiddle while Diana was alive and now the H&M show is stealing his thunder!


I think Charles will gain a new popularity and show how he has what it takes to follow in his mother's footsteps.  I think he'll come out of this looking good because he's not afraid to deal with Andrew.

Diana and H&M look disfunctional and Charles will look steady and proper.


----------



## PewPew

Flatsy said:


> Harry complained that whenever Meghan takes time off, the media continues writing about her.
> 
> So, during their extremely heavily publicized 6-week break, the Sussexes choose to release a never-before-seen wedding photo?  That will guarantee a round of publicity from every major media outlet in the US and UK.  At a time when they have told the world they want peace and privacy.
> 
> Proving yet again that they do want attention and publicity at all times - they just want to control it.



I was really hopeful & supportive of H&M at the beginning (didn’t know anything about her till the engagement, but always liked Harry & Diana). But I have just become so disappointed by their inconsistencies and seeming ingratitude to those (non-celebrities) who DO support H&M, their charities & the larger BRF (both via taxes and otherwise).

Releasing this photo on the heels of demanding media privacy & public sympathy  just rubs me wrong. It’s like the saying that “the only thing worse than people speaking ill of you, is them not thinking of you at all” — they cannot bear to be ignored or to miss an opportunity for “good” press, so they release an exclusive photo to commemorate their 2nd ENGAGEMENT anniversary?! It’s too much when you claim to be desperate for peace and privacy.

It’s also a little insensitive to draw attention to their engagement anniversary, when there’s so much attention on Princes Beatrice’s new engagement and the need for her now to be discreet and pared down in light of Andrew’s behavior. Though, I should stop being surprised at H&M, given how their pregnancy was made the focus during Princess Eunice’s wedding.

Are H&M reaching out privately to see if Bea & Eunice “are ok?” Because publicly they keep rubbing salt in wounds.


----------



## Flatsy

PewPew said:


> they cannot bear to be ignored or to miss an opportunity for “good” press, so they release an exclusive photo to commemorate their 2nd ENGAGEMENT anniversary?!


It's not even their engagement anniversary, it's an anniversary of a press conference.  It's ridiculous.


----------



## pixiejenna

My theory is they know Harry’s role will greatly diminish with his father in charge and his desire to trim the royal family . I think that they are working on their exit strategy during the next 6 week sabbatical. He’ll be relieved from his royal duties which could allow him to move to the US as it’s been rumored that they want to do.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Chagall

Charles never seemed to have any leadership qualities. He seemed very wishy washy and weak. When Diana went to the Queen for her advice with her marital problems the Queen’s only response was that ‘Charles is hopeless’! Maybe he has somehow managed to gain some backbone, or he is being coached from the wings and realizes that it’s now time for him to step up to the plate. As far as getting Megs and Harry in line, forget it. I don’t think he has it in him.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Charles never seemed to have any leadership qualities. He seemed very wishy washy and weak. When Diana went to the Queen for her advice with her marital problems the Queen’s only response was that ‘Charles is hopeless’! Maybe he has somehow managed to gain some backbone, or he is being coached from the wings and realizes that it’s now time for him to step up to the plate. As far as getting Megs and Harry in line, forget it. I don’t think he has it in him.



Exactly. Who is this Prince Charles who will supposedly come in and lay down the law? Has he had a personality transplant? Last I knew he’s still the weak, boring man he’s always been. He’s not going to suddenly become a strong, dominant leader at age 71.


----------



## chowlover2

I think it's all up to Camilla! A  strong woman can to wonders for a weak willed man. I don't think QE's father would have risen to the occasion if it were not for QE's Mother. Charles has Camilla at his side after all these years and he may finally be King after absolutely forever. I hope he rises to the occasion. I feel much more kindly towards him after this season of the Crown. I realize all is not gospel, but I was stunned how his grandmother and Lord Mountbatten went behind his back towards Camilla. Everyone should be free to marry whoever they choose! ( even if it is Meghan Markle )


----------



## jblended

I try not to get worked up about MM, but stuff like this makes my blood boil!
Got this from another forum:
https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/image/189301879781
The Andrew situation is horrific and it has created enough tension within the BRF, so having Meghan opine on it by calling the press herself is outrageous!
Whatever her stance- and clearly everyone agrees Andrew is vile- she should not be making statements to the press about it at this time! Even the palace are limiting what they say and there is likelihood the FBI will be investigating. Do not muddy the waters with your wokeness at this time. Shut up; it is not your place to comment. This is not about you, Me-again.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chowlover2 said:


> I think it's all up to Camilla! A  strong woman can to wonders for a weak willed man. I don't think QE's father would have risen to the occasion if it were not for QE's Mother. Charles has Camilla at his side after all these years and he may finally be King after absolutely forever. I hope he rises to the occasion. I feel much more kindly towards him after this season of the Crown. I realize all is not gospel, but I was stunned how his grandmother and Lord Mountbatten went behind his back towards Camilla. Everyone should be free to marry whoever they choose! ( even if it is Meghan Markle )


My respect for Charles has increased I must admit. He may not (he probably isn’t) the strongest of leaders, but he’s been proved right about many things that he used to be mocked for.  His stance on the environment, on organic food free from pesticides, on supporting small farmers and independent businesses etc.,  was very forward thinking.  He’s also done an awful lot to support young people through the Princes Trust.  I think he will deal with Harry and Meghan, but I don’t think we’ll see any drama about it - well not from him anyway - it’ll happen gradually.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jblended said:


> I try not to get worked up about MM, but stuff like this makes my blood boil!
> Got this from another forum:
> https://anonymoushouseplantfan.tumblr.com/image/189301879781
> The Andrew situation is horrific and it has created enough tension within the BRF, so having Meghan opine on it by calling the press herself is outrageous!
> Whatever her stance- and clearly everyone agrees Andrew is vile- she should not be making statements to the press about it at this time! Even the palace are limiting what they say and there is likelihood the FBI will be investigating. Do not muddy the waters with your wokeness at this time. Shut up; it is not your place to comment. This is not about you, Me-again.


We’ve yet to find a subject on which Meghan doesn’t think the world needs her opinion.  I’m thoroughly fed up with the woman.  The press isn’t hounding her, she’s hounding it.


----------



## kemilia

pixiejenna said:


> My theory is they know Harry’s role will greatly diminish with his father in charge and his desire to trim the royal family . I think that they are working on their exit strategy during the next 6 week sabbatical. He’ll be relieved from his royal duties which could allow him to move to the US as it’s been rumored that they want to do.


I don't think Meghan is working on any exit strategy--she didn't get into this royal marriage to now leave the royal part behind. 

Harry may be though, he may see the writing on the wall, or have advisors and/or a brother that is saying "things are gonna change with the monarchy--get ready." They are already standing further (farther? I can never remember that rule) on the balcony appearances. I do hope we continue to see glimpses of Archie--I love seeing the little one grow up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Flatsy said:


> It's not even their engagement anniversary, it's an anniversary of a press conference.  It's ridiculous.


At least we didn't have to hear a retelling of how it all happened (roasted chicken and all).


----------



## doni

Clearblueskies said:


> My respect for Charles has increased I must admit. He may not (he probably isn’t) the strongest of leaders, but he’s been proved right about many things that he used to be mocked for.  His stance on the environment, on organic food free from pesticides, on supporting small farmers and independent businesses etc.,  was very forward thinking.  He’s also done an awful lot to support young people through the Princes Trust.  I think he will deal with Harry and Meghan, but I don’t think we’ll see any drama about it - well not from him anyway - it’ll happen gradually.



That's true, I distinctively remember when his plight for biological farming and his organic biscuits were dismissed as the eccentricities of a bore with nothing better to do...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> It's not even their engagement anniversary, it's an anniversary of a press conference.  It's ridiculous.


It is ridiculous.  And it reminds me of the people who say “we’re going to get engaged on....”  er right, so you’re engaged to be engaged then


----------



## Chagall

Happy Thanksgiving to all our American friends.  If Harry and Megan happen to be with you in the US. well, I hope they are both OK.


----------



## bag-mania

^No Meghan sightings here so far but if they did come over we’ll all hear about it soon. I bet there are a couple of paparazzi hanging around near Doria’s house prepared to follow her just in case. 

The Archbishop of Canterbury has been defending Meghan in the last day or so.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> ^No Meghan sightings here so far but if they did come over we’ll all hear about it soon. I bet there are a couple of paparazzi hanging around near Doria’s house prepared to follow her just in case.
> 
> The Archbishop of Canterbury has been defending Meghan in the last day or so.


What?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> What?


You mean about the defending? This is how the Archbishop has been describing Meghan this week.

*Meghan Markle Praised for Her 'Profound Humanity' by Archbishop of Canterbury*
Meghan Markle has been praised as a woman of “profound humanity” by the man who conducted her wedding to Prince Harry.

Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, defended the Duchess of Sussex against what he called the “totally undeserved” criticism she has received.

“She’s a person of profound humanity and deep concern for people, seeking to carry out her role with every ounce of her being, and I think she’s a remarkable person,” Welby told Emma Barnett on _BBC Radio 5 Live_.
https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-praised-profound-humanity-archbishop-of-canterbury/amp/


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> You mean about the defending? This is how the Archbishop has been describing Meghan this week.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Praised for Her 'Profound Humanity' by Archbishop of Canterbury*
> Meghan Markle has been praised as a woman of “profound humanity” by the man who conducted her wedding to Prince Harry.
> 
> Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, defended the Duchess of Sussex against what he called the “totally undeserved” criticism she has received.
> 
> “She’s a person of profound humanity and deep concern for people, seeking to carry out her role with every ounce of her being, and I think she’s a remarkable person,” Welby told Emma Barnett on _BBC Radio 5 Live_.
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-praised-profound-humanity-archbishop-of-canterbury/amp/


Seems like her acting skills have improved from her Suits days - LOL!!!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Seems like someone has made some calls and asked for some favors.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> You mean about the defending? This is how the Archbishop has been describing Meghan this week.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Praised for Her 'Profound Humanity' by Archbishop of Canterbury*
> Meghan Markle has been praised as a woman of “profound humanity” by the man who conducted her wedding to Prince Harry.
> 
> Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, defended the Duchess of Sussex against what he called the “totally undeserved” criticism she has received.
> 
> “She’s a person of profound humanity and deep concern for people, seeking to carry out her role with every ounce of her being, and I think she’s a remarkable person,” Welby told Emma Barnett on _BBC Radio 5 Live_.
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-praised-profound-humanity-archbishop-of-canterbury/amp/




Somebody got an idea from that TV show "God Friended Me" and this is as close as they could come to getting a text from The God Account. Somebody now owes the Archbishop. First celebrities come to Meghan's defense, then Parliament, and now The Archbishop? Who's going to get tapped and forced to defend Meghan next? The Beefeaters Union? How about if Meghan just shut up for a while, knock off the woking act and not screw up? Just smile, trot out Archie, say gracious things, not complain, ask other people how THEY are doing--rehab her own image and not force others to do it for her.


----------



## Tivo

The saddest thing of all is she can’t see how transparent this all is.


----------



## hellosunshine

I think it's sorta amusing that anyone would believe celebrities, parliamentary members, and archbishops are somehow taking barking orders from people who are often referred to here as "minor royals".


----------



## rose60610

I'm not convinced that the minor royals are the ones barking, more like Charles throwing Meghan a bone after Harry approached him ("Daaaaad, we can't take it anymore) and Chuck saying " Hey, so I'll try to get your daft woking D-List butt out of hot water but there's only so many strings I can pull, sooner or later it's up to you and you can't woke your way out of it".


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Somebody got an idea from that TV show "God Friended Me" and this is as close as they could come to getting a text from The God Account. Somebody now owes the Archbishop. First celebrities come to Meghan's defense, then Parliament, and now The Archbishop? Who's going to get tapped and forced to defend Meghan next? The Beefeaters Union? How about if Meghan just shut up for a while, knock off the woking act and not screw up? Just smile, trot out Archie, say gracious things, not complain, ask other people how THEY are doing--rehab her own image and not force others to do it for her.


But isn't that the 'STIFF UPPER LIP' which she is so against since it's just 'living'????


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> I think it's sorta amusing that anyone would believe celebrities, parliamentary members, and archbishops are somehow taking barking orders from people who are often referred to here as "minor royals".


I don't one bit, as a matter of fact, I know it happens with the celebrities all the time ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> I think it's sorta amusing that anyone would believe celebrities, parliamentary members, and archbishops are somehow taking barking orders from people who are often referred to here as "minor royals".


Referred to here maybe, but, Harry is not a minor Royal.


----------



## PewPew

hellosunshine said:


> I think it's sorta amusing that anyone would believe celebrities, parliamentary members, and archbishops are somehow taking barking orders from people who are often referred to here as "minor royals".



With the respect to the Archbishop’s statement, I did wonder if it was encouraged as part of a wider effort to make the BRF seem more relevant, productive & unified in light of Andrew’s behavior. There have been a lot of articles now claiming that not just Charles, but also William, are steering the actions with respect to Andrew. (These soft articles may be a direct response to rumblings about the purpose of monarchy in general in light of recent scandals & QE2’s age)


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> My respect for Charles has increased I must admit. He may not (he probably isn’t) the strongest of leaders, but he’s been proved right about many things that he used to be mocked for.  His stance on the environment, on organic food free from pesticides, on supporting small farmers and independent businesses etc.,  was very forward thinking.  He’s also done an awful lot to support young people through the Princes Trust.  I think he will deal with Harry and Meghan, but I don’t think we’ll see any drama about it - well not from him anyway - it’ll happen gradually.


Granted he has been forward thinking on the environment and farming etc. He might have good ideas, everyone has good ideas about some things. However that  doesn’t mean he has the strength of character necessary to deal with all the other things a leader of any kind has to deal with. I’ve never seen these qualities in Charles.  JMO.


----------



## lulilu

Was it ever disclosed where H&M spent Thanksgiving?


----------



## hellosunshine

lulilu said:


> Was it ever disclosed where H&M spent Thanksgiving?



Not definitely known but it's been mentioned that they're spending Thanksgiving & Christmas with Doria in LA.


----------



## hellosunshine

The Duke & Duchess are continuing their monthly tradition of highlighting charities and for the month of December, they've chosen 12 charities to reflect those in need – those who may feel lonely, hungry, homeless, or may be experiencing the holidays for the first time without loved ones.



1. https://www.instagram.com/st.felixcentre
2. https://www.instagram.com/fareshareuk
3. https://www.instagram.com/sheltercharity
4. https://www.instagram.com/trusselltrust
5. https://www.instagram.com/salvationarmyuk
6. https://www.instagram.com/thefelixproject
7. https://www.instagram.com/centrepointuk
8. https://www.instagram.com/scottyslittlesoldiers
9. https://www.instagram.com/lifewisenz
10. https://www.instagram.com/social_bite
11. https://www.instagram.com/ssafa_armedforcescharity
12. https://www.instagram.com/thelamission


----------



## Flatsy

Omid Scobie confirmed it was in the US, where they are going to be remaining for the rest of their break.  

My guess is they are staying in a well-protected estate belonging to a celebrity friend.  Oprah has one in Montecito that would fit the bill.  Ellen Degeneres also has a lot of very large, very nice properties in Southern California.


----------



## bag-mania

Scobie also said “They celebrated Thanksgiving privately with close family, which is lovely.” I wonder what constitutes close family, just Doria and themselves, right? Or does Oprah count?


----------



## Flatsy

Oprah celebrated in Milwaukee and the Sussexes were not part of it, but I would not be surprised if "close family" meant Doria + celebrities.


----------



## rose60610

The fact that we haven't been alerted to where M&H spent Thanksgiving might mean that word has gotten back to the royal whiners that they best shut up for a while and not feel compelled to think the public would fawn over their gratitude at their position in life (wait-- are they grateful at their royal existence or only existing?).  Why would I not be surprised if they were complaining behind closed doors at how hard their lives are while eating caviar and hoisting glasses of Cristal? At least we didn't see pictures of them "only existing" during Thanksgiving. Are they returning to England before Christmas just in time to jet off again somewhere else for Christmas? Is this when we get treated to Meghan "working" in homeless shelters wearing clothes from Target? I hope her handlers advise her not to complain about "only existing" while she serves food to the homeless. Well, they could advise but it'll be up to Meghan to actually take the advice, so we'll see.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> Oprah celebrated in Milwaukee and the Sussexes were not part of it, but I would not be surprised if "close family" meant Doria + celebrities.


Unfortunately I don’t think close family would include her father or siblings. Probably just Doria and celebrity friends. Sad seeing it was her dad and not Doria who raised her.


----------



## Chagall

I keep thinking that Megan’s dad was manipulated into looking bad. Everyone who knew her growing up said Thomas did everything for her to help her have a good start in life. They can’t all be wrong.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Scobie also said “They celebrated Thanksgiving privately with close family, which is lovely.” I wonder what constitutes close family, just Doria and themselves, right? Or does Oprah count?


“Close family” does beg the inevitable question *well who’s that then?* doesn’t it - so why doesn’t someone In their PR department stop to think how these cliches come across? Because I can’t think of anyone but Doria that she hasn’t alienated. Perhaps Omid got thrown a turkey leg


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> “Close family” does beg the inevitable question *well who’s that then?* doesn’t it - so why doesn’t someone In their PR department stop to think how these cliches come across? Because I can’t think of anyone but Doria that she hasn’t alienated. *Perhaps Omid got thrown a turkey leg*



They have been making him work much harder than he probably wants to to make them sound wonderful. It takes time to keep reapplying lipstick to a pig.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Omid Scobie confirmed it was in the US, where they are going to be remaining for the rest of their break.
> 
> My guess is they are staying in a well-protected estate belonging to a celebrity friend.  Oprah has one in Montecito that would fit the bill.  Ellen Degeneres also has a lot of very large, very nice properties in Southern California.


Oprah's property in Montecito was heavily affected by the mudslides last year, so doubt that it would be that property .. she has many more though!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I keep thinking that Megan’s dad was manipulated into looking bad. Everyone who knew her growing up said Thomas did everything for her to help her have a good start in life. They can’t all be wrong.


.. and they aren't; according to my friends that knew the Markles well especially during Meghan's high school years, they never ever saw Doria, it was Thomas that took care of Meghan; they are just shaking their heads right now regarding what is going on.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> “Close family” does beg the inevitable question *well who’s that then?* doesn’t it - so why doesn’t someone In their PR department stop to think how these cliches come across? Because I can’t think of anyone but Doria that she hasn’t alienated. Perhaps Omid got thrown a turkey leg


since her mother was the only one who came to the wedding, I don't think there is any other "close family"......really, the rest of the royals must have been shaking their heads at Harry marrying someone with this kind of family relationships


----------



## rose60610

So....M was visiting "close family", the same "close family" that didn't get invited to the wedding except her mom? She changes the whole definition of "close".


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> So....M was visiting "close family", the same "close family" that didn't get invited to the wedding except her mom? She changes the whole definition of "close".


ha
yes.....I have to admit I don't have the closest family relationships but I am quite sure if I was marrying a prince I would have had more than one relative willing to come (and that I was willing to invite) to the wedding

this may not be meghan's fault at all.  but if you don't come from a stable family and you've been married twice before, it seems the odds of having a happy family are reduced (IMO)


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> since her mother was the only one who came to the wedding, I don't think there is any other "close family"......really, the rest of the royals must have been shaking their heads at Harry marrying someone with this kind of family relationships


well, is not like the british royal family relationships are the best so MM’s fam dram fits quite well


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> So....M was visiting "close family", the same "close family" that didn't get invited to the wedding except her mom? She changes the whole definition of "close".


Close = on the same continent perhaps


----------



## LittleStar88

I really, really think she blew it big time with her ungratefulness and public whining. She is a grown adult - go hire someone to talk through these challenges and help realize that the life you have somehow managed to secure for yourself is filled with every comfort, privilege, and abundance, and deviod of every having to worry about a real problem like struggling to get off the streets, or keep a roof over your head, or feed yourself... She made herself look like a complete cad.


----------



## bag-mania

I don't think Meghan and Harry are stupid. We know they read what is written about them, hence the lawsuits. I think they will adapt and adjust their approach to PR. They've already tried what doesn't work so maybe now they'll try a different way.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I don't think Meghan and Harry are stupid. We know they read what is written about them, hence the lawsuits. I think they will adapt and adjust their approach to PR. They've already tried what doesn't work so maybe now they'll try a different way.



I also don't think they are stupid, but they are really showing a lot of poor judgment and have made some decisions that don't make them look very good. 

Harry seemed fine all these years for the most part? Because he had probably a handler or a guide to help him stay on track as a singleton? Makes it seem like he has been let out of the cage to do some adulting with Meghan and now it is sink or swim? Because he didn't get much adulting time until late in life and now this is how it plays out?


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I also don't think they are stupid, but they are really showing a lot of poor judgment and have made some decisions that don't make them look very good.
> 
> Harry seemed fine all these years for the most part? Because he had probably a handler or a guide to help him stay on track as a singleton? Makes it seem like he has been let out of the cage to do some adulting with Meghan and now it is sink or swim? Because he didn't get much adulting time until late in life and now this is how it plays out?


I think it's HER supreme desire to constantly be in the media .. albeit, "positive" media!!!  Again, the comments this morning (_and yes, know it's the Daily Fail_) have not been positive about EITHER of them - more along the lines of "_just go away and stay away_"!  I agree with you, they blew it big-time by whining on their African special; instead of highlighting the horrible conditions they made it about themselves and the "_woe is me_" routine.  If they want to get back into the good graces, they need to wise-up tout suite!


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I also don't think they are stupid, but they are really showing a lot of poor judgment and have made some decisions that don't make them look very good.
> 
> Harry seemed fine all these years for the most part? Because he had probably a handler or a guide to help him stay on track as a singleton? Makes it seem like he has been let out of the cage to do some adulting with Meghan and now it is sink or swim? Because he didn't get much adulting time until late in life and now this is how it plays out?



I may have spoken too soon. It appears they decided that releasing inspirational quotes periodically during their hiatus is the best way to keep themselves in the news. They are attention-seeking monsters.


*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Promote Doing Good on Giving Tuesday Amid Stand Against Negative Press*

The royal couple chose the words of American author, professor and motivational speaker Leo Buscaglia



Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reminding fans that small actions can inspire big changes.

The royal couple dedicated an Instagram post to Giving Tuesday, “a day that encourages people to do good” celebrated by both the U.S. and the U.K., by sharing an inspirational quote from American author, professor and motivational speaker Leo Buscaglia: “Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around.”

The quote followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s regular format for sharing words of wisdom on their social media platform, with white lettering on a blue screen under their joint monogram.

“GivingTuesday is a global generosity movement unleashing the power of people and organisations to transform their communities and the world on December 3, 2019 and every day,” they said in the post’s caption.

The poignant reminder comes just days after Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, announced the organizations they will follow for the month of December that fall under the umbrella theme of caring for those in need.

“Continuing our monthly tradition of highlighting accounts that do good, and inspired by the ‘Twelve Days of Christmas’ – we have selected twelve organisations caring for those in need – especially at this time of year,” they captioned a collage of photos from the charities.

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ng-tuesday-amid-stand-against-negative-press/


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I may have spoken too soon. It appears they decided that releasing inspirational quotes periodically during their hiatus is the best way to keep themselves in the news. They are attention-seeking monsters.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Promote Doing Good on Giving Tuesday Amid Stand Against Negative Press*
> 
> The royal couple chose the words of American author, professor and motivational speaker Leo Buscaglia
> View attachment 4605985
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reminding fans that small actions can inspire big changes.
> 
> The royal couple dedicated an Instagram post to Giving Tuesday, “a day that encourages people to do good” celebrated by both the U.S. and the U.K., by sharing an inspirational quote from American author, professor and motivational speaker Leo Buscaglia: “Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around.”
> 
> The quote followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s regular format for sharing words of wisdom on their social media platform, with white lettering on a blue screen under their joint monogram.
> 
> “GivingTuesday is a global generosity movement unleashing the power of people and organisations to transform their communities and the world on December 3, 2019 and every day,” they said in the post’s caption.
> 
> The poignant reminder comes just days after Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, announced the organizations they will follow for the month of December that fall under the umbrella theme of caring for those in need.
> 
> “Continuing our monthly tradition of highlighting accounts that do good, and inspired by the ‘Twelve Days of Christmas’ – we have selected twelve organisations caring for those in need – especially at this time of year,” they captioned a collage of photos from the charities.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ng-tuesday-amid-stand-against-negative-press/


Yuk   This stuff is nauseating.  It’ll generate lots more comments about not taking their own advice and applying it to their own relationships.  More do as I say not do as I do stuff from Harry and Meghan.

And another point - a small one, but nevertheless - they’ve only had an Instagram acc for 6 months, so how can it be a tradition?  A Tradition is something passed on for generations.  Lazy use of language, and more bigging up of themselves.


----------



## LittleStar88

I agree - this is a no effort way to come off as a caring humanitarian (I am sure someone they hired posted this, not one of them). 

I would have had way more respect if they had gone out to do something rather than just post words on social.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> And another point - a small one, but nevertheless - they’ve only had an Instagram acc for 6 months, so how can it be a tradition?  A Tradition is something passed on for generations.  Lazy use of language, and more bigging up of themselves.



Well, it's not like they are coming up with the stuff themselves. Isn't this what they pay Sunshine Sachs to do for them, handle their Instagram and get an upbeat article placed in _People_ magazine daily? So maybe the agency had an intern do it for them this week and that's where we get a six-month "tradition."


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> I agree - this is a no effort way to come off as a caring humanitarian (I am sure someone they hired posted this, not one of them).
> 
> I would have had way more respect if they had gone out to do something rather than just post words on social.


They can’t bear it when they get given the privacy they make such a big performance about, and so have to keep reminding us they’re still there and being better humans than the rest of us by posting cr*p on insta


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

They are treating their Instagram account like they are millennial influencers trying to get likes and clicks for internet fame and cash.  They are NOT a “brand”.  This just reeks of immaturity and a lack of sophistication, IMO.


----------



## rose60610

So they can't even craft an original statement themselves and have to reuse somebody else's words. They can contribute to Giving Tuesday by giving US a break! I agree that a "tradition" connotes something that has been repeated and then expected over time. Their biggest "tradition" seems to be: how to screw up; they got that down cold.  They threw the Sandringham Christmas tradition out the window so what makes them think any tradition of theirs has merit? And who has a "monthly tradition"? How about "monthly practice" or something more apt? Unless they fire their entire PR team and not replace them with rejects, they're not likely to wow us anytime soon. Archie will be driving by the time they get their act together.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> I may have spoken too soon. It appears they decided that releasing inspirational quotes periodically during their hiatus is the best way to keep themselves in the news. They are attention-seeking monsters.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Promote Doing Good on Giving Tuesday Amid Stand Against Negative Press*
> 
> The royal couple chose the words of American author, professor and motivational speaker Leo Buscaglia
> View attachment 4605985
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reminding fans that small actions can inspire big changes.
> 
> The royal couple dedicated an Instagram post to Giving Tuesday, “a day that encourages people to do good” celebrated by both the U.S. and the U.K., by sharing an inspirational quote from American author, professor and motivational speaker Leo Buscaglia: “Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around.”
> 
> The quote followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s regular format for sharing words of wisdom on their social media platform, with white lettering on a blue screen under their joint monogram.
> 
> “GivingTuesday is a global generosity movement unleashing the power of people and organisations to transform their communities and the world on December 3, 2019 and every day,” they said in the post’s caption.
> 
> The poignant reminder comes just days after Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, announced the organizations they will follow for the month of December that fall under the umbrella theme of caring for those in need.
> 
> “Continuing our monthly tradition of highlighting accounts that do good, and inspired by the ‘Twelve Days of Christmas’ – we have selected twelve organisations caring for those in need – especially at this time of year,” they captioned a collage of photos from the charities.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ng-tuesday-amid-stand-against-negative-press/



This is just soooo pathetic


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> I agree - this is a no effort way to come off as a caring humanitarian (I am sure someone they hired posted this, not one of them).
> 
> I would have had way more respect if they had gone out to do something rather than just post words on social.


Inspirational quotes are so meaningless, really.

Maybe they went back to Africa, since she told the girls, "I'm here for you."  What does that even mean, unless they can reach out to her when they need her.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Inspirational quotes are so meaningless, really.
> 
> Maybe they went back to Africa, since she told the girls, "I'm here for you."  What does that even mean, unless they can reach out to her when they need her.


maybe she can open a school as Oprah did....now (regardless of whether you like her or not) that's putting your money where your mouth is (IMO)


----------



## rose60610

Meghan "is there for people" because it gives her a two-fer: (1) another opportunity for publicity coverage, and, (2) to publicly complain about how hard it is to exist in her shoes. Isn't everyone grateful to have people like that in their corner?


----------



## Tivo

The Sussex IG account is totally Meghan’s style. It always reads so trite and vapid. Much like her blog and that Vogue spread.
She needs to hand the reigns over to an assistant and focus on her family’s privacy.


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> Meghan "is there for people" because it gives her a two-fer: (1) another opportunity for publicity coverage, and, (2) to publicly complain about how hard it is to exist in her shoes. Isn't everyone grateful to have people like that in their corner?


Sadly it’s bringing her more attention.


----------



## Chagall

Tivo said:


> The Sussex IG account is totally Meghan’s style. It always reads so trite and vapid. Much like her blog and that Vogue spread.
> She needs to hand the reigns over to an assistant and focus on her family’s privacy.


She dosen’t really want her family’s privacy. That’s just a pose. Give them their privacy and they do something to bring the attention back to them.


----------



## LittleStar88

They only want privacy when it is not positive feedback.


----------



## hellosunshine

Chagall said:


> Unfortunately I don’t think close family would include her father or siblings. Probably just Doria and celebrity friends. *Sad seeing it was her dad and not Doria who raised her.*



Oh, you mean the father who said he worked 16 hour long days to provide for Meghan, used drugs to cope with his supposed schedule, but also said it was "what everyone on set did" as an excuse too. The same absentee father who admitted that he was never home due to his long days at work; worked so much and did drugs but somehow never around Meg so she was never aware of it while living with him..ok?!?!


----------



## meluvs2shop

If that’s true regarding her upbringing and her father raising her, using drugs, working long hours etc. that may explain a lot of Meghan’s behavior. Sometimes I want to root for her and feel sorry for her for being under such a microscope then I read things and I’m like, is that really who she is? I can’t keep up. It’s like a double life or something.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, you mean the father who said he worked 16 hour long days to provide for Meghan, used drugs to cope with his supposed schedule, but also said it was "what everyone on set did" as an excuse too. The same absentee father who admitted that he was never home due to his long days at work; worked so much and did drugs but somehow never around Meg so she was never aware of it while living with him..ok?!?!
> 
> View attachment 4607049
> 
> View attachment 4607050



Isn’t it the case that, until very recently, she posted glowing tributes to her Dad on social media, consistently into adulthood?
She had no problem with him, until just recently - why?


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> I may have spoken too soon. It appears they decided that releasing inspirational quotes periodically during their hiatus is the best way to keep themselves in the news. They are attention-seeking monsters.



I cannot roll my eyes far back enough to do justice for their use of that quote.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chagall said:


> She dosen’t really want her family’s privacy. That’s just a pose. Give them their privacy and they do something to bring the attention back to them.


Pleading for privacy is a great way for celebs to evoke sympathy and gain an emotional attachment from fans. She's no different from the Hollywood celebrities who lobby for rules protecting their kids from paparazzi but privately tip off the paparazzi when they are taking those kids to the library or school to reinforce they are great and caring moms.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

Meghan wants to be in Hollywood so bad and she’s not fooling anyone. All these theatrics somehow seem attached to a goal of being a movie star. That’s what I don’t like about her. It reminds me of Bethenny Frankel, ugh.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, you mean the father who said he worked 16 hour long days to provide for Meghan, used drugs to cope with his supposed schedule, but also said it was "what everyone on set did" as an excuse too. The same absentee father who admitted that he was never home due to his long days at work; worked so much and did drugs but somehow never around Meg so she was never aware of it while living with him..ok?!?!



Instead of complaining you should be thanking Thomas for his Hollywood career. Without him Meghan would never have visited the sets of TV shows when she was a kid, attended her private Hollywood school where she met other spawn from the entertainment industry, and overall getting an edge over her competition by learning the business from a young age. If all that hadn't happened, Meghan would never have been in a position to catch a certain prince's eye and you would likely never have known who she was. You should be sending Thomas a freakin' bouquet!


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> Meghan wants to be in Hollywood so bad and she’s not fooling anyone. All these theatrics somehow seem attached to a goal of being a movie star. That’s what I don’t like about her. It reminds me of Bethenny Frankel, ugh.


I doubt she's going to become a movie star at 38.  she has more fame as a duchess than most movie stars.  that should make her happy.


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, you mean the father who said he worked 16 hour long days to provide for Meghan, used drugs to cope with his supposed schedule, but also said it was "what everyone on set did" as an excuse too. The same absentee father who admitted that he was never home due to his long days at work; worked so much and did drugs but somehow never around Meg so she was never aware of it while living with him..ok?!?!
> 
> View attachment 4607049
> 
> View attachment 4607050


I don’t know whether raising his daughter alone (without her mother) stressed him out to the extent that he self medicated. No idea whether the long hours and the added responsibility of being a single parent was too much for him to cope with. But apparently he tried. This appears to be more than we can say for Doria, who was seldom seen.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, you mean the father who said he worked 16 hour long days to provide for Meghan, used drugs to cope with his supposed schedule, but also said it was "what everyone on set did" as an excuse too. The same absentee father who admitted that he was never home due to his long days at work; worked so much and did drugs but somehow never around Meg so she was never aware of it while living with him..ok?!?!
> 
> View attachment 4607049
> 
> View attachment 4607050


So, you know what it's like to work on set in the TV industry?  Okay, so let me tell you what it's really like .. *exactly* what Thomas is saying.  I had a colleague whose father was the Producer of a very well-known TV show and she told us what it was like to have a father like that .. pretty much exactly like Thomas - wicked long hours, oftentimes including weekends and then having to deal with the over-indulgent stars of these shows!  Her father also used drugs - mostly Pot because having to deal with all that Industry pressure (_and constantly being reminded that "you are replaceable"_) does make one a rather nervous type. 

My next-door neighbor was a TV Cameraman (_Thomas did lighting_), and he was divorced and only saw his children when he was off from work (_which was almost never_).  Same thing - super long days, weekends and then sometimes, they had to film at weird hours (_needed the streets to be empty, etc_.). 

Now, one thing that I do want to say .. neither my friend or my neighbor's children ever lived in poverty!!!  While many would say that they would rather have had their father's around more, they also understood the Industry business and how difficult it was (_and also knew that the father's job could be terminated at any time_).  Not an ideal upbringing, but .. again, my very close friends who knew the Markles during Meghan's high school years, did say that he was the one who was always there for her .. Doria was not .. and they also told me that many in the TV, Film and Music industry (_themselves included_) did drugs (_mostly Pot_) in addition to drinking... sadly, it is VERY common in the entertainment business hence the reason why you hear about so many stars doing drugs and/or getting in trouble. 

To me, this story isn't 'news' and isn't surprising; what is "news" to me is that who even decided to publish this at this time?  What's the point???


----------



## CeeJay

LibbyRuth said:


> Pleading for privacy is a great way for celebs to evoke sympathy and gain an emotional attachment from fans. She's no different from the Hollywood celebrities who lobby for rules protecting their kids from paparazzi but privately tip off the paparazzi when they are taking those kids to the library or school to reinforce they are great and caring moms.


YUP .. and let me tell you of an instance that I saw not so long ago .. Gabriel Aubry (_and my god - he is SO handsome_) and his/Halle's daughter - Nahla at Joan's on 3rd in Studio City.  Were there any paps around?! - *NOPE*!  A week after, there is Halle and her daughter Nahla again at Joan's on 3rd in Studio City and were there paps around?!?! - *HOLY COW, TONS*!!!  Kind of goes to show you that the celebs can be private if THEY choose to do so!


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> Are you serious? Do you not see the hundreds of other threads here about celebrities? If Meghan were to disappear tomorrow there will always be someone else to fill the void.



That's true. But it would be dishonest to say that people here do not have a committed interest in Meghan & Harry. I, very rarely see comments like "Where the heck are they? Who knows, by the time they resurface, Archie may be running in a 5k." or "They've been awfully quiet - when are they going to pop up in LA?".  These are literally comments made here - very rarely said about other celebrities when they disappear from the public for 6-weeks.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> So, you know what it's like to work on set in the TV industry?  Okay, so let me tell you what it's really like .. exactly what Thomas is saying.  I had a colleague whose father was the Producer of a very well-known TV show and she told us what it was like to have a father like that .. pretty much exactly like Thomas - wicked long hours, oftentimes including weekends and then having to deal with the over-indulgent stars of these shows!  Her father also used drugs - mostly Pot because having to deal with all that Industry pressure (_and constantly being reminded that "you are replaceable"_) does make one a rather nervous type.
> 
> My next-door neighbor was a TV Cameraman (_Thomas did lighting_), and he was divorced and only saw his children when he was off from work (_which was almost never_).  Same thing - super long days, weekends and then sometimes, they had to film at weird hours (_needed the streets to be empty, etc_.).
> 
> Now, one thing that I do want to say .. neither my friend or my neighbor's children ever lived in poverty!!!  While many would say that they would rather have had their father's around more, they also understood the Industry business and how difficult it was (_and also knew that the father's job could be terminated at any time_).  Not an ideal upbringing, but .. again, my very close friends who knew the Markles during Meghan's high school years, did say that he was the one who was always there for her .. Doria was not .. and they also told me that many in the TV, Film and Music industry (_themselves included_) did drugs (_mostly Pot_) in addition to drinking... sadly, it is VERY common in the entertainment business hence the reason why you hear about so many stars doing drugs and/or getting in trouble.
> 
> To me, this story isn't 'news' and isn't surprising; what is "news" to me is that who even decided to publish this at this time?  What's the point???


It’s interesting to hear this close-hand perspective on the business.  The story’s dated July 2018, so it’s old news.  Interestingly there are less of these stories about Thomas in the press lately, because I think it’s obvious he’s not perfect, but also I think because it’s becoming evident that the truth about their father/daughter relationship isn’t entirely as it’s been portrayed by Meghan.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, you mean the father who said he worked 16 hour long days to provide for Meghan, used drugs to cope with his supposed schedule, but also said it was "what everyone on set did" as an excuse too. The same absentee father who admitted that he was never home due to his long days at work; worked so much and did drugs but somehow never around Meg so she was never aware of it while living with him..ok?!?!
> 
> View attachment 4607049
> 
> View attachment 4607050


So what's the alternative, since the mother wasn't around? Seems like the father worked his a$$ off to provide for his daughter.


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> That's true. But it would be dishonest to say that people here do not have a committed interest in Meghan & Harry. I, very rarely see comments like "Where the heck are they? Who knows, by the time they resurface, Archie may be running in a 5k." or "They've been awfully quiet - when are they going to pop up in LA?".  These are literally comments made here - very rarely said about other celebrities when they disappear from the public for 6-weeks.


I would hardly refer to them as being celebrities. They are members of the Royal Family. They should be doing work to help people. That is their job and what they are being financially supported to do. Of course we wonder where the heck they are and what they are up to. They don’t seem to be earning their keep.


----------



## LittleStar88

16 hour days? Working nights and weekends? Sounds like any executive in the Silicon Valley. I work 10 - 12 hour days + weekends and I am not a VP or above. Sometimes you have to do what you have to do in order to support yourself and provide for your family.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> I would hardly refer to them as being celebrities. They are members of the Royal Family. They should be doing work to help people. That is their job and what they are being financially supported to do. Of course we wonder where the heck they are and what they are up to. They don’t seem to be earning their keep.


Exactly this.  They made a big drama about taking a 6 week break (from what??).  No wonder the public funding the Meghan Markle show are asking questions.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> That's true. But it would be dishonest to say that people here do not have a committed interest in Meghan & Harry. I, very rarely see comments like "Where the heck are they? Who knows, by the time they resurface, Archie may be running in a 5k." or "They've been awfully quiet - when are they going to pop up in LA?".  These are literally comments made here - very rarely said about other celebrities when they disappear from the public for 6-weeks.



We are enjoying watching the train wreck that is the Meghan and Harry publicity machine. That is true. I don't think anyone is denying that.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> 16 hour days? Working nights and weekends? Sounds like any executive in the Silicon Valley. I work 10 - 12 hour days + weekends and I am not a VP or above. Sometimes you have to do what you have to do in order to support yourself and provide for your family.


I hear 'ya; used to work in Financial Services (IT side), so yes .. an 80-hour workweek was very (unfortunately) common .. and, if you were on-call, you just might be asked to go into the office to fix a problem!


----------



## daisychainz

Is it possible that Meghan and Harry have gone into a kinda-hiding not so much because of the negative press but because of Epstein and the scandal that was forthcoming with Andrew? I am seeing more and more articles online connecting Meghan, and her two bff's Jessica and Markus to Epstein and NYC, and also Elton John. Perhaps Meghan and Harry were also somehow involved with Epstein (or even brought together somehow via him) - they were using Elton John's private jets recently and Elton's charity has received major donations from Epstein. And Markus set them up, so perhaps some meetups between Meghan/Harry happened at the Epstein home in NYC? Could be gossip, but the connections are easily traced via old pics and what has been uncovered already about Epstein and his spending.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Is it possible that Meghan and Harry have gone into a kinda-hiding not so much because of the negative press but because of Epstein and the scandal that was forthcoming with Andrew? I am seeing more and more articles online connecting Meghan, and her two bff's Jessica and Markus to Epstein and NYC, and also Elton John. Perhaps Meghan and Harry were also somehow involved with Epstein (or even brought together somehow via him) - they were using Elton John's private jets recently and Elton's charity has received major donations from Epstein. And Markus set them up, so perhaps some meetups between Meghan/Harry happened at the Epstein home in NYC? Could be gossip, but the connections are easily traced via old pics and what has been uncovered already about Epstein and his spending.



Anything is possible. You can be sure there are many more associates who knew or were involved with Epstein than were ever reported publicly. The US news media has been quick to drop any investigations on the matter since the "suicide."


----------



## rose60610

Meghan is unique. 

In the sense that I don't recall any other person of fame, celebrity or otherwise, at one point in their life as being on top of the world, enjoying all the trappings of being a member of the RF, success, attention, fame, wealth, comfort, luxury everything, connections, etc, and shortly thereafter complaining about it all due to one's own screwing up. (I'd be on total Cloud Nine and pinch myself a million times a day. And if I screwed up I'd know it.) 

Yes, Meghan is unique. From dysfunctional family D-Lister to marrying and cranking out a Royal Family anchor baby? Damn! And then complain? In poverty stricken Africa? That's either chutzpah or psychosis. She kind of reminds me of the people you read about who win an enormous lottery (and M has "won" far more than that) and then quickly p*ss away everything. All she has to do is not screw up. But she can't help it! Of course they'll always have Anchor, oops, I mean Archie. He's her Forever Meal Ticket.


----------



## Swanky

My dad raised me and my sis alone and worked 14 hr days with flipping schedules.  Meaning he was 6am-8pm for 3 days, off 2, then 6pm-8am for 3 days, etc. . . 
He never resorted to drugs to cope.  I'm a single mom to 3 kids and am VERY thinly spread. . . no drugs here. (though I'm a fan of wine )
I don't give 2 effs about the royals or any celebs, but I saw the posts kind of justifying a parent's drug use to cope and I had to say something.
I'm possibly sensitive to it given the fact that I'm a child of an addicted mom.  So, I mean. . .
YMMV


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Gee, thanks a pant load for your “commentary”!  Just so you know, I do live in LA and so, yes .. we see quite a few celebrities around and yes, I have friends in the entertainment industry.. sorry to disappoint all you HATERS!  So, just go back to your “LuckyBitch” status - okay?!?  Bye ..


Most of us have neighbors or friends who do something in entertainment i.e. movies, TV etc.  As @CeeJay can tell you, we see them all the time at the grocery store.    They have to eat too.


----------



## CobaltBlu

So, anyway,....
Let's stick to talking about these two crazy kids, OK






Please stop the back-and-forth between one another. 
This thread is really messy, and it really is a drag.

Don't make me post an inspirational quote y'all....


----------



## threadbender

Jayne1 said:


> So what's the alternative, since the mother wasn't around? Seems like the father worked his a$$ off to provide for his daughter.


And, has there been a definitive answer as to why Doria was not in the picture?


----------



## bag-mania

Now, everyone let's just take a moment and remember why we are all here. Oh, looky! Meghan contributed to a charity cookbook and she wants us all to know about it via People magazine! She didn't make any of the the actual recipes but she wrote a very nice foreword and we should all celebrate it. Oh wait! This all happened a year ago but they want to remind us about it again now for some reason we shouldn't think about too closely.

Anyway, it's a cookbook y'all! 


*Meghan Markle Dedicates Instagram Post to Her First-Ever Royal Cause Ahead of New Year*

The Duchess of Sussex worked with the Hubb Community Kitchen for several months and wrote the foreword for a cookbook featuring their recipes
Giving Tuesday may be over, but Meghan Markle isn’t done highlighting worthwhile causes this holiday season.

The SussexRoyal Instagram page, which Meghan shares with husband Prince Harry, dedicated Thursday’s post to the Hubb Community Kitchen, a group started by women whose community was affected by the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire in which more than 70 people died. The Duchess of Sussex worked privately with the organization for several months and wrote the foreword for a cookbook featuring their recipes to benefit the project.

“Spotlight on: The Hubb Community Kitchen,” she captioned a collection of photos highlighting the women. “It was just one year ago that The Duchess of Sussex made a special visit to the women of The Hubb Community Kitchen to help prepare meals for those in need. The connection between The Duchess and these women began a year prior, as she supported them in the creation of ‘Together,’ a charity cookbook which celebrates the power of cooking to bring communities together.”

The cookbook went on to be a bestseller, helping the community kitchen open for seven days a week rather than the previous two.

“Today, the women at the Hubb Community Kitchen continue to have a positive impact in their community, across the UK, and around the world,” reads the Instagram post. “Whether it’s providing a safe space for women and children to come for a hot meal, supporting local schools, serving free lunches to senior citizens, partnering with the Red Cross to provide lunches for refugees, or feeding the homeless – the Hubb helps and heals through their support and sustenance.”

She continued by wishing them continued success in the year ahead: “Thank you, ladies, for the leadership and inspiration that your cooking and love of community brings to all those around you. We remain so very proud of the good work that you continue to do, and cannot wait to see what 2020 brings!”

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...her-first-ever-royal-cause-ahead-of-new-year/


----------



## Flatsy

If you instagram about the work you did 10 times, that counts as 10 times the work and 10 times the number of engagements!  How handy to be able to take a 6 week+ break and still be "working" the whole time!


----------



## PewPew

Flatsy said:


> If you instagram about the work you did 10 times, that counts as 10 times the work and 10 times the number of engagements!



How dare you? They’re not simply documenting something 10 times— after the first wave of publicity, all subsequent mentions are intended to commemorate that event and initial adulation...so that we can continue to be enlightened by their grace. Just like how they publicly commemorate not only their wedding anniversary and engagement, but also _the anniversary of the public announcement of their engagement._ Because those repetitions are important when one is awoke (and oddly, such repetition is also required when one has dementia, but I digress...)


----------



## Jktgal

Lol I like this thread.

We have to be reminded of the cookgook because the Cambridges have a Christmas cooking special....


----------



## Jayne1

threadbender said:


> And, has there been a definitive answer as to why Doria was not in the picture?


Not sure -- anyone know?


----------



## bisousx

Jayne1 said:


> Not sure -- anyone know?



It’s been said that Meghan preferred to live with her father as she became older, since he was more laid back and not around as much to parent her. I don’t know if it’s accurate to say that Doria wasn’t in the picture though.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jktgal said:


> Lol I like this thread.
> 
> We have to be reminded of the cookgook because the Cambridges have a Christmas cooking special....


Oh no, I hadn’t made the connection, but now that you’ve pointed it out it’s obvious  the implication being that a Christmas special with Mary Berry is less worthy than something with links to a tragedy   Everything is a competition for Meghan.



bisousx said:


> It’s been said that Meghan preferred to live with her father as she became older, since he was more laid back and not around as much to parent her. I don’t know if it’s accurate to say that Doria wasn’t in the picture though.


He had the connections she needed to pursue her career.  Simple as that.  She doesn’t need him anymore and so he’s history.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Now, everyone let's just take a moment and remember why we are all here. Oh, looky! Meghan contributed to a charity cookbook and she wants us all to know about it via People magazine! She didn't make any of the the actual recipes but she wrote a very nice foreword and we should all celebrate it. Oh wait! This all happened a year ago but they want to remind us about it again now for some reason we shouldn't think about too closely.
> 
> Anyway, it's a cookbook y'all!
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle Dedicates Instagram Post to Her First-Ever Royal Cause Ahead of New Year*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex worked with the Hubb Community Kitchen for several months and wrote the foreword for a cookbook featuring their recipes
> Giving Tuesday may be over, but Meghan Markle isn’t done highlighting worthwhile causes this holiday season.
> 
> The SussexRoyal Instagram page, which Meghan shares with husband Prince Harry, dedicated Thursday’s post to the Hubb Community Kitchen, a group started by women whose community was affected by the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire in which more than 70 people died. The Duchess of Sussex worked privately with the organization for several months and wrote the foreword for a cookbook featuring their recipes to benefit the project.
> 
> “Spotlight on: The Hubb Community Kitchen,” she captioned a collection of photos highlighting the women. “It was just one year ago that The Duchess of Sussex made a special visit to the women of The Hubb Community Kitchen to help prepare meals for those in need. The connection between The Duchess and these women began a year prior, as she supported them in the creation of ‘Together,’ a charity cookbook which celebrates the power of cooking to bring communities together.”
> 
> The cookbook went on to be a bestseller, helping the community kitchen open for seven days a week rather than the previous two.
> 
> “Today, the women at the Hubb Community Kitchen continue to have a positive impact in their community, across the UK, and around the world,” reads the Instagram post. “Whether it’s providing a safe space for women and children to come for a hot meal, supporting local schools, serving free lunches to senior citizens, partnering with the Red Cross to provide lunches for refugees, or feeding the homeless – the Hubb helps and heals through their support and sustenance.”
> 
> She continued by wishing them continued success in the year ahead: “Thank you, ladies, for the leadership and inspiration that your cooking and love of community brings to all those around you. We remain so very proud of the good work that you continue to do, and cannot wait to see what 2020 brings!”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...her-first-ever-royal-cause-ahead-of-new-year/


The Meghan Markle self publicity machine just keeps on running.  One of those close family members she’s spending precious holiday time with should tap Meghan on the shoulder and remind her that it’s ok, she got the Royal gig and she’s FAMOUS now.  Time to stop hustling.


----------



## Flatsy

Celebrity social media gurus tell their clients that they need to provide new content to their followers every few days.  Meghan is clearly following those "rules".  Because she doesn't get that she's not supposed to be acting like she's in the celebrity rat race.

Royalty actually can go away for 6 weeks and the world won't forget who they are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

The #24 case Meghan would open during her season working as a "briefcase girl" on the game show _Deal or No Deal _is up for sale. They are hoping to get at least $5,000 for it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> The #24 case Meghan would open during her season working as a "briefcase girl" on the game show _Deal or No Deal _is up for sale. They are hoping to get at least $5,000 for it.
> 
> View attachment 4608184


The life of an A-lister


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Now, everyone let's just take a moment and remember why we are all here. Oh, looky! Meghan contributed to a charity cookbook and she wants us all to know about it via People magazine! She didn't make any of the the actual recipes but she wrote a very nice foreword and we should all celebrate it. Oh wait! This all happened a year ago but they want to remind us about it again now for some reason we shouldn't think about too closely.
> 
> Anyway, it's a cookbook y'all!
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle Dedicates Instagram Post to Her First-Ever Royal Cause Ahead of New Year*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex worked with the Hubb Community Kitchen for several months and wrote the foreword for a cookbook featuring their recipes
> Giving Tuesday may be over, but Meghan Markle isn’t done highlighting worthwhile causes this holiday season.
> 
> The SussexRoyal Instagram page, which Meghan shares with husband Prince Harry, dedicated Thursday’s post to the Hubb Community Kitchen, a group started by women whose community was affected by the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire in which more than 70 people died. The Duchess of Sussex worked privately with the organization for several months and wrote the foreword for a cookbook featuring their recipes to benefit the project.
> 
> “Spotlight on: The Hubb Community Kitchen,” she captioned a collection of photos highlighting the women. “It was just one year ago that The Duchess of Sussex made a special visit to the women of The Hubb Community Kitchen to help prepare meals for those in need. The connection between The Duchess and these women began a year prior, as she supported them in the creation of ‘Together,’ a charity cookbook which celebrates the power of cooking to bring communities together.”
> 
> The cookbook went on to be a bestseller, helping the community kitchen open for seven days a week rather than the previous two.
> 
> “Today, the women at the Hubb Community Kitchen continue to have a positive impact in their community, across the UK, and around the world,” reads the Instagram post. “Whether it’s providing a safe space for women and children to come for a hot meal, supporting local schools, serving free lunches to senior citizens, partnering with the Red Cross to provide lunches for refugees, or feeding the homeless – the Hubb helps and heals through their support and sustenance.”
> 
> She continued by wishing them continued success in the year ahead: “Thank you, ladies, for the leadership and inspiration that your cooking and love of community brings to all those around you. We remain so very proud of the good work that you continue to do, and cannot wait to see what 2020 brings!”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...her-first-ever-royal-cause-ahead-of-new-year/




It's easy to have a best selling book when you buy thousands of your own copies, but Meghan would never think of that......or...... would she........well.....if it became a best seller she'd get more attention......and she could say "See, I told you I'm not such a loser"......not that she'd ever think of such a thing. And why celebrate a Cambridge Christmas when you can slam it with your last year's "best selling" book? I CAN see Meghan coming out with a cookbook titled: "1000 Ways You Can Eat Crow, Have Egg on Your Face, and Let Them Eat Cake".  She could package it in a #24 briefcase as a slip cover.  I'd pay up to two bucks for that.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> The life of an A-lister



Supposedly that was her first acting job. I'd call it more of a modeling gig since there wasn't much acting required other than looking somewhat alert and happy for the contestants.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly that was her first acting job. I'd call it more of a modeling gig since there wasn't much acting required other than looking somewhat alert and happy for the contestants.


That was more acting for her than you may think. It was tough on her to look happy for all those contestants who didn't bother to ask her how she was doing.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> That was more acting for her than you may think. It was tough on her to look happy for all those contestants who didn't bother to ask her how she was doing.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> That was more acting for her than you may think. It was tough on her to look happy for all those contestants who didn't bother to ask her how she was doing.


she was probably grateful for the job back then.  now she feels entitled.  I was at the doctor's yesterday and they had People in the waiting room.  I picked up the copy with the article about her - big quote of her saying she knew it would be hard but thought it would be fair.  BOO HOO.  I feel So Sorry for her.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> That was more acting for her than you may think. It was tough on her to look happy for all those contestants who didn't bother to ask her how she was doing.



True. It would also be tough for her because she was only one of many pretty girls and she didn't stand out. I did find this Christmas-themed sexy Santa photo of her though. She probably wishes the internet could be wiped of all these reminders of the past.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> True. It would also be tough for her because she was only one of many pretty girls and she didn't stand out. I did find this Christmas-themed sexy Santa photo of her though. She probably wishes the internet could be wiped of all these reminders of the past.
> 
> View attachment 4608212


A dress that fits!!


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> She probably wishes the internet could be wiped of all these reminders of the past.
> View attachment 4608212



I doubt it. Meghan has spoken proudly of her struggles to "make it" plus the paychecks from this show that you're mocking paid rather well for her.


----------



## bellecate

LibbyRuth said:


> That was more acting for her than you may think. It was tough on her to look happy for all those contestants who didn't bother to ask her how she was doing.


----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> I doubt it. Meghan has spoken proudly of her struggles to "make it" plus the paychecks from this show that you're mocking paid rather well for her.
> View attachment 4608313
> 
> View attachment 4608312


She sounded a bit like a spoiled brat already. Imagine how many people would want to earn 23K just for standing and yet all she wants to do is sit down. And it was a struggle for her to earn so much for doing so little. How's that for foreshadowing.


----------



## gracekelly

Hmm,  I don't know.  Standing in a pair of sky high cheap heels is not fun. Cheap shoes cutting into your feet and trying to smile at the same time.  Ugh!   I am going to sympathize with MM on that one.  But... as my old friend Bob used to say, "a buck is a buck" and if you need said bucks, then you stand there and take it.  She won't be the first to have done that or the last.


----------



## hellosunshine

In hollywood, people are capable of making lots of money doing very little, so I wouldn't judge so harshly. Secondly, within the industry Deal or No Deal was a job she did not enjoy but she was thankful for the experience. I know so many people who would rather prioritize happiness and personal fulfillment than money...Meghan seems no different here.


----------



## Welltraveled!

$23k a week to stand in one spot and smile!   

that’s some pretty good money!



hellosunshine said:


> I doubt it. Meghan has spoken proudly of her struggles to "make it" plus the paychecks from this show that you're mocking paid rather well for her.
> View attachment 4608313
> 
> View attachment 4608312


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> She sounded a bit like a spoiled brat already. Imagine how many people would want to earn 23K just for standing and yet all she wants to do is sit down. And it was a struggle for her to earn so much for doing so little. How's that for foreshadowing.



Aren't the veiled complaints what we have come to expect from her? At the time she was undoubtedly thrilled to be chosen to be a briefcase babe and earning big bucks. Who knew that by wearing those uncomfortable shoes she was actually paying her dues as an actress? I'm glad Meghan shared her struggles with us so we can all appreciate how hard she had it back then.


----------



## sdkitty

Welltraveled! said:


> $23k a week to stand in one spot and smile!
> 
> that’s some pretty good money!


yes, beats sitting at a desk answering phones, typing, etc.  or, as I've said before, working on a factory line, cleaning other people's houses (for Much Less money)


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> In hollywood, people are capable of making lots of money doing very little, so I wouldn't judge so harshly. Secondly, within the industry Deal or No Deal was a job she did not enjoy but she was thankful for the experience. I know so many people who would rather prioritize happiness and personal fulfillment than money...Meghan seems no different here.


Really? .. and how do know this?  I have skepticism about this ..


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> In hollywood, people are capable of making lots of money doing very little, so I wouldn't judge so harshly. Secondly, within the industry Deal or No Deal was a job she did not enjoy but she was thankful for the experience. I know so many people who would rather prioritize happiness and personal fulfillment than money...Meghan seems no different here.


also in Hollywood there are a lot of "starving actors" waiting on tables, etc.
So whether it was her dream job or not, it paid well and she should have been happy to have the work (not saying she can't say her shoes hurt)


----------



## Tivo

rose60610 said:


> Meghan is unique.
> 
> In the sense that I don't recall any other person of fame, celebrity or otherwise, at one point in their life as being on top of the world, enjoying all the trappings of being a member of the RF, success, attention, fame, wealth, comfort, luxury everything, connections, etc, and shortly thereafter complaining about it all due to one's own screwing up. (I'd be on total Cloud Nine and pinch myself a million times a day. And if I screwed up I'd know it.)
> 
> Yes, Meghan is unique. From dysfunctional family D-Lister to marrying and cranking out a Royal Family anchor baby? Damn! And then complain? *In poverty stricken Africa?* That's either chutzpah or psychosis. She kind of reminds me of the people you read about who win an enormous lottery (and M has "won" far more than that) and then quickly p*ss away everything. All she has to do is not screw up. But she can't help it! Of course they'll always have Anchor, oops, I mean Archie. He's her Forever Meal Ticket.



Not all of Africa is poverty stricken, just saying.


----------



## Chagall

Tivo said:


> Not all of Africa is poverty stricken, just saying.


That is right, parts of Africa are quite affluent.


----------



## zen1965

To keep this in perspective: In Subsahara Africa most countries battle with poverty. Sadly, there are only few countries that feature inclusive growth (Botswana for instance). 
Giving an interview in Malawi of all countries bemoaning her own "plight" while 70% of the population of her host country have to get by with less than USD 1.90 per day, Meghan lost all credibility as a philanthrop. That was shameful, totally tone-deaf and cringe-worthy.


----------



## Chagall

zen1965 said:


> To keep this in perspective: In Subsahara Africa most countries battle with poverty. Sadly, there are only few countries that feature inclusive growth (Botswana for instance).
> Giving an interview in Malawi of all countries bemoaning her own "plight" while 70% of the population of her host country have to get by with less than USD 1.90 per day, Meghan lost all credibility as a philanthrop. That was shameful, totally tone-deaf and cringe-worthy.


When I lived in Africa parts of South Africa and even Zimbabwe were quite Affulent. Mind you that is going back awhile. This is still true of Port Elizabeth and Cape Town today. Borrowdale in Zim remains affulent today.


----------



## Chagall

The great disparagy between the rich and poor in Africa is very pronounced. A great majority of Africa live in poverty, but not all. There are parts of the States where there is a lot of poverty. Her poor me comment would have been totally out of place there also. Just a completely ridiculous thing to say in a lot of places in a lot of countries.


----------



## rose60610

Many parts of Africa, indeed, are affluent. The area that Meghan of Wokeness complained from, saying she had it hard, not so much.  I should have made that point more clearly in my post. Aren't you going to ask me if I'm OK?  Well, I'm not OK, instead, I'm doing great. And I didn't even marry into a life of unimaginable luxuries or have a staff of servants to hand me hankies so I can console myself when the media aren't fawning all over me with puff pieces.  I want my D-List life back. Oh wait.  Naw, it's easier to go into public pity mode while enjoying a life that most others could only dream about.


----------



## Chagall

One of Harries previous girlfriends, who he was very serious with, Chelsey Davy, was from Zimbabwe. He spent a lot of time there with her, so must have been aware of the conditions there, good and mostly not so good. Yet he let Megan spout her poor me nonsense.


----------



## sdkitty

^                                  ^
maybe harry takes after uncle andy in the intelligence dept


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> ^                                  ^
> maybe harry takes after uncle andy in the intelligence dept


He is supposedly not the brightest (as in "_sharp as a spoon_")!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> He is supposedly not the brightest (as in "_sharp as a spoon_")!!


that might explain the debacle with the Nazi uniform


----------



## CeeJay

Meghan seems to have been super-busy (on her 6-week 'privacy' break) .. making sure 'glowing' reviews have been posted of her (latest is her picture at the Toronto shelter).  So much for the 'press break' ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Hanging w/Adele in


CeeJay said:


> Meghan seems to have been super-busy (on her 6-week 'privacy' break) .. making sure 'glowing' reviews have been posted of her (latest is her picture at the Toronto shelter).  So much for the 'press break' ..


Yep. Some "newly surfaced photos" just happened to pop up  the other day featuring the dynamic duo at a soup kitchen last year, with Adele. In case we forget she is a wonderful, and charitable being who just wants to hug the world.
Image from The Sun


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Hanging w/Adele in
> 
> Yep. Some "newly surfaced photos" just happened to pop up  the other day featuring the dynamic duo at a soup kitchen last year, with Adele. In case we forget she is a wonderful, and charitable being who just wants to hug the world.
> Image from The Sun
> View attachment 4610102


I'm starting wonder if this was her goal in snagging him whether it can last long term.  She "acts" as if she loves him ("H")......


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'm starting wonder if this was her goal in snagging him whether it can last long term.  She "acts" as if she loves him ("H")......


Sadly, I'm not convinced of that, especially given how many people she has jettisoned on her way "up" ..


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Hanging w/Adele in
> 
> Yep. Some "newly surfaced photos" just happened to pop up  the other day featuring the dynamic duo at a soup kitchen last year, with Adele. In case we forget she is a wonderful, and charitable being who just wants to hug the world.
> Image from The Sun
> View attachment 4610102


Amazing how these *private* photos of Meghan keep cropping up


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> Sadly, I'm not convinced of that, especially given how many people she has jettisoned on her way "up" ..


Me neither.  It’s all about fame and profile for Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Sadly, I'm not convinced of that, especially given how many people she has jettisoned on her way "up" ..


if that's the case, then I feel kinda sorry for Harry


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> The great disparagy between the rich and poor in Africa is very pronounced. A great majority of Africa live in poverty, but not all. There are parts of the States where there is a lot of poverty. Her poor me comment would have been totally out of place there also. Just a completely ridiculous thing to say in a lot of places in a lot of countries.


I certainly don't proclaim to know African like those of you who lived there, but I can only opine on what I saw when I was in South Arica, Zimbabwe and Kenya.  I was there on a business trip and as such, we had a personal driver the whole time we were there (_they specifically told us to NOT hail any cabs or take ones by ourselves - even from our Hotel_)!!!  Bottom liine, when driving through Johannesburg (_and even Cape Town_), the disparity of those very well-off compared to the Shanti towns was very visible and very sad IMO.  I have close friends (_back in Boston_) who were from SA (_one from Cape Town and the other from Johannesburg_) and they also told me about the huge gap in the 'have' and 'have nots'.  I saw the same in Zimbabwe (_Harari_) and then in Kenya (_Nairobi_).  No matter what, how stupid were BOTH of them for airing their "_grievances_" while in a part of the world where, sadly, there are many who live by the seat of their pants (_if that_)!!!  It was so tone-deaf, and Meghan being this (_supposedly_) 'woke' person???  Am I the only one sick and tired of hearing that word???  I think SHE thinks she is so smart; I haven't seen it ..


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> if that's the case, then I feel kinda sorry for Harry


Yes, I do too .. sadly, I think he was originally besotted (_'rumors' have said that_) .. but I wonder if he has "woken" up yet?  At some point, it's inevitable .. I have seen that in the past with other couples that I have known.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> I certainly don't proclaim to know African like those of you who lived there, but I can only opine on what I saw when I was in South Arica, Zimbabwe and Kenya.  I was there on a business trip and as such, we had a personal driver the whole time we were there (_they specifically told us to NOT hail any cabs or take ones by ourselves - even from our Hotel_)!!!  Bottom liine, when driving through Johannesburg (_and even Cape Town_), the disparity of those very well-off compared to the Shanti towns was very visible and very sad IMO.  I have close friends (_back in Boston_) who were from SA (_one from Cape Town and the other from Johannesburg_) and they also told me about the huge gap in the 'have' and 'have nots'.  I saw the same in Zimbabwe (_Harari_) and then in Kenya (_Nairobi_).  No matter what, how stupid were BOTH of them for airing their "_grievances_" while in a part of the world where, sadly, there are many who live by the seat of their pants (_if that_)!!!  It was so tone-deaf, and Meghan being this (_supposedly_) 'woke' person???  Am I the only one sick and tired of hearing that word???  I think SHE thinks she is so smart; I haven't seen it ..


It was a sad state of affairs with the Europeans living in opulence and the servants living in corrugated shacks at the back of the property. Even as a child I knew it was wrong. If it is even remotely like that today, and I have no idea if it is,  then the extent of how shocking Megan’s comments were is still sinking in.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> It was a sad state of affairs with the Europeans living in opulence and the servants living in corrugated shacks at the back of the property. Even as a child I knew it was wrong. If it is even remotely like that today, and I have no idea if it is,  then the extent of how shocking Megan’s comments were is still sinking in.


agree saying those things while in Africa instead of focusing on the African people some of whom are really poor was so tone deaf.  But to me, hearing her complain is annoying no matter who she is talking to or where she is.
She has so much privilege even just compared to the middle class, never mind compared to poor people.  Just shut up or if you're really so sad then get out (after giving it some time and effort for adjustment of course).  Personally I'm not rich but I am grateful to have everything I need and I've worked for it.  Did not marry into it.  Rant over.
I don't mind that she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams in networking but just don't ask me to feel sorry for her.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> agree saying those things while in Africa instead of focusing on the African people some of whom are really poor was so tone deaf.  But to me, hearing her complain is annoying no matter who she is talking to or where she is.
> She has so much privilege even just compared to the middle class, never mind compared to poor people.  Just shut up or if you're really so sad then get out (after giving it some time and effort for adjustment of course).  Personally I'm not rich but I am grateful to have everything I need and I've worked for it.  Did not marry into it.  Rant over.
> I don't mind that she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams in networking but just don't ask me to feel sorry for her.


100% AGREE!!!!  Don't know how much $$$ her high school was, but it is a private school .. unlikely to have been cheap!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Amazing how these *private* photos of Meghan keep cropping up


It's almost like she's suffocating without six weeks of attention.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> 100% AGREE!!!!  Don't know how much $$$ her high school was, but it is a private school .. unlikely to have been cheap!


One of her little "quirks" is to ask people who lived in California where they went to high school - it's her way of showing her place in the hierarchy. Pathetic for an almost-40 year old woman to think her high school impresses anyone, but here we are.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> 100% AGREE!!!!  Don't know how much $$$ her high school was, but it is a private school .. unlikely to have been cheap!


right....thanks to her daddy


----------



## bag-mania

It's difficult to tell which stories are actually coming from the M/H publicity machine. Various publications and organizations are going out of their way to manufacture Meghan stories because they want the clicks (money) and attention they get from her popularity. That "never-before-seen" photo posted on Instagram from the Toronto shelter is coming directly from the charity and (if you can trust the comments in the feed) they are getting donations because the women seeing it love Meghan. That photo was taken years ago when Meghan was still working on Suits. It's nice that the shelter is earning money but the media writing articles about it today as if an old photo is news is annoying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> right....thanks to her daddy


Her poor dad. I really do feel sorry for him. She got all she could out of him then, as someone said ‘jettisoned’ him. The big discard is a very prominent narcissist trait.


----------



## Tivo

I’ll never feel sorry for those Markles. Horrible people.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Looks like they’re figuring out how to line their pockets for when they’re cut off.


----------



## Chagall

Tivo said:


> I’ll never feel sorry for those Markles. Horrible people.


Does that include Meghan?


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like they’re figuring out how to line their pockets for when they’re cut off.
> View attachment 4610823



Haha! I thought it was going to say raising money for she and Harry (mentally fixed it and skipped the word "charity" in the headline).

I guess at least they can hustle some other MMO's for themselves in preparation of being on their own?


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like they’re figuring out how to line their pockets for when they’re cut off.
> View attachment 4610823


It’s not a charity, they’ve set up a limited company.  An entirely different animal.  
So basically she’s taken time off from her Royal duties not to spend 6 weeks of “much needed family time” but to peddle her own business, all at our expense.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s not a charity, they’ve set up a limited company.  An entirely different animal.
> So basically she’s taken time off from her Royal duties not to spend 6 weeks of “much needed family time” but to peddle her own business, all at our expense.


headline says for charity.....not true?


----------



## Clearblueskies

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-pal-told-take-21061385
And here’s another - one of her besties using pictures of MM wearing the stuff she gave her, on her jewellery website, to sell the goods.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> headline says for charity.....not true?


We have structures in the uk for setting up charitable organisations and for their oversight and governance.  Harry and Meghan have chosen instead to establish a public limited company - they can call it what they like but put simply this is a commercial organisational model.  We’ve discussed this here before.
(ETA I know something about this, having served as a trustee on a UK charity board for some years).


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> We have structures in the uk for setting up charitable organisations and for their oversight and governance.  Harry and Meghan have chosen instead to establish a public limited company - they can call it what they like but put simply this is a commercial organisational model.  We’ve discussed this here before.
> (ETA I know something about this, having served as a trustee on a UK charity board for some years).


does the general population know about this?
I would think it would make them very unpopular


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> does the general population know about this?
> I would think it would make them very unpopular


They use the word charity rather than company - I think they’re misleading the public, because it’s natural that everyone will assume it’s charity.  It may sound boring but governance arrangements, probity, and clarity about decision making etc are really important when it comes to using money that’s been gifted to a cause.  And it sounds like Meghan expects to receive a lot of money by using the name of the BRF.


----------



## doni

I guess they have set up a company so that they can invest some those US raised funds to make even more money. Even if it can be controlled that every single penny is spent on charity, and I trust that would be the case and the intention, this sounds all kinds of wrong to me... I guess they see it as ‘modernizing’ the monarchy... but to me serving charity as a royal is not about setting up a filantropy power house and trying to compete with Bill Gates or something. A royal’s main role is to represent their country, charity work is an add on to that. I do not think Meghan realizes this. Wonder what Charles thinks about the whole thing.


----------



## LibbyRuth

doni said:


> I guess they have set up a company so that they can invest some those US raised funds to make even more money. Even if it can be controlled that every single penny is spent on charity, and I trust that would be the case and the intention, this sounds all kinds of wrong to me... I guess they see it as ‘modernizing’ the monarchy... but to me serving charity as a royal is not about setting up a filantropy power house and trying to compete with Bill Gates or something. A royal’s main role is to represent their country, charity work is an add on to that. I do not think Meghan realizes this. Wonder what Charles thinks about the whole thing.


If they will remain long term royals, I agree with you.  If they see the writing on the wall and know they'd be out when Charles pars things down, then setting up a foundation now to be high society people instead of royals makes sense.


----------



## LittleStar88

This whole thing puts me off so much, to use the guise of a charity organization as a revenue stream for themselves. 

@Clearblueskies - do you know if there are more loopholes/incentives/lack of required transparency for them to do this in the US versus UK? 

I feel as though Harry would not be doing any of this stuff if it weren't for Meghan. I really wish I understood their personal dynamic a little more (he must be totally blinded by her charms?) in order to understand why he would go along with this.

I would guess that Charles is ok to let them do this, and then he could make himself look good by _trimming the monarchy_ as Meghan and Harry go their own way. Maybe Charles is pushing them this direction and off granny's purse strings in order to align with the goal of trimming the fat?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Buckingham Palace asks company to stop merching... 

https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-cu...rkles-jewellery-jennifer-meyer-ban-instagram/

*Buckingham Palace ‘Bans’ Meghan Markle’s Jewellery Designer From Using Pictures Of Her On Instagram*
The Palace reportedly asked jewellery designer Jennifer Meyer to remove images of the Duchess of Sussex from her social media platforms

Buckingham Palace representatives have allegedly told celebrity favourite jewellery designer Jennifer Meyer to stop using images of Meghan Markle to promote her business.

In recent months, the 42-year-old jeweller – who was previously married to actor Tobey Maguire and is best friends with the likes of Kate Hudson and Cameron Diaz – has posted several images of the Duchess of Sussex wearing her designs to the her Instagram account.

However, the _Daily Mail _reports that the designer is said to have breached a non-disclosure agreement by sharing images of the 38-year-old on her social media platforms.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> This whole thing puts me off so much, to use the guise of a charity organization as a revenue stream for themselves.
> 
> @Clearblueskies - do you know if there are more loopholes/incentives/lack of required transparency for them to do this in the US versus UK?
> 
> I feel as though Harry would not be doing any of this stuff if it weren't for Meghan. I really wish I understood their personal dynamic a little more (he must be totally blinded by her charms?) in order to understand why he would go along with this.
> 
> I would guess that Charles is ok to let them do this, and then he could make himself look good by _trimming the monarchy_ as Meghan and Harry go their own way. Maybe Charles is pushing them this direction and off granny's purse strings in order to align with the goal of trimming the fat?


I’m afraid I don’t know how things differ between the US and Uk, but it’s obviously a much bigger target audience for them in the US.  I agree with you - Harry wouldn’t be doing this, and certainly not in this way if not for MM - plus the articles read very much that he’s taking a back seat.  I think the RF are in a difficult position, I’m thinking they’re not being consulted or informed in advance of decisions being made.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Buckingham Palace asks company to stop merching...
> 
> https://www.elle.com/uk/life-and-cu...rkles-jewellery-jennifer-meyer-ban-instagram/
> 
> *Buckingham Palace ‘Bans’ Meghan Markle’s Jewellery Designer From Using Pictures Of Her On Instagram*
> The Palace reportedly asked jewellery designer Jennifer Meyer to remove images of the Duchess of Sussex from her social media platforms
> 
> Buckingham Palace representatives have allegedly told celebrity favourite jewellery designer Jennifer Meyer to stop using images of Meghan Markle to promote her business.
> 
> In recent months, the 42-year-old jeweller – who was previously married to actor Tobey Maguire and is best friends with the likes of Kate Hudson and Cameron Diaz – has posted several images of the Duchess of Sussex wearing her designs to the her Instagram account.
> 
> However, the _Daily Mail _reports that the designer is said to have breached a non-disclosure agreement by sharing images of the 38-year-old on her social media platforms.



About time! I’ve wondered about that for a long time.


----------



## Chagall

Megan Markle aside, I have for the most part never understood the adoration of Jennifer Meyer jewelry. There was one leaf pendant Jennifer Anniston wore in a movie that was kind of nice, but apart  from that, I think it’s very ordinary.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Megan Markle aside, I have for the most part never understood the adoration of Jennifer Meyer jewelry. There was one leaf pendant Jennifer Anniston wore in a movie that was kind of nice, but apart  from that, I think it’s very ordinary.


maybe she's good at networking


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like they’re figuring out how to line their pockets for when they’re cut off.
> View attachment 4610823


.. and the comments on DM re: this?!?! .. WOW - *NOT POSITIVE* at all!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/meghan-markles-pal-told-take-21061385
> And here’s another - one of her besties using pictures of MM wearing the stuff she gave her, on her jewellery website, to sell the goods.


Yeah, and let me tell you .. that "designer" (_cough-cough, sputter, sputter_) has simplistic designs and doesn't know A THING about metalsmithing or jewelry making, it's all about her 'name'.  However, her stuff is outrageously expensive; I will never buy jewelry from "designers" who don't know a thing about metalsmithing/jewelry-making because I do and it IS NOT an easy artform (_especially if you do the forging or wax casting yourself_)!!!  I'm glad that Buckingham Palace has informed this "designer" to stop using Meghan's images for her jewelry promotions!


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> We have structures in the uk for setting up charitable organisations and for their oversight and governance.  Harry and Meghan have chosen instead to establish a public limited company - they can call it what they like but put simply this is a commercial organisational model.  We’ve discussed this here before.
> (ETA I know something about this, having served as a trustee on a UK charity board for some years).


.. and so far, I've heard that this 'organization' will only get 5% .. Harry & Meghan get the rest, and they will be ACTIVELY promoting this in the US .. that REALLY PISSES ME OFF!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> .. and so far, I've heard that this 'organization' will only get 5% .. Harry & Meghan get the rest, and they will be ACTIVELY promoting this in the US .. that REALLY PISSES ME OFF!



Same. I think it is sneaky and wrong, and taking advantage of people liking her and people giving money to charity (Meghan is not a charity case). Very tacky and low class.


----------



## altigirl88

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, and let me tell you .. that "designer" (_cough-cough, sputter, sputter_) has simplistic designs and doesn't know A THING about metalsmithing or jewelry making, it's all about her 'name'.  However, her stuff is outrageously expensive; I will never buy jewelry from "designers" who don't know a thing about metalsmithing/jewelry-making because I do and it IS NOT an easy artform (_especially if you do the forging or wax casting yourself_)!!!  I'm glad that Buckingham Palace has informed this "designer" to stop using Meghan's images for her jewelry promotions!



 I took a peek at the jewelry, today. I imagined $500. Boy, was I surprised!


----------



## LittleStar88

altigirl88 said:


> I took a peek at the jewelry, today. I imagined $500. Boy, was I surprised!



Same. Very little gold and not terribly unique for the price. Did she get her start by comping at award show swag suites and to TV show/movie sets? Not sure how else she could get so many famous folk to all wear her stuff.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> Megan Markle aside, I have for the most part never understood the adoration of Jennifer Meyer jewelry. There was one leaf pendant Jennifer Anniston wore in a movie that was kind of nice, but apart  from that, I think it’s very ordinary.


Agree -- it is teeny tiny for what you get and what you get isn't so special.

She has famous friends who wear her stuff.  Courtney Cox wore a long necklace with circles, for a while, which made it popular and Aniston wears her stuff, so that's really all you need to sell, I guess.


----------



## HiromiT

LittleStar88 said:


> Same. Very little gold and not terribly unique for the price. Did she get her start by comping at award show swag suites and to TV show/movie sets? Not sure how else she could get so many famous folk to all wear her stuff.


Her dad Ronald Meyer was the president and CEO of Universal Studios, so I’m sure he had a lot to do with celebs wearing her line of jewellery.

I have her leaf necklace and thin stacking rings — pretty but nothing unique. I only bought them because I was into delicate yellow gold jewellery at the time and the retailer offered gift cards with purchase.


----------



## rose60610

Wait, M, or the company used an image of THE QUEEN? WHA???  How can you live that down or ride that out?  Yikes. So the jewelry can't stand on its own or on M's image that they have to co-op the Queen? Now that they got the cease-and-desist on that who will they use next? Princess Diana? Nothing like using a dead mother-in-law to pimp your goods, right? Hey, we got photoshop, so what's the problem? Think Harry would grow a pair to tell M "no"?  Anybody put THAT past Meghan? I don't.

*********I just re-read posts, the Queen's image wasn't used, it was M's*********** my bad, but still.........watch them use Di's image until they get the cease-and-desist from that, and it won't be from Harry. 

Know what else I don't put past her? Gifting pieces of Meyer jewelry to QEII and the rest of the RF gang for Christmas. Hah!  They must get woke!!  Why not? M&H are already in the doghouse, what have they got to lose?  Respect? Too late for that! All they need is for one giftee to wear it and it'll be on every catalog or tweet from M. How could the Queen not wear it? How can the friggin' literal Crown Jewels even compare?  I'll be stocking up on the popcorn for this train wreck.


----------



## doni

LittleStar88 said:


> Same. Very little gold and not terribly unique for the price. Did she get her start by comping at award show swag suites and to TV show/movie sets? Not sure how else she could get so many famous folk to all wear her stuff.



It is so random. The concept is to copy from cheaper jewelry brands aimed at young people and teenagers (and doing a better job of it), render it in gold and semi-precious stones with no attempt at quality craftsmanship and plaster an outrageous price on it to make it sound luxury. The only unique selling point is the contacts she has. Celebrities may be wearing the stuff, but I highly doubt the business is that successful...


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Agree -- it is teeny tiny for what you get and what you get isn't so special.
> 
> She has famous friends who wear her stuff.  Courtney Cox wore a long necklace with circles, for a while, which made it popular and Aniston wears her stuff, so that's really all you need to sell, I guess.


As someone said it is like the stuff teenagers wear. I can’t understand what these women see in it. There are so many beautiful jewelry designers to choose from. She has no flare or imagination.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m picturing her small light pieces next to the insane jewelry that the royal family has in their collection not much of a comparison.


----------



## bag-mania

Apparently the gossip about their foundation has reached a point where they are pushing back with a rebuttal.

*Meghan Markle Is Not Plotting the U.S. Expansion of Sussex Foundation While on Royal Break*
The duchess is "very much on break" Stateside with Prince Harry and Baby Archie in tow.

Prior to contrary reports yesterday, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is not spending her six-week-long sabbatical from royal duties planning the Stateside launch of the Sussex Royal Foundation.

_The Telegraph_ reported that Meghan would be spending part of her vacation time plotting the expansion of the royal charity program rather than relishing time with her family and friends in the States. Supposedly, HRH was in total “work mode,” hoping to finalize the U.S. launch of her and the Duke of Sussex’s foundation and aiming to make it “one of the biggest and most successful philanthropic organisations in the world.”

A source tells _BAZAAR.com,_ however, “This story is a stretch. The couple are very much on a break.”

Since the start of the holiday season, the duke and duchess have been on a lengthy pause from royal duties, reportedly obtaining much-needed rest and relaxation in Meghan’s home country. A source previously told _BAZAAR.com_ that the couple “plan to spend time as a family for their first break this year.”

The couple have managed to stay completely out of the spotlight since the beginning of their time off and will probably remain so until after Christmas, which—much to public surprise—they will not be spending with the queen at Sandringham Estate. Instead, they are reportedly spending the holiday in the duchess’s home state of California with her mother, Doria Ragland.

“Having spent the last two Christmases at Sandringham, Their Royal Highnesses will spend the holiday this year, as a new family, with the Duchess’ mother Doria Ragland,” a spokesperson for the Sussexes swiftly explained once the news was announced. “This decision is in line with precedent set previously by other members of the Royal Family, and has the support of Her Majesty The Queen.”

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...n-markle-is-not-working-while-on-royal-break/


----------



## Flatsy

The Sussexes should just fire their press office since Harper's Bazaar seems to work full time for them now.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> The Sussexes should just fire their press office since Harper's Bazaar seems to work full time for them now.


yes, interesting source for "news"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> “Having spent the last two Christmases at Sandringham, Their Royal Highnesses will spend the holiday this year, as a new family, with the Duchess’ mother Doria Ragland,” a spokesperson for the Sussexes swiftly explained once the news was announced. “This decision is in line with precedent set previously by other members of the Royal Family, and has the support of Her Majesty The Queen.”
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...n-markle-is-not-working-while-on-royal-break/



How times change. Two years ago she was happy to have wiggled her way into the royal Christmas despite not being married yet, now it sounds like a chore.


----------



## piperdog

Flatsy said:


> The Sussexes should just fire their press office since Harper's Bazaar seems to work full time for them now.


I'd say there are a LOT of reasons why they should fire their press office, though for all we know H&M may be thrilled with how things are being managed.


----------



## Tivo

LittleStar88 said:


> Same. Very little gold and not terribly unique for the price. Did she get her start by comping at award show swag suites and to TV show/movie sets? Not sure how else she could get so many famous folk to all wear her stuff.


She’s Jennifer Meyer. Her dad used to be CEO of Universal Studios. I’m not sure Meghan is cool with BP slapping Jennifer’s hand.


----------



## Flatsy

Tivo said:


> She’s Jennifer Meyer. Her dad used to be CEO of Universal Studios. I’m not sure Meghan is cool with BP slapping Jennifer’s hand.


Jennifer Meyer is tight with EVERYBODY in Hollywood.  She's gone on vacation with every actress under the age of 50. I've even seen her hanging out with people like Miley Cyrus and Cara Delevigne who are way younger than her.  She's one of the few females Leonardo DiCaprio hangs out with platonically other than his mom.  She is one of the most well-connected people there is.

Not only did BP smack her hand, but her face was on all of these articles saying she was taking advantage of Meghan for publicity.  Meghan definitely wouldn't be cool with that being done to one of her biggest social climbing contacts.


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> Jennifer Meyer is tight with EVERYBODY in Hollywood.  She's gone on vacation with every actress under the age of 50. I've even seen her hanging out with people like Miley Cyrus and Cara Delevigne who are way younger than her.  She's one of the few females Leonardo DiCaprio hangs out with platonically other than his mom.  She is one of the most well-connected people there is.
> 
> Not only did BP smack her hand, but her face was on all of these articles saying she was taking advantage of Meghan for publicity.  *Meghan definitely wouldn't be cool with that being done to one of her biggest social climbing contacts.*


I’m gonna assume BP knows this too.


----------



## TC1

Flatsy said:


> Jennifer Meyer is tight with EVERYBODY in Hollywood.  She's gone on vacation with every actress under the age of 50. I've even seen her hanging out with people like Miley Cyrus and Cara Delevigne who are way younger than her.  She's one of the few females Leonardo DiCaprio hangs out with platonically other than his mom.  She is one of the most well-connected people there is.
> 
> Not only did BP smack her hand, but her face was on all of these articles saying she was taking advantage of Meghan for publicity.  Meghan definitely wouldn't be cool with that being done to one of her biggest social climbing contacts.


Being married to Tobey Macguire for 10 years served her well. No one would pay her prices if she hadn't become the "in crowd" chick.


----------



## doni

TC1 said:


> Being married to Tobey Macguire for 10 years served her well. No one would pay her prices if she hadn't become the "in crowd" chick.


I believe he was the one marrying well. Her father is a very big shot in Hollywood.


----------



## Chagall

TC1 said:


> Being married to Tobey Macguire for 10 years served her well. No one would pay her prices if she hadn't become the "in crowd" chick.


Well she must have a really great personality then. Apart from one or two of her items her jewelry designs are pretty awful IMO. Certainly a case of who, not what you know.


----------



## TC1

doni said:


> I believe he was the one marrying well. Her father is a very big shot in Hollywood.


Yeah, but Tobey's BFF's with Leo DiCaprio and he's connected.


----------



## Flatsy

I think Jennifer is connected because of Tobey/Leo, connected because of her Dad, and connected through the west side network of famous moms.    

Tobey Maguire is not a popular guy.  Other than Leo and his father-in-law, he doesn't have many allies in Hollywood.  He was almost fired from Spiderman for bad behavior and his father-in-law intervened.  He was focused more on underground poker than acting for a while - it was pretty obvious in Molly Bloom's book that Tobey was the jerk who made her bark like a seal in front of a room full of people in exchange for tips. 

I would say at this point that Jennifer Meyer is waaaaay more powerful in Hollywood than her ex-husband.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Tobey Maguire is not a popular guy.  Other than Leo and his father-in-law, he doesn't have many allies in Hollywood.  He was almost fired from Spiderman for bad behavior and his father-in-law intervened.  He was focused more on underground poker than acting for a while - *it was pretty obvious in Molly Bloom's book that Tobey was the jerk who made her bark like a seal in front of a room full of people in exchange for tips.*



Why would she demean herself like that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Why would she demean herself like that?


Without him, her poker game would have collapsed.  He was her biggest player.  He also brought in Leo and Leo attracted other celebrities.


----------



## CeeJay

It was really tacky of Jennifer to use pictures of Meghan; seriously .. this woman has PLENTY of celebrity clients, did she really have to exploit the BRF?!?!  Am I surprised though? .. NOPE!


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> Not only did BP smack her hand, but her face was on all of these articles saying she was taking advantage of Meghan for publicity.  Meghan definitely wouldn't be cool with that being done to one of her biggest social climbing contacts.


----------



## lanasyogamama

doni said:


> I believe he was the one marrying well. Her father is a very big shot in Hollywood.



I think it was mutually beneficial. I’m not sure he would’ve gotten all those roles without his connection to her, and she certainly wouldn’t have her jewelry line without him.


----------



## doni

lanasyogamama said:


> I think it was mutually beneficial. I’m not sure he would’ve gotten all those roles without his connection to her, and she certainly wouldn’t have her jewelry line without him.


Yes I am sure it didn’t hurt. But her jewelry got its push when it was publicized that it was being selected by film stylists to use on the stars (Jennifer Aniston) of movies which were _all_ (what a coincidence!) produced by Universal of which her father was (longest serving) CEO and President.


----------



## Swanky

I like her jewelry lol  
Anyway, this thread isn’t about her.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> It was really tacky of Jennifer to use pictures of Meghan; seriously .. this woman has PLENTY of celebrity clients, did she really have to exploit the BRF?!?!  Am I surprised though? .. NOPE!


maybe meghan was cool with it?


----------



## daisychainz

I had to just look her up, never even heard of her. Sounds like the Marchesa thing, with people being "asked" to wear her items.


----------



## jehaga

MM schemed her way into genuine royalty as a means to infiltrate Hollywood royalty. Next is to run some worldwide money-laundering organization. No grifter con artist in the history of the universe has ever achieved this level of success. Honestly, kudos!


----------



## sdkitty

jehaga said:


> MM schemed her way into genuine royalty as a means to infiltrate Hollywood royalty. Next is to run some worldwide money-laundering organization. No grifter con artist in the history of the universe has ever achieved this level of success. Honestly, kudos!


LOL


----------



## meluvs2shop

Chagall said:


> Megan Markle aside, I have for the most part never understood the adoration of Jennifer Meyer jewelry. There was one leaf pendant Jennifer Anniston wore in a movie that was kind of nice, but apart  from that, I think it’s very ordinary.


I agree. Celebrity friends, I suppose. Didn’t she come from a known family in the industry? Plus she was married to once a famous actor. I think around that time she launched her jewelry- give or take a couple of years.


----------



## sdkitty

meluvs2shop said:


> I agree. Celebrity friends, I suppose. Didn’t she come from a known family in the industry? Plus she was married to once a famous actor. I think around that time she launched her jewelry- give or take a couple of years.


yes her father is some important exec......this and her marriage to toby maguire are discussed in the thread above


----------



## gracekelly

*Daily Mail article    Stephanie Powers had an interview with the Daily Beast. *Let’s say she didn’t mince words.  

*
It's her job to be Harry's wife, not change the royal dynamic': Prince Charles' Hollywood polo pal Stefanie Powers, 77, unloads on Meghan and brands Andrew 'stupid' - but gushes about 'impeccable' Kate*

*Stefanie Powers, 77, shared her unrestrained opinions about the Royal Family in a new interview*
*The American actress known for her leading role on the 80s sitcom Hart to Hart became friends with Prince Charles years ago through their mutual love of polo*
*Powers said she's not a fan of Charles' daughter-in-law Meghan Markle, accusing the duchess of trying to turn the royals into her own reality show  *
*She also took aim at Prince Andrew, calling him stupid and saying: 'Both him and Harry have making fools of themselves in common'*
*Powers spoke fondly of Kate Middleton, saying she 'doesn't put a foot wrong'   *
*In the same interview Powers talked at length about her Hart to Hart co-star and friend of 40 years Robert *
Stefanie Powers unloaded on fellow actress Meghan Markle in a new interview where she shared a range of unrestrained opinions about the Royal Family. 

Powers, who is best known for her leading role on the 80s sitcom Hart to Hart and currently splits her time between the UK, Los Angeles and Kenya, formed a close relationship with Prince Charles years ago through their mutual love of polo. 

Speaking to The Daily Beast in an interview published Thursday, Powers revealed that she strongly disapproves of Charles' daughter-in-law Meghan. 

The actress charged that the Duchess of Sussex has tried to turn the Royal Family into her own personal TV show, 'Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous' 'The Adventures of Meghan in the Palace'. 

'[Meghan] wants to be a star, which, I'm sorry, is not what she is supposed to be doing,' Powers said. 'Meghan's role is not about being a star. 

'It's her job to be Harry's wife, not change the royal dynamic.'







+7
Powers claimed that Meghan has been trying to turn the Royal Family into her own reality show. '[Meghan] wants to be a star, which, I'm sorry, is not what she is supposed to be doing,' she said. It's her job to be Harry's wife, not change the royal dynamic'






+7
Powers was far more complimentary when talking about other members of the Royal Family, calling Kate Middleton 'impeccable' and Prince Charles 'lovely and witty'

Powers went on to take aim at Meghan's acting career, saying: 'Those headlines saying she was Hollywood royalty marrying British royalty... She had a role in a TV show. 





Powers called Prince Andrew (pictured) 'stupid' and said: 'Both him and Harry have making fools of themselves in common'

'Please, she's obviously not a great actress. She's not gotten into the role she has taken on. 

'Grace Kelly did [when she married Prince Rainier of Monaco], but then she was Hollywood royalty—not a bit player in a minor television series.' 

Her rant then shifted to other members of the Royal Family as she said: 'Britain is outstanding because of the Royal Family, and when a member of it misbehaves they shorten its viability. 

'Prince Andrew is stupid. Both him and Harry have making fools of themselves in common. 

'Kate [Middleton] is impeccable, she doesn't put a foot wrong.

'Look at Princess Anne. I love Princess Anne. I know her. She is sensational. She is her mother's daughter, totally committed to what she does. She has stepped back, and doesn't make a circus of life whenever she steps out. She's the real thing. She's kind of mischievous. She has a wicked twinkle.'


----------



## megs0927

sdkitty said:


> maybe meghan was cool with it?



Blind Gossip implied that MM would purchase the pieces from JM but then receive a kickback from JM for letting her post pics on IG/social media. 

IF that’s true the BRF is not going to be happy.


----------



## CeeJay

megs0927 said:


> Blind Gossip implied that MM would purchase the pieces from JM but then receive a kickback from JM for letting her post pics on IG/social media.
> 
> IF that’s true the BRF is not going to be happy.


WHOA .. but not surprising (alas, somewhat 'common' in the entertainment industry ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> *Daily Mail article    Stephanie Powers had an interview with the Daily Beast. *Let’s say she didn’t mince words.
> 
> 
> *It's her job to be Harry's wife, not change the royal dynamic': Prince Charles' Hollywood polo pal Stefanie Powers, 77, unloads on Meghan and brands Andrew 'stupid' - but gushes about 'impeccable' Kate*
> 
> *Stefanie Powers, 77, shared her unrestrained opinions about the Royal Family in a new interview*
> *The American actress known for her leading role on the 80s sitcom Hart to Hart became friends with Prince Charles years ago through their mutual love of polo*
> *Powers said she's not a fan of Charles' daughter-in-law Meghan Markle, accusing the duchess of trying to turn the royals into her own reality show  *
> *She also took aim at Prince Andrew, calling him stupid and saying: 'Both him and Harry have making fools of themselves in common'*
> *Powers spoke fondly of Kate Middleton, saying she 'doesn't put a foot wrong'   *
> *In the same interview Powers talked at length about her Hart to Hart co-star and friend of 40 years Robert *
> Stefanie Powers unloaded on fellow actress Meghan Markle in a new interview where she shared a range of unrestrained opinions about the Royal Family.
> 
> Powers, who is best known for her leading role on the 80s sitcom Hart to Hart and currently splits her time between the UK, Los Angeles and Kenya, formed a close relationship with Prince Charles years ago through their mutual love of polo.
> 
> Speaking to The Daily Beast in an interview published Thursday, Powers revealed that she strongly disapproves of Charles' daughter-in-law Meghan.
> 
> The actress charged that the Duchess of Sussex has tried to turn the Royal Family into her own personal TV show, 'Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous' 'The Adventures of Meghan in the Palace'.
> 
> '[Meghan] wants to be a star, which, I'm sorry, is not what she is supposed to be doing,' Powers said. 'Meghan's role is not about being a star.
> 
> 'It's her job to be Harry's wife, not change the royal dynamic.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +7
> Powers claimed that Meghan has been trying to turn the Royal Family into her own reality show. '[Meghan] wants to be a star, which, I'm sorry, is not what she is supposed to be doing,' she said. It's her job to be Harry's wife, not change the royal dynamic'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +7
> Powers was far more complimentary when talking about other members of the Royal Family, calling Kate Middleton 'impeccable' and Prince Charles 'lovely and witty'
> 
> Powers went on to take aim at Meghan's acting career, saying: 'Those headlines saying she was Hollywood royalty marrying British royalty... She had a role in a TV show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Powers called Prince Andrew (pictured) 'stupid' and said: 'Both him and Harry have making fools of themselves in common'
> 
> 'Please, she's obviously not a great actress. She's not gotten into the role she has taken on.
> 
> 'Grace Kelly did [when she married Prince Rainier of Monaco], but then she was Hollywood royalty—not a bit player in a minor television series.'
> 
> Her rant then shifted to other members of the Royal Family as she said: 'Britain is outstanding because of the Royal Family, and when a member of it misbehaves they shorten its viability.
> 
> 'Prince Andrew is stupid. Both him and Harry have making fools of themselves in common.
> 
> 'Kate [Middleton] is impeccable, she doesn't put a foot wrong.
> 
> 'Look at Princess Anne. I love Princess Anne. I know her. She is sensational. She is her mother's daughter, totally committed to what she does. She has stepped back, and doesn't make a circus of life whenever she steps out. She's the real thing. She's kind of mischievous. She has a wicked twinkle.'


*BOOM!!!* .. Stephanie NAILED it .. and this from a well-respected Film, TV and Stage Actress!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *BOOM!!!* .. Stephanie NAILED it .. and this from a well-respected Film, TV and Stage Actress!


Like I said, she didn't mince words lol!  I didn't read the Daily Beast so I have no idea why they interviewed her in the first place.It does have me wondering why they would solicit her opinion on this subject.


----------



## gracekelly

She is still acting and that is why she was interviewed.  She became interested in wildlife conservation when she was the companion of William Holden and still has a home in Kenya.  That is a slight connection to the Sussex.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Like I said, she didn't mince words lol!  I didn't read the Daily Beast so I have no idea why they interviewed her in the first place.It does have me wondering why they would solicit her opinion on this subject.


she talked about a lot of other things - her relationship with robert wagner and with william holden. maybe the stuff about the royals came up because she knew charles back in the day


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she talked about a lot of other things - her relationship with robert wagner and with william holden. maybe the stuff about the royals came up because she knew charles back in the day


She has a home in Kenya and she runs with the Polo crowd.  An upper crust group with money.  I bet she has heard an earful.  This is the crowd that separates the husbands and wives at a dinner party and we know how that went over with Meghan.  The cattiness level was probably stratospheric.  I'm sure gossip is the next major event at a Polo match aside from the polo itself.


----------



## marthastoo

And we should care about the random musings of an aged American actress because ...?


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> And we should care about the random musings of an aged American actress because ...?


It isn't a question of caring about what she said.  It is interesting that she made these statements during an interview when she was ostensibly being interviewed for another reason.  In a way, I find it shocking that she did it.


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> And we should care about the random musings of an aged American actress because ...?


so she's irrelevant because of her age?


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How times change. Two years ago she was happy to have wiggled her way into the royal Christmas despite not being married yet, now it sounds like a chore.


LMAO


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan may not be in the Guinness Book of Records (yet),  but she made the Urban Dictionary.  
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Markled

Markled
A form of cat-fishing. Having been duped or conned by someone pretending to be someone they are not.
She markled him with her fake online profile.
#catfish#bait and switch#con artist#duped#conned#fraud
by PBFYI June 08, 2018
MARKLED
Cutting off all communication and contact for no obvious reason. This form of ghosting is not limited to intimate relationships. It can include friends, associates or family members.
When Jessica mentioned after 3 months of reaching out to friend without success, she was of the opinion, for reasons unbeknownst to her, she had been Markled.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Meghan may not be in the Guinness Book of Records (yet),  but she made the Urban Dictionary.
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Markled
> 
> Markled
> A form of cat-fishing. Having been duped or conned by someone pretending to be someone they are not.
> She markled him with her fake online profile.
> #catfish#bait and switch#con artist#duped#conned#fraud
> by PBFYI June 08, 2018
> MARKLED
> Cutting off all communication and contact for no obvious reason. This form of ghosting is not limited to intimate relationships. It can include friends, associates or family members.
> When Jessica mentioned after 3 months of reaching out to friend without success, she was of the opinion, for reasons unbeknownst to her, she had been Markled.



this is awesome


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Meghan may not be in the Guinness Book of Records (yet),  but she made the Urban Dictionary.
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Markled
> 
> Markled
> A form of cat-fishing. Having been duped or conned by someone pretending to be someone they are not.
> She markled him with her fake online profile.
> #catfish#bait and switch#con artist#duped#conned#fraud
> by PBFYI June 08, 2018
> MARKLED
> Cutting off all communication and contact for no obvious reason. This form of ghosting is not limited to intimate relationships. It can include friends, associates or family members.
> When Jessica mentioned after 3 months of reaching out to friend without success, she was of the opinion, for reasons unbeknownst to her, she had been Markled.


she and her very protective husband must be seething over this


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> she and her very protective husband must be seething over this


Or very proud.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Any chance that the BRF (Charles) is playing Meghan’s game against her.  She tends to have “famous friends” speak on her behalf.  Maybe Charles is using his friend Stephanie for the same thing???


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Any chance that the BRF (Charles) is playing Meghan’s game against her.  She tends to have “famous friends” speak on her behalf.  Maybe Charles is using his friend Stephanie for the same thing???


could be but this was an interview where she talked mostly about her life


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

.. and meanwhile, the '*24*' case that Meghan (_mostly_) had on the '_Deal or No Deal_' TV show will be put up for Auction, where they expect up to a $6000 bid .. UFB!!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-No-Deal-briefcase-hitting-auction-block.html


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and meanwhile, the '24' case that Meghan (mostly) had on the Deal or No Deal TV show will be put up for Auction, where they expect up to a $6000 bid .. UFB!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-No-Deal-briefcase-hitting-auction-block.html



Yeah, that's a great price for an old stage prop. Some Meghan stans are probably pooling their funds as we speak in anticipation of the auction. Or else maybe Harry will submit a grossly inflated high bid secretly for her. We'll wonder if that's the case (pun intended!) if the winner remains anonymous. 

Those cases have likely been sitting forgotten in a storage unit for years until this moment. It's funny that Howie Mandell admits he doesn't remember her on the show. There were so many and it's not like there was any opportunity to stand out when you are opening a briefcase.


----------



## Jayne1

HiromiT said:


> I have her leaf necklace and thin stacking rings — pretty but nothing unique. I only bought them because I was into delicate yellow gold jewellery at the time and the retailer offered gift cards with purchase.


I like that teeny tiny look and she uses little dots (stones) of colour, and I would buy it if it were a fraction of the cost.  But the cost being what it is makes it a no for me. 

Having said that, when I see her stuff in Holts, I always take a look.  (To see if maybe the prices have been slashed by two thirds!  lol)


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, that's a great price for an old stage prop. Some Meghan stans are probably pooling their funds as we speak in anticipation of the auction. Or else maybe Harry will submit a grossly inflated high bid secretly for her. We'll wonder if that's the case (pun intended!) if the winner remains anonymous.
> 
> Those cases have likely been sitting forgotten in a storage unit for years until this moment. It's funny that Howie Mandell admits he doesn't remember her on the show. There were so many and it's not like there was any opportunity to stand out when you are opening a briefcase.
> 
> View attachment 4613765


She looked a bit different back then and I can't put my finger on why. I think she became even more beautiful after the first few seasons of Suits.  She did something to really stand out.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> She looked a bit different back then and I can't put my finger on why. I think she became even more beautiful after the first few seasons of Suits.  She did something to really stand out.


She was not as thin on '_Deal or No Deal_'; she became very thin when working on Suits (_although TBH, I never watched the show - just seen pictures of her in it_)!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Meghan may not be in the Guinness Book of Records (yet),  but she made the Urban Dictionary.
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Markled
> 
> Markled
> A form of cat-fishing. Having been duped or conned by someone pretending to be someone they are not.
> She markled him with her fake online profile.
> #catfish#bait and switch#con artist#duped#conned#fraud
> by PBFYI June 08, 2018
> MARKLED
> Cutting off all communication and contact for no obvious reason. This form of ghosting is not limited to intimate relationships. It can include friends, associates or family members.
> When Jessica mentioned after 3 months of reaching out to friend without success, she was of the opinion, for reasons unbeknownst to her, she had been Markled.


HA HA HA .. *love* this!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. *love* this!!!


I've seen you post about how she ghosted people but I wasn't aware it was widely known.....ha....now she does have something to be upset about


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I've seen you post about how she ghosted people but I wasn't aware it was widely known.....ha....now she does have something to be upset about


To me the funniest thing in this definition is this:

_When* Jessica* mentioned after 3 months of reaching out to friend without success, she was of the opinion, for reasons unbeknownst to her, she had been Markled._

Whoa!  What is the chance that the writer randomly picked the name Jessica?    Veiled meaning here? hahahaha!


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/20...b3qaiw0EYEz7dtAbcTtsJnfvkUONRuPMp2fErZiLCOP73


----------



## rose60610

I always liked Stephanie Powers....

Is Meghan going to sue "urban dictionary" somehow?  I can think of other people who got "Markled".


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I always liked Stephanie Powers....
> 
> Is Meghan going to sue "urban dictionary" somehow?  I can think of other people who got "Markled".


maybe she'll get her hero, "H" to sue them for her


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> maybe she'll get her hero, "H" to sue them for her


Ugh, “Harry” is so much easier to say than “H”.


----------



## coleigh

sdkitty said:


> maybe she'll get her hero, "H" to sue them for her


Good for her.  Harry is her biggest fan.


----------



## coleigh

marthastoo said:


> And we should care about the random musings of an aged American actress because ...?


So right!  I never heard of her.  Now I will google her because she used MM as a way gain popularity.  She appears parasitic to me.  lmao


----------



## sdkitty

coleigh said:


> So right!  I never heard of her.  Now I will google her because she used MM as a way gain popularity.  She appears parasitic to me.  lmao


No.  She did not use Meghan as a way to gain popularity.  This was part of an interview not primarily about mm


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## coleigh

Sorry, sdkitty, but her response was parasitic.


----------



## sdkitty

coleigh said:


> Sorry, sdkitty, but her response was parasitic.


In your opinion


----------



## coleigh

Absolutely!


----------



## coleigh

Just googled her....I do remember her.  MM has resurrected her status.  She may have earned 2 inquiries on google today.  Haaa!


----------



## HiromiT

Jayne1 said:


> I like that teeny tiny look and she uses little dots (stones) of colour, and I would buy it if it were a fraction of the cost.  But the cost being what it is makes it a no for me.
> 
> Having said that, when I see her stuff in Holts, I always take a look.  (To see if maybe the prices have been slashed by two thirds!  lol)



I can think of at least two Canadian designers making similar teeny tiny pieces...at a fraction of the cost LOL. I’m over that look but at least I can pass on my JM pieces to my daughter when she’s older.


----------



## sdkitty

coleigh said:


> Just googled her....I do remember her.  MM has resurrected her status.  She may have earned 2 inquiries on google today.  Haaa!


well your Meghan is rapidly going from famous to infamous


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> well your Meghan is rapidly going from famous to infamous



famous for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## CeeJay

Definition of Parasitic: _*habitually relying on or exploiting others*
_
IMO, that suits Meghan to a 'T' .. after all, she has relied on many people throughout her illustrious  (sic) career, to move up and then just '*Markle*' them!!   She is not even close to the stature of Stephanie Powers .. puhleeze!


----------



## mrsinsyder

So Meghan and Harry haven’t been spotted during their “break”... doesn’t that kind of prove all their whining has been for nothing? They’ve gone away and no one is looking for them...


----------



## maryg1

mrsinsyder said:


> So Meghan and Harry haven’t been spotted during their “break”... doesn’t that kind of prove all their whining has been for nothing? They’ve gone away and no one is looking for them...


Probably that proves that people can live in privacy without paparazzis around them if they actually want


----------



## Sharont2305

maryg1 said:


> Probably that proves that people can live in privacy without paparazzis around them if they actually want


Absolutely, I've lost count of the times I've heard of very famous American actors spending weeks and months here in the UK, usually for filming, and only finding out after they left!
Richard Gere, Angelina Jolie and Demi Moore have filmed in my area and we never knew. Well, we did with the Gere film as I remember adverts wanting extras for it.


----------



## gelbergirl

mrsinsyder said:


> So Meghan and Harry haven’t been spotted during their “break”... doesn’t that kind of prove all their whining has been for nothing? They’ve gone away and no one is looking for them...



yeah, where are they?


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> yeah, where are they?


supposedly visiting her mom?


----------



## LittleStar88

gelbergirl said:


> yeah, where are they?



Does anyone actually care?


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> supposedly visiting her mom?


I do find it interesting that there have been no sightings at all--the US press seems to be as photo crazy as the ones in the UK. I hope they are enjoying their time wherever they are (maybe Africa?).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

When they come back they’ll probably make a documentary about their time off.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> Does anyone actually care?


It's been so nice. My eyeballs have gotten a break from rolling constantly.


----------



## CeeJay

But, but, but .. Meghan had to make sure to post an '_inspirational_' bit on their Instagram .. hmmm, how interesting given that it was posted at the same time that William and Catherine had the airing of the Great British Baking Show (_with Mary Berry_) the same evening.  It seems she just simply cannot stand 'sharing' the spotlight!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> But, but, but .. Meghan had to make sure to post an '_inspirational_' bit on their Instagram .. hmmm, how interesting given that it was posted at the same time that William and Catherine had the airing of the Great British Baking Show (_with Mary Berry_) the same evening.  It seems she just simply cannot stand 'sharing' the spotlight!
> View attachment 4617246


well she had better get used to it


----------



## CeeJay

While this is old (from October), it has some interesting points in it re: H&M ever thinking about moving to the US .. 
https://www.today.com/news/could-prince-harry-meghan-markle-move-united-states-t165270


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> While this is old (from October), it has some interesting points in it re: H&M ever thinking about moving to the US ..
> https://www.today.com/news/could-prince-harry-meghan-markle-move-united-states-t165270


interesting
the last part about other celebs being in pain isn't relevant IMO......Robin Williams was not suffering due to the paps or fans.  His depression was probably clinical or possibly in part due to personal relationships.  Same with Kate Spade.  Yes it's true that having money or fame doesn't buy happiness but H&M are blaming her unhappiness on outside forces (media, etc).  There's a difference


----------



## LittleStar88

I know we have seen most - if not all. But still a fun read (a few I wasn't aware of/hadn't heard about)

https://www.nickiswift.com/104261/shady-side-meghan-markle/


----------



## altigirl88

CeeJay said:


> But, but, but .. Meghan had to make sure to post an '_inspirational_' bit on their Instagram .. hmmm, how interesting given that it was posted at the same time that William and Catherine had the airing of the Great British Baking Show (_with Mary Berry_) the same evening.  It seems she just simply cannot stand 'sharing' the spotlight!
> View attachment 4617246



I always find this mix of fonts hard to read. I end up not bothering.


----------



## cafecreme15

altigirl88 said:


> I always find this mix of fonts hard to read. I end up not bothering.


I agree - it's hard to process and retain and the fonts are not on the proper accent words for the most part.


----------



## marthastoo

LittleStar88 said:


> Does anyone actually care?


Clearly all the people who manage to keep this thread at the top of the page despite the fact they haven't been seen in public in weeks.


----------



## CeeJay

altigirl88 said:


> I always find this mix of fonts hard to read. I end up not bothering.





cafecreme15 said:


> I agree - it's hard to process and retain and the fonts are not on the proper accent words for the most part.



Are you talking about my post or H&M's instagram post?


----------



## cafecreme15

CeeJay said:


> Are you talking about my post or H&M's instagram post?


The Sussex insta account! At least - that's what I was talking about.


----------



## LittleStar88

marthastoo said:


> Clearly all the people who manage to keep this thread at the top of the page despite the fact they haven't been seen in public in weeks.



Haha savage response! 

She serves so much fodder that we don't necessarily need new material - can go on for weeks on what she has already provided!


----------



## coleigh

marthastoo said:


> Clearly all the people who manage to keep this thread at the top of the page despite the fact they haven't been seen in public in weeks.


She has many fans


----------



## CeeJay

.. and for the person who said I was lying re: Meghan's plays and my friend's who know them .. here you go:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

.. and notice WHO did the lighting for MANY of her plays .. not Doria!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Just saw this on Instagram!


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> .. and notice WHO did the lighting for MANY of her plays .. not Doria!
> View attachment 4617338


Aside from Archie, I really feel for her Dad. Here we have proof in black & white what he did for Meghan and she is so ungrateful. What a mess she has created.


----------



## CeeJay

As I've said numerous times, my friends who knew the Markles back then have said numerous times how GENEROUS he was with Meghan, to the point of spoiling her.  Sad to say, she seems to have inherited the same narcissist gene that is in her father!


----------



## altigirl88

CeeJay said:


> Are you talking about my post or H&M's instagram post?



Sussex IG


----------



## jblended

To me the fact that they're laying low tells me that BRF pulled them aside and gave them *strict instructions* to stay out of the way during their 6 week break. No news from them, no pap shots, no "friends" speaking for them to the press.


----------



## veroliz

​


----------



## myown

chowlover2 said:


> Aside from Archie, I really feel for her Dad. Here we have proof in black & white what he did for Meghan and she is so ungrateful. What a mess she has created.


Or did he created that mess? We have no idea what happened that this relationship broke


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> interesting
> the last part about other celebs being in pain isn't relevant IMO......Robin Williams was not suffering due to the paps or fans.  His depression was probably clinical or possibly in part due to personal relationships.  Same with Kate Spade.  Yes it's true that having money or fame doesn't buy happiness but H&M are blaming her unhappiness on outside forces (media, etc).  There's a difference


Robin suffered from two types of  dementia at the time of his death (I watched his bio on HBO) so the last part, as you said, isn't relevant.


cafecreme15 said:


> I agree - it's hard to process and retain and the fonts are not on the proper accent words for the most part.


I was wondering why how they decided to accent certain words.  So distracting!


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> .. and notice WHO did the lighting for MANY of her plays .. not Doria!
> View attachment 4617338


And not a paid gig, I'm sure!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> And not a paid gig, I'm sure!


Nope, always for free ..


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> .. and notice WHO did the lighting for MANY of her plays .. not Doria!
> View attachment 4617338



Thomas was a career professional photography and lighting director - what does Doria have anything to do with this? I don't understand what you're implying here?

Secondly, Meghan was in many elementary, middle, and high school play productions. Any stranger online could pick a playbill and say "See, this is Meghan in a play and my friends know her!". Aren't people told to not believe everything you read on the internet? We're all inclined to believe or not believe. I, happen to not and I'm allowed that.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Please let's not go down this road again.


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> Robin suffered from two types of  dementia at the time of his death (I watched his bio on HBO) so the last part, as you said, isn't relevant.
> 
> I was wondering why how they decided to accent certain words.  So distracting!



Looks like they run it through some kind of app that randomly accents words.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> *Any stranger online could pick a playbill and say "See, this is Meghan in a play and my friends know her!". Aren't people told to not believe everything you read on the internet? *We're all inclined to believe or not believe. I, happen to not and I'm allowed that.


Difference is that I did not read this on the internet and the person / family that I know is on that playbill.  Why would I be so insistent if I was lying?  Please just put me on *IGNORE *please .. thank you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Meanwhile, this is going on .. this would SO piss off H&M! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ate-stripping-Meghan-Harry-Sussex-titles.html

_"Brighton councillors will debate stripping Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after thousands signed a petition branding them 'morally wrong' and 'disrespectful'. 

The petition claims Sussex residents should not have to refer to the royal couple as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as the titles are 'entirely non-********ic' and a 'symbol of oppression by the wealthy elite'. 

Campaigner Charles Ross has accumulated more than 3,800 signatures, which means Brighton and Hove City councillors will have to discuss the motion on Thursday.  

But the council cannot strip the couple of their titles, which are given by the Queen, so the petition calls on officials to stop calling them the Sussexes in council documents. _

_The petition reads: 'We the undersigned petition Brighton & Hove Council to reject the usage of the titles 'Duke of Sussex' and 'Duchess of Sussex' by the individuals Henry ('Harry') Windsor and Rachel Meghan Markle as morally wrong and disrespectful to the county of East Sussex."_


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Meanwhile, this is going on .. this would SO piss off H&M!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ate-stripping-Meghan-Harry-Sussex-titles.html
> 
> _"Brighton councillors will debate stripping Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after thousands signed a petition branding them 'morally wrong' and 'disrespectful'.
> 
> The petition claims Sussex residents should not have to refer to the royal couple as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as the titles are 'entirely non-********ic' and a 'symbol of oppression by the wealthy elite'.
> 
> Campaigner Charles Ross has accumulated more than 3,800 signatures, which means Brighton and Hove City councillors will have to discuss the motion on Thursday.
> 
> But the council cannot strip the couple of their titles, which are given by the Queen, so the petition calls on officials to stop calling them the Sussexes in council documents. _
> 
> _The petition reads: 'We the undersigned petition Brighton & Hove Council to reject the usage of the titles 'Duke of Sussex' and 'Duchess of Sussex' by the individuals Henry ('Harry') Windsor and Rachel Meghan Markle as morally wrong and disrespectful to the county of East Sussex."_


this should actually fit well with the "woke" thinking


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> this should actually fit well with the "woke" thinking


The woke family of colonizers. Woke and joke.


----------



## gracekelly

Waiting for the Christmas card. Wonder where they will be sent from. It’s supposed to be different. I think it will be related to the woeisme tour.


----------



## bisbee

CeeJay said:


> Meanwhile, this is going on .. this would SO piss off H&M!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ate-stripping-Meghan-Harry-Sussex-titles.html
> 
> _"Brighton councillors will debate stripping Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after thousands signed a petition branding them 'morally wrong' and 'disrespectful'.
> 
> The petition claims Sussex residents should not have to refer to the royal couple as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as the titles are 'entirely non-********ic' and a 'symbol of oppression by the wealthy elite'.
> 
> Campaigner Charles Ross has accumulated more than 3,800 signatures, which means Brighton and Hove City councillors will have to discuss the motion on Thursday.
> 
> But the council cannot strip the couple of their titles, which are given by the Queen, so the petition calls on officials to stop calling them the Sussexes in council documents. _
> 
> _The petition reads: 'We the undersigned petition Brighton & Hove Council to reject the usage of the titles 'Duke of Sussex' and 'Duchess of Sussex' by the individuals Henry ('Harry') Windsor and Rachel Meghan Markle as morally wrong and disrespectful to the county of East Sussex."_



You must be thrilled.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Now we know why she invited all these people who she barely knew. 

*Meghan Markle 'cleverly' invited stars she barely knew like Oprah and George Clooney to her wedding because they've since become her public defenders, royal biographer Andrew Morton claims*

*Duchess of Sussex was 'smart' to befriend high-profile stars, expert claimed*
*Biographer Andrew Morton noted she had 'big Hollywood hitters' at the wedding*
*Claimed the royal didn't know Oprah or George and Amal Clooney well *
*Said these same stars now speak out to publicly defend Meghan from criticism*
*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-stars-like-Oprah-George-Clooney-wedding.html*


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Waiting for the Christmas card. Wonder where they will be sent from. It’s supposed to be different. I think it will be related to the woeisme tour.


I do hope it is a nice pic of all three of them, not like that pic (Father's Day?) of infant Archie clutching Harry's finger. 

Seeing the kids at Christmas time is what it's all about.


----------



## CeeJay

bisbee said:


> You must be thrilled.


Uh, no .. merely posted it


----------



## Stansy

mrsinsyder said:


> Now we know why she invited all these people who she barely knew.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'cleverly' invited stars she barely knew like Oprah and George Clooney to her wedding because they've since become her public defenders, royal biographer Andrew Morton claims*
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex was 'smart' to befriend high-profile stars, expert claimed*
> *Biographer Andrew Morton noted she had 'big Hollywood hitters' at the wedding*
> *Claimed the royal didn't know Oprah or George and Amal Clooney well *
> *Said these same stars now speak out to publicly defend Meghan from criticism*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-stars-like-Oprah-George-Clooney-wedding.html*


I don‘t understand why they showed up at the wedding if they barely knew her... vanity because it was a royal wedding after all? The wish to befriend H&M?
I don‘t get it.


----------



## sdkitty

Stansy said:


> I don‘t understand why they showed up at the wedding if they barely knew her... vanity because it was a royal wedding after all? The wish to befriend H&M?
> I don‘t get it.


I think they would probably enjoy the spectacle of a royal wedding and maybe they felt it would elevate their status too


----------



## mrsinsyder

Stansy said:


> I don‘t understand why they showed up at the wedding if they barely knew her... vanity because it was a royal wedding after all? The wish to befriend H&M?
> I don‘t get it.


Heck I'd have gone, it's still a pretty interesting thing to be a part of.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Heck I'd have gone, it's still a pretty interesting thing to be a part of.


Haha!  True!   What would you have given for a wedding gift?  I think a complete set of The Twilight Zone  and  The Outer Limits would have been good.  Both are descriptive of the marriage so far.


----------



## LittleStar88

Stansy said:


> I don‘t understand why they showed up at the wedding if they barely knew her... vanity because it was a royal wedding after all? The wish to befriend H&M?
> I don‘t get it.



I totally would have gone! Even if I could only go alone and knew no one!


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Heck I'd have gone, it's still a pretty interesting thing to be a part of.


agree, that's why I would have thought Meghan could have come up with some other relatives besides her mother to attend


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> agree, that's why I would have thought Meghan could have come up with some other relatives besides her mother to attend


So her mom was her only relative there? No cousins, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews? 

I remember the drama with her dad (heart attack or no heart attack?) and I thought something could have been worked out so he could walk her down the aisle (if no heart attack).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Stansy said:


> I don‘t understand why they showed up at the wedding if they barely knew her... vanity because it was a royal wedding after all? The wish to befriend H&M?
> I don‘t get it.


I thought it was odd too.

Celebrities, with their huge egos, love attention if they deem it the right kind of attention and being invited to a British royal wedding is very desirable, I guess.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I thought it was odd too.
> 
> Celebrities, with their huge egos, love attention if they deem it the right kind of attention and being invited to a British royal wedding is very desirable, I guess.


It works the other way too.  By inviting high profile people like the Clooneys, it made her appear more A list than she actually was.  

Inviting people you don't know and excluding your own family.....  pretty amazing.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> So her mom was her only relative there? No cousins, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews?
> 
> I remember the drama with her dad (heart attack or no heart attack?) and I thought something could have been worked out so he could walk her down the aisle (if no heart attack).


yes, I think her mom was the only relative - no aunt, uncle, cousin....no one.  maybe she didn't feel they were presentable


----------



## Sophisticatted

LittleStar88 said:


> I totally would have gone! Even if I could only go alone and knew no one!



That pretty much describes Doria!


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> yes, I think her mom was the only relative - no aunt, uncle, cousin....no one.  maybe she didn't feel they were presentable


She wanted to portray a little orphan Annie victim, like she’s doing now with the media. Having a family would have gone against that. Remember how the BRF was the “family she never had?”


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> She wanted to portray a little orphan Annie victim, like she’s doing now with the media. Having a family would have gone against that. Remember how the BRF was the “family she never had?”


makes no sense to me but I guess that's possible


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> Meanwhile, this is going on .. this would SO piss off H&M!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ate-stripping-Meghan-Harry-Sussex-titles.html
> 
> _"Brighton councillors will debate stripping Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after thousands signed a petition branding them 'morally wrong' and 'disrespectful'.
> 
> The petition claims Sussex residents should not have to refer to the royal couple as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as the titles are 'entirely non-********ic' and a 'symbol of oppression by the wealthy elite'.
> 
> Campaigner Charles Ross has accumulated more than 3,800 signatures, which means Brighton and Hove City councillors will have to discuss the motion on Thursday.
> 
> But the council cannot strip the couple of their titles, which are given by the Queen, so the petition calls on officials to stop calling them the Sussexes in council documents. _
> 
> _The petition reads: 'We the undersigned petition Brighton & Hove Council to reject the usage of the titles 'Duke of Sussex' and 'Duchess of Sussex' by the individuals Henry ('Harry') Windsor and Rachel Meghan Markle as morally wrong and disrespectful to the county of *East Sussex.*"_



What about* West Sussex  (*my neck of the woods) lol???


----------



## myown

Stansy said:


> I don‘t understand why they showed up at the wedding if they barely knew her... vanity because it was a royal wedding after all? The wish to befriend H&M?
> I don‘t get it.


Oprah is barely known in Europe. Guess it was a PR stunt for her, too


----------



## PewPew

It’s possible this may change holiday plans, if Harry’s grandfather is ill.
________________
*Prince Philip, age 98, has been taken to hospital as “precaution for a pre-existing condition”*.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50870869


----------



## LittleStar88

PewPew said:


> It’s possible this may change holiday plans, if Harry’s grandfather is ill.
> ________________
> *Prince Philip, age 98, has been taken to hospital as “precaution for a pre-existing condition”*.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50870869



If Harry was smart, he would be getting on the next plane home. At 98 years old, precautionary hospitalization can become something critical very quickly.


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> If Harry was smart, he would be getting on the next plane home. At 98 years old, precautionary hospitalization can become something critical very quickly.


I agree. Harry should return home asap.


----------



## altigirl88

PewPew said:


> It’s possible this may change holiday plans, if Harry’s grandfather is ill.
> ________________
> *Prince Philip, age 98, has been taken to hospital as “precaution for a pre-existing condition”*.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50870869


I hope he’s doing ok


----------



## Welltraveled!

More importantly I hope for a speedy recovery for Prince Philip.



PewPew said:


> It’s possible this may change holiday plans, if Harry’s grandfather is ill.
> ________________
> *Prince Philip, age 98, has been taken to hospital as “precaution for a pre-existing condition”*.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50870869


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> I agree. Harry should return home asap.



Hmm...  Not so sure about that.  If he walked into the hospital, Phil might think he was a goner for sure.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Hmm...  Not so sure about that.  If he walked into the hospital, Phil might think he was a goner for sure.



Or he will feel loved because his grandson cared enough to come see him?

Also hoping that Prince Philip is back home and feeling well soon.


----------



## cafecreme15

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4619399


Omg LOL


----------



## ccbaggirl89

“As has been reported, Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are spending private family time in Canada. The decision to base themselves in Canada reflects the importance of this Commonwealth country to them both,” reads a statement from the couple's rep.

Apparently Doria was spotted in Canada, too.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...-markle-prince-harry-archie-christmas-canada/


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> “As has been reported, Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are spending private family time in Canada. The decision to base themselves in Canada reflects the importance of this Commonwealth country to them both,” reads a statement from the couple's rep.
> 
> Apparently Doria was spotted in Canada, too.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...-markle-prince-harry-archie-christmas-canada/


so Canada instead of LA
and Bazaar is their method of announcing things.  interesting


----------



## mrsinsyder

Hmm.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> “As has been reported, Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are spending private family time in Canada. The decision to base themselves in Canada reflects the importance of this Commonwealth country to them both,” reads a statement from the couple's rep.
> 
> Apparently Doria was spotted in Canada, too.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...-markle-prince-harry-archie-christmas-canada/



Perhaps they were told that they weren't going to get security in US.  Staying in the Commonwealth makes sense.  Jessica and her family are more her family in truth so it makes sense to me.  Plus the IVF clinic is there.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> It works the other way too.  By inviting high profile people like the Clooneys, it made her appear more A list than she actually was.
> 
> Inviting people you don't know and excluding your own family.....  pretty amazing.



Have NO WORDS regarding MM and her many delusions, including inviting celebs whom are not close friends to her “Royal Wedding” instead of immediate family relations - obviously MM has a lot of shame issues and her a@@-kissing is literally unpalatable 

Such an ACTRESS, we should all remember that fact


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps they were told that they weren't going to get security in US.  Staying in the Commonwealth makes sense.  Jessica and her family are more her family in truth so it makes sense to me.  Plus the IVF clinic is there.


Maybe it's just a better overall look/image to be in a Commonwealth country. Apparently it's Doria's fault we know - someone saw her about in Canada and it led to some idea of their location.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Maybe it's just a better overall look/image to be in a Commonwealth country. Apparently it's Doria's fault we know - someone saw her about in Canada and it led to some idea of their location.


I guess it is more palatable if you are British, but I thought the whole thing was to go to LA and that is why they weren't going to Sandringham.  I think I am agreeing with the folks who feel they weren't invited.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Not invited AND told WHERE to go for their “time out”.

Meanwhile, William, Kate, George, and Charlotte will be the “Fab Four” on the photo op walk this year.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sophisticatted said:


> Not invited AND told WHERE to go for their “time out”.
> 
> Meanwhile, William, Kate, George, and Charlotte will be the “Fab Four” on the photo op walk this year.


i hope so! Those kids are just adorable, I'm really hopeful we get to see them.


----------



## threadbender

No Christmas card yet? 
Will it just be an e-card? 
The Queen and Prince Phillip's was a cute one and I like the Cambridge's. It will be interesting if MH will a) even have one and b) stick with the theme.


----------



## Chagall

So they are in Canada then. That is extremely disappointing to hear.


----------



## Jayne1

Saying they're in Canada is like saying they're in the United States. That's not exactly pinpointing where they are. 

We're a huge country and they can be anywhere from the Pacific Coast to the Atlantic. If they're back in Toronto, it's freezing at the moment. Maybe staying with Jess?


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Saying they're in Canada is like saying they're in the United States. That's not exactly pinpointing where
> We're a huge country and they can be anywhere from the Pacific Coast to the Atlantic. If they're back in Toronto, it's freezing at the moment. Maybe staying with Jess?


They are probably back in Toronto. I just hope that none of the Canadian tax payers money is going on their security when there are so many needy people on whom the money could be better spent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Wasn't there speculation they honeymooned in Canada? Perhaps they are in the same location, since that place was never uncovered.


----------



## eunaddict

Chagall said:


> They are probably back in Toronto. I just hope that none of the Canadian tax payers money is going on their security when there are so many needy people on whom the money could be better spent.



As a Canadian, that was my first thought. They had the option of staying in the UK (family Christmas at one of the BRF's estates with BRF security), and *NEITHER are Canadian* but somehow, they decide it'll be a good idea to head over?

If Charles removes their royal titles, can I just pre-emptively say we don't want them either? >.>


----------



## myown

kemilia said:


> I agree. Harry should return home asap.


Are we sure he“s not home?


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Hmm.
> View attachment 4619883


WTF is that


----------



## Chagall

eunaddict said:


> As a Canadian, that was my first thought. They had the option of staying in the UK (family Christmas at one of the BRF's estates with BRF security), and *NEITHER are Canadian* but somehow, they decide it'll be a good idea to head over?
> 
> If Charles removes their royal titles, can I just pre-emptively say we don't want them either? >.>


Yes you can say that we don’t want them either. Why have they chosen our country that they have no ties to, other than the fact she shot a tv show here. Very odd IMO!


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> Yes you can say that we don’t want them either. Why have they chosen our country that they have no ties to, other than the fact she shot a tv show here. Very odd IMO!


Like someone upthread said, Canada is part of the Commonwealth so there is a connection there, it looks better to us Brits that they are there rather than swanning around LA. 
Personally, I think they should be here in the UK.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Like someone upthread said, Canada is part of the Commonwealth so there is a connection there, it looks better to us Brits that they are there rather than swanning around LA.
> Personally, I think they should be here in the UK.


Agreed, they belong in the UK over Xmas and especially with prince Philip not well.


----------



## kemilia

myown said:


> Are we sure he“s not home?


Recent news says Canada. Could have changed overnight.


----------



## kemilia

Chagall said:


> Agreed, they belong in the UK over Xmas and especially with prince Philip not well.


With all the drama they generate, staying away lets the rest of the clan have a quiet Holiday, especially now with Prince Philip being ill. 

They'll be back soon enough.


----------



## kemilia

eunaddict said:


> As a Canadian, that was my first thought. They had the option of staying in the UK (family Christmas at one of the BRF's estates with BRF security), and *NEITHER are Canadian* but somehow, they decide it'll be a good idea to head over?
> 
> If Charles removes their royal titles, can I just pre-emptively say we don't want them either? >.>


Canada being a Commonwealth country--aren't they obliged to "protect" to the royal family? If so, that would take care of their security. 

Just a thought, I don't know how it works, just glad American tax dollars aren't involved--we've got enough problems going on.


----------



## Chagall

kemilia said:


> Canada being a Commonwealth country--aren't they obliged to "protect" to the royal family? If so, that would take care of their security.
> 
> Just a thought, I don't know how it works, just glad American tax dollars aren't involved--we've got enough problems going on.


Obligated to protect these spoilt over indulged royals? I begrudge any of my tax payer money being spent on them. Couldn’t they have found a quiet little out of the way spot in the UK to go. Scotland Ireland Wales, anywhere but here. They have probably burnt too many bridges in the UK and California for that matter. Poor Canada is probably their last frontier.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Obligated to protect these spoilt over indulged royals? I begrudge any of my tax payer money being spent on them. Couldn’t they have found a quiet little out of the way spot in the UK to go. Scotland Ireland Wales, anywhere but here. They have probably burnt too many bridges in the UK and California for that matter. Poor Canada is probably their last frontier.


they had better start behaving and posting cute baby pictures....seems their past behavior has not done them well


----------



## Sharont2305

^^^They'd better be quick, can't have the latest 4 generations pictures overshadowing them now, can we?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> ^^^They'd better be quick, can't have the latest 4 generations pictures overshadowing them now, can we?


The Cambridge’s are quickly leaving them in the dust.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> The Cambridge’s are quickly leaving them in the dust.


Aren't they just.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

Why do I feel that this “competition” between the couples was manufactured and kept going by those who hate MM with a passion so they will continue to have something to bash her with?

I am not a big fan of any of them, but I am continuously entertained by the antics of those who care SO much about these people and their lives.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Just the opposite, actually. 

There’s frustration that MM will never see the throne, so there are constant attempts to take Kate down a few pegs. Like her camp starting the Will affair rumors. 

It’s all good, though. IMO all the Sussex antics have made Will and Kate really shine lately.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s frustration that MM will never see the throne,


I agree that the bashing of the Cambridges started by frustrated Meghan and Harry stans, but not because M&H aren't in line for the throne.  

I think the stans are angry and frustrated that Meghan hasn't met their expectations, which is that she would become the most popular member of the royal family, would outshine everyone, and would be recognized for her brilliant work and modernizing influence.  None of that happened. Meghan has done nothing but struggle, and while she's struggled, the Cambridges have benefited from having less media heat on them, and from being in a more settled and experienced phase of their own lives.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I agree that the bashing of the Cambridges started by frustrated Meghan and Harry stans, but not because M&H aren't in line for the throne.
> 
> I think the stans are angry and frustrated that Meghan hasn't met their expectations, which is that she would become the most popular member of the royal family, would outshine everyone, and would be recognized for her brilliant work and modernizing influence.  None of that happened. Meghan has done nothing but struggle, and while she's struggled, the Cambridges have benefited from having less media heat on them, and from being in a more settled and experienced phase of their own lives.


but of course the stans don't see that as being any fault of Meghan.  It is the outside world (media and haters) who have caused the failure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ccbaggirl89 said:


> “As has been reported, Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are spending private family time in Canada. The decision to base themselves in Canada reflects the importance of this Commonwealth country to them both,” reads a statement from the couple's rep.
> 
> Apparently Doria was spotted in Canada, too.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...-markle-prince-harry-archie-christmas-canada/



I saw a note in a German newspaper that before the information about Canada surfaced, the Sussex instagram account posted Thanksgiving greetings with a maple leaf. I don't follow them and avoid that thing altogether, but is this true? If so, oh you two. Noboby went looking for you, so you posted hints? I have no patience anymore.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I saw a note in a German newspaper that before the information about Canada surfaced, the Sussex instagram account posted Thanksgiving greetings with a maple leaf. I don't follow them and avoid that thing altogether, but is this true? If so, oh you two. Noboby went looking for you, so you posted hints? I have no patience anymore.


Yes, I read that as well. They gave their own clue.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I saw a note in a German newspaper that before the information about Canada surfaced, the Sussex instagram account posted Thanksgiving greetings with a maple leaf. I don't follow them and avoid that thing altogether, but is this true? If so, oh you two. Noboby went looking for you, so you posted hints? I have no patience anymore.


Well I just checked.  And so they did.  How pathetic


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Well I just checked.  And so they did.  How pathetic


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I saw a note in a German newspaper that before the information about Canada surfaced, the Sussex instagram account posted Thanksgiving greetings with a maple leaf. I don't follow them and avoid that thing altogether, but is this true? If so, oh you two. Noboby went looking for you, so you posted hints? I have no patience anymore.


If that’s true, then they have been in Canada since October 14th which was the date of the Canadian Thanksgiving this year. We celebrate much earlier than the Americans because we have a much shorter growing season.


----------



## Flatsy

Chagall said:


> If that’s true, then they have been in Canada since October 14th which was the date of the Canadian Thanksgiving this year. We celebrate much earlier than the Americans because we have a much shorter growing season.


No, they were still in England through the first half of November.  They posted their Thanksgiving message on American Thanksgiving, but it was with a maple leave emoji.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> No, they were still in England through the first half of November.  They posted their Thanksgiving message on American Thanksgiving, but it was with a maple leave emoji.


Why would they do that if not to advertise where they were.


----------



## marthastoo

Here's a possible explanation:  they (Meghan) wanted to insert a Thanksgiving emoji.  Problem is, the closest Thanksgiving emoji is a turkey, but since I believe she's avoids meat and animal products, she might want to stay away from emphasizing the animal that's eaten by the millions on Thanksgiving in America.  The other choices would be a cornucopia (not an emoji), pumpkin (only jack o lantern emoji), or maple leaf emoji.  I personally always decorate my pumpkin pie with leaf cut outs (maple and oak), so I can see it being the best choice for Thanksgiving emoji.

Of course, some will and do think it's a nasty, attention seeking act to signal that they were in Canada.  Which even if it were, I don't get why that is worthy of such disdain.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> but since I believe she's avoids meat and animal products, she might want to stay away from emphasizing the animal that's eaten by the millions on Thanksgiving in America.


She both eats and wears animal products (like that big leather skirt she wore a few weeks ago.)  She said she was roasting a chicken when Harry proposed, she said she was eating chicken tacos when she spoke to Michelle *****, and she has weirdly posted multiple "sexy" photos on social media of herself cooking turkeys.  She has also talked about her love of seafood, bacon, and eggs.  She's no advocate for animals if they are edible or wearable.


marthastoo said:


> Which even if it were, I don't get why that is worthy of such disdain.


Because they continuously fed the story through their favorite outlets that they wanted privacy, privacy, privacy on this trip.  Dropping clues about their whereabouts on social media in the hopes that the media would figure out their location is not seeking privacy.  I think Harry actually does want privacy, which is why it took this long for them to "confirm" where they are.


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Noboby went looking for you, so you posted hints? I have no patience anymore.


This.

Can someone explain the timeline for me?  Not a peep from them, just some inspirational quotes on their instagram page thingy since they've been "spending time with family in America", and then?  I don't know how instagram works.  Did they/she just post a Happy Thanksgiving message now? On December 20th? Three weeks after Thanksgiving? Because it seems that there were no stories or articles speculating about their whereabouts until December 20th.  I mean, no one apparently knew where they were and then Doria was spotted "in Canada"  around the same time as their sooper seekrit hiding place was discovered.  I dunno, I just get my info from this thread - I don't really find them that interesting.
I will say tho that it's a good thing they're in Canada; surrounded by all that fresh water to quench their thirst.

*Remind me to post a Merry Christmas message to my fans somewhere around the MLK holiday, k?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> but of course the stans don't see that as being any fault of Meghan.  It is the outside world (media and haters) who have caused the failure.


WELL SAID!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I saw a note in a German newspaper that before the information about Canada surfaced, the Sussex instagram account posted Thanksgiving greetings with a maple leaf. I don't follow them and avoid that thing altogether, but is this true? If so, oh you two. Noboby went looking for you, so you posted hints? I have no patience anymore.


.. and that is rather interesting, given that Canada has it's own Thanksgiving holiday - in October!!!


----------



## marthastoo

V0N1B2 said:


> This.
> 
> Can someone explain the timeline for me?  Not a peep from them, just some inspirational quotes on their instagram page thingy since they've been "spending time with family in America", and then?  I don't know how instagram works.  Did they/she just post a Happy Thanksgiving message now? On December 20th? Three weeks after Thanksgiving? Because it seems that there were no stories or articles speculating about their whereabouts until December 20th.  I mean, no one apparently knew where they were and then Doria was spotted "in Canada"  around the same time as their sooper seekrit hiding place was discovered.  I dunno, I just get my info from this thread - I don't really find them that interesting.
> I will say tho that it's a good thing they're in Canada; surrounded by all that fresh water to quench their thirst.
> 
> *Remind me to post a Merry Christmas message to my fans somewhere around the MLK holiday, k?


The Happy Thanksgiving message with the maple leaf was posted at the traditional time to wish someone happy Thanksgiving - on Thanksgiving.  

It's only now three weeks later that people are Blue's Clueing the maple leaf from last month and the Doria spotting recently into a very clear pattern of thirsty clue dropping.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> It's only now three weeks later that people are Blue's Clueing the maple leaf from last month and the Doria spotting recently into a very clear pattern of thirsty clue dropping.


Nope!  Pretty much every UK media outlet immediately picked up on the maple leaf hint, including Meghan and Harry's good friends at the Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...h-Instagram-followers-happy-Thanksgiving.html



> *Are the Sussexes in Canada?  Meghan Markle and Prince Harry wish fans a 'very happy Thanksgiving' from their family with a maple leaf emoji - amid their six-week break from royal duties*
> 
> *Maple leaf emoji suggests they may have travelled to Canada for the US holiday *


It's reminiscent of Meghan posting the spooning bananas on instagram right at the time the tabloids were trying to confirm she was dating Prince Harry, just to help them along a little bit.


----------



## V0N1B2

marthastoo said:


> The Happy Thanksgiving message with the maple leaf was posted at the traditional time to wish someone happy Thanksgiving - on Thanksgiving.
> 
> It's only now three weeks later that people are Blue's Clueing the maple leaf from last month and the Doria spotting recently into a very clear pattern of thirsty clue dropping.


Oh ok. That makes more sense. I thought it was weird they would post something after the fact, lol.

I’m surprised her fans didn’t post anything here, especially with the maple leaf emoji as a clue, since all the media reports were so certain about them being in California. 
I guess it was only just confirmed on Friday then? I see the PM et. al have tweeted holiday messages to them.


----------



## Chagall

Kate and William frequently posted pictures of their kiddies. Where are the pictures of baby Archie. He could be waving a Canadian flag or eating maple syrup. In case we didn’t get the point.​


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Kate and William frequently posted pictures of their kiddies. Where are the pictures of baby Archie. He could be waving a Canadian flag or eating maple syrup. In case we didn’t get the point.​


LOL
maybe they are trying to create interest .....you know - absence makes the heart grow fonder


----------



## PewPew

Flatsy said:


> She both eats and wears animal products (like that big leather skirt she wore a few weeks ago.)  She said she was roasting a chicken when Harry proposed, she said she was eating chicken tacos when she spoke to Michelle *****, and she has weirdly posted multiple "sexy" photos on social media of herself cooking turkeys.  She has also talked about her love of seafood, bacon, and eggs.  She's no advocate for animals if they are edible or wearable.



This is very true. Her behavior with respect to animal rights has not been consistent with her past advocacy (PETA & pet adoption in conjunction with Ellen). She gave away the adopted dogs before moving to England because of “old age” (oldest age 7) & then the new dog in England got hit by a car.

But at this stage, with so much public criticism, and celebrity vegans like Ellen & Portia offering support, her team needs to be extra careful not to use things like Turkey-food emojis. Although for any slip ups (like the past mis-quotes on IG), H&M can maintain plausible deniability b/c they do need a team doing their social media given their busy schedule btwn the Great Enwokening & fundraising for the business that they call a charity, but is classified as a business.


----------



## altigirl88

Chagall said:


> Kate and William frequently posted pictures of their kiddies. Where are the pictures of baby Archie. He could be waving a Canadian flag or eating maple syrup. In case we didn’t get the point.​



Archie eating maple syrup would probably be pretty cute, lol


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

altigirl88 said:


> Archie eating maple syrup would probably be pretty cute, lol



Or NOT, lol [emoji813]️


----------



## Clearblueskies

altigirl88 said:


> Archie eating maple syrup would probably be pretty cute, lol


I’m betting an Archie photo is in prep for Christmas insta.  He is their ***** card, and I’m sorry to say I believe they are that calculated about attention seeking.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m betting an Archie photo is in prep for Christmas insta.  He is their ***** card, and I’m sorry to say I believe they are that calculated about attention seeking.


I'd say 10:45ish on Christmas morning, just before The Royals attend church, especially seeing there are rumours George and Charlotte may attend.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I'd say 10:45ish on Christmas morning, just before The Royals attend church, especially seeing there are rumours George and Charlotte may attend.


george and charlotte are stiff competition


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I'd say 10:45ish on Christmas morning, just before The Royals attend church, especially seeing there are rumours George and Charlotte may attend.


Yes, or maybe 5 to 3pm


----------



## Morgan R

Harry and Meghan's Christmas Card


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hmmm they are certainly not keeping a low profile. Here they are on Insta confirming how stupid and irrelevant they both are today [emoji1361]

Fun Fact: Was not a hater of this couple until a few days


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

I don't think they are coming back to the UK. Compared to Will & Kate they are woefully inadequate.  Thank God they are not in the US.


----------



## bisbee

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hmmm they are certainly not keeping a low profile. Here they are on Insta confirming how stupid and irrelevant they both are today [emoji1361]
> 
> Fun Fact: Was not a hater of this couple until a few days
> 
> View attachment 4622060


What did they do on Instagram?


----------



## gracekelly

I expected an internet card.  Saving the environment and allowing the Daily Mail to buy more ink and paper.  I wish it had been in color.  I don't understand this romance with black and white photography.  On the positive side, Archie looks like he is crawling.


----------



## Chagall

chowlover2 said:


> I don't think they are coming back to the UK. Compared to Will & Kate they are woefully inadequate.  Thank God they are not in the US.


So is it your opinion that we have them for good then?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

That's a really ugly holiday card...


----------



## CeeJay

Uh oh .. according to this DM article, they are saying that H&M should return to the UK since Prince Phillip is now in his 4th day at the Hospital.  Doesn't sound good .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...urged-Royal-family-members-return-abroad.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

Morgan R said:


> Harry and Meghan's Christmas Card
> 
> View attachment 4622076


I see Archie and his mom have a lot in common.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bisbee said:


> What did they do on Instagram?



It was posted by Elle, I think 
Went back to Insta and tried to find that post to no avail, seems like everyone is uploading content the day before Christmas!

Also, I think there was a tag about an interview (??) but I did not bother to read that garbage


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t think that is a very good picture of Archie.


----------



## hellosunshine

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hmmm they are certainly not keeping a low profile. Here they are on Insta confirming how stupid and irrelevant they both are today [emoji1361]
> 
> Fun Fact: Was not a hater of this couple until a few days
> 
> View attachment 4622060



This isn't a recent photo. Your photo is from Meghan's first royal walkabout, post engagement and it's from December 2017.


----------



## Straight-Laced

*Harry and Meghan out of the frame in the Queen’s Christmas message*
*Sean O’Neill,* *Valentine Low*
December 24 2019, 12:01am, The Times
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...ame-in-the-queens-christmas-message-39bf8bsc3

"When the Queen recorded her Christmas broadcast in the White Drawing Room last year, the photographs on her desk offered a vision of the royal family’s young future.

The largest frame contained a photo of the Prince of Wales with his wife, his sons and their wives and his grandchildren. On another table was a picture from the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a family snap of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridgeand a picture from the wedding of Princess Eugenie. This year, the selection on her desk in the Green Drawing Room at Windsor Castle does not feature Eugenie, daughter of the Duke of York, or Harry and Meghan.




There is an image of the Queen’s father King George VI delivering a message of hope to the nation in 1944. Then there is a photograph of the Duke of Edinburgh and one of Charles and Camilla marking the 50th anniversary of his investiture as Prince of Wales. Pride of place goes to Prince William with his family. The Sussexes are not spending Christmas at Sandringham but are in Canada with their son, Archie, after a year in which they have seemed uncomfortable in the public eye.

Dickie Arbiter, the former Buckingham Palace press secretary, said: “Their son Archie was born this year. You would have thought there might be a picture. It is a very clear omission. I am surprised but whether there is a clear message being sent out I don’t know.”

Other royal watchers believe this year’s framed photographs have been carefully chosen to represent the direct line of succession. “It’s almost as if Charles dictated the selection,” said one. “His monarchy will be leaner, more economical and firmly based around the vertical succession.”

Palace sources dismissed speculation that the absence of a photograph of Harry and Meghan was a snub. The full text of the message has not been released and it remains possible that Harry and Meghan may feature.

Analysis

With the Queen, nothing ever happens by accident. While other, lesser members of the royal family might find themselves overtaken by misfortune thanks to their own thoughtlessness, the Queen’s attention to detail is too good for that (Valentine Low writes).

So when she delivers her Christmas message surrounded by pictures of members of her family, it can be taken as read that the significance of each picture has been carefully considered.

The immediate, and obvious, question to ask is: where are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? It is, perhaps, an intriguing omission. Is it a calculated snub? If so, it would be out of character for the Queen. She seeks reconciliation, not retribution. Instead, contained within those photographs is a positive message, about the line of succession and the future of the royal family.

There are Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall. There are the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. And there are their children including, of course, Prince George. The other day a picture was released of four generations of the royal family — the Queen, Charles, William and George — as they mixed Christmas puddings for the Royal British Legion. Her Majesty and, as one wag put it, We Three Kings.

This is very much in line with Charles’s view of how the royal family should present itself. He believes a slimmed-down monarchy is the only way the royal family will be able to justify its existence. Charles’s view has brought him into direct conflict with his brother the Duke of York, who has been keen to carve out a royal role for his daughters Beatrice and Eugenie. He has talked about blood princesses, to mark his daughters out from those other princesses — Meghan and Kate — who merely married into the family.

As the pictures chosen by the Queen seem to show, Charles has won that battle."


----------



## mrsinsyder

But Meghan is the queen’s favorite! She made her a birthday cake!!


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> But Meghan is the queen’s favorite! She made her a birthday cake!!


Is that the one that had the flavor of crow?


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I don’t think that is a very good picture of Archie.


not the cutest baby I've seen but he's still an infant.....may get cuter as he grows


----------



## hellosunshine

When people say that Harry & Meghan are attention-seekers - I laugh. I remember earlier this year, when Harry said he was not interested in playing the media games that killed his mother and judging by his recent actions, it appears he truly meant it! See below, where Katie Hind of the DailyMail got a bit peeved over the release of the Sussex Christmas Card.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Since H&M ditched Sandringham (or were told to stay away), my guess the Palace dictated the release timing of their Christmas card. It'd be raunchy to skip the royal Christmas but then shove their card in everyone's face in the paper like "You must have missed us, so here we are, gracing you with our presence!"  Not that Meghan would have a problem with that...methinks the Crown put the kibosh on it until after Christmas. Besides, stans can rush to their Twitter or whatever to get their fix if they can't take it.


----------



## chowlover2

Chagall said:


> So is it your opinion that we have them for good then?


If you are Canadian yes, I weep for you. I think they really want to go for that king and kween of Canada. Harry really doesn’t even have the brains he was born with.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> When people say that Harry & Meghan are attention-seekers - I laugh. I remember earlier this year, when Harry said he was not interested in playing the media games that killed his mother and judging by his recent actions, it appears he truly meant it! See below, where Katie Hind of the DailyMail got a bit peeved over the release of the Sussex Christmas Card.
> 
> View attachment 4622231


But silly, intellectually challenged, Harry never stops playing games with the media.  H&M know their poor fans have been desperate to see a Christmas card and they wait and wait and then release this arty cr*p in black and white, deliberately intended to miss the British Christmas papers?  (Plenty of time for the US press though no?) I can think of several adjectives to describe it - childish and controlling - being just a couple. 
And if Harry prioritises his holiday instead of seeing his grandfather before it’s too late, he’ll make himself extremely unpopular in the country that’s funding his luxe lifestyle.  Charles is right, we need a slimmed down monarchy.  The only trouble with that is I can see these two pimping themselves all over the press and SM for money, rather than earning a decent living.


----------



## myown

Morgan R said:


> Harry and Meghan's Christmas Card
> 
> View attachment 4622076


I love it


----------



## PewPew

Prince Philip has been released from hospital Christmas Eve morning!
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50902011

In non-breaking news, Charles remains tactful as ever:

Charles, who was visiting flood-hit communities in South Yorkshire, added: "When you get to that age things don't work so well."

Screenshot:


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> Prince Philip has been released from hospital Christmas Eve morning!
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50902011
> 
> In non-breaking news, Charles remains tactful as ever:
> 
> Charles, who was visiting flood-hit communities in South Yorkshire, added: "When you get to that age things don't work so well."
> 
> Screenshot:
> View attachment 4622317


I hope he’s able to enjoy Christmas at home.


----------



## Chagall

PewPew said:


> Prince Philip has been released from hospital Christmas Eve morning!
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50902011
> 
> In non-breaking news, Charles remains tactful as ever:
> 
> Charles, who was visiting flood-hit communities in South Yorkshire, added: "When you get to that age things don't work so well."
> 
> Screenshot:
> View attachment 4622317


Good old Charles. Tact was never his strength.


----------



## eunaddict

marthastoo said:


> Here's a possible explanation:  they (Meghan) wanted to insert a Thanksgiving emoji.  Problem is, the closest Thanksgiving emoji is a turkey, but since I believe *she's avoids meat and animal products*, she might want to stay away from emphasizing the animal that's eaten by the millions on Thanksgiving in America.



Oh that is so not true and such a stretch. Wasn't their entire engagement story proposing over a home-made chicken dinner?

Also, there is disdain because how much more attention-seeking can you get, posting little breadcrumbs of where you are and what you're doing even when you were very likely told to "go, keep away, keep a low profile"?! 

The BRF benefits the taxpayers of the UK by economic stimulation because people literally travel and fly into the UK for events and the massive amounts of souvenirs that can get sold whenever someone gets married or birthed. No one is flying into Canada to see H&M, the country will get zero benefit from hosting them long-term. And we already have enough semi-political figures who barely work (see our Senators). Please don't stay.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Why would she have to Photoshop her head in? Can’t they do anything that doesn’t cause speculation??


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Why would she have to Photoshop her head in? Can’t they do anything that doesn’t cause speculation??
> 
> View attachment 4622374


To me her face looks blurr too


This really is starting to become a witch-hunt


----------



## LittleStar88

Checked in for the comments and you all didn’t disappoint 

I actually think the picture is cute. Candid and relaxed. Timing of release was suspiciously delayed. color photo would have been nice.

Charles’ comment about his dad and things not working well at a certain age - priceless and true! I appreciate the humor and down to earth nature of the comment.

looking forward to Harry and Meghan’s return after the break and the fodder they will be serving next year


----------



## daisychainz

to the card it's super dorky


----------



## bisousx

Strange choice of photo for Christmas card.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Checked in for the comments and you all didn’t disappoint
> 
> I actually think the picture is cute. Candid and relaxed. Timing of release was suspiciously delayed. color photo would have been nice.
> 
> Charles’ comment about his dad and things not working well at a certain age - priceless and true! I appreciate the humor and down to earth nature of the comment.
> 
> looking forward to Harry and Meghan’s return after the break and the fodder they will be serving next year


I think I share Charles's bluntness.  I'd have to agree at 98 things don't work so well.  Most people don't even live that long.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bisousx said:


> Strange choice of photo for Christmas card.


It’s DiFfErReNt because god forbid they don’t make a statement with everything they do. 

Soho and Harry would do well to remember the monarchy only exists because of its dedication to tradition.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Gotta love a frail 98 year old who leaves the hospital walking upright, making eye contact and dressed impeccably in fine clothes. He health is failing but on the inside he is one tough bird. He's going to project strength and dignity if it kills him. Not one thread of victimhood "poor me" nonsense. Part of me feels 95%+ of people could learn from that.


----------



## rose60610

Maybe Meghan's face is shopped on the card because the real reason for her "privacy" is due to having extensive face or other work done. It's possible. Just like it's possible she is a genuine sincere person. Hmm.....which is more plausible.....


----------



## lazeny

Archie is seriously adorable in that picture. He'll be a charmer.


----------



## daisychainz

rose60610 said:


> Maybe Meghan's face is shopped on the card because the real reason for her "privacy" is due to having extensive face or other work done. It's possible. Just like it's possible she is a genuine sincere person. Hmm.....which is more plausible.....


That's funny.  I never even considered the 6-week break was for procedures, but it's totally possible!! Lots of women go underground for weeks at a time and reemerge when things look better.


----------



## Morgan R

myown said:


> To me her face looks blurr too
> 
> 
> This really is starting to become a witch-hunt



Daily Mail posted an edited picture even though they had access to the unedited picture. The picture I saw many royal reporters and websites post is the picture where Harry, Meghan, and Archie are all in focus and that picture wasn't edited (that is the picture I posted a few pages ago)

The picture was originally posted first by the twitter account of The Queen's Commonwealth Trust. The picture was turned into a gif that made the quality poor with only Archie really being in focus while Harry and Meghan appear blurry.





This is an edited picture that Daily Mail decided to post. The edited picture makes Archie still in focus but also makes Meghan's face the main focus while it makes Harry appear blurry.



This is the unedited picture that Daily Mail had access to that I saw some royal reporters and websites post (yet Daily Mail used a picture that was edited). I posted the picture that has Harry, Meghan, and Archie all in focus (this is the picture I posted in this thread a few pages ago: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-1035#post-33508809)


----------



## meluvs2shop

Archie is a cutie pie!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Dailymail posted the edited picture because it had the shadows removed so that you could see the difference between her and the rest of the photo. When you remove the smoothing they added you can see how off she looks.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Dailymail posted the edited picture because it had the shadows removed so that you could see the difference between her and the rest of the photo. When you remove the smoothing they added you can see how off she looks.
> View attachment 4622487


Something very off with that picture. Her face not in the same focus as her body or anything else. Looks tampered with in some way to me.


----------



## rose60610

M's face looks very thin on the Christmas card whereas after Archie was born and until recently her face remained much more plump and rounded. Unless she went to one of those hoity-toity starvation spas and then got the photo taken after, I'll agree the photo was, at minimum, touched up A LOT, if not shopped from archives.


----------



## sdkitty

I don't know what to think about the photo but this being her first Christmas with H and baby, she should def be living and not merely existing


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Aside from the tweaking, I love the picture.  Archie is adorable.


----------



## Welltraveled!

My goodness It’s a Christmas card move on. All of the BRF cards are lovely and I enjoy seeing them.

I hope you all enjoy your holidays.


----------



## sdkitty

Welltraveled! said:


> My goodness It’s a Christmas card move on. All of the BRF cards are lovely and I enjoy seeing them.
> 
> I hope you all enjoy your holidays.


happy holidays to you too
people will move on when they're ready to.  you may use the ignore button


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> H&M know their poor fans have been desperate to see a Christmas card and they wait and wait and then release this arty cr*p in black and white, deliberately intended to miss the British Christmas papers?  (Plenty of time for the US press though no?) I can think of several adjectives to describe it - childish and controlling - being just a couple.
> And if Harry prioritises his holiday instead of seeing his grandfather before it’s too late, he’ll make himself extremely unpopular in the country that’s funding his luxe lifestyle.



Well, isn't it the British press that's harassing them? Why would Harry & Meghan help them to sell papers? Honestly, I'm so pleased that the press lost ££££ and couldn't profit off of this. Furthermore, I'm enjoying so much that many reporters were stalking their Instagram (assuming they'd release on there), but instead tweeted it from the Queen's Common Wealth Trust, a Sussex patronage and it was photographed by Meghan's great friend of almost two decades, Janina - so no leaks! If the press wants to continue vilifying them, then they deserve no kindness from the Sussexs', period. 

Secondly, I hope you know that Prince Philip was hospitalized on the 20th. The Queen was seen boarding a train to Sandringham while Philip was airlifted to London Hospital. Philip was hospitalized for 4 days, while the Queen resided in Sandringham and it seems now upon his release today, he's joining her there. So, are we really going prioritize Harry being present over his spouse, the Queen? Makes little sense to me.


----------



## Morgan R

Morgan R said:


> Daily Mail posted an edited picture even though they had access to the unedited picture. The picture I saw many royal reporters and websites post is the picture where Harry, Meghan, and Archie are all in focus and that picture wasn't edited (that is the picture I posted a few pages ago)
> 
> The picture was originally posted first by the twitter account of The Queen's Commonwealth Trust. The picture was turned into a gif that made the quality poor with only Archie really being in focus while Harry and Meghan appear blurry.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4622480
> 
> 
> This is an edited picture that Daily Mail decided to post. The edited picture makes Archie still in focus but also makes Meghan's face the main focus while it makes Harry appear blurry.
> View attachment 4622478
> 
> 
> This is the unedited picture that Daily Mail had access to that I saw some royal reporters and websites post (yet Daily Mail used a picture that was edited). I posted the picture that has Harry, Meghan, and Archie all in focus (this is the picture I posted in this thread a few pages ago: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-1035#post-33508809)
> View attachment 4622481




Update to my previous post:

PA Media (the Press Association) posted this on their website (https://www.paimages.co.uk/image-details/2.49221001) regarding the edited photo which was also posted on the Daily Mail


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Well, isn't it the British press that's harassing them? Why would Harry & Meghan help them to sell papers? Honestly, I'm so pleased that the press lost ££££ and couldn't profit off of this. Furthermore, I'm enjoying so much that many reporters were stalking their Instagram (assuming they'd release on there), but instead tweeted it from the Queen's Common Wealth Trust, a Sussex patronage and it was photographed by Meghan's great friend of almost two decades, Janina - so no leaks! If the press wants to continue vilifying them, then they deserve no kindness from the Sussexs', period.
> 
> Secondly, I hope you know that Prince Philip was hospitalized on the 20th. The Queen was seen boarding a train to Sandringham while Philip was airlifted to London Hospital. Philip was hospitalized for 4 days, while the Queen resided in Sandringham and it seems now upon his release today, he's joining her there. So, are we really going prioritize Harry being present over his spouse, the Queen? Makes little sense to me.
> 
> View attachment 4622589


Nobody’s harassing them dear, they’ve been left alone until they started issuing stuff to gain the attention they crave.  Makes little sense to me that you follow our Royal Family so fervently and yet expect the Queen to behave like a regular housewife and not someone who is Head of State.  But thanks for the information about Janina - so Meghan has a friend of 20 years?!  Wow, who knew?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> But thanks for the information about Janina - so Meghan has a friend of 20 years?!  Wow, who knew?



She must still be useful.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> She must still be useful.


Exactly.  Takes a dodgy photo though


----------



## maryg1

I like the card tbh!
And it’s nice to ser Prince Philip walking out of the hospital


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> That's funny.  I never even considered the 6-week break was for procedures, but it's totally possible!! Lots of women go underground for weeks at a time and reemerge when things look better.


Kate did!  Then she surfaced again, engaged and very camera ready.

I think H&M look very happy in the photo, as blurry as it is.


----------



## altigirl88

hellosunshine said:


> Well, isn't it the British press that's harassing them? Why would Harry & Meghan help them to sell papers? Honestly, I'm so pleased that the press lost ££££ and couldn't profit off of this. Furthermore, I'm enjoying so much that many reporters were stalking their Instagram (assuming they'd release on there), but instead tweeted it from the Queen's Common Wealth Trust, a Sussex patronage and it was photographed by Meghan's great friend of almost two decades, Janina - so no leaks! If the press wants to continue vilifying them, then they deserve no kindness from the Sussexs', period.
> 
> Secondly, I hope you know that Prince Philip was hospitalized on the 20th. The Queen was seen boarding a train to Sandringham while Philip was airlifted to London Hospital. Philip was hospitalized for 4 days, while the Queen resided in Sandringham and it seems now upon his release today, he's joining her there. So, are we really going prioritize Harry being present over his spouse, the Queen? Makes little sense to me.
> 
> View attachment 4622589



I just want to say I like seeing the queen on the commuter train in her blush pink coat


----------



## White Orchid

LittleStar88 said:


> Checked in for the comments and you all didn’t disappoint
> 
> I actually think the picture is cute. Candid and relaxed. Timing of release was suspiciously delayed. color photo would have been nice.
> 
> Charles’ comment about his dad and things not working well at a certain age - priceless and true! I appreciate the humor and down to earth nature of the comment.
> 
> looking forward to Harry and Meghan’s return after the break and the fodder they will be serving next year


Yeah, I barely come here anymore. This site, or more so this thread, ain’t that much different from the stuff I see on the DM’s comments section.  Why this woman has caused so much angst is beyond me.  Some of you are making Kim K seem like an absolute saint in comparison lol.
And yup, cute photo.  Very different, but then I like different.  Bubs is adorable


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meh, I have no time for these two but that kid is cute and the card is adorable. And all kinds of things are photo shopped now. I’m sure Archie didn’t pose for them to get a ton of shots so maybe in the one where he looked cutest her eyes were closed or something.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

rose60610 said:


> Gotta love a frail 98 year old who leaves the hospital walking upright, making eye contact and dressed impeccably in fine clothes. He health is failing but on the inside he is one tough bird. He's going to project strength and dignity if it kills him. Not one thread of victimhood "poor me" nonsense. Part of me feels 95%+ of people could learn from that.



THIS. You said it best, rose [emoji813]️


----------



## hellosunshine

*Vogue's Biggest Fashion Headlines Of 2019*

7/10
The Force For Change: The Duchess of Sussex
Over six months spent working with the Duchess of Sussex on the September 2019 Forces for Change issue convinced Edward Enninful that the first person to guest edit an issue of British Vogue was, as he put it, “the real deal”. “From negotiating first-time motherhood within an ancient institution to changing how we frame the conversation around women who face rabid media interest, her positive influence is everywhere,” Enninful wrote in his editor’s letter. And, with a capsule collection in aid of the charity of which she is patron, Smart Works, under her belt, 2020 looks to be another change-making year as the Sussex Royal Foundation, Meghan and Harry’s new charitable foundation, flexes its philanthropic muscle.

*

*
*https://www.vogue.co.uk/news/gallery/biggest-fashion-news*


----------



## marthastoo

eunaddict said:


> Oh that is so not true and such a stretch. Wasn't their entire engagement story proposing over a home-made chicken dinner?
> 
> *Also, there is disdain because how much more attention-seeking can you get, posting little breadcrumbs of where you are and what you're doing even when you were very likely told to "go, keep away, keep a low profile"?! *
> 
> The BRF benefits the taxpayers of the UK by economic stimulation because people literally travel and fly into the UK for events and the massive amounts of souvenirs that can get sold whenever someone gets married or birthed. No one is flying into Canada to see H&M, the country will get zero benefit from hosting them long-term. And we already have enough semi-political figures who barely work (see our Senators). Please don't stay.



Ah, yes.  You are basing your explanation on a supposition that you accept as fact:  that they were "were very likely told to "go, keep away, keep a low profile."  And in the same way I don't accept the Christmas card as "altered" or Meghan's "surrogate pregnancy" or they were told to "go away," I am going to just take it as face value that they are taking a self-imposed break for whatever reason.


----------



## PatsyCline

Harry & Meghan in British Columbia. 
https://vancouversun.com/news/local...ily-celebrating-christmas-on-vancouver-island


----------



## bellecate

PatsyCline said:


> Harry & Meghan in British Columbia.
> https://vancouversun.com/news/local...ily-celebrating-christmas-on-vancouver-island


Apparently just a few kilometres from where I live according to a few sightings though I haven’t caught any sight of them.


----------



## V0N1B2

When I found out (here, on TPF) that they were in Canada, I knew they wouldn't have gone to Toronto - too obvious.  I had a feeling Harry might've wanted to do a bit of skiing, but I would have never expected to hear they were on the Island.
*we don't have much snow anyway, so... maybe he can hit up Mt. Washington while he's over there


----------



## mrsinsyder

I like how the lady who wants them to have peace and quiet ran to the press


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mrsinsyder

V0N1B2 said:


> When I found out (here, on TPF) that they were in Canada, I knew they wouldn't have gone to Toronto - too obvious.  I had a feeling Harry might've wanted to do a bit of skiing, but I would have never expected to hear they were on the Island.
> *we don't have much snow anyway, so... maybe he can hit up Mt. Washington while he's over there


Is there a SoHo House on Vancouver Island?


----------



## V0N1B2

mrsinsyder said:


> Is there a SoHo House on Vancouver Island?


There’s a Sooke Harbour House. If you take out a couple of letters, it spells Soho House.


----------



## mrsinsyder

V0N1B2 said:


> There’s a Sooke Harbour House. If you take out a couple of letters, it spells Soho House.


Maybe they saw the abbreviation as S.H. house and made a terrible mistake!!


----------



## Voyageuse

gracekelly said:


> I expected an internet card.  Saving the environment and allowing the Daily Mail to buy more ink and paper.  I wish it had been in color.  I don't understand this romance with black and white photography.  On the positive side, Archie looks like he is crawling.



I like color photography, but find black and white more artistic.  My older boy (then 16) found black and white boring.  My younger son (now 18) thinks color looks dated, so there you go.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> yet expect the Queen to behave like a regular housewife and not someone who is Head of State.  But thanks for the information about Janina - so Meghan has a friend of 20 years?!  Wow, who knew?



My overall point was that his own wife wasn't sufficiently concerned about his hospitalization to delay her holiday travel plans, but somehow her grandson should drop everything and head back home? It makes little sense to me but let's move on.

It's not only Janina. Meghan has known Lindsay Roth from University so another 19 yr friendship. Janina Gavankar and Meghan used to go to auditions together in LA as support buddies. Genevieve Hillis has been friends with Meghan since their Northwestern days - both were in the same sorority. Benita Litt was Meghan's dearest and oldest childhood friend. Benita's twin daughters were Meghan's flower girls at the royal wedding. Jessica Mulroney and Misha Nonoo's friendship with Meghan is heading into almost 10 yrs.


----------



## contributor

ayla said:


> Have you guys also now noticed Will getting.. ugh, uglier ?
> 
> Harry is definitely the prince to marry at this point !!


I never thought William was good looking. He looks too much like his mom which is creepy. 

Both he and his wife look SO OLD.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> My overall point was that his own wife wasn't sufficiently concerned about his hospitalization to delay her holiday travel plans, but somehow her grandson should drop everything and head back home? It makes little sense to me but let's move on.
> 
> It's not only Janina. Meghan has known Lindsay Roth from University so another 19 yr friendship. Janina Gavankar and Meghan used to go to auditions together in LA as support buddies. Genevieve Hillis has been friends with Meghan since their Northwestern days - both were in the same sorority. Benita Litt was Meghan's dearest and oldest childhood friend. Benita's twin daughters were Meghan's flower girls at the royal wedding. Jessica Mulroney and Misha Nonoo's friendship with Meghan is heading into almost 10 yrs.
> 
> View attachment 4623389


How do you know all this stuff?  Amazing.

Also amazing -- I think the very bottom, left photo is Jessica's original face, or one of her her original faces and she was so pretty!


----------



## chowlover2

PatsyCline said:


> Harry & Meghan in British Columbia.
> https://vancouversun.com/news/local...ily-celebrating-christmas-on-vancouver-island


I think Harry was in rehab in Vancouver and Meghan & Archie were at Soho House in Toronto. Looking at the Christmas card the carpet looks different on both sides of the room. 
Look what opened in Vancouver.


----------



## HiromiT

Jayne1 said:


> How do you know all this stuff?  Amazing.
> 
> Also amazing -- I think the very bottom, left photo is Jessica's original face, or one of her her original faces and she was so pretty!



That is certainly one iteration of Jessica’s face but not the one she was born with. I remember when she became a Birks ambassador and was in their ads with her old nose, and then, boom, she suddenly got a new face around or shortly after her wedding to Ben. Since then, it’s been one face after another LOL. I’m rather fascinated with her transformation.

Anyway, to stick to the topic, I’m surprised H & M are on Vancouver Island but maybe it’s one of a few stops during their Canada sojourn. I’m sure they would’ve dropped into TO to visit the Mulroneys. M wouldn’t dare to ghost them, would she?!?


----------



## muchstuff

V0N1B2 said:


> When I found out (here, on TPF) that they were in Canada, I knew they wouldn't have gone to Toronto - too obvious.  I had a feeling Harry might've wanted to do a bit of skiing, but I would have never expected to hear they were on the Island.
> *we don't have much snow anyway, so... maybe he can hit up Mt. Washington while he's over there


I think there’s even less snow on Mt. Washington unless they’ve had a dump recently. I was a tad surprised to hear they were on the Island as well.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> My overall point was that his own wife wasn't sufficiently concerned about his hospitalization to delay her holiday travel plans, but somehow her grandson should drop everything and head back home? It makes little sense to me but let's move on.
> 
> It's not only Janina. Meghan has known Lindsay Roth from University so another 19 yr friendship. Janina Gavankar and Meghan used to go to auditions together in LA as support buddies. Genevieve Hillis has been friends with Meghan since their Northwestern days - both were in the same sorority. Benita Litt was Meghan's dearest and oldest childhood friend. Benita's twin daughters were Meghan's flower girls at the royal wedding. Jessica Mulroney and Misha Nonoo's friendship with Meghan is heading into almost 10 yrs.
> 
> View attachment 4623389


You expect the Queen to weep and wail and make a public fuss about her private life?  If you’re expecting her to behave like a character in a cheap soap opera you’re in for a big disappointment.  Thank goodness.  She is discretion itself, and everything going on in the background won’t become public knowledge.  
Unlike Markle, who thinks performing emotional acrobatics in front of the camera equates to depth of feeling - the public aren’t buying the act.



chowlover2 said:


> I think Harry was in rehab in Vancouver and Meghan & Archie were at Soho House in Toronto. Looking at the Christmas card the carpet looks different on both sides of the room.
> Look what opened in Vancouver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4623448


----------



## myown

I still think, what you guys call , her public crying, is part of their heads together campaign. Talking about mental health.


----------



## bisbee

chowlover2 said:


> I think Harry was in rehab in Vancouver and Meghan & Archie were at Soho House in Toronto. Looking at the Christmas card the carpet looks different on both sides of the room.


What would lead you to believe Harry is in rehab?  For what?


----------



## lulilu

Chagall said:


> Good old Charles. Tact was never his strength.





sdkitty said:


> I think I share Charles's bluntness.  I'd have to agree at 98 things don't work so well.  Most people don't even live that long.





Clearblueskies said:


> You expect the Queen to weep and wail and make a public fuss about her private life?  If you’re expecting her to behave like a character in a cheap soap opera you’re in for a big disappointment.  Thank goodness.  She is discretion itself, and everything going on in the background won’t become public knowledge.
> Unlike Markle, who thinks performing emotional acrobatics in front of the camera equates to depth of feeling - the public aren’t buying the act,



I think Charles and the Queen were trying to assuage concern the Prince Phillip was gravely ill.  Just a normal thing for someone his age.  NBD.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

As for William or any other man looking, shall we say, "uncomely", I'll take an uncomely but well-groomed, reserved but  personable heir to the throne over some chiclet-toothed beefcake-calendar life-of-the-party boy any day of the week.


----------



## Stansy

rose60610 said:


> As for William or any other man looking, shall we say, "uncomely", I'll take an uncomely but well-groomed, reserved but  personable heir to the throne over some chiclet-toothed beefcake-calendar life-of-the-party boy any day of the week.



A friend of mine always says something along the lines of „a good-looking man will never be yours alone“.....


----------



## chowlover2

bisbee said:


> What would lead you to believe Harry is in rehab?  For what?


Harry has been a hot mess lately, he looks like he slept on the street. I think coke and drinking to excess.


----------



## PewPew

bisbee said:


> What would lead you to believe Harry is in rehab?  For what?



My mind didn’t jump to rehab, but now that it’s come up, I do think the break is good for him regardless of whether it was due to M’s wishes, a hiatus imposed by the BRF or rehab / therapy. He has admitted to trouble with alcohol in the past (though there has been no recent evidence of partying or excessive drinking). In the couple of months before leading up to the break, he has appeared a bit disheveled in terms of clothing and emotional state, tearing up at public speaking events when discussing his mother & his fears for his new family. For anyone with a history of substance abuse, major life changes and stressors can precipitate relapse without new coping skills & social supports. He may be at increased risk with a new baby, wife who is also struggling & the loss of previous social supports (Will/BRF, past friends in England more loyal to Will, etc)


----------



## bag-mania

*Swanky Canadian restaurant turns down Meghan and Harry*

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle can’t have everything, it seems.

They managed to avoid Christmas with the royal family at Sandringham for a Canadian retreat. But when their security team reached out to reserve a table at a fancy waterfront eatery, they were turned down.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex spent baby Archie’s first Christmas with Markle’s mother, Doria Ragland, on Vancouver Island. They’ve been seen hiking in Horth Hill Regional Park and jogging in neighboring North Saanich, according to reports.

Bev Koffel, who owns Deep Cove Chalet, said she met their security team last week. But her husband, chef Pierre Koffel, turned down their reservation due to the tight security involved.




She hopes they’ll call again when she’s by the phone, adding: “Let them have their peace and quiet. For us to be so lucky to have them in the area, how lucky is that? I wish them all the privacy they can possibly get. They deserve it.”

She told the Vancouver Sun: “Horth Hill’s become a very popular place now. And they jog around, so they’ve been seen. It’s kind of exciting. I hope everything goes fine for them. They’re breaking away from tradition and I just wish them all the best."

https://pagesix.com/2019/12/27/swan...ns-down-meghan-and-harry-over-security-needs/


----------



## kemilia

I do feel that this Bev woman should have kept her big mouth shut. Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## hellosunshine

What is wrong with this woman? She seriously wished them “all the privacy they can get”! LOL! I’d say she may have screwed that up. Secondly, I don't believe her story. I think Harry & Meghan's security staff met with this lady and her husband, inquired about the safety and privacy that could be guaranteed to such a high profile couple, and I'm guessing their security wasn't too satisfied, so the family decided to go elsewhere. I'm sure it was a disappoint so to recoup any future business - they sold them out for publicity. Very short-sighted move to promote your business in this manner.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Harry and Meghan’s West Coast Christmas*

It was revealed last week that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been in Canada for the holidays and now it’s being reported that they’re on the West Coast in British Columbia, spotted on Vancouver Island in Greater Victoria, in a municipality called North Saanich, about 20 km from downtown Victoria, the province’s capital. Victoria, the city, was named after Queen Victoria, great-great grandmother of Harry’s grandmother, Queen Elizabeth. A statue of Queen Victoria stands just outside Windsor Castle where Harry and Meghan of House Sussex were married. So there are all kinds of connections here for Harry and Meghan to be spending the holidays in a Commonwealth country and in a city with so many British connections. When you think about it that way, it becomes clear that the decision about where to spend the holidays, if it is to be away from England, was properly considered. Whether or not that’s acknowledged is another matter.

The British tabloids certainly haven’t acknowledged the deeper meaning. Instead the Daily Mail tried to create a scandal out of the Sussex Christmas card. As posted the other day, Harry and Meghan sent out digital Christmas cards this year to their patronages and friends. The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust Twitter account was the first to post the card and it is the original:



As you can see, Archie is in focus, the prime subject of the photo while Harry and Meghan, in the background, are out of focus. But some online troll ended up taking that image and tweaking it, making Meghan’s face much more clear. This is the photoshopped – and unsanctioned, unauthorised – version that somehow ended up making the rounds:




The Daily Mail published the doctored photo and brought in “experts” to analyse what was happening, accusing the Sussexes of committing fraud. So Meghan’s friend, Janina Gavankar, who took the photo, showed them on Instagram:



Note that the Daily Mail is one of the publications that the Sussexes are suing for their fabricated stories. And here’s another example – this should NOT have been an issue. Had they just went with the image that Queen’s Commonwealth Trust posted, this would not be a thing. The Daily Mail’s article, however, about Harry and Meghan photoshopping their photo is still up on their site. And their post about Janina releasing the original photo of course does not include the part where she trashes them for being trash. Instead they attempt to explain themselves like this:

_“The card was not officially released through any official royal channels, and first appeared on an unverified Twitter account called The Queen's Commonwealth Trust.” _

So it’s the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust’s fault for not having a blue checkmark beside their name on Twitter. And this is the bullsh-t that the Sussexes have been up against with, quite possibly, an assist from inside the palace gates and the courtiers and aides who keep selling them out. Which only fuels the nutjobs out there who think that Archie is the biggest fake of them all. That’s a thing now, did you know? These are people with the same DNA as the Twi-Hards who think that Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson have been secretly married all these years and raising two (or is it three now?) secret children. In Harry and Meghan’s case, their haters think she faked her pregnancy and that Archie doesn’t exist. The extra layer to that madness is that it’s a gross and sinister attempt to not recognise a biracial baby. Considering the history of that family, probably not the first time?


https://www.laineygossip.com/daily-...sex-christmas-card-to-stir-conspiracies/61276


----------



## Straight-Laced

From The Daily Mail :
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ns-turn-Sussex-Royal-brand-global-empire.html
*Could Meghan Markle start her own newspaper? Duchess plans to turn her Sussex Royal brand into a global empire as she trademarks the title on dozens of products including 'emotional support services', clothing and magazines*
*“Meghan Markle has trademarked her Sussex royal brand on more than 100 items, from teaching materials and emotional support groups to clothing and even newspapers, it can be revealed today.*

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently enjoying a six-week Christmas break in Canada, appear intent on turning their brand into a global empire as they stamp their name on the list of good and services*.

The move has seen the royal submit trademark applications on dozens of products including T-shirts, social services and more surprisingly newspapers for their newly created foundation Sussex Royal.

It comes after the royal pair have struggled through a tumultuous year in which they have been criticised for their 'hypocritical' preaching on environmental issues despite travelling the globe on private jets, and planning to 'modernise' the Royal family.

Documents published by the Intellectual Property Office disclose that among the items the royals have so far trademarked are instructional and teaching materials; printed educational materials; printed publications; educational books; textbooks; magazines and newsletters.

Also on the list are clothing; footwear; headgear; t-shirts; coats; jackets; anoraks; trousers; sweaters; jerseys; dresses; pyjamas; suits; sweat shirts; hooded tops; caps; hats; bandanas; headbands; socks; scarves and neckwear; gloves; sportswear.

The list also shows the royal pair have hopes to trademark the title on developing and coordinating volunteer projects for charitable purposes; providing volunteering opportunities and recruitment of volunteers and information, advisory and consultancy services.

While some of the items align with what the royal pair continue to promote, others appear to indicate that former actress Meghan and Harry truly are intent on 'changing the world', as their admirer Kim Kardashian once said.

Speaking at the Armenia Technology Convention in Yerevan this year, the famous Kardashian said: 'I still love and value the fact they bring such attention to such important movements that need to happen and things that they're really passionate about.

'They're still changing the world.'

The most intriguing of all is the application to trademark 'magazines, newspapers, newsletters [and] periodicals'.

*The list also revealed the pair have submitted trademarks in periodicals; printed reports; fact sheets; brochures; programmes; booklets; pamphlets; leaflets; manuals; journals; diaries; calendars; posters; art prints; notebooks; postcards and greeting cards.”    




*


----------



## gracekelly

Straight-Laced said:


> From The Daily Mail :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ns-turn-Sussex-Royal-brand-global-empire.html
> *Could Meghan Markle start her own newspaper? Duchess plans to turn her Sussex Royal brand into a global empire as she trademarks the title on dozens of products including 'emotional support services', clothing and magazines*
> *“Meghan Markle has trademarked her Sussex royal brand on more than 100 items, from teaching materials and emotional support groups to clothing and even newspapers, it can be revealed today.*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently enjoying a six-week Christmas break in Canada, appear intent on turning their brand into a global empire as they stamp their name on the list of good and services*.
> 
> The move has seen the royal submit trademark applications on dozens of products including T-shirts, social services and more surprisingly newspapers for their newly created foundation Sussex Royal.
> 
> It comes after the royal pair have struggled through a tumultuous year in which they have been criticised for their 'hypocritical' preaching on environmental issues despite travelling the globe on private jets, and planning to 'modernise' the Royal family.
> 
> Documents published by the Intellectual Property Office disclose that among the items the royals have so far trademarked are instructional and teaching materials; printed educational materials; printed publications; educational books; textbooks; magazines and newsletters.
> 
> Also on the list are clothing; footwear; headgear; t-shirts; coats; jackets; anoraks; trousers; sweaters; jerseys; dresses; pyjamas; suits; sweat shirts; hooded tops; caps; hats; bandanas; headbands; socks; scarves and neckwear; gloves; sportswear.
> 
> The list also shows the royal pair have hopes to trademark the title on developing and coordinating volunteer projects for charitable purposes; providing volunteering opportunities and recruitment of volunteers and information, advisory and consultancy services.
> 
> While some of the items align with what the royal pair continue to promote, others appear to indicate that former actress Meghan and Harry truly are intent on 'changing the world', as their admirer Kim Kardashian once said.
> 
> Speaking at the Armenia Technology Convention in Yerevan this year, the famous Kardashian said: 'I still love and value the fact they bring such attention to such important movements that need to happen and things that they're really passionate about.
> 
> 'They're still changing the world.'
> 
> The most intriguing of all is the application to trademark 'magazines, newspapers, newsletters [and] periodicals'.
> 
> *The list also revealed the pair have submitted trademarks in periodicals; printed reports; fact sheets; brochures; programmes; booklets; pamphlets; leaflets; manuals; journals; diaries; calendars; posters; art prints; notebooks; postcards and greeting cards.”
> View attachment 4624567
> 
> View attachment 4624566
> *


All that is missing is a brand of toilet paper. They really should contact Costco as most of the Western world uses the one they sell.  Imagine wiping with Harry and Meghan on the paper or Sussex Royal stamped on it!  Do they think the are going head to head with Amazon with the rest.  Grandiose, delusional and pretty funny.

Le't give  the photo shopped card a rest.  They brought this on themselves with an awful picture.  The DM or any other tabloid didn't have to do a thing as it was all done for them. They just sat back and sold newspapers and got hits on the internet.


----------



## Meh-gan

Straight-Laced said:


> From The Daily Mail :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ns-turn-Sussex-Royal-brand-global-empire.html
> *Could Meghan Markle start her own newspaper? Duchess plans to turn her Sussex Royal brand into a global empire as she trademarks the title on dozens of products including 'emotional support services', clothing and magazines*
> *“Meghan Markle has trademarked her Sussex royal brand on more than 100 items, from teaching materials and emotional support groups to clothing and even newspapers, it can be revealed today.*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently enjoying a six-week Christmas break in Canada, appear intent on turning their brand into a global empire as they stamp their name on the list of good and services*.
> 
> The move has seen the royal submit trademark applications on dozens of products including T-shirts, social services and more surprisingly newspapers for their newly created foundation Sussex Royal.
> 
> It comes after the royal pair have struggled through a tumultuous year in which they have been criticised for their 'hypocritical' preaching on environmental issues despite travelling the globe on private jets, and planning to 'modernise' the Royal family.
> 
> Documents published by the Intellectual Property Office disclose that among the items the royals have so far trademarked are instructional and teaching materials; printed educational materials; printed publications; educational books; textbooks; magazines and newsletters.
> 
> Also on the list are clothing; footwear; headgear; t-shirts; coats; jackets; anoraks; trousers; sweaters; jerseys; dresses; pyjamas; suits; sweat shirts; hooded tops; caps; hats; bandanas; headbands; socks; scarves and neckwear; gloves; sportswear.
> 
> The list also shows the royal pair have hopes to trademark the title on developing and coordinating volunteer projects for charitable purposes; providing volunteering opportunities and recruitment of volunteers and information, advisory and consultancy services.
> 
> While some of the items align with what the royal pair continue to promote, others appear to indicate that former actress Meghan and Harry truly are intent on 'changing the world', as their admirer Kim Kardashian once said.
> 
> Speaking at the Armenia Technology Convention in Yerevan this year, the famous Kardashian said: 'I still love and value the fact they bring such attention to such important movements that need to happen and things that they're really passionate about.
> 
> 'They're still changing the world.'
> 
> The most intriguing of all is the application to trademark 'magazines, newspapers, newsletters [and] periodicals'.
> 
> *The list also revealed the pair have submitted trademarks in periodicals; printed reports; fact sheets; brochures; programmes; booklets; pamphlets; leaflets; manuals; journals; diaries; calendars; posters; art prints; notebooks; postcards and greeting cards.”
> View attachment 4624567
> 
> View attachment 4624566
> 
> *


Are they allowed to make money like this? Putting their crap on sweatshirts etc?


----------



## Straight-Laced

gracekelly said:


> All that is missing is a brand of toilet paper. They really should contact Costco as most of the Western world uses the one they sell.  Imagine wiping with Harry and Meghan on the paper or Sussex Royal stamped on it!  Do they think the are going head to head with Amazon with the rest.  Grandiose, delusional and pretty funny.


Thinking they've probably got tissues/Kleenex covered under the category of 'emotional support services products'


----------



## Sophisticatted

Seems like they either want to get a payday when someone else tries to use their name and/or images; OR they want to prevent other people from using their name and/or images.


----------



## mrsinsyder

No one was looking for them so they started sending out all these little nibbles to the media.  

we hate to see it.


----------



## V0N1B2

Straight-Laced said:


> From The Daily Mail :
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ns-turn-Sussex-Royal-brand-global-empire.html
> *Could Meghan Markle start her own newspaper? Duchess plans to turn her Sussex Royal brand into a global empire as she trademarks the title on dozens of products including 'emotional support services', clothing and magazines*
> *“Meghan Markle has trademarked her Sussex royal brand on more than 100 items, from teaching materials and emotional support groups to clothing and even newspapers, it can be revealed today.*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently enjoying a six-week Christmas break in Canada, appear intent on turning their brand into a global empire as they stamp their name on the list of good and services*.
> 
> The move has seen the royal submit trademark applications on dozens of products including T-shirts, social services and more surprisingly newspapers for their newly created foundation Sussex Royal.
> 
> It comes after the royal pair have struggled through a tumultuous year in which they have been criticised for their 'hypocritical' preaching on environmental issues despite travelling the globe on private jets, and planning to 'modernise' the Royal family.
> 
> Documents published by the Intellectual Property Office disclose that among the items the royals have so far trademarked are instructional and teaching materials; printed educational materials; printed publications; educational books; textbooks; magazines and newsletters.
> 
> Also on the list are clothing; footwear; headgear; t-shirts; coats; jackets; anoraks; trousers; sweaters; jerseys; dresses; pyjamas; suits; sweat shirts; hooded tops; caps; hats; bandanas; headbands; socks; scarves and neckwear; gloves; sportswear.
> 
> The list also shows the royal pair have hopes to trademark the title on developing and coordinating volunteer projects for charitable purposes; providing volunteering opportunities and recruitment of volunteers and information, advisory and consultancy services.
> 
> While some of the items align with what the royal pair continue to promote, others appear to indicate that former actress Meghan and Harry truly are intent on 'changing the world', as their admirer Kim Kardashian once said.
> 
> Speaking at the Armenia Technology Convention in Yerevan this year, the famous Kardashian said: 'I still love and value the fact they bring such attention to such important movements that need to happen and things that they're really passionate about.
> 
> 'They're still changing the world.'
> 
> The most intriguing of all is the application to trademark 'magazines, newspapers, newsletters [and] periodicals'.
> 
> *The list also revealed the pair have submitted trademarks in periodicals; printed reports; fact sheets; brochures; programmes; booklets; pamphlets; leaflets; manuals; journals; diaries; calendars; posters; art prints; notebooks; postcards and greeting cards.”
> View attachment 4624567
> 
> View attachment 4624566
> *


Hmm... I don’t know about this. It sounds a bit far-fetched to me.  I heard that Harry and Megan are buying a banana plantation and have already had the #youareloved PLU stickers printed for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Straight-Laced said:


> Thinking they've probably got tissues/Kleenex covered under the category of 'emotional support services products'


Exactly!   I can see the tissues having  inspirational quotes on them to make you feel better as you wipe away your tears.


----------



## hellosunshine

Registering trademarks in multiple categories is a standard business practice just as how earlier this year, Meghan renewed the trademarks for The Tig. These trademarks will protect them from anyone possibly profiting from the SussexRoyal name. In fact, many charitable organizations/foundations have done similar trademarking to protect their brands.


----------



## gracekelly

Trademarking is interesting when you see what will actually be done with it. It can be done to prevent others from using your name or you can put it in a tee shirt. Consider the source.


----------



## myown

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are currently celebrating the holidays in Canada this year and they were denied a reservation at a local restaurant.

The royal couple tried to book a dinner reservation at Deep Cover Chalet in North Saanich, but they were turned down after the restaurant owner met with the couple's security guards.

Bev Koffel, who owns the establishment with her husband chef Pierre Koffel, says that her husband turned down the reservation because of the security required for the royal couple's visit.

“Let them have their peace and quiet. For us to be so lucky to have them in the area, how lucky is that?” Bev said. “I wish them all the privacy they can possibly get. They deserve it.”

*
Got this from just Jared 

honestly, how can you wish someone privacy but running to the papers the minute they placed the request


----------



## meluvs2shop

myown said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are currently celebrating the holidays in Canada this year and they were denied a reservation at a local restaurant.
> 
> The royal couple tried to book a dinner reservation at Deep Cover Chalet in North Saanich, but they were turned down after the restaurant owner met with the couple's security guards.
> 
> Bev Koffel, who owns the establishment with her husband chef Pierre Koffel, says that her husband turned down the reservation because of the security required for the royal couple's visit.
> *
> “*Let them have their peace and quiet. For us to be so lucky to have them in the area, how lucky is that?” Bev said. “I wish them all the privacy they can possibly get. They deserve it.*”
> 
> *
> Got this from just Jared
> 
> *honestly, how can you wish someone privacy but running to the papers the minute they placed the request*


THIS!


----------



## Flatsy

myown said:


> honestly, how can you wish someone privacy but running to the papers the minute they placed the request


I'm thinking the reason why they turned down the Sussexes is because they were going to have to sign an NDA.  They probably saw an NDA-free opportunity to get publicity for their restaurant by talking about how the Sussexes *wanted* to eat there, and then had to pay some lip service to how they support their privacy.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I'm thinking the reason why they turned down the Sussexes is because they were going to have to sign an NDA.  They probably saw an NDA-free opportunity to get publicity for their restaurant by talking about how the Sussexes *wanted* to eat there, and then had to pay some lip service to how they support their privacy.



It was the husband that nixed their visit to his restaurant. It sounds like his wife would have rolled out the red carpet and done anything possible for them. He was probably being practical and knows he’ll make more money filling the restaurant with unknown rich people than closing off part of it to give Harry and Meghan their privacy and security. I can’t blame him for avoiding the hassle and they still got the free publicity.


----------



## rose60610

Since H&M weren't allowed to eat in the restaurant, I hope they didn't have to brown bag it. Would their security detail get turned away from buying sandwiches at the 7 Eleven? Now I know what Meghan meant by she's "only existing, not living".  Pooooor thing. I hope they found somewhere that would take them in. She must be starving by now.


----------



## V0N1B2

When I click on the thread title It takes me to the first unread post. I then read the posts that have been written since the last one.  Kind of like a bookmark, you know? It lets me know where I left off, so if I wanted to post something, I'm not repeating the same thing that's already been discussed upthread or several pages ago.
Do I have magic powers inside this 7 year old iPad or can everyone do this? 
#askingforafriend


----------



## muchstuff

V0N1B2 said:


> When I click on the thread title It takes me to the first unread post. I then read the posts that have been written since the last one.  Kind of like a bookmark, you know? It lets me know where I left off, so if I wanted to post something, I'm not repeating the same thing that's already been discussed upthread or several pages ago.
> Do I have magic powers inside this 7 year old iPad or can everyone do this?
> #askingforafriend


Works like that for me too, maybe it’s a Canuck thing


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Since H&M weren't allowed to eat in the restaurant, I hope they didn't have to brown bag it. Would their security detail get turned away from buying sandwiches at the 7 Eleven? Now I know what Meghan meant by she's "only existing, not living".  Pooooor thing. I hope they found somewhere that would take them in. She must be starving by now.


But wait, isn’t Meghan touted as quite the home “chef” herself, and as such, she probably just baked another chicken with a side of Avocado Toast!!


----------



## myown

rose60610 said:


> Since H&M weren't allowed to eat in the restaurant, I hope they didn't have to brown bag it. Would their security detail get turned away from buying sandwiches at the 7 Eleven? Now I know what Meghan meant by she's "only existing, not living".  Pooooor thing. I hope they found somewhere that would take them in. She must be starving by now.


So what exactly did she meant?!


----------



## Jayne1

HiromiT said:


> That is certainly one iteration of Jessica’s face but not the one she was born with. I remember when she became a Birks ambassador and was in their ads with her old nose, and then, boom, she suddenly got a new face around or shortly after her wedding to Ben. Since then, it’s been one face after another LOL. I’m rather fascinated with her transformation.
> 
> Anyway, to stick to the topic, I’m surprised H & M are on Vancouver Island but maybe it’s one of a few stops during their Canada sojourn. I’m sure they would’ve dropped into TO to visit the Mulroneys. M wouldn’t dare to ghost them, would she?!?


I'm fascinated with Jess too, because whenever I see a glimpse of her (never watch her segments) I always see a new addition or subtraction. 

I remember Ben saying she was the prettiest girl he had ever seen, and that was just when they were getting married, meaning her old face.  What does he think now, I wonder.  Not that his mother is a stranger to face altering plastic surgery...

Back on topic -- Say what you will about M&H, they did disappear during this sabbatical/retreat/vacation.


----------



## mrsinsyder

V0N1B2 said:


> When I click on the thread title It takes me to the first unread post. I then read the posts that have been written since the last one.  Kind of like a bookmark, you know? It lets me know where I left off, so if I wanted to post something, I'm not repeating the same thing that's already been discussed upthread or several pages ago.
> Do I have magic powers inside this 7 year old iPad or can everyone do this?
> #askingforafriend



Works here in Florida too


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> As for William or any other man looking, shall we say, "uncomely", I'll take an uncomely but well-groomed, reserved but  personable heir to the throne over some chiclet-toothed beefcake-calendar life-of-the-party boy any day of the week.


So I take it Harry is the chicklet- toothed beefcake calendar life of the party boy then.


Jayne1 said:


> I'm fascinated with Jess too, because whenever I see a glimpse of her (never watch her segments) I always see a new addition or subtraction.
> 
> I remember Ben saying she was the prettiest girl he had ever seen, and that was just when they were getting married, meaning her old face.  What does he think now, I wonder.  Not that his mother is a stranger to face altering plastic surgery...
> 
> Back on topic -- Say what you will about M&H, they did disappear during this sabbatical/retreat/vacation.


They did disappear but with lots of bread crumbs and hints as to where they disappeared to. ​


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> So I take it Harry is the chicklet- toothed beefcake calendar life of the party boy then.
> 
> They did disappear but with lots of bread crumbs and hints as to where they disappeared to. ​



Wow, it must be hard to merely exist.


----------



## Swanky

V0N1B2 said:


> When I click on the thread title It takes me to the first unread post. I then read the posts that have been written since the last one.  Kind of like a bookmark, you know? It lets me know where I left off, so if I wanted to post something, I'm not repeating the same thing that's already been discussed upthread or several pages ago.
> Do I have magic powers inside this 7 year old iPad or can everyone do this?
> #askingforafriend



It's the only way I peruse the forum, it's a great feature!


----------



## mrsinsyder

I read that the restaurant is being inundated by harassment from Meghan stans now. How sad.


----------



## Sophisticatted

That’ll teach ‘em!


----------



## Annawakes

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, it must be hard to merely exist.
> View attachment 4625120


I think it’s funny how one of the pics in that article is of the trash cans outside the gate.  As if trash cans are something worth photographing!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I think I'd say the business made a mistake. MM and Harry are a short-term inconvenience for a long-term payoff. And now they suffer a worse fate for the story getting out that they declined these two.


----------



## gracekelly

These people did nothing wrong. This story has grown out of hand and now they are being subjected to haters.   If the Sussex wanted to eat there all they would have needed was an extra table for their security team. If the restaurant was asked to close off a portion, then that wouldn’t have been fair during the busy season and just as unnecessary as clearing all those rows at Wimbledon.   The Queen of England took a public train to Sandringham and that was good enough for her. Who do these two think are coming after them?  The Canadian Mafia?  This is a nice restaurant and the other diners probably would have ignored them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> These people did nothing wrong. This story has grown out of hand and now they are being subjected to haters.   If the Sussex wanted to eat there all they would have needed was an extra table for their security team. If the restaurant was asked to close off a portion, then that wouldn’t have been fair during the busy season and just as unnecessary as clearing all those rows at Wimbledon.   The Queen of England took a public train to Sandringham and that was good enough for her. Who do these two think are coming after them?  The Canadian Mafia?  This is a nice restaurant and the other diners probably would have ignored them.


Exactly. Didn’t they eat basically by themselves in some London pub already? 

This stinks of when Meghan had her people doxx all the folks who would comment negatively on her press stories. They’re so pathetic.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> These people did nothing wrong. This story has grown out of hand and now they are being subjected to haters.   If the Sussex wanted to eat there all they would have needed was an extra table for their security team. If the restaurant was asked to close off a portion, then that wouldn’t have been fair during the busy season and just as unnecessary as clearing all those rows at Wimbledon.   The Queen of England took a public train to Sandringham and that was good enough for her. Who do these two think are coming after them?  The Canadian Mafia?  This is a nice restaurant and the other diners probably would have ignored them.


Agreed, they should just have gone in to eat and kept it low key.  No one would’ve noticed in all likelihood.  Instead it’s drama, drama, all the way - and their stans are doing them no favours whatsoever.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, it must be hard to merely exist.
> View attachment 4625120


lol looks very Meghan, very Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous doing “Conspicuous Seclusion”


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think I'd say the business made a mistake. MM and Harry are a short-term inconvenience for a long-term payoff. And now they suffer a worse fate for the story getting out that they declined these two.



It is their prerogative if they don’t want to jump through the hoops necessary to create a “safe space” for Harry and Meghan to eat a fancy dinner. If that means their stans were triggered by the rejection I’m sure they’ll be able to deal with it.


----------



## hellosunshine

There's something very fishy about this restaurant story. First of all, after googling Deep Cove Chalet - I noticed the restaurant suffered a devastating fire last year and it had only just recently reopened. The fire left an estimated total of $100,000 in damage. Secondly, high profile individuals typically request the rental of an entire establishment (i.e asking a restaurant/store to stay open a little later or closing down for a portion of the day), it's always done at a rate above what would typically cost for operation and you'd ask that they tip graciously too - never mind the immense amount of publicity you get after their visit. Now, what business would ever turn this down? Something is not right.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Something is not right.
> 
> View attachment 4625247


They seem to be doing just fine.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Deep Cove has been around for a very long time.  They have a loyal following in their clientele and don’t need publicity.  Not everyone in Canada is overwhelmed with celebrities and the royals. Depending on what the request was or how soon it was made, I could absolutely see a well-established business turning it down. For example, if they were asked to shut down the restaurant or section off a portion of the restaurant for that night or the next then they would have to cancel on other customers. That would be some pretty bad PR and run the risk of offending repeat customers.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> They seem to be doing just fine.
> View attachment 4625282


The only fishy thing present is on the menu


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> They seem to be doing just fine.
> View attachment 4625282



I meant with the couples' story. Not the restaurant.

I'm moving on...


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Moving on...



Is this somehow related to Meghan and Harry? Seems off topic...


----------



## FreeSpirit71

It's a storm in a teacup. There's a new story in the DM where they lay out what actually happened. 

They were never rejected by that restaurant.

_*Koffel says he was merely visited by the royals’ security team and didn’t decline their reservations.

The local newspaper reported that Pierre turned down Harry and Meghan because of their disruptive security needs, but the chef said it wasn’t true.

‘They came to have a look and then they left,’ he said. ‘I didn’t turn them down. I’ve got no idea where that came from, things take a life of their own.*_’

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...adian-waterfront-mansion.html#article-7832511


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Is this somehow related to Meghan and Harry? Seems off topic...



Meghan is a patron of Luminary Bakery and they've recently been contracted by Deloitte for Christmas. Deloitte is one of the "Big Four" accounting organizations and the largest professional service networks in the UK and the world by revenue. This is the MeghanEffect in full swing and I thought I'd share it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan is a patronage of Luminary Bakery and they've recently been contracted by Deloitte for Christmas. Deloitte is one of the "Big Four" accounting organizations and the largest professional service networks in the UK and the world by revenue. This is the MeghanEffect in full swing and I thought I'd share it.


Yet neither of them mentioned Meghan. 

oh the humanity.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m reading rumors that her fertility clinic may be in Vancouver. Apparently she was there shortly before Archie’s pregnancy was announced?


----------



## V0N1B2

The patron of a _bakery_. It sounds so... odd.
Maybe I could be the Patron of Tim Hortons?
I support Timbits Hockey and Rrrrroll up the rim!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Luminary have a great story. They provide work experience and training programmes for women. Much more than just a bakery.

_Luminary Is an innovative response to a need we saw for *women* who have had a social and economic disadvantage. We are a *social enterprise* designed to offer opportunities for women to *build a future* for themselves. 

We provide a *safe and professional* environment where women can* grow holistically* – encouraging ambition, restoration and second chances. We use baking as a tool to take women on a journey to *employability and entrepreneurship*, equipping them with transferrable skills for the working world. 

We offer courses, work experience and paid employment within our bakery, *empowering* women to build their career. By *investing* in and releasing them to realise their dreams - through training, employment and community, we aim to break cycles of poverty, violence & disadvantage once and for all._

https://www.luminarybakery.com/about


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m reading rumors that her fertility clinic may be in Vancouver. Apparently she was there shortly before Archie’s pregnancy was announced?


That makes a lot of sense


----------



## Straight-Laced

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's a storm in a teacup. There's a new story in the DM where they lay out what actually happened.
> 
> They were never rejected by that restaurant.
> 
> _*Koffel says he was merely visited by the royals’ security team and didn’t decline their reservations.
> 
> The local newspaper reported that Pierre turned down Harry and Meghan because of their disruptive security needs, but the chef said it wasn’t true.
> 
> ‘They came to have a look and then they left,’ he said. ‘I didn’t turn them down. I’ve got no idea where that came from, things take a life of their own.*_’
> 
> Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...adian-waterfront-mansion.html#article-7832511


According to the rest of the article, not quoted, it doesn’t sound like just ‘a storm in a teacup’  for the owners of the restaurant who are now being harrassed by phone and email by Sussex fans.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Straight-Laced said:


> According to the rest of the article, not quoted, it doesn’t sound like just ‘a storm in a teacup’  for the owners of the restaurant who are now being harrassed by phone and email by Sussex fans.



I agree, that response by Sussex stans was ridiculous, not helped by the fact-deficient initial reporting of the "story".

Both sides make my skin crawl - the rabid pettiness of Meghan detractors, and the defend-at-all-costs Meghan defenders.

Extremism in any form is bad. And the truth is *always* somewhere in the middle anyhow.


----------



## rose60610

Why do I think the stans harassing the restaurant aren't really stans, but basically buddies of theirs complaining to make it look like M&H actually have more than six stans?  Like a previous poster said, QEII took a public train to Sandringham and turned out OK. I've seen governors of U.S. states in restaurants, their security is seated at the next table(s).  I wouldn't put it past Meghan to plant this whole stupid story just to make her look SOOOOOO important that she couldn't dine there because of her Crucially Necessary Massive Enormous Security Detail. Oooooohhh! Impressive!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

The bakery was also founded in 2014, while Meghan was still trawling the halls of Soho House. Let’s not take away from everything the bakery is and was by acting like it’s had anything to do with Meghan.


----------



## mrsinsyder

V0N1B2 said:


> The patron of a _bakery_. It sounds so... odd.
> Maybe I could be the Patron of Tim Hortons?
> I support Timbits Hockey and Rrrrroll up the rim!
> View attachment 4625322


I’ll be the pizza patron then. I wonder if Meghan has banned Harry from eating pizza? She doesn’t seem like the type to dive into a nice big slice. Maybe as long as it’s gluten free...


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> There's something very fishy about this restaurant story. First of all, after googling Deep Cove Chalet - I noticed the restaurant suffered a devastating fire last year and it had only just recently reopened. The fire left an estimated total of $100,000 in damage. Secondly, high profile individuals typically request the rental of an entire establishment (i.e asking a restaurant/store to stay open a little later or closing down for a portion of the day), it's always done at a rate above what would typically cost for operation and you'd ask that they tip graciously too - never mind the immense amount of publicity you get after their visit. Now, what business would ever turn this down? Something is not right.
> 
> View attachment 4625247


The fire damage doesn't look that devastating.  100K would just replace most of the kitchen where the fire started and some cosmetic work to the dining room.  It didn't look that bad.  

Plenty of restaurateurs would say no to people they don't know, and will never see again if it means that their regular customers will be inconvenienced.  The regulars keep the place in business and not folks who do a fly by for a few days.  This is an area that also has a great deal of tourism and I suspect that many customers are being sent by the concierge desk at  the local hotels.  If it starts closing then the concierges will just send the diners someplace else and may just cross the eatery off their list of recommends.     Just because a restaurant is asked to close, doesn't mean they have to or want to.  It's their business and they can do as they see fit.  It is totally unfair that these people are receiving so much hate.  

I see plenty of high profile people, including politicians at nice restaurants.  Sometimes they have some security with them and sometimes not.  You smile at them, and leave them alone and for the most part, they aren't bothered.  The fans usually wait outside the restaurant.  I have never seen them come in and disrupt anything.  If you want total privacy, then go to a restaurant that has a private room and/or a private entrance to said room.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muchstuff

gracekelly said:


> The fire damage doesn't look that devastating.  100K would just replace most of the kitchen where the fire started and some cosmetic work to the dining room.  It didn't look that bad.
> 
> Plenty of restaurateurs would say no to people they don't know, and will never see again if it means that their regular customers will be inconvenienced.  The regulars keep the place in business and not folks who do a fly by for a few days.  This is an area that also has a great deal of tourism and I suspect that many customers are being sent by the concierge desk at  the local hotels.  If it starts closing then the concierges will just send the diners someplace else and may just cross the eatery off their list of recommends.     Just because a restaurant is asked to close, doesn't mean they have to or want to.  It's their business and they can do as they see fit.  It is totally unfair that these people are receiving so much hate.
> 
> I see plenty of high profile people, including politicians at nice restaurants.  Sometimes they have some security with them and sometimes not.  You smile at them, and leave them alone and for the most part, they aren't bothered.  The fans usually wait outside the restaurant.  I have never seen them come in and disrupt anything.  If you want total privacy, then go to a restaurant that has a private room and/or a private entrance to said room.


I agree. We’re called “Hollywood North” here for a reason. Celebrities are fairly common in the area and even a royal couple wouldn’t necessarily generate a huge fuss. They probably could have dined without a massive security force quite successfully.


----------



## mrsinsyder

muchstuff said:


> I agree. We’re called “Hollywood North” here for a reason. Celebrities are fairly common in the area and even a royal couple wouldn’t necessarily generate a huge fuss. They probably could have dined without a massive security force quite successfully.


I thought the same; VI is full of people with tons of money. These two are small fish there.


----------



## muchstuff

mrsinsyder said:


> I thought the same; VI is full of people with tons of money. These two are small fish there.


I’m actually in the Vancouver area, not on  the Island, but yes. The Victoria area sees it’s fair share of VIPs. 
Fun fact, Jason Momoa frequents one of the establishments my DD works at. I know who I’d be looking at if he, Harry, and Meghan were in the same dining room .


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> The bakery was also founded in 2014, while Meghan was still trawling the halls of Soho House. Let’s not take away from everything the bakery is and was by acting like it’s had anything to do with Meghan.



I completely disagree. Luminary Bakery was a small and underfunded bakery prior to the Duchess highlighting them in the September issue of Vogue. The bakery operated from the same location since 2014; however within mere months after Meghan elevated them - they were able to open a second store through an increase in projects and funding.


----------



## Chagall

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I agree, that response by Sussex stans was ridiculous, not helped by the fact-deficient initial reporting of the "story".
> 
> Both sides make my skin crawl - the rabid pettiness of Meghan detractors, and the defend-at-all-costs Meghan defenders.
> 
> Extremism in any form is bad. And the truth is *always* somewhere in the middle anyhow.


That’s a nice saying but the truth is not always somewhere in the middle. Sometimes things are exactly what they seem to be. H and M have conducted themselves in a way that has really rubbed people the wrong way. It is not imagined or made up, its consistent and ongoing!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> The bakery was also founded in 2014, while Meghan was still trawling the halls of Soho House. Let’s not take away from everything the bakery is and was by acting like it’s had anything to do with Meghan.


Meghan is not the patron of Luminary Bakery.  She publicised it.  Interestingly Meghan doesn’t feature in their 2019 impact statement.  
Small doesn’t equate to struggling either, or to lack of impact on a local community. In fact it’s run by a very savvy group of women if you have a look at their stuff.  Meghan probably hopes some of their credibility will rub off - it’s safe to say associating with Luminary would never be a bad move, and she desperately needs good publicity after a poor year.  There are also similar charities elsewhere in the country operating the same model - not quite so convenient for London photo-ops though.


----------



## hellosunshine

Yes, Meghan shined a spotlight on the east London bakery in her first issue of Vogue jointly with SmartWorks (patronage). Luminary Bakery founder, Alice Williams has always emphasized that since being founded in 2014, Luminary has supported 66 women and with a second location in Camden, it'll enable the team to “provide services, support, and mentoring to four times the number of women.”

Secondly, it's unfair to imply that Meghan's somehow  "associating with Luminary because she desperately needs good publicity after a poor year" - The Duchess first began working with Luminary more than 18 months ago, or shortly before she married Harry when publicity was good.

“I first met Meghan Markle 18 months ago, shortly before she married Prince Harry. We went for lunch at a restaurant in London, sitting in a corner where she went unnoticed and undisturbed. She ate monkfish, offering me some when I expressed my food envy, and we discussed some of our shared passions: mental health, running, yoga.”

Thirdly, Meghan does not have to be mentioned in the organizations impact statement. Alice Williams has been clear and thankful for the Duchess' support.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, Meghan shined a spotlight on the east London bakery in her first issue of Vogue jointly with SmartWorks (patronage). Luminary Bakery founder, Alice Williams has always emphasized that since being founded in 2014, Luminary has supported 66 women and with a second location in Camden, it'll enable the team to “provide services, support, and mentoring to four times the number of women.”
> 
> Secondly, it's unfair to imply that Meghan's somehow  "associating with Luminary because she desperately needs good publicity after a poor year" - The Duchess first began working with Luminary more than 18 months ago, or shortly before she married Harry when publicity was good.
> 
> “I first met Meghan Markle 18 months ago, shortly before she married Prince Harry. We went for lunch at a restaurant in London, sitting in a corner where she went unnoticed and undisturbed. She ate monkfish, offering me some when I expressed my food envy, and we discussed some of our shared passions: mental health, running, yoga.”
> 
> Thirdly, Meghan does not have to be mentioned in the organizations impact statement. Alice Williams has been clear and thankful for the Duchess' support.
> 
> View attachment 4625641
> 
> 
> View attachment 4625642


Luminary Bakery sound very polite, it’s only what you’d expect.  However it’s undeniable that Meghan needs good news stories, and badly.  This has been a year of c*ckups for the Sussexes, particularly around ill-judged PR that’s backfired.
Several thousand people in Sussex launched a petition recently that they be stripped of their Sussex title.  It’ll never amount to anything, but it shows how unpopular they’ve made themselves.


----------



## hellosunshine

No one takes those type of petitions seriously. First, those sorta petitions are usually created by an aggrieved individual from the public and through online shares of the petition, like-minded people sign it. I remember in 2013/2014/2015, Kate and William had similar petitions as the public got very frustrated with their lack of work ethic. There's also been countless anti-royal or abolish the monarchy petitions. Petitions hold little value and honestly outside of the media and the small but vocal online anti-fans of the Duchess, the Sussex' are well-liked and popular - no matter how the media continues to spin otherwise.


----------



## hellosunshine

A friend sent the below screen-capture to me from another royal forum. Take note of the date of the post. I'm guessing the posters first language isn't English but it's rather amazing how accurate they were.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> No one takes those type of petitions seriously. First, those sorta petitions are usually created by an aggrieved individual from the public and through online shares of the petition, like-minded people sign it. I remember in 2013/2014/2015, Kate and William had similar petitions as the public got very frustrated with their lack of work ethic. There's also been countless anti-royal or abolish the monarchy petitions. Petitions hold little value and honestly outside of the media and the small but vocal online anti-fans of the Duchess, the Sussex' are well-liked and popular - no matter how the media continues to spin otherwise.


What’s your source for this?


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> A friend sent the below screen-capture to me from another royal forum. Take note of the date of the post. I'm guessing the posters first language isn't English but it's rather amazing how accurate they were.
> 
> View attachment 4625812



So let’s get this straight, you went back five years for a post by some anonymous person on another forum who spouted off about how she doesn’t like Kate? And you posted it on Meghan’s thread. Do you believe an unknown person’s years-old speculations are relevant in some way? For all you know the author of the quote may have come around and actually likes Kate today.


----------



## hellosunshine

No, I was sent this. Secondly, whether this person likes Kate or not is irrelevant. It's just interesting that no matter who Harry married, they would always be smeared and side-lined in favor of direct descendents of the throne. And, that Kate and William would likely weaponize the media in their favor. 

BTW, this unknown person’s years-old speculations were pretty spot-on.


----------



## rose60610

Definitely sounds like an "aggrieved individual" wrote that, like somebody who had it in for Kate. I'm not sure Kate and William "weaponized" the media. The media do have their sacred protect-at-all-cost cows, I'll agree, but I don't think K&W are among them. The media do thrive on cat fights so I don't think it's in the medias' interest to "protect" Kate. 

Meghan hasn't helped her own image by blatantly framing herself as a poor hapless victim despite wallowing in all the trappings and luxuries of the Royal Family who welcomed her with open arms. I can think of other women who have been treated MUCH more harshly than Meghan, on a daily basis, and haven't cast themselves as victims.


----------



## Clearblueskies

It’s all becoming a bit silly IMO.  William will be King, and Harry will gradually be marginalised as time passes.  That’s how it always is with the succession.  As George and Charlotte grow up, it’ll be all about them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Clearblueskies said:


> What’s your source for this?


I googled - found one that ran for 6 months against paying for the Kensington palace refurb in 2014, which had 5 signatures.  And one opposed to Will and Kate attending a rodeo event in Calgary, which had 668.  That’s it.  All the rest of the results were about petitions against the public funding the H&M wedding, Eugenie’s wedding and the aforementioned Sussex title petition.  Not prepared to look beyond page 2 sorry.


----------



## hellosunshine

As I said previously, the petitions were from 7+ years ago. After some time, I'm certain those petitions would expire and likely be removed so they wouldn't come up in a google search. However, they did exist and that narrative of the Cambridges lack of work ethic was being reported on.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> A friend sent the below screen-capture to me from another royal forum. Take note of the date of the post. I'm guessing the posters first language isn't English but it's rather amazing how accurate they were.
> 
> View attachment 4625812


From 2014? Interesting prediction. Even if Kate isn't actively out to do no good, I think this post ended up being fairly accurate.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> As I said previously, the petitions were from 7+ years ago. After some time, I'm certain those petitions would expire and likely be removed so they wouldn't come up in a google search. However, they did exist and that narrative of the Cambridges lack of work ethic was being reported on.


Public petitions are on the public record.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Ah, I remember only a few weeks ago being challenged on the reliability of news from actual sources. Now we’re scouring Lipstick Alley from 2014 for posts.

I noticed the 65,000+ post Meghan Markle unpopular opinions thread isn’t mentioned.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> Public petitions are on the public record.



I don't remember them being of that level of seriousness. It was just an online petition expressing some members of the public's frustrations at the time.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> From 2014? Interesting prediction. Even if Kate isn't actively out to do no good, I think this post ended up being fairly accurate.



Not really. That post went on about how Kate and her mother would try to make Harry’s future unknown wife look bad. There’s nothing to back that assertion up. Meghan gets loads of criticism but it comes from what she does herself. Kate didn’t cause it and her mom certainly didn’t.


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


> No, I was sent this. Secondly, whether this person likes Kate or not is irrelevant. It's just interesting that no matter who Harry married, they would always be smeared and side-lined in favor of direct descendents of the throne. And, that Kate and William would likely weaponize the media in their favor.
> 
> BTW, this unknown person’s years-old speculations were pretty spot-on.



the only person making Meghan look bad is Meghan. compounded by the contrast in public behavior and presentation difference between Meghan and Kate. Kate simply has to show up as she usually does and by default Meghan looks messy and pitiful. 

Rather than whining publicly about how hard she has it and no one asks her how she is doing, she should have scheduled some sessions with a therapist to work through why she feels her life is currently a state of just existing.

kate had it rough from the press for a while. They weren’t out to get her. It’s that snarky and negative headlines sell clicks and papers. Kate kept it together on the outside and kept evolving and now she kills it every time she is out. Meghan seems to want to troll for pity.

Kate has more important things to do (like prepping to be queen consort, raising kids, and representing herself and the BRF with elegance and grace) than to sit around and play with the press and ways to make Meghan look bad.


----------



## V0N1B2

I feel like I've seen all these pictures and the speculation about their relationship *IN THE WILLIAM AND KATE THREAD.*
Or am I just imagining it?


----------



## hellosunshine

No, this is different. This is about what has transpired over the last week.


----------



## Sharont2305

As previously discussed on the William and Catherine thread, William and George arrived separately and probably earlier than the others to film the Christmas pudding footage. You can clearly see the collar on George's shirt in the car being the same as the footage.
Camilla and Charles arrived separately too for the same reason, Camilla arrived in a grey car, Charles arrived in a blue car


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> So, what's the overall message? When something proves to become too much - the Cambridges draw out their favorite diversion tactic - they sell out the Sussexes to take any heat off their issues.



You seem to be working under the flawed assumption that members of the media will only report gossip on one branch of the royal family at a time. I can assure you that if the gossip reporters could come up with a negative story about each family member they would consider that to be a fantastic week and a job well done! 

Nobody has to feed them information, they’ve been continually asking the palace about H&M’s whereabouts ever since they began their six week vacation. Now, a week from it being over, they finally release information, but only after H&M posted their Christmas card and the cat was already let out of the bag. Sorry but there’s no conspiracy.


----------



## V0N1B2

hellosunshine said:


> Anyway, there was apparently a press briefing over at Kensington Palace on either the 19th or 20th of December.
> The usual lot of royal reporters like Omid Scobie, Rebecca English (pro-Cambridge reporter), Emily Andrews, Camilla Tominey, etc were present.  Within hours after the meeting, Rebecca English - William and Kate's favorite royal reporter leaks story on Sussex' staying in Canada.
> 
> Harry and Meghan went weeks (well before the Thanksgiving holidays) without anyone knowing their location yet after a press briefing at Kensington Palace, this was leaked and they had to rush out a statement asking to respect their privacy.


That's interesting about the timeline. It was "confirmed" they were in Canada on December 20th, yet according to @Flatsy 's post below, it was speculated they were in Canada on November 28th.


Flatsy said:


> Nope!  Pretty much every UK media outlet immediately picked up on the maple leaf hint, including Meghan and Harry's good friends at the Daily Mail: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...h-Instagram-followers-happy-Thanksgiving.html







Harry and Meghan are the ones who dropped the hints they were in Canada - they had to know the press/twitterverse would pick up on it.  If anyone is to blame for the "leak" it's Harry and Meghan themselves.

I guess it's kinda like when Meghan showed up at Eugenie's wedding on October 12th looking pregnant and KP had to make a formal announcement three days later.

For the record, I think she's already pregnant again and will emerge from her sabbatical with a very noticeable "baby bump" and will name the baby Saanich or Horth, or even better - Maple.  Maple Markle. I love it


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh I like Horth very much!


----------



## mrsinsyder

They’re dropping hints about their whereabouts because the Cambridge’s have been killing it in the press and no one cares where the Markle’s are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> No one takes those type of petitions seriously. First, those sorta petitions are usually created by an aggrieved individual from the public and through online shares of the petition, like-minded people sign it. I remember in 2013/2014/2015, Kate and William had similar petitions as the public got very frustrated with their lack of work ethic. There's also been countless anti-royal or abolish the monarchy petitions. Petitions hold little value and honestly outside of the media and the small but vocal online anti-fans of the Duchess, *the Sussex' are well-liked and popular* - no matter how the media continues to spin otherwise.


Re the bolded, I have a lot of family all over Britain (London & Edinburgh mostly) and the general consensus is *no one* there likes Megz! People who love Harry dislike her because she’s acting like an obnoxious American noob - according to them she has given great reason to cut back most/all of the BRF. And people who dislike Harry have found a reason to slam him - because of his ignorant-acting wifey!


----------



## zen1965

That's what I hear from quite a few British friends, too.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I get that there is overlap between the Sussex and Cambridge families, but extended posts about the Cambridge crew are off topic for this thread. You can link to posts in Will and Kate's thread if you need to bring them into the discussion, but this thread is for Meghan and Harry. Thanks.

Also, please keep it friendly.


----------



## hellosunshine

The difference between Camilla/Charles and Kate/William arriving separately is that Kate/William have made a united effort to always travel together as a family every year. Some years they've even squeezed the entire family w/ car seats plus nannies, so I don't buy the "small space excuse". Furthermore, no one can definitively say that George and William traveled over together after the Christmas pudding photo session solely based on his outfit/shirt collar because George is frequently dressed in that shirt style. 

Honestly, I just find it somewhat funny that even TMZ thought this was odd enough that they reach out to Kensington Palace.







bag-mania said:


> You seem to be working under the flawed assumption that members of the media will only report gossip on one branch of the royal family at a time. I can assure you that if the gossip reporters could come up with a negative story about each family member they would consider that to be a fantastic week and a job well done!



See, that's what one would assume but that is the furthest from the truth. William is hiding multiple affairs, we're saying not one, or two, more like four! A few year ago, I remember there were rumors here and there and sometimes occasional photographic leaks of woman gyrating on William. I just always assumed that Kate/William had some sort of agreement in place, where William could have his fun and Kate would turn the other cheek; however with the most recent affair being with Kate's bestest friend, I believe it completely soured the couple's relationship. 





Furthermore, William's shift of attitude towards the media is very uncharacteristic of him. The man used to loathe the press. As I've said before, I geniunely believe that after the "shrug off" went viral, it brought up the cheating rumors again. It's kinda of obvious that the Cambridge’s have struck a deal with the press. Whenever the media says ‘jump’, William responds ‘how high’. William has made it clear that he's willing to make deals and play ball with press (i.e. “dont talk about my indiscretions, here’s a photo op with my kids.” “stop talking about my marriage woes, they’re in Canada.”). The media has thanked William whereas they continue to beg Harry and Meghan for access.











If anyone in the press knew, they'd have certainly published the location a long, long time ago. For many weeks, reporters were speculating they were in the US, whereas the British media were saying Canada or some undisclosed location. It took weeks for them to work out where this supposedly ‘showy Hollywood’ couple were yet after a press briefing at Kensington, the Cambridges favorite reporter leaks their location. And, personally the maple leaf meant very little to me as it is a pretty common American Thanksgiving emoticon. It's up there with the turkey and the cornucopia of fall harvest.


----------



## hellosunshine

CobaltBlu said:


> I get that there is overlap between the Sussex and Cambridge families, but extended posts about the Cambridge crew are off topic for this thread. You can link to posts in Will and Kate's thread if you need to bring them into the discussion, but this thread is for Meghan and Harry. Thanks.
> 
> Also, please keep it friendly.



Oop, didn't see your post until I posted mine. I was constructing my post to respond to the other posters but if need be - you can delete my post.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Oop, didn't see your post until I posted mine. I was constructing my post to respond to the other posters but if need be - you can delete my post.


Good idea


----------



## caramelize126

rose60610 said:


> Definitely sounds like an "aggrieved individual" wrote that, like somebody who had it in for Kate. I'm not sure Kate and William "weaponized" the media. The media do have their sacred protect-at-all-cost cows, I'll agree, but I don't think K&W are among them. The media do thrive on cat fights so I don't think it's in the medias' interest to "protect" Kate.
> 
> Meghan hasn't helped her own image by blatantly framing herself as a poor hapless victim despite wallowing in all the trappings and luxuries of the Royal Family who welcomed her with open arms. I can think of other women who have been treated MUCH more harshly than Meghan, on a daily basis, and haven't cast themselves as victims.



All of this.

That post was from what, 2014? Kate was not well liked for years. She dealt with almost a DECADE of awful headlines, her family being called gold diggers and social climbers, interviews from her creepy Uncle Gary, etc. I dont think the public perception of Kate actually changed until Meghan came along and folks realized how much worse she is.  Many ppl both on this thread and the lipstick alley thread are actually former Meg fans/supporters. She has  no one to blame but herself for her awful image/press.


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> All of this.
> 
> That post was from what, 2014? Kate was not well liked for years. She dealt with almost a DECADE of awful headlines, her family being called gold diggers and social climbers, interviews from her creepy Uncle Gary, etc. I dont think the public perception of Kate actually changed until Meghan came along and folks realized how much worse she is.  Many ppl both on this thread and the lipstick alley thread are actually former Meg fans/supporters. She has  no one to blame but herself for her awful image/press.


I don’t even care about the private jets etc.  it’s the poor me I’m not really living that really turned me off


----------



## gracekelly

The need to resort  to writing/relating scurrilous lies about another person in order to make  the subject of this thread look good certainly speaks volumes.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> The need to resort  to writing/relating scurrilous lies about another person in order to make  the subject of this thread look good certainly speaks volumes.


Couldn’t have said it better.


----------



## Lodpah

So a couple of days ago it was reported on Yahoo that Harry and his wife trademarked the SussexRoyal thing.

Is this a normal thing for the BRF to do?

Isn’t this a title that’s bestowed and any profit they make off this brand should go to the Trust IMHO.


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> For the record, I think she's already pregnant again and will emerge from her sabbatical with a very noticeable "baby bump" and will name the baby Saanich or Horth, or even better - Maple.  Maple Markle. I love it



I believe she’ll turn up pregnant too. I figured the six week break was so they could take time to work on it, either through visits to a fertility clinic or the old-fashioned way. We’ll know soon enough if baby Maple is coming in 2020.


----------



## hellosunshine

bag-mania said:


> I figured the six week break was so they could take time to work on it.



I agree. I'm crossing my fingers for twins! Harry would be so over the moon happy.


----------



## muchstuff

V0N1B2 said:


> That's interesting about the timeline. It was "confirmed" they were in Canada on December 20th, yet according to @Flatsy 's post below, it was speculated they were in Canada on November 28th.
> 
> View attachment 4625943
> View attachment 4625944
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are the ones who dropped the hints they were in Canada - they had to know the press/twitterverse would pick up on it.  If anyone is to blame for the "leak" it's Harry and Meghan themselves.
> 
> I guess it's kinda like when Meghan showed up at Eugenie's wedding on October 12th looking pregnant and KP had to make a formal announcement three days later.
> 
> For the record, I think she's already pregnant again and will emerge from her sabbatical with a very noticeable "baby bump" and will name the baby Saanich or Horth, or even better - Maple.  Maple Markle. I love it


I’m voting for Inukshuk  but Victoria or Victor would probably be more likely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

muchstuff said:


> I’m voting for Inukshuk  but Victoria or Victor would probably be more likely.


I like Inukshuk because if has true meaning for Meghan.  it fits the theme of word salads i.e. communication and to paraphrase existing and not living. i.e. survival.

An "inuksuk" (pronounced "in-uk-shuk") is a monument used for *communication* and *survival* that is usually made of un-worked stones. ... An inuksuk-like monument in the form of a human being is called an *inunnguaq* (an imitation of a person).
*Inuksuk / Inunnguaq - ATHROPOLIS*

https://www.athropolis.com › arctic-facts › fact-inuksuk


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> Definitely sounds like an "aggrieved individual" wrote that, like somebody who had it in for Kate. I'm not sure Kate and William "weaponized" the media. The media do have their sacred protect-at-all-cost cows, I'll agree, but I don't think K&W are among them. The media do thrive on cat fights so I don't think it's in the medias' interest to "protect" Kate.
> 
> *Meghan hasn't helped her own image by blatantly framing herself as a poor hapless victim despite wallowing in all the trappings and luxuries of the Royal Family who welcomed her with open arms. I can think of other women who have been treated MUCH more harshly than Meghan, on a daily basis, and haven't cast themselves as victims.*




This.
 I think the Sussexs' brought all the bad press onto themselves, with their ridiculous behaviour!


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The need to resort  to writing/relating scurrilous lies about another person in order to make  the subject of this thread look good certainly speaks volumes.


Doesn't it just? Because people arrive somewhere separately is evidence there's something wrong? Ridiculous assumption.
I forgot to add, Edward and Sophie arrived separately too, each with one child. Are they in trouble too?


----------



## hellosunshine

So, the press is now openly begging for Harry and Meghan's return lol


----------



## Sharont2305

I was merely stating that  going by assumptions being made that the Cambridges arrived separately so there must be something wrong with the marriage, two other couples arrived separately too but that wasn't made a fuss over.
And for the record, I don't think there is anything wrong with any of the marriages. 
People arrive separately, so what?


----------



## Clearblueskies

duna said:


> This.
> I think the Sussexs' brought all the bad press onto themselves, with their ridiculous behaviour!


Absolutely 


Sharont2305 said:


> I was merely stating that  going by assumptions being made that the Cambridges arrived separately so there must be something wrong with the marriage, two other couples arrived separately too but that wasn't made a fuss over.
> And for the record, I don't think there is anything wrong with any of the marriages.
> People arrive separately, so what?


It’s only worth making a fuss over if you’re stretching for bad news.  We have carbon offset, now we have H&M offset  (aka promote conspiracy theories about the happily married “competition”)


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> So, the press is now openly begging for Harry and Meghan's return lol
> 
> View attachment 4626365



That doesn't read like begging... more like how much longer are you going to be on "vacation" from whatever it is you do...


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> People arrive separately, so what?


Maybe the original poster isn't aware of what it's like to be married with three small children.  Each member of the family isn't glued together 24/7.  They all have different places to go and different things to accomplish during the day.  That's why most families have more than one vehicle.  (Or is that a sign of a crumbling marriage too? LOL.)

In this particular case, it's particularly silly because we know the exact reason why Will arrived early with George - the two of them were participating in a separate event prior to the lunch.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> That doesn't read like begging... more like how much longer are you going to be on "vacation" from whatever it is you do...


No kidding!  And apparently they don't have anything officially scheduled in January yet, so it may be a while before they actually get back to work.  "6 week break" I don't think is accurate.  Try 8+.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Maybe the original poster isn't aware of what it's like to be married with three small children.  Each member of the family isn't glued together 24/7.  They all have different places to go and different things to accomplish during the day.  That's why most families have more than one vehicle.  (Or is that a sign of a crumbling marriage too? LOL.)
> 
> In this particular case, it's particularly silly because we know the exact reason why Will arrived early with George - the two of them were participating in a separate event prior to the lunch.


Exactly.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> So, the press is now openly begging for Harry and Meghan's return lol



H&M have a symbiotic relationship with the gossip press. They love (and crave) the positive attention they receive and the media loves the advertising money they get with the Royals stories. I’m sure readership must be down this past month without the hourly updates  analyzing their latest faux pas or conversely articles gushing about whatever wondrous thing Meghan was doing that week.

I’m sure they are strategically planning their return for maximum personal benefit.


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> I was merely stating that  going by assumptions being made that the Cambridges arrived separately so there must be something wrong with the marriage, two other couples arrived separately too but that wasn't made a fuss over.
> And for the record, I don't think there is anything wrong with any of the marriages.
> People arrive separately, so what?



The issue was never that they arrived separately although previous years they've always made it a point to travel together as a united family. It's a cumulative assumption considering a few days before, Kate shrugged off her husband's hand then there's been rumors and photographs of William conducting himself inappropriately with other women. Any other couple deciding to arrive separately wouldn't garner a close look as they likely don't have cheating rumors swirling.

Anyway, please don't bother responding, I don't care

Let's move on


----------



## meluvs2shop

Sometimes we don’t always need to have the last word creating more of an issue that really shouldn’t be one.

Let’s all move on.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> . Any other couple deciding to arrive separately wouldn't garner a close look as they likely don't have cheating rumors swirling.
> 
> Anyway, please don't bother responding, I don't care


The only cheating rumors that are swirling are being swirled by you.  There was an extremely vague rumor last spring which never amounted to anything and has been virtually forgotten, except by those who are looking for bad things to believe about the Cambridges because they are upset that their favorite couple, Meghan and Harry, are an utter mess.

If you don't want responses, then don't post because we all have every right to reply.  You also don't get to dictate to anyone when to "move on".  If you wish to move on, then you can do so yourself by discontinuing your own posts on the subject.


----------



## hellosunshine

VICTORIA (NEWS 1130) – Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and the newest Royal, Archie, all spent their Christmas in Victoria this year.

Unlike previous official visits from the royals, this was a private vacation, so we don’t exactly know what they’ve been up to or whether they’re still there.

Either way, Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps says she’s thrilled to have them in her city.

“I think it’s fantastic news. I felt honoured,” she says. “They could have chosen literally anywhere in the world to go for Christmas vacation, and it’s wonderful they chose Victoria.”

*She adds that Victoria is a finalist for the 2022 Invictus Games, an international sports competition for veterans that Harry champions.


“We think it’s a good sign that he’s here maybe checking out potential venues for 2022,” She tells NEWS 1130. “I’m optimistic about it, given their visit.”*

Helps is hopeful this trip will convince him to support the city in its bid to host, a decision which should come in the next few months.

Help says she is also happy that with this visit, it will continue to familiarize Victoria’s international profile.

“I think Victoria is growing up,” she says.

“We’re, I think, putting ourselves on the map as a bit of a small powerhouse, globally and certainly, the prince’s visit will help with that.”

https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/1...arry-meghan-markle-spent-christmas-on-island/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I'm waiting for Meghan to state that she is exhausted from her break and needs a break from her break. Exhausted from existing. She knows she'll be under more scrutiny when she returns to GB.  Regardless, chances are 4 out of 5 that the first time she opens her mouth in public she'll step in it, despite her PR coaches. Since expectations of her are so low right now it could actually work in her favor. All she has to do is not screw up or beg for pity and her public perception will improve. Because it can't get much lower. Unless she turns on the pity spigot again. Or says something like: "I loved Victoria because people were so nice to me there".


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> *She adds that Victoria is a finalist for the 2022 Invictus Games, an international sports competition for veterans that Harry champions.*
> 
> *“We think it’s a good sign that he’s here maybe checking out potential venues for 2022,” She tells NEWS 1130. “I’m optimistic about it, given their visit.”*



Ah, I bet this is how they're justifying spending all those tax dollars on their vacay


----------



## Flatsy

Richard Eden tweeted this: 





> *Richard Eden*‏ @richardaeden 22h22 hours ago
> Simon Heffer reports in the Sunday @telegraph that the Duchess of Sussex 'complains about the weather and other aspects of life in Britain'. Some courtiers 'fully expect the Duchess to want to go to live in California'. #royal #MeghanMarkle


When Meghan and Harry come back, I wouldn't be surprised if they aren't back for long.  Meghan is unhappy with the life she signed up for.  The monarchy, the Windsor family, the UK and its weather, the tabloids are not things that are going to change, so either she will have to adjust or it's just not going to work.  The fact that the ITV documentarian asked her whether she could tolerate her life going forward and she wouldn't commit to a "yes" and just said she's taking it one day at a time - I think that said it all.

I know Meghan's fans believe that Harry is going to be knight in shining armor who will give it all up for her happiness, but I doubt that's going to happen.  His family, his lifestyle, his job, his identity, and his purpose in life are all inseparable from the monarchy.  He married someone he thought would fit into all of that.  I have a feeling he'd let the marriage suffer and die before going the Wallis/Edward route.


----------



## hellosunshine

Isn't it very normal for British people to complain about their weather? That's the "go-to" topic for the usual small talk. Anyway, this new narrative is rather ridiculous when you know Meg adored living in Canada for 7 years yet she's now somehow complaining about the weather in the UK. BTW, Meg also lived in Chicago during her college years. She's used to terrible weather, I doubt she'd complain about the UK's.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Woof.
https://news.yahoo.com/prince-andrew-lesson-harry-popularity-115107911.html

*'Andrew has shown Harry popularity isn’t a given and you need to choose your friends carefully'*
My favorite point is this one...
_
He said Andrew had “*surrounded himself for years by the rich and the powerful and that has come back to bite him very badly*”.

He went on: “I’m not for a second suggesting Prince Harry is of the same ilk in that association but Harry needs to realise if he hasn’t already that he can’t just expect to be loved.

“He has to give something back to the public and in 2019 I think he’s tried that but they’ve got it wrong time and time again.”_


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Isn't it very normal for British people to complain about their weather? That's the "go-to" topic for the usual small talk. Anyway, this new narrative is rather ridiculous when you know Meg adored living in Canada for 7 years yet she's now somehow complaining about the weather in the UK. BTW, Meg also lived in Chicago during her college years. She's used to terrible weather, I doubt she'd complain about the UK's.



I dont complain about the weather.


----------



## mrsinsyder

There's a rumor that the mansion belongs to Elon Musk, which would fit the "not American or UK-born billionaire who is based in the US."

He and Harry can sit around and do drugs together, at least.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I dont complain about the weather.


Me neither


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4626404
> 
> 
> VICTORIA (NEWS 1130) – Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and the newest Royal, Archie, all spent their Christmas in Victoria this year.
> 
> Unlike previous official visits from the royals, this was a private vacation, so we don’t exactly know what they’ve been up to or whether they’re still there.
> 
> Either way, Victoria Mayor Lisa Helps says she’s thrilled to have them in her city.
> 
> “I think it’s fantastic news. I felt honoured,” she says. “They could have chosen literally anywhere in the world to go for Christmas vacation, and it’s wonderful they chose Victoria.”
> 
> *She adds that Victoria is a finalist for the 2022 Invictus Games, an international sports competition for veterans that Harry champions.
> 
> 
> “We think it’s a good sign that he’s here maybe checking out potential venues for 2022,” She tells NEWS 1130. “I’m optimistic about it, given their visit.”*
> 
> Helps is hopeful this trip will convince him to support the city in its bid to host, a decision which should come in the next few months.
> 
> Help says she is also happy that with this visit, it will continue to familiarize Victoria’s international profile.
> 
> “I think Victoria is growing up,” she says.
> 
> “We’re, I think, putting ourselves on the map as a bit of a small powerhouse, globally and certainly, the prince’s visit will help with that.”
> 
> https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/1...arry-meghan-markle-spent-christmas-on-island/


Victoria has been a well known destination for decades. Cruise stop there regularly.  These comments are borderline idiotic and make me wonder how long she has actually lived there.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Victoria has been a well known destination for decades. Cruise stop there regularly.  These comments are borderline idiotic and make me wonder how long she has actually lived there.


I thought so too, as we stopped there on a cruise in 2011 or so? Even back then it was bustling.


----------



## mrsinsyder

People are more excited about a donkey 

*Jack Knox: What if you spotted a prince? ‘I’d do nothing’*
Here’s a nice thing about Victoria: Nobody was looking for Prince Harry on Horth Hill on Friday.
...
“I’d do nothing,” said Ashley Jackson, who was on one of her twice-a-day walks with her young black lab, Sula. “I’d just hope Sula wouldn’t jump on him.”
...
Actually, Jackson seemed more excited to learn that Northcott was the owner of a donkey named Pepe, who is something of a neighbourhood rock star. “*Prince Harry, that’s awesome, but Pepe is the talk of the town around here*.”

https://www.timescolonist.com/news/...ou-spotted-a-prince-i-d-do-nothing-1.24042938


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> I thought so too, as we stopped there on a cruise in 2011 or so? Even back then it was bustling.


I have been there several times and twice from a cruise. There are so many things to see and the town is lovely   The hanging flower baskets are my favorite thing. A night tour of the famous Butchart Gardens was particularly interesting. Tea at the Empress Hotel is a must at least once.  The Sussex didn’t need to put Victoria on the map as it was already known.


----------



## LittleStar88

What’s to sell out?


mrsinsyder said:


> There's a rumor that the mansion belongs to Elon Musk, which would fit the "not American or UK-born billionaire who is based in the US."
> 
> He and Harry can sit around and do drugs together, at least.



maybe the three of them are having a weedcation? Meghan is medicating her misery away.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> Victoria has been a well known destination for decades. Cruise stop there regularly.  These comments are borderline idiotic and make me wonder how long she has actually lived there.


Helps is an idiot and thinks Victoria was nothing before she came along.


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> Re the bolded, I have a lot of family all over Britain (London & Edinburgh mostly) and the general consensus is *no one* there likes Megz! People who love Harry dislike her because she’s acting like an obnoxious American noob - according to them she has given great reason to cut back most/all of the BRF. And people who dislike Harry have found a reason to slam him - because of his ignorant-acting wifey!


Agree with this; *ALL* of my British colleagues cannot stand Meghan and their view of Harry has also diminished.  Yes, to a certain degree it is Meghan being American (_although they won't flat out tell me that_), but mostly that they think she is taking advantage of Harry for her social-climbing.  The nails in their coffin were 3-fold .. their eco-preaching (_and then not following what they preach_), the '_woe-is-me_' during their Africa trip (_lack of sensitivity to the folks in Africa who are truly barely living/existing_) and lastly, when the news came out about the wedding invitation to folks that they really didn't know (_e.g., Oprah, the Clooney's, etc_.).  

I spoke to them last week (_to wish Happy Holidays, etc_.) .. and given the fact that the King of Sweden recently announced that he will be paring down the Swedish Royal Family, they all also felt that Prince Charles should streamline the BRF .. and eliminate Harry & Megan and Beatrice & Eugenie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I have been there several times and twice from a cruise. There are so many things to see and the town is lovely   The hanging flower baskets are my favorite thing. A night tour of the famous Butchart Gardens was particularly interesting. Tea at the Empress Hotel is a must at least once.  The Sussex didn’t need to put Victoria on the map as it was already known.


Agree.

Victoria isn't a town though, it's the capital city of British Columbia, although it is quite small as far as cities go.  I think if I lived in Vancouver, I'd probably want to ferry over there for weekends all the time.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> No one is trying to make the subject of this thread look good nor is anyone telling lies. I wish people would become more mindful that this is also a gossip thread. Everyone's encouraged to mute and ignore posters who's posts they'd rather not see. It's all very simple.


Hmmmm ..


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> People are more excited about a donkey
> 
> *Jack Knox: What if you spotted a prince? ‘I’d do nothing’*
> Here’s a nice thing about Victoria: Nobody was looking for Prince Harry on Horth Hill on Friday.
> ...
> “I’d do nothing,” said Ashley Jackson, who was on one of her twice-a-day walks with her young black lab, Sula. “I’d just hope Sula wouldn’t jump on him.”
> ...
> Actually, Jackson seemed more excited to learn that Northcott was the owner of a donkey named Pepe, who is something of a neighbourhood rock star. “*Prince Harry, that’s awesome, but Pepe is the talk of the town around here*.”
> 
> https://www.timescolonist.com/news/...ou-spotted-a-prince-i-d-do-nothing-1.24042938



Is it fair to say one's image is on the decline when you get upstaged by Pepe? Harry can remedy that right away if he puts an offer on Pepe saying he's doing it for Archie. Or he could trade in one of the royal carriage horses to sweeten the pot for Pepe to help build back some of his lost street cred. Or...considering what happened to Meghan's beagle, Guy (two broken legs, remember?) Pepe would be wiser to stay where he's at.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Woof.
> https://news.yahoo.com/prince-andrew-lesson-harry-popularity-115107911.html
> 
> *'Andrew has shown Harry popularity isn’t a given and you need to choose your friends carefully'*
> My favorite point is this one...
> _
> He said Andrew had “*surrounded himself for years by the rich and the powerful and that has come back to bite him very badly*”.
> 
> He went on: “I’m not for a second suggesting Prince Harry is of the same ilk in that association but Harry needs to realise if he hasn’t already that he can’t just expect to be loved.
> 
> “He has to give something back to the public and in 2019 I think he’s tried that but they’ve got it wrong time and time again.”_


Yes, and what did he do? .. "_unfriended_" some of his friends (_Eton classmates, etc_.) that he has known and been friends with for a lot longer than knowing Meghan!


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I dont complain about the weather.


*NEVER* heard any of my British colleagues (_or Irish or Scottish for that matter_) complain about the weather because they've dealt with it their entire lives and just carry on!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and what did he do? .. "_unfriended_" some of his friends (_Eton classmates, etc_.) that he has known and been friends with for a lot longer than know
> 
> Harry seems to have changed from the "fun" prince to the grumpy one


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> *NEVER* heard any of my British colleagues (_or Irish or Scottish for that matter_) complain about the weather because they've dealt with it their entire lives and just carry on!


“There’s no such thing as bad weather, only unsuitable clothing”


----------



## mrsinsyder

I thought Megsy was such a California girl... it was even incorporated into her made-up coat of arms. Now she's a weathered Canadian northerner? Hmm...


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> *NEVER* heard any of my British colleagues (_or Irish or Scottish for that matter_) complain about the weather because they've dealt with it their entire lives and just carry on!


But they must be horribly internally damaged from stiff upper-lipping their way through intolerable circumstances!

I doubt weather is actually at the top of Meghan's concerns, but if she's all-around unhappy and really wants to find a reason to leave, gloomy weather is something to complain about it.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> “There’s no such thing as bad weather, only unsuitable clothing”


funny, I was just the other day telling DH how when I lived in NYC the cold wind would blow down the streets and make a wind tunnel but I wore boots heavy long coat, gloves and maybe a hat......(he's from So Cal so has not really experienced truly cold weather)


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> “There’s no such thing as bad weather, only unsuitable clothing”


HA - yes, so true!!  My Brit colleagues couldn't believe that I came over and didn't have an Umbrella with me!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> *NEVER* heard any of my British colleagues (_or Irish or Scottish for that matter_) complain about the weather because they've dealt with it their entire lives and just carry on!


Scotland is still part of Britain, lol


----------



## rose60610

If I went from the D-List to marrying into the Royal Family, privileged to immerse myself in all its trappings, I think I could overlook the weather. "Commoners" put up with it without an entourage of staff to shield them from the elements. It's part of living AND existing.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Scotland is still part of Britain, lol



What about Wales?


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> What about Wales?


Always forgotten about, lol, I'm used to it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## glamourous1098

Lodpah said:


> So a couple of days ago it was reported on Yahoo that Harry and his wife trademarked the SussexRoyal thing.
> 
> Is this a normal thing for the BRF to do?
> 
> Isn’t this a title that’s bestowed and any profit they make off this brand should go to the Trust IMHO.


I believe the Cambridges have done this as well - usually something like this is not so much so that they (the Sussexes) can profit off it, but so other people can't.  You see this quite a bit with musicians (Taylor Swift and Beyonce) trademarking bits from their songs so that other people can't make money off merchandise with their phrasing.

This is most likely why M&H trademarked SussexRoyal - I'll eat my words if they start selling tea towels, or something, but as it stands, this is fairly standard.


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> “There’s no such thing as bad weather, only unsuitable clothing”


That's what we say in Canada too.  lol


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Scotland is still part of Britain, lol


Yes, I know that .. I was thinking more in lines of the weather in Scotland is a LOT worse than in England (well - London for sure).  It would be sunny, rain, sleet, snow, sunny, rain .. you likely know what I'm saying!  Never heard any of my Scot colleagues complain about it!


----------



## mrsinsyder

From the same source quoted earlier as "openly begging for Harry and Meghan's return"...

*Royal shock: How Meghan Markle and Harry could be ousted from ‘slimmed down’ monarchy*

*MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are currently in Canada enjoying a six-week break from the royal bubble. One royal commentator has claimed the couple could lose their official roles in future if Prince Charles opts for a minimal monarchy when he becomes king*

*https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...e-harry-news-prince-charles-royal-family-news*


----------



## rose60610

What with trademarks and such, and the possibility of Charles slimming down the monarchy, perhaps the Sussex' are out to make their hay while their sun shines, (however dimly). If Charles became King tomorrow and cut Harry loose, H&M would fall in stature quite quickly. Oh, they'd be in demand to cut ribbons at grand openings and present trophies for best floral arrangements for a while, but it'd be Charles and William who the crowds would really show up for.  H&M's security detail might even diminish to the extent they wouldn't be in danger of being turned away from any restaurant. Or hamlet diner.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> “There’s no such thing as bad weather, only unsuitable clothing”



Meg literally uses a variation of your quote in the below interview @1:03.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Meg literally uses a variation of your quote in the below interview @1:03.



so she goes by "Meg" now?


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Meg literally uses a variation of your quote in the below interview @1:03.



The quote is from Alfred Wainwright (1907-1991) - he wrote and illustrated many books on fell walking in the Lake District.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Yes, I know that .. I was thinking more in lines of the weather in Scotland is a LOT worse than in England (well - London for sure).  It would be sunny, rain, sleet, snow, sunny, rain .. you likely know what I'm saying!  Never heard any of my Scot colleagues complain about it!


Oh I know. We can have 4 seasons in one day, even in the summer, lol


----------



## Flatsy

glamourous1098 said:


> This is most likely why M&H trademarked SussexRoyal - I'll eat my words if they start selling tea towels, or something, but as it stands, this is fairly standard.


I agree, I think this is routine trademarking.

But what's interesting is that if Meghan and Harry divorce, she will likely lose her title and patronages, as did Diana.  But I don't think she can be forced to give up her role in the foundation if she doesn't want to, so she can continue on with the "Sussex Royal" foundation and brand.  And if independent from the royal family, that would open up merchandising opportunities that would be frowned upon or forbidden now.  So long term, this might not result in tea towels, but maybe stuff like inspirational books or a clothing line to benefit the foundation/charity (most people aren't aware that the foundation isn't actually a charity and use the terms interchangeably).


----------



## hellosunshine

I doubt Meghan and Harry will ever divorce or separate. It's pretty safe to say the Queen and Prince Phillip plus Prince Harry and Meghan are the only royals who've married for love.


----------



## marthastoo

sdkitty said:


> so she goes by "Meg" now?


Isn't that what literally half the people on this thread refer to her as?


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> It's pretty safe to say the Queen and Prince Phillip plus Prince Harry and Meghan are the only royals who've married for love.


 
That’s a ridiculous and gross thing to say that has no factual basis.

I will agree that M2 and H are a hypocritical, attention seeking, fame hungry match made in heaven though.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> I doubt Meghan and Harry will ever divorce or separate. It's pretty safe to say the Queen and Prince Phillip plus Prince Harry and Meghan are the only royals who've married for love.


After the decades of torment, it's clear Charles married Camilla for love.  You may not want to admit it, but Will and Kate pretty clearly love each other.  And I don't think there's anybody in the current generation of royals who didn't marry for love. There's no need to insult all of those people just because you want to believe that Meghan and Harry are the greatest love story of all time.  Tearing others down does not build Meghan and Harry up.

The big difference between W&K and H&M is that in addition to love and affection, I think they have a long-lasting commitment that will carry them through tough times.  

I don't think Harry and Meghan have that at all.  They clearly didn't take enough time before getting married.  If they had, Meghan wouldn't have been so unprepared for what she was in for.  I think Harry was so infatuated, he didn't want to risk seeing any warning signs and forged ahead too quickly (despite friends and family trying to gently make him aware of the red flags).  Infatuation burns out fast though.

As for Meghan, she's repeatedly shown a willingness throughout her life to cut out people who aren't making her happy and move on.   She already did it once with her first husband, and there is a correlation between that and the fact that 67% of second marriages fail.  A person who is on TV complaining about how awful her life is after barely a year of marriage doesn't strike me as someone who is prepared to tough things out when necessary.  She said herself that she's not going to stiff upper lip anymore, and that she needs to thrive, not just survive.  She couldn't be any more clear about the fact that she's not willing to put up with difficulties.  And frankly, I think she already has one foot out the door.

But if you are someone who judges relationships by how much Hollywood-style PDA the couple displays in public, then Harry and Meghan have a fantastic relationship, second only to Angelina and Billy Bob.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> After the decades of torment, it's clear Charles married Camilla for love.  You may not want to admit it, but Will and Kate pretty clearly love each other.  And I don't think there's anybody in the current generation of royals who didn't marry for love. There's no need to insult all of those people just because you want to believe that Meghan and Harry are the greatest love story of all time.  Tearing others down does not build Meghan and Harry up.
> 
> The big difference between W&K and H&M is that in addition to love and affection, I think they have a long-lasting commitment that will carry them through tough times.
> LOL
> I don't think Harry and Meghan have that at all.  They clearly didn't take enough time before getting married.  If they had, Meghan wouldn't have been so unprepared for what she was in for.  I think Harry was so infatuated, he didn't want to risk seeing any warning signs and forged ahead too quickly (despite friends and family trying to gently make him aware of the red flags).  Infatuation burns out fast though.
> 
> As for Meghan, she's repeatedly shown a willingness throughout her life to cut out people who aren't making her happy and move on.   She already did it once with her first husband, and there is a correlation between that and the fact that 67% of second marriages fail.  A person who is on TV complaining about how awful her life is after barely a year of marriage doesn't strike me as someone who is prepared to tough things out when necessary.  She said herself that she's not going to stiff upper lip anymore, and that she needs to thrive, not just survive.  She couldn't be any more clear about the fact that she's not willing to put up with difficulties.  And frankly, I think she already has one foot out the door.
> 
> But if you are someone who judges relationships by how much Hollywood-style PDA the couple displays in public, then Harry and Meghan have a fantastic relationship, second only to Angelina and Billy Bob.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Tearing others down does not build Meghan and Harry up.



Exactly. Doesn’t this behavior go against the kindness Meghan is always preaching? I don’t understand why her stans do the complete opposite of what their beloved idol would do.


----------



## zen1965

Flatsy said:


> But if you are someone who judges relationships by how much Hollywood-style PDA the couple displays in public, then Harry and Meghan have a fantastic relationship, second only to Angelina and Billy Bob.



ROFL !


----------



## pukasonqo

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh I know. We can have 4 seasons in one day, even in the summer, lol


Sounds like Melbourne, here is a song by Crowded House “Four seasons in one day”


----------



## hellosunshine

Tonight, Meghan was chosen as the Most Powerful Fashion Influencer for 2019 by Hello! Magazine, in collaboration with Lyst. The below images were posted on their Instagram account -
https://www.hellomagazine.com/


----------



## sdkitty

yeah, I think she was being facetious


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I don't think holding anyone up as having the perfect relationship because of how they behave or what they say in public is a good idea.

Look at both Heidi Klum/Seal and Gwen Stefani/Gavin Rossdale.  Wedding vows repeated every year, and loud protestations of how in love they are - mostly always precedes a split.

I think Meghan and Harry are fine with their PDA so far, it hasn't been over the top but also not what we've usually seen with royal couples.

I think it's quite mean-spirited to say that only certain couples have married for love.  Love comes in many forms, even for royal couples.  It's narrow-minded and not without bias to judge that way.


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> I doubt Meghan and Harry will ever divorce or separate. It's pretty safe to say the Queen and Prince Phillip plus Prince Harry and Meghan are the only royals who've married for love.



Yes they do like to hold hands, but I think it serves a dual purpose when she's wearing heels and walking on gravel or a hill.  He cannot let her slip, can you imagine.


----------



## hellosunshine

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it's quite mean-spirited to say that only certain couples have married for love.  Love comes in many forms, even for royal couples.  It's narrow-minded and not without bias to judge that way.



I don't think it's mean-spirited at all. Believing that certain couples may have married out of convenience, duty, or purity is a reality. People can disagree.

Secondly, everything said in this thread (whether from fans or anti-fans of the Duke & Duchess) has a bias. There are people who consistently post and highlight the most negative of stories and on the opposite spectrum there's the fans. Every article and story is deciphered through whatever bias that person holds. That is the nature of this thread.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

When you're bias is clear and OTT, it's mean-spirited and transparent - no matter which side you favour.  I mean, I like Meghan and Harry and I think what you wrote is unjustified and defensive because of the views of others here that aren't the same as yours.

It may be reactionary (been there, done that, got the t-shirt), and I get that - but still my opinion is it's unnecessary.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> I don't think it's mean-spirited at all. Believing that certain couples may have married out of convenience, duty, or purity is a reality. People can disagree.
> 
> Secondly, everything said in this thread (whether from fans or anti-fans of the Duke & Duchess) has a bias. There are people who consistently post and highlight the most negative of stories and on the opposite spectrum there's the fans. Every article and story is deciphered through whatever bias that person holds. That is the nature of this thread.


Purity?


----------



## gracekelly

I think Sophie Wessex would be shocked to find out that she and Edward didn't marry for love.  I would hardly call the Cambridge marriage one of convenience since the Royals weren't that keen on her and she had a rather hard time of it even before they were engaged.   

If Harry and Meghan are the great love story, that is great, but they are not the only ones and they haven't been married that long.  Give it some time.  I think they are going to have a big storm to weather together so let's see how they do.


----------



## Flatsy

Zara and Mike, Peter and Autumn, Eugenie and Jack, Beatrice and Edo.  I don't think any of those couples got married or are getting married out of some kind of duty.  

Just because they get less attention does not mean their love is less real.


----------



## rose60610

People can marry for love, or a naive person can marry for love to a conniving and calculating woker who manipulates the besotted dullard by never being satisfied and cries for pity while indulging in the world's most famous family's resources. Mr. Dullard must save face by coddling Ms. Woker in an attempt to shut her up. Not only can she not shut up she single handedly turns off an entire globe spanning kingdom. She's only "existing", you see, after a whirlwind romance, a 50 million dollar wedding, a multi million dollar renovated estate, and having unlimited access to whatever whims of the day she has. And that's "just existing"? One of these days Dullard will not woke up, but wake up, and beg Daddy for a way out. Daddy's been down that road and will bring in the best attorneys. Even if Ms. Woker is discarded all she has to do is move onto the next gazillionaire as her resume is now very impressive. Of course she'll continue to bat her D-List goo-goo eyes and lovingly hold Dullard's hand until the papers are signed. Trademark that!


----------



## muchstuff

mrsinsyder said:


> I thought Megsy was such a California girl... it was even incorporated into her made-up coat of arms. Now she's a weathered Canadian northerner? Hmm...


Victoria is about as south as one can get in Canada. Not far from the Washington state border so all she’d really need is a good fleece and a rain coat .


----------



## Clearblueskies

It’s not exactly a cosy festive holiday is it. Rattling around in that Disneyfied monstrosity as guests of a stranger.  And barricaded in with a bunch of security guards for company as a consequence of their privacy paranoia.  Oh what fun, I don’t think.  How on earth did Harry let himself get cornered in like this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> I thought Megsy was such a California girl... it was even incorporated into her made-up coat of arms. Now she's a weathered Canadian northerner? Hmm...


Canada is a big country with at times a cold harsh climate. Toronto and Vancouver only represent a small part of our country and climate. Vancouver is referred to as ‘Lotus Land’ here. Very mild. Other than the mountains it rarely sees snow. Toronto is colder but not nearly as frigid as many other parts of Canada. We laughed at Toronto a few years back when they declared a state of emergency after a big snow fall. The rest of Canada just gets on with clearing the snow and salting the roads. No, she’s not a weathered Canadian northerner. Once again, as with so much to do with MM, it’s a pose.


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> People can marry for love, or a naive person can marry for love to a conniving and calculating woker who manipulates the besotted dullard by never being satisfied and cries for pity while indulging in the world's most famous family's resources. Mr. Dullard must save face by coddling Ms. Woker in an attempt to shut her up. Not only can she not shut up she single handedly turns off an entire globe spanning kingdom. She's only "existing", you see, after a whirlwind romance, a 50 million dollar wedding, a multi million dollar renovated estate, and having unlimited access to whatever whims of the day she has. And that's "just existing"? One of these days Dullard will not woke up, but wake up, and beg Daddy for a way out. Daddy's been down that road and will bring in the best attorneys. Even if Ms. Woker is discarded all she has to do is move onto the next gazillionaire as her resume is now very impressive. Of course she'll continue to bat her D-List goo-goo eyes and lovingly hold Dullard's hand until the papers are signed. Trademark that!


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s not exactly a cosy festive holiday is it. Rattling around in that Disneyfied monstrosity as guests of a stranger.  And barricaded in with a bunch of security guards for company as a consequence of their privacy paranoia.  Oh what fun, I don’t think.  How on earth did Harry let himself get cornered in like this?


Lust?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Flatsy said:


> I know Meghan's fans believe that Harry is going to be knight in shining armor who will give it all up for her happiness, but I doubt that's going to happen.  His family, his lifestyle, his job, his identity, and his purpose in life are all inseparable from the monarchy.  He married someone he thought would fit into all of that.  I have a feeling he'd let the marriage suffer and die before going the Wallis/Edward route.



I don't know about that. He's already alienated his family over this woman, is catering to her every whim and she seems to have a firm grip on him for whatever reason.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Lust?


Possibly, but the pictures of them at that Jamaican wedding showed him looking completely disinterested and bored with her.  The body language was so obvious.  At that time all his friends expected him to dump her didn’t they.  So it doesn’t sound like lust to me, because lust is usually a pretty immediate reaction to someone I think.  But something happened - and its my guess she Diana played him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know about that. He's already alienated his family over this woman, is catering to her every whim and she seems to have a firm grip on him for whatever reason.


She has the child now, and he’s always wanted a family.  She’ll always have a hold over him.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Possibly, but the pictures of them at that Jamaican wedding showed him looking completely disinterested and bored with her.  The body language was so obvious.  At that time all his friends expected him to dump her didn’t they.  So it doesn’t sound like lust to me, because lust is usually a pretty immediate reaction to someone I think.  But something happened - and its my guess she Diana played him.


Supposedly she'd already been dumped but showed up so that pics would get out to the press.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Supposedly she'd already been dumped but showed up so that pics would get out to the press.


I really don't believe that at all.  That's extremist conspiracy theory stuff based on nothing but rabid Meghan-haters analyzing photos and seeing things that are not there.

I've never seen or heard anything to indicate that Meghan and Harry ever had a rocky courtship let alone a breakup prior to their engagement.  (Anything outside of internet sites that hate Meghan.)  The idea that he broke up with her and she stalked him to Jamaica and forced her way into a wedding is absolutely nutso.

I think Meghan has some flaws, but she's not a psychopath or soap opera villainess.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> I really don't believe that at all.  That's extremist conspiracy theory stuff based on nothing but rabid Meghan-haters analyzing photos and seeing things that are not there.



Heh, I'd say this is pretty tame compared to some of the stuff that floats around about them.


----------



## daisychainz

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know about that. He's already alienated his family over this woman, is catering to her every whim and she seems to have a firm grip on him for whatever reason.


That is exactly why I think it'll be her, eventually, that runs from him. Aside from being her MO, she is the one less blinded by love, at least it seems.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Heh, I'd say this is pretty tame compared to some of the stuff that floats around about them.


It is, but I think there are a lot of wild untruths and baseless speculation floating around about them.  Stuff about drug addiction and secret surrogate pregnancies is just off the wall to me.

As the marriage has unfolded, I have personally come to believe that it's not a marriage built to last.  I think Meghan's "heart's desires" (as she put it) have turned out not to align well with being a member of the royal family.   I think she's shallow, egocentric, materialistic, and in need of excessive adulation. I think she has driven a wedge between Harry and his family.   But I'm basing that largely on what I've personally witnessed her say and do, and some tabloid gossip if it has seemed well-sourced and backed up elsewhere.  That's the stuff that interests me.

But I fully believe that Harry enthusiastically married Meghan because he loved her. She didn't trick him or force him to do anything he didn't want to do.  I don't think she's blackmailing anybody, or abusing anybody, or any other wild stuff.


----------



## cafecreme15

Flatsy said:


> It is, but I think there are a lot of wild untruths and baseless speculation floating around about them.  Stuff about drug addiction and secret surrogate pregnancies is just off the wall to me.
> 
> As the marriage has unfolded, I have personally come to believe that it's not a marriage built to last.  I think Meghan's "heart's desires" (as she put it) have turned out not to align well with being a member of the royal family.   I think she's shallow, egocentric, materialistic, and in need of excessive adulation. I think she has driven a wedge between Harry and his family.   But I'm basing that largely on what I've personally witnessed her say and do, and some tabloid gossip if it has seemed well-sourced and backed up elsewhere.  That's the stuff that interests me.
> 
> But I fully believe that Harry enthusiastically married Meghan because he loved her. She didn't trick him or force him to do anything he didn't want to do.  I don't think she's blackmailing anybody, or abusing anybody, or any other wild stuff.


Thank you for this! Proof that it is definitely possible to have a strong opinion but still be able to think rationally and critically.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> That is exactly why I think it'll be her, eventually, that runs from him. Aside from being her MO, she is the one less blinded by love, at least it seems.



I think she'll hang in there. She would only leave him if she thought she could get something better and I don't see that happening. How do you go higher up after marrying a prince? If she was truly miserable possibly, but I don't think she is, despite her performance fighting back tears in that interview. Things aren't going exactly the way she wanted but she's not in a bad situation. It's not like Diana being forced to face the reality of Charles' mistress Camilla right from the beginning.

Why would Meghan leave? In her hands Harry is a malleable piece of clay she is molding to be what she wants him to be and give her what she desires. He has already proven to be well-trained husband.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> It is, but I think there are a lot of wild untruths and baseless speculation floating around about them.  Stuff about drug addiction and secret surrogate pregnancies is just off the wall to me.
> 
> As the marriage has unfolded, I have personally come to believe that it's not a marriage built to last.  I think Meghan's "heart's desires" (as she put it) have turned out not to align well with being a member of the royal family.   I think she's shallow, egocentric, materialistic, and in need of excessive adulation. I think she has driven a wedge between Harry and his family.   But I'm basing that largely on what I've personally witnessed her say and do, and some tabloid gossip if it has seemed well-sourced and backed up elsewhere.  That's the stuff that interests me.
> 
> But I fully believe that Harry enthusiastically married Meghan because he loved her. She didn't trick him or force him to do anything he didn't want to do.  I don't think she's blackmailing anybody, or abusing anybody, or any other wild stuff.


I totally agree with you


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> It is, but I think there are a lot of wild untruths and baseless speculation floating around about them.  Stuff about drug addiction and secret surrogate pregnancies is just off the wall to me.
> 
> As the marriage has unfolded, I have personally come to believe that it's not a marriage built to last.  I think Meghan's "heart's desires" (as she put it) have turned out not to align well with being a member of the royal family.   I think she's shallow, egocentric, materialistic, and in need of excessive adulation. I think she has driven a wedge between Harry and his family.   But I'm basing that largely on what I've personally witnessed her say and do, and some tabloid gossip if it has seemed well-sourced and backed up elsewhere.  That's the stuff that interests me.
> 
> But I fully believe that Harry enthusiastically married Meghan because he loved her. She didn't trick him or force him to do anything he didn't want to do.  I don't think she's blackmailing anybody, or abusing anybody, or any other wild stuff.


I do agree, I find a lot of the over-the-top stuff to be nothing more than funny gossip fodder. In my opinion, their own bizarre behavior leads to a lot of these theories, which may actually just be their way of getting more attention.

I think she did her best to find herself in Harry's orbit but being a part of the BRF was not as she expected, because you can't do whatever you please (or you can, but you'll have massive fallout). I think their best chance of redemption was after the well-received Africa tour, and they bungled that with the documentary. Now, combined with Prince Andrew's mess, the public doesn't seem that interested in salvaging anymore "lesser" royals.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

I’m still hoping she will try harder to grow into her role so that Harry can have a happy family life like William.  

I look forward to see how they present themselves in 2020.  If they behave well they can bounce back, I believe.


----------



## bag-mania

*Sign of a united front? Kate Middleton and Prince William include snaps of Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and Archie in their 'year in review' video - winning praise for the 'beautiful' gesture*

After months of a rumoured rift between the 'Fab Four', Prince William and Kate Middleton have hinted at a more united 2020 with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after including them in their yearly roundup video.

Prince William, 37, and Kate Middleton, 37, shared their '2019 year in review' video with their 10.6 million Instagram followers in the early hours of this morning.

The 2 minute long video includes snaps and clips from the royal couple's various engagements throughout the year, but also features several photos of Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, including baby Archie's photocall.

The video comes after a turbulent year for the Cambridges and the Sussexes in which royal commentators suggested there was a 'deep rift' between the couples.

The adorable round-up review of the year included clips of Kate and Prince William during their engagements throughout the past 12 months.

Among the highlights were moments from the widely praised Pakistan tour, as well as Kate's hugely popular RHS Back to Nature garden.

Alongside the video, the caption read: 'To all the fantastic organisations and inspirational people we met and worked with in 2019: Thank you for a wonderful year, and see you in 2020!'

But as well as including their own highlights of the year, the video also made a nod to important moments for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.

The round-up included a clip of Meghan and Kate sharing a laugh while attending Wimbledon together, as well as Prince Harry and William with Sir David Attenborough at a screening at an 'Our Planet' at the Natural History Museum.

And despite neither of the Cambridges being present at Archie's photocall, it was included in the yearly roundup.

The clip, which featured Prince Harry and Meghan beaming down at their newborn son as they introduced him to the world, was the only moment in the round-up  which the Cambridges didn't attend.

Royal fans couldn't help but notice the inclusion of the Sussexes in the yearly round-up, with some calling it 'beautiful.'

One wrote: 'Thank you for including your brother and his family @sussexroyal in this. You didn't have to, but you did, and this shows your wonderful character. None of us on the outside knows what really has been going on, but family is everything. Thank you for showing this.'

Another added: 'I love this. I love the fact that you guys include images of Harry and his family. It's beautiful.'

One commented: 'This is lovely. So nice to see inclusion of @Sussexroyal in this too.'

The inclusion of the happy moments for the Sussexes comes after a year of rumours of a 'deep rift' betwen the royal couples.

Tensions reportedly arose in the run-up to last year's royal wedding, with Harry apparently accusing his elder brother of failing to support him and Meghan.

William is also understood to have privately expressed concern about the whirlwind romance, while Kate is said to have struggled to get on with Meghan.

Matters came to a head when the Sussexes decided to move out of Kensington Palace to Windsor and split their joint household, moving their staff over to Buckingham Palace. The two couples have also parted ways over their charitable work, with Harry and Meghan set to launch their own royal foundation next year.

The break-up was said to be a mutual decision and one that was the result of a natural divergence of ways, as William's role as heir to the throne evolves.

In November, Harry and Meghan opened up about struggling with royal life and public scrutiny in the explosive ITV programme Meghan and Harry: An African Journey, in which Meghan revealed not many people have asked if she's 'okay.'

Harry, meanwhile, refused to deny a rift between himself and Prince William, acknowledging, 'we are on different paths at the moment.'

It was reported after the documentary aired that Prince William was 'concerned' for his younger brother, and hoped he and Meghan were 'all right'.

But despite the reports the group once known as the 'Fab Four' were trying to patch things up, a source today suggested that there had been no '180' from the royal family.

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...de-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-round-year.html


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> She would only leave him if she thought she could get something better and I don't see that happening. How do you go higher up after marrying a prince?


I remember having a conversation with my sister when they got engaged.  We thought yeah, this could work!  Because she was a social climber, but she reached the top of the social ladder, so that's where she'd be happy and satisfied.

I think now that Meghan has gotten a taste of royal life, she's realized it's not the top of the social ladder.  It's actually kind of crappy being married to "the spare" and destined to fade further into the background as time goes on, expected to shake hands and cut ribbons for the rest of her life while being watched like a hawk and criticized for how much she spends and what she wears.

I think she realizes there are higher rungs to reach for: post-divorce Diana.  Oprah. Bill Gates.  To be in a position where she has lots and lots of money with no one giving her grief about spending it.  To be able to cavort on yachts, live in huge mansions, and fly around on private jets without anyone caring.   And most of all, to be treated like a saint and a savior for doing some part-time charity work.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> I think now that Meghan has gotten a taste of royal life, she's realized it's not the top of the social ladder.  It's actually kind of crappy being married to "the spare" and destined to fade further into the background as time goes on, expected to shake hands and cut ribbons for the rest of her life while being watched like a hawk and criticized for how much she spends and what she wears.
> 
> I think she realizes there are higher rungs to reach for: post-divorce Diana.  Oprah. Bill Gates.  To be in a position where she has lots and lots of money with no one giving her grief about spending it.  To be able to cavort on yachts, live in huge mansions, and fly around on private jets without anyone caring.   And most of all, to be treated like a saint and a savior for doing some part-time charity work.



ALL THIS. I chuckle anytime someone says people are jealous of Meghan. I would never, ever want to sign up for that nonsense life. She'd be better off marrying some random rich real estate developer who lets her blog and Instagram all day long. Harry positioned her to have name-recognition; I see this being nothing more than her jumping off point.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I think she realizes there are higher rungs to reach for: post-divorce Diana.  Oprah. Bill Gates.  To be in a position where she has lots and lots of money with no one giving her grief about spending it.  To be able to cavort on yachts, live in huge mansions, and fly around on private jets without anyone caring.   And most of all, to be treated like a saint and a savior for doing some part-time charity work.



I'm not sure about that. The higher you reach, the less room there is for newcomers at the top. Despite the admirable charity work she's done, Meghan doesn't have the charisma or genuine nature that Diana had. Even the people who hated Diana never accused her of doing charity work because she was trying to create an image. That accusation has been made of Meghan. 

Meghan would make out fine in a divorce because having a kid(s) with Harry would guarantee it. But I don't see her being fawned over by celebrities and living the top-tier life the way she does currently. Her status would drop in the famous circles when she's no longer the flavor-of-the-month. I don't think she'd be offered any more multimillion dollar mansions for vacations.


----------



## daisychainz

She could go much higher than Harry. It's his prince title that is going to limit what she can achieve. And we all know that even when married to princes and kings women like bodyguards, lol


----------



## Flatsy

There's no higher level of world-wide fame and prestige than becoming a member of the British Royal Family.  You don't become beloved around the world just by marrying someone rich.  

Diana maintained her status as a world-wide celebrity post-divorce.  Nobody stopped calling her "Princess Diana".  She still lived in a palace.  But she was also freed up to attend the Costume Institute Gala, appear on the cover of Harper's Bazaar, date a billionaire's son, and vacation on a yacht in the Mediterranean with her rich boyfriend.   But I don't see anybody else being able to pull that off .

I think Meghan would be more likely to follow in Fergie's footsteps.  Fergie maintained her princess cachet for a while, but cheapened her brand in order to make money and eventually faded until she was no longer even the most famous "Fergie" around.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> She could go much higher than Harry. It's his prince title that is going to limit what she can achieve. And we all know that even when married to princes and kings *women like bodyguards*, lol


I don't get the impression Meghan lets Harry out of her sight long enough for either of them to have an affair.

If Meghan left Harry and he ended up being a broken shell of a man, she would be the most despised woman in the world.


----------



## myown

bag-mania said:


> *Sign of a united front? Kate Middleton and Prince William include snaps of Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and Archie in their 'year in review' video - winning praise for the 'beautiful' gesture*
> 
> After months of a rumoured rift between the 'Fab Four', Prince William and Kate Middleton have hinted at a more united 2020 with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after including them in their yearly roundup video.
> 
> Prince William, 37, and Kate Middleton, 37, shared their '2019 year in review' video with their 10.6 million Instagram followers in the early hours of this morning.
> 
> The 2 minute long video includes snaps and clips from the royal couple's various engagements throughout the year, but also features several photos of Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, including baby Archie's photocall.
> 
> The video comes after a turbulent year for the Cambridges and the Sussexes in which royal commentators suggested there was a 'deep rift' between the couples.
> 
> The adorable round-up review of the year included clips of Kate and Prince William during their engagements throughout the past 12 months.
> 
> Among the highlights were moments from the widely praised Pakistan tour, as well as Kate's hugely popular RHS Back to Nature garden.
> 
> Alongside the video, the caption read: 'To all the fantastic organisations and inspirational people we met and worked with in 2019: Thank you for a wonderful year, and see you in 2020!'
> 
> But as well as including their own highlights of the year, the video also made a nod to important moments for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
> 
> The round-up included a clip of Meghan and Kate sharing a laugh while attending Wimbledon together, as well as Prince Harry and William with Sir David Attenborough at a screening at an 'Our Planet' at the Natural History Museum.
> 
> And despite neither of the Cambridges being present at Archie's photocall, it was included in the yearly roundup.
> 
> The clip, which featured Prince Harry and Meghan beaming down at their newborn son as they introduced him to the world, was the only moment in the round-up  which the Cambridges didn't attend.
> 
> Royal fans couldn't help but notice the inclusion of the Sussexes in the yearly round-up, with some calling it 'beautiful.'
> 
> One wrote: 'Thank you for including your brother and his family @sussexroyal in this. You didn't have to, but you did, and this shows your wonderful character. None of us on the outside knows what really has been going on, but family is everything. Thank you for showing this.'
> 
> Another added: 'I love this. I love the fact that you guys include images of Harry and his family. It's beautiful.'
> 
> One commented: 'This is lovely. So nice to see inclusion of @Sussexroyal in this too.'
> 
> The inclusion of the happy moments for the Sussexes comes after a year of rumours of a 'deep rift' betwen the royal couples.
> 
> Tensions reportedly arose in the run-up to last year's royal wedding, with Harry apparently accusing his elder brother of failing to support him and Meghan.
> 
> William is also understood to have privately expressed concern about the whirlwind romance, while Kate is said to have struggled to get on with Meghan.
> 
> Matters came to a head when the Sussexes decided to move out of Kensington Palace to Windsor and split their joint household, moving their staff over to Buckingham Palace. The two couples have also parted ways over their charitable work, with Harry and Meghan set to launch their own royal foundation next year.
> 
> The break-up was said to be a mutual decision and one that was the result of a natural divergence of ways, as William's role as heir to the throne evolves.
> 
> In November, Harry and Meghan opened up about struggling with royal life and public scrutiny in the explosive ITV programme Meghan and Harry: An African Journey, in which Meghan revealed not many people have asked if she's 'okay.'
> 
> Harry, meanwhile, refused to deny a rift between himself and Prince William, acknowledging, 'we are on different paths at the moment.'
> 
> It was reported after the documentary aired that Prince William was 'concerned' for his younger brother, and hoped he and Meghan were 'all right'.
> 
> But despite the reports the group once known as the 'Fab Four' were trying to patch things up, a source today suggested that there had been no '180' from the royal family.
> 
> Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...de-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-round-year.html


„Beautiful gesture“ is a bit much, isn’t it?! After all the do the family business. Never would they show any weakness and not include pictures of them. And it was meaningful for the RF and tourists


----------



## jehaga

rose60610 said:


> People can marry for love, or a naive person can marry for love to a conniving and calculating woker who manipulates the besotted dullard by never being satisfied and cries for pity while indulging in the world's most famous family's resources. Mr. Dullard must save face by coddling Ms. Woker in an attempt to shut her up. Not only can she not shut up she single handedly turns off an entire globe spanning kingdom. She's only "existing", you see, after a whirlwind romance, a 50 million dollar wedding, a multi million dollar renovated estate, and having unlimited access to whatever whims of the day she has. And that's "just existing"? One of these days Dullard will not woke up, but wake up, and beg Daddy for a way out. Daddy's been down that road and will bring in the best attorneys. Even if Ms. Woker is discarded all she has to do is move onto the next gazillionaire as her resume is now very impressive. Of course she'll continue to bat her D-List goo-goo eyes and lovingly hold Dullard's hand until the papers are signed. Trademark that!


Mic drop, boom!

She will get a gazillionaire a la Onassis. In fact, Harry is far from her endgame, IMO.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think it was a decent intentional gesture. I mean, the Queen had no qualms not including them.


----------



## bag-mania

I see the inclusion of the photos as being an olive branch of sorts. I don't think any of them want to be fighting or estranged. At least I hope not.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it was a decent intentional gesture. I mean, the Queen had no qualms not including them.


She did it because it was her great grandchild being born.


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> That is exactly why I think it'll be her, eventually, that runs from him. Aside from being her MO, she is the one less blinded by love, at least it seems.


But he’s the big ‘meal ticket’, so just like some of their pics seem to show, she’ll continue to glom onto him for as long as she can.  Personally, as much as I think Harry is not the brightest bulb in the world, I do think at some point he will resent having to give up so much due to her “what Meghan wants” behavior.  Obviously, one always hopes that their marriage continues to grow stronger as time goes on, but I’ve also seen a lot of marriages break down because the partners go in their own ways and/or one becomes resentful of the other one.  Only time will tell ..


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it was a decent intentional gesture. I mean, the Queen had no qualms not including them.


The Queen did mention her great-grandson's birth in her speech, which I think was the exactly appropriate level of mention for the Sussex branch of the family.

The queen's picture choice on the table during her speech was so, so obvious.  Her purpose in life has been to serve her Kingdom and preserve the monarchy, and I think her biggest concern is that it continue in the future.  It was so clear that she was thinking about her legacy and the people who are going to be taking that over when she's gone.  It was a nod to the future, and I found it to be quite touching.

The Sussexes simply have little to do with any of that.  Despite the outsized level of fame they enjoy, they are not the future of the monarchy.  There was no reason for any Sussex photos to be on the table.  They weren't excluded so much as just not relevant.

Although I don't think the picture choice was intended as a direct snub to the Sussexes, I think the days of the Queen giving special prominence to her favorite (or former favorite) grandson are over.  After all of the drama the Sussexes caused this year, I think the Queen is probably especially grateful for the Cambridges with their stability, lack of drama, and commitment to duty.  The big-ass, dead-center photo of the Cambridge family next to the Queen spoke volumes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Congrats To @Sussexroyal on reaching 10m followers on Instagram. Only took them 9 months!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow what an incredible accomplishment. 400,000 up from yesterday, that’s a lot of bots to buy.


----------



## rose60610

jehaga said:


> Mic drop, boom!
> 
> She will get a gazillionaire a la Onassis. In fact, Harry is far from her endgame, IMO.



There are money meal tickets and there are prestige meal tickets. Certainly the Crown has the most prestige and money is not is short supply. There are many more Onassis' these days, but they also often come with pre-nups. What Jackie K had that Meghan will never have is dignity, class, and admiration, as well as a publicly demonstrated iron strength on how she handled JFK's assassination--very elegantly and extremely strong while suffering greatly inside.

Our poor Meghan goes around lamenting that "not many people asked if she's OK".  OK from WHAT, exactly? Our darling Meghan is "only existing". Um, yeah. Tea at Buckingham Palace, anyone?

I think Meghan believes that she is just as admired as Princess Grace of Monaco or Jackie Kennedy Onassis and that it's everyone else's task to learn how to see it that way. And she'll pout until we do. Most might see marrying into the BRF as the ultimate rung on the ladder, but when she realizes that her non-adoring public can't stand her she could well head for "greener" pastures. My bets are on a Russian oligarch. Or somebody from Singapore or Brunei. Maybe she'll do all three and I'll win the trifecta.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow what an incredible accomplishment. 400,000 up from yesterday, that’s a lot of bots to buy.


Did they have a target for the new year maybe?  I’m not on Instagram or any other SM platform (tpf is quite enough ), tbh I couldn’t give a toss about this sort of stuff.  I think it’s meaningless.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> She has the child now, and he’s always wanted a family.  She’ll always have a hold over him.


right and I think she will make another one ASAP


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> There are money meal tickets and there are prestige meal tickets. Certainly the Crown has the most prestige and money is not is short supply. There are many more Onassis' these days, but they also often come with pre-nups. What Jackie K had that Meghan will never have is dignity, class, and admiration, as well as a publicly demonstrated iron strength on how she handled JFK's assassination--very elegantly and extremely strong while suffering greatly inside.
> 
> Our poor Meghan goes around lamenting that "not many people asked if she's OK".  OK from WHAT, exactly? Our darling Meghan is "only existing". Um, yeah. Tea at Buckingham Palace, anyone?
> 
> I think Meghan believes that she is just as admired as Princess Grace of Monaco or Jackie Kennedy Onassis and that it's everyone else's task to learn how to see it that way. And she'll pout until we do. Most might see marrying into the BRF as the ultimate rung on the ladder, but when she realizes that her non-adoring public can't stand her she could well head for "greener" pastures. My bets are on a Russian oligarch. Or somebody from Singapore or Brunei. Maybe she'll do all three and I'll win the trifecta.


Jackie Kennedy Onasis was an icon.  Meghan is certainly not that IMO.  However there are people who are very impressed with her. I saw a woman on TV recently - forget exactly who she was but she had occasion to meet Meghan.  I think Meghan was congratulating her for something.  She was awestruck to meet "The Duchess!"


----------



## gracekelly

This whole numbers thing is stupid. What does it prove?  People like you?  That and a buck won't get  you on the subway.   Doing something for the people is what counts.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow what an incredible accomplishment. 400,000 up from yesterday, that’s a lot of bots to buy.



Isn't it worth any price you could pay if you get to be declared a "powerful influencer?"


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow what an incredible accomplishment. 400,000 up from yesterday, that’s a lot of bots to buy.


Easier to purchase rather  than standing on a street corner in Victoria with an iPad.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow what an incredible accomplishment. 400,000 up from yesterday, that’s a lot of bots to buy.


Yeah, I don't keep careful track personally, but last I heard their followers had tapered off and decreased a bit to about 9.6 million.  A 400,000 leap, particularly when they are on a sabbatical and not posting significant new content, that's pure follower buying.

I don't really understand the point.  They aren't celebrities who are going to make more money or land more endorsements based on their follower count.  They are just doing it to puff themselves up.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> They are just doing it to puff themselves up.



Sunshine Sachs is getting ready to send them their monthly invoice. They need to show they've accomplished something to earn it.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Easier to purchase rather  than standing on a street corner in Victoria with an iPad.


HA!!! .. and yes, some folks do in fact, purchase these "likes" (the Kardashian clan was found out to have done this)!


----------



## Morgan R

New picture of Harry and Archie featured in the video


----------



## mrsinsyder

I knew they’d have to post something on the day the Cambridge’s made their big announcement. Cute pic.


----------



## Flatsy

Oh my God, they actually contacted Chris Martin and Coldplay for their video song.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Morgan R said:


> New picture of Harry and Archie featured in the video
> 
> View attachment 4627393



So cute, love his little booties and hat!


----------



## Sharont2305

He is so cute.


----------



## bag-mania

Adorable baby wearing cute hat, check. Doting father looking lovingly at adorable baby, check. Soundtrack from a popular band, check. Gorgeous background scenery, check. Their PR game is strong. They aren't playing around!


----------



## threadbender

Yeah, I got to see Archie. I don't have to admire his parents but I certainly can appreciate a cute little boy!


----------



## gracekelly

Morgan R said:


> New picture of Harry and Archie featured in the video
> 
> View attachment 4627393



Thank Goodness!  A cute picture of Archie!  @threadbender totally agree.  Love his little outfit. Who said it isn't fun to dress a boy?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Thank Goodness!  A cute picture of Archie!  @threadbender totally agree.  Love his little outfit. Who said it isn't fun to dress a boy?


yes, finally a straightforward cute color photo of the baby......not that I was really waiting for it but anyway it's cute and you can really see him


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yes, finally a straightforward cute color photo of the baby......not that I was really waiting for it but anyway it's cute and you can really see him


And why couldn't they have done this before? How hard is this?  He is such a cute baby and looks  very good natured.    I thought the video and choice of music was very well done.  Probably because a professional did it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> Oh my God, they actually contacted Chris Martin and Coldplay for their video song.


What song is it? I refuse to give them a click.


----------



## Sharont2305

OK, I'm going to say it... I'm glad the picture is of only Archie and Harry.
*scurries off


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> And why couldn't they have done this before? How hard is this?  He is such a cute baby and looks  very good natured.    I thought the video and choice of music was very well done.  Probably because a professional did it.


I hadn't watched the video but not have...nicely done


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> OK, I'm going to say it... I'm glad the picture is of only Archie and Harry.
> *scurries off


hahahahaha!  Reports are that Archie is a friendly easy going baby and likes people.  Sounds like one of my nieces who was like that as a baby and as an adult, is still a happy easy going person with a smile on her face all the time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I hadn't watched the video but not have...nicely done


I hate to say it, but it makes me think there is an ulterior motive, like she wants to wait and have a big preggo pic or something after the break.

Also, it annoys me how DM calls it an "unseen pic", like isn't every pic unseen until it's published?


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> There are money meal tickets and there are prestige meal tickets. Certainly the Crown has the most prestige and money is not is short supply. There are many more Onassis' these days, but they also often come with pre-nups. What Jackie K had that Meghan will never have is dignity, class, and admiration, as well as a publicly demonstrated iron strength on how she handled JFK's assassination--very elegantly and extremely strong while suffering greatly inside.
> 
> Our poor Meghan goes around lamenting that "not many people asked if she's OK".  OK from WHAT, exactly? Our darling Meghan is "only existing". Um, yeah. Tea at Buckingham Palace, anyone?
> 
> I think Meghan believes that she is just as admired as Princess Grace of Monaco or Jackie Kennedy Onassis and that it's everyone else's task to learn how to see it that way. And she'll pout until we do. Most might see marrying into the BRF as the ultimate rung on the ladder, but when she realizes that her non-adoring public can't stand her she could well head for "greener" pastures. My bets are on a Russian oligarch. Or somebody from Singapore or Brunei. Maybe she'll do all three and I'll win the trifecta.


Any of these men would have to be 'secondary' to her though; I can't see her being second fiddle to any man .. hence the reason why Harry fits so well into her plan so far!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Isn't it worth any price you could pay if you get to be declared a "powerful influencer?"


.. and hence the reason why the Kardashian/Jenner family was accused of buying their "likes".  Speaking of which, I thought IG was getting away from publicly showing the likes to anyone but the person(s) themselves?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

Morgan R said:


> New picture of Harry and Archie featured in the video
> 
> View attachment 4627393



Archie is ADORABLE; I do not get why they don't post more pictures of him!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Archie is ADORABLE; I do not get why they don't post more pictures of him!!!!



Maybe Meghan wants to get paid for them.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I hate to say it, but it makes me think there is an ulterior motive, like she wants to wait and have a big preggo pic or something after the break.



Yep, we can look forward to several months of Meghan pregnancy photos complete with lots of belly cradling and shy smiles.


----------



## meluvs2shop

I just saw that recent photo on IG of Harry holding Archie. So cute!


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> I knew they’d have to post something on the day the Cambridge’s made their big announcement. Cute pic.


They just can’t do right


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Flatsy said:


> But I fully believe that Harry enthusiastically married Meghan because he loved her. She didn't trick him or force him to do anything he didn't want to do.  I don't think she's blackmailing anybody, or abusing anybody, or any other wild stuff.



I don't think she held a gun to his head, either. I do think she is a master manipulator and quite a bit smarter than him, though.


----------



## Jayne1

The video seemed very un-royal though. I guess that's what they want -- just showing how positive and caring and helpful they are.  But it doesn't seem to fit with what I expect from the BRF.


----------



## Sterntalerli

Morgan R said:


> New picture of Harry and Archie featured in the video
> 
> View attachment 4627393




omg that slideshow is horrible Oo


----------



## TC1

The pic of Harry holding Archie is much cuter than the pic they used for the Christmas greeting. IMO that wasn't a flattering pic at all.


----------



## CeeJay

TC1 said:


> The pic of Harry holding Archie is much cuter than the pic they used for the Christmas greeting. IMO that wasn't a flattering pic at all.


100% agree; those artsy-fartsy (my opinion) photographs of Archie for their IG account are IMO tired and pretentious!


----------



## big bad mama

rose60610 said:


> Maybe Meghan wants to get paid for them.


Maybe she wants her child to have a normal life like William and Kate want for their kids.


----------



## Roxanna

big bad mama said:


> Maybe she wants her child to have a normal life like William and Kate want for their kids.


I wonder what is  normal for her position . She is part of BRF, so far everything she's done was far from normal. I am sure it played  role in her public perception,  at least in UK.


----------



## myown

Roxanna said:


> I wonder what is  normal for her position . She is part of BRF, so far everything she's done was far from normal. I am sure it played  role in her public perception,  at least in UK.


But Archie has no title but a surname. He won’t get any money from the BRF. He is like a commoner


Did Zara made many pictures of her daughters public?


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> He won’t get any money from the BRF. He is like a commoner


I doubt MM and H are paying separately for Archie related things.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> I doubt MM and H are paying separately for Archie related things.



probably they will cover until he is of age?


----------



## hellosunshine

*Kiwi group Make Give Live overwhelmed by orders after Archie wears their hat*

*

*

New Zealand social enterprise Make Give Live has been overwhelmed with orders since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared a photo of their baby, Archie, wearing one of its beanies yesterday.

"The orders are just flying in like crazy," said Claire Conza, who co-founded Make Give Live three years ago alongside her business partner Becky Smith.

"I'm getting multiple orders a second. We'd made thousands of dollars before 8am this morning and we've sold out of all the stock that we had of that style (the Cocobear)."





A person involved with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's tour to New Zealand last year approached Make Give Live for a hat to gift to the royal couple while the Duchess of Sussex was pregnant with Archie. 

At the time, however, Conza wasn't even sure if the Sussexes would receive the hat due to strict rules around what kinds of gifts the royal family can accept. 

"I'd kind of almost forgotten about it until yesterday," she confessed.





* She thought Make Give Live, which aims to tackle isolation and mental illness by bringing people together to knit and crochet hats and other items, one of which is then donated to charity for each item sold, would appeal to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex because of their commitment to mental health advocacy.

But she "never imagined" that they would give her little social enterprise such a huge global platform. 

"I almost can't even comprehend what it means," she said.*

The rush of orders came as a particular surprise because up until now Make Give Live had been focusing on building a wholesale business rather than online sales.

So this morning, Conza had kicked into action. 

She had purchased literally all the wool that her supplier had available, which was about 400 balls, or around 600 beanies' worth.

"I don't think it's really going to make a dent though," Conza admitted.

Her other challenge was finding enough knitters to fulfil 200 per cent of all of the orders - one for the customer and one for charity. 

Make Give Live currently has 125 people working in 11 groups, but Conza there were also about 200 people who were on waiting lists, wanting to get involved.





And while the influx of orders had taken Make Give Live utterly by surprise, Conza was excited by the chance to expand the benefits of the social enterprise.

*"We know from our makers how, in some cases, life-changing and life-saving it has been - something as simple as being in a group of people who care about each other and become like your family, and just enjoying the therapy of the knitting and crochet."

 It could even present the opportunity to expand internationally, something Conza said she had been approached about before.

 "Isolation and mental illness are global problems, and social connection and knitting and crochet are a global solution," she said. *

https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/...helmed-by-orders-after-archie-wears-their-hat


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

I mean... it’s just a beanie with pom-poms...


----------



## Flatsy

myown said:


> I mean... it’s just a beanie with pom-poms...


It always amazes me how much simple things will sell out just because they are worn by one of the duchesses or their children.

I will give credit to Meghan - I think she is doing a good job promoting some of these small charity businesses.  She's done so previously with other jewelry, accessories (and on rare occasions, clothing) that she has worn.

It would be nice if she utilized her influence more often in her clothing choices to support smaller British fashion designers who could use the help, instead of wearing so much high-end designer and couture.


----------



## kemilia

Sterntalerli said:


> omg that slideshow is horrible Oo


Was it supposed to run that fast or was it my computer?


----------



## rose60610

When high profile people wear things that are affordable it can be exciting, in this case, to get a "royal connection" by buying the baby hat for not much money. We see clothes and accessories at all price points sell out frequently due to being worn by high profilers. The lower the price the higher the demand. Meghan needs as much positive press as she can get to overcome her self-inflicted pitiful woes of victimhood. Archie to the rescue!


----------



## bag-mania

I guess that's the result of being an "influencer." It has never occurred to me to buy something simply because I saw a famous person (or their kid) wearing it, but clearly hundreds (thousands?) of people are out there waiting to be influenced.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I guess that's the result of being an "influencer." It has never occurred to me to buy something simply because I saw a famous person (or their kid) wearing it, *but clearly hundreds (thousands?) of people are out there waiting to be influenced*.



Agreed. I predict many of those waiting to be influenced likely spent their adolescent summers going to leadership camps learning to build safe spaces to shut out ideas different from their own while seeing themselves as open-minded.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> It always amazes me how much simple things will sell out just because they are worn by one of the duchesses or their children.
> 
> I will give credit to Meghan - I think she is doing a good job promoting some of these small charity businesses.  She's done so previously with other jewelry, accessories (and on rare occasions, clothing) that she has worn.
> 
> It would be nice if she utilized her influence more often in her clothing choices to support smaller British fashion designers who could use the help, instead of wearing so much high-end designer and couture.


It would also be nice if H&M actually *BOUGHT *the item as opposed to it being gifted!  In regards to the Jewelry, while I support Pippa Small's efforts around employing folks from countries that have seen strife, I can't say the same thing about Jen Meyer or other "designers" that Meghan has worn.  In my opinion, if H&M truly want to support these businesses, then it seems natural to me that they should purchase their goods as opposed to being gifted the item(s).


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I guess that's the result of being an "influencer." It has never occurred to me to buy something simply because I saw a famous person (or their kid) wearing it, but clearly hundreds (thousands?) of people are out there waiting to be influenced.


Same here!!! .. I have to truly like the item/product otherwise, no way would I buy it regardless of who is wearing it (_and in some cases, certain people - not talking H&M here actually IMO de-value a brand/item/product_)!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Someone asked about their changes in followers a few days ago...


----------



## Tivo

If you back to page 46 of this thread...right when it was rumored they were dating, it is so entertaining.


----------



## cafecreme15

Morgan R said:


> New picture of Harry and Archie featured in the video
> 
> View attachment 4627393



What a great photo! Archie and his outfit are super adorable, and Harry looks the happiest he's been in a while. I hope their time away did the family some good.


----------



## Bentley1

Deleted post


----------



## cafecreme15

Bentley1 said:


> I’m never in this thread but saw the Queen’s holiday broadcast video on YouTube and couldn’t help but notice something missing from her desk!
> Why isn’t there a pic of Prince Harry & his family?
> Look at that huge pic of William & his family right in the center, then Prince Charles-Camilla, Prince Phillip etc, But no Harry ? And all the pics are pointed towards the camera, so they were definitely meant to be seen.
> What do you guys think?


I believe this was discussed at length up-thread (can be a full time job keeping up around here!) The long and short of it was that the Queen's message by displaying these pictures is that she is focusing on the future of the slimmed down monarchy with an heirs-only, line of succession group of photographs. This is not and should not be interpreted as a slight against the Sussexes.


----------



## Bentley1

cafecreme15 said:


> I believe this was discussed at length up-thread (can be a full time job keeping up around here!) The long and short of it was that the Queen's message by displaying these pictures is that she is focusing on the future of the slimmed down monarchy with an heirs-only, line of succession group of photographs. This is not and should not be interpreted as a slight against the Sussexes.


Ahh ok sorry didn’t read back at all maybe I’ll delete my post lol thanks for clarifying


----------



## V0N1B2

Meh, I got my hat back in Nov/18 in Seattle. Take that Baby Archie! 


I got a grey one too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> It would also be nice if H&M actually *BOUGHT *the item as opposed to it being gifted!  In regards to the Jewelry, while I support Pippa Small's efforts around employing folks from countries that have seen strife, I can't say the same thing about Jen Meyer or other "designers" that Meghan has worn.  In my opinion, if H&M truly want to support these businesses, then it seems natural to me that they should purchase their goods as opposed to being gifted the item(s).


I thought they weren’t allowed to accept gifts and free swag? Yet she seems to show off a lot of it? Like the head of the initiative didn’t even know for sure if Megan received the hat, so she definitely didn’t approach the organization to pay for it. Isn’t this a big no no?


----------



## kemilia

Meh-gan said:


> I thought they weren’t allowed to accept gifts and free swag? Yet she seems to show off a lot of it? Like the head of the initiative didn’t even know for sure if Megan received the hat, so she definitely didn’t approach the organization to pay for it. Isn’t this a big no no?


Don't know about the gifts issue but I would not try to take that pink flamingo away from Princess Charlotte. That little girl seems to know her mind already.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I guess that's the result of being an "influencer." It has never occurred to me to buy something simply because I saw a famous person (or their kid) wearing it, but clearly hundreds (thousands?) of people are out there waiting to be influenced.


It's usually a reason for me not to, it's like I have no mind of my own and I'm copying a famous person.


----------



## caramelize126

Meh-gan said:


> I thought they weren’t allowed to accept gifts and free swag? Yet she seems to show off a lot of it? Like the head of the initiative didn’t even know for sure if Megan received the hat, so she definitely didn’t approach the organization to pay for it. Isn’t this a big no no?



They are allowed to accept small gifts such as flowers, stuffed animals, etc. I believe it has to be under a certain value amount ( I believe?) and ALL items received must be publicly reported in a list that is published once a year.

Interesting point though- Was there a list posted with the items that Meghan and Harry received?

edit- here is the website but this is only listing gifts received at official events.. There is a PDF once you click each event that itemizes everything received -https://www.royal.uk/media-packs

Forexample-  https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/the_duke_of_sussex_zambia_november_2018_0.pdf


----------



## bag-mania

caramelize126 said:


> They are allowed to accept small gifts such as flowers, stuffed animals, etc. I believe it has to be under a certain value amount ( I believe?) and ALL items received must be publicly reported in a list that is published once a year.
> 
> Interesting point though- Was there a list posted with the items that Meghan and Harry received?
> 
> edit- here is the website but this is only listing gifts received at official events.. There is a PDF once you click each event that itemizes everything received -https://www.royal.uk/media-packs
> 
> Forexample-  https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/the_duke_of_sussex_zambia_november_2018_0.pdf



Wow. Thanks for that. It's interesting to see all the things people gave them. In addition to tons of baby clothes and toys, I was surprised to see that dozens of books were given to them. I expect most of that stuff must get donated or passed on.


----------



## Meh-gan

caramelize126 said:


> They are allowed to accept small gifts such as flowers, stuffed animals, etc. I believe it has to be under a certain value amount ( I believe?) and ALL items received must be publicly reported in a list that is published once a year.
> 
> Interesting point though- Was there a list posted with the items that Meghan and Harry received?
> 
> edit- here is the website but this is only listing gifts received at official events.. There is a PDF once you click each event that itemizes everything received -https://www.royal.uk/media-packs
> 
> Forexample-  https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/the_duke_of_sussex_zambia_november_2018_0.pdf


And I thought the point was they also can’t promote or endorse items they received for free as gifts. Which this is a pretty big endorsement of this hat and the organization that makes them.


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> I thought they weren’t allowed to accept gifts and free swag? Yet she seems to show off a lot of it? Like the head of the initiative didn’t even know for sure if Megan received the hat, so she definitely didn’t approach the organization to pay for it. Isn’t this a big no no?


In the US, government officials (_President, VP, Senate, Congress_) can accept gifts .. *BUT *said gift cannot exceed certain dollar amounts.  In addition to the amount, Government officials cannot accept gifts/money from countries that are on the 'high risk' list - e.g., (countries known to launder money and/or other financial risks).  Regardless of those rules, the official must declare the item and it's particulars. 

Not sure if the same applies to the BRF ..


----------



## hellosunshine

*'Is this actually happening?': Prince Harry and Meghan Markle help Victoria couple struggling with selfie stick*




A young Victoria couple out for a New Year's Day picnic and a hike were treated to the surprise of a lifetime yesterday.

Iliya Pavlovic and Asymina Kantorowicz had just finished eating in Vancouver Island's Horth Hill Regional Park on Wednesday afternoon when they started taking photos of themselves with their selfie stick among the natural scenery.

"We noticed a group was standing nearby and they had two dogs, one of which was approaching us," said Kantorowicz, who happens to be a producer for CTV News Vancouver Island.

They were checking the pictures they had just taken when a woman from the group approached them.

"She starts asking if we want her to take a photo for us," Kantorowicz said. "We said sure. I didn't see who she was at that time."

Kantorowicz did recognize another member of the group as Abigail Spencer, an actress from the television show _Suits_.

"I thought she looked familiar, but didn't think it could actually be her," Kantorowicz added.

The realization sparked a chain reaction and it soon dawned on Kantorowicz that the woman who was asking to take their photo was none other than Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex and fellow _Suits_ actress.

"I froze up. I actually couldn’t believe who it was. Then I looked over to the side and that’s when I realized Prince Harry was standing there," Kantorowicz said. "I kept looking back and forth like, 'Is this actually happening?'"

Pavlovic and Kantorowicz graciously accepted the royal's offer to photograph the pair.

"In that moment the only thing I could think to say, 'There's only so much that selfie sticks can do,'" Kantorowicz said. "She laughed and responded with something like, 'We'll have to do better,' and then Harry said, 'No pressure.'"

Markle took three photos of the star-struck couple before the royals left with the black dog and a beagle.

"She handed the phone back and said, 'Happy New Year!' and we said, 'Thanks and happy New Year!" the Victoria woman said. "Then we kind of turned to each other laughed and said, 'Did that just happen?' I still can't believe it. It feels like a dream."

The Victoria woman says Markle was "super friendly" during the encounter and she appreciates that the royal took the time to stop to help them out. "We didn't want to make a big deal of it. We hope they're enjoying their family trip to the island."

It wasn't the first time the royal couple was spotted hiking at Horth Hill over the holidays.

Since before Christmas, Vancouver Island residents have reported encounters with the duke and duchess on the trails in the area.

"We really appreciated that she stopped to take a photo for us. We would not have recognized them had they not approached us," Kantorowicz said. "I was in shock and I didn’t want to make it a big deal. But then we both called our moms to tell them."

https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/...couple-struggling-with-selfie-stick-1.4750879


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> *'Is this actually happening?': Prince Harry and Meghan Markle help Victoria couple struggling with selfie stick*
> 
> View attachment 4629110
> 
> 
> A young Victoria couple out for a New Year's Day picnic and a hike were treated to the surprise of a lifetime yesterday.
> 
> Iliya Pavlovic and Asymina Kantorowicz had just finished eating in Vancouver Island's Horth Hill Regional Park on Wednesday afternoon when they started taking photos of themselves with their selfie stick among the natural scenery.
> 
> "We noticed a group was standing nearby and they had two dogs, one of which was approaching us," said Kantorowicz, who happens to be a producer for CTV News Vancouver Island.
> 
> They were checking the pictures they had just taken when a woman from the group approached them.
> 
> "She starts asking if we want her to take a photo for us," Kantorowicz said. "We said sure. I didn't see who she was at that time."
> 
> Kantorowicz did recognize another member of the group as Abigail Spencer, an actress from the television show _Suits_.
> 
> "I thought she looked familiar, but didn't think it could actually be her," Kantorowicz added.
> 
> The realization sparked a chain reaction and it soon dawned on Kantorowicz that the woman who was asking to take their photo was none other than Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex and fellow _Suits_ actress.
> 
> "I froze up. I actually couldn’t believe who it was. Then I looked over to the side and that’s when I realized Prince Harry was standing there," Kantorowicz said. "I kept looking back and forth like, 'Is this actually happening?'"
> 
> Pavlovic and Kantorowicz graciously accepted the royal's offer to photograph the pair.
> 
> "In that moment the only thing I could think to say, 'There's only so much that selfie sticks can do,'" Kantorowicz said. "She laughed and responded with something like, 'We'll have to do better,' and then Harry said, 'No pressure.'"
> 
> Markle took three photos of the star-struck couple before the royals left with the black dog and a beagle.
> 
> "She handed the phone back and said, 'Happy New Year!' and we said, 'Thanks and happy New Year!" the Victoria woman said. "Then we kind of turned to each other laughed and said, 'Did that just happen?' I still can't believe it. It feels like a dream."
> 
> The Victoria woman says Markle was "super friendly" during the encounter and she appreciates that the royal took the time to stop to help them out. "We didn't want to make a big deal of it. We hope they're enjoying their family trip to the island."
> 
> It wasn't the first time the royal couple was spotted hiking at Horth Hill over the holidays.
> 
> Since before Christmas, Vancouver Island residents have reported encounters with the duke and duchess on the trails in the area.
> 
> "We really appreciated that she stopped to take a photo for us. We would not have recognized them had they not approached us," Kantorowicz said. "I was in shock and I didn’t want to make it a big deal. But then we both called our moms to tell them."
> 
> https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/...couple-struggling-with-selfie-stick-1.4750879


Will be the memory of a lifetime for them! How funny that they recognized Abigail Spencer before Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

Funny how they can remain invisible for five weeks and then in the final days of their vacation they are suddenly out and about among the tourists offering to take photos.  The cynical amongst us might believe it was a publicity stunt to mark their return.

The two dogs they were walking sound like the dogs she left behind  in Canada. It’s nice she visited them I guess.


----------



## marthastoo

Waiting for the comments about how thirsty Meghan was for offering to take the photo in the first place in 3...2..1...


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> They are allowed to accept small gifts such as flowers, stuffed animals, etc. I believe it has to be under a certain value amount ( I believe?) and ALL items received must be publicly reported in a list that is published once a year.
> 
> Interesting point though- Was there a list posted with the items that Meghan and Harry received?
> 
> edit- here is the website but this is only listing gifts received at official events.. There is a PDF once you click each event that itemizes everything received -https://www.royal.uk/media-packs
> 
> Forexample-  https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/the_duke_of_sussex_zambia_november_2018_0.pdf


Goodness!  You need an assistant just to register all the things given to all the royals.


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> Waiting for the comments about how thirsty Meghan was for offering to take the photo in the first place in 3...2..1...


I think Meghan's interest in photography has increased since she has seen how  Kate's pictures have turned out so well.   Hoping she takes more color pictures of Archie in the future so we can see how he thrives.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meh-gan said:


> And I thought the point was they also can’t promote or endorse items they received for free as gifts. Which this is a pretty big endorsement of this hat and the organization that makes them.



I’ve posted the laws with respect to what they can and cannot accept upstream a couple times in this thread.  They can promote not for profit organizations as long as they are not making a profit from the promotion.  They can keep certain gifts, under a certain amount, again, as long as they are not making any money off them, and the organization isn’t using them as advertising. You’ll tend to see them using things from charities or for charities, formal gifts from states or gifts from individuals. They have to be careful to not be seen to advertise for profit items. Hence the whole cease and desist request with Mayer this year.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> *'Is this actually happening?': Prince Harry and Meghan Markle help Victoria couple struggling with selfie stick*
> 
> View attachment 4629110
> 
> 
> A young Victoria couple out for a New Year's Day picnic and a hike were treated to the surprise of a lifetime yesterday.
> 
> Iliya Pavlovic and Asymina Kantorowicz had just finished eating in Vancouver Island's Horth Hill Regional Park on Wednesday afternoon when they started taking photos of themselves with their selfie stick among the natural scenery.
> 
> "We noticed a group was standing nearby and they had two dogs, one of which was approaching us," said Kantorowicz, who happens to be a producer for CTV News Vancouver Island.
> 
> They were checking the pictures they had just taken when a woman from the group approached them.
> 
> "She starts asking if we want her to take a photo for us," Kantorowicz said. "We said sure. I didn't see who she was at that time."
> 
> Kantorowicz did recognize another member of the group as Abigail Spencer, an actress from the television show _Suits_.
> 
> "I thought she looked familiar, but didn't think it could actually be her," Kantorowicz added.
> 
> The realization sparked a chain reaction and it soon dawned on Kantorowicz that the woman who was asking to take their photo was none other than Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex and fellow _Suits_ actress.
> 
> "I froze up. I actually couldn’t believe who it was. Then I looked over to the side and that’s when I realized Prince Harry was standing there," Kantorowicz said. "I kept looking back and forth like, 'Is this actually happening?'"
> 
> Pavlovic and Kantorowicz graciously accepted the royal's offer to photograph the pair.
> 
> "In that moment the only thing I could think to say, 'There's only so much that selfie sticks can do,'" Kantorowicz said. "She laughed and responded with something like, 'We'll have to do better,' and then Harry said, 'No pressure.'"
> 
> Markle took three photos of the star-struck couple before the royals left with the black dog and a beagle.
> 
> "She handed the phone back and said, 'Happy New Year!' and we said, 'Thanks and happy New Year!" the Victoria woman said. "Then we kind of turned to each other laughed and said, 'Did that just happen?' I still can't believe it. It feels like a dream."
> 
> The Victoria woman says Markle was "super friendly" during the encounter and she appreciates that the royal took the time to stop to help them out. "We didn't want to make a big deal of it. We hope they're enjoying their family trip to the island."
> 
> It wasn't the first time the royal couple was spotted hiking at Horth Hill over the holidays.
> 
> Since before Christmas, Vancouver Island residents have reported encounters with the duke and duchess on the trails in the area.
> 
> "We really appreciated that she stopped to take a photo for us. We would not have recognized them had they not approached us," Kantorowicz said. "I was in shock and I didn’t want to make it a big deal. But then we both called our moms to tell them."
> 
> https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/...couple-struggling-with-selfie-stick-1.4750879


The female half of this duo is a producer for CTV News Vancouver Island.  If she didn't recognize Harry and Meghan then she should be fired or I will try to sell her the Brooklyn Bridge.  I don't believe that this encounter just happened.  It has the earmarks of planning all over it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The female half of this duo is a producer for CTV News Vancouver Island.  If she didn't recognize Harry and Meghan then she should be fired or I will try to sell her the Brooklyn Bridge.  I don't believe that this encounter just happened.  It has the earmarks of planning all over it.


Hmm
And for once I was giving them credit


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> The female half of this duo is a producer for CTV News Vancouver Island.  If she didn't recognize Harry and Meghan then she should be fired or I will try to sell her the Brooklyn Bridge.  I don't believe that this encounter just happened.  It has the earmarks of planning all over it.


Stopppppp hahahahhaha


----------



## rose60610

Ooooh!  Meghan took their picture! Someone nominate her for the Nobel Peace Prize!


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I think Meghan's interest in photography has increased since she has seen how  Kate's pictures have turned out so well.   Hoping she takes more color pictures of Archie in the future so we can see how he thrives.


But photographing into the sun might be something she avoids next time.  (If that photo was taken by Meg.)


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> Funny how they can remain invisible for five weeks and then in the final days of their vacation they are suddenly out and about among the tourists offering to take photos.  The cynical amongst us might believe it was a publicity stunt to mark their return.
> 
> The two dogs they were walking sound like the dogs she left behind  in Canada. It’s nice she visited them I guess.




Maybe......after 5 weeks of down time/vacation ....they were ready to come out and get back to work.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-princess said:


> Maybe......after 5 weeks of down time/vacation ....they were ready to come out and get back to work.


Now it's 5 weeks?  6 weeks was the number consistently used in the media, but if you count from their last engagement it's actually 7 weeks (so far).


----------



## bag-princess

Flatsy said:


> Now it's 5 weeks?  6 weeks was the number consistently used in the media, but if you count from their last engagement it's actually 7 weeks (so far).




i don't know the number of weeks - just saw that mentioned in one of the responses


----------



## bag-mania

What I meant by five weeks was that was about how long it was where we didn't know where they were or what they were doing. It was the week before Christmas the reports of their whereabouts started trickling in, which I assumed was their last (sixth) week. But maybe they are taking longer than that.

They managed to avoid any reported sightings for all that time. They wanted to be seen this time because they turned up in a public park with a group, including one of Meghan's former _Suits _castmates. And it was Meghan who approached the couple taking photos, the woman who coincidentally also happens to be a writer and producer for CTV News.


----------



## TC1

Couple 'struggling with selfie stick" haha I don't think you need a selfie stick for a pic of 2 people, and it's been a damn long time since I've seen one used in public.


----------



## hellosunshine

*“Not A Moment, But A Movement”: Edward Enninful On Continuing British Vogue’s Forces For Change Story
*
One of my proudest moments as editor-in-chief of British Vogue came with the publication of last year’s Forces For Change September issue. Guest edited by the Duchess of Sussex, the magazine was – for the first time in its history – entirely dedicated to people changing society for the better. From the 15 women on the cover – including Greta Thunberg, Sinéad Burke, Laverne Cox and Jane Fonda – to our back page, the issue championed those who are working hard to raise awareness and change minds on topics spanning climate change, mental health, gender rights, disability and many more.
*



The phenomenal response we received to the Forces For Change theme, and the people it championed, made it clear that this was not simply a moment, but a movement. For that reason, as we enter a new decade, we wish to continue that story. Over the next year, expect to see some truly inspirational figures appearing under the Forces For Change banner in the magazine, and across our digital platforms. Now more than ever, it is important to keep the spotlight trained on the people who are challenging the status quo, and using their voice to help shape and change conversations around the most pressing issues of our time.*

To kick off our Forces For Change for 2020, I am so pleased to bring you a piece by the newly appointed Bishop of Dover, Rose Hudson-Wilkin, who, in her many years of service to her church, the monarchy and parliament, has been a voice in changing perceptions of all three. She has so much wisdom to impart, and is a true force for change.

https://www.vogue.co.uk/news/article/british-vogue-forces-for-change


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> *“Not A Moment, But A Movement”: Edward Enninful On Continuing British Vogue’s Forces For Change Story
> *
> One of my proudest moments as editor-in-chief of British Vogue came with the publication of last year’s Forces For Change September issue. Guest edited by the Duchess of Sussex, the magazine was – for the first time in its history – entirely dedicated to people changing society for the better. From the 15 women on the cover – including Greta Thunberg, Sinéad Burke, Laverne Cox and Jane Fonda – to our back page, the issue championed those who are working hard to raise awareness and change minds on topics spanning climate change, mental health, gender rights, disability and many more.
> *
> View attachment 4629694
> 
> 
> The phenomenal response we received to the Forces For Change theme, and the people it championed, made it clear that this was not simply a moment, but a movement. For that reason, as we enter a new decade, we wish to continue that story. Over the next year, expect to see some truly inspirational figures appearing under the Forces For Change banner in the magazine, and across our digital platforms. Now more than ever, it is important to keep the spotlight trained on the people who are challenging the status quo, and using their voice to help shape and change conversations around the most pressing issues of our time.*
> 
> To kick off our Forces For Change for 2020, I am so pleased to bring you a piece by the newly appointed Bishop of Dover, Rose Hudson-Wilkin, who, in her many years of service to her church, the monarchy and parliament, has been a voice in changing perceptions of all three. She has so much wisdom to impart, and is a true force for change.
> 
> https://www.vogue.co.uk/news/article/british-vogue-forces-for-change


should make Meghan feel she is living, not just existing


----------



## mrsinsyder

More celeb friends speaking out


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> More celeb friends speaking out
> 
> View attachment 4629704


Didn't know that Meghan was friends with Katherine...looks like they both eventually did pretty well for themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

cafecreme15 said:


> Didn't know that Meghan was friends with Katherine...looks like they both eventually did pretty well for themselves.


Can’t even imagine how they were in the same circles. Katherine is much more high profile and extremely successful in her career. Her sphere is music and she has had lead roles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

I believe they went to high school together.  Their makeup in the photo indicates the 90s.  And it was clearly pre-nose job for both of them.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> I believe they went to high school together.  Their makeup in the photo indicates the 90s.  And it was clearly pre-nose job for both of them.


No. Katherine went to Notre Dame HS in Sherman Oaks and is four years younger.

Katherine’s father is a TV producer so perhaps they met via that.


----------



## jehaga

TC1 said:


> Couple 'struggling with selfie stick" haha I don't think you need a selfie stick for a pic of 2 people, and it's been a damn long time since I've seen one used in public.



Lol! This story is so lame. Who even goes around with selfie sticks anymore, let alone two locals going on a hike. And one of them “happens” to work in media? C’mon, Sunshine Sachs creative team, storyboard harder!


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> Couple 'struggling with selfie stick" haha I don't think you need a selfie stick for a pic of 2 people, and it's been a damn long time since I've seen one used in public.



Yes, weird. Struggling with a selfie stick. Makes the couple sound dumb.

M&H were obviously ready to be seen and have their whereabouts known, but they did manage to stay hidden when they wanted to.


----------



## jehaga

hellosunshine said:


> *
> View attachment 4629694
> *



Meghan’s hair/extensions are so pretty. And she has really good clothes style and is a great picture taker!


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> More celeb friends speaking out
> 
> View attachment 4629704


Real friends wouldn’t „speak out“


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> No. Katherine went to Notre Dame HS in Sherman Oaks and is four years younger.
> 
> Katherine’s father is a TV producer so perhaps they met via that.


The article does say they went to school together... I wonder which one?


----------



## Flatsy

McPhee told People earlier this year that they went to Immaculate Heart together and Meghan was two years ahead of her: https://people.com/music/katharine-mcphee-treat-meghan-markle-prince-harry-waitress/


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> The article does say they went to school together... I wonder which one?


Katherine grew up in Sherman Oaks after age 12.  Meghan did not and went to a different high school and there is an age difference.  Katherine is 35 so they would not be in the same grade.  Just because it is in an article, it doesn't make it correct.   I thought that Katherine and her family lived in Thousand Oaks prior to moving to Sherman Oaks.  TO is 25 miles farther west of SO.  

From wikipedia

*Early life[edit]*
McPhee was born in Los Angeles, California.[5] Her father, Daniel McPhee,[5] was a television producer.[10] Her mother, Peisha (née Burch) McPhee, has been a vocal coach on _American Idol_ since 2011.[11][12] The family moved to the Sherman Oaks neighborhood of Los Angeles when she was 12 years old. Peisha McPhee recognized her daughter's musical talent and decided to train her. McPhee's older sister, Adriana, has been a vocal coach on _American Idol_ since 2012.[13] McPhee is of Irish, Scottish, and German descent.[14]

McPhee attended Notre Dame High School in Sherman Oaks, where she performed in school plays and musicals.[_citation needed_] She graduated in 2002. She attended Boston Conservatory for three semesters, majoring in musical theatre. She left college before graduation on the advice of her manager, and returned to Los Angeles to try out for television pilots. McPhee was cast (during the time she had dropped out of college and was auditioning in Los Angeles) in a mall-based MTV soap opera pilot, _You Are Here_, playing the older sister of a more popular younger sister. MTV never aired the pilot and did not pick up the series.[15]


----------



## gracekelly

One way or the other, someone should get their facts straight about where they went to school and how old they are!  Meghan is three years older and graduated from Immaculate Heart in 1999 if she graduated from college in 2003.  Katherine graduated from HS in 2002.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Katherine grew up in Sherman Oaks after age 12.  Meghan did not and went to a different high school and there is an age difference.  Katherine is 35 so they would not be in the same grade.  Just because it is in an article, it doesn't make it correct.   I thought that Katherine and her family lived in Thousand Oaks prior to moving to Sherman Oaks.  TO is 25 miles farther west of SO.


It's hard to keep all the lies straight, I guess...

_Katharine McPhee recently caught up with her old musical theater buddy – and invited the royal mom-to-be to come see her on West End!

The American Idol alum reunited with Meghan Markle – with whom she performed in musicals when they were both teens growing up in Los Angeles – last week backstage at Prince Harry surprised the crowd by “dragging” his wife onstage with him for an unexpected appearance._

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reunites-katharine-mcphee/


----------



## A1aGypsy

^^ that article doesn’t make it sound like they were close at all. McPhee sounds surprised Markle remembered her.  It might be that they were  in a musical theatre program together outside of school.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Perhaps it’s time for them to return to public life and Royal duties, the fantastic stories are starting to spiral out of control.....like Yeti sightings


----------



## Flatsy

McPhee's Wikipedia information says "citation needed" next to her high school information. I wouldn't count on it be 100% accurate.


----------



## gracekelly

The musical program that @CeeJay posted from November 1998 does not show McPhee as one of the cast members.  That would have been Meghan's senior year of HS and McPhee's freshman year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Perhaps it’s time for them to return to public life and Royal duties, the fantastic stories are starting to spiral out of control.....like Yeti sightings


You're right!  However hahahahahaha!  if you google Mc Phee there are numerous sites with her bio as having graduated from Notre Dame HS.  When things are incorrect on Wiki, the actor's management get them corrected and this hasn't happened.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> if you google Mc Phee there are numerous sites with her bio as having graduated from Notre Dame HS.


Immaculate Heart also includes a middle school.  She might have been in middle school while Meghan was in high school.  And Katharine saying she moved to Sherman Oaks when she was 12 might have been an approximation.   (I'm not too specific when I recount things I did when I was a kid.)  There are too many variables here to try to pin this down 100%, and I don't think it's necessary when there's a picture.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> Immaculate Heart also includes a middle school.  She might have been in middle school while Meghan was in high school.  And Katharine saying she moved to Sherman Oaks when she was 12 might have been an approximation.   (I'm not too specific when I recount things I did when I was a kid.)  There are too many variables here to try to pin this down 100%, and I don't think it's necessary when there's a picture.


Middle school sounds plausible.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Katharine secured the bag Meghan would have liked... rich old dude with enough money to do whatever and decent name recognition.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Katharine secured the bag Meghan would have liked... rich old dude with enough money to do whatever and decent name recognition.


True except she wants a baby and he doesn't.  Can't blame either of them.


----------



## bag-mania

It's being reported the dogs they had with them were their own. If true, that means Guy the beagle survived his two broken legs. 
Good for you, Guy! I thought you were no longer with us.


----------



## hellosunshine

*King Harry? Jamelia admits she would prefer ‘relatable’ Meghan and Harry to reign over UK*
*


*
PRINCE HARRY may be a better king for modern times than Prince William because he and Meghan Markle are more “relatable” and “progressive”, according to singer Jamelia.

Talk of the Queen stepping down from her throne has sparked up again as 2020 begins. Bookmakers have put 10/1 odds on Queen Elizabeth II stepping down this year. Channel 5’s Jeremy Vine show spoke about whether the monarch should abdicate and let Prince Charles, Prince William or even Prince Harry take over.

Singer Jamelia joined the panel, agreeing that it was “inevitable” that the UK will see the Duke of Cambridge as King, whether or not his father has a turn first.

However, to the shock of the audience, she revealed that she actually “preferred” spare heir, Prince Harry, for the top job.

The singer said: “I think it’s inevitable that we’re going to see Prince William as King.

“I prefer Prince Harry, I don’t know if I’m allowed to say that.”




She continued: “I relate to him, I relate to Meghan.

“I love what they stand for, what they represent.

“I think, for someone of my generation, I don’t want to over use the worst, but I think they’re progressive and relatable.”

On the different approaches between the Queen and her grandsons, Jamelia added: “I do think we have to take into consideration the difference in time. In the post-war era, it would have been the way to be buttoned up."




She continued: “For my generation, I think Prince William was born in 1981, the same year as me, we are very open and we discuss things.

“I don’t think we should be surprised by that.

“I don’t think it’s fair to compare the two.”

But, both Prince William and Prince Harry have done a lot of work with mental health charities and promoting speaking out.

Heads Together is a mental health initiative spearheaded by The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Prince Harry and his wife also spoke openly about struggling with the intense public scrutiny in a recent ITV documentary.

The monarch has reigned for 67 years, breaking Queen Victoria’s record by four years.

She is 93 now, and Prince Charles is the longest waiting heir-apparent.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...yal-family-news-jamelia-jeremy-vine-channel-5


----------



## mrsinsyder

It doesn’t work that way.


----------



## V0N1B2




----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> *King Harry? Jamelia admits she would prefer ‘relatable’ Meghan and Harry to reign over UK*
> *
> View attachment 4629902
> 
> *
> PRINCE HARRY may be a better king for modern times than Prince William because he and Meghan Markle are more “relatable” and “progressive”, according to singer Jamelia.
> 
> Talk of the Queen stepping down from her throne has sparked up again as 2020 begins. Bookmakers have put 10/1 odds on Queen Elizabeth II stepping down this year. Channel 5’s Jeremy Vine show spoke about whether the monarch should abdicate and let Prince Charles, Prince William or even Prince Harry take over.
> 
> Singer Jamelia joined the panel, agreeing that it was “inevitable” that the UK will see the Duke of Cambridge as King, whether or not his father has a turn first.
> 
> However, to the shock of the audience, she revealed that she actually “preferred” spare heir, Prince Harry, for the top job.
> 
> The singer said: “I think it’s inevitable that we’re going to see Prince William as King.
> 
> “I prefer Prince Harry, I don’t know if I’m allowed to say that.”
> 
> View attachment 4629903
> 
> 
> She continued: “I relate to him, I relate to Meghan.
> 
> “I love what they stand for, what they represent.
> 
> “I think, for someone of my generation, I don’t want to over use the worst, but I think they’re progressive and relatable.”
> 
> On the different approaches between the Queen and her grandsons, Jamelia added: “I do think we have to take into consideration the difference in time. In the post-war era, it would have been the way to be buttoned up."
> 
> View attachment 4629904
> 
> 
> She continued: “For my generation, I think Prince William was born in 1981, the same year as me, we are very open and we discuss things.
> 
> “I don’t think we should be surprised by that.
> 
> “I don’t think it’s fair to compare the two.”
> 
> But, both Prince William and Prince Harry have done a lot of work with mental health charities and promoting speaking out.
> 
> Heads Together is a mental health initiative spearheaded by The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Prince Harry and his wife also spoke openly about struggling with the intense public scrutiny in a recent ITV documentary.
> 
> The monarch has reigned for 67 years, breaking Queen Victoria’s record by four years.
> 
> She is 93 now, and Prince Charles is the longest waiting heir-apparent.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...yal-family-news-jamelia-jeremy-vine-channel-5


In other words, I like him so I think he should be king.


----------



## bag-mania

Because the first word everyone thinks of when they think royalty is "relatable."


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> In other words, I like him so I think he should be king.


Well, I think we can pretty much say that that would make Meghan happy, no?


----------



## TC1

A singer gets input on how the monachy is run? LOLLLLLLL


----------



## mrsinsyder

TC1 said:


> A singer gets input on how the monachy is run? LOLLLLLLL


Who even is that person?


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> *King Harry? Jamelia admits she would prefer ‘relatable’ Meghan and Harry to reign over UK*
> *
> View attachment 4629902
> 
> *
> PRINCE HARRY may be a better king for modern times than Prince William because he and Meghan Markle are more “relatable” and “progressive”, according to singer Jamelia.
> 
> Talk of the Queen stepping down from her throne has sparked up again as 2020 begins. Bookmakers have put 10/1 odds on Queen Elizabeth II stepping down this year. Channel 5’s Jeremy Vine show spoke about whether the monarch should abdicate and let Prince Charles, Prince William or even Prince Harry take over.
> 
> Singer Jamelia joined the panel, agreeing that it was “inevitable” that the UK will see the Duke of Cambridge as King, whether or not his father has a turn first.
> 
> However, to the shock of the audience, she revealed that she actually “preferred” spare heir, Prince Harry, for the top job.
> 
> The singer said: “I think it’s inevitable that we’re going to see Prince William as King.
> 
> “I prefer Prince Harry, I don’t know if I’m allowed to say that.”
> 
> View attachment 4629903
> 
> 
> She continued: “I relate to him, I relate to Meghan.
> 
> “I love what they stand for, what they represent.
> 
> “I think, for someone of my generation, I don’t want to over use the worst, but I think they’re progressive and relatable.”
> 
> On the different approaches between the Queen and her grandsons, Jamelia added: “I do think we have to take into consideration the difference in time. In the post-war era, it would have been the way to be buttoned up."
> 
> View attachment 4629904
> 
> 
> She continued: “For my generation, I think Prince William was born in 1981, the same year as me, we are very open and we discuss things.
> 
> “I don’t think we should be surprised by that.
> 
> “I don’t think it’s fair to compare the two.”
> 
> But, both Prince William and Prince Harry have done a lot of work with mental health charities and promoting speaking out.
> 
> Heads Together is a mental health initiative spearheaded by The Royal Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Prince Harry and his wife also spoke openly about struggling with the intense public scrutiny in a recent ITV documentary.
> 
> The monarch has reigned for 67 years, breaking Queen Victoria’s record by four years.
> 
> She is 93 now, and Prince Charles is the longest waiting heir-apparent.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...yal-family-news-jamelia-jeremy-vine-channel-5


God this nonsense says more about the low standards of Express than it does about the idiocy of whatever rando wasted her breath saying this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

It's always one thing to hear about a royals impact; however it’s quite another to actually see it take off. The kind and genuine appreciation in the video below is touching and I'm so happy that going forward this charity will have more resources to further help others. Hooray to Archie!


----------



## Lounorada

Mrs.Z said:


> Perhaps it’s time for them to return to public life and Royal duties, *the fantastic stories are starting to spiral out of control.....like Yeti sightings*


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Hooray to Archie!



Wow what an accomplished infant! He's changing the world already!

What a joke


----------



## bellecate

mrsinsyder said:


> It doesn’t work that way.


Thank goodness.


----------



## rose60610

Leave it to Meghan to have Archie do the heavy lifting. I hope HE'S ok so she can continue existing.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Found 'em! https://zonafranca.mx/cultura-y-ent...icJEcS88Tf2swv0j4C81TrPnORMVgC0Z-Lq3PIeuRPQ24
"
Mexico City, (RT). A young couple,  Iliya Pavlovic  and  Asymina Kantorowicz,  had finished having a picnic in the  Regional Park  of  Vancouver Island  (Canada)  on January 1 when they decided to take a “ _selfie_ ” and received an unexpected help, _CTV News Vancouver Island_ collects  _._






Iliya Pavlovic and Asymina Kantorowicz photographed by Meghan Markle. Photo: Asymina Kantorowicz
"We noticed that a group was close and had two dogs, one of which was approaching us," Kantorowicz said.

When the couple was reviewing the images that had just been taken, they were approached by a woman from the group and  offered  to  photograph them. At that time, they had not yet realized who he was.

"She started asking if we wanted her to take a picture of us," Kantorowicz said. “We said yes. I didn't see who she was at that time. ”

"I thought it looked familiar, but I didn't think it could really be her," Kantorowicz added. But in a few moments the woman recognized the volunteer, she was none other than  Meghan Markle.

“I froze. I really couldn't believe who it was. Then I looked to the side and that was when I realized that  Prince Henry  was standing there, ”Kantorowicz explained.

Markle took three photos of the couple. The woman described the  Duchess of Sussex as "super-friendly" and appreciated that she has offered to help them.

“He returned my phone and said: 'Happy new year!' and we said: "Thank you and happy new year!" Kantorowicz said.

"Then we laughed again and said," Did that just happen? "I still can't believe it. It feels like a dream, ”he added." (Google translate)


----------



## coleigh

mrsinsyder said:


> Katharine secured the bag Meghan would have liked... rich old dude with enough money to do whatever and decent name recognition.


David and Katharine are both phenomenal entertainers, but I doubt that Meghan would have dreamed of a relationship with an old rich dude with at least 4 ex-wives.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Found 'em! https://zonafranca.mx/cultura-y-ent...icJEcS88Tf2swv0j4C81TrPnORMVgC0Z-Lq3PIeuRPQ24
> "
> Mexico City, (RT). A young couple,  Iliya Pavlovic  and  Asymina Kantorowicz,  had finished having a picnic in the  Regional Park  of  Vancouver Island  (Canada)  on January 1 when they decided to take a “ _selfie_ ” and received an unexpected help, _CTV News Vancouver Island_ collects  _._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iliya Pavlovic and Asymina Kantorowicz photographed by Meghan Markle. Photo: Asymina Kantorowicz
> "We noticed that a group was close and had two dogs, one of which was approaching us," Kantorowicz said.
> 
> When the couple was reviewing the images that had just been taken, they were approached by a woman from the group and  offered  to  photograph them. At that time, they had not yet realized who he was.
> 
> "She started asking if we wanted her to take a picture of us," Kantorowicz said. “We said yes. I didn't see who she was at that time. ”
> 
> "I thought it looked familiar, but I didn't think it could really be her," Kantorowicz added. But in a few moments the woman recognized the volunteer, she was none other than  Meghan Markle.
> 
> “I froze. I really couldn't believe who it was. Then I looked to the side and that was when I realized that  Prince Henry  was standing there, ”Kantorowicz explained.
> 
> Markle took three photos of the couple. The woman described the  Duchess of Sussex as "super-friendly" and appreciated that she has offered to help them.
> 
> “He returned my phone and said: 'Happy new year!' and we said: "Thank you and happy new year!" Kantorowicz said.
> 
> "Then we laughed again and said," Did that just happen? "I still can't believe it. It feels like a dream, ”he added." (Google translate)


Why?


----------



## Stansy

CobaltBlu said:


> Found 'em! https://zonafranca.mx/cultura-y-ent...icJEcS88Tf2swv0j4C81TrPnORMVgC0Z-Lq3PIeuRPQ24
> "
> Mexico City, (RT). A young couple,  Iliya Pavlovic  and  Asymina Kantorowicz,  had finished having a picnic in the  Regional Park  of  Vancouver Island  (Canada)  on January 1 when they decided to take a “ _selfie_ ” and received an unexpected help, _CTV News Vancouver Island_ collects  _._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iliya Pavlovic and Asymina Kantorowicz photographed by Meghan Markle. Photo: Asymina Kantorowicz
> "We noticed that a group was close and had two dogs, one of which was approaching us," Kantorowicz said.
> 
> When the couple was reviewing the images that had just been taken, they were approached by a woman from the group and  offered  to  photograph them. At that time, they had not yet realized who he was.
> 
> "She started asking if we wanted her to take a picture of us," Kantorowicz said. “We said yes. I didn't see who she was at that time. ”
> 
> "I thought it looked familiar, but I didn't think it could really be her," Kantorowicz added. But in a few moments the woman recognized the volunteer, she was none other than  Meghan Markle.
> 
> “I froze. I really couldn't believe who it was. Then I looked to the side and that was when I realized that  Prince Henry  was standing there, ”Kantorowicz explained.
> 
> Markle took three photos of the couple. The woman described the  Duchess of Sussex as "super-friendly" and appreciated that she has offered to help them.
> 
> “He returned my phone and said: 'Happy new year!' and we said: "Thank you and happy new year!" Kantorowicz said.
> 
> "Then we laughed again and said," Did that just happen? "I still can't believe it. It feels like a dream, ”he added." (Google translate)


Yikes, that is one crappy pic! Sun in the back, backpack half in the picture, feet cut off. I would delete it in a heartbeat.


----------



## CobaltBlu

@gracekelly  LOL Well, I guess they found me because I really could not care any less about them. The last interesting thing about Meghan, to me, was the tiara she wore for her wedding.  However, i did think it was odd that this was newsworthy in Mexico. Weird.


----------



## Jayne1

Stansy said:


> Yikes, that is one crappy pic! Sun in the back, backpack half in the picture, feet cut off. I would delete it in a heartbeat.


That's what I said. Shooting into the sun, cutting off the lower limbs at such an awkward length.  I can't imagine Meg took the photo. I think she's far more Insta savvy and therefore photo savvy.


----------



## rose60610

I'm not completely sold on the tale of Shutterbug Meghan.  Sounds like a set-up for a favorable PR story to prove that Meghan isn't always a total disaster.  So she still has to interject herself in other people's privacy "Look! It's ME! And I can help out! I'm capable of taking a picture! And getting great press and media attention for myself!" 

If this "hiking in the woods" story is true, and the land belonged to the hosting couple, then wasn't the couple in the picture trespassing?  If it was a park for hikers and picnickers, why would Meghan's security entourage OK that but then not a restaurant? The whole thing reeks of staging.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I offer to take lots of people's pictures. No one gives me international press for it. Celebs are just human beings with a particular job. This “oh my god, they did something considerate launder it everywhere” culture we live in is ridiculous.


----------



## myown

rose60610 said:


> I'm not completely sold on the tale of Shutterbug Meghan.  Sounds like a set-up for a favorable PR story to prove that Meghan isn't always a total disaster.  So she still has to interject herself in other people's privacy "Look! It's ME! And I can help out! I'm capable of taking a picture! And getting great press and media attention for myself!"
> 
> If this "hiking in the woods" story is true, and the land belonged to the hosting couple, then wasn't the couple in the picture trespassing?  If it was a park for hikers and picnickers, why would Meghan's security entourage OK that but then not a restaurant? The whole thing reeks of staging.


Or the couple made up the story


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

A1aGypsy said:


> I offer to take lots of people's pictures. No one gives me international press for it. Celebs are just human beings with a particular job. This “oh my god, they did something considerate launder it everywhere” culture we live in is ridiculous.


Just remember, the couple decided to post it for everyone to see, not Meghan.


----------



## A1aGypsy

PatsyCline said:


> Just remember, the couple decided to post it for everyone to see, not Meghan.



I understand that. That’s my point.


----------



## gracekelly

The articles have used the buzz words of not OK and Struggling. Sound familiar?  Def coming from SS.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Sharont2305 said:


>




As an Australian on the east coast, I am very grateful to them and anyone else who is not only posting about the fires but also the links for people to help.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan is such a master manipulator using Archie to try sway public opinion about her. What happened to all the secrecy about his birth? Hey when you are a demented, nasty and cold and calculating. . . she has to do what she has to do.


----------



## Sharont2305

FreeSpirit71 said:


> As an Australian on the east coast, I am very grateful to them and anyone else who is not only posting about the fires but also the links for people to help.


Thinking of you all over there, stay safe. Xxx


----------



## marthastoo

Demented, nasty, cold, and calculating?


----------



## bag-mania

PatsyCline said:


> Just remember, the couple decided to post it for everyone to see, not Meghan.



The chances of approaching a random couple and offering to take their photo only to discover one of them happens to work for the local TV news station is insanely unlikely. It was set up.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

*David Foster Helped Meghan & Harry Secure Their Canadian Vacation Home *
(article: People magazine: *https://people.com/royals/david-fos...-and-prince-harrys-holiday-getaway-in-canada/)*

"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been on vacation in Canada during the holidays and their vacation home was arranged by someone famous!

Music producer and composer David Foster has revealed that he helped the royal couple secure their vacation home in Vancouver Island.

The $14 million home where Meghan and Harry are staying is owned by one of David‘s close friends, though he declined to name the owner while talking to Daily Mail.

“I felt honored that I was able to help Meghan there, because I’m a Canadian and we’re a commonwealth country, we’re the Crown’s,” he said. “It’s important to us, so I grew up with that kind of sentiment. I was really happy to be able to help them to find a respite just to take a little time off.”

*David‘s wife Katharine McPhee actually grew up with Meghan and they did some musicals together. *Kat‘s older sister Adriana went to the same school as the future Duchess of Sussex.

“*Katharine went to school with Meghan and her sister went to school with Meghan*,” David said. “We actually met Meghan and Harry at D-Day in London maybe a year ago. Immediately we were drawn to them, like everybody is, and I was just happy to help.”


----------



## Gal4Dior

ccbaggirl89 said:


> *David Foster Helped Meghan & Harry Secure Their Canadian Vacation Home *
> (article: People magazine: *https://people.com/royals/david-fos...-and-prince-harrys-holiday-getaway-in-canada/)*
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been on vacation in Canada during the holidays and their vacation home was arranged by someone famous!
> 
> Music producer and composer David Foster has revealed that he helped the royal couple secure their vacation home in Vancouver Island.
> 
> The $14 million home where Meghan and Harry are staying is owned by one of David‘s close friends, though he declined to name the owner while talking to Daily Mail.
> 
> “I felt honored that I was able to help Meghan there, because I’m a Canadian and we’re a commonwealth country, we’re the Crown’s,” he said. “It’s important to us, so I grew up with that kind of sentiment. I was really happy to be able to help them to find a respite just to take a little time off.”
> 
> *David‘s wife Katharine McPhee actually grew up with Meghan and they did some musicals together. *Kat‘s older sister Adriana went to the same school as the future Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> “*Katharine went to school with Meghan and her sister went to school with Meghan*,” David said. “We actually met Meghan and Harry at D-Day in London maybe a year ago. Immediately we were drawn to them, like everybody is, and I was just happy to help.”



Hope this was sanctioned by H&M...almost seems like it’s a press grab for Foster and McPhee, not that Foster needs that much publicity, but anyway...


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Katherine McPhee is thirsty AF and is a nasty piece (see her reaction when her and a friend weren't allowed entry to a stranger's wedding event).

https://www.inquisitr.com/4665410/d...s-after-getting-kicked-out-of-mexico-wedding/

I have serious doubts this was ok'd by H & M.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Katherine McPhee is thirsty AF and is a nasty piece (see her reaction when her and a friend weren't allowed entry to a stranger's wedding event).
> I don’t like McPhee and it’s very obvious she didn’t marry this man for love imo
> https://www.inquisitr.com/4665410/d...s-after-getting-kicked-out-of-mexico-wedding/
> 
> I have serious doubts this was ok'd by H & M.


----------



## Flatsy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I have serious doubts this was ok'd by H & M.


No such thing as a free lunch. Any rich celebrity friends who are willing to hook them up with holiday mansions are going to want to leverage their royal friendship one way or another. 

Unlike Meghan's family who have nothing of value to offer her in her new life, I doubt any of Meghan's celebrity friends will get cut off for talking to the Mail about her.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if they are going to plan a move to that part Canada now.  They can still seem royal because it’s a Commonwealth country, but it is far enough away from “the successors” that they won’t have to feel like second fiddles. It’s close enough to L.A. that they can hobnob with the entertainment industry (and it has its own entertainment industry there) and it’s close to Doria.  

So much for Frogmore!


----------



## Chagall

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if they are going to plan a move to that part Canada now.  They can still seem royal because it’s a Commonwealth country, but it is far enough away from “the successors” that they won’t have to feel like second fiddles. It’s close enough to L.A. that they can hobnob with the entertainment industry (and it has its own entertainment industry there) and it’s close to Doria.
> 
> So much for Frogmore!


Canada May be technically a commonwealth country but all the Canadians I know have zero interest in the royal family. That went by the wayside when we refused to stand for the playing of God Save The Queen during the office of Pierre Elliot Trudeau. I only hear about them on TPF. If they want attention and adulation I very much doubt they will get it here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if they are going to plan a move to that part Canada now.  They can still seem royal because it’s a Commonwealth country, but it is far enough away from “the successors” that they won’t have to feel like second fiddles. It’s close enough to L.A. that they can hobnob with the entertainment industry (and it has its own entertainment industry there) and it’s close to Doria.
> 
> So much for Frogmore!


Would be alike to princess Madeleine of Sweden


----------



## lanasyogamama

They might look like they failed or gave up if they move to Canada.


----------



## Flatsy

Being medium fish in the big pond isn't working out so well for them - I think they might want to be big fish in the small pond. (Canada being the small pond because there are no other royals there.)  

But after going rogue several times in the past year, I don't think QEII and Charles will allow them that long a leash.  They unfortunately need supervision, and it would be very easy for them to start acting like King and Queen of Canada.  

And the financial aspects (security, housing, travel back and forth to England) would be extremely difficult to justify.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Canada’s not a small pond.  We don’t much care for the royals on a day to day basis and we have many celebs that live / vacation here that generally keep a low profile and are generally left alone as a result. If that is what they want, this is a good place for them as long as Britain is going to reimburse the cost of their security. The RCMP / local police should not have to absorb that, nor should the taxpayers (Canadian or British, quite frankly).  But, if they are expecting to come here and be Royalty South, they likely have a rude awakening coming.


----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Can't Stand Public Scrutiny And Public Roles; Couple May Permanently Live In Canada

https://apple.news/AWINwUevETA2ENRS0bAs3jA


----------



## Flatsy

A1aGypsy said:


> Canada’s not a small pond.


As I said in my post, it's a small pond in the sense that they would be the only royals there.  Please don't take it to mean anything else.   They wouldn't have to compete for attention with the Queen, Charles & Camilla or William and Kate.  It would be their own territory.  

But Harry is as deserving of his own territory as other spares Princess Margaret or Prince Andrew - which is not at all.


----------



## kemilia

FreeSpirit71 said:


> As an Australian on the east coast, I am very grateful to them and anyone else who is not only posting about the fires but also the links for people to help.


I am so upset about the fires, I deliberately turn away from the images, cannot cope with the devastation--same thing when California burns and burns. 

I will be donating, hoping some of it goes to the poor animals that can't help themselves. If Meghan wanted major points, she could turn her Markle-ing powers towards this disaster. Nothing gets the public sympathy like helping children and animals. Just my 2 cents, of course.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LVSistinaMM said:


> Hope this was sanctioned by H&M...almost seems like it’s a press grab for Foster and McPhee, not that Foster needs that much publicity, but anyway...


They are probably far gone from that location by now. It seems like maybe he held his silence until they vacated.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> Canada May be technically a commonwealth country but all the Canadians I know have zero interest in the royal family. That went by the wayside when we refused to stand for the playing of God Save The Queen during the office of Pierre Elliot Trudeau. I only hear about them on TPF. If they want attention and adulation I very much doubt they will get it here.


I don't know.  I think we still have a large number of royalists.

“God Save the Queen” is still the royal anthem of Canada. I remember when we had to stop singing it in school. That and "The Maple Leaf Forever" which symbolized Canada's Irish, Scottish and English roots at the time.

Anyway, I do think there still is lots of interest in the BRF, but perhaps the newer Canadians from all parts of the world don't care?


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> *David Foster Helped Meghan & Harry Secure Their Canadian Vacation Home *
> (article: People magazine: *https://people.com/royals/david-fos...-and-prince-harrys-holiday-getaway-in-canada/)*
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been on vacation in Canada during the holidays and their vacation home was arranged by someone famous!
> 
> Music producer and composer David Foster has revealed that he helped the royal couple secure their vacation home in Vancouver Island.
> 
> The $14 million home where Meghan and Harry are staying is owned by one of David‘s close friends, though he declined to name the owner while talking to Daily Mail.
> 
> “I felt honored that I was able to help Meghan there, because I’m a Canadian and we’re a commonwealth country, we’re the Crown’s,” he said. “It’s important to us, so I grew up with that kind of sentiment. I was really happy to be able to help them to find a respite just to take a little time off.”
> 
> *David‘s wife Katharine McPhee actually grew up with Meghan and they did some musicals together. *Kat‘s older sister Adriana went to the same school as the future Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> “*Katharine went to school with Meghan and her sister went to school with Meghan*,” David said. “We actually met Meghan and Harry at D-Day in London maybe a year ago. Immediately we were drawn to them, like everybody is, and I was just happy to help.”


So, two things...

First, isn't it nice that the rich can sponge off other rich folks that they don't even know and get holiday lodging for free.

The second thing is, Foster said he was, "happy to be able to help them to find a respite just to take a little time off.”  Time off from what exactly?  The Africa trip was probably exhausting when you insist on smiling a Hollywood smile in every photo, but other than that, I can't see why they needed such a long respite.


----------



## Meh-gan

Jayne1 said:


> I don't know.  I think we still have a large number of royalists.
> 
> “God Save the Queen” is still the royal anthem of Canada. I remember when we had to stop singing it in school. That and "The Maple Leaf Forever" which symbolized Canada's Irish, Scottish and English roots at the time.
> 
> Anyway, I do think there still is lots of interest in the BRF, but perhaps the newer Canadians from all parts of the world don't care?



God Save the Queen is played literally never. I’m Canadian. It’s not played at important events or ceremonies. So while it may be an official royal anthem whatever the heck that means, it’s not an important ceremonial song used here. Our national anthem is used for everything. 

God Save the Queen is only used in the presence of the Queen or royals for formal events. Which is pretty much never. It’s not like the BRF comes here all that often.


----------



## A1aGypsy

God Save the Queen is our Royal Anthem, not the official anthem. It’s played when the royals are here or for specific functions of the GG and / or the LG. Our National Anthem is O Canada.


----------



## A1aGypsy

A1aGypsy said:


> God Save the Queen is our Royal Anthem, not the official anthem. It’s played when the royals are here or for specific functions of the GG and / or the LG. Our National Anthem is O Canada.



Or I could just quote the two above lol.


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> So, two things...
> 
> First, isn't it nice that the rich can sponge off other rich folks that they don't even know and get holiday lodging for free.
> 
> The second thing is, Foster said he was, "happy to be able to help them to find a respite just to take a little time off.”  *Time off from what exactly*?  The Africa trip was probably exhausting when you insist on smiling a Hollywood smile in every photo, but other than that, I can't see why they needed such a long respite.


This is such a good example of the Emperor's new clothes--the royals really do no real work--no lawn mowing, snow shoveling, dish washing, bus driving, fire fighting, nursing, coal mining--the list of what they *don't* do is endless. Appearing at various "engagements" wearing clothing/jewels that most could never afford to simply endorse a good charity and then get back in a chauffeured vehicle (which again is something most could not afford), is not work, imo. 

Which is why so many take exception to M's "existing" comment and now this cretin Foster's "respite" comment--are these people so stupid that they can't keep their mouths shut? No matter what that Jemelia person says--H&M are not doing the BRF any favors. Arrggh.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I can imagine being a significant royal as a very arduous role.  It may be a gilded cage, it's still a cage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Cavalier Girl said:


> I can imagine being a significant royal as a very arduous role.  It may be a gilded cage, it's still a cage.



I entirely agree. I argued the same when they initially got married and she hit the first few speed bumps. But it is a privileged cage of her choosing and being openly hostile and disrespectful to those around her, her new family and her new country isn’t the appropriate response if she is struggling.


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> I don't know.  I think we still have a large number of royalists.
> 
> “God Save the Queen” is still the royal anthem of Canada. I remember when we had to stop singing it in school. That and "The Maple Leaf Forever" which symbolized Canada's Irish, Scottish and English roots at the time.
> 
> Anyway, I do think there still is lots of interest in the BRF, but perhaps the newer Canadians from all parts of the world don't care?


Yes of course ‘God Save the Queen’ is still the royal anthem, but O Canada is played in nearly all occasions where it used to be played. Where I am there is little to no interest in the BRF. Surprisingly there is a lot of interest in them in the US.


----------



## Jayne1

Meh-gan said:


> God Save the Queen is played literally never. I’m Canadian. It’s not played at important events or ceremonies. So while it may be an official royal anthem whatever the heck that means, it’s not an important ceremonial song used here. Our national anthem is used for everything.
> 
> God Save the Queen is only used in the presence of the Queen or royals for formal events. Which is pretty much never. It’s not like the BRF comes here all that often.


That's why I said “God Save the Queen” is still the _royal anthem_ of Canada. 

Anyway, Meg and H can come here to live, not that they ever will.  But who really cares if they do.  They'll just fade into the background.  Remember when Prince had a house here. Did we ever see him on the streets? Drake has a house here. Does Rachel McAdams still have her Victorian in Harbord Village?  We never see Mark Wahlberg. If they live in Canada, anywhere in Canada, they will become invisible.


----------



## Meh-gan

Jayne1 said:


> That's why I said “God Save the Queen” is still the _royal anthem_ of Canada.
> 
> Anyway, Meg and H can come here to live, not that they ever will.  But who really cares if they do.  They'll just fade into the background.  Remember when Prince had a house here. Did we ever see him on the streets? Drake has a house here. Does Rachel McAdams still have her Victorian in Harbord Village?  We never see Mark Wahlberg. If they live in Canada, anywhere in Canada, they will become invisible.


If you are from here you know God Save the Queen is not a thing so why continue to bring it up? Like an official royal anthem on paper that is never performed in important situations is not something that proves there are a lot of royalists here as your earlier post said lol. 

Like no one is a royalist here, we barely acknowledge there is a Queen associated with Canada. In Quebec the BRF are not even a blip on their radars. 

I think most are just looking for gossip and clothes not harbouring royalist dreams for Canada.


----------



## Chagall

Cavalier Girl said:


> I can imagine being a significant royal as a very arduous role.  It may be a gilded cage, it's still a cage.


Everyone on this earth is in a ‘cage’ of some sort. Usually one of responsibility that is hard to escape from. Don’t get me started on this one it makes my blood boil!


----------



## Sophisticatted

David Foster said he arranged their place to stay.  Does he have any Sunshine Sachs connection?


----------



## Flatsy

Sophisticatted said:


> David Foster said he arranged their place to stay.  Does he have any Sunshine Sachs connection?


Katharine McPhee's publicist is Sunshine Sachs.


----------



## V0N1B2

I'm reminded of the Queen every time I open my wallet


----------



## Meh-gan

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm reminded of the Queen every time I open my wallet


Who carries cash anymore? LOL


----------



## V0N1B2

Meh-gan said:


> Who carries cash anymore? LOL


Because the male strippers don't carry debit machines in their g-string, doll.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan is such a self-inflicted PR disaster I'd think she has difficulty getting a new PR team.  No one wants to sign onto a job where your client finds it impossible to just shut up. You'd be branded as the PR person who must have lined up one disaster after another. Even her dog got two legs broken. Archie is too young realize any of this so he makes the perfect Fall Guy for when M steps in it.


----------



## Jayne1

Meh-gan said:


> If you are from here you know God Save the Queen is not a thing so why continue to bring it up? Like an official royal anthem on paper that is never performed in important situations is not something that proves there are a lot of royalists here as your earlier post said lol.
> 
> Like no one is a royalist here, we barely acknowledge there is a Queen associated with Canada. In Quebec the BRF are not even a blip on their radars.
> 
> I think most are just looking for gossip and clothes not harbouring royalist dreams for Canada.


Royalist dreams for Canada is quite a stretch. Don’t know where you got that, but let’s put each other on ignore, shall we?


----------



## White Orchid

V0N1B2 said:


> Because the male strippers don't carry debit machines in their g-string, doll.


Oh you are sofaking banned


----------



## daisychainz

I was surprised the article said Katharine McPhee went to school with Meghan. I don't know why -American Idol maybe- but I thought Katharine McPhee was much younger. I didn't realize she and Meghan were in the same age group.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I was surprised the article said Katharine McPhee went to school with Meghan. I don't know why -American Idol maybe- but I thought Katharine McPhee was much younger. I didn't realize she and Meghan were in the same age group.



She was on American Idol around 2006. She is four years younger than Meghan so saying they went to the same school isn't like saying they attended classes together. It's likely the school had a theater group where kids from different grades could participate in plays and maybe that is how they became acquainted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Chagall said:


> Everyone on this earth is in a ‘cage’ of some sort. Usually one of responsibility that is hard to escape from. Don’t get me started on this one it makes my blood boil!



My comment was in response to the general thought that royal duties aren't actually work, but rather that it's a privilege to look perfect every day, study what your event is about, and smile, smile, smile.....even when you feel like sh!t.  No thank you. 

Harry and Meghan have brought their bad press on themselves, and I have no sympathy for them.  And remember, they have a choice.  They can remove themselves from royal duties at any time if they see it as just existing, not living.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chagall said:


> Everyone on this earth is in a ‘cage’ of some sort. Usually one of responsibility that is hard to escape from. Don’t get me started on this one it makes my blood boil!



True! I work my butt off without all of the royal perks, money, support, and don't get a six week hiatus from it all when life gets hard.


----------



## Jayne1

Sophisticatted said:


> David Foster said he arranged their place to stay.  Does he have any Sunshine Sachs connection?





Flatsy said:


> Katharine McPhee's publicist is Sunshine Sachs.


What?  So it's all business? Oh, Hollywood...


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## TC1

it's considered an "engagement" to say thank you? Geez, no wonder some of these royals have a tally of 500 "engagements" a year


----------



## mrsinsyder

Ugh, it's honestly been so nice not seeing his wrinkled pants and her smug face for a few weeks. All good things must end.


----------



## CeeJay

According to their "royal mouthpiece", H&M will be taking on more work in Canada .. okay, like what??  I think the Canadians don't need their "help" .. and if I was Canadian, I would be pretty pissed having my taxpayer money go to support these 2 .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rry-work-Canada-2020-royal-expert-claims.html


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> According to their "royal mouthpiece", H&M will be taking on more work in Canada .. okay, like what??  I think the Canadians don't need their "help" .. and if I was Canadian, I would be pretty pissed having my taxpayer money go to support these 2 ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rry-work-Canada-2020-royal-expert-claims.html


I dont think our taxes go to support them. Maybe it’s used to throw the events they may attend that are arranged by the Canadian government, but I’m pretty sure their care is still being paid for by the British. 

We wouldn’t be paying for their living expenses or anything if they lived here.


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


>




This "thank you" event seems like a grab for some attention masked as being thankful for hospitality.


----------



## TC1

CeeJay said:


> According to their "royal mouthpiece", H&M will be taking on more work in Canada .. okay, like what??  I think the Canadians don't need their "help" .. and if I was Canadian, I would be pretty pissed having my taxpayer money go to support these 2 ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rry-work-Canada-2020-royal-expert-claims.html


Just a quick google search mentioned that in 2015 alone it cost us (Canadians) $43 million to support the royal family. I've said before and I got chewed out...but they are the largest welfare recipients


----------



## Meh-gan

TC1 said:


> Just a quick google search mentioned that in 2015 alone it cost us (Canadians) $43 million to support the royal family. I've said before and I got chewed out...but they are the largest welfare recipients


Dang. I mean what do they even do for us in Canada lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meh-gan said:


> Dang. I mean what do they even do for us in Canada lol





TC1 said:


> Just a quick google search mentioned that in 2015 alone it cost us (Canadians) $43 million to support the royal family. I've said before and I got chewed out...but they are the largest welfare recipients


This is why I’ve rolled my eyes at both of them from the beginning. You can’t seriously push for conservation and equality and all the other things your family is LITERALLY the opposite of. Meghan married into the family that colonized the world and is the epitome of class division while telling women in South Africa “I am one of you”? Girl bye. You’re aligned with a bunch of colonizing, classist freeloaders. Please.


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> I dont think our taxes go to support them. Maybe it’s used to throw the events they may attend that are arranged by the Canadian government, but I’m pretty sure their care is still being paid for by the British.
> 
> We wouldn’t be paying for their living expenses or anything if they lived here.





TC1 said:


> Just a quick google search mentioned that in 2015 alone it cost us (Canadians) $43 million to support the royal family. I've said before and I got chewed out...but they are the largest welfare recipients



My understanding is that when the BRF is in Canada, the Canadians foot the bill for their security, etc. - and you know that these folks aren't going to staying at some fleabag hotel or have crap transportation!  

As I said before, okay .. they go to Canada, but HOW are they going to help???  I think in some respects, Harry would love to just get away, but I *DO NOT* see that happening with Meghan who just can't help herself in staying away from the press.  Many noted that their post of Archie's picture, was the SAME day that the Cambridges had their big announcement .. how many "coincidences" is this???


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> My understanding is that when the BRF is in Canada, the Canadians foot the bill for their security, etc. - and you know that these folks aren't going to staying at some fleabag hotel or have crap transportation!
> 
> As I said before, okay .. they go to Canada, but HOW are they going to help???  I think in some respects, Harry would love to just get away, but I *DO NOT* see that happening with Meghan who just can't help herself in staying away from the press.  Many noted that their post of Archie's picture, was the SAME day that the Cambridges had their big announcement .. how many "coincidences" is this???


IDK about these things but I could see if Canada is part of the Commonwealth they might att least pay for H&M's security


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lmao.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulu212121

That is disgraceful. Isn't that theft?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Someone found a website written by the woman who ran into them in the woods and didn’t recognize them


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> H&M will be taking on more work in Canada .



Taking on more work in Canada? "Taking on work" to me implies "helping out". When it comes to helping out a country, Canada doesn't strike me as one of the countries that could use the most help. Maybe Meghan just means she finds it easier to exist there.  Existing = work, eh?


----------



## muchstuff

CeeJay said:


> According to their "royal mouthpiece", H&M will be taking on more work in Canada .. okay, like what??  I think the Canadians don't need their "help" .. and if I was Canadian, I would be pretty pissed having my taxpayer money go to support these 2 ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rry-work-Canada-2020-royal-expert-claims.html


I’m Canadian, make them go home please.


----------



## Meh-gan

sdkitty said:


> IDK about these things but I could see if Canada is part of the Commonwealth they might att least pay for H&M's security



I mean Australia part of the commonwealth, but I don’t see H&M going there to help out during the wildfires. I thought they were all about climate change disasters etc. Or is there no rich Aussies handing over the keys to their mansions there?

Also re: Commonwealth, I think people think this means more than it does. It’s not really something that Canadians identify with on a daily basis or affects us. Like it doesn’t affect our government policies or anything like that it’s more of a formality/technicality.


----------



## sdkitty

Meh-gan said:


> I mean Australia part of the commonwealth, but I don’t see H&M going there to help out during the wildfires. I thought they were all about climate change disasters etc. Or is there no rich Aussies handing over the keys to their mansions there?
> 
> Also re: Commonwealth, I think people think this means more than it does. It’s not really something that Canadians identify with on a daily basis or affects us. Like it doesn’t affect our government policies or anything like that it’s more of a formality/technicality.


Good point.  Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban donated $500k and pink did same.


----------



## rose60610

muchstuff said:


> I’m Canadian, make them go home please.



Well, now, aren't you just being a little ungrateful?  I mean, they just announced they wanted to "take on more work" in your fine country.  So....it's up to you and your compatriots to find and give them some work to do!!  And because Canadians have the reputation as being upstanding solid people, I'm sure it'll be meaningful and fulfilling. 

Here, let me help you out. As everyone knows, Harry Winston, Inc sources many of their diamonds from the Diavik Mine in your Northwest Territories (and ol' Harry himself donated the Hope Diamond to our Smithsonian in 1958, but I digress).  If you think about it, the Yukon and Northwest Territories are rather underdeveloped, just begging to be built up and hawked by some celebrity cachet (H&M, duh!!--all that WORK!!) to make them catch on. You could basically host the Winter Olympics all year long, year in and year out.  Throw in some casinos, shows, and neon and make it the Las Vegas of The North as well.  Why not? Your fellow Canadians, Celine Dion and Justin Bieber, could do some shows for free. Tourists could fly their private jets there and give lectures on carbon emissions.  

All I know is, is that the United States pawned Meghan off on the Brits so we could get rid of her, then the Brits discovered "Oh crap, we're stuck with her now, let's shove her off on Canada!" and NOW look, YOU got her (see how that works?).  I'mmmmm sorrrrrrrrry..........if you play your cards right, you could shove her off onto somebody ELSE. Unfortunately, the entire continent of Africa "is busy" (Meghan specializes in burning bridges) and can't take your call, but maybe somewhere like, I dunno, Guyana in South America? That's a British Commonwealth country. Meghan is already toxic in North America, Europe, and Africa--pretty soon you'll run out of continents so you'll have to act fast. Good luck!


----------



## hellosunshine

* Duke and Duchess of Sussex to visit Canada House in London to pay thanks for 'warm hospitality'  *




The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are to visit Canada House in London to personally thank the high commissioner for the “warm hospitality” and support they received during their six-week sabbatical.

The couple recently returned home from their extended break, having celebrated Thanksgiving and Christmas with their eight-month-old son Archie out of the public eye.

Buckingham Palace said the couple would visit Canada House on Tuesday to meet Janice Charette, Canada's High Commissioner to the UK, as well as staff to "thank them for the warm Canadian hospitality and support they received during their recent stay".

It will be their first official engagement since they were last seen at Remembrance Day services in November.

During their visit, the couple will tour the Canada Gallery and view a special exhibition by indigenous Canadian artist Skawennati, an award winning new-media artist based in Montreal.

The Duke and Duchess will also meet different members of the High Commission team who work in a range of sectors supporting the partnership between Canada and the UK.

The Sussexes last visited Canada House on Commonwealth Day last March, when they met and spoke with young Canadians from a wide range of sectors including fashion, the arts, business and academia, about their experiences as expats as well as opportunities for young people working in the Commonwealth.

The Duchess, particularly, has strong ties to Canada, having lived and worked in Toronto whilst starring in the US television drama Suits. 

The couple were first pictured together in the city when she joined her then-boyfriend, Prince Harry, at the 2017 Invictus Games.

They are expected to have a busy few months as they formally launch their own charitable foundation. 


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...ex-visit-canada-house-london-pay-thanks-warm/


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm reminded of the Queen every time I open my wallet


Can you imagine Charles on our bills? It's almost unthinkable.


----------



## muchstuff

Jayne1 said:


> Can you imagine Charles on our bills? It's almost unthinkable.


----------



## muchstuff

rose60610 said:


> Well, now, aren't you just being a little ungrateful?  I mean, they just announced they wanted to "take on more work" in your fine country.  So....it's up to you and your compatriots to find and give them some work to do!!  And because Canadians have the reputation as being upstanding solid people, I'm sure it'll be meaningful and fulfilling.
> 
> Here, let me help you out. As everyone knows, Harry Winston, Inc sources many of their diamonds from the Diavik Mine in your Northwest Territories (and ol' Harry himself donated the Hope Diamond to our Smithsonian in 1958, but I digress).  If you think about it, the Yukon and Northwest Territories are rather underdeveloped, just begging to be built up and hawked by some celebrity cachet (H&M, duh!!--all that WORK!!) to make them catch on. You could basically host the Winter Olympics all year long, year in and year out.  Throw in some casinos, shows, and neon and make it the Las Vegas of The North as well.  Why not? Your fellow Canadians, Celine Dion and Justin Bieber, could do some shows for free. Tourists could fly their private jets there and give lectures on carbon emissions.
> 
> All I know is, is that the United States pawned Meghan off on the Brits so we could get rid of her, then the Brits discovered "Oh crap, we're stuck with her now, let's shove her off on Canada!" and NOW look, YOU got her (see how that works?).  I'mmmmm sorrrrrrrrry..........if you play your cards right, you could shove her off onto somebody ELSE. Unfortunately, the entire continent of Africa "is busy" (Meghan specializes in burning bridges) and can't take your call, but maybe somewhere like, I dunno, Guyana in South America? That's a British Commonwealth country. Meghan is already toxic in North America, Europe, and Africa--pretty soon you'll run out of continents so you'll have to act fast. Good luck!


 I think they’ll leave on their own after the initial fuss dies down. As stated, Canadians (especially Vancouverites) aren’t big on fawning on celebs, we’ll come out and welcome the royals but then go about our daily business. All very politely of course, and wearing our best workout gear.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan married into the family that colonized the world and is the epitome of class division while telling women in South Africa “I am one of you”? Girl bye. You’re aligned with a bunch of colonizing, classist freeloaders. Please.



As you mention this speech, am I the only one who found it really odd she had to fit "as a member of the royal family" into this very sentence? I don't think I've seen the others feeling the need to point out they are a member of the royal family, most people are probably aware.


----------



## Sharont2305

This engagement this afternoon at Canada House is a bit odd, why thank them if it was a private holiday?
Im not sure I've read of any members of the RF go to any government building of any country after they've even been there on an official visit to thank them, let alone a holiday.


----------



## TC1

Sharont2305 said:


> This engagement this afternoon at Canada House is a bit odd, why thank them if it was a private holiday?
> Im not sure I've read of any members of the RF go to any government building of any country after they've even been there on an official visit to thank them, let alone a holiday.


Because it's an offical engagement they can call it work..and not be accused of doing their share, would be my guess.
Add it to the list of appearances, no speech or involvement required.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> This engagement this afternoon at Canada House is a bit odd, why thank them if it was a private holiday?
> Im not sure I've read of any members of the RF go to any government building of any country after they've even been there on an official visit to thank them, let alone a holiday.


Seems like the Palace is working hard on finding something for H&M to do that's an "engagement".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

So they are getting ready to launch their new charity foundation. I'm only posting this article because I love the maniacal look on Meghan's face as she mixes the vegetables. It's like "See, I'm doing good and important things, LOVE ME!" 


*Everything We Know so Far About Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's New Charity, Sussex Royal*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex split from the Royal Foundation, their formerly joint charity with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Prince Harry established the Royal Foundation with Prince William in 2009.
Meghan and Harry plan to launch their own charitable organization called Sussex Royal, and it sounds like it will kick off in 2020.
They've already filed for a trademark for the new organization.
In mid-June of 2019, Kensington Palace confirmed the rumors that had been swirling for weeks: the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are leaving the Royal Foundation, the charitable organization that they have shared with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They plan to start their own separate charitable foundation, and it sounds like it will officially launch in 2020.

Here's everything we know about the project know so far:

*HARRY AND MEGHAN HAVE REVEALED THAT THE ORGANIZATION WILL BE CALLED SUSSEX ROYAL.*
During her speech at the launch of her charitable clothing line for Smart Works, Meghan shared that the fashion project is "the same vein of work my husband and I will continue doing—really strong, community-based projects—and this is something that we'll be excited to be able to share more about next year when we launch our foundation, Sussex Royal 2020."

Back in early June, Omid Scobie reported that "the plans for 'Project Sussex Foundation' are so beta, preliminary paperwork is only just being filed."

*THEY'VE ALSO FILED FOR A TRADEMARK FOR THE ORGANIZATION.*
Harry and Meghan filed to register a trademark for "Sussex Royal The Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" back in June, but the filing wasn't published until December.

*HARRY AND MEGHAN ARE "VERY EXCITED" TO START THEIR OWN CHARITABLE INITIATIVE.*
The new organization will "[allow] the Sussexes to do things exactly how they want," a palace source told Scobie. "Their operating style is very different to the Cambridges and so having their own space to think as big as they like, working on a global scale, is perfect for them."

The insider also noted that Harry and Meghan are thinking big with their philanthropic plans. “Not only will their new foundation stand the test of time, but it will allow them to do some very ambitious things," said the source. "Their charity will provide them with an opportunity to create something that will be their defining work—and it’s entirely theirs.”




*IT'S UNCLEAR EXACTLY WHICH ISSUES THE ORGANIZATION WILL FOCUS ON.*
Both Meghan and Harry have expressed interest in a wide variety of causes in the past ranging from women's rights and empowerment to veteran affairs, conservation, the elimination of landmines, and reducing the stigma of mental health concerns.

*THEY WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE CAMBRIDGES ON SPECIFIC PROJECTS.*
Even after the Sussexes launch their new charity, Meghan and Harry will still collaborate with Will and Kate on philanthropic efforts. The press release announcing the separation specifically noted that "both couples will continue to work together on projects in the future, including on The Foundation’s mental health programme, Heads Together."

The name of the Royal Foundation has since been changed to The Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...meghan-markle-charity-sussex-foundation-news/


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> This engagement this afternoon at Canada House is a bit odd, why thank them if it was a private holiday?
> Im not sure I've read of any members of the RF go to any government building of any country after they've even been there on an official visit to thank them, let alone a holiday.


seeking publicity?


----------



## Sharont2305

The hand holding is back


----------



## mrsinsyder

I knew she'd come back looking totally different. A little Canada nip tuck eh?


----------



## LittleStar88

Meh-gan said:


> I mean Australia part of the commonwealth, but I don’t see H&M going there to help out during the wildfires. I thought they were all about climate change disasters etc. Or is there no rich Aussies handing over the keys to their mansions there?
> 
> Also re: Commonwealth, I think people think this means more than it does. It’s not really something that Canadians identify with on a daily basis or affects us. Like it doesn’t affect our government policies or anything like that it’s more of a formality/technicality.



You know what would have blown my mind? If Harry and Meghan flew to AUS and got in there and got their hands dirty helping out. Go hand out supplies to the displaced. Go see the centers helping animals that have been hurt by fires, etc. 

Same with the other BRF members. Why isn't someone going there to bring more attention to this crisis? Would be doing more than _Thoughts and Prayers_ posts on social media which do little to nothing.


----------



## Sharont2305

She sat down first
By touching his back is she basically telling him to sit down?


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> All I know is, is that the United States pawned Meghan off on the Brits so we could get rid of her, then the Brits discovered "Oh crap, we're stuck with her now, let's shove her off on Canada!" and NOW look, YOU got her (see how that works?).  I'mmmmm sorrrrrrrrry..........if you play your cards right, you could shove her off onto somebody ELSE. Unfortunately, the entire continent of Africa "is busy" (Meghan specializes in burning bridges) and can't take your call, but maybe somewhere like, I dunno, Guyana in South America? That's a British Commonwealth country. Meghan is already toxic in North America, Europe, and Africa--pretty soon you'll run out of continents so you'll have to act fast. Good luck!



I don't think many in the US really knew who she was - or even *cared* - until she was dating Harry.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## mrsinsyder

How is she lighter than Harry


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> How is she lighter than Harry


IDK....unfortunate that he's losing his hair


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> IDK....unfortunate that he's losing his hair


Yes, and his head always looks horribly scruffy even when he's put together.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan visited Hubb Community Kitchen earlier this morning -


----------



## eunaddict

CeeJay said:


> According to their "royal mouthpiece", H&M will be taking on more work in Canada .. okay, like what??  I think the Canadians don't need their "help" .. and if I was Canadian, I would be pretty pissed having my taxpayer money go to support these 2 ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rry-work-Canada-2020-royal-expert-claims.html



As a Canadian, no thanks.

Go home, stay home and "exist" behind those gilded gates please. Seriously, if our current government keeps spending our tax dollars on these two, they'll lose my vote. We don't have millions to go throwing around annually to fund "sabbaticals".


----------



## Blyen

Her face looks different for sure,kinda puffy? Is she pregnant again?
She is nicely dressed though, this time.. No ill fitting everything, no inappropriate cleavage... I just wish she would put on tights! Bare legs during the winter just looks weird to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't think many in the US really knew who she was - or even *cared* - until she was dating Harry.



Exactly! She is famous because of who she married. There, I said it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Blyen said:


> Her face looks different for sure,kinda puffy? Is she pregnant again?
> She is nicely dressed though, this time.. No ill fitting everything, no inappropriate cleavage... I just wish she would put on tights! Bare legs during the winter just looks weird to me.


Probably fresh fillers.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Exactly! She is famous because of who she married. There, I said it.


of course....as we've discussed here before, he TV show was pretty obscure.  She was far from a household name.  But now she's one of the most famous women in the world.  So - she should be happy!


----------



## bag-mania

Yes, she should be happy but she obviously wants more. I thought it was funny that this is how a body language expert analyzed their Christmas card. (It's a bit over-the-top but the media has been starving for H&M gossip.)

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s eco Christmas card shows a desire to be a ‘cool’ A-list power couple with Archie as ‘the centre of their universe’*

The sweet black-and-white image showed the new parents gazing adoringly at baby Archie - and a body language expert has said it proves they are the “ultimate A-list power couple”. 

The adorable photo, which shows the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in fits of laughter behind their cute son, was released electronically to be eco-friendly. 

Judi James told Fabulous Digital: “Harry reveals his passion for change is still a defining quality with this stylish and very non-traditional monochrome pose. 

“Xmas cards are known for their warm colours and sparkle but this cool, fashionable look bucks that trend totally. 

“The environmental considerations are clearly important given some of the criticism they have suffered in the past year, but otherwise this spontaneous-looking pose looks like something from a fashion magazine interview with an A-list power couple.”

Judi added that the card “blends humour with the feeling that we are watching a private moment between the clearly besotted parents and their adventurous son”.

Archie can be seen wearing contemporary British kids-wear label Boden, as he beams at the camera.

She added: “Harry and Meghan’s eyes are on their son, showing he is the centre of their universe, although their matching poses behind him as they sit casually on the floor gives us a new glimpse of the strong love ties between the couple themselves too.”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s last Christmas card was a glossy black-and-white shot of the couple watching the fireworks at their evening wedding reception at Frogmore Hall in Windsor.

Judi said that both cards “suggest little has changed in terms of the Sussex couple's ambitions, intentions and sense of marketing themselves as a couple on the world stage.”

She said: “Both cards have an A-list feel to them, from the glamour of the wedding day to more casual glamour of what appears to be the couple at home this year. 

“The monochrome shows a desire to be cool, stylish and rather different and on both cards we are being shown the couple in what is suggested to be a spontaneous, intimate and highly emotional moment rather than being directly engaged with them via their eye contact with the camera.” 

“Both cards are also very high on romance. Harry and Meghan might not want to share their eye contact with the camera but they do appear keen to emphasise strength of their emotions, both as a couple and as parents.

“They were clearly besotted with one another in last year’s pose and this year they are showing how besotted they are with baby Archie, too.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/1...co-christmas-card-a-list-power-couple-archie/


----------



## daisychainz

Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.


----------



## Mrs.Z

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367


oh my gosh, this is horrible, poor thing......BOTOX !!!!


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367


oh dear


----------



## mrsinsyder

Tell me more about how she’s a style icon...


----------



## sdkitty

she is a style icon because of who she's married to


mrsinsyder said:


> Tell me more about how she’s a style icon...


----------



## doni

Love the browns, don’t like the new wig.

I really find this new foundation business very dodgy. I don’t see on which grounds they should become a philanthropic power house that influences the charity agenda at international level...  As royals they should support projects exclusively on the basis of the priorities of the UK... I don’t get the entitlement (unlike say Bill Gates, they haven’t themselves made the money that justifies the influence and agenda setting). Plus the name, Sussex Royal, I find it preposterous when their are not even in the throne line...


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Love the browns, don’t like the new wig.
> 
> I really find this new foundation business very dodgy. I don’t see on which grounds they should become a philanthropic power house that influences the charity agenda at international level...  As royals they should support projects exclusively on the basis of the priorities of the UK... I don’t get the entitlement (unlike say Bill Gates, they haven’t themselves made the money that justifies the influence and agenda setting). Plus the name, Sussex Royal, I find it preposterous when their are not even in the throne line...


didn't notice the wig but now that you mention it her hair does appear longer and straighter


----------



## Annawakes

Blyen said:


> Her face looks different for sure,kinda puffy? Is she pregnant again?
> She is nicely dressed though, this time.. No ill fitting everything, no inappropriate cleavage... I just wish she would put on tights! Bare legs during the winter just looks weird to me.


I thought her face looks puffy too.  Her nose seems wider?  Something does look different.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

hellosunshine said:


> *
> The Duchess, particularly, has strong ties to Canada, having lived and worked in Toronto whilst STARRING in the US television Suits.
> 
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...ex-visit-canada-house-london-pay-thanks-warm/*


*

Re-writing history a little? 

My daughters and I watched the TV series, Suits, for years and it’s news to me that MM “starred” in the show.

Apologies but she was not even the period mark at the end of a sentence in that series.*


----------



## Annawakes

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367


Now I feel bad for her.  How embarrassing.  Maybe she’s not as bad as we think.  Maybe she’s trying very hard, and gets nervous and hence sweaty.


----------



## Jayne1

muchstuff said:


> All very politely of course, and wearing our best workout gear.


Funny!

I don't like her recent hair.  It's not very elegant for a member of the royal family and it just seems so unhealthy or something.  

I mean Anne's hair is blah lately, but she's not trying, so that fair.  She's a no nonsense princess.  Meg is really trying to be fashionable and the hair is so distracting. Especially when she keeps pushing it back from her face.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367



Omg ewww, I have no words but I’m surprised the press would run such a pic of a member of the BRF, very telling 

A move to Canada - please, not the USA - might be wise


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Funny!
> 
> I don't like her recent hair.  It's not very elegant for a member of the royal family and it just seems so unhealthy or something.
> 
> I mean Anne's hair is blah lately, but she's not trying, so that fair.  She's a no nonsense princess.  Meg is really trying to be fashionable and the hair is so distracting. Especially when she keeps pushing it back from her face.



It looks very raggedy. She’s had pretty hair before, so I don’t understand.


----------



## mrsinsyder

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Re-writing history a little? *



It's a common theme in the story of Meghan. Her fans will have you thinking she was on the A-list.


----------



## jcnc

mrsinsyder said:


> wrinkled





hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4633291
> 
> View attachment 4633297
> 
> View attachment 4633298


I like the color of her heels!


----------



## hellosunshine

Outfit Details for today-

Reiss Sabel Camel Wool Blend Overcoat
Massimo Dutti Silk Satin Midi Skirt
Massimo Dutti Plain Silk Wool Sweater
Jimmy Choo 'Romy' Pumps
Catzor Jewelry 'Sparrow' Earrings
Kismet by Milka Dangle Bracelet


----------



## daisychainz

Annawakes said:


> Now I feel bad for her.  How embarrassing.  Maybe she’s not as bad as we think.  Maybe she’s trying very hard, and gets nervous and hence sweaty.


Yes. Agree. Lots of people get nervous and sweaty in clothing. It's common, and so easy to fix with an undershirt, or cardigan, just something. She KNOWS she'll be photographed all day, so why risk it.


----------



## myown

LittleStar88 said:


> You know what would have blown my mind? If Harry and Meghan flew to AUS and got in there and got their hands dirty helping out. Go hand out supplies to the displaced. Go see the centers helping animals that have been hurt by fires, etc.
> 
> Same with the other BRF members. Why isn't someone going there to bring more attention to this crisis? Would be doing more than _Thoughts and Prayers_ posts on social media which do little to nothing.


And Zara is on vacation there


----------



## myown

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367


Well there are worse things


----------



## kemilia

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367


Holy Guacamole--she looks different! 

Seriously, not like herself at all, Wow.


----------



## bag-mania

Cue the pregnancy rumors.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> didn't notice the wig but now that you mention it her hair does appear longer and straighter


I thought at first it was really sh**y extensions but after reading the Kim K site for a long time, I can now recognize a really bad wig, and that is one imo. Why do this to herself? She had nice hair but maybe the baby hormones and years of that scary Brazilian hair treatment destroyed it? 

And there is no excuse for pitting out a blouse like that--like someone said--Botox.


----------



## Tivo

Meghan is definitely not wearing a wig. Extensions maybe (like everyone else) but not a wig.


----------



## jcnc

Tivo said:


> Meghan is definitely not wearing a wig. Extensions maybe (like everyone else) but not a wig.


I am really bad at sighting wigs or extensions but I surely understand a new mom's insecurity to wear such things.. given that hair fall for some can be BRUTAL plus she gets SOOO much media attention.


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't think many in the US really knew who she was - or even *cared* - until she was dating Harry.


 
You're right, few in the U.S. did. Once she was in the limelight with Harry I thought she WAS OK, and nice. As time went on and she began complaining about her new royal want-for-nothing-life, she dug herself into a hole. If she were not married to Harry nobody would have the time of day for her now.


----------



## Jayne1

But wouldn't a wig have nice looking hair?  Better than average hair?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

jcnc said:


> I am really bad at sighting wigs or extensions but I surely understand a new mom's insecurity to wear such things.. given that hair fall for some can be BRUTAL plus she gets SOOO much media attention.


I don’t even think it is about insecurities. Many if not most public personalities with lots of appearances are using wigs or hair pieces at the moment. They have become so much better, they can mirror your own hair quite well, only better, and they are so extremely convenient and time saving.


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4633294
> 
> View attachment 4633295
> 
> View attachment 4633311
> 
> View attachment 4633314


Can’t stand seeing them in the same room as a Mountie. They don’t belong there. Go home indeed!


----------



## bellecate

hellosunshine said:


> Outfit Details for today-
> 
> Reiss Sabel Camel Wool Blend Overcoat
> Massimo Dutti Silk Satin Midi Skirt
> Massimo Dutti Plain Silk Wool Sweater
> Jimmy Choo 'Romy' Pumps
> Catzor Jewelry 'Sparrow' Earrings
> Kismet by Milka Dangle Bracelet
> 
> View attachment 4633438



She does love being the center of attention.


----------



## hellosunshine

Interesting song choice in the above video.

♫ "There's no distance in between/ Darling you and me / Make this thing complete /We go drifting out to sea / Making memories /Your honey's oh so sweet" ♬♬


----------



## threadbender

We all know I am not the biggest fan but I am embarrassed for her. Nowadays with botox and miradry, she doesn't have to have the perspiration stains. 
Agree with someone else, love the shoes!


----------



## mrsinsyder

threadbender said:


> We all know I am not the biggest fan but I am embarrassed for her. Nowadays with botox and miradry, she doesn't have to have the perspiration stains.
> Agree with someone else, love the shoes!


I am the sweatiest person ever AND I live in Florida... I haven't had pit stains like that since I was in high school. It's so easy to deal with that issue.


----------



## daisychainz

Jayne1 said:


> But wouldn't a wig have nice looking hair?  Better than average hair?


Yes. They are almost too perfect. Pretty sure she just makes liberal use of extensions and pieces and not wigs, or maybe she uses a half wig/wig fall. She parts her hair in the middle - that type of wig would be super hard to pull off under such camera scrutiny.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> You know what would have blown my mind? If Harry and Meghan flew to AUS and got in there and got their hands dirty helping out. Go hand out supplies to the displaced. Go see the centers helping animals that have been hurt by fires, etc.
> 
> Same with the other BRF members. Why isn't someone going there to bring more attention to this crisis? Would be doing more than _Thoughts and Prayers_ posts on social media which do little to nothing.


.. and *AMEN*; this is EXACTLY what they should be doing!!!  You two want to get up on your soapboxes and spout what "we" should all be doing about Climate Change .. well, here's your PERFECT backdrop!!!   Why do I feel that they are just going to be mucking up things even more than before???


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> Armpit stains and a stained shirt ... welcome back Meghan.
> View attachment 4633366
> View attachment 4633367


WOW!!!  Having worked in an environment (_Executive - Financial Services_) which was very stodgy, we were always told (_especially when I was working in the UK_) .. '*NEVER, EVER remove your blazer/jacket*'!!!  It was viewed as being very unprofessional!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Funny!
> 
> I don't like her recent hair.  It's not very elegant for a member of the royal family and it just seems so unhealthy or something.
> 
> I mean Anne's hair is blah lately, but she's not trying, so that fair.  She's a no nonsense princess.  Meg is really trying to be fashionable and the hair is so distracting. *Especially when she keeps pushing it back from her face*.


*THANK YOU*; remind you of anyone .. Khloe Kardashian???  Put your hair back if you know that it's going to be windy; the constant hair touching _(much like Harry's constant hands-on his blazer_) are signs of a lack of confidence.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> *THANK YOU*; remind you of anyone .. Khloe Kardashian???  Put your hair back if you know that it's going to be windy; the constant hair touching _(much like Harry's constant hands-on his blazer_) are signs of a lack of confidence.


Agree.  Very Khloe. People with fake hair love to touch it.  But also, as you mentioned, true professionals don't fidget with their hair. They stay still.


----------



## Chagall

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Omg ewww, I have no words but I’m surprised the press would run such a pic of a member of the BRF, very telling
> 
> A move to Canada - please, not the USA - might be wise


Well you took Justin Bieber off our hands so please extend the same curtesy with these two.


----------



## gracekelly

I thought it was a sad presentation.  At the first public outing, I would have thought her appearance would be better.  The hair is just too much for a person this age.  It looks unkempt and not professional at all.  This can be easily remedied, so hopefully that will happen.  Not a fan of the outfit and think it is kind of dull.  Red for the Canadian symbolic maple leaf would have been nice.  I think the only thing that Harry lost on his vacay was his hair.  I hope that Customs returns it soon.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.  Very Khloe. People with fake hair love to touch it.  But also, as you mentioned, true professionals don't fidget with their hair. They stay still.


Even Kate has figured out how to stop touching her hair, and she’s not a trained professional at being on camera like MM.


----------



## altigirl88

I say it’s a wig because the part looks way too wide/deep


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also aren’t satin and velvet evening fabrics?


----------



## LittleStar88

How did she manage to make the browns so frumpy dumpy on her? Shoes and skirt are nice. Face does look different. That lipstick is not a great color on her. And wow about the sweaty pits - totally unavoidable.

She does look different - can't place it though.


----------



## doni

daisychainz said:


> Yes. They are almost too perfect. Pretty sure she just makes liberal use of extensions and pieces and not wigs, or maybe she uses a half wig/wig fall. She parts her hair in the middle - that type of wig would be super hard to pull off under such camera scrutiny.


There are good wigs with middle partings. Naomi Campbell has worn that style forever. Some are also open at the top so that you have your real parting showing. But I think this is a full wig or, as you say, a top hair piece. You can see her freezy natural hair showing under at the sides of the forehead, from so much touching it I guess, and the sweating.

As someone who also sweats a lot I feel for her on that front and understand if she doesn’t want to use Botox. But then you have to be tough and keep a jacket on... guess it was a bad choice for that particular event. Not easy to be under so much scrutiny.


----------



## marthastoo

Oh, good god.  She's not wearing a wig or extensions.   It looks exactly like it always has.  Whether it's "too much" hair for someone her age - Kate is exactly the same age and similar length and style (long waves) and fiddles with it arguably more than Meghan.  Meghan's in her late 30s - I happily rock my long waves in my late 40s, but if a woman wants to wear her hair long at 68 - more power to her.  I'm not in the business of policing women's hair lengths based on antiquated notions of what is appropriate.  As long as it looks good - go for it.

Overall, she looks good.  Basic, respectable, simple.  The sweat stains are unfortunate.  She probably wasn't expecting to sweat through - maybe it was warmer than expected or she was nervous?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

She's an awful mess of a woman. The pieces in her outfit are nice though, especially the shoes and coat. Someone with style could totally make those work and look great. She just makes them look super frumpy.


----------



## doni

marthastoo said:


> Oh, good god.  She's not wearing a wig or extensions.   It looks exactly like it always has.


But she has always worn wigs and hair pieces... I don’t see there is anything at all wrong with that. It is perfectly standard among African American women, and used by many others, witness Melania ***** or Queen Letizia.. It is a practical and understandable choice, I on my side never meant it as a criticism...


----------



## gracekelly

There is nothing wrong with wearing hair long.  My thought is that it needs to be styled.  It is just a wild mess at the moment and it is difficult to look put together and professional especially when you have to keep moving it out of your face.  If she wants to wear a wig and/or extensions that is her business, but keep it styled.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> Well you took Justin Bieber off our hands so please extend the same curtesy with these two.


OH NO, NO, NO and NO!!!  Let them go to Malawi or South Africa or somewhere else .. we do not want them either!  

You know, I thought .. do they want to be in Canada so that they can 'act' like they are the King & Queen of Canada?  It just seems that they are SO desperate for a 'place' somewhere because they are always going to be second fiddle in the BRF!


----------



## lulilu

I always thought that the women we see with long hair extensions are constantly touching it to make sure everything is staying in place.  It seems very common (and distracting).


----------



## Jayne1

marthastoo said:


> Oh, good god.  She's not wearing a wig or extensions.   It looks exactly like it always has.  Whether it's "too much" hair for someone her age - Kate is exactly the same age and similar length and style (long waves) and fiddles with it arguably more than Meghan.  Meghan's in her late 30s - I happily rock my long waves in my late 40s, but if a woman wants to wear her hair long at 68 - more power to her.  I'm not in the business of policing women's hair lengths based on antiquated notions of what is appropriate.  As long as it looks good - go for it.
> 
> Overall, she looks good.  Basic, respectable, simple.  The sweat stains are unfortunate.  She probably wasn't expecting to sweat through - maybe it was warmer than expected or she was nervous?


I wear my hair long too and I'm older than you.

However, you said as long as it looks good and I think that's what we were saying.  It doesn't look good.  It looks unhealthy and a bit unkempt for a fashionably conscious royal.  

Kate's hair, which looks to be done by a stylist everyday, always looks camera ready and very polished.

I loved Meg's messy bun though.


----------



## altigirl88

marthastoo said:


> Oh, good god.  She's not wearing a wig or extensions.   It looks exactly like it always has.  Whether it's "too much" hair for someone her age - Kate is exactly the same age and similar length and style (long waves) and fiddles with it arguably more than Meghan.  Meghan's in her late 30s - I happily rock my long waves in my late 40s, but if a woman wants to wear her hair long at 68 - more power to her.  I'm not in the business of policing women's hair lengths based on antiquated notions of what is appropriate.  As long as it looks good - go for it.
> 
> Overall, she looks good.  Basic, respectable, simple.  The sweat stains are unfortunate.  She probably wasn't expecting to sweat through - maybe it was warmer than expected or she was nervous?



A little OT, but my mother still wears hers long at 67 and was told when she was early fifties (by an elderly lady) that she needed to cut it and start perming it


----------



## hellosunshine

+More Photos Released


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## ccbaggirl89

lulilu said:


> I always thought that the women we see with long hair extensions are constantly touching it to make sure everything is staying in place.  It seems very common (and distracting).


Only in the wind is that really a concern


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> I wear my hair long too and I'm older than you.
> 
> However, you said as long as it looks good and I think that's what we were saying.  It doesn't look good.  It looks unhealthy and a bit unkempt for a fashionably conscious royal.
> 
> Kate's hair, which looks to be done by a stylist everyday, always looks camera ready and very polished.
> 
> I loved Meg's messy bun though.


I don’t think the length is the issue with hair. The condition and grooming of the hair is what makes or breaks it. I’ve seen horrible long hair and horrible short hair. Also beautiful long and short hair styles. Knowing what suits you is key. Diana would have looked witchy with long hair but wore her short cropped hair with incredible style. Megan always looks sloppy (as does Harry) and considering the amount of money they have available to them insofar as having a groomed polished appearance, it is hard to believe. They seem to be looking worse and worse as time goes buy rather than acquiring a more professional appearance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Re-writing history a little? *
> 
> *My daughters and I watched the TV series, Suits, for years and it’s news to me that MM “starred” in the show.*
> 
> *Apologies but she was not even the period mark at the end of a sentence in that series.*


I'm glad to see you back, you've been missed!


----------



## mdcx

kemilia said:


> Holy Guacamole--she looks different!
> 
> Seriously, not like herself at all, Wow.


She has had injectables up the wazoo it looks like. Her face strangely reminds me of Pippa Middleton now.
As for her clothes, she is trying to do that whole messy elegant thing, but it really only works on very tall, slim, naturally graceful people. Stella Tennant comes to mind. It’s not really a royal look. The bare legs with a satin skirt really doesn’t look great on her. A bit like “ there was a fire alarm so I threw this sweater and coat over my negligee...”

ETA: she has got to be ignoring all advice about undergarments given to her. That strapless bra that you can 100% see the outline of, and that seems too small, I’m sure that was not signed off by the wardrobe mistress.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> I don’t think the length is the issue with hair. The condition and grooming of the hair is what makes or breaks it. I’ve seen horrible long hair and horrible short hair. Also beautiful long and short hair styles. Knowing what suits you is key. Diana would have looked witchy with long hair but wore her short cropped hair with incredible style. Megan always looks sloppy (as does Harry) and considering the amount of money they have available to them insofar as having a groomed polished appearance, it is hard to believe. They seem to be looking worse and worse as time goes buy rather than acquiring a more professional appearance.


I agree.

By the way, it was reported (Tina Brown, I think) that Diana had her hair styled, or blown out, twice a day.  Once after her morning gym sessions and again for an evening out. Her hair always did look polished, although really large sometimes.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Meghan’s hair is looking like Morticia’s hair. It needs to be thinned our and styled. She’s trying to pull off “Hollywood It Girl” hair when she’s supposed to represent as a royal. She’s not KK, she’s the wife of the BRF spare. 

Her outfit looks nice, but I see a fullness in the face and larger bust. I have a feeling she is pregnant again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> ETA: she has got to be ignoring all advice about undergarments given to her. That strapless bra that you can 100% see the outline of, and that seems too small, I’m sure that was not signed off by the wardrobe mistress.



Indeed. I am way bustier than her and I can find bras that don't show under tight clothing. It's also not a "I just had a baby" thing, anyone remember her very first trip to Ireland? The awful dress that was way too tight over the bust and her bra line was super visible? Honestly, if I was that rich, I would have all my clothes tailored to fit like a glove instead of squeezing into something not my size.


----------



## TC1

I don't know how her besite Jessica Mulroney let her wear that in public.


----------



## LittleStar88

I almost feel like she doesn't know how to identify what looks good on her (body type, colors, fit) and instead goes for stylish things even if they don't suit her. She should know better by now. No excuse for this brown atrocity - lipstick color, sweaty pits, ill-fitting bra, hair all over the place...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Why does she refuse to wear a coat properly?


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Why does she refuse to wear a coat properly?
> 
> View attachment 4634026



Even the top looks very messy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mdcx said:


> She has had injectables up the wazoo it looks like. Her face strangely reminds me of Pippa Middleton now.
> As for her clothes, she is trying to do that whole messy elegant thing, but it really only works on very tall, slim, naturally graceful people. Stella Tennant comes to mind. It’s not really a royal look. The bare legs with a satin skirt really doesn’t look great on her. A bit like “ there was a fire alarm so I threw this sweater and coat over my negligee...”
> 
> ETA: she has got to be ignoring all advice about undergarments given to her. That strapless bra that you can 100% see the outline of, and that seems too small, I’m sure that was not signed off by the wardrobe mistress.



Oh my gosh, why would anyone wear a strapless bra under a turtleneck?!


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh my gosh, why would anyone wear a strapless bra under a turtleneck?!


I wondered the same thing. Strapless bras are an absolute last resort for me.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I wonder if when palace staffers want to do things that they do like taking photo checks of outfits, lighting checks, etc, she may decline thinking that it shows how down to earth and laid back she is. Those things are not pretentious ... they are necessary for people who have jobs where looking good in pictures is in the job description!


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan was spotted leaving the National Theatre today. I'm really loving that she's visting/checking-in on all her patronages!


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> Why does she refuse to wear a coat properly?
> 
> View attachment 4634026


Hair looks much better today at least!


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan was spotted leaving the National Theatre today. I'm really loving that she's visting/checking-in on all her patronages!
> 
> View attachment 4634110
> 
> View attachment 4634112


They all do.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

She needs a stylist who really likes her and wants to see her presented at her best. If everything we see is really her trying to put her best self forward, it falls well below the royal standards we are used to. She dresses more like a nanny or personal aide to the family rather than a member. Would you arrive at a job interview looking like her outfit today, with your shirt hanging open towards cleavage areas and the jacket half-off? At minimum, she should strive for interview-appropriate. I'm convinced she runs late all the time and dresses in the car on the way to events.


----------



## bisousx

At first I thought Meghan tried to look a little disheveled to portray that she’s not perfect & “one of the people”, but wearing your coat on your shoulders is a pretentious fashionista look, so that theory is out the door. I think she just doesn’t listen to stylists and royal circles.


----------



## JolieS

Coat over shoulders is a current fashionista trend that other royals have worn as well, but in this case it is functional as we know she is a sweaty-betty.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> At first I thought Meghan tried to look a little disheveled to portray that she’s not perfect & “one of the people”, but wearing your coat on your shoulders is a pretentious fashionista look, so that theory is out the door. I think she just doesn’t listen to stylists and royal circles.



You can take the girl out of Hollywood but you can't take Hollywood out of the girl. She wants to be seen as being trendy by her fans. That's important to her.


----------



## sdkitty

interesting story from the daily beast.  maybe they will move to canada.  I doubt they will give up their royal titles:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...r-hrh-titles-bombshell-report-claims?ref=home


----------



## bag-mania

That rumor is going around today but I don't see it happening either. They are ready to launch their big new charity and they aren't going to give up the ROYAL in Sussex Royal. 

Frankly, they are nothing without the title.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That rumor is going around today but I don't see it happening either. They are ready to launch their big new charity and they aren't going to give up the ROYAL in Sussex Royal.
> 
> Frankly, they are nothing without the title.


agree about the title
but they may feel they would be bigger fish if they move somewhere away from William & Kate


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> agree about the title
> but they may feel they would be bigger fish if they move somewhere away from William & Kate



They would be free to fully embrace the celebrity lifestyle and I'm sure they would be popular for awhile. But nobody is going to be lining up to offer them stays at their mansions when they no longer have any status beyond "I used to be a prince" and "I'm a former TV actress who is married to a former prince."


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They would be free to fully embrace the celebrity lifestyle and I'm sure they would be popular for awhile. But nobody is going to be lining up to offer them stays at their mansions when they no longer have any status beyond "I used to be a prince" and "I'm a former TV actress who is married to a former prince."


right....but what if they are able to retain their titles and move to canada?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> right....but what if they are able to retain their titles and move to canada?



I don't know enough about the royal family to know if that is truly an option. Maybe someone else here does. 

I doubt there would be as many "engagements" for them to do, so should they still get a free ride if they are doing a lot less?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't know enough about the royal family to know if that is truly an option. Maybe someone else here does.
> 
> I doubt there would be as many "engagements" for them to do, so should they still get a free ride if they are doing a lot less?


good question...if they are truly unhappy and can't stand being second bananas, this may turn into a negotiation with the queen


----------



## maryg1

I think they could be pretty well paid for interviews if they quit the title, and be free to appear among the Hollywood stars without any criticism, which is probably what they prefer
Living a pretty life without the duties, I can’t really blame them!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry and Meghan to step back as senior royals


https://mol.im/a/7866007

gasp!


----------



## PatsyCline

BBC just announced Harry & Meghan are taking a step away from being ‘senior royals’ and will be dividing time between the UK and a North America. 

Whatever that means.


----------



## cafecreme15

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51040751

Harry and Meghan have announced they are stepping back as “senior royals” and will split their time between North America and the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Renouncing titles or...


----------



## Mrs.Z

Stop it!


----------



## Sharont2305

In other words, she can't hack it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Renouncing titles or...



that’s the big question!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> that’s the big question!!


All that money they blew on fixing up their house and now... 

Woof

byeeeeeee


----------



## bag-mania

If they think that will make the gossip media leave them alone they are in for a rude awakening.


----------



## Mrs.Z

They are going to “work to become financially independent”....by what?......using their status to become celebrity philanthropists??....feels weird to me.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> In other words, she can't hack it.



That also assumes this was even their idea. I wonder if they were told to go.


----------



## cafecreme15

Mrs.Z said:


> They are going to “work to become financially independent”....by what?......using their status to become celebrity philanthropists??....feels weird to me.


I truly wonder what “financial independence” means to them. Living off Harry’s inheritance from Diana? Mooching off Prince Charles’ private wealth? Hawking themselves out for appearances?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Wouldn't it be funny if this was all Harry's doing?  If she were drawn into being royalty, and he said "now that I'm a husband and father, I don't want to be a Duke anymore - see ya"?


----------



## Katel

Mrs.Z said:


> Stop it!


This is what Harry has wanted all along and that’s why he married Meghan... they’ll negotiate a cut in pay looking to keep their title and they won’t have the high public scrutiny attached with being “ Senior Royals” (whatever that means). He doesn’t want to compete with his brother and he doesn’t like the media/public scrutiny.

But as was mentioned earlier, I don’t think that they’re going to get much (any?) relief from the media with this move.

eta: Also, Meghan seems so thirsty for attention, and Harry is not... I think his eyes will open at some point and they’ll ultimately split...leaving Harry freed up, as he’s positioned himself at a distance from the main BRF stage.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> They would be free to fully embrace the celebrity lifestyle and I'm sure they would be popular for awhile. But nobody is going to be lining up to offer them stays at their mansions when they no longer have any status beyond "I used to be a prince" and "I'm a former TV actress who is married to a former prince."


I wonder about that.

Remember "Prince" Radziwill -- his family lost their wealth and titles, but he still called himself "Prince" and managed to live extravagantly on the kindness of strangers. When he died, in debt, owing millions to creditors, Lee got a pass and the loans were never called in.

All because his family once held land and royal titles in Poland.

So, I think there are still a huge number of rich people who would love to associate themselves with M&H. Have times changed?  We'll see.


----------



## TC1

Pehaps they just wanted to beat this whole "slimming down" of the Monarchy thing. You know, announce like it was their idea instead of getting the boot.


----------



## gracekelly

They are now part of the slimmed down monarchy. I think they did it to themselves. If you believe Tom Bradford this has been brewing for a while. He said he saw a troubled couple when he was making the documentary. Sounds like he kept them from looking worse then they could have. It’s pretty sad realty

There will be plenty of spins on this as if it is a great thing and who knows maybe it will be, we’ll see.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

In 2020 Harry and Meghan will be changing how they work with the media, to ensure diverse and open access to their work. Over the months ahead, through a phased approach, they plan to:


----------



## myown

In all fairness this sounds like it was Harrys idea. He always went for independence and with what happened to his mother etc. Also that Archie is a „commoner“ plays into these cards. 
maybe he realised what he wants in life after his wedding and becoming a dad. 

I doubt this is coming from Meghan. But I guess she is a big support for him.

also that the BRF wants to slim down


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think they will work to keep their titles.


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> In other words, she can't hack it.




  ya'll keep trying it! 



LibbyRuth said:


> Wouldn't it be funny if this was all Harry's doing?  If she were drawn into being royalty, and he said "now that I'm a husband and father, I don't want to be a Duke anymore - see ya"?




i could see that.  he knows he doesn't have to worry about being king and he's never been the kind that loves his royal job they way will and kate do.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> All that money they blew on fixing up their house and now...
> 
> Woof


Hmmm.  I forgot about that.  Well, someone in the extended family will happily move in.


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> Pehaps they just wanted to beat this whole "slimming down" of the Monarchy thing. You know, announce like it was their idea instead of getting the boot.



That has been the MO for lots of things. Knowing they weren’t invited to Sandringham so they said ahead of  time that they weren’t  going.   Saying they didn’t want a title for Archie because they knew they weren’t getting one. 

They have been Markled.


----------



## myown

LibbyRuth said:


> Wouldn't it be funny if this was all Harry's doing?  If she were drawn into being royalty, and he said "now that I'm a husband and father, I don't want to be a Duke anymore - see ya"?


I guess she is his support and he wouldn’t dare taking this step without her. Else he could have said that years ago with Chelsea


----------



## myown

Jayne1 said:


> Hmmm.  I forgot about that.  Well, someone in the extended family will happily move in.


If they split time between America and uk, I think they keep their house


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Hmmm.  I forgot about that.  Well, someone in the extended family will happily move in.


Bea or Eugenie


----------



## justwatchin

Time to go to work...first an Oprah special, then on to the Ellen show, People magazine cover/interview, sitting on some Board of Directors, etc etc


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> If they split time between America and uk, I think they keep their house


Don’t think so. I see them taking a placein London  proper.


----------



## skarsbabe




----------



## daisychainz

I think it's good. They obviously don't want the royal life and are a distraction from the members of the family who are working hard to make the institution remain important and something worth looking up to. They can now go earn some money through acting, or speaking, or whatever makes them happy and "financially independent." There will be lower expectations on them all around, which is good, they consistently meet those.


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> Pehaps they just wanted to beat this whole "slimming down" of the Monarchy thing. You know, announce like it was their idea instead of getting the boot.


That's _exactly_ what I was thinking!  Saves face and status in a way.

It's like you're fired, well you can't fire me because I already quit!


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> Time to go to work...first an Oprah special, then in to the Ellen show, People magazine cover/interview, sitting on some Board of Directors, etc etc


That will last for about a year and then they will be yesterday’s news


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

TC1 said:


> Pehaps they just wanted to beat this whole "slimming down" of the Monarchy thing. You know, announce like it was their idea instead of getting the boot.


It’s not like they could announce anything like this without the support of the palace


----------



## gracekelly

daisychainz said:


> I think it's good. They obviously don't want the royal life and are a distraction from the members of the family who are working hard to make the institution remain important and something worth looking up to. They can now go earn some money through acting, or speaking, or whatever makes them happy and "financially independent." There will be lower expectations on them all around, which is good, they consistently meet those.


He will miss it. She can’t hack it   Don’t see a future for them together.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think we will still see them supporting The Queen at things like Trooping the Colour and Rememberance events. Other than that, I don't know.


----------



## myown

gracekelly said:


> Don’t think so. I see them taking a placein London  proper.


Ah Right! Forgot the house is not that close to London


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> Ah Right! Forgot the house is not that close to London


No, they'll stay at Frogmore Cottage which is really private, to protect Archie.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I think we will still see them supporting The Queen at things like Trooping the Colour and Rememberance events. Other than that, I don't know.


Don’t think so. If they knew they were leaving then they would have come back to go to Sandringham for the last few days of Christmas holiday They didn’t say a proper goodbye and are sneaking away.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> No, they'll stay at Frogmore Cottage which is really private, to protect Archie.


Protect him from what?  He will be a John Q Citizen.


----------



## Mrs.Z

cafecreme15 said:


> I truly wonder what “financial independence” means to them. Living off Harry’s inheritance from Diana? Mooching off Prince Charles’ private wealth? Hawking themselves out for appearances?


Hasn’t most of the wealth come from The Crown...you can’t wave a wand and make it personal wealth.  Also, yes, it feels like they want the rules relaxed so they can profit off their status.  The whole thing smells bad.


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> It’s not like they could announce anything like this without the support of the palace


They received the Royal kiss off and don’t let the door slam you in the butt on the way out.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Hasn’t most of the wealth come from The Crown...you can’t wave a wand and make it personal wealth.  Also, yes, it feels like they want the rules relaxed so they can profit off their status.  The whole thing smells bad.


Yup. And that could be part of the exit. Too much metching on the Royal name


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Don’t think so. If they knew they were leaving then they would have come back to go to Sandringham for the last few days of Christmas holiday They didn’t say a proper goodbye and are sneaking away.


Not necessarily, it's not as though they're leaving the country for good.
Trooping the Colour and Remembrance events are pretty big, and having been in the services himself, he wouldn't miss the latter especially. This is partly supporting the Queen and country,


----------



## hellosunshine

So why now? The Sussexes (who are still members of the Royal Family and will continue to carry out duties for the Queen) simply want to get on with their work:


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Protect him from what?  He will be a John Q Citizen.


Paps


----------



## bag-mania

I bet the interview with Oprah is already being scheduled.


----------



## jcnc

Wow!! Many here had predicted that but hearing the Sussexes announce it soo soon after their sabattical still feels BIG


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## meluvs2shop

skarsbabe said:


>



I don’t think I saw this coming. I mean, once they took their hiatus over the holidays I expected some sort of announcement, but not sure what.


----------



## Sharont2305

Will be interesting to see how it all actually pans out.


----------



## mrsinsyder

It sounds like they want to have their cake and eat it too. Nothin new with them.


----------



## rose60610

The way I see it: they've finally realized that the Brits can't stand them and Meghan refuses to stop woking, so they won't even try to rehab their image.  They've become pariahs to The Crown. They must "exist" elsewhere, and not be a distraction to Charles or William's reigns.  They got the heave-ho.


----------



## hellosunshine

Twitter trends right now is insane!


----------



## A1aGypsy

This is going to get so messy.


----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> Twitter trends right now is insane!
> View attachment 4634343


For sure, this would be a major story, so lots of legitimate interest.


----------



## Jayne1

Mrs.Z said:


> Hasn’t most of the wealth come from The Crown...you can’t wave a wand and make it personal wealth.  Also, yes, it feels like they want the rules relaxed so they can profit off their status.  The whole thing smells bad.


But didn't Harry get the bulk of the Queen Mum's money and also half of Diana's money?  I read around 40 million in inheritance.


----------



## bag-princess

gracekelly said:


> Don’t think so. If they knew they were leaving then they would have come back to go to Sandringham for the last few days of Christmas holiday They didn’t say a proper goodbye* and are sneaking away.*




sneaking away??   by announcing it for all the public and press to see on their website?


----------



## alismarr

Hallelujah.  Perhaps they can take some ( most ) other members of the family with them. 
A royal family in this day and age is an anachronism.


----------



## bag-princess

Jayne1 said:


> But didn't Harry get the bulk of the Queen Mum's money and also half of Diana's money?  I read around 40 million in inheritance.




i forget the amount but yes he got big money!!   people keep trying to say they will be crawling back as if they won't be able to make ends meet!


----------



## LittleStar88

cafecreme15 said:


> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51040751
> 
> Harry and Meghan have announced they are stepping back as “senior royals” and will split their time between North America and the UK.



Doing what, exactly? Where will they get their money?

Now I see how this has played out. Clearly a slimmer BRF is happening and Meghan didn't like it. That must be what the big pity party, subsequent money siphoning scheme guised as charity group, and hiatus was all about. She came in thinking she would be the bees knees but instead was phased out.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Meghan said take this job and shove it. Should have announced it on IG live while flying private. oh well. I’m ready for more style watch.


----------



## MCF

Good for them.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-princess said:


> sneaking away??   by announcing it for all the public and press to see on their website?


Sneaking away from facing the family. Didn’t have the guts to tell them at Christmas

it’s on IG because she can’t stand the idea of not being talked about. No such thing as bad publicity when you are selling yourself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Why does she refuse to wear a coat properly?
> 
> View attachment 4634026


Because this was last year's (and even prior to that) what the "Fashionista's" thought was fashionable; to resemble what the Italians oftentimes did with their Jackets (_my Uncle was a huge proponent of it so I've always been kind of used to it_).  However, when I asked him "why do you wear your coat that way", he told me that he only did that when he was going in/out of places (quick meetings) such that he didn't take up a lot of time taking off/putting on his Jacket.  As I recall, all of a sudden you saw a lot of the "Hollywood" folks doing this - Kardashians, etc. -- but they were called out for the stupidity of it because they would be wearing it as a coat.  There was a big article in the NY Times (Fashion Editor) which stated that it was a STUPID trend, so many stopped doing it .. well, I guess that message didn't get to Meghan!


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## daisychainz

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan was spotted leaving the National Theatre today. I'm really loving that she's visting/checking-in on all her patronages!
> 
> View attachment 4634110
> 
> View attachment 4634112


They are reporting she was there to leave this position.


----------



## bag-princess

LittleStar88 said:


> Doing what, exactly? Where will they get their money?
> 
> Now I see how this has played out. Clearly a slimmer BRF is happening and Meghan didn't like it. That must be what the big pity party, *subsequent money siphoning scheme guised as charity group*, and hiatus was all about. She came in thinking she would be the bees knees but instead was phased out.


----------



## LittleStar88

Question: As unofficial royals (or whatever they are to be called now), will they really be in demand as they were before? Will people care about them as much since their "value" is less than before?

Seems to be a small blow to the patronages - they won't get the same airtime and attention as I sort of predict the interest in them will wane.

Thank goodness for this. As someone else said, they were a negative distraction for the BRF and the members who take the role seriously and understand their part. Now Meghan can turn up with ratty hair, pit stains, and ill-fitting undergarments to her heart's delight.


----------



## lanasyogamama

#Megxit


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


>



Maybe Meghan can get a job with WeightWatchers like Fergie did


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> That rumor is going around today but I don't see it happening either. They are ready to launch their big new charity and they aren't going to give up the* ROYAL in Sussex Royal*.
> 
> Frankly, they are nothing without the title.


*THIS .. 100%!!! *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

2020 has been proven to be eventful up to now.

I don't know. If that makes them happy, more power to them. I can't help but feel at some point Meghan will chew up and spit out Harry, but who knows.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I feel like very little is changing. They haven’t really even said what this means.


----------



## daisychainz

lanasyogamama said:


> #Megxit


----------



## mrsinsyder

BBC just said that the BRF didn’t approve or have anything to do with the statement.


----------



## bisousx

Meghan really is the Yoko Ono of the RF. Hope Harry can cope well with being far from his family and his identity.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Being royal is the only thing that’s interesting about either of them. She was a soon-to-be washed up D-list actress and Harry is ...?

I think once the initial kerfluffle dies down, they’ll fade away. They don’t bring anything to the table without their royal connection.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So... nothing really changes but they get the opportunity to merch. Lmaoooo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## doni

One could see this coming but it is unbelievable anyway...
For a start, why do they start a charity under the name Sussex Royal and copyright everything when they are stepping down? They should take the royal out...

And what does it mean that they are going to “work to become financially independent”? That they are going to take employment? Or that they are going to be paid by their own charity for their ‘work’? I suspect the later and that would be a disgrace.

And if you stop being a ‘senior’ royal, do you become a junior royal or what? Perhaps members from the UK can clarify.

It sounds to me like they want exactly the life they have but without the rules, the protocol, the accountability, and the bowing to a higher authority.

On top they seem to have gone public without clarifying with the Crown and the government.

It s unbelievable that Prince Harry would go along with something like this. I hope there is appropriate outrage in the UK.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> BBC just said that the BRF didn’t approve or have anything to do with the statement.


This seems quite unbelievable, if you’re trying to carve out your own role or way of serving The Crown, shouldn’t The Crown know.....these two might be as messy as I think they are.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yikes. It will be interesting to see if Parliament gets involved in this. You can’t just opt out of being a royal and start earning money, as a result of being a royal.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634398


It’s complicated is a nice way of saying it’s a mess


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> It’s complicated is a nice way of saying it’s a mess


Yep. 
The Queen needs to stop this foolishness and tell them they’re either in or out.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634398


Does this mean the family was blindsided?


----------



## Annawakes

1. They should have their titles taken away.  Or at least downgraded.
2. M is probably in talks for a Suits spinoff or other acting opportunity.  I’m sure she still has acting ambitions.
3. Does Harry even have any employable skills?


----------



## BagOuttaHell

I can’t wait to see this thread a year from now. Still on page 1.


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> Does this mean the family was blindsided?


Amazing, so many people called it that she would alienate Harry from his family like a true narcissist. This is sad.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634398



This is a weird statement from Buckingham Palace. Harry & Meghan's statement is very clear that they're interested in leaving yet in the Buckingham Palace statement, it seems they're insisting for them to re-consider. Anyone else reading it this way?


----------



## maryg1

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634398


This sounds like “they reckoned without their host” to me, but in a much politer way


----------



## queennadine

I think this is politically motivated, just don’t know to what extent. It’s obvious what her political ideology is and regardless of the BRF agreeing or disagreeing, royals are not supposed to be political. I don’t think Meghan is capable of just keeping her mouth shut and being publicly neutral because she thinks she smarter than everyone. She’s already pushed boundaries with some of her actions. I’m sure she was told to appear more neutral and probably didn’t take it too well. I think think is the culmination of a series of temper tantrums, and seems rash IMO. I could start making bets on the types of causes, charities, and celebs they’ll start working with.


----------



## maryg1

hellosunshine said:


> This is a weird statement from Buckingham Palace. Harry & Meghan's statement is very clear that they're interested in leaving yet in the Buckingham Palace statement, it seems they're insisting for them to re-consider. Anyone else reading it this way?


No


----------



## Mrs.Z

hellosunshine said:


> This is a weird statement from Buckingham Palace. Harry & Meghan's statement is very clear that they're interested in leaving yet in the Buckingham Palace statement, it seems they're insisting for them to re-consider. Anyone else reading it this way?


It’s like telling your employer you’re changing your job title and all your duties.......your employer will eventually have something to say about it but first they need to process whether or not you’ve lost your marbles


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

maryg1 said:


> No



Agreed. It reads like the BRF was blindsided and this is a polite way of saying ‘Slow your roll, this is more complicated than what you’re making it out to be.’ Plus also seems like a warning shot and reminder that the Crown calls the shots, NOT the Sussex’s.


----------



## hellosunshine

"The decision may have been fueled by the deteriorating relationship between the royals and the British media, with the two being the source of relentless speculation and scrutiny in the tabloid press.

Last year, Markle announced that she was suing the _Mail on Sunday_ over an allegation that it unlawfully published a private letter she sent to her estranged father, while at the same time Harry accused British tabloids of a launching a “ruthless” campaign against his wife.

Given Markle’s acting background and Prince Harry’s upcoming Apple TV+ series on mental health in partnership with Oprah Winfrey, the power couple could take a page out of another power couple’s playbook — the Obamas — and establish a production company to develop content in line with their interests.

"We have an office waiting for them in the animation studios building should they be looking to produce television," ABC Entertainment president Karey Burke said in response to the news while at the network's TCA press tour on Wednesday."

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-step-down-as-senior-royals-1268068

_They're already getting offers through press releases! Amazing! _


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> This is a weird statement from Buckingham Palace. Harry & Meghan's statement is very clear that they're interested in leaving yet in the Buckingham Palace statement, it seems they're insisting for them to re-consider. Anyone else reading it this way?


No, it reads like the Queen saying “sit down honey, it doesn’t work that way.”


----------



## bagshopr

I can't believe the British taxpayers paid good money for their wedding. 
Royalty is not something you can apply for and resign from. Harry was born royal and he will remain that way until he dies.


----------



## PewPew

mrsinsyder said:


> So... nothing really changes but they get the opportunity to merch. Lmaoooo
> 
> View attachment 4634397



This is such a blatent financial & more subtle political move. _Our brand is based on being royal, so we’re going to still do royal things. Since we’re still doing some royal things the taxpayers can pay for our accommodations / security / world travel. But we’re also going to make money off being royal, so just call us junior royal, so you can’t criticize how we raise and spend the money we’ve hard-earned by being royal._

I’m glad they’ve been so brazen about it, so BRF and possibly parliament will have to weigh in on how they’ll use their royal titles and funds in future. The Queen had to deal with the aftermath of Edward and Wallis Simpson for decades, and she and her father did not tolerate their attempts to cash in on their titles.

Even if they don’t sell things under their cheapened “brand”, the private fundraising power & political implications are serious. People & even countries wanting access to either the BRF or their connections, can donate heavily to the H&M foundation in a way they can’t directly do to senior royals. We’ve historically seen royals caught for selling access, like Fergie getting slapped for selling access to Andrew (just prior to W&K’s wedding, which is why she wasn’t invited).

I really think H&M are more the figureheads than the driving force of this. Since the Africa documentary fall-out, they were ripe to the influence of foreign and domestic sweet talkers with a vested interest in using H&M, just like H&M wish to use the BRF & British people for connections and funding. Their ambition and egos were ripe for flattery after the public lampooned their intelligence, environmental hypocrisy and lack of empathy following their in-Africa ”poor us” remarks.


----------



## queennadine

Also, as a British taxpayer I’d be FURIOUS right now. Why didn’t you decide to not be senior royals before your multimillion wedding and home reno?!


----------



## hellosunshine

queennadine said:


> Plus also seems like a warning shot and reminder that the Crown calls the shots, NOT the Sussex’s.



Not really. If they want to leave, they can leave which they're doing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan is starting to look like a classic abuser.


----------



## Annawakes

mrsinsyder said:


> No, it reads like the Queen saying “sit down honey, it doesn’t work that way.”


----------



## queennadine

hellosunshine said:


> Not really. If they want to leave, they can leave which they're doing.



But they clearly want to their leave on their own terms, which isn’t going to fly. They could absolutely leave 100% and never look back, renounce their titles, go into hiding, and get real jobs. But they want the benefits of being royal without the constraints. I don’t believe the Crown will permit that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I hate that I agree with Piers


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634398


That sounds like things may not be as settled or complete as the Sussex would have you believe. They may try to have the cake and eat it too, but the palace may not allow it, I.e. you want  to make money fine, but not off your title and not connected with a royal engagement.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Not really. If they want to leave, they can leave which they're doing.


Did you not read where they still want to represent the Queen? And you think she has to say in that?

ohkayyyy


----------



## doni

hellosunshine said:


> This is a weird statement from Buckingham Palace. Harry & Meghan's statement is very clear that they're interested in leaving yet in the Buckingham Palace statement, it seems they're insisting for them to re-consider. Anyone else reading it this way?


No.
I read it as meaning: fine if you want to leave and live like ‘normal’ people. But it is not for you to decide you are keeping your patronages, or continuing your work, or supporting the Monarchy, or using the term ‘royal’ for your business... it is not that you can do as you like because you don’t get an allowance, and it is not for you to announce this sort of thing in Instagram...
One can see the fumes in the back of the statement...


----------



## maryg1

hellosunshine said:


> Not really. If they want to leave, they can leave which they're doing.


It doesn’t sound like leaving the BRF to me, they just want to do things the way they like.
They actually want to keep the title because it’s still nice to be called Duke and Duchess, but they don’t want to be told what to do, where to go, how to spend money etc.
And the BP statement reads like “hey dear, it’s not like you wake up one day and set the rule”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> _They're already getting offers through press releases! Amazing! _



Not that amazing. They have as much as announced they are ready to pimp themselves out. Any Hollywood studio would be thrilled to be the first to get them before they are overexposed and their popularity wanes. They will be used and they will use others. It's the celebrity way.


----------



## Blyen

They really are a mess... This will end badly for them, and sadly I don't even see them lasting. Harry revealed himself to be quite dense though, so maybe Meghan will be able to keep him entranced for quite a while before he realizes what he's given up.


----------



## CeeJay

Well, now the Daily Fail is saying that H&M had not even discussed this with the Queen beforehand!  In addition, there are reports saying that if they do move to Canada, the Brits will still be paying for their security via their taxes .. that doesn't seem right!  Lastly, some have also mentioned that just like Meghan has 'markled' so many former friends, associates, etc. - she is now removing Harry from his family .. YIKES!


----------



## gracekelly

it’s up to the Queen now and she has to do something. I don’t know if Charles is capable of cutting the cord to his son.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Not that amazing. They have as much as announced they are ready to pimp themselves out. Any Hollywood studio would be thrilled to be the first to get them before they are overexposed and their popularity wanes. They will be used and they will use others. It's the celebrity way.


Having a TV show isn’t that impressive. Just flip through the channels and you can see all the trash that gets airtime.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Indeed. I am way bustier than her and I can find bras that don't show under tight clothing. It's also not a "I just had a baby" thing, anyone remember her very first trip to Ireland? The awful dress that was way too tight over the bust and her bra line was super visible? Honestly, if I was that rich, I would have all my clothes tailored to fit like a glove instead of squeezing into something not my size.


Maybe I’m OCD or something but neither Harry or Megan look particularly clean. Their hair and faces need a good scrub IMO. Even their clothes don’t look clean or pressed. Casually on their own I don’t suppose it really matters, but during royal engagements they should display a bit of spit and polish.


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> One could see this coming but it is unbelievable anyway...
> For a start, why do they start a charity under the name Sussex Royal and copyright everything when they are stepping down? They should take the royal out...
> 
> And what does it mean that they are going to “work to become financially independent”? That they are going to take employment? Or that they are going to be paid by their own charity for their ‘work’? I suspect the later and that would be a disgrace.


Well, I can tell you that many charitable organizations here in the US have "executives" that get some hefty pay; as a matter of fact, there have been numerous lawsuits and terminations related to this matter.  For that reason alone, when it came time in Corporate America to provide these organizations with $$$ (every October - and HATED that) .. I would give $0.00 .. because all my funds go to private institutions that I know are not taking large salaries .. the money is going to the reason - e.g., Cancer, Diabetes, etc.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Piers Morgan please. Her old friends and family sold her down the river for 15 minutes of fame.


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> Does this mean the family was blindsided?


That is what is being said at the moment .. there was no prior discussion with the Queen or the rest of the family .. looks like they are getting 'markled'!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Well, now the Daily Fail is saying that H&M had not even discussed this with the Queen beforehand!  In addition, there are reports saying that if they do move to Canada, the Brits will still be paying for their security via their taxes .. that doesn't seem right!  Lastly, some have also mentioned that just like Meghan has 'markled' so many former friends, associates, etc. - she is now removing Harry from his family .. YIKES!


He is pretty isolated. His old friends may renew their friendships, but not if she is part of the package. He is really ripe to be used by the wrong people, I.e. his new “friends” like the fellow who really owns that estate on Vancouver Island   He has the potential to make Andrew look like a rank amateur in questionable business dealings.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Did you not read where they still want to represent the Queen? And you think she has to say in that?



Yes, I believe they meant in the capacity of attending the Queen's larger events (i.e Remembrance Day Ceremony, etc).


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, I believe they meant in the capacity of attending the Queen's larger events (i.e Remembrance Day Ceremony, etc).


How did you not even read their statement? 

They themselves said they want to retain their patronages.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> "We have an office waiting for them in the animation studios building should they be looking to produce television," ABC Entertainment president Karey Burke said in response to the news while at the network's TCA press tour on Wednesday."
> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-step-down-as-senior-royals-1268068


HA!!! .. I know exactly where their Animation Studios are; not exactly in a great area and not the easiest place to get to.  While I'm sure these two would have a driver, just try schlepping down the 101 or the 134 during rush hour!  Besides, if they end up in Malibu, wow ... that would be a MEGA-SCHLEP!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Can we guess at their next endeavors?

Spokespeople for indeed.com, as they hunt for jobs?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> How did you not even read their statement?
> 
> They themselves said they want to retain their patronages.



Yes, I read their statement. Thanks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Well, I can tell you that many charitable organizations here in the US have "executives" that get some hefty pay; as a matter of fact, there have been numerous lawsuits and terminations related to this matter.  For that reason alone, when it came time in Corporate America to provide these organizations with $$$ (every October - and HATED that) .. I would give $0.00 .. because all my funds go to private institutions that I know are not taking large salaries .. the money is going to the reason - e.g., Cancer, Diabetes, etc.


Exactly. Plus a foundation only has to distribute  5% a year to retain tax free status. 
*The 5% Minimum Distribution Rule*
In general, Section 4942 of the Internal Revenue Code requires private foundations to distribute 5% of the fair market value of their assets each year. The intent of this requirement is to ensure that private foundations are serving legitimate charitable purposes and not merely acting as a means for the foundation’s contributors to avoid taxes on their investment earnings. Since private foundations are, by definition, supported by only a few donors, and private foundations pay only a small excise tax of 1% or 2% on investment earnings, it is conceivable that, absent a requirement for private foundations to make annual grant distributions, private foundations could be misused by wealthy individuals as a way to hold investments in a nearly tax-free environment.

Specifically, Section 4942 requires private foundations to distribute 5% of the fair market value of their non-charitable use assets for the current year by the end of next year. For example, a private foundation must distribute 5% of the 2014 average fair value of its assets by the end of 2015. Distributions for this purpose include amounts paid to accomplish the foundation’s charitable purposes, as well as reasonable and necessary administrative expenses. Non-charitable use assets include all cash and investments (based on an average of the monthly fair market values of these assets) as well as other assets (valued annually) except those held solely for charitable purposes. If a private foundation distributes more than 5% in a given fiscal year, the excess may be carried forward and applied against the distribution requirement for any of the next five fiscal years. The required distribution and carryfoward amount (if any) are calculated on Part XIII of the Form 990-PF, which is the tax return that private foundations are required to file.

If a private foundation fails to distribute the required 5% by the end of the subsequent fiscal year, it is subject to a 30% excise tax on the undistributed amount. If the required amounts remain undistributed, the foundation may be subject to an additional 100% excise tax on the undistributed amount.


----------



## mrsinsyder

My job is actually solely dedicated to working with foundations so I’m an expert here...

foundations are definitely a good way for rich people to sponge money.


----------



## kemilia

rose60610 said:


> The way I see it: they've finally realized that the Brits can't stand them and Meghan refuses to stop woking, so they won't even try to rehab their image.  They've become pariahs to The Crown. They must "exist" elsewhere, and not be a distraction to Charles or William's reigns.  *They got the heave-ho*.[1Z12R0R14291567995/QUOTE]
> Totally believe this is the case.
> 
> Imo, they were informed pre-Christmas that this was going to happen hence 6-week trip to figure things out. The big slim-down has been talked about for a while--wasn't Andrew whining about having to support his blood princesses instead of the Crown doing it? H marrying M, who turned out to be an unpopular choice, made the slim down easier. I hope it works out ok, the Monarchy has gone through rough patches before (Edward/Wallis) and survived.
> 
> And this explains M's fillers--gotta be camera ready!


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4634308
> 
> View attachment 4634309



How are they able to make money by being supported by the tax payers? Will that all change? Are royals allowed to use their titles/names to make money commercially? 

It seems like the posters who pointed out the sketchiness about their charity - the way it was set up etc - were on point. If it’s a charity it shouldn’t be a major source of revenue for these two. It should be for charity. Anyone who donates is also helping MM exist? I dunno.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Can we guess at their next endeavors?
> 
> Spokespeople for indeed.com, as they hunt for jobs?



They won't want to work that hard. It will be something that gives the public the impression they're doing a lot to help raise awareness or some such nonsense, but in reality they will hire a staff to perform the daily duties. They will likely give more hypocritical speeches.

I'm thinking of the monologue Ricky Gervais gave to all the celebs at the Golden Globes.  H&M are the kind of people he was talking about.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> This is a weird statement from Buckingham Palace. Harry & Meghan's statement is very clear that they're interested in leaving yet in the Buckingham Palace statement, it seems they're insisting for them to re-consider. Anyone else reading it this way?


No. I read it that they can’t leave under the terms stated in their IG  post and the palace will issue terms that they can agree to or not. . Obviously if they don’t agree to the terms of the palace, they will be leaving without palace support.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> So why now? The Sussexes (who are still members of the Royal Family and will continue to carry out duties for the Queen) simply want to get on with their work:
> 
> View attachment 4634332



Also “financial independence” to them will include famous people lending them mansions etc. Like they are mooches. Aren’t they embarrassed?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> He is pretty isolated. His old friends may renew their friendships, but not if she is part of the package. He is really ripe to be used by the wrong people, I.e. his new “friends” like the fellow who really owns that estate on Vancouver Island   He has the potential to make Andrew look like a rank amateur in questionable business dealings.


EXACTLY!!! .. let's face it, as a Royal, one should be held to a higher-standard .. well, we saw that Prince Andrew certainly didn't.  So, given that, I cannot see them keeping Royal titles and then "making money" regardless of their charities or whatever else they decide to do.  Government officials are NOT supposed to engage in profitable (to them) ventures although, alas .. we have seen that happen too many times (and in some cases, those politicians/government workers are removed and jailed for their offenses).  It just stinks and if I was a British taxpayer, I would be pretty darn pissed if I had to fund these two going forward!


----------



## Welltraveled!

BagOuttaHell said:


> Meghan said take this job and shove it. Should have announced it on IG live while flying private. oh well. I’m ready for more style watch.



Your post made me Lol’d!!!

As for half the questions in these last few pages I read somewhere if you go to sussexroyal.com there’s a FAQ on their website.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’d stan for them if they said we’re leaving IT ALL and going to be private citizens. 

What they’re trying to do is appalling and shameful.


----------



## Meh-gan

bag-princess said:


> i forget the amount but yes he got big money!!   people keep trying to say they will be crawling back as if they won't be able to make ends meet!



I mean they already rely on the charity of celebrity friends for vacations and the British public for their home renos. People used to not spending/managing their own money will burn through it pretty quickly.


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> Also “financial independence” to them will include famous people lending them mansions etc. Like they are mooches. Aren’t they embarrassed?


Nope, I know that Meghan wouldn't be .. she's mooched quite a bit from many over the years!


----------



## zen1965

Harry won‘t fare well in this unless dad foots the bill.
IMHO his marketable skills are limited, he hasn‘t got a clue what life outside the royal enclave is like, and he continues to be plagued by the ghosts of his past.


----------



## PewPew

Jayne1 said:


> But didn't Harry get the bulk of the Queen Mum's money and also half of Diana's money?  I read around 40 million in inheritance.



They would actually burn through that very quickly if they had to actually fund the jet-set lifestyle H grew up & M aspires to.  Think about A-list celebrity houses in the 20+ Million range + upkeep. They can’t live the life they want without a lot more funds coming in


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!!! .. let's face it, as a Royal, one should be held to a higher-standard .. well, we saw that Prince Andrew certainly didn't.  So, given that, I cannot see them keeping Royal titles and then "making money" regardless of their charities or whatever else they decide to do.  Government officials are NOT supposed to engage in profitable (to them) ventures although, alas .. we have seen that happen too many times (and in some cases, those politicians/government workers are removed and jailed for their offenses).  It just stinks and if I was a British taxpayer, I would be pretty darn pissed if I had to fund these two going forward!


AND....Now that the PA dirty laundry is out, ANY other royal will come under harder scrutiny with any money making venture. The Sussex may  be cut off for that reason alone. The palace is frightened to death of another scandal. If they cut them loose, the palace can claim ignorance. 

Once  again I am going to mention Marcus Anderson and Soho House cronies for business deals and how connected I think MA is to this


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Meh-gan said:


> I mean they already rely on the charity of celebrity friends for vacations and the British public for their home renos. People used to not spending/managing their own money will burn through it pretty quickly.



Rely on the charity of celebrities? I am laughing so hard.


----------



## gracekelly

Meh-gan said:


> I mean they already rely on the charity of celebrity friends for vacations and the British public for their home renos. People used to not spending/managing their own money will burn through it pretty quickly.


I keep thinking about   A Streetcar Named Desire and Blanche Dubois and her line “ I have always depended on  the kindness of strangers..”


----------



## Meh-gan

Meh-gan said:


> I mean they already rely on the charity of celebrity friends for vacations and the British public for their home renos. People used to not spending/managing their own money will burn through it pretty quickly.





BagOuttaHell said:


> Rely on the charity of celebrities? I am laughing so hard.


I mean they are constantly doing this.  

Also, if he has 40 million he is already financially independent and doesnt need a dime from the British tax payers or Charles. “Moving towards financial independence” - because 40 mil isn’t enough for them to live apparently.


----------



## Mrs.Z

PewPew said:


> They would actually burn through that very quickly if they had to actually fund the jet-set lifestyle H grew up & M aspires to.  Think about A-list celebrity houses in the 20+ Million range + upkeep. They can’t live the life they want without a lot more funds coming in


Agreed, when I read what his actual net worth is reported to be I thought this does not fund the lifestyle I believe they want to live.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Seems like they aspire to be like “post divorce Diana”.  If anything they’ll be like “post divorce Fergie”.


----------



## hellosunshine

In relation to the below article on the best tweets about Harry and Meghan stepping back -

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ehisosifo1/meghan-markle-prince-harry-stepping-down-reactions

I think Bossip (a black gossip site) has won the internet with their article's headline!


----------



## youngster

Well, I can't say that I'm all that surprised by this news but still . . . wow and what a bizarre statement for them to issue.  I think they are trying to push the Palace into accepting their terms by announcing them up front.  I'd be pretty furious if I were QEII or Charles.  

They may try to carve out their own path, but the Queen, Charles and Will may just decide to sideline them to obscurity. They may want to keep their patronages, which allows them to stay somewhat relevant and in the news, but the Queen may not allow them to do so.  I think I agree with those of you that say the Palace will dictate the terms and may just cut them out all together.  Basically, they'll end up as the 21st Century's Duke and Duchess of WIndsor, aimless and irrelevant.


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> They would actually burn through that very quickly if they had to actually fund the jet-set lifestyle H grew up & M aspires to.  Think about A-list celebrity houses in the 20+ Million range + upkeep. They can’t live the life they want without a lot more funds coming in


Heck .. $20m out here is now chump change, especially if they want to be in a gated community like Malibu and be right on the Ocean!  I am constantly amazed at what properties are going for out here and it just keeps on getting worse!  I truly think that this is what Meghan really wanted; someone English who had tons of $$$ .. who could support her high-end lifestyle.  If they no longer have to follow the rules of the BRF, then heck .. she can go out and buy (more likely pimp) all those jewels and fashion that she would love to.  Some of her favorite jewelers are NOT known for their cheap pieces!!!!!!


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Meh-gan said:


> I mean they are constantly doing this.
> 
> Also, if he has 40 million he is already financially independent and doesnt need a dime from the British tax payers or Charles. “Moving towards financial independence” - because 40 mil isn’t enough for them to live apparently.



Celebs don't like to pay for anything regardless what is in their bank account. You make it sound like a bad thing that someone would extend an invite or offer their home to them.


----------



## doni

I really don’t think it is about big houses, high fashion and jewels for her. She wants to be a top filantropist, set the agenda and mix with the powerful and above all be admired and respected.

I had cut her some slack up to to this point because I am all for ambitious driven women, but now I do believe she is a master manipulator. And she has found the ideal tool/victim in poor Prince Harry, who doesn’t look at all happy or even himself in the latest pictures to say the truth... But he is now perfectly isolated from friends and family. Just the moment to move forward with something like this...


----------



## PewPew

LittleStar88 said:


> Will people care about them as much since their "value" is less than before?



They will always have a draw because he’ll (eventually) be the cooler son of the King of England. In the U.S. (as with Edward & Wallis Simpson) there’s an additional draw of him “fighting for love” and marrying an American.



youngster said:


> They may try to carve out their own path, but the Queen, Charles and Will may just decide to sideline them to obscurity. They may want to keep their patronages, which allows them to stay somewhat relevant and in the news, but the Queen may not allow them to do so.



It it weren’t for Andrew just being forced to give up his patronages and funding, I could have envisioned a softer type of early royal retirement for Harry & M. But it took years of pedo/misbehavior rumors to force Andrew to step aside, so it may be seen as an overly harsh to remove patronages from H following just a year of his poor PR and his questionable foundation.



> I really don’t think it is about big houses, high fashion and jewels for her. She wants to be a top filantropist, set the agenda and mix with the powerful and above all be admired and respected.



You’re right— she’s always made her own hype. But now has had an Archbishop, Parliamentarians & a nobel peace prize winner talk about her amazing “humanity”. While Megan hasn’t actually done Herculean acts to support that level praise (yet), there’s no way she’d be happy with even the A-list lifestyle now, let alone shake hands & do charity teas all day.


----------



## Welltraveled!

If the Queen cut off HM she will need to cut off Randy Andy as well.  The backlash to cut off HM and not Randy Andy could be severe.


----------



## Tivo

doni said:


> I really don’t think it is about big houses, high fashion and jewels for her. She wants to be a top filantropist, set the agenda and mix with the powerful and above all be admired and respected.
> 
> I had cut her some slack up to to this point because I am all for ambitious driven women, but now I do believe she is a master manipulator. And she has found the ideal tool/victim in poor Prince Harry, who doesn’t look at all happy or even himself in the latest pictures to say the truth... But he is now perfectly isolated from friends and family. Just the moment to move forward with something like this...


I don’t see her as a master manipulator, I just think she’s phony. I also believe she thinks she’s smarter and more savvy than she really is.
She wants a Hollywood career, so it remains to be seen if she’ll get one. This could all blow up in her face.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Well, I can't say that I'm all that surprised by this news but still . . . wow and what a bizarre statement for them to issue.  I think they are trying to push the Palace into accepting their terms by announcing them up front.  I'd be pretty furious if I were QEII or Charles.


Same here; I think it's really pretty sh!tty of them to do this!  From what I understood, Prince Harry was the Queen's favorite grandson, so the fact that they didn't have the decency to go over this with her really stinks!  Makes me think about the rumors around their wedding related to Meghan wanting a particular Crown and the Queen said "no - I will give her one that I select" and Harry going around telling people "What Meghan wants Meghan gets".  WOW - this is not going to be pretty, and if they think that they can use their "charities" to be their cashflow, well .. let's just say the MEDIA will be all over that!! I just don't see them thinking that they are going to control the media, especially as non-Royal folks!!!


----------



## bisousx

Welltraveled! said:


> If the Queen cut off HM she will need to cut off Randy Andy as well.  The backlash to cut off HM and not Randy Andy could be severe.



excellent idea, cut them all off


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

They want to do what they want to do - their way and on their terms. Honestly I don't think they should keep the titles.

Now I guess Meghan can go back to acting using the excuse that they need the money in order to just exist?


----------



## jcnc

I don’t understand the way royalty works and serior Royals vs others and its implications on tax payer funded things but their statement does make it sound like they want yo continue to use the tax payer money but be independent to do what they please.. will be interesting to see what the crown does, if anything


----------



## CeeJay

Excellent article on the Beeb (BBC) .. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51040751


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> Time to go to work...first an Oprah special, then on to the Ellen show, People magazine cover/interview, sitting on some Board of Directors, etc etc


fine for now but wonder if the public will lose interest in them eventually


----------



## doni

Tivo said:


> I don’t see her as a master manipulator, I just think she’s phony. I also believe she thinks she’s smarter and more savvy than she really is.
> She wants a Hollywood career, so it remains to be seen if she’ll get one. This could all blow up in her face.


You think so? Maybe, I don’t know... I’d be surprised if she goes back to acting. I don’t think she ever wanted a Hollywood career, but had other goals in mind. I mean, at 11 she did this thing that changed the language in an add and I believe that was her defining moment. She said of it herself: “It was at that moment that I realised the magnitude of my actions. At the age of eleven I had created my small level of impact by standing up for equality”. I think that’s what she still wants, to have an impact, or to be seen as having an impact. She went on to do international studies and traineeships in embassies but at the end of the day that is a very humble way to make an impact...My bet is the future will be all about this Sussex Royal business.


----------



## gelbergirl

what happens to all the charities they are part of and the Diana charity legacy???


----------



## youngster

It's amazing to me that the two of them don't realize that without the glamour of being senior members of the royal family, on the inside, doing all the important and official engagements from which they will now be excluded, that they'll lose their relevance rapidly, especially if their patronages are systematically taken away and the Palace no longer has any motivation to promote them. 

I am not British though, and I'd love to hear what some of our Brit members think about all this. I just can't imagine it's going to go over well with the general public in the UK. To me, just looking at it from the U.S., it sort of feels like a betrayal by Harry.  He's born a Prince of the United Kingdom, how does he just walk away from his duties and obligations to the Queen and Charles and, eventually, Will?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> But didn't Harry get the bulk of the Queen Mum's money and also half of Diana's money?  I read around 40 million in inheritance.


I don't know if 40 million is enough, unless the invest very wisely or generate other income too


----------



## Welltraveled!

bisousx said:


> excellent idea, cut them all off



You’re right end the British monarchy.


----------



## mdcx

Harry is notoriously tight with his own money so will be interesting to see how this plays out.

“I’m working towards financial independence” sounds like what a low-energy unemployed college grad who plays video games in the basement all day tells their annoyed parents.


----------



## bisousx

Welltraveled! said:


> You’re right end the British monarchy.



just the weaker links would suffice


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> Harry is notoriously tight with his own money so will be interesting to see how this plays out.
> 
> “I’m working towards financial independence” sounds like what a low-energy unemployed college grad who plays video games in the basement all day tells their annoyed parents.


Ha!  I thought the same thing.  I’m trying to make it on my own...wish me luck.  Again, it shows how horribly disconnected they are from real people.


----------



## ap.

Tivo said:


> I don’t see her as a master manipulator, I just think she’s phony. I also believe she thinks she’s smarter and more savvy than she really is.
> *She wants a Hollywood career*, so it remains to be seen if she’ll get one. This could all blow up in her face.



This is what popped up in my mind when I saw the Washington Post Breaking News banner (I don’t think this really meets breaking news banner importance):  will Meghan Markle be going back to acting to get their “financial independence”?


----------



## doni

CeeJay said:


> Excellent article on the Beeb (BBC) .. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51040751


I hadn’t picked on that point, that deciding to divide their time and life between two continents is rather something for a couple who not long ago were preaching about carbon footprint and asking us, the people, not to go on holidays...


----------



## Zucnarf

https://www.royal.uk/statement-discussions-duke-and-duchess-sussex


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> "The decision may have been fueled by the deteriorating relationship between the royals and the British media, with the two being the source of relentless speculation and scrutiny in the tabloid press.
> 
> Last year, Markle announced that she was suing the _Mail on Sunday_ over an allegation that it unlawfully published a private letter she sent to her estranged father, while at the same time Harry accused British tabloids of a launching a “ruthless” campaign against his wife.
> 
> Given Markle’s acting background and Prince Harry’s upcoming Apple TV+ series on mental health in partnership with Oprah Winfrey, the power couple could take a page out of another power couple’s playbook — the Obamas — and establish a production company to develop content in line with their interests.
> 
> "We have an office waiting for them in the animation studios building should they be looking to produce television," ABC Entertainment president Karey Burke said in response to the news while at the network's TCA press tour on Wednesday."
> 
> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-step-down-as-senior-royals-1268068
> 
> _They're already getting offers through press releases! Amazing! _


they shouldn't be mentioned in the same paragraph as the Obamas (IMO)

not fit to shine their shoes (again IMO)


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Seems like they aspire to be like “post divorce Diana”.  If anything they’ll be like “
> 
> LOL


----------



## lulilu

I really have to wonder about the discussions HM had leading up to this "decision."  It is truly idiotic for them to believe that they will succeed on the terms they predict.  Who is running their show?  Is H really as dumb as they say?  He clearly seems very stubborn and narrow-sighted.

I can't help remember reading that through their entire trip to Africa, M kept telling H how proud his mother would be of him, etc.  Either she was holding his fragile self up or she was manipulating him.

I hope QE2 hands them their respective asses.


----------



## CeeJay

Funny how the "deteriorating relationship" never seemed to be until Meghan joined the party.  I was always pleased to see Will and Harry be so close and if you watch some of their earlier videos, you can clearly see that.  Now, again .. rumors were that Will pulled Harry aside in regards to "moving too fast" with Meghan, but heck .. this is NOT abnormal by any means (_heck, I've seen it in my family_).  Especially given his position in the BRF, I totally understand why Will and some of Harry's friends would ask this.  Ever since Meghan came on-board, their relationship with the BRF and the Media (_and I'm not taking the media's side here_) has been fraught with issues.  While I somewhat understand their desire to move back a bit, I just don't see how they think that retaining their Royal Titles and shtupping what? .. merchandise?? .. is going to make the British public like them more .. to me, I think this is going to change the minds of many who MAY have liked them.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Jayne1

bag-princess said:


> i forget the amount but yes he got big money!!   people keep trying to say they will be crawling back as if they won't be able to make ends meet!


Also, H inherited his mother's and grandmother's money a very long time ago and since he, up until now, had few expenses to fund his lifestyle, wouldn't his inheritance have grown substantially, sitting in the bank making interest?

Yes, I'm counting H's money, it seems.


----------



## hellosunshine

sdkitty said:


> they shouldn't be mentioned in the same paragraph as the Obamas (IMO)
> not fit to shine their shoes (again IMO)


----------



## Meh-gan

BagOuttaHell said:


> Celebs don't like to pay for anything regardless what is in their bank account. You make it sound like a bad thing that someone would extend an invite or offer their home to them.



Because MM are also rich and shouldnt need celebs offering homes and free things to them. But continue your stan agenda. They are super shady and not financially independent and take freebies from British taxpayers and celebs. This isn’t admirable or something to faun over but you do you.


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4634525
> 
> View attachment 4634526
> View attachment 4634528


Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but the last line "so  that their family will always have a place to call home in the United Kingdom" almost seems like foreshadowing of their move.


----------



## A1aGypsy

cafecreme15 said:


> Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but the last line "so  that their family will always have a place to call home in the United Kingdom" almost seems like foreshadowing of their move.



Or a veiled threat that, if the Queen removes them from residence, then they won’t be back to the UK.


----------



## sdkitty

this seems very fast....how long have they been married?  two years?  I have to think maybe it has something to do with being in the shadow of Will & Kate


----------



## mdcx

I think she will bounce from Canada back to LA within a year or two and Harry back to the UK. Imo Harry has outlived his usefulness to her.


----------



## marthastoo

Wow - this is all very interesting.  Not what I was expecting. Good for them.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I think she will bounce from Canada back to LA within a year or two and Harry back to the UK. Imo Harry has outlived his usefulness to her.


IDK......she may be bored with him but how much of a commodity will she be as an ex-cable tv actress and ex-wife of a former prince?


----------



## youngster

This is really going to be fascinating to watch them do . . . what exactly?  Develop a business?  Write a book?  Skim money off their charity in "consulting fees" and "travel expenses"?  Just wait until they are introduced to the auditors from the IRS, or whatever the equivalent is in Canada.  

Harry hasn't been trained to do much other than be Prince Harry so it's difficult to imagine how he is going to achieve "financial independence" on his own.  He is ripe for falling under the influence of shady people (like his uncle) so who knows what kind of crazy business deals he might fall for.  Meghan might get a few novelty acting roles but I doubt that'll become a big moneymaker for them.  They probably will have to sign a pretty ironclad and lengthy NDA in order to hold on to their titles or for any possible future financial help from the Queen or Charles or even Will down the road.

One group of people who will be getting rich will be Meghan and Harry's lawyers.  They're going to be working overtime. Lawyers to draw up their agreement with the Palace, lawyers reviewing the NDA, lawyers handling their lawsuits against various tabloids and newspapers and other media, lawyers to eventually handle their divorce when Harry wakes up in Vancouver one day and thinks "_what the heck am I doing here?" _and calls up his Dad or Will asking to come home.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

doni said:


> No.
> I read it as meaning: fine if you want to leave and live like ‘normal’ people. But it is not for you to decide you are keeping your patronages, or continuing your work, or supporting the Monarchy, or *using the term ‘royal’ for your business*... it is not that you can do as you like because you don’t get an allowance, and it is not for you to announce this sort of thing in.



this part is bugging me. 


CeeJay said:


> Well, I can tell you that many charitable organizations here in the US have "executives" that get some hefty pay; as a matter of fact, there have been numerous lawsuits and terminations related to this matter.  For that reason alone, when it came time in Corporate America to provide these organizations with $$$ (every October - and HATED that) .. I would give $0.00 .. because all my funds go to private institutions that I know are not taking large salaries .. the money is going to the reason - e.g., Cancer, Diabetes, etc.



I’m hoping that they will have a huge microscope on their costs and salaries when this whole charitable foundation gets going.


----------



## doni

youngster said:


> One group of people who will be getting rich will be Meghan and Harry's lawyers.  They're going to be working overtime.



I have the impression they already are...


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> IDK......she may be bored with him but how much of a commodity will she be as an ex-cable tv actress and ex-wife of a former prince?



I have no doubts about Meghan’s abilities to land a new (richer) husband after Harry. She’s gorgeous and determined.  Someone will fall for it.


----------



## Welltraveled!

bisousx said:


> just the weaker links would suffice



I know that’s what you and others in this thread would like.  But it would cause more harm than good to remove any member of the BRF titles.  I think it would open the door to question if there’s a need to have a British monarchy.


----------



## sdkitty

Welltraveled! said:


> I know that’s what you and others in this thread would like.  But it would cause more harm than good to remove any member of the BRF titles.  I think it would open the door to question if there’s a need to have a British monarchy.


well they are the ones who are apparently dissatisfied.....so doing it to themselves (if the info being put out is true)


----------



## LittleStar88

Did Meghan ever give up her US citizenship? Never heard a word about her working on that. Kind of feeling like she knew pretty quickly that it was easier to make Harry change than to make herself change.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Funny how the "deteriorating relationship" never seemed to be until Meghan joined the party.  I was always pleased to see Will and Harry be so close and if you watch some of their earlier videos, you can clearly see that.



This is one of the saddest aspects of this whole situation, that the brothers relationship has been damaged so badly.  They did seem really close and Harry got along well with Kate.  I guess Meghan is playing the Yoko Ono part here and breaking up the group lol.


----------



## shelleymuth

mrsinsyder said:


> Why does she refuse to wear a coat properly?
> 
> View attachment 4634026


I quit like that she wears her coat on her shoulders. Very classic look with a simple shirt and pants.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

sdkitty said:


> this seems very fast....how long have they been married?  two years? * I have to think maybe it has something to do with being in the shadow of Will & Kate*



Maybe more than a little something.  Once it became clear they'd never outshine the future king and his immediate family, they saw the writing on the wall and found no comfort in it.


----------



## gracekelly

Welltraveled! said:


> If the Queen cut off HM she will need to cut off Randy Andy as well.  The backlash to cut off HM and not Randy Andy could be severe.


The difference is that  Andrew spend decades doing the royal duties that he was asked to do and had hundreds of patronages for which he was responsible.  He is at an age where they can call it retirement and they can call it a pension.    Harry does not have decades under his belt and he is farther away from the Queen as a grandson.  Andrew is too damaged to try to find a new livelihood and much older so there isn't much for him to be able to do.  Harry is under 40 and can begin a new career as he has stated he wished to,  do so in theory he does not need the allowance.


----------



## mdcx

bisousx said:


> I have no doubts about Meghan’s abilities to land a new (richer) husband after Harry. She’s gorgeous and determined.  Someone will fall for it.


My feeling also. She will leverage her celebrity and nab someone old, American and rich ala David Foster.


----------



## sdkitty

shelleymuth said:


> I quit like that she wears her coat on her shoulders. Very classic look with a simple shirt and pants.


maybe she gets hot.  but I'd think it could fall off pretty easily that way


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> well they are the ones who are apparently dissatisfied.....so doing it to themselves (if the info being put out is true)



That BBC article that Ceejay linked previously said that this might just be the first step in the two of them leaving the royal family altogether.  Seems like such a drastic move by Harry after such a short period of time in this marriage, barely 1.5 years.  He should have read a few more books about his great-great-Uncle Edward VIII and his aimless, empty life after abdicating, though what a blessing for the British people since they ended up with George VI and now QEII.


----------



## gracekelly

Cavalier Girl said:


> Maybe more than a little something.  Once it became clear they'd never outshine the future king and his immediate family, they saw the writing on the wall and found no comfort in it.


Harry knew his position from birth.  He knew he was to support his brother. and the family.  It isn't such a terrible thing and he certainly enjoyed the perks over the years.   I don't think it is a question of outshining as much as being there for your sibling.   Sorry he didn't have a wife who understood this.


----------



## shelleymuth

LittleStar88 said:


> How did she manage to make the browns so frumpy dumpy on her? Shoes and skirt are nice. Face does look different. That lipstick is not a great color on her. And wow about the sweaty pits - totally unavoidable.
> 
> She does look different - can't place it though.


My first thought was great lipstick choice with the colors of her outfit. She can really pull off a lot of coolers. Love the shirt and shoes.


JolieS said:


> Coat over shoulders is a current fashionista trend that other royals have worn as well, but in this case it is functional as we know she is a sweaty-betty.


 Huuum I know this is a “gossip” thread but  one picture with a underarm stain and she is now a “sweaty Betty”? Give her a break!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Soniaa

Is this decision due to wanting to live a more "normal life"...cause if it is...well good luck with that!


----------



## doni

Actually there is much more info in their website... they have it all worked out.
(You can tell I am nursing a flue and bored).

They say the are relinquishing the sovereign grant which they say covers 5% of their expenses.
And in return they get the chance to build their own financial independence (make their own money).
The remaining 95% is reimbursed by Prince Charles (Duchy of Cornwall).
Nowhere does it say they are giving up on that... or on the patronages, official travels and all that jazz.
On security, they say they are international protected people and as such their security is to be provided by the British police and funded by the British state at all times, not just when on duty. The implication being also when they reside in North America.

It sounds like the deal is that they give up just 5% of their current funding but get to do whatever they want? The Guardian’s conclusion also appears to be this.


*How has the Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex been funded up to now?*
_Since the establishment of The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, 95 percent of the funding received for their Office expenditure is derived from income allocated by HRH The Prince of Wales, generated through the Duchy of Cornwall. This provision has been in place since Prince William and Prince Harry first established their offices in support of The Queen, and is the responsibility of The Prince of Wales. This information continues to be available on The Duchy of Cornwall website.
_
*Where does the other five percent come from?*
_As described above, the remaining five percent of funding for the Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, covering costs associated with employing members of their official office, is received through the Sovereign Grant. During the course of 2020, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made the choice to step back as senior members of the Royal Family and no longer receive funding through the Sovereign Grant, thereby making them members of the Royal Family with financial independence. This phased approach will take time to transition in consultation with other senior members of the Royal Family, but Their Royal Highnesses are hopeful that this change is in the best interest for all and look forward to carrying out their duties to the monarch as well as their charitable work with financial autonomy.

*Does their future financial autonomy extend to covering the costs of security?*
The provision of armed security by The Metropolitan Police is mandated by the Home Office, a ministerial department of Her Majesty’s Government, responsible for security and law & order. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are classified as internationally protected people which mandates this level of security. As stated on gov.uk, “No breakdown of security costs is available as disclosure of such information could compromise the integrity of these arrangements and affect the security of the individuals protected. It is long established policy not to comment upon the protective security arrangements and their related costs for members of the Royal Family or their residences.”
_


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> My feeling also. She will leverage her celebrity and nab someone old, American and rich ala David Foster.


Maybe he can introduce her to some Russian oligarchs, but they tend to like them a lot younger and blonder.  She is an attractive woman, but I wouldn't call her stunningly beautiful.


----------



## Soniaa

It almost always the women that enter into a family unit and either break it apart or keep it together!!! #randomthoughts #personalexperience


----------



## Bag*Snob

@doni  I read that but...can/will Prince Charles pull his financial support of these two?  Does he have that option or is it an obligation he cannot change?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

doni said:


> Actually there is much more info in their website... they have it all worked out.
> (You can tell I am nursing a flue and bored).
> 
> They say the are relinquishing the sovereign grant which they say covers 5% of their expenses.
> And in return they get the chance to build their own financial independence (make their own money).
> They remaining 95% is reimbursed by Prince Charles (Duchy of Cornwall).
> Nowhere does it say they are giving up on that... or on the patronage’s, official travels and all that jazz.
> On security, they say they are international protected people and as such their security is to be provided by the British police and funded by the British state at all times, not just when in duty. The implication being also when they reside in North America.
> 
> It sounds like the deal is that they give up just 5% of their current funding but get to do whatever they want? The Guardian’s conclusion also appears to be this.
> 
> 
> *How has the Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex been funded up to now?*
> _Since the establishment of The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, 95 percent of the funding received for their Office expenditure is derived from income allocated by HRH The Prince of Wales, generated through the Duchy of Cornwall. This provision has been in place since Prince William and Prince Harry first established their offices in support of The Queen, and is the responsibility of The Prince of Wales. This information continues to be available on The Duchy of Cornwall website.
> _
> *Where does the other five percent come from?*
> _As described above, the remaining five percent of funding for the Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, covering costs associated with employing members of their official office, is received through the Sovereign Grant. During the course of 2020, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made the choice to step back as senior members of the Royal Family and no longer receive funding through the Sovereign Grant, thereby making them members of the Royal Family with financial independence. This phased approach will take time to transition in consultation with other senior members of the Royal Family, but Their Royal Highnesses are hopeful that this change is in the best interest for all and look forward to carrying out their duties to the monarch as well as their charitable work with financial autonomy.
> 
> *Does their future financial autonomy extend to covering the costs of security?*
> The provision of armed security by The Metropolitan Police is mandated by the Home Office, a ministerial department of Her Majesty’s Government, responsible for security and law & order. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are classified as internationally protected people which mandates this level of security. As stated on gov.uk, “No breakdown of security costs is available as disclosure of such information could compromise the integrity of these arrangements and affect the security of the individuals protected. It is long established policy not to comment upon the protective security arrangements and their related costs for members of the Royal Family or their residences.”_


How interesting that they'd making these decisions and statements when the Queen has been seemingly left out of the loop. I hope this manifesto of theirs gets shot down, along with their titles, security, and any income streams. Want independence, go be 100% independent of the royal family.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

daisychainz said:


> Yes. Agree. Lots of people get nervous and sweaty in clothing. It's common, and so easy to fix with an undershirt, or cardigan, just something. She KNOWS she'll be photographed all day, so why risk it.



Why make excuses for her? 

Even my DDs have heard of Botox for armpit sweat.

Please....


----------



## altigirl88

Did Harry graduate college? It seems like he went right into the military


----------



## Flatsy

Bag*Snob said:


> @doni  I read that but...can/will Prince Charles pull his financial support of these two?  Does he have that option or is it an obligation he cannot change?


Hell yes, Prince Charles can withdraw his funding.  They are owed nothing by anyone.  Harry's so spoiled he thinks he can announce unilaterally that he intends to "become" financially independent, but he's apparently too arrogant to remember that his 35-year-old's "allowance" is not really his.

The truth is, the Sussexes can be booted out of Frogmore House tonight.  Their entire staff can be fired effective immediately (including the staff who helped them create that rogue website).  And they can be sent packing right at this moment with nothing except the inheritances Harry received from his mother and grandmother.

I don't think a wise monarch (or future monarch) who would handle this situation that way, but the terms the Sussexes laid out on their website are definitely NOT the terms the royal family has to abide by.


----------



## doni

Bag*Snob said:


> @doni  I read that but...can/will Prince Charles pull his financial support of these two?  Does he have that option or is it an obligation he cannot change?


At the very least, if someone is paying for 95% of your living expenses, it should be difficult to ignore their opinion...


----------



## Lounorada

If it's true that they, _especially Harry_, didn't have the decency and respect to go to the Queen first and discuss their intentions with her or at least about how they are feeling about their roles and responsibilities, then that is beyond sh**ty and quite frankly utterly selfish and disrespectful.

This announcement was expected at some point to say the least, but it's pretty laughable that they want their cake and eat it too by still wanting to keep ties to the RF and continue to use the name/status and get a lot of the perks, but at the same time head off into their own little world, do what they like and make their own money (and a lot of it i'm guessing).
If you want out of the Royal life & duties, then just exit it completely, drop your titles and cut ALL ties.

I've got a feeling this is gonna be a sh*t-show, so imma be here like...


----------



## TC1

Perhaps now Megs will get Harry some hair plugs to start off his new glam lifestyle once he's "financially independent"


----------



## gelbergirl

Will he attend the Charles coronation one day?  What about William's???  In what capacity?


----------



## youngster

Bag*Snob said:


> @doni  I read that but...*can/will Prince Charles pull his financial support of these two? * Does he have that option or is it an obligation he cannot change?



Prince Charles can do whatever he wants regarding his financial support of these two.  He has the substantial income from the Duchy of Cornwall at his disposal. That is my understanding. He can continue to support them or cut them off or somewhere in between.  Now, what will be really interesting is down the road, Will is going to inherit the Duchy, and can choose to financially support his brother, or not. I'm thinking he might _not_. 

It's the British public still having to pay for their security that will be infuriating to taxpayers, I would imagine.  Why should they if they are splitting their time?  I can imagine a backlash over that and Charles possibly having to pick up that expense.


----------



## doni

Wow. There is more.

They have also published a statement on how they intend to deal with the media in the future. They are unilaterally stepping down from the rota system established since time immemorial by Buckingham Palace. Presumably without first checking with Buckingham Palace.

They do have some nerve, you have to give them that.

https://sussexroyal.com/media/
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-to-restrict-media-access-in-snub-to-tabloids


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

For some reason I have an image of all of Meghan’s Canadian friends and her former Suits costar friends (the ones who pranced in front of the cameras at the wedding) cackling and rubbing their hands with glee at this announcement.


----------



## youngster

doni said:


> They do have some nerve, you have to give them that.
> https://sussexroyal.com/media/
> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-to-restrict-media-access-in-snub-to-tabloids



They think they don't need the media.  They think they can reach people through their own social media accounts but they don't seem to realize that the tabloids and newspapers and _their _social media accounts are pretty darn powerful and also operate 24/7.  Making enemies of them is so, so foolish.


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> Now, what will be really interesting is down the road, Will is going to inherit the Duchy, and can choose to financially support his brother, or not. I'm thinking he might _not_.


Supporting or not supporting Harry is always going to be on Charles.  The Duchy of Cornwall is only for the heir and his family.  Once Charles becomes King, if he continues supporting Harry, he will just draw from different resources to do so.

If not for "stepping back", Harry's path would be like that of Prince Andrew.  Andrew is supported by his mother, not by his brother.


----------



## youngster

Flatsy said:


> Supporting or not supporting Harry is always going to be on Charles.  The Duchy of Cornwall is only for the heir and his family.  Once Charles becomes King, if he continues supporting Harry, he will just draw from different resources to do so.



I was thinking of the time after Charles has passed away. I forgot that the Duchy then would go to the heir, who would then be little PG.  With Diana gone and Harry already having received his inheritance from her, he will likely receive an inheritance from Charles' personal estate which could be quite substantial, but I also thought he might need to rely on Will for financial support too.


----------



## Welltraveled!

sdkitty said:


> well they are the ones who are apparently dissatisfied.....so doing it to themselves (if the info being put out is true)



They're not doing anything to themselves - besides stepping down as working Royals.   Based on this thread alone, there were comments that Charles wanted to slimmed down the monarchy/working Royals.  HM gave him what he wanted.  

And some of you felt HM shouldn't receive taxpayers money - Done.  

Most of you wanted them to go away.  Guess what?  There's a chance you will only see them when  they are engaging in their patronages/Crown duties, etc.  

It seems like HM was on the same page as some of you.


----------



## caramelize126

So they are only giving up the 5% from the sovereign grant and  planning on keeping that 95% from PC? Definitely “financial independence”   H only knows the fishbowl life. The likelihood of him making it on his own without financial help and the protection and sheltering his family provided is slim. 

BP must’ve had a feeling this wouldn’t last. I always thought it was interesting that H &M were given Frogmore House, a property that belongs to the Crown and that H&M have no real rights to. Also interesting that the family did nothing to expedite her citizenship process, which they definitely have the power to do.


----------



## youngster

What is so bizarre about all of this is that Harry said in that interview when they announced their engagement, how he was giving Meghan "the family that she never had", and here they are running far away from the family less than two years after the wedding.  

She barely made an effort to adapt to British life and she seems to have avoided spending time with the family.  Maybe she planned this out, or the two of them planned this out, to keep the perks and as much of the money and funding as possible while bailing out on all those pesky duties and obligations they don't like (which appears to be most of them).


----------



## mdcx

caramelize126 said:


> So they are only giving up the 5% from the sovereign grant and  planning on keeping that 95% from PC? Definitely “financial independence”   H only knows the fishbowl life. The likelihood of him making it on his own without financial help and the protection and sheltering his family provided is slim.
> 
> BP must’ve had a feeling this wouldn’t last. I always thought it was interesting that H &M were given Frogmore House, a property that belongs to the Crown and that H&M have no real rights to. Also interesting that the family did nothing to expedite her citizenship process, which they definitely have the power to do.


I need like a dummies version of how they think this is all going to work. Because surely the Queen can just put the kibosh on all of this? At minimum she can withdraw their titles?


----------



## caramelize126

Welltraveled! said:


> And some of you felt HM shouldn't receive taxpayers money - Done.



Because an allowance from the duchy is totally “adulting”.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

caramelize126 said:


> So they are only giving up the 5% from the sovereign grant and  planning on keeping that 95% from PC? Definitely “financial independence”   H only knows the fishbowl life. The likelihood of him making it on his own without financial help and the protection and sheltering his family provided is slim.
> 
> BP must’ve had a feeling this wouldn’t last. I always thought it was interesting that H &M were given Frogmore House, a property that belongs to the Crown and that H&M have no real rights to. Also interesting that the family did nothing to expedite her citizenship process, which they definitely have the power to do.


I think there was no plan for her to ever be a citizen. It was all talk without true intent. imho.


----------



## caramelize126

mdcx said:


> I need like a dummies version of how they think this is all going to work. Because surely the Queen can just put the kibosh on all of this? At minimum she can withdraw their titles?



Of course they can. But cutting off your brother or your uncle ( a la Edward and Wallis) is much easier than cutting off your son. I’m not sure if Charles has it in him to cut Harry off.

Also, I don’t think they can completely take away Harry’s titles because he is a blood prince. They can take away the Sussex titles but he can always use his prince title.


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> And some of you felt HM shouldn't receive taxpayers money - Done.
> 
> Most of you wanted them to go away. Guess what? There's a chance you will only see them when they are engaging in their patronages/Crown duties, etc.


I will eat my hat if the Sussex version of "earning money" doesn't involve posing for ads and otherwise merchandising themselves, in addition to working their foundation for profit.  Hello, honoraria!  I think we will see them more than ever.

And the Sussex website said they are giving up the 5% of funding they get from the Sovereign Grant, not the 95% of funding they get from the Duchy of Cornwall.  The Duchy of Cornwall is an asset that belongs to the people of the UK, but one degree of separation from official "public funding" that the Sussexes can call that "financial independence".  The Flow Chart For Dummies that they put up on their website was insulting.


----------



## LizzieBennett

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ed-to-pay-rent-after-going-it-alone-rb93kxr0v

Interesting article


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welltraveled! said:


> And some of you felt HM shouldn't receive taxpayers money - Done.


 
Except they themselves said they expect the taxpayers to still pick up their security tab.


----------



## caramelize126

Can someone confirm the inheritance situation? He received about 10 million from Diana and all estimates that I have read stated approximately 20 million from the queen mother for Harry and William to SPLIT.  Whether it was split evenly or not, that’s not very much money to keep up with the standard of living he is accustomed to. He had access to his money when he turned 30. How do we know there is even still anything substantial left? We can’t forget his wild partying days  ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

I think they know that if the Queen pulls their titles now, it will look spiteful. It may take a while but I have no doubt she’ll have the last laugh.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> I think they know that if the Queen pulls their titles now, it will look spiteful. It may take a while but I have no doubt she’ll have the last laugh.


Meghan will be persona non grata at Buckingham Palace. I imagine no-one will dare even speak her name.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

So...they quit and run, publicly embarrassed their family, and still think they're going to let them keep 95% of their funding and their house? What am I missing?


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634666



dying!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Welltraveled! said:


> I know that’s what you and others in this thread would like.  But it would cause more harm than good to remove any member of the BRF titles.  I think it would open the door to question if there’s a need to have a British monarchy.



I feel like that horse just left the stable today...

I’m absolutely gobsmacked at the arrogance and entitlement.


----------



## queennadine

I don’t think the BRF will care one iota about appearing petty. The Queen is savvy enough to know that these are different times and she can’t be seen coddling lazy spoiled members of her family who don’t give a flying leap about duty and loyalty to her, despite fake protestations. She’s lived through way too much for too long to be held an image-hostage by MM. She dealt with Diana and Fergie. She won’t hesitate to strip who of what needs to be. The monarchy has existed for centuries, and the House of Windsor has been ruthless over the years when it came to trimming away loose fat. I think these two have overplayed their hand. Badly.


----------



## rose60610

I think The Crown shoved them off, and allowed them to say they were doing it their own so H&M could save face. For H&M to say they'll "become financially independent" is such a joke. Between their funds from active work, then inheritances from the BRF, "financial independence" in this case isn't dependent on gainful employment. Foundations' assets can easily be used as giant slush funds for their board members (which are usually family members, surprise!).  They set "salaries" and cover expenses "related" to foundation activities. They've had a year+ to rake in monies and will continue to do so. Sure, they have to disperse some funds as they go, but they're not exactly making any kind of real sacrifice. The real test will be if they're capable of living within the means of their net worth and foundation parameters. Who knows? Maybe they invested in some high flyer stocks for all we know, and good for them if they did. They probably have enough friends with private jets to use so they don't need their own plane. I find it hard they can be comfortable to the level to which they're accustomed if they actually got a 100% total cutoff from Charles and The Crown.


----------



## mrsinsyder

And the dragging begins...


----------



## MizGemma

mrsinsyder said:


> And the dragging begins...
> 
> View attachment 4634690
> View attachment 4634691


Ha ha! Love the NY Post drawing.


----------



## youngster

caramelize126 said:


> Can someone confirm the inheritance situation? He received about 10 million from Diana and all estimates that I have read stated approximately 20 million from the queen mother for Harry and William to SPLIT.  Whether it was split evenly or not, that’s not very much money to keep up with the standard of living he is accustomed to. He had access to his money when he turned 30. How do we know there is even still anything substantial left? We can’t forget his wild partying days  ...



It's really hard to be definite about it since it's private and difficult to value certain assets.  I've read that Harry is worth around $25 million.  He received maybe about $8 million - $10 million from Diana's estate, getting some at age 25 and the rest at 30. He received about $9 million from his great-grandmother's estate, Elizabeth the Queen Mum.  The total probably grew over time as it was invested and as he is notoriously reluctant about spending his own money.

I've read that Charles is worth about $100 million, with an additional $20 million in annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall.  He uses the income from the Duchy to pay allowances/salaries to Camilla and Will and Harry.  When he becomes King, the Duchy will go to Will.  

I've read that QEII is worth privately about $550 - $600 million, but that's based on estimates and guesses.  She likely will leave substantial bequests to her 4 children and some likely to her grandchildren. I wouldn't be surprised if the bulk goes to Charles and then to Will though.

So, Harry likely will receive a substantial inheritance in the next 10 - 20 years from the Queen (unless she's really angry at him) and a substantial inheritance from Charles (unless he also is really angry at him)!


----------



## youngster

_*Megxit* . . . 
_
Too funny!


----------



## hellosunshine

May 3rd, 2018 Germaine Greer was spot on . Marrying into the royal family is NOT easy and we all should've expected that Meghan (plus Harry) would eventually say enough is enough.


----------



## caramelize126

youngster said:


> It's really hard to be definite about it since it's private and difficult to value certain assets.  I've read that Harry is worth around $25 million.  He received maybe about $8 million - $10 million from Diana's estate, getting some at age 25 and the rest at 30. He received about $9 million from his great-grandmother's estate, Elizabeth the Queen Mum.  The total probably grew over time as it was invested and as he is notoriously reluctant about spending his own money.
> 
> I've read that Charles is worth about $100 million, with an additional $20 million in annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall.  He uses the income from the Duchy to pay allowances/salaries to Camilla and Will and Harry.  When he becomes King, the Duchy will go to Will.
> 
> I've read that QEII is worth privately about $550 - $600 million, but that's based on estimates and guesses.  She likely will leave substantial bequests to her 4 children and some likely to her grandchildren. I wouldn't be surprised if the bulk goes to Charles and then to Will though.
> 
> So, Harry likely will receive a substantial inheritance in the next 10 - 20 years from the Queen (unless she's really angry at him) and a substantial inheritance from Charles (unless he also is really angry at him)!



Ooh thanks for this! Very interesting.

I always thought that the Crown kept the money with the heir. My understanding was that, like the generations prior, all the money would stay with the heir and the heir is responsible for then taking care of other family members. Hence all of the cousins and random family members that QE supports and live in KP and on other Crown properties. I think the money from the queen mother might have been money from her own inheritance along with her estate ( artwork, etc)

If this is the case, Harry’s future income would be entirely in William’s hands? Splitting the money every generation would have greatly weakened the Firm by now, IMO


----------



## mdcx

So if Harry is loaded due to inheritance what's with the comment about "working towards financial independence"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## closeted

I truly feel for HM the Queen. That is all. No words for them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

When will we see the first sponsored post on Insta?


----------



## youngster

mdcx said:


> So if Harry is loaded due to inheritance what's with the comment about "working towards financial independence"?



He's got a lot of money for sure, but even $25 million or so isn't enough to pay for the lavish lifestyle that he is used to leading.  Private jets, gorgeous houses in different countries, the staff and their salaries . . . he needs way more to support that lifestyle.


----------



## youngster

caramelize126 said:


> I always thought that the Crown kept the money with the heir. My understanding was that, like the generations prior, all the money would stay with the heir and the heir is responsible for then taking care of other family members. Hence all of the cousins and random family members that QE supports and live in KP and on other Crown properties. I think the money from the queen mother might have been money from her own inheritance along with her estate ( artwork, etc)
> 
> If this is the case, Harry’s future income would be entirely in William’s hands?



That was always my understanding too, that the Queen is likely to leave the bulk  of her assets to Charles who will leave the bulk of assets to Will.  But, I think she will leave some money to each of her children and grandchildren out of love and concern for each of them.  Just my opinion!   

And, sure, if Harry runs through his inherited wealth and can't make a go of a private business then he likely would have to go to Charles or Will at some point.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> It's really hard to be definite about it since it's private and difficult to value certain assets.  I've read that Harry is worth around $25 million.  He received maybe about $8 million - $10 million from Diana's estate, getting some at age 25 and the rest at 30. He received about $9 million from his great-grandmother's estate, Elizabeth the Queen Mum.  The total probably grew over time as it was invested and as he is notoriously reluctant about spending his own money.
> 
> I've read that Charles is worth about $100 million, with an additional $20 million in annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall.  He uses the income from the Duchy to pay allowances/salaries to Camilla and Will and Harry.  When he becomes King, the Duchy will go to Will.
> 
> I've read that QEII is worth privately about $550 - $600 million, but that's based on estimates and guesses.  She likely will leave substantial bequests to her 4 children and some likely to her grandchildren. I wouldn't be surprised if the bulk goes to Charles and then to Will though.
> 
> So, Harry likely will receive a substantial inheritance in the next 10 - 20 years from the Queen (unless she's really angry at him) and a substantial inheritance from Charles (unless he also is really angry at him)!


And whatever they do they will set it up with encumbrances.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

closeted said:


> I truly feel for HM the Queen. That is all. No words for them.


Me too. I feel sad for her because lets be real, this woman is inching closer to her time and this is what she'll know going out. After all her years of work and service it ends in a royal mess. She should have let Charles just marry Camilla.


----------



## mrsinsyder

All jokes aside, what major draw would these two have? Comparisons to the Harvard educated Obamas... what? Barack was a Senator and President while Michelle is also extremely accomplished.

Harry has done very little, and Meghan volunteered at some soup kitchens in Toronto. They really think they’re going to be the leading voices of solving all the worlds problems? I’d rather listen to Pitbull speak about the schools he’s opened in Miami.


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> Ooh thanks for this! Very interesting.
> 
> I always thought that the Crown kept the money with the heir. My understanding was that, like the generations prior, all the money would stay with the heir and the heir is responsible for then taking care of other family members. Hence all of the cousins and random family members that QE supports and live in KP and on other Crown properties. I think the money from the queen mother might have been money from her own inheritance along with her estate ( artwork, etc)
> 
> If this is the case, Harry’s future income would be entirely in William’s hands? Splitting the money every generation would have greatly weakened the Firm by now, IMO


This was my understanding as well.  I also didn't think that the Queen Mum had that much.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> This was my understanding as well.  I also didn't think that the Queen Mum had that much.


There are a lot of rumors about her extravagant spending and blowing through money. I think you’re right.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> All jokes aside, what major draw would these two have? Comparisons to the Harvard educated Obamas... what? Barack was a Senator and President while Michelle is also extremely accomplished.
> 
> Harry has done very little, and Meghan volunteered at some soup kitchens in Toronto. They really think they’re going to be the leading voices of solving all the worlds problems? I’d rather listen to Pitbull speak about the schools he’s opened in Miami.


I know.  It doesn't make any sense at all.  It is similar to what Ricky Gervais said in the opening.  Just because you win an award, it doesn't mean you are brilliant and should expound on the world's problems. In this case substitute title for award.   Harry tried that with his barefoot speech, which was topped off with the private jet usage.  Without the support of the palace, he will do nothing.  The Earthshot initiative got the big intro thanks to that kind of support.  All the power brokers Harry met this summer will not be standing on line to help him if he loses his glow as a Prince.  They don't want a Prince of Nothing just like the world didn't want the Duke of Windsor once he gave up his crown and his family said no thanks we don't need your help for anything.  Meghan is not a Hollywood power broker nor a A list actress.  In an alternate time line, if Grace Kelly had left Prince Ranier and returned to Hollywood, she would have been given carte blanche as she was a famous actress and Academy Award winner.  Food blog?  Cooking show?  Join the crowd.


----------



## gracekelly

I wonder if Prince Philip is going to be the one to make the decision.  He may be retired, but I think he hold a lot of sway in the family.


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> There are a lot of rumors about her extravagant spending and blowing through money. I think you’re right.



The Queen Mum had an estate valued between 50 - 70 million British pounds, the majority of which went to Queen Elizabeth. Art, jewelry, Faberge eggs, etc.   (She did have some debts too, that QEII apparently paid or maybe the debts were paid from the estate.)  She did set up a trust for her great-grandchildren. I read that Will and Harry apparently split about $17.9 million from her estate so Harry would have received about $9 million.  Of course, that's all based on reports but I think the Queen had to make some of the details public due to requests/demands from politicians.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if Prince Philip is going to be the one to make the decision.  He may be retired, but I think he hold a lot of sway in the family.


That poor man is just trying to stay alive. He had Meghan pegged from the beginning, so hopefully he sticks to his guns.


----------



## bag-princess

BagOuttaHell said:


> Rely on the charity of celebrities? I am laughing so hard.




It’s almost scary to the point of being hilarious the things posted here about them that people really believe!


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> That poor man is just trying to stay alive. He had Meghan pegged from the beginning, so hopefully he sticks to his guns.


Seriouisly!  Date an actress, don't marry one! 

*date is a code word, wink wink!*

I don't think he is as decrepit as all that and his brain and mouth function just fine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> All jokes aside, what major draw would these two have?
> 
> Harry has done very little, and Meghan volunteered at some soup kitchens in Toronto. They really think they’re going to be the leading voices of solving all the worlds problems?



Well, the Sussex's main draw is their work ethic. Meghan has practically hustled her whole life. Same for Harry. 

While in college, Meghan was able to finish all the necessary credits needed to graduate in her third year enabling her to take on an internship at the U.S Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 

Prince Harry never pursued a post-high school education, however he served in the Army for ten years, rising to the rank of Captain and undertaking two tours to Afghanistan. Harry was actively deployed in the fields, conducting operations against the Taliban.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Well, the Sussex's main draw is their work ethic. Meghan has practically hustled her whole life. Same for Harry.
> 
> While in college, Meghan was able to finish all the necessary credits needed to graduate in her third year enabling her to take on an internship at the U.S Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
> 
> Prince Harry never pursued a post-high school education, however he served in the Army for ten years, rising to the rank of Captain and undertaking two tours to Afghanistan. Harry was actively deployed in the fields, conducting operations against the Taliban.



Myself and most of my classmates finished college in three years. With AP credits in high school, it’s not hard to do at all. Her uncle handed her the embassy job. And then he got Markle’d. 

Hundreds of thousands of men and women were deployed in combat. 

So...


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Seriouisly!  Date an actress, don't marry one!
> 
> *date is a code word, wink wink!*
> 
> I don't think he is as decrepit as all that and his brain and mouth function just fine.


----------



## auntyjo

closeted said:


> I truly feel for HM the Queen. That is all. No words for them.


I don't usually  comment here but it is truly heartbreaking for the Queen and family for Harry to do this in public without talking to them first if this is true. Very selfish and an act of betrayal. A sensible partner should advise not instigate. Family should still comes first. It's not all about me. I don't know what makes him happy, him 'doing good to people and the world' but didn't realise he's hurting his closest people, family and his country. Sad. He was so popular and a great asset to the British people but now.... just endless criticisms.


----------



## bisousx

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634749



omg!! Lmao


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So...



Ok. Nothing else to add here. I was just simply responding to your question on what major draw would these two have.

Secondly, I've always believed that one doesn't need to be a state senator or former president to yield influence. The Sussex's are fine in this regard.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Well, the Sussex's main draw is their work ethic. *Meghan has practically hustled her whole life. Same for Harry. *
> 
> While in college, Meghan was able to finish all the necessary credits needed to graduate in her third year enabling her to take on an internship at the U.S Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
> 
> Prince Harry never pursued a post-high school education, however he served in the Army for ten years, rising to the rank of Captain and undertaking two tours to Afghanistan. Harry was actively deployed in the fields, conducting operations against the Taliban.




Totally agree that Meghan is a hustler.  Not Harry,


----------



## mrsinsyder

The bolded 

Harry has worked SO HARD his whole life!!


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> Well, the Sussex's main draw is their work ethic. Meghan has practically hustled her whole life. Same for Harry.



I don't think this is their main draw.  Their main draw is that they were members of the royal family and Harry was Diana's son.  They are both good looking people who are photogenic too.  

Meghan never gave herself a chance to really settle into her role before she appears to have started to lobby to get out.  They got married in May 2018 and went on their honeymoon.  Meghan didn't start making appearances until maybe July or August of 2018 then she's pregnant almost immediately and takes a totally understandable maternity leave of a large part of 2019. She comes back, they go on their Africa trip, do a few more appearances, and then take these last 6 weeks off.  So, I haven't observed her or Harry working very hard in the last couple of years. They've seemed to be on vacation or leave for most of the time.


----------



## Welltraveled!

caramelize126 said:


> Because an allowance from the duchy is totally “adulting”.




is any member of the BRF adulting?  The taxpayers fund their lifestyle.


----------



## Welltraveled!

I heard the Sun was going to announce it.  Which is why HM move up their announcement. Don’t know if it’s true or not.

Thinking about the past few weeks and the initiative from the Palace to focus on the heirs and the future.  That everyone in their family (Charles, Queen, Harry and Meghan) were in agreement about slimming down the working Royals.  

I do believe the announcement from HM was unexpected.





A1aGypsy said:


> I feel like that horse just left the stable today...
> 
> I’m absolutely gobsmacked at the arrogance and entitlement.


----------



## Welltraveled!

mrsinsyder said:


> Except they themselves said they expect the taxpayers to still pick up their security tab.



Yes that’s due to their station.  Andrew still receive a security detailed as well.

you should be happy your American dollars doesn’t go towards their protection


----------



## Annawakes

Their main draw is giving us commoners something to watch and gossip about.  Like watching something implode in slow motion.


----------



## Flatsy

Welltraveled! said:


> you should be happy your American dollars doesn’t go towards their protection


Who says it won't?  The Sussexes said they intend to live part time in "North America." If they spend any significant time in the US, they will get State Department protection when they are here, like Meghan did for her ridiculous baby shower.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hmmm, I think the media and the world in general is a lot better off without these two freeloaders, and Harry certainly hitched himself to the wrong whor... I mean horse.

As far as finances, QEII may be one of the wealthiest women in the world as I have read that her assets are in the $1B range, double the $500K mentioned in a post earlier. Maybe this has changed but do not underestimate who CONTROLS the purse strings in the Firm. 

She has made it very clear during the holidays where her heart is - and money is usually controlled by emotions - Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince George. Full Stop.

As far as the Sussex couple, MM was FAR from a household name here in the US before she married. Harry’s net worth of $25M is not considerable AT ALL and it will not take them far.

Neither one of this couple has Q score that would make them “brand friendly”. So where does that leave them? Jeez, MM is making the Duchess of Windsor look good.

Also do not underestimate the impact that the Jefferey Epstein & Price Andrew scandal has had on the crown and this saga is probably not over yet. Not one intelligent person takes the BRF seriously right now as Andrew seems to have been given a carte blanche when it comes to being a responsible law-abiding citizen.

Sooo, as my father always said, don’t let the door hit you in the a@@, MM & Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

doni said:


> Actually there is much more info in their website... they have it all worked out.
> (You can tell I am nursing a flue and bored).
> 
> They say the are relinquishing the sovereign grant which they say covers 5% of their expenses.
> And in return they get the chance to build their own financial independence (make their own money).
> The remaining 95% is reimbursed by Prince Charles (Duchy of Cornwall).
> Nowhere does it say they are giving up on that... or on the patronages, official travels and all that jazz.
> On security, they say they are international protected people and as such their security is to be provided by the British police and funded by the British state at all times, not just when on duty. The implication being also when they reside in North America.
> 
> It sounds like the deal is that they give up just 5% of their current funding but get to do whatever they want? The Guardian’s conclusion also appears to be this.
> 
> 
> *How has the Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex been funded up to now?*
> _Since the establishment of The Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, 95 percent of the funding received for their Office expenditure is derived from income allocated by HRH The Prince of Wales, generated through the Duchy of Cornwall. This provision has been in place since Prince William and Prince Harry first established their offices in support of The Queen, and is the responsibility of The Prince of Wales. This information continues to be available on The Duchy of Cornwall website.
> _
> *Where does the other five percent come from?*
> _As described above, the remaining five percent of funding for the Office of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, covering costs associated with employing members of their official office, is received through the Sovereign Grant. During the course of 2020, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made the choice to step back as senior members of the Royal Family and no longer receive funding through the Sovereign Grant, thereby making them members of the Royal Family with financial independence. This phased approach will take time to transition in consultation with other senior members of the Royal Family, but Their Royal Highnesses are hopeful that this change is in the best interest for all and look forward to carrying out their duties to the monarch as well as their charitable work with financial autonomy.
> 
> *Does their future financial autonomy extend to covering the costs of security?*
> The provision of armed security by The Metropolitan Police is mandated by the Home Office, a ministerial department of Her Majesty’s Government, responsible for security and law & order. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are classified as internationally protected people which mandates this level of security. As stated on gov.uk, “No breakdown of security costs is available as disclosure of such information could compromise the integrity of these arrangements and affect the security of the individuals protected. It is long established policy not to comment upon the protective security arrangements and their related costs for members of the Royal Family or their residences.”
> _



I love how they have planned something that the palace didnt agree to apparently based on the statement it provided lol. Like they assume they get all the $ from Charles and get to keep their patronages.


----------



## PewPew

After being “Markled” when his daughter married a Prince, it must be difficult for M’s father to read the recent news. His daughter is unlikely to reconcile with him (to save face), but giving up “senior” BRF status after just 2 yrs may make the father-daughter split seem extra futile
________


----------



## myown

LittleStar88 said:


> Question: As unofficial royals (or whatever they are to be called now), will they really be in demand as they were before? Will people care about them as much since their "value" is less than before?
> 
> Seems to be a small blow to the patronages - they won't get the same airtime and attention as I sort of predict the interest in them will wane.
> 
> Thank goodness for this. As someone else said, they were a negative distraction for the BRF and the members who take the role seriously and understand their part. Now Meghan can turn up with ratty hair, pit stains, and ill-fitting undergarments to her heart's delight.


I actually think, this will turn out like Madeleine of Sweden. Official a princess, but living her own life, making her own money and only being in Sweden if she _really_ has to


----------



## myown

bagshopr said:


> I can't believe the British taxpayers paid good money for their wedding.
> Royalty is not something you can apply for and resign from. Harry was born royal and he will remain that way until he dies.


Didn’t the wedding made more money than it did cost?


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan is starting to look like a classic abuser.
> View attachment 4634402


Of course she is disappointed. Wouldn’t every granny?


----------



## myown

maryg1 said:


> It doesn’t sound like leaving the BRF to me, they just want to do things the way they like.
> They actually want to keep the title because it’s still nice to be called Duke and Duchess, but they don’t want to be told what to do, where to go, how to spend money etc.
> And the BP statement reads like “hey dear, it’s not like you wake up one day and set the rule”


One shouldn’t forget; its everything Harry knows


----------



## byzina

I was surprised by the timing they chose. It's Kate's birthday today. Australia is on fire and you can't look without tears at these pictures. And they always mention how much they love Canada (actually the recent post about it was 2 days ago). And yesterday 63 Canadiens died in a plane crash. And instead of expressing condolences they made this fuss in the press. Either her PR consultant is not very good or they do everything themselves.
I mean if Meghan wanted to be loved by people, there are still many of them to help and support in such a difficult situation in the world.


----------



## V0N1B2

All Meghan needed to do was smile and nod.  Listen to her handlers about choosing which outfits to wear, mind her manners and learn official royal protocol.  Don't wear an ill-fitting strapless bra with a sweater, don't show up to an event with dirty shoes, stop constantly touching her hair, don't rush past The Prince to shake hands or hug people, walk behind the more senior royal (ie: her husband), don't complain publicly about the immense privilege that has been handed to you etc. AKA: Don't rock the boat, play nice, learn your place in the game etc.
But no.  She thought she was somehow going to change thousands of years of the Monarchy by having a ring put on her finger.  She just needed to wait it out for a couple of years until Charles took over.  By then Harry would be the son of the King and brother of a future King.  As the direct descendant of the King, I don't think Harry, and in effect Meghan would have been considered the fat that needed to be trimmed.  It would have perhaps meant more responsibility for Harry and less so for those farther away from Charles.  Why have your niece(s) out there doing work when it could be your own son?
Tsk tsk Meghan.  You had so much promise and had a grasp on that brass ring for a fleeting moment but you had to p!ss it all away because you think you'e smarter than 1000 years of tradition. 
The further she and Harry get from the Royal Family, the dimmer her light will shine thus becoming less and less relevant.
Was this the "Forces of Change" she was always on about?

Her sugars are desperately trying to put a positive spin on this though, and I'm here for all of it


----------



## elvisfan4life

Bag*Snob said:


> @doni  I read that but...can/will Prince Charles pull his financial support of these two?  Does he have that option or is it an obligation he cannot change?


He will be cut off when William takes.over the Duchy then when Charles becomes king lol


----------



## elvisfan4life

byzina said:


> I was surprised by the timing they chose. It's Kate's birthday today. Australia is on fire and you can't look without tears at these pictures. And they always mention how much they love Canada (actually the recent post about it was 2 days ago). And yesterday 63 Canadiens died in a plane crash. And instead of expressing condolences they made this fuss in the press. Either her PR consultant is not very good or they do everything themselves.
> I mean if Meghan wanted to be loved by people, there are still many of them to help and support in such a difficult situation in the world.


Really! I.wasn't anything to upstage Kate - seriously go now and stay.away.for.good!


----------



## mshermes

elvisfan4life said:


> Really! I.wasn't anything to upstage Kate - seriously go now and stay.away.for.good!


Totally agree. She is toxic and manipulative. She hunted him down, had his son and now has him by the ba***. I think he has been thinking with his D from the git go. I just see her as highly toxic. Shame on her. I wouldn’t give up a sibling for anyone.


----------



## scrpo83

myown said:


> I actually think, this will turn out like *Madeleine of Sweden*. Official a princess, but living her own life, making her own money and only being in Sweden if she _really_ has to



I suppose H&M want it to be that way..but Madeleine is even lower in the succession line than Harry is..her husband never took up her titles and still maintain a full time job..The announcement of her moving to the US was handled by the Palace communique and she never had her own foundation. And correct me if I'm wrong, but Sweden did not provide security details while she is living her life in the US


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The more I read the more I think Harry has completely lost it. I didn't expect much from Meghan, but for him to treat his family this way (not even that he wants to step down, but letting them know via Instagram etc.) and to make the most ridiculous demands ("Let us be but still fund our lifestyle") is so outrageous I don't know what to say. And yes, I do blame Meghan. She smelled his fragility, preyed on it, quickly worked out how to push his buttons and this is now the result. I usually like great romances and grand romantic gestures...this is neither.


----------



## mdcx

V0N1B2 said:


> All Meghan needed to do was smile and nod.  Listen to her handlers about choosing which outfits to wear, mind her manners and learn official royal protocol.  Don't wear an ill-fitting strapless bra with a sweater, don't show up to an event with dirty shoes, stop constantly touching her hair, don't rush past The Prince to shake hands or hug people, walk behind the more senior royal (ie: her husband), don't complain publicly about the immense privilege that has been handed to you etc. AKA: Don't rock the boat, play nice, learn your place in the game etc.
> But no.  She thought she was somehow going to change thousands of years of the Monarchy by having a ring put on her finger.  She just needed to wait it out for a couple of years until Charles took over.  By then Harry would be the son of the King and brother of a future King.  As the direct descendant of the King, I don't think Harry, and in effect Meghan would have been considered the fat that needed to be trimmed.  It would have perhaps meant more responsibility for Harry and less so for those farther away from Charles.  Why have your niece(s) out there doing work when it could be your own son?
> Tsk tsk Meghan.  You had so much promise and had a grasp on that brass ring for a fleeting moment but you had to p!ss it all away because you think you'e smarter than 1000 years of tradition.
> The further she and Harry get from the Royal Family, the dimmer her light will shine thus becoming less and less relevant.
> Was this the "Forces of Change" she was always on about?
> 
> Her sugars are desperately trying to put a positive spin on this though, and I'm here for all of it


I feel like everyone on earth knew that the cardinal rule of marrying into the BRF was “know your place”. She had this end goal in mind imo - play the victim, pretend she didn’t know she would be subject to detailed protocols, dress codes, obligatory appearances etc. Claim it was all too much, use the race card, bait Harry with constant references to his mum.
End result - secure the bag minus the responsibilities. I really don't think she cares about the collateral damage. I also don't think she understands how horrified and angry the public is at how she treated the Queen. I feel like karma will bite.


----------



## myown

youngster said:


> It's amazing to me that the two of them don't realize that without the glamour of being senior members of the royal family, on the inside, doing all the important and official engagements from which they will now be excluded, that they'll lose their relevance rapidly, especially if their patronages are systematically taken away and the Palace no longer has any motivation to promote them.
> 
> I am not British though, and I'd love to hear what some of our Brit members think about all this. I just can't imagine it's going to go over well with the general public in the UK. To me, just looking at it from the U.S., it sort of feels like a betrayal by Harry.  He's born a Prince of the United Kingdom, how does he just walk away from his duties and obligations to the Queen and Charles and, eventually, Will?


But maybe they know that all and know what they are doing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

it is just so odd for a royal family to announce something *anything* (and especially that important) on social media. 
I would have expected more


----------



## doni

I think if they wanted to live their own life, do their own thing, live in their own place, quit, a la Madeleine of Sweden, that would be perfectly fine. No one can stop them doing that and many may welcome it.

But they don’t want that. They want to run a charity that will rule the world and that is called Sussex _Royal_.

I have been thinking and I believe they must have a team of lawyers working hard on this who also advised them to go public on their own to have the upper hand. The brief they got was, how can we do as we wish without loosing any perks or influence. As a lawyer, in the last years I’ve specialized in public institutions corporate governance, ethical issues and conflicts of interests, so I find this fascinating.

Now, what the lawyers are saying is, they are recipients of a sovereign grant that prevents them from taking employment or earning they own money. Hence if they give up the sovereign grant they can earn their own money. Easy.
Particularly as the grant only covers 5% of their expenses and then will keep receiving the remaining 95% from the Duchy of Cornwall (in the understanding that restrictions are only attached to the sovereign grant).

They have made it clear they do not intend to renounce their patronages, their official travels, their representing the Queen, their Frogmore palace home, etc. On top, they are also clear that they intend to substantially raise the taxpayer-paid security costs by residing in two continents. Plus the charity, Sussex Royal.

Their lawyers are not stupid. But to me what is twisted is the interpretation that they can’t earn their own money because they happen to receive a sovereign grant.

Rather, they receive a sovereign grant SO THAT they don’t earn their own money.

The understanding is that if they are working members of the Royal Family, representing the Crown and by extension the UK, any money they earn privately has the potential to constitute a conflict of interest. Hence, the best way to prevent conflict of interest is to amply pay for their expenses so that they have no need for nothing.

It is not because they renounce the sovereign grant that the potential for conflicts of interests disappears.
In so far as the keep patronages, representations, charity work etc... any penny they earn needs to be clean of conflict of interest potential (which includes actual conflict and the perception or possibility of conflict). That means they still should not be allowed to earn any money from activities that relate to their role or position as royals but only unrelated activities (like Vicecount Linley doing carpentry).
So in my understanding money received by the Sussex Royal foundation would be related to their official roles, as the name of the charity makes abundantly clear, and thus it is not obvious it could be used for their own profit. As Buckingham Palace says, it is complicated.


----------



## Welltraveled!

Flatsy said:


> Who says it won't?  The Sussexes said they intend to live part time in "North America." If they spend any significant time in the US, they will get State Department protection when they are here, like Meghan did for her ridiculous baby shower.



You may be right.  I thought the State Department was only for “formal” visits.


----------



## Handbag1234

Prince Harry is the Queens favourite, but to do this without consulting her or Charles is very disrespectful and arrogant. 

She will be very hurt and he won’t get any favours now.

‘working toward financial independence’ shows the bubble they live in. There will be a huge public backlash, and they may end up regretting their decision when The Queen cuts  them off from royal funding. 

without the ‘senior royal’ badge, I can imagine their light will fade very quickly. 

It will be interesting to see how they intend to find gainful employment.


----------



## mdcx

How can they possibly think they will be allowed to sell cr-p with “Sussex Royal” emblazoned on it? I read that they registered 100 items with this logo. Mind boggling.


----------



## keodi

CeeJay said:


> Funny how the "deteriorating relationship" never seemed to be until Meghan joined the party.  I was always pleased to see Will and Harry be so close and if you watch some of their earlier videos, you can clearly see that.  Now, again .. rumors were that Will pulled Harry aside in regards to "moving too fast" with Meghan, but heck .. this is NOT abnormal by any means (_heck, I've seen it in my family_).  Especially given his position in the BRF, I totally understand why Will and some of Harry's friends would ask this.  Ever since Meghan came on-board, their relationship with the BRF and the Media (_and I'm not taking the media's side here_) has been fraught with issues.  While I somewhat understand their desire to move back a bit, I just don't see how they think that retaining their Royal Titles and shtupping what? .. merchandise?? .. is going to make the British public like them more .. to me, *I think this is going to change the minds of many who MAY have liked them*.


I agree!


----------



## keodi

youngster said:


> It's amazing to me that the two of them don't realize that without the glamour of being senior members of the royal family, on the inside, doing all the important and official engagements from which they will now be excluded, that they'll lose their relevance rapidly, especially if their patronages are systematically taken away and the Palace no longer has any motivation to promote them.
> 
> *I am not British though, and I'd love to hear what some of our Brit members think about all this. I just can't imagine it's going to go over well with the general public in the UK*. To me, just looking at it from the U.S., it sort of feels like a betrayal by Harry.  He's born a Prince of the United Kingdom, how does he just walk away from his duties and obligations to the Queen and Charles and, eventually, Will?


same here, i'm curious to know how the British public feels about this..


----------



## eunaddict

Urgh.

Do not move to Canada, do not move to Canada. FML. Do not move to Canada.

*crossing all fingers and toes*


----------



## mdcx

keodi said:


> same here, i'm curious to know how the British public feels about this..


The 33,000 comments on this Daily Mail article give a pretty fair idea: 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ep-senior-royals-financially-independent.html


----------



## Gabs007

mdcx said:


> The 33,000 comments on this Daily Mail article give a pretty fair idea:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ep-senior-royals-financially-independent.html



I wouldn't really rely on the Daily Fail to report how people feel, in all honesty, most couldn't care less


----------



## papertiger

scrpo83 said:


> I suppose H&M want it to be that way..but Madeleine is even lower in the succession line than Harry is..her husband never took up her titles and still maintain a full time job..The announcement of her moving to the US was handled by the Palace communique and she never had her own foundation. And correct me if I'm wrong, but Sweden did not provide security details while she is living her life in the US



I can't help it, everytime I read H&M I think Hennes.


----------



## Sharont2305

As Julia Roberts said in Pretty Woman.... 

Big Mistake.... Huge!!


----------



## duna

I have still to read the last ten pages of this thread, it's moved a lot since yesterday All I can say is if they want to leave the RF fine ( as a Brit I find it disgusting), but *they must give up their titles and privileges, they can't have their cake and eat it!*


----------



## mdcx

Piers Morgan encapsulates the views of most I have chatted with about this today:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7868371/PIERS-MORGAN-Queen-FIRE-Royal-Hustlers.html

ETA: wasn't there a rumour/blind about Megs keeping a detailed diary with the possible intent if using BRF secrets/info as leverage?


----------



## zen1965

Harry‘s work ethic????
Pulease. How deluded can one get?
And BTW: After several years in the army as a high-ranking aristocrat holding the rank of captain is not exactly an outstanding accomplishment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lazeny

It's bold of them to assume that they can have it both ways. It's either be independent or not. They will be still using the title Sussex Royal and profiting from it. If they want autonomy, they need to embrace it fully, otherwise it's a joke. Like Princess Anne's children do not belong to the peerage.


----------



## bag-princess

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4634749




DEAD!!!!!    i watch some of the old skits of Key & Peele and they leave me crying!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> Piers Morgan encapsulates the views of most I have chatted with about this today:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7868371/PIERS-MORGAN-Queen-FIRE-Royal-Hustlers.html
> 
> ETA: wasn't there a rumour/blind about Megs keeping a detailed diary with the possible intent if using BRF secrets/info as leverage?



I dislike Piers Morgan and his foul mouth, but can't disagree here.


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> I can't help it, everytime I read H&M I think Hennes.


 Same. Glad I'm not the only one!


----------



## Mrs.Z

So do we think H & M are going over to Will & Kate’s for birthday cake or no?


----------



## duna

Mrs.Z said:


> So do we think H & M are going over to Will & Kate’s for birthday cake or no?


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> This is one of the saddest aspects of this whole situation, that the brothers relationship has been damaged so badly.  They did seem really close and Harry got along well with Kate.  I guess Meghan is playing the Yoko Ono part here and breaking up the group lol.


I used to read how Harry was the fun uncle that played with George and how they both loved it. His being AWOL this past Christmas, especially with George's new cuz, must have hurt the little royals, which I thought was pretty sad seeing what he went through with losing his Mom. This feeling of abandonment can obviously influence the future.


----------



## elvisfan4life

mshermes said:


> Totally agree. She is toxic and manipulative. She hunted him down, had his son and now has him by the ba***. I think he has been thinking with his D from the git go. I just see her as highly toxic. Shame on her. I wouldn’t give up a sibling for anyone.


He has given up.his dream of living and working in Africa too so sad


----------



## Handbag1234

eunaddict said:


> Urgh.
> 
> Do not move to Canada, do not move to Canada. FML. Do not move to Canada.
> 
> *crossing all fingers and toes*


TV


keodi said:


> same here, i'm curious to know how the British public feels about this..


 The 2.4 m refurbishment of frogmore cottage was controversial and did not go down well with British tax payers. I see they intend to stay there when in a UK. Will they be paying market price rent? I doubt it.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I really have to wonder about the discussions HM had leading up to this "decision."  It is truly idiotic for them to believe that they will succeed on the terms they predict.  Who is running their show?  Is H really as dumb as they say?  He clearly seems very stubborn and narrow-sighted.
> 
> I can't help remember reading that through their entire trip to Africa, M kept telling H how proud his mother would be of him, etc.  Either she was holding his fragile self up or she was manipulating him.
> 
> I hope QE2 hands them their respective asses.


I obviously don't know "H" but the impression I get from what I see in photos and what I hear about him is of a somewhat immature man who is not super intelligent and is being strongly influenced by his ambitious and somewhat older wife.  Just my impression.


----------



## keodi

papertiger said:


> I can't help it, everytime I read H&M I think Hennes.


lo! me too!


----------



## carebearz

Read somewhere that her sister said something along the lines of,” If Megan wasn’t number 1, she rather not be part of it”

Seems like there might be some truth to it..odd that they always managed to put themselves in the headlines when there’s something going on about the royal family like Kate’s birthday today. 

I think she has played the race and Diana card too much after all that the royal family has blended over and done for her.


----------



## marietouchet

Concerning the way this was announced, and (not) arranged ahead of time ... Wow, what a mess they made... They had a second chance after the vacation ...  
https://pagesix.com/2020/01/08/piers-morgan-rips-meghan-markle-for-breaking-up-royal-family/
The optics of wanting Frogmore cottage and public-paid-security - super greedy bad, all they had to do was work it out first ... and probably break it to the public gradually. I know there is a legal thing whereby the UK must provide Metropolitan police security - well, someone is going to ask to change that law.


----------



## sdkitty

Cavalier Girl said:


> Maybe more than a little something.  Once it became clear they'd never outshine the future king and his immediate family, they saw the writing on the wall and found no comfort in it.


May be snarky of me to say but I wonder if it kills Meghan, the Hollywood actress, that Kate is performing her duties so perfectly and looking so great.  She may have thought she would be the more glamorous one and outshine Kate.  Hasn't turned out that way.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> I used to read how Harry was the fun uncle that played with George and how they both loved it. His being AWOL this past Christmas, especially with George's new cuz, must have hurt the little royals, which I thought was pretty sad seeing what he went through with losing his Mom. This feeling of abandonment can obviously influence the future.


I feel sorry for Archie who may very well be an only child, how often does he see his Cambridge cousins I wonder? It'll affect him more than the Cambridge children as they grow up. Archie will still be involved with some part of Royal life because his grandfather will be King. The Cambridge’s are very close to the Tindall and Phillips children, that'll be part of their circle when they grow up, some normality for them when they start their Royal duties, just like their parents were for William when he was growing up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> May be snarky of me to say but I wonder if it kills Meghan, the Hollywood actress, that Kate is performing her duties so perfectly and looking so great.  She may have thought she would be the more glamorous one and outshine Kate.  Hasn't turned out that way.


You're absolutely right.


----------



## keodi

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I dislike Piers Morgan and his foul mouth, but can't disagree here.


I agree, I'm not a fan of Piers Morgan, but I agree with what he had to say here.


----------



## youngster

elvisfan4life said:


> He has given up.his dream of living and working in Africa too so sad



I noticed this too.  They plan to split their time between the UK and North America because, well, _North America_ really needs their presence. 

If they truly wanted to do some good and advance charitable initiatives in places that could use the attention and help, why didn't they choose some part of Africa to split their time?  Probably because the actual doing would be not so easy and not so comfortable? Because they are truly photo-op philanthropists and Africa is too far away from the media centers of the world, many time zones removed perhaps ?  If they truly wanted to focus on charitable activities and get away from the tabloid media, you'd think splitting their time in Africa would have been an ideal solution.


----------



## daisychainz

mdcx said:


> I need like a dummies version of how they think this is all going to work. Because surely the Queen can just put the kibosh on all of this? At minimum she can withdraw their titles?


I need the easy version too, lol. Just because they have said what they plan to do it wouldn't mean the Queen has to abide by their decisions, right? I assume they cannot dictate to her. Unless by putting it all out there in public it's intended to force the royals to agree with their plan. It's awful what they have done, really.


----------



## Blyen

Just saw this on Instagram.. Poor Kate.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> I noticed this too.  They plan to split their time between the UK and North America because, well, _North America_ really needs their presence.
> 
> If they truly wanted to do some good and advance charitable initiatives in places that could use the attention and help, why didn't they choose some part of Africa to split their time?  Probably because the actual doing would be not so easy and not so comfortable? Because they are truly photo-op philanthropists and Africa is too far away from the media centers of the world, many time zones removed perhaps ?  If they truly wanted to focus on charitable activities and get away from the tabloid media, you'd think splitting their time in Africa would have been an ideal solution.


Definitely, but a lot of the countries in Africa are the same time zone as us in the UK, the rest is maximum 3 hours ahead. 
IMHO, Africa would have been a much better option for them.


----------



## TC1

I think Harry is a spoiled brat. He didn't want to have to play nice and kiss babies anymore. His new wife didn't replace Diana as some sort of princess they could all fawn over (which I honestly think she expected) She didn't want to go without the luxuries she has always had and get her hands slapped if she stepped out of line. She helped him craft an exit, and this is it.


----------



## rose60610

After all they been given they ruin it and throw it away like ungrateful brats because they apparently know better. If they think the media have been mean to them before...and public opinion was harsh before....  So here comes Meghan, puts her claws in Harry, gets the $50 million wedding, travel, luxury everything, etc...and now wants to break off from the The Crown yet keep all its privileges? Nobody is falling for the "want financial independence" line. I think they were given the boot and it's framed as being their idea for them to save face.  We haven't heard the last from Meghan or her demanding public pity. It's like marrying a filthy rich guy you can't stand just to go after his money. She landed a dullard prince, cranked out the anchor baby, and played her cards well. I think she enjoys the drama.


----------



## mshermes

marietouchet said:


> Concerning the way this was announced, and (not) arranged ahead of time ... Wow, what a mess they made... They had a second chance after the vacation ...
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/08/piers-morgan-rips-meghan-markle-for-breaking-up-royal-family/
> The optics of wanting Frogmore cottage and public-paid-security - super greedy bad, all they had to do was work it out first ... and probably break it to the public gradually. I know there is a legal thing whereby the UK must provide Metropolitan police security - well, someone is going to ask to change that law.


There is more than meets the eye when the QM had her Christmas talk and their photos were MIA. Did she know something or did this action add fuel for H&M? M is an actress.....albeit poor at it.....but she is extremely ambitious. It was mentioned everywhere how she wanted to meet a Brit......bingo! If she was not going to be welcomed with open arms then she was going to create a tsunami. Harry's brother warned him!


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Definitely, but a lot of the countries in Africa are the same time zone as us in the UK, the rest is maximum 3 hours ahead.
> IMHO, Africa would have been a much better option for them.



Yes, totally, I was thinking of the time zone differences between there and North America, where I think Meghan really wants to be, back with her friends in Canada and her faux-friends in L.A.


----------



## mshermes

rose60610 said:


> After all they been given they ruin it and throw it away like ungrateful brats because they apparently know better. If they think the media have been mean to them before...and public opinion was harsh before....  So here comes Meghan, puts her claws in Harry, gets the $50 million wedding, travel, luxury everything, etc...and now wants to break off from the The Crown yet keep all its privileges? Nobody is falling for the "want financial independence" line. I think they were given the boot and it's framed as being their idea for them to save face.  We haven't heard the last from Meghan or her demanding public pity. It's like marrying a filthy rich guy you can't stand just to go after his money. She landed a dullard prince, cranked out the anchor baby, and played her cards well. I think she enjoys the drama.



Precisely!!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I feel sorry for Archie who may very well be an only child, how often does he see his Cambridge cousins I wonder? It'll affect him more than the Cambridge children as they grow up. Archie will still be involved with some part of Royal life because his grandfather will be King. The Cambridge’s are very close to the Tindall and Phillips children, that'll be part of their circle when they grow up, some normality for them when they start their Royal duties, just like their parents were for William when he was growing up.


I still think she will be pushing out another little royal soon


----------



## mshermes

youngster said:


> I noticed this too.  They plan to split their time between the UK and North America because, well, _North America_ really needs their presence.
> 
> If they truly wanted to do some good and advance charitable initiatives in places that could use the attention and help, why didn't they choose some part of Africa to split their time?  Probably because the actual doing would be not so easy and not so comfortable? Because they are truly photo-op philanthropists and Africa is too far away from the media centers of the world, many time zones removed perhaps ?  If they truly wanted to focus on charitable activities and get away from the tabloid media, you'd think splitting their time in Africa would have been an ideal solution.



I think financially independent is more important to her, for sure. She is a diva. The lion leading the lamb.


----------



## youngster

daisychainz said:


> I need the easy version too, lol. Just because they have said what they plan to do it wouldn't mean the Queen has to abide by their decisions, right? I assume they cannot dictate to her. Unless by putting it all out there in public it's intended to force the royals to agree with their plan. It's awful what they have done, really.



Can't believe I'm quoting Piers Morgan lol, but he wrote in that article that was linked above:

_*Nobody tells the Queen what to do.
She's the most powerful, respected person in Britain.
And right now, she's facing a direct threat to everything she has worked so hard to maintain.
Harry and Meghan's astonishingly brazen and selfish antics have left her no choice but to cut them loose and fire them both from the Royal Family.
*_
And, if the posts from above are to be believed, the Queen ordered Harry not to put out any statements about his future. So, if Harry wanted to torch his relationship with the Queen and Charles and his brother and cousins, he did a great job.


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> I still think she will be pushing out another little royal soon



Maybe not now? She did what she intended to accomplish....a boy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

This whole thing is just.... Wow. The more that trickles out, the more cringeworthy this whole thing is.

I can't imagine their tax situation with her being a US citizen - the IRS likely will be looking forward to getting their grubby little hands on some tax money from them. I suspect this "charity organization" they have established (or whatever kind of sham income arrangement this will be) is probably designed in a way to avoid/shelter from some taxes in some way. I hope the IRS audits them heavily.

Are they even allowed to market and profit from the Sussex Royal title, or their titles in general? Seems so trashy and like it will be a blight on the image the BRF likes to maintain (class, dignity, honor).

Classic _Cake And Eat It _scenario - they want all of the benefits of being associated with the BRF without any of the work. I just don't see the Queen/Charles letting that actually happen. My guess is they will slowly be phased out with little to no fanfare.

I am honestly very surprised by all of this mostly because of Harry. It's been mentioned that Meghan seems to wear the pants and I agree. Harry is probably so triggered and traumatized by what happened in the past with his mom that he wants to "protect" his family - Meghan is probably like a mother figure to him in that she makes him feel loved and cared for and therefore he wants to protect that above all else. Fine, but he really blew it by not sitting down with the Queen/Charles to discuss what they would like to do and then mapping out a plan to do it in a way that makes everyone happy while following proper protocol.

Harry and Meghan have burned their bridges now!


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> I think if they wanted to live their own life, do their own thing, live in their own place, quit, a la Madeleine of Sweden, that would be perfectly fine. No one can stop them doing that and many may welcome it.
> 
> But they don’t want that. They want to run a charity that will rule the world and that is called Sussex _Royal_.
> 
> I have been thinking and I believe they must have a team of lawyers working hard on this who also advised them to go public on their own to have the upper hand. The brief they got was, how can we do as we wish without loosing any perks or influence. As a lawyer, in the last years I’ve specialized in public institutions corporate governance, ethical issues and conflicts of interests, so I find this fascinating.
> 
> Now, what the lawyers are saying is, they are recipients of a sovereign grant that prevents them from taking employment or earning they own money. Hence if they give up the sovereign grant they can earn their own money. Easy.
> Particularly as the grant only covers 5% of their expenses and then will keep receiving the remaining 95% from the Duchy of Cornwall (in the understanding that restrictions are only attached to the sovereign grant).
> 
> They have made it clear they do not intend to renounce their patronages, their official travels, their representing the Queen, their Frogmore palace home, etc. On top, they are also clear that they intend to substantially raise the taxpayer-paid security costs by residing in two continents. Plus the charity, Sussex Royal.
> 
> Their lawyers are not stupid. But to me what is twisted is the interpretation that they can’t earn their own money because they happen to receive a sovereign grant.
> 
> Rather, they receive a sovereign grant SO THAT they don’t earn their own money.
> 
> The understanding is that if they are working members of the Royal Family, representing the Crown and by extension the UK, any money they earn privately has the potential to constitute a conflict of interest. Hence, the best way to prevent conflict of interest is to amply pay for their expenses so that they have no need for nothing.
> 
> It is not because they renounce the sovereign grant that the potential for conflicts of interests disappears.
> In so far as the keep patronages, representations, charity work etc... any penny they earn needs to be clean of conflict of interest potential (which includes actual conflict and the perception or possibility of conflict). That means they still should not be allowed to earn any money from activities that relate to their role or position as royals but only unrelated activities (like Vicecount Linley doing carpentry).
> So in my understanding money received by the Sussex Royal foundation would be related to their official roles, as the name of the charity makes abundantly clear, and thus it is not obvious it could be used for their own profit. As Buckingham Palace says, it is complicated.


EXACTLY, 100% +++!!!  
That’s just it, if they can now receive monies for whatever and, in essence be the CEOs (and I think we know who that would be) .. then they are RIPE for unscrupulous dealings.  This is the MAIN reason why most Government Officials are prohibited from any financial dealings.  Every year in Financial Services, Officers and above are REQUIRED to take the AML/CFT Exams .. AND you have to pass these exams!
If they truly want to hawk their wares, then IMO .. they need to COMPLETELY remove themselves from any monies they receive and no more Royal titles!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY, 100% +++!!!
> That’s just it, if they can now receive monies for whatever and, in essence be the CEOs (and I think we know who that would be) .. then they are RIPE for unscrupulous dealings.  This is the MAIN reason why most Government Officials are prohibited from any financial dealings.  Every year in Financial Services, Officers and above are REQUIRED to take the AML/CFT Exams .. AND you have to pass these exams!
> If they truly want to hawk their wares, then IMO ..* they need to COMPLETELY remove themselves from any monies they receive and no more Royal titles*!!!



They're nothing without those titles, though. I suspect they will fight kicking and screaming to keep and monetize the titles. So wrong and cheapens the BRF brand.


----------



## LizzieBennett

TC1 said:


> I think Harry is a spoiled brat. He didn't want to have to play nice and kiss babies anymore. His new wife didn't replace Diana as some sort of princess they could all fawn over (which I honestly think she expected) She didn't want to go without the luxuries she has always had and get her hands slapped if she stepped out of line. She helped him craft an exit, and this is it.


I think you are absolutely right in everything you said.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> Maybe not now? She did what she intended to accomplish....a boy.


yes its possible now if they are really giving up royal status she won't be as intent on holding on to Harry and will stop producing heirs


----------



## hellosunshine

youngster said:


> They got married in May 2018 and went on their honeymoon.  Meghan didn't start making appearances until maybe July or August of 2018 then she's pregnant almost immediately and takes a totally understandable maternity leave of a large part of 2019. She comes back, they go on their Africa trip, do a few more appearances, and then take these last 6 weeks off.  So, I haven't observed her or Harry working very hard in the last couple of years. They've seemed to be on vacation or leave for most of the time.



No, she hit the ground running as soon as the engagement was announced. If I remember correctly, they  announced their engagement on November 27, and on December 1st she was already seen with Harry at World Aids Day Walkabout in Nottingham. Over the month of December 2017, she celebrated the usual royal holiday traditions (i.e church with the queen, Sandringham, etc), planned her wedding behind-the-scenes, and scheduled out for their Northern Ireland tour. On March 23rd, they made their first visit to Northern Ireland and had 23 engagements while there. Between March 23rd and October, Meghan accompanied the Queen and Prince Charles on several solo engagements on behalf of the British Government. Wedding was on May 19. October 2018, was their first trip to Australia, Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand with 74 total engagements, all while Meg was in the early stages of her pregnancy. In February 2019, during her final trimester - they traveled to Morocco on a 3-day tour with 14 total engagements focusing on women's empowerment, girls' education, inclusivity and encouragement of social entrepreneurship. March 14th, Meghan officially went on her maternity leave and returned September 5th, with a clothing collection for the benefit of her patronage, Smart Works. September 24th, they embarked on a 10-day visit to South Africa, Angola, Malawi, and Botswana with 32 engagements throughout the visit. After the ITV interview, they were seen again on November 9th for the Royal British Legion Festival of Remembrance and only then went on their 6-week break. So, no they haven't been on vacation or leave for most of the time.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> How can they possibly think they will be allowed to sell cr-p with “Sussex Royal” emblazoned on it? I read that they registered 100 items with this logo. Mind boggling.



Can’t remember where I saw a blurb on this but .. yes, some of the items were downright cheesy!  To put a “Royal” label on these is a huge slap to the rest of the BRF.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> They're nothing without those titles, though. I suspect they will fight kicking and screaming to keep and monetize the titles. So wrong and cheapens the BRF brand.


If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.


LOL......agree, she probably loves the Duchess title


----------



## zen1965

This is so incredibly messy and undignified.
If Wills indeed advised him to take more time to get married - Boy, was he right.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.


Or princess Harry of wales
Alike princess Michael of Kent


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.


Correct, but given the news that they have trademarked over 100 items, etc. under the “Sussex Royal” umbrella, it sounds like they thought that would never happen!  Boneheads ..


----------



## hellosunshine

Rest easy, guys. We should all remember that Harry chose not to give his son a title. He will not care if he loses his. Besides, he'll always be Prince Harry with or without his title. He's always going to be the son of Charles, Prince of Wales and grandson of Queen Elizabeth.


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> Or princess Harry of wales
> Alike princess Michael of Kent


I dont think so as she wasn't given that title when she married, she was given Duchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel.


----------



## daisychainz

The Canadian mansion they stayed in for several weeks. It looks stunning, so scenic and beautiful. 

"the $13.26 million waterfront home spans over 10,000 square feet, and includes a surplus of bedrooms and bathrooms and a kitchen with a pizza oven. There’s a formal dining room, two-story living room, game room with a wet bar, media room and wine-tasting room, with luxe details like a 17th century imported French fireplace."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

Lots of interesting implications, though. The line of succession will need to be changed, for instance. 
Oh, and apparently Mme Tussauds have already removed H&M‘s waxworks.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> LOL......agree, she probably loves the Duchess title



Duchess Do Nothing? Duchess Do Little? She can still have one of those.


----------



## Sferics

Sorry for losing objectivity but I...woah...I have to: 
I hated hated hated her the first time I saw her on Suits. I thought this is exactly how a manipulative gold digger looks like.


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> Correct, but given the news that they have hallmarked over 100 items, etc. under the “Sussex Royal” umbrella, it sounds like they thought that would never happen!  Boneheads ..



I may be wrong but I see a Royal Sussex Deodorant in the future.....sorry! Had to bring a little humour into the whole mess.


----------



## CeeJay

Sferics said:


> Sorry for losing objectivity but I...woah...I have to:
> I hated hated hated her the first time I saw her on Suits. I thought this is exactly how a manipulative gold digger looks like.


Well then, heck .. she wasn’t acting at all!!!


----------



## hellosunshine

*Harry and Meghan Won’t Play the Game*




The unofficial motto of the Queen Mother was simple: “Never complain, never explain.” It was an attitude influenced by her aristocratic upbringing—in which a “stiff upper lip” was highly prized—and the sense that the royal family must retain its mystery to survive.

It is a motto that Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, have comprehensively rejected. The couple’s announcement that they will “step back” as senior members of the royal family is a significant moment in the centuries-old soap opera of the British monarchy. Harry and Meghan have come to symbolize a new type of royal: unashamedly political, emotionally open, socially conscious. As a mixed-race woman and a feminist, Meghan has become an icon (and a hate figure). As an American, she has exported the Windsor brand back to a continent that once took a rather dim view of hereditary rulers. And like another American divorcée, Wallis Simpson, she has emboldened her royal husband to break away from his family.

The couple have repeatedly shown their willingness to complain, and to explain. The 12-year-old boy once told to walk behind his mother’s coffin, showing no emotion, has grown up into a man determined to talk about his mental-health struggles. Markle has been similarly honest about the difficult transition to royal wife and mother. “Not many people have asked if I’m okay,” she told a reporter for the British broadcaster ITV in October, fighting back tears.

Harry and Meghan have departed from royal protocol by laying the blame for this unhappiness squarely at the door of the media. The novelist Hilary Mantel once compared the royal family to pandas. There is one big difference, though: _Zoos are nice to pandas._ Parts of the British press have often taken a baiting tone with the royals, accusing them of being lazy drifters while also making it impossible for them to hold down normal jobs. They are too fat, too thin, too “waity,” too “pushy,” too opinionated, too everything.

Harry has called out this attitude more since meeting and marrying Markle—a woman with a successful career, money and opinions of her own. Soon after their relationship became public in 2016, he released a statement criticizing “the racial undertones of comment pieces” as well as the “outright sexism and racism of social-media trolls.” He has repeatedly made it clear that the press harassment of Markle has stirred up memories of his mother, Diana, who was being pursued by paparazzi when her car crashed in a Paris underpass in August 1997. “One of the hardest things to come to terms with is the fact that the people that chased her into the tunnel were the same people that were taking photographs of her while she was still dying on the back seat of the car,” he told a BBC documentary on the 20th anniversary of her death.

In October, when Meghan launched a lawsuit against a British newspaper for publishing a letter she wrote to her estranged father, Harry supported the move. “I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person,” he said in a statement. “I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”

Accordingly, the announcement about stepping back was accompanied by the launch of a new website, SussexRoyals.com, with a section dedicated to the media. Harry and Meghan will no longer participate in the “royal rota” system, in which one media outlet covers an event and distributes footage and photographs to other organizations. Instead, they will work with “grassroots media organisations and young, up-and-coming journalists,” and “provide access to credible media outlets focused on objective news reporting.” In other words … _Harry and Meghan to Royal Correspondents: Drop Dead_.

The royal family was surprised and “disappointed” by the announcement, which does not seem to have been cleared in advance. But really, it cannot have come as much of a shock. Harry and Meghan have been edging toward the royal exit door for months. Megxit was merely a matter of time. They have only just returned from six weeks with their baby son, Archie, in a private house on Vancouver Island in Canada, a location that stayed secret until almost the end of their stay. They missed the traditional royal Christmas at Sandringham and undertook no public engagements in that period. It was a remarkable leave of absence from life in the royal zoo.

Previously, no royal has ever taken on the press quite so directly, much though they might have wanted to. In 2005, Harry’s father, Prince Charles, was caught on a microphone complaining about the journalists at a photo-call on their family skiing trip. “I hate these people,” he said. The photo-call was the price of the media leaving the prince and his sons alone for the rest of their holiday. Similar quid pro quos are still in operation: limited, controlled media access in exchange for some peace.

Harry is unwilling to accept this bargain. When Archie was born, there was no announcement that Meghan had gone into labor, and no photoshoot on the hospital steps. (The arrival of his older brother’s children was accompanied by a media scrum, and William struggling to fit a car seat in full glare of the world’s press.) Harry has now gone further. By withdrawing from the royal rota, Harry and Meghan are pursuing a media strategy closer to Hollywood A-listers than the grin-and-bear-it universalism associated with the ruling family. The price of access will now be good behavior—or as they call it, “objective news reporting.” No more vague rumors, no more cruel comment pieces, if you want a ringside seat at the Harry and Meghan show.

The most noteworthy part of the statement was the couple’s wish to become “financially independent.” The rationale for press scrutiny of the royal family has always been: _We pay for them, so we own them_. Harry currently receives an income from his father’s estates in Cornwall, and has an estimated £30 million inheritance from his mother. Giving any of that up would be truly radical, and so would renouncing his title.

The evolution of the royal family has always reflected changes in British society, as every season of _The Crown _proves. In two generations, “The Firm” has gone from forbidding Princess Margaret to marry a divorcé to embracing one—Markle—into its fold without fuss. This latest move reveals another generational shift. Like many other Millennials, Prince Harry is more socially liberal than his elders and more willing to share his emotions on social media. (Also like many other Millennials, he was only able to afford a house thanks to money he got from his parents.) He represents the end of the stiff upper lip as the royals’ default mode, forcing Britons to confront the human cost of their obsession with the monarchy.

Harry has always been a royal rebel: smoking cannabis, partying in Las Vegas, admitting how close he came to a breakdown. With his wife by his side, he may now be making his most significant contribution to the royal family—by walking away from it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/prince-harry-meghan-markle-sussex/604657/


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Rest easy, guys. We should all remember that Harry chose not to give his son a title. He will not care if he loses his.


That wasn't up to Harry.   By law, Archie does not rank high enough to receive a title.  When Charles becomes king, Archie will become a prince as grandson of the monarch.  If Harry lobbies King Charles to keep Archie title-free at that time, then we can safely say Harry doesn't want a title for his son.

And I wouldn't say Harry "doesn't care" about his own title since he made clear on his website that he intends to keep his title, and he has also trademarked the hell out of "Sussex Royal".


----------



## doni

Q


hellosunshine said:


> *Harry and Meghan Won’t Play the Game*
> 
> [
> 
> The most noteworthy part of the statement was the couple’s wish to become “financially independent.” The rationale for press scrutiny of the royal family has always been: _We pay for them, so we own them_. Harry currently receives an income from his father’s estates in Cornwall, and has an estimated £30 million inheritance from his mother. Giving any of that up would be truly radical, and so would renouncing his title.
> 
> https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/prince-harry-meghan-markle-sussex/604657/



I just don’t get that journalists will write articles, and as long and opinionated as this, without first getting the basic information.

They have _themselves_ said they do not intend to give up Prince Charles contribution, their main source of income. They say _themselves_ they intend to keep the title and actually name their new charity after it.
This person hasn’t even bothered to read the website...


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> That wasn't up to Harry.   By law, Archie does not rank high enough to receive a title.  When Charles becomes king, Archie will become a prince as grandson of the monarch.  If Harry lobbies King Charles to keep Archie title-free at that time, then we can safely say Harry doesn't want a title for his son.
> 
> And I wouldn't say Harry "doesn't care" about his own title since he made clear on his website that he intends to keep his title, and he has also trademarked the hell out of "Sussex Royal".



We will see.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Q
> 
> 
> I just don’t get that journalists will write articles, and as long and opinionated as this, without first getting the basic information.
> 
> They have _themselves_ said they do not intend to give up Prince Charles contribution, their main source of income. They say _themselves_ they intend to keep the title and actually name their new charity after it.
> This person hasn’t even bothered to read the website...


sounds like the work of a fan


----------



## Katel

Oh twitter


----------



## Sferics

CeeJay said:


> Well then, heck .. she wasn’t acting at all!!!


I doubt she can


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> Oh twitter
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635167


Ha Ha


----------



## Katel

And I, too, can’t believe I’m saying this -but I agree with Piers’ article.

reposted here:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...Royal-Hustlers.html?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## Katel

Sad days - I feel very sad for the Queen today.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

The more I think about them and this situation the more I’m just IRKED. And I have not been a ‘hater’ from the beginning. I got up at 3-4 am my time to watch the wedding. I was happy for Harry that he finally found someone. But as soon as MM stepped out of that car or carriage, whatever she was in (honestly don’t remember) I remember thinking ‘Wow, she’s not taking this seriously.’ I posted here that she put less effort into how looked on the most important day of her life than going to a photoshoot or a soup kitchen. That was the first public slap in the face that I can recall.
She never embraced all of the trappings of royal life, and in fact appeared to revel in trying to dismantle it under the guise of being forward thinking.
If they truly have mental health problems (Harry from never having gotten proper help after his mom’s passing and MM struggling with PPD) there are proper, respectable ways to continue to due your duty as part of the BRF and draw attention to those causes.
Had MM respectfully approached the Queen and asked her to work with post-partum women and addressing care for PPD and PPA, I’m sure she would have been granted that request. Had Harry wanted to speak out more about trauma and grief after losing a loved one, I can’t imagine that wouldn’t have been permitted. 
But no, they whine to some reporter while on a cushy tour of Africa that they haven’t been coddled and are on a different path as Will and Kate. Give me an effing break.
So they have to go shake hands and cut ribbons and ceremoniously dig a hole here and there...all in exchange for the most carefree, luxurious, deferential existence in the world. And I’m SO tired of the race card being thrown around. 99% of people don’t care about MM’s race. We care about her character, or lack thereof. That fact that they constantly default back to that shows how truly out of touch they are with reality. And I would never equate what happened to Diana to what MM “suffered:” essentially getting chased to death vs a letter being published. Harry should have known better; than cheapened the tragedy that befell his mother.
Add to this the fact that they announce this on the day before Kate’s birthday? The future Queen of England, seeming BFF to Harry, aunt to his child..wow.
I hope Frogmore gets stripped from them. I hope the D&D titles get stripped from them. I hope they’re given a plane ticket, a real estate magazine, and an unceremonious kick in the a** on the way out.
I think I speak for America in saying that we don’t want them. If they start coming here and spouting off, especially about the election, people will lose it.


----------



## hellosunshine

So, courtiers would not “allow” the Queen to meet with him? And, she's supposed to be the sovereign. 



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...monarchs-instructions-not-announce-plans.html


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.


Right now, Meghan is just one rung above Countess LuAnn, IMO 
@Sharont2305 you know much more about the BRF than I do, so what do you think the chances are that HM The Queen will put her foot down and say enough of this nonsense, neither of you are going anywhere. 
I personally wouldn't want to play chicken with the Queen!
Now this is all my opinion but I think if Woke & Joke intend to stay within the Commonwealth and spend a year in Canada, Australia (where they could really be of some use and talk about positive PR), geez even Barbados, that the Queen will allow them to keep their official titles and the unlimited credit card. I think I heard somewhere that they have internet in those countries now, apparently you can run a foundation, blog or business without ever leaving your house.   
But! If Meghan thinks she's moving to the USA and taking her son with her, she and Harry are stripped of everything. Titles, funding, support... I believe there is a reason they didn't go to the States during their break, I mean she may have gone, but Archie certainly never stepped foot in The States.

I can assure you, Meghan NEVER planned on marrying a Prince in a fairytale wedding, and had dreams of living the quiet life in some secluded little place in the woods or on the beach with no title to her name, no support from the BRF, and her revenue stream cut off.  You don't take the time to plan all that out to lose everything in a matter of two and a half years.  

She could have joined the Peace Corps in her youth if she really wanted to help change the world.  Instead, she chose to take the route that would put her closest to hooking up with celebrities and large-scale philanthropists. 
She should have just married some aging rock star if she wanted to show up at red carpet events, hawk a jewellery line on QVC and burn through someone else's money.

Psst... "they won't make it easy" doll


----------



## bag-mania

The media floodgates are open! The dogs are off the leash and Meghan and Harry have nobody to blame but themselves.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hypocrites — abdicate or stay!*
How’s this for quitting your job: Abandon every aspect you hate, while continuing to reap all the benefits you love.

This, in effect, is what Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have done. In a statement loaded with confusing double-speak, the couple wrote, in part, “We intend to step back as ‘senior’ members of the royal family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen.”

None other than Queen Elizabeth is confused. According to BBC royal correspondent Jonny Dymond, the statement blindsided the entire royal family, and they don’t know what this means either.

Will Harry and Meghan keep their royal titles? “Work to” become financially independent — how long is that going to take? Will they continue to get an allowance until that happens? Where will they live while in the UK? In Frogmore Cottage, the estate gifted to them by the Queen, which they spent another $3 million in taxpayer funds renovating?

They say yes. Can’t wait to hear what the Queen has to say about that.



This is all so smug and gross, considering British taxpayers already spent $3 million on Harry and Meghan’s wedding.

Since then, the couple has generated more headlines for feuding with William and Kate, for exorbitant spending (half a million for Meghan’s wardrobe in 2018 alone), for seeking the company and approbation of Hollywood stars, for snubbing engagements — both public (last month’s NATO reception at Buckingham Palace) and private (most recently the Queen’s annual Christmas family gathering at Sandringham) — than for any good works as royals.

Oh, and who can forget last year’s colossally tone-deaf documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey,” in which the newly world-famous, unbelievably wealthy duchess, having met with children who suffer violence and deprivation, had the gall to tear up in sympathy for herself, for her plight as a new royal.

“Not many people have asked if I’m OK,” she said, eyes welling. “But it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes.”

Anyone who has watched “The Crown” knows what the historic trade-off of royalty is: Untold riches and a life of privilege, in exchange for ribbon-cutting, waving and scrutiny. The latter might not always be easy, but seems a small price.

The hypocrisy here is Harry and Meghan announcing a “step back” rather than abdication.

To employ a cliché: They are having their cake and eating it, too.

Going forward, they should have to pay for their own security, their own travel, their own staff, their own homes and upkeep and child care. As it is, they’ve made no secret of their plans to monetize and trade upon their status, from spending their six-week holiday “break” in a $14 million waterfront mansion in Vancouver — brokered by musician David Foster, who declined to say if the couple paid rent — to trademarking “Sussex Royal,” which will allow them to slap their brand on everything from clothing to books and magazines to anything you can think of, really.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out amid the Brexit crisis, the Prince Andrew disaster, and with a public that has long adored Harry for bravely suffering the loss of his mother, for his wartime service in Afghanistan, for his charity work with veterans and children, for his charisma and his common touch.

The latter, of course, now in question.

https://nypost.com/2020/01/08/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-are-hypocrites-abdicate-or-stay/


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> There is more than meets the eye when the QM had her Christmas talk and their photos were MIA. Did she know something or did this action add fuel for H&M? M is an actress.....albeit poor at it.....but she is extremely ambitious. It was mentioned everywhere how she wanted to meet a Brit......bingo! If she was not going to be welcomed with open arms then she was going to create a tsunami. Harry's brother warned him!


Agree this has been brewing - the lack of photos for Xmas message is proof positive.
But, I had taken the H&M rift stories with a grain of salt, after all Beatrice and Eugenie have been successfully excised from the core of the BRF without too much fuss an their parts (OK, it is complicated due to Andrew, but B & E have been gracious)  Also, slimming down royal families has been a recent trend in Europe - Denmark and Sweden did it in the last year
So, i was hoping for a mopre gras


Sharont2305 said:


> If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.


It is the title of Duke of Sussex and the style of HRH that they can lose, remember how Diana lost her HRH after the divorce


----------



## joyeaux

youngster said:


> Meghan never gave herself a chance to really settle into her role before she appears to have started to lobby to get out.  They got married in May 2018 and went on their honeymoon.  Meghan didn't start making appearances until maybe July or August of 2018 then she's pregnant almost immediately and takes a totally understandable maternity leave of a large part of 2019. She comes back, they go on their Africa trip, do a few more appearances, and then take these last 6 weeks off.  So, I haven't observed her or Harry working very hard in the last couple of years. They've seemed to be on vacation or leave for most of the time.



THIS SO MUCH. The dust has hardly even settled from their wedding! It’s all been this chaotic whirlwind and now they’re taking their toys (that Daddy paid for) and going home?

With the benefit of hindsight, it makes her “hit the ground running” proclamations seem so very empty and contrived. Yes, the girl has hustle and I was SO ON BOARD with them initially. I thought she was going to be Michelle ***** with a tiara, a beautiful and smart woman of color who made the racist bigots look like the pathetic people they are by just being kind and lovely and gracious. I think their intentions on changing the world were sincere, although highly jaded and unrealistic and honestly, arrogant. Remember that “Friends” episode where Phoebe says you can’t do a good deed without getting something out of it too? I think H and M loved the idea of doing good for the world for altruistic reasons AND the adoration/unquestioning adulation/front cover glowing headlines of alllll the magazines they assumed would come from it.

And you know what? I no longer think Meghan has grit. I think she is tireless, but I think she’s frighteningly ambitious and entitled and frankly, a spoiled brat. She ate up the “I’m a Duchess” stuff with a spoon when it suited her—I’m waving from my carriage ride down the Long Walk because I’m a Duchess, I’m being showered in front of all the paps at The Mark hotel because Duchess Baby Shower, I’m at Wimbledon so clear the rows for the Duchess, I’m in Ibiza because this is how a Duchess gets away from it all— but has embarrassed and disrespected someone who not only is the reason she had the means and clout to do all the aforementioned, but has given _almost a century_ to her country? Sacrificing a life for an institution, now THAT is grit.

Y’all the Queen rode with Meghan’s DOG IN HER CAR. She invited Meghan to family events far earlier than precedent dictated. They took a train to make a joint appearance, just the two of them, where the Queen was photographed visibly smiling— and I promise you that was a _very deliberate_ move on QEII’s part to show her endorsement of Meghan as the newest member of the family.

The latest headlines I saw say that not only was the family blindsided, but that Harry was told by the Queen to _hold off on announcements_ until they could get things straightened out. And guess what, they did it anyway and had a website ready to answer questions that may come from the plebs about how this is all gonna work. “You have questions, Gran? No problem! Visit sussexroyal.com for more information. And yes we bought the website address, so we totally are still royal because see it’s right there in the domain name.”

I can’t believe I’ve written so much and know that’s kind of lame to give this kind of thought to people that don’t know I exist  but my excuse is that I majored in British history and have a decent understanding of what the monarchy is and how incredible it is to still be around today. There’s something so “greatest generation” about Queen Elizabeth and it makes me angry that at the end of her long life she’s dealing with an Instagram-generation “power couple” who have not only made her look stupid, but have only strengthened the argument for abolishing the institution she has lived her life to keep relevant.


----------



## marietouchet

Also to put things in context, Denmark and Sweden both slimmed down their royal families in the last year, 
The Danish govt said it would fund only 1 of Margrethe's 8 grandchildren, ie the son of Frederick
5 of the Swedish grandchildren lost the style of princess/ HRH, but they kept their ducal titles, I believe Swedish ducal titles are not hereditary anyway
The Spanish royal family is reduced to four after their scandals
So, slimming down royal families has been happening a lot lately but it has been done gradually and quietly


----------



## hellosunshine

*Prince Harry Previously Revealed He Wanted Out of His Royal Duties in Resurfaced Interview*

*

*

*Prince Harry* previously opened up about being a part of the royal family and in 2017, he revealed that he once almost stepped away.

In 2017, *Harry* gave an interview to the Mail on Sunday where he spoke about his life as a royal.

He recalled being in Afghanistan as a member of the army in 2007.

“I felt as though I was really achieving something. I had a deep understanding of all sorts of people from different backgrounds and felt I was part of a team,” he said. “I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry.”

He then had to be evacuated due to a magazine leaking his location.

“I spent many years kicking my heels and I didn’t want to grow up,” *Harry* said about the time that followed, which included some partying and making headlines.

Later, he said he wanted out and to be a commoner, saying, “I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself.” His grandmother, *Queen Elizabeth*, helped him make his decision to stay.

*At the time, he added, “I am determined to have a relatively normal life and if I am lucky enough to have children they can have one too. We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities but instead use our role for good.”*

http://www.justjared.com/2020/01/08...-of-his-royal-duties-in-resurfaced-interview/


----------



## duna

hellosunshine said:


> Rest easy, guys. We should all remember that Harry chose not to give his son a title. He will not care if he loses his. Besides, he'll always be Prince Harry with or without his title. He's always going to be the son of Charles, Prince of Wales and grandson of Queen Elizabeth.



Yes he'll always be Prince Harry, but maybe, hopefully, not HRH anymore nor Dukes of Sussex!


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Rest easy, guys. We should all remember that Harry chose not to give his son a title. He will not care if he loses his. Besides, he'll always be Prince Harry with or without his title. He's always going to be the son of Charles, Prince of Wales and grandson of Queen Elizabeth.


True .. he will always be Prince Harry, but I think Meghan would not be happy losing her "royal" titles .. (_my opinion_)


----------



## doni

marietouchet said:


> Also to put things in context, Denmark and Sweden both slimmed down their royal families in the last year,
> The Danish govt said it would fund only 1 of Margrethe's 8 grandchildren, ie the son of Frederick
> 5 of the Swedish grandchildren lost the style of princess/ HRH, but they kept their ducal titles, I believe Swedish ducal titles are not hereditary anyway
> The Spanish royal family is reduced to four after their scandals
> So, slimming down royal families has been happening a lot lately but it has been done gradually and quietly


Slimming down is fine.
Continuing to receive 95% of your stipend plus making extra money out of the Royal name while you are financed living in two different continents... not exactly slimming down I’d say.


----------



## bag-mania

Their shenanigans could single-handedly destroy the royal family. What a legacy!


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> And I, too, can’t believe I’m saying this -but I agree with Piers’ article.
> 
> reposted here:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...Royal-Hustlers.html?__twitter_impression=true


I LOATHE Piers Morgan and have many times just wanted him to shut up about being 'ghosted' by Meghan, but I have to say .. alas, I had to agree with his article this morning!  How (if true) H&M were instructed NOT to do this until more discussions could occur is a major slap to the Queen and she DOES NOT deserve this one BIT!!!


----------



## Sferics

joyeaux said:


> THIS SO MUCH. The dust has hardly even settled from their wedding! It’s all been this chaotic whirlwind and now they’re taking their toys (that Daddy paid for) and going home?
> 
> With the benefit of hindsight, it makes her “hit the ground running” proclamations seem so very empty and contrived. Yes, the girl has hustle and I was SO ON BOARD with them initially. I thought she was going to be Michelle ***** with a tiara, a beautiful and smart woman of color who made the racist bigots look like the pathetic people they are by just being kind and lovely and gracious. I think their intentions on changing the world were sincere, although highly jaded and unrealistic and honestly, arrogant. Remember that “Friends” episode where Phoebe says you can’t do a good deed without getting something out of it too? I think H and M loved the idea of doing good for the world for altruistic reasons AND the adoration/unquestioning adulation/front cover glowing headlines of alllll the magazines they assumed would come from it.
> 
> And you know what? I no longer think Meghan has grit. I think she is tireless, but I think she’s frighteningly ambitious and entitled and frankly, a spoiled brat. She ate up the “I’m a Duchess” stuff with a spoon when it suited her—I’m waving from my carriage ride down the Long Walk because I’m a Duchess, I’m being showered in front of all the paps at The Mark hotel because Duchess Baby Shower, I’m at Wimbledon so clear the rows for the Duchess, I’m in Ibiza because this is how a Duchess gets away from it all— but has embarrassed and disrespected someone who has given _almost a century_ to her country? Sacrificing a life for an institution, now THAT is grit.
> 
> Y’all the Queen rode with Meghan’s DOG IN HER CAR. She invited Meghan to family events far earlier than precedent dictated. They took a train to make a joint appearance, just the two of them, where the Queen was photographed visibly smiling— and I promise you that was a _very deliberate_ move on QEII’s part to show her endorsement of Meghan as the newest member of the family.
> 
> The latest headlines I saw say that not only was the family blindsided, but that Harry was told by the Queen to _hold off on announcements_ until they could get things straightened out. And guess what, they did it anyway and had a website ready to answer questions that may come from the plebs about how this is all gonna work. “You have questions, Gran? No problem! Visit sussexroyal.com for more information. And yes we bought the website address, so we totally are still royal because see it’s right there in the domain name.”
> 
> I can’t believe I’ve written so much and know that’s kind of lame to give this kind of thought to people that don’t know I exist  but my excuse is that I majored in British history and have a decent understanding of what the monarchy is and how incredible it is to still be around today. There’s something so “greatest generation” about Queen Elizabeth and it makes me angry that at the end of her long life she’s dealing with an Instagram-generation “power couple” who have not only made her look stupid, but have only strengthened the argument for abolishing the institution she has lived her life to keep relevant.



I love your comment and I am happy you have "written so much"!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Harry is a spoiled man toddler who has no idea what the real world is like. I’d love to see his poor me shtick when he can’t pay his rent, get medical care, or buy food.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry is a spoiled man toddler who has no idea what the real world is like. I’d love to see his poor me shtick when he can’t pay his rent, get medical care, or buy food.


right....like that would ever happen


----------



## PewPew

elvisfan4life said:


> He has given up.his dream of living and working in Africa too so sad



That’s unfair of you to expect him for to return to a place with such difficult memories— Spending time in Africa recently made H&M realize how badly neglected they are & that they are “merely existing & not living” with their jet set life. They required months of recovery time from that trip & will now require fewer responsibilities & gobs more funds to “truly live.”

It may be better for H to stay away from the continent he was once so fond of— the next time they go to Africa they may be so inspired they decide they need a spaceship to “truly live.”


----------



## Coconuts40

joyeaux said:


> THIS SO MUCH. The dust has hardly even settled from their wedding! It’s all been this chaotic whirlwind and now they’re taking their toys (that Daddy paid for) and going home?
> 
> With the benefit of hindsight, it makes her “hit the ground running” proclamations seem so very empty and contrived. Yes, the girl has hustle and I was SO ON BOARD with them initially. I thought she was going to be Michelle ***** with a tiara, a beautiful and smart woman of color who made the racist bigots look like the pathetic people they are by just being kind and lovely and gracious. I think their intentions on changing the world were sincere, although highly jaded and unrealistic and honestly, arrogant. Remember that “Friends” episode where Phoebe says you can’t do a good deed without getting something out of it too? I think H and M loved the idea of doing good for the world for altruistic reasons AND the adoration/unquestioning adulation/front cover glowing headlines of alllll the magazines they assumed would come from it.
> 
> And you know what? I no longer think Meghan has grit. I think she is tireless, but I think she’s frighteningly ambitious and entitled and frankly, a spoiled brat. She ate up the “I’m a Duchess” stuff with a spoon when it suited her—I’m waving from my carriage ride down the Long Walk because I’m a Duchess, I’m being showered in front of all the paps at The Mark hotel because Duchess Baby Shower, I’m at Wimbledon so clear the rows for the Duchess, I’m in Ibiza because this is how a Duchess gets away from it all— *but has embarrassed and disrespected someone who has given almost a century to her country? Sacrificing a life for an institution, now THAT is grit. *
> 
> Y’all the Queen rode with Meghan’s DOG IN HER CAR. She invited Meghan to family events far earlier than precedent dictated. They took a train to make a joint appearance, just the two of them, where the Queen was photographed visibly smiling— and I promise you that was a _very deliberate_ move on QEII’s part to show her endorsement of Meghan as the newest member of the family.
> 
> The latest headlines I saw say that not only was the family blindsided, but that Harry was told by the Queen to _hold off on announcements_ until they could get things straightened out. And guess what, they did it anyway and had a website ready to answer questions that may come from the plebs about how this is all gonna work. “You have questions, Gran? No problem! Visit sussexroyal.com for more information. And yes we bought the website address, so we totally are still royal because see it’s right there in the domain name.”
> 
> I can’t believe I’ve written so much and know that’s kind of lame to give this kind of thought to people that don’t know I exist  but my excuse is that I majored in British history and have a decent understanding of what the monarchy is and how incredible it is to still be around today. There’s something so “greatest generation” about Queen Elizabeth and it makes me angry that at the end of her long life she’s dealing with an Instagram-generation “power couple” who have not only made her look stupid, but have only strengthened the argument for abolishing the institution she has lived her life to keep relevant.



Spot on, my sentiment exactly!  Well said!

How can they say they respect and want to serve Her Majesty the Queen, but completely blindsided her?  If it is true they did this without consulting with the Queen and family, and I believe it is based on the statement released by Buckingham Palace, they should be completely ashamed of themselves.


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> I LOATHE Piers Morgan and have many times just wanted him to shut up about being 'ghosted' by Meghan, but I have to say .. alas, I had to agree with his article this morning!  How (if true) H&M were instructed NOT to do this until more discussions could occur is a major slap to the Queen and she DOES NOT deserve this one BIT!!!



I must say, at this point, I am sick to death of both of them and believe they deserve each other. I am just hoping they ride off into the sunset and we hear very little of them....wishful thinking.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Agree this has been brewing - the lack of photos for Xmas message is proof positive.
> But, I had taken the H&M rift stories with a grain of salt, after all Beatrice and Eugenie have been successfully excised from the core of the BRF without too much fuss an their parts (OK, it is complicated due to Andrew, but B & E have been gracious)  Also, slimming down royal families has been a recent trend in Europe - Denmark and Sweden did it in the last year
> So, i was hoping for a mopre gras
> 
> It is the title of Duke of Sussex and the style of HRH that they can lose, remember how Diana lost her HRH after the divorce


She lost it because she wasn't born  HRH, not sure how that would work with Harry, he was born HRH.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Coconuts40 said:


> Spot on, my sentiment exactly!  Well said!
> 
> How can they say they respect and want to serve Her Majesty the Queen, but completely blindsided her?  If it is true that they did this without consulting with the Queen and family, and I believe it is based on the statement released by Buckingham Palace, then they should be completely ashamed of themselves.



We know Woko Ono has no problem leaving people in the dust, family or not.


----------



## Sharont2305

V0N1B2 said:


> Right now, Meghan is just one rung above Countess LuAnn, IMO
> @Sharont2305 you know much more about the BRF than I do, so what do you think the chances are that HM The Queen will put her foot down and say enough of this nonsense, neither of you are going anywhere.
> I personally wouldn't want to play chicken with the Queen!
> Now this is all my opinion but I think if Woke & Joke intend to stay within the Commonwealth and spend a year in Canada, Australia (where they could really be of some use and talk about positive PR), geez even Barbados, that the Queen will allow them to keep their official titles and the unlimited credit card. I think I heard somewhere that they have internet in those countries now, apparently you can run a foundation, blog or business without ever leaving your house.
> But! If Meghan thinks she's moving to the USA and taking her son with her, she and Harry are stripped of everything. Titles, funding, support... I believe there is a reason they didn't go to the States during their break, I mean she may have gone, but Archie certainly never stepped foot in The States.
> 
> I can assure you, Meghan NEVER planned on marrying a Prince in a fairytale wedding, and had dreams of living the quiet life in some secluded little place in the woods or on the beach with no title to her name, no support from the BRF, and her revenue stream cut off.  You don't take the time to plan all that out to lose everything in a matter of two and a half years.
> 
> She could have joined the Peace Corps in her youth if she really wanted to help change the world.  Instead, she chose to take the route that would put her closest to hooking up with celebrities and large-scale philanthropists.
> She should have just married some aging rock star if she wanted to show up at red carpet events, hawk a jewellery line on QVC and burn through someone else's money.
> 
> Psst... "they won't make it easy" doll


I dont think the Queen will say enough is enough etc to them, tbh. No idea how this is going to pan out but I bet Prince Philip will have plenty to say to his grandson


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> She lost it because she wasn't born a HRH, not sure how that would work with Harry, he was born a HRH.


Hmmm , thinking back to precedents ...
Edward VIII never lost HRH, but his wife Wallis never got it


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> We know Woko Ono has no problem leaving people in the dust, family or not.


ROTFL WOKO ONO !


----------



## hellosunshine

How ominous....


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm , thinking back to precedents ...
> Edward VIII never lost HRH, but his wife Wallis never got it


Exactly, you're safe if you were born it.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> So, courtiers would not “allow” the Queen to meet with him? And, she's supposed to be the sovereign.
> 
> View attachment 4635182
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...monarchs-instructions-not-announce-plans.html


As many of us have been reminded, the Daily Fail is .. well called that for a reason.  What I read from this is that:


Harry contacted Charles to discuss their desires before the holidays
I’m assuming that Charles, given the holidays and the very complicated matter (_titles, financials, etc._) would likely have discussed this with some of the Sandringham celebrations .. we don’t know if they didn’t discuss this
After the New Year, Harry sends a draft proposal to Charles .. but yet again, was told that more time as needed (_which we’ve heard quite a few times now .. and certainly, this is not an easy matter for any of them_)
H&M come back from Holiday, and because (_maybe – again we don’t know_) they felt that they were being ignored, Harry then requests an audience with the Queen
Now .. *and this is my opinion*, if Harry was told by Charles that matters still needed to be discussed and was also told by the Queen before their holiday that *NO ANNOUNCEMENT* was to be made until the “complicated” issues were resolved, then by sheer virtue of the fact that it looks like Harry is now trying to go around Charles and directly to the Queen (_maybe because he was her favorite Grandson_) .. well, if I was Charles (the parent) .. I would be pretty darn PO’d by what Harry has done.
Who knows what the Queen’s Courtiers know; could they have known what was about .. and as such, “blocked” Harry from seeing the Queen because they knew that he was supposed to first discuss with Charles?  Again .. not something we truly know about.
As this states .. “the Queen made an *explicit* request to Harry that he first discuss his future plans in detail with HIS FATHER”!!!


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> So, courtiers would not “allow” the Queen to meet with him? And, she's supposed to be the sovereign.
> 
> View attachment 4635182
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...monarchs-instructions-not-announce-plans.html



I think the Queen was being the Queen, while also taking into consideration that they are also a family.  I would expect her, as a grandparent to say to her grandchild . . .  "talk it over with your father first, come to an agreement, then you come to me with what you've worked out and I, because I'm Queen, may agree or disagree".   (She may have left out the "because I'm Queen" part.)

And, if you read what you posted, Harry . . . 
 "was told that more time was needed to talk through the complex implications, notably around finances".  
(The Queen) "still made an explicit request to her grandson that he first discuss his future plans in detail with his father, the Prince of Wales".


----------



## mshermes

Uh oh.....
	

		
			
		

		
	



Madame Tussauds don't play....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Hmmmm .. well this kind of says it all doesn't it??? 

Prince Harry:  *At the time, he added, “I am determined to have a relatively normal life and if I am lucky enough to have children they can have one too. We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities but instead use our role for good.”*


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. well this kind of says it all doesn't it???
> 
> Prince Harry:  *At the time, he added, “I am determined to have a relatively normal life and if I am lucky enough to have children they can have one too. We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities but instead use our role for good.”*


I would say now that they do want to be celebs and also use their role for good (or politically correct anyway)


----------



## Flatsy

The original story about the sequence of events was from the Evening Standard, not the Daily Fail.  The Queen wanted to meet with Harry, but she also wanted him to hammer out all of the details with Prince Charles first.  She told Harry she was not going to go over his "wish list" with him until it was approved by Charles.

Courtiers (aka the Queen's advisors), turned down the first proposed meeting time.  It's not clear why.  It could have been a scheduling issue.  It could have been to enforce the Queens command that Harry not attempt to go over Charles's head, which is their job.

The Sussexes arrived back in the UK over the weekend and Harry made his announcement on Wednesday morning.  That means he gave the Queen and Prince Charles a grand total of TWO DAYS to meet with him and approve all of his plans.  That's nothing.  

He wanted immediate approval to do whatever he wanted, and he didn't get it, so he defied the Queen's direct order not to make a statement.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> The original story about the sequence of events was from the Evening Standard, not the Daily Fail.  The Queen wanted to meet with Harry, but she also wanted him to hammer out all of the details with Prince Charles first.  She told Harry she was not going to go over his "wish list" with him until it was approved by Charles.
> 
> Courtiers (aka the Queen's advisors), turned down the first proposed meeting time.  It's not clear why.  It could have been a scheduling issue.  It could have been to enforce the Queens command that Harry not attempt to go over Charles's head, which is their job.
> 
> The Sussexes arrived back in the UK over the weekend and Harry made his announcement on Wednesday morning.  That means he gave the Queen and Prince Charles a grand total of TWO DAYS to meet with him and approve all of his plans.  That's nothing.
> 
> He wanted immediate approval to do whatever he wanted, and he didn't get it, so he defied the Queen's direct order not to make a statement.


you would think he (not his wife) would be in charge of this whole thing and that he would know better than to do it they way they have.  but again, maybe he's not that smart


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> The original story about the sequence of events was from the Evening Standard, not the Daily Fail.  The Queen wanted to meet with Harry, but she also wanted him to hammer out all of the details with Prince Charles first.  She told Harry she was not going to go over his "wish list" with him until it was approved by Charles.
> 
> Courtiers (aka the Queen's advisors), turned down the first proposed meeting time.  It's not clear why.  It could have been a scheduling issue.  It could have been to enforce the Queens command that Harry not attempt to go over Charles's head, which is their job.
> 
> The Sussexes arrived back in the UK over the weekend and Harry made his announcement on Wednesday *morning.  *That means he gave the Queen and Prince Charles a grand total of TWO DAYS to meet with him and approve all of his plans.  That's nothing.
> 
> He wanted immediate approval to do whatever he wanted, and he didn't get it, so he defied the Queen's direct order not to make a statement.


Evening.


----------



## joyeaux

Coconuts40 said:


> Spot on, my sentiment exactly!  Well said!
> 
> How can they say they respect and want to serve Her Majesty the Queen, but completely blindsided her?  If it is true that they did this without consulting with the Queen and family, and I believe it is based on the statement released by Buckingham Palace, they should be completely ashamed of themselves.



ITA! That reminds me of something else I meant to add to my dissertation earlier ... there’s a tweet by some Hollywoodian with a photo of H and M saying “This is what power looks like” and— NO. This is what entitlement, a grandiose sense of self, and disrespect to your elders looks like. What looking a gift horse in the mouth looks like.

Okay off to yell at little kids to get off my lawn because for some reason this whole thing has made me quite the finger wagging old lady!


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Sferics

mshermes said:


> Uh oh.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635228
> 
> Madame Tussauds don't play....



I can't belive they did this. And I love it


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> *Prince Harry Previously Revealed He Wanted Out of His Royal Duties in Resurfaced Interview*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4635199
> *
> 
> *Prince Harry* previously opened up about being a part of the royal family and in 2017, he revealed that he once almost stepped away.
> 
> In 2017, *Harry* gave an interview to the Mail on Sunday where he spoke about his life as a royal.
> 
> He recalled being in Afghanistan as a member of the army in 2007.
> 
> “I felt as though I was really achieving something. I had a deep understanding of all sorts of people from different backgrounds and felt I was part of a team,” he said. “I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry.”
> 
> He then had to be evacuated due to a magazine leaking his location.
> 
> “I spent many years kicking my heels and I didn’t want to grow up,” *Harry* said about the time that followed, which included some partying and making headlines.
> 
> Later, he said he wanted out and to be a commoner, saying, “I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself.” His grandmother, *Queen Elizabeth*, helped him make his decision to stay.
> 
> *At the time, he added, “I am determined to have a relatively normal life and if I am lucky enough to have children they can have one too. We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities but instead use our role for good.”*
> 
> http://www.justjared.com/2020/01/08...-of-his-royal-duties-in-resurfaced-interview/


That’s exactly what everyone on here first said - it was his idea but he needed her support


----------



## mrsinsyder

Again, acting like a baby who can’t even wait a couple of days to think things out. How spoiled can you be?


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry is a spoiled man toddler who has no idea what the real world is like. I’d love to see his poor me shtick when he can’t pay his rent, get medical care, or buy food.


Being in the army and „Harry, not the prince“ isn’t exactly the same as a normal working person. i doubt he has any idea what a normal person does. They will fail so hard


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry is a spoiled man toddler who has no idea what the real world is like. I’d love to see his poor me shtick when he can’t pay his rent, get medical care, or buy food.



That could happen should he ever find himself on the receiving end of being "Markled." He would be a clueless, shellshocked mess if she left him, taking along half of his assets and the kid.


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> Being in the army and „Harry, not the prince“ isn’t exactly the same as a normal working person. i doubt he has any idea what a normal person does. They will fail so hard


From some accounts on those that followed Harry's military career, he didn't exactly have it like the 'regular Joe' in the British Military.  Yes, while he didn't go by the Prince Harry title, he certainly didn't 'experience' the war like many of the other soldiers.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Courtiers (aka the Queen's advisors), turned down the first proposed meeting time.  *It's not clear why.  *It could have been a scheduling issue.  It could have been to enforce the Queens command that Harry not attempt to go over Charles's head, which is their job.



Your assessment is all speculative. Honestly, I would be slightly worried that the embodiment of the state is being overridden by the men in grey suits.



> The Sussexes arrived back in the UK over the weekend and Harry made his announcement on Wednesday morning.  That means he gave the Queen and Prince Charles a grand total of TWO DAYS to meet with him and approve all of his plans.  That's nothing.



There was a leak. It's being reported that they were trying to get ahead of an article by The Sun. The article was getting leaked by Dan Wootton, who is oddly great friends with Kensington Palace's Press Officer.


----------



## Handbag1234

How long before the media are calling Meghan ‘Me-gone’ rather than ‘Me-ghan’ ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Your assessment is all speculative.



Is yours not?


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Your assessment is all speculative. Honestly, I would be slightly worried that the embodiment of the state is being overridden by the men in grey suits.
> 
> 
> 
> There was a leak. It's being reported that they were trying to get ahead of an article by The Sun. The article was getting leaked by Dan Wootton, who is oddly great friends with Kensington Palace's Press Officer.


Dan Wootton is a slime ball of the highest order.
Odious man

Diana famously insinuated that the men in grey suits have more power than people think


----------



## CeeJay

Handbag1234 said:


> How long before the media are calling Meghan ‘Me-gone’ rather than ‘Me-ghan’ ?


That happened some time ago!


----------



## Handbag1234

myown said:


> That’s exactly what everyone on here first said - it was his idea but he needed her support


Wants to be a ‘commoner’ but live on the Windsor estate and have £600,000 per annum global security detail paid for by British Tax payers?  Yer right


----------



## Handbag1234

CeeJay said:


> That happened some time ago!


Haha! I’ve missed that


----------



## mrsinsyder

I was always fond of “Me-gain”


----------



## hellosunshine

> "Harry is the second most popular member of the Royal Family and inside his circle there have been complaints that royal courtiers have been briefing against him"


  - Keir Simmons



So, judging by the video reporting above..there have been non-stop leaks and jealousy to undermine the duke and duchess....


----------



## queennadine

If Harry truly wanted to leave the BRF, he would have married Chelsey or Cressida and moved to Africa. This wasn’t his idea, although he probably thinks it is based on MM’s manipulation.


----------



## daisychainz

queennadine said:


> If Harry truly wanted to leave the BRF, he would have married Chelsey or Cressida and moved to Africa. This wasn’t his idea, although he probably thinks it is based on MM’s manipulation.


I agree. Meghan probably had ideas on how to do it and he didn't. It seems he truly wanted to leave the family somehow and perhaps didn't know how to implement it (aside from a simple move to Africa, which wouldn't have worked). Meghan is his idea person and the planner.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

elvisfan4life said:


> He will be cut off when William takes.over the Duchy then when Charles becomes king lol



Hope springs eternal [emoji813]️


----------



## Meh-gan

joyeaux said:


> ITA! That reminds me of something else I meant to add to my dissertation earlier ... there’s a tweet by some Hollywoodian with a photo of H and M saying “This is what power looks like” and— NO. This is what entitlement, a grandiose sense of self, and disrespect to your elders looks like. What looking a gift horse in the mouth looks like.
> 
> Okay off to yell at little kids to get off my lawn because for some reason this whole thing has made me quite the finger wagging old lady!


Sorry but Hollywood is dumb AF. Real powerful to still need handouts from daddy to be free to skim $ off the top of a charity that needs the “royal” association to even be a thing. 

They 100% need the support of British $ and royal branding to function. Powerful not. They can’t stand on their own two feet.


----------



## hellosunshine

* No wonder Harry and Meghan are quitting. The rightwing press – and their families – left them no choice *




It’s unlikely that Marshall McLuhan was thinking of the British press’s deranged relationship with the royal family when he made his famous declaration that the medium is the message, but the response to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s announcement certainly bore out his theory. “What lies behind Harry and Meghan’s SHOCK decision? We turn to our 18 columnists who have spent the past three years slagging them off every week,” was, in spirit, the headline on most rightwing British newspapers today. 

For truly exclusive insight into Harry and Meghan’s thinking, the Daily Mail need not have looked any further than its website’s front page on Thursday morning: the site ran no fewer than 14 stories tearing into the couple. *The same commentators who sneered at Meghan for being dazzled by royalty now condemn her for wanting to leave it.* Anyone who has been lucky enough to avoid being in an abusive relationship can, excitingly, experience that dynamic for themselves via the media’s reaction to Harry and Meghan. Thursday’s front pages were the newspaper equivalent of an abusive husband expressing shock that his wife has finally left him.

And, speaking of abusive relationships, there was the inevitable input from Meghan’s eternally available father, Thomas, who has truly shown his capacity for paternal love by regularly denigrating his daughter to the international press. When Meghan sent him a letter in August 2018 telling him he had “broken her heart into a million pieces” by flogging stories about her to the media, the loving father responded by promptly handing said letter, along with other cards and baby photos of his daughter, over to the Mail.

The Mail’s columnist Piers Morgan maintained the completely sane and normal tone for which he has become known when it comes to Meghan: “Who the f**k do they think they are?” he began and escalated from there. “Nobody tells the Queen what to do,” he huffed, only to decree, sentences later: “Get rid of these whining, ego-crazed, deluded leeches, Ma’am.” Of course, Morgan’s column makes reference to the seismic, nay, legendary time he met Meghan for half a drink, an encounter that in Morgan’s mind has achieved mythic proportions, only to become symbolic to him when afterwards she, bafflingly, decided against continuing their friendship. “She’s an unsavoury, manipulative, social-climbing piece of work,” Morgan raged, displaying his usual capacity for self-awareness. Stats: Morgan has written precisely two columns on Prince Andrew’s friendship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He has written so many on Meghan – who, lest we forget, committed the worse-than-paedophilia crime of not inviting Morgan to her wedding – that my browser crashed.

The Sussexes’ problems with the British media are as well known as they are long-term, dating back to 2016 when Harry complained about the “racial undertones” in the coverage of his then new relationship with Meghan, to Meghan herself launching a legal action against the Mail last October. But it is not just the British media the Sussexes might want to keep at a distance. Let’s turn to the Windsors, shall we? As satisfying as it might be for some commentators to style Meghan as Princess Yoko who broke up the band, is it really a mystery why Harry, who, at the age of 12, was made to walk behind his mother’s coffin while watched by millions, not even allowed to hold his father’s hand, might decide, as a father now himself, that his family is a bit, well, lacking? And let’s get back to Prince Andrew. There is no doubt that Harry and Meghan’s decision has been in the pipeline for some time, but it feels significant that it comes so soon after his downfall. If Meghan felt she could do without spending her Christmasses alongside a friend of a convicted sex offender, it would take a more pie-eyed royalist than me to condemn her. Then there is Harry, watching what was ostensibly his future unfold right in front of him. Because what options are there, really, for the royal spare, other than to become an irrelevant, embarrassing bore?

The awkward irony for royalists is that, with this bid for (semi) independence, Harry and Meghan will seem to a younger generation like more appealing royal icons than a million photos of William and Kate mutely waving from a balcony. The Queen is often applauded by royalists for evolving the monarchy – well, welcome to evolution, buttercup. Some are transferring their rage at the Sussexes for not behaving as they would like into huffing about their titles, money and security. It’s quite something to see the same people who believe so deeply in the divine right of the monarch and all her descendants then express outrage at the thought of Harry and Meghan capitalising on their name in the US. Because it is absolutely fine to monetise your apparent God-given divinity, as long as it is done in a Mail-approved context? Because royalty is a totally sensible setup – but celebrity? Outrageous. If you think it is unfair that a pair of Windsors will enjoy the fruits of outrageous wealth simply because of who they are, well, allow me to introduce you to the royal family. And imagine someone in America enjoying the blessings of fame just because of their surname – who can fathom such a concept? (Surely not Morgan, who once married Paris Hilton as a stunt in Las Vegas and, when he interviewed the Kardashians on his CNN show, asked them for advice on how to bump up his Twitter followers.) Harry and Meghan won’t escape scrutiny, let alone criticism, no matter where they go, and they must know that. But that they have chosen this option, one that will result in decades of media bile being dumped on their heads, is not a reflection on them. It is a reflection on everyone else.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-press-and-their-families-left-them-no-choice


----------



## Katel

joyeaux said:


> ITA! That reminds me of something else I meant to add to my dissertation earlier ... *there’s a tweet by some Hollywoodian* with a photo of H and M saying “This is what power looks like” and— NO. This is what entitlement, a grandiose sense of self, and disrespect to your elders looks like. What looking a gift horse in the mouth looks like.
> 
> Okay off to yell at little kids to get off my lawn because for some reason this whole thing has made me quite the finger wagging old lady!




Was it this person?


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> * No wonder Harry and Meghan are quitting. The rightwing press – and their families – left them no choice *
> 
> View attachment 4635281
> 
> 
> It’s unlikely that Marshall McLuhan was thinking of the British press’s deranged relationship with the royal family when he made his famous declaration that the medium is the message, but the response to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s announcement certainly bore out his theory. “What lies behind Harry and Meghan’s SHOCK decision? We turn to our 18 columnists who have spent the past three years slagging them off every week,” was, in spirit, the headline on most rightwing British newspapers today.
> 
> For truly exclusive insight into Harry and Meghan’s thinking, the Daily Mail need not have looked any further than its website’s front page on Thursday morning: the site ran no fewer than 14 stories tearing into the couple. *The same commentators who sneered at Meghan for being dazzled by royalty now condemn her for wanting to leave it.* Anyone who has been lucky enough to avoid being in an abusive relationship can, excitingly, experience that dynamic for themselves via the media’s reaction to Harry and Meghan. Thursday’s front pages were the newspaper equivalent of an abusive husband expressing shock that his wife has finally left him.
> 
> And, speaking of abusive relationships, there was the inevitable input from Meghan’s eternally available father, Thomas, who has truly shown his capacity for paternal love by regularly denigrating his daughter to the international press. When Meghan sent him a letter in August 2018 telling him he had “broken her heart into a million pieces” by flogging stories about her to the media, the loving father responded by promptly handing said letter, along with other cards and baby photos of his daughter, over to the Mail.
> 
> The Mail’s columnist Piers Morgan maintained the completely sane and normal tone for which he has become known when it comes to Meghan: “Who the f**k do they think they are?” he began and escalated from there. “Nobody tells the Queen what to do,” he huffed, only to decree, sentences later: “Get rid of these whining, ego-crazed, deluded leeches, Ma’am.” Of course, Morgan’s column makes reference to the seismic, nay, legendary time he met Meghan for half a drink, an encounter that in Morgan’s mind has achieved mythic proportions, only to become symbolic to him when afterwards she, bafflingly, decided against continuing their friendship. “She’s an unsavoury, manipulative, social-climbing piece of work,” Morgan raged, displaying his usual capacity for self-awareness. Stats: Morgan has written precisely two columns on Prince Andrew’s friendship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He has written so many on Meghan – who, lest we forget, committed the worse-than-paedophilia crime of not inviting Morgan to her wedding – that my browser crashed.
> 
> The Sussexes’ problems with the British media are as well known as they are long-term, dating back to 2016 when Harry complained about the “racial undertones” in the coverage of his then new relationship with Meghan, to Meghan herself launching a legal action against the Mail last October. But it is not just the British media the Sussexes might want to keep at a distance. Let’s turn to the Windsors, shall we? As satisfying as it might be for some commentators to style Meghan as Princess Yoko who broke up the band, is it really a mystery why Harry, who, at the age of 12, was made to walk behind his mother’s coffin while watched by millions, not even allowed to hold his father’s hand, might decide, as a father now himself, that his family is a bit, well, lacking? And let’s get back to Prince Andrew. There is no doubt that Harry and Meghan’s decision has been in the pipeline for some time, but it feels significant that it comes so soon after his downfall. If Meghan felt she could do without spending her Christmasses alongside a friend of a convicted sex offender, it would take a more pie-eyed royalist than me to condemn her. Then there is Harry, watching what was ostensibly his future unfold right in front of him. Because what options are there, really, for the royal spare, other than to become an irrelevant, embarrassing bore?
> 
> The awkward irony for royalists is that, with this bid for (semi) independence, Harry and Meghan will seem to a younger generation like more appealing royal icons than a million photos of William and Kate mutely waving from a balcony. The Queen is often applauded by royalists for evolving the monarchy – well, welcome to evolution, buttercup. Some are transferring their rage at the Sussexes for not behaving as they would like into huffing about their titles, money and security. It’s quite something to see the same people who believe so deeply in the divine right of the monarch and all her descendants then express outrage at the thought of Harry and Meghan capitalising on their name in the US. Because it is absolutely fine to monetise your apparent God-given divinity, as long as it is done in a Mail-approved context? Because royalty is a totally sensible setup – but celebrity? Outrageous. If you think it is unfair that a pair of Windsors will enjoy the fruits of outrageous wealth simply because of who they are, well, allow me to introduce you to the royal family. And imagine someone in America enjoying the blessings of fame just because of their surname – who can fathom such a concept? (Surely not Morgan, who once married Paris Hilton as a stunt in Las Vegas and, when he interviewed the Kardashians on his CNN show, asked them for advice on how to bump up his Twitter followers.) Harry and Meghan won’t escape scrutiny, let alone criticism, no matter where they go, and they must know that. But that they have chosen this option, one that will result in decades of media bile being dumped on their heads, is not a reflection on them. It is a reflection on everyone else.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-press-and-their-families-left-them-no-choice



Such a surprise coming from the Guardian


----------



## myown

queennadine said:


> If Harry truly wanted to leave the BRF, he would have married Chelsey or Cressida and moved to Africa. This wasn’t his idea, although he probably thinks it is based on MM’s manipulation.


My guess is chelsey didn’t want him to give up his life only to be with her. That’s why she declined his proposal. And it was all in his head all these years but he didn’t have someone behind him standing, so he stayed. To be not alone. Now he has a supporter. He would have never made these decisions without anyone by his side


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

myown said:


> My guess is chelsey didn’t want him to give up his life only to be with her. That’s why she declined his proposal. And it was all in his head all these years but he didn’t have someone behind him standing, so he stayed. To be not alone. Now he has a supporter. He would have never made these decisions without anyone by his side


Harry didn’t want to be the bad guy, so he married a troublemaker to help him implement an exit - but he’s in over his head and he’ll figure that out pretty soon (if he hasn’t already).

(My guess is that he has - he doesn’t look very happy, just sick-at-heart.)


----------



## joyeaux

Katel said:


> Was it this person?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635283



Yep! That’s it! Funny how she also added a crown emoji (apparently for emphasis) considering that’s the oppressive and uncaring thumb they’re trying to distance themselves from


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just read that they left the baby in Canada!


----------



## Tivo

I still contend this circus is Meghan trying to carve a path back to Hollywood. She wants Vogue covers and movie roles. I’d respect her more if she would just admit it.


----------



## daisychainz

lanasyogamama said:


> I just read that they left the baby in Canada!


Excellent excuse for them to leave very soon - they knew what was coming and needed an exit plan in place.


----------



## pixiejenna

Handbag1234 said:


> How long before the media are calling Meghan ‘Me-gone’ rather than ‘Me-ghan’ ?



I’ve seen Megxit tossed out there lol.


----------



## CeeJay

myown said:


> My guess is chelsey didn’t want him to give up his life only to be with her. That’s why she declined his proposal. And it was all in his head all these years but he didn’t have someone behind him standing, so he stayed. To be not alone. Now he has a supporter. He would have never made these decisions without anyone by his side


Honestly (_and this is my opinion_), I think H&M's trip to Africa (_without it being the "holiday" they enjoyed before their engagement_) was too stark in reality and Meghan realized she didn't really want to be a part of that!   After all, would they live the life of luxury down there, but yet .. try to tell everyone that "_they are one of them_"? .. PUHLEEZE!!!  

Meghan may want people to think she had it so tough here in LA, but let me say that is *NOT* the case.  She grew up in a relatively 'privileged' environment here .. she wasn't living on the streets, she had food on the table every night, she lived in a comfortable house in not a schleppy area of San Fernando Valley and she was able to take all her theatre, music, etc. classes .. in addition to the expense of her private schooling.  But yeah, make it seem like you had it so tough .. heck, I give Oprah a heck of a lot more credit by what she was able to achieve having been molested while a youth down South and how she just kept on fighting to move up (_and I'm not a huge fan of Oprah - but have to give her that_)!   Maybe this was Meghan's dream, who knows .. but PLEASE do not market yourself as someone who has truly seen "tough times".


----------



## hellosunshine

I really cannot believe that this was publicly printed by courtiers as a response to Harry and Meghan wanting to leave their senior royal roles. These sorta threats don't reflect well on the RF honestly...absolutely mental!


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> My guess is chelsey didn’t want him to give up his life only to be with her. That’s why she declined his proposal. And it was all in his head all these years but he didn’t have someone behind him standing, so he stayed. To be not alone. Now he has a supporter. He would have never made these decisions without anyone by his side


Chelsy declined him because she knew what pressure would be put on her if she became a Royal wife, she'd been within the circle for long enough to know how it works. I believe that even though Chelsy is the love of his life, I think he could've left the RF if he felt how he feels now then but duty of being a Royal came first.


----------



## Katel

CeeJay said:


> Honestly (_and this is my opinion_), I think *H&M's trip to Africa (without it being the "holiday" they enjoyed before their engagement) was too stark in reality and Meghan realized she didn't really want to be a part of that! *  After all, would they live the life of luxury down there, but yet .. try to tell everyone that "_they are one of them_"? .. PUHLEEZE!!!
> 
> Meghan may want people to think she had it so tough here in LA, but let me say that is *NOT* the case.  She grew up in a relatively 'privileged' environment here .. she wasn't living on the streets, she had food on the table every night, she lived in a comfortable house in not a schleppy area of San Fernando Valley and she was able to take all her theatre, music, etc. classes .. in addition to the expense of her private schooling.  But yeah, make it seem like you had it so tough .. heck, I give Oprah a heck of a lot more credit by what she was able to achieve having been molested while a youth down South and how she just kept on fighting to move up (_and I'm not a huge fan of Oprah - but have to give her that_)!   Maybe this was Meghan's dream, who knows .. but PLEASE do not market yourself as someone who has truly seen "tough times".


Haha the bolded occurred to me too... it may be she wants things fluffy - not too real. The pampered life....it would be very ironic if Harry was more committed to the plight of humanity than she is, in all her wokeness.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Evening.


WOW TO THAT STORY , AND I BELIEVE THAT SOURCE


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4635309
> 
> 
> I really cannot believe that this was publicly printed by courtiers as a response to Harry and Meghan wanting to leave their senior royal roles. These sorta threats don't reflect well on the RF honestly...absolutely mental!


Can't say I'm surprised one bit .. they have *EMBARRASSED* the Queen and the rest of the BRF by going ahead and putting their intentions on their Instagram website WITHOUT hammering out all the details with either his Father or the Queen!   The word is out .. they did it WITHOUT consulting any other members of the Royal Family ..


----------



## Katel

marietouchet said:


> WOW TO THAT STORY , AND I BELIEVE THAT SOURCE


Hi MT 
I have the morning off (and getting too engaged LOL) - what story are you quoting?


----------



## bellecate

Mrs.Z said:


> So do we think H & M are going over to Will & Kate’s for birthday cake or no?


----------



## pixiejenna

So the royal family will punish them for this while fully supporting pedophile prince Andrew? I think that they need to re-evaluate their priorities ASAP. I would think that with the way Prince Charles wants to slim down and modernize the monarchy they’d be thrilled with them leaving on their own accord instead of having to be forced out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sgj99

Sharont2305 said:


> If, and its a big if, they relinquish their titles, or it'll be taken away, it'll only be the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. I don't think they can take the Prince title off him as he was born with it. He'd still be Prince Harry of Wales and she will simply be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor. Somehow, I don't think that will make her happy.



i think that's exactly what should happen, take the ducal titles and HRHs way.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> WOW TO THAT STORY , AND I BELIEVE THAT SOURCE


It was announced in the evening


----------



## doni

pixiejenna said:


> So the royal family will punish them for this while fully supporting pedophile prince Andrew? I think that they need to re-evaluate their priorities ASAP. I would think that with the way Prince Charles wants to slim down and modernize the monarchy they’d be thrilled with them leaving on their own accord instead of having to be forced out.


I suspect by ‘punishing’ they mean ‘made to leave.’ Not that this will happen, but I can imagine it is what some courtiers wish for.
Because they do not want to leave, they have made that abundantly clear in all the explanations they have given. They very much want to stay but on their own terms. Which is what has upset the family.
I think if they truly wanted to leave and go do something else, I don’t know, open a gluten free bakery or a real estate agency, everybody would be rather happy and relieved at this point.


----------



## Katel

Sharont2305 said:


> It was announced in the evening


Do you by chance have the link?


----------



## V0N1B2

I can’t believe all the tweets of support crashing twitter and the ‘gram today from H&M’s besties like Serena Williams, Mischa Nonoo, Jessica Mulroney, Amal Clooney, Oprah, whoever that gold digger is that married David Foster etc.


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> I suspect by ‘punishing’ they mean ‘made to leave.’ Not that this will happen, but I can imagine it is what some courtiers wish for.
> Because they do not want to leave, they have made that abundantly clear in all the explanations they have given. They very much want to stay but on their own terms. Which is what has upset the family.
> I think if they truly wanted to leave and go do something else, I don’t know, open a gluten free bakery or a real estate agency, everybody would be rather happy and relieved at this point.


The problem is really related to their use of the Royal 'title' to (_in essence_) make $$$ .. which is why they have been saying that they will give up the 5% Sovereign money.  However, it's really much bigger than that (_IMO_); how can you 'sell' items related to any member of a Royal Family, put those monies into a "charity" and not expect that some time down the road, there aren't going to be some questions .. for instance: 

How much has the Charity made?  
How much are H&M being paid? 
How much of the funds are being distributed? 
etc. - not to even mention that said goods .. will they "cheapen" the view of the family in the Public's eye?  In addition, the continued cost to the British Taxpayers .. since the bulk of what they would still receive is way more than 5%!


----------



## bag-mania

*Losing Meghan, Prince Harry and and (Potentially) Billions of Pounds*
That sound you hear is hundreds of British brands biting their nails as the royal influencers depart.

The wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in May 2018, watched by a television audience of almost two billion viewers worldwide, was heralded by many as the ultimate 21st century fairy tale. It was hoped that the union of a beautiful biracial American actress and one of the world’s favorite princes would firmly nudge the British royal family into a new era.

It was also hoped, somewhat less romantically, that the potential star power of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (as the new celebrity couple became known) would be an economic windfall for Britain, potentially bringing billions of pounds to the economy for decades to come.

Just eighteen months later, the couple announced via Instagram that they would be stepping down as “senior” royals, splitting their time between Britain and North America and working toward becoming “financially independent.”

Just how much of a loss for Britain, its monarchy and businesses, could the new arrangement represent?

“The short answer is that it is rather hard to say, given no one yet knows the exact terms of Megxit,” said David Haigh, chief executive of brand valuation consultancy Brand Finance. The company calculated that the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex generated £1 billion for the British economy in 2018 alone, including an additional £300 million in travel and accommodation spent by foreign tourists and £50 million spent on merchandise such as coins, dish cloths and clothing, not to mention those billions of clicks in free media coverage that enhanced the value of the Britain brand.

In the months since the wedding, patronage by the Sussexes has continued to generate hefty revenue for retail and leisure industries in particular, for British household names such as Marks & Spencer and John Lewis and through charitable projects like the Duchess’s fashion workwear collaboration with Smartworks.

A new half-in, half-out of the firm arrangement would not necessarily put a stop to those earnings and endorsements for Britain and its businesses; if anything, extensive ambassadorial work at home and abroad could even increase them. But it all depends on the nature of the long-term relationship with Buckingham Palace, and what, with the creation of the Sussex Royal brand, the couple plan to control themselves when it comes to their cultural and commercial influence.

“Harry and Meghan say they want to be involved in Commonwealth activities, patronages and support the Queen — which suggests retaining some form of official royal role and duties,” Mr. Haigh said of the Sussexes’ unveiling of what they termed on their website “a new working model.”

“But they also want to earn their own money and partly live in North America. *So, in other words, do whatever the hell they like, no matter what has been invested in them by others,”* he said.

Those outside investments include security at their wedding, which was paid for by British taxpayers and cost an estimated £30 million (the church service, flowers and reception were paid for by the royal family) and £2.4 million to renovate the Duke and Duchess’s official residence, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, which the couple moved into nine months ago. Until now, five percent of the couple’s official expenses were paid for by the Sovereign Grant — an annual lump sum from the British government — and public funding the couple say they now plan to relinquish.

*However, they also said via the Sussex Royal website that they hope to continue receiving money from Harry’s father, Prince Charles, who funds the remaining 95 percent of the couple’s personal and professional expenses through his private estate, the Duchy of Cornwall, which he possesses by right of being the Queen’s heir. *In 2018, Prince Harry and his brother William, the Duke of Cambridge, and their wives received £4.9m from Prince Charles and the Duchy. This contributed to Prince Harry’s fortune, believed to be around £30m. Meghan’s net worth before marrying Prince Harry was estimated at £3.5m.

Whether Prince Charles — an advocate of streamlining the size of the monarchy, which is in line with the downsizing trend taking place in other European royal families — will reconsider that support remains to be seen. At a time when there has been greater scrutiny around the degree of public spending on the royals who qualify for police protection, Harry and Meghan also noted on their site that they will continue to have a publicly-funded security detail as they embark on a quest for financial independence.

The Duke and Duchess “value the ability to earn a professional income, which in the current structure they are prohibited from doing,” said a statement published on their website. (Royal protocol states that no gifts or funds, including hospitality or services, should be accepted that would, or might appear to, place a royal family member under any obligation to the donor.)

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/style/harry-meghan.html


----------



## V0N1B2

doni said:


> ...if they truly wanted to leave and go do something else, I don’t know, open a gluten free bakery...


We all know Meg is the patron saint of bakeries, so it’s the most logical career path.


----------



## marietouchet

Katel said:


> Hi MT
> I have the morning off (and getting too engaged LOL) - what story are you quoting?


Use link in comment to get to evening std story


----------



## Sharont2305

Katel said:


> Do you by chance have the link?


It's on their instagram


----------



## marietouchet

This whole flap is so interesting , from a timing perspective
The BRF works so slowly, eg the Queen took 2 years to approve the divorce of Charles and Diana, and the pesky details , the HRH issue , were hammered out by a previous PM no less John Major
And the BRF has had other pressing matters this year - Andrew and Philip’s health , those had to be dealt with immediately, H&M could have / should have shown patience, the crown was not going to speed up things just for them 
And ... they could have waited until after Kate’s bday .... why create family havoc over the bday that could have been avoided with a 2 day wait


----------



## Meh-gan

bag-mania said:


> *Losing Meghan, Prince Harry and and (Potentially) Billions of Pounds*
> That sound you hear is hundreds of British brands biting their nails as the royal influencers depart.
> 
> The wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in May 2018, watched by a television audience of almost two billion viewers worldwide, was heralded by many as the ultimate 21st century fairy tale. It was hoped that the union of a beautiful biracial American actress and one of the world’s favorite princes would firmly nudge the British royal family into a new era.
> 
> It was also hoped, somewhat less romantically, that the potential star power of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (as the new celebrity couple became known) would be an economic windfall for Britain, potentially bringing billions of pounds to the economy for decades to come.
> 
> Just eighteen months later, the couple announced via Instagram that they would be stepping down as “senior” royals, splitting their time between Britain and North America and working toward becoming “financially independent.”
> 
> Just how much of a loss for Britain, its monarchy and businesses, could the new arrangement represent?
> 
> “The short answer is that it is rather hard to say, given no one yet knows the exact terms of Megxit,” said David Haigh, chief executive of brand valuation consultancy Brand Finance. The company calculated that the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex generated £1 billion for the British economy in 2018 alone, including an additional £300 million in travel and accommodation spent by foreign tourists and £50 million spent on merchandise such as coins, dish cloths and clothing, not to mention those billions of clicks in free media coverage that enhanced the value of the Britain brand.
> 
> In the months since the wedding, patronage by the Sussexes has continued to generate hefty revenue for retail and leisure industries in particular, for British household names such as Marks & Spencer and John Lewis and through charitable projects like the Duchess’s fashion workwear collaboration with Smartworks.
> 
> A new half-in, half-out of the firm arrangement would not necessarily put a stop to those earnings and endorsements for Britain and its businesses; if anything, extensive ambassadorial work at home and abroad could even increase them. But it all depends on the nature of the long-term relationship with Buckingham Palace, and what, with the creation of the Sussex Royal brand, the couple plan to control themselves when it comes to their cultural and commercial influence.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan say they want to be involved in Commonwealth activities, patronages and support the Queen — which suggests retaining some form of official royal role and duties,” Mr. Haigh said of the Sussexes’ unveiling of what they termed on their website “a new working model.”
> 
> “But they also want to earn their own money and partly live in North America. *So, in other words, do whatever the hell they like, no matter what has been invested in them by others,”* he said.
> 
> Those outside investments include security at their wedding, which was paid for by British taxpayers and cost an estimated £30 million (the church service, flowers and reception were paid for by the royal family) and £2.4 million to renovate the Duke and Duchess’s official residence, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, which the couple moved into nine months ago. Until now, five percent of the couple’s official expenses were paid for by the Sovereign Grant — an annual lump sum from the British government — and public funding the couple say they now plan to relinquish.
> 
> *However, they also said via the Sussex Royal website that they hope to continue receiving money from Harry’s father, Prince Charles, who funds the remaining 95 percent of the couple’s personal and professional expenses through his private estate, the Duchy of Cornwall, which he possesses by right of being the Queen’s heir. *In 2018, Prince Harry and his brother William, the Duke of Cambridge, and their wives received £4.9m from Prince Charles and the Duchy. This contributed to Prince Harry’s fortune, believed to be around £30m. Meghan’s net worth before marrying Prince Harry was estimated at £3.5m.
> 
> Whether Prince Charles — an advocate of streamlining the size of the monarchy, which is in line with the downsizing trend taking place in other European royal families — will reconsider that support remains to be seen. At a time when there has been greater scrutiny around the degree of public spending on the royals who qualify for police protection, Harry and Meghan also noted on their site that they will continue to have a publicly-funded security detail as they embark on a quest for financial independence.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess “value the ability to earn a professional income, which in the current structure they are prohibited from doing,” said a statement published on their website. (Royal protocol states that no gifts or funds, including hospitality or services, should be accepted that would, or might appear to, place a royal family member under any obligation to the donor.)
> 
> Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/style/harry-meghan.html


So how are they allowed to accept all the free vacations, flights etc from celebrities? The last sentence says they can’t accept anything that gives the impression they would owe them something. 

Anyway I think it’s hilarious they included in their manifesto the phrase want to be financially independent and then also that they hope to continue sponging off Charles lmaooooooo.


----------



## Katel

marietouchet said:


> Use link in comment to get to evening std story





Sharont2305 said:


> It's on their instagram



Thanks to both, I did go back prior to posting and looked on both sources and didn’t find it ...can anyone help a gal out?   I’d like to read the story (I glanced through the DM story but I guess it’s different?).


----------



## Katel

Flatsy said:


> *The original story about the sequence of events was from the Evening Standard,* not the Daily Fail.  The Queen wanted to meet with Harry, but she also wanted him to hammer out all of the details with Prince Charles first.  She told Harry she was not going to go over his "wish list" with him until it was approved by Charles.
> 
> Courtiers (aka the Queen's advisors), turned down the first proposed meeting time.  It's not clear why.  It could have been a scheduling issue.  It could have been to enforce the Queens command that Harry not attempt to go over Charles's head, which is their job.
> 
> The Sussexes arrived back in the UK over the weekend and Harry made his announcement on Wednesday morning.  That means he gave the Queen and Prince Charles a grand total of TWO DAYS to meet with him and approve all of his plans.  That's nothing.
> 
> He wanted immediate approval to do whatever he wanted, and he didn't get it, so he defied the Queen's direct order not to make a statement.



do you by chance have the link to the ES story? TIA


----------



## Sharont2305

Katel said:


> Thanks to both, I did go back prior to posting and looked on both sources and didn’t find it ...can anyone help a gal out?   I’d like to read the story (I glanced through the DM story but I guess it’s different?).


I meant the actual announcement was on their Insta, someone said it was in the morning but it wasn't, it was early evening (our time, UK)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

*Queen directs four-way crisis talks to find 'workable solution' for Harry and Meghan's future 'within days'*

The Queen, Prince Charles and the Duke of Cambridge have ordered their teams to find a "workable solution" over Harry and Meghan's future amid four-way talks to head off a royal crisis, the Evening Standard understands.

Buckingham Palace revealed they will work "at pace" in forming a plan to find an outcome for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in a matter of "days, not weeks".

The Queen and Prince Charles are said to be locked in “calm” conversations with Prince Harry amid a series of conference calls - Her Majesty from Sandringham and Charles in Birkhall, Scotland - over his and Meghan's decision to resign as senior royals.

Royal aides from across the households have also been instructed to liaise with Government departments. It is understood that the Royal Family will talk to multiple governments which suggests US and Canadian officials may be involved.

Palace sources say the directive is to sort it out "in days not weeks".

The news came as the Queen released a fresh statement on the issue, which was described on Wednesday as a "complicated issue".

It read: "The Queen, the Prince Of Wales and Duke of Cambridge have directed their teams to work together at pace with the government and the Sussex household to find workable solutions."

One source told the Standard: “Everyone is pulling together to make this work.

“The Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex have been in constant communication through out the day to find a sensible resolution to the issues.

“There has been no retribution. No finger pointing. The conversations have been calm, constructive and productive.

“Nobody is blaming anyone, it is all about making it work for all parties concerned."

The development comes after senior sources said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex ignored instructions from the Queen not to go public with their bombshell announcement to step back from their roles.

As reported earlier by the Evening Standard, the Queen is said to have made it clear to her grandson that he should not proceed with any announcement this week about his future after he requested a meeting with her at Sandringham.

But Harry and Meghan went ahead and released their personal statement on Wednesday eveningBuckingham Palace, sources said.

In the statement, the sixth in line to the throne effectively resigned from his frontline role “after many months of reflection and internal discussions”.

It also said they would work to become "financially independent" royals who will divide their time between the UK and North America.

The Duke of Sussex’s apparent refusal to comply with an explicit request from the head of the royal family helps explain the unprecedented expressions of “hurt” and “disappointment” from the palace over last night’s statement .

The Queen, Prince of Wales and other senior royals were not consulted about the content of the couple's statement or knew it was to be issued, with Charles and the Duke of Cambridge only receiving it 10 minutes before it was released, sources said.

The Duke and Duchess, who have only recently returned from a six-week stay in Canada with eight-month-old son Archie, said in their statement: "After many months of reflection and internal discussions, we have chosen to make a transition this year in starting to carve out a progressive new role within this institution.

"We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the royal family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty the Queen."

The statement - and a new official Sussexroyal.com website - have also thrown up important questions about funding for the couple's round-the-clock security, media access to their royal events and how they will pay for their future lifestyles.

Buckingham Palace said after the announcement: "We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through."

The latest developments reveal the divisions within the heart of the British monarchy which has already been rocked by the Duke of York's disastrous television interview about his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...-prince-harry-quit-senior-royal-a4330801.html


----------



## daisychainz

marietouchet said:


> This whole flap is so interesting , from a timing perspective
> The BRF works so slowly, eg the Queen took 2 years to approve the divorce of Charles and Diana, and the pesky details , the HRH issue , were hammered out by a previous PM no less John Major
> And the BRF has had other pressing matters this year - Andrew and Philip’s health , those had to be dealt with immediately, H&M could have / should have shown patience, the crown was not going to speed up things just for them


These are the two that were engaged and married in 6 months. I don't think patience is their thing.


----------



## LittleStar88

PewPew said:


> That’s unfair of you to expect him for to return to a place with such difficult memories— Spending time in Africa recently made H&M realize how badly neglected they are & that they are “merely existing & not living” with their jet set life. They required months of recovery time from that trip & will now require fewer responsibilities & gobs more funds to “truly live.”
> 
> It may be better for H to stay away from the continent he was once so fond of— the next time they go to Africa they may be so inspired they decide they need a spaceship to “truly live.”



I am sure Sir Richard Branson can hook them up on a Virgin Galactic flight (one way trip).


----------



## bag-mania

From the Standard article posted above. This is all we need to know about it, Harry has gone rogue. Now whether it was Meghan prodding him or his own idea, he can't take it back. He has to live (or at least exist!) with his choice.
_
"The development comes after senior sources said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex ignored instructions from the Queen not to go public with their bombshell announcement to step back from their roles.

As reported earlier by the Evening Standard, the Queen is said to have made it clear to her grandson that he should not proceed with any announcement this week about his future after he requested a meeting with her at Sandringham.

But Harry and Meghan went ahead and released their personal statement on Wednesday evening Buckingham Palace, sources said._


----------



## Mrs.Z

I can’t quit this story, it’s literally too much, how do you make your own rules when you are in charge of nothing!  One or both of them are delusional.


----------



## lanasyogamama

You would think the British royal family would look less messy and dramatic than what we see on reality TV, but not so these days.


----------



## hellosunshine

lanasyogamama said:


> You would think the British royal family would look less messy and dramatic than what we see on reality TV, but not so these days.



You must've not been paying too much attention. The BRF has always been messy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> The Queen, Prince Charles and the Duke of Cambridge have ordered their teams to find a "workable solution" over Harry and Meghan's future amid four-way talks to head off a royal crisis, the Evening Standard understands.
> 
> Buckingham Palace revealed they will work "at pace" in forming a plan to find an outcome for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in a matter of "days, not weeks".
> 
> The Queen and Prince Charles are said to be locked in “calm” conversations with Prince Harry amid a series of conference calls - Her Majesty from Sandringham and Charles in Birkhall, Scotland - over his and Meghan's decision to resign as senior royals.



It annoys me to no end that these two delusional, spoilt brats without even a smidge of sense of duty are seriously bullying the Queen and two heirs into "finding a solution". I get it's probably partly damage control, but I so wish the Queen would lay down the law without showing much courtesy. They don't deserve any kind of reward for their behaviour.


----------



## Tivo

Are there contractual obligations here or can Harry just refuse their money and bounce?

Because if he can just leave and the only thing holding him is “an understanding of how things work,” then I really don’t see the problem.

He’s not in line for the throne.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tivo said:


> Are there contractual obligations here or can Harry just refuse their money and bounce?
> 
> Because if he can just leave and the only thing holding him is “an understanding of how things work,” then I really don’t see the problem.
> 
> He’s not in line for the throne.



He can, he just doesn't plan on living on his measly 30 million pounds. So as he expects to still be funded by his father he can't just pack up and go.


----------



## doni

Tivo said:


> Are there contractual obligations here or can Harry just refuse their money and bounce?
> 
> Because if he can just leave and the only thing holding him is “an understanding of how things work,” then I really don’t see the problem.



Yes he could just leave but he doesn’t want to! For crying out loud, he wants to be financed by his father, keep the patronages, represent the Queen, do official trips, manage a ‘royal’ charity, keep a palace home, get taxpayer financed security... in two continents... plus earn his own money on the side. That’s the problem.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> From the Standard article posted above. This is all we need to know about it, Harry has gone rogue. Now whether it was Meghan prodding him or his own idea, he can't take it back. He has to live (or at least exist!) with his choice.
> _
> "The development comes after senior sources said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex ignored instructions from the Queen not to go public with their bombshell announcement to step back from their roles.
> 
> As reported earlier by the Evening Standard, the Queen is said to have made it clear to her grandson that he should not proceed with any announcement this week about his future after he requested a meeting with her at Sandringham.
> 
> But Harry and Meghan went ahead and released their personal statement on Wednesday evening Buckingham Palace, sources said._


I wonder if Prince Phillip is part of these discussions because from what I recall, he was always the 'REAL' disciplinarian!  I can't imagine that he would be very keen to just give them what they want, no questions asked!


----------



## mshermes

Well, if nothing else has been accomplished, toxic Meg is now the center of attention trying to outshine her sister-in-law on her birthday.  Shame on her!


----------



## Flatsy

Katel said:


> do you by chance have the link to the ES story? TIA



Here you go: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...rkle-defied-plans-senior-royals-a4330341.html


----------



## hellosunshine

So, the palace knew...




> ITV News Presenter Tom Bradby, who filmed a documentary with the couple during their tour of Africa last summer, spoke about how the couple's desire to leave the front line of royal duties was not totally unknown to senior members of the family; but their timing was.
> 
> *"It's certainly not true to say the palace were blindsided by this," he said.*
> 
> "The couple's view was they came back and wanted to talk to the family about their plans. It had been made clear to them in their absence there was going to be a slimmed down monarchy and they weren't really a part of it."
> 
> *He went on to say how the couple were asked to put down their suggestions on paper - but initially declined to do so for fear of a press leak. When that did happen, and the news leaked, the couple then decided to go public with their decision, sending ripples through the family firm.*





> Harry's friend Dean Stott said he was not left "shocked" or "surprised" by the decision, as it was one made "over the last few months."
> 
> He told ITV News: "Harry is an independent person, he has always been a part of the royal family, Meghan has been introduced to that circle, obviously the first person people would target is Meghan.
> 
> "He has made decisions that are right for him and his family now being Archie and Meghan.
> 
> "He is carving his own path, he has his own family, they are public figures, they can do so much good, probably away from those royal constraints."



https://www.itv.com/news/2020-01-09...mily-shock-announcement-queen-sussex-website/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

Tivo said:


> Are there contractual obligations here or can Harry just refuse their money and bounce?
> 
> Because if he can just leave and the only thing holding him is “an understanding of how things work,” then I really don’t see the problem.
> 
> He’s not in line for the throne.


But they said very plainly they expect to continue to get money from Charles. There is no intention of refusing money and walking away. They want to walk away WITH the cash and the ability to make more cash using the royal status. 

Like there is nothing cool or admirable or forward thinking about this move. They just want to be royal without obligations, spend Charle’s money and shill **** with their logo on it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sorry, this was in response to hellosunshine above.

Yeah, that bolded bit might have flown if they hadn’t taken the time to fully create a website with a FAQs section.  It wasn’t like this was a hastily prepared press conference.

They got six weeks with their lawyers and PR people to work this all out and gave BR three days notice and then released on the future Queen Consort’s birthday.


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> Here you go: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...rkle-defied-plans-senior-royals-a4330341.html


So basically Harry and Meghan could make this easier by walking away and striking out on their own? 

Then that’s what they need to do.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tivo said:


> Are there contractual obligations here or can Harry just refuse their money and bounce?
> 
> Because if he can just leave and the only thing holding him is “an understanding of how things work,” then I really don’t see the problem.
> 
> He’s not in line for the throne.


He is in line to the throne, sixth. 
I know its unlikely that he will be King, there would have to be a complete disaster for the Cambridges to be completely wiped out for him to become one.
But, the Queen is old, Charles is 71, by all accounts William may be King in 4 or 5 years. If he passed away before George comes of age, what will happen then? Prince Harry becomes Prince Regent till George is old enough.
I know this is all ifs and buts but you never know.


----------



## doni

Tivo said:


> So basically Harry and Meghan could make this easier by walking away and striking out on their own?
> 
> Then that’s what they need to do.


Yes, no one could (or would want to) stop them.
But that’s not at all what they want...


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> I wonder if Prince Phillip is part of these discussions because from what I recall, he was always the 'REAL' disciplinarian!  I can't imagine that he would be very keen to just give them what they want, no questions asked!


Ooh yes, he is definitely the head of the family, the Queen made sure that he's in charge "at home"


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> Yeah, that bolded bit might have flown if they hadn’t taken the time to fully create a website with a FAQs section.  It wasn’t like this was a hastily prepared press conference.



They were obviously very prepared in the event that anything leaked during discussions and when info got out, they released their terms and plans. This is the sorta move that Diana would've been ever so proud to do tbqh. Yeah, it's rather messy but Sussex's have tried the more diplomatic route and it hasn't served them well, so they've now gone rogue. Honestly, I support it.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> He is in line to the throne, sixth.
> I know its unlikely that he will be King, there would have to be a complete disaster for the Cambridges to be completely wiped out for him to become one.
> But, the Queen is old, Charles is 71, by all accounts William may be King in 4 or 5 years. If he passed away before George comes of age, what will happen then? Prince Harry becomes Prince Regent till George is old enough.
> I know this is all ifs and buts but you never know.



I thought the Queen may be thinking of abdicating soon, even this year. Is that not in the books? All those messages she has been throwing about the line of succession, Prince Philip being ill...

If that was the case the Duchy of Cornwall would go to William. Not sure how Harry will then be financed?

Perhaps they want to make lots of money quick (and establish the charity) in anticipation of that. I am sure they have a whole timeline planned out.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe all the tweets of support crashing twitter and the ‘gram today from H&M’s besties like Serena Williams, Mischa Nonoo, Jessica Mulroney, Amal Clooney, Oprah, whoever that gold digger is that married David Foster etc.



Oh, I believe it!  This is a crowd who want the world to believe they're all completely "woke" while private jetting around the world, cruising on mega yachts, and maintaining multiple huge homes.  Sure they care about the world .......that is as long as they can live by their own rules, not the ones that would actually benefit the planet.


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> But, the Queen is old, Charles is 71, by all accounts William may be King in 4 or 5 years.



And, what if Charles lives as along as his mother? That's 22 years for you. William might be in his mid-fifties before he even sets foot on the throne. These Windsors have long lives.


----------



## rose60610

From what I've read, Charles net worth is astronomical largely due to the Duchy estate. I can't see him cutting Harry out of the will, but I can see M&H demanding "their share" well before he dies. And if they don't get it, or get as much as they would like, all Meghan has to do is play the race card and certainly the American media will come running to her aid. Besides, isn't it time the BRF practice wealth redistribution? That is, redistribute it to H&M so they can support all kinds of worthy causes through their foundation........suuuurrrrre.........there is molto bank behind the Monarchy that could be redistributed, it's about time the Crown get Markled and REAL woke.


----------



## Sharont2305

I did say ifs and buts. 
Also, the Queen's father was 56 when he died.
So, who knows?


----------



## CeeJay

I know I keep on bringing this up, but I would think that the BRF as a whole would need to think about the impact related to how the British public are going to see this.  Regardless of H&M's notice that they are giving up the 5% Sovererign monies, it's really the other costs that the British taxpayers would have to swallow.  That's where this becomes a whole mess; it's the Sovereign 'rules' that did not allow them to be gifted or make $$$ for themselves .. not the rest of the stuff!  So, if the taxpayers have to still foot the bill for their travel, security and whatever else expenditures .. how would that make them feel?   I think that is something that they all need to think about ..


----------



## Katel

Flatsy said:


> Here you go: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...rkle-defied-plans-senior-royals-a4330341.html


TU!


----------



## Lounorada

rose60610 said:


> After all they been given they ruin it and throw it away like ungrateful brats because they apparently know better. If they think the media have been mean to them before...and public opinion was harsh before....  So here comes Meghan, puts her claws in Harry, gets the $50 million wedding, travel, luxury everything, etc...and now wants to break off from the The Crown yet keep all its privileges? Nobody is falling for the "want financial independence" line. I think they were given the boot and it's framed as being their idea for them to save face.  We haven't heard the last from Meghan or her demanding public pity. It's like marrying a filthy rich guy you can't stand just to go after his money. She landed a dullard prince, cranked out the anchor baby, and played her cards well. *I think she enjoys the drama*.


This! at the bolded. I think she lives for attention.



Katel said:


> Was it this person?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635283


I can't stand Jameela. She's nothing but another attention seeker, loves to say things to get a reaction.



V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe all the tweets of support crashing twitter and the ‘gram today from H&M’s besties like Serena Williams, Mischa Nonoo, Jessica Mulroney, Amal Clooney, Oprah, whoever that gold digger is that married David Foster etc.


Of course. What else would they do but try and get a little attention for themselves out of this too...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

rose60610 said:


> From what I've read, Charles net worth is astronomical largely due to the Duchy estate. I can't see him cutting Harry out of the will, but I can see M&H demanding "their share" well before he dies..



They don’t have a share. My understanding is that the Duchy is attached to the Prince of Wales, was established for that purpose in the Middle Ages. So when Charles becomes King it must go to William in its totality.


----------



## Lounorada

mshermes said:


> I may be wrong but I see a Royal Sussex Deodorant in the future.....sorry! Had to bring a little humour into the whole mess.


 ...with the scent of Jasmine, Lavender and Mothballs. Perfect for sensitive skin that is just existing not living.


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> They don’t have a share. My understanding is that the Duchy is attached to the Prince of Wales, was established for that purpose in the Middle Ages. So when Charles becomes King it must go to William in its totality.


Correct, they won't have a share of the Duchy money. 
Charles' personal wealth, he'll obviously get a share of that.


----------



## rose60610

doni said:


> They don’t have a share. My understanding is that the Duchy is attached to the Prince of Wales, was established for that purpose in the Middle Ages. So when Charles becomes King it must go to William in its totality.



Interesting. OK. Makes sense. Thanks.  It can still be used as leverage for Harry. "Look what Will gets, not fair!" or some similar snivelling rot.


----------



## Lounorada

joyeaux said:


> THIS SO MUCH. The dust has hardly even settled from their wedding! It’s all been this chaotic whirlwind and now they’re taking their toys (that Daddy paid for) and going home?
> 
> With the benefit of hindsight, it makes her “hit the ground running” proclamations seem so very empty and contrived. Yes, the girl has hustle and I was SO ON BOARD with them initially. I thought she was going to be Michelle ***** with a tiara, a beautiful and smart woman of color who made the racist bigots look like the pathetic people they are by just being kind and lovely and gracious. I think their intentions on changing the world were sincere, although highly jaded and unrealistic and honestly, arrogant. Remember that “Friends” episode where Phoebe says you can’t do a good deed without getting something out of it too? I think H and M loved the idea of doing good for the world for altruistic reasons AND the adoration/unquestioning adulation/front cover glowing headlines of alllll the magazines they assumed would come from it.
> 
> And you know what? I no longer think Meghan has grit. I think she is tireless, but I think she’s frighteningly ambitious and entitled and frankly, a spoiled brat. She ate up the “I’m a Duchess” stuff with a spoon when it suited her—I’m waving from my carriage ride down the Long Walk because I’m a Duchess, I’m being showered in front of all the paps at The Mark hotel because Duchess Baby Shower, I’m at Wimbledon so clear the rows for the Duchess, I’m in Ibiza because this is how a Duchess gets away from it all— but has embarrassed and disrespected someone who not only is the reason she had the means and clout to do all the aforementioned, but has given almost a century to her country? Sacrificing a life for an institution, now THAT is grit.
> 
> Y’all the Queen rode with Meghan’s DOG IN HER CAR. She invited Meghan to family events far earlier than precedent dictated. They took a train to make a joint appearance, just the two of them, where the Queen was photographed visibly smiling— and I promise you that was a very deliberate move on QEII’s part to show her endorsement of Meghan as the newest member of the family.
> 
> The latest headlines I saw say that not only was the family blindsided, but that Harry was told by the Queen to hold off on announcements until they could get things straightened out. And guess what, they did it anyway and had a website ready to answer questions that may come from the plebs about how this is all gonna work. “You have questions, Gran? No problem! Visit sussexroyal.com for more information. And yes we bought the website address, so we totally are still royal because see it’s right there in the domain name.”
> 
> I can’t believe I’ve written so much and know that’s kind of lame to give this kind of thought to people that don’t know I exist  but my excuse is that I majored in British history and have a decent understanding of what the monarchy is and how incredible it is to still be around today. There’s something so “greatest generation” about Queen Elizabeth and it makes me angry that at the end of her long life she’s dealing with an Instagram-generation “power couple” who have not only made her look stupid, but have only strengthened the argument for abolishing the institution she has lived her life to keep relevant.


Great post  Well said!


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> They don’t have a share. My understanding is that the Duchy is attached to the Prince of Wales, was established for that purpose in the Middle Ages. So when Charles becomes King it must go to William in its totality.


agree Cornwall goes to William when Charles is king 
And the lands could not / should not be sold , that is where the real value lies, but the Duke does get the revenue even if he can’t sell the pile 
Hmmm ... wonder if it is subject to inheritance taxes ?


----------



## CeeJay

Cavalier Girl said:


> Oh, I believe it!  This is a crowd who want the world to believe they're all completely "woke" while private jetting around the world, cruising on mega yachts, and maintaining multiple huge homes.  Sure they care about the world .......that is as long as they can live by their own rules, not the ones that would actually benefit the planet.


..  yes, and did any of THEM ask Meghan if she was "okay"???  It's usually your 'friends' who ask that question, not the media!


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> They were obviously very prepared in the event that anything leaked during discussions and when info got out, they released their terms and plans. This is the sorta move that Diana would've been ever so proud to do tbqh. Yeah, it's rather messy but Sussex's have tried the more diplomatic route and it hasn't served them well, so they've now gone rogue. Honestly, I support it.


well of course you do


----------



## mdcx

Poor Kate, thinking about her having to deal with this garbage on her birthday and after all the efforts she made to include and guide Meghan makes me a little teary.

Meghan is not mentally normal imo. She has chosen to make an enemy of QEll. She has thrown away a cushy life with a loving extended family all because she couldn’t bear to be told what to do now and then. As someone else said, being #2 to Kate seemed to enrage her.

And baby Archie left behind in Canada so she had a reason to leave the UK asap, and so she could use him as leverage.

Well, she got her notoriety alright. How long until she stabs one of her North American BFFs in the back by stealing their husband/business/friends/contacts?

Appalling. If they had done this right, they could have gotten most of what they wanted and still kept on the right side of everyone.


----------



## cafecreme15

Predictably, the American media (even "intellectual" papers like the NY times) have started with the Meghan was forced out because racism narrative.


----------



## Handbag1234

pixiejenna said:


> I’ve seen Megxit tossed out there lol.


Ha ha! Yes I’ve seen that!!


----------



## Handbag1234

Katel said:


> Was it this person?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635283


Jameela is fame hungry and trying to make her own name and probably sees Meghan as the poster girl for what she wants to achieve


----------



## Mrs.Z

Handbag1234 said:


> Jameela is fame hungry and trying to make her own name and probably sees Meghan as the poster girl for what she wants to achieve


Agreed and I could not believe Meghan picked her for that Vogue piece she did....this woman recently got upset with someone for saying only women can give birth....come on.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Poor Kate, thinking about her having to deal with this garbage on her birthday and after all the efforts she made to include and guide Meghan makes me a little teary.


.. YES, and to that point, it's not like the press was so nice to Kate in the beginning, but she has proved without doubt, that she will make a fine Queen to accompany Will!  As many others have said, and this should be of no surprise to any of us here (_since we've discussed this ad nauseum_), no one says it will be a walk in the park to marry into the BRF!  None of us really know what transpired behind the scenes, but it sure looked like the Queen and others did extend their welcome when Meghan first came into the picture, so what happened?  Ah - yes, the press .. it's all their fault that they did not write glowing commentary about them non-stop (_and the reason why she continues to leak information to her friends and the US-friendly rags_).   For someone who was supposed to be as media-savvy as she purported herself to be, did they really think a lot of their antics last year should have still been reported favorably???   While they may initially have some positive US media, I have seen first-hand that they can turn on you in a minute, so if they think they are going to be able to 'control' the media here .. think again.  Okay, so use unknown "younger" media personnel .. is that really going to help?  They both have to realize that it's THEIR ACTIONS that are causing more scrutiny .. and that isn't going to change regardless of where they live!


----------



## mdcx

Meghan popped back to the UK to prance around at the Canadian Embassy looking smug, knowing that Archie was secure back in Canada and that she was going to napalm the BRF the next day and then leave town forever. That's how it looks imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## closeted

In a few years time little Archie will ask who is our family? Harry shall turn to Meghan and ask, "Darling, who is still on that list?".


----------



## randr21

Saw this almost a year ago. For entertainment purposes only...


----------



## cph706

My two cents...

I think it’s possible that Harry was looking down the road and sees how pushed aside the second sibling is...he is likely to be son of the monarch for a relatively short time, given Charles’ age. He will then be brother of the monarch.  Margaret wasn’t happy being sister of the monarch and Andrew (who will be brother of the King) seems to be foundering as well. Maybe the 21st/22nd century monarchy will look very different than the 20th century one.


----------



## mdcx

randr21 said:


> Saw this almost a year ago. For entertainment purposes only...



Oh my. I had to stop watching this 2 minutes in as it was a little too accurate!


----------



## youngster

doni said:


> Perhaps they want to make lots of money quick (and establish the charity) in anticipation of that. I am sure they have a whole timeline planned out.



I think this is part of it, their relevance clock is ticking.  There will be less and less interest in them as the years pass as Will becomes Prince of Wales and Kate, Princess of Wales, and the little Cambridge kids grow up and become teens.  So, if a priority for Meghan and Harry is accumulating a lot of independent wealth, which appears to be the case, they likely feel the need to do something now.  Cash in on all that SussexRoyal stuff that they will be pushing (if allowed which I doubt).


----------



## mdcx

This is the part I don't get though - once Meghan gets all the money and all the fame and all the whatever it is she is seeking, then what? She will have no family left, her name will be dirt in the UK and Commonwealth.

I mean, if she is just famous enough and rich enough she will be content? It does all point to her not being in the normal mental frame of things, as to most people this would all not be sitting well with their conscience/heart/soul etc.

ETA is it possible that Harry will remain in the UK? I sense that Meghan would be 100% fine with that and it's possible the BRF may be able to talk some sense into him without her there.


----------



## Chagall

cafecreme15 said:


> Predictably, the American media (even "intellectual" papers like the NY times) have started with the Meghan was forced out because racism narrative.


Oh how ridiculous. I can’t believe anyone would believe that in a million years. Simply put they knew they were on their way out (streamlining of the monarchy) and Megan couldn’t stand not being the most important, number one runner up to the throne. You are going to dump us so we will beat you to the punch and leave first. So they bailed to save face. It’s like watching a soap opera or train wreck. Don’t know where our boy Harry is in all this.


----------



## cafecreme15

Chagall said:


> Oh how ridiculous. I can’t believe anyone would believe that in a million years. Simply put they knew they were on their way out (streamlining of the monarchy) and Megan couldn’t stand not being the most important, number one runner up to the throne. You are going to dump us so we will beat you to the punch and leave first. So they bailed to save face. It’s like watching a soap opera or train wreck. Don’t know where our boy Harry is in all this.


"Because racism" is the lazy explanation, imo. I suppose everyone in this thread pays more attention to the royal family than the average person, so that explanation alone doesn't fly with us here! Not saying that racism hasn't played a part in the initial hostilities toward her, but that is hardly the whole, or even a substantial part, of the story to date.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Archie is such a pawn in this nasty game. 
Wishing this poor little rich boy well.


----------



## queennadine

Wait, I must have missed that Archie isn’t in the UK with them?


----------



## mdcx

queennadine said:


> Wait, I must have missed that Archie isn’t in the UK with them?


They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.

ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html


----------



## bisousx

Straight-Laced said:


> Archie is such a pawn in this nasty game.
> Wishing this poor little rich boy well.



Thanks to both of his parents, he may not get to know either sides of his family. It is kinda sad to think.


----------



## cafecreme15

mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html


So much for minimizing their carbon footprint! Not even enough time to get over the jet lag.


----------



## mdcx

I have noticed the Daily Mail seem to be referring to them now as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, as opposed to the Duke/Duchess of Cambridge. Maybe it's just me?


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html


She knows she is a pariah. Let’s hope the family rallies around him and helps him to open his eyes.

Actually surprised that she would leave Harry to be possibly influenced by his family, unless this is it. She has Archie and she’s taking him with her as hostage/leverage. She is really despicable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

jehaga said:


> She knows she is a pariah. Let’s hope the family rallies around him and helps him to open his eyes.
> 
> Actually surprised that she would leave him to be possibly influenced by his family, unless this is it. She has Archie and she’s taking him with her as hostage/leverage. She is really despicable.



I would be very surprised if her mother is not there with Archie. And, yes, she is despicable. I just keep shaking my head over this whole thing. They should never have had a child. I feel so sorry for him.


----------



## mdcx

mshermes said:


> I would be very surprised if her mother is not there with Archie. And, yes, she is despicable. I just keep shaking my head over this whole thing. They should never have had a child. I feel so sorry for him.


I do really wonder whether she has any attachment bond with Archie. The way things are going I would guess Archie won't have a lot of time with his dad, who he actually does seem to have an attachment with.


----------



## Chagall

jehaga said:


> She knows she is a pariah. Let’s hope the family rallies around him and helps him to open his eyes.
> 
> Actually surprised that she would leave him to be possibly influenced by his family, unless this is it. She has Archie and she’s taking him with her as hostage/leverage. She is really despicable.


I think this may be it. This marriage won’t last.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> This is the part I don't get though - once Meghan gets all the money and all the fame and all the whatever it is she is seeking, then what? She will have no family left, her name will be dirt in the UK and Commonwealth.
> 
> I mean, if she is just famous enough and rich enough she will be content? It does all point to her not being in the normal mental frame of things, as to most people this would all not be sitting well with their conscience/heart/soul etc.
> 
> ETA is it possible that Harry will remain in the UK? I sense that Meghan would be 100% fine with that and it's possible the BRF may be able to talk some sense into him without her there.


Maybe we've got it wrong and the fame she seeks isn't about celebrity, but making herself a major historical person that will long be remembered. Celebrities fade out all the time and don't really make history books, but perhaps she's more interested in being the woman responsible for making the monarchy change/fall and leaving a larger historical footprint. She definitely has some sort of world domination plan in place.


----------



## queennadine

mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html



Thanks!

Wooooow so they didn’t even take Archie initially...did they think the BRF was going to have MI6 steal him? And then MM flees after just 3 days and can’t even face the family or be by Harry’s side? I’m flabbergasted that she can’t be bothered to stay in the country that embraced her and celebrated her marriage for more than a few days.


----------



## Flatsy

queennadine said:


> I’m flabbergasted that she can’t be bothered to stay in the country that embraced her and celebrated her marriage for more than a few days.


And yet the Sussexes still want their own personal mansion so they can feel at home during their brief and probably infrequent trips to the UK.


----------



## mdcx

The "follow your bliss, whatever makes you happy!!!!!" commenters on their instagram post blow my mind. Imagine if everyone just "did what made them happy" 24/7?


----------



## youngster

They didn't take little Archie so that Meghan would have an excuse to leave_ rapidly_ and not face the family.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Flatsy said:


> And yet the Sussexes still want their own personal mansion so they can feel at home during their brief and probably infrequent trips to the UK.


So brazen. 
At this point it seems more like a raid than an actual marriage.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> The "follow your bliss, whatever makes you happy!!!!!" commenters on their instagram post blow my mind. Imagine if everyone just "did what made them happy" 24/7?


World chaos!


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html


*Un-freaking believable* .. what a sh##ty thing to do, leave Prince Harry to be left holding the bag!  Then again, am I truly surprised .. nope.  What I heard about her out here is just ringing more true to the day ..


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> *Un-freaking believable* .. what a sh##ty thing to do, leave Prince Harry to be left holding the bag!  Then again, am I truly surprised .. nope.  What I heard about her out here is just ringing more true to the day ..



And on her way back to Victoria. Please no, don't want you here.


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Wooooow so they didn’t even take Archie initially...did they think the BRF was going to have MI6 steal him? And then MM flees after just 3 days and can’t even face the family or be by Harry’s side? I’m flabbergasted that she can’t be bothered to stay in the country that embraced her and celebrated her marriage for more than a few days.


Well, she might just want to be careful .. remember all those rumors about MI6 taking out Princess Diana?


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chagall said:


> I think this may be it. This marriage won’t last.


If this marriage lasts Harry is a lot sicker than he seems. 
More people would see this if it was fictional Princess Harriet from the BRF who married a commoner, and Harriet’s life was suddenly turned upside down and inside out, personality change was apparent, birth family was on the outer etc. 
Harry needs to get out and use legal means to ensure a relationship with his son, who needs him. And he needs to stay sober. Meghan could easily turn on Harry, and probably will.


----------



## marietouchet

This story just keeps on giving ... 
Can not believe that Archie had been left in Canada... heck he travelled to the USA for Serena’s tennis game. H and  M knew this would cause a ruckus and M gave herself an out 
I am gaga that one sister in law would muck up things so bad when it is her sister in law’s bday, that was gratuitous rudeness and collateral damage, they will always be family
All this heartburn could have been minimized with a little common sense, self control and patience
OK I get it , those are not M’s strong points , but I still cannot believe the way the pair handled this 
To quote Jane Austen , badly done !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> And on her way back to Victoria. Please no, don't want you here.


What? .. back to the Mansion? .. will she be joined by David Foster and his pathetic wife .. you know, Katherine McPhee who went to school with Meghan (more lies)!!  Just when you think it couldn't get worse, it just does ..


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> *Un-freaking believable* .. what a sh##ty thing to do, leave Prince Harry to be left holding the bag!  Then again, am I truly surprised .. nope.  What I heard about her out here is just ringing more true to the day ..


I have a friend in Cali who knows her a bit. Same here.....been waiting for her to act out.


----------



## bisousx

It’s incredibly cowardly of Meghan to run away from the RF.  Neither her nor Harry can be trusted. I don’t see how they could continue to have a role in the RF.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> What? .. back to the Mansion? .. will she be joined by David Foster and his pathetic wife .. you know, Katherine McPhee who went to school with Meghan (more lies)!!  Just when you think it couldn't get worse, it just does ..



From the local Victoria Chek News -  

BBC News has confirmed to CHEK News that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is on her way back to Greater Victoria.
Meghan, Prince Harry and their child, Archie, were recently seen spending the Christmas holidays in North Saanich on Vancouver Island.


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> It’s incredibly cowardly of Meghan to run away from the RF.  Neither her nor Harry can be trusted. I don’t see how they could continue to have a role in the RF.


*Cowardly* and *calculated*; Harry has been played for a fool (IMO)!  Like the rest of you, I feel so sorry for that little boy; didn't we all see such joy that Harry had in his face in the latest picture of the two of them?!?!


----------



## jcnc

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan





mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html




I don’t understand why they had to leave Archie ( if they indeed did) . Makes no sense to me


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Was the baby left behind in Canada because she thought they might try to take him somehow? The family is probably trying to talk sense into Harry without her and the baby was her assurance Harry will come back to her? Maybe...


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I dont think the Queen will say enough is enough etc to them, tbh. No idea how this is going to pan out but I bet Prince Philip will have plenty to say to his grandson


Yes.  I think he will remind him of duty with a big fat lecture.  I don't put it past him to tell him that he is very disappointed in him as well.


----------



## joyeaux

I listened to a podcast by the Evening Standard today and they discuss a timeline I hadn’t heard explained so fully before. They now have an article published with the same info, so I’ll quote rather than try to paraphrase (this is from article here).

_It is understood that:
_

_Harry originally contacted Prince Charles about spending more time in Canada and America just before Christmas, but was told he needed to come up with a thought-out plan._
_Harry sent a draft proposal about his future role to his father early in the New Year but was again informed that more time was needed to think through the complex implications, particularly over funding._
_Harry asked for a summit with the Queen at Sandringham as soon as he, Meghan and their son Archie, arrived back from their long Christmas break in Canada at the weekend._
_He was told that while the Queen was happy to meet him, she would not discuss his wishlist before he had discussed it in detail with his father._
_The planned meeting was blocked by courtiers, but the Queen made it clear to Harry that he should not go public about his future plans at this time._

(My hot take starts here): I guess this set hothead Harry, Meghan, and whoever their yes-people are off, because they basically gave the Queen the finger and did it anyway. Family, history, birthdays of sisters in law, auto-billpay setups be damned.

One other thing to note, they said that H and M have been discussing this and getting wise counsel on navigating Royal life PR from some of their friends— George and Amal, Gayle, for example. I’ll just leave that there.

So basically, The Crown was blindsided not by the fact that they are wanting to redefine their role; they were aware this was the direction in which H and M wanted to go. The blindsiding was that _they went public with an announcement when they did, _and without having ironed out any of the details with anyone else. I suppose any questions can be directed to the website FAQ section though. 

Going back to what I said in a post earlier, it’s just such an audacious F You to everyone who has ever tried to advise them (and to all the people this leaves in the dust, like their many patronages that are probably freaking out about where they now stand). But it’s an even bigger finger to the elderly grandmother who _really did_ make efforts to show the world that Meghan was a welcome addition to the family. Ya know the lady that puts the “royal” in their “Sussex Royal” and has been the ruling monarch since 1952 yet never once complained to a camera or shown anything other than grace and diligence to her country? It’s just so selfish and mean-spirited IMO. She’s your grandmother, she’s a human, she has given up a lot to afford you the life you live now. Never thought I’d say this but... You suck Harry.


----------



## mrsinsyder

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Was the baby left behind in Canada because she thought they might try to take him somehow? The family is probably trying to talk sense into Harry without her and the baby was her assurance Harry will come back to her? Maybe...


That’s my guess. They may have made archie stay in the country.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> That’s my guess. They may have made archie stay in the country.


On legal advice my guess.


----------



## queennadine

I would never leave my baby (who’s 8.5 months) for this type of situation.


----------



## marietouchet

Straight-Laced said:


> On legal advice my guess.


No woke momma would leave her baby behind ... yes, agree there must have been legal advice to cause that, BUT think of it ...
They knew they were in boiling hot water if they sought legal advice in the first place. Her attorney, not his ? Perhaps she has already sought divorce attorney advice ...
WAIT !
 I finally figured it out ! Yippee ! Archie’s carbon footprint for the round trip flights was deemed unacceptable so he could not go to England ... now that makes sense to me lol


----------



## Flatsy

I think Meghan left Archie in Canada to put extra pressure on Harry to get the job done.  She didn't want Harry listening to his family telling him to take his time and think things through.  She wanted him to hit the detonator.

And I think Meghan shared the tidbit about Archie staying in Canada with her friends at People Magazine to make people think she was scared of the big, bad royal family trying to take her baby.  Which would never happen in a million years.


----------



## gracekelly

queennadine said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Wooooow so they didn’t even take Archie initially...did they think the BRF was going to have MI6 steal him? And then MM flees after just 3 days and can’t even face the family or be by Harry’s side? I’m flabbergasted that she can’t be bothered to stay in the country that embraced her and celebrated her marriage for more than a few days.



I'm not even sure why she went back .  Why didn't she just stay in Canada?  She has left Harry to face the music alone and just cut and run.



youngster said:


> They didn't take little Archie so that Meghan would have an excuse to leave_ rapidly_ and not face the family.



Maybe



CeeJay said:


> *Cowardly* and *calculated*; Harry has been played for a fool (IMO)!  Like the rest of you, I feel so sorry for that little boy; didn't we all see such joy that Harry had in his face in the latest picture of the two of them?!?!



Yeah, he looks like a real chump now.  I think she is going to get on a plane for the US with Archie.  Archie has dual citizenship so it shouldn't be difficult.  I also think she has divorce in the back of her mind and having Archie with her in the US would be a good bargaining chip.



mrsinsyder said:


> That’s my guess. They may have made archie stay in the country.



They must have been thinking along those lines.  I don't know if the the Queen's reach extends to a great grandchild.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Courtesy of Gary Janetti on IG


----------



## marietouchet

bisousx said:


> It’s incredibly cowardly of Meghan to run away from the RF.  Neither her nor Harry can be trusted. I don’t see how they could continue to have a role in the RF.


No one will forgive her for the departure ..
I remember one thing that contributed to the popularity of the Queen Mum in WWII was her refusal to leave England, it gained her so much respect. One does not gain the respect of the English by leaving ...
Not that WWII and H&Mmageddon are comparable in gravity


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> I'm not even sure why she went back .  Why didn't she just stay in Canada?  She has left Harry to face the music alone and just cut and run.



She’s a thirst trap. She wanted to see everyone groveling for their return. Instead she was a pit-sweating brown mess.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> I think this is part of it, their relevance clock is ticking.  There will be less and less interest in them as the years pass as Will becomes Prince of Wales and Kate, Princess of Wales, and the little Cambridge kids grow up and become teens.  So, if a priority for Meghan and Harry is accumulating a lot of independent wealth, which appears to be the case, they likely feel the need to do something now.  Cash in on all that SussexRoyal stuff that they will be pushing (if allowed which I doubt).



BUT... If they stuck it out, remade their image in the best way possible, did the BRF thing the right way they could be quite adored. Instead they blew it.


----------



## mdcx

I predict Megs will be off to LA with Archie soon (or without him, don't think she cares very much!) I really don't think she minds what happens to Harry at this point.


----------



## muchstuff

Watching the news in Vancouver, Meghan is touching down as we speak at Vancouver Int’l airport en route to Victoria. Baby Archie is apparently in Victoria with Jessica Mulroney.


----------



## mrsinsyder

muchstuff said:


> Watching the news in Vancouver, Meghan is touching down as we speak at Vancouver Int’l airport en route to Victoria. Baby Archie is apparently in Victoria with Jessica Mulroney.



He’ll have lip injections before we know it. Why does this feel like he’s in protective custody?


----------



## mdcx

Jessica Mulroney, Katharine McPhee, Sarah Rafferty - there's something so venal and grasping about all Meghan's supposed BFFs. Social climbers the lot.


----------



## mdcx

https://www.cheknews.ca/meghan-duchess-of-sussex-returning-to-greater-victoria-635891/


----------



## TC1

I had always watched Suits. Meghan seemed like your run of the mill actress..when it was "leaked" that she was seeing Harry, her whole demeanor changed, even with her character. All of a sudden she refused any kissing scenes with her on screen lover and asked to be written out of the show. As a fan of the show, I lost a lot of respect for the way she handled that. But it just proves, to me at least...everything is calculated.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

marietouchet said:


> No one will forgive her for the departure ..
> I remember one thing that contributed to the popularity of the Queen Mum in WWII was her refusal to leave England, it gained her so much respect. One does not gain the respect of the English by leaving ...
> Not that WWII and H&Mmageddon are comparable in gravity


I was just wondering this - like, how can she even go back and live there?


----------



## Gabs007

I loved those 2 tweets regarding the issue, believe one was  a direct response to that flabby guy with the overinflated ego, formerly losing his job due to a phone hacking scandal, in general misogynistic "person" (I use the term broadly) failed with his career move to the US biggly, first name Piers, the same guy (again using the term broadly) who had a melt down when a fast food store decided to sell vegetarian sausages


----------



## Gabs007

TC1 said:


> I had always watched Suits. Meghan seemed like your run of the mill actress..when it was "leaked" that she was seeing Harry, her whole demeanor changed, even with her character. All of a sudden she refused any kissing scenes with her on screen lover and asked to be written out of the show. As a fan of the show, I lost a lot of respect for the way she handled that. But it just proves, to me at least...everything is calculated.



Doubtful it was calculated, more likely it was demanded of her and she seems to have enough of demands


----------



## mdcx

Returning to Vancouver Island apparently:
https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/duchess-meghan-markle-returning-to-vancouver-island-1.4761133


----------



## mrsinsyder

Looks like the vacation was for lessons on becoming “financially independent”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the vacation was for lessons on becoming “financially independent”
> 
> View attachment 4635723


They are like those loser guys with no job sleeping on their friend’s couch. I wonder why they won’t name this Russian billionaire - probably sketchy AF.


----------



## mdcx

A yachting contact maybe? The name Yuri Milner pops up in the article. No doubt the owner has their own angle on how they will benefit from this "generosity".
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...multi-millionaire-owns-Christmas-mansion.html


----------



## V0N1B2

V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe all the tweets of support crashing twitter and the ‘gram today from H&M’s besties like Serena Williams, Mischa Nonoo, Jessica Mulroney, Amal Clooney, Oprah, whoever that gold digger is that married David Foster etc.


Oh I’m sorry dolls, I was being facetious. A smartypants, sarcastic, sh!t disturber. I've seen NO tweets of support from Meghan’s besties. 
Of course not including She's So Plastic Jessica Mulroney - aka: Archies babysitter. 
Next time I promise to use the sarcasm font.


----------



## mshermes

OK....verrry snarky.....this will be how she will be remembered as last seen as a Royal. I love it! Meow....


----------



## Flatsy

mshermes said:


> OK....verrry snarky.....this will be how she will be remembered as last seen as a Royal. I love it! Meow....


I think the tacky fake eyelashes are more embarrassing than the pit stains.  At least the pit stains were accidental.


----------



## mrsinsyder

This article is so sad...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10708668/meghan-harry-miserable-media-toxic/


----------



## mrsinsyder

mshermes said:


> OK....verrry snarky.....this will be how she will be remembered as last seen as a Royal. I love it! Meow....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635748


She has her cat that got the cream look there again. She knew what was about to pop off...


----------



## LittleStar88

Didn’t they adopt a dog? If so, I guess she is leaving the dog with...? Give it back? 

I hope the Queen takes their titles away (can she?), removes Meghan from her patronages, and retires them permanently to Canada (sorry). Frogmore can go to Beatrice or Eugenie and let them take Meghan’s patronages if they want them.


----------



## LittleStar88

mshermes said:


> OK....verrry snarky.....this will be how she will be remembered as last seen as a Royal. I love it! Meow....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4635748



she looks suuuuper puffy in the face. Like she drank a cup of soy sauce or something.


----------



## mshermes

LittleStar88 said:


> Didn’t they adopt a dog? If so, I guess she is leaving the dog with...? Give it back?
> 
> I hope the Queen takes their titles away (can she?), removes Meghan from her patronages, and retires them permanently to Canada (sorry). Frogmore can go to Beatrice or Eugenie and let them take Meghan’s patronages if they want them.



As I recall, she brought one or two dogs over with her.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LittleStar88 said:


> Didn’t they adopt a dog? If so, I guess she is leaving the dog with...? Give it back?
> 
> I hope the Queen takes their titles away (can she?), removes Meghan from her patronages, and retires them permanently to Canada (sorry). Frogmore can go to Beatrice or Eugenie and let them take Meghan’s patronages if they want them.


You're right. They did adopt one and then she took one over. She leaves a trail of people and animals behind her. Even the dogs get #markled


----------



## V0N1B2

Oh man, this getting MESSY. 
The Queen does.not.play.  I don’t know who Meghan thought she was f*cking with but she is gonna have her arse handed to her in a Royal Wedding Commemorative teacup.  

Meghan honey, it looks like your chickens have finally come home to ROAST  
*sorry dolls, couldn’t help it.


----------



## mdcx

She won't come back to the UK again will she? I can just see all her things being shipped over. Poor dog.
A commenter on the Daily Mail speculated that the strange marks on Kate's face in this pic may have been caused during a fight of some sort, perhaps with a troubled relative by marriage. At first I thought they were just shadows from something on the glass but...


----------



## youngster

I did see a People website article that claimed a friend of Harry and Meghan said the two of them were being "driven out" of the family.  Uh, _what_?  I mean, they are the ones that announced they were leaving and wanted everything on their terms and wouldn't be senior royals any longer.  I know People is not much more than a fawning tabloid but you'd think they'd do a little fact checking.


----------



## LittleStar88

Jeez. Maybe her family (dad and his side) have been right all along and we were all played by her. Biggest hustle ever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> A yachting contact maybe? The name Yuri Milner pops up in the article. No doubt the owner has their own angle on how they will benefit from this "generosity".
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...multi-millionaire-owns-Christmas-mansion.html


Gee what a surprise. My guess was that Foster probably played a private party for this guy for a several million years dollar fee. That happens all the time with big name entertainers and of course the public rarely hears about it. I’m sure the mansion owner was more than happy to have a royal in residence. 

The gray men will go ballistic over this after the Prince Andrew episode.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I did see a People website article that claimed a friend of Harry and Meghan said the two of them were being "driven out" of the family.  Uh, _what_?  I mean, they are the ones that announced they were leaving and wanted everything on their terms and wouldn't be senior royals any longer.  I know People is not much more than a fawning tabloid but you'd think they'd do a little fact checking.


They are being driven out in the same way they said they weren’t going to Sandringham. Preemptive strike to spin it their way. People mag will milk this story until the cows come home just like when they would put Diana on the cover when sales were  slow.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You're right. They did adopt one and then she took one over. She leaves a trail of people and animals behind her. Even the dogs get #markled


She took the dog because she knew she wasn’t going back to England to live.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> She won't come back to the UK again will she? I can just see all her things being shipped over. Poor dog.
> A commenter on the Daily Mail speculated that the strange marks on Kate's face in this pic may have been caused during a fight of some sort, perhaps with a troubled relative by marriage. At first I thought they were just shadows from something on the glass but...
> 
> View attachment 4635792


I read comment that pointed out that Meghan has made announcements to coincide with Kate’s birthday. This is really pathological behavior to deliberately spoil it for her and the family. Raging jealousy.


----------



## randr21

mdcx said:


> Oh my. I had to stop watching this 2 minutes in as it was a little too accurate!


I know, I wish he wasn't so accurate, but I guess lots of tpfers on this thread already had a sixth sense about this before the big announcement.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> He is in line to the throne, sixth.
> I know its unlikely that he will be King, there would have to be a complete disaster for the Cambridges to be completely wiped out for him to become one.
> But, the Queen is old, Charles is 71, by all accounts William may be King in 4 or 5 years. If he passed away before George comes of age, what will happen then? Prince Harry becomes Prince Regent till George is old enough.
> I know this is all ifs and buts but you never know.


this was my thought too. maybe he can't fully step back until George is 18?


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> And baby Archie left behind in Canada so she had a reason to leave the UK asap, and so she could use him as leverage.
> .


I really wonder if this is true. 
I mean, I understand you don't want the stress and jetlag for the baby, but how can she be so sure to be back soon. and how can you leave your baby on a different continent that is so far away?


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> ETA is it possible that Harry will remain in the UK? I sense that Meghan would be 100% fine with that and it's possible the BRF may be able to talk some sense into him without her there.


I had these thoughts, too


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> I have noticed the Daily Mail seem to be referring to them now as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, as opposed to the Duke/Duchess of Cambridge. Maybe it's just me?


they still refer to Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> this was my thought too. maybe he can't fully step back until George is 18?


There is a provisional in the act if the regent is unable to perform the duties. In theory another could be appointed.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html


To face the backlash from his father and brother alone


----------



## elvisfan4life

LittleStar88 said:


> Jeez. Maybe her family (dad and his side) have been right all along and we were all played by her. Biggest hustle ever.


Some of.us.saw.her.for.what.she was.from.day 1


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> they still refer to Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton


I hate that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> They left him in Canada. Meghan has now flown back to Canada also, leaving Harry in UK alone.
> 
> ETA: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-Meghan-Markle-left-young-Archie-Canada.html



Leaving the baby...if anyone needed proof they had this sh*tshow planned, there it is. WTF. Meghan is lucky Harry is under her spell or else she might find herself childless because doesn't the Queen have custody of Archie? She is really counting on everyone but the two of them not wanting to escalate things.


----------



## Sharont2305

Diana once said about the future of the boys "I don't worry about William, he'll be fine. It's Harry I worry about"
Seems like mum was right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

elvisfan4life said:


> Some of.us.saw.her.for.what.she was.from.day 1



Totally.


----------



## PewPew

Sharont2305 said:


> Diana once said about the future of the boys "I don't worry about William, he'll be fine. It's Harry I worry about"
> Seems like mum was right.



She famously said & still gets quoted saying “Harry is an airhead,” which is a terrible thing for him to have grown up hearing in the press, even if he isn’t a scholar. Diana probably said it as a joke, but it’s terrible for that to have gotten out, given he was only 12 when she died. It’s easy for children to internalize that kind of comment


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Daily Mail article over Archie being left in Canada and Harry possibly being headed there as well:

"Further tension in the lead-up to the event threatened to spill over after Meghan insisted she be allowed to choose a tiara once worn by Diana. This time it was the Queen who said no and instead allowed Meghan to wear the diamond lozenge bandeau made for Queen Mary in 1932."

Now it's the first time I hear this version of the story, but suddenly it makes so much more sense. I never got the fuss over some random emerald tiara, but it makes totally sense Meghan would want to enhance herself with wearing one of Diana's tiaras and that the Queen wouldn't have it.


----------



## mdcx

I think a lot will come out now about MM that the press may have previously held back. The gloves are off, so to speak.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the Daily Mail article over Archie being left in Canada and Harry possibly being headed there as well:
> 
> "Further tension in the lead-up to the event threatened to spill over after Meghan insisted she be allowed to choose a tiara once worn by Diana. This time it was the Queen who said no and instead allowed Meghan to wear the diamond lozenge bandeau made for Queen Mary in 1932."
> 
> Now it's the first time I hear this version of the story, but suddenly it makes so much more sense. I never got the fuss over some random emerald tiara, but it makes totally sense Meghan would want to enhance herself with wearing one of Diana's tiaras and that the Queen wouldn't have it.


Now, That really does make sense.


----------



## myown

I really wonder how things turned out a year from now


----------



## doni

myown said:


> I really wonder if this is true.
> I mean, I understand you don't want the stress and jetlag for the baby, but how can she be so sure to be back soon. and how can you leave your baby on a different continent that is so far away?


Babys deal with jet lag better that’s older kids, plus they have decided they want to live between two continents so they cannot be overly worried about things like jet lag...

Unless they mean the family will live in Canada/US and the two will travel to the UK occasionally for appearances to justify all the money they are getting from the Prince of Wales.

What I find sad is that they have been 1 month a half away but still the cousins will not be meeting, have some sort of celebration, presents... The brothers always appeared to be extremely close and they were also very close to their cousins so I’m sure they would have looked forward to having their kids grow up together... Gossip aside, just this, their kids not meeting at all over the extended holiday period, shows that their relationship must be at a very low point indeed...


----------



## doni

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the vacation was for lessons on becoming “financially independent”
> 
> View attachment 4635723


I think this is the core of the question. They believe giving up on that 5% of their funding gives them the right not to be accountable on stuff like this...
I don’t think the US media gets any of this. They judge the whole situation as if they were any celebrity couple.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> Jessica Mulroney, Katharine McPhee, Sarah Rafferty - there's something so venal and grasping about all Meghan's supposed BFFs. Social climbers the lot.


I can’t imagine leaving my precious baby with anyone of those people.


----------



## Chagall

LittleStar88 said:


> Jeez. Maybe her family (dad and his side) have been right all along and we were all played by her. Biggest hustle ever.


I think you are right. Everyone who knew Megan growing up said her Dad did everything for her. He wouldn’t suddenly change. I think he was manipulated into behaving in a way that made him look bad., I have seen that happen to many people especially when dealing with a narcissist. They know your buttons to push and all anyone else sees is your reaction, they don’t know what prompted it.


----------



## Grande Latte

Why not change the thread title to "Mr. and Mrs. Markle"?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gracekelly said:


> She took the dog because she knew she wasn’t going back to England to live.


Really? That's some major pre-planning, I'm kind of shocked.


----------



## Roxanna

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine leaving my precious baby with anyone of those people.


Are those ppl are even capable of caring for baby? It would be probably some hired help,  strangers so to say...so how it goes with legacy of Diana's approach they were so much fond of?  It also raises  questions concerning security and wellbeing of baby. It all seems so unreal...


----------



## CAH

If they were worried about Charles slimming down the royal family I don't think they had anything to worry about.  Harry and Megan would not have been part of that.  If anything, they would have had to step up their appearances.  Maybe that's what she didn't want?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

At this point I am convinced these two are trolling us. They can't be so tone-deaf, can they?

ETA: I tried to insert a screenshot of them wishing Kate a happy birthday on Instagram, doesn't work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the Daily Mail article over Archie being left in Canada and Harry possibly being headed there as well:
> 
> "Further tension in the lead-up to the event threatened to spill over after Meghan insisted she be allowed to choose a tiara once worn by Diana. This time it was the Queen who said no and instead allowed Meghan to wear the diamond lozenge bandeau made for Queen Mary in 1932."
> 
> Now it's the first time I hear this version of the story, but suddenly it makes so much more sense. I never got the fuss over some random emerald tiara, but it makes totally sense Meghan would want to enhance herself with wearing one of Diana's tiaras and that the Queen wouldn't have it.


I mean that is how they are playing it up - acting as if MM is like Diana and hounded by the media and it could end in tragedy like it did for her. They are really laying it on thick when MM isn’t anywhere close to being Diana.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

This was Doria, Wednesday and Thursday in Los Angeles. She's obviously not the one taking care of Archie, so it must be Jessica Mulroney, as reported.


----------



## Meh-gan

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine leaving my precious baby with anyone of those people.


I mean the stable of nannies who care for him anyway are there and that’s who he is used to probably. She does like to leave his care up to others for random nonsense a lot.


----------



## rose60610

I just read where Oprah and others encouraged them to break off from The Firm and build up their "own brand".  How nice, now the Royal Family is about pimping it to make your own brand. It was estimated they could make 500 million from their "Sussex Royal" merch.  I wouldn't buy a dog dish from them.


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> I have a friend in Cali who knows her a bit. Same here.....been waiting for her to act out.


Surely going to  Serena’s match at US Open was also acting out, now that I think of it
I am tired just thinking of the work involved to get her there, with Archie, Nanny - to cover during yoga class, and security personnel and prolly 89 pieces of luggage


----------



## mia55

The man child is up for the biggest lesson of his life. Probably it'll teach him how to judge people. I feel bad for the queen


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jayne1 said:


> I agree.
> 
> By the way, it was reported (Tina Brown, I think) that Diana had her hair styled, or blown out, twice a day.  Once after her morning gym sessions and again for an evening out. Her hair always did look polished, *although really large sometimes.*



It WAS the 80's, after all.


----------



## Compass Rose

You know, the bottom line is that he is just a man....a 35 year-old man who just left  living in his mommy's basement and will have to look for work.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> If they think that will make the gossip media leave them alone they are in for a rude awakening.



I don't believe for a minute they want the media to leave them alone.


----------



## Mrs.Z

#Megxit


----------



## justwatchin

I can see it now, Sussex Royal, merchandise on Oprah’s Favorite Things for 2020


----------



## papertiger

PewPew said:


> She famously said & still gets quoted saying “Harry is an airhead,” which is a terrible thing for him to have grown up hearing in the press, even if he isn’t a scholar. Diana probably said it as a joke, but it’s terrible for that to have gotten out, given he was only 12 when she died. It’s easy for children to internalize that kind of comment



In context of the quote (she said it to a royal chef and jokingly) she was remarking that William was 'deep, like his father' and Harry was like her an 'airhead'.

This could be why people read into it (and other quotes) she worried more about Harry's future, but for that moment she was in the kitchen being jokey with staff and self-depreciating. I'm sure she wouldn't have thought that 30ish years later it would be key quote. Personally, I don't see William as deep so I'd take airhead with a pinch of salt too...but maybe not.

Harry's absolutely fine in the right setting. Down to earth and friendly, but he's obviously led a shelterd life and seems constantly to need assurance his a 'good bloke'. He's young for his age and idealistic, he sees only good v evil and demonises everyone who doesn't agree with him or let's him do what he wants.

Anyone who has a reasonably normal job knows there are always procedures and responsibilities for every role and often compromises. That he's been a Captain in the army (my uncle was a Captain in the same army) makes me think (as he's said himself previously) he was too cocooned there as well.

To use the word "collaborate" as in the future he's willing to collaborate with the Queen shows he's delusional. That's something a 12 y o tourist might say. QE II is the Head of the Constitution and he is still duty bound as an officer to the British Army by virtue of swearing an oath to that effect:

The Oath starts:
'I (name), *swear* by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty *Queen* Elizabeth II, her *heirs and successors *and that I will as in* duty bound *honestly and faithfully defend Her Majesty, her heirs and successors in person, crown and dignity against all enemies and will observe... '

To say 'collaborate' with the Queen is tandermount to saying he's her equal. If I said it, I'd be off to the Tower. Yes it's very 'now' to use X everywhere but seriously - screw loose to use on an official doc. Maybe Diana was right, maybe he _is _an airhead. His granny is his granny but he seems to have no idea what granny's 'job' is and what it stands for. Hilarious to think we had to learn this stuff at school. Obviously Harry was daydreaming and staring out the window at every history lesson.

I think it will be good for his wellbeing if he was truly independent. Let him go and find himself. Unfortunately that's not what he wants and not what he'll get. He'll be allowed to live on the estate at Windsor (the couple were disappointed they weren't allowed to live in the Castle BtW) and his father will take care of an allowance and they'll keep their titles (yes, the Queen _can_ take them away). He'll be another clueless Bertie Wooster forever (some could say like his stupid uncle, who's also been allowed to do whatever he wants all his life).

Edited because of personal appalling grammar and lousy autocorrect on phone!


----------



## Allisonfaye

I am betting they will go all in on the 'foundation' angle. I once called a tax accountant to see if I could reduce my taxes and he pretty much told me the only way was to start a foundation. You put your income intoit and pay no taxes on the money and basically direct where the money goes. There are some guidelines but I get the feeling some people (politicians as an example) live pretty high on the hog on the tax free money. 

They will need people to put $$ into the foundation and they will need some pretty big donors. Not sure what they will give in exchange. They can't sell access to the Queen or anything. 

I saw one pundit last night and he said that Hollywood celebrities are used to and enjoy all the focus being on them. But members of the BRF, when doing their charity events, aren't able to have it be about them. The focus is the sick kids in the hospital, for example. And no doubt MM doesn't like not getting the limelight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> To say 'collaborate' with the Queen is tandermount to saying he's her equal. If I said it, I'd be off to the Tower. Yes it's 'now' to use X everywhere but seriously - screw loose to use on an official doc.



The audacity is kind of fascinating. In  a trainwreck way.



> He'll be allowed to live on the estate at Windsor (the couple were disappointed they weren't allowed to live at the Castle BtW) and his father will take care of an allowance and they'll keep their titles (yes, the Queen can take them away).



German media is reporting Charles threatened to take away said allowance and refuses to warrant anything until details are worked out. 

I personally feel this family has been extremely indulgent - indulgent with Harry and his antics and even more induldent with entitled Meghan who couldn't be bothered to even try to fit in. Maybe time for a reality check.


----------



## joyeaux

So The Telegraph is behind a paywall, but because it was one of the outlets considered “ok” to the Sussexes and because I apparently love other people’s drama I decided to sign up for a trial so you don’t have to a 

There’s two really good articles— one in defense and one a criticism— I thought I’d post. If this gets annoying, y’all let me know because I definitely don’t want to spam a thread!

Okay, first for the sympathetic one, from here. Although I think this article ignores the fact that the stunt they just pulled is awful on so many levels (I.e., “Ok, the delivery may not have been perfect” is the most glossy gloss-over I’ve ever read), I still appreciate the viewpoint and the explanations for some of these points.



> *Bryony Gordon reveals why, after visiting the Sussexes late last year, this week's announcement that the young royals are stepping back was far from a shock *
> _
> Frogmore Cottage is not quite the lavish pit of taxpayers money that the tabloids would have you believe. It’s nice, of course, a great deal more than most British people could ever imagine living in, but it is by no means extravagant or palatial.
> 
> It is the kind of home you see a thousand times over in the pages of Country Life or on estate agent marketing material. There is a sofa by the popular high street furniture store, Loaf.
> 
> A lovely, but not substantial kitchen. A downstairs loo with a candle in it. Dogs running around merrily. It’s the kind of modern home you might see many times over scrolling through Instagram.
> 
> But when I visited towards the end of last year, there was a sense in some parts of the media that  the duke and duchess of Sussex were sitting in sumptuous robes, throwing tax payers money into an expensive wood burning stove, setting fire to the world they claimed to care so much about in the process. (For the record: there were no wood burning stoves or robes; they were dressed in the casual weekend get up of jeans, sweat pants, and jumpers, and kindly offered tea).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frogmore Cottage, Windsor Great Park the home which was gifted to Harry and Meghan by Her Majesty the Queen Credit: n/a/Flickr
> Any perspective regarding the couple had long disappeared into a strange vacuum of hysteria that seemed to have appeared as a way to distract ourselves from the endless tedium of Brexit.
> 
> It didn't matter that the Crown had needed to renovate the decaying Frogmoreanyway, or that Harry and Meghan had paid for all the fixtures and fittings themselves - the cottage, and its £2.4 million building costs, had become one of many quick and easy ways for some to go to town on the couple.
> 
> They had just returned from South Africa, where they had filmed their interviews with Tom Bradby. Prince Andrew was yet to do his own  infamous interview with Emily Maitlis, but the matter of his already known association with a convicted sex offender seemed to bother people less than the matter of the Sussexes associations with ‘woke’ celebrities and campaigners.
> 
> The couple seemed subdued and sad. They lacked the energy or sparkle I had seen in them previously. All the hope that Prince Harry had expressed when we spoke about his mental health in 2017 appeared to have evaporated. Then he had been lauded for his openness and honesty; fast forward to October 2019 and that same openness and honesty was now being used against him.
> 
> Though he never said as much, it felt to me that the Prince was living out the trauma he had experienced as a 12 year old - walking behind his mother’s coffin on global television - again and again and again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles, Earl Spencer, Prince Harry and Prince William walking slowly behind the funeral cortege of Diana, the Princess of Wales Credit: Adam Butler/PA/Wire
> In our interview in 2017 he had spoken candidly of the panic attacks that he had long experienced whenever he appeared at a public engagement. But if he thought then that he had beaten this mental torture, he now seemed to be realising that he had spoken too soon.
> 
> It is hard to imagine being in his situation, but not at all difficult to see how he might now want to protect his immediate family from the same fate; how all the money and privilege in the world will never make up for the fact your mother died pursued by paparazzi.
> 
> Some have described Harry as “petulant”; the words I would use are passionate and fiercely protective. He is a kind person, a soft and warm man, and it is hard to square the open and honest person I have met with the portrait of the sullen prince that is so often painted in the press.
> 
> “Why don’t you just jack it all in?” I said to Meghan, after she had told me about the unexpected issues she had experienced in her new position: the loneliness; the sudden muting of her voice; the giving up of everything she knew for love, only to be, as she saw it, hounded and pilloried.
> 
> These were, of course, exactly the things that some cynics had said would happen when she married into the firm, but in her defence there was also an optimism that times had changed, that it was no longer 1981 and  the establishment was now ready to be dragged into the 21st Century.
> 
> I wasn't expecting an answer to my question about jacking it all in; it was more of a statement of what I would do if put in a similar position. But the look on her face suggested that she had thought about it too. So it didn’t surprise me when the Duke and Duchess made their announcement late on Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> Putting the timing of their announcement and the way in which they delivered it to other members of the royal family to one side, their intention to ‘step back’ can only be positive, a move that will enable a young family to live their lives properly, while still flying the flag for Britain.
> 
> Okay, the delivery may not have been perfect, but constitutionally the decision barely makes any difference to the firm at all, given that Prince Harry is currently sixth in line to the throne. What’s more, it is entirely in keeping with his father’s intentions to have a slimmed down version of the monarchy that is more Swedish in style.
> 
> While some have chosen to interpret the news as the couple wanting to enjoy a lavish lifestyle without any of the scrutiny, a more accurate reading of the situation is that they want to be able to express their views and pursue their campaigning passions without coming under constant fire for doing so.
> 
> Currently, their positions prohibit them from letting even the most anodyne of their opinions known, something that Prince Harry may be used to but that his wife, who has been speaking out about injustice since she was a child, has struggled to adapt to. Like it or not, the Duchess has a clear, passionate and articulate voice - and crucially, one that empowers people who typically find it hard to be heard.
> 
> This ‘wokeness’ may seem annoyingly American to British traditionalists, but in the grand scheme of things it is hardly the worst quality for a royal to have - indeed, put next to the behaviour of Harry’s uncle, it is positively refreshing. It is puzzling, then, to hear Nicholas Witchell state that he has never known Buckingham Palace to have been so “disappointed” with other members of the royal family. Given recent events with Prince Andrew - and not so recent ones at that - how can this be true?
> 
> Shortly after my visit to Frogmore, I went with Meghan to a social enterprise in north London to meet women who had been the victim of trafficking and domestic violence, women who had been able to rebuild their lives through baking. Here, talking to these women, Meghan came alive.
> 
> She opened them up and allowed them to talk freely about deeply disturbing experiences that had long been a source of shame for them. It was moving and powerful to watch, and it seemed to me to be exactly the kind of thing a modern royal should be doing. It is, I imagine, exactly the kind of thing she will continue to do.
> 
> Will that much change in the long run, other than the public funding piece? The world has always known Harry to be a wildcard.
> 
> Deviating from the norm has long been his style; to many, it is all part of his appeal. Is this next chapter in his story really such a shock, then? I don’t think so. Indeed, in many ways, this is classic Harry.
> 
> When you really think about it, it is vintage Harry. Indeed, stepping back from the royal family so he can forge his own path might just be the most predictable thing he has done in years._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## joyeaux

Okay now for the critical article from here:



> *How the royals gave Harry and Meghan everything they wanted - but they still wanted more*
> 
> Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor
> It was the outburst that first put Prince Harry at odds with his grandmother over the way he and his wife intended to run their royal lives.
> 
> Telling one of the Queen’s most senior aides: “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets”, in the run up to their Windsor wedding in May 2018, the ill-tempered comment is understood to have prompted a rare rebuke from the 93-year-old monarch.
> 
> Yet ever since that glittering ceremony at St George’s Chapel, Windsor, the royals have been uncharacteristically accommodating of the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ demands - which makes their decision to step down as senior royalswithout consultation all the more baffling.
> 
> It started before the couple had even got married when the Queen broke with royal tradition to invite American divorcee Meghan to spend Christmas at Sandringham in 2017, even though she was only engaged to Harry at the time.
> 
> Recognising that the former Suits star had not just moved to the UK but also given up her blossoming acting career to marry into the Firm, the royals bent over backwards to make Meghan feel as welcome as possible - as did the British public.
> 
> The Cambridges even allowed the lovestruck pair to stay at Anmer Hall, their private bolthole on the royal estate in Norfolk and the ‘Fab Four’ were famously captured by amateur photographer Karen Anvil walking arm in arm to St Mary Magdalene Church on Christmas morning.
> 
> When their big day arrived, Harry and Meghan got the multicultural service they craved, the carriage procession and the star-studded reception, away from the prying eyes of the world’s media.
> 
> When cracks started appearing in their relationship with the Cambridges amid rumours of a rift between the royal brothers - and a tearful incident between the sisters in law at a bridesmaids dress fitting for Princess Charlotte - efforts were made behind the scenes to patch things up.
> 
> The Duchesses put on a united front in the Royal Box at Wimbledon a couple of months later, and the Sussexes agreed to spend a second Christmas at Sandringham - albeit staying at the ‘big’ house rather than Anmer Hall.
> 
> Soon after it was announced that the royal household shared by the brothers at Kensington Palace was to split, a move engendered by Harry and Meghan amid fears they were being overshadowed by the Cambridges and their growing brood.
> 
> Moves to renovate a larger apartment for the couple at the royal residence synonymous with Diana, the late Princess of Wales, were abandoned and £2.4 million of taxpayers' cash was instead ploughed into the refurbishment of Grade II listed Frogmore Cottage in Windsor.
> 
> Although the Queen and Prince Charles denied the couple the chance to set up their own ‘court’ in Windsor, preferring instead for them to be kept under the auspices of Buckingham Palace, their wish to set up their own charitable foundation was granted - as well as their own Sussex Royal Instagram page and social media platform.
> 
> And when their son Archie was born in May 2019, the Queen agreed that the newborn should not have a royal title but inherit the family surname Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> They were allowed to keep the location of the birth secret (until it was later revealed on the royal baby’s birth certificate) as well as breaking with royal protocol by also keeping the identity of his godparents under wraps.
> 
> And when it came to their first royal tour as a family - following a hugely successful visit to Australia in 2018 - the Sussexes were permitted to take Archie to Harry’s beloved Africa last autumn.
> 
> Almost everything that Meghan (and Harry) wanted, they got.  And yet it still didn’t seem to be enough. Giving an interview to ITV’s Tom Bradby during the African tour, Meghan hinted at a lack of support from her royal relatives, tearfully declaring: “Not many people have asked if I’m ok.”
> 
> Harry later issued a statement attacking the press for “bullying” Meghan - without the prior knowledge of the Queen or her successors in a growing sign of what was to come.
> 
> According to one former aide: “They always wanted autonomy and saw it as a huge disadvantage to be in with all the others at Buckingham Palace. They think the world is against them. Harry has always complained about being sidelined by William”.
> 
> But in wanting the cake and eat it scenario of being “financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen,” the couple now appear to have issued a demand too far.
> 
> With both Buckingham Palace and Clarence House pushing back on the idea of them continuing to hold onto their royal titles and receive money from the Duchy of Cornwall while ‘stepping back’ as senior royals, the couple has never looked more isolated.
> 
> And not just from their nearest and dearest but their own advisers. Their PR chief Sara Latham now appears to be playing second fiddle to US based master of the dart arts Ken Sunshine, David Beckham’s former publicist Izzy May and talent agent Nick Collins - all of whom now appear a part of the Sussexes’ inner circle amid claims royal aides have been “frozen out”.
> 
> “The couple have been ignoring the advice of their palace staff,” revealed an insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family
> 
> ✔@RoyalFamily
> https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily/status/1215216314840748033
> 
> Wishing The Duchess of Cambridge a very Happy Birthday!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Find out more about The Duchess and her work here: https://******/2s4PXlh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30K
> 4:18 AM - Jan 9, 2020
> Twitter Ads info and privacy
> 
> 3,384 people are talking about this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A power vacuum following the sudden departure of the Queen’s former private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt in 2017 has not helped matters. Some have suggested that Harry and Meghan have capitalised on the absence of the highly respected former Scots Guard, reportedly forced out by Prince Charles and the Duke of York, who “ran a very tight ship”. With the Queen turning 94 in April and the Duke of Edinburgh, 98, now retired from public life and recently in ill health, the “Sussex situation” appears to have lacked proper management.
> 
> The complex relationship between Harry, William and Charles - which was tested heavily during the commemorations to mark the 20th anniversary of Diana’s death in 2017 - has made it difficult for both father and brother to assert their authority, with William’s attempts only serving to further drive a wedge. (The heir and second in line to the throne are only mentioned twice on the Sussexes's revamped website).
> 
> As Bradby, who knows both couples well, mused in the aftermath of Wednesday’s shock statement: “With families, we all know stuff happens, things are said.
> 
> “And also a family dispute within a family firm - you are working in a big family firm, everyone has their wishes and desires and ambitions and they have to be balanced up - and it’s very hard.”
> 
> Or as that understated and rather curt Buckingham Palace response put it: “These are complicated issues”.
> 
> The simple truth is, in giving them what they wanted, the royals only succeeded in leaving Harry and Meghan wanting more.


----------



## daisychainz

I am still reeling over the fact Meghan flew in for a day and a half to quit a job, drop a bombshell on the family (on Kate's birthday no less!) and then leave Harry to deal with all the fallout. I don't think she's that in love with Harry, she's willing to leave him behind and not sort it out together. I guess she's exiled to Canada now, or maybe the US? I can't imagine the British people and press would welcome her back again, or will they. I feel so confused what this woman is trying to achieve.  She's not even British, why set out to destroy a family and system you don't even know or understand.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine leaving my precious baby with anyone of those people.



I can't even bear to leave my dog with anyone (friend, family, or otherwise), let alone my child. Especially at such a young age.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> I am betting they will go all in on the 'foundation' angle. I once called a tax accountant to see if I could reduce my taxes and he pretty much told me the only way was to start a foundation. You put your income intoit and pay no taxes on the money and basically direct where the money goes. There are some guidelines but I get the feeling some people (politicians as an example) live pretty high on the hog on the tax free money.
> 
> They will need people to put $$ into the foundation and they will need some pretty big donors. Not sure what they will give in exchange. They can't sell access to the Queen or anything.
> 
> I saw one pundit last night and he said that Hollywood celebrities are used to and enjoy all the focus being on them. But members of the BRF, when doing their charity events, aren't able to have it be about them. The focus is the sick kids in the hospital, for example. And no doubt MM doesn't like not getting the limelight.


but don't the monies in a charitable (tax free) foundation have to go to charity?  not in the pocket of the foundation's owner/leader?  I guess there are ways around it but I don't think they would be ethical


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> I am still reeling over the fact Meghan flew in for a day and a half to quit a job, drop a bombshell on the family (on Kate's birthday no less!) and then leave Harry to deal with all the fallout. I don't think she's that in love with Harry, she's willing to leave him behind and not sort it out together. I guess she's exiled to Canada now, or maybe the US? I can't imagine the British people and press would welcome her back again, or will they. I feel so confused what this woman is trying to achieve.  She's not even British, why set out to destroy a family and system you don't even know or understand.


IDK if they intentionaly did this on Kates birthday.  Harry used to be very friendly to Kate I think.  I suppose it's possible Meghan has turned him against her.  But in any case, I think Kate is strong enough to take it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> but don't the monies in a charitable (tax free) foundation have to go to charity?  not in the pocket of the foundation's owner/leader?  I guess there are ways around it but I don't think they would be ethical



No, they are definitely not ethical (which is why I didn't do it) but I doubt they come under much IRS scrutiny. Too many connected people with a vested interest in the outcomes.


----------



## papertiger

joyeaux said:


> So The Telegraph is behind a paywall, but because it was one of the outlets considered “ok” to the Sussexes and because I apparently love other people’s drama I decided to sign up for a trial so you don’t have to a
> 
> There’s two really good articles— one in defense and one a criticism— I thought I’d post. If this gets annoying, y’all let me know because I definitely don’t want to spam a thread!
> 
> Okay, first for the sympathetic one, from here. Although I think this article ignores the fact that the stunt they just pulled is awful on so many levels (I.e., “Ok, the delivery may not have been perfect” is the most glossy gloss-over I’ve ever read), I still appreciate the viewpoint and the explanations for some of these points.



Thanks so much for signing up on our behalf 

1. If Fogmore's not all that, rent somewhere else. Most people would be grateful for anywhere they didn't have to fork out for.

2. That Megan uses thewhole isolation, for love, gave up stuff is right out of Diana's lexicon. Dismissed.

I liked them more before I read it (but I'm glad I did). I know every journalist has to have a different angle but portraying them once again as victims and misunderstood is not helping them right now.


----------



## ChanelCelineLaurentLover

CeeJay said:


> *Un-freaking believable* .. what a sh##ty thing to do, leave Prince Harry to be left holding the bag!  Then again, am I truly surprised .. nope.  What I heard about her out here is just ringing more true to the day ..


Agreed...I’ve tried to think that maybe the media has gotten it all wrong and maybe she’s this innocent victim of the press but it seems she knew she didn’t want that life but wanted the image and money that comes with it....then convinced him to move back to where she is comfortable. I just don’t think this was a good match. It seems to be tearing him apart from his family and that’s terrible. He needed to marry someone who could handle things better. It’s not for everyone, I for sure would never ever want to be famous because I couldn’t handle negative criticism from the media and now, social media.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> IDK if they intentionaly did this on Kates birthday.  Harry used to be very friendly to Kate I think.  I suppose it's possible Meghan has turned him against her.  But in any case, I think Kate is strong enough to take it.



They may not have intentionally set out to do this on Kate's birthday, but they knew it was her birthday and just couldn't wait one more day. Totally rude, selfish, and inconsiderate.


----------



## Lounorada

cafecreme15 said:


> So much for minimizing their carbon footprint! Not even enough time to get over the jet lag.


This! They need to start making notes on the s**t they preach.


Flatsy said:


> And yet the Sussexes still want their own personal mansion so they can feel at home during their brief and probably infrequent trips to the UK.


The Queen needs to start charging a very high rent on that place, they won't be long finding somewhere else to stay for free.


joyeaux said:


> I listened to a podcast by the Evening Standard today and they discuss a timeline I hadn’t heard explained so fully before. They now have an article published with the same info, so I’ll quote rather than try to paraphrase (this is from article here).
> 
> _It is understood that:
> _
> 
> _Harry originally contacted Prince Charles about spending more time in Canada and America just before Christmas, but was told he needed to come up with a thought-out plan._
> _Harry sent a draft proposal about his future role to his father early in the New Year but was again informed that more time was needed to think through the complex implications, particularly over funding._
> _Harry asked for a summit with the Queen at Sandringham as soon as he, Meghan and their son Archie, arrived back from their long Christmas break in Canada at the weekend._
> _He was told that while the Queen was happy to meet him, she would not discuss his wishlist before he had discussed it in detail with his father._
> _The planned meeting was blocked by courtiers, but the Queen made it clear to Harry that he should not go public about his future plans at this time._
> 
> (My hot take starts here): I guess this set hothead Harry, Meghan, and whoever their yes-people are off, because they basically gave the Queen the finger and did it anyway. Family, history, birthdays of sisters in law, auto-billpay setups be damned.
> 
> One other thing to note, they said that H and M have been discussing this and getting wise counsel on navigating Royal life PR from some of their friends— George and Amal, Gayle, for example. I’ll just leave that there.
> 
> So basically, The Crown was blindsided not by the fact that they are wanting to redefine their role; they were aware this was the direction in which H and M wanted to go. The blindsiding was that _they went public with an announcement when they did, _and without having ironed out any of the details with anyone else. I suppose any questions can be directed to the website FAQ section though.
> 
> Going back to what I said in a post earlier, it’s just such an audacious F You to everyone who has ever tried to advise them (and to all the people this leaves in the dust, like their many patronages that are probably freaking out about where they now stand). But it’s an even bigger finger to the elderly grandmother who _really did_ make efforts to show the world that Meghan was a welcome addition to the family. Ya know the lady that puts the “royal” in their “Sussex Royal” and has been the ruling monarch since 1952 yet never once complained to a camera or shown anything other than grace and diligence to her country? It’s just so selfish and mean-spirited IMO. She’s your grandmother, she’s a human, she has given up a lot to afford you the life you live now. Never thought I’d say this but... You suck Harry.


Another great post! Especially agree with your last paragraph.


Flatsy said:


> I think Meghan left Archie in Canada to put extra pressure on Harry to get the job done.  She didn't want Harry listening to his family telling him to take his time and think things through.  She wanted him to hit the detonator.
> 
> *And I think Meghan shared the tidbit about Archie staying in Canada with her friends at People Magazine to make people think she was scared of the big, bad royal family trying to take her baby.  Which would never happen in a million years*.


Agree with the bolded. As crazy as it sounds to us normal people, it's what I expect people as highly egotistical and delusional as these two to believe.


V0N1B2 said:


> Oh I’m sorry dolls, I was being facetious. A smartypants, sarcastic, sh!t disturber. I've seen NO tweets of support from Meghan’s besties.
> Of course not including She's So Plastic Jessica Mulroney - aka: Archies babysitter.
> Next time I promise to use the sarcasm font.


 I'm not on Twitter so I didn't have a clue that you were being sarcastic


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I can't even bear to leave my dog with anyone (friend, family, or otherwise), let alone my child. Especially at such a young age.



Totally. I haven't been on vacation for years because I don't want to leave my sick cat with anyone just for fun. The one time I left him was when I had a medical emergency and was hospital bound for 10 days.


----------



## joyeaux

papertiger said:


> Thanks so much for signing up on our behalf
> 
> 1. If Fogmore's not all that, rent somewhere else. Most people would be grateful for anywhere they didn't have to fork out for.
> 
> 2. That Megan uses thewhole isolation, for love, gave up stuff is right out of Diana's lexicon. Dismissed.
> 
> I liked them more before I read it (but I'm glad I did). I know every journalist has to have a different angle but portraying them once again as victims and misunderstood is not helping them right now.



You’re welcome!! 

Okay one more Telegraph article because it focuses on what I personally think is the worst part of this whole debacle, and that’s how QEII had been treated... (sorry the photos don’t show up, I’m copy/pasting from my iPad)



> *Harry and Meghan’s bombshell announcement is a discourtesy to the Queen – and smacks of millennial self-absorption*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen is thought to have given the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a clear instruction to delay publishing their statement Credit:  Matt Dunham/AP
> Pity the poor Queen. Still reeling from Prince Andrew’s kamikaze interview about his friendship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and with her husband of 72 years in extremely fragile health, Her Majesty admitted in her Christmas message that the year had been “quite bumpy”.
> 
> Barely a fortnight later, her grandson and his wife managed to turn quite bumpy into white-knuckle turbulence with the announcement on their Sussex Royal Instagram page that they were stepping back as senior Royals.
> 
> It was claimed the Duke had ignored a personal request from the Queen not to go public with his plans until he had properly consulted with his father. The Queen is said to have made it clear to the Duke that he should not reveal their intentions with so many questions yet to be answered – and yet the Sussex’s did it anyway.
> 
> Not only was this a huge discourtesy to the monarch from whom they derive their titles and public profile, it was hurtful, cruel even, to deal such a blow to a 93-year-old lady who has only recently had to ask her errant second son to relinquish his Royal duties.
> 
> Faith in the Firm, as the Windsors call the family business, has already been shaken. The last thing the Queen needed, at the start of a new year’s trading, was the defection of two key personnel who seem to be threatening to set up a tacky rival company in north America: Royals R US.
> 
> If the Sussexes had bothered to show up at Sandringham for Christmas with the rest of the family, witnessing the pressures that the stoical, snowy monarch was under might have inclined them to think again. But Harry, Meghan and eight-month-old Archie were too busy on their six-week “holiday” in Canada, meditating on their own grievances. Funny, isn’t it, how global humanitarians can find it so hard to spot problems nearer to home?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are not long back from a six-week break in Canada, where they "meditated on their own grievances" Credit:  Jeremy Selwyn/Evening Standard/PA
> To add insult to injury, the pair went on to preach that they would start “to carve out a progressive new role within this institution”. What does that imply about William and Kate, to whom Harry was once so close? Do the the ultra-woke Sussexes think the Cambridges are not “progressive” as they go about their boring old duty of supporting the Queen and keeping their political opinions to themselves?
> 
> Not for the first time, we can thank our lucky stars that it is William who is the elder brother and future King, and steady Catherine who will be our Queen, not Harry the petulant boy and Duchess “I don’t like this new part, let’s tear it up and rewrite it” Meghan.
> 
> The idea that the Sussexes can cast off their main responsibilities yet retain a place within “this institution” is downright baffling. Royalty is like virginity; you can’t be a bit Royal.
> 
> When Edward VIII abdicated the throne for Wallis Simpson, he made the error of assuming that he could continue to play a significant role as the new monarch’s brother. The Windsors had other ideas. Remember that Princess Elizabeth spent her formative years with a seething mother who could never forgive her brother-in-law’s betrayal. Today, the Queen will be saddened by the behaviour of the grandson with whom, until his wedding in 2018, she enjoyed an immensely fond and teasing relationship.
> 
> Her Majesty’s displeasure was captured in a notably terse statement from Buckingham Palace. “Discussions with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are at an early stage. We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through.”
> 
> Translated from Monarchese, that reads: “Gordon Bennett, they completely blindsided us with this one. Well, if Harry and Meghan think they can have their cake and eat it, they’re in for a rude shock. I am Elizabeth the Second and I still call the shots round here.”
> 
> As one exasperated Palace aide is reported to have said: “People had bent over backwards for them. They were given the wedding they wanted, the house they wanted, the office they wanted, the staff they wanted and had the backing of the family. What more did they want?”
> 
> What indeed. After that heavenly wedding on a glittering May day just 20 months ago, the Queen made the newlyweds Youth Ambassadors to her beloved Commonwealth. It was a brilliant appointment for Meghan and Harry and displayed great thoughtfulness, affection and respect on the monarch’s part. Shame they couldn’t show the same in return.
> 
> I’m afraid their bombshell announcement smacks of millennial self-absorption, of values that prize identity, the expression of emotion and personal happiness above all else. The exact opposite, in fact, of the Queen’s wartime generation which believed that you didn’t throw in the towel, you stuck at things through good and bad.
> 
> Last October, when a tearful Duchess told Tom Bradby in an interview from South Africa that not many people had asked her how she was coping, you saw just how badly this actress had been miscast. Meghan is not a bad person. But it was always going to be a stretch to parachute an intelligent, highly driven American professional woman in her late-thirties with passionate, campaigning views into a role which, above all else, demands heroic levels of self-effacement.
> 
> Meghan Markle never wanted to be a Royal, she wanted to be Michelle *****. The mistake was to think she could bend a centuries-old institution to that end. During their engagement interview, Meghan talked about cracking on with various causes, putting “boots on the ground” while a mildly shellshocked Harry gazed on in awe.
> 
> “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets,” a panicky Prince said on the eve of their wedding when the Queen refused to lend a certain tiara. When he refused to release any information or pictures of baby Archie’s christening, we barely recognised this new Harry, the silly control-freak. Had he married a different sort of girl, would Harry be stepping away from the Royal family now? I seriously doubt it.
> 
> Still haunted by the death of Princess Diana, Harry was badly triggered when Meghan became a mother. It unleashed in him such a furious protectiveness that he lashed out at the press, lost his sense of humour and he has now decided it’s right to remove his young family from the Royal spotlight. I’m afraid Harry will find that there is no escaping the wattage of that kind of fame. Ironically, staying within the Palace fold, however constraining, offered the best hope of safety.
> 
> You know, I am sure there would have been considerable sympathy if Harry and Meghan had gone to Her Majesty and declared a desire to live more privately abroad, with a scaled-down profile, forsaking family money and privileges. The Palace could have helped draw up a plan. Instead, they have acted with a breathtaking self-centredness, announcing their decision to the public first and clearly hoping to bounce the monarch into accepting their “progressive” new role, which keeps the perks of Royalty while shirking its duties.
> 
> The Queen doesn’t deserve that. She really does not. Her grandson and his wife may like to style themselves as humanitarians, but it’s hard to detect much humanity in their treatment of a vulnerable nonagenarian who may soon be a widow. With their new freedom, I suppose the Duke and Duchess of Sussex could always audition to play the parts of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in Season 8 of The Crown.
> 
> Some of us may feel they have caused quite enough of a bloody drama already.
> 
> 
> *'They can pay back taxpayers for Frogmore Cottage'- Telegraph readers on Harry and Meghan*


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Totally. I haven't been on vacation for years because I don't want to leave my sick cat with anyone just for fun. The one time I left him was when I had a medical emergency and was hospital bound for 10 days.



It must have been so stressful to be not feeling well AND worry about your little guy! We take our pup on vacation with us, which means very limited options (car travel, pet-friendly places to stay and things to do) but we wouldn't have it any other way. 

Meghan has just turned out to be such a con artist, sham, and huge embarrassment. I feel sorry for everyone who will suffer the repercussions of this - the BRF, the patronages to which she was assigned, and to Harry. I think Harry is going to eventually have to manage the worst of it. 

How I wish I could be a fly on the wall for all of the discussions that are happening with the Queen, Charles, Harry, etc. That's gotta be some major drama.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I have to say, the discussion here is so much better informed than what I see on Facebook.  Over there it’s all “if they want to give up all the money and live their life, so be it!!!!”  SMDH.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wouldn't call the Queen vulnerable, but otherwise I agree with everything the article says. The lack of respect and the entitlement are stunning.

Also, Meghan will never be a Michelle who is brilliant but still humble while Meghan who is not half as accomplished has shown over and over again how full of herself she is. If I have to hear one more time about how she changed the world at age 11 (conventiently forgetting this was a freaking school project) I'll kick something.

What I really don't get is how smart, accomplished women like Michelle, Hillary and Amal are fawning over her. Why?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. The moment I saw right through her was when Harry announced "We'll be the family she never had." It was there and then I knew how she had presented herself to him to bring out the knight in shining armor who'd fight armies for her. But then I grew up with a narcisstic mother who employs a lot of Meghan's methods.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I remember Fergie telling Oprah that she couldn’t take her daughters anywhere without the Queen’ permission.  I don’t know whether that applies to all grandchildren, or only those with titles.  I don’t know if it applies to great-grandchildren.

I wonder if they had permission to take Archie away for their holiday and were worried that they wouldn’t get permission to take him away again after the announcement.  I wonder if they were trying to force this change before the Queen dies.

My personal opinion is they should get the “tough love” approach and get nothing.  Harry’s own personal money is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to live.  The Firm can use legal action to prevent Sussex Royal usage, or at least make them spend money they won’t have fighting it.  Meg can go back to doing “The Tig” (roll eyes).  They may get appearance fees for a while, but without the Firm and its’ money supporting them, the allure will fade, Harry will run out of money, and Meg will move on.  They can then fight for Archie and bring Harry back into the fold.


----------



## kemilia

She, who cradled her pregnant belly for the entire 9 months, leaves the little guy on another continent with friends. Oh, we were played.

Wonder if the Palace wondered "where is Archie? Why did they leave him In Canada if their 6 week vacay is done? What's going on here?"


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> That’s my guess. They may have made archie stay in the country.



I think they left Archie behind so that she had an excuse to leave the UK ASAP......


----------



## Chagall

LittleStar88 said:


> I can't even bear to leave my dog with anyone (friend, family, or otherwise), let alone my child. Especially at such a young age.


I agree, it breaks my heart to leave my dog at all and I only do it when I absolutely have to. If it is possible to bring him with me he comes. Leaving a baby is beyond my comprehension.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. The moment I saw right through her was when Harry announced "We'll be the family she never had." It was there and then I knew how she had presented herself to him to bring out the knight in shining armor who'd fight armies for her. But then I grew up with a narcisstic mother who employs a lot of Meghan's methods.


Agree, I had thought her issues with the Markle family were due to it being dysfunctional, but, MM seems to have ditched her second family as well - pattern ?


----------



## duna

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine leaving my precious baby with anyone of those people.



They probably left him with the grandmother.....I hope...


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m kind of surprised that Meghan is letting Harry handle the negotiations.


----------



## bag-mania

Fascinating take from a financial point of view.

*‘Meghan Markle found out she would be a civil servant in a tiara.’ How Meghan and Harry’s great American adventure will make them rich beyond their wildest dreams*
The royal couple will likely follow the Obamas’ lucrative post-White House career model with philanthropy, book deals and Netflix

It’s been said that behind every great man is a great woman. In Prince Harry’s case, it’s three wealthy and media-savvy women.

Prince Harry owes his fortune and media savvy to three famous women: his mother, the late Princess Diana, who became a global superstar; his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, who helped bring the monarchy into the 20th and 21st Centuries, and his wife, Meghan Markle, an American-born self-made former actress who had a lifestyle brand before their life-changing meeting.

The couple announced Wednesday that they will “step back” from royal life, “work to become financially independent” and split their time between the U.K. and North America. Free from the ribbon-cutting duties of royal life, they’re on the brink of becoming a new kind of global-media power couple. Their Instagram FB, +0.33% account already has 10.2 million followers.

Prince Harry is friends with former U.S. president Barack *****, and will likely consider adopting the Obamas’ post-White House career model, some royal observers say. ***** and his wife, Michelle, reportedly signed an eight-figure deal with Netflix NFLX, -0.89%  to produce a slate of high-brow historical, biographical and social-justice programming with their company, Higher Ground Productions.

Netflix would give the Sussexes a platform of 158 million paid subscribers and certainly be a coup for the streaming service, which won critical praise for its series, “The Crown,” chronicling the life of Queen Elizabeth. (Netflix was not immediately available for comment.) Media mogul Oprah Winfrey is another powerful friend of the couple and attended their May 2018 wedding.

Ashley Pearson, an American-born writer based in London who has been a royal commentator for two decades, said their powerful political and media connections will serve them well. She sees them leveraging their circle of boldfaced names: “Their kind of lifestyle costs a fortune. However, one of the reasons they broke off from the royals is, in part, because they want to build their own brand.”

Pearson alleges that Markle is behind their strategy to strike out on their own. “She would rather be a celebrity than a royal,” Pearson said. “She had no idea how unglamorous it really is to be a royal and, when she found out she would be a civil servant in a tiara she was, like, ‘No way.’” The couple unveiled a sleek, new website, which is not so different from the tone of *****.org.

The royal couple have cut their teeth in broadcast media. In 2017, Prince Harry interviewed Barack ***** when he was the guest editor of BBC Radio 4’s Today program and, last year, ITV in the U.K. broadcast “Harry & Meghan: An African Journey,” which aired in the U.S. on ABC DIS, +0.21% Another route: The Obamas reportedly inked a book deal for more than $65 million.

While the couple will likely gain not a small degree of freedom from the drab ribbon-cutting, handshaking daily duties of royal life in the U.K., and better shield themselves from the jaundiced coverage the couple have received at the hands of the British tabloids, their bid for financial independence is somewhat more complicated and will not require them to take up full-time jobs.

For a start, they will keep their U.K. base, Frogmore Cottage, their historic Grade II-listed house in the grounds of Frogmore House in Windsor, which was renovated for 2.4 British pounds ($3 million), a cost shouldered by the U.K. taxpayer. They will also likely to have a paid security detail. They have built a strong royal/celebrity personal brand, breaking the traditional mold of the royal family.

Achieving financial independence is a status that Markle, 38, can more legitimately claim to have achieved on her own. She has a reported net worth of $6.5 million (5 million British pounds) from her work on the USA Network legal drama “Suits.” Like many former television and film stars, Markle will likely also receive residuals from her seven seasons on that show.

Prince Harry, 35, on the other hand, inherited a sizable fortune after the death of his mother. He inherited approximately 7 million British pounds ($9.2 million) from his mother’s estate, the BBC estimated. His father's side of the family is far richer — worth more than $88 billion, according to Forbes — including investments, properties, castles and land.

To be fair, Prince Harry also reportedly earned an annual salary of $45,000 when he served as an officer in the Army Air Corps and approximately $52,000 a year while working as a helicopter pilot for the Army Air Corps, according to separate estimates by Forbes and Fortune magazines based on publicly available figures for salaries in the U.K. army.

They have a gilded cushion to fall back on. Prince Harry’s father, Prince Charles — first in line to the British throne — earns nearly $23 million from the Duchy of Cornwall, a private estate with more than $1.3 billion in assets. The Duchy’s financial accounts reveal a total income for the financial year ending March 31, 2017 of 37.2 million British pounds ($48.7 million), up 2.5% on the previous year.

Pearson said Markle struggled to adapt to royal protocol. The Sussexes will no longer be part of the “royal rota,” giving media access to royal appearances. “Much like Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop, and as Markle previously did with TIG, their personal brand could be worth billions and they know it.” (Forbes recently named reality TV star Kylie Jenner, 22, the youngest self-made billionaire ever.)

It had been rumored the couple were contemplating a move to Canada. Markle lived there while filming “Suits,” and the couple spent Christmas and New Year’s in Canada, reportedly at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island. As Canada is part of the U.K. Commonwealth, it may be required to pay for security for the couple and their son, Archie, the Daily Telegraph reported.

Prince Harry’s late mother, Princess Diana — who died at 36 in a car crash in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by photographers — had long battled the relentless, prying eyes of the British red tops, which dissected her every move in the years following her 1981 marriage to Prince Charles, and 1996 divorce. She had reportedly long dreamed of starting a new life in the U.S.

Markle told their ITV documentary last year that she had a difficult time adapting to life with the often critical media attention in the U.K. “I’ve really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip. I’ve tried, I’ve really tried, I think that what that does internally is probably really damaging,” she said. “The biggest thing that I know is that I never thought this would be easy, but I thought it would be fair.”

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/p...can-legitimately-claim-that-status-2020-01-08


----------



## doni

daisychainz said:


> I am still reeling over the fact Meghan flew in for a day and a half to quit a job, drop a bombshell on the family (on Kate's birthday no less!) and then leave Harry to deal with all the fallout. I don't think she's that in love with Harry, she's willing to leave him behind and not sort it out together.



I think she may not have wanted to confront the members of the royalty face to face, like she’d be insecure, which is totally understandable. She can do it through the lawyers, social media and celebrity friends, but it is another thing to sit down in a palace room with Prince Charles or the Queen and a bunch of courtiers... Then again, she never discussed with her father face to face either when they had their fall out or? At the time, it was argued it was very complicated for her to get there so far away...

I think being far with the baby may also give her some power with Harry, who is the one left to confront the family... In a way it is easy to put pressure from there, but at this point I am just thinking the worst of her.



lanasyogamama said:


> I have to say, the discussion here is so much better informed than what I see on Facebook.  Over there it’s all “if they want to give up all the money and live their life, so be it!!!!”  SMDH.



I believe no one well informed can justify this whole mess. The thing is, they have explained it all cristaline clear in their website, no hiding. But I bet most of the fans, celebrities and sympathetic journalists haven’t even read that. I think they know their public and sensed they could be frank about the whole think while relaying on fans reading only the instagram message and defending them on that basis... Otherwise what explanation is there?


----------



## bag-mania

This Megxit has obviously been in the planning stages for several months.


----------



## mshermes

mshermes said:


> I would be very surprised if her mother is not there with Archie. And, yes, she is despicable. I just keep shaking my head over this whole thing. They should never have had a child. I feel so sorry for him.


Well....just ate my words. Her mother was in LA. Saw pics of her walking her dogs and talking on the phone. Guess she dumped her mother as well. Doesn’t need her now for aesthetics.


----------



## mshermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this point I am convinced these two are trolling us. They can't be so tone-deaf, can they?
> 
> ETA: I tried to insert a screenshot of them wishing Kate a happy birthday on Instagram, doesn't work.


So very cordial of them.....


----------



## mshermes

duna said:


> They probably left him with the grandmother.....I hope...


No....her mother was in LA. Guess she abandoned her mother as well. No need for her now.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

This.

I don't believe anything isn't calculated (she triggers me a lot because of family stuff so I analyze stuff to death to work out what someone really means/wants).

A few months back a designer friend of hers had to distance herself because active royals can't endorse/advertise or something like that and I thought for anyone actively pushing themselves to get free stuff or leverage (M) would be embarrassed by that. Personally I think the ITV woe is me was all part of a staged campaign leading up to this and the backlash instead of fawning after this week's comeback was H being hotheaded and petulant releasing the statement.

Purely based in family relationships, doing it to your gran and before a SIL's birthday smacks of someone/people with their heads too far up their own ..... to think beyond themselves.

I'm neither for it against royals, but I don't buy naive narratives. And the half in-half out approach while saying 'we cost people half as much as we could have done if we'd lived in another palace or palace grounds' was always going to cause even people who don't care to get annoyed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

papertiger said:


> In context of the quote (she said it to a royal chef and jokingly) she was remarking that William was 'deep, like his father' and Harry was like her an 'airhead'.
> 
> This could be why people read into it (and other quotes) she worried more about Harry's future but for tthat moment she was in the kitchen being jokey with staff and self-deprecing. Iim sure she wouldn't have thought that 30ish years later it would be key QUOTE. Personally, I don't see William as deep so I'd take airhead with a pinch of salt too, but maybe not.
> 
> Harry's absolutely fine in the right setting. Down to earth and friendly, but he's obviously led a shelterd life and seems to constantly needs assurances his a good bloke. He's young for his age and idealistic, he sees only good v evil and demonises everyone who doesn't agree with him or let's him do what he wants.
> 
> Anyone who has a reasonably normal job knows there are always procedures and responsibilities for every role and often compromises. That he's been a Captain in the army (my uncle was a Captain in the same army) makes me think (as he's said previously) he was too cocooned there too.
> 
> To use the word "collaborate" in in future he's willing to collaborate with the Quuen shows he's delusional. That's something a 12 y o tourist might say. QE II is the Head of the Constitution and duty bound as an officer to the British Army:
> 
> The Oath starts:
> 'I (name), *swear* by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty *Queen* Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors and that I will as in duty bound honestly and faithfully defend Her Majesty, her heirs and successors in person, crown and dignity against all enemies and will observe... '
> 
> To say 'collaborate' with the Queen is tandermount to saying he's her equal. If I said it, I'd be off to the Tower. Yes it's 'now' to use X everywhere but seriously - screw loose to use on an official doc. Maybe Diana was right, maybe he is an airhead. His granny is his granny but he has no idea what her 'job' is and what it stands for. Hilarious to think we had to learn this stuff at school. Obviously Harry was daydreaming and staring out the window at every history lesson.
> 
> I think it will be good for his wellbeing if he was truly independent. Let him go and find himself. Unfortunately that's not what he wants and not what he'll get. He'll be allowed to live on the estate at Windsor (the couple were disappointed they weren't allowed to live at the Castle BtW) and his father will take care of an allowance and they'll keep their titles (yes, the Queen can take them away). He'll be another clueless Bertie Wooster forever (some could say like his stupid uncle, who's also been allowed to do whatever he wants)


Problem with your logic is Harry ISN’T an officer in the British army anymore. He may hold a ceremonial position, (as does Kate, Camilla etc).


----------



## PatsyCline

Sophisticatted said:


> I remember Fergie telling Oprah that she couldn’t take her daughters anywhere without the Queen’ permission.  I don’t know whether that applies to all grandchildren, or only those with titles.  I don’t know if it applies to great-grandchildren.
> 
> I wonder if they had permission to take Archie away for their holiday and were worried that they wouldn’t get permission to take him away again after the announcement.  I wonder if they were trying to force this change before the Queen dies.
> 
> My personal opinion is they should get the “tough love” approach and get nothing.  Harry’s own personal money is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to live.  The Firm can use legal action to prevent Sussex Royal usage, or at least make them spend money they won’t have fighting it.  Meg can go back to doing “The Tig” (roll eyes).  They may get appearance fees for a while, but without the Firm and its’ money supporting them, the allure will fade, Harry will run out of money, and Meg will move on.  They can then fight for Archie and bring Harry back into the fold.


Between the two of them, they have a 9 figure personal fortune. They’ll be just fine on their own, if they choose.


----------



## cph706

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/opinion/meghan-markle-prince-harry.html

Not sure if anyone’s posted this yet... my DH has family members in London and I am the only family member of color. I think there’s a point here.


----------



## hellosunshine

ITV News Tom Bradby interview:

*Sussexit is mostly about personal stuff within the family:* It “is just really bad personal splits — that’s the honest truth… There’ve been a lot of fallouts; a lot of harsh things were said around the time of the wedding. And it’s gone a bit too far. And certainly the rest of the family find Harry and Meghan very difficult and, from Harry and Meghan’s point of view, they’re just being driven out as they see it. And it’s sad.”

*The toxicity:* “There are going to be so many complications, so many controversies. There needs to be a peace deal really soon because this is so toxic, there’s so much anger and, to be honest with you at the moment it looks like it might get worse, not better.”

*The declaration of independence: *“It was, in effect, a declaration of independence…My impression is they’re pretty philosophical about it. [It’s] ‘We are making a break for independence and freedom here. You wanted a slimmed-down monarchy. There’s no place for us in it. We need to learn to live on our own. We want to get on and do that.’ They’re philosophical as in it’s up to [the royal family] — protection, Frogmore, everything else, the titles. You want to take it all away, fine. That’s okay. But it’s sort of up to you. We’d like to be involved, we’d like to do our charities, we’d like to support the Queen and we’d like to do stuff through the Commonwealth, but we accept that we’ve got no right to do that anymore.”

*The battle with the media:* “Not their battle with the media itself…But the split within the family about it. In their eyes, they’re on a moral mission to take on the media or the tabloid media and the excesses of it. Their view is, ‘If we don’t stand up to it, who’s going to? We have to take a lead on this.’ They think their family kowtows to the media and plays the game — the ‘game that killed my mother’ as Harry would put it. So a bit of it is about that. The rest of the family thinks this is mad — you can win a battle against the media but not the war.”

*The Sussexes only announced when Sussexit was leaked to Dan Wooten:* “Harry has been talking to his family for some weeks about all this. And certainly as I understand it what happened is he was asked by members of his family — or at least his officials — to put some of these ideas in writing. He said, ‘I really don’t want to do that because it normally leaks.’ And they were very insistent in order to go forward and discuss it properly it had to be put in writing. He did put it in writing, and it did leak. So yes, I don’t think [the royal family] got much heads-up as to the actual announcement, but they certainly knew what was going on. I think [Harry] felt once it had been leaked all bets were off.”

*Meghan & Harry felt cut adrift by the royal family:* “A lot of old friends of the couple took [Meghan’s words in the documentary] primarily to be aimed at the royal family, not the media… The atmosphere has been fractious within the family ever since those close to Prince Charles pushed out the Queen’s long-standing and well-regarded private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt two years ago,” he said. Geidt had long smoothed over any grievances between the boys and the rest of the family, particularly their father Prince Charles, with whom William and Harry have a complex relationship. “Central authority weakened, the rest of the family increasingly doing their own thing. There have been many battles within the family since then. As an outsider, it would take the wisdom of Solomon to work out who is right, who is wrong.”

*The War of the Windors:* “Some argue Harry and Meghan were too independent, too difficult, but their friends feel they have been driven out. Those close to the couple say that if the royal family is to be slimmed down, this is the right, indeed only, step. But complicated it will be. This is a new war of the Windsors. It’s not over yet.”


----------



## byzina

In the engagement video interview H&M announced that they are planning to focus on charity projects. It looks as if they've quickly become tired of this job. It would be much easier for them to raise funds for charity being senior royals. All those words were only for the camera and Meghan wants to do something more glamorous. Right after her marriage they went on their honeymoon, then she had a maternity leave. They had a long holiday in Canada and now they refuse to work again. She used to say that she is the woman who loves to work but it doesn't look so. I really doubt that she will be a great designer or fashion editor or even actress. They will just exploit the Royal family brand doing something.


----------



## myown

daisychainz said:


> I am still reeling over the fact Meghan flew in for a day and a half to quit a job, drop a bombshell on the family (on Kate's birthday no less!) and then leave Harry to deal with all the fallout. I don't think she's that in love with Harry, she's willing to leave him behind and not sort it out together. I guess she's exiled to Canada now, or maybe the US? I can't imagine the British people and press would welcome her back again, or will they. I feel so confused what this woman is trying to achieve.  She's not even British, why set out to destroy a family and system you don't even know or understand.


Or we all think wrong and it’s all Harrys mess. She is the one that follows him and he’s the leader. He tells her what to do. Told her to leave the baby, told her to come to uk for 1.5 days then go back get the baby and get under the surface again. 

I don’t think so, but anything is possible


----------



## myown

LittleStar88 said:


> I can't even bear to leave my dog with anyone (friend, family, or otherwise), let alone my child. Especially at such a young age.


I would never leave my child with family or friends and take a two hour drive. Let alone fly 12 hours out of the country!


----------



## mshermes

This is not involving the HM dilemma but it put a smile on my face. Gotta love how feisty she is and independent.....driving her own car.


----------



## myown

mshermes said:


> So very cordial of them.....


LOL a comment. Not even put up a post


----------



## myown

Sophisticatted said:


> I remember Fergie telling Oprah that she couldn’t take her daughters anywhere without the Queen’ permission.  I don’t know whether that applies to all grandchildren, or only those with titles.  I don’t know if it applies to great-grandchildren.
> 
> I wonder if they had permission to take Archie away for their holiday and were worried that they wouldn’t get permission to take him away again after the announcement.  I wonder if they were trying to force this change before the Queen dies.
> 
> My personal opinion is they should get the “tough love” approach and get nothing.  Harry’s own personal money is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to live.  The Firm can use legal action to prevent Sussex Royal usage, or at least make them spend money they won’t have fighting it.  Meg can go back to doing “The Tig” (roll eyes).  They may get appearance fees for a while, but without the Firm and its’ money supporting them, the allure will fade, Harry will run out of money, and Meg will move on.  They can then fight for Archie and bring Harry back into the fold.


Wasn’t there an article saying that the queen is officially guardian of all royal born kids?


----------



## TC1

I don't understand why people think M & H would need the Queen's permission to travel with Archie (or think she'd take him away from his parents). He is not a royal with a title, he is just Archie Monty Windsor.


----------



## rose60610

It's appearing to me that this whole scheme of theirs was hatched well before Harry even proposed.

I'm convinced that by Meghan's fourth date with Harry she was approached.  Then as a couple they were approached by the same schemer who made it sound all brand new to Meghan (sorry to sound all tin-foil-hatty here) about how if they played their cards right they could build a gargantuan brand promoting progressive causes and become even more filthy rich global movers and shakers themselves. As much as Meghan would have loved to have achieved this on her own she wouldn't be smart enough to pull it off on her own, but was enthralled with making it happen. 

Get engaged, mega wedding, new titles, royal this and royal that, celebrity friends galore, crank out a Royal anchor baby, wallow in all the royal luxuries bla bla bla. Sponge off of all that coverage and fame, do the alligator tears thing, then pull the carpet out from under the RF (after a while I think they saw it coming.)

And here we are. They're puppets.


----------



## PewPew

doni said:


> I think this is the core of the question. They believe giving up on that 5% of their funding gives them the right not to be accountable on stuff like this...
> I don’t think the US media gets any of this. They judge the whole situation as if they were any celebrity couple.



Plus 90+% of his funding isn’t just “coming from his dad” in a traditional sense. His father has that income & the Duchy by virtue of his royal position and the will of Queen. It’s not a traditional trust fund.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m kind of surprised that Meghan is letting Harry handle the negotiations.


Hmmm from a psychological point of view ... one leaves the negotiation table, leaving someone else as one's negotiator, only if one has communicated one's (virtually) non-negotiable position , the negotiator is tasked with getting what you want not compromising on your behalf


----------



## Katel

rose60610 said:


> It's appearing to me that this whole scheme of theirs was hatched well before Harry even proposed.
> 
> I'm convinced that by Meghan's fourth date with Harry she was approached.  Then as a couple they were approached by the same schemer who made it sound all brand new to Meghan (sorry to sound all tin-foil-hatty here) about how if they played their cards right they could build a gargantuan brand promoting progressive causes and become even more filthy rich global movers and shakers themselves. *As much as Meghan would have loved to have achieved this on her own she wouldn't be smart enough to pull it off on her own*, but was enthralled with making it happen.
> 
> Get engaged, mega wedding, new titles, royal this and royal that, celebrity friends galore, crank out a Royal anchor baby, wallow in all the royal luxuries bla bla bla. Sponge off of all that coverage and fame, do the alligator tears thing, then pull the carpet out from under the RF (after a while I think they saw it coming.)
> 
> And here we are. They're puppets.



The bold is so true haha! 
If (lol big tinfoil hat If) this scenario is true, who do you think the schemers are? Just platform builders out to make a profit, or something more sinister/global?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

myown said:


> Wasn’t there an article saying that the queen is officially guardian of all royal born kids?


Found this after quick search....
https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8


----------



## Sharont2305

mshermes said:


> Found this after quick search....
> https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8


This is why Fergie never saw her children on Christmas Day, only seeing them on the walk to and from church on TV.


----------



## Katel

mshermes said:


> Found this after quick search....
> https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8


I had also heard long ago that the Queen is the absolute guardian of all the children in her line...but I don’t know if that is still the case?

Also wonder about Archie’s automatic dual citizenship...because in America, I thought that is determined by the father’s place of birth?

For example, I know someone born in the USA but raised in Europe and his son was born in Europe, but son was able to get dual citizenship (European country and USA) because his father was born in the USA.

 I may be all wrong here and of course HM can pursue that now if Archie has no current USA citizenship.


----------



## mshermes

Katel said:


> I had also heard long ago that the Queen is the absolute guardian of all the children in her line...but I don’t know if that is still the case?
> 
> Also wonder about Archie’s automatic dual citizenship...because in America, I thought that is determined by the father’s place of birth?
> 
> For example, I know someone born in the USA but raised in Europe and his son was born in Europe, but son was able to get dual citizenship (European country and USA) because his father was born in the USA.
> 
> I may be all wrong here and of course HM can pursue that now if Archie has no current USA citizenship.


https://www.immigrationvisaattorney...chie-mountbatten-windsor-is-a-us-citizen-too/


----------



## hellosunshine

*What now for Harry and Meghan after they choose to reject front line duties? | ITV News*


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the vacation was for lessons on becoming “financially independent”
> 
> View attachment 4635723


So, so much for the Sovereign rules that state that the members of the BRF not accept "gifts" .. and this is one of the reasons why I DO NOT think they can just set up this Charity and not have unscrupulous "donations", etc. -- stinks of potential "persuasion" ..


----------



## mshermes

Damage control? Posted two hours ago.....


----------



## Katel

mshermes said:


> https://www.immigrationvisaattorney...chie-mountbatten-windsor-is-a-us-citizen-too/


Ah interesting, thanks...my example is from long ago and it looks like the laws have changed. 

There are still specific parameters to the law - but in Archie’s case, he passes all the criteria it appears.


----------



## marietouchet

PewPew said:


> Plus 90+% of his funding isn’t just “coming from his dad” in a traditional sense. His father has that income & the Duchy by virtue of his royal position and the will of Queen. It’s not a traditional trust fund.


And, should Charles become king, then William gets Cornwall , and the duchy income should/could go to his kids instead, there is no obvious long term provision for Cornwall to pay for H&M.
In the past, the main sources of income for the monarch's children have been private trusts (H has some of those esp from his mother) and the civil list (which H is currently turning down). Yes, the monarch has made private grants to children - esp in the form of one-time gifts eg estate/house, rather than recurring income (forever).


----------



## V0N1B2

Aww man, you just _know_ Harry is dreading going to the mailbox, right?


----------



## mrsinsyder

V0N1B2 said:


> Aww man, you just _know_ Harry is dreading going to the mailbox, right?


Eh, they have their stans so brainwashed they could probably start a GoFundMe and they’d send them money.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I did see a People website article that claimed a friend of Harry and Meghan said the two of them were being "driven out" of the family.  Uh, _what_?  I mean, they are the ones that announced they were leaving and wanted everything on their terms and wouldn't be senior royals any longer.  I know People is not much more than a fawning tabloid but you'd think they'd do a little fact checking.


Yes, saw that as well .. BUT, there was a little blurp that said the coup-de-grace was the Queen's address where she made it very clear (_via the pictures on her desk_) that H&M were part of that BRF streamlining .. but that they were also pissed off that the BRF had not made all their "decisions" yet.  *Impatient bunch??*


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Jeez. Maybe her family (dad and his side) have been right all along and we were all played by her. Biggest hustle ever.


.. and it's NOT just them; as I've stated before (but certain folks didn't 'believe' me), I know people out here in LA who have known the family for many years, and been 'markled' way back in the day!


----------



## hellosunshine

mshermes said:


> Damage control? Posted two hours ago.....



How is this damage control? These photos are from earlier this week when they visited Hubb Community kitchen before heading to the Canada House engagement.


----------



## hellosunshine

Details from an interview w/ Omid Scobie of Harper’s Bazaar-

*The plans to move away had been in the pipeline for a while:* Senior aides reveal that conversations about the couple’s future plans and ambitions had taken place internally “on all levels” for several months in the run-up to their so-called “bombshell” on January 8. It was information that the couple had planned to hold back from the media until logistics had been further fleshed out among households, but after their agenda was leaked to British tabloid The Sun, “they felt they had been cornered,” says a source close to the couple. “It was a case of act now or lose control of something they had spent a long time working on.”

*No one was enraged: *Surprised, yes, but the royal reaction, says a high-ranking palace aide, was “far from the dramatic emotional response described by some—nobody was ‘incandescent with rage’ and nobody is about to punish anyone. The speed at which this now needs to be dealt with is not ideal, but the plans themselves are not a problem. This is not a ‘crisis,’ it’s a case of helping the couple reach their goal.”

*Their hatred of The Rota: *“They saw the current model as outdated and in desperate need of change,” says a source, who notes that previous attempts to change the current system had been repeatedly met with dead ends. “It became clear that press, including foreign media and digital outlets, to have access to their work, they would have to self-fund their own engagements.”

*The SussexRoyal.com site:* Put together away from the palace, the site was written by an individual known to the couple and designed by Made by Article, the same Toronto-based company that successfully produced Meghan’s now-shuttered lifestyle blog The Tig. “Very few people were involved in the process, but those who were managed to keep information of the site confidential,” says the Sussex source. The online hub has already received millions of visits since its launch and the couple have also been inundated with supportive messages from charities and organizations they have worked as well as close friends around the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Details from interview w/ Katie Nicholl at Vanity Fair -

*The Queen personally ordered for royal parties to come together to solve the Sussex riddle:* In a sign of the Queen’s frustration and growing anger at the situation, the order was said to have come directly from the monarch, who remains in Sandringham on an extended new year break. The decision is expected to “take days not weeks,” said the royal aide. The senior royals have been in contact with one another throughout the day Thursday as their households have worked together to come up with a crisis strategy to prevent any further damage to the reputation of the monarchy. Despite the scale of the story, which has made headlines around the world, royal aides have said the Queen has no immediate plans to return to London and is leaving it to her trusted aides and courtiers to work together with the Sussexes’ household.

*The Sussexes might not be HRHs:* It is understood that the matter of the Sussexes’ HRH titles is “up in the air” as courtiers deal with the fallout…with royal sources telling Vanity Fair that “nothing has been ruled in or out.”

*The Queen is devastated: *Sources close to the Queen have said that she is privately devastated by Prince Harry and Meghan’s decision to stand down…Sources close to the Queen say there is a feeling of deep hurt and resentment about how the Sussexes have handled the situation. “The Queen will expect Harry to go and see her and explain himself,” a source told Vanity Fair. “This is not how things are done in the royal family and now it is down to the Queen and her advisors to sort things out.” As yet Vanity Fair understands Prince Harry has yet to see his grandmother.

*Building the Sussex brand:* Last night a source close to Prince Harry said that a major reason for the couple standing down from the Royal Family is so that they can build their own Sussex brand. The couple will launch their own charitable foundation later this year and “Sussex Royal” could potentially earn them millions. “Building their brand is the most important thing to them right now,” a source told Vanity Fair. “I think it might be more important than their royal titles because they are already so huge, so successful and so popular particularly in the US which is where they see their brand really taking off. Meghan is seriously bright and business savvy and together they have come up with a plan to become the royal version of the Beckhams.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just read the most insane piece of gossip on Instagram: The poster claims two days ago the Queen asked the both of them to meet but Meghan refused and went on to an appointment at the National Theater, only to find it had been cancelled by the palace. Apparently she got so fuming mad her security had difficulties handling the situation. I haven't found anything at all in the press (plus it does sound outrageous even for her), but she does look p*ssed leaving the theater and also she is not wearing her wedding set (person claims she wore them when entering the theater but I didn't see pictures). That appointment was a few hours before the bomb dropped.


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> How is this damage control? These photos are from earlier this week when they visited Hubb Community kitchen before heading to the Canada House engagement.


The fact that they were posted two hours ago.


----------



## TC1

One article says the Queen expects Harry to see her personally (and is devastated), yet hasn't.
Another article says she refused to see him. 
*shrugs*


----------



## mrsinsyder

TC1 said:


> One article says the Queen expects Harry to see her personally (and is devastated), yet hasn't.
> Another article says she refused to see him.
> *shrugs*


Yeah I’m not sure what these were supposed to prove...


----------



## Mrs.Z

hellosunshine said:


> Details from interview w/ Katie Nicholl at Vanity Fair -
> 
> *The Queen personally ordered for royal parties to come together to solve the Sussex riddle:* In a sign of the Queen’s frustration and growing anger at the situation, the order was said to have come directly from the monarch, who remains in Sandringham on an extended new year break. The decision is expected to “take days not weeks,” said the royal aide. The senior royals have been in contact with one another throughout the day Thursday as their households have worked together to come up with a crisis strategy to prevent any further damage to the reputation of the monarchy. Despite the scale of the story, which has made headlines around the world, royal aides have said the Queen has no immediate plans to return to London and is leaving it to her trusted aides and courtiers to work together with the Sussexes’ household.
> 
> *The Sussexes might not be HRHs:* It is understood that the matter of the Sussexes’ HRH titles is “up in the air” as courtiers deal with the fallout…with royal sources telling Vanity Fair that “nothing has been ruled in or out.”
> 
> *The Queen is devastated: *Sources close to the Queen have said that she is privately devastated by Prince Harry and Meghan’s decision to stand down…Sources close to the Queen say there is a feeling of deep hurt and resentment about how the Sussexes have handled the situation. “The Queen will expect Harry to go and see her and explain himself,” a source told Vanity Fair. “This is not how things are done in the royal family and now it is down to the Queen and her advisors to sort things out.” As yet Vanity Fair understands Prince Harry has yet to see his grandmother.
> 
> *Building the Sussex brand:* Last night a source close to Prince Harry said that a major reason for the couple standing down from the Royal Family is so that they can build their own Sussex brand. The couple will launch their own charitable foundation later this year and “Sussex Royal” could potentially earn them millions. “Building their brand is the most important thing to them right now,” a source told Vanity Fair. “I think it might be more important than their royal titles because they are already so huge, so successful and so popular particularly in the US which is where they see their brand really taking off. Meghan is seriously bright and business savvy and together they have come up with a plan to become the royal version of the Beckhams.”


The Royal version of the Beckhams....so Meghan can have a business funded by her husband that loses millions every year.  People say such stupid things.


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read the most insane piece of gossip on Instagram: The poster claims two days ago the Queen asked the both of them to meet but Meghan refused and went on to an appointment at the National Theater, only to find it had been cancelled by the palace. Apparently she got so fuming mad her security had difficulties handling the situation. I haven't found anything at all in the press (plus it does sound outrageous even for her), but she does look p*ssed leaving the theater and also she is not wearing her wedding set (person claims she wore them when entering the theater but I didn't see pictures). That appointment was a few hours before the bomb dropped.


Maybe she mailed them back to Harry from the post inside the theatre? #trevorengelson

I hope the Frogmore staff is counting the silverware.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> I just read where Oprah and others encouraged them to break off from The Firm and build up their "own brand".  How nice, now the Royal Family is about pimping it to make your own brand. It was estimated they could make 500 million from their "Sussex Royal" merch.  I wouldn't buy a dog dish from them.


I saw this as well this morning and, I admit .. not a fan of Oprah; she should just keep her nose out of things that she does not understand (_and don't get me started about the 'real' story behind the Hermes event_).  In addition, Oprah also alluded to the fact that H&M may plan a session with Gayle King .. well, well, well .. how convenient .. yet another person who likely had no clue of MM until she married Harry!


----------



## mrsinsyder

I know there’s blind allegiance from the stans but how can anyone honestly think the Queen wouldn’t at least be a little bit upset? The monarchy is her whole life, and especially after what happened with her uncle and father?

At this point I feel like they could join ISIS and people would say it’s a good organization committed to religious teachings


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> I saw this as well this morning and, I admit .. not a fan of Oprah; she should just keep her nose out of things that she does not understand (_and don't get me started about the 'real' story behind the Hermes event_).  In addition, Oprah also alluded to the fact that H&M may plan a session with Gayle King .. well, well, well .. how convenient .. yet another person who likely had no clue of MM until she married Harry!



As expected, Oprah is denying this all over the place. Personally, I don’t buy her denials.


----------



## LittleStar88

I am still not understanding how it is ok for them to brand, market, and profit from the "Sussex Royal" name and have a website, etc... Can anyone explain?


----------



## zinacef

Does anybody notice that they announce something on other family members special day like they made their pregnancy announcement on Eugenie’s Wedding day and now on Kate’s birthday.  I bet everybody in the BRF who’s having something special happening in the future is on edge as these two will be dropping something.  Beatrice you’re next, she better brace herself as her day will be ruined by something woke announcement.  Meanwhile , uncle Andy is thanking his lucky stars for these two taking the spotlight from him.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> I know there’s blind allegiance from the stans but how can anyone honestly think the Queen wouldn’t at least be a little bit upset? The monarchy is her whole life, and especially after what happened with her uncle and father?



See, my thinking is that very few people have sympathy for her nowadays. Personally, I think she's learning the hard way that you reap what you sow. Like how is it even a discussion that Harry & Meghan's HRH titles are in jeopardy but her disgusting, sick sons is not???


----------



## Tivo

Im ashamed to admit this but I find this so entertaining.

My theory is William said some effed up ish to Meghan, pissed Harry off and drove Meghan further into defiant mode. 
I think jealousy is at the root of much of the animosity. 

Meanwhile Meghan is ready to take on Hollywood - I mean that was her passion long before meeting Harry. 

Harry has always supported Will and Kate, so William being an ass probably feels like betrayal.


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> See, my thinking is that very few people have sympathy for her nowadays. Personally, I think she's learning the hard way that you reap what you sow. Like how is it even a discussion that Harry & Meghan's HRH titles are in jeopardy but her disgusting, sick sons is not???


I agree with you that I don't think Andrew faced nearly enough repercussions. However, it is completely incorrect that very few people have sympathy for the Queen. On the contrary, the Queen has over a 90% approval rating (as of her Diamond Jubilee), and is adored by million and millions of people across the commonwealth. She has devoted her life to the service of her country, and the public is extremely grateful and protective of her for that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> See, my thinking is that very few people have sympathy for her nowadays. Personally, I think she's learning the hard way that you reap what you sow. Like how is it even a discussion that Harry & Meghan's HRH titles are in jeopardy but her disgusting, sick sons is not???


Believe it or not, people can have opinions about BOTH and think both shouldn’t be HRH. Crazy, I know.


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> See, my thinking is that very few people have sympathy for her nowadays. Personally, I think she's learning the hard way that you reap what you sow. Like how is it even a discussion that Harry & Meghan's HRH titles are in jeopardy but her disgusting, sick sons is not???



The Queen is the most popular and respected person in the UK.  She is 93. She has devoted her life to her duty.  I think all the sympathy is with the Queen over this, certainly in the UK.  (Maybe some of our Brit members can discuss this further.) 

Prince Andrew . . . I'm not a fan at all . . . but he's a good example of what can happen to the second son of the monarch, associating with shady people and "yes" people and not being particularly smart.  Prince Edward also got himself into trouble and a lot of negative publicity over his own failed TV production company and his wife, Countess Sophie, over charges that she was using her royal connections to advance her PR firm.  These were huge news stories at the time.  ETA:  These younger children of the monarch sure can be trouble lol.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Agree, I had thought her issues with the Markle family were due to it being dysfunctional, but, MM seems to have ditched her second family as well - pattern ?


It's not just her family, trust me .. she has ditched MANY over the years once she deemed them "_no longer useful_" to her plan of world dominance ()!!!  As much as I loathe Piers Morgan and his constant whining about being 'ghosted', I can tell you that there are other folks have been very hurt by what she has done to them and/or their family members .. so, this is MOST DEFINITELY a pattern for her (_yes - narcissism 101_)!!


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> And, should Charles become king, then William gets Cornwall , and the duchy income should/could go to his kids instead, there is no obvious long term provision for Cornwall to pay for H&M.



Yep, Will will get the Duchy of Cornwall when Charles becomes King, with no guarantee that he would continue Harry's generous annual allowance, especially not now, though Charles could certainly continue to pay Harry an allowance from his own substantial assets once he becomes King. If they were on good terms, he likely would pay it, or maybe he will just decide not to.


----------



## hellosunshine

cafecreme15 said:


> I agree with you that I don't think Andrew faced nearly enough repercussions. However, it is completely incorrect that very few people have sympathy for the Queen.



Ok, that's fine. But please understand that the larger public are not so happy on how she's handled her disgusting son in comparison to how Meghan has taken hits in the press and she's been silent. The public sees the unprecedented showcase of support and it doesn't sit well with many people.



mrsinsyder said:


> Believe it or not, people can have opinions about BOTH and think both shouldn’t be HRH. Crazy, I know.



Good! Now, going forward we can contend that if Meghan and Harry lose their titles then Andrew and his daughters should lose theirs as well.


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> I am still not understanding how it is ok for them to brand, market, and profit from the "Sussex Royal" name and have a website, etc... Can anyone explain?



I'm really wondering this too.  I'd imagine that the Queen can and will order them to stop using it, but that's probably what Harry is trying hard to hold on to and negotiate for.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Good! Now, going forward we can contend that if Meghan and Harry lose their titles then Andrew and his daughters should lose theirs as well.



Please don’t speak for me, especially if you’re not even going to read what I wrote. 

Meghan and Harry have nothing to do with Andrew or his kids or anyone else. This thread is about the Markle couple so perhaps we should keep it on topic. It doesn’t seem like they’d care about losing their titles anyway... or maybe they are, because that kills their brand.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Now, going forward we can contend that if Meghan and Harry lose their titles then Andrew and his daughters should lose theirs as well.


None of them are losing their HRH's. The two York girls are "HRH Princess Beatrice of York" and "HRH Princess Eugenie of York".  

But if Harry wants a part-time royal job on the same level as Beatrice and Eugenie (which is what he described on his website) than he could and should lose his dukedom.  That would knock him back to "HRH Prince Henry of Wales" again, and make Meghan "HRH Princess Henry of Wales."

I don't think anything would hurt the two of them more than to lose the "Sussex" brand - even though I think they would still shamelessly milk their obsolete titles in the US.


----------



## youngster

One thing I find fascinating is this idea that has been reported that Harry and Meghan think they will turn themselves into a version of Michelle and Barack *****, who have a charitable foundation (the Obamas was mostly created to fund the ***** Presidential Library) and a Netflix production deal to produce content like documentaries and films about historical figures.

First, the Obamas are literally 20 years older than the two of them with vastly better educations, intelligence, and life experiences. Oh, and they have that "job" on their resumes of having been President of the United States and First Lady of the United States for 8 years, which is like being the 24/7 CEO of a trillion dollar enterprise.  They have a network of contacts built over decades across industries and political circles with people who respect them and trust them.

There is little on Meghan or Harry's resume to indicate that they can write a thoughtful, best selling book or produce a well thought of documentary or even serve as a competent CEO, especially if the management of their exit from the BRF is an example of their abilities.  I'll be really curious to see who will sign a production deal with them or a book deal or whatever else they have in mind.


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> I had also heard long ago that the Queen is the absolute guardian of all the children in her line...but I don’t know if that is still the case?
> 
> Also wonder about Archie’s automatic dual citizenship...because in America, I thought that is determined by the father’s place of birth?
> 
> For example, I know someone born in the USA but raised in Europe and his son was born in Europe, but son was able to get dual citizenship (European country and USA) because his father was born in the USA.
> 
> I may be all wrong here and of course HM can pursue that now if Archie has no current USA citizenship.


My niece had her little girl in Dubai (_she is American, her husband is Canadian_).  They had to apply for Canadian citizenship (_which they got_), but then she realized that she needed to apply for American citizenship for their daughter (_they are currently in Hong Kong_).  She told me that it's been a real P-I-T-A; not that I'm surprised given what I've seen of the US Government red-tape after working down in Washington DC!


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> Fascinating take from a financial point of
> 
> Pearson alleges that Markle is behind their strategy to strike out on their own. “She would rather be a celebrity than a royal,” Pearson said. “She had no idea how unglamorous it really is to be a royal and, when she found out she would be a civil servant in a tiara she was, like, ‘No way.’”





I think this really is the clue to this whole thing.
We complain about royals being entitled and privileged but we don’t realize that what they do is not at all as glam as it sounds and carries a high cost.

All this mess is making me appreciate more our Queen Letizia. She may have made many mistakes and may come across as arrogant an bossy, but she is working hard at it, supports the King, and has never complained in public no matter how vicious things have got.



LittleStar88 said:


> I am still not understanding how it is ok for them to brand, market, and profit from the "Sussex Royal" name and have a website, etc... Can anyone explain?



It isn’t, no in so far as they want to have’ financial independence’.. Both things should be incompatible.


----------



## cafecreme15

hellosunshine said:


> Ok, that's fine. But please understand that the larger public are not so happy on how she's handled her disgusting son in comparison to how Meghan has taken hits in the press and she's been silent. The public sees the unprecedented showcase of support and it doesn't sit well with many people.
> .


I assume you’ve conducted a comparative poll on this issue? But in a vacuum you are quite right that the public the world over is appalled at the Andrew situation. Over the course of her long reign, the Queen has certainly had her missteps and provoked public outrage (eg her handling of Princess Diana’s death, her response to the Aberfan tragedy), but she has remained the most popular and respected royal regardless of all of this, and I think it’s a fundamental misreading of people’s respect for the monarch to think that they don’t have sympathy for her.


----------



## Roxanna

bag-mania said:


> This Megxit has obviously been in the planning stages for several months.


Yes, I agree.  Therefore , I think, that sympathy seeking interview in Africa was all fake.  It was a carefully orchestrated and very intentionally timed.  It  all  seems so surreal.


----------



## TC1

Harry always seemed close with Will & Kate before Meghan. I wonder what all went down. There was clearly something. Also when it came out that M&H "stole" the name Archie from George (as he called HIMSELF that as a nickname) it seemed to spiral.
Once the Queen dies, the lot of them could go get jobs for all I care. Freeloaders.. IMO


----------



## CeeJay

Tivo said:


> Im ashamed to admit this but I find this so entertaining.
> 
> My theory is William said some effed up ish to Meghan, pissed Harry off and drove Meghan further into defiant mode.
> I think jealousy is at the root of much of the animosity.
> 
> Meanwhile Meghan is ready to take on Hollywood - I mean that was her passion long before meeting Harry.
> 
> Harry has always supported Will and Kate, so William being an ass probably feels like betrayal.


Again .. given that there have been a plethora of "news" blips about these two as of late, one of the other things I saw is that William pulled Harry aside and "_reminded_" him of something their mother said, and that was "_take your time to LEARN about the individual that you will marry_" as she stated that she and Prince Charles didn't really "_know each other_" before they married.  Well, as rumors have abounded .. apparently Harry took umbrage of this and that is when the "_different paths_" (Harry's words) began ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Did Sunshine get Sached or what?


----------



## youngster

*She had no idea how unglamorous it really is to be a royal and, when she found out she would be a civil servant in a tiara she was, like, ‘No way.’”*

I think it's safe to say that Meghan has been loaned her last royal tiara from the Queen.


----------



## Flatsy

Yes, Meghan actually never wore a tiara after her wedding day!  She was a civil servant without the tiara.  And she never got to wear any jewelry from the Queen's collection either - which Dan Wootton said long ago was not an accident.  The Queen's advisors "warned" her in the fall of 2018 not to loan jewelry to Meghan, and the Queen followed their advice.   I think the Sussexes have been trouble from the very beginning, and behind the scenes, a lot of people could see the writing on the wall that the Sussexes were going to fall apart one way or another.

I do think that quote is an accurate description of what happened to Meghan.  She was not prepared for the work she signed up for, and was not at all in the mindset to put duty before self.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> I do think that quote is an accurate description of what happened to Meghan.  She was not prepared for the work she signed up for, and was not at all in the mindset to put duty before self.



And that’s totally okay! But walk away with dignity. I’d have a lot of respect for her if she’d say that. Instead she’s “I want the nice parts but not the yucky parts” of the job.


----------



## youngster

@Flatsy, that's really interesting, the Palace probably didn't want any photos of her in historic jewels because they were concerned she might use them to promote herself or her connection to them perhaps?  Also, maybe you have to prove yourself to the Queen too, to borrow the good stuff.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> And that’s totally okay! But walk away with dignity. I’d have a lot of respect for her if she’d say that. Instead she’s “I want the nice parts but not the yucky parts” of the job.



It's even worse. She wants to parlay the whole experience for a profit.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> See, my thinking is that very few people have sympathy for her nowadays. Personally, I think she's learning the hard way that you reap what you sow. Like how is it even a discussion that Harry & Meghan's HRH titles are in jeopardy but her disgusting, sick sons is not???


Andrew is her son and she won't take it away.  I don't think she will take it from Harry either because he is a blood Prince, but Meghan will lose it because she is not a UK citizen and just a spouse.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Ok, that's fine. But please understand that the larger public are not so happy on how she's handled her disgusting son in comparison to how Meghan has taken hits in the press and she's been silent. The public sees the unprecedented showcase of support and it doesn't sit well with many people.
> 
> 
> 
> Good! Now, going forward we can contend that if Meghan and Harry lose their titles then Andrew and his daughters should lose theirs as well.



Again, blood Princes/Princesses will not lose these  titles.  

The Queen doesn't want a visit from Boris Johnson  like she had from Tony Blair when Diana died.  The palace has learned to be more attune to the opinions of the people.  When the Queen was perceived to have ignored Diana's death, she was on rather dangerous ground for the first time in her reign and she was truly shocked by it.


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> @Flatsy, that's really interesting, the Palace probably didn't want any photos of her in historic jewels because they were concerned she might use them to promote herself or her connection to them perhaps? Also, maybe you have to prove yourself to the Queen too, to borrow the good stuff.


I think it is a sign of the Queen's good favor to allow family members access to her jewelry collection.  Katie Nicholl said in Vanity Fair that the Queen never got over some of the things that happened with Meghan around the time of the wedding.  I think it was probably tiara-gate and the Queen having to subsequently discipline Harry for bullying her staff with "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets."  I suspect there was other drama that still hasn't made it into the tabloids yet.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I'm really wondering this too.  I'd imagine that the Queen can and will order them to stop using it, but that's probably what Harry is trying hard to hold on to and negotiate for.


If she takes away the Dukedom, then printing sussexroyal on a tee shirt will be meaningless.  If she allows him to keep the title then she is allowing the monetizing of the title.  Don't think that will happen.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I'm really wondering this too.  I'd imagine that the Queen can and will order them to stop using it, but that's probably what Harry is trying hard to hold on to and negotiate for.


If she takes away the Dukedom, then printing sussexroyal on a tee shirt will be meaningless.  If she allows him to keep the title then she is allowing the monetizing of the title.  Don't think that will happen.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh my gosh ..: as proof that this really is H&Mmaggeddon ... a certain very high placed us government official - like at the top - has weighed in on the matter 
Rotfl


----------



## bellecate

From the local paper this morning.


----------



## gracekelly

doni said:


> I think this really is the clue to this whole thing.
> We complain about royals being entitled and privileged but we don’t realize that what they do is not at all as glam as it sounds and carries a high cost.
> 
> All this mess is making me appreciate more our Queen Letizia. She may have made many mistakes and may come across as arrogant an bossy, but she is working hard at it, supports the King, and has never complained in public no matter how vicious things have got.
> 
> 
> 
> It isn’t, no in so far as they want to have’ financial independence’.. Both things should be incompatible.


I believe the choice of Leti as wife brought a lot of criticism at the time since she was a divorcee and commoner.  She weathered the storm and has worked hard.  She and the King appear to take their jobs very seriously and their children look like lovely girls.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh ..: as proof that this really is H&Mmaggeddon ... a certain very high placed us government official - like at the top - has weighed in on the matter
> Rotfl



Lol just what we needed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> If she takes away the Dukedom, then printing sussexroyal on a tee shirt will be meaningless.


Technically meaningless, but in America, I don't think it will matter.  People Magazine will call them whatever they want to be called.  They can call themselves the "former Duke and Duchess of Sussex" and "Patrons of the Sussex Royal Foundation".


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> Yes, Meghan actually never wore a tiara after her wedding day!  She was a civil servant without the tiara.  And she never got to wear any jewelry from the Queen's collection either - which Dan Wootton said long ago was not an accident.  The Queen's advisors "warned" her in the fall of 2018 not to loan jewelry to Meghan, and the Queen followed their advice.   I think the Sussexes have been trouble from the very beginning, and behind the scenes, a lot of people could see the writing on the wall that the Sussexes were going to fall apart one way or another.
> 
> I do think that quote is an accurate description of what happened to Meghan.  She was not prepared for the work she signed up for, and was not at all in the mindset to put duty before self.


I don't think she ever intended to do enough or hang around long enough to be considered a civil servant.  The plan was always to use it to make money off the titles and not do the work.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> Technically meaningless, but in America, I don't think it will matter.  People Magazine will call them whatever they want to be called.  They can call themselves the "former Duke and Duchess of Sussex" and "Patrons of the Sussex Royal Foundation".


True and we will see them for sale in downtown LA, Canal St. in NYC and Tijuana.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> If she takes away the Dukedom, then printing sussexroyal on a tee shirt will be meaningless.  If she allows him to keep the title then she is allowing the monetizing of the title.  Don't think that will happen.



The Queen was right that it is a complicated situation. She knows if she strips him of the title that the general public (who know only a tiny bit of the situation) will think she's being mean and vindictive and it will garner more sympathy for them. I'm sure she doesn't want to feed into their victimhood narrative.


----------



## lulu212121

V0N1B2 said:


> Did Sunshine get Sached or what?


According to an article I read on "the wrap" yesterday Sunshine Sachs was no longer representing them. 

I don't see how Harry or Megs come out of this looking good at all. Their friends, too. Seems their "friends" connections could dry up.


----------



## rose60610

Flatsy said:


> Yes, Meghan actually never wore a tiara after her wedding day!  She was a civil servant without the tiara.  And she never got to wear any jewelry from the Queen's collection either - which Dan Wootton said long ago was not an accident.  The Queen's advisors "warned" her in the fall of 2018 not to loan jewelry to Meghan, and the Queen followed their advice.   I think the Sussexes have been trouble from the very beginning, and behind the scenes, a lot of people could see the writing on the wall that the Sussexes were going to fall apart one way or another.
> 
> I do think that quote is an accurate description of what happened to Meghan.  She was not prepared for the work she signed up for, and was not at all in the mindset to put duty before self.



Fully agree, but instead of "not prepared" I think she and Harry had this entire scheme lined up, orchestrated and timed well before they even got married. They just needed a couple of years to build up their clout (on somebody else's dime, of course) before they branched off into their own progressive money-grubbing orbit. Just think of all that "redistribution of wealth" that The Monarchy represents. Does The Crown really need all those palaces, castles, jewels, artifacts, art, etc? Can't they get by with a few tens of millions instead of the billions in value of all their assets? There's a strong and powerful belief out there that nobody should be a billionaire or ultra wealthy, and that taxes should be predicated on one's net worth, not annual income. And that wealth should be spread around so that nobody has loads of student loan debt, etc. Who better to promote those and other progressive ideas than a newly minted globally famous beautiful young couple, who are "OH-SO-BRAVE" to walk away from the Royal Family? The "Royal Sussex" brand alone was projected to make over 500 million. No doubt a bunch of crap made in Third World country sweat shops, purchased mainly by idiots (and Hollywood celebrities, but I repeat myself) who think M&H are actually wonderful brave philanthropic without a greedy scheming bone in their bodies. Oh, and profits will go....where?....their foundation of course! So they can do all sorts of great things for people around the world....suuuuuurrrrrrre.  As long as that is what M&H stand for, and they do, no mega wealthy friends of theirs have to sacrifice, just everybody else. That's Meghan's way of existing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

There’s an article on daily mail that shows all her outfits since they got married. It’s amazing how happy and fresh they were, to now so sullen and messy all the time. What a fall from grace.


----------



## daisychainz

Have any famous friends come forward (like Ellen, Elton, Oprah, George and Amal, etc.) - have any of them made statements of support for Harry/Meghan - has anyone seen anything?


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> Have any famous friends come forward (like Ellen, Elton, Oprah, George and Amal, etc.) - have any of them made statements of support for Harry/Meghan - has anyone seen anything?


Oprah said “they don’t need my help” which isn’t very reassuring. Sounds like she doesn’t want to be dragged into it. 

The only other people I saw were other D-list scroungers.


----------



## DC-Cutie

daisychainz said:


> Have any famous friends come forward (like Ellen, Elton, Oprah, George and Amal, etc.) - have any of them made statements of support for Harry/Meghan - has anyone seen anything?


Oprah has but only because some new outlet reported she helped them make the decision. 
She said it wasn’t true and supports their decisions, whatever they make


----------



## DC-Cutie

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s an article on daily mail that shows all her outfits since they got married. It’s amazing how happy and fresh they were, to now so sullen and messy all the time. What a fall from grace.


Far from a fall from grace


----------



## hellosunshine

I blame the mess that was tiara-gate on Angela Kelly. The woman is ridiculously petty.

Secondly, Meghan didn't have too many tiara options to choose from. Over the years, many had already been worn by Kate and Camilla, which technically takes them off the list of possibilities for Meghan. I've read the Queen also has a system of lifetime loans to any single person, so there's little to no chance of repeating the tiara's on others.


----------



## mdcx

I don’t see Harry going to Canada for a while. I’m wondering(hoping) the fam might convince him he needs a “rest” in a rehab facility of some sort.

And Meghan surely knew he had this rugby commitment in the UK coming up, but was happy to leave the country knowing he would likely have to remain behind alone for a while.

I see a few stories coming out openly speculating that Meghan deliberately isolated and controlled Harry. Good that this is becoming part of the narrative now.


----------



## rose60610

I wouldn't trust Meghan with a bobby pin.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

doni said:


> Babys deal with jet lag better that’s older kids, plus they have decided they want to live between two continents so they cannot be overly worried about things like jet lag...
> 
> Unless they mean the family will live in Canada/US and the two will travel to the UK occasionally for appearances to justify all the money they are getting from the Prince of Wales.
> 
> What I find sad is that they have been 1 month a half away but still the cousins will not be meeting, have some sort of celebration, presents... The brothers always appeared to be extremely close and they were also very close to their cousins so I’m sure they would have looked forward to having their kids grow up together... Gossip aside, just this, their kids not meeting at all over the extended holiday period, shows that their relationship must be at a very low point indeed...



There is no legitimate reason for leaving little baby Archie alone. Especially when I consider their mode of travel.

We do not know their mode of transportation to cross the pond for their reception post-Holidays to join Prince Harry’s family. Talk about MM putting QEII in her place.

Am I to surmise that Oprah’s private plane or Air Canada or British Airways’ First Class is not a viable way for Meghan to keep Archie close?

Funny, we have traveled globally w/two children since they were infants and we were just fine.

Harry was ripe for a plucking and we just witnessed history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

DC-Cutie said:


> Far from a fall from grace


I was being generous. 

Everything about them from then to now is a stark contrast. And now here we are, on the cusp of them being persona non-grata from the whole thing. They burned down so much promise.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Flatsy said:


> I think it is a sign of the Queen's good favor to allow family members access to her jewelry collection.  Katie Nicholl said in Vanity Fair that the Queen never got over some of the things that happened with Meghan around the time of the wedding.  I think it was probably tiara-gate and the Queen having to subsequently discipline Harry for bullying her staff with "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets."  I suspect there was other drama that still hasn't made it into the tabloids yet.


These stories are juicy and I need to hear all of them.  They take on a new level of absurdity in light of what is presently occurring.


----------



## Lounorada

Dunno if anyone is interested in this (slightly long) interview but I watched this earier as I waited for a delayed flight. Very interesting as Arthur Edwards has been a royal photgrapher for a long time and has known Harry and William since they were little kids- he knows them personally and always comes across as a pure gentleman so what he has to say is genuine not petty, hateful gossip.
Thought it was quite sad to hear how disappointed he is at hows things have unfolded.
Moments I thought were especially interesting were:
3.23  -  3.51  -  6.53  -  7.41  -  10.30  - 12.55  -  15.26  -  15.48  - 17.10


----------



## mdcx

Mrs.Z said:


> These stories are juicy and I need to hear all of them.  They take on a new level of absurdity in light of what is presently occurring.


Can you imagine some of the discussions had amongst the staff about Madam Sussex?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting... apparently Meghan ended up storming out of the theater visit which is why it wasn’t publicized... this was right before the announcement. She also seemed to be splaying out her hands to show she wasn’t wearing her rings? Hmm.


----------



## carmen56

Yes, I noticed she wasn’t wearing her rings.  Hopefully Harry will wise up eventually and see he’s been had.  I await the divorce announcement with interest!


----------



## Mrs.Z

If they get divorced any time soon my head will explode!  I mean really....it’s been a hot minute!


----------



## LittleStar88

This is all better than anything on TV right now...


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> This is all better than anything on TV right now...


LOL
even the usually low key NPR called the announcement a bombshell


----------



## mrsinsyder

I hadn’t thought of it but it was mentioned elsewhere... god forbid anything were to happen to the Queen or Philip right now. The world would never forgive them.


----------



## Chagall

LittleStar88 said:


> This is all better than anything on TV right now...


​


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> This is all better than anything on TV right now...


The Crown will be juicy for the next few seasons!


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting... apparently Meghan ended up storming out of the theater visit which is why it wasn’t publicized... this was right before the announcement. She also seemed to be splaying out her hands to show she wasn’t wearing her rings? Hmm.
> 
> View attachment 4636429


I read somewhere else that she got to the engagement only to find QEll had cancelled it! Her “revenge” was to remove her rings for the paps.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting... apparently Meghan ended up storming out of the theater visit which is why it wasn’t publicized... this was right before the announcement. She also seemed to be splaying out her hands to show she wasn’t wearing her rings? Hmm.



I read that earlier in an Instagram comment but I wonder WHY she stormed off? (IG said Queen had asked for a meeting, M refused and went to the theater instead just to find palace had cancelled her appointment)


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t thought of it but it was mentioned elsewhere... god forbid anything were to happen to the Queen or Philip right now. The world would never forgive them.



Another reason they probably wanted to leave now, sooner rather than later.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> I read somewhere else that she got to the engagement only to find QEll had cancelled it! Her “revenge” was to remover her rings for the paps.



LOL...that will teach them! If that's true, how petty and immature can one get.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t thought of it but it was mentioned elsewhere... god forbid anything were to happen to the Queen or Philip right now. The world would never forgive them.


How true. Prince Philip is 98 years old and just recently released from hospital. What cruel behaviour to create all this friction and drama on him at this time.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I think it is a sign of the Queen's good favor to allow family members access to her jewelry collection.  Katie Nicholl said in Vanity Fair that the Queen never got over some of the things that happened with Meghan around the time of the wedding.  I think it was probably tiara-gate and the Queen having to subsequently discipline Harry for bullying her staff with "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets."  I suspect there was other drama that still hasn't made it into the tabloids yet.


Sheesh .. and to me, *THIS *shows the extent to which Meghan just didn't "get" what she was marrying into!!!  I can't even begin to imagine telling the Queen of England that I '_want_' this or '_want_' that .. seriously .. that takes some stones for sure!?!?!?!  Darn good thing that Meghan didn't exist during the time of QEI .. it would be more like "_take off her head_"!!


----------



## mdcx

So, now that Megs views herself as freed from the shackles of royal dress codes and decorum, what can we look forward to her appearing in?
I would say denim cutoffs and a well unbuttoned white shirt but it is winter there.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> So, now that Megs views herself as freed from the shackles of royal dress codes and decorum, what can we look forward to her appearing in?
> I would say denim cutoffs and a well unbuttoned white shirt but it is winter there.



I heard she’s already teaming up with Givenchy 

Unfortunately for them she makes everything she wears look terrible.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I heard she’s already teaming up with Givenchy
> 
> Unfortunately for them she makes everything she wears look terrible.


LOL


----------



## jcnc

lanasyogamama said:


> I have to say, the discussion here is so much better informed than what I see on Facebook.  Over there it’s all “if they want to give up all the money and live their life, so be it!!!!”  SMDH.


That and the many US articles stating Meghan had to make this call due to racism... SMH


----------



## mdcx

Juicy:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7874687/Friends-Meghan-Markle-open-DAVID-JONES-Megxit.html


----------



## sdkitty

jcnc said:


> That and the many US articles stating Meghan had to make this call due to racism... SMH


believe me she has plenty of support on that.....someone on a talk show recently lamented how meghan suffered racism and the royals should have defended her more......


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s an article on daily mail that shows all her outfits since they got married. It’s amazing how happy and fresh they were, to now so sullen and messy all the time. What a fall from grace.


RIGHT? .. saw that this morning and thought EXACTLY the same thing!  You could totally believe their happiness and WOW .. her style was SO MUCH better at that point!  Mind you, yes .. expensive items, but she looked great!


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> The Crown will be juicy for the next few seasons!


Meghan can play herself when the show reaches the present day.


----------



## mdcx

The article I posted above confirms that both their dogs travelled to Canada with them in November, and remain there.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lounorada said:


> Meghan can play herself when the show reaches the present day.


She’s such a crummy actress someone else would probably be better at it.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> If they get divorced any time soon my head will explode!  I mean really....it’s been a hot minute!


Noooo!  Don't explode.  You won't be able to wear your pretty C things hahaha!


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> The article I posted above confirms that both their dogs travelled to Canada with them in November, and remain there.


They knew they were moving.  Gee, this was nice of her to take them instead of sending them off to who knows where.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s such a crummy actress someone else would probably be better at it.


No she can't.  She's too old.  She will demand to observe all the auditions and will end up picking a 14 year old.


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s such a crummy actress someone else would probably be better at it.


So true


----------



## mshermes

TBH....I really do not care what becomes of either one of them, although there is a lot of drama.  But, poor Archie is the one who will suffer and be traumatized. It is so unfair. He could have had a lovely life with his cousins if he had the proper parents.


----------



## Annawakes

mrsinsyder said:


> She also seemed to be splaying out her hands to show she wasn’t wearing her rings? Hmm.
> 
> View attachment 4636429



Soooooo pathetic to walk with her hands splayed like that just to show no rings.  Who walks like that?!  It’s so pathetic.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Sheesh .. and to me, *THIS *shows the extent to which Meghan just didn't "get" what she was marrying into!!!  I can't even begin to imagine telling the Queen of England that I '_want_' this or '_want_' that .. seriously .. that takes some stones for sure!?!?!?!  Darn good thing that Meghan didn't exist during the time of QEI .. it would be more like "_take off her head_"!!


Back then, when a man was given a Dukedom, he was given lands and riches too.  The monarchs took away such as easily as they gave them.   They also took away the children and made them wards and fostered them to another noble family who might be given the income from those land as recompense for their trouble.  Since there is no land/estate associated with the Sussex Dukedom, there is nothing to take in the way of land, but there are riches and today it is called an allowance.  Taking away the children is still an option if the monarch so wishes.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> I heard she’s already teaming up with Givenchy
> 
> Unfortunately for them she makes everything she wears look terrible.



Will never wear Givenchy again, that reeks of BRAND DESPERATION


----------



## mdcx

I mean, does Megs realise Canada is part of the Commonwealth? We who live in the Commonwealth have QEll on all our money! I’m guessing Megs will avoid cash!


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Will never wear Givenchy again, that reeks of BRAND DESPERATION


Lucky for me I have never worn it.


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hope QEII & Prince Charles cuts them off and strips their titles.  Truly. It will save the BRF a lot of heartache. 

This is war

Just read this in Daily Mail and it looks this couple, if we judge them by their “friends” are following Andrew’s example of seedy relationships:

“Meanwhile, the Sussexes declined to name the alleged Russian billionaire who may have bankrolled their getaway. The owner of the mansion has masked his identity using controversial legal methods.”


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Sheesh .. and to me, *THIS *shows the extent to which Meghan just didn't "get" what she was marrying into!!!  I can't even begin to imagine telling the Queen of England that I '_want_' this or '_want_' that .. seriously .. that takes some stones for sure!?!?!?!  Darn good thing that Meghan didn't exist during the time of QEI .. it would be more like "_take off her head_"!!



Meghan seems to be treating the Queen with as much respect as she has treated most (all?) of her own family with the possible exception of Doria.


----------



## mrsinsyder

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Will never wear Givenchy again, that reeks of BRAND DESPERATION


Spongebob would wear it better.


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> Meghan seems to be treating the Queen with as much respect as she has treated most (all?) of her own family with the possible exception of Doria.


I find it odd that Doria did an obviously staged pap walk today. Especially after people were thinking she may be with Archie. Was she making a statement?


----------



## rose60610

jcnc said:


> That and the many US articles stating Meghan had to make this call due to racism... SMH



The US media are mainly garbage. Their hard core news job is to report news, instead they do all they can to sensationalize it and throw in bias. Opinion people are expected to be biased and that's fine, that's why they're called "opinion" people. But even hard news is so slanted it's often at least part fiction. Stuff I care about I'll cross reference with several foreign news sources instead.


----------



## youngster

mdcx said:


> So, now that Megs views herself as freed from the shackles of royal dress codes and decorum, what can we look forward to her appearing in?
> I would say denim cutoffs and a well unbuttoned white shirt *but it is winter there*.



Yes, it is! I'm to the south of where she is and temps are dropping.  We're due for a cold snap and some serious snow next week. She might get snowed in next week if she sticks around.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

youngster said:


> Meghan seems to be treating the Queen with as much respect as she has treated most (all?) of her own family with the possible exception of Doria.


I got the impression Doria had ‘abandoned’ Meghan in her childhood. Perhaps in Meghan’s different way of thinking, that made her ‘respect’ Doria? All very dysfunctional obviously.


----------



## mshermes

Have a laugh.....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...arkle-have-been-plotting-this-my-entire-life/


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Annawakes said:


> Soooooo pathetic to walk with her hands splayed like that just to show no rings.  Who walks like that?!  It’s so pathetic.


Why isn't she wearing her rings? What's the statement she's trying to make?


----------



## mshermes

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Why isn't she wearing her rings? What's the statement she's trying to make?


A not so subtle FU???


----------



## mrsinsyder

LOL I’m visiting my parents and they just came on the news.

My dad: “who is she anyway? Be independent? How do they make money? Social media influencers? Oh god”


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mshermes said:


> A not so subtle FU???


To Harry? Cuz who else does that hurt but your spouse. I don't get it. Unless she wanted stories about a split in the press. Whatever. Childish move.


----------



## Coconuts40

mshermes said:


> Found this after quick search....
> https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8



If this is the case, couldn't Meghan and Harry be accused and charged with kidnapping?  MM likely deliberately kept baby Archie in Canada because with the news breaking, and if Archie came back to England with them, there is no way the Queen would allow Archie back out of the country and back to Canada.  This was all perfectly orchestrated.


----------



## big bad mama

mshermes said:


> TBH....I really do not care what becomes of either one of them, although there is a lot of drama.  But, poor Archie is the one who will suffer and be traumatized. It is so unfair. He could have had a lovely life with his cousins if he had the proper parents.


Yeah, loving relatives that are truly prejudice. Maybe if the BRF had stood up against all the racial attacks Meghan and Harry would still be in London. Glad they are standing up for themselves. No one knows what it’s like to be called racial slurs if you’ve never experience it. To be ridicule just because you are different is disgusting. Plus no one knows how Harry has been treated behind closed doors by his so called family. Sometimes family is your worst enemy. If he had been treated so well by his family I don’t think he would have agreed so readily to leave the BRF.


----------



## Katel

Lounorada said:


>



Bwahahahahahaha!!!


----------



## big bad mama

Annawakes said:


> Soooooo pathetic to walk with her hands splayed like that just to show no rings.  Who walks like that?!  It’s so pathetic.


Give me a break. So she doesn’t have her rings on that means nothing. There are plenty of people that don’t wear their rings everyday. Sometimes you may forget, fingers swell, your profession, etc. People need to quit looking for something that isn’t there.


----------



## LittleStar88

mdcx said:


> So, now that Megs views herself as freed from the shackles of royal dress codes and decorum, what can we look forward to her appearing in?
> I would say denim cutoffs and a well unbuttoned white shirt but it is winter there.



We already saw it. Boring brown with pit stains.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Will never wear Givenchy again, that reeks of BRAND DESPERATION


I don't hate Meghan and Givenchy enough to give up wearing my Antigona  But no to future pieces!


----------



## LittleStar88

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hope QEII & Prince Charles cuts them off and strips their titles.  Truly. It will save the BRF a lot of heartache.
> 
> This is war
> 
> Just read this in Daily Mail and it looks this couple, if we judge them by their “friends” are following Andrew’s example of seedy relationships:
> 
> “Meanwhile, the Sussexes declined to name the alleged Russian billionaire who may have bankrolled their getaway. The owner of the mansion has masked his identity using controversial legal methods.”



OMG this will be a movie. You can't even make this stuff up! Who would play Meghan, Harry?


----------



## jehaga

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This was Doria, Wednesday and Thursday in Los Angeles. She's obviously not the one taking care of Archie, so it must be Jessica Mulroney, as reported.
> View attachment 4635943
> View attachment 4635944


Doria seems like a no-nonsense no-drama person. She has been staying off the radar since the beginning. Respect.


----------



## big bad mama

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t thought of it but it was mentioned elsewhere... god forbid anything were to happen to the Queen or Philip right now. The world would never forgive them.


If they die it’s because of old age. We all are going to die. That’s part of life’s journey. I mean she didn’t die when her pedophile son Andrew got accused. To me that’s more scandalous to have a pedophile as a son. Kate and Sophie better watch their daughters around him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

big bad mama said:


> Give me a break. So she doesn’t have her rings on that means nothing. There are plenty of people that don’t wear their rings everyday. Sometimes you may forget, fingers swell, your profession, etc. People need to quit looking for something that isn’t there.


How do you know it means nothing?  Maybe it does and maybe it doesn’t. Maybe you need to stop looking for things that don’t exist.


----------



## big bad mama

mshermes said:


> How do you know it means nothing?  Maybe it does and maybe it doesn’t. Maybe you need to stop looking for things that don’t exist.


Because I know a lot of women that don’t wear their rings everyday.


----------



## mshermes

big bad mama said:


> If they die it’s because of old age. We all are going to die. That’s part of life’s journey. I mean she didn’t die when her pedophile son Andrew got accused. To me that’s more scandalous to have a pedophile as a son. Kate and Sophie better watch their daughters around him.


Accused does not mean guilty.


----------



## mshermes

big bad mama said:


> Because I know a lot of women that don’t wear their rings everyday.


Well they aren’t MM and they are not hounded by photographers


----------



## big bad mama

mshermes said:


> Accused does not mean guilty.


That man is guilty and to not believe these women is crazy. Not one but dozens of women have come out.


----------



## mrsinsyder

big bad mama said:


> If they die it’s because of old age. We all are going to die. That’s part of life’s journey. I mean she didn’t die when her pedophile son Andrew got accused. To me that’s more scandalous to have a pedophile as a son. Kate and Sophie better watch their daughters around him.


There’s a whole thread about Andrew that you can go off on.


----------



## Flatsy

big bad mama said:


> Because I know a lot of women that don’t wear their rings everyday.


Meghan's never been photographed in public not wearing at least one of her rings.  Knowing that every last detail of her appearance is under scrutiny whenever she's in public, it's very odd that she was photographed without her rings for the very first time right now.  I don't know if it means anything, but it was odd.


----------



## jcnc

I find the excuse that “media hounds Meghan and thus she is leaving BRF” very unbelievable. Press follows anyone who marries a famous person. And Meghan was an actress before. She could have managed media than many others. An example is Amal.. she had a lot of media eyes initially after she married George.. but she continued with her life and media backed off..

I understand media is a parcel of the royal family but she knew that when she got married. Making Harry give up on his family/ legacy/ country/ duty seems soo foolish and petty.


----------



## marthastoo

big bad mama said:


> Give me a break. So she doesn’t have her rings on that means nothing. There are plenty of people that don’t wear their rings everyday. Sometimes you may forget, fingers swell, your profession, etc. _People need to quit looking for something that isn’t there_.


Oh, people have plenty to say whether there's something there or not.  Like 1129 pages of stuff to say.


----------



## Aqua01

Isn't it sad that every obsessive and delusional Megxit stan has to talk down someone to elevate their woke queen. 

Each and every single time that happens, it only makes me dislike Megxit even more and more. And I have a feeling I'm not the only one....


----------



## PewPew

Lounorada said:


> Dunno if anyone is interested in this (slightly long) interview but I watched this earier as I waited for a delayed flight. Very interesting as Arthur Edwards has been a royal photgrapher for a long time and has known Harry and William since they were little kids- he knows them personally and always comes across as a pure gentleman so what he has to say is genuine not petty, hateful gossip.
> Thought it was quite sad to hear how disappointed he is at hows things have unfolded.
> Moments I thought were especially interesting were:
> 3.23  -  3.51  -  6.53  -  7.41  -  10.30  - 12.55  -  15.26  -  15.48  - 17.10




Thanks for posting this interview & taking time to mark the times of key points. I found the royal photographer to be very calm & insightful. The contrast btwn Harry’s photos and demeanor pre & post marriage are stark


----------



## youngster

I also thought that video interview that @Lounorada posted was fascinating.  Mr. Edwards has some really interesting insight and opinions, and he's basically known both Will and Harry for decades.  He thinks they will find that the grass is not always greener and might be regretting what they've done within a year or so.  Well, he thinks there is a good chance that Harry will regret it.

Who would have thought 3 or so years ago that Harry, who seemed like he'd really matured, seemed happy, settled, getting along great with his brother, and was one of the most popular members of the royal family, would end up in this place with his family, the same family he wanted to give Meghan because "she'd never had a family of her own"?  Clearly, he liked his family just fine before and during their engagement.

She's quite an operator, gotta hand it to her.  She got Harry to adopt her attitude and markle his own family, just like she did hers. Cut them off, leave them behind, move on and don't look back.  Not even the decency to stay in London for an extra couple of days to meet with Charles or the Queen face to face. Just run off to Vancouver Island and leave Harry to deal with the fall out.


----------



## mdcx

Remember the *Ignore* button. #blessed


----------



## ilovenicebags

For some reason Meghan comes across as the type of woman that no matter who she married she would distance that man from his family/career/individuality, etc. She just happened to marry a member of the royal family so that means royal family must go and you must move to North America. I think if anyone seriously wants to marry a royal (from any monarchy) there is a clear understanding that you are not only marrying that member but you are marrying the monarchy as well. For some people it works out great for others it doesn’t.


----------



## PewPew

carmen56 said:


> Yes, I noticed she wasn’t wearing her rings.



This is such a Hollywood / celebrity thing to do. Classy people don’t remove their rings whenever they have a spat with their spouse or his family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

PewPew said:


> Thanks for posting this interview & taking time to mark the times of key points. I found the royal photographer to be very calm & insightful. The contrast btwn Harry’s photos and demeanor pre & post marriage are stark


My pleasure  I agree, he gave a really calm and insightful interview. Harry now, looks a shadow of his former happy, friendly self.


----------



## youngster

Lounorada said:


> My pleasure  I agree, he gave a really calm and insightful interview. Harry now, looks a shadow of his former happy, friendly self.



That's also what his biographer said, that he is behaving really out of character.  These are a few of the things she has said:
_The Harry that the nation came to love, a charming, cheerful, self-deprecating Jack the Lad, has been missing for many months.

He is essentially rejecting his birthright, his closest family and a public role that he seemed to have embraced and flourished in. Everything, indeed, that helped transform a headstrong, troubled teenager into a fine soldier respected by his comrades, who saw military action twice and who became a hugely effective campaigner for wounded veterans.

I am baffled, too, by the sheer disrespect he has shown to his grandmother. He was always so close to the Queen. He'd even call her on her mobile!

Her Majesty will put up with a lot, but one thing she hates is surprises: she likes to know what will confront her in the morning papers. But Harry and Meghan ignored this.

Any negative stories about Meghan — for example, those that questioned her taking a private jet, costing hundreds of thousands of pounds, to New York for a baby shower, have been relatively mild compared to those printed about the Princess of Wales (or Camilla Parker Bowles, for that matter).

His former friends, meanwhile, are desperately hurt. Many would love to help him, yet he has isolated himself. That is not healthy. For prince or pauper, life is lonely without friends to lean on.


_


----------



## mshermes

mdcx said:


> Remember the *Ignore* button. #blessed


There's a REPORT button as well.


----------



## CeeJay

I sincerely hope this DM article is somewhat jaded because if it reads as I interpreted it (_my opinion_), I hope that Meghan didn't see that she could take advantage of Harry and his "mental illness" .. because that would be WAY BEYOND sh##ty!!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ry-suffering-mental-trauma-mothers-death.html


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> There's a REPORT button as well.


Ah .. done!!!


----------



## Lounorada

Yesterday I saw a news report about this story on tv and as the reporter was talking they played footage of H&M at the Canada House the other day and the things that struck me are-
How Harry looks on edge around Meghan, he never looks at ease, always fidgeting and nervous looking.
How she charges ahead of him all the time, he always stands back and waits for her to greet people first, like she's the blood royal not him. And before people say he's being polite, no. It doesn't look like that and it also doesn't look like he's being chivalrous.
How she's always 'switched on' and knows what camers are watching and listening.
How they walk over to greet people putside and stand there holding hands. Looks so rude IMO.
There was also a clip of them inside the building standing by a couch ready to sit down and chat with the staff, Meghan sits first, Harry is chatting/laughing and then she taps him to sit down because heaven forbid he wouldn't do as he should.
It just seems like she has him wrapped around her little finger, she would say jump and he'd say how high.
Can't find the exact coverage I saw on the news but these are similar...


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> I sincerely this DM article is somewhat jaded because if it reads as I interpreted it (_my opinion_), I hope that Meghan didn't see that she could take advantage of Harry and his "mental illness" .. because that would be WAY BEYOND sh##ty!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ry-suffering-mental-trauma-mothers-death.html


I almost want to not believe it because it made me so sad; however, I would put nothing past her.


----------



## Coconuts40

Lounorada said:


> Yesterday I saw a news report about this story on tv and as the reporter was talking they played footage of H&M at the Canada House the other day and the things that struck me are-
> How Harry looks on edge around Meghan, he never looks at ease, always fidgeting and nervous looking.
> How she charges ahead of him all the time, he always stands back and waits for her to greet people first, like she's the blood royal not him. And before people say he's being polite, no. It doesn't look like that and it also doesn't look like he's being chivalrous.
> How she's always 'switched on' and knows what camers are watching and listening.
> How they walk over to greet people putside and stand there holding hands. Looks so rude IMO.
> *There was also a clip of them inside the building standing by a couch ready to sit down and chat with the staff, Meghan sits first, Harry is chatting/laughing and then she taps him to sit down *because heaven forbid he wouldn't do as he should.
> It just seems like she has him wrapped around her little finger, she would say jump and he'd say how high.
> Can't find the exact coverage I saw on the news but these are similar...




See Bold in quote.... I am in complete agreement with you!  I noticed this too and noticed the same thing right away, how she sat down first and gestures for him to sit down too.  Poor Harry.


----------



## rose60610

big bad mama said:


> Because I know a lot of women that don’t wear their rings everyday.



I don't wear my rings every day either!  

But then I don't issue statements saying I'm walking away from The Crown but of course of course of course I will support the Crown and The Queen because they will always be OH-SO-PRECIOUS-TO-ME or words thereabouts. 

So the least Meghan could have done, in her married environment of where everything is a symbol or symptom or something, is wear her rings. Don't tell me she wasn't wearing them when got to the Theatre assuming, rightfully, she'd be photographed six ways to Sunday. It wasn't until after she arrived that she was notified the event "was cancelled". And I don't believe it was due to racism. It was probably due to being .......an expression that'd get one banned from this site. And that isn't racist either.


----------



## baghagg

kemilia said:


> She, who cradled her pregnant belly for the entire 9 months



Thank you!  I really thought I was the only one who noticed this - her hands were constantly on her stomach, drawing the publics' eyes to it and putting it on display.  It was such a bizarre, creepy manipulation.  I remember pointing it out to my husband - he definitely would not have noticed unless I said something.  Having been a pregnant woman, it is so not a thing women do all the time.  She seems extremely needy to be honest..


----------



## mrsinsyder

rose60610 said:


> I don't wear my rings every day either!
> 
> But then I don't issue statements saying I'm walking away from The Crown but of course of course of course I will support the Crown and The Queen because they will always be OH-SO-PRECIOUS-TO-ME or words thereabouts.
> 
> So the least Meghan could have done, in her married environment of where everything is a symbol or symptom or something, is wear her rings. Don't tell me she wasn't wearing them when got to the Theatre assuming, rightfully, she'd be photographed six ways to Sunday. It wasn't until after she arrived that she was notified the event "was cancelled". And I don't believe it was due to racism. It was probably due to being .......an expression that'd get one banned from this site. And that isn't racist either.



This is also a woman who was SO aware of her rings that she wore different rings to avoid offending the poors in South Africa. And now all of a sudden it’s something she probably didn’t even think about? Okay sure.


----------



## Annawakes

big bad mama said:


> Give me a break. So she doesn’t have her rings on that means nothing. There are plenty of people that don’t wear their rings everyday. Sometimes you may forget, fingers swell, your profession, etc. People need to quit looking for something that isn’t there.


It’s the awkward way she’s showing the world that she doesn’t have them on.  Who walks with their hands splayed on their thighs like that?

She wanted people to notice the rings aren’t there.  Whatever message she’s trying to send with walking like that, I don’t know.

At this point, she should know that not wearing her rings would be endlessly speculated on.  

I don’t wear my wedding ring either.  Nobody cares to speculate about me though.  I also don’t walk around with my hands splayed on my thighs.


----------



## Lodpah

Just reading the comments is educational .  Meghan could wipe out an entire population somewhere in the world and her stans would say, "well, poor people, they didn't stand a chance in this world, with hunger and starvation. She did a humane thing."


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Yesterday I saw a news report about this story on tv and as the reporter was talking they played footage of H&M at the Canada House the other day and the things that struck me are-
> How Harry looks on edge around Meghan, he never looks at ease, always fidgeting and nervous looking.
> How she charges ahead of him all the time, he always stands back and waits for her to greet people first, like she's the blood royal not him. And before people say he's being polite, no. It doesn't look like that and it also doesn't look like he's being chivalrous.
> How she's always 'switched on' and knows what camers are watching and listening.
> How they walk over to greet people putside and stand there holding hands. Looks so rude IMO.
> There was also a clip of them inside the building standing by a couch ready to sit down and chat with the staff, Meghan sits first, Harry is chatting/laughing and then she taps him to sit down because heaven forbid he wouldn't do as he should.
> It just seems like she has him wrapped around her little finger, she would say jump and he'd say how high.
> Can't find the exact coverage I saw on the news but these are similar...




Think he has Stockholm Syndrome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome


----------



## Lodpah

Annawakes said:


> It’s the awkward way she’s showing the world that she doesn’t have them on.  Who walks with their hands splayed on their thighs like that?
> 
> She wanted people to notice the rings aren’t there.  Whatever message she’s trying to send with walking like that, I don’t know.
> 
> At this point, she should know that not wearing her rings would be endlessly speculated on.
> 
> I don’t wear my wedding ring either.  Nobody cares to speculate about me though.  I also don’t walk around with my hands splayed on my thighs.


Meghan does not do anything without thinking it through. We know the Queen is not that dense. The Queen will have the last word. She does things in such subtle ways but powerful, like driving the Saudi King or prince when the Queen knows that in SA women can't drive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m hoping they can deprogram Harry and then send special operatives to Canada to take the baby back, then put Meg on the same list as her sister Sam and keep her out of the country.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I don't wear my rings every day either!
> 
> But then I don't issue statements saying I'm walking away from The Crown but of course of course of course I will support the Crown and The Queen because they will always be OH-SO-PRECIOUS-TO-ME or words thereabouts.
> 
> So the least Meghan could have done, in her married environment of where everything is a symbol or symptom or something, is wear her rings. Don't tell me she wasn't wearing them when got to the Theatre assuming, rightfully, she'd be photographed six ways to Sunday. It wasn't until after she arrived that she was notified the event "was cancelled". And I don't believe it was due to racism. It was probably due to being .......an expression that'd get one banned from this site. And that isn't racist either.


The palace markled her at the theater.  It's OK you can say that.


----------



## Lodpah

Also, didn't Harry say he fell in love with Meghan when he saw her in Suits? He married an actress playing the part but he forgot the part that she was playing a role. I don't think he knew what he was getting himself into.


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG this will be a movie. You can't even make this stuff up! Who would play Meghan, Harry?


I would love to see Jessica Alba play her and Ed Sheeran play Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Meghan does not do anything without thinking it through. We know the Queen is not that dense. The Queen will have the last word. She does things in such subtle ways but powerful, like driving the Saudi King or prince when the Queen knows that in SA women can't drive.


The Queen was paying the King back for making her sit out in the sun when she visited S. Arabia.  She was in the desert and supposed to see him and she was told that he was taking a nap.  I actually saw this on a documentary of her travels several years ago.  I couldn't believe what I was seeing.  Her Majesty literally sat down and made small talk with  her courtiers while the guy napped.  The King thought he was sending a message that she was nothing but a mere female.  She never forgets anything!


----------



## Lodpah

So did London Madame Tussaud's remove their wax figures and the LA Times really ran an article called: "Renounce Your Titles You Cowards"?

This is better than any drama out there now. 

They are going to be banished and live out their lives with endless cocktail parties, celebrity events (unless the celebrities don't want to be associated with them). 

I feel bad for Elton John as I'm sure he's close to both brothers but since he's been knighted I'm sure his loyalty is to the Crown.


----------



## Lodpah

Talk about scathing news. This person has to be a source or knows someone on the inside. 

https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/01/10/the-sussex-crisis-reactions-and-responses/

In the end tho, the Crown will be for the people, what is best for the people, damn the family drama. I believe the Queen will do the right thing and it will probably be the most dramatic event in the monarchy forever. The Crown has had many troubling events but the Monarchy is still standing. Meghan? I don't think she knows what she's up against. The Queen has many advisors.


----------



## Lodpah

OMG, even the RAF/Banter twitter are making memes and jokes. Hilarious, the Queen is called Aunty Betty.


----------



## Lodpah

Couldn't help myself:

Will this recreate the Battle of New Orleans (Meghan) and Great Britain (Harry):





Sorry, need a little humour


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m hoping they can deprogram Harry and then send special operatives to Canada to take the baby back, then put Meg on the same list as her sister Sam and keep her out of the country.


 great plan


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Talk about scathing news. This person has to be a source or knows someone on the inside.
> 
> https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/01/10/the-sussex-crisis-reactions-and-responses/
> 
> In the end tho, the Crown will be for the people, what is best for the people, damn the family drama. I believe the Queen will do the right thing and it will probably be the most dramatic event in the monarchy forever. The Crown has had many troubling events but the Monarchy is still standing. Meghan? I don't think she knows what she's up against. The Queen has many advisors.


WOW!! .. this is quite the article and those memes .. 

On another note, I've got to give some side-eye to the article(s) that said that the Obamas were 'coaching' H&M in regards to their "life outside the BRF".  I cannot imagine Barak ***** giving them advice about creating a Foundation/Charity using their titles because he knows darn well about financial dealings when you represent a Governmental Domain and especially if part of the British Royal Family.  To be honest, this whole 'gifting' of the Vancouver property by some Russian oligarch should raise quite a concern there!  Could this guy have secretly taped them? .. could he then ask for favors, etc.?  It's just NOT something one does when they are that high up in ANY country!!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Don’t you think the empty spread fingers was a warning to Harry? “Stick to the plan or there will be consequences.” 

Wowzers. This is just unbelievable.


----------



## Tivo

Meghan is being so messy. She better scale it down before her celebrity friends start distancing themselves. All the sudden  Oprah and Amal stop answering their phones. She seems exhausting.


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> I sincerely hope this DM article is somewhat jaded because if it reads as I interpreted it (_my opinion_), I hope that Meghan didn't see that she could take advantage of Harry and his "mental illness" .. because that would be WAY BEYOND sh##ty!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ry-suffering-mental-trauma-mothers-death.html


Meghan has been pandering to Harry’s mental health issues by cosplaying Diana for the last two and a half years. Feeding on his every insecurity. Wasn’t there another boy who walked behind his mothers coffin? If only I could remember his name. Hmm... or was it Harry walking there all by himself? It must have been...



Coconuts40 said:


> See Bold in quote.... I am in complete agreement with you!  I noticed this too and noticed the same thing right away, how she sat down first and gestures for him to sit down too.  Poor Harry.


She’s been rushing in front of him at official events and telling him where to stand and when to speak since like, forever. 



Lodpah said:


> Just reading the comments is educational .  Meghan could wipe out an entire population somewhere in the world and her stans would say, "well, poor people, they didn't stand a chance in this world, with hunger and starvation. She did a humane thing."


Sounds like another narc I know 



Sophisticatted said:


> I’m hoping they can deprogram Harry and then send special operatives to Canada to take the baby back, then put Meg on the same list as her sister Sam and keep her out of the country.


Megs better stay out of the Massey Tunnel on her way to/from the Victoria ferry terminal. 



Lodpah said:


> I feel bad for Elton John as I'm sure he's close to both brothers but since he's been knighted I'm sure his loyalty is to the Crown.


His only loyalty is to them dolla dolla dolla bills.


----------



## hellosunshine

For those that are concerned in the future commercialization of the Sussex brand, here's an interesting tidbit-

Did you know Prince Charles' already making money in the very same way that the Sussex's intend to make money? He sells biscuits, sausages, jams, bread, milk, vegetables and even nursery products through his Duchy of Cornwall. He makes a good chunk of money from this too. Below is one of the products he sells...




So, if you're going to be concerned/outraged about this...shouldn't everyone be more concerned in the direct heir, and not the 7th in line?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## auntyjo

hellosunshine said:


> For those that are concerned in the future commercialization of the Sussex brand, here's an interesting tidbit-
> 
> Did you know Prince Charles' already making money in the very same way that the Sussex's intend to make money? He sells biscuits, sausages, jams, bread, milk, vegetables and even nursery products through his Duchy of Cornwall. He makes a good chunk of money from this too. Below is one of the products he sells...
> 
> View attachment 4636675
> 
> 
> So, if you're going to be concerned/outraged about this...shouldn't everyone be more concerned in the direct heir, and not the 7th in line?


Thing is, all profits made goes back to the duchy but brand Sussex wants to get all profits to their own pocket by being ‘financially independent’ whilst capitalising on the title bestowed by them by Britain and still wants to be funded? Now that’s greedy. Britain should have a right to their profits too IMO. If they wanna break free  , by all means go ahead whatever makes them happy please ditch all royal entitlements , stop capitalising on it and create their own brand. That is how it should be done.


----------



## mshermes

auntyjo said:


> Thing is, all profits made goes back to the duchy but brand Sussex wants to get all profits to their own pocket by being ‘financially independent’ whilst capitalising on the title bestowed by them by Britain and still wants to be funded? Now that’s greedy. Britain should have a right to their profits too IMO. If they wanna break free  , by all means go ahead whatever makes them happy please ditch all royal entitlements , stop capitalising on it and create their own brand. That is how it should be done.


Correct.....
The company Duchy Originals Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary company of The Prince of Wales's Charitable Foundation and donates to the charity from its profits.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> For those that are concerned in the future commercialization of the Sussex brand, here's an interesting tidbit-
> 
> Did you know Prince Charles' already making money in the very same way that the Sussex's intend to make money? He sells biscuits, sausages, jams, bread, milk, vegetables and even nursery products through his Duchy of Cornwall. He makes a good chunk of money from this too. Below is one of the products he sells...
> 
> View attachment 4636675
> 
> 
> So, if you're going to be concerned/outraged about this...shouldn't everyone be more concerned in the direct heir, and not the 7th in line?


Stop.


----------



## leuleu

Annawakes said:


> Soooooo pathetic to walk with her hands splayed like that just to show no rings.  Who walks like that?!  It’s so pathetic.


That's exactly the post I wanted to write before reading yours.


----------



## hellosunshine

mshermes said:


> Correct.....
> The company Duchy Originals Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary company of The Prince of Wales's Charitable Foundation and donates to the charity from its profits.



Yes, and the Sussex's own profits could be tied to their charity. We will see.



Meh-gan said:


> Stop.



Confused. Stop what?


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, and the Sussex's own profits could be tied to their charity. We will see.
> 
> 
> 
> Confused. Stop What?
> 
> Embarrassing yourself.


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> Yes, and the Sussex's own profits could be tied to their charity. We will see.
> 
> 
> 
> Confused. Stop what?


Sussex’s could be tied to.....will the profits go to the charity? It is not how you were presenting your blockbuster information on Duchy.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meh-gan said:


> Yes, and the Sussex's own profits could be tied to their charity. We will see.
> 
> Confused. Stop What?
> 
> Embarrassing yourself.
> 
> LOL! Not embarrassed but thanks for your concern.


----------



## Straight-Laced

gracekelly said:


> No she can't.  She's too old.  *She will demand to observe all the auditions and will end up picking a 14 year old.*


I know how that goes.  She picks a 14 year old _orphan_ who she then adopts and the story behind the story will be inspiring and heartwarming and ...blah blah blah


----------



## hellosunshine

mshermes said:


> Sussex’s could be tied to.....will the profits go to the charity? It is not how you were presenting your blockbuster information on Duchy.



We don't know what the Sussex's intend to do. They could do something very similar to Prince Charles, I was simply posting a different perspective. We will see though.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> For those that are concerned in the future commercialization of the Sussex brand, here's an interesting tidbit-
> 
> Did you know Prince Charles' already making money in the very same way that the Sussex's intend to make money? He sells biscuits, sausages, jams, bread, milk, vegetables and even nursery products through his Duchy of Cornwall. He makes a good chunk of money from this too. Below is one of the products he sells...
> 
> View attachment 4636675
> 
> 
> So, if you're going to be concerned/outraged about this...shouldn't everyone be more concerned in the direct heir, and not the 7th in line?


All the profits go to charity.


----------



## Aqua01

mshermes said:


> Sussex’s could be tied to.....*will the profits go to the charity? *It is not how you were presenting your blockbuster information on Duchy.


Of course not!!! What these 2 self absorbed brats want is to fatten their own pockets. Giving everything to charity won't exactly achieve them "financial independency", whatever the heck that means with these 2 freeloaders, LMAO


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> We don't know what the Sussex's intend to do. They could do something very similar to Prince Charles, I was simply posting a different perspective. We will see though.


What was your source of information: “He makes a good chunk of money from this too.”?


----------



## myown

Tivo said:


> None of them are losing their HRH's. The two York girls are "HRH Princess Beatrice of York" and "HRH Princess Eugenie of York".
> 
> But if Harry wants a part-time royal job on the same level as Beatrice and Eugenie (which is what he described on his website) than he could and should lose his dukedom.  That would knock him back to "HRH Prince Henry of Wales" again, and make Meghan "HRH Princess Henry of Wales."
> 
> I don't think anything would hurt the two of them more than to lose the "Sussex" brand - even though I think they would still shamelessly milk their obsolete titles in the US.


I mean if he wanted the life Beatrice or eugenie have, it wouldn’t be that difficult. If he wanted a job like they have but still standing on the balcony


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s an article on daily mail that shows all her outfits since they got married. It’s amazing how happy and fresh they were, to now so sullen and messy all the time. What a fall from grace.


Wouldn’t that be a sign of a depressed person?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

Afternoon tea and some light reading


----------



## Chagall

big bad mama said:


> Give me a break. So she doesn’t have her rings on that means nothing. There are plenty of people that don’t wear their rings everyday. Sometimes you may forget, fingers swell, your profession, etc. People need to quit looking for something that isn’t there.


Megan is a staged drama queen. Everything is done for effect. Displaying her splayed hands so obviously was done for attention. She was making a statement of some kind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Megan is a staged drama queen. Everything is done for effect. Displaying her splayed hands so obviously was done for attention. She was making a statement of some kind.



I agree, it's just that no rational person understands what that statement was really.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree, it's just that no rational person understands what that statement was really.


A rational person would not do 90% of anything Meghan is doing. The minute we start to understand her actions, we are in trouble.


----------



## mdcx

I believe she meant to say “look at my ringless fingers, paparazzi! Please write a story about how my marriage is probably over!” 
All designed to irritate QEll who had just “humiliated” her by cancelling Meghan’s scheduled appearance without telling her.

I get the feeling vengeance is Meghan’s favourite seasoning.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

mrsinsyder said:


> There’s an article on daily mail that shows all her outfits since they got married. It’s amazing how happy and fresh they were, to now so sullen and messy all the time. What a fall from grace.


 It could easily be part of the plan.
'New mum, no time, why are you bullying me etc'


----------



## Kim O'Meara

youngster said:


> I also thought that video interview that @Lounorada posted was fascinating.  Mr. Edwards has some really interesting insight and opinions, and he's basically known both Will and Harry for decades.  He thinks they will find that the grass is not always greener and might be regretting what they've done within a year or so.  Well, he thinks there is a good chance that Harry will regret it.
> 
> Who would have thought 3 or so years ago that Harry, who seemed like he'd really matured, seemed happy, settled, getting along great with his brother, and was one of the most popular members of the royal family, would end up in this place with his family, the same family he wanted to give Meghan because "she'd never had a family of her own"?  Clearly, he liked his family just fine before and during their engagement.
> 
> She's quite an operator, gotta hand it to her.  She got Harry to adopt her attitude and markle his own family, just like she did hers. Cut them off, leave them behind, move on and don't look back.  Not even the decency to stay in London for an extra couple of days to meet with Charles or the Queen face to face. Just run off to Vancouver Island and leave Harry to deal with the fall out.



Yeah I was thinking about this yesterday. For a while, after his wild days, he seemed to find his passion and with Invictus Games, was carving a niche to make a difference. It seems for a while this has gone.

I was also thinking I'd give them a little leeway in the Archie in Canada stuff, maybe he wasn't well etc, but if their dogs (unknown names because apparently they'll never be made public was the stance months ago) moved in Nov, then it's clearly all orchestrated.

Is this Russian fella just allowing them to move in fully, dogs and all?


----------



## doni

hellosunshine said:


> For those that are concerned in the future commercialization of the Sussex brand, here's an interesting tidbit-
> 
> Did you know Prince Charles' already making money in the very same way that the Sussex's intend to make money? He sells biscuits, sausages, jams, bread, milk, vegetables and even nursery products through his Duchy of Cornwall. He makes a good chunk of money from this too. Below is one of the products he sells...
> 
> View attachment 4636675
> 
> 
> So, if you're going to be concerned/outraged about this...shouldn't everyone be more concerned in the direct heir, and not the 7th in line?


No, he doesn’t.
Money is made from the exploitation of the Duchy, mainly land and some financial assets. The Duchy was created in the XIVth century and is attached to the Prince of  Wales (not Charles particularly), so it is all within the Crown structure, not private property as such. The purpose of the Duchy is _precisely_ to provide for the Prince of Wales so s/he doesn’t have to seek their own money or income, in others words, so that they have no temptation to become financially independent. Charles cannot dispose of any of the assets but only use the profits. The U.K. Treasury is involved in the management of the Duchy and there are lots of rules and restrictions. The whole thing is heavily audited.

It basically has nothing to do with what Harry and Meghan are proposing. It is actually the very opposite.

The biscuits are a separate business owned by Waitrose. They buy the oats to the Duchy. All profits go to charity.

By the way Charles was going on about organic oats when no one in LA had heard about organic farming. People thought he was a loony but he quietly went on making the Duchy an example of bio agriculture and of use of renewable energies. Oh but Harry and Meghan are the ones who are going to save the world with their progressive new role which apparently involves a strikingly high carbon count in transatlantic flights....


----------



## mdcx

Kim O'Meara said:


> Yeah I was thinking about this yesterday. For a while, after his wild days, he seemed to find his passion and with Invictus Games, was carving a niche to make a difference. It seems for a while this has gone.
> 
> I was also thinking I'd give them a little leeway in the Archie in Canada stuff, maybe he wasn't well etc, but if their dogs (unknown names because apparently they'll never be made public was the stance months ago) moved in Nov, then it's clearly all orchestrated.
> 
> Is this Russian fella just allowing them to move in fully, dogs and all?


I’m sure the Russian will do nicely out of it. The optics are pretty bad aren’t they - British prince indebted to Russian oligarch. What could go wrong?


----------



## Kim O'Meara

mdcx said:


> I’m sure the Russian will do nicely out of it. The optics are pretty bad aren’t they - British prince indebted to Russian oligarch. What could go wrong?



Yep. Thirsty people will always get what they want from other thirsty people I guess. But it’s not a good look, getting into bed with someone for short term gain and long term who knows what...

Our media can be harsh. Build people up to tear them down etc and it’s terrible, but I really think K&W have shown you can be part of The Firm and not have every inch of your day (or kid’s childhood) shown. If you care to. But the media won’t go for being manipulated and having it all ways. They’ll go for the throat then.

I’ve part believed stories over the last few years. Neither really caring about the Royals or not, I do quite like the gossip (lol). For me the point where I started to believe the M stuff was after Wimbledon when she turned up, couldn’t go into the Royal box (some outdated nonsense about jeans or something) and one guy was trying to take a selfie of himself and M’s team told him off and tried to get him thrown out because she was in a mood. He apparently hadn’t even clocked she was there. He just wanted a pic of him with Wimbledon in the background.

And the ‘we will never reveal the dog’s name’ stuff - I mean, get over yourself.


----------



## duna

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Hope QEII & Prince Charles cuts them off and strips their titles.  Truly. It will save the BRF a lot of heartache. *
> 
> This is war
> 
> Just read this in Daily Mail and it looks this couple, if we judge them by their “friends” are following Andrew’s example of seedy relationships:
> 
> “Meanwhile, the Sussexes declined to name the alleged Russian billionaire who may have bankrolled their getaway. The owner of the mansion has masked his identity using controversial legal methods.”



THIS!


----------



## PewPew

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10716340/meghan-markle-prince-harry-stripped-titles-poll-queen-royals/


----------



## mrsinsyder

It’s funny that only two days after this “bombshell” they’ve already faded from the headlines.

But keep telling us how they’re going to make hundreds of millions of dollars with all their popularity...


----------



## Sophisticatted

mdcx said:


> I’m sure the Russian will do nicely out of it. The optics are pretty bad aren’t they - British prince indebted to Russian oligarch. What could go wrong?



Maybe it’s payback for not getting the tiara “with possible Russian ties”.  LOL!


----------



## Lounorada

Coconuts40 said:


> See Bold in quote.... I am in complete agreement with you!  I noticed this too and noticed the same thing right away, how she sat down first and gestures for him to sit down too.  Poor Harry.


Yeah, it looked so odd  Gesturing/telling someone to sit down is more like something a parent might do to a child not to an adult, let alone your husband.



mrsinsyder said:


> This is also a woman who was SO aware of her rings that she wore different rings to avoid offending the poors in South Africa. And now all of a sudden it’s something she probably didn’t even think about? Okay sure.


Not to mention her engagement ring was changed (and made uglier IMO, stripped of any character it had) within the first year of marriage and is always aware of her hand placements and gestures so she can show off that she's wearing wedding rings  So, her _not_ wearing them was planned move on her part for whatever statement she was trying to make.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

doni said:


> No, he doesn’t.
> Money is made from the exploitation of the Duchy, mainly land and some financial assets. The Duchy was created in the XIVth century and is attached to the Prince of  Wales (not Charles particularly), so it is all within the Crown structure, not private property as such. The purpose of the Duchy is _precisely_ to provide for the Prince of Wales so s/he doesn’t have to seek their own money or income, in others words, so that they have no temptation to become financially independent. Charles cannot dispose of any of the assets but only use the profits. The U.K. Treasury is involved in the management of the Duchy and there are lots of rules and restrictions. The whole thing is heavily audited.
> 
> It basically has nothing to do with what Harry and Meghan are proposing. It is actually the very opposite.
> 
> The biscuits are a separate business owned by Waitrose. They buy the oats to the Duchy. All profits go to charity.
> 
> By the way Charles was going on about organic oats when no one in LA had heard about organic farming. People thought he was a loony but he quietly went on making the Duchy an example of bio agriculture and of use of renewable energies. Oh but Harry and Meghan are the ones who are going to save the world with their progressive new role which apparently involves a strikingly high carbon count in transatlantic flights....


I can't like this post enough. Well said!


----------



## mrsinsyder

LOL I just read a stan post that said the Queen is taking her time because she will charge Will and Kate with treason for leaking stories about the Sussexes and banish them, and then Harry and Meghan can ascend the throne.


----------



## duna

I wouldn't be surprised if their next " coup de théatre" is their divorce!!!


----------



## myown

PewPew said:


> View attachment 4636885
> 
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10716340/meghan-markle-prince-harry-stripped-titles-poll-queen-royals/


How can an „or question“ been answered with yes/no


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> LOL I just read a stan post that said the Queen is taking her time because she will charge Will and Kate with treason for leaking stories about the Sussexes and banish them, and then Harry and Meghan can ascend the throne.


OMG that's hilarious


----------



## Kim O'Meara

This made me laugh.
At least not every celeb is taken in.


----------



## queennadine

Have there been reports of them buying a place in Canada that I may have missed? Still trying to wrap my head about leaving Archie there with a nanny of group of nannies. 
If they don’t have a home there, was Archie just plopped in a pack n play in a hotel room with the nanny/ies? Did they put him in some wealthy person’s home again?
MM not even meeting with the family proves that this is a tantrum and they have no respect for the BRF. Charles walked her partly down the aisle, for crying out loud, and she can’t even meet with him to talk about taking his son and grandchild away? GTFO.


----------



## Grande Latte

PewPew said:


> View attachment 4636885
> 
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10716340/meghan-markle-prince-harry-stripped-titles-poll-queen-royals/



I'm not well versed in royal customs. But when you want to relinquish your royal duties, shouldn't you expect to be stripped of royal titles too? It's logic.

These two are a train wreck, a divorce is imminent.

PS: Andy Cohen is calling. They can join The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.


----------



## Lounorada

Grande Latte said:


> View attachment 4636937
> 
> 
> I'm not well versed in royal customs. But when you want to relinquish your royal duties, shouldn't you expect to be stripped of royal titles too? It's logic.
> 
> These two are a train wreck, a divorce is imminent.
> 
> *PS: Andy Cohen is calling. They can join The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills*.


You just reminded me of this, saw it on instagram last night...


----------



## Plussizegirl

There was an interesting story in an Austrian newspaper with the headline " all this already happened once" showing Fotos of MM and Wallis Simpson. So funny.
QE II  was a child when her family had to handle Wallis Simpson.
I am pretty sure she will know how to handle MM.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> View attachment 4636885
> 
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10716340/meghan-markle-prince-harry-stripped-titles-poll-queen-royals/


good job H&M


----------



## zinacef

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s funny that only two days after this “bombshell” they’ve already faded from the headlines.
> 
> But keep telling us how they’re going to make hundreds of millions of dollars with all their popularity...


Not too fast now,  there’s a wedding coming up or probably one of the kids birthday and BAM! another announcement coming up.  I think they have different announcement/agenda lined up in index cards for quick use.


----------



## Grande Latte

Plussizegirl said:


> There was an interesting story in an Austrian newspaper with the headline " all this already happened once" showing Fotos of MM and Wallis Simpson. So funny.
> QE II  was a child when her family had to handle Wallis Simpson.
> I am pretty shure she will know how to handle MM.



I know the Queen will handle this debacle with wit and grace. But I feel so sorry for her that she has to deal with all this mess at her advance age. When I'm old, I don't want to deal with any toxic people/ situations. 

Very disappointed with Harry. He may be born in the royal family, but he doesn't deserve a place in it anymore. Bye.


----------



## Coconuts40

Just saw this on Instagram.
Apparently MM has signed a voiceover deal with Disney.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Coconuts40 said:


> Just saw this on Instagram.
> Apparently MM has signed a voiceover deal with Disney.


I saw this last night in the news. She signed a voice-over agreement in exchange for a donation to an elephant conservation fund/place. It's a nice gesture, but tbh I take from it she wants to be in some form of acting (still) and connected to networks and studios. It didn't say what she'd be voicing - documentary? a new disney princess?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

according to this article from the daily beast Charles is about ready to fold due to concrn for Harry's mental health
https://www.thedailybeast.com/amids...m-what-they-want-is-on-the-horizon?ref=scroll


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I saw this last night in the news. She signed a voice-over agreement in exchange for a donation to an elephant conservation fund/place. It's a nice gesture, but tbh I take from it she wants to be in some form of acting (still) and connected to networks and studios. It didn't say what she'd be voicing - documentary? a new disney princess?


that's good that she's donating the money to a very worthy cause


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> I find it odd that Doria did an obviously staged pap walk today. Especially after people were thinking she may be with Archie. Was she making a statement?


Possibly, but I've also read she makes a small income from staging her papwalks so the last day or two would make a great opportunity.


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I saw this last night in the news. She signed a voice-over agreement in exchange for a donation to an elephant conservation fund/place. It's a nice gesture, but tbh I take from it she wants to be in some form of acting (still) and connected to networks and studios. It didn't say what she'd be voicing - documentary? a new disney princess?


A donation. Who donates and how much. A donation could be 5%.


----------



## Coconuts40

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I saw this last night in the news. She signed a voice-over agreement in exchange for a donation to an elephant conservation fund/place. It's a nice gesture, but tbh I take from it she wants to be in some form of acting (still) and connected to networks and studios. It didn't say what she'd be voicing - documentary? a new disney princess?



It is a nice gesture indeed in the name of elephant conservation.  I believe they can become global citizens and can have a positive impact on this world, whether I like her or not, and whether I agree with her decisions and how she manipulates Harry and the BRF...


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Possibly, but I've also read she makes a small income from staging her papwalks so the last day or two would make a great opportunity.


oh gawd......up to now she seems to have held on to her rep as a nice quiet woman


----------



## queennadine

I forgot that Doria is in LA! Why wouldn’t they have left Archie with her?! Just SMH at all of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> according to this article from the daily beast Charles is about ready to fold due to concrn for Harry's mental health
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/amids...m-what-they-want-is-on-the-horizon?ref=scroll



I understand, I love my family as well and worry about their wellbeing. But really, will enabling and indulging do any good? If he's ready to have a mental breakdown he needs professional help. Also I feel scheming Meg probably expected the family to give in out of love for Harry. Gross.


----------



## Chagall

Waiting for a doctors appointment and I thought the news cast on TV said Harry might become Governor General of Canada. Please tell me I heard that wrong.


----------



## mdcx

I feel like Harry is in a desperate position. 
I would guess Meghan said something like “Get me what I want or don’t bother coming back to Canada...”


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Waiting for a doctors appointment and I thought the news cast on TV said Harry might become Governor General of Canada. Please tell me I heard that wrong.


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder what the duties would be


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> A donation. Who donates and how much. A donation could be 5%.


True. It didn't specify. Maybe accepting the job was payback for the gifts Disney has been bestowing upon them since Archie was born. They obviously felt indebted to DIsney, who have been courting them for a while.
"In May the royal couple were given a rare honour by Disney – a beautiful watercolour Winnie-the-Pooh animation to celebrate the birth of the new royal baby" Pic was on Daly Mail story


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> I wonder what the duties would be



A quick read....

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/cana...eral/wcm/05943bb8-f140-41d7-9e6a-c701505dd412


----------



## momtok

doni said:


> No, he doesn’t.
> Money is made from the exploitation of the Duchy, mainly land and some financial assets. The Duchy was created in the XIVth century and is attached to the Prince of  Wales (not Charles particularly), so it is all within the Crown structure, not private property as such. The purpose of the Duchy is _precisely_ to provide for the Prince of Wales so s/he doesn’t have to seek their own money or income, in others words, so that they have no temptation to become financially independent. Charles cannot dispose of any of the assets but only use the profits. The U.K. Treasury is involved in the management of the Duchy and there are lots of rules and restrictions. The whole thing is heavily audited.
> 
> It basically has nothing to do with what Harry and Meghan are proposing. It is actually the very opposite.
> 
> The biscuits are a separate business owned by Waitrose. They buy the oats to the Duchy. All profits go to charity.
> 
> By the way Charles was going on about organic oats when no one in LA had heard about organic farming. People thought he was a loony but he quietly went on making the Duchy an example of bio agriculture and of use of renewable energies. Oh but Harry and Meghan are the ones who are going to save the world with their progressive new role which apparently involves a strikingly high carbon count in transatlantic flights....





Lounorada said:


> I can't like this post enough. Well said!



Like Lounorada, I too cannot like doni's post enough.  
I don't usually say much here, but I've been a Britphile since the mid 80's, when, in high school, I turned on PBS and discovered both Britcoms and Brit-mysteries.  I believe my response was, "What glorious heaven is this?!?!?!"  (I've got "They Do it With Mirrors" with Joan Hickson on the TV ... errrr, telly ... right this moment.)   Now in my early fifties I am still in complete learning mode, and did not know the details of the Duchy of Cornwall, nor had I heard of Waitrose.  There's simply too much to learn (lol)!  But even *I*, as a lifelong Britphile from America, knew that the royal family primarily acts as (in terms of modern day purpose) a form of public service for the good of the public.  A posh life, yes of course.  But putting the good of the people at the front, requires a very purposeful and specific attitude, of which the Queen has been the utmost pillar.  (And I'd put Ann and Sophie up there too. And Kate is getting there imho, though she's still juggling multiple children.)  I told hubby and daughter from day one that an American, let alone an American with a *Hollywood* definition of celebrity, would never grasp this without a lot of training, education, and hands on practice.  My admittedly blunt opinion has not changed -- he should have married a Brit girl.  I don't care age, race, or class.  (And before racism is slung my way, I'm in an interracial family myself, by my own hand and my own choice.)  But he should have gone for a Brit girl, simply because she would have grown up understanding this principle, and this "role" from the start.

And now I shall go back to lurking, except to add this ...



Straight-Laced said:


> View attachment 4636768
> 
> 
> Afternoon tea and some light reading



I've often purchased Brit foods from both "Brit Food Depot" here in America, and of course Amazon.  Can you say Walker's toffee??  ......... Is it wrong that now I'm looking up Waitrose at these places?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lexgal

TC1 said:


> I don't understand why people think M & H would need the Queen's permission to travel with Archie (or think she'd take him away from his parents). He is not a royal with a title, he is just Archie Monty Windsor.


The queen has custody of George, Charlotte, and Louis per some royal thing. Presumably the same applies to Archie.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lexgal said:


> The queen has custody of George, Charlotte, and Louis per some royal thing. Presumably the same applies to Archie.


But they are all UK born to UK citizens, Archie is also American by birth. Wouldn't that complicate it? I have no idea but expect it would.


----------



## elisa_p

Oh geez....as a Canadian, I do not want Harry to be a GG nor do I want to use my tax dollars to support their security detail.  No offence, but we have other more important things to spend our money on like healthcare and transit than footing the bill for these two year after year.  Our GG's are usually bilingual and accomplished Canadians....what does Harry bring to the table exactly?  I haven't really cared about what they do...but please stay away from my country!  I feel like they are more trouble than they are worth.  Sorry if this is very harsh....I and everyone I know work very hard for what we have it pisses me off to no end that these two can easily afford private security and instead are wasting tax payers money.


----------



## bagshopr

Governor General of Canada, huh? Does anyone know the history of King Edward VIII, who abdicated the throne to be with Wallis Simpson? Granted, he was a WHOLE lot higher than Harry on the royal totem pole. Anyway, he was given the post of Governor of the Bahamas. And he was banished . Never saw his family again.  It seems like nothing good ever comes of royals marrying Americans.


----------



## mshermes

Lexgal said:


> The queen has custody of George, Charlotte, and Louis per some royal thing. Presumably the same applies to Archie.


Repost....
https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8


----------



## Tivo

Coconuts40 said:


> Just saw this on Instagram.
> Apparently MM has signed a voiceover deal with Disney.


Boom. There it is.


----------



## hellosunshine

doni said:


> The purpose of the Duchy is _precisely_ to provide for the Prince of Wales* so s/he doesn’t have to seek their own money or income, in others words, so that they have no temptation to become financially independent. *Charles cannot dispose of any of the assets but only use the profits.



First of all, the Duchy belongs to the taxpayer; however the incumbent Crown Prince aka the Duke of Cornwall is allowed to take some of its profits out for personal use (i.e he's allowed to enjoy its overall net income). Today, the Duchy consists of public, charitable, and private activities, so to say it's full profits go to charity is dishonest.




> It basically has nothing to do with what Harry and Meghan are proposing. It is actually the very opposite.



We do not know what Harry and Meghan are doing. We should wait for them to release the information and not assume that they're doing something flagrantly wicked. 



> By the way Charles was going on about organic oats when no one in LA had heard about organic farming. People thought he was a loony but he quietly went on making the Duchy an example of bio agriculture and of use of renewable energies. Oh but Harry and Meghan are the ones who are going to save the world with their progressive new role which apparently involves a strikingly high carbon count in transatlantic flights....



He still uses private jets for travel so the overall concern for a high carbon footprint is still there. Personally, I am a fan of Charles. His management of the Prince's Trust has been remarkable.


----------



## mshermes

https://www.immigrationvisaattorney...chie-mountbatten-windsor-is-a-us-citizen-too/


----------



## Jayne1

elisa_p said:


> Oh geez....as a Canadian, I do not want Harry to be a GG nor do I want to use my tax dollars to support their security detail.  No offence, but we have other more important things to spend our money on like healthcare and transit than footing the bill for these two year after year.  Our GG's are usually bilingual and accomplished Canadians....what does Harry bring to the table exactly?  I haven't really cared about what they do...but please stay away from my country!  I feel like they are more trouble than they are worth.  Sorry if this is very harsh....I and everyone I know work very hard for what we have it pisses me off to no end that these two can easily afford private security and instead are wasting tax payers money.


The GG is mostly a ceremonial role and the pay is not nearly enough for them. So no chance at all, none.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> Boom. There it is.


I still don't think she has a big future as an actress.  Yes, she is very famous now.  But having gotten to the age of 38 with no movies, just a basic cable TV series, which she wasn't even the star of.....I doubt she's a very talented actress.....her name will open some doors but only goes so far IMO


----------



## Sophisticatted

The RF is probably trying to keep Archie in the Commonwealth so as not to establish a US residency precedent.  I imagine they are expecting a future divorce and want to work out something where Archie stays within the RF (for his own and Harry’s sake) and stays away from Hollywood and other US media centers.  

They were probably only given permission to take Archie to Canada.  He is probably staying put on their lawyers advice to not cross over into the US.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> The RF is probably trying to keep Archie in the Commonwealth so as not to establish a US residency precedent.  I imagine they are expecting a future divorce and want to work out something where Archie stays within the RF (for his own and Harry’s sake) and stays away from Hollywood and other US media centers.
> 
> They were probably only given permission to take Archie to Canada.  He is probably staying put on their lawyers advice to not cross over into the US.


this is getting sad
I'm sure Harry will be heartbroken if they divorce.....starting to remind me of Paul McCartney and the younger wife with one leg....


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> Personally, I am a fan of Charles. His management of the Prince's Trust has been remarkable.


Yes and also his stance on traditional building styles vs some modern architecture. Not that he has the ability to stop it but he argued from early on about ugly architecture.


----------



## youngster

bagshopr said:


> Governor General of Canada, huh? Does anyone know the history of King Edward VIII, who abdicated the throne to be with Wallis Simpson? Granted, he was a WHOLE lot higher than Harry on the royal totem pole. Anyway, he was given the post of Governor of the Bahamas. And he was banished . Never saw his family again.  It seems like nothing good ever comes of royals marrying Americans.



I think Edward VIII did see his family again.  He met with his mother occasionally and his brother, then George VI, and went to George VI's funeral, though he did not attend QEII's coronation.  

However, I agree with you about royals marrying Americans lol!  Well, actually, it may have been a very good thing that Edward VIII abdicated.  He would have been a terrible war time monarch and the country was way better off with George VI.  Even Edward's father, George V, did not want him to take the throne and was hoping to have George and then Elizabeth succeed him.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Lounorada said:


> You just reminded me of this, saw it on instagram last night...



This is hilarious ...I heard Andy Cohen already made her a public offer to be on the show.  I suspect Meghan thinks this is completely beneath her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Prufrock613

Mrs.Z said:


> This is hilarious ...I heard Andy Cohen already made her a public offer to be on the show.  I suspect Meghan thinks this is completely beneath her.


----------



## hellosunshine

Iran and the US are nearly at war and Australia is on fire. 

But according to today’s Daily Mail, there’s only one story worth reading about.

16 pages on Meghan & Harry leaving the RF.

The below video is great and it showcases the ridiculousness of the British press.


----------



## youngster

_Narcissist_.  She's somewhere on the spectrum.  An inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of concern for others, which she disguises by insisting that she wants to be a force for good and help all of humanity, while consistently treating the people actually around her as disposable, even the Queen.


----------



## elvisfan4life

momtok said:


> Like Lounorada, I too cannot like doni's post enough.
> I don't usually say much here, but I've been a Britphile since the mid 80's, when, in high school, I turned on PBS and discovered both Britcoms and Brit-mysteries.  I believe my response was, "What glorious heaven is this?!?!?!"  (I've got "They Do it With Mirrors" with Joan Hickson on the TV ... errrr, telly ... right this moment.)   Now in my early fifties I am still in complete learning mode, and did not know the details of the Duchy of Cornwall, nor had I heard of Waitrose.  There's simply too much to learn (lol)!  But even *I*, as a lifelong Britphile from America, knew that the royal family primarily acts as (in terms of modern day purpose) a form of public service for the good of the public.  A posh life, yes of course.  But putting the good of the people at the front, requires a very purposeful and specific attitude, of which the Queen has been the utmost pillar.  (And I'd put Ann and Sophie up there too. And Kate is getting there imho, though she's still juggling multiple children.)  I told hubby and daughter from day one that an American, let alone an American with a *Hollywood* definition of celebrity, would never grasp this without a lot of training, education, and hands on practice.  My admittedly blunt opinion has not changed -- he should have married a Brit girl.  I don't care age, race, or class.  (And before racism is slung my way, I'm in an interracial family myself, by my own hand and my own choice.)  But he should have gone for a Brit girl, simply because she would have grown up understanding this principle, and this "role" from the start.
> 
> And now I shall go back to lurking, except to add this ...
> 
> 
> 
> I've often purchased Brit foods from both "Brit Food Depot" here in America, and of course Amazon.  Can you say Walker's toffee??  ......... Is it wrong that now I'm looking up Waitrose at these places?


Google betty s tea rooms !!! You will.love a.hamper i can recommend the fat rascals!! I am a Brit who would love to be in the USA we.should swop lol


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Iran and the US are nearly at war and Australia is on fire.
> 
> But according to today’s Daily Mail, there’s only one story worth reading about.
> 
> 16 pages on Meghan & Harry leaving the RF.
> 
> The below video is great and it showcases the ridiculousness of the British press.



makes for a good distraction from real problems


----------



## bisousx

*New to Airbnb: recently renovated Windsor cottage*

This gorgeous, private cottage in Windsor is now available to rent for £10,000 a night on Airbnb because the owners are moving abroad.

The property has been renovated recently at great expense – about £2.4 million – and comes with all the mod cons and extensive security and personal staff.

Despite unexpectedly moving to North America, host Harry writes on the Airbnb page that he wants to keep the cottage, even though he doesn’t actually own it.

“One is needing to become financially independent, so we are reluctantly allowing the great unwashed to stay in our cottage.

“It’s only £10,000 a night, and you’ll find the key in a key safe by the back door. I will send you the combination code prior to your arrival.”

The Airbnb page is full of glorious photographs of the Grade Two-listed property but warns against families with young children renting it out.

“There is a dodgy uncle who might pop round uninvited. Don’t let him in, whatever you do,” host Harry adds.

https://www.suffolkgazette.com/news/frogmore-cottage-on-airbnb/


(lol!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I still don't think she has a big future as an actress.  Yes, she is very famous now.  But having gotten to the age of 38 with no movies, just a basic cable TV series, which she wasn't even the star of.....I doubt she's a very talented actress.....her name will open some doors but only goes so far IMO



A few months ago I was zapping through channels, and there it was: one of those awful, cheesy Disney movies aimed at teenagers. Best friend to the main role: a maneating, too tight clothes wearing, super pushy party girl played by MM. I watched for 5 mins, she was not a good actress at all. Probably better in Suits or else they wouldn't have kept her on for 7 years, but yeah. This movie was nothing to be proud of.


----------



## Fally420

Plussizegirl said:


> There was an interesting story in an Austrian newspaper with the headline " all this already happened once" showing Fotos of MM and Wallis Simpson. So funny.
> QE II  was a child when her family had to handle Wallis Simpson.
> I am pretty sure she will know how to handle MM.



haha saw that headline too!


----------



## mshermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A few months ago I waszapping through channels, and there it was: one of those awful, cheesy Disney movies aimed at teenagers. Best friend to the main role: a meaneating, too tight clothes wearing, super pushy party girl played by MM. I watched for 5 mins, she was not a good actress at all. Probably better in Suits or else they wouldn't have kept her on for 7 years, but yeah. This movie was nothing to be proud of.


She was in a Hallmark movie as well and was just horrible. No acting talent whatsoever. I think the thing with Suits is that she made the character her....so no real acting needed....IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> _Narcissist_.  She's somewhere on the spectrum.  An inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of concern for others, which she disguises by insisting that she wants to be a force for good and help all of humanity, while consistently treating the people actually around her as disposable, even the Queen.



I wonder why so many don't see this (also how she treats Harry in public...no mean Daily Mail, actual uncut video footage...even during the wedding!). Maybe you need to have had some sort of contact with a narcissist but to me it's so obvious.


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder why so many don't see this (also how she treats Harry in public...no mean Daily Mail, actual uncut video footage). Maybe you need to have had sone sort of contact with a narcissist but to me it's so obvious.



Most people who have never met a narcissist think that it’s someone who is in love with themselves (like Kim Kardashian). Narcissism is quite different from what people think, and I can completely understand why those who’ve never brushed with a narcissist can’t see it.


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> Found this after quick search....
> https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8


To pick a n


mshermes said:


> Found this after quick search....
> https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/...s/news-story/316a7f499645e3dafdc247d78b5c31c8


hmm ok this pertains to the queen’s grandchildren, but Archie, and George are great- granchildren, is there a difference ?
Of course, when Charles is king, they will be granchildren and the law will apply


----------



## HiromiT

elisa_p said:


> Oh geez....as a Canadian, I do not want Harry to be a GG nor do I want to use my tax dollars to support their security detail.  No offence, but we have other more important things to spend our money on like healthcare and transit than footing the bill for these two year after year.  Our GG's are usually bilingual and accomplished Canadians....what does Harry bring to the table exactly?  I haven't really cared about what they do...but please stay away from my country!  I feel like they are more trouble than they are worth.  Sorry if this is very harsh....I and everyone I know work very hard for what we have it pisses me off to no end that these two can easily afford private security and instead are wasting tax payers money.



As a fellow Canuck, I agree 100%! We don’t want those freeloaders to live here and we certainly don’t want to pay for anything involving them. Let their Russian sugar daddy take them into his fold.


----------



## Chagall

Plussizegirl said:


> There was an interesting story in an Austrian newspaper with the headline " all this already happened once" showing Fotos of MM and Wallis Simpson. So funny.
> QE II  was a child when her family had to handle Wallis Simpson.
> I am pretty sure she will know how to handle MM.


While the Queen is nobody’s fool, I fully believe MM is a narcissist. They are extremely difficult if not impossible to handle. Just when you think you have them figured out and know how to head off their next move, they will have a trick up their sleeve that you haven’t even thought of.


----------



## Tivo

Archie isn’t a Royal, he has no title so I doubt the Crown can claim any guardianship of him. Not that they would, unless it was a petty way to hurt Meghan and the public outcry would be deafening. 
That is not going to happen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

Tivo said:


> Archie isn’t a Royal, he has no title so I doubt the Crown can claim any guardianship of him. Not that they would, unless it was a petty way to hurt Meghan and the public outcry would be deafening.
> That is not going to happen.


Just found this. May or may not hold water....
https://vocal.media/theSwamp/queen-...ustody-of-archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor


----------



## bisousx

Yeah I don’t think anybody cares enough to take custody of Archie (no offense to him, there’s just no reason to do so), and it wouldn’t fly in today’s age either way.


----------



## lulilu

V0N1B2 said:


> Meghan has been pandering to Harry’s mental health issues by c*osplaying Diana for the last two and a half years. Feeding on his every insecurity. *Wasn’t there another boy who walked behind his mothers coffin? If only I could remember his name. Hmm... or was it Harry walking there all by himself? It must have been...



It has been said that she spent the entire time in Africa telling him how proud his mother would be of him.  Clearly manipulating him and playing into any emotional issues re Diana.


----------



## youngster

She's probably been working on (gaslighting?) Harry, telling him that she and the baby_ need his protection_, with weeping and histrionics, fueling those helpless feelings Harry had as a young boy about his mother.  No matter that they have 24/7 protection, no one drunk behind the wheel when they drive, and likely always wear their seat belts.


----------



## carmen56

The law, from 1717, is entitled The Grand Opinion for the Prerogative Concerning the Royal Family.


mshermes said:


> Just found this. May or may not hold water....
> https://vocal.media/theSwamp/queen-...ustody-of-archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor


----------



## Flatsy

bisousx said:


> Yeah I don’t think anybody cares enough to take custody of Archie (no offense to him, there’s just no reason to do some), and it wouldn’t fly in today’s age either way.


It would not fly at all and would probably mean the end of the monarchy if the Queen tried it. Archie is not remotely worth it in the grand scheme.

I do think the royal family wants to protect Harry, and that's why they are going to try to keep him in the fold and keep him happy.  That includes protecting him from a potential divorce.  They don't want to give Meghan (more) material for her tell-all book.  They don't want her to be able to say that the evil Firm treated them terribly, took their titles, cut them off financially, humiliated them and wrecked their marriage.  She's already got enough complaints without them giving her legitimate ones.

Unfortunately, there's only so much they can do to protect Harry from his own bad decisions.  As soon as Harry joins his family in North America and their residence is official, it's game over.  Harry's never going to have legal grounds for custody in England.  I think that's a huge part of the reason why Meghan left Archie in Canada, and I'm sure Harry's family is right now trying to gently convince him to protect himself in this deal.


----------



## mshermes

Flatsy said:


> It would not fly at all and would probably mean the end of the monarchy if the Queen tried it. Archie is not remotely worth it in the grand scheme.
> 
> I do think the royal family wants to protect Harry, and that's why they are going to try to keep him in the fold and keep him happy.  That includes protecting him from a potential divorce.  They don't want to give Meghan (more) material for her tell-all book.  They don't want her to be able to say that the evil Firm treated them terribly, took their titles, cut them off financially, humiliated them and wrecked their marriage.  She's already got enough complaints without them giving her legitimate ones.
> 
> Unfortunately, there's only so much they can do to protect Harry from his own bad decisions.  As soon as Harry joins his family in North America and their residence is official, it's game over.  Harry's never going to have legal grounds for custody in England.  I think that's a huge part of the reason why Meghan left Archie in Canada, and I'm sure Harry's family is right now trying to gently convince him to protect himself in this deal.


This is all so terribly sad. At first glance, it seemed entertaining due to all the drama, but no longer....


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> It has been said that she spent the entire time in Africa telling him how proud his mother would be of him.  Clearly manipulating him and playing into any emotional issues re Diana.


I bet she would have loved to be with him walking Diana's path in Angola.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> It would not fly at all and would probably mean the end of the monarchy if the Queen tried it. Archie is not remotely worth it in the grand scheme.
> 
> I do think the royal family wants to protect Harry, and that's why they are going to try to keep him in the fold and keep him happy.  That includes protecting him from a potential divorce.  They don't want to give Meghan (more) material for her tell-all book.  They don't want her to be able to say that the evil Firm treated them terribly, took their titles, cut them off financially, humiliated them and wrecked their marriage.  She's already got enough complaints without them giving her legitimate ones.
> 
> Unfortunately, there's only so much they can do to protect Harry from his own bad decisions.  As soon as Harry joins his family in North America and their residence is official, it's game over.  Harry's never going to have legal grounds for custody in England.  I think that's a huge part of the reason why Meghan left Archie in Canada, and I'm sure Harry's family is right now trying to gently convince him to protect himself in this deal.


ironic that she and her stans seem to think she wasn't treated well.  seems to me she was welcomed with open arms by the queen


----------



## Sferics

Sorry, could anyone explain?
How could she sign a contract with Disney?
Is she allowed to do things like that without permission? I don't think so...?


----------



## Annawakes

bagshopr said:


> It seems like nothing good ever comes of royals marrying Americans.


I agree.  I think it’s terrible how badly MM and Wallis Simpson makes Americans look.  

The queen welcomed MM, as did the whole RF.  Now imagine what the RF response will be if George, Charlotte or Louis happens to meet and fall in love with an American.  I don’t think they would be welcomed as warmly anymore.  

It really stinks that MM couldn’t have done a better job at representing Americans.


----------



## CeeJay

Coconuts40 said:


> Just saw this on Instagram.
> Apparently MM has signed a voiceover deal with Disney.


Saw that too!!  Glad I’ve turned down every job opportunity at Disney!!


----------



## mshermes

Sferics said:


> Sorry, could anyone explain?
> How could she sign a contract with Disney?
> Is she allowed to do things like that without permission? I don't think so...?


https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-disney-deal-royal-exit

Hmm....it appears that it is a done deal. She already recorded. The caveat may be (?) the donation to Elephants Without Borders. My question is....what is the donation? A percentage of what she would be paid?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sferics said:


> Sorry, could anyone explain?
> How could she sign a contract with Disney?
> Is she allowed to do things like that without permission? I don't think so...?


They signed a contract with Oprah and Apple TV, so some stuff must be allowed. And there are reports she's talking with Givenchy for a contract.


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> They signed a contract with Oprah and Apple TV, so some stuff must be allowed. And there are reports she's talking with Givenchy for a contract.


She's not wasting any time, is she??  Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sferics

@mshermes @ccbaggirl89
Thank you both...the world of the royals is confusing.

I stumbled over some old questions abizt her on quora - I guess some people kinda saw this all before  
I wonder when she will leave him.


----------



## sparklebunny

Annawakes said:


> I agree.  I think it’s terrible how badly MM and Wallis Simpson makes Americans look.
> 
> The queen welcomed MM, as did the whole RF.  Now imagine what the RF response will be if George, Charlotte or Louis happens to meet and fall in love with an American.  I don’t think they would be welcomed as warmly anymore.
> 
> It really stinks that MM couldn’t have done a better job at representing Americans.



As an American myself, I feel embarrassed by all of this! Of course any other future American romantic partners will be viewed with great suspicion. Too bad...

I was initially excited to have Meghan join the Royal Family, but the way this was carried out is so disrespectful to Harry’s family and especially the Queen. This is a betrayal, and a very public and humiliating one at that. 

If it truly was Meghan who orchestrated this, she deserves to lose her Duchess title.


----------



## hellosunshine

Harry and Diana dumped the Windsors like a sack of bricks. I, for one am very excited for Harry and Meghan's fruitful future.


----------



## bellecate

mshermes said:


> A quick read....
> 
> https://ottawacitizen.com/news/cana...eral/wcm/05943bb8-f140-41d7-9e6a-c701505dd412



No we do not want him as our Governor General.


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> She's not wasting any time, is she??  Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching ..


She already recorded the voiceover with Disney before their six-week adventure.


----------



## hellosunshine

Jayne1 said:


> Yes and also his stance on traditional building styles vs some modern architecture. Not that he has the ability to stop it but he argued from early on about ugly architecture.



I actually take back what I said..especially after reading the article below. Goodness, the lot of that family is a mess. Happy that the Prince's Trust was a success for him though.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-charles-sold-out-william-and-harry-to-the-tabloids


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mshermes said:


> She already recorded the voiceover with Disney before their six-week adventure.


Maybe that's why they ended up at the Lion King show? It must have something to do with it. Crafty, these two.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> this is getting sad
> I'm sure Harry will be heartbroken if they divorce.....starting to remind me of Paul McCartney and the younger wife with one leg....



Right? Totally concur, so true. The public sensed she was a train-wreck, a gold-digger. MM’s bio on Netflix will open with Kanye singing sweetly in the background:

“She take my money when I'm in need
Yea she's a triflin' friend indeed
Oh she's a gold digger way over town
That digs on me”

A word to HRH Prince Charles, your son needs TOUGH LOVE until that gold-digger moves on to greener pastures.

And she certainly will [emoji813]️


----------



## Aqua01

hellosunshine said:


> Harry and Diana dumped the Windsors like a sack of bricks. I, for one am very excited for Harry and Meghan's fruitful future.


They will be signing divorce papers in no time and I hope Harry will eventually find a mentally sane woman with no delusions of grandeur. One whose head is not so big that she is actually capable of love and will treat his family with respect and dignity.
Not that Harry deserves it, but I feel sorry for his family, especially the queen.

As for Megxit, hope she can get some help......, or falls off the end of the earth.
Whatever....


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lulilu said:


> It has been said that she spent the entire time in Africa telling him how proud his mother would be of him.  Clearly manipulating him and playing into any emotional issues re Diana.



That thought alone makes me sick.

Hmm, two actresses that will be future great besties: MM and Angie, they could compare notes on who has the biggest inflated ego, sense of entitlement and self-importance while MAKING EVERYONE ELSE MISERABLE


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> That thought alone makes me sick.
> 
> Hmm, two actresses that will be future great besties: MM and Angie, they could compare notes on who has the biggest inflated ego, sense of entitlement and self-importance while MAKING EVERYONE ELSE MISERABLE


Yes, but Angelina has Oscars, MM can only 'think' about that ..


----------



## meluvs2shop

No personal attacks on members. Stay on topic. It’s a thread, people!


----------



## kemilia

Kim O'Meara said:


> This made me laugh.
> At least not every celeb is taken in.



Betheny is generally pretty blunt and right, the only HW I would ever take biz advice from (but not personal romance advice!).


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## marietouchet

Researched the income from the Duchy of Cornwall , Charles funds Harry from Duchy. 
It seems that C voluntarily pays tax on his income AFTER expenses eg money used to fund Harry’s work, so the Harry money is a sort of business expense ....but if Harry is not employed by the Firm, are these still business expenses ? Maybe not .. 
and C has worked out a deal to VOLUNTARILY pay tax , whatever that means, he has a deal with the government, and the latter could choose to demand renegotiation  of the deal, if the money is no longer spent in an approved manner
Well, all of this is rather inexact, but I now get it, this mess is complicated ! It is not just a family matter - father and son -  but involves the government, even though Harry is now tuning down money from the civil 
list 
Similarly, the question of who pays for the security personnel involves the government 
Megxit is a financial mess of their own doing  ... if Brexit is taking 3 years, then H & M should be patient


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Why aren't we blaming Harry for just as much of this? Is he so weak he lets his wife control the whole show?

I think Harry's decisions are a direct result of some kind of mental instability. Shouldn't we include him on the criticism?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Aqua01 said:


> They will be signing divorce papers in no time and I hope Harry will eventually find a mentally sane woman with no delusions of grandeur. One whose head is not so big that she is actually capable of love and will treat his family with respect and dignity.
> Not that Harry deserves it, but I feel sorry for his family, especially the queen.
> 
> As for Megxit, hope she can get some help......, or falls off the end of the earth.
> Whatever....



If she is a narcissist, that is a personality disorder. You can't get help for a personality disorder. It's like being a sociopath. You can't help someone into have a conscience that they don't have.


----------



## youngster

I wonder if one issue in the negotiations with the Queen and the Palace is that they want to be allowed to take sides, or express their opinion, on political issues?  I think Meghan has been massively frustrated that she is not allowed to tweet and post her support of whatever she wants, to "make her voice heard", to make sure she is seen on the "correct" side of whatever the issue of the day is.  I also think she needs the attention that unfettered 24/7 access to social media brings.

But, the royal family is, and must, remain apolitical.  It's the only reason they've survived this long.  The monarchy has a defined role, symbolizing the state through duty and ceremony. Basically, civil servants with tiaras. They are to unify the country through their neutrality and stay out of politics.  I don't know if Meghan and Harry have realized that as soon as they take sides on a controversial cause or political issue, their popularity would dwindle further as large numbers of people will not agree with them.  At that point, they aren't royals any longer, just another celebrity couple.


----------



## bisousx

Jayne1 said:


> Why aren't we blaming Harry for just as much of this? Is he so weak he lets his wife control the whole show?
> 
> I think Harry's decisions are a direct result of some kind of mental instability. Shouldn't we include him on the criticism?



I don’t know about everyone else, but I def include Harry in on the criticism. I also side eye the theory that he’s so feeble that he allowed his wife to take the reigns. The two of them are using mental health and racism as a cop-out and shield for their disrespectful, entitled behavior. If Harry was so unhappy with his life as a royal, he had 30-something years to talk it over with Grandma & Dad, and leave his privileged life in a dignified manner that doesn’t bring down the entire family. Harry is the biggest loser of them all, and only because little Archie is too young to know what’s going on yet. He went from being Britain’s most eligible bachelor to the world’s most spoiled manchild.


----------



## mshermes

The more this drama unravels, the more I give kudos to Kate.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> I don’t know about everyone else, but I def include Harry in on the criticism. I also side eye the theory that he’s so feeble that he allowed his wife to take the reigns. The two of them are using mental health and racism as a cop-out and shield for their disrespectful, entitled behavior. If Harry was so unhappy with his life as a royal, he had 30-something years to talk it over with Grandma & Dad, and leave his privileged life in a dignified manner that doesn’t bring down the entire family. Harry is the biggest loser of them all, and only because little Archie is too young to know what’s going on yet. He went from being Britain’s most eligible bachelor to the world’s most spoiled manchild.


I would think Harry would be embarassed that his mental health is the subject of discussion.  I know he lost his mom and everything and we're not supposed to be ashamed of mental illness but still....
It's one thing to acknowledge that you went through a lot over the loss of your mom and another thing to be seen as a weak unstable man-boy


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> The more this drama unravels, the more I give kudos to Kate.


Yes kudos to Kate 
She has learned from experience, she dated William for 7 years and has been married for 8, 15 years ! H and M have known each other for 3 years or so


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Meghan and Harry going rogue seems to have been built on a solid foundation of friends in higher places  Or maybe Michelle ***** is just another hateful racist, like everyone else not worshipping at the sandal clad feet of the new people's princess.

https://people.com/royals/michelle-...-advising-prince-harry-meghan-markle-sources/

_"Sources close to Michelle and Barack ***** tell PEOPLE that reports they have offered advice to — or even been in contact with — Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over their “step back” from the royal family are “totally false.”

“The rumors of them having anything to do with this are totally false. The former president and first lady are not advising the couple and have not been in contact with them,” says one source close to the Obamas, who spent Christmas in Hawaii and remain there on holiday, after a busy December traveling throughout Asia as part of their ***** Foundation work on education and leadership training.

Another ***** source, reacting to rumors that they played any role in the Sussexes’s bombshell plans, says, “There’s no truth to it.”[...]

"And, though Mrs. ***** submitted written answers to Meghan’s interview questions for the September issue of British Vogue that she guest-edited last summer, the two women have only met once — more than a year ago — when Meghan popped backstage during the London stop of Mrs. *****’s sold-out book tour for her memoir, Becoming."_


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Why aren't we blaming Harry for just as much of this? Is he so weak he lets his wife control the whole show?
> 
> I think Harry's decisions are a direct result of some kind of mental instability. Shouldn't we include him on the criticism?


After dressing up in black face, wearing a Nazi uniform and prancing around in his birthday suit (in front of the cameras) not too long ago, I think we can roughly assess Harry’s mental stability.


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan and Harry going rogue seems to have been built on a solid foundation of friends in higher places  Or maybe Michelle ***** is just another hateful racist, like everyone else not worshipping at the sandal clad feet of the new people's princess.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/michelle-...-advising-prince-harry-meghan-markle-sources/
> 
> _"Sources close to Michelle and Barack ***** tell PEOPLE that reports they have offered advice to — or even been in contact with — Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over their “step back” from the royal family are “totally false.”
> 
> “The rumors of them having anything to do with this are totally false. The former president and first lady are not advising the couple and have not been in contact with them,” says one source close to the Obamas, who spent Christmas in Hawaii and remain there on holiday, after a busy December traveling throughout Asia as part of their ***** Foundation work on education and leadership training.
> 
> Another ***** source, reacting to rumors that they played any role in the Sussexes’s bombshell plans, says, “There’s no truth to it.”_


THIS is what I questioned before and I'm glad that Meghan's "mouthpiece" has confirmed it!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Why aren't we blaming Harry for just as much of this? Is he so weak he lets his wife control the whole show?
> 
> I think Harry's decisions are a direct result of some kind of mental instability. Shouldn't we include him on the criticism?



The thing is, can't get much lower than taking advantage of a mentally fragile person, can you. Sure, maybe it's all Harry's doing. But somehow he was close to his brother and had strong ties with the rest of the family before Meghan came along. Also not buying that he suddenly decided at age 35 a whole bunch of friends he had grown up with were not his cup of tea anymore.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> After dressing up in black face, wearing a Nazi uniform and prancing around in his birthday suit (in front of the cameras) not too long ago, I think we can roughly assess Harry’s mental stability.


I agree; to me (having seen it in my family) .. he appears to have the type of mental illness where he is super-happy one moment and then he crashes and burns.  I feel for him, but I also think that it would be better for the BRF to get him the help he truly needs and sadly, Meghan IMO was NOT helping him!


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> I agree; to me (having seen it in my family) .. he appears to have the type of mental illness where he is super-happy one moment and then he crashes and burns.  I feel for him, but I also think that it would be better for the BRF to get him the help he truly needs and sadly, Meghan IMO was NOT helping him!


No she is not helping him, quite the contrary. But I do think MM is a narcissist and they often choose vulnerable people to target and manipulate. I think she knew Harry much more than she admitted and saw him as a soft target she could use to get what she wanted. Don’t forget how charming narcs can be when they want something.


----------



## pukasonqo

Interesting that there is more noise in the press about Megxit than about Andrew’s possible involvement w Epstein, seems that leaving the firm is a worst offence that engaging in relationships w underaged girls


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4637323
> 
> View attachment 4637324


Haha she’s “calling in”


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> Haha she’s “calling in”


WIMPIE, WIMPIE, WIMPIE ... !!!  When you have to negotiate, you must be there IN PERSON and get their early and get that "power" chair .. and she thinks she knows about these things .. HA, amateur!


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m imagining her dialing in...

“please enter your participant code, followed by pound”

“please state your name after the tone”

“sorry, your host hasn’t joined the meeting yet”


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m imagining her dialing in...
> 
> “please enter your participant code, followed by pound”
> 
> “please state your name after the tone”
> 
> “sorry, your host hasn’t joined the meeting yet”


----------



## jcnc

Chagall said:


> Waiting for a doctors appointment and I thought the news cast on TV said Harry might become Governor General of Canada. Please tell me I heard that wrong.


i hope its a rumour.. also, wouldn't holding any official position such as governor general prevent them from running a private money making hussle?


----------



## Chagall

jcnc said:


> i hope its a rumour.. also, wouldn't holding any official position such as governor general prevent them from running a private money making hussle?


Have no idea but our man Harry is not suited to be Governor General of anything let alone anything to do with my country.


----------



## DD101

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, can't get much lower than taking advantage of a mentally fragile person, can you. Sure, maybe it's all Harry's doing. But somehow he was close to his brother and had strong ties with the rest of the family before Meghan came along. Also not buying that he suddenly decided at age 35 a whole bunch of friends he had grown up with were not his cup of tea anymore.





Chagall said:


> No she is not helping him, quite the contrary. But I do think MM is a narcissist and they often choose vulnerable people to target and manipulate. I think she knew Harry much more than she admitted and saw him as a soft target she could use to get what she wanted. Don’t forget how charming narcs can be when they want something.



I have been reading this thread for quite a while, but never posting.  I feel Meghan is very manipulative  and she's playing Harry like a fiddle. She seems to have no relationship with her family (other than her mother)....and now she is pulling Harry away from his. Harry seemed to have a good relationship with his brother William and with Kate, his father Prince Charles and even the Queen. Sometimes people like Meghan learn how to isolate others from their families in order to gain more control over that person. Meghan is probably playing it to Harry, "It's us against the world"......stuff like that. I hope Harry can wake up and see what appears to be happening here.


----------



## 1LV

DD101 said:


> I have been reading this thread for quite a while, but never posting.  I feel Meghan is very manipulative  and she's playing Harry like a fiddle. She seems to have no relationship with her family (other than her mother)....and now she is pulling Harry away from his. Harry seemed to have a good relationship with his brother William and with Kate, his father Prince Charles and even the Queen. Sometimes people like Meghan learn how to isolate others from their families in order to gain more control over that person. Meghan is probably playing it to Harry, "It's us against the world"......stuff like that. I hope Harry can wake up and see what appears to be happening here.


Divide and conquer.


----------



## mdcx

My feeling is, once $X million hits her bank account, as instructed/demanded via Harry, she will book it to LA.
She will either take Archie with her or “allow” his dad to come and pick him up in Canada.

I really don’t see one big happy family happening.


----------



## DD101

1LV said:


> Divide and conquer.



Yes, 100%


----------



## Meh-gan

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan and Harry going rogue seems to have been built on a solid foundation of friends in higher places  Or maybe Michelle ***** is just another hateful racist, like everyone else not worshipping at the sandal clad feet of the new people's princess.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/michelle-...-advising-prince-harry-meghan-markle-sources/
> 
> _"Sources close to Michelle and Barack ***** tell PEOPLE that reports they have offered advice to — or even been in contact with — Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over their “step back” from the royal family are “totally false.”
> 
> “The rumors of them having anything to do with this are totally false. The former president and first lady are not advising the couple and have not been in contact with them,” says one source close to the Obamas, who spent Christmas in Hawaii and remain there on holiday, after a busy December traveling throughout Asia as part of their ***** Foundation work on education and leadership training.
> 
> Another ***** source, reacting to rumors that they played any role in the Sussexes’s bombshell plans, says, “There’s no truth to it.”[...]
> 
> "And, though Mrs. ***** submitted written answers to Meghan’s interview questions for the September issue of British Vogue that she guest-edited last summer, the two women have only met once — more than a year ago — when Meghan popped backstage during the London stop of Mrs. *****’s sold-out book tour for her memoir, Becoming."_


I hope her stans are paying attention. Like didn’t they try to spin it that she was practically besties with Michelle and they had some phone call/lunch meeting for her magazine thing? It says Michelle submitted questions in writing and that MM stalked her once at a book event. Lmao. 

It doesn’t mention that they did in fact ever speak directly on the phone over lunch.


----------



## 1LV

mdcx said:


> My feeling is, once $X million hits her bank account, as instructed/demanded via Harry, she will book it to LA.
> She will either take Archie with her or “allow” his dad to come and pick him up in Canada.
> 
> I really don’t see one big happy family happening.


I don’t see her handing Archie over.  He’s her ace in the hole... money in the bank...leverage.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Meh-gan said:


> I hope her stans are paying attention. Like didn’t they try to spin it that she was practically besties with Michelle and they had some phone call/lunch meeting for her magazine thing? It says Michelle submitted questions in writing and that MM stalked her once at a book event. Lmao.
> 
> It doesn’t mention that they did in fact ever speak directly on the phone over lunch.


I seem to recall something about a lunch "meeting" with Michelle ***** over a "burgeoning bump" and a plate of chicken, yes


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The fact that she's holed up in Canada while Harry is left behind to handle his family and everything else is just ridiculous. What happened to the clingy girlfriend and wife who was latched to his arm 24/7. Was that also all for cameras? Seems she's just fine with not being a loving and supportive wife. Running when it gets tough, which we were all told she does. I hope Harry's family is somehow able to help him make some better decisions in her absence. He isn't blameless but certainly needs some help.


----------



## Katel

https://www.buzz.ie/celebs/eamonn-holmes-brands-meghan-markle-manipulative-spoilt-350633


Also:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4637323
> 
> View attachment 4637324


Meghan will not be calling in imo.
As long as her bag is secured, she will not consent to actually being held to account by the people she just dropped a bomb on.


----------



## youngster

You know, even if they can work out some kind of solution that keeps them involved in the British royal family with official duties, how in heaven's name do Harry and Meghan expect Meghan to ever set foot in Britain again?  How will she be treated at her next public appearance?  I'm curious what our British members think.  A portion of the public is likely deeply offended.  She's basically saying "I don't like living in the UK, I don't want to be British, you people are mean, you people are toxic, I want to go home."  

She was welcomed at all of her outings and appearances.  Yes, she got some negative press, as all the royals do at certain times.  It's almost like the press make you run the gauntlet to see what you're made of, and if you can take it.  She threw in the towel as soon as she wasn't getting constant glowing coverage. All she had to do was ride it out and smile and move on to the next event.  They got more and worse coverage because she and Harry overreacted in so many ways.   

So, what will people say to her when she does a walk about in the UK, if she ever does again?  They aren't going to be able to screen every single person and keep her shielded from comments and questions and some of them are going to be plenty brutal. Can anyone imagine that she'll spend significant time in the UK ever again?


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> My feeling is, once $X million hits her bank account, as instructed/demanded via Harry, she will book it to LA.
> She will either take Archie with her or “allow” his dad to come and pick him up in Canada.
> 
> I really don’t see one big happy family happening.


I have (_kind of_) been thinking the same thing; after all .. he's her big-time cash-ola!!!  If she gets a LOT of millions out of this deal, then what would prevent her from hightailing it back to LA and hob-nobbing with all her "celeb" friends (_she may just 'markle' all her "friends" back in Toronto_)!  I think she would want to keep Archie, because she can always cry "need more for Archie .." blah-blah.  God, do I ever feel SO sorry for that cute little boy .. I've seen this happen first-hand and it's NEVER pretty!


----------



## Straight-Laced

ccbaggirl89 said:


> They signed a contract with Oprah and Apple TV, so some stuff must be allowed. And there are reports she's talking with Givenchy for a contract.


It's not allowed as such, 'SussexRoyal' did it without consulting the firm.  Hence the pre-Christmas blow up about contracts already signed. Basically these two have been sneakily moving on and doing deals while still employed by and obligated to their BRF 'employer'.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

youngster said:


> You know, even if they can work out some kind of solution that keeps them involved in the British royal family with official duties, how in heaven's name do Harry and Meghan expect Meghan to ever set foot in Britain again?  How will she be treated at her next public appearance?  I'm curious what our British members think.  A portion of the public is likely deeply offended.  She's basically saying "I don't like living in the UK, I don't want to be British, you people are mean, you people are toxic, I want to go home."
> 
> She was welcomed at all of her outings and appearances.  Yes, she got some negative press, as all the royals do at certain times.  It's almost like the press make you run the gauntlet to see what you're made of, and if you can take it.  She threw in the towel as soon as she wasn't getting constant glowing coverage. All she had to do was ride it out and smile and move on to the next event.  They got more and worse coverage because she and Harry overreacted in so many ways.
> 
> So, what will people say to her when she does a walk about in the UK, if she ever does again?  They aren't going to be able to screen every single person and keep her shielded from comments and questions and some of them are going to be plenty brutal. Can anyone imagine that she'll spend significant time in the UK ever again?


It seems unlikely right now that she'd be welcomed back, but this is a woman who doesn't seem to care. Is she in Canada reading about herself and upset because of what she's done, or is she happy her name is in every world newspaper? Given what we've come to know, she'd probably not give a care and show up for all the haters.


----------



## Straight-Laced

From The Times UK. 
Although this version might actually work for Disney's The Lion King 4.  A bit of tweaking here and there (Duchess Meghan as a zebra not a unicorn.etc) and the motto *'Hakuna Matata'  *


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork




----------



## Straight-Laced

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


>




WOW  
It looks like the narc is gonna get beaten at her own game.
Hardly ever happens.
Serious popcorn time !!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


>



Can't remember where I read it, but one very respective UK journalist essentially said that this will be a big acid test for Charles (similar to what occurred with the Duke of Windsor and his brother - the Queen's father).  He said that, in essence, the BRF needs to treat this exactly the same .. as an "abdication" of sorts and that if Charles does not do this, he will appear 'weak'.  

I have to say that, the Journalist was right .. this is NO picnic for the entire BRF, but I kind of feel for Prince Charles here because he needs to think about the perception of the British public as well as the financial impact not only on the British Taxpayer, but also on the Canadian and (potentially) US taxpayer.  

WHAT A MESS!!!


----------



## youngster

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


>




This is the saddest part of this whole situation, the complete destruction of his once close relationship with William.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Straight-Laced said:


> WOW
> It looks like the narc is gonna get beaten at her own game.
> Hardly ever happens.
> Serious popcorn time !!!!!


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> You know, even if they can work out some kind of solution that keeps them involved in the British royal family with official duties, how in heaven's name do Harry and Meghan expect Meghan to ever set foot in Britain again? How will she be treated at her next public appearance?


Harry and Meghan's plan is to do what Meghan did at one of her visits to the Luminary Bakery. It was a "private visit".  Royal reporters weren't invited.  Meghan only invited a couple of friendly publications, with whom she sat for an interview.  They printed exactly what Meghan told them plus some complimentary words about the project and that's it.

Harry and Meghan only have 18 patronages between them.  They can ditch almost all of them and nobody would care.  Royal Marines already said Harry doesn't do **** for them and they'd be happy to see him go.  

The few charities that the Sussexes actually care about like Sentebale and Smartworks they can continue supporting as private citizens instead of royal patrons and only let sycophantic press outlets have access.


----------



## mdcx

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-william-shares-sadness-admits-21263559


----------



## mdcx

I’m curious why no pap photos of Meghan have appeared since she went AWOL.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

mdcx said:


> I’m curious why no pap photos of Meghan have appeared since she went AWOL.


She’s holed up in that dump  provided by the anonymous Russian...


----------



## Straight-Laced

Oh no,  not appeasement.  I'd hoped the BRF 'mental health concerns for Harry' leaks might be a cover to give Harry thinking time with his father and family. 
Harry's been using his mental health fragility as a leverage tool since he was a teenager.  There's more than a grain of truth in it, he does have some ongoing mental health/trauma issues.  But he's become a bit of a tyrant along the lines of _'if you don't give me what I want I could do this... if you don't leave me alone I could do that_.  Media and family largely obliged. 
I hope what I'm reading about them both maintaining titles and position is wrong.


----------



## shiba

Lovely, this makes it sound like Canadians are responsible for their security......

https://globalnews.ca/news/6393526/meghan-markle-prince-harry-canada-taxpayer-cost/

“His Royal Highness, Prince Henry of Wales [Harry], along with members of his family, are Internationally Protected Persons (IPPs) and are entitled to the protection of the RCMP while in Canada,” said Cpl. Caroline Duval of the RCMP in a statement.
“As part of its mandate, the RCMP is responsible at all times for the safety and security of visiting members of the Royal Family while they are in Canada. Security costs for protection of visiting members of the Royal Family while in Canada are covered through the existing operational budget. For security reasons, we cannot provide a detailed breakdown of these costs. For security reasons, the RCMP does not disclose the number of police personnel assigned to work during this type of visit.”


----------



## mshermes

Straight-Laced said:


> Oh no,  not appeasement.  I'd hoped the BRF 'mental health concerns for Harry' leaks might be a cover to give Harry thinking time with his father and family.
> Harry's been using his mental health fragility as a leverage tool since he was a teenager.  There's more than a grain of truth in it, he does have some ongoing mental health/trauma issues.  But he's become a bit of a tyrant along the lines of _'if you don't give me what I want I could do this... if you don't leave me alone I could do that_.  Media and family largely obliged.
> I hope what I'm reading about them both maintaining titles and position is wrong.


Ya’ know......maybe they deserve each other.....but poor Archie.


----------



## Gimmethebag

It sounds like it will be Harry and Meghan’s Choice (so, Meghan’s choice): Work for the Firm or be prepared to pay taxes on global income like everyone else...

Not that she wasn’t planning to funnel income and lifestyle expenses through their sketchy sketchy “foundation.” 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-abandoning-royal-family.html#article-7876671


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> After dressing up in black face, wearing a Nazi uniform and prancing around in his birthday suit (in front of the cameras) not too long ago, I think we can roughly assess Harry’s mental stability.


I was wiling to cut him a lot of slack when he was young - being immature and having lost his mother in such a tragic way.  but he's not that young anymore.  time to man up.  unfortunately his version of manning up isn't so great IMO


----------



## sdkitty

DD101 said:


> I have been reading this thread for quite a while, but never posting.  I feel Meghan is very manipulative  and she's playing Harry like a fiddle. She seems to have no relationship with her family (other than her mother)....and now she is pulling Harry away from his. Harry seemed to have a good relationship with his brother William and with Kate, his father Prince Charles and even the Queen. Sometimes people like Meghan learn how to isolate others from their families in order to gain more control over that person. Meghan is probably playing it to Harry, "It's us against the world"......stuff like that. I hope Harry can wake up and see what appears to be happening here.


I don't think he will wake up until and unless she asks for a divorce


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> WIMPIE, WIMPIE, WIMPIE ... !!!  When you have to negotiate, you must be there IN PERSON and get their early and get that *"power" chair *.. and she thinks she knows about these things .. HA, amateur!



She IS a wimp. In this unique case, any chairs taken by QEII, C & W would be basically throne symbols, so there is no power for her to be had. Even if she got the chair at the head of table by the window. No excuse for her not to be there, she ditched Archie and pawned him off on nannies before, why couldn't she leave him in Canada again to attend a meeting of this magnitude? I bet she would ditch Archie to fly to Orlando for another Disney voiceover. Just sayin'. Harry must feel like a chump. Unless he's still crazy in love. In which case I hope the RF can get his head out of his arse. 

Another example of just because you had a zillion dollar wedding doesn't mean your marriage is any stronger than people who get married in a tiny private ceremony.  That said, what do you want to bet that plenty of British girls can't wait till Harry is back on the market?

I thought H&M were planning on world domination as a global power couple. Now I'm not so sure. Could go either way. I wonder if they DID break away from The Crown, THEN got divorced (because not enough people worshipped them and #Sussex Royal fizzled), if the RF could, or would, do a Harry recall and bring him back into the fold.


----------



## jcnc

shiba said:


> Lovely, this makes it sound like Canadians are responsible for their security......
> 
> https://globalnews.ca/news/6393526/meghan-markle-prince-harry-canada-taxpayer-cost/
> 
> “His Royal Highness, Prince Henry of Wales [Harry], along with members of his family, are Internationally Protected Persons (IPPs) and are entitled to the protection of the RCMP while in Canada,” said Cpl. Caroline Duval of the RCMP in a statement.
> “As part of its mandate, the RCMP is responsible at all times for the safety and security of visiting members of the Royal Family while they are in Canada. Security costs for protection of visiting members of the Royal Family while in Canada are covered through the existing operational budget. For security reasons, we cannot provide a detailed breakdown of these costs. For security reasons, the RCMP does not disclose the number of police personnel assigned to work during this type of visit.”


Now i am appalled. Why should we foot their bill..?!?!


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> She IS a wimp. In this unique case, any chairs taken by QEII, C & W would be basically throne symbols, so there is no power for her to be had. Even if she got the chair at the head of table by the window. No excuse for her not to be there, she ditched Archie and pawned him off on nannies before, why couldn't she leave him in Canada again to attend a meeting of this magnitude? I bet she would ditch Archie to fly to Orlando for another Disney voiceover. Just sayin'. Harry must feel like a chump. Unless he's still crazy in love. In which case I hope the RF can get his head out of his arse.
> 
> Another example of just because you had a zillion dollar wedding doesn't mean your marriage is any stronger than people who get married in a tiny private ceremony.  That said, what do you want to bet that plenty of British girls can't wait till Harry is back on the market?
> 
> I thought H&M were planning on world domination as a global power couple. Now I'm not so sure. Could go either way. I wonder if they DID break away from The Crown, THEN got divorced (because not enough people worshipped them and #Sussex Royal fizzled), if the RF could, or would, do a Harry recall and bring him back into the fold.


IDK if he is still crazy in love but I have a feeling he is stubborn and firmly entrenched in his loyalty for his wife.


----------



## Gimmethebag

They could have been a real global power if they were willing to do their... jobs. IMHO, Harry and Meghan are good looking and reflect where the world is going.

Kate does her job well and almost every organization on the planet would be beside themselves to have her attend an event. Having the Duchess of Cambridge wear one of your fashions is considered the biggest break or win for any designer. It doesn’t get more A-list.

But Kate doesn’t do it with her hand out like a greedy, tacky pauper because she focuses on her JOB and is happy for the lifestyle she has, that’s more luxurious than any other civil servant’s in the world.

If Harry and Meghan weren’t so shortsighted and impatient, she would be having her tiara moments and UN speeches. But they don’t want to be royalty. They want to be celebrities and they don’t want to bust their butts like real celebrities have either. If they want to be celebrities, they need to work for it themselves under Harry and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor. 

Knowing Harry’s relationship with the BRF is fractured, I’m sure most Hollywood A-listers won’t have use for them either.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mshermes said:


> Ya’ know......maybe they deserve each other.....but poor Archie.


Absolutely poor Archie 
Many of us have been concerned by the way Archie has been shown off for celebrities - Ellen, Hillary, Desmond Tutu etc - but has barely seen his regular family like Cambridge cousins and other close, stable family members.
I'm certainly not royal but I had a narcissistic mother and a damaged, dependent father and it was hell - all an act in public and crazy neglect behind closed doors.   
Fortunately Archie has a nanny - I hope the nanny is stabilising and remains with the family for years (doubtful though, TBH). And there's Doria of course, but she has her own life elsewhere.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CeeJay said:


> I have (_kind of_) been thinking the same thing; after all .. he's her big-time cash-ola!!!  If she gets a LOT of millions out of this deal, then what would prevent her from hightailing it back to LA and hob-nobbing with all her "celeb" friends (_she may just 'markle' all her "friends" back in Toronto_)!  I think she would want to keep Archie, because she can always cry "need more for Archie .." blah-blah.  God, do I ever feel SO sorry for that cute little boy .. I've seen this happen first-hand and it's NEVER pretty!



She might get a crapload of money but I think she is going to be surprised at how fast she would be abandoned in the celebrity world after a divorce. Her only value is that she is married to a royal. If she divorced, she would just be another D-list rich celebrity, not unlike Camille Grammar or the like.


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Absolutely poor Archie
> Many of us have been concerned by the way Archie has been shown off for celebrities - Ellen, Hillary, Desmond Tutu etc - but has barely seen his regular family like Cambridge cousins and other close, stable family members.
> I'm certainly not royal but I had a narcissistic mother and a damaged, dependent father and it was hell - all an act in public and crazy neglect behind closed doors.
> Fortunately Archie has a nanny - I hope the nanny is stabilising and remains with the family for years (doubtful though, TBH). And there's Doria of course, but she has her own life elsewhere.


right....and now doria is doing pap walks?


----------



## shiba

jcnc said:


> Now i am appalled. Why should we foot their bill..?!?!



Hopefully the media finds out if there are costs being passed onto the Canadian taxpayer and blasts it. This isn't an official Royal visit and the Canadian people should not be responsible. But hey, that must the reason for their visit to Canada House, so they can say they did official Royal business and send the bill.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> She might get a crapload of money but I think she is going to be surprised at how fast she would be abandoned in the celebrity world after a divorce. Her only value is that she is married to a royal. If she divorced, she would just be another D-list rich celebrity, not unlike Camille Grammar or the like.


well, she could still be a real houswife on bravo


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mshermes said:


> She’s holed up in that dump  provided by the anonymous Russian...


Do you think maybe she couldn't go back there after David Foster gave up the location? He probably didn't know she had planned to go back right away. I dunno, but perhaps for safety she went to another Canadian home of a Russian "friend."
	

		
			
		

		
	




https://homesoftherich.net/2012/09/mille-fleurs-an-18-million-waterfront-estate-in-canada/

"This waterfront estate, named Mille Fleurs, is located at 525 Towner Park Road in Victoria, BC, Canada. It features an 11,416 square foot main houes and a 2,349 square foot guest cottage. As you pass through the gated entrance you are first greeted by the charming guest cottage which features 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. Beyond that is the French Country inspired main house with 5 bedrooms, 8 bathrooms, formal dining room, paneled office with fireplace, large 2-story living room opening to the gourmet kitchen with pizza oven, game room with wet bar, media room, wine tasting room and more. The manicured grounds also boast formal gardens, a conservatory and 2 access points to the beach."


----------



## Straight-Laced

Some light humour from The Times  

My week: Prince Harry*
January 11 2020, 12:01am, 
The Times

Monday

"I took her to a supermarket. I don’t know why, but I had to start it somewhere. So it started there.

“But we’ll still have Ocado,” she said.

“Oh,” I said, “so we won’t need to do this every day? When we’re normal?”

Meghan said “no”. Then she said “nice to meet you” to a cashier who was doing a curtsey and giving her a bouquet. And then we told the police that they could let the public back in, and then we flew to Canada. And that was six weeks ago.

Now we’re heading back to the UK, but not for long. Things are going to change.

“But what if they say no?” I’m fretting, in the car to the airport.

Meghan says they can’t. Because we have all the power. And they have nothing we need.

“Apart from the house,” I say.

“Yes,” says Meghan.

“And the title,” I say.

“Yes,” says Meghan.

“And the money,” I say.

“Yes,” says Meghan. “Apart from that.”

Tuesday

The courtiers, I tell Father, won’t let me see Granny. And frankly that just sums up everything I want to leave behind.

“You won’t even have courtiers?” says Father, astonished.

“Not more than a couple,” I say, recklessly.

“This,” says Father, “is madness.”

I don’t care, I tell him. We want out. We’ll have a completely normal life. Like Meghan used to. Back when she was only middlingly famous and wrote a blog and occasionally had a drink with Piers Morgan.

“How ghastly,” says Father.

“It sounds better when she says it,” I admit.

Wednesday

Meghan says they’re stalling us, and we can’t let them, and we ought to go public. So we do. Then Wills calls.

“Dude,” he says. “What have you done? How will you live?”

“We’ll manage,” I tell him. “Meghan used to be a lawyer.”

Wills says not a real one, though. So I tell him that he obviously hasn’t seen seasons four to nine. Because it’s only in the first three that she was just a paralegal.

“But we have lots of options,” I say. “Like the Beckhams. Or the Kardashians. The fact is, we’re out. Deal with it. We’re not going to be royals any more. We just don’t want it. As it says, very clearly, on our website.”

“The one with the crown on it?” says Wills.

“Yes,” I say.

Thursday

Meghan says she’s going back to Canada, because she can’t stay any longer in a country where everybody clearly hates her.

“I just wish I could fly private,” she sighs, “because there are always so many damn wellwishers wanting selfies at Heathrow.”

Once she’s gone, I have an unprecedented conference call with the top three.

“Mmmhello?” says the speakerphone, cautiously.

“Hi Granny,” I say.

Then Wills comes on, and then Father. Who says I’m responsible for the most embarrassing day for the Firm in months.

“And how is Uncle Andy?” I ask.

“OK, weeks,” says Father.

Then Granny says we need to come to some sort of agreement about the money. And I say I don’t see why, because we have plans.

“But that’s what we’re worried about,” says Wills.

“Indeed,” says Father. “You’re royalty, Harry. It’s a noble duty. It’s not just a brand you can stick on stuff for cash.”

“Except for biscuits,” I say.

“Yes,” says Father, defensively. “Except for biscuits.”

Friday

I’m home alone at Frogmore Cottage when the Ocado man comes. I’ve sent the courtiers away, for practice, so I unpack the bags myself. Quite proud.

“Moving to Canada, then?” he says, on the way out.

Maybe, I say. Not sure. It’s all really complicated. No offence, but you wouldn’t understand. What am I supposed to do for the rest of my life? Open hospitals? Smile at people? Stand on balconies in medals? It’s suffocating. All I want is to be normal.

“Well between us,” says the Ocado man, “we’re looking for drivers. It’s OK. Nobody slags off your missus in the papers and you get at least a tenner an hour. What do you reckon?”

“Not that bloody normal,” I tell him, and close the door."

*according to Hugo Rifkind


----------



## youngster

Allisonfaye said:


> She might get a crapload of money but I think she is going to be surprised at how fast she would be abandoned in the celebrity world after a divorce. Her only value is that she is married to a royal. If she divorced, she would just be another D-list rich celebrity, not unlike Camille Grammar or the like.



She'd be Sarah Ferguson 2.0.  No more glamorous patronages like the Royal Theatre, no more high profile official state visits and events.  All of a sudden, those phone calls to Oprah and Gayle would go straight to their voice mail.  Harry would get Elton in a divorce.  She might get a couple high profile interviews in the U.S. but what about that NDA she likely signed? I can imagine that was one thing the family absolutely insisted on.


----------



## youngster

@Straight-Laced, thanks for posting that!  Hilarious!

_“How ghastly,” says Father.
It sounds better when she says it,” I admit_
_
I’ve sent the courtiers away, for practice, so I unpack the bags myself. Quite proud.

“We’ll manage,” I tell him. “Meghan used to be a lawyer.”
Wills says not a real one, though. So I tell him that he obviously hasn’t seen seasons four to nine. Because it’s only in the first three that she was just a paralegal.
“But we have lots of options,” I say. “Like the Beckhams. Or the Kardashians. The fact is, we’re out. Deal with it. We’re not going to be royals any more. We just don’t want it. As it says, very clearly, on our website.”
“The one with the crown on it?” says Wills._


----------



## Straight-Laced

january 12 2020, 12:01am, the sunday times  CAMILLA LONG
*Meghan’s snubbed the Queen and country, and now she’s off with her prince. Charming!*

"Even if you don’t like the royal family, there is something truly horrifying about watching them being turned over by someone they met only four seconds ago. I watched agog last Wednesday, as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex launched their stunning smackdown, telling the Queen they’d be rejecting her kindness and understanding in favour of “stepping back” as senior royals.

They told their readers they had come to this decision “with your encouragement, over the last few years”. Whereupon I thought, “over the last few years”? But Meghan’s only been here three seconds. She met him only one minute ago — the gushing, joyful wedding was yesterday!

Why? What happened? We clearly still have really no idea who this woman is, however many thousands of words she no doubt personally writes on the lardy sussexroyal blog, a resurrection of her original blog, The Tig, just with more Julian Fellowes (“the history of the British monarchy is steeped in tradition and pride . . .”).

Maybe even Harry doesn’t know who she is, although I’d imagine he’s getting more of a sense of things now. But the main thing I felt, as the palace fired back that the Queen was “disappointed”, was a sense of sad foreboding: we aren’t watching the end of the royal family, or the end of Britain, or the end of deference and respect or politeness whatever people say the royal family stands for — they’re long gone — but yet another series of awful stresses and strains that could now spell the beginning of the end of their marriage.

What else does the future really look like for this couple, if they go abroad, stripped of their titles, relieved of as much money as the politicians can get off them, after the excitement, the deals and the television exclusives are over? Even if you aren’t a damaged and delicate person like Harry, few people would be able to cope with the sudden estrangement of their entire family and transfer to the alien landscape of what Meghan describes as “Canada” and I call “Los Angeles”.

He will also have to cope with growing isolation as he finds himself unprotected at the hands of LA’s ruthless paparazzi, whose habit of hiring gun-toting gang members to get the job done make the quaint and courtly royal rota, which he hates, look like a vicar’s tea party. And who’s he going to hang out with while he’s being chased around the car park of the local In-N-Out Burger? Jason Statham and Victoria Beckham? Have they any idea how this will all pan out?

Meanwhile, it must be dawning on even him that it’s something of a task keeping Madam entertained, given that an entire country of 66m people bored her to death within 18 months. In fact, I doubt he has much of a role in any of the decision-making any more — he seems merely a passenger, watching from the sidelines as Meghan and her oily PR consigliere gab about the money and deals with Disney.

I can think of no other reason for Meghan to have come all the way back for just three days, unless she had been told by her “people” it was necessary to insert herself back into the spotlight before the big announcement. The engagements didn’t even make sense — why would anyone come to London to thank the Canadians when they could stay in Canada and thank them there? If I were her, I’d be thinking of every excuse not to leave my son with the nanny 3,500 miles away — and avoid the showdown.

I should say that I don’t disagree with Meghan’s view that a new approach is needed within the royal family. You can’t pretend that you are an inclusive, warm, friendly, happy family if you still divide your members into first and second class. It must have come as a horrible thunderclap moment to Meghan when she saw the bizarre pictures of Prince George stirring a cake, amid talk of a “slimmed-down” royal family. She was treated as a second-class citizen by the original Markle clan — I bet she was damned if her son Archie was going to end up as one as well.

But oh, the manner of their self-ejection — so ill-considered and unpolished. Imagine setting up a website complete with flowcharts to explain in greater detail how troughingly wealthy and privileged you are. Imagine saying you’re going to cherry-pick photographers and journalists and think this “revised media approach” can be passed off as “open”. Imagine calling yourself “progressive”, then joining one of the least progressive institutions in the world and then complaining it isn’t “progressive” enough. How does the Queen even begin to negotiate with such self-obsessed individuals?"


----------



## Meh-gan

ccbaggirl89 said:


> It seems unlikely right now that she'd be welcomed back, but this is a woman who doesn't seem to care. Is she in Canada reading about herself and upset because of what she's done, or is she happy her name is in every world newspaper? Given what we've come to know, she'd probably not give a care and show up for all the haters.


This is her angle isn’t it? Diana 2.0 hounded by the press, forced to leave Britain, booking multi million dollar deals trading on the royal association etc.


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Some light humour from The Times
> 
> My week: Prince Harry*
> January 11 2020, 12:01am,
> The Times
> 
> Monday
> 
> "I took her to a supermarket. I don’t know why, but I had to start it somewhere. So it started there.
> 
> “But we’ll still have Ocado,” she said.
> 
> “Oh,” I said, “so we won’t need to do this every day? When we’re normal?”
> 
> Meghan said “no”. Then she said “nice to meet you” to a cashier who was doing a curtsey and giving her a bouquet. And then we told the police that they could let the public back in, and then we flew to Canada. And that was six weeks ago.
> 
> Now we’re heading back to the UK, but not for long. Things are going to change.
> 
> “But what if they say no?” I’m fretting, in the car to the airport.
> 
> Meghan says they can’t. Because we have all the power. And they have nothing we need.
> 
> “Apart from the house,” I say.
> 
> “Yes,” says Meghan.
> 
> “And the title,” I say.
> 
> “Yes,” says Meghan.
> 
> “And the money,” I say.
> 
> “Yes,” says Meghan. “Apart from that.”
> 
> Tuesday
> 
> The courtiers, I tell Father, won’t let me see Granny. And frankly that just sums up everything I want to leave behind.
> 
> “You won’t even have courtiers?” says Father, astonished.
> 
> “Not more than a couple,” I say, recklessly.
> 
> “This,” says Father, “is madness.”
> 
> I don’t care, I tell him. We want out. We’ll have a completely normal life. Like Meghan used to. Back when she was only middlingly famous and wrote a blog and occasionally had a drink with Piers Morgan.
> 
> “How ghastly,” says Father.
> 
> “It sounds better when she says it,” I admit.
> 
> Wednesday
> 
> Meghan says they’re stalling us, and we can’t let them, and we ought to go public. So we do. Then Wills calls.
> 
> “Dude,” he says. “What have you done? How will you live?”
> 
> “We’ll manage,” I tell him. “Meghan used to be a lawyer.”
> 
> Wills says not a real one, though. So I tell him that he obviously hasn’t seen seasons four to nine. Because it’s only in the first three that she was just a paralegal.
> 
> “But we have lots of options,” I say. “Like the Beckhams. Or the Kardashians. The fact is, we’re out. Deal with it. We’re not going to be royals any more. We just don’t want it. As it says, very clearly, on our website.”
> 
> “The one with the crown on it?” says Wills.
> 
> “Yes,” I say.
> 
> Thursday
> 
> Meghan says she’s going back to Canada, because she can’t stay any longer in a country where everybody clearly hates her.
> 
> “I just wish I could fly private,” she sighs, “because there are always so many damn wellwishers wanting selfies at Heathrow.”
> 
> Once she’s gone, I have an unprecedented conference call with the top three.
> 
> “Mmmhello?” says the speakerphone, cautiously.
> 
> “Hi Granny,” I say.
> 
> Then Wills comes on, and then Father. Who says I’m responsible for the most embarrassing day for the Firm in months.
> 
> “And how is Uncle Andy?” I ask.
> 
> “OK, weeks,” says Father.
> 
> Then Granny says we need to come to some sort of agreement about the money. And I say I don’t see why, because we have plans.
> 
> “But that’s what we’re worried about,” says Wills.
> 
> “Indeed,” says Father. “You’re royalty, Harry. It’s a noble duty. It’s not just a brand you can stick on stuff for cash.”
> 
> “Except for biscuits,” I say.
> 
> “Yes,” says Father, defensively. “Except for biscuits.”
> 
> Friday
> 
> I’m home alone at Frogmore Cottage when the Ocado man comes. I’ve sent the courtiers away, for practice, so I unpack the bags myself. Quite proud.
> 
> “Moving to Canada, then?” he says, on the way out.
> 
> Maybe, I say. Not sure. It’s all really complicated. No offence, but you wouldn’t understand. What am I supposed to do for the rest of my life? Open hospitals? Smile at people? Stand on balconies in medals? It’s suffocating. All I want is to be normal.
> 
> “Well between us,” says the Ocado man, “we’re looking for drivers. It’s OK. Nobody slags off your missus in the papers and you get at least a tenner an hour. What do you reckon?”
> 
> “Not that bloody normal,” I tell him, and close the door."
> 
> *according to Hugo Rifkind


that's funny
wonder if SNL will do something on them


----------



## big bad mama

People are missing the point. When family is toxic it’s time to move on like a job. A person’s mental health is more important. Fact: anxiety and stress will kill you. Life is too short.  Why be around people that obviously don’t love or care about you or your family. Everyone deserves and wants to be happy. I’m sure everyone has someone in their family that they’d like to get rid of. If Harry was happy in the BF I don’t think he would have left. Why hasn’t his father or brother stood up for them. Why because they are racist. William has always treated Harry as the red headed stepchild ( no punt intended). Harry is looking out for his family. He has a son now. Do you think he wants his children to be called racial names and from people in their own family.  Sometimes friends treat you better than your own family. Run as fast as you can Harry and Meghan. It’s obvious that Harry is like his mom loving, caring and compassionate and William is like his dad...a womanizer. Harry married his equal while William married a doormat. Look at the pictures. There is no way in hell Kate is happy. She sold her soul to the devil.


----------



## youngster

@sdkitty, SNL isn't back live for another 2 weeks.  So unfortunate.  Their writers are probably weeping over the missed opportunity.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> @sdkitty, SNL isn't back live for another 2 weeks.  So unfortunate.  Their writers are probably weeping over the missed opportunity.


there will probably still be material in two weeks LOL


----------



## CeeJay

shiba said:


> Lovely, this makes it sound like Canadians are responsible for their security......
> 
> https://globalnews.ca/news/6393526/meghan-markle-prince-harry-canada-taxpayer-cost/
> 
> “His Royal Highness, Prince Henry of Wales [Harry], along with members of his family, are Internationally Protected Persons (IPPs) and are entitled to the protection of the RCMP while in Canada,” said Cpl. Caroline Duval of the RCMP in a statement.
> “As part of its mandate, the RCMP is responsible at all times for the safety and security of visiting members of the Royal Family while they are in Canada. Security costs for protection of visiting members of the Royal Family while in Canada are covered through the existing operational budget. For security reasons, we cannot provide a detailed breakdown of these costs. For security reasons, the RCMP does not disclose the number of police personnel assigned to work during this type of visit.”


Security reasons? .. like what????  I would be VERY pissed if I was Canadian and had to pay for the security of those two .. let them hire their Russian's friends bodyguards (or their own - if they are celebrities after all)!!!


----------



## Katel

mdcx said:


> Meghan will not be calling in imo.
> As long as her bag is secured, she will not consent to actually being held to account by the people she just dropped a bomb on.



looks like you are right, mdcx!





mdcx said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-william-shares-sadness-admits-21263559



...
”A senior palace source said *Meghan is expected to dial in to the meeting, if it works with her schedule owing to the time difference in Canada* where she is staying with the couples eight month old son Archie after she fled the UK on Wednesday.

They intend to split their time between the UK and Canada after struggling to deal with life in the spotlight and refusing to carry on.”


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> january 12 2020, 12:01am, the sunday times  CAMILLA LONG
> *Meghan’s snubbed the Queen and country, and now she’s off with her prince. Charming!*
> 
> "Even if you don’t like the royal family, there is something truly horrifying about watching them being turned over by someone they met only four seconds ago. I watched agog last Wednesday, as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex launched their stunning smackdown, telling the Queen they’d be rejecting her kindness and understanding in favour of “stepping back” as senior royals.
> 
> They told their readers they had come to this decision “with your encouragement, over the last few years”. Whereupon I thought, “over the last few years”? But Meghan’s only been here three seconds. She met him only one minute ago — the gushing, joyful wedding was yesterday!
> 
> Why? What happened? We clearly still have really no idea who this woman is, however many thousands of words she no doubt personally writes on the lardy sussexroyal blog, a resurrection of her original blog, The Tig, just with more Julian Fellowes (“the history of the British monarchy is steeped in tradition and pride . . .”).
> 
> Maybe even Harry doesn’t know who she is, although I’d imagine he’s getting more of a sense of things now. But the main thing I felt, as the palace fired back that the Queen was “disappointed”, was a sense of sad foreboding: we aren’t watching the end of the royal family, or the end of Britain, or the end of deference and respect or politeness whatever people say the royal family stands for — they’re long gone — but yet another series of awful stresses and strains that could now spell the beginning of the end of their marriage.
> 
> What else does the future really look like for this couple, if they go abroad, stripped of their titles, relieved of as much money as the politicians can get off them, after the excitement, the deals and the television exclusives are over? Even if you aren’t a damaged and delicate person like Harry, few people would be able to cope with the sudden estrangement of their entire family and transfer to the alien landscape of what Meghan describes as “Canada” and I call “Los Angeles”.
> 
> He will also have to cope with growing isolation as he finds himself unprotected at the hands of LA’s ruthless paparazzi, whose habit of hiring gun-toting gang members to get the job done make the quaint and courtly royal rota, which he hates, look like a vicar’s tea party. And who’s he going to hang out with while he’s being chased around the car park of the local In-N-Out Burger? Jason Statham and Victoria Beckham? Have they any idea how this will all pan out?
> 
> Meanwhile, it must be dawning on even him that it’s something of a task keeping Madam entertained, given that an entire country of 66m people bored her to death within 18 months. In fact, I doubt he has much of a role in any of the decision-making any more — he seems merely a passenger, watching from the sidelines as Meghan and her oily PR consigliere gab about the money and deals with Disney.
> 
> I can think of no other reason for Meghan to have come all the way back for just three days, unless she had been told by her “people” it was necessary to insert herself back into the spotlight before the big announcement. The engagements didn’t even make sense — why would anyone come to London to thank the Canadians when they could stay in Canada and thank them there? If I were her, I’d be thinking of every excuse not to leave my son with the nanny 3,500 miles away — and avoid the showdown.
> 
> I should say that I don’t disagree with Meghan’s view that a new approach is needed within the royal family. You can’t pretend that you are an inclusive, warm, friendly, happy family if you still divide your members into first and second class. It must have come as a horrible thunderclap moment to Meghan when she saw the bizarre pictures of Prince George stirring a cake, amid talk of a “slimmed-down” royal family. She was treated as a second-class citizen by the original Markle clan — I bet she was damned if her son Archie was going to end up as one as well.
> 
> But oh, the manner of their self-ejection — so ill-considered and unpolished. Imagine setting up a website complete with flowcharts to explain in greater detail how troughingly wealthy and privileged you are. Imagine saying you’re going to cherry-pick photographers and journalists and think this “revised media approach” can be passed off as “open”. Imagine calling yourself “progressive”, then joining one of the least progressive institutions in the world and then complaining it isn’t “progressive” enough. How does the Queen even begin to negotiate with such self-obsessed individuals?"


Camilla Long is savage and I love it!


----------



## CeeJay

Allisonfaye said:


> She might get a crapload of money but I think she is going to be surprised at how fast she would be abandoned in the celebrity world after a divorce. Her only value is that she is married to a royal. If she divorced, she would just be another D-list rich celebrity, not unlike Camille Grammar or the like.


HA .. and then Andy Cohen might have been right; she must just be the most perfect villain of the RHoBH!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

big bad mama said:


> People are missing the point. When family is toxic it’s time to move on like a job. A person’s mental health is more important. Fact: anxiety and stress will kill you. Life is too short.  Why be around people that obviously don’t love or care about you or your family. Everyone deserves and wants to be happy. I’m sure everyone has someone in their family that they’d like to get rid of. If Harry was happy in the BF I don’t think he would have left. Why hasn’t his father or brother stood up for them. Why because they are racist. William has always treated Harry as the red headed stepchild ( no punt intended). Harry is looking out for his family. He has a son now. Do you think he wants his children to be called racial names and from people in their own family.  Sometimes friends treat you better than your own family. Run as fast as you can Harry and Meghan. It’s obvious that Harry is like his mom loving, caring and compassionate and William is like his dad...a womanizer. Harry married his equal while William married a doormat. Look at the pictures. There is no way in hell Kate is happy. She sold her soul to the devil.


I think YOU are missing the point. They want to make money. The end. All of the extra hysterics about mental health and media are to gain sympathy from people who aren’t really paying attention like you. 

MM has shown repeatedly who she is and it’s not pretty.


----------



## Straight-Laced

The official version from The Times already linked to The Mirror.

*january 12 2020, 12:01am, the sunday times ROYA NIKKHAH Royal Correspondent*

*Prince William on Harry and Meghan crisis: ‘I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can’t do it any more’

Queen calls family crisis summit*


“The Duke of Cambridge has spoken of his “sadness” at the broken bond with his brother and voiced sorrow that the royal family is no longer a “team”.

As the Queen called emergency peace talks tomorrow at Sandringham to end the Windsors’ civil war, The Sunday Times can reveal that Prince William has said he feels sorrow that he and Prince Harry are now “separate entities” and expressed hope that they might pull together again in future.

“I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives and I can’t do that any more; we’re separate entities,” he told a friend.



“I’m sad about that. All we can do, and all I can do, is try and support them and hope that the time comes when we’re all singing from the same page. I want everyone to play on the team.”

The comments lay bare the tensions at the heart of the royal household as it was announced that the Queen has summoned Princes Charles, William and Harry to the “Sandringham summit” to thrash out their differences. Meghan will dial in via a conference call from Canada, where she travelled on Friday.

It will be the first time the family has met since Harry and Meghan’s bombshell last week that the couple want to step down as senior royals, become “financially independent” and divide their time between the UK and North America. Courtiers and government officials have drawn up proposals covering a “range of possibilities” for the Queen, Charles, William and Harry to review. They include:

● How much “official” royal work Harry and Meghan will do in the UK and overseas on behalf of the royal family and the government

● Harry and Meghan’s HRH titles, and how they will be styled

● How much money they might receive from the Queen and the Prince of Wales, once their sovereign grant public funding is cut

● What commercial deals the couple might be allowed to strike.

Writing for this newspaper, Tom Bradby, who did the recent ITV interview in which Harry and Meghan confessed their sense of isolation, warned failure to keep the pair on side could lead the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to do a “no-holds-barred” interview that could damage the monarchy further.

He writes: “I have some idea of what might be aired in a full, no-holds-barred sit down interview and I don’t think it would be pretty.” Bradby does not say what concerns they might voice, but courtiers fear she would brand the royal household racist and sexist.

The peace summit comes as The Sunday Times can reveal that:

● Harry and Meghan may have their security downgraded, with protection squad officers armed only with Tasers rather than guns

● Senior royals are calling for the head of the Queen’s private secretary, Sir Edward Young, for presiding over the mess, with Princess Anne and Prince Edward among those who have questioned his grip on the royal household

● Harry’s allies say he believes aides to Prince William or Prince Charles leaked the details of his plans — with the other side blaming Meghan’s American PR company.


Royal aides said that making changes to the Sussexes’ future roles required “complex and thoughtful” discussions, but that the “next steps” would be agreed at tomorrow’s meeting. It is still the Queen’s wish to move “at pace”for the situation to be resolved within “days, not weeks”.

A concrete plan is expected to be agreed and publicly announced this week, but after the couple’s rushed statement last Wednesday, issued without the Queen’s knowledge, royal sources insisted there was now a “genuine understanding” from all involved that any changes to the Sussexes’ roles would “take time to implement”.

Meghan arrived in Canada on Friday morning to be reunited with the couple’s son, Archie. Harry, meanwhile, is expected to remain in Britain until the deal for their future is thrashed out.

The prince is due to make his first public appearance since renouncing his senior royal role on Thursday, when he will host the Rugby League World Cup 2021 draws for the wheelchair tournaments, at Buckingham Palace.

Royal aides dismissed reports that he has no other official public engagements in his diary as “incorrect”.

In a sign of how complex politics behind palace walls have become, Fiona Mcilwham, Harry and Meghan’s new private secretary and a highly experienced diplomat who joined their team from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), last week joked to colleagues during the discussions: “I was offered the Iran desk [at the FCO]. That might have been easier.”


----------



## Straight-Laced

sdkitty said:


> right....and now doria is doing pap walks?


Yeess... definitely not a saint, even if some people really wanted her to be one.


----------



## sdkitty

big bad mama said:


> People are missing the point. When family is toxic it’s time to move on like a job. A person’s mental health is more important. Fact: anxiety and stress will kill you. Life is too short.  Why be around people that obviously don’t love or care about you or your family. Everyone deserves and wants to be happy. I’m sure everyone has someone in their family that they’d like to get rid of. If Harry was happy in the BF I don’t think he would have left. Why hasn’t his father or brother stood up for them. Why because they are racist. William has always treated Harry as the red headed stepchild ( no punt intended). Harry is looking out for his family. He has a son now. Do you think he wants his children to be called racial names and from people in their own family.  Sometimes friends treat you better than your own family. Run as fast as you can Harry and Meghan. It’s obvious that Harry is like his mom loving, caring and compassionate and William is like his dad...a womanizer. Harry married his equal while William married a doormat. Look at the pictures. There is no way in hell Kate is happy. She sold her soul to the devil.


the royal family are racist?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

"if it works with her schedule owing to the time difference in Canada"


----------



## big bad mama

Meh-gan said:


> I think YOU are missing the point. They want to make money. The end. All of the extra hysterics about mental health and media are to gain sympathy from people who aren’t really paying attention like you.
> 
> MM has shown repeatedly who she is and it’s not pretty.


So what they want to make money who doesn’t. Don’t you? Money makes the world go around. Duh? If you’ve never experienced mental health issues you don’t know what it’s like. You can still somewhat function when need be.


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> I think YOU are missing the point. They want to make money. The end. All of the extra hysterics about mental health and media are to gain sympathy from people who aren’t really paying attention like you.
> 
> MM has shown repeatedly who she is and it’s not pretty.


YES!! .. and god knows, I know exactly what Mental Illness does to ALL members of a family as my mother was institutionalized for most of my youth.  

No one is saying that Harry hasn't suffered before he met Meghan, BUT .. as many have noted and we have seen with our own eyes when Will & Harry have done programs together, they WERE very close.  Harry was also very close to his sister-in-law, and then when they had their children.  The "issue" began when Meghan became involved; if she played him related to his mother, then she is EVIL in my opinion and as such, the ONLY way for him to get better is to JETTISON the ILLNESS out the door .. and that is HER!  

As I've said before (others have objected - whatever), there are plenty of folks out here who knew Meghan and her family dynamics.  Are they "surprised" by what has transpired? .. yes and no.  I think more are now surprised that could have (potentially) played Harry for the fool .. yes, time WILL tell!


----------



## Flatsy

big bad mama said:


> When family is toxic it’s time to move on like a job. A person’s mental health is more important. Fact: anxiety and stress will kill you. Life is too short. Why be around people that obviously don’t love or care about you or your family.


It's funny how everybody Meghan encounters turns out to be "toxic" and gives her no choice but to "move on".

To quote the old expression: "If you run into an ***hole in the morning, you ran into an ***hole. If you run into ***holes all day long, you're the ***hole."


----------



## Meh-gan

big bad mama said:


> So what they want to make money who doesn’t. Don’t you? Money makes the world go around. Duh? If you’ve never experienced mental health issues you don’t know what it’s like. You can still somewhat function when need be.


They have plenty of money and would have had plenty of money by performing their regular roles. 

There is no need for deals with Givenchy and Disney except for MM to be famous and greedy. This is the opposite of being woke and philanthropic. This isn’t charity work and helping people around the world. 

WAKE UP. The daft defence of her on here is insane.


----------



## CeeJay

_"Writing for this newspaper, Tom Bradby, who did the recent ITV interview in which Harry and Meghan confessed their sense of isolation, warned failure to keep the pair on side *could lead the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to do a “no-holds-barred” interview that could damage the monarchy further.*

He writes: “I have some idea of what might be aired in a full, no-holds-barred sit down interview and I don’t think it would be pretty.” Bradby does not say what concerns they might voice, but courtiers fear she would brand the royal household racist and sexist."_

So .. if she signed a NDA, wouldn't this be a violation of that?  It almost sounds like Blackmail to me .. WOW!


----------



## pukasonqo

mshermes said:


> To some people everyone is racist.....


well, the brits in general are not particularly fond of minorities (lived in the UK so yup, got first hand experience of their racism)
remember those nasty comments when M was pregnant showing her baby as a chimpanzee? and please don’t that it was done in good natured jest


----------



## big bad mama

CeeJay said:


> YES!! .. and god knows, I know exactly what Mental Illness does to ALL members of a family as my mother was institutionalized for most of my youth.
> 
> No one is saying that Harry hasn't suffered before he met Meghan, BUT .. as many have noted and we have seen with our own eyes when Will & Harry have done programs together, they WERE very close.  Harry was also very close to his sister-in-law, and then when they had their children.  The "issue" began when Meghan became involved; if she played him related to his mother, then she is EVIL in my opinion and as such, the ONLY way for him to get better is to JETTISON the ILLNESS out the door .. and that is HER!
> 
> As I've said before (others have objected - whatever), there are plenty of folks out here who knew Meghan and her family dynamics.  Are they "surprised" by what has transpired? .. yes and no.  I think more are now surprised that could have (potentially) played Harry for the fool .. yes, time WILL tell!


How do you know they were so close? Everyone is and has been acting for years not just Meghan. It’s their job to put on a united front in public.  Meghan and Harry owe no one an explanation because it’s their lives point blank. Real family and friends don’t tell your business only opportunist. William, Charles, Kate, Thomas Markel, etc.


----------



## mdcx

Straight-Laced said:


> The official version from The Times already linked to The Mirror.
> 
> *january 12 2020, 12:01am, the sunday times ROYA NIKKHAH Royal Correspondent*
> 
> *Prince William on Harry and Meghan crisis: ‘I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can’t do it any more’
> 
> Queen calls family crisis summit*
> 
> 
> “The Duke of Cambridge has spoken of his “sadness” at the broken bond with his brother and voiced sorrow that the royal family is no longer a “team”.
> 
> As the Queen called emergency peace talks tomorrow at Sandringham to end the Windsors’ civil war, The Sunday Times can reveal that Prince William has said he feels sorrow that he and Prince Harry are now “separate entities” and expressed hope that they might pull together again in future.
> 
> “I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives and I can’t do that any more; we’re separate entities,” he told a friend.
> 
> 
> 
> “I’m sad about that. All we can do, and all I can do, is try and support them and hope that the time comes when we’re all singing from the same page. I want everyone to play on the team.”
> 
> The comments lay bare the tensions at the heart of the royal household as it was announced that the Queen has summoned Princes Charles, William and Harry to the “Sandringham summit” to thrash out their differences. Meghan will dial in via a conference call from Canada, where she travelled on Friday.
> 
> It will be the first time the family has met since Harry and Meghan’s bombshell last week that the couple want to step down as senior royals, become “financially independent” and divide their time between the UK and North America. Courtiers and government officials have drawn up proposals covering a “range of possibilities” for the Queen, Charles, William and Harry to review. They include:
> 
> ● How much “official” royal work Harry and Meghan will do in the UK and overseas on behalf of the royal family and the government
> 
> ● Harry and Meghan’s HRH titles, and how they will be styled
> 
> ● How much money they might receive from the Queen and the Prince of Wales, once their sovereign grant public funding is cut
> 
> ● What commercial deals the couple might be allowed to strike.
> 
> Writing for this newspaper, Tom Bradby, who did the recent ITV interview in which Harry and Meghan confessed their sense of isolation, warned failure to keep the pair on side could lead the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to do a “no-holds-barred” interview that could damage the monarchy further.
> 
> He writes: “I have some idea of what might be aired in a full, no-holds-barred sit down interview and I don’t think it would be pretty.” Bradby does not say what concerns they might voice, but courtiers fear she would brand the royal household racist and sexist.
> 
> The peace summit comes as The Sunday Times can reveal that:
> 
> ● Harry and Meghan may have their security downgraded, with protection squad officers armed only with Tasers rather than guns
> 
> ● Senior royals are calling for the head of the Queen’s private secretary, Sir Edward Young, for presiding over the mess, with Princess Anne and Prince Edward among those who have questioned his grip on the royal household
> 
> ● Harry’s allies say he believes aides to Prince William or Prince Charles leaked the details of his plans — with the other side blaming Meghan’s American PR company.
> 
> 
> Royal aides said that making changes to the Sussexes’ future roles required “complex and thoughtful” discussions, but that the “next steps” would be agreed at tomorrow’s meeting. It is still the Queen’s wish to move “at pace”for the situation to be resolved within “days, not weeks”.
> 
> A concrete plan is expected to be agreed and publicly announced this week, but after the couple’s rushed statement last Wednesday, issued without the Queen’s knowledge, royal sources insisted there was now a “genuine understanding” from all involved that any changes to the Sussexes’ roles would “take time to implement”.
> 
> Meghan arrived in Canada on Friday morning to be reunited with the couple’s son, Archie. Harry, meanwhile, is expected to remain in Britain until the deal for their future is thrashed out.
> 
> The prince is due to make his first public appearance since renouncing his senior royal role on Thursday, when he will host the Rugby League World Cup 2021 draws for the wheelchair tournaments, at Buckingham Palace.
> 
> Royal aides dismissed reports that he has no other official public engagements in his diary as “incorrect”.
> 
> In a sign of how complex politics behind palace walls have become, Fiona Mcilwham, Harry and Meghan’s new private secretary and a highly experienced diplomat who joined their team from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), last week joked to colleagues during the discussions: “I was offered the Iran desk [at the FCO]. That might have been easier.”


So they are in fact blackmailing the BRF - do what Meghan wants or we’ll do the tell-all interview. Grotesque.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "if it works with her schedule owing to the time difference in Canada"



Right.  Just like going to Balmoral and Sandringham didn't fit into the schedule.  

Sick of the excuses from these two.  It has all been said on this thread many times.  Never once have I seen either of them taking personal responsibility for anything in their lives.  Meghan is from the cut and run school. Scream shout and weep and then run away and let others pick up the pieces.  Feel sorry for the two prior husbands and the live in BF.   So much for her being a strong woman.  The only strength I saw was her strong arm pushing her husband around, shoving her way in front of him and hanging on to his arm for dear life in case he tried to escape her grasp.  Harry needs to give up the mental health mantra.  He has had ample opportunity over decades to get good help.  If he had, then he wouldn't have been so easily victimized by a manipulator.  His brother tried to help and that just ended up with tearing into William and Kate when William offered common sensical advice.    His father fears for his mental health?  Is this a polite way of saying he is off his nut?  I guess it sounds better than saying his wife is leading him around by said nuts.


----------



## hellosunshine

Interesting....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## big bad mama

pukasonqo said:


> well, the brits in general are not particularly fond of minorities (lived in the UK so yup, got first hand experience of their racism)
> remember those nasty comments when M was pregnant showing her baby as a chimpanzee? and please don’t that it was done in good natured jest


Spot on. Until people walk a mile in a minorities shoe they have no room to talk. Racism is alive and running rampant all over the world.


----------



## Gimmethebag

If the royal family was racist, they wouldn’t have let Harry marry Meghan in the first place. Or at least, they wouldn’t have spent millions of dollars on the wedding nor would have Prince Charles spent six figures dressing her in bespoke Dior, that the future queens and blood princesses don’t even wear.

It’s not like the royal family doesn’t have a history of telling people they can’t marry their first choice. (Princess Margaret and Prince Charles, both wanting to marry other white people.)

Meghan, IMHO, is a communal narcissist. They come from all backgrounds. She didn’t want to become famous to shine a light on worldwide initiatives. She wants to pretend to be charitable in order to be rich and famous. Gross.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Obviously, you have not been on this thread for a long time; many of the folks here (not necessarily fans of Meghan's) are bi-racial or a minority, so you shouldn't assume anything.  In addition, I would be careful what you say because these types of accusations have not gone down well on TPF .. just sayin' ..


This.    She is a toxic person and that is why people don't like her. Period.  The *only *people who have ever brought up racism on this thread are her strong supporters.  That speaks volumes to me.  It is a lame excuse for people not liking her.


----------



## Straight-Laced

CeeJay said:


> _"Writing for this newspaper, Tom Bradby, who did the recent ITV interview in which Harry and Meghan confessed their sense of isolation, warned failure to keep the pair on side *could lead the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to do a “no-holds-barred” interview that could damage the monarchy further.*
> 
> He writes: “I have some idea of what might be aired in a full, no-holds-barred sit down interview and I don’t think it would be pretty.” Bradby does not say what concerns they might voice, but courtiers fear she would brand the royal household racist and sexist."_
> 
> So .. if she signed a NDA, wouldn't this be a violation of that?  It almost sounds like Blackmail to me .. WOW!


Definitely sounds like blackmail and threats to divulge certain things and pull back the curtains are part of this super mess ...
Reason why so many who don’t like the BRF have liked Meghan and the new Harry and their so called ‘modernising’ - potential to blow it all up, metaphorically speaking. 
No wonder the government is involved.


----------



## mrsinsyder

big bad mama said:


> If you aren’t a minority you don’t know how racism works. Most people that are racist will make little subliminal comments and then say oh we don’t mean you. FACT!!



Many of us in here are minorities who aren’t Meghan fans.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Interesting....



Are we now resorting to gobbledygook?


----------



## mdcx

When Meghan misbehaves, I am always reminded of American actress AJ Langer, who is now doing a very respectable job as Countess of Devon:
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/08/my-so-called-life-rayanne-aj-langer-countess


----------



## big bad mama

mrsinsyder said:


> Many of us in here are minorities who aren’t Meghan fans.


I never said I was or wasn’t a Meghan fan. I see reality and things aren’t  just black and white anymore. No one knows what these 2 have gone thru on a daily basis. I unlike some folks can see both sides. Can’t believe people would stand up so heartedly for a monarchy that some feel killed Diana.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also, famous people of color have been exposed to racism since the beginning of time. Meghan isn’t the first person to the subject to racist statements, and won’t be the last. 

Yet, I can’t think of any person of color who has taken all their toys and stormed off. They persevere and rise above the trash, instead of using it as an out to do whatever they please.


----------



## Jaxion

big bad mama said:


> Spot on. Until people walk a mile in a minorities shoe they have no room to talk. Racism is alive and running rampant all over the world.


 I've been on the recieving end of racism in my life and I care about the issue a lot but I'm offended that so many of the Meghan fans want to pretend like racism is the only reason that Meghan is criticised. *Yes she would have been on the receiving end of racism either way but majority of the criticism is because of the poor way she has acted and the genuine red flags she gives off. *Like seriously how do you explain the taking off the rings and splaying her hands thing? That's just most recent example that she's got some personality issue that makes her behave in a not normal way.

Pretending it's all racism is the part of the reason people aren't willing to acknowledge all the times when racism genuinely rears it's ugly head.


----------



## mrsinsyder

But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *

Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...


----------



## big bad mama

Jaxion said:


> I've been on the recieving end of racism in my life and I care about the issue a lot but I'm offended that so many of the Meghan fans want to pretend like racism is the only reason that Meghan is criticised. *Yes she would have been on the receiving end of racism either way but majority of the criticism is because of the poor way she has acted and the genuine red flags she gives off. *Like seriously how do you explain the taking off the rings and splaying her hands thing? That's just most recent example that she's got some personality issue that makes her behave in a not normal way.
> 
> Pretending it's all racism is the part of the reason people aren't willing to acknowledge all the times when racism genuinely rears it's ugly head.


How is she supposed to so call ‘act’. This is their lives nothing more nothing less. Let them live their lives in peace. No one should butt in their marriage or what they want to do period. I never said it was all racism. I’m sure the monarchy didn’t like it either because she was divorced. No one is perfect.


----------



## Gimmethebag

mrsinsyder said:


> But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...


I could see Prince Phillip being a racist, but he’s also like 98 years old. And there’s that weird and irrelevant Princess Michael.

But the Queen, Charles, William, Kate, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie? Sophie and Edward? I don’t see it.


----------



## big bad mama

mrsinsyder said:


> But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...


Can’t deny that.


----------



## big bad mama

Gimmethebag said:


> I could see Prince Phillip being a racist, but he’s also like 98 years old. And there’s that weird and irrelevant Princess Michael.
> 
> But the Queen, Charles,William, Kate, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie? Sophie and Edward? I don’t see it.


Younger generation may not be racist but those older ones definitely are. I mean how can they not be they were born doing those times whereas the new generation wants change excluding William and Kate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jaxion said:


> I've been on the recieving end of racism in my life and I care about the issue a lot but I'm offended that so many of the Meghan fans want to pretend like racism is the only reason that Meghan is criticised. *Yes she would have been on the receiving end of racism either way but majority of the criticism is because of the poor way she has acted and the genuine red flags she gives off. *Like seriously how do you explain the taking off the rings and splaying her hands thing? That's just most recent example that she's got some personality issue that makes her behave in a not normal way.
> *
> Pretending it's all racism is the part of the reason people aren't willing to acknowledge all the times when racism genuinely rears it's ugly head.*


----------



## Meh-gan

big bad mama said:


> How is she supposed to so call ‘act’. This is their lives nothing more nothing less. Let them live their lives in peace. No one should butt in their marriage or what they want to do period. I never said it was all racism. I’m sure the monarchy didn’t like it either because she was divorced. No one is perfect.


They can’t be left to live their lives in peace and do whatever they want because they are still funded by the Royal family and bear titles that present them as members of that institution. Anything they do, any deal they sign, any company they collaborate with is associated with the BRF because they bear those titles. 

If those companies end up doing something that could make the BRF look bad by association, or M&H do a shady deal that would have a negative impact on the BRF, it would be a huge liability. They can’t legally be allowed to just do what they want while trading on their titles. 

Like this has been explained to you multiple times in multiple ways. If they want to have no titles, move away, not take any money that has ANY ties to the British taxpayers then sure they live in peace all they want.  But that is NOT what they have announced. It’s all plain for you to read on their website. Until they do all those things, yes people can butt into their marriage and what they want to do all they want. The Queen is in charge here.


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...




That just made me laugh...


----------



## big bad mama

CeeJay said:


> First of all, you don't know me .. I don't know you; so DO NOT say that I do not know Mental Illness first hand.
> 
> Secondarily, many others (journalists, friends, etc.) noted the closeness of William and Harry many times; before Meghan and even before William married Kate.  Did I say that I (me) specifically knew that they were so close? .. nope.
> 
> Agree that they need to put on a united front; do you think John Q Public would love to see a knock-down-drag-out amongst the BRF?  Again .. you have a lot of conjecture here as well .. "don't tell your business only opportunists" ..c'mon.
> 
> Why don't you just put all the folks you don't agree with on IGNORE so we don't need to see your vitriol .. 'kay?


If the brother’s bond was so close then William would fight for the relationship. You don’t give up on family if you feel that closeness. Look at parents who fight for their drug addicted kids who may have stolen from them. You don’t give up so easily. You don’t have to like the person a family member marries but you show respect on both sides. This family already had issues. Why be so mad that Harry and Meghan are stepping back. The monarchy was going to scale down anyway so this may have played out in the end. Oh wait the monarchy wanted to have the upper hand and didn’t get it so now they are mad. Let Eugenia and Beatrice be working royals after all that’s what their dad has been wanting all along.


----------



## Jaxion

big bad mama said:


> How is she supposed to so call ‘act’. This is their lives nothing more nothing less. Let them live their lives in peace. No one should butt in their marriage or what they want to do period. I never said it was all racism. I’m sure the monarchy didn’t like it either because she was divorced. No one is perfect.


How she's supposed to act? It's called following protocol and any member of any royal family in any country that doesn't follow protocol is called up on it. You've never followed anything about any royal family have you? It really shows and maybe you aren't the person to comment on it if you don't want to learn more about what the duties and responsibilities of being royalty are. 

The lack of respect for protocol can maybe be ignored if she didn't have all the other red flags.



mrsinsyder said:


> But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...


Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...[/QUOTE]I genuinely laughed out loud at your post. It's so good and a good point!

I'm even willing to concede that some of the royal family are racist because of course some of them are. We have to be very kind to pretend like Princess Michael of Kent isn't racist given she's been caught out more than once and not to mention her father was in the SS. The Queen Mother and Princess Margaret were also have been known for making racist jokes more than once. But honestly the rest especially Queen Elizabeth have done things to try and not be racist and to try and stop racist injustice. I know it's probably off topic but I quite admire some of the things QEII has done during her reign. Like her reaction to Thatcher's racism during apartheid.


----------



## big bad mama

Meh-gan said:


> They can’t be left to live their lives in peace and do whatever they want because they are still funded by the Royal family and bear titles that present them as members of that institution. Anything they do, any deal they sign, any company they collaborate with is associated with the BRF because they bear those titles.
> 
> If those companies end up doing something that could make the BRF look bad by association, or M&H do a shady deal that would have a negative impact on the BRF, it would be a huge liability. They can’t legally be allowed to just do what they want while trading on their titles.
> 
> Like this has been explained to you multiple times in multiple ways. If they want to have no titles, move away, not take any money that has ANY ties to the British taxpayers then sure they live in peace all they want.  But that is NOT what they have announced. It’s all plain for you to read on their website. Until they do all those things, yes people can butt into their marriage and what they want to do all they want. The Queen is in charge here.


That’s why the monarchy needs to be abolish. It’s too old fashion and not progressive at all. Then everyone in the royal family will have to get a real job. Everyone should pay their own way. Use the people’s tax money to help the homeless, feed kids, better healthcare, etc.


----------



## big bad mama

big bad mama said:


> That’s why the monarchy needs to be abolish. It’s too old fashion and not progressive at all. Then everyone in the royal family will have to get a real job. Everyone should pay their own way.





Gimmethebag said:


> If the royal family was racist, they wouldn’t have let Harry marry Meghan in the first place. Or at least, they wouldn’t have spent millions of dollars on the wedding nor would have Prince Charles would have spent six figures dressing her in bespoke Dior, that the future queens and blood princesses don’t even wear.
> 
> It’s not like the royal family doesn’t have a history of telling people they can’t marry their first choice. (Princess Margaret and Prince Charles, both wanting to marry other white people.)
> 
> Meghan, IMHO, is a communal narcissist. They come from all backgrounds. She didn’t want to become famous to shine a light on worldwide initiatives. She wants to pretend to be charitable in order to be rich and famous. Gross.


You can still be racist. It’s call being passive aggressive


----------



## Flatsy

big bad mama said:


> If the brother’s bond was so close then William would fight for the relationship. You don’t give up on family if you feel that closeness.


You said yourself, when a family member is toxic, sometimes you have to move on.  Or is that only a healthy thing to do when it's Meghan ghosting everyone?

I guess Harry and Meghan are allowed to abuse his family as much as they want, and if the family can't deal with it anymore, it's their fault.

William made very clear that he hopes to reunite with his brother someday, but he can't force Harry to be part of the family.  I think Will, like everyone else, is waiting for the day when Harry gets himself out of the clutches of the toxic, manipulative narcissist who is destroying his life.


----------



## Meh-gan

big bad mama said:


> That’s why the monarchy needs to be abolish. It’s too old fashion and not progressive at all. Then everyone in the royal family will have to get a real job. Everyone should pay their own way.


Your plan won’t work for MM and Harry. They wont get big deals and be able to make lots of money without being royalty. So. 

And this couple isn’t even suggesting no more monarchy lol they still want the titles and money from Charles. These are crucial pieces in their plans.


----------



## big bad mama

Flatsy said:


> You said yourself, when a family member is toxic, sometimes you have to move on.  Or is that only a healthy thing to do when it's Meghan ghosting everyone?
> 
> I guess Harry and Meghan are allowed to abuse his family as much as they want, and if the family can't deal with it anymore, it's their fault.
> 
> William made very clear that he hopes to reunite with his brother someday, but he can't force Harry to be part of the family.  I think Will, like everyone else, is waiting for the day when Harry gets himself out of the clutches of the toxic, manipulative narcissist who is destroying his life.


To me it looks like both sides are in the wrong. Like I said I can see both sides.


----------



## big bad mama

Jaxion said:


> How she's supposed to act? It's called following protocol and any member of any royal family in any country that doesn't follow protocol is called up on it. You've never followed anything about any royal family have you? It really shows and maybe you aren't the person to comment on it if you don't want to learn more about what the duties and responsibilities of being royalty are.
> 
> The lack of respect for protocol can maybe be ignored if she didn't have all the other red flags.
> 
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...


I genuinely laughed out loud at your post. It's so good and a good point!

I'm even willing to concede that some of the royal family are racist because of course some of them are. We have to be very kind to pretend like Princess Michael of Kent isn't racist given she's been caught out more than once and not to mention her father was in the SS. The Queen Mother and Princess Margaret were also have been known for making racist jokes more than once. But honestly the rest especially Queen Elizabeth have done things to try and not be racist and to try and stop racist injustice. I know it's probably off topic but I quite admire some of the things QEII has done during her reign. Like her reaction to Thatcher's racism during apartheid.[/QUOTE]


----------



## big bad mama

mrsinsyder said:


> Also, famous people of color have been exposed to racism since the beginning of time. Meghan isn’t the first person to the subject to racist statements, and won’t be the last.
> 
> Yet, I can’t think of any person of color who has taken all their toys and stormed off. They persevere and rise above the trash, instead of using it as an out to do whatever they please.


Sometimes when people are the only children they can move on more easily than regular people. Sounds like it may be a coping skill.


----------



## Jaxion

big bad mama said:


> You think the younger generation cares about protocol? Only the old care about that because they don’t want and are scared of change. The younger generation want love, peace, happiness and to do whatever you makes you happy. Change is coming to the monarchy whether people want it or not.


 Okay that's funny. Guess who follows protocol? Literally every other member of the BRF including, Kate and William, Zara Tindall, the York sisters etc. I'm going to stop replying to you because you obviously don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## big bad mama

Meh-gan said:


> Your plan won’t work for MM and Harry. They wont get big deals and be able to make lots of money without being royalty. So.
> 
> And this couple isn’t even suggesting no more monarchy lol they still want the titles and money from Charles. These are crucial pieces in their plans.


Charles’s money. Last time I looked it was the tax payers money.


----------



## Allisonfaye

I don't think anyone would mind the whole thing if they didn't expect to keep all the trappings of the BRF without the sacrifice required. I don't see how it's racist for the British taxpayers to expect something for their hard earned tax dollars just as we citizens of the US do.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## big bad mama

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't think anyone would mind the whole thing if they didn't expect to keep all the trappings of the BRF without the sacrifice required. I don't see how it's racist for the British taxpayers to expect something for their hard earned tax dollars just as we citizens of the US do.


That’s why EVERYONE in the RF should have a real job to take care of themselves and their families. If everyone had a real job it wouldn’t matter what any of them did. Why should you get tax payers money just because you are born into a family. That’s called entitlement.


----------



## queennadine

I'm very interested to see how this will all play out, and what concessions will be made.


----------



## Allisonfaye

big bad mama said:


> That’s why EVERYONE in the RF should have a real job to take care of themselves and their families. If everyone had a real job it wouldn’t matter what any of them did. Why should you get tax payers money just because you are born into a family. That’s called entitlement.



That's a whole different issue. Whether or not you believe the BRF should be supported by the taxpayers or not is a separate issue. I know many people don't. But they obviously get something from having them in place or they wouldn't do it. I am sure that millions pour into to the coffers from the whole BRF. I remember when my husband and I went to London clear back in 2002 and he said the same thing. He said the BRF was a thing of the past. And then we got there and watched the changing of the guards, the parade and saw the souvenirs and all the touristy stuff and he changed his mind.


----------



## queennadine

big bad mama said:


> That’s why EVERYONE in the RF should have a real job to take care of themselves and their families. If everyone had a real job it wouldn’t matter what any of them did. Why should you get tax payers money just because you are born into a family.



Ok, well that's a whoooooole other issue and completely separate from what's going on here. The facts right now are this: the BRF exists; they live off of taxpayer money as well as some of their own; the Brits by and large feel pride in the BRF; the BRF brings in tourism $. 

In exchange for all of this (and by 'this' I mean: living in castles/palaces, wearing designer clothes, having access to millions of $ of jewels, staff, never having to worry about a single thing...), the BRF is expected to behave in a certain way, like being humble and showing gratitude. Which, frankly, everyone should do. 

PH and MM have done, and are continuing to do, the opposite. They lecture people, demand all of the perks of royal life, whine, throw temper tantrums, and completely disrespect the family members that have supported them. Quite unbecoming.


----------



## rose60610

mshermes said:


> To some people everyone is racist.....



Especially the New York Times. Seems 98% of their articles the "bad guy" is always "racist".  Even if the "bad guy" is a minority him/herself.


----------



## mia55

Jaxion said:


> I've been on the recieving end of racism in my life and I care about the issue a lot but I'm offended that so many of the Meghan fans want to pretend like racism is the only reason that Meghan is criticised. *Yes she would have been on the receiving end of racism either way but majority of the criticism is because of the poor way she has acted and the genuine red flags she gives off. *Like seriously how do you explain the taking off the rings and splaying her hands thing? That's just most recent example that she's got some personality issue that makes her behave in a not normal way.
> 
> Pretending it's all racism is the part of the reason people aren't willing to acknowledge all the times when racism genuinely rears it's ugly head.


I’m a woman of color too and I totally agree with you. Because of these kind of people, who play race card for their own selfish interest, racism is not taken seriously many times. I’m  so appalled with MM and hope she stops playing games and   genuinely  take care of her family.


----------



## rose60610

big bad mama said:


> Maybe you need to look at the bigger issues. That family is toxic point blank. They had issues BEFORE Meghan married into that family. She just brought it to the surface because she’s black. Look at how they treated Diana but I guess that’s okay.



Diana was black?


----------



## mia55

mrsinsyder said:


> But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...


----------



## big bad mama

Meh-gan said:


> They can’t be left to live their lives in peace and do whatever they want because they are still funded by the Royal family and bear titles that present them as members of that institution. Anything they do, any deal they sign, any company they collaborate with is associated with the BRF because they bear those titles.
> 
> If those companies end up doing something that could make the BRF look bad by association, or M&H do a shady deal that would have a negative impact on the BRF, it would be a huge liability. They can’t legally be allowed to just do what they want while trading on their titles.
> 
> Like this has been explained to you multiple times in multiple ways. If they want to have no titles, move away, not take any money that has ANY ties to the British taxpayers then sure they live in peace all they want.  But that is NOT what they have announced. It’s all plain for you to read on their website. Until they do all those things, yes people can butt into their marriage and what they want to do all they want. The Queen is in charge here.


People worried so much about Harry and Meghan they better be more worried about having a pedophile in the BF. If that hasn’t brought bad business to the monarchy why would you assume this would.


----------



## big bad mama

queennadine said:


> Ok, well that's a whoooooole other issue and completely separate from what's going on here. The facts right now are this: the BRF exists; they live off of taxpayer money as well as some of their own; the Brits by and large feel pride in the BRF; the BRF brings in tourism $.
> 
> In exchange for all of this (and by 'this' I mean: living in castles/palaces, wearing designer clothes, having access to millions of $ of jewels, staff, never having to worry about a single thing...), the BRF is expected to behave in a certain way, like being humble and showing gratitude. Which, frankly, everyone should do.
> 
> PH and MM have done, and are continuing to do, the opposite. They lecture people, demand all of the perks of royal life, whine, throw temper tantrums, and completely disrespect the family members that have supported them. Quite unbecoming.


No it is the same issue because it boils down to the money and nothing else. That’s what everyone seems to be so much in arms about. Them wanting money from the Duchy, security etc. The British taxpayers should be up in arms about paying for nonsense.


----------



## Vanilla Bean

The royals personally own real estate that generates millions in income in addition to the crown-owned property.

Anyway, I looked up the Vancouver Island estate where Harry and Meghan stayed. Milles Fluers is absolutely stunning. Good thing Harry didn't marry me because I couldn't walk around a place like that without my jaw dropping to the floor. I wonder what it's like for him...is he ever impressed anymore? That said, I do expect he still appreciates the sight of a lion on a savanna in Africa. We would have that in common.


----------



## Meh-gan

big bad mama said:


> People worried so much about Harry and Meghan they better be more worried about having a pedophile in the BF. If that hasn’t brought bad business to the monarchy why would you assume this would.


Andrew’s bad behaviour doesn’t excuse Harry and Meghan’s behaviour. If you want to talk about him there is a thread for that.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## queennadine

big bad mama said:


> No it is the same issue because it boils down to the money and nothing else. That’s what everyone seems to be so much in arms about. Them wanting money from the Duchy, security etc. *The British taxpayers should be up in arms about paying for nonsense.*



Are you British? Genuinely curious. Because if not, it's none of your business. I believe the Brits generally like the BRF, so long as they tow the line. If they're not up in arms about it, what's it to you?


----------



## rose60610

big bad mama said:


> So what they want to make money who doesn’t. Don’t you? Money makes the world go around. Duh? If you’ve never experienced mental health issues you don’t know what it’s like. You can still somewhat function when need be.



I must admit, you have me intrigued. "They want to make money"?  As if heir to the BRF isn't money enough? Wha? I mean, help me out here.  Your life doesn't require lifting a finger (OK, maybe a little, Royal Tush Wipers are no longer employed as they once were), you have everything you want handed to you, all the royal privileges, servants galore, nannies galore, drivers galore, everything galore--all you do is have to show up at events and (act, hmmm, who likes to act....?) make the masses feel blessed by your presence, go home, nap, change designer wardrobe, and hobnob with important people instead of the unwashed masses. So the media are mean to you, who cares? Don't give them further ammunition. Oh! Too late! Meghan can't help it. 

If one can function "when need be" with mental health issues, then are you seriously actually mentally ill?  I'm not buying that Harry is mentally "ill".  It isn't as though his family was short on resources to help him out with the best therapists, etc if that were the case.  Why did the British military entrust him with flying helicopters with soldiers on board if he were so "mentally ill"? Especially with lights and noise? Doesn't military from time to time encounter lights and noise? 

I'm sorry that Harry's mother was killed when he was 12. That is indeed a tragedy. 

Nobody discussed mental health issues with Harry until Meghan came on board. That's rather telling........


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Back on topic...


----------



## Straight-Laced

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-tout-Meghan-Markle-Disney-voiceover-job.html
*My wife needs a job! Astonishing moment Prince Harry appears to tout Meghan Markle for a Disney voiceover job as he's seen explaining her credentials to Hollywood mogul Bob Iger at Lion King premiere*

Surely not !!!??? 
Certainly looks like Harry was hustling for Meghan back in July.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Straight-Laced said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-tout-Meghan-Markle-Disney-voiceover-job.html
> *My wife needs a job! Astonishing moment Prince Harry appears to tout Meghan Markle for a Disney voiceover job as he's seen explaining her credentials to Hollywood mogul Bob Iger at Lion King premiere*
> 
> Surely not !!!???
> Certainly looks like Harry was hustling for Meghan back in July.



Do people really know what she sounds like that they would recognize her voice in a movie?


----------



## queennadine

^^ Omg, what is he? Her agent? Good Lord.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## pukasonqo

Please don’t send them to Oz, we have been punished enough (dimwit as PM and the horrendous ongoing bushfires)


----------



## Jaxion

Straight-Laced said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-tout-Meghan-Markle-Disney-voiceover-job.html
> *My wife needs a job! Astonishing moment Prince Harry appears to tout Meghan Markle for a Disney voiceover job as he's seen explaining her credentials to Hollywood mogul Bob Iger at Lion King premiere*
> 
> Surely not !!!???
> Certainly looks like Harry was hustling for Meghan back in July.


Woah that's shocking. If it were any other member of the family this would be a bombshell by itself but since they've been causing so much drama I wonder if this'll slide by and not be commented on much.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> There's a difference between IGNORE and REPORT; I have had to use the latter ..



I’ve been using it a ton since these posts first began. At first it was entertaining but then became sad and exhausting.

On topic... They can have a reality TV show.


----------



## LittleStar88

Another fun job option...


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-tout-Meghan-Markle-Disney-voiceover-job.html
> *My wife needs a job! Astonishing moment Prince Harry appears to tout Meghan Markle for a Disney voiceover job as he's seen explaining her credentials to Hollywood mogul Bob Iger at Lion King premiere*
> 
> Surely not !!!???
> Certainly looks like Harry was hustling for Meghan back in July.


WHAT?!?!! .. WHOA!! .. and someone taped it???


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> WHAT?!?!! .. WHOA!! .. and someone taped it???


How embarrassing.


----------



## mshermes

The more I think about all of the possible outcomes, the one person who is going to be hurt is Archie. It kills me that he is this little, innocent baby and has no idea that all of this turmoil is going on. So sad.


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> well, the brits in general are not particularly fond of minorities (lived in the UK so yup, got first hand experience of their racism)
> remember those nasty comments when M was pregnant showing her baby as a chimpanzee? and please don’t that it was done in good natured jest


Th


big bad mama said:


> Younger generation may not be racist but those older ones definitely are. I mean how can they not be they were born doing those times whereas the new generation wants change excluding William and Kate.


so the queen who put on a huge wedding for them, loaned her a tiara, made public appearances (the train thing, etc) with Meghan -is a racist?
Maybe you think deep down she is racist but if she is she made a good show of accepting Harry's bride


----------



## Katel

queennadine said:


> Ok, well that's a whoooooole other issue and completely separate from what's going on here. The facts right now are this: the BRF exists; they live off of taxpayer money as well as some of their own; the Brits by and large feel pride in the BRF; the BRF brings in tourism $.
> 
> In exchange for all of this (and by 'this' I mean: living in castles/palaces, wearing designer clothes, having access to millions of $ of jewels, staff, never having to worry about a single thing...), the BRF is expected to behave in a certain way, like being humble and showing gratitude. Which, frankly, everyone should do.
> 
> PH and MM have done, and are continuing to do, the opposite. They lecture people, demand all of the perks of royal life, whine, throw temper tantrums, and completely disrespect the family members that have supported them. Quite unbecoming.



yes x a million!



mia55 said:


> I’m a woman of color too and I totally agree with you. Because of these kind of people, who play race card for their own selfish interest, racism is not taken seriously many times. I’m  so appalled with MM and hope she stops playing games and   genuinely  take care of her family.



Again, yes yes yes!



LittleStar88 said:


> I’m so thankful for the ignore function. Painful. Wow.



another TRUE TRUE post lol!


----------



## Gimmethebag

It seems like everyone in the family was avoiding Prince Phillip getting involved. But now he is. He moved from his man-cave farmhouse back into the Queen's primary residence through the crisis.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Allisonfaye said:


> Do people really know what she sounds like that they would recognize her voice in a movie?



her voice is flat and annoying, and has that trendy whiny “vocal fry” - eeks


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

big bad mama said:


> *If you aren’t a minority you don’t know how racism works.* Most people that are racist will make little subliminal comments and then say oh we don’t mean you. FACT!!


I could posts news clips and articles of minorities committing violent hate crimes against Europeans in the US and Europe, all day and all week long, proving you very wrong. But doing so would of course be triggeringly racist  



big bad mama said:


> Maybe you need to look at the bigger issues. That family is toxic point blank. They had issues BEFORE Meghan married into that family. She just brought it to the surface because she’s black. Look at how they treated Diana but I guess that’s okay.


Actually, and since you keep bringing up race, Meghan is bi-racial. Although don't let the "FACT" that she's half white and half black but only started identifying as black when she couldn't make a whole nation bow down to her narc demands, get in the way of your point blanks. 


This whole sham was allowed to happen because everyone is so terrified of being called a racist when criticising anyone "of colour". And they were right. But the truth is Meghan is a flamin' textbook narc right down to the smirk and the mastery of manipulative doe eyed victim-hood, whatever colour she'd come in. If anything, she was cut a lot of slack for far too long for the exact fact that she is bi-racial. Which is in fact extremely patronising.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Allisonfaye said:


> Do people really know what she sounds like that they would recognize her voice in a movie?


Well, I did watch Suits for 9 years, 7 of which she was on. I probably have a shot at recognizing her voice


----------



## mdcx

She’s been working this angle right from the start - poor little delicate Meghan who needs to be protected from her “bully” of the moment. Of course Harry rushed in:


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-fast-tracked-plans-feared-wife-meltdown.html


----------



## baghagg

mdcx said:


> When Meghan misbehaves, I am always reminded of American actress AJ Langer, who is now doing a very respectable job as Countess of Devon:
> https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/08/my-so-called-life-rayanne-aj-langer-countess
> View attachment 4637558


I can honestly say I've never heard of this person, nor did I ever hear of MM until she started dating PH.  
PS:. Has MM been twice divorced?  Did I read that comment here correctly?


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> Back on topic...
> 
> View attachment 4637612



This is a really interesting article linked by @mrsinsyder. I think the headline might be a bit misleading (that trouble is brewing in the marriage  mostly because Harry was grumpy at a private dinner and said he'd rather be home with Archie), but Ms. Schulman makes some great points:

This is not the complete article at all, just excerpts:
_What is baffling to me is why they are choosing to swap the unique and deeply rooted status they currently enjoy for the capricious and transient position of celebrities on the open market. *The greatest aspiration of many of the world’s best-known and wealthiest stars is precisely for the life Harry and Meghan already have – the palaces, the jewels and gowns, the holidays, the staff, the deference and, crucially, the unassailability of their position in the pecking order of fame.* What wouldn’t David and Victoria Beckham give to be a royal duke and duchess?

If their intention was simply to disappear for half the year and live in a Vancouver wood, showing Archie the native chipmunks on pre-breakfast hikes, that would perhaps be disappointing for their family, but not any kind of serious problem. However, disappearing is not what they are intending. Not at all.   

But as second-tier Royals roaming the world on the speaker circuit, making red-carpet appearances, endorsing products and occasionally appearing on the balcony at Buckingham Palace, the rules of engagement become very murky. Right now the Sussexes are hot.  Meghan is beautiful and impassioned. Harry still dashing and a frontline Royal. Things change. In the world of celebrity, you are always having to watch out for the new kid on the block. Fame is a greedy beast that has to be continually fed.

*Until now, their working life of Royal tours, walkabouts, visiting disaster zones and being guests of honour at charity events has automatically fuelled and burnished their profile. But without the very special imprimatur of first-tier Royalty, the kind of power and influence they currently enjoy may not survive in the long term* – especially if they are cashing them in to gain financial independence.

*The celebrity circuit is complex and quite brutal. If you become known as an easy gun for hire to the highest bidder, in a short time your currency drops. *You can spend a few years giving hugely lucrative speeches for international hedge-fund dinners, and being on the advisory board of a biodiversity start-up in Qatar, b*ut to give this existence longevity you have to keep replenishing your worth – whether that is in the degree of your fame or in exceptional talent or knowledge.

Unanchored celebrity has a built-in obsolescence. It’s hard to understand why they are swapping a profile that confers automatic and eternal worldwide fame for one where your worth will be in part measured by your number of Instagram followers and dependent on the skill of your marketing team. *This kind of celebrity is also reliant on exposure, and not simply the exposure that you selectively chose to put out on your own social media sites. The relentless commentary of media of every kind is part of the deal and, if anything, the Sussexes may well be less protected in this new world than they felt in their old. Every move they make will be analysed and scrutinised and if they are being paid handsomely for it, they will no doubt be regarded as fair game.





_


----------



## mshermes

baghagg said:


> I can honestly say I've never heard of this person, nor did I ever hear of MM until she started dating PH.
> PS:. Has MM been twice divorced?  Did I read that comment here correctly?


I am only aware of one prior marriage which lasted two years, 2011-2013.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Gimmethebag said:


> It seems like everyone in the family was avoiding Prince Phillip getting involved. But now he is. He moved from his man-cave farmhouse back into the Queen's primary residence through the crisis.


Both sad and glad to read this.
On the one hand concerned that the Queen and Prince Philip are having to deal with such a major internal crisis at this time in their lives but also reassured that such a steely pair are still at the helm to get this mess sorted.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mdcx said:


> She’s been working this angle right from the start - poor little delicate Meghan who needs to be protected from her “bully” of the moment. Of course Harry rushed in:
> View attachment 4637682
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-fast-tracked-plans-feared-wife-meltdown.html


Good grief just let her have her freakin’ meltdown !!
More threats, more emotional blackmail  because she must get her way or else ...
The tiresome and exhausting ways of the narcissist.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mshermes said:


> The more I think about all of the possible outcomes, the one person who is going to be hurt is Archie. It kills me that he is this little, innocent baby and has no idea that all of this turmoil is going on. So sad.


I feel the same way. Hopefully he’s a resilient child who takes after some of the very tough ancestors he has on his father’s side.


----------



## baghagg

Straight-Laced said:


> Good grief just let her have her freakin’ meltdown !!
> More threats, more emotional blackmail  because she must get her way or else ...
> The tiresome and exhausting ways of the narcissist.


100%


----------



## baghagg

youngster said:


> This is a really interesting article linked by @mrsinsyder. I think the headline might be a bit misleading (that trouble is brewing in the marriage  mostly because Harry was grumpy at a private dinner and said he'd rather be home with Archie), but Ms. Schulman makes some great points:
> 
> This is not the complete article at all, just excerpts:
> _What is baffling to me is why they are choosing to swap the unique and deeply rooted status they currently enjoy for the capricious and transient position of celebrities on the open market. *The greatest aspiration of many of the world’s best-known and wealthiest stars is precisely for the life Harry and Meghan already have – the palaces, the jewels and gowns, the holidays, the staff, the deference and, crucially, the unassailability of their position in the pecking order of fame.* What wouldn’t David and Victoria Beckham give to be a royal duke and duchess?
> 
> If their intention was simply to disappear for half the year and live in a Vancouver wood, showing Archie the native chipmunks on pre-breakfast hikes, that would perhaps be disappointing for their family, but not any kind of serious problem. However, disappearing is not what they are intending. Not at all.
> 
> But as second-tier Royals roaming the world on the speaker circuit, making red-carpet appearances, endorsing products and occasionally appearing on the balcony at Buckingham Palace, the rules of engagement become very murky. Right now the Sussexes are hot.  Meghan is beautiful and impassioned. Harry still dashing and a frontline Royal. Things change. In the world of celebrity, you are always having to watch out for the new kid on the block. Fame is a greedy beast that has to be continually fed.
> 
> *Until now, their working life of Royal tours, walkabouts, visiting disaster zones and being guests of honour at charity events has automatically fuelled and burnished their profile. But without the very special imprimatur of first-tier Royalty, the kind of power and influence they currently enjoy may not survive in the long term* – especially if they are cashing them in to gain financial independence.
> 
> *The celebrity circuit is complex and quite brutal. If you become known as an easy gun for hire to the highest bidder, in a short time your currency drops. *You can spend a few years giving hugely lucrative speeches for international hedge-fund dinners, and being on the advisory board of a biodiversity start-up in Qatar, b*ut to give this existence longevity you have to keep replenishing your worth – whether that is in the degree of your fame or in exceptional talent or knowledge.
> 
> Unanchored celebrity has a built-in obsolescence. It’s hard to understand why they are swapping a profile that confers automatic and eternal worldwide fame for one where your worth will be in part measured by your number of Instagram followers and dependent on the skill of your marketing team. *This kind of celebrity is also reliant on exposure, and not simply the exposure that you selectively chose to put out on your own social media sites. The relentless commentary of media of every kind is part of the deal and, if anything, the Sussexes may well be less protected in this new world than they felt in their old. Every move they make will be analysed and scrutinised and if they are being paid handsomely for it, they will no doubt be regarded as fair game.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


... and then they will  have become the _Royal_ Kardashians lol


----------



## youngster

It's hard not to make the comparison to Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, even though Harry is the spare not the heir.  Harry has backed himself into a corner rather similar to Edward VIII in that even if he wants to end the marriage one day, it'll be tough for him to do so, since it would be so darn humiliating after he caused such turmoil.  He's going to need some time to go by and memories to fade.

I think he also wouldn't want Archie to be raised by divorced parents so he'll stick it out as long as he possibly can.  Maybe that'll be 2 or 3 years or even 5 years but it's hard to imagine the two of them married for the long haul.  Imagine him sitting in Canada, surrounded by Meghan's friends, isolated from all his friends and family, watching events in the UK on the telly and thinking that's where he should be, standing by his father's side or Will's side.  Eventually, he'll figure it out.  Hopefully, he'll figure it out before he and Will become strangers to each other.


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> I feel the same way. Hopefully he’s a resilient child who takes after some of the very tough ancestors he has on his father’s side.


His grandfather is not one of them!


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> I am only aware of one prior marriage which lasted two years, 2011-2013.


She was married prior to Trevor and it was annulled.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

gracekelly said:


> She was married prior to Trevor and it was annulled.


Really? I had no idea! Hmmm....poor Harry!


----------



## Grande Latte

youngster said:


> It's hard not to make the comparison to Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, even though Harry is the spare not the heir.  Harry has backed himself into a corner rather similar to Edward VIII in that even if he wants to end the marriage one day, it'll be tough for him to do so, since it would be so darn humiliating after he caused such turmoil.  He's going to need some time to go by and memories to fade.
> 
> I think he also wouldn't want Archie to be raised by divorced parents so he'll stick it out as long as he possibly can.  Maybe that'll be 2 or 3 years or even 5 years but it's hard to imagine the two of them married for the long haul.  Imagine him sitting in Canada, surrounded by Meghan's friends, isolated from all his friends and family, watching events in the UK on the telly and thinking that's where he should be, standing by his father's side or Will's side.  Eventually, he'll figure it out.  Hopefully, he'll figure it out before he and Will become strangers to each other.



I really think Harry is weak and and incredibly stupid. The only thing he had going for him all his life is his royal status. Don't think he will be able to recover from a true narcissist like Meghan, Harry will self-destruct and it will not end well.


----------



## big bad mama

Harry has always wanted to leave the royal family before Meghan. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ha.../prince-harry-hinted-at-leaving-royal-family/


----------



## big bad mama

*Prince Harry contemplated leaving the royal family before*
It turns out Prince Harry had shared his thoughts on leaving the royal family long before Markle was in his life.

In a June 2017 interview with the Mail on Sunday, Prince Harry shared that he had considered giving up his royal title after his time in the army ended in 2015. He admitted: “I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself.”

He continued: “We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities, but instead use our role for good.”

He found his time in the service the “best escape I’ve ever had,” adding, “I felt as though I was really achieving something [in the army]. I have a deep understanding of all sorts of people from different backgrounds and felt I was part of a team. I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry.”

In an interview with Newsweek magazine that same year, he again shared that he wanted something more than royal life could offer, saying he wanted to be “something other than Prince Harry” and to “make something of my life.”

He explained: “I feel there is just a smallish window when people are interested in me before [William’s children] take over, and I’ve got to make the most of it.”


----------



## myown

baghagg said:


> I can honestly say I've never heard of this person, nor did I ever hear of MM until she started dating PH.
> PS:. Has MM been twice divorced?  Did I read that comment here correctly?


It was a rumor but there was never a proof


----------



## maryg1

big bad mama said:


> So what they want to make money who doesn’t. Don’t you? Money makes the world go around. Duh? If you’ve never experienced mental health issues you don’t know what it’s like. You can still somewhat function when need be.


Did you miss the fact that they still want the 95% of their income from the BRF, the very same family you say they are leaving because it’s toxic?
So the family is toxic, racist, and doing them no good but it’s fine when it comes to grant money and titles?
Oh dear


----------



## big bad mama

mdcx said:


> So they are in fact blackmailing the BRF - do what Meghan wants or we’ll do the tell-all interview. Grotesque.


How can Meghan blackmail the family when Harry is the one that knows the REAL dirt on the family. She’s only been in the family a short time. Harry will be the one to spill the dirt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gimmethebag said:


> It seems like everyone in the family was avoiding Prince Phillip getting involved. But now he is. He moved from his man-cave farmhouse back into the Queen's primary residence through the crisis.



Oh wow. I feel he won't be quite as indulgent and accomodating as the rest of them.


----------



## maryg1

big bad mama said:


> *Prince Harry contemplated leaving the royal family before*
> It turns out Prince Harry had shared his thoughts on leaving the royal family long before Markle was in his life.
> 
> In a June 2017 interview with the Mail on Sunday, Prince Harry shared that he had considered giving up his royal title after his time in the army ended in 2015. He admitted: “I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself.”
> 
> He continued: “We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities, but instead use our role for good.”
> 
> He found his time in the service the “best escape I’ve ever had,” adding, “I felt as though I was really achieving something [in the army]. I have a deep understanding of all sorts of people from different backgrounds and felt I was part of a team. I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry.”
> 
> In an interview with Newsweek magazine that same year, he again shared that he wanted something more than royal life could offer, saying he wanted to be “something other than Prince Harry” and to “make something of my life.”
> 
> He explained: “I feel there is just a smallish window when people are interested in me before [William’s children] take over, and I’ve got to make the most of it.”


And again...nobody is criticising them for wanting to leave the BRF, if they want to leave and be the average family, having a (obviously well paid) job, and be really indipendent that would absolutely no problem.
But no, they want to earn money exploiting their role in the BRF and having most of their income out of British taxpayer, as you like to point out, without doing all the duties the British taxpayers expect from them.
That’s what raises eyebrows
And about racism: was Charles being racist when he walked her down the aisle during her wedding, when she had no other family member that could do it?
Was the Queen being racist when inviting her for Christmas before she was married?


----------



## Tivo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *I could posts news clips and articles of minorities committing violent hate crimes against Europeans in the US and Europe, all day and all week long, proving you very wrong. But doing so would of course be triggeringly racist  *
> 
> 
> Actually, and since you keep bringing up race, Meghan is bi-racial. Although don't let the "FACT" that she's half white and half black but only started identifying as black when she couldn't make a whole nation bow down to her narc demands, get in the way of your point blanks.
> 
> 
> This whole sham was allowed to happen because everyone is so terrified of being called a racist when criticising anyone "of colour". And they were right. But the truth is Meghan is a flamin' textbook narc right down to the smirk and the mastery of manipulative doe eyed victim-hood, whatever colour she'd come in. If anything, she was cut a lot of slack for far too long for the exact fact that she is bi-racial. Which is in fact extremely patronising.



This makes no sense. Racism is about power and the ability to disenfranchise someone out of hatred and spite.
The fact is MM _has_ been publicly subjected to racism and who knows what behind closed doors...which is why many people who otherwise wouldn’t care, have rallied around her. Any valid reasons for why many people don’t like her will be clouded by that argument.  It is what it is. Those toxic, vocal racists who delighted in calling Archie a “monkey” or whatever else was said now have to live with the fact that their poison has backfired.


----------



## doni

big bad mama said:


> *Prince Harry contemplated leaving the royal family before*
> It turns out Prince Harry had shared his thoughts on leaving the royal family long before Markle was in his life.
> 
> In a June 2017 interview with the Mail on Sunday, Prince Harry shared that he had considered giving up his royal title after his time in the army ended in 2015. He admitted: “I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself.”
> 
> He continued: “We don’t want to be just a bunch of celebrities, but instead use our role for good.”
> 
> He found his time in the service the “best escape I’ve ever had,” adding, “I felt as though I was really achieving something [in the army]. I have a deep understanding of all sorts of people from different backgrounds and felt I was part of a team. I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry.”
> 
> In an interview with Newsweek magazine that same year, he again shared that he wanted something more than royal life could offer, saying he wanted to be “something other than Prince Harry” and to “make something of my life.”
> 
> He explained: “I feel there is just a smallish window when people are interested in me before [William’s children] take over, and I’ve got to make the most of it.”



This is interesting. It shows that Harry understood clearly that carving a different life for himself and escape his royal role meant giving up his royal title and privileges and arguably income. Instead now he wants to be independent while operating under the Sussex Royal monicker and without giving up anything. I wonder how he came to believe this was acceptable.

On the Disney thing  . That Disney executive looks so taken aback!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> She was married prior to Trevor and it was annulled.



But has this been proven? Np pics, no public record.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> On the Disney thing  . That Disney executive looks so taken aback!



So embarrassing. But totally reminds me of how an enabler to a narcissist would act.


----------



## doni

big bad mama said:


> That’s why EVERYONE in the RF should have a real job to take care of themselves and their families. If everyone had a real job it wouldn’t matter what any of them did. Why should you get tax payers money just because you are born into a family. That’s called entitlement.


They get tax payers money not because of being born in a family because they do a job for the tax payer. The members of say, the Greek royal family, who live in the UK, do not get tax payer money and have jobs, because Greece is no longer a monarchy. The members of the British royal family without official representation roles, say the children of the Princess Royal, also have jobs. Whether you agree with it or not is another question but in so far as a state has a monarchy system it is of the utmost importance that the money running it is somehow public and that the public, through public institutions such as Parliament or the Treasury, can control exactly how that money is used. If they were to get ‘jobs’ the conflict of interest would be huge. It is the same in a Presidential system. You wouldn’t have the President or the Chancellor in Germany getting jobs on the side to fund their roles.


----------



## doni

mia55 said:


> I’m a woman of color too and I totally agree with you. Because of these kind of people, who play race card for their own selfish interest, racism is not taken seriously many times. I’m  so appalled with MM and hope she stops playing games and   genuinely  take care of her family.


I often think this. It is difficult to have a legitimate opinion when you are not in the minority in question. But it is the same with women issues for example. There is nothing that damages a good cause more, I feel, that people (mis)using the gender or the race card for their own private interests.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

> Harry explained: “I feel there is just a smallish window when people are interested in me before [William’s children] take over, and I’ve got to make the most of it.”



If this was his mindset going into marriage, he was pretty vulnerable to being swayed by M & the public’s growing interest in Will’s children. Even before M, it would have been natural for H and William not to have been quite so close as Will spent more time and energy both with the kids & in learning about the Duchy and running the country, given QE2’s age.


----------



## Plussizegirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. I feel he won't be quite as indulgent and accomodating as the rest of them.


Yes, and I am looking forward to it.


----------



## mdcx

So, what time do we think this epic crisis meeting will occur on Monday?


----------



## maryg1

mdcx said:


> So, what time do we think this epic crisis meeting will occur on Monday?


Since HRH is in Canada and has to attend at the telephone, I would say around 3 p.m. so she has all the time to wake up, doing her joga, healthy breakfast etc...


----------



## Grande Latte

maryg1 said:


> Since HRH is in Canada and has to attend at the telephone, I would say around 3 p.m. so she has all the time to wake up, doing her joga, healthy breakfast etc...



Yes. Because she's International super business woman/ philanthropist and doesn't have time for the Queen of England.

And she probably has her lawyer recording the conversation too so BRF better be careful with their language.


----------



## mdcx

Yes, I forgot about including Meghan.
If they convened at 8am, then it would be midnight in Canada, which is still manageable you would think. Or they wait for morning Meghan’s time, which does push it to the afternoon in the UK.

I kind of think she will refuse to participate though.


----------



## gelbergirl

Meh-gan said:


> This is her angle isn’t it? Diana 2.0 hounded by the press, forced to leave Britain, booking multi million dollar deals trading on the royal association etc.



Speaking of which, I'm wondering if Diana was legally blocked from doing these things, if it was part of her divorce agreement?  Once divorced she was no longer a part of the Royal family.  She could have made big ca$h as well.


----------



## doni

gelbergirl said:


> Speaking of which, I'm wondering if Diana was legally blocked from doing these things, if it was part of her divorce agreement?  Once divorced she was no longer a part of the Royal family.  She could have made big ca$h as well.


She remained a part of the Royal family taking up many engagements and I believe she never lost the title of Princess of Wales. Divorced or not, she was always going to be the mother of a King.
Diana was far from perfect, she was emotional, carried her heart in her sleeve, and possibly made many mistakes. But she was never about the money.


----------



## myown

maryg1 said:


> Since HRH is in Canada and has to attend at the telephone, I would say around 3 p.m. so she has all the time to wake up, doing her joga, healthy breakfast etc...


And Charles is in Oman


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> She remained a part of the Royal family taking up many engagements and I believe she never lost the title of Princess of Wales. Divorced or not, she was always going to be the mother of a King.
> Diana was far from perfect, she was emotional, carried her heart in her sleeve, and possibly made many mistakes. But she was never about the money.


She was asked once, after the separation about her damaging the Monarchy, she replied "why would I damage my sons heritage, the family they were born into" or words to that effect.
She knew the importance of the monarchy, and its history, her son will be in charge one day


----------



## Kim O'Meara

youngster said:


> This is a really interesting article linked by @mrsinsyder. I think the headline might be a bit misleading (that trouble is brewing in the marriage  mostly because Harry was grumpy at a private dinner and said he'd rather be home with Archie), but Ms. Schulman makes some great points:
> 
> This is not the complete article at all, just excerpts:
> _What is baffling to me is why they are choosing to swap the unique and deeply rooted status they currently enjoy for the capricious and transient position of celebrities on the open market. *The greatest aspiration of many of the world’s best-known and wealthiest stars is precisely for the life Harry and Meghan already have – the palaces, the jewels and gowns, the holidays, the staff, the deference and, crucially, the unassailability of their position in the pecking order of fame.* What wouldn’t David and Victoria Beckham give to be a royal duke and duchess?
> 
> If their intention was simply to disappear for half the year and live in a Vancouver wood, showing Archie the native chipmunks on pre-breakfast hikes, that would perhaps be disappointing for their family, but not any kind of serious problem. However, disappearing is not what they are intending. Not at all.
> 
> But as second-tier Royals roaming the world on the speaker circuit, making red-carpet appearances, endorsing products and occasionally appearing on the balcony at Buckingham Palace, the rules of engagement become very murky. Right now the Sussexes are hot.  Meghan is beautiful and impassioned. Harry still dashing and a frontline Royal. Things change. In the world of celebrity, you are always having to watch out for the new kid on the block. Fame is a greedy beast that has to be continually fed.
> 
> *Until now, their working life of Royal tours, walkabouts, visiting disaster zones and being guests of honour at charity events has automatically fuelled and burnished their profile. But without the very special imprimatur of first-tier Royalty, the kind of power and influence they currently enjoy may not survive in the long term* – especially if they are cashing them in to gain financial independence.
> 
> *The celebrity circuit is complex and quite brutal. If you become known as an easy gun for hire to the highest bidder, in a short time your currency drops. *You can spend a few years giving hugely lucrative speeches for international hedge-fund dinners, and being on the advisory board of a biodiversity start-up in Qatar, b*ut to give this existence longevity you have to keep replenishing your worth – whether that is in the degree of your fame or in exceptional talent or knowledge.
> 
> Unanchored celebrity has a built-in obsolescence. It’s hard to understand why they are swapping a profile that confers automatic and eternal worldwide fame for one where your worth will be in part measured by your number of Instagram followers and dependent on the skill of your marketing team. *This kind of celebrity is also reliant on exposure, and not simply the exposure that you selectively chose to put out on your own social media sites. The relentless commentary of media of every kind is part of the deal and, if anything, the Sussexes may well be less protected in this new world than they felt in their old. Every move they make will be analysed and scrutinised and if they are being paid handsomely for it, they will no doubt be regarded as fair game.
> _



I wonder if Canada was chosen as their second/other base over Africa (which we heard for months was where they might move to) because of the celebrity factor as their ability to make money there vs Africa is greater. In which case it’s all about money and the profile, not a simpler, quieter life etc.


----------



## mrsinsyder

myown said:


> And Charles is in Oman


He’s flying back later today for this mess.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’ll remind the stans that when this guy did the South Africa interview, it was claimed he had the utmost inside track with the royal family.


----------



## eunaddict

As a Canadian, all I can say is I want them both to fill out a proper application for permanent residency if they intend to stay longer than 6 months. Because I guarantee neither of them would make the necessary number of points to even qualify. And if this isn't required of either of them, then there should be calls for an overhaul of the current government at the next election. If they want in, they have to do what the rest of us plebs had to do to get in. No special treatment anymore for the non-royals.

And as a Canadian, between spending millions on these two and their security (again, we spent 8 digits on a week long tour for them), I'd rather that money go to our homeless, our veterans, our firefighters currently helping out in Australia and our refugees.

I'm pretty ragey right now. The gall, the absolutely gall.


ETA: Ah yes, the guy who once dressed up as a Nazi for funsies is going to expose other racists? In the wise old words of Ice Cube, check yourself before you wreck yourself.


----------



## mia55

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ll remind the stans that when this guy did the South Africa interview, it was claimed he had the utmost inside track with the royal family.
> 
> View attachment 4637895


Wow, what a ****ty way to blackmail his own family. This man child has lost all his respect, shameful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Straight-Laced said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-tout-Meghan-Markle-Disney-voiceover-job.html
> *My wife needs a job! Astonishing moment Prince Harry appears to tout Meghan Markle for a Disney voiceover job as he's seen explaining her credentials to Hollywood mogul Bob Iger at Lion King premiere*
> 
> Surely not !!!???
> Certainly looks like Harry was hustling for Meghan back in July.


Yikes, that is awkward as heck.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ll remind the stans that when this guy did the South Africa interview, it was claimed he had the utmost inside track with the royal family.
> 
> View attachment 4637895


Threats of blackmail, unreal, the situation continues to deteriorate.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

This is hilarious. Via and thanks to Twitter and "the other forum": 
*
Woko Ono*


----------



## doni

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ll remind the stans that when this guy did the South Africa interview, it was claimed he had the utmost inside track with the royal family.
> 
> View attachment 4637895


They should let them. It will be interesting to see how they will argue that an institution that has been run by an obviously strong and independent woman for more than half a century is so more sexist that any other out there (sexism is everywhere, and more rampant in places like Hollywood).

As to racist accusations, I would be curious to learn if any member of the royal family has done anything that has more racist undertones than dressing as a nazi for a party.

These two have kept me entertained while down with the flu, but I am having enough of them at this point...


----------



## Flatsy

mia55 said:


> Wow, what a ****ty way to blackmail his own family. This man child has lost all his respect, shameful.


I have always expected to read this sort of thing in Meghan's tell-all.  I didn't expect it from Harry.  He has definitely sunk to a new low.


----------



## PatsyCline

eunaddict said:


> As a Canadian, all I can say is I want them both to fill out a proper application for permanent residency if they intend to stay longer than 6 months. Because I guarantee neither of them would make the necessary number of points to even qualify. And if this isn't required of either of them, then there should be calls for an overhaul of the current government at the next election. If they want in, they have to do what the rest of us plebs had to do to get in. No special treatment anymore for the non-royals.
> 
> And as a Canadian, between spending millions on these two and their security (again, we spent 8 digits on a week long tour for them), I'd rather that money go to our homeless, our veterans, our firefighters currently helping out in Australia and our refugees.
> 
> I'm pretty ragey right now. The gall, the absolutely gall.
> 
> 
> ETA: Ah yes, the guy who once dressed up as a Nazi for funsies is going to expose other racists? In the wise old words of Ice Cube, check yourself before you wreck yourself.


Good grief, Canada allowed a convicted criminal, Conrad Black into the country after he made such a fuss by giving up his Canadian citizenship to become a British Lord.


----------



## eunaddict

doni said:


> As to racist accusations, I would be curious to learn if any member of the royal family has done anything that has more racist undertones than dressing as a nazi for a party.



I mean the Duke of Edinburgh has said some pretty horrendous things.

If you stay here much longer you will all be slitty-eyed,"  - to British exchange students who were living in Xian (1986).

"If it has four legs and it is not a chair, if it has two wings and flies but is not an aeroplane, and if it swims and it is not a submarine, the Cantonese will eat it." - at a World Wildlife Fund meeting (1986).

"You managed not to get eaten then?" - asked British student who'd been trekking in Papua New Guinea (1998).

"Do you still throw spears at each other?" - Australia, to the Indigenous people (2002).

But if we're talking Harry's generation, the most (only???) racist action so far, is by him.


----------



## eunaddict

PatsyCline said:


> Good grief, Canada allowed a convicted criminal, Conrad Black into the country after he made such a fuss by giving up his Canadian citizenship to become a British Lord.



Just because we did doesn't mean we have to keep on. And hey, at least he was Canadian, neither of these two were/are. Her tenuous connection is working in Canada, his is that his family once owned it...kinda.

Also, come on, he was arrested for fraud...let's give H&M time with their charity and see how that goes? We all know private charities often double as a slush fund/tax break for the wealthy.


----------



## doni

eunaddict said:


> I mean Prince Phillips has said some pretty horrendous things.
> 
> If you stay here much longer you will all be slitty-eyed,"  - to British exchange students who were living in Xian (1986).
> 
> "If it has four legs and it is not a chair, if it has two wings and flies but is not an aeroplane, and if it swims and it is not a submarine, the Cantonese will eat it." - at a World Wildlife Fund meeting (1986).
> 
> "You managed not to get eaten then?" - asked British student who'd been trekking in Papua New Guinea (1998).
> 
> "Do you still throw spears at each other?" - Australia, to the Indigenous people (2002).
> 
> But if we're talking Harry's generation, the most (only???) racist action so far, is by him.


That’s true. I was indeed thinking, in respect of and since the arrival of Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

It's interesting that H&M didn't mind having the huge expensive wedding with all the pomp and circumstance but such a short time later they must modernize the monarchy

Oh, never mind.  I forgot - she didn't know it would be So Hard


----------



## Eva1991

Just because someone speculated that they might do a tell-all interview doesn't mean they will. 

Been following the issue for the last few days and this thread as well. TBH I'm kinda tired reading about these two on every news outlet there is. I don't live in the UK and even my local media are reporting on H&M daily. 

My personal opinion is live and let live. They want to live independently as "celebrity philanthropists"? Fine. Everyone has the right to choose their path in life. Just because someone's born into royalty (or into any kind of family really) doesn't mean they should follow suit. The way they handled the whole situation though is childish to say the least. They should have waited before making such an announcement. I've read that the palace knew about their intentions but they had advised them to wait and negotiate. You don't pull such a stunt on your family when you know, given their position, it will cause chaos. 

Regarding Meghan manipulating Harry and being a narcissist, I don't obviously know them (none of us does) and don't know the dynamics of their relationship. That being said, I think their decision was common. Don't think anyone forced the other. Also, just because someone (Harry) has had mental issues in the past (after his mother's death) doesn't mean that they're dense or easy to manipulate.

To summarize, I'm OK with their decision to leave the BRF. I'm not OK with the way they handled the whole thing. I'm also not OK with everyone bashing Meghan as if Harry didn't have anything to do with their announcement.


----------



## Coconuts40

The fact that Meghan left Archie in Canada has been unsettling to me.  It was perfectly orchestrated as Meghan knew that she would not be able to leave England again with Archie after they dropped this bombshell.

She also used Archie as a pawn with Harry.  As Harry is sitting at home trying to negotiate with his family, he has no choice really and needs to stay in good graces with his wife.  If he doesn't, he won't see his son.  There is no way Meghan is coming back to England with Archie until she has the terms she is satisfied with.  If Harry tries to reach an amicable decision with his family, that Meghan does not agree with, there is no way Meghan will come back to England.

And then there is the decision of what happens to Archie if Meghan and Harry reach an agreement?  If she flies back to England for royal duties, does she bring Archie back with her?  Because unless she negotiates his status with the Queen, the Queen has every right to prevent him from leaving the country, as is she not the legal guardian ?  (someone please correct me if I am wrong).

I never thought she could actually have this power over the Monarchy.


----------



## mshermes

I may be way off but, to me, there is no acceptable, good decision for one person.......Archie. He will suffer losses no matter what the outcome. Having a child is a big responsibility and you have to put that child's welfare first and foremost . You have to be selfless to a point......IMO. Hey....I try with my five dogs and macaw.....lol


----------



## hockeygirl

In my personal opinion, H&M should be stripped of the Sussex titles and all income, Frogmore and royal duties.  I saw this coming when I watched the engagement interview, admittedly never thought it would happen this fast.

I think H&M are hoping to keep the titles and at least a good portion of the income.

I don’t see the queen allowing them to stay in Frogmore (bad optics) and there will be in charities in the UK (don’t see Meghan coming back in the near future).  

I think(hope) the queen takes away the Sussex title but think H&M may get to keep it...


----------



## Flatsy

Eva1991 said:


> Just because someone speculated that they might do a tell-all interview doesn't mean they will.


Tom Bradby is a friend of the Sussexes who has started acting as an indirect mouthpiece for them in the past few days.  It's really not about whether they actually do the tell-all interview, but about the fact that he's communicating the threat on their behalf.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> Tom Bradby is a friend of the Sussexes who has started acting as an indirect mouthpiece for them in the past few days.  It's really not about whether they actually do the tell-all interview, but about the fact that he's communicating the threat on their behalf.



A tell-all is unlikely to happen any time soon regardless of what Tom says. There have been rumors that Gayle King would conduct the interview, yet she's denied it.


----------



## marthastoo

Eva1991 said:


> Just because someone speculated that they might do a tell-all interview doesn't mean they will.
> 
> Been following the issue for the last few days and this thread as well. TBH I'm kinda tired reading about these two on every news outlet there is. I don't live in the UK and even my local media are reporting on H&M daily.
> 
> My personal opinion is live and let live. They want to live independently as "celebrity philanthropists"? Fine. Everyone has the right to choose their path in life. Just because someone's born into royalty (or into any kind of family really) doesn't mean they should follow suit. The way they handled the whole situation though is childish to say the least. They should have waited before making such an announcement. I've read that the palace knew about their intentions but they had advised them to wait and negotiate. You don't pull such a stunt on your family when you know, given their position, it will cause chaos.
> 
> Regarding Meghan manipulating Harry and being a narcissist, I don't obviously know them (none of us does) and don't know the dynamics of their relationship. That being said, I think their decision was common. Don't think anyone forced the other. Also, just because someone (Harry) has had mental issues in the past (after his mother's death) doesn't mean that they're dense or easy to manipulate.
> 
> To summarize, I'm OK with their decision to leave the BRF. I'm not OK with the way they handled the whole thing. I'm also not OK with everyone bashing Meghan as if Harry didn't have anything to do with their announcement.


Agreed.  We have no idea what has happened behind the scenes (and no, the Daily Mirror et. al. do not count as legitimate news sources), except the BP statement.  Reading between the lines, it's clear they were either caught unawares or the announcement came before they were ready for it.  Because of that, yes, Meghan and Harry did not handle the roll out well and were wrong in the manner and timing of the announcement. 

But the rampant armchair psychiatric diagnoses, running with conspiracy theories (e.g. she's been divorced twice! No proof, but it's TRUE!), talk of the imminent divorce (soooo, Meghan has so much control over him to cause this breakup of the BRF .... but yet people are talking about his post-divorce life?  makes. no. sense.), the unmitigated venom and nastiness - ugh.  It's like, who hurt you?  How is Meghan affecting your real, day-to-day life?

I await to see how it all turns out.


----------



## Roxanna

big bad mama said:


> That’s why the monarchy needs to be abolish. It’s too old fashion and not progressive at all. Then everyone in the royal family will have to get a real job. Everyone should pay their own way. Use the people’s tax money to help the homeless, feed kids, better healthcare, etc.


I am not sure that MM is thinking alone this lines. She used all perks that comes with BRF, she wanted to wear the one of the LARGEST crowns,  she received much more attentive treatment from them then the other spouses.  Were there any special jewellery gifts given to Kate by Charles like he gifted to MM, for example? 
She still wants very much be associated with Crown.
If they'd abdicate their titles, live independently,  paid for their own security and tried to maintain normal relationships with family and friends,  then it wouldn't cause that much uproar with public.  And btw  bringing racism argument in this case is really detrimental to the cause.  
The case with HM has nothing to fo with it, except that ppl who brings it up again and again project their own thoughts.


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> He’s flying back later today for this mess.


Oh i thought he’s staying for 3 days


----------



## myown

eunaddict said:


> As a Canadian, all I can say is I want them both to fill out a proper application for permanent residency if they intend to stay longer than 6 months. Because I guarantee neither of them would make the necessary number of points to even qualify. And if this isn't required of either of them, then there should be calls for an overhaul of the current government at the next election. If they want in, they have to do what the rest of us plebs had to do to get in. No special treatment anymore for the non-royals.
> 
> And as a Canadian, between spending millions on these two and their security (again, we spent 8 digits on a week long tour for them), I'd rather that money go to our homeless, our veterans, our firefighters currently helping out in Australia and our refugees.
> 
> I'm pretty ragey right now. The gall, the absolutely gall.
> 
> 
> ETA: Ah yes, the guy who once dressed up as a Nazi for funsies is going to expose other racists? In the wise old words of Ice Cube, check yourself before you wreck yourself.


Wouldn’t they count as diplomats?


----------



## Sferics

duna said:


> Can someone delete my above post?
> 
> I don't know what happened but I didn't want to quote these quotes!


Silly me - I tried for ages to understand what your point is


----------



## marthastoo

Why is it that so many people accept as fact that Meghan demanded THE BIGGEST TIARA or some other tiara?  Oh, that's right, was it an anonymous source?  Or unnamed person close to the palace? 

Of all the silly rumors that keep getting bandied about on this thread, that one seems the most ridiculous.  The woman does not wear any jewelry. Ok, she wears tiny, thin little trendy pieces on occasion, but most of the time, she's literally accessory-free.  Not even a pair of earrings.  So how does it make any sense that Meghan wants and demands weighty, mega-jewels?  Even the expensive jewels she's already been gifted like the Cartier earring and bracelet - when has she reworn them? Like once, if that?  It's just not her style.


----------



## rose60610

With Meghan's gig doing the voiceover for Disney and whatever else she has lined up, she's literally trading the British Kingdom for the Magic Kingdom.  I don't think she has a firm grasp on reality.  Disney World is fiction, Sweetheart. On the other hand, Disney money isn't. But will her lined-up gigs compensate for what she's throwing away? 

The best thing IMO that could happen is The Crown cutting them off lock, stock, and barrel. If they want to be independent after all they already been given and the perks they've enjoyed, so be it and let them. 

I have a feeling they've fallen for some early planned scheme about everyone can't wait to fawn all over them and treat them as though they've made a huge personal sacrifice to save the world with their greatness--their Foundation (slush fund) will be worth billions and they won't have to get permission on how to pilfer it or use it for whatever causes or people they want to support. There's something much deeper at play here IMO other than just two activist wokers telling the Queen to go to hell but still demanding Crown income. If they don't get Crown income and their Woke Party fails, they'll come groveling back to The Firm. By that time, QEII and Philip will likely be dead and Charles won't have the spine to say "no".


----------



## mshermes

marthastoo said:


> Why is it that so many people accept as fact that Meghan demanded THE BIGGEST TIARA or some other tiara?  Oh, that's right, was it an anonymous source?  Or unnamed person close to the palace?
> 
> Of all the silly rumors that keep getting bandied about on this thread, that one seems the most ridiculous.  The woman does not wear any jewelry. Ok, she wears tiny, thin little trendy pieces on occasion, but most of the time, she's literally accessory-free.  Not even a pair of earrings.  So how does it make any sense that Meghan wants and demands weighty, mega-jewels?  Even the expensive jewels she's already been gifted like the Cartier earring and bracelet - when has she reworn them? Like once, if that?  It's just not her style.


She most certainly does wear earrings and rings. And, if people were opinion free, we would not have 1154 pages on TPF. Check images and you will find very few of her sans earrings.


----------



## myown

rose60610 said:


> trading the British Kingdom for the Magic Kingdom.
> 
> .


----------



## futurewoman

I’m sure this has been mentioned before, but I can’t help but feel like this is all too conveniently timed to keep us distracted from the Prince Andrew/Epstein story. They function as fancier Kardashians, if you really think about it. Has everyone forgotten about Prince Charles and Tampongate?! These people are MESSY!

Harry is obviously messy himself, but can you blame him (or anyone) for wanting to take a step back? He didn’t choose the royal life, after all. I would absolutely never want to be a celebrity or public figure. I’m shocked that so many people seem incapable of showing empathy to anyone who is “privileged” - as if money solves all problems. 

I don’t love MM, but she definitely seems like a scapegoat here. I just don’t buy that she is a master manipulator and singlehandedly destroying the British Royal Family  ...and if she is, well played!


----------



## Sophisticatted

They should revoke their titles and funding.  Harry would still be a Prince by birth and if they want to bring him back into the fold, that is the title he should go by.  I feel they should leave the door open for Harry’s return, but Meghan should have no more opportunities within the BRF.  If they don’t divorce, and Harry wants to return she should be purely in the background, kept at home.  No more carriages and balconies.  No more events.


----------



## Flatsy

marthastoo said:


> The woman does not wear any jewelry. Ok, she wears tiny, thin little trendy pieces on occasion, but most of the time, she's literally accessory-free. Not even a pair of earrings. So how does it make any sense that Meghan wants and demands weighty, mega-jewels?


Dan Wootton (who was known as one of the more accurate royal reporters even prior to breaking the current story) says Meghan has not been given the opportunity to wear royal mega-jewels, even if she wanted to.  

Wootton reported last spring that the Queen's advisors advised her in Fall 2018 that she should not loan any of the royal collection jewelry to Meghan, and the Queen made the rare and significant decision to agree with them.  Meghan hasn't borrowed a single piece of jewelry from the Queen since her wedding day tiara.  (Those who follow what Kate wears know that Kate borrows the Queen's jewelry on a very regular basis - including multiple times over Remembrance Weekend.)

The palace saw the writing on the wall that Meghan was not going to be around long and was going to do whatever she could to exploit her royal status while it lasted, including wearing whatever trademark Diana pieces she could.  I think Meghan asked, but was denied.  She wanted to wear a tiara to the state dinner in Fiji and Charles told her no, it would be too extravagant to wear in that country.

Since then, Meghan has been amassing a collection of purchased jewelry worth upwards of 600,000 pounds at last count.  She doesn't wear things twice - that would slow her down from buying a new pair of $25k earrings for every event.  Unlike the Queen's jewels, Meghan personally owns the jewelry she's wearing now and will be able to take it with her in the event of a divorce.


----------



## youngster

Mrs.Z said:


> Yikes, that is awkward as heck.



If this is the way they will manage their new business interests and media empire then it's going to be very entertaining in a train wreck kind of way.  I repeat myself but these two are not Michelle and Barack *****, not just the age difference and the lifetime of actual work experience in government and the real world, but in terms of intelligence, education and media savviness.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I’m sure Meghan will not be able to take Diana’s jewelry in the event of divorce (just guessing that’s in the pre-nup) and who knows about pieces acquired during the marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> If this is the way they will manage their new business interests and media empire then it's going to be very entertaining in a train wreck kind of way.  I repeat myself but these two are not Michelle and Barack *****, not just the age difference and the lifetime of actual work experience in government and the real world, but in terms of intelligence, education and media savviness.



Exactly. If Harry wasn’t born a prince, he’d be nothing of interest.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I don’t wear much jewelry either, but if I were marrying a prince I’d totally be down to wear a tiara. 

It’s been proven that Meg had an obsession with Diana so let’s not act like she doesn’t care.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sure Meghan will not be able to take Diana’s jewelry in the event of divorce (just guessing that’s in the pre-nup) and who knows about pieces acquired during the marriage.


who knows about any of it.....a week ago I would have said she wouldn't let go of Harry in the foreseeable future but now......anyone's guess


----------



## Flatsy

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sure Meghan will not be able to take Diana’s jewelry in the event of divorce (just guessing that’s in the pre-nup) and who knows about pieces acquired during the marriage.


Prenups aren't valid in the UK and I don't think Harry and Meghan have one.

I think the Diana jewelry that Harry has been given Meghan as gifts are going to be hers to keep.  But he doesn't appear to have given her very much of it so far, just the butterfly earrings, aquamarine ring, and the diamonds in her engagement ring.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I'm sure many of us have or have had a grandparent or two that we loved and who loved us. And know how protective you can feel about a loved elderly family member as they age. How can Harry put his own aging grandmother (whether a queen or not) through this?

It's hard to understand because it's such an utterly entitled bast*ard thing to do. He must have harboured some serious grudges, jealousy and delusions of grandeur to do this. Or he has serious mental issues. Or a drug addiction. Or all of it.

I mean, extorting your own gran? I can see a drug addict do that. Or a narcissist's puppet.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm sure many of us have or have had a grandparent or two that we loved and who loved us. And know how protective you can feel about a loved elderly family member as they age. How can Harry put his own aging grandmother (whether a queen or not) through this?
> 
> It's hard to understand because it's such an utterly entitled bast*ard thing to do. He must have harboured some serious grudges, jealousy and delusions of grandeur to do this. Or he has serious mental issues. Or a drug addiction. Or all of it.
> 
> I mean, extorting your own gran? I can see a drug addict do that. Or a narcissist's puppet.


again - I don't think he's the sharpest tack


----------



## eunaddict

myown said:


> Wouldn’t they count as diplomats?



That depends entirely on whether they still represent the state or not, and we already have a British High Commissioner. Also, most diplomats have education backgrounds that suit the position, and years of government service before they get posted somewhere as "highly sought after" as Canada.

They would also need to be hired/commissioned at a position that represents the home country (most diplomats are hired to a position and then posted to the country) and not just living and frolicking around an island. It means hosting events, building relationships between the two countries, helping British citizens who find themselves in trouble in Canada and actually working. 

It would also mean living in Ottawa, and mostly likely in official housing; not "super, natural British Columbia" - which is where I'm from and where they spent their sabbatical.


----------



## Allisonfaye

futurewoman said:


> I’m sure this has been mentioned before, but I can’t help but feel like this is all too conveniently timed to keep us distracted from the Prince Andrew/Epstein story. They function as fancier Kardashians, if you really think about it. Has everyone forgotten about Prince Charles and Tampongate?! These people are MESSY!
> 
> Harry is obviously messy himself, but can you blame him (or anyone) for wanting to take a step back? He didn’t choose the royal life, after all. I would absolutely never want to be a celebrity or public figure. I’m shocked that so many people seem incapable of showing empathy to anyone who is “privileged” - as if money solves all problems.
> 
> I don’t love MM, but she definitely seems like a scapegoat here. I just don’t buy that she is a master manipulator and singlehandedly destroying the British Royal Family  ...and if she is, well played!



Again, I don't think ANYONE would have a problem if they didn't want all the trappings but none of the work.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

futurewoman said:


> I’m sure this has been mentioned before, but I can’t help but feel like this is all too conveniently timed to keep us distracted from the Prince Andrew/Epstein story. They function as fancier Kardashians, if you really think about it. Has everyone forgotten about Prince Charles and Tampongate?! These people are MESSY!
> 
> Harry is obviously messy himself, but can you blame him (or anyone) for wanting to take a step back? He didn’t choose the royal life, after all. I would absolutely never want to be a celebrity or public figure. I’m shocked that so many people seem incapable of showing empathy to anyone who is “privileged” - as if money solves all problems.
> 
> I don’t love MM, but she definitely seems like a scapegoat here. I just don’t buy that she is a master manipulator and singlehandedly destroying the British Royal Family  ...and if she is, well played!


I don't think any one person can be that cunning and manipulative without some help. She must have people in her life who she takes advice from and listens to. Maybe a team who has been guiding these decisions, which seem to now pre-date the engagement. I don't think she'd be capable of doing it all alone. Decisions that seemed fine at the time - the Givenchy wedding dress, having a future king walk her down the aisle instead of her dad, asking for certain jewelry pieces, etc. all seem part of a greater plan now. Maybe it's the Obamas, or Oprah, but she does get some advice from someplace. And she seems to have fashioned herself a bit after Diana, in terms of portraying herself as a victim of the family and press. It just seems to be imploding right now, but perhaps she'll recover from it.


----------



## LibbyRuth

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm sure many of us have or have had a grandparent or two that we loved and who loved us. And know how protective you can feel about a loved elderly family member as they age. How can Harry put his own aging grandmother (whether a queen or not) through this?
> 
> It's hard to understand because it's such an utterly entitled bast*ard thing to do. He must have harboured some serious grudges, jealousy and delusions of grandeur to do this. Or he has serious mental issues. Or a drug addiction. Or all of it.
> 
> I mean, extorting your own gran? I can see a drug addict do that. Or a narcissist's puppet.


Many also have that older demanding family member who judges people harshly and it can cause conflict with newcomers. Seems to me that Harry could be struggling with both. In addition to that, they are now at points in their lives where the differences between William and Harry become more and more obvious with William getting favor since he’ll be king. So who knows how many emotions and family dynamics Harry is dealing with to make stupid and self centered decisions. There are a lot of indicators that he’s been able to be rather self centered most of his life.


----------



## youngster

It is not as if Meghan wasn't told up-front that she would have to:
1. Retire from acting
2. Shut down her accounts on twitter and other social media.
3. Shut down her lifestyle blog/site
4. Remain outside politics
5. Not profit off the monarchy and her title 

All the basic stuff.  They announced her "retirement" from acting on the day they got they got engaged, I believe. She deleted her accounts on twitter, facebook, instagram before they got married as well.  She understood all of the restrictions and had to put them in place before they married.


----------



## myown

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm sure many of us have or have had a grandparent or two that we loved and who loved us. And know how protective you can feel about a loved elderly family member as they age. How can Harry put his own aging grandmother (whether a queen or not) through this?
> 
> It's hard to understand because it's such an utterly entitled bast*ard thing to do. He must have harboured some serious grudges, jealousy and delusions of grandeur to do this. Or he has serious mental issues. Or a drug addiction. Or all of it.
> 
> I mean, extorting your own gran? I can see a drug addict do that. Or a narcissist's puppet.


But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't think any one person can be that cunning and manipulative without some help. She must have people in her life who she takes advice from and listens to. Maybe a team who has been guiding these decisions, which seem to now pre-date the engagement. I don't think she'd be capable of doing it all alone. Decisions that seemed fine at the time - the Givenchy wedding dress, having a future king walk her down the aisle instead of her dad, asking for certain jewelry pieces, etc. all seem part of a greater plan now. Maybe it's the Obamas, or Oprah, but she does get some advice from someplace. And she seems to have fashioned herself a bit after Diana, in terms of portraying herself as a victim of the family and press. It just seems to be imploding right now, but perhaps she'll recover from it.


I believe someone posted yesterday that the Obamas have denied being involved, giving advice, etc.  
and Oprah seems to be not saying much


----------



## sdkitty

myown said:


> But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?


but I think what people are saying is there's a right and wrong way to go about escaping the "cage"


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LibbyRuth said:


> Many also have that older demanding family member who judges people harshly and it can cause conflict with newcomers. Seems to me that Harry could be struggling with both. In addition to that, they are now at points in their lives where the differences between William and Harry become more and more obvious with William getting favor since he’ll be king. So who knows how many emotions and family dynamics Harry is dealing with to make stupid and self centered decisions. There are a lot of indicators that he’s been able to be rather self centered most of his life.


This is true, I'm sure many of us have or have had one or two of those as well. But I think judging from the spare's behaviour since long before marrying Meghan, there's been a lot of over indulgence lavished on him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I believe someone posted yesterday that the Obamas have denied being involved, giving advice, etc.
> and Oprah seems to be not saying much


Oprah also released a statement saying that she's not giving them advice.

I don't think any of them are actually close with the Sussexes - they are just "friends" from networking each other.  And they don't want to be tagged in the current mess.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Oprah also released a statement saying that she's not giving them advice.
> 
> I don't think any of them are actually close with the Sussexes - they are just "friends" from networking each other.  And they don't want to be tagged in the current mess.


right
but I'm sure Gayle (or Oprah) would be more than happy to do an interview


----------



## eunaddict

myown said:


> But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?



My grandmother is 98. I would live caged willingly at least till after she has passed so her legacy stays intact (to the best of her knowledge). I wouldn't be stressing her out on purpose. The elderly are pretty fragile and I would never be able to live with myself if my decisions and actions put any of them in the hospital (or worse).


----------



## rose60610

myown said:


> But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?



I think Meghan used all her power to claw her way into that cage. Just to flip it. It's served her purpose. Gave her more cred. Now she can save and woke the world by being a martyr and walking away from The Firm. She's showing them! What bravery! (she thinks).  She's only following a plan. I'm interested in seeing how these sociopaths end up.


----------



## bisousx

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm sure many of us have or have had a grandparent or two that we loved and who loved us. And know how protective you can feel about a loved elderly family member as they age. How can Harry put his own aging grandmother (whether a queen or not) through this?
> 
> It's hard to understand because it's such an utterly entitled bast*ard thing to do. He must have harboured some serious grudges, jealousy and delusions of grandeur to do this. Or he has serious mental issues. Or a drug addiction. Or all of it.
> 
> I mean, extorting your own gran? I can see a drug addict do that. Or a narcissist's puppet.



I don’t think Harry is close to his grandmother in a normal commoner way, nor Charles close to his mother. The gist I got, at least from watching all the royal TV specials like “House of Windsor” is that QE II barely spent time with her family unless it was scheduled and so their relationships are cold, formal and businesslike. Which doesn’t excuse Harry’s behavior at all - he knew what he was doing and had his whole life to distance himself in a manner that was best for all involved, if that’s what he wanted. But no.. he can’t let go of being taken care of financially, his title, or the fame.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

myown said:


> But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?


Of course not. But I wouldn't extort my gran in order to have her and the public pay for my leaving the cage.


----------



## Aqua01

myown said:


> But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?


So instead you decide to blackmail and humiliate her and everything she stands for publicly to get what you want? 
You could've discussed and settled everything privately behind closed doors and walked away from all the restrictions *AND* money leaving your own dignity and your grandma's intact.


----------



## Allisonfaye

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't think any one person can be that cunning and manipulative without some help. She must have people in her life who she takes advice from and listens to. Maybe a team who has been guiding these decisions, which seem to now pre-date the engagement. I don't think she'd be capable of doing it all alone. Decisions that seemed fine at the time - the Givenchy wedding dress, having a future king walk her down the aisle instead of her dad, asking for certain jewelry pieces, etc. all seem part of a greater plan now. Maybe it's the Obamas, or Oprah, but she does get some advice from someplace. And she seems to have fashioned herself a bit after Diana, in terms of portraying herself as a victim of the family and press. It just seems to be imploding right now, but perhaps she'll recover from it.



I honestly doubt the Obamas would be interested in getting involved in this drama. I could see someone like Oprah advising her but I doubt the Oprahs and the Obamas think she is being manipulative, as many of us do. They probably wouldn't get involved in discussions over what she and Harry want along with their departure.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> but I think what people are saying is there's a right and wrong way to go about escaping the "cage"



Agree. I tell my kids on occasion that he/she who pays the bills makes the rules. I learned that by the time I was 20. That's why I always worked through college and put money aside that my dad didn't know about.


----------



## sparklebunny

doni said:


> As to racist accusations, I would be curious to learn if any member of the royal family has done anything that has more racist undertones than dressing as a nazi for a party.



Someone already mentioned Prince Phillip and some of his controversial comments.

Also, Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson were both Nazi sympathizers and met with Adolf Hitler himself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Roxanna said:


> Were there any special jewellery gifts given to Kate by Charles like he gifted to MM, for example?


.
Actually, yes. He gave her a yellow diamond set (I think necklace, bracelet and earrings?) for her wedding. Camilla gave her a gold bracelet on the same occasion.


----------



## Lounorada

Jaxion said:


> I've been on the recieving end of racism in my life and I care about the issue a lot but I'm offended that so many of the Meghan fans want to pretend like racism is the only reason that Meghan is criticised. *Yes she would have been on the receiving end of racism either way but majority of the criticism is because of the poor way she has acted and the genuine red flags she gives off. *Like seriously how do you explain the taking off the rings and splaying her hands thing? That's just most recent example that she's got some personality issue that makes her behave in a not normal way.
> 
> Pretending it's all racism is the part of the reason people aren't willing to acknowledge all the times when racism genuinely rears it's ugly head.


Great points, well said!  I totally agree.
Also welcome to the PurseForum  (I see you became a member in the ast few days)



mrsinsyder said:


> But yes, the royal family is racist. *One of them even dressed up like a Nazi as a joke. *
> 
> Oh wait, that’s literally the one she married...











Katel said:


> her voice is flat and annoying, and has that trendy whiny “vocal fry” - eeks


Yes, painful to listen to! She sounds like the Kardashians when she talks.


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7876753/Astonishing-moment-Prince-Harry-appears-tout-Meghan-Markle-Disney-voiceover-job.html
> *My wife needs a job! Astonishing moment Prince Harry appears to tout Meghan Markle for a Disney voiceover job as he's seen explaining her credentials to Hollywood mogul Bob Iger at Lion King premiere*
> 
> Surely not !!!???
> Certainly looks like Harry was hustling for Meghan back in July.


Oh my god!  The _audacity_.
And not to forget that (as the current Captain General of the Royal Marines) he declined an invite to a Royal Marine’s memorial event, so he could attend The Lion King premiere instead... so he could act as an agent for his attention seeking wife? Disgraceful. He should be ashamed of himself.
Although I did notice how embarrassed/red-faced H looked while saying that to Bob Iger (who seemed awkward to have H pitch M like that), so random to just bring that up. I wouldn't be surprised if M told H to 'casually' chat-up Bob while she chats with Bey & Jay.


----------



## mia55

I’m curious if queen accepts all of Harry’s terms, how the public and government will react? Do they have any say in it?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I believe someone posted yesterday that the Obamas have denied being involved, giving advice, etc.
> and Oprah seems to be not saying much


Michelle ***** even denied the chicken tacos lunch, made famous in Meghan's Vogue extravaganza. And made a point to say they became friends with Will and Kate during *****'s presidency, to finish it all off  



sdkitty said:


> again - I don't think he's the sharpest tack


William did say that he's been keeping his arm around hos brother all his life...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Michelle ***** even denied the chicken tacos lunch, made famous in Meghan's Vogue extravaganza. And made a point to say they became friends with Will and Kate during *****'s presidency, to finish it all off



Haha. Well that does sound quite a bit different from the picture that was painted of Michelle being a huge fan. Kind of reassuring.


----------



## Meh-gan

futurewoman said:


> I’m sure this has been mentioned before, but I can’t help but feel like this is all too conveniently timed to keep us distracted from the Prince Andrew/Epstein story. They function as fancier Kardashians, if you really think about it. Has everyone forgotten about Prince Charles and Tampongate?! These people are MESSY!
> 
> Harry is obviously messy himself, but can you blame him (or anyone) for wanting to take a step back? He didn’t choose the royal life, after all. I would absolutely never want to be a celebrity or public figure. I’m shocked that so many people seem incapable of showing empathy to anyone who is “privileged” - as if money solves all problems.
> 
> I don’t love MM, but she definitely seems like a scapegoat here. I just don’t buy that she is a master manipulator and singlehandedly destroying the British Royal Family  ...and if she is, well played!


They DO want to be celebrities and public people though so. Huge endorsement deals and world wide promotion of their charitable foundation is what they plan to do - they don’t plan to retire from public life.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haha. Well that does sound quite a bit different from the picture that was painted of Michelle being a huge fan. Kind of reassuring.


Quoting myself if anyone missed it, it's from People. Whatever Michelle ***** may have thought at the start of this drama, she's definitely taking a stand here.


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan and Harry going rogue seems to have been built on a solid foundation of friends in higher places  Or maybe Michelle ***** is just another hateful racist, like everyone else not worshipping at the sandal clad feet of the new people's princess.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/michelle-...-advising-prince-harry-meghan-markle-sources/
> 
> _"Sources close to Michelle and Barack ***** tell PEOPLE that reports they have offered advice to — or even been in contact with — Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over their “step back” from the royal family are “totally false.”
> 
> “The rumors of them having anything to do with this are totally false. The former president and first lady are not advising the couple and have not been in contact with them,” says one source close to the Obamas, who spent Christmas in Hawaii and remain there on holiday, after a busy December traveling throughout Asia as part of their ***** Foundation work on education and leadership training.
> 
> Another ***** source, reacting to rumors that they played any role in the Sussexes’s bombshell plans, says, “There’s no truth to it.”[...]
> 
> "And, though Mrs. ***** submitted written answers to Meghan’s interview questions for the September issue of British Vogue that she guest-edited last summer, the two women have only met once — more than a year ago — when Meghan popped backstage during the London stop of Mrs. *****’s sold-out book tour for her memoir, Becoming."_


----------



## Meh-gan

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sure Meghan will not be able to take Diana’s jewelry in the event of divorce (just guessing that’s in the pre-nup) and who knows about pieces acquired during the marriage.





marthastoo said:


> Why is it that so many people accept as fact that Meghan demanded THE BIGGEST TIARA or some other tiara?  Oh, that's right, was it an anonymous source?  Or unnamed person close to the palace?
> 
> Of all the silly rumors that keep getting bandied about on this thread, that one seems the most ridiculous.  The woman does not wear any jewelry. Ok, she wears tiny, thin little trendy pieces on occasion, but most of the time, she's literally accessory-free.  Not even a pair of earrings.  So how does it make any sense that Meghan wants and demands weighty, mega-jewels?  Even the expensive jewels she's already been gifted like the Cartier earring and bracelet - when has she reworn them? Like once, if that?  It's just not her style.


Girl, Meghan has amassed a very $$$$ collection of jewelry since she married Harry. This is not someone who doesn’t care about jewels LOL. She is always wearing jewelry. Even her dainty pieces are overpriced for what they are. 

Why do her stans deny facts that are easily accessible.


----------



## rose60610

mia55 said:


> I’m curious if queen accepts all of Harry’s terms, how the public and government will react? Do they have any say in it?



While H&M may discuss some terms or demands, I don't think they're in any kind of position to have any say in whatever the Queen decides. There could be some 500 year old protocols in place for all I know. I predict that if M&H are not satisfied with what the Queen says, they'll play the race card and use Archie as a bargaining chip for public pity.  We all know Meghan isn't shy about painting herself as a victim and loves wallowing in drama. And Harry is the perfect dupe.


----------



## sdkitty

Meh-gan said:


> Girl, Meghan has amassed a very $$$$ collection of jewelry since she married Harry. This is not someone who doesn’t care about jewels LOL. She is always wearing jewelry. Even her dainty pieces are overpriced for what they are.
> 
> Why do her stans deny facts that are easily accessible.


because they are stans?


----------



## carmen56

mia55 said:


> I’m curious if queen accepts all of Harry’s terms, how the public and government will react? Do they have any say in it?



Speaking as a Brit, the Government would probably go along with whatever HMQ decides, albeit with some dissenters who would speak out.  As far as the public is concerned, I think there would be outrage, I would certainly be outraged if they kept their titles, monetary handouts and security detail.


----------



## altigirl88

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ll remind the stans that when this guy did the South Africa interview, it was claimed he had the utmost inside track with the royal family.
> 
> Every time I see his name I think it’s Tom Brady and I pause for a sec, lol
> View attachment 4637895


----------



## hellosunshine

I understand the Queen can strip Harry of his HRH Prince title but I've been reading many "royal-ists" making the argument that the title is his birthright. Wouldn't it look very bad on the British Royal Family if they strip him of it and Prince Andrew begins to occupy the sixth position? I don't think there's anybody in the world that wants Andrew that close to the throne, right?


----------



## youngster

She and Philip and Charles and Will all love Harry and that's going to make this all so difficult.  He can use his mental health and stability and Meghan's mental health and instability as a bargaining chip, play off the guilt that Charles still probably carries around over Diana and see how far it takes him.  

But, I think there are basic principles that the Queen cannot compromise on. They cannot be seen to personally profit and build a fortune off their royal status and connections. (Remember 20 years ago and Sophie's issues with her PR firm.)  They cannot take sides on political issues. British and Canadian taxpayers should not have to pay for any of their upkeep and security.  Harry knows all of this.  Maybe Meghan just insists that he try anyway?  Maybe some of their American and Canadian advisers are this clueless? Maybe they want an excuse to cut all ties, renounce the entire family, and just become Mr. and Mrs. Harry Mountbatten-Windsor so they can build a media/charitable empire all on their own?  Delusions of grandeur much?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Meh-gan said:


> Girl, Meghan has amassed a very $$$$ collection of jewelry since she married Harry. This is not someone who doesn’t care about jewels LOL. She is always wearing jewelry. Even her dainty pieces are overpriced for what they are.
> 
> Why do her stans deny facts that are easily accessible.


I’m definitely not a stan.  I was pointing out that I would be shocked if they had a short lived marriage and she was able to walk away with Princess Di’s jewelry.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Oprah also released a statement saying that she's not giving them advice.
> 
> I don't think any of them are actually close with the Sussexes - they are just "friends" from networking each other.  And they don't want to be tagged in the current mess.


But it was oka for these people to wrangle a wedding invite from someone they barely know and sit in the posh seats. My god, people who have known Harry for a long time ie the Beckhams, Elton John and personal close friends had to slum it in the "cheap seats" with the riff raff.
I despair, I really do. How This will end I'll never know?


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Wouldn't it look very bad on the British Royal Family if they strip him of it and Prince Andrew begins to occupy the sixth position? I don't think there's anybody in the world that wants Andrew that close to the throne, right?



https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-andrew-and-the-epstein-scandal.1020367/unread


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> .
> Actually, yes. He gave her a yellow diamond set (I think necklace, bracelet and earrings?) for her wedding. Camilla gave her a gold bracelet on the same occasion.


I'm sure there's a torque bangle I've seen her wear that was Diana's.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm sure there's a torque bangle I've seen her wear that was Diana's.



That wouldn't have come from Charles though, her personal jewelry was divided between the boys.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

myown said:


> But would you live a life you hate and feel caged just so your grandma doesn’t get upset?


You can’t compare this situation to a regular family. There are government, legal and dynastic royal things to consider not just Harry’s feelings. 

If he wants to live his own life and not be royal fine. But that’s not what both he and MM are proposing. So no they can’t just do what they want it all has to be legally worked out.


----------



## Meh-gan

Allisonfaye said:


> I honestly doubt the Obamas would be interested in getting involved in this drama. I could see someone like Oprah advising her but I doubt the Oprahs and the Obamas think she is being manipulative, as many of us do. They probably wouldn't get involved in discussions over what she and Harry want along with their departure.


The Obamas have already issued a statement and they are not advising them. Michelle submitted written answers for Vogue (there was no chicken taco lunch) and she met Meghan once when Meghan went backstage at her book tour. That is IT.


----------



## Flatsy

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m definitely not a stan. I was pointing out that I would be shocked if they had a short lived marriage and she was able to walk away with Princess Di’s jewelry.


I think Harry's been gifting his half of Diana's jewelry collection to Meghan over time and probably intends to give more pieces to her on occasions like anniversaries. So far, he hasn't given her pieces that are worth very much - they would be worth a lot only because they belonged to Diana.

But I do think Harry is all in with Meghan and wouldn't do anything as awkward as to give her a gift but also make her sign something saying it's not actually a gift and that it still belongs to him.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Everyone is backing away lmao


----------



## Flatsy

Nobody wants to be seen as conspiring with them.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That wouldn't have come from Charles though, her personal jewelry was divided between the boys.


It would still be a connection to Diana though.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Meh-gan said:


> Girl, Meghan has amassed a very $$$$ collection of jewelry since she married Harry. This is not someone who doesn’t care about jewels LOL. She is always wearing jewelry. Even her dainty pieces are overpriced for what they are.
> 
> Why do her stans deny facts that are easily accessible.


She absolutely likes jewelry. She gave the story about the $7500 Cartier watch she gifted and engraved to herself - to MM from MM. She does seem more tasteful with her pieces though, I'll give her that. Regardless of prices or where it came from she doesn't over-accessorize. She still needs a daughter though - that's who the watch was intended for, ultimately.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I hoped so much that she wouldn’t have a daughter. A female child with a female narc mother would be the worst combination.


----------



## Lake Effect

Since this has been so much in the media, and I seen so many comments from many sources about Meghan manipulating Harry into going through with this break, I came to this thread  to read up a little.
I can’t wonder about so many possible dynamics here, at the risk of playing armchair psychologist. Meghan is coming into this marriage at an age, late 30s , as a grown woman profEssionally established. Am I the only one not shocked that she is suggesting this break? And look at Harry. He grew up watching his mother in particular hounded by the media. And at some point, he had to learn his mother was stuck in marriage, where it was open at some point his father loved another woman, where, the Queen’s sage advice to his parents was work it out? Because working out a divorce at that point, IMO, was not convenient to the monarchy ( not a British Citizen here). And on top of it, you cannot tell me that from a young age  he did not know he was the ‘spare’ ( am I the only one completely offended by that phrase? ). I wouldn’t blame him for having no eff’s to give for the monarchy, aka his family of origin. Wasn’t he photographed or video taped naked at some Las Vegas bender in his youth? Another example of, who cares, even if he did not know he was being videoed. So even if Meaghan was the one who suggested ditching the royals, I cannot believe Harry gave it more than 5 minutes before he said, Yeah, let’s do this.
And why not brand themselves? That is essentially then taking control. I sincerely doubt they would be allowed to retreat away quietly, in the face of the voracious appetite of social media. Why not make money off a brand? And if people are not happy with how tax dollars are spent on them, that is what voting and government representation is for. And I don’t mean this to be inflammatory.
I think if Di had lived in the age of voracious social media (remember she died in ‘97 well before the age of social media, and I remember , she was born 6 months before me) she would have taken control of her brand. Not for the money (I saw in many places she was very savvy with her money and had shrewdly invested and had increased her divorce settlement quite nicely) but to have control over her image.


----------



## Meh-gan

Sharont2305 said:


> But it was oka for these people to wrangle a wedding invite from someone they barely know and sit in the posh seats. My god, people who have known Harry for a long time ie the Beckhams, Elton John and personal close friends had to slum it in the "cheap seats" with the riff raff.
> I despair, I really do. How This will end I'll never know?


I doubt they wrangled an invite - M&H invited them for optics and to make them look more important. The *****’s weren’t out there begging for an invite lol


----------



## Meh-gan

Lake Effect said:


> Since this has been so much in the media, and I seen so many comments from many sources about Meghan manipulating Harry into going through with this break, I came to this thread  to read up a little.
> I can’t wonder about so many possible dynamics here, at the risk of playing armchair psychologists. Meghan is coming into this marriage at an age, late 30s , as a grown woman profEssionally established. Am I the only one not shocked that she is suggesting this break? And look at Harry. He grew up watching his mother in particular hounded by the media. And at some point, he had to learn his mother was stuck in marriage, where it was open at some point his father loved another woman, where, the Queen’s sage advice to his parents was work it out? Because working out a divorce at that point, IMO, was not convenient to the monarchy ( not a British Citizen here). And on top of it, you cannot tell me that from a young age  he did not know he was the ‘spare’ ( am I the only one completely offended by that phrase? ). I wouldn’t blame him for having no eff’s to give for the monarchy, aka his family of origin. Wasn’t he photographed or video taped naked at some Las Vegas bender in his youth? Another example of, who cares, even if he did not know he was being videoed. So even if Meaghan was the one who suggested ditching the royals, I cannot believe Harry gave it more than 5 minutes before he said, Yeah, let’s do this.
> And why not brand themselves? That is essentially then taking control. I sincerely doubt they would be allowed to retreat away quietly, in the face of the voracious appetite of social media. Why not make money off a brand? And if people are not happy with how tax dollars are spent on them, that is what voting and government representation is for. And I don’t mean this to be inflammatory.
> I think if Di had lived in the age of voracious social media (remember she died in ‘97 well before the age of social media, and I remember , she was born 6 months before me) she would have taken control of her brand. Not for the money (I saw in many places she was very savvy with her money and had shrewdly invested and had increased her divorce settlement quite nicely) but to have control over her image.


It’s been explained a million times why they can’t just ditch the royals and “make money on their brand.” And they aren’t giving up titles or money. So yes there are issues here for the crown and government to work out. This isn’t something Harry and Meghan can just decide on their own.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lake Effect said:


> Since this has been so much in the media, and I seen so many comments from many sources about Meghan manipulating Harry into going through with this break, I came to this thread  to read up a little.
> I can’t wonder about so many possible dynamics here, at the risk of playing armchair psychologist. Meghan is coming into this marriage at an age, late 30s , as a grown woman profEssionally established. Am I the only one not shocked that she is suggesting this break? And look at Harry. He grew up watching his mother in particular hounded by the media. And at some point, he had to learn his mother was stuck in marriage, where it was open at some point his father loved another woman, where, the Queen’s sage advice to his parents was work it out? Because working out a divorce at that point, IMO, was not convenient to the monarchy ( not a British Citizen here). And on top of it, you cannot tell me that from a young age  he did not know he was the ‘spare’ ( am I the only one completely offended by that phrase? ). I wouldn’t blame him for having no eff’s to give for the monarchy, aka his family of origin. Wasn’t he photographed or video taped naked at some Las Vegas bender in his youth? Another example of, who cares, even if he did not know he was being videoed. So even if Meaghan was the one who suggested ditching the royals, I cannot believe Harry gave it more than 5 minutes before he said, Yeah, let’s do this.
> And why not brand themselves? That is essentially then taking control. I sincerely doubt they would be allowed to retreat away quietly, in the face of the voracious appetite of social media. Why not make money off a brand? And if people are not happy with how tax dollars are spent on them, that is what voting and government representation is for. And I don’t mean this to be inflammatory.
> I think if Di had lived in the age of voracious social media (remember she died in ‘97 well before the age of social media, and I remember , she was born 6 months before me) she would have taken control of her brand. Not for the money (I saw in many places she was very savvy with her money and had shrewdly invested and had increased her divorce settlement quite nicely) but to have control over her image.


I don't think people have a problem with what they want, but the method of achieving it. But patience and respect and compromise would have gone farther than guns blazing. They probably would have come quite close to everything they wanted, with time.


----------



## Flatsy

Lake Effect said:


> So even if Meaghan was the one who suggested ditching the royals, I cannot believe Harry gave it more than 5 minutes before he said, Yeah, let’s do this.


I disagree.  As of 2015, Harry talked about how he'd considered doing something outside of royal life, but couldn't figure out a way to do it and still fulfill royal duties, which is what was most important to him.  He's been raised his whole life to believe that he had a duty to fulfill, and I think he believed in it.

And although the family has many dysfunctions, he always loved and got along with his family - until Meghan came along.   This is the guy who proudly said his family was "going to be the family Meghan had".  He didn't think they were a bunch of cold-hearted villains.



> And why not brand themselves? That is essentially then taking control.


Branding themselves or branding the royal titles that were granted to them by the UK government?  Those are two very different things.  People only care about them because of their titles.  If they wanted to brand themselves as Meghan the actress/humanitarian and Harry the ex-army soldier, they are always free to do that. 

One only needs to look at Princess Martha Louise of Norway to see how messy it can get when a spare royal tries to make money by commercializing her royal status.  Martha Louise at least had the decency to apologize to Norway and promise to stop doing it.


----------



## marthastoo

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She absolutely likes jewelry. She gave the story about the $7500 Cartier watch she gifted and engraved to herself - to MM from MM. She does seem more tasteful with her pieces though, I'll give her that. Regardless of prices or where it came from she doesn't over-accessorize. She still needs a daughter though - that's who the watch was intended for, ultimately.


I didn't say she didn't like jewelry - I said what little she wears is generally tiny, dainty and minimal.  I am familiar with the Cartier watch story.  And when was the last time you saw her wearing a watch, let alone the tank watch?

Both Kate and Meghan's tastes have changed, especially once entering the RF.  Older photos of Kate shows her wearing bracelets, watches, necklaces, hoops, etc. as part of her everyday wear.  Same with Meghan - but over time, her tastes have definitely moved toward the minimalism end.


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> Everyone is backing away lmao
> 
> View attachment 4638143


is this a foreshadow of their future? Hmmm.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gimmethebag

Oh, Harry, baby, what are you doing?!

https://pagesix.com/2020/01/12/cana...-luxe-hideout-for-prince-harry-meghan-markle/

His and Meghan's greediness is not a good look. The only people who are going to donate to their "foundation" aka slush fund will be the sketchiest people ever, and even then, how much influence will those two have with the monarch after threatening to call them racist and sexist if the royal family doesn't pay them millions of dollars a year?


----------



## Kim O'Meara

carmen56 said:


> Speaking as a Brit, the Government would probably go along with whatever HMQ decides, albeit with some dissenters who would speak out.  As far as the public is concerned, I think there would be outrage, I would certainly be outraged if they kept their titles, monetary handouts and security detail.


Me too.

Walk away with nothing or stay. No half way houses.


----------



## mshermes

Flatsy said:


> I disagree.  As of 2015, Harry talked about how he'd considered doing something outside of royal life, but couldn't figure out a way to do it and still fulfill royal duties, which is what was most important to him.  He's been raised his whole life to believe that he had a duty to fulfill, and I think he believed in it.
> 
> And although the family has many dysfunctions, he always loved and got along with his family - until Meghan came along.   This is the guy who proudly said his family was "going to be the family Meghan had".  He didn't think they were a bunch of cold-hearted villains.
> 
> Branding themselves or branding the royal titles that were granted to them by the UK government?  Those are two very different things.  People only care about them because of their titles.  If they wanted to brand themselves as Meghan the actress/humanitarian and Harry the ex-army soldier, they are always free to do that.
> 
> One only needs to look at Princess Martha Louise of Norway to see how messy it can get when a spare royal tries to make money by commercializing her royal status.  Martha Louise at least had the decency to apologize to Norway and promise to stop doing it.


Prince Harry said the royal family acted as the family Meghan Markle never had this Christmas....brings up two questions to me: 
...It appears that the the RF was quite acceptable then and
...What had Meghan told him about her family? She appeared close to her mother, and, at one point in time, her father. 

Was she playing the "poor me" to him? I do not know the answers. I am posing questions.


----------



## Gimmethebag

At least the home is owned by the sketchy uranium guy. It was initially rumored the home was owned a Russian investor in Facebook/Twitter who received his early seed money via the Kremlin. Yikes.


----------



## gracekelly

myown said:


> It was a rumor but there was never a proof


She married Joe Giuliano and it was annulled.  You can easily find this information on the web.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> But has this been proven? Np pics, no public record.



The entire point of an annulment is that is is expunged, but there is always a paper trial despite that.


----------



## Lake Effect

Meh-gan said:


> It’s been explained a million times why they can’t just ditch the royals and “make money on their brand.” And they aren’t giving up titles or money. So yes there are issues here for the crown and government to work out. This isn’t something Harry and Meghan can just decide on their own.





ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't think people have a problem with what they want, but the method of achieving it. But patience and respect and compromise would have gone farther than guns blazing. They probably would have come quite close to everything they wanted, with time.


I can appreciate that your comments. I can appreciate that Harry and Meghan are human too and feeling impatient.



Flatsy said:


> I disagree.  As of 2015, Harry talked about how he'd considered doing something outside of royal life, but couldn't figure out a way to do it and still fulfill royal duties, which is what was most important to him.  He's been raised his whole life to believe that he had a duty to fulfill, and I think he believed in it.
> 
> And although the family has many dysfunctions, he always loved and got along with his family - until Meghan came along.   This is the guy who proudly said his family was "going to be the family Meghan had".  He didn't think they were a bunch of cold-hearted villains.
> 
> Branding themselves or branding the royal titles that were granted to them by the UK government?  Those are two very different things.  People only care about them because of their titles.  If they wanted to brand themselves as Meghan the actress/humanitarian and Harry the ex-army soldier, they are always free to do that.
> 
> One only needs to look at Princess Martha Louise of Norway to see how messy it can get when a spare royal tries to make money by commercializing her royal status.  Martha Louise at least had the decency to apologize to Norway and promise to stop doing it.


If his behavior toward his family is changing since his involvement with Meghan, I would find it hard to believe that she could change  his behavior single handedly. In my life I have seen some people go through some radical behavior changes, with many people commenting that a started after a relationship, a job etc. I can’t  help but believe that maybe there was some seed of conflict buried, all along . . .


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> I disagree.  As of 2015, Harry talked about how he'd considered doing something outside of royal life, but couldn't figure out a way to do it and still fulfill royal duties, which is what was most important to him.  He's been raised his whole life to believe that he had a duty to fulfill, and I think he believed in it.
> 
> And although the family has many dysfunctions, he always loved and got along with his family - until Meghan came along.   This is the guy who proudly said his family was "going to be the family Meghan had".  He didn't think they were a bunch of cold-hearted villains.




Actually, no. Harry didn't just want to consider doing something outside of royal family - he wanted to leave. 

"In a candid interview with the Mail on Sunday, the 32-year-old has admitted that he was tempted to leave the Monarchy in favour of an 'ordinary life'. He told the newspaper: "There was a time I felt I wanted out."

Referring to the Royal Family as 'The Firm', the prince continued: "But then I decided to stay in [The Firm] and work out a role for myself.""

Secondly,  I don’t understand why Meghan seems to get all the blame for BOTH of them choosing to walk away. She's labeled here as being manipulative and narcissist who does as she pleases and Harry is just a nonparticipant and has zero autonomy. Why is it so difficult to believe that Harry might be making some of the decisions here or maybe they agreed on things together as a couple?


----------



## kemilia

Flatsy said:


> Dan Wootton (who was known as one of the more accurate royal reporters even prior to breaking the current story) says Meghan has not been given the opportunity to wear royal mega-jewels, even if she wanted to.
> 
> Wootton reported last spring that the Queen's advisors advised her in Fall 2018 that she should not loan any of the royal collection jewelry to Meghan, and the Queen made the rare and significant decision to agree with them.  Meghan hasn't borrowed a single piece of jewelry from the Queen since her wedding day tiara.  (Those who follow what Kate wears know that Kate borrows the Queen's jewelry on a very regular basis - including multiple times over Remembrance Weekend.)
> 
> The palace saw the writing on the wall that Meghan was not going to be around long and was going to do whatever she could to exploit her royal status while it lasted, including wearing whatever trademark Diana pieces she could.  I think Meghan asked, but was denied.  She wanted to wear a tiara to the state dinner in Fiji and Charles told her no, it would be too extravagant to wear in that country.
> 
> Since then, Meghan has been amassing a collection of purchased jewelry worth upwards of 600,000 pounds at last count.  She doesn't wear things twice - that would slow her down from buying a new pair of $25k earrings for every event.  Unlike the Queen's jewels, Meghan personally owns the jewelry she's wearing now and will be able to take it with her in the event of a divorce.


She was gifted that gorgeous aquamarine ring by Harry that she was seen wearing to go to their wedding reception. That was Diana's, just over the top huge & beautiful. I haven't seen her wear that again. 

I do get the idea that she likes smaller jewelry--little quiet pieces (by designers that charge way too much for so-so designs but that's my opinion).


----------



## gracekelly

Straight-Laced said:


> Good grief just let her have her freakin’ meltdown !!
> More threats, more emotional blackmail  because she must get her way or else ...
> The tiresome and exhausting ways of the narcissist.


Totally agree.  Let the meltdown happen and that way she will show her true colors.


----------



## Flatsy

kemilia said:


> She was gifted that gorgeous aquamarine ring by Harry that she was seen wearing to go to their wedding reception. That was Diana's, just over the top huge & beautiful. I haven't seen her wear that again.


That was a gift from Harry though and wouldn't have had anything to do with the Queen's decision not to loan her anything from the crown jewelry collection.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Actually, no. Harry didn't just want to consider doing something outside of royal family - he wanted to leave.
> 
> "In a candid interview with the Mail on Sunday, the 32-year-old has admitted that he was tempted to leave the Monarchy in favour of an 'ordinary life'. He told the newspaper: "There was a time I felt I wanted out."
> 
> Referring to the Royal Family as 'The Firm', the prince continued: "But then I decided to stay in [The Firm] and work out a role for myself.""
> 
> Secondly,  I don’t understand why Meghan seems to get all the blame for BOTH of them choosing to walk away. She's labeled here as being manipulative and narcissist who does as she pleases and Harry is just a nonparticipant and has zero autonomy. Why is it so difficult to believe that Harry might be making some of the decisions here or maybe they agreed on things together as a couple?


When he first floated the idea of leaving, it was just leaving.  Now it is leaving and monetizing his title and he got that idea from Meghan.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> I don’t understand why Meghan seems to get all the blame for BOTH of them choosing to walk away. She's labeled here as being manipulative and narcissist who does as she pleases and Harry is just a nonparticipant and has zero autonomy.


That's a strawman argument.  Harry is not being treated as a "nonparticipant"..  Harry is being called to task for his terrible behavior and decisions. The Sussexes are a two-headed monster and are acting as such. His wife's desires, ambitions and influence are very much part of the equation.  And yes, she is manipulative and a narcissist.  Harry has his own set of bad qualities and lately has been displaying many of the traits of a narcissist as well.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Flatsy said:


> Nobody wants to be seen as conspiring with them.


No, but I suspect one or more of them or others were. HnM had to have felt they had some more leverage to fall back on, not just extortion.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lake Effect said:


> I can appreciate that your comments. I can appreciate that Harry and Meghan are human too and feeling impatient.
> 
> 
> If his behavior toward his family is changing since his involvement with Meghan, I would find it hard to believe that she could change  his behavior single handedly. In my life I have seen some people go through some radical behavior changes, with many people commenting that a started after a relationship, a job etc. I can’t  help but believe that maybe there was some seed of conflict buried, all along . . .


I agree. There was something brewing, or usually is. You need that catalyst to kick it off, usually a partner gives someone that strength.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> again - I don't think he's the sharpest tack


Uh, he wore a Nazi uniform--couldn't have been much going on in his head to do that. Glad William was the first born.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gimmethebag

kemilia said:


> She was gifted that gorgeous aquamarine ring by Harry that she was seen wearing to go to their wedding reception. That was Diana's, just over the top huge & beautiful. I haven't seen her wear that again.
> 
> I do get the idea that she likes smaller jewelry--little quiet pieces (by designers that charge way too much for so-so designs but that's my opinion).



I think Meghan was playing the Hollywood game three ways with her jewelry:

1. The dainty pieces she often wears are Jennifer Meyer, who is basically studio royalty. All the actresses support her brand in the same way that before #metoo anyone who wanted to be cast by Weinstein supported Marchesa on the red carpet.

2. She knows that wearing a big piece, like Diana's aquamarine ring will get a lot of media attention. She doesn't want to wear jewelry that's big, but not $$$$, and have people get used to seeing her in pieces like that. It's more impactful if you play things low-key, with Jennifer Meyer gems, and then have a royalty moment. Kate does the same thing. She wears smaller pieces for royal engagements and then really does the full princess look for state dinners.

3. She knows they don't own Frogmore Cottage. Harry's trusts are likely protected in case of divorce (that's how it is in the States for non-royals), and so she's stacking jewelry as assets she can take with her after this thing ends. I don't think she really cared about others' warnings about marrying into the British royal family. I think she went in with a strategy in place of securing the title, lining things up for herself, and when/if things explode, her gameplan to go back to Hollywood as legitimate royalty.

TBH, the push for the private foundation registered to Arizona (where only 10% of charitable donations have to go to charitable endeavors) and purchasing a private family home in Canada or the U.S. comes across like a move to establish assets out of Harry's royal trusts.


----------



## gracekelly

Back before Harry met Meghan, I thought he had finally found his path.  He had the Invictis games and appeared to be interested in veterans and their issues. He seemed to have achieved some maturity and moved away from his younger doing silly and inappropriate things self.   He had a warm relationship, from all appearances, with his brother and SIL.  I am guessing that Meghan saw this and he thought she was like minded at the time.  Seeing now how everything has done a 180 turn, one cant help but wonder if they wasn't just a way to get into his good graces until the real agenda came into play.  A stronger person would have see this and listened to family advice.  I think we know the rest without my having to spell it out.  It is all very sad and not only has his life been ruined, they brought a new life into the world and who knows how it will play out for Archie.  Hoping for the best.


----------



## doni

Lake Effect said:


> And why not brand themselves? That is essentially then taking control. I sincerely doubt they would be allowed to retreat away quietly, in the face of the voracious appetite of social media. Why not make money off a brand? And if people are not happy with how tax dollars are spent on them, that is what voting and government representation is for. And I don’t mean this to be inflammatory.
> .



Because it is not _their_ brand. It is the brand of royalty which belongs to the UK people and is managed by the Queen, not for them to exploit.

Btw, I am the only one that hates the word ‘brand’ being applied to human beings? Missed those Diana times, when celebrities where people and not ‘brands’ ...


----------



## lulu212121

Flatsy said:


> Nobody wants to be seen as conspiring with them.


i think many are afraid of being iced out. Harry and Megan do not look good at all.


----------



## hellosunshine

gracekelly said:


> When he first floated the idea of leaving, it was just leaving.  Now it is leaving and monetizing his title and he got that idea from Meghan.



Or this narrative could be a little too misogynistic. It's interesting that members here keep posting about Yoko Ono and superimposing Yoko's face over a photo of Meghan's from their engagement photocall. Yoko, was essentially blamed for the Beatles falling apart and here we are blaming another woman (Meghan) for an agreement likely made by two people.


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> Or this narrative could be a little too misogynistic. It's interesting that members here keep posting about Yoko Ono and superimposing Yoko's face over a photo of Meghan's from their engagement photocall. Yoko, was essentially blamed for the Beatles falling apart and here we are blaming another woman (Meghan) for an agreement likely made by two people.


Is it true about Yoko Ono? My point being, if people formed that opinion of YO they have the right to form that opinion about MM. And, nobody knows what agreement was made.


----------



## lulu212121

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I don't think people have a problem with what they want, but the method of achieving it. But patience and respect and compromise would have gone farther than guns blazing. They probably would have come quite close to everything they wanted, with time.


I don't understand why some can't understand this!


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Back before Harry met Meghan, I thought he had finally found his path.


He also seemed to really come into his own when he married her.  The wild child was ready to settle down and have a wife and family of his own - aw, how sweet.

I can't believe I actually fell for the hype that the two of them wanted to be private and low key.  I seriously believed that they did the full-scale wedding and carriage ride out of graciousness to the public who wanted to see it, and then were going to be the royal family's hardest working worker bees.

I didn't realize that the two of them have egos the size of planets, and encourage each other's worst, most avaricious and most selfish impulses.

There are a lot of longer articles today about Harry's mindset the past few years.  He and Meghan are absolutely delusional about their own importance.  When they broke away from Kensington Palace, they didn't get to have their own royal court like they wanted (which was an outrageous idea).  Instead, Harry went around reminding everybody that he was "the #2 ranking royal in Buckingham Palace after the queen".  Because that was something really important to him.

I have also read that the final straw for the Sussexes was seeing the portrait of the Queen/Charles/William/George and the fact that they weren't included, and I believe it.  They are leaving because they can't handle that their status in the family is not as big as they think they deserve.


----------



## Coconuts40

Gimmethebag said:


> *TBH, the push for the private foundation registered to Arizona (where only 10% of charitable donations have to go to charitable endeavors)* and purchasing a private family home in Canada or the U.S. comes across like a move to establish assets out of Harry's royal trusts.



I wasn't aware of the registration in Arizona , and that only 10% of charitable donations need to go to charitable endeavors . Interesting.


----------



## rose60610

Gimmethebag said:


> Oh, Harry, baby, what are you doing?!
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/12/cana...-luxe-hideout-for-prince-harry-meghan-markle/
> 
> His and Meghan's greediness is not a good look. The only people who are going to donate to their "foundation" aka slush fund will be the sketchiest people ever, and even then, how much influence will those two have with the monarch after threatening to call them racist and sexist if the royal family doesn't pay them millions of dollars a year?



Well, well, well!!!  The article makes for very interesting reading.  Guistra is a professional foundation grifter guy who plays with other famous professional foundation grifters. But of course it's all for the benefit of charity and mankind.  All you need are a few good contacts and billions of dollars and Heads of State can be yours. If H&M play their cards right, they don't need any RF money. If their cheesy Foundation pans out then Meghan can really exist in style. She might even call it "living".  Snow White, Cinderella and Jasmine--eat your hearts out!


----------



## Mrs.Z

I notice a number of the pictures on their Instagram already have the Sussex Royal copyright next to them.


----------



## Lake Effect

doni said:


> Because it is not _their_ brand. It is the brand of royalty which belongs to the UK people and is managed by the Queen, not for them to exploit.
> 
> Btw, I am the only one that hates the word ‘brand’ being applied to human beings? Missed those Diana times, when celebrities where people and not ‘brands’ ...


Thank you and to all who corrected me, I understand what is meant by the royal brand. I misunderstood, that  in these  comments about creating their brand I understood that as to create what ever image they want, through social media and the like, to bankroll themselves, and not to capitalize on the Queen brand, aka the monarchy.
About people being brands, do we have Kris Jenner to thank for that??



hellosunshine said:


> Or this narrative could be a little too misogynistic. It's interesting that members here keep posting about Yoko Ono and superimposing Yoko's face over a photo of Meghan's from their engagement photocall. Yoko, was essentially blamed for the Beatles falling apart and here we are blaming another woman (Meghan) for an agreement likely made by two people.


I saw the Yoko face superimposed and I was troubled by that. I am not getting that John Lennon was a hostage or that Prince Harry is. It’s too simplistic to say,  “but it’s her fault!” 
But I can appreciate that fans of Harry do not like the path he is choosing, or the woman he chose to marry.


----------



## scrpo83

hellosunshine said:


> I understand the Queen can strip Harry of his HRH Prince title but I've been reading many "royal-ists" making the argument that the title is his birthright. Wouldn't it look very bad on the British Royal Family if they strip him of it and Prince Andrew begins to occupy the sixth position? I don't think there's anybody in the world that wants Andrew that close to the throne, right?


The succesion line and the hrh title are 2 separate things..


----------



## hellosunshine

scrpo83 said:


> The succesion line and the hrh title are 2 separate things..



I understand that. As I've said in my post, there are some "royal-ists" who have made the argument that neither can be taken from him. They make the argument that both are his birthright and if stripped - it'd cause an unnecessary blow-back to the firm.


----------



## rose60610

Lake Effect said:


> About people being brands, do we have Kris Jenner to thank for that??



From the NYT 3/11/10: 

WASHINGTON — Long before the State Dinner party crashers and the tension with her White House colleagues and the strain in her relationship with the first lady, Desiree Rogers began to understand she was in trouble when David Axelrod summoned her to his office last spring to scold her.

Ms. Rogers had appeared in another glossy magazine, posing in a White House garden in a borrowed $3,495 silk pleated dress and $110,000 diamond earrings. But if the image was jarring in a time of recession, Mr. Axelrod was as bothered by the words and her discussion of “the ***** brand” and her role in promoting it, according to people informed about the conversation.

“The president is a person, not a product,” he was said to tell her. “We shouldn’t be referring to him as a brand.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

There's been a great deal of good articles published this morning-  one in particular says the Queen and Charles have come to realize the true significance and importance of the upcoming meeting on Monday. There are discussions that whatever transpires of the meeting - it'll apparently be used as a sort of road map for Charlotte and Louis in the future. So, in essence this will be used for the future "spare" Cambridge kids too!


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Or this narrative could be a little too misogynistic. It's interesting that members here keep posting about Yoko Ono and superimposing Yoko's face over a photo of Meghan's from their engagement photocall. Yoko, was essentially blamed for the Beatles falling apart and here we are blaming another woman (Meghan) for an agreement likely made by two people.



They are most likely in agreement now, but who came up with the idea?  Harry never was quoted previous to this relationship regarding making millions and how he could possibly do it.  

Misogyny is strong  prejudice again women.  Don't think I qualify.  If this was a male partner of Harry instead of a female I still would think that person to be the driving force behind this.  

Let's leave Yoko out of this.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m sure it’s no coincidence the queen wore a very visible hearing aid for the first time today. I love how she can do subtle shade


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> There's been a great deal of good articles published this morning-  one in particular says the Queen and Charles have come to realize the true significance and importance of the upcoming meeting on Monday. There are discussions that whatever transpires of the meeting - it'll apparently be used as a sort of road map for Charlotte and Louis in the future. So, in essence this will be used for the future "spare" Cambridge kids too!


Yikes I agree with this post!  Yes, they have to deal with all the children and might as well start now.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

hellosunshine said:


> Or this narrative could be a little too misogynistic. It's interesting that members here keep posting about Yoko Ono and superimposing Yoko's face over a photo of Meghan's from their engagement photocall. Yoko, was essentially blamed for the Beatles falling apart and here we are blaming another woman (Meghan) for an agreement likely made by two people.


I can only take a wild guess, hellosunshine, but I'm pretty sure whoever made that photo meant it as a pop/meme culture joke, not a seething blow to all womankind. Or even Japan. Trying to turn this in to how everyone critical of HnM are not only racist but also misogynist is pretty desperate considering all the serious and well-deserved flak Harry is getting both here and elsewhere.


----------



## youngster

I admit to being really curious about what kind of products SussexRoyal will try to sell:  Reusable supermarket bags?  Reusable stainless water bottles? Cloth baby diaper packs? Yoga mats?  Coffee mugs?  All branded SussexRoyal with their little trademark?  Have they convinced themselves that the general world population is desperately in need of whatever they would sell?


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Yikes I agree with this post!  Yes, they have to deal with all the children and might as well start now.



I agree and, if they come up with this road map for Harry, then it can be explained and presented to Louis and Charlotte from fairly early on in their lives, even start talking to them about this in their mid teen years so there are no hurt feelings or insane expectations.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Interesting article on the Travalyst “initiative” launched back in September and announced on Sussex Royal ...not a charity, an “initiative”. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/trave...dvisor-skyscanner-meghan-markle-a9139646.html


----------



## Sharont2305

Apparently Charles has arrived at Sandringham, William is at Anmer Hall, Harry hasn't been seen as yet


----------



## Meh-gan

Mrs.Z said:


> Interesting article on the Travalyst “initiative” launched back in September and announced on Sussex Royal ...not a charity, an “initiative”.
> 
> https://www.independent.co.uk/trave...dvisor-skyscanner-meghan-markle-a9139646.html


LMAOOOOOO

Like stans pay attention. They are fake AF. This thing isn’t even real. How much $ did they get to put together this crap?


----------



## Eva1991

So, from what I gather after reading the last few pages, Meghan's been "diagnosed" as a narcissist and a manipulator and she and Harry are going to get divorced soon. All of that based on an IG post where they state that they intend to step down as senior working royals! Alright!


----------



## Meh-gan

Eva1991 said:


> So, from what I gather after reading the last few pages, Meghan's been "diagnosed" as a narcissist and a manipulator and she and Harry are going to get divoreced soon. All of that based on an IG post where they state that they intend to step down as senior working royals! Alright!


You are over simplifying things and ignoring a whole lot of other facts in this. 

And there’s lots to support the claims Meghan is a narc and the both of them are spiralling right now. 

 Fact: they can’t just announce they are stepping back while keeping titles and $ from Royal avenues. The end. 

They are creating bogus initiatives, shilling the royal connection for commercial deals and taking freebies from celebrities and billionaires. Like these people are lame.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Eva1991 said:


> So, from what I gather after reading the last few pages, Meghan's been "diagnosed" as a narcissist and a manipulator and she and Harry are going to get divorced soon. All of that based on an IG post where they state that they intend to step down as senior working royals! Alright!


Yes, the IG post was literally the first time any of us had heard about Meghan.


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> I agree and, if they come up with this road map for Harry, then it can be explained and presented to Louis and Charlotte from fairly early on in their lives, even start talking to them about this in their mid teen years so there are no hurt feelings or insane expectations.


Except I don't think what the Sussexes are asking for is going to be possible for future generations.

If nothing else, the spares are the ones the family needs to grind away at the hundreds and hundreds of less-glamorous engagements that the royal family needs to carry out.  Anne, Edward, Sophie and formerly Andrew are carrying a HUGE portion of the family burden.

Under the Sussex model, Louis and Charlotte would flounce off to America to become celebrities, not do engagements, but still be given royal residences and several million pounds per year in support.  That's the exact opposite of a "slimmed down" monarchy.   That would be slimming down the work side of it only.


----------



## Lodpah

Iran has arrested the UK ambassador, which is major and the country needs to focus on its internal issues and Meghan is center stage. Meghan is loving, loving the attention. I believe her family now. Her father, bless his heart and I know he's no angel but he got played by his own daughter. If she can do that to her own father, imagine the deceitfulness of her soul. Harry is not innocent either. Either he's PW or Meghan has a hold on him with some sort of voodoo (yes it does occur and side eye me all you want) but it's been practiced in many many countries. 

What got me is her cunning way of leaving Archie in Canada. Someone is advising her and it's not Michele ***** but probably Hillary *******. I read above the connections to all the parties.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aqua01

gracekelly said:


> Yikes I agree with this post!  Yes, they have to deal with all the children and might as well start now.


And let's hope she's going to deal with it with a FIRM hand. Starting Monday.


----------



## scrpo83

hellosunshine said:


> I understand that. As I've said in my post, there are some "royal-ists" who have made the argument that neither can be taken from him. They make the argument that both are his birthright and if stripped - it'd cause an unnecessary blow-back to the firm.



Yes but i was commenting more on the second part of your original poast.In that post you wrote: 'Wouldn't it look very bad on the British Royal Family if they strip him of it and Prince Andrew begins to occupy the sixth position? I don't think there's anybody in the world that wants Andrew that close to the throne, right?'

If the queen recind Harry's HRH (which she will never do in this lifetime or the next) he will not lose his place in the succession line..nobody is going up the succession line just because someone loses the HRH styling. I'm pretty sure they need a Parliment's act to remove somebody from the line of succession (correct me if i'm wrong).. plenty of 'commoners' in line of succession as it currently stands see: peter, zara and their children. And Archie comes before Andrew..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Iran has arrested the UK ambassador, which is major and the country needs to focus on its internal issues and Meghan is center stage.



Seriously. 2020 started in chaos yet the UK is forced to entertain these clowns and their shenanigans.


----------



## youngster

Flatsy said:


> Except I don't think what the Sussexes are asking for is going to be possible for future generations.



Oh, i agree with you, I was just responding to the poster who said that the Queen and Charles are looking at this situation with Harry as a way to develop a road map for future siblings of the heir.  Basically, what they can and cannot do, probably with an emphasis on "no monetizing your title", etc.  I don't think what Harry and Meghan are asking for is going to be possible for Harry and Meghan, let alone Charlotte and Louis.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Can't put all the blame on Meghan for the Disney deal. TMZ has a video where Harry gets her the Disney job 

"Resurfaced video from this past July appears to show PH chatting it up with Bob Iger at the '"Lion King" premiere in London -- during which he seems to say, "You know she does voice-overs?" to a genuinely surprised Iger who responds with, "Oh really? Ah ..."

https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/12/prin...disney-bob-iger/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange


----------



## Aqua01

If it's true that Me-Gain's father is absolute TRASH like I've heard all her worshipers claim, then well well well......... this apple truly didn't fall far from the tree.


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> She was gifted *that gorgeous aquamarine ring* by Harry that she was seen wearing to go to their wedding reception. That was Diana's, just over the top huge & beautiful. I haven't seen her wear that again.
> 
> I do get the idea that she likes smaller jewelry--little quiet pieces (by designers that charge way too much for so-so designs but that's my opinion).



It was by Asprey (Appointment to the Queen). Stunning stone and suited Diana's amazonian frame perfectly. 

MM is a more petit lady with fine limbs, and I can see why she may prefer something smaller and more in keeping with her frame. I think she will be touched it was Diana's though.


----------



## scrpo83

I think it is high time the BRF plan a roadmap for the spares so they will have clear understanding what is expected of them. Maybe this generation's spares should be told to find meaningful employment by the time the reached 21st birthday and not just expecting to become 'working royal' by virtue of their father, brother or uncle is the king. Just a thought.


----------



## queennadine

I need to go back and read all of the dirt that came out from MM’s family at the time of the wedding. I didn’t pay any attention to it, thinking that they were jealous, and because I gave her the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Lodpah

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Can't put all the blame on Meghan for the Disney deal. TMZ has a video where Harry gets her the Disney job
> 
> "Resurfaced video from this past July appears to show PH chatting it up with Bob Iger at the '"Lion King" premiere in London -- during which he seems to say, "You know she does voice-overs?" to a genuinely surprised Iger who responds with, "Oh really? Ah ..."
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/12/prin...disney-bob-iger/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange



Nah, she probably told him to say something. In her defense tho how many of us have said "Hey, would you put in a good word for me."  But in her case it is embarrassing for the both of them.


----------



## marthastoo

Eva1991 said:


> So, from what I gather after reading the last few pages, Meghan's been "diagnosed" as a narcissist and a manipulator and she and Harry are going to get divorced soon. All of that based on an IG post where they state that they intend to step down as senior working royals! Alright!


Oh, that diagnosis has been made on this thread a looooong time ago.  It wasn't based on their recent IG post.


----------



## mrsinsyder

queennadine said:


> I need to go back and read all of the dirt that came out from MM’s family at the time of the wedding. I didn’t pay any attention to it, thinking that they were jealous, and because I gave her the benefit of the doubt.


Here’s the letter her brother sent Prince Harry...


----------



## Lodpah

I just thought of something. Meghan not being present at the meeting IS A GOOD THING. Harry will have his family there and he just might break down cause he's away from his captor . . . oops I meant Meghan and the people who care the most for him will be there. Hope he will feel loved and encouraged and shown that he's being grifted by the biggest con artist of all time (a small time bit actress).  You know, someone who has been kidnapped and then rescued and away from their kidnapper can then fully feel safe? (Yes, I know I'm being dramatic and all that).

The Queen is no fool. She can outfox those trying to ruin the reputation of the Crown. Meghan did not learn anything from Fergie's situation. As Simon would say, "Off you go."


----------



## marthastoo

I've actually always thought Meghan has a very nice voice.  That was one of the first take aways I got when listening to her for the first time in that engagement interview with Harry.  She's well-spoken and her voice has a nice tone and timbre to it.  I'm always listening for tone since I desperately wish I could sing and cringe every time I hear a recording of my own voice.  I'm surprised that several people have complained that they hate her voice.  Well, actually I'm not surprised.


----------



## Roxanna

Just came to my mind why Harry did not commission tiara especially M  for their wedding?
He obviously wanted her to have something what she wanted, then why he did not gave  it to her himself?  I wonder was there any restrictions or limitations that prevented him doing something like that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

I am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I TELL YOU. Tell me more about how they want to move to a healthier and more private environment again...


----------



## mdcx

Some thoughts:

Did Meghan plot for Charles to walk her down the aisle from the beginning, knowing the optics on this would suit her better than having her own commoner father do it?
Did Meghan deliberately wear a mishmash of camel tones to Grenfell last week in an attempt to get under the skin of QEll? From what I understand, senior royals wardrobe choices for public events are shared ahead of time. See QEll’s camel hat and coat at church today.

Blackmail???
All the attempts to wear major jewels were just for photo ops imo. My guess is MM has a look book of all her “major” BRF moments that will be used to help sell her services to the highest bidder in the future - endorsements etc.


----------



## Lodpah

The comments are brutal on other sites: one said, Harry should have paid, played and walked away.  That comment is rough.


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> Here’s the letter her brother sent Prince Harry...
> 
> View attachment 4638307
> View attachment 4638308



How do you always find the good stuff?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Here’s the letter her brother sent Prince Harry...
> 
> View attachment 4638307
> View attachment 4638308



Meghan has never had a relationship with her step-brother. They last saw each other at Doris' (his mother and Meghans' grandmother) funeral in 2011, and had not spoken for years prior.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan has never had a relationship with her step-brother. They last saw each other at Doris' (his mother and Meghans' grandmother) funeral in 2011, and had not spoken for years prior.
> 
> View attachment 4638327



So? He obviously still knows her (and completely had her pegged early on)...


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> I am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I TELL YOU. Tell me more about how they want to move to a healthier and more private environment again...
> 
> View attachment 4638317



The stalling tactic that Harry feared.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

After reading the letter sent by MM’s step-brother to PH a few posts earlier thanks to mrsinsyder, I can only surmise that PH has a case of  Stockholm Syndrome.

We can add that to all of his mental disabilities. In any case, it may be that he was looking for a strong “mommy figure” but what he latched on to in this relationship is “Mommy Dearest”.


----------



## youngster

I can't imagine Harry living in L.A., if its true that she's convinced him to settle there.  The paparazzi are going to make him crazy, they'll stalk him through the city.  He'll have less privacy than in the UK as no one will keep their distance.  I lived there for decades and don't miss it a bit.


----------



## Allisonfaye

mrsinsyder said:


> I am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I TELL YOU. Tell me more about how they want to move to a healthier and more private environment again...
> 
> View attachment 4638317



This is seriously nuts.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So? He obviously still knows her (and completely had her pegged early on)...



LOL! He didn't peg anything. He never knew her. Doesn't matter though because he penned that note to collect a check.


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> I can't imagine Harry living in L.A., if its true that she's convinced him to settle there.  The paparazzi are going to make him crazy, they'll stalk him through the city.  He'll have less privacy than in the UK as no one will keep their distance.  I lived there for decades and don't miss it a bit.



I, on the other hand, KNEW all along that's where she wanted to go.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan has never had a relationship with her step-brother. They last saw each other at Doris' (his mother and Meghans' grandmother) funeral in 2011, and had not spoken for years prior.
> 
> View attachment 4638327


And yet he knows her very well. She obviously hasn't changed her ways too much.


----------



## Allisonfaye

I think it would be obvious Hollywood was her ultimate goal. She left a D-list celebrity and now since marrying H, she is A-list. I am sure she is getting attention from people who would never have given her a second glance 3 or 4 years ago and she wants the attention.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I hadn't read the brother's letter before, but that's harsh. Not that right now it doesn't sound believable but ugh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> LOL! He didn't peg anything. He never knew her. Doesn't matter though because he penned that note to collect a check.


He must be a psychic then, because everything he warns Harry about is coming to fruition.


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Here’s the letter her brother sent Prince Harry...
> 
> View attachment 4638307
> View attachment 4638308


I never read this before and to say I am shocked is an understatement.  He may not have had frequent contact with her, but he certainly had her number.  I really have to ask, is it a habit of the Markle family to make copies of correspondence?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> Here’s the letter her brother sent Prince Harry...
> 
> View attachment 4638307
> View attachment 4638308


Was this published a few years ago or just recent?


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> LOL! He didn't peg anything. He never knew her. Doesn't matter though because he penned that note to collect a check.


And yet his words ring true ...


----------



## Aqua01

hellosunshine said:


> LOL! He didn't peg anything. He never knew her. Doesn't matter though because he penned that note to collect a check.


Then isn't it just _amazing_ how the things he wrote came true? Me, Me, and Me-Again indeed made a joke out of Harry and the Royal family.


----------



## Lodpah

mrsinsyder said:


> I am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I TELL YOU. Tell me more about how they want to move to a healthier and more private environment again...
> 
> View attachment 4638317


So Meghan basically and in a subtle FU to the Queen equates ***** with the Queen? Wow!


----------



## sdkitty

Aqua01 said:


> Then isn't it just _amazing_ how the things he wrote came true? Me, Me, and Me-Again indeed made a joke out of Harry and the Royal family.


and I could never understand how she had not one presentable relative other than her mother to invite to the wedding.....not a cousin?  not an aunt or an uncle?  even if her relationship with her half siblings wasn't good, you'd think there would have been some other relatives.  you don't have to be super close to be invited to a wedding


----------



## youngster

Allisonfaye said:


> I think it would be obvious Hollywood was her ultimate goal. She left a D-list celebrity and now since marrying H, she is A-list. I am sure she is getting attention from people who would never have given her a second glance 3 or 4 years ago and she wants the attention.



She wants to go to the Oscars and the Golden Globes and the Vanity Fair parties. She wants a beach house in Malibu. She wants to be on a first name basis with the A list, which she couldn't ever do on her own, while building some kind of media/charity empire on the back of SussexRoyal and the titles.  We'll see how long Harry lasts if they do move there.


----------



## Aqua01

Her beauty is only skin deep. These pictures give me chills as to me they show her true personality.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> She wants to go to the Oscars and the Golden Globes and the Vanity Fair parties. She wants a beach house in Malibu. She wants to be on a first name basis with the A list, which she couldn't ever do on her own, while building some kind of media/charity empire on the back of SussexRoyaland the titles.  We'll see how long Harry lasts if they do move there.


even though she has a lot of fame and notoreity now, I wonder how long that would last if she was the ex-wife instead of the wife of a prince


----------



## mdcx

Details about Sandringham and the meeting. It sounds as though it will start at lunchtime Monday, and that Meghan will not be conferenced in for it:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Sandringham-scene-todays-royal-showdown.html


----------



## mdcx

Aqua01 said:


> Her beauty is only skin deep. These pictures give me chills as to me they show her true personality.
> 
> View attachment 4638342
> View attachment 4638345


Oh this is from when Meghan showed up to Harry’s friends wedding as his “date” even he and his friends all thought they had broken up, I believe.
ETA: Tom Inskip’s wedding.


----------



## Jaxion

queennadine said:


> I need to go back and read all of the dirt that came out from MM’s family at the time of the wedding. I didn’t pay any attention to it, thinking that they were jealous, and because I gave her the benefit of the doubt.


 Me too. I completely ignored every article from her family because I just assumed they were just clueless and stirring up drama.

I realise now that I was just projecting. Since I come from an abusive background I totally understand that there are some families that need to cut out from your life and because of that I assumed Meghan must have been in my situation too. It's now obvious to me that she has a clear pattern of ghosting people when they are no longer useful to her. I can't believe she got me to relate to Piers Morgan of all people.

Anyway I think this is what's going on with some of the Meghan fans who idolise her.They're just projecting good qualities and the problems they've faced in their own lives onto her and she's taking full advantage by playing into it.


----------



## sdkitty

Aqua01 said:


> Her beauty is only skin deep. These pictures give me chills as to me they show her true personality.
> 
> View attachment 4638342
> View attachment 4638345


to be fair, we don't have any context for the pics.  don't well all have our moments when we're frowning or irritated?


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> Details about Sandringham and the meeting. It sounds as though it will start at lunchtime Monday, and that Meghan will not be conferenced in for it:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Sandringham-scene-todays-royal-showdown.html


She can’t call in that sounds absurd, she would have Jessica and all her people in the background, it would be like a live broadcast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> and I could never understand how she had not one presentable relative other than her mother to invite to the wedding.....not a cousin?  not an aunt or an uncle?  even if her relationship with her half siblings wasn't good, you'd think there would have been some other relatives.  you don't have to be super close to be invited to a wedding


She actually had a niece I think 12 years old who adored her "Aunty" and had nothing bad to say about her "Aunty" Meg. I don't know about anyone but I have some relatives I don't get along with but I DO have some that I adore and simply love getting together with.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> even though she has a lot of fame and notoreity now, I wonder how long that would last if she was the ex-wife instead of the wife of a prince


You know all these celebs snark about her behind her back.


----------



## joyeaux

I have about 20 pages (!!) to catch up with, but wanted to share another interesting (I thought) Telegraph article behind the paywall. This is the perspective of Tom Bradby who did the ITV interview in Africa and seems to sort of be the Sussex mouthpiece at the moment, so reading his input is the closest thing I think we have to “hearing” from H and M at the moment. For what that’s worth.

This whole thing is getting so ugly and it honestly makes me sad.

Also, (and this is a legit, non-rhetorical question): has anyone read anything speaking to how the Sussexes have reconciled “leaving” a family while still branding themselves as “Royal”? Which of course means retaining all the kudos in (literally) a name that they were born and married into? I’m truly not trying to be snarky. I just don’t understand the people patting them on the back for showing the Royal Family what’s what, “turning their back” on the UK, etc etc but that they’re going off into this new era _still riding the coattails of said family _and planning a life of star-powered global reach as a brand named SUSSEX ROYAL.

They’re not going to open up a Bed and Breakfast in Nova Scotia, right? They’re planning on being celebrities, and utilizing the star power that sort of being/having been/whatever royal brings them?

This is really a sticking point with me in all of the defensiveness I’m seeing in posts here and elsewhere, and I truly would love to hear at least a direct argument for that part of their case (and just to reiterate because I know it’s hard to read tone in posts... I’m not being sarcastic or trying to be condescending at all )

Okay back to the article I wanted to share!



> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex accuse royals of being 'jealous' and 'unfriendly' as Prince William says: 'We're separate entities'*
> 
> Victoria Ward
> Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex Credit: ADEL SENNA/AFP
> When the Duke of Sussex hinted at a rift with his brother in a television interview a few months back, many assumed - or perhaps hoped - that it was just a bump in the road.
> 
> Far from it. As the crisis engulfing the Royal Family has unfolded in recent days it has become increasingly clear, via a web of close friends and confidantes, that a much deeper, more damaging and even “poisonous” schism has taken root.
> 
> The danger now facing the Queen is that this bitter divide stretches beyond the two brothers to senior members of the family, with burning resentment on both sides.
> 
> Tom Bradby, the ITV journalist and a friend of both Princes, has made clear that relations became toxic a long time ago.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan,” he wrote in the Sunday Times, “find some other members of the family (with the exception of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh) jealous and, at times, unfriendly.
> 
> “The fallout began at the time of the wedding in 2018. Really damaging things were said and done. The atmosphere soured hard and early, but few meaningful attempts were made by anyone to heal the wounds.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Credit: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty
> Bradby said there was “no doubt” that the Sussexes felt they had been “driven out” of the Royal Family.
> 
> Indeed, he now believes that when he interviewed the couple in South Africa last autumn and they admitted they were struggling with life in the public eye, it was a cry for help from those closest to them.
> 
> The Sussexes had already been mulling over taking a bold move away from the institution and so took the opportunity to prepare the ground for what was to come, whilst also hoping their revelations might act as a catalyst for a significant change in the way they were treated.
> 
> Bradby, along with many others, assumed that when the Duchess tearfully revealed that “not many people” had asked if she was OK, it was a thinly veiled dig at her new British relations.
> 
> But if the decision to show their vulnerability was an attempt to instigate change, it failed.
> 
> Bradby said many people subsequently tried to persuade the couple to “take a deep breath and step back from the brink” but to little effect.
> 
> “My understanding is that William did try, but the impression I have, for the moment at least, is that things have gone too far to be retrieved,” he said.
> 
> The once inseparable brothers are now no longer simply forging separate paths.
> 
> The bespoke international role the Sussexes are determined to carve out for themselves could pitch them as celebrity rivals to the monarchy, harnessing their star power to generate wealth and attention for both themselves and their causes.
> 
> As one source told the Telegraph last year: “Harry has always complained about being sidelined by William but now I think they see this split as an opportunity to really spread their wings.”
> 
> As the family prepared for peace talks at Sandringham on Monday, the Duke of Cambridge appeared almost resigned to the fact that the brotherly bond had been catastrophically broken.
> 
> "I've put my arm around my brother all our lives and I can't do that any more; we're separate entities," he was quoted in the Sunday Times as having told a friend.
> 
> "I'm sad about that. All we can do, and all I can do, is try and support them and hope that the time comes when we're all singing from the same page. I want everyone to play on the team."
> 
> It is not just Prince William that the Sussexes appear to have fallen out with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles is flanked by his sons, Prince Harry and Prince William Credit: Alastair Grant/PA
> Bradby has made it clear that the couple believe they are on their own moral crusade against the Press, believing that the rest of the family ”kowtows to the media and plays the game” - the game of course, that the Duke believes killed his mother..
> 
> He singled out Prince Charles, whom he accuses of being particularly keen to “make sure the newspapers are on side.”
> 
> For his part, the heir to the throne is less than pleased with reports suggesting the Sussexes had been “forced out” of the family and were clearly not part of its future.
> 
> Prince Charles insists they have bent over backwards to give the couple what they have asked for, supporting their many endeavours and giving them the wedding, the house and the separate office that they wanted.
> 
> Matters between the Duke, his father and his brother have become so acrimonious that some in the Prince's household have even gone so far as to suggest that Prince Harry leaked his plans to step away from the Royal Family to The Sun last month himself, out of frustration that his father had not found a swifter solution.
> 
> Fuelling the toxic narrative, the Sussex’s allies have said they believe aides to Prince William or Prince Charles leaked details of the plan. Others have suggested it came from Sunshine Sachs, the New York-based PR company that has long worked for the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex Credit: MEGA
> It was the tabloid’s story outlining the Sussex’s radical plans that prompted them to release a “personal message” confirming their desire to “step back” and spend part of the year in north America.
> 
> That, in turn, caused the Royal Family to swing into action, keen to prevent the situation from becoming even worse and fully aware of the need to keep the couple onside.
> 
> As a result, urgent meetings were convened with courtiers from all four households as the Queen ordered them to find a solution “at pace”.
> 
> The aim is to sign off on a deal within days rather than weeks although aides stress that all sides agree any decision will take time to be implemented.
> 
> In a telling sign of how political and fraught the negotiations have become, Fiona Mcilwham, the Sussex’s new private secretary and a highly experienced diplomat who joined their team from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), last week reportedly joked to colleagues during the discussions: "I was offered the Iran desk (at the FCO). That might have been easier."
> 
> It has been clear to many who know them that trouble had been brewing in the Sussex camp for some time.
> 
> Insiders were concerned that Meghan was “on the brink" and that Prince Harry knew he needed to take swift action to ensure her happiness.
> 
> One suggested it had become worse recently and that it was clear life in the UK was not working out for the American actress.
> 
> She is said to have found the workings of the royal machine slow and repetitive and was desperate to take control of her own image and charity work - as she did so successfully before meeting Prince Harry.
> 
> The Duchess was also said to be unwilling to play second fiddle to her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, to whom she is not close.
> 
> While it is obvious the two women have different characters, some claim they have barely been in touch in recent months.
> 
> One report suggested yesterday that the two women had not spoken in more than six months after they severed all communication on a family WhatsApp group.
> 
> The frosty relations could date back as far as Christmas 2018, when the Sussexes chose to stay in the “big house” at Sandringham at Christmas rather than at Anmer Hall, the Cambridges’ Norfolk bolthole, where they had stayed the year before.
> 
> Soon after, it was announced that the two households were to split.
> 
> As the crunch meeting gets underway at Sandringham, all parties will be hoping for a swift resolution that will prevent any further damage to the beleaguered monarchy.


----------



## mshermes

With all of this going down in the manner that it is, I do not see how it could ever be possible for M to serve the RF in any capacity or show her face in the U.K.


----------



## mshermes

mdcx said:


> Oh this is from when Meghan showed up to Harry’s friends wedding as his “date” even he and his friends all thought they had broken up, I believe.
> ETA: Tom Inskip’s wedding.


Yep. That’s where they were taken. Now this is frightening.


----------



## mdcx

Some more photos from Tom Inskip’s wedding.Speculation is she was invited as Harry’s plus one but by time of wedding, Harry had broken up with her. She came anyway, in order to create photo ops of her and Harry as a couple:
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2...-wedding-partially-responsible-for-this-mess/


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her thirsty friend is pap strolling in a very discreet outfit.


----------



## mdcx

Also, I do all the shopping for our family and I really cannot imagine any circumstances under which I would buy _anything_ branded with “Sussex Royal”. I can’t imagine who would.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

mdcx said:


> Oh this is from when Meghan showed up to Harry’s friends wedding as his “date” even he and his friends all thought they had broken up, I believe.
> ETA: Tom Inskip’s wedding.



Yes here is a link to these pics plus more photos from the wedding



> Someone is advising her and it's not Michele ***** but probably Hillary *******.



There are some crazy comments and theories on this thread but this may be the winner!


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Also, I do all the shopping for our family and I really cannot imagine any circumstances under which I would buy _anything_ branded with “Sussex Royal”. I can’t imagine who would.


My friend got me this from London as a gag. I hate it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder, where do all the paranoia come from? "They" are jealous, "they" fed us to the wolves, "they" leaked plans that weren't even worked out to the press. I have a hard time believing the whole royal family is out to get them.


----------



## Lodpah

Aqua01 said:


> Her beauty is only skin deep. These pictures give me chills as to me they show her true personality.
> 
> View attachment 4638342
> View attachment 4638345


This is when she most likely invoked her voodoo. The nostrils, the splayed hands, with one hand showing the clawed symbol and the eyes.  I don't think she used a talisman on this one I believe she used either ancient olds practicing such as chanting, invoking/summoning and then allowed the demons to cast the spell on Harry in the Caribbean.  I wonder if she did the 3 day one or the 7 day one. 

I believe also this is when Harry was ignoring her. Think about it, she shows up unannounced at one of his games, was not that into her and them boom he's about to throw his family 
away for this?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder, where do all the paranoia come from? "They" are jealous, "they" fed us to the wolves, "they" leaked plans that weren't even worked out to the press. I have a hard time believing the whole royal family is out to get them.


It's not about racism, it's about a spoilt rotten d-list and narcissistic woman.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> My friend got me this from London as a gag. I hate it
> 
> View attachment 4638358
> View attachment 4638359


LOL! I adore your Catogram btw.


----------



## Aqua01

sdkitty said:


> to be fair, we don't have any context for the pics.  don't well all have our moments when we're frowning or irritated?


Oh, I agree and I would have thought the same if I haven't seen all the crap she pulled, all her shenanigans. Even in pictures where she's all smiley and acting sweet, there's something insincere, and dare I say, insidious about her.
She used her 1st husband, and now moved on to using Harry. 
She used her family, ditched them, and now is using Harry's family.
It's all about her, the classic story of a narcissist.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

I think they are both over estimating their popularity and star power, especially if they are known to be estranged from Charles and Will.  Harry's conversation with Bob Iger about Meghan doing voice over work was embarrassing.  You can see how taken aback Iger is. If this is the way they behave, Harry's media venture is going to go the way of Prince Edward's Ardent Productions:

_Ardent was liquidated in 2009 when it was left with assets of just £40.27. Investors who pumped £2.2 million into the company have been left with nothing.  When he launched the venture in 1993, the Earl  (Prince Edward) boasted that Ardent would become one of the country's leading production firms.  He was accused of abusing his position by making a string of programmes about the Royal Family, including a documentary about the restoration of Windsor Castle and a history of his great uncle, Edward VIII, called Edward on Edward._


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> LOL! I adore your Catogram btw.


Thank you! My absolute favorite collection. 

Let’s hope Meg doesn’t become an LV ambassador...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aqua01 said:


> Even in pictures where she's all smiley and acting sweet, there's something insincere, and dare I say, insidious about her.



The face she makes when trying to feign sympathy with the eyebrows raised to her hairline. So. Irritating. You'd think an actress could do better.


----------



## hellosunshine

* Prince William: Harry and I are now separate entities *




The Duke of Cambridge has expressed his sadness over tensions with his brother before Monday’s crisis summit at Sandringham called by the Queen to decide the future of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

The brothers are now “separate entities” but Prince William hopes matters can be resolved so the royal family can once more play as “a team”, according to reports.

William told a friend: “I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives and I can’t do that any more; we’re separate entities,” the Sunday Times reported.

William continued: “I’m sad about that. All we can do, and all I can do, is try and support them and hope that the time comes when we’re all singing from the same page. I want everyone to play on the same team.”

While senior royals have been talking on the phone since the crisis broke, the Queen has been in Norfolk, Charles has been at Birkhall in Aberdeenshire, William at Kensington Palace, and Harry at Windsor.

Monday’s meeting will be an opportunity for them to discuss proposals drawn up after a series of consultations between palace officials and representatives of the UK and Canadian governments about how Meghan and Harry can achieve their aim of carving out new “progressive” roles as hybrid royals.

William’s reported comments on the growing distance between the brothers reflects those made by Harry in an ITV documentary in November. In it, Harry told ITV’s Tom Bradby that the brothers were on “different paths” . Bradby, who is considered a friend of the Sussexes, has since spoken of a “toxic” relationship between the couple and the rest of the family, and said that they feel “driven out”.

Harry and Meghan also hope talks can be concluded “sooner rather than later”, according to a source. “It’s in everyone’s interest this can be figured out, and figured out quickly, but not at the expense of the outcome,” the source said.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/12/prince-william-harry-and-i-are-now-separate-entities



Oh, please.  William and his hairline are separate entities. I would say he should worry about his own problems and stop talking to the press. My god...


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> She actually had a niece I think 12 years old who adored her "Aunty" and had nothing bad to say about her "Aunty" Meg. I don't know about anyone but I have some relatives I don't get along with but I DO have some that I adore and simply love getting together with.


I haven't stayed close to many relatives (really none except my sister and we're not super close).  But I'm sure I could find someone to come to my wedding if I were marrying basically the most famous prince in the world.

I have to think royal or not, Harry's family must have wondered about this too.  But she was who harry wanted so they welcomed her.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> She wants to go to the Oscars and the Golden Globes and the Vanity Fair parties. She wants a beach house in Malibu. She wants to be on a first name basis with the A list, which she couldn't ever do on her own, while building some kind of media/charity empire on the back of SussexRoyal and the titles.  We'll see how long Harry lasts if they do move there.


It's like a little girl's fantasy.  It they come here with the taint of disgrace, them it will be crickets.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Oh, please.  William and his hairline are separate entities. I would say he should worry about his own problems and stop talking to the press. My god...


----------



## Jaxion

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder, where do all the paranoia come from? "They" are jealous, "they" fed us to the wolves, "they" leaked plans that weren't even worked out to the press. I have a hard time believing the whole royal family is out to get them.


The paranoia is something Prince Harry probably has had since he was a kid that he inherited from his mother. She was famously paranoid about the family both during the marriage and after, like when she rejected royal protection services and instead got private security because she thought the royal services would spy on her. Some of it was understandable but like most things her mistake was that she took it too far. 

Harry seems like he never matured on his view of his mother. Like if someone came up to Harry and told him that his mother leaked stories to the tabloids and paps and sometimes exaggerated stories to make herself look better, which is something well documented, would he believe that about his mother? Prince William certainly would believe it because he was old enough to understand and see that she wasn't perfect and had some faults.

So of course he would still think she was 100% right in her extreme paranoia.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> It's like a little girl's fantasy.  It they come here with the taint of disgrace, them it will be crickets.



Oh yeah, if they are seen as being on the outs with the Queen and Charles and Will, they'd be curiosities for awhile and then nothing.

She actually could make a difference if she tried out the "boring" duties that she and Harry apparently aren't interested in: opening the senior centers and attending the memorial services and other such events.  Those events have meaning to the people involved.  If she was truly interested in becoming British and embracing the UK, these type events would be a great way to get to know the country and its people and she'd have an impact on every single person she stopped and spoke with, and she barely gave herself a chance to do any of them.


----------



## lulu212121

mrsinsyder said:


> My friend got me this from London as a gag. I hate it
> 
> View attachment 4638358
> View attachment 4638359


At least you got a close up picture of Archie!


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> Oh yeah, if they are seen as being on the outs with the Queen and Charles and Will, they'd be curiosities for awhile and then nothing.
> 
> She actually could make a difference if she tried out the "boring" duties that she and Harry apparently aren't interested in: opening the senior centers and attending the memorial services and other such events.  Those events have meaning to the people involved.  If she was truly interested in becoming British and embracing the UK, these type events would be a great way to get to know the country and its people and she'd have an impact on every single person she stopped and spoke with, and she barely gave herself a chance to do any of them.


I think she had a plan from Day One, and becoming British and embracing the UK was never part of it.  Btw, your avatar?  Best.One.Ever.


----------



## mdcx

Wtf? Every man and his dog understands  that “knowing your place” is the most critical aspect of being in the BRF:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rkle-feel-forced-BULLYING-Prince-William.html


----------



## youngster

1LV said:


> I think she had a plan from Day One, and becoming British and embracing the UK was never part of it.  *Btw, your avatar?  Best.One.Ever*.



Heehee, thanks!  I love cats. I really like dogs too but we ended up with a couple of kitties.


----------



## baghagg

Lodpah said:


> Someone is advising her and it's not Michele ***** but probably Hillary *******.



Of course, let's blame HC for this debacle too  SMH...


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> I think it would be obvious Hollywood was her ultimate goal. She left a D-list celebrity and now since marrying H, she is A-list. I am sure she is getting attention from people who would never have given her a second glance 3 or 4 years ago and she wants the attention.



Well OK, I can see what you're saying, but...that's like marrying a King's BROTHER, living a gazzillionaire's life, enjoying top shelf International Royal perks, to then give THAT up to get back into mud wrestling.  (IMO)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> He must be a psychic then, because everything he warns Harry about is coming to fruition.



Can't argue with that


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> I never read this before and to say I am shocked is an understatement.  He may not have had frequent contact with her, but he certainly had her number.  I really have to ask, is it a habit of the Markle family to make copies of correspondence?



If I were sending such correspondence, I'd copy it, even if I didn't do it to anyone else.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> and I could never understand how she had not one presentable relative other than her mother to invite to the wedding.....not a cousin?  not an aunt or an uncle?  even if her relationship with her half siblings wasn't good, you'd think there would have been some other relatives.  you don't have to be super close to be invited to a wedding



Especially when the family you're marrying into is already forking out 50 million for the wedding.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Also, I do all the shopping for our family and I really cannot imagine any circumstances under which I would buy _anything_ branded with “Sussex Royal”. I can’t imagine who would.


I can


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Speculation she has either left Canada for LA, or to another location already. Life on the run, it must be exhausting.

"Rumour going around the airport Friday was that Meghan had returned to the area to pick up her eight-month-old son, Archie, and was heading to Los Angeles to see her mother, according to an airport volunteer.

Meghan was reportedly spotted at the Sidney Pier Hotel Friday morning, but the hotel did not respond to a request to confirm the sighting."

https://vancouversun.com/news/local...val-victoria-airport-confirms-amid-royal-buzz


----------



## Straight-Laced

youngster said:


> Oh yeah, if they are seen as being on the outs with the Queen and Charles and Will, they'd be curiosities for awhile and then nothing.
> 
> *She actually could make a difference if she tried out the "boring" duties that she and Harry apparently aren't interested in: opening the senior centers and attending the memorial services and other such events.  Those events have meaning to the people involved.  If she was truly interested in becoming British and embracing the UK, these type events would be a great way to get to know the country and its people and she'd have an impact on every single person she stopped and spoke with, and she barely gave herself a chance to do any of them*.



@youngster I'm enjoying your thoughtful and well written posts in this thread!
I think you are being far too kind, decent, reasonable, understanding and logical when it comes to Meghan and her behaviour as Duchess of Sussex. She was never going to carry out boring BRF duties because *DUTY* doesn't figure in Meghan's world, even though it should have in her position as Duchess of Sussex.

She really is the operator that she appears to be.
And this is a smash 'n' grab operation - by both Harry & Meghan.
Right now Meghan is apparently sweating it out in their preferred transit country Canada (I mean no offence Canada, but we all know now it's just a comfortable and familiar Commonwealth stepping stone back to the US) waiting with the innocent Archie for Harry to do their dirty work and make his getaway with all the 'loot' they want for their new life.

Who knows what she'll do next because it depends on the outcome of this crisis meeting or series of meetings as Harry tries to partially extract his Sussex Royal brand from the duty bound, golden clutches of his birth family.


----------



## mrsinsyder

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Speculation she has either left Canada for LA, or to another location already. Life on the run, it must be exhausting.
> 
> "Rumour going around the airport Friday was that Meghan had returned to the area to pick up her eight-month-old son, Archie, and was heading to Los Angeles to see her mother, according to an airport volunteer.
> 
> Meghan was reportedly spotted at the Sidney Pier Hotel Friday morning, but the hotel did not respond to a request to confirm the sighting."
> 
> https://vancouversun.com/news/local...val-victoria-airport-confirms-amid-royal-buzz



What a great image for the papers, her and Doria pushing a stroller with sad faces.


----------



## Straight-Laced

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Speculation she has either left Canada for LA, or to another location already. Life on the run, it must be exhausting.
> 
> "Rumour going around the airport Friday was that Meghan had returned to the area to pick up her eight-month-old son, Archie, and was heading to Los Angeles to see her mother, according to an airport volunteer.
> 
> Meghan was reportedly spotted at the Sidney Pier Hotel Friday morning, but the hotel did not respond to a request to confirm the sighting."
> 
> https://vancouversun.com/news/local...val-victoria-airport-confirms-amid-royal-buzz


This would not surprise me one bit  
She plays very dirty.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4638381


Oh is harrys bald spot better?


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## mrsinsyder

Some of the comments are suggesting that Meg gave H an ultimatum... me or the family, hence the ring off and “fleeing” with Archie.


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> Some of the comments are suggesting that Meg gave H an ultimatum... me or the family, hence the ring off and “fleeing” with Archie.


This whole thing is a real crap shoot on her behalf. I would be willing to bet that this will not turn out well for her. It's quite obvious that from the git go she had to know she could not show her face in the UK again. So......hence an ultimatum. Poor Archie!


----------



## Grande Latte

youngster said:


> Oh yeah, if they are seen as being on the outs with the Queen and Charles and Will, they'd be curiosities for awhile and then nothing.
> 
> She actually could make a difference if she tried out the "boring" duties that she and Harry apparently aren't interested in: opening the senior centers and attending the memorial services and other such events.  Those events have meaning to the people involved.  If she was truly interested in becoming British and embracing the UK, these type events would be a great way to get to know the country and its people and she'd have an impact on every single person she stopped and spoke with, and she barely gave herself a chance to do any of them.



She doesn't want to. All she thinks about is HERSELF. She wants to be rich, rich, rich on the backs of the BRF.


----------



## scrpo83

Roxanna said:


> Just came to my mind why Harry did not commission tiara especially M  for their wedding?
> He obviously wanted her to have something what she wanted, then why he did not gave  it to her himself?  I wonder was there any restrictions or limitations that prevented him doing something like that.



Yeah there is a limitation..money..☺️ he had no problem commissioning her engagement ring because he already had the stone for it but commissioning an entirely new tiara maybe a bit much for Harry to swallow since Charles obviously won't pay for it..


----------



## Straight-Laced

If true that Meghan has left for LA with Archie then it likely means that she’s heard that negotiations aren’t going the Sussex way and she’s applying A LOT of pressure to Harry, who’s already ragged; she’s over and out already and given up on Harry ; or they’ve both given in to BRF family (for the time being perhaps) and are taking another break together in LA to get their tish together while working towards another plan more palatable to the BRF and less punishing for the Sussexes ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I'm surprised she left Harry by himself...if she's as calculating and manipulative as everyone seems to agree she is I would have thought she would have decided to stay close to counteract any influence his family could still have on him.


----------



## Grande Latte

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm surprised she left Harry by himself...if she's as calculating and manipulative as everyone seems to agree she is I would have thought she would have decided to stay close to counteract any influence his family could still have on him.



Are you kidding me? 

With her in a different continent with baby Archie, she's manipulating Harry to carry out all her demands to the royal family, all the while appearing as if Harry has full control of the situation.  Harry is a puppet.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Grande Latte said:


> Are you kidding me?
> 
> With her in a different continent with baby Archie, she's manipulating Harry to carry out all her demands to the royal family, all the while appearing as if Harry has full control of the situation.  Harry is a puppet.



Exactly. Imagine how Harry has to feel right now. His son is halfway around the world. He’s isolated from his family. It’s terrible.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I just read that the Queen’s stylist and BFF Angela Kelly is now joining the summit. 

Between protective William, Prince Phillip in the next room, and now her BFF (who never trusted Meghan to borrow significant family heirlooms) joining the summit, it looks like Gan-Gan is not taking those blackmail threats lightly.

It also sounds like they are smart enough to not trust Meghan to not record the summit via speaker phone. Hence why now the leaks suggest Harry will be texting her, versus a full phone conference.

I don’t think they’ll drop the hammer completely on Harry but... Gan-Gan isn’t going to be bullied by her petulant grandson when she has given him a pretty privileged upbringing.

I still cannot believe the nerve. His grandma was walking through the rubble during the Blitz. She saved her ration coupons for the fabric for her wedding dress.

And it’s unacceptable for him to not get a multi-million dollar allowance while playing Instagram influencer?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Grande Latte said:


> Are you kidding me?
> 
> With her in a different continent with baby Archie, she's manipulating Harry to carry out all her demands to the royal family, all the while appearing as if Harry has full control of the situation.  Harry is a puppet.



I wasn't kidding. 

I think leaving him alone with his family is a risk if he is truly "torn"  as the report indicates above.


----------



## Katel

mrsinsyder said:


> Her thirsty friend is pap strolling in a very discreet outfit.
> 
> View attachment 4638357



haha and with her name on her arm in case we missed it lol.


----------



## sgj99

mshermes said:


> With all of this going down in the manner that it is, I do not see how it could ever be possible for M to serve the RF in any capacity or show her face in the U.K.



very much like the Duchess of Windsor


----------



## Grande Latte

Gimmethebag said:


> I just read that the Queen’s stylist and BFF Angela Kelly is now joining the summit.
> 
> Between protective William, Prince Phillip in the next room, and now her BFF (who never trusted Meghan to borrow significant family heirlooms) joining the summit, it looks like Gan-Gan is not taking those blackmail threats lightly.
> 
> It also sounds like they are smart enough to not trust Meghan to not record the summit via speaker phone. Hence why now the leaks suggest Harry will be texting her, via a full phone conference.
> 
> I don’t think they’ll drop the hammer completely on Harry but... Gan-Gan isn’t going to be bullied by her petulant grandson when she has given him a pretty privileged upbringing.
> 
> I still cannot believe the nerve. His grandma was walking through the rubble during the Blitz. She saved her ration coupons for the fabric for her wedding dress.
> 
> And it’s unacceptable for him to not get a multi-million dollar allowance while playing Instagram influencer?



No one plays the Queen or the BRF, using Harry as a puppet. That's what's so delusional about Meghan. Which is why I insist she has some sort of psychosis. I call her a true narcissist.


----------



## Grande Latte

The only way to deal with a narcissist is to completely disengage.....
Even if it means losing Harry/ Archie. Just drop this weakling before Meghan thinks of more ways to sink the British Empire.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Speculation she has either left Canada for LA, or to another location already. Life on the run, it must be exhausting.
> 
> "Rumour going around the airport Friday was that Meghan had returned to the area to pick up her eight-month-old son, Archie, and was heading to Los Angeles to see her mother, according to an airport volunteer.
> 
> Meghan was reportedly spotted at the Sidney Pier Hotel Friday morning, but the hotel did not respond to a request to confirm the sighting."
> 
> https://vancouversun.com/news/local...val-victoria-airport-confirms-amid-royal-buzz



Omg, MM is not going to LA to visit her mother!!! Are you kidding?

We have East and West homes and in LA, especially if you are in the business, it’s meetings, baby!!!

MM is hustling, things have turned suddenly sour - I’m sure she is reading all of the press and she is getting all her ducks, ie $$$$$ in order so she can tell Harry tomorrow, “hey babe, we don’t need THEM, ie the BRF, look how many meetings are planned and Hollywood is waiting for us. Oh btw I just saw the most beautiful house in Bel Air, hurry back to Archie and me”.

It’s a shame but with that said, I hope at tomorrow’s meeting at least ONE person in the BRF family will  voice that PH & MM should be stripped of all titles, funding, etc and be kicked to the curb. 

They, esp  MM were offered a privilege- to do some good in this world - and to see this opportunity left with dirty, money grabbing hands all over it, is quite frankly sickening to me.

If QEII decides to fund PH & MM’s lifestyle on another continent, doing only what pleases themselves, I think the citizens of the UK are going to have a very difficult time with it.

Especially since both, esp PH gave a blatant middle finger to their Queen, maybe some people blame MM exclusively but to my mind PH is even more F-Ed up.


----------



## mshermes

I really would have very little interest in this whole mess, other than sheer rubber necking, if it were not for that baby.  I think the poor kid is not much more than a pawn in her eyes.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm surprised she left Harry by himself...if she's as calculating and manipulative as everyone seems to agree she is I would have thought she would have decided to stay close to counteract any influence his family could still have on him.


Unless she's already checked out of the marriage. This is not something a new wife and mother would do, is it? - up and leave her husband to another country for days on end while he deals with the family and country fallout. I think Harry's been dumped, or given a choice. Too bad she hates her dad, she could have kept Mexico as an option for future exiles.


----------



## Jaxion

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I wasn't kidding.
> 
> I think leaving him alone with his family is a risk if he is truly "torn"  as the report indicates above.


Maybe she's just overconfident? She probably trusts that she's done enough to keep him onside. He's been her willing participant and enabler so far, he's deeply in this mode of  'What Meghans wants, Meghan Gets!' 

I think to a certain extent a lot of this is what he always wanted too, it was just a more hidden side of him before Meghan came onto the scene.


----------



## baghagg

mshermes said:


> I really would have very little interest in this whole mess, other than sheer rubber necking, if it were not for that baby.  I think the poor kid is not much more than a pawn in her eyes.


True narcissists have _attachments only_ to their offspring, not love. So, yes, pawn also applies unfortunately.  
TBH, MM has probably grown bored of her role (pun intended) in BP, probably longs for better weather and more attention/worship (media, social media, etc), and wants to "earn" her own money for a "rainy day" (which is always looming when divorce is part of the daily/weekly/monthly dialogue).  She's definitely got her eye on the bigger picture.  PH may have selected her in the same way she selected him - she possesses the crazy it takes to pull away from his fam.  Perhaps they're a match made in ...


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> She actually could make a difference if she tried out the "boring" duties that she and Harry apparently aren't interested in: opening the senior centers and attending the memorial services and other such events.  Those events have meaning to the people involved.  If she was truly interested in becoming British and embracing the UK, these type events would be a great way to get to know the country and its people and she'd have an impact on every single person she stopped and spoke with, and she barely gave herself a chance to do any of them.


I always look at the faces when a royal attends one of their events and the people are beaming. Everyone has the biggest smile on their faces.  It's an easy crowd! They already love them and are so happy to be in their presence.  They don't have to win anyone over.

I'm surprised that isn't a huge deal for Meg.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Straight-Laced said:


> @youngster I'm enjoying your thoughtful and well written posts in this thread!
> I think you are being far too kind, decent, reasonable, understanding and logical when it comes to Meghan and her behaviour as Duchess of Sussex. She was never going to carry out boring BRF duties because *DUTY* doesn't figure in Meghan's world, even though it should have in her position as Duchess of Sussex.



Thanks!  When I first read about them dating, I figured it was a short affair.  When they got engaged, I was surprised. I thought he could do better than a divorced, American TV actress with horrible relatives and a history of ghosting people but, hey, she had potential.  College education from a very fine school, very attractive, used to public speaking, used to some level of dealing with the press, and I love a good royal wedding. I've always been fond of Harry and wanted him to be happy.  He seemed like he'd really turned a corner and was really doing well.  So, OK, give her a chance and hopefully she's ready for this new chapter of her life and will throw herself into it.  I thought she was smart enough to realize what an amazing turn her life took, and work really hard at embracing it and a new country_.  _


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> I always look at the faces when a royal attends one of their events and the people are beaming. Everyone has the biggest smile on their faces.  It's an easy crowd! They already love them and are so happy to be in their presence.  They don't have to win anyone over.
> 
> I'm surprised that isn't a huge deal for Meg.



Exactly. I thought she'd eat this up, as an actress.  As a member of the royal family, she'd always be guaranteed a pretty big crowd.  People are excited to see them and appreciate that they show up.


----------



## threadbender

Poor Archie. That little boy doesn't stand a chance.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> But it was oka for these people to wrangle a wedding invite from someone they barely know and sit in the posh seats. My god, people who have known Harry for a long time ie the Beckhams, Elton John and personal close friends had to slum it in the "cheap seats" with the riff raff.
> I despair, I really do. How This will end I'll never know?


well if Oprah had a better seat than some other people, that would have been done by the wedding planners, not by Oprah....I doubt she demanded to be in the front row


----------



## mdcx

Pap shot of Megs wearing yoga tights on a coffee run in LA in 3, 2, 1...
Not wearing her rings, obviously!


----------



## Aqua01

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Unless she's already checked out of the marriage. This is not something a new wife and mother would do, is it? - up and leave her husband to another country for days on end while he deals with the family and country fallout. *I think Harry's been dumped, or given a choice. *Too bad she hates her dad, she could have kept Mexico as an option for future exiles.


I haven't thought of this, but it would perfectly explain the "no ring" pictures of hers, and the articles saying that Harry feels torn about leaving his family, his country.
If this is true, MM is right now blackmailing her husband, who in turn is going to blackmail his  grandma/family.
Jesus, this stinks to high heaven.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lodpah said:


> Iran has arrested the UK ambassador, which is major and the country needs to focus on its internal issues and Meghan is center stage. Meghan is loving, loving the attention. I believe her family now. Her father, bless his heart and I know he's no angel but he got played by his own daughter. If she can do that to her own father, imagine the deceitfulness of her soul. Harry is not innocent either. Either he's PW or Meghan has a hold on him with some sort of voodoo (yes it does occur and side eye me all you want) but it's been practiced in many many countries.
> 
> What got me is her cunning way of leaving Archie in Canada. Someone is advising her and it's not Michele ***** but probably Hillary *******. I read above the connections to all the parties.


You might be right about the *******s.  They uncovered the owner of the waterfront home in Canada... he is a personal friend of the *******s who gave over 20 million to Hilary's campaign and traveled to Russia with Bill *******. Also besties with David Foster.
Story: https://pagesix.com/2020/01/12/cana...-luxe-hideout-for-prince-harry-meghan-markle/


----------



## gracekelly

Grande Latte said:


> Are you kidding me?
> 
> With her in a different continent with baby Archie, she's manipulating Harry to carry out all her demands to the royal family, all the while appearing as if Harry has full control of the situation.  Harry is a puppet.


Perfect summation.


----------



## youngster

Meghan not ever making any effort towards obtaining UK citizenship is making more sense now. I didn't understand why she hadn't done that. It would have been a natural step in a new life.

An exit strategy already thought out maybe?  It might possibly give her some extra negotiating power regarding custody of Archie if she is not a UK citizen too?


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You might be right about the *******s.  They uncovered the owner of the waterfront home in Canada... he is a personal friend of the *******s who gave over 20 million to Hilary's campaign and traveled to Russia with Bill *******. Also besties with David Foster.
> Story: https://pagesix.com/2020/01/12/cana...-luxe-hideout-for-prince-harry-meghan-markle/


The billionaire was born in Sudbury, Ontario (Canada) -- he's not Russian.  Why was that reported, I wonder.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Jayne1 said:


> The billionaire was born in Sudbury, Ontario (Canada) -- he's not Russian.  Why was that reported, I wonder.



Read how he amassed his fortune.


----------



## joyeaux

mdcx said:


> Pap shot of Megs wearing yoga tights on a coffee run in LA in 3, 2, 1...
> Not wearing her *redesigned to meet Megspifications *rings, obviously!



Fixed that for you!


----------



## threadbender

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You might be right about the *******s.  They uncovered the owner of the waterfront home in Canada... he is a personal friend of the *******s who gave over 20 million to Hilary's campaign and traveled to Russia with Bill *******. Also besties with David Foster.
> Story: https://pagesix.com/2020/01/12/cana...-luxe-hideout-for-prince-harry-meghan-markle/


He has issued a statement saying he is not the owner and is not affiliated with HM.


----------



## hellosunshine

ccbaggirl89 said:


> They uncovered the owner of the waterfront home in Canada... he is a personal friend of the *******s who gave over 20 million to Hilary's campaign and traveled to Russia with Bill *******. Also besties with David Foster.
> Story: https://pagesix.com/2020/01/12/cana...-luxe-hideout-for-prince-harry-meghan-markle/


----------



## BigPurseSue

According to normal standards Harry and his wife are already financially independent. Meghan according to the financial press is worth $6.5 million from her role in Suits and continues to receive substantial residuals. She was a very wealthy women even before she married Harry. Harry inherited $9 million from his mother's estate and apparently is in line to receive more money from the Spencers. True the bulk of their annual income comes from Prince Charles, and the British taxpayers are soaked for necessities like Frogmore home improvements, but even if those funds are withdrawn it's not like the couple will be living in a ranch house in Winnipeg, shoveling neighbors' snow to make ends meet. Or so we hope.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Yes here is a link to these pics plus more photos from the wedding
> 
> 
> 
> There are some crazy comments and theories on this thread but this may be the winner![/QUOTE





hellosunshine said:


>



in other words: The trust owns the house and it was David Foster who contacted me.

It’s all in the wording. He’s right.


----------



## Gimmethebag

BigPurseSue said:


> According to normal standards Harry and his wife are already financially independent. Meghan according to the financial press is worth $6.5 million from her role in Suits and continues to receive substantial residuals. She was a very wealthy women even before she married Harry. Harry inherited $9 million from his mother's estate and apparently is in line to receive more money from the Spencers. True the bulk of their annual income comes from Prince Charles, and the British taxpayers are soaked for necessities like Frogmore home improvements, but even if those funds are withdrawn it's not like the couple will be living in a ranch house in Winnipeg, shoveling neighbors' snow to make ends meet. Or so we hope.



Yep, so it's odd that they are asking for an allowance from his elderly father and 90-something-year-old grandmother. 

They have a safety net to pay their bills while they transition to suitable work like Peter Phillips, Zara Tindell, Beatrice (she works in finance in NYC - security privately paid for) or Eugenie (art gallery). 

Charles also offered Harry a working estate away from the paparazzi as an outright gift, where they could own land and receive an income from it, but Harry and Meghan turned it down.


----------



## V0N1B2

hellosunshine said:


>



I was very surprised to hear Frank Giustra owned that home in North Saanich, and initially didn't believe it anyway.  He is well-known in certain circles around here - mostly for his involvement with charities and would have absolutely no reason to hide the fact that he owns the property.  I understand the owner of the North Saanich property has purposely hidden his ownership by purchasing the house in the name of or through shares of ownership in a Country Club or something. Kind of a way to wash his cash I assume, something Giustra wouldn't need to do.  He has been a very successful businessman here.
Besides, he already has almost the same house in West Van with basically the same views so no need to duplicate 
My money is still on this Yuri Milner guy...


----------



## BigPurseSue

Gimmethebag said:


> Yep, so it's odd that they are asking for an allowance from his elderly father and 90-something-year-old grandmother.
> 
> They have a safety net to pay their bills while they transition to suitable work like Peter Phillips, Zara Tindell, Beatrice (she works in finance in NYC - security privately paid for) or Eugenie (art gallery).
> 
> Charles also offered Harry a working estate away from the paparazzi as an outright gift, where they could own land and receive an income from it, but Harry and Meghan turned it down.



I've read that it will be very difficult for the couple to scale back their opulent lifestyle. But you can't have it both ways--a clean break from the royal family while still getting an allowance to maintain the lifestyle of a royal. Not to mention the taxpayer-funded Frogmore house. Perhaps Harry thinks the allowances are due to him as a future heir to the family fortune. But it's all just wild speculation at this point. A close friend of Harry's wrote an essay in the British press in which he claimed it was the poisonous, back-stabbing politics of the royal family which drove Harry and his wife out.


----------



## wisconsin

youngster said:


> Thanks!  When I first read about them dating, I figured it was a short affair.  When they got engaged, I was surprised. I thought he could do better than a divorced, American TV actress with horrible relatives and a history of ghosting people but, hey, she had potential.  College education from a very fine school, very attractive, used to public speaking, used to some level of dealing with the press, and I love a good royal wedding. I've always been fond of Harry and wanted him to be happy.  He seemed like he'd really turned a corner and was really doing well.  So, OK, give her a chance and hopefully she's ready for this new chapter of her life and will throw herself into it.  I thought she was smart enough to realize what an amazing turn her life took, and work really hard at embracing it and a new country_.  _



So true.
How wrong we were to expect grace and maturity from her.
I am truly saddened.


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> Meghan not ever making any effort towards obtaining UK citizenship is making more sense now. I didn't understand why she hadn't done that. It would have been a natural step in a new life.
> 
> An exit strategy already thought out maybe?  It might possibly give her some extra negotiating power regarding custody of Archie if she is not a UK citizen too?


I believe you need 3 or 5 year residency in the UK before you apply for citizenship. There’s nothing she can do until she has been there for that period of time. 

Not sure if Archie is granted citizenship automatically by being born there, or having one parent being British. 

Not sure either if he’s entitled to American citizenship by virtue of Meghan being American either.


----------



## Sol Ryan

BigPurseSue said:


> I've read that it will be very difficult for the couple to scale back their opulent lifestyle. But you can't have it both ways--a clean break from the royal family while still getting an allowance to maintain the lifestyle of a royal. Not to mention the taxpayer-funded Frogmore house. Perhaps Harry thinks the allowances are due to him as a future heir to the family fortune. But it's all just wild speculation at this point. A close friend of Harry's wrote an essay in the British press in which he claimed it was the poisonous, back-stabbing politics of the royal family which drove Harry and his wife out.



I’ve been lurking here for a long time, but if Harry feels his family’s money is so toxic, he should be man enough to walk away from it, the house the family is providing to them and the titles... anything else is just whiny complaining... it makes him sound like a weak chump... “You’re toxic, but still support me and my wife and kid because I’m not man enough to do it on my own even with the millions of starter money we have in the bank”

I used to like Harry. He was the fun one. Didn’t have a clue who she was, but I was willing to give her a chance until Eugenie’s wedding, where I thought she was extremely disrespectful with the weird pregnancy clothes and announcement taking the spotlight from Eugenie so quickly. It’s just tacky. 

Harry’s lectures about how regular people should travel less so he can got on more private jet trips was the end of my patience with him. I mean I guess he feels he’s more important than the people he was supposed to be serving.

They want out great I fully support them leaving if that’s what they want, but I don’t think the Family or the British/Canadian taxpayers should have to take care of them. If the British people aren’t getting any work from them, why should they have to support them?

Also, I liked the screenshot above where they plan to move to LA after ***** leaves office, hope they’ve planned for 4 more years in Canada... because with our luck that’s probably what’s gonna happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I wasn't kidding.
> 
> I think leaving him alone with his family is a risk if he is truly "torn"  as the report indicates above.



True, but she might have simply miscalculated that. She thought she had him by the ... and is keeping his baby hostage so that should be enough. I don't think someone like her with no real ties to anyone can understand how being part of the royal family is so deeply ingrained in him.


----------



## Sharont2305

mshermes said:


> I really would have very little interest in this whole mess, other than sheer rubber necking, if it were not for that baby.  I think the poor kid is not much more than a pawn in her eyes.


I think most women who find out they are pregnant are like "omg, I'm pregnant, we're having a baby" with tears of joy. I feel Meghan's initial response was "yes, I got them, this secures everything."


----------



## myown

sdkitty said:


> but I think what people are saying is there's a right and wrong way to go about escaping the "cage"


Definitely!


----------



## myown

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Can't put all the blame on Meghan for the Disney deal. TMZ has a video where Harry gets her the Disney job
> 
> "Resurfaced video from this past July appears to show PH chatting it up with Bob Iger at the '"Lion King" premiere in London -- during which he seems to say, "You know she does voice-overs?" to a genuinely surprised Iger who responds with, "Oh really? Ah ..."
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/12/prin...disney-bob-iger/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange


Searched for someone who posted that! 

as I said, it is possible that Harry is the puppetmaster


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

myown said:


> as I said, it is possible that Harry is the puppetmaster



Sure, but there is literally no footage of him pushing in front of her or pushing her aside (even pushing his ellbow into her ribs) to get to an important person first, talking over her, making a fool of her in public, yanking her hand when she wants to let go, telling her where to stand, to sit down etc. but there's plenty of MM doing exactly that. Also plenty of moments caught on film when she wouldn't get her way and her Hollywood smile was gone until she got herself together again...even during their freaking wedding ceremony. That's just not normal.


----------



## myown

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but there is literally no footage of him pushing in front of her or pushing her aside (even pushing his ellbow into her ribs) to get to an important person first, talking over her, making a fool of her in public, yanking her hand when she wants to let go, telling her where to stand, to sit down etc. but there's plenty of MM doing exactly that. Also plenty of moments caught on film when she wouldn't get her way and her Hollywood smile was gone until she got herself together again...even during their freaking wedding ceremony. That's just not normal.


Let me first say, I agree with you.


But some manipulator push their victims in front of them.


ETA But well yes, the ellbow things speaks for her


----------



## arnott

BigPurseSue said:


> According to normal standards Harry and his wife are already financially independent. Meghan according to the financial press is worth $6.5 million from her role in Suits and continues to receive substantial residuals. She was a very wealthy women even before she married Harry. Harry inherited $9 million from his mother's estate and apparently is in line to receive more money from the Spencers. True the bulk of their annual income comes from Prince Charles, and the British taxpayers are soaked for necessities like Frogmore home improvements, but even if those funds are withdrawn *it's not like the couple will be living in a ranch house in Winnipeg, shoveling neighbors' snow to make ends meet. Or so we hope. *



Hey, that's where my Auntie lives, and she loves shovelling snow!


----------



## myown

Gimmethebag said:


> Yep, so it's odd that they are asking for an allowance from his elderly father and 90-something-year-old grandmother.
> 
> They have a safety net to pay their bills while they transition to suitable work like Peter Phillips, Zara Tindell, Beatrice (she works in finance in NYC - security privately paid for) or Eugenie (art gallery).
> 
> Charles also offered Harry a working estate away from the paparazzi as an outright gift, where they could own land and receive an income from it, but Harry and Meghan turned it down.


It could have been so easy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BigPurseSue

arnott said:


> Hey, that's where my Auntie lives, and she loves shovelling snow!



I'm moving next door to your Auntie ASP.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I wonder, where do all the paranoia come from?* "They" are jealous, "they" fed us to the wolves, "they" leaked plans that weren't even worked out to the press. I have a hard time believing the whole royal family is out to get them.


Drugs?


----------



## RAINDANCE

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m sure it’s no coincidence the queen wore a very visible hearing aid for the first time today. I love how she can do subtle shade



... and went to Church with her real Canadian granddaughter-in-law Autumn Phillips.


----------



## mdcx

So, she really is making Harry choose between his brother William and her.
MM strikes me as someone who thinks grand gestures prove someone’s love, as opposed to day to day, lifelong loyalty and support.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ueen-gathers-Royals-Megxit-crisis-summit.html




ETA I think that someone saying a firm “No” to Meghan on more than one occasion probably equates to bullying in her mind.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but there is literally no footage of him pushing in front of her or pushing her aside (even pushing his ellbow into her ribs) to get to an important person first, talking over her, making a fool of her in public, yanking her hand when she wants to let go, telling her where to stand, to sit down etc. but there's plenty of MM doing exactly that. Also plenty of moments caught on film when she wouldn't get her way and her Hollywood smile was gone until she got herself together again...even during their freaking wedding ceremony. That's just not normal.


Totally agree with you. It was very annoying


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> ... and went to Church with her real Canadian granddaughter-in-law Autumn Phillips.


And wore feathers on her hat like Catherine did last week


----------



## duna

carmen56 said:


> Speaking as a Brit, the Government would probably go along with whatever HMQ decides, albeit with some dissenters who would speak out.  As far as the public is concerned, I think there would be outrage, I would certainly be outraged if they kept their titles, monetary handouts and security detail.



ITA, as a Brit I would be outraged too!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> ETA I think that someone saying a firm “No” to Meghan on more than one occasion probably equates to bullying in her mind.



Just sharing from my experience, if my narcisstic mother is not met with pure adoration and subservient answers, the screaming and tears set in because "Don't yell at me" (nobody yelled, it was just a firm no to an outrageous idea), "How dare you treat me like this" or even better "I won't be treated like this by anyone, you all have bullied me for years!" (nobody has ever, it's just as you say, if it's not 100% agreement and fawning it's bullying to her) and depending on the day seasoned with threats about something a normal person would not even blink an eye over.


----------



## doni

.


duna said:


> ITA, as a Brit I would be outraged too!!!



I wonder, just how dangerous for the Crown all this is going to be. And on top of the Andrew affair too... If they conclude something that satisfies Harry but that the British public finds outrageous (Harry is already sinking in popularity ratings) and then something would happen to the Queen... who’s looking great but she is in her 90s... Charles is already not that super popular. I don’t know, the whole monarchy could be in jeopardy. They really have a difficult job today.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> .
> 
> 
> I wonder, just how dangerous for the Crown all this is going to be. And on top of the Andrew affair too... If they conclude something that satisfies Harry but that the British public finds outrageous (Harry is already sinking in popularity ratings) and then something would happen to the Queen... who’s looking great but she is in her 90s... Charles is already not that super popular. I don’t know, the whole monarchy could be in jeopardy. They really have a difficult job today.



I guess it's really a good thing the Cambridges have been stepping it up with immaculate performances lately.


----------



## baghagg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just sharing from my experience, if my narcisstic mother is not met with pure adoration and subservient answers, the screaming and tears set in because "Don't yell at me" (nobody yelled, it was just a firm no to an outrageous idea), "How dare you treat me like this" or even better "I won't be treated like this by anyone, you all have bullied me for years!" (nobody has ever, it's just as you say, if it's not 100% agreement and fawning it's bullying to her) and depending on the day seasoned with threats about something a normal person would not even blink an eye over.


Yup


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Can't argue with any of this.




Excellent points:


----------



## duna

Kim O'Meara said:


> Me too.
> 
> Walk away with nothing or stay. No half way houses.



THIS!!!!


----------



## mdcx

The next time (if ever) Kate and Meghan come face to face, the walls will weep, or something else equally spooky will happen. There’s just so much bad juju there from MM.
How can Meghan ever face these people again?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> The next time (if ever) Kate and Meghan come face to face, the walls will weep, or something else equally spooky will happen. There’s just so much bad juju there from MM.
> How can Meghan ever face these people again?



Right. Whatever Harry's part in this, he's their son/brother/grandson. As we say in Germany, blood is thicker than water.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

Even if they work something out like „do your thing in North America, but show up to trooping the colours“, the public won’t welcome them with open arms


----------



## Grande Latte

They won't be able to work out the details and put everything in writing. It's like trying to define a mother/ daughter relationship on paper. Everything should be about honor and respect, from one unit to another. But Harry and Meghan exhibits none of these qualities. So even if they all agree to some sort of working structure in the meeting, H&M can flip and do the opposite the next day!

You cannot negotiate with a narcissist!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Just my personal view here but I don't believe it was The Queen and her Heirs photo that put the Sussex noses out of joint ; My guess is it was the announcement of The Earthshot Prize by Prince William with David Attenbough
I truly believe Meghan was lead to believe by Prince Harry she would be a latter day Princess Diana ( conveniently by passing the fact that Diana put in a lot of years of daily royal grind up and down the UK and overseas on behalf of the Crown)


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'll give Meghan credit for one thing ... after people watched The Crown and questioned why on earth the Queen would ever use her power to deny a member of the royal family the ability to marry the person of his/her choice, Meghan came along and has demonstrated why it can be a very bad idea for the Queen to say "you're in love - do what you wish!".


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince William and Prince Harry have said an "offensive and potentially harmful" newspaper report published today about their relationship is false.

Spokespeople for the Duke of Sussex and Duke of Cambridge said: "Despite clear denials, a false story ran in a UK newspaper today speculating about the relationship between The Duke of Sussex and The Duke of Cambridge.

"For brothers who care so deeply about the issues surrounding mental health, the use of inflammatory language in this way is offensive and potentially harmful."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Just my personal view here but I don't believe it was The Queen and her Heirs photo that put the Sussex noses out of joint ; My guess is it was the announcement of The Earthshot Prize by Prince William with David Attenbough



Yeah. I saw that and thought the Sussexes wouldn't like how someone "stole" their hobbyhorse which is the environment. Then again I'm sure they could have been a part of it hadn't they insisted on breaking free of the mean, outranking them Cambridges.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

gracekelly said:


> Back before Harry met Meghan, I thought he had finally found his path.  He had the Invictis games and appeared to be interested in veterans and their issues. He seemed to have achieved some maturity and moved away from his younger doing silly and inappropriate things self.   He had a warm relationship, from all appearances, with his brother and SIL.  I am guessing that Meghan saw this and he thought she was like minded at the time.  Seeing now how everything has done a 180 turn, one cant help but wonder if they wasn't just a way to get into his good graces until the real agenda came into play.  A stronger person would have see this and listened to family advice.  I think we know the rest without my having to spell it out.  It is all very sad and not only has his life been ruined, they brought a new life into the world and who knows how it will play out for Archie.  Hoping for the best.


This, 100%.


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince William and Prince Harry have said an "offensive and potentially harmful" newspaper report published today about their relationship is false.
> 
> Spokespeople for the Duke of Sussex and Duke of Cambridge said: "Despite clear denials, a false story ran in a UK newspaper today speculating about the relationship between The Duke of Sussex and The Duke of Cambridge.
> 
> "For brothers who care so deeply about the issues surrounding mental health, the use of inflammatory language in this way is offensive and potentially harmful."


What I got from this was an implication that Meghan was behind the bullying story. (Who else would have the ability to get such a story printed?) If that’s so and Harry has had to step forward and deny it....not a good look for their future as a couple.


----------



## mdcx

I have to say, this story is moving at such pace, so many twists and turns, I’m a little breathless!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

threadbender said:


> He has issued a statement saying he is not the owner and is not affiliated with HM.


The same as how the Obamas said they have really never talked to them, and Oprah said she has never advised them.  Deny deny deny in order to distance yourself, perhaps? If you read about this guy's business dealings, he's shady, he hides and covers stuff up.


----------



## bisbee

I am not a rabid fan of MM, although I am not a “hater” either, but I refuse to believe that she intends to “bring down” the British Royal Family.  That idea is absolutely ludicrous.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince William and Prince Harry have said an "offensive and potentially harmful" newspaper report published today about their relationship is false.
> 
> Spokespeople for the Duke of Sussex and Duke of Cambridge said: "Despite clear denials, a false story ran in a UK newspaper today speculating about the relationship between The Duke of Sussex and The Duke of Cambridge.
> 
> "For brothers who care so deeply about the issues surrounding mental health, the use of inflammatory language in this way is offensive and potentially harmful."


so they confirm that Harry is mental ill?


----------



## Kim O'Meara

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I wasn't kidding.
> 
> I think leaving him alone with his family is a risk if he is truly "torn"  as the report indicates above.



Some people don’t have to be there to be controlling the situation, ie he’ll have to run things by her before agreeing anything, his kid being nowhere near him is good incentive to do what she wants, and there’s the optics. Not being there might give her an attempt at an out to say she had no role but it doesn’t mean she isn’t playing one.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lodpah said:


> in other words: The trust owns the house and it was David Foster who contacted me.
> 
> It’s all in the wording. He’s right.


I find it so sad, that people lie like that. Just his simple word choice makes all the difference. His words are in fact true, yet not the truth.


----------



## SouthTampa

duna said:


> THIS!!!!


I love the saying “You are in or you are out!”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kim O'Meara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just sharing from my experience, if my narcisstic mother is not met with pure adoration and subservient answers, the screaming and tears set in because "Don't yell at me" (nobody yelled, it was just a firm no to an outrageous idea), "How dare you treat me like this" or even better "I won't be treated like this by anyone, you all have bullied me for years!" (nobody has ever, it's just as you say, if it's not 100% agreement and fawning it's bullying to her) and depending on the day seasoned with threats about something a normal person would not even blink an eye over.



Yep. And in my experience, it intensifies to get their own way. Each occasion you see them, it gets worse and more intense like a boiling pot until you relent and they get their own way or you walk away.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I knew Meghan would end up being a mess but this is way bigger than i expected.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisbee said:


> I am not a rabid fan of MM, although I am not a “hater” either, but I refuse to believe that she intends to “bring down” the British Royal Family.  That idea is absolutely ludicrous.



Naw. She just doesn't care whatsoever what or who falls by the wayside on her way to exactly what she wants.


----------



## Allisonfaye

BigPurseSue said:


> According to normal standards Harry and his wife are already financially independent. Meghan according to the financial press is worth $6.5 million from her role in Suits and continues to receive substantial residuals. She was a very wealthy women even before she married Harry. Harry inherited $9 million from his mother's estate and apparently is in line to receive more money from the Spencers. True the bulk of their annual income comes from Prince Charles, and the British taxpayers are soaked for necessities like Frogmore home improvements, but even if those funds are withdrawn it's not like the couple will be living in a ranch house in Winnipeg, shoveling neighbors' snow to make ends meet. Or so we hope.



A net worth of $6.5m in LA is peanuts.


----------



## DC-Cutie

I just hope whatever they do, that it makes them happy.  period.

It's amazing how this is causing much more of an uproar, than Prince Andrew and his ill behavior


----------



## mrsinsyder

Ooof...

"Harry's father reportedly used his private income to support the Sussexes because he was desperate to keep them happy in the UK and particularly to 'embrace' his daughter-in-law after she moved to Britain from Toronto. "

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ueen-gathers-Royals-Megxit-crisis-summit.html


----------



## queennadine

Allisonfaye said:


> A net worth of $6.5m in LA is peanuts.



Exactly. And if they truly thought they could live off of what they currently have, they wouldn’t have said that they would strive to be come financially independent (which I don’t buy for one second). They fully intend to keep lining their coffers while everyone else pays for the COL. 
The video of Harry acting as MM’s agent to Iger is making the rounds on Twitter. It’s so embarrassing. He addresses it like 3 times to Iger while MM talks to Beyonce and then awkwardly hugs Jay-Z. That clip shows nothing genuine about these two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Ooof...
> 
> "Harry's father reportedly used his private income to support the Sussexes because he was desperate to keep them happy in the UK and particularly to 'embrace' his daughter-in-law after she moved to Britain from Toronto. "
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ueen-gathers-Royals-Megxit-crisis-summit.html



From the very article: "Philip was reportedly 'spitting blood' with anger when he found out last Wednesday and yelled at his aides: 'What the hell are they playing at?'"


----------



## mshermes

There are two words disturbing me.....meltdown and paranoia.  What would happen to H if M told him that she understands what happened to his mother because it is happening to her.  Just saying.....


----------



## daisychainz

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I find it so sad, that people lie like that. Just his simple word choice makes all the difference. His words are in fact true, yet not the truth.


Admit nothing. Deny everything. It is spin 101.


----------



## Sophisticatted

At first the *******s as behind the scenes advisors seemed silly to me.  However, Hillary does seem to want to run again and the Epstein scandal involves Bill.  So maybe this is a smokescreen for them.  I wonder if any promises have been made?


----------



## sdkitty

BigPurseSue said:


> According to normal standards Harry and his wife are already financially independent. Meghan according to the financial press is worth $6.5 million from her role in Suits and continues to receive substantial residuals. She was a very wealthy women even before she married Harry. Harry inherited $9 million from his mother's estate and apparently is in line to receive more money from the Spencers. True the bulk of their annual income comes from Prince Charles, and the British taxpayers are soaked for necessities like Frogmore home improvements, but even if those funds are withdrawn it's not like the couple will be living in a ranch house in Winnipeg, shoveling neighbors' snow to make ends meet. Or so we hope.


$6 mil is more than enough for most people but nothing compared to the ultra rich they are (now) used to being part of


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> At first the *******s as behind the scenes advisors seemed silly to me.  However, Hillary does seem to want to run again and the Epstein scandal involves Bill.  So maybe this is a smokescreen for them.  I wonder if any promises have been made?


I haven't heard anything about Hilary running again.  This seems like a reach to me


----------



## queennadine

She knew.


----------



## mshermes

DC-Cutie said:


> I just hope whatever they do, that it makes them happy.  period.
> 
> It's amazing how this is causing much more of an uproar, than Prince Andrew and his ill behavior


They have a child’s welfare to think about. Unfortunately,  as the news cycles work, PA is old news now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DC-Cutie

mshermes said:


> They have a child’s welfare to think about. Unfortunate, as the news cycles work, PA is old news now.


I have a feeling that the child's welfare will be fine.


----------



## daisychainz

Sophisticatted said:


> At first the *******s as behind the scenes advisors seemed silly to me.  However, Hillary does seem to want to run again and the Epstein scandal involves Bill.  So maybe this is a smokescreen for them.  I wonder if any promises have been made?


It is like pieces of a puzzle that begin to fall into place. Amazing to think that any of this could have ties to American politics, but it could. I recall Meghan (and Harry??) refusing to meet with ***** and perhaps down the line they'd refuse others who don't share their politics. The foundation the *******'s had sounds like the Sussex Royal nonsense - maybe a page from the same playbook to amass a fortune. I read that Sussex Royal could take in 500 million.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I promised myself that i would not get invested in this but here I am so here goes ...

As a Brit I would like to see a fair degree of transparency about the options presented to the Sussexes today and a high degree of accountability for the choice they make. 

I suspect that having created a crisis last week to get things moving, they did not expect to find themselves fast tracked to a decision in under a week. I feel strongly that since they instigated this timescale, they can't later claim they did not have enough time to fully comprehend the implications and consequences of their decision when it has been widely reported that they were advised to take it slowly.

It seems to me there are 3 broad paths that are open to them
I. Withdraw from the Royal family and public life totally.
There are precedents for this with both Sarah  Duchess of York  and Katherine Kent, the wife of the Duke of Kent (Some may recall she was the "Wimbledon royal" before Kate)

2. Return to the Royal fold and carry on as before. 

3. A hybrid arrangement - clearly the one that will happen. It will be interesting to see later what gets thrashed out but I strongly feel they should be held to account if they deviate in any way from what is agreed. They pushed for their independence and they should now take full responsibility for their choices.

Here is what I personally would find acceptable:
1. Both personally retain HRH unless they divorce when Meghan would cease to be HRH 
2. The use of "Royal" in any foundation, charity or other commercial endeavor with which they are connected be expressly forbidden.
3. The establishment of income generating activities (irrespective of the structure that takes - foundation charity etc) be prohibited in the UK, Crown Dependencies, Overseas Territories and the 16 other countries of which the Queen is head of state to ensure no conflicts of interest in the Sovereign's position of non-profit and political neutrality.
3. Continue with their current UK Charities and Organisation, if those charities wish to continue their associations. 
4. Continue to be included as part of the wider Royal family in the whole family events way that their cousins and second cousins currently are.

I believe the arrangements will be more generous and less punitive than many people feel is warranted (especially considering the appalling lack of manners and grace displayed by the Sussexes last week) but at the end of the day, no one benefits if this is not resolved swiftly and with compassion.


----------



## LittleStar88

BigPurseSue said:


> According to normal standards Harry and his wife are already financially independent. Meghan according to the financial press is worth $6.5 million from her role in Suits and continues to receive substantial residuals. She was a very wealthy women even before she married Harry. Harry inherited $9 million from his mother's estate and apparently is in line to receive more money from the Spencers. True the bulk of their annual income comes from Prince Charles, and the British taxpayers are soaked for necessities like Frogmore home improvements, but even if those funds are withdrawn it's not like the couple will be living in a ranch house in Winnipeg, shoveling neighbors' snow to make ends meet. Or so we hope.



Then why do they need to continue to receive money from the BRF? Just make a clean break of it and live off of the millions. If they are savvy and not wasteful, that money could last forever, and then some.


----------



## duna

DC-Cutie said:


> I just hope whatever they do, that it makes them happy.  period.
> 
> It's amazing how this is causing much more of an uproar, than Prince Andrew and his ill behavior



It's been mentioned dozens of times in this thread in the last few days: it's not the fact that they want to leave the BRF that people criticize, it's THE WAY they want to leave, i.e keeping titles and tax payers' money. That's the BIG NO NO.

Prince Andrew is a whole different story.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Just read this - the comments are seething, this couple deserves NO support and the public agrees:

Canada offers to pick up Harry and Meghan's £500,000 security bill
 https://mol.im/a/7881493


----------



## LittleStar88

bisbee said:


> I am not a rabid fan of MM, although I am not a “hater” either, but I refuse to believe that she intends to “bring down” the British Royal Family.  That idea is absolutely ludicrous.



Probably not her intention, but she seems so hell-bent on getting what she wants she has no care for any collateral damage as a result.


----------



## rose60610

daisychainz said:


> Admit nothing. Deny everything. It is spin 101.





Sophisticatted said:


> At first the *******s as behind the scenes advisors seemed silly to me.  However, Hillary does seem to want to run again and the Epstein scandal involves Bill.  So maybe this is a smokescreen for them.  I wonder if any promises have been made?



I wouldn't say that Hillary will actually run, judging from comments in the NYT the last 3 years about 1/3 of her old base can't stand her anymore. I found it laughable that Meghan "refuses" to return to the U.S. until ***** is out. Is she trying to influence the election? Timing....Like we'd want her so bad no one would dare vote for *****? As far as I'm concerned, M and Hillary are cut from the same psychotic cloth. Funny how major players are like "uh, no, uh, we had nothing to do with M&H's decision to go the mega Foundation slush-fund route like we do and push/manipulate for causes we all want."  Judging from Guistra and other professional foundation grifters and manipulators, an H&M foundation, the way I see it, would get billions. Some of the $ would be legit, most would simply be for international arm twisting under the guise of "humanitarian causes". Not so different from how the Mafia threw tons of money at some of the Catholic churches and politicians around Chicago and pretty much got left alone unless they got waxed. Nope. I'm convinced M&H had this scheme all hatched well before the wedding with a little help in the shadows. That darn Monarchy is so wealthy that it could use some "wokin'" and wealth redistribution, no? Who better to tear it down than somebody who'll cry for pity and scream "Racism!" if she doesn't get her way? Spare Heir Harry would be a global mover/shaker, not a ribbon cutting dolt. I've a feeling that little poopsie Meghan is no match for QEII, who stared down Germany in WWII. Think The Crown doesn't have a few investigators behind the scenes?


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is so crazy, I feel like *I* have a big meeting later today!


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> At first the *******s as behind the scenes advisors seemed silly to me.  However, Hillary does seem to want to run again and the Epstein scandal involves Bill.  So maybe this is a smokescreen for them.  I wonder if any promises have been made?



Let's look at the timeline, shall we? Hillary visited Meghan at Frogmore Cottege around the middle of November. A few days later Hillary is on BBC Radio full of glowing compliments and offering support for Meghan. Around a week after that it was announced Harry and Meghan would be taking their six week vacation. I doubt Hillary orchestrated all of this but I wouldn't be at all surprised if she gave her new friend Meghan lots of advice and "help."


----------



## CAH

So, Megan doesn't think she's been treated right by the public....however she refused to meet with the Trumps and sent Harry, who was beyond rude to Ivanka.  But that was okay because she's a ***** and and doesn't deserve any kindness.  Got it Megan....

And do those two really think they have any say in what the Queen decides?  All she has to say is You lose your Duke and Duchess title, any money provided by the public purse, no Frogmore cottage and basic security.  She should tell them say whatever you want to say, you won't come out looking good.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CAH said:


> So, Megan doesn't think she's been treated right by the public....however she refused to meet with the Trumps and sent Harry, who was beyond rude to Ivanka.  But that was okay because she's a ***** and and doesn't deserve any kindness.  Got it Megan....



What did he do?


----------



## tannim44

A huge moneymaking opportunity has been overlooked by all involved.  Today's meeting should have been broadcast as a Pay Per View special.


----------



## DC-Cutie

how do you make a grown man to meet with someone?  Harry could have declined the offer to meet with ***** or any members of the family as well, right?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also... the William "bullying" thing...

Meg and Harry have made a mockery of everything since day 1. Will probably WAS mean to them about it. He takes his role seriously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gimmethebag

Oh, Prince Charles was giving them more than the £2M a year from the duchy. He was also giving them millions in personal money on top of that, and more than he was giving the Cambridge family. 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1578917392

He sounds super racist.


----------



## CAH

I think the Queen requested him to come.  But he was sour faced walking with Ivanka then looked made at every other picture you see of him.  I'm sure he was told by Megan not to be nice.  Harry has been to enough of these diplomatic events to keep a blank face.


----------



## sdkitty

joint statement from William & Harry.  seems like a positive thing to me.  from Huffpost:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-william-harry-slam-story_n_5e1c6e4bc5b6da971d196878


----------



## Sophisticatted

I suspect the “bullying” was him telling Harry to wait a bit.  That probably made him enemy #1.

I would LOVE for her to do a Tell All interview.  I’m sure it would be as well received as their Africa interview.  D-list heading for the Z-list.


----------



## Katel

mrsinsyder said:


> Also... the William "bullying" thing...
> 
> Meg and Harry have made a mockery of everything since day 1. Will probably WAS mean to them about it. He takes his role seriously.


“Mean” meaning he disagreed with them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

tannim44 said:


> A huge moneymaking opportunity has been overlooked by all involved.  Today's meeting should have been broadcast as a Pay Per View special.




They could have paid for the security for years!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

rose60610 said:


> I wouldn't say that Hillary will actually run, judging from comments in the NYT the last 3 years about 1/3 of her old base can't stand her anymore. I found it laughable that Meghan "refuses" to return to the U.S. until ***** is out. Is she trying to influence the election? Timing....Like we'd want her so bad no one would dare vote for *****? As far as I'm concerned, M and Hillary are cut from the same psychotic cloth. Funny how major players are like "uh, no, uh, we had nothing to do with M&H's decision to go the mega Foundation slush-fund route like we do and push/manipulate for causes we all want."  Judging from Guistra and other professional foundation grifters and manipulators, an H&M foundation, the way I see it, would get billions. Some of the $ would be legit, most would simply be for international arm twisting under the guise of "humanitarian causes". Not so different from how the Mafia threw tons of money at some of the Catholic churches and politicians around Chicago and pretty much got left alone unless they got waxed. Nope. I'm convinced M&H had this scheme all hatched well before the wedding with a little help in the shadows. That darn Monarchy is so wealthy that it could use some "wokin'" and wealth redistribution, no? Who better to tear it down than somebody who'll cry for pity and scream "Racism!" if she doesn't get her way? Spare Heir Harry would be a global mover/shaker, not a ribbon cutting dolt. I've a feeling that little poopsie Meghan is no match for QEII, who stared down Germany in WWII. Think The Crown doesn't have a few investigators behind the scenes?


At least ***** has a star on Hollywood Walk of Fame  Meghan is no match for a ***** in Twitter mode. She and her shadow advisers are quite delusional.


----------



## sdkitty

DC-Cutie said:


> how do you make a grown man to meet with someone?  Harry could have declined the offer to meet with ***** or any members of the family as well, right?


I'd like to comment on this but I'm not allowed to talk about that family


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

tannim44 said:


> A huge moneymaking opportunity has been overlooked by all involved.  Today's meeting should have been broadcast as a Pay Per View special.


  
The British taxpayers should demand it as a tax refund.


----------



## Katel

Sophisticatted said:


> I suspect the “bullying” was him telling Harry to wait a bit.  That probably made him enemy #1.
> 
> *I would LOVE for her to do a Tell All interview.  I’m sure it would be as well received as their Africa interview.  D-list heading for the Z-list.*




She (both of them, really) is not too bright - she’s persona non grata to everyone who supports the Queen/RF/Britain - in Britain and now all the world over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gimmethebag said:


> Oh, Prince Charles was giving them more than the £2M a year from the duchy. He was also giving them millions in personal money on top of that, and more than he was giving the Cambridge family.
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1578917392
> 
> He sounds super racist.



Talk about treating someone unfairly...sounds like it wasn't the Sussexes yet somehow the Cambridges never complained. Of course Kate does not spend half a million pounds a year on her wardrobe (I still can't get over that 90.000 pounds Dior pregnancy kaftan she wore for two hours while at a dinner. WTF), so they probably made do with what was given to them.


----------



## LittleStar88

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> At least ***** has a star on Hollywood Walk of Fame  Meghan is no match for a ***** in Twitter mode. She and her shadow advisers are quite delusional.



I am not sure what planet she thinks she is from. I work with people that I do not like (as does pretty much everyone in society)... I would rather stab my eyes with shrimp forks than have to look at them. But... Part of the real world is you have to deal and interact with people you don't like. Especially in professional/diplomatic settings. And in family. That's just life as an adult.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> She (both of them, really) is not too bright - she’s persona non grata to everyone who supports the Queen/RF/Britain - in Britain and now all the world over.


IDK - Christiane Amanpour, who I consider to be a serious journist, did a segment on this subject on her PBS show.  She was pretty sympathetic to Meghan in the area of the British press.  So while a lot of people aren't impressed or happy with M, she still has lots of support.


----------



## rose60610

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> At least ***** has a star on Hollywood Walk of Fame  Meghan is no match for a ***** in Twitter mode. She and her shadow advisers are quite delusional.



I was prepared to get big time blowback for my theory, like I'd been over-served on the wacky juice. And if so, I can take it and still feel I'm living, not just existing. It's gotten to the point that Dan Brown, Lee Child and James Patterson combined couldn't have come up with a thriller plot like the real life drama we got unfolding here. D-Lister woker marries prominent Royal, check, cranks out anchor baby, check, makes demands on world's most famous family after enjoying zillions in Royal Perks, check.


----------



## daisychainz

Do you think any of the talk in the meeting will involve divorce? I wonder if the royal family would push for that instead of negotiating an exit plan for them. What if they eventually divorce, does Harry get welcomed 100% back in with funding again? I wonder if this is a family-only meeting or if there are lawyers and reps for each person fighting for their best interests.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

rose60610 said:


> I was prepared to get big time blowback for my theory, like I'd been over-served on the wacky juice. And if so, I can take it and still feel I'm living, not just existing. It's gotten to the point that Dan Brown, Lee Child and James Patterson combined couldn't have come up with a thriller plot like the real life drama we got unfolding here. D-Lister woker marries prominent Royal, check, cranks out anchor baby, check, makes demands on world's most famous family after enjoying zillions in Royal Perks, check.


Truth is stranger than fiction, lol. Meghan's ex-Suits producer has that as his twitter quote.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know I’m horrible for saying this, but I feel like she never got her looks back after baby, and I wonder if that also will limit her appeal.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> IDK - Christiane Amanpour, who I consider to be a serious journist, did a segment on this subject on her PBS show.  She was pretty sympathetic to Meghan in the area of the British press.  So while a lot of people aren't impressed or happy with M, she still has lots of support.



I quite agree that M still has a good amount of support. And I think that's what nails it for her. M was blindsided at first that the entire globe wasn't downright in love with her, so as long as she can get "just enough" support she can still sandbag her slush Foundation with billions. And she probably can.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

daisychainz said:


> Do you think any of the talk in the meeting will involve divorce? I wonder if the royal family would push for that instead of negotiating an exit plan for them. What if they eventually divorce, does Harry get welcomed 100% back in with funding again? I wonder if this is a family-only meeting or if there are lawyers and reps for each person fighting for their best interests.



Honestly at this point I feel good riddance...and I'm not usually one to root for breaking up a family. But this woman is either insane or simply the rudest, most entitled individuum I've ever encountered. The gall to be the newest family member and having these demands. Harry will always be a family member. Meghan doesn't have to be.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Do you think any of the talk in the meeting will involve divorce? I wonder if the royal family would push for that instead of negotiating an exit plan for them. What if they eventually divorce, does Harry get welcomed 100% back in with funding again? I wonder if this is a family-only meeting or if there are lawyers and reps for each person fighting for their best interests.



I don't get the idea Harry wants a divorce. Meghan shouldn't either since it appears she's got him doing whatever she wants. Why get yourself a rich famous puppet who adores you and then throw him over?

The American media is still supporting Meghan and Harry but it's obvious they haven't been following the minutiae of this story like the UK media. They just report the surface information and leave it at that. Who needs details when you can make a story about traditional royal establishment unfairness and possible racism? That's what US news journalists want to report about.


----------



## rose60610

tannim44 said:


> A huge moneymaking opportunity has been overlooked by all involved.  Today's meeting should have been broadcast as a Pay Per View special.



Best post ever


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> I have to say, this story is moving at such pace, so many twists and turns, I’m a little breathless!


It'll take Chanel finally updating their website for the new season to distract me from this


----------



## A1aGypsy

I find it very interesting that the first “official” comment that emerges from this situation is a joint statement between the brothers that: a) re-enforces their bond and b) strikes down at least part of the narrative that the MM / HM camp had been trying to establish (Will bullied them).


----------



## Katel

sdkitty said:


> IDK - Christiane Amanpour, who I consider to be a serious journist, did a segment on this subject on her PBS show.  She was pretty sympathetic to Meghan in the area of the British press.  So while a lot of people aren't impressed or happy with M, she still has lots of support.


Noted... I was mostly referring to the general populace of the world, not the media.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

A1aGypsy said:


> I find it very interesting that the first “official” comment that emerges from this situation is a joint statement between the brothers that: a) re-enforces their bond and b) strikes down at least part of the narrative that the MM / HM camp had been trying to establish (Will bullied them).


I'm sure this was first order of business of the agenda by unanimous vote from all (except Harry of course) and/or by Gan-Gan's iron fist - NOBODY gets in between the brothers! MeGain must be stomping her feet across the pond when she saw that.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Meghan not ever making any effort towards obtaining UK citizenship is making more sense now. I didn't understand why she hadn't done that. It would have been a natural step in a new life.
> 
> An exit strategy already thought out maybe?  It might possibly give her some extra negotiating power regarding custody of Archie if she is not a UK citizen too?


Yes, that could have been expedited if that was wanted, but it almost seems that she had NO intentions of 'truly' settling in the UK.  Which brings me to my next item .. *How in God's name does she think that the British public would be 'okay' if she comes back and continues her patronages and 'some' events?*  If I was a Brit (_although - okay, a good dose of American Yank here_) .. I would give her the British Salute .. and I know you Brits know EXACTLY what that means!!!


----------



## Cosmopolitan

I think the Queen's statement just crashed Twitter lol...

Here's some breaking news alerts


----------



## Flatsy

daisychainz said:


> Do you think any of the talk in the meeting will involve divorce? I wonder if the royal family would push for that instead of negotiating an exit plan for them. What if they eventually divorce, does Harry get welcomed 100% back in with funding again? I wonder if this is a family-only meeting or if there are lawyers and reps for each person fighting for their best interests.


The Windsors know they have to be extra careful on this topic.  Harry flew off the handle at the suggestion that he take things slow with Meghan back when she was just a new girlfriend!  Any suggestion that they are trying to split him and Meghan up might permanently drive him away. I believe the Windsors are just going to try to show Harry that they love him and want him to be happy.

I think Harry loves Meghan and doesn't want a divorce, but also isn't happy.  I do think he's probably coming to realize that the woman currently holding herself and his baby hostage on another continent while forcing him to cut ties with his family does not care about his best interests.  But I think he's going to continue giving the marriage his best effort, especially for the sake of their son.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It looks like they are getting what they want, at least some initial steps toward it.

I’m starting to think that no matter what comes out of the negotiations, this marriage will not last very long.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> IDK - Christiane Amanpour, who I consider to be a serious journist, did a segment on this subject on her PBS show.  She was pretty sympathetic to Meghan in the area of the British press.  So while a lot of people aren't impressed or happy with M, she still has lots of support.



Or it could be her personal viewpoint on types of journalism and journalists more than it is about Meghan?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Katel said:


> She (both of them, really) is not too bright - she’s persona non grata to everyone who supports the Queen/RF/Britain - in Britain and now all the world over.



She only has to be smarter than Harry, and I think that’s been established.


----------



## Jayne1

NM


----------



## youngster

Cosmopolitan said:


> I think the Queen's statement just crashed Twitter lol...
> Here's the breaking news alert from the Post
> View attachment 4638904



I think the key phrase is *"transitioning to a life without reliance on public funds".
*
This is what most people care about.  They can go live in L.A. and Toronto and Timbuktu but it's the continued expectation that the public will still pay for their upkeep and security that was so outrageous.  That, and creating this "SussexRoyal" brand, basically profiting off of their titles but withdrawing from all the stuff they didn't like. 

But, further details are needed. How this all works out over the next few weeks will be interesting.  Did the Queen basically say no "SussexRoyal" branding and use of that to make money?  That's a hugely important point.


----------



## cafecreme15

Cosmopolitan said:


> I think the Queen's statement just crashed Twitter lol...
> 
> Here's some breaking news alerts
> 
> View attachment 4638904
> View attachment 4638917
> View attachment 4638918


The Queen really had no choice - she needs to appear as supportive publicly. What I wouldn't give to really know what she thinks!


----------



## LittleStar88

I expect this will just be a long, gentle phasing-out. Perhaps by this time next year they will not be working royals but rather successfully sponging off of the donations to their charity and no longer receiving money from the BRF.

If I were Meghan, I would probably never want to show my face at any BRF event. I expect her popularity there has diminished.


----------



## CAH

How can they even make any appearances now?  If Megan thinks she had it hard before then she's in for a shock of her next public appearance.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CAH said:


> How can they even make any appearances now?  If Megan thinks she had it hard before then she's in for a shock of her next public appearance.


Can you imagine her plastic smile when people boo them?


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> .
> 
> 
> I wonder, just how dangerous for the Crown all this is going to be. And on top of the Andrew affair too... If they conclude something that satisfies Harry but that the British public finds outrageous (Harry is already sinking in popularity ratings) and then something would happen to the Queen... who’s looking great but she is in her 90s... Charles is already not that super popular. I don’t know, the whole monarchy could be in jeopardy. They really have a difficult job today.


I agree .. and I think I noted before that there was an excellent article written by a long-time Royal historian/Journalist who basically said that this would be Charles' acid test.  He said that similar to how QEII's father handled the Duke of Windsor situation, Charles should (_at minimum_) take away the Sussex titles.  The situation with the finances is a whole different issue, and many articles that I've been reading as of late say that by virtue of H&M wanting to be "financially independent", they are opening up themselves to a LOT more auditing of their financials (_and yes, the US would also be able to 'open the books'_).  

Just read a blurb this morning that apparently, Charles has already funded H&M via his personal fortune, but don't know how much of that is true ..


----------



## rose60610

CAH said:


> How can they even make any appearances now?  If Megan thinks she had it hard before then she's in for a shock of her next public appearance.



Agreed.  "They won't make it easy".  That will also give her a "justified" pouting meltdown so she can flee the country.


----------



## mshermes

Sooo.....all of this hoopla about this meeting for the outcome to be.....fly and be free....we’ll sort the details out later, keep doing your job and don’t let the door hit you in the a**? Queen ain’t no dummy.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Just read a blurb this morning that apparently, Charles has already funded H&M via his personal fortune, but don't know how much of that is true ..



Charles isn't the first parent of an adult child who always has a hand out and is always needing more. No parent wants to admit their kid is a loser.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. Whatever Harry's part in this, he's their son/brother/grandson. As we say in Germany, *blood is thicker than wate*r.


Oh yeah .. same with the Italians and have seen that FIRST HAND many times!!!


----------



## myown

mshermes said:


> Sooo.....all of this hoopla about this meeting for the outcome to be.....fly and be free....we’ll sort the details out later, keep doing your job and don’t let the door hit you in the a**? Queen ain’t no dummy.


Well what exactly did people expect? 

they would never give a statement like „the family is broken, we let H&M do their sh t in North America but ask the British press to never talk about them again“?


----------



## myown

bag-mania said:


> Charles isn't the first parent of an adult child who always has a hand out and is always needing more. No parent wants to admit their kid is a loser.


My aunt and uncle literally live of her parents money. It always „just this one last time“ more money


----------



## 1LV

mrsinsyder said:


> Can you imagine her plastic smile when people boo them?


Will probably be more like a smirk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Here is the Queen's statement: https://www.royal.uk/statement-her-majesty-queen

*A statement from Her Majesty The Queen*
*Published 13 January 2020

Today my family had very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family.

My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan’s desire to create a new life as a young family. Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family.

Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.

It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.

These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.*


----------



## CeeJay

Allisonfaye said:


> A net worth of $6.5m in LA is peanuts.


THANK YOU!! .. I was going to say that it's chump change for sure!  Heck, when tiny little houses are now selling over $1m and they would want to live in some 'exclusive' community?!?! .. you better have a LOT OF


----------



## mshermes

Cosmopolitan said:


> Here is the Queen's statement: https://www.royal.uk/statement-her-majesty-queen
> 
> *A statement from Her Majesty The Queen*
> *Published 13 January 2020
> 
> Today my family had very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family.
> 
> My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan’s desire to create a new life as a young family. Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family.
> 
> Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.
> 
> It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.
> 
> These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.*


What a well crafted statement.


----------



## threadbender

But, referencing the "public funds", is that only the 5%? Seems, they are getting exactly what they demanded. Or, do the public funds include the moneys that Charles currently controls, as well?


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Yes, that could have been expedited if that was wanted, but it almost seems that she had NO intentions of 'truly' settling in the UK.  Which brings me to my next item .. *How in God's name does she think that the British public would be 'okay' if she comes back and continues her patronages and 'some' events?*  If I was a Brit (_although - okay, a good dose of American Yank here_) .. I would give her the British Salute .. and I know you Brits know EXACTLY what that means!!!
> View attachment 4638901


Yep


----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


> Here is the Queen's statement: https://www.royal.uk/statement-her-majesty-queen
> 
> *A statement from Her Majesty The Queen*
> *Published 13 January 2020
> 
> Today my family had very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family.
> 
> My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan’s desire to create a new life as a young family. Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family.
> 
> Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.
> 
> It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.
> 
> These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.*



Interesting strong separation between "my family" and "his family".


----------



## Meh-gan

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Can't argue with any of this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent points:



Why would they want to bring down the royal fam tho? If there was no monarchy, they would be nobodies with no $ stream from the British public.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Now that was a bit of an anticlimax.


----------



## mrsinsyder

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Now that was a bit of an anticlimax.


Yep.

It sounds like they'll slowly be phased out...?


----------



## LittleStar88

Well, this all puts this 100% on them. They could have paved a path of success within the easy-to-navigate structure of the BRF with all the best staff to guide and groom them, but now they have to do it totally on their own. The world is watching. Good luck! 

PS: The IRS will enjoy getting their grubby little fingers into this tax quagmire.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Interesting strong separation between "my family" and "his family".


She really is very, very angry, isn’t she?


----------



## Gimmethebag

I wonder how Camilla feels about Charles giving Harry and Meghan millions of pounds of their personal money. I'm sure her children aren't treated the same way and say what you will about her, she's his wife of 20-something years. 

Also, how is Meghan not completely embarrassed to liken herself to Michelle *****?


----------



## Clearblueskies

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Now that was a bit of an anticlimax.


Not really.  It’s a long cool game that’s being played here in response to the Sussex theatrics.


----------



## PewPew

lanasyogamama said:


> It looks like they are getting what they want, at least some initial steps toward it.
> 
> I’m starting to think that no matter what comes out of the negotiations, this marriage will not last very long.



For Archie’s sake I hope it isn’t the case, but when the dust settles, it may be a brutal shock for Harry to realize that seeking a “geographical cure” and excising his family (and the UK media) hasn’t brought perpetual happiness.

Sometimes people who are unhappy blame one stressor (like location or family) for ALL their unhappiness, and it takes time to sort out the root of the problem. 

Another issue is when you have a whirlwind courtship, (even without the excitement of a jetset life & public adoration), there’s a (natural) emotional change that gradually happens when the pheromones and excitement of the relationship “honeymoon period” wanes. Some partners mistake that emotional change as problematic & tend to panic, demanding their partner “prove” their love in various ways (ie public gestures, isolating their partner etc).


----------



## Sol Ryan

The Sussexes huh? Guess that means they’re keeping their titles.... :/ dang. I expected better... I guess we’ll see what happens, but I’m not holding out hope now....



Cosmopolitan said:


> Here is the Queen's statement: https://www.royal.uk/statement-her-majesty-queen
> 
> *A statement from Her Majesty The Queen*
> *Published 13 January 2020
> 
> Today my family had very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family.
> 
> My family and I are entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan’s desire to create a new life as a young family. Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family.
> 
> Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives.
> 
> It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.
> 
> These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

youngster said:


> I think the key phrase is *"transitioning to a life without reliance on public funds".
> *
> This is what most people care about.  They can go live in L.A. and Toronto and Timbuktu but it's the continued expectation that the public will still pay for their upkeep and security that was so outrageous.  That, and creating this "SussexRoyal" brand, basically profiting off of their titles but withdrawing from all the stuff they didn't like.
> 
> But, further details are needed. How this all works out over the next few weeks will be interesting.  Did the Queen basically say no "SussexRoyal" branding and use of that to make money? *That's a hugely important point.*



I agree. To capitalise financially and reputationally off being Royal whilst eschewing the job of being a working Royal is what has most Brits fuming.


----------



## LittleStar88

Gimmethebag said:


> I wonder how Camilla feels about Charles giving Harry and Meghan millions of pounds of their personal money. I'm sure her children aren't treated the same way and say what you will about her, she's his wife of 20-something years.
> 
> *Also, how is Meghan not completely embarrassed to liken herself to Michelle *****?*




Narcissists have visions of grandeur.


----------



## daisychainz

Gimmethebag said:


> I wonder how Camilla feels about Charles giving Harry and Meghan millions of pounds of their personal money. I'm sure her children aren't treated the same way and say what you will about her, she's his wife of 20-something years.
> 
> Also, how is Meghan not completely embarrassed to liken herself to Michelle *****?


The situation must put stress on all the married couples involved and make for some awful disagreements.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Meh-gan said:


> Why would they want to bring down the royal fam tho? If there was no monarchy, they would be nobodies with no $ stream from the British public.


Because I believe both are shortsighted mentally unstable dupes. Only question is,whose dupes.

The only one involved whose opinions I'm very interested in right now, is William. We'll have to see how this transpires in the coming days and weeks. But I fear the queen is handling this just as firmly, resolutely and putting country & duty first as she did with Andrew for decades.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

threadbender said:


> But, referencing the "public funds", is that only the 5%? Seems, they are getting exactly what they demanded. Or, do the public funds include the moneys that Charles currently controls, as well?


This is a very good question.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Camilla shouldn't feel too much of a way, because I'm sure he was using personal money to see her while married to diana.


----------



## youngster

It will be so interesting to watch this play out over the coming weeks and months.  The British Royal Family!  The longest running soap opera in the world.  Going strong since 1066!


----------



## Gimmethebag

Sol Ryan said:


> The Sussexes huh? Guess that means they’re keeping their titles.... :/ dang. I expected better... I guess we’ll see what happens, but I’m not holding out hope now....



How I read that statement is that the Queen did not utilize Duke/Duchess or HRH language. They may be able to use Sussex but not "Royal"... which kind of cuts them off at the knees if they were planning on leveraging close proximity to monarchs to profit. 

She also uses "my family" and "his family." I think Harry's family will be supportive of what he wants to do, but the "final decisions" will come from parliament/government officials and it won't necessarily be everything they asked for. (Like senior royal titles.) 

Charles also seems very hurt/mad at the betrayal when he has under the table given them a lot of support. More than he's given his other son and their three children. I can also see his personal level of support diminishing.


----------



## myown

Gimmethebag said:


> I wonder how Camilla feels about Charles giving Harry and Meghan millions of pounds of their personal money. I'm sure her children aren't treated the same way and say what you will about her, she's his wife of 20-something years.
> 
> Also, how is Meghan not completely embarrassed to liken herself to Michelle *****?


But it is said they have a strong bound to her kids
Money can’t buy love


----------



## CAH

It's none of Camilla's business.  Her kids aren't his by blood so it has nothing to do with them.


----------



## LibbyRuth

cafecreme15 said:


> The Queen really had no choice - she needs to appear as supportive publicly. What I wouldn't give to really know what she thinks!


In my ultimate fantasy life the Queen would give a tell all interview and teach Harry what a threat looks like!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sol Ryan said:


> The Sussexes huh? Guess that means they’re keeping their titles.... :/ dang. I expected better... I guess we’ll see what happens, but I’m not holding out hope now....


 
Queen Elizabeth is a smart cookie despite her age and the text of this statement does not directly refer to them as the Duke and Duchess ... I sincerely hope that in their commercial activities outside of the Crown's Realm they are only allowed to call themselves Mr Harry & Mrs Megan Sussex.


----------



## myown

CAH said:


> It's none of Camilla's business.  Her kids aren't his by blood so it has nothing to do with them.


Im my eyes a married couple shares money. But some people keep his and hers money even after years


----------



## duna

This made me laugh:

"If anyone has a right to be mad at Harry and Meghan it's the people of Sussex, who have been left leaderless without a Duke and who are now defenseless against incursions from Hampshire and Kent."


----------



## mrsinsyder

*Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I initially thought the Queen's statement was too mild and indulgent (valued members of my family...as if anyone will ever trust them again).But what do we think of addressing them as Harry and Meghan, not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?


----------



## Gimmethebag

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*


May as well give Frog Cott to another family member and hope they like the decor.


----------



## LittleStar88

myown said:


> Im my eyes a married couple shares money. But some people keep his and hers money even after years



It's not like handing them the money is at the peril of their own finacial security. Camilla and Charles are set for life so nothing to discuss other than the fact that H&M are behaving like spoiled, petulant children.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, this all puts this 100% on them. They could have paved a path of success within the easy-to-navigate structure of the BRF with all the best staff to guide and groom them, but now they have to do it totally on their own. The world is watching. Good luck!
> 
> PS: The IRS will enjoy getting their grubby little fingers into this tax quagmire.


YUP .. in addition to (potentially) being able to look inside some of the BRF books!!!  They must be rubbing the tips of their fingers on that one!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I initially thought the Queen's statement was too mild and indulgent (valued members of my family...as if anyone will ever trust them again).But what do we think of addressing them as Harry and Meghan, not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?



I suspect the real stuff will drop when the government reviews and decides the limitations (thus not making the Queen look like the meanie).


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I initially thought the Queen's statement was too mild and indulgent (valued members of my family...as if anyone will ever trust them again).But what do we think of addressing them as Harry and Meghan, not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Now that was a bit of an anticlimax.



I knew it would be some statement like this. But when the shi$ will fly will be going forward. The Q is in damage control, stop the bleeding mode now. She is between a rock and a har place. She could strip them of everything and they won't get the $$ but she wants to keep them in the family. But if she doesn't the taxpayers will want their return on the investment. This is far from the end of it. They are still 'working the details out'.  Those are some big details. 



PewPew said:


> For Archie’s sake I hope it isn’t the case, but when the dust settles, it may be a brutal shock for Harry to realize that seeking a “geographical cure” and excising his family (and the UK media) hasn’t brought perpetual happiness.
> 
> Sometimes people who are unhappy blame one stressor (like location or family) for ALL their unhappiness, and it takes time to sort out the root of the problem.
> 
> Another issue is when you have a whirlwind courtship, (even without the excitement of a jetset life & public adoration), there’s a (natural) emotional change that gradually happens when the pheromones and excitement of the relationship “honeymoon period” wanes. Some partners mistake that emotional change as problematic & tend to panic, demanding their partner “prove” their love in various ways (ie public gestures, isolating their partner etc).



Agree. This is why the Bachelor rarely works out. They get the whirlwind romance with all the drama and fancy locations but then it all ends and they are in the real world with real problems.


----------



## RAINDANCE

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*



Maybe the Queen can re-gift Frogmore Cottage to Princess Beatrice as her wedding present.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*


Well someone on the news just referred to her as the most loathed woman in the UK so I guess this makes sense.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I once read that Camilla still has a personal home (pre-marriage to Charles) where she goes to spend family time with just her kids and family.

My predictions for Harry’s future are dissolution of the separate royal Sussex offices and websites, an eventual divorce, securing custody of Archie (hopefully), continued involvement with Invictus, Sentebale, and Heads Together, moving back to Great Britain, taking Charles up on the offer of a working estate (a quiet life with purpose) and/or moving back to Kensington Palace to be near to his brother and be a supportive and close family member again.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect that the Queen was given a stunning and hard lesson with the reaction to her handling of Diana and, while I personally see this situation as different, she is wise to play the long game.

Who knows, it might be that they realize with a few months of the real world that the grass isn’t greener and come back to the fold (eta: together or apart) and problem solved.

ETA: or the marriage implodes under the strain of the


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But what do we think of addressing them as Harry and Meghan, not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?



It’s very clever to go the informal route to show she’s his grandma and loves him. She not going to use titles they aren’t living up to, but she did use the Sussex name so she can’t be viewed as being cruel, snarky or forshadowing doom. It’s a classy statement. We knew she was not going to throw mud because that makes her & the institution look bad.


----------



## youngster

So Meghan (and apparently Harry too) looked ahead and saw their lives filled with endless, boring duties, directed by the Palace.  Instead, why didn't they take a step back and realize their roles are a tremendous _privilege_?  Harry of all people should have made sure Meghan understood this.

It's a privilege to represent the Queen at all these events, the schools and hospitals and senior center and memorial services.  Places she can't go or Charles can't go since they can't be everywhere.  They could really have an impact one-on-one with people.  Harry seemed so good at that and for him to basically blow it off is incredibly disappointing.   They'd rather give paid speeches at large business functions or market junk branded "SussexRoyal" and attend the Vanity Fair parties or the Met Gala and air-kiss dozens of other celebrities while tweeting out support for whatever the problem du jour is.  Photo-op philanthropy.  I can not imagine how much contempt the Queen must have for _both_ of them.


----------



## bisousx

I expected this response from the Queen for several reasons.

This isn't a time where you can hold people accountable anymore. If the Queen were to take away their titles, access to public funding and security, then she will be labeled cruel. I remember how the Queen's popularity plummeted during Diana's divorce and subsequent death. She was viewed as ruthless and vengeful for taking away Diana's royal security after the divorce. Though I think this wasn't an accurate account of how Diana was left without royal protection, it's how the media portrayed QE and she will not want to go through that experience twice.

It's also the Queen's family at the end of the day and those of us who have complicated family situations know that even when your relative royally effs up, there's usually a parent or two ready to make excuses, further enable and empower bad behavior.

If the Queen is dealing with the situation pragmatically, she can't deliver a slap on the wrist to Harry and Meghan because it would force her to slap her own son, Andrew, on the wrist as well. If she cuts off Harry financially then she has to cut off Andrew, and many families just won't do that. Perhaps QE would rather suffer a little backlash from the public than do what's right and cut out Andrew. (Like I said, those of us with complicated family situations have seen this before).

Like many concerned siblings being put in this position, Prince William may have been the only one to be honest with Harry from the beginning, but he quickly learned that no good deed goes unpunished. Nobody wants to be on the receiving end of an unstable family member or friend, and so now the RF has to walk on eggshells. Everyone is affected.

A quick view on this thread shows that most people hope for justice and accountability, but the Queen's reaction to the disrespect and the theatrics reflects real life and the state of society today tbh. It's setting a poor example for the public. Now it will be common knowledge that by pulling out the race card and throwing tantrums, you can bully just about anyone around.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I have to add that following his recent hospital stay, I was wondering if Prince Phillip may be returning home for end of life care and that was a factor in the Queen declining the meeting request with Harry. 

I was however delighted to see that the Prince was well enough to summon a driver to take him to the big house to (probably) have a stomp and a rant about " the youth of today "  LOL !


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Raglan
> *


*Shocking, huh? Difficult to perform her Royal duties w/o ever returning to the UK. Of course, this was expected. The Royal statement leaves more questions than gives answers. I bet Megs is not a happy camper.  Oh well........*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Now that was a bit of an anticlimax.


Did you really think they wouldn't find some compromise? This gives time for things to settle down, hopefully the press will leave them alone, and eventually they might go back to their previous roles.


----------



## CeeJay

Gimmethebag said:


> May as well give Frog Cott to another family member and hope they like the decor.


Well then .. take away Frogmore Cottage!!!  How are 'they' going to be able to continue with their Patronages and other events if Megan has no plans to go back to the UK??!?!!?  

I sincerely hope that during this 'transition' time, they are NOT allowed to use their titles to profit!


----------



## akoko

I find it interesting that this is the fist time their titles weren't used in an official announcement. Maybe it's an indication of the direction this is going. What is winding everyone up here, is the expectation they have to keep the money and benefits of being a royal. I hope this is a smart way that the Queen intends to handle this. Support her grandson as a family member, but cut of any sort of direct or indirect public funding. People are quite angry about this. Even colleagues that have never cared about the royal family find it unbelievable that they want to keep the perks and the royal name, but not the obligations. That really puts in question the whole role of the monarchy.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Mrs.Z said:


> Well someone on the news just referred to her as the most loathed woman in the UK so I guess this makes sense.



Haha. The 'full support' of her mom? Can you say 'payday'?

I suppose it's possible MM is suffering from postpartum depression.


----------



## PatsyCline

LibbyRuth said:


> In my ultimate fantasy life the Queen would give a tell all interview and teach Harry what a threat looks like!


OMG. Please! I have always said I would love to hear the stories she has experienced, in her long life as monarch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

When an established press agency like AP publishes such an unbecoming video that's pretty telling.

ETA: the guy's some German journalist saying he is starting to understand why the UK is less than impressed with MM.


----------



## CAH

I'm still trying to figure out how Megan can show her face at any event, especially one with the entire family present.  Is she just going to leave Harry to fend for himself and bear the brunt of the public anger at them?


----------



## jehaga

lanasyogamama said:


> I know I’m horrible for saying this, but I feel like she never got her looks back after baby, and I wonder if that also will limit her appeal.


ITA! She looks matronly now. Wonder if she’ll ever get her pre-pregnancy looks back?


----------



## Mrs.Z

CAH said:


> I'm still trying to figure out how Megan can show her face at any event, especially one with the entire family present.  Is she just going to leave Harry to fend for himself and bear the brunt of the public anger at them?


Yes, I see that happening, Harry will work part-time in the UK and she will work on their new life.  Seems like a recipe for a bad marriage.


----------



## CAH

The next balcony appearance should be interesting.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I initially thought the Queen's statement was too mild and indulgent (valued members of my family...as if anyone will ever trust them again).But what do we think of addressing them as Harry and Meghan, not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?


Maybe they're just trying to give the statement a grandmotherly, personal touch. Either for optics as many here are likely correct about and/or because the queen in fact, is also a loving grandmother. Who is letting her tantrum prone grandson and his hustler wife get away with extorting her and the rest of the family. 

Ah well, it's all on taxpayer dosh so no matter


----------



## youngster

duna said:


> This made me laugh:
> *"If anyone has a right to be mad at Harry and Meghan it's the people of Sussex, who have been left leaderless without a Duke and who are now defenseless against incursions from Hampshire and Kent."*



I'm sending this to all my royal watcher friends lololol!  I love this!  Thanks @duna!


----------



## bag-mania

Sometimes it's worth paying someone off just to go away. I can't help but think the Queen and Charles must think of H&M as being nothing better than blackmailers at this point.

I give them a year or two before everyone in North America is sick of them too and they crash and burn. The other celebrities they want to rub shoulders with will naturally be suspicious of such obvious shakedown artists.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bisousx said:


> I expected this response from the Queen for several reasons.
> 
> This isn't a time where you can hold people accountable anymore. If the Queen were to take away their titles, access to public funding and security, then she will be labeled cruel. I remember how the Queen's popularity plummeted during Diana's divorce and subsequent death. She was viewed as ruthless and vengeful for taking away Diana's royal security after the divorce. Though I think this wasn't an accurate account of how Diana was left without royal protection, it's how the media portrayed QE and she will not want to go through that experience twice.
> 
> It's also the Queen's family at the end of the day and those of us who have complicated family situations know that even when your relative royally effs up, there's usually a parent or two ready to make excuses, further enable and empower bad behavior.
> 
> If the Queen is dealing with the situation pragmatically, she can't deliver a slap on the wrist to Harry and Meghan because it would force her to slap her own son, Andrew, on the wrist as well. If she cuts off Harry financially then she has to cut off Andrew, and many families just won't do that. Perhaps QE would rather suffer a little backlash from the public than do what's right and cut out Andrew. (Like I said, those of us with complicated family situations have seen this before).
> 
> Like many concerned siblings being put in this position, Prince William may have been the only one to be honest with Harry from the beginning, but he quickly learned that no good deed goes unpunished. Nobody wants to be on the receiving end of an unstable family member or friend, and so now the RF has to walk on eggshells. Everyone is affected.
> 
> A quick view on this thread shows that most people hope for justice and accountability, but the Queen's reaction to the disrespect and the theatrics reflects real life and the state of society today tbh. It's setting a poor example for the public. *Now it will be common knowledge that by pulling out the race card and throwing tantrums, you can bully just about anyone around.*



This isn't anything new.


----------



## bisousx

Gimmethebag said:


> Oh, Prince Charles was giving them more than the £2M a year from the duchy. He was also giving them millions in personal money on top of that, and more than he was giving the Cambridge family.
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/...=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1578917392
> 
> He sounds super racist.



I'm sad for Charles. Let me guess - Harry has been pulling the "you cheated on my mother" card on Charles his whole life. Forget Meghan, Harry might be the most manipulative one of them all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

Allisonfaye said:


> This isn't anything new.



I guess I've been under a rock, cause I'm Harry's age and I still remember when flinging racism around wasn't as fashionable as it is today.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> Did you really think they wouldn't find some compromise? This gives time for things to settle down, hopefully the press will leave them alone, and eventually they might go back to their previous roles.


The press would’ve had nothing to print if Meghan and Harry had used an iota of discretion.  They chose to air it in public instead.  Funny that.


----------



## TC1

I think Charles has a soft spot for Harry because he was so young when Diana died, didn't seem to have any guidance. Everyone was always so focused on William and Harry was the spare. I'm sure there is some level of guilt that while Charles was off shagging Camilla, Di and the boys were trying to make it all appear fine.
It's difficult in every family when your father marries the woman he cheated on your mother with.


----------



## myown

Meanwhile Chelsy and Methans ex are laughing


----------



## Tivo

The Queen isn’t stupid. She knows this is a battle of “optics.”
Give them what they want and let them self destruct. Meghan is chasing fame, and that never ends well. She reminds me of Bethenny Frankel. Harry will always be welcomed home. 

I imagine the Markle family will be making appearances soon.


----------



## bisousx

I’m really surprised at how quiet the Markle family is throughout all this!


----------



## bag-mania

Tivo said:


> I imagine the Markle family will be making appearances soon.



We all owe Samantha an apology. She told it like it was and we all thought she was a jealous b*tch.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CAH said:


> I'm still trying to figure out how Megan can show her face at any event, especially one with the entire family present.  Is she just going to leave Harry to fend for himself and bear the brunt of the public anger at them?


The woman has a brass neck so nothing would surprise me. 
At this point I think it’s a toss up as to which comes first, Meghan’s “her true story” book, or her filing for (a lucrative) divorce.


----------



## daisychainz

CAH said:


> I'm still trying to figure out how Megan can show her face at any event, especially one with the entire family present.  Is she just going to leave Harry to fend for himself and bear the brunt of the public anger at them?


She left him to sort all this alone, so I think that says a lot about who she is and how it will be in the future. She has no reason to ever visit the UK again. I can't imagine anyone in the immediate family likes her. But who knows, she might give the middle finger to them all and keep showing up and weddings and events. Guess time will tell.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Tivo said:


> The Queen isn’t stupid. She knows this is a battle of “optics.”
> Give them what they want and let them self destruct. Meghan is chasing fame, and that never ends well. She reminds me of Bethenny Frankel. Harry will always be welcomed home.
> 
> I imagine the Markle family will be making appearances soon.





bisousx said:


> I’m really surprised at how quiet the Markle family is throughout all this!



I saw Samantha on Entertainment Tonight? (One of those shows) when I was at the gym last week... they would barely let her talk and just called her jealous... I was actually feeling a little bad for her for the first time EVER, might have been because she was muted and all I had was captions and facial expressions though ...

She was basically right though  so far. I just wish she hadn’t pulled all those stunts at the beginning of their marriage... she’d have a lot more credibility now...


----------



## CeeJay

jehaga said:


> ITA! She looks matronly now. Wonder if she’ll ever get her pre-pregnancy looks back?


See, I think it's not necessarily her pregnancy, but remember .. as an actress, those gals are super-skinny because the camera adds 10 pounds.  If you look at older pictures of her as well, she was not as slender as she was when she met Harry.  I think now that she has had a baby and is no longer acting, she has decided to resume a more 'normal' weight.  All my opinion of course!


----------



## mshermes

This is all going to work out just fine. Harry can shuttle back and forth while Megs desperately looks for the billionaire she wanted but settled for Harry. Perfect. The RF can keep in their back pocket the fact that she is sooo ill with panic attacks, sleep deprivation etc. that she is probably an unfit mother.


----------



## bag-mania

PatsyCline said:


> Did you really think they wouldn't find some compromise? This gives time for things to settle down,* hopefully the press will leave them alone, *and eventually they might go back to their previous roles.



Not me. I'm hoping the press rides their a$$es like a demon bursting through the gates of hell. I'm here for the train wreak!


----------



## Gimmethebag

Clearblueskies said:


> The woman has a brass neck so nothing would surprise me.
> At this point I think it’s a toss-up as to which comes first, Meghan’s “her true story” book, or her filing for (a lucrative) divorce.



One of her friends was quoted in the Daily Mail as predicting she will divorce Harry for a billionaire because she always talked about wanting to marry a billionaire. 

She's close to 40 (which is older for a looks-only trophy wife) and has proven to have zero discretion and throws threats of blackmail and racism to up her spending allowance. Yes, the world's richest men are going to line up for that.


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> See, I think it's not necessarily her pregnancy, but remember .. as an actress, those gals are super-skinny because the camera adds 10 pounds.  If you look at older pictures of her as well, she was not as slender as she was when she met Harry.  I think now that she has had a baby and is no longer acting, she has decided to resume a more 'normal' weight.  All my opinion of course!


I totally agree...the caveat being that perhaps she is having problems keeping her weight down and it isn't a choice? IDK...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bisousx said:


> I’m really surprised at how quiet the Markle family is throughout all this!



They're all basking in _I Told You So_ glory.


----------



## LittleStar88

mshermes said:


> I totally agree...the caveat being that perhaps she is having problems keeping her weight down and it isn't a choice? IDK...



The weight doesn't melt away as you get older. It takes a significant amount of effort with each passing year. But it looks like most of the weight is hanging around in her face, making her look puffy.

Plus probably a bit of stress - even for crazy Meghan, I wonder if she is eating and sleeping properly. Is a nanny with her in Canada?


----------



## CAH

I can't remember if it was William or Harry that fell out of a tree and really hurt his arm (or if not a tree, something happened where he hurt it) and Diana called Charles from the hospital and Charles wouldn't leave because he was with Camilla.  Kids remember that sort of stuff, and I do think it was Harry.


----------



## Gimmethebag

mshermes said:


> I totally agree...the caveat being that perhaps she is having problems keeping her weight down and it isn't a choice? IDK...



From personal experience, changes in hormones can cause weight gain in the weirdest places and can be difficult to lose. Once the fat is there, you need some extra help removing it. She was also "actress thin" meaning, she likely managed her weight through a light exercise like yoga and diet. 

She had a child later in life and she's 5'6"... not like Kate's 5'11" athletic frame. Kate has a lot of muscle on her, which affects metabolism and likely how quickly she "snapped back" from her three pregnancies. Any fat gained from pregnancy also has more area to distribute because she's so tall. 

Said as a 5'2" woman. Weight gain sucks, lol.


----------



## PewPew

I think she’s still lovely & post-partum change is hard for anyone regardless of wealth. But I will say that her slight frame & uber-thinness when she met Harry helped create this image of a waif in need of protection. H wanted to be her Prince-protector long before the UK press turned. (The image she presented & the way Harry spoke of her made her seem more like the naive ingenue Diana was at 19, than a divorced, established actress in her mid-late 30’s.)

That dynamic was visible in their physical interactions in their public appearances, clinging to each other. He was going to give this fragile, beautiful woman a home & “the family she never had”. He still views himself her protector, but she’s naturally the more aggressive one, and no longer needs to play the docile waif role.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I think Charles has a soft spot for Harry because he was so young when Diana died, didn't seem to have any guidance.



I mean, I have a soft spot for Harry. I'm about William's age and the two boys at the funeral were painful to watch. I feel it's exactly because of that soft spot that so many people have no soft spot whatsoever for Meghan because he does not look like a happy man and her very public shenanigans are out there for everyone to see. Even the stans if they just cared to look.


----------



## pukasonqo

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*



yup, M has it hard...especially when you think she has access to top mental and physical health specialists, is not fleeing a DV situation or is a refugee in a strange, sometimes hostile, land
If she had PND why not see an specialist and come clean about it? That would have helped other women struggling w it
I moved countries and had my children w no blood family w me, I am not going to pretend that, as lovely as my in laws are, it was a struggle but I have always known I was lucky and that many women do not have access to medical and social services before and after childbirth
I am not dissing M’s experience but she had what many don’t: access to help


----------



## sdkitty

Gimmethebag said:


> I wonder how Camilla feels about Charles giving Harry and Meghan millions of pounds of their personal money. I'm sure her children aren't treated the same way and say what you will about her, she's his wife of 20-something years.
> 
> Also, how is Meghan not completely embarrassed to liken herself to Michelle *****?


the likened herself to Michelle *****....that is just ridiculous....let's see, attorney, first lady, author vs D-list actress, champion networker


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When an established press agency like AP publishes such an unbecoming video that's pretty telling.
> 
> ETA: the guy's some German journalist saying he is starting to understand why the UK is less than impressed with MM.




So interesting!
Translation (loose)
“I am slowly beginning to understand why the British public is so skeptical about it #MeghanMarkle has become. How she gets into the discussion is somehow "cringe" (as the cool youth says today).”


----------



## youngster

I think many people would have loved a fire-brand statement from the Queen, as if she were Elizabeth I and not Elizabeth II, but she is playing the long game and, as others have said, learned from her mistakes with Diana.  

Here is how the DM interprets the statement.  She refers to them as "Harry and Meghan" and not the Duke/Duchess of Sussex. The Queen makes clear that she wanted them to stay (so that no one can say they were forced out). Details and path forward to be ironed out, now that they sat down and explained to Harry in great financial detail what the cost of all his and Meghan's upkeep and security and the Frogmore house and possible tax situation would be going forward.


----------



## bag-princess

Gimmethebag said:


> *I wonder how Camilla feels about Charles giving Harry and Meghan millions of pounds of their personal money.* I'm sure her children aren't treated the same way and say what you will about her, she's his wife of 20-something years.
> 
> Also, how is Meghan not completely embarrassed to liken herself to Michelle *****?




i thought that it was Charles money they were paid from - so would she really have any say in the matter?


----------



## kissmysass

This situation is crazy makes me feel like a fool that I ever liked her. Her greed is showing.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan wants everyone to think she's a strong, independent woman but she's anything but.


----------



## Aqua01

bag-mania said:


> Not me. I'm hoping the press rides their a$$es like a demon bursting through the gates of hell. I'm here for the train wreak!


LMAO, so funny 
I like you


----------



## mshermes

youngster said:


> I think many people would have loved a fire-brand statement from the Queen, as if she were Elizabeth I and not Elizabeth II, but she is playing the long game and, as others have said, learned from her mistakes with Diana.
> 
> Here is how the DM interprets the statement.  She refers to them as "Harry and Meghan" and not the Duke/Duchess of Sussex. The Queen makes clear that she wanted them to stay (so that no one can say they were forced out). Details and path forward to be ironed out, now that they sat down and explained to Harry in great financial detail what the cost of all his and Meghan's upkeep and security and the Frogmore house and possible tax situation would be going forward.


I think there is going to be a slight problem with “them” splitting their time between NA and the UK since she is not ever stepping foot in the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> I think there is going to be a slight problem with “them” splitting their time between NA and the UK since she is not ever stepping foot in the UK.


Perhaps she’ll ring some of us up now and again


----------



## Katel

Sophisticatted said:


> I once read that Camilla still has a personal home (pre-marriage to Charles) where she goes to spend family time with just her kids and family.
> 
> My predictions for Harry’s future are dissolution of the separate royal Sussex offices and websites, an eventual divorce, securing custody of Archie (hopefully), continued involvement with Invictus, Sentebale, and Heads Together, moving back to Great Britain, taking Charles up on the offer of a working estate (a quiet life with purpose) and/or moving back to Kensington Palace to be near to his brother and be a supportive and close family member again.


I agree with all of this but regarding divorce, I am of two minds: Not sure if she’ll let go of her guaranteed paycheck (Archie)  until she’s unable to draw child support on him ...
Or, is she such a narcissist that she doesn’t want to be encumbered and would take a big massive RF paycheck to turn him over to Harry?
ETA: I think it’s the former, because then she’ll have all the (media, etc.) attention that she’d get from day to day association with Archie for 18 years. Plus child support.

Additionally, thank you for the discussion on narcissism - fascinating - I don’t think I’ve ever known one, but now know what to watch out for...


----------



## Gimmethebag

bag-princess said:


> i thought that it was Charles money they were paid from - so would she really have any say in the matter?



I posted an article that laid out that Harry and Meghan received €2M/year from the Duchy of Cornwall, which is Prince Charles’s entitlement as Prince of Wales and then Charles was also giving Harry and Meghan additional money from his “personal accounts.” That money likely comes from investment interest, etc., which as his wife, is technically Camilla’s money too. 

Again, she’s his wife of 20+ years. I’m sure she feels some kind of way about how much money her husband was throwing at his ungrateful adult son.


----------



## Sharont2305

Off topic but I've just watched a drama I'd recorded last Wednesday and who had one of the starring roles?
Cressida Bonas, one of the two he should have married. And from what little I've seen of Meghan's acting, Cressida was a better actress, lol


----------



## Gimmethebag

Sharont2305 said:


> Off topic but I've just watched a drama I'd recorded last Wednesday and who had one of the starring roles?
> Cressida Bonas, one of the two he should have married. And from what little I've seen of Meghan's acting, Cressida was a better actress, lol



Supposedly Harry was a jerk to her. She decided she can do better.


----------



## carmen56

Good riddance.  And if Markle ever decides to grace the Uk with her presence again, she won’t get a very warm welcome!


mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*


----------



## carmen56

Beatrice can have it when she marries Edo.


Gimmethebag said:


> May as well give Frog Cott to another family member and hope they like the decor.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Piers Morgan
@piersmorgan
·
3h

BREAKING: Harry/Meghan have successfully bullied the Queen into letting them have their cake & eat it.


----------



## queennadine

Had to catch up! 

So I’m definitely reading into TQ’s statement and her not calling them HRH or Duke/Duchess. The BRF is always very formal so I think it’s meant to knock them down a peg or two. I think TQ will try to let public opinion and Parliament “make the decisions” about cutting them so she doesn’t look like the big bad racist some idiots claim she is. 
Also, I would hope Harry doesn’t hold what happened between his parents over his father’s head. Diana was no saint in that marriage either, and the argument that because Charles cheated it’s only natural that she would too doesn’t fly with me. You’re either willing to cross that line or not, and it shouldn’t matter if your partner did. 
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I also don’t think she can show up in the UK again. Who on earth would want her there?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Allisonfaye said:


> Piers Morgan
> @piersmorgan
> ·
> 3h
> 
> BREAKING: Harry/Meghan have successfully bullied the Queen into letting them have their cake & eat it.


Not so sure about that, her statement said a whole lot of nothing!


----------



## Chagall

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Just read this - the comments are seething, this couple deserves NO support and the public agrees:
> 
> Canada offers to pick up Harry and Meghan's £500,000 security bill
> https://mol.im/a/7881493


Reading that has sent my blood pressure through the roof. There are 14 year waiting lists for subsidized housing, people living on the streets and kids going hungry in Canada. Now this stupid bleeding heart country wants to throw that kind of money at those sleeze  bags.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> *Meghan Markle has the 'full support' of mom Doria Ragland after being 'miserable, having anxiety attacks and struggling after Archie's birth, as Duchess confides she has no intention of ever returning to the UK to live'*
> *
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881909/Meghan-Markle-support-mom-Doria-Ragland-miserable-UK.html*


of course her mother will support her....and maybe she was raised to always put herself first and that's why she is who she is


----------



## 1LV

For those who compared Yoko to MM...


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Haha. The 'full support' of her mom? Can you say 'payday'?
> 
> I suppose it's possible MM is suffering from postpartum depression.


I noted that her mom is referred to as a former yoga instructor....gues she was able to retire


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> For those who compared Yoko to MM...
> 
> View attachment 4639080





1LV said:


> For those who compared Yoko to MM...
> 
> View attachment 4639080


I don't think people were talking about their looks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I don't think people were talking about their looks


Haha.  Nor do I!


----------



## daisychainz

Would British people really boo her if she showed up at something public?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> See, I think it's not necessarily her pregnancy, but remember .. as an actress, those gals are super-skinny because the camera adds 10 pounds.  If you look at older pictures of her as well, she was not as slender as she was when she met Harry.  I think now that she has had a baby and is no longer acting, she has decided to resume a more 'normal' weight.  All my opinion of course!


or she didn't decide to resume a more normal weight.....maybe her body didn't bounce back as she would have liked and she didn't want to spend hours a day working out......I guess that would be a decision


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> or she didn't decide to resume a more normal weight.....maybe her body didn't bounce back as she would have liked and she didn't want to spend hours a day working out......I guess that would be a decision



Or perhaps this is her normal, walking around weight? Or she is holding the weight to project an image like her life is substandard compared to before the wedding?


----------



## sdkitty

Gimmethebag said:


> I posted an article that laid out that Harry and Meghan received €2M/year from the Duchy of Cornwall, which is Prince Charles’s entitlement as Prince of Wales and then Charles was also giving Harry and Meghan additional money from his “personal accounts.” That money likely comes from investment interest, etc., which as his wife, is technically Camilla’s money too.
> 
> Again, she’s his wife of 20+ years. I’m sure she feels some kind of way about how much money her husband was throwing at his ungrateful adult son.


wow time flies....I didn't realize they'd been married over 20 years.....hopefully she would leave it up to Charles how he shares money with his kids.  I'm sure there will be plenty for her.  On the other hand, he loves her and probably values her opinion


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> wow time flies....I didn't realize they'd been married over 20 years.....hopefully she would leave it up to Charles how he shares money with his kids.  I'm sure there will be plenty for her.  On the other hand, he loves her and probably values her opinion


They were actually married in 2005, so 15 years this year.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> wow time flies....I didn't realize they'd been married over 20 years.....hopefully she would leave it up to Charles how he shares money with his kids.  I'm sure there will be plenty for her.  On the other hand, he loves her and probably values her opinion


They were married 2005 I think.


----------



## mrsinsyder

She's shaped like sponge-bob to begin with, which isn't a forgiving shape. She gave up the white powder and here we are.


----------



## PewPew

Chagall said:


> Reading that has sent my blood pressure through the roof. There are 14 year waiting lists for subsidized housing, people living on the streets and kids going hungry in Canada. Now this stupid bleeding heart country wants to throw that kind of money at those sleeze  bags.



This made me realize part of why my blood boils when I read about how much money was spent on H & M, and their home reno & her million dollar wardrobe. Of course rich people will always spend extravagantly. That’s a given.

But H&M *talk* so much about wanting to improve mental health, for example. My friend who was gang raped had to wait 7 months for a regular NHS therapist. (In the meantime her family & church helped pay for intensive treatment privately). I’m sorry I never stopped to wonder “how Meghan is doing,” because I figured that someone who wears a $90,000 pregancy caftan for 2 hrs can also afford quality help at home & healthcare if she’s unwell.

I’m NOT saying that the answer is H&M pay for people’s therapy & obviously Parliament decides healthcare funding. But these discussions bring to light just how much wealth the BRF has (& how they got that wealth generations ago, some of it is ugly). But when millions of pounds of TAXPAYER funds can be spent on the wedding of the 2nd daughter of the 3rd child of the Queen, it makes me extraordinarily sad that my friend had to crowdfund her treatment for assault.  Apparently being a “patron” of a cause is mostly just an appearance, some photos & a pretty speech about how WE should do more to help X or Y.  These days H&M, being so modern, could even be a “patron” remotely from Canada by throwing up a woke instagram post.


----------



## mrsinsyder

_Meghan's friend revealed that she has no 'intention' to return to the UK to live permanently, saying: 'She doesn’t want to raise Archie there and she doesn’t want to schlep back and forth. She’ll make extended visits but that’s it.

'They are looking for a permanent residence in Canada. She said she wants a country house in Whistler outside of Vancouver and a home in Toronto.'_


----------



## queennadine

Yeah, MM’s insinuations of suffering from PPD and PPA would sound more plausible if she mentioned it apart from trying to garner sympathy for herself. I hope for her sake that she didn’t/doesn’t suffer from either, but if she did/does and only mentions it to paint herself as a victim and not help other women, then Im even more disgusted with her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> _'They are looking for a permanent residence in Canada. She said she wants a country house in Whistler outside of Vancouver and a home in Toronto.'_



I hope they'll pay for that themselves.


----------



## tiktok

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtm...ble-standards-royal?__twitter_impression=true
(Not sure if these are cherry picked to prove the point or not)
Regardless of yes/no racism, I hope they both get the extensive therapy they need. Running away or making tons of
money isn’t going to solve any of their unhappiness problems. Their “I’m a victim” mentality needs to be resolved or they’ll forever be unhappy even swimming in billions.


----------



## mdcx

Imo “transition period” means “until Harry comes to his senses and dumps her”.
I can see them being a bit softly softly until they get Harry back, then she will be iced out permanently.
As others have said, how could she ever represent the BRF again? She obviously does not want to.

I would not be surprised if this is either cover for, or planning for, a separation leading hopefully to divorce. Megs can stay in Canada, merch herself to oblivion and they will work on getting Harry back to solid mental health in the UK.

Obvs the BRF are extremely angry with both of them. Megs title will be yanked soon enough.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> _Meghan's friend revealed that she has no 'intention' to return to the UK to live permanently, saying: 'She doesn’t want to raise Archie there and she doesn’t want to schlep back and forth. She’ll make extended visits but that’s it.
> 
> 'They are looking for a permanent residence in Canada. She said she wants a country house in Whistler outside of Vancouver and a home in Toronto.'_



She is pit of wants and needs.

Archie should be raised in the UK and close to his cousins and family. It is the ONLY family he will have so why take that away from him?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

How long will this satisfy them before their need for drama and attention compels them to give interviews, write books, and otherwise mess up a good thing? I don't believe they are capable of being happy with their "win" and keeping their mouths shut.


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> See, I think it's not necessarily her pregnancy, but remember .. as an actress, those gals are super-skinny because the camera adds 10 pounds.  If you look at older pictures of her as well, she was not as slender as she was when she met Harry.  I think now that she has had a baby and is no longer acting, she has decided to resume a more 'normal' weight.  All my opinion of course!


I think there were rumours about how she maintained her low weight, and speculation that it would be hard to obtain the necessary ingredient as a member of the BRF.


----------



## bisousx

mrsinsyder said:


> She's shaped like sponge-bob to begin with, which isn't a forgiving shape. She gave up the white powder and here we are.



this is so delightfully catty, I can’t even 

Personally I think she looks great right now, and back to her slim self. Still smug looking AF but looking good


----------



## rose60610

From the Wall Street Journal:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have chosen to step back as senior members of the British royal family and become financially independent.

Your definition of financially independent may differ a little from theirs.

The Sussexes will cut themselves off from the Sovereign Grant, their portion of the income from the Crown Estate. The £14.3 billion ($18.7 billion) estate, which was cobbled together over centuries of savvy acquisition and brute force, is neither quite the property of the government nor the monarch.

Most of the couple’s money comes from the more modest Duchy of Cornwall, an entirely different £931 million estate cobbled together over centuries of savvy acquisition and brute force. It is a private estate, and the Sussexes intend to hang on to their chunk—which makes up 95% of their income.

Japan has a simpler system: The property of the imperial household belongs to the state and the family members receive allowances from the government.

Reluctant royals may look on at Thailand’s King Maha Vajiralongkorn with envy. Thailand’s royal portfolio, thought to be in the tens of billions of dollars, was transferred to the king’s personal control in 2018.

--Mike Bird


----------



## carmen56

Well, Camilla Parker Bowles was pelted with bread rolls in the supermarket after Diana died, so yes, I think Markle would get booed, or worse!


daisychainz said:


> Would British people really boo her if she showed up at something public?


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> _Meghan's friend revealed that she has no 'intention' to return to the UK to live permanently, saying: 'She doesn’t want to raise Archie there and she doesn’t want to schlep back and forth. She’ll make extended visits but that’s it.
> 
> 'They are looking for a permanent residence in Canada. She said she wants a country house in Whistler outside of Vancouver and a home in Toronto.'_


Of course, just the basics of life


----------



## chaneljewel

I was a supporter of Meghan until all of this.  It seems that Harry and Meghan are being completely selfish.  M should have thought deeper about the lifestyle she was marrying.   It does seem like there’s a lot of “poor pitiful me” playing into the situation, like a child having a temper tantrum.  No one truly wins from this.  I think it makes M supporters realize she’s not the ‘good’ person they thought.   At least that’s how I feel right now.  I’m not sure why Canada wants the couple, or maybe they have ties there?  I mostly feel terrible about the strain this has put on William and Harry’s relationship.  They’ve always been so close.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> From the Wall Street Journal:
> 
> *Sussexes intend to hang on to their chunk—which makes up 95% of their income...*
> --Mike Bird



Yep.


----------



## bag-mania

chaneljewel said:


> I was a supporter of Meghan until all of this.  It seems that Harry and Meghan are being completely selfish.  M should have thought deeper about the lifestyle she was marrying.   It does seem like there’s a lot of “poor pitiful me” playing into the situation, like a child having a temper tantrum.  No one truly wins from this.  I think it makes M supporters realize she’s not the ‘good’ person they thought.   At least that’s how I feel right now.  I’m not sure why Canada wants the couple, or maybe they have ties there?  I mostly feel terrible about the strain this has put on William and Harry’s relationship.  They’ve always been so close.



Yes, she is coming across as a weak, whiny crybaby. Work is hard! The press is mean! Why doesn't everybody love me?! Harry, you tell your family we're not going to do it anymore! Call me when it's done, I'll be in the Toronto mansion we're borrowing this week!


----------



## mdcx

So when will Meghan post again on her socials? You know she’s just dying to flex some of her new found freedom by doing something she was not “allowed” to previously.
Set up a personal insta account, wear something revealing-ish, go shopping for high end items in front of paps?
We all know she cannot bear to be out of the spotlight for long...


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I think there were rumours about how she maintained her low weight, and speculation that it would be hard to obtain the necessary ingredient as a member of the BRF.


WHOA! .. did not ever hear those, but nothing about Hollyweird surprised me anymore!


----------



## Handbag1234

akoko said:


> I find it interesting that this is the fist time their titles weren't used in an official announcement. Maybe it's an indication of the direction this is going. What is winding everyone up here, is the expectation they have to keep the money and benefits of being a royal. I hope this is a smart way that the Queen intends to handle this. Support her grandson as a family member, but cut of any sort of direct or indirect public funding. People are quite angry about this. Even colleagues that have never cared about the royal family find it unbelievable that they want to keep the perks and the royal name, but not the obligations. That really puts in question the whole role of the monarchy.



I have little interest in the royal family but I’m really angry about the £9 million wedding plus £2.4 million spent on the house , plus the annual funding for them- then  20 months later they decide they’re out. But they appear to pick and choose what they want to keep. A friend of mine is so angry she was going to write to the Queen! I bet MM is watching the famous Diana interview on a loop, so she can perfect her performance for the Oprah/***** exclusive interview they’ve lined up.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

carmen56 said:


> Well, Camilla Parker Bowles was pelted with bread rolls in the supermarket after Diana died, so yes, I think Markle would get booed, or worse!



We can only hope!!! [emoji813]️


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ivorce-rejoin-Royals-time-bookmakers-say.html


----------



## mdcx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> We can only hope!!! [emoji813]️


I could see people staring at her in stony, contemptuous silence, a few backs turned. Maybe an older person calling out “How could you do that to Her Majesty?”
Overall extremely uncomfortable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## legaldiva

I used to like Meghan.  I thought she understood the responsibilities of being a member of the Royal Family ... this is atrocious.  They've accepted millions from the public now to betray those responsbilities?  And head for Canada?  If I were a British taxpayer, I would take this personally.


----------



## mshermes

mdcx said:


> So when will Meghan post again on her socials? You know she’s just dying to flex some of her new found freedom by doing something she was not “allowed” to previously.
> Set up a personal insta account, wear something revealing-ish, go shopping for high end items in front of paps?
> We all know she cannot bear to be out of the spotlight for long...


She’s got this company Frim Fram (?), her PR firm, attorneys....so she’s good to go.


----------



## Sophisticatted

While I doubt it would happen, due to optics, I hope that once Archie is back in Britain, they refuse to let him out of the country again.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> _Meghan's friend revealed that she has no 'intention' to return to the UK to live permanently, saying: 'She doesn’t want to raise Archie there and she doesn’t want to schlep back and forth. She’ll make extended visits but that’s it.
> 
> 'They are looking for a permanent residence in Canada. She said she wants a country house in Whistler outside of Vancouver and a home in Toronto.'_


And that’s just the beginning of Meghan’s real estate shopping list ...


----------



## mdcx

mshermes said:


> She’s got this company Frim Fram (?), her PR firm, attorneys....so she’s good to go.


Interesting. I assume “Frim Fram” comes from the jazz number.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Frim-Fram_Sauce


Seems about right.


----------



## rose60610

How long will it be before Meghan gives "the interview" that blames all criticism on racism and a horrible rotten mean RF? And how she deserves pity and felt honored to represent the USA in Britain? It's only a matter of time. She pretty much has what she wants. Like a previous post says, nobody is responsible for anything anymore.  If you call out a jerk for being a jerk then you're the one framed as the meanie regardless of all you've done for and given the jerk. There will always be a core of stans that will excuse her and give every benefit of doubt. Comments in the NYT are pretty much split, which is rare. That readership is usually either out for blood or gloats like frothing zombies on divisive issues. I think there'll be enough donors to the H&M Slush Foundation to make it worth billions. From what the Queen said, they won't get "public" financial support, but there's plenty of other Royal funds they can still suck off. The Crown has definitely been Markled. Thanks Harry. Dope.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mshermes said:


> She’s got this company Frim Fram (?), her PR firm, attorneys....so she’s good to go.


Murkey Meg on Youtube has a lot to say about Meghan and all her new companies and shell companies #shady


----------



## Straight-Laced

carmen56 said:


> Well, Camilla Parker Bowles was pelted with bread rolls in the supermarket after Diana died, so yes, I think Markle would get booed, or worse!


Well speaking personally, should the Duchess Meghan descend upon Australia any time soon I will be well dressed woman in the crowd  - slightly middle aged but NOT matronly   and carrying an excellent handbag of course  - while blowing raspberries at madam  

(JOKING. I don't blow raspberries and I certainly wouldn't bother going anywhere to see Meghan)


----------



## youngster

I'd think that any power player in the media or business who might consider partnering with them or co-producing something with the two of them would think twice, then think again, based on how they've managed this debacle and what it has revealed about them.  This all could have been done behind the scenes, discreetly, probably taken several months to work out but, no, no, they have no patience for the details and their time is so very valuable (and there was that hateful photo of the Queen at Christmas with her three heirs that excluded Harry after all) so they go public with that atrocious statement. If they treat the Queen this way, how would they treat some lowly mark, I mean,_ business partner_?


----------



## mdcx

Saw this via another forum. Serena William’s husband:
https://mobile.twitter.com/alexisohanian/status/1216652533508104193


----------



## marthastoo

smh at the ugliness on this thread.


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> I think there'll be enough donors to the H&M Slush Foundation to make it worth billions. From what the Queen said, they won't get "public" financial support, but there's plenty of other Royal funds they can still suck off. The Crown has definitely been Markled. Thanks Harry. Dope.



This will be really interesting to see, how much money can they actually raise for their charitable foundation. Will large numbers of people actually send them money? It's easy to post on social media, not as many will actually pull out their credit cards or write a check.  It's a lot harder to raise money than people think and to sustain it is even harder over the long haul.  I think even the Princess Diana Foundation shut down a few years ago.  There are so many charities out there and you need a clear mission statement, goals, and action plan with competent management and an annual audit and evidence that what you are actually doing is actually working.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> Saw this via another forum. Serena William’s husband:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4639141



Yikes, coincidence or throwing shade?  He had to know people would interpret it this way.


----------



## mdcx

Well, well:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7883451/Inside-Megxit-summit-Harry-talked-Queen-story.html


----------



## Chagall

legaldiva said:


> I used to like Meghan.  I thought she understood the responsibilities of being a member of the Royal Family ... this is atrocious.  They've accepted millions from the public now to betray those responsbilities?  And head for Canada?  If I were a British taxpayer, I would take this personally.


Being a Canadian Citizen I take this personally!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> She's shaped like sponge-bob to begin with, which isn't a forgiving shape. She gave up the white powder and here we are.


lol
you're bad


----------



## LittleStar88

Straight-Laced said:


> Well speaking personally, should the Duchess Meghan descend upon Australia any time soon I will be well dressed woman in the crowd  - slightly middle aged but NOT matronly   and carrying an excellent handbag of course  - while blowing raspberries at madam
> 
> (JOKING. I don't blow raspberries and I certainly wouldn't bother going anywhere to see Meghan)



I thought this was going in the direction of having an excellent handbag loaded with bread rolls for pelting...

Get the hard crust type for best effect.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> lol
> you're bad


Lol sorry. 

I don’t think she’s unattractive, she’s just square. She wears clothes made for someone tall and thin. She dressed herself much better on her Suits days.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> WHOA! .. did not ever hear those, but nothing about Hollyweird surprised me anymore!


would be interesting if this was true since she wanted to ban harry from drinking


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol sorry.
> 
> I don’t think she’s unattractive, she’s just square. She wears clothes made for someone tall and thin. She dressed herself much better on her Suits days.


probably someone else dressing her then


----------



## Luvluxx098

Of course everyone expects royalty to live in luxury, but they have gone overboard. No one expects them to live like regular people, and give their money to support others; they feel their contribution to publicizing worthy causes and charities is their contribution.  But people only laugh when they see someone who wants to be financially independent at 35 and 38 drive to a meeting in a $100,000 car and then fly first class or privately to a $14,000,000 mansion. I hope they have the cash to keep that up.


----------



## PatsyCline

carmen56 said:


> Well, Camilla Parker Bowles was pelted with bread rolls in the supermarket after Diana died, so yes, I think Markle would get booed, or worse!


Hardly the same scenario. Camilla was the other woman, and one of the reasons for the break-up of their marriage. 

Harry & Meghan want a quieter life away from the rabid press.


----------



## Chagall

LittleStar88 said:


> I thought this was going in the direction of having an excellent handbag loaded with bread rolls for pelting...
> 
> Get the hard crust type for best effect.


Be careful not to mess up the inside of that excellent handbag with the very hard crust bread rolls.


----------



## bag-princess

Gimmethebag said:


> I posted an article that laid out that Harry and Meghan received €2M/year from the Duchy of Cornwall, which is Prince Charles’s entitlement as Prince of Wales and then Charles was also giving Harry and Meghan additional money from his “personal accounts.” That money likely comes from investment interest, etc., which as his wife, is technically Camilla’s money too.
> 
> Again, she’s his wife of 20+ years. I’m sure she feels some kind of way about how much money her husband was throwing at his ungrateful adult son.




she can feel any way she wants but that is his child and if he wants to continue to support them he will.  if she doesn't like it i suggest a seperate account for her money!


----------



## Chagall

I am very angry that they have decided to spend time in Canada. A lot of people really don’t want them here. I am taking solace in the fact that it won’t last long here either. They will fall out with, burn bridges and eventually need to isolate themselves from this country and everyone here also. I guess they could move on to Australia then, when it is far too late to lend their support with all the devastation going on there now.


----------



## Straight-Laced

LittleStar88 said:


> I thought this was going in the direction of having an excellent handbag loaded with bread rolls for pelting...
> 
> Get the hard crust type for best effect.


LOL I'm so with you, but you don't get arrested for blowing raspberries.  
(Clever ...  )


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> This will be really interesting to see, how much money can they actually raise for their charitable foundation. *Will large numbers of people actually send them money?* It's easy to post on social media, not as many will actually pull out their credit cards or write a check.  It's a lot harder to raise money than people think and to sustain it is even harder over the long haul.  I think even the Princess Diana Foundation shut down a few years ago.  There are so many charities out there and you need a clear mission statement, goals, and action plan with competent management and an annual audit and evidence that what you are actually doing is actually working.



One doesn't necessarily need "large numbers of people", a few mega donors would suffice. Foundations can also give to other working foundations, scratching backs, as it were. Certainly some good works are expected, and required, to maintain good graces with tax collectors. Question is, do M&H have enough pull to connect powerful people to other powerful people? If you have a few million to throw at a charity, will you give it to M&H, or Gates, *******, Ford, Rockefeller, MacArthur, or any one of numerous others? Who can give you bang for your buck? Who can M&H hook you up with? As long as they got Charles and William (who are forced to be nice to them), that connection can be leveraged to bigger and better things. I'm sure there are some other high profile people M&H hobnob with that'd donate. People give to others they despise simply for the networking opportunities. Certainly Hollywood types who couldn't get into Buckingham Palace otherwise without a tourist ticket. I think M&H are banking on their celebrity and sponging off daddy and brother's notoriety. And they probably can. And will.


----------



## mshermes

Realizing now that M has been doing more than double duty....dissolution of her company in CA and registering in DE, working with her PR people and attorney, designing the new website sussexroyal.com, etc. since last year, being a new mother and her RF duties....no wonder she is sleep deprived and having anxiety attacks. I am exhausted taking it all in. To say she is overly ambitious and deceitful is an understatement.


----------



## closeted

They ain't bill gates nor oprah. What clouds do they have personally? They are or were prince and princess of UK, not the world. I still don't get what will they be selling and who will be foolish enough to fund or buy it. I mean if you wanna talk work ethics .....


----------



## rose60610

mshermes said:


> Realizing now that M has been doing more than double duty....dissolution of her company in CA and registering in DE, working with her PR people and attorney, etc. since last year, being a new mother and her RF duties....no wonder she is sleep deprived and having anxiety attacks. I am exhausted taking it all in. To say she is overly ambitious and deceitful is an understatement.



It's beyond obvious to me this was all planned well before their wedding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suzie

I had a chuckle at this on twitter.


----------



## chaneljewel

My dh listened to the report on the news tonight and stated that he thinks H and M will eventually be completely ostracized by the royal family.  He said that the queen has enough class to not do it at once, but it will happen gradually.  Then they’ll be forgotten and unimportant in Royal matters.  I think he’s right.  I’m already done with their soap opera drama.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chaneljewel said:


> My dh listened to the report on the news tonight and stated that he thinks H and M will eventually be completely ostracized by the royal family.  He said that the queen has enough class to not do it at once, but it will happen gradually.  Then they’ll be forgotten and unimportant in Royal matters.  I think he’s right.  I’m already done with their soap opera drama.


Agree. The Queen wasn’t going to banish them publicly today. She’ll just slow fade them.


----------



## BigPurseSue

rose60610 said:


> One doesn't necessarily need "large numbers of people", a few mega donors would suffice. Foundations can also give to other working foundations, scratching backs, as it were. Certainly some good works are expected, and required, to maintain good graces with tax collectors. Question is, do M&H have enough pull to connect powerful people to other powerful people? If you have a few million to throw at a charity, will you give it to M&H, or Gates, *******, Ford, Rockefeller, MacArthur, or any one of numerous others? Who can give you bang for your buck? Who can M&H hook you up with? As long as they got Charles and William (who are forced to be nice to them), that connection can be leveraged to bigger and better things. I'm sure there are some other high profile people M&H hobnob with that'd donate. People give to others they despise simply for the networking opportunities. Certainly Hollywood types who couldn't get into Buckingham Palace otherwise without a tourist ticket. I think M&H are banking on their celebrity and sponging off daddy and brother's notoriety. And they probably can. And will.



DH is involved with several charities, and on the board of directors of some. They're not terribly interested in wooing ordinary donors, the people who write $20 and $50 checks. It's all about courting the big-money donors, the people who toss millions at charities, and their fund-raisers are focused on winning over those people usually with the possibility of networking. It's truly a whole different charity world than the one in which pot-lucks and Santa-photo sessions are hosted for the local dog rescue.


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> Hardly the same scenario. Camilla was the other woman, and one of the reasons for the break-up of their marriage.
> 
> Harry & Meghan want a quieter life away from the rabid press.


That’s cute.


----------



## Katel

rose60610 said:


> One doesn't necessarily need "large numbers of people", a few mega donors would suffice. Foundations can also give to other working foundations, scratching backs, as it were. Certainly some good works are expected, and required, to maintain good graces with tax collectors. Question is, do M&H have enough pull to connect powerful people to other powerful people? If you have a few million to throw at a charity, will you give it to M&H, or Gates, *******, Ford, Rockefeller, MacArthur, or any one of numerous others? Who can give you bang for your buck? Who can M&H hook you up with? *As long as they got Charles and William (who are forced to be nice to them)*, that connection can be leveraged to bigger and better things. I'm sure there are some other high profile people M&H hobnob with that'd donate. People give to others they despise simply for the networking opportunities. Certainly Hollywood types who couldn't get into Buckingham Palace otherwise without a tourist ticket. I think M&H are banking on their celebrity and sponging off daddy and brother's notoriety. And they probably can. And will.



Why would the RF be willing? I think Charles, Will, the whole family, will distance themselves from H&M.



chaneljewel said:


> My dh listened to the report on the news tonight and stated that he thinks *H and M will eventually be completely ostracized by the royal family.  *He said that the queen has enough class to not do it at once, but it will. happen gradually.  Then they’ll be forgotten and unimportant in Royal matters.  I think he’s right.  I’m already done with their soap opera drama.


Agree...slowly slowly slowly...
I think (hope) Harry comes to his senses and he and the family can reconcile.


----------



## V0N1B2

mrsinsyder said:


> _Meghan's friend revealed that she has no 'intention' to return to the UK to live permanently, saying: 'She doesn’t want to raise Archie there and she doesn’t want to schlep back and forth. She’ll make extended visits but that’s it.
> 
> 'They are looking for a permanent residence in Canada. She said she wants a country house in Whistler outside of Vancouver and a home in Toronto.'_


Pfft. I’ll be standing by the lights at Funky Junky (Function Junction) giving her the finger as she approaches town. I hope her settlement is big ‘cause she’s gonna need a good 4-5 mil for a house here. I can’t see her living in a 1.8M rickety old Gothic arch ski cabin. 
Best wishes sweetheart


----------



## rose60610

Katel said:


> Why would the RF be willing? I think Charles, Will, the whole family, will distance themselves from H&M.
> 
> 
> Agree...slowly slowly slowly...
> I think (hope) Harry comes to his senses and he and the family can reconcile.



I see your point. I also see M&H's point of making $$$ while they can. Perception is reality. If people (donors) feel they can get access to a King by throwing $ at M&H's foundation, they will. It's M&H's job to make potential donors feel they can, whether or not they really can. At the very least, I think there will be enough Hollywood donors to make it worth their immediate while. I also hope Harry wakes up from woking and ditches Meghan. Without him she is nothing. We'll see.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

And the Oscar for Best Actress goes to ..... Meghan

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...HN-Oscar-Best-Actress-goes-Meghan-Markle.html


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> Agree. The Queen wasn’t going to banish them publicly today. She’ll just slow fade them.


Before the crisis meeting a few experienced observers said that the Queen would take control to get this live issue off the front pages.
So add no more fuel to the media fire and have it dealt with properly and privately.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I notice a lot of new people have popped in to say they never cared about them much before, but now they dislike them. No one has said the opposite. 

I guess they didn’t gain any fans from this.


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> She’s got this company Frim Fram (?), her PR firm, attorneys....so she’s good to go.


Saw that .. so in addition to my blood boiling over what it "appears" that they will get so far, she had her "high-powered" LA Attorneys involved? .. FROM WHEN???? .. the minute she figured that she had snagged/duped Harry?


----------



## muchstuff

chaneljewel said:


> I was a supporter of Meghan until all of this.  It seems that Harry and Meghan are being completely selfish.  M should have thought deeper about the lifestyle she was marrying.   It does seem like there’s a lot of “poor pitiful me” playing into the situation, like a child having a temper tantrum.  No one truly wins from this.  I think it makes M supporters realize she’s not the ‘good’ person they thought.   At least that’s how I feel right now.  I’m not sure why Canada wants the couple, or maybe they have ties there?  I mostly feel terrible about the strain this has put on William and Harry’s relationship.  They’ve always been so close.


We don’t want them.


----------



## bagshopr

The fairytale is over. They may think they have won but they have lost.


----------



## chaneljewel

mrsinsyder said:


> I notice a lot of new people have popped in to say they never cared about them much before, but now they dislike them. No one has said the opposite.
> 
> 
> I guess they didn’t gain any fans from this.


I was actually a fan of the two before this drama.  After watching and listening to the disrespect towards the Queen, I’ve become annoyed with their behavior.  They’re grown ups who should have aired their concerns privately instead of in the public eye.  As I stated earlier, I think they’re both being selfish and acting like spoiled brats.  I’m sure the Royal life gets difficult but Harry is used to it and Meghan shouldn’t have married Harry if she didn’t want to be part of that life.  To turn him against his family is what bothers me.  She will live to regret that decision in years to come.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well, this is a fine kettle of fish. QE2 is playing chess not checkers, and knows all her moves in advance.

I hope H&M have a good tax attorney and have not co-mingled their funds.....
Because if they have, more hilarity will ensue...When Harry owes $ to the IRS even if he never steps foot in the US.

Flapping in the woke breeze on their own they are more likely to make some major mistakes.

https://www.taxesforexpats.com/expat-tax-advice/foreign-spouse.html


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> Saw that .. so in addition to my blood boiling over what it "appears" that they will get so far, she had her "high-powered" LA Attorneys involved? .. FROM WHEN???? .. the minute she figured that she had snagged/duped Harry?


For sure since September 2019, when I saw actual documentation, meaning in the works well before.


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> Saw that .. so in addition to my blood boiling over what it "appears" that they will get so far, she had her "high-powered" LA Attorneys involved? .. FROM WHEN???? .. the minute she figured that she had snagged/duped Harry?


I wonder if there is any possibility of an annulment based on fraud. I doubt it, but seems like she came in with a plan.


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> I see your point. I also see M&H's point of making $$$ while they can. Perception is reality. If people (donors) feel they can get access to a King by throwing $ at M&H's foundation, they will. It's M&H's job to make potential donors feel they can, whether or not they really can. At the very least, I think there will be enough Hollywood donors to make it worth their immediate while. I also hope Harry wakes up from woking and ditches Meghan. Without him she is nothing. We'll see.



This is exactly what Sarah Ferguson tried to do about 10 years ago, sell access to Andrew.  She was divorced from him of course but still on good terms. Can't imagine that Harry and Meghan will have better luck trying this and I suspect Will and Charles will do triple vetting of anything the two of them suggest, if they pay any attention at all.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> This is exactly what Sarah Ferguson tried to do about 10 years ago, sell access to Andrew.  She was divorced from him of course but still on good terms. Can't imagine that Harry and Meghan will have better luck trying this and I suspect Will and Charles will do triple vetting of anything the two of them suggest, if they pay any attention at all.


After Andrew, any business of any kind will have very serious scrutiny.  In addition, it might even put people off from wanting to do business with them.  If the perception exists that the Queen was hurt or damaged by their behavior, people will treat them like they have leprosy.  If the Sussex were a company and opening on the stock market with an IPO, whatever the stock price was on January 7th, would have nosedived and now be so low the exchange would probably halt selling it.


----------



## baghagg

bagshopr said:


> The fairytale is over. They may think they have won but they have lost.


^^^this^^^100%


----------



## jcnc

And as a Canadian Taxpayer, i am taking it personally




legaldiva said:


> I used to like Meghan.  I thought she understood the responsibilities of being a member of the Royal Family ... this is atrocious.  They've accepted millions from the public now to betray those responsbilities?  And head for Canada?  If I were a British taxpayer, I would take this personally.


----------



## closeted

My 7yo DS is struggling with his mental health due to his school environment. So I hope if there is really this issue, it is being dealt with properly. It is an issue very much worthy to be highlighted especially due to its stigma as we know the fab four did. But if this is used as somekind of a ransom, truly shame on them.


----------



## scrpo83

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When an established press agency like AP publishes such an unbecoming video that's pretty telling.
> 
> ETA: the guy's some German journalist saying he is starting to understand why the UK is less than impressed with MM.




This video is so cringeworthy and painful to watch..


----------



## mshermes

scrpo83 said:


> This video is so cringeworthy and painful to watch..


You are so right. It makes me both angry and sad.


----------



## lulilu

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol sorry.
> 
> I don’t think she’s unattractive, she’s just square. She wears clothes made for someone tall and thin. *She dressed herself much better on her Suits days*.



My sister has been costumer/in charge of wardrobe for a number of tv shows (not Suits) and trust me, MM did not dress herself on the show.  She certainly had input in clothing fit etc.  I always thought that she looks so slim on the show, and her clothes fit so tightly that it looked as if she was sewn into them.  I kind of liked her on the show.  I was misty-eyed watching the wedding -- they seemed in love to me.  But otherwise, she always has seemed as if she is acting for the camera.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> After Andrew, any business of any kind will have very serious scrutiny.  In addition, it might even put people off from wanting to do business with them.  If the perception exists that the Queen was hurt or damaged by their behavior, people will treat them like they have leprosy.  If the Sussex were a company and opening on the stock market with an IPO, whatever the stock price was on January 7th, would have nosedived and now be so low the exchange would probably halt selling it.



There also isn't a great track record of these recent royals making themselves into big successes outside the confines of the royal family. There was the non-success of Prince Edward's TV production company that went under, of course. Sarah Ferguson has actually done quite a bit of what Harry and Meghan seem to be proposing.  After her divorce, she retained the title of Duchess of York and moved to the U.S., put out an autobiography for which she received quite a large amount of money, set up a charitable foundation, became a spokesperson for Weight Watchers, wrote a series of children's books, established some fancy offices in NYC to manage her business interests, but appears to teeter close to bankruptcy every few years, only to be rescued by Andrew.  No idea if her charitable foundation is still operating.


----------



## mdcx

youngster said:


> There also isn't a great track record of these recent royals making themselves into big successes outside the confines of the royal family. There was the non-success of Prince Edward's TV production company that went under, of course. Sarah Ferguson has actually done quite a bit of what Harry and Meghan seem to be proposing.  After her divorce, she retained the title of Duchess of York and moved to the U.S., put out an autobiography for which she received quite a large amount of money, set up a charitable foundation, became a spokesperson for Weight Watchers, wrote a series of children's books, established some fancy offices in NYC to manage her business interests, but appears to teeter close to bankruptcy every few years, only to be rescued by Andrew.  No idea if her charitable foundation is still operating.


Fergie was always known as a “good time girl”. Don’t think she was ever much for hard work and getting her hands dirty. I remember her being loud and boisterous and unladylike basically. Unfortunately I think Harry shares a few things in common with her.


----------



## mdcx

lulilu said:


> My sister has been costumer/in charge of wardrobe for a number of tv shows (not Suits) and trust me, MM did not dress herself on the show.  She certainly had input in clothing fit etc.  I always thought that she looks so slim on the show, and her clothes fit so tightly that it looked as if she was sewn into them.  I kind of liked her on the show.  I was misty-eyed watching the wedding -- they seemed in love to me.  But otherwise, she always has seemed as if she is acting for the camera.


Every woman on Suits was squeezed into their shapewear and tight dresses 24/7 it seemed. Meghan’s figure was 50% of her “acting”, her face the other 50% imo!


----------



## rose60610

Based on reports of Meghan seeing attorneys to set up companies for a year, isn't it obvious she had this all planned well before the wedding?  If the RF learned of this they'd have never let the marriage happen. I sometimes wondered if they'd divorce, on the other hand, she'd be nothing without Harry. The parasite can never exist without the host. (Yet the host can live life much better without the parasite.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

muchstuff said:


> . But honestly. She could have said that on the contrary, in her opinion there are many Canadians who would welcome the couple, but she chose to take a pot shot at me. This could be a really interesting thread to follow if people would stop injecting so bloody much venom into their comments.


I mean I’m Canadian and I can say confidently that no one here would want to pay one dime to support them.


----------



## muchstuff

Meh-gan said:


> I mean I’m Canadian and I can say confidently that no one here would want to pay one dime to support them.


Hi fellow Canuck . I'm sure there are many Canadians who love the idea of having H & M here, but as has been mentioned previously, we have many many other areas where the money spent on security could be better used. I personally don't care to have the drama brought here.


----------



## Coconuts40

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When an established press agency like AP publishes such an unbecoming video that's pretty telling.
> 
> ETA: the guy's some German journalist saying he is starting to understand why the UK is less than impressed with MM.




Oh my gosh this just speaks volumes.


----------



## elisa_p

I'm also Canadian and I can even take it one step further and say that they should pay taxes at Canadian tax rates if they want to live here and make their millions.  If they no longer wish to be royalty then it's time to face the harsh realities of world; they aren't exempt because they're "Sussex Royals".  This whole thing reeks of privilege; one they aren't even grateful for.


----------



## TC1

muchstuff said:


> Hi fellow Canuck . I'm sure there are many Canadians who love the idea of having H & M here, but as has been mentioned previously, we have many many other areas where the money spent on security could be better used. I personally don't care to have the drama brought here.


I just read an article in The Globe and Mail saying they are welcome to stay in the country as visitors but not in any "Royal" capacity whatsoever.


----------



## muchstuff

TC1 said:


> I just read an article in The Globe and Mail saying they are welcome to stay in the country as visitors but not in any "Royal" capacity whatsoever.



A couple of quotes from Global News:

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says there are still a lot of discussions to be had about who will cover security costs while Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle are living in Canada."

And THIS from Premier (of BC) Horgan:

“If they want to come back here and put down roots I am sure I could find something for Harry to do. And the film industry is booming in British Columbia and I’m sure Meghan could get on to maybe Riverdale.”  DEAD


----------



## mdcx

muchstuff said:


> A couple of quotes from Global News:
> 
> "Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says there are still a lot of discussions to be had about who will cover security costs while Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle are living in Canada."
> 
> And THIS from Premier (of BC) Horgan:
> 
> “If they want to come back here and put down roots I am sure I could find something for Harry to do. And the film industry is booming in British Columbia and I’m sure Meghan could get on to maybe Riverdale.”  DEAD


Riverdale as a mom of one of the teens, rather than playing the sexy ingenue role??? Megs says no thanks!


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> There also isn't a great track record of these recent royals making themselves into big successes outside the confines of the royal family. There was the non-success of Prince Edward's TV production company that went under, of course. Sarah Ferguson has actually done quite a bit of what Harry and Meghan seem to be proposing.  After her divorce, she retained the title of Duchess of York and moved to the U.S., put out an autobiography for which she received quite a large amount of money, set up a charitable foundation, became a spokesperson for Weight Watchers, wrote a series of children's books, established some fancy offices in NYC to manage her business interests, but appears to teeter close to bankruptcy every few years, only to be rescued by Andrew.  No idea if her charitable foundation is still operating.


I remember she was selling something ( a book maybe) and she arrived with paid-for bodyguards and God Save the Queen on a soundtrack. She really worked her previous life into her new one and people bought it, I think.


----------



## HiromiT

Can you imagine how insufferable they would be if they were treated like royals in Canada? Not just the hefty security and accompanying bill to taxpayers but things like clearing out an entire section of Rogers Arena for a Canucks game.


----------



## queennadine

I think she’s dying to make a political endorsement and start campaigning for someone.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

queennadine said:


> I think she’s dying to make a political endorsement and start campaigning for someone.


Or run for something herself. The woman has PLANS.


----------



## kissmysass

Wait, it's confirmed that Canada may foot the bill for them to stay there? Idk I feel like she/they always had this planned.

Kind of like if UK the public continues to dislike me we will go on break and come back with a list of demands.

From what I see, these demands are more beneficial for than they are for Harry. 

But Harry having a job in CA government? He can't even handle his job as a royal. It most likey will be the same but maybe he will view it as more freedom?

Idk this whole situation is a mess. Money is a heck of motivator...


----------



## Twelve

TC1 said:


> I just read an article in The Globe and Mail saying they are welcome to stay in the country as visitors but not in any "Royal" capacity whatsoever.



https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...why-members-of-the-royal-family-cant-live-in/


----------



## gracekelly

From the Globe article kindly posted by @Twelve. 
_
Canada is not a halfway house for anyone looking to get out of Britain while remaining a royal._

That says it all.


----------



## V0N1B2

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Or run for something herself. The woman has PLANS.


If she wants to make a difference, then she should totally run for office. House of Representives or something.  But, as if she has it in her to run for any kind of political office - talk about not enough glory. Tho I always did assume she would play AOC in the made for TV movie about her  
Besides, if she thought the BRF were meanies...

@bellecate : how much do you think Meghan is enjoying the Saanich Peninsula right now? Do you think she is still out walking around Horth Hill?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

The more I think about it the more find this whole thing totally unnecessary. Both M and H are either hysterical, wrapped up in their psychosomatic mental anguish and are in need of help OR this whole statement and resulting drama is a notice they're ready for business - store's open. 

... Meanwhile, tea will be served at 4pm as usual.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Saw this via another forum. Serena William’s husband:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4639141



Well said by him.  You want the kudos?  Put in the work.  I hate the way Meghan insinuates herself as being best buddies and on a par with powerful successful women - they fought their battles against discrimination and achieved what they have by their own talent and hard work.


----------



## mshermes

Clearblueskies said:


> Well said by him.  You want the kudos?  Put in the work.  I hate the way Meghan insinuates herself as being best buddies and on a par with powerful successful women - they fought their battles against discrimination and achieved what they have by their own talent and hard work.


This was posted earlier. Bold of him and makes me ask a few questions. And, yes, well stated.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> The more I think about it the more find this whole thing totally unnecessary. Both M and H are either hysterical, wrapped up in their psychosomatic mental anguish and are in need of help OR this whole statement and resulting drama is a notice they're ready for business - store's open.
> 
> ... Meanwhile, tea will be served at 4pm as usual.


I loved that the Queen had her tea on time.  It says so much by saying nothing at all.


----------



## nanou3175

I was misty-eyed watching the wedding -- they seemed in love to me.  But otherwise said:
			
		

> I had the same feeling but told my self I was bad to think such thing.....seems i wasnt


----------



## closeted

Clearblueskies said:


> I loved that the Queen had her tea on time.  It says so much by saying nothing at all.


You wanna play the player? Game on


----------



## arnott

HiromiT said:


> Can you imagine how insufferable they would be if they were treated like royals in Canada? Not just the hefty security and accompanying bill to taxpayers* but things like clearing out an entire section of Rogers Arena for a Canucks game. *



Oh please no!      I was already annoyed that they spent Christmas here!


----------



## RAINDANCE

And so several months before the actual day, already mired with some controversy, poor old Princess Beatrice's wedding will undoubtedly be upstaged by a press frenzy over whether the Sussexes will be there or not.


----------



## DC-Cutie

Caught a glimpse of Piers Morgan, he really talks about Meghan like a bitter ex boyfriend, he takes her too personal.  His behavior is rather cringy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> And so several months before the actual day, already mired with some controversy, poor old Princess Beatrice's wedding will undoubtedly be upstaged by a press frenzy over whether the Sussexes will be there or not.



I feel bad for her. Nothing like having your wedding overshadowed by not one, but two dramatic family events which would have been totally preventable if both parties had shown better judgement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DC-Cutie said:


> Caught a glimpse of Piers Morgan, he really talks about Meghan like a bitter ex boyfriend, he takes her too personal.  His behavior is rather cringy



Yeah. I have no sympathy for MM whatsoever, but he needs to let it go and shut up. We've all heard the story, thankyouverymuch, next.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

VigeeLeBrun said:


> And the Oscar for Best Actress goes to ..... Meghan
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...HN-Oscar-Best-Actress-goes-Meghan-Markle.html


*Thank you*, VigeeLeBrun, that was hilarious! And to Richard Littlejohn who wrote this masterpiece- on a purely professional level, I.LOVE.YOU 

For those that maybe can't access the link (in bold mine, but the whole thing could have been in bold, it's so good):
_
"The Queen deserves better than this, as I wrote on Friday, but she certainly hasn’t let it affect her legendary equilibrium.
Yesterday’s hastily convened summit at Sandringham was a reminder to everyone, not just Harry and Meghan, exactly who’s in charge.

Her gaff. Her rules.

Even Philip was told to make himself scarce, for the sake of his own health. The last thing the frail 98-year-old Duke of Edinburgh needed was the prospect of Little Miss Markle laying down the law from Canada. Her Maj was clearly determined, too, that the crisis was only going to cause minimum disruption to her daily routine. She insisted that the summit be wound up in time for tea, so she could settle down in front of Pointless with a cup of Earl Grey and a plate of ginger biscuits. How quintessentially English. As a young woman, the Queen will have grown up with Jack Buchanan’s whimsical 1935 song Everything Stops For Tea, a celebration of our love affair with a nice cuppa.

Curiously, when Long John Baldry recorded his own version of Everything Stops For Tea in 1972, it was co-produced by Elton John and Rod Stewart. Fast-forward five decades and we now learn that Harry and Meghan decided to tell Elton John about their decision before informing Her Maj. No doubt they felt that was the least they could do after Elton paid for their private jet. Presumably, they couldn’t get hold of Rod Stewart, who was still sleeping off his 75th birthday celebrations.

*This is the world they now inhabit: beholden to a merry-go-round of septuagenarian pop stars, superwoke showbiz riff-raff, snouts-in-the-trough politicians and dubious billionaires.* They’re welcome to each other. Still, whatever you think about the Sussexes’ unilateral declaration of independence, there’s no doubt it has contributed enormously to the gaiety of the nation. Just sit back and enjoy it.

*Never having been a monarchist, I rarely take any notice of royal tittle-tattle.* But over the weekend, I’ve savoured every cough and spit. The devil, as always, is in the detail. Frankly, it’s difficult to know where to start. *I haven’t stopped laughing for days.*

There appears to be no limit to Meghan’s self-absorption and obsession with privacy, when it suits her. According to one paper, we should have spotted that the couple were intending to do a Captain Oates when they took both their dogs to Canada for their six-week Christmas holiday. Royal ‘sources’ confided that Meghan wouldn’t have contemplated subjecting her pet beagle and black Labrador to such a gruelling, nine-hour plane journey if she hadn’t been planning an extended stay away from Britain. The beagle is called Guy, and was rescued from a Kentucky swamp before Meghan adopted him. Oh, the sun shines bright on my old Kentucky swamp . . .

But we’re not allowed to know anything about the Labrador. The couple have never released the name of the dog, which they acquired in 2018. We’re not even told whether it is male or female. What’s the big secret? Has the Lab ticked the box marked ‘no publicity’? Is Meghan worried that if its identity is made public, it will be hounded (so to speak) by the puparazzi? Is she concerned that every time the Lab goes walkies it will have to wear a baseball cap and sunglasses and be surrounded by burly minders — like Madonna, when she goes jogging. There was also a hilarious report about Harry’s attempts to pass himself off as one of the locals on Vancouver Island.

According to the owner of a home decor store, while shopping for Christmas decorations, the Prince pulled a blue woolly hat down over his eyes and effected a terrible Canadian accent. On a small island, where everyone knows everyone else, he was doomed to failure, especially as he was accompanied by a close protection officer. He couldn’t have been more conspicuous if he tried.
_
*He might just as well have dressed up as a Mountie and started singing I’m A Lumberjack, I wish I’d been a Princess, just like my dear Mama . . .
*
_The shop’s owner said: ‘I thought there was something familiar about him, even though I could barely see his face.’

Then the penny dropped. *‘Oh, my God, you’re Prince Andrew!’ *You couldn’t make it up. And speaking of close protection officers, it was reported that the couple’s taxpayer-funded security detail could be downgraded once they turn their back on royal duties. They won’t be left ‘unguarded’, however, although their protection officers will now carry Tasers instead of shooters. Thank God, we were worried sick. Never mind that the Old Bill think nothing of leaving the rest of us unguarded. I’ve been trying to imagine the top-level meeting at the Yard to review the couple’s security arrangements.

‘Now listen up. The fifth floor have decreed that security for the Duke and Duchess of Suffolk must be downgraded concomitant to the reduction in their royal commitments. Any suggestions? Yes, Hollis.’

‘Why don’t we swap their protection officers’ guns for Tasers? That should send out the right message.’ ‘Excellent idea. In fact, let ’em make do with truncheons and whistles. And instead of half a dozen Range Rovers, in future they can be accompanied everywhere by a bobby on a bicycle.’
_
_Still, they shouldn’t be in much danger in laid-back Canada, which looks certain to be their destination for the forseeable. (_*Xxxx political content is still not allowed!)*
_
She’s also playing the victim card for all it’s worth — those ‘friends’ again threatening a warts ’n’ all interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which she will smear the Royal Family as racist and sexist, unless she gets the settlement she wants. As Home Secretary Priti Flamingo says, the idea that Meghan has been forced out of Britain by racism is beyond absurd. *Maybe the makers of The Crown can hire Ms Markle to play herself in a movie version — with Chris Evans as Harry and Al Jolson as Trudeau. Nailed on for a Best Actress Oscar, I’d have thought.*

Finally, I loved the story which said that, rather than learning about the couple’s announcement from TV, Her Maj read it first on her iPad. I couldn’t help smiling. For my mum’s 91st birthday last summer, I bought her a new iPad. She now sits up half the night reading Mail Online. Maybe our 93-year-old Queen does the same.

Meanwhile, I have visions of the situation room at Sandringham being kitted out with one of the giant screens you see in White House war rooms, like the time they took out Osama Bin Laden. You can just imagine Her Maj sitting there in a bomber jacket with the royal crest on her chest, directing operations, as General Sir Alan Fitztightly informs her: *‘Ma’am, we have a drone in situ over Vancouver Island and have eyeballs on the target. We await your instructions . . .’"*_


----------



## Suzie

I love the saying that H and M play checkers and the Queen plays Chess!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mdcx said:


> Saw this via another forum. Serena William’s husband:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4639141



wow... I doubt this was a coincidence. 

I guess Serena and Meghan are no longer beholden to the same PR firm  I also think the emergence of concepts like blackmail and extortion in this story has gotten some a bit hesitant nervous.


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel bad for her. Nothing like having your wedding overshadowed by not one, but two dramatic family events which would have been totally preventable if both parties had shown better judgement.


At this point, if I were in her shoes, I'd go with my fiancee to the court house and get married without telling anyone. Then I'd wait until family members asked when we were getting married (likely years later with this bunch) and say "Oh, we already did, you weren't invited".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

papertiger said:


> The more I think about it the more find this whole thing totally unnecessary. Both M and H are either hysterical, wrapped up in their psychosomatic mental anguish and are in need of help OR this whole statement and resulting drama is a notice they're ready for business - store's open.
> 
> ... Meanwhile, tea will be served at 4pm as usual.


I know right, so unnecessary!
The other Granddaughters of the Queen have Jobs and one of them lived in NYC. Why all the fuss about H&M.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

mrsinsyder said:


> She's shaped like sponge-bob to begin with, which isn't a forgiving shape. She gave up the white powder and here we are.


Ay ay ay 

Yup, carbs are the debil! I'm assuming we're talking about sugar and white flour here


----------



## Suzie

Loving the creativity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Of course. Back to their previous roles as red carpet hustlers while representing queen and country, as jetsetting for me but not for thee eco warrior hypocrites and social climbing on other people's money (including one of their dad's) almost 40-year-olds.
> 
> All while pretend lunching with Michelle *****, being politically neutral cuddling with Hillary ******* while poking *****, dressing in taxpayer funded haute couture and throwing self pitying parties in third world countries while tossing Archie's discarded gifted clothing at HIV infected mothers living in African shack dwellings. When they're not taking yet another break in Elton John's or some shady foundation billionaire's luxury villa.
> 
> Proper role models. I can't fathom why the press doesn't leave them alone.



Sums it up nicely. But, racism.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sums it up nicely. But, racism.


I left it out. I didn't have the time to write a post the size of War and Peace


----------



## mdcx

Meghan really likes to bring her own gasoline to the bonfire, it seems. She had to chip in with this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7885023/Prince-William-leaves-Kensington-Palace-morning-crunch-Sandringham-Summit.html


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Meghan really likes to bring her own gasoline to the bonfire, it seems. She had to chip in with this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Palace-morning-crunch-Sandringham-Summit.html
> 
> View attachment 4639557


This is the type of woman that will never be satisfied with what she asks for, she'll always want more, always want to be noticed, always cause trouble. Give her what she wants and she'll still complain about it. I don't think anyone believes they want a peaceful family life in Canada - maybe he does. Too bad she's completely isolating him from family and friends - I'm sure he wanted away from royal life but not necessarily his family.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> Meghan really likes to bring her own gasoline to the bonfire, it seems. She had to chip in with this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Palace-morning-crunch-Sandringham-Summit.html
> 
> View attachment 4639557


Seriously!  Unreal.  She was barred, I’m sure the Queen does not “do” conference calls with possible random people listening in, especially over family matters.  This has risen to a whole new level of childish.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

So glad nobody cares about Harry and Meghan. Lol


----------



## CAH

Ok, hands up everyone who would have loved if the Queen had taken a page from Donald ***** and just said, "You're fired!"


----------



## gelbergirl

The Queen is a class act.  I admire her so much.
I wonder if she knew about that "you know she does voice-over work" comment from Harry.  How embarrassing.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> wow... I doubt this was a coincidence.
> 
> I guess Serena and Meghan are no longer beholden to the same PR firm  I also think the emergence of concepts like blackmail and extortion in this story has gotten some a bit hesitant nervous.


interesting


----------



## mrsinsyder

We have a new king of petty...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-trademarks-Sussex-Royal-brand-America.html
*Intellectual property lawyer 'trademarks Sussex Royal brand in America to teach Harry and Meghan a lesson about having a proper plan'*

*Harry and Meghan trademarked 'Sussex Royal' brand in the UK in June last year *
*But lawyer in the US has applied for the trademark after finding it was available *
*Jared Fogelson says he wanted to 'teach the couple a lesson about planning'*


----------



## daisychainz

If the Queen takes away the Duke/Duchess titles then Sussex Royal is useless to them? The branding and merchandising is all contingent on them retaining their titles. Is that accurate?


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> We have a new king of petty...
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-trademarks-Sussex-Royal-brand-America.html
> *Intellectual property lawyer 'trademarks Sussex Royal brand in America to teach Harry and Meghan a lesson about having a proper plan'*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan trademarked 'Sussex Royal' brand in the UK in June last year *
> *But lawyer in the US has applied for the trademark after finding it was available *
> *Jared Fogelson says he wanted to 'teach the couple a lesson about planning'*



So awesome! Too bad someone (why didn't I think of it?!?) didn't register the SussexRoyal domain name (and several variations thereof) before they had a chance to do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

DC-Cutie said:


> Caught a glimpse of Piers Morgan, he really talks about Meghan like a bitter ex boyfriend, he takes her too personal.  His behavior is rather cringy



It's an ego thing. Like most people, he probably believes he's a great judge of character. He realizes she put one over on him and she wasn't what she seemed. Now, he's being a resentful, surly @sshole about it.


----------



## rose60610

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Or run for something herself. The woman has PLANS.



If she ran for anything her competition would easily eat her alive. Hyper sensitive what-Meghan-wants-Meghan-gets would be drawn and quartered. Politics isn't for the faint hearted. Clearly she saw the BRF as a huge cash register and is treating it as such, while bemoaning her tough existence. The campaign manager for her opponent would have a total field day. I'd love to be THAT campaign manager. She wouldn't know what hit her.


----------



## gelbergirl

mrsinsyder said:


> We have a new king of petty...
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-trademarks-Sussex-Royal-brand-America.html
> *Intellectual property lawyer 'trademarks Sussex Royal brand in America to teach Harry and Meghan a lesson about having a proper plan'*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan trademarked 'Sussex Royal' brand in the UK in June last year *
> *But lawyer in the US has applied for the trademark after finding it was available *
> *Jared Fogelson says he wanted to 'teach the couple a lesson about planning'*



Excellent.


----------



## Katel

mrsinsyder said:


> We have a new king of petty...
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...er-trademarks-Sussex-Royal-brand-America.html
> *Intellectual property lawyer 'trademarks Sussex Royal brand in America to teach Harry and Meghan a lesson about having a proper plan'*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan trademarked 'Sussex Royal' brand in the UK in June last year *
> *But lawyer in the US has applied for the trademark after finding it was available *
> *Jared Fogelson says he wanted to 'teach the couple a lesson about planning'*



Sadly...not so fast, Mr.F...
...
“However, Harry and Meghan's team will soon be teaching Fogelson a lesson - because they filed an application for 'Sussex Royal' with the World Intellectual Property Organisation on December 31 - a full week before him.

The application covers everything from branded pencils to charity fundraising and social care services in Australia, Canada the EU and US.

While the application is still pending, it would almost certainly supersede Fogelson's application with local US authorities.”

and

“The Sussexes want to stamp their name on dozens of products including T-shirts, hoodies, journals and gloves for their newly-created foundation Sussex Royal.

Retail expert Andy Barr said he would expect Prince Harry and Meghan's new Sussex Royal product empire to generate revenues of £400million.

He told MailOnline of the trademark applications: 'This will just be the stepping stone for higher value products being launched later down the line.

'Undoubtedly this will be a multi-million pound revenue business given they are effectively trading on the back of the Royal name *which is ironic given they are seemingly trying to escape its clutches.”
*
The bolded is the entire problem in a nutshell and why they are so obviously at it.

If there truly were problems of racism and all the other excuses made for Meghan and Harry, why would they want to continue operating, living under that “evil” royal name? Wasn’t that “barely existing?”

Ca-ching Ca-ching Ca-ching.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If she ran for anything her competition would easily eat her alive. Hyper sensitive what-Meghan-wants-Meghan-gets would be drawn and quartered. Politics isn't for the faint hearted. Clearly she saw the BRF as a huge cash register and is treating it as such, while bemoaning her tough existence. The campaign manager for her opponent would have a total field day. I'd love to be THAT campaign manager. She wouldn't know what hit her.



Could you imagine her in a political debate where she would actually have to think on her feet instead of reading a scripted speech? She would be chewed up and spit out.


----------



## Katel

daisychainz said:


> If the Queen takes away the Duke/Duchess titles then Sussex Royal is useless to them? The branding and merchandising is all contingent on them retaining their titles. Is that accurate?



This is what I’d like to know...maybe they can use the name Sussex Royal, but if there isn’t any royal connection behind it, i.e. to QE2, Charles and William, then it’s an empty promise of “trading on the back of the royal name” and the foundation won’t flourish.

? not sure ... it’s going to take time to shake out probably.


----------



## LittleStar88

Katel said:


> Sadly...not so fast, Mr.F...
> ...
> “However, Harry and Meghan's team will soon be teaching Fogelson a lesson - because they filed an application for 'Sussex Royal' with the World Intellectual Property Organisation on December 31 - a full week before him.
> 
> The application covers everything from branded pencils to charity fundraising and social care services in Australia, Canada the EU and US.
> 
> While the application is still pending, it would almost certainly supersede Fogelson's application with local US authorities.”
> 
> and
> 
> “The Sussexes want to stamp their name on dozens of products including T-shirts, hoodies, journals and gloves for their newly-created foundation Sussex Royal.
> 
> Retail expert Andy Barr said he would expect Prince Harry and Meghan's new Sussex Royal product empire to generate revenues of £400million.
> 
> He told MailOnline of the trademark applications: 'This will just be the stepping stone for higher value products being launched later down the line.
> 
> 'Undoubtedly this will be a multi-million pound revenue business given they are effectively trading on the back of the Royal name *which is ironic given they are seemingly trying to escape its clutches.”*



But... Who wants to buy their branded crap? Pencils? Hoodies? Really?? How about bananas stamped with inspirational quotes? That could be fun...


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Could you imagine her in a political debate where she would actually have to think on her feet instead of reading a scripted speech? She would be chewed up and spit out.



She would get eaten alive. It would be spectacular.


----------



## imgg

Katel said:


> Sadly...not so fast, Mr.F...
> ...
> “However, Harry and Meghan's team will soon be teaching Fogelson a lesson - because they filed an application for 'Sussex Royal' with the World Intellectual Property Organisation on December 31 - a full week before him.
> 
> The application covers everything from branded pencils to charity fundraising and social care services in Australia, Canada the EU and US.
> 
> While the application is still pending, it would almost certainly supersede Fogelson's application with local US authorities.”
> 
> and
> 
> “The Sussexes want to stamp their name on dozens of products including T-shirts, hoodies, journals and gloves for their newly-created foundation Sussex Royal.
> 
> Retail expert Andy Barr said he would expect Prince Harry and Meghan's new Sussex Royal product empire to generate revenues of £400million.
> 
> He told MailOnline of the trademark applications: 'This will just be the stepping stone for higher value products being launched later down the line.
> 
> 'Undoubtedly this will be a multi-million pound revenue business given they are effectively trading on the back of the Royal name *which is ironic given they are seemingly trying to escape its clutches.”*


Who would buy anything with their name on it?  I'm sure there is plenty of people, but I can't imagine _that _many people.  Public opinion of these two are not great.  I hope Disney reneges on the voiceover deal, especially after the embarrassing footage of Harry pimping out his wife.


----------



## joyeaux

daisychainz said:


> If the Queen takes away the Duke/Duchess titles then Sussex Royal is useless to them? The branding and merchandising is all contingent on them retaining their titles. Is that accurate?



I have the same question! Also, I hope Wayback Machine has a nice detailed snap of that glossy new website of theirs, because all those terms and conditions they laid out last week are surely going to get a QEII revision or ten.

They just seem to be playing this with such impulsivity, and whatever consultant team they’re listening to (paid or otherwise) is advising them pretty poorly IMO... I would imagine it’s because that’s because their advisors have backgrounds in Hollywood and politics, not the British monarchy, and are thus way out of their element. Lots of not being able to see the forest for the trees (like this morning’s “Nuh uh! Megan was totally NOT not invited to yesterday’s talks”... stop adding more material to the tabloids, kids!).

And then every now and then something from the palace comes out (like William and Harry’s statement about the bullying, the Queen’s statement yesterday, etc.) and is this classy volley to more Sussex noise. Or in really bad tv analogies, The Crown vs. Made in Chelsea


----------



## Grande Latte

Katel said:


> This is what I’d like to know...maybe they can use the name Sussex Royal, but if there isn’t any royal connection behind it, i.e. to QE2, Charles and William, then it’s an empty promise of “trading on the back of the royal name” and the foundation won’t flourish.
> 
> ? not sure ... it’s going to take time to shake out probably.



Yeah, I don't get this either. Will the BRF allow H&M to use "Sussex Royal" as brand name if they rescind the titles? The lawyers on both sides will be figuring everything, but the Queen will have final say on the matter....?

No. Personally I will NOT buy or give charity to anything these two are involved in. The way they have treated the royal family and turn their backs on the UK citizens, almost seems criminal.


----------



## daisychainz

imgg said:


> Who would buy anything with their name on it?  I'm sure there is plenty of people, but I can't imagine _that _many people.  Public opinion of these two are not great.  I hope Disney reneges on the voiceover deal.


The same people who buy anything with the Kardashian name on it? I imagine their faces will be on everything they sell.


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> Who would buy anything with their name on it?  I'm sure there is plenty of people, but I can't imagine _that _many people.  *Public opinion of these two are not great.  *I hope Disney reneges on the voiceover deal.



I'm not sure about that. Most people are not following it that closely and those who aren't still have a positive opinion of Meghan and Harry. Literally as I was reading your post the DJ on the radio station I have on in the office said how much she likes Harry and Meghan. She has no clue about all the chaos they've been causing. I think that's typical of the average member of the public.


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> The same people who buy anything with the Kardashian name on it? I imagine their faces will be on everything they sell.



Different crap, different demographic. Meghan can only dream of achieving the Kardashian empire (I am not a Kardashian fan). I don't see Harry and Meghan selling diet aids and body-shaping undergarments.


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> I'm not sure about that. Most people are not following it that closely and those who aren't still have a positive opinion of Meghan and Harry. Literally as I was reading your post the DJ on the radio station I have on in the office said how much she likes Harry and Meghan. She has no clue about all the chaos they've been causing. I think that's typical of the average member of the public.


Perhaps in the US (especially here with the new loud media narrative of “but racism”)...

But I don’t think that’s the case In Britain - at all.

Some crazy questionable sub-levels are advising them how to reel in the big fish, like all the other “foundations” have been doing recently - she is not smart enough to create and plan this herself, IMO.

I don’t believe this will turn out well at all for H&M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> Perhaps in the US (especially here with the new loud media narrative of “but racism”)...
> 
> But I don’t think that’s the case In Britain - at all.
> 
> Some crazy questionable sub-levels are advising them how to reel in the big fish, like all the other “foundations” have been doing recently - she is not smart enough to create and plan this herself, IMO.
> 
> I don’t believe this will turn out well at all for H&M.


dont know if stans buy merchandise or are just happy to post on or look at Instagram.....guess judging by Kylie Jenner they do buy stuff.  but she's selling stuff that they think will make them look like her.  different merchandising.  time will tell


----------



## bag-mania

Katel said:


> Perhaps in the US (especially here with the new loud media narrative of “but racism”)...
> But I don’t think that’s the case In Britain - at all.
> Somebody is advising them how to reel in the big fish, like all the other “foundations” have been doing recently - she is not smart enough to create and plan this herself, IMO.



True, the US media isn't looking too closely at them and taking it all at face value. I'm sure she has her advisors but whoever it is won't continue offering their services for nothing. Everything is reciprocal, whether it is returned through cash or favors.

I wouldn't say she isn't smart, you can only get so far through ambition and chutzpah. And she has gotten very far.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I just don’t understand how the government can allow the use of Sussex Royal. It seems to be a direct violation of conflict laws and really is an affront to “lesser” public servants who have been held to much higher standards.


----------



## imgg

daisychainz said:


> The same people who buy anything with the Kardashian name on it? I imagine their faces will be on everything they sell.


True.  I am still flabbergasted that the Kardashian are not only relevant but millionaires 15 years later for doing nothing but promote themselves....


----------



## daisychainz

imgg said:


> True.  I am still flabbergasted that the Kardashian are not only relevant but millionaires 15 years later for doing nothing but promote themselves....


Yeah. They are proof that people will buy anything from anyone. I am sure Meghan and Harry will find legions of fans wanting hoodies and planners with their faces on it.


----------



## rose60610

Author Dean Koontz has a short story titled "The Praying Mantis Bride".  I've no idea what it's about, but it sounds like a perfect nickname for Meghan. People dopey enough to buy her merch wouldn't know what a praying mantis is, anyway.


----------



## chaneljewel

It seems that the two of them are relying on celebrities for advice. I watch movies, listen to singers, etc BUT do not think their word is valuable as far as living my life.  I’d much rather listen to advice from my family who truly love and care about what’s best for me. I was raised that family is everything and even if there are disputes, they’re the ones who truly have your back.  I understand that they might be tired of the constant media backlash, but it seems they’re both being hypocritical in the sense they’re using the media to voice their concerns about life with the BRF.  Sorry, you can’t have it both ways.  You either want to be part of your family, or you don’t.  In the end, you have to live with the decision you make.  Just stop the whining and accept responsibility for your part in this mess.


----------



## Lodpah

The Queen’s got this. I think that the celebrities she she thinks are friends are backing away.

We will see the Queen’s hands unfolding surely little by little. She knows those two will self implode cause of their petulant and stupid making decisions. 

Meghan should be henceforth called Werewolf in London or the Werewolf of Sussex, along with her perpetual man-child.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> I remember she was selling something ( a book maybe) and she arrived with paid-for bodyguards and God Save the Queen on a soundtrack. She really worked her previous life into her new one and people bought it, I think.



I think people did for awhile, but she's now been living with Andrew again as his guest in some kind of arrangement, probably because she's blown through most, if not all, of her money.  She was a notorious big spender with a taste for the lavish lifestyle she'd come to enjoy. Andrew, or someone in the royal family, has constantly been helping her with money over the years. But, her writing career appears over, her Weight Watchers contract ended years and years ago, her charitable foundation has folded and ten years ago she was caught trying to sell access to Andrew on tape. So, easy to make some money up front after leaving, but tougher to hang on to that celebrity and relevancy for years and years afterwards.   Meghan and Harry, take note.


----------



## rose60610

imgg said:


> True.  I am still flabbergasted that the Kardashian are not only relevant but millionaires 15 years later for doing nothing but promote themselves....



You're not the only one. I think they took a page out of Howard Stern's playbook and took "shock level" to an extreme. I wouldn't put it past Meghan to do a porn centerfold pic if the price were right. I don't hold centerfold contracts against the others who did/do them, but Meghan has made fair game out of anything related to the BRF to hawk.


----------



## kissmysass

VigeeLeBrun said:


> We can only hope!!! [emoji813]️


I hate people getting disrespected and this will only bring on more victim claims but I would like to see this. Knowing this won't knock her ego. I hope someone records it.

Understandably, I do think Rachel was disrespected and she is doing right FOR HERSELF in getting out but all of us do not have that luxury.

Imagine hating your in laws so isolate your husband from them while you still have family and friends?

Imagine hating your job and you quit it without anything really lined up?

Imagine disrespecting your boss because they did not stick up for you till your liking?

She is a go getter but also an entitled quitter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Meghan should be henceforth called Werewolf in London or the Werewolf of Sussex, along with her perpetual man-child.



LMAO. The Werewolf of Sussex is a great title for a dark Victorian novel.


----------



## bag-mania

kissmysass said:


> She is a go getter but also an entitled quitter.



Don't forget her being a professional victim. Nobody has taken the "poor little me" game to such epic levels while in reality living in the lap of luxury and having her feelings coddled.


----------



## imgg

Lodpah said:


> The Queen’s got this. I think that the celebrities she she thinks are friends are backing away.
> 
> We will see the Queen’s hands unfolding surely little by little. She knows those two will self implode cause of their petulant and stupid making decisions.
> 
> Meghan should be henceforth called Werewolf in London or the Werewolf of Sussex, along with her perpetual man-child.


Agree.  She does not have celebrity friends just "friends".  The ones with clout (Clooney's, Oprah)  never met her until they received invitations to her wedding.  I read Reese Witherspoon was invited but thought it was totally weird since she never met Megan or Harry so declined.  Megan is a strange one.


----------



## LittleStar88

kissmysass said:


> Imagine hating your job and you quit it without anything really lined up?



Actually, more like saying you may or may not come in to the office and may or may not do any work but still would like the pay and benefits anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Could you imagine her in a political debate where she would actually have to think on her feet instead of reading a scripted speech? She would be chewed up and spit out.


Any interviewer worth their salt will ask her to explain what her words really mean, ask about costs, impact on taxes etc etc.  Word salad, other peoples inspirational quotes, and pretty pictures won’t be sufficient.  Not to mention politicians need grit and very thick hides.


youngster said:


> I think people did for awhile, but she's now been living with Andrew again as his guest in some kind of arrangement, probably because she's blown through most, if not all, of her money.  She was a notorious big spender with a taste for the lavish lifestyle she'd come to enjoy. Andrew, or someone in the royal family, has constantly been helping her with money over the years. But, her writing career appears over, her Weight Watchers contract ended years and years ago, her charitable foundation has folded and ten years ago she was caught trying to sell access to Andrew on tape. So, easy to make some money up front after leaving, but tougher to hang on to that celebrity and relevancy for years and years afterwards.   Meghan and Harry, take note.


OT but not sure how this’ll continue now that Andrew doesn’t have the funds he used to.  He may not be able to afford her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Meghan really likes to bring her own gasoline to the bonfire, it seems. She had to chip in with this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Palace-morning-crunch-Sandringham-Summit.html
> 
> View attachment 4639557


Bad move, literally no one believes her on this 


Mrs.Z said:


> Seriously!  Unreal.  She was barred, I’m sure the Queen does not “do” conference calls with possible random people listening in, especially over family matters.  This has risen to a whole new level of childish.


Course not, they no longer trust her.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> I think people did for awhile, but she's now been living with Andrew again as his guest in some kind of arrangement, probably because she's blown through most, if not all, of her money.  She was a notorious big spender with a taste for the lavish lifestyle she'd come to enjoy. Andrew, or someone in the royal family, has constantly been helping her with money over the years. But, her writing career appears over, her Weight Watchers contract ended years and years ago, her charitable foundation has folded and ten years ago she was caught trying to sell access to Andrew on tape. So, easy to make some money up front after leaving, but tougher to hang on to that celebrity and relevancy for years and years afterwards.   Meghan and Harry, take note.


I read she tried to sell access to the BRF with Andrew's blessing.

Can't imagine what she spent all that money on. Not on rent or a mortgage that's for sure.


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> Course not, they no longer trust her.



I'm not sure they ever did trust her fully.  She was just welcomed into the family and I think she was in the process of proving herself., or not, as things currently stand. Just my .02, but I think the Queen is likely cautious, especially after Sarah Ferguson and Diana. She wants to see how people react and handle themselves over a period of years, not just a few months.


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> True, the US media isn't looking too closely at them and taking it all at face value. I'm sure she has her advisors but whoever it is won't continue offering their services for nothing. Everything is reciprocal, whether it is returned through cash or favors.
> 
> *I wouldn't say she isn't smart, you can only get so far through ambition and chutzpah.* And she has gotten very far.



Re the bolded, that may be true - and narcissism needs to be taken into account, if that’s truly the case with her, because mental illness can be quite a driver (as we have seen throughout history).


----------



## lanasyogamama

I was just thinking, if the marriage dissolves, she’d really be starting with nothing. No home, furniture, car, job, family (besides Doria and Archie).   Probably wouldn’t bother her, but I would feel so lost.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> Can't imagine what she spent all that money on. Not on rent or a mortgage that's for sure.



Oh, she  (Sarah Ferguson) was, and probably still is, a notorious big spender.  She was trying to maintain her own residency for a number of years and spent massive amounts on leases, luxury vacations, jetting around the world, jewelry, clothes, employees and their salaries, taxes, cars, maintaining her fancy office digs in New York, etc.  She was called the Duchess of New York in the UK for awhile since she had basically moved there. Some real similarities to what Harry and Meghan appear to be trying to do, but without as much star power as Harry. Sarah was ripe for the plucking by shady multi-millionaires and billionaires, just like they are.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I was just thinking, if the marriage dissolves, she’d really be starting with nothing. No home, furniture, car, job, family (besides Doria and Archie).   Probably wouldn’t bother her, but I would feel so lost.



She'd have a big 'ol pile of money. With that she can buy any homes, furnishings, vehicles, and yes, even friends. She doesn't need or want real friends, just superficial ones like herself who could improve her image or social status. She would be just fine. Now, Harry on the other hand, he would be an absolute basket case and they would probably have to hide the sharp objects.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> Oh, she  (Sarah Ferguson) was, and probably still is, a notorious big spender.  She was trying to maintain her own residency for a number of years and spent massive amounts on leases, luxury vacations, jetting around the world, jewelry, clothes, employees and their salaries, taxes, cars, maintaining her fancy office digs in New York, etc.  She was called the Duchess of New York in the UK for awhile since she had basically moved there. Some real similarities to what Harry and Meghan appear to be trying to do, but without as much star power as Harry. Sarah was ripe for the plucking by shady multi-millionaires and billionaires, just like they are.



I am guessing that this new living structure would allow Meghan to receive gifts of clothing, jewelry, travel, vacations, etc. Would she need to claim that on US taxes (taxed on the value of gifts), or would she put it through the charity?

Reminds me of a former employer who essentially ran ALL of his personal expenses through the business as business expenses and received a small paycheck each payday so he would not have to be taxed at a higher rate.


----------



## lulilu

youngster said:


> I'm not sure they ever did trust her fully.  She was just welcomed into the family and I think she was in the process of proving herself., or not, as things currently stand. Just my .02, but I think the Queen is likely cautious, especially after Sarah Ferguson and Diana. She wants to see how people react and handle themselves over a period of years, not just a few months.



You are right, if the story about the queen heeding advice not to lend her any good jewelry is true.


----------



## mrsinsyder

rose60610 said:


> You're not the only one. I think they took a page out of Howard Stern's playbook and took "shock level" to an extreme. I wouldn't put it past Meghan to do a porn centerfold pic if the price were right. I don't hold centerfold contracts against the others who did/do them, but Meghan has made fair game out of anything related to the BRF to hawk.


----------



## LibbyRuth

When Harry and Meghan first got married, I remember being swept up in the romance of it all - the Lifetime movie, imagining their courtship, etc. It was so exciting! Now with their current behavior, I picture those early dates being long discussions about all the big bad mean people who were out to get them, and all the romance just dies.



youngster said:


> I'm not sure they ever did trust her fully.  She was just welcomed into the family and I think she was in the process of proving herself., or not, as things currently stand. Just my .02, but I think the Queen is likely cautious, especially after Sarah Ferguson and Diana. She wants to see how people react and handle themselves over a period of years, not just a few months.


Seeing how all of this is playing out, I wonder if Meghan's attitude explains the optics we got for how she was received by the family early on.  When the Queen took Meghan out on a joint engagement so quickly after the wedding, I remember a big deal being made about how soon she got that treatment - something Kate had not gotten until much further into her marriage. With the benefit of hindsight, perhaps royal watchers got it all wrong. Rather than the "The Queen adores Meghan" spin that we were fed then, perhaps the truth is that the distrust really has been there all along, and the Queen got ahead of the optics to prevent her from claiming she was never accepted.


----------



## lulilu

LittleStar88 said:


> I am guessing that this new living structure would allow Meghan to receive gifts of clothing, jewelry, travel, vacations, etc. Would she need to claim that on US taxes (taxed on the value of gifts), or would she put it through the charity?
> 
> Reminds me of a former employer who essentially ran ALL of his personal expenses through the business as business expenses and received a small paycheck each payday so he would not have to be taxed at a higher rate.



It will be very interesting to see how all the tax ramifications (US and otherwise) shake out.


----------



## daisychainz

I firmly believe she had zero intention of ever being a UK citizen and it was just to make her seem likable for the engagement interview, but perhaps she could become a Canadian citizen? I wonder if that is possible, or likely.


----------



## Chagall

scrpo83 said:


> This video is so cringeworthy and painful to watch..


Oh my god she is awful. Poor Harry is looking at her with daggers. That is extremely rude behavior. Cringeworthy indeed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Meghan really likes to bring her own gasoline to the bonfire, it seems. She had to chip in with this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Palace-morning-crunch-Sandringham-Summit.html
> 
> View attachment 4639557


That’s the ego talking. Just like the we can’t make it to Sandringham,when they really weren’t invited. 

Everyday their worth is going down. Such miscalculation.  My local pizza place is advertising for a driver,,will an international driver’s license be ok?


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> I am guessing that this new living structure would allow Meghan to receive gifts of clothing, jewelry, travel, vacations, etc.* Would she need to claim that on US taxes (taxed on the value of gifts), or would she put it through the charity?*
> 
> Reminds me of a former employer who essentially ran ALL of his personal expenses through the business as business expenses and received a small paycheck each payday so he would not have to be taxed at a higher rate.



A lot of small business owners try to get away with that, they're breaking the law of course, and your former employer better hope he is never audited.  People can be caught when the wages/earnings on their W-2 or K-1 doesn't appear to support a home in a fancy zip code, but that's OT. 

Yes, Meghan would need to declare "gifts" on her U.S. taxes from businesses because it is effectively income unless it is for very minor things, like a box of candy or flowers. (U.S. businesses themselves are only allowed to deduct $25 of each business gift on their own taxes.)   Some things like dining out or event tickets could be treated as "business meals and entertainment" expense which has is own set of IRS rules and you need to keep good documentation of what was discussed and the results.  Separately, friends or colleagues or anyone else are allowed to give up to $15,000 per year to anyone, without any tax implications whatsoever, but that won't even cover a week of her designer clothes. 

More likely businesses and friends would make donations to their foundation and the foundation would pay for their travel, some of their meals, maybe even a really nice apartment or hotel in NYC for all those "foundation meetings", and things like that. Of course, the foundation will be likely scrutinized carefully. They will have to file with the IRS annually and will be subject to IRS examination and heaven help them if they try running through clearly personal expenses.  All it takes is a whiff of impropriety and the IRS will be all over them.


----------



## BigPurseSue

An interesting article in the NY Times today about the tax, citizenship and other legal ramifications of British royalty moving to Canada. 
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/14/world/canada/harry-meghan-canada-queen-royals.html

A couple interesting points. Under Canadian law the couple would not be allowed to keep their titles as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as Canada forbids citizens as well as residents from having or using titles given by the British. Brits who want to move to Canada have to relinquish their titles. 

Whether they would qualify for citizenship is also dubious as they lack any special skills and certainly wouldn't qualify under "compassionate" re-location. They could obtain residency but wouldn't be allowed to work in Canada, although they could manage a company in another country (like Los Angeles ), which I suspect is what they are planning. There's a special law in Canada that allows non-citizen actors filming foreign productions to live and work in Canada which is how Meghan was permitted to live there prior. (Maybe that is the reason for securing her future acting work?) It is assumed Trudeau would have to step in to resolve their immigration issues which might not be popular with Canadians.   

And it's already assumed that Canada will be on the hook for their security, even though technically as "non-royals" who will no longer be working for the Crown Canada would not be obligated to pay for the Mounted Police to guard them,


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> True, the US media isn't looking too closely at them and taking it all at face value. I'm sure she has her advisors but whoever it is won't continue offering their services for nothing. Everything is reciprocal, whether it is returned through cash or favors.
> 
> I wouldn't say she isn't smart, you can only get so far through ambition and chutzpah. And she has gotten very far.


... And by her not being smart, I mean being able to plan something to succeed long term - because I don’t think this will.

Someone smart would not have  gone about the strategy, tactics, and optics this way.


----------



## gracekelly

This is just my opinion

They will never be allowed to brand anything. The Queen gave them the Dukedom/title as a wedding present. I don’t think she will take it away, but it won’t have the meaning that it did. You will see her referred to as Meghan Markle and him as Prince Harry. No more D/D of Sussex. Harry gets to keep the HRH because he is a blood Prince. To allow the use of the Sussex title on anything is an insult to the Queen. It insults the intention that she had when gifting him with it. She was elevating him to a Royal Duke like her sons and William. (Edward is slated to inherit Philip’s Edinburgh title at his death.).   The family is very careful to separate themselves from two things, politics and commerce. They will be skating on the edge with the Earthshot Initiative because certain countries are known to be gross polluters and the politicians are doing nothing about it. As for commerce, we have seen what happened to Edward, Sophie and the egregious Andrew. Now more than ever, the idea that a title can be monetized is unacceptable to the Queen. Along with the lessening of the meaning of the particular title comes the unsavory people who want to get in on the action.  Just imagine the brouhaha if it comes out that the sweatshirt with SussexRoyal stamped on it is found to be made by 12 year old children in Asia, or the baseball endorsed by little Archie is made by 8 year  olds in India. Lawsuits and people picketing BP. It would be an understatement to say that the mystique would evaporate quickly. Those who would prefer the retirement of the monarchy would have more ammunition for their cause. The Firm has been around a long time and there are plenty of people behind the figureheads that you know to keep it going. The Grey Men, as Lady Diana called them, are hard at work.  

The Queen enjoys a position that will most likely never be duplicated.  The  world on the whole is very respectful of her and any perceived insult to her does not go down well. All the actions of the Sussex, in combination, have put them in a precarious position. All the celebrity friends that they are counting on to smooth the way for them are going to disappear into the night when they think that the Sussex star has dimmed sufficiently to no longer “shine a light” or make money for them.   Speaking engagements, books, talk shows, maybe, but at a crass level and purse strings from the place will put limits on what can be said or written along with NDA tied to some type of allowance.    They will become Fergie 2 and we now how that worked.   Meghan may  have thought that she “hit the ground running” when she married Harry, but the way I see it, she is just hitting the ground.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Katel said:


> Sadly...not so fast, Mr.F...
> ...
> “However, Harry and Meghan's team will soon be teaching Fogelson a lesson - because they filed an application for 'Sussex Royal' with the World Intellectual Property Organisation on December 31 - a full week before him.
> 
> The application covers everything from branded pencils to charity fundraising and social care services in Australia, Canada the EU and US.
> 
> While the application is still pending, it would almost certainly supersede Fogelson's application with local US authorities.”
> 
> and
> 
> “The Sussexes want to stamp their name on dozens of products including T-shirts, hoodies, journals and gloves for their newly-created foundation Sussex Royal.
> 
> Retail expert Andy Barr said he would expect Prince Harry and Meghan's new Sussex Royal product empire to generate revenues of £400million.
> 
> He told MailOnline of the trademark applications: 'This will just be the stepping stone for higher value products being launched later down the line.
> 
> 'Undoubtedly this will be a multi-million pound revenue business given they are effectively trading on the back of the Royal name *which is ironic given they are seemingly trying to escape its clutches.”
> *
> The bolded is the entire problem in a nutshell and why they are so obviously at it.
> 
> If there truly were problems of racism and all the other excuses made for Meghan and Harry, why would they want to continue operating, living under that “evil” royal name? Wasn’t that “barely existing?”
> 
> Ca-ching Ca-ching Ca-ching.



I imagine they’ll do a lot of product stuff and try to cloak it with a % goes towards x cause, but really, it’ll be about fudging the amount required to cover costs pre-profit so they make as much as possible but on the surface it looks ‘good’.


----------



## LittleStar88

Perhaps by only living in Canada "part-time", they won't have to abide by the laws as visitors?
How long can they reside in Canada as part of their new "work" plan?
Hopefully Canada will send a bill to the UK for their security coverage?
Something tells me this Canada thing will be short-term until they can find a place to live in the US. I am guessing California (Los Angeles) is where they will end up eventually.


----------



## V0N1B2

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> .... _*and Al Jolson as Trudeau.... *_


#DEAD


----------



## mshermes

This is an interesting read. In my prior life, I dealt with this a lot. I am obviously not in a position to diagnose; however, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..........
understanding-the-narcissistic-sociopath-4587611


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> But... Who wants to buy their branded crap? Pencils? Hoodies? Really?? How about bananas stamped with inspirational quotes? That could be fun...


How long before her own line of handbags, I wonder.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I notice that in Meghan's statement today, she was sure to start it off with "The Duchess of Sussex..."


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Perhaps by only living in Canada "part-time", they won't have to abide by the laws as visitors?
> How long can they reside in Canada as part of their new "work" plan?
> Hopefully Canada will send a bill to the UK for their security coverage?
> *Something tells me this Canada thing will be short-term until they can find a place to live in the US. *I am guessing California (Los Angeles) is where they will end up eventually.



You mean until they divorce due to irreconcilable differences and Meghan heads back to LA and Harry scurries home to England with his tail between his legs.


----------



## daisychainz

Maybe this is why Doria never went to visit over there. It all seemed so remarkably strange that her mother who she was sosupercloseto made like two visits and stayed completely away. Doria is private, Doria wants to stay in her home and live low-key, Doria doesn't like media, Doria is afraid to fly, etc. but maybe mom knew all along that Meghan was working to get away from the royals and the UK and would end up back with her in LA. Maybe Meghan was protecting Doria all along by keeping her away.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> How long before her own line of handbags, I wonder.



I look forward to seeing them in the aisles at Target.


----------



## daisychainz

kemilia said:


> How long before her own line of handbags, I wonder.


A Meghan-Givenchy collab.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

kemilia said:


> How long before her own line of handbags, I wonder.



With their new “SR - Sussex Royal “ logo!



bag-mania said:


> You mean until they divorce due to irreconcilable differences and Meghan heads back to LA and Harry scurries home to England with his tail between his legs.



But where does the baby live in that scenario? My divorced friends can’t even move out of state.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Maybe this is why Doria never went to visit over there. It all seemed so remarkably strange that her mother who she was sosupercloseto made like two visits and stayed completely away. Doria is private, Doria wants to stay in her home and live low-key, Doria doesn't like media, Doria is afraid to fly, etc. but maybe mom knew all along that Meghan was working to get away from the royals and the UK and would end up back with her in LA. Maybe Meghan was protecting Doria all along by keeping her away.



Or maybe Doria loves her daughter but finds her exhausting to be around. There could be a bit of self-preservation going on.


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4639779


Remember Koo Stark?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> But where does the baby live in that scenario? My divorced friends can’t even move out of state.



Archie would go with Meghan of course. She wouldn't pass up the opportunity to portray herself publicly as a single mother just trying to make her way in the world (cue the violins!). Plus she could use him for emotional blackmail any time she needed something from Harry.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Perhaps by only living in Canada "part-time", they won't have to abide by the laws as visitors?
> How long can they reside in Canada as part of their new "work" plan?
> Hopefully Canada will send a bill to the UK for their security coverage?
> Something tells me this Canada thing will be short-term until they can find a place to live in the US. I am guessing California (Los Angeles) is where they will end up eventually.


*PLEASE NO!!!!!!!!!  *No freakin' way will I support any additional monies to pay for their security; they can hire their own security just like the "celebrities" they so think that they are!  Plus, if they think that the media was horrible in the UK? .. just wait!  until they have the hoardes of paps surrounding them!


----------



## LittleStar88

daisychainz said:


> A Meghan-Givenchy collab.



Ariana Grande was their face for a second. I like Ariana more than I do Meghan, but I would never buy an Ariana-Givenchy bag, let alone a Meghan one. I wouldn't want anything with her monogram on it.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> *PLEASE NO!!!!!!!!!  *No freakin' way will I support any additional monies to pay for their security; they can hire their own security just like the "celebrities" they so think that they are!  Plus, if they think that the media was horrible in the UK? .. just wait!  until they have the hoardes of paps surrounding them!



Haha! Yessssss.... Where else would they go? Options would be Los Angeles, NYC, or Miami? Where do other famous folk tend to gather and live?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Ariana Grande was their face for a second. I like Ariana more than I do Meghan, but I would never buy an Ariana-Givenchy bag, let alone a Meghan one. I wouldn't want anything with her monogram on it.


you and I wouldn't buy anything wth her monogram on it.  wonder about some of the posters on this thread who care so passionately about her.  would they buy her stuff?


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Haha! Yessssss.... Where else would they go? Options would be Los Angeles, NYC, or Miami? Where do other famous folk tend to gather and live?


Well, not that I would be living near them since I'm in the Valley, but for some odd reason, I see to always run into various celebrities (I think it's because in most cases I despise them and their antics)!


----------



## daisychainz

I think they choose something East Coast, to make travel (for Harry) to the UK easier. It seems like Toronto/NYC would be the best option for them, it has proximity to DC, too. Victoria/BC was nice for the getaway but as a base it'd be too remote for them imo. No matter where they go the press will follow, they cannot escape that no matter where they live.


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> I notice that in Meghan's statement today, she was sure to start it off with "The Duchess of Sussex..."



I don't mind her referring to herself as the Duchess of Sussex for now, but it would be utterly ridiculous (and clueless) for her to continue to use that title if she never steps foot in Sussex again.  _"I hate your toxic country and don't want to raise my child there but I'm still the Duchess of Sussex and will continue to profit off my title and everything SussexRoyal".  _


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> you and I wouldn't buy anything wth her monogram on it.  wonder about some of the posters on this thread who care so passionately about her.  would they buy her stuff?


Well, as other folks have said .. it's like those folks that buy that Kardashian crap .. personally, I don't get it, but there are always going to be some buyers (unfortunately)!!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> That’s the ego talking. Just like the we can’t make it to Sandringham,when they really weren’t invited.
> 
> Everyday their worth is going down. Such miscalculation.  My local pizza place is advertising for a driver,,will an international driver’s license be ok?


 
So long as they don't mind oneof ttheir drivers driving on the left


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I don't mind her referring to herself as the Duchess of Sussex for now, but it would be utterly ridiculous (and clueless) for her to continue to use that title if she never steps foot in Sussex again.  _"I hate your toxic country and don't want to raise my child there but I'm still the Duchess of Sussex and will continue to profit off my title and everything SussexRoyal".  _


THIS!!! .. remember, way back I posted a blurb how some folks in the Sussex County put forth a document of sorts which was to remove Harry & Meghan from being able to use their titles within the Sussex county?  I thought that was hilarious (now - remember, this is JUST the county and does not affect the Queen's decision)!  Personally, I want them NOT to be able to profit from that one bit; to me, it just reeks of potential issues!


----------



## LittleStar88

I liked Meghan in the beginning but even then I was not interested in buying anything with her on it (commemorative wedding keepsakes, etc). A little weird. And sad if they end up getting a divorce.

I kind of feel like they totally blew it with how they have handled their escape from BRF. Who would want to walk around with stuff that has their name or faces on it, or even give money to their organization knowing that it is already going into their well-padded bank account?

I agree that NYC may make a good spot for them given proximity BUT to be honest I don't see her going back to the UK. If she does, it will be some rear-balcony positioning for trouping the colour. Or better yet - no positioning on the balcony!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, as other folks have said .. it's like those folks that buy that Kardashian crap .. personally, I don't get it, but there are always going to be some buyers (unfortunately)!!


yes, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think at lot of the kardashian stuff is supposed to make you look like them.  Buy Kylies lipstick and have your lips look like hers.  seems different than buying a mug with a pic of H&M on it.  maybe meghan will have a makeup or clothing line.  

Meghan fans, will you buy their merchandise?


----------



## RAINDANCE

A bit of compassion for me here for Sarah Ferguson (Duchess of York)  who I  recall had a truly horrible treatment in the 80's at the hand of the tabloids with the headlines  "the Duchess of Pork" splattered over the red tops post pregnancies and lots of criticism of her clothing choices and deeply unflattering school run photos. _( although it was the 80's - a decade fashion should forget ! )_


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> I don't mind her referring to herself as the Duchess of Sussex for now, but it would be utterly ridiculous (and clueless) for her to continue to use that title if she never steps foot in Sussex again.  _"I hate your toxic country and don't want to raise my child there but I'm still the Duchess of Sussex and will continue to profit off my title and everything SussexRoyal".  _


Has she actually set foot in the county of Sussex?
@CeeJay it sounds so odd you referring it as Sussex County. Over here in the UK we would say (County name) Or, rarely, the county of (County name) lol


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> Has she actually set foot in the county of Sussex?
> @CeeJay it sounds so odd you referring it as Sussex County. Over here in the UK we would say (County name) Or, rarely, the county of (County name) lol



I think they went there once? I am guessing now that will be the only time ever.


----------



## LittleStar88

RAINDANCE said:


> A bit of compassion for me here for Sarah Ferguson (Duchess of York)  who I  recall had a truly horrible treatment in the 80's at the hand of the tabloids with the headlines  "the Duchess of Pork" splattered over the red tops post pregnancies and lots of criticism of her clothing choices and deeply unflattering school run photos. _( although it was the 80's - a decade fashion should forget ! )_



And Meghan acts like the is the only one to ever get beaten up by the press. I remember the Duchess of Pork comments and the bad clothing. Clothing I agree could not be helped.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I saw a news item that said they had not in fact been to Sussex.

*Sussex* (/ˈsʌsɪks/), from the Old English _Sūþsēaxe_ (South Saxons), is a historic county in South East England corresponding roughly in area to the ancient Kingdom of Sussex. It is bounded to the west by Hampshire, north by Surrey, northeast by Kent, south by the English Channel.


----------



## mrsinsyder

They've been there once


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> They've been there once


He's obviously been there many times prior to being Duke of Sussex. 
Might have to cut them some slack though, how many times have the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge been to Cambridge since they got married. Not Cambridgeshire but to Cambridge itself.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Has she actually set foot in the county of Sussex?
> @CeeJay it sounds so odd you referring it as Sussex County. Over here in the UK we would say (County name) Or, rarely, the county of (County name) lol


HA - you know @Sharont2305 .. I can pretty much guarantee that I'm going to screw up the names; heck .. that and me ALWAYS going to the 'wrong' side of the escalators in London had my English & Scottish colleagues howling (and yes, those stinkers would always let me blaze the trail so that they could get their jollies out of me going the wrong way, etc.)!!  Thank god I NEVER drove in London (have in Scotland and Ireland), but I was not in the Cities!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA - you know @Sharont2305 .. I can pretty much guarantee that I'm going to screw up the names; heck .. that and me ALWAYS going to the 'wrong' side of the escalators in London had my English & Scottish colleagues howling (and yes, those stinkers would always let me blaze the trail so that they could get their jollies out of me going the wrong way, etc.)!!  Thank god I NEVER drove in London (have in Scotland and Ireland), but I was not in the Cities!


Lol, I've never driven in any city, no chance. Give me my little country roads of Anglesey and the mountainous roads of Snowdonia any day!!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> And Meghan acts like the is the only one to ever get beaten up by the press. I remember the Duchess of Pork comments and the bad clothing. Clothing I agree could not be helped.


EXACTLY!!  Yes, there are always going to be some people that are horrible (thinking about how some referred to Archie as a Chimpanzee - truly horrible), but I have not seen any that have called Meghan anything close to what Fergie was called!


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, I've never driven in any city, no chance. Give me my little country roads of Anglesey any day!!


Once I was out of the City, I was just fine .. but I would always 'remind' myself "opposite side of the road .."!!!  Honestly, I think the time I lived (briefly) in the US Virgin Islands helped a lot because they also drive British drive!  Now, I did make a huge mistake one day in looking the opposite direction before attempting to cross the street, when (thank god) my British colleague immediately pulled me back before I was flattened by a car (driving too fast I must say)!!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!!  Yes, there are always going to be some people that are horrible (thinking about how some referred to Archie as a Chimpanzee - truly horrible), but I have not seen any that have called Meghan anything close to what Fergie was called!



I fully believe that kids are off limits. But I am very confused by what she is looking to accomplish here. I don't believe for a second that she truly thought that there would be zero fallout from this. 

If she was _just existing_ before, she is in for a really big reality check ahead.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Has she actually set foot in the county of Sussex?
> @CeeJay it sounds so odd you referring it as Sussex County. Over here in the UK we would say (County name) Or, rarely, the county of (County name) lol



That’s the Canadians influencing our border mates.  We say “Essex County” here (at least in Ontario)


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Once I was out of the City, I was just fine .. but I would always 'remind' myself "opposite side of the road .."!!!  Honestly, I think the time I lived (briefly) in the US Virgin Islands helped a lot because they also drive British drive!  Now, I did make a huge mistake one day in looking the opposite direction before attempting to cross the street, when (thank god) my British colleague immediately pulled me back before I was flattened by a car (driving too fast I must say)!!


Oh, I've done that when abroad too, forgetting to look left first before crossing the road. Easily done


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> That’s the Canadians influencing our border mates.  We say “Essex County” here (at least in Ontario)


Same back East, especially in Boston (which is a mirror image of London in many respects) .. you would say "Essex County"!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I fully believe that kids are off limits. But I am very confused by what she is looking to accomplish here. I don't believe for a second that she truly thought that there would be zero fallout from this.
> 
> If she was _just existing_ before, she is in for a really big reality check ahead.


100% agree!!!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

imgg said:


> Who would buy anything with their name on it?  I'm sure there is plenty of people, but I can't imagine _that _many people.  Public opinion of these two are not great.  I hope Disney reneges on the voiceover deal, especially after the embarrassing footage of Harry pimping out his wife.



That word “PIMP” and Harry - hey, if QEII can omit the word Prince with regard to her grandson, well, so can I - going forward he is good ole Harry to me. 

Yes, running through my mind the past few days is the monstrous gaff that Harry pulled on Bob Igor@Disney while going through a crowded reception line no less, thoroughly without any dignity - Harry, pimping out your wife is usually done in private even if it is purely for a voice-over. 

How did you not know that, you fool? Oh, Meggy TOLD YOU TO DO IT, got that now. 

Also, Meggy’s complaints that “no-one asked how I was feeling”, the sheer NERVE of that statement. THIS.

Meggy, WOMEN HAVE BABIES ALL THE TIME & without the luxuries that you enjoy and cannot appreciate.

Yes, women have babies and work in one capacity or another these days and they come home, cook dinner, clean up a million messes not of their doing AND most of the time, NO-ONE EVER ASKS HOW THEY ARE DOING BC THIS IS SIMPLY NORMAL AND PART OF LIFE.

What a stupid cow, and the blame rests with Harry just as much if not more for the horrible optics of this situation. Personally, Harry can keep his grubby ugly face under his ski cap for the remainder of his days.
[emoji813]️


----------



## RAINDANCE

Is it worth noting here (for any one interested) that there is a difference between the Royal Dukedoms and the Dukedoms of the Aristocracy. 
Being a Duke does not mean you are Royal. There are a number of non-royal dukedoms that form the very top layer of the Aristocracy in the UK and Ireland. Most are very old titles and families with historical lineage.
The difference is that the non royal dukedoms are not part of the Royal family by virtue of their birth.
The Dukes of Kent and Gloucester are cousins of the Queen - they have the same Grandfather, King George V so they are Royal Dukes. Usually a royal duke would also be HRH.
But, for example, the Dukes of Rutland (Belvoir Castle) or Devonshire ( Chatsworth House) are not of Royal descent. 

The reason this is relevant to Harry (and Meghan) is that he is currently a Royal Duke.

One of the fundamental issues with their "resignation" is that it appears that H&M want to give up being "working royals" but retain their title and the royal honorific and to use it for commercial activities - Sussex Royal - and it is the (ab)use of the "ROYAL"  status (whilst simultaneously rejecting it) FOR PERSONAL GAIN  that has enraged so many here in the UK. 

Just to note there is nothing stopping a duke from using their family name behind their various commercial enterprises although these are usually in support of their estates. [Emma, Duchess of Rutland for example has overseen the refurbishment of a number of derelict building on the Belvoir Estate in the last 2 years and converted it into a small upmarket shopping outlet and markets country wear and other items there under her own brand The Duchess Gallery]


----------



## gelbergirl

Anyone actually reading their website.  There's a section on Media & how it will be handled going forward.  There's also a bit of history there, on press pool access for British papers.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sharont2305 said:


> He's obviously been there many times prior to being Duke of Sussex.
> Might have to cut them some slack though, how many times have the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge been to Cambridge since they got married. Not Cambridgeshire but to Cambridge itself.



 2014 Wills did a 10 week land management course at Cambridge - does that count ?
And Kate almost always wear the Cambridge Lovers Knot tiara.

I wonder if there is a Sussex tiara hidden away in a vault somewhere.


----------



## bag-mania

*Here’s what Meghan Markle has been doing as Megxit plays out*

Meghan Markle has been laying low — driving herself around Vancouver Island in Canada in a Range Rover to do errands — as Megxit plays out, according to reports.

While her husband, Prince Harry, continues to grapple with fallout from the pair’s controversial move to rid themselves of their “senior royal duties,” Meghan “mostly stays at home but ventures out around mid-day just to get out,” a source told E! News. 

A security detail follows her around, the site said.

The weather has been “cold and rainy” in the town where Meghan has been mainly holed up in a wealthy pal’s mansion along with baby boy Archie since she and Harry stunned the Palace and world last week with their announcement to severely curb their life in the royal spotlight, the source said.

When the Duchess of Sussex does leave her secluded current digs, “She has gone for a drive around town and to pick up someone at the airport that looked like her mom,” the source said.

This past weekend, before Monday’s historic Megxit summit involving Harry, the queen, Prince William and Prince Charles, Meghan was spotted tooling around the area running errands, ending up at one point in “a drug-store parking lot,” a source added to US magazine. 

Harry is reportedly set to reunite with his wife and son in Canada at the end of the week.

He and Meghan have been ripped for blindsiding the queen and the rest of the royal family with their announcement, which was posted online last Wednesday. But the couple only made the move because Britain’s The Sun was set to publish a front-page story about their plan, a source told US.

Still, Harry is contrite over making his relatives, especially his grandmother the queen, upset by not breaking the news to them first, a source told Britain’s Telegraph.

https://pagesix.com/2020/01/14/heres-what-meghan-markle-has-been-doing-as-megxit-plays-out/


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> Is it worth noting here (for any one interested) that there is a difference between the Royal Dukedoms and the Dukedoms of the Aristocracy.
> Being a Duke does not mean you are Royal. There are a number of non-royal dukedoms that form the very top layer of the Aristocracy in the UK and Ireland. Most are very old titles and families with historical lineage.
> The difference is that the non royal dukedoms are not part of the Royal family by virtue of their birth.
> The Dukes of Kent and Gloucester are cousins of the Queen - they have the same Grandfather, King George V so they are Royal Dukes. Usually a royal duke would also be HRH.
> But, for example, the Dukes of Rutland (Belvoir Castle) or Devonshire ( Chatsworth House) are not of Royal descent.
> 
> The reason this is relevant to Harry (and Meghan) is that he is currently a Royal Duke.
> 
> One of the fundamental issues with their "resignation" is that it appears that H&M want to give up being "working royals" but retain their title and the royal honorific and to use it for commercial activities - Sussex Royal - and it is the (ab)use of the "ROYAL"  status (whilst simultaneously rejecting it) FOR PERSONAL GAIN  that has enraged so many here in the UK.
> 
> Just to note there is nothing stopping a duke from using their family name behind their various commercial enterprises although these are usually in support of their estates. [Emma, Duchess of Rutland for example has overseen the refurbishment of a number of derelict building on the Belvoir Estate in the last 2 years and converted it into a small upmarket shopping outlet and markets country wear and other items there under her own brand The Duchess Gallery]


The Duchess of Rutland is a lovely lady, I've seen a few programmes featuring her and always impressed by her grace and elegance. Belvoir Castle, pronounce beaver looks lovely. She's separated from the Duke and still lives there, in separate wings. She's done wonders with that place. She wasn't born an aristocrat.


----------



## chaneljewel

I want no harm to come to H and M, and was totally in support of their marriage; however, how they went about this mess was disrespectful to the Queen and the people of Britain.  That’s what makes me upset with them.  I live in the U.S. but have always been in awe of the BRF.  I know that there are issues and problems and life isn’t perfect there, but the world watches what happens and H and M‘s behavior was distasteful and totally disrespectful.  I was taught that if you want respect then you need to earn respect.  Both of them need a lesson in honor and respect to their country and family.


----------



## Chagall

kemilia said:


> How long before her own line of handbags, I wonder.


Oh no. If she gets into handbags I’m hiring a hit man. My heart couldn’t take her moving into something so sacred to me!​


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duchess of Rutland is a lovely lady, I've seen a few programmes featuring her and always impressed by her grace and elegance. Belvoir Castle, pronounce beaver looks lovely. She's separated from the Duke and still lives there, in separate wings. She's done wonders with that place. She wasn't born an aristocrat.


They are both well liked and respected here and have worked out a very amicable arrangement. Vale of Belvoir is a fantastic part of the UK.
She also oversaw the construction of a number of affordable cottages (from derelict barns in one of the estate villages) that are only rented to local residents - I think only young families or "seniors" were eligible. Really putting back into the local community.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## mdcx

The cat that got the cream:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7887419/Meghan-Markle-breaks-cover-time-leaving-UK.html


----------



## youngster

I'm not very far south of the Duchess. It's cold and dreary with snow turning to rain over the next few days. Not a great place to be hanging about honestly lol.  Everyone around here is hoping to escape to California soon for a few days.  Just like Meghan!


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7887419/Meghan-Markle-breaks-cover-time-leaving-UK.html
> View attachment 4640008


I always liked her casual, winter street wear best. I read it's unusually cold in BC. Here in Toronto, it's above freezing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> I liked Meghan in the beginning but even then I was not interested in buying anything with her on it (commemorative wedding keepsakes, etc). A little weird. And sad if they end up getting a divorce.
> 
> I kind of feel like they totally blew it with how they have handled their escape from BRF. Who would want to walk around with stuff that has their name or faces on it, or even give money to their organization knowing that it is already going into their well-padded bank account?
> 
> I agree that NYC may make a good spot for them given proximity BUT to be honest I don't see her going back to the UK. If she does, it will be some rear-balcony positioning for trouping the colour. Or better yet - no positioning on the balcony!



Instead of performing off-Broadway, she can do off-Balcony


----------



## mrsinsyder

Where’s Archie tho


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Instead of performing off-Broadway, she can do off-Balcony


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> Where’s Archie tho


Who?


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Who?


The MEAL TICKET


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> The MEAL TICKET


I believe he and Harry may have served their purpose. I hope he has a lovely nanny, poor wee mite.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Who?





mrsinsyder said:


> The MEAL TICKET



Archie the phantom rent a child.  Kidding.  Or maybe not kidding.

Good thing he likes the nanny.


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> Where’s Archie tho



Archie is the sad part of this whole mess.  (I figure Harry and Meghan are old enough to deal with the consequences of their choices.)  But, Archie . . . she doesn't want to raise Archie in the UK which basically cuts him off from half his heritage without regular access to his grandfather or his uncle. No regular interaction with his cousins, George and Charlotte and Louis or any of the other extended family and cousins like Lena and Mia Tindall.  Even if they actually do make occasional visits to the UK, they'll all be strangers to each other. Maybe that's what she wants.  She seems to have cut herself off from her family quite easily, with the exception of Doria who has probably learned to just keep her mouth shut and pat her hand.


----------



## doni

It is mid-January and I have already lost count how many planes these two have caught in 2020...


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4639779



Meghan's centerfold pic will be included in her new Sussex Royal calendar. She has a good start. It'll require a ton of airbrushing and photoshop if she doesn't resume the white powder that made her so thin, you know, Sweet'N Low.


----------



## muchstuff

daisychainz said:


> I think they choose something East Coast, to make travel (for Harry) to the UK easier. It seems like Toronto/NYC would be the best option for them, it has proximity to DC, too. Victoria/BC was nice for the getaway but as a base it'd be too remote for them imo. No matter where they go the press will follow, they cannot escape that no matter where they live.


I read that Meghan wants a home in Toronto and another in Whistler BC. Hey @V0N1B2 she’d be your neighbour! Maybe you can show her around the Village....


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> *Here’s what Meghan Markle has been doing as Megxit plays out*
> 
> Meghan Markle has been laying low — driving herself around Vancouver Island in Canada in a Range Rover to do errands — as Megxit plays out, according to reports.
> 
> While her husband, Prince Harry, continues to grapple with fallout from the pair’s controversial move to rid themselves of their “senior royal duties,” Meghan “mostly stays at home but ventures out around mid-day just to get out,” a source told E! News.
> 
> A security detail follows her around, the site said.
> 
> The weather has been “cold and rainy” in the town where Meghan has been mainly holed up in a wealthy pal’s mansion along with baby boy Archie since she and Harry stunned the Palace and world last week with their announcement to severely curb their life in the royal spotlight, the source said.
> 
> When the Duchess of Sussex does leave her secluded current digs, “She has gone for a drive around town and to pick up someone at the airport that looked like her mom,” the source said.
> 
> This past weekend, before Monday’s historic Megxit summit involving Harry, the queen, Prince William and Prince Charles, Meghan was spotted tooling around the area running errands, ending up at one point in “a drug-store parking lot,” a source added to US magazine.
> 
> Harry is reportedly set to reunite with his wife and son in Canada at the end of the week.
> 
> He and Meghan have been ripped for blindsiding the queen and the rest of the royal family with their announcement, which was posted online last Wednesday. But the couple only made the move because Britain’s The Sun was set to publish a front-page story about their plan, a source told US.
> 
> Still, Harry is contrite over making his relatives, especially his grandmother the queen, upset by not breaking the news to them first, a source told Britain’s Telegraph.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/14/heres-what-meghan-markle-has-been-doing-as-megxit-plays-out/


Hmmm .. SO:

They are still in the "mansion" that they were in when on holiday (or should I say their MegExit planning)?
She is driving around a Range Rover - nice
Obviously, has a Nanny or two to help out with Archie (can't imagine that her BFF Jessica is still there)
Now picking up Doria .. what? .. so that the Nannies can take a break?
UFB .. they remind me of the early Venture Capital days, when all this 'angel money' was given to all these Internet start-ups, to just see that money pissed away by the 'children' who bought all these toys .. and then all of a sudden, someone took a look at the books and realized "oh crap - we have no more $$$"!!  Didn't his father tell him that he didn't have unlimited resources!!!!


----------



## Chagall

muchstuff said:


> I read that Meghan wants a home in Toronto and another in Whistler BC. Hey @V0N1B2 she’d be your neighbour! Maybe you can show her around the Village....


Thank the gods I’m in the nations capitol. Nowhere near TO or BC.


----------



## mdcx

Gosh there’s a lot of positive comments on the latest pic of Meghan in the DM, someone is hard at work:


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Archie is the sad part of this whole mess.  (I figure Harry and Meghan are old enough to deal with the consequences of their choices.)  But, Archie . . . she doesn't want to raise Archie in the UK which basically cuts him off from half his heritage without regular access to his grandfather or his uncle. No regular interaction with his cousins, George and Charlotte and Louis or any of the other extended family and cousins like Lena and Mia Tindall.  Even if they actually do make occasional visits to the UK, they'll all be strangers to each other. Maybe that's what she wants.  She seems to have cut herself off from her family quite easily, with the exception of Doria who has probably learned to just keep her mouth shut and pat her hand.



This is exerting complete control over a person.  My aunt by marriage did this.  The aunt, married to my mother's weak willed brother, was an only child,  They had three children similar in age to us and we never saw them.  We had tons of cousins in my dad's family so no problem for us, but I always wondered about these three.  They had no cousins at all and a mother who hated the rest of us.  They were the big losers and poor Archie could be in the same boat.  It is obvious that between Zara, and Peter Phillips, the Wessex children  and potentially Bea and Eugenie, there will be a boatload of cousins to know and have fun with.  Even the older cousins from Princess Margaret's two children are active in the family and were at Balmoral this summer.  These are important friendships with people who share an understanding of what it is like to grow up in the Royal family or Royal adjacent.  This is incredibly sad to me for a little boy who looks like he is a sociable and charming baby.  Just hoping he stays that way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Gosh there’s a lot of positive comments on the latest pic of Meghan in the DM, someone is hard at work:
> View attachment 4640035
> View attachment 4640036


Thank you for giving me my afternoon chuckle.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> Where’s Archie tho


Mother of the year, eh.


----------



## mshermes

gracekelly said:


> This is exerting complete control over a person.  My aunt by marriage did this.  The aunt, married to my mother's weak willed brother, was an only child,  They had three children similar in age to us and we never saw them.  We had tons of cousins in my dad's family so no problem for us, but I always wondered about these three.  They had no cousins at all and a mother who hated the rest of us.  They were the big losers and poor Archie could be in the same boat.  It is obvious that between Zara, and Peter Phillips, the Wessex children  and potentially Bea and Eugenie, there will be a boatload of cousins to know and have fun with.  Even the older cousins from Princess Margaret's two children are active in the family and were at Balmoral this summer.  These are important friendships with people who share an understanding of what it is like to grow up in the Royal family or Royal adjacent.  This is incredibly sad to me for a little boy who looks like he is a sociable and charming baby.  Just hoping he stays that way.


You are correct. Exerting control over two people. Archie will know her, Doria and his father....time will tell. I think Harry is in for a ton of heartache and pain. She looks happier in this pic than she did on her wedding day. Just incredibly sad.


----------



## CeeJay

HA .. yeah, this one really slays me .. yeah, don't need the trappings of royalty, but sure as heck NEED THE MOO-LAH!!!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mshermes said:


> You are correct. Exerting control over two people. Archie will know her, Doria and his father....time will tell. I think Harry is in for a ton of heartache and pain. She looks happier in this pic than she did on her wedding day. Just incredibly sad.


You're too kind, thinking he'll know his father. She'll haul off with that baby away from Harry, too. Family cycle, her dad was cut out of her life - who needs a dad, right? Archie will survive.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You're too kind, thinking he'll know his father. She'll haul off with that baby away from Harry, too. Family cycle, her dad was cut out of her life - who needs a dad, right? Archie will survive.



I don't think the family will stand for that.  Charles will be willing to put up the legal fight if it comes to that, but for what?  Two weeks or months in the summer and every other Christmas holiday?


----------



## keodi

LibbyRuth said:


> When Harry and Meghan first got married, I remember being swept up in the romance of it all - the Lifetime movie, imagining their courtship, etc. It was so exciting! Now with their current behavior, I picture those early dates being long discussions about all the big bad mean people who were out to get them, and all the romance just dies.
> 
> 
> Seeing how all of this is playing out, I wonder if Meghan's attitude explains the optics we got for how she was received by the family early on.  When the Queen took Meghan out on a joint engagement so quickly after the wedding, I remember a big deal being made about how soon she got that treatment - something Kate had not gotten until much further into her marriage. With the benefit of hindsight, perhaps royal watchers got it all wrong. Rather than the "The Queen adores Meghan" spin that we were fed then, perhaps the truth is that the distrust really has been there all along, and the Queen got ahead of the optics to prevent her from claiming she was never accepted.


Great post! I'm with you on this! I was excited and happy for them, but now its very disappointing.


----------



## mshermes

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You're too kind, thinking he'll know his father. She'll haul off with that baby away from Harry, too. Family cycle, her dad was cut out of her life - who needs a dad, right? Archie will survive.


No....not that kind. I said time will tell.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

gracekelly said:


> I don't think the family will stand for that.  Charles will be willing to put up the legal fight if it comes to that, but for what?  Two weeks or months in the summer and every other Christmas holiday?


There are probably already plans in motion for the 'what if's' surrounding this dilemma. No doubt it'll come.


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> HA .. yeah, this one really slays me .. yeah, don't need the trappings of royalty, but sure as heck NEED THE MOO-LAH!!!
> View attachment 4640037


The comments are a joke. They are moderated. Notice the number of down votes and many of the accounts are new accounts. Her team must be doing damage control. Someone posted that she will make a great Queen? WTF?


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> This is exerting complete control over a person.  My aunt by marriage did this.  The aunt, married to my mother's weak willed brother, was an only child,  They had three children similar in age to us and we never saw them.  We had tons of cousins in my dad's family so no problem for us, but I always wondered about these three.  They had no cousins at all and a mother who hated the rest of us.  They were the big losers and poor Archie could be in the same boat.  It is obvious that between Zara, and Peter Phillips, the Wessex children  and potentially Bea and Eugenie, there will be a boatload of cousins to know and have fun with.  Even the older cousins from Princess Margaret's two children are active in the family and were at Balmoral this summer.  These are important friendships with people who share an understanding of what it is like to grow up in the Royal family or Royal adjacent.  This is incredibly sad to me for a little boy who looks like he is a sociable and charming baby.  Just hoping he stays that way.


Sometimes in an extremely dysfunctional family cutting ties is a very healthy thing to. When they cause you so much endless stress and heartache, hurt your children, and destroy your mental health it is the only sane thing to do. In MM’s case she has done this with all her relationships. It would appear that she is the problem. If it happens with everyone it is not about the other people.


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> The comments are a joke. They are moderated. Notice the number of down votes and many of the accounts are new accounts. Her team must be doing damage control. Someone posted that she will make a great Queen? WTF?


Thinking she could be Queen shows how ignorant these people are.  Or really delusional haha!


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> Sometimes in an extremely dysfunctional family cutting ties is a very healthy thing to. When they cause you so much endless stress and heartache, hurt your children, and destroy your mental health it is the only sane thing to do. In MM’s case she has done this with all her relationships. It would appear that she is the problem. If it happens with everyone it is not about the other people.


VERY, VERY true .. had to 'divorce' certain members of my family because of this.  However, as you note, when the individual has a repeated history of 'ghosting' not only family, but friends (and especially friends that helped them!) .. then, yup .. it's THEM!!!  Again, knowing the early history of Meghan, this has been going on for a VERY long time and once her "friend's" usefulness was no longer needed, poof .. 'ghosted'!


----------



## rose60610

Where's Archie? Hopefully in the care of a competent person. Maybe he's being fitted for Sussex Royal baby clothing and photographed with SR toys, diapers, etc for the online catalog. Archie's been around long enough now, time for him to start pulling his own weight. Prince Harry waited until he was 35 to be independent. I think Archie could earn more than his parents right now. People like Archie more than his mom and dad. At least somebody in the family has a little couth.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oop


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Oop
> 
> View attachment 4640070


Unreal! What a complete mess!


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> Oop
> 
> View attachment 4640070


Markle-vs-Markle-Meghans-father-set-star-witness-against-High-Court-showdown.html Read this a little while ago. A few of the texts are in this article.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Gloves are coming off.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Awww.... so cute


----------



## imgg

I picture Meghan sitting back with a smug smile on her face, proud of herself for all the chaos she caused.  Waiting for her new friends to call- Pharrell, George, Orpah so she can tell them how hard it is for her.


----------



## chloebagfreak

This has been a tough week for the Kartrashians! They must have been gnashing their teeth over all of this coverage- hence the multiple bikini shots of Kim . I had a feeling the photos of their kids and the contents of their refrigerators wouldn’t get the eyeballs they want.


----------



## marietouchet

chloebagfreak said:


> This has been a tough week for the Kartrashians! They must have been gnashing their teeth over all of this coverage- hence the multiple bikini shots of Kim . I had a feeling the photos of their kids and the contents of their refrigerators wouldn’t get the eyeballs they want.


Are they the real victims in this sturm and drang lol ?
Ps loved how spelling checker changed the text to storm and drank, before I fixed it


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> Gloves are coming off.
> 
> View attachment 4640090
> View attachment 4640091


The more things like this that come to light, these people will ghost her. They don't need the bad PR this parasite brings them.


----------



## bisousx

Everyone knows to keep friends close but “enemies” closer - you’d think Meghan would try to patch things up with her dad so he keeps his mouth shut and spares her the embarrassment of whatever he’s about to spill. 

Meghan’s looking less a scheming mastermind and more of an impatient, entitled brat who thinks she’s much smarter than she is.

oh, and


----------



## pukasonqo

chloebagfreak said:


> This has been a tough week for the Kartrashians! They must have been gnashing their teeth over all of this coverage- hence the multiple bikini shots of Kim . I had a feeling the photos of their kids and the contents of their refrigerators wouldn’t get the eyeballs they want.


Maybe MM could hire PMK as her manager? She has really stretched Kimbo’s 15 mins to almost 20 yrs!


----------



## chloebagfreak

pukasonqo said:


> Maybe MM could hire PMK as her manager? She has really stretched Kimbo’s 15 mins to almost 20 yrs!


I have often thought of that. 
They- K Klan- have passed their expiration date for sure, and the younger ones don’t seem to be very interesting.


----------



## chloebagfreak

marietouchet said:


> Are they the real victims in this sturm and drang lol ?
> Ps loved how spelling checker changed the text to storm and drank, before I fixed it


Haha


----------



## mdcx

I think Meg probably subscribes to the “any publicity is good publicity” concept. 
Her team likely has binders of story ideas prepped and ready to go in the event that people get bored with the whole “Megs vs. QEll, where’s Archie?” angle.


----------



## hellosunshine

Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, where she spent time discussing some of the issues affecting women in the local area.


----------



## mshermes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...laiming-internationally-protected-people.html
This is funny....busted. They had to remove from their website that they were “internationally protected people”. What????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, where she spent time discussing some of the issues affecting women in the local area.


JFC, she's doing photo ops NOW?!


----------



## Annawakes

She definitely doesn’t look as pretty as before.  I wonder why?

the whole bottom half of her face looks different.  From the nose downwards, including her nose.


----------



## mdcx

Annawakes said:


> She definitely doesn’t look as pretty as before.  I wonder why?
> 
> the whole bottom half of her face looks different.  From the nose downwards, including her nose.


I read somewhere that she regularly had something called a”liquid nose-job” where fillers were injected to improve her profile I guess. I would imagine getting filler/Botox touchups was first on her agenda on her “holidays”. Maybe that is all still settling?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

hellosunshine said:


> Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, where she spent time discussing some of the issues affecting women in the local area.
> 
> View attachment 4640112


Image rehab begins.


----------



## mdcx

Erm, in what capacity is she doing this appearance? Is this off her own bat? So odd.

ETA:https://www.straight.com/life/13467...its-downtown-eastside-womens-centre-vancouver

“Vancouver's Downtown Eastside is one of the poorest neighbourhoods in the country.

It's also the epicentre of a national illicit-drug overdose crisis that has claimed more that 13,000 lives since January 2016.

But today, those who work and volunteer at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre had something positive to share—a photo with Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, who dropped by to boost their spirits.

Since 1978 the centre has been providing a safe space for women and children—as well as counselling, hot meals, and basic necessities, such as feminine hygiene products and toiletries.

It also fights economic injustice and systemic discrimination.

And staff there were on the frontlines in drawing awareness to the dozens of missing and murdered women from the Downtown Eastside over the past few decades.

Markle, 38, was seen boarding a seaplane in Victoria earlier today, but no one expected her to show up at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre.

Her various appearances in B.C. are fuelling speculation that she and her husband, Prince Harry, may settle in B.C. now that the Queen has given them permission to live part-time in North America.“


----------



## rose60610

Up next: Photo ops at an orphanage, a homeless shelter, and a food pantry. Stay tuned for lots of Archie sightings. She's going to sponge off her own baby's cuteness and popularity to compensate for her gold digger palace wrecker reputation. So we all feel good buying #SussexRoyal hoodies and coffee cups that say: "Aren't you going to ask me if I'm OK?", and "Don't just exist, live!", and "You are special".


----------



## queennadine

The change in her face and specifically her nose are super obvious in the one article that had the picture of her and her dad.


----------



## carmen56

I don't know how she's got the cheek to show her face.  If I was her I'd be keeping a low profile until all the hoo-ha has died down.


----------



## kissmysass

hellosunshine said:


> Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, where she spent time discussing some of the issues affecting women in the local area.
> 
> View attachment 4640112


Damage control is in full effect. 

Also I read sometimes that she has a nice style but I find her style so bland and flashy (brand wise) which is fine if she could dress....


----------



## shiba

Did they offer condolences to the families of the 57 Canadians (and others) that died in the plane that was shot down by Iran?


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> She definitely doesn’t look as pretty as before.  I wonder why?
> 
> the whole bottom half of her face looks different.  From the nose downwards, including her nose.


She seems to have a new set of veneers.

The thing is, the set she had before gave her a truly stunning smile. So much better than when she first came on the scene.

These new veneers are strangely bigger or longer or something and they're not as pretty. Changes her mouth.


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> She seems to have a new set of veneers.
> 
> The thing is, the set she had before gave her a truly stunning smile. So much better than when she first came on the scene.
> 
> These new veneers are strangely bigger or longer or something and they're not as pretty. Changes her mouth.


I think you could be right. Maybe they are thicker? Hillary Duff really went overboard with veneers a while back.
I would guess she had a laundry list of cosmetic procedures done in last 2 months. Probably they were not something easy for her to do in London, it just doesn’t seem like obvious procedures are really endorsed by the BRF.


----------



## auntyjo

mdcx said:


> Erm, in what capacity is she doing this appearance? Is this off her own bat? So odd.
> 
> ETA:https://www.straight.com/life/13467...its-downtown-eastside-womens-centre-vancouver
> 
> “Vancouver's Downtown Eastside is one of the poorest neighbourhoods in the country.
> 
> It's also the epicentre of a national illicit-drug overdose crisis that has claimed more that 13,000 lives since January 2016.
> 
> But today, those who work and volunteer at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre had something positive to share—a photo with Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, who dropped by to boost their spirits.
> 
> Since 1978 the centre has been providing a safe space for women and children—as well as counselling, hot meals, and basic necessities, such as feminine hygiene products and toiletries.
> 
> It also fights economic injustice and systemic discrimination.
> 
> And staff there were on the frontlines in drawing awareness to the dozens of missing and murdered women from the Downtown Eastside over the past few decades.
> 
> Markle, 38, was seen boarding a seaplane in Victoria earlier today, but no one expected her to show up at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre.
> 
> Her various appearances in B.C. are fuelling speculation that she and her husband, Prince Harry, may settle in B.C. now that the Queen has given them permission to live part-time in North America.“


No one invited her, so she decides to give a surprise visit.


----------



## chowlover2

Jayne1 said:


> She seems to have a new set of veneers.
> 
> The thing is, the set she had before gave her a truly stunning smile. So much better than when she first came on the scene.
> 
> These new veneers are strangely bigger or longer or something and they're not as pretty. Changes her mouth.


They are definitely bigger, they look like chiclets.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?

She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.  

She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?  
As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.                                                

So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.

Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?

So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham


----------



## Grande Latte

Her look changed because she doesn't have that "royal" aura anymore. There used to be a halo around her because she's married into the BRF. Not because she's "oh my god have never seen a woman so beautiful"....

Now the photographs of her in Canada make her look like a fugitive. And soon, her cool friends will start to disappear...It's all really stupid because she got too high in life then threw herself into this mess.

I have a feeling in a very short amount of time she's going to regret her decisions. And beg to go back to the UK. Let's hope the royal family will embrace her....but I don't think so.

Is Harry still in the UK? He belongs there. Don't want to sound like a psychic, but their destinies are not intertwined anymore. This is OBVIOUS.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, where she spent time discussing some of the issues affecting women in the local area.
> 
> View attachment 4640112


This is so gross ...haha, you know the Queen soon won’t let her flaunt that title around in such a gross manner - she is so obviously *not* representing the Crown here. Nor will she ever henceforth - she will only be representing herself— and everyone knows it now. Such a clever girl.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

V0N1B2 said:


> I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?
> 
> She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?
> As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.
> 
> So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.
> 
> Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?
> 
> So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham


This! All of it x 1000% And it’s funny! Rimmel lip liner and plastica  Mulroney! So funny!


----------



## V0N1B2

V0N1B2 said:


> So did they *pot* an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?


Maybe this was a Freudian slip.  
No wonder they wanna settle here, they're coming for the world-class legal Island Sweet Skunk, baby.
Maybe they can pitch a script titled "Duke, where's my car?


----------



## mdcx

V0N1B2 said:


> I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?
> 
> She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?
> As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.
> 
> So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.
> 
> Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?
> 
> So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham


Love it! I have had the same thoughts about the hostage-nanny. Surely the poor girl didn’t sign up to be on the run with Meghan?


----------



## Katel

V0N1B2 said:


> I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?
> 
> She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?
> As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.
> 
> So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.
> 
> Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?
> 
> So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham



Bwahahahaha! TU V0N!


----------



## arnott

Flatsy said:


> *JFC*, she's doing photo ops NOW?!



I just figured out what that stands for without knowing what it stands for!


----------



## threadbender

Poor Archie. Will there be anyone who will just love that little boy?


----------



## mdcx

What staff do we think Meghan has with her in Canada? Obviously no BRF advisers, as she is totes over that. And advisers would not have okayed the random pop-in at a women’s shelter.
I’m thinking just Yes-Men to do her bidding, no questions asked. 
It will be interesting to see how “authentic Meghan” behaves with all the monies and none of the rules(apparently) in coming days.


----------



## byzina

Sorry, I don't know if it has already been here but this is an interesting video how they plan to get a new job for Meg:


----------



## Sharont2305

She's already been papped more over there than she did when living here in the UK.
Harry, are you watching? This is what you have to look forward to.


----------



## muchstuff

Flatsy said:


> JFC, she's doing photo ops NOW?!


Downtown East Side is in Vancouver, I guess she’s left the Island?


----------



## Clearblueskies

byzina said:


> Sorry, I don't know if it has already been here but this is an interesting video how they plan to get a new job for Meg:



This has been posted a few times, and every time I see it I can’t get over seeing the shock and disbelief on Bob Igors face.  He only just manages to keep his composure.  Harry must be stupid.


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> She's already been papped more over there than she did when living here in the UK.
> Harry, are you watching? This is what you have to look forward to.


Someone commented on another forum that Megs wasn't papped in the UK due to strict press guidelines or something? Basically this peeved Ms Markle off and she much prefers to be in a country that is a pap free for all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## auntyjo

Maybe she call pap herself to take some happy pictures at shelter since it was a private surprise visit.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Someone commented on another forum that Megs wasn't papped in the UK due to strict press guidelines or something? Basically this peeved Ms Markle off and she much prefers to be in a country that is a pap free for all.


Exactly, the press also have an mutual understanding with the RF not to pap them.
I think Harry is going to get a very big wake up call.


----------



## muchstuff

V0N1B2 said:


> I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?
> 
> She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?
> As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.
> 
> So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.
> 
> Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?
> 
> So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham


For her to be doing a photo op in the DTES leaves me speechless, and not in a good way. We have people freezing in a tent city down there in this bone-chilling weather we have going on and she’s smiling for the camera. Better she went out there and handed out socks, toques and blankets to some of those poor unfortunates. The DTES has its own very special set of issues and to see her exploit it in that manner really is atrocious.


----------



## arnott

V0N1B2 said:


> I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?
> 
> She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?
> As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.
> 
> So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.
> 
> Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?
> 
> So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham



I shudder that she's running rampant in my city!      Is she leaving yet?!         Oh, and I also went out today in the -7c weather with no gloves on!


----------



## mdcx

This is why the BRF have advisers that determine appropriate patronages and visits, plan them, prepare the hosts, the security, the press, establish a point to the visit which is usually some kind of benefit to the host charity/organisation. Ensure the optics on said visits are good.
But no, Megs knows better.


----------



## byzina

Clearblueskies said:


> This has been posted a few times, and every time I see it I can’t get over seeing the shock and disbelief on Bob Igors face.  He only just manages to keep his composure.  Harry must be stupid.



I agree this was so awkward. While Meghan tries to be associated with independent self-made women like her friend Serena or Michelle ***** or Amal, she gets everything via her husband and his family. I don't know why some people call her "a new role model", it's quite old - marry successfully and let your husband do the rest of work.


----------



## PewPew

arnott said:


> Oh, and I also went out today in the -7c weather with no gloves on!



You too must have the perpetual inner fire of the awoken to keep ye warm!

The unscheduled, uninvited snowstorm visit is going to backfire. It shows remarkably poor judgement.

1) It’s too blatant a PR move given her public problems. She trying to win over Canadian public opinion, but no one believes she was suddenly awoken to her responsibility to leave Archie & talk about women’s issues in a snowstorm. It’s amusing that the lady next to her couldn’t be bothered to remove her headphones for these deep convos and photo ops with the Duchess.

2) She HAD to know any public appearance is going to have the media calling her a Duchess. The BRF are currently in discussions about how H & M can use their titles, or if they can even keep them. The Queen already didn’t use their titles in her letter. M’s public flaunting of a position/ title she’s had less than 2 yrs is going to make the Queen even less sympathetic to the Megxit demands. What a picnic dealing with Fergie must now seem in retrospect.


----------



## lanasyogamama

V0N1B2 said:


> I just don't get this chick.  I mean, I do, but I don't get why she's so thirsty.  She married a real live Prince - isn't that enough? to marry into the most famous Royal Family of them all?
> 
> She was apparently sighted last night in the parking lot of a drugstore at a strip mall.  In a snowstorm.  When the police are telling people to stay off the roads.  Council meetings were cancelled, schools were closed, the conditions on the road were treacherous.  Hey, I was at my mum's last night, I watched CHEK News, its on right after two episodes of Blue Bloods   I know the sugars are gonna come for me and tell me that she lived in Toronto! She's used to snow! Meghan is very special and if she needed that Rimmel lip liner for her big surprise visit (and it was a surprise) to The Downtown East Side the next day, well ice covered roads be damned.  What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.
> 
> She decides to pop on over to Vancouver for the afternoon and waits for the seaplane down at the harbour where it's about -5c not including the wind coming from the water, with no gloves on.  Was she hoping someone would see her without her rings? Or maybe with her rings?
> As an aside, I can't imagine what a sh!tty flight that would have been today.
> 
> So she decides to visit the DES.  What was the purpose of her trip? Is she looking for a patronage? It couldn't have been anything official, unless the terms of her exit contract allow her to show up representing the queen in leggings and a baggy sweater.  Was she there as "Meghan"?  The radio coverage this afternoon stated "Duchess Meghan made a surprise visit to the downtown east side this afternoon....". Oh, and if she was concerned about wearing her rings/jewellery around the poors in Africa, she definitely does not want to be flashin' anything in that neighbourhood.
> 
> Why not bring Archie and show him off? What if the planes cancelled their flights back due to poor flying conditions? The ferries back and forth from the island were cancelled for three days straight on the weekend because of high winds.  Would the kid miss her if she didn't show up for the night?  She must have someone looking after him.  Did they bring a nanny over with them and if so, is she being held hostage? Her mum isn't there, Plastica Mulroney isn't there.... So did they pot an ad in the Times-Colonist for a child care professional?
> 
> So many questions! UGH!  I'm beginning to think her publicist is actually Stephanie Grisham



love me a fired up V0N1B2


----------



## bisbee

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...rce=dynamic&bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Grande Latte said:


> Her look changed because she doesn't have that "royal" aura anymore. There used to be a halo around her because she's married into the BRF. Not because she's "oh my god have never seen a woman so beautiful"....
> 
> Now the photographs of her in Canada make her look like a fugitive. And soon, her cool friends will start to disappear...It's all really stupid because she got too high in life then threw herself into this mess.
> 
> I have a feeling in a very short amount of time she's going to regret her decisions. And beg to go back to the UK. Let's hope the royal family will embrace her....but I don't think so.
> 
> Is Harry still in the UK? He belongs there. Don't want to sound like a psychic, but their destinies are not intertwined anymore. This is OBVIOUS.


Harry is hosting an event, or speaking - something at one of his patronages, so yes, he's still there. This will be the look of their marriage - one in Canada/US doing whatever they want, and one still feeling some obligation to family and country. Makes for a strong marriage, right? I also believe Harry belongs in the UK, and the more time they can keep him away from her, the better the chances he can wake up and see the light.


----------



## Annawakes

Jayne1 said:


> She seems to have a new set of veneers.
> 
> The thing is, the set she had before gave her a truly stunning smile. So much better than when she first came on the scene.
> 
> These new veneers are strangely bigger or longer or something and they're not as pretty. Changes her mouth.


Yes yes!  That’s it.  It changes her whole face shape, making her face longer I think.  And she used to have this cute sharp little nose.  Now it looks kind of bulbous.  Maybe those fillers are still settling as @mdcx said.  

also I wonder in what capacity she is doing these “appearances” in?  Is she still holding herself out at Duchess or just Meghan?  

she should just stay home with Archie and let us forget about her.  But of course she can’t do that.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think he's hosting a reception at Buckingham Palace tomorrow re the Rugby World Cup. So yes, he's definitely here.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> I think he's hosting a reception at Buckingham Palace tomorrow re the Rugby World Cup. So yes, he's definitely here.


So Harry is still fulfilling some of his obligations to the BRF while MM is flitting  about frantically trying to promote herself on a continent that dosen’t seems to be fooled by her. Come on Harry, wake up and smell the coffee. Dump her now before she does any more damage.


----------



## carebearz

I’m actually all for H&am to do a tell-all interview, what else can they say that we don’t already know about the royal family? That they are close-knitted, old-fashioned, unhelpful etc etc etc...We know all these from Diana already. That since, things have changed since Diana’s time.

I rather they do a tell-all, the monarchy can survive this and then cut them off completely and leave them to their own devices for good.


----------



## Chagall

It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

How soon will Meg start trotting around "giving appearances" when the real purpose of her presence is slap up tables like they do at concerts so she can sell her #SussexRoyal merch? She has to eventually realize that popping up at places to "help" unfortunate people isn't ideal for pimping the merch, but since she's Meghan......."Here, a coffee cup with my picture on it won't make that much of a dent in your disability check, look, it's asks "Are you OK?". She's going to have to elevate her venues: watch out libraries, universities and shopping centers. 

Poor Canada. Better you than the U.S., but I believe we have more nut jobs than Canada so she'll eventually slither down here where she can feel more at home. Carpet bagger extraordinaire. She's probably begging Iger to slap up #SussexRoyal stores in Disney World, that's really what the Harry/Iger exchange was about, doing a voiceover for the real foot in the door.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> She's already been papped more over there than she did when living here in the UK.
> Harry, are you watching? This is what you have to look forward to.


Once? Or did I missed the pictures?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chagall said:


> It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.


I guess Harry was among the people missing that intuition. You'd think with all the women he'd come across he'd know ...


----------



## myown

bisbee said:


> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...rce=dynamic&bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc


Also the press printed so many false stories in the last few month/years.


----------



## rose60610

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I guess Harry was among the people missing that intuition. You'd think with all the women he'd come across he'd know ...



Harry = ultimate duped chump. Hey Harry, next time try to find a girl who hasn't alienated her entire family and most other people she knows. Find one that really IS "OK". And listen to your brother.


----------



## imgg

myown said:


> Also the press printed so many false stories in the last few month/years.


  That's the press for you.  They do twist anything to make a headline.  Most of the media outlets in the US are totally bias and do try to alter the way people view/think about important topics.  I'm sure it happened in this case as well, but the biggiest "clue" that something wasn't right w Meghan imo is inviting important strangers to your wedding over family  That is insight on what was on her agenda.

But to be fair, the press wrote ton of positive articles on H&M and also wrote a ton of negative articles on Kate early on.  I think it was Meghan's own words from interviews that really turned the public against her.  When you are in the public eye you take the good with the bad, its how it goes.  If you want to be a private citizen don't become an actor, don't marry a prince and for goodness sake, stop calling the press.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Harry = ultimate duped chump. Hey Harry, next time try to find a girl who hasn't alienated her entire family and most other people she knows. Find one that really IS "OK". And listen to your brother.



He has "sucker" written all over him. All she had to do was feed his ego, make him feel more important/special/smarter than he actually is. If he is harboring any insecurities or an inferiority complex it would be easy to use that to manipulate him.

I wish his family were having an intervention for him, but I suspect they are so angry with him right now and he is so stubborn it wouldn't work.


----------



## Lounorada

Chagall said:


> It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.


I can't like this post enough and totally agree with your last sentence.

My gut is always right about people and I don't always listen to it which I should because it is never wrong, could've saved a lot of time in the past on pointless, selfish people if I'd have listened to it!

And I'm one of those people who had suspicions about M from the get-go. That suspicion turned out to be so damn right and a whole lot more. I saw all of these shenanigans happening years down the line, not so soon when they're not even 2 years married yet. Madness.


----------



## TC1

I was watching Vanderpump Rules last night and Jax was talking about their wedding and he says 'Geez, we're  not Meghan Markle and what's-his-name"


----------



## bisousx

Chagall said:


> It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.



A lot of Meghan’s supporters (myself included) switched sides when her true nature became apparent.


----------



## TC1

It's -46 C today in Canada where I live. MM is welcome to pop by for a visit and "brave the elements"


----------



## daisychainz

Lounorada said:


> Dunno if anyone is interested in this (slightly long) interview but I watched this earier as I waited for a delayed flight. Very interesting as Arthur Edwards has been a royal photgrapher for a long time and has known Harry and William since they were little kids- he knows them personally and always comes across as a pure gentleman so what he has to say is genuine not petty, hateful gossip.
> Thought it was quite sad to hear how disappointed he is at hows things have unfolded.
> Moments I thought were especially interesting were:
> 3.23  -  3.51  -  6.53  -  7.41  -  10.30  - 12.55  -  15.26  -  15.48  - 17.10



I finally had the chance to watch this. It's really the only 'news' segment I have watched. Without even knowing it he shares many of the sentiments as expressed on this board. He knows them all personally for years so it was very interesting. And he was so even-tempered, very observant without being mean-spirited. Super interesting to hear how Meghan's presence has destroyed the brother-brother and father-son relationships.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I cannot believe she went out and visited a women's shelter with media in tow to satisfy her thirst. What the hell is wrong with this woman?


----------



## duna

RAINDANCE said:


> I saw a news item that said they had not in fact been to Sussex.
> 
> *Sussex* (/ˈsʌsɪks/), from the Old English _Sūþsēaxe_ (South Saxons), is a historic county in South East England corresponding roughly in area to the ancient Kingdom of Sussex. It is bounded to the west by Hampshire, north by Surrey, northeast by Kent, south by the English Channel.



My roots

I think they went to Worthing once, soon after their marriage. I don't think they have been again....


----------



## bag-mania

byzina said:


> Sorry, I don't know if it has already been here but this is an interesting video how they plan to get a new job for Meg:




Oh man, that is priceless! You can't make this stuff up and you know she put him up to it. I wish the interaction had gone on a little longer. I want to see Harry campaigning to have Meghan officially declared a Disney princess!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Deleted 698298

bisbee said:


> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellievhallmeghan-markle-kate-middleton-double-standards-royal?utm_source=dynamic&bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc



1. This above is very telling.
2. MM seems like a typical insecure, and a little naive, girl who just wants the guy she loves (I do think she loves HRH HMW) all to herself, away from friends and family because she doesn’t fit in.
3. Did MM really think life was a fairytale? She can’t get away with this, or rather stirring that pot will end in someone’s tears...
4. May I remind everybody that HRH WMW was groomed to be a king one day, he was shaped from a very young age. You can see that his behaviour and manners and pose are different to that of HRH HMW’s right? The former will be king one day, the latter’s role was never precise, hence his more laid back and ‘common’ attitude...HRH HMW made a sack load of gaffes in his life whereas his brother maybe one? I’m not surprised how HRH HMW pimped his wife to the important guy at Disney, wife’s an opportunist and he’s blindly in love.
Despite all I wish them best and hope they can survive this mess and learn an important lesson. I don’t believe they’re  bad people (like Kartrashians for example - how can any sane/mature person be in awe of those piranhas)


----------



## Chagall

Lounorada said:


> I can't like this post enough and totally agree with your last sentence.
> 
> My gut is always right about people and I don't always listen to it which I should because it is never wrong, could've saved a lot of time in the past on pointless, selfish people if I'd have listened to it!
> 
> And I'm one of those people who had suspicions about M from the get-go. That suspicion turned out to be so damn right and a whole lot more. I saw all of these shenanigans happening years down the line, not so soon when they're not even 2 years married yet. Madness.


So right. I think our gut feeling is our subconscious telling us things we don’t consciously pick up on. I get really strong feelings about people and situations sometimes for no obvious reason. The only time I run into trouble is when I use logic to talk myself out of a feeling. These gut feelings are nearly always accurate.


----------



## LittleStar88

Clearblueskies said:


> This has been posted a few times, and every time I see it I can’t get over seeing the shock and disbelief on Bob Igors face.  He only just manages to keep his composure.  Harry must be stupid.



Eek. This video is so cringeworthy. Awkward for Bob Iger... If my husband did that to me I would have been so mortified and angry. What on earth was Harry thinking? Certainly a majority of adults with any amount of composure would know that was not the right time/setting to do that.


----------



## Luvluxx098

She had a modicum of success and then hit the wall personally and professionally- needed to get married and have kids, marry a powerful person. It is not unusual, many people find themselves in this situation late in their 30s. But to pretend to be a trailblazer and a disruptor when you are a 1 percenter and live off of a royal family is ridiculous.


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe this is all Meghan wanted from her visit to the women's center. The media analyzing her clothes and announcing the prices of everything she is wearing, including taking notice of a sweater she wore as her character on _Suits_. 

*Meghan Markle steps out in $1,350 sweater from her ‘Suits’ days*
Meghan Markle may not be planning a return to acting post-“Megxit,” but she sure is dressing the part.

On Tuesday — just one week after she and husband Prince Harry announced they were stepping away from their senior roles in the royal family — the Duchess of Sussex, 38, paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre in Vancouver.

To enjoy tea with the organization’s staff, Markle pulled out a sweater she wore in her role as Rachel Zane on “Suits,” as eagle-eyed fans quickly pointed out.

Her cream cable-knit “Bea” sweater by The Row, which the star sported on a 2013 episode titled “Bad Faith,” originally retailed for $1,350; it’s now sold out.

The duchess finished her look this week with slim black pants and brown quilted Le Chameau “Jameson” boots ($488). She was later spotted making a quick getaway on a seaplane, bundled up in a Barbour “Epler” parka and clutching a black leather Cuyana tote ($195).

https://pagesix.com/2020/01/15/meghan-markle-steps-out-in-1350-sweater-from-her-suits-days/


----------



## Flatsy

bisousx said:


> A lot of Meghan’s supporters (myself included) switched sides when her true nature became apparent.


Yes, I didn't have any negative gut feelings about Meghan.  But rationally, I could see that the marriage had more risk factors than most royal marriages, and I was mainly curious to see how it would go.  

The fact that she was at least a little bit of a social climber, someone who always really wanted to be famous, someone who had a tendency to "act" even in real life (see: engagement interview) and someone with a number of rocky relationships in her life, including a marriage that she abandoned - all of those are risk factors that could have turned out not to matter at all.  (I actually thought the actress part was going to be an asset! I was so, so wrong.)

And now I'm just astounded that all of those things have turned into such a car crash only a year and half later.


----------



## zinacef

Strange  is we’ve never heard from dearest Serena who she flew  across the pond to watch a game for,  these are MM trying times, where are the defense tweets.  What about the 8 friends from Suits that attended her wedding?  Crickets?  What about the guy that played her daddy on tv who has given interviews and such before?  Nobody wants to get involve on her trying times. Please at least 1 of them show up for her,  paging Priyanka,  this is a great moment for you to shine as great support friend , you might need MM for your 4 renewal of vows this year. Where’s everybody?


----------



## sdkitty

zinacef said:


> Strange  is we’ve never heard from dearest Serena who she flew  across the pond to watch a game for,  these are MM trying times, where are the defense tweets.  What about the 8 friends from Suits that attended her wedding?  Crickets?  What about the guy that played her daddy on tv who has given interviews and such before?  Nobody wants to get involve on her trying times. Please at least 1 of them show up for her,  paging Priyanka,  this is a great moment for you to shine as great support friend , you might need MM for your 4 renewal of vows this year. Where’s everybody?


I saw an interview a while back with the guy who played her dad on suits  He was talking nice about her but he said when he was on stage in a play in London she was invited and a staff member responded that she couldn't make it.  you'd think she could call or text herself if she cared.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Maybe this is all Meghan wanted from her visit to the women's center. The media analyzing her clothes and announcing the prices of everything she is wearing, including taking notice of a sweater she wore as her character on _Suits_.
> 
> *Meghan Markle steps out in $1,350 sweater from her ‘Suits’ days*
> Meghan Markle may not be planning a return to acting post-“Megxit,” but she sure is dressing the part.
> 
> On Tuesday — just one week after she and husband Prince Harry announced they were stepping away from their senior roles in the royal family — the Duchess of Sussex, 38, paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre in Vancouver.
> 
> To enjoy tea with the organization’s staff, Markle pulled out a sweater she wore in her role as Rachel Zane on “Suits,” as eagle-eyed fans quickly pointed out.
> 
> Her cream cable-knit “Bea” sweater by The Row, which the star sported on a 2013 episode titled “Bad Faith,” originally retailed for $1,350; it’s now sold out.
> 
> The duchess finished her look this week with slim black pants and brown quilted Le Chameau “Jameson” boots ($488). She was later spotted making a quick getaway on a seaplane, bundled up in a Barbour “Epler” parka and clutching a black leather Cuyana tote ($195).
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/15/meghan-markle-steps-out-in-1350-sweater-from-her-suits-days/


As long as everyone’s talking about her and people are taking her picture, I’m not sure she cares whether she’s famous or infamous.  All she wants is to be the centre of attention.  ALL THE TIME.  People like this are very wearing company in real life.
It’s quite a reminder of how very little time she’s been married that she’s wearing clothes to this appearance which she was wearing before Harry came on the scene


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think she still doesn’t have permission to take Archie outside of the Commonwealth.  I doubt she will ever get it.  It’s almost like a game of chicken at this point.  Canadian winter and Archie, or hustlin’ In LA without Archie.  They are going to try to maker her choose so she can’t say they took her child away from her.


----------



## scarlet555

byzina said:


> Sorry, I don't know if it has already been here but this is an interesting video how they plan to get a new job for Meg:




wouldn't believe this unless it was on video!
He is a royal... did he forget ?  this is cringe-worthy!


----------



## kemilia

byzina said:


> Sorry, I don't know if it has already been here but this is an interesting video how they plan to get a new job for Meg:



Yes, I've seen this before but it's still as embarrassing to watch again. Gives insight to their relationship.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Oh man, that is priceless! You can't make this stuff up and you know she put him up to it. I wish the interaction had gone on a little longer. *I want to see Harry campaigning to have Meghan officially declared a Disney princess*!



He may have to if the Queen strips her of her title so she can still sell merch under #WhateverRoyal.


----------



## myown

Sophisticatted said:


> I think she still doesn’t have permission to take Archie outside of the Commonwealth.  I doubt she will ever get it.  It’s almost like a game of chicken at this point.  Canadian winter and Archie, or hustlin’ In LA without Archie.  They are going to try to maker her choose so she can’t say they took her child away from her.


I had the same thoughts today


----------



## Jktgal

From The Economist:
"The Sussexes are doing something new. They are embracing capitalism in its rawest, most modern form: global rather than national, virtual rather than solid, driven, by its ineluctable logic, constantly to produce new fads and fashions."
https://www.economist.com/britain/2020/01/14/harry-meghan-and-marx

It would be a shame to lose the British Monarchy. It's been a fun source of entertainment for the rest of the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Today, Prince Harry has announced the location for the 2022 @*WeAreInvictus* Games — Düsseldorf. In a statement, he says: “I hope everyone in Germany is ready for what will be an incredible week of sport! I have no doubt that the German public will get right behind these games.”


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> Eek. This video is so cringeworthy. Awkward for Bob Iger... If my husband did that to me I would have been so mortified and angry. What on earth was Harry thinking? Certainly a majority of adults with any amount of composure would know that was not the right time/setting to do that.


This, imo, is a good example of Harry's coddled life--he DOESN'T know that this just isn't done (pimping the wife for a job). 

Being a royal, even a spare, as given him everything, and until Meghan, he was loved by all. So talking up his wife in a very public venue (with microphones around--yikes) was probably no big deal. Cringeworthy for us maybe, but not him. A good story for Iger though to tell later (video included).


----------



## Clearblueskies

^ This is interesting, because I’ve read a few reports recently about how disappointed the military are with Harry’s attitude in the last 12 months towards Invictus amongst other things.  Seriously unimpressed with his lack of input.  Perhaps he read them also..


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> ^ This is interesting, because I’ve read a few reports recently about how disappointed the military are with Harry’s attitude in the last 12 months towards Invictus amongst other things.  Seriously unimpressed with his lack of input.  Perhaps he read them also..


I recently met an ambassador for one of the military charities he worked with. He had no good things to say.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Image rehab begins.



Imagine the PR pitch meeting ‘Ok so this has gone t*ts up, what can people not bash? I know, let’s pretend she gives a toss about others’.


----------



## arnott

Chagall said:


> *It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. *Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.



And of course these people were accused of being jealous.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Chagall said:


> It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.


My OH said he saw a clip from the ITV doc she and H did a few months ago. It was on in the background with no sound and he said he didn’t believe whatever was coming out of her mouth because her face was so put on. It was so false. She’s definitely trying to channel Diana but no where near as sincere.


----------



## mrsinsyder

arnott said:


> And of course these people were accused of being jealous.


Don’t forget racist.


----------



## LittleStar88

Kim O'Meara said:


> My OH said he saw a clip from the ITV doc she and H did a few months ago. It was on in the background with no sound and he said he didn’t believe whatever was coming out of her mouth because her face was so put on. It was so false. She’s definitely trying to channel Diana but no where near as sincere.



Her eyes looks the same as the girl in the Peloton commercial


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Here is the question that came to my mind last night: 

Will Harry get booed by the crowds on Thursday or has the BRF ensured that this last event scheduled for Harry will be an interior event and tightly controlled, only with an audience that has been screened as pro Harry?

Personally I would love to see that carrot-top covered in squished red tomatoes. [emoji534]


----------



## Kim O'Meara

LittleStar88 said:


> Her eyes looks the same as the girl in the Peloton commercial


Yes!

Has anyone asked her if she’s ok?


----------



## Kim O'Meara

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Here is the question that came to my mind last night:
> 
> Will Harry get booed by the crowds on Thursday or has the BRF ensured that this last event scheduled for Harry will be an interior event and tightly controlled, only with an audience that has been screened as pro Harry?
> 
> Personally I would love to see that carrot-top covered in squished red tomatoes. [emoji534]



I’d imagine the crowd will be heavy Royal lovers, committed enough to show up. But I think he and she will soon find out how beloved K&W are vs them at any joint engagements.


----------



## Clearblueskies

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Here is the question that came to my mind last night:
> 
> Will Harry get booed by the crowds on Thursday or has the BRF ensured that this last event scheduled for Harry will be an interior event and tightly controlled, only with an audience that has been screened as pro Harry?
> 
> Personally I would love to see that carrot-top covered in squished red tomatoes. [emoji534]


I think the draw’s carried out in a studio, I doubt very much he’ll be booed in that sort of environment.


----------



## tequila29

Annawakes said:


> Yes yes!  That’s it.  It changes her whole face shape, making her face longer I think.  And she used to have this cute sharp little nose.  Now it looks kind of bulbous.  Maybe those fillers are still settling as @mdcx said.



If you click on the link and look at Meghan's nose in the photo when she was younger with her dad, you can see she has his nose. I think she got plastic surgery to make it look 'sharp' but as one ages, everyone's nose and ears continue to grow. She will probably need a touch up unless she wants her nose to get big and bulbous again.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...star-witness-against-High-Court-showdown.html

I personally never had an opinion either way about Meghan and I realize the British press has been very negative about her but in just seeing her actions alone, she is perhaps not a good person. The fact that she has alienated Harry from his friends and now his family is a very bad sign. People who alienate their partners are usually controlling, selfish and manipulative and will ultimately make their partner worse off. I have seen this kind of behavior first hand. I feel sorry for Harry. He lost his mom when he was young and was only looking for a mother figure. I guess he found this in Meghan but its turning out very badly for him.


----------



## Annawakes

tequila29 said:


> If you click on the link and look at Meghan's nose in the photo when she was younger with her dad, you can see she has his nose. I think she got plastic surgery to make it look 'sharp' but as one ages, everyone's nose and ears continue to grow. She will probably need a touch up unless she wants her nose to get big and bulbous again.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...star-witness-against-High-Court-showdown.html
> 
> I personally never had an opinion either way about Meghan and I realize the British press has been very negative about her but in just seeing her actions alone, she is perhaps not a good person. The fact that she has alienated Harry from his friends and now his family is a very bad sign. People who alienate their partners are usually controlling, selfish and manipulative and will ultimately make their partner worse off. I have seen this kind of behavior first hand. I feel sorry for Harry. He lost his mom when he was young and was only looking for a mother figure. I guess he found this in Meghan but its turning out very badly for him.


Oh wow.  Her natural nose does look just like her dads!  Totally agree with everything else you said too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## arnott

Is she back on Vancouver Island?  The snow was so bad, the schools in Victoria are closed today:

"It’s a SNOW DAY! Due to heavy snowfall overnight, all schools in the Greater Victoria School District are CLOSED today (Jan. 15th, 2020). Please share this message to help inform our learning community."

EDIT:  It's not just the Island, tons of schools and Universities are closed in the Vancouver area too!   People are being told to stay home.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6414137/snow-storm-wallops-lower-mainalnd-powerful-winds-on-the-way/


----------



## Sharont2305

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Here is the question that came to my mind last night:
> 
> Will Harry get booed by the crowds on Thursday or has the BRF ensured that this last event scheduled for Harry will be an interior event and tightly controlled, only with an audience that has been screened as pro Harry?
> 
> Personally I would love to see that carrot-top covered in squished red tomatoes. [emoji534]


It's the Rugby World Cup draw and it's at Buckingham Palace so it'll be dignitaries and officials and players.


----------



## mshermes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nusually-romantic-PDA-signals-confidence.html

Oh boy....the train wreck has got to be seething.


----------



## daisychainz

mshermes said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nusually-romantic-PDA-signals-confidence.html
> 
> Oh boy....the train wreck has got to be seething.


They look incredibly happy,  just beaming and stress-free. Maybe a resolution was reached that makes them all very happy.


----------



## Chagall

scarlet555 said:


> wouldn't believe this unless it was on video!
> He is a royal... did he forget ?  this is cringe-worthy!


I see that video and I don’t feel so sorry for poor hood winked Harry. They appear to be cut from the same cloth. Dress them up and give them titles but nobody can give  them class. Neither has one shred of class.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Presented without comment


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s so funny in that video that Prince Harry says “you seem surprised?”  Yeah, I’d say he didn’t see that coming!!


----------



## Lounorada

Chagall said:


> So right. I think our gut feeling is our subconscious telling us things we don’t consciously pick up on. I get really strong feelings about people and situations sometimes for no obvious reason. The only time I run into trouble is when I use logic to talk myself out of a feeling. These gut feelings are nearly always accurate.


Absolutely, I agree. Well said


----------



## sgj99

the press has been hard on her ... but how could she not expect it?  in this day and age of media and paparazzi she'd have to know going into the relationship and the marriage she'd be picked a part and hounded, just get through it and come out on the other end.  but no!  darling, the press doesn't care about your feelings!  and all she's done if give them plenty of material to work with by whining and feeling sorry for herself.  suck it up, buttercup!
and congratultions:  you are now your generations Duchess of Windsor - hated for what you've done to the BRF


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> This article doesn't belong here. We're told often by moderators to stick to the topic of the thread, so this should be discussed in Prince William and Kate's thread.


Then you had better hunt down Serena Williams husband’s Twitter post. That was a def no-no.


----------



## hellosunshine

mshermes said:


> Then you had better hunt down Serena Williams husband’s Twitter post. That was a def no-no.



I didn't post that. Besides, I haven't been reading posts here the last few days and did not see that post. Either way, no harm done - we should just stick to the topic at hand.


----------



## Coconuts40

tequila29 said:


> *I personally never had an opinion either way about Meghan and I realize the British press has been very negative about her but in just seeing her actions alone, she is perhaps not a good person. The fact that she has alienated Harry from his friends and now his family is a very bad sign. People who alienate their partners are usually controlling, selfish and manipulative and will ultimately make their partner worse off. I have seen this kind of behavior first hand. I feel sorry for Harry. He lost his mom when he was young and was only looking for a mother figure. I guess he found this in Meghan but its turning out very badly for him*.



This!  I see a lot of mean spirited comments about her appearance, but quite honestly I don't think making fun of ones appearance is fair.  What concerns me is the alienation.  I have been around long enough to see Princess Diana and Prince Charles' wedding, birth of their two sons, the unfortunate loss of Princess Diana (still makes me cry), and seeing these two boys grow up.  I agree, this is not looking good for Prince Harry.  Even if he stays in the marriage for the long run, I don't think it is going to be a happy one,  and "if" he can get out, he will likely need a lot of therapy to recover.  She is changing him, and not in a good way.  Anyone that alienates their spouses/friends/partners from family and friends is toxic and this can't end well for Prince Harry.


----------



## V0N1B2

Hey guys, I found him!
He's a little wrinkled, like one of Harry's suits, but he's ok.


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Hey guys, I found him!
> He's a little wrinkled, like one of Harry's suits, but he's ok.
> View attachment 4640635


OMG.  You are hilarious!!


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> It’s funny how so many members on this thread had suspicions about MM’s integrity long before she started to so flagrantly flaunt her lack of it. Something seemed way off right after they got married. This is a prime example of trusting your gut when it comes to other people.


YUP .. there are some of us who know the 'real' back story!  Got a lot of flack for putting it out there, but now .. different story and NOT un-true!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

V0N1B2 said:


> Hey guys, I found him!
> He's a little wrinkled, like one of Harry's suits, but he's ok.
> View attachment 4640635



Omg soooo baddd and I’m rofling!!!
[emoji813]️


----------



## tequila29

Coconuts40 said:


> This!  I see a lot of mean spirited comments about her appearance, but quite honestly I don't think making fun of ones appearance is fair.  What concerns me is the alienation.  I have been around long enough to see Princess Diana and Prince Charles' wedding, birth of their two sons, the unfortunate loss of Princess Diana (still makes me cry), and seeing these two boys grow up.  I agree, this is not looking good for Prince Harry.  Even if he stays in the marriage for the long run, I don't think it is going to be a happy one,  and "if" he can get out, he will likely need a lot of therapy to recover.  She is changing him, and not in a good way.  Anyone that alienates their spouses/friends/partners for family and friends is toxic and this can't end well for Prince Harry.



Yes! I don't like being mean spirited about people's appearances either. You can't help how you're born and I'm no 10/10! I do, however, think its interesting to see how people can improve their looks through plastic surgery and I think Meghan's nose job was a good choice and it turned out great. I feel she is very attractive and don't have anything negative to say about her looks. My apologies to anyone who was offended if my comments came across mean spirited.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> He has "sucker" written all over him. All she had to do was feed his ego, make him feel more important/special/smarter than he actually is. If he is harboring any insecurities or an inferiority complex it would be easy to use that to manipulate him.
> 
> I wish his family were having an intervention for him, but I suspect they are so angry with him right now and he is so stubborn it wouldn't work.


I wish Prince Phillip could have attended that 'conference', but I suspect that the family thought he might just slap Harry upside the head, even with his advanced age.  Wish he was younger and could have done that; Harry needs it!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I wish Prince Phillip could have attended that 'conference', but I suspect that the family though the might just slap Harry upside the head, even with his advanced age.  Wish he was younger and could have done that; Harry needs it!



I think they were afraid Phillip would have keeled over if he'd been there. His heart might not have been able to handle what a henpecked douchebag his grandson has become.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Tomorrow's engagement will no doubt go "as well as could be expected in the circumstances"
i expect Harry will be whisked inside the venue quickly to ensure there are no hecklers but I think we can forget an impromptu walk about in the crowds !
The audience & guests will almost certainty, in the British way, be respectful and polite.

I have huge sympathy for anyone who is expected to make small talk with him - what can they say ? 
I think we could discount the following ...
How was your Christmas?
Happy New Year - hope it's got off to good start ?
How's the family ?
Any pictures of the new baby ?


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> Tomorrow's engagement will no doubt go "as well as could be expected in the circumstances"
> i expect Harry will be whisked inside the venue quickly to ensure there are no hecklers but I think we can forget an impromptu walk about in the crowds !
> The audience & guests will almost certainty, in the British way, be respectful and polite.
> 
> I have huge sympathy for anyone who is expected to make small talk with him - what can they say ?
> I think we could discount the following ...
> How was your Christmas?
> Happy New Year - hope it's got off to good start ?
> How's the family ?
> Any pictures of the new baby ?


The engagement is in Buckingham Palace so there will not be crowds
It'll be with Rugby people so he'll know a lot personally, maybe one of them will say "Harry, mate, what the hell are you doing?"


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> It's -46 C today in Canada where I live. MM is welcome to pop by for a visit and "brave the elements"


Winnipeg… Edmonton?  We're mild here in Toronto, but we'll get ours soon enough.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> Presented without comment
> 
> View attachment 4640616


I have such a dislike for being asked to crouch when others are standing erect.


----------



## TC1

Jayne1 said:


> Winnipeg… Edmonton?  We're mild here in Toronto, but we'll get ours soon enough.


Regina. Middle of Sask prairie. Currently brutal, supposed to be -50 C with the windchill tonight.
So, good ole Megs is welcome to pop by one of our shelters here! Not even her $1300 sweater would be enough to keep her warm. LOL


----------



## Sharont2305

TC1 said:


> Regina. Middle of Sask prairie. Currently brutal, supposed to be -50 with the windchill tonight.


Oh my word, and here's me moaning I've been cold all day, its about 47°here


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> Regina. Middle of Sask prairie. Currently brutal, supposed to be -50 with the windchill tonight.
> So, good ole Megs is welcome to pop by one of our shelters here! Not even her $1300 sweater would be enough to keep her warm. LOL


I love Regina.  Nicest people. 

I don't think Meg is all that uncomfortable in BC, she's used to cold temperatures and snow and even though it's snowing where she is, it's still quite mild, relatively speaking. Plus, she has such great outerwear for cold weather.


----------



## CeeJay

TC1 said:


> Regina. Middle of Sask prairie. Currently brutal, supposed to be -50 C with the windchill tonight.
> So, good ole Megs is welcome to pop by one of our shelters here! Not even her $1300 sweater would be enough to keep her warm. LOL


*HOLY MACKEREL* .. that is wicked COLD!!!  Every once in awhile we would have below zero weather in Boston; and 9 times out of ten, it would be that Canadian Air coming down and whipping off the ocean!  Love Canada, but dayum .. we hated that Air coming down!!!


----------



## V0N1B2

Oh noes doll!  I hate to rain on your pap-walk parade, but it looks like Will & Kate did it first.
Whomp Whomp 



I'm still trying to figure out what Meghan thinks she's gonna do in Canada.  Shine a light on our access to free healthcare? 
The DTES Women's Centre and places like Union Gospel Mission are great charities to be aligned with and to volunteer for, but they don't really need a "Duchess" to represent them. For all the misfortunes of the DTES, it's actually pretty progressive - they've had their needle exchange program for many many years (back when I lived downtown, and that was over 20 years ago) and the supervised injection sites have been around for quite some time.  She could help out with A Loving Spoonful - a charity that brings free meals to those affected with HIV/AIDS if she really wants to pull the Diana card... But again, it's been around since the early 90s so my question is, what new thing/idea/mandate/charity is she bringing to the table?  A SmartWorks type thing? Chiiiile. It's all been done.

I don't know why she needed to spend $500 on a seaplane ride to go to Vancouver yesterday when there are plenty of shelter and charities that could have used the exposure in Victoria. JMO of course.

If she was as smart as she thinks she is, she would have asked for an invite to hang with the hockey wives crowd in TO and gotten herself a hockey player.  That's what any good Canadian girl would have been doing


----------



## mrsinsyder

It’s really weird that two people so in love are choosing to be separated like this.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I think they were afraid Phillip would have keeled over if he'd been there. His heart might not have been able to handle what a henpecked douchebag his grandson has become.


I read somewhere that after Fergie was seen on that yacht with the dude at her feet (I'm being kind) Prince Philip never spoke to her again and that they were photographed for the first time in close proximity at Beatrice's wedding - or whichever one got married.  <-- run-on sentence - deal with it.
I have a feeling the same will happen with Megs and I honestly don't see how she could ever show her face in the UK ever again.  I think the only option for her is to go back to the USA.  It's probably the best place for her because the media were so mean to her in the UK and she won't have that problem in America.  They don't have paps in LA, and they don't have racism either, so she doesn't need to worry about driving her Range Rover around in the white neighbourhood she's gonna move into, and worry about being pulled over for no apparent reason. 
/sarcasm

*oh and I mean the same as in Prince Philip not speaking to Meghan, not the toe-slurping part. Although....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s really weird that two people so in love are choosing to be separated like this.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


>


Seriously though. If she wants to hide, she can’t do it at Froggy house? And Harry wants to be away from his infant for so long?

They think we were all born yesterday.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I thought Archie’s godparents were a mystery??
(From People mag)


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Seriously though. If she wants to hide, she can’t do it at Froggy house? And Harry wants to be away from his infant for so long?
> 
> They think we were all born yesterday.


There are millions of places you can live privately, (esp so at somewhere like Frogmore), but she wants to be a celebrity.  Harry wants it for her too, - at least for now, that is.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> I read somewhere that after Fergie was seen on that yacht with the dude at her feet (I'm being kind) Prince Philip never spoke to her again and that they were photographed for the first time in close proximity at Beatrice's wedding - or whichever one got married.  <-- run-on sentence - deal with it.
> I have a feeling the same will happen with Megs and I honestly don't see how she could ever show her face in the UK ever again.  I think the only option for her is to go back to the USA.  It's probably the best place for her because the media were so mean to her in the UK and she won't have that problem in America.  They don't have paps in LA, and they don't have racism either, so she doesn't need to worry about driving her Range Rover around in the white neighbourhood she's gonna move into, and worry about being pulled over for no apparent reason.
> /sarcasm
> 
> *oh and I mean the same as in Prince Philip not speaking to Meghan, not the toe-slurping part. Although....



Okay, we really don't need her back in the US. We've already got a place overflowing with self-obsessed, wannabe celebrities and we call that place Southern California. (_I kid, I kid! _) And seriously, we took Justin Bieber off of Canada's hands, can't you all keep Meghan for us? All her new hoity-toity royal airs and graces just would not be appreciated among our rebellious unrefined masses. 

Oh, Fergie and her toe sucking scandal. It will never be forgotten!


----------



## CeeJay

.. honestly, I bet she's enjoying her time alone without Harry!  If he's such a basket case and she (supposedly) has had to be the 'rock', that can get rather tiresome.


----------



## PatsyCline

Here’s a thought...

Maybe Prince Harry could be the next Queen’s representative, the Governor General?


----------



## HiromiT

She’s not out to shine a light on anyone/anything except herself. I bet she did the DTES pap walk in a pathetic attempt to steal the thunder from Kate and William’s public engagement at Bradford today — their first since the crisis summit. Meg is thirsty and competitive AF, so subzero temps and $500 seaplane fare are a small price for any press coverage. She brought nothing to the table and I’m pretty sure she won’t be back to the DTES. I’m just surprised she didn’t deliver warm socks scribbled with Sharpie messages. 



V0N1B2 said:


> Oh noes doll!  I hate to rain on your pap-walk parade, but it looks like Will & Kate did it first.
> Whomp Whomp
> View attachment 4640650
> 
> 
> I'm still trying to figure out what Meghan thinks she's gonna do in Canada.  Shine a light on our access to free healthcare?
> The DTES Women's Centre and places like Union Gospel Mission are great charities to be aligned with and to volunteer for, but they don't really need a "Duchess" to represent them. For all the misfortunes of the DTES, it's actually pretty progressive - they've had their needle exchange program for many many years (back when I lived downtown, and that was over 20 years ago) and the supervised injection sites have been around for quite some time.  She could help out with A Loving Spoonful - a charity that brings free meals to those affected with HIV/AIDS if she really wants to pull the Diana card... But again, it's been around since the early 90s so my question is, what new thing/idea/mandate/charity is she bringing to the table?  A SmartWorks type thing? Chiiiile. It's all been done.
> 
> I don't know why she needed to spend $500 on a seaplane ride to go to Vancouver yesterday when there are plenty of shelter and charities that could have used the exposure in Victoria. JMO of course.
> 
> If she was as smart as she thinks she is, she would have asked for an invite to hang with the hockey wives crowd in TO and gotten herself a hockey player.  That's what any good Canadian girl would have been doing


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> Here’s a thought...
> 
> Maybe Prince Harry could be the next Queen’s representative, the Governor General?


That’s not how any of this works.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ouch.


----------



## queennadine

Yesterday’s visit to the women’s shelter is MM’s future now: wearing 7 year old sweaters (seriously nothing wrong with that but she did have access to a $1M wardrobe previously), traveling without her family, and staging awkward photo ops where everyone around her looks uncomfortable. 
What a dream!


----------



## HiromiT

Will and Kate are likely thrilled and relieved that a certain toxic person is no longer in their midst.



mshermes said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nusually-romantic-PDA-signals-confidence.html
> 
> Oh boy....the train wreck has got to be seething.


----------



## HiromiT

PatsyCline said:


> Here’s a thought...
> 
> Maybe Prince Harry could be the next Queen’s representative, the Governor General?



Um, no. He’s not qualified.


----------



## JolieS

PatsyCline said:


> Here’s a thought...
> 
> Maybe Prince Harry could be the next Queen’s representative, the Governor General?


Nah, never going to happen. To my knowledge neither of them speaks French, which is a requirement for the job these days. It is largely a ceremonial position, the kind of thing both are said to dislike - cutting ribbons, receiving ambassadors, that kind of thing. Plus Ottawa would be too deadly quiet for M. - a backwater for somebody ambitious like her.


----------



## mdcx

Mrs.Z said:


> I thought Archie’s godparents were a mystery??
> (From People mag)


I’m sure I read in another article in the last day that Jessica Mulroney and husband are also godparents.
But yes, all the secrets are coming out now!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

There are early talks/rumors right now that Meghan and Rihanna intend to work collaboratively together with CAMFED - Campaign for Female Education.


----------



## Twelve

PatsyCline said:


> Here’s a thought...
> 
> Maybe Prince Harry could be the next Queen’s representative, the Governor General?



Was told he would not be a candidate, the job require to speak fluent French.


----------



## slang

mdcx said:


> I’m sure I read in another article in the last day that Jessica Mulroney and husband are also godparents.
> But yes, all the secrets are coming out now!



The Anglican Church used to be pretty strict on god parent requirements (at least when I was asked to be one), guess they’ve loosened  up the rules since Jessica is Jewish


----------



## hellosunshine

Twelve said:


> Was told he would not be a candidate, the job require to speak fluent French.



Meghan's more than conversational in French. Is she fluent? I have no idea but she studied it for six years.  https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex


----------



## daisychainz

Markled - it made it into the urban dictionary!

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=MARKLED

MARKLED
Cutting off all communication and contact for no obvious reason. This form of ghosting is not limited to intimate relationships. It can include friends, associates or family members.

When Jessica mentioned after 3 months of reaching out to friend without success, she was of the opinion, for reasons unbeknownst to her, she had been Markled.


----------



## slang

V0N1B2 said:


> If she was as smart as she thinks she is, she would have asked for an invite to hang with the hockey wives crowd in TO and gotten herself a hockey player.  That's what any good Canadian girl would have been doing



Not sure any Leaf player is rich enough for her. If she’s moving to TO and looking for a rich guy with money to blow, with a big house, private plane and lots of private security she should see if Drake is in town


----------



## PatsyCline

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan's more than conversational in French. Is she fluent? I have no idea but she studied it for six years.  https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex


Alrighty then, Meghan for Governor General!


----------



## PatsyCline

slang said:


> The Anglican Church used to be pretty strict on god parent requirements (at least when I was asked to be one), guess they’ve loosened  up the rules since Jessica is Jewish


Wow, do you have to be an Anglican to be a god parent?


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan's more than conversational in French. Is she fluent? I have no idea but she studied it for six years.  https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex


Dude I’m Canadian and studied French for 8 years as required in school with straight A’s and I was on exchange in France for a year in high school and I’m not fluent in French. Meghan is NOT fluent by taking a few classes. 

Why inflate her talents and go on and on about her education etc. She has a bachelors degree like literally everyone else. Esp in Canada - we have a high rate of post secondary education. Like the starbucks barista has a bachelors. 

Is a bachelor degree a big deal in the states? She is not some genius she went to school then became a briefcase girl in a short skirt.


----------



## Meh-gan

slang said:


> Not sure any Leaf player is rich enough for her. If she’s moving to TO and looking for a rich guy with money to blow, with a big house, private plane and lots of private security she should see if Drake is in town


Good hockey players have more money than Harry soooo


----------



## hellosunshine

Meh-gan said:


> Dude I’m Canadian and studied French for 8 years as required in school with straight A’s and I was on exchange in France for a year in high school and I’m not fluent in French. Meghan is NOT fluent by taking a few classes.



Everyone has a different learning curve. I'll just leave this at that.


----------



## Meh-gan

Twelve said:


> Was told he would not be a candidate, the job require to speak fluent French.


It’s not just because he can’t speak French.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> There are early talks/rumors right now that Meghan and Rihanna intend to work collaboratively together with CAMFED - Campaign for Female Education.



Oh joy! 
This is a serious side question: I’ve always been curious - and I mean no disrespect but - do you work on her PR team? The detail and the sourcing of some of your info has interested me.


----------



## Katel

Meh-gan said:


> Dude I’m Canadian and studied French for 8 years as required in school with straight A’s and I was on exchange in France for a year in high school and I’m not fluent in French. Meghan is NOT fluent by taking a few classes.
> 
> Why inflate her talents and go on and on about her education etc. She has a bachelors degree like literally everyone else. Esp in Canada - we have a high rate of post secondary education. Like the starbucks barista has a bachelors.
> 
> Is a bachelor degree a big deal in the states? She is not some genius she went to school then became a briefcase girl in a short skirt.


YES to alladat!


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan's more than conversational in French. Is she fluent? I have no idea but she studied it for six years.  https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex


My understanding is that you need to be proficient not only conversationally but also written ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

slang said:


> Not sure any Leaf player is rich enough for her. If she’s moving to TO and looking for a rich guy with money to blow, with a big house, private plane and lots of private security she should see if Drake is in town


She waaaaaay too old for Drake and besides, he usually likes them very sexy and she's kind of lost that now ..


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> My understanding is that you need to be proficient not only conversationally but also written ..


I mean she took classes guys!! LOL


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> Dude I’m Canadian and studied French for 8 years as required in school with straight A’s and I was on exchange in France for a year in high school and I’m not fluent in French. Meghan is NOT fluent by taking a few classes.
> 
> Why inflate her talents and go on and on about her education etc. She has a bachelors degree like literally everyone else. Esp in Canada - we have a high rate of post secondary education. Like the starbucks barista has a bachelors.
> 
> Is a bachelor degree a big deal in the states? She is not some genius she went to school then became a briefcase girl in a short skirt.


It depends on your field of study; in some cases .. no a Bachelors is not enough; you need a Masters and in some cases, a PhD.  She went to an 'okay' institution, by no means an Ivy League and as far as speaking French fluently, I doubt it.  Taking a language for years (in class) is a heck of a lot different than having a total immersion experience.  If you have a parent who is fluent in a different language and it is spoken at home, then oftentimes the child will pick up the language!


----------



## Twelve

Meh-gan said:


> It’s not just because he can’t speak French.


Of course not.  Just point out the very minimum requirement has not met.


----------



## slang

The current Canadian Governor General of Canada Julie Payette is such an accomplished woman.
Meghan has nothing on her and it would be an embarrassment if they replaced her for Meghan or Harry.
She speaks several languages, she was  pilot, engineer and astronaut- she was the head of the Canadian space agency and also worked at NASA and completed 2 space flights.


----------



## hellosunshine

*'She was really great': Meghan Markle visits women's shelter on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside*

Meghan Markle made an appearance in Vancouver Tuesday for a quiet visit with frontline workers at a downtown women's shelter.

The Duchess of Sussex sipped Tetley tea and spent more than an hour with managers and staff at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, learning about issues faced by marginalized and vulnerable women.

Meghan asked about the work done at the centre and what can be done to make life safer for women in the neighbourhood, said Kate Gibson, the centre's acting director.

"She was just casual and lovely," Gibson said.

"She just wants to get to know the community. We know she's going to come to Canada and I think possibly the West Coast.

"I think that she just doesn't want to be sort of a stranger in the midst. She just wants to get to know people."

The Duchess of Sussex and her husband, Prince Harry, recently announced they wanted to step back from royal duties and split their time between Canada and the U.K.

The couple spent the holidays on Vancouver Island. Tuesday's Vancouver visit was Meghan's first public appearance since the couple's announcement.

Gibson said the visit was arranged when she received a "somewhat mysterious" email from a Hotmail account on Monday asking about security. 

 It was Meghan's assistant. The Duchess was interested in visiting some Vancouver organizations that serve women, Gibson said. 

The Downtown Eastside Women's Shelter provides services for women and also serves as a drop-in emergency night shelter. More than 500 women use its services every day, according to its website.

Gibson said she had a great conversation with Meghan, and it was a welcome opportunity for the women working on the front lines to share stories about their work in the community.

"I thought she was really down to earth," Gibson said.

"She's very good at sort of picking up something from the conversation and expanding that a bit, and asking questions and [was] empathetic. She was really great."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/meghan-markle-dtes-womens-shelter-1.5427270


----------



## mdcx

Just speculating that the dynamic between Megs and Jessica Mulroney will be interesting in months to come.
I am thinking that when they met, JM was Queen Bee, then Megs married into the BRF which one-upped her somewhat, but she was safely living in the UK so it likely didn’t affect JM’s position on the social hierarchy in Canada. 
But now she’s living there! I wonder if JM is concerned at the possible competition.

I note JM is off on yet another beach holiday. Hold your breath for more thirsty bikini snaps!


----------



## mdcx

slang said:


> The current Canadian Governor General of Canada Julie Payette is such an accomplished woman.
> Meghan has nothing on her and it would be an embarrassment if they replaced her for Meghan or Harry.
> She speaks several languages, she was  pilot, engineer and astronaut- she was the head of the Canadian space agency and also worked at NASA and completed 2 space flights.


Megs lacks the basic diplomacy and discretion skills for any important position imo!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh my god, they are now using hotmail to communicate about security. 

I. just. can’t.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> *'She was really great': Meghan Markle visits women's shelter on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside*
> 
> Meghan Markle made an appearance in Vancouver Tuesday for a quiet visit with frontline workers at a downtown women's shelter.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex sipped Tetley tea and spent more than an hour with managers and staff at the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre, learning about issues faced by marginalized and vulnerable women.
> 
> Meghan asked about the work done at the centre and what can be done to make life safer for women in the neighbourhood, said Kate Gibson, the centre's acting director.
> 
> "She was just casual and lovely," Gibson said.
> 
> "She just wants to get to know the community. We know she's going to come to Canada and I think possibly the West Coast.
> 
> "I think that she just doesn't want to be sort of a stranger in the midst. She just wants to get to know people."
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex and her husband, Prince Harry, *recently announced they wanted to step back from royal duties and split their time between Canada and the U.K.
> 
> The couple spent the holidays on Vancouver Island. Tuesday's Vancouver visit was Meghan's first public appearance since the couple's announcement.
> 
> Gibson said the visit was arranged when she received a "somewhat mysterious" email from a Hotmail account on Monday asking about security.
> 
> It was Meghan's assistant. The Duchess was interested in visiting some Vancouver organizations that serve women, Gibson said.
> 
> The Downtown Eastside Women's Shelter provides services for women and also serves as a drop-in emergency night shelter. More than 500 women use its services every day, according to its website.
> 
> Gibson said she had a great conversation with Meghan, and it was a welcome opportunity for the women working on the front lines to share stories about their work in the community.
> 
> "I thought she was really down to earth," Gibson said.
> 
> "She's very good at sort of picking up something from the conversation and expanding that a bit, and asking questions and [was] empathetic. She was really great."
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/meghan-markle-dtes-womens-shelter-1.5427270





Hahaha!
“The Duchess of Sussex and her husband, Prince Harry, ...”

I guess according to missy M, Harry lost his title of Duke but Her She-ness has kept hers - such an imagination she has!

(Because someone/PR is informing the press about the proper title/terminology and I doubt it’s Harry or the Queen at this point. Or, the media is making it up as they go, which is also hugely plausible.)

p.s. No answer re: PR firm? Just curious...


----------



## hellosunshine

The use of throw-away email accounts is pretty normal. Using it prevents leaks and hacking attempts to their more professional email account.


----------



## PatsyCline

slang said:


> The current Canadian Governor General of Canada Julie Payette is such an accomplished woman.
> Meghan has nothing on her and it would be an embarrassment if they replaced her for Meghan or Harry.
> She speaks several languages, she was  pilot, engineer and astronaut- she was the head of the Canadian space agency and also worked at NASA and completed 2 space flights.


Isn’t the Governor General appointed for a specific term? Not in any way suggesting the current one should be replaced.


----------



## arnott

bag-mania said:


> Okay, we really don't need her back in the US. We've already got a place overflowing with self-obsessed, wannabe celebrities and we call that place Southern California. (_I kid, I kid! _)* And seriously, we took Justin Bieber off of Canada's hands, can't you all keep Meghan for us?* All her new hoity-toity royal airs and graces just would not be appreciated among our rebellious unrefined masses.
> 
> Oh, Fergie and her toe sucking scandal. It will never be forgotten!





And I don't even want to ask about that Fergie scandal!


----------



## gracekelly

PatsyCline said:


> Wow, do you have to be an Anglican to be a god parent?


You don't have to be an Anglican, you just have to be a Christian.


----------



## slang

PatsyCline said:


> Isn’t the Governor General appointed for a specific term? Not in any way suggesting the current one should be replaced.



Yes, usually 5 years but can be extended by the Prime Minister at their discretion.

She has been in office since end of 2017.
The GG before her was in office for 7 years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Oh man, that is priceless! You can't make this stuff up and you know she put him up to it. I wish the interaction had gone on a little longer. I want to see Harry campaigning to have Meghan officially declared a Disney princess!


I was thinking they could be Mickey and Minnie Mouse at Disneyland.  Decent pay.  Benefits.  The costume is perfect because they won't be recognized.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Maybe this is all Meghan wanted from her visit to the women's center. The media analyzing her clothes and announcing the prices of everything she is wearing, including taking notice of a sweater she wore as her character on _Suits_.
> 
> *Meghan Markle steps out in $1,350 sweater from her ‘Suits’ days*
> Meghan Markle may not be planning a return to acting post-“Megxit,” but she sure is dressing the part.
> 
> On Tuesday — just one week after she and husband Prince Harry announced they were stepping away from their senior roles in the royal family — the Duchess of Sussex, 38, paid a visit to the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre in Vancouver.
> 
> To enjoy tea with the organization’s staff, Markle pulled out a sweater she wore in her role as Rachel Zane on “Suits,” as eagle-eyed fans quickly pointed out.
> 
> Her cream cable-knit “Bea” sweater by The Row, which the star sported on a 2013 episode titled “Bad Faith,” originally retailed for $1,350; it’s now sold out.
> 
> The duchess finished her look this week with slim black pants and brown quilted Le Chameau “Jameson” boots ($488). She was later spotted making a quick getaway on a seaplane, bundled up in a Barbour “Epler” parka and clutching a black leather Cuyana tote ($195).
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/15/meghan-markle-steps-out-in-1350-sweater-from-her-suits-days/


She was robbed.  I would have sold her my identical Ellen Tracy sweater from 199? for lots less.  It's in perfect condition, no moth holes and freshly laundered.  I even have the matching cowl scarf for those blustery days.


----------



## bag-mania

arnott said:


> And I don't even want to ask about that Fergie scandal!



Suffice it to say back in the early ‘90s Fergie was enjoying a liaison with her financial advisor who happened to really like her feet. Neither one noticed the paparazzi with the long distance lens. Oh, and Fergie was topless as well. The Queen was not amused.


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> The use of throw-away email accounts is pretty normal. Using it prevents leaks and hacking attempts to their more professional email account.



It’s not normal for those who are working in security to use an unsecured platform like Hotmail.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Just speculating that the dynamic between Megs and Jessica Mulroney will be interesting in months to come.
> I am thinking that when they met, JM was Queen Bee, then Megs married into the BRF which one-upped her somewhat, but she was safely living in the UK so it likely didn’t affect JM’s position on the social hierarchy in Canada.
> But now she’s living there! I wonder if JM is concerned at the possible competition.
> 
> I note JM is off on yet another beach holiday. Hold your breath for more thirsty bikini snaps!


I can totally see this friendship being over sooner rather than later. Jessica is getting much more attention these days and photographers are following her around and asking about her plans. That can't sit well with someone who wants all the attention for themselves. I think Meghan will use her for a bit longer, to get some intel on Canada and where to go for a pop-up visit, and when Jessica has served her purpose... bye bye


----------



## mshermes

View attachment 4640939


bag-mania said:


> Suffice it to say back in the early ‘90s Fergie was enjoying a liaison with her financial advisor who happened to really like her feet. Neither one noticed the paparazzi with the long distance lens. Oh, and Fergie was topless as well. The Queen was not amused.


                                          Megs is going to have a difficult time finding someone to really like her feet that much....JMO. Have you seen them? GAH.....


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> Megs is going to have a difficult time finding someone to really like her feet that much....JMO. Have you seen them? GAH.....


At least her post bunionectomy feet look better and they certainly must feel better from her point of view.


----------



## mshermes

gracekelly said:


> At least her post bunionectomy feet look better and they certainly must feel better from her point of view.


I think....foot.....she only had one done. I think the left. Personally, I am not a foot fan. Not even my own.


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> I think....foot.....she only had one done. I think the left. Personally, I am not a foot fan. Not even my own.


haha!  Who even looks at their feet in the winter?  Too cold to wear sandals.  
Seriously, I felt sorry for her when I saw that picture of her in the stilt heels when she was a suitcase girl.  Standing there for eons, even when you are getting paid is not fun when you have bad feet.


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> I read somewhere that after Fergie was seen on that yacht with the dude at her feet (I'm being kind) Prince Philip never spoke to her again and that they were photographed for the first time in close proximity at Beatrice's wedding - or whichever one got married.  <-- run-on sentence - deal with it.
> I have a feeling the same will happen with Megs and I honestly don't see how she could ever show her face in the UK ever again.  I think the only option for her is to go back to the USA.  It's probably the best place for her because the media were so mean to her in the UK and she won't have that problem in America.  They don't have paps in LA, and they don't have racism either, so she doesn't need to worry about driving her Range Rover around in the white neighbourhood she's gonna move into, and worry about being pulled over for no apparent reason.
> /sarcasm
> 
> *oh and I mean the same as in Prince Philip not speaking to Meghan, not the toe-slurping part. Although....


It didn't take toe sucking for Philip to dislike Fergie. He disliked her way before. 

Philip disliked both Fergie and Diana because, unlike the Queen or her mother, they insisted on calling attention to themselves. Their looks, their feelings, their thoughts. Philip believed that attention should go, not to them personally, but their role in the monarchy. Like the Queen.


----------



## mrsinsyder

She’s racking up a lot of private visits.


----------



## Flatsy

She's showing there's "work" for her to do in Canada that justifies Charles continuing to funnel them millions per year form the Duchy of Cornwall.


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s racking up a lot of private visits.
> View attachment 4640958
> View attachment 4640958


Same day...same sweater.


----------



## Meh-gan

Flatsy said:


> She's showing there's "work" for her to do in Canada that justifies Charles continuing to funnel them millions per year form the Duchy of Cornwall.


So where is the “pop in” at a memorial for the plane crash victims? Or attending a moment of silence. Or giving a heartfelt speech in flawless French about the tragedy? 

She doesn’t give an eff about Canada. 

All these drive by duchess stunts are desperate and gross - like that time she did a drive by back stage at Michelle *****’s book tour. Pathetic.


----------



## mdcx

What on earth? These visits are so self-serving. Until her official position is clarified, she shouldn’t be doing anything except normal day to day life matters, like looking after her child for instance!
As someone commented on the DM “Meghan doesn't like authority.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10749922/meghan-markle-visits-womens-charity-vancouver-canada/amp/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Meh-gan said:


> Dude I’m Canadian and studied French for 8 years as required in school with straight A’s and I was on exchange in France for a year in high school and I’m not fluent in French. Meghan is NOT fluent by taking a few classes.
> 
> Why inflate her talents and go on and on about her education etc. She has a bachelors degree like literally everyone else. Esp in Canada - we have a high rate of post secondary education. Like the starbucks barista has a bachelors.
> 
> Is a bachelor degree a big deal in the states? She is not some genius she went to school then became a briefcase girl in a short skirt.



Whether or not Meghan studied French for 6 years has no reflection of how fluent she is, and whether she speaks it like a Parisian or remembers nothing has no bearing on her reputation as a gold-digger-palace-wrecker reputation. And many uber successful Americans do not have a Bachelors. On the other hand, many Ph D's couldn't find their a** with both hands.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> haha!  Who even looks at their feet in the winter?  Too cold to wear sandals.
> Seriously, I felt sorry for her when I saw that picture of her in the stilt heels when she was a suitcase girl.  Standing there for eons, even when you are getting paid is not fun when you have bad feet.



I can’t believe the shoes Kim K survived in her first pregnancy


----------



## mshermes

I am starting to feel really sad for Archie. Wouldn't you think she would want a photo op with him.....not because she is maternal...but to at least appear that she is. He is such a cute baby.


----------



## V0N1B2

TC1 said:


> It's -46 C today in Canada where I live. MM is welcome to pop by for a visit and "brave the elements"





TC1 said:


> Regina. Middle of Sask prairie. Currently brutal, supposed to be -50 C with the windchill tonight.


Respect, doll


----------



## Meh-gan

rose60610 said:


> Whether or not Meghan studied French for 6 years has no reflexion of how fluent she is, and whether she speaks it like a Parisian or remembers nothing has no bearing on her reputation as a gold-digger-palace-wrecker reputation. And many uber successful Americans do not have a Bachelors. On the other hand, many Ph D's couldn't find their a** with both hands.




I think this whole French nonsense is a reflection on her and contributes to her reputation in a bad way to anyone who is paying attention. It’s clearly pretentious nonsense that isn’t true, along with her inflating her educational achievements in an attempt to position herself at the level of Michelle ***** or Amal to fans who don’t know any better. 

All of this just adds more evidence for how much of a poser she really is. 

She couldn’t even speak French at this engagement and admits she needs to “re-learn” French. So I guess her learning curve isn’t all that up to par either, eh??? You mean she isn’t a genius who can be flawless in French for life after studying it years ago? Quel grand suprise! 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/people....-at-canada-house-in-first-outing-of-2020/amp/


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> She's showing there's "work" for her to do in Canada that justifies Charles continuing to funnel them millions per year form the Duchy of Cornwall.


Except her work is supposed to be in GB and not Canada.  She has no official function in Canada.  If she wants to visit these charities, fine,  but not as an official of HM's gov't and that is how this is coming off.


----------



## auntyjo

Everyone has got work lined up by BRF. She needs to create and be seen doing work too (cause I'm sure no work for her by BRF), lots of pictures to prove it and make sure she don't lose out on publicity to con Canadian people into liking her and justifying her stay.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> Except her work is supposed to be in GB and not Canada. She has no official function in Canada. If she wants to visit these charities, fine, but not as an official of HM's gov't and that is how this is coming off.


Agreed.  She's not even there volunteering, she's there "listening" as if she's going to report back to some official powers that be.


----------



## gracekelly

Flatsy said:


> Agreed.  She's not even there volunteering, she's there "listening" as if she's going to report back to some official powers that be.


Pleeezzz.  Not listening.  It is a photo op.


----------



## V0N1B2

Meh-gan said:


> So where is the “pop in” at a memorial for the plane crash victims? Or attending a moment of silence. Or giving a heartfelt speech in flawless French about the tragedy?
> 
> She doesn’t give an eff about Canada.
> 
> All these drive by duchess stunts are desperate and gross - like that time she did a drive by back stage at Michelle *****’s book tour. Pathetic.


Right? There was a service in North Van last night, she could have taken the seabus over and given her respects. I mean Pdub learned to say Congratulations in Sign Language, I’m sure she could learn to say ‘my condolences’ in Farsi. Or ‘I’m sorry for your loss’. I mean, if she wants to live in Canada she better start apologizing/saying I’m sorry A LOT


----------



## V0N1B2

Flatsy said:


> She's showing there's "work" for her to do in Canada that justifies Charles continuing to funnel them millions per year form the Duchy of Cornwall.


Not gonna lie, I gotta admire the hustle.


----------



## closeted

Imagine harry telling her, so darling if we settle here, apparently they don't really want us playing prince and princess here. Good luck with that.


----------



## rose60610

auntyjo said:


> Everyone has got work lined up by BRF. She needs to create and be seen doing work too (cause I'm sure no work for her by BRF), lots of pictures to prove it and make sure she don't lose out on publicity to con Canadian people into liking her and justifying her stay.





Flatsy said:


> Agreed.  She's not even there volunteering, she's there "listening" as if she's going to report back to some official powers that be.



It took only minutes for the Queen to quash Meghan's theatre event, remember the one where she arrived, found it "cancelled" and left in a huff, pouting without her rings, hands splayed ringless weird on her thighs? If there were other events scheduled for Meghan to appear at, they'd have been in England, not Canada. But then she and Harry sprung the "--thanks for the 50 million dollar wedding, 10 million on Frog, other millions, perks galore.....but no thanks, too tough for us......besides, already struck deal with Iger and all kinds of other crap behind Palace's back (IMO Palace had these things followed, they're not dumb) and we think we're so brilliant we're going to sell #SR merch and pimp ourselves (actually the Crown, without we'd be snot) so we'll be the most revered people in the world---" crap, on the Queen.

Meg and her PR whatever people (by now NOT in good graces to The Crown) are making nicey phone calls for photo op garbage. Let's see how many recycled Suits clothes appear. Apparently Meghan is at least bright enough to not have worn super expensive Crown purchased clothes. Most likely the freezing temps in current Canada don't permit the 40K outfits Meggie wore.  How many abused people's shelters can she exploit for her own gain anyway? She's going to run out. Then what? Cut ribbons on diner openings? I'd applaud the Queen to turn back local news cameras for those too.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s racking up a lot of private visits.
> View attachment 4640958
> View attachment 4640958



This is stupid. What is she doing? What is the point? Doing same thing as before really.


----------



## closeted

Maybe this is her trying to say hey the gig and the pay was not that bad, this is her signalling pls take me back! Beats cutting ribbon opening the local aritzia next year


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

*Thomas Markle Is Set To Testify Against Duchess Meghan In Her Tabloid Case*


Us Weekly says that 75-year-old Thomas is set to be called to court to offer evidence _against_ his own child in her legal battle with the _Daily Mail_ publisher. She is suing them for publishing the _“private and confidential”_ letter to her father which she says was written at a _“time of great personal anguish and distress.”_ Her lawyers say the letter included:

“Her intimate thoughts and feelings about her father’s health and her relationship with him at that time [and the newspaper] chose to deliberately omit or suppress [pertinent sections of the letter].”

Thomas is a huge part of this and is now supposed to be a key witness for the defense. Which makes sense since he’s the one who gave them the letter in the first place.

https://dlisted.com/2020/01/15/thom...y-against-duchess-meghan-in-her-tabloid-case/


----------



## mdcx

Accurate!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7891173/Prince-Harrys-friends-express-concern-cut-contact.html


----------



## LittleStar88

> https://dlisted.com/2020/01/15/prin...is-friends-while-duchess-meghan-was-pregnant/
> 
> *Prince Harry Reportedly Stepped Away From His Friends While Duchess Meghan Was Pregnant*
> *Prince Harry* and *Duchess Meghan* have announced they want to be semi-regular people who live part-time in Canada. But it sounds like Harry won’t get to experience the regular non-royal guy tradition of calling on your buddies to help haul boxes in exchange for a couple beers and slices of pizza. Because not only does Harry have Bad Blood, he’s also got Rotten Water.
> 
> According to a source who spoke to People magazine, Harry kind of cut off most of his friends when Meghan was in her sixth month of pregnancy with *Archie*.
> 
> “Most no longer even have his cell number. They totally understand that men often drift from their friends after marriage, but there’s still a lot of resentment because they had been so close for so long.”
> 
> Six months into Meghan’s pregnancy would be around February of 2019. That’s the same month it was rumored that Harry and Meghan were escaping to Frogmore Cottage. It’s also the same month the Mail on Sunday published a private letter between Meghan and her father *Thomas Markle*, and the month Meghan caught **** for having an “_extravagant_” NYC baby shower with all her rich American friends. Oh, and the same month Meghan’s friends had to defend her name in the press against all the haters in the UK. Not that that’s any indication of anything. I’m just pointing out it was the kind of month that Harry probably could have used a few pints at the pub with his mates, but well – apparently he didn’t have too many mates left.
> 
> Except he does have one person to lean on, and that’s his friend *Charlie van Straubenzee*. People points out that Harry, who has been friends with Charlie since their prep school days, are still close. Harry attended Charlie’s wedding back in 2018, and Charlie is reportedly one of Archie’s secret godparents. I don’t know how common it is to dump all your friends while your wife is pregnant, but I do know it’s kind of difficult to hang out in the same way you used to before a kid. After all, most boys nights aren’t interrupted by a text message from a very pregnant wife telling you there’s an emergency at home (and the emergency is that someone needs $30 worth of Taco Bell and ice cream).
> 
> People also made sure to point out that while Harry allegedly ghosted 99.9% of his friends, Meghan kept close to hers. She’s still good friends with everyone in her pre-Duchess circle. Most recently, she allegedly left baby Archie with her friend* Jessica Mulroney* while she returned to the UK for some business.
> 
> Speaking of Meghan’s great Canadian adventure, we know Meghan is back on the west coast while Harry is in England. The Vancouver Sun says that Meghan took a seaplane yesterday from Vancouver Island to the mainland, and she’s settled somewhere in Vancouver. It’s not known if they plan on settling in Vancouver, but we do know she was most likely alone and left Archie back on the island. We also know she got in a little charity work at a women’s shelter during her mainland visit.


----------



## scarlet555

hellosunshine said:


> There are early talks/rumors right now that Meghan and Rihanna intend to work collaboratively together with CAMFED - Campaign for Female Education.



I think Rihanna is smarter than that...


----------



## rose60610

An excerpt from "The Globe and Mail" a prominent newspaper in Canada

.........“A royal living in this country does not accord with the long-standing nature of the relationship between Canada and Britain, and Canada and the Crown," the editorial said.

The article cites Britain's "class system with hereditary aristocrats" as a reason that Canada cannot allow Harry, 35, and Markle, 38, to live within its boundaries.
"What’s more, with the Statute of Westminster of 1931, Canada’s relationship to Britain was spelled out as one of equal, independent nations," the editorial explains.

"The Sussexes are working out their own personal issues, and Canadians wish them the best of luck," the paper added. "Canada welcomes people of all faiths, nationalities and races, but if you’re a senior member of our Royal Family, this country cannot become your home."

Maybe they can settle in The Falklands, and hang with the penguins. They can maintain the privacy they cherish.


----------



## PewPew

gracekelly said:


> Except her work is supposed to be in GB and not Canada.  She has no official function in Canada.  If she wants to visit these charities, fine,  but not as an official of HM's gov't and that is how this is coming off.



She has 4 UK patronages of her own (not jointly with H) that she’s left hanging. One has already expressed disappointment & concern that they will fall by the wayside with their patron permanently MIA.

A bit off topic, but it seems comical to me that both H & M are so attached to their titles and their SussexRoyal brand, but have only been to Sussex once since receiving their titles. I’d be so embarrassed, but H & M have a much higher threshold for shame, as evidenced by the clips of them independently being clueless and inappropriate when off script in public (H at Disney & M’s awkwardness in trying to insert herself in convos at events)


----------



## mdcx

PewPew said:


> She has 4 UK patronages of her own (not jointly with H) that she’s left hanging. One has already expressed disappointment & concern that they will fall by the wayside with their patron permanently MIA.
> 
> A bit off topic, but it seems comical to me that both H & M are so attached to their titles and their SussexRoyal brand, but have only been to Sussex once since receiving their titles. I’d be so embarrassed, but H & M have a much higher threshold for shame, as evidenced by the clips of them independently being clueless and inappropriate when off script in public (H at Disney & M’s awkwardness in trying to insert herself in convos at events)


----------



## prettyprincess

mdcx said:


> Accurate!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rrys-friends-express-concern-cut-contact.html
> View attachment 4641085


Umm, who cares to all of the above. You actually think these nonprofits are offended that she brought attention to them?? She’s bringing awareness to their cause, that’s their whole mission. There’s so much venom directed at this woman, it’s insane. She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t! Would you all prefer her to be a useless bobble head like  the majority of celebrities. Is she calculating? A social climber? An opportunist? Maybe, but if that’s the case, I say good for her! 
I love a woman who takes control of her sh*t.


----------



## threadbender

prettyprincess said:


> Umm, who cares to all of the above. You actually think these nonprofits are offended that she brought attention to them?? She’s bringing awareness to their cause, that’s their whole mission. There’s so much venom directed at this woman, it’s insane. She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t! Would you all prefer her to be a useless bobble head like  the majority of celebrities. Is she calculating? A social climber? An opportunist? Maybe, but if that’s the case, I say good for her!
> I love a woman who takes control of her sh*t.


As long as it is on her own dime, sure. But, she is supported by tax payers and neglecting the organizations she is supposed to be bringing attention to. 
I get that these are important, as well, but there are protocols.

jmho


----------



## Meh-gan

prettyprincess said:


> Umm, who cares to all of the above. You actually think these nonprofits are offended that she brought attention to them?? She’s bringing awareness to their cause, that’s their whole mission. There’s so much venom directed at this woman, it’s insane. She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t! Would you all prefer her to be a useless bobble head like  the majority of celebrities. Is she calculating? A social climber? An opportunist? Maybe, but if that’s the case, I say good for her!
> I love a woman who takes control of her sh*t.


You can take control of your sh*t without being fake, exploitative, embarrassing, tacky, asking for freebies etc. Like there are plenty of examples of women who are actually in control of their sh*t, with major accomplishments who do it with grace and dignity. Michelle ***** is one example. 

MM might as well sign Kris Jenner as her manager since that’s the tacky road she’s heading down


----------



## prettyprincess

Meh-gan said:


> You can take control of your sh*t without being fake, exploitative, embarrassing, tacky, asking for freebies etc. Like there are plenty of examples of women who are actually in control of their sh*t, with major accomplishments who do it with grace and dignity. Michelle ***** is one example.
> 
> MM might as well sign Kris Jenner as her manager since that’s the tacky road she’s heading down


You’d be naive to think that Michelle ***** didn’t have a team behind her to “manipulate” or “guide” the narrative about her. And I don’t mean that in a negative way, I’m sure everyone does it. As for MM being “fake and tacky” we’ll have to agree to disagree on that bc I don’t see that at all and comparing her to the Kardashians is ridiculous and unfair.


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> You’d be naive to think that Michelle ***** didn’t have a team behind her to “manipulate” or “guide” the narrative about her. And I don’t mean that in a negative way, I’m sure everyone does it. As for MM being “fake and tacky” we’ll have to agree to disagree on that bc I don’t see that at all and comparing her to the Kardashians is ridiculous and unfair.


You’re not comparing her to Michelle ***** are you?


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> You’re not comparing her to Michelle ***** are you?


No, my point is that everyone attempts to manipulate the perception (of themselves) at one point or another.


----------



## muchstuff

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan's more than conversational in French. Is she fluent? I have no idea but she studied it for six years.  https://www.royal.uk/duchess-sussex


In Canada we all grew up studying French in school, it was a requirement. I still can’t string two sentences together...


----------



## byzina

rose60610 said:


> An excerpt from "The Globe and Mail" a prominent newspaper in Canada
> .........“A royal living in this country does not accord with the long-standing nature of the relationship between Canada and Britain, and Canada and the Crown," the editorial said.



I really doubt that Meghan wants to lead a royal life. For her it's quite enough to be famous and have some cash to spare. I think she was just pretending for some time that she loved this royal lifestyle. When she got married she probably even believed that she would be able to get used to it and follow all these rules, listen attentively to the RF and the public because she couldn't resist the temptation to marry a real prince and become famous. But despite the nice attitude to her from the Queen, royal life turned out to be harder than she had expected. It's quite obvious that Meghan wants to use private jets, have parties with her friends in the most expensive locations and buy extravagant clothes without people discussing and analysing her spendings. And now, since she has a child, she feels much more confident in showing her voice.
Speaking IMHO,  she's got really tired of the royal protocol and she wants to live the life she wants. If Harry didn't follow her, I do think, she wouldn't give in and would leave for Canada or the USA anyway.  She already got what she wanted - a royal child and the name. I'm not a fortune-teller, but I don't believe in their marriage any more. But I believe in Meghan as she managed to get the most of both her marriages.

And I really feel pity for the Queen who doesn't look strong enough and must be protected by her family. Such a blow from her favourive grandson! Neither she nor the family deserved it in this situation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> Pleeezzz.  Not listening.  It is a photo op.


I have visions of her trawling through the phone book.... “ooh, here’s one, this’ll do for tomorrow”
She’s probably bored, plus narcissists need constant attention and admiration


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s racking up a lot of private visits.
> View attachment 4640958
> View attachment 4640958


Rings are back on!


----------



## doni

The Queen has come out to say she supports Harry and Meghan wanting to go their own way but they are negotiating the details which are quite complex. Was it so difficult to just lay low for a couple of weeks, spend time with your baby and relax, until the whole thing starts to be fixed? I just don’t get it. For her to go around charities and publicizing visits that have not been cleared by the court, is not only disrespectful to the Queen but to the British people... There is really no need...


----------



## Grande Latte

The queen is the Queen. She'll take care of everything. In fact, I don't think she trusts Charles or William to take care of the Megxit situation. No need to worry. Just feel sorry that she has to deal with all this nonsense at her advanced age.

God bless the UK, and God bless the Queen.


----------



## gelbergirl

Grande Latte said:


> The queen is the Queen. She'll take care of everything. In fact, I don't think she trusts Charles or William to take care of the Megxit situation. No need to worry. Just feel sorry that she has to deal with all this nonsense at her advanced age.
> 
> God bless the UK, and God bless the Queen.



God Save the Queen!


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> Umm, who cares to all of the above. You actually think these nonprofits are offended that she brought attention to them?? She’s bringing awareness to their cause, that’s their whole mission. There’s so much venom directed at this woman, it’s insane. She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t! Would you all prefer her to be a useless bobble head like  the majority of celebrities. Is she calculating? A social climber? An opportunist? Maybe, but if that’s the case, I say good for her!
> I love a woman who takes control of her sh*t.


At this stage, she’s not a free agent but rather The Duchess of Sussex in a state of limbo. She is essentially an employee of the BRF who has been sent on gardening leave until her severance package has been finalised.
As such, all those individualistic_ you go girl boss!_ type cheers don’t really apply. 
Going off piste and creating her own charity engagements is going to cause headaches all around. What does her visiting even mean for these charities? 
She’s using her role in the BRF to get in the door, but not following the BRF rules of engagement.


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> Presented without comment
> 
> View attachment 4640616


Well to be fair 
If any royal from any country would come to my workplace I would make sure to be on a picture with them


----------



## myown

Mrs.Z said:


> I thought Archie’s godparents were a mystery??
> (From People mag)


I think some are known and some are not. just like the Cambridge-Kids


----------



## Sharont2305

Maybe he needs to heed his own advice, especially the first two lines, change Rugby to Royal Family


----------



## rose60610

Chagall said:


> Rings are back on!



Then I guess Meggie wasn't THAT angry at getting her Theatre visit cancelled by the Queen if she kept the rings.....  so it probably means she didn't burn the millions in designer wear the Crown supplied for her either.  Well, maybe she tossed the sweat soaked brown turtleneck she wore the day before she and Harry pulled the public pin off the "we-quit-grenade". That's probably why she was sweating like she was locked in a sauna.


----------



## hellosunshine

*U.K. veteran says Prince Harry defended him from anti-gay soldiers*




A former soldier who served with Prince Harry in the British army said that the prince defended him from other soldiers who had taunted him for being gay, and that the abuse stopped once the prince confronted them.

James Wharton, one of the British army's first openly gay soldiers, told Forces News in the United Kingdom, that Prince Harry, who was his tank commander in 2008, stood up to colleagues who had made him feel "uncomfortable" about his sexuality.

"I got into my tank where Prince Harry was doing something, and he could see that I was clearly affected by something and he asked me what the problem was," Wharton told Forces News. "I told him that there were a couple of soldiers outside who weren't very happy with the fact I was gay."

According to Wharton, the Duke of Sussex was "quite offended" by his fellow soldiers' behavior and after the prince spoke to them, "the problem went away."

Beyond this incident, Wharton noted that Prince Harry, who announced plans last week to step back from the monarchy, was "well liked" and frequently commiserated with his peers, despite his royal status.

"He knew how to do his job. He was skilled," Wharton said. "He took the time to know his people. He wasn't afraid to get himself involved with things that were going on."

Prince Harry's LGBTQ allyship has been well documented and has garnered him favorable comparisons to his mother, Princess Diana, who worked to destigmatize the lesbian and gay community in the United Kingdom during the HIV/AIDS crisis in the 1980s.

Last year, his mental health charity, Heads Together, invited Mermaid, a U.K.-based transgender youth charity, to join its wellness efforts. The collaboration was considered noteworthy given that Mermaids — and transgender advocates more broadly — had been subject to vocal criticism by the public and media in the U.K.

Harry's wife, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, has also been lauded by the LGBTQ community for reportedly telling her friends that she plans to raise their son, Archie, with a “fluid” approach to gender, including a gender-neutral nursery, according to Vanity Fair.

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/u-k-veteran-says-prince-harry-defended-him-anti-gay-n1116671


----------



## hellosunshine

No "special treatment"...


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> Harry's wife, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, has also been lauded by the LGBTQ community for reportedly telling her friends that she plans to raise their son, Archie, with a “fluid” approach to gender, including a gender-neutral nursery, according to Vanity Fair.


Well....I suppose that would work if he had a home.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> No "special treatment"...


How unfortunate it is that Harry has changed so dramatically.  

William told him so when he was being such a jerk to palace stuff prior to the wedding and bullying everyone for the sake of his fiancee.


----------



## daisychainz

I assume security people have to follow Meghan to these visits, too, so is she paying for that? I find it seriously bizarre that someone would just start calling up and going around without any invitation to do so, or any backing of the royals. It corresponds to an earlier post in this thread that Meghan arrived at that beach wedding Harry was invited to even after he broke off with her? It must be another MO for her, even when you've been dumped, keep showing up until they love you again. It's like showing up for your 9-5 job the next morning even though you were fired the day before, lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

hellosunshine said:


> No "special treatment"...



Is it not "special treatment" to have numerous news articles about it? Okay great..you did your job. Hooray, gold star.
If one of my employees was being bullied for being gay, I would address it too.


----------



## byzina

hellosunshine said:


> No "special treatment"...




I've heard the inside information (though I don't claim that it is 100% true) that other soldiers might have risked their lives because everyone knew that the prince was there and could plan target attacks.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> This is stupid. What is she doing? What is the point? Doing same thing as before really.



I believe it's because 1) She doesn't want the media to report that she's hiding in a mansion so she's getting out there to show everyone that it's business as usual in Meghanland. She's out there CARING about others. 2) She's feeling insecure with Harry being so far away and out of her direct influence. She wants everyone, _including him,_ to know she's still working (as she sees these photo ops).


----------



## LittleStar88

doni said:


> The Queen has come out to say she supports Harry and Meghan wanting to go their own way but they are negotiating the details which are quite complex. Was it so difficult to just lay low for a couple of weeks, spend time with your baby and relax, until the whole thing starts to be fixed? I just don’t get it. *For her to go around charities and publicizing visits that have not been cleared by the court, is not only disrespectful to the Queen but to the British people...* There is really no need...



And disrespectful of the charities for which she is a patron. Her efforts should be going to the groups to which she has been assigned and who rely on her, not some local randoms for photo opportunities.


----------



## rose60610

So when Harry was in the military he did his job. Well goody for him. Harry's loyalty to military duty didn't carry over to his RF duty. So much for duty and loyalty. Oh well. I'm sure Meghan is worth upending a 1000 years of tradition. What has the BRF ever done for Harry anyway?


----------



## cafecreme15

Very commendable that Harry served in the military, did his job, and bonded with the other soldiers in his unit. If anything, this just serves as a sharp contrast as to how his sense of loyalty and duty have changed over the years, and it seems not for the better.


----------



## hellosunshine

I wonder if Harry and Meghan will join PM Trudeau for Canada Day festivities on July 1st?


----------



## hellosunshine

Today, The Duke of Sussex will host The Rugby League World Cup Live Draw from Buckingham Palace.


----------



## hellosunshine

Cont'd...


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> She wants everyone, _including him,_ to know she's still working (as she sees these photo ops).



Good point, and also probably showing him that she'll be just fine without him.

How incredibly tacky to use people who are down on their luck for photo ops.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Cont'd...



Is this the sex symbol of the BRF?


----------



## Sophisticatted

daisychainz said:


> It's like showing up for your 9-5 job the next morning even though you were fired the day before, lol.



She just wants her red stapler!

(Office Space movie reference.)


----------



## LittleStar88

Sophisticatted said:


> She just wants her red stapler!
> 
> (Office Space movie reference.)



HAHAHA That was the first thing I thought, too!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> She just wants her red stapler!
> 
> (Office Space movie reference.)



Well, it is a Swingline.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Sorry Rugby people, Harry just isn't that into you anymore. Goodness knows Meghan isn't. She's busy pimping #SR merch as much as she can. She'll do a voiceover for you though, as long as she gets paid.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> How unfortunate it is that Harry has changed so dramatically.
> 
> William told him so when he was being such a jerk to palace stuff prior to the wedding and bullying everyone for the sake of his fiancee.


 Harry hasn’t changed. All we knew was happy go lucky pictures of him which created our perception. We didn’t know the real Harry at all. Like I said before (along with others) anyone who dresses up as a Nazi, wears black face and acts inappropriately in Vegas is a jerk plain and simple. There is no other explaination for this. Once a jerk always a jerk!


----------



## youngster

Prince Harry served honorably and well in the military, it seemed to help him grow up and put some of his worst pranks and behavior behind him, but he left the military several years ago.  People are upset and unhappy with what he is doing _now,_ and how he seems to have turned into the worst version of himself, walking away from the family but wanting to profit from it, cutting off his long time friends, walking away from his brother, and hurting his father and his granny.

I didn't really think this marriage would last, royal marriages have all that incredible extra pressure, but I thought they had a chance.  I actually thought Meghan being an actress might be helpful as she'd enjoy the cameras and attention and was used to public speaking. I didn't think she'd bail after only a few months of actual royal duties since she's been on her honeymoon and then maternity leave or family vacation for most of it, it seems. I guess I underestimated how much of a self-absorbed actress she really is at heart.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I read something today that they are probably going to take away Prince Andrew’s security because he is no longer a working royal.  I imagine Harry and Meg will be next on the list.


----------



## LibbyRuth

hellosunshine said:


> *U.K. veteran says Prince Harry defended him from anti-gay soldiers*
> 
> View attachment 4641331
> 
> 
> A former soldier who served with Prince Harry in the British army said that the prince defended him from other soldiers who had taunted him for being gay, and that the abuse stopped once the prince confronted them.
> 
> James Wharton, one of the British army's first openly gay soldiers, told Forces News in the United Kingdom, that Prince Harry, who was his tank commander in 2008, stood up to colleagues who had made him feel "uncomfortable" about his sexuality.
> 
> "I got into my tank where Prince Harry was doing something, and he could see that I was clearly affected by something and he asked me what the problem was," Wharton told Forces News. "I told him that there were a couple of soldiers outside who weren't very happy with the fact I was gay."
> 
> According to Wharton, the Duke of Sussex was "quite offended" by his fellow soldiers' behavior and after the prince spoke to them, "the problem went away."
> 
> Beyond this incident, Wharton noted that Prince Harry, who announced plans last week to step back from the monarchy, was "well liked" and frequently commiserated with his peers, despite his royal status.
> 
> "He knew how to do his job. He was skilled," Wharton said. "He took the time to know his people. He wasn't afraid to get himself involved with things that were going on."
> 
> Prince Harry's LGBTQ allyship has been well documented and has garnered him favorable comparisons to his mother, Princess Diana, who worked to destigmatize the lesbian and gay community in the United Kingdom during the HIV/AIDS crisis in the 1980s.
> 
> Last year, his mental health charity, Heads Together, invited Mermaid, a U.K.-based transgender youth charity, to join its wellness efforts. The collaboration was considered noteworthy given that Mermaids — and transgender advocates more broadly — had been subject to vocal criticism by the public and media in the U.K.
> 
> Harry's wife, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, has also been lauded by the LGBTQ community for reportedly telling her friends that she plans to raise their son, Archie, with a “fluid” approach to gender, including a gender-neutral nursery, according to Vanity Fair.
> 
> https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/u-k-veteran-says-prince-harry-defended-him-anti-gay-n1116671



Is this meant to remind us that Harry is a war hero and kind, and therefore should not be criticized?  It's kind of like what Prince Andrew tried claiming he could not sweat because he fought in the Falklands. Time for royalty to take note that the "but I'm a war hero" defense does not protect you from criticism.


----------



## Flatsy

I think Prince Andrew is going to be losing in this deal as well, which is good.  A lot of the things the BRF may have been able to let slide and not address with Andrew are things they have to address with the Sussexes.  If the Sussexes lose their protection as non-working royals, then it's much harder to justify letting Andrew keep it.  I hope Andrew also loses his titles, but that probably won't happen.



youngster said:


> I didn't really think this marriage would last, royal marriages have all that incredible extra pressure, but I thought they had a chance. I actually thought Meghan being an actress might be helpful as she'd enjoy the cameras and attention and was used to public speaking. I didn't think she'd bail after only a few months of actual royal duties since she's been on her honeymoon and then maternity leave or family vacation for most of it, it seems. I guess I underestimated how much of a self-absorbed actress she really is at heart.


Totally agree with all of this!  I thought they stood a chance and thought, at worst, that they might face an amicable breakup in 5-7 years.  I had no idea a trainwreck of this magnitude was in store!

I thought Meghan being an actress would be an asset.  I didn't realize she's one of those people who became an actress just for the feelings of adulation and love that come with Hollywood fame, but not at all suited to accept the downsides of being a public person.  

I truly believed that Meghan was committed to royal work.  I had no idea she would cast aside her commitment so easily, or that she would encourage Harry to leave the royal family too.  After only a year and a half!  It's astounding.


----------



## mshermes

*Harry and Meghan Markle release video of his 'final' engagement as senior royal at Buckingham Palace – pointedly accompanied by Stone Roses hit that includes the line 'I'd like to leave the country for month of Sundays'*
*Petty......*


----------



## Deleted 698298

What if we’re all reading it wrong? What if Meghan was tired of the BRF’s hypocrisy sweeping sh!it under carpets, making things hush hush and go away? That’s why she left, distanced herself from them and trying to take Archie and Harry (who’s also fed up with all of them and doesn’t want to spend his life pretending like HRH Diana) with her? The revelations about Andrew (is he a prince?) and young girls was just too much for the woman who always supported women’s cause? (Btw that Nazi costume would have been a ‘rebellious Harry’ pointing  at HRH Phillip’s background??) 

just a thought


----------



## bisousx

byzina said:


> I've heard the inside information (though I don't claim that it is 100% true) that other soldiers might have risked their lives because everyone knew that the prince was there and could plan target attacks.



Actually, around 2012, the British base Harry was stationed at in Afghanistan was attacked once the Taliban found out he was there. My ex fiancee was a US Marine and during the last month of his tour, he patrolled from his base to Harry’s base. After reading about the attack and being in the dark with zero news or contact from my ex for nearly 2 weeks, it was extremely upsetting to me that my then-bf could have been killed because of Harry. Thankfully my ex wasn’t hurt. It’s chilling to reminisce that time...


----------



## Mrs.Z

Consumer2much said:


> What if we’re all reading it wrong? What if Meghan was tired of the BRF’s hypocrisy sweeping sh!it under carpets, making things hush hush and go away? That’s why she left, distanced herself from them and trying to take Archie and Harry (who’s also fed up with all of them and doesn’t want to spend his life pretending like HRH Diana) with her? The revelations about Andrew (is he a prince?) and young girls was just too much for the woman who always supported women’s cause? (Btw that Nazi costume would have been a ‘rebellious Harry’ pointing  at HRH Phillip’s background??)
> 
> just a thought


I also thought that the Andrew situation probably bothered Meghan quite a bit.  I get it ...but again, you had to know what you were signing up for and it’s not so much that people are criticizing their leaving the family, it’s the manner in which they are leaving.


----------



## youngster

mshermes said:


> *Harry and Meghan Markle release video of his 'final' engagement as senior royal at Buckingham Palace – pointedly accompanied by Stone Roses hit that includes the line 'I'd like to leave the country for month of Sundays'*
> *Petty......*



Seriously?  They seriously have done this?  Who is advising them, who is running their PR?  Why do they seem like they are going out of their way to make enemies in the UK?  Maybe this is Meghan's way of making sure that Harry burns as many bridges as possible and it is incredibly difficult for him to ever go back.


----------



## sdkitty

last night Amanpoour & Co had two guests talking about harry and meghan - Afua Hirsch, author, younger bi-racial woman.  and an older white man who is a historian and has written about the royals.
both of them felt that Meghan had been the victim of racism - not so much by the royal family but by the British tabloid press.
They believe Meghan is being demonized and that the exit idea was Harry's.
They showed a clip of Harry saying how when he sees the flashbulbs it takes him back to his mother.
Who knows?  maybe this is Harry's idea.
What I can't forgive is Meghan marrying the dream prince and then complaining that the dream come true is So Hard.  
I think she should have saved that whining for her close friends or therapist.
And I don't think 18 months is long enough to try to make it work.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Mrs.Z said:


> I also thought that the Andrew situation probably bothered Meghan quite a bit.  I get it ...but again, you had to know what you were signing up for and it’s not so much that people are criticizing their leaving the family, it’s the manner in which they are leaving.


If the issues of the family were what bothered Meghan so much and led her to want out, then I still blame her to a degree. She and Harry decided to ignore all the advice encouraging a long courtship so she understood what she was getting in to. If she chose ignorance that falls on her shoulders. She entered into marriage and brought a child into the world being blissfully ignorant, and then suddenly was outraged by bad behavior?  Sorry - that doesn't buy any sympathy from me.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Honestly this couple has NO APPEAL at all in any way shape or form and their lack of sound judgement is appalling.

Harry and MM, that stupid carrot-top film-flam of a man and his sweaty bride, well let’s just say I’m glad my life and well-being does not rest on their shoulders

Still believe that QEII will strip them of all titles in the long run, that Harry and MM statement said it all


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Good point, and also probably showing him that she'll be just fine without him.
> 
> How incredibly tacky to use people who are down on their luck for photo ops.


No poor sod is safe 


mshermes said:


> *Harry and Meghan Markle release video of his 'final' engagement as senior royal at Buckingham Palace – pointedly accompanied by Stone Roses hit that includes the line 'I'd like to leave the country for month of Sundays'*
> *Petty......*


It’s in poor taste, given they’ve just had an extensive freebie holiday  



bisousx said:


> Actually, around 2012, the British base Harry was stationed at in Afghanistan was attacked once the Taliban found out he was there. My ex fiancee was a US Marine and during the last month of his tour, he patrolled from his base to Harry’s base. After reading about the attack and being in the dark with zero news or contact from my ex for nearly 2 weeks, it was extremely upsetting to me that my then-bf could have been killed because of Harry. Thankfully my ex wasn’t hurt. It’s chilling to reminisce that time...


They had to cut Harry’s tour short - he came home early because of the danger to himself and everyone around him.  He also was restricted in the duties he was allowed to undertake.  So yes, he did get treated differently.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

Mrs.Z said:


> I also thought that the Andrew situation probably bothered Meghan quite a bit. I get it ...but again, you had to know what you were signing up for and it’s not so much that people are criticizing their leaving the family, it’s the manner in which they are leaving.


I have a cousin who is a perv. (Don't we all have bad eggs somewhere in our extended families?) I'm not leaving my family and moving to a new continent over it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Interesting...I thought everyone expected Harry to chuff straight back to Canada, post draw, but apparently he’s staying on here for more meetings next week


----------



## queennadine

I heard recently that Harry had a soldier assigned to protect him, like that was the guy’s only job during that time while in the military. I can’t find a source for it, but apparently that guy was later KIA. 

Yes, very interesting that he isn’t on the first plane to Canada. Poor poor Archie. I wish we could get him and send him to BP, lol.


----------



## Clearblueskies

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Still believe that QEII will strip them of all titles in the long run, that Harry and MM statement said it all


I sincerely hope so.  The idea of them hanging on to the titles to exploit them for money whilst bad mouthing the RF on tacky chat shows or via “royal” social media accounts, sticks in my throat.


----------



## RueMonge

sdkitty said:


> last night Amanpoour & Co had two guests talking about harry and meghan - Afua Hirsch, author, younger bi-racial woman.  and an older white man who is a historian and has written about the royals.
> both of them felt that Meghan had been the victim of racism - not so much by the royal family but by the British tabloid press.
> They believe Meghan is being demonized and that the exit idea was Harry's.
> They showed a clip of Harry saying how when he sees the flashbulbs it takes him back to his mother.
> Who knows?  maybe this is Harry's idea.
> .



I saw that also and thought it was very plausible.


----------



## hellosunshine

*The Charms of Toronto for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle*




When Prince Harry first started dating Meghan Markle, the Duchess-to-be was renting a house a few blocks from me, in Seaton Village, a sleepy little neighborhood in Toronto’s West End. One morning, on the way to the local Italian grocery store, I found the sidewalk blocked by large black sport-utility vehicles. The Prince was visiting. My instant reaction was annoyance. “Why don’t they move off my sidewalks?” I complained to an American friend. “That’s it?” my friend replied. “That’s your reaction to a royal romance in your neighborhood?” This week, I imagine that there are a great number of people wondering why one of the most prominent couples in the world would endure a grilling by the Queen and humiliation in the press to move to Canada. My reaction to those black S.U.V.s offers a clue: nobody here really cares what they do. The literary critic Northrop Frye once called Toronto a good place to mind your own business—a trait that must seem pretty attractive to Meghan and Harry right now.

The British press, in their relationship to the Royal Family, can be staggeringly cruel. With Meghan, their overt racism is glaring. But while the racism is new, the savagery isn’t. They go after everyone, exploiting whatever vulnerabilities they find. They called Fergie the “Duchess of Pork” because she struggled with her weight. They called Kate Middleton “Waity Katie” because she dated Prince William for a few years before they married. For the British, the royals rest at the pinnacle of a class structure that freezes and defines every member of society. The royals are permanent celebrities, untouchable—and therefore one may degrade them however one likes, because they will always be so far above everyone else.

The British press may be casually brutal in their treatment of the royals, but they do obey a key set of rules, which Meghan and Harry are about to abandon. The Royal Rota system, by which selected press members trade regular access to the royals in exchange for an agreement to respect their basic privacy, has been in place for generations. The cage works both ways. It keeps the royals in a state of servitude—a _Sunday Times_ columnist famously described the arrangement as “we pay, you pose”—but it also limits the voraciousness of the press.

Which is partly why it is inconceivable that Harry and Meghan would move to New York or Los Angeles, at least in the short term. Who would want to live like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie used to, prisoners of celebrity surviving invigilation without restraint, barely able to walk down the street? No couple could survive it. But Toronto? There’s a reason why the Rolling Stones always rehearse their tours here: it’s big enough to have city attractions, but its people will leave you in peace. Toronto is the ideal city to move to if you want to become less famous. It is not a particularly amenable place for people who think they’re special. There are Toronto celebrities, but ninety-nine per cent of them became celebrities elsewhere.

The only way that people would put up with the horror-show nonsense of royal scrutiny is if they believed in the vital importance of the monarchy. Who, at this point, would be willing to sacrifice their chance at happiness for that old bit of painted board? The British press are calling it a #Megxit, but who really left whom? Has England understood how much less attractive it has become as a country over the past few years? It wanted the foreigners to leave, remember? Who would want to endure it? For what?

Harry and Meghan seem pretty Canadian to me already—a multicultural family with a weirdly strong relationship to English institutions that they’re trying to overcome, a love of violent sports, and a profound desire to be left alone. I could see them fitting right in. (She’s already good friends with a Mulroney.) It’s almost imaginable that they could have a life here. I mean, no one would notice if Meghan wore bluejeans to a tennis match.

It’s conceivable—I’m not saying this would happen, but it is conceivable—that Meghan could walk her dog in the park, like I used to see her doing. She looked so happy then, just before she met Prince Charming. Her life has been like a Hallmark movie in reverse: she had a great life that made perfect sense, right until the wedding with the scion of one of the oldest families in Europe. Is it any wonder that she’s come to believe that her story can only have a happy ending if it goes backward? There’s a moral of a kind here, unknown to Hallmark: it is infinitely better to be a working actress in Toronto than a Duchess in Buckingham Palace.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/c...of-toronto-for-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Interesting...I thought everyone expected Harry to chuff straight back to Canada, post draw, but apparently he’s staying on here for more meetings next week



Maybe he needs time to clear his head. He's giving up a lot even though he is negotiating for a lucrative "settlement." Once he leaves his life will be different from everything he has ever known.


----------



## mshermes

*Canada goes cold on Megxit: 73pc of Canadians do NOT want to pick up cost of Harry and Meghan living in the country with just 14pc ‘very pleased’ with their planned move*


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> Interesting...I thought everyone expected Harry to chuff straight back to Canada, post draw, but apparently he’s staying on here for more meetings next week


I heard this yesterday too, he is staying on longer. They speculate it's to make sure everything is being sorted as the couple wants, but he is doing engagements at the same time.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> *The Charms of Toronto for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle*
> 
> View attachment 4641451
> 
> 
> When Prince Harry first started dating Meghan Markle, the Duchess-to-be was renting a house a few blocks from me, in Seaton Village, a sleepy little neighborhood in Toronto’s West End. One morning, on the way to the local Italian grocery store, I found the sidewalk blocked by large black sport-utility vehicles. The Prince was visiting. My instant reaction was annoyance. “Why don’t they move off my sidewalks?” I complained to an American friend. “That’s it?” my friend replied. “That’s your reaction to a royal romance in your neighborhood?” This week, I imagine that there are a great number of people wondering why one of the most prominent couples in the world would endure a grilling by the Queen and humiliation in the press to move to Canada. My reaction to those black S.U.V.s offers a clue: nobody here really cares what they do. The literary critic Northrop Frye once called Toronto a good place to mind your own business—a trait that must seem pretty attractive to Meghan and Harry right now.
> 
> The British press, in their relationship to the Royal Family, can be staggeringly cruel. With Meghan, their overt racism is glaring. But while the racism is new, the savagery isn’t. They go after everyone, exploiting whatever vulnerabilities they find. They called Fergie the “Duchess of Pork” because she struggled with her weight. They called Kate Middleton “Waity Katie” because she dated Prince William for a few years before they married. For the British, the royals rest at the pinnacle of a class structure that freezes and defines every member of society. The royals are permanent celebrities, untouchable—and therefore one may degrade them however one likes, because they will always be so far above everyone else.
> 
> The British press may be casually brutal in their treatment of the royals, but they do obey a key set of rules, which Meghan and Harry are about to abandon. The Royal Rota system, by which selected press members trade regular access to the royals in exchange for an agreement to respect their basic privacy, has been in place for generations. The cage works both ways. It keeps the royals in a state of servitude—a _Sunday Times_ columnist famously described the arrangement as “we pay, you pose”—but it also limits the voraciousness of the press.
> 
> Which is partly why it is inconceivable that Harry and Meghan would move to New York or Los Angeles, at least in the short term. Who would want to live like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie used to, prisoners of celebrity surviving invigilation without restraint, barely able to walk down the street? No couple could survive it. But Toronto? There’s a reason why the Rolling Stones always rehearse their tours here: it’s big enough to have city attractions, but its people will leave you in peace. Toronto is the ideal city to move to if you want to become less famous. It is not a particularly amenable place for people who think they’re special. There are Toronto celebrities, but ninety-nine per cent of them became celebrities elsewhere.
> 
> The only way that people would put up with the horror-show nonsense of royal scrutiny is if they believed in the vital importance of the monarchy. Who, at this point, would be willing to sacrifice their chance at happiness for that old bit of painted board? The British press are calling it a #Megxit, but who really left whom? Has England understood how much less attractive it has become as a country over the past few years? It wanted the foreigners to leave, remember? Who would want to endure it? For what?
> 
> Harry and Meghan seem pretty Canadian to me already—a multicultural family with a weirdly strong relationship to English institutions that they’re trying to overcome, a love of violent sports, and a profound desire to be left alone. I could see them fitting right in. (She’s already good friends with a Mulroney.) It’s almost imaginable that they could have a life here. I mean, no one would notice if Meghan wore bluejeans to a tennis match.
> 
> It’s conceivable—I’m not saying this would happen, but it is conceivable—that Meghan could walk her dog in the park, like I used to see her doing. She looked so happy then, just before she met Prince Charming. Her life has been like a Hallmark movie in reverse: she had a great life that made perfect sense, right until the wedding with the scion of one of the oldest families in Europe. Is it any wonder that she’s come to believe that her story can only have a happy ending if it goes backward? There’s a moral of a kind here, unknown to Hallmark: it is infinitely better to be a working actress in Toronto than a Duchess in Buckingham Palace.
> 
> https://www.newyorker.com/culture/c...of-toronto-for-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle


Hilarious  absolutely the last thing Meghan wants is to be left alone


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> *The Charms of Toronto for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle*
> 
> View attachment 4641451
> 
> 
> When Prince Harry first started dating Meghan Markle, the Duchess-to-be was renting a house a few blocks from me, in Seaton Village, a sleepy little neighborhood in Toronto’s West End. One morning, on the way to the local Italian grocery store, I found the sidewalk blocked by large black sport-utility vehicles. The Prince was visiting. My instant reaction was annoyance. “Why don’t they move off my sidewalks?” I complained to an American friend. “That’s it?” my friend replied. “That’s your reaction to a royal romance in your neighborhood?” This week, I imagine that there are a great number of people wondering why one of the most prominent couples in the world would endure a grilling by the Queen and humiliation in the press to move to Canada. My reaction to those black S.U.V.s offers a clue: nobody here really cares what they do. The literary critic Northrop Frye once called Toronto a good place to mind your own business—a trait that must seem pretty attractive to Meghan and Harry right now.
> 
> The British press, in their relationship to the Royal Family, can be staggeringly cruel. With Meghan, their overt racism is glaring. But while the racism is new, the savagery isn’t. They go after everyone, exploiting whatever vulnerabilities they find. They called Fergie the “Duchess of Pork” because she struggled with her weight. They called Kate Middleton “Waity Katie” because she dated Prince William for a few years before they married. For the British, the royals rest at the pinnacle of a class structure that freezes and defines every member of society. The royals are permanent celebrities, untouchable—and therefore one may degrade them however one likes, because they will always be so far above everyone else.
> 
> The British press may be casually brutal in their treatment of the royals, but they do obey a key set of rules, which Meghan and Harry are about to abandon. The Royal Rota system, by which selected press members trade regular access to the royals in exchange for an agreement to respect their basic privacy, has been in place for generations. The cage works both ways. It keeps the royals in a state of servitude—a _Sunday Times_ columnist famously described the arrangement as “we pay, you pose”—but it also limits the voraciousness of the press.
> 
> Which is partly why it is inconceivable that Harry and Meghan would move to New York or Los Angeles, at least in the short term. Who would want to live like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie used to, prisoners of celebrity surviving invigilation without restraint, barely able to walk down the street? No couple could survive it. But Toronto? There’s a reason why the Rolling Stones always rehearse their tours here: it’s big enough to have city attractions, but its people will leave you in peace. Toronto is the ideal city to move to if you want to become less famous. It is not a particularly amenable place for people who think they’re special. There are Toronto celebrities, but ninety-nine per cent of them became celebrities elsewhere.
> 
> The only way that people would put up with the horror-show nonsense of royal scrutiny is if they believed in the vital importance of the monarchy. Who, at this point, would be willing to sacrifice their chance at happiness for that old bit of painted board? The British press are calling it a #Megxit, but who really left whom? Has England understood how much less attractive it has become as a country over the past few years? It wanted the foreigners to leave, remember? Who would want to endure it? For what?
> 
> Harry and Meghan seem pretty Canadian to me already—a multicultural family with a weirdly strong relationship to English institutions that they’re trying to overcome, a love of violent sports, and a profound desire to be left alone. I could see them fitting right in. (She’s already good friends with a Mulroney.) It’s almost imaginable that they could have a life here. I mean, no one would notice if Meghan wore bluejeans to a tennis match.
> 
> It’s conceivable—I’m not saying this would happen, but it is conceivable—that Meghan could walk her dog in the park, like I used to see her doing. She looked so happy then, just before she met Prince Charming. Her life has been like a Hallmark movie in reverse: she had a great life that made perfect sense, right until the wedding with the scion of one of the oldest families in Europe. Is it any wonder that she’s come to believe that her story can only have a happy ending if it goes backward? There’s a moral of a kind here, unknown to Hallmark: it is infinitely better to be a working actress in Toronto than a Duchess in Buckingham Palace.
> 
> https://www.newyorker.com/culture/c...of-toronto-for-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle


if Meghan wanted privacy I don't think she'd be out having her photo taken every day


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> I sincerely hope so.  The idea of them hanging on to the titles to exploit them for money whilst bad mouthing the RF on tacky chat shows or via “royal” social media accounts, sticks in my throat.



This is exactly right. If they want to live in privacy and anonymity, feel free, they could have engineered a gracious withdrawal. But, they want to exploit their connection to the royal family for money while simultaneously giving the finger to the country.

Maybe they should change SussexRoyal to SucksToBeRoyal. It'd be more honest on their part.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> I heard this yesterday too, he is staying on longer. They speculate it's to make sure everything is being sorted as the couple wants, but he is doing engagements at the same time.


These engagements will have been planned weeks or months in advance so it would seem churlish for him to cancel them.


----------



## CAH

I wonder if Megan had any engagements that had to be cancelled.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sharont2305 said:


> These engagements will have been planned weeks or months in advance so it would seem churlish for him to cancel them.


Is it fair to assume that Meghan would have also had engagements scheduled weeks or months in advance which were cancelled?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> Is it fair to assume that Meghan would have also had engagements scheduled weeks or months in advance which were cancelled?


I'd assume so, time will tell. At least he still has some sense of duty left in him.
It's well known that most engagements are planned well in advance. At a previous place of work we had a Royal visitor, we found out about 3 days before but our bosses knew about it for about 6 weeks


----------



## Flatsy

CAH said:


> I wonder if Megan had any engagements that had to be cancelled.


I think she had no intention of coming back from Canada when she went there in November, so probably not IMO.


----------



## mshermes

Friend-reveals-Meghan-Markle-pleases-without-asking-permission.html

Violin accompaniment.  What an awful, awful life she had! SMH............I volunteer at a shelter for abused women. This falls on deaf ears.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> These engagements will have been planned weeks or months in advance so it would seem churlish for him to cancel them.


He cancelled for the Lion King 


Flatsy said:


> I think she had no intention of coming back from Canada when she went there in November, so probably not IMO.


I read (before they went to Canada) she had nothing in the calendar for January.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> He cancelled for the Lion King
> 
> I read (before they went to Canada) she had nothing in the calendar for January.


Yes, but that was then, he would look worse if he cancelled now we know what we know, lol


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I think she had no intention of coming back from Canada when she went there in November, so probably not IMO.



Definitely. This wasn't a decision they reached in the six weeks they were vacationing. It's been in the works for months. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they had most of their clothes and belongings shipped to Canada during their break. They brought the dogs too, though that's the only part of Megxit I wholeheartedly agree with.


----------



## rose60610

When you read the Meghan worked with attorneys to set up companies even before her baby was born, this whole scheme was obviously in the works well before the wedding. She's an actress, by virtual of that profession alone she is no stranger to media attention, albeit she wasn't, nor received, the coverage an A-Lister gets. She loves attention, as long as it's fawning and gushing. She lived with Harry before the wedding and basically went through an apprenticeship before she got married. So I'm not buying for one second the "she didn't realize what she was getting into" or "it got too hard for her" or "poor thing suffers bad media" or any of that. To what extent Harry was a willing participant in all this we can't be sure, but he had to go along with a good part of it. In which case, they should have just gotten married in front of a judge instead of the 50 million dollar wedding, the 10 million Frog house, "representing" The Crown in Africa and places, etc.  But no. They both willingly acted and went through the Fairy Tale of a world televised Royal Wedding and played the roles of active Senior Royals, complete with designer wardrobes, servants, private jets, appearances, etc.

They had to go through all these motions to add to the luster of their #Sussex Royal whatever companies and the collaring of Disney, etc. 

They used the BRF as fodder and a springboard for their personal benefit. Meghan had no intention of undertaking the traditional role of a RF member. She just pretended to for as long as she felt she had to. Hence the "Not many people as me if I'm OK" garbage knowing she'd get blasted so she could turn around and say "They're so mean to me".

Meghan has used, chewed and spit out the BRF like her family members and others who are no longer useful to her. No wonder Oprah and the rest are like "uh, no, I didn't discuss anything with her".  I have 100% more respect for the Kardashian's than for MM. And I don't respect them that much either. At least the K's are up front and say outright they're about making money, and don't whither under bad press. They don't run away with their hands on their thighs to show they're not wearing rings. 

I'm just enjoying the show right now to see how far she can take this. Before the Palace buries her. Long Live the Queen.


----------



## joyeaux

A counterpoint to some of the articles on Harry and his military comrades now that this has all gone down... the “Queen and country” thing really got me. 

I sort of wonder if 5 years down the road (I.e., more than twice the amount of time they’ve been married) Harry will regret how rouge he’s going now. It just seems so impulsive, and as I’ve said before it’s the grandiose sense of self these two have (IMO their FAQ on the new website is patronizing as h#$l to the average citizen) as well as detachment from how 99% of the people who are paying for them is staggering. So. Much. Entitlement.

_________________

Via the Telegraph here (paywalled), bolded by me



> *'We have lost respect for you': Military figures dismayed by Duke of Sussex's behaviour*
> 
> Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry racing out from the VHR (very high ready-ness) tent to scramble his Apache Credit: PA
> One of the Army's most senior former officers urged the Duke of Sussex to "put Queen and country first", as a former officer in the Royal Marines, of which the Duke is Captain General, said he would not raise a toast to him.
> 
> The retired military chief urged the 35-year-old Duke to honour his pledge of allegiance to the Queen, while a decorated war hero described his decision to stand down from the Royal family as "disgusting".
> 
> James Glancy, a former captain in the Special Boat Service, said he and many military colleagues would not raise a toast to the Duke if he tried to earn money from his royal position with commercial ventures.
> 
> His criticism came as a highly decorated Army figure told The Daily Telegraph:* "Prince Harry has every right to want to balance his responsibilities between the Royal family and his wife and young family. But first and foremost Harry was a commissioned officer who pledged allegiance to the Queen and the Queen is his grandmother, so when push comes to shove, Queen and country come first."*
> 
> Speaking to Nigel Farage on LBC radio, Capt Glancy, who won the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross in 2012 for courage and leadership during three campaigns in Afghanistan, said: "Harry's been a great public servant.
> 
> "He's done two tours of Afghanistan. I was there for one of his tours ... He's done brilliant work in charity since he's left the Armed Forces, especially with the Invictus Games*, but his behaviour in the last year is not becoming of somebody that holds these important positions, these patronages, including that of the Captain General."*
> 
> Insisting others in the Royal Marines and military were "very upset, if not disgusted by the disrespect to the Queen by not discussing this", Capt Glancy added: "Everybody agrees that if he wants to leave these positions ... he's absolutely entitled to have another life, and he's entitled to live overseas. But you can't do this half and half. You're either in or out.
> 
> "If Harry goes down this route of semi-privatising his role I wouldn't raise a toast to him as he wouldn't have my respect."
> 
> The Duke was made Captain General of the Royal Marines last year, taking over from the Duke of Edinburgh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The father of a British soldier who protected Prince Harry on the front line in Afghanistan and later took his own life after developing post-traumatic stress disorder, accused the Duke of "abandoning his Army family".
> 
> Derek Hunt, whose son Nathan was mentioned in dispatches for neutralising Taliban bombs in Helmand province in 2008, said: "Nathan kept Prince Harry alive in Afghanistan. He'd have been blown up had my son not found those IEDs. After everything they went through together, I think it is terrible to see him turning his back on everyone.
> 
> "We all thought Harry really understood what life is like for veterans and their families, as if he was one of us and by our side - but he's shattered that impression now. It's like he's lost his spark, like he's not the same person."
> 
> Yesterday, Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary, said the taxpayer should continue to pay for the Sussexes' security because he "has done great service" as an Army officer.
> 
> She told Andrew Marr on BBC One: "I just hate to think what he must be thinking ... having used his instinct to try and defend our country, now he has his [wife and baby] under the ... media scrutiny they are suffering. He must be really wanting to defend them."


----------



## bag-mania

Do we know if Harry actually got any voiceover work for Meghan? The video showed his awkward cornering of Bob Iger but just because the blindsided exec said "sure" doesn't mean it will actually happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

joyeaux said:


> "He's done two tours of Afghanistan. I was there for one of his tours ... He's done brilliant work in charity since he's left the Armed Forces, especially with the Invictus Games*, but his behaviour in the last year is not becoming of somebody that holds these important positions, these patronages, including that of the Captain General."*.



Interesting that apparently other people could see what a lot of us here were seeing...they don't just take offense with the newest scandal but weren't impressed for a whole year.


----------



## kemilia

daisychainz said:


> I heard this yesterday too, he is staying on longer. They speculate it's to make sure everything is being sorted as the couple wants, but he is doing engagements at the same time.


Didn’t the Queen say she wanted this sorted out in days not weeks? His staying put would make good sense for him. Or there’s more going on behind the scenes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mshermes said:


> Friend-reveals-Meghan-Markle-pleases-without-asking-permission.html
> 
> Violin accompaniment.  What an awful, awful life she had! SMH............I volunteer at a shelter for abused women. This falls on deaf ears.



Sorry to say but I feel Meghan might not be the best mother anyway seeing how selfabsorbed she is.


----------



## youngster

I am wondering if she's pregnant.  Has that rumor popped up anywhere?  She looks bigger in the face and midsection but she has since Archie was born.  If they are going to have a second child, she is running out of time.  I think she's, what, 39 this year?


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Do we know if Harry actually got any voiceover work for Meghan? The video showed his awkward cornering of Bob Iger but just because the blindsided exec said "sure" doesn't mean it will actually happen.


"According to _The Times_, Meghan has signed a deal with Disney to do a bit of voiceover work for an unnamed future project. However, the Duchess will not see a dime from the project, as she reportedly agreed to do the voiceover in exchange for a donation to the charity organization Elephants Without Borders."


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Do we know if Harry actually got any voiceover work for Meghan? The video showed his awkward cornering of Bob Iger but just because the blindsided exec said "sure" doesn't mean it will actually happen.


Yes, she already did a voiceover project for Disney, her fee went to some sort of wildlife charity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## byzina

bisousx said:


> Actually, around 2012, the British base Harry was stationed at in Afghanistan was attacked once the Taliban found out he was there. My ex fiancee was a US Marine and during the last month of his tour, he patrolled from his base to Harry’s base. After reading about the attack and being in the dark with zero news or contact from my ex for nearly 2 weeks, it was extremely upsetting to me that my then-bf could have been killed because of Harry. Thankfully my ex wasn’t hurt. It’s chilling to reminisce that time...



I'm happy to hear that your ex fiancee wasn't hurt. I don't really think Harry's service there was that important, taking into account that others were put at risk. 



youngster said:


> this is Meghan's way of making sure that Harry burns as many bridges as possible and it is incredibly difficult for him to ever go back.



It will be difficult for Meghan to come back (I think she doesn't want it anyway). If Harry ever decides to divorce, he will be very welcome back in the family. They will support him because they must disapprove of her actions now. I've seen this many times in ordinary families.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> "According to _The Times_, Meghan has signed a deal with Disney to do a bit of voiceover work for an unnamed future project. However, the Duchess will not see a dime from the project, as she reportedly agreed to do the voiceover in exchange for a donation to the charity organization Elephants Without Borders."





Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, she already did a voiceover project for Disney, her fee went to some sort of wildlife charity.



Thanks. I won't criticize her for it since she wants to do it for charity. Unless she's gunning for David Attenborough's job narrating beautiful wildlife shows, because that man's voice is synonymous with that genre.


----------



## mshermes

Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, she already did a voiceover project for Disney, her fee went to some sort of wildlife charity.


We don't know what percentage of her fee went to Elephants Without Borders. It could have been the entire amount or it could have been a percentage.


----------



## V0N1B2

PewPew said:


> The general public underestimates (but, frankly Meghan may *overestimate*) the clout of her BFF stylish Jessica Mulroney, who was a longtime driving force behind the secretive Canada escape plan.
> 
> Mulroney is not only the daughter of a former Canadian PM, but she also is the stylist & friend of the wife of current PM Justin Trudeau. (Trudeau himself is the son of a former Canadian PM, a fact that Jessica and he have bonded over). Mulroney is also a correspondent at Good Morning America & had personal and professional connections with some of the big celebrities M didn’t know before the wedding.
> 
> M didn’t technically have a maid of honor, but Jessica had that unofficial role & all 3 of Jessica’s children were in H&M’s wedding. It’s unlikely H&M’s courtship would’ve been successful without General Jessica’s promotion and arrangements.
> 
> Jessica grew up among politics and dignitaries. She’s never been one to be in awe of royalty or world leaders. This hugely impressed M, who trusts her fully. Remember H&M are now promoting themselves not just to the Canadian public, but behind the scenes with political influencers.


Her HUSBAND is the son of a former Prime Minister (one that has not been in power since 1993). I don't believe she grew up around politicians or dignitaries.
Until this MM chick came on the scene, I had never heard of her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> Friend-reveals-Meghan-Markle-pleases-without-asking-permission.html
> 
> Violin accompaniment.  What an awful, awful life she had! SMH............I volunteer at a shelter for abused women. This falls on deaf ears.


It’d be difficult for Archie to pick up on her “stress” and “anxiety” since he seems to spend most of his time with the nanny.
She’s a thoroughly nasty piece of work - she’s using her friends as mouthpieces to label everyone she’s pissed with - which now covers her family, his family (aka the family she never had), the Trumps, and the entire British nation - as toxic.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mshermes said:


> We don't know what percentage of her fee went to Elephants Without Borders. It could have been the entire amount or it could have been a percentage.


When I read it, it sounded like her entire fee went to Charity....will this be the case in the future.....I doubt it but who knows.


----------



## Flatsy

mshermes said:


> Friend-reveals-Meghan-Markle-pleases-without-asking-permission.html
> 
> Violin accompaniment.  What an awful, awful life she had! SMH............I volunteer at a shelter for abused women. This falls on deaf ears.


I don't blame a person for wanting to have a happy life and live how they want to, but this sort of thing just shows how much of a huge mistake it was for her to commit to this life without trying it out.  She wasn't aware that working for the royal family would involve a lot of rule following and being told what to do?  Come on. 

Harry knew better and should not have rushed her into this.  I don't care what promises she made to him or how convincingly she told him that she would cooperate and do whatever she was told, he knew she could not have really known what it was like until she experienced it.  And he also wouldn't know whether she meant what she said until he saw her do it.  (When in her life did she ever ride out something not being totally to her liking?  Her whole philosophy seems to be to move on with haste whenever she doesn't like something.)

It was just stupid.  And not surprising since they are handling their handling their exit even more stupidly.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Clearblueskies said:


> It’d be difficult for Archie to pick up on her “stress” and “anxiety” since he seems to spend most of his time with the nanny.
> She’s a thoroughly nasty piece of work - she’s using her friends as mouthpieces to label everyone she’s pissed with - which now covers her family, his family (aka the family she never had), the Trumps, and the entire British nation - as toxic.


Soul crushing and toxic, I mean I don’t like my in-laws either but they are my husband’s family ....no need to actively treat them like garbage.


----------



## hellosunshine

PewPew said:


> Mulroney is not only the daughter of a former Canadian PM, but she also is the stylist & friend of the wife of current PM Justin Trudeau. (Trudeau himself is the son of a former Canadian PM, a fact that Jessica and he have bonded over). Mulroney is also a correspondent at Good Morning America & *had personal and professional connections with some of the big celebrities M didn’t know before the wedding.*



Meghan knew Jessica and Sophie (Trudeau's wife) before getting married to Harry though. They've gone on girls trip type of vacations together.



Meghan, Sophie, and Jessica


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> I don't blame a person for wanting to have a happy life and live how they want to, but this sort of thing just shows how much of a huge mistake it was for her to commit to this life without trying it out.  She wasn't aware that working for the royal family would involve a lot of rule following and being told what to do?  Come on.
> 
> Harry knew better and should not have rushed her into this.  I don't care what promises she made to him or how convincingly she told him that she would cooperate and do whatever she was told, he knew she could not have really known what it was like until she experienced it.  And he also wouldn't know whether she meant what she said until he saw her do it.  (When in her life did she ever ride out something not being totally to her liking?  Her whole philosophy seems to be to move on with haste whenever she doesn't like something.)
> 
> It was just stupid.  And not surprising since they are handling their handling their exit even more stupidly.


I’m pretty sure in that interview they did when they announced their engagement Harry said he warned her about life in the BRF.


----------



## slang

PewPew said:


> The general public underestimates (but, frankly Meghan may *overestimate*) the clout of her BFF stylish Jessica Mulroney, who was a longtime driving force behind the secretive Canada escape plan.
> 
> Mulroney is not only the daughter of a former Canadian PM, but she also is the stylist & friend of the wife of current PM Justin Trudeau. (Trudeau himself is the son of a former Canadian PM, a fact that Jessica and he have bonded over). Mulroney is also a correspondent at Good Morning America & had personal and professional connections with some of the big celebrities M didn’t know before the wedding.
> 
> M didn’t technically have a maid of honor, but Jessica had that unofficial role & all 3 of Jessica’s children were in H&M’s wedding. It’s unlikely H&M’s courtship would’ve been successful without General Jessica’s promotion and arrangements.
> 
> Jessica grew up among politics and dignitaries. She’s never been one to be in awe of royalty or world leaders. This hugely impressed M, who trusts her fully. Remember H&M are now promoting themselves not just to the Canadian public, but behind the scenes with political influencers.



Jessica is not the daughter of a former Prime Minister. She married into the Mulroney family


----------



## Flatsy

Mrs.Z said:


> When I read it, it sounded like her entire fee went to Charity....will this be the case in the future.....I doubt it but who knows.


She's not allowed to earn money right now, so I believe that it did go to charity.  However, this experience helped her nail down her quote.  She now knows how much she can make from this stuff now that she's Duchess Meghan.  I'm sure that influenced her decision to quit royal life and go after the $$$$.


----------



## Flatsy

Tivo said:


> I’m pretty sure in that interview they did when they announced their engagement Harry said he warned her about life in the BRF.


Oh yeah, all of the royal engagement interviews always include the newbie assuring everyone that she knows exactly what she's in for and is totally up for the challenge.

But really, she moved to the UK in September and they were officially engaged pretty much immediately.  She never spent any time getting to know his family or viewing from the sidelines how things work.  Huge mistake.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> Soul crushing and toxic, I mean I don’t like my in-laws either but they are my husband’s family ....no need to actively treat them like garbage.


For soul crushing read wallet crushing though.  She could.not.bear. being told she mustn’t exploit her new position in society for money.  It’s all been about the money.  Money Money Money.


----------



## Meh-gan

bag-mania said:


> Definitely. This wasn't a decision they reached in the six weeks they were vacationing. It's been in the works for months. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they had most of their clothes and belongings shipped to Canada during their break. They brought the dogs too, though that's the only part of Megxit I wholeheartedly agree with.



The thing is they aren’t able to just squat in Canada forever. It’s also in our laws etc that royals can’t live here - someone posted an article about it. 

You can only stay here so long as a tourist and they aren’t working and don’t have jobs so they are on limited time here as non Canadian citizens. 

Being a citizen of the commonwealth doesn’t mean you can live wherever, like I can’t move to Australia as a Canadian without proper immigration process. And Meghan isn’t a British citizen - as an American, she definitely can’t just up and move to Canada. 

This is just another example of their nonsense. Like whatever we are moving to Canada everyone! There are legal, government-y things involved here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## slang

V0N1B2 said:


> Her HUSBAND is the son of a former Prime Minister (one that has not been in power since 1993). I don't believe she grew up around politicians or dignitaries.
> Until this MM chick came on the scene, I had never heard of her.



YES, Jessica was barely on any radar until she was hired to style Sophie Trudeau.
Even then when ever she was mentioned it was as a bridal stylist - I remember whenever she was on CityTV it was only a few times a year and she was only a bridal stylist. Now all if a sudden she is supposed to be some big shot fashion stylist? Umm ok.
I do remember reading when she married Ben Mulroney and the comments about her were not good, people thought she was rather unfortunate looking. That was 3 nose jobs ago


----------



## Meh-gan

PewPew said:


> The general public underestimates (but, frankly Meghan may *overestimate*) the clout of her BFF stylish Jessica Mulroney, who was a longtime driving force behind the secretive Canada escape plan.
> 
> Mulroney is not only the daughter of a former Canadian PM, but she also is the stylist & friend of the wife of current PM Justin Trudeau. (Trudeau himself is the son of a former Canadian PM, a fact that Jessica and he have bonded over). Mulroney is also a correspondent at Good Morning America & had personal and professional connections with some of the big celebrities M didn’t know before the wedding.
> 
> M didn’t technically have a maid of honor, but Jessica had that unofficial role & all 3 of Jessica’s children were in H&M’s wedding. It’s unlikely H&M’s courtship would’ve been successful without General Jessica’s promotion and arrangements.
> 
> Jessica grew up among politics and dignitaries. She’s never been one to be in awe of royalty or world leaders. This hugely impressed M, who trusts her fully. Remember H&M are now promoting themselves not just to the Canadian public, but behind the scenes with political influencers.



Jessica is NOT the daughter of a former PM. Her husband Ben is the son of Brian Mulroney a former PM.

So no Justin and Jessica did not bond over being children of Prime Ministers. Where are you getting this nonsense? She did not grow up around dignitaries so no Meghan was not impressed by this etc. She was impressed by her strategic marriage choice more likely. 

Like are you just making up stories? Because your whole lengthy post doesn’t have any reality it in lol.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> I don't blame a person for wanting to have a happy life and live how they want to, but this sort of thing just shows how much of a huge mistake it was for her to commit to this life without trying it out.  She wasn't aware that working for the royal family would involve a lot of rule following and being told what to do?  Come on.
> 
> Harry knew better and should not have rushed her into this.  I don't care what promises she made to him or how convincingly she told him that she would cooperate and do whatever she was told, he knew she could not have really known what it was like until she experienced it.  And he also wouldn't know whether she meant what she said until he saw her do it.  (When in her life did she ever ride out something not being totally to her liking?  Her whole philosophy seems to be to move on with haste whenever she doesn't like something.)
> 
> It was just stupid.  And not surprising since they are handling their handling their exit even more stupidly.


I don't know what to think about these two.  My guess is that Harry was infatuated.  I can see where he would want a private life if he was so traumatized my what happened to his mother and blamed the paps.  But then why marry an actress?  

It seems like he was attracted to her at least in part for her activism which would mean she wants to be a more of a public person.  I guess it just wasn't logical on his part.

As for her, I don't know whether she loves or loved him but there is no doubt him being a prince in the most famous royal family in the world was a Big part of the attraction.

and now - she has landed one of the most eligible bachelors in the world and it's Just So Hard.  Uugh


----------



## slang

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan knew Jessica and Sophie (Trudeau's wife) before getting married to Harry though. They've gone on girls trip type of vacations together.
> 
> View attachment 4641567
> 
> Meghan, Sophie, and Jessica



Yes the Trudeau and Mulroney families are  friends. Meghan meet the Trudeaus through Jessica


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> This is exactly right. If they want to live in privacy and anonymity, feel free, they could have engineered a gracious withdrawal. But, they want to exploit their connection to the royal family for money while simultaneously giving the finger to the country.
> 
> Maybe they should change SussexRoyal to* SucksToBeRoyal.* It'd be more honest on their part.


Winner, winner .. chicken dinner .. THE BEST EVER!!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what to think about these two.  My guess is that Harry was infatuated.  I can see where he would want a private life if he was so traumatized my what happened to his mother and blamed the paps.  But then why marry an actress?
> 
> It seems like he was attracted to her at least in part for her activism which would mean she wants to be a more of a public person.  I guess it just wasn't logical on his part.
> 
> As for her, I don't know whether she loves or loved him but there is no doubt him being a prince in the most famous royal family in the world was a Big part of the attraction.
> 
> and now - she has landed one of the most eligible bachelors in the world and it's Just So Hard.  Uugh



He has always been attracted to actresses. Many of his past girlfriends were either actresses or models. Does that mean he's more interested in a woman's looks than her substance? Ideally, he probably wants both. Her motivations are even easier to define, she wanted the worldwide fame and wealth and if she could get love too then she hit the trifecta!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He has always been attracted to actresses. Many of his past girlfriends were either actresses or models. Does that mean he's more interested in a woman's looks than her substance? Ideally, he probably wants both. Her motivations are even easier to define, she wanted the worldwide fame and wealth and if she could get love too then she hit the trifecta!



Yet the one that got away, the one he's called his soulmate, is pretty averagely looking.


----------



## V0N1B2

Did she make it back over to the The Island on Tuesday night?  I hear most flights were cancelled and/or severely delayed due to weather.
Who is minding Archie?
Did Doria fly to Victoria the other night when Meghan was spotted driving around in the biggest storm in 25 years?
What cause/charity organization will she randomly pop in to with another surprise visit?
Will Harry ever rejoin her in Canada?
Who really sent that email to the women's centre and the climate for girls charity?
WTF is Climate Justice?
Did the woman behind Meghan's Mirror get a chance to meet her when she was in Vancouver? 
If Harry's deprogramming takes, who will help toss her word salad?
The details around Merch and Lurch's exit strategy was to be finalized in days - how long has it been now? 
How is the suit coming along with The Mail on Sunday? Any updates?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yet the one that got away, the one he's called his soulmate, is pretty averagely looking.



Not to him. Everyone has their own standard of beauty and it is not something an outsider can gauge. There are plenty of men who think their average looking wives are gorgeous.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> He has always been attracted to actresses. Many of his past girlfriends were either actresses or models. Does that mean he's more interested in a woman's looks than her substance? Ideally, he probably wants both. Her motivations are even easier to define, she wanted the worldwide fame and wealth and if she could get love too then she hit the trifecta!


See .. I'm not convinced that she truly loves him, and a big part of that is what I've heard about her re: her past.  Once Harry has provided her with what she wants out of this relationship ($$$ - fame??) .. then I really don't think she'll stay .. that is not her modus operandi.  Bottom line, she is the type of person that is all about "me, me, me" ..


----------



## youngster

Meh-gan said:


> This is just another example of their nonsense. Like whatever we are moving to Canada everyone! *There are legal, government-y things involved here.*



I love how you phrased this lol.  But, don't you know that they are above all those silly rules and laws? Everyone else has to go through a formal immigration process, heck, there is a lottery for the ordinary folk who want to get into the U.S. unless you are sponsored by an employer or have some other specific circumstance that allows you in.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if that’s part of the chess game.  Stay in Canada for the allowable amount of time, then HAVE to return to Great Britain.  Maybe Meg should start attending auditions for Canadian acting work.  Financial independence and all that....


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> See .. I'm not convinced that she truly loves him, and a big part of that is what I've heard about her re: her past.  Once Harry has provided her with what she wants out of this relationship ($$$ - fame??) .. then I really don't think she'll stay .. that is not her modus operandi.  Bottom line, she is the type of person that is all about "me, me, me" ..



I can see that. Let me put it another way, she _loved_ what she thought marrying him could do for her. From her history it's obvious she isn't loyal to anyone but herself (and maybe her mother and hopefully her son).


----------



## hellosunshine

Funny interaction today..


----------



## mdcx

It is a bit rich that they took the multi million dollar royal wedding, all the goodies(clothes, jewels, homes etc), all the while knowing they were going to bunk off.
Maybe the BRF needs to institute a rule along the line of employers who pay for expensive training but require employees to repay it if they quit within 6 months.

“If you abandon post within 36 months of your royal wedding, we will deduct the total costs from any future settlement...”

On another note, the DM is very “gloves off” here about the royal media:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

CeeJay said:


> See .. I'm not convinced that she truly loves him, and a big part of that is what I've heard about her re: her past.  Once Harry has provided her with what she wants out of this relationship ($$$ - fame??) .. then I really don't think she'll stay .. that is not her modus operandi.  Bottom line, she is the type of person that is all about "me, me, me" ..


I agree. This is the woman who her (former) friends said was pursuing any prominent English man for years. She would have done the same to any man with $$$ or position (married, baby, take him from family, etc.), she just got super lucky Harry was into her. She'll take whatever it is she's after and chuck him along with the rest. Not sure what the heck she's after but this isn't a fairly-tale love story, lol - she's only in love with herself.


----------



## mdcx

Sure:


----------



## hellosunshine

mdcx said:


> It is a bit rich that they took the multi million dollar royal wedding, all the goodies(clothes, jewels, homes etc), all the while knowing they were going to bunk off.
> Maybe the BRF needs to institute a rule along the line of employers who pay for expensive training but require employees to repay it if they quit within 6 months.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Sure:
> 
> View attachment 4641645


Oh, waaaah, waaaah, waaaah .. CROCODILE tears , the both of them!!!  I have zero sympathy at this point; you want to be in the "public eye", but wait .. the media CAN ONLY write positive, glowing things about us - PUHLEEZE!!!  Yeah, let them come down and live in the LA area for a bit and see what it's like with the paps down here!  If they honestly think that they can control the media, then I say "the check is in the mail"!


----------



## daisychainz

The best part of all this royal mess are the gifs and memes


----------



## Twelve

V0N1B2 said:


> Her HUSBAND is the son of a former Prime Minister (one that has not been in power since 1993). I don't believe she grew up around politicians or dignitaries.
> Until this MM chick came on the scene, I had never heard of her.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Mulroney 

JM parents  https://www.retail-insider.com/reta...es-to-open-5-stores-in-the-first-half-of-2018


----------



## PewPew

V0N1B2 said:


> Her HUSBAND is the son of a former Prime Minister (one that has not been in power since 1993). I don't believe she grew up around politicians or dignitaries.
> Until this MM chick came on the scene, I had never heard of her.



Thanks for clarifying this! I’m mortified for presenting info from a local program without realizing that a news outlet here in the US incorrectly reported her as Brian Mulroney’s daughter instead of DIL. I requested my post removed because I do not want to partake in misinformation

Edit: post successfully removed - thanks again everyone for your correction and links & to the mods for your help to remove my misinformed post. I’ve learned an important lesson regarding how even the simplest facts can be blatantly falsely reported for the sake of mindless speculation


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> Or ‘I’m sorry for your loss’. I mean, if she wants to live in Canada she better start apologizing/saying I’m sorry A LOT



Love that -- and so true.


V0N1B2 said:


> Her HUSBAND is the son of a former Prime Minister (one that has not been in power since 1993). I don't believe she grew up around politicians or dignitaries.
> Until this MM chick came on the scene, I had never heard of her.


Yes, Ben's father was a rather disliked, former prime minister as I like to remind people.  lol  Ben is apparently a sweetheart though.  Guess you can't have two of a kind in a marriage.


----------



## mdcx

Goodness:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7896661/Harry-Meghans-Frogmore-staff-AXED-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html


----------



## PewPew

slang said:


> Jessica is not the daughter of a former Prime Minister. She married into the Mulroney family





Meh-gan said:


> Jessica is NOT the daughter of a former PM. Her husband Ben is the son of Brian Mulroney a former PM.
> 
> So no Justin and Jessica did not bond over being children of Prime Ministers. Where are you getting this nonsense? She did not grow up around dignitaries so no Meghan was not impressed by this etc. She was impressed by her strategic marriage choice more likely.
> 
> Like are you just making up stories? Because your whole lengthy post doesn’t have any reality it in lol.



You are correct & I had already requested mods to remove my earlier post for incorrect information, which came from a local morning show discussion in the US today in which they incorrectly identified her as Brian Mulroney’s daughter & conflated the experiences of Jessica and her husband.

It’s such an obvious & avoidable error that I’m horrified at the lack of fact checking, as well as my own ignorance, which I why I immediately asked the mods to remove my post when I read more about her. I had also posted in this thread to admit my mistake and thank other posters for correcting me. I’ve learned a valuable lesson regarding how even the most basic facts can be misrepresented so grotesquely by shows with an agenda, particularly one with an entertainment slant. Again, my sincerest apologies to anyone reading my initial post!


----------



## Jayne1

Twelve said:


> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Mulroney
> 
> JM parents  https://www.retail-insider.com/reta...es-to-open-5-stores-in-the-first-half-of-2018


Jessica Mulroney was a Brownstein, but not a daughter of the Brownstein family that opened up Browns shoes.  She was a niece or something and not overly involved in the business, or not in line for an inheritance in any case.  lol


----------



## youngster

So, the Frogmore cottage staff are being let go:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html

Amazing to me that they had all that taxpayer money spent on the remodel only to basically abandon it after rarely using it. Maybe because they were told that they'd have to pay rent on it going forward?  It's disgusting, truly.  All that money could have stayed in taxpayer hands and used for something truly useful like, oh I don't know, maybe to help women in distress or the unfortunate that we claim to care so much about?


----------



## mdcx

Jessica does not fare well in the DM comments:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7894157/Meghan-Markles-BFF-Jessica-Mulroney-shows-golden-tan-Jamaica.html


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Goodness:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html
> 
> View attachment 4641664


SO .. all that renovation for WHAT????  I cannot possibly see any British taxpayer being 'happy' about this, regardless of what they think of H or M .. I know I would be *BEYOND BS*!!!


----------



## mdcx

youngster said:


> So, the Frogmore cottage staff are being let go:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html
> 
> Amazing to me that they had all that taxpayer money spent on the remodel only to basically abandon it after never using it. Maybe because they were told that they'd have to pay rent on it going forward?  It's disgusting, truly.  All that money could have stayed in taxpayer hands and used for something truly useful like, oh I don't know, maybe to help women in distress or the unfortunate that we claim to care so much about?


I really hope someone else gets to enjoy it, like Zara or Eug or Bea.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

PewPew said:


> You are correct & I had already requested mods to remove my earlier post for incorrect information, which came from a local morning show discussion in the US today in which they incorrectly identified her as Brian Mulroney’s daughter & not DIL & they conflated the experiences of Jessica and her husband. It’s such an obvious & avoidable error that I’m horrified at the lack of fact checking, as well as my own ignorance, which I why I immediately asked the mods to remove my post when I read more about her & I had also posted to admit my mistake and thank other posters for correcting me. I’ve learned a valuable lesson regarding how even the most basic facts can be misrepresented so grotesquely when the show, particularly one with an entertainment slant


I wouldn’t worry, we all make mistakes in this fast moving thread.


----------



## youngster

Here we go again, Meghan is determined to "hit the ground running" in Canada.  I think we just heard that a couple years ago, no? When she moved to the UK?   Oh, Canada.

From the DM article above:
‘Outside of anything that is being decided between the private offices [the nerve centres of royal operations] and the British and Canadian governments this week, *no-one here believes that the duchess will ever really return to the UK in a meaningful way*,’ one said.

Palace uncertainty has been fuelled by the couple’s decision not to bring their eight-month-old son, Archie, back to the UK to spend time with his British relatives – including his great-grandmother the Queen, and his young cousins George, Charlotte and Louis, who he has not seen since at least last autumn.

*It has also been compounded by Meghan’s determination to ‘hit the ground running’ in Canada by privately visiting charities in the Vancouver area this week.*


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> I really hope someone else gets to enjoy it, like Zara or Eug or Bea.


It will interesting to see who is lucky enough to get it!


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> So, the Frogmore cottage staff are being let go:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html
> 
> Amazing to me that they had all that taxpayer money spent on the remodel only to basically abandon it after rarely using it. Maybe because they were told that they'd have to pay rent on it going forward?  It's disgusting, truly.  All that money could have stayed in taxpayer hands and used for something truly useful like, oh I don't know, maybe to help women in distress or the unfortunate that we claim to care so much about?


On the remodel expenses ... I am sure that the couple wanted some customizing but a large chunk of expenses was due to the age of the building, out of date electricity, plumbing, roof , asbestos etc  things that needed to be redone no matter the occupant, heck they need to be redone even if the building sits empty to avoid damage due to rain or electrical hazard
Unfortunately those old buildings are expensive to maintain in condition that is even modestly up to date / up to code
So, the expenses are not totally the fault of H&M, but they will not be forgiven for them any time soon


----------



## mdcx

I suspect this will be accurate:


----------



## lanasyogamama

PewPew said:


> You are correct & I had already requested mods to remove my earlier post for incorrect information, which came from a local morning show discussion in the US today in which they incorrectly identified her as Brian Mulroney’s daughter & conflated the experiences of Jessica and her husband.
> 
> It’s such an obvious & avoidable error that I’m horrified at the lack of fact checking, as well as my own ignorance, which I why I immediately asked the mods to remove my post when I read more about her. I had also posted in this thread to admit my mistake and thank other posters for correcting me. I’ve learned a valuable lesson regarding how even the most basic facts can be misrepresented so grotesquely by shows with an agenda, particularly one with an entertainment slant. Again, my sincerest apologies to anyone reading my initial post!



Don’t beat yourself up girl.  It’s not so serious.


----------



## slang

PewPew said:


> You are correct & I had already requested mods to remove my earlier post for incorrect information, which came from a local morning show discussion in the US today in which they incorrectly identified her as Brian Mulroney’s daughter & conflated the experiences of Jessica and her husband.
> 
> It’s such an obvious & avoidable error that I’m horrified at the lack of fact checking, as well as my own ignorance, which I why I immediately asked the mods to remove my post when I read more about her. I had also posted in this thread to admit my mistake and thank other posters for correcting me. I’ve learned a valuable lesson regarding how even the most basic facts can be misrepresented so grotesquely by shows with an agenda, particularly one with an entertainment slant. Again, my sincerest apologies to anyone reading my initial post!



No biggie


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Here we go again, Meghan is determined to "hit the ground running" in Canada.  I think we just heard that a couple years ago, no? When she moved to the UK?   Oh, Canada.
> 
> From the DM article above:
> ‘Outside of anything that is being decided between the private offices [the nerve centres of royal operations] and the British and Canadian governments this week, *no-one here believes that the duchess will ever really return to the UK in a meaningful way*,’ one said.
> 
> Palace uncertainty has been fuelled by the couple’s decision not to bring their eight-month-old son, Archie, back to the UK to spend time with his British relatives – including his great-grandmother the Queen, and his young cousins George, Charlotte and Louis, who he has not seen since at least last autumn.
> 
> *It has also been compounded by Meghan’s determination to ‘hit the ground running’ in Canada by privately visiting charities in the Vancouver area this week.*


This just amazes me, but then again .. I do not have the crass that Meghan does!  Obviously, she thinks she's won this hand of cards; she doesn't give a toss about what the BRF or others may be thinking .. it's all Meghan.  Meanwhile, she is obviously *THAT* *STUPID *that she doesn't think that her actions at this time may not be looked upon favorably by those deciding their fate???  I know that working with Corporate Negotiators in the past (_especially in the International Markets_), we would always 'observe' for a while before any final decisions would be made!  As I mentioned before (_based on an article written by a BRF historian_), he felt that Charles needed to be 'tough'; that just like QEII's father, just because there is blood there does not mean that they should just "allow" what has been asked!  I truly hope that they:

Take away the "Royal Sussex" titles - yes, Prince Harry will retain his "Prince" title due to the fact that he is Royal blood
Take away Frogmore - looks like that may happen?
No funding for their security .. unless they are in the UK in a formal BRF capacity
Not allowing them to profit from their titles
Charles & family cap their yearly expenses - they want to be financially independent, then so be it!
HA - that DM poster beat me to it .. *TICK*!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Jayne1 said:


> It will interesting to see who is lucky enough to get it!


I’ve said from the beginning, it’s cursed and haunted.


----------



## PatsyCline

PewPew said:


> She has 4 UK patronages of her own (not jointly with H) that she’s left hanging. One has already expressed disappointment & concern that they will fall by the wayside with their patron permanently MIA.
> 
> A bit off topic, but it seems comical to me that both H & M are so attached to their titles and their SussexRoyal brand, but have only been to Sussex once since receiving their titles. I’d be so embarrassed, but H & M have a much higher threshold for shame, as evidenced by the clips of them independently being clueless and inappropriate when off script in public (H at Disney & M’s awkwardness in trying to insert herself in convos at events)


She hasn't left any of them 'hanging'. She can meet with them during the times she and Harry are in the UK.

And if there's something important, they do have flights every day leaving Canada for the UK.


----------



## slang

Jayne1 said:


> Love that -- and so true.
> 
> Yes, Ben's father was a rather disliked, former prime minister as I like to remind people.  lol  Ben is apparently a sweetheart though.  Guess you can't have two of a kind in a marriage.



“rather disliked” - love it!  
I know we can’t get political so all I’d say about him is as a taxpayer I’d appreciate him paying back the 2 million he took. That’s all.


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> So, the Frogmore cottage staff are being let go:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html
> 
> Amazing to me that they had all that taxpayer money spent on the remodel only to basically abandon it after rarely using it. Maybe because they were told that they'd have to pay rent on it going forward?  It's disgusting, truly.  All that money could have stayed in taxpayer hands and used for something truly useful like, oh I don't know, maybe to help women in distress or the unfortunate that we claim to care so much about?


If they kept the staff on. when the Sussex's weren't there, someone would be complaining about the waste of taxpayer funds.


----------



## mdcx

PatsyCline said:


> She hasn't left any of them 'hanging'. She can meet with them during the times she and Harry are in the UK.
> 
> And if there's something important, they do have flights every day leaving Canada for the UK.


I really don’t see Meghan doing this.


----------



## youngster

PatsyCline said:


> If they kept the staff on. when the Sussex's weren't there, someone would be complaining about the waste of taxpayer funds.



I have no idea if the staff were paid for by the taxpayers (doubt it) or out of Harry's allowance from Prince Charles which is somewhere around 2+ million pounds per year.  Maybe one of our British members knows for sure?

Letting them go, or letting them go back to other jobs at BP, might have been done by Harry if he didn't want to continue to pay for staff at a location that he planned to rarely stay.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> If they kept the staff on. when the Sussex's weren't there, someone would be complaining about the waste of taxpayer funds.


Yes.  True.  And that criticism would be very justified - nobody should be paying for the Sussexes to have staff after they have quit and moved away.  But it is too bad for the staff members who didn't know when they were hired that their employers weren't planning on keeping them employed for long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> And if there's something important, they do have flights every day leaving Canada for the UK.


Meghan and Harry commuting to work via transcontinental flights is going to make them even more of a laughingstock on environmental issues.  

The two of them are completely selfish and tone deaf when it comes to their environmental hypocrisy - this is why adults are stepping in and will likely tell them they have to give up their local patronages.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Meghan and Harry commuting to work via transcontinental flights is going to make them even more of a laughingstock on environmental issues.
> 
> The two of them are completely selfish and tone deaf when it comes to their environmental hypocrisy - this is why adults are stepping in and will likely tell them they have to give up their local patronages.


.. let's not also forget that a number of articles are saying that Meghan will never return to the UK!  I just can't see her going to various events there, showing her face after what she has done!  While I applaud the British folks and their class .. who knows when there might just be some booing (etc.) if she does show up???  She has made her bed, and it's not in the UK!


----------



## LibbyRuth

mdcx said:


> I suspect this will be accurate:
> View attachment 4641680


Here’s a question for anyone who may know how this works ... it this turns out to be true and they are barred from profiting off the Sussex Royal name, what enforcement power is there to block them? If the Queen says it’s not allowed, and sitting in Canada Harry and Meghan say “tough we’re doing it anyway and we’re going on Shark Tank to expand distribution in Canada and the US what can the Queen do about it?


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ve said from the beginning, it’s cursed and haunted.


This. It looks creepy AF. A house that old and full of that much history, you couldn't pay me to live in it or step foot inside the door.


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> She hasn't left any of them 'hanging'. She can meet with them during the times she and Harry are in the UK.
> 
> And if there's something important, they do have flights every day leaving Canada for the UK.



Again they can’t stay in Canada forever. Royals cannot live in Canada permanently so stop trying to make Canada happen. And I dont think she is being invited back to the UK anytime soon lol. 


Like stans pay attention.


----------



## mdcx

Meh-gan said:


> Again they can’t stay in Canada forever. Royals cannot live in Canada permanently so stop trying to make Canada happen. And I dont think she is being invited back to the UK anytime soon lol.
> 
> 
> Like stans pay attention.


It’s all rather convenient. 
Next thing, Meghan will be saying “as we can’t stay in Canada easily it’s best if we bunk off to LA. Toodles!”


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I have no idea if the staff were paid for by the taxpayers (doubt it) or out of Harry's allowance from Prince Charles which is somewhere around 2+ million pounds per year.  Maybe one of our British members knows for sure?
> 
> Letting them go, or letting them go back to other jobs at BP, might have been done by Harry if he didn't want to continue to pay for staff at a location that he planned to rarely stay.



So if they let the staff go, where is he camping out?  He must not be staying there.  Sleepover at Will's house?  Ummm, guess not.


----------



## mdcx

gracekelly said:


> So if they let the staff go, where is he camping out?  He must not be staying there.  Sleepover at Will's house?  Ummm, guess not.


Soho House?


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> This. It looks creepy AF. A house that old and full of that much history, you couldn't pay me to live in it or step foot inside the door.



It always looked like a prison or a post office to me.  Not attractive in the least.  It didn't need to be back in the day as it was the servant's quarters.  Since it is a protected building at this point, I doubt that anyone would be allowed to change the look of it very much or at all.


----------



## Meh-gan

mdcx said:


> It’s all rather convenient.
> Next thing, Meghan will be saying “as we can’t stay in Canada easily it’s best if we bunk off to LA. Toodles!”


In Canada they are literally only allowed to represent the queen on a visit they are not allowed to do royal crap and be royal while living in Canada. It’s against our constitution. And if they wanted to immigrate for real they can’t hold titles.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I have no idea if the staff were paid for by the taxpayers (doubt it) or out of Harry's allowance from Prince Charles which is somewhere around 2+ million pounds per year.  Maybe one of our British members knows for sure?
> 
> Letting them go, or letting them go back to other jobs at BP, might have been done by Harry if he didn't want to continue to pay for staff at a location that he planned to rarely stay.


Yes, I think the staff came from Windsor or BP, and they just went back and were reabsorbed into the household staff.  They probably haven't been in the house for 6 weeks and someone just went over to flush the toilets and look around.  The   popular opinion was that the Sussex never really lived there anyway.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Soho House?



Good guess.

Back in the day, a gentlemen would stay at his club.


----------



## jcnc

zinacef said:


> Strange  is we’ve never heard from dearest Serena who she flew  across the pond to watch a game for,  these are MM trying times, where are the defense tweets.  What about the 8 friends from Suits that attended her wedding?  Crickets?  What about the guy that played her daddy on tv who has given interviews and such before?  Nobody wants to get involve on her trying times. Please at least 1 of them show up for her,  paging Priyanka,  this is a great moment for you to shine as great support friend , you might need MM for your 4 renewal of vows this year. Where’s everybody?


Off topic but when Priyanka got married, i thought her marriage would go for a toss based on how fast they moved and the over the top wedding.. but now i think its her friend meghan who is in a difficult place - relationship wise.


----------



## jcnc

rose60610 said:


> He may have to if the Queen strips her of her title so she can still sell merch under #WhateverRoyal.


Or maybe Suss ex-royal ​


----------



## gracekelly

jcnc said:


> Off topic but when Priyanka got married, i thought her marriage would go for a toss based on how fast they moved and the over the top wedding.. but now i think its her friend meghan who is in a difficult place - relationship wise.


If the gossip sites are to be believed, the  Priyanka /Jonas marriage was a contract.  If so, they they are honest with each other and know what to expect and how long it will last.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Lounorada said:


> This. It looks creepy AF. A house that old and full of that much history, you couldn't pay me to live in it or step foot inside the door.


Ha, just read it was built in 1610 so yup, needed some renovations.


----------



## gracekelly

jcnc said:


> Or maybe Suss ex-royal ​



How scary.  An entire product line of Suss ex-royal tee shirts, sweat shirts, mugs.............................


----------



## kissmysass

I dont know I think her stans may be right but I hope I am wrong.

Rachel seems very headstrong and adamant that everything will go her way or no way at all. She is very skilled in manipulation and working the press to her liking. See what she did at Justice For Girls. I read other places that she is "showing herself to be useful in Canada." People are seeing her as the damsel in distress even tho she caused 50 percent of it.

People like us see her for what she really is but others may see her as the victim.

She is Harry's wife and Harry said from the get go what ever she wants she gets. I am thinking they will make it so Canadians have to foot the bill for their lifestyle. They will get to keep everything they desire. 

Royals can not stay in Canada we may know this but do you think she/they care? They are buddies with the person that can make it work in their favour.

Like it or not this woman is going to get all of wishes granted because she/they are literally steps ahead of the firm.


----------



## V0N1B2

PewPew said:


> You are correct & I had already requested mods to remove my earlier post for incorrect information, which came from a local morning show discussion in the US today in which they incorrectly identified her as Brian Mulroney’s daughter & conflated the experiences of Jessica and her husband.
> 
> It’s such an obvious & avoidable error that I’m horrified at the lack of fact checking, as well as my own ignorance, which I why I immediately asked the mods to remove my post when I read more about her. I had also posted in this thread to admit my mistake and thank other posters for correcting me. I’ve learned a valuable lesson regarding how even the most basic facts can be misrepresented so grotesquely by shows with an agenda, particularly one with an entertainment slant. Again, my sincerest apologies to anyone reading my initial post!


Aww, no big deal. 
When I first heard about her I thought she was Brian M’s daughter. They were droning on about her styling MM so I assumed she was Ben’s sister - I mean she kinda almost looked like him about 3-4 faces ago.


----------



## Lounorada

Mrs.Z said:


> Ha, just read it was built in 1610 so yup, needed some renovations.


Over 400 years old... that's a no thanks from me


----------



## youngster

jcnc said:


> Or maybe *Suss ex-royal* ​



OK. This is brilliant!  Well done @jcnc


----------



## gracekelly

kissmysass said:


> I dont know I think her stans may be right but I hope I am wrong.
> 
> Rachel seems very headstrong and adamant that everything will go her way or no way at all. She is very skilled in manipulation and working the press to her liking. See what she did at Justice For Girls. I read other places that she is "showing herself to be useful in Canada." People are seeing her as the damsel in distress even tho she caused 50 percent of it.
> 
> People like us see her for what she really is but others may see her as the victim.
> 
> She is Harry's wife and Harry said from the get go what ever she wants she gets. I am thinking they will make it so Canadians have to foot the bill for their lifestyle. They will get to keep everything they desire.
> 
> Royals can not stay in Canada we may know this but do you think she/they care? They are buddies with the person that can make it work in their favour.
> 
> Like it or not this woman is going to get all of wishes granted because she/they are literally steps ahead of the firm.



Ultimately, Trudeau is a politician.  He isn't going to do them a favor like that if the public outcry against them is strong.  They can stay 3 months and after that, they have to leave.

How long with the "friend" with the mansion allow them to stay before it looks like they are squatters?


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Over 400 years old... that's a no thanks from me



I bet it needed those air fresheners that Meghan wanted sprayed in the Chapel prior to the wedding.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> It always looked like a prison or a post office to me.  Not attractive in the least.  It didn't need to be back in the day as it was the servant's quarters.  Since it is a protected building at this point, I doubt that anyone would be allowed to change the look of it very much or at all.


Yeah it definitely looks like a working building, not a homely looking house

Also, I too would of thought with it being a protected building they couldn't really do much work to it, especially the outside. I'd love to see what changes have been done that cost millions of pounds. 

H&M could have pitched to get a feature in Architectural Digest to show of the finished product, if they bothered to stick around in the UK.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> I bet it needed those air fresheners that Meghan wanted sprayed in the Chapel prior to the wedding.


 Electric air fresheners in every socket in the house.


----------



## Sophisticatted

mdcx said:


> It’s all rather convenient.
> Next thing, Meghan will be saying “as we can’t stay in Canada easily it’s best if we bunk off to LA. Toodles!”



Except she needs the Queen’s permission to move Archie around, and I doubt the Queen will let her take him to L.A.

My best guess is three months in Canada and then she will have to return Archie to Great Britain.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Good guess.
> 
> Back in the day, a gentlemen would stay at his club.


Eugenie just moved out of St James , her old apt is vacant


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Eugenie just moved out of St James , her old apt is vacant



Great!  He can move the furniture over there and the copper bathtub.  The floating yoga floor will have to stay put.

Entirely possible that Frogmore will be offered to one of the York girls.


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> Except she needs the Queen’s permission to move Archie around, and I doubt the Queen will let her take him to L.A.
> 
> My best guess is three months in Canada and then she will have to return Archie to Great Britain.


Yeah come to think , Archie must be a U.K. citizen only ? Could not possibly be a US citizen yet since not born in USA and prolly M has not asked ***** to expedite USA citizenship ...
Does a U.K. citizen need a visa for a long term stay in Canada ? 
M has not been in the U.K. long enough for citizenship, and don’t know if an American needs a visa for a long term stay in Canada


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> Over 400 years old... that's a no thanks from me


HA .. and see those of us who are from back East, heck .. 1600's? .. that's not so old!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Great!  He can move the furniture over there and the copper bathtub.  The floating yoga floor will have to stay put.
> 
> Entirely possible that Frogmore will be offered to one of the York girls.


Frogmore has its good and bad points , Andrew is nearby but London is an hour away , Eugenie has a place at Kensington Palace now and but can prolly stay with her dad if she wants to go to the country, or if he is gone to His main house in Switzerland


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Yeah come to think , Archie must be a U.K. citizen only ? Could not possibly be a US citizen yet since not born in USA and prolly M has not asked ***** to expedite USA citizenship ...
> Does a U.K. citizen need a visa for a long term stay in Canada ?
> M has not been in the U.K. long enough for citizenship, and don’t know if an American needs a visa for a long term stay in Canada


 Archie has dual citizenship.  All they had to do was go to the Embassy or Consulate and show her US passport and his birth cert and he could get a US  passport

Yes, if you are planning to emigrate to Canada you need to apply for residence papers.  They are on a 3  month visiting visa.  Also if they wanted to work in Canada, they are rules for that too.


----------



## Meh-gan

kissmysass said:


> I dont know I think her stans may be right but I hope I am wrong.
> 
> Rachel seems very headstrong and adamant that everything will go her way or no way at all. She is very skilled in manipulation and working the press to her liking. See what she did at Justice For Girls. I read other places that she is "showing herself to be useful in Canada." People are seeing her as the damsel in distress even tho she caused 50 percent of it.
> 
> People like us see her for what she really is but others may see her as the victim.
> 
> She is Harry's wife and Harry said from the get go what ever she wants she gets. I am thinking they will make it so Canadians have to foot the bill for their lifestyle. They will get to keep everything they desire.
> 
> Royals can not stay in Canada we may know this but do you think she/they care? They are buddies with the person that can make it work in their favour.
> 
> Like it or not this woman is going to get all of wishes granted because she/they are literally steps ahead of the firm.


Trudeau can’t decide this on his own and it would be so bad for him politically. Canada outside of Toronto & Vancouver is basically all Old rural conservative white dudes who don’t give an eff about what Meghan Markle wears and don’t want to pay carbon tax to save the environment let alone A royals tax. And Quebec would lose their sh*t over a British royal being supported in Canada. And Trudeau supports Quebec in everything. No way will that province allow them to stay full time with titles. They won’t even let civil servants wear burkas. 

We have a government he has to answer to and royals living here with titles etc is against our constitution. He can’t just invite his friend’s to come stay forever. And her doing duchess work that is not representing the queen isn’t allowed under our laws. She isn’t even British so she can’t get any special treatment or consideration either. She can do this for now all she wants but our government and the queen wont allow her to fawn around as a duchess in canada forever. She’s going to care a lot when Canada strips her titles.


----------



## gracekelly

Meh-gan said:


> Trudeau can’t decide this on his own and it would be so bad for him politically. Canada outside of Toronto & Vancouver is basically all Old rural conservative white dudes who don’t give an eff about what Meghan Markle wears and don’t want to pay carbon tax to save the environment let alone A royals tax. And Quebec would lose their sh*t over a British royal being supported in Canada. And Trudeau supports Quebec in everything. No way will that province allow them to stay full time with titles. They won’t even let civil servants wear burkas.
> 
> We have a government he has to answer to and royals living here with titles etc is against our constitution. He can’t just invite his friend’s to come stay forever. And her doing duchess work that is not representing the queen isn’t allowed under our laws. She isn’t even British so she can’t get any special treatment or consideration either. She can do this for now all she wants but our government and the queen wont allow her to fawn around as a duchess in canada forever. She’s going to care a lot when Canada strips her titles.


Wonderful post.  Someone needs to explain this to Meghan.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Archie has dual citizenship.  All they had to do was go to the Embassy or Consulate and show her US passport and his birth cert and he could get a US  passport
> 
> Yes, if you are planning to emigrate to Canada you need to apply for residence papers.  They are on a 3  month visiting visa.  Also if they wanted to work in Canada, they are rules for that too.


I did not know about dual citizenship , mea culpa


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> Trudeau can’t decide this on his own and it would be so bad for him politically. Canada outside of Toronto & Vancouver is basically all Old rural conservative white dudes who don’t give an eff about what Meghan Markle wears and don’t want to pay carbon tax to save the environment let alone A royals tax. And Quebec would lose their sh*t over a British royal being supported in Canada. And Trudeau supports Quebec in everything. No way will that province allow them to stay full time with titles. They won’t even let civil servants wear burkas.
> 
> We have a government he has to answer to and royals living here with titles etc is against our constitution. He can’t just invite his friend’s to come stay forever. And her doing duchess work that is not representing the queen isn’t allowed under our laws. She isn’t even British so she can’t get any special treatment or consideration either. She can do this for now all she wants but our government and the queen wont allow her to fawn around as a duchess in canada forever. She’s going to care a lot when Canada strips her titles.


SO .. their whole 'plan' to utilize their Royal Tiles but yet live in Canada for part of the year (or whatever) .. well, then .. in fact, they won't be able to do so???  [I'm sure hoping .. but figured I would ask!}  Hence, the reason for them to have to also reside in the UK?  So, as much as she had her Hollywood lawyers lined up, it almost sounds as though this is not fully vetted (I guess that's what you get for hiring Hollywood attorneys as opposed to those knowledgeable in International Law)!  

So, let's say that they do have to go back to the UK for a bit; do we really think Meggie-sleggie will go back?  My guess .. she'll de-camp to LA .. you know, to "visit" family (what's left of it)!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Archie has dual citizenship.  All they had to do was go to the Embassy or Consulate and show her US passport and his birth cert and he could get a US  passport
> 
> Yes, if you are planning to emigrate to Canada you need to apply for residence papers.  They are on a 3  month visiting visa.  Also if they wanted to work in Canada, they are rules for that too.


Many said he does have dual citizenship - then I looked it up - this seems to suggest both parents must be us citizens and a residence is required - clip from us govt site - I dunno for certain


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> SO .. their whole 'plan' to utilize their Royal Tiles but yet live in Canada for part of the year (or whatever) .. well, then .. in fact, they won't be able to do so???  [I'm sure hoping .. but figured I would ask!}  Hence, the reason for them to have to also reside in the UK?  So, as much as she had her Hollywood lawyers lined up, it almost sounds as though this is not fully vetted (I guess that's what you get for hiring Hollywood attorneys as opposed to those knowledgeable in International Law)!
> 
> So, let's say that they do have to go back to the UK for a bit; do we really think Meggie-sleggie will go back?  My guess .. she'll de-camp to LA .. you know, to "visit" family (what's left of it)!


I mean they can plan all they want to use their titles etc but they are not legally allowed to have them if they want to become citizens of Canada for example. 

And yes they can only live here for so long as visitors but they can’t have permanent residence here and can’t work in Canada etc. The queen will sort this all out with both Canadian and British governments I’m sure.


----------



## mdcx

So, isn’t their three months as visitors to Canada almost up then?
They arrived start of November was it?


----------



## V0N1B2

gracekelly said:


> Ultimately, Trudeau is a politician.  He isn't going to do them a favor like that if the public outcry against them is strong....


With a minority government, I might add. 
Hey! now *that’s* where good ol’ Harry can come in handy... as Governor General, he can bang his gavel and dissolve parliament if and when necessary


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Meghan looks good, and I hope she and Harry find what they're looking for. Can't help but notice Harry wore a proper suit......thankfully.


----------



## momtok

marietouchet said:


> Many said he does have dual citizenship - then I looked it up - this seems to suggest both parents must be us citizens and a residence is required - clip from us govt site - I dunno for certain



You're clear if at least one parent was a US citizen.  Same is true for adoption of overseas children (after ******* signed a law for that latter one during his presidency).  You might have to go through the red tape of filling out paperwork to obtain official naturalization papers (since the birth certificate lists out-of-country as place of birth), but it's merely a red-tape formality. In other words, it might be filed under the 'naturalization' process, but it's an automatic approval.  
Been there, done that.


----------



## A1aGypsy

They can get special dispensation from the Canadian government to stay. I have no doubt they will be permitted to do so if the Queen requests it given that we are part of the Commonwealth.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

marietouchet said:


> Many said he does have dual citizenship - then I looked it up - this seems to suggest both parents must be us citizens and a residence is required - clip from us govt site - I dunno for certain


That might be outdated. This is the official, government website:  https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-parents
Bottom line, Archie is a dual because Meghan never changed her citizenship, she's a full-on American, making the child one too. You just need one parent who is a citizen. MM just needs to file paperwork for a passport - it's something she probably has done. Super easy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, I’m starting to worry that Harry is right, that she gets what she wants.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## shiba

A1aGypsy said:


> They can get special dispensation from the Canadian government to stay. I have no doubt they will be permitted to do so if the Queen requests it given that we are part of the Commonwealth.



If this is the case, I hope that the 180 day tax law comes into effect. They would both be taxed on worldwide earnings at Canadian tax rates so at least they might cover the security costs. Not going to do the math for each bracket, but essentially 33% Federal tax plus 16.8% for BC provincial tax, so 49.8% - I wonder how much they will love Canada after that. Oh right, they don't earn income....they have a foundation.


----------



## xobellavidaxo

kissmysass said:


> I dont know I think her stans may be right but I hope I am wrong.
> 
> Rachel seems very headstrong and adamant that everything will go her way or no way at all. She is very skilled in manipulation and working the press to her liking. See what she did at Justice For Girls. I read other places that she is "showing herself to be useful in Canada." People are seeing her as the damsel in distress even tho she caused 50 percent of it.
> 
> People like us see her for what she really is but others may see her as the victim.
> 
> She is Harry's wife and Harry said from the get go what ever she wants she gets. I am thinking they will make it so Canadians have to foot the bill for their lifestyle. They will get to keep everything they desire.
> 
> Royals can not stay in Canada we may know this but do you think she/they care? They are buddies with the person that can make it work in their favour.
> 
> Like it or not this woman is going to get all of wishes granted because she/they are literally steps ahead of the firm.



This irks me to no end. She was a NObody when she married Harry. NO one knew who she was, D-List actress. She played up her “philanthropy” while she was engaged because she wanted to be the next Diana but what is actually real? What has she ever really done besides write a blog and act in Suits? She married a prince, 6th in line, they decided they didn’t want their royal duties anymore so now she’s living in Canada and visiting charities? which is what she would probably be doing in the UK? no? What exactly is the purpose of her visits? To say hi? Does her presence raise awareness? If she wanted privacy and to get away from the toxic royal environment why isn’t she home with Archie? That poor baby is never seen unless it’s a “photo op”.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> Yeah come to think , Archie must be a U.K. citizen only ? Could not possibly be a US citizen yet since not born in USA and prolly M has not asked ***** to expedite USA citizenship ...
> Does a U.K. citizen need a visa for a long term stay in Canada ?
> M has not been in the U.K. long enough for citizenship, and don’t know if an American needs a visa for a long term stay in Canada



If the Duke and Duchess must leave Canada, and don't wish to go to the U.S. or back to England, then where?  Oh!  How about the *British* Virgin Islands?  They're part of the Commonwealth. There are enough British Commonwealth  countries to play musical chairs on until "the agreement" is reached.  Meggie, pack your bikini! Don't forget Meal Ticket, doh! I mean, ARCHIE!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Many said he does have dual citizenship - then I looked it up - this seems to suggest both parents must be us citizens and a residence is required - clip from us govt site - I dunno for certain



 I had a friend who had a Canadian father and a US mother and she had dual citizenship and she was born in Toronto.


----------



## pukasonqo

rose60610 said:


> If the Duke and Duchess must leave Canada, and don't wish to go to the U.S. or back to England, then where?  Oh!  How about the *British* Virgin Islands?  They're part of the Commonwealth. There are enough British Commonwealth  countries to play musical chairs on until "the agreement" is reached.  Meggie, pack your bikini! Don't forget Meal Ticket, doh! I mean, ARCHIE!



Don’t even think of sending them to Oz!


----------



## rose60610

pukasonqo said:


> Don’t even think of sending them to Oz!



What if you're too late?  Stock up on those conch fritters and rum punch!  Yum!  They're reason enough to relocate to OZ!


----------



## Sophisticatted

I don’t think the Queen would allow it.  I think Meghan needs her permission to move Archie about.  I think if she COULD be in L.A. right now, she would be in L.A. right now.  

I think she’s so ridiculous for thinking the British monarchy was a mere _stepping stone_ in her grand, ambitious plan.  To what, exactly?!?!?


----------



## Meh-gan

A1aGypsy said:


> They can get special dispensation from the Canadian government to stay. I have no doubt they will be permitted to do so if the Queen requests it given that we are part of the Commonwealth.



Why would the queen request it? She can’t just pawn them off on Canada and she won’t. She can’t anyway. Commonwealth doesn’t mean the queen can do what she wants - she needs the government in Britain even to approve most things. It’s also against our constitution and citizens CANNOT have titles. 

And the government in Canada can’t grant them dispensation. The immigration minister could grant them residency based on compassionate grounds but they won’t because the uproar will be insane. 

There are a bunch of articles and information on all of this out there to look up. Canada is a completely separate country the commonwealth inclusion doesn’t give British royals any rights to just squat in Canada. 

There are so many factors that would make it a disaster for Trudeau to grant them residency here. Which he can’t even do on his own without going through government approvals.


----------



## V0N1B2

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That might be outdated. This is the official, government website:  https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-parents
> Bottom line, Archie is a dual because Meghan never changed her citizenship, she's a full-on American, making the child one too. You just need one parent who is a citizen. MM just needs to file paperwork for a passport - it's something she probably has done. Super easy.


I know nothing of US laws but I believe there is some sort of residency requirement. I thought Meghan was living in Toronto nine months of the year for seven years. Would that fulfill her US physical presence requirements, I wonder?


----------



## queennadine

I wonder if her leaving Canada for those few days reset the ‘clock’ on her visitor visa?
I know my grandma (who was German) could only be here in the U.S. on vacation for 6 months at a time. She could have left the country for a day, though, and then come back and started another 6 months.
But then that doesn’t explain why Archie was left...so who knows!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

V0N1B2 said:


> I know nothing of US laws but I believe there is some sort of residency requirement. I thought Meghan was living in Toronto nine months of the year for seven years. Would that fulfill her US physical presence requirements, I wonder?


It's so easy, she totally meets it. It's 5 years of non-consecutive US residency. Archie is US/UK.


----------



## TC1

kissmysass said:


> I dont know I think her stans may be right but I hope I am wrong.
> 
> Rachel seems very headstrong and adamant that everything will go her way or no way at all. She is very skilled in manipulation and working the press to her liking. See what she did at Justice For Girls. I read other places that she is "showing herself to be useful in Canada." People are seeing her as the damsel in distress even tho she caused 50 percent of it.
> 
> People like us see her for what she really is but others may see her as the victim.
> 
> She is Harry's wife and Harry said from the get go what ever she wants she gets. I am thinking they will make it so Canadians have to foot the bill for their lifestyle. They will get to keep everything they desire.
> 
> Royals can not stay in Canada we may know this but do you think she/they care? They are buddies with the person that can make it work in their favour.
> 
> Like it or not this woman is going to get all of wishes granted because she/they are literally steps ahead of the firm.


Do you refer to Meghan as Rachel because you think she's still in character from Suits?


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> I know nothing of US laws but I believe there is some sort of residency requirement. I thought Meghan was living in Toronto nine months of the year for seven years. Would that fulfill her US physical presence requirements, I wonder?


I read that because she worked in Canada, that would give her an advantage to seek permanent resident status.  However, Harry was considered to old and had no work skills or education and he wouldn't qualify.  A country wants a productive and contributing citizen for resident status.  What is he going to do?  Open a soccer field?


----------



## PatsyCline

shiba said:


> If this is the case, I hope that the 180 day tax law comes into effect. They would both be taxed on worldwide earnings at Canadian tax rates so at least they might cover the security costs. Not going to do the math for each bracket, but essentially 33% Federal tax plus 16.8% for BC provincial tax, so 49.8% - I wonder how much they will love Canada after that. Oh right, they don't earn income....they have a foundation.


You’re assuming they have taxable income to tax. Money given to them from Charles probably isn’t taxable, but money from investments would.


----------



## kissmysass

Meh-gan said:


> Trudeau can’t decide this on his own and it would be so bad for him politically. Canada outside of Toronto & Vancouver is basically all Old rural conservative white dudes who don’t give an eff about what Meghan Markle wears and don’t want to pay carbon tax to save the environment let alone A royals tax. And Quebec would lose their sh*t over a British royal being supported in Canada. And Trudeau supports Quebec in everything. No way will that province allow them to stay full time with titles. They won’t even let civil servants wear burkas.
> 
> We have a government he has to answer to and royals living here with titles etc is against our constitution. He can’t just invite his friend’s to come stay forever. And her doing duchess work that is not representing the queen isn’t allowed under our laws. She isn’t even British so she can’t get any special treatment or consideration either. She can do this for now all she wants but our government and the queen wont allow her to fawn around as a duchess in canada forever. She’s going to care a lot when Canada strips her titles.



I fully agree with this post. I just hope Justin knows this and does not pull rank. Giving them everything they ask for will just make their head bigger and do we really need it as big as it is now?? I am really hoping they dont get what they want out of Canada. It would be a bad look.



xobellavidaxo said:


> This irks me to no end. She was a NObody when she married Harry. NO one knew who she was, D-List actress. She played up her “philanthropy” while she was engaged because she wanted to be the next Diana but what is actually real? What has she ever really done besides write a blog and act in Suits? She married a prince, 6th in line, they decided they didn’t want their royal duties anymore so now she’s living in Canada and visiting charities? which is what she would probably be doing in the UK? no? What exactly is the purpose of her visits? To say hi? Does her presence raise awareness? If she wanted privacy and to get away from the toxic royal environment why isn’t she home with Archie? That poor baby is never seen unless it’s a “photo op”.


The way she and other celebrities work is a "me" mentality. They do not care about the causes in front of them just how it will look to people who think they can do wrong seeing them doing something "selfless" but it is anything but. They majority of celebs are so transparent and self absorbed and it is sad. Her going to these charities show nothing but "look at I may have quit charities in the UK but I am all for them in Canada because they dont have press questioning my every move" rightfully so. I think she thinks as long as the people that come to bat for me can see this I dont care for those who can see right through. I truly hate referring to children as this; but Archie is nothing but a sealed deal and a connections to money and fame for life. People would view her as not being home with Archie because she is a working mother and that's fair. I just hope she is being attentive to him because he is the only innocent party.

Also it is a smack in the face to the firm and the fact that they are seeming to allow her to make them look like clowns is sad to think/see.


TC1 said:


> Do you refer to Meghan as Rachel because you think she's still in character from Suits?



Lol no I call her Rachel because that's her first and sometimes I refer to Harry as Henry if it's too much I can just call them Meghan and Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## shiba

shiba said:


> If this is the case, I hope that the 180 day tax law comes into effect. They would both be taxed on worldwide earnings at Canadian tax rates so at least they might cover the security costs. Not going to do the math for each bracket, but essentially 33% Federal tax plus 16.8% for BC provincial tax, so 49.8% - I wonder how much they will love Canada after that. _Oh right, they don't earn income....they have a foundation._





PatsyCline said:


> You’re assuming they have taxable income to tax. Money given to them from Charles probably isn’t taxable, but money from investments would.



That was sarcasm.


----------



## tiktok

queennadine said:


> I wonder if her leaving Canada for those few days reset the ‘clock’ on her visitor visa?
> I know my grandma (who was German) could only be here in the U.S. on vacation for 6 months at a time. She could have left the country for a day, though, and then come back and started another 6 months.
> But then that doesn’t explain why Archie was left...so who knows!



It does reset the clock. 
Also to other people’s comments, they don’t need work authorization - as visitors they can work on a business based outside of Canada, i.e. if their business is US-based they can freely operate it as visitors in Canada. If they exit and re-enter every 3 months or whatever the visit limitation is they’re good. How they sign Archie up for school later on or what taxes they pay are different and more difficult questions, but in the foreseeable future theoretically they can continue to “visit” Canada.


----------



## mdcx

TC1 said:


> Do you refer to Meghan as Rachel because you think she's still in character from Suits?


Her legal name is Rachel Meghan Markle, but she goes by Meghan.
Just a coincidence that her character on ‘Suits’ was named Rachel, I believe.


----------



## mdcx

Can we say “smug”? She certainly seems to have made a rapid recovery from all of her troubles...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Canadian-airport-Land-Rover-pick-friend.html




ETA I would not be surprised if this “friend” is an employee of sorts - stylist, life coach etc.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Can we say “smug”? She certainly seems to have made a rapid recovery from all of her troubles...
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Canadian-airport-Land-Rover-pick-friend.html
> 
> View attachment 4641918


The camera just happened to be perfectly positioned. Sure.


----------



## byzina

Sophisticatted said:


> Except she needs the Queen’s permission to move Archie around, and I doubt the Queen will let her take him to L.A.
> 
> My best guess is three months in Canada and then she will have to return Archie to Great Britain.



Well, the Queen will probably try to avoid the scandal of separating the mother and her child.



lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, I’m starting to worry that Harry is right, that she gets what she wants.



She is nearly 40, she loves to be rich, famous and free. I think she is quite used to living her way. It's like when you buy some expensive fancy item. The first couple of weeks you feel really happy about it and try to be careful with it. But you can't be excited forever. And soon you hardly pay any attention to it. I don't want to say that Meghan doesn't love Harry, but she wouldn't have even looked at him, if he wasn't a prince or something. Now she will do everything her way, Harry can join or go. She doesn't act too sharply, but clearly his interests are not in her focus.

She looks so much happier in her Canadian photos (or US baby-shower stay), it'm nearly 100% sure, she will never come back. It's her only life.


----------



## mdcx

So, the friend is her “pilates guru”. No doubt Megs paid to fly her in for some essential private pilates sessions.
Living that rich socialite life which I’m sure she feels she deserves!


----------



## Chagall

I think she has flown the coop as far as the UK is concerned. I honestly don’t know what’s going to happen with Harry but it doesn’t look promising. She seems disinterested in baby Archie. Why is she not relocating to California. She is hanging out in the most Americanized parts of Canada. She spent part of several years working here but also lived a lot in the US. Is there some reason she’s not returning to  to her roots, and Archies grandmother?


----------



## Sharont2305

Lounorada said:


> This. It looks creepy AF. A house that old and full of that much history, you couldn't pay me to live in it or step foot inside the door.


Lol, a lot of our houses are that old, and older. A friend of mine lives in a house built in 1751.


----------



## Grande Latte

PatsyCline said:


> You’re assuming they have taxable income to tax. Money given to them from Charles probably isn’t taxable, but money from investments would.



Gift money over a certain amount is "taxable. In the US if over $15,000 it is taxable. Maybe Canada is different. Or the accountants act creative and claim it as something else.


----------



## Grande Latte

I think too many people see through her transparent motives, it'll be hard for her to "attain" the type of lifestyle she aspires to.

She uses Harry and she's using Archie like a prop. They are human beings but seem to mean very little to her.


----------



## Roxanna

She probably got bored of Archie.  It was often emphasized that her disaffection  with UK started after Archie was born. So I guess it is fair to assume she is not very much interested in him too, besides his potential as her meal ticket.  That is really sad  indeed.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, a lot of our houses are that old, and older. A friend of mine lives in a house built in 1751.


A lot of houses in Europe are centuries old. In harsh climates like ours buildings don’t last that long. Places of 49 years are demolished and replaced. It’s sad.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> A lot of houses in Europe are centuries old. In harsh climates like ours buildings don’t last that long. Places of 49 years are demolished and replaced. It’s sad.


Oh I agree, same here ( UK) in some cases, houses built in the 60s onwards are awful. Give me old house any day.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh I agree, same here ( UK) in some cases, houses built in the 60s onwards are awful. Give me old house any day.


Yep we live in such a throw away society nothing is made to last anymore. I love old houses.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## byzina

Roxanna said:


> She probably got bored of Archie.  It was often emphasized that her disaffection  with UK started after Archie was born. So I guess it is fair to assume she is not very much interested in him too, besides his potential as her meal ticket.  That is really sad  indeed.



I guess that's just because now having a child she feels much more confident to announce Harry and the family her terms. She knew no one would listen to her without a baby.


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if MM was not allowed to take clothes purchased as Duchess of Sussex with her on her “trip” to Canada. Or perhaps she chose to leave them all behind? Seems like she is only wearing clothes purchased pre-Harry.


----------



## myown

bag-mania said:


> Do we know if Harry actually got any voiceover work for Meghan? The video showed his awkward cornering of Bob Iger but just because the blindsided exec said "sure" doesn't mean it will actually happen.


But it’s not like that royals aren’t allowed to do things like that. 
also that one rumor they would not be allowed to have a IG account in wrong. Look at Eugenie for example. i think for that work thing she would need the play of the queen and wouldn’t do a movie or so, but little charity project?


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> .. let's not also forget that a number of articles are saying that Meghan will never return to the UK!


the articles say she won’t return to live. I read none that say she will never actually return.


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> I wonder if MM was not allowed to take clothes purchased as Duchess of Sussex with her on her “trip” to Canada. Or perhaps she chose to leave them all behind? Seems like she is only wearing clothes purchased pre-Harry.
> View attachment 4641984


Maybe she had no warm clothes or need to wear them in UK. It’s colder in Canada than in UK. She is prob happy to have anything that warm, even if it’s „old“


----------



## myown

mdcx said:


> So, isn’t their three months as visitors to Canada almost up then?
> They arrived start of November was it?


Was that ever confirmed in any way? the Media assumed they went straight at the beginning of their vacation, but then there have been rumors that they spent thanksgiving in uk.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> Yep we live in such a throw away society nothing is made to last anymore. I love old houses.


I love them too, I have a lot of original paperwork (handwritten on vellum) that came with mine.  Copies of wills, old plans etc.  It’s really interesting to read about the people that owned it before me.  I’ll pass it all on to the next owner eventually.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> I love them too, I have a lot of original paperwork (handwritten on vellum) that came with mine.  Copies of wills, old plans etc.  It’s really interesting to read about the people that owned it before me.  I’ll pass it all on to the next owner eventually.


What a wonderful story. It must be so nice to have all the information on the history of your old home. Unfortunately a lot of old homes are not kept up and get to a state that they are beyond repair you have to gut them completely and only preserve the shell.


----------



## JolieS

Here is an editorial from the Toronto Globe & Mail, Canada’s leading newspaper, about why they can’t stay in Canada
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...why-members-of-the-royal-family-cant-live-in/


----------



## Sharont2305

It's crossed my mind, what will she do if either the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh passes away anytime soon? Will she attend?


----------



## Deleted 698298

I really tried to cut them some slack but “flying a friend over”, frequent flying long hauls (both of them) and then preaching about climate catastrophe...this is too FU! All those celebs, including Di Caprio, who fly frequently should just go jump of a cliff and we would see carbon imprint reduction straight away


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Clearblueskies said:


> I sincerely hope so.  The idea of them hanging on to the titles to exploit them for money whilst bad mouthing the RF on tacky chat shows or via “royal” social media accounts, sticks in my throat.



Especially with their/her PR going about things as they are. It surely just adds extra flames to the fire. They can't possibly say they'll behave in the future and not disrepute the BRF if they're running things as they are now.


----------



## Meh-gan

Consumer2much said:


> I really tried to cut them some slack but “flying a friend over”, frequent flying long hauls (both of them) and then preaching about climate catastrophe...this is too FU! All those celebs, including Di Caprio, who fly frequently should just go jump of a cliff and we would see carbon imprint reduction straight away


And she had to personally drive to the airport to pick up her fitness instructor like no. 

She must also be tipping off the paps about her whereabouts too. 

I thought they wanted no press, live low key. Mmmhmm.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meh-gan said:


> Why would the queen request it? She can’t just pawn them off on Canada and she won’t. She can’t anyway. Commonwealth doesn’t mean the queen can do what she wants - she needs the government in Britain even to approve most things. It’s also against our constitution and citizens CANNOT have titles.
> 
> And the government in Canada can’t grant them dispensation. The immigration minister could grant them residency based on compassionate grounds but they won’t because the uproar will be insane.
> 
> There are a bunch of articles and information on all of this out there to look up. Canada is a completely separate country the commonwealth inclusion doesn’t give British royals any rights to just squat in Canada.
> 
> There are so many factors that would make it a disaster for Trudeau to grant them residency here. Which he can’t even do on his own without going through government approvals.



I don’t need to read articles, I understand how it works.  I didn’t say citizenship, I said to stay. And the Immigration Minister is part of the government.  I never said the PMO’s office would be granting the approval (although he can certainly direct his ministers)

The Queen has said she wants to assist them, who knows what she will do. Banishing them to another country for a while might be her end game.  It will be interesting to watch this play out from a foreign relations point of view.


----------



## mdcx

I’ve read a few comments that MM must be tipping off Splash photo agency, and that there are really not that many paps just hanging around Vancouver.
Maybe one staged photo op a day is her new PR strategy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Yikes. So instead of staying at Frogmore, which is secluded and protected, she’s making daily pap strolls. 

Privacy, indeed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> It's crossed my mind, what will she do if either the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh passes away anytime soon? Will she attend?



she would *have* to go, don’t you think?


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> she would *have* to go, don’t you think?


I think it's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> It's crossed my mind, what will she do if either the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh passes away anytime soon? Will she attend?


Our family discussed this as well. I think 'events' like that are a must-go for her. Weddings, funerals, Christening - close family events. I can't see her missing a chance to be there anyway - from a historical perspective she'd want in on those pictures.


----------



## Chagall

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t need to read articles, I understand how it works.  I didn’t say citizenship, I said to stay. And the Immigration Minister is part of the government.  I never said the PMO’s office would be granting the approval (although he can certainly direct his ministers)
> 
> The Queen has said she wants to assist them, who knows what she will do. Banishing them to another country for a while might be her end game.  It will be interesting to watch this play out from a foreign relations point of view.


The queen is a real tough cookie. As everyone keeps saying, she plays chess not checkers. If I were H and M I would be very nervous. They  may have underestimated her because of her advanced ago. Not smart!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German poet Friedrich Schiller:

"Drum prüfe, wer sich ewig bindet,
Ob sich das Herz zum Herzen findet.
Der Wahn ist kurz, die Reu‘ ist lang."

So test therefore who join forever,
If heart to heart be found together.
Delusion is short, regret is long.


----------



## Allisonfaye

xobellavidaxo said:


> This irks me to no end. She was a NObody when she married Harry. NO one knew who she was, D-List actress. She played up her “philanthropy” while she was engaged because she wanted to be the next Diana but what is actually real? *What has she ever really done besides write a blog and act in Suits? *She married a prince, 6th in line, they decided they didn’t want their royal duties anymore so now she’s living in Canada and visiting charities? which is what she would probably be doing in the UK? no? What exactly is the purpose of her visits? To say hi? Does her presence raise awareness? If she wanted privacy and to get away from the toxic royal environment why isn’t she home with Archie? That poor baby is never seen unless it’s a “photo op”.



Hey, don't forget she was a suitcase girl.


----------



## Annawakes

Just wondering....Where did the term “stan” come from?

I know what it means, but always wondered when I see it here.

My two cents, I wish MM would just go away and stop making pap appearances.  Just go away!  No one cares to know what you’re doing.  She sure is enjoying tooling around Canada “living her best life” while poor H is in the U.K. probably missing Archie terribly.  How can she separate Archie from his dad....oh yes, to get what she wants.  

Her life was a fairy tale dream come true and she had to ruin it all with her grandiose view of herself.  Ugh!

I’m following this thread to find out what happens to H and to poor Archie.  Not to her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Annawakes said:


> Just wondering....Where did the term “stan” come from?



It's from an Eminem song called "Stan" about an obsessed fan.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Yikes. So instead of staying at Frogmore, which is secluded and protected, she’s making daily pap strolls.
> 
> Privacy, indeed.


And sitting about in full view so they can get a good shot


----------



## WillstarveforLV

How on earth did paps know be there and when? And so close? Come on! so transparent!


----------



## mrsinsyder

The stan sites are rejoicing about her driving herself but like... Will, Kate, even the Queen drive themselves all the time? What? 

People celebrate this woman for doing the absolute least, I swear.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also I'm  that the stans swore Meghan was doing the most in the BRF and living her absolute best life, and now they're saying the same thing about how she got away from the BRF. People swore she was the best thing to happen to the family and now it's "OMG her smile is back!"


----------



## WillstarveforLV

mdcx said:


> I’ve read a few comments that MM must be tipping off Splash photo agency, and that there are really not that many paps just hanging around Vancouver.
> Maybe one staged photo op a day is her new PR strategy.


It has to be. And not even Vancouver but Vancouver Island where most residents are retirees. Just how did a pap get there just in time for her friend of the day to make the exit from arrivals entrance.


----------



## LibbyRuth

A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> The stan sites are rejoicing about her driving herself but like... Will, Kate, even the Queen drive themselves all the time? What?
> 
> People celebrate this woman for doing the absolute least, I swear.


I think some people have a very distorted view of how the BRF goes on.  It’s almost as if they expect princesses to be locked in a tower and the Queen to be yelling “off with his head” all the time 
I feel sorry for Meghan’s ardent fans though, for they’re trying hard to spin this deceitful mess into a positive story.  But she’s let them down too - because she never had the fairytale they so wanted for her as her end goal - she always had other plans


----------



## TC1

mrsinsyder said:


> The stan sites are rejoicing about her driving herself but like... Will, Kate, even the Queen drive themselves all the time? What?
> 
> People celebrate this woman for doing the absolute least, I swear.


Perhaps driving herself around and having her pics published make her feel like she's truly living now..not just existing in her royal cage.  poor thing.


----------



## Allisonfaye

LibbyRuth said:


> A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?



I thought that too but people are saying they had this in the works before they even got married so I don't know.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> It's crossed my mind, what will she do if either the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh passes away anytime soon? Will she attend?


Next to her wedding, this would be a huge opportunity to showcase her acting skills. There is no way she is honestly going to be grief-stricken over their death(s), so showing up and pretending to be - the actress will be there. I vote she shows up.


----------



## LittleStar88

queennadine said:


> I wonder if her leaving Canada for those few days reset the ‘clock’ on her visitor visa?
> I know my grandma (who was German) could only be here in the U.S. on vacation for 6 months at a time. She could have left the country for a day, though, and then come back and started another 6 months.
> But then that doesn’t explain why Archie was left...so who knows!



It is possible that she never started the UK citizenship paperwork. A friend of mine recently went through the UK citizenship process and he was limited on how long he could be out of the country during the process - even for business trips. Either that or she just trashed the whole process knowing she won't be following through.

Guys, she has done something bigger than just trying to struggle for relevance. She has become a chapter in British history - which I think is way more than just being "famous". And I am sure the history books will not be very fair to her for all of these stunt queen antics.


----------



## LittleStar88

mdcx said:


> I wonder if MM was not allowed to take clothes purchased as Duchess of Sussex with her on her “trip” to Canada. Or perhaps she chose to leave them all behind? Seems like she is only wearing clothes purchased pre-Harry.
> View attachment 4641984



OMG she even kept her old (Canadian) wardrobe? Seems like the interesting details just keep coming!


----------



## daisychainz

jcnc said:


> Off topic but when Priyanka got married, i thought her marriage would go for a toss based on how fast they moved and the over the top wedding.. but now i think its her friend meghan who is in a difficult place - relationship wise.


Me too. I actually thought she was actively trying to compete with Meghan with her wedding, and was just getting married for the heck of it to some young star. Turns out she got the fairy-tale and their marriage so far has been very positive and successful.

Plus, he got to keep his brothers


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG she even kept her old (Canadian) wardrobe? Seems like the interesting details just keep coming!



Now I'm imagining her having kept a storage unit in Toronto for the past few years containing all her old clothes and furnishings. Everything prepared for an inevitable quick escape. I'll give her this, she went into this marriage with a plan and alternative plans should the first plan not work out.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Consumer2much said:


> I really tried to cut them some slack but “flying a friend over”, frequent flying long hauls (both of them) and then preaching about climate catastrophe...this is too FU! All those celebs, including Di Caprio, who fly frequently should just go jump of a cliff and we would see carbon imprint reduction straight away



My husband has a “celebrity plane crash” list.  All the insufferable celebs he’d want packed onto a doomed flight.


----------



## Grande Latte

mrsinsyder said:


> It's from an Eminem song called "Stan" about an obsessed fan.



Hahaha. I remember this song, but maybe younger folks haven't heard of it.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Why can’t Meg and baby be with Harry in UK right now?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> If the gossip sites are to be believed, the  Priyanka /Jonas marriage was a contract.  If so, they they are honest with each other and know what to expect and how long it will last.


don't know if I believe that but I find the idea fascinating - what?  they were not in love and just put on the spectacular wedding for publicity?  to advance her career?  I think his career was doing fine

that wedding was OTT....and I'm not really a fan of either of them.....

if it was a contract, then would that mean it's for a limited time and no children?


----------



## LittleStar88

Mrs.Z said:


> Why can’t Meg and baby be with Harry in UK right now?



I am wondering who in the same place as Meghan would dare to show their face in the UK right now. I am guessing more people dislike her there now than ever before.

My money is the only time she will go there is for the Queen's funeral.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Why can’t Meg and baby be with Harry in UK right now?



Because she has convinced Harry that everyone would be mean to her. Being the manly man he is, he wants to protect his lady from getting her wittle feelings hurt.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Mrs.Z said:


> Why can’t Meg and baby be with Harry in UK right now?



My guess is 1) she doesn’t want to be and 2) she worries that Archie (the meal ticket) won’t be allowed back out of the country if he returns.

My HOPE is Harry can be deprogrammed and file for divorce and custody.  He can promise a more stable, secure, quiet life filled with family connections, etc.



sdkitty said:


> don't know if I believe that but I find the idea fascinating - what?  they were not in love and just put on the spectacular wedding for publicity?  to advance her career?  I think his career was doing fine
> 
> if it was a contract, then would that mean it's for a limited time and no children?



I’ve heard of celebrity contract weddings before.  Sonny Bono had an ex-wife who talked about their marriage being arranged by a manager to make him look good.  Basically, it raises a person’s profile and creates interest and publicity. It can also make a celebrity appear a certain way (popular, desirable, straight, family-oriented, whatever).  Now I wonder if the other brother’s marriage is also a contract.  Hmm....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

I just read an article (not posting as it's probabably already been posted here) saying life a a royal was "soul crushing" and now she can be her "authentic self"
I'm sorry but this is just so ridiculous and ungrateful.  Must make the queen sick. 
But apparently her "friends", her stans and her husband believe this crap.


----------



## Plussizegirl

LibbyRuth said:


> A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?


I thought this as well.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?



I think she can't stick with one thing for very long. She's always looking on to the next goal to achieve. She had dated her first husband for seven years before they married. Then less than two years later they divorced. After seven years of dating she would have known who she was marrying, but once the challenge was over and she had him, she decided she didn't want him anymore. Maybe her current marriage has the same root problem, only on a much grander and publicized scale. Meghan may be incapable of being satisfied for long.


----------



## marietouchet

On Archie being in Canada , yes, his location seems to have been carefully calculated , no happenstance 
All I can think of is the long term effect of that ..
Philip is doing poorly and this could be the last time to visit Archie , after all Archie was not there last Xmas 
From a family point of view, missed holidays are never forgiven, especially if it becomes the last opportunity to visit due to illness 
The awkward Instagram post of the rugby event is one thing, that will be quickly forgotten but missing a Xmas will never be forgotten by the family , sad but true


----------



## mdcx

I’m finding it hard to keep track of what MM is playing at. Paps, charity pop ins, millionaire mansions with no end date in sight, now this gold necklace “gifted” to her when she visited one of the charities, everything is being monetised somehow.
I thought she had to wait for some sort of “clearance” from the BRF before going 100% into being an influencer for cash or whatever it is she is doing. It’s so grubby.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I’m finding it hard to keep track of what MM is playing at. Paps, charity pop ins, millionaire mansions with no end date in sight, now this gold necklace “gifted” to her when she visited one of the charities, everything is being monetised somehow.
> I thought she had to wait for some sort of “clearance” from the BRF before going 100% into being an influencer for cash or whatever it is she is doing. It’s so grubby.


what Meghan wants Meghan gets.....what are they gonna do to her?


----------



## youngster

It is truly amazing to observe her isolating Harry from his former life, discarding his family, discarding his old friends, quitting his duties, walking away from everything basically. (ETA: Well, walking away from everything except the money.) Maybe he's secretly wanted to do this for years or maybe it was just a "_wouldn't it be nice to be normal_" type fantasy of his that he never had any intention of putting into motion.  It sure seemed like he was happy and flourishing, before he met her, and even during their engagement. When they were engaged, he talked about giving Meghan "the family she never had".  He was proud of his family then.  He talked about Meghan as being another member of the team and all that.

She's pulled this off in full view of the world when anyone else would be accused of being some type of abuser.  People are allowed to make changes in their life for sure, and sometimes they are dramatic changes, but what he's doing, and how he's doing it, does not seem reasonable or rational or in character with the Harry that we've watched for decades. He's turned into an unrecognizable version of himself, arrogant and immature, and I can understand why his family is probably bewildered and hurt.


----------



## Lounorada

CeeJay said:


> HA .. and see those of us who are from back East, heck .. 1600's? .. that's not so old!!!





Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, a lot of our houses are that old, and older. A friend of mine lives in a house built in 1751.


Maybe I should have been more clear,  my comments about old houses and not wanting to go near it were specifically about Frogmore Cottage.
I have plenty of experience being around old houses myself having lived in a couple of different old properties throughout my life and I actually prefer old houses over modern ones, it's just the ones that look really creepy and/or that have A LOT of history with lots of owner-occupiers/tenants having gone through the place. Nope, no thanks. I'm really particular about that 
Frogmore is creepy AF looking.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> It is truly amazing to observe her isolating Harry from his former life, discarding his family, discarding his old friends, quitting his duties, walking away from everything basically.  Maybe he's secretly wanted to do this for years or maybe it was just a "_wouldn't it be nice to be normal_" type fantasy of his that he never had any intention of putting into motion.  It sure seemed like he was happy and flourishing, before he met her, and even during their engagement. When they were engaged, he talked about giving Meghan "the family she never had".  He was proud of his family then.  He talked about Meghan as being another member of the team and all that.
> 
> She's pulled this off in full view of the world when anyone else would be accused of being some type of abuser.  People are allowed to make changes in their life for sure, and sometimes they are dramatic changes, but what he's doing, and how he's doing it, does not seem reasonable or rational or in character with the Harry that we've watched for decades. He's turned into an unrecognizable version of himself, arrogant and immature, and I can understand why his family is probably bewildered and hurt.


Harry doesn’t know what normal is.  He has NO idea how privileged he is.  Things he takes for granted are about to vanish and I think he’s in for the shock of his life.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Sorry if it’s been mentioned, can’t keep up ...but did you see the post from Harry’s friends wife that appeared to be making fun of them, she said she’s stepping away from her tax return bc it’s no longer fun or suits her.....kind of seemed like a huge dig, will have to find the article.


----------



## Meh-gan

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t need to read articles, I understand how it works.  I didn’t say citizenship, I said to stay. And the Immigration Minister is part of the government.  I never said the PMO’s office would be granting the approval (although he can certainly direct his ministers)
> 
> The Queen has said she wants to assist them, who knows what she will do. Banishing them to another country for a while might be her end game.  It will be interesting to watch this play out from a foreign relations point of view.


If you know how this works you would know that the queen would not force or make Canada do anything. She is a head of state from afar but will step up to force Canada’s hand over Harry and Meghan? No way. 

The whole royal ties in Canada are basically ceremonial at this point. It is an independent country. We don’t have to join in Britain’s wars, they can’t make us do things, our biggest trading partner is the US by a long shot. The monarchy’s relationship with Canada is benign at this point. 

The Queen isn’t going to all of a sudden try to be the boss in Canada this late into her reign.


----------



## sdkitty

this business (as told my her "friends") of royal life being "soul crushing" would seem to me to imply it was not the paps (who Harry was so traumatized by and who they are suing) that was the problem.....she just didn't like the protocol and the princess dream wasn't what she expected?


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> this business (as told my her "friends") of royal life being "soul crushing" would seem to me to imply it was not the paps (who Harry was so traumatized by and who they are suing) that was the problem.....she just didn't like the protocol and the princess dream wasn't what she expected?


I don't suppose "H" has noticed the conflict between what he saw as the problem and what now is being said


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meh-gan said:


> If you know how this works you would know that the queen would not force or make Canada do anything. She is a head of state from afar but will step up to force Canada’s hand over Harry and Meghan? No way.
> 
> The whole royal ties in Canada are basically ceremonial at this point. It is an independent country. We don’t have to join in Britain’s wars, they can’t make us do things, our biggest trading partner is the US by a long shot. The monarchy’s relationship with Canada is benign at this point.
> 
> The Queen isn’t going to all of a sudden try to be the boss in Canada this late into her reign.



I didn’t say she would force us?

And it’s a bit more complicated than that. This is a good explanation:

https://thecanadaguide.com/government/the-monarchy/

However, if she were to pay for their security and then ask Canada to allow them to stay for an extended period of time, it would be an interesting foreign relations / constitutional issue to say no.  So, my only point was, it will be very interesting from a foreign relations perspective.


----------



## DC-Cutie

It’s interesting reading the views/opinions here vs another board I belong to with different demographics.  

I have rooted for them from the beginning, still rooting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry doesn’t know what normal is.  He has NO idea how privileged he is.  Things he takes for granted are about to vanish and I think he’s in for the shock of his life.



I agree.  His pitch to Bob Iger about Meghan doing voice over work for Disney was really an eye-opener.  Not smart, not smooth, just inappropriate and cringy. Maybe that is the real Harry, and we've only previously seen the Harry that had smart, professional, experienced staff that knew how to handle him and show him in the best possible light.


----------



## Meh-gan

A1aGypsy said:


> I didn’t say she would force us?


Maybe banishing them is her end game is what you said. She would have to force Canada to accept them against our constitution, immigration laws etc to make this happen. Which she isn’t going to do.


----------



## PatsyCline

Roxanna said:


> She probably got bored of Archie.  It was often emphasized that her disaffection  with UK started after Archie was born. So I guess it is fair to assume she is not very much interested in him too, besides his potential as her meal ticket.  That is really sad  indeed.


That comment is simply disgusting.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meh-gan said:


> Maybe banishing them is her end game is what you said. She would have to force Canada to accept them against our constitution, immigration laws etc to make this happen. Which she isn’t going to do.



I accidentally clicked post before I was done so I added to my response above. However, I don’t think she would necessarily have to force Canada to do it. It may be that a situation arises where our government believes it is an appropriate thing to do.


----------



## DC-Cutie

PatsyCline said:


> That comment is simply disgusting.


Simply!

I’ve  read a lot of trash talk about this woman, but to now talk about her child, is taking it to a level that’s not even necessary. Sickening really


----------



## V0N1B2

myown said:


> Maybe she had no warm clothes or need to wear them in UK. It’s colder in Canada than in UK. She is prob happy to have anything that warm, even if it’s „old“


With the exception of this recent cold snap on the Southern Coast, the weather in Victoria, BC is not really that different from London, probably about 1-2°C colder on average year-round. Many people assume Canada is COLD, and it is - where @TC1 lives, but the southern west coast is a temperate rain forest.  The snowdrops peek out of the ground in late January and the cherry blossoms are in full splendour by mid-late February. Always get a kick out of Canadian Tire's harsh cold winter commercials when most people in Vancouver are walking about in shorts on their way to yoga. Again, the past week being an exception. I don't need warm clothes when I'm being chauffeured to and from events and walking 200m from a venue to greet adoring fans either. I'm sure she took whatever warm sweaters and coats she would have worn around Frogmore walking her dogs and playing outside with Archie   Besides, whatever she didn't have, I'm sure she can pop into The Bay or better yet Aritzia (right up her alley) and pick something up.
/end rant and sorry for the hijack 



Consumer2much said:


> I really tried to cut them some slack but “flying a friend over”, frequent flying long hauls (both of them) and then preaching about climate catastrophe...this is too FU! All those celebs, including Di Caprio, who fly frequently should just go jump of a cliff and we would see carbon imprint reduction straight away


And the SUV she's driving around in is electric, right? 



ccbaggirl89 said:


> Our family discussed this as well. I think 'events' like that are a must-go for her. Weddings, funerals, Christening - close family events. I can't see her missing a chance to be there anyway - from a historical perspective she'd want in on those pictures.


If y'all thought the pit-stained turtleneck was bad, wait until you see the stains left on her coat from the tomatoes being pelted at her from the crowd.  That sh!t is hard to get out, man.



daisychainz said:


> Plus, he got to keep his brothers


Oh snap!



youngster said:


> Maybe he's secretly wanted to do this for years or maybe it was just a "_wouldn't it be nice to be normal_" type fantasy of his that he never had any intention of putting into motion.


I think he did talk about it. Hey Haz, how's this for a "normal life"... You can get up at 5am, take your kid to his/her 6am hockey practice, , commute 90mins into the city to go work at a job you don't really like, for a boss who's kind of a d!ck, listen to your co-workers moan about their own mundane lives - maybe even have to pretend to like the 27639 pictures of Sally's cats she shows you everyday - ask yourself at least twice a day "is this it? really?" Then get back in the car for another 90min commute home, open the bills, wonder how the neighbours are perpetually on vacation every other month, and how is it possible to be making seemingly good money but there's not much left over after the mortgage, utilities, food, car payment, Taylor's hockey dues, etc... run over to the mother-in-law's place because she's disabled/old/whatever and Wheel of Fortune is on and she can't find the remote, your wife is off with MacKenzie at Cheerleading practice, tell yourself one more time "tomorrow is gonna be great", answer a couple of work-related emails, then hopefully be in bed by 11pm and do it all over again tomorrow. YAY!


youngster said:


> He's turned into an unrecognizable version of himself, arrogant and immature, and I can understand why his family is probably bewildered and hurt.


 I dunno doll, I'm beginning to think more and more that he's always been kind of an arsehole and protected by everyone.  I think people would just chalk it up to Harry being playful, impish, and a jokester.

But yeah, as usual doll, spot-on post


----------



## Meh-gan

A1aGypsy said:


> I accidentally clicked post before I was done so I added to my response above. However, I don’t think she would necessarily have to force Canada to do it. It may be that a situation arises where our government believes it is an appropriate thing to do.


If you are Canadian with any knowledge at all about politics here you would know this is not a thing. They aren’t going to be able to do it just to be nice. And it won’t ever be the appropriate thing to do. What on earth lmaoo. 

It would set a precedent that goes against the foundations of our government and the Supreme court would need to be involved etc. No one is doing this for them. Also Trudeau does what Quebec wants - they will not approve of British royals being here. Neither will all the taxpayers.


----------



## V0N1B2

DC-Cutie said:


> It’s interesting reading the views/opinions here vs another board I belong to with different demographics.
> 
> I have rooted for them from the beginning, still rooting!


Then I guess you must not read the Meghan Markle Unpopular Opinions thread, because compared to here... this thread is bland.

I also rooted for them, hoped that they would have a lovely life together, but unfortch she thought she knew best, and now she's paying the price for being a greedy bish.

I thought she would stick around at least long enough to pick up a fake British accent.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

So I went on their IG for the first time just now - wow - the comments are all very negative calling her out - esp.  the last post with her in it - sweaty armpits and all.  They now have to realize that really screwed things up - this is just simply not how you go about doing things on this scale as royals. Even civilians know this. Clearly, they have no shame in their game. None. Like you just threw a grenade and you couldn't even be low pro for like a week. She just HAD to pick up her friend from the airport - heaven for bid her security do it. Nope MeGain had to be in the driver's seat to officially kick off "girls' yoga weekend @ McMansion" . She thirsty AF for doing this.


----------



## daisychainz

WillstarveforLV said:


> So I went on their IG for the first time just now - wow - the comments are all very negative calling her out - esp.  the last post with her in it - sweaty armpits and all.  They now have to realize that really screwed things up - this is just simply not how you go about doing things on this scale as royals. Even civilians know this. Clearly, they have no shame in their game. None. Like you just threw a grenade and you couldn't even be low pro for like a week. She just HAD to pick up her friend from the airport - heaven for bid her security do it. Nope MeGain had to be in the driver's seat to officially kick off "girls' yoga weekend @ McMansion" . She thirsty AF for doing this.


Why wouldn't they actively delete/cut off comments that are negative? I'm surprised to hear this - not that she is getting negative comments, but that they aren't deleted by her.


----------



## joyeaux

Chagall said:


> The queen is a real tough cookie. As everyone keeps saying, she plays chess not checkers. If I were H and M I would be very nervous. They  may have underestimated her because of her advanced ago. Not smart!



One thing I heard on a podcast from one of the Royal Rota is that the reason the courtiers blocked the meeting with the Queen initially was because they were worried she’d get sentimental with Harry and give him his way. So they detoured it to Charles first instead. Also that the reason for them pushing the red button on the statement is that things at BP tend to take a long time to get done and they were not willing to wait more (I think Harry tried to start talks officially before Xmas).




LibbyRuth said:


> A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?



I think this is entirely plausible. Which makes me feel for her (I know a lot of you think it’s all been an act and I certainly don’t have a high opinion of her at the moment either, but having suffered from PPD myself it is a very, very hard thing to deal with). I feel like she and Harry both have some _major_ mental health issues— which is ironic considering Heads Together and how vocal they were about that joint effort with William and Kate at the beginning of the marriage. I truly hope they are getting the help they need.



youngster said:


> Maybe he's secretly wanted to do this for years or maybe it was just a "_wouldn't it be nice to be normal_" type fantasy.



ITA with this. I’ve read lots about Harry’s disdain for the media which is DEEPLY rooted everything Diana. (Even when he was little he was sticking his tongue out at the paps, which I always thought was adorable because what kid wants cameras in their face all the time?) I think he was proud of his family though, like you mentioned @youngster, but maybe having Meghan mantras in his ear now (“can’t just survive, have to thrive,” etc) and stories she’s likely told him of normal life “on the outside” all the time has influenced his estrangement.

ETA: here’s little Harry sticking out the tongue


----------



## mrsinsyder

I guess to them, "being normal" means doing nothing all day, being protected by someone you don't pay, living in a house for free, and driving a Land Rover you didn't pay for either. Oh, all the while someone else watches your kid.

I'd like this "normal."


----------



## mshermes

Perception is everything.....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...tually-stepped-foot-Canada-womens-center.html


----------



## WillstarveforLV

daisychainz said:


> Why wouldn't they actively delete/cut off comments that are negative? I'm surprised to hear this - not that she is getting negative comments, but that they aren't deleted by her.


Many of the comments were that their comments got deleted! And they just kept on reposting. I think the amount of comments that post is getting, they simply cant keep up to deleting. I am surprised they just didn't disable comments all together. Now the last 2 posts with just Harry with rugby and the games,  pretty much all positive.


----------



## youngster

V0N1B2 said:


> I dunno doll, *I'm beginning to think more and more that he's always been kind of an arsehole and protected by everyone. * I think people would just chalk it up to Harry being playful, impish, and a jokester.



Definitely agree with this.  Seems like we are getting the real Harry now.  Unfortunately, the real Harry is an immature, arrogant arsehat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh I agree, same here ( UK) in some cases, houses built in the 60s onwards are awful. Give me old house any day.


SAME HERE!!! .. growing up in Connecticut, I had friends who lived in old historic houses built in the 1600's, and let me tell you, those houses were sturdy as heck!!  Other friends who had houses built in the 60's/70's .. yuck, and it seems that they were constantly doing work on those POS's!!!  I see the same out here in LA; unless it's a particular architectural style (Case Study, Mid-Century Modern, etc.) -- most of the houses were built cheaply and as such, most are tear-downs when they are sold.


----------



## Clearblueskies

joyeaux said:


> One thing I heard on a podcast from one of the Royal Rota is that the reason the courtiers blocked the meeting with the Queen initially was because they were worried she’d get sentimental with Harry and give him his way. So they detoured it to Charles first instead.


I understood it was because the Queen had instructed Harry to discuss it with his father first.  Harry tried to leapfrog his father and meet with the Queen first, and the meeting was therefore refused.


----------



## youngster

joyeaux said:


> I think this is entirely plausible. Which makes me feel for her (I know a lot of you think it’s all been an act and I certainly don’t have a high opinion of her at the moment either, but having suffered from PPD myself it is a very, very hard thing to deal with). I feel like she and Harry both have some _major_ mental health issues— which is ironic considering Heads Together and how vocal they were about that joint effort with William and Kate at the beginning of the marriage. I truly hope they are getting the help they need.



I also think she could be suffering from untreated PPD, but I also think she's suffering from being Meghan Markle who leaves a trail of relationship wreckage behind her no matter what continent she is on.  That's going to continue to be a problem for her, no matter where they live, Canada or the U.S.  (Guess Africa is off the table, who seriously thought they would ever move there?)   

Btw, hope you have gotten the help that you need and that things are better for you and your little one.  Those first few months are tough, whether you have PPD or not.


----------



## Chagall

LibbyRuth said:


> A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?


She is not acting like someone with any kind of depression. People with depression are usually so down they are no trouble to anyone but themselves. They don’t run around acting like MM causing  trouble for everyone else. Getting out of bed, eating and functioning in any way is a challenge. Yes, I do know PPD first hand and I don’t think she is exhibiting the symptoms. She is acting like someone absolutely delighted with herself.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Meh-gan said:


> If you are Canadian with any knowledge at all about politics here you would know this is not a thing. They aren’t going to be able to do it just to be nice. And it won’t ever be the appropriate thing to do. What on earth lmaoo.



I would love to discuss it further because I find it fascinating and I do think it is nuanced with a lot of implications- regardless of what Canada does. But I have no interest in discussing this with someone who is just going to throw rudeness around. So let’s just agree to disagree on what I do or don’t know.

And just for the record, I am not, for a moment, advocating they be permitted to stay.  I could just see it happening. We will see.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> A thought occurred to me earlier this week ... is it possible that this is all happening because Meghan is suffering from undiagnosed postpartum?


But she conducted herself similarly in other relationships and friendships.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> It always looked like a prison or a post office to me.  Not attractive in the least.  It didn't need to be back in the day as it was the servant's quarters.  Since it is a protected building at this point, I doubt that anyone would be allowed to change the look of it very much or at all.





Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, a lot of our houses are that old, and older. A friend of mine lives in a house built in 1751.


Yes, I have a friend outside of London, who renovated her early 1800s, or maybe late 1700s home, interior only of course and it's stunning.  Updated, but not modern.  All the mouldings and millwork still there.  So beautiful, so much character and charm.


----------



## joyeaux

youngster said:


> I also think she could be suffering from untreated PPD, but I also think she's suffering from being Meghan Markle who leaves a trail of relationship wreckage behind her no matter what continent she is on.  That's going to continue to be a problem for her, no matter where they live, Canada or the U.S.  (Guess Africa is off the table, who seriously thought they would ever move there?)
> 
> Btw, hope you have gotten the help that you need and that things are better for you and your little one.  Those first few months are tough, whether you have PPD or not.



That’s so sweet, I’m good! Got help pretty quickly because it was SCARY. Hormones are a beast.



Chagall said:


> She is not acting like someone with any kind of depression. People with depression are usually so down they are no trouble to anyone but themselves. They don’t run around acting like MM causing  trouble for everyone else. Getting out of bed, eating and functioning in any way is a challenge. Yes, I do know PPD first hand and I don’t think she is exhibiting the symptoms. She is acting like someone absolutely delighted with herself.



That’s a good point... I was almost debilitated with it. I was thinking more of the emotional roller coaster, which she certainly seemed to exhibit during that (horribly timed) ITV interview. I know that in the context of everything else though, it does seem likely it was putting the acting skills into good use. I just have a sensitive spot for PPD.  I will say part of the things I did to help alleviate it was get my mom to stay to help out with it all, and Meghan certainly had plenty of that at her disposal!


----------



## cafecreme15

V0N1B2 said:


> I think he did talk about it. Hey Haz, how's this for a "normal life"... You can get up at 5am, take your kid to his/her 6am hockey practice, , commute 90mins into the city to go work at a job you don't really like, for a boss who's kind of a d!ck, listen to your co-workers moan about their own mundane lives - maybe even have to pretend to like the 27639 pictures of Sally's cats she shows you everyday - ask yourself at least twice a day "is this it? really?" Then get back in the car for another 90min commute home, open the bills, wonder how the neighbours are perpetually on vacation every other month, and how is it possible to be making seemingly good money but there's not much left over after the mortgage, utilities, food, car payment, Taylor's hockey dues, etc... run over to the mother-in-law's place because she's disabled/old/whatever and Wheel of Fortune is on and she can't find the remote, your wife is off with MacKenzie at Cheerleading practice, tell yourself one more time "tomorrow is gonna be great", answer a couple of work-related emails, then hopefully be in bed by 11pm and do it all over again tomorrow. YAY!



Oh my, this thread just gotta little too real LOL


----------



## bisousx

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh my, this thread just gotta little too real LOL



Von, please don’t ever stop posting


----------



## Chagall

joyeaux said:


> That’s so sweet, I’m good! Got help pretty quickly because it was SCARY. Hormones are a beast.
> 
> 
> 
> That’s a good point... I was almost debilitated with it. I was thinking more of the emotional roller coaster, which she certainly seemed to exhibit during that (horribly timed) ITV interview. I know that in the context of everything else though, it does seem likely it was putting the acting skills into good use. I just have a sensitive spot for PPD.  I will say part of the things I did to help alleviate it was get my mom to stay to help out with it all, and Meghan certainly had plenty of that at her disposal!


Her behavior is no different from before she had Archie. I would say she is narcissistic not depressed.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> A lot of houses in Europe are centuries old. In harsh climates like ours buildings don’t last that long. Places of 49 years are demolished and replaced. It’s sad.


Because they are made so cheaply.  The grand, old brick and stone houses are built to last. Not the interiors, they often had asbestos and lead, but the exteriors are solid.  They need maintenance, but tearing them down is a crime. (Actually a real crime in the protected districts.)

The thing is, often buyers prefer new, shiny, modern houses and do what they can to tear the old down.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Breaking News!  Megxit deal reached! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...etails-Megxit-deal-announcement-imminent.html


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> Her behavior is no different from before she had Archie. I would say she is *narcissistic* not depressed.


THIS 100%+++!!! .. and she's been like this for a VERY LONG time!!!  It's ALL ABOUT HER!


----------



## CAH

In hindsight I wonder if she didn't want to show pictures of Archie right after his birth is because it would have put the attention on him and off her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Mrs.Z said:


> Breaking News!  Megxit deal reached!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...etails-Megxit-deal-announcement-imminent.html




Except security, titles and financial future are still left to be ironed out. What else is there? Lol.


----------



## daisychainz

CAH said:


> In hindsight I wonder if she didn't want to show pictures of Archie right after his birth is because it would have put the attention on him and off her.


She probably wanted $$$$ for those pics and she was upset the reporters get royal baby pics for free. Now Archie's pics become much more valuable because he won't be seen as often and *they* can decide who will photograph him and when he makes pop-up appearances.


----------



## Mrs.Z

A1aGypsy said:


> Except security, titles and financial future are still left to be ironed out. What else is there? Lol.


Ha...seriously!  Another statement that says nothing??


----------



## Mrs.Z

daisychainz said:


> She probably wanted $$$$ for those pics and she was upset the reporters get royal baby pics for free. Now Archie's pics become much more valuable because he won't be seen as often and *they* can decide who will photograph him and when he makes pop-up appearances.


I read something about this.  The piece noted that H & M are the only members of the royal family that have a copyright for their photos (note the Sussex Royal copyright at the end of many of their Instagram posts).  The suggestion was that they fully intend to profit off their own photos in the future.


----------



## daisychainz

Mrs.Z said:


> I read something about this.  The piece noted that H & M are the only members of the royal family that have a copyright for their photos (note the Sussex Royal copyright at the end of many of their Instagram posts).  The suggestion was that they fully intend to profit off their own photos in the future.


Wow. Everything for profits.


----------



## Mrs.Z

daisychainz said:


> She probably wanted $$$$ for those pics and she was upset the reporters get royal baby pics for free. Now Archie's pics become much more valuable because he won't be seen as often and *they* can decide who will photograph him and when he makes pop-up appearances.


And yes spot on, these exact pics have a Sussex Royal copyright on them.


----------



## V0N1B2

Mrs.Z said:


> Breaking News!  Megxit deal reached!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...etails-Megxit-deal-announcement-imminent.html


But what about the merching?????
I need to get me some of that Sussex Royal Flat Tummy Tea.
"It gives you the runs so bad, it propels you to another continent"





now available in pumpkin spice flavour


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Because they are made so cheaply.  The grand, old brick and stone houses are built to last. Not the interiors, they often had asbestos and lead, but the exteriors are solid.  They need maintenance, but tearing them down is a crime. (Actually a real crime in the protected districts.)
> 
> The thing is, often buyers prefer new, shiny, modern houses and do what they can to tear the old down.


I moved to a small town 20 years ago in the Ottawa region. It is heartbreaking how many old homes, businesses and even an old Church have been torn down. The story is always the same, the expense of making them structurally sound is too high. Not impossible but too expensive.


----------



## Roxanna

DC-Cutie said:


> Simply!
> 
> I’ve  read a lot of trash talk about this woman, but to now talk about her child, is taking it to a level that’s not even necessary. Sickening really


I am really sorry that my comment  offended  you. In my defence  I might just clarify and hope that you will  agree  that baby Archie  is the person affected the most by his parents decisions.  I feel  really bad for him. He is not even a year old but so many recent events already took his mother's focus away from him. I am sure though he is well taken care of, however I have met fair share of kids of mothers with narcissistic tendencies and it did affect their lives  besides all other things.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG she even kept her old (Canadian) wardrobe? Seems like the interesting details just keep coming!


I would.  I liked her street clothes as I've said many times.  Better than what she wore as a duchess.


V0N1B2 said:


> With the exception of this recent cold snap on the Southern Coast, the weather in Victoria, BC is not really that different from London, probably about 1-2°C colder on average year-round. Many people assume Canada is COLD, and it is - where @TC1 lives, but the southern west coast is a temperate rain forest.  The snowdrops peek out of the ground in late January and the cherry blossoms are in full splendour by mid-late February. Always get a kick out of Canadian Tire's harsh cold winter commercials when most people in Vancouver are walking about in shorts on their way to yoga. Again, the past week being an exception. I don't need warm clothes when I'm being chauffeured to and from events and walking 200m from a venue to greet adoring fans either. I'm sure she took whatever warm sweaters and coats she would have worn around Frogmore walking her dogs and playing outside with Archie   Besides, whatever she didn't have, I'm sure she can pop into The Bay or better yet Aritzia (right up her alley) and pick something up.
> /end rant and sorry for the hijack
> 
> 
> And the SUV she's driving around in is electric, right?
> 
> 
> If y'all thought the pit-stained turtleneck was bad, wait until you see the stains left on her coat from the tomatoes being pelted at her from the crowd.  That sh!t is hard to get out, man.
> 
> 
> Oh snap!
> 
> 
> I think he did talk about it. Hey Haz, how's this for a "normal life"... You can get up at 5am, take your kid to his/her 6am hockey practice, , commute 90mins into the city to go work at a job you don't really like, for a boss who's kind of a d!ck, listen to your co-workers moan about their own mundane lives - maybe even have to pretend to like the 27639 pictures of Sally's cats she shows you everyday - ask yourself at least twice a day "is this it? really?" Then get back in the car for another 90min commute home, open the bills, wonder how the neighbours are perpetually on vacation every other month, and how is it possible to be making seemingly good money but there's not much left over after the mortgage, utilities, food, car payment, Taylor's hockey dues, etc... run over to the mother-in-law's place because she's disabled/old/whatever and Wheel of Fortune is on and she can't find the remote, your wife is off with MacKenzie at Cheerleading practice, tell yourself one more time "tomorrow is gonna be great", answer a couple of work-related emails, then hopefully be in bed by 11pm and do it all over again tomorrow. YAY!
> 
> I dunno doll, I'm beginning to think more and more that he's always been kind of an arsehole and protected by everyone.  I think people would just chalk it up to Harry being playful, impish, and a jokester.
> 
> But yeah, as usual doll, spot-on post



Brilliant!  And stop bragging about the weather.  Not this week's, but the unusual weather, you make Torontonians very jealous! lol


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I moved to a small town 20 years ago in the Ottawa region. It is heartbreaking how many old homes, businesses and even an old Church have been torn down. The story is always the same, the expense of making them structurally sound is too high. Not impossible but too expensive.


Houses in LA .. rarely don't get demolished and some atrocity built in its place!  My whole neighborhood .. all gorgeous Mid-Century Modern homes (built above the old RKO Studios land) are being demolished on a daily basis .. and some new unknown architectural 'style' put up.  It's really sad because while these houses do need repair and upgrading, the architectural style is so unique and beautiful .. yet, many of these folks just want 'new'!


----------



## Allisonfaye

LittleStar88 said:


> Guys, she has done something bigger than just trying to struggle for relevance. *She has become a chapter in British history -* which I think is way more than just being "famous". And I am sure the history books will not be very fair to her for all of these stunt queen antics.



Meh, I kinda doubt it. 



mshermes said:


> Perception is everything.....
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...tually-stepped-foot-Canada-womens-center.html



Celebrities and politicians have used these kinds of places/events, etc.s to manipulate their image for eons. I think they are no longer getting away with the fakeness of it all because a little digging by some internet sleuths can go viral in minutes showing that they are disingenuous. Like some people saying they carry around hot sauce in their purse or such nonsense. I really love seeing the fakes being exposed day after day....


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Houses in LA .. rarely don't get demolished and some atrocity built in its place!  My whole neighborhood .. all gorgeous Mid-Century Modern homes (built above the old RKO Studios land) are being demolished on a daily basis .. and some new unknown architectural 'style' put up.  It's really sad because while these houses do need repair and upgrading, the architectural style is so unique and beautiful .. yet, many of these folks just want 'new'!


or they want to build a bigger home on the lot?
when I lived at the beach older homes would be torn down and two or three story condos built on the lots


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> I would.  I liked her street clothes as I've said many times.  Better than what she wore as a duchess.



Agreed. It always looked like she was playing dress-up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Houses in LA .. rarely don't get demolished and some atrocity built in its place!  My whole neighborhood .. all gorgeous Mid-Century Modern homes (built above the old RKO Studios land) are being demolished on a daily basis .. and some new unknown architectural 'style' put up.  It's really sad because while these houses do need repair and upgrading, the architectural style is so unique and beautiful .. yet, many of these folks just want 'new'!


 This breaks my heart, I love mid century homes!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> or they want to build a bigger home on the lot?
> when I lived at the beach older homes would be torn down and two or three story condos built on the lots


Not in my neighborhood because the plots are not big enough, BUT .. on some of the more major streets, 100% correct .. every other day, a new "Luxury Condo" or "Luxury Apartments" complex .. and NO ONE can freakin' afford them!!!  Everytime I see that, it drives me nuts because we have an EPIC homeless situation up here in LA .. let's build housing for them!


----------



## youngster

Mrs.Z said:


> Breaking News!  Megxit deal reached!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...etails-Megxit-deal-announcement-imminent.html



With the details to still be ironed out on security, titles, and finances.  OK, then, that was not really worth a press announcement.

I do think the Queen and Charles are going to try and find some way to give Harry a path back, to save face, for when he changes his mind and decides that being a member of the common folk doesn't really suit him, or after Meghan decides that a multi-billionaire oligarch would be a better husband.  No need to work or pretend to work!  Never have to ask anyone's permission for anything!  Ever again!


----------



## CobaltBlu

Welp, I totally and completely love old homes too, and just moved out of a 300 year old little casita here in my town, but we need to keep on the topic of the woke royals and Sussexit.... Thanks


----------



## wisconsin

DC-Cutie said:


> It’s interesting reading the views/opinions here vs another board I belong to with different demographics.
> 
> I have rooted for them from the beginning, still rooting!



well good for you. 
She does have many  followers though I think most are blind followers.


----------



## mdcx

I can’t get over this, I mean come on...she knows it’s not kosher to accept this gift, let alone publicise/merch it.
 I do wonder if MM is “acting out” a bit in Canada in an attempt to pressure the BRF to hurry up and finalise her $ettlement.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7898971/Meghan-Markle-gifted-diamond-18ct-gold-tail-necklace-Nations-artist.html


----------



## daisychainz

mdcx said:


> I can’t get over this, I mean come on...she knows it’s not kosher to accept this gift, let alone publicise/merch it.
> I do wonder if MM is “acting out” a bit in Canada in an attempt to pressure the BRF to hurry up and finalise her $ettlement.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-18ct-gold-tail-necklace-Nations-artist.html
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-18ct-gold-tail-necklace-Nations-artist.html
> View attachment 4642424


I wonder how did she get a gift if the visit was not scheduled?


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> I wonder how did she get a gift if the visit was not scheduled?


THANK YOU, right???  More importantly, why would they even 'gift' her anything; why isn't that $$$ going to the cause that they are (supposed) to be representing???  I don't get this ..


----------



## bag-mania

*Harry and Meghan's Frogmore staff are let go: Speculation mounts among courtiers that the couple will settle in Canada and the Duchess will NEVER return to live in Britain in a 'meaningful way' after Megxit*
At least two permanent employees – a house manager and a cleaner – are being moved to other duties within the Queen’s household.

Other members of staff who are used on an ad hoc basis, such as chefs, maids and footmen, have been told their services are no longer required at the couple’s Windsor residence.

Sources said Harry and Meghan operated Frogmore, on the Queen’s Windsor estate, with a ‘skeleton staff’ and no-one was being made redundant. But it is understood the employees are having to switch jobs as a ‘knock-on effect’ of the couple’s decision to relocate to North America for at least part of the year.

The revelation will fuel speculation among palace officials that the Duchess of Sussex, in particular, will never return to Britain to live in a ‘meaningful’ way.

Eight days ago the couple shocked the royals by publicly announcing that they planned to step down as senior working members of the family.

The Queen, Harry’s 93-year-old grandmother, was said to be particularly hurt by their decision. On Monday, the monarch, Prince Charles, Prince William and Harry held an unprecedented summit at Sandringham to discuss where they went from here.

A source said: ‘The workers are already being offered other roles at Buckingham Palace.

‘There is a skeleton staff there all the time, consisting of one cleaner and a house manager. Others work as and when needed.

‘This has all come as a bit of shock. They took great pride in working for them and being at Frogmore.’

When they made their announcement last week, Harry and Meghan made clear they wished to keep the five-bedroom home in Windsor, which was a gift from the Queen. It was previously five separate staff cottages but was knocked into one larger residence, controversially using £2.4 million of taxpayers’ money.

On their new website, Harry and Meghan state that the Grade II-listed building in Windsor Home Park was owned by the Queen and was refurbished from the Sovereign Grant, given to her by the Government, as part of her responsibility to ‘maintain the upkeep of buildings with historical significance’.

The site says that expenses relating to fixtures and fitting were met by the couple privately.

The duke and duchess said they wished to continue to use it as their official residence ‘as they continue to support the monarchy and so that their family will always have a place to call home in the United Kingdom’.

It is not clear whether the Queen will accede to that request, although sources have indicated she is privately unhappy at the amount of money spent on it when the couple will be there for significantly less time.







A spokesman for the couple declined to comment.

Several royal sources have told the Daily Mail that regardless of the proposal that is being thrashed out behind closed doors to secure an ‘exit package’ for herself and Harry, they do not believe Meghan will ever return to the UK for any lengthy period of time.

‘Outside of anything that is being decided between the private offices [the nerve centres of royal operations] and the British and Canadian governments this week, no-one here believes that the duchess will ever really return to the UK in a meaningful way,’ one said.

Palace uncertainty has been fuelled by the couple’s decision not to bring their eight-month-old son, Archie, back to the UK to spend time with his British relatives – including his great-grandmother the Queen, and his young cousins George, Charlotte and Louis, who he has not seen since at least last autumn.

It has also been compounded by Meghan’s determination to ‘hit the ground running’ in Canada by privately visiting charities in the Vancouver area this week.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Speculation-mounts-couple-settle-Canada.html


----------



## cph706

I know there are strong feelings on both sides here.

If the Sussexes are no longer to be TRH then (IMHO) there is NO WAY Prince Andrew should keep his.  He has also “stepped back”, for terrible conduct.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

daisychainz said:


> Why wouldn't they actively delete/cut off comments that are negative? I'm surprised to hear this - not that she is getting negative comments, but that they aren't deleted by her.



Their bots delete negative posts within a few days or hours and replaces them with gushing “I [emoji813]️ MM” posts.


----------



## PewPew

mdcx said:


> I can’t get over this, I mean come on...she knows it’s not kosher to accept this gift, let alone publicise/merch it.
> I do wonder if MM is “acting out” a bit in Canada in an attempt to pressure the BRF to hurry up and finalise her $ettlement.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-18ct-gold-tail-necklace-Nations-artist.html
> View attachment 4642424



The caption is too much — HRH The Duchess of Sussex @sussexroyal wearing <this gift to honor her amazingness & promote the artist>.

This is a blatant slap back for all the times Meghan’s friends/sponsors like (celeb jewelry designer Jennifer Meyer) had to stop using Meghan’s image and duchess title to promote their wares.

These humanitarian trips in Canada are billed as unscheduled, rather impromptu events, but a lot of planning has clearly gone in to the locations, the publicity, the glowing follow up social media from the site & days of follow up stories. This is a well-coordinated effort. She has an amazing publicist & PR people behind the scenes. But she should have this dream team, because tens of millions of dollars, if not more, is at stake.

(Btw people joke about pro-Meghan bots, but sophisticated bots promoting an individual, film, cause, or candidate are not new at all. They are a cornerstone of publicity b/c social media has as more reach than traditional media in many markets.)


----------



## mdcx

cph706 said:


> I know there are strong feelings on both sides here.
> 
> If the Sussexes are no longer to be TRH then (IMHO) there is NO WAY Prince Andrew should keep his.  He has also “stepped back”, for terrible conduct.


I think the titles people are concerned about are the ones granted on their marriage - Duke and Duchess ofSussex etc. I don’t know that the titles the men were given at birth (Prince) can be withdrawn. It wouldn’t make MM Princess though, she would revert to being Mrs Henry Windsor etc.


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-Kremlin-linked-billionaire-Yuri-Milner.html


----------



## CeeJay

cph706 said:


> I know there are strong feelings on both sides here.
> 
> If the Sussexes are no longer to be TRH then (IMHO) there is NO WAY Prince Andrew should keep his.  He has also “stepped back”, for terrible conduct.


I don't think anyone is saying that Prince Harry should lose his "Prince" title, he is after all .. a Prince by birth (same with Andrew).  The titles that we are referring to are the "Duke & Duchess of Sussex"; why should they keep them .. especially Meghan if she plans to never return to the UK in a "meaningful" way (as quoted above)?


----------



## cph706

I meant that they could loose their “HRH” and simply be the duke and duchess. (Similar to Diana, Princess of Wales, after her divorce) Harry will always be Prince Henry. Without the dukedom Meghan will be Princess Henry (like Princess Michael, wife of Prince Michael of Kent).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-Kremlin-linked-billionaire-Yuri-Milner.html
> 
> View attachment 4642445


I bet they were set up on their 'blind date' by someone much more interesting than the reported friend Nonoo.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> I can’t get over this, I mean come on...she knows it’s not kosher to accept this gift, let alone publicise/merch it.
> I do wonder if MM is “acting out” a bit in Canada in an attempt to pressure the BRF to hurry up and finalise her $ettlement.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-18ct-gold-tail-necklace-Nations-artist.html
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-18ct-gold-tail-necklace-Nations-artist.html
> View attachment 4642424


Oh my goodness, now we see why the Palace gets involved in choosing charities and planning engagements etc. bc this is so inappropriate and awkward!!!!  I get annoyed when charities send me return address labels and notepads, don’t waste the money!


----------



## Annawakes

V0N1B2 said:


> Then I guess you must not read the Meghan Markle Unpopular Opinions thread, because compared to here... this thread is bland.
> 
> I also rooted for them, hoped that they would have a lovely life together, but unfortch she thought she knew best, and now she's paying the price for being a greedy bish.
> 
> I thought she would stick around at least long enough to pick up a fake British accent.


I love love love all your commentary!  So sharp.  Totally makes my day


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> I don't think anyone is saying that Prince Harry should lose his "Prince" title, he is after all .. a Prince by birth (same with Andrew).  The titles that we are referring to are the "Duke & Duchess of Sussex"; why should they keep them .. especially Meghan if she plans to never return to the UK in a "meaningful" way (as quoted above)?


I mean it’s sticky because they can’t be waltzing around in Canada With titles if they did plan to apply for immigration. Citizens can’t hold titles. 

She also can’t go around on engagements as a duchess either. 

I wonder if they can be made to take down their sussexroyal instagram if they are going to be shilling stuff and promoting freebies they get while using those titles.


----------



## youngster

So interesting that Meghan's friends are saying that she found life in the royal family "soul crushing".  I guess because she couldn't tweet at will or post on the gram or had to occasionally shake hands or sit next to someone she didn't like.

But, still.  More "soul crushing" than Hollywood?  How is that possible?  How about some of the downright embarrassing things she had to do, and acting jobs she had to take, in order to make it in Hollywood?  Posing for photos in her undies?  Being a briefcase girl on the "Deal or No Deal" game show?  Commercials for stuff she'd probably never use in real life?  Bit parts on tired TV shows?  The constant cycle of auditions and callbacks and rejection? All of that sounds way more "soul crushing" than being asked to go to events for senior citizens and women and veterans.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Did the queen lose the key to The Tower? because these kids need a time-out to think abou their behavior.


----------



## mdcx

youngster said:


> So interesting that Meghan's friends are saying that she found life in the royal family "soul crushing".  I guess because she couldn't tweet at will or post on the gram or had to occasionally shake hands or sit next to someone she didn't like.
> 
> But, still.  More "soul crushing" than Hollywood?  How is that possible?  How about some of the downright embarrassing things she had to do, and acting jobs she had to take, in order to make it in Hollywood?  Posing for photos in her undies?  Being a briefcase girl on the "Deal or No Deal" game show?  Commercials for stuff she'd probably never use in real life?  Bit parts on tired TV shows?  The constant cycle of auditions and callbacks and rejection? All of that sounds way more "soul crushing" than being asked to go to events for senior citizens and women and veterans.


I think “soul crushing” means “had to curtsey to Kate”.


----------



## mshermes

youngster said:


> So interesting that Meghan's friends are saying that she found life in the royal family "soul crushing".  I guess because she couldn't tweet at will or post on the gram or had to occasionally shake hands or sit next to someone she didn't like.
> 
> But, still.  More "soul crushing" than Hollywood?  How is that possible?  How about some of the downright embarrassing things she had to do, and acting jobs she had to take, in order to make it in Hollywood?  Posing for photos in her undies?  Being a briefcase girl on the "Deal or No Deal" game show?  Commercials for stuff she'd probably never use in real life?  Bit parts on tired TV shows?  The constant cycle of auditions and callbacks and rejection? All of that sounds way more "soul crushing" than being asked to go to events for senior citizens and women and veterans.


Like this one?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-sex-act-CAR-90210.html#v-6159369984511033179


----------



## Sol Ryan

I think it’s more of an issue of in Hollywood, she was serving herself. As a royal, she was supposed to be serving the Monarchy/UK... that’s the soul crushing part for her, it’s not supposed to be about her...


----------



## Sophisticatted

Meh-gan said:


> I wonder if they can be made to take down their sussexroyal instagram if they are going to be shilling stuff and promoting freebies they get while using those titles.



 I wish!  I wonder if Megxit was announced abruptly due to the “Jennifer Meyer incident”.  Meg is clearly an Insta-influencer at heart.  She wants the freebies.  She would probably just open a new website, though.  Or re-open “The Tig”.


----------



## Meh-gan

[Outside of anything that is being decided between the private offices [the nerve centres of royal operations] and the British and Canadian governments this week, no-one here believes that the duchess will ever really return to the UK in a meaningful way,’ one said.]

Like our government & Trudeau don’t have enough to do right now. They are trying to bring bodies home from Iran and deal with the aftermath of that tragedy. Of which Harry & Meghan haven’t even acknowledged. No one has time for the royal squatters.

There are so many issues to work out - like they really can’t allow another branch of the royal family to be set up in Canada. Like it’s not good for optics on both sides - for the Queen or Trudeau.


----------



## mdcx

No pap stroll by Megs today?


----------



## youngster

mshermes said:


> Like this one?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-sex-act-CAR-90210.html#v-6159369984511033179


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> So interesting that Meghan's friends are saying that she found life in the royal family "soul crushing".  I guess because she couldn't tweet at will or post on the gram or had to occasionally shake hands or sit next to someone she didn't like.
> 
> But, still.  More "soul crushing" than Hollywood?  How is that possible?  How about some of the downright embarrassing things she had to do, and acting jobs she had to take, in order to make it in Hollywood?  Posing for photos in her undies?  Being a briefcase girl on the "Deal or No Deal" game show?  Commercials for stuff she'd probably never use in real life?  Bit parts on tired TV shows?  The constant cycle of auditions and callbacks and rejection? All of that sounds way more "soul crushing" than being asked to go to events for senior citizens and women and veterans.


THIS .. and she wrote about the fact that after a 'rejection', she would simply sit in her bedroom and eat junk for days!  Was she eating junk the entire time as part of the BRF? .. I DOUBT IT!


----------



## Meh-gan

mshermes said:


> Like this one?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-sex-act-CAR-90210.html#v-6159369984511033179


I will say this again - How has this woman gained a legion of stans duped into thinking she is SO smart having a bachelors degree and a humanitarian wunderkind with a background of wearing short skirts, pretending to suck D on a tv show and film credits of “hot girl.” Like come on people need to be smarter than this. She CHOSE to play sh*tty roles on tv and movies instead of using her degree and experience to do humanitarian or the like work. This is not someone who cares about the causes, she very obviously just wanted to be famous. 

She was never some active humanitarian - she went to a soup kitchen a few times and ran a charity thing in Toronto that was attended by 12 people guys. Then she marries Harry and everyone thinks she is Amal Clooney or something. It’s really WEIRD. 

Being an actress is fine, having bit parts in shows whatever it’s ok. But don’t act like you are some kind of global ambassador for women’s rights or whatever she claims her causes to be because she never did anything of any significance in that arena til she married Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Meh-gan said:


> I will say this again - How has this woman gained a legion of stans duped into thinking she is SO smart having a bachelors degree and a humanitarian wunderkind with a background of wearing short skirts, pretending to suck D on a tv show and film credits of “hot girl.” Like come on people need to be smarter than this. She CHOSE to play sh*tty roles on tv and movies instead of using her degree and experience to do humanitarian or the like work. This is not someone who cares about the causes, she very obviously just wanted to be famous.
> 
> She was never some active humanitarian - she went to a soup kitchen a few times and ran a charity thing in Toronto that was attended by 12 people guys. Then she marries Harry and everyone thinks she is Amal Clooney or something. It’s really WEIRD.
> 
> Being an actress is fine, having bit parts in shows whatever it’s ok. But don’t act like you are some kind of global ambassador for women’s rights or whatever she claims her causes to be because she never did anything of any significance in that arena til she married Harry.


*HEAR-HEAR!!!* .. let us not forget (well, not sure about the younger folks) .. that another OSCAR-winning Actress married into Royalty .. Grace Kelly!  Not one single time did you see her act out, not perform her Royal duties, etc. - she was revered .. Meghan is a JOKE, not WOKE (puhleeze).  I really hope that the Queen takes away their titles and they have to shut down that IG site; to make $$$ off of a family that she has embarassed, turned her back on, etc.? - NOPE!


----------



## DreamingBeauty

They're like a train wreck I can't stop watching/reading about  But if they don't want to fulfill their royal duties (do the work), they shouldn't receive free money from Charles to support their lavish spending, or tax funded security.  They should function like the rest of Hollywood/Instagram culture and pay their own way through endorsements, businesses, appearances and such.  They might have to live like normal people if they can't pull enough money on their own, oh the horror!


----------



## Meh-gan

DreamingBeauty said:


> They're like a train wreck I can't stop watching/reading about  But if they don't want to fulfill their royal duties (do the work), they shouldn't receive free money from Charles to support their lavish spending, or tax funded security.  They should function like the rest of Hollywood/Instagram culture and pay their own way through endorsements, businesses, appearances and such.  They might have to live like normal people if they can't pull enough money on their own, oh the horror!


But who would hire them for endorsements as former duchess Meghan? Woman married to prince Harry. Like I dunno.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Meh-gan said:


> But who would hire them for endorsements as former duchess Meghan? Woman married to prince Harry. Like I dunno.


Oh plenty of people, Weight Watchers hired Fergie, she will do a series of children’s books about kids learning to recycle and use paper straws, flat tummy tea as someone else suggested, I see her selling probiotics....hocking Teslas, the list goes on and on


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

This is so duplicitous it makes me ill [emoji1361]


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> With the details to still be ironed out on security, titles, and finances.  OK, then, that was not really worth a press announcement.
> 
> I do think the Queen and Charles are going to try and find some way to give Harry a path back, to save face, for when he changes his mind and decides that being a member of the common folk doesn't really suit him, or after Meghan decides that a multi-billionaire oligarch would be a better husband.  No need to work or pretend to work!  Never have to ask anyone's permission for anything!  Ever again!


There will be no problem with TQ or Prince Charles allowing him back in.  Prince William could give him a hard time, but ultimately he will cave.


----------



## gracekelly

CAH said:


> In hindsight I wonder if she didn't want to show pictures of Archie right after his birth is because it would have put the attention on him and off her.


They restricted photo access to him because they were trying to figure out a way to make money out of it. .  I don't know if it is allowed to link to the blindgossip site, but there is a pretty good description there under the heading  _the big plan_


----------



## PewPew

VigeeLeBrun said:


> This is so duplicitous it makes me ill [emoji1361]
> 
> View attachment 4642552



If this hits the news cycle in Canada & the U.S., there will likely be a statement from “friends” stating M desperately wanted to meet with the women at the center, but it was impromptu so her security team couldn’t do a sweep & the weather was bad & she had to stay close to Archie etc etc


----------



## Gimmethebag

Looks like Harry and Meghan’s invite was lost in the mail... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-surprise-5m-weddingin-Princess-Beatrice.html


----------



## HiromiT

Of course she didn’t or we would have seen photos of her strolling the gritty streets of the Downtown Eastside, shaking hands with residents, or posing next to the sign for Oppenheimer Park (tent city for the homeless) — with protection officer(s) in tow. But she couldn’t be bothered.

She’s a poser, not an activist or humanitarian. That is all.



VigeeLeBrun said:


> This is so duplicitous it makes me ill [emoji1361]
> 
> View attachment 4642552


----------



## kemilia

mdcx said:


> I’ve read a few comments that MM must be tipping off Splash photo agency, and that there are really not that many paps just hanging around Vancouver.
> Maybe one staged photo op a day is her new PR strategy.


Isn’t Splash the group the Kartrashians use?


----------



## gracekelly

She missed the boat with Stavros.  He could have given her the life she wanted.  Dasha got there first.

I mentioned to another member here that going back to Frogmore would be such a let down after spending time at that the fabulous home and estate on Vancouver Island.  It is like being Cinderella and at midnight, it all goes away.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> She missed the boat with Stavros.  He could have given her the life she wanted.  Dasha got there first.
> 
> I mentioned to another member here that going back to Frogmore would be such a let down after spending time at that the fabulous home and estate on Vancouver Island.  It is like being Cinderella and at midnight, it all goes away.


100% to everything!!!


----------



## marthastoo

DC-Cutie said:


> It’s interesting reading the views/opinions here vs another board I belong to with different demographics.
> 
> I have rooted for them from the beginning, still rooting!


Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.  

Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.


----------



## Gimmethebag

gracekelly said:


> She missed the boat with Stavros.  He could have given her the life she wanted.  Dasha got there first.
> 
> I mentioned to another member here that going back to Frogmore would be such a let down after spending time at that the fabulous home and estate on Vancouver Island.  It is like being Cinderella and at midnight, it all goes away.



I don’t think Stavros was on the table. It’s not surprising he is Dasha’s second billionaire husband. Those guys either go for supermodels or Jackie O/Princess Diana society types.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

marthastoo said:


> Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.
> 
> Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.



Circle jerk is a bit unimaginative, isn’t it? Who suggested the hit man? I missed that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marthastoo said:


> Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.
> 
> Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.



Lots of trashy people have fans. Heck, people write love letters to serial killers in prisons.


----------



## Aqua01

Well, rather "circle jerk" , than circle "pathetic and delusional" for blindly revering a you-know-what. Still waiting for an article where Megain's stans announce that her name has been sanctified


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> Lots of trashy people have fans. Heck, people write love letters to serial killers in prisons.


Too funny. I just saw that post above and was like Charles Manson had fans, too!!! Everyone "famous" can find fans. The world is full of mindless followers.


----------



## hellosunshine

This advertisement  "Canada : Escape the Family"


----------



## Aqua01

Saw this on the net, hilarious  and how true:
"When the going gets tough, Meghan Markle gets gone"


----------



## DreamingBeauty

Meh-gan said:


> But who would hire them for endorsements as former duchess Meghan? Woman married to prince Harry. Like I dunno.


Yeah, I don't foresee ANY issues with them getting paid partnerships if that's what they want. If bloggers/vloggers who are nobodies or D-list celebs can do it, Meghan (former D-list celeb) certainly can.  I'm sure she can have a clothing line, makeup line, furniture line, whatever she wants.  Or she can resort to hawking Walmart, FabFitFun, and Homechef


----------



## Meh-gan

marthastoo said:


> Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.
> 
> Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.


I mean that doesn’t make those people look very smart lol. 

She is showing you all exactly who she is. Pay attention. Like she didn’t even go to the women’s shelter - even the director of the charity is outing her nonsense. 

She is doing pap walks, tipping them off so they can get shots of her, she is no better than a thirsty Kardashian. She isn’t after privacy at all. 

She has created this OTT drama over how difficult her royal life is to try and achieve the level of attention and sympathy that Diana did over her struggles within the royal family. She is not Diana come again. 

If people continue to support this in the face of overwhelming evidence that she isn’t someone anyone should admire, that’s just willful ignorance and I’m judging hard.


----------



## Meh-gan

DreamingBeauty said:


> Yeah, I don't foresee ANY issues with them getting paid partnerships if that's what they want. If bloggers/vloggers who are nobodies or D-list celebs can do it, Meghan (former D-list celeb) certainly can.  I'm sure she can have a clothing line, makeup line, furniture line, whatever she wants.  Or she can resort to hawking Walmart, FabFitFun, and Homechef


Ugh this makes me sad. Like humans we need to be better than this.


----------



## rose60610

Well, "Squatty Potty" fired Kathy Griffin, so........perhaps Meghan could fill that opening and hawk those.  Some people do call toilets a "throne", so it is one way of linking her "Royal Title".  I bet they'd pay her ten times over what they paid Griffin.  I'm just trying to help.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> So interesting that Meghan's friends are saying that she found life in the royal family "soul crushing".  I guess because she couldn't tweet at will or post on the gram or had to occasionally shake hands or sit next to someone she didn't like.
> 
> But, still.  More "soul crushing" than Hollywood?  How is that possible?  How about some of the downright embarrassing things she had to do, and acting jobs she had to take, in order to make it in Hollywood?  Posing for photos in her undies?  Being a briefcase girl on the "Deal or No Deal" game show?  Commercials for stuff she'd probably never use in real life?  Bit parts on tired TV shows?  The constant cycle of auditions and callbacks and rejection? All of that sounds way more "soul crushing" than being asked to go to events for senior citizens and women and veterans.


It is odd that she said soul crushing.  I said this before -- I always look at the faces and everyone the royal family stands with is smiling ear to ear. They don't have to win anyone over. How can that be soul crushing?


marthastoo said:


> Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.
> 
> Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.


Our national news stations, because they have air time to fill, have gone to the streets of BC to ask their opinions of the move and not one person said anything bad. Everyone was very chill.

That's not to say there weren't any angry people with nasty answers, but if there were, they didn't get air time.  Most people don't care and think it's cool.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> It is odd that she said soul crushing.  I said this before -- I always look at the faces and everyone the royal family stands with is smiling ear to ear. They don't have to win anyone over. How can that be soul crushing?
> 
> Our national news stations, because they have air time to fill, have gone to the streets of BC to ask their opinions of the move and not one person said anything bad. Everyone was very chill.
> 
> That's not to say there weren't any angry people with nasty answers, but if there were, they didn't get air time.  Most people don't care and think it's cool.



It's most ironic that Meghan found the RF "soul crushing" since she apprenticed for the job by living with Harry before they were even married. Not for one minute will I ever believe she didn't have this all planned well before she married Harry. She was setting up companies a year ago. She treats Archie like a fashion accessory, IMO his purpose was to provide an inheritance stream from the RF. She must realize she is persona non grata to them, but Archie comes to the molto British pounds rescue! Who spends 4 million dollars on a house renovation only to move out basically ten minutes later?  Maybe Meghan meant "soul crushing" in the sense that the RF saw through her deceitfulness. 

And it's easy to edit out negative responses from "Man on the Street" interviews for the news. I can see Canadians saying they don't care if Harry and Meghan live in Canada, even if somebody wanted to complain they won't as they don't want to risk being on the receiving end of some crazy stan feedback.


----------



## V0N1B2

IDGAF where Meghan Markle lives, I’m just not down with paying for her security on her extended six month vacation from the UK because she couldn’t hack being married to a damn Prince. We pay enough taxes as it is and if she’s as rich as everyone claims her to be, she can pay her own way. Now if y’all excuse me, Real Time is back on after it’s winter hiatus. 
Adieu  (oh and I actually do speak fluent French)


----------



## Meh-gan

rose60610 said:


> It's most ironic that Meghan found the RF "soul crushing" since she apprenticed for the job by living with Harry before they were even married. Not for one minute will I ever believe she didn't have this all planned well before she married Harry. She was setting up companies a year ago. She treats Archie like a fashion accessory, IMO his purpose was to provide an inheritance stream from the RF. She must realize she is persona non grata to them, but Archie comes to the molto British pounds rescue! Who spends 4 million dollars on a house renovation only to move out basically ten minutes later?  Maybe Meghan meant "soul crushing" in the sense that the RF saw through her deceitfulness.
> 
> And it's easy to edit out negative responses from "Man on the Street" interviews for the news. I can see Canadians saying they don't care if Harry and Meghan live in Canada, even if somebody wanted to complain they won't as they don't want to risk being on the receiving end of some crazy stan feedback.


Also Canadians don’t really care about them that much or know all the details like we do. People are posting on my social feeds (rarely but when they do mention H&M) like if they want to be regular people who cares whatever. Let them be nobodies - it’s not a big deal to them because they don’t realize all the things like we may pay for their security and they will still get money from public funds in a roundabout way via Charles etc. 

And I mean Canadians paid more attention to the Don Cherry scandal than they would do these two. The news coverage has also been brief mentions at the end of segments since we have an actual real event that just happened that is taking up the news cycle.


----------



## Jktgal

marthastoo said:


> Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.
> 
> Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.



That a lot of people like her is obvious. I enjoy this thread because   people here question why. Plus it's a great source of reference of media reports/op-eds. I've enjoyed the editorial linked here from Canadian newspapers, raising discussions on monarchy, Canadian history, etc. The Economist article on this issue is fascinating. 
[Simple minded stans just brand you hater or jealous, yawn]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> I think “soul crushing” means “had to curtsey to Kate”.


Exactly lol


----------



## Kim O'Meara

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU, right???  More importantly, why would they even 'gift' her anything; why isn't that $$$ going to the cause that they are (supposed) to be representing???  I don't get this ..


Exactly. There’s a childish element to it all, using causes after abandoning the UK causes that were so important last year, the clothes and some real shoddy PR (good PR is seemless). 

Even if they were generous gifting for a reason, she should say ‘it’s gorgeous, I’ll wear it for this photo now you auction it and use the money’ etc.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Sophisticatted said:


> I wish!  I wonder if Megxit was announced abruptly due to the “Jennifer Meyer incident”.  Meg is clearly an Insta-influencer at heart.  She wants the freebies.  She would probably just open a new website, though.  Or re-open “The Tig”.


Yeah I didn’t think that’d sit well. It would be embarrassing because I think a good friend would probably ask, Meghan ok’d then had to walk back. If you’re trying to be the big dog to your friends, it’s a clear sign you’re not.

I hope they get the freedom they want. I hope Harry has a way back with his family. It would be nice to think they could be happy, but not at the expense (literally) of others. Be you, do you, but you is the operative word. You’re responsible. Not the public, not the BRF. Anything gained by the association you want to get rid of should go too.

I genuinely thought they were genuine people. I bought it all. I don’t now. I think the grass is greener thinking ruins many a would be otherwise happy life.


----------



## Chagall

PewPew said:


> If this hits the news cycle in Canada & the U.S., there will likely be a statement from “friends” stating M desperately wanted to meet with the women at the center, but it was impromptu so her security team couldn’t do a sweep & the weather was bad & she had to stay close to Archie etc etc


Narcissists have an excuse for all their questionable behaviour.


----------



## Chagall

VigeeLeBrun said:


> This is so duplicitous it makes me ill [emoji1361]
> 
> View attachment 4642552


When the pictures were posted of her with the women it struck me that they all looked so nice. Hair, makeup, clothes etc. it didn’t look impromptu.


----------



## mdcx

Chagall said:


> When the pictures were posted of her with the women it struck me that they all looked so nice. Hair, makeup, clothes etc. it didn’t look impromptu.


Yes! I noticed a few of them had their hair nicely done. Not your usual ‘random day down the office’ looks in my experience.


----------



## Chagall

It has been suggested that the BRF would be happy for Harry to be the Governor General of Canada. That is what they did to avoid having the Duke of Windsor, aka King Edward the eighth hanging around the U.K. and causing embarrassment and controversy. I won’t make some tongue in cheek dry joke about my feelings as it would be taken literally and provide fodder for the stans.


----------



## lindsey rim

i shoked when i read this article in this poste https://www.ladieshabits.com/post/Prince-Harry-and-Meghan-Markle's-Royal-Retirement/0 , i dont think the royal family will allow them to split from thier job, besides it realy hard that they can live a normal life and get a normal job, they are already famous.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m hoping in a few years she will be on the Real Housewives franchise. Move to Los Angeles and join the fun. I’ll watch her day drink and cry about her life.


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> Agreed. While this thread seems to be a circle jerk of ever-increasing outrage with people literally so affronted that one posted she literally wanted to hire a hit man to kill Meghan, there are many others who feel the exact opposite.  After reading this, one would think that the entire British and Canadian populace despises her so deeply that if she dares shows her face pretty much anywhere, she will be "pelted with tomatoes" or worse.
> 
> Of course, that isn't the case.  Yes, some people dislike Meghan and Harry, very much so.  But, some like them very much.  I am sure this entire thread will be thunder stuck when people actually cheer and seem happy to see her at her next public appearance.


someone here said they wanted to hire a hit on her?  I didn't see that and if it was posted I imagine it's been deleted.
I'm not a fan of Meghan and don't like Harry as much as I used to.  I don't really care if they travel via private jet, etc.
The thing that bothers me is she landed this prince, had the huge wedding, became famous beyond her wildest dreams.  then complained (publicly) that life was hard.

But I'm well aware that lots of people like them.


----------



## Deleted 698298

The total money spent on them should have gone towards NHS, where it’s needed most! I can’t get over the fact how ungrateful they behave the more I think of it all


----------



## Chagall

I am concerned that the turmoil from this may cause health problems for QE and Prince Philip. They are both in their 90’s and PP has recently been admitted to hospital. I hope they can smooth it out.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think the Queen will be OK. She has people to ask her that, too, not like poor Meghan. She has weathered far worse than the shenanigans of these two. I know she is older now but she clearly knows how to set boundaries and I think these two are on her to-do list with a lot of other things.  Over the course of her life, imagine the things she has had on her plate! She has to focus on the Mister now, too.

A spin around the estate in her Range Rover and a nice brisk hack on one of her ponies is probably all she needs to put Sussexit on the back burner for the day.


----------



## Chagall

CobaltBlu said:


> I think the Queen will be OK. She has people to ask her that, too, not like poor Meghan. She has weathered far worse than the shenanigans of these two. I know she is older now but she clearly knows how to set boundaries and I think these two are on her to-do list with a lot of other things.  Over the course of her life, imagine the things she has had on her plate! She has to focus on the Mister now, too.
> 
> A spin around the estate in her Range Rover and a nice brisk hack on one of her ponies is probably all she needs to put Sussexit on the back burner for the day.


I think that you are right. I just know when my mother was up in age we had to be so careful not to upset her in any way. I think the the queen is very strong but their are limits. Maybe the other Royals will help smooth things out amicabley.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I think the Queen will be OK. She has people to ask her that, too, not like poor Meghan. She has weathered far worse than the shenanigans of these two. I know she is older now but she clearly knows how to set boundaries and I think these two are on her to-do list with a lot of other things.  Over the course of her life, imagine the things she has had on her plate! She has to focus on the Mister now, too.
> 
> A spin around the estate in her Range Rover and a nice brisk hack on one of her ponies is probably all she needs to put Sussexit on the back burner for the day.


agree... although H is her grandson and I'm sure she loves him, she also knows she has a duty and can separate her personal feelings from her "job" when she needs to


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

DreamingBeauty said:


> Yeah, I don't foresee ANY issues with them getting paid partnerships if that's what they want. If bloggers/vloggers who are nobodies or D-list celebs can do it, Meghan (former D-list celeb) certainly can.  I'm sure she can have a clothing line, makeup line, furniture line, whatever she wants.  Or she can resort to hawking Walmart, FabFitFun, and Homechef


Maybe Reitman's (clothing line she did commercials for here in Canada) can hire her again!!


----------



## wisconsin

We can speculate all we want but Meghan has Archie and Harry and she is going to get what she wants and she knows it.
I have given up.
I can only hope for Karma.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

wisconsin said:


> We can speculate all we want but Meghan has Archie and Harry and she is going to get what she wants and she knows it.
> I have given up.
> I can only hope for Karma.



I hope she goes the one step too far that will make Harry wake up. I feel if the family including Harry closed ranks MM would be over in the blink of an eye. BRF only keeps mum because they a) love Harry and b) don't want to give him a reason to completely turn against them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, I wonder...does she have someone follow all the sh*t that's being written about her and feeling even the slightest bit uneasy there are indeed people who don't buy her shtick (and not because "She's black!" or "She's American" but because they actually took the time to listen, watch, analyze)? Or still too smug for her own good?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Here we go.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

mrsinsyder said:


> Here we go.
> View attachment 4643079


Who’s paying for that I wonder??


----------



## jennalovesbags

*Statement from HM The Queen *
Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.

Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.

I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.

I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family. 

It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.


----------



## jennalovesbags

jennalovesbags said:


> *Statement from HM The Queen *
> Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.
> 
> Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.
> 
> I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.
> 
> I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family.
> 
> It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.



*Statement from Buckingham Palace*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are grateful to Her Majesty and the Royal Family for their ongoing support as they embark on the next chapter of their lives.

As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties. 

With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations. While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.

The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home.

Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security.

This new model will take effect in the Spring of 2020.


----------



## hellosunshine

They're no longer a part of the royal family  They're free!

It's a clean break!!!! There's no one foot in and one foot out.


----------



## mshermes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-HRH-titles-REPAY-2-4million-public-cash.html

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will no longer use HRH titles, will REPAY £2.4million of public cash spent on their Frogmore Cottage home and receive no more public cash as Queen says they remain 'much loved family members'*

Fly and be free.....


----------



## PatsyCline

More than a fair arrangement for all.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Byeeeeeee!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Then they won’t be using Sussex Royal anymore?


----------



## maryg1

hellosunshine said:


> They're no longer a part of the royal family  They're free!
> 
> It's a clean break!!!! There's no one foot in and one foot out.


That’s hilarious....MM stans have always been so proud of her being a member of the BRF and now are happy she’s not
Were would she be now exactly, if she hadn’t married a prince?


----------



## gelbergirl

are they still Duke and Duchess?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cph706

PatsyCline said:


> More than a fair arrangement for all.


Completely agree. 
Other HRHs have given up the title, such as the current Duchess of Kent. It’s their lives and they should do as they please.


----------



## mrsinsyder

maryg1 said:


> That’s hilarious....MM stans have always been so proud of her being a member of the BRF and now are happy she’s not
> Were would she be now exactly, if she hadn’t married a prince?


Exactly!
She’d still be yachting trying to find a rich guy.

It sounds like the Queen told them where to go. We love to see it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gelbergirl said:


> are they still Duke and Duchess?


Yes


----------



## A1aGypsy

They should have to give up all titles.


----------



## hellosunshine

maryg1 said:


> That’s hilarious....MM stans have always been so proud of her being a member of the BRF and now are happy



Speaking for myself,  but I was more proud of the significance of her presence within the British Royal Family.




gelbergirl said:


> are they still Duke and Duchess?



It's being reported that they're no longer the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. They'll keep their HRH titles but will not use them.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Speaking for myself,  but I was more proud of the significance of her presence within the British Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's being reported that they're no longer the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.


They'll still be Duke and Duchess, but not HRHs. Just like Diana was still Princess of Wales and Fergie is still Duchess of York. They just took their HRH away.


----------



## gelbergirl

A Royal High-Five to the Queen for getting this done.


----------



## gelbergirl

Sharont2305 said:


> They'll still be Duke and Duchess, but not HRHs. Just like Diana was still Princess of Wales and Fergie is still Duchess of York. They just took their HRH away.



which means William can give it back one day, just like he promised his Mom he would do one day.


----------



## hellosunshine

Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennalovesbags said:


> *Statement from HM The Queen *[...]
> I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, *and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family.*



OMG.



jennalovesbags said:


> *Statement from Buckingham Palace*
> While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.



Give me a break. One part of the Sussexes has not "upheld the values of Her Majesty" a single day ever since she married into this family.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

So SR x (insert brand) collaborations are coming to a store near you soon then, with, at a guess, % of profits going to this year’s cause of choice until it’s no longer convenient. Giving the appearance of goodness for the SR brand but really just a cloaked sales tool.

And the Duchy of Cornwall will probably still be picking up the bill for tonnes, probably the repayment of FC too.

A nicely worded statement from the Queen though, including MM so she can’t play the victim saying the Queen was mean.


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> Here we go.
> View attachment 4643079



The purchase of this house, or estate, would probably use up their entire combined net worth so I assume that they would expect Charles or the Queen to step in and buy it for them and likely help them maintain it.  I guess we're on to the thriving part of life now.


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> which means William can give it back one day, just like he promised his Mom he would do one day.


I was going to add the very same thing


----------



## jcnc

gelbergirl said:


> which means William can give it back one day, just like he promised his Mom he would do one day.


I doubt William will do that. Harry’s departure has the biggest impact on him. His brother decided to leave the family and forgo his duty to the crown.

time will tell


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

jennalovesbags said:


> *Statement from Buckingham Palace*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are grateful to Her Majesty and the Royal Family for their ongoing support as they embark on the next chapter of their lives.
> 
> As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties.
> 
> With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations. While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.
> 
> The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home.
> 
> Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security.
> 
> This new model will take effect in the Spring of 2020.


When referrred to „the Sussexes“ it sounds like their lastname. But there surname is mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## PatsyCline

gelbergirl said:


> which means William can give it back one day, just like he promised his Mom he would do one day.


I was always wondering if William would consider doing that once he becomes king.


----------



## myown

gelbergirl said:


> are they still Duke and Duchess?


The statement says so?


----------



## Clearblueskies

I'm pleased to see the statement makes clear they no longer represent the crown.  No ambiguity there for them to exploit.


----------



## PatsyCline

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!


Even when Meghan was a member, she would curtsy to Kate. Hierarchy rules.


----------



## myown

gelbergirl said:


> which means William can give it back one day, just like he promised his Mom he would do one day.


It kinda sounds like they went through a lot and need to find their own path. But to me it sounds like if they want to come back in 30yrs they will be welcome


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Daily Mail journalist answered some Qs on her Twitter. It’s a thread beyond the main tweet, about money, names etc.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!





PatsyCline said:


> Even when Meghan was a member, she would curtsy to Kate. Hierarchy rules.


I think within the family, the younger generation don't bow and curtsy to one another, only to their elders.

That would change when Kate becomes Queen, but I agree with hellosunshine - Meghan will be long, long gone by the time that happens.  Harry's second wife will curtsy to Kate.


----------



## Flatsy

The statement does not say they have lost their HRH titles; statement says they will not *use* them.


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!


Why would she not?


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!


She'll have to, like she's always had to


----------



## hellosunshine

PatsyCline said:


> Even when Meghan was a member, she would curtsy to Kate. Hierarchy rules.



Yeah. Technically, Meghan is supposed to curtsy to Kate (though the lot of the immediate family do not often bow to other royals other than the Queen). However, if Meghan stuck around long enough for William to take the throne, yeah we'd see Meghan bowing to Kate.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> She'll have to, like she's always had to


Yep, and she’ll be curtsying to people who used to curtsey to her


----------



## myown

Where is the big deal? That’s howvthey wanted it


Clearblueskies said:


> Yep, and she’ll be curtsying to people who used to curtsey to her


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> Where is the big deal? That’s howvthey wanted it


I’m not the poster making it one!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!



I don't think there will be that many opportunities for her to curtsy to Kate. I don't think that she will spend much time in the UK ever again, unless it's under carefully controlled circumstances and for photo ops for short periods.  I doubt she'll be spending any time going to church in public with the family for example.  But, she and Harry will show up occasionally, like for balcony photo-ops, to make sure it is evident that they are still associated with the family and I could see them now trying to get those invites to spend a weekend at Balmoral for the same reason. 

I expect that the rest of the family will treat them politely, but they'll be outsiders who abandoned their duties to go make money which, in turn, placed more work and duties on all the remaining members of the family.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> I don't think there will be that many opportunities for her to curtsy to Kate. I don't think that she will spend much time in the UK ever again, unless it's under carefully controlled circumstances and for photo ops for short periods.  I doubt she'll be spending any time going to church in public with the family for example.  But, she and Harry will show up occasionally, like for balcony photo-ops, to make sure it is evident that they are still associated with the family and I could see them now trying to get those invites to spend a weekend at Balmoral for the same reason.
> 
> I expect that the rest of the family will treat them politely, but they'll be outsiders who abandoned their duties to go make money which, in turn, placed more work and duties on all the remaining members of the family.


I think they’ll be treated correctly as you say, but the trust is gone.  They’ll be making a progressive new role (whatever that means) outside the institution, not within it.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Yep, and she’ll be curtsying to people who used to curtsey to her


Ha ha, yes, lol. Brilliant


----------



## joyeaux

WOW, just wow. I have the same question as was posted earlier, what does this mean for that Sussex Royal moniker if they're no longer "his/her royal highness"?

I thought this article was a really interesting perspective (and all the more relevant now that we know the deets of the deal) in comparison to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, and the aftermath of a huge exit like this. Harry's life is going to really change I think in ways he can't even fathom yet.  Like the part about the Duke of Windsor not realizing he didn't need to buy everything in bulk anymore (because he didn't need one for each of his residences), and having a "programme" laid out for him because... that's just what he always did. (bolded by me). From The Telegraph, link here.

I do think Harry will keep himself busier than the Duke of Windsor did, but once the dust settles from all of this, I truly hope it's a happy life for them both.



> *To stop history repeating, Meghan must learn from Wallis Simpson*
> Save
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like Wallis Simpson, Meghan may have a new role to play once Harry's royal support network falls away  CREDIT: REX/PA
> 
> Anna Pasternak
> 18 JANUARY 2020 • 7:00AM
> 
> 
> When the Sussexes married in May 2018, we wanted to believe in happily-ever-after. Prince Harry finding true love was cause for celebration and, as a nation, we were rooting for the glamorous young couple. Less than two years later, we are faced with the seismic news that Harry and Meghan are to be semi-detached royals, living largely in Canada.
> 
> This week, the duke performed what may be his last official duty as a senior royal, laughing with something approaching relief as he launched the rugby league world cup at Buckingham Palace. It has also been reported that staff at the couple’s Windsor home, Frogmore House, have been let go. The consensus seems to be that this partial abdication proves the immortal phrase from the time of their nuptials: “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets”.
> 
> Reluctant to be a silent ribbon-cutter, “progressive” Meghan appears determined to have it all. She wants her modern marriage and her royal husband on her terms - and her terrain, having previously lived in Toronto while filming *Suits*. But if history has taught us anything, it’s that the real work will now begin for Meghan.
> 
> *When Edward VIII abdicated to marry Wallis Simpson in 1936, he never paused to consider the complex emotional implications the decision would have on his wife.* More prescient than him, Wallis – who burst into tears at the first mention of abdication - could see that she would be blamed in perpetuity for stealing a popular king from his throne and almost destroying the monarchy. The relationship that began as a thrilling coup de foudre for the former ruler, became a Faustian pact for his wife.
> 
> 
> Meghan should look to her predecessor - the first American Duchess - to see that, *once Harry’s royal support network falls away, she will have a new role to play. Suddenly, without his family and roster of royal duties – everything that has given structure and meaning to his life - Harry’s sense of purpose will demand detailed attention from his wife. While Meghan will be inundated with exciting opportunities, his future is far less certain.*
> 
> He appears to have admirably put Meghan’s happiness first while she settled into his world; now it will have to be the other way around. The onus will be on her to ensure that this monumental sacrifice has been worth it. She may well find, as Wallis did, that this becomes onerous. The “us against the world” mantra fast exposes any relationship flaws and requires a backbone of committed steel not to buckle.
> 
> For Wallis and Edward there remained a seam of guilt that underlay their marriage. He had turned her into the most hated woman in the world, while she felt responsible for taking him away from his country. Their marriage became an overcompensation for this. It simply had to work; they couldn’t let a sacrifice of such monumental proportions have been in vain.
> 
> *Once the banished couple arrived in Paris, where they settled, it began to sink in that the duke - then in his early forties, not much older than 35-year-old Harry - had nothing to do. He yearned for gainful employment, while idle restlessness gave him time to nurse his grievances against his family and dwell on injustices. While Wallis filled his life as much as she could, neither had anticipated a life of obscurity.*
> 
> She told the writer Gore Vidal: “I remember like yesterday the morning after we married and I woke up and there was David standing beside my bed with this innocent smile, saying ‘and now what do we do?’ My heart sank.* Here was someone whose every day had been arranged for him all his life and now I was the one who was going to take the place of the entire British government, trying to think up things to do”.*
> 
> Harry may not be a king renouncing the throne, but Meghan will have to be similarly diligent towards a man who, rather like his great great uncle, does not seem to be as emotionally resourceful as his wife.
> 
> In August 1942, when Edward was Governor of the Bahamas, his brother, the Duke of Kent was killed in a plane crash in Scotland. Edward was consumed with grief. Wallis watched his agonies helplessly. It was poignant that earlier that year, she had attempted, without her husband’s knowledge, to make “one last try to reach his mother and heal the breach between them.” She wrote a generous-spirited letter to Queen Mary, explaining: “It has always been a source of sorrow and regret to me that I have been the cause of any separation between mother and son and I can’t help feeling that there must be moments, perhaps, however fleeting they many be, when you wonder how David is.”
> 
> 
> The sweet missive received no reply. The love affair between Edward and Wallis was a story of devotion and a heart-rending chronicle of the consequences of sacrifice - his in giving up the throne for the woman he adored, but also hers in having to put her husband’s needs first for the duration of their 35-year marriage.
> 
> It remains to be seen if Meghan has the selflessness to place Harry’s happiness ahead of her own. Family may be fraught, but exile illustrates that no man – and no marriage - is an island.
> 
> _*The American Duchess by Anna Pasternak is published by William Collins on February 6*_


----------



## LittleStar88

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!



is that what this was about then? 
Kate doesn’t need her curtesy or the drama that came with it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Amazing that they are allowed to keep a massive cottage for the odd occasion when they come back. Seems a small apt at KP would have made more sense.


----------



## doni

The statement is anything but clear to say the least.

If they will not use their HRH titles, can they still exploit the Sussex Royal brand? It doesn’t say.

Will they continue to receive funds from the Duchy of Cornwall? it doesn’t say.

Who will pay for security? It doesn’t say.

Will their financial activities be in any way audited or under control from the UK state (government/parliament)? It doesn’t say.


----------



## youngster

I guess they mean that Prince Charles will be paying back the 2.4 million pounds that it cost to renovate Frogmore cottage.  Can't imagine those two would spend a dime of their own money to repay anyone.  Also, are they going to be paying rent on it?  That's another open question.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I wonder how that petition from the people of Sussex is going now...


----------



## Meh-gan

Flatsy said:


> The statement does not say they have lost their HRH titles; statement says they will not *use* them.


I dont get why Meghan even has to have it. Like the duchess title she married into was enough. Harry can keep his HRH title cus he is a blood prince. Like MM doesn’t need it.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I don't think there will be that many opportunities for her to curtsy to Kate. I don't think that she will spend much time in the UK ever again, unless it's under carefully controlled circumstances and for photo ops for short periods.  I doubt she'll be spending any time going to church in public with the family for example.  But, she and Harry will show up occasionally, like for balcony photo-ops, to make sure it is evident that they are still associated with the family and I could see them now trying to get those invites to spend a weekend at Balmoral for the same reason.
> 
> I expect that the rest of the family will treat them politely, but they'll be outsiders who abandoned their duties to go make money which, in turn, placed more work and duties on all the remaining members of the family.


This so reminds me of the the duke of Windsor story after abdication


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> The statement is anything but clear to say the least.
> 
> If they will not use their HRH titles, can they still exploit the Sussex Royal brand? It doesn’t say.
> 
> Will they continue to receive funds from the Duchy of Cornwall? it doesn’t say.
> 
> Who will pay for security? It doesn’t say.
> 
> Will their financial activities be in any way audited or under control from the UK state (government/parliament)? It doesn’t say.


I doubt they can use Sussexroyal anymore, they are no longer royals , no HRH
They need a new brand name , I suspect


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I find it sad, the breaking up of a family under any circumstances is painful. And I wonder what Diana would be thinking about it all.


----------



## sdkitty

I was listening (or half listening) to CNN on TV.  Brit reporter was speculating that now Harry may get the private life he's always wanted and Meghan will be the famous or public one.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kansashalo

sdkitty said:


> I was listening (or half listening) to CNN on TV.  Brit reporter was speculating that now Harry may get the private life he's always wanted and Meghan will be the famous or public one.



I  agree with CNN lol  I know quite a few folks blame Mehgan for all this, but perhaps this has been Harry's plan since childhood.  He knew that the average woman in his circle was too enamored on "being a princess" or having a title to ever agree to such a thing as no longer being a recognized part if the royal family.  But then came Mehgan... 

I'm happy for them and wish them the best


----------



## CeeJay

maryg1 said:


> That’s hilarious....MM stans have always been so proud of her being a member of the BRF and now are happy she’s not
> *Were would she be now exactly, if she hadn’t married a prince?*


A D-List actress and then an out-of-work actress .. and since she's not going to be able to get those 'ingenue' parts, who knows???


----------



## bag-princess

marietouchet said:


> I doubt they can use Sussexroyal anymore, they are no longer royals , no HRH
> They need a new brand name , I suspect



has a new article come out saying that they no longer have the titles - because the ones I have seen just say that they will not use them!


----------



## bag-mania

Kansashalo said:


> I  agree with CNN lol  I know quite a few folks blame Mehgan for all this, but perhaps this has been Harry's plan since childhood.  He knew that the average woman in his circle was too enamored on "being a princess" or having a title to ever agree to such a thing as no longer being a recognized part if the royal family.  But then came Mehgan...
> 
> I'm happy for them and wish them the best



 I doubt that. Harry lived his whole life and never made the slightest effort to liberate himself from the “burden” of being royalty. He’s been married less than two years and here they are running away.  Do you honestly believe Meghan  wasn’t strongly attracted to the prince angle when she met him?   She wanted it badly until she realized she didn’t like it because it wasn’t the way she thought it would be.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I think saying they won’t use HRH is a HUGE statement of the Queen putting them in their places. It’s clear this didn’t go the way they wanted. Who would ask to pay £2.4 million back on a home they don’t even want? 

Good job Liz.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Here we go.
> View attachment 4643079
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOT
> I don't think $40 mil will do it for this.....imagine just the upkeep


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> I doubt that. *Harry lived his whole life and never made the slightest effort to liberate himself from the “burden” of being royalty. *He’s been married less than two years and here they are running away.  Do you honestly believe Meghan  wasn’t strongly attracted to the prince angle when she met him?   She wanted it badly until she realized she didn’t like it because it wasn’t the way she thought it would be.



Doesn’t mean he didn’t want to!  Nobody can say for certain that he didn’t.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Smiling Meg and Archie pap stroll in 5.. 4 .. 3..


----------



## mrsinsyder

Can they scrap that silly little crown monogram they use now?


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> This so reminds me of the the duke of Windsor story after abdication



They are basically the Duke and Duchess of Windsor 2.0, but slightly younger and with a baby.  Harry wasn't the King, of course, so a lot less dramatic and with many fewer repercussions  as the line of succession is still the same. The social media era that we live in heightens the drama for a bit.

Still, Meghan now finds herself playing the Wallis SImpson role here. They've had their "us against the world" mindset and it must have been so exciting!  Look at us being rebels (but with really big allowances from Daddy)!   And, the Queen and the world said "OK, fine, go do you". So, we'll see how they like it long term. Harry made a big sacrifice for her happiness.  Is she willing to make sacrifices now for his happiness?  He's a total fish out of water.  Harry in Vancouver.  Harry in L.A.   A prince without a Palace to tell him what to do, where to go, what to say, issue discreet and well written speeches or statements on his behalf, and make sure the Invictus Games were a success. There are opportunities to make money now but many more opportunities to screw up publicly.  Edward and Wallis Simpson stayed together their whole lives because splitting would have been humiliating, after what he gave up, so they made it work.  Time will tell about H and MM.


----------



## hellosunshine

*Prince Harry Was Spotted at a London Pub Looking "Happy" and "Relaxed"*

While Meghan Markle is carrying out low-key engagements in Canada, Prince Harry remains in England.

The Duke of Sussex has had a busy week attending official events and entering discussions regarding his decision to step down as a senior member of the royal family. But according to a new report, the prince has also found time to catch up with some of his closest friends.

After Prince Harry was reportedly spotted at Fulham's Brook House Pub this week, a source told _The Sun_'s Fabulous Digital, "He seemed very happy, relaxed. He was sat in the middle of seven guys and they spent a good few hours laughing and joking." The onlooker noted that the duke had been "enjoying a few beers and a meal with his pals."

It's heartwarming to know that the prince has been able to catch up with friends during his time in the United Kingdom.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb.../prince-harry-fulham-london-pub-visit-report/


----------



## Sharont2305

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I find it sad, the breaking up of a family under any circumstances is painful. And I wonder what Diana would be thinking about it all.


I think she would be very sad about all this. For Harry and for William.


----------



## Coconuts40

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!



Don't understand the point of this statement.
Is this why this was all done, because Meghan Markle has so much ego that she can't fathom the fact of having to curtsy to anyone?  She married into a family rich in history and protocol, and all this so she doesn't have to curtsy?

I swear the more I read about Meghan Markle the more I feel a lot of her decisions to leave the Monarchy have to do with ego.   Not having to curtsy, having to walk behind Kate, not being the big fish in the pond....


----------



## Coconuts40

hellosunshine said:


> *Prince Harry Was Spotted at a London Pub Looking "Happy" and "Relaxed"*
> 
> While Meghan Markle is carrying out low-key engagements in Canada, Prince Harry remains in England.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has had a busy week attending official events and entering discussions regarding his decision to step down as a senior member of the royal family. But according to a new report, the prince has also found time to catch up with some of his closest friends.
> 
> After Prince Harry was reportedly spotted at Fulham's Brook House Pub this week, a source told _The Sun_'s Fabulous Digital, "He seemed very happy, relaxed. He was sat in the middle of seven guys and they spent a good few hours laughing and joking." The onlooker noted that the duke had been "enjoying a few beers and a meal with his pals."
> 
> It's heartwarming to know that the prince has been able to catch up with friends during his time in the United Kingdom.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb.../prince-harry-fulham-london-pub-visit-report/



Lets see how long this lasts. 
As the saying goes,  be careful what you ask for ....


----------



## hellosunshine

Coconuts40 said:


> Don't understand the point of this statement.
> Is this why this was all done, because Meghan Markle has so much ego that she can't fathom the fact of having to curtsy to anyone?



No.  And, if anyone believes this was the reason  then you clearly haven't been paying attention the last 3 years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

He was probably looking happy and relaxed because his wife is on another continent. Making the most of his freedom


----------



## Coconuts40

hellosunshine said:


> No.  And, if anyone believes this was the reason  then you clearly haven't been paying attention the last 3 years.



I have been paying close attention indeed.


----------



## shiba

Flatsy said:


> The statement does not say they have lost their HRH titles; statement says they will not *use* them.



And there is the loophole....


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> They are basically the Duke and Duchess of Windsor 2.0, but slightly younger and with a baby.  Harry wasn't the King, of course, so a lot less dramatic and with many fewer repercussions  as the line of succession is still the same. The social media era that we live in heightens the drama for a bit.
> 
> Still, Meghan now finds herself playing the Wallis SImpson role here. They've had their "us against the world" mindset and it must have been so exciting!  Look at us being rebels (but with really big allowances from Daddy)!   And, the Queen and the world said "OK, fine, go do you". So, we'll see how they like it long term. Harry made a big sacrifice for her happiness.  Is she willing to make sacrifices now for his happiness?  He's a total fish out of water.  Harry in Vancouver.  Harry in L.A.   A prince without a Palace to tell him what to do, where to go, what to say, issue discreet and well written speeches or statements on his behalf, and make sure the Invictus Games were a success. There are opportunities to make money now but many more opportunities to screw up publicly.  Edward and Wallis Simpson stayed together their whole lives because splitting would have been humiliating, after what he gave up, so they made it work.  Time will tell about H and MM.




Duke of Windsor made a few bucks off his brother by forcing him to buy Balmoral and Sandringham. Harry has nothing to sell. Wallis traveled in pretty high circles prior to meeting the Prince.  She had connections and great style and that helped them maintain their lifestyle, boring and vapid as it was. He had been a King, which puts him in a whole other category than Harry.  Harry has now joined the club of other princes without a country. He will never be shown the respect that he previously enjoyed. My take on the British is that they have always been proud of doing their duty to King/Queen and country. An island nation that ruled a large part of the world at one time and fought it as well and won. The steadfastness of the Windsors during WW ll is known by all and the reason the Queen is so beloved.    Harry did not uphold any of this and only thought of himself. I know that many will be in disagreement with this.   I don’t think the the majority of his country will disagree and they won’t think much of him for it in addition.

There will be limits on how much of themselves they can sell. There is more to come on this subject I’m sure.  The attorneys are probably still hashing it out. While that happens the Sussex are probably still going to get an allowance. The deals may have to be vetted by BP and it could be a long time before the cash rolls in if at all. If the Sussex ignore this, there could be serious repercussions.  Given the impatience that they have previously shown, I wouldn’t be surprised if this will happen.


----------



## youngster

Coconuts40 said:


> Lets see how long this lasts.
> As the saying goes,  be careful what you ask for ....



And . . . "the grass is always greener", right?  Time will tell. I think Harry will see this as fun and different and such a change from stuffy old London and his stuffy old duties for a year or two.  I still don't understand how they plan to build a media and philanthropic empire.  It's not all that easy. You don't just sift through dozens of proposals and choose the ones that you like and, bam, money starts pouring in lol.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> He was probably looking happy and relaxed because his wife is on another continent. Making the most of his freedom


He has looked cheerful this week


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> No.  And, if anyone believes this was the reason  then you clearly haven't been paying attention the last 3 years.


Have you been paying attention? LMAO


----------



## Meh-gan

youngster said:


> And . . . "the grass is always greener", right?  Time will tell. I think Harry will see this as fun and different and such a change from stuffy old London and his stuffy old duties for a year or two.  I still don't understand how they plan to build a media and philanthropic empire.  It's not all that easy. You don't just sift through dozens of proposals and choose the ones that you like and, bam, money starts pouring in lol.


Also how are they going to pay all the staff and agencies and lawyers they need to build these businesses for them? They can’t do it on their own and she’s out shopping for mansions lol. The money is going to run out before they can make enough money off this.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> They are basically the Duke and Duchess of Windsor 2.0, but slightly younger and with a baby.  Harry wasn't the King, of course, so a lot less dramatic and with many fewer repercussions  as the line of succession is still the same. The social media era that we live in heightens the drama for a bit.
> 
> Still, Meghan now finds herself playing the Wallis SImpson role here. They've had their "us against the world" mindset and it must have been so exciting!  Look at us being rebels (but with really big allowances from Daddy)!   And, the Queen and the world said "OK, fine, go do you". So, we'll see how they like it long term. Harry made a big sacrifice for her happiness.  Is she willing to make sacrifices now for his happiness?  He's a total fish out of water.  Harry in Vancouver.  Harry in L.A.   A prince without a Palace to tell him what to do, where to go, what to say, issue discreet and well written speeches or statements on his behalf, and make sure the Invictus Games were a success. There are opportunities to make money now but many more opportunities to screw up publicly.  Edward and Wallis Simpson stayed together their whole lives because splitting would have been humiliating, after what he gave up, so they made it work.  Time will tell about H and MM.


I don’t know that they’re qualified for anything on the level they’re going for.  Other than connections (and many of those connections will now be wary of choosing H&M over the RF) what do they have?  A minor actress and a prince who has little to no experience of real life?  Which of them has any business experience or experience in running any kind of organisation?


----------



## mia55

These guys are not stupid, pretty sure they already have couple of deals worth hundreds of millions and very soon they’ll be announcing it. For the next couple of years they’ll be making tons of money, the real set back will be when they become stale news and William becomes the king.


----------



## hellosunshine

shiba said:


> And there is the loophole....



Not a loophole. They didn’t lose their HRH titles; however like any other royal member working outside the family - they cannot use it for future business ventures. I think they understand that their names Harry & Meghan are worth more anyways and will use that.


----------



## gracekelly

I see a bankruptcy in their future.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> I see a bankruptcy in their future.


Like Fergie all over again lol


----------



## mia55

gracekelly said:


> I see a bankruptcy in their future.


And a tell all book


----------



## hockeygirl

bag-princess said:


> has a new article come out saying that they no longer have the titles - because the ones I have seen just say that they will not use them!



If the agreement specifically states they cannot use the “Royal” title and are not royals then it stands that they should not be able to use  the brand Sussex”Royal”?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Not a loophole. They didn’t lose their HRH titles; however like any other royal member working outside the family - they cannot use it for future business ventures. I think they understand that their names Harry & Meghan are worth more anyways and will use that.


I think it is a loophole.  It’s a way of allowing Harry back into the fold as HRH when Meghan decides she’s only surviving in the marriage, and dumps him.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Not a loophole. They didn’t lose their HRH titles; however like any other royal member working outside the family - they cannot use it for future business ventures. I think they understand that their names Harry & Meghan are worth more anyways and will use that.


Since they pledged to “uphold the Queens values” you may be right and all they can use is Harry&Meghan. No Sussex Royal or Not Royal on anything.


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> Not a loophole. They didn’t lose their HRH titles; however like any other royal member working outside the family - they cannot use it for future business ventures. *I think they understand that their names Harry & Meghan are worth more anyways and will use that*.



Unfortunately for them, H&M has already been trademarked.


----------



## zen1965

Sharont2305 said:


> He was probably looking happy and relaxed because his wife is on another continent. Making the most of his freedom




To the corner with you! (I will probably join you shortly... )


----------



## youngster

mia55 said:


> These guys are not stupid, *pretty sure they already have couple of deals worth hundreds of millions* and very soon they’ll be announcing it. For the next couple of years they’ll be making tons of money, the real set back will be when they become stale news and William becomes the king.



Doing what exactly?  What is it that they can do that would be worth hundreds of millions right away?


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Unfortunately for them, H&M has already been trademarked.


----------



## LibbyRuth

When Harry and Meghan got married, wasn’t their talk that the Queen could have possibly given them the titles Duke and Duchess of Windsor? Now it’s a shame she didn’t go that route. 
I wonder if Meghan will get herself cast as Wallis Simpson in a biopic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Unfortunately for them, H&M has already been trademarked.



LOL


----------



## Jayne1

Okay, so everything starts this spring, 2020 and until then, they do have some royal engagements. They did _not_ lose their HRH, they are just not to use them.

A year from now, they go back to the UK to have the Queen review the situation. But I assume Harry can review the situation too and maybe go back to royal life at some point.

In the meantime, they are free to make a fortune, however they please.

Did I get all this right?


----------



## CeeJay

Sorry to be daft here (not enough coffee I guess), but .. do they get to keep (and earn $$$) off of the "RoyalSussex" moniker?


----------



## Deleted 698298




----------



## Sophisticatted

I assume that there have been some (privately) very spelled out consequences for going against this “gentleman’s agreement”.  Harry may be happy to be a stay at home dad to Archie for a few years.  And he will still have 
Invictus and Sentebale.  Meghan may be happy to hustle for them (herself), but that Canadian mansion is totally out of their reach.  

I have felt that renovating but not really living in Frogmore was Meghan’s FU to the Queen for not letting her live in the Castle.  Making them keep it as their home base for visits (no castle or estate quarters for them, out in the country, no 
London society stuff or pap walks nearby) in the Queen’s FU right back!

It only took her two years to divorce Trevor.   Imagine by the time Archie is school age, he and Harry might be heading back to the home country and the family fold.


----------



## youngster

Sophisticatted said:


> I have felt that renovating but not really living in Frogmore was Meghan’s FU to the Queen for not letting her live in the Castle.  Making them keep it as their home base for visits (no castle or estate quarters for them, out in the country, no
> London society stuff or pap walks nearby) in the Queen’s FU right back!



I thought the Frogmore cottage was a really odd choice from the beginning since it's really close to Heathrow airport, from what I recall, and there is flight noise.  Our Brit members probably know a lot more about this.


----------



## Chagall

Even if they do manage deals to earn lots of money, the loss of status is going to hurt them once the dust settles and reality sets in. Money isn’t everything and Harry had plenty before. He could now end up with less financial security and no status. Ouch!


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Sorry to be daft here (not enough coffee I guess), but .. do they get to keep (and earn $$$) off of the "RoyalSussex" moniker?



Nobody is really sure yet.  That wasn't spelled out in the statement released. It seems unlikely they get to keep it as they are giving up the HRH and are no longer senior royals.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

The update to the sussexroyal.com site:


Update: 18th of January 2020

In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.


----------



## A1aGypsy

“Their Royal Highnesses”? Too much.


----------



## Eva1991

I've read the statement. What I don't understand is how they get to keep their duke / duchess titles (I've read that they will now be called Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex) but are no loner HRH. Isn't the title of a duke / duchess an HRH title per se? Can you be a duke without being an HRH? Can someone from the UK and / or familiar with the RF's protocol enlighten us?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes



Just heard a UK reporter state that MM and PH have given up the Sussex Royal titles. 

So idk, tPF members seem to be genuinely better informed most of the time [emoji813]️


----------



## Aqua01

Wow, so M found a weak suck in H. Found world fame and access to his $$$$. Wanted to single-handedly modernize the Monarchy and be loved by all. When that went a little bit different than expected, demolishing it is plan B. So playing on hubby's weakness with her "they-don't make-it easy on me, H" crocodile tears and yanking him away from his country, family and heritage will do. 
And now here we are. M has his $$$ (and will still be funded by his father), has spawned an heir aka security blanket, has now enough fame and connections to trade her former D-list acting jobs for better ones. 
And all that within less than 2 years. 
Wow Meghan, great game. This is your golden globe moment, enjoy! You will go down in history, babe, for sure. Congratulations!
Now let the dust settle a little and then....... on to the bigger fish.........!!!

Then you Harry...
You suck
Enjoy your little family while it lasts. Life's going to teach you a lesson, or two.


----------



## mshermes

Hadn’t thought of this:


Harry will be stepping down from his military appointments.

He will no longer be Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Force Commandant of the Royal Air Force Base Honington, and Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of the Royal Naval Commands' Small Ships and Diving.


----------



## redney

Eva1991 said:


> I've read the statement. What I don't understand is how they get to keep their duke / duchess titles (I've read that they will now be called Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex) but are no loner HRH. Isn't the title of a duke / duchess an HRH title per se? *Can you be a duke without being an HRH?* Can someone from the UK and / or familiar with the RF's protocol enlighten us?


Yes. After their divorces, Diana and Fergie retained their Princess and Duchess titles, respectively, but lost the use of HRH.


----------



## youngster

mshermes said:


> Harry will be stepping down from his military appointments.
> 
> He will no longer be Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Force Commandant of the Royal Air Force Base Honington, and Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of the Royal Naval Commands' Small Ships and Diving.



I was wondering about this myself.  I imagine that Will will take on a number of these.  

I was wondering too, who will be picking up all the other duties of the Couple Formerly Known As SussexRoyal?  Will and Kate and Edward and Sophie for sure, along with maybe Eugenie and Beatrice?  There is an article about how Edward and Sophie will be making a side-by-side appearance with Will and Kate coming up, which they haven't done very often. I don't think Charles or Princess Anne could make any more appearances than they currently do.  They both work really hard as it is.  That has to be a point of friction between everyone in the family and Harry going forward.  He jumped ship and left the rest of them to take over his duties and obligations.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Just heard a UK reporter state that MM and PH have given up the Sussex Royal titles.
> 
> So idk, tPF members seem to be genuinely better informed most of the time [emoji813]️



And the same reporter just stated that they will keep the Sussex titles 

Ugh, please take those titles away, William


----------



## mdcx

So, Meghan will be on a level with Princess Michael of Kent, roughly speaking, only less well liked ( if that is possible). Also no-one bowing and scraping to her, thinly veiled contempt because of how she used and abused the BRF, people sarcastically referring to her as Duchess whenever they can.
Sussex Royal doesn’t make too much sense now as a brand.

ETA now that she is no longer royal, can her stans explain what exactly is so great about MM? That she's pretty? Biracial? Extremely fond of a dollar? Kind? Family oriented? A #girlboss????


----------



## shiba

hellosunshine said:


> Not a loophole. They didn’t lose their HRH titles; however like any other royal member working outside the family - they cannot use it for future business ventures. I think they understand that their names Harry & Meghan are worth more anyways and will use that.



Key words - for business ventures. What about all their "charity" work that funnels through their Foundation as well as all the things that they are still entitled to as non-working Royals, housing, security, flights etc., none of which was paid by their measly stipend from being a working royal. None of this has been clarified yet.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> Hadn’t thought of this:
> 
> 
> Harry will be stepping down from his military appointments.
> 
> He will no longer be Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Force Commandant of the Royal Air Force Base Honington, and Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of the Royal Naval Commands' Small Ships and Diving.


I think he’ll be very sad about this.


----------



## Meh-gan

mshermes said:


> The update to the sussexroyal.com site:
> 
> 
> Update: 18th of January 2020
> 
> In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.


The queen says they aren’t to use that designation. So. Why is it being used in this message? 

Also lol that they have to update the site they launched prematurely to reflect actual reality.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I wonder if we'll see the non-royals step in too. The Queen can title Peter and Zara... they are royalty by blood. Peter and Zara are also close to their cousin William, and when he's Prince of Wales it will be nice to have more working royals to pitch in. Beatrice has her life in New York City, but maybe Eugenie can become a working royal as well?


----------



## Gimmethebag

Meh-gan said:


> The queen says they aren’t to use that designation. So. Why is it being used in this message?
> 
> Also lol that they have to update the site they launched prematurely to reflect actual reality.



Because narcissism.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

Eva1991 said:


> I've read the statement. What I don't understand is how they get to keep their duke / duchess titles (I've read that they will now be called Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex) but are no loner HRH. Isn't the title of a duke / duchess an HRH title per se? Can you be a duke without being an HRH? Can someone from the UK and / or familiar with the RF's protocol enlighten us?


If they try to immigrate to Canada, which I don’t think they will, they can’t hold any titles. So I dont think they will be looking for Canadian citizenship. 

Looks like they will squat in Canada for 6 months and go to the UK and the US for the rest of the time.


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> Hadn’t thought of this:
> 
> 
> Harry will be stepping down from his military appointments.
> 
> He will no longer be Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Force Commandant of the Royal Air Force Base Honington, and Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of the Royal Naval Commands' Small Ships and Diving.


These are all low blows for him and he will be sorry about it. No more fancy uniform photo ops.   The British military is always very loyal to the crown and they starting pulling away from him when the Sussex made the announcement. The military doesn’t like disloyal quitters.


----------



## mdcx

I thought they couldn’t have titles and live permanently in Canada? Imo the end goal is living between LA/NYC so probably not an issue.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I was wondering about this myself.  I imagine that Will will take on a number of these.
> 
> I was wondering too, who will be picking up all the other duties of the Couple Formerly Known As SussexRoyal?  Will and Kate and Edward and Sophie for sure, along with maybe Eugenie and Beatrice?  There is an article about how Edward and Sophie will be making a side-by-side appearance with Will and Kate coming up, which they haven't done very often. I don't think Charles or Princess Anne could make any more appearances than they currently do.  They both work really hard as it is.  That has to be a point of friction between everyone in the family and Harry going forward.  He jumped ship and left the rest of them to take over his duties and obligations.


Wondering if they will give any of these toEdward or even the Earl of Snowdon  who is Princess Margaret’s son.


----------



## gracekelly

If Harry will be known as Harry Duke if Sussex, are they even dropping the Prince?    You always used to see Prince Harry Duke of Sussex


----------



## Meh-gan

mdcx said:


> I thought they couldn’t have titles and live permanently in Canada? Imo the end goal is living between LA/NYC so probably not an issue.


They can’t be citizens in Canada while holding titles given by the crown. Which is why they won’t be going for citizenship here. They will just squat here for awhile and come and go.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Wondering if they will give any of these toEdward or even the Earl of Snowdon  who is Princess Margaret’s son.



I doubt they would go to Edward who did not have an easy time of it in the military.  He left the Royal Marines after only a few months.  Snowdon is the furniture maker, is he not?  I think all the military titles will go to William.


----------



## mdcx

Duchess of Sussex who never sets foot in Sussex and would likely be run out by a mob of villagers if she dared 

ETA Megs can finally order her new monogrammed stationery now that her title is clear!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hmmm, is this the definitive answer? 
Hopefully! [emoji813]️


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Clearblueskies said:


> I think he’ll be very sad about this.


Why would he be sad, he asked to be released. It's a situation imo where from the outside it looked as though this mattered to him and guess what - it didn't. He knew what he'd be giving up.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> *Prince Harry Was Spotted at a London Pub Looking "Happy" and "Relaxed"*
> 
> While Meghan Markle is carrying out low-key engagements in Canada, Prince Harry remains in England.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has had a busy week attending official events and entering discussions regarding his decision to step down as a senior member of the royal family. But according to a new report, the prince has also found time to catch up with some of his closest friends.
> 
> After Prince Harry was reportedly spotted at Fulham's Brook House Pub this week, a source told _The Sun_'s Fabulous Digital, "He seemed very happy, relaxed. He was sat in the middle of seven guys and they spent a good few hours laughing and joking." The onlooker noted that the duke had been "enjoying a few beers and a meal with his pals."
> 
> It's heartwarming to know that the prince has been able to catch up with friends during his time in the United Kingdom.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb.../prince-harry-fulham-london-pub-visit-report/


I thought Meghan told him he couldn't drink


----------



## Meh-gan

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Why would he be sad, he asked to be released. It's a situation imo where from the outside it looked as though this mattered to him and guess what - it didn't. He knew what he'd be giving up.


Did he though? Because the website they launched seemed to think it would play out differently than it did. They expected to still be royal and do all the same things, while also being allowed to make their own money. They need to update their manifesto to reflect what really happened.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> “Their Royal Highnesses”? Too much.


and you know they had to have approved this statement


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> I thought Meghan told him he couldn't drink


The cat's away, the mouse is playing.


----------



## Annawakes

mshermes said:


> The update to the sussexroyal.com site:
> 
> 
> Update: 18th of January 2020
> 
> In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.


How can they still refer to themselves as Their Royal Highnesses?  I thought they weren’t allowed to use that designation anymore, just Duke and Duchess.

And, what will the Queen do about it if they continue calling themselves Their Royal Highnesses????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

Meh-gan said:


> The queen says they aren’t to use that designation. So. Why is it being used in this message?
> 
> Also lol that they have to update the site they launched prematurely to reflect actual reality.


My guess is that they have until Spring and this is her FU to the Queen??? Just my guess.....


----------



## mdcx

Is this why the rush to register everything Sussex Royal? Because they believe that since it was all technically registered while they held the titles, there is nothing the BRF can do about it, _nyah, nyah, nyah_!
As I've said before, who on earth will be buying the Sussex Royal tat anyway?


----------



## mshermes

Here are some questions and some answers......

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Harry-Meghan-wish-walk-away-royal-family.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Why would he be sad, he asked to be released. It's a situation imo where from the outside it looked as though this mattered to him and guess what - it didn't. He knew what he'd be giving up.


I doubt Harry expected this.  They wanted a hybrid role, still carrying out some duties on behalf of the monarchy, maybe some tours etc. whilst having extra freedom to pursue new stuff.  They won’t have any royal role going forward, and Harry’s lost all his military responsibilities.


----------



## mshermes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-TV-attack-Megxit-Channel-5-documentary.html
This is Meghan’s father speaking. I was not aware that she lived with him from the ages of 11-18. So what happened?


----------



## mdcx

mshermes said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...y-TV-attack-Megxit-Channel-5-documentary.html
> This is Meghan’s father speaking. I was not aware that she lived with him from the ages of 11-18. So what happened?


Wasn't Doria in prison at some stage? In any case I believe Doria "abandoned" Meghan effectively. There is some speculation this might have led to some of MM's apparent issues. It makes it even more sad how she treated her dad vs her mother recently.


----------



## joyeaux

Sorry y’all I know all I have done lately is post articles but I’m milking this one month trial to a “legit” (that is endorsed by the one and only “SussexRoyal.com”) website to all it’s worth! Plus I always love a good citation. 

Her clothes have been in Canada THE WHOLE TIME.

Was this a “Sayonara Zara” party on steroids because, this time, she knew she’d be swimming in free Givenchy? Or because she knew she’d be back and she may have to visit a women’s shelter and that Suits department really knew how to outfit a gal to the cold Canada winters? 





> *Meghan kept clothes in Canada when she moved to Britain to start new life*
> 
> Patrick Sawer, Senior News Reporter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, visiting the Canadian non-profit organisation Justice for Girls, wearing some of the clothes she left in Toronto when she moved to Britain Credit: Justice for Girls/AFP
> When Meghan Markle married Prince Harry at St George’s Chapel in Windsor in May 2018 it was assumed that the couple would base themselves permanently in Britain.
> 
> After all the Queen had even given them Frogmore Cottage, in Windsor Great Park, as their marital home, with a refurbishment and redecoration programme for the property, eventually costing the taxpayer £2.4 million.
> 
> But the Duchess of Sussex’s commitment to living in Britain may not have been as wholehearted as previously supposed.
> 
> It has now emerged that when she left her home in Toronto, where the LA born actress was based for seven years during the filming of the legal drama Suits, she left behind an entire wardrobe of clothes.
> 
> The revelation suggests the couple may have always been planning to spend much of their time across the Atlantic, long before their shock announcement earlier this month that they wanted to step back as senior members of the Royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan also met staff running a women's shelter in Vancouver on January 14, in her first public appearance since the couple decided to step back as senior Royals Credit: Justice for Girls/AFP
> Citing a first-hand source, Canada’s Entertainment Tonight TV channel has reported that when Meghan Markle moved to London in November 2017 to live with Prince Harry, initially at Kensington Palace’s Nottingham Cottage, she packed up her clothes and put them into storage in Toronto for use at a later date.
> 
> Furthermore it reports that a significant proportion of the clothes she left behind, including some of those outfits she wore on Suits, have now been shipped to the home they couple have rented on Vancouver Island.
> 
> That follows the decision by palace officials to redeploy two of the staff employed at Frogmore to Windsor Castle. Other staff, including a chef and maids who were employed part-time, were told they will no longer be needed.
> 
> The clothes which Meghan left in storage in Canada when she moved to the UK and which she has worn since her return  include a black cashmere beanie, a parka by Soia & Kyo, a Barbour “Epler” coat and the “Bea” cable knit sweater from The Row.
> 
> Jamie Samhan, ET Canada’s online editor, writes: “While it was known the Duchess put her furniture into storage, it was said at the time she took all her personal items with her.
> 
> “It also begs the question, did Meghan always plan on returning to North America in some capacity? Many have raised doubts around the step down of being senior royals and that both Prince Harry and Meghan had been planning this for some time.
> 
> “The two did give the full royal life a go, but perhaps they always considered having a Canadian abode.”
> 
> The Epler coat was worn by Meghan on one of her first public appearances since returning to Canada, when she was photographed boarding a seaplane on Vancouver Island. The cable-knit swing sweater from the Row which she for the flight is thought to be the same one she wore on Suits, in Season 3, Episode 9.
> 
> She was previously seen wearing the faux fur parka while on her way to a Yoga class in Toronto in 2017, shortly after returning from a holiday in Jamaica with Harry.
> 
> It came after the Duchess’ close friend in Toronto, Jessica Mulroney, shared a quote on Instagram, interpreted as showing support for Meghan’s separation from the rest of the Royal family, which read: “A strong woman looks a challenge in the eye and gives it a wink.”
> 
> On leaving her husband, Prince Harry, 35, in the UK to begin the complex negotiations over their break away from the Royal Family, the Duchess got down to business, visiting two charities in Vancouver - Justice For Girls and the Downtown Eastside Women's Centre.
> 
> Photographed wearing some of the clothes she had left behind in Canada the Duchess spoke to staff who help run a shelter used by hundreds of vulnerable women.
> 
> The refuge is linked to a charity initiative called the Shoebox Project, co-founded by Ms Mulroney


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Clearblueskies said:


> I doubt Harry expected this.  They wanted a hybrid role, still carrying out some duties on behalf of the monarchy, maybe some tours etc. whilst having extra freedom to pursue new stuff.  They won’t have any royal role going forward, and Harry’s lost all his military responsibilities.


I just don't think he cares right now. It'll likely be a major regret later on but they did negotiate it, so he must have been happy enough with the outcome.


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if Harry will "go wild" again with his newfound freedom? I can see him making a few excuses about why he is not able to join MM in Canada "just yet"?
And where is little Archie? Maybe he is the crown jewel in MM's merching plan - Duchess of Sussex diapers etc.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Have any of their celeb friends said anything as yet?  Oprah has denied planning any tell-all interview, and the Obamas denied advising them.  Other than that it seems quiet??


----------



## hellosunshine

mshermes said:


> I was not aware that she lived with him from the ages of 11-18. So what happened?



Meghan lived with her mother and father until their divorce when she was 6. After the divorce, Meghan lived with her mother but stayed with her father after-school until Doria finished work and picked her up from the Married With Children set.

When Meghan was 13 or 14, she began living with her father full-time but moved back with her mother on her 17th birthday. During her entire senior year of high school, she stayed with her mother then moved out to attend college in Chicago.

All info was provided by her long time friend, Ninaki. Regrettably, Ninaki and Meghan are not friends today.












mdcx said:


> Wasn't Doria in prison at some stage?



Doria was never in prison.


----------



## gracekelly

Meh-gan said:


> Did he though? Because the website they launched seemed to think it would play out differently than it did. They expected to still be royal and do all the same things, while also being allowed to make their own money. They need to update their manifesto to reflect what really happened.


They never would have put up that site if they dreamed this would happen.  What a waste of money.


----------



## mdcx

gracekelly said:


> They never would have put up that site if they dreamed this would happen.  What a waste of money.


I mean surely "Sussex Royal" is no longer applicable, then there's the H/M icon with a tiara/crown which doesn't really apply either.
ETA
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...d-personal-website-call-royal-Highnesses.html


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope they have to give up the Sussex Royal branding. You’d never know with them though. 

Does Charles have to disclose how much he gives them?


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> I mean surely "Sussex Royal" is no longer applicable, then there's the H/M icon with a tiara/crown which doesn't really apply either.


I don't think it applied either.  The simplest thing would be to take down the site and start over with something else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> Have any of their celeb friends said anything as yet?  Oprah has denied planning any tell-all interview, and the Obamas denied advising them.  Other than that it seems quiet??



Most have kept their distance it seems.  I'd think most celebrities don't want to get dragged into this in any way.  They will watch and see how it is all sorted out and where the two of them end up in terms of general public opinion and what they've been able to maintain of their royal status and connections to the Queen.  Also, they are learning a lot about the two of them just by watching.  If you were thinking about working with them, you might think twice after the way they've managed their withdrawal.


----------



## marietouchet

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I just don't think he cares right now. It'll likely be a major regret later on but they did negotiate it, so he must have been happy enough with the outcome.


Sad, his particular strength was in the military arena


----------



## mshermes

gracekelly said:


> They never would have put up that site if they dreamed this would happen.  What a waste of money.


The person who designed the website is the same person as for The Tig.
https://news.yahoo.com/sussex-royal-website-the-tig-144604074.html


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> All info was provided by her long time friend, Ninaki. *Regrettably, Ninaki and Meghan are not friends today.*



What a shock.


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan lived with her mother and father until their divorce when she was 6. After the divorce, Meghan lived with her mother but stayed with her father after-school until Doria finished work and picked her up from the Married With Children set.
> 
> When Meghan was 13 or 14, she began living with her father full-time but moved back with her mother on her 17th birthday. During her entire senior year of high school, she stayed with her mother then moved out to attend college in Chicago.
> 
> All info was provided by her long time friend, Ninaki. Regrettably, Ninaki and Meghan are not friends today.
> 
> View attachment 4643283
> 
> View attachment 4643284
> 
> View attachment 4643285
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doria was never in prison.


This was from a birthday party for Ninaki. Megs already a Queen with her servants. I do know that Doria has a criminal record.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5539893/Meghan-Markle-video-1990-shows-dressed-Queen.html


----------



## Straight-Laced

Camilla Long delivers in The Sunday Times today    

j*anuary 19 2020, 12:01am, CAMILLA LONG the sunday times
Meghan’s PR stunts can’t gloss over the appalling way she’s treated her dad*

_"You know who the real victim in this whole Harry and Meghan thing is? It isn’t Harry or Meghan, however much these fey children tell us they’ve had their spirits “crushed” by the sheer number of palaces and diamonds and footmen we’ve flung at them. It isn’t us, even though we’ve had the stupidity to pay this pair of oxygen thieves more than £60,000 a day, if you take into account the £32m wedding, the £2.4m cottage renovation, the security and fripperies and Meghan’s dresses, for the privilege of being patronised and dissed to our faces by them, since they married in May 2018.

It’s the poor, sweet, unsuspecting ladies of the Grenfell soup kitchen I feel sorry for, who have been repeatedly duped into smiling and nodding as the duchess sweeps in to pretend to cook rice on yet another of her many content-gathering missions. These women have been treated as a glorified backdrop by Meghan, and at some point you have to ask yourself: if there were zero chance of those pictures being used for PR purposes, would the duchess even have come? Imagine arriving “discreetly”, as if you’d gone just for them, only to splash pics as soon as you need to launder your image. No sincerity, no truth — these visits only help Meghan.

She was at it again in Vancouver last week, where she has turned her vampire gaze on virgin territory on Canada’s west coast. There were the usual “secret” visits convened by a “secret” assistant from a “secret” hotmail address, before the smug blanket photo-dump, prompting one paper to shriek: “Canada cannot allow you to come to stay.”

How do we judge this woman, I thought, as I looked at the latest shots of her catching a seaplane to visit a women’s shelter.

By the actions that she takes that are easy for her, such as a quick visit to a kitchen or a refuge, where she is treated like a goddess and praised for her do-gooding by millions of leftards, or by the way she actually treats the people who are close to her, which is the way most people are judged in life? If we’re going on the way she treats people who are close to her, the record is currently abysmal.

You probably didn’t have time last Tuesday to read the response by The Mail on Sunday to the duchess’s decision to sue the paper. You probably missed the paragraphs revealing how Meghan is obsessed to the point of self-destruction with her own publicity, getting her friends to intervene over articles, even after she was married (hot tip: don’t sue a paper you’ve tried to manipulate). You probably missed the paper’s claim that she went as far as sending a letter to her father, the contents of which she allowed five of her friends to discuss and disclose to an American magazine, with the intention of smearing him and making herself look better. This is all desperate, mediocre stuff.

I should say at this point I don’t have an enormous amount of time for men who side with the papers against their childreneither. I don’t have the wildest respect for fathers who are prepared to clamber into the courtroom in order to slate any member of their family in petty disputes. It’s not thrilling that Thomas Markle is gearing up to bear witness against his own daughter but maybe it’s the only way he feels he can communicate with her these days — besides, he must be angry.

The letter wasn’t even the worst thing: there was the cold way in which Meghan responded to the news that he’d had emergency heart surgery the week of her wedding. I say Meghan, but it appears that Harry was the one who sent the text message to his soon-to-be father-in-law after he came out of surgery — no note, no words of condolence, no sign of the human warmth he’s famous for; just a curt telling-off for speaking to the press.

I am sure Harry was busy — wondering, perhaps, which wall of the suite at Coworth Park he was going to spray with his pre-wedding champagne — but it was a stinging enough response for Markle to say he was sorry his heart attack had been an “inconvenience”. How does anyone get tangled up in a web of such toxic misery and self-obsession that they can’t even ask a 73-year-old man how his surgery went? Who cares about the stupid wedding?

If Meghan is sensible, she will drop this legal dispute as quick as she can, unless she so wants to add “copyright warrior” to her Insta bio that she will submit to a shameful courtroom showdown. If she is sensible, she will realise this situation is now lose-lose for her — but, unlike Fergie, unlike Diana, she may not be able to resist the drama."_


----------



## gelbergirl

I don't understand why Harry is still in England.
Shouldn't he be on a plane heading over to be with Meghan and Archie in some sort of victory lap?


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> I don't understand why Harry is still in England.
> Shouldn't he be on a plane heading over to be with Meghan and Archie in some sort of victory lap?



Maybe she hasn’t given him permission to come back yet.  Harry does not wear the pants in that marriage. She might be mad at him because he didn’t negotiate an even better settlement.


----------



## wisconsin

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert..._campaign=socialflowFBRBK&utm_source=facebook


----------



## mshermes

Harry-Meghan-LOSE-HRH-titles-REPAY-2-4million-public-cash.html

The DM remarking about the sussex royal website stating Their Royal Highnesses minutes after the fact.......


----------



## chowlover2

youngster said:


> I thought the Frogmore cottage was a really odd choice from the beginning since it's really close to Heathrow airport, from what I recall, and there is flight noise.  Our Brit members probably know a lot more about this.


Frogmore is right next to Wallis Simpson's grave. Queen Elizabeth is also the Queen of shade!


----------



## Grande Latte

chowlover2 said:


> Frogmore is right next to Wallis Simpson's grave. Queen Elizabeth is also the Queen of shade!



 Queen of shade indeed.


----------



## PatsyCline

For those who get CNN, they’re broadcasting a special, ‘Royal Revolution’ about Harry & Meghan.


----------



## LibbyRuth

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope they have to give up the Sussex Royal branding. You’d never know with them though.
> 
> Does Charles have to disclose how much he gives them?


Will it be disclosed if Charles suddenly gets a raise equal to what H&M had been making?


----------



## PurpleLilac97

I don’t have a dog in this fight. But Doria does not have a criminal record. She has a Masters in Social Work from USC. And she was a licensed Social Worker in CA. Not possible with a criminal history. That’s kind of not cool spreading rumors she’s a criminal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

mshermes said:


> Harry-Meghan-LOSE-HRH-titles-REPAY-2-4million-public-cash.html
> 
> The DM remarking about the sussex royal website stating Their Royal Highnesses minutes after the fact.......


I still don’t get why in this situation she should get to keep HRH. Like she wants to leave etc. Why let her keep that status on the down low? If they can’t really use them anymore why keep it? I can see why Harry would he is an actual prince. MM is nothing. It’s bad enough she gets to keep calling herself duchess.


----------



## bag-mania

PatsyCline said:


> For those who get CNN, they’re broadcasting a special, ‘Royal Revolution’ about Harry & Meghan.



Since it’s CNN it will definitely be an ultra supportive puff piece. They don’t delve too deeply when they do human interest programs like that and they never include anything critical.


----------



## Kansashalo

bag-mania said:


> I doubt that. Harry lived his whole life and never made the slightest effort to liberate himself from the “burden” of being royalty. He’s been married less than two years and here they are running away.  Do you honestly believe Meghan  wasn’t strongly attracted to the prince angle when she met him?   She wanted it badly until she realized she didn’t like it because it wasn’t the way she thought it would be.


Nope, I don't believe that Meghan is the sole driver behind this.  While us women are quite convincing to get our husbands to do a lot of things, sonething of this magnitude is beyond the idea of "happy wife, happy life". Plus,  I don't believe Harry to be a guilible man either. 

Harry knows what the life of a royal did to his mom & family and its hard for me to believe that experience would not have influenced his decision to  put his own family first when the time came (hence why he may have never distanced himself previously).  Sometimes you have to make other people/situations uncomfortable in order to protect your own peace and happiness.


----------



## imgg

Kansashalo said:


> Nope, I don't believe that Meghan is the sole driver behind this.  While us women are quite convincing to get our husbands to do a lot of things, sonething of this magnitude is beyond the idea of "happy wife, happy life". Plus,  I don't believe Harry to be a guilible man either.
> 
> Harry knows what the life of a royal did to his mom & family and its hard for me to believe that experience would not have influenced his decision to  put his own family first when the time came (hence why he may have never distanced himself previously).  Sometimes you have to make other people/situations uncomfortable in order to protect your own peace and happiness.


I think Harry always felt a bit lesser knowing he would never be king.  I think Megan fed into his ego (to manipulate him into getting what she wanted)  and had a huge influence on this decision.  She played her cards well by getting pregnant so fast.  This allowed her to be in the driving seat....


----------



## imgg

Meh-gan said:


> I still don’t get why in this situation she should get to keep HRH. Like she wants to leave etc. Why let her keep that status on the down low? If they can’t really use them anymore why keep it? I can see why Harry would he is an actual prince. MM is nothing. It’s bad enough she gets to keep calling herself duchess.


Why would she want it if she felt it was so insufferable.  Hypocritical imo.


----------



## PatsyCline

imgg said:


> I think Harry always felt a bit lesser knowing he would never be king.  I think Megan fed into his ego (to manipulate him into getting what she wanted)  and had a huge influence on this decision.  She played her cards well by getting pregnant so fast.  This allowed her to be in the driving seat....


Considering a Harry has mulled for years about leaving the Royal family, are you saying Meghan put that into his head, by some voodoo spell?


----------



## keodi

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she would be very sad about all this. For Harry and for William.


That's exactly what I was thinking. I'm so disappointed, and I'm sad for William and Harry.


----------



## keodi

bag-mania said:


> *I doubt that. Harry lived his whole life and never made the slightest effort to liberate himself from the “burden” of being royalty. He’s been married less than two years and here they are running away.  Do you honestly believe Meghan  wasn’t strongly attracted to the prince angle when she met him?   She wanted it badly until she realized she didn’t like it because it wasn’t the way she thought it would be*.


This!


----------



## Gimmethebag

This article is weird, because we know that Harry and Meghan can’t afford a $36M home. That would eat up Harry’s entire inheritance and they still depend on Charles for allowance money. Plus, they’ll soon be paying income taxes to three different countries. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/vancou...harry-reportedly-eyeing-kitsilano-mansion/amp

My guess is Meghan’s PR flexed and said she was shopping Billionaire’s Row and may soon be the Lululemon founder’s neighbor. The seller’s realtor would be excited if that happens, but no one has contacted him this week. 

Anything to try and control the narrative.


----------



## Julide

bisbee said:


> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...rce=dynamic&bftwnews&utm_term=4ldqpgc#4ldqpgc


Wow!


----------



## wisconsin

imgg said:


> I think Harry always felt a bit lesser knowing he would never be king.  I think Megan fed into his ego (to manipulate him into getting what she wanted)  and had a huge influence on this decision.  She played her cards well by getting pregnant so fast.  This allowed her to be in the driving seat....



very likely this.


----------



## Grande Latte

I think so far the terms of the agreement are reasonable. Forsake your royal titles and you're released from your royal duties.

And paying back the renovation costs sound reasonable. And paying 360,000 per year to retain their UK home also sounds reasonable. 

Funny thing is, I don't believe H&M will float financially outside of the Firm. The security costs, the lavish lifestyle, keeping up residences in the UK, Canada, and possibly the US will sink them. Despite how experts "value" their commercial potential. It's one thing to be a royal, yet quite another to be a successful businessperson year after year. I think this is why their friends are keeping their distances.


----------



## youngster

This agreement with the Queen also doesn't become effective until Spring, so that is likely why they are continuing to use the HRH for now on their site, though I think they should just stop right away.


----------



## sgj99

CeeJay said:


> *HEAR-HEAR!!!* .. let us not forget (well, not sure about the younger folks) .. that another OSCAR-winning Actress married into Royalty .. Grace Kelly!  Not one singleshe was revered .. Meghan is a JOKE, not WOKE (puhleeze).  I really hope that the Queen takes away their titles and they have to shut down that IG site; to make $$$ off of a family that she has embarassed, turned her back on, etc.? - NOPE!


----------



## Annawakes

youngster said:


> This agreement with the Queen also doesn't become effective until Spring, so that is likely why they are continuing to use the HRH for now on their site, though I think they should just stop right away.


I think it’s disgusting they referred to themselves as Their Royal Highnesses when the Queen’s message clearly says those titles are not to be used.  Okay, not to be used come Spring.  But can’t they just give her a little bit of respect for ONCE and stop already!?!!!!

They love rubbing it in, don’t they?  It sure seems so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

I agree, I can't imagine them being viable anywhere but the UK. I also think Wallis Simpson will be considered a saint after Meghan Markle. About 10 years ago a cache of letters was found from Wallis to Ernest Simpson. In them she explained how she was going to come back to him. She never thought David would abdicate. She begged him not too. When she saw it had gone too far she resigned by being a good wife to David. She knew she was hated either way, so best to be a good wife to the former King. Wallis also tried making things right with Queen Mary. David was gutted when his younger brother was killed in a plane crash and he could not attend his funeral. Wallis wrote Queen Mary a letter trying to make things right, but Queen Mary never replied.

 QE II learned from her great grand parents mistakes.  Harry can at least return to the UK at will. I doubt if Meghan will let him, but there it is. I also think she will ditch him as soon as a richer man comes along. For them to thrive it has to be outside the UK and it is going to be tough for a man who had everyday mapped out for him. He's never had to even balance a checkbook. And David had much more money that Harry.

I guess Harry takes after the Windsor side of the family. I hope William takes after the Spencer side in that respect. He seems like his own man. David liked being bossed around by Wallis, same as Harry. She used to always do the meat carving and make fun of him when they had company and it is said he liked it. So many similarities between him and his Great Uncle. 

I am torn about how Diana would think of it all. Part of me thinks he heard his Mum talk about leaving the UK and how their lives would be easier abroad. No paps. Unfortunately Meghan a poor imitation of his Mom. She would not like the rift between the 2 boys. I and think coming from an old family she would have had Meghan vetted. I think she would have had the smarts to do that, not Charles. I think Charles is weak. It probably would be a tossup. Let's see how long she stays with him.


----------



## threadbender

lizzy_bennett said:


> I don’t have a dog in this fight. But Doria does not have a criminal record. She has a Masters in Social Work from USC. And she was a licensed Social Worker in CA. Not possible with a criminal history. That’s kind of not cool spreading rumors she’s a criminal.


I don't know anything about any sort of criminal record. I believe she filed for bankruptcy but, many people find themselves in that situation.
I thought it was just a 7 year rule in California unless a violent offense. I may not be remembering correctly.But, I agree, that sort of thing should not be spread without some sort of proof.


----------



## Julide

I wonder with the megexit and prince Andrew in the last year how this bodes for the BRF in the future? Very interesting...


----------



## Encore Hermes

mshermes said:


> This was from a birthday party for Ninaki. Megs already a Queen with her servants. I do know that Doria has a criminal record.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5539893/Meghan-Markle-video-1990-shows-dressed-Queen.html


@criminal record could you post what she is convicted of, other than this.


----------



## pixiejenna

I don’t think that they’ll release all the details and terms but I’d feel that regardless of the fact that Harry is “out” they’ll still cover the cost of his (and by default Megan and Archie’s) security detail. Harry still requires it and if they don’t continue it he’s a literal walking target. They might not be big Megan fans but they care enough about Harry to ensure that he’s safe. It would bankrupt them to pay out of pocket for their own security, ironic for a couple who wants to be so financially independent. Now if they get divorced will they will drop Megan’s detail like a hot potato? I’d be inclined to think so, but I could see Harry fight for her to keep it because of what happened to his mom. I feel like this will most likely come out of Prince Charles pocket along with the 2.5 million Frogmore remodel repayment. I feel like they’re going to be receiving a lot of financial aid from Prince Charles, between the remodel repayment, the rent for a home that they will most likely never go back too, security detail, buying a new home in North America, and flying halfway across the world in private planes on the regular they might make it 6 months before they’re broke. The real question is if they get divorced who keeps Archie?


----------



## Jktgal

mdcx said:


> Is this why the rush to register everything Sussex Royal? Because they believe that since it was all technically registered while they held the titles, there is nothing the BRF can do about it, _nyah, nyah, nyah_!
> As I've said before, who on earth will be buying the Sussex Royal tat anyway?



It's stiil a good move for them to register rights for it. If they can't use it, no one can.


----------



## hellosunshine

Julide said:


> I wonder with the megexit and prince Andrew in the last year how this bodes for the BRF in the future?



Apparently, not well. 

"This week a senior Commonwealth figure told me that the tabloid treatment of Meghan – so clearly racist to observers in other parts of the world, while large parts of the British public remain in denial – is having a knock-on effect in making it harder for him to promote Britain abroad."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/16/playing-the-race-card-racism-black-experience


----------



## Stansy

mdcx said:


> Imo the end goal is living between LA/NYC so probably not an issue.


And using a BMW i3 for the „commute“ in order to reduce their carbon footprint I hope!


----------



## Grande Latte

pixiejenna said:


> ....and flying halfway across the world in private planes on the regular they might make it 6 months before they’re broke. The real question is if they get divorced who keeps Archie?



This is why Archie is abroad. It's all been planned. Meghan wants sole custody. 

I beg to differ on Charles paying a majority of H&M bills. Don't forget, he's married to Camilla. Camilla doesn't care about Meghan, and if she were to choose, she'd pick William to be generous towards. And I think Charles listens to Camilla.


----------



## chicinthecity777

hellosunshine said:


> Apparently, not well.
> 
> "This week a senior Commonwealth figure told me that the tabloid treatment of Meghan – so clearly racist to observers in other parts of the world, while large parts of the British public remain in denial – is having a knock-on effect in making it harder for him to promote Britain abroad."
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/16/playing-the-race-card-racism-black-experience


Oh another Guardian article! YAWN! the most biased newspaper in Britain!


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> *They'll still be Duke and Duchess,* but not HRHs. Just like Diana was still Princess of Wales and Fergie is still Duchess of York. They just took their HRH away.



Damn


----------



## PewPew

pixiejenna said:


> I don’t think that they’ll release all the details and terms but I’d feel that regardless of the fact that Harry is “out” they’ll still cover the cost of his (and by default Megan and Archie’s) security detail. Harry still requires it and if they don’t continue it he’s a literal walking target. They might not be big Megan fans but they care enough about Harry to ensure that he’s safe. It would bankrupt them to pay out of pocket for their own security, ironic for a couple who wants to be so financially independent. Now if they get divorced will they will drop Megan’s detail like a hot potato? I’d be inclined to think so, but I could see Harry fight for her to keep it because of what happened to his mom. I feel like this will most likely come out of Prince Charles pocket along with the 2.5 million Frogmore remodel repayment. I feel like they’re going to be receiving a lot of financial aid from Prince Charles, between the remodel repayment, the rent for a home that they will most likely never go back too, security detail, buying a new home in North America, and flying halfway across the world in private planes on the regular they might make it 6 months before they’re broke. The real question is if they get divorced who keeps Archie?



You make a good point that it’s not possible for even Charles to pay for H&M’s security, which the BBC estimates at 7.6 million pounds annually (nearly $10 million USD). Even with a personal fortune of $100 million USD, Charles would burn thru it fast if he actually had to pay for their security, let alone Canadian mansions and jet setter transport.


----------



## mdcx

I realised why Harry seemed so odd talking to the Disney executive about getting MM a job.
Growing up, he could ask (i.e. actually command) for anything and it would be provided instantly by his staff. He probably sees the world as being an incredibly accomodating place, so asking for whatever pops into his head is A-OK, whereas to most regular people it would be gauche and an imposition to do so.

On another note, will Megs slum it with the plebs at Wimbledon this year? Oh that’s right, banished and all that.


----------



## queennadine

Do we know for sure that Charles is re-paying the Frogmore remodel $?


----------



## mdcx

I have to say, now that things have finally come to a head and been largely resolved, my interest in these two is seriously waning.
I’m sure there will be some embarrassing money grubbing activities here and there, and the eternal question of “where is wee Archie?” but apart from that, I’m not expecting anything too interesting. 

As a side note, Jessica Mulroney does not seem a natural fit as TV host.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

If indeed they have to payback then MM will not have anything , she’s worth maybe $3 mil tops that’s just the Reno price of Frogmore, then the support staff like nanny, PA, housekeeper,etc... she better do more than voice overs.


----------



## Chagall

I think the queen along with her advisors resolved this the best possible way. I still think that at her age, or any age for that matter, it must have been stressful for her. Let’s hope it goes smoothly from now on.


----------



## lazeny

PewPew said:


> You make a good point that it’s not possible for even Charles to pay for H&M’s security, which the BBC estimates at 7.6 million pounds annually (nearly $10 million USD). Even with a personal fortune of $100 million USD, Charles would burn thru it fast if he actually had to pay for their security, let alone Canadian mansions and jet setter transport.



I don't get it. Relying on Charles to pay for anything for them is not what financial independence means. They're in their late 30's and both educated. If they want independence they can work for it. 

I also think if Harry wants to live a different life from the BRF because of what happened to Diana, shouldn't he and Meghan be a low key, discreet couple so they wouldn't be under intense scrutiny and paps wouldn't follow them? 

It's so odd.


----------



## mrsinsyder

How embarrassing


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I have to say, now that things have finally come to a head and been largely resolved, my interest in these two is seriously waning.
> I’m sure there will be some embarrassing money grubbing activities here and there, and the eternal question of “where is wee Archie?” but apart from that, I’m not expecting anything too interesting.
> 
> As a side note, Jessica Mulroney does not seem a natural fit as TV host.



I’m glad it’s settled, hoping for no more drama and sniping from them, now they have the privacy they said they wanted 
The wedding dress video is quite scary frankly, I had to switch it off.  Why are they SHOUTING in each other faces??  Weird.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lazeny said:


> I don't get it. Relying on Charles to pay for anything for them is not what financial independence means. They're in their late 30's and both educated. If they want independence they can work for it.
> 
> I also think if Harry wants to live a different life from the BRF because of what happened to Diana, shouldn't he and Meghan be a low key, discreet couple so they wouldn't be under intense scrutiny and paps wouldn't follow them?
> 
> It's so odd.


This.  Like the rest of the royals do in fact.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> How embarrassing
> 
> View attachment 4643632


 Those faces!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Those faces!


This is Bob Iger’s wife, after they walked away


----------



## carmen56

The report I read said that the reimbursement of Frogmore was the first item Harry put on the table, and that he would pay.


queennadine said:


> Do we know for sure that Charles is re-paying the Frogmore remodel $?


----------



## marthastoo

chicinthecity777 said:


> Oh another Guardian article! YAWN! the most biased newspaper in Britain!


srsly.  Please only quote from the Daily Mail, the standard bearer for journalistic integrity.


----------



## RAINDANCE

youngster said:


> I doubt they would go to Edward who did not have an easy time of it in the military.  He left the Royal Marines after only a few months.  Snowdon is the furniture maker, is he not?  I think all the military titles will go to William.



Princes Anne's husband Vice Admiral Sir Timothy James Hamilton Laurence could be in the frame as an ex Navy man ? None of the others  ( Peter Phillips, Snowdon or any of the girls !  ) have a military background.


----------



## imgg

I wonder if Meghan even realizes the only reason she will be getting new movie/tv roles is because of who she married, not for merit or talent.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Eva1991 said:


> I've read the statement. What I don't understand is how they get to keep their duke / duchess titles (I've read that they will now be called Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex) but are no loner HRH. Isn't the title of a duke / duchess an HRH title per se? Can you be a duke without being an HRH? Can someone from the UK and / or familiar with the RF's protocol enlighten us?



I did a post a couple of days ago on this for our non UK members. Yes there is a difference between a Royal Duke and the non-royal dukedoms. Whilst not having their HRH removed, the non use therof effectively puts the Sussexes in the same rank of the aristocracy as the non royal dukes.(so this is really a demotion in rank)
More interestingly Diana's brother is an Earl which is lower rank than a Duke.
It is widely expected that Prince Edward currently the Earl of Wessex will become Duke of Edinburgh at some point in the future


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it is a loophole.  It’s a way of allowing Harry back into the fold as HRH when Meghan decides she’s only surviving in the marriage, and dumps him.





bag-mania said:


> Maybe she hasn’t given him permission to come back yet.  Harry does not wear the pants in that marriage. She might be mad at him because he didn’t negotiate an even better settlement.


LOL


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> I wonder if Meghan even realizes the only reason she will be getting new movie/tv roles is because of who she married, not for merit or talent.


she would have to know that....no matter how large her ego may be


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

This story is sad ...
H&M now owe like 2.4 million pounds for the house they wont use in the UK, yesterday, supposedly M was looking at a $20M house in Vancouver - they are BADLY in debt - H only got like $35M from his mother 
H lost his military positions - colonel of this and that - he was very good at interfacing with the military, and his time in the army is a huge accomplishment - we wont see him in uniform anytime soon, his raison d etre was the military - SAD
When, H travels he will no longer represent the Queen and get treated as a head of state, no one will automatically come meet the plane
I remember the stories of how bored the Windsors were when they lived in the Caribbean, cannot remember, but he was governor of an island there


----------



## imgg

sdkitty said:


> she would have to know that....no matter how large her ego may be


Some narcissists really don't see things like that.....


----------



## mia55

I’m sure MM is fuming right now and probably that’s why Harry is delaying his travels to Canada to avoid her anger. Based on the earlier website post, she was expecting to still be HRH.

Eagerly waiting to see what happens to them next


----------



## SouthTampa

mdcx said:


> I have to say, now that things have finally come to a head and been largely resolved, my interest in these two is seriously waning.
> I’m sure there will be some embarrassing money grubbing activities here and there, and the eternal question of “where is wee Archie?” but apart from that, I’m not expecting anything too interesting.
> 
> As a side note, Jessica Mulroney does not seem a natural fit as TV host.



That belt is tragic.


----------



## sdkitty

mia55 said:


> I’m sure MM is fuming right now and probably that’s why Harry is delaying his travels to Canada to avoid her anger. Based on the earlier website post, she was expecting to still be HRH.
> 
> Eagerly waiting to see what happens to them next


well, her stans are so excited for her so.....time will tell with these two.  hope for his sake the loss of his military "job" isn't too hard on him


----------



## hellosunshine

Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.

"The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."


----------



## Clearblueskies

marthastoo said:


> srsly.  Please only quote from the Daily Mail, the standard bearer for journalistic integrity.


I’ve seen the Daily Mail quoted here by both Meghan’s supporters and critics.  Perhaps that is a definition of journalistic integrity (if that’s not an oxymoron in itself of course)


sdkitty said:


> well, her stans are so excited for her so.....time will tell with these two.  hope for his sake the loss of his military "job" isn't too hard on him


These would be the same people who literally 5 minutes ago were lecturing us about how Meghan overcame all odds to become a fairytale princess? Really, this fandom thing is all so silly, I’m sure it’s not helped the couple.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."



I'm sure the Windsors will be just fine


----------



## sdkitty

Prince Charles is apparently worth about a hundred million dollars.  Wonder how much he will be willing to give his son as an allowance.  Oh, never mind - they are going to be earning millions and millions.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."



The Royal Family are better off without people who think they’re more important than the institution.  It’s not show biz.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> I’ve seen the Daily Mail quoted here by both Meghan’s supporters and critics.



I disagree. It's almost always used by critics. Secondly, the Daily Mail is considered tabloid trash and should be considered as such.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> I disagree. It's almost always used by critics. Secondly, the Daily Mail is considered tabloid trash and should be considered as such.


Haha, I’ll remind you of this next time you quote them


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> Haha, I’ll remind you of this next time you quote them



I'll never source the Daily Fail when it's in relation to Meghan and Harry as there's an obvious bias in coverage; however I will for the other couples because if everyones going to continue sourcing it here then what's good for the goose is good for the gander.


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> I'll never source the Daily Fail when it's in relation to Meghan and Harry as there's an obvious bias in coverage; however I will for the other couples because if everyones going to continue sourcing it here then what's good for the goose is good for the gander.


that's funny
"other couples" like Will & Kate?


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."



Have we forgotten Charlotte?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

This is a gossip thread. Tabloid posts are fine. Gossip. What is not fine is arguing with other members and making things personal between members. But yea, gossip, random musings, and tabloid references are fine. 



hellosunshine said:


> I disagree. It's almost always used by critics. Secondly, the Daily Mail is considered tabloid trash and should be considered as such.


----------



## Stansy

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."




Obviously as so far we have not heard anybody chime in „I‘m with the band, ahhhm, H&M“. So maybe this is an outlook that not many people will buy t-shirts and other souvenirs from their recent hideaway?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Have we forgotten Charlotte?


Good point, and little Louis looks like he could be quite a character too


----------



## Cavalier Girl

hellosunshine said:


> Meghan will never curtsy to Kate!



Like Catherine would care.  Anyway, Megless is a US citizen.


----------



## PurpleLilac97

Just curious. I get the term stan = stalker fan. Is there a term for the passionate anti-fans? Stanti-ans? Stantians? I don’t know, I don’t really get the strong love or dislike for either of the brothers or their wives. It’s not like we’d be bff if we crossed paths.


----------



## Aqua01

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."




Two superstars? 



Oh... you mean the con artist and the wimp?


----------



## Stansy

lizzy_bennett said:


> Just curious. I get the term stan = stalker fan. Is there a term for the passionate anti-fans? Stanti-ans? Stantians? I don’t know, I don’t really get the strong love or dislike for either of the brothers or their wives. It’s not like we’d be bff if we crossed paths.


I am fine as long as stansy does not come into play here


----------



## sdkitty

lizzy_bennett said:


> Just curious. I get the term stan = stalker fan. Is there a term for the passionate anti-fans? Stanti-ans? Stantians? I don’t know, I don’t really get the strong love or dislike for either of the brothers or their wives. It’s not like we’d be bff if we crossed paths.


I think part of the reason for the anti-fans is reaction to the stans


----------



## rose60610

Meghan has branded herself as needy and greedy. She's no Meryl Streep or Elizabeth Taylor or Jennifer Lawrence. Yet she demands attention while at the same time says "I need privacy". If she doesn't knock her first acting role out of the park, she'll be made an even bigger fool and not live it down. So I really wonder if she'll pursue an in-front of camera job. She won't be able to take a single negative review without sounding like the world's most famous victim. 

I've a feeling she and Harry are trying to muscle in on trying to be part of *****'s Netflix production projects. Why not? In her head she thinks she and Harry are their equals. Fellow wokers!


----------



## rose60610

lizzy_bennett said:


> Just curious. I get the term stan = stalker fan. Is there a term for the passionate anti-fans? Stanti-ans? Stantians? I don’t know, I don’t really get the strong love or dislike for either of the brothers or their wives. It’s not like we’d be bff if we crossed paths.



Term? How about "normal people"?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Meghan has branded herself as needy and greedy. She's no Meryl Streep or Elizabeth Taylor or Jennifer Lawrence. Yet she demands attention while at the same time says "I need privacy". If she doesn't knock her first acting role out of the park, she'll be made an even bigger fool and not live it down. So I really wonder if she'll pursue an in-front of camera job. She won't be able to take a single negative review without sounding like the world's most famous victim.
> 
> I've a feeling she and Harry are trying to muscle in on trying to be part of *****'s Netflix production projects. Why not? In her head she thinks she and Harry are their equals. Fellow wokers!


IDK if you can muscle in on the Obamas.....hope not


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

pixiejenna said:


> I don’t think that they’ll release all the details and terms but I’d feel that regardless of the fact that Harry is “out” they’ll still cover the cost of his (and by default Megan and Archie’s) security detail. Harry still requires it and if they don’t continue it he’s a literal walking target. They might not be big Megan fans but they care enough about Harry to ensure that he’s safe. It would bankrupt them to pay out of pocket for their own security, ironic for a couple who wants to be so financially independent. Now if they get divorced will they will drop Megan’s detail like a hot potato? I’d be inclined to think so, but I could see Harry fight for her to keep it because of what happened to his mom. I feel like this will most likely come out of Prince Charles pocket along with the 2.5 million Frogmore remodel repayment. I feel like they’re going to be receiving a lot of financial aid from Prince Charles, between the remodel repayment, the rent for a home that they will most likely never go back too, security detail, buying a new home in North America, and flying halfway across the world in private planes on the regular they might make it 6 months before they’re broke. The real question is if they get divorced who keeps Archie?



Let Harry be a target [emoji457]
He wants to be soooo normal


----------



## sdkitty

lizzy_bennett said:


> Thanks. That’s super helpful. So it’s normal to hate people you’ve never met?


I don't hate them.......but I'm just annoyed that they have the gall to complain about life being hard with all their privilege.....they can complain to her mother, their friends, their therapist.  but to do it in public is not ok IMO.


----------



## PurpleLilac97

Maybe. But then chicken or egg? Anyway, I’m heading back to Switzerland. I’m sure everything for the Royal Family will turn out fine. 



sdkitty said:


> I think part of the reason for the anti-fans is reaction to the stans


----------



## Deleted 698298

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."



What an arse! Will and Kate are doing their duties just fine (and with smiles on their faces)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## myown

mrsinsyder said:


> How embarrassing
> 
> View attachment 4643632


Sounds like she tried to save the situation 
And Harry acts headless


----------



## skyqueen

I thought of this thread and couldn't resist. This sums it up IMHO


----------



## Clearblueskies

skyqueen said:


> I thought of this thread and couldn't resist. This sums it up IMHO
> View attachment 4643809


----------



## sdkitty

skyqueen said:


> I thought of this thread and couldn't resist. This sums it up IMHO
> View attachment 4643809


funny


----------



## Chagall

skyqueen said:


> I thought of this thread and couldn't resist. This sums it up IMHO
> View attachment 4643809


That is so funny.​


----------



## youngster

I don't hate them either.  I've always been really fond of Harry.  I had a lot of doubts about him marrying an American actress who never spent any serious time in the UK, but people said that she had a degree in International Relations, so she'd be just fine.   

Now, I'm just really disappointed and shocked at their behavior and how they both have handled this whole debacle.  They could have engineered a gracious withdrawal but it seems like they tried to inflict maximum damage and perhaps not even intentionally, just through their own immaturity and impatience. He traded in his duty to his granny and the entire country to go make more money (because they didn't live well enough) and because the tabloids ran critical stories.  Just so he can give lucrative paid speeches, narrate documentaries, sell Harry & Meghan compostable bags, and do ads for Omega watches?  Well done, Harry.


----------



## mdcx

H & M seem like ungrateful selfish greedy people, with some untreated mental health issues that bring out the worst in each other.
It’s quite possible to actively dislike the behaviour of someone in the public sphere without hating them, I thought that was a given. 
Now that they are “private” people, I think many members of Commonwealth countries will hope they behave in a reasonably dignified and discreet way, and let the real royals of the BRF get on with doing the job properly.
This seems a bit unlikely as MM seems desperately fond of media attention and drama.
The DM seems to have had the inside track on most of the H&M story in the last week so I am happy to read their “trash”


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> I don't hate them either.  I've always been really fond of Harry.  I had a lot of doubts about him marrying an American actress who never spent any serious time in the UK, but people said that she had a degree in International Relations, so she'd be just fine.
> 
> Now, I'm just really disappointed and shocked at their behavior and how they both have handled this whole debacle.  They could have engineered a gracious withdrawal but it seems like they tried to inflict maximum damage and perhaps not even intentionally, just through their own immaturity and impatience. He traded in his duty to his granny and the entire country to go make more money (because they didn't live well enough) and because the tabloids ran critical stories.  Just so he can give lucrative paid speeches, narrate documentaries, sell Harry & Meghan compostable bags, and do ads for Omega watches?  Well done, Harry.


What ‘debacle’ are you referring to? The unrelenting harassment and bigotry by the press?  Just what would you have them do, keep a stiff upper lip?

No one is required to put up with that type of crap. Bravo to the two them for walking away.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> I don't hate them either.  I've always been really fond of Harry.  I had a lot of doubts about him marrying an American actress who never spent any serious time in the UK, but people said that she had a degree in International Relations, so she'd be just fine.
> 
> Now, I'm just really disappointed and shocked at their behavior and how they both have handled this whole debacle.  They could have engineered a gracious withdrawal but it seems like they tried to inflict maximum damage and perhaps not even intentionally, just through their own immaturity and impatience. He traded in his duty to his granny and the entire country to go make more money (because they didn't live well enough) and because the tabloids ran critical stories.  Just so he can give lucrative paid speeches, narrate documentaries, sell Harry & Meghan compostable bags, and do ads for Omega watches?  Well done, Harry.


You’ve summed it up very well.  I feel exact the same way.  And the sheer speed of it all - especially since we now know this was in the active planning stage last March.  Hardly time for the wedding cake to go stale


----------



## myown

skyqueen said:


> I thought of this thread and couldn't resist. This sums it up IMHO
> View attachment 4643809


But does it really? or is harry the leading part? The „she does vocals“ gives me second thoughts


----------



## pixiejenna

imgg said:


> I wonder if Meghan even realizes the only reason she will be getting new movie/tv roles is because of who she married, not for merit or talent.



I don’t think that she cares why she’s getting new work, as much as she cares about putting herself out there and getting attention. As long as the cameras are on her she’s happy.



VigeeLeBrun said:


> Let Harry be a target [emoji457]
> He wants to be soooo normal



The thing is the average “normal” person generally isn’t a walking target. The people that would target Harry would never target me, I’m not a person of importance to them. That’s why I said what I did they’ll still have to protect him, he’s a walking target without it. Imagine how poorly it would look for the BRF if something awful did happen to him due to lack of protection. It’s too much of a risk and it would be extremely difficult to manage such a tragedy. It would be touted as Princess Diana 2.0 her fate befalls her son in the media. Especially during a time of transition with Prince Charles taking the reins very shortly. It’s not just about protecting Harry and his  immediate family it’s also about protecting the crown. The implications of Harry going unprotected has the potential to be extremely damaging to the crown. The cost of his security detail is far beyond what any normal person could pay, and beyond what they can pay as millionaires. We’re only going to know the details about this deal that they want us to know. They aren’t going to announce any specifics regarding his and his family’s security detail.


----------



## mdcx

PatsyCline said:


> What ‘debacle’ are you referring to? The unrelenting harassment and bigotry by the press?  Just what would you have them do, keep a stiff upper lip?
> 
> No one is required to put up with that type of crap. Bravo to the two them for walking away.


Imo this is the exact narrative MM would have you believe. Some would even say that MM carefully orchestrated this narrative in order to achieve her end goal of exiting the BRF on very beneficial financial terms.
Yet whilst on their six week “break” H&M were entirely off the radar. Almost as if when their PR team stops pumping out stories, magically people leave them alone...


----------



## hellosunshine

mdcx said:


> Imo this is the exact narrative MM would have you believe. Some would even say that MM carefully orchestrated this narrative in order to achieve her end goal of exiting the BRF on very beneficial financial terms.



So, she's essentially schemed to get into royalty & is now scheming to get out of it.


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> What ‘debacle’ are you referring to? The unrelenting harassment and bigotry by the press?  Just what would you have them do, keep a stiff upper lip?
> 
> No one is required to put up with that type of crap. Bravo to the two them for walking away.


Except they are not walking away, they still want and need tons of money from the BRF and are still using their HRH titles on their website lol. They need those titles and being a duke and duchess to make any money on their royal brand. 

Like selling your brand and being an instagram shill is just what the Kardashians do - MM traded the monarchy to be Insta famous. 

She has no intention of hiding away from the press.


----------



## Aqua01

PatsyCline said:


> What ‘debacle’ are you referring to? The unrelenting harassment and bigotry by the press?  Just what would you have them do, keep a stiff upper lip?
> 
> No one is required to put up with that type of crap. Bravo to the two them for walking away.



Yes, stiff upper lip, or don't marry into the royal family. How hard is that to not comprehend, even for M? 
Like what, for world fame, adoration, and $$$, she stretched her arms open wide, but some criticism, and poor poor baby just couldn't take it any longer and had cry and whine in front of the camera for the world to see? Please look at privileged me, boohoo.
It's a package deal, baby. You took the best, so when the going gets tough, you take the rest!!!!!  Don't want to put up with a little crap, don't hunt for the goodies, Meghan. Simple as heck.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Annawakes said:


> I think it’s disgusting they referred to themselves as Their Royal Highnesses when the Queen’s message clearly says those titles are not to be used.  Okay, not to be used come Spring.  But can’t they just give her a little bit of respect for ONCE and stop already!?!!!!
> 
> They love rubbing it in, don’t they?  It sure seems so.


This! Just goes to show you. I was so shocked that had the balls to do that. They are relentless. They refuse to save any face. From the Disney pitching to merching to no one ask me if I’m ok to all of it. They are their biggest enemies with their shocking and disgusting behaviour. No wonder all the press  and social media is so savage on them. They truly deserve all this backlash. 
.


----------



## PatsyCline

Aqua01 said:


> Yes, stiff upper lip, or don't marry into the royal family. How hard is that to not comprehend, even for M?
> Like what, for world fame, adoration, and $$$, she stretched her arms open wide, but some criticism, and poor poor baby just couldn't take it any longer and had cry and whine in front of the camera for the world to see? Please look at privileged me, boohoo.
> It's a package deal, baby. You took the best, so when the going gets tough, you take the rest!!!!!  Don't want to put up with a little crap, don't hunt for the goodies, Meghan. Simple as heck.


I disagree. Bullying and bigotry are something no one should be required to tolerate, no matter what your station in life is. 

Press coverage is one thing, what the two of them are subjected to is not.


----------



## mdcx

hellosunshine said:


> So, she's essentially schemed to get into royalty & is now scheming to get out of it.


A fair assessment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have to ask the sympathetic Meghan fans: where none of you around when the press was having a go at Kate and Camilla? It wasn't on my radar either before it was said over and over again MM had it hardest, so I ventured out and read up on it/watched some footage. Kate especially was harassed in a way MM has no idea of. Yet somehow she powered through with dignity even though she's described as shy, a quality I wouldn't necessarily connect with MM. And those tear jerker collage of headlines? Says really nothing because they took not one headline from when Kate was the favourite victim of the yellow press.


----------



## youngster

PatsyCline said:


> What ‘debacle’ are you referring to? The unrelenting harassment and bigotry by the press?  Just what would you have them do, keep a stiff upper lip?
> 
> No one is required to put up with that type of crap. Bravo to the two them for walking away.



Yes, actually, Harry was a member of the British Royal Family so I would expect him, of all people, to carry on with a stiff upper lip.  All members of that family are criticized, made fun of, and generally harassed in the tabloid press. In between those episodes, they get lots of glowing articles.  It's part of the deal, it's part of their life.  Just go back and look at the articles and years long treatment of Sarah Ferguson, for example, among many others.  All of them have been through the ringer.  It's like a gauntlet they all have to run.  They ignore it and carry on and the tabloids eventually turn their attention elsewhere.  

The articles critical of them centered around Meghan's horrible and embarrassing family, Meghan's treatment of her father, the massive secrecy surrounding Archie's birth and the names of his Godparents, their private jet use while lecturing the masses about climate change, the lawsuits they filed against the tabloids, the huge amount of money spent on the renovations to the Frogmore cottage, the cost of her clothes, etc.  All of this was fair game.  If you're in the Royal Family, every aspect of your life and your past is going to be taken out and examined.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

PatsyCline said:


> I disagree. Bullying and bigotry are something no one should be required to tolerate, no matter what your station in life is.
> 
> Press coverage is one thing, what the two of them are subjected to is not.


Yes and I think that is why Her Majesty The Queen squashed their dreams and demands to be “part time royals” . The Queen and the rest of the BRF are not going to tolerate the Harkles bullying.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## youngster

PatsyCline said:


> What ‘debacle’ are you referring to? The unrelenting harassment and bigotry by the press?  Just what would you have them do, keep a stiff upper lip?



The "debacle" that I'm referring to is how they've managed their withdrawal from the family, putting out a press release and putting the 93 year old Queen on the spot.  Not taking into consideration that Prince Philip had just left the hospital.  Not having calm discussions behind the scenes to manage their withdrawal before anything went public.  No recognition that maybe, just maybe, Prince Charles and the Queen have a lot of important obligations and duties they are attending to, before they drop their little press bomb, because things weren't moving forward as quickly as they wanted.  After all, they are just barely surviving.  As a result, tons of negative press and a huge backlash. That debacle.


----------



## Aqua01

PatsyCline said:


> I disagree*. Bullying and bigotry* are something no one should be required to tolerate, no matter what your station in life is.
> 
> Press coverage is one thing, what the two of them are subjected to is not.


That's what her stans like call it. And again, package deal. If it was so easy, Meghan wouldn't even had a chance with Harry. Chelsy would've already snatched that ring. And as if M was the first or only one to deal with bad press and negativety. Just keep your head up high and keep moving!
The bad rap M got is due to her own doing, and has nothing to do with who her ancestors were.

When I look at William and Kate, and then Harry and Meghan, I can't help but think:
Winners don't quit, and quitters don't win.


----------



## V0N1B2

CobaltBlu said:


> This is a gossip thread. Tabloid posts are fine. Gossip. What is not fine is arguing with other members and making things personal between members. But yea, gossip, random musings, and tabloid references are fine.


And GIFs right? You didn't say more GIFs.  
'Cause sometimes there are no words - just a reaction.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Peter Hunt was a BBC commentator on international and national events, politics and the royal family. He's been called upon on BBC a lot this week in discussions relating to Sussexit.
> 
> "The House of Windsor have lost their two superstars. There’s none left."




That’s the point that Meghan and her fans keep missing:

*The royal family are not supposed to be superstars*


----------



## imgg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have to ask the sympathetic Meghan fans: where none of you around when the press was having a go at Kate and Camilla? It wasn't on my radar either before it was said over and over again, so I ventured out and read up on it/watched some footage. Kate especially was harassed in a way MM has no idea of. Yet somehow she powered through with dignity even though she's described as shy, a quality I wouldn't necessarily connect with MM. And those tear jerker collage of headlines? Says really nothing because they took not one headline from when Kate was the favourite victim of the yellow press.


Exactly.  The comparison that someone posted re the unfair treatment of MM by the press is BS.  It is cherry picked articles to make an argument.  You could easily make the opposite argument that Kate was treated unfairly by the press and MM was treated kindly, if you cherry pick certain press coverage.  Poor Kate was called Waity Katy for the longest time.  It was Megan's own words and actions not because of anything else, that changed the way people view her.


----------



## PatsyCline

Aqua01 said:


> That's what her stans like call it. And again, package deal. If it was so easy, Meghan wouldn't even had a chance with Harry. Chelsy would've already snatched that ring. And as if M was the first or only one to deal with bad press and negativety. Just keep your head up high and keep moving!
> The bad rap M got is due to her own doing, and has nothing to do with who her ancestors were.
> 
> When I look at William and Kate, and then Harry and Meghan, I can't help but think:
> Winners don't quit, and quitters don't win.


But Kate, even at its worst, didn’t have to put up with attacks against her family and heritage. It’s one thing to criticize when you’ve misstepped or misspoke, but this is way over the top.


----------



## mrsinsyder

PatsyCline said:


> But Kate, even at its worst, didn’t have to put up with attacks against her family and heritage. It’s one thing to criticize when you’ve misstepped or misspoke, but this is way over the top.


Yes she did. She’s been called lower class, all her families skeletons were drug up, etc. Her mom was called a ruthless social climbing stewardess. Even her sister is relentless stalked despite not really having any public profile. 

Meghan has enjoyed much more personal privacy during the dating phase than Kate ever did.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

PatsyCline said:


> But Kate, even at its worst, didn’t have to put up with attacks against her family and heritage. It’s one thing to criticize when you’ve misstepped or misspoke, but this is way over the top.



Definitely, Kate's family hasn't had to put up with as much bad coverage as Meghan's because Kate's family is not the crazed, dysfunctional lot that the Markles are, airing their grievances on TV and in interviews, with their multiple bankruptcies, jail time for her half-brother and his girlfriend, and DUI's. I actually admire that Meghan was able to pull herself up and away from that crew.   But, if Kate's family were like the Markles, they'd be in the press daily too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PatsyCline said:


> But Kate, even at its worst, didn’t have to put up with attacks against her family and heritage. It’s one thing to criticize when you’ve misstepped or misspoke, but this is way over the top.



Her parents and their modest background (new money doesn't mean anything) were the butt of ugly jokes for years, and that's easy to verify.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her parents and their modest background (new money doesn't mean anything) were the butt of ugly jokes for years, and that's easy to verify.


The press also had a field day when Kate and Will broke up for several months, and everyone assumed that was the end of their relationship.  They absolutely piled in to her.  Yet none of Kate’s family or friends, complained or sold stories about her.


----------



## imgg

What is striking to me, when she and Harry went to the strategically planned visit to the Disney premier to pitch Meghan for work to the Disney executives, moments before she was greeted by Pharrell and you could clearly hear Meghan whining to him about how hard it is for her with a fake tear in her eye.    Playing victim before the big pitch.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> But Kate, even at its worst, didn’t have to put up with attacks against her family and heritage. It’s one thing to criticize when you’ve misstepped or misspoke, but this is way over the top.


Meghan’s family brought criticism on themselves.  It’s been quite the display.  In fact the press were positively fighting them off during the engagement.  On the other hand I haven’t seen any criticism of Meghan’s heritage other than the infamous single tweet from Danny Baker.  Is that what you’re referring to?  Or do you have other specific examples you can share with us?


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan’s family brought criticism on themselves.  It’s been quite the display.  In fact the press were positively fighting them off during the engagement.  On the other hand I haven’t seen any criticism of Meghan’s heritage other than the infamous single tweet from Danny Baker.  Is that what you’re referring to?  Or do you have other specific examples you can share with us?


I've heard (second hand) about the baby being compared to an ape or monkey and something about Meghan or her mom being "straight out of Compton"
So there has been some racist stuff (on the Internet? or in the British tabloids?).
But Nothing anywhere near that here on the PF.  Some of us just aren't fans


----------



## CobaltBlu

Oh yes indeed!!!  The more the merrier~~!!!!



V0N1B2 said:


> And GIFs right? You didn't say more GIFs.
> 'Cause sometimes there are no words - just a reaction.


----------



## Sharont2305

To be honest I don't know where all this racism has come from, since the beginning any coverage  here (UK) I've seen about her colour has been positive, apart from, as @Clearblueskies posted, the Danny Baker tweet, which was disgusting.

ETA... @sdkitty I don't know where that Compton comment was from but I think the majority of us Brits wouldn't have a clue what that would be referring to. I do now, as a kind forumite explained it to me.


----------



## Annawakes

hellosunshine said:


> So, she's essentially schemed to get into royalty & is now scheming to get out of it.


Exactly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> To be honest I don't know where all this racism has come from, since the beginning any coverage  here (UK) I've seen about her colour has been positive, apart from, as @Clearblueskies posted, the Danny Baker tweet, which was disgusting.



Also he was fired from his job over this (rightfully so), so it's not like the whole nation was cheering him on.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also he was fired from his job over this (rightfully so), so it's not like the whole nation was cheering him on.


No he was reviled for it.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also he was fired from his job over this (rightfully so), so it's not like the whole nation was cheering him on.


Exactly, I certainly wasn't. I've never liked him tbh


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> Definitely, Kate's family hasn't had to put up with as much bad coverage as Meghan's because Kate's family is not the crazed, dysfunctional lot that the Markles are, airing their grievances on TV and in interviews, with their multiple bankruptcies, jail time for her half-brother and his girlfriend, and DUI's. I actually admire that Meghan was able to pull herself up and away from that crew.   But, if Kate's family were like the Markles, they'd be in the press daily too.


This is what I don’t understand. None of that has anything to do with Meghan directly. It’s gutter journalism at it’s worst.


----------



## mshermes

I don know if this is fact or conjecture.....
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will KEEP their HRH titles but have 'agreed NOT to use them' after Megxit (but they are still using it on their website)*

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are to be known as Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex *
*Last night's statement from the Queen said they will 'not use their HRH titles', suggesting it had been revoked*
*But the Palace and Sussex households have now been accused of purposefully fudging the statement*
*It transpired Harry and Meghan have not been stripped of the title, but have just agreed not to deploy it *
*This sparked concern they could row back on their pledge if doing so could bolster their commercial brand*
*.......*
*Last time I checked the website it appeared that they added more of “Their Royal Highnesses”?*


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> I don know if this is fact or conjecture.....
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will KEEP their HRH titles but have 'agreed NOT to use them' after Megxit (but they are still using it on their website)*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are to be known as Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex *
> *Last night's statement from the Queen said they will 'not use their HRH titles', suggesting it had been revoked*
> *But the Palace and Sussex households have now been accused of purposefully fudging the statement*
> *It transpired Harry and Meghan have not been stripped of the title, but have just agreed not to deploy it *
> *This sparked concern they could row back on their pledge if doing so could bolster their commercial brand*
> *.......*
> *Last time I checked the website it appeared that they added more of Their Royal Highnesses?*


The palace said there were many details still to be worked out.  And the whole arrangement is to be reviewed in 12 months.  I think I said before, this is a long game.  For now we know they will not be working Royals from the spring onward, and will therefore not be allowed to use HRH.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

*There’s a reason why the royals are demonised. But you won’t read all about it*
Alan Rusbridger







_Who really knows what is going on with Harry and Meghan? But we can be sure the storytellers, the press, are hardly disinterested observers_.

To understand the “real” story of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, it helps to think in three dimensions. *On one level*, we have a story about a couple who, for perfectly understandable reasons, want a different kind of life: a new start, a fresh role, less scrutiny, more peace of mind. All eminently reasonable and not very remarkable.

But there is, of course, *the second level*: they’re inescapably royal. This is hardly the abdication: the constitutional ramifications of the sixth in line bailing out to a new life in Canada are not earth-shattering. But, whether you are a pope or a prince, there are undoubtedly complications in trying to assert a private identity that is decoupled from your apparent destiny or birthright.

*The third level* is the storytellers. Almost everything we think we know about this couple is filtered through journalists. It is unusually difficult to judge the reliability of most royal reporting because it is a world almost devoid of open or named sources. So, in order to believe what we’re being told, we have to take it on trust that there are currently legions of “aides”, “palace insiders”, “friends” and “senior courtiers” constantly WhatsApping their favourite reporters with the latest gossip. It has been known to happen. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. We just don’t know.

But trust in this third dimension is further compromised by the fact that none of the major players filtering this story for our consumption is exactly a disinterested bystander. All three of the major newspaper groups most obsessed with Harry and Meghan are themselves being sued by the couple for assorted breaches of privacy and copyright. There is, to any reasonable eyes, a glaring conflict of interest that, for the most part, goes undeclared.

For some years now – largely unreported – two chancery court judges have been dealing with literally hundreds of cases of phone hacking against MGN Ltd and News Group, the owners, respectively, of the Daily Mirror and the Sun (as well as the defunct News of the World).

The two publishers are, between them, forking out eye-watering sums to avoid any cases going to trial in open court. Because the newspaper industry lobbied so forcefully to scrap the second part of the Leveson inquiry, which had been due to shine a light on such matters, we can only surmise what is going on.

But there are clues. Mirror Group (now Reach) had by July 2018 set aside more than £70m to settle phone-hacking claims without risking any of them getting to court. The BBC reported last year that the Murdoch titles had paid out an astonishing £400m in damages and calculated that the total bill for the two companies could eventually reach £1bn.

Last October, Prince Harry added his own name to the list of people claiming they had been hacked by both the Sun and the Mirror.

To understand why this is, to put it mildly, a bombshell, you would have needed to be following the patient work of Mr Justice Mann (and before him, Mr Justice Vos) in the anonymous Rolls Building, home to the chancery court, just off London’s Strand.

Publicly available court documents detail the alleged involvement of Rupert Murdoch’s son James and the reinstated CEO of News UK, Rebekah Brooks, in suppressing or concealing the true extent of wrongdoing within the Murdoch titles. The Sun’s official position is to “not admit” any unlawful activity, while simultaneously shelling out enormous sums so that this position can never be tested.

Over at the Mirror Group, there is a similar shyness about allowing daylight into the activities of past executives. Former DailyMirror editor Piers Morgan, one of the most vehement critics of the royal couple, does not find time or space to let his readers or viewers know that his name crops up very many times in the generic phone-hacking litigation particulars of claims in front of Mann. Morgan may be entirely innocent, but if you spend your time pouring venom over a claimant in a case that might touch on your own conduct, you’d think there was at least an interest to declare – every single time you do it.

And then there is the further legal action by Meghan against Associated Newspapers claiming assorted breaches of copyright, privacy and data protection. The Mail on Sunday claims “huge and legitimate public interest” in publishing extracts from a private letter from Meghan to her father. We shall see, but meanwhile there’s no harm in portraying her as a ruthless hypocrite and gold-digger. If Morgan’s on hand with the vitriol, everyone’s happy.

So, when reading about Harry and Meghan, it really does pay to keep your wits about you. There is a surface level to the story – not all of it untrue – and there are many anonymous sources of varying degrees of reliability to give colour and context. And, in the background, there are quite a lot of worried newspaper executives and former editors, who have absolutely zero interest in treating the couple kindly or even-handedly.

The metrics are irresistible: this couple sell newspapers and attract eyeballs by the billion. There is little hope that editors are going to dial down their coverage. But there is kindness; and there is fairness; and there is honesty. A little bit of each of those would help the rest of us understand better and trust more.

Alan Rusbridger is principal of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University, and chairs the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. He is the author of Breaking News (Canongate)

*Source*: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-read-all-about-it-prince-harry-meghan-markle


----------



## Coconuts40

I used to be a strong supporter of Meghan Markle.

However, there have been too many instances where I feel she is incredibly manipulative.  Just click through this thread and there are several videos demonstrating this.

When she cried to Tom Bradby about the British media, she completely lost me with her comments suggesting she was a helpless victim and had no idea what she was getting into.  She says she was stunned by the british media, because in the United States it wasn't like this.....seriously????  She did not grow up under a rock.  She grew up in L.A. and was an actress.  The paparazzi in L.A are completely ruthless.  This was one of those defining moments when I realized she would always play the victim.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

“Blood will tell, but often it tells too much”
Don Marquis


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> I doubt that. Harry lived his whole life and never made the slightest effort to liberate himself from the “burden” of being royalty. He’s been married less than two years and here they are running away.  Do you honestly believe Meghan  wasn’t strongly attracted to the prince angle when she met him?   She wanted it badly until she realized she didn’t like it because it wasn’t the way she thought it would be.


This.


Clearblueskies said:


> The Royal Family are better off without people who think they’re more important than the institution.  It’s not show biz.


And this.



mrsinsyder said:


> How embarrassing
> 
> View attachment 4643632


Ugh...







QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I have to ask the sympathetic Meghan fans: where none of you around when the press was having a go at Kate and Camilla*? It wasn't on my radar either before it was said over and over again MM had it hardest, so I ventured out and read up on it/watched some footage. Kate especially was harassed in a way MM has no idea of. Yet somehow she powered through with dignity even though she's described as shy, a quality I wouldn't necessarily connect with MM. And those tear jerker collage of headlines? Says really nothing because they took not one headline from when Kate was the favourite victim of the yellow press.


This (@ the bolded) The people claiming M is the biggest victim of the press in the history of the press, need to be showing the same energy for the constant abuse and harassment Kate & Camilla got _for years_ from the media, in the past.
I think it shows an ignorance when people claim M is the only one in recent Royal Family times to have suffered or have been a target by the media. Maybe go back and do a little reseach before claiming that because Kate and Camilla got it much worse IMO. I particularly remember when I was teenager being regularly shocked reading/seeing the stuff they used to write about Kate and the pictures they'd print of her, groups of paparazzi stalking, chasing and hounding her for pictures any time she stepped out in public. They were relentless and disgusting.
*No one* deserves it.



mrsinsyder said:


> That’s the point that Meghan and her fans keep missing:
> 
> *The royal family are not supposed to be superstars*


Well, *_there kind of is_.*.. there's supposed to be only 1 'superstar' in the royal family and that's the Queen.
Everyone else in the family is pretty much supposed to know their place.
_Supposed to..._


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## youngster

PatsyCline said:


> This is what I don’t understand. None of that has anything to do with Meghan directly. It’s gutter journalism at it’s worst.



The point is that every person who marries into the royal family also has had their family examined in tremendous detail.  A lot of the articles are happy pieces that just recounts the family story but, if there is anything interesting or juicy, then it is dug into ruthlessly.  Lady Diana Spencer's parents were divorced.  Her mother, Frances Shand Kydd, remarried and they were not on the best of terms for much of Diana's life.  Diana's father remarried and Diana and her siblings had a turbulent relationship with their stepmother, Raine, nicknaming her "Acid Raine".  Tons and tons of coverage of this.  Sarah Ferguson's parents were also divorced.  Her mother ran off with an Argentinian polo player.  You can imagine the coverage of this.  Her nickname was "the bolter".  It goes on and on.  Meghan's family was always going to be written about.  If they were all successful, happy Eagle Scouts then there would not be as much interest or coverage of them, other than the basics.


----------



## sdkitty

Coconuts40 said:


> I used to be a strong supporter of Meghan Markle.
> 
> However, there have been too many instances where I feel she is incredibly manipulative.  Just click through this thread and there are several videos demonstrating this.
> 
> When she cried to Tom Bradby about the British media, she completely lost me with her comments suggesting she was a helpless victim and had no idea what she was getting into.  She says she was stunned by the british media, because in the United States it wasn't like this.....seriously????  She did not grow up under a rock.  She grew up in L.A. and was an actress.  The paparazzi in L.A are completely ruthless.  This was one of those defining moments when I realized she would always play the victim.


she wasn't a big enough star to be of interest to the paps when she was in LA.....of course she got A Lot more scrutiny when she married Harry.  And it may have been hard.  But she is a grown woman, has been married before, has had a career as an actress plus her website and her activism.  She's no babe in the woods.


----------



## Sharont2305

Morgan R said:


>



That actually made me teary


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Morgan R said:


>



Very well spoken.  I think he made his points very clearly and with a lot of warmth he feels for the Sentebale project.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So clearly this wasn’t the arrangement they wanted. Interesting that he came out and said that...


----------



## Coconuts40

FreeSpirit71 said:


> *There’s a reason why the royals are demonised. But you won’t read all about it*
> Alan Rusbridger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Who really knows what is going on with Harry and Meghan? But we can be sure the storytellers, the press, are hardly disinterested observers_.
> 
> To understand the “real” story of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, it helps to think in three dimensions. *On one level*, we have a story about a couple who, for perfectly understandable reasons, want a different kind of life: a new start, a fresh role, less scrutiny, more peace of mind. All eminently reasonable and not very remarkable.
> 
> But there is, of course, *the second level*: they’re inescapably royal. This is hardly the abdication: the constitutional ramifications of the sixth in line bailing out to a new life in Canada are not earth-shattering. But, whether you are a pope or a prince, there are undoubtedly complications in trying to assert a private identity that is decoupled from your apparent destiny or birthright.
> 
> *The third level* is the storytellers. Almost everything we think we know about this couple is filtered through journalists. It is unusually difficult to judge the reliability of most royal reporting because it is a world almost devoid of open or named sources. So, in order to believe what we’re being told, we have to take it on trust that there are currently legions of “aides”, “palace insiders”, “friends” and “senior courtiers” constantly WhatsApping their favourite reporters with the latest gossip. It has been known to happen. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. We just don’t know.
> 
> But trust in this third dimension is further compromised by the fact that none of the major players filtering this story for our consumption is exactly a disinterested bystander. All three of the major newspaper groups most obsessed with Harry and Meghan are themselves being sued by the couple for assorted breaches of privacy and copyright. There is, to any reasonable eyes, a glaring conflict of interest that, for the most part, goes undeclared.
> 
> For some years now – largely unreported – two chancery court judges have been dealing with literally hundreds of cases of phone hacking against MGN Ltd and News Group, the owners, respectively, of the Daily Mirror and the Sun (as well as the defunct News of the World).
> 
> The two publishers are, between them, forking out eye-watering sums to avoid any cases going to trial in open court. Because the newspaper industry lobbied so forcefully to scrap the second part of the Leveson inquiry, which had been due to shine a light on such matters, we can only surmise what is going on.
> 
> But there are clues. Mirror Group (now Reach) had by July 2018 set aside more than £70m to settle phone-hacking claims without risking any of them getting to court. The BBC reported last year that the Murdoch titles had paid out an astonishing £400m in damages and calculated that the total bill for the two companies could eventually reach £1bn.
> 
> Last October, Prince Harry added his own name to the list of people claiming they had been hacked by both the Sun and the Mirror.
> 
> To understand why this is, to put it mildly, a bombshell, you would have needed to be following the patient work of Mr Justice Mann (and before him, Mr Justice Vos) in the anonymous Rolls Building, home to the chancery court, just off London’s Strand.
> 
> Publicly available court documents detail the alleged involvement of Rupert Murdoch’s son James and the reinstated CEO of News UK, Rebekah Brooks, in suppressing or concealing the true extent of wrongdoing within the Murdoch titles. The Sun’s official position is to “not admit” any unlawful activity, while simultaneously shelling out enormous sums so that this position can never be tested.
> 
> Over at the Mirror Group, there is a similar shyness about allowing daylight into the activities of past executives. Former DailyMirror editor Piers Morgan, one of the most vehement critics of the royal couple, does not find time or space to let his readers or viewers know that his name crops up very many times in the generic phone-hacking litigation particulars of claims in front of Mann. Morgan may be entirely innocent, but if you spend your time pouring venom over a claimant in a case that might touch on your own conduct, you’d think there was at least an interest to declare – every single time you do it.
> 
> And then there is the further legal action by Meghan against Associated Newspapers claiming assorted breaches of copyright, privacy and data protection. The Mail on Sunday claims “huge and legitimate public interest” in publishing extracts from a private letter from Meghan to her father. We shall see, but meanwhile there’s no harm in portraying her as a ruthless hypocrite and gold-digger. If Morgan’s on hand with the vitriol, everyone’s happy.
> 
> So, when reading about Harry and Meghan, it really does pay to keep your wits about you. There is a surface level to the story – not all of it untrue – and there are many anonymous sources of varying degrees of reliability to give colour and context. And, in the background, there are quite a lot of worried newspaper executives and former editors, who have absolutely zero interest in treating the couple kindly or even-handedly.
> 
> The metrics are irresistible: this couple sell newspapers and attract eyeballs by the billion. There is little hope that editors are going to dial down their coverage. But there is kindness; and there is fairness; and there is honesty. A little bit of each of those would help the rest of us understand better and trust more.
> 
> Alan Rusbridger is principal of Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford University, and chairs the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. He is the author of Breaking News (Canongate)
> 
> *Source*: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-read-all-about-it-prince-harry-meghan-markle



I agree with this article, I have no doubt there was a lot of scrutiny and racism that Meghan had to deal with that I would never know about.  No doubt.   There is no doubt some media were unfair and often painted a poor picture of her.   It was very clear her family were not fans of hers, and the tabloids had no right to give her family a platform when all her family wanted to do was discredit her and drag her through the mud.  I see that.  I see Harry blames the media for the death of his mother, I don't blame him for doing everything to protect his wife and child and future children.

My decline in support for Meghan really was not from what I read in the papers, but from her own actions and words that I have seen in interviews and videos of public appearances.


----------



## ali w

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I've been here a while and I'm pretty shocked reading comments from other longtime members I used to have a lot of respect for.
> 
> The pure nastiness of some of the comments has changed that.



Yes, for you and I both!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Coconuts40 said:


> My decline in support for Meghan really was not from what I read in the papers, but from her own actions and words that I have seen in interviews and videos of public appearances.



Same. I was never a fan but I began to actively dislike her due to what she said and how she acted.


----------



## youngster

In Harry's speech, he said the following: 
_
“Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible. I’ve accepted this, knowing that it doesn’t change who I am or how committed I am. But I hope that helps you understand what it had to come to, that I would step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life,” he said._

So, any interpretations?  Seems like he's saying that they expected to give up the 5% of their public funding, but hang on to everything else, including the use of titles and still be able to go out and make their own money and do their own thing with SussexRoyal?   I'm confused.

ETA:  They had to know they would not be allowed to monetize their titles and promote their brand. That just seems really disingenuous.


----------



## mdcx

mshermes said:


> There were never underlying racial undertones. You just made it that. Doria is off limits.


Agreed. MM’s race is actually not relevant to me in my dislike of her actions. And obviously it is odd for other posters to assume anything about the race/ethnicity of those posting about MM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Harry in DM:
_The decisión that I have made for my wife and I to step back is not one I made lightly. It was so many months of talks after so many years of challenges and I know I haven't always gotten it right but as far as this goes there really was no other option.'_

The no other option statement really sounds like it came from Meghan. Because there were plenty of other options. But this one gave MM the freedom to merch and not follow protocol.


----------



## mdcx

youngster said:


> In Harry's speech, he said the following:
> _
> “Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible. I’ve accepted this, knowing that it doesn’t change who I am or how committed I am. But I hope that helps you understand what it had to come to, that I would step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life,” he said._
> 
> So, any interpretations?  Seems like he's saying that they expected to give up the 5% of their public funding, but hang on to everything else, including the use of titles and still be able to go out and make their own money and do their own thing with SussexRoyal?   I'm confused.
> 
> ETA:  They had to know they would not be allowed to monetize their titles and promote their brand. That just seems really disingenuous.


I think he’s trying to say things were so hellish for us I _had _to give up everything to protect Meghan.
As I’ve said before, sounds like script/talking points straight from Meghan’s playbook.


----------



## mshermes

ali w said:


> Still waiting for you to address and post proof of the accusations you threw out pages back about Doria spending time in jail and abandoning her daughter?


 MOD COMMENT: This is a gossip thread. Tabloid posts are fine. Gossip. What is not fine is arguing with other members and making things personal between members. But yea, gossip, random musings, and tabloid references are fine.


----------



## ali w

mshermes said:


> Please do not make false accusations.



"MOD COMMENT: This is a gossip thread. Tabloid posts are fine. Gossip. What is not fine is arguing with other members and making things personal between members. But yea, gossip, random musings, and tabloid references are fine."


----------



## hockeygirl

youngster said:


> In Harry's speech, he said the following:
> _
> “Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible. I’ve accepted this, knowing that it doesn’t change who I am or how committed I am. But I hope that helps you understand what it had to come to, that I would step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life,” he said._
> 
> So, any interpretations?  Seems like he's saying that they expected to give up the 5% of their public funding, but hang on to everything else, including the use of titles and still be able to go out and make their own money and do their own thing with SussexRoyal?   I'm confused.
> 
> ETA:  They had to know they would not be allowed to monetize their titles and promote their brand. That just seems really disingenuous.



I totally agree.  They couldn’t have been that naive to think they could just give up the 5% and the unglamorous jobs but get to do whatever else they want?

For him to make this speech so soon is also a bit disrespectful to the queen, in my opinion?


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> The point is that every person who marries into the royal family also has had their family examined in tremendous detail.  A lot of the articles are happy pieces that just recounts the family story but, if there is anything interesting or juicy, then it is dug into ruthlessly.  Lady Diana Spencer's parents were divorced.  Her mother, Frances Shand Kydd, remarried and they were not on the best of terms for much of Diana's life.  Diana's father remarried and Diana and her siblings had a turbulent relationship with their stepmother, Raine, nicknaming her "Acid Raine".  Tons and tons of coverage of this.  Sarah Ferguson's parents were also divorced.  Her mother ran off with an Argentinian polo player.  You can imagine the coverage of this.  Her nickname was "the bolter".  It goes on and on.  Meghan's family was always going to be written about.  If they were all successful, happy Eagle Scouts then there would not be as much interest or coverage of them, other than the basics.


And it wasn’t right then, and it’s not right now. Meghan, or anyone else are not responsible for what their families do or don’t do.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Harry is a balding and disheveled mess, once again. His speech sounds like “we wanted to have our cake and eat it too, but the cake got taken away.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

But wasn’t will the meanest most evil person ever?


----------



## Jaxion

youngster said:


> In Harry's speech, he said the following:
> _
> “Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible. I’ve accepted this, knowing that it doesn’t change who I am or how committed I am. But I hope that helps you understand what it had to come to, that I would step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life,” he said._
> 
> So, any interpretations?  Seems like he's saying that they expected to give up the 5% of their public funding, but hang on to everything else, including the use of titles and still be able to go out and make their own money and do their own thing with SussexRoyal?   I'm confused.
> 
> ETA:  They had to know they would not be allowed to monetize their titles and promote their brand. That just seems really disingenuous.


It seems like what he's saying and I guess It fits with what they had written on their website. I think it's possible he was under the delusion that he could get exactly what he wants without compromise. Which makes me think more and more that for most of his life the palace has been unusually accomodating to him even when they didn't agree with him.


----------



## hellosunshine

QueenofWrapDress said:


> where none of you around when the press was having a go at Kate and Camilla?



Camilla was eviscerated by the press because she was THE MISTRESS. Kate centered her entire life around marrying into that family and took the hounding by the paparazzi in stride. She got called "Work-shy" and "Waity Katie" as she waited around for almost 10 years. Meghan’s crime has been to simply exist in the British Royal Family and essentially took a space meant for an "English Rose" - it's why people always lament that Harry should've married Cressida Bonas.

Anyway, it's been very clearly established that there has been a double standard in Meghan's coverage - and if anyone could provide an actual, factual, provable instance where she's acted differently than others in the British Royal Family..I'd like to see it.


----------



## youngster

Jaxion said:


> It seems like what he's saying and I guess It fits with what they had written on their website. *I think it's possible he was under the delusion that he could get exactly what he wants without compromise.* Which makes me think more and more that for most of his life the palace has been unusually accomodating to him even when they didn't agree with him.



Yes, I agree, I think they hoped to get some kind of half-in/half-out situation so that they could go make their own money and promote SussexRoyal but still take on some royal duties.  Seems obvious now that wouldn't be approved.  Possibly they announced it in order to put pressure on the Queen to give in to their demands but weren't expecting the backlash (?)  In any case, they were told no, you're either in or out, no more official appearances on behalf of the Queen, no more HRH, no more military positions and patronages, and all that.  Still, the Queen and Charles gave them a way back and they are going to review the situation in a year which seems reasonable to me.


----------



## Jktgal

ali w said:


> Is she off limits now? Weren't you the one posting a few pages back that you knew she had a criminal record? Did you also miss the pages where it was stated that she had been to Jail and abandoned her daughter when she lived with her dad for a time?
> Clearly Doria is not off limits and that's fine she is the mother of a public figure, unfortunately her life is also subjected to scrutiny. However, stating lies as facts is not ok and it's happening page after page in this thread. So don't fake shock and outrage at my comment when the facts can be found in the previous pages.



The Forum is entitled Celebrity News and Gossip. Even 'News' can be nonfactual, even more so Gossip ("casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.")
So unproven facts are actually permited in this thread. People obsessed with facts shouldn't really read this thread if they want to keep their (and our) mental healh.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Jktgal

Don't forget Chelsy Davy! If the internet in those days was what it's like now, they'd be getting the same treatment from the press (and trolls). They broke off because Chelsy reportedly couldn't take the pressure - she was very young at the time yet was able to see writing on the wall.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> Camilla was eviscerated by the press because she was THE MISTRESS. Kate centered her entire life around marrying into that family and took the hounding by the paparazzi in stride. She got called "Work-shy" and "Waity Katie" as she waited around for almost 10 years. Meghan’s crime has been to simply exist in the British Royal Family and essentially took a space meant for an "English Rose" - it's why people always lament that Harry should've married Cressida Bonas.
> 
> Anyway, it's been very clearly established that there has been a double standard in Meghan's coverage - and if anyone could provide an actual, factual, provable instance where she's acted differently than others in the British Royal Family..I'd like to see it.
> 
> View attachment 4644212


It actually hasn’t been “clearly established” that MM has it worse than Kate. Anyone here can do a comparison of headlines being nice to MM vs bad to Kate and visa versa. 

MM is not a victim. I’m sorry we can’t make this a reality for you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4644241


Hey! Is that a #royalsussex fine bone china mug he has there? How did Piers get one already? I heard they were on pre-order and not shipping until the Spring?
Looks like I'm not the only one mad about it.


----------



## Gal4Dior

imgg said:


> I wonder if Meghan even realizes the only reason she will be getting new movie/tv roles is because of who she married, not for merit or talent.


It didn’t stop her before when her ex helped her get that role in Suits. Lol!


----------



## mrsinsyder

V0N1B2 said:


> Hey! Is that a #royalsussex fine bone china mug he has there? How did Piers get one already? I heard they were on pre-order and not shipping until the Spring?
> Looks like I'm not the only one mad about it.


I was worried he broke into the room of one of the stans...


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> In Harry's speech, he said the following:
> _
> “Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible. I’ve accepted this, knowing that it doesn’t change who I am or how committed I am. But I hope that helps you understand what it had to come to, that I would step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life,” he said._
> 
> So, any interpretations?  Seems like he's saying that they expected to give up the 5% of their public funding, but hang on to everything else, including the use of titles and still be able to go out and make their own money and do their own thing with SussexRoyal?   I'm confused.
> 
> ETA:  They had to know they would not be allowed to monetize their titles and promote their brand. That just seems really disingenuous.



Totally agree with your summation.  I don't think he wrote that speech either, though he delivered it extremely well and better than most of his speeches.  

The military appointment losses still haven't been digested by him.  This is a huge loss and I think he was blindsided by it.     I don't think he will be going back to any reunions of his class at Sandhurst.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Morgan R said:


>



I don’t understand why he continually looks slovenly...he hasn’t given up HRH yet, doesn’t he have staff who can dress him when he makes public appearances??


----------



## mdcx

What on earth is Harry going to do all day in Canada? No retinue of servants so I suppose basic household matters like making his own tea will take up a bit of time. Then caring for Archie. But he’s not exactly had to be autonomous or self-managing before in his life. Let alone adjusting to all that far from home.
Megs will be straight into merching and influencing with no issues though, so she will be busy.


----------



## mdcx

LVSistinaMM said:


> I don’t understand why he continually looks slovenly...he hasn’t given up HRH yet, doesn’t he have staff who can dress him when he makes public appearances??


I did wonder if he was back on the drink.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> What on earth is Harry going to do all day in Canada? No retinue of servants so I suppose basic household matters like making his own tea will take up a bit of time. Then caring for Archie. But he’s not exactly had to be autonomous or self-managing before in his life. Let alone adjusting to all that far from home.
> Megs will be straight into merching and influencing with no issues though, so she will be busy.



He’s literally so privileged that doing normal people stuff is probably an exciting adventure for him. It’ll get old.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Yes, I agree, I think they hoped to get some kind of half-in/half-out situation so that they could go make their own money and promote SussexRoyal but still take on some royal duties.  Seems obvious now that wouldn't be approved.  Possibly they announced it in order to put pressure on the Queen to give in to their demands but weren't expecting the backlash (?)  In any case, they were told no, you're either in or out, no more official appearances on behalf of the Queen, no more HRH, no more military positions and patronages, and all that.  Still, the Queen and Charles gave them a way back and they are going to review the situation in a year which seems reasonable to me.



I'm thinking that the proclamations on their website were just business negotiations.  You ask for the moon and stars and work your way down.  I am giving them the benefit of the doubt in this BTW.  If they didn't understand this when they posted this on the site , then they were very naive.  In this case the working the way down was done by the Royals who basically told them how it was going to be.  Harry is lucky because his family will always take him back and what was given and then taken away, can be given again.  

The Queen and Prince were very gracious towards Meghan and Doria.  They were invited to join the Queen even before the wedding.  Unless I am mistaken, the Middletons have never been invited to Sandringham for Christmas or Balmoral in the summer.  If anyone has a right to complain about being left out, they certainly do.


----------



## chowlover2

I don't think anything will really hit him til a few months right now. The adrenaline is flowing and he only sees leaving the BRF as a positive choice. And it hit me last week that he is really, really in love with her. Like last Mon when he met with the Queen he arrived an hour early to plead his case. Thankfully his Grandmother has the foresight to have them review their decision in 6 months and again in a year. If things are going badly he can reconnect with his family. I wish MM would rise to the occasion, but I doubt it. I really respect QE II and her decision. It could not have been easy, but I think it's a good move.

 Let's hope William inherited some of her good sense when he ascends the throne. I really wish they would skip Charles but he has waited so long to be King.


----------



## momtok

mdcx said:


> No retinue of servants so I suppose basic household matters like making his own tea will take up a bit of time.



"No retinue of servants so I suppose basic household matters like making his own tea will take up a bit of time."

For the Brits, Brit-philes, and all-around BBC watchers.  Father Ted (Irish comedy), end of episode where Mrs. Doyle is away.  Father Ted and Father Dougal in a burning kitchen, clutching each other and crying, "We just wanted a cup of tea!!!"  (Love the series so much that we bought the DVDs years ago.)

Sorry.  Couldn't resist.


----------



## Grande Latte

mdcx said:


> I did wonder if he was back on the drink.



Harry can't hack "normal/ boring" people life. He will go back on the drink for sure. Maybe even worse. And that will be Meghan's way to divorce him and take Archie away AS SOON AS she's bagged a real wealthy man with his own money in the bank.

I really don't have a good opinion of Harry these days. Are Charles and William the same? I mean how do Brits really think of their male royals?


----------



## chowlover2

Can he even fill the gas tank in his car?


----------



## Gal4Dior

Grande Latte said:


> Harry can't hack "normal/ boring" people life. He will go back on the drink for sure. Maybe even worse. And that will be Meghan's way to divorce him and take Archie away AS SOON AS she's bagged a real wealthy man with his own money in the bank.
> 
> I really don't have a good opinion of Harry these days. Are Charles and William the same? I mean how do Brits really think of their male royals?



She can also claim he is mentally unstable and not fit to be a husband or a full time father. Knowing his weaknesses made him a prime target in the beginning. Harry’s strength of character has been very disappointing to witness these past two years. I used to like him much more than Will and I even thought Meghan much more interesting than boring ole Kate, but now I just have extreme admiration for both Will and Kate putting crown over self needs and saying nothing when they have been attacked with all sorts of bad press. That is way harder than just throwing punches as a reaction. It takes a lot of maturity and self restraint, exactly what is needed in a future King and Queen consort.


----------



## lazeny

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have to ask the sympathetic Meghan fans: where none of you around when the press was having a go at Kate and Camilla? It wasn't on my radar either before it was said over and over again MM had it hardest, so I ventured out and read up on it/watched some footage. Kate especially was harassed in a way MM has no idea of. Yet somehow she powered through with dignity even though she's described as shy, a quality I wouldn't necessarily connect with MM. And those tear jerker collage of headlines? Says really nothing because they took not one headline from when Kate was the favourite victim of the yellow press.



I remember Kate being photographed topless in one of their vacations and the brouhaha that came after. I think a difference with Kate and Meghan is that Kate came from a solid, supporting and loving family.  Meghans own family added to the flames. It certainly didn't helped her and it seems to me they all relish the drama. They have vastly different upbringing and they cope differently.

Kate is under more intense scrutiny because of her position at the BRF and will eventually be Queen.  It's expected that a comparison will be made between the two women, it's the nature of things. But all in all Meghan shouldn't matter as much because Harry is a supporting character in this saga. But well, here we are. 

That's why many are saying the drama is completely Harry and Meghan's doing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Coconuts40 said:


> My decline in support for Meghan really was not from what I read in the papers, but from her own actions and words that I have seen in interviews and videos of public appearances.





mdcx said:


> Agreed. MM’s race is actually not relevant to me in my dislike of her actions. And obviously it is odd for other posters to assume anything about the race/ethnicity of those posting about MM.





mrsinsyder said:


> As a person of color I’ve grown really tired of the racism accusations thrown at those posting in the thread, but alas.


I hate that this thread is just so damn divisive and I don't understand why it always has to be some kind of US vs. THEM situation.  Black vs. White, Left vs. Right, Kate vs. Meg, hell even Jen vs. Angie.  It's so stupid.
It's like if you don't like Meghan, you're painted as some kind of racist bigot right-leaning hater of all things woke.  There are people in here that I know for a fact I do not agree with politically or on other social issues and you know what? That's okay. It really is.  We happen to share a dislike (or like) of a particular celebrity.  We have something in common.  Imagine that.  Some people might not like her because she's bi-racial, I really don't know, but since no one on this thread that I'm aware of has come out and pulled a Kanye circa 2005, please don't go assuming that people don't like Meghan because she's bi-racial.  I don't like her because she's a disingenuous, phony b!tch.
I just wanna pop in and have a few laughs at someone else expense, kinda like this poor model.  






Sorry, but I just can't help it, it makes me laugh my azz off - something we could all probably do a lot more of in these crazy times.  
I guess I'm just a mean girl, tho.


----------



## chowlover2

How long do we think the marriage will last? I think 1-2 years, but she may be out by the end of year 1.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t understand. Peter Philip isn’t a senior royal - he works. And he also (to the best I can tell, holy hell that was a boring commercial), didn’t mention being a royal or anything about the royals in that commercial?


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t understand. Peter Philip isn’t a senior royal - he works. And he also (to the best I can tell, holy hell that was a boring commercial), didn’t mention being a royal or anything about the royals in that commercial?


I don’t even know who he is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## A1aGypsy

Zara’s brother. Anne’s son


----------



## gracekelly

chowlover2 said:


> Can he even fill the gas tank in his car?


----------



## V0N1B2

What? You guys don't know H.R.H Peter Phillips? Duke of Lactose? 
A private citizen with no title? Works for a living? 
Comparing him to Harry and Meghan because... 
But please, keep on making the comparisons.  It's doesn't elevate Megs & Harr any higher, it just shows that you can have no title and still be boring.


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> She can also claim he is mentally unstable and not fit to be a husband or a full time father. Knowing his weaknesses made him a prime target in the beginning. Harry’s strength of character has been very disappointing to witness these past two years. I used to like him much more than Will and I even thought Meghan much more interesting than boring ole Kate, but now I just have extreme admiration for both Will and Kate putting crown over self needs and saying nothing when they have been attacked with all sorts of bad press. That is way harder than just throwing punches as a reaction. It takes a lot of maturity and self restraint, exactly what is needed in a future King and Queen consort.


All this talk about his mental problems and how it is so stressed in the media is just going to burn him.  They really need to ease up on that.  I do see where it could be used against him eventually.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

"


FreeSpirit71 said:


>


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> What? You guys don't know H.R.H Peter Phillips? Duke of Lactose?
> A private citizen with no title? Works for a living?
> Comparing him to Harry and Meghan because...
> But please, keep on making the comparisons.  It's doesn't elevate Megs & Harr any higher, it just shows that you can have no title and still be boring.


He wasn't completely boring.  He also got into a little hot water.  He and his wife were paid 500 pounds for an interview prior to the wedding.  The Queen was not amused.


----------



## Gal4Dior

LVSistinaMM said:


> She can also claim he is mentally unstable and not fit to be a husband or a full time father. Knowing his weaknesses made him a prime target in the beginning. Harry’s strength of character has been very disappointing to witness these past two years. I used to like him much more than Will and I even thought Meghan much more interesting than boring ole Kate, but now I just have extreme admiration for both Will and Kate putting crown over self needs and saying nothing when they have been attacked with all sorts of bad press.





gracekelly said:


> All this talk about his mental problems and how it is so stressed in the media is just going to burn him.  They really need to ease up on that.  I do see where it could be used against him eventually.


Yup, he’s pretty much set up all the ammunition against him if there would ever be an acrimonious divorce, and I don’t think for one second Meghan is stupid enough to throw all this convenient written and video evidence in his face if it ever came to a nice tidy divorce settlement or custody of Archie. Meghan has a clean record, no drug use, no drinking problem, and no mental illness. She’s a smart one.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well howdy all!!!

...someone asked why some posts were deleted and not others......


Well I can only say that we are not monitoring this thread 24/7.  We Don’t get alerts when, for example, there are dozens or reports within an hour or one another in a thread ....as happened tonight with this thread.  We all do the best we can to clean up quickly and return the thread to topic and get back to a more enjoyable experience.   Sometimes that means posts get caught up in the sweep and get deleted, and people get upset, which means there are also messages to be answered. Sometimes we miss things.  Especially when things are repeated as quotes. 

This thread is really pushing a lot of people’s buttons so please try to stay on the topic of the Sussexes and not focus on each others comments.  Doria is obviously a messy topic so that is getting tossed out, and we also don’t allow political discussions on PF.

please don’t get personal with each other, nobody likes to read a bunch of back and forth snarling  between members in a royal gossip thread.

If your post got deleted please understand it was for the sake of smoothing the waters in a really devisive thread.  Use the report button if you need to, please don’t moderate each other.

if you feel ready to hit the keyboard in a heated response to something.....ask yourself...what would Queen Elizabeth do in this situation.  And do that instead.

thanks and goodnight.


----------



## Lexgal

Grande Latte said:


> This is why Archie is abroad. It's all been planned. Meghan wants sole custody.
> 
> I beg to differ on Charles paying a majority of H&M bills. Don't forget, he's married to Camilla. Camilla doesn't care about Meghan, and if she were to choose, she'd pick William to be generous towards. And I think Charles listens to Camilla.


QEII has custody of Archie.


----------



## V0N1B2

Lexgal said:


> QEII has custody of Archie.








Is she hiding him under one of those funny hats she wears?


----------



## Lexgal

V0N1B2 said:


> Is she hiding him under one of those funny hats she wears?


No a 300 year law that gives her custody of George, Louis, charlotte, and Archie. Just like she had custody of Harry, will, Eugenie and Beatrice.  Given the circumstances,  I say Archie is lucky.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

V0N1B2 said:


> What? You guys don't know H.R.H Peter Phillips? Duke of Lactose?
> A private citizen with no title? Works for a living?
> Comparing him to Harry and Meghan because...
> But please, keep on making the comparisons.  It's doesn't elevate Megs & Harr any higher, it just shows that you can have no title and still be boring.


And also to the other poster’s point - he isn’t USING A ROYAL LOGO and HRH titles when he is doing those things. 

Like MM wants to go full Kardashian using her title and SussexRoyal.


----------



## mdcx

chowlover2 said:


> How long do we think the marriage will last? I think 1-2 years, but she may be out by the end of year 1.


I give it a year. Away from all the drama and distractions of their beef with the BRF, the media etc, they may find that their relationship is not that strong.
Having a “common enemy” seems to have been a driving force, and now that has dissipated. 
Being in a cross cultural marriage with in-laws in different countries brings a lot of stress and issues. Add regular day to day life without servants and things could get tense. Us regular married people find it hard going at times, and that’s without Megxit!


----------



## Coconuts40

https://twitter.com/julesverne12345/media

Has anyone seen this page?  It's very controversial and I do not agree with anyone making fun of Doria, or Meghans looks.  I think making fun of anyones appearance is totally off limits!   I am pointing out the videos of Meghan and the way she treats Harry.


----------



## scrpo83

PatsyCline said:


> But Kate, even at its worst, didn’t have to put up with attacks against her family and heritage. It’s one thing to criticize when you’ve misstepped or misspoke, but this is way over the top.


Doors to manual anyone? (Refering to carole middleton's stewardess background)..not defending anyone but kate's family got a lot of crap as well..not to forget her shady uncle whom some believe bankrolled kate while she waits around until she got the ring..


----------



## Jayne1

lazeny said:


> I remember Kate being photographed topless in one of their vacations and the brouhaha that came after. I think a difference with Kate and Meghan is that Kate came from a solid, supporting and loving family.  Meghans own family added to the flames. It certainly didn't helped her and it seems to me they all relish the drama. They have vastly different upbringing and they cope differently.


I remember that and seeing the photos. 

They couldn't make some important event due to prior commitments and the paps found her in the south of France sunbathing topless. 

About M&H - this might be like an extended vacation for them and I can see them, or at least Harry, going back after the novelty wears off.


----------



## Sharont2305

Meh-gan said:


> And also to the other poster’s point - he isn’t USING A ROYAL LOGO and HRH titles when he is doing those things.
> 
> Like MM wants to go full Kardashian using her title and SussexRoyal.


He's not even HRH.


----------



## mshermes

Coconuts40 said:


> https://twitter.com/julesverne12345/media
> 
> Has anyone seen this page?  It's very controversial and I do not agree with anyone making fun of Doria, or Meghans looks.  I think making fun of anyones appearance is totally off limits!   I am pointing out the videos of Meghan and the way she treats Harry.


I don’t especially like it or agree with, either; however, this type of stuff comes with being in the public eye in an arena....politics, entertainment, RF.  One has to be aware going into it and just tough it out or.....get out.


----------



## mshermes

LVSistinaMM said:


> Yup, he’s pretty much set up all the ammunition against him if there would ever be an acrimonious divorce, and I don’t think for one second Meghan is stupid enough to throw all this convenient written and video evidence in his face if it ever came to a nice tidy divorce settlement or custody of Archie. Meghan has a clean record, no drug use, no drinking problem, and no mental illness. She’s a smart one.


On the other hand, she is the one who simply had to bolt because it was soul crushing and she was doing to have a meltdown due to the toxic environment and racial issues.  Harry’s speech didn’t make it sound very toxic? He seemed to make it sound quite lovely. It could be a not very nice battle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

hellosunshine said:


> Camilla was eviscerated by the press because she was THE MISTRESS. Kate centered her entire life around marrying into that family and took the hounding by the paparazzi in stride. She got called "Work-shy" and "Waity Katie" as she waited around for almost 10 years. Meghan’s crime has been to simply exist in the British Royal Family and essentially took a space meant for an "English Rose" - it's why people always lament that Harry should've married Cressida Bonas.
> 
> Anyway, it's been very clearly established that there has been a double standard in Meghan's coverage - and if anyone could provide an actual, factual, provable instance where she's acted differently than others in the British Royal Family..I'd like to see it.
> 
> View attachment 4644212



Ah, so Kate and Camilla DESERVED it? My bad.

Meghan misbehaved from Day 1 because following rules was beneath her and she thought the UK was waiting for her to change things up. Also I've said before (and I have a Master's in Media Studies so I've conducted more than one study as a grad student. My thesis was statistics based) this collage of covers really says nothing, it's anecdotal at best.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The Queen and Prince were very gracious towards Meghan and Doria.  They were invited to join the Queen even before the wedding.  Unless I am mistaken, the Middletons have never been invited to Sandringham for Christmas or Balmoral in the summer.  If anyone has a right to complain about being left out, they certainly do.



Or were present at the big baby photo op...they are never seen until it's say, a Christening family picture. I have no problem with Doria but the difference was interesting. She is a big girl, I'm sure she would have survived 60 mins alone at Frogmore. Unless someone had to push an agenda.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Coconuts40 said:


> https://twitter.com/julesverne12345/media
> 
> Has anyone seen this page?  It's very controversial and I do not agree with anyone making fun of Doria, or Meghans looks.  I think making fun of anyones appearance is totally off limits!   I am pointing out the videos of Meghan and the way she treats Harry.



These videos - don't know if exactly these, but plenty of footage of her pushing him around, landing her ellbow in his ribs, pushing him aside to reach an important person first, yanking his hand when he wanted to let go or losing that fake Hollywood smile to reveal a really scary face when things didn't go her way - were actually the reason my negative opinion of MM was sealed into place. This is not normal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chowlover2 said:


> Can he even fill the gas tank in his car?


I’m sure he can, but I bet he’s never had to think about it much as someone’s usually seen to it for him.


V0N1B2 said:


> I hate that this thread is just so damn divisive and I don't understand why it always has to be some kind of US vs. THEM situation.  Black vs. White, Left vs. Right, Kate vs. Meg, hell even Jen vs. Angie.  It's so stupid.
> It's like if you don't like Meghan, you're painted as some kind of racist bigot right-leaning hater of all things woke.  There are people in here that I know for a fact I do not agree with politically or on other social issues and you know what? That's okay. It really is.  We happen to share a dislike (or like) of a particular celebrity.  We have something in common.  Imagine that.  Some people might not like her because she's bi-racial, I really don't know, but since no one on this thread that I'm aware of has come out and pulled a Kanye circa 2005, please don't go assuming that people don't like Meghan because she's bi-racial.  I don't like her because she's a disingenuous, phony b!tch.
> I just wanna pop in and have a few laughs at someone else expense, kinda like this poor model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but I just can't help it, it makes me laugh my azz off - something we could all probably do a lot more of in these crazy times.
> I guess I'm just a mean girl, tho.


Well said.  I dislike Meghan because I think she’s fake.  She thought she could come here and be instantly adored and set up as Diana2.  I didn’t buy it, not one bit.  She found out the Royal thing wasn’t as easy as she thought, they wouldn’t let her publicise herself, and so now she’s off and she’s made him choose.  All very horrible and unnecessary.  Poor Harry
ETA
And one other thing.  Why is it ok to assume that being pretty imbues someone with all the qualities of goodness and kindness?  Why is it ok to mock the older or less glamorous and sneer at them for being older and plainer?  I’ve seen that here and it’s hateful and insidious.  It’s bad enough when employers or politicians treat women this way, so why do ordinary grown women do this other women?


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> *To be honest I don't know where all this racism has come from, since the beginning any coverage  here (UK) I've seen about her colour has been positive,* apart from, as @Clearblueskies posted, the Danny Baker tweet, which was disgusting.
> 
> ETA... @sdkitty* I don't know where that Compton comment was from but I think the majority of us Brits wouldn't have a clue what that would be referring to. I do now, as a kind forumite explained it to me.*




I for one have no idea what Compton is.....

 I liked Meghan until their stupid African interview, that really changed my mind about her and she's done nothing ever since to make me, and many other people, go back to liking her:  as simple as that!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These videos - don't know if exactly these, but plenty of footage of her pushing him around, landing her ellbow in his ribs, pushing him aside to reach an important person first, yanking his hand when he wanted to let go or losing that fake Hollywood smile to reveal a really scary face when things didn't go her way - were actually the reason my negative opinion of MM was sealed into place. This is not normal.


I totally agree with you, I think the most annoying thing for me was the pushing in to get to the important person. She should have respected the fact that Harry out ranks her so should go first. I know people who will say that Catherine has done it too, and yes I've seen this, especially if she's got out of the car closest to where the dignitaries are, and shakes hands with the first person. But, she then steps aside so William can greet the rest first.
The only time it's okay, in my opinion, is when they are attending one of Meghan's or Catherine's patronages and the husbands are the +1, that's fine. I'm not saying it's right as I think rank outweighs everything. But, on those occasions, it's fine.


----------



## Deleted 698298

Coconuts40 said:


> https://twitter.com/julesverne12345/media
> 
> Has anyone seen this page?  It's very controversial and I do not agree with anyone making fun of Doria, or Meghans looks.  I think making fun of anyones appearance is totally off limits!   I am pointing out the videos of Meghan and the way she treats Harry.


Rather scary.
She is beautiful and attractive and nearly 40! Single for most of her life. Did anyone really expect that someone who had to always rely on her cleverness and on being cunning when necessary, would just fit in to the “being second”, “not speaking when not addressed”, “being a supportive wife”...I don’t think she knows how to. Acting can only last so long...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I totally agree with you, I think the most annoying thing for me was the pushing in to get to the important person. She should have respected the fact that Harry out ranks her so should go first. I know people who will say that Catherine has done it too, and yes I've seen this, especially if she's got out of the car closest to where the dignitaries are, and shakes hands with the first person. But, she then steps aside so William can greet the rest first.
> The only time it's okay, in my opinion, is when they are attending one of Meghan's or Catherine's patronages and the husbands are the +1, that's fine. I'm not saying it's right as I think rank outweighs everything. But, on those occasions, it's fine.



I mean, it's one thing if it's the natural flow of things e.g. if she got out of the car first. But actively pushing someone aside? What is this, wrestling?


----------



## doni

So, he has been very frank, Harry, specially by admitting that it was all about the money and that “_our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the Commonwealth, and my military associations without public funding. Unfortunately that wasn’t possible_.”

I am surprised that he thought otherwise. I realize they must have been advised by American lawyers/consultants, and I believe Meghan is smart but has probably never fully understood the role of the monarchy, but he should have known better.

I don't agree with criticism on them stepping out. Once William had kids, and three to boot, the role of Harry is not essential. Many other royals in his situation have done the same. Madeleine of Sweden married an American and went to live in the US and noone blinks an eye. That her husband is rich and thus the financial independence thing is sorted obviously helps, but is beyond the point. The husband of Infanta Cristina, sister of the King of Spain, instead used his royal associations to convince people to put money in sham charity projects and he is now serving time in prison.

The problem of these two is that they wanted the have the cake and eat it thing. And not judging from newspaper reports but from their own narrative which they published in their website to try and force the crown to do things their way. Now it just remains to be seen that they don't use their 'royal' status for their own gain.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Grande Latte said:


> Harry can't hack "normal/ boring" people life. He will go back on the drink for sure. Maybe even worse. And that will be Meghan's way to divorce him and take Archie away AS SOON AS she's bagged a real wealthy man with his own money in the bank.
> 
> I really don't have a good opinion of Harry these days. Are Charles and William the same? I mean how do Brits really think of their male royals?


We can't stand Harry nor Charles!


----------



## Chagall

What is so amazing is how quickly this has all played out. You could see events like this happening over the course of time but not in this whirlwind manner. It all seems so unsettled. I feel sorry for baby Archie and any animals they may have now. Let’s hope this is the end of the constant drama.


----------



## myown

just want to leave that here:

*"the decisions I have made for my wife and I to step back"*


----------



## myown

Clearblueskies said:


> The palace said there were many details still to be worked out.  And the whole arrangement is to be reviewed in 12 months.  I think I said before, this is a long game.  For now we know they will not be working Royals from the spring onward, and will therefore not be allowed to use HRH.


would love to know by now, what the review in 12 month is


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

myown said:


> just want to leave that here:
> 
> *"the decisions I have made for my wife and I to step back"*



I heard that...but I still don't think he's calling the shots in that marriage.


----------



## Deleted 698298

myown said:


> just want to leave that here:
> 
> *"the decisions I have made for my wife and I to step back"*


Hmmmm, so no one can partially blame his wife? Very chivalrous.


----------



## myown

hellosunshine said:


> Camilla was eviscerated by the press because she was THE MISTRESS. Kate centered her entire life around marrying into that family and took the hounding by the paparazzi in stride. She got called "Work-shy" and "Waity Katie" as she waited around for almost 10 years. Meghan’s crime has been to simply exist in the British Royal Family and essentially took a space meant for an "English Rose" - it's why people always lament that Harry should've married Cressida Bonas.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4644212


and in this thread you can still read the shouts for harry to reconsider Chelsea or Cressida


----------



## myown

Consumer2much said:


> Hmmmm, so no one can partially blame his wife? Very chivalrous.


I think with that line he tries to take it off of Meghans shoulders. Maybe he thinks he could handle it all better than her, but most things said are against her not him. think he tries to protect her.


----------



## myown

Coconuts40 said:


> https://twitter.com/julesverne12345/media
> 
> Has anyone seen this page?  It's very controversial and I do not agree with anyone making fun of Doria, or Meghans looks.  I think making fun of anyones appearance is totally off limits!   I am pointing out the videos of Meghan and the way she treats Harry.


how can someone have so much hate for a person they don't actually know


----------



## Clearblueskies

myown said:


> how can someone have so much hate for a person they don't actually know


In the same way that some people spend all their time and effort doting over someone they don’t know presumably.  Both extremes baffle me.


----------



## PatsyCline

myown said:


> I think with that line he tries to take it off of Meghans shoulders. Maybe he thinks he could handle it all better than her, but most things said are against her not him. think he tries to protect her.


Why is it so hard to believe Harry wants to protect his family from the press?


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> Why is it so hard to believe Harry wants to protect his family from the press?


LOL because Meghan is over in Canada doing pap walks/drives ffs that’s why. And doing weird random drop ins with press coverage at charity offices etc. 

She has absolutely no intention of living privately away from the press. The whole Meghan is a victim of the press angle is to paint her as Diana 2.0.


----------



## doni

PatsyCline said:


> Why is it so hard to believe Harry wants to protect his family from the press?


Because he denies it himself? Yesterday he very clearly said that if it had been possible to continue with their royal work while being financially independent (as they had described in their website) they would have done that. He actually said it was _unfortunate _that this was not possible and that it made him sad. It is true that in following that (impossible) path, they had planned to get out from the Buckingham rota system and call their own journalists to events while continuing to keep their public informed through social media. But aside from that they had expressed no intention to stop public work. My guess is going on they will continue to engage in activities involving public exposure rather than in more private endevours, but that we shall see.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I heard that...but I still don't think he's calling the shots in that marriage.


He's not going to publicly admit Meghan calls the shots, even if its true.  I would bet had he married anyone else, he would not be stepping down from the RF.


----------



## LittleStar88

V0N1B2 said:


> I hate that this thread is just so damn divisive and I don't understand why it always has to be some kind of US vs. THEM situation.  Black vs. White, Left vs. Right, Kate vs. Meg, hell even Jen vs. Angie.  It's so stupid.
> It's like if you don't like Meghan, you're painted as some kind of racist bigot right-leaning hater of all things woke.  There are people in here that I know for a fact I do not agree with politically or on other social issues and you know what? That's okay. It really is.  We happen to share a dislike (or like) of a particular celebrity.  We have something in common.  Imagine that.  Some people might not like her because she's bi-racial, I really don't know, but since no one on this thread that I'm aware of has come out and pulled a Kanye circa 2005, please don't go assuming that people don't like Meghan because she's bi-racial.  I don't like her because she's a disingenuous, phony b!tch.
> I just wanna pop in and have a few laughs at someone else expense, kinda like this poor model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but I just can't help it, it makes me laugh my azz off - something we could all probably do a lot more of in these crazy times.
> I guess I'm just a mean girl, tho.



You are spot on and your posts are the best. I’m laughing so hard right now!


----------



## mshermes

Meh-gan said:


> LOL because Meghan is over in Canada doing pap walks/drives ffs that’s why. And doing weird random drop ins with press coverage at charity offices etc.
> 
> She has absolutely no intention of living privately away from the press. The whole Meghan is a victim of the press angle is to paint her as Diana 2.0.


And, according to her mother on very many sites: “Meghan is strong and will always be OK”. A contrast between her worrying about M’s welfare in the RF. Go figure?


----------



## Coconuts40

It's interesting as I find these recent press photos of MM a bit suspicious.  If you look at the press photos Meghan looks thinner in the press photos in Vancouver and looks like she did pre-Archie.  If you look at the photos of them just recently when she and Harry visited Canada House, she looks fantastic but she still has some pregnancy weight on.  This is not the case in the press photos seen of her in Vancouver.  Also, her clothes are outdated from years past.  There was a massive storm in Vancouver and I thought sea planes were not flying, let alone the drive to the airport to pick up her friend?  I am not a conspiracy theorist but I am starting to believe these press photos were just being published now but taken in the past.

I am not saying Meghan released these photos now, and perhaps the tabloids had them from a few years ago but are now releasing them to stir things.

Does anyone else feel like these press photos are a bit odd?


----------



## duna

myown said:


> just want to leave that here:
> 
> *"the decisions I have made for my wife and I to step back"*



He could hardly have said otherwize......


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> He could hardly have said otherwize......


She'd have his guts for garters!


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> She'd have his guts for garters!



LOL, exactly!


----------



## Deleted 698298

Coconuts40 said:


> It's interesting as I find these recent press photos of MM a bit suspicious.  If you look at the press photos Meghan looks thinner in the press photos in Vancouver and looks like she did pre-Archie.  If you look at the photos of them just recently when she and Harry visited Canada House, she looks fantastic but she still has some pregnancy weight on.  This is not the case in the press photos seen of her in Vancouver.  Also, her clothes are outdated from years past.  There was a massive storm in Vancouver and I thought sea planes were not flying, let alone the drive to the airport to pick up her friend?  I am not a conspiracy theorist but I am starting to believe these press photos were just being published now but taken in the past.
> 
> I am not saying Meghan released these photos now, and perhaps the tabloids had them from a few years ago but are now releasing them to stir things.
> 
> Does anyone else feel like these press photos are a bit odd?


Seems people have been saying that. Wouldn’t surprise me if she was actually sitting at home with her newborn waiting for the storm to pass (no pun intended), and the rest is media manipulating us as they always do, hah!


----------



## hellosunshine

The comments under this tweet -


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> He’s literally so privileged that doing normal people stuff is probably an exciting adventure for him. It’ll get old.


what normal people stuff?  don't you think they will still have servants?  maybe he will drive and maybe play with Archie


----------



## myown

duna said:


> He could hardly have said otherwize......


He could have said it was the decision of both of them


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> what normal people stuff?  don't you think they will still have servants?  maybe he will drive and maybe play with Archie



Agree.  They will still have a full staff of people and full security.  It's gonna cost Charles a fortune until they actually start making money.  That, and the lawyers for the lawsuits and everything else, are probably draining Charles quite a bit.  

The Duchy produces 20 million GBP per year approximately and Charles needs to take care of himself, Camilla, Will and Kate and their kids, and Harry and MM and Archie.  With Harry likely having three houses in three very expensive places it seems: Frogmore cottage, Vancouver/Whistler, L.A., and setting up new offices for Harry and that staff, a lot of money will be rolling out.  I can understand why they want to revisit the situation in a year as I doubt Charles can provide them with the millions per year they need indefinitely. I think they'll have to show serious financial progress fairly quickly.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> Agree.  They will still have a full staff of people and full security.  It's gonna cost Charles a fortune until they actually start making money.  That, and the lawyers for the lawsuits and everything else, are probably draining Charles quite a bit.
> 
> The Duchy produces 20 million GBP per year approximately and Charles needs to take care of himself, Camilla, Will and Kate and their kids, and Harry and MM and Archie.  With Harry likely having three houses in three very expensive places it seems: Frogmore cottage, Vancouver/Whistler, L.A., and setting up new offices for Harry and that staff, a lot of money will be rolling out.  I can understand why they want to revisit the situation in a year as I doubt Charles can provide them with the millions per year they need indefinitely. I think they'll have to show serious financial progress fairly quickly.


Especially as the next Duke of Cornwall is William, and I can't see him supporting Harry and Meghan financially


----------



## youngster

myown said:


> He could have said it was the decision of both of them



He said this in order to try and deflect some criticism from Meghan, though I'm not sure it does much good.  There is no way that this was his decision alone and she just meekly followed him.


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Especially as the next Duke of Cornwall is William, and I can't see him supporting Harry and Meghan financially



Yes, exactly, and this might have been a big contributing factor to their decision to leave.  Maybe Meghan looked ahead and realized that when Charles is king, he'd likely continue paying them their hefty annual allowance, but realized that William probably wouldn't when he inherits the Duchy or when he becomes King.  Williams isn't Charles and doesn't have the guilt that Charles does over Diana and how that all went down.  Maybe Meghan saw that their life might come down to living in apartments at Kensington or the Frogmore cottage and a much more limited annual allowance plus doing all the secondary duties, and she'd have to be really nice to both William and Kate on top of that, and figured why stick around.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

imgg said:


> He's not going to publicly admit Meghan calls the shots, even if its true.  I would bet had he married anyone else, he would not be stepping down from the RF.


He certainly wouldn't be leaving Britain. That's 100% on her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I see their bot army is back.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chowlover2 said:


> How long do we think the marriage will last? I think 1-2 years, but she may be out by the end of year 1.


I go with 5 more.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The godparents revealed:

"Recently, news broke about who Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle have chosen as baby Archie‘s godparents. The news had never been previously revealed, but we now know that they chose Prince Harry‘s former nanny, Tiggy Pettifer, Mark Dyer, a close friend of the family’s, and Prince Harry’s longtime friend Charlie van Straubenzee, The Times reports. It’s unclear if baby Archie has any other godparents apart from these three individuals."


----------



## eunaddict

myown said:


> and in this thread you can still read the shouts for harry to reconsider Chelsea or Cressida



Can't reconsider women who dumped you. Doesn't work that way. And so far, no one has "shouted" for it (), merely pointed out how different these women were, and how wise to step away from H; oh and how he spiralled after Cressida. Can't deny history girls, sorry.


----------



## imgg

youngster said:


> Agree.  They will still have a full staff of people and full security.  It's gonna cost Charles a fortune until they actually start making money.  That, and the lawyers for the lawsuits and everything else, are probably draining Charles quite a bit.
> 
> The Duchy produces 20 million GBP per year approximately and Charles needs to take care of himself, Camilla, Will and Kate and their kids, and Harry and MM and Archie.  With Harry likely having three houses in three very expensive places it seems: Frogmore cottage, Vancouver/Whistler, L.A., and setting up new offices for Harry and that staff, a lot of money will be rolling out.  I can understand why they want to revisit the situation in a year as I doubt Charles can provide them with the millions per year they need indefinitely. I think they'll have to show serious financial progress fairly quickly.



It's ridiculous that either of them would take any money from Charles.  They are grown adults.

I am sure they will trade their servants in for maids/housekeepers/assistants.  I can't see either of them doing any normal household tasks.  They are too busy plotting their acting/merchandising deals and how they can make a ton of money off what they walked away from.


----------



## queennadine

So I wonder what their next steps are. A permanent place to live, I assume?
I wonder if they’ll try to find an old castle or chateau (do those exist in Canada? I honestly don’t know!) and then have Chip and Joanna help them renovate


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Agree.  They will still have a full staff of people and full security.  It's gonna cost Charles a fortune until they actually start making money.  That, and the lawyers for the lawsuits and everything else, are probably draining Charles quite a bit.
> 
> The Duchy produces 20 million GBP per year approximately and Charles needs to take care of himself, Camilla, Will and Kate and their kids, and Harry and MM and Archie.  With Harry likely having three houses in three very expensive places it seems: Frogmore cottage, Vancouver/Whistler, L.A., and setting up new offices for Harry and that staff, a lot of money will be rolling out.  I can understand why they want to revisit the situation in a year as I doubt Charles can provide them with the millions per year they need indefinitely. I think they'll have to show serious financial progress fairly quickly.


Charles is very wealthy but nevertheless, I think its ridiculous that he would pay for three lavish homes for them.  Let them live in one location.  They want independence.  Let them start to be independent.  If they "earn" enough to support three homes, then they can pay for them.


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> So I wonder what their next steps are. A permanent place to live, I assume?
> I wonder if they’ll try to find an old castle or chateau (do those exist in Canada? I honestly don’t know!) and then have Chip and Joanna help them renovate



The Property Brothers are Canadian. They would probably love a crack at it. They could have an episode where Drew shows them three mansions. Then we can watch Meghan and Harry pick the houses apart over minor issues before finally deciding on one. Jonathan will then come in with a crew and turn it into a showplace. It would be ratings gold!


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> Charles is very wealthy but nevertheless, I think its ridiculous that he would pay for three lavish homes for them.  Let them live in one location.  They want independence.  Let them start to be independent.  If they "earn" enough to support three homes, then they can pay for them.


As to paying for MORE NEW residences ... the BRF owns a lot of run down buildings eg Buckingham Palace & Frogmore Cottage, the latter not in move-in condition by modern standards but a historical building, cant let them go unattended
The crown has too many old ENGLISH run-down properties to manage, and negotiate upkeep with the government - who controls the purse strings on a lot of the money. In a practical sense, the BRF needs to make do with the English houses and not buy something else
To make an analogy, they need to  shop from their own closets LOL


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> Charles is very wealthy but nevertheless, I think its ridiculous that he would pay for three lavish homes for them.  Let them live in one location.  They want independence.  Let them start to be independent.  If they "earn" enough to support three homes, then they can pay for them.



I think Charles is worth about $100 million (?), I've seen that number tossed about. He also has that 20 million GBP income from the Duchy.  Not enough to pay for $30 million dollar homes in Vancouver and L.A. for Harry, let alone maintain those homes plus the staff and security and all other personal expenses.  Heck, even paying for $4 or $5 million dollar homes in these places would put a dent in his net worth and that amount isn't going to get you the type of palatial estate they have currently borrowed from the Russian fellow.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think Charles is worth about $100 million (?), I've seen that number tossed about. He also has that 20 million GBP income from the Duchy.  Not enough to pay for $30 million dollar homes in Vancouver and L.A. for Harry, let alone maintain those homes plus the staff and security and all other personal expenses.  Heck, even paying for $4 or $5 million dollar homes in these places would put a dent in his net worth and that amount isn't going to get you the type of palatial estate they have currently borrowed from the Russian fellow.


right....and there's the maintenance on a property


----------



## bag-mania

myown said:


> He could have said it was the decision of both of them



That was already assumed. He didn’t want her to get more blame from the media than there already is. 

There isn’t anyone naive enough to believe that if Meghan didn’t really want to leave that she would be in Canada right now.


----------



## marietouchet

As a PS
the the Danish government stated it will not pay for 7 of 8 grandchildren of Queen Margrethe, because of the numbers - too many grandchildren , not enuf money to go around


----------



## myown

imgg said:


> He's not going to publicly admit Meghan calls the shots, even if its true.  I would bet had he married anyone else, he would not be stepping down from the RF.


He talked about that in the past


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

myown said:


> He talked about that in the past


Talking about and doing are two different things...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Agree.  They will still have a full staff of people and full security.  It's gonna cost Charles a fortune until they actually start making money.  That, and the lawyers for the lawsuits and everything else, are probably draining Charles quite a bit.
> 
> The Duchy produces 20 million GBP per year approximately and Charles needs to take care of himself, Camilla, Will and Kate and their kids, and Harry and MM and Archie.  With Harry likely having three houses in three very expensive places it seems: Frogmore cottage, Vancouver/Whistler, L.A., and setting up new offices for Harry and that staff, a lot of money will be rolling out.  I can understand why they want to revisit the situation in a year as I doubt Charles can provide them with the millions per year they need indefinitely. I think they'll have to show serious financial progress fairly quickly.



I mean, why would Charles fund that? When I was still getting an allowance from my parents (like, when in highschool LOL) they'd give me the money and expect me to make do with it. If I wanted to buy three pairs of shoes that month that weren't in my budget they were not upping the funds.

ETA: Also, Harry has about 30 millions. He can take 5 of that to buy a house if he feels he needs one. Or he could just live in a gifted mansion like his brother and not worry about such mundane things.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

queennadine said:


> So I wonder what their next steps are. A permanent place to live, I assume?
> I wonder if they’ll try to find an old castle or chateau (do those exist in Canada? I honestly don’t know!) and then have Chip and Joanna help them renovate


They need a home. They're homeless and just living off someone - maybe even paying rent. I also assume the first move is buying a residence.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Perhaps a SoHo House collab?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Or a David Foster loaner?  She and McPhee can hug it up all over the gram, Grady witty quips in the comments.


----------



## mdcx

I would guess H&M have little realistic idea of how much it costs to live in the style to which they became accustomed as senior royals.
When it’s coming out of their pocket, there may have to be some compromises!
It will be interesting to see how the reality of H&M in Canada plays out.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, why would Charles fund that? When I was still getting an allowance from my parents (like, when in highschool LOL) they'd give me the money and expect me to make do with it. If I wanted to buy three pairs of shoes that month that weren't in my budget they were not upping the funds.
> 
> ETA: Also, Harry has about 30 millions. He can take 5 of that to buy a house if he feels he needs one. Or he could just live in a gifted mansion like his brother and not worry about such mundane things.


If he bought a home for $5 mil he'd have to deal with taxes and maintenance.  I wonder how long "friends" will be wanting to give them places to stay.  Probably more likely for vacations than for a longer term stay.


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7907757/PIERS-MORGAN-Spare-crocodile-tears-Harry.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, Piers is a bitter POS, but he does have a point. Even though even I with my shared dislike of MM get tired of his tirades.


----------



## Tina_Bina

a good read if anyone has any interest https://www.vox.com/first-person/20...e-prince-harry-leaving-royal-family-uk-racism

“Not all racism is overt. Much of it is subtle, quietly shaping the way people are seen, talked about, and treated. Some, like Piers Morgan, have argued it’s not racist to talk about Markle’s DNA as “exotic,” but this term has colonial roots, long working as a form of othering. Acknowledging this would mean really grappling with the insidious ways racism operates in the UK, undermining the notion that it is fundamentally a “tolerant” and “progressive” country.”


----------



## Annawakes

I just wanted to say that I finally decided to watch that Africa documentary.  Like many others, I became irritated when M complained about the tabloids.  It’s irritating that she couldn’t hack it as an American.  Again, I’m so disappointed that she couldn’t have weathered through it.  

All that said, yes, I think they went about the departure from the RF all wrong.  But.  I don’t wish them harm, or a bankruptcy, or even to have to go crawling back to the RF in a year.  I hope they do find what they’re looking for.  Maybe they are very misguided in what they think their ideal life should be. Agree with everyone here who says they will tire of “normal” life quickly.

I really now feel like wishing them a stable life, for the sake of Archie.


----------



## CeeJay

This is so embarrassing . have a feeling that Beyonce & Jay-Z will not be 'close' friends with these two .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-Meghan-Markle-asking-voiceover-work.html


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> This is so embarrassing . have a feeling that Beyonce & Jay-Z will not be 'close' friends with these two ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-Meghan-Markle-asking-voiceover-work.html



Ew! While I'm sure DM is exaggerating their embarrassing behavior for maximum effect, it all looks pathetic for Harry and Meghan. There's no way watching a soon-to-be-former royal husband trying awkwardly to score a side hustle for his actress wife doesn't cheapen their barely launched brand.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Agree.  They will still have a full staff of people and full security.  It's gonna cost Charles a fortune until they actually start making money.  That, and the lawyers for the lawsuits and everything else, are probably draining Charles quite a bit.
> 
> The Duchy produces 20 million GBP per year approximately and Charles needs to take care of himself, Camilla, Will and Kate and their kids, and Harry and MM and Archie.  With Harry likely having three houses in three very expensive places it seems: Frogmore cottage, Vancouver/Whistler, L.A., and setting up new offices for Harry and that staff, a lot of money will be rolling out.  I can understand why they want to revisit the situation in a year as I doubt Charles can provide them with the millions per year they need indefinitely. I think they'll have to show serious financial progress fairly quickly.


.. and let's not forget that MM was 'supposedly' looking at a $23m house in Vancouver!!!  That would pretty much use up most of what Harry has now, and from what I've been reading, Charles has said that the purse is not exhaustible!


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> This is so embarrassing . have a feeling that Beyonce & Jay-Z will not be 'close' friends with these two ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-Meghan-Markle-asking-voiceover-work.html


So awkward. Written all over her face. I read that Jessica Mulroney made her Instagram account private and Serena, when asked about the whole thing, said she absolutely had no comment. Don't know what to read into both of them?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> So awkward. Written all over her face. I read that Jessica Mulroney made her Instagram account private and Serena, when asked about the whole thing, said she absolutely had no comment. Don't know what to read into both of them?


Hmmmm .. that's interesting about Jessica!!  Although, it has been said that she has (for some time now) been Meghan's "mouthpiece" to the 'friendly' press!   I kind of understand why Serena wouldn't engage in that convo; after all .. she's there for the Australian Open, not to answer questions about H&M!


----------



## PewPew

mshermes said:


> So awkward. Written all over her face. I read that Jessica Mulroney made her Instagram account private and Serena, when asked about the whole thing, said she absolutely had no comment. Don't know what to read into both of them?



Serena is in a difficult position & it’s probably a big blow to MM that she hasn’t voiced support since Megxit. Serena’s been a frequent competitor at Wimbleton and isn’t going to insult the Queen. But I think there’s more to it than that b/c Serena isn’t shy to speak her mind (though the Australian Open wouldn’t have been the place). If anyone knows unfair & racist press, it’s Serena. She’s faced blatant racism & sexism in her sport and in the international media (ape-like cartoons) all her career. On top of that, she’s also been mocked for her “masculine physique” since she was a teen.

Serena’s husband, reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian had a really interesting tweet shortly after the Megxit announcement (it was posted on this thread earlier). He basically said people need to earn respect. Many viewed it as a response to H&M. Alexis is media savvy & I don’t think the timing was accidental. He has always been a strong supporter of Serena & he’s very protective of her & their daughter. Even if there wasn’t an overt falling out btwn Serena & M, he doesn’t want Serena to be a lightning rod in this controversy.


----------



## Mrs.Z

PewPew said:


> Serena is in a difficult position & it’s probably a big blow to MM that she hasn’t voiced support since Megxit. Serena’s been a frequent competitor at Wimbleton and likely isn’t going to insult the Queen. But I think there’s more to it than that b/c Serena isn’t shy to speak her mind. If anyone knows unfair & racist press, it’s Serena. She’s had to face blatant racism & sexism in her sport and in the media (savage cartoons) all her career. On top of that, she’s also been attacked for her “masculine physique” and being manly since she was a teen.
> 
> Serena’s husband, reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian had a really interesting post (tweet?) shortly after the Megxit announcement (it was posted on this thread earlier). He basically said people need to earn respect. A lot a people viewed it as a response to H&M. Alexis is media savvy & I don’t think the timing was accidental. He has always been a strong supporter of Serena & he’s very protective of her & their daughter. Even if there wasn’t an overt falling out btwn Serena & M, he doesn’t want Serena to be a lightning rod in this controversy.


It’s possible people are just tired of the drama, wishing H & M well but really there are other things going on in life.  They were not held captive by rebel forces for two years, they were not prisoners of conscience, I see no need for their “friends” to be constantly defending them.


----------



## mdcx

Serena and Alexis seem to be very decent people with a very strong relationship. They also both seem to be very pragmatic and also both are genuine proponents of women’s rights. Family seems to be super important to them. Both have very important/successful/powerful professional careers.
I am not surprised that they appear to be distancing themselves from this situation.

ETA it must be weird to have gone to the 20 million dollar royal wedding as a guest, then hear H&M complain about how oppressive it all was.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I think Charles is worth about $100 million (?), I've seen that number tossed about. He also has that 20 million GBP income from the Duchy.  Not enough to pay for $30 million dollar homes in Vancouver and L.A. for Harry, let alone maintain those homes plus the staff and security and all other personal expenses.  Heck, even paying for $4 or $5 million dollar homes in these places would put a dent in his net worth and that amount isn't going to get you the type of palatial estate they have currently borrowed from the Russian fellow.


Agree and to further drive home your point .. 
On the topic of his INCOME - the 20 M GBP income is before taxes, yes, he pays taxes, and I just googled the top UK tax bracket - 45 % , so, he nets 11 M GBP after taxes but (just googled it) he paid 6.5M GBP for H&M last year alone, I seem to remember W&K got a similar amount, well, last year's income went lock, stock and barrel to the boys 
And on the subject of CAPITAL - the crown (not sure technically if Cornwall belongs to him or to the Queen) owns a  lot of pricey land that it cant liquidate without government approval 
Yes, he has a bank account somewhere that most of us would be thrilled to have, but his expenses are monumental


----------



## Lodpah

Well done Queen Elizabeth. Meghan and Harry didn’t think this through. The Queen I believe in her chess move has protected the Crown’s money from Meghan’s grubby hands. Harry is on his own plus of course with Prince Charles support which most likely PC will cut it off long enough  so in the event of a divorce Meghan will only be able to tap in PH money (of course after she runs through it). Brilliant move on the Crown. I sincerely think that H&M were quite impulsive in their decision. 

Others have said that Meghan has her own money but really how far does that go in LA and the fact that she spends millions on clothing. Even highly paid athletes go broke.


----------



## sdkitty

Serena has no comment.  Appropriate IMO
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/serena-williams-meghan-markle-question_n_5e25e7edc5b673621f7a1d6d


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Well done Queen Elizabeth. Meghan and Harry didn’t think this through. The Queen I believe in her chess move has protected the Crown’s money from Meghan’s grubby hands. Harry is on his own plus of course with Prince Charles support which most likely PC will cut it off long enough  so in the event of a divorce Meghan will only be able to tap in PH money (of course after she runs through it). Brilliant move on the Crown. I sincerely think that H&M were quite impulsive in their decision.
> 
> Others have said that Meghan has her own money but really how far does that go in LA and the fact that she spends millions on clothing. Even highly paid athletes go broke.


the money Meghan has wouldn't go far at all with the lifestyle she has become accustomed to


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> Serena has no comment.  Appropriate IMO
> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/serena-williams-meghan-markle-question_n_5e25e7edc5b673621f7a1d6d


Was totally inappropriate to ask Serena this at this time. She is a professional and was there to do her job - not comment on her friends’ dodgy decisions.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> This is so embarrassing . have a feeling that Beyonce & Jay-Z will not be 'close' friends with these two ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-Meghan-Markle-asking-voiceover-work.html


Then this is the real reason why Harry didn’t go to the military event. I mean it’s so obvious what their agenda was.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> .. and let's not forget that MM was 'supposedly' looking at a $23m house in Vancouver!!!  That would pretty much use up most of what Harry has now, and from what I've been reading, Charles has said that the purse is not exhaustible!


It's fun for "normal" people to go looking looing at homes like this, but realistically, this is way too much for them to spend at this point in time.    If they try to fund based on expected earnings, that is a recipe for disaster and I doubt a bank would given them a loan. You have to produce some tax returns for prior years showing stability of earnings or better. The Bank of Dad is pretty stretched at the moment and all they can count on for the next year us the allowance.  In one year there will be a re-evaluation of the situation and if they do make good money, that allowance will be curtailed.

I would think that Meghan was just having fun by looking at this.  Renting at this point would be the wiser option until there is more stability in their situation and they are certain as to where they want to live.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Then this is the real reason why Harry didn’t go to the military event. I mean it’s so obvious what their agenda was.


Sadly I agree with this.  This action definitely was a major factor in the military patronages being stripped.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> On the topic of his INCOME - the 20 M GBP income is before taxes, yes, he pays taxes, and I just googled the top UK tax bracket - 45 % , so, he nets 11 M GBP after taxes but (just googled it) he paid 6.5M GBP for H&M last year alone, I seem to remember W&K got a similar amount, well, last year's income went lock, stock and barrel to the boys



Actually William and Kate with three kids got a little over two millions. He pays both his boys that amount for their household expenses but forked out majorly to set up Harry and Meghan. 

Surprisingly (not) IF W & K felt they were dealt the short end of the stick they didn't complain about it to the press.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> It's fun for "normal" people to go looking looing at homes like this, but realistically, this is way too much for them to spend at this point in time.    If they try to fund based on expected earnings, that is a recipe for disaster and I doubt a bank would given them a loan. You have to produce some tax returns for prior years showing stability of earnings or better. The Bank of Dad is pretty stretched at the moment and all they can count on for the next year us the allowance.  In one year there will be a re-evaluation of the situation and if they do make good money, that allowance will be curtailed.
> 
> I would think that Meghan was just having fun by looking at this.  Renting at this point would be the wiser option until there is more stability in their situation and they are certain as to where they want to live.


ABSOLUTELY .. have done that out here before we bought our house!  They do need to be realistic; agree that it would likely be better to rent for a bit .. and I don't mean .. WITHOUT paying as it appears they are doing currently in that Vancouver mansion!  I don't know, maybe it's me, but as much as I like to look at those types of places, the thought of living in a house that big .. what's the point?  Don't get me wrong, I like to have 'enough' room, but not too much room (just as much as not enough room)!!


----------



## BlueCherry

I’ve been quietly following this thread when I have little to do just for the opinions from other countries. However I’m getting pi**ed off with the racist comments. 

I’m white, London born of Irish parents. They suffered explicit racism in the 50’s such as notices on shop doors saying “No dogs, no Blacks and no Irish”. This is what I call abject racism. 

The police can and do arrest people who make racist comments to others and quite rightly so. 

Throughout my life there’s been numerous changes on how we must describe people. I literally cannot keep up and what suits one doesn’t suit all. It’s got to the point where I don’t want to describe anyone for fear of being labelled racist. 

I’ve been an employer for 30 years and been on committees etc. I personally have experience that when someone has an issue they’re not winning or needs support they pull the race card. It’s an easy and effective “weapon” but utterly pathetic. 

I love and admire the Queen, adore Prince Philip and I’m proud of William and Kate thus far. I like that we have a Monarchy, I’m happy to support it but Harry and Meghan can take a running jump. Spoilt brats who can’t fight a clean fight. Disgusted how they treated the Queen and Prince Philip. Good riddance and commiserations to the US and Canada!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Sadly I agree with this.  This action definitely was a major factor in the military patronages being stripped.


Yes and lest we forget the Queen has advisors that she depends on. I mean the Queen’s image is on their money. I feel bad now for saying this but Meghan’s delusion of grandeur and her narcissistic trait are on full display.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> ABSOLUTELY .. have done that out here before we bought our house!  They do need to be realistic; agree that it would likely be better to rent for a bit .. and I don't mean .. WITHOUT paying as it appears they are doing currently in that Vancouver mansion!  I don't know, maybe it's me, but as much as I like to look at those types of places, the thought of living in a house that big .. what's the point?  Don't get me wrong, I like to have 'enough' room, but not too much room (just as much as not enough room)!!


The first thing I always think of is who is going to clean it hahahaha!


----------



## mdcx

She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7909443/Meghan-beams-carrying-Archie-walking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Agree and to further drive home your point ..
> On the topic of his INCOME - the 20 M GBP income is before taxes, yes, he pays taxes, and I just googled the top UK tax bracket - 45 % , so, he nets 11 M GBP after taxes but (just googled it) he paid 6.5M GBP for H&M last year alone, I seem to remember W&K got a similar amount, well, last year's income went lock, stock and barrel to the boys
> And on the subject of CAPITAL - the crown (not sure technically if Cornwall belongs to him or to the Queen) owns a  lot of pricey land that it cant liquidate without government approval
> Yes, he has a bank account somewhere that most of us would be thrilled to have, but his expenses are monumental



I've read that Charles feels a lot of guilt about Diana, Camilla, and all of his travel.  It's definitely not a 9-5 job.  He does not say no to either of his sons very often as a result and they both take advantage of that.  Still, Charles isn't a billionaire and isn't going to be able to provide much more than he is already doing from the Duchy's income.


----------



## Meh-gan

Look stans! More pap walk pictures! 

They managed to have NO pictures of them for 6 weeks, so if they were really looking for a life out of the media spotlight they could easily do it. But MM clearly doesn’t. I think we can expect almost daily pap walks and drops ins and MM spotted! posts from now on 

And yeah damn that is a woman who clearly spends no time holding her baby ..... these photos are bad and so thirsty. Omg


----------



## zen1965

Another pap stroll. SMH.
And yes, very peculiar way to carry a baby in an Ergo Carrier - he should not be hanging there like that.
I just cannot get over the fact how you can consider yourself Ms Woke and then marry a member of one of the most conservative families in the world in a very traditional and grossly expensive wedding ceremony.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html
> 
> View attachment 4645103


I wonder who the subtle hand signal is for.


----------



## mshermes

Funny....she goes out and walks the dogs and, for that, she wears her ring.

It looks like she has got a hold on Archie around his neck...yikes!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Ah, come on!  Archie is being carried in something like a Bjorn and is well supported.  I can see no shade to be thrown her way for how she's holding him.  Now, the pap walk, that's a different story.


----------



## PatsyCline

marietouchet said:


> Agree and to further drive home your point ..
> On the topic of his INCOME - the 20 M GBP income is before taxes, yes, he pays taxes, and I just googled the top UK tax bracket - 45 % , so, he nets 11 M GBP after taxes but (just googled it) he paid 6.5M GBP for H&M last year alone, I seem to remember W&K got a similar amount, well, last year's income went lock, stock and barrel to the boys
> And on the subject of CAPITAL - the crown (not sure technically if Cornwall belongs to him or to the Queen) owns a  lot of pricey land that it cant liquidate without government approval
> Yes, he has a bank account somewhere that most of us would be thrilled to have, but his expenses are monumental


Your figures could be off tremendously, as he may have considerable taxable deductions before he actually pays taxes.


----------



## mdcx

The poor boy is dangling there. And yes, photos copyrighted by Meghan's pap agency of choice Splash/Backgrid.



ETA Meghan's probably been dying to do a Jess Mulroney style "look at mah figure!" shot. This will have to do until she goes on a tropical vacay I guess.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> The first thing I always think of is who is going to clean it hahahaha!


BOOM!!! .. same here!!!! .. because, let's face it .. it's almost always the 'woman' of the house!!!


----------



## Meh-gan

Cavalier Girl said:


> Ah, come on!  Archie is being carried in something like a Bjorn and is well supported.  I can see no shade to be thrown her way for how she's holding him.  Now, the pap walk, that's a different story.


The carrier looks like it’s not adjusted properly and he isn’t properly positioned. I stand by my statement. Like this is the first time that woman has put that carrier on clearly and it’s just for the paps.


----------



## zen1965

mdcx said:


> The poor boy is dangling there. .


Indeed. This is just not how you carry a baby in a baby carrier. Particularly not, if you have two dogs on a leash at the same time. There is even a strap of the darn thing slipping off.
Sorry but another indication that this was done for effect only. If she regularly walked her dogs with Archie in a sling he would never be in there like this hanging on for dear life.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> The poor boy is dangling there. And yes, photos copyrighted by Meghan's pap agency of choice Splash/Backgrid.
> View attachment 4645135
> 
> 
> ETA Meghan's probably been dying to do a Jess Mulroney style "look at mah figure!" shot. This will have to do until she goes on a tropical vacay I guess.


LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

mdcx said:


> The poor boy is dangling there. And yes, photos copyrighted by Meghan's pap agency of choice Splash/Backgrid.
> View attachment 4645135
> 
> 
> ETA Meghan's probably been dying to do a Jess Mulroney style "look at mah figure!" shot. This will have to do until she goes on a tropical vacay I guess.


Omg loollolololol this angle makes it look even more awkward. This is so cringe-worthy. Her, the wonky carrier, the dangling baby, the prop dogs. I can’t.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html
> 
> View attachment 4645103


I said a smiling Archie pap shot was coming.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I always bring a photographer when I walk my kids and dogs in the rain, too.


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> I said a smiling Archie pap shot was coming.


You called it! She looks like she is hardcore struggling in that shot. Though I am glad to see that Guy the beagle still lives!


----------



## mrsinsyder

cafecreme15 said:


> You called it! She looks like she is hardcore struggling in that shot. Though I am glad to see that Guy the beagle still lives!


She’s so predictable. 

Where are her stans to tell us how all they wanted was privacy? She was papped once in the U.K.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also it’s pretty gross that Harry is clearly emotional and unhappy about how things went down and she’s out here cheesing it up. You can tell his heart was broken by giving up his military roles. I guess narcissists can’t care about how they hurt others.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s so predictable.
> 
> Where are her stans to tell us how all they wanted was privacy? She was papped once in the U.K.


At some point dear Harry will ask Megs
"Um Meggy, how is it that the paps always know where we are? This never happened in jolly old England?"


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> At some point dear Harry will ask Megs
> "Um Meggy, how is it that the paps always know where we are? This never happened in jolly old England?"


“Dear, who is Splash and they do they send us bank deposits every two weeks?”


----------



## PewPew

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I always bring a photographer when I walk my kids and dogs in the rain, too.
> View attachment 4645151
> View attachment 4645152



Well someone has to pick up the poop & doggie bags. She can’t do it with a dangling baby plus 2 dogs & her e-ring weighing down her free hand.  Security is still courtesy of the British taxpayers (& will continue to be, given the $10 million per anum estimate), so they can’t be seen on poop duty.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> The poor boy is dangling there. And yes, photos copyrighted by Meghan's pap agency of choice Splash/Backgrid.
> View attachment 4645135
> 
> 
> ETA Meghan's probably been dying to do a Jess Mulroney style "look at mah figure!" shot. This will have to do until she goes on a tropical vacay I guess.


So, does this mean that the various media outlets have to PAY to publish these pictures???


----------



## zinacef

Looks like Splash news paid for this,  y’all she’s not HRH anymore so she has to do everything by herself now like strapping the baby , walking the dog ,driving to airport or a CVS, looks strange with her security behind her in looks like wooded walking trail.  Maybe because it looked like a secluded area so security looked more obvious compared to Kate shopping last Christmas or loading groceries in her car and security wasn’t as close. Looks like somebody got paid.


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> So, does this mean that the various media outlets have to PAY to publish these pictures???


I think that's how it works - they set up a time/date with the paps who then split the profits of selling the pics?


----------



## Roxanna

Baby mittens string  usually go through the sleeves , but not from under the jacket. But that  is ok. However she obviously was not trying to dress him in rush while handling two jumping dogs. She probably has help too. Details like this are not in her favour and her team should probably pay better attention.


----------



## PewPew

CeeJay said:


> So, does this mean that the various media outlets have to PAY to publish these pictures???



Exactly. It’s a symbiotic relationship. It’s always happened in the business, but Splash (who took these pictures) is actually known for contracting with celebrities for “pap shots”. Splash pays for access via scheduled “candid” shots & will publish these “exclusive” photos, often with retouching favorable to the celebrity.

Kris Kardashian famously has partnered with Splash for years for the K-J family, which is how we mysteriously have all these photoshopped photos of Kim all dolled up for a late night convenience store run, often wearing Kanye’s latest Yeezy release etc. Splash always takes the “pap shots” when the K-J’s are on holiday. Their photos are always marked Splash, so it’s not a secret. I’m surprised M’s team is being this obvious by using them. But on the other hand, Splash definitely has the cash, manpower and experience to be on call & get results.

People on the K threads have compared Splash shots of the “target” celeb next to photos by other outlets or bystander shots of the same event & it’s clear that Splash invests a lot of time in selecting flattering pictures and editing on behalf of the celebrity for these “contracted” candids. Splash still does unflattering pics and normal pap stuff at events, but these contracted candids is where the big money is b/c they’re obviously the only ones with these “exclusive” pics to sell to magazines.

(And Splash & their competition only have to pay for high interest celebs. Publicists & films are happy to actually pay the outlet for coverage of these uncandid candids for publicity.)


----------



## hockeygirl

mdcx said:


> The poor boy is dangling there. And yes, photos copyrighted by Meghan's pap agency of choice Splash/Backgrid.
> View attachment 4645135
> 
> 
> ETA Meghan's probably been dying to do a Jess Mulroney style "look at mah figure!" shot. This will have to do until she goes on a tropical vacay I guess.



Judging by just this picture alone, this is definitely not the proper way to wear your baby carrier.  It looks like an Ergo and Archie should be sitting in the carrier, not dangling like that.

This was definitely a pap walk.  The ground looked very slippery.  When you are carrying your baby in a carrier, do you really want to have two dogs on a leash while walking on a slippery road?  Those dogs must be the worlds’ most well behaved dogs in the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Also it’s pretty gross that Harry is clearly emotional and unhappy about how things went down and she’s out here cheesing it up. You can tell his heart was broken by giving up his military roles. *I guess narcissists can’t care about how they hurt others*.


NOPE, not ever!


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> Exactly. It’s a symbiotic relationship. It’s always happened in the business, but Splash (who took these pictures) is actually known for contracting with celebrities for “pap shots”. Splash pays for access via scheduled “candid” shots & will publish these “exclusive” photos, often with retouching favorable to the celebrity.
> 
> Kris Kardashian famously has partnered with Splash for years for the K-J family, which is how we mysteriously have all these photoshopped photos of Kim all dolled up for a late night convenience store run, often wearing Kanye’s latest Yeezy release etc. Splash always takes the “pap shots” when the K-J’s are on holiday. Their photos are always marked Splash, so it’s not a secret. I’m surprised M’s team is being this obvious by using them. But on the other hand, Splash definitely has the cash, manpower and experience to be on call & get results.
> 
> People on the K threads have compared Splash shots of the “target” celeb next to photos by other outlets or bystander shots of the same event & it’s clear that Splash invests a lot of time in selecting flattering pictures and editing on behalf of the celebrity for these “contracted” candids. Splash still does unflattering pics and normal pap stuff at events, but these contracted candids is where the big money is b/c they’re obviously the only ones with these “exclusive” pics to sell to magazines.
> 
> (And Splash & their competition don’t always have to pay. Publicists for up and coming celebs are happy to pay the outlet for coverage of these uncandid candids for publicity.)


Okay .. so, the celebrities 'contract' the Agency to take 'flattering' pictures of them (_yes - heavy on the photoshopping - god knows, I've seen the Kim-K a@@ in person and it's pretty horrible_)!  Then, once the celeb reviews them and likes them, then the Agency can send them out? .. for publish, where the various media pay them for the pics?  I'm assuming that both the Celebrity and the Agency get $$$?  Sorry, not in that business; sorry for the dumb questions!


----------



## Meh-gan

hockeygirl said:


> Judging by just this picture alone, this is definitely not the proper way to wear your baby carrier.  It looks like an Ergo and Archie should be sitting in the carrier, not dangling like that.
> 
> This was definitely a pap walk.  The ground looked very slippery.  When you are carrying your baby in a carrier, do you really want to have two dogs on a leash while walking on a slippery road?  Those dogs must be the worlds’ most well behaved dogs in the world.



I mean she looks incredibly foolish and obvious. 

Maybe this was the first time she has used the carrier and there is a learning curve to getting the fit right, but that’s why you don’t use your baby as a prop in your pap walk.


----------



## hockeygirl

Meh-gan said:


> I mean she looks incredibly foolish and obvious.
> 
> Maybe this was the first time she has used the carrier and there is a learning curve to getting the fit right, but that’s why you don’t use your baby as a prop in your pap walk.



You are totally right.  I am speaking as a mom of three and there was a learning curve to using baby carriers like Ergo.  This was definitely not the right way and a mom can tell right away she has not had much, if any, experience, using a baby carrier.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, that S*it eating grin is killing me.

Even the poor dogs look confused.


----------



## CeeJay

hockeygirl said:


> You are totally right.  I am speaking as a mom of three and there was a learning curve to using baby carriers like Ergo.  This was definitely not the right way and a mom can tell right away she has not had much, if any, experience, using a baby carrier.


Buf, if she has Nannies / help, wouldn't they help her with that?


----------



## PewPew

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. so, the celebrities 'contract' the Agency to take 'flattering' pictures of them (_yes - heavy on the photoshopping - god knows, I've seen the Kim-K a@@ in person and it's pretty horrible_)!  Then, once the celeb reviews them and likes them, then the Agency can send them out? .. for publish, where the various media pay them for the pics?  I'm assuming that both the Celebrity and the Agency get $$$?  Sorry, not in that business; sorry for the dumb questions!



I don’t know if this is how it works for all agencies, but this is what I understand about Splash from a friend who worked at a gossip site similar to TMZ— For really high-interest celebs, the celeb can get paid up front for access (& whatever the contract specifies in terms of being able to review pics). It’s usually done through the publicist or a third party so you don’t have transactions like a check btwn the pap and celeb. The publicist may help select pics. They may even pay for a stylist if you’re talking about something really exclusive like baby pics.

Splash owns the photos, so any magazine, newspaper or entertainment shows or websites using their pictures has to pay them for their use. (Some of those entertainment shows may also contract with Splash so they can use any picture Splash takes.) It’s not worth going after people who repost Splash pics on gossip forums like ours, because we are fueling interest in the target celeb & don’t affect their bottom line.


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> Buf, if she has Nannies / help, wouldn't they help her with that?



Maybe they did or she just grabbed it pre-fitted to when the nanny was using it. 

I want to know what the security guards think observing all of this. Lol. Like “hot messss”


----------



## PewPew

Meh-gan said:


> I want to know what the security guards think observing all of this. Lol. Like “hot messss”



“Technically we’re also supposed to be protecting Archie, but we don’t want to be fired, so we’ll just keep walking... unless he falls out” -Security dudes


----------



## ccbaggirl89

PewPew said:


> This is what I understand from a friend who used to work at a site similar to TMZ— For really high-interest celebs, they can get paid up front for access (& whatever the contract specifies in terms of being able to review pics). It’s usually done through the publicist or a third party so you don’t have transactions like a check btwn the pap and celeb. The publicist may help select pics.
> 
> Splash owns the photos, so any magazine, newspaper or entertainment shows or websites using their pictures has to pay them for their use. (Some of those entertainment shows may also contract with Splash so they can use any picture Splash takes.) It’s not worth going after people who repost Splash pics on gossip forums like ours, because we are fueling interest in the target celeb & don’t affect their bottom line.


Thanks for taking the time to explain all this to the forum. It's highly interesting.


----------



## mshermes

cafecreme15 said:


> You called it! She looks like she is hardcore struggling in that shot. Though I am glad to see that Guy the beagle still lives!


Didn't Guy have two broken legs?


----------



## mrsinsyder

mshermes said:


> Didn't Guy have two broken legs?


Yes


----------



## marietouchet

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Thanks for taking the time to explain all this to the forum. It's highly interesting.


Am I getting it right ? She is making money off dog walk photos ?


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> Am I getting it right ? She is making money off dog walk photos ?


The photo agency is well known for that. They get a nicely staged pic and the celeb can control the narrative.


----------



## youngster

So, for six weeks when they spent Christmas in Canada, not a single photo of them.  Now we're starting to see daily photos of Meg because it makes perfect sense that the paparazzi would be out in force on the British Columbia trail network looking for random celebs. In the winter. In the rain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> The photo agency is well known for that. They get a nicely staged pic and the celeb can control the narrative.


Ok , goody , lots to look forward to next month at hairdresser when I marathon the recent issues of ok, People and National Enquirer


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> The photo agency is well known for that. They get a nicely staged pic and the celeb can control the narrative.



That’s the way she likes it, they’re completely under her control (just like Harry)!


----------



## queennadine

mdcx said:


> She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html
> 
> View attachment 4645103



He’s the size of a toddler! Woah.


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes


I thought so but wasn't sure. That's what Archie is going to have if she doesn't put that strap on her shoulder.


----------



## northerndancer

Guy the Beagle is very on-trend with his Canadian coat.


----------



## mdcx

Meh-gan said:


> I want to know what the security guards think observing all of this. Lol. Like “hot messss”


"Only 67* more days of this sh!te then I can get back to my real life in the UK..."

*actual number TBD depending on when exactly the Spring transition happens


----------



## mdcx

It looks to me that Meghan's PR are hard at work on the DM comments for this story. So many rapid over the top positive comments.


----------



## mdcx

I’m in the mood for merching....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7909539/Meghan-Markle-dons-160-boots-98-Lululemon-leggings-Archie-walk-Canada.html


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> "Only 67* more days of this sh!te then I can get back to my real life in the UK..."
> 
> *actual number TBD depending on when exactly the Spring transition happens


HA HA HA .. haven’t heard the Sh!te word since working in Edinburgh.. thanks for the laugh!!


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Ugh....she sooooooo thirsty......soooo transparent for these smug staged pap shots. Yet completely clueless how pathetic and desperate she comes across. Just when u think they can’t sink any lower...they find more ways and creative ones. Like the dogs matter now? Is she now PITCHING Archie to the Cirque du soleil showing how acrobatic he is the way she has him slung like that?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Archie looks like he’s trying to escape!  I bet Harry is the one who parents him.


----------



## Twelve

May be in order to profile Meghan face, she was told to push Archie to the side . Clearly not from someone with experience with babies how this will look.  The subject of the photos is Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

I, for one, am looking forward to the next several months of watching her shameless plan for self-promotion. How low will she go? Will Harry join her for the pap walks or will that be solely her thing? Honestly, you cannot buy entertainment like this and I’m here for every minute of it.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> I, for one, am looking forward to the next several months of watching her shameless plan for self-promotion. How low will she go? Will Harry join her for the pap walks or will that be solely her thing? Honestly, you cannot buy entertainment like this and I’m here for every minute of it.


It’s SO embarrassing I’m embarrassed for her.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html
> 
> View attachment 4645103


That look at the paps, pure bliss, that look at baby Archie says it all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

Lodpah said:


> That look at the paps, pure bliss, that look at baby Archie says it all.


I still can’t LOL. Like the blatant posing/smiling directly at the camera etc. 

BUT THE PRESS IS MEAN GUYS! We want to live a private life in seclusion from the press! 

The press drove her out of Britain with their “harassment”, but she claims she NEVER reads the press about her. And here she is staging some press with a sh*t eating grin on her face for the cameras. Nothing but a pile of lies from this woman.


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> So, for six weeks when they spent Christmas in Canada, not a single photo of them.  Now we're starting to see daily photos of Meg because it makes perfect sense that the paparazzi would be out in force on the British Columbia trail network looking for random celebs. In the winter. In the rain.


At many thousands of dollars per photo, you bet they would. They probably found out where they were staying, and from there, they just hang around the likely spots.


----------



## mdcx

Something is not right with her, seriously not right.


----------



## lazeny

hockeygirl said:


> You are totally right.  I am speaking as a mom of three and there was a learning curve to using baby carriers like Ergo.  This was definitely not the right way and a mom can tell right away she has not had much, if any, experience, using a baby carrier.



That carrier is not properly secured on Meghan, it has to be snug. Unless the jacket she wears is too slippery, but still. While there's a learning curve in using a carrier, she should have practiced it at home first before walking out in that weather with two dogs. But she's a first time mom and maybe a little clueless. There's certainly plenty of times I looked so awkward holding my first baby but not at 8months, at that time I was used to handle a wriggly baby. But then we're not sure if Meghan is a hands on mom. 

The dogs are lovely btw.


----------



## mrsinsyder

My guess is the next pap call will be her and Harry doing something normal, like grocery shopping.


----------



## Meh-gan

PatsyCline said:


> At many thousands of dollars per photo, you bet they would. They probably found out where they were staying, and from there, they just hang around the likely spots.


These are staged pap walks girl. GET A CLUE


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meh-gan said:


> These are staged pap walks girl. GET A CLUE


The delusion is real. People really think the paps are in the middle of some random woods in Canada winter? 

Make it make sense lord!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Meh-gan said:


> I still can’t LOL. Like the blatant posing/smiling directly at the camera etc.
> 
> BUT THE PRESS IS MEAN GUYS! We want to live a private life in seclusion from the press!
> 
> The press drove her out of Britain with their “harassment”, but she claims she NEVER reads the press about her. And here she is staging some press with a sh*t eating grin on her face for the cameras. Nothing but a pile of lies from this woman.


I wonder if people who don't actively follow celebs, royals, politicians, etc. would know these were staged. If Meghan came out tomorrow and said she was followed into the woods by aggressive photographers while she was with her baby - would the general population buy that?


----------



## imgg

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I always bring a photographer when I walk my kids and dogs in the rain, too.
> View attachment 4645151
> View attachment 4645152


She is just so gross.  She doesn't even try to hide the fact all she cares about is making money and being a star. There is no room for Harry in this marriage.  It will not last.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> My guess is the next pap call will be her and Harry doing something normal, like grocery shopping.


Or the earth shatteringly romantic reunion at the airport...


----------



## bisousx

Sooo... Harry left his family and royal position to join forces with what he abhors the most: posing for paps and selling staged photo opps to the media.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Meh-gan said:


> These are staged pap walks girl. GET A CLUE


Exactly! She was strutting in the woods like she was on a runway doing her catwalk.


----------



## mdcx

bisousx said:


> Sooo... Harry left his family and royal position to join forces with what he abhors the most: posing for paps and selling staged photo opps to the media.


Does he really not know this is what she does, or does he know and not care? Is he just too simple to get it?


----------



## youngster

I'm super curious to see if she gets Harry to join her on these pap walks.  I can't imagine that he'd agree to it, they crave their privacy after all, but I guess time will tell.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

mdcx said:


> Does he really not know this is what she does, or does he know and not care? Is he just too simple to get it?


I believe that would be the correct assumption. Simply does not get it. For him to be in this situation now, no way does he get it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jaxion

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I wonder if people who don't actively follow celebs, royals, politicians, etc. would know these were staged. If Meghan came out tomorrow and said she was followed into the woods by aggressive photographers while she was with her baby - would the general population buy that?


From talking to people about topics like pap shots, I've come to realise that most people would totally buy that story. I've even talked to a few people who regularly follow some celebs who are clueless that their fav celebs stage pap shots! Most people just are a little gulliable when it comes to celebrities.


----------



## Lodpah

Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> Something is not right with her, seriously not right.


Watch the video I just posted. In one of the comments and now I agree, the Queen does have a wicked sense of humor. Appointing Meghan to the seniors patronage - she abandons her father, appointing Meghan to the animal shelter patronage - she abandons her dog and appointing her to the theatre patronage - Meghan's not really any worthwhile roles. 
 It's crazy. And to top it off, Frogmore where Wallis is buried.  '

The Queen is definitely not stupid.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> Watch the video I just posted. In one of the comments and now I agree, the Queen does have a wicked sense of humor. Appointing Meghan to the seniors patronage - she abandons her father, appointing Meghan to the animal shelter patronage - she abandons her dog and appointing her to the theatre patronage - Meghan's not really any worthwhile roles.
> It's crazy. And to top it off, Frogmore where Wallis is buried.  '
> 
> The Queen is definitely not stupid.


Gosh, that was a good wrap up. A lot of those I hadn’t heard before, sounds like they had their eye on her as a loose cannon from the get go.


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html
> 
> View attachment 4645103


She looks ridiculous.


----------



## mshermes

Well....no nothing for Harry at the airport in Canada. Arrives and leaves alone in a black minivan.


----------



## Meh-gan

mshermes said:


> Well....no nothing for Harry at the airport in Canada. Arrives and leaves alone in a black minivan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4645496


Why is he on the tarmac did he fly a private plane again. FoR CliMaTe ChANge.


----------



## mshermes

I just posted one pic. Here is the article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7910227/Harry-arrives-Canada-start-new-life-Meghan.html British Airways but took the back staircase. Normal....just like we do.


Meh-gan said:


> Why is he on the tarmac did he fly a private plane again. FoR CliMaTe ChANge.[/QUOTE


----------



## pixiejenna

So many pap shots this week for a couple who’s suffering from anxiety from the paps. I am surprised that Megan didn’t pick him up, maybe because she got her pap shots in the morning and she filled her quota for the day lol. Should we be expecting a family pap session tomorrow?


----------



## V0N1B2

Meh-gan said:


> Why is he on the tarmac did he fly a private plane again. FoR CliMaTe ChANge.





mshermes said:


> I just posted one pic. Here is the article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7910227/Harry-arrives-Canada-start-new-life-Meghan.html British Airways but took the back staircase. Normal....just like we do.


I haven't flown into Victoria before, but I'm pretty sure they don't have jet bridges.  You have to walk outside to get on the plane. It's a very small airport.
EDIT: nevermind, I just read the accompanying article. Yeah, those pics were taken at YVR,


----------



## Meh-gan

Lodpah said:


> Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.



Interesting that all the jewels she was given/wore were replicas LOL


----------



## Sharont2305

Wow, the nerve of the woman!
Like someone upthread said, she was papped once in the UK, at the polo match with Archie, Catherine was there too with the children. My word, poor Archie, he's obviously been pushed aside as he's getting so big now, otherwise we wouldn't see the full force of her perfectly made up face.
Oh Harry, what now?


----------



## Clearblueskies

The “driven out of the UK by the wicked intrusive press” is already starting to look a little thin, and it’s only been a few days.  She is ridiculous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.



WTF was this. I wouldn't necessarily agree with all of the video's conclusions, but the footage of her rummaging through the trunk of the car and security shooing her away not once, not twice, but three times really speaks for itself. Even if her intentions were harmless, who does that? (and also, if they were married it speaks VOLUMES they would even do that to begin with)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

pixiejenna said:


> So many pap shots this week for a couple who’s suffering from anxiety from the paps. I am surprised that Megan didn’t pick him up, maybe because she got her pap shots in the morning and she filled her quota for the day lol. Should we be expecting a family pap session tomorrow?



No. I think she left him there on purpose. Lovebomb, devalue. Leave you hot and cold and no peace, only to have total control over your mind and body. That's what narcissists do best.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> She really needs some assistance with how to hold a baby:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lking-dogs-Harry-boards-flight-Vancouver.html
> 
> View attachment 4645103


As was mentioned earlier in the thread, MM looks fuller in the face and body than she appeared when hopping on the sea plane. She looks fine, just quite different.


----------



## PatsyCline

pixiejenna said:


> So many pap shots this week for a couple who’s suffering from anxiety from the paps. I am surprised that Megan didn’t pick him up, maybe because she got her pap shots in the morning and she filled her quota for the day lol. Should we be expecting a family pap session tomorrow?


Might be she was at home putting Archie to bed? If she picked him up, someone would be complaining sh wasn’t at home taking care of Archie.


----------



## Chagall

youngster said:


> So, for six weeks when they spent Christmas in Canada, not a single photo of them.  Now we're starting to see daily photos of Meg because it makes perfect sense that the paparazzi would be out in force on the British Columbia trail network looking for random celebs. In the winter. In the rain.


Yes of course they would be. Makes perfect sense.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Looks like Harry had a really difficult go with immigration in those pics.


----------



## VickyB

Has she reclaimed the beloved dog she was forced to leave behind in Canada for his own good? Where’s Bogart?


----------



## joyeaux

Wow... that’s definitely a pap stroll. #justiceforBogart


----------



## joyeaux

VickyB said:


> Has she reclaimed the beloved dog she was forced to leave behind in Canada for his own good? Where’s Bogart?



I just posted the same thing! He was left behind because the overseas trip was too much, right? Wonder if she will take him back. Although I really am glad to see the beagle is still alive and kicking!


----------



## Welltraveled!

https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112


----------



## Sophisticatted

Couldn’t she have just had her security deal with it, like she did at Wimbledon?


----------



## mrsinsyder

LMAO. Yeah, she looks super upset that they're photographing her.


----------



## cafecreme15

Welltraveled! said:


> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> 
> 
> View attachment 4645730
> View attachment 4645731
> View attachment 4645732


Oh for crying out loud. Does that **** eating grin looking RIGHT at the camera look like she is even remotely angry at their presence? However if the photogs did try to take pictures of them inside their home (or Russian billionaire's home, as the case may be), then that is unacceptable.


----------



## mshermes

Welltraveled! said:


> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> 
> 
> View attachment 4645730
> View attachment 4645731
> View attachment 4645732


Curious.....looks like she is smiling right at the camera.


----------



## Coconuts40

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF was this. I wouldn't necessarily agree with all of the video's conclusions, but the footage of her rummaging through the trunk of the car and security shooing her away not once, not twice, but three times really speaks for itself. Even if her intentions were harmless, who does that? (and also, if they were married it speaks VOLUMES they would even do that to begin with)



I'm in full agreement with you here!
People can say anything they want and end it with 'allegedly' but actions speak volumes and I always create my own judgement by the actions.  I have seen enough video and photos of Meghan that personally show me that her character is questionable and insincere. That footage of her rummaging is another example of her shady character.


----------



## doni

Funnily enough a good way to avoid paparazzi is being a working member of the royal family, (since Diana) you are practically guaranteed a paparazzi free life, which Meghan must have realized, as we have seen more paparazzi pictures of her in the last couple of days than in the last two years altogether...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe people are still buying what they’re selling.


----------



## Annawakes

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I wonder if people who don't actively follow celebs, royals, politicians, etc. would know these were staged. If Meghan came out tomorrow and said she was followed into the woods by aggressive photographers while she was with her baby - would the general population buy that?





Welltraveled! said:


> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> 
> 
> View attachment 4645730
> View attachment 4645731
> View attachment 4645732



@ccbaggirl89 you totally called it!!!


----------



## cafecreme15

doni said:


> Funnily enough a good way to avoid paparazzi is being a working member of the royal family, (since Diana) you are practically guaranteed a paparazzi free life, which Meghan must have realized, as we have seem more paparazzi pictures of her in the last couple of days than in the last two years altogether...


Totally agree! I refuse to believe that Harry and/or Meghan did not realize they would be giving up the pap shield that being members of the RF afforded them.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Of course she threatened legal action against the paps hiding out. If the rogue paps get pictures it's a smaller payday for her from Splash and the like....her official paps that I am sure are hiding in plain sight....400mm away max LOL.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Flatsy said:


> I think within the family, the younger generation don't bow and curtsy to one another, only to their elders.
> 
> That would change when Kate becomes Queen, but I agree with hellosunshine - Meghan will be long, long gone by the time that happens.  Harry's second wife will curtsy to Kate.


What on earth makes you say that ? There is a clear rule of who bows and curtseys to who within the royal.family which is.adhered to following laws and traditions


----------



## daisychainz

Harry probably believes she was photographed without her permission while he was away and issued a statement to protect her, lol. She is staring right at the camera with her p/t pets and toddler. This is 1000x staged.


----------



## TC1

If she doesn't want the paps following her around...perhaps she should stop calling them 
They were here for almost 2 months, not a single pic (that they didn't authorize) and now all of a sudden she can't go anywhere?/ Oh yes, please sue. The legal system isn't at your beck and call anymore. You're a cilivllian!! as requested!!


----------



## PatsyCline

Sophisticatted said:


> Couldn’t she have just had her security deal with it, like she did at Wimbledon?


Wimbledon is a private club, anyone can be asked to leave, unfortunately there's nothing that can be done if the photographers are standing on a public street taking photos of them when they leave the property.


----------



## bag-mania

VickyB said:


> Has she reclaimed the beloved dog she was forced to leave behind in Canada for his own good? Where’s Bogart?





joyeaux said:


> Wow... that’s definitely a pap stroll. #justiceforBogart





joyeaux said:


> I just posted the same thing! He was left behind because the overseas trip was too much, right? Wonder if she will take him back. Although I really am glad to see the beagle is still alive and kicking!



I believe Bogart is still wherever she left him, hopefully with decent people who actually love him and didn't adopt him just to please Ellen Degeneres. 

I'm thrilled to see Guy survived his two broken legs incident (assuming that beagle is Guy). The second dog must be the one they got in the fall of 2018 and we never heard about again. I'll refer to him as the Lab-with-no-name.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Annawakes said:


> @ccbaggirl89 you totally called it!!!


She's transparent. You'd think the megawatt smile would give people a clue.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I'm really appalled by the smiling pap walk the more I think about it. No matter whether you feel they should have left the BRF or not, most people would agree that it's a sad thing that happened, especially for Harry, who has quite clearly been pulled away from a lot of things he cared about. But she's walking around like she won the lottery.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Coconuts40 said:


> I have seen enough video and photos of Meghan that personally show me that her character is questionable and insincere.



Same.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Welltraveled! said:


> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> 
> 
> View attachment 4645730
> View attachment 4645731
> View attachment 4645732


“HARRY. FIX. THIS. NOW! “ - Raggy Meggy. Guy has not even been on Canadian soil for 12 hours and she busting his balls already.


----------



## CobaltBlu

And the camera is very close to her, this was not done with a super zoom telephoto.


----------



## queennadine

She’s beyond thirsty and ridiculous. And the way Archie is dangling off of her in that carrier...you practice baby wearing at home first, Meghan. 

Welcome to your new life, Harry!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She's transparent. You'd think the megawatt smile would give people a clue.



Most people aren't following them closely. In the US the news media has been giving them glowing reviews. Meghan and Harry fall into the celebrity category here and they leave all that to the gossip media. Should Harry or Meghan commit a crime or become involved in politics, then the news media might finally take a close look at them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Most people aren't following them closely. In the US the news media has been giving them glowing reviews. Meghan and Harry fall into the celebrity category here and they leave all that to the gossip media. Should Harry or Meghan commit a crime or become involved in politics, then the news media might finally take a close look at them.


even stephen colbert last night said something to the effect that H&M had to leave due to paps and racism......hard to say for sure with him but i don't think he was being facetious


----------



## joyeaux

TC1 said:


> If she doesn't want the paps following her around...perhaps she should stop calling them
> They were here for almost 2 months, not a single pic (that they didn't authorize) and now all of a sudden she can't go anywhere?/ Oh yes, please sue. The legal system isn't at your beck and call anymore. You're a cilivllian!! as requested!!




Oh give me strength! They’re threatening legal action now? They've gotten so litigious! IT’S PART OF WHAT YOU SIGNED UP FOR and you know it. Everyone knows it. And you obviously were okay with it enough to give the paps a heads up where you’d be and smile big for the oh-so-invasive cameras. Photos of royals being hounded have been circulated as long as I can remember. Not saying it’s right but it is what it is, unfortunately. There’s a reason the Queen takes the “never complain, never explain” stance. With the microscope they’re under, just letting the little things go is probably the only way you don’t drive yourself crazy. Meghan says she doesn’t read what’s written about her, but I think both she and Harry definitely do, to be so constantly up in arms.

A photographer in the bushes that takes topless photos of you on vacation (a la Kate and William), I get suing. The “straight outta Compton thing” or horrible monkey thing, those clearly cross a major line and those guys deserve to be taken to the cleaners. But to counter *every* stupid story with a lawsuit or threat of lawsuit (the copper tub report I remember was named as false in one of their suits) I mean, give me a break. And all it does is bring _more_ attention and scrutiny to whatever it is they’re denying.


----------



## Charles

bag-mania said:


> Most people aren't following them closely. In the US the news media has been giving them glowing reviews. Meghan and Harry fall into the celebrity category here and they leave all that to the gossip media. Should Harry or Meghan commit a crime or become involved in politics, then the news media might finally take a close look at them.



It's not really that.  They're totally being reported on.  I mean, they're fun to watch and check out their style, but the reason Harry and Megan aren't being ragged by the US media is cause we don't care about the protocol and pomp and manners and rituals, so when someone like MM doesn't follow them, it's not that big of a deal to us.  There are articles about how the British press report on very similar stories between Kate and Meghan, but how the headlines are much more nastier when it comes to Megan, so most Americans think it's a good thing they're leaving.  We just don't care about the same things that the Brits do, so they don't come across as being bad people over here.


----------



## imgg

mdcx said:


> Does he really not know this is what she does, or does he know and not care? Is he just too simple to get it?


He has rose colored glasses, at the moment.  He must get it to some degree since he agreed to pimp her out to Disney.  I see a lot of regret in his future.


----------



## daisychainz

imgg said:


> He has rose colored glasses, at the moment.  He must get it to some degree since he agreed to pimp her out to Disney.  I see a lot of regret in his future.


Me too. His decision-making right now is clouded by so many factors, but I don't believe someone who comes from a close and loving family will make it in isolation long-term. Even if he continues to dislike royal duties and press he will want his family and friends back. She doesn't care about family and friends but he will. I am not familiar with narcissism (sp?) and what people say she has, but I wonder when he will break free of her spell. I think he will enjoy his new life for a while - like a vacation from adulthood and a job you hate - but reality will eventually come back.


----------



## LibbyRuth

They're going to have to start making choices ... $23m house, or sue every photographer that takes a picture of you when asked. Now that they are on a budget without that 5% of their income that was public money, they can't have both!


----------



## bag-mania

Charles said:


> It's not really that.  They're totally being reported on.  I mean, they're fun to watch and check out their style, but the reason Harry and Megan aren't being ragged by the US media is cause we don't care about the protocol and pomp and manners and rituals, so when someone like MM doesn't follow them, it's not that big of a deal to us.  There are articles about how the British press report on very similar stories between Kate and Meghan, but how the headlines are much more nastier when it comes to Megan, so most Americans think it's a good thing they're leaving.  We just don't care about the same things that the Brits do, so they don't come across as being bad people over here.



Well, you're right there. We are used to celebrities pimping themselves out for cash and creating their own narratives for public consumption. An institution like the BRF is unique and that interests many here. I don't think anyone thinks Meghan and Harry are evil people, but they do come across as being hypocritical and whiners. Yes, there were unfair things written about her but there are many things they did that contributed to the dislike of them as a couple in the UK. Those are not being reported here.


----------



## Chagall

Charles said:


> It's not really that.  They're totally being reported on.  I mean, they're fun to watch and check out their style, but the reason Harry and Megan aren't being ragged by the US media is cause we don't care about the protocol and pomp and manners and rituals, so when someone like MM doesn't follow them, it's not that big of a deal to us.  There are articles about how the British press report on very similar stories between Kate and Meghan, but how the headlines are much more nastier when it comes to Megan, so most Americans think it's a good thing they're leaving.  We just don't care about the same things that the Brits do, so they don't come across as being bad people over here.


Where does Canada fit into all this!


----------



## imgg

Lodpah said:


> Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.



So much energy for one disrespectful idiot .  I'm embarrassed for her even if she is not.


----------



## queennadine

LibbyRuth said:


> They're going to have to start making choices ... $23m house, or sue every photographer that takes a picture of you when asked. Now that they are on a budget without that 5% of their income that was public money, they can't have both!



Maybe suing IS their strategy to get $. Their attorneys most likely work on contingency and they’re probably hoping to settle before any real litigation even commences.


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm really appalled by the smiling pap walk the more I think about it. No matter whether you feel they should have left the BRF or not, most people would agree that it's a sad thing that happened, especially for Harry, who has quite clearly been pulled away from a lot of things he cared about. But *she's walking around like she won the lottery*.



She's won her lottery three times--

1. By marrying Harry (in other words, clawing her way into the BRF)
2. Cranking out Anchor Baby as an insurance policy on her meal ticket 
3. Forcing Harry to leave The Firm in hopes of a greener pasture

IMO, her greener pasture consists of incessant pap coverage, a "career", divorce, snagging an oligarch and living a Royals lifestyle without having to adhere to a Crown schedule, pretending to like the pesky public. As she's approaching 40 she had to work fast. I'm interested in how successful her "slash and burn" program turns out. It's working so far....


----------



## daisychainz

I already find her less interesting. I think to follow her closely now I'd have to be a Meghan fan and I'm not. I really don't care what she gets up to - it'll just be regular celebrity/Kim K. stuff and not nearly as interesting as being a royal. I fall into the camp that is more interested in the British royal family and a whole, not Meghan and Harry as individuals.


----------



## mrsinsyder

daisychainz said:


> I already find her less interesting. I think to follow her closely now I'd have to be a Meghan fan and I'm not. I really don't care what she gets up to - it'll just be regular celebrity/Kim K. stuff and not nearly as interesting as being a royal. I fall into the camp that is more interested in the British royal family and a whole, not Meghan and Harry as individuals.


Same. The train wreck interest is wearing off.


----------



## youngster

Meh-gan said:


> Interesting that all the jewels she was given/wore were replicas LOL



Is that really true?  I saw where it was said that the very top center stone/brooch part of the Queen Mary Bandeau tiara that she wore at her wedding might have been a replica of paste stones but was the whole thing a replica?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

daisychainz said:


> I already find her less interesting. I think to follow her closely now I'd have to be a Meghan fan and I'm not. I really don't care what she gets up to - it'll just be regular celebrity/Kim K. stuff and not nearly as interesting as being a royal. I fall into the camp that is more interested in the British royal family and a whole, not Meghan and Harry as individuals.



This is how I feel too, I'm tired of the drama and they are not a couple that I would follow or be interested in now that they are not really in the royal family anymore.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.



WOW!!   No words, but fits into the narrative that I’ve heard about her in the past!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> This is how I feel too, I'm tired of the drama and they are not a couple that I would follow or be interested in now that they are not really in the royal family anymore.


I guess maybe it's too late for them to take a page from Will & Kate's book and just behave and present the image of a happy family.....they seem to have chosen a different path


----------



## Welltraveled!

interesting read










WillstarveforLV said:


> “HARRY. FIX. THIS. NOW! “ - Raggy Meggy. Guy has not even been on Canadian soil for 12 hours and she busting his balls already.


----------



## Corneto

rose60610 said:


> She's won her lottery three times--
> 
> 1. By marrying Harry (in other words, clawing her way into the BRF)
> 2. Cranking out Anchor Baby as an insurance policy on her meal ticket
> 3. Forcing Harry to leave The Firm in hopes of a greener pasture
> 
> IMO, her greener pasture consists of incessant pap coverage, a "career", divorce, snagging an oligarch and living a Royals lifestyle without having to adhere to a Crown schedule, pretending to like the pesky public. As she's approaching 40 she had to work fast. I'm interested in how successful her "slash and burn" program turns out. It's working so far....



"Anchor baby" LOLOL


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I already find her less interesting. I think to follow her closely now I'd have to be a Meghan fan and I'm not. I really don't care what she gets up to - it'll just be regular celebrity/Kim K. stuff and not nearly as interesting as being a royal. I fall into the camp that is more interested in the British royal family and a whole, not Meghan and Harry as individuals.



That is going to be their biggest challenge. How do you retain celebrity status when you have given up the only thing that made you a celebrity? They claim they want to live like regular people but they don't really mean it. They still fully expect to enjoy the perks of being famous, whether that means invitations to elite events, making connections for the purposes of profit, or rubbing shoulders with other famous people. But what exactly do they bring to the table?


----------



## mrsinsyder

*EXCLUSIVE: 'It's the best thing that could ever happen to him!' Meghan tells friends it was her love for Harry that made their new life possible and he'll flourish now, as she insists their spirits were being crushed by royal family*

*Meghan Markle has been telling her friends that quitting the royal family is the best thing that could ever happen to Prince Harry, a source told DailyMail.com*
*'She said that like her, his spirit was being crushed and she simply couldn't bare to see him suffer anymore,' the friend added*
*Meghan also confided that 'it was her love for him that made this possible'*
*On Monday, Meghan went for a walk with Archie and her dogs on Vancouver Island, Canada, just a few hours before Harry landed in Vancouver  *
*They are in 'no rush' to move out of the $14m mansion they've been using*
*The friend also said: 'Meghan and Harry are not planning on changing their website or Instagram name... they will keep the Royal part in'*
*'Meghan says they will always be considered royalty regardless of where they live or what they do' *
_The friend said Meghan 'has a lot up her sleeve that she wants to do.' 

Meghan 'will continue making surprise visits to different places that help women and children. She wants to feel embraced by her community, something she says she didn't feel in the UK. She felt stifled and restricted.' _
Read: she wasn't getting the attention she wanted...

*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nds-Harry-flourish-quitting-royal-family.html*


----------



## duna

BlueCherry said:


> I’ve been quietly following this thread when I have little to do just for the opinions from other countries. However I’m getting pi**ed off with the racist comments.
> 
> I’m white, London born of Irish parents. They suffered explicit racism in the 50’s such as notices on shop doors saying “No dogs, no Blacks and no Irish”. This is what I call abject racism.
> 
> The police can and do arrest people who make racist comments to others and quite rightly so.
> 
> Throughout my life there’s been numerous changes on how we must describe people. I literally cannot keep up and what suits one doesn’t suit all. It’s got to the point where I don’t want to describe anyone for fear of being labelled racist.
> 
> I’ve been an employer for 30 years and been on committees etc. I personally have experience that when someone has an issue they’re not winning or needs support they pull the race card. It’s an easy and effective “weapon” but utterly pathetic.
> 
> I love and admire the Queen, adore Prince Philip and I’m proud of William and Kate thus far. I like that we have a Monarchy, I’m happy to support it but Harry and Meghan can take a running jump. Spoilt brats who can’t fight a clean fight. Disgusted how they treated the Queen and Prince Philip. Good riddance and commiserations to the US and Canada!



THIS!


----------



## bag-mania

So is that going to be the attitude? We're going to call ourselves Royal no matter what and Grandma Liz can just suck it. Hopefully this is DM exaggerating for shock effect, but with these two and their delusions of grandeur anything is possible.


----------



## youngster

Well, time will tell, of course whether Harry flourishes or not.  Pretty bizarre though  . . .  a British prince giving up his life and role in the royal family to move to America or Canada to pursue his brand and a life of "financial independence" centered around media deals and philanthropy. The U.S. and Canada are very different from the UK and I wonder if Harry has fully considered that he is an interesting curiosity over here, but will not receive the deference that he's used to.  It will get him and Meghan in the door and invited to some fun cocktail parties and movie premieres.  But, what can they do?  What's their track record of actual accomplishment?  What do they bring to the table, as @bag-mania said above, besides being royal or being former royals?

I think for Harry this will all be so exciting for a few months, a year maybe, like he's on a vacation from his real life, but the day-in/day-out drudgery of getting up, hustling to bring in the dollars and keep them relevant, would wear anyone down over time.  Real life, Harry, good luck with it.


----------



## paper_flowers

Charles said:


> It's not really that.  They're totally being reported on.  I mean, they're fun to watch and check out their style, but the reason Harry and Megan aren't being ragged by the US media is cause we don't care about the protocol and pomp and manners and rituals, so when someone like MM doesn't follow them, it's not that big of a deal to us.  There are articles about how the British press report on very similar stories between Kate and Meghan, but how the headlines are much more nastier when it comes to Megan, so most Americans think it's a good thing they're leaving.  We just don't care about the same things that the Brits do, so they don't come across as being bad people over here.



I think you’ve hit the nail on the head

Full disclosure: I’m not super invested in the BRF, but as a casual watcher I can’t help but have some thoughts. I feel conflicted. I initially brought into what the US media is saying about how awful the UK media has been to her and what Harry has said about not wanting the same thing to happen to them that happened to his mom. I thought her family was literally deranged and jealous. Part of me still wonders about that

However, I also wonder what the hell Meghan was thinking when she married Harry. Even an idiot knows that it’s a pretty rigid life of public appearances and service, tradition, and looking/behaving a certain way. We’ve all known that William and Kate will one day rule. I don’t know. I’m not very well-read on the monarchy. This is all Harry has ever known and I worry about how tough the transition will be on him.

If she’s ungrateful for having been accepted into the BRF and has found that the lifestyle isn’t really for her, she should divorce him. It takes a special kind of person to recruit her husband to alienate themselves and dismantle the family. But only a sane person would think that way


----------



## Tivo

I mean she could’ve picked him up from the airport. Since she drove there to pick up her yoga friend the other day.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> So is that going to be the attitude? We're going to call ourselves Royal no matter what and Grandma Liz can just suck it. Hopefully this is DM exaggerating for shock effect, but with these two and their delusions of grandeur anything is possible.


I think that is the way she feels and the way it will be until Queen E has enough and puts her foot down over them damaging and using the royal name for pure greed.


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> I think that is they way she feels and the way it will be until Queen E has enough and puts her foot down over them damaging and using the royal name for pure greed.



Can the Queen really stop them though? You or I could create a brand with the word "royal" in it and get it trademarked and protected. Isn't that what Meghan has done?


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> Can the Queen really stop them though? You or I could create a brand with the word "royal" in it and get it trademarked and protected. Isn't that what Meghan has done?


Good question.  They agreed not use to the name, but are using it anyway.  Such spoiled little greedy brats.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Meh-gan

Welltraveled! said:


> https://news.sky.com/story/harry-an...l-action-over-canada-paparazzi-shots-11914112
> 
> 
> View attachment 4645730
> View attachment 4645731
> View attachment 4645732


Lmaooooo keeping that victim storyline alive and well. She is milking this AND being paid for pap walks too. 

Like impromptu drops ins that have full photo coverage, staged pap walks with her smiling into the cameras. And we have seen no long lens images of them in their house - if there were any, done without their permission, no pap is sitting on those they would have been published by now. If they come out after this announcement they are going to sue, they were released on authority of one MM.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: 'It's the best thing that could ever happen to him!' Meghan tells friends it was her love for Harry that made their new life possible and he'll flourish now, as she insists their spirits were being crushed by royal family*
> 
> *Meghan Markle has been telling her friends that quitting the royal family is the best thing that could ever happen to Prince Harry, a source told DailyMail.com*
> *'She said that like her, his spirit was being crushed and she simply couldn't bare to see him suffer anymore,' the friend added*
> *Meghan also confided that 'it was her love for him that made this possible'*
> *On Monday, Meghan went for a walk with Archie and her dogs on Vancouver Island, Canada, just a few hours before Harry landed in Vancouver  *
> *They are in 'no rush' to move out of the $14m mansion they've been using*
> *The friend also said: 'Meghan and Harry are not planning on changing their website or Instagram name... they will keep the Royal part in'*
> *'Meghan says they will always be considered royalty regardless of where they live or what they do' *
> _The friend said Meghan 'has a lot up her sleeve that she wants to do.'
> 
> Meghan 'will continue making surprise visits to different places that help women and children. She wants to feel embraced by her community, something she says she didn't feel in the UK. She felt stifled and restricted.' _
> Read: she wasn't getting the attention she wanted...
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nds-Harry-flourish-quitting-royal-family.html*



Awww, feeding news to the press again? Also, this woman is so f*cking full of herself, I can't even.


----------



## mshermes

_The friend said Meghan 'has a lot up her sleeve that she wants to do.'  *I am sure she does!*

Meghan 'will continue making surprise visits to different places that help women and children. She wants to feel embraced by her community, something she says she didn't feel in the UK. She felt stifled and restricted.'   *To the office staff to boost their spirits? *_
Read: she wasn't getting the attention she wanted... *I wonder if it will ever be enough attention. Her previous husband got her Suits and she mailed the rings back to him....to his surprise since he was the one shlepping up to Canada to see his wife. Poor Harry........the writing seems to be in the wall.....IMO. More so....poor Archie.*


----------



## zen1965

She will always be considered royalty? Nah, she is not and she won‘t. Except by her avid fans, of course.
Despite being almost 40 there seems to be absolutely no understanding whatsoever that you cannot have it both ways.


----------



## jcnc

I actually found this video very sad for meghan. It looks like a horrible case of mismatch.. meghan is too strong headed in her ways and BRF too rigod to accommodate meghan. Plus instead of snubbing and stopping her at every step, couldn’t they all have communicated openly? this videos makes it seem like the BRF did indeed push meghan out.



Lodpah said:


> Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> Oh my goodness. Have you guys seen this video? Look at 2:53 where MM is busted going through the trunk of a car and backs away. This woman is too much. The smirkness on her face is because she got Harry to walk away from his family. This woman has no shame.




Not sure I believe this. The second clip looks like she was walking forward and someone reversed it.


----------



## Soniaa

My mom and I were discussing about them last night and she was saying how she's on meghan's side of this because the palace have some absurdly rigid regulations that no American woman would be able to abide by...look at diana and how they treated her...and I was like well yeahhh but it wasn't like she didn't know what she was getting herself into...she's an opportunist...she found one and snatched it up...and she wasn't gonna make the move until she popped out a kid (which she wasted no time in cause that's the only way she can put a leash around harry's neck)...
And that interview she did a while back where she tearing up about how the media treated her as if she wasn't aware it was gonna get like that was complete bs to me!


----------



## lanasyogamama

zen1965 said:


> She will always be considered royalty? Nah, she is not and she won‘t. Except by her avid fans, of course.
> Despite being almost 40 there seems to be absolutely no understanding whatsoever that you cannot have it both ways.



totally.  When is the last time you heard Fergie referred to as royalty?


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Is that really true?  I saw where it was said that the very top center stone/brooch part of the Queen Mary Bandeau tiara that she wore at her wedding might have been a replica of paste stones but was the whole thing a replica?


It could very well be that the stones are paste; I know that the BRF did replace some of the gemstones in various pieces for safety reasons.  However, did not agree with the fact that a Diamond won't sparkle in the sun? .. WHAT?? .. quite to the contrary!!!  The whole point of 'cut' diamonds is that they will display the "fire" (rainbow colors)!!!


----------



## Meh-gan

CeeJay said:


> It could very well be that the stones are paste; I know that the BRF did replace some of the gemstones in various pieces for safety reasons.  However, did not agree with the fact that a Diamond won't sparkle in the sun? .. WHAT?? .. quite to the contrary!!!  The whole point of 'cut' diamonds is that they will display the "fire" (rainbow colors)!!!


Cubics and crystal will have crazy rainbows though much more than a diamond with a good cut. It looks very obvious and fake in real life compared to a diamond.


----------



## bag-mania

Samatha is back and she's spilling the tea! This train wreck of a story provides so much over-the-top drama and fun. 

*Meghan Markle's objective is 'fame and fortune': 'She and Harry will never find happiness,' sister says*
Meghan Markle only married Prince Harry to amass a fortune and rub shoulders with Hollywood's A-list stars, her estranged sister Samantha Markle has claimed.

Samantha, who has been vocal about Meghan's union to Prince Harry since their first public debut as a couple in 2017, penned an op-ed piece in The Sun on Monday, slamming Meghan for using her romance to Harry to achieve fame and splitting up the royal family in the process.

Samantha first defends the queen in her letter, crediting Her Majesty for wanting to repair the damage in her latest statement supporting Meghan and Harry's decision to "step back" as senior royals.


"Her Majesty's words show great diplomacy but Meghan's behavior has so far not been diplomatic," her sister wrote. "A diplomat wouldn't fall out with her own family."

Meghan's sister also accused the former "Suits" actress of failing to defend their father, Thomas Markle, who she said is currently "frail" due to a heart condition.

"[Thomas Markle] doesn't have a PR team to spin him a good story," Samantha claimed. "The Queen, at 93, shouldn't have had to face the stress of seeing her family torn apart. Meghan hasn't stepped forward to minimize the damage. She knows how Harry leaving has affected them, but she hasn't spoken up in their defense."

Samantha blasted Meghan for becoming a "totally different person" than the sister she once knew for "choosing wealth and fortune over family."

"My fear is Meghan’s decision isn’t about moving to Canada for a quiet life as a young mother. Nothing about their actions so far suggest they truly desire a private life out the limelight. They have paraded themselves on the red carpet, tried to make deals with Disney, and become pals with the Clooneys and other A-list stars.

"Smooching up to Vogue magazine, to fashion and to the film industry is not consistent with taking a step back. Their objective is fame and fortune — to be Hollywood," Samantha added.

The estranged sister pointed out all the ways the royals tried to embrace Meghan, who is half African-American.

"Her marriage to Prince Harry was so symbolic of ethnic unity. The preacher and choir were all of African heritage. It was a lovely joining together," Samantha said, referencing Meghan and Harry's 2018 nuptials.

She continued: "The royals embraced that. They welcomed Meghan into their lives, into the culture, and allowed her to promote people of all races. I have never heard anything racist coming out of the Windsors about my sister."

On Monday, Prince Harry traveled to Canada to reunite with Meghan and their eight-month-old son.

Samantha said she fears Meghan and Harry will not have a promising future no matter where they are.

"I am worried that Meghan and Harry will never find true happiness," Samantha wrote. "They could not find contentment with the Royal Family, will they be able to find it away from them?"

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-fame-fortune-sister-says


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Samatha is back and she's spilling the tea! This train wreck of a story provides so much over-the-top drama and fun.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's objective is 'fame and fortune': 'She and Harry will never find happiness,' sister says*
> Meghan Markle only married Prince Harry to amass a fortune and rub shoulders with Hollywood's A-list stars, her estranged sister Samantha Markle has claimed.
> 
> Samantha, who has been vocal about Meghan's union to Prince Harry since their first public debut as a couple in 2017, penned an op-ed piece in The Sun on Monday, slamming Meghan for using her romance to Harry to achieve fame and splitting up the royal family in the process.
> 
> Samantha first defends the queen in her letter, crediting Her Majesty for wanting to repair the damage in her latest statement supporting Meghan and Harry's decision to "step back" as senior royals.
> 
> 
> "Her Majesty's words show great diplomacy but Meghan's behavior has so far not been diplomatic," her sister wrote. "A diplomat wouldn't fall out with her own family."
> 
> Meghan's sister also accused the former "Suits" actress of failing to defend their father, Thomas Markle, who she said is currently "frail" due to a heart condition.
> 
> "[Thomas Markle] doesn't have a PR team to spin him a good story," Samantha claimed. "The Queen, at 93, shouldn't have had to face the stress of seeing her family torn apart. Meghan hasn't stepped forward to minimize the damage. She knows how Harry leaving has affected them, but she hasn't spoken up in their defense."
> 
> Samantha blasted Meghan for becoming a "totally different person" than the sister she once knew for "choosing wealth and fortune over family."
> 
> "My fear is Meghan’s decision isn’t about moving to Canada for a quiet life as a young mother. Nothing about their actions so far suggest they truly desire a private life out the limelight. They have paraded themselves on the red carpet, tried to make deals with Disney, and become pals with the Clooneys and other A-list stars.
> 
> "Smooching up to Vogue magazine, to fashion and to the film industry is not consistent with taking a step back. Their objective is fame and fortune — to be Hollywood," Samantha added.
> 
> The estranged sister pointed out all the ways the royals tried to embrace Meghan, who is half African-American.
> 
> "Her marriage to Prince Harry was so symbolic of ethnic unity. The preacher and choir were all of African heritage. It was a lovely joining together," Samantha said, referencing Meghan and Harry's 2018 nuptials.
> 
> She continued: "The royals embraced that. They welcomed Meghan into their lives, into the culture, and allowed her to promote people of all races. I have never heard anything racist coming out of the Windsors about my sister."
> 
> On Monday, Prince Harry traveled to Canada to reunite with Meghan and their eight-month-old son.
> 
> Samantha said she fears Meghan and Harry will not have a promising future no matter where they are.
> 
> "I am worried that Meghan and Harry will never find true happiness," Samantha wrote. "They could not find contentment with the Royal Family, will they be able to find it away from them?"
> 
> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-fame-fortune-sister-says


Not that I'm a fan of Meghan's sister, but I think she nailed this one!  I recently talked to my friend who has known the Markle family for a long time, and they said that they aren't really surprised with what has transpired and that even early on (_high school_), Meghan was 'thirsty' as heck to be a 'STAR' and have that fame and fortune, and once she figured out that "you" couldn't provide a stepping stone for her .. BOOM .. you got "*markled*"!   As they say, a leopard doesn't change their spots ..


----------



## gracekelly

What!!!  Now they are complaining about the pap pictures from yesterday?!  She was grinning straight into the camera.  It looked like a set-up to me and the paps were arranged.


----------



## hockeygirl

bag-mania said:


> Samatha is back and she's spilling the tea! This train wreck of a story provides so much over-the-top drama and fun.
> 
> "I am worried that Meghan and Harry will never find true happiness," Samantha wrote. "They could not find contentment with the Royal Family, will they be able to find it away from them?"
> 
> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-fame-fortune-sister-says



Like everyone else, I find Samantha Markle’s actions questionable and she is obviously out to make some quick bucks off of the whole situation.  However, I find myself agreeing with everything she said in this article.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> What!!!  Now they are complaining about the pap pictures from yesterday?!  She was grinning straight into the camera.  It looked like a set-up to me and the paps were arranged.


She's threatening the outlets who publish them, not the photographer. Because that's who she set the whole thing up with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Can the Queen really stop them though? You or I could create a brand with the word "royal" in it and get it trademarked and protected. Isn't that what Meghan has done?


The Queen/Charles control the purse strings, which they need. 

If they are expecting money to pour in from their various endeavors, it will take a while to amass what they will need to live they way they (especially H) is used to.


----------



## V0N1B2

In what jurisdiction are they suing? USA? UK? Cuz in Canada... not a sue-happy nation. It’s just not done here lol.

EDITED: why did it autocorrect to ink? It's UK.  Ugh.


----------



## rose60610

V0N1B2 said:


> In what jurisdiction are they suing? USA? Ink? Cuz in Canada... *not a sue-happy nation.* It’s just not done here lol.



Then Meghan must figure Canada just needs a little sue-woking, and she's just the woker to do it. Even if she has to frame her own paps for a payday.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> She's threatening the outlets who publish them, not the photographer. Because that's who she set the whole thing up with.


So her issue is when people use her pap photos without passing her the cash first?
Because the DM listed them as exclusive so surely they bought them direct from Splash, as Meghan had arranged. 
Meghan wants her cut of everything!


----------



## marietouchet

Add litigation to the list of their expensive pursuits , many sets of lawyers , in many countries 
Remember the suit over the publication of her letter to father, that is still pending


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry joins Meghan in Canada, without the half-in, half-out royal deal they wanted*

Prince Harry joined his wife, Meghan, and their son, Archie, Tuesday on Canada's Vancouver Island, to begin mapping out a life outside the royal fold.

Harry and Meghan won their freedom, but things didn’t go quite as planned. Two weeks ago, they announced they wanted to “step back” as front-line royals and “carve out a progressive new role within this institution.” But they aren’t stepping back so much as stepping down.

As of the spring, the couple will no longer perform royal duties on behalf of the queen, receive public funding or be able to use their “royal highness” titles. They will continue to be known as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, titles gifted to them by the queen on their wedding day.

The British tabloids have dubbed it a “hard Megxit” — playing off the most severe version of Brexit discussed in negotiations with the European Union.

In his first public comments on Sunday night, Harry suggested he didn’t expect quite so many ties would be broken.

“Our hope was to continue serving the queen, the Commonwealth and my military associations, but without public funding. Unfortunately, that wasn’t possible,” he said.

Peter Hunt, former royal correspondent for the BBC, tweeted: “There’s no third way for senior royals. You either stiffen that lip or you leave.”

A debate is underway in Britain about whether Harry and Meghan should be allowed to use their SussexRoyal brand — the name they use on their social media platforms and their newly launched website, where they still call themselves “Their Royal Highnesses.”

They are also reportedly trying to register the SussexRoyal name as part of a global trademark.

Thomas Woodcock, a senior adviser to the queen who was speaking in a personal capacity, told the Times of London: “I don’t think it’s satisfactory. One cannot be two things at once. You either are [royal] or you’re not.”






Tall trees shield the view of Meghan and Harry’s temporary estate in North Saanich, British Columbia, on Tuesday. (Mark Goodnow/AFP/Getty Images)
Robert Lacey, a royal historian and consultant to “The Crown” TV series, suggested there would be a good case for giving up SussexRoyal.

“Neither Meghan nor Harry have anything special to do with the county of Sussex, and now they have been told they are not royal,” Lacey said. “I think they should go out to the world as ‘Harry and Meghan.’ That’s who they are, and that’s what people love and respond to. Sussex is a posh, old-fashioned pre-revolution title of privilege and distinction, and most people, especially young people, don’t get it. They should leave all that behind.”

While the couple hasn’t outlined next steps, they could face a backlash if they attempt to cash in on their status.

When Prince Edward, the queen’s youngest son, ran a television company, he was criticized for exploiting his connections to make royal documentaries, including “Edward on Edward,” a film about his great uncle, Edward VIII.

Even those who don’t have any royal titles — like the queen’s grandchildren Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips — have faced criticism for allegedly trading off their relations.

Harry and Meghan merchandise prices drop in Windsor as residents react to their leaving

A store in Britain held clearance sales for Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, merchandise on Jan. 20, after the couple’s split from the royal family. (Reuters)
Lacey said that even having a “royal aura,” as opposed to an actual royal title, can open members of the royal family to accusations of abusing their connections.

There may be other reasons, too, why the queen did not greenlight a hybrid model for Harry and Meghan.

Canada, though it remains a member of the British Commonwealth, wasn’t especially enthusiastic about becoming an outpost for the royal family.

“Our royals don’t live here. They reign from a distance,” the Globe and Mail editorial board wrote last week.

But the newspaper seemed satisfied by the terms of the deal agreed over the weekend.

The editorial board wrote: “The Queen’s decision announced on Saturday, under which Harry remains a member of the Queen’s biological family, but is no longer a member of the Royal Family, is a neat bit of splitting hairs, and heirs. It answers the concern about a Royal resident changing Canada’s distant, yet solid relationship to the Crown.”

One open question is whether Canada will be asked to help pay for the couple’s security — something 73 percent of Canadians oppose, according to a poll by the Angus Reid Institute.

“Any fascination in, curiosity about and support for the couple does not necessarily extend to Canadians saying we have extra money in our household budget to subsidize their lives,” said pollster Shachi Kurl.

The queen’s rejection of a half-in, half-out deal may also address potential grumbling within the royal family.

Robert Hazell, professor of government and the constitution at University College London, said the couple “must be allowed to opt out” of royal life, “because if they didn’t have that right, then their position is akin to modern slavery. They’re trapped in a gilded cage.”

But he said any special treatment could spark complaints within the “the Firm,” as the royals are said to call their family.

“If Harry and Meghan wanted to pick and choose, do engagements that interested them — and maybe this is unfair, but if they were interested in attending a film premiere in London’s West End with other celebs, but less interested in being asked to go visit a primary school in Yorkshire and do the typical local event . . . other members of the royal family might be rather resentful,” Hazell said.

The queen, 93, is the undisputed captain of her ship, as she has demonstrated over the past two weeks. But she is also supported by a core team of working royals who fan out across the country, taking part in “engagements.” Many of the events aren’t glamorous; royals cut ribbons for new hospital wings, attend basketmaking trade fairs, open the new Highland Pony Society headquarters.

“I think people don’t generally know quite how much hard work, and possibly rather boring work, it all involves. The visits are far more numerous than people think,” Hazell said.

In 2019, 15 working royals took part in more than 3,500 engagements across Britain, according to figures compiled and published annually in the Times of London. Princess Anne, the queen’s only daughter, is known for being one of the hardest-working members of the royal family. Last year she carried out 506 engagements, second only to Prince Charles, who did 521 events.

In exchange for these public duties, senior royals receive public funds, paying for their lifestyle.

As Harry and Meghan enter into a “period of transition,” there are already signs of a new approach. They are posting videos straight to their Instagram account. Meghan showed up at a Canadian charity wearing a sweater and jeans.

A palace official said that after the new arrangements take effect in the spring, they will be reviewed after a year and could be modified.

Being a half-in, half-out royal is “a nonstarter,” said Dickie Arbiter, the queen’s former press secretary. “You’re either one or the other. You can’t do both. Both leads to a conflict of interest.”

He added: “Harry knows the rules, and Meghan may be frustrated by the rules, but it’s not an option, which is why they have chosen both feet out rather than one foot in.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...f08cba-3c29-11ea-afe2-090eb37b60b1_story.html


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Can the Queen really stop them though? You or I could create a brand with the word "royal" in it and get it trademarked and protected. Isn't that what Meghan has done?


I'm sure she could rebrand as Royal Princess Meghan on instagram, I mean her sugars already refer to her as their Queen, the true Queen   but I would think using the Sussex name with Royal atttached to it would be seen as misrepresentation and the (real, actual) Queen could bar them legally from using it.  I mean, I can't call myself an MD and put it on my business cards if I don't have an actual medical degree.  I think she'll continue to use that Royal Sussex name until 11:59pm of whatever the date is for her to stop using it.

She looks so pleased with herself in those pap pics, doesn't she?  I guess those photos couldn't have been much of a bother since we didn't hear of her RPOs getting into a tussle with any of them.  Maybe she should hire Alec Baldwin as security - those intrusive paps will soon learn their lesson!

I get this weird feeling that this isn't really what Harry wanted. At all.  Step back and pursue other interests, sure.  Not move to the other side of the country, have paparazzi in your face all the time and go to Hollywood parties.  I'm sure they'll show up at the Oscars.  I wonder if he'll be okay with all those flashbulbs, or if his PTSD from his mother's death is a bit more selective.  I thought Harry meant he was going to have a program on the BBC interviewing do-gooders, kind of like an Amanpour & Friends type thing but with guests like Greta Thurnberg (sp?), and go to Africa and Australia, and work on conservation of wildlife and different aid organizations while still receiving an allowance from his dad, but earning a paycheque from thre BBC or whatever network(s) he chose to do specials with.

I think his wife has a very different idea of his future.


----------



## mdcx

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm sure she could rebrand as Royal Princess Meghan on instagram, I mean her sugars already refer to her as their Queen, the true Queen   but I would think using the Sussex name with Royal atttached to it would be seen as misrepresentation and the (real, actual) Queen could bar them legally from using it.  I mean, I can't call myself an MD and put it on my business cards if I don't have an actual medical degree.  I think she'll continue to use that Royal Sussex name until 11:59pm of whatever the date is for her to stop using it.
> 
> She looks so pleased with herself in those pap pics, doesn't she?  I guess those photos couldn't have been much of a bother since we didn't hear of her RPOs getting into a tussle with any of them.  Maybe she should hire Alec Baldwin as security - those intrusive paps will soon learn their lesson!
> 
> I get this weird feeling that this isn't really what Harry wanted. At all.  Step back and pursue other interests, sure.  Not move to the other side of the country, have paparazzi in your face all the time and go to Hollywood parties.  I'm sure they'll show up at the Oscars.  I wonder if he'll be okay with all those flashbulbs, or if his PTSD from his mother's death is a bit more selective.  I thought Harry meant he was going to have a program on the BBC interviewing do-gooders, kind of like an Amanpour & Friends type thing but with guests like Greta Thurnberg (sp?), and go to Africa and Australia, and work on conservation of wildlife and different aid organizations while still receiving an allowance from his dad, but earning a paycheque from thre BBC or whatever network(s) he chose to do specials with.
> 
> I think his wife has a very different idea of his future.


Meghan convinced him he had no other choice. Like you say, not what he would have wanted. It would be very possible for them to step down into living like Beatrice, Zara etc. Off the radar a bit, more private, still part of the fam, show up here and there. But oh that Royal protocol is so oppressive to poor wee Meghan! I would guess she has a very black and white worldview and to keep her, Harry had to take that on also.

ETA I do think that Meghan is chock full of nuts. Seriously, something is rather off.


----------



## Clearblueskies

In thinking of Harry lately I’m reminded of those brides I’ve known who concentrate so much on stuff like the invitations and bridal place settings, that the thought of what happens after the wedding day never crosses their mind.


----------



## gelbergirl

Did Harry even _consider_ marrying a pretty royal from one of the other royal families in Europe???


----------



## mdcx

I know this is very out there, but what is up with Archie? Was he sedated during that pap walk? Was it a Real Doll? Do they borrow babies? All the secrecy and weirdness around him. I mean, I can't imagine Harry going along with a fake baby situation but then everything about this is so bizarre.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder what Harry will be thinking in another year or so. Will he still believe that being married to Meghan was worth giving up everything else he was?

Or maybe he'll take to the celebrity party culture like a duck to water. No responsibilities and all self-indulgence.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> I know this is very out there, but what is up with Archie? Was he sedated during that pap walk? Was it a Real Doll? Do they borrow babies? All the secrecy and weirdness around him. I mean, I can't imagine Harry going along with a fake baby situation but then everything about this is so bizarre.


Ha!  I thought the same thing, he looked really large all of a sudden and he was hanging in such a way that I could not imagine he was comfortable.


----------



## jehaga

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm sure she could rebrand as Royal Princess Meghan on instagram, I mean her sugars already refer to her as their Queen, the true Queen   but I would think using the Sussex name with Royal atttached to it would be seen as misrepresentation and the (real, actual) Queen could bar them legally from using it.  I mean, I can't call myself an MD and put it on my business cards if I don't have an actual medical degree.  I think she'll continue to use that Royal Sussex name until 11:59pm of whatever the date is for her to stop using it.
> 
> She looks so pleased with herself in those pap pics, doesn't she?  I guess those photos couldn't have been much of a bother since we didn't hear of her RPOs getting into a tussle with any of them.  Maybe she should hire Alec Baldwin as security - those intrusive paps will soon learn their lesson!
> 
> I get this weird feeling that this isn't really what Harry wanted. At all.  Step back and pursue other interests, sure.  Not move to the other side of the country, have paparazzi in your face all the time and go to Hollywood parties.  I'm sure they'll show up at the Oscars.  I wonder if he'll be okay with all those flashbulbs, or if his PTSD from his mother's death is a bit more selective.  I thought Harry meant he was going to have a program on the BBC interviewing do-gooders, kind of like an Amanpour & Friends type thing but with guests like Greta Thurnberg (sp?), and go to Africa and Australia, and work on conservation of wildlife and different aid organizations while still receiving an allowance from his dad, but earning a paycheque from thre BBC or whatever network(s) he chose to do specials with.
> 
> I think his wife has a very different idea of his future.


OMG Alec Baldwin as their security!!! ROFL!!! Thanks for that imagery!


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> Meghan convinced him he had no other choice. Like you say, not what he would have wanted. It would be very possible for them to step down into living like Beatrice, Zara etc. Off the radar a bit, more private, still part of the fam, show up here and there. But oh that Royal protocol is so oppressive to poor wee Meghan! I would guess she has a very black and white worldview and to keep her, Harry had to take that on also.
> 
> ETA I do think that Meghan is chock full of nuts. Seriously, something is rather off.


Yes, she looks off the hinges in those recent photo shoots.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well they trademarked Sussex Royal so my guess is they will keep using it.  It’s just a little word salad now like Royal Crown Cola.  Smart move but I don’t think without actual royal titles it will mean much.  But on the other hand who is to stop them really from calling themselves his highness and her highness.  Will the Firm slap a restraining order on them? They may get away with it after all....they won’t receive any of the actual official benefits but it sounds like they have set themselves up to be the renegade royals and I wonder what really can be done legally to stop them.  It’s interesting to think of the lawyering that is going to be done around all of this.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> What!!!  Now they are complaining about the pap pictures from yesterday?!  She was grinning straight into the camera.  It looked like a set-up to me and the paps were arranged.


This!
If their complaining and legal action went any further, I'd laugh if Splash, to save themselves, released receipts to show an arranged pap session between them and M. She looked like she was in her absolute element, grinning from ear to ear, she did not look surprised, stressed or worried.
Classic narcissist trait = forever playing the victim.


----------



## bag-mania

Just what the royal family needs, an animated show created for HBO Max by someone who wrote for _Family Guy. _In case anyone is interested Orlando Bloom will be the voice of Prince Harry.


https://www.eonline.com/news/111416...ram-parody-is-becoming-the-prince-for-hbo-max


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> What!!!  Now they are complaining about the pap pictures from yesterday?!  She was grinning straight into the camera.  It looked like a set-up to me and the paps were arranged.



Also, the two guys following behind her in the photos were likely her security right?  So, why weren't they rushing to stand in front of her and chase the photographer off?


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> Just what the royal family needs, an animated show created for HBO Max by someone who wrote for _Family Guy. _In case anyone is interested Orlando Bloom will be the voice of Prince Harry.
> View attachment 4646148
> 
> https://www.eonline.com/news/111416...ram-parody-is-becoming-the-prince-for-hbo-max


I'm so excited for this! (Though I can't imagine the Queen feels the same). Gary Janetti's satirical takes on Prince George on Instagram are pure comedic gold - highly recommend checking it out if you haven't already!


----------



## bag-mania

cafecreme15 said:


> I'm so excited for this! (Though I can't imagine the Queen feels the same). Gary Janetti's satirical takes on Prince George on Instagram are pure comedic gold - highly recommend checking it out if you haven't already!



I've never heard of him. I may have to take a look.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> Also, the two guys following behind her in the photos were likely her security right?  So, why weren't they rushing to stand in front of her and chase the photographer off?



I have one dog, no kids. Dog is 13 pounds. One dog in the wilderness can be enough to handle. Two dogs and a baby affixed to me sideways and I would have those guards each with a dog in hand. I would NOT be smiling about any of it.

This was totally staged.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> I've never heard of him. I may have to take a look.


Oh you must! I always have to remind myself that the personality that Gary has created for George is (likely) not his real one!  Beyond hilarious.


----------



## mrsinsyder

From the BRF being the “family she never had” to this. How do people not see through this??


----------



## Oreosmom

bag-mania said:


> I believe Bogart is still wherever she left him, hopefully with decent people who actually love him and didn't adopt him just to please Ellen Degeneres.
> 
> I'm thrilled to see Guy survived his two broken legs incident (assuming that beagle is Guy). The second dog must be the one they got in the fall of 2018 and we never heard about again. I'll refer to him as the Lab-with-no-name.



I think the black labs name is Oz.


----------



## momtok

Ok, now *that* ^^^^ is funny.    One of the few times I have **literally** laughed out loud while reading here.

eta: Referring to mrsinsyder's post just two above.


----------



## closeted

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Harry will be thinking in another year or so. Will he still believe that being married to Meghan was worth giving up everything else he was?
> Or maybe he'll take to the celebrity party culture like a duck to water. No responsibilities and all self-indulgence.


That is if he survives ( or their words thrives) adjusting to life as a semi commoners. First year might be doable with his dad cushioning, but after that? 
At the end of the day money talks. Or how they would earn and more importantly manage their money. For most normal marriages isn't this one of the top cause of divorce?


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> From the BRF being the “family she never had” to this. How do people not see through this??
> View attachment 4646199


*sigh* I remember the early, hopeful days on the left. I think she looks the most beautiful she ever has in that photo - hair absolutely on point and that dress! Sad what everything has come to in less than 2 years.


----------



## youngster

Oreosmom said:


> I think the black labs name is Oz.



For Meghan, this really has been one heck of a trip down the yellow brick road.


----------



## queennadine

^ Seriously. This has been MM’s best role yet: a combo of the Wicked Witch and the Wizard scheming behind the curtain


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> I have one dog, no kids. Dog is 13 pounds. One dog in the wilderness can be enough to handle. Two dogs and a baby affixed to me sideways and I would have those guards each with a dog in hand. I would NOT be smiling about any of it. This was totally staged.



I live in the pacific northwest, a couple hours to the south of BC, and I've got trails and a park that look basically identical to those in the pap photos.  It's been raining for weeks, we had snow last week, it's cold and damp and drippy and trails are walkable but slick.  I still go out hiking and walking too, as do lots of other people, but we wear about 2x as many clothes as Meghan was wearing. I've seen people slip and slide and get pulled into shrubs and brambles by their dogs.  I personally wouldn't take a baby out for more than 5 minutes in this weather.  I'm sure she wasn't out there very long but the baby is basically defenseless if she slips or if the dogs get tangled up around her.  Now, if security was managing the dogs and she just had the baby to focus on, or if the baby was in a heavy duty hiking stroller, then that would be different.


----------



## mdcx

closeted said:


> That is if he survives ( or their words thrives) adjusting to life as a semi commoners. First year might be doable with his dad cushioning, but after that?
> At the end of the day money talks. Or how they would earn and more importantly manage their money. For most normal marriages isn't this one of the top cause of divorce?


Disputes about money, kids, in-laws and religion are the top 4 causes of divorce apparently. H&M hit on a few!


----------



## mdcx

Oreosmom said:


> I think the black labs name is Oz.


This is the dog whose name they kept secret in the UK right? Not sure why. Apparently they also kept their honeymoon destination a secret when people asked how it went. All totes normal!!1111!!!!!!11


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

LittleStar88 said:


> I have one dog, no kids. Dog is 13 pounds. One dog in the wilderness can be enough to handle. Two dogs and a baby affixed to me sideways and I would have those guards each with a dog in hand. I would NOT be smiling about any of it.
> 
> This was totally staged.



Of course it was COMPLETELY STAGED!!!

It would have been far more normal if the security guards were actually assisting the Queen of Phonies with her two dogs and baby (???) Archie on her private walk in the state park or wherever she planted herself.

Instead, I can only imagine Herself telling them, "oh NOOOO, I can do this" and then plastering that cat-that-ate-the-canary smile on her face as she made a complete a@@ of herself  AGAIN. 

Personally, I would much rather a tell-all book from MM's security detail.
Now that will be worth reading.


----------



## kipp

FWIW: https://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/meghan-markle-thought-curtsying-was-ridiculous-before-move/


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> I live in the pacific northwest, a couple hours to the south of BC, and I've got trails and a park that look basically identical to those in the pap photos.  It's been raining for weeks, we had snow last week, it's cold and damp and drippy and trails are walkable but slick.  I still go out hiking and walking too, as do lots of other people, but we wear about 2x as many clothes as Meghan was wearing. I've seen people slip and slide and get pulled into shrubs and brambles by their dogs.  I personally wouldn't take a baby out for more than 5 minutes in this weather.  I'm sure she wasn't out there very long but the baby is basically defenseless if she slips or if the dogs get tangled up around her.  Now, if security was managing the dogs and she just had the baby to focus on, or if the baby was in a heavy duty hiking stroller, then that would be different.


Do you have any idea what security does? They’re not there to carry your luggage, pick up your laundry, walk your dog etc.  Their hands need to be free to protect the person they’re hired to protect. 

All the other stuff is what you hire a personal assistant for.


----------



## mdcx

kipp said:


> FWIW: https://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/meghan-markle-thought-curtsying-was-ridiculous-before-move/


Nuts:
"Not feeling it. Meghan Markle had to abide by several rules and regulations when she became the Duchess of Sussex, including curtsying, and a source tells _In Touch_ exclusively that she “couldn’t stand” the traditional gesture of greeting. Now that she and Prince Harry have “stepped back” from their royal duties, she won’t be missing it.

It’s been a tradition for women to bend their knees while bowing their head to pay respects to high-ranking royals. “This may seem like a small detail, but honestly Meghan couldn’t stand curtsying,” an insider tells _In Touch_. “It’s what I think threw her over the edge, having to curtsy to everyone!”

The source adds, “She thought it was ridiculous and that was honestly a big, big problem for her.”​The pomp and ceremony and protocol are some of the major components of royal life. As if she didn't know that! She knew she would have to curtsey to Kate, walk behind Harry etc. She just thought she could charm her way out of it.


----------



## mshermes

Yep....just living a regular life now.......
Harry-Meghan-Markles-24-hour-security-DOES-include-British-police-bodyguards.html


----------



## jcnc

mdcx said:


> Nuts:
> "Not feeling it. Meghan Markle had to abide by several rules and regulations when she became the Duchess of Sussex, including curtsying, and a source tells _In Touch_ exclusively that she “couldn’t stand” the traditional gesture of greeting. Now that she and Prince Harry have “stepped back” from their royal duties, she won’t be missing it.
> 
> It’s been a tradition for women to bend their knees while bowing their head to pay respects to high-ranking royals. “This may seem like a small detail, but honestly Meghan couldn’t stand curtsying,” an insider tells _In Touch_. “It’s what I think threw her over the edge, having to curtsy to everyone!”
> 
> The source adds, “She thought it was ridiculous and that was honestly a big, big problem for her.”​The pomp and ceremony and protocol are some of the major components of royal life. As if she didn't know that! She knew she would have to curtsey to Kate, walk behind Harry etc. She just thought she could charm her way out of it.



I, like some others on this thread had started to blame  Meghan’s mind games for this royal step back but based on stuff like this thats coming out a lot these days, it looks like a clear case of misfit. Meghan didnt take enough time to understand the RF. She saw traditions as something her liberal mind opposed vehemently and therefore she never fit into the family. That obviously irked the BRF and in return she claimed to be stifled. Plus the $$$ itch = sussex royals who are no longer royals .


----------



## youngster

PatsyCline said:


> Do you have any idea what security does? They’re not there to carry your luggage, pick up your laundry, walk your dog etc.  Their hands need to be free to protect the person they’re hired to protect.
> 
> All the other stuff is what you hire a personal assistant for.



So, then she should have brought her personal assistant or the nanny along to take the dogs or the baby.


----------



## BigPurseSue

The point is that the photo of her strolling along in the Canadian wilderness with a lab, a beagle and a toddler in her arms was staged. There's no way anyone can stroll down a city sidewalk with a lab, a beagle and a toddler in arms not to mention the Canadian wilderness. (I've see people try this on my city street and within a block they're a hot mess.) She obviously had p.r. people set this up with the paps, as they did the photos at the women's center, but the question is why? Why would she spend money on p.r. people for something like this? I've heard that she will probably re-launch her lifestyle blog and perhaps this is why. But still. P.R. people are very expensive.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> FWIW: https://www.intouchweekly.com/posts/meghan-markle-thought-curtsying-was-ridiculous-before-move/



Damn, she makes me cringe and her behavior is the worst stereotype of the “ugly American.” She wanted to live in another country but she had no respect for the culture or the customs and thought everything should be adapted with her personal comfort in mind.


----------



## PatsyCline

youngster said:


> So, then she should have brought her personal assistant or the nanny along to take the dogs or the baby.


That’s a fair criticism. We’re assuming she has a personal assistant...


----------



## Meh-gan

mdcx said:


> Nuts:
> "Not feeling it. Meghan Markle had to abide by several rules and regulations when she became the Duchess of Sussex, including curtsying, and a source tells _In Touch_ exclusively that she “couldn’t stand” the traditional gesture of greeting. Now that she and Prince Harry have “stepped back” from their royal duties, she won’t be missing it.
> 
> It’s been a tradition for women to bend their knees while bowing their head to pay respects to high-ranking royals. “This may seem like a small detail, but honestly Meghan couldn’t stand curtsying,” an insider tells _In Touch_. “It’s what I think threw her over the edge, having to curtsy to everyone!”
> 
> The source adds, “She thought it was ridiculous and that was honestly a big, big problem for her.”​The pomp and ceremony and protocol are some of the major components of royal life. As if she didn't know that! She knew she would have to curtsey to Kate, walk behind Harry etc. She just thought she could charm her way out of it.


I mean she will have to do even more curtseying now whenever she does attend things with senior royals and be put waaaay in the back


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Damn, she makes me cringe and her behavior is the worst stereotype of the “ugly American.” She wanted to live in another country but she had no respect for the culture or the customs and thought everything should be adapted with her personal comfort in mind.



Two or so years ago, I remember people saying that her degree in International Relations made her perfect for marrying into the royal family and accompanying Harry all over the world.  But, apparently, understanding and respect for other cultures doesn't extend to the UK and their traditions.  She may not like some of these traditions, like curtseying, but it's not as if she wasn't fully aware of it before marrying Harry.  I mean, I don't think I would like to curtsy to people either but I didn't marry Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

Meh-gan said:


> Why is he on the tarmac did he fly a private plane again. FoR CliMaTe ChANge.


No, he and his bodyguard flew commercial.


----------



## mshermes

chowlover2 said:


> No, he and his bodyguard flew commercial.


Not one, but two bodyguards. 
The Duke of Sussex, who landed in the country last night, has travelled across the Atlantic by at least two Met close protection officers earning more than £100,000-a-year, not including overtime or expenses.


----------



## lalame

Wow, I did not realize people hated Meghan so much. I really don’t get it. I don’t find her actions regarding the marriage and leaving the RF so shocking, Prince Harry seemed to always have one foot out the door, and his actual friends have said as much to the media. It’s not incomprehensible that he would see his wife struggling with the hyper critical environment and find it to be the last straw. I don’t think it’s giving him much credit to assume she could con him into leaving everything he knows had he not truly agreed with the decision.

As an American, I know I learned a lot over the last two years about life under the royal rules that I had no clue of before. I could not choose that life either, and I think it’s perfectly understandable that she might fall in love with someone, try to make it work, and then just find the lifestyle was a total mismatch. Especially as an American, where you might not have that inherent understanding and reverence for the royal family to begin with... that’s a lot of sacrifices to make,

About the photo of her “rummaging” in the car... what? There is absolutely no context there to even verify what the video is assuming happened. Maybe she was rummaging for her phone, and her security told her it was elsewhere. The shot is so brief and clearly so edited that you really can’t read anything into it. I edit videos at work and you can take any 2 seconds out of a few hrs. of footage and make it fit whatever narrative you want.

The photos today did look off as she is smiling straight at the camera, but I do have a hard time thinking she would stage that. Yes, I grew up in LA and have found myself close to a pap swarm many a time and understand some celebs stage those scenes. I get it but I have no information beyond knowing what COULD be done to make me think that’s what actually happened.


----------



## lalame

And I’m not understanding the hate about the curtsying. I doubt that was at the top of her list of reasons to move out of country. That’s just silly. If she doesn’t like curtsying, so what? She seems to have done it as appropriate. You’re allowed to not like certain aspects of your culture, or your family’s culture, or anything really... it’s not like she disrespected them by flagrantly not doing it when she should. I hate some of my family’s cultural traditions, and my husband’s as well... am I disrespecting them just because I don’t like those things? heck no, I still do them. 

And that’s even assuming that news article is true!!! Some of these tabloids will write anything. There’s just no penalty for lying as the royal family has a longstanding tradition not to sue the media. Whatever sells papers.


----------



## hockeygirl

lalame said:


> Wow, I did not realize people hated Meghan so much. I really don’t get it. I don’t find her actions regarding the marriage and leaving the RF so shocking, Prince Harry seemed to always have one foot out the door, and his actual friends have said as much to the media. It’s not incomprehensible that he would see his wife struggling with the hyper critical environment and find it to be the last straw. I don’t think it’s giving him much credit to assume she could con him into leaving everything he knows had he not truly agreed with the decision.
> 
> As an American, I know I learned a lot over the last two years about life under the royal rules that I had no clue of before. I could not choose that life either, and I think it’s perfectly understandable that she might fall in love with someone, try to make it work, and then just find the lifestyle was a total mismatch. Especially as an American, where you might not have that inherent understanding and reverence for the royal family to begin with... that’s a lot of sacrifices to make,
> 
> About the photo of her “rummaging” in the car... what? There is absolutely no context there to even verify what the video is assuming happened. Maybe she was rummaging for her phone, and her security told her it was elsewhere. The shot is so brief and clearly so edited that you really can’t read anything into it. I edit videos at work and you can take any 2 seconds out of a few hrs. of footage and make it fit whatever narrative you want.
> 
> The photos today did look off as she is smiling straight at the camera, but I do have a hard time thinking she would stage that. Yes, I grew up in LA and have found myself close to a pap swarm many a time and understand some celebs stage those scenes. I get it but I have no information beyond knowing what COULD be done to make me think that’s what actually happened.



Again, I don't think anyone is saying they can't leave the royal family.  The problem most people have is how they handled it and wanting their cake and eat it too...


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> Wow, I did not realize people hated Meghan so much. I really don’t get it. I don’t find her actions regarding the marriage and leaving the RF so shocking, Prince Harry seemed to always have one foot out the door, and his actual friends have said as much to the media. It’s not incomprehensible that he would see his wife struggling with the hyper critical environment and find it to be the last straw. I don’t think it’s giving him much credit to assume she could con him into leaving everything he knows had he not truly agreed with the decision.
> 
> As an American, I know I learned a lot over the last two years about life under the royal rules that I had no clue of before. I could not choose that life either, and I think it’s perfectly understandable that she might fall in love with someone, try to make it work, and then just find the lifestyle was a total mismatch. Especially as an American, where you might not have that inherent understanding and reverence for the royal family to begin with... that’s a lot of sacrifices to make,
> 
> About the photo of her “rummaging” in the car... what? There is absolutely no context there to even verify what the video is assuming happened. Maybe she was rummaging for her phone, and her security told her it was elsewhere. The shot is so brief and clearly so edited that you really can’t read anything into it. I edit videos at work and you can take any 2 seconds out of a few hrs. of footage and make it fit whatever narrative you want.
> 
> The photos today did look off as she is smiling straight at the camera, but I do have a hard time thinking she would stage that. Yes, I grew up in LA and have found myself close to a pap swarm many a time and understand some celebs stage those scenes. I get it but I have no information beyond knowing what COULD be done to make me think that’s what actually happened.


It was 100% staged. The whole set up was obviously NOT a casual walk on a trail lol. Plus someone posted that the photos are owned by Splash or whatever and that’s who sets up these kind of things with celebrities like Kim K etc. 

Same with the photos of her at the airport. They were so close and she was looking at the cameras/smiling etc. Airports in Canada aren’t simply swarming with paps for them to just happen upon MM.


----------



## lalame

hockeygirl said:


> Again, I don't think anyone is saying they can't leave the royal family.  The problem most people have is how they handled it and wanting their cake and eat it too...


I think that whole situation is a mess all around... they probably have not handled it the best, but it's never been done before, right? I think they are all clumsily trying to find a way to make everyone happy with some compromises. Personally I think it's absurd that Prince Charles would even continue to support them and find it's appropriate for them to be entirely cut off but I can empathize with the fact that the security they need is insanely expensive (didn't Kylie Jenner say she pays $1m/year just for security?) and they can't really escape that due to Harry happening to have been born into that family. It's definitely a messy situation.


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> It was 100% staged. The whole set up was obviously NOT a casual walk on a trail lol. Plus someone posted that the photos are owned by Splash or whatever and that’s who sets up these kind of things with celebrities like Kim K etc.
> 
> Same with the photos of her at the airport. They were so close and she was looking at the cameras/smiling etc. Airports in Canada aren’t simply swarming with paps for them to just happen upon MM.


I find it also likely that someone in their camp, or someone on their plane, leaked it and paps came. In that situation, honestly, I'm not sure, do you just frown the entire way? Or maybe she did and they didn't release those photos? Truly don't know. Either scenarios seem equally likely to me, and where it leans depends on what you think of her motivations as a person.


----------



## kissmysass

Sorry for the long post:/

Personally, I do not hate her. She does not owe me anything but I was a fan of MM before I saw her for what she was. I did not need media to tell what I know.

When she first got engaged to Harry, I did not care much. I was happy for her because like I said I was a fan before so I knew she was kinda into charities but she literally, to my knowledge, only did three things regarding charity. One when she was younger, the UN which I read her uncle helped her get and that trip to India. The firm tried to big her up like it was more. Charity is charity so I did not care. Always find it strange people site her UN speech tho.

What did it for me was I got a vibe from her that she was still in acting mode. Every time we see them with fans outside waiting to see she always seemed to put up this "you guys are here for me?: kind of thing. Like she wanted to be the peoples duchess. It was weird.

Then reports came in that she spent more money on her wardrobe than any other royal and at this time they were only six months in. Not to mention, if the reports are true about her having a "sayonara Zara party" rubbed me the wrong way. I viewed it as she did not have to purchase "low end" fashion anymore. That sealed it for me that money was a big factor for her. 

The more I read about her the more I see she is not who she nor the people who have rose colored glasses on when it comes to her. 

The british media was cruel, yes but I did feel behind the scenes she expected a lot. I believe the firm tried with her but she did not like the traditional values it upheld. Everyone gets ripped in the media and I do not see them doing half the stuff she does They lay low until people move on. 

All this "the way the royal family works, I would have left to" is funny to me because she did not marry into the family with no knowledge at 19. She was 36 and it seemed like she followed them enough to know that it is not all glitz and glam like she thought...crazy to find out that it is an actual job.

Now, there are reports saying that she did not like that she "has to curtsy to her family" etc it comes off as "I am better than you. I should not have to do all of this."

I am not too bothered they left but it is how they left. To me it shows that she never had respect for the firm from the beginning. It's not even two years and they already bailed. Granted, I am happy for them but it all seems staged, entitled, greedy and bratty to me.


----------



## kissmysass

Meh-gan said:


> It was 100% staged. The whole set up was obviously NOT a casual walk on a trail lol. Plus someone posted that the photos are owned by Splash or whatever and that’s who sets up these kind of things with celebrities like Kim K etc.
> 
> Same with the photos of her at the airport. They were so close and she was looking at the cameras/smiling etc. Airports in Canada aren’t simply swarming with paps for them to just happen upon MM.



I do not understand how people do not see that this was staged. They spent 6 weeks in canada did not see much of them. All of sudden they breakaway from the treacherous and we see them daily.

Then has the nerve to smile like a Cheshire cat and get mad that the pictures were taken?

Make it make it sense.


----------



## lalame

I really have a hard time believing any "Sayonara Zara" parties... what, she was too good for Zara but then.... wore Everlane,  Jcrew, Banana Republic? It just doesn't add up. 

I have a lot of empathy for situations where you "know" how it's going to be, but then when you're in it it's sooo much worse than you imagined. Happens to people all the time, with jobs, neighborhoods, heck marriages. I don't think that part is very unbelievable... whatever we know about the royal family, I'm sure we can't fully appreciate what it's like to actually live it. I know I can't imagine what it's like to experience the positive parts - the bad parts just sound awful to me. 

I really don't mean to come off as a MM stan... I'm mostly just skeptical about media reports and have empathy about these situations in general. I never really paid attention to her until more and more negative and obviously bogus articles about her (mainly from Business Times) started coming up on my Apple News.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> From the BRF being the “family she never had” to this. How do people not see through this??
> View attachment 4646199


These two are sooooo full of crap it’s unreal! Can’t make this stuff up!!


----------



## lalame

FWIW, she was an actress and I assume she's just as materialistic, self-involved, and flawed as any person in hollywood. Their whole careers are driven around their image and persona. I am totally open to the possibility that she's a horrible person. I'm just saying, I don't really draw these particular conclusions based on the situations I'm seeing.


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> I find it also likely that someone in their camp, or someone on their plane, leaked it and paps came. In that situation, honestly, I'm not sure, do you just frown the entire way? Or maybe she did and they didn't release those photos? Truly don't know. Either scenarios seem equally likely to me, and where it leans depends on what you think of her motivations as a person.


They were in Canada for 6 weeks and no info was leaked or discovered without them manipulating it. A total hide out with no photos of them, no leaks as to their whereabouts, so it IS more likely it was manipulated by MM and the paps were tipped off by her own PR team. 

The only photo or news item during their 6 week break was that weird couple can’t take a selfie story - where the woman was a producer at the local news station - OBVIOUSLY set up by the PR team. 

The evidence doesn’t really support your theory of surprise paps or random leaks. And no one from the plane could leak it - she drove from the billionaire’s compound to the airport to pick up her friend.


----------



## lalame

I think William lucked out with Kate because she was so young and, while it seems the media were awful to her for awhile too, ramping into that environment as you mature is probably easier for all involved than throwing in a 37 year old woman. I think Meghan made some missteps for sure, like throwing in the towel so quickly, and bringing in a little too much of the Hollywood persona..... but I'm guessing being older and having been in that line of work for so long, it was difficult to give up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> They were in Canada for 6 weeks and no info was leaked or discovered without them manipulating it. A total hide out with no photos of them, no leaks as to their whereabouts, so it IS more likely it was manipulated by MM and the paps were tipped off by her own PR team.
> 
> The only photo or news item during their 6 week break was that weird couple can’t take a selfie story - where the woman was a producer at the local news station - OBVIOUSLY set up by the PR team.
> 
> The evidence doesn’t really support your theory of surprise paps or random leaks. And no one from the plane could leak it - she drove from the billionaire’s compound to the airport to pick up her friend.



I thought you were talking about the photos of him or her landing at the airport. About the time she picked up a friend.... isn't it just as likely the paps that were camped out in that area followed her to the airport? I think all these scenarios are equally plausible.


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> I thought you were talking about the photos of him or her landing at the airport. About the time she picked up a friend.... isn't it just as likely the paps that were camped out in that area followed her to the airport? I think all these scenarios are equally plausible.


IF there were paps camped out they were the ones she hired lol.


----------



## lalame

I think the whole thing is unfortunate and clearly Harry picked someone who was just not suited for all of this at all. I do think partly it's due to her age, her expectations about income and personal freedoms due to her experiences, that just made her overall a bad fit for this type of situation. They really should've dated for a longer period so BOTH could be fully educated and observed how the other handled this. If I were Meghan, I would've thought seriously about the fact that Cressida and Chelsea dated him for so long and still said "nope" about that lifestyle. She seemed to rush into it.


----------



## hockeygirl

lalame said:


> I think the whole thing is unfortunate and clearly Harry picked someone who was just not suited for all of this at all. I do think partly it's due to her age, her expectations about income and personal freedoms due to her experiences, that just made her overall a bad fit for this type of situation. They really should've dated for a longer period so BOTH could be fully educated and observed how the other handled this. If I were Meghan, I would've thought seriously about the fact that Cressida and Chelsea dated him for so long and still said "nope" about that lifestyle. She seemed to rush into it.



I think given Meghan’s age, they couldn't really afford to wait around if they want to have kids.


----------



## lalame

hockeygirl said:


> I think given Meghan’s age, they couldn't really afford to wait around if they want to have kids.


I agree, and that's probably why they rushed in. And now we see the consequences.... Granted I don't think a year is inherently too short before getting married, but when the culture is SO different and the stakes so high I would've waited a bit. But I may not be appreciating the strong yearn to have kids asap or fear of running out of time that one might feel at that age. Either way, generally, whatever age, it would've been smart for them to have a longer courtship considering the baggage.


----------



## LittleStar88

PatsyCline said:


> Do you have any idea what security does? They’re not there to carry your luggage, pick up your laundry, walk your dog etc.  Their hands need to be free to protect the person they’re hired to protect.
> 
> All the other stuff is what you hire a personal assistant for.



Protect Archie from Meghan falling forward on top of him? If the dog takes off on chase and pulls her down or if she slips/falls forward... one of the two of them should be helping ensure the Duchess’ safety and that of the helpless cutie perilously affixed to her frontside.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She honestly is reminding me of Kim K from years ago where she was constantly getting fake papped but you could tell she loves and orchestrated it.


----------



## lalame

I wonder what kind of girl WOULD be a good fit for both this position AND Harry. He seems to like "normal" ladies and working ones at that... so I don't know if he could've fallen for a woman who would've just fallen in line or "speak only when spoken to" as one poster said many pages ago. And yet what type of woman would take this role except someone who would do all of those things. Seems like a lose-lose on his part.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The 2 dog plus baby pic is reminding me of a woman who was pushing a stroller on roller blades while her younger kid rode a bike behind her. She almost ran straight into my SUV entering a driveway from the wrong side and I was so shocked I didn’t scream at her for being van idiot and putting her exercise needs before her kids safety. It’s a huge regret of mine.


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> I really have a hard time believing any "Sayonara Zara" parties... what, she was too good for Zara but then.... wore Everlane,  Jcrew, Banana Republic? It just doesn't add up.
> 
> I have a lot of empathy for situations where you "know" how it's going to be, but then when you're in it it's sooo much worse than you imagined. Happens to people all the time, with jobs, neighborhoods, heck marriages. I don't think that part is very unbelievable... whatever we know about the royal family, I'm sure we can't fully appreciate what it's like to actually live it. I know I can't imagine what it's like to experience the positive parts - the bad parts just sound awful to me.
> 
> I really don't mean to come off as a MM stan... I'm mostly just skeptical about media reports and have empathy about these situations in general. I never really paid attention to her until more and more negative and obviously bogus articles about her (mainly from Business Times) started coming up on my Apple News.


I can relate to how you feel empathy for her situation and I used to feel the same way about her mainly because I kept giving her the benefit of the doubt but as I learned more about her I've changed my mind. 

Even putting aside the unverifiable claims about her there is a lot of simple definite stuff that points to her personality actually being a big part of the problem in every situation. 

We have to assume that a lot of people are lying inorder to keep giving her the benefit of the doubt, and honestly I don't even respect Piers Morgan as a journalist but he's not lying when describing being ghosted by her. 

I don't want to rehash all the things that point to issues with her personality but one thing I will point out is how weird is it that she invited famous people she doesn't even know well like Oprah and the Clooneys to the wedding? And then gave them such front row seats? That was strange no matter how we interpret it. 

Even if we didn't know all this stuff those pap shots in the woods would still be as suspicious as they are.


----------



## kissmysass

lalame said:


> I think the whole thing is unfortunate and clearly Harry picked someone who was just not suited for all of this at all. I do think partly it's due to her age, her expectations about income and personal freedoms due to her experiences, that just made her overall a bad fit for this type of situation. They really should've dated for a longer period so BOTH could be fully educated and observed how the other handled this. If I were Meghan, I would've thought seriously about the fact that Cressida and Chelsea dated him for so long and still said "nope" about that lifestyle. She seemed to rush into it.





lalame said:


> I wonder what kind of girl WOULD be a good fit for both this position AND Harry. He seems to like "normal" ladies and working ones at that... so I don't know if he could've fallen for a woman who would've just fallen in line or "speak only when spoken to" as one poster said many pages ago. And yet what type of woman would take this role except someone who would do all of those things. Seems like a lose-lose on his part.



That is the thing. I think Harry thought MM was the perfect choice because she was a 36 year old actress. Maybe he thought she would be use to all of it because as an actress youre in front of the camera all the time. You are definitely right about the freedoms she has had to "give up". But she had to have seem that coming tho. Also, it is apparent that she did not give up her life at all. She actually gained (money and more fame) and he was the one gave up his life.

I think Harry should pick someone like him. He seems to genuinely want to bring awareness to causes no matter the agenda or hypocrisy that comes with it. He seems to want to live a "low" profile life. I mean seriously if William and Kate can why can't he? There is one factor. MM likes the limelight as much as she says she hates it. She just wants to control the narrative and cash those checks.

The kind of woman who would expect this role is maybe maybe one that accepts tradition, accepts the institution they are married in, has a genuine sense of wanting to go charities that are not full with Hollywood celebrities, someone who puts their spending habits last and the causes first. Someone who actually wants privacy instead of saying it and then smiling for the cameras and then suing the british press. She is out there but like you said they rushed into all of this.


----------



## lalame

I don't think people like Piers Morgan are lying, but it could just be a much more mundane issue than thought. Maybe she was giving creeper vibes from him and when she got a BF, she decided to ghost him. Who has not ghosted guys you date, guys who hit on you, guys who you have a maybe-maybe-not thing with when you got an SO??? Hey been there, and no it wasn't to chase fame lol. 

And how do you KNOW she didn't know Oprah and the Clooneys well? This is the part that confuses me. There are a lot of assumptions along the lines of "I didn't see it therefor it can't be true." Surely we can believe that they may have hung out, talked on the phone, etc. even if billions of strangers did not see, hear, or witness it... celebs can and do befriend one another behind closed doors. 

I don't really have an explanation for the photos in the woods. Maybe they are papped. I just have a hard time saying it with certainty because I don't know with certainty. But I don't doubt you and signs strongly suggest it, so sure. She was an actress, aka image-driven and attention-seeking as chosen career, so I'm certainly not going to die on this hill.


----------



## lalame

And along the same lines... surely we can believe she supported many charities that we have never heard of, volunteered when we didn't see it, etc. It just seems like there's no recognition that any of this could possibly be true unless it was out in the open. I worked at a non-profit many moons ago, and many public/famous donors did so anonymously - the public would never even have a chance of witnessing that stuff. 

I agree that she's litigious, a quitter, attention-seeking, materialistic, etc. But I do have to give her the benefit of the doubt that the woman could have done a few things that I or you didn't witness and may have a side to her that none of us have ever seen simply for the fact that we're not there most of the time. The level of certainty here that we have seen all, know all, and can read the woman's intentions based on a few photos of her expressions just doesn't add up to me.


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> I don't think people like Piers Morgan are lying, but it could just be a much more mundane issue than thought. Maybe she was giving creeper vibes from him and when she got a BF, she decided to ghost him. Who has not ghosted guys you date, guys who hit on you, guys who you have a maybe-maybe-not thing with when you got an SO??? Hey been there, and no it wasn't to chase fame lol.
> 
> And how do you KNOW she didn't know Oprah and the Clooneys well? This is the part that confuses me. There are a lot of assumptions along the lines of "I didn't see it therefor it can't be true." Surely we can believe that they may have hung out, talked on the phone, etc. even if billions of strangers did not see, hear, or witness it... celebs can and do befriend one another behind closed doors.
> 
> I don't really have an explanation for the photos in the woods. Maybe they are papped. I just have a hard time saying it with certainty because I don't know with certainty. But I don't doubt you and signs strongly suggest it, so sure. She was an actress, aka image-driven and attention-seeking as chosen career, so I'm certainly not going to die on this hill.


If it were just one or two people she has ghosted then we could say yea maybe Piers was just being annoying. But it's almost everyone from her old life including long time close friends. At some point giving the benefit of the doubt becomes willfully ignoring stuff. And if you haven't you should read Pier's article it's illuminating because he's obviously confused by it because he's never been treated that way before but it should be relateble to anyone who has had someone really manipulative in their life before.

Okay, even when I liked her I thought she wasn't really friends with either the Clooneys or Oprah. I know how celebrities circles work and she was nowhere near the level of fame required to be actually friends with them. Certainly her acting career would have been doing much better if she actually did have such good connections. 

Even if they did know each other did you see where they were sitting? Literally in the spots where the people closest to her in her life should have been sitting. Even if they did know each other it's still freaking weird that she had ghosted people she's actually close to and replaced them with famous people she at most might sort of know.


----------



## Aqua01




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> Okay, even when I liked her I thought she wasn't really friends with either the Clooneys or Oprah. I know how celebrities circles work and she was nowhere near the level of fame required to be actually friends with them. Certainly her acting career would have been doing much better if she actually did have such good connections.
> 
> Even if they did know each other did you see where they were sitting? Literally in the spots where the people closest to her in her life should have been sitting. Even if they did know each other it's still freaking weird that she had ghosted people she's actually close to and replaced them with famous people she at most might sort of know.



You REALLY don't think A-list celebs can have B-list, C-list, or even non-famous friends??? You really think all the Clooneys' friends are required to be of a certain level of fame? They probably just met during the year that H+M were dating and Harry had been a longtime friend, hence the wedding invite.

Regarding Piers Morgan and older friends, maybe Meghan is a bad and flaky friend. I don't have any qualms about saying that. I don't know the lady. I could very well believe she is a hot/cold friend like he charges. Like I said, I call out her flaws that I can believe in (eg quitter, attention-seeking, and here we are flaky friend). Just not sure that leads me down the path of... she also must fit XYZ negative traits simply because she has these negative traits.


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> I don't think people like Piers Morgan are lying, but it could just be a much more mundane issue than thought. Maybe she was giving creeper vibes from him and when she got a BF, she decided to ghost him. Who has not ghosted guys you date, guys who hit on you, guys who you have a maybe-maybe-not thing with when you got an SO??? Hey been there, and no it wasn't to chase fame lol.
> 
> And how do you KNOW she didn't know Oprah and the Clooneys well? This is the part that confuses me. There are a lot of assumptions along the lines of "I didn't see it therefor it can't be true." Surely we can believe that they may have hung out, talked on the phone, etc. even if billions of strangers did not see, hear, or witness it... celebs can and do befriend one another behind closed doors.
> 
> I don't really have an explanation for the photos in the woods. Maybe they are papped. I just have a hard time saying it with certainty because I don't know with certainty. But I don't doubt you and signs strongly suggest it, so sure. She was an actress, aka image-driven and attention-seeking as chosen career, so I'm certainly not going to die on this hill.


So she got creeper vibes from literally everyone? Her history of ghosting is epic. She is the common denominator here. 

Re: The Clooneys and Oprah - these are really high profile people - she was a cable tv show actress. There was nothing linking her to them pre-wedding. PLUS we already have a lot of proof that her relationships with the elite are exaggerated or made up. Case in point: the Obamas have said they are not advising H&M and are not involved with them. Michelle ***** has denied having lunch with her and that she only submitted her answers for the Vogue issue in writing (where MM’s narrative has her basically eating lunch with Michelle ***** - that never happened). Plus to top it off, Michelle says she only met MM briefly when MM showed up and came backstage at a stop on her book tour. 

So it really IS more likely she doesn’t have a relationship with the Clooneys or Oprah. She is very obviously inflating any connection or assumed connection between her and important people.


----------



## Roxanna

lalame said:


> I think the whole thing is unfortunate and clearly Harry picked someone who was just not suited for all of this at all. I do think partly it's due to her age, her expectations about income and personal freedoms due to her experiences, that just made her overall a bad fit for this type of situation. They really should've dated for a longer period so BOTH could be fully educated and observed how the other handled this. If I were Meghan, I would've thought seriously about the fact that Cressida and Chelsea dated him for so long and still said "nope" about that lifestyle. She seemed to rush into it.


I hope you might find this article by Katie Hind interesting https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkle-begged-tabloids-KATIE-HIND-reveals.html
MM definitely knew of what to expect. She is still part of family, hopefully she would come to understanding of how important traditions are. Time will tell.


----------



## jess236

Why is she so happy and smiling? She acts like nothing is going on and this hasn’t been a world-wide debacle.  This seems sociopathic to me.  The Royal Family and Harry were unhappy about it and regret the outcome.   
Her photo-op seems to be flaunting that she could care less. Clearly shows she doesn’t have enough class to be in the royal family.  

I always thought she was a phony – especially from that cringe-worthy engagement interview.  I think many people knew it would be a disaster and that she wasn’t suited to be a part of the royal family. It wasn’t a race issue but an issue of character.


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> You REALLY don't think A-list celebs can have B-list, C-list, or even non-famous friends??? You really think all the Clooneys' friends are required to be of a certain level of fame?


They can but Meghan was no where near C list and the Clooney's friends are pretty well documented. They aren't an extremely private couple and neither was Meghan. If they knew each other well enough to be in such a prime position in her wedding then we would have known about their friendship and her career would definitely would have been going to better places than it was. (The Clooneys are well known for being extremely generous and helpful to their friends.) 

I think this is just a case of you not having much context.


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> You REALLY don't think A-list celebs can have B-list, C-list, or even non-famous friends??? You really think all the Clooneys' friends are required to be of a certain level of fame?





lalame said:


> You REALLY don't think A-list celebs can have B-list, C-list, or even non-famous friends??? You really think all the Clooneys' friends are required to be of a certain level of fame?
> 
> Regarding Piers Morgan, maybe Meghan is a bad and flaky friend. I don't have any qualms about saying that. I don't know the lady. I could very well believe she is a hot/cold friend like he charges. Like I said, I call out her flaws that I can believe in (eg quitter, attention-seeking, and here we are flaky friend). Just not sure that leads me down the path of... she also must fit XYZ negative traits simply because she has these negative traits.



If they were all friends there WOULD be proof of it. The end. There is plenty of visible proof of her friendship with Jessica Mulroney, the Suits cast
People etc. Why are you so willing to give her the benefit of the doubt - “sure she could have been hanging out with Amal in secret” but are quick to dismiss the obvious?


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> If they were all friends there WOULD be proof of it. The end. There is plenty of visible proof of her friendship with Jessica Mulroney, the Suits cast
> People etc. Why are you so willing to give her the benefit of the doubt - “sure she could have been hanging out with Amal in secret” but are quick to dismiss the obvious?



Because there isn't visible proof of EVERY friendship every celeb has... that's just crazy!!! These guys, while they do get photographed a lot, certainly don't get photographed every day of every year of their lives. I don't have any visible proof that Serena and Meghan hung out before she became famous... and yet now they have a very visible friendship. I'm just saying, as much as we feel like we know these people, we don't. They have full lives that we don't see all the time.

I mean, by your logic... you must know every friend the Clooneys and every famous person has, because 1. every interaction would've been photographed and been out in public (they never meet at their homes), 2. you have seen every photo.  I just don't think that's realistic. Also, I didn't say Meghan was the Clooney's friends... I assumed it was Harry who knew them, likely from events.


----------



## mdcx

Let’s say the photos in woods were not staged by Meghan. Why did her security not rush into action on seeing a random person stalking their client? They were well behind her, very relaxed, Meghan was closest to the photographer and ridiculously burdened down with dogs and giant baby grinning right at the cameras. Doesn’t add up.

As for Meghan not realising the protocol etc - come on. She was guided/instructed/babysat from day dot. She chose to deliberately flout convention on many occasions. Then tried to frame it that she was being bullied. Nonsense - she just hates following rules imo. Trying to build her personal brand while she was a senior Royal - beyond stupid.
Harry should have married someone who could fit into his world, not try to reshape it.
Unfortunately I don’t think many of the good candidates wanted to sign up due to the restrictions of the role, Harry’s known issues etc.


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> Because there isn't visible proof of EVERY friendship every celeb has... that's just crazy!!! These guys, while they do get photographed a lot, certainly don't get photographed every day of every year of their lives. I don't have any visible proof that Serena and Meghan hung out before she became famous... and yet now they have a very visible friendship. I'm just saying, as much as we feel like we know these people, we don't. They have full lives that we don't see all the time.


The “friendship” I’m sure was superficial and it seems Serena and her husband are pretty much ghosting Harry and Meghan now. 

Don’t you think it’s weird that this “friendship” only became a thing around when she was with Harry and the wedding and after etc? It’s like when PR teams set up celebs to date. I think that is more likely what happened with this “friendship”


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> The “friendship” I’m sure was superficial and it seems Serena and her husband are pretty much ghosting Harry and Meghan now.
> 
> Don’t you think it’s weird that this “friendship” only became a thing around when she was with Harry and the wedding and after etc? It’s like when PR teams set up celebs to date. I think that is more likely what happened with this “friendship”



No, I don't think that's weird because who even knew Meghan before she was with Harry? if they were friends, how would we even know... Meghan was a nobody.


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> Let’s say the photos in woods were not staged by Meghan. Why did her security not rush into action on seeing a random person stalking their client? They were well behind her, very relaxed, Meghan was closest to the photographer and ridiculously burdened down with dogs and giant baby grinning right at the cameras. Doesn’t add up.
> 
> As for Meghan not realising the protocol etc - come on. She was guided/instructed/babysat from day dot. She chose to deliberately flout convention on many occasions. Then tried to frame it that she was being bullied. Nonsense - she just hates following rules imo. Trying to build her personal brand while she was a senior Royal - beyond stupid.
> Harry should have married someone who could fit into his world, not try to reshape it.
> Unfortunately I don’t think many of the good candidates wanted to sign up due to the restrictions of the role, Harry’s known issues etc.



I agree that she SHOULD have taken the role more seriously, and that was a major bad on them that they didn't wait longer to get a better feel for it before rushing into engagement. I can only imagine it was wishful thinking, or just bad judgment to ignore it. If she had just so much as moved to the UK for a period while they dated, I bet there wouldn't have even been a wedding. And now, well the lady is a quitter.


----------



## mdcx

I think a lot of these celeb friendships are very transactional. For the English celebs at least, attending Harry’s wedding was a good way to show respect to the BRF, get their photos in Tatler etc, build their brand. I didn’t assume all of those guests were actual friends with H&M.


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> I think a lot of these celeb friendships are very transactional. For the English celebs at least, attending Harry’s wedding was a good way to show respect to the BRF, get their photos in Tatler etc, build their brand. I didn’t assume all of those guests were actual friends with H&M.



For sure... like who really believes Harry or Meghan are good friends with James Corden? George Clooney and Amal in particular I could believe have gotten to know Harry over the years (and met Meghan later on). Didn't one of them say as much?


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> No, I don't think that's weird because who even knew Meghan before she was with Harry? if they were friends, how would we even know... Meghan was a nobody.


Serena wasn’t. Come on you are just being willfully naive at this point. MM wouldnt have continued to BE a nobody with powerful close friends like Serena, Oprah and the Clooneys. Come on I think you are smarter than this.


----------



## mdcx

lalame said:


> I agree that she SHOULD have taken the role more seriously, and that was a major bad on them that they didn't wait longer to get a better feel for it before rushing into engagement. I can only imagine it was wishful thinking, or just bad judgment to ignore it. If she had just so much as moved to the UK for a period while they dated, I bet there wouldn't have even been a wedding. And now, well the lady is a quitter.


The rumour is that William conveyed this very advice to Harry - wait, you hardly know each other, she’s not ready to take on the role. Harry was offended, probably told Meghan. This started the rift between the brothers.
It is possible for an “outsider” to marry in - see Mary marrying into the Danish royal family - but _they_ have to assimilate and change.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> Serena wasn’t. Come on you are just being willfully naive at this point. MM wouldnt have continued to BE a nobody with powerful close friends like Serena, Oprah and the Clooneys. Come on I think you are smarter than this.



What I'm saying is... Serena was of course famous, but we don't know all her non-famous friends.... until they become famous. That's why I'm saying we saw no evidence of Meghan with Serena before because Meghan wasn't famous. Who knew Amber Heard and Johnny Depp were friends... until suddenly we saw they dated? (Amber wasn't that famous) So many examples out there of celeb friends/SO's being secret until we finally see it.

So just backing up here... I'm suggesting that we don't know all of every celebrity's friends, and there are likely friendships that we have not seen visual evidence of. What you're saying is there MUST be visual evidence of every celebrity friendship, or the friendship doesn't exist. That does not sound crazy to you at all....


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> The rumour is that William conveyed this very advice to Harry - wait, you hardly know each other, she’s not ready to take on the role. Harry was offended, probably told Meghan. This started the rift between the brothers.
> It is possible for an “outsider” to marry in - see Mary marrying into the Danish royal family - but _they_ have to assimilate and change.



Yes and I could totally believe that rumor. Harry just seems very sensitive and temperamental IMO. He should've been more patient for sure.


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> Because there isn't visible proof of EVERY friendship every celeb has... that's just crazy!!! These guys, while they do get photographed a lot, certainly don't get photographed every day of every year of their lives. I don't have any visible proof that Serena and Meghan hung out before she became famous... and yet now they have a very visible friendship. I'm just saying, as much as we feel like we know these people, we don't. They have full lives that we don't see all the time.
> 
> I mean, by your logic... you must know every friend the Clooneys and every famous person has, because 1. every interaction would've been photographed and been out in public (they never meet at their homes), 2. you have seen every photo.  I just don't think that's realistic. Also, I didn't say Meghan was the Clooney's friends... I assumed it was Harry who knew them, likely from events.


Guess what? Oprah, the Clooneys, Doria, Serena, the Mulonreys were sitting on her side of the wedding, meaning they were there for her:
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/...00000578-5748561-image-m-15_1526752999028.jpg

While Harry's actual celebrity acquiantances like Posh and Becks? They were sitting in the outer area of the chapel. Also part of the way the Clooney's market themselves is by showing how close they are to their friends. So we would have known if they actually were friends. Any way I'm going to stop replying now.


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> What I'm saying is... Serena was of course famous, but we don't know all her non-famous friends.... until they become famous. That's why I'm saying we saw no evidence of Meghan with Serena before because Meghan wasn't famous. Who knew Amber Heard and Johnny Depp were friends... until suddenly we saw they dated? (Amber wasn't that famous) So many examples out there of celeb friends/SO's being secret until we finally see it.


The minute she started dating Harry she was everywhere. Every paper every website etc. IF she was that close with Serena and the Clooneys etc for years pre Harry, she would have been spotted with them doing something. These are mega famous people. Their friends are well known as someone pointed out. MM would not be “girl giving head” on a TV show and in the credits as “hot girl” if she had a legit friendship with George effing Clooney. 

And where are they all now? She caused the biggest, lamest drama and everyone is like nope. 

Like girl come on.


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> Guess what? Both Oprah, the Clooneys, Doria, the Mulonreys were sitting on her side of the wedding, meaning they were there for her:
> https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/newpix/...00000578-5748561-image-m-15_1526752999028.jpg
> 
> While Harry's actual celebrity acquiantances like Posh and Becks? They were sitting in the outer area of the chapel. Also part of the way the Clooney's market themselves is by showing how close they are to their friends. So we would have known if they actually were friends. Any way I'm going to stop replying now.



Dude, what is that proof of... if you meet your husband's friends, and you all become friends... wedding day comes, are people REALLY still sticklers for which side to sit on? I've sat on the "Wrong" side plenty of times, and people have done so at my wedding too!


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> The minute she started dating Harry she was everywhere. Every paper every website etc. IF she was that close with Serena and the Clooneys etc for years pre Harry, she would have been spotted with them doing something. These are mega famous people. Their friends are well known as someone pointed out. MM would not be “girl giving head” on a TV show and in the credits as “hot girl” if she had a legit friendship with George effing Clooney.
> 
> And where are they all now? She caused the biggest, lamest drama and everyone is like nope.
> 
> Like girl come on.



She was ONLY everywhere when she started dating Harry... because she was dating Harry!! There were photos of her with Serena long before, no one CARED about this friendship until she was with Harry. https://www.biography.com/news/serena-williams-meghan-markle-friendship

I mean look, you've got old social media posts from Meghan showing they've good friends. Serena has said herself they've been good friends for years before the wedding. And there is proof of them participating in events together, as well as Meghan attending many tennis matches. What more... do you need...


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> She was ONLY everywhere when she started dating Harry... because she was dating Harry!! There were photos of her with Serena long before, no one CARED about this friendship until she was with Harry. https://www.biography.com/news/serena-williams-meghan-markle-friendship
> 
> I mean look, you've got old social media posts from Meghan showing they've good friends. Serena has said herself they've been good friends for years before the wedding. And there is proof of them participating in events together, as well as Meghan attending many tennis matches. What more... do you need...


This still seems like a hollywood set up and PR relationship to me - also she stalked Serena Williams at a Superbowl? If this wasn’t a set up by PR people it’s pretty sad and more proof of her desperate social climbing


----------



## lalame

And actually, just to back up... I don't know for sure or care whether they were true friends of the Clooney's or not. I certainly don't believe they were of James Corden or some others that were there. Just thought that was a likely friendship in particular. If you feel strongly that it's not a plausible friendship, okay.  I am not claiming omniscience here.


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> This still seems like a hollywood set up and PR relationship to me - also she stalked Serena Williams at a Superbowl? If this wasn’t a set up by PR people it’s pretty sad and more proof of her desperate social climbing



Look, if it was all faked, I truly wouldn't know. All I can take is what they say at face value when there is that much evidence. I just don't know otherwise. If you do, I can respect that.


Jaxion said:


> If it's both their friends then why was Posh and Becks or especially Elton John not sitting in that area too? Elton John, who I'm sure I don't have to explain how he'd warrant a spot there?
> 
> It's time to admit to yourself that you've become a stan. You're bending over backwards to explain away something that doesn't make sense if you actually know more about the situation. Like you didn't follow Harry's life much at all before Meghan did you? Any way I had to say that and now I'm really done.



I really didn't follow either of them. Girl, I have just said I thought this was a LIKELY friendship and am giving my reasons for thinking it is likely and what signs I see that it could be true. I truly don't know, and frankly short of a lie detector test I don't know how any of us could know conclusively. Of course I don't know why Elton or Becks or the Clooneys were where they were... just sharing some opinions and plainly saying "I know nothing conclusively, and neither do any of us." We're just speculating here for giggles at the end of the day.


----------



## lalame

Is it really THAT unreasonable that, out of maybe the 10 reasons that have been thrown out so far that "prove" Meghan is this awful, evil person... I say, I buy 5 of them but not the other 5?   It seems like in the Kate Middleton thread, everything she does is looked at with full optimism and here it's full negativity. For example, in that thread, people say to a smiling Kate, "thank goodness she's in good spirits given everything going on." Here, a photo of Meghan gets the reaction, "she must be a sociopath to be smiling in these times... what's wrong with her." I like them both - and think they're both very flawed in their own ways (and me too btw).


----------



## mdcx

Just an fyi for anyone who needs it - you can put certain posters on Ignore and make this thread easier for you to read.


----------



## jess236

lalame said:


> Is it really THAT unreasonable that, out of maybe the 10 reasons that have been thrown out so far that "prove" Meghan is this awful, evil person... I say, I buy 5 of them but not the other 5?   It seems like in the Kate Middleton thread, everything she does is looked at with full optimism and here it's full negativity. For example, in that thread, people say to a smiling Kate, "thank goodness she's in good spirits given everything going on." Here, a photo of Meghan gets the reaction, "she must be a sociopath to be smiling in these times... what's wrong with her." I like them both - and think they're both very flawed in their own ways (and me too btw).



Whether she is a terrible person or a great person is kind of irrelevant. What is a fact is that she has a terrible public image and whatever she is doing at the moment is not helping.  She may be the nicest sweetest most dedicated person but somehow she has not convinced the public of that.  So if anything can be said, it's that she has terrible PR.

As for her being a sociopath because she is smiling. I think that it would have been better for her not to be photographed that way because it definitely gives the impression that she could care less.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> *And how do you KNOW she didn't know Oprah and the Clooneys well? This is the part that confuses me. There are a lot of assumptions along the lines of "I didn't see it therefor it can't be true." Surely we can believe that they may have hung out, talked on the phone, etc. even if billions of strangers did not see, hear, or witness it... celebs can and do befriend one another behind closed doors. *



ummm, I see your point that none of us know MM personally so how can we make the assumption, like most of us have - and let me point out that it is not just our fellow tPF members, but also users on social media, esp Insta, and readers of most media outlets throughout the world here and abroad - how could we possibly deduce that MM is just a nasty piece of work?

Well, she is not a very good actress, is she? Her goals are shallow, her view of herself is so bloviated that she is clueless that the general public does not like her and her schemes one bit.

And why would anyone ever think that Clooney et al are NOT HER FRIENDS?
There is a distinct and loud SILENCE from them that absolutely deafens.

No friends - except that cheesy JM - no family, except her mum, and to compound problems MM just has to play the victim every single second. That staged walk in the woods "alone", see it's just me, my dogs , my child and oops, a few paps that were invited.

And even then that B-list actress could not take on the role of a caring mother to her child bc she simply is NOT - to MM it appears that everything is always ME, ME ME.

Well that is one very sick mind.


----------



## lalame

jess236 said:


> Whether she is a terrible person or a great person is kind of irrelevant. What is a fact is that she has a terrible public image and whatever she is doing at the moment is not helping.  She may be the nicest sweetest most dedicated person but somehow she has not convinced the public of that.  So if anything can be said, it's that she has terrible PR.
> 
> As for her being a sociopath because she is smiling. I think that it would have been better for her not to be photographed that way because it definitely gives the impression that she could care less.



I agree with you totally. And ironically, I myself don't like her public image. It rubs me the wrong way and smacks of being a little too goody-goody if that makes sense. Some people are just like this - like always "on" - and I get that vibe from her majorly. A bit too Ms Perfect. I'm certain, though I think she's likely a good person at heart, I would not be friends with her if I actually met her under normal circumstances. Is it really bad PR? IDK, I think that's just the lady's personality. If she tries to engineer it any more it will just come off even more inauthentic.


----------



## tiktok

Bottom line, she may or may not be a horrible person, but even a totally random, anonymous person moving countries from the US to the UK, planning a huge wedding, adjusting to married life, getting pregnant, having a baby for the first time in their life, all within 2 years, would be close to a nervous breakdown. Add to that the royal family traditions and obligations, the media, the brand new “profession” as a senior royal - yes, no one on the planet would be having fun under that level of turmoil and change. To say she didn’t even give it a chance is an understatement. I moved cities within the US and it took me nearly 2 years to truly feel at home in my new city. Any reasonable adult knows to give these things time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> Is it really THAT unreasonable that, out of maybe the 10 reasons that have been thrown out so far that "prove" Meghan is this awful, evil person... I say, I buy 5 of them but not the other 5?   It seems like in the Kate Middleton thread, everything she does is looked at with full optimism and here it's full negativity. For example, in that thread, people say to a smiling Kate, "thank goodness she's in good spirits given everything going on." Here, a photo of Meghan gets the reaction, "she must be a sociopath to be smiling in these times... what's wrong with her." I like them both - and think they're both very flawed in their own ways (and me too btw).


I don't think that's unreasonable and agree with you that this thread may be slanted too much to one side. It's not you being unreasonable per se but I do think you might also be biased more to one side because you were missing some of the context and you didn't even realise that you are missing it.


----------



## rose60610

MM wasn't a 19 year old starry eyed naivete . She was an older divorced actress, albeit a D Lister, but never met a camera she didn't love. She meets Harry. An hour's worth of Google could tell her 95% of what she didn't already know about him. She moved IN with him before they married, basically an apprenticeship. The press was hugely favorable and kind. She basked and thrived on it all. She was schooled in RF expectations and protocols. She did not go into this marriage blindly. Where was she ever going to get more attention and fame than she ever thought possible?

So she gets the 50 million dollar world televised wedding. In regard to their wedding guests, if you get invited to one of the highest level Royal weddings ever, who's going to turn it down?  It's catnip for all the guests--Oprah, Amal, whoever, they're used to make M&H look better. She gets Frogmore, all the royal trappings and luxuries. Then Archie. Then the "boo hoo poor me" trip in Africa. "The Media are so mean." They go on a 6 week break. So MM keeps Archie stashed in Canada while she and Harry go to England to drop the "we quit but we still want most of the $$" bomb on the RF. MM rushes back to Archie, Harry deals with the chips.

That rotten mean Media manage to discover a gloating Lululemon wearing MM walking her dogs and dangling Archie all at the same time. Not for a minute do I believe MM "got in over her head", IMO she wanted the lifestyle and willingly dove headfirst into it. Of course the Media are vicious, so why did she gift them tons of ammunition? IMO so she could claim "Victim! poor me!" to bolster their case of breaking up the RF. Like a previous poster said, Harry has selective PTSD. Then we learn MM has been setting up companies for a year. Harry pitched her to Iger for work. Somebody else stated MM is a sociopath. A year ago I might have thought that was a stretch. Now? I might agree. And Harry is a willing dupe. The BRF got Markled.


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> I don't think that's unreasonable and agree with you that this thread may be slanted too much to one side. It's not you being unreasonable per se but I do think you might also be biased more to one side because you were missing some of the context and you didn't even realise that you are missing it.



I can appreciate that. I truly haven't followed Meghan or Harry much so I am likely missing a lot of things you guys have seen. Can't claim to have the full picture... just drawing some conclusions on very specific, limited things (eg her friendship with Serena).


----------



## lalame

Meghan's actual personality aside, I think the tragedy is if she had given it a longer go, she might have just actually blown right through the negativity and ended up on the other side like Kate did. I had a lot of empathy for her when she said "it's not good enough just to survive," but... girl.... you really should've given it a bit more time. One year is not enough to judge a relationship to a royal, one year is not enough to judge a lifestyle, and one year is not enough to judge a whole institution. :/ I wonder if Harry was just already so fed up with the lifestyle, he went along a little TOO much instead of pushing back and challenging her to stick it out longer.


----------



## hockeygirl

lalame said:


> Dude, what is that proof of... if you meet your husband's friends, and you all become friends... wedding day comes, are people REALLY still sticklers for which side to sit on? I've sat on the "Wrong" side plenty of times, and people have done so at my wedding too!



This wasn’t just ”any” wedding, certainly not a casual or even formal American wedding.  This was a British royal wedding of Prince Harry, grandson of the Queen.  People don’t just sit on the ”wrong” side.


----------



## hellosunshine

jess236 said:


> As for her being a sociopath because she is smiling. I think that it would have been better for her not to be photographed that way because it definitely gives the impression that she could care less.



I don't see the big deal with her smiling - who cares. She looks content and happy to get some fresh air, she’s walking alongside her dogs, has her precious son close to her chest, and most importantly her husband was enroute to her! All logical reasons to smile and be joyful.


----------



## DreamingBeauty

I had never even heard of Meghan until she was dating Harry and really didn't pay attention until they got engaged and she was all over the internet.  She got what she wanted (fame, household name, money) but I guess it holds true, "Be careful what you wish for." Maybe her old life acting on Suits and bit parts and blogging weren't so bad after all?


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> Just an fyi for anyone who needs it - you can put certain posters on Ignore and make this thread easier for you to read.


But, when others reply to them, it quotes the post.

I am fairly certain that she is lovin all the attention, paps, twitter etc.

ETA
I guess I was wrong. My apology for posting incorrect information. I seriously thought it did. I thought I had had it happen a long time ago.


----------



## jess236

hellosunshine said:


> I don't see the big deal with her smiling - who cares. She looks content and happy to get some fresh air, she’s walking alongside her dogs, has her precious son close to her chest, and most importantly her husband was enroute to her! All logical reasons to smile and be joyful.



I disagree. It is a big deal that she is smiling. She's not just a casual mom on a walk with her son and dogs.  There is a world-wide media hoopla about her at the moment.  Neither the Royal family nor her husband are happy about the fallout and the end result.  She looks like she doesn't have a care in the world.   This is not a great resolution or a celebratory experience.  

Her dumb grin doesn't look good.  It also highlights she is happy to see the photographers that she apparently has filed a lawsuit against.  Mixed messages galore.


----------



## mdcx

threadbender said:


> But, when others reply to them, it quotes the post.
> 
> I am fairly certain that she is lovin all the attention, paps, twitter etc.


Not for me - I just see the reply without the ignored post, so there is no context to some of what I read  I can select ‘Show Ignored Content’ if I feel I am missing something good.


----------



## mdcx

jess236 said:


> I disagree. It is a big deal that she is smiling. She's not just a casual mom on a walk with her son and dogs.  There is a world-wide media hoopla about her at the moment.  Neither the Royal family nor her husband are happy about the fallout and the end result.  She looks like she doesn't have a care in the world.   This is not a great resolution or a celebratory experience.
> 
> Her dumb grin doesn't look good.  It also highlights she is happy to see the photographers that she apparently has filed a lawsuit against.  Mixed messages galore.


To me the dumb grin illustrates nicely why MM found the BRF hard going - she doesn’t adjust her behaviour according to what is appropriate, but “does what she feels”. Having grown up around that, its very invasive and demanding on others.


----------



## jess236

mdcx said:


> To me the dumb grin illustrates nicely why MM found the BRF hard going - she doesn’t adjust her behaviour according to what is appropriate, but “does what she feels”. Having grown up around that, its very invasive and demanding on others.



She is a public figure who agreed willingly to join the BRF. She HAS to adjust her behavior.
And yes, a nobody from the United States is not in a position to change the centuries old traditions.
Learning how to behave with decorum is important.  That means not elbowing people out of the way or talking over others or pushing yourself to the front of the line.  These are the basics.


----------



## lalame

jess236 said:


> I disagree. It is a big deal that she is smiling. She's not just a casual mom on a walk with her son and dogs.  There is a world-wide media hoopla about her at the moment.  Neither the Royal family nor her husband are happy about the fallout and the end result.  She looks like she doesn't have a care in the world.   This is not a great resolution or a celebratory experience.
> 
> Her dumb grin doesn't look good.  It also highlights she is happy to see the photographers that she apparently has filed a lawsuit against.  Mixed messages galore.



I think the smile was also very odd. Harry's photos at the airport were similar.... they were probably happy to be together again and there's probably some relief in the sense of "thank god that's all done (tough week)." But it just doesn't come off right. At best, clearly people believe she staged it. At worst, she comes off totally out of touch or even basking in the sad moment. This kind of reminds me of that Hillary in the woods, day-after photo except you could see the sadness in Hillary's eyes. This is a very different expression.


----------



## Lodpah

To sum Meghan up, its very simple.
1. She hates being upstaged.
2. She wants to be the center of attention.
3. She’s vindictive because the BRF have protocols which did not make her the center of attention.
4. She is divisive and pulling Harry away from his family and his love of Africa and the military was an FU to the BRF.

Lots more but why can’t people realize that there are some seriously depraved people in the world, even famous people. 

She did not want bridesmaids and she wanted to walk alone during her wedding so that all eyes are on her.

Y’all ever watched the movie “The Hand that Rocks the Cradle is the Hand that Rules the World?”

In any event her doing her pap walk and those eyes of hers are simply demonic. Yes I said it. I can count on only one hand in my lifetime 2 fingers that I have ever come across online or tv that exhibit that chill me to the core.

Seriously look up Chucky’s Bride and compare her eyes to MM. Songs have been written about women like her. She’s evil. There’s a saying some people shine like angels of light but inside are ravenous wolves. 
Only 2 people that I have ever felt their spirits are just pure evil and she’s one of them. Evil in the sense of their motives toward others, a dangerous woman this MM.


----------



## threadbender

mdcx said:


> Not for me - I just see the reply without the ignored post, so there is no context to some of what I read  I can select ‘Show Ignored Content’ if I feel I am missing something good.


Mmm, cool. I guess I was wrong. I could have sworn I saw them. But, it was a long time ago. lol
Thank you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

VigeeLeBrun said:


> That staged walk in the woods "alone", see it's just me, my dogs , my child and oops, a few paps.


I thought she had her yoga friend staying in the oligarchs pile with her?  I don’t understand why she’s traipsing about in the woods alone, it would’ve looked a bit more natural if she’d had her friend with her.
Meghan is going to be her own undoing IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> The rumour is that William conveyed this very advice to Harry - wait, you hardly know each other, she’s not ready to take on the role. Harry was offended, probably told Meghan. This started the rift between the brothers.
> It is possible for an “outsider” to marry in - see Mary marrying into the Danish royal family - but _they_ have to assimilate and change.



I mean...Mette Marit of Norway. Single mom with slightly shady past, yet she did well. Maxima of the Netherlands was in her 30s and a career woman too, did you ever read of any scandal (besides her father's political affiliations)? This is not a problem of being an indipendent woman who suddendly has to follow rules, it's a  problem of MM feeling she's above it all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> To me the dumb grin illustrates nicely why MM found the BRF hard going - she doesn’t adjust her behaviour according to what is appropriate, but “does what she feels”. Having grown up around that, its very invasive and demanding on others.



OMG yes. I once had to snag a condolence card written to a neighbour that basically read "Good thing [sick elderly father] died". When confronted about it because even if someone is sick that's just no appropriate wording the answer was "But this is how I feel! Why wouldn't I say that!" Uhm, maybe because it's inappropriate and not everything is about you and your feelings?


----------



## PatsyCline

kissmysass said:


> I do not understand how people do not see that this was staged. They spent 6 weeks in canada did not see much of them. All of sudden they breakaway from the treacherous and we see them daily.
> 
> Then has the nerve to smile like a Cheshire cat and get mad that the pictures were taken?
> 
> Make it make it sense.


They were laying low before, and the press didn’t know where they were. Now they do. No huge conspiracy, no hidden agenda. 

Now that they’ve withdrawn from royal duties they’re starting to try and figure out what they’re going to do.


----------



## threadbender

I can't remember where I saw it but I believe M&H have released a new insta post or something talking about their great love. Whatever.


----------



## mdcx

threadbender said:


> I can't remember where I saw it but I believe M&H have released a new insta post or something talking about their great love. Whatever.


I just see this one -M trying to upstage Kate:


----------



## mdcx

The comments section of the above story is very entertaining, one example:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7915141/Meghan-Markle-reveals-visit-dog-rescue-centre-two-weeks-ago.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I just see this one -M trying to upstage Kate:
> View attachment 4646650


I find this behaviour really weird.


----------



## doni

Charles said:


> It's not really that.  They're totally being reported on.  I mean, they're fun to watch and check out their style, but the reason Harry and Megan aren't being ragged by the US media is cause we don't care about the protocol and pomp and manners and rituals, so when someone like MM doesn't follow them, it's not that big of a deal to us.  There are articles about how the British press report on very similar stories between Kate and Meghan, but how the headlines are much more nastier when it comes to Megan, so most Americans think it's a good thing they're leaving.  We just don't care about the same things that the Brits do, so they don't come across as being bad people over here.



I think this is a fair comment and really the core of this question... I am going to dare to say something that I hope doesn’t offend our American members as it is said from a place of affection (I couldn’t love the US more, it is a fantastic place). One thing all those royals from different backgrounds or from foreign lands who have done well in royal life have in common is: none of them are from the US.  Americans, in general, are just _not the best_ at adapting to other cultures... It is the other side of the amazing ability of American culture to bring people in (and I know this because after less than one year of living in the US no one would have convinced my kids that they were not as American as any one).

If on top you are already in your late 30s and strong minded and what you have to adapt to is the bizarre and by necessity outdated ways of the monarchy... Plus Megan didn’t have to learn a new language, which is always the best way for a foreigner to get to know a new culture. I am convinced that a lot of the criticism that is viewed as racist in the US was in reality chauvinist, aimed at Meghan’s American’s ways more than anything, and she would have got it too had she been a blond instead (maybe more so). There is also something very American in this stomping into a place and wanting to immediately make it better, and change all those wrong ways, like when she said she tried stiff upper lip but it is just _wrong_. It is endearing in a way, but it was never going to work. Harry’s fault more than anything else in any event.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> The comments section of the above story is very entertaining, one example:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ls-visit-dog-rescue-centre-two-weeks-ago.html
> 
> View attachment 4646664


I love this


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> The comments section of the above story is very entertaining, one example:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ls-visit-dog-rescue-centre-two-weeks-ago.html
> 
> View attachment 4646664


LOL


----------



## eunaddict

lalame said:


> I wonder what kind of girl WOULD be a good fit for both this position AND Harry. He seems to like "normal" ladies and working ones at that... so I don't know if he could've fallen for a woman who would've just fallen in line or "speak only when spoken to" as one poster said many pages ago. And yet what type of woman would take this role except someone who would do all of those things. Seems like a lose-lose on his part.



Someone smarter, more patient, more willing to learn. Someone who understands that change occurs slowly and to effect change, you must first become a part of the system, raise to the top and then slowly change the things you deem necessary. Someone who understands the game is loooooong, and marriage is just Round 1.

Like any other industry with strict hierarchies in place - eg. medicine. A fresh medical graduate isn't going to change hospital policies or the way course material is taught at medical schools. No, that fresh-faced, eager young man or woman must wait till they've climbed the ranks, earned their place and the respect of their peers and THEN, be the change they want to see.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh Canada why are you bullying H & M!  

H&M moving to LA after being bullied by Canadians in 5....4...3.....2....1.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...pay-Harry-Meghans-security-costs-MP-says.html


----------



## Annawakes

Add another thing that irritates me about her.  Always releasing stuff to overshadow other royals’ big news.  Lots of examples already, I won’t cite them.

This dog rescue pic that is 2 weeks old.  She held onto it and now decides to release?  Just waiting to compete in the news with Kate’s initiative? 

It’s so transparent.  So transparent!  Once maybe twice ok.  But too many times to document now.  This and the ghosting.  At this point it’s well documented this is the kind of person she is.  I don’t believe anyone can argue that anymore.  1. She upstages (or tries to).  2. She ghosts.


----------



## rose60610

Someone may have mentioned before, Reuters article on Jan. 10 stated H&M likely to pattern themselves after *****'s, Harry already has teamed up with Oprah on a documentary about mental health (hmmm, Oprah claims she had nothing to do with influencing them to leave The Crown), and with speaking fees, MM's "huge influence" in fashion, bla bla bla they could make fortunes. 

Oh, they probably could. It'll be interesting to see what happens. There's always going to be a big enough following to keep them wealthy. Other previous huge personalities had tons of influence, more potential and power, then fizzled, but they still make a good buck making rounds on the "has been" circuits. If MM is making more money hand over fist being in the center of the spotlight she'll be smugly elated. If there's a wane in business she'll bale (Harry Who?) and go the marry an oligarch route. I think she has a well established flow chart.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

tiktok said:


> Bottom line, she may or may not be a horrible person, but even a totally random, anonymous person moving countries from the US to the UK, planning a huge wedding, adjusting to married life, getting pregnant, having a baby for the first time in their life, all within 2 years, would be close to a nervous breakdown. Add to that the royal family traditions and obligations, the media, the brand new “profession” as a senior royal - yes, no one on the planet would be having fun under that level of turmoil and change. To say she didn’t even give it a chance is an understatement. I moved cities within the US and it took me nearly 2 years to truly feel at home in my new city. Any reasonable adult knows to give these things time.


Does this excuse her behavior by taking photos of Buckingham Palace when rules are clearly in place to prohibit that.  For someone who is dating the Prince (at the time) and can not respect this basic, simple request, says so much about Meghan's character.  I am baffled he married her...


----------



## lanasyogamama

doni said:


> I think this is a fair comment and really the core of this question... I am going to dare to say something that I hope doesn’t offend our American members as it is said from a place of affection (I couldn’t love the US more, it is a fantastic place). One thing all those royals from different backgrounds or from foreign lands who have done well in royal life have in common is: none of them are from the US.  Americans, in general, are just _not the best_ at adapting to other cultures... It is the other side of the amazing ability of American culture to bring people in (and I know this because after less than one year of living in the US no one would have convinced my kids that they were not as American as any one).
> 
> If on top you are already in your late 30s and strong minded and what you have to adapt to is the bizarre and by necessity outdated ways of the monarchy... Plus Megan didn’t have to learn a new language, which is always the best way for a foreigner to get to know a new culture. I am convinced that a lot of the criticism that is viewed as racist in the US was in reality chauvinist, aimed at Meghan’s American’s ways more than anything, and she would have got it too had she been a blond instead (maybe more so). There is also something very American in this stomping into a place and wanting to immediately make it better, and change all those wrong ways, like when she said she tried stiff upper lip but it is just _wrong_. It is endearing in a way, but it was never going to work. Harry’s fault more than anything else in any event.



I’m not offended. I remember talking to my cousin when they got engaged, and I said for me it was more shocking that he married an American than anything else.

I unfollowed Sussexroyal on Instagram. I’m sure they’ll be heartbroken, but there are other 11 million followers will keep them going.


----------



## imgg

Meh-gan said:


> The minute she started dating Harry she was everywhere. Every paper every website etc. IF she was that close with Serena and the Clooneys etc for years pre Harry, she would have been spotted with them doing something. These are mega famous people. Their friends are well known as someone pointed out. MM would not be “girl giving head” on a TV show and in the credits as “hot girl” if she had a legit friendship with George effing Clooney.
> 
> And where are they all now? She caused the biggest, lamest drama and everyone is like nope.
> 
> Like girl come on.


One would think if Meghan was friends with Orpah/Clooney's there would be photos by now of them prior to her meeting Harry.  Especially how she loves to promote herself in the media.  Photos of A list celebrities would be all over her D list IG account.


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> I think the smile was also very odd. Harry's photos at the airport were similar.... they were probably happy to be together again and there's probably some relief in the sense of "thank god that's all done (tough week)." But it just doesn't come off right. At best, clearly people believe she staged it. At worst, she comes off totally out of touch or even basking in the sad moment. This kind of reminds me of that Hillary in the woods, day-after photo except you could see the sadness in Hillary's eyes. This is a very different expression.



*I read yesterday that Harry claimed the paps were hiding in the bushes to ambush her and the photos -- in which she appears to be smiling directly at the camera in front of her -- were not staged, but poor girl was taken advantage of again.*



Annawakes said:


> Add another thing that irritates me about her.  Always releasing stuff to overshadow other royals’ big news.  Lots of examples already, I won’t cite them.
> 
> This dog rescue pic that is 2 weeks old.  She held onto it and now decides to release?  Just waiting to compete in the news with Kate’s initiative?
> 
> It’s so transparent.  So transparent!  Once maybe twice ok.  But too many times to document now.  This and the ghosting.  At this point it’s well documented this is the kind of person she is.  I don’t believe anyone can argue that anymore.  1. She upstages (or tries to).  2. She ghosts.



*This is one thing that especially infuriates me.  The maternity outfit she wore (obviously pushing the coat open) at Eugenie's (Bea's?) wedding was truly OTT bad taste.*


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I always thought the Clooneys etc were seated on “the brides side” because there were spaces to fill there.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

rose60610 said:


> Someone may have mentioned before, Reuters article on Jan. 10 stated H&M likely to pattern themselves after *****'s


----------



## mia55

lulilu said:


> *I read yesterday that Harry claimed the paps were hiding in the bushes to ambush her and the photos -- in which she appears to be smiling directly at the camera in front of her -- were not staged, but poor girl was taken advantage of again.*
> 
> 
> 
> *This is one thing that especially infuriates me.  The maternity outfit she wore (obviously pushing the coat open) at Eugenie's (Bea's?) wedding was truly OTT bad taste.*



Is Harry really this stupid to not see all these craziness of her? They must have been taught since their childhood about these gold diggers, how did he not figure out,it’s so transparent. He must be really mentally sick.


----------



## Charles

bag-mania said:


> Well, you're right there. We are used to celebrities pimping themselves out for cash and creating their own narratives for public consumption. An institution like the BRF is unique and that interests many here. I don't think anyone thinks Meghan and Harry are evil people, but they do come across as being hypocritical and whiners. Yes, there were unfair things written about her but there are many things they did that contributed to the dislike of them as a couple in the UK. Those are not being reported here.



I don't find them hypocritical or whiny at all, and neither do most of the US reports I'd seen on them.  Honestly, I've read a lot in this thread, the stories that you claim aren't being reported on in the US.  I've yet to read anything that I didn't feel was somewhat justified on MM's part.  Again, most of us don't care about the things the Brit media does, so when I read a report about her not allowing someone to curtsy before she hugged them and how people in here feel it's some sort of purposeful slight against the queen, I think it's rather...silly.  Or the video that Lodpah posted.  So because MM was seen talking to someone and walking back from the back of Harry's Audi, she's guilty of something?  Guilty of what?  Like, really??  The nerve of her!  Going through her husband's trunk!  I see a woman who was ragged on from the get go and every single thing she did that wasn't perfect, the brit tabloids latched on to.  From there, it just snowballed and people kept piling on.  Now anything she does has a motive or she's trying to destroy the BRF.  Please.  Most of my friends who've commented on it, think it's great they left and support them 100%.  But like I said, we don't care about the things the Brits seem to care about.


----------



## imgg

mia55 said:


> Is Harry really this stupid to not see all these craziness of her? They must have been taught since their childhood about these gold diggers, how did he not figure out,it’s so transparent. He must be really mentally sick.


I think its the attention she brings.  All the attention was on Will and Kate until Megan.


----------



## Sharont2305

Events would have been planned ages ago re Catherine and Charles. 
What wouldn't have been planned ages ago are photos taken 2 weeks ago and "coincidentally" published today!!


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> Events would have been planned ages ago re Catherine and Charles. What wouldn't have been planned ages ago are photos taken 2 weeks ago and "coincidentally" published today!!



So? The argument is still that two photos posted to social media can upstage an entire day filled with events for other SENIOR royals. LOL! You guys are really giving Meghan all this power..wow!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Charles said:


> I see a woman who was ragged on from the get go and every single thing she did that wasn't perfect, the brit tabloids latched on to.  From there, it just snowballed and people kept piling on.  Now anything she does has a motive or she's trying to destroy the BRF.



I really don't think so. When they got engaged the press was very friendly, sympathetic even because of her crazy family. Even though she showed some odd behaviour from the get go (sticking out her tongue at onlookers on that first Christmas church walk? That's cute for 4yo Charlotte, not a 36yo woman). I remember reading an article by an UK journalist saying he along with most of his peers wished her well and were excited for the breath of fresh air. I do agree that at some point it all went horribly wrong, I just strongly feel not a small part is her own fault and not just some evil, oldfashioned media out to get her.


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> So? The argument is still that two photos posted to social media can upstage an entire day filled with events for other SENIOR royals. LOL! You guys are really giving Meghan all this power..wow!


Not for long, we are getting bored of her shenanigans and disregard for the Monarchy.
History will not be nice to her.
ETA, these two photos are more important than the two you mentioned


----------



## Mrs.Z

I don’t think anyone is suggesting Charles and Kate were upstaged.  It’s just another example of Markle’s disrespect for the Royal family, releasing old photos on a day where two working members have important things going on.


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> I find this behaviour really weird.


Kate must have done something that Meghan felt seriously upset or embarrassed by. She's on another continent now and still feels the need to compete. They had the fights over Charlotte's dress and Meghan yelling at Kate's staff, but it must be something else. Maybe Meghan was really put in her place over those incidents - by William or even the Queen - and just harbors the resentment towards Kate. She's a mean girl.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> Kate must have done something that Meghan felt seriously upset or embarrassed by. She's on another continent now and still feels the need to compete. They had the fights over Charlotte's dress and Meghan yelling at Kate's staff, but it must be something else. Maybe Meghan was really put in her place over those incidents - by William or even the Queen - and just harbors the resentment towards Kate. She's a mean girl.


She’s a strange one for sure   I read earlier she just lost another member of her staff as well.


----------



## bag-mania

Charles said:


> I don't find them hypocritical or whiny at all, and neither do most of the US reports I'd seen on them.  Honestly, I've read a lot in this thread, the stories that you claim aren't being reported on in the US.  I've yet to read anything that I didn't feel was somewhat justified on MM's part.  Again, most of us don't care about the things the Brit media does, so when I read a report about her not allowing someone to curtsy before she hugged them and how people in here feel it's some sort of purposeful slight against the queen, I think it's rather...silly.  I see a woman who was ragged on from the get go and every single thing she did that wasn't perfect, the brit tabloids latched on to.  From there, it just snowballed and people kept piling on.  Now anything she does has a motive or she's trying to destroy the BRF.  Please.  Most of my friends who've commented on it, think it's great they left and support them 100%.  But like I said, we don't care about the things the Brits seem to care about.



You must know the British media trashes every woman who marries into the royal family. If you are old enough to remember Diana and Fergie, they really got destroyed in the tabloids in the 80s and 90s. Meghan is only the latest to face a brutal media. And while she got some bad press, she also got just as much glowing, adoring press from other publications, particularly in the US. 

Some thought she would be able to handle the position, that she would have more fortitude, be able to ignore media articles she didn't like, but she couldn't hack it. She loved her $43 million wedding. She loved her titles and trappings. She loved her almost limitless expense account. She didn't love doing the boring ribbon cuttings and small events that were expected of her. She didn't love that she wasn't getting 100% positive press. That's why I see her as being a whiner. She wasn't forced into it, she wanted it! She said that she thought she understood what it meant to be in the royal family, but admitted later she didn't. 

Of course, now she'll be free to pursue her ideal life. She can be a celebrity without having to do any unpleasant work if she isn't feeling it. She can do as many pap strolls as she likes without having to answer to anyone.


----------



## momtok

doni said:


> I think this is a fair comment and really the core of this question... I am going to dare to say something that I hope doesn’t offend our American members as it is said from a place of affection (I couldn’t love the US more, it is a fantastic place).  snip





lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not offended. I remember talking to my cousin when they got engaged, and I said for me it was more shocking that he married an American than anything else.
> snip
> .



I'm not offended either, and I too agree (as An American, and rabid Brit-phile of many decades).  I think I commented many pages back that the first thing I said to hubby/daughter was that Harry should have married a British girl.  I should probably amend that to: at least not an American.  And I've said that repeatedly for exactly this reason.

I've had this conversation multiple times with teen daughter over the last few months, and the way I've been explaining it to her is this ....... think of when a president comes out of our white house with his hair having gone grey.  I say that with a tone of whimsy, but I further explain that while the presidency brings fame and notoriety and "celebrity" in one sense, and yes, people line up to see you and hip hip hooray!,  the _true_ role, and what should remain the true focus, is still about serving the people.  It's a job with real responsibilities and real consequences, and it's not just about prancing about and waving at fans.  You shouldn't be worried about whether or not the cameras are on *YOU*, but whether or not the cameras are on the cause you're highlighting.  And in my opinion, yes, you can tell the difference.  You can tell if the person is thinking, "Is the camera on me?" vs. "Is the camera on this little child I'm highlighting?"  You _can_ tell.  But unfortunately, Hollywood is the only benchmark a lot of Americans have.

If all you're doing is _constantly_ smiling at the camera and thinking it's all about you, that's Hollywood celebrity.  I want to see you taking things seriously.  I _want_ to see you not always smiling, because to me, that means you're taking the role ... the job ... the important task you've been blessed with ... seriously.

(Sorry for the ramble.  I still need caffeine. Going back to lurking.)


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Events would have been planned ages ago re Catherine and Charles.
> What wouldn't have been planned ages ago are photos taken 2 weeks ago and "coincidentally" published today!!





hellosunshine said:


> So? The argument is still that two photos posted to social media can upstage an entire day filled with events for other SENIOR royals. LOL! You guys are really giving Meghan all this power..wow!





Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t think anyone is suggesting Charles and Kate were upstaged.  It’s just another example of Markle’s disrespect for the Royal family, releasing old photos on a day where two working members have important things going on.


I'm wondering if this is not an intentional attempt to upstage on Meghan's part, but more of an attempt to say "oh me too! I'm doing work too in my own way even though I'm thousands of miles away in Canada." As "off" as I think she is, I don't think even she would believe that her two week old photo of visiting an animal shelter would outshine the future king and queen consort. Just a bad attempt to stay relevant rather than outshine, imo.


----------



## hellosunshine

Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t think anyone is suggesting Charles and Kate were upstaged.



Actually, the press is in fact using terms like "overshadow" and "upstage" so yes - they're implying that two photos posted to social media by the Sussex's are eclipsing other senior royals work today.




At the end of the day, Meghan and Harry are no longer working royals, so any future timing of annoucements should not matter.


----------



## Roxanna

daisychainz said:


> Kate must have done something that Meghan felt seriously upset or embarrassed by. She's on another continent now and still feels the need to compete. They had the fights over Charlotte's dress and Meghan yelling at Kate's staff, but it must be something else. Maybe Meghan was really put in her place over those incidents - by William or even the Queen - and just harbors the resentment towards Kate. She's a mean girl.


Kate might have done nothing. Just her existence might have been triggering or perceived as competition to MM.  It is all seems so immature and petty...almost unreal.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> You must know the British media trashes every woman who marries into the royal family. If you are old enough to remember Diana and Fergie, they really got destroyed in the tabloids in the 80s and 90s. Meghan is only the latest to face a brutal media. And while she got some bad press, she also got just as much glowing, adoring press from other publications, particularly in the US.
> 
> Some thought she would be able to handle the position, that she would have more fortitude, be able to ignore media articles she didn't like, but she couldn't hack it. She loved her $43 million wedding. She loved her titles and trappings. She loved her almost limitless expense account. She didn't love doing the boring ribbon cuttings and small events that were expected of her. She didn't love that she wasn't getting 100% positive press. That's why I see her as being a whiner. She wasn't forced into it, she wanted it! She said that she thought she understood what it meant to be in the royal family, but admitted later she didn't.
> 
> Of course, now she'll be free to pursue her ideal life. She can be a celebrity without having to do any unpleasant work if she isn't feeling it. She can do as many pap strolls as she likes without having to answer to anyone.


This!! As much as I have soured on her over the last couple of years, I don't think her intent from the get-go was malicious - she thought she could have her cake and eat it to, and when it proved more "difficult" than she was anticipating, she ran away and fed into Harry's past traumas rather than stick it out and see where the chips would fall.


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> I'm wondering if this is not an intentional attempt to upstage on Meghan's part, but more of an attempt to say "oh me too! I'm doing work too in my own way even though I'm thousands of miles away in Canada." As "off" as I think she is, I don't think even she would believe that her two week old photo of visiting an animal shelter would outshine the future king and queen consort. Just a bad attempt to stay relevant rather than outshine, imo.


Making sure she's not forgotten


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> Kate must have done something that Meghan felt seriously upset or embarrassed by. She's on another continent now and still feels the need to compete. They had the fights over Charlotte's dress and Meghan yelling at Kate's staff, but it must be something else. Maybe Meghan was really put in her place over those incidents - by William or even the Queen - and just harbors the resentment towards Kate. She's a mean girl.


My theory is that Meghan was treated by the family in ways that tradition calls for - Kate was given favored treatment as a higher ranking royal.  Members of the royal family saw this as normal and tradition (illustrated in an early season of The Crown when Phillip complained that he was pushed aside for his young son and Elizabeth deadpan responded "well of course, he'll be king some day"). Meghan, given the experiences she'd had growing up, interpreted it as being tinged with racism. I think that is the root cause of most of the issues.  If it's anything close to this it is totally understandable that Meghan would misunderstand the motivations and be hurt by it ... but again, all that could have been avoided had Meghan and Harry listened to all the warnings to take it slow and make sure that Meghan was ready for this life. But then, given the comments Harry had made about considering leaving the family long before he met Meghan, I think that he always viewed her as a reason to leave if she didn't like it.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> Making sure she's not forgotten


Precisely! Somehow I get the vibe she would not be content with being out of sight, out of mind.


----------



## cafecreme15

LibbyRuth said:


> My theory is that Meghan was treated by the family in ways that tradition calls for - Kate was given favored treatment as a higher ranking royal.  Members of the royal family saw this as normal and tradition (illustrated in an early season of The Crown when Phillip complained that he was pushed aside for his young son and Elizabeth deadpan responded "well of course, he'll be king some day"). Meghan, given the experiences she'd had growing up, interpreted it as being tinged with racism. I think that is the root cause of most of the issues.  If it's anything close to this it is totally understandable that Meghan would misunderstand the motivations and be hurt by it ... but again, all that could have been avoided had Meghan and Harry listened to all the warnings to take it slow and make sure that Meghan was ready for this life. But then, given the comments Harry had made about considering leaving the family long before he met Meghan, I think that he always viewed her as a reason to leave if she didn't like it.


Very possible! I feel like so much of this drama was caused by miscommunication, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding, and Harry and Meghan did not stick around long enough to clear it all up.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Well, Markle’s PR team is working hard to make sure she stays relevant in the press and this thread!!!


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> You must know the British media trashes every woman who marries into the royal family. If you are old enough to remember Diana and Fergie, they really got destroyed in the tabloids in the 80s and 90s. Meghan is only the latest to face a brutal media. And while she got some bad press, she also got just as much glowing, adoring press from other publications, particularly in the US.
> 
> Some thought she would be able to handle the position, that she would have more fortitude, be able to ignore media articles she didn't like, but she couldn't hack it. She loved her $43 million wedding. She loved her titles and trappings. She loved her almost limitless expense account. She didn't love doing the boring ribbon cuttings and small events that were expected of her. She didn't love that she wasn't getting 100% positive press. That's why I see her as being a whiner. She wasn't forced into it, she wanted it! She said that she thought she understood what it meant to be in the royal family, but admitted later she didn't.
> 
> Of course, now she'll be free to pursue her ideal life. She can be a celebrity without having to do any unpleasant work if she isn't feeling it. She can do as many pap strolls as she likes without having to answer to anyone.


This is the exact reason why so many people do not sympathize with her "poor me" attitude "this is so hard" as she is flying private, can buy anything she wants, has her assistants phone Disney to say she will be attending their premier while A List celebrities and executives greet her like royalty, so she can rub elbows to get new jobs.   Does she really think the public is buying her sob story?  Poor me I had to curtsey to Kate.....please.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Actually, the press is in fact using terms like "overshadow" and "upstage" so yes - they're implying that two photos posted to social media by the Sussex's are eclipsing other senior royals work today.
> 
> View attachment 4646807
> 
> 
> At the end of the day, Meghan and Harry are no longer working royals, so any future timing of annoucements should not matter.


That’s how to wear a camel coat!


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s how to wear a camel coat!


ROFL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Mrs.Z said:


> Well, Markle’s PR team is working hard to make sure she stays relevant in the press and this thread!!!



Actually, I'd say the press and people who apparently "dislike" Meghan are the ones keeping her relevant. Seriously, what does it say if photos of a simple visit to an animal shelter can overshadow an 8- year long landmark survey for the future, future Queen Consort and a future King at Davos? Instead of the frustrations and anger being directed at the Sussex's, I wish more people realized that there's room for all as far as it helps people. One couple should not have to dim their lights, so others can shine.


----------



## Annawakes

_xx AGAIN, discuss the celebs/royals NOT the members - mod_

**I** don’t believe she has upstaged anybody.  She tries to, sure.  She tries so hard to.  So hard that it’s ridiculous.

On the other hand, Kate and Charles are dutifully going about their work.  No fuss.  So that is another reason why the press doesn’t make a big fuss about what they’re doing.  It’s “another day at the office” for them.  Which is a good thing.  A great thing!  That’s why their photos aren’t incessantly commented over.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I see Meghan's behavior has become indefensible so the next best thing is Meghan vs. Kate, again.


----------



## hellosunshine

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s how to wear a camel coat!



Has she ever worn a camel coat before? If not, I'm glad Meghan has inspired her to expand her wardrobe choices.


----------



## lalame

I think the social media post today was probably to try to defray the all the scandal of the hiking photos, which I see many people calling out as staged. Like “we don’t stage photos... we sometimes have private events and don’t even release photos.” I think Meghan did not want ALL the scrutiny of the international press as a royal, but it’s just not realistic to think she could be totally private. I’m sure she doesn’t even have that big of an expectation herself... for one, he’s always going to be royal but more importantly they’re always going to need to be relevant and interesting to make money now.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Has she ever worn a camel coat before? If not, I'm glad Meghan has inspired her to expand her wardrobe choices.


The new trend for 2020: Meghan Markle pit stains


----------



## lalame

I’m definitely conflicted about the idea of them making money the good ol’ fashioned celebrity way - product endorsements, photos, tell all’s. I’m American and surely don’t have the same reverence of the royal family as many over there do but even I feel a sense of impropriety about that. It’s tacky. But now that they’ve taken these drastic measures, I also hope Prince Charles won’t keep supporting them financially nor any other government..... and they’ve got to make money somehow. :/ i think they’ve really put themselves in a corner.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> The new trend for 2020: Meghan Markle pit stains


Really? Come on, the lady’s actions are fair game but why even criticize her for something so mundane that happens to everybody.


----------



## joyeaux

rose60610 said:


> like a previous poster said, Harry has selective PTSD. Then we learn MM has been setting up companies for a year. Harry pitched her to Iger for work. Somebody else stated MM is a sociopath. A year ago I might have thought that was a stretch. Now? I might agree. And Harry is a willing dupe. The BRF got Markled.



I agree. I think Harry is pretty impulsive, and has admitted himself he has a _lot _of baggage. When he finds something he’s passionate about, he goes all-in and quickly (the military, the Invictus Games, Meghan). I was struck when they first got together about how much PDA they showed— and I guarantee you that was a deliberate thing they agreed upon get-go. Let’s separate ourselves from the stuffy RF who never touch each other. We are madly in love, and we are putting that all out there, all the time, to be photographed and burned into the public’s mind. And hey, I ate it up with a spoon because I love love. But it has crossed my mind that if they ever were to divorce, the second wife is going to be haunted by the Harry and Meghan era. (Disclaimer: I am NOT saying a divorce will ever happen but if it does)



lalame said:


> Meghan's actual personality aside,  I wonder if Harry was just already so fed up with the lifestyle, he went along a little TOO much instead of pushing back and challenging her to stick it out longer.


I think this is a HUGE part of what has happened and why. Meghan is convincing, and didn’t Harry even say a few years ago that he’d like to be a private citizen? The combo of the 2 of them, and Harry having someone by his side, I’m sure gave him the confidence to make the break.



Charles said:


> I've yet to read anything that I didn't feel was somewhat justified on MM's part.


Do you think she was justified in the “you can’t just survive, you’ve got to thrive” thing though? (Honest question, no snark intended). I think context has a lot to do with most of the opinions here. I totally get thinking that the trunk thing is a conspiracy theory, and as a few have said you can’t “prove” motive even if it seems to be pretty obvious (the dog walking with photos for example). But, for example the baby shower in NYC, or the Wimbledon thing— that’s not conjecture, that’s her _literally putting herself _in situations, and enjoying them, that are just off-putting for the normal citizen. And the “thrive” thing came straight out of her mouth.

Just a friendly counter to your point, not meaning to start anything.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> Really? Come on, the lady’s actions are fair game but why even criticize her for something so mundane that happens to everybody.


It's a counter point to the suggestion that she's a style icon that anyone would try to emulate. She looks an appalling hot mess at all of her events, so I'm unsure as to why it would be suggested that she's influencing the fashion choices of other royals who always look put together and polished.


----------



## lalame

I really hope they’ll stay together (as I hope everyone does) but this is all a lot to deal with for any couple.... once the fresh glow wears off the situation I really wonder how they’ll feel. I have a feeling, in a few years, they’ll look back at this time with regret over the big changes they’ve made,


----------



## daisychainz

lalame said:


> Really? Come on, the lady’s actions are fair game but why even criticize her for something so mundane that happens to everybody.


Maybe because she's help up by her legions of fans as a fashion influencer who looks AMAZING at all her events. Clearly not the case.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> It's a counter point to the suggestion that she's a style icon that anyone would try to emulate. She looks an appalling hot mess at all of her events, so I'm unsure as to why it would be suggested that she's influencing the fashion choices of other royals who always look put together and polished.



She IS a style icon.... and so is Kate of course. They both are, or there wouldn’t be troves of style sites for either one. As to who influenced who, who knows. I’m sure they and their stylists are influenced by lots of people.  Just trying to be balanced here as life is so rarely black and white.


----------



## Sharont2305

Et tu Meghan


----------



## LizzieBennett

momtok said:


> I'm not offended either, and I too agree (as An American, and rabid Brit-phile of many decades).  I think I commented many pages back that the first thing I said to hubby/daughter was that Harry should have married a British girl.  I should probably amend that to: at least not an American.  And I've said that repeatedly for exactly this reason.
> 
> I've had this conversation multiple times with teen daughter over the last few months, and the way I've been explaining it to her is this ....... think of when a president comes out of our white house with his hair having gone grey.  I say that with a tone of whimsy, but I further explain that while the presidency brings fame and notoriety and "celebrity" in one sense, and yes, people line up to see you and hip hip hooray!,  the _true_ role, and what should remain the true focus, is still about serving the people.  It's a job with real responsibilities and real consequences, and it's not just about prancing about and waving at fans.  You shouldn't be worried about whether or not the cameras are on *YOU*, but whether or not the cameras are on the cause you're highlighting.  And in my opinion, yes, you can tell the difference.  You can tell if the person is thinking, "Is the camera on me?" vs. "Is the camera on this little child I'm highlighting?"  You _can_ tell.  But unfortunately, Hollywood is the only benchmark a lot of Americans have.
> 
> If all you're doing is _constantly_ smiling at the camera and thinking it's all about you, that's Hollywood celebrity.  I want to see you taking things seriously.  I _want_ to see you not always smiling, because to me, that means you're taking the role ... the job ... the important task you've been blessed with ... seriously.
> 
> (Sorry for the ramble.  I still need caffeine. Going back to lurking.)


Very well said!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Let’s be real, both these ladies have had stunning moments and “wtf” outfits, chosen by stylists.  Kate has had a much longer time to show us beautiful outfits in the spotlight so I think it is easier to recall those. I love Kate’s style, and generally like meghan’s when she’s not trying to be loyal to her friends in fashion (who I think are hideous stylists). I think she could’ve had a lot of great moments if she had stayed longer in the role... her outfits were getting better over time.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Has she ever worn a camel coat before? If not, I'm glad Meghan has inspired her to expand her wardrobe choices.


Are you kidding?  Kate has a coat wardrobe to die for 


mrsinsyder said:


> The new trend for 2020: Meghan Markle pit stains


Haha, can’t see it catching on myself


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Meghan's actual personality aside, I think the tragedy is if she had given it a longer go, she might have just actually blown right through the negativity and ended up on the other side like Kate did. I had a lot of empathy for her when she said "it's not good enough just to survive," but... girl.... you really should've given it a bit more time. One year is not enough to judge a relationship to a royal, one year is not enough to judge a lifestyle, and one year is not enough to judge a whole institution. :/ I wonder if Harry was just already so fed up with the lifestyle, he went along a little TOO much instead of pushing back and challenging her to stick it out longer.


that whole "not good enough to just survive" is super annoying to me.....just surviving with a loving husband, a baby, fame beyond your wildest dreams (as a d-list actress), tiaras, mansions, A-list friends?  

While those ungrateful hungry people are living the life?

This is the thing that makes me really dislike her.  

and agree, she and harry didn't give it enough time


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> ummm, I see your point that none of us know MM personally so how can we make the assumption, like most of us have - and let me point out that it is not just our fellow tPF members, but also users on social media, esp Insta, and readers of most media outlets throughout the world here and abroad - how could we possibly deduce that MM is just a nasty piece of work?
> 
> Well, she is not a very good actress, is she? Her goals are shallow, her view of herself is so bloviated that she is clueless that the general public does not like her and her schemes one bit.
> 
> And why would anyone ever think that Clooney et al are NOT HER FRIENDS?
> There is a distinct and loud SILENCE from them that absolutely deafens.
> 
> No friends - except that cheesy JM - no family, except her mum, and to compound problems MM just has to play the victim every single second. That staged walk in the woods "alone", see it's just me, my dogs , my child and oops, a few paps that were invited.
> 
> And even then that B-list actress could not take on the role of a caring mother to her child bc she simply is NOT - to MM it appears that everything is always ME, ME ME.
> 
> Well that is one very sick mind.


.. and, to add to that, there ARE people on this thread that DO INDEED know more information on MM’s history going way back, and it’s not favorable. The ghosting (“marbling”) of people no longer useful to her stone stepping is WELL known!!


----------



## cafecreme15

lalame said:


> Let’s be real, both these ladies have had stunning moments and “wtf” outfits, chosen by stylists.  Kate has had a much longer time to show us beautiful outfits in the spotlight so I think it is easier to recall those. I love Kate’s style, and generally like meghan’s when she’s not trying to be loyal to her friends in fashion (who I think are hideous stylists). I think she could’ve had a lot of great moments if she had stayed longer in the role... her outfits were getting better over time.


I actually think Megan's outfits from right before and right after her wedding were the best, where she wore lots of classics but with modern, architectural takes. She seemed to have gotten a bit sloppier over time. Maybe this was intentional on her part, but I am personally not a fan of that look for anyone, let alone a royal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> I actually think Megan's outfits from right before and right after her wedding were the best, where she wore lots of classics but with modern, architectural takes. She seemed to have gotten a bit sloppier over time. Maybe this was intentional on her part, but I am personally not a fan of that look for anyone, let alone a royal.


I agree, the early outfits were much the best, more flattering, and for the most part fitted her.  Things went downhill after the wedding IMO.  So many ill fitting and messy outfits, I never understood that.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I think this is a fair comment and really the core of this question... I am going to dare to say something that I hope doesn’t offend our American members as it is said from a place of affection (I couldn’t love the US more, it is a fantastic place). One thing all those royals from different backgrounds or from foreign lands who have done well in royal life have in common is: none of them are from the US.  Americans, in general, are just _not the best_ at adapting to other cultures... It is the other side of the amazing ability of American culture to bring people in (and I know this because after less than one year of living in the US no one would have convinced my kids that they were not as American as any one).
> well another American actress - and a huge star, not a d-lister - Grace Kelly, managed to adapt to a new culture.  I know this was a long time ago but anyway.....
> If on top you are already in your late 30s and strong minded and what you have to adapt to is the bizarre and by necessity outdated ways of the monarchy... Plus Megan didn’t have to learn a new language, which is always the best way for a foreigner to get to know a new culture. I am convinced that a lot of the criticism that is viewed as racist in the US was in reality chauvinist, aimed at Meghan’s American’s ways more than anything, and she would have got it too had she been a blond instead (maybe more so). There is also something very American in this stomping into a place and wanting to immediately make it better, and change all those wrong ways, like when she said she tried stiff upper lip but it is just _wrong_. It is endearing in a way, but it was never going to work. Harry’s fault more than anything else in any event.


----------



## muchstuff

mdcx said:


> Not for me - I just see the reply without the ignored post, so there is no context to some of what I read  I can select ‘Show Ignored Content’ if I feel I am missing something good.


Weird, sometimes I see the ignored post and sometimes I don’t.


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> For sure... like who really believes Harry or Meghan are good friends with James Corden? George Clooney and Amal in particular I could believe have gotten to know Harry over the years (and met Meghan later on). Didn't one of them say as much?



I think their handlers and publicists just schedule play dates for their clients (famous folks). No real friendships, just get-togethers.


----------



## lalame

cafecreme15 said:


> I actually think Megan's outfits from right before and right after her wedding were the best, where she wore lots of classics but with modern, architectural takes. She seemed to have gotten a bit sloppier over time. Maybe this was intentional on her part, but I am personally not a fan of that look for anyone, let alone a royal.



i like her pre-royal style but right after she got married, I didn’t love her outfits.. especially the Mulroney styled ones. Like the super long baggy trousers or floppy boots or that really inappropriate striped reformation dress. But I think her outfits got way better over time... like thinking of some hits during their tour in Africa.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> that whole "not good enough to just survive" is super annoying to me.....just surviving with a loving husband, a baby, fame beyond your wildest dreams (as a d-list actress), tiaras, mansions, A-list friends?
> 
> While those ungrateful hungry people are living the life?
> 
> This is the thing that makes me really dislike her.
> 
> and agree, she and harry didn't give it enough time



There’s a reason many have struggled before her... like Diana or Fergie or even Harry himself. And even thinking about other super famous and wealthy people where you see all the glitz and glam. But things aren’t always what you see... hence why so much alcoholism, drug abuse etc among rich people who have the money, mansions, etc. I can believe that what we see to be so charming could be an actual awful day to day for someone.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> There’s a reason many have struggled before her... like Diana or Fergie or even Harry himself. And even thinking about other super famous and wealthy people where you see all the glitz and glam. But things aren’t always what you see... hence why so much alcoholism, drug abuse etc among rich people who have the money, mansions, etc. I can believe that what we see to be so charming could be an actual awful day to day for someone.


maybe so but I still think she could try to work through it and save the complaining for people close to her....esp when she wants to be an activist and there are so many people who are Truly Suffering in this world


----------



## cafecreme15

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, the early outfits were much the best, more flattering, and for the most part fitted her.  Things went downhill after the wedding IMO.  So many ill fitting and messy outfits, I never understood that.





lalame said:


> i like her pre-royal style but right after she got married, I didn’t love her outfits.. especially the Mulroney styled ones. Like the super long baggy trousers or floppy boots or that really inappropriate striped reformation dress. But I think her outfits got way better over time... like thinking of some hits during their tour in Africa.


My personal favorites off the top of my head were the Roland Mouret navy clover dress on the eve of her wedding, the off the shoulder blush suit on trooping the colour right after the wedding (I think Carolina Herrera maybe?), the navy dior boatneck to what I think was her first Remembrance Sunday (if it wasn’t that, it was some somber event at Westminster Abbey), plus a couple of her gowns from the Australia/South Pacific tour (the blue cape dress in particular)


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> maybe so but I still think she could try to work through it and save the complaining for people close to her....esp when she wants to be an activist and there are so many people who are Truly Suffering in this world



I totally agree with you... she really, really should’ve given it more time!! It reflects very badly on her and Harry. I would be incredibly hurt if I were his family... like you just meet a girl and bam you’re gone just like that? Maybe that’s part of why he fell for her... he saw her as an “out.”


----------



## Chagall

cafecreme15 said:


> I actually think Megan's outfits from right before and right after her wedding were the best, where she wore lots of classics but with modern, architectural takes. She seemed to have gotten a bit sloppier over time. Maybe this was intentional on her part, but I am personally not a fan of that look for anyone, let alone a royal.


I loved how she looked on her wedding day. The dress was simple and tasteful. She wore minimal fresh makeup that let her freckles show. Sadly she seems to have moved on from that look to heavy make up and no longer looks put together or fresh anymore. It’s like she is grabbing things out of her closet without any thought.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

Chagall said:


> I loved how she looked on her wedding day. The dress was simple and tasteful. She wore minimal fresh makeup that let her freckles show. Sadly she seems to have moved on from that look to heavy make up and no longer looks put together or fresh anymore. It’s like she is grabbing things out of her closet without any thought.


I agree except that I thought the dress was extremely ill fitting throughout the torso. Had that been corrected, the whole look would have been perfect.


----------



## Meh-gan

hellosunshine said:


> Actually, I'd say the press and people who apparently "dislike" Meghan are the ones keeping her relevant. Seriously, what does it say if photos of a simple visit to an animal shelter can overshadow an 8- year long landmark survey for the future, future Queen Consort and a future King at Davos? Instead of the frustrations and anger being directed at the Sussex's, I wish more people realized that there's room for all as far as it helps people. One couple should not have to dim their lights, so others can shine.


Her post didn’t overshadow the senior royals, but the media is pointing out the blatant nature of her posts. They use “overshadow” for dramatic effect. 

The point is that MM clearly and pathetically feels the need to post things so that she can be in the media at the same time too. Like that is just sad and so lame. She is doing it to herself. Not the media and not the people who dislike her.


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> The new trend for 2020: Meghan Markle pit stains


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> She IS a style icon.... and so is Kate of course. They both are, or there wouldn’t be troves of style sites for either one. As to who influenced who, who knows. I’m sure they and their stylists are influenced by lots of people.  Just trying to be balanced here as life is so rarely black and white.


I think the reason she is a "style icon" is that people are interested in her as the American biracial wife of a prince, not because her style is so special


----------



## Meh-gan

lalame said:


> Really? Come on, the lady’s actions are fair game but why even criticize her for something so mundane that happens to everybody.


Speak for yourself. I’ve never once had visible wetness on my shirts. Also the sweater was showing bra through it too. She looks sloppy AF that day sorry


----------



## Chagall

cafecreme15 said:


> I agree except that I thought the dress was extremely ill fitting throughout the torso. Had that been corrected, the whole look would have been perfect.


I agree that was the one drawback. Loved the concept though. She seems to have trouble getting a good fit on her clothes.


----------



## mshermes

The more I learn about all the soul-crushing issues MM had that caused her hasty departure, the more I give kudos to Kate.


----------



## lalame

Meh-gan said:


> Speak for yourself. I’ve never once had visible wetness on my shirts. Also the sweater was showing bra through it too. She looks sloppy AF that day sorry


Well you’re lucky then as this is a very common thing. I don’t know who you DO think is glamorous or above this but I’ve seen this on everyone from Halle Berry to Gwyneth Paltrow. It’s obviously embarrassing but not a big deal, certainly doesn’t reflect on a person’s style.

The bra, yeah for some reason Meghan has a habit of wearing ill fitting bras.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> Well you’re lucky then as this is a very common thing. I don’t know who you DO think is glamorous or above this but I’ve seen this on everyone from Halle Berry to Gwyneth Paltrow. It’s obviously embarrassing but not a big deal, certainly doesn’t reflect on a person’s style.
> 
> The bra, yeah for some reason Meghan has a habit of wearing ill fitting bras.


I think it does reflect on a persons style.  Poor grooming isn’t stylish IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it does reflect on a persons style.  Poor grooming isn’t stylish IMO.


It's possible this perspiration thing wasn't "normal" for her.  If she knows this happens, the she should have been prepared.  But if it was unusual then maybe she didn't expect it.  This doesn't happen to me so IDK.


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it does reflect on a persons style.  Poor grooming isn’t stylish IMO.


Come on - this has even happened to Kate. Kate’s not stylish or is a poor groomer? You guys have sky high standards for women.




These ladies get photographed hundreds of times from all sorts of unflattering angles. I’m just giving them the pass to be human and not look impeccable all the time... if this was really common for them then that’s another story.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> It's possible this perspiration thing wasn't "normal" for her.  If she knows this happens, the she should have been prepared.  But if it was unusual then maybe she didn't expect it.  This doesn't happen to me so IDK.


I think it was down to her clothing choices.  It was quite a warm day here that day, yet she chose to wear a jumper and heavy coat.  And most of the appearance was indoors, not outside.  It might’ve been what she’d planned to wear,  but given the weather there should really have been a change of outfit.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> Come on - this has even happened to Kate. Kate’s not stylish or is a poor groomer? You guys have sky high standards for women.
> 
> View attachment 4646902
> 
> 
> These ladies get photographed hundreds of times from all sorts of unflattering angles. I’m just giving them the pass to be human and not look impeccable all the time... if this was really common for them then that’s another story.


I’m not into the Kate v Meghan thing.  This picture doesn’t change my point of view.  But hey, speedy Googling on your part.  Congrats.


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m not into the Kate v Meghan thing.  This picture doesn’t change my point of view.  But hey, speedy Googling on your part.  Congrats.



I mentioned other people but I figured the bar was higher for royals, so I looked up Kate. My point is it happens to many women, stylish or not. What IS your point of views... that no woman can be stylish if she finds herself in this situation or is it only Meghan?

And I’m not trying to change your mind; we’re just discussing opinions here. I’m only responding to your posts because they are interesting opinions.


----------



## Swanky

How about we stop the incessant bickering?  Pits sweat sometimes, big whoop, nothing to debate lol
We've continued to temporarily ban and permanently ban members who can't seem to respond without getting personal, and we'll continue to do so.
So play nice, discuss the celebs, not the members and stay on topic please.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> I mentioned other people but I figured the bar was higher for royals, so I looked up Kate. My point is it happens to many women, stylish or not. What IS your point of views... that no woman can be stylish if she finds herself in this situation or is it only Meghan?


Cross posted with swanky.


----------



## lalame

At the end of the day, it’s just good fun. Who really loses sleep over whether Meghan looks good or not on any given day (except her stylist or herself).


----------



## duna

What I'd like to know is A) whether they pay a rent to the Russian owner of the house they're staying in and B) since they are not senior royals anymore why do they have security ( British police payed by British taxpayers)?


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> I think this is a fair comment and really the core of this question... I am going to dare to say something that I hope doesn’t offend our American members as it is said from a place of affection (I couldn’t love the US more, it is a fantastic place). One thing all those royals from different backgrounds or from foreign lands who have done well in royal life have in common is: none of them are from the US.  Americans, in general, are just _not the best_ at adapting to other cultures... It is the other side of the amazing ability of American culture to bring people in (and I know this because after less than one year of living in the US no one would have convinced my kids that they were not as American as any one).
> 
> If on top you are already in your late 30s and strong minded and what you have to adapt to is the bizarre and by necessity outdated ways of the monarchy... Plus Megan didn’t have to learn a new language, which is always the best way for a foreigner to get to know a new culture. I am convinced that a lot of the criticism that is viewed as racist in the US was in reality chauvinist, aimed at Meghan’s American’s ways more than anything, and she would have got it too had she been a blond instead (maybe more so). There is also something very American in this stomping into a place and wanting to immediately make it better, and change all those wrong ways, like when she said she tried stiff upper lip but it is just _wrong_. It is endearing in a way, but it was never going to work. Harry’s fault more than anything else in any event.


Okay .. as a Yank (_US American_) .. sad to say, I have to agree with you.  My mother was pure 100% Italian, so very early on, I saw the differences between European cultures and American culture.  As such, I never had an issue going on holiday in Europe and when I had the opportunity to work overseas, I jumped at it.  I quickly realized, however, that many of my US Colleagues were "_well - we do it the AMERICAN way_"; they were loud, boastful and acted extremely immaturely .. frankly, I was appalled.  I was constantly told that I did not fit the "typical" American profile (_thank god_)! On holiday, never would the locals think we were American .. they were shocked when we would tell them.  Bottom line, oftentimes when we would see the "_loud Americans_", we would either go in the opposite direction or let them know that they needed to respect the customs of the country they were visiting.  Sadly, many Americans are extremely xenophobic and fear not being able to speak/understand a foreign language (_like British English is foreign_) .. and just go around expecting that the locals in a foreign country are just going to "know" how Americans do/like things .. REALLY????  

Like many here, this whole BS of Meghan not knowing what she was getting into .. and puhleeze, curtsying bothered her???  WTF???  Not buying it one BIT!!!


----------



## lalame

duna said:


> What I'd like to know is A) whether they pay a rent to the Russian owner of the house they're staying in and B) since they are not senior royals anymore why do they have security ( British police payed by British taxpayers)?



Every news article I read about them, Canadians are saying “I hope we’re not paying for that.” I agree! Maybe Prince Charles? About the house, if it’s not a personal friend, don’t they HAVE to pay for services they get (nothing comped)? Question for the royal experts...


----------



## hellosunshine

duna said:


> What I'd like to know is A) whether they pay a rent to the Russian owner of the house they're staying in and B) since they are not senior royals anymore why do they have security ( British police payed by British taxpayers)?



A- No one knows whether they pay or they're being allowed to stay for free as a goodwill gesture from the owners.

B- Harry and his family are considered high-profile as he's the grandson of the Queen and the son/brother to the future kings. He is a prime target for kidnapping and terroristic attacks, so on those basis..Buckingham Palace said security is a non-issue and it will be provided regardless.


----------



## lulilu

With re MM's ill-fitting clothing, her clothes on the tv show fit beautifully.  I can't believe someone is styling her when her clothing on a cable TV show look infinitely better.  (I know on the show she dressed like a lawyer/paralegal, but if a cable tv stylist can make her look good, a real stylist with access to designer clothing should make her look very put together.


----------



## zen1965

doni said:


> I think this is a fair comment and really the core of this question... I am going to dare to say something that I hope doesn’t offend our American members as it is said from a place of affection (I couldn’t love the US more, it is a fantastic place). One thing all those royals from different backgrounds or from foreign lands who have done well in royal life have in common is: none of them are from the US.  Americans, in general, are just _not the best_ at adapting to other cultures... It is the other side of the amazing ability of American culture to bring people in (and I know this because after less than one year of living in the US no one would have convinced my kids that they were not as American as any one).
> 
> If on top you are already in your late 30s and strong minded and what you have to adapt to is the bizarre and by necessity outdated ways of the monarchy... Plus Megan didn’t have to learn a new language, which is always the best way for a foreigner to get to know a new culture. I am convinced that a lot of the criticism that is viewed as racist in the US was in reality chauvinist, aimed at Meghan’s American’s ways more than anything, and she would have got it too had she been a blond instead (maybe more so). There is also something very American in this stomping into a place and wanting to immediately make it better, and change all those wrong ways, like when she said she tried stiff upper lip but it is just _wrong_. It is endearing in a way, but it was never going to work. Harry’s fault more than anything else in any event.



From a European perspective I do not find this endearing at all. In fact, I find this incredibly patronising and uncalled for. Make it better? Change all those wrong ways? Sorry, just because something is not the American way does  certainly NOT mean it is the wrong way.  Most  Europeans I know greatly appreciate their own respective cultures and do not aspire to the American Way of Life. I have fabulous friends from the US. However, we respect our different backgrounds. And none of us is waiting for MM-alikes to change our supposedly wrong ways.
The British monarchy has been around for centuries. Meghan who considers herself as such an international player should have known better.
I‘ll get off my soap box now.


----------



## lalame

lulilu said:


> With re MM's ill-fitting clothing, her clothes on the tv show fit beautifully.  I can't believe someone is styling her when her clothing on a cable TV show look infinitely better.  (I know on the show she dressed like a lawyer/paralegal, but if a cable tv stylist can make her look good, a real stylist with access to designer clothing should make her look very put together.



Agree. Jessica Mulroney was a disaster.... anyone know if she still is her stylist? Apparently she styles Ms Trudeau as well.


----------



## queennadine

I’m gonna try to put this as delicately as possible...but I truly don’t think MM’s approach to wanting to change/modernize/update the Monarchy has anything to do with her being American. 
I believe it is entirely due to her ideology. 
She clearly thinks she is smarter than most, and that people all over the world can benefit from her great wisdom. Hence the constant social activism, chiding behaviors she believes are dangerous to the environment, not wanting more children due to their carbon footprint  
That’s not American, IMO. That’s indicative of a certain set of beliefs.


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> What I'd like to know is A) whether they pay a rent to the Russian owner of the house they're staying in and B) since they are not senior royals anymore why do they have security ( British police payed by British taxpayers)?


THANK YOU!! .. how is this allowed since the Sovereign Grant specifically prohibited "gifts" .. and god knows, this must exceed that monetary amount!!  The whole notion that they could get themselves into some 'shady' deals, IMO .. should be tricky and likely why the BRF said that they would review this after a certain amount of time!


----------



## Sferics




----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> maybe so but I still think she could try to work through it and save the complaining for people close to her....esp when she wants to be an activist and there are so many people who are Truly Suffering in this world


... and especially when giving an interview whilst in one of the poorest countries of this world.


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> B- Harry and his family are considered high-profile as he's the grandson of the Queen and the son/brother to the future kings. He is a prime target for kidnapping and terroristic attacks, so on those basis..Buckingham Palace said security is a non-issue and it will be provided regardless.


Buckingham Palace said nothing of the sort.   The Queen's statement said they do not comment publicly on the details of security arrangements, and that the matter will be determined by the "well-established independent processes" that are in place to decide whether publicly-funded security is warranted.  In other words, _it's not her decision_.  Scotland Yard are the ones reviewing the security issue.

The Queen's other non-working grandchildren do not get publicly-funded security, so precedent is not on his side.  Additionally, royals who have publicly-funded security all live in the UK.  They are protected when they travel, but under the model that their time abroad is not indefinite.  

If Harry and Meghan establish permanent residence abroad and maintain their status as "internationally protected people" then it creates a legal problem as some countries, such as Canada, will be required by law to participate in their protection, which costs a substantial amount of money that the majority of Canadians do not want to pay.

I think Harry and Meghan will wind up with private security that Charles will pay for.


----------



## mshermes

When anyone is in the public eye, they are open to scrutiny and criticism. That is simply how it is. People make choices in life. Meghan was not born into the public eye....she chose it over and over. She married into the RF and she is not some twenty something, starry eyed no nothing. And, by choice, she is going to continue to be in the public eye...open to scrutiny and criticism.  So....she didn’t like to curtsy, she didn’t want to be told what charities she should engage, she wants to keep Archie out of the picture? We just saw him dangling by one strap off her shoulder. So....it seems to boil down to Meghan wants to do what Meghan wants when Meghan wants and call all the shots. Not particularly good traits for a mother IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

Flatsy said:


> Buckingham Palace said nothing of the sort.   The Queen's statement said they do not comment publicly on the details of security arrangements, and that the matter will be determined by the "well-established independent processes" that are in place to decide whether publicly-funded security is warranted.  In other words, _it's not her decision_.  Scotland Yard are the ones reviewing the security issue.
> 
> The Queen's other non-working grandchildren do not get publicly-funded security, so precedent is not on his side.  Additionally, royals who have publicly-funded security all live in the UK.  They are protected when they travel, but under the model that their time abroad is not indefinite.
> 
> If Harry and Meghan establish permanent residence abroad and maintain their status as "internationally protected people" then it creates a legal problem as some countries, such as Canada, will be required by law to participate in their protection, which costs a substantial amount of money that the majority of Canadians do not want to pay.
> 
> I think Harry and Meghan will wind up with private security that Charles will pay for.


This is what Meghan had on her jaunt through the woods.....


----------



## mrsinsyder

How does she not feel so embarrassed?


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> How does she not feel so embarrassed?


No conscience?


----------



## zen1965

mshermes said:


> …, she wants to keep Archie out of the picture? We just saw him dangling by one strap off her shoulder. .....


----------



## Mrs.Z

hellosunshine said:


> Actually, I'd say the press and people who apparently "dislike" Meghan are the ones keeping her relevant. Seriously, what does it say if photos of a simple visit to an animal shelter can overshadow an 8- year long landmark survey for the future, future Queen Consort and a future King at Davos? Instead of the frustrations and anger being directed at the Sussex's, I wish more people realized that there's room for all as far as it helps people. One couple should not have to dim their lights, so others can shine.


It is your opinion that her thirsty pics overshadow the work of Senior Royals, others simply view them as a disrespectful distraction.  
Moreover, Markle appears to legally own or be profiting from all the recent pics we see of her so clearly Markle herself (or her PR team) are the ones desperately trying to keep her in the press and relevant.  
Markle can be free if she wants to ...I wish her well.....but why publicly disrespect your in-laws, even if you don’t like them.


----------



## Mrs.Z

cafecreme15 said:


> I actually think Megan's outfits from right before and right after her wedding were the best, where she wore lots of classics but with modern, architectural takes. She seemed to have gotten a bit sloppier over time. Maybe this was intentional on her part, but I am personally not a fan of that look for anyone, let alone a royal.


Agreed, I absolutely loved her style in the beginning.  It was so fresh and modern.  After the baby, things just went downhill.  Her body slightly changed after baby but suddenly nothing fit correctly and then she did start to look a bit messy.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Sferics said:


> View attachment 4646941


Oh this is hilarious!


----------



## josieblime

tiktok said:


> Bottom line, she may or may not be a horrible person, but even a totally random, anonymous person moving countries from the US to the UK, planning a huge wedding, adjusting to married life, getting pregnant, having a baby for the first time in their life, all within 2 years, would be close to a nervous breakdown. Add to that the royal family traditions and obligations, the media, the brand new “profession” as a senior royal - yes, no one on the planet would be having fun under that level of turmoil and change. To say she didn’t even give it a chance is an understatement. I moved cities within the US and it took me nearly 2 years to truly feel at home in my new city. Any reasonable adult knows to give these things time.


Exactly! But it doesn’t seem like they did give it time. Only 20 months in and much of that time on various breaks from royal duty, I don’t see how she could have given it an earnest try. I feel like Harry would spout off how he wanted to leave it all behind and M took it and ran with it. “Oh, Harry! You can leave. You deserve to be happy! I’ll take you away from all this!”  Too many things were in the works for too long to imagine this plan was of recent vintage or that it evolved after a lengthy time of M trying to fit in.


----------



## V0N1B2

Welltraveled! said:


> interesting read
> 
> View attachment 4645812
> View attachment 4645813
> View attachment 4645814


Just for the record, copying the entire Privacy act here:
Note the two exceptions circled.  The media/paparazzi will maintain that the story of this couple is public interest.  I only post this because listening to talk radio last night, they said that the couple may end up with a fight on their hands due to the public interest angle - they were kind enough not to mention Meghan calling the paps herself.
Please also note for anyone unfamiliar with where they are staying... There are no paps just casually hanging out in Victoria/Saanich area.  I am also waiting to see these invasive photos because AFAIK, there haven't been any pictures published of Meghan on the grounds of the estate where they are staying.  An estate large enough (at almost four acres) I might add, that she could easily walk around the property with her dogs without being seen.  She was photographed on a public trail, accessible to anyone and everyone because.... KATE!!!  Nah, I'm kidding - because she _wanted_ to be seen and photographed.  Anyone who doesn't get this is willfully naive and/or being obtuse.


----------



## youngster

Anyone else think that we might see Meghan at the Academy Awards next month, Meghan at the Vanity Fair party, Meghan at the Superbowl, Meghan at Fashion Week in Paris?  Maybe this would be pushing Harry too far too soon, after all, they're trying to live a quiet, more private life.  Still, can't imagine that her PR firm isn't trying to get her into at least one or two of these events.


----------



## prettyprincess

youngster said:


> Anyone else think that we might see Meghan at the Academy Awards next month, Meghan at the Vanity Fair party, Meghan at the Superbowl, Meghan at Fashion Week in Paris?  Maybe this would be pushing Harry too far too soon, after all, they're trying to live a quiet, more private life.  Still, can't imagine that her PR firm isn't trying to get her into at least one or two of these events.


Ooh I hope she attends the academy awards!!!  I’d love to see what she’d wear


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Ooh I hope she attends the academy awards!!!  I’d love to see what she’d wear


well, if she does she will have plenty of competition from real movie stars


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Anyone else think that we might see Meghan at the Academy Awards next month, Meghan at the Vanity Fair party, Meghan at the Superbowl, Meghan at Fashion Week in Paris?  Maybe this would be pushing Harry too far too soon, after all, they're trying to live a quiet, more private life.  Still, can't imagine that her PR firm isn't trying to get her into at least one or two of these events.



She will go to any big ticket event where she can score an invitation. If she could wrangle a chance to be a presenter at the Academy Awards she would be over the moon. She is ready to be SEEN, baby!


----------



## bag-mania




----------



## youngster

Harry:  _But, Meghan darling, aren't we trying to live a quiet, more private life, of doing good and public service?_
Meghan:  _Well, you know, H, my appearing at the Oscars is a service to my public!_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

V0N1B2 said:


> Just for the record, copying the entire Privacy act here:
> Note the two exceptions circled. The media/paparazzi will maintain that the story of this couple is public interest. I only post this because listening to talk radio last night, they said that the couple may end up with a fight on their hands due to the public interest angle -


Pretty much all ********ic nations have freedom of the press that allows the photographing of and reporting on of people of public interest.   As members of the British royal family, with public funding and security, Meghan and Harry have* zero* case when it comes to claiming they aren't legitimately people of public interest.


----------



## hellosunshine

queennadine said:


> She clearly thinks she is smarter than most.



She clearly doesn't just "think" she's smart..she is smart. As a matter of fact, early into the relationship (before the wedding) a palace aide did note that Meghan seemed too smart for everyone in the room with her.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> It is your opinion that her thirsty pics overshadow the work of Senior Royals, others simply view them as a disrespectful distraction.
> Moreover, Markle appears to legally own or be profiting from all the recent pics we see of her so clearly Markle herself (or her PR team) are the ones desperately trying to keep her in the press and relevant.
> Markle can be free if she wants to ...I wish her well.....but why publicly disrespect your in-laws, even if you don’t like them.


Plus your in-laws are paying your allowance


----------



## TC1

LOL "well placed aide"


----------



## queennadine

hellosunshine said:


> She clearly doesn't just "think" she's smart..she is smart. As a matter of fact, early into the relationship (before the wedding) a palace aide did note that Meghan seemed too smart for everyone in the room with her.
> 
> View attachment 4647067



I can't with this "story"  But I never said she wasn't smart...just that she thinks she's smarter than most people. Which I don't believe to be the case. Truly smart people know their place, manners, decorum, how to treat in-laws...etc.


----------



## gracekelly

Apparently she wasn’t putting that IQ to good use if she didn’t”know anything about the family” and didn’t perform her due diligence regarding them or what would be expected of her.   This wasn’t that different from researching a role, which as an actress, she should  have been familiar with doing.


----------



## hellosunshine

Mrs.Z said:


> Moreover, Markle appears to legally own or *be profiting from all the recent pics we see of her so clearly. *Markle herself (or her PR team) are the ones desperately trying to keep her in the press and relevant.



What's your source for this? Where has it been reported that she's profiting off her photos?


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> Apparently she wasn’t putting that IQ to good use if she didn’t”know anything about the family” and didn’t perform her due diligence regarding them or what would be expected of her.   This wasn’t that different from researching a role, which as an actress, she sound have been familiar with doing.


And to your earlier point, the smartest person in the room is generally not receiving an allowance.


----------



## bag-mania

There is going to be a show on British TV called _Thomas Markle: My Story. _Meghan's daddy gets to vent his frustrations! If any of our UK members see this program, give us a review. At one point he says Harry and Meghan turned the House of Windsor into "a Walmart with a crown on it."


----------



## daisychainz

youngster said:


> Anyone else think that we might see Meghan at the Academy Awards next month, Meghan at the Vanity Fair party, Meghan at the Superbowl, Meghan at Fashion Week in Paris?  Maybe this would be pushing Harry too far too soon, after all, they're trying to live a quiet, more private life.  Still, can't imagine that her PR firm isn't trying to get her into at least one or two of these events.


My sister just asked me this yesterday - will Meghan show up at the Oscars? Maybe not this year, but William and Kate have gone to the BAFTAs numerous times so you know Meghan needs to go to the Oscars at least once.


----------



## LibbyRuth

daisychainz said:


> My sister just asked me this yesterday - will Meghan show up at the Oscars? Maybe not this year, but William and Kate have gone to the BAFTAs numerous times so you know Meghan needs to go to the Oscars at least once.


I think the problem with Meghan going to the Oscars or the Vanity Fair party would be that in that crowd, people would be more excited to see the winners than her ... it wouldn't be much fun for her if she was not the center of attention!


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> And to your earlier point, the smartest person in the room is generally not receiving an allowance.


----------



## daisychainz

LibbyRuth said:


> I think the problem with Meghan going to the Oscars or the Vanity Fair party would be that in that crowd, people would be more excited to see the winners than her ... it wouldn't be much fun for her if she was not the center of attention!


Thanks to the Lion King video I can now imagine Harry working the room asking everyone if they know Meghan can act. Doesn't Elton John host an annual after party? - they totally have an in for that one.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> My sister just asked me this yesterday - will Meghan show up at the Oscars? Maybe not this year, but William and Kate have gone to the BAFTAs numerous times so you know Meghan needs to go to the Oscars at least once.


True, but William is President of BAFTA so, really, he hasn't been going as a guest lol


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. as a Yank (_US American_) .. sad to say, I have to agree with you.  My mother was pure 100% Italian, so very early on, I saw the differences between European cultures and American culture.  As such, I never had an issue going on holiday in Europe and when I had the opportunity to work overseas, I jumped at it.  I quickly realized, however, that many of my US Colleagues were "_well - we do it the AMERICAN way_"; they were loud, boastful and acted extremely immaturely .. frankly, I was appalled.  I was constantly told that I did not fit the "typical" American profile (_thank god_)! On holiday, never would the locals think we were American .. they were shocked when we would tell them.  Bottom line, oftentimes when we would see the "_loud Americans_", we would either go in the opposite direction or let them know that they needed to respect the customs of the country they were visiting.  Sadly, many Americans are extremely xenophobic and fear not being able to speak/understand a foreign language (_like British English is foreign_) .. and just go around expecting that the locals in a foreign country are just going to "know" how Americans do/like things .. REALLY????
> 
> Like many here, this whole BS of Meghan not knowing what she was getting into .. and puhleeze, curtsying bothered her???  WTF???  Not buying it one BIT!!!


I agree with you on the difference between US and European culture. I have spent enough time in the US to say that although we are often lumped together, there is a big difference between the American and Canadian cultures also. We are for the most part a whole lot quieter and conservative (Jessica Mulroney aside). I was recently in a waiting room with two Americans. The Canadians were sitting quietly and whispering among themselves, while the Americans were talking very loudly about Vegas, Miami and other US locations and events. They were seemingly drawing attention to themselves, or maybe trying to put some excitement into the lives of these dull canucks lol. I know this sounds collective and there would obviously be many exceptions, but the border appears to make a difference in outlook. Love the people south of the border though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Mrs.Z said:


> And to your earlier point, the smartest person in the room is generally not receiving an allowance.



It's fine. Soon, they won't be needing that "allowance" unlike the rest of that family freeloading from the public purse.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> She clearly doesn't just "think" she's smart..she is smart. As a matter of fact, early into the relationship (before the wedding) a palace aide did note that Meghan seemed too smart for everyone in the room with her.
> 
> View attachment 4647067


 .. HA! .. yes, well .. there are some that are 'book smart' but 'life dumb', seen it first-hand!


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> I think the problem with Meghan going to the Oscars or the Vanity Fair party would be that in that crowd, people would be more excited to see the winners than her ... it wouldn't be much fun for her if she was not the center of attention!



I didn't realize the Oscars were coming up so soon, less than three weeks. Her PR agency is probably calling in lots of favors as we speak to try to get them some seats. You're right that she wouldn't stand out but it's probably been her life's dream to walk the red carpet so...


----------



## Mrs.Z

If anyone’s freeloading it’s currently H & M, non-working members not supporting themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> It's fine. Soon, they won't be needing that "allowance" unlike the rest of that family freeloading from the public purse.




If the Sussex were still working Royals like the rest of the family they would also, as you say be “freeloading off the public purse.”


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I agree with you on the difference between US and European culture. I have spent enough time in the US to say that although we are often lumped together, there is a big difference between the American and Canadian cultures also. We are for the most part a whole lot quieter and conservative (Jessica Mulroney aside). I was recently in a waiting room with two Americans. The Canadians were sitting quietly and whispering among themselves, while the Americans were talking very loudly about Vegas, Miami and other US locations and events. They were seemingly drawing attention to themselves, or maybe trying to put some excitement into the lives of these dull canucks lol. I know this sounds collective and there would obviously be many exceptions, but the border appears to make a difference in outlook. Love the people south of the border though.


Again .. SOOOOOOOOOOOO true, have experienced it myself.  Having spent a fair amount of time in Canada (business), I honestly seriously thought about moving there because there were many folks who knew a lot more about European culture than what I saw in the US (especially the South - and that's all I'll say about that)!  We were always thought to be Canadian, Scandanavian or German (me = Blonde, husband = brown hair, but Red beard & freckles)!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I didn't realize the Oscars were coming up so soon, less than three weeks. Her PR agency is probably calling in lots of favors as we speak to try to get them some seats. You're right that she wouldn't stand out but it's probably been her life's dream to walk the red carpet so...


Oh yeah .. she could be one of those 'fillers' who sits in the unoccupied stars seats while they are on-stage or have gone to the lavatories!!!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I didn't realize the Oscars were coming up so soon, less than three weeks. Her PR agency is probably calling in lots of favors as we speak to try to get them some seats. You're right that she wouldn't stand out but it's probably been her life's dream to walk the red carpet so...


Yes, and if anyone wants to see celebrities, just go to the various (well-known) Jewelers and/or stylist parties .. that's when you get to see the 'real' celebrities!


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Oh yeah .. she could be one of those 'fillers' who sits in the unoccupied stars seats while they are on-stage or have gone to the lavatories!!!


She gave up being royal for that.


----------



## lanasyogamama

From my light googling, it doesn’t look like she ever went to a major awards show before. I’m sure she would love to walk a real red carpet, vs the USA network upfronts.


----------



## Lounorada

So today has taught me that
1) M is a fashion inspiration to all women having recently being the first woman ever to wear a camel coat in public and therefore inspired us all (especially Kate-the-queen-of-coats) to do the same.
2) M has a genius IQ. Albert Einstein, who?



I mean...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She will go to any big ticket event where she can score an invitation. If she could wrangle a chance to be a presenter at the Academy Awards she would be over the moon. She is ready to be SEEN, baby!


I don't know how she could do that but I guess anything is possible


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> She clearly doesn't just "think" she's smart..she is smart. As a matter of fact, early into the relationship (before the wedding) a palace aide did note that Meghan seemed too smart for everyone in the room with her.


Before the wedding...before anybody heard one of her speeches and realized she's full of incoherent gibberish.

I can see why Meghan and Harry are mad at the media - they thought this kind of smoke would continue to be blown up their rear ends on a daily basis.  What a rude awakening that must have been when the media stopped pretending like Meghan was God's gift to everything.


----------



## jess236

zen1965 said:


> ... and especially when giving an interview whilst in one of the poorest countries of this world.



This is so true! She was complaining about her life while surrounded by extreme poverty and suffering - including the suffering of children and babies - and it didn't place things in perspective for her.  I think most people would feel grateful about even having the basics after visiting some of these places. 

It really shows incredible bad judgment and extreme self-absorption to choose that time and place to complain about her privileged life. It is hard not to conclude that she lacks empathy..


----------



## mshermes

If H&M truly want privacy.......a person I consider a very good role model is Cameron Diaz.  Maybe they should take tips from her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> She gave up being royal for that.


Well, not really .. doubt that she's EVER been to the Oscars!!!


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> It's fine. Soon, they won't be needing that "allowance" unlike the rest of that family freeloading from the public purse.


ha.....we'll see


----------



## V0N1B2

Wasn't Meghan Markle supposed to attend the Academy Awards back in 2018?  I thought the higher-ups quashed that citing it was a "security issue".  At least that's what her PR firm, er I mean LaineyGossip wrote.
I'm sure she'll be there this year though, probably in a poorly tailored dress, messy hair and ill-fitting shoes.  Why should accomplished actresses, get all the attention, amirite?


----------



## mshermes

jess236 said:


> This is so true! She was complaining about her life while surrounded by extreme poverty and suffering - including the suffering of children and babies - and it didn't place things in perspective for her.  I think most people would feel grateful about even having the basics after visiting some of these places.
> 
> It really shows incredible bad judgment and extreme self-absorption to choose that time and place to complain about her privileged life. It is hard not to conclude that she lacks empathy..


With regard to most of the things you mentioned and her "high IQ", I would just like to throw this out for people to peruse. If the shoe fits....

*High IQ*: High-functioning sociopaths often have a higher IQ than other sociopaths or people without personality disorders. This helps them plan, manipulate, and exploit others.
*Lack of empathy*: They find it difficult to empathize with others or understand the emotional consequences of their actions.
*Narcissism*: They often have strong self-love and grandiose self-image. This occurs because of low esteem and delusional beliefs.
*Charming*: Although most sociopaths lack empathy, they are capable of mimicking and manipulating emotions to appear charming and normal.
*Secretive*: A sociopath doesn't feel the need to share intimate details with others- unless they are using them to manipulate others.
*Sexually deviant*: Since they lack guilt, remorse, and emotional attachments, high-functioning sociopaths tend to have affairs and engage in the questionable sexual activity.
*Sensitive to criticism*: Despite their lack of empathy, sociopaths desire the approval of others. They feel entitled to admiration and are quick to anger when criticized.
*Impulsive behavior*: Sociopaths often live in the moment and will do what they feel is needed to reach their immediate goals.
*Compulsive lying:* They will often disregard the truth to make themselves look better or get what they want.
*Needing constant stimulation*: Sociopaths often get bored easily and need to be actively engaged.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how she could do that but I guess anything is possible



Remember the US media is portraying her as being a victim of royal snobbery and British racism. The Hollywood elite will lap that up with a spoon! They will make a place for her if they can, if only to congratulate themselves on being so welcoming and inclusive.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mensa Meghan but she was opening deal or not deal suitcases for a living. 

Ohhhkay


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Mensa Meghan but she was opening deal or not deal suitcases for a living.
> 
> Ohhhkay


But did she ever mess up an opening?


----------



## youngster

Chagall said:


> Love the people south of the border though.



We love you too!  Our Canadian neighbors are the best!


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Mensa Meghan but she was opening deal or not deal suitcases for a living.
> 
> Ohhhkay



But that was all part of her master plan. When you want to marry your way to the top you need to put yourself where rich dudes will see you wearing tight dresses and high heels.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> There is going to be a show on British TV called _Thomas Markle: My Story. _Meghan's daddy gets to vent his frustrations! If any of our UK members see this program, give us a review. At one point he says Harry and Meghan turned the House of Windsor into "a Walmart with a crown on it."


I’m not watching it, sorry.  I’m looking forward to the day all the Markles decide to lead a private life


----------



## youngster

I'd read that rumor too, last year, that she was invited to the Oscars but the Palace said no, you aren't going.  Maybe one of the many things she wanted to do that she hated that she couldn't do.  Walking that red carpet has probably been a major priority her whole life lol.  Could have been true, or could have just been a planted story though.  I think she'd love to go this year, but Harry will probably not want her to, so soon after ditching the family.  The UK press would be all over her for it and Harry at least is going to still be going back to the UK occasionally.  She might have to wait until next year, maybe by then they'll have a documentary they want to promote or something. I do expect to see her at Paris or NYC Fashion week, front row somewhere.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Remember the US media is portraying her as being a victim of royal snobbery and British racism. The Hollywood elite will lap that up with a spoon! They will make a place for her if they can, if only to congratulate themselves on being so welcoming and inclusive.


She’ll need more than one seat surely, won’t they have to clear all the rows around her?


----------



## hellosunshine

Lounorada said:


> 1) M is a fashion inspiration to all women having recently being the first woman ever to wear a camel coat in public and therefore inspired us all (especially Kate-the-queen-of-coats) to do the same.
> 2) M has a genius IQ. Albert Einstein, who?



Wow, such exaggerations! 

Anyway, to move on...Oprah has spoken! See, the video below..


----------



## momtok

Lounorada said:


> So today has taught me that
> 1) M is a fashion inspiration to all women having recently being the first woman ever to wear a camel coat in public and therefore inspired us all (especially Kate-the-queen-of-coats) to do the same.
> 2) M has a genius IQ. Albert Einstein, who?
> 
> View attachment 4647116
> 
> I mean...



So, I haven't been around for a good chunk of the day, and just opened up the current last page of the thread.  I have no idea what the Albert Einstein reference above is about, and I probably won't because a) I probably won't get that far back into old posts, and b) I have a couple posters on ignore anyway so I already suspect it will simply be filtered out.

So with the disclaimer that I am only replying to having seen this comment:
"2) M has a genius IQ. Albert Einstein, who?" .....

My initial response is, "Well isn't one of the Kardashians a lawyer (cough) now or something?  Sounds about right. (snort, sputter, lol )


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I'd read that rumor too, last year, that she was invited to the Oscars but the Palace said no, you aren't going.  Maybe one of the many things she wanted to do that she hated that she couldn't do.  Walking that red carpet has probably been a major priority her whole life lol.  Could have been true, or could have just been a planted story though.  I think she'd love to go this year, but Harry will probably not want her to, so soon after ditching the family.  The UK press would be all over her for it and Harry at least is going to still be going back to the UK occasionally.  She might have to wait until next year, maybe by then they'll have a documentary they want to promote or something. I do expect to see her at Paris or NYC Fashion week, front row somewhere.


See, I think that if she does do that, it's really going to backfire on them!  Think about it, they left the BRF to have a more 'normal family' life (pared down), and remember .. they are to become "financially independent".  Let's face it, 'branding' takes a minimum of 3-5 years (hence the reason why so many Private Equity firms wanted out of the new fashion ventures as they want their ROI in 3 years).  So, if she shows up at these fancy-schmancy fashion shows / parties, etc. -- the question is going to be asked "who is funding this?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Wow, such exaggerations!
> 
> Anyway, to move on...Oprah has spoken! See, the video below..



HA .. as though we really care what Oprah and Gayle King think!!!  PUHLEEZE ...


----------



## lalame

momtok said:


> So, I haven't been around for a good chunk of the day, and just opened up the current last page of the thread.  I have no idea what the Albert Einstein reference above is about, and I probably won't because a) I probably won't get that far back into old posts, and b) I have a couple posters on ignore anyway so I already suspect it will simply be filtered out.
> 
> So with the disclaimer that I am only replying to having seen this comment:
> "2) M has a genius IQ. Albert Einstein, who?" .....
> 
> My initial response is, "Well isn't one of the Kardashians a lawyer (cough) now or something?  Sounds about right. (snort, sputter, lol )



That’s Kim... she’s studying to be a lawyer (edited after being corrected). But I don’t think one’s profession really says anything about their intelligence... sometimes just work ethic, values, etc. maybe emotional intelligence. Not saying you are saying that, just making a general comment.


----------



## CeeJay

momtok said:


> So, I haven't been around for a good chunk of the day, and just opened up the current last page of the thread.  I have no idea what the Albert Einstein reference above is about, and I probably won't because a) I probably won't get that far back into old posts, and b) I have a couple posters on ignore anyway so I already suspect it will simply be filtered out.
> 
> So with the disclaimer that I am only replying to having seen this comment:
> "2) M has a genius IQ. Albert Einstein, who?" .....
> 
> My initial response is, "Well isn't one of the Kardashians a lawyer (cough) now or something?  Sounds about right. (snort, sputter, lol )


Not until the fat lady sings .. translation:  she needs to pass the Bar Exam!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> That’s Kim... she’s in law school. But I don’t think one’s profession really says anything about their intelligence... sometimes just work ethic, values, etc. maybe emotional intelligence. Not saying you are saying that, just making a general comment.


*No*, she is not in law school!  She is getting individualized training via some lawyers here in LA (and SF I believe?) ..


----------



## Annawakes

I’m kind of glad her dad is making a tv show.  Let someone else profit off of her antics.


----------



## lalame

I would be incredibly surprised if Meghan and Harry showed up at the Academy Awards or any high profile award shows except BAFTA to maybe support William. I really hope their route to post-royal life isn’t Hollywood. Anything else, please. I would really like to see them just head up their own charity or something (suppose PC would have to support them for life in that case).


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Well, not really .. doubt that she's EVER been to the Oscars!!!


Not yet but mark my words it’s just a matter of time and a step down from being royal.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Waiting for the outrage that Prince Charles flew via private plane to the DAVOS environmental summit in Switzerland where he's speaking about the environment and sustainability - but of course that won't happen because it's not Harry and Meghan 

And yes, it is relevant to this thread.


----------



## zen1965

hellosunshine said:


> She clearly doesn't just "think" she's smart..she is smart. As a matter of fact, early into the relationship (before the wedding) a palace aide did note that Meghan seemed too smart for everyone in the room with her.
> 
> View attachment 4647067


Oh. Out of the sudden you consider The Sun a suitable and reliable source?
Interesting.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> She’ll need more than one seat surely, won’t they have to clear all the rows around her?



Not at the Oscars. She would be deliriously happy to be rubbing shoulders with all those stars, directors, and studio execs! What better time to hit them up for money-making opportunities? I'm sure she has plenty of ideas for projects she could star in.


----------



## lalame

zen1965 said:


> Oh. Out of the sudden you consider The Sun a suitable and reliable source?
> Interesting.



Actually this is something I’ve always wondered. Which U.K. papers are generally considered reputable and which aren’t? Like generally in the US I believe People is reputable (perhaps too cozy with celebs), Star is not, TMZ maybe.... what is the same breakdown in U.K. where you’d normally get royal news/gossip?


----------



## Mrs.Z

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Waiting for the outrage that Prince Charles flew via private plane to the DAVOS environmental summit in Switzerland where he's speaking about the environment and sustainability - but of course that won't happen because it's not Harry and Meghan
> 
> And yes, it is relevant to this thread.


Oh I saw the article already....it stated his carbon output...will post


----------



## jess236

It's interesting how she had to give up her previous life - her country, her career, her blog, her pets etc. to marry Harry and that didn't work out. Now he has to give up everything - his country, his former patronages, his newphews/neices, his friends etc in order to be with her.  There doesn't seem to be a way for them to meet in the middle. It's kind of hard to make things work when there isn't much in common.


----------



## Mrs.Z

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...tonnes-carbon-launch-sustainable-project.html


----------



## Chagall

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Waiting for the outrage that Prince Charles flew via private plane to the DAVOS environmental summit in Switzerland where he's speaking about the environment and sustainability - but of course that won't happen because it's not Harry and Meghan
> 
> And yes, it is relevant to this thread.


No Charles isn’t perfect and loves his royal trappings but at least he has the sense to fly, as it were, under the radar. He has no need to constantly draw attention to himself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Waiting for the outrage that Prince Charles flew via private plane to the DAVOS environmental summit in Switzerland where he's speaking about the environment and sustainability - but of course that won't happen because it's not Harry and Meghan
> 
> And yes, it is relevant to this thread.


Oh boy, and yes .. agree with that, he shouldn't be flying Private!!!  Will H&M mention this? .. to be seen!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chagall said:


> No Charles isn’t perfect and loves his royal trappings but at least he has the sense to fly, as it were, under the radar. He has no need to constantly draw attention to himself.


Flying under the radar doesn't change the impact of his travel, unfortunately.

All the royals are guilty of this, not only Charles but it grates when they lecture the rest of us on environmentally-friendly travel.


----------



## Chagall

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Flying under the radar doesn't change the impact of his travel, unfortunately.
> 
> All the royals are guilty of this, not only Charles but it grates when they lecture the rest of us on environmentally-friendly travel.


Yes it does but in all honesty I don’t see it changing.


----------



## zen1965

Coming from the UK Davos is not that far away. Charles should have toughed it up for a couple hours sitting with the plebs.
As I keep saying, the entitlement is real with all of them. One of the few things seemingly, Princess Henry did not seem to have a problem with.


----------



## Lounorada

hellosunshine said:


> Wow, such exaggerations!


----------



## pixiejenna

Prince Charles flew in a private plane to a summit about climate change to be photographed with teen activist Greta Thunberg who travels by zero carbon emissions  boats. Guess we know where Harry learned the rules of climate change from lol.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, the early outfits were much the best, more flattering, and for the most part fitted her.  Things went downhill after the wedding IMO.  So many ill fitting and messy outfits, I never understood that.



I haven't followed her closely enough to know the timing but maybe she didn't know how to adapt her style to her pregnancy and post pregnancy body?



Mrs.Z said:


> Agreed, I absolutely loved her style in the beginning.  It was so fresh and modern.  After the baby, things just went downhill.  Her body slightly changed after baby but suddenly nothing fit correctly and then she did start to look a bit messy.



That's what I was thinking. And changes in hormones could also account for the excess sweating?



queennadine said:


> I’m gonna try to put this as delicately as possible...but I truly don’t think MM’s approach to wanting to change/modernize/update the Monarchy has anything to do with her being American.
> I believe it is entirely due to her ideology.
> She clearly thinks she is smarter than most, and that people all over the world can benefit from her great wisdom. Hence the constant social activism, chiding behaviors she believes are dangerous to the environment, not wanting more children due to their carbon footprint
> That’s not American, IMO. That’s indicative of a certain set of beliefs.


----------



## mdcx

Mrs.Z said:


> Agreed, I absolutely loved her style in the beginning.  It was so fresh and modern.  After the baby, things just went downhill.  Her body slightly changed after baby but suddenly nothing fit correctly and then she did start to look a bit messy.


I think she may have accepted all the help/advice from her wardrobe advisors in the beginning. Everything tailored and appropriate. 
At a certain point imo she told them all to take a hike, she knew better.


----------



## zen1965

Lounorada said:


>



OT: I remember as a new member you asked how to embed GIFs your posts. You have certainly mastered you craft in the past years!  Being so smart will you join Meghan at the annual gathering of the Canadian Mensa chapter in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in July this year - wearing a camel coat, of course?


----------



## doni

Harry and Megahn were criticized for using jets for private vacations. To Ibiza and the Côte d’Azur. Right after Harry had lectured about curbing tourism to popular places to fight climate change.

On official duty the royals often fly jet. Including Harry and Meghan or Prince Charles. It is not exactly the same.
In particular Davos. There is no commercial airport and I believe they calculated 1500 private jets were landing there this weekend. Everyone and their mother (with the exception of Greta and hers) gets there by jet. I know people who never take a jet but get to Davos in one.

Personally I abhor all these submits where we are lectured on climate change by people who fly jets and yachts (as in Sicily last year) and in general have twice the average carbon count of normal humans.


----------



## Lounorada

zen1965 said:


> OT: I remember as a new member you asked how to embed GIFs your posts. You have certainly mastered you craft in the past years!  Being so smart will you join Meghan at the annual gathering of the Canadian Mensa chapter in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in July this year - wearing a camel coat, of course?


Oh of course! I wouldn't miss it for the world. Must book my flight for the private jet to Saskatoon because when you're thriving, you take the jet!
Although, how on earth will I decide which camel coat to wear?


----------



## hellosunshine

*Canadian shopkeeper who served Harry glad he has returned ‘home’*

A Canadian shopkeeper who shared a hug with the Duke of Sussex when he visited her home decor store before Christmas said she is happy he has returned “home”.

Chris Stephen owns Lilaberry in Sidney, British Columbia, near to where Harry, the Duchess of Sussex and their baby son Archie are staying as they attempt to forge a new life for themselves.

The duke touched down in Canada on Monday and the family’s arrival has made headlines around the world following their decision to step back from the monarchy.

Residents in Vancouver Island, on the country’s Pacific Coast, have largely welcomed the new arrivals, though many are concerned about taxpayers potentially footing the bill for their security costs.

Ms Stephen, who said she has had a special place in her heart for Harry since watching the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, is glad he has returned after he visited her shop in December.

*She told the PA news agency: “It was funny last night when the news said that he had arrived back, I immediately thought, ‘oh good, I’m glad he’s home’. I don’t have to worry about him. 


 “And when I say worry about him, worry about the press and all the nastiness and negativity that seems to be out there. People passing opinions, who you would think they live under the same roof and know all the ins and outs of what they’re going through.” 
*
Ms Stephen, 60, said life on Vancouver Island has been “a bit of a carnival” since news of the Sussexes’s arrival broke and called on the paparazzi to leave the couple in peace. 


 “Now that the excitement has sort of worn off, they’ve made their plans known, it’s time to just allow them to get on with the changes in their life,” she said. 


 “The paparazzi needs to go home and leave them alone and let them do what is coming natural to them and wanting to be independent and raise their child in peace and be able to do what they want to do and not be hounded. I think it’s time.” 


 Ms Stephens, a mother of three sons, said she has had a soft spot for Harry since Diana’s death and always hoped to one day give him a hug. 


 “As luck would have it, he came into my shop and that emotion came flooding back,” she said. “And I asked and I was granted the opportunity to give him a hug and it’s a gift that I will cherish and carry in my heart forever. 

“It was very special, he was very lovely, and very accommodating and just a nice young man. Just a very, nice, pleasant young man.”

Ms Stephen also said the Sussexes have an open invitation for dinner at her home.

“As a Canadian, I welcome them and I still hope to invite him to dinner and hope he’ll come for a good old Canadian barbecue,” she said.

https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/cf635158c29549208cd1a66c09ed7723/


----------



## Flatsy

doni said:


> In particular Davos. There is no commercial airport and I believe they calculated 1500 private jets were landing there this weekend. Everybody and their mother (with the exception of Greta and hers) gets there by jet.


Me and my mother get to Davos by train.   There is a high-speed train from Zurich airport to Davos that arrives in under two hours.   IMO no celebrities or wealthy people should be talking about climate change while being unwilling to inconvenience themselves even the slightest bit to travel responsibly.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> *Canadian shopkeeper who served Harry glad he has returned ‘home’*
> 
> A Canadian shopkeeper who shared a hug with the Duke of Sussex when he visited her home decor store before Christmas said she is happy he has returned “home”.
> 
> Chris Stephen owns Lilaberry in Sidney, British Columbia, near to where Harry, the Duchess of Sussex and their baby son Archie are staying as they attempt to forge a new life for themselves.
> 
> The duke touched down in Canada on Monday and the family’s arrival has made headlines around the world following their decision to step back from the monarchy.
> 
> Residents in Vancouver Island, on the country’s Pacific Coast, have largely welcomed the new arrivals, though many are concerned about taxpayers potentially footing the bill for their security costs.
> 
> Ms Stephen, who said she has had a special place in her heart for Harry since watching the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, is glad he has returned after he visited her shop in December.
> 
> *She told the PA news agency: “It was funny last night when the news said that he had arrived back, I immediately thought, ‘oh good, I’m glad he’s home’. I don’t have to worry about him.
> 
> 
> “And when I say worry about him, worry about the press and all the nastiness and negativity that seems to be out there. People passing opinions, who you would think they live under the same roof and know all the ins and outs of what they’re going through.”
> *
> Ms Stephen, 60, said life on Vancouver Island has been “a bit of a carnival” since news of the Sussexes’s arrival broke and called on the paparazzi to leave the couple in peace.
> 
> 
> “Now that the excitement has sort of worn off, they’ve made their plans known, it’s time to just allow them to get on with the changes in their life,” she said.
> 
> 
> “The paparazzi needs to go home and leave them alone and let them do what is coming natural to them and wanting to be independent and raise their child in peace and be able to do what they want to do and not be hounded. I think it’s time.”
> 
> 
> Ms Stephens, a mother of three sons, said she has had a soft spot for Harry since Diana’s death and always hoped to one day give him a hug.
> 
> 
> “As luck would have it, he came into my shop and that emotion came flooding back,” she said. “And I asked and I was granted the opportunity to give him a hug and it’s a gift that I will cherish and carry in my heart forever.
> 
> “It was very special, he was very lovely, and very accommodating and just a nice young man. Just a very, nice, pleasant young man.”
> 
> Ms Stephen also said the Sussexes have an open invitation for dinner at her home.
> 
> “As a Canadian, I welcome them and I still hope to invite him to dinner and hope he’ll come for a good old Canadian barbecue,” she said.
> 
> https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/cf635158c29549208cd1a66c09ed7723/



Lmaoooo yeah this person is obviously really concerned with Harry’s privacy. 

I can’t.


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> *Canadian shopkeeper who served Harry glad he has returned ‘home’*
> 
> A Canadian shopkeeper who shared a hug with the Duke of Sussex when he visited her home decor store before Christmas said she is happy he has returned “home”.
> 
> Chris Stephen owns Lilaberry in Sidney, British Columbia, near to where Harry, the Duchess of Sussex and their baby son Archie are staying as they attempt to forge a new life for themselves.
> 
> The duke touched down in Canada on Monday and the family’s arrival has made headlines around the world following their decision to step back from the monarchy.
> 
> Residents in Vancouver Island, on the country’s Pacific Coast, have largely welcomed the new arrivals, though many are concerned about taxpayers potentially footing the bill for their security costs.
> 
> Ms Stephen, who said she has had a special place in her heart for Harry since watching the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, is glad he has returned after he visited her shop in December.
> 
> *She told the PA news agency: “It was funny last night when the news said that he had arrived back, I immediately thought, ‘oh good, I’m glad he’s home’. I don’t have to worry about him.
> 
> 
> “And when I say worry about him, worry about the press and all the nastiness and negativity that seems to be out there. People passing opinions, who you would think they live under the same roof and know all the ins and outs of what they’re going through.”
> *
> Ms Stephen, 60, said life on Vancouver Island has been “a bit of a carnival” since news of the Sussexes’s arrival broke and called on the paparazzi to leave the couple in peace.
> 
> 
> “Now that the excitement has sort of worn off, they’ve made their plans known, it’s time to just allow them to get on with the changes in their life,” she said.
> 
> 
> “The paparazzi needs to go home and leave them alone and let them do what is coming natural to them and wanting to be independent and raise their child in peace and be able to do what they want to do and not be hounded. I think it’s time.”
> 
> 
> Ms Stephens, a mother of three sons, said she has had a soft spot for Harry since Diana’s death and always hoped to one day give him a hug.
> 
> 
> “As luck would have it, he came into my shop and that emotion came flooding back,” she said. “And I asked and I was granted the opportunity to give him a hug and it’s a gift that I will cherish and carry in my heart forever.
> 
> “It was very special, he was very lovely, and very accommodating and just a nice young man. Just a very, nice, pleasant young man.”
> 
> Ms Stephen also said the Sussexes have an open invitation for dinner at her home.
> 
> “As a Canadian, I welcome them and I still hope to invite him to dinner and hope he’ll come for a good old Canadian barbecue,” she said.
> 
> https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/cf635158c29549208cd1a66c09ed7723/


KA-CHING, KA-CHING .. just another person using H&M to sell more goods; give me a break!!!  Too funny ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> *Canadian shopkeeper who served Harry glad he has returned ‘home’*
> 
> A Canadian shopkeeper who shared a hug with the Duke of Sussex when he visited her home decor store before Christmas said she is happy he has returned “home”.
> 
> Chris Stephen owns Lilaberry in Sidney, British Columbia, near to where Harry, the Duchess of Sussex and their baby son Archie are staying as they attempt to forge a new life for themselves.
> 
> The duke touched down in Canada on Monday and the family’s arrival has made headlines around the world following their decision to step back from the monarchy.
> 
> Residents in Vancouver Island, on the country’s Pacific Coast, have largely welcomed the new arrivals, though many are concerned about taxpayers potentially footing the bill for their security costs.
> 
> Ms Stephen, who said she has had a special place in her heart for Harry since watching the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, is glad he has returned after he visited her shop in December.
> 
> *She told the PA news agency: “It was funny last night when the news said that he had arrived back, I immediately thought, ‘oh good, I’m glad he’s home’. I don’t have to worry about him.
> 
> 
> “And when I say worry about him, worry about the press and all the nastiness and negativity that seems to be out there. People passing opinions, who you would think they live under the same roof and know all the ins and outs of what they’re going through.”
> *
> Ms Stephen, 60, said life on Vancouver Island has been “a bit of a carnival” since news of the Sussexes’s arrival broke and called on the paparazzi to leave the couple in peace.
> 
> 
> “Now that the excitement has sort of worn off, they’ve made their plans known, it’s time to just allow them to get on with the changes in their life,” she said.
> 
> 
> “The paparazzi needs to go home and leave them alone and let them do what is coming natural to them and wanting to be independent and raise their child in peace and be able to do what they want to do and not be hounded. I think it’s time.”
> 
> 
> Ms Stephens, a mother of three sons, said she has had a soft spot for Harry since Diana’s death and always hoped to one day give him a hug.
> 
> 
> “As luck would have it, he came into my shop and that emotion came flooding back,” she said. “And I asked and I was granted the opportunity to give him a hug and it’s a gift that I will cherish and carry in my heart forever.
> 
> “It was very special, he was very lovely, and very accommodating and just a nice young man. Just a very, nice, pleasant young man.”
> 
> Ms Stephen also said the Sussexes have an open invitation for dinner at her home.
> 
> “As a Canadian, I welcome them and I still hope to invite him to dinner and hope he’ll come for a good old Canadian barbecue,” she said.
> 
> https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/cf635158c29549208cd1a66c09ed7723/


Cringe worthy.


----------



## Corneto

hellosunshine said:


> *Canadian shopkeeper who served Harry glad he has returned ‘home’*
> 
> A Canadian shopkeeper who shared a hug with the Duke of Sussex when he visited her home decor store before Christmas said she is happy he has returned “home”.
> 
> Chris Stephen owns Lilaberry in Sidney, British Columbia, near to where Harry, the Duchess of Sussex and their baby son Archie are staying as they attempt to forge a new life for themselves.
> 
> The duke touched down in Canada on Monday and the family’s arrival has made headlines around the world following their decision to step back from the monarchy.
> 
> Residents in Vancouver Island, on the country’s Pacific Coast, have largely welcomed the new arrivals, though many are concerned about taxpayers potentially footing the bill for their security costs.
> 
> Ms Stephen, who said she has had a special place in her heart for Harry since watching the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales in 1997, is glad he has returned after he visited her shop in December.
> 
> *She told the PA news agency: “It was funny last night when the news said that he had arrived back, I immediately thought, ‘oh good, I’m glad he’s home’. I don’t have to worry about him.
> 
> 
> “And when I say worry about him, worry about the press and all the nastiness and negativity that seems to be out there. People passing opinions, who you would think they live under the same roof and know all the ins and outs of what they’re going through.”
> *
> Ms Stephen, 60, said life on Vancouver Island has been “a bit of a carnival” since news of the Sussexes’s arrival broke and called on the paparazzi to leave the couple in peace.
> 
> 
> “Now that the excitement has sort of worn off, they’ve made their plans known, it’s time to just allow them to get on with the changes in their life,” she said.
> 
> 
> “The paparazzi needs to go home and leave them alone and let them do what is coming natural to them and wanting to be independent and raise their child in peace and be able to do what they want to do and not be hounded. I think it’s time.”
> 
> 
> Ms Stephens, a mother of three sons, said she has had a soft spot for Harry since Diana’s death and always hoped to one day give him a hug.
> 
> 
> “As luck would have it, he came into my shop and that emotion came flooding back,” she said. “And I asked and I was granted the opportunity to give him a hug and it’s a gift that I will cherish and carry in my heart forever.
> 
> “It was very special, he was very lovely, and very accommodating and just a nice young man. Just a very, nice, pleasant young man.”
> 
> Ms Stephen also said the Sussexes have an open invitation for dinner at her home.
> 
> “As a Canadian, I welcome them and I still hope to invite him to dinner and hope he’ll come for a good old Canadian barbecue,” she said.
> 
> https://www.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/cf635158c29549208cd1a66c09ed7723/



She jumped on that train with a quickness! It’s like a disease...


----------



## mdcx

mshermes said:


> If H&M truly want privacy.......a person I consider a very good role model is Cameron Diaz.  Maybe they should take tips from her.


Love her! She seems so pragmatic about the fact that her looks got her a long way, acting isn't the be all and end all of life, and that personal happiness should be guarded closely.  Meghan doesn't have the same baseline emotional intelligence imo.


----------



## mdcx

LOL. Omid is hard at work!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ion-royal-family-came-instant-popularity.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

Don’t worry Thomas, she ditched her newfound father even quicker than she ditched you.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

That man is trash.


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> Love her! She seems so pragmatic about the fact that her looks got her a long way, acting isn't the be all and end all of life, and that personal happiness should be guarded closely.  Meghan doesn't have the same baseline emotional intelligence imo.


To be fair though, Cameron hasn’t been hot in a long time!! Not super hard to be private. I think of someone like ScarJo or Margot Robbie... super famous but no one even knows what they’re up to when they’re not promoting something. And not really much complaining. But Meghan is going down the Gwyneth path... and although I used to love Gwen she really does rub most people the wrong way with her self promotion and image.


----------



## Aqua01

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That man is trash.


Yup, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Aqua01 said:


> Yup, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.



We can agree to disagree on that note.


----------



## Chagall

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That man is trash.


Or manipulated to appear that way.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chagall said:


> Or manipulated to appear that way.


Whatever the relationship, he sold stories for $$$ to the very same outlets trashing his daughter.  No manipulation is necessary in that regard.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That man is trash.


Meg learned from the best.


----------



## cafecreme15

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Waiting for the outrage that Prince Charles flew via private plane to the DAVOS environmental summit in Switzerland where he's speaking about the environment and sustainability - but of course that won't happen because it's not Harry and Meghan
> 
> And yes, it is relevant to this thread.


If this happened then it’s an outrage, same as when Harry and Meghan do it. It is possible for multiple people to be hypocrites at the same time in this family!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

cafecreme15 said:


> If this happened then it’s an outrage, same as when Harry and Meghan do it. It is possible for multiple people to be hypocrites at the same time in this family!


Agree. It's the difference in media coverage that is interesting.


----------



## Aqua01

CeeJay said:


> HA .. as though we really care what Oprah and Gayle King think!!!  PUHLEEZE ...


Right? As if God has spoken .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aqua01

Those memes, though


----------



## cafecreme15

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Agree. It's the difference in media coverage that is interesting.


Totally! I think the younger royals are just more interesting to people (for “relatability” maybe?) so anything they do is scrutinized more closely


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Oh of course! I wouldn't miss it for the world. Must book my flight for the private jet to Saskatoon because when you're thriving, you take the jet!
> Although, how on earth will I decide which camel coat to wear?
> 
> View attachment 4647268


If you don't want to wear one of these,  I can lend you my double breasted long length jacket  I also have a black camel's hair coat (yes they exist) and you can try that.  I want you to have all eyes on you for the pap shot!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

cafecreme15 said:


> Totally! I think the younger royals are just more interesting to people (for “relatability” maybe?) so anything they do is scrutinized more closely


Things like supporting Greta Thunberg, you mean? Because again....big difference in coverage and language.







*Source:* Express UK

Cue photo of Charles with Greta in Davos - headline is also by Express UK
https://www.express.co.uk/videos/6125650135001/Prince-Charles-meets-with-Greta-Thunberg-in-Davos


----------



## Mrs.Z

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Agree. It's the difference in media coverage that is interesting.


I don’t see a difference, the same outlets are calling out the same people for being climate hypocrites.


----------



## cafecreme15

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Things like supporting Greta Thunberg, you mean? Because again....big difference in coverage and language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Source:* Express UK
> 
> Cue photo of Charles with Greta in Davos - headline is also by Express UK
> https://www.express.co.uk/videos/6125650135001/Prince-Charles-meets-with-Greta-Thunberg-in-Davos


Agree that there seems to be some bias in the headlines. However without reading the text of the articles I can’t say whether the overall approach has been uneven.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

cafecreme15 said:


> Agree that there seems to be some bias in the headlines. However without reading the text of the articles I can’t say whether the overall approach has been uneven.


Sure, I get that. But unfortunately many people are drawn in by clickbait headlines like these and for _some_ people (_please note I said some)_ it does help to sway opinion.  There were similar theories regarding Cambridge Analytica and Facebook.  Clickbait headlines that have little to nothing to do with the actual story but they are persuasive for some people.  When you hold up the headlines side by side, that's when you see the difference in language and tone.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chagall said:


> Or manipulated to appear that way.



I am sorry as a parent there is nothing my kids could do that would make me talk about them like that to the tabloids. Nothing. That is seriously effed up and if anything makes me wonder what went on in her childhood to contribute to her issues now.


----------



## imgg

The media is the most biased form of information out there.   Most of the media stories are fake, misleading or downright lies.  You can not say that Meghan didn't get a fair shot.  The media wanted to love her, she fit the story they wanted to tell.  The problem was Meghan herself, she is her own worst enemy and the bad press *was from the things she said or did on camera.  *


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan is on s rampage to destroy the monarchy. They gave her a dream wedding, supported her financially and she pays them back by acting petulant because she was put in her place and told to follow protocol. No weapon formed against the Queen shall prosper. Evil never wins.


----------



## lazeny

Mrs.Z said:


> Agreed, I absolutely loved her style in the beginning.  It was so fresh and modern.  After the baby, things just went downhill.  Her body slightly changed after baby but suddenly nothing fit correctly and then she did start to look a bit messy.




Most of us are not very lucky. Our bodies change after having a child and are having a difficult, almost impossible task of bringing it back pre-baby weight, especially from the breast, waist and hips area. 

Meghan can have a stylist and seamstress that knows their job and properly fit her into clothes no matter her body type. Under garments can be altered and fitted to.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Mrs.Z said:


> If anyone’s freeloading it’s currently H & M, non-working members not supporting themselves.



And, living in a house belonging to a "friend of a friend of a friend."


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Aqua01 said:


> Those memes, though
> 
> View attachment 4647337
> 
> 
> View attachment 4647338
> 
> 
> View attachment 4647339


That last one


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Waiting for the outrage that Prince Charles flew via private plane to the DAVOS environmental summit in Switzerland where he's speaking about the environment and sustainability - but of course that won't happen because it's not Harry and Meghan
> 
> And yes, it is relevant to this thread.



You don't see a difference between taking a private plane in general (to go to a work function no less) and taking several to go to various vacation spots within a week? After lecturing others? I do.

ETA: Also, there was instant backlash


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> LOL. Omid is hard at work!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ion-royal-family-came-instant-popularity.html
> View attachment 4647298


I mean, while I agree with the statement, isn't Scobie usually the one kissing a*s and taking H&Ms side? How quickly things can change, eh? Not impressed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, while I agree with the statement, isn't Scobie usually the one kissing a*s and taking H&Ms side? How quickly things can change, eh? Not impressed.


I doubt there’s any loyalty amongst these people.  They’re all out to make money and raise their own profile. Whether by being supporters, critics, or both, and they’re all using each other.  It’s an influencers/influencing bear pit where everyone scrambles to stay “relevant”. I really don’t think Harry knows what he’s walked into.


----------



## doni

Flatsy said:


> Me and my mother get to Davos by train.   There is a high-speed train from Zurich airport to Davos that arrives in under two hours.   IMO no celebrities or wealthy people should be talking about climate change while being unwilling to inconvenience themselves even the slightest bit to travel responsibly.


Completely agree.
And I meant getting to Davos for the annual meetings of course. I have friends who go there every weekend by car or train from Germany, but on the meetings weekend stay home (and charge an abusive amount for a stay in their apartment ).


----------



## Gal4Dior

I just find it odd that to date I am still confused about:

1) How they really met
2) How and when he really proposed
3) Where exactly they went on their honeymoon
4) Where and when exactly Archie was born
5) Who exactly are his godparents
6) How they escaped being papped during their 6 week break, but can’t seem to catch a break this past week in cars, waiting for seaplanes, exiting a plane, taking a walk with two dogs and a baby with the biggest grin on her face by someone supposedly invading her privacy enough for them to sue them in the same place.

Yup, still utterly confused....


----------



## eunaddict

Mrs.Z said:


> H&M moving to LA after being bullied by Canadians in 5....4...3.....2....1.



Ah, damnit. I thought they were actually moving. Made me momentarily happy.


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Meghan is on s rampage to destroy the monarchy. They gave her a dream wedding, supported her financially and she pays them back by acting petulant because she was put in her place and told to follow protocol. No weapon formed against the Queen shall prosper. Evil never wins.


I don’t understand why she is so invested against this family and the British system.
She is American, went back home. Why is she acting so bitter?
She was only married for 20 months and spent a large part away from it all.
If she dislikes them so much, perhaps she needs to let go of this stupid title and forgo Prince Charles’s financial support.
She comes accross as greedy and entitled, not a good look, imo.
Prince Harry is a moron going thru an early mid life crisis, imho.
I feel sorry for their adorable little baby. A damn shame.




eunaddict said:


> Ah, damnit. I thought they were actually moving. Made me momentarily happy.


There is no way that they will stay in Canada, they will be moving in the US shortly imho.
Perhaps after the divorce?


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I doubt there’s any loyalty amongst these people.  They’re all out to make money and raise their own profile. Whether by being supporters, critics, or both, and they’re all using each other.  It’s an influencers/influencing bear pit where everyone scrambles to stay “relevant”. I really don’t think Harry knows what he’s walked into.


He has no clue, just like Meghan didn't on joining the Royal Family.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> I don’t understand why she is so invested against this family and the British system.
> She is American, went back home. Why is she acting so bitter?
> She was only married for 20 months and spent a large part away from it all.
> If she dislikes them so much, perhaps she needs to let go of this stupid title and forgo Prince Charles’s financial support.
> She comes accross as greedy and entitled, not a good look, imo.
> Prince Harry is a moron going thru an early mid life crisis, imho.
> I feel sorry for their adorable little baby. A damn shame.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way that they will stay in Canada, they will be moving in the US shortly imho.
> Perhaps after the divorce?


No they won’t stay here. I think Canada will eventually join the ghosted/markled club.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chagall said:


> No they won’t stay here. I think Canada will eventually join the ghosted/markled club.


You're probably right - wonder what the excuse will be for running.


----------



## Annawakes

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You're probably right - wonder what the excuse will be for running.


Too much paparazzi


----------



## PatsyCline

limom said:


> I don’t understand why she is so invested against this family and the British system.
> She is American, went back home. Why is she acting so bitter?
> She was only married for 20 months and spent a large part away from it all.
> If she dislikes them so much, perhaps she needs to let go of this stupid title and forgo Prince Charles’s financial support.
> She comes accross as greedy and entitled, not a good look, imo.
> Prince Harry is a moron going thru an early mid life crisis, imho.
> I feel sorry for their adorable little baby. A damn shame.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way that they will stay in Canada, they will be moving in the US shortly imho.
> Perhaps after the divorce?


Where has she once said anything negative about the royal family?


----------



## Clearblueskies

PatsyCline said:


> Where has she once said anything negative about the royal family?


You’re right, she doesn’t.  She leaves it to her friends and sources to pass on her messages.


----------



## mrsinsyder

PatsyCline said:


> Where has she once said anything negative about the royal family?


"No one has asked if I'm ok" seemed pretty direct.


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

Aqua01 said:


> Right? As if God has spoken .
> 
> View attachment 4647327


Hysterical ! I’m very much a fan of the Royal Family- and I take my hat off to the Queen and her advisors - as she (with their sage advice) have stayed the course and are consistent in their approach , while their detractors have consistently crashed and burned... who cares what Oprah and Gayle think ??? Their information is obviously not an iota more than what is in the public domain...clearly they don’t understand that yes- they were in talks for months - BUT no, there was no need to rush things through- don’t forget when Prince George (prince Williams son and 3rd in line to the throne) was born - that both of his parents were living in a small town in Wales - where his father, Prince William was gainfully employed... 
and they eased back into Royal life- what was the Sussexes rush ???? They know Prince Charles was looking at streamlining the family ...and they felt so insecure as to push this through ??! 

What concerns me more than anything (and I’m going off my gut- I feel we have a first impression when we see someone - but I try to gauge my feeling how I respond to someone - what I call my First reaction ): 

1/ the B.S in the engagement interview and all public appearances from Meghan - just looking at her - there is not a drop of sincerity - apart from Harry telling her to “turn around” on the balcony during the trooping of the color- she turns around and looks about to burst into tears ...She always comes across to me as too polished and corporate in her approach...

1/ it is clear to me that Prince Harry is besotted with his wife and enjoys being the big protector/ teddy bear - and I appreciate his doing what he feels needs to be done - but I feel they are enabling each other to be miserable and will always run away rather than being mature about things - which I think is a true shame ...their ITV interview was pathetic - where was the Queen’s advice : never complain , never explain ...they need to grow up ...

3/  Harry looks giddy pitching to the likes of Jon Favreau and Iger of Disney- It’s almost childlike glee - but I feel Meghan’s response is to try to make light of Harry’s gaffe- especially when he just pitched Meghan before to Iger- they obviously planned to do that ...tacky ...

3/ The BRF can’t be too drastic with cutting them off- the reality it’s going to be a new blueprint for others who may choose or be encouraged to look elsewhere for their means of survival ... and they well know that the pendulum of public opinion constantly moves- but If they’re consistent - they will be fine ... 

As for Harry and Meghan - good luck - pursue your happiness and grow up - they should at least teach out to her dad - he has his shortcomings - but he’s also been extremely hurt ...Forgiving him would be charity in the kindest and most meaningful way ...okay - end of my post !


----------



## marietouchet

mdcx said:


> I think she may have accepted all the help/advice from her wardrobe advisors in the beginning. Everything tailored and appropriate.
> At a certain point imo she told them all to take a hike, she knew better.


Mostly, after the baby, we saw her on the trip to Africa, she recycled maternity wear previously worn to Australia, not a bad idea when going to Africa, I dont think the Givenchys would have worked there, she did not lose the baby weight as fast as Kate, and she may have been breast feeding ?
To me, her African wardtobe was on point though the outfits were not sleek or tailored, they were relatively loud prints


----------



## doni

PatsyCline said:


> Where has she once said anything negative about the royal family?


_I've tried stiff upper lip but I think what it does to you internally is very damaging_, would seem quite a quip, given that the Queen is the Olympic champion in stiff-upper-lip...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Also the soul crushing comment.....good grief!


----------



## Sharont2305

Plus "they don't make it easy"


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> If you don't want to wear one of these,  I can lend you my double breasted long length jacket  I also have a black camel's hair coat (yes they exist) and you can try that.  I want you to have all eyes on you for the pap shot!


Thanks @gracekelly, you're so thoughtful!  
Just remembered no one has asked if I'm ok recently... they don't make this easy.


----------



## Charles

bag-mania said:


> You must know the British media trashes every woman who marries into the royal family. If you are old enough to remember Diana and Fergie, they really got destroyed in the tabloids in the 80s and 90s. Meghan is only the latest to face a brutal media. And while she got some bad press, she also got just as much glowing, adoring press from other publications, particularly in the US.
> 
> Some thought she would be able to handle the position, that she would have more fortitude, be able to ignore media articles she didn't like, but she couldn't hack it. She loved her $43 million wedding. She loved her titles and trappings. She loved her almost limitless expense account. She didn't love doing the boring ribbon cuttings and small events that were expected of her. She didn't love that she wasn't getting 100% positive press. That's why I see her as being a whiner. She wasn't forced into it, she wanted it! She said that she thought she understood what it meant to be in the royal family, but admitted later she didn't.
> 
> Of course, now she'll be free to pursue her ideal life. She can be a celebrity without having to do any unpleasant work if she isn't feeling it. She can do as many pap strolls as she likes without having to answer to anyone.



I'm aware of the negative attention Di and Fergie got...and they both hated it.  I see nothing wrong with MM and Harry trying to get out of the public eye.  She's allowed to not want to be trashed AND be the wife of a royal.  This whole idea of "Well, you married him, so now you have to put up with all the negative aspects of it" is ludicrous.  She doesn't.  They don't.  That's like saying "Well, you loved your beautiful wedding and expense account, but when your husband started beating you just couldn't 'hack' it.  If you want the good stuff, you have to take the bad stuff too!"  There's absolutely nothing wrong with her trying to get the press to be more compassionate.  Granted, she might have gone about it wrong (by actually thinking they'd respect her wishes to back off), but that shouldn't be ragged on.  Now you're saying she's a gold digger?  Then why withdraw from the family causing her to possibly have less money?  That doesn't even make sense.  Then you have Harry, who also hated the negative press and attention his mother got, trying to pull back too (who's wanted to pull back even before he met Meghan).  That's part of the reason they moved out of Kensington, but no...of course it's Meghan who's brain washing him and getting him to walk out on the family.  That's not even what's happening.  They just want to step away from the publicity.  They're not going to stop talking to their loved ones.  Like...there's no logic being used here at all.


----------



## joyeaux

So slightly random question but does this “no longer senior royal” thing mean they won’t ever be on the balcony with the Queen again? She made a big point about how they are still her family (I think she said it like 7 or 8 times in her last statement). Hopefully she’ll be around for more of her birthday celebrations and wasn’t that always the extended family on the balcony?

I’m also interested to see if/when Meghan comes back to the UK for the patronages she and Harry kept and seemed passionate about. I listened to a podcast yesterday about the National Theater, who had several things planned for her to do with them and were completely blindsided also when she sat in with them for a meeting and didn’t mention the _huge_ bombshell about to happen that did directly affect the plans and promotions they’d counted on her doing for them.


----------



## imgg

^ stepping away publicly while getting all the trappings for the very thing they said were "soul crushing"  Sussexroyal

Like many have said before, its not the fact they stepped away, its how they went about doing it.   Blindsiding the Queen with their public resignation letter, instead of speaking directly to her.  It was their way of cornering/blackmailing her into getting what they wanted.  Titles, money, fame without the work.

I loved how M & H team fed the media Meghan will be attending the meeting via conference call and the Queen was like nope, that won't be necessary.


----------



## Aqua01

PatsyCline said:


> Where has she once said anything negative about the royal family?


She said plenty, but yeah, her actions gave them the royal FU, and spoke louder than anything she said.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Charles said:


> Now you're saying she's a gold digger?  Then why withdraw from the family causing her to possibly have less money?  That doesn't even make sense.



Because as a royal, she can't spend the money on conspicuous stuff without being scrutinized. She wants to wear $90,000 muumuus and the public will fuss about that. There's no point in having a ton of money when you have to spend like you're an average person.


----------



## imgg

joyeaux said:


> So slightly random question but does this “no longer senior royal” thing mean they won’t ever be on the balcony with the Queen again? She made a big point about how they are still her family (I think she said it like 7 or 8 times in her last statement). Hopefully she’ll be around for more of her birthday celebrations and wasn’t that always the extended family on the balcony?
> 
> I’m also interested to see if/when Meghan comes back to the UK for the patronages she and Harry kept and seemed passionate about. I listened to a podcast yesterday about the National Theater, who had several things planned for her to do with them and were completely blindsided also when she sat in with them for a meeting and didn’t mention the _huge_ bombshell about to happen that did directly affect the plans and promotions they’d counted on her doing for them.


I am no expert, but I think senior members receive more funding and are required to attend more royal functions.  I am sure there is more to it....


----------



## Aqua01

Men , no wonder they're being played by chicks like M all the time


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> Because as a royal, she can't spend the money on conspicuous stuff without being scrutinized. She wants to wear $90,000 muumuus and the public will fuss about that. There's no point in having a ton of money when you have to spend like you're an average person.



I think this was prob one of the hardest for her to adjust to. Imagine being in an industry where everyone wants/tries/looks up to having luxury everything and suddenly  you get loud criticism for doing it too much.


----------



## Flatsy

joyeaux said:


> So slightly random question but does this “no longer senior royal” thing mean they won’t ever be on the balcony with the Queen again?


Trooping the Color is the annual event where the whole family appears on the balcony and this is considered a family event.  Stepping down from royal duties should not affect this at all, unless Harry and Meghan decide they don't want to fly back to attend.


----------



## bag-mania

Charles said:


> I'm aware of the negative attention Di and Fergie got...and they both hated it.  I see nothing wrong with MM and Harry trying to get out of the public eye.  She's allowed to not want to be trashed AND be the wife of a royal.  This whole idea of "Well, you married him, so now you have to put up with all the negative aspects of it" is ludicrous.  She doesn't.  They don't.  *That's like saying "Well, you loved your beautiful wedding and expense account, but when your husband started beating you just couldn't 'hack' it. * If you want the good stuff, you have to take the bad stuff too!"  There's absolutely nothing wrong with her trying to get the press to be more compassionate.  Granted, she might have gone about it wrong (by actually thinking they'd respect her wishes to back off), but that shouldn't be ragged on.  Now you're saying she's a gold digger?  Then why withdraw from the family causing her to possibly have less money?  That doesn't even make sense.  Then you have Harry, who also hated the negative press and attention his mother got, trying to pull back too (who's wanted to pull back even before he met Meghan).  That's part of the reason they moved out of Kensington, but no...of course it's Meghan who's brain washing him and getting him to walk out on the family.  That's not even what's happening.  They just want to step away from the publicity.  They're not going to stop talking to their loved ones.  Like...there's no logic being used here at all.



You are seriously comparing the media writing mean things about her to spousal abuse? Come on! The media isn't going to disappear because they move to Canada. She will still be written about. Their "escape" won't solve that problem. Their lawsuit will not solve it either. No, she couldn't take the restrictions of the position. She didn't want to have to answer to anyone. Those were all issues she knew about before she married Harry, but I guess she felt (rightly, as it turns out) that she would figure a way out of it.

She also revealed herself to be completely tone deaf when she did her interview last year at the end of their Africa trip. If you haven't watched that poor-me pity party I suggest you give it a look. You would think having spent the past week among truly disadvantaged people would have been a revelation of what an incredibly overprivileged life she had by comparison. But no, nothing sank in and the interview was Meghan complaining about her life. I guess there was no logic being used there.


----------



## doni

Charles said:


> I Now you're saying she's a gold digger?  Then why withdraw from the family causing her to possibly have less money?  That doesn't even make sense.  .



They didn't want to withdraw from the family or from their royal duties. They wanted to be able to make their own money and make their own decisions by stopping the allowance that covered  5% of their expenses, plus residence in two continents and security covered in both. This is what they wrote themselves. As told by Harry, when he was told it was 'unfortunately' not possible to  simultaneously have financial independence and do royal work, he chose to leave.


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> Trooping the Color is the annual event where the whole family appears on the balcony and this is considered a family event.  Stepping down from royal duties should not affect this at all, unless Harry and Meghan decide they don't want to fly back to attend.



I expect Harry will fly back, but not Meghan. 

If she does go, I hope she finds a well-obscured spot in the back so as not to take away from the family who wants to be there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

LittleStar88 said:


> I expect Harry will fly back, but not Meghan.
> 
> If she does go, I hope she finds a well-obscured spot in the back so as not to take away from the family who wants to be there.


One could only wish, but that is not her style....


----------



## LittleStar88

imgg said:


> One could only wish, but that is not her style....



I would actually feel bad for everyone if people boo her when she does show her face in the UK.

UK folks - what is the general opinion towards Meghan now? Here in the US it seems like high overview, emphasizing general drama of the overall story of them leaving, but nothing on TV news that is overly sympathetic. Tabloids seem to be a different story but all media outlets seem keen to skew an angle to whichever way sells clicks, commercials, magazines. And I think most US folks could not care less in general.


----------



## limom

LittleStar88 said:


> I would actually feel bad for everyone if people boo her when she does show her face in the UK.
> 
> UK folks - what is the general opinion towards Meghan now? Here in the US it seems like high overview, emphasizing general drama of the overall story of them leaving, but nothing on TV news that is overly sympathetic. Tabloids seem to be a different story but all media outlets seem keen to skew an angle to whichever way sells clicks, commercials, magazines. And I think most US folks could not care less in general.


I doubt that she will show up.
As far as boos, it will be what will happen imo.
How much of an hypocrite can one be?
She does not want to be part of the firm, fine but don’t expect people not expressing their displeasure.
Plus, she has done very little to endear herself to the British, imho.
It is way too soon for her to go back.
People will be savage, imho.


----------



## Ludmilla

Charles said:


> I'm aware of the negative attention Di and Fergie got...and they both hated it.  I see nothing wrong with MM and Harry trying to get out of the public eye.  She's allowed to not want to be trashed AND be the wife of a royal.  This whole idea of "Well, you married him, so now you have to put up with all the negative aspects of it" is ludicrous.  She doesn't.  They don't.  That's like saying "Well, you loved your beautiful wedding and expense account, but when your husband started beating you just couldn't 'hack' it.  If you want the good stuff, you have to take the bad stuff too!"  There's absolutely nothing wrong with her trying to get the press to be more compassionate.  Granted, she might have gone about it wrong (by actually thinking they'd respect her wishes to back off), but that shouldn't be ragged on.  Now you're saying she's a gold digger?  Then why withdraw from the family causing her to possibly have less money?  That doesn't even make sense.  Then you have Harry, who also hated the negative press and attention his mother got, trying to pull back too (who's wanted to pull back even before he met Meghan).  That's part of the reason they moved out of Kensington, but no...of course it's Meghan who's brain washing him and getting him to walk out on the family.  That's not even what's happening.  They just want to step away from the publicity.  They're not going to stop talking to their loved ones.  Like...there's no logic being used here at all.


With marrying a senior royal you are also marrying duties. And running away from your duties, because you have the feeling that the press is treating you a bit harsh ... well, yes. In other parts of the world this might be considered a tiny bit irresponsible and immature. Esp. if you do it the way they both did it.


----------



## limom

Ludmilla said:


> With marrying a senior royal you are also marrying duties. And running away from your duties, because you have the feeling that the press is treating you a bit harsh ... well, yes. In other parts of the world this might be considered a tiny bit irresponsible and immature. Esp. if you do it the way they both did it.


Plus both Dianna and Fergie worked for the British people for years.
The public liked them.
Meg just got here, did very little work and complained.
I agree with some of her grievances but no job is perfect.
She was given much and as a result people expected a lot and rightly so, imho.
This all affair will not end up well for the Prince,imho.
I doubt that he will be able to function as a civilian, time will tell though.
People are fed up nowadays and with social media, it is way harder to hide stuff. (Such a private planes and so forth)


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> I would actually feel bad for everyone if people boo her when she does show her face in the UK.
> 
> UK folks - what is the general opinion towards Meghan now? Here in the US it seems like high overview, emphasizing general drama of the overall story of them leaving, but nothing on TV news that is overly sympathetic. Tabloids seem to be a different story but all media outlets seem keen to skew an angle to whichever way sells clicks, commercials, magazines. And I think most US folks could not care less in general.


Most people I know are unimpressed and think they’ve been silly and immature, the rest are disinterested.  I don’t know any fans of Meghan and Harry.  All the same it’s unlikely they’d be booed.  We’re still too polite for that I think.


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> You're probably right - wonder what the excuse will be for running.


They’ll come up with something I’m sure lol.


----------



## limom

The weather, imo.
Canada is not for sissies,imho.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> They’ll come up with something I’m sure lol.


The oligarch might want his house back!


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Plus both Dianna and Fergie worked for the British people for years.
> The public liked them.
> Meg just got here, did very little work and complained.
> I agree with some of her grievances but no job is perfect.
> She was given much and as a result people expected a lot and rightly so, imho.
> This all affair will not end up well for the Prince,imho.
> I doubt that he will be able to function as a civilian, time will tell though.
> People are fed up nowadays and with social media, it is way harder to hide stuff. (Such a private planes and so forth)


Like that old saying goes:
To whom much is given much is expected!


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> He has no clue, *just like Meghan didn't *on joining the Royal Family.



This I blame mostly on Harry, for not making sure she truly understood what she was getting herself into.  However, could be that he  and his staff did try and they spent tons of time explaining to her and showing her the tabloids, and she ignored it all.  She probably would have married Harry under any circumstance, no matter what. What did she have to go back to?  She was written out of her TV series which has now ended anyway, late 30's as an actress is basically brutal, going back to the endless cycle of auditions and callbacks, biological clock ticking, no other good prospects.  He goes back to being Prince Harry and she goes back to not much.  So, she marries him anyway, knowing that she will have financial security for life and has raised her profile beyond her wildest dreams even if they do divorce.


----------



## Flatsy

Ludmilla said:


> With marrying a senior royal you are also marrying duties. And running away from your duties, because you have the feeling that the press is treating you a bit harsh ... well, yes. In other parts of the world this might be considered a tiny bit irresponsible and immature. Esp. if you do it the way they both did it.


Exactly.   Sometimes you don't just marry a person, you marry their job.  There are other jobs that come with some really terrible downsides (such as marrying active duty military).  People recognize and deal with those downsides, in my experience with a whole lot less complaining than the Sussexes.

Since Meghan arrived, the Sussexes have been sorely lacking in good judgment and character when it has come to dealing with their challenges.  Throwing the baby out with the bathwater after less than 2 years...I really think this is not what Harry intended when he married Meghan.  I don't think he intended to give up the job he has been raised to do his whole life, or move 4,500 miles away from his entire family.  And I don't think it bodes well for their future.  

But hey, it's their decision.  The way they announced and handled their exit thoroughly sucked. And they have already started complaining about the downsides (lack of paparazzi protection) of the new life they have chosen and which they intend to profit from.  I'm sure there is much more complaining to come because that's what they do.  Moving to Canada isn't going to change the people they are.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> The weather, imo.
> Canada is not for sissies,imho.


Haha yes, but if they hang out in Vancouver and Toronto they will be avoiding the worst of Canada’s harsh climate.


----------



## limom

youngster said:


> This I blame mostly on Harry, for not making sure she truly understood what she was getting herself into. * However, could be that he  and his staff did try and they spent tons of time explaining to her and showing her the tabloids*, and she ignored it all.  She probably would have married Harry under any circumstance, no matter what. What did she have to go back to?  She was written out of her TV series which has now ended anyway, late 30's as an actress is basically brutal, going back to the endless cycle of auditions and callbacks, biological clock ticking, no other good prospects.  He goes back to being Prince Harry and she goes back to not much.  So, she marries him anyway, knowing that she will have financial security for life and has raised her profile beyond her wildest dreams even if they do divorce.


Honestly, I think it is an excuse.
I don’t believe for one minute that she cares about the tabloids.
Meg  does not like the work, imo.
it was not a good match from the start.
In addition, Meagan will never be promoted, if anything her role and prestige will go down, so no upside there. No hope for a better situation,imho.
There will be only one queen and Meg is not it, imho.
Prince Harry could also have similar feelings as well, he has been the spare all his life, this has to be difficult,imho.


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> Haha yes, but if they hang out in Vancouver and Toronto they will be avoiding the worst of Canada’s harsh climate.


She was born and raised in LA. Toronto might as well be the Klondike.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

youngster said:


> This I blame mostly on Harry, for not making sure she truly understood what she was getting herself into.  However, could be that he  and his staff did try and they spent tons of time explaining to her and showing her the tabloids, and she ignored it all.  She probably would have married Harry under any circumstance, no matter what. What did she have to go back to?  She was written out of her TV series which has now ended anyway, late 30's as an actress is basically brutal, going back to the endless cycle of auditions and callbacks, biological clock ticking, no other good prospects.  He goes back to being Prince Harry and she goes back to not much.  So, she marries him anyway, knowing that she will have financial security for life and has raised her profile beyond her wildest dreams even if they do divorce.


I'd believe it if I were  told that Harry warned her and she ignored it. I'd also believe it if I was told that Harry didn't fully warn her. Since Harry had lost two girlfriends in the past reportedly because they didn't want that life, it would not surprise me if he selfishly chose to downplay it because he didn't want to keep on getting dumped because no woman he could find wanted that lifestyle.



limom said:


> Honestly, I think it is an excuse.
> I don’t believe for one minute that she cares about the tabloids.
> Meg  does not like the work, imo.
> it was not a good match from the start.
> In addition, Meagan will never be promoted, if anything her role and prestige will go down, so no upside there. No hope for a better situation,imho.
> There will be only one queen and Meg is not it, imho.
> Prince Harry could also have similar feelings as well, he has been the spare all his life, this has to be difficult,imho.



It would not surprise me if what soured Meghan to the whole thing was not the work as much as how the work carries over into the family. It may have surprised her that for family gatherings, rank and status matters and everyone is not seen as equal.  She could have easily assumed this was not so much the case given that exceptions were made to include her before they got married and immediately following. When they gather as a family, Kate is going to be treated better than her because she ranks higher and I think that rattled her. And given Meghan's background and other experiences she had growing up, I could see how she'd totally misread that as discrimination instead of tradition. It would take a humble person to really dig in to understand the reasons and I don't think Meghan has that level of humility.  She'd make an assumption and then dig in to be offended.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> You are seriously comparing the media writing mean things about her to spousal abuse? Come on! The media isn't going to disappear because they move to Canada. She will still be written about. Their "escape" won't solve that problem. Their lawsuit will not solve it either. No, she couldn't take the restrictions of the position. She didn't want to have to answer to anyone. Those were all issues she knew about before she married Harry, but I guess she felt (rightly, as it turns out) that she would figure a way out of it.
> 
> She also revealed herself to be completely tone deaf when she did her interview last year at the end of their Africa trip. If you haven't watched that poor-me pity party I suggest you give it a look. You would think having spent the past week among truly disadvantaged people would have been a revelation of what an incredibly overprivileged life she had by comparison. But no, nothing sank in and the interview was Meghan complaining about her life. I guess there was no logic being used there.


Yup!! Even one of the foremost royals reporters, Omid Scobie, who has unabashedly fawned over Meghan since she came on the scene, has admitted that his sources told him that Meghan had completely unrealistic expectations about the position and thought everyone would automatically love her immediately.


----------



## limom

LibbyRuth said:


> I'd believe it if I were  told that Harry warned her and she ignored it. I'd also believe it if I was told that Harry didn't fully warn her. Since Harry had lost two girlfriends in the past reportedly because they didn't want that life, it would not surprise me if he selfishly chose to downplay it because he didn't want to keep on getting dumped because no woman he could find wanted that lifestyle.


At what point does someone take responsibility for their own destiny?
I am all for some people are victims at timesbut this was not a secret, she knew better however she was blinded by her desire to marry Harry, imho.
It is not the poor bloke’s fault.
Meghan is a smart and older thus wiser woman, she is simply not willing to do the job, imho.
And it is ok, not everyone like to be polite 24/7 and do the amounts of charity work required.
Plus the type of work that is expected is boring and repetitive, imho.
I could not do it, even in Givenchy.


----------



## LibbyRuth

limom said:


> At what point does someone take responsibility for their own destiny?
> I am all for some people are victims at timesbut this was not a secret, she knew better however she was blinded by her desire to marry Harry, imho.
> It is not the poor bloke’s fault.
> Meghan is a smart and older thus wiser woman, she is simply not willing to do the job, imho.
> And it is ok, not everyone like to be polite 24/7 and do the amounts of charity work required.
> Plus the type of work that is expected is boring and repetitive, imho.
> I could not do it, even in Givenchy.



I agree with you 100%.  There's not a lot about Meghan that indicates she's got a level headed and humble approach to anything. A lot of the success she's had in her life can likely be attributed to that ... but it creates the problems too. I don't feel sympathy for either of them because they were told over and over by so many people to take it slow and chose not to. They are laying in the bed they made, no question about it. I can look to them to shoulder the responsibility of their choices, and still speculate about what happened to get them to those choices.


----------



## limom

LibbyRuth said:


> I'd believe it if I were  told that Harry warned her and she ignored it. I'd also believe it if I was told that Harry didn't fully warn her. Since Harry had lost two girlfriends in the past reportedly because they didn't want that life, it would not surprise me if he selfishly chose to downplay it because he didn't want to keep on getting dumped because no woman he could find wanted that lifestyle.
> 
> 
> 
> It would not surprise me if what soured Meghan to the whole thing was not the work as much as how the work carries over into the family. It may have surprised her that for family gatherings, rank and status matters and everyone is not seen as equal.  She could have easily assumed this was not so much the case given that exceptions were made to include her before they got married and immediately following. When they gather as a family, Kate is going to be treated better than her because she ranks higher and I think that rattled her. And given Meghan's background and other experiences she had growing up, I could see how she'd totally misread that as discrimination instead of tradition. It would take a humble person to really dig in to understand the reasons and I don't think Meghan has that level of humility.  She'd make an assumption and then dig in to be offended.


True, it must be incredibly weird.


----------



## hellosunshine

The decision to leave looks better and better every day:


----------



## limom

This is not a correct analogy. They do not work for the press, imho.
Also, if he thinks he has not be treated right by his grandmother, he is in for a rude awakening, imho.
How old are those two again?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Honestly, I think it is an excuse.
> I don’t believe for one minute that she cares about the tabloids.
> Meg  does not like the work, imo.
> it was not a good match from the start.
> In addition, Meagan will never be promoted, if anything her role and prestige will go down, so no upside there. No hope for a better situation,imho.
> There will be only one queen and Meg is not it, imho.
> Prince Harry could also have similar feelings as well, he has been the spare all his life, this has to be difficult,imho.


I agree with you on most parts, however, I think Harry seems to have been happy to be demoted in the line of succession each time a Cambridge child has been born. I remember a TV reporter asking him when George was born how he felt about being pushed down to fourth in line, he replied "great"


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I'd believe it if I were  told that Harry warned her and she ignored it. I'd also believe it if I was told that Harry didn't fully warn her. Since Harry had lost two girlfriends in the past reportedly because they didn't want that life, it would not surprise me if he selfishly chose to downplay it because he didn't want to keep on getting dumped because no woman he could find wanted that lifestyle.
> 
> 
> 
> It would not surprise me if what soured Meghan to the whole thing was not the work as much as how the work carries over into the family. It may have surprised her that for family gatherings, rank and status matters and everyone is not seen as equal.  She could have easily assumed this was not so much the case given that exceptions were made to include her before they got married and immediately following. When they gather as a family, Kate is going to be treated better than her because she ranks higher and I think that rattled her. And given Meghan's background and other experiences she had growing up, I could see how she'd totally misread that as *discrimination instead of tradition. *It would take a humble person to really dig in to understand the reasons and I don't think Meghan has that level of humility.  She'd make an assumption and then dig in to be offended.


Yes! Especially to what I've highlighted


----------



## Lodpah

One thing that would have smoothed things over is if Meghan would just stop disparaging the BRF by complaining and  act mature and exit quietly. Why she keeps complaining especially about it is quite telling.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree with you on most parts, however, I think Harry seems to have been happy to be demoted in the line of succession each time a Cambridge child has been born. I remember a TV reporter asking him when George was born how he felt about being pushed down to fourth in line, he replied "great"


This is the weird part about it, he loves his family and yet he seems threatened by it.
His position is very, very awkward imho.
I do not blame them for their decision, The execution is the problem, imho.
 A true Marie Antoinette moment.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> This is the weird part about it, he loves his family and yet he seems threatened by it.
> His position is very, very awkward imho.
> I do not blame them for their decision, The execution is the problem, imho.
> A true Marie Antoinette moment.


This!


----------



## Flatsy

limom said:


> This is the weird part about it, he loves his family and yet he seems threatened by it.
> His position is very, very awkward imho.


It is a very awkward position and one his predecessors have struggled with.  I believe Harry loves his niece and nephews.  I believe him when he says it is a relief that he will never have to worry about becoming King.

But I think Harry's ego is not one to accept slowly fading into the background.  He wants to make his mark - he has said so himself. He married a woman with a similar ego, and I think the two of them have decided there is more glory for them outside of royal life.

As much as I do believe that the press was overly harsh with Meghan for much of 2019, I don't think they are leaving because of the press.  They are leaving because they saw the writing on the wall that they will never achieve the status in the royal family that they wanted.  They were denied their own royal court.  They were given a cottage instead of a grand residence.  They were not given a staff as big as the Cambridge's.  They fought continuously with the powers that be about what they could and could not do. And final straw, they were not given the special prominence they think they deserve in the Christmas photographs.

So now they are off to try to become the next Oprah or Bill Gates.  If things don't work out as the Sussexes hope - business-wise and marriage-wise -  I foresee Harry wanting to return to his place in the royal family.  Problem is, he's going to be stuck in whatever place the Sussexes wind up, whether that's Canada or the US.


----------



## lalame

This thread has truly opened my eyes to the level of disdain people have about her... and I don’t mean that in an offensive way. Being in the US imo you only get the brief update and I never cared enough to track it all too closely. They’re just like any other celeb to me, where I plug in once in awhile mostly due to interest in their outfits.

But I definitely see now where they went wrong and why they continue to rub people the wrong way. Well, all one can hope is they find a way to redeem themselves to the public. I think they’re both probably good people at the end of the day, albeit with flaws and bad judgment that were at minimum inappropriate/unacceptable for their roles. I find the whole ordeal sad, and I WANT to look positively on the royal family so I hope it turns around. On the bright side, I’ve developed a much greater appreciation for what the rest of that family does for the public and their sacrifices.

If only they had not rushed in...


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> If only they had not rushed in...


Unfortunately, biology was not on their side.
I believe that was the big rush.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> _I've tried stiff upper lip but I think what it does to you internally is very damaging_, would seem quite a quip, given that the Queen is the Olympic champion in stiff-upper-lip...


Wow, that’s stretching things to the absurd. Keeping a stiff upper lip is an alleged British trait, has nothing particular against the Royal family. You’re grasping at straws with that one.


----------



## PatsyCline

doni said:


> They didn't want to withdraw from the family or from their royal duties. They wanted to be able to make their own money and make their own decisions by stopping the allowance that covered  5% of their expenses, plus residence in two continents and security covered in both. This is what they wrote themselves. As told by Harry, when he was told it was 'unfortunately' not possible to  simultaneously have financial independence and do royal work, he chose to leave.


It’s the same security detail, whether they reside on one continent, or five.


----------



## lalame

PatsyCline said:


> Wow, that’s stretching things to the absurd. Keeping a stiff upper lip is a n alleged British trait, has nothing particular against the Royal family. You’re grasping at straws with that one.


Honestly both sides are right! It’s generally understandable by anyone that it’s damaging to feel repressed - no matter who you are. But :/ it’s not very respectful to say it publicly about a privileged role. For example, sometimes my job freakin’ bites but imagine saying that publicly or even just in front of my boss or the head of the company. True or not, it is pretty disrespectful. And an institution like the BRF has more emotional significance to so many more people than just a normal employer. So I don’t begrudge Meghan for feeling how she does but making this statement was not appropriate and was just bound to rub people the wrong way.


----------



## PatsyCline

lalame said:


> Honestly both sides are right! It’s generally understandable by anyone that it’s damaging to feel repressed - no matter who you are. But :/ it’s not very respectful to say it publicly about a privileged role. For example, sometimes my job freakin’ bites but imagine saying that publicly or even just in front of my boss or the head of the company. True or not, it is pretty disrespectful.


I don’t believe she has a problem with the duties she was performing, it’s the attendant slanted and biased reporting of the tabloid press that’s the issue. 

A person can only tolerate that for so long before wanting to get away from it. Whether or not this will work, only time will tell.


----------



## lalame

Meghan seems like the embodiment of millennial vulnerability (some may call it snowflake) meets celebrity self-promotion... meeting a traditional, duty-bound environment quite apart from all that. And it was a train wreck. Frankly same thing happened in my head as I’ve tried to wrap my head around this whole situation. It’s like if I see Meghan as any celebrity I wouldn’t find her actions very off-putting or at the very least surprising but in the royal context... yeah, it’s just not the right place at all for all of that. They were probably egged on by the public/media initial reaction of “look, they’re modernizing the royal family yay”... but it went too far.


----------



## threadbender

I think I will tell my boss that I want to work part-time and pick my own schedule and tasks. But, I will only accept a 5% pay cut. In addition, I expect to be allowed to use the company's name in private enterprises for my gain.
I think that will go over really well. Oh, and I am going to move so expect to be able to work remotely, again, when I feel like it.


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> Meghan seems like the embodiment of millennial vulnerability (some may call it snowflake) meets celebrity self-promotion... meeting a traditional, duty-bound environment quite apart from all that. And it was a train wreck. Frankly same thing happened in my head as I’ve tried to wrap my head around this whole situation. It’s like if I see Meghan as any celebrity I wouldn’t find her actions very off-putting or at the very least surprising but in the royal context... yeah, it’s just not the right place at all for all of that. They were probably egged on by the public/media initial reaction of “look, they’re modernizing the royal family yay”... but it went too far.



and... you’ve nailed it.


----------



## limom

threadbender said:


> I think I will tell my boss that I want to work part-time and pick my own schedule and tasks. But, I will only accept a 5% pay cut. In addition, I expect to be allowed to use the company's name in private enterprises for my gain.
> I think that will go over really well. Oh, and I am going to move so expect to be able to work remotely, again, when I feel like it.


And expect to keep my title and my corporate apartment for when I need/feel like coming.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> It’s the same security detail, whether they reside on one continent, or five.


That's not true at all.  Living in or on the grounds of a palace (such as Kensington) reduces security costs considerably as the whole palace is constantly guarded, rather than a full security force guarding each individual occupant. 

The Sussexes establishing their own "palace" 4,500 miles away means a full team of constant security just for them and their home.  There are also huge additional costs for transatlantic travel and local lodging for their RPO's.  (Even if Canada's security force gets involved, they will only be taking on partial burden.)


----------



## imgg

threadbender said:


> I think I will tell my boss that I want to work part-time and pick my own schedule and tasks. But, I will only accept a 5% pay cut. In addition, I expect to be allowed to use the company's name in private enterprises for my gain.
> I think that will go over really well. Oh, and I am going to move so expect to be able to work remotely, again, when I feel like it.


I am going tell them my new plan on IG as I have no respect for my employer to do it in private either!


----------



## daisychainz

threadbender said:


> I think I will tell my boss that I want to work part-time and pick my own schedule and tasks. But, I will only accept a 5% pay cut. In addition, I expect to be allowed to use the company's name in private enterprises for my gain.
> I think that will go over really well. Oh, and I am going to move so expect to be able to work remotely, again, when I feel like it.


For every day I work I also want one week off, at minimum, thank you.


----------



## PatsyCline

threadbender said:


> I think I will tell my boss that I want to work part-time and pick my own schedule and tasks. But, I will only accept a 5% pay cut. In addition, I expect to be allowed to use the company's name in private enterprises for my gain.
> I think that will go over really well. Oh, and I am going to move so expect to be able to work remotely, again, when I feel like it.


Your analogy doesn’t work. If the ‘public’ is only paying 5% of their expenses, and Charles is picking up the rest, that’s between Charles and them what he continues to give them.


----------



## LittleStar88

A guy friend posted this today haha


----------



## cafecreme15

threadbender said:


> I think I will tell my boss that I want to work part-time and pick my own schedule and tasks. But, I will only accept a 5% pay cut. In addition, I expect to be allowed to use the company's name in private enterprises for my gain.
> I think that will go over really well. Oh, and I am going to move so expect to be able to work remotely, again, when I feel like it.





limom said:


> And expect to keep my title and my corporate apartment for when I need/feel like coming.





imgg said:


> I am going tell them my new plan on IG as I have no respect for my employer to do it in private either!


Wow this really puts in perspective how ridiculous this all is.


----------



## Flatsy

PatsyCline said:


> Your analogy doesn’t work. If the ‘public’ is only paying 5% of their expenses, and Charles is picking up the rest, that’s between Charles and them what he continues to give them.


It isn't, because most of the millions Charles currently pays them every year come from the Duchy of Cornwall and are allocated to them in exchange for doing royal work - things like food, clothing and household staff.

While the Duchy of Cornwall is not "taxpayer" money in the strictest and most literal sense as interpreted by the Sussexes, and even though Charles does not itemize its expenditures, he knows that if he abuses the Duchy money, he could lose it.  Or at the very least, face public scrutiny and backlash that would harm the royal family.

That's why Charles has always paid for certain gifts out of his own private savings.  That's how he paid for the hundreds of thousands of pounds of interior fixtures and furnishings for Frogmore Cottage.  And according to several reports, the money Charles will be spending on the Sussexes over the next year will be from his private savings.  

And while that is a matter between Charles and his spoiled son, Charles has supposedly told Harry that his private funds are not unlimited and that this will only be a temporary arrangement.  Why anyone would think that a 35 year old man should be supported by his father to the tune of millions and millions per year just for existing, and that this is totally cool behavior, is beyond me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aqua01

Lodpah said:


> To sum Meghan up, its very simple.
> 1. She hates being upstaged.
> 2. She wants to be the center of attention.
> 3. She’s vindictive because the BRF have protocols which did not make her the center of attention.
> 4. She is divisive and pulling Harry away from his family and his love of Africa and the military was an FU to the BRF.
> Lots more but why can’t people realize that there are some seriously depraved people in the world, even famous people.
> She did not want bridesmaids and she wanted to walk alone during her wedding so that all eyes are on her.
> Y’all ever watched the movie “The Hand that Rocks the Cradle is the Hand that Rules the World?”
> In any event her doing her pap walk and those eyes of hers are simply demonic. Yes I said it. I can count on only one hand in my lifetime 2 fingers that I have ever come across online or tv that exhibit that chill me to the core.
> Seriously look up Chucky’s Bride and compare her eyes to MM. Songs have been written about women like her. She’s evil. There’s a saying some people shine like angels of light but inside are ravenous wolves.
> Only 2 people that I have ever felt their spirits are just pure evil and she’s one of them. Evil in the sense of their motives toward others, a dangerous woman this MM.


Didn't you post something similar a while ago? I remember that was met with outrage and eye rolls. What a difference now. Goes to show that not everyone disliked M right out of the gate. The majority of us in this thread (including me) were cheering for them and happy for Harry.
The negative reactions they get today they totally have themselves to thank for. Creating your own f*cking drama and then enjoy playing the victim 
Yeah, no, I no longer like this chick, though I don't necessary think she's evil. I think she is self-absorbed,  greedy, ungrateful, phony af, delusional, a master manipulator, an exploiter, has an ego from here to Tokyo, someone with little self-awareness, only love for self, and steps on others to rise to the top.

But, oh wait......... isn't that evil ??.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> It isn't, because most of the millions Charles currently pays them every year come from the Duchy of Cornwall and are allocated to them in exchange for doing royal work - things like food, clothing and household staff.
> 
> While the Duchy of Cornwall is not "taxpayer" money in the strictest and most literal sense as interpreted by the Sussexes, and even though Charles does not itemize its expenditures, he knows that if he abuses the Duchy money, he could lose it.  Or at the very least, face public scrutiny and backlash that would harm the royal family.
> 
> That's why Charles has always paid for certain gifts out of his own private savings.  That's how he paid for the hundreds of thousands of pounds of interior fixtures and furnishings for Frogmore Cottage.  And according to several reports, the money Charles will be spending on the Sussexes over the next year will be from his private savings.
> 
> And while that is a matter between Charles and his spoiled son, Charles has supposedly told Harry that his private funds are not unlimited and that this will only be a temporary arrangement.  Why anyone would think that a 35 year old man should be supported by his father to the tune of millions and millions per year just for existing, and that this is totally cool behavior, is beyond me.


And financial independence it is not.  Perhaps they have a different definition from the rest of us.


----------



## imgg

cafecreme15 said:


> Wow this really puts in perspective how ridiculous this all is.


Right?!  Coupled by the video showing Meghan rummaging though Harry's car while they were dating, taking photos of BH when told not to, having to be escorted/supervised at all times because of this and other shenanigans.  Gifted by the Queen SussexRoyal and then trademarking to cash in with a FU to the RF on the way out.  She is a piece of work.  Everyone sees this train wreck but Harry.


----------



## scarlet555

View attachment 4647904

	

		
			
		

		
	
[/QUOTE]
'






although there may be more to it,
that pretty much sums it up


----------



## mrsinsyder

imgg said:


> Everyone sees this train wreck but Harry.


And a few others


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> And financial independence it is not. Perhaps they have a different definition from the rest of us.


The Sussex website was VERY clear on this point.  It said that by giving up the 5% Sovereign Grant money, they will have achieved financial independence. The website said absolutely nothing about giving up the 95% funding they got from Duchy of Cornwall, and I think they intended to keep it.


----------



## bag-mania

Supposedly Netflix has expressed an interest in working with Meghan and Harry. Other media outlets will likely follow. Will they opt out of such high profile projects and pursue becoming economically self-sufficient quietly in the name of "privacy." Or, will they jump at any opportunity to be on TV like attention-starved, ego-driven barracudas? Time will tell.


----------



## Flatsy

I think the Sussexes aspire to produce and star in documentaries about themselves doing charitable work around the world (i.e., what they used to do as civil servants) and get a $20 million streaming deal like the Obamas did.  It might happen.  Netflix will give $20 million to anyone for anything these days.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Netflix has expressed an interest in working with Meghan and Harry. Other media outlets will likely follow. Will they opt out of such high profile projects and pursue becoming economically self-sufficient quietly in the name of "privacy." Or, will they jump at any opportunity to be on TV like attention-starved, ego-driven barracudas? Time will tell.



I BET lots of brands are knocking on their door. And dear lord I hope they don’t go down that road of base celebrity-ness. But how else will they make their money? IDK I think they’ve put themselves into a corner and I am very interested to see which route they take. Diana May have “put out” a book but clearly it wasn’t for monetary gain. This would be just ugh.


----------



## limom

Flatsy said:


> I think the Sussexes aspire to produce and star in documentaries about themselves doing charitable work around the world (i.e., what they used to do as civil servants) and get a $20 million streaming deal like the Obamas did.  It might happen.  Netflix will give $20 million to anyone for anything these days.


It might work for one doc but who wanna see Prince Harry shoeless ranting about the environment more than once?
It is a hard no for me.


----------



## josieblime

imgg said:


> Right?!  Coupled by the video showing Meghan rummaging though Harry's car while they were dating, taking photos of BH when told not to, having to be escorted/supervised at all times because of this and other shenanigans.  Gifted by the Queen SussexRoyal and then trademarking to cash in with a FU to the RF on the way out.  She is a piece of work.  Everyone sees this train wreck but Harry.


I am confused about this section of the video. One of the men seen approaching M is Serena Williams’ husband. But if you take him out of the equation that leaves 2 times she was confronted at Harry’s car. I don’t know what to make of this because this was _*after* _their wedding. Why isn’t she allowed to be around her husband’s car??


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I BET lots of brands are knocking on their door. And dear lord I hope they don’t go down that road of base celebrity-ness. But how else will they make their money? IDK I think they’ve put themselves into a corner and I am very interested to see which route they take. Diana May have “put out” a book but clearly it wasn’t for monetary gain. This would be just ugh.



There's no telling. Nothing would surprise me about these two anymore. I can see a future of them slapping their "brand" on all sorts of tacky products. We can probably expect a line of cosmetics, hair care products, inexpensive jewelry, cologne, the sky's the limit.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> The Sussex website was VERY clear on this point.  It said that by giving up the 5% Sovereign Grant money, they will have achieved financial independence. The website said absolutely nothing about giving up the 95% funding they got from Duchy of Cornwall, and I think they intended to keep it.


Mmm doesn't surprise does it! - I think Charles has already signalled that that’s a non starter long term.


bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Netflix has expressed an interest in working with Meghan and Harry. Other media outlets will likely follow. Will they opt out of such high profile projects and pursue becoming economically self-sufficient quietly in the name of "privacy." Or, will they jump at any opportunity to be on TV like attention-starved, ego-driven barracudas? Time will tell.


They have a short window of opportunity IMO, I’m sure they’ll grab anything going.



Flatsy said:


> I think the Sussexes aspire to produce and star in documentaries about themselves doing charitable work around the world (i.e., what they used to do as civil servants) and get a $20 million streaming deal like the Obamas did.  It might happen.  Netflix will give $20 million to anyone for anything these days.


Harry and Meghan only have themselves to sell.  What skills or qualifications do they have?  Being an ex-royal, or an ex-actress/briefcase girl?


----------



## Lodpah

About Thomas Markle. He knows his daughter has lost her sparkle and all Harry does is harkle (it’s a real word) and I’m not trying to be cute.

Anyway, I get angry at my father too but to throw him at the dogs and have him out of my life? If he passed away without me making amends or to just even say I forgive you then I’m not human. Only the most egregious acts to humanity and my well being would I not have contact with him. 

He obviously has to defend himself and so far all I read is that he still loves her and maybe he does not fit her image but then Harry is hardly looking like a prize these days.

I couldn’t believe how he was explaining how happy he was at that event he was speaking at but he looked so miserable but once he got through MM prepared speech in the beginning where she was at center albeit not there physically and started talking about his charities, he was not fumbling and actually sailed through it, smiling while he was talking. 

Harry’s heart is in Africa and Meghan doing these ‘charity’ visits on her own accord is simply stunning and conniving.


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry and Meghan only have themselves to sell.  What skills or qualifications do they have?  Being an ex-royal, or an ex-actress/briefcase girl?


She wants to be the STAR, front and center, not standing behind someone else. I bet they (or she) goes the route of setting up their own studio/production company like Oprah did, fronting her own clothing/jewelry line, opening a factory - projects where she is the employer vs the employee. Whatever the project is she doesn't want to be in the passenger seat at all, so looking for opportunities where she fully controls everything is more her style. Why sell stuff under Givenchy when she can have her own design label, or jewelry line. Why do voice work for Disney when she can create and star in her own documentaries or shows. Setting up their own firms and labels keeps them from needing to be 'employed' by others - that is the route I see them headed, or trying to go. Why be the brand ambassador when you can be the brand - that's more Meghan-think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

I would never read nor watch any of Thomas Markle's attempts to make money but... I sometimes wonder...if Thomas was the Black parent...would the media and the general public be so sympathetic towards him? Would they have given him a media platform to denigrate on his mixed-race daughter - in the same manner that Thomas has? Somehow I doubt it.


----------



## Flatsy

limom said:


> It might work for one doc but who wanna see Prince Harry shoeless ranting about the environment more than once?
> It is a hard no for me.


The public appetite for royal documentaries seems to be about one every few years.  And that's largely because people want to see them talking about their personal relationships with one another, royal life, Diana, Granny, and in the case of the Africa documentary, personal drama and complaints. (Although I don't think that documentary got very good ratings, despite all of the publicity.)  Whatever charity stuff the documentary is focused on is the medicine that comes along with it.

The Sussexes probably aren't going to be producing documentaries that are compelling by virtue of the subject matter.  Their knowledge on everything is largely superficial - although I don't think Meghan in particular is aware of that, based on how willing she is to expound at length on a whole host of topics that are out of her depth.  And they have no known documentary skills.  

This will be sold based on their celebrity, and curiosity about their personal lives.  I don't think there is an audience for that over a whole series of documentaries.


----------



## bag-mania

*80K Canadians sign petition telling Prince Harry, Meghan Markle to pay for their security*

Welcome to Canada, eh.

More than 80,000 people in the Great White North have signed an online petition demanding that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pay for their security detail while they’re in town.

The petition, from the fiscally conservative Canadian Taxpayer Federation, racked up the signatures over six days from residents who refuse to use taxpayer money toward the estimated millions of dollars needed annually to safeguard the Sussexes.

Prince Harry and Meghan are on Vancouver Island preparing to begin a new life with their 8-month-old son, Archie, after stepping back from the British royal family.

“Canadians are pleased to welcome the Duke and Duchess to Canada, but have made it crystal clear that taxpayers should not be forced to support them while they are living here,” said Aaron Wudrick, the federation’s federal director. “All Canadians wish them well as they realize their ambition of financial independence.”

Wudrick’s group delivered the signatures to the prime minister’s office Tuesday.

Details are still unclear on security when Harry and Meghan formally leave the monarchy this spring. Costs to protect the family could top $10 million annually, the Globe and Mail reported.

Bruce Hallsor, of the Monarchist League of Canada, told the Vancouver Sun there doesn’t seem to be “any expectation” that the family is going to “receive any money from the Canadian taxpayer.”

Hallsor told the paper Harry could “still be a target for the Taliban,” since he did complete two tours of duty in Afghanistan with the British army.

The next chapter of Harry and Meghan’s life has not exactly started smoothly. The Sun reported that on their first day in Vancouver, the family threatened to sue prying paparazzi outside their home.

https://pagesix.com/2020/01/22/80k-...arry-meghan-markle-to-pay-for-their-security/


----------



## lalame

No way is Meghan going to go back to acting. Can you imagine.... The BRF is going to have a collective fit to see Meghan on big or small screens in romantic scenes, action scenes, or playing unsavory characters... aka the vast majority of interesting roles. All they’ve got is their image to get by.

At least Beatrice and Eugenie started early in building their careers...


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> About Thomas Markle. He knows his daughter has lost her sparkle and all Harry does is harkle (it’s a real word) and I’m not trying to be cute.
> 
> Anyway, I get angry at my father too but to throw him at the dogs and have him out of my life? If he passed away without me making amends or to just even say I forgive you then I’m not human. Only the most egregious acts to humanity and my well being would I not have contact with him.
> 
> He obviously has to defend himself and so far all I read is that he still loves her and maybe he does not fit her image but then Harry is hardly looking like a prize these days.
> 
> I couldn’t believe how he was explaining how happy he was at that event he was speaking at but he looked so miserable but once he got through MM prepared speech in the beginning where she was at center albeit not there physically and started talking about his charities, he was not fumbling and actually sailed through it, smiling while he was talking.
> 
> Harry’s heart is in Africa and Meghan doing these ‘charity’ visits on her own accord is simply stunning and conniving.


While I won't get into in detail, both of my parents were massive narcissists such that at/about age 35 I realized that in order to stay 'sane', I needed to divorce both of them.  Is it easy, no .. they are your parents, but I realized that I could not continue to get involved in their fights and their b!tching about each other .. along with the coup-de-grace of what my father did to me.  That being said, it would have been nice if one of them actually had shown affection towards me .. physically or verbally, but nope. 

Look, I think all of us can say that at one point or the other, we had issues with our parents .. it's human nature.  Yes, I have known some folks that truly do have amazing parents and frankly, given my past .. it somewhat shocks me and yeah, I'm jealous!  However, seeing pictures of Meghan and her father, do not convey to me that it was a horrible relationship during her teen years.  In addition, given what I have been told by those that knew Thomas and Meghan during her teen years, she was spoiled by her father .. and yes, I'm sure to a degree it was because he wasn't always there 'physically' for her (he was the Lighting Director on a very well-known TV show at the time).  

When both of my parents were very ill, I did make amends .. how can one not?  This is what I simply do not understand, but she has had a pattern of doing this .. "_I don't need you anymore, see 'ya .. bye_".  I totally understand why he would want to say something; there are always 2 sides to every story.  Both of them have made mistakes and she should recognize that, but she continues to go the path "_he is in the wrong_".  Samantha is a different story in my opinion, but her latest missive about Meghan was somewhat spot-on.


----------



## lalame

They could follow the Goop model but even Gwyneth makes it work by shilling product and stirring controversy so that’s not so different than what we’re talking about. Not to mention she probably started with much more capital to invest. I don’t seeing any other path for them than to do merch and a lot of product sponsorships.


----------



## wisconsin

hellosunshine said:


> I would never read nor watch any of Thomas Markle's attempts to make money but... I sometimes wonder...if Thomas was the Black parent...would the media and the general public be so sympathetic towards him? Would they have given him a media platform to denigrate on his mixed-race daughter - in the same manner that Thomas has? Somehow I doubt it.


If he were black, you would totally sympathize with him, I think.


----------



## limom

daisychainz said:


> She wants to be the STAR, front and center, not standing behind someone else. I bet they (or she) goes the route of setting up their own studio/production company like Oprah did, fronting her own clothing/jewelry line, opening a factory - projects where she is the employer vs the employee. Whatever the project is she doesn't want to be in the passenger seat at all, so looking for opportunities where she fully controls everything is more her style. Why sell stuff under Givenchy when she can have her own design label, or jewelry line. Why do voice work for Disney when she can create and star in her own documentaries or shows. Setting up their own firms and labels keeps them from needing to be 'employed' by others - that is the route I see them headed, or trying to go. Why be the brand ambassador when you can be the brand - that's more Meghan-think.


Good luck to her.


----------



## hellosunshine

wisconsin said:


> If he were black, you would totally sympathize with him, I think.



No, I wouldn't.


----------



## limom

hellosunshine said:


> I would never read nor watch any of Thomas Markle's attempts to make money but... I sometimes wonder...if Thomas was the Black parent...would the media and the general public be so sympathetic towards him? Would they have given him a media platform to denigrate on his mixed-race daughter - in the same manner that Thomas has? Somehow I doubt it.


Are you serious right now?
What does the man’s race have to do with anything?
Come on now.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> The public appetite for royal documentaries seems to be about one every few years.  And that's largely because people want to see them talking about their personal relationships with one another, royal life, Diana, Granny, and in the case of the Africa documentary, personal drama and complaints. (Although I don't think that documentary got very good ratings, despite all of the publicity.)  Whatever charity stuff the documentary is focused on is the medicine that comes along with it.
> 
> The Sussexes probably aren't going to be producing documentaries that are compelling by virtue of the subject matter.  Their knowledge on everything is largely superficial - although I don't think Meghan in particular is aware of that, based on how willing she is to expound at length on a whole host of topics that are out of her depth.  And they have no known documentary skills.
> 
> This will be sold based on their celebrity, and curiosity about their personal lives.  I don't think there is an audience for that over a whole series of documentaries.


In addition, even if they decide to produce a documentary (_whatever_) .. YOU NEED $$$'s up-front!!!  I would say that the majority of friends of mine in the Entertainment business who work in Film, Documentaries, Music, etc. - have all said that getting funding nowadays is not like it was before!  If you do get funding, those bean counters are going t be watching every penny .. bottom line, they pretty much want a guarantee that the project is going to make $$$.  A good friend of mine who produces Documentaries around Music/Bands is always trying to scrounge up $$$; he even asked me about setting up a Fund that Private Equity investors would invest in .. and that sunk like a dead fish.  Even crowd-funding is not eager to put in $$$ into things that they are concerned will just bleed $$$.  We'll see, but if they bomb .. that will likely be the end of that!


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> *80K Canadians sign petition telling Prince Harry, Meghan Markle to pay for their security*
> 
> Welcome to Canada, eh.
> 
> More than 80,000 people in the Great White North have signed an online petition demanding that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pay for their security detail while they’re in town.
> 
> The petition, from the fiscally conservative Canadian Taxpayer Federation, racked up the signatures over six days from residents who refuse to use taxpayer money toward the estimated millions of dollars needed annually to safeguard the Sussexes.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan are on Vancouver Island preparing to begin a new life with their 8-month-old son, Archie, after stepping back from the British royal family.
> 
> “Canadians are pleased to welcome the Duke and Duchess to Canada, but have made it crystal clear that taxpayers should not be forced to support them while they are living here,” said Aaron Wudrick, the federation’s federal director. “All Canadians wish them well as they realize their ambition of financial independence.”
> 
> Wudrick’s group delivered the signatures to the prime minister’s office Tuesday.
> 
> Details are still unclear on security when Harry and Meghan formally leave the monarchy this spring. Costs to protect the family could top $10 million annually, the Globe and Mail reported.
> 
> Bruce Hallsor, of the Monarchist League of Canada, told the Vancouver Sun there doesn’t seem to be “any expectation” that the family is going to “receive any money from the Canadian taxpayer.”
> 
> Hallsor told the paper Harry could “still be a target for the Taliban,” since he did complete two tours of duty in Afghanistan with the British army.
> 
> The next chapter of Harry and Meghan’s life has not exactly started smoothly. The Sun reported that on their first day in Vancouver, the family threatened to sue prying paparazzi outside their home.
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/22/80k-...arry-meghan-markle-to-pay-for-their-security/



I agree with this petition.  I would like them to face the consequence of their 'sass', and pay for their own security like actors/actresses/ in hollywood.   And what's with this gibberish with Prince Charles, his father giving him allowances or money?  If you have the gall to leave the royal family and yet accept their money, you're a loser.  If you leave, just leave, I'd respect you more.  Have some dignity and be a man, don't be so despicable!  The only thing I'd pay would be, Harry's medical bills and medications if any-that's it.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> In addition, even if they decide to produce a documentary (_whatever_) .. YOU NEED $$$'s up-front!!!  I would say that the majority of friends of mine in the Entertainment business who work in Film, Documentaries, Music, etc. - have all said that getting funding nowadays is not like it was before!  If you do get funding, those bean counters are going t be watching every penny .. bottom line, they pretty much want a guarantee that the project is going to make $$$.  A good friend of mine who produces Documentaries around Music/Bands is always trying to scrounge up $$$; he even asked me about setting up a Fund that Private Equity investors would invest in .. and that sunk like a dead fish.  Even crowd-funding is not eager to put in $$$ into things that they are concerned will just bleed $$$.  We'll see, but if they bomb .. that will likely be the end of that!


I can see them getting financing on the first project but not in the long run unless they are good at it.
I command you for making peace with your parents.


----------



## bag-mania

I wish we could look about five years into the future and see how they were doing. Or whether they are still together.

Because I can imagine Harry thinking at some point, "I gave it all up for her." Here's hoping she proves to be worth it for you, Harry.


----------



## threadbender

limom said:


> And expect to keep my title and my corporate apartment for when I need/feel like coming.


Oh, yes, of course! I definitely need them to provide a home base for me. And, they need to keep it up and the larder full.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

PatsyCline said:


> Wow, that’s stretching things to the absurd. Keeping a stiff upper lip is an alleged British trait, has nothing particular against the Royal family. You’re grasping at straws with that one.


In fact I think that sentence was an “offence” to all British people, not only the RF.
You don’t move to a country and publicly say that a trait of that country is bad, while your point of view is far better.
And I’m not a stiff upper lip person, not at all.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> There's no telling. Nothing would surprise me about these two anymore. I can see a future of them slapping their "brand" on all sorts of tacky products. We can probably expect a line of cosmetics, hair care products, inexpensive jewelry, cologne, the sky's the limit.


Well their wedding memorabilia including tea are at TJ Max on the clearance bin. I would have bought the tea but found some good quality tea. With their teas I was not sure what I would be getting.


----------



## rose60610

IMO M&H had this whole scheme hatched well before they married. M's "poor me" crap was written into the script to attempt to lend credence to the "mean Media" partly being blamed for breaking off from The Crown.  Somebody approached them about making obscene money, being able to woke the world, promote pet causes and do whatever they want with no constraints--things that wouldn't fly as being as part of the BRF. I think they can surpass the fortunes that Paris Hilton, the K Clan, Gwyneth, Jessica Simpson, Michael Jordan, Martha Stewart and others have made. They already marketed themselves by getting the huge royal wedding, etc before telling the RF "Thanks Suckers!"  They're certainly not short on name recognition, free press coverage, a fairytale story based on a real life fairytale background. Here come a myriad of products ranging from perfumes, sheets, luggage, figurines, alcohol products (nod to Clooney) to lifestyle blogs, documentaries, you name it. M will be on even more covers with articles on how hard working she is and brave to leave the RF, when all she really had to do is pimp The Crown six ways to Sunday.


----------



## CeeJay

maryg1 said:


> In fact I think that sentence was an “offence” to all British people, not only the RF.
> You don’t move to a country and publicly say that a trait of that country is bad, while your point of view is far better.
> And I’m not a stiff upper lip person, not at all.


When I was working in the UK, I made sure to read up on their likes/dislikes such that I did not offend my colleagues.  To a certain degree, as an American, they did give me more leeway, but there were times when I realized that I needed to let something go .. such that we could progress on what we were working on.  Bottom line, both on holiday and working, I have always said the same thing .. *one needs to respect the cultures/traditions of the country in which you are in *.. PERIOD END-OF-STORY!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Well their wedding memorabilia including tea are at TJ Max on the clearance bin. I would have bought the tea but found some good quality tea. With their teas I was not sure what I would be getting.



Oddly, I saw several tins of their wedding tea at a booth at my state's Irish Festival a couple of months back and nobody was buying. I guess few people want to see Harry and Meghan's smiling faces when they are making their tea. I know I don't.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I BET lots of brands are knocking on their door. And dear lord I hope they don’t go down that road of base celebrity-ness. But how else will they make their money? IDK I think they’ve put themselves into a corner and I am very interested to see which route they take. Diana May have “put out” a book but clearly it wasn’t for monetary gain. This would be just ugh.



This is what I read, it's just from memory, so probably isn't a complete list:
1. Books (with a ghost writer almost certainly, life story type stuff). Problem is that MM almost certainly signed an NDA when she married Harry and I don't think Harry is so alienated and hates his granny so much, that he would want to publish something that would hurt her.
2. Children's books (ghost written or written by them to fund their foundation)
3. Interview with Oprah ($20 million perhaps once)
4. Produce/voice over work in documentaries for Netflix.
5. Other acting work for Meghan perhaps.  No clue if there would be much demand for her as an actress.
6. Merchandising of stuff they've trademarked. Stationary, coffee mugs, pajamas, whatever lol.
7. Board of Director positions on companies for which they would be paid or receive stock.  Can't imagine  they would be very highly in demand.  Boards have to answer to their shareholders.  There are useless directors sitting on Boards all around the world of course, but Harry would face extra scrutiny by shareholders and Boards alike.
8. Board of Director positions for charitable foundations including their own (which might pay them depending on the charity).
9. Product endorsements.  Perfume, clothes, watches, whatever.
10.  Paid speaking circuit.  Harry is a pretty good public speaker and could bring in good money doing this but he'd have to travel a lot.
ETA 11. Lifestyle blog?


----------



## Clearblueskies

scarlet555 said:


> I agree with this petition.  I would like them to face the consequence of their 'sass', and pay for their own security like actors/actresses/ in hollywood.   And what's with this gibberish with Prince Charles, his father giving him allowances or money?  If you have the gall to leave the royal family and yet accept their money, you're a loser.  If you leave, just leave, I'd respect you more.  Have some dignity and be a man, don't be so despicable!  The only thing I'd pay would be, Harry's medical bills and medications if any-that's it.


I agree.  How many of us would step back from our jobs - without notice - disappear on holiday, and expect someone else to sort out the financial and workload consequences of our unilateral decision, such that we’re not inconvenienced at all?


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> Meghan seems like the embodiment of millennial vulnerability (some may call it snowflake) meets celebrity self-promotion... meeting a traditional, duty-bound environment quite apart from all that. And it was a train wreck. Frankly same thing happened in my head as I’ve tried to wrap my head around this whole situation. It’s like if I see Meghan as any celebrity I wouldn’t find her actions very off-putting or at the very least surprising but in the royal context... yeah, it’s just not the right place at all for all of that. They were probably egged on by the public/media initial reaction of “look, they’re modernizing the royal family yay”... but it went too far.



100%

And given that she is an educated woman (or at least, attended college), at her age she should have known this.

For the most part I am totally not interested in anything about her anymore, other than occasionally watching the train wreck that is their master plan unfold.


----------



## daisychainz

rose60610 said:


> IMO M&H had this whole scheme hatched well before they married. M's "poor me" crap was written into the script to attempt to lend credence to the "mean Media" partly being blamed for breaking off from The Crown.  Somebody approached them about making obscene money, being able to woke the world, promote pet causes and do whatever they want with no constraints--things that wouldn't fly as being as part of the BRF. I think they can surpass the fortunes that Paris Hilton, the K Clan, Gwyneth, Jessica Simpson, Michael Jordan, Martha Stewart and others have made. They already marketed themselves by getting the huge royal wedding, etc before telling the RF "Thanks Suckers!"  They're certainly not short on name recognition, free press coverage, a fairytale story based on a real life fairytale background. Here come a myriad of products ranging from perfumes, sheets, luggage, figurines, alcohol products (nod to Clooney) to lifestyle blogs, documentaries, you name it. M will be on even more covers with articles on how hard working she is and brave to leave the RF, when all she really had to do is pimp The Crown six ways to Sunday.


Totally agree with you - Meghan, or Harry and Meghan, went in with a game plan that may - in her case - have predated him. I just wonder who the 'somebody' is/are who advised them. The extraction planning was quite good.


----------



## limom

youngster said:


> This is what I read, it's just from memory, so probably isn't a complete list:
> 1. Books (with a ghost writer almost certainly, life story type stuff). Problem is that MM almost certainly signed an NDA when she married Harry and I don't think Harry is so alienated and hates his granny so much, that he would want to publish something that would hurt her.
> 2. Children's books (ghost written or written by them to fund their foundation)
> 3. Interview with Oprah ($20 million perhaps once)
> 4. Produce/voice over work in documentaries for Netflix.
> 5. Other acting work for Meghan perhaps.  No clue if there would be much demand for her as an actress.
> 6. Merchandising of stuff they've trademarked. Stationary, coffee mugs, pajamas, whatever lol.
> 7. Board of Director positions on companies for which they would be paid or receive stock.  Can't imagine  they would be very highly in demand.  Boards have to answer to their shareholders.  There are useless directors sitting on Boards all around the world of course, but Harry would face extra scrutiny by shareholders and Boards alike.
> 8. Board of Director positions for charitable foundations including their own (which might pay them depending on the charity).
> 9. Product endorsements.  Perfume, clothes, watches, whatever.
> 10.  Paid speaking circuit.  Harry is a pretty good public speaker and could bring in good money doing this but he'd have to travel a lot.
> ETA 11. Lifestyle blog?


Reality tv? God forbid.


----------



## joyeaux

Flatsy said:


> The Sussex website was VERY clear on this point.  It said that by giving up the 5% Sovereign Grant money, they will have achieved financial independence. The website said absolutely nothing about giving up the 95% funding they got from Duchy of Cornwall, and I think they intended to keep it.



It’s semantics, just like Meghan’s Vogue article talking about having this conversation with Michelle ***** over her— whatever it was— salad and “burgeoning belly” or some such similar nonsense... when it very quickly came out the only thing she was doing over lunch was _reading an email from Michelle_.

It’s like they assume all of us are dumb plebs that only take things at face value. “Giving up money? WELL DONE Sussexes!” Oh wait. That’s actually only 5% of your income.

Insulting. Methinks the odds are not going to ever be in their favor as far as keeping Daddy Charles as their personal checkbook.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

joyeaux said:


> It’s semantics, just like Meghan’s Vogue article talking about having this conversation with Michelle ***** conversation over her (whatever it was) salad and “burgeoning belly” or some such similar nonsense... when it very quickly came out the only thing she was doing over lunch was _reading an email from Michelle_.



Why on earth would one publicly lie like that? Not even thinking about her apparently feeling all the onlookers are idiots, but she must have known there's a good chance it would get back to Michelle?


----------



## Lodpah

The gut feeling I have is the reasons the celebrities they courted are  not speaking out is because of Harry. Without Harry she’s quite not in their line of sight. 

These people stick together and I hope for Meghan’s sake she realizes this.


----------



## Chagall

Lodpah said:


> About Thomas Markle. He knows his daughter has lost her sparkle and all Harry does is harkle (it’s a real word) and I’m not trying to be cute.
> 
> Anyway, I get angry at my father too but to throw him at the dogs and have him out of my life? If he passed away without me making amends or to just even say I forgive you then I’m not human. Only the most egregious acts to humanity and my well being would I not have contact with him.
> 
> He obviously has to defend himself and so far all I read is that he still loves her and maybe he does not fit her image but then Harry is hardly looking like a prize these days.
> 
> I couldn’t believe how he was explaining how happy he was at that event he was speaking at but he looked so miserable but once he got through MM prepared speech in the beginning where she was at center albeit not there physically and started talking about his charities, he was not fumbling and actually sailed through it, smiling while he was talking.
> 
> Harry’s heart is in Africa and Meghan doing these ‘charity’ visits on her own accord is simply stunning and conniving.


Can’t help but feel for Harry sometimes even if he did bring much of this on himself.


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> The gut feeling I have is the reasons the celebrities they courted are  not speaking out is because of Harry. Without Harry she’s quite not in their line of sight.
> 
> These people stick together and I hope for Meghan’s sake she realizes this.


There is a video out there of them and Beyonce/Jay. It is painful to watch.
Between the church hug and B’s side eyes. I could not stop laughing.
They probably feel the same about him however he was well born.
I would die to be in a meeting between Jay and Harry. 
As far as Meghan, she knows. Imho, she is no dummy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Ok I’ll stop but what really pissed me off is that she spoke hope to women and children. Saying things you’re strong, don’t quit, ad naseum, etc. Like she cared and what happens she bails. The most vulnerable people she encountered. She could have used her fame to enrich their charities and that would have spoken volumes. 
She dangled hope and encouragement only to swipe it back like she’s to people.


----------



## bag-mania

joyeaux said:


> Methinks the odds are not going to ever be in their favor as far as keeping Daddy Charles as their personal checkbook.



It would be fitting if Charles decides the tough love approach is best and completely cuts the purse strings in the spring. I think the entire royal family is so over Meghan at this point they would cut off the cash just to see if it drives her away from Harry.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> It would be fitting if Charles decides the tough love approach is best and completely cuts the purse strings in the spring. I think the entire royal family is so over Meghan at this point they would cut off the cash just to see if it drives her away from Harry.


He seems weak but yet he has a reputation for being frugal.
If it is on the dole, yes.
His own cash, they will be cut off.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Meghan was a nobody before Harry and no one was looking for her. Hundreds of thousands of people volunteer and support charities, that doesn’t make her unique to anything. No one would be offering her anything if it weren’t for who she married so let’s not act like she’s some person who has a ton to offer.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> He seems weak but yet he has a reputation for being frugal.
> If it is on the dole, yes.
> His own cash, they will be cut off.



Remembering how Charles was from the past, he could be vindictive if provoked. And Harry's "Megxit" was provoking to be sure. For a man who has devoted so much of his life to his duty, Charles is bound to resent his second son opting for a life of relative leisure yet expecting his Daddy to foot the bill.


----------



## hellosunshine

I see an incoming lawsuit in Thomas' future.....


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Netflix has expressed an interest in working with Meghan and Harry. Other media outlets will likely follow. Will they opt out of such high profile projects and pursue becoming economically self-sufficient quietly in the name of "privacy." Or, will they jump at any opportunity to be on TV like attention-starved, ego-driven barracudas? Time will tell.


I predict “creative differences” may occur..


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Remembering how Charles was from the past, he could be vindictive if provoked. And Harry's "Megxit" was provoking to be sure. For a man who has devoted so much of his life to his duty, Charles is bound to resent his second son opting for a life of relative leisure yet expecting his Daddy to foot the bill.


I absolutely believe those stories about Prince Charles being devastated over the whole thing. He in particular sacrificed SO much for the royal duty and I saw him trying hard to accommodate  their lifestyle so that they didn’t have to deal with the same pressures he dealt with when he was younger.... only for it all still to end in tatters.


----------



## Lounorada

ICant said:


> And that’s admirable to you? Them continuing to get an allowance from daddy? It makes them look like giant losers to me.


This!
Announcing to the world that 'we want to be financially independent, but, like, we really would like to keep getting a huge allowance from you every year also'.
Wow, so inspiring...


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> I see an incoming lawsuit in Thomas' future.....



What for? He doesn't have any money and the lawyers aren't going to waste their time going after anything that doesn't have any meat on the bone for them.

And who cares what Bette Midler thinks about it?


----------



## Flatsy

hellosunshine said:


> I see an incoming lawsuit in Thomas' future.....


While I'm sure Meghan would love to be able to sue anyone who talks about her negatively, including her own family members, the law entitles them to freedom of speech.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> This!
> Announcing to the world that 'we want to be financially independent, but, like, we really would like to keep getting a huge allowance from you every year also'.
> Wow, so inspiring...
> View attachment 4648009


Sounds like sulky teenage logic to me


----------



## limom

hellosunshine said:


> I see an incoming lawsuit in Thomas' future.....



The truth is a defense. Good luck with that lawsuit.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> What for? He doesn't have any money and the lawyers aren't going to waste their time going after anything that doesn't have any meat on the bone for them.
> 
> And who cares what Bette Midler thinks about it?


He spent all his money on Meghan.  Poor guy.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> The truth is a defense. Good luck with that lawsuit.


She probably could sue for _something_, like a libelous claim somewhere (Wouldn’t be surprised if he or Samantha embellished). Didn’t that one diver sue Elon Musk for calling him a pedo and they settled? But doubt she would go that far as to sue.... it wouldn’t reflect well on her any way they go about it.

Either way, I don’t have any sympathy for Thomas or Samantha. If my family gave negative interviews or photos about me to the media, you’re done. But that’s just me and I respect others’ different ways of handling it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> What for? He doesn't have any money and the lawyers aren't going to waste their time going after anything that doesn't have any meat on the bone for them.
> 
> And who cares what Bette Midler thinks about it?


He’s most likely judgment proof no money


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Thomas Markle is a scumbag parasite: this isn't just about Meghan, this is him expecting the BRF to look after him or he'll continue to sell stories.

His own words will come back to haunt him in that lawsuit.

And I quote:

_Meghan Markle’s dad has bragged about his plans to continue cashing in on her, saying *“the royals owe me” *— and telling his daughter, “It’s time to look after Daddy.” Thomas Markle, 75, admitted on an upcoming UK documentary that he is still making money off photos he staged with a paparazzo, even though they humiliated his daughter just days before her 2018 royal wedding — and that he lied to Prince Harry about his involvement.

“Absolutely. Those pictures will sell forever,” he told the doc, “Thomas Markle: My Story,” according to clips shared with the Mirror. Now the estranged dad — who has never met his royal grandson, Archie — has no qualms about demanding cash for interviews, including the one he was giving for the Channel 5 documentary, the report says.

“I’m going to defend myself and I’m going to be paid for it. I don’t care,” he told the Channel 5 documentary, the Mirror said. “*At this point, they owe me. The royals owe me. Harry owes me, Meghan owes me. What I’ve been through I should be rewarded for.”*
_
*Source*


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> She probably could sue for _something_, like a libelous claim somewhere (Wouldn’t be surprised if he or Samantha embellished). Didn’t that one diver sue Elon Musk for calling him a pedo and they settled? But doubt she would go that far as to sue.... it wouldn’t reflect well on her any way they go about it.
> 
> Either way, I don’t have any sympathy for Thomas or Samantha. If my family gave negative interviews or photos about me to the media, you’re done. But that’s just me and I respect others’ different ways of handling it.


From his point of view, it is legitimate to say that she is throwing it all for Money.
Sad situation, they both need to stop talking to the press. It is unbecoming, imho.


----------



## hellosunshine

Aqua01 said:


> Men , no wonder they're being played by chicks like M all the time



Well, as they say "_When You_'_ve Got it, You've Got it_ "


----------



## limom

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Thomas Markle is a scumbag parasite: this isn't just about Meghan, this is him expecting the BRF to look after him or he'll continue to sell stories.
> 
> His own words will come back to haunt him in that lawsuit.
> 
> And I quote:
> 
> _Meghan Markle’s dad has bragged about his plans to continue cashing in on her, saying *“the royals owe me” *— and telling his daughter, “It’s time to look after Daddy.” Thomas Markle, 75, admitted on an upcoming UK documentary that he is still making money off photos he staged with a paparazzo, even though they humiliated his daughter just days before her 2018 royal wedding — and that he lied to Prince Harry about his involvement.
> 
> “Absolutely. Those pictures will sell forever,” he told the doc, “Thomas Markle: My Story,” according to clips shared with the Mirror. Now the estranged dad — who has never met his royal grandson, Archie — has no qualms about demanding cash for interviews, including the one he was giving for the Channel 5 documentary, the report says.
> 
> “I’m going to defend myself and I’m going to be paid for it. I don’t care,” he told the Channel 5 documentary, the Mirror said. “*At this point, they owe me. The royals owe me. Harry owes me, Meghan owes me. What I’ve been through I should be rewarded for.”*
> _
> *Source*



How did the crown allow Harry to marry into that family?
Who says that the Queen was old fashioned? Hell no, she is very accepting, imho.


----------



## marthastoo

hellosunshine said:


> I would never read nor watch any of Thomas Markle's attempts to make money but... I sometimes wonder...if Thomas was the Black parent...would the media and the general public be so sympathetic towards him? Would they have given him a media platform to denigrate on his mixed-race daughter - in the same manner that Thomas has? Somehow I doubt it.


Um, I'm pretty sure the majority of the world is NOT sympathetic to Thomas Markle and see him as the pathetic, money-grubbing person that he is.  If, however, he were the black parent, I'm guessing people would falsely claim he was a convicted felon or some such.


----------



## Lounorada

maryg1 said:


> In fact I think that sentence was an “offence” to all British people, not only the RF.
> You don’t move to a country and publicly say that a trait of that country is bad, while your point of view is far better.
> And I’m not a stiff upper lip person, not at all.


Totally agree.
When I saw the clip of M talking about the British stiff upper lip in that woe-is-me interview, I was offended and so was my Dad who mentioned it to me a few days later (my Dad is British/English and I am half British/English, neiter of us have a stiff upper lip). He said to me 'Who does she think she is? She obviously hasn't spent much time getting to know many British people to paint them all with the same brush' and I totally agreed with him.
Half of my family are British and I have many British friends, none of them have a 'stiff upper lip' in fact they are all the complete opposite. I'm sure some British people are the type of people to have stiff upper lip as are people from many different cultures/countries. Having that type of attribute comes down to the individual personality, how they are brought up, life experiences etc. you're not taught it in school or instantly that way at birth because you happen to be British.
I hate generalizations like that.


----------



## limom

marthastoo said:


> Um, I'm pretty sure the majority of the world is NOT sympathetic to Thomas Markle and see him as the pathetic, money-grubbing person that he is.  If, however, he were the black parent, I'm guessing people would falsely claim he was a convicted felon or some such.


Who exactly will accuse anyone to be a felon because of their race?
I am lost here.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> How did the crown allow Harry to marry into that family?
> Who says that the Queen was old fashioned? Hell no, she is very accepting, imho.


I know
I think the average nice middle class family would have had concerns about her family and her lack of relationships with them.  But I'm guessing the queen felt like after what she went through after Diana's death she had to be accepting of Harry's choice.


----------



## marthastoo

You know, I keep reading posts about how much people have zero interest in Meghan and Harry, and will they please go away, and they will never buy buy anything/promote the Sussexes, etc.  And yet, 1315 pages later (and counting) ... um, I'm sure they're obsessed with her.  And every click on a DM article is promoting them.  Just saying.


----------



## limom

Lounorada said:


> Totally agree.
> When I saw the clip of M talking about the British stiff upper lip in that woe-is-me interview, I was offended and so was my Dad who mentioned it to me a few days later (my Dad is British/English and I am half British/English, neiter of us have a stiff upper lip). He said to me 'Who does she think she is? She obviously hasn't spent much time getting to know many British people to paint them all with the same brush' and I totally agreed with him.
> Half of my family are British and I have many British friends, none of them have a 'stiff upper lip' in fact they are all the complete opposite. I'm sure some British people are the type of people to have stiff upper lip as are people from many different cultures/countries. Having that type of attribute comes down to the individual personality, how they are brought up, life experiences etc. you're not taught it in school or instantly that way at birth because you happen to be British.
> I hate generalizations like that.


Funny as English is not my first language, I always thought of stiff upper lip as a compliment. 
The thing, you learn.


----------



## limom

marthastoo said:


> You know, I keep reading posts about how much people have zero interest in Meghan and Harry, and will they please go away, and they will never buy buy anything/promote the Sussexes, etc.  And yet, 1315 pages later (and counting) ... um, I'm sure they're obsessed with her.  And every click on a DM article is promoting them.  Just saying.


 Absolutely true.
This is my new soap opera.


----------



## wisconsin

limom said:


> Funny as English is not my first language, I always thought of stiff upper lip as a compliment.
> The thing, you learn.


Same here
Sometimes the best thing to do is to keep a stiff upper lip.
That’s diplomacy.


----------



## Aqua01

marthastoo said:


> You know, I keep reading posts about how much people have zero interest in Meghan and Harry, and will they please go away, and they will never buy buy anything/promote the Sussexes, etc.  And yet, 1315 pages later (and counting) ... um, I'm sure they're obsessed with her.  And every click on a DM article is promoting them.  Just saying.


Yeah, like I said, they are of great entertainment value. Can't wait for the trainwreck. Beats any reality TV at the moment.


----------



## Clearblueskies

hellosunshine said:


> Well, as they say "_When You_'_ve Got it, You've Got it_ "



This is pretty old news for Meghan.  Back a whole long 18 months ago when Meghan was basking in the RF family glow, and happy to be part of it.  Time flies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Remembering how Charles was from the past, he could be vindictive if provoked. And Harry's "Megxit" was provoking to be sure. For a man who has devoted so much of his life to his duty, Charles is bound to resent his second son opting for a life of relative leisure yet expecting his Daddy to foot the bill.


Unfortunately, from what I recall reading, Charles has a tremendous amount of guilt when it comes to his children and what occurred with his affair with Camilla and then (of course) what happened to Princess Diana.  While William was older, Harry was much younger, and it was said that he has used that 'guilt' to his advantage.  As I wrote many pages back, while many hoped that Charles would show some backbone, they also predicted that he would likely go along with their departure .. for now.  I think if they try to take advantage of him, at some point, he will cut them off .. again, time will tell.


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> The truth is a defense. Good luck with that lawsuit.


.. and didn't Bette Midler previously slam Meghan & Harry??? .. or am I thinking of someone else?  Seriously, who gives a flying 'F' to what many of these 'celebrities' think .. c'mon!


----------



## mdcx

Another posted a few pages back that there is no room to “advance” in the BRF. Everything is predetermined in regards to being wife of the brother to the heir. 
It is a lower level position.
No amount of hustle is going to turn it into a leading role. That would defintely bug Meghan imo. Aristocracy vs. meritocracy etc.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Unfortunately, from what I recall reading, Charles has a tremendous amount of guilt when it comes to his children and what occurred with his affair with Camilla and then (of course) what happened to Princess Diana.  While William was older, Harry was much younger, and it was said that he has used that 'guilt' to his advantage.  As I wrote many pages back, while many hoped that Charles would show some backbone, they also predicted that he would likely go along with their departure .. for now.  I think if they try to take advantage of him, at some point, he will cut them off .. again, time will tell.


He really seemed to bend over backwards to welcome her. He’s been a model parent imo during this fiasco. Honestly I believe this whole thing has been very good for the family’s image (their personal lives and sanity, that’s another story)... Charles has emerged like a doting dad; Queen is a sympathetic monarch; Wills and Kate are models for responsibility and family; and heck this has even shone a light on Eugenie and Beatrice’s responsible paths for financial independence. And who would’ve predicted just 5 years ago that the BRF would still be on front pages daily into 2020!!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> She probably could sue for _something_, like a libelous claim somewhere (Wouldn’t be surprised if he or Samantha embellished). Didn’t that one diver sue Elon Musk for calling him a pedo and they settled? But doubt she would go that far as to sue.... it wouldn’t reflect well on her any way they go about it.
> 
> Either way, I don’t have any sympathy for Thomas or Samantha. If my family gave negative interviews or photos about me to the media, you’re done. But that’s just me and I respect others’ different ways of handling it.


Burden is on the Plaintiff to *prove* the truth .. good luck with that!


----------



## Lounorada

wisconsin said:


> Same here
> Sometimes the best thing to do is to keep a stiff upper lip.
> That’s diplomacy.


So true.


----------



## CeeJay

marthastoo said:


> You know, I keep reading posts about how much people have zero interest in Meghan and Harry, and will they please go away, and they will never buy buy anything/promote the Sussexes, etc.  And yet, 1315 pages later (and counting) ... um, I'm sure they're obsessed with her.  And every click on a DM article is promoting them.  Just saying.


.. and your point is .. what? .. that we shouldn't be posting in this thread?  We've been down this road before; let's just leave it at that!


----------



## Lounorada

limom said:


> Funny as English is not my first language, I always thought of stiff upper lip as a compliment.
> The thing, you learn.


Oh, don't get me wrong, it's not necessarily a bad thing I just hate when people make a generalization that all people of a certain nationality have the same attribute


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Another posted a few pages back that there is no room to “advance” in the BRF. Everything is predetermined in regards to being wife of the brother to the heir.
> It is a lower level position.
> No amount of hustle is going to turn it into a leading role. That would defintely bug Meghan imo. Aristocracy vs. meritocracy etc.


.. and AGAIN, didn't she do all this 'research' into the BRF starting in her younger years (_what 8 - 10 years old_).  I'm sorry, but .. if she purports (_or others_) that she is "so smart", the fact that she was then ~ *surprised* ~ by the hierarchy in the BRF, their traditions, etc. -- well, that surely shows that someone *DID NOT* do their homework and/or simply felt that she was going to get around it (_as she seems to have a reputation for -_ "_what Meghan wants _..").  I am really dumbstruck by this; *DO NOT* move to a different country and expect that you .. will be given special treatment or "_well - this is how we do it in America_".  This really PISSES me off because I can't even say how many times I have had to defend my background (_American_) against those horrible stereotypes .. and what did she do??  *Uggh ... *


----------



## mdcx

Being talked about on gossip sites and on the DM is not my definition of success. Being discretely rich and living a largely private life would be. MM could have had that if she had played her cards right...


----------



## limom

.. and AGAIN, didn't she do all this 'research' into the BRF starting in her younger years (_what 8 - 10 years old_). I'm sorry, but .. if she purports (_or others_) that she is "so smart", the fact that she was then ~ *surprised* ~ by the hierarchy in the BRF, their traditions, etc. -- well, that surely shows that someone *DID NOT* do their homework and/or simply felt that she was going to get around it (_as she seems to have a reputation for -_ "_what Meghan wants _.."). I am really dumbstruck by this; *DO NOT* move to a different country and expect that you .. will be given special treatment or "_well - this is how we do it in America_". This really PISSES me off because I can't even say how many times I have had to defend my background (_American_) against those horrible stereotypes .. and what did she do??  *Uggh ...*

She was not surprised, she does not like it.
However, she likes the perks and I like to believe that she loves Harry.
So here we are.


----------



## lalame

She probably knew it would be tough but thought she could handle it or expected the same treatment Kate gets today - without understanding what Kate put up with for years and years to “earn” it. She could have achieved that with time, patience, and a little more discretion as she had all the building blocks for success - aka beauty, style and money. But definitely her own actions have contributed to a negative environment that has taken on a life of its own today. Even if she were to manage to do the right things now, people will be skeptical of her intentions. She has to rebuild the trust of the people first, and that probably requires her to really actually lay low.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> How did the crown allow Harry to marry into that family?
> Who says that the Queen was old fashioned? Hell no, she is very accepting, imho.


Well the Queen was very accepting of MM. She was afforded a lot more privileges than Kate in the beginning. She was very accepted and welcomed by everyone, aside from Will telling him to slow down a bit, which was reasonable advice. I think the BRF may have been a bit worried about Harry. He was put in the position of being the brother who would not be king and I think they wanted him happy and settled. They were given a beautiful  expensive wedding with Charles kindly walking Meghan down the isle and a completely renovated luxurious country home. Look how they have been repaid. No good deed goes unpunished.


----------



## tiktok

It’s pretty obvious that more than the money her father is looking for validation that he’s a good person and his behavior is justified. Given the level of emotional maturity that has been obvious to anyone above the age of 12, you’d think the resources and foresight of the Sussexes, not to mention the entire royal family, would be enough to keep him under control even if he’s not Meghan’s favorite person. The fact that this whole business is turning into a saga worse than some trash reality show is stunning and makes me truly question how intelligent these people truly are and how good their advisors and employees are. I feel sorry for the queen who found herself in the middle of a reality show that makes the Kardashians look classy at the age of 93. She’s certainly too old for this ****.


----------



## cafecreme15

Lodpah said:


> Ok I’ll stop but what really pissed me off is that she spoke hope to women and children. Saying things you’re strong, don’t quit, ad naseum, etc. Like she cared and what happens she bails. The most vulnerable people she encountered. She could have used her fame to enrich their charities and that would have spoken volumes.
> She dangled hope and encouragement only to swipe it back like she’s to people.


Just another example of her "do what I say not what I do" hypocrisy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> Wtf did she do that was so horrible?! Y’all are acting like she assassinated the Queen. Every person is entitled to change their mind and live their life the way THEY want to. Some of the comments in this thread show just how petty, jealous, and vicious people can be.


By the same token, people are entitled to THEIR opinion.
And as always , the ignore button is here for a reason.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

hellosunshine said:


> I would never read nor watch any of Thomas Markle's attempts to make money but... I sometimes wonder...if Thomas was the Black parent...would the media and the general public be so sympathetic towards him? Would they have given him a media platform to denigrate on his mixed-race daughter - in the same manner that Thomas has? Somehow I doubt it.



We don't know that it's about money for Thomas.  One could also wonder if he were the black parent, if Meghan would be so unforgiving.  But, I don't think most people think about it in terms race.  Of course, there are others who insist on continuing to make it an issue.


----------



## PatsyCline

ICant said:


> And that’s admirable to you? Them continuing to get an allowance from daddy? It makes them look like giant losers to me.


Oh that’s another topic of conversation entirely. 

I have no idea how royalty (British or otherwise) pay their bills. Maybe this is how it’s done?

I do recall watching a program on the Queen Mother who apparently had a weakness for some expensive liquor and constantly was over budget, but the Queen paid the extra without complaint.


----------



## limom

PatsyCline said:


> Oh that’s another topic of conversation entirely.
> 
> I have no idea how royalty (British or otherwise) pay their bills. Maybe this is how it’s done?
> 
> I do recall watching a program on the Queen Mother who apparently had a weakness for some expensive liquor and constantly was over budget, but the Queen paid the extra without complaint.


Holy crap. How much booze was the queen mother consuming?
Is that the secret of her long life?


----------



## prettyprincess

ICant said:


> They aren’t entitled to live life their way though that’s the point lol. They want to live their life on someone else’s dime with titles and royal duties when they feel like it and the queen said no.
> 
> I think people need to go beyond the fluff in US media and really LOOK at what they did/were trying to do. And Charles’ money still comes from the public tax payers in the end. So they aren’t living life their way, on their own dime etc.
> 
> And posters are also entitled to think it’s gross that they plan to merch the hell out of themselves LOL. People tear up the Kardashians for it why should harry & meghan be immune?



So they’re judged for taking money and judged for wanting to make it on their own? Makes sense.
It seems to me like a majority of the blame is falling on Meghan as if she’s some Svengali who brainwashed poor helpless Harry into abandoning his family. It was his choice as well! Should she stay in a situation that is emotionally and psychologically detrimental to her well being to make the loyalists happy??

Also, people tear into the kardashians bc they (to name just a few reasons) steal ideas, culturally appropriate, perpetuate very dangerous standards of “beauty” that they achieved through plastic surgery. You can’t compare the two.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Absolutely true.
> This is my new soap opera.


Absolutely. You couldn’t make this stuff up. I am sitting watching a TV series and I can’t drag myself away from this. Couldn’t tell you what is happening in the series. This is way better.


----------



## Tootsie17

Chagall said:


> Absolutely. You couldn’t make this stuff up. I am sitting watching a TV series and I can’t drag myself away from this. Couldn’t tell you what is happening in the series. This is way better.


I almost feel like popping popcorn! All the comments are so interesting and passionate.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Holy crap. How much booze was the queen mother consuming?
> Is that the secret of her long life?


 It makes one consider giving up being a tea totaler.


----------



## lalame

I don’t really pile onto hate about her looks, style, friendships etc as that’s just either territory I don’t know about or don’t agree with but I think her persona as we’ve seen it in the press and all the events that have transpired are fair game.


----------



## youngster

Chagall said:


> Well the Queen was very accepting of MM. She was afforded a lot more privileges than Kate in the beginning. She was very accepted and welcomed by everyone, aside from Will telling him to slow down a bit, which was reasonable advice. I think the BRF may have been a bit worried about Harry. He was put in the position of being the brother who would not be king and I think they wanted him happy and settled.* They were given a beautiful  expensive wedding with Charles kindly walking Meghan down the isle* and a completely renovated luxurious country home. Look how they have been repaid. No good deed goes unpunished.



From what I've read, Charles really fought to make sure Harry and Meghan were able to have a church wedding, which he was not allowed when he married Camilla since they were both divorced.  Charles and Camilla had a civil ceremony followed by a blessing in St. George's chapel.  Meghan, as a divorced woman, should also not have been allowed to be married in St. George's Chapel at Windsor Castle but Charles really pushed for it and made it happen for her and Harry.


----------



## hellosunshine

ICant said:


> I think people need to go beyond the fluff in US media and really LOOK at what they did/were trying to do. And Charles’ money still comes from the public tax payers in the end. So they aren’t living life their way, on their own dime etc.



Wait, didn't Meghan & Harry release themselves from that measly 5%? Didn't they say through a "phased approach they'd transition towards financial autonomy"? We know they're currently receiving a portion of funds from the Duchy of Cornwall - which is completely contingent on Prince Charles' goodwill. I doubt Prince Charles would appreciate to be told what to do with these funds. If he wants to fund his son, that is his decision. I wouldn't worry too much either way- Harry & Meghan will cut those financial strings soon. 

Btw, the Duchy consists of funds that are public, charitable and PRIVATE. It's not ALL public tax payer dollars.


----------



## mrsinsyder

ICant said:


> I don’t really care if the Duchy is some or all public money - Harry & Meghan need to take handouts from his daddy. It’s pathetic no matter what acrobatics in logic you try to post to make them look good.



Amen. He’s a 35 year old man. I’ve been making my own way since I was 17.


----------



## limom

ICant said:


> I don’t really care if the Duchy is some or all public money - Harry & Meghan need to take handouts from his daddy.


While proclaiming wanting independence on the gram.
Just do it already.


----------



## hellosunshine

It's really breath-taking how effective tabloid campaigns can be. Food for thought.


----------



## prettyprincess

limom said:


> Being a celebrity, one has to expect being talked about by people. She does not want perfect strangers discussing her problems, she could have_ chosen _another way of life.
> Derision brought on by her silly decisions.
> I don’t believe that she cares about what people think about her whatsoever. It is her story line at this point, imho.



I doubt she had any real understanding of how the vicious the media could get. Do you think Diana knew it would be the death of her? Probably not.  
But alas, Meghan has taken your advice and she’s choosing another way of life. I hope she and her family have a happy healthy life in Canada.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PatsyCline

limom said:


> Holy crap. How much booze was the queen mother consuming?
> Is that the secret of her long life?


Apparently she liked to entertain a lot, and had a soft spot for a particularly expensive liquor. I can’t recall now if it was champagne or wine.


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> I doubt she had any real understanding of how the vicious the media could get. Do you think Diana knew it would be the death of her? Probably not.
> But alas, Meghan has taken your advice and she’s choosing another way of life. I hope she and her family have a happy healthy life in Canada.


Diana died because she was driven by someone under the influence and she was not wearing a seatbelt.
Did you notice that there were zero pictures during the six weeks “vacation”?
If she wants to get away from the attention she can.
so there, do it!


----------



## CeeJay

PatsyCline said:


> Apparently she liked to entertain a lot, and had a soft spot for a particularly expensive liquor. I can’t recall now if it was champagne or wine.


I thought it was either Vodka or Gin; stronger stuff!


----------



## prettyprincess

limom said:


> Diana died because she was driven by someone under the influence and she was not wearing a seatbelt.
> Did you notice that there were zero pictures during the six weeks “vacation”?
> If she wants to get away from the attention she can.
> so there, do it!


I’m sure the paparazzi, who relentlessly hunted her like an animal, had nothing to do with it. But yea, she should’ve chosen another path.


----------



## meluvs2shop

This thread gets more action than newlyweds. STOP attacking other members that differ from your opinion/beliefs, because at the end of the day, that’s all it is, an opinion. Some of you like to stir the pot, really?! Keep it moving.


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> I’m sure the paparazzi, who relentlessly hunted her like an animal, had nothing to do with it. But yea, she should’ve chosen another path.


Yes, her sister refused to marry charles.
It is a choice.


----------



## mshermes

This thread gets more action than newlyweds.


----------



## lalame

mshermes said:


> This thread gets more action than newlyweds.



I know, I never really thought about Meghan before but this thread certainly sucked me in.

No doubt, the media and millions of strangers can be nasty (to all celebs)... Enough celebrities have said as much that I believe it. I’ve also been caught up in pap storms before while they were chasing their target and it is indeed terrifying. But I think this all goes back to... this could’ve probably been avoided if they hadn’t rushed in. I think they can probably turn public perception around... life is long, hopefully. But until then, it’s hard not to form an opinion if you’re a royal watcher or you just get served news about them all the time.


----------



## muchstuff

limom said:


> The weather, imo.
> Canada is not for sissies,imho.


The weather on the west coast isn't much different from England. Back east is fine if you like high humidity in the summer and snow up to your butt in winter .


----------



## limom

muchstuff said:


> The weather on the west coast isn't much different from England. The east coast is fine if you like high humidity in the summer and snow up to your butt in winter .


Basically, it sucks!


----------



## Aqua01

meluvs2shop said:


> This thread gets more action than newlyweds. *STOP attacking other members that differ from your opinion/beliefs, *because at the end of the day, that’s all it is, an opinion. Some of you like to stir the pot, really?! Keep it moving.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mshermes said:


> This thread gets more action than newlyweds.


Sometimes it feels more like an old married couple...


----------



## mdcx

The suggestion that posters are jealous of MM is curious to me. I’m an old married lady with lovely in-laws and a fine life. I am not gnashing my teeth that MM got to Harry before I did. Envy is not something I feel when I look at her life. The money would be fun, but that’s it.


----------



## muchstuff

Tootsie17 said:


> I almost feel like popping popcorn! All the comments are so interesting and passionate.


----------



## lalame

I called her a style icon, and I stand by that. Does that mean I find her the MOST fashionable? No, but there are many style icons I don’t find fashionable (Kim Kardashian would be one). It’s just a term for someone who people find fashionable and want to emulate. Doesn’t mean everyone, but I see enough out there to consider her one. Other women who are also considered style icons have had their messy moments too, so I don’t really blink at a few bad appearances.

I’d just consider anyone that can inspire large amounts of sales due to their style, like the Markle Sparkle or Kate Effect is an icon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

mdcx said:


> The suggestion that posters are jealous of MM is curious to me. I’m an old married lady with lovely in-laws and a fine life. I am not gnashing my teeth that MM got to Harry before I did. Envy is not something I feel when I look at her life. The money would be fun, but that’s it.



I’m thinking it’s more of a subconscious thing for women (not you specifically). Women in general can be extremely catty and most of the the time they don’t even know why they feel so much hatred or disdain towards her. Maybe it’s because someone “like her” married a prince? Or maybe it’s bc her husband has her back? Or maybe it’s bc she decided that the “fairytale” wasn’t enough for her, she wants more. She took control of her situation and that makes people very uncomfortable. 
 She’s an articulate, accomplished, philanthropic, beautiful young woman, who is always kind and courteous to her audience. I guess that’s a trigger for some.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Or maybe she’s just unlikeable? It’s not that deep.


----------



## wisconsin

prettyprincess said:


> I’m thinking it’s more of a subconscious thing for women (not you specifically). Women in general can be extremely catty and most of the the time they don’t even know why they feel so much hatred or disdain towards her. Maybe it’s because someone “like her” married a prince? Or maybe it’s bc her husband has her back? Or maybe it’s bc she decided that the “fairytale” wasn’t enough for her, she wants more. She took control of her situation and that makes people very uncomfortable.
> She’s an articulate, accomplished, philanthropic, beautiful young woman, who is always kind and courteous to her audience. I guess that’s a trigger for some.



Thats what I thought she was.. articulate accomplished, a breath of fresh air.
Until she showed her true colors.
And of course, I don’t know her personally just like everyone here does not know her personally.
So we are all speaking from the same stage whether we like what we see or don’t.


----------



## lalame

And remember, you can be all of the above and still be unlikeable. Nice, articulate, philanthropic people also sometimes make bad choices that piss people off. And they can be all of those good qualities but also be a whiny person who rubs people the wrong way. I think Meghan has many good qualities but she has clearly rubbed people the wrong way with some highly visible choices and behaviors. People are complicated.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

limom said:


> How did the crown allow Harry to marry into that family?
> Who says that the Queen was old fashioned? Hell no, she is very accepting, imho.


I think it was a threat - I'm gonna marry her one way or another, so you're on board, or you're disgraced when we run off and elope.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I very _consciously_ dislike the Duchess of Grifterton.


----------



## Aqua01

mrsinsyder said:


> Or maybe she’s just unlikeable? It’s not that deep.


Isn't it funny that it doesn't matter how many times we spelled it out, repeated ad nauseam as to why we're not charmed by M, the only true reasons can only be because we're 1) stinking jealous, 2) a racist, and 3) nasty vicious people, because how can someone just not _adore_ the woke goddess? She's is all that's good in this world. 
Girl, you and I, and so members in this thread have sooo many severe issues to work through. Thankfully we have Megan's stans to remind us to get some help.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Aqua01 said:


> Isn't it funny that it doesn't matter how many times we spelled it out, repeated ad nauseam as to why we're not charmed by M, the only true reasons can only be because we're 1) stinking jealous, 2) *a racist*, and 3) nasty vicious people, because how can someone just not _adore_ the woke goddess? She's is all that's good in this world.
> Girl, you and I, and so members in this thread have sooo many severe issues to work through. Thankfully we have Megan's stans to remind us to get some help.



Can’t remember the last time I wore a Nazi uniform. Harry, on the other hand...


----------



## lalame

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think it was a threat - I'm gonna marry her one way or another, so you're on board, or you're disgraced when we run off and elope.



They probably have permanent PTSD from the Wallis fiasco, and then Diana and Fergie... this time around, they did everything they could've done to be accommodating and it still blew up in their faces.  Wouldn't be surprised if they went back to only marrying relatives.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> They probably have permanent PTSD from the Wallis fiasco, and then Diana and Fergie... this time around, they did everything they could've done to be accommodating and it still blew up in their faces.  _Wouldn't be surprised if they went back to only marrying relatives._



LMAO no you didn’t


----------



## ccbaggirl89

lalame said:


> They probably have permanent PTSD from the Wallis fiasco, and then Diana and Fergie... this time around, they did everything they could've done to be accommodating and it still blew up in their faces.  Wouldn't be surprised if they went back to only marrying relatives.


No kidding. I bet this is the last time they want an American marrying in for a long long long time....


----------



## Aqua01

mrsinsyder said:


> Can’t remember the last time I wore a Nazi uniform. Harry, on the other hand...


Yeah, not brightest bulb in the box. I mean, look what he brought home that turned him into a frog.....


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> I’m thinking it’s more of a subconscious thing for women (not you specifically). Women in general can be extremely catty and most of the the time they don’t even know why they feel so much hatred or disdain towards her. Maybe it’s because someone “like her” married a prince? Or maybe it’s bc her husband has her back? Or maybe it’s bc she decided that the “fairytale” wasn’t enough for her, she wants more. She took control of her situation and that makes people very uncomfortable.
> She’s an articulate, accomplished, philanthropic, beautiful young woman, who is always kind and courteous to her audience. I guess that’s a trigger for some.


Nope, no subconscious thing here. I feel zero envy/jealousy but I am not a big fan of the couple at the moment.
Bear with me as menopause is hitting me hard. Could that be the reason?
Unconscious feelings brought on by menopause?


----------



## V0N1B2

prettyprincess said:


> Maybe it’s because someone “like her” married a prince?


Explain?


----------



## prettyprincess

limom said:


> Nope, no subconscious thing here. I feel zero envy/jealousy but I am not a big fan of the couple at the moment.
> Bear with me as menopause is hitting me hard. Could that be the reason?
> Unconscious feelings brought on by menopause?


Haha! Could be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

V0N1B2 said:


> Explain?


A 37 yr old, American, actress, woman of color, divorcee.


----------



## V0N1B2

prettyprincess said:


> A 37 yr old, American, actress, woman of color, divorcee.


Right. The bi-racial thing again. 
Are the “women in general” you’re alluding to the ones posting in this thread, or?  

I mean, I can’t stand Kellyanne Conway either, does this make me racist against crypt keepers?

I guess I just need confirmation from you that you aren’t specifically generalizing about the women posting in this thread and inferring they’re somehow racist against bi-racial women.  Because not one poster here has given that impression, IMO.


----------



## prettyprincess

V0N1B2 said:


> Right. The bi-racial thing again.
> Are the “women in general” you’re alluding to the ones posting in this thread, or?
> 
> *I mean, I can’t stand Kellyanne Conway either, does this make me racist against crypt keepers?*
> 
> I guess I just need confirmation from you that you aren’t specifically generalizing about the women posting in this thread and inferring they’re somehow racist against bi-racial women.  Because not one poster here has given that impression, IMO.



Lmao!! That was really funny actually. 

Anyway, I was basically trying to figure out why she elicits such a negative reaction from women. I truly don’t understand the venom directed at her. 
As for the racism, I didn’t accuse anyone of that. Is it a possibility, sure, but I don't know what’s really in people’s hearts.


----------



## Lodpah

prettyprincess said:


> A 37 yr old, American, actress, woman of color, divorcee.


Actually it’s deeper than skin.


----------



## Lodpah

prettyprincess said:


> Lmao!! That was really funny actually.
> 
> Anyway, I was basically trying to figure out why she elicits such a negative reaction from women. I truly don’t understand the venom directed at her.
> As for the racism, I didn’t accuse anyone of that. Is it a possibility, sure, but I don't know what’s really in people’s hearts.


To me it’s because of the lack of content in her character.


----------



## lalame

prettyprincess said:


> Lmao!! That was really funny actually.
> 
> Anyway, I was basically trying to figure out why she elicits such a negative reaction from women. I truly don’t understand the venom directed at her.
> As for the racism, I didn’t accuse anyone of that. Is it a possibility, sure, but I don't know what’s really in people’s hearts.



I don't think it's just women... so I don't think it's necessarily a women hating her thing. She has a personality that can bother people. For me, I'm always bothered by a "sugary" personality. She just makes me recall people I've known many times in my life, who are always "on" and have this constant "life is so charming" thing going on. That's my _personal_ reaction to it. I do think she's beautiful, has a cute style, genuinely cares about things like animal causes and I respect that.... and I don't believe some things I've seen like that bizarre video with her "rummaging" in the car. But her persona and this whole fiasco are so messy and right now, that just happens to ***** the other things. With celebrities, we don't KNOW them so whatever you see most recently is just how you view them overall. And most recently, she's come off whiny, flighty, impulsive, spoiled, image-conscious, etc. It could just be momentary; if she truly disappeared for awhile, people would probably forget and she could reshape her image.


----------



## lalame

^ and that's not even getting into people's reactions who have developed a stronger sense of respect and appreciation for the British royal family than I do. She's seen as straight up disruptive (not in a good way) and disrespectful for them. Literal home wrecker!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

prettyprincess said:


> Lmao!! That was really funny actually.
> 
> Anyway, I was basically trying to figure out why she elicits such a negative reaction from women. I truly don’t understand the venom directed at her.
> As for the racism, I didn’t accuse anyone of that. Is it a possibility, sure, but I don't know what’s really in people’s hearts.


Women have great intuition, especially about other women playing games. Even through video and images you can see the acting coming through, all the pretense. Imagine meeting her in person and seeing that - she had to run away, everyone in Harry's circle was viewing her up-close and she was probably feeling like a fraud.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think the RF might be viewing this whole debacle as Harry’s Rumspringa.


----------



## prettyprincess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Women have great intuition, especially about other women playing games. Even through video and images you can see the acting coming through, all the pretense. Imagine meeting her in person and seeing that - she had to run away, everyone in Harry's circle was viewing her up-close and she was probably feeling like a fraud.



Women do have great intuition, but we’re also unfairly critical of other women. She’s in an unbelievably difficult situation. Imagine being scrutinized and picked apart ruthlessly, on a daily basis. 

Just today in this forum someone criticized her for sticking her tongue out. Like she’s obviously trying to be playful and silly, maybe trying to show us a glimpse of who she really is, and it turns into oh she’s 38, she doesn’t know how to conduct herself, how déclassé! But if she acts proper, it’s pretense. It’s impossible! No wonder she wants to leave. And maybe she’s putting on “an act” as a defense mechanism because she doesn’t trust anyone anymore! 

Her husband knows the real part of her and he loves her. He’s giving up everything for her, that says something.


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> I’m thinking it’s more of a subconscious thing for women (not you specifically). Women in general can be extremely catty and most of the the time they don’t even know why they feel so much hatred or disdain towards her. Maybe it’s because someone “like her” married a prince? Or maybe it’s bc her husband has her back? Or maybe it’s bc she decided that the “fairytale” wasn’t enough for her, she wants more. She took control of her situation and that makes people very uncomfortable.
> She’s an articulate, accomplished, philanthropic, beautiful young woman, who is always kind and courteous to her audience. I guess that’s a trigger for some.


So you’re telling me the reason I don’t like her is because she’s too awesome? Ok then.


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> Lmao!! That was really funny actually.
> 
> Anyway, I was basically trying to figure out why she elicits such a negative reaction from women. I truly don’t understand the venom directed at her.
> As for the racism, I didn’t accuse anyone of that. Is it a possibility, sure, but I don't know what’s really in people’s hearts.


I think posters here have made the reasons why they don’t like her pretty clear over the thread.
If the only reason you believe people dislike Meghan is because they are “othering” her, then you are missing a big chunk of the discourse.


----------



## lalame

I used to think Kate and the queen were boring because they never showed much personality. But I'm starting to see the wisdom of not letting the public in, not letting people know what ticks you off, etc. They keep it professional and open up juuuust enough to be pleasant and connect with the people they meet... but not enough for anyone to see the mess behind the scenes or to let people feel too familiar. Who really knows what bothers Kate or what her favorite hobby is, for example? Meghan was just a little too eager to put herself out there, and it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle. She's already given us too much material.


----------



## prettyprincess

mdcx said:


> I think posters here have made the reasons why they don’t like her pretty clear over the thread.
> If the only reason you believe people dislike Meghan is because they are “othering” her, then you are missing a big chunk of the discourse.



I get it. You’re offended that she offended your beloved Queens sensibilities, she shook up the establishment, she’s fake, she fully controls that brainless spineless simp Harry, her shirts are wrinkled, she hasn’t done enough for climate change, blah blah blah. 

IMO, she is deserving of compassion and empathy. IMO she hasn’t done anything to elicit such cruelty from people, but clearly we feel differently about that.


----------



## prettyprincess

lalame said:


> I used to think Kate and the queen were boring because they never showed much personality. But I'm starting to see the wisdom of not letting the public in, not letting people know what ticks you off, etc. They keep it professional and open up juuuust enough to be pleasant and connect with the people they meet... but not enough for anyone to see the mess behind the scenes or to let people feel too familiar. Who really knows what bothers Kate or what her favorite hobby is, for example? Meghan was just a little too eager to put herself out there, and it's hard to put the genie back in the bottle. She's already given us too much material.



I think there’s a cultural difference too. Also, I don’t think she anticipated that her father and half sister from hell were going to turn on her the way they did.

It’s fascinating really, when she’s stoic, they say she’s fake, when she shows genuine pain like in that interview, they say shes fake. 

Instead of giving another human being the benefit of the doubt or showing an ounce compassion, people doubled down on being gross.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jaxion

prettyprincess said:


> Women do have great intuition, but we’re also unfairly critical of other women. She’s in an unbelievably difficult situation. Imagine being scrutinized and picked apart ruthlessly, on a daily basis.
> 
> Just today in this forum someone criticized her for sticking her tongue out. Like she’s obviously trying to be playful and silly, maybe trying to show us a glimpse of who she really is, and it turns into oh she’s 38, she doesn’t know how to conduct herself, how déclassé! But if she acts proper, it’s pretense. It’s impossible! No wonder she wants to leave. And maybe she’s putting on “an act” as a defense mechanism because she doesn’t trust anyone anymore!
> 
> Her husband knows the real part of her and he loves her. He’s giving up everything for her, that says something.


You made a great point that in general that women are sometimes unfairly hard on each other because of internalized misogyny and that's an issue I care about a lot. It's just that in this case that's not the main reason that women are being hard on her. So it's exactly like the accusations of racism, *yes regardless of whatever she did she would have been faced with some racism and sexism but the main reason she is recieving so much criticism here is because of the poor behaviour she has shown and is continuing to show*. 

Though you do have a point that maybe we should also give more of the blame for all this mess on Harry as well because he's not come off well in all this and we're probably going too easy on him in comparison.


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> I get it. You’re offended that she offended your beloved Queens sensibilities, she shook up the establishment, she’s fake, she fully controls that brainless spineless simp Harry, her shirts are wrinkled, she hasn’t done enough for climate change, blah blah blah.
> 
> IMO, she is deserving of compassion and empathy. IMO she hasn’t done anything to elicit such cruelty from people, but clearly we feel differently about that.


It’s not that emotional to me. She is disingenuous, disrespectful, calls the paps then complains, uses then discards people. All of that would have been tolerable if she had just hunkered down and done her job as DOS. No-one is perfect after all. But she had to blow that up too. It was completely possible for her to exit the BRF in a quiet and financially beneficial way, she didn’t have to go this route, nor Harry, but something about a dramatic exit suited their end goals obviously.


----------



## lalame

prettyprincess said:


> I think there’s a cultural difference too. Also, I don’t think she anticipated that her father and half sister from hell were going to turn on her the way they did.
> 
> It’s fascinating really, when she’s stoic, they say she’s fake, when she shows genuine pain like in that interview, they say shes fake.
> 
> Instead of giving another human being the benefit of the doubt or showing an ounce compassion, people doubled down on being gross.



That’s kind of par for the course of celebrity, though... for any celebrity in the world, there are many who hate them and many who love them. It seems to be the same for other royals too. I haven’t seen anyone accuse her of being stoic, but that’s just me, I’m sure that’s out there somewhere. At the end of the day I think the job of a Royal is... a job. Like any job where you’re  a leader or spokesperson... you have to strike that balance between authenticity and stoicism and she didn’t quite. I absolutely think there’s a cultural component to that - American, commoner, actress - and a generational component as I mentioned before. 

I feel sorry for all the royals! Their jobs seem very sacrificial and obviously the media is a nightmare. That seems like a terrible existence and I wouldn’t do it. But at the same time, she chose it and though it may suck to her momentarily she was offered a lot of influence, wealth and status. It’s like I feel sorry for my lawyer friends who stay at the office late, but that is not mutually exclusive with my knowledge that they chose it and they’re getting due compensation in return etc. Both exist. But when my lawyer friends start whining toooo much in their fancy cars or houses, it’s like....Sorry I can’t really feel too bad for you.


----------



## lalame

And for what it’s worth I’m pretty sure everyone here feels Harry is also messy and was clearly asleep at the wheel during this whole ordeal.


----------



## lalame

I randomly watched this video tonight and IMO I think these ladies make a great point and show some good reasons why people in the U.K. in particular may be rubbed the wrong way by this ordeal. It goes beyond just who she is... it’s about what they’re creating around them. Note: never seen this show before, don’t know these ladies, and can’t vouch for their respectability in any other context.


----------



## Sharont2305

I'll be glad when all this dies down, because of the time difference between here in the UK and the US, I wake up to about 10 pages to catch up on! You guys have been busy, 107 posts this morning. Oh well, here we go.......


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Another posted a few pages back that there is no room to “advance” in the BRF. Everything is predetermined in regards to being wife of the brother to the heir.
> It is a lower level position.
> No amount of hustle is going to turn it into a leading role. That would defintely bug Meghan imo. Aristocracy vs. meritocracy etc.


Yes, it would have been better for her, and less restrictive if she'd gone searching for a non royal Duke, or Earl. Then she would have been top dog, "Queen" of her "castle" (stately home)
But then again, not all of them are rich.


----------



## Chagall

youngster said:


> From what I've read, Charles really fought to make sure Harry and Meghan were able to have a church wedding, which he was not allowed when he married Camilla since they were both divorced.  Charles and Camilla had a civil ceremony followed by a blessing in St. George's chapel.  Meghan, as a divorced woman, should also not have been allowed to be married in St. George's Chapel at Windsor Castle but Charles really pushed for it and made it happen for her and Harry.


Everything was done by the BRF to give Harry and Megan a successful start to their marriage. I think most people would have appreciated that fact.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## mshermes

prettyprincess said:


> Women do have great intuition, but we’re also unfairly critical of other women. She’s in an unbelievably difficult situation. Imagine being scrutinized and picked apart ruthlessly, on a daily basis.
> 
> Just today in this forum someone criticized her for sticking her tongue out. Like she’s obviously trying to be playful and silly, maybe trying to show us a glimpse of who she really is, and it turns into oh she’s 38, she doesn’t know how to conduct herself, how déclassé! But if she acts proper, it’s pretense. It’s impossible! No wonder she wants to leave. And maybe she’s putting on “an act” as a defense mechanism because she doesn’t trust anyone anymore!
> 
> Her husband knows the real part of her and he loves her. He’s giving up everything for her, that says something.


Please do not generalize and speak for all women. I do nothing but promote women. I do not understand why it is simply possible to not like a person....be it male or female, any color. I do not like her. I certainly am not jealous of her. I would never want to be like her. She has absolutely nothing I want. Why did nobody question a poster who called her father a scumbag parasite?  I could care less and don’t question it. She hates him. Big deal. Her opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Why continue questioning why...why..why and looking for perceived reasons? Maybe I am simply a tough broad but I don’t even think she has been treated that badly. I have seen much worse. If you are comfortable in your own skin and confident then you ignore it and move on. As far as her husband knowing the real part of her.....let’s give that some time. I believe it’s too soon to draw that conclusion.


----------



## Laneige

Only know it’s quite ironic when they want to walks away from royal duties by going to another country... to be financially independent but they registered the trademark for sussexroyals .... which is also relying on their royal identities to sell things. Doesn’t matter if it’s for charity or their own pockets 

however the press hasn’t been very kind towards her n that can be quite stressful esp when she’s pregnant. The way s0me media behaves should be charged for infringing privacy. Not everyone enjoys having reporters or cam 24/7 on them because they r thinking abt their own private space n lives. But there will be some celebrities that will think from reporters POV that they are earning a living.. I Guess everyone should be more understanding towards one another n not do the extreme.


----------



## Lodpah

mshermes said:


> Please do not generalize and speak for all women. I do nothing but promote women. I do not understand why it is simply possible to not like a person....be it male or female, any color. I do not like her. I certainly am not jealous of her. I would never want to be like her. She has absolutely nothing I want. Why did nobody question a poster who called her father a scumbag parasite?  I could care less and don’t question it. She hates him. Big deal. Her opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Why continue questioning why...why..why and looking for perceived reasons? Maybe I am simply a tough broad but I don’t even think she has been treated that badly. I have seen much worse. If you are comfortable in your own skin and confident then you ignore it and move on. As far as her husband knowing the real part of her.....let’s give that some time. I believe it’s too soon to draw that conclusion.



Well said and the sad thing is now MM is bad mouthing the Royals. It's like what? That family including MM are quite a trip.


----------



## lalame

About the trademark... is it possible they trademarked it just to prevent someone else from selling merch or profiting off their brand? Even if they weren’t going to use it themselves commercially.... I know companies do this.


----------



## Clearblueskies

ICant said:


> This is a perfect example of how people have been manipulated by the positive narrative though.
> 
> Articulate? No. Her speeches are word vomit and woke buzz words that mean nothing. Long and convoluted etc. Plus, her writing is atrocious. I’m an editor for a major publication for 15 years I would have been really upset letting that Vogue drivel go to print. It’s simply NOT GOOD.
> 
> Accomplished: in what way? What has she accomplished that is wow worthy really? A BA? Everyone has one. A pretty basic tv career? I dunno.
> 
> Philanthropic? What has she really done for any cause that had an actual impact? Climate change - nope. That weird travel initiative doesn’t even have a plan/strategy and yet they announced it to the world without a leg to stand on. Or maybe this charitable foundation they keep talking about that is dubious in how much $ will actually go to the charity and not in their pockets. Pre-Harry she volunteered at soup kitchen once and did a charity drive in Toronto. All good things, but an impactful global charitable phenom she is not.
> 
> Beautiful? People have different definitions of beauty and not everyone will like her look plus 38 is not that young.
> 
> Always kind and courteous? I mean she was caught and on camera too sticking her tongue out at members of the royal fam and at crowds. Was she trying to be cute? I dont know but the lady is 38 years old ffs. Courteous to me means always being on your best behaviour to those around you.
> 
> Maybe because my background is media and journalism I question things and look at all the angles not just take what’s being pushed at me. There are lots of contrary evidence to the narrative she and Harry are trying to put out there.


Speaking of philanthropy- seems to me Harry did far more than Meghan to forward the causes he was passionate about before he met her than she ever did, or than he’s done since the marriage.  Meghan is all about talking up a good story and pretty photo ops, but when you look into it there’s no real substance to anything.  She assumes credit for the efforts of others too.  Harry produced some real tangible benefits on his own initiative.
For Meghan it’s philanthropy by association - as in I’m standing next to this person who had this great idea, and these people who’ve put in all this effort...and now it’s my “collaboration” look at me and all the good work I’m doing!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

lalame said:


> About the trademark... is it possible they trademarked it just to prevent someone else from selling merch or profiting off their brand? Even if they weren’t going to use it themselves commercially.... I know companies do this.


Yes, it is. Lots of royals have done so, including the Cambridges.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

For all those who think it's racist of some of us re MM. Here's a link of beautiful women of color who are married into Royalty in Europe (modern times). I especially admire the Countess of Hapsburg, Austria (a Sudanese woman). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_von_Habsburg


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> I'll be glad when all this dies down, because of the time difference between here in the UK and the US, I wake up to about 10 pages to catch up on! You guys have been busy, 107 posts this morning. Oh well, here we go.......


I have developed this pesky habit of waking up at 3:00 in the middle of the night to have a little peek at the thread. Afraid of missing something. I know-get a life!


----------



## LibbyRuth

mdcx said:


> It’s not that emotional to me. She is disingenuous, disrespectful, calls the paps then complains, uses then discards people. All of that would have been tolerable if she had just hunkered down and done her job as DOS. No-one is perfect after all. But she had to blow that up too. It was completely possible for her to exit the BRF in a quiet and financially beneficial way, she didn’t have to go this route, nor Harry, but something about a dramatic exit suited their end goals obviously.


Had they done it quietly, there would not have been as much reason for paparazzi.  Then they couldn't complain about the paparazzi they stirred up, along with the criticism, and play themselves the victim.


----------



## wisconsin

Lodpah said:


> To me it’s because of the lack of content in her character.


This!


----------



## lazeny

Flatsy said:


> It isn't, because most of the millions Charles currently pays them every year come from the Duchy of Cornwall and are allocated to them in exchange for doing royal work - things like food, clothing and household staff.
> 
> While the Duchy of Cornwall is not "taxpayer" money in the strictest and most literal sense as interpreted by the Sussexes, and even though Charles does not itemize its expenditures, he knows that if he abuses the Duchy money, he could lose it.  Or at the very least, face public scrutiny and backlash that would harm the royal family.
> 
> That's why Charles has always paid for certain gifts out of his own private savings.  That's how he paid for the hundreds of thousands of pounds of interior fixtures and furnishings for Frogmore Cottage.  And according to several reports, the money Charles will be spending on the Sussexes over the next year will be from his private savings.
> 
> And while that is a matter between Charles and his spoiled son, Charles has supposedly told Harry that his private funds are not unlimited and that this will only be a temporary arrangement.  Why anyone would think that a 35 year old man should be supported by his father to the tune of millions and millions per year just for existing, and that this is totally cool behavior, is beyond me.




This. You can't be financially independent and rely on your Dad to pay for things. These two are adults. If they want to be independent, they need to work for it. Not freeloaders from Daddy's savings.


----------



## limom

Quick question:
Loose women in the US= hoes
Loose women in the U.K.=?
Or the loose women title an inside joke?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Quick question:
> Loose women in the US= hoes
> Loose women in the U.K.=?
> Or the loose women title an inside joke?


It pretty much is the same meaning here in the UK as it does over there. It is kind of an inside joke for this programme as most of the various panelists (it's not these 4 women every show) are quite forthright in their opinions. Loose tongues etc


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> It pretty much is the same meaning here in the UK as it does over there. It is kind of an inside joke for this programme as most of the various panelists (it's not these 4 women every show) are quite forthright in their opinions. Loose tongues etc


Thanks.
Really liked the panel. 
Is this show popular?


----------



## limom

ICant said:


> Hasn’t done anything for climate change. I fixed it for you.
> 
> I think what you are missing is that yes, “leaders” and prominent figures are held to a higher standard and unfortunately MM is simply NOT rising to the occasion. She tucked tail instead of standing her ground and proving to everyone she was someone of substance with the ability to make change or have a positive impact on anything.
> 
> All she has are empty words with nothing to back them up. No one here is being cruel for pointing out her shirts are wrinkled or they don’t like her style. Or when they point out FACTS like how her puppy eyes on camera complaining about her life in a third world country was tone deaf and gross, or how they preach climate change but take jets every 5 mins while telling regular people to watch their own footprints etc. Like I could go on. The truth hurts sometimes.


Once again, I do not believe that she likes the job and was self sabotaging.(tongue sticking and other silly behaviors)
I have to say that she dresses much better as Meghan Markle, American actress than Duchess Sussex.
She looked like she was playing dress up and it made her look 10 years older,imho.
Same goes with Kate, btw. Gorgeous girl who has to dress like a 70 years old woman.
Is there some type of rules that women have to dress like matrons?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Thanks.
> Really liked the panel.
> Is this show popular?


Yes, it's on at lunchtime Mon - Fri. I don't watch it that often tbh but they seem to get good guests. It's very topical. 
Someone may correct me if I'm wrong but I get the impression that it's similar to The View (?)


----------



## Murphy47

limom said:


> Once again, I do not believe that she likes the job and was self sabotaging.(tongue sticking and other silly behaviors)
> I have to say that she dresses much better as Meghan Markle, American actress than Duchess Sussex.
> She looked like she was playing dress up and it made her look 10 years older,imho.
> Same goes with Kate, btw. Gorgeous girl who has to dress like a 70 years old woman.
> Is there some type of rules that women have to dress like matrons?



Sadly, I believe there are some antiquated rules for the dressing of Royal ladies.


----------



## Plussizegirl

Murphy47 said:


> Sadly, I believe there are some antiquated rules for the dressing of Royal ladies.


No nailpolish exxept of Essie Ballet Slippers.
So sad.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, it's on at lunchtime Mon - Fri. I don't watch it that often tbh but they seem to get good guests. It's very topical.
> Someone may correct me if I'm wrong but I get the impression that it's similar to The View (?)


Yes it sounded like a British version of the View.
Funny how anything sounds more substantial with a British accent, though.


----------



## limom

Plussizegirl said:


> No nailpolish exxept of Essie Ballet Slippers.
> So sad.


Total deal breaker here.


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> About the trademark... is it possible they trademarked it just to prevent someone else from selling merch or profiting off their brand? Even if they weren’t going to use it themselves commercially.... I know companies do this.


Actually, you have to use the trademark in order to protect it.  Trademarking something doesn't necessarily protect you.  If H&M  trademark sussexroyal and never use it, than they can be sued for fraud or lose the mark. If someone else who did not trademark sussexroyal and is using the mark, they will have the rights to use it unless H & M can prove they have used the mark in commerce.  Trademarks are all about use and who started using the mark first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CAH

Is there video of her sticking her tongue out?  I must have missed it.


----------



## mshermes

*Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - as 'secretive' sit-down is expected to include Prince Harry*

**


----------



## mrsinsyder

CAH said:


> Is there video of her sticking her tongue out?  I must have missed it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> *Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - as 'secretive' sit-down is expected to include Prince Harry*
> 
> **


Well that didn’t take long


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> I have to say that she dresses much better as Meghan Markle, American actress than Duchess Sussex.
> She looked like she was playing dress up and it made her look 10 years older,imho.



Yes! I always thought she was trying on the duchess outfits for fit. That pillbox hat when she was very pregnant? So. Bad. 



> Same goes with Kate, btw. Gorgeous girl who has to dress like a 70 years old woman.
> Is there some type of rules that women have to dress like matrons?



True, but with Kate you actually believe her style is just a bid oldfashioned. With MM the impression I got is that's her flight attendant uniform she kicks off the minute she walks into Frogmore Cottage. But yes, when you look e.g. to Mary of Denmark, who is older than them, her outfits are much "fresher".


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow those pictures are so terrible lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

mshermes said:


> *Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - as 'secretive' sit-down is expected to include Prince Harry*
> 
> **


Oh good, another faux woke insufferable phony.


----------



## imgg

Why is Megan & Harry not following any of the royals on IG but clearly enjoy using the Royal name gifted to them by the Queen.


----------



## CAH

Wow, why would you stick your tongue out at an event like that?


----------



## Flatsy

I don't believe any interview rumors until I see it on my TV schedule.  Not that they won't do interview, I just don't think the tabloids have any actual information at this point.


----------



## queennadine

My dislike began early on, even though I was happy for Harry, watched the royal wedding, and truly wished them the best.

Her attitude towards the RF has been disrespectful from the start.

What normal person (and again, she was not 19/20 years old...she was in her mid-30’s when adults are expected to be mature and know better) goes into their upcoming marriage and future relationship with their in-laws with this attitude: “I can absolutely make it in this family and I know what I’m getting into (having to convince everyone, essentially) and you’ll be like the family I never had! BUUUUT I truly can’t wait to modernize things and frankly I think you’re all old fashioned and archaic and thank GOD you guys have me joining to update everything.”

That was her and Harry’s attitude. How can anyone not see how disrespectful that is? They both happily participated in, and benefited from, a multi-million dollar wedding, accepted a family home with millions worth in renovations, wardrobe/travel/staff all paid for...meanwhile always talking about how everyone else needs to amend their ways.

THAT’S why I don’t care for MM. Plus the way in which they went about this exit, the grinning at pap cameras, etc.

Kate has an arguably even more ‘privileged’ life so the jealous argument is completely moot. But I respect her work ethic, dedication to her immediate family and the BRF, and decorum.


----------



## limom

So Ellen and Elle?
Ok then.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh good, another faux woke insufferable phony.



Meghan is absolutely a phony! That's what I dislike the most about her. She wanted everyone to believe she was a strong, independent woman, but you can tell she is chock full of insecurities. She feels threatened by everything and everyone. She can't stand when she isn't the center of attention. Even now, when they are supposedly stepping back, she can't help herself from trying to compete.


*Meghan Markle accused of competing with Kate Middleton on Instagram*
Meghan Markle may be fighting back against her royal rivals — on Instagram.

The Duchess of Sussex made a surprise post on the social media site Wednesday promoting a prior visit to an animal charity in the UK — even though she fled the country almost two weeks ago after Megxit.

The post “dismayed courtiers at Buckingham Palace” because it appeared so soon after one by Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton promoting her child welfare campaign, The Times of London said.

Meghan’s post on the Sussex Royal profile she shares with husband Prince Harry is said to be the “latest clash of campaigns by the Sussexes and other members of the royal family,” the UK paper said.

It also helped take the @sussexroyal Instagram to 11,032,000 followers — overtaking Middleton”s account with husband Prince William, @kensingtonroyal, for the first time, the report says.

The two families are long rumored to be feuding, with many insiders suggesting it was the spark that led to Megxit.

Markle’s post was liked by more than 300,000 people in the first few hours — with many commentators noting the timing.

“You just can’t help yourself can you Meghan? The Duchess of Cambridge is on the front page of UK newspapers and you have to release a photo from 2 weeks ago,” @itscatherinetoyou said.

“Meghan, you need to calm down and leave, its ridiculous,” @tanyakastornaya said of the timing, while @misssharoncoles claimed, “Trying to steal Kate’s thunder again.

https://pagesix.com/2020/01/22/meghan-markle-accused-of-competing-with-kate-middleton-on-instagram/


----------



## mshermes

CAH said:


> Is there video of her sticking her tongue out?  I must have missed it.





CAH said:


> Wow, why would you stick your tongue out at an event like that?


Hey....a class act. Wait.....a trash act? How does one defend actions such as this? Not once but twice?
Guess it’s a Royal thing....


----------



## imgg

mshermes said:


> *Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - as 'secretive' sit-down is expected to include Prince Harry*
> 
> **


I need privacy didn't last more than 5 minutes.  All she cares about is being a celebrity.  Poor Harry is in for a ride....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ludmilla

mrsinsyder said:


>


Well ... yes. This is just the behaviour that I expect from a royal.


----------



## cafecreme15

mshermes said:


> *Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - as 'secretive' sit-down is expected to include Prince Harry*
> 
> **


If this is true...

You can't make this stuff up. Truly unbelievable.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


>



This makes me cringe!!!


----------



## joyeaux

lalame said:


> I don't think it's just women... so I don't think it's necessarily a women hating her thing. She has a personality that can bother people. For me, I'm always bothered by a "sugary" personality. She just makes me recall people I've known many times in my life, who are always "on" and have this constant "life is so charming" thing going on. That's my _personal_ reaction to it. I do think she's beautiful, has a cute style, genuinely cares about things like animal causes and I respect that.... and I don't believe some things I've seen like that bizarre video with her "rummaging" in the car. But her persona and this whole fiasco are so messy and right now, that just happens to ***** the other things. With celebrities, we don't KNOW them so whatever you see most recently is just how you view them overall. And most recently, she's come off whiny, flighty, impulsive, spoiled, image-conscious, etc. It could just be momentary; if she truly disappeared for awhile, people would probably forget and she could reshape her image.



@lalame you completely echoed exactly how I feel about her, so well said! Also, I’ve been meaning to say that I know you came into the thread with one opinion and I give you major props for playing devil’s advocate graciously, and being willing to consider other views.

From what I’ve seen all across the Internet, for whatever reason the Meghan fans/non-fans get pretty heated and extreme on both sides... but I think this thread is pretty great and full of good info/back story/context.

While we do get snarky and silly sometimes (because, it’s a _gossip thread_ ) I don’t think the majority of us are just trying to tear a person down because we are mean and jealous and enjoy tearing a person down. We’re willing to explain why we have the opinion of MM  we do. (And for what it’s worth, it’s been pretty crappy being told that it’s because of my demographic that I’m critical of M, or that if people were a different color I’d feel differently. That’s not how I work _at all _and it’s a real cheap blow TBH. )

Anyway, back to fun stuff like celebrating the return of Guy the beagle!


----------



## queennadine

That Ellen interview, which will no doubt consist of wailing and gnashing of teeth (cause why else do an interview?), will sit reeeeaaaaal well with the meal tickets over in the U.K.


----------



## limom

queennadine said:


> That Ellen interview, which will no doubt consist of wailing and gnashing of teeth (cause why else do an interview?), will sit reeeeaaaaal well with the meal tickets over in the U.K.


Has she been watching Ellen recently?
Ellen is going thru some things and one minute can be sweet as pie and the next she is coming for you.
I don’t believe that she will go there. My hunch would be good morning America with Robin. Much, much safer space,
Plus Disney and all.


----------



## Sharont2305

Who on earth thought it was a good idea to do an interview? If indeed they are? 
Bizarre


----------



## imgg

Sharont2305 said:


> Who on earth thought it was a good idea to do an interview? If indeed they are?
> Bizarre


Meghan.  In her mind, she is the biggest celebrity on earth and needs to tell her story.


----------



## Clearblueskies

imgg said:


> Meghan.  In her mind, she is the biggest celebrity on earth and needs to tell her story.


She still thinks she’s Princess Di


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> Meghan.  In her mind, she is the biggest celebrity on earth and needs to tell her story.


In all fairness, we all want to read the expose and watch the interview.
I will believe it when I see her on my tv.


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> I get it. You’re offended that she offended your beloved Queens sensibilities, she shook up the establishment, she’s fake, she fully controls that brainless spineless simp Harry, her shirts are wrinkled, she hasn’t done enough for climate change, blah blah blah.
> 
> IMO, she is deserving of compassion and empathy. IMO she hasn’t done anything to elicit such cruelty from people, but clearly we feel differently about that.


Since you're asking, I'll repeat myself.  For me, I don't really care that much how sincere she is about her philantrophy, etc.  Whether she flies in a private jet.   I just find it totally unacceptable for her to go on TV from a poor country and complain how hard her life is.  Does she not have Any Idea how hard life is for people who are much less fortunate? Like hungry people?
If she was having difficulty adjusting she should have gone to a therapist.  Or talked to her husband (which she obviously did).  Not to the public.  Just made her seem phony and ungrateful.


----------



## limom

On a lighter note.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> She still thinks she’s Princess Di


I'll be waiting for her "Queen of hearts" moment and the "well there was (insert number) of us in this marriage/team"


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Has she been watching Ellen recently?
> Ellen is going thru some things and one minute can be sweet as pie and the next she is coming for you.
> I don’t believe that she will go there. My hunch would be good morning America with Robin. Much, much safer space,
> Plus Disney and all.



Ellen would most likely go real easy on her. Let her emote as much as she wants and tell her story, her way. Even Good Morning America would probably feel they had to ask her one or two uncomfortable questions.


----------



## sdkitty

Jaxion said:


> You made a great point that in general that women are sometimes unfairly hard on each other because of internalized misogyny and that's an issue I care about a lot. It's just that in this case that's not the main reason that women are being hard on her. So it's exactly like the accusations of racism, *yes regardless of whatever she did she would have been faced with some racism and sexism but the main reason she is recieving so much criticism here is because of the poor behaviour she has shown and is continuing to show*.
> 
> Though you do have a point that maybe we should also give more of the blame for all this mess on Harry as well because he's not come off well in all this and we're probably going too easy on him in comparison.


It's quite possible that she is being blamed for manipulating Harry and in reality he may have wanted to break away from the family before he married her.  But I'd say his popularity is way down too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ellen would most likely go real easy on her. Let her emote as much as she wants and tell her story, her way. Even Good Morning America would probably feel they had to ask her one or two uncomfortable questions.


I think Gayle King may get an interview


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Ellen would most likely go real easy on her. Let her emote as much as she wants and tell her story, her way. Even Good Morning America would probably feel they had to ask her one or two uncomfortable questions.


But the PR department will arrange the questions in advance. Ellen is cray atm


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think Gayle King may get an interview



I bet there will be a few interviews. It's not like she has much else to do at the moment. The real question is will Harry be allowed to be part of them? I'm thinking no, she will want all of the focus to be on herself and her feelings.


----------



## daisychainz

limom said:


> On a lighter note.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4648553


This is so freakin' funny - where do you guys find these??!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I'll be waiting for her "Queen of hearts" moment and the "well there was (insert number) of us in this marriage/team"


“People’s princess” will get a mention for sure - as in People magazine


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> But the PR department will arrange the questions in advance. Ellen is cray atm



Oh absolutely. I didn't know about Ellen's current mental state, but I don't think that would surprise anyone.  

I don't get the impression Meghan thinks all that quickly in the moment so she will want to have her answers as prepared and rehearsed in advance as possible.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Oh absolutely. I didn't know about Ellen's current mental state, but I don't think that would surprise anyone.
> 
> I don't get the impression Meghan thinks all that quickly in the moment so she will want to have her answers as prepared and rehearsed in advance as possible.


I don’t watch Ellen either and have no idea what people are referring to, I just imagine Ellen asking her silly fluff questions without one single challenging question.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I bet there will be a few interviews. It's not like she has much else to do at the moment. The real question is will Harry be allowed to be part of them? I'm thinking no, she will want all of the focus to be on herself and her feelings.


on the one hand, Harry is a more sympathetic figure for a lot of people.  on the other hand, if she has him there and doesn't allow him to talk, she'll look bad.  will be interesting to see (sorta; I actually didn't watch that first debacle right away)


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t watch Ellen either and have no idea what people are referring to, I just imagine Ellen asking her silly fluff questions without one single challenging question.



Ellen is all about silly and fluff. I can imagine her asking Meghan one tough question. _So what did you do with that dog I badgered you to adopt?_ The correct answer: "I dumped him on some people as soon as I found out I was getting married."


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ellen is all about silly and fluff. I can imagine her asking Meghan one tough question. _So what did you do with that dog I badgered you to adopt?_ The correct answer: "I dumped him on some people as soon as I found out I was getting married."


I def don't think she would get tough.  But she would probably get serious - like how hard has it been on you poor baby?


----------



## lalame

Yeah Ellen is an easy audience for sure. I like her and enjoy watching clips on YouTube but it’s clear she gets great celeb guests because she takes it easy on them and keeps it light and funny. I thought the story of how her meeting Meghan by chance at a shelter and keeping in touch was sweet, if true. If Ellen and Portia really did get an audience with them in London to see Archie, they’ve probably got a friendly thing going on. Makes sense overall but it’s a really slipper slope once you start doing interviews so I hope she treads lightly.


----------



## prettyprincess

mshermes said:


> Why? She is entitled to her opinion.


Sure, and I’m entitled to think it sounds crazy. It’s gauche for a woman to be playful or silly?? That’s it, at 38 women should act like their grandmothers ALL THE TIME? 
 Michelle ***** was on Ellen dancing, having fun, being playful. And guess what her tongue came out, how classless of her


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Sure, and I’m entitled to think it sounds crazy. It’s gauche for a woman to be playful or silly?? That’s it, at 38 women should act like their grandmothers ALL THE TIME?
> Michelle ***** was on Ellen dancing, having fun, being playful. And guess what her tongue came out, how classless of her


on Ellen is one thing.......where was Meghan when she did this?


----------



## limom

daisychainz said:


> This is so freakin' funny - where do you guys find these??!!


You know Twitter has zero chill.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Yeah Ellen is an easy audience for sure. I like her and enjoy watching clips on YouTube but it’s clear she gets great celeb guests because she takes it easy on them and keeps it light and funny. I thought the story of how her meeting Meghan by chance at a shelter and keeping in touch was sweet, if true. If Ellen and Portia really did get an audience with them in London to see Archie, they’ve probably got a friendly thing going on. Makes sense overall but it’s a really slipper slope once you start doing interviews so I hope she treads lightly.


Oh yes, they share the same PR firm.
Like the kids say,  if it is not on the gram it never happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

prettyprincess said:


> That’s it, at 38 women should act like their grandmothers ALL THE TIME?



I don't stick my tongue out at work.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Once again, I do not believe that she likes the job and was self sabotaging.(tongue sticking and other silly behaviors)
> I have to say that she dresses much better as Meghan Markle, American actress than Duchess Sussex.
> She looked like she was playing dress up and it made her look 10 years older,imho.
> Same goes with Kate, btw. Gorgeous girl who has to dress like a 70 years old woman.
> Is there some type of rules that women have to dress like matrons?



Sooo true. I don’t know what happened with her wardrobe... aren’t they allowed to yay or nay all their outfits, or are they forced to just wear whatever someone picks? Or maybe her comfort zone is casual separates and she doesn’t have an eye for formal wear so she THOUGHT they looked good. I like Meghan’s casual style but never saw her do great evening or formal looks.

Kate - yes. I hate when she wears dress suits or whatnot. Otherwise she looks great, not too old when not forced to wear those mini-Queen outfits. She hits evening out of the ballpark. But with that body, I mean, 75% of the job is already done for you.


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> I think the RF might be viewing this whole debacle as Harry’s Rumspringa.



Ha! Except rumspringa is supposed to be for teenagers. I guess a case could be made that Harry hasn't emotionally developed much beyond that age and he has certainly been sheltered his whole life.


----------



## Sharont2305

If she does do an interview, what exactly will she be saying?
Oh yeah, negative things about the family you're still married to and the country who, on the whole, welcomed you warmly.


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> That Ellen interview, which will no doubt consist of wailing and gnashing of teeth (cause why else do an interview?), will sit reeeeaaaaal well with the meal tickets over in the U.K.


Right?!?!  What can she really say?  “Oh, they were all so mean to me?”  Why do I think that this is REALLY going to sink her ship, and that BRF “review” of their circumstances may just come earlier???


----------



## CobaltBlu

Y'all, we mods get reports from Royal Landia and we are like this:






Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If you don't like someone's opinion, don't come for them. Just sit on your hands and find something else to talk about. Don't criticize each other!  
*Don't be like this:*





Don't tell each other to "lighten up" or "get a life" or get personal with other members call them stans or haters or racists yada yada yada.
*We do not want to delete your posts and have you feel like this:*





Harry and Meghan are fair game in this thread, that is the nature of GOSSIP.
*Be like this:*





Please do not attack  each other...
*Then we can all be like this:*




THANK YOU! 
*******************
THANK YOU! 
*******************


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> If she does do an interview, what exactly will she be saying?
> Oh yeah, negative things about the family you're still married to and the country who, on the whole, welcomed you warmly.



This is what I'm wondering. I'd imagine they will try to spend a lot of time talking about the future and laying the groundwork for whatever projects are out there, to drum up public interest.  I also expect some talk about the past.  With tears!  And regret!  And how sad they both are!  How they didn't really want to leave!  How they love the UK and "plan" to be there "frequently"!  (Ok, that last one  might just be Harry.)  I do think Harry would steer clear of any criticism of his family since they are still relying on massive financial support from Charles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Darn, now I want to know what Ellen’s been saying.


----------



## imgg

Opposition filed over their trademark..... I hope the Australian doctor has a good argument and won't give in to $ by H & M

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...mpt-trademark-Sussex-Royal-brand-blocked.html


----------



## daisychainz

prettyprincess said:


> Sure, and I’m entitled to think it sounds crazy. It’s gauche for a woman to be playful or silly?? That’s it, at 38 women should act like their grandmothers ALL THE TIME?
> Michelle ***** was on Ellen dancing, having fun, being playful. And guess what her tongue came out, how classless of her


It also comes down to lack of cultural awareness. She's doing it to be cutesy/childish I guess, but sticking out your tongue (at a royal event no less) is generally considered a very rude gesture. Cultural awareness is probably very much part of the training(s) that royals, leaders, and international business people get but we all know she skipped her royal training and fired the trainers.


----------



## imgg

daisychainz said:


> It also comes down to lack of cultural awareness. She's doing it to be cutesy/childish I guess, but sticking out your tongue (at a royal event no less) is generally considered a very rude gesture. Cultural awareness is probably very much part of the training(s) that royals, leaders, and international business people get but we all know she skipped her royal training and fired the trainers.


So much ego for one person, its ridiculous.


----------



## prettyprincess

daisychainz said:


> It also comes down to lack of cultural awareness. She's doing it to be cutesy/childish I guess, but sticking out your tongue (at a royal event no less) is generally considered a very rude gesture. Cultural awareness is probably very much part of the training(s) that royals, leaders, and international business people get but we all know she skipped her royal training and fired the trainers.


Its also rude for members of the royal family to sleep with underage girls, but I guess the Royals can more easily overlook that misstep when there are more pressing issues to address, like Meghans tongue. 
As much as I’d love to respond to all the comments directed at me, I was advised not to argue, so we’ll all just have to agree to disagree


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> In all fairness, we all want to read the expose and watch the interview.
> I will believe it when I see her on my tv.


Tbh, I have zero interest in watching another interview with Meghan.  The "poor me" bit filmed in Africa was my fill.  I am actually not that interested in Meghan herself, I find her disingenuous, egoistical, narcissistic and morally empty.  What I am currently fascinated by is how this women was able to snag Harry and completely turn his life upside down.  How she disrupted the Royal Family without what appears to be any shame, regret or guilt.


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> Tbh, I have zero interest in watching another interview with Meghan.  The "poor me" bit filmed in Africa was my fill.  I am actually not that interested in Meghan herself, I find her disingenuous, egoistical, narcissistic and empty.  What I am currently fascinated by is how this women was able to snag Harry and completely turn his life upside down.  How she disrupted the Royal Family without any shame, regret or guilt.


And therefore, this interview is a must see to see signs of narcissism, sex appeal, voodoo, or if this is more your thing Illuminati conspiracy  whatever your theory is.
Imho, she is right now, one fascinating woman.
History in the making... or like we say in French la petite histoire.


----------



## imgg

prettyprincess said:


> Its also rude for members of the royal family to sleep with underage girls, but I guess the Royals can more easily overlook that misstep when there are more pressing issues to address, like Meghans tongue.
> As much as I’d love to respond to all the comments directed at me, I was advised not to argue, so we’ll all just have to agree to disagree


Sorry, those are two different issues than what we are discussing.   No one said its okay for a Royal to sleep with underaged girls.  Where on earth did you see any poster on this tread saying that was okay?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lmao. I guess she's only very supportive of people of color when she needs that narrative. 

*EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - a snub to BFF Oprah*

*Meghan Markle told her close friends she is planning on giving Ellen DeGeneres her first interview, insiders have exclusively told DailyMail.com*
*They said: '[Meghan] said Ellen understands her pain and suffering. That she epitomizes authenticity. [Meghan] feels like they are kindred spirits' *
*The two met at a dog shelter in LA where Ellen encouraged Meghan to adopt her first dog Bogart, and Ellen and her wife visited Meghan and Harry in London *
*'Ellen and Meghan have already discussed a sit-down interview. That's been in the works for quite some time now,' a source at the Ellen Show confirmed*
*They said the interview will 'be all hush-hush and most likely at a secret location' *
*They added: '[Ellen] would want a sit-down with the both of them together. She wants her fans to see what she already knows to be true'*
*'Ellen getting the first shot at an in depth interview is surely going to put Oprah's - (and Gayle King's) nose out of joint,' a source added to DailyMail.com*


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> And therefore, this interview is a must see to see signs of narcissism, sex appeal, voodoo, or if this is more your thing Illuminati conspiracy  whatever your theory is.
> Imho, she is right now, one fascinating woman.
> History in the making... or like we say in French la petite histoire.


No, I don't find her fascinating at all, I find what she did and how she did it fascinating.  There is a difference.

The damage she made is already done.  I am more of a behavior observer than believing what people say and wanting us to believe.


----------



## mrsinsyder

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markle-love-bombed-victoria-21335484

*Meghan Markle 'love bombed' Victoria Beckham before 'turning on her over dress'*
Victoria Beckham was reportedly 'mortified' when Meghan Markle allegedly accused her of leaking stories to the press

When Meghan Markle first moved to London to be with Prince Harry in 2017, Victoria Beckham is said to have taken the actress under her wing and set her up with the best fashion tips and beauticians in town.

As neighbours in the Cotswolds, Meghan, Harry, Victoria, 45, and her husband David, 44, apparently became good pals - and there were even rumours that Victoria helped design the interior of the couple's Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage.

But their friendship is said to have soured when a story appeared about Posh setting Meghan, 38, up with Sarah Chapman - one of the capital's most sought-after beauticians - and the Duchess allegedly accused Posh of leaking it.

According to reports, a 'furious' Meghan voiced her fears to Harry, 35, who then called his long-time friend David to quiz him about his wife.

In a phone call described as 'awkward', David is said to have wasted no time setting Harry straight.

A source told The Sun: “Inexplicably, [Meghan] feared Victoria was behind [the leak] - I mean, the idea that Victoria Beckham would be personally ringing journalists to give them a scoop is ridiculous — and spoke to Harry about it.

David was mortified. He quickly put Harry right, and the two men agreed to move on - but it certainly made things awkward for a while. It later turned out the leak probably came from a beauty salon."

After a few months things are said to have got back on track, although while the Beckhams scored a daytime invite to Harry and Meghan's May 2018 wedding, they didn't make the cut for the evening bash.

And now a new spin has been thrown on the saga, with sources claiming Victoria's friendship with Meghan went south after the designer refused to let the former royal wear her dresses for free.

*“Victoria has had more than enough involvement with Meghan – first she was love bombed by her, via Harry, wanting to visit the store, and always looking for tips on London, and hanging out in the Cotswolds as they are neighbours there,” the insider told heat magazine.

“Then things took a funny turn. Meghan made overtures about wearing Victoria’s clothes, but she doesn't give them out for free. She is happy to give a discreet discount to anyone that she knows personally but she doesn't give them out – that's her policy.

"That’s when Meghan turned on her, accusing her of selling stories on her – with the really awkward call between Harry and David.”*


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmao. I guess she's only very supportive of people of color when she needs that narrative.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - a snub to BFF Oprah*
> 
> *Meghan Markle told her close friends she is planning on giving Ellen DeGeneres her first interview, insiders have exclusively told DailyMail.com*
> *They said: '[Meghan] said Ellen understands her pain and suffering. That she epitomizes authenticity. [Meghan] feels like they are kindred spirits' *
> *The two met at a dog shelter in LA where Ellen encouraged Meghan to adopt her first dog Bogart, and Ellen and her wife visited Meghan and Harry in London *
> *'Ellen and Meghan have already discussed a sit-down interview. That's been in the works for quite some time now,' a source at the Ellen Show confirmed*
> *They said the interview will 'be all hush-hush and most likely at a secret location' *
> *They added: '[Ellen] would want a sit-down with the both of them together. She wants her fans to see what she already knows to be true'*
> *'Ellen getting the first shot at an in depth interview is surely going to put Oprah's - (and Gayle King's) nose out of joint,' a source added to DailyMail.com*


I think her American fans will lap this up, because they gush over her wordy emoting.  But it’ll devalue the brand IMO.  She’s quickly giving the impression she’s the kind of low rate celeb that’ll turn up for the opening of an envelope.  
Her soul may be crushed but she’s willing to bare it on tv for $$$$. Not a good look.


----------



## Corneto

Chagall said:


> I have developed this pesky habit of waking up at 3:00 in the middle of the night to have a little peek at the thread. Afraid of missing something. I know-get a life!



You are not alone!
I actually got irritated with my sister last night when she called while i was watching one of the excruciatingly sharp and funny videos about Her Megness.
Talk about get a grip!!
Have fun.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markle-love-bombed-victoria-21335484
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'love bombed' Victoria Beckham before 'turning on her over dress'*
> Victoria Beckham was reportedly 'mortified' when Meghan Markle allegedly accused her of leaking stories to the press
> 
> When Meghan Markle first moved to London to be with Prince Harry in 2017, Victoria Beckham is said to have taken the actress under her wing and set her up with the best fashion tips and beauticians in town.
> 
> As neighbours in the Cotswolds, Meghan, Harry, Victoria, 45, and her husband David, 44, apparently became good pals - and there were even rumours that Victoria helped design the interior of the couple's Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage.
> 
> But their friendship is said to have soured when a story appeared about Posh setting Meghan, 38, up with Sarah Chapman - one of the capital's most sought-after beauticians - and the Duchess allegedly accused Posh of leaking it.
> 
> According to reports, a 'furious' Meghan voiced her fears to Harry, 35, who then called his long-time friend David to quiz him about his wife.
> 
> In a phone call described as 'awkward', David is said to have wasted no time setting Harry straight.
> 
> A source told The Sun: “Inexplicably, [Meghan] feared Victoria was behind [the leak] - I mean, the idea that Victoria Beckham would be personally ringing journalists to give them a scoop is ridiculous — and spoke to Harry about it.
> 
> David was mortified. He quickly put Harry right, and the two men agreed to move on - but it certainly made things awkward for a while. It later turned out the leak probably came from a beauty salon."
> 
> After a few months things are said to have got back on track, although while the Beckhams scored a daytime invite to Harry and Meghan's May 2018 wedding, they didn't make the cut for the evening bash.
> 
> And now a new spin has been thrown on the saga, with sources claiming Victoria's friendship with Meghan went south after the designer refused to let the former royal wear her dresses for free.
> 
> *“Victoria has had more than enough involvement with Meghan – first she was love bombed by her, via Harry, wanting to visit the store, and always looking for tips on London, and hanging out in the Cotswolds as they are neighbours there,” the insider told heat magazine.
> 
> “Then things took a funny turn. Meghan made overtures about wearing Victoria’s clothes, but she doesn't give them out for free. She is happy to give a discreet discount to anyone that she knows personally but she doesn't give them out – that's her policy.
> 
> "That’s when Meghan turned on her, accusing her of selling stories on her – with the really awkward call between Harry and David.”*





mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markle-love-bombed-victoria-21335484
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'love bombed' Victoria Beckham before 'turning on her over dress'*
> Victoria Beckham was reportedly 'mortified' when Meghan Markle allegedly accused her of leaking stories to the press
> 
> When Meghan Markle first moved to London to be with Prince Harry in 2017, Victoria Beckham is said to have taken the actress under her wing and set her up with the best fashion tips and beauticians in town.
> 
> As neighbours in the Cotswolds, Meghan, Harry, Victoria, 45, and her husband David, 44, apparently became good pals - and there were even rumours that Victoria helped design the interior of the couple's Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage.
> 
> But their friendship is said to have soured when a story appeared about Posh setting Meghan, 38, up with Sarah Chapman - one of the capital's most sought-after beauticians - and the Duchess allegedly accused Posh of leaking it.
> 
> According to reports, a 'furious' Meghan voiced her fears to Harry, 35, who then called his long-time friend David to quiz him about his wife.
> 
> In a phone call described as 'awkward', David is said to have wasted no time setting Harry straight.
> 
> A source told The Sun: “Inexplicably, [Meghan] feared Victoria was behind [the leak] - I mean, the idea that Victoria Beckham would be personally ringing journalists to give them a scoop is ridiculous — and spoke to Harry about it.
> 
> David was mortified. He quickly put Harry right, and the two men agreed to move on - but it certainly made things awkward for a while. It later turned out the leak probably came from a beauty salon."
> 
> After a few months things are said to have got back on track, although while the Beckhams scored a daytime invite to Harry and Meghan's May 2018 wedding, they didn't make the cut for the evening bash.
> 
> And now a new spin has been thrown on the saga, with sources claiming Victoria's friendship with Meghan went south after the designer refused to let the former royal wear her dresses for free.
> 
> *“Victoria has had more than enough involvement with Meghan – first she was love bombed by her, via Harry, wanting to visit the store, and always looking for tips on London, and hanging out in the Cotswolds as they are neighbours there,” the insider told heat magazine.
> 
> “Then things took a funny turn. Meghan made overtures about wearing Victoria’s clothes, but she doesn't give them out for free. She is happy to give a discreet discount to anyone that she knows personally but she doesn't give them out – that's her policy.
> 
> "That’s when Meghan turned on her, accusing her of selling stories on her – with the really awkward call between Harry and David.”*


Meghan burns bridges wherever she goes.


----------



## limom

No Ellen after all:
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...terview-with-ellen-degeneres-will-not-happen/


----------



## Clearblueskies

limom said:


> No Ellen after all:
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...terview-with-ellen-degeneres-will-not-happen/


Interesting, I wonder if Charles made a phone call?


----------



## Corneto

Ludmilla said:


> Well ... yes. This is just the behaviour that I expect from a royal.


Indeed. Whatever is everyone going on about?....


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Interesting, I wonder if Charles made a phone call?


It just says "However, this has been swiftly denied."

By who? What??


----------



## jess236

limom said:


> No Ellen after all:
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...terview-with-ellen-degeneres-will-not-happen/


This is the first smart decision. An Ellen interview would have been a trainwreck.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It just says "However, this has been swiftly denied."
> 
> By who? What??


 Who knows  But I’m sure she’s just dying to do a high profile interview.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Maybe they could try Dr. Phil.....


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> It also comes down to lack of cultural awareness. She's doing it to be cutesy/childish I guess, but sticking out your tongue (at a royal event no less) is generally considered a very rude gesture. Cultural awareness is probably very much part of the training(s) that royals, leaders, and international business people get but we all know she skipped her royal training and fired the trainers.


*THIS!!!!  * I had a fellow working for me ages ago; his wife was career Military and was in charge of "cultural" training for the US Army.  Her job was to train all personnel who would be living/working (etc.) overseas about being sensitive to the differences in the culture in which they would be living.  It was amazing talking to her, and what we (as Americans) felt was okay .. but SO NOT okay in a different culture! .. and I thought Meghan had a degree in International studies????


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I'll be glad when all this dies down, because of the time difference between here in the UK and the US, I wake up to about 10 pages to catch up on! You guys have been busy, 107 posts this morning. Oh well, here we go.......



Tell me about it.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

jess236 said:


> This is the first smart decision. An Ellen interview would have been a trainwreck.


Any interview would have been a train wreck


----------



## Milosmum0307

This thread gives me life.


----------



## jess236

Sharont2305 said:


> Any interview would have been a train wreck


That goes without saying!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> *THIS!!!!  * I had a fellow working for me ages ago; his wife was career Military and was in charge of "cultural" training for the US Army.  Her job was to train all personnel who would be living/working (etc.) overseas about being sensitive to the differences in the culture in which they would be living.  It was amazing talking to her, and what we (as Americans) felt was okay .. but SO NOT okay in a different culture! .. and I thought Meghan had a degree in International studies????


Yeah, like having muffins for breakfast, lol

I'll get my coat.....


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, it would have been better for her, and less restrictive if she'd gone searching for a non royal Duke, or Earl. Then she would have been top dog, "Queen" of her "castle" (stately home)
> But then again, not all of them are rich.



Yes, or a footballer, but then she'd have the money but no title or stately home.


----------



## Corneto

prettyprincess said:


> Its also rude for members of the royal family to sleep with underage girls, but I guess the Royals can more easily overlook that misstep when there are more pressing issues to address, like Meghans tongue.
> As much as I’d love to respond to all the comments directed at me, I was advised not to argue, so we’ll all just have to agree to disagree



You know you just have to wonder what the playbook looks like when not only the BRF but the media in general are not grilling their royal arses about Andrew. And while yes, they are two different issues, the proximity of these two notable events in time and relevant players makes it, in my view, pretty tough to ignore.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, like having muffins for breakfast, lol
> 
> I'll get my coat.....


HA .. for us Yanks, it would be Beans on Toast .. still do not get that!!!


----------



## sdkitty

ICant said:


> Formal events


obviously Michelle ***** is Way smarter than this


----------



## bag-mania

Corneto said:


> You know you just have to wonder what the playbook looks like when not only the BRF but the media in general are not grilling their royal arses about Andrew. And while yes, they are two different issues, the proximity of these two notable events in time and relevant players makes it, in my view, pretty tough to ignore.



My take on it, there are several high up members of the media who were also "associates" with Epstein. The people we have heard about are only the tip of the iceberg. There are many others we don't know about who are very happy to let sleeping (er, dead) dogs lie.


----------



## Corneto

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmao. I guess she's only very supportive of people of color when she needs that narrative.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle is planning to give her first interview to Ellen because she feels they are 'kindred spirits and host understands her pain and suffering' - a snub to BFF Oprah*
> 
> *Meghan Markle told her close friends she is planning on giving Ellen DeGeneres her first interview, insiders have exclusively told DailyMail.com*
> *They said: '[Meghan] said Ellen understands her pain and suffering. That she epitomizes authenticity. [Meghan] feels like they are kindred spirits' *
> *The two met at a dog shelter in LA where Ellen encouraged Meghan to adopt her first dog Bogart, and Ellen and her wife visited Meghan and Harry in London *
> *'Ellen and Meghan have already discussed a sit-down interview. That's been in the works for quite some time now,' a source at the Ellen Show confirmed*
> *They said the interview will 'be all hush-hush and most likely at a secret location' *
> *They added: '[Ellen] would want a sit-down with the both of them together. She wants her fans to see what she already knows to be true'*
> *'Ellen getting the first shot at an in depth interview is surely going to put Oprah's - (and Gayle King's) nose out of joint,' a source added to DailyMail.com*



Perhaps. But honestly, not one of the three of them (Ellen, Oprah or Gayle) is going to do anymore than the usual “let’s just emote all over the place” interview and they’ll still talk to her I’m guessing, even after the snub.


----------



## sdkitty

Corneto said:


> You know you just have to wonder what the playbook looks like when not only the BRF but the media in general are not grilling their royal arses about Andrew. And while yes, they are two different issues, the proximity of these two notable events in time and relevant players makes it, in my view, pretty tough to ignore.


Andy is creepy and has behaved very badly.  But he's keeping a low profile (except for going to church with mom) I think


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> My take on it, there are several high up members of the media who were also "associates" with Epstein. The people we have heard about are only the tip of the iceberg. There are many others we don't know about who are very happy to let sleeping (er, dead) dogs lie.


He was Parnas before Parnas. Pictures with everybody!
I read recently that an official at MIT (or another prestigious university) had to resign because he accepted money after Epstein was found guilty


----------



## Chagall

Ludmilla said:


> Well ... yes. This is just the behaviour that I expect from a royal.


This is absolutely ridiculous behaviour, something a five year old would do. What was she thinking. And photographed doing it twice. It’s almost like she was trying to send some sort of message of disrespect, not a playful act. And one of the pictures was right at the beginning of their marriage so It was before she had a chance to get tired of it all.


----------



## Corneto

bag-mania said:


> My take on it, there are several high up members of the media who were also "associates" with Epstein. The people we have heard about are only the tip of the iceberg. There are many others we don't know about who are very happy to let sleeping (er, dead) dogs lie.


Good points. Thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> This is absolutely ridiculous behaviour, something a five year old would do. What was she thinking. And photographed doing it twice. It’s almost like she was trying to send some sort of message of disrespect, not a playful act. And one of the pictures was right at the beginning of their marriage so It was before she had a chance to get tired of it all.



The one in blush was the day after the wedding. The one in brown was before they were even married, when the very accomodating RF invited her for Christmas because apparently planes to the US were not flying over the holidays (I'm being tongue in cheek really...I find it so irritating that they really bent over backwards for her and look how she thanked them).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> This is absolutely ridiculous behaviour, something a five year old would do. What was she thinking. And photographed doing it twice. It’s almost like she was trying to send some sort of message of disrespect, not a playful act. And one of the pictures was right at the beginning of their marriage so It was before she had a chance to get tired of it all.



I'm certain Meghan believed she looked all cute and sassy. She would probably be appalled to know what a turn off it was to so many people.


----------



## lalame

Corneto said:


> You know you just have to wonder what the playbook looks like when not only the BRF but the media in general are not grilling their royal arses about Andrew. And while yes, they are two different issues, the proximity of these two notable events in time and relevant players makes it, in my view, pretty tough to ignore.



IMO there is a lot of press about Andrew! At least in the US, but of course so much depends on what news algorithms think you’re interested in seeing where you’re seeing it. Though there haven’t been any NEWS about him in awhile and since then Meghan and Harry have had nearly daily updates to their situation so there’s just more reason for it to be covered.


----------



## mshermes

*Meghan Markle posts MORE pictures of her doing good works on Instagram and highlights charity trips she made even BEFORE she married Prince Harry*

*Meghan Markle posted pictures of her doing good works all around the world on the Sussex Royal Instagram  *
*Images include Meghan in Rwanda in 2016 with World Vision, which was expanding access to clean water *
*Meghan was also pictured in India in 2017 and at an Association of Commonwealth Universities event in Africa*
*
Interesting.....I looked at a lot of the positive comments on Instagram ...... 0 posts, 5 posts, etc. *


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA .. for us Yanks, it would be Beans on Toast .. still do not get that!!!


OT but Beans on Toast is amazing, lol


----------



## limom

ICant said:


> She must read this thread lmaooo


Nah, resume building.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I don’t understand how they are still Royal patrons and VP of a Commonwealth Organization etc.  if they are no longer working members?  It all seems quite murky.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> This is absolutely ridiculous behaviour, something a five year old would do. What was she thinking. And photographed doing it twice. It’s almost like she was trying to send some sort of message of disrespect, not a playful act. And one of the pictures was right at the beginning of their marriage so It was before she had a chance to get tired of it all.


One of the pictures, they weren't even married, newly engaged, Christmas Day at Sandringham


----------



## Swanky

Was this posted?

*Thomas Markle Admits Lying To Meghan Markle, Prince Harry About Paparazzi Photos*

Thomas Markle admitted he lied to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about the 2018 paparazzi photos he said were staged in collaboration with a photographer.

Markle, a former Hollywood lighting director who has been estranged from his daughter, spoke about misleading Meghan and Harry in a Channel 5 documentary released Wednesday. 

Just days before the royal wedding on May 19, 2018, the Mail on Sunday broke the storythat photos of Markle that appeared to show him preparing for the nuptials had been staged. The paper reported it had video showing Markle meeting Los Angeles-based photographer Jeff Rayner of the Coleman-Rayner picture agency.

Markle was photographed reading a book about Great Britain and an article about Meghan and Harry. He also was shown getting measured for a suit and lifting weights. 

The now-Duke and Duchess of Sussex contacted Markle after the photos were published to ask if they were staged, but he said in the new documentary that he denied it. 

“All Harry asked me was did I pose for measurements for a suit, and I said, ’No, I wasn’t posing for a measurement for a suit, I was being measured for a new hoodie,” Thomas said, according to clips obtained by the Mirror. “That’s what I told them.” 

“And of course that was a lie,” he added. “I lied to him. I’m not proud of that, but I did. I didn’t do it for money. I did this to change my image.” 

Despite his claim, Markle admitted he’s still making money off of the photos. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...-about-paparazzi-photos/ar-BBZizy7?li=BBnbfcL


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> *Meghan Markle posts MORE pictures of her doing good works on Instagram and highlights charity trips she made even BEFORE she married Prince Harry*
> 
> *Meghan Markle posted pictures of her doing good works all around the world on the Sussex Royal Instagram  *
> *Images include Meghan in Rwanda in 2016 with World Vision, which was expanding access to clean water *
> *Meghan was also pictured in India in 2017 and at an Association of Commonwealth Universities event in Africa*
> *
> Interesting.....I looked at a lot of the positive comments on Instagram ...... 0 posts, 5 posts, etc. *



In other words, "Look at me, look at me! I'm good! I'm kind! I'm important! Don't forget about me! Here I am!"


----------



## Mrs.Z

Swanky said:


> Was this posted?
> 
> *Thomas Markle Admits Lying To Meghan Markle, Prince Harry About Paparazzi Photos*
> 
> Thomas Markle admitted he lied to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about the 2018 paparazzi photos he said were staged in collaboration with a photographer.
> 
> Markle, a former Hollywood lighting director who has been estranged from his daughter, spoke about misleading Meghan and Harry in a Channel 5 documentary released Wednesday.
> 
> Just days before the royal wedding on May 19, 2018, the Mail on Sunday broke the storythat photos of Markle that appeared to show him preparing for the nuptials had been staged. The paper reported it had video showing Markle meeting Los Angeles-based photographer Jeff Rayner of the Coleman-Rayner picture agency.
> 
> Markle was photographed reading a book about Great Britain and an article about Meghan and Harry. He also was shown getting measured for a suit and lifting weights.
> 
> The now-Duke and Duchess of Sussex contacted Markle after the photos were published to ask if they were staged, but he said in the new documentary that he denied it.
> 
> “All Harry asked me was did I pose for measurements for a suit, and I said, ’No, I wasn’t posing for a measurement for a suit, I was being measured for a new hoodie,” Thomas said, according to clips obtained by the Mirror. “That’s what I told them.”
> 
> “And of course that was a lie,” he added. “I lied to him. I’m not proud of that, but I did. I didn’t do it for money. I did this to change my image.”
> 
> Despite his claim, Markle admitted he’s still making money off of the photos.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...-about-paparazzi-photos/ar-BBZizy7?li=BBnbfcL



Ugh, he needs to STOP TALKING!!!


----------



## limom

Was this Oprah interview posted.
https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/22/oprah-supports-prince-harry-meghan-markle-megxit-gayle-king/
She sounds so preachy and angry at the same time.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The one in blush was the day after the wedding. The one in brown was before they were even married, when the very accomodating RF invited her for Christmas because apparently planes to the US were not flying over the holidays (I'm being tongue in cheek really...I find it so irritating that they really bent over backwards for her and look how she thanked them).


I agree completely. Right from the beginning it was a ‘lark’ for her with no respect whatsoever for the people that did so much for her.


----------



## joyeaux

bag-mania said:


> In other words, "Look at me, look at me! I'm good! I'm kind! I'm important! Don't forget about me! Here I am!"



And out of 6 photos posted, she’s in 5. Harry’s in 2 (one of those being with Meghan). The caption in a quick skim by me because I truly can’t handle MM’s word salad begins with “The Duchess of Sussex” bla bla, then there’s one mention of the Duke, then back to the Duchess.

I really think they have the notion that they are going to rely solely on Instagram to communicate with people— legit journalists are out. Which works except for the fact that there’s an entire generation of people in the world that are not technology natives and don’t know how to even create an Instagram account. Like my mama. So go get those 20-40 year olds Megs! Who needs the rest??


----------



## prettyprincess

bag-mania said:


> I'm certain Meghan believed she looked all cute and sassy. She would probably be appalled to know what a turn off it was to so many people.




Other royals have done the same exact cheeky pose at various formal events.


----------



## limom

joyeaux said:


> And out of 6 photos posted, she’s in 5. Harry’s in 2 (one of those being with Meghan). The caption in a quick skim by me because I truly can’t handle MM’s word salad begins with “The Duchess of Sussex” bla bla, then there’s one mention of the Duke, then back to the Duchess.
> 
> I really think they have the notion that they are going to rely solely on Instagram to communicate with people— legit journalists are out. Which works except for the fact that there’s an entire generation of people in the world that are not technology natives and don’t know how to even create an Instagram account. Like my mama. So go get those 20-40 year olds Megs! Who needs the rest??


It is actually quite astute, imho. They are addressing their audience themselves and can control the message 100%.
Plus if they are starting to actually sell items, they can go straight from there. No middlemen.
Now if she could only come down from her high horse....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

joyeaux said:


> And out of 6 photos posted, she’s in 5. Harry’s in 2 (one of those being with Meghan). The caption in a quick skim by me because I truly can’t handle MM’s word salad begins with “The Duchess of Sussex” bla bla, then there’s one mention of the Duke, then back to the Duchess.
> 
> I really think they have the notion that they are going to rely solely on Instagram to communicate with people— legit journalists are out. Which works except for the fact that there’s an entire generation of people in the world that are not technology natives and don’t know how to even create an Instagram account. Like my mama. *So go get those 20-40 year olds Megs! Who needs the rest??*



She is approaching it as a business. She is going full-on influencer! 
She doesn't need older people because they won't be buying the crap they will eventually sell anyway. Most of her fans seem to fall in that young age bracket so it makes sense to pander to them.

As for Harry, I don't think he feels comfortable exploiting himself for profit yet. Meghan will have to guide him in slowly. He'll get used to it if he wants to stay in business with her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

prettyprincess said:


> Other royals have done the same exact cheeky pose at various formal events.


Exactly.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> She is approaching it as a business. She is going full-on influencer!
> She doesn't need older people because they won't be buying the crap they will eventually sell anyway. Most of her fans seem to fall in that young age bracket so it makes sense to pander to them.
> 
> As for Harry, I don't think he feels comfortable exploiting himself for profit yet. Meghan will have to guide him in slowly. He'll get used to it if he wants to stay in business with her.


He was perfectly fine ranting shoeless on climate change for a free airplane ride and access to a free party.
He is no stranger to “exploiting himself”.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> I'm certain Meghan believed she looked all cute and sassy. She would probably be appalled to know what a turn off it was to so many people.


At her age she should have known. I think most of us got over that kind of silly stuff in grade school or at least in our teens.


----------



## Murphy47

bag-mania said:


> She is approaching it as a business. She is going full-on influencer!
> She doesn't need older people because they won't be buying the crap they will eventually sell anyway. Most of her fans seem to fall in that young age bracket so it makes sense to pander to them.
> 
> As for Harry, I don't think he feels comfortable exploiting himself for profit yet. Meghan will have to guide him in slowly. He'll get used to it if he wants to stay in business with her.



I can see that. She’s way to old to “influence” Gen Z. 
They could care less about royalty.


----------



## limom

Murphy47 said:


> I can see that. She’s way to old to “influence” Gen Z.
> They could care less about royalty.


Isn’t millenials her target audience?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chagall said:


> At her age she should have known. I think most of us got over that kind of silly stuff in grade school or at least in our teens.


Apparently not all the royals though.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> He was perfectly fine ranting shoeless on climate change for a free airplane ride and access to a free party.
> He is no stranger to “exploiting himself”.



Ah, but there he actually thought he was making a difference! He was sharing the wisdom of his 35 years of privileged life with those folks who needed to hear his message. Like most celebrities who tell people what they should be doing while doing the opposite themselves, the hypocrisy completely escaped him.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Apparently not all the royals though.



Wasn't she doing that while interacting with a child in the crowd?  That's a bit different than sticking a tongue out at the paparazzi.


----------



## Murphy47

limom said:


> Isn’t millenials her target audience?



She may think it is but I can guarantee my Gen Z daughters think she’s “too old” to get it.


----------



## Aqua01

imgg said:


> Sorry, those are two different issues than what we are discussing.   No one said its okay for a Royal to sleep with underaged girls.  Where on earth did you see any poster on this tread saying that was okay?



You know I've learned so much from this thread. I've learned what being deliberately obtuse actually looks like. I've also seen selective memory and confirmation bias in full force.

 But seriously what's up with that trend of bringing other Royals (*who happens to have their own thread, people*) down to excuse and elevate your eh.........idol? It never fails to have the complete reverse effect on me.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Wasn't she doing that while interacting with a child in the crowd?  That's a bit different than sticking a tongue out at the paparazzi.


All the complaints about Meghan doing it are saying it's inappropriate because it's a royal event.

Isn't Kate also at a royal event? And what about William?

It's splitting hairs and excuses because of dislike of the person doing it.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> All the complaints about Meghan doing it are saying it's inappropriate because it's a royal event and inappropriate.
> 
> Isn't Kate also at a royal event? And what about William?
> 
> It's splitting hairs and excuses because of dislike of the person doing it.



Fair enough. I don't like seeing anyone's tongue sticking out. Miley Cyrus did it all the time for years and she looked gross each and every time.


----------



## Milosmum0307

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Apparently not all the royals though.


She’s licking her lips.  In the other photo, William is kicking his lips.  I think Meghan is as well.  They’re not being cheeky.  They just need Chapstick.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> All the complaints about Meghan doing it are saying it's inappropriate because it's a royal event.
> 
> Isn't Kate also at a royal event? And what about William?
> 
> It's splitting hairs and excuses because of dislike of the person doing it.



Or because this is a thread about Meghan and Harry. I’m sure the other threads would love to discuss the other royals tongues.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Ah, but there he actually thought he was making a difference! He was sharing the wisdom of his 35 years of privileged life with those folks who needed to hear his message. Like most celebrities who tell people what they should be doing while doing the opposite themselves, the hypocrisy completely escaped him.


Here is the future for prince Harry.:
https://www.itv.com/news/channel/2020-01-21/the-queens-grandson-selling-jersey-milk-in-china/


----------



## prettyprincess

Milosmum0307 said:


> She’s licking her lips.  In the other photo, William is kicking his lips.  I think Meghan is as well.  They’re not being cheeky.  They just need Chapstick.








	

		
			
		

		
	
 They all do it, not just Meghan.
Normally, I see it as a playful gesture. When Miley was doing it she was twerking and making provocative gestures, so I can see how that looks off putting.


----------



## Mrs.Z

With all due respect...no more tongue pictures please ....pretty please.  

Being photographed constantly leads to at least a few questionable photos!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> Or because this is a thread about Meghan and Harry. I’m sure the other threads would love to discuss the other royals tongues.


I'm making a comparison and it's perfectly fine to do so, so please don't  try and move me along because you  don't agree with my posts. You are not a Mod. 

As you have advised others, you may also use the Ignore button. Cheers!


----------



## limom

You are all wrong. The tongue sticking is part of an ancient royal secret code.
Can we move on, now?


----------



## gazoo

Gawd, I can't believe how messy this has become. I was so excited and rooting for them, UGH. I do think she was subjected to racism. There is a lot of nuance that can go over heads unless one is actually a minority. However, I don't feel the Queen has been anything but welcoming and dare I say supportive of both Harry and Meghan. I won't go into the Andrew debacle since this isn't his thread, but I will say the Queen's behavior with him does leave much to be desired.

Having gotten that off my chest, Meghan's actions aren't those of someone that actively tried to make an honest go of being a working member of the RF, IMO. If she and Harry were getting websites and companies trademarked many months ago, then it seems obvious the plan was always to get out. I don't care if they want to leave the RF, in fact I wish them well. My only complaint is that they want to still be supported and trade on their Royal identity. They should have separated completely, as in zero funding from Charles/Cornwall Duchy. Anything short of that feels manipulative and exploitative to me. I read a quote somewhere, can't remember where, that they wanted to have their cake and eat it, and screw the baker too. Made me LOL and feels quite on the nose. And Meghan shouldn't be taking the brunt of the criticism for their leaving the RF. Harry is a grown man. He's an active participant in everything.

Her dad really should just stop with the interviews. I get that he feels he has nothing to lose, but it's not a good look for any parent to bad mouth their child. I wish Meghan wasn't the person she's purported to be, but actions speak louder than words. Her actions are stacking up to be those of someone that has always used others to their own benefit, someone that will never be happy, and someone that has some very real issues with ever being out of the spotlight. Harry keeps banging on about their wanting to have a peaceful life. There is nothing showing me that this is what Meghan actually wants. It's sad and doesn't bode well for their marriage.

If it's true that Meghan or her fans leaked the Will affair rumors, if it's true that Meghan got Harry to go off his anti-depressants before they even got married, if it's true that they've tried to blackmail the Queen with a tell all interview  to get their way, if it's true that there are accounting shenanigans with their foundation, if it's true that Meghan is actively working with paps to document pap walks whilst Harry is threatening to sue them, I can't see a happy ending here for either of them. I hope they are truly sincere in wanting to work for the greater good, but again, their actions aren't showing anything like that. JMO.

The only winner here has been Kate. Most people that used to complain about her and Wills being work shy are now supporting them and thinking they're amazing. As to the tongue showing, I don't know. Maybe a little kid stuck their tongue out at Meghan and she returned the gesture? I don't really feel a couple of seconds of sticking her tongue out is the end all of disrespect. Sadly, there's far worse that has occurred, such as her pushing her way towards the front all the time. THAT makes me cringe and I still can't really believe she'd behave that way. I read about it and didn't believe it until I saw the many videos of her doing it. How can she do that, over and over again? It's beyond gauche.

It's an odd time really. On the one hand you could say the Monarchy is firmly safe since most people now seem to love Will and Kate, and are supportive and empathetic to the Queen over all the recent craziness. And then on the other hand, people are turning their gazes towards the huge amount of monies these people are given with all their public funding, and asking themselves if it's really worth it when they're just flawed people like the rest of messy humanity. I never thought the BRF was in danger of being dismantled, but things don't feel very secure all of a sudden. That the impetus is an allegedly sweat free Prince with connections to sex trafficking and a beautiful American/bi-racial/divorcee/actress, feels kinda surreal.


----------



## mshermes

I see a vast difference in the tongue pictures. This is a forum about H&M.  Let's leave it at that before the MOD steps in AGAIN!


----------



## imgg

Aqua01 said:


> You know I've learned so much from this thread. I've learned what being deliberately obtuse actually looks like. I've also seen selective memory and confirmation bias in full force.
> 
> But seriously what's up with that trend of bringing other Royals (*who happens to have their own thread, people*) down to excuse and elevate your eh.........idol? It never fails to have the complete reverse effect on me.


My theory is when people use irrelevant comparisons, deflect, or use popular descriptives, its because they have no valid argument.


----------



## mrsinsyder

imgg said:


> My theory is when people use irrelevant comparisons, deflect, or use popular descriptives, its because they have no valid argument.


Exactly. I don't understand why no one on the Meghan fan side can ever admit she's done even a single thing incorrectly. I like lots of people. But I can also admit when they screw up. Meghan and Harry aren't perfect and that's ok.


----------



## lalame

gazoo said:


> Gawd, I can't believe how messy this has become. I was so excited and rooting for them, UGH. I do think she was subjected to racism. There is a lot of nuance that can go over heads unless one is actually a minority. However, I don't feel the Queen has been anything but welcoming and dare I say supportive of both Harry and Meghan. I won't go into the Andrew debacle since this isn't his thread, but I will say the Queen's behavior with him does leave much to be desired.
> 
> Having gotten that off my chest, Meghan's actions aren't those of someone that actively tried to make an honest go of being a working member of the RF, IMO. If she and Harry were getting websites and companies trademarked many months ago, then it seems obvious the plan was always to get out. I don't care if they want to leave the RF, in fact I wish them well. My only complaint is that they want to still be supported and trade on their Royal identity. They should have separated completely, as in zero funding from Charles/Cornwall Duchy. Anything short of that feels manipulative and exploitative to me. I read a quote somewhere, can't remember where, that they wanted to have their cake and eat it, and screw the baker too. Made me LOL and feels quite on the nose. And Meghan shouldn't be taking the brunt of the criticism for their leaving the RF. Harry is a grown man. He's an active participant in everything.
> 
> Her dad really should just stop with the interviews. I get that he feels he has nothing to lose, but it's not a good look for any parent to bad mouth their child. I wish Meghan wasn't the person she's purported to be, but actions speak louder than words. Her actions are stacking up to be those of someone that has always used others to their own benefit, someone that will never be happy, and someone that has some very real issues with ever being out of the spotlight. Harry keeps banging on about their wanting to have a peaceful life. There is nothing showing me that this is what Meghan actually wants. It's sad and doesn't bode well for their marriage.
> 
> If it's true that Meghan or her fans leaked the Will affair rumors, if it's true that Meghan got Harry to go off his anti-depressants before they even got married, if it's true that they've tried to blackmail the Queen with a tell all interview  to get their way, if it's true that there are accounting shenanigans with their foundation, if it's true that Meghan is actively working with paps to document pap walks whilst Harry is threatening to sue them, I can't see a happy ending here for either of them. I hope they are truly sincere in wanting to work for the greater good, but again, their actions aren't showing anything like that. JMO.
> 
> The only winner here has been Kate. Most people that used to complain about her and Wills being work shy are now supporting them and thinking they're amazing. As to the tongue showing, I don't know. Maybe a little kid stuck their tongue out at Meghan and she returned the gesture? I don't really feel a couple of seconds of sticking her tongue out is the end all of disrespect. Sadly, there's far worse that has occurred, such as her pushing her way towards the front all the time. THAT makes me cringe and I still can't really believe she'd behave that way. I read about it and didn't believe it until I saw the many videos of her doing it. How can she do that, over and over again? It's beyond gauche.
> 
> It's an odd time really. On the one hand you could say the Monarchy is firmly safe since most people now seem to love Will and Kate, and are supportive and empathetic to the Queen over all the recent craziness. And then on the other hand, people are turning their gazes towards the huge amount of monies these people are given with all their public funding, and asking themselves if it's really worth it when they're just flawed people like the rest of messy humanity. I never thought the BRF was in danger of being dismantled, but things don't feel very secure all of a sudden. That the impetus is an allegedly sweat free Prince with connections to sex trafficking and a beautiful American/bi-racial/divorcee/actress, feels kinda surreal.


Um, can you read minds? Bc this is IT - fair, balanced, and everything.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Exactly. I don't understand why no one on the Meghan fan side can ever admit she's done even a single thing incorrectly. I like lots of people. But I can also admit when they screw up. Meghan and Harry aren't perfect and that's ok.



I'm still trying to understand what it is about her that her fans like so much. Is it because she's pretty? Did they feel any disruption she caused to the royal family was a good thing? Do they believe her blatant self-promotion is the best and most modern way to get herself known? What is it about her?


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I'm still trying to understand what it is about her that her fans like so much. Is it because she's pretty? Did they feel any disruption she caused to the royal family was a good thing? Do they believe her blatant self-promotion is the best and most modern way to get herself known? What is it about her?


Commoner marrying prince, imho.


----------



## tiktok

It's very simple, no photos required. If you start working at a straightlaced law firm, you're not going to show up wearing jeans on the first few months of work, even if you see the senior partners doing that when they don't have client meetings. It's a question of judgment. We've all been there. You start by the book, earn some trust, and then start being less formal, make suggestions and get people to loosen up. You don't come into a law firm telling them on day 3 that they should be more like Silicon Valley. It's just common sense for most professional adults.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I'm still trying to understand what it is about her that her fans like so much. Is it because she's pretty? Did they feel any disruption she caused to the royal family was a good thing? Do they believe her blatant self-promotion is the best and most modern way to get herself known? What is it about her?



What do people see in Margot Robbie, ScarJo, JLaw, etc? They’re just normal people who happen to be beautiful. Imo the bar is just that low for a celeb and I don’t even mean that as a dig. There’s not really any deeper basis to love any celebrity. At least with some celebs and royals, they’ve been there for a long time so you’ve grown with them and naturally there’s some inherent attachment that goes with that.

MM hasn’t been famous long enough to grow attachment to so all people can do is love her because she’s beautiful or dislike her because of her most recent actions. It can swing the other way if either of those things change.


----------



## wisconsin

prettyprincess said:


> Its also rude for members of the royal family to sleep with underage girls, but I guess the Royals can more easily overlook that misstep when there are more pressing issues to address, like Meghans tongue.
> As much as I’d love to respond to all the comments directed at me, I was advised not to argue, so we’ll all just have to agree to disagree




What a comparison
This thread is about MM!
This wins the internet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> It's very simple, no photos required. If you start working at a straightlaced law firm, you're not going to show up wearing jeans on the first few months of work, even if you see the senior partners doing that when they don't have client meetings. It's a question of judgment. We've all been there. You start by the book, earn some trust, and then start being less formal, make suggestions and get people to loosen up. You don't come into a law firm telling them on day 3 that they should be more like Silicon Valley. It's just common sense for most professional adults.





tiktok said:


> It's very simple, no photos required. If you start working at a straightlaced law firm, you're not going to show up wearing jeans on the first few months of work, even if you see the senior partners doing that when they don't have client meetings. It's a question of judgment. We've all been there. You start by the book, earn some trust, and then start being less formal, make suggestions and get people to loosen up. You don't come into a law firm telling them on day 3 that they should be more like Silicon Valley. It's just common sense for most professional adults.



And if you don’t like it there and want to leave, no problem, but you’re bound to piss off everyone if you leave in a shockingly short time, after creating a storm of criticism, and asking for sympathy of everyone you talk to. We’ve all had THAT coworker, right?


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> What do people see in Margot Robbie, ScarJo, JLaw, etc? They’re just normal people who happen to be beautiful. Imo the bar is just that low for a celeb and I don’t even mean that as a dig. There’s not really any deeper basis to love any celebrity. At least with some celebs and royals, they’ve been there for a long time so you’ve grown with them and naturally there’s some inherent attachment that goes with that.
> 
> MM hasn’t been famous long enough to grow attachment to so all people can do is love her because she’s beautiful or dislike her because of her most recent actions. It can swing the other way if either of those things change.


Hum, hum, she has a talent for opening up suitcases.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Commoner marrying prince, imho.





lalame said:


> What do people see in Margot Robbie, ScarJo, JLaw, etc? They’re just normal people who happen to be beautiful. Imo the bar is just that low for a celeb and I don’t even mean that as a dig. There’s not really any deeper basis to love any celebrity. At least with some celebs and royals, they’ve been there for a long time so you’ve grown with them and naturally there’s some inherent attachment that goes with that.
> 
> MM hasn’t been famous long enough to grow attachment to so all people can do is love her because she’s beautiful or dislike her because of her most recent actions. It can swing the other way if either of those things change.



That makes as much sense as anything. Because from what we have seen of her personality in interviews she is not particularly charismatic.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Hum, hum, she has a talent for opening up suitcases.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4648761


Okay but just don’t come for Suits as I love that show lol


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> That makes as much sense as anything. Because from what we have seen of her personality in interviews she is not particularly *charismatic*.


that is part of the charm. She could be anyone. 
She gives some younger women (obviously not here) hope. She is the every woman hero.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Okay but just don’t come for Suits as I love that show lol


Can’t comment, I have never even heard of the show before she met Harry.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> that is part of the charm. She could be anyone.
> She gives some younger women (obviously not here) hope. She is the every woman hero.



I actually don’t agree with this, since it doesn’t seem like that’s the vibe she’s projected. IMO she’s been trying for the Lady Di or Mother Theresa image since she got married... and before marriage she was an actress who blogged about her charming, stylish life. Can’t imagine either are relatable to the every woman.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Can’t comment, I have never even heard of the show before she met Harry.


Me neither and I watched it on a whim but honestly it’s a surprisingly good show! Love that cast, and I can totally see fans of the show naturally loving MM as an extension of it. Her character was relatable-ish.


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> Exactly. I don't understand why no one on the Meghan fan side can ever admit she's done even a single thing incorrectly. I like lots of people. But I can also admit when they screw up. Meghan and Harry aren't perfect and that's ok.



Very true. I'd really like whoever ends up interviewing them one day (because they will sit down with Oprah or Gayle or whoever at some point) to ask both Harry and Meghan:  _Looking back, what would you have done differently?_  Their answer would be really revealing, whether they chose to be honest or not!


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> that is part of the charm. She could be anyone.
> *She gives some younger women (obviously not here) hope.* She is the every woman hero.



That is a singularly depressing thought.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> I actually don’t agree with this, since it doesn’t seem like that’s the vibe she’s projected. IMO she’s been trying for the Lady Di or Mother Theresa image since she got married... and before marriage she was an actress who blogged about her charming, stylish life. Can’t imagine either are relatable to the every woman.


Who is the woman who does not want to be seen charitable and/or stylish?
Those are very common and attainable goal. (When young anyways)


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> Very true. I'd really like whoever ends up interviewing them one day (because they will sit down with Oprah or Gayle or whoever at some point) to ask both Harry and Meghan:  _Looking back, what would you have done differently?_  Their answer would be really revealing, whether they chose to be honest or not!


They’d never accept any responsibility of their own.


----------



## limom

youngster said:


> Very true. I'd really like whoever ends up interviewing them one day (because they will sit down with Oprah or Gayle or whoever at some point) to ask both Harry and Meghan:  _Looking back, what would you have done differently?_  Their answer would be really revealing, whether they chose to be honest or not!


It is too soon for them to have the wherewithal to reflect, imho.
5 years from now would be better.


----------



## marthastoo

limom said:


> No Ellen after all:
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...terview-with-ellen-degeneres-will-not-happen/


What?  Misinformation from a rag magazine?  Say it isn't so!

Can we rewind the 3 pages where people excoriate Meghan's audacity and tackiness of giving Ellen an exclusive interview?


----------



## marthastoo

Mrs.Z said:


> Ugh, he needs to STOP TALKING!!!


But, he's such a sympathetic character!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

marthastoo said:


> What?  Misinformation from a rag magazine?  Say it isn't so!
> 
> Can we rewind the 3 pages where people excoriate Meghan's audacity and tackiness of giving Ellen an exclusive interview?


Is Hello! any more reliable? The article denying their Ellen story says almost exactly nothing about this supposed “denial.”

Also it says they’re doing one with Oprah, so still just as tacky!


----------



## lalame

I truly do think 90% (non-academic number) of what is printed in tabloids are either entirely fake or exaggerated based on a small nugget of truth. Enough celebs of all stripes have said as much... can’t imagine it’s different for these guys. How easy is it for a person to claim they know her and have xyz knowledge when they don’t and just want the money... or for a writer to exaggerate. The royal circle is surrounded by so many handlers, friends of friends, etc.


----------



## daisychainz

lalame said:


> Okay but just don’t come for Suits as I love that show lol


Me too! My boyfriend and I watched it every week for nine years. And I enjoyed her character on it, she was ok. But she was a character and I knew nothing about the woman at all. She wasn't ever my fave on the show, but seeing her real self now outside the show is unreal. I think fans can easily fall in love with the character/image that a celeb creates and the real person, if we ever got to know them, would be a major let down. Meghan Markle, for example.


----------



## mshermes

limom said:


> Hum, hum, she has a talent for opening up suitcases.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4648761


Thank you for posting this. I have a much clearer picture now why she had to bolt from the RF. I never saw her have this much fun!


----------



## marthastoo

I like how it's the people who don't like Meghan answering what people like about her.  

I will answer - overall, I like Meghan.  I like her activism, rooted from her childhood.  I like her American (forgive me for "stereotyping Americans") can-do spirit.  I like that she's sensitive.  I like that she clearly loves her husband.

What makes me like her more than a passing general positive impression is the rabid hatred that has unfurled on this thread.  The more people hate her (irrational hatred, IMO), the more I like her.  The more people quote the comment section of the Daily Mail as if it's a works cited page, the more I like her.  The more people pick apart a photograph taken in a nanosecond and attributing motivations, attitudes, and thoughts as if it's a slide in an art history class, the more I like her.

Is she perfect?  Far from it.  But does she deserve the calls for hitmen and violence?  Um, no.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

i was curious so I just did the math: There have been more than 3,800 posts in this thread (250+ pages) since Jan. 8 when Harry and Megan announced they were stepping back as senior royals. That's just jaw-dropping. Must be some kind of tPF record.


----------



## lalame

Dear lord, can we all at least agree that MM does not deserve anything close to violence!!! That’s truly OTT (not directed at you marthastoo)


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> Dear lord, can we all at least agree that MM does not deserve anything close to violence!!! That’s truly OTT (not directed at you marthastoo)


No one in this thread has said anything of the sort, nor has anyone said they hate her.


----------



## mshermes

marthastoo said:


> I like how it's the people who don't like Meghan answering what people like about her.
> 
> I will answer - overall, I like Meghan.  I like her activism, rooted from her childhood.  I like her American (forgive me for "stereotyping Americans") can-do spirit.  I like that she's sensitive.  I like that she clearly loves her husband.
> 
> What makes me like her more than a passing general positive impression is the rabid hatred that has unfurled on this thread.  The more people hate her (irrational hatred, IMO), the more I like her.  The more people quote the comment section of the Daily Mail as if it's a works cited page, the more I like her.  The more people pick apart a photograph taken in a nanosecond and attributing motivations, attitudes, and thoughts as if it's a slide in an art history class, the more I like her.
> 
> Is she perfect?  Far from it.  But does she deserve the calls for hitmen and violence?  Um, no.


Not one person on here has called for violence or a hitman. I certainly hope that is not what you are insinuating.


----------



## lalame

Cosmopolitan said:


> i was curious so I just did the math: There have been more than 3,800 posts in this thread (250+ pages) since Jan. 8 when Harry and Megan announced they were stepping back as senior royals. That's just jaw-dropping. Must be some kind of tPF record.



Honestly I hadn’t given her much thought until that all went down! I think that’s the tragedy... their privacy push is not just bringing more attention and interest on them but also more of the negative kind. I didn’t care enough to form an opinion before it got so dramatic.


----------



## marthastoo

mshermes said:


> Not one person on here has called for violence or a hitman. I certainly hope that is not what you are insinuating.


Wrong.  Feel free to go back through the 250 pages to find it.


----------



## mshermes

marthastoo said:


> Wrong.  Feel free to go back through the 250 pages to find it.


What 250 pages? This is now 1334 pages. You need proof because those are some bad accusations.


----------



## marthastoo

250+ pages since the Jan 8th announcement.  Hundreds of people read this thread.  I know I was not the only person who saw it.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


>


Actually she has, or maybe had, a habit of sticking out her tongue somewhat, but I noticed the magazines and blogs were really nice about not using those photos. 

Anyway, she's not alone in doing it.


----------



## wisconsin

I don’t support any violence or hit men threats.
No one has to worry. 
MM is not going anywhere. 
People like her know how to live.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

prettyprincess said:


> View attachment 4648728
> View attachment 4648729
> View attachment 4648730
> View attachment 4648731
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They all do it, not just Meghan.
> Normally, I see it as a playful gesture. When Miley was doing it she was twerking and making provocative gestures, so I can see how that looks off putting.


These look more like they were just licking their lips to me due to the rest of the expression on their faces. Harry looks like he is doing it as a playful gesture of exhaustion after trying some boxing. It's not ipso facto inappropriate (seems totally fine in Harry's context), but it's hard to imagine this not being an odd thing to do at a formal garden party in Buckingham Palace or on a walk to church. Playing with animals or children is one thing - I don't think anyone would criticize a tongue out in that context (at least I wouldnt)


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Actually she has, or maybe had, a habit of sticking out her tongue somewhat, but I noticed the magazines and blogs were really nice about not using those photos.
> 
> Anyway, she's not alone in doing it.
> View attachment 4648846
> View attachment 4648847
> View attachment 4648848
> View attachment 4648849
> 
> 
> View attachment 4648844
> View attachment 4648845


Kind of just looks like everyone is saying thank you here


----------



## cafecreme15

gazoo said:


> Gawd, I can't believe how messy this has become. I was so excited and rooting for them, UGH. I do think she was subjected to racism. There is a lot of nuance that can go over heads unless one is actually a minority. However, I don't feel the Queen has been anything but welcoming and dare I say supportive of both Harry and Meghan. I won't go into the Andrew debacle since this isn't his thread, but I will say the Queen's behavior with him does leave much to be desired.
> 
> Having gotten that off my chest, Meghan's actions aren't those of someone that actively tried to make an honest go of being a working member of the RF, IMO. If she and Harry were getting websites and companies trademarked many months ago, then it seems obvious the plan was always to get out. I don't care if they want to leave the RF, in fact I wish them well. My only complaint is that they want to still be supported and trade on their Royal identity. They should have separated completely, as in zero funding from Charles/Cornwall Duchy. Anything short of that feels manipulative and exploitative to me. I read a quote somewhere, can't remember where, that they wanted to have their cake and eat it, and screw the baker too. Made me LOL and feels quite on the nose. And Meghan shouldn't be taking the brunt of the criticism for their leaving the RF. Harry is a grown man. He's an active participant in everything.
> 
> Her dad really should just stop with the interviews. I get that he feels he has nothing to lose, but it's not a good look for any parent to bad mouth their child. I wish Meghan wasn't the person she's purported to be, but actions speak louder than words. Her actions are stacking up to be those of someone that has always used others to their own benefit, someone that will never be happy, and someone that has some very real issues with ever being out of the spotlight. Harry keeps banging on about their wanting to have a peaceful life. There is nothing showing me that this is what Meghan actually wants. It's sad and doesn't bode well for their marriage.
> 
> If it's true that Meghan or her fans leaked the Will affair rumors, if it's true that Meghan got Harry to go off his anti-depressants before they even got married, if it's true that they've tried to blackmail the Queen with a tell all interview  to get their way, if it's true that there are accounting shenanigans with their foundation, if it's true that Meghan is actively working with paps to document pap walks whilst Harry is threatening to sue them, I can't see a happy ending here for either of them. I hope they are truly sincere in wanting to work for the greater good, but again, their actions aren't showing anything like that. JMO.
> 
> The only winner here has been Kate. Most people that used to complain about her and Wills being work shy are now supporting them and thinking they're amazing. As to the tongue showing, I don't know. Maybe a little kid stuck their tongue out at Meghan and she returned the gesture? I don't really feel a couple of seconds of sticking her tongue out is the end all of disrespect. Sadly, there's far worse that has occurred, such as her pushing her way towards the front all the time. THAT makes me cringe and I still can't really believe she'd behave that way. I read about it and didn't believe it until I saw the many videos of her doing it. How can she do that, over and over again? It's beyond gauche.
> 
> It's an odd time really. On the one hand you could say the Monarchy is firmly safe since most people now seem to love Will and Kate, and are supportive and empathetic to the Queen over all the recent craziness. And then on the other hand, people are turning their gazes towards the huge amount of monies these people are given with all their public funding, and asking themselves if it's really worth it when they're just flawed people like the rest of messy humanity. I never thought the BRF was in danger of being dismantled, but things don't feel very secure all of a sudden. That the impetus is an allegedly sweat free Prince with connections to sex trafficking and a beautiful American/bi-racial/divorcee/actress, feels kinda surreal.


Thanks for taking the time to contribute with such a well-thought out and well-rounded post!


----------



## prettyprincess

cafecreme15 said:


> These look more like they were just licking their lips to me due to the rest of the expression on their faces. Harry looks like he is doing it as a playful gesture of exhaustion after trying some boxing. It's not ipso facto inappropriate (seems totally fine in Harry's context), but it's hard to imagine this not being an odd thing to do at a formal garden party in Buckingham Palace or on a walk to church. Playing with animals or children is one thing - I don't think anyone would criticize a tongue out in that context (at least I wouldnt)


In the real world no one would bat an eye. In the hate Meghan Markle for every little thing she does world, it turns into a huge kerfuffle. 

It was the same bs with Diana, even something as natural as her publicly hugging her sons, people criticized her for it.


----------



## mshermes

prettyprincess said:


> In the real world no one would bat an eye. In the hate Meghan Markle for every little thing she does world, it turns into a huge kerfuffle.
> 
> It was the same bs with Diana, even something as natural as her publicly hugging her sons, people criticized her for it.


Hate is a strong word and, thus far, you are the one using it.


----------



## mdcx

Srsly Wendy said:


> MM wasn’t sticking her tongue out at paps or a child in some instances. In the one event she was doing it to Camilla apparently.


It was at this event. Apparently MM’s behaviour was all around inappropriate to the point that Charles called a car for her early, told her goodbye before the party had ended and her and Harry had to go:
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ghan-markle-camilla-parker-bowles-hold-hands/


----------



## limom

hit man now?
This is getting wild.
Should I grab the popcorn?


----------



## mdcx

If MM does an interview with Oprah or Ellen, I predict she will go down the “I was just being authentic, and they were soooo mean!” route.


----------



## mdcx

I am all prepped for MM’s first interview!


----------



## redney

Hit man? Oh pul-leaze. It was said as a tongue-in-cheek joke about MM getting into having a handbag line. LOL! 

https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-1200#post-33552847


----------



## mrsinsyder

redney said:


> Hit man? Oh pul-leaze. It was said as a tongue-in-cheek joke about MM getting into having a handbag line. LOL!
> 
> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-1200#post-33552847


Oh good grief.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Actually she has, or maybe had, a habit of sticking out her tongue somewhat, but I noticed the magazines and blogs were really nice about not using those photos.
> 
> Anyway, she's not alone in doing it.
> View attachment 4648846
> View attachment 4648847
> View attachment 4648848
> View attachment 4648849
> 
> 
> View attachment 4648844
> View attachment 4648845


seems funny coming from a woman who wants to be taken seriously


----------



## scarlet555

redney said:


> Hit man? Oh pul-leaze. It was said as a tongue-in-cheek joke about MM getting into having a handbag line. LOL!
> 
> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-1200#post-33552847



No one is taking this seriously are they?


----------



## mshermes

scarlet555 said:


> No one is taking this seriously are they?


Hmmmm....who could? It was an obvious joke and quite comical.


----------



## Lounorada

Me reading the last 8 or so pages of this thread...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

limom said:


> On a lighter note.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4648553





CobaltBlu said:


> Maybe they could try Dr. Phil.....





limom said:


> Here is the future for prince Harry.:
> https://www.itv.com/news/channel/2020-01-21/the-queens-grandson-selling-jersey-milk-in-china/
> View attachment 4648735






limom said:


> But the PR department will arrange the questions in advance. Ellen is cray atm


What's going on with Ellen? I haven't watched her show in forever.



Sharont2305 said:


> OT but Beans on Toast is amazing, lol


So amazing. Also great with a sprinkle of cheddar cheese on top 



Milosmum0307 said:


> She’s licking her lips.  In the other photo, William is kicking his lips.  I think Meghan is as well.  They’re not being cheeky.  They just need Chapstick.


Exactly. All these tongue pics look like photos taken in the split second they all happen to be licking their lips. Especially the photo of Kate leaning over, prob talking to a child.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The only “hitman” reference I can recall was the 007 meme.


----------



## A1aGypsy

redney said:


> Hit man? Oh pul-leaze. It was said as a tongue-in-cheek joke about MM getting into having a handbag line. LOL!
> 
> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-1200#post-33552847



oh come ON.


----------



## pursegirl3

That 007 meme was really funny !


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Harry and Meghan’s attempt to trademark their Sussex Royal brand had been blocked after an alleged complaint from a British doctor living in Melbourne.

*But in a bizarre twist the man named in the complaint, Benjamin Worcester, has claimed an impostor lodged the bid and the notice has now been withdrawn from the UK Government’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO).

Source: click on link for full story news.com.au


*


----------



## limom

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Harry and Meghan’s attempt to trademark their Sussex Royal brand had been blocked after an alleged complaint from a British doctor living in Melbourne.
> 
> *But in a bizarre twist the man named in the complaint, Benjamin Worcester, has claimed an impostor lodged the bid and the notice has now been withdrawn from the UK Government’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO).
> 
> Source: click on link for full story news.com.au
> 
> *


This is so freakin entertaining. Between the Sussex and the Bezos, what a year!
2020. Thank you!


----------



## limom

As far as Ellen’s situation, besides her insane reputation (she is mean to staffers and writers...) she has been caught being sarcastic and pretty passive aggressive with her guests.
Most notably, she had a weird interview with Dakota Johnson.
I don’t watch her regularly but I caught a couple of exchanges that were cringe worthy, imho.
I don’t blame her, I actually find it funny plus I will always like her for having the balls to be the first lesbian to come out 
publicly irl and in a sitcom.


----------



## limom

Oprah and Gail mentioned that the exit was planned for months. Since they have been only married for 20 months, it would make sense that it was a long time coming.
It might even be possible that the firm knew about it but kept it under wraps in order to get the wedding and re-energized the monarchy.
Anything is possible....


----------



## imgg

This is a small thing, but speaks volumes from social media savvy MM.  Kate and Will follow M&H on Instagram, but apparently M&H unfollowed K&W.   They are such immature, spoiled, greedy brats.  I would give them some credit and respect if they walked away from everything Royal, but they are still using  sussexroyal and have no intentions of stopping until they milk every last cent from it.

I have never followed M&H but I just followed Kate and Will.


----------



## lalame

imgg said:


> This is a small thing, but speaks volumes from social media savvy MM.  Kate and Will follow M&H on Instagram, but apparently M&H unfollowed K&W.   They are such immature, spoiled, greedy brats.  I would give them some credit and respect if they walked away from everything Royal, but they are still using  sussexroyal and have no intentions of stopping until they milk every last cent from it.
> 
> I have never followed M&H but I just followed Kate and Will.



To be fair though, they unfollowed everyone/everything except 1 organization to put the spotlight on it. It wasn't a personal or disrespectful thing against Wills and Kate imo.


----------



## wisconsin

Just a reminder
Oprah is not always right about people.
She gave a HUGE platform to Dr Oz and to Jenny McCarthy.
In doing so she promoted Medical misinformation, anti vaxxers, quack cures.
I feel she is “1000 percent” wrong on MM too.


----------



## limom

wisconsin said:


> Just a reminder
> Oprah is not always right about people.
> She gave a HUGE platform to Dr Oz and to Jenny McCarthy.
> In doing so she promoted Medical misinformation, anti vaxxers, quack cures.
> I feel she is “1000 percent” wrong on MM too.


Oprah is about her bottom line.
Would it be wise for her to take a stand against the firm?


----------



## mshermes

limom said:


> Oprah is about her bottom line.
> Would it be wise for her to take a stand against the firm?


I guess this just proves that when one attains a certain level they can no longer be true to themselves.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Today I woke up to the German press reporting another one of Meghan's mysterious friends has spoken out saying Kate made her life living hell because she was jealous how immensely close M was to the Queen. Is really anyone going to believe any of this? They need to be more subtle and not lay on the sh*t quite as thick IMO.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> That makes as much sense as anything. Because from what we have seen of her personality in interviews *she is not particularly charismatic.*




Nor particularly beautiful: she's a pretty girl, period.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I think she’s very beautiful. Pretty girl + Thin + hair and makeup professionals usually = beautiful. But it’s so subjective. There are many people considered stunning that I find average, like JLaw (though I like her a lot for other reasons). I do often wonder, if they all were normal people I see on the street, whether I’d even look twice.


----------



## lalame

lalame said:


> I truly do think 90% (non-academic number) of what is printed in tabloids are either entirely fake or exaggerated based on a small nugget of truth. Enough celebs of all stripes have said as much... can’t imagine it’s different for these guys. How easy is it for a person to claim they know her and have xyz knowledge when they don’t and just want the money... or for a writer to exaggerate. The royal circle is surrounded by so many handlers, friends of friends, etc.



on this note... did anyone see that Thomas Markle admitted he lied several times in the Piers Morgan interview to “change his image” and somehow make their image a little better too. Just ick.


----------



## Sharont2305

rose60610 said:


> If anybody seriously called for "hitman" and/or violence on this thread I'm not aware of it.
> 
> If it were any kind of even quasi-serious call for it, I'd imagine the mods would have cut it.
> 
> I happened to post a true and heinous statement that Peter Fonda made about a certain child deserving to locked up with pedophiles and that was cut due to "being political" when the post had zero to do with politics. It was made to contrast the vitriol others get vs the criticism Markle received which is extremely mild in comparison. Before it was cut another poster actually stated "Well, Fonda apologized and XXXXXXXX deserved it".  Now THAT'S sick AF.  And that poster still posts.
> 
> For the record, I saw my hair stylist today. He is a huge follower and fan of the Monarchy. And extremely disappointed in MM. He said that for MM to complain about bad press is absurd when you compare how horrible the Media were to Diana. "There is no comparison, Diana had it far far worse". He also thinks that MM had this scheme planned all along yet wanted the huge expensive wedding and all the glory until she and Harry quit. He said H&M will regret this decision and probably beg to go back.
> 
> We'll see what happens.


I agree with you, Diana got it far worse media wise but tbh I think Camilla had it even more so. Once the affair became public after Diana's Panorama interview it was bad enough for Camilla but once Diana died she was absolutely public enemy number one. The media were after her, her kids were still youngish, older than William and Harry. I can't imagine how they felt, plus the *whole country* was against her. Looking back, it was horrendous. I don't condone what her and Charles did. It was a masterstroke of PR to bring her into the RF. Now, people love her.
Just saying, what MM has "gone through" is nothing.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Today I woke up to the German press reporting another one of Meghan's mysterious friends has spoken out saying Kate made her life living hell because she was jealous how immensely close M was to the Queen. Is really anyone going to believe any of this? They need to be more subtle and not lay on the sh*t quite as thick IMO.


I heard this somewhere also (don’t remember where) and don’t know if there is any truth to it. In the beginning MM was given a lot of privileges that were slow to come for Kate, so maybe she did feel a bit put out. The comment that she made Meghans life a living hell is hard to believe. I think that this is further proof that the BRF including the Queen were very welcoming to MM in the beginning.


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> I heard this somewhere also (don’t remember where) and don’t know if there is any truth to it. In the beginning MM was given a lot of privileges that were slow to come for Kate, so maybe she did feel a bit put out. The comment that she made Meghans life a living hell is hard to believe. I think that this is further proof that the BRF including the Queen were very welcoming to MM in the beginning.


“Living hell” is subjective. 
Remember here, Meghan was a cherished daughter and an Hollywood actress. She had a charmed life prior to marrying into that family, imho.
So living hell could be that Kate made her curtsy, wait for her turn  and so forth.
As the latest member of the family, Meghan needed to adapt a bit, I don’t see her bending much to fit in, imho.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Today I woke up to the German press reporting another one of Meghan's mysterious friends has spoken out saying Kate made her life living hell because she was jealous how immensely close M was to the Queen. Is really anyone going to believe any of this? They need to be more subtle and not lay on the sh*t quite as thick IMO.



There has never been any indication Meghan and Kate were ever around each other often enough to make either of their lives a “living hell.” All that report does is confirm my belief that Meghan was incapable of sucking it up and seeing anyone else but herself get attention. So here come the made-up stories from anonymous sources to try to portray her as the poor little victim again. What a joke.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> “Living hell” is subjective.
> Remember here, Meghan was a cherished daughter and an Hollywood actress. She had a charmed life prior to marrying into that family, imho.
> So living hell could be that Kate made her curtsy, wait for her turn  and so forth.
> As the latest member of the family, Meghan needed to adapt a bit, I don’t see her bending much to fit in, imho.


Living hell is definitely subjective and I am sure things happened that made MM displeased. That’s life. From what I remember she upset Kate a few times also. Example is the problem with the fitting of Charlottes brides made dress. She allegedly had Kate in tears. Whatever may or may not have happened MM should have taken it in her stride. You don’t have to be a strident monarcist to not feel sorry for the BRF. As flawed as they are this must be a bitter pill for them to swallow. Hopefully this will all settled down to the satisfaction of all sides. Hopefully they all find happiness.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> There has never been any indication Meghan and Kate were ever around each other often enough to make either of their lives a “living hell.” All that report does is confirm my belief that Meghan was incapable of sucking it up and seeing anyone else but herself get attention. So here come the made-up stories from anonymous sources to try to portray her as the poor little victim again. What a joke.


All this does is show exactly where the jealousy lies IMO.


----------



## imgg

wisconsin said:


> Just a reminder
> Oprah is not always right about people.
> She gave a HUGE platform to Dr Oz and to Jenny McCarthy.
> In doing so she promoted Medical misinformation, anti vaxxers, quack cures.
> I feel she is “1000 percent” wrong on MM too.


Don't forget quack Dr. Phil


----------



## Annawakes

I wonder if MM ever laments the fact that she didn’t/couldn’t get to William before Kate did.  Or even during W and K’s brief breakup period.  I kind of shudder to think what that might have looked like.  But I think W had more sense than H.  So he probably wouldn’t have fallen for her ruse.


----------



## scarlet555

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree with you, Diana got it far worse media wise but tbh I think Camilla had it even more so. Once the affair became public after Diana's Panorama interview it was bad enough for Camilla but once Diana died she was absolutely public enemy number one. The media were after her, her kids were still youngish, older than William and Harry. I can't imagine how they felt, plus the *whole country* was against her. Looking back, it was horrendous. I don't condone what her and Charles did. It was a masterstroke of PR to bring her into the RF. Now, people love her.
> Just saying, what MM has "gone through" is nothing.



MM was older and a divorcee when she married Prince Harry; as you’re older you are less tolerant of BS around you, but you should also have the wisdom to know that marrying into the BRF will be full of daily scrutiny, and know that racism exists among the very elite in society, it has in fact no bounds.  She’s too old to be naive, and being an actress already strips you of your naïveté- so then after 20 months you decide to depart the royal family...  this is not about Meghan hate, it doesn’t make much sense but to conclude some kind of pre planning was involved from the beginning, and not the kindest planning involved either.  It’s hard to exclude mischievous intentions.


----------



## imgg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Today I woke up to the German press reporting another one of Meghan's mysterious friends has spoken out saying Kate made her life living hell because she was jealous how immensely close M was to the Queen. Is really anyone going to believe any of this? They need to be more subtle and not lay on the sh*t quite as thick IMO.


I think it was the other way around, Meghan made it living hell for Kate.

Just looking at their Instagram accounts, Kate has photos of Harry and Meghan to show support, Meghan has photos of Meghan


----------



## mrsinsyder

I thought Kate was so docile and spineless that she lets Will openly cheat on her? Now she’s so aggressive that she’s intimidating the strong, independent, willful Meghan? Please.


----------



## Chagall

I read somewhere, don’t ask me where, that MM talked Harry into going off his anti depressants. If that was true then he was clinically depressed and obviously vulnerable. This might explain some of his dubious decision making.


----------



## CeeJay

I still have to wonder, what transpired with Harry and Meghan during that time that they “supposedly” broke up (when Meghan was the +1 to the Tom Inskip wedding) and then fast forward to all of a sudden they are so in love (because those wedding pictures sure didn’t make it look like they were so in love)!  Meanwhile, Inskip and his wife are invited to H&M’s wedding but not their reception?!?!?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> I like how it's the people who don't like Meghan answering what people like about her.
> 
> I will answer - overall, I like Meghan.  I like her activism, rooted from her childhood.  I like her American (forgive me for "stereotyping Americans") can-do spirit.  I like that she's sensitive.  I like that she clearly loves her husband.
> 
> What makes me like her more than a passing general positive impression is the rabid hatred that has unfurled on this thread.  The more people hate her (irrational hatred, IMO), the more I like her.  The more people quote the comment section of the Daily Mail as if it's a works cited page, the more I like her.  The more people pick apart a photograph taken in a nanosecond and attributing motivations, attitudes, and thoughts as if it's a slide in an art history class, the more I like her.
> 
> Is she perfect?  Far from it.  But does she deserve the calls for hitmen and violence?  Um, no.


interesting....we are direct opposites on this
The more people worship her beyond what she deserves, the more I dislike her.  That and more importantly, the stupid complaining about her entitled life.


----------



## mshermes

*Queen Elizabeth Gives Prince William a New Royal Title amid Prince Harry & Meghan Markle's Exit*
*
*

Gotta love the Queen...


----------



## mshermes

What makes me like her more than a passing general positive impression is the rabid hatred that has unfurled on this thread. The more people hate her (irrational hatred, IMO), the more I like her.

With this irrational logic, I see how unseemly individuals have fans. Not comparing to MM  but I always found it distressing when people like Manson, Ted Bundy, etc. not only have fans but marriage proposals.


----------



## lalame

mshermes said:


> *Queen Elizabeth Gives Prince William a New Royal Title amid Prince Harry & Meghan Markle's Exit*
> 
> 
> 
> Gotta love the Queen...


IMO it sounded more like another responsibility than honor. I felt sorry for him... all the extra events and responsibilities they now have to take on with 2 vacant positions.

that’s a big reason I turned around on Harry’s plight. The life is so hard and intrusive that you cut and run so your other family has to double their load on your behalf? Geez. Not like they can just hire another royal.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I read somewhere, don’t ask me where, that MM talked Harry into going off his anti depressants. If that was true then he was clinically depressed and obviously vulnerable. This might explain some of his dubious decision making.


Gosh, I hope not because that would be truly un-savory behavior!!!


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> What makes me like her more than a passing general positive impression is the rabid hatred that has unfurled on this thread. The more people hate her (irrational hatred, IMO), the more I like her.
> 
> With this irrational logic, I see how unseemly individuals have fans. Not comparing to MM  but I always found it distressing when people like Manson, Ted Bundy, etc. not only have fans but marriage proposals.


rabid hatred?  I don't see it that way


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> I thought Kate was so docile and spineless that she lets Will openly cheat on her? Now she’s so aggressive that she’s intimidating the strong, independent, willful Meghan? Please.



I don't buy it for one minute. Also, only the gullible (sadly there seem to be a lot of gullible people who don't follow closely and just eat up what the press is feeding them about M's victimhood) would believe Meghan was "incredibly close" to the Queen. The Queen is not even "incredibly close" to her own children, and there have been reports she was less than impressed with Meghan's conduct on more than one occasion.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> rabid hatred?  I don't see it that way


Please, it is dislike at best.
Meaghan is not worth hatred, imho.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't buy it for one minute. Also, only the gullible (sadly there seem to be a lot of gullible people who don't follow closely and just eat up what the press is feeding them) would believe Meghan was "incredibly close" to the Queen. The Queen is not even "incredibly close" to her own children, and there have been reports she was less than impressed with Meghan's conduct on more than one occasion.


How can she be so close in 20 months?
They are not two teenage girls engaged in a fast friendship.


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> How can she be so close in 20 months?
> They are not two teenage girls engaged in a fast friendship.


I also have to question the "being close" because if history were to serve me, Meghan doesn't seem to have many "close" friends (except those that formerly helped her with her 'climb') ..


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chagall said:


> I read somewhere, don’t ask me where, that MM talked Harry into going off his anti depressants. If that was true then he was clinically depressed and obviously vulnerable. This might explain some of his dubious decision making.



this might explain why Harry might be back on the sauce too


----------



## mshermes

VigeeLeBrun said:


> this might explain why Harry might be back on the sauce too


He certainly has been looking disheveled.


----------



## marthastoo

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


?


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't condone what her and Charles did. It was a masterstroke of PR to bring her into the RF. Now, people love her.
> Just saying, what MM has "gone through" is nothing.


Camilla did everything right it seems, especially after they went public with their relationship.

She knew her place, never acted up, stayed kinda in the background, dressed appropriately and as always, supported Charles and never once tried to over-shadow him.

She really was the right woman for the job (with him) I think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

limom said:


> How can she be so close in 20 months?
> They are not two teenage girls engaged in a fast friendship.


 20 months is a very long time. I know adults who have met and gotten married in less time. You can get close to someone in that time if you’re putting in the effort to get close to them, you don’t have to be a teenager.


----------



## mshermes

marthastoo said:


> The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


Me thinks so, too...


----------



## Clearblueskies

prettyprincess said:


> 20 months is a very long time. I know adults who have met and gotten married in less time. You can get close to someone in that time if you’re putting in the effort to get close to them, you don’t have to be a teenager.


Bogart probably thinks it’s a very long time, but then he measures things in dog years.  No time at all to the rest of us.


----------



## mshermes

This truly is bizarre....wax figures traveling through Canada
https://www.businessinsider.com/pri...le-instagram-wax-figures-photos-canada-2020-1


----------



## mrsinsyder

Is anyone watching The Circle? It’s hilarious when they have to guess at who Meghan is and most can’t remember her name


----------



## mdcx

This whole MM saga is losing steam for me. We know how it will end - lots of mutually beneficial celeb “friendships”/interviews/appearances. Meghan builds her personal brand, leverage$ that, gets in with the right crowd in LA, snags her next husband to be before the shine is off, gives Harry the heave-ho and, curtains!
Poor little Archie and to a lesser degree Harry, are both minor concerns. I wouldn't be surprised if both end up back the UK in a few years.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> This truly is bizarre....wax figures traveling through Canada
> https://www.businessinsider.com/pri...le-instagram-wax-figures-photos-canada-2020-1


Very odd!


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> This whole MM saga is losing steam for me. We know how it will end - lots of mutually beneficial celeb “friendships”/interviews/appearances. Meghan builds her personal brand, leverage$ that, gets in with the right crowd in LA, snags her next husband to be before the shine is off, gives Harry the heave-ho and, curtains!
> Poor little Archie and to a lesser degree Harry, are both minor concerns. I wouldn't be surprised if both end up back the UK in a few years.


I keep hoping that that is not the case but fear that you might just be 100% accurate.  When they first got together, I admit .. I had no idea who Meghan was but I was rooting for them.  Even my friends who knew the Markles back then; they were also rooting for them.  But as time has gone on, and to see what has transpired .. well, let's just say that they haven't been surprised but very dismayed.  I'm so hoping that that cute little boy (what we've seen of him) is okay in the long run ..


----------



## TrishN

So if I read it correctly Meghan's admirers simply adore her, because other people in this thread don't like her?
Hmm, OK....
I guess it makes sense that that is the reason, because you need to have lovable personality traits for people to love you for who you are. She's not what you call a person of substance.


----------



## mdcx

Not super shocked by this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...undation-eight-days-announcing-pregnancy.html



ETA there was a tiny bit of shade in there about how you can’t know babies gender til 16 weeks. Reference to the rumours Archie is older than stated? Lol.


----------



## limom

mshermes said:


> This truly is bizarre....wax figures traveling through Canada
> https://www.businessinsider.com/pri...le-instagram-wax-figures-photos-canada-2020-1


Now we know what happened to Madame Tussaud’s cast offs.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

As an Aussie I appreciate this tribute to the ongoing bushfire recovery effort - the fires are not over but the community is pulling together. The highlighted efforts  here are worth supporting.


----------



## limom

FreeSpirit71 said:


> As an Aussie I appreciate this tribute to the ongoing bushfire recovery effort - the fires are not over but the community is pulling together. The highlighted efforts  here are worth supporting.



Hope all is well by you.
Heartbreaking situation.
Wishing all of the inhabitants of Australia, the very, very best.


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> As an Aussie I appreciate this tribute to the ongoing bushfire recovery effort - the fires are not over but the community is pulling together. The highlighted efforts  here are worth supporting.



I have watched this on the news, and understand that many of us here in California can commiserate (unfortunately)!   It irks me to no end that there are naysayers re: climate change!  Also understand that many of us have contributed not only $$$ but also personnel (Firefighters, Water Tankers, etc.) to your efforts.  I keep on hoping for LOTS OF RAIN for our Aussie friends!!!


----------



## CeeJay

So, according to that tidbit in the Daily Fail re: Meghan & the US Foundation, it also states that her Business Manager also did the following:  

"_Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsof sussexroyal.com.  It is not known whether the websites and social media sites are intended for charity or commercial ventures_."

Seriously???  I'm hoping that this is not true because this would be pretty calculating IMO!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> So, according to that tidbit in the Daily Fail re: Meghan & the US Foundation, it also states that her Business Manager also did the following:
> 
> "_Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsof sussexroyal.com.  It is not known whether the websites and social media sites are intended for charity or commercial ventures_."
> 
> Seriously???  I'm hoping that this is not true because this would be pretty calculating IMO!


I only know The Tig part is correct. I saw paperwork. Would not be shocked if the other two were true.


----------



## Straight-Laced

*Royals make plans for return of ‘vulnerable’ Harry and Meghan*
Tim Shipman, Political Editor
January 26 2020, 12:01am, 
The Sunday Times

"Senior royals are drawing up contingency plans to provide the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with a haven in the UK, amid fears that the intrusion of photographers in North America could force them to move back across the Atlantic.

Sources close to the royal household say Prince Charles and Prince William have been “reaching out” to Harry and Meghan to say that if they wanted to return to the UK full-time they could do so without having to resume their official royal duties.

Courtiers fear the pressure of media scrutiny on Vancouver Island, where the Sussexes are staying, will take a heavy toll on the couple.

A historic “divorce” deal was thrashed out by Buckingham Palace last weekend that will see Harry and Meghan move to North America, stop using their HRH titles and surrender state funding in exchange for the freedom to seek commercial deals in areas where they can promote their charitable values.

But royal sources say the pair are under severe strain and that family members and staff are concerned about the effect the breakaway is having on them.

Prince Harry broke cover last week to express his disappointment that he had been asked to give up his military titles as part of the agreement, including his role as captain-general of the Royal Marines.

At the same time, Meghan was ambushed by photographers while out walkingwith the couple’s infant son, Archie.

“The palace are very worried about the Sussexes, because they are vulnerable outside the embrace of the family,” a source said.

“They are making contingency plans in case the Sussexes suddenly turn round and say: ‘Can we come back under your wing?’”

Under the terms of the deal, the Sussexes will keep Frogmore Cottage on the Windsor estate as their British base, but will repay the £2.4m of taxpayers’ money used to renovate the property and will pay for its upkeep in future. It is a place where royal officials think it will be easier to protect them from media scrutiny.

“You could bring them back to Frogmore to look after them. They wouldn’t return to royal duties, but they could have a period of rehabilitation and recuperation,” a source said.

“You see the way it has disintegrated over there in the last few days. What is happening is that they are being told that there is love and affection on standby.”


----------



## Straight-Laced

... and comment in The Sunday Times today.

january 26 2020, 12:01am, the sunday times, camilla long
*Harry’s princely earnings won’t be enough to buy Meghan the celebrity lifestyle she wants*

"Back when I was a baby journalist on Tatler, we’d regularly hold features meetings about how rich everyone was. One question that seemed to torment us was: how much was really enough? What was the basic amount you needed in order to bankroll a proper jet-set lifestyle? By which I mean your bog-standard, no-frills, skeleton service of three houses, a jet and a boat (never “yacht”), plus butlers, housekeepers, publicists, lawyers, florists, log painters — it was around the time when socialites were having their fireplaces “art directed” by people who would individually paint and lay the twigs.

One afternoon we came to the conclusion: 50 mil. This was the bare minimum you’d need to secure the fifth spread in Tatler’s Bystander section or get Taki to diss you in his column. I probably don’t need to tell you that Prince Harry doesn’t even come close to having this amount, especially not after he has subtracted the costs of the endless legal letters and the £2.4m he’s paying back for the Balinese open-air waterfall sex shower or whatever plinking wellness nonsense he’s set up in the side garden at Frogmore Cottage.

I don’t think even Prince Charles has this amount at his disposal — the duchy of Cornwall brings him a measly £21m a year, putting him firmly in the embarrassing “for sale” bracket of celebs, with Kate Moss and Robbie Williams, who offer their star power in exchange for free flights on private jets, as, indeed, Charles has just done, jetting in on a £15,000 aircraft to this year’s Davos.

In fact, so much is laid on for royals in terms of palaces and staff, it is almost as if it’s designed to brainwash them into not leaving. Prince Laurent of Belgium, younger brother of the king and the royal family’s mouton noir, has been trying to leave his family for decades, moaning about how they have “sabotaged” his life and monitored him “like the Stasi” so much he once sought “exile” in Libya. How did this 56-year-old gilded mollusc manage to choose the only country in the world that’s worse than Belgium? Money, of course: he thought licking Colonel Muammar Gadaffi’s feet was preferable to being an “object”, the “property of his family or government”, as he put it last week. What a dazzling example he has set for Harry.

We are reaching a period in history when for the first time celebrities have better lives than royals do, and for royals, this is a worrisome and dangerous turn of events. As a celebrity, you have maximum freedom to earn money and spend it however you please. As a royal you have too little money and almost no freedom and you are constantly “stigmatised” and “crushed”, as Belgium’s answer to Prince Andrew puts it, in your attempts to drive fast cars and shag unlimited gorgeous women, or lose millions on doomed charitable projects as he did in Libya.

You are ridiculed and misrepresented if you so much as make friends with a paedophile or take his cash; you are offered, and must take, the jobs even celebs won’t do, such as promoting milk in China. What on earth possessed Peter Phillips, son of Princess Anne, to agree to the Jersey milk ads? Not his own talent: he almost screws up the one line he’s been paid to say. Watching the camera as it glides over a horrifying Chinese interpretation of everything it means to be British, you can’t help imagining that at least some of Peter’s present lies in Harry’s future.

Harry seems to think he deserves more than milk ads, even though any ordinary man with his intelligence and skills (he barely has two A-levels) would die of joy to be offered tens of thousands to say one sentence. Any commoner would die of joy to be called a “winner” by Prince Philip for the basic task of earning enough money outside the firm to feed their family, as Peter Phillips was.

How many Chinese milk ads would the permanently dissatisfied Prince Harry have to film if he’s to buy that £21m waterfront home in Vancouver that Meghan allegedly sniffed? How many Disney magnates will he have to schmooze to keep her in hot and cold- running publicists? Can he achieve this? The closest any of the royals has come to commercial competence is David Linley designing awesome bogs at Claridges.

What happens after the first interview, the first royal shoe “collab”? What happens once Meghan has shared her “pain and suffering”, a narrative her PR clearly believes is the most lucrative for her, because what else does she have to sell, beyond victimhood and totes? My guess is no second “pain and suffering” interview, nor a second Chinese milk ad."


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> I only know The Tig part is correct. I saw paperwork. Would not be shocked if the other two were true.


WOW .. so she is going to resurrect her site (blog, IG, etc.) .. but then still utilize the "SussexRoyal" titles and such???  Sorry, but that is so not bueno to me.


----------



## threadbender

If the report of the Royals preparing to welcome them back is true, I hope it is simply to get Archie home. Please do not reward these two for bailing on their jobs. Make sure they earn their keep.
I seriously do not see this happening.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh Markle was “ambushed while out walking with her infant son”.  It really didn’t appear that way.


----------



## Straight-Laced

CeeJay said:


> I have watched this on the news, and understand that many of us here in California can commiserate (unfortunately)!   It irks me to no end that there are naysayers re: climate change!  Also understand that many of us have contributed not only $$$ but also personnel (Firefighters, Water Tankers, etc.) to your efforts.  I keep on hoping for LOTS OF RAIN for our Aussie friends!!!


Seeing firefighters from the United States, Canada and New Zealand arrive in waves for months now to assist the firefighting effort has made me tear up.  The air accident last week that killed three US firefighters was a shocking tragedy and I can assure you that their generosity and sacrifice won't be forgotten


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> *Royals make plans for return of ‘vulnerable’ Harry and Meghan*
> Tim Shipman, Political Editor
> January 26 2020, 12:01am,
> The Sunday Times
> 
> "Senior royals are drawing up contingency plans to provide the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with a haven in the UK, amid fears that the intrusion of photographers in North America could force them to move back across the Atlantic.
> 
> Sources close to the royal household say Prince Charles and Prince William have been “reaching out” to Harry and Meghan to say that if they wanted to return to the UK full-time they could do so without having to resume their official royal duties.
> 
> Courtiers fear the pressure of media scrutiny on Vancouver Island, where the Sussexes are staying, will take a heavy toll on the couple.
> 
> A historic “divorce” deal was thrashed out by Buckingham Palace last weekend that will see Harry and Meghan move to North America, stop using their HRH titles and surrender state funding in exchange for the freedom to seek commercial deals in areas where they can promote their charitable values.
> 
> But royal sources say the pair are under severe strain and that family members and staff are concerned about the effect the breakaway is having on them.
> 
> Prince Harry broke cover last week to express his disappointment that he had been asked to give up his military titles as part of the agreement, including his role as captain-general of the Royal Marines.
> 
> At the same time, Meghan was ambushed by photographers while out walkingwith the couple’s infant son, Archie.
> 
> “The palace are very worried about the Sussexes, because they are vulnerable outside the embrace of the family,” a source said.
> 
> “They are making contingency plans in case the Sussexes suddenly turn round and say: ‘Can we come back under your wing?’”
> 
> Under the terms of the deal, the Sussexes will keep Frogmore Cottage on the Windsor estate as their British base, but will repay the £2.4m of taxpayers’ money used to renovate the property and will pay for its upkeep in future. It is a place where royal officials think it will be easier to protect them from media scrutiny.
> 
> “You could bring them back to Frogmore to look after them. They wouldn’t return to royal duties, but they could have a period of rehabilitation and recuperation,” a source said.
> 
> “You see the way it has disintegrated over there in the last few days. What is happening is that they are being told that there is love and affection on standby.”


Meghan was 'ambushed'??? .. I'm calling BS on that big-time!  She had both a British Security Guard and a Canadian Mountie on the walk with her; if this was indeed an "ambush", then don't you think that either would have IMMEDIATELY gone after the pap?  More importantly, weren't these pictures put out by "their" Pap company???


----------



## Straight-Laced

threadbender said:


> If the report of the Royals preparing to welcome them back is true, I hope it is simply to get Archie home. Please do not reward these two for bailing on their jobs. Make sure they earn their keep.
> I seriously do not see this happening.


Reads like spin (from Charles?) IMO ...


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> Seeing firefighters from the United States, Canada and New Zealand arrive in waves for months now to assist the firefighting effort has made me tear up.  The air accident last week that killed three US firefighters was a shocking tragedy and I can assure you that their generosity and sacrifice won't be forgotten


Yes, I read about that .. so sad.  Alas, we lost quite a few in our blazes of last year and I sure as heck don't look forward to our Fire season again this year since last year, we had 3 next to us (to the West, to the South and to the East).  The smoke was so bad that leaving the house was not recommended!


----------



## mshermes

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. so she is going to resurrect her site (blog, IG, etc.) .. but then still utilize the "SussexRoyal" titles and such???  Sorry, but that is so not bueno to me.


I posted this on the 13th:
Realizing now that M has been doing more than double duty....dissolution of her company in CA and registering in DE, working with her PR people and attorney, designing the new website sussexroyal.com, etc. since last year, being a new mother and her RF duties....no wonder she is sleep deprived and having anxiety attacks. I am exhausted taking it all in. To say she is overly ambitious and deceitful is an understatement.

Many companies are incorporated in DE.  Taxes and extreme privacy.

Just found this in a DE paper:
https://www.delawareonline.com/stor...and-meghans-shocking-announcement/4460007002/
*What is a company linked to Duchess Meghan doing in Delaware?*


----------



## Corneto

Straight-Laced said:


> *Royals make plans for return of ‘vulnerable’ Harry and Meghan*
> Tim Shipman, Political Editor
> January 26 2020, 12:01am,
> The Sunday Times
> 
> "Senior royals are drawing up contingency plans to provide the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with a haven in the UK, amid fears that the intrusion of photographers in North America could force them to move back across the Atlantic.
> 
> Sources close to the royal household say Prince Charles and Prince William have been “reaching out” to Harry and Meghan to say that if they wanted to return to the UK full-time they could do so without having to resume their official royal duties.
> 
> Courtiers fear the pressure of media scrutiny on Vancouver Island, where the Sussexes are staying, will take a heavy toll on the couple.
> 
> A historic “divorce” deal was thrashed out by Buckingham Palace last weekend that will see Harry and Meghan move to North America, stop using their HRH titles and surrender state funding in exchange for the freedom to seek commercial deals in areas where they can promote their charitable values.
> 
> But royal sources say the pair are under severe strain and that family members and staff are concerned about the effect the breakaway is having on them.
> 
> Prince Harry broke cover last week to express his disappointment that he had been asked to give up his military titles as part of the agreement, including his role as captain-general of the Royal Marines.
> 
> At the same time, Meghan was ambushed by photographers while out walkingwith the couple’s infant son, Archie.
> 
> “The palace are very worried about the Sussexes, because they are vulnerable outside the embrace of the family,” a source said.
> 
> “They are making contingency plans in case the Sussexes suddenly turn round and say: ‘Can we come back under your wing?’”
> 
> Under the terms of the deal, the Sussexes will keep Frogmore Cottage on the Windsor estate as their British base, but will repay the £2.4m of taxpayers’ money used to renovate the property and will pay for its upkeep in future. It is a place where royal officials think it will be easier to protect them from media scrutiny.
> 
> “You could bring them back to Frogmore to look after them. They wouldn’t return to royal duties, but they could have a period of rehabilitation and recuperation,” a source said.
> 
> “You see the way it has disintegrated over there in the last few days. What is happening is that they are being told that there is love and affection on standby.”



I really have to process this.
I’ll be back later.


----------



## mdcx

I'm sure the BRF are making plans for when a shell-shocked Harry (and maybe Archie) comes to his senses and wants to come back home. Meghan will not be super-welcome imo, and I can't see her wanting anything to do with the BRF going forward except in regards to $$$$.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think the royals knew what Meghan was about and saw this coming, but knew that Harry had to find out for himself.  His recent suing of HER paparazzi has probably clued him in.  They are preparing for Harry and Archie’s return, IMO.  The language includes Meghan, but I doubt they think she will take them up on the offer for herself.  

I feel like Harry is actually the one who is Diana 2.0.  Heart on his sleeve, bad first marriage, other stuff....  I’m sure that his family does not want him to suffer form all her problems or fate.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Yes, possibly Harry caught wind of Markle’s future plans and went into a closet with his burner phone and called Charles about returning home.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh Markle was “ambushed while out walking with her infant son”.  It really didn’t appear that way.



I've been reading this thread and not commenting, because I have more feelings than I even think I should (ha!), but THIS. 

If you see nearly anyone who doesn't want to be papp'd, they aren't smiling like she was in those pics. Not even a forced smile, a really happy smile. 

And I know some of you talked about it, but I could not get over how Archie was being carried in that carrier. I'm clutching my pearls here, but it was so bad!


----------



## limom

Megs said:


> I've been reading this thread and not commenting, because I have more feelings than I even think I should (ha!), but THIS.
> 
> If you see nearly anyone who doesn't want to be papp'd, they aren't smiling like she was in those pics. Not even a forced smile, a really happy smile.
> 
> And I know some of you talked about it, but I could not get over how Archie was being carried in that carrier. I'm clutching my pearls here, but it was so bad!


She either never used that carrier or she pushed him to the side so we could see her face.
Either ways, she sucks!


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> Meghan was 'ambushed'??? .. I'm calling BS on that big-time!  She had both a British Security Guard and a Canadian Mountie on the walk with her; if this was indeed an "ambush", then don't you think that either would have IMMEDIATELY gone after the pap?  More importantly, weren't these pictures put out by "their" Pap company???



And if you were 'ambushed' you don't keep sauntering along while looking directly into the lens and smiling.


----------



## gracekelly

Megs said:


> I've been reading this thread and not commenting, because I have more feelings than I even think I should (ha!), but THIS.
> 
> If you see nearly anyone who doesn't want to be papp'd, they aren't smiling like she was in those pics. Not even a forced smile, a really happy smile.
> 
> And I know some of you talked about it, but I could not get over how Archie was being carried in that carrier. I'm clutching my pearls here, but it was so bad!


I bet you had to control yourself from screaming into the computer screen. With one baby and a toddler, you  appreciated how awful that was.  This is what happens when the desire to be photographed overtakes common sense and maternal feelings.


----------



## prettyprincess

Megs said:


> I've been reading this thread and not commenting, because I have more feelings than I even think I should (ha!), but THIS.
> 
> If you see nearly anyone who doesn't want to be papp'd, they aren't smiling like she was in those pics. Not even a forced smile, a really happy smile.
> 
> And I know some of you talked about it, but I could not get over how Archie was being carried in that carrier. I'm clutching my pearls here, but it was so bad!


Let’s not mom shame a new mother. Imagine being a new mom and having paparazzi taking pictures of all of your mistakes. No one is perfect.


----------



## gracekelly

prettyprincess said:


> Let’s not mom shame a new mother. Imagine being a new mom and having paparazzi taking pictures of all of your mistakes. No one is perfect.


I don't call the comments mom shaming.  I call it reading the instructions as to properly use the baby carrier so your child is properly positioned.  If she wasn't so concerned about smiling widely into the camera lens, she might have noticed the bad position her child was in.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> She either never used that carrier or she pushed him to the side so we could see her face.
> Either ways, she sucks!


hilarious


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> Let’s not mom shame a new mother. Imagine being a new mom and having paparazzi taking pictures of all of your mistakes. No one is perfect.


She had 9 months or so to figure out how to strap a baby carrier before she called the paparazzi.
Believe me, it is not that complicated.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> She had 9 months or so to figure out how to strap a baby carrier before she called the paparazzi.
> Believe me, it is not that complicated.


and with her being So Intelligent


----------



## rose60610

For Meghan to claim the paps ambushed her on the walk, with that smile, dogs, dangling Archie,  I'm convinced she's a sociopath. She's mother to a royal heir. So she's walking two dogs while carrying Archie? I don't care if the dogs are well trained, they could see a squirrel and all bets are off, they go nuts. All the "boo hoo me' garbage despite all the RF trappings is beyond the pale. Media criticism? She doesn't have a clue in comparison with the media vitriol thrown at others. Early on the media was very kind to her. Then she kept screwing up. Ultimate snowflake spoiled brat. Her coming interviews will have been very rehearsed so she can be seen in the best light to peddle her merch, work opportunities, and whatever she can make a buck from.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> For Meghan to claim the paps ambushed her on the walk, with that smile, dogs, dangling Archie,  I'm convinced she's a sociopath. She's mother to a royal heir. So she's walking two dogs while carrying Archie? I don't care if the dogs are well trained, they could see a squirrel and all bets are off, they go nuts. All the "boo hoo me' garbage despite all the RF trappings is beyond the pale. Media criticism? She doesn't have a clue in comparison with the media vitriol thrown at others. Early on the media was very kind to her. Then she kept screwing up. Ultimate snowflake spoiled brat. Her coming interviews will have been very rehearsed so she can be seen in the best light to peddle her merch, work opportunities, and whatever she can make a buck from.



spoiled brats is exactly what I was thinking as a read that bit about royals preparing to take them back


----------



## V0N1B2

Where are all the photos? I mean she’s being ambushed by the paparazzi and the only pics we’ve seen are the ones taken on one particular day on a public hiking trail? Harry’s been on the island for how many days now, but not one photo of him.
As for Archie, the only photographs anyone has seen of him other than the official Christening pics were from their trip to South Africa.


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> She’s carrying him. Her arm is supporting him.
> Were you a perfect mother 24/7? Did you never make a mistake? What would we see if we followed you around nonstop?


Just remembered  at 9 months, the baby would be facing forward.
I was far from perfect but I knew the basics.


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> Where are all the photos? I mean she’s being ambushed by the paparazzi and the only pics we’ve seen are the ones taken on one particular day on a public hiking trail? Harry’s been on the island for how many days now, but not one photo of him.
> As for Archie, the only photographs anyone has seen of him other than the official Christening pics were from their trip to South Africa.


Don't forget the Christmas card.  That was the last time we saw Archie's face.


----------



## rose60610

limom said:


> Just remembered  at 9 months, the baby would be facing forward.
> I was far from perfect but I knew the basics.



Right. And if Meghan didn't know the basics, don't tell me she was without hired help getting prepared to go on her "walk" with two dogs and Archie. An employee to a princess would not let her dangle Archie like that. For some weird reason, M must have thought the "ambush picture" would look more authentic if Archie were dangling like a broken shingle. And at the very least, if the kid shifted in the carrier, why didn't she readjust it? It had to be uncomfortable on her. I guess the  SURPRISE picture was more important.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> Don't forget the Christmas card.  That was the last time we saw Archie's face.


We did see the photo of Harry and Archie. I think that was after Christmas. 
The pap photos of her with the dogs and Archie make me cringe so badly. He looks limp and would be so uncomfortable, as should she be too. But, I guess the the cameras were, pardon the pun, her focus, not her son.
Makes me sad. I wish I could just take that little boy and give him some love. I pray his nanny(ies) love him dearly.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> spoiled brats is exactly what I was thinking as a read that bit about royals preparing to take them back



Agree. I think the letter was more directed at Harry, like throwing him a life preserver. Sly move on The Crown's part, as they must figure M couldn't dare take on the horrible mean Media that was so cruel to her, so why would she even want to come back? She'd look like a total whimpering fool. But I wouldn't put it past her. With that letter, I have to wonder if The Crown is a staging an intervention with Harry.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> For Meghan to claim the paps ambushed her on the walk, with that smile, dogs, dangling Archie,  I'm convinced she's a sociopath. She's mother to a royal heir. So she's walking two dogs while carrying Archie? I don't care if the dogs are well trained, they could see a squirrel and all bets are off, they go nuts. All the "boo hoo me' garbage despite all the RF trappings is beyond the pale. Media criticism? She doesn't have a clue in comparison with the media vitriol thrown at others. Early on the media was very kind to her. Then she kept screwing up. Ultimate snowflake spoiled brat. Her coming interviews will have been very rehearsed so she can be seen in the best light to peddle her merch, work opportunities, and whatever she can make a buck from.


I can't fault her for not using the carrier properly, she's a new mom as said above, but there did seem to be a lot going on during that walk. Two dogs and a baby.  It just looked so awkward and uncomfortable and not much fun at all!


----------



## lalame

I really don't want to mom-shame, esp as I'm not a mom and certainly don't know how to do any of that myself.... but that really did look bad, and I felt embarrassed for her. :/ Whether it was staged or not, I'm sure she's mortified.

Did anyone watch the actual video footage of the hike? I saw it on Daily Mail somewhere... honestly didn't know what to think about it. She seemed like she was talking to Archie and laughing while looking forward. Or maybe talking to someone with Airpods in her ears? I can't believe the paps just happened to find the perfect spot to "hide" so as to take footage of her head-on like that. I really don't want to believe she would have staged them.


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> *Royals make plans for return of ‘vulnerable’ Harry and Meghan*
> Tim Shipman, Political Editor
> January 26 2020, 12:01am,
> The Sunday Times
> 
> "Senior royals are drawing up contingency plans to provide the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with a haven in the UK, amid fears that the intrusion of photographers in North America could force them to move back across the Atlantic.
> 
> Sources close to the royal household say Prince Charles and Prince William have been “reaching out” to Harry and Meghan to say that if they wanted to return to the UK full-time they could do so without having to resume their official royal duties.
> 
> Courtiers fear the pressure of media scrutiny on Vancouver Island, where the Sussexes are staying, will take a heavy toll on the couple.
> 
> A historic “divorce” deal was thrashed out by Buckingham Palace last weekend that will see Harry and Meghan move to North America, stop using their HRH titles and surrender state funding in exchange for the freedom to seek commercial deals in areas where they can promote their charitable values.
> 
> But royal sources say the pair are under severe strain and that family members and staff are concerned about the effect the breakaway is having on them.
> 
> Prince Harry broke cover last week to express his disappointment that he had been asked to give up his military titles as part of the agreement, including his role as captain-general of the Royal Marines.
> 
> At the same time, Meghan was ambushed by photographers while out walkingwith the couple’s infant son, Archie.
> 
> “The palace are very worried about the Sussexes, because they are vulnerable outside the embrace of the family,” a source said.
> 
> “They are making contingency plans in case the Sussexes suddenly turn round and say: ‘Can we come back under your wing?’”
> 
> Under the terms of the deal, the Sussexes will keep Frogmore Cottage on the Windsor estate as their British base, but will repay the £2.4m of taxpayers’ money used to renovate the property and will pay for its upkeep in future. It is a place where royal officials think it will be easier to protect them from media scrutiny.
> 
> “You could bring them back to Frogmore to look after them. They wouldn’t return to royal duties, but they could have a period of rehabilitation and recuperation,” a source said.
> 
> “You see the way it has disintegrated over there in the last few days. What is happening is that they are being told that there is love and affection on standby.”


H&M can return to the UK full-time without having to resume their official royal duties, keep Frogmore Cottage for rehabilitation and recuperation because the poor things are under under severe strain??

This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard. I wish Harry could be a regular guy and try to eke out a meager living and then find out what severe strain is.


----------



## mdcx

lalame said:


> I really don't want to mom-shame, esp as I'm not a mom and certainly don't know how to do any of that myself.... but that really did look bad, and I felt embarrassed for her. :/ Whether it was staged or not, I'm sure she's mortified.
> 
> Did anyone watch the actual video footage of the hike? I saw it on Daily Mail somewhere... honestly didn't know what to think about it. She seemed like she was talking to Archie and laughing while looking forward. Or maybe talking to someone with Airpods in her ears? I can't believe the paps just happened to find the perfect spot to "hide" so as to take footage of her head-on like that. I really don't want to believe she would have staged them.


Yes I watched the video. Meghan looked unhinged and Archie was dangling and banging around like a bag of potatoes. He honestly looked sedated to me.
As for mom-shaming, lol.
If a person is endangering the safety of their child and they are deliberately posing for paparazzi photos whilst doing it, I think it is fair to comment on.
I feel like Meghan could take Archie out with only a diaper on, in the Canadian winter and some fans would create a scenario where that was an example of Meghan's superior parenting skills.


----------



## lalame

She did keep looking ahead as if she was looking directly at someone... what I don't get is, where's the rest of the footage? Did they follow her for the entirety of her hike, or did she see them and turn back? It's kind of mysterious that the only photos/footage that exists is the same 30 secs of her walk. 

I'm astounded that Harry, being probably the most media-phobic of them all, would ironically find himself with someone with a career dependent on fame and exposure. I think he was probably so happy to find someone who didn't run away screaming immediately like his exes that he didn't stop to think, "maybe she's tooooo 'okay' with being in the public eye.'" If it's true that she staged these, frankly I don't see them lasting for much longer.


----------



## cmm62

prettyprincess said:


> Let’s not mom shame a new mother. Imagine being a new mom and having paparazzi taking pictures of all of your mistakes. No one is perfect.


I know I should resist but want to jump in as I’m in a very similar point in life as Megs - toddler and baby (and beyond grateful for both). She’s not mom shaming. as moms in the thick of this time of life, the baby carrier being worn so poorly for an almost 9 month old is a bit odd. For me the photo of the shoulder strap falling off was so weird - there’s a snap for the two shoulder straps to be snapped together at the top of your back. It’s the most basic of instructions - no reason for anyone outside of the mother of a newborn to not know this. It hasn’t been posted here but the video of her walking with him in this carrier is bizarre. He is stiff like I’ve never seen a nine month old in a carrier be stiff before. Newborns sleep against chests without a care in the world. Oddly askew splayed against a chest nine month old fast asleep and stiff as a board? Can’t say I’ve seen that. And I’ll leave it there. I want Meghan and Harry to be happy, have strong relationships with their family, be married until death do them part, and create charities that change the world. So I’ve established I’m not a “hater”. I still find, like Megs, this quiet walk in the woods and the lack of sense related to the carrier to be bizarre. Nothing to do with mom shaming. We’re both moms in the thick of raising young kids who know this is not how we and our friends behave when carrying our babies after having almost a Year of motherhood under our belts. And like Megs I will do my best to not post in this thread again because y’all are crazy but also I love it dont ever stop


----------



## mdcx

Video of Meghan with Archie in the carrier:


----------



## prettyprincess

mdcx said:


> Video of Meghan with Archie in the carrier:



This is unhinged? Her sleeping baby looks sedated and endangered? Lol, wow.


----------



## mdcx

prettyprincess said:


> This is unhinged? Her sleeping baby looks sedated and endangered? Lol, wow.


If you see nothing wrong in that video, then I don’t know what to say...


----------



## Gal4Dior

mdcx said:


> Video of Meghan with Archie in the carrier:




After viewing this video I can’t believe it isn’t a set up! She’s all smiles looking directly in the camera and of course Archie’s face is obscured because she has the baby carrier with him facing her! How convenient! 
Then that weird angle with the one baby carrier strap looking like it was slipping off her shoulder. If it were me, there is no way that baby wouldn’t be fully strapped in, especially on a rainy, muddy day outside with not one, but two dogs in tow. 
I’m not buying that she was papped and it supposedly invaded her privacy.


----------



## lalame

Yeah I truly don't understand what is going on with that baby and the looks straight into the camera. You can almost see the eye contact she's making with the photog, who is supposedly hidden in a bush so it wouldn't make sense if she didn't know he was there.

I don't even think I've seen a legitimately candid photo of her at royal events with this level of eye contact. But here, while the guy is in the bushes, hiding, and she's walking with child and 2 dogs?


----------



## prettyprincess

mdcx said:


> If you see nothing wrong in that video, then I don’t know what to say...


And if you can watch that video and see an “unhinged person” I too don’t know what to say.


----------



## Lodpah

prettyprincess said:


> This is unhinged? Her sleeping baby looks sedated and endangered? Lol, wow.


Yes it is. The position of her holding the baby at the neck with her wrist is Uber dangerous and he’s dangling. He’s not secured and the biggest problem is her holding him at the neck area. If her dogs happened to pull her forward her hand/wrist area would have either chocked Archie’s neck or broken it. Babies neck areas, frontal lobes are still soft. So yes, it’s a dangerous way to hold him.

Mothers have natural instincts in some cases a
all the pictures I’ve seen of her holding him is not natural. 

Babies have died from being carried improperly. Also never put a baby’s face against your body they can’t breathe.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fatherly.com/gear/dangerous-baby-carrier-mistakes-parents/amp/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jaxion

mdcx said:


> Video of Meghan with Archie in the carrier:



Wow that's worse than I imagined it to be because she's grinning so much and it's hard to explain who or what she's looking at other than the pap. Even for a staged pap walk it's one of weirder ones I've seen.


----------



## Eva1991

I think the baby is sleeping. The shoulder strap has probably fallen off her shoulder and she's also holding two dogs. Her hands are full. That being said, she could have asked one of they guys behind her (assuming they're security) to hold the dogs for a while so she could fix the strap. Other than that, I don't see anything wrong in the video. Just a mom on a hike with her sleeping baby and two dogs.


----------



## Clearblueskies

It’s not “mom shaming” - to use that as an excuse is just another of those catch-all-get-out-of-jail-cards IMO.  This is calling out someone for being a shameless hypocrite and staging a pap walk whilst claiming to be hounded by the press.  The ONLY photos we’ve seen of Meghan in Canada are the ones she’s set up - pointless appearances at bemused charitable organisations to raise her profile, repeat posting on insta, and now this.
And Archie is not a newborn - I’m surprised that Meghan hasn’t worked out how to carry him yet.  It looks very much like she doesn't do it very often to me.


----------



## Clearblueskies

prettyprincess said:


> And if you can watch that video and see an “unhinged person” I too don’t know what to say.


I don’t think she looks unhinged, I think she looks sly.  She knows exactly what she’s doing, and she wants those cameras on her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

prettyprincess said:


> If these comments were rooted in genuine concern for the baby, fine, but that’s not what’s happening here. It’s so sad to me that grown women cant wait to tear another woman, a new mother, to shreds all from a tiny snippet of a video. In one minute, you were all able to brand her mentally ill, negligent, and a danger to her own child.
> 
> The fervor in which this woman is torn down post after post is scary.


Meghan’s behaving appallingly, that’s what’s happening here.


----------



## threadbender

I have always posted my concern for Archie. I don't like him being used as a prop. I want him to be loved and cared for. I want him to be safe. Archie is the true innocent in all of this hoopla. Seeing him carried around like a school backpack, with no movement literally made me cringe. As a Mom, it is hard to see a child being so carelessly carried. My son was not that limp when he was 8 months old. He was a wriggly little guy who wanted to see outward and was not shy about telling me if he was uncomfortable. Archie did not seem to have any interaction at all. I guess he could be asleep but in that position?
So, please, when I express my opinions on how things are going for that sweet little boy, understand he is the one I am worried for. His two parents can take care of themselves, or so they say.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla did everything right it seems, especially after they went public with their relationship.
> 
> She knew her place, never acted up, stayed kinda in the background, dressed appropriately and as always, supported Charles and never once tried to over-shadow him.
> 
> She really was the right woman for the job (with him) I think.


Exactly, it's such a shame they weren't allowed to marry the first time around.


----------



## zen1965

limom said:


> Just remembered  at 9 months, the baby would be facing forward.
> I was far from perfect but I knew the basics.


Actually, I think she used an Ergo Carrier or similar. Not facing forward but sitting rather spreadeagled on mom’s hip would be the correct placement. Anyway, the way he dangled there was just atrocious. Nothing to do with mom shaming. Before you use a carrier and potentially endanger your baby to fall out, you take a look at the user manual which is easy to understand in the case of Ergo


----------



## limom

zen1965 said:


> Actually, I think she used an Ergo Carrier or similar. Not facing forward but sitting rather spreadeagled on mom’s hip would be the correct placement. Anyway, the way he dangled there was just atrocious. Nothing to do with mom shaming. Before you use a carrier and potentially endanger your baby to fall out, you take a look at the user manual which is easy to understand in the case of Ergo


Thanks for the details.
So nowadays, they recommend older babies to still face inward?


----------



## Chagall

MM is walking along holding two reasonable sized dogs leashes in one hand when they could easily try to take off and cause her and baby Archie to fall. She appears to be clamping the baby’s  face to her chest. She is looking happily straight at the camera. I can’t believe Harry is so foolish as to believe she was not consenting of the photographs. I think the royal family is completely aware of what is going on and is offering Harry an out to return. What troubles me is that he is a grown man who will possibly be bailed out again by his family. How will he learn.


----------



## duna

Jayne1 said:


> H&M can return to the UK full-time without having to resume their official royal duties, keep Frogmore Cottage for rehabilitation and recuperation because the poor things are under under severe strain??
> 
> This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard. I wish Harry could be a regular guy and try to eke out a meager living and then find out what severe strain is.



ITA!!!

I'm really beginning to think they have some kind of mental issues because, if it's true, that they are so phobic towards paps and media this must be the reason. Compared to Diana, and more recently Camilla and Kate, H&M have had ZERO stalking. They said they were going expressly to Canada/Vancouver because there are no paps, and then, hey presto, they are being stalked there aswell. This whole story is becoming more and more ridiculous and pathetic.....I would seriously look for professional help at this point. They both need it.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, it's such a shame they weren't allowed to marry the first time around.



I truly believe that the Queen Mother put the kibosh on that relationship as she deemed Camilla "not suitable" ( ie. not euro royalty or aristocracy) It was well know she QEQM could be quite a snob. Poor old Diana didn't even know she was in an arranged marriage. I was a young teen at the time and I can remember thinking why on earth would a 19 year old want to marry a 32 year old !


----------



## limom

RAINDANCE said:


> I truly believe that the Queen Mother put the kibosh on that relationship as she deemed Camilla "not suitable" ( ie. not euro royalty or aristocracy) It was well know she QEQM could be quite a snob. Poor old Diana didn't even know she was in an arranged marriage. I was a young teen at the time and I can remember thinking why on earth would a 19 year old want to marry a 32 year old !


Diana was incredibly in love with him. He needed to marry a virgin. So there.


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> I truly believe that the Queen Mother put the kibosh on that relationship as she deemed Camilla "not suitable" ( ie. not euro royalty or aristocracy) It was well know she QEQM could be quite a snob. Poor old Diana didn't even know she was in an arranged marriage. I was a young teen at the time and I can remember thinking why on earth would a 19 year old want to marry a 32 year old !


Right, it was the Queen Mother and Diana's maternal grandmother, who were friends who put this match together.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Right, it was the Queen Mother and Diana's maternal grandmother, who were friends who put this match together.


Do you think that Diana’s grandmother knew about Camilla and Charles?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Wtf, this just gets more and more bizarre. It’s hard not to conclude that MM was very calculating.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7930957/Meghan-Markle-happy-stop-career-working-member-Firm.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Wtf, this just gets more and more bizarre. It’s hard not to conclude that MM was very calculating.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...le-happy-stop-career-working-member-Firm.html
> 
> View attachment 4649980


I also just read this article.  Definitely an opportunist on the make.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Do you think that Diana’s grandmother knew about Camilla and Charles?


I got the impression that the affair between Charles and Camilla was common knowledge among all the royal family. The exception was poor Diana. But even she had warnings. On the night before her wedding she found a gift of jewelry from Charles to Camilla. She apparently considered calling off the wedding but it was too late. When she walked down the isle looking from side to side she said later she was looking for Camilla. What a way to start a marriage.


----------



## limom

mdcx said:


> Wtf, this just gets more and more bizarre. It’s hard not to conclude that MM was very calculating.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...le-happy-stop-career-working-member-Firm.html
> 
> View attachment 4649980


Why can’t the Daily Fail hire better writers/editors?
Besides the typos, everyone knows that Archie was born in May, he is not one year old yet.


----------



## mdcx

limom said:


> Why can’t the Daily Fail hire better writers/editors?
> Besides the typos, everyone knows that Archie was born in May, he is not one year old yet.


Hmm, maybe this is their way of addressing those “mighty big for an eight month old” whispers.


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Do you think that Diana’s grandmother knew about Camilla and Charles?


Of course, I think it was an "open secret" between everyone in their circle, and Charles' family, including his grandmother.


----------



## gelbergirl

mdcx said:


> Wtf, this just gets more and more bizarre. It’s hard not to conclude that MM was very calculating.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...le-happy-stop-career-working-member-Firm.html
> 
> View attachment 4649980



That would have been the perfect time to break away.  The Queen knows all.


----------



## mdcx

Diana’s sensitivity to finding out about Camilla was unexpected imo. Seemed everyone imagined she would be fine with it, enjoy her princess wedding and put on a good act. But she actually believed Charles loved her. Very innocent and naive in many regards, and very emotionally needy after her childhood.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Of course, I think it was an "open secret" between everyone in their circle, and Charles' family, including his grandmother.


Thanks. Poor Diana.


mdcx said:


> Hmm, maybe this is their way of addressing those “mighty big for an eight month old” whispers.


Shady, shady, shady.


----------



## Ludmilla

gelbergirl said:


> That would have been the perfect time to break away.  The Queen knows all.


The wedding would have probably been smaller then.


----------



## zen1965

limom said:


> Thanks for the details.
> So nowadays, they recommend older babies to still face inward?


Depending on the carrier both ways are possible. In Northern Europe inwards seems to be preferred. For instance like this https://images.app.goo.gl/U7KWZmZVn78WRGDV8


----------



## joyeaux

#1. I do not thrive (see what I did there) on “tearing” anyone down. I can assure you I love supporting other women in their successes. So tired of being accused of that... agreeing to disagree is a lot better than name-calling (yes I know both “sides” have done that, and imo it’s not ok either way. But most everyone including myself have been civil. Before that sentence gets thrown back as an argument.)

#2. It’s about _context. _This “candid” walk, which apparently was such a total affront to their privacy that there was talk of suing—AGAIN— is garnering eyerolls from a lot of us because it is one in a mountain of odd/contradictory things this couple seem to be doing. Fine if you think they baby-wearing looks normal here’s where I’ll do the agree to disagree thing, but it is the first and only “candid” photo since they went to Canada before Christmas, and was taken right after she got back and stuck it to the entire RF,  she just happens to be grinning like a Cheshire Cat? Sorry but you can’t tell me that whole thing wasn’t to convey the message that, “Hey we did it, we are out and we are sooo happy.” 

_It’s all done for PR. _I promise you. 

All they want to do is survive in peace... with Disney and Oprah and Ellen or whatever... again, in _context_ the contradictions are ridiculous and exhasperating.

This is what someone looks like when they’re in a private moment with their child and are upset their photos are being taken.








Not this.



Ok, I feel better now.


----------



## maryg1

Ok, I can say I’m jealous of MM now...her dogs are better trained than mine! If I walked my 2 whippets that way they would be gone as soon as 1) a cat 2) another dog 3) whatever they think is  interesting crossed our path!
She really isn’t even closing her fist to keep the leads!


----------



## queennadine

My baby was born a couple of weeks before Archie. I got 3 carriers at various showers. I read the instructions for each a ton of times and watched YouTube videos put out by the companies as well as other moms. My husband and I practiced at home, over our bed, in case poor LO should take a tumble. 

I’m certainly not a perfect mom...but at least TRYING to figure out how to safely baby-wear is expected. 

What MM did on that walk did not indicate to me that she had ever worn that carrier, read instructions or warnings, did additional research, or know in any way what she was doing. 

As others have pointed out, baby wearing can be extremely dangerous (as can most things, hello parental anxiety!) to a baby if not worn correctly. If that’s considered “mom shaming” then ok, I’m mom shaming and don’t give AF. 

Also, for us “regular” people: I HAD to learn how to baby wear correctly and safely because I’ve traveled with my LO by myself several times now. Meaning I had her, my purse, carryon, suitcase, car seat, and stroller to deal with...all without help. And I can promise you that my baby didn’t look like a limp sack of potatoes hanging off of me while I gleefully eyed people’s iPhones hoping the pics turned out well.


----------



## 1LV

joyeaux said:


> #1. I do not thrive (see what I did there) on “tearing” anyone down. I can assure you I love supporting other women in their successes. So tired of being accused of that... agreeing to disagree is a lot better than name-calling (yes I know both “sides” have done that, and imo it’s not ok either way. But most everyone including myself have been civil. Before that sentence gets thrown back as an argument.)
> 
> #2. It’s about _context. _This “candid” walk, which apparently was such a total affront to their privacy that there was talk of suing—AGAIN— is garnering eyerolls from a lot of us because it is one in a mountain of odd/contradictory things this couple seem to be doing. Fine if you think they baby-wearing looks normal here’s where I’ll do the agree to disagree thing, but it is the first and only “candid” photo since they went to Canada before Christmas, and was taken right after she got back and stuck it to the entire RF,  she just happens to be grinning like a Cheshire Cat? Sorry but you can’t tell me that whole thing wasn’t to convey the message that, “Hey we did it, we are out and we are sooo happy.”
> 
> _It’s all done for PR. _I promise you.
> 
> All they want to do is survive in peace... with Disney and Oprah and Ellen or whatever... again, in _context_ the contradictions are ridiculous and exhasperating.
> 
> This is what someone looks like when they’re in a private moment with their child and are upset their photos are being taken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not this.
> View attachment 4650038
> 
> 
> Ok, I feel better now.





joyeaux said:


> #1. I do not thrive (see what I did there) on “tearing” anyone down. I can assure you I love supporting other women in their successes. So tired of being accused of that... agreeing to disagree is a lot better than name-calling (yes I know both “sides” have done that, and imo it’s not ok either way. But most everyone including myself have been civil. Before that sentence gets thrown back as an argument.)
> 
> #2. It’s about _context. _This “candid” walk, which apparently was such a total affront to their privacy that there was talk of suing—AGAIN— is garnering eyerolls from a lot of us because it is one in a mountain of odd/contradictory things this couple seem to be doing. Fine if you think they baby-wearing looks normal here’s where I’ll do the agree to disagree thing, but it is the first and only “candid” photo since they went to Canada before Christmas, and was taken right after she got back and stuck it to the entire RF,  she just happens to be grinning like a Cheshire Cat? Sorry but you can’t tell me that whole thing wasn’t to convey the message that, “Hey we did it, we are out and we are sooo happy.”
> 
> _It’s all done for PR. _I promise you.
> 
> All they want to do is survive in peace... with Disney and Oprah and Ellen or whatever... again, in _context_ the contradictions are ridiculous and exhasperating.
> 
> This is what someone looks like when they’re in a private moment with their child and are upset their photos are being taken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not this.
> View attachment 4650038
> 
> 
> Ok, I feel better now.


A picture paints a thousand words, and I must say the one where she’s holding the leashes above her waist looks like the cat that ate the canary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

gracekelly said:


> I bet you had to control yourself from screaming into the computer screen. With one baby and a toddler, you  appreciated how awful that was.  This is what happens when the desire to be photographed overtakes common sense and maternal feelings.



I did not intend to ignite a firestorm here! I know everyone parents differently, and that is fine but safety of devices we use (stroller, car seat, carrier, bed, etc) is one of few things in our control as a parent so when I see people misusing it, it's hard to look at. It's really hard to see those photos as someone who is distraught over being photographed. Heck, she could have covered her face and used her guards to shield herself! 



prettyprincess said:


> Let’s not mom shame a new mother. Imagine being a new mom and having paparazzi taking pictures of all of your mistakes. No one is perfect.



I truly was not trying to mom shame, and in my opinion, saying that someone is using a baby device improperly is not mom shaming. Like I said above, there are few things as a parent we have in our control. Babies and kids are throwing all sorts of curveballs at every single moment. I have a 3 yr old and 1 year old, I know how trying and confusing and exhausting it can all be. 

*BUT* that being said, I think that as parents we have to do our best to protect our children. When it comes to safety with baby devices, it's in our control. Baby wearing is great, but needs to be done so safely so that our babies don't fall. In this case, it's not the worst thing ever, but he isn't strapped in properly and if he were to fall, a fall from that high on a small baby can be really damaging. 

I feel very strongly about baby safety. There are too many stories of babies who have catastrophic injuries over unsafe sleep conditions (1000000% in our control), car seat not properly set up or restraints not proper (also in our control), as well as baby gear/wearing, again in our control! There are easy youtube manuals online! 

Again, I wasn't saying she is a bad mom. I hope she is a great mom to that little guy and loves on him and protects him! And I am not saying I've done everything perfectly myself. But safety is such a big thing for Vlad and I with our kids and it was hard for me to imagine someone with so much help and access to help, not using a simple carrier properly. 



cmm62 said:


> I know I should resist but want to jump in as I’m in a very similar point in life as Megs - toddler and baby (and beyond grateful for both). She’s not mom shaming. as moms in the thick of this time of life, the baby carrier being worn so poorly for an almost 9 month old is a bit odd. For me the photo of the shoulder strap falling off was so weird - there’s a snap for the two shoulder straps to be snapped together at the top of your back. It’s the most basic of instructions - no reason for anyone outside of the mother of a newborn to not know this. It hasn’t been posted here but the video of her walking with him in this carrier is bizarre. He is stiff like I’ve never seen a nine month old in a carrier be stiff before. Newborns sleep against chests without a care in the world. Oddly askew splayed against a chest nine month old fast asleep and stiff as a board? Can’t say I’ve seen that. And I’ll leave it there. I want Meghan and Harry to be happy, have strong relationships with their family, be married until death do them part, and create charities that change the world. So I’ve established I’m not a “hater”. I still find, like Megs, this quiet walk in the woods and the lack of sense related to the carrier to be bizarre. Nothing to do with mom shaming. We’re both moms in the thick of raising young kids who know this is not how we and our friends behave when carrying our babies after having almost a Year of motherhood under our belts. And like Megs I will do my best to not post in this thread again because y’all are crazy but also I love it dont ever stop



Ya, exactly! I usually never speak up for many things, but I've even told friends who have really unsafe sleep environments for their little ones that it's not safe. The last thing I would want is something to happen to someone's baby over something that could have easily been prevented, and me not speak up. 

Again, not saying this was the worst thing ever (truly!, unsafe sleep environments are far more dangerous and parents partake in it all the time), but Archie wasn't secure and a bit more of a slip of the shoulder strap could have been dangerous. 



prettyprincess said:


> If these comments were rooted in genuine concern for the baby, fine, but that’s not what’s happening here. It’s so sad to me that grown women cant wait to tear another woman, a new mother, to shreds all from a tiny snippet of a video. In one minute, you were all able to brand her mentally ill, negligent, and a danger to her own child.
> 
> The fervor in which this woman is torn down post after post is scary.



No! Not saying she is a danger to her child, simply saying it was hard to see her carry him the wrong way and there's an easy fix. I really don't want to go out of my way to comment on people's parenting. Doesn't mean I don't have opinions (ha!), but I truly do try to keep those to myself! In this case, it was about how she was carrying him imporperly!


----------



## limom

queennadine said:


> My baby was born a couple of weeks before Archie. I got 3 carriers at various showers. I read the instructions for each a ton of times and watched YouTube videos put out by the companies as well as other moms. My husband and I practiced at home, over our bed, in case poor LO should take a tumble.
> 
> I’m certainly not a perfect mom...but at least TRYING to figure out how to safely baby-wear is expected.
> 
> What MM did on that walk did not indicate to me that she had ever worn that carrier, read instructions or warnings, did additional research, or know in any way what she was doing.
> 
> As others have pointed out, baby wearing can be extremely dangerous (as can most things, hello parental anxiety!) to a baby if not worn correctly. If that’s considered “mom shaming” then ok, I’m mom shaming and don’t give AF.
> 
> Also, for us “regular” people: I HAD to learn how to baby wear correctly and safely because I’ve traveled with my LO by myself several times now. Meaning I had her, my purse, carryon, suitcase, car seat, and stroller to deal with...all without help. And I can promise you that my baby didn’t look like a limp sack of potatoes hanging off of me while I gleefully eyed people’s iPhones hoping the pics turned out well.


Congratulations.


----------



## limom

Megs said:


> I did not intend to ignite a firestorm here! I know everyone parents differently, and that is fine but safety of devices we use (stroller, car seat, carrier, bed, etc) is one of few things in our control as a parent so when I see people misusing it, it's hard to look at. It's really hard to see those photos as someone who is distraught over being photographed. Heck, she could have covered her face and used her guards to shield herself!
> 
> 
> 
> I truly was not trying to mom shame, and in my opinion, saying that someone is using a baby device improperly is not mom shaming. Like I said above, there are few things as a parent we have in our control. Babies and kids are throwing all sorts of curveballs at every single moment. I have a 3 yr old and 1 year old, I know how trying and confusing and exhausting it can all be.
> 
> *BUT* that being said, I think that as parents we have to do our best to protect our children. When it comes to safety with baby devices, it's in our control. Baby wearing is great, but needs to be done so safely so that our babies don't fall. In this case, it's not the worst thing ever, but he isn't strapped in properly and if he were to fall, a fall from that high on a small baby can be really damaging.
> 
> I feel very strongly about baby safety. There are too many stories of babies who have catastrophic injuries over unsafe sleep conditions (1000000% in our control), car seat not properly set up or restraints not proper (also in our control), as well as baby gear/wearing, again in our control! There are easy youtube manuals online!
> 
> Again, I wasn't saying she is a bad mom. I hope she is a great mom to that little guy and loves on him and protects him! And I am not saying I've done everything perfectly myself. But safety is such a big thing for Vlad and I with our kids and it was hard for me to imagine someone with so much help and access to help, not using a simple carrier properly.
> 
> 
> 
> Ya, exactly! I usually never speak up for many things, but I've even told friends who have really unsafe sleep environments for their little ones that it's not safe. The last thing I would want is something to happen to someone's baby over something that could have easily been prevented, and me not speak up.
> 
> Again, not saying this was the worst thing ever (truly!, unsafe sleep environments are far more dangerous and parents partake in it all the time), but Archie wasn't secure and a bit more of a slip of the shoulder strap could have been dangerous.
> 
> 
> 
> No! Not saying she is a danger to her child, simply saying it was hard to see her carry him the wrong way and there's an easy fix. I really don't want to go out of my way to comment on people's parenting. Doesn't mean I don't have opinions (ha!), but I truly do try to keep those to myself! In this case, it was about how she was carrying him imporperly!


Exactly, it takes a village.


----------



## Mrs.Z

maryg1 said:


> Ok, I can say I’m jealous of MM now...her dogs are better trained than mine! If I walked my 2 whippets that way they would be gone as soon as 1) a cat 2) another dog 3) whatever they think is  interesting crossed our path!
> She really isn’t even closing her fist to keep the leads!


Ha!  I thought the same thing, I can barely walk my two dogs...one goes left, one goes right, I’m tangled and my life is in danger.  Especially in the forest...all the smells!!!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Quick PSA for all soon to be or new moms on this thread...

Please don't panic! I had to wear my kids all the time and I promise you it's not that complicated or scary! Archie looks fast asleep and Meghan looks uncomfortable...the strap has slipped, he's heavy and leaning and she knows the paps are there so she can't do what would have made the most sense...simply ask the guys behind her to hold the leashes for a minute while she readjusts. Her effort to stage the scene of an every day super mom backfired miserably.

But as the parent of now teenagers who navigated much worse than a walk in the park with my kids in bjorns, slings and whatever ridiculous contraption I bought in the hopes of making my exhausted life easier I promise you Archie is not in danger and you are not a bad parent for an awkward moment.

Now if you call the paps and smile directly at them while complaining you are on your own.  

Please pardon the interruption, there is so much anxiety and guilt around parenting I had to try to tone down the rhetoric. Back to your regularly scheduled gossip!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Does anyone see the baby move in any of the videos? It wouldn’t surprise me at all if that wasn’t Archie. She wanted to combat the complaints that no one had seen her with Archie but didn’t want to risk having him out in public so she went for a pap stroll with a doll. Mission accomplished and Archie isn’t exposed. Except she held the doll like it’s a doll and not a child.  Oops.


----------



## marthastoo

My take on the video is this.  First of all, the photographer was clearly far away from Meghan.  You can only hear the loud sound of rushing car traffic, so I'm going to surmise that the pap who took this was very far away.  These are very expensive pieces of equipment that can zoom in from hundreds of yards away.  As far as the insinuations that this is not Archie or he's actually older than 8 months or she sedated him...   This is exactly the not-based-in-reality talk that makes me .  My son was a big baby too (born at almost 10 lbs) and had a temperament similar to what I've seen of Archie - smiley, content, big boy, great sleeper.  At 8 months, he was 24 lbs and 30" and he look very similar to Archie in a baby carrier - a big lug who was out like a light with any movement (car, stroller, baby carrier).  

Same with the criticism about walking with dogs.  I only had one dog at a time, but I absolutely took my babies out for walks in the baby carrier with my dog.  And after watching the video, it is clear these are extremely well-behaved dogs that heel. Notice the leashes are always slack - no pulling. Yes, the strap of the carrier had fallen off her shoulder and if she were alone, okay I can see being stuck in this position.  No excuse when she's got 2 security guards behind her who can adjust it.  Bad on her.  It's not like she's not holding Archie though.  Maybe she didn't want to disturb his sleep by shifting him up?   

As far as the strange grinning, it seems to me she was smiling after looking down at Archie or the dogs. Sometimes I smile too when thinking about something happy.


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> Video of Meghan with Archie in the carrier:




Looking at this video, baby proportion to MM body, and holding onto to not one but two dogs while, (are those her body guards?) two bodyguards walk behind her, their hands free or on the phone( they’d better get better security) I don’t care how much you like her, that is not the normal face of someone carrying a baby that size.  Try it yourself if you don’t know and see.  Now the baby looks uncomfortable and unconscious, I would take 5 seconds to at at least pretend to re-arrange the baby and have security hold the two dogs if I were her.  If I didn’t want the paps, security would walk in front of me and I would cover my face.   We’ve all seen it....even as a fan you see NOTHING wrong with this video?  Not even a little attention seeking?

Again she already knows ‘paps’ be around, after such an announcement, ‘we leaving the royals’, she is no amateur, maybe she doesn’t listen to anyone.


----------



## doni

I see a mum talking to her baby, probably singing to him, perhaps to help him sleep.
She seems quite relaxed.


----------



## marthastoo

scarlet555 said:


> Looking at this video, baby proportion to MM body, and holding onto to not one but two dogs while, (are those her body guards?) two bodyguards walk behind her, their hands free or on the phone( they’d better get better security) I don’t care how much you like her, *that is not the normal face of someone carrying a baby that size*.  Try it yourself if you don’t know and see.  Now the baby looks uncomfortable and unconscious, I would take 5 seconds to at at least pretend to re-arrange the baby and have security hold the two dogs if I were her.  If I didn’t want the paps, security would walk in front of me and I would cover my face.   We’ve all seen it....even as a fan you see NOTHING wrong with this video?  Not even a little attention seeking?


What is the "normal face" of someone carrying a baby that size?  I had a baby that size.  Not sure what that face is.

I guess the difference between those who criticize and someone like myself is that I do not accept as fact that she called the paps and was smiling for the cameras.  I understand that she was walking in a public park near the house she's staying at.  If the pap was crouched in some tree hundreds of yards away (or in a car, etc.), she cannot see him.  You can sort of see in the video when he pulls back from the hyperzoom some sense of the distance between them.  I will assume the walk was more than the <2 minutes posted.  If she's smiling like a crazy person the entire walk, ok.  Let's see the tapes.


----------



## scarlet555

Normal face:  Baby gets heavy and you feel it, as much as you love your child you don’t stay in a smile position especially if you’re pissed paps could be around while you just want your baby to get a breath of fresh air.

But what do I know maybe MM is just a very happy person.  Always smiling at the world and the paps.   She did marry a prince after all...


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Diana’s sensitivity to finding out about Camilla was unexpected imo. Seemed everyone imagined she would be fine with it, enjoy her princess wedding and put on a good act. But she actually believed Charles loved her. Very innocent and naive in many regards, and very emotionally needy after her childhood.


and she was very young


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Normal face:  Baby gets heavy and you feel it, as much as you love your child you don’t stay in a smile position especially if you’re pissed paps could be around while you just want your baby to get a breath of fresh air.
> 
> But what do I know maybe MM is just a very happy person.  Always smiling at the world and the paps.   She did marry a prince after all...


how about big baby gets heavy and you're also holding two dogs on a leash?  and smiling for the camera?


----------



## LVLover

A friend sent this to me via text as I’m not on Twitter, FB, Insata. I’m unsure of source. It’s worth a giggle or two....


----------



## marthastoo

Dianaredbridge said:


> But it was staged; she looked very uncomfortable, as did this Archie doll. And walking two dogs at once, it all seemed very unnatural! I have never seen a mother do that in a park.


I would take my children out for walks with my dog all the time - big baby in carrier, toddler in umbrella stroller and dog on leash.  Not unnatural at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aqua01

Dianaredbridge said:


> But it was staged; she looked very uncomfortable, as did this Archie doll. And walking two dogs at once, it all seemed very unnatural! I have never seen a mother do that in a park.


That walk, that face, that 100 watt "can't-wait-to-see-my-dazzling-self-in-the-pics-soon" smile. 

So phony, it hurts.


----------



## CobaltBlu

If the photographer was using a telephoto lens, the guards would not look like that.  they would be out of focus and compressed toward her.


----------



## Chagall

threadbender said:


> I have always posted my concern for Archie. I don't like him being used as a prop. I want him to be loved and cared for. I want him to be safe. Archie is the true innocent in all of this hoopla. Seeing him carried around like a school backpack, with no movement literally made me cringe. As a Mom, it is hard to see a child being so carelessly carried. My son was not that limp when he was 8 months old. He was a wriggly little guy who wanted to see outward and was not shy about telling me if he was uncomfortable. Archie did not seem to have any interaction at all. I guess he could be asleep but in that position?
> So, please, when I express my opinions on how things are going for that sweet little boy, understand he is the one I am worried for. His two parents can take care of themselves, or so they say.


I absolutely agree that Archie should be the main concern. Silly maybe but as an animal lover I worry about her dogs. Are they props also. My German Shepherd is so sensitive to the behaviors of everyone around him that if he wasn’t loved he would know.


----------



## threadbender

Chagall said:


> I absolutely agree that Archie should be the main concern. Silly maybe but as an animal lover I worry about her dogs. Are they props also. My German Shepherd is so sensitive to the behaviors of everyone around him that if he wasn’t loved he would know.


Agree. My doggy is here next to me as I post. Dogs and babies know if you care.


----------



## lalame

There is absolutely a possibility it’s all innocent, ie not staged. Without being there or more first hand accounts, I can’t feel 100% sure what’s going on. But it certainly just looks bizarre and unlikely not to be staged to me. definitely the photogs were far away, and hiding behind bushes or trees, with some sort of long lens. No arguments there. But first of all, how is he so well positioned to get straight on shots like that of her smiling directly into camera? Like I said I’ve never even seen candid shots of her in other scenarios that look so picture perfect, when there were dozens or hundreds getting shots... but here this one guy or team, gets these? And two, where are the other photogs if she was in a public park? If the location was unintentionally leaked, I’m sure more photogs would show up.. or just normal people.. this seems like an “exclusive” given to one photog so they could get shots while still allowing her to maintain some semblance of control over the situation.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> There is absolutely a *possibility it’s all innocent*, ie not staged. Without being there or more first hand accounts, I *can’t feel 100% sure what’s going on*. But it certainly just looks bizarre and unlikely not to be staged to me. definitely the photogs were far away, and hiding behind bushes or trees, with some sort of long lens. No arguments there. But first of all, how is he so well positioned to get straight on shots like that of her smiling directly into camera? Like I said I’ve never even seen candid shots of her in other scenarios that look so picture perfect, when there were dozens or hundreds getting shots... but here this one guy or team, gets these? And two, where are the other photogs if she was in a public park? If the location was unintentionally leaked, I’m sure more photogs would show up.. or just normal people.. this seems like an “exclusive” given to one photog so they could get shots while still allowing her to maintain some semblance of control over the situation.



There is a possibility we are all wrong and just too critical.  Possible, of course.  This is a gossip site, lets all keep this in mind, people.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> There is absolutely a possibility it’s all innocent, ie not staged. Without being there or more first hand accounts, I can’t feel 100% sure what’s going on. But it certainly just looks bizarre and unlikely not to be staged to me. definitely the photogs were far away, and hiding behind bushes or trees, with some sort of long lens. No arguments there. But first of all, how is he so well positioned to get straight on shots like that of her smiling directly into camera? Like I said I’ve never even seen candid shots of her in other scenarios that look so picture perfect, when there were dozens or hundreds getting shots... but here this one guy or team, gets these? And two, where are the other photogs if she was in a public park? If the location was unintentionally leaked, I’m sure more photogs would show up.. or just normal people.. this seems like an “exclusive” given to one photog so they could get shots while still allowing her to maintain some semblance of control over the situation.



With all the fuss she has made you know Harry must have a security team for her and Archie, particularly when he’s not around. Yet we are supposed to believe there was a wide open, full body,  frontal shot of her and her guards didn’t intervene with the photographer or block her from the cameras? They have one job and that’s to prevent such intrusions. If they didn’t do it and they were walking outside of camera view, it’s because they were told to do so. Rest assured, the scene was staged and just another example of Meghan’s phoniness.


----------



## Sharont2305

After seeing KensingtonRoyals new post, I'm wondering how Meghan's going to top that. 
Cynical I know.....


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> After seeing KensingtonRoyals new post, I'm wondering how Meghan's going to top that.
> Cynical I know.....


Beautiful photos. I like the “Portraits copyright Duchess of Cambridge.”
Meghan’s team will be furiously consulting their playbook regards their next move.


----------



## Tootsie17

lalame said:


> There is absolutely a possibility it’s all innocent, ie not staged. Without being there or more first hand accounts, I can’t feel 100% sure what’s going on. But it certainly just looks bizarre and unlikely not to be staged to me. definitely the photogs were far away, and hiding behind bushes or trees, with some sort of long lens. No arguments there. But first of all, how is he so well positioned to get straight on shots like that of her smiling directly into camera? Like I said I’ve never even seen candid shots of her in other scenarios that look so picture perfect, when there were dozens or hundreds getting shots... but here this one guy or team, gets these? And two, where are the other photogs if she was in a public park? If the location was unintentionally leaked, I’m sure more photogs would show up.. or just normal people.. this seems like an “exclusive” given to one photog so they could get shots while still allowing her to maintain some semblance of control over the situation.



I believe that if she, or someone on her team tipped off a photographer, that expalins why she seems to be smiling durint the entire walk. She knows a photographer is lurking nearby.  She can't bother positioning Archie correctly in the carrier.   She must me ready for her closeup at any moment with that dazzling smile.


----------



## Pinkfoot

Ask one of those men behind you to pull the carrier strap up or to hold the dogs so you can do it yourself. Quick fix if you're not too busy getting your smile camera ready.


----------



## lalame

The only signs I can think of in favor of this not being staged are... if you were image-driven enough to stage photos, you would make sure to look better than how she looks in these photos (carrier and all). You would know better than to make it look so obvious.  And you'd probably have Harry in there too to maximize the interest. And make sure the photographer could get clearer, less grainy photos.


----------



## joyeaux

bag-mania said:


> With all the fuss she has made you know Harry must have a security team for her and Archie, particularly when he’s not around. Yet we are supposed to believe there was a wide open, full body,  frontal shot of her and her guards didn’t intervene with the photographer or block her from the cameras? They have one job and that’s to prevent such intrusions. If they didn’t do it and they were walking outside of camera view, it’s because they were told to do so. Rest assured, the scene was staged and just another example of Meghan’s phoniness.



I can’t help but think of Wimbledon, when security asked people in the same box to please not take photos because she was there in a “private capacity”... but let’s do this nature walk trail, trudging forward without any hint of being startled, and with a continued smile stuck on face (per the video) and staring straight at camera. Right after you’ve dropped a bombshell in the UK and high-tailed it out. 

Wow the difference in security teams is startling!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Mrs.Z said:


> Ha!  I thought the same thing, I can barely walk my two dogs...one goes left, one goes right, I’m tangled and my life is in danger.  Especially in the forest...all the smells!!!


I have two tiny dogs that are a nightmare to walk together. Another reason - aside from her posing - you know this is pic is 100% staged. She probably stepped outside, posed for her pics, took 10 steps with the dogs and ran back in. The baby looks beyond ridiculous in the carrier, my lord.


----------



## keodi

youngster said:


> I don't hate them either.  I've always been really fond of Harry.  I had a lot of doubts about him marrying an American actress who never spent any serious time in the UK, but people said that she had a degree in International Relations, so she'd be just fine.
> 
> Now, I'm just really disappointed and shocked at their behavior and how they both have handled this whole debacle.  They could have engineered a gracious withdrawal but it seems like they tried to inflict maximum damage and perhaps not even intentionally, just through their own immaturity and impatience. He traded in his duty to his granny and the entire country to go make more money (because they didn't live well enough) and because the tabloids ran critical stories.  Just so he can give lucrative paid speeches, narrate documentaries, sell Harry & Meghan compostable bags, and do ads for Omega watches?  Well done, Harry.


I Agee with this 100%!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

CobaltBlu said:


> If the photographer was using a telephoto lens, the guards would not look like that.  they would be out of focus and compressed toward her.



Those are _much_ smaller and less powerful than the cameras used by the paparazzi.  For example the topless photo's of Duchess Kate were taken between 800metres and 1.3 kilometres away using a high-powered, long range camera with a *600* millimetre lense - the highest in your post is 210mm.

And that was in 2012. Technology has come a long way since then with cameras.

The _possibility_ is there that the paps who took Meghan's photo's could have been half that distance away, could have been hidden and the pictures still would have been clear.

*Source:* https://www.smh.com.au/entertainmen...topless-shots-spanned-1km-20120917-261a1.html


----------



## lulilu

She had to have been smiling for the cameras.  Sorry, but I will never be convinced otherwise.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Of course, but the higher the millimetre the more the background is compressed. I have a 400mm.

That is the point of the photos, the higher the mm telephoto the closer the background looks to the subject in focus.  If the photog was far away, shooting with even a 400mm (which is not a jumbo telephoto) the guards would not look like they are in the same plane/distance as Meghan.







See how the subject is the same size but the red building in the background seems to move closer, the far right is 210mm imagine it at 400mm   Even the orange cone, which is closer than where the guards would have been, completely disappears at only 200mm. You certainly would not see it at 400, 600, or 1200mm.  



FreeSpirit71 said:


> Those are _much_ smaller and less powerful than the cameras used by the paparazzi.  For example the topless photo's of Duchess Kate were taken between 800metres and 1.3 kilometres away using a high-powered, long range camera with a *600* millimetre lense - the highest in your post is 210mm.
> 
> And that was in 2012. Technology has come a long way since then with cameras.
> 
> The _possibility_ is there that the paps who took Meghan's photo's could have been half that distance away, could have been hidden and the pictures still would have been clear.
> 
> *Source:* https://www.smh.com.au/entertainmen...topless-shots-spanned-1km-20120917-261a1.html


----------



## Megs

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Those are _much_ smaller and less powerful than the cameras used by the paparazzi.  For example the topless photo's of Duchess Kate were taken between 800metres and 1.3 kilometres away using a high-powered, long range camera with a *600* millimetre lense - the highest in your post is 210mm.
> 
> And that was in 2012. Technology has come a long way since then with cameras.
> 
> The _possibility_ is there that the paps who took Meghan's photo's could have been half that distance away, could have been hidden and the pictures still would have been clear.
> 
> *Source:* https://www.smh.com.au/entertainmen...topless-shots-spanned-1km-20120917-261a1.html



Don't think any of us will ever really know what camera/lens took the pic, but I want @Vlad to weigh in since he's knows so much about photo equipment! And he would give a totally unbiased opinion because he truly has no idea why anyone, especially me, cares about Harry and Meghan


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Megs said:


> Don't think any of us will ever really know what camera/lens took the pic, but I want @Vlad to weigh in since he's knows so much about photo equipment! And he would give a totally unbiased opinion because he truly has no idea why anyone, especially me, cares about Harry and Meghan



Cool. One of my friends is a professional photographer and we were talking about it - *not* whether or not the photo's were staged (she's all for a republic here in Australia and doesn't give a proverbial rat's a$$ either) but that the _possibility_ is there they _could_ have gotten those photo's from quite a distance away.

She was firmly in the YES, it's possible category.


----------



## Jktgal

Has this been posted? I am less interested in this couple than their impacts to the royal family - sorry if this is oot here.

"Prince Charles’s fortune, long shielded from scrutiny by parliamentary indifference and obscure accounting, spilled into public view this month when his younger son, Prince Harry, announced that he and his wife, Meghan, were quitting their royal duties. In trying to prove that they would renounce taxpayer money, Harry and Meghan gave Britons a peek at the shadowy world of ostensibly private finance that bankrolls the family and its mansions, gardens and considerable staff."
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/world/europe/harry-meghan-charles-duchy-of-cornwall.html


----------



## FreeSpirit71

That aside, for me...her staging it just doesn't add up for me - despite the huge grin.

There's no benefit for her or Harry in it. None.  She's savvy enough PR-wise to know it too, how it would look.  And the fact that her and Harry are suing about these pictures as well - it means in a court case all the details surrounding these photo's would be called into question in court - if they are staged she is opening herself up to be countersued.  Then the lack of photo's since.

For me, it doesn't add up - but I understand why others may feel differently.


----------



## Vlad

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Cool. One of my friends is a professional photographer and we were talking about it - *not* whether or not the photo's were staged (she's all for a republic here in Australia and doesn't give a proverbial rat's a$$ either) but that the _possibility_ is there they _could_ have gotten those photo's from quite a distance away.
> 
> She was firmly in the YES, it's possible category.



Are we talking about those baby carrying pictures from a few pages ago? Looks like they were indeed shot with a long lens from distance.

Nowadays you can mount an 800mm lens with a 2x extender on a crop body for a total reach of 2400mm equivalent. That's some *serious* distance covered. 

At that distance there will be atmospheric factors impacting the clarity and detail of the subject photographed.


----------



## Vlad

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That aside, for me...her staging it just doesn't add up for me - despite the huge grin.



If the photographer uses a very long lens, she wouldn't know she was photographed and certainly wouldn't be smiling directly into the lens. Definitely staged.


----------



## Jaxion

Vlad said:


> Are we talking about those baby carrying pictures from a few pages ago? Looks like they were indeed shot with a long lens from distance.
> 
> Nowadays you can mount an 800mm lens with a 2x extender on a crop body for a total reach of 2400mm equivalent. That's some *serious* distance covered.
> 
> At that distance there will be atmospheric factors impacting the clarity and detail of the subject photographed.


There is a video version as well as the photos:


----------



## muchstuff

Jaxion said:


> There is a video version as well as the photos:



How can anyone think she’s not totally aware of the camera? Wow.


----------



## chaneljewel

I just don’t care about H and M any longer.  I’m tired of their “game”.  Let them be and have their privacy.  We will see how long the lack of attention lasts.


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> Diana was incredibly in love with him. He needed to marry a virgin. So there.


How in love could she be considering she only had a few dates with him before the wedding. Infatuation with a prince, sure. But immediately upstaging him when she knew how he resented it is not love. 

I think Kate is well aware how she could upstage Will who, like his father, would resent it and she purposely doesn't shine too brightly.


----------



## lalame

I just realized looking at the video again that it is splices of different times during the walk, like one is apparently at a parking area and one is deeper in the woods. Did the photogs follow her throughout the hike, or how were they able to keep filming her head-on as if from the same position...  the different locations seem far from one another. That's getting into Jason Bourne territory for some guys to follow her through the woods, undetected by her and 2 professional guards and dogs, yet always remaining in front of her to capture the head-on.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Jayne1 said:


> How in love could she be considering she only had a few dates with him before the wedding. Infatuation with a prince, sure. But immediately upstaging him when she knew how he resented it is not love.
> 
> I think Kate is well aware how she could upstage Will who, like his father, would resent it *and she purposely doesn't shine too brightly*.


While I understand the BRF and that the ruling monarch and heir apparent's are all important, I just can't condone a system where a woman has to dim her own light that way. It is a _*big*_ sacrifice - of anyone, of any sex, that must do that for a royal partner and institution of the monarchy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> How in love could she be considering she only had a few dates with him before the wedding. Infatuation with a prince, sure. But immediately upstaging him when she knew how he resented it is not love.
> 
> I think Kate is well aware how she could upstage Will who, like his father, would resent it and she purposely doesn't shine too brightly.



To be fair, at 19.... one can easily fall "in love" (or you think it is) when an older man with status and power and some charms has you in his sights. Not to mention I'm sure the pressure behind the scenes from her own family and friends to reel in this great catch. If she really was a virgin, it may have been her first love or anything close to it. And yes it is well documented that she did have emotional troubles and would immaturely lash out at him at times.


----------



## Megs

lalame said:


> I just realized looking at the video again that it is splices of different times during the walk, like one is apparently at a parking area and one is deeper in the woods. Did the photogs follow her throughout the hike, or how were they able to keep filming her head-on as if from the same position...  the different locations seem far from one another. That's getting into Jason Bourne territory for some guys to follow her through the woods, undetected by her and 2 professional guards and dogs, yet always remaining in front of her to capture the head-on.



Ya, somehow the photogs are PERFECTLY situated for every single pic/video. 

I stand behind the fact that Archie looks loose how he's being worn but I bet he is weighing her down a ton! I can't imagine how she can even smile like that. I find carrying a heavy baby to be grueling (Millie wasn't heavy, but Vaughn is), and I am in no way as small as Meghan! I would be in pain carrying Vaughn like that!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

If these weren't posed, why would that security guy be on the phone the whole time?? He knew it was just a pap walk, too.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That aside, for me...her staging it just doesn't add up for me - despite the huge grin.
> 
> There's no benefit for her or Harry in it. None.  She's savvy enough PR-wise to know it too, how it would look.  And the fact that her and Harry are suing about these pictures as well - it means in a court case all the details surrounding these photo's would be called into question in court - if they are staged she is opening herself up to be countersued.  Then the lack of photo's since.



Here’s how it would benefit them.  Their lawsuit is directed towards the media outlets who purchase and publish photos of them taken by paparazzi. As I understand the way the lawsuit is written, it would not go after individual paparazzi for taking the photos. By letting the photographer(s) know where she’d be and staging the scene, Meghan was setting up the bait knowing that some outlet would certainly buy and publish the photos. Then they could bring up their lawsuit again and threaten the British media, which is exactly what happened two days later.


----------



## tiktok

FreeSpirit71 said:


> While I understand the BRF and that the ruling monarch and heir apparent's are all important, I just can't condone a system where a woman has to dim her own light that way. It is a _*big*_ sacrifice - of anyone, of any sex, that must do that for a royal partner and institution of the monarchy.



While I realize that “The Crown” is fictional it does address this exact point, wrt Prince Phillip struggling with playing second fiddle to QE and the monarchy and giving up his own career aspirations. I can totally believe that would be a struggle to any independent person. Since it’s pretty clear to anyone that the royal family is a very rigid institution that comes before any personal desires of its members it’s even more surprising to discover that Meghan only realized she doesn’t want this life once she fully committed to it and before she gave it a real shot.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

tiktok said:


> While I realize that “The Crown” is fictional it does address this exact point, wrt Prince Phillip struggling with playing second fiddle to QE and the monarchy and giving up his own career aspirations. I can totally believe that would be a struggle to any independent person. Since it’s pretty clear to anyone that the royal family is a very rigid institution that comes before any personal desires of its members it’s even more surprising to discover that Meghan only realized she doesn’t want this life once she fully committed to it and before she gave it a real shot.



I think _knowing_ what you are getting into and actually _living it_ day to day are very different.  Being a person who is in anyway different to that lifestyle or hasn't been brought up in it ( ie Diana - emotionally fragile, Fergie - too brash, Meghan - too everything (apparently ) , it would have to rub. 

I have only moving with my husband to a new country that was very different to my own to live and work to compare it to (ie Samoa).  I knew all about Samoa, we were very prepared and even then, it took a very long time to get over the cultural differences etc - and that is without the intense media glare.  Even if Meghan was in it for fame or to elevate herself I'm not certain she fully knew what she was letting herself in for.

But I know my opinion is in the minority here - and I'm ok with that


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Here’s how it would benefit them.  Their lawsuit is directed towards the media outlets who purchase and publish photos of them taken by paparazzi. As I understand the way the lawsuit is written, it would not go after individual paparazzi for taking the photos. By letting the photographer(s) know where she’d be and staging the scene, Meghan was setting up the bait knowing that some outlet would certainly buy and publish the photos. Then they could bring up their lawsuit again and threaten the British media, which is exactly what happened two days later.


Very true. Lawsuit settlements are big money makers. Perchance this is one of her strategies to earn money? Imagine the millions she will make by settling.


----------



## Megs

Lodpah said:


> Very true. Lawsuit settlements are big money makers. Perchance this is one of her strategies to earn money? Imagine the millions she will make by settling.



Maybe I didn't read up on the lawsuit they are filing enough, but what exactly is the reason for them suiting - simply because the photos were taken and published? In the US, you can take photos of people in public places and share them. Not sure if there is any law in Canada that protects them.


----------



## tiktok

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think _knowing_ what you are getting into and actually _living it_ day to day are very different.  Being a person who is in anyway different to that lifestyle or hasn't been brought up in it ( ie Diana - emotionally fragile, Fergie - too brash, Meghan - too everything (apparently ) , it would have to rub.
> 
> I have only moving with my husband to a new country that was very different to my own to live and work to compare it to (ie Samoa).  I knew all about Samoa, we were very prepared and even then, it took a very long time to get over the cultural differences etc - and that is without the intense media glare.  Even if Meghan was in it for fame or to elevate herself I'm not certain she fully knew what she was letting herself in for.
> 
> But I know my opinion is in the minority here - and I'm ok with that



I agree that knowing and living it are two different things (although it seems like knowing was enough to deter at least 2 prior girlfriends with less life experience than Meghan). Hence my comment re not giving it a chance - when you get into such situations you know they’re not going to be easy and you need to give yourself time to adjust, just as you said you did in Samoa. I don’t think Meghan did that.

[Btw difficulties aside, Samoa sounds like a really cool experience ]


----------



## mdcx

I have no issue with MM and Harry wanting to withdraw from being senior royals, even after all the money spent. They could have done so quietly and nicely, without sending shockwaves through the BRF, without coming off as greedy, without all the attention seeking behaviours. It was not necessary to abruptly abandon ship and threaten the BRF in order to get their way. MM seems to delight in being the centre of drama imo, because she certainly could have “retired” into a quiet wealthy life without all of this hubbub, yet chose to go about it in the most high-conflict way possible.
I would guess that conflict will follow her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Megs said:


> Maybe I didn't read up on the lawsuit they are filing enough, but what exactly is the reason for them suiting - simply because the photos were taken and published? In the US, you can take photos of people in public places and share them. Not sure if there is any law in Canada that protects them.


I'm not sure it relates to photos of Meghan actually but in Canada it may pertain to photographing Archie. Normally it's legal but different states and provinces have different laws.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

tiktok said:


> I agree that knowing and living it are two different things (although it seems like knowing was enough to deter at least 2 prior girlfriends with less life experience than Meghan). Hence my comment re not giving it a chance - when you get into such situations you know they’re not going to be easy and you need to give yourself time to adjust, just as you said you did in Samoa. I don’t think Meghan did that.
> 
> [*Btw difficulties aside, Samoa sounds like a really cool experience *]



It was - we ran and renovated a boutique hotel there.  It was a great experience.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think _knowing_ what you are getting into and actually _living it_ day to day are very different.  Being a person who is in anyway different to that lifestyle or hasn't been brought up in it ( ie Diana - emotionally fragile, Fergie - too brash, Meghan - too everything (apparently ) , it would have to rub.



I totally agree with you, and I said earlier that it's a very common situation to not really KNOW until you're in the situation (for any number of situations). Yesterday I watched an old documentary about servants of the BRF and they talked about how the environment is incomprehensible to people who are new to it, and how Diana really struggled. Like for example she used to be admonished for chatting up the servants... she was drawn to people who were kind to her, not mindful about decorum. 

That's why it's so tragic that they had not played it slower. I know I probably would not have fully understood something like that either until I were in it..... but I would have slowly eased in and tried to build my confidence level before making the big commitment. She didn't do enough due diligence, which could be forgiven.... except she also didn't give it a fair go before quitting. :/


----------



## Megs

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not sure it relates to photos of Meghan actually but in Canada it may pertain to photographing Archie. Normally it's legal but different states and provinces have different laws.



Ya, the photo agency we purchase celeb images from for our celebrity bag round ups many times blurs kids faces  on photos, but still takes the photo and sells it.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Megs said:


> Ya, the photo agency we purchase celeb images from for our celebrity bag round ups many times blurs kids faces  on photos, but still takes the photo and sells it.


Just looking it up - it seems like in British Columbia the laws are a bit different.  It's still fairly vague and it's a fine line I think.

https://ambientlight.ca/laws/the-laws/provincial-law/british-columbia/privacy-act/

They may be suing under the Provincial Privacy Act.

They may come up against the counter-argument that it was in the public interest to take those photos which is also outlined.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

MM was given ample opportunity to slow down, get to grips with the role, make an educated decision about joining. She knocked all that back and raced into marriage and title. I hardly think she was naive.


----------



## Straight-Laced

chaneljewel said:


> I just don’t care about H and M any longer.  I’m tired of their “game”.  Let them be and have their privacy.  We will see how long the lack of attention lasts.


I feel the same way about M & H now, what with the cliched celebrity pap walks and insta posts and strategic leaks and all.  It looks and feels like a standard celebrity marriage breakup with one party ‘moving on’,  instead of a split between the Sussexes and the BRF.

But ... if Meghan turns up for a candid special with Ellen anytime soon I won’t be able to resist watching that doe eyed performance


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> To be fair, at 19.... one can easily fall "in love" (or you think it is) when an older man with status and power and some charms has you in his sights. Not to mention I'm sure the pressure behind the scenes from her own family and friends to reel in this great catch. If she really was a virgin, it may have been her first love or anything close to it. And yes it is well documented that she did have emotional troubles and would immaturely lash out at him at times.


Pressure from her family to reel in the great catch? Her older sister had the first chance with Charles and didn't want that life. I doubt she'd pressure Diana to take it up.


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> Pressure from her family to reel in the great catch? Her older sister had the first chance with Charles and didn't want that life. I doubt she'd pressure Diana to take it up.


I read somewhere that Princess Diana's grandmother was close friends with the Queen Mother and the two of them orchestrated them coming together. That's what I meant. But after looking this up more, looks like the grandmother denied it:


----------



## duna

queennadine said:


> My baby was born a couple of weeks before Archie. I got 3 carriers at various showers. I read the instructions for each a ton of times and watched YouTube videos put out by the companies as well as other moms. My husband and I practiced at home, over our bed, in case poor LO should take a tumble.
> 
> I’m certainly not a perfect mom...but at least TRYING to figure out how to safely baby-wear is expected.
> 
> What MM did on that walk did not indicate to me that she had ever worn that carrier, read instructions or warnings, did additional research, or know in any way what she was doing.
> 
> As others have pointed out, baby wearing can be extremely dangerous (as can most things, hello parental anxiety!) to a baby if not worn correctly. If that’s considered “mom shaming” then ok, I’m mom shaming and don’t give AF.
> 
> Also, for us “regular” people: I HAD to learn how to baby wear correctly and safely because I’ve traveled with my LO by myself several times now. Meaning I had her, my purse, carryon, suitcase, car seat, and stroller to deal with...all without help.* And I can promise you that my baby didn’t look like a limp sack of potatoes hanging off of me while I gleefully eyed people’s iPhones hoping the pics turned out well.*



Guess what, I read in some article (can't remember which paper) that it wasn't really Archie she was carrying but a DOLL This really made me laugh!!! But.....with MM you never know......


----------



## duna

A1aGypsy said:


> Does anyone see the baby move in any of the videos? It wouldn’t surprise me at all if that wasn’t Archie. She wanted to combat the complaints that no one had seen her with Archie but didn’t want to risk having him out in public so she went for a pap stroll with a doll. Mission accomplished and Archie isn’t exposed. Except she held the doll like it’s a doll and not a child.  Oops.



LOL, I posted my above post before reading this, too funny


----------



## Straight-Laced

Jktgal said:


> Has this been posted? I am less interested in this couple than their impacts to the royal family - sorry if this is oot here.
> 
> "Prince Charles’s fortune, long shielded from scrutiny by parliamentary indifference and obscure accounting, spilled into public view this month when his younger son, Prince Harry, announced that he and his wife, Meghan, were quitting their royal duties. In trying to prove that they would renounce taxpayer money, Harry and Meghan gave Britons a peek at the shadowy world of ostensibly private finance that bankrolls the family and its mansions, gardens and considerable staff."
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/world/europe/harry-meghan-charles-duchy-of-cornwall.html



Fascinating (and kind of medieval) that the Duchy of C inherits the assets of residents in Cornwall who die without a will or next of kin. That’s how State government works where I live. At least the Duchy distributes most of the proceeds to charities.


----------



## doni

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think _knowing_ what you are getting into and actually _living it_ day to day are very different.  Being a person who is in anyway different to that lifestyle or hasn't been brought up in it ( ie Diana - emotionally fragile, Fergie - too brash, Meghan - too everything (apparently ) , it would have to rub.
> 
> I have only moving with my husband to a new country that was very different to my own to live and work to compare it to (ie Samoa).  I knew all about Samoa, we were very prepared and even then, it took a very long time to get over the cultural differences etc - and that is without the intense media glare.  Even if Meghan was in it for fame or to elevate herself I'm not certain she fully knew what she was letting herself in for.
> 
> But I know my opinion is in the minority here - and I'm ok with that



I think that is a fair comment. It must be an extremely hard environment to adapt to, and that would be the case for all royal houses. I can’t imagine now hard it was for Australian Mary or Argentinian Maxima to integrate into their roles and countries, so radically different from their former lives. Even Letizia of Spain has had a rough ride and she was a Spaniard and a journalist to start with. Teresa of Luxembourg has probably had the hardest ride of all, and she has only come into her own with the passing of her mother in law, who used to refer to her as _la petite cubaine_. Popular lore has it that she unsuccessfully tried to fly the minuscule country a couple of times. Still, no one has heard her complain. Of course, these are all outsiders who marry the heir, so the pressure is different.

In the case of Meghan I think people would have empathized  if she had said, “this is hard”. Everybody understands that. Instead she said: “no one is asking me how I am doing.” She could have said, I am trying British stiff-upper-lip but it doesn’t work for me, or it is so difficult as an American. People would have got it. Instead she said, I have tried British stiff-upper-lip but I believe what it does to you inside is very damaging... She never seemed to address the British people either, but the world in general. I don’t know what idea she had going into it, but my personal impression is not that she underestimated the effort but that she didn’t get _at all _the institutional and representative role of a monarchy and what that implies. That’s only Harry’s fault, as he is the one who should had explained. Personally I believe he is not particularly bright.

Then, for a brother of the heir to leave royal work, to me that is perfectly fine. But the plan they had for leaving I think reflects Meghan’s understanding of the royal role as a special type of celebrity with a potential for global influence. This idea of creating a _brand_, make your own money, set up your own agenda while continuing to support the Queen and represent the country? What they called “a progressive new role” of the monarchy. There is no new roles in a monarchy. The whole and only point of the monarchy is that it is an _old_ role. Then the fact that they tried to impose this concept through communication tactics... the  disregard for their institutional role in a monarchic system, that’s what I take issue with. Again, more Harry’s fault than anything as he is the one who should have known better.


----------



## mdcx

Imo MM’s view of marrying Harry was that it would turn her into a literal pampered princess who could rudely order servants about and never hear the word “no”.

As far as poor Archie, in some respects it would make me feel better that a doll was dangling and banging about in that carrier than an actual un moving baby. I have my concerns about his welfare, I’m sure the BRF do too, probably another reason MM seems to keep him away from them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> What they called “a progressive new role” of the monarchy.



I found the wording so...interesting. "We are carving out a new progressive role for ourselves". Oh, are you? Thank you for letting the Royal family know. Are those two really that dim? It's not them who are calling the shots.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> MM was given ample opportunity to slow down, get to grips with the role, make an educated decision about joining. She knocked all that back and raced into marriage and title. I hardly think she was naive.


She could’ve chosen the option she was offered by the RF of marrying Harry and living a life that didn’t involve royal duty and ceremonial, whilst continuing her career.  That would’ve been a modern, independent and unique approach to joining the monarchy IMO.  But no, she wanted the titles.  I think she wanted them very badly indeed, because we also now know that the Sussex Branding and marketing was being planned at a very early stage of the marriage.  There is nothing about Meghan that is not calculating in my view.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Imo MM’s view of marrying Harry was that it would turn her into a literal pampered princess who could rudely order servants about and never hear the word “no”.
> 
> As far as poor Archie, in some respects it would make me feel better that a doll was dangling and banging about in that carrier than an actual un moving baby. I have my concerns about his welfare, I’m sure the BRF do too, probably another reason MM seems to keep him away from them.


The scene she made at Wimbledon was a good example of that.  Yes you can get people cleared out of seats if you insist on it, and use your security staff to threaten people for (not even) taking your photo - but abusing your privilege offends the RF, the press and the public.  That was a huge error.


----------



## doni

mdcx said:


> As far as poor Archie, in some respects it would make me feel better that a doll was dangling and banging about in that carrier than an actual un moving baby. I have my concerns about his welfare, I’m sure the BRF do too, probably another reason MM seems to keep him away from them.



I’d be surprised the royal family gives a toss about that... Actually, this concern over baby safety is, I find, so American. When I see Meghan happily strolling around with two dogs and a baby half hanging from the carrier I think I am wrong and that she has indeed adapted to some European ways .

When I saw the pics it looks like she is smiling to the camera. But in the video, to me it looks like she is singing to the baby, which is something that makes you automatically smile. Probably she didn’t want to disturb him or the pace of the walk as he slided sideways in the carrier. She is in actress and very camera savvy, if she had set up the whole thing she would have made sure not to smile towards the camera I think...


----------



## limom

doni said:


> I’d be surprised the royal family gives a toss about that... Actually, this concern over baby safety is, I find, so American. When I see Meghan happily strolling around with two dogs and a baby half hanging from the carrier I think I am wrong and that she has indeed adapted to some European ways .
> .


If she was smoking at the same time. It would have been perfectly European. (Which I believe that he does, not sure about her)


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found the wording so...interesting. "We are carving out a new progressive role for ourselves". Oh, are you? Thank you for letting the Royal family know. Are those two really that dim? It's not them who are calling the shots.


Who knew that being progressive and charitable involved such a thirst for financial rewards?
Those two seem lost right now.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The concern trolling about Archie is laughable, and really reaching IMHO.

Because she held him awkwardly? Ok, go off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Surely it’s about time for MM to publish another shot of her charity works on Insta?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe Harry put the kibosh on it.  Her posts were while he was away and busy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> Diana really struggled. Like for example *she used to be admonished for chatting up the servants...* she was drawn to people who were kind to her, not mindful about decorum.
> 
> . :/



Well, at least we didn’t hear of MM getting in trouble for that!


----------



## lulilu

It may be true that MM didn't know what she was getting into, didn't give it enough time, etc. -- why was she having trademarks filed even before the wedding?  That doesn't evidence someone who planned to spend her life with the RF.


----------



## limom

lulilu said:


> It may be true that MM didn't know what she was getting into, didn't give it enough time, etc. -- why was she having trademarks filed even before the wedding?  That doesn't evidence someone who planned to spend her life with the RF.


She wanted to do both. The glam of a royal person and the financial rewards and excitement of being a celebrity.
The Firm put an end to it, imho.
Also, I could not believe how open she was about some controversial issues.
Another element of friction imho.


----------



## Megs

lulilu said:


> It may be true that MM didn't know what she was getting into, didn't give it enough time, etc. -- why was she having trademarks filed even before the wedding?  That doesn't evidence someone who planned to spend her life with the RF.



It could be a combination of her being overly excited and over zealous to really make a name for herself, and surrounding herself with a team that was ready to jump on the opportunities. You hear that celebrities like Taylor Swift and the Kardashians file trademarks for everything under the sun and I'm sure that's at their team's discretion. But clearly she/her team were ready to capitalize on her new royal status.


----------



## bisbee

duna said:


> Guess what, I read in some article (can't remember which paper) that it wasn't really Archie she was carrying but a DOLL This really made me laugh!!! But.....with MM you never know......


Oh, come on!


----------



## Jktgal

Well they could sue and the settlement will go to a charity. So it's sort of like matching a donation. Say lawyers cost them $2million and settlement is $2million and that all goes to charity - it's like they donated $1mio and somebody matching it 100%.


----------



## Megs

bisbee said:


> Oh, come on!



I dunno, I wouldn't even fault her carrying a doll to throw people off if they're taking pics. But I am sure that was Archie, just resting hence he wasn't moving much. Not all kids squirm and move non-stop. Mine do, but so many of my friend's kids don't!


----------



## Mrs.Z

They are also suing over the letter to her Father being published which I just don’t understand.  Thomas sent the letter to the press didn’t he?  Now he may testify.   There are also claims that Markle’s camp leaked contents of the letter to the press which makes her suit really quite murky.  If H & M want to create total chaos they are doing a great job of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Megs said:


> I dunno, I wouldn't even fault her carrying a doll to throw people off if they're taking pics.



Hu? How about just not taking out the kid if you don't want to have his picture taken like a normal person? (I do think claiming it's a doll is crazy, but also going out with an actual doll would be completely nuts).


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Of course, but the higher the millimetre the more the background is compressed. I have a 400mm.
> 
> That is the point of the photos, the higher the mm telephoto the closer the background looks to the subject in focus.  If the photog was far away, shooting with even a 400mm (which is not a jumbo telephoto) the guards would not look like they are in the same plane/distance as Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See how the subject is the same size but the red building in the background seems to move closer, the far right is 210mm imagine it at 400mm   Even the orange cone, which is closer than where the guards would have been, completely disappears at only 200mm. You certainly would not see it at 400, 600, or 1200mm.


Very cool graphic, I learned something - YES ! 
All I really know is that you can photoshop anything if you spend enough time, so, much quicker to  change things with the lens


----------



## bag-mania

I think Meghan will learn from her mistake and she won't be beaming from ear to ear the next time she stages a "paparazzi intrusion on her privacy." Likely her ego wouldn't allow her have a photo taken where she wasn't controlling how she looked. She should have taken a page from her mother who has been photographed by the paparazzi while walking her dogs and seems genuinely annoyed by it.

This is how you should have looked, Meghan.


----------



## green.bee

bag-mania said:


> I think Meghan will learn from her mistake and she won't be beaming from ear to ear the next time she stages a "paparazzi intrusion on her privacy." Likely her ego wouldn't allow her have a photo taken where she wasn't controlling how she looked. She should have taken a page from her mother who has been photographed by the paparazzi while walking her dogs and seems genuinely annoyed by it.
> 
> This is how you should have looked, Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 4650796




even her dogs look annoyed here


----------



## bag-mania

green.bee said:


> even her dogs look annoyed here



Yes, there's 100% pure doggy side-eye going on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

I don't have a strong opinion as to whether Meghan set up the paparazzi photos, and definitely don't believe she was carrying a doll.  (I mean, c'mon people. ) 

But the photographers definitely looked visible to her and I do believe she was smiling for them.  She seems to have a compulsion to prove she's living her best life whenever there's a camera near her.  She can't ever not pose like she's starring in a shampoo commercial.  

It's something that's particularly hard to swallow when she's simultaneously trying to convince us that her life is horrible and she's the most victimized person in the world.


----------



## Megs

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? How about just not taking out the kid if you don't want to have his picture taken like a normal person? (I do think claiming it's a doll is crazy, but also going out with an actual doll would be completely nuts).



I think people in the limelight like her and other major celebrities have to try many tactics to protect their kids if that's really want they desire. I don't know how it would make sense, but I am sure stranger things have happened. But I am not saying she had a doll, I just think she had a baby who was asleep! 

There are extremes when it comes to celebs and their kids is what I mean - either they will go out of their way to not have their kid shown, or they will use their kid to help promote their brand. Celebs use decoys often when trying to elude pics being taken, so that's why I'm saying it wouldn't shock me that a celeb would use a doll, but ya, it's crazy talk too!


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> I think Meghan will learn from her mistake and she won't be beaming from ear to ear the next time she stages a "paparazzi intrusion on her privacy." Likely her ego wouldn't allow her have a photo taken where she wasn't controlling how she looked. She should have taken a page from her mother who has been photographed by the paparazzi while walking her dogs and seems genuinely annoyed by it.
> 
> This is how you should have looked, Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 4650796



Yes, that is for sure the face of someone who spotted the camera, looked toward it, and was annoyed it was happening. Pups and mom, all clearly over it and wishing to be left in peace to go on with their lives!


----------



## cafecreme15

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It was - we ran and renovated a boutique hotel there.  It was a great experience.


What an incredible experience this must have been! I often fantasize about doing this whenever I get fed up with the rat race big city life, but I'm sure it is not as simple or easy as I make it out to be in my mind!


----------



## sdkitty

Megs said:


> Yes, that is for sure the face of someone who spotted the camera, looked toward it, and was annoyed it was happening. Pups and mom, all clearly over it and wishing to be left in peace to go on with their lives!


but didn't someone say her mom scheduled pap walks for pay?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but didn't someone say her mom scheduled pap walks for pay?



I haven't read or heard that. Doria is aware she might get photographed these days because there are paparazzi who know where she lives. But I've yet to see her smiling or looking comfortable in a pap photo.


----------



## tiktok

Train wreck continues...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...assed-Meghans-decision-quit-Royal-Family.html


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I haven't read or heard that. Doria is aware she might get photographed these days because there are paparazzi who know where she lives. But I've yet to see her smiling or looking comfortable in a pap photo.


Yeah I can’t imagine Doria being wired that way. She’s a social worker.... if she had any inclination to be a celebrity or rake in the money she wouldn’t have chosen that route much less continued in it once her daughter started getting famous. She would’ve gone Dina Lohan or similar.

Looks like Meghan inherited all that from dad instead.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> but didn't someone say her mom scheduled pap walks for pay?



sdkitty, yes, have read that too about Doria and I believe it now.

My question regarding the validity of MM’s pap walk of shame- supposedly it has been freezing cold outside there and MM’s pics do not seem to reflect the freezing cold conditions of the weather.

My thoughts about the faulty baby carrier, Archie (?) the doll, the nonchalant security guards - even our driver is more on the ball compared to those two smoking and chatting it up while ferocious paps are hiding in the bushes, and the two dogs going every which way. 

Something is off about this.

Also, one of the reasons, I am, at least, eyeing each and every pic/video as a setup by MM is bc every single PR attempt that is released by her has validity theories two-minutes later.

For example, when she did those charity expeditions a few weeks ago, there were questions raised about Canada’s seaplanes actually not working due to the severe cold or that MM did not actually go to the shelters per her PR team but instead stopped by the executive offices, which is hardly mixing with the general population.

Bottom line is that MM has proved herself so sketchy historically that now her authenticity is nil.


----------



## bag-mania

Aw, I hate to believe that about Doria. I'd hoped Meghan had at least one relative who wasn't motivated by the pursuit of $$$.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Aw, I hate to believe that about Doria. I'd hoped Meghan had at least one relative who wasn't motivated by the pursuit of $$$.


I’ve heard she does it so they leave her alone the majority of the time. I think it’s a good idea - here, I’ll throw you a bone if you don’t bug me all the time.


----------



## Stansy

FreeSpirit71 said:


> While I understand the BRF and that the ruling monarch and heir apparent's are all important, I just can't condone a system where a woman has to dim her own light that way. It is a _*big*_ sacrifice - of anyone, of any sex, that must do that for a royal partner and institution of the monarchy.


It is not a male/female thing but rather a monarch/consort thing: Prince Philipp also leaves the stage for his wife, QEII.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FreeSpirit71 said:


> While I understand the BRF and that the ruling monarch and heir apparent's are all important, I just can't condone a system where a woman has to dim her own light that way. It is a _*big*_ sacrifice - of anyone, of any sex, that must do that for a royal partner and institution of the monarchy.


Agree with you there, and that's exactly why I wouldn't want to marry into it (I also wouldn't marry someone who wore a Nazi uniform).


----------



## lalame

She probably saw it as just a platform instead of a duty. Once I was talking to my boss about how I felt bad for some of our executives since they were getting hammered by the press and on Glassdoor, etc. while still juggling so many sales calls and pressures at the same time. And she said, big bucks = big responsibilities... this is what you work so hard for and if you finally get it, who’s really going to feel bad for you then. Well, so true.


----------



## Megs

sdkitty said:


> but didn't someone say her mom scheduled pap walks for pay?



I didn't hear that, but I think everyone has thoughts and theories on everything. I saw upthread someone say she could schedule to them have them stop hounding her all the time, I would get that. I've heard other celebs say they'll stop and smile for the camera in order to give the papp a photo but then expect to be left alone after. 

Truly, would NEVER want that life!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muchstuff

VigeeLeBrun said:


> sdkitty, yes, have read that too about Doria and I believe it now.
> 
> My question regarding the validity of MM’s pap walk of shame- supposedly it has been freezing cold outside there and MM’s pics do not seem to reflect the freezing cold conditions of the weather.
> 
> My thoughts about the faulty baby carrier, Archie (?) the doll, the nonchalant security guards - even our driver is more on the ball compared to those two smoking and chatting it up while ferocious paps are hiding in the bushes, and the two dogs going every which way.
> 
> Something is off about this.
> 
> Also, one of the reasons, I am, at least, eyeing each and every pic/video as a setup by MM is bc every single PR attempt that is released by her has validity theories two-minutes later.
> 
> For example, when she did those charity expeditions a few weeks ago, there were questions raised about Canada’s seaplanes actually not working due to the severe cold or that MM did not actually go to the shelters per her PR team but instead stopped by the executive offices, which is hardly mixing with the general population.
> 
> Bottom line is that MM has proved herself so sketchy historically that now her authenticity is nil.


Just as a quick comment, temps in the Vancouver area swung up by about ten or so degrees within 48 hours, I went from long underwear to unzipped jackets overnight.


----------



## zen1965

In my opion she should not keep her title. The title came with a job she is not willing to do. Royal life was soul crushing in her opinion. So why cling to a title that represents everything she finds harmful?
She proved herself a hypocrite when she gave that tonedeaf I nterview in Malawi of all countries. And she proved herself a hypocrite all over again when she discarded royal duties while planning continued funding through PC and continued use of her title.


----------



## Flatsy

If they truly wanted to be independent (financially and otherwise) they would try to make honest livings as Harry Mountbatten-Windsor and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor (or Markle if she prefers) and not have anything to do with "Sussex" or "Royal".  

They have stopped referring to themselves incessantly as "Their Royal Highnesses" on instagram but are still laboriously using "Duke of Sussex" and "Duchess of Sussex" 4,000 times in every post.  

They are simultaneously biting the hand that feeds them and trying to cash in on it.


----------



## cafecreme15

zen1965 said:


> In my opion she should not keep her title. The title came with a job she is not willing to do. Royal life was soul crushing in her opinion. So why cling to a title that represents everything she finds harmful?
> She proved herself a hypocrite when she gave that tonedeaf I nterview in Malawi of all countries. And she proved herself a hypocrite all over again when she discarded royal duties while planning continued funding through PC and continued use of her title.


And yet she was so quick to turn down a title for Archie but has no problem keeping hers...


----------



## scarlet555

zen1965 said:


> In my opion she should n*ot keep her title*. The *title came with a job* she is not willing to do. Royal life was soul crushing in her opinion. So why cling to a title that represents everything she finds harmful?
> She proved herself a hypocrite when she gave that interview in Malawi of all countries. And she proved herself a hypocrite all over again when she discarded royal duties while planning continued funding through PC and continued use of her title.


 
I agree.  
I am not criticizing her for wanting to be happy and choosing what's best for her, it's about being a fraud and a hypocrite or acting like a delusional child, when you've been married twice, and now have a child.  If you don't want the job, don't keep the name and don't take money from the family you 'quit'!  So spineless and ridiculous for taking money from people you say are not supportive of you.  It makes no sense.  Upset about the pap?  Don't call them!   Want to sue to pap?  Don't call them!


----------



## scarlet555

Flatsy said:


> If they truly wanted to be independent (financially and otherwise) they would try to make honest livings as Harry Mountbatten-Windsor and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor (or Markle if she prefers) and not have anything to do with "Sussex" or "Royal".
> 
> They have stopped referring to themselves incessantly as "Their Royal Highnesses" on instagram but are still laboriously using "Duke of Sussex" and "Duchess of Sussex" 4,000 times in every post.
> 
> They are simultaneously biting the hand that feeds them and trying to cash in on it.



they should change their Instagram name!  They should not be allowed to keep it.


----------



## bag-mania

So maybe this is part of their pimping themselves plan. Getting organizations to pay them for hypocritical speeches like the one Harry gave last year.

*MEGHAN MARKLE & PRINCE HARRY*
*No Public Funds, No Prob ...$500K EACH JUST TO OPEN OUR TRAPS!!!*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry should have no problem becoming self-sufficient ... because there are huge sums to be made for speaking engagements and book deals.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex would easily command upwards of $500,000 each to speak in front of crowds ... according to folks who help celebs get such deals.

Lots of famous folks get paid huge sums to speak, and Meghan and Harry are obviously in demand. GDA Speakers, whose clients include Nicole Kidman and Diane Keaton, predicts baby Archie's parents could do a lot of business speaking in front of non-profit and volunteer-based organizations, and they'd get more than the standard $200,000 to $300,000 going to most celebs.




Meghan and Harry could make even more by putting their names on a book ... celebrity and sports agent *Darren Prince* tells TMZ, the former Royals could easily bank an $8M to $10M advance on a book deal. The final amount could be even higher because we're told the $8-10 mil figure would essentially be a starting off point.

If Meghan and Harry go down the book publishing road ... we're told they would trigger a massive bidding war, with the winner cutting the biggest check they've likely ever written.

Meghan and Harry's story is one-of-a-kind ... but the real moneymaker, we're told, would be an unprecedented Royal biography or tell-all from an actual Royal. Meghan and Harry would command a fortune, even surpassing Michelle *****'s highly lucrative book.

The numbers stay the same for joint speaking appearances ... we're told Harry and Meghan would collect a cool $1 million as a pair. The prices will go up, we're told if they speak longer and add Q&As and meet and greets.

It's an insane amount of money, but we're told Harry and Meghan wouldn't shock anyone by donating the cash to charity ... after all, it's what most celebs, do ... and this couple is known for its big deeds.

https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/27/megh...ngagements-book-deals-millions-dollars-money/


----------



## Mrs.Z

This man is a train wreck.....

https://pagesix.com/2020/01/27/megh...ges-prince-harry-to-man-up-and-duel-with-him/


----------



## lalame

Mrs.Z said:


> This man is a train wreck.....
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/01/27/megh...ges-prince-harry-to-man-up-and-duel-with-him/



Is he unwell??? Do they pay him per word? Per click? Why does he go to such ridiculous lengths...


----------



## Mrs.Z

lalame said:


> Is he unwell??? Do they pay him per word? Per click? Why does he go to such ridiculous lengths...


He sounds slightly unhinged and frankly at this point the media should stop giving him a platform, he’s an admitted liar.


----------



## queennadine

I honestly can’t imagine who would want to see/hear them speak, and why. What would they talk about? “We had everything handed to us and paid for but, like, that life just wasn’t for us ya know?”

Or are they gonna keep lecturing everyone about their carbon footprint?

I really hope the BRF had them sign NDA’s.


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> I agree.
> I am not criticizing her for wanting to be happy and choosing what's best for her, it's about being a fraud and a hypocrite or acting like a delusional child, when you've been married twice, and now have a child.  If you don't want the job, don't keep the name and don't take money from the family you 'quit'!  So spineless and ridiculous for taking money from people you say are not supportive of you.  It makes no sense.  Upset about the pap?  Don't call them!   Want to sue to pap?  Don't call them!



So very true... you want to live a normal life? Normal people don’t get to keep titles or funds when they not just walk away from a job but put down the institution on their way out. They seem fine with painting it as a miserable existence but still want to enjoy the spoils. Very off putting and entitled.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Is he unwell??? Do they pay him per word? Per click? Why does he go to such ridiculous lengths...



I think they egg him on and then take down every word of his rants. Every article about him gets tons of clicks.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

The DM and Piers Morgan are in Thomas Markle's corner because they are on the same side of the lawsuit Meghan has against them regarding the publication of Meghan's letter.

Whichever side you're on, there is no doubt of the context of the DM/Thomas relationship.

They get major $$ from the clickbait and stories Thomas gives them. And Thomas, of course is getting paid. It's a symbiotic relationship.

His interview came off very stilted to me, as if he was prepped for it and fed answers, particularly regarding issues that effect the DM such as the charges of racist media articles.

Again, that's aside from my personal feelings about those subjects.

Thomas also said he'd give an interview every 30 days until they speak to him. That's blackmail and not the actions of a man truly seeking to connect with his daughter. 

He would sell every, single detail if they met with him IMO.


----------



## lalame

And he also seems to be releasing old home photos and such with each interview! So sick... I get it, you’re mad at your daughter... but who shares private photos of her as a child as a weapon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> She probably saw it as just a platform instead of a duty. Once I was talking to my boss about how I felt bad for some of our executives since they were getting hammered by the press and on Glassdoor, etc. while still juggling so many sales calls and pressures at the same time. And she said, big bucks = big responsibilities... this is what you work so hard for and if you finally get it, who’s really going to feel bad for you then. Well, so true.


HA! .. you are sweet; nowadays .. those executives are highly compensated and it's usually those that work for them that get stuck with all their work in addition to their duties!  I worked from 7am - 9pm every day; oftentimes on weekends as well .. why? .. because I had my work to do plus had to do all the bosses crap.  When I finally drew a line in the sand, boom .. I get "laid off" (although the other superiors made a furor and they called me back 3 weeks later .. but given that I would still have to work for the a-hole, I said "nope, see 'ya"!  That's Corporate America for you nowadays .. ageism and you betcha .. men over women!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> And he also seems to be releasing old home photos and such with each interview! So sick... I get it, you’re mad at your daughter... but *who shares private photos of her as a child as a weapon*.



Someone who thinks his daughter turned on him and he wants to get back at her. He's angry and hurt for sure. Oddly, I think he's trying to make himself look better by getting his story out but he just looks like a pathetic loser.


----------



## daisychainz

I think Thomas can do whatever he wants for whatever money he wants. He owes Meghan no allegiance at this point as she's shown no interest in him and used him to further her own family victim status. I don't see how Thomas being influenced by the media for payment is any different from Meghan being obsessed with media attention and trying to profit from them, too. Like father like daughter. They both want celebrity status and to be in the news. She is certainly more like Thomas than Doria.


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if MM realises that now that she has “consciously uncoupled” from the BRF, the gloves are off, so to speak regards what the media will print about her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mdcx said:


> I wonder if MM realises that now that she has “consciously uncoupled” from the BRF, the gloves are off, so to speak regards what the media will print about her.


That implies the gloves were ever on with her, to begin with.


----------



## mdcx

Interesting comments in DM:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...royal-family-didnt-compare-accustomed-to.html


----------



## Mrs.Z

She really should have watched The Crown, it’s all explained!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Someone who thinks his daughter turned on him and he wants to get back at her. He's angry and hurt for sure. Oddly, I think he's trying to make himself look better by getting his story out but he just looks like a pathetic loser.


I can understand that. And taken in the context of Thomas and Meghan alone I might think this as well.  But Thomas isn't only estranged from Meghan, he's also estranged from Tom Jr and Samantha Grant (ie Markle) though you never see that in the media - Samantha only brings him up in interviews for her own uses.

For all the talk of the broken relationship between Thomas Sr and Meghan there is little to no talk of his fraught relationships with his other children.  Because for sure if Samantha had a recent photo of herself with Mr Markle she would have sold it. Same with Tom Jr.

This is not a good person - and certainly not a good father.

His ex-wife Roslyn (Samantha and Thomas' father) said this about him:

*Thomas Markle’s ex-wife says he was an ‘awful father’*
_Thomas Markle’s ex-wife, Roslyn Markle, has broken her silence about Thomas and she has a lot to say, notably claiming that he was an “awful father” to their children.

Roslyn was Thomas’ first wife; they were married from 1964 to 1975 and he went on to marry Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, in 1979; they split in 1987.

Roslyn explained why Meghan shouldn’t allow her father to be a part of Archie’s life, telling The Mirror: “Knowing Tom as I do, Meghan would be a fool to have him in her life. While he portrays himself as a loving father, he was anything but to our two children during our marriage. It may sound cliched but a leopard does not change its spots.”_

_She added: “Tom was an awful father. What makes him think he’d be a great grandfather to Archie?”
*Source*_


----------



## PatsyCline

CobaltBlu said:


> Of course, but the higher the millimetre the more the background is compressed. I have a 400mm.
> 
> That is the point of the photos, the higher the mm telephoto the closer the background looks to the subject in focus.  If the photog was far away, shooting with even a 400mm (which is not a jumbo telephoto) the guards would not look like they are in the same plane/distance as Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See how the subject is the same size but the red building in the background seems to move closer, the far right is 210mm imagine it at 400mm   Even the orange cone, which is closer than where the guards would have been, completely disappears at only 200mm. You certainly would not see it at 400, 600, or 1200mm.


Great explanation for those who aren’t photographically inclined.


----------



## PatsyCline

Megs said:


> Don't think any of us will ever really know what camera/lens took the pic, but I want @Vlad to weigh in since he's knows so much about photo equipment! And he would give a totally unbiased opinion because he truly has no idea why anyone, especially me, cares about Harry and Meghan


If you look at the metadata of the photograph (most photo software will show it) you can find out that info.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

PatsyCline said:


> If you look at the metadata of the photograph (most photo software will show it) you can find out that info.


That's only true if you have the original photo or the original photo was uploaded without removing it. Media websites strip the metadata before publishing.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I think Thomas can do whatever he wants for whatever money he wants. He owes Meghan no allegiance at this point as she's shown no interest in him and used him to further her own family victim status. I don't see how Thomas being influenced by the media for payment is any different from Meghan being obsessed with media attention and trying to profit from them, too. Like father like daughter. They both want celebrity status and to be in the news. She is certainly more like Thomas than Doria.



True. It's his right to sell his side of the story. It isn't very classy of him to air his family squabble in the press, but then the way Harry and Meghan handled their exit wasn't particularly classy either. The difference being we expected Meghan and Harry to be more media savvy and we don't expect much of anything from Thomas.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I can understand that. And taken in the context of Thomas and Meghan alone I might think this as well.  But Thomas isn't only estranged from Meghan, he's also estranged from Tom Jr and Samantha Grant (ie Markle) though you never see that in the media - Samantha only brings him up in interviews for her own uses.
> 
> For all the talk of the broken relationship between Thomas Sr and Meghan there is little to no talk of his fraught relationships with his other children.  Because for sure if Samantha had a recent photo of herself with Mr Markle she would have sold it. Same with Tom Jr.
> 
> This is not a good person - and certainly not a good father.
> 
> His ex-wife Roslyn (Samantha and Thomas' father) said this about him:
> 
> *Thomas Markle’s ex-wife says he was an ‘awful father’*
> _Thomas Markle’s ex-wife, Roslyn Markle, has broken her silence about Thomas and she has a lot to say, notably claiming that he was an “awful father” to their children.
> 
> Roslyn was Thomas’ first wife; they were married from 1964 to 1975 and he went on to marry Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, in 1979; they split in 1987.
> 
> Roslyn explained why Meghan shouldn’t allow her father to be a part of Archie’s life, telling The Mirror: “Knowing Tom as I do, Meghan would be a fool to have him in her life. While he portrays himself as a loving father, he was anything but to our two children during our marriage. It may sound cliched but a leopard does not change its spots.”_
> 
> _She added: “Tom was an awful father. What makes him think he’d be a great grandfather to Archie?”
> *Source*_



MM and her father? 
Isn’t there a quote about airing dirty linen in public? 
NOT

This saga, now with MM’s dad, Oprah, Ellen, HRC, and every Tom, Dick and Harry jumping in with an opinion - well, I am not sure that this story is heading anywhere but south in the days, weeks and months to come.

Imo, it’s just too energy for a couple that are not worth it. Their shelf life is about to expire hopefully.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I agree the media saturation, from every point of view in this story is _exhausting.
_
There are many more stories that deserve the attention.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I can understand that. And taken in the context of Thomas and Meghan alone I might think this as well.  But Thomas isn't only estranged from Meghan, he's also estranged from Tom Jr and Samantha Grant (ie Markle) though you never see that in the media - Samantha only brings him up in interviews for her own uses.
> 
> For all the talk of the broken relationship between Thomas Sr and Meghan there is little to no talk of his fraught relationships with his other children.  Because for sure if Samantha had a recent photo of herself with Mr Markle she would have sold it. Same with Tom Jr.
> 
> This is not a good person - and certainly not a good father.
> 
> His ex-wife Roslyn (Samantha and Thomas' father) said this about him:
> 
> *Thomas Markle’s ex-wife says he was an ‘awful father’*
> _Thomas Markle’s ex-wife, Roslyn Markle, has broken her silence about Thomas and she has a lot to say, notably claiming that he was an “awful father” to their children.
> 
> Roslyn was Thomas’ first wife; they were married from 1964 to 1975 and he went on to marry Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, in 1979; they split in 1987.
> 
> Roslyn explained why Meghan shouldn’t allow her father to be a part of Archie’s life, telling The Mirror: “Knowing Tom as I do, Meghan would be a fool to have him in her life. While he portrays himself as a loving father, he was anything but to our two children during our marriage. It may sound cliched but a leopard does not change its spots.”_
> 
> _She added: “Tom was an awful father. What makes him think he’d be a great grandfather to Archie?”
> *Source*_



Wow! Didn’t know all that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Not trying to infer anything, but what is the reputation of the DM in U.K.? On a scale of 1 (NYT) to 10 (National Inquirer) in terms of public trust where does it fall?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Not trying to infer anything, but what is the reputation of the DM in U.K.? On a scale of 1 (NYT) to 10 (National Inquirer) in terms of public trust where does it fall?



Definitely closer to the Enquirer but even so, always take any media source with a grain of salt. Some are certainly more credible than others. However, they ALL have an agenda, philosophy, or viewpoint that they push. The days of a newspaper reporting the news and not skewing the story with the writer's opinion are long gone.


----------



## cafecreme15

lalame said:


> Not trying to infer anything, but what is the reputation of the DM in U.K.? On a scale of 1 (NYT) to 10 (National Inquirer) in terms of public trust where does it fall?


Not based in the UK but lived there for a bit. I think the question probably depends on one's political leanings to some extent but I would venture to say probably about an 8? Brits correct me if I'm wrong here!


----------



## Beany

0 terrible paper, full of nasty and hateful gossip.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Meghan and Harry could make even more by putting their names on a book ... celebrity and sports agent *Darren Prince* tells TMZ, the former Royals could easily bank an $8M to $10M advance on a book deal. The final amount could be even higher because we're told the $8-10 mil figure would essentially be a starting off point.
> 
> If Meghan and Harry go down the book publishing road ... we're told they would trigger a massive bidding war, with the winner cutting the biggest check they've likely ever written.
> 
> Meghan and Harry's story is one-of-a-kind ... but the real moneymaker, we're told, would be an unprecedented Royal biography or tell-all from an actual Royal. Meghan and Harry would command a fortune, even surpassing Michelle *****'s highly lucrative book.



I can't believe that Meghan didn't have to sign a NDA before marrying Harry.  Also, I don't think Harry is so very alienated from his grandmother, father and brother that he would participate in ripping down of his family.  He wouldn't hurt the Queen that way, and he is still dependent on Charles for financial support of course.  Sure, they have their own money, something like $35 million combined wealth, but that pales in comparison to the 2 million GBP/year in income that they currently receive from Charles, plus that Charles is likely going to be footing the massive bill for their private security once their publicly funded security ends at some point.  So, bite the hand that feeds them?  Certainly not right away.  It will take them years, if not a decade, to amass the kind of capital they would need to replace that 2+ million GBP in annual income, once you consider taxes and living in 3 different countries.


----------



## marthastoo

sdkitty said:


> but didn't someone say her mom scheduled pap walks for pay?


Was that the same person who said Doria was a convicted felon?


----------



## marthastoo

mdcx said:


> I wonder if MM realises that now that she has “consciously uncoupled” from the BRF, the gloves are off, so to speak regards what the media will print about her.


Yes, because the press has been giving her white glove treatment up to this point.


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> Was that the same person who said Doria was a convicted felon?


IDK and I'm not saying it's true.  I think someone here said something about it.
Most of what we see about them whether positive or negative can be taken with a grain of salt IMO


----------



## mrsinsyder

marthastoo said:


> Was that the same person who said Doria was a convicted felon?


No.


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> Yes, because the press has been giving her white glove treatment up to this point.


maybe not in Britain but here in the US her coverage is very positive (esp on TV)


----------



## Aqua01

zen1965 said:


> In my opion she should not keep her title. The title came with a job she is not willing to do. Royal life was soul crushing in her opinion. So why cling to a title that represents everything she finds harmful?
> She proved herself a hypocrite when she gave that tonedeaf I nterview in Malawi of all countries. And she proved herself a hypocrite all over again when she discarded royal duties while planning continued funding through PC and continued use of her title.





Flatsy said:


> If they truly wanted to be independent (financially and otherwise) they would try to make honest livings as Harry Mountbatten-Windsor and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor (or Markle if she prefers) and not have anything to do with "Sussex" or "Royal".
> 
> They have stopped referring to themselves incessantly as "Their Royal Highnesses" on instagram but are still laboriously using "Duke of Sussex" and "Duchess of Sussex" 4,000 times in every post.
> 
> They are simultaneously biting the hand that feeds them and trying to cash in on it.





One thousand likes from me !!!


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I can understand that. And taken in the context of Thomas and Meghan alone I might think this as well.  But Thomas isn't only estranged from Meghan, he's also estranged from Tom Jr and Samantha Grant (ie Markle) though you never see that in the media - Samantha only brings him up in interviews for her own uses.
> 
> For all the talk of the broken relationship between Thomas Sr and Meghan there is little to no talk of his fraught relationships with his other children.  Because for sure if Samantha had a recent photo of herself with Mr Markle she would have sold it. Same with Tom Jr.
> 
> This is not a good person - and certainly not a good father.
> 
> His ex-wife Roslyn (Samantha and Thomas' father) said this about him:
> 
> *Thomas Markle’s ex-wife says he was an ‘awful father’*
> _Thomas Markle’s ex-wife, Roslyn Markle, has broken her silence about Thomas and she has a lot to say, notably claiming that he was an “awful father” to their children.
> 
> Roslyn was Thomas’ first wife; they were married from 1964 to 1975 and he went on to marry Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, in 1979; they split in 1987.
> 
> Roslyn explained why Meghan shouldn’t allow her father to be a part of Archie’s life, telling The Mirror: “Knowing Tom as I do, Meghan would be a fool to have him in her life. While he portrays himself as a loving father, he was anything but to our two children during our marriage. It may sound cliched but a leopard does not change its spots.”_
> 
> _She added: “Tom was an awful father. What makes him think he’d be a great grandfather to Archie?”
> *Source*_


Hate to say it, and not necessarily defending Thomas' actions, but his ex-wife (1st) did this to make $$$ on this news, so .. I guess the entire family is trying to score some bucks!  That being said, and I continue to say this as very close friends of mine knew the Markles during Meghan's teenage years, Thomas was the one who spoiled her (according to my friends - too much, as in "spoiled rotten"), he was there for all her plays (as the lightening Director) .. and yes, was he sometimes not around ?? .. yup, but such is the life of many in the entertainment business especially when on a very popular TV show.  Bottom line, my friends said that what they saw was a man who clearly loved his daughter and bent over backwards for her (they do not recall ever seeing Doria during this time).  As I've said before, there are always 2 sides to every story, and while I loathe Piers and hate the fact that Thomas is working with him, I do also think to a certain degree, Thomas is pissed off and acting out.  If he is also a narcissist, then is this behavior unexpected? .. nope and sadly, I think Meghan resembles her father a lot more than her mother!


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> Hate to say it, and not necessarily defending Thomas' actions, but his ex-wife (1st) did this to make $$$ on this news, so .. I guess the entire family is trying to score some bucks!  That being said, and I continue to say this as very close friends of mine knew the Markles during Meghan's teenage years, Thomas was the one who spoiled her (according to my friends - too much, as in "spoiled rotten"), he was there for all her plays (as the lightening Director) .. and yes, was he sometimes not around ?? .. yup, but such is the life of many in the entertainment business especially when on a very popular TV show.  Bottom line, my friends said that what they saw was a man who clearly loved his daughter and bent over backwards for her (they do not recall ever seeing Doria during this time).  As I've said before, there are always 2 sides to every story, and while I loathe Piers and hate the fact that Thomas is working with him, I do also think to a certain degree, Thomas is pissed off and acting out.  If he is also a narcissist, then is this behavior unexpected? .. nope and sadly, I think Meghan resembles her father a lot more than her mother!


Besides Samantha Markle who speaks non stop, what is the situation with the other siblings?
I saw an interview with Daria’s side of the family and there were lovely. They were excited but no negative gossip from them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> Besides Samantha Markle who speaks non stop, what is the situation with the other siblings?
> I saw an interview with Daria’s side of the family and there were lovely. They were excited but no negative gossip from them.


Yet they still didn’t get invited to the wedding.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> Yet they still didn’t get invited to the wedding.


I was shocked that she would invite numerous celebrities and no family member  besides Daria and her father.
When Thomas had her heart attack, only Daria was left.
Who made that decision?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Yet they still didn’t get invited to the wedding.


that's what I was thinking


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> I was shocked that she would invite numerous celebrities and no family member  besides Daria and her father.
> When Thomas had her heart attack, only Daria was left.
> Who made that decision?


Are we sure she didn’t invite any other family members or did they just not attend?


----------



## tiktok

Chagall said:


> Are we sure she didn’t invite any other family members or did they just not attend?


Right, because so many people would get an invitation to a royal wedding of a family member and not attend...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Doria’s family didn’t fit in to the little orphan Annie act.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can see Harry getting speaking gigs for awhile, but do her two year in the RF really give her that much credibility as a big time speaker?


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I can see Harry getting speaking gigs for awhile, but do her two year in the RF really give her that much credibility as a big time speaker?


you must not be paying attention...she is a brilliant humanitarian


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> you must not be paying attention...she is a brilliant humanitarian


   !!!


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> I can see Harry getting speaking gigs for awhile, but do her two year in the RF really give her that much credibility as a big time speaker?



Considering even some of the most stupid and/or corrupt people get paid to speak, M would likely get a number of speaking engagements. She IS an expert on the topic of "How to Snag a World Famous Man, Destroy His Relationship with His Family to Make a Huge Fortune--All You Need is Manufactured Pity And Here's How to Act it Out   " #No refunds.


----------



## scarlet555

You guys are haters and jelly...


----------



## muchstuff

scarlet555 said:


> You guys are haters and jelly...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

rose60610 said:


> Considering even some of the most stupid and/or corrupt people get paid to speak, M would likely get a number of speaking engagements. She IS an expert on the topic of "How to Snag a World Famous Man, Destroy His Relationship with His Family to Make a Huge Fortune--All You Need is Manufactured Pity And Here's How to Act it Out   " #No refunds.


Duchess of Destruction, her new moniker


----------



## prettyprincess

scarlet555 said:


> You guys are haters and jelly...


The bitter kind of jelly


----------



## mdcx

scarlet555 said:


> You guys are haters and jelly...


Jealous of MM? Really? She has made an enemy of QEll, her family of origin is a disaster, her life is in a state of chaos and she is all over the Daily Mail. The money and the fact she’s pretty do not make me jealous.There are plenty of pretty rich women with more enviable lives.
And who hates her? I don’t even know her. The behaviour that she has demonstrated thus far has been very poor however.


----------



## mdcx

rose60610 said:


> Considering even some of the most stupid and/or corrupt people get paid to speak, M would likely get a number of speaking engagements. She IS an expert on the topic of "How to Snag a World Famous Man, Destroy His Relationship with His Family to Make a Huge Fortune--All You Need is Manufactured Pity And Here's How to Act it Out   " #No refunds.


I feel she might have a market in the Rachel Hollis #girlboss word-salad space.


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> Jealous of MM? Really? She has made an enemy of QEll, her family of origin is a disaster, her life is in a state of chaos and she is all over the Daily Mail. The money and the fact she’s pretty do not make me jealous.There are plenty of pretty rich women with more enviable lives.
> And who hates her? I don’t even know her. The behaviour that she has demonstrated thus far has been very poor however.



lol... did I sound serious?
I don’t think anyone on this forum hates her or is jealous of her...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

scarlet555 said:


> lol... did I sound serious?
> I don’t think anyone on this forum hates her or is jealous of her...


Maybe use the sarcasm font next time? <s>sarcastic text</s>
I did wonder!


----------



## Chagall

tiktok said:


> Right, because so many people would get an invitation to a royal wedding of a family member and not attend...


Not everyone is enthralled by royalty or MM. Maybe they didn’t want to or couldn’t attend for some reason. Why would she not invite Doria’s side of the family. Makes no sense.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chagall said:


> Not everyone is enthralled by royalty or MM. Maybe they didn’t want to or couldn’t attend for some reason. Why would she not invite Doria’s side of the family. Makes no sense.


I didn't think Doria had a family? She's a single child with dead parents. Who would there be from her side.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> you must not be paying attention...she is a brilliant humanitarian





CeeJay said:


> !!!





rose60610 said:


> Considering even some of the most stupid and/or corrupt people get paid to speak, M would likely get a number of speaking engagements. She IS an expert on the topic of "How to Snag a World Famous Man, Destroy His Relationship with His Family to Make a Huge Fortune--All You Need is Manufactured Pity And Here's How to Act it Out   " #No refunds.



you all schooled me!


----------



## limom

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I didn't think Doria had a family? She's a single child with dead parents. Who would there be from her side.


There were a bunch of cousins.


----------



## mshermes

marthastoo said:


> Was that the same person who said Doria was a convicted felon?


No. Perhaps it was the person who accused others of calling for violence and a hitman.


----------



## mshermes

limom said:


> There were a bunch of cousins.


She has three half siblings.


----------



## limom

mshermes said:


> She has three half siblings.


Even worst, then.


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I didn't think Doria had a family? She's a single child with dead parents. Who would there be from her side.


Even if she was a single parent she must have come from somewhere. If I remember correctly someone up thread said her extended family on Dorias side, cousins etc. we’re interviewed and were excited and ‘lovely’! If that is the case odd they weren’t invited.


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t think it’s odd that cousins weren’t invited to the wedding.  I have cousins who live the next city over and we are not close at all.  Haven’t seen them or spoken in over 15 years.  Besides, don’t you just hate being invited to an out of town wedding for someone you barely know?  They would’ve have to fly to London for it.  No thanks.

I’m not defending her, its just my take on the cousins.

I do think she was trying to put on the orphan Annie act though.  In that one video it said she wanted to walk down the aisle alone but the RF wouldn’t allow it. So they sent Charles down with her.  Wouldn’t it have looked just so forlorn to be walking down the aisle all by herself, with almost no family in attendance?

let me caveat that by saying there isn’t anything wrong with walking down the aisle alone, if that’s what one must do (if you lost your parent, for example).....but it’s just the image she was trying to project by doing that on purpose. It was wise of the RF to stop that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Even if she was a single parent she must have come from somewhere. If I remember correctly someone up thread said her extended family on Dorias side, cousins etc. we’re interviewed and were excited and ‘lovely’! If that is the case odd they weren’t invited.



Right? I've been invited to all my stepdad's nieces' and nephews' weddings (and also attended minus the one time I had pneumonia), and we didn't grow up together nor do we talk outside of family gatherings. We're friendly when we see each other but definitely not close or anything. I can see you skip people you aren't close to when it's a small, intimate wedding, but they basically had a circus.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I don’t think it’s odd that cousins weren’t invited to the wedding.  I have cousins who live the next city over and we are not close at all.  Haven’t seen them or spoken in over 15 years.  Besides, don’t you just hate being invited to an out of town wedding for someone you barely know?  They would’ve have to fly to London for it.  No thanks.
> 
> I’m not defending her, its just my take on the cousins.
> 
> I do think she was trying to put on the orphan Annie act though.  In that one video it said she wanted to walk down the aisle alone but the RF wouldn’t allow it. So they sent Charles down with her.  Wouldn’t it have looked just so forlorn to be walking down the aisle all by herself, with almost no family in attendance?
> 
> let me caveat that by saying there isn’t anything wrong with walking down the aisle alone, if that’s what one must do (if you lost your parent, for example).....but it’s just the image she was trying to project by doing that on purpose. It was wise of the RF to stop that.


I think I'd fly to London for a royal wedding......look at all her new "friends" who made the effort to go


----------



## daisychainz

Annawakes said:


> I don’t think it’s odd that cousins weren’t invited to the wedding.  I have cousins who live the next city over and we are not close at all.  Haven’t seen them or spoken in over 15 years.  Besides, don’t you just hate being invited to an out of town wedding for someone you barely know?  They would’ve have to fly to London for it.  No thanks.
> 
> I’m not defending her, its just my take on the cousins.
> 
> I do think she was trying to put on the orphan Annie act though.  In that one video it said she wanted to walk down the aisle alone but the RF wouldn’t allow it. So they sent Charles down with her.  Wouldn’t it have looked just so forlorn to be walking down the aisle all by herself, with almost no family in attendance?
> 
> let me caveat that by saying there isn’t anything wrong with walking down the aisle alone, if that’s what one must do (if you lost your parent, for example).....but it’s just the image she was trying to project by doing that on purpose. It was wise of the RF to stop that.


I have over 20 cousins, I've met 2 and we haven't spoken in maybe 20 years. Just distance and countries of separation. These are not even first-degree cousins, they would be step-cousins, half-cousins?? Meghan comes from a family that isn't close, so I don't think cousins from her mom's half-siblings would have ever been in her life. Doria seems like a loner, is she close to her half-siblings?? She might be like Meghan and disregard them. They probably hoped for an invitation.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Even if she was a single parent she must have come from somewhere. If I remember correctly someone up thread said her extended family on Dorias side, cousins etc. we’re interviewed and were excited and ‘lovely’! If that is the case odd they weren’t invited.



Doesn't that describe Meghan in a nutshell though? She likely lost touch with her mother's relatives when she reached adulthood because they were of no use to her. Just like she drops friends that are no longer useful. Meghan gets focused on her objectives and she doesn't maintain relationships. You are on a very short list if Meghan is interested in spending time with you. Even the BRF doesn't make the cut.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Annawakes said:


> I don’t think it’s odd that cousins weren’t invited to the wedding.  I have cousins who live the next city over and we are not close at all.  Haven’t seen them or spoken in over 15 years.  Besides, don’t you just hate being invited to an out of town wedding for someone you barely know?  They would’ve have to fly to London for it.  No thanks.
> 
> I’m not defending her, its just my take on the cousins.


I'd be so good with this explanation if she hadn't invited all kinds of celebs she barely knew. This isn't directed at you, I'm just sayin'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Doesn't that describe Meghan in a nutshell though? She likely lost touch with her mother's relatives when she reached adulthood because they were of no use to her. Just like she drops friends that are no longer useful. Meghan gets focused on her objectives and she doesn't maintain relationships. You are on a very short list if Meghan is interested in spending time with you. Even the BRF doesn't make the cut.


You are right it does describe her. She ‘ghosts’ everyone. This furthers our point.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I think I'd fly to London for a royal wedding......look at all her new "friends" who made the effort to go


Yep a lot of new celebrity friends who maybe didn’t know her too well yet attended. Narcs have a habit of constantly befriending new ‘fresh’ people all the time to replace the older friends who have wised up to them.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Yep a lot of new celebrity friends who maybe didn’t know her too well yet attended. Narcs have a habit of constantly befriending new ‘fresh’ people all the time to replace the older friends who have wised up to them.


or whom they no longer have use for


----------



## scarlet555

Haha only TMZ but still....

Not sure why they would be shocked.  You're in or you're out.  Get a grip of reality!

https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/28/prin...le-title-megxit/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange

*PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE'SHOCKED' BY LOSING IMPORTANT ROLE ...We're Not Youth Ambassadors?!?*
*Megxit presented a huge unintended consequence for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ... the loss of one of their beloved titles, Commonwealth Youth Ambassadors.*

*Sources close to the couple tell TMZ ... the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were "shocked" they had to forgo their roles as youth ambassadors to the Commonwealth ... as part of the Megxit deal they struck with Queen Elizabeth, Prince William and Prince Charles.*

*As you know ... Harry and Megan were forced to stop using their Royal titles when they spurned the Crown and moved to Canada. We're told the couple didn't expect their ambassadorships to even be on the table during Megxit negotiations -- but the Queen drew a hard line in the sand, and they had to surrender the role.*

*

*
*TMZ*
*https://twitter.com/TMZ*
*✔@TMZ*

*We're cutting through the noise, inaccuracies and speculation surrounding Meghan and Harry's surprise exit ... Set your DVRs for an all-new one-hour special HARRY AND MEGHAN: THE ROYALS IN CRISIS, airing Wednesday, Jan. 29 (8:00-9:00 PM ET/PT) on @FOXTV*

*https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1221862557163507712*
*

*
*https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1221862557163507712*
*126*
*10:28 AM - Jan 27, 2020*
*Twitter Ads info and privacy*
*https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1221862557163507712*
*55 people are talking about this*
*https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1221862557163507712*





*

 SHARE ON FACEBOOK

 TWEET THIS
*
*RELATED ARTICLES*
*

*
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Would Easily Fetch $500k Each To Speak*
*

*


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Haha only TMZ but still....
> 
> Not sure why they would be shocked.  You're in or you're out.  Get a grip of reality!
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/28/prin...le-title-megxit/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE'SHOCKED' BY LOSING IMPORTANT ROLE ...We're Not Youth Ambassadors?!?*
> *Megxit presented a huge unintended consequence for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ... the loss of one of their beloved titles, Commonwealth Youth Ambassadors.*
> 
> *Sources close to the couple tell TMZ ... the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were "shocked" they had to forgo their roles as youth ambassadors to the Commonwealth ... as part of the Megxit deal they struck with Queen Elizabeth, Prince William and Prince Charles.*
> 
> *As you know ... Harry and Megan were forced to stop using their Royal titles when they spurned the Crown and moved to Canada. We're told the couple didn't expect their ambassadorships to even be on the table during Megxit negotiations -- but the Queen drew a hard line in the sand, and they had to surrender the role.*
> 
> *
> 
> *
> *TMZ*
> *✔@TMZ*
> 
> *We're cutting through the noise, inaccuracies and speculation surrounding Meghan and Harry's surprise exit ... Set your DVRs for an all-new one-hour special HARRY AND MEGHAN: THE ROYALS IN CRISIS, airing Wednesday, Jan. 29 (8:00-9:00 PM ET/PT) on @FOXTV*
> 
> *
> 
> *
> *126*
> *10:28 AM - Jan 27, 2020*
> *Twitter Ads info and privacy*
> *55 people are talking about this*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> SHARE ON FACEBOOK
> 
> 
> TWEET THIS
> *
> *RELATED ARTICLES*
> *
> 
> *
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Would Easily Fetch $500k Each To Speak*
> *
> 
> *


the nerve of those royals


----------



## joyeaux

I was also pretty surprised at the lack of family at the wedding. Doria has such a dignified presence but the optics of her sitting alone seemed intentional they were so glaring.

I get why horrible Samantha, et al who have spoken negatively about her to the press getting snubbed, but what about the uncle that got her the job in Argentina? (Which she plays up almost as much as the dishwashing commercial).

sorry this is Daily Fail but I’m too lazy to dig further at the moment 


> Last night Michael, 78, who had a distinguished 19-year US government career, told The Mail on Sunday how he helped Meghan get a job at the American embassy in Argentina in 2001 when she was just 20 – a position she later boasted about in interviews.
> 
> ‘I knew the ambassador and I asked him if he could help, as her application was a little on the late side,’ he said. ‘That’s why I don’t understand why she has been so indifferent towards me. It’s uncalled for. I helped her out and I didn’t ask for anything in return.
> 
> ‘I’m upset and surprised about not being selected but if they don’t want me there, then I don’t want to go.
> 
> ‘This whole invitation thing has not been played out very well. I never did anything to embarrass Meghan. It seems to me they handled the arrangements poorly.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-left-Meghan-Markles-wedding-guest-list.html


----------



## tiktok

scarlet555 said:


> Haha only TMZ but still....
> 
> Not sure why they would be shocked.  You're in or you're out.  Get a grip of reality!
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/28/prin...le-title-megxit/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE'SHOCKED' BY LOSING IMPORTANT ROLE ...We're Not Youth Ambassadors?!?*



In the Instagram of KensingtonRoyal under their story bookmarks there's a bookmark titled "IWD" which has Meghan passionately speaking about women's education, justice etc. It's so hard to imagine someone involving themselves in such important causes at the highest levels and then caring so much about what some tabloids wrote about them that they abandon this insane platform the royal family gives them to visit a couple of shelters for photo ops. It just doesn't add up.

(Not that I'm discounting visiting shelters by any means, it just seems like several orders of magnitude difference in the impact you can have with the royal platform behind you)


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> In the Instagram of KensingtonRoyal under their story bookmarks there's a bookmark titled "IWD" which has Meghan passionately speaking about women's education, justice etc. It's so hard to imagine someone involving themselves in such important causes at the highest levels and then caring so much about what some tabloids wrote about them that they abandon this insane platform the royal family gives them to visit a couple of shelters for photo ops. It just doesn't add up.
> 
> (Not that I'm discounting visiting shelters by any means, it just seems like several orders of magnitude difference in the impact you can have with the royal platform behind you)



If there is one thing we've learned about Meghan it's that she doesn't like to share attention. She was never going to be top dog in the royal family and she hated the restrictions she had to live under. Wherever she is she needs to be queen bee. Nothing less will do.


----------



## Clearblueskies

scarlet555 said:


> Haha only TMZ but still....
> 
> Not sure why they would be shocked.  You're in or you're out.  Get a grip of reality!
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/28/prin...le-title-megxit/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE'SHOCKED' BY LOSING IMPORTANT ROLE ...We're Not Youth Ambassadors?!?*
> *Megxit presented a huge unintended consequence for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ... the loss of one of their beloved titles, Commonwealth Youth Ambassadors.*
> 
> *Sources close to the couple tell TMZ ... the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were "shocked" they had to forgo their roles as youth ambassadors to the Commonwealth ... as part of the Megxit deal they struck with Queen Elizabeth, Prince William and Prince Charles.*
> 
> *As you know ... Harry and Megan were forced to stop using their Royal titles when they spurned the Crown and moved to Canada. We're told the couple didn't expect their ambassadorships to even be on the table during Megxit negotiations -- but the Queen drew a hard line in the sand, and they had to surrender the role.*
> 
> *
> 
> *
> *TMZ*
> *✔@TMZ*
> 
> *We're cutting through the noise, inaccuracies and speculation surrounding Meghan and Harry's surprise exit ... Set your DVRs for an all-new one-hour special HARRY AND MEGHAN: THE ROYALS IN CRISIS, airing Wednesday, Jan. 29 (8:00-9:00 PM ET/PT) on @FOXTV*
> 
> *
> 
> *
> *126*
> *10:28 AM - Jan 27, 2020*
> *Twitter Ads info and privacy*
> *55 people are talking about this*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> SHARE ON FACEBOOK
> 
> 
> TWEET THIS
> *
> *RELATED ARTICLES*
> *
> 
> *
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Would Easily Fetch $500k Each To Speak*
> *
> 
> *


Poor babies


----------



## mrsinsyder

scarlet555 said:


> Haha only TMZ but still....
> 
> Not sure why they would be shocked.  You're in or you're out.  Get a grip of reality!


I think what happened with Kobe showed us that TMZ knows their stuff..


----------



## Kim O'Meara

bag-mania said:


> Someone who thinks his daughter turned on him and he wants to get back at her. He's angry and hurt for sure. Oddly, I think he's trying to make himself look better by getting his story out but he just looks like a pathetic loser.


I also think the less he says the more he harms the public view of M&H. The more he talks, the more people are likely to think ‘ah, well, makes sense to keep him at arms length’.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

joyeaux said:


> I was also pretty surprised at the lack of family at the wedding. Doria has such a dignified presence but the optics of her sitting alone seemed intentional they were so glaring.
> 
> I get why horrible Samantha, et al who have spoken negatively about her to the press getting snubbed, but what about the uncle that got her the job in Argentina? (Which she plays up almost as much as the dishwashing commercial).
> 
> sorry this is Daily Fail but I’m too lazy to dig further at the moment
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-left-Meghan-Markles-wedding-guest-list.html


Or her adult niece she used to post pictures with often? She's apparently a lawyer and has never said a single word to the press. What's her crime?


----------



## mdcx

MM might want to consider silence as an option:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7937643/Meghan-Markle-not-spoken-Kate-Middleton-Megxit-source-tells-Weekly.html


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> Haha only TMZ but still....
> 
> Not sure why they would be shocked.  You're in or you're out.  Get a grip of reality!
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/01/28/prin...le-title-megxit/?adid=justjaredsocialexchange
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE'SHOCKED' BY LOSING IMPORTANT ROLE ...We're Not Youth Ambassadors?!?*
> *Megxit presented a huge unintended consequence for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ... the loss of one of their beloved titles, Commonwealth Youth Ambassadors.*
> 
> *Sources close to the couple tell TMZ ... the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were "shocked" they had to forgo their roles as youth ambassadors to the Commonwealth ... as part of the Megxit deal they struck with Queen Elizabeth, Prince William and Prince Charles.*
> 
> *As you know ... Harry and Megan were forced to stop using their Royal titles when they spurned the Crown and moved to Canada. We're told the couple didn't expect their ambassadorships to even be on the table during Megxit negotiations -- but the Queen drew a hard line in the sand, and they had to surrender the role.*
> 
> *
> 
> *
> *TMZ*
> *✔@TMZ*
> 
> *We're cutting through the noise, inaccuracies and speculation surrounding Meghan and Harry's surprise exit ... Set your DVRs for an all-new one-hour special HARRY AND MEGHAN: THE ROYALS IN CRISIS, airing Wednesday, Jan. 29 (8:00-9:00 PM ET/PT) on @FOXTV*
> 
> *
> 
> *
> *126*
> *10:28 AM - Jan 27, 2020*
> *Twitter Ads info and privacy*
> *55 people are talking about this*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> SHARE ON FACEBOOK
> 
> 
> TWEET THIS
> *
> *RELATED ARTICLES*
> *
> 
> *
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Would Easily Fetch $500k Each To Speak*
> *
> 
> *



Wouldn't you love to see what they could teach as Youth Ambassadors? Here's how they could mentor youth: "When you face a situation that seems hard or unfair, kids, the best thing you can do is complain and whine about it, then run away and quit as soon as you can. Don't make any effort to try to find an acceptable solution, just QUIT. That's what we do!"


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Wouldn't you love to see what they could teach as Youth Ambassadors? Here's how they could mentor youth: "When you face a situation that seems hard or unfair, kids, the best thing you can do is complain and whine about it, then run away and quit as soon as you can. Don't make any effort to try to find an acceptable solution, just QUIT. That's what we do!"


And don’t forget to ask for your allowance on the way out


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> And don’t forget to ask for your allowance on the way out



Of course. I'll add this on.

"Make sure your rich dad supports you for life because he OWES you for being such a cold ass father. And stop talking to your brother, who you were close to your entire life until your wife set you straight about who you should care about."


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> Not everyone is enthralled by royalty or MM. Maybe they didn’t want to or couldn’t attend for some reason. Why would she not invite Doria’s side of the family. Makes no sense.


It would cost a lot of money if that person didn't have the means.  Air fare, meals, hotel, outfit (!) and gift.

Nevertheless, a one time experience that would be hard to pass up.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mrsinsyder said:


> I think what happened with Kobe showed us that TMZ knows their stuff..


The only thing TMZ and the soulless Harvey Levin have are paid insiders inside law enforcement and medical institutions.

The rest of their stories are trash. You only need to look at the cringeworthy comment section to see who TMZ appeals to. The lowest denominator of muckraking.

The DailyMail stories with "sources" (insert eyeroll) are being used as a pressure tool to try and get H & M to drop the case against them, same with their continued support of Thomas Markle and his veiled threats.


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> I do think she was trying to put on the orphan Annie act though.  In that one video it said she wanted to walk down the aisle alone but the RF wouldn’t allow it. So they sent Charles down with her.  Wouldn’t it have looked just so forlorn to be walking down the aisle all by herself, with almost no family in attendance?


Or, maybe she wasn't envisioning forlorn as much as she was imagining a modern day female... independent, strong and self assured.  No man needed to help her walk down the aisle.

Not the best attitude for marrying into the BRF, but who knows what she was thinking.


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> Or, maybe she wasn't envisioning forlorn as much as she was imagining a modern day female... independent, strong and self assured.  No man needed to help her walk down the aisle.
> 
> Not the best attitude for marrying into the BRF, but who knows what she was thinking.


Modern and independent doesn’t necessarily mean alone in the world. I hope she understands that or else she is in for a both a dramatic and lonely life.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> Modern and independent doesn’t necessarily mean alone in the world. I hope she understands that or else she is in for a both a dramatic and lonely life.


I don't know her but I'm thinking maybe she is more sly and not necessarily very intelligent


----------



## V0N1B2

Annawakes said:


> I do think she was trying to put on the orphan Annie act though.  In that one video it said she wanted to walk down the aisle alone but the RF wouldn’t allow it. So they sent Charles down with her.  Wouldn’t it have looked just so forlorn to be walking down the aisle all by herself, with almost no family in attendance?
> 
> let me caveat that by saying there isn’t anything wrong with walking down the aisle alone, if that’s what one must do (if you lost your parent, for example).....but it’s just the image she was trying to project by doing that on purpose. It was wise of the RF to stop that.


For sure. If she’s such great friends with Ben & Jessica Mulroney, why didn’t she ask Ben to walk her down the aisle. My father has been dead for like 20 years but even if I were to get married at this point in my life, I have two very incredible male friends that would be proud to give me away, so to speak. I’m surprised Meghan had so such friends. 
Well, actually I’m not


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> For sure. If she’s such great friends with Ben & Jessica Mulroney, why didn’t she ask Ben to walk her down the aisle. My father has been dead for like 20 years but even if I were to get married at this point in my life, I have two very incredible male friends that would be proud to give me away, so to speak. I’m surprised Meghan had so such friends.
> Well, actually I’m not


Elton?


----------



## Chagall

joyeaux said:


> I was also pretty surprised at the lack of family at the wedding. Doria has such a dignified presence but the optics of her sitting alone seemed intentional they were so glaring.
> 
> I get why horrible Samantha, et al who have spoken negatively about her to the press getting snubbed, but what about the uncle that got her the job in Argentina? (Which she plays up almost as much as the dishwashing commercial).
> 
> sorry this is Daily Fail but I’m too lazy to dig further at the moment
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-left-Meghan-Markles-wedding-guest-list.html


‘Michael’ is a prime example of being used then discarded. Very sad really.


----------



## mdcx

V0N1B2 said:


> For sure. If she’s such great friends with Ben & Jessica Mulroney, why didn’t she ask Ben to walk her down the aisle. My father has been dead for like 20 years but even if I were to get married at this point in my life, I have two very incredible male friends that would be proud to give me away, so to speak. I’m surprised Meghan had so such friends.
> Well, actually I’m not


I had read/heard that Meghan wanted to walk down completely alone, either to have the spotlight 100% on her, or to further her poor orphan Meghan narrative, but the BRF said no, Charles will walk you. I did wonder if it was to ensure she didn’t do anything inappropriate/cute/attention grabby as she approached Harry.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> I think what happened with Kobe showed us that TMZ knows their stuff..


They do. And they are known for covering celebs nonstop and getting the stories and images. So if Meghan and Harry are now gracing the pages of TMZ, not only will they be followed around for dirt by insiders everywhere, they've become real tabloid junk. TMZ pays doctors, lawyers, police, all the insiders. They get the info., just avoid comments, they get ugly lol


----------



## lalame

I think walking down the aisle alone is getting more in fashion. I know a few people who did it and who had many close friends and people at the wedding... it wasn’t a statement on friendship but on tradition, etc.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> Wouldn't you love to see what they could teach as Youth Ambassadors? Here's how they could mentor youth: "When you face a situation that seems hard or unfair, kids, the best thing you can do is complain and whine about it, then run away and quit as soon as you can. Don't make any effort to try to find an acceptable solution, just QUIT. That's what we do!"


This is also basically the sum of what they have to offer on the paid speaker circuit.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> I had read/heard that Meghan wanted to walk down completely alone, either to have the spotlight 100% on her, or to further her poor orphan Meghan narrative, but the BRF said no, Charles will walk you. I did wonder if it was to ensure she didn’t do anything inappropriate/cute/attention grabby as she approached Harry.


I think if they were worried about her doing something inappropriate or attention grabbing they must have had an inkling even at that early date what she was like.


----------



## jcnc

The more I read about how the royals works and how they needed the royal spouses to be, the more i am convinced that Harry made a BIG mistake not looking me up and marrying me instead


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

jcnc said:


> The more I read about how the royals works and how they needed the royal spouses to be, the more i am convinced that Harry made a BIG mistake not looking me up and marrying me instead



HAHAHAHAHA!


----------



## Megs

So I've been thinking way too much about Harry and Meghan (no really, way too much). 

I rewatched their engagement interview today. For someone who says she wasn't happy, or checked on, or welcomed, and needed privacy, this interview has a lot of foreshadowing for what was to come. 

Firstly, she grips his hand so aggressively the entire interview with both her hands. I am most likely overthinking it (I'm admitting it, I'm spending way too much time on this), but I feel like any body language expert would have a lot to say about that. I never really hold 2 hands, seems weird. 

I know the new narrative is that both Harry and Meghan wanted out of the UK and Royal family, but this interview is not long ago and what they both say could not be further from what has happened. It honestly just makes me sad for Harry, and sad for his family. 

Now I am sure it has been incredibly hard for Meghan to be under the scrutiny she is under. Even if she LOVES the attention, that is attention on an entirely monstrous scale. 

But here are some quotes that really stuck out to me from this interview. And you can tell that Harry meant it, he was genuine, and this is how he felt then. I can only imagine he's hurting right now. He may be saying it's both of them deciding this, but I highly doubt it. Plus, Meghan raved about how wonderful his family has been to her, including Kate who now she won't speak to and has alluded isn't kind. Plus she talks about her dad kindly as well. 

I mean, nothing makes sense.

Harry: "She's an added member of the family, it's another team player as part of the bigger team, and for all of us what we want to do is be able to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work..."

Harry: *"The fact that she... I know she'll be really unbelievably good at the job part of it as well and that's a huge relief to me because she'll be able to deal with everything else that comes with it" *

Meghan: "I think what's been really exciting as we've talked about the transition out of my career into the role is that as you said the causes that have been really important to me I can focus more energy on. Once you have access or a voice people want to listen to, with that comes a lot of responsibility which I take seriously. Now being boots on the ground in the UK, I'm really excited to really get to know more about the communities here. It's just the beginning of...."

Harry: "She's capable of anything and there's a hell of a lot of work that needs doing."

Meghan: "One of the first things we connected on when we met was just the different things we wanted to do in the world and how passionate we are about change."

Meghan: *"His family has been so welcoming. His family has been great over the past year and a half and just getting to know them and progressively helping me feel a part of not just the institution but a part of the family which has been really special."*

Harry: "Katherine has been absolutely wonderful to her". Meghan: "She's been amazing". Harry: "My whole family has come together and been a huge support." Meghan: "They've been amazing."

Ok, that's all for now.


----------



## Vlad

I am watching the HBO show The New Pope and in the third episode of the second season, the new prospective candidate to become pope (Sir Braddox, played by John Malkovich) makes a rather hilarious reference to Meghan Markle. The show runners build her into the script by having Braddox say that Meghan would call him regularly for fashion advice and that it was ludicrous of her and Harry wanting to become influencers while never knowing how to dress themselves to the occasion.

Unsure if this is rooted anyway in reality, I just found this to be a curious reference to real life in an otherwise completely fictitious show.

By the way, it's excellent and well worth a watch.


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> So I've been thinking way too much about Harry and Meghan (no really, way too much).
> 
> I rewatched their engagement interview today. For someone who says she wasn't happy, or checked on, or welcomed, and needed privacy, this interview has a lot of foreshadowing for what was to come.
> 
> Firstly, she grips his hand so aggressively the entire interview with both her hands. I am most likely overthinking it (I'm admitting it, I'm spending way too much time on this), but I feel like any body language expert would have a lot to say about that. I never really hold 2 hands, seems weird.
> 
> I know the new narrative is that both Harry and Meghan wanted out of the UK and Royal family, but this interview is not long ago and what they both say could not be further from what has happened. It honestly just makes me sad for Harry, and sad for his family.
> 
> Now I am sure it has been incredibly hard for Meghan to be under the scrutiny she is under. Even if she LOVES the attention, that is attention on an entirely monstrous scale.
> 
> But here are some quotes that really stuck out to me from this interview. And you can tell that Harry meant it, he was genuine, and this is how he felt then. I can only imagine he's hurting right now. He may be saying it's both of them deciding this, but I highly doubt it. Plus, Meghan raved about how wonderful his family has been to her, including Kate who now she won't speak to and has alluded isn't kind. Plus she talks about her dad kindly as well.
> 
> I mean, nothing makes sense.
> 
> Harry: "She's an added member of the family, it's another team player as part of the bigger team, and for all of us what we want to do is be able to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work..."
> 
> Harry: *"The fact that she... I know she'll be really unbelievably good at the job part of it as well and that's a huge relief to me because she'll be able to deal with everything else that comes with it" *
> 
> Meghan: "I think what's been really exciting as we've talked about the transition out of my career into the role is that as you said the causes that have been really important to me I can focus more energy on. Once you have access or a voice people want to listen to, with that comes a lot of responsibility which I take seriously. Now being boots on the ground in the UK, I'm really excited to really get to know more about the communities here. It's just the beginning of...."
> 
> Harry: "She's capable of anything and there's a hell of a lot of work that needs doing."
> 
> Meghan: "One of the first things we connected on when we met was just the different things we wanted to do in the world and how passionate we are about change."
> 
> Meghan: *"His family has been so welcoming. His family has been great over the past year and a half and just getting to know them and progressively helping me feel a part of not just the institution but a part of the family which has been really special."*
> 
> Harry: "Katherine has been absolutely wonderful to her". Meghan: "She's been amazing". Harry: "My whole family has come together and been a huge support." Meghan: "They've been amazing."
> 
> Ok, that's all for now.



What a difference two years makes. It’s hard not to analyze even the tiniest details of their relationship because, as you say, nothing makes sense. 

I find it myself checking this thread several times a day. It is consuming my life! The dysfunction of these two is that compelling.


----------



## lalame

Megs said:


> So I've been thinking way too much about Harry and Meghan (no really, way too much).
> 
> I rewatched their engagement interview today. For someone who says she wasn't happy, or checked on, or welcomed, and needed privacy, this interview has a lot of foreshadowing for what was to come.
> 
> Firstly, she grips his hand so aggressively the entire interview with both her hands. I am most likely overthinking it (I'm admitting it, I'm spending way too much time on this), but I feel like any body language expert would have a lot to say about that. I never really hold 2 hands, seems weird.
> 
> I know the new narrative is that both Harry and Meghan wanted out of the UK and Royal family, but this interview is not long ago and what they both say could not be further from what has happened. It honestly just makes me sad for Harry, and sad for his family.
> 
> Now I am sure it has been incredibly hard for Meghan to be under the scrutiny she is under. Even if she LOVES the attention, that is attention on an entirely monstrous scale.
> 
> But here are some quotes that really stuck out to me from this interview. And you can tell that Harry meant it, he was genuine, and this is how he felt then. I can only imagine he's hurting right now. He may be saying it's both of them deciding this, but I highly doubt it. Plus, Meghan raved about how wonderful his family has been to her, including Kate who now she won't speak to and has alluded isn't kind. Plus she talks about her dad kindly as well.
> 
> I mean, nothing makes sense.
> 
> Harry: "She's an added member of the family, it's another team player as part of the bigger team, and for all of us what we want to do is be able to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work..."
> 
> Harry: *"The fact that she... I know she'll be really unbelievably good at the job part of it as well and that's a huge relief to me because she'll be able to deal with everything else that comes with it" *
> 
> Meghan: "I think what's been really exciting as we've talked about the transition out of my career into the role is that as you said the causes that have been really important to me I can focus more energy on. Once you have access or a voice people want to listen to, with that comes a lot of responsibility which I take seriously. Now being boots on the ground in the UK, I'm really excited to really get to know more about the communities here. It's just the beginning of...."
> 
> Harry: "She's capable of anything and there's a hell of a lot of work that needs doing."
> 
> Meghan: "One of the first things we connected on when we met was just the different things we wanted to do in the world and how passionate we are about change."
> 
> Meghan: *"His family has been so welcoming. His family has been great over the past year and a half and just getting to know them and progressively helping me feel a part of not just the institution but a part of the family which has been really special."*
> 
> Harry: "Katherine has been absolutely wonderful to her". Meghan: "She's been amazing". Harry: "My whole family has come together and been a huge support." Meghan: "They've been amazing."
> 
> Ok, that's all for now.



When I read her words about the job, it seems like she’s so eager for the “fun” parts (aka focusing on the things she really cares about) and having a “voice people want to listen to”... I get it, she’s not going to spill negativity in an engagement interview but she just seemed focused on that more than the non-work-related hopes and experiences that a normal couple would probably be gushing about. He was probably so thrilled to find someone even open to the job of it, he didn’t have his guard up about someone chasing fame.

Idk, it’s hard not to look back and scrutinize every sign for clues.


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> What a difference two years makes. It’s hard not to analyze even the tiniest details of their relationship because, as you say, nothing makes sense.
> 
> I find it myself checking this thread several times a day. It is consuming my life! The dysfunction of these two is that compelling.



And of course time can change things for everyone. But unlike us mere muggles, she fell in love with a Prince who's brother is in line for the throne. I am sure nothing prepared her for that, but she still shouldn't handle it like I would a bad job. Sorry, just not the same and of course everyone is going to talk about it! 



lalame said:


> When I read her words about the job, it seems like she’s so eager for the “fun” parts (aka focusing on the things she really cares about) and having a “voice people want to listen to”... I get it, she’s not going to spill negativity in an engagement interview but she just seemed focused on that more than the non-work-related hopes and experiences that a normal couple would probably be gushing about. He was probably so thrilled to find someone even open to the job of it, he didn’t have his guard up about someone chasing fame.
> 
> Idk, it’s hard not to look back and scrutinize every sign for clues.



The job part is what really got me - Harry was genuinely happy to find someone who wanted to marry him and was up for what that entailed job wise. You could see it, he was thrilled. I know so many people say don't just blame her, blame him too, but I have a hard time thinking he truly was ready to quit the BRF and what it entailed.


----------



## lalame

Megs said:


> The job part is what really got me - Harry was genuinely happy to find someone who wanted to marry him and was up for what that entailed job wise. You could see it, he was thrilled. I know so many people say don't just blame her, blame him too, but I have a hard time thinking he truly was ready to quit the BRF and what it entailed.



I think he resented and rebelled against royal life, especially as women he loved walked away because of it. But here comes someone he connects with and she doesn’t seem hesitant at all about that lifestyle but actually seems eager and has her own ideas about how to do it even better. He probably felt like, “maybe together we can turn this bad experience into a great one, and she’ll help me come to love this side of my life I’ve always struggled with.” That’s a powerful feeling. 

And then when she ended up hating it too he probably was like “okay I quit, it really was that bad and here’s validation” and was all too eager to now bail with his new accomplice.


----------



## mdcx

I think Meghan knew the right things to say. She may have been thinking “give me the monies, the servants, the couture!” but being the smarty-pants she is, kept that out of the engagement interview! She really isn’t that bad of an actress it seems.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Harry has said and hinted at it repeatedly in the past that he wasn't entirely happy with his role in the royal family nor the press treatment - well before Meghan was on the scene.

As much as some people want to think that Meghan is the harbinger of the Apocalypse - when you read Harry's opinions I would wager some dosh that his opinion on this is actually stronger.


_Back in 2017, Harry spoke to the *Mail on Sunday* about a time when he "wanted out" of the royal family, to instead pursue an "ordinary life."_

_He said that during his time in the armed forces, he felt most at home. "I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry," he explained. That lead him to wonder whether his life was better spent outside the palace gates—but eventually, he decided to stay the course. "I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself," Harry said.

The 35-year-old then explained that he struggled to find meaning in his position in the royal family before his deployment, as he came "very close" to having a breakdown.

"I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself," he said.

"I am determined to have a relatively normal life, and if I am lucky enough to have children, they can have one, too," he added.

*And*

The royal also said in a 2017 interview with Newsweek magazine that he longed to be “something other than Prince Harry.”

At the same time, he knew his role put him in a position of power — and he wanted to “make something of my life.”

“I feel there is just a smallish window when people are interested in me before [William’s children] take over, and I’ve got to make the most of it,” he said.

Source
Source_
_Source_

I highly recommend reading the *Newsweek* article on Harry - it's very insightful.  I've cited it as a source but this is the direct link
https://www.newsweek.com/2017/06/30...diana-death-why-world-needs-magic-627833.html


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> I think he resented and rebelled against royal life, especially as women he loved walked away because of it. But here comes someone he connects with and she doesn’t seem hesitant at all about that lifestyle but actually seems eager and has her own ideas about how to do it even better. He probably felt like, “maybe together we can turn this bad experience into a great one, and she’ll help me come to love this side of my life I’ve always struggled with.” That’s a powerful feeling.
> 
> *And then when she ended up hating it too *he probably was like “okay I quit, it really was that bad and here’s validation” and was all too eager to now bail with his new accomplice.



I see what you're saying, but I don't think Meghan "hated" the job, instead she probably thrived on all the attention and admiration. She had all these copyrights and trademarks early on, knowing they were going to bail from The Crown, but wanted the huge wedding and a little time in the limelight to build their eventual brand. When the press went from slobbering all over them to criticizing them (much as a result of their own calculated doing), it gave them "an excuse" to say "golly we tried but this gig is just too much for us, so we'd like to split while sucking off as much Crown money as we still can at the same time making our own fortune and getting folks woke which Queen Granny wouldn't like. We don't have to answer to her anymore but still demand Crown $$$$$$$." 

Harry may have liked his military service, but to live in his new real world (which will still be luxurious and full of servants) he's going to miss things like maybe having to put his own toothpaste on his own toothbrush and dealing with traffic without roads being closed down for him, he's going to find it a hardship.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> I see what you're saying, but I don't think Meghan "hated" the job, instead she probably thrived on all the attention and admiration. She had all these copyrights and trademarks early on, knowing they were going to bail from The Crown, but wanted the huge wedding and a little time in the limelight to build their eventual brand. When the press went from slobbering all over them to criticizing them (much as a result of their own calculated doing), it gave them "an excuse" to say "golly we tried but this gig is just too much for us, so we'd like to split while sucking off as much Crown money as we still can at the same time making our own fortune and getting folks woke which Queen Granny wouldn't like. We don't have to answer to her anymore but still demand Crown $$$$$$$."
> 
> Harry may have liked his military service, but to live in his new real world (which will still be luxurious and full of servants) he's going to miss things like maybe having to put his own toothpaste on his own toothbrush and dealing with traffic without roads being closed down for him, he's going to find it a hardship.



Yeah, I meant she hated the duties and negative press that came with it. I guarantee you if she WANTED to stay in the role, they'd still both be there now!


----------



## pukasonqo

mdcx said:


> I had read/heard that Meghan wanted to walk down completely alone, either to have the spotlight 100% on her, or to further her poor orphan Meghan narrative, but the BRF said no, Charles will walk you. I did wonder if it was to ensure she didn’t do anything inappropriate/cute/attention grabby as she approached Harry.


Now I have that scene from the Blues Brothers when Jake flips all the way to the altar and back


----------



## Sweettea73

hellosunshine said:


> * No wonder Harry and Meghan are quitting. The rightwing press – and their families – left them no choice *
> 
> View attachment 4635281
> 
> 
> It’s unlikely that Marshall McLuhan was thinking of the British press’s deranged relationship with the royal family when he made his famous declaration that the medium is the message, but the response to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s announcement certainly bore out his theory. “What lies behind Harry and Meghan’s SHOCK decision? We turn to our 18 columnists who have spent the past three years slagging them off every week,” was, in spirit, the headline on most rightwing British newspapers today.
> 
> For truly exclusive insight into Harry and Meghan’s thinking, the Daily Mail need not have looked any further than its website’s front page on Thursday morning: the site ran no fewer than 14 stories tearing into the couple. *The same commentators who sneered at Meghan for being dazzled by royalty now condemn her for wanting to leave it.* Anyone who has been lucky enough to avoid being in an abusive relationship can, excitingly, experience that dynamic for themselves via the media’s reaction to Harry and Meghan. Thursday’s front pages were the newspaper equivalent of an abusive husband expressing shock that his wife has finally left him.
> 
> And, speaking of abusive relationships, there was the inevitable input from Meghan’s eternally available father, Thomas, who has truly shown his capacity for paternal love by regularly denigrating his daughter to the international press. When Meghan sent him a letter in August 2018 telling him he had “broken her heart into a million pieces” by flogging stories about her to the media, the loving father responded by promptly handing said letter, along with other cards and baby photos of his daughter, over to the Mail.
> 
> The Mail’s columnist Piers Morgan maintained the completely sane and normal tone for which he has become known when it comes to Meghan: “Who the f**k do they think they are?” he began and escalated from there. “Nobody tells the Queen what to do,” he huffed, only to decree, sentences later: “Get rid of these whining, ego-crazed, deluded leeches, Ma’am.” Of course, Morgan’s column makes reference to the seismic, nay, legendary time he met Meghan for half a drink, an encounter that in Morgan’s mind has achieved mythic proportions, only to become symbolic to him when afterwards she, bafflingly, decided against continuing their friendship. “She’s an unsavoury, manipulative, social-climbing piece of work,” Morgan raged, displaying his usual capacity for self-awareness. Stats: Morgan has written precisely two columns on Prince Andrew’s friendship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He has written so many on Meghan – who, lest we forget, committed the worse-than-paedophilia crime of not inviting Morgan to her wedding – that my browser crashed.
> 
> The Sussexes’ problems with the British media are as well known as they are long-term, dating back to 2016 when Harry complained about the “racial undertones” in the coverage of his then new relationship with Meghan, to Meghan herself launching a legal action against the Mail last October. But it is not just the British media the Sussexes might want to keep at a distance. Let’s turn to the Windsors, shall we? As satisfying as it might be for some commentators to style Meghan as Princess Yoko who broke up the band, is it really a mystery why Harry, who, at the age of 12, was made to walk behind his mother’s coffin while watched by millions, not even allowed to hold his father’s hand, might decide, as a father now himself, that his family is a bit, well, lacking? And let’s get back to Prince Andrew. There is no doubt that Harry and Meghan’s decision has been in the pipeline for some time, but it feels significant that it comes so soon after his downfall. If Meghan felt she could do without spending her Christmasses alongside a friend of a convicted sex offender, it would take a more pie-eyed royalist than me to condemn her. Then there is Harry, watching what was ostensibly his future unfold right in front of him. Because what options are there, really, for the royal spare, other than to become an irrelevant, embarrassing bore?
> 
> The awkward irony for royalists is that, with this bid for (semi) independence, Harry and Meghan will seem to a younger generation like more appealing royal icons than a million photos of William and Kate mutely waving from a balcony. The Queen is often applauded by royalists for evolving the monarchy – well, welcome to evolution, buttercup. Some are transferring their rage at the Sussexes for not behaving as they would like into huffing about their titles, money and security. It’s quite something to see the same people who believe so deeply in the divine right of the monarch and all her descendants then express outrage at the thought of Harry and Meghan capitalising on their name in the US. Because it is absolutely fine to monetise your apparent God-given divinity, as long as it is done in a Mail-approved context? Because royalty is a totally sensible setup – but celebrity? Outrageous. If you think it is unfair that a pair of Windsors will enjoy the fruits of outrageous wealth simply because of who they are, well, allow me to introduce you to the royal family. And imagine someone in America enjoying the blessings of fame just because of their surname – who can fathom such a concept? (Surely not Morgan, who once married Paris Hilton as a stunt in Las Vegas and, when he interviewed the Kardashians on his CNN show, asked them for advice on how to bump up his Twitter followers.) Harry and Meghan won’t escape scrutiny, let alone criticism, no matter where they go, and they must know that. But that they have chosen this option, one that will result in decades of media bile being dumped on their heads, is not a reflection on them. It is a reflection on everyone else.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-press-and-their-families-left-them-no-choice


YES!!!


----------



## Sweettea73

pixiejenna said:


> So the royal family will punish them for this while fully supporting pedophile prince Andrew? I think that they need to re-evaluate their priorities ASAP. I would think that with the way Prince Charles wants to slim down and modernize the monarchy they’d be thrilled with them leaving on their own accord instead of having to be forced out.



Thank you for this. It's remarkable how people on here expect people they know nothing about to put up with things they wouldn't in there own lives. Start a new job and experience problems with coworkers you reach out to HR. No resolution after months...you resign from the 'firm.' Have toxic family who are vocal about what a horrible person you are (but want to be in your life...ummkay) while you have not spoken a negative word about them? You cut off contact, maintain your distance and peace of mind. Raised within a life of privilege and groomed to work in the family business but only staying out of sense of duty and no personal entanglements (gf/wife). You meet someone who had her own life, work/career, independence, and dedication to


----------



## lalame

Everyone here has been vocal about their disgust about Andrew... and a lot of us have expressed this in the Prince Andrew thread. This one is just focused on Meghan... there is no equivalency between the two, of course. 



Sweettea73 said:


> Thank you for this. It's remarkable how people on here expect people they know nothing about to put up with things they wouldn't in there own lives. Start a new job and experience problems with coworkers you reach out to HR. No resolution after months...you resign from the 'firm.' Have toxic family who are vocal about what a horrible person you are (but want to be in your life...ummkay) while you have not spoken a negative word about them? You cut off contact, maintain your distance and peace of mind. Raised within a life of privilege and groomed to work in the family business but only staying out of sense of duty and no personal entanglements (gf/wife). You meet someone who had her own life, work/career, independence, and dedication to



I actually agree with you about the family bit but I wouldn't characterize what M&H did as just starting a job and quitting with no problems. This is more like... start a new job, quit in an unfortunately short amount of time, and yet still expect to keep reaping the rewards of that job even after you stop working. That's my issue with this situation. I was pulling for them the entire time until that came up. 

Are you non-British? IMO, the "so what" is easily missed for people who aren't British - me included. The BRF isn't just a "job"... it's a British institution that is respected but frankly outdated and only really justifies its existence to taxpayers by carrying out a public duty. It's off putting when people reap the rewards of that public support without carrying out the public duty or by acting in ways that go against what the institution stands for (eg no commercial gain).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sweettea73 said:


> And do you people have a direct link with the royal households to know that "all" the family and Kate rolled out the welcome mat and open arms to MM.



Well, "we" have an engagement interview where they both gush about this very fact, even singling out Kate. Of course that was before Meghan found out she wasn't Kate's equal.


----------



## lalame

And also, no one here HATES her... we're just speculating, opining, and sharing. It's a gossip thread. Of course none of us know what is REALLY going on with Meghan... we're just drawing conclusions based on what we see in the media which is pretty much par for the course of all celebrities.


----------



## zen1965

Sweettea73 said:


> Thank you for this. It's remarkable how people on here expect people they know nothing about to put up with things they wouldn't in there own lives. Start a new job and experience problems with coworkers you reach out to HR. No resolution after months...you resign from the 'firm.' Have toxic family who are vocal about what a horrible person you are (but want to be in your life...ummkay) while you have not spoken a negative word about them? You cut off contact, maintain your distance and peace of mind. Raised within a life of privilege and groomed to work in the family business but only staying out of sense of duty and no personal entanglements (gf/wife). You meet someone who had her own life, work/career, independence, and dedication to


If you resign from your position as, let‘s say, CFO and are unemployed you do not continue to call yourself CFO unless you are fraud. I simply cannot come to terms with the fact that she continues referring to herself as Duchess, a title directly connected to a ever so toxic family and environment in her opinion. She is not a bloodline aristo so she could easily discard that toxic baggage. Yet she seems to cling to that. Strange that...


----------



## mshermes

Sweettea73 said:


> Thank you for this. It's remarkable how people on here expect people they know nothing about to put up with things they wouldn't in there own lives. Start a new job and experience problems with coworkers you reach out to HR. No resolution after months...you resign from the 'firm.' Have toxic family who are vocal about what a horrible person you are (but want to be in your life...ummkay) while you have not spoken a negative word about them? You cut off contact, maintain your distance and peace of mind. Raised within a life of privilege and groomed to work in the family business but only staying out of sense of duty and no personal entanglements (gf/wife). You meet someone who had her own life, work/career, independence, and dedication to


I think what you are missing here is that most people do not care that she/they left....it is how she/they did it. Similar to....it is not what you say but how you say it. The latter being quite important IMO. Something I see sorely missing with some posting here.


----------



## Sweettea73

lalame said:


> Everyone here has been vocal about their disgust about Andrew... and a lot of us have expressed this in the Prince Andrew thread. This one is just focused on Meghan... there is no equivalency between the two, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually agree with you about the family bit but I wouldn't characterize what M&H did as just starting a job and quitting with no problems. This is more like... start a new job, quit in an unfortunately short amount of time, and yet still expect to keep reaping the rewards of that job even after you stop working. That's my issue with this situation. I was pulling for them the entire time until that came up.
> 
> Are you non-British? IMO, the "so what" is easily missed for people who aren't British - me included. The BRF isn't just a "job"... it's a British institution that is respected but frankly outdated and only really justifies its existence to taxpayers by carrying out a public duty. It's off putting when people reap the rewards of that public support without carrying out the public duty or by acting in ways that go against what the institution stands for (eg no commercial gain).


I respect your opinion and yes, I'm American. Reared in a Jamaican household by old school parents who had very British customs (my mom loved telling me how she was married on the same day as Princess Margaret and seeing her when she visited Jamaica on her royal tour). 
My take at this point is the Queen made her decision and H&M have accepted the terms. For now it's done hence my 'so what attitude'. If people are genuinely still this bothered by H&M in light of a pending Brexit, and the ramifications of Andrew's relationship w/a sex trafficker I'm baggled. I understand fully the British monarchy is a respected institution, however, as you stated it is outdated and may already be irrelevant despite public duty (from my understanding this is a much debated topic across the pond). With many in Australia, Canada, Ireland, and Scotland seeking to become a Republic completely independent of the Crown it would seem there are more important concerns.


----------



## Sweettea73

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, "we" have an engagement interview where they both gush about this very fact, even singling out Kate. Of course that was before Meghan found out she wasn't Kate's equal.


Gushing about about how nice someone is upon initial introduction does not translate into consistent behavior. Many are guilty of smiling in someone's face but despising them behind closed doors. Again, NO ONE knows the reality of what actually took place within this household. Also, trying not to pre-judge your response before it's supplied but what pray tell makes Kate superior to Megan (or any other human being)? Please share...


----------



## tiktok

Sweettea73 said:


> Gushing about about how nice someone is upon initial introduction does not translate into consistent behavior. Many are guilty of smiling in someone's face but despising them behind closed doors. Again, NO ONE knows the reality of what actually took place within this household. Also, trying not to pre-judge your response before it's supplied but what pray tell makes Kate superior to Megan (or any other human being)? Please share...



Just the simple fact that she’s going to be queen consort one day. Tip: Saying “trying not to pre-judge” usually comes across as pre-judging. 
Also to another post of yours - it’s a gossip site, we’re debating a clearly unimportant issue in the grand scheme of problems the world is facing. People come to gossip sites to forget about those bigger problems for a bit, not because they’re unaware they exist.


----------



## lalame

There are DEFINITELY more important concerns.  This is just a fun thread for some of us to speculate about news that come up related to H&M - just like you. And believe it or not there is a range of opinions in this thread.

We’re on the purse forum for goodness sakes, of course there are more pressing concerns about the world outside of the gossip corner.  We’re just here to talk about this topic which for one reason or another continues to be pretty fun to talk about.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sweettea73 said:


> Gushing about about how nice someone is upon initial introduction does not translate into consistent behavior.



They did mention the "past 18 months", though. Of course they could all have turned on her, but if that's the case I also wonder: why?



> Also, trying not to pre-judge your response before it's supplied but what pray tell makes Kate superior to Megan (or any other human being)? Please share...



Thank you for not unwrapping the racism card prematurely  This has nothing to do with Kate as a person or even my personal opinion about either woman but everything with rank within the RF. Kate is married to the 2nd in line to the throne, the future Princess of Wales, a future queen consort and mother to a future king. Meghan is not. Regarding rank even baby Louis is ahead of both Harry and Meghan.


----------



## mshermes

Sweettea73 said:


> Gushing about about how nice someone is upon initial introduction does not translate into consistent behavior. Many are guilty of smiling in someone's face but despising them behind closed doors. Again, NO ONE knows the reality of what actually took place within this household. Also, trying not to pre-judge your response before it's supplied but what pray tell makes Kate superior to Megan (or any other human being)? Please share...


With regard to “what pray tell makes Kate superior to Meghan”....definition of superior includes higher in rank.


----------



## Sweettea73

zen1965 said:


> If you resign from your position as, let‘s say, CFO and are unemployed you do not continue to call yourself CFO unless you are fraud. I simply cannot come to terms with the fact that she continues referring to herself as Duchess, a title directly connected to a ever so toxic family and environment in her opinion. She is not a bloodline aristo so she could easily discard that toxic baggage. Yet she seems to cling to that. Strange that...


And I suppose this is my issue. Why wouldn't she call herself Duchess of Sussex when the Queen herself states that is how she should currently be addressed? As well, where is your vitriol for the Duke who is to addressed the same and has been the one actually vocaI about the toxicity of the press? I find it telling on a H & M thread that majority of women on here feel comfortable completely dragging this woman as if her husband hasn't been vocal about leaving the Firm long they met. I'm in 100% agreement that they did not handle this well but place the blame firmly where it belongs...on BOTH husband and wife. Classic misogynoi


QueenofWrapDress said:


> They did mention the "past 18 months", though. Of course they could all have turned on her, but if that's the case I also wonder: why?
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for not unwrapping the racism card prematurely  This has nothing to do with Kate as a person or even my personal opinion about either woman but everything with rank within the RF. Kate is married to the 2nd in line to the throne, the future Princess of Wales, a future queen consort and mother to a future king. Meghan is not. Regarding rank even baby Louis is ahead of both Harry and Meghan.


Thank you for your thoughtful response. I'm aware of race for likely obvious reasons, however, my family background doesn't lend itself to seeing racism behind every corner. Regarding the comment about Kate...again thank you. She's obviously higher ranking along with her precious children but the previous comment about her being "better than" rankled.


----------



## mshermes

Sweettea73 said:


> And I suppose this is my issue. Why wouldn't she call herself Duchess of Sussex when the Queen herself states that is how she should currently be addressed? As well, where is your vitriol for the Duke who is to addressed the same and has been the one actually vocaI about the toxicity of the press? I find it telling on a H & M thread that majority of women on here feel comfortable completely dragging this woman as if her husband hasn't been vocal about leaving the Firm long they met. I'm in 100% agreement that they did not handle this well but place the blame firmly where it belongs...on BOTH husband and wife. Classic misogynoi
> 
> Thank you for your thoughtful response. I'm aware of race for likely obvious reasons, however, my family background doesn't lend itself to seeing racism behind every corner. Regarding the comment about Kate...again thank you. She's obviously higher ranking along with her precious children but the previous comment about her being "better than" rankled.


There was no comment about “better than”.


----------



## lalame

Literally everyone here has expressed opinions about Harry being partly to blame, irresponsible, impatient, spineless, entitled, etc. No one has spared Harry. But I think he’s a bit of a known quantity at this point and Meghan is the new shiny object so she’s getting a little more speculation directed her way, not to mention the near daily drama involving photos of her or her family speaking out or whatever that tends to keep her name in the news more than Harry’s.

Also, what’s wrong with the Queen being okay with them continuing to use their titles is... it shows the utter entitlement and privilege of this family. I don’t agree with her decision. That’s what’s wrong with it. Neither should be allowed to use any public funds, keep their titles, or trade on their royal status without being in the full time job that is supposed to be a requirement for all that. I would say that whether it was H&M, Wills, or anyone else in this situation.


----------



## tiktok

Sweettea73 said:


> And I suppose this is my issue. Why wouldn't she call herself Duchess of Sussex when the Queen herself states that is how she should currently be addressed? As well, where is your vitriol for the Duke who is to addressed the same and has been the one actually vocaI about the toxicity of the press? I find it telling on a H & M thread that majority of women on here feel comfortable completely dragging this woman as if her husband hasn't been vocal about leaving the Firm long they met. I'm in 100% agreement that they did not handle this well but place the blame firmly where it belongs...on BOTH husband and wife. Classic misogynoi
> 
> Thank you for your thoughtful response. I'm aware of race for likely obvious reasons, however, my family background doesn't lend itself to seeing racism behind every corner. Regarding the comment about Kate...again thank you. She's obviously higher ranking along with her precious children but the previous comment about her being "better than" rankled.



It would be so much more pleasant to have a conversation with you if you state opposing opinions or bring new information to the table rather than attack the character of the members here.


----------



## mshermes

tiktok said:


> It would be so much more pleasant to have a conversation with you if you state opposing opinions or bring new information to the table rather than attack the character of the members here.


Absolutely. We have seen this before and the MOD will again most likely make that crystal clear.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sweettea73 said:


> She's obviously higher ranking along with her precious children but the previous comment about her being "better than" rankled.



I didn't say that though. I said "not equal". I mean, most of us find themselves in situations where we are not equal to everyone, be it because of age, of someome having a more senior or junior role in our career etc.


----------



## mdcx

I think MM gets the attention here because she’s the one most obviously trying to monetise everything and she’s the one with endless rumours/instances of her apparently deliberately breaking royal protocol. Harry is not the sharpest knife, so it easy to assume that the ambitious Meghan is behind most of it.


----------



## LibbyRuth

It makes perfect sense to me that the Queen would declare they can still use the Duke and Duchess titles because they matter to her, and because precedent has been set with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor that when one leaves they keep the title. That said, it does not make as much sense to me that Harry and Meghan continue to cling to those titles after claiming that being royal is so oppressive and made their lives so miserable. This is the core of the having the cake and eating it too problem with them right now. If they wanted so desperately to escape their terrible royal lives that they could not wait any longer for their family to come on board, then it seems to me it's something they need to fully walk away from. When they keep using the titles, they are not. A person who felt so oppressed by being royal should be saying "Please call us Meghan and Harry" and not referring to themselves by titles bestowed on them being royalty.


----------



## doni

I personally think all this mess is Harry’s fault and responsibility more than Meghan’s. He is the one who knows how things work, how a monarchic system functions, what he owns to his country as a royal etc. He doesn’t seem to have been able to explain this to her, plus he should have known better before proposing what they did and in that way.

But I can see how people put a lot of the responsibility on Meghan in light of how carefully everything was planned because most think of her as an intelligent, determined woman of character. Whereas Harry, well, he comes across as not being particularly bright, which is not unusual among the inbreed royals. He has his education to make up for that but still. So I don’t think it is misogyny, but rather on the contrary, the perception that she is smarter than he is.



Sweettea73 said:


> Thank you for this. It's remarkable how people on here expect people they know nothing about to put up with things they wouldn't in there own lives. Start a new job and experience problems with coworkers you reach out to HR. No resolution after months...you resign from the 'firm.' Have toxic family who are vocal about what a horrible person you are (but want to be in your life...ummkay) while you have not spoken a negative word about them? You cut off contact, maintain your distance and peace of mind. Raised within a life of privilege and groomed to work in the family business but only staying out of sense of duty and no personal entanglements (gf/wife). You meet someone who had her own life, work/career, independence, and dedication to



But how is the family punishing them? I think they are being very generous. For what we know, they are still receiving 95% of the funds they received for fulfilling their public functions while their find their way. Not bad.

On Andrew, the reason that there is no more debate about him in this or other fora is because for a debate you need differences of opinion. But in this case, finding people who think what he did is perfectly okay and who defend him, well, it is not so easy. So you say he is despicable, I agree he is despicable and at that point the conversation dwindles, there is just not much else to say.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mdcx said:


> I think MM gets the attention here because she’s the one most obviously trying to monetise everything and she’s the one with endless rumours/instances of her apparently deliberately breaking royal protocol.* Harry is not the sharpest knife, *so it easy to assume that the ambitious Meghan is behind most of it.


You know...personally I find this a bit much and comments (and gutter press articles) about Harry's intelligence actually stem from his childhood, aged 12 when he was found to have trouble concentrating in school - Diana and Charles had him tested and he was diagnosed with dyslexia.

Dyslexia doesn't mean you are stupid, only that you learn differently.

But whatever makes Meghan look like the one manipulating him, I guess.

Because a man can't make his own decisions ..obviously 

Source


----------



## Megs

I know I have partaken in this thread a bit lately and am intrigued by it all. I actually think the reason so many have strong opinions is because how different Meghan and Harry's life is from our own. A celebrity usually has gossip threads, where we chat about them and their lives, but it's easier to be far more invested and wanting to understand something like Royalty and part of the Royal family stepping back. In our era, it's unheard of and that makes it something people want to spend time hearing about and wondering about and sharing opinions on it. 

I don't believe that because someone finds fault with Meghan they are tearing her down as a woman. Unfortunately, she married into the most prominent Royal family in the world - with that comes scrutiny. 

We ask that everyone be respectful in their comments. Please don't call members of tPF names, or be combative. We can all voice our opinions respectfully. And remember, we don't all have to agree with one another's opinions either, and that's ok too. 

Like many have said, we are all just speculating. We can read all the articles we want, but we will never truly know what is happening.


----------



## limom

I think discussing celebrities and royalties is actually a healthy way to bond, imho.
Gossip in general gets a bad rep but it can also be constructive.
My two cents.


----------



## queennadine

What I always come back to is the disrespectful way in which MM entered the family. She expected the red carpet treatment and warm, loving embraces from everyone while gleefully talking about how she couldn’t wait to modernize things. 
That’s just wrong, regardless of whether it’s the BRF or any family. I would never have dreamt of behaving that way, or even thinking that, when DH and I married and I became a part of his family. 
In that engagement interview, Harry says there’s a lot of work to do or be done. But MM focused on the causes SHE was passionate about, and the things SHE wanted to focus on.

That’s the difference. For her, it appears to always have been self above duty. That’s the rub.

Say they were not a royal family but a wealthy American family very involved in their community. To have a new person come into their family and essentially disregard their traditions and family history and talk about what everything SHE wants to focus on is rude, dismissive, and cold. 

If family members started treating her differently based on this attitude, I’m not surprised one bit.


----------



## rose60610

queennadine said:


> What I always come back to is the disrespectful way in which MM entered the family. She expected the red carpet treatment and warm, loving embraces from everyone while gleefully talking about how she couldn’t wait to modernize things.
> That’s just wrong, regardless of whether it’s the BRF or any family. I would never have dreamt of behaving that way, or even thinking that, when DH and I married and I became a part of his family.
> In that engagement interview, Harry says there’s a lot of work to do or be done. But MM focused on the causes SHE was passionate about, and the things SHE wanted to focus on.
> 
> That’s the difference. *For her, it appears to always have been self above duty*. That’s the rub.
> 
> Say they were not a royal family but a wealthy American family very involved in their community. To have a new person come into their family and essentially disregard their traditions and family history and talk about what everything SHE wants to focus on is rude, dismissive, and cold.
> 
> If family members started treating her differently based on this attitude, I’m not surprised one bit.



Spot on. It became "Meghan vs 1000 years of entrenched Royal Tradition". When she became criticized for it she goes into hyper pity "poor me" mode. I'd say like a spoiled brat, but she's way beyond spoiled brat, more like sociopath IMO. Her whole background consists of alienating people and family. That isn't made up.


----------



## LibbyRuth

queennadine said:


> What I always come back to is the disrespectful way in which MM entered the family. She expected the red carpet treatment and warm, loving embraces from everyone while gleefully talking about how she couldn’t wait to modernize things.
> That’s just wrong, regardless of whether it’s the BRF or any family. I would never have dreamt of behaving that way, or even thinking that, when DH and I married and I became a part of his family.
> In that engagement interview, Harry says there’s a lot of work to do or be done. But MM focused on the causes SHE was passionate about, and the things SHE wanted to focus on.
> 
> That’s the difference. For her, it appears to always have been self above duty. That’s the rub.
> 
> Say they were not a royal family but a wealthy American family very involved in their community. To have a new person come into their family and essentially disregard their traditions and family history and talk about what everything SHE wants to focus on is rude, dismissive, and cold.
> 
> If family members started treating her differently based on this attitude, I’m not surprised one bit.


How much of the talk about her modernizing the royal family was from her, and how much was thrust on her from the press?  At the time they got married, I remember a lot of that chatter, but I don't recall it coming from Meghan. Rather, I recall a lot of royal watchers talking about how the Queen had dropped so many traditions to give her blessing to their marriage - the biggest being ignoring that she had been divorced - and that as a result Harry and Meghan had a chance to change things.


----------



## mia55

What’s surprising is since Harry joined her in Canada there are no paparazzi pics of her driving around to pick up friends or walking Archie/dogs together. It’s not like they’re cooped up inside the house all the time, did all the press suddenly started respecting their privacy? Or someone is not getting a chance to tip the photographers about her schedule ??


----------



## Sharont2305

Agree, I think it's the latter.


----------



## doni

LibbyRuth said:


> How much of the talk about her modernizing the royal family was from her, and how much was thrust on her from the press?  At the time they got married, I remember a lot of that chatter, but I don't recall it coming from Meghan. Rather, I recall a lot of royal watchers talking about how the Queen had dropped so many traditions to give her blessing to their marriage - the biggest being ignoring that she had been divorced - and that as a result Harry and Meghan had a chance to change things.


Prince Charles heir to the throne, is married to a divorced woman.
Before that Princess Marguerite, the Queen’s only sister, had married a divorced man.
Princess Anne, the Queen’s daughter, divorced herself and married a second time.
So the fact that Meghan was divorced could not be such a big deal at this stage... even if I could easily believe reports that the Queen flinched a little that she was to marry in a long dress and a veil. But okay, that is more visuals than anything else.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mia55 said:


> What’s surprising is since Harry joined her in Canada there are no paparazzi pics of her driving around to pick up friends or walking Archie/dogs together. It’s not like they’re cooped up inside the house all the time, did all the press suddenly started respecting their privacy? Or someone is not getting a chance to tip the photographers about her schedule ??


How WEIRD!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> Prince Charles heir to the throne, is married to a divorced woman.



Yes, but because Camilla was divorced they could only have a civil ceremony. If I remember correctly MM had a grand church wedding.

That said, maybe it's a bit like with the Queen of Spain...as she never married in a church during her first marriage it didn't matter. MM converted (what a feminist thing to do to appease your husband's religion, eh? I don't have a problem with it in general to keep the family peace, but MM has a ton of opinions she is very vocal about, especially about being an independent woman, then turns around and does something completely opposite), so maybe her first marriage didn't count or maybe they didn't have a religious ceremony to begin with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but because Camilla was divorced they could only have a civil ceremony. If I remember correctly MM had a grand church wedding.
> 
> That said, maybe it's a bit like with the Queen of Spain...as she never married in a church during her first marriage it didn't matter. MM converted (what a feminist thing to do to appease your husband's religion, eh? I don't have a problem with it in general to keep the family peace, but MM has a ton of opinions she is very vocal about, especially about being an independent woman, then turns around and does something completely opposite), so maybe her first marriage didn't count or maybe they didn't have a religious ceremony to begin with.


Yes, if you haven’t married in church before, you can marry in church after your divorce.
Princess Anne’s second marriage was also in Church, but Church of Scotland (first was Church of England).
In any event, I believe the Church of England now also allows for second marriages?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> Yes, if you haven’t married in church before, you can marry in church after your divorce.
> In any event, I believe the Anglican Church now also allows for a second marriage in church?



I thought only if your former spouse is dead? But I'll admit I am not familiar with all the rules.


----------



## doni

-


----------



## duna

doni said:


> Prince Charles heir to the throne, is married to a divorced woman.
> *Before that Princess Marguerite, the Queen’s only sister, had married a divorced man.*
> Princess Anne, the Queen’s daughter, divorced herself and married a second time.
> So the fact that Meghan was divorced could not be such a big deal at this stage... even if I could easily believe reports that the Queen flinched a little that she was to marry in a long dress and a veil. But okay, that is more visuals than anything else.



*Princess Margaret* *did not marry *a divorced man: she was in love with Peter Townsend who WAS divorced and the RF didn't approve, so she married Tony Armstrong Jones, who was made Earl of Snowdon by the Queen after their marriage.


----------



## doni

duna said:


> *Princess Margaret* *did not marry *a divorced man: she was in love with Peter Townsend who WAS divorced and the RF didn't approve, so she married Tony Armstrong Jones, who was made Earl of Snowdon by the Queen after their marriage.


Sorry it is true, she didn’t marry him!


----------



## Sweettea73

FreeSpirit71 said:


> You know...personally I find this a bit much and comments (and gutter press articles) about Harry's intelligence actually stem from his childhood, aged 12 when he was found to have trouble concentrating in school - Diana and Charles had him tested and he was diagnosed with dyslexia.
> 
> Dyslexia doesn't mean you are stupid, only that you learn differently.
> 
> But whatever makes Meghan look like the one manipulating him, I guess.
> 
> Because a man can't make his own decisions ..obviously
> 
> Source


Yes! This is what I've been trying to say but as you said it's easier to target MM I suppose. She's the grand puppet master bent on world domination it seems.


----------



## sdkitty

Sweettea73 said:


> Gushing about about how nice someone is upon initial introduction does not translate into consistent behavior. Many are guilty of smiling in someone's face but despising them behind closed doors. Again, NO ONE knows the reality of what actually took place within this household. Also, trying not to pre-judge your response before it's supplied but what pray tell makes Kate superior to Megan (or any other human being)? Please share...


She behaves better....doesn't complain about the hardships of her privileged life


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> How WEIRD!


Perhaps H told M that the pap walks were very not cool and these have to stop. Take walks on the grounds where we are staying.

Or/and maybe their security folks asked him just what level of protection do you expect with the paps--M took the dogs and baby to a public park and, well ...? 

And/or maybe H also pointed out that driving to the airport to pick up a Pilates instructor (!) with security following behind is not playing well to the Canadian citizens, who have made it very clear that they do NOT want to support said security but might have to so lets keep things low key.

And/or maybe Charles pointed these things out because he is supporting them and is does not want any more stuff blowing up in his face.

These are all just conjectures on my part.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Every time Meghan said she was ready to “hit the ground running” I thought that’s probably a big mistake.  It’s just the kind of institution that lends itself to careful observation, listening and learning instead of diving right in.


----------



## bag-mania

Sweettea73 said:


> Yes! This is what I've been trying to say but as you said it's easier to target MM I suppose. She's the grand puppet master bent on world domination it seems.



A public figure like Harry has been kind of a known quantity for his entire life. When his behavior seemingly abruptly changed in the past several months, people are going to speculate about why that is. What is different? All roads lead to Meghan.

World domination, certainly not. Shameless self-promotion, yes please!


----------



## queennadine

^ That’s the other thing: she went out of her way to constantly talk about how ready she was and couldn’t wait to get started and this is how they bonded and fell in love! 
She was clearly trying to convince everyone this was the case. Methinks some humility would have gone a long way...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


> You know...personally I find this a bit much and comments (and gutter press articles) about Harry's intelligence actually stem from his childhood, aged 12 when he was found to have trouble concentrating in school - Diana and Charles had him tested and he was diagnosed with dyslexia.
> 
> Dyslexia doesn't mean you are stupid, only that you learn differently.
> 
> But whatever makes Meghan look like the one manipulating him, I guess.
> 
> Because a man can't make his own decisions ..obviously
> 
> Source



I personally don't think she plays him because his IQ is so low or something. I think it's an unholy marriage between him being crazy about her and her knowing exactly where his weaknesses lie and how to use them to her advantage.


----------



## Mrs.Z

This is also what I believe makes the whole “saga” so interesting, they were 1000% in and ready ....then things began to shift.....turn a bit sour....then BOOM....we’re out! In the most spectacular fashion.... we have even fled the country!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Well this is disgusting.

On the same day Kate took photographs of holocaust survivors, Meg's best friend Jessica Mulroney posted:






But keep telling us how poor Meghan is so bullied and innocent.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Well this is disgusting.
> 
> On the same day Kate took photographs of holocaust survivors, Meg's best friend Jessica Mulroney posted:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But keep telling us how poor Meghan is so bullied and innocent.


Just saw this article, I really can’t imagine she directed this at Kate.....but....why does Jessica need to tell everyone else how to live??? Nothing wrong with pretty pictures ....it’s Instagram, it’s not that deep. (Also what about Jessica’s bikini pics?  Are they making the world a better place???)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

Sweettea73 said:


> And I suppose this is my issue. Why wouldn't she call herself Duchess of Sussex when the Queen herself states that is how she should currently be addressed? As well, where is your vitriol for the Duke who is to addressed the same and has been the one actually vocaI about the toxicity of the press? I find it telling on a H & M thread that majority of women on here feel comfortable completely dragging this woman as if her husband hasn't been vocal about leaving the Firm long they met. I'm in 100% agreement that they did not handle this well but place the blame firmly where it belongs...on BOTH husband and wife. Classic misogynoi



It is my understanding that Harry did exclaim that he was merely existing and that stiff upper-lipping was soul crushing. Anyway, I am all for it that he renounces the Dukedom. However, he is a bloodline aristrocrat, and he always will be - nevermind whether he uses a title or not. This is how the system works whether you like it or not.

BTW, calling my line of thinking as "classic misogynoi (sic)" is totally uncalled for, and name calling is not appropriate in this forum. As a new member it always pays off to tread lightly. If you do not appreciate the opinion of certain member, put them on ignore instead hurling insults at them. My 2 cents.


----------



## queennadine

I was just reading through their engagement interview transcript again and what struck me this time was Harry saying: “...encourage others in the younger generation to be able to see the world in the correct sense...”

WTH does that mean? Ugh. I can’t with these two.


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> I was just reading through their engagement interview transcript again and what struck me this time was Harry saying: “...encourage others in the younger generation to be able to see the world in the correct sense...”
> 
> WTH does that mean? Ugh. I can’t with these two.


wonder if this was scripted or spontaneous.....seems somewhat arrogant


----------



## CobaltBlu

Not sure how to frame this, but I have been thinking about this for a while...
I have not been interested in these two beyond her fabulous tiara a the wedding, and they are not covered much where I live.

I am here mostly to read @V0N1B2's posts, forget about the insect apocalypse, and lend a hand to the mods, LOL.

When H&M bugged out, I read a timeline on a magazine site just to catch up, because seriously I did not remember much about them, and to be 100% honest I did not even remember she was biracial. I dont even know if I ever knew.  Or if I did know, I forgot. I have not been living in the states and my life has been really focused on other things since late 2015. Where I am, no magazines at the checkout etc.... I knew they had a baby, but I didn't even know how woke she is!!

Anyway, I pretty much missed it all except for the wedding photos. So, on the timeline (dont recall which one), I read that that awful Princess Michael of Kent wore a pretty controversial and IMHO shockingly inappropriate brooch to an event early on in Meghan's introduction to the Firm.

I was pretty gobsmacked when I saw it, for the tone-deafness of it all -- and to be honest, even though I give Meghan the side-eye about 89% of the time, when I thought about how she could have/must have felt when she saw it, I wonder if  maybe it was either the beginning of the end, or the last straw. It certainly would have been for me had I been in her shoes.  I would have imagined my life as a simmering nightmare with people like that in it. I am from SoCal like she is and i am mellowed with age but man, I would have had a hard time keeping my mouth shut.


Here is a link to the story and the brooch, I am not putting a photo in the thread.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a14481097/princess-michael-of-kent-racist-brooch/

I guess my point is, whatever you may think of Meghan, to imagine her seeing that; I would be mighty offended, but also absolutely shocked that anyone could be so incredibly lacking in self awareness as to wear that to a luncheon where I was a guest of honor. Seems inexcusable to me.  And I am not that easily offended to be honest. But when I saw it I thought, how could you ever feel 100% comfortable in that sphere. And then the other things the press said, well....I understand wanting to put some distance between myself and that. How they did it, that is a whole other thing.

Sometimes little things are really not little at all, and Meghan is old enough to know this. I was pretty much over Harry when I saw him dressed up as a Nazi, even though I felt differently when he was a young boy and I certainly remember when his mother was killed and hoped he would be OK. But she married him, so sure, there is good reason to discount my theory, or maybe she has a sliding scale, who knows.

I know she has done a lot of things since that luncheon, and I do believe that pap walk was staged.... and I am not excusing any of it, but just wanted to say that when I saw Princess Michael, I thought, yea, I would probably be plotting an escape pronto (though apparently she was plotting it earlier....)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh I don't think for a minute poor old Michael was tone-deaf and didn't know exactly what she was doing. This was honestly the one time I felt bad for Meghan because that was so outrageously hostile. Then again, so what? Don't we all have that embarrassing uncle that makes any family gathering weird with his racist or sexist jokes or his inability to decide how much wine is enough? I honestly doubt Michael (or is it Marie Christine when skipping the Princess?) with her Nazi dad is the norm in the RF and also she's not that important that she would have been in Meghan's face all the time.


----------



## Mrs.Z

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I don't think for a minute poor old Michael was tone-deaf and didn't know exactly what she was doing. This was honestly the one time I felt bad for Meghan because that was so outrageously hostile. Then again, so what? Don't we all have that embarrassing uncle that makes any family gathering weird with his racist or sexist jokes or his inability to decide how much wine is enough? I honestly doubt Michael (or is it Marie Christine when skipping the Princess?) with her Nazi dad is the norm in the RF and also she's not that important that she would have been in Meghan's face all the time.


Yes, no excuse for it but Princess Michael is pretty much a known racist elitist that no one likes anyway...right?


----------



## CobaltBlu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I don't think for a minute poor old Michael was tone-deaf and didn't know exactly what she was doing. This was honestly the one time I felt bad for Meghan because that was so outrageously hostile. Then again, so what? Don't we all have that embarrassing uncle that makes any family gathering weird with his racist or sexist jokes or his inability to decide how much wine is enough? I honestly doubt Michael (or is it Marie Christine when skipping the Princess?) with her Nazi dad is the norm in the RF and also she's not that important that she would have been in Meghan's face all the time.



Yes, I dont think she was tone deaf either, actually. And I know she isnt around that much....maybe it shocked me so I figured it must have been a big deal to Meghan.  I just thought it was jawdroppingly awful on every possible level.


----------



## queennadine

^ Not excusing those actions one bit, but a mentally stable and properly functioning adult doesn’t plan an exit strategy from an entire family based off of the behavior of ONE relative.


----------



## mshermes

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes, I dont think she was tone deaf either, actually. And I know she isnt around that much....maybe it shocked me so I figured it must have been a big deal to Meghan.  I just thought it was jawdroppingly awful on every possible level.


I agree. That was not a nice thing to do; however, I kind of doubt that had much impact on this final decision. I have read so much about how strong MM is. Personally, things like that make me stronger to push forward rather than retreat.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes, I dont think she was tone deaf either, actually. And I know she isnt around that much....maybe it shocked me so I figured it must have been a big deal to Meghan.  I just thought it was jawdroppingly awful on every possible level.



As an American would Meghan even know what that brooch was? I wouldn't have known. Now when the story came out she would know, but I don't think a rude "message" from Michael made them throw it all away. That's giving Michael too much power over their lives.


----------



## queennadine

^ Agreed! People like that motivate me to rise above and prove them wrong.


----------



## CobaltBlu

this is weird...when I was thinking about that luncheon, I suddonly randomly remembered, the day my ex-husbands grandmother visited us after my daughter was born. 

She was 80+ at the time. I was exhausted, really trying to hold it together with a newborn, feeling a mess....and at some point in the (unannounced) visit, I saw my cordless phone and walked over to pick it up and put it in the cradle. this was 1992.  

And out of seemingly (but apparently not) nowhere, she said "Everything is so fancy with you isnt it?"  (I am really not that fancy, I did not even have a tiara on!) 

How it struck me at that moment was so hurtful, I literally never got over it, and I didn't get over his parents whole family just sitting there looking at me balancing the baby and the stupid phone. Another day, another time, I would not give a rats over a comment like that. But that day, wow.  It was 27 years ago.... weird....  (and, er, thanks Meghan and PF hahahah)

I dont want to defend Meghan, but somehow the idea of her at that luncheon brought that memory back so vividly. That's what got me thinking about it....


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> As an American would Meghan even know what that brooch was? I wouldn't have known. Now when the story came out she would know, but I don't think a rude "message" from Michael made them throw it all away. That's giving Michael too much power over their lives.



i was thinking it was pivotal, not THE incident, but tipping point or something like that....


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> i was thinking it was pivotal, not THE incident, but tipping point or something like that....



I think we would have heard about it if that were the case. They have complained loudly about the media being mean. If they had an issue with the Queen's cousin I'm sure it would have been mentioned. I doubt Michael even appears on their radar.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> this is weird...when I was thinking about that luncheon, I suddonly randomly remembered, the day my ex-husbands grandmother visited us after my daughter was born.
> 
> She was 80+ at the time. I was exhausted, really trying to hold it together with a newborn, feeling a mess....and at some point in the (unannounced) visit, I saw my cordless phone and walked over to pick it up and put it in the cradle. this was 1992.
> 
> And out of seemingly (but apparently not) nowhere, she said "Everything is so fancy with you isnt it?"  (I am really not that fancy, I did not even have a tiara on!)
> 
> How it struck me at that moment was so hurtful, I literally never got over it, and I didn't get over his parents whole family just sitting there looking at me balancing the baby and the stupid phone. Another day, another time, I would not give a rats over a comment like that. But that day, wow.  It was 27 years ago.... weird....  (and, er, thanks Meghan and PF hahahah)
> 
> I dont want to defend Meghan, but somehow the idea of her at that luncheon brought that memory back so vividly. That's what got me thinking about it....



Oh man, CobaltBlu, don't let the Meghan thread get inside your head! It's insidious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Harry has said and hinted at it repeatedly in the past that he wasn't entirely happy with his role in the royal family nor the press treatment - well before Meghan was on the scene.
> 
> As much as some people want to think that Meghan is the harbinger of the Apocalypse - when you read Harry's opinions I would wager some dosh that his opinion on this is actually stronger.
> 
> 
> _Back in 2017, Harry spoke to the *Mail on Sunday* about a time when he "wanted out" of the royal family, to instead pursue an "ordinary life."_
> 
> _He said that during his time in the armed forces, he felt most at home. "I wasn’t a Prince, I was just Harry," he explained. That lead him to wonder whether his life was better spent outside the palace gates—but eventually, he decided to stay the course. "I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself," Harry said.
> 
> The 35-year-old then explained that he struggled to find meaning in his position in the royal family before his deployment, as he came "very close" to having a breakdown.
> 
> "I felt I wanted out but then decided to stay in and work out a role for myself," he said.
> 
> "I am determined to have a relatively normal life, and if I am lucky enough to have children, they can have one, too," he added.
> 
> *And*
> 
> The royal also said in a 2017 interview with Newsweek magazine that he longed to be “something other than Prince Harry.”
> 
> At the same time, he knew his role put him in a position of power — and he wanted to “make something of my life.”
> 
> “I feel there is just a smallish window when people are interested in me before [William’s children] take over, and I’ve got to make the most of it,” he said.
> 
> Source
> Source_
> _Source_
> 
> I highly recommend reading the *Newsweek* article on Harry - it's very insightful.  I've cited it as a source but this is the direct link
> https://www.newsweek.com/2017/06/30...diana-death-why-world-needs-magic-627833.html



Cool - so they both used each other. Harry saw Meghan and her ideas as a ticket OUT of the BRF life and Meghan to social climb on the backs on the BRF. Excellent. Good luck to them both.


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> Oh man, CobaltBlu, don't let the Meghan thread get inside your head! It's insidious.



hahahah, right?   this is what happens when you are home waiting for the internet guy to come sometime between 8-4.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally don't think she plays him because his IQ is so low or something. I think it's an unholy marriage between him being crazy about her and her knowing exactly where his weaknesses lie and how to use them to her advantage.


I still wonder what happened .. at one point, Harry (supposedly) breaks up with Meghan and the pictures of them at Tom Inskip’s wedding reception seem to show discord (she was invited as the +1).  Then, all of a sudden, they are madly in love and Harry’s friendship with Tom is no longer (also including many of his other close friends). Rumors - yes, but did Meghan tell Harry to go off his depression meds and tell him that his friends were mean to her? Why would he invite a formerly very close friend to the wedding but not the reception???  I still can’t wrap my head around that ..


----------



## kemilia

CobaltBlu said:


> hahahah, right?   this is what happens when you are home waiting for the internet guy to come sometime between 8-4.


Off topic but they gave you an 8 hr "window?" I whine when I have to hang around 2 hours for a delivery, etc.!


----------



## CobaltBlu

yea, I have had a lot of contractors come to do stuff lately, and they never show up even close to when they say.  Gives me a lot of time to share with these crazy royals!  







kemilia said:


> Off topic but they gave you an 8 hr "window?" I whine when I have to hang around 2 hours for a delivery, etc.!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I still wonder what happened .. at one point, Harry (supposedly) breaks up with Meghan and the pictures of them at Tom Inskip’s wedding reception seem to show discord (she was invited as the +1).  Then, all of a sudden, they are madly in love and Harry’s friendship with Tom is no longer (also including many of his other close friends). Rumors - yes, but did Meghan tell Harry to go off his depression meds and tell him that his friends were mean to her? Why would he invite a formerly very close friend to the wedding but not the reception???  I still can’t wrap my head around that ..



We have no way of knowing but I wonder how many of Harry's old friends he still keeps in touch with on a regular basis. When someone turns his/her back on all former friends, as well as family, and focuses 100% attention on their significant other, something is off. Major unhealthy relationship vibes come from these two.


----------



## lulilu

I know pretty much nothing about Harry, but how soon after his "hijinks" of naked pool playing in Vegas, partying, and nazi costumes did he become woke?  And determined to change the world to his vision?


----------



## Ludmilla

lulilu said:


> I know pretty much nothing about Harry, but how soon after his "hijinks" of naked pool playing in Vegas, partying, and nazi costumes did he become woke?  And determined to change the world to his vision?


I just spilled my tea laughing.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> We have no way of knowing but I wonder how many of Harry's old friends he still keeps in touch with on a regular basis. When someone turns his/her back on all former friends, as well as family, and focuses 100% attention on their significant other, something is off. Major unhealthy relationship vibes come from these two.



When a lot of people close to you are wrong or have wronged you, it's time to re-evaluate if something isn't wrong with you instead.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> I know pretty much nothing about Harry, but how soon after his "hijinks" of naked pool playing in Vegas, partying, and nazi costumes did he become woke?  And determined to change the world to his vision?



You missed out visiting a protected area in with his mates a few years ago where and when they literally had a field day shooting everything they came across. Oh now I remember why not many know - because the media was abruptly hushed.
https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE=#aoh=15803239279622&csi=1&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> You missed out visiting a protected area in Scotland with his mates a few years ago where and when they literally had a field day shooting everything they came across. Oh now I remember why not many (outside Scotland) know - because the media was abruptly hushed.



WTF that's disgusting.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> I know pretty much nothing about Harry, but how soon after his "hijinks" of naked pool playing in Vegas, partying, and nazi costumes did he become woke?  And determined to change the world to his vision?


It’s a recent conversion lol.  He’s like those people that give up smoking or take up marathon running and bore everyone rigid with how great it all is.  No wonder his friends are AWOL - they’re all like “Er yeah, er no, H, we’re all insanely wealthy and privileged, we’re going to carry on making the most of it.  Get stuffed!”


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hmmm, this thread has truly been the gift that keeps on giving during this past, usually sleepy month of January.

Thank you, CobaultBlue, for your post about WHY MM and Harry caught your attention and HOW their “situation’ caused you to reflect on an occurrence in your own life.

So, instead of heading to my work-out at the gym as planned this morning, will delay this much anticipated event for 10-minutes to consider why we are all so interested in these two narcissistic, exploitive individuals who are both reckless to the extreme.

Rarely, has my interest been so piqued about a celeb couple and what their future holds - I am truly more interested in seasonal leather offerings from Hermès for a B/K handbag, lol!

Also, rarely do I push-back negatively about anyone doing their own thing in this lifetime - I’m pretty liberal socially and have had at least nine lives in various parts of the globe. 

So I get that what you see is not always what you get and life is not always fair.

My eldest DD, who is 30-years old and I were discussing MM & Harry last night and why we BOTH DISLIKED THEM to such an extreme extent. 

Why? Coming from the generation of women that worked very hard and thereby broke the “glass ceiling” in the marketplace, I’m reeling from the nerve of MM’s shrill voice and that of her “friends” trying to manipulate facts, distorting reality, nonchalantly stating their intention is to financially line their own pockets by disowning their UK responsibilities, which they had agreed to work towards for the public good just 24-months prior.

Let alone the wasteful misuse of funds ie their $30M royal wedding, the cost of their UK house  renos, etc, and their proceeding grab at financial “freedom” while neglecting to honor past commitments.

All I know is that if MM were my DD, I would not be proud of her actions. There are no good excuses for the decisions made to date bc the optics are not kind but they sure are fair.


----------



## Tivo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I don't think for a minute poor old Michael was tone-deaf and didn't know exactly what she was doing. This was honestly the one time I felt bad for Meghan because that was so outrageously hostile. Then again, so what? Don't we all have that embarrassing uncle that makes any family gathering weird with his racist or sexist jokes or his inability to decide how much wine is enough? I honestly doubt Michael (or is it Marie Christine when skipping the Princess?) with her Nazi dad is the norm in the RF and also she's not that important that she would have been in Meghan's face all the time.


But not everyone reacts the same way to something like this. If you’ve never had someone more powerful than you degrade you to your face like you’re nothing, to insult you because of your race, it’s like looking at the devil. Cuts you to the core. 
It’s not something you really get over.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Tivo said:


> But not everyone reacts the same way to something like this. If you’ve never had someone more powerful than you degrade you to your face like you’re nothing, to insult you because of your race, it’s like looking at the devil. Cuts you to the core.
> It’s not something you really get over.



Gotta say, if that is the worst thing that ever occurs to MM in this lifetime, she will have had it lucky. Buck up, life is tough - for everyone - sometimes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Gotta say, if that is the worst thing that ever occurs to MM in this lifetime, she will have had it lucky. Buck up, life is tough - for everyone - sometimes.


Oh I agree life is tough. But sometimes people try the wrong person, a person who will not let it go.

That’s the risk you take when you decide to be an *******.


----------



## doni

[


Tivo said:


> But not everyone reacts the same way to something like this. If you’ve never had someone more powerful than you degrade you to your face like you’re nothing, to insult you because of your race, it’s like looking at the devil. Cuts you to the core.
> It’s not something you really get over.



I agree with you and I see what you are saying. But how is Princess Michael of Kent (whom no one in the royal family can stand) more powerful than Meghan? She is the wife of the Queen’s cousin, Harry’s cousin-grand-uncle... you are the wife of the son of a future King... I don’t believe for a moment Kent was tone deaf or unaware. But really, you have  been able to get past your husband dressing as a nazi for fun, I think you can deal with the antics of the universally disliked crazy aunt you hardly ever have to meet, particularly if the rest of the closer family has been as welcoming as you say they have.


----------



## limom

Tivo said:


> But not everyone reacts the same way to something like this. If you’ve never had someone more powerful than you degrade you to your face like you’re nothing, to insult you because of your race, it’s like looking at the devil. Cuts you to the core.
> It’s not something you really get over.


I also read somewhere that perhaps a journalist  in GB, compared or portrayed the baby as a monkey.
That is taking it, way, way too far.
I would have not known about the broach either, but the monkey would have put me over the edge.


----------



## mdcx

MM and Harry bunking down at a secretive Russian billionaire’s(Yuri Milner, anyone?) mansion for the foreseeable future - what could possibly go wrong?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> You missed out visiting a protected area in with his mates a few years ago where and when they literally had a field day shooting everything they came across. Oh now I remember why not many know - because the media was abruptly hushed.
> https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE=#aoh=15803239279622&csi=1&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies


this makes me sick
can't even read the whole thing
I think I'm done with Harry.....I can't excuse this with being young


----------



## Tivo

TMZ is airing a special on the Royal Mess tonight at 8


----------



## mdcx

I feel like Jess Mulroney and MM are pretty much clones of each other. Basic b with money. 
MM can’t go full Mulroney in her quest for duck lips, sexy selfies, hot mom looks, ‘look at my wealth’ posts etc just yet, but once her $$$ from the BRF are 100% locked down, I expect she will return to form. 
I assume MM and Harry are negotiating $$ for a first family photo in Canada...


----------



## A1aGypsy

I agree with both of you - those two examples are beyond the pale and may cause someone to run away from the media. And, if they were to head to a Caribbean island, give up their titles and live their lives quietly working in an orphanage or building schools and shunning any contact with the media other than a once a year turn up at the Queen’s birthday for example, then I would have sympathy. And i would probably even turn a blind eye to Charles throwing them some sustenance.  Because, while MM chose this life, Harry did not.

However, what this jaunt to Canada has demonstrated is that they don’t hate the media, they just want to control / profit from their media. And break all the laws about public service and conflict of interest while doing so. And earn money while also being supported by tax payers and the commonwealth. And there are much better places where that money could be used. And there are many public servants who struggle to do their jobs within the rules.

I have no doubt that royal life isn't for the faint of heart, but you are either in or out. The royals are supported to prevent the potential misuse of their office. You don’t get to have it both ways.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Tivo said:


> TMZ is airing a special on the Royal Mess tonight at 8


Just watched the preview, it looks like it's a business-perspective take on their future. I don't see how Harry is really that marketable outside of Britain and Canada, maybe Australia. The US doesn't have a monarchy, so not sure what his draw would be there, or what products he could promote that people would buy or see just because its Harry. Maybe exposing the royals or life as a royal, but products and services? Meghan is unknown to most people for anything other than having married Harry. I think the fans of this couple would likely be females, so that would influence a lot of what they can do and promote. Are men even interested in Harry and Meghan?


----------



## queennadine

papertiger said:


> You missed out visiting a protected area in with his mates a few years ago where and when they literally had a field day shooting everything they came across. Oh now I remember why not many know - because the media was abruptly hushed.
> https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE=#aoh=15803239279622&csi=1&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies


And then wasn’t there a story after him and MM got married that he all of a sudden wasn’t participating in the family holiday hunts and shoots anymore?


----------



## bag-mania

Tivo said:


> TMZ is airing a special on the Royal Mess tonight at 8



I'll be surprised if the program is anything more than a fluffy "hooray for Harry and Meghan" show. Harvey Levin has been promoting it by saying that one of the guests refers to H&M as "Junior Obamas" when it comes to marketability. We'll see. I still don't get why they would be marketable. They don't really do much.


----------



## limom

queennadine said:


> And then wasn’t there a story after him and MM got married that he all of a sudden wasn’t participating in the family holiday hunts and shoots anymore?


Good. Are they still fox hunting over there?


----------



## tiktok

limom said:


> I also read somewhere that perhaps a journalist  in GB, compared or portrayed the baby as a monkey.
> That is taking it, way, way too far.
> I would have not known about the broach either, but the monkey would have put me over the edge.



While these incidents are both awful to experience, they reflect on the character of the person who initiated them, not the person they were inflicted upon. If as a public figure she doesn’t understand that and can’t deal with these incidents to the extent that they make her escape the life she chose to supposedly do so much good in the world, then I hope she gets the therapy she needs. I mean, come on. Unpleasant but not life altering. And I’m sure the queen would have been happy to include this racist awful woman in even fewer events if that would have kept H&M around.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I'll be surprised if the program is anything more than a fluffy "hooray for Harry and Meghan" show. Harvey Levin has been promoting it by saying that one of the guests refers to H&M as "Junior Obamas" when it comes to marketability. We'll see. I still don't get why they would be marketable. They don't really do much.


Junior *****’s?
Oh hell, no.


----------



## lalame

queennadine said:


> And then wasn’t there a story after him and MM got married that he all of a sudden wasn’t participating in the family holiday hunts and shoots anymore?



If Meghan really did compel Harry to give up knuckleheaded hobbies like shooting animals nilly willy, dressing up like Nazis or getting nekkid drunk with strangers in Las Vegas then we can certainly consider that one valuable public service she did for that family. Apparently she also got him to quit smoking.... good for him!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

limom said:


> Good. Are they still fox hunting over there?



I’m honestly not sure, but I’m assuming yes. I think this particular shooting was for grouse, if I remember right. 

I’m not a fan of hunting myself, but he apparently loved shooting and hunting and then drops it as soon as she’s involved. That’s not going to endear her to his family.


----------



## pixiejenna

mia55 said:


> What’s surprising is since Harry joined her in Canada there are no paparazzi pics of her driving around to pick up friends or walking Archie/dogs together. It’s not like they’re cooped up inside the house all the time, did all the press suddenly started respecting their privacy? Or someone is not getting a chance to tip the photographers about her schedule ??



I think that she was going out of her way to send a message to Harry by doing these daily pap outings while he was back home. Now that he’s back with her she doesn’t need to do them to manipulate him. It will be interesting if the next time he’s away from her if she picks up where she left off going on pap walks.


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> I’m not a fan of hunting myself, but he apparently loved shooting and hunting and then drops it as soon as she’s involved. That’s not going to endear her to his family.



If it was only hunting it might not bother the family too terribly. But if he has changed in so many ways as to be barely recognizable to his own family, that would be a problem to them.


----------



## papertiger

queennadine said:


> And then wasn’t there a story after him and MM got married that he all of a sudden wasn’t participating in the family holiday hunts and shoots anymore?



Shots must have WOKE him


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> MM and Harry bunking down at a secretive Russian billionaire’s(Yuri Milner, anyone?) mansion for the foreseeable future - what could possibly go wrong?


is this confirmed?


----------



## papertiger

queennadine said:


> I’m honestly not sure, but I’m assuming yes. I think this particular shooting was for grouse, if I remember right.
> 
> I’m not a fan of hunting myself, but he apparently loved shooting and hunting and then drops it as soon as she’s involved. That’s not going to endear her to his family.



Grouse and pheasant you shoot and take home for dinner. These were protected, endangered hen harriers (birds). There were only about 20 breeding pairs in England at the time. It should be up to 6 months in jail and a £5K fine if found guilty. And yes there were witnesses. We have a lot of this illegal activity in Scotland too.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

mdcx said:


> MM and Harry bunking down at a secretive Russian billionaire’s(Yuri Milner, anyone?) mansion for the foreseeable future - what could possibly go wrong?


Milner has denied the property is his.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hmmm, this thread has truly been the gift that keeps on giving during this past, usually sleepy month of January.
> 
> Thank you, CobaultBlue, for your post about WHY MM and Harry caught your attention and HOW their “situation’ caused you to reflect on an occurrence in your own life.
> 
> So, instead of heading to my work-out at the gym as planned this morning, will delay this much anticipated event for 10-minutes to consider why we are all so interested in these two narcissistic, exploitive individuals who are both reckless to the extreme.
> 
> Rarely, has my interest been so piqued about a celeb couple and what their future holds - I am truly more interested in seasonal leather offerings from Hermès for a B/K handbag, lol!
> 
> Also, rarely do I push-back negatively about anyone doing their own thing in this lifetime - I’m pretty liberal socially and have had at least nine lives in various parts of the globe.
> 
> So I get that what you see is not always what you get and life is not always fair.
> 
> My eldest DD, who is 30-years old and I were discussing MM & Harry last night and why we BOTH DISLIKED THEM to such an extreme extent.
> 
> Why? Coming from the generation of women that worked very hard and thereby broke the “glass ceiling” in the marketplace, I’m reeling from the nerve of MM’s shrill voice and that of her “friends” trying to manipulate facts, distorting reality, nonchalantly stating their intention is to financially line their own pockets by disowning their UK responsibilities, which they had agreed to work towards for the public good just 24-months prior.
> 
> Let alone the wasteful misuse of funds ie their $30M royal wedding, the cost of their UK house  renos, etc, and their proceeding grab at financial “freedom” while neglecting to honor past commitments.
> 
> All I know is that if MM were my DD, I would not be proud of her actions. There are no good excuses for the decisions made to date bc the optics are not kind but they sure are fair.


*THIS .. 100+++ %!!!!*  Like you, I had to work my a@@ off to climb that Corporate ladder - and ALWAYS with the mindset of "_I'll scratch your back and you'll scratch mine_" (_in other words - *COLLABORATION* as opposed to just using people to move up and then 'ghosting' them once you no longer "need" them_)!!! As a matter of fact, that is a trait that I absolutely abhor, and when I sense that in someone, I am not as generous with my time or knowledge.   It seems that H&M are perfectly content to use other people for their gain, after all .. what about the house in Vancouver that they are still living in .. are they paying rent???  More importantly, it irks me that while they wanted out of the "_soul-crushing_" BRF, boy-oh-boy .. they sure want to keep those titles!!!  Uggh ..


----------



## Jayne1

Well, they certainly have gone into hiding this past week.  Nothing  new to talk about!


----------



## bag-mania

There are plenty of shows about them on US television. In addition to tonight's Fox show, ABC is airing "Royal Divide: Harry, Meghan, and the Crown" tonight at 10 pm ET.


----------



## Megs

I think off many people's points upthread on why this is hard to look away from... If Meghan immediately didn't look to be public with Harry and they took the alleged Queen's offer initially to step back, no one would probably care as much. 

It truly is how gung-ho camera and attention ready she was for all of what it entailed, saying she couldn't wait to get to work, looking for attention, being over the top to show how much she and Harry are in love, only to shortly after say it's been terrible terrible terrible and she and he have to run away. 

It's bizarre how she and they have handled this and it makes almost everyone I talk to have a strong opinion.


----------



## lalame

Not to mention Thomas Sr has been making the rounds on TV. I can’t believe I’m saying it but I actually had sympathy for him after watching his latest appearance on Good Morning Britain. 

Apparently H&M didn’t believe the stories about his failing health and totally ghosted him, with no reaching out or concern after his surgery?? He mentions in *that* letter, she never even alluded to it and the only times the word “love” appeared was in reference to her loving husband. Ouch!


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> I’m honestly not sure, but I’m assuming yes. I think this particular shooting was for grouse, if I remember right.
> 
> I’m not a fan of hunting myself, but he apparently loved shooting and hunting and then drops it as soon as she’s involved. That’s not going to endear her to his family.


See, this is yet another situation where I have to question what the heck is going on with Harry.  So, in order to "_please_" Meghan, he has to (_yet again_) give up something he enjoyed (_and I am also not a fan of hunting, but recognize that some do enjoy it_).  So, in essence, he's given up quite a bit (_including his family_); what has she given up for him? .. oh yeah, being on Suits (_although based on some other articles, the Queen indicating that she could continue acting_)?!?!?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> Not to mention Thomas Sr has been making the rounds on TV. I can’t believe I’m saying it but I actually had sympathy for him after watching his latest appearance on Good Morning Britain.
> 
> Apparently H&M didn’t believe the stories about his failing health and totally ghosted him, with no reaching out or concern after his surgery?? He mentions in *that* letter, she never even alluded to it and the only times the word “love” appeared was in reference to her loving husband. Ouch!



it seems that most of the media outlets and the UK citizens are definitely not behind H&M.

Have read that many people sympathize with Dad Markle, esp in view of the way Harry treated his grandmum recently. 

It’s like the hits just keep on coming with these two clowns.


----------



## bag-mania

The premeditation cannot be ignored. They applied to trademark "Sussex Royal" back in June but we have to assume they were planning it and working it out with their lawyers weeks/months before the filing. It takes time to come up with over 100 products they could slap their logo on and profit from. That would put it back to well before Archie was born, when they hadn't even had their one year wedding anniversary yet. We know they wanted to have their cake and eat it too, but I'd like to hear from someone who honestly believes Meghan really gave it a chance. Because I don't see it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

lalame said:


> Not to mention Thomas Sr has been making the rounds on TV. I can’t believe I’m saying it but I actually had sympathy for him after watching his latest appearance on Good Morning Britain.
> 
> Apparently H&M didn’t believe the stories about his failing health and totally ghosted him, with no reaching out or concern after his surgery?? He mentions in *that* letter, she never even alluded to it and the only times the word “love” appeared was in reference to her loving husband. Ouch!


He's a manipulator and a liar IMO.

He was photographed two days after suffering what he says was a heart attack (still no reciepts on that) on a fast food run to KFC and McDonalds...lol

From the linked article:

*However, the Daily Mail reports via media stationed outside Markle’s home that he stayed home on those days and was not seen leaving or visiting a hospital at any time*.

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...k/news-story/9d009544a06192df890da503b6f09f31


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Not to mention Thomas Sr has been making the rounds on TV. I can’t believe I’m saying it but I actually had sympathy for him after watching his latest appearance on Good Morning Britain.
> 
> Apparently H&M didn’t believe the stories about his failing health and totally ghosted him, with no reaching out or concern after his surgery?? He mentions in *that* letter, she never even alluded to it and the only times the word “love” appeared was in reference to her loving husband. Ouch!


It is hard not to feel compassion for a man who just had a heart attack!
He shared that PH and Meghan did not believe him.
How sway?
He has the scars and TEXTS.


----------



## Sharont2305

She absolutely hasn't given it a chance, I think it took about 4 or 5 years for Catherine to settle into the role properly, and she had been "in training" as it were for 9 years prior to her and William's engagement. It took a few years for Camilla too, and she had virtually the whole of the UK to win over too.
Now, looking at these two Duchesses, you'd think they were born royal. They do their job impeccably well.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> He's a manipulator and a liar IMO.
> 
> He was photographed two days after suffering what he says was a heart attack (still no reciepts on that) on a fast food run to KFC and McDonalds...lol
> 
> From the linked article:
> 
> *However, the Daily Mail reports via media stationed outside Markle’s home that he stayed home on those days and was not seen leaving or visiting a hospital at any time*.
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...k/news-story/9d009544a06192df890da503b6f09f31



He mentioned on GMB that he put out official paperwork from his doctors advising him he couldn’t travel after the surgery (hence missing the wedding) and that he would’ve died without it. Idk where these papers were published but maybe sharper followers than me know.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

limom said:


> It is hard not to feel compassion for a man who just had a heart attack!
> He shared that PH and Meghan did not believe him.
> How sway?
> He has the scars and TEXTS.



What scars did he have from a heart attack?


----------



## limom

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> What scars did he have from a heart attack?


He underwent surgery.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

lalame said:


> He mentioned on GMB that he put out official paperwork from his doctors advising him he couldn’t travel after the surgery (hence missing the wedding) and that he would’ve died without it. Idk where these papers were published but maybe sharper followers than me know.


He's never produced that. And it's one  reason I believe he will never go to Britain to be a witness in the trial.  He will be exposed.

For now he can safely muckrake and earn money from interviews from his home.

I do wonder how the DM will address that, since they are the outlet who said he never went to hospital as they had reporters stationed outside his home. Hmmmm....


----------



## pixiejenna

How does one get rid of squatters when they are royal?


----------



## limom

pixiejenna said:


> How does one get rid of squatters when they are royal?


He is a Russian billionaire. He has his ways!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

limom said:


> He underwent surgery.



Oh okay I was curious because I googled but couldn't find anything about scars...


----------



## Mrs.Z

pixiejenna said:


> How does one get rid of squatters when they are royal?


Why can’t they rent a place like normal people, this whole squatting in a mansion that may or may not be owned by a shady Russian is awkward.


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe they are looking for their own special mansion as we speak.   I hope they are paying rent. It would be awkward if they are borrowing a house from publicly unknown sources. Nobody lends out mansions out of the goodness of their hearts. Whoever it is will expect something in return.


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they are looking for their own special mansion as we speak.   I hope they are paying rent. It would be awkward if they are borrowing a house from publicly unknown sources. Nobody lends out mansions out of the goodness of their hearts. Whoever it is will expect something in return.


I would also think that it would be taxable. Then, all sorts of information might come out. I think she still has to file a US return, right? I don't know how the UK or Canada consider it. Barter, gifting?


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they are looking for their own special mansion as we speak.   I hope they are paying rent. It would be awkward if they are borrowing a house from publicly unknown sources. Nobody lends out mansions out of the goodness of their hearts. Whoever it is will expect something in return.


I just saw on DM yesterday, that Caitlin Jenner was saying that H&M were interested in Houses/properties in Malibu (Caitlin lives in Malibu).  Not sure how true this is ..


----------



## limom

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/world/europe/harry-meghan-charles-duchy-of-cornwall.html
Fascinating article about Charles finances.
Are Brits Ok with those shenanigans?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

VigeeLeBrun said:


> All I know is that if MM were my DD, I would not be proud of her actions. There are no good excuses for the decisions made to date bc the optics are not kind but they sure are fair.



Heh - maybe this is why her mom has been soooo quiet. She is very embarrassed.


----------



## LittleStar88

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Milner has denied the property is his.



I am surprised no one has gone digging to see who owns the home. Maybe they are no longer worth the effort now that they are on their way to being nobodies (Meghan _WHO_?)


----------



## Mrs.Z

LittleStar88 said:


> I am surprised no one has gone digging to see who owns the home. Maybe they are no longer worth the effort now that they are on their way to being nobodies (Meghan _WHO_?)


It’s apparently registered to a company that is registered somewhere in the Caribbean so no one knows at this time. However, new laws in British Columbia will soon force transparency re: ownership.  So....we shall see.  (I read this on the Daily Mail so take it for what it’s worth)


----------



## bag-mania

OMG is anyone watching the Fox show about Meghan and Harry. What little I’ve seen has mostly been a love letter to Meghan. One of the guests dissed Kate for not having a real career before marrying but extolled how Meghan had a career and the British couldn’t take it. Unbelievable and hilarious.

Dr. Phil offers his opinion. Lol


----------



## zinacef

I’m watching it and there’s this one girl  maybe her colleague or a girl from the luggage show who kept on saying about Meghan being woke, woke then woke.  I hope she got invited to the wedding and the reception as this girl maybe an actress was really singing some love songs to her. Clearly, they’re about business and money . BTW, DH is so mad he has to watch the show, our yorkie is asleep on his lap so he can’t go anywhere. What’s worst is TMZ produced the show and  narrated by Harry levin. Yup!


----------



## threadbender

There was no way I was giving either special any of my time. lol We know the US media seems to buy their victimhood and think they will be major money makers here.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> OMG is anyone watching the Fox show about Meghan and Harry. What little I’ve seen has mostly been a love letter to Meghan. One of the guests dissed Kate for not having a real career before marrying but extolled how Meghan had a career and the British couldn’t take it. Unbelievable and hilarious.
> 
> Dr. Phil offers his opinion. Lol



Would have to be staged by M&H team. Sure their new PR team is just ramping up. 

Why they need to dig at Kate is embarrassing and seems personal, which could only mean coming from Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

zinacef said:


> I’m watching it and there’s this one girl  maybe her colleague or a girl from the luggage show who kept on saying about Meghan being woke, woke then woke.  I hope she got invited to the wedding and the reception as this girl maybe an actress was really singing some love songs to her. Clearly, they’re about business and money . BTW, DH is so mad he has to watch the show, our yorkie is asleep on his lap so he can’t go anywhere. What’s worst is TMZ produced the show and  narrated by Harry levin. Yup!





threadbender said:


> There was no way I was giving either special any of my time. lol We know the US media seems to buy their victimhood and think they will be major money makers here.



I watched for about five minutes and that was as much as I could take. Harvey Levin’s business thrives on having celebrities cooperate with TMZ so he won’t criticize anyone unless they have done something egregious.


----------



## imgg

Is anyone else looking forward to the media losing interest in Meghan and Harry?


----------



## chaneljewel

imgg said:


> Is anyone else looking forward to the media losing interest in Meghan and Harry?


YES!


----------



## marthastoo

imgg said:


> Would have to be staged by M&H team. Sure their new PR team is just ramping up.
> 
> Why they need to dig at Kate is embarrassing and seems personal, which could only mean coming from Meghan.


So Meghan produced this "documentary?"  Wow, she's been busy.


----------



## rose60610

pixiejenna said:


> How does one get rid of squatters when they are royal?



In this particular case?  Just pay them money!!!!!  That's why they broke off from The Crown.


----------



## imgg

marthastoo said:


> So Meghan produced this "documentary?"  Wow, she's been busy.


I didn't say produced, but as far as being busy, well they are both unemployed now...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

rose60610 said:


> In this particular case?  Just pay them money!!!!!  That's why they broke off from The Crown.



Just pay them money, lol?
These two grifters do not want funds from the BRF that are ALREADY theirs in exchange for their allegiance to the citizens of the UK but INSTEAD want me to buy a sweatshirt with MM’s smug face on it to pad their lifestyle?
NOT
rofling a million times over ♥️


----------



## Straight-Laced

papertiger said:


> You missed out visiting a protected area in with his mates a few years ago where and when they literally had a field day shooting everything they came across. Oh now I remember why not many know - because the media was abruptly hushed.
> https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCKAE=#aoh=15803239279622&csi=1&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/oct/31/monarchy.endangeredspecies


Oh no  
Those magnificent birds of prey had no hope against a couple of posh twats with guns  

Wait, isn’t Harry best mates with Sir David Attenborough ??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Straight-Laced said:


> Oh no
> Those magnificent birds of prey had no hope against a couple of posh twats with guns
> 
> Wait, isn’t Harry best mates with Sir David Attenborough ??



There was earlier incidents in 2004 as well. Unfortunately both Harry and William have hunted animals to the exasperation of people worldwide (including me), though, to their credit, in recent years they have changed their tune.

William was also criticised for saying some trophy hunting of animals can be justified.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...justified-in-some-circumstances-a6933906.html

Now if only the rest of the Royals would give up the hunts as well, tradition be damned.

Both men are now involved in environmental causes, which is good. And *William's *new environmental cause, the Earthshot Prize is actually in conjunction with David Attenborough.


> *And it also follows worldwide condemnation of another royal hunting trip just ten days ago when Prince William went boar shooting in Spain*



Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...re-emerges-princes-call-protect-wildlife.html


.


----------



## limom

Basically, marketers/businesses are salivating at the idea of making beaucoup bucks with the Sussex.
Good luck to all involved.
As long as they don’t cost any taxpayers money, be my guest.
If they really move to Malibu, it is going to be horrendous for the neighborhood.
When the *******s move to Chappaqua, it created tons of commotion. It is still annoying for the people living there.
5 th Avenue is a big old mess now.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Basically, marketers/businesses are salivating at the idea of making beaucoup bucks with the Sussex.
> Good luck to all involved.
> As long as they don’t cost any taxpayers money, be my guest.
> If they really move to Malibu, it is going to be horrendous for the neighborhood.
> When the *******s move to Chappaqua, it created tons of commotion. It is still annoying for the people living there.
> 5 th Avenue is a big old mess now.


Are they really relocating to the US or is this gossip?


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> Are they really relocating to the US or is this gossip?


Gossip, but it would be logical for someone pursuing a career in Entertainment.


----------



## maryg1

I think living in the USA was in their plan, if I recall well in their statement they wrote that they would have spent their time in Uk and North America, which includes both Canada and Usa, but BP probably required them to live in a Commonwealth country, since the BP statement clearly indicated that they would be living in UK and Canada, no mention of “North America”


----------



## mdcx

I thought MM had kept her agents etc from before Harry or was that just the PR team? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...g-manager-future-projects-insider-claims.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

Someone should tell her she wasn’t very good at the acting thing.


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/world/europe/harry-meghan-charles-duchy-of-cornwall.html
> Fascinating article about Charles finances.
> Are Brits Ok with those shenanigans?


I read this yesterday in the Chicago Tribune (from the NYTimes) and thought, wow, H&M's shenanigans have opened up a whole Pandora's Box of things most people did not know about. Not good for the Royal Fam but interesting to the minions that keep them afloat in palaces, private planes and couture.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maybe she can do the Hallmark Channel thing.


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she can do the Hallmark Channel thing.


Well, there may be an opening for the roles Lori L did in the past (doesn't seem like her mess will go well).


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> I read this yesterday in the Chicago Tribune (from the NYTimes) and thought, wow, H&M's shenanigans have opened up a whole Pandora's Box of things most people did not know about. Not good for the Royal Fam but interesting to the minions that keep them afloat in palaces, private planes and couture.


Unbelievable that in 2020, Charles can get away with acting like feudal lord.
Being that it is such a small milieu, they have to scratch each other backs.
Perhaps those two, will really take down the monarchy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> I read this yesterday in the Chicago Tribune (from the NYTimes) and thought, wow, H&M's shenanigans have opened up a whole Pandora's Box of things most people did not know about. Not good for the Royal Fam but interesting to the minions that keep them afloat in palaces, private planes and couture.



Interesting read. I wonder, were those two really so stupid to not know they might open Pandora's box, or did they really want to do such potential harm to their closest kin? If I were Charles they wouldn't see a penny LOL


----------



## bisousx

Can someone post a link to the Chicago Tribune article?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Unbelievable that in 2020, Charles can get away with acting like feudal lord.



I don't find the rent for the land people own houses on so weird. We have a similar concept in Germany, hereditary leasehold (and I do think it's a bit more than 30 pounds a year haha). The main holder of these properties is the Catholic church, though.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't find the rent for the land people own houses on so weird. We have a similar concept in Germany, hereditary leasehold (and I do think it's a bit more than 30 pounds a year haha). The main holder of these properties is the Catholic church, though.


Yes, particularly in England where most people who own a home actually lease it... I mean, if this is the case in London, not so surprising this happens in Cornwall right?
Then, the NY Times is free to opine  Government or Parliament are not interfering in what Charles does, but the fact is,  the Treasury has an institutional role in the management of the Duchy which is regulated by law, there are things that the Duke can't do without explicit authorization from the Treasury, and the Duchy's annual accounts are presented to the Parliament (both houses) and published.
And then yes, this is the property of Charles, but only in his institutional role as Prince of Wales (the moment he becomes King, or say if he quits, he stops 'owning' the Duchy), and he cannot dispose of it. If he was to pass away it would not be part of his inheritance. So this is nothing like normal private ownership as the paper itself admits.
Is it a bizarre and outdated construction that does not find parallel in the normal market regulated world the rest of us live? Yes, but, hello? this is the British monarchy we are talking about... I find it stranger that the UK constitution is not written anywhere, but there you go, if it works, why fix it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

In the Harvey Levin special last night, there was a bit of an interview with Thomas Markle. At one point he says "I think she mothers him." I was thinking 'holy crap, Thomas, you're probably right." Some of us might say smothers instead of mothers, but the point is the essentially the same.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> In the Harvey Levin special last night, there was a bit of an interview with Thomas Markle. At one point he says "I think she mothers him." I was thinking 'holy crap, Thomas, you're probably right." Some of us might say smothers instead of mothers, but the point is the essentially the same.



Wow. That might actually be the sharpest remark he's ever made regarding the Sussexes.


----------



## mshermes

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she can do the Hallmark Channel thing.


She was in two Hallmark movies......dull thud.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I thought MM had kept her agents etc from before Harry or was that just the PR team? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...g-manager-future-projects-insider-claims.html
> View attachment 4653037


I thought she’d kept them on too.  Are they working on commission?  How can she afford all these people?
One day I hope these anonymous sources Meghan uses to publicise her messages are unmasked.  It would be really interesting to see who exactly they are.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought she’d kept them on too.  Are they working on commission?  How can she afford all these people?
> One day I hope these anonymous sources Meghan uses to publicise her messages are unmasked.  It would be really interesting to see who exactly they are.



They are all publicists. They put these stories out so it will look like Meghan is in demand as an actress, hoping that it will cause that to become true. They've got their work cut out for them. Meghan doesn't have the chops for starring roles. Maybe they will bankroll a project themselves that she can star in.


----------



## daisychainz

Mrs.Z said:


> Just saw this article, I really can’t imagine she directed this at Kate.....but....why does Jessica need to tell everyone else how to live??? Nothing wrong with pretty pictures ....it’s Instagram, it’s not that deep. (Also what about Jessica’s bikini pics?  Are they making the world a better place???)


She got a lot of hate for her post, so her husband came to her defense.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> There was earlier incidents in 2004 as well. Unfortunately both Harry and William have hunted animals to the exasperation of people worldwide (including me), though, to their credit, in recent years they have changed their tune.
> 
> William was also criticised for saying some trophy hunting of animals can be justified.
> 
> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...justified-in-some-circumstances-a6933906.html
> 
> Now if only the rest of the Royals would give up the hunts as well, tradition be damned.
> 
> Both men are now involved in environmental causes, which is good. And *William's *new environmental cause, the Earthshot Prize is actually in conjunction with David Attenborough.
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...re-emerges-princes-call-protect-wildlife.html
> 
> 
> .


I just can't understand what is sporting about hunting.  The person has a gun.  The animal does not.  Sitting next to a dead animal grinning is just so disgusting to me.  I don't have enough words.


----------



## sdkitty

I tried to watch the H&M special on ABC last night but fell asleep.  It seemed to be mostly positive about them.   Another US puff piece.


----------



## cafecreme15

daisychainz said:


> She got a lot of hate for her post, so her husband came to her defense.
> View attachment 4653126


Mhmm...and if you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell ya!


----------



## limom

doni said:


> Yes, particularly in England where most people who own a home actually lease it... I mean, if this is the case in London, not so surprising this happens in Cornwall right?
> Then, the NY Times is free to opine  Government or Parliament are not interfering in what Charles does, but the fact is,  the Treasury has an institutional role in the management of the Duchy which is regulated by law, there are things that the Duke can't do without explicit authorization from the Treasury, and the Duchy's annual accounts are presented to the Parliament (both houses) and published.
> And then yes, this is the property of Charles, but only in his institutional role as Prince of Wales (the moment he becomes King, or say if he quits, he stops 'owning' the Duchy), and he cannot dispose of it. If he was to pass away it would not be part of his inheritance. So this is nothing like normal private ownership as the paper itself admits.
> Is it a bizarre and outdated construction that does not find parallel in the normal market regulated world the rest of us live? Yes, but, hello? this is the British monarchy we are talking about... I find it stranger that the UK constitution is not written anywhere, but there you go, if it works, why fix it?


It does not work for me but I am not British, so if it works for the Brits,,great 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-prince-charles-doesnt-want-you-to-know-about-his-lavish-lifestyle


sdkitty said:


> I just can't understand what is sporting about hunting.  The person has a gun.  The animal does not.  Sitting next to a dead animal grinning is just so disgusting to me.  I don't have enough words.


Endless argument during the Holidays, can’t discuss the subject anymore.


----------



## threadbender

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she can do the Hallmark Channel thing.


Well, they played one of her Hallmark movies the other day. I didn't watch but saw that it was on. I wouldn't bother to watch anything she is in or where she is featured.
Maybe she can get more bit parts like she had on Castle (I think her true self was in that one).


----------



## kemilia

bisousx said:


> Can someone post a link to the Chicago Tribune article?


https://www.chicagotribune.com/nati...0200129-y6k6m5ikqfah3bb62v4v7zgzf4-story.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> She was in two Hallmark movies......dull thud.


I wonder how she’ll manage to pad out those 72 days of Royal Duties on her CV   Hmmm I  expect it’ll read like a blockbuster all the same


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> I wonder how she’ll manage to pad out those 72 days of Royal Duties on her CV   Hmmm I  expect it’ll read like a blockbuster all the same


72 days? That is the only amount of work she ever did?


----------



## Clearblueskies

daisychainz said:


> 72 days? That is the only amount of work she ever did?


 Apparently.  According to the Daily Telegraph.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Ok, so who is substituting for all the engagements they both had scheduled? I feel for those charities if their events have been cancelled--the exposure with a royal seemed to really help them. Or is this where like Anne's children are stepping in?


----------



## daisychainz

Clearblueskies said:


> Apparently.  According to the Daily Telegraph.


Wow, that is amazing to see that. Really puts in perspective how short her time in the family was.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I tried to watch the H&M special on ABC last night but fell asleep.  It seemed to be mostly positive about them.   *Another US puff piece.*



It is inevitable they will eventually come live here. The American media is kissing H&M a$$ shamelessly. It's not just the poofy, mindless magazines like, _People_, _Elle_, and _Harper's Bazaar_. Even the so-called respectable publications are buying into the victimhood of Harry and Meghan. Never have multimillionaires elicited such sympathy. I know most US journalists despise traditional institutions like the BRF but they picked the wrong poster children.


----------



## mshermes

threadbender said:


> Well, they played one of her Hallmark movies the other day. I didn't watch but saw that it was on. I wouldn't bother to watch anything she is in or where she is featured.
> Maybe she can get more bit parts like she had on Castle (I think her true self was in that one).


My personal favorite is her 30 seconds as a Fed Ex girl in Horrible Bosses.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> It is inevitable they will eventually come live here. The American media is kissing H&M a$$ shamelessly. It's not just the poofy, mindless magazines like, _People_, _Elle_, and _Harper's Bazaar_. Even the so-called respectable publications are buying into the victimhood of Harry and Meghan. Never have multimillionaires elicited such sympathy. I know most US journalists despise traditional institutions like the BRF but they picked the wrong poster children.


They will be a money machine, unfortunately.  I'm not sure there's enough to keep the public interest for that long, but I also thought that about the Kardashians.


----------



## imgg

mshermes said:


> My personal favorite is her 30 seconds as a Fed Ex girl in Horrible Bosses.


Ha, didn't know that...


----------



## lalame

kemilia said:


> Ok, so who is substituting for all the engagements they both had scheduled? I feel for those charities if their events have been cancelled--the exposure with a royal seemed to really help them. Or is this where like Anne's children are stepping in?



I think naturally some will be dropped but most will probably be picked up by the other family members. I read somewhere that Charles already does 500 or so events per year. Yikes! And now with H&M and Andrew out, I wonder if they’ll have to pull in some of the “independent” family members like Eugenie or Beatrice to help pick up the slack.


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> They will be a money machine, unfortunately.  I'm not sure there's enough there to keep the public interest for that long, but I also thought that about the Kardashians.



They will be popular for awhile. They should have a year or two where they will be invited to the A-list events and celebrity parties. After that they will need to have something to bring to the table. They aren't particularly entertaining as themselves. Maybe that is when the tell-all book comes out. (That will absolutely happen if their marriage implodes and Meghan wants to play the victim yet again.)


----------



## Clearblueskies

Harry’s just lost a complaint about an article in the Mail on Sunday.  He failed to point out the elephant in wildlife pictures he posted of himself was both drugged and tethered.  Pictures posted on Instagram were edited to hide the rope around the animals hind legs.  The MoS ran a story about this apparently and Harry made a complaint that it wasn’t necessary to inform the public.  The Independent Press standards organisation ruled otherwise. I think they were right, it was a pretty disingenuous thing to do.


----------



## bisousx

^Oops, posted at the same time 

Looks like Prince Harry just lost against the Mail on a complaint about a wildlife photo he cropped for instagram. The media apparently took the cropped photo and made a scandal out of it, making it seem like Harry was trying to hide the fact that the animals were drugged.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...sunday-complaint-over-sedated-wildlife-photos

If it isn’t glaringly obvious by now, Harry is thin skinned and can’t handle any negativity. It’s annoying to think of how him and Meghan will be tying up the courts with all their silly lawsuits.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m really just lol that all the “intrusive” pap pics stopped as soon as Harry showed up. It’s a late Christmas miracle


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> They will be popular for awhile. They should have a year or two where they will be invited to the A-list events and celebrity parties. After that they will need to have something to bring to the table. They aren't particularly entertaining as themselves. Maybe that is when the tell-all book comes out. (That will absolutely happen if their marriage implodes and Meghan wants to play the victim yet again.)


Ryan Seacrest was pandering for a reality show, last night
Also, the interview when Meghan said “I expected it to be hard, but not unfair” show how delusional, she is.
The entire monarchy system is based on privilege, there is no room for fairness, there.
You remember the movies “Reality bites”, she could be on the reboot, .
“Reality bites, the duchess diaries”..


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Ryan Seacrest was pandering for a reality show, last night
> Also, the interview when Meghan said “I expected it to be hard, but not unfair” show how delusional, she is.
> The entire monarchy system is based on privilege, there is no room for fairness, there.
> You remember the movies “Reality bites”, she could be on the reboot, .
> “Reality bites, the duchess diaries”..



I wonder what aspect she’s specifically talking about that isn’t “fair.” Media coverage? How could you not have seen the press scrutinizing  royal women for decades... if she’s talking about any other facets of the job, well....


----------



## Mrs.Z

limom said:


> Ryan Seacrest was pandering for a reality show, last night
> Also, the interview when Meghan said “I expected it to be hard, but not unfair” show how delusional, she is.
> The entire monarchy system is based on privilege, there is no room for fairness, there.
> You remember the movies “Reality bites”, she could be on the reboot, .
> “Reality bites, the duchess diaries”..


If she doesn’t realize life is unfair at her age, then yes, she is delusional.


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> She got a lot of hate for her post, so her husband came to her defense.
> View attachment 4653126


As we used to say in Boston - "_if you can't take the heat, then get the he!! out of the Kitchen_"!!!  If you pick a battle and then make a different party 'shield' you, then you are a first-class wimp (_according to Boston tradition_)!!


lalame said:


> I think naturally some will be dropped but most will probably be picked up by the other family members. I read somewhere that Charles already does 500 or so events per year. Yikes! And now with H&M and Andrew out, I wonder if they’ll have to pull in some of the “independent” family members like Eugenie or Beatrice to help pick up the slack.


I read somewhere that Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice may possibly take on more of these events ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Mrs.Z said:


> If she doesn’t realize life is unfair at her age, then yes, she is delusional.


She was referring to her treatment by the media compared to the treatment that Kate received.
Apparently when this picture was tweeted, not one member of the RF said boo.
But yep, life is unfair.


----------



## Jayne1

daisychainz said:


> She got a lot of hate for her post, so her husband came to her defense.
> View attachment 4653126


Someone explain. I thought Jess was posting about the Ukrainian passenger plane that went down, of which those that were killed, 138 were Canadian.

How did this reference Kate?


----------



## lulu212121

Jayne1 said:


> Someone explain. I thought Jess was posting about the Ukrainian passenger plane that went down, of which those that were killed, 138 were Canadian.
> 
> How did this reference Kate?


Was that referenced before or after people spoke out about Kate's pictures with the Holocaust survivors? Or her husband speaking up? Jessica looked like she was trying to be coy but got called out.


----------



## hellosunshine

Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


----------



## Mrs.Z

UNREAL


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## LibbyRuth

lalame said:


> I wonder what aspect she’s specifically talking about that isn’t “fair.” Media coverage? How could you not have seen the press scrutinizing  royal women for decades... if she’s talking about any other facets of the job, well....


Rehearing that quote on one of the specials last night, I kind of wondered if when she was talking about fairness she was talking about press coverage, or family dynamics. I do think that she has a lot of issues with the hierarchy of the family, and the fact that William and Kate will always be seen as a higher priority than she and Harry. 
Even if it was entirely on the press coverage, I think you're very right about the history of scrutinizing royal women. Looking back a generation, the press was much tougher I think on Sarah than they were Diana.  With Meghan the cheap shot was race. With Sarah, the cheap shot was weight. But there was a lot of that same building Diana up as the future queen while tearing Sarah down for the very same things because there was no need to build her up. 
It's been said very well in this thread - nothing about royalty is based on merit or fairness!


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


You’re right. 

The Sussex duo would never be anti-semit... oh wait.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4653310


Ohhhh this is hilarious!


----------



## tiktok

lulu212121 said:


> Was that referenced before or after people spoke out about Kate's pictures with the Holocaust survivors? Or her husband speaking up? Jessica looked like she was trying to be coy but got called out.



I don't know about that. As much as I don't think very highly of her (or Meghan), she's Jewish, and for Jewish people especially, any "digs" remotely related to the Holocaust are so low and awful they're inconceivable. It's the genocide of your own people - it's just not something you would ever think of touching (and if you do then you need to truly take a hard look at your values and get some serious therapy).


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, isn't it better to be boring than to be a fragile, emotional phony trying to convince everyone she's a strong, independent woman?


----------



## LibbyRuth

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4653310


Aww ... some of the In Touch editors have been following Gary Janetti's instagram and thinking it's real!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> UNREAL


“Cambridge fans”


----------



## Lounorada

Speaking of Gary Janetti... (the captions too)


----------



## bag-mania

"She Meghan Markled herself right out of Gan Gan's will"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

I seriously cannot see Markle returning to acting


----------



## limom

Brad’s hubby is a mess.
Start following twitter account


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> I seriously cannot see Markle returning to acting


Lawd... She barely even acted in the first place


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Lawd... She barely even acted in the first place


I never watched anything she was in, but even really successful actresses struggle to fund good roles after 40.  Showbiz isn’t kind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry’s just lost a complaint about an article in the Mail on Sunday.  He failed to point out the elephant in wildlife pictures he posted of himself was both drugged and tethered.  Pictures posted on Instagram were edited to hide the rope around the animals hind legs.  The MoS ran a story about this apparently and Harry made a complaint that it wasn’t necessary to inform the public.  The Independent Press standards organisation ruled otherwise. I think they were right, it was a pretty disingenuous thing to do.



Ya know, I've said before I've always had a weak spot for Harry, but I'm also a huge animal lover and I am rapidly losing patience with him.


----------



## mshermes

hellosunshine said:


> Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


So funny. I had to reread this as I thought you were describing MM.


----------



## bag-mania




----------



## scarlet555

limom said:


> She was referring to her treatment by the media compared to the treatment that Kate received.
> Apparently when this picture was tweeted, not one member of the RF said boo.
> But yep, life is unfair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4653264



when people don't like you, they will stop defending you...


----------



## scarlet555

mshermes said:


> So funny. I had to reread this as I thought you were describing MM.



word


----------



## Aqua01

hellosunshine said:


> Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


Sussex fans embarrassingly assume that insulting Kate would make Meghan look better. My opinion, but deep down I know that Sussex fans know the truth about Meghan all along. She's self-absorbed, greedy, ungrateful, entitled, phony af, delusional, sociopathic , manipulative, thirsty, and parasitic.  Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings and keep bringing down a fine woman who is just doing her job and has nothing to do with this whole disaster A.k.a. Sussex in order to feel better about themselves and their goddess? Kate has nothing to do with that Duchess of Damnation (Meghan).


----------



## mshermes

Aqua01 said:


> Sussex fans embarrassingly assume that insulting Kate would make Meghan look better. My opinion, but deep down I know that Sussex fans know the truth about Meghan all along. She's self-absorbed, greedy, ungrateful, entitled, phony af, delusional, sociopathic , manipulative, thirsty, and parasitic.  Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings and keep bringing down a fine woman who is just doing her job and has nothing to do with this whole disaster A.k.a. Sussex in order to feel better about themselves and their goddess? Kate has nothing to do with that Duchess of Damnation (Meghan).


May I add narcissistic.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Aqua01 said:


> Sussex fans embarrassingly assume that insulting Kate would make Meghan look better. M*y opinion, but deep down I know that Sussex fans know the truth about Meghan all along. *She's self-absorbed, greedy, ungrateful, entitled, phony af, delusional, sociopathic , manipulative, thirsty, and parasitic.  Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings and keep bringing down a fine woman who is just doing her job and has nothing to do with this whole disaster A.k.a. Sussex in order to feel better about themselves and their goddess? Kate has nothing to do with that Duchess of Damnation (Meghan).


Is there really a need to insult people who just don't share your opinion? 

People who like Harry&  Meghan obviously don't think she is those things you say she is, in your words above.  

People who admire Kate don't like _her_ being called names (as someone here has done), and call that behaviour out. It's hypocritical when it's a free-for-all the other way.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ya know, I've said before I've always had a weak spot for Harry, but I'm also a huge animal lover and I am rapidly losing patience with him.


Me too.  It’s no different from a tourist taking a selfie with a doped and toothless tiger - well, it’s just the same actually.  His defence was that the animals were being prepared for transfer - but if that was the case why not make it clear on Instagram?   It’s not credible, I don’t believe him.


----------



## Aqua01

mshermes said:


> May I add narcissistic.


Yes, you may


----------



## lanasyogamama

I went to Gary Janetti’s book signing a few months ago. He’s so great.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> In the Harvey Levin special last night, there was a bit of an interview with Thomas Markle. At one point he says "I think she mothers him." I was thinking 'holy crap, Thomas, you're probably right." Some of us might say smothers instead of mothers, but the point is the essentially the same.


WHOA!! .. that certainly fits the narrative of what I've heard about Meghan (from my friends who knew the family very well when Meghan was in High School and their son was her counterpart in the School play).  So, can't say that I'm shocked by this tidbit of 'news'!


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> I went to Gary Janetti’s book signing a few months ago. He’s so great.


I hope he does a Charlotte version at some point


----------



## daisychainz

Mrs.Z said:


> I seriously cannot see Markle returning to acting


Really? I totally see it. You don't think she'd want a Holly wood star, an Oscar nod, and so on? Maybe even an Oscar for a documentary film. I can't see her doing anything tv or like that, but even Oprah has done movies. I definitely think she'll stay in that field somehow.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


> People who like Harry&  Meghan obviously don't think she is those things you say she is, in your words above.
> 
> People who admire Kate don't like _her_ being called names (as someone here has done), and call that behaviour out. It's hypocritical when it's a free-for-all the other way.



Well, the difference is that Meghan's shenanigans are well documented...the sh*t she's said, the weird things she's been seen doing (like pushing aside her husband or pulling him from the middle of a conversation without even letting him finish his sentence, clearing out that Wimbledon section when Wills and Kate with all of their kids - two  future kings - can go to a soccer game and sit amongst, *gasp*, people) and the newest phony things e.g. pap pictures which miraculously stopped as soon as Harry set foot on Canadian soil. You don't need to "believe" anything, it's pretty out there.

Kate on the other hand  is completely inoffensive and doing her job appropriately, so going after her is pretty random, isn't it?


----------



## daisychainz

Aqua01 said:


> Sussex fans embarrassingly assume that insulting Kate would make Meghan look better. My opinion, but deep down I know that Sussex fans know the truth about Meghan all along. She's self-absorbed, greedy, ungrateful, entitled, phony af, delusional, sociopathic , manipulative, thirsty, and parasitic.  Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings and keep bringing down a fine woman who is just doing her job and has nothing to do with this whole disaster A.k.a. Sussex in order to feel better about themselves and their goddess? Kate has nothing to do with that Duchess of Damnation (Meghan).


And, Kate will one day be Queen. #winning


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> They will be a money machine, unfortunately.  I'm not sure there's enough to keep the public interest for that long, but I also thought that about the Kardashians.


Right? .. same here!  Heaven forbid, H&M have PMK "sell" them!!!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> WHOA!! .. that certainly fits the narrative of what I've heard about Meghan (from my friends who knew the family very well when Meghan was in High School and their son was her counterpart in the School play).  So, can't say that I'm shocked by this tidbit of 'news'!



Yeah, some of H&M’s inexplicable behavior makes more sense when you see them as being codependent.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Clearblueskies said:


> I hope he does a Charlotte version at some point


She looks like a firecracker!


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


HA .. tell us how you really feel!!!


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I just can't understand what is sporting about hunting.  The person has a gun.  The animal does not.  Sitting next to a dead animal grinning is just so disgusting to me.  I don't have enough words.


I totally agree. Hunting has always upset me. It is incredibly cruel to want to kill animals for sport. In the past when it was necessary for food to survive then it was justified. The royal family has always loved hunting, the Queen included. It’s funny but the more H and M deliberately or inadvertently expose the underpinnings of the Royal Family the more unsavory they appear.


----------



## mshermes

*Critics accuse Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of promoting phone network blamed for death of vulnerable man...*
*
They are going to find that life is not a bowl of cherries anywhere when in the public eye.*


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4653310


Gary Janetti for the win again!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I see shades of the..

*Meghan Markle's avocado on toast 'fuelling drought and murder*, non-story


----------



## Chagall

I can’t understand the interest in Jessica Mulroney. She is not well liked. She’s awful. Who cares what she has to say about anyone or anything.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Public Service Announcement:

The ignore feature, while imperfect, is here for you!

You may still see your ignore-ee in a quoted post, but you guys can just scroll past that stuff, right?  Please.  My face was literally like this a little while ago.







Its totally cool that some of you are split into Kate vs Meghan, that makes life interesting, I guess. But you cannot fight this battle on the PF.

It is exhausting. And I promise neither Kate and certainly not Meghan (due to, you know) will reward your loyalty with her royal favours, nor will QE2 knight you like this fine fellow.



I return you to your regular programming. Thank you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

hellosunshine said:


> Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


This is a very interesting assessment of Kate Middleton   Is it a corollary of this opinion that Meghan Markle is not mediocre, is sincere, not vapid, is competent and secure?


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4653310


Is this a parody/joke?
ETA I see this is from Gary Janetti’s Insta! Very good


----------



## mdcx

Kate - insecure and unconfident? I fail to see evidence of that literally anywhere. 
It doesn’t make MM look very secure when she keeps slagging off the entire BRF on the other hand.


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Is there really a need to insult people who just don't share your opinion?
> 
> People who like Harry&  Meghan obviously don't think she is those things you say she is, in your words above.
> 
> People who admire Kate don't like _her_ being called names (as someone here has done), and call that behaviour out. It's hypocritical when it's a free-for-all the other way.


She did say "_my opinion_"; I don't think it was directed at anyone.  Oftentimes, many of us do say "i_n my opinion_" purposely to prevent the back-&-forth between members (we were instructed to do so by the Mods).  Just 'sayin .. Cheers !


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## bag-mania

Aw, it didn't quite work out the way you planned.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I totally agree. Hunting has always upset me. It is incredibly cruel to want to kill animals for sport. In the past when it was necessary for food to survive then it was justified. The royal family has always loved hunting, the Queen included. It’s funny but the more H and M deliberately or inadvertently expose the underpinnings of the Royal Family the more unsavory they appear.


I don't like any kind of hunting.  I understand there are "responsible" hunters who kill animals like deer and eat the animal.  And that this can help with population control.  But I still can't understand the enjoyment of killing a beautiful animal.
The royals (I think) are mostly known for fox hunts.  Again, I don't see the fun in this.  But it's not nearly as bad as going to Africa or wherever and killing an endangered animal and posing with the body.  This is Just Beyond Disgusting.


----------



## Mrs.Z

daisychainz said:


> Really? I totally see it. You don't think she'd want a Holly wood star, an Oscar nod, and so on? Maybe even an Oscar for a documentary film. I can't see her doing anything tv or like that, but even Oprah has done movies. I definitely think she'll stay in that field somehow.


I guess I just don’t see her going back to long hours on set etc.


----------



## lalame

How does anyone really know Kate’s personality anyway... she doesn’t really share enough of that side of her. From what I can tell, she has areas of interest like children but I don’t really know what she’s wildly passionate about, troubled by, etc. In that way she is a bit “bland” and just does what she’s supposed to but I’ve come to appreciate that in a royal. She’s drama-free, complain-free, and just shows up with a smile whenever she’s supposed to. She even seems a bit shy. 

And I say that without any sort of comparison to Meghan... that’s always been my impression of Kate.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> I guess I just don’t see her going back to long hours on set etc.


The older you get as an actress the longer it takes for hair and makeup. 3am call for 7am  shoot. Takes time.


----------



## lalame

Mrs.Z said:


> I guess I just don’t see her going back to long hours on set etc.


I don’t think she’ll go back to acting. The only roles that would be interesting, substantial, etc would mortify the BRF to see her in. Can you even imagine having photos of royals kissing other people, much less in love scenes or emotional scenes?

They’re probably still mortified to have footage of her in risqué love scenes out there! (And they were pretty steamy in Suits)


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> How does anyone really know Kate’s personality anyway... she doesn’t really share enough of that side of her. From what I can tell, she has areas of interest like children but I don’t really know what she’s wildly passionate about, troubled by, etc. In that way she is a bit “bland” and just does what she’s supposed to but I’ve come to appreciate that in a royal. She’s drama-free, complain-free, and just shows up with a smile whenever she’s supposed to. She even seems a bit shy.
> 
> And I say that without any sort of comparison to Meghan... that’s always been my impression of Kate.


She also is very sporty. Read a quote that said Kate and Pippa never met a sport they didn’t like. It may not be that obvious but she has a competitive streak.   That usually is indicative of a person who will do what it takes to get the ball into the end zone.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> She also is very sporty. Read a quote that said Kate and Pippa never met a sport they didn’t like. It may not be that obvious but she has a competitive streak.   That usually is indicative of a person who will do what it takes to get the ball into the end zone.



It probably helped her tough it out in the beginning when the tabloids WERE on her case.


----------



## Mrs.Z

lalame said:


> How does anyone really know Kate’s personality anyway... she doesn’t really share enough of that side of her. From what I can tell, she has areas of interest like children but I don’t really know what she’s wildly passionate about, troubled by, etc. In that way she is a bit “bland” and just does what she’s supposed to but I’ve come to appreciate that in a royal. She’s drama-free, complain-free, and just shows up with a smile whenever she’s supposed to. She even seems a bit shy.
> 
> And I say that without any sort of comparison to Meghan... that’s always been my impression of Kate.



I think some of the criticism of Kate is due to fundamental lack of understanding of her role (again watch The Crown people!)  She’s NOT here to be your fashion icon, your totally relatable girlfriend, she’s not supposed to talk about her feelings in public, she’s not here to revolutionize the field of child psychology, she’s not your “woke” guru/life coach....she’s the wife of the future King and the mother of the future King.  Frankly, she comes off as pretty likable in my opinion, super exciting...NO...but that’s not who she is supposed to be. 

To keep my comment relevant, Meghan should be all this to even a lesser degree, but I’m just not sure this was ever going to be acceptable to Meghan.  Wife of spare....what did you expect?


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Kate - insecure and unconfident? I fail to see evidence of that literally anywhere.
> It doesn’t make MM look very secure when she keeps slagging off the entire BRF on the other hand.


You forgot sincere, as in sincerely wanting to support he work of the Royal family and not being confident enough to stick it out and learn the ropes.   I guess she wasn’t OK, I forgot to ask.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Mrs.Z said:


> I think some of the criticism of Kate is due to fundamental lack of understanding of her role (again watch The Crown people!)  She’s NOT here to be your fashion icon, your totally relatable girlfriend, she’s not supposed to talk about her feelings in public, she’s not here to revolutionize the field of child psychology, she’s not your “woke” guru/life coach....she’s the wife of the future King and the mother of the future King.  Frankly, she comes off as pretty likable in my opinion, super exciting...NO...but that’s not who she is supposed to be.
> 
> To keep my comment relevant, Meghan should be all this to even a lesser degree, but I’m just not sure this was ever going to be acceptable to Meghan.  Wife of spare....what did you expect?



Totally agree! Seems like the QEII model (Kate is). That probably was a fundamental issue for Meghan as her entire adult life has been focused on advancing in a career that is very much based on self-promotion, being interesting, having a memorable image, etc. Not knocking that really, all actors have to do that to be successful, but obviously the playing field is very different for BRF and you have to adjust to the role.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Totally agree! Seems like the QEII model (Kate is). That probably was a fundamental issue for Meghan as her entire adult life has been focused on advancing in a career that is very much based on self-promotion, being interesting, having a memorable image, etc. Not knocking that really, all actors have to do that to be successful, but obviously the playing field is very different for BRF and you have to adjust to the role.


Exactly. In a nutshell, membership in this family means it’s not all about you. People in egocentric professions best not apply.


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> Exactly. In a nutshell, membership in this family means it’s not all about you. People in egocentric professions best not apply.



Although a great sense of privilege and entitlement is welcome (as the articles posted about Charles as well as Andrew's conduct demonstrate).


----------



## Jayne1

Mrs.Z said:


> I think some of the criticism of Kate is due to fundamental lack of understanding of her role (again watch The Crown people!)  She’s NOT here to be your fashion icon, your totally relatable girlfriend, she’s not supposed to talk about her feelings in public, she’s not here to revolutionize the field of child psychology, she’s not your “woke” guru/life coach....she’s the wife of the future King and the mother of the future King.


Agree... and that's why I was never much of a Diana fan. She kept communicating too much about herself. It wasn't proper.

Notice how M&H have gone underground? We're running out of things to say.  lol


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I don't like any kind of hunting.  I understand there are "responsible" hunters who kill animals like deer and eat the animal.  And that this can help with population control.  But I still can't understand the enjoyment of killing a beautiful animal.
> The royals (I think) are mostly known for fox hunts.  Again, I don't see the fun in this.  But it's not nearly as bad as going to Africa or wherever and killing an endangered animal and posing with the body.  This is Just Beyond Disgusting.


The queen herself has shot stags for sport I believe.


----------



## tiktok

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/o...buy-a-piece-of-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle
... the odds are low that the royal couple will come out of the gate hawking body lotion and sticky notes. “I think the British public would recoil at that, and even in the U.S. people may see it as a sellout, an overcommercialization of their status,” he told me. Rather, he said, “I think the initial objective should be to establish their brand as a purpose-driven brand and their careers as purpose-driven careers. That’s what their generation is looking for.” They could do this through continued charity work, and the tasteful forms of cashing in exemplified by the Obamas: a book deal, speaking engagements, producing TV shows about worthy topics.


----------



## Megs

Jayne1 said:


> Agree... and that's why I was never much of a Diana fan. She kept communicating too much about herself. It wasn't proper.
> 
> Notice how M&H have gone underground? We're running out of things to say.  lol



Just made me laugh because I clearly was oddly into the drama surrounding them and now they are in hiding and I'm like... 

Heyyyyyyyy you guys!!!!! Come out and play!


----------



## mdcx

I imagine there might be a few cold hard truths being uncovered during this “blissful love in” of Meg, Harry and hopefully Archie.
MMs driving ambition for all the fame might be starting to crystallise for Harry. Now that they are away from all the distractions of the mean BRF, the mean British media, the haters blah blah. In theory everything should be peachy, but I think this may be the chapter where the marriage starts to unravel.


----------



## jess236

MM did have a positive effect. Ironically she strengthened the traditional monarchy. In contrast to her antics, she made William and Kate look noble, professional, dedicated and authentic.  They look much happier since MM left.


----------



## Chagall

tiktok said:


> Although a great sense of privilege and entitlement is welcome (as the articles posted about Charles as well as Andrew's conduct demonstrate).


I agree. Andrew’s interview for one, showed him to be an absolute pompous a** without a trace of remorse.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> Kate - insecure and unconfident? I fail to see evidence of that literally anywhere.
> It doesn’t make MM look very secure when she keeps slagging off the entire BRF on the other hand.


I think if you are secure and confident you don’t have the need to keep pushing yourself into the limelight like MM. Kate’s quiet dignity shows she is very sure of herself.


----------



## lulu212121

mdcx said:


> I imagine there might be a few cold hard truths being uncovered during this “blissful love in” of Meg, Harry and hopefully Archie.
> MMs driving ambition for all the fame might be starting to crystallise for Harry. Now that they are away from all the distractions of the mean BRF, the mean British media, the haters blah blah. In theory everything should be peachy, but I think this may be the chapter where the marriage starts to unravel.


I wonder if Harry, I mean H, is hearing the word "No" a lot right now. I bet that gets in his head.


----------



## rose60610

It's ironic that attention-loving Meghan who couldn't get enough of the cameras even when she complained about the "mean media", begged out of royal duties yet begged for continuing Crown cash, fled to Canada to rejoin stashed Archie. Yet she could pick up friends at the airport (pictures!) and take a pap walk half-holding her baby with dogs and a psycho smile plastered on her face, and now? Where is she? I can't believe Harry suggested she tone down the pap sightings without getting pressure from back home as in: "you want to keep getting money on your 'venture to independence', then make all the pap sightings disappear for a while".  Maybe she shut up (for once) in light of the upcoming TV interviews. 

Meghan must be beside herself not to be able to gloat in front of cameras. When she emerges, will we get "weird smile face" or "pity me because I'm lonely" face?


----------



## doni

tiktok said:


> Although a great sense of privilege and entitlement is welcome (as the articles posted about Charles as well as Andrew's conduct demonstrate).


Privilege and entitlement are a given in all blood royals I believe, whether they are good or not at not showing it... No matter if you are second fiddle to your brother, if you have been treated like a Prince, in the most literal sense, since you are born, it gets into your head. I mean, that is after all what entitlement means, to be ‘given a title’.


----------



## floatinglili

Privilege  and entitlement is the very essence of aristocracy. I haven’t really wanted to wade into the issue of racism against MM by the BRF but as an Australian I can’t help feeling the intrinsic starting position for aristocrats must be a deep and overwhelming snobbery. In discussing MM it seems to me that the snobbery of aristocrats has been perhaps underplayed. As a young person visiting and working in Britain, I met a condescending attitude of ‘convicts and colonials’ many times in my months there. Even amongst some quite ordinary middle class British folk. One doesn’t need to be a different colour to be patronised in a well established class system. Being from a different country can be quite enough. Let’s not forget, the aristocrats forcibly exported their own poor for the purposes of monetising Australia.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> Yes, particularly in England where most people who own a home actually lease it... I mean, if this is the case in London, not so surprising this happens in Cornwall right?
> Then, the NY Times is free to opine  Government or Parliament are not interfering in what Charles does, but the fact is,  the Treasury has an institutional role in the management of the Duchy which is regulated by law, there are things that the Duke can't do without explicit authorization from the Treasury, and the Duchy's annual accounts are presented to the Parliament (both houses) and published.
> And then yes, this is the property of Charles, but only in his institutional role as Prince of Wales (the moment he becomes King, or say if he quits, he stops 'owning' the Duchy), and he cannot dispose of it. If he was to pass away it would not be part of his inheritance. So this is nothing like normal private ownership as the paper itself admits.
> Is it a bizarre and outdated construction that does not find parallel in the normal market regulated world the rest of us live? Yes, but, hello? this is the British monarchy we are talking about... I find it stranger that the UK constitution is not written anywhere, but there you go, if it works, why fix it?



I own my own home but half my 'garden' belongs do a Duke (not that Duke) and I pay him an annual rent for it. No problem. 

In the UK land owners have to pay tax on land (relatively new law) so they now need to raise money from it. Not all land is suitable for farming.


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> Privilege  and entitlement is the very essence of aristocracy. I haven’t really wanted to wade into the issue of racism against MM by the BRF but as an Australian I can’t help feeling the intrinsic starting position for aristocrats must be a deep and overwhelming snobbery. In discussing MM it seems to me that the snobbery of aristocrats has been perhaps underplayed. As a young person visiting and working in Britain, I met a condescending attitude of ‘convicts and colonials’ many times in my months there. Even amongst some quite ordinary middle class British folk. One doesn’t need to be a different colour to be patronised in a well established class system. Being from a different country can be quite enough. Let’s not forget, the aristocrats forcibly exported their own poor for the purposes of monetising Australia.




There would have been just as many feathers ruffled had M been a British white girl from a council estate. Aristocracy is all.about class not colour. Had she been a princess from Swaziland, they'd be no problem.


----------



## floatinglili

Wow @Clearblueskies, you seem to be taking things very seriously. Perhaps the common issue of reading tone online is the issue on this one. Nobody is underplaying the seriousness of either issue including me. Let’s agree to not pursue it any further. It is OT for this thread and besides we are here for leisure not silly argumentation.


----------



## Sharont2305

floatinglili said:


> Privilege  and entitlement is the very essence of aristocracy. I haven’t really wanted to wade into the issue of racism against MM by the BRF but as an Australian I can’t help feeling the intrinsic starting position for aristocrats must be a deep and overwhelming snobbery. In discussing MM it seems to me that the snobbery of aristocrats has been perhaps underplayed. As a young person visiting and working in Britain, I met a condescending attitude of ‘convicts and colonials’ many times in my months there. Even amongst some quite ordinary middle class British folk. One doesn’t need to be a different colour to be patronised in a well established class system. Being from a different country can be quite enough. Let’s not forget, the aristocrats forcibly exported their own poor for the purposes of monetising Australia.


Being from a different country within the UK can be difficult too, lol


----------



## floatinglili

@papertiger, interesting points about class vs other elements such as culture or ethnic heritage.
In my view there are several elements to judging who is ‘in’, and who is out. Obviously family aristocratic lineage is one important factor to the ‘in’ club.
‘Polish’ (that old school tie manner of cultural knowledge, etiquette knowledge and the right accent) is another. Even today, it is said that the most important element of a private school education is’polish’. Polish is how the upper middle class recognise and screen each other. MM would have made a bad impression with her assertive manners, pushing in front of H in a rush to introduce herself, disdain for royal tradition etc.
The values of the aristocracy are different from the middle class. It amuses me greatly to see the ongoing debate about MM work habits vs the ‘work shy’ Kate. Until very recently, the idea of an upper class woman being judged on work history and  output would have been seen as incredibly vulgar. Higher ups are not there on merit, but God’s grace.
I find these long involved discussions on the ‘work’ of these upper class women, their work history and general usefulness to be quite amusing. 
These conversations prove to me the inexorable weakening of the aristocratic class and their self-serving values.
In the modern age the aristocrats are publicly judged according to lower class merit-based values of ‘work’ . Oops!


----------



## Allisonfaye

Not sure if it's been posted here because I can't possibly keep up with this thread but it says they are house hunting in LA. I KNEW they would end up back in LA. She wants to hobnob with celebrities now that she is no longer D list.


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I own my own home but half my 'garden' belongs do a Duke (not that Duke) and I pay him an annual rent for it. No problem.
> 
> In the UK land owners have to pay tax on land (relatively new law) so they now need to raise money from it. Not all land is suitable for farming.


Could you have purchased the whole land or not?
I read that if a mineral is found on your land, the owner does not own the right to mine, but the Duchy does. Is it accurate?


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> @papertiger, interesting points about class vs other elements such as culture or ethnic heritage.
> In my view there are several elements to judging who is ‘in’, and who is out. Obviously family aristocratic lineage is one important factor to the ‘in’ club.
> ‘Polish’ (that old school tie manner of cultural knowledge, etiquette knowledge and the right accent) is another. Even today, it is said that the most important element of a private school education is’polish’. Polish is how the upper middle class recognise and screen each other. MM would have made a bad impression with her assertive manners, pushing in front of H in a rush to introduce herself, disdain for royal tradition etc.
> The values of the aristocracy are different from the middle class. It amuses me greatly to see the ongoing debate about MM work habits vs the ‘work shy’ Kate. Until very recently, the idea of an upper class woman being judged on work history and  output would have been seen as incredibly vulgar. Higher ups are not there on merit, but God’s grace.
> I find these long involved discussions on the ‘work’ of these upper class women, their work history and general usefulness to be quite amusing.
> These conversations prove to me the inexorable weakening of the aristocratic class and their self-serving values.
> In the modern age the aristocrats are publicly judged according to lower class merit-based values of ‘work’ . Oops!



I agree but also read Zygmunt Bauman's Memories of Class and Consumerism and New Poor.

Basically, we can't trust anyone, not even the way we're sold the 'work ethic'.

However, I've yet to see M work. What I've seen are pictures of her posed at various places acting as though at work and lots of words about work.

Honestly, I love my work (mostly) and travel 4 hours a day (no limo involved) in order to have that pleasure but,I wouldn't mind if Kate or Megs stayed at home with their babies, went to WI meetings  and crafted all day. 

Working class women have always had to work - which was why the middle classes frowned on it for their own, it was a mark of distinction. Aristos of both genders didn't ever work, which was why they were called GENTLEmen and ladies, that was their distinction. If M & H sincerely want to work there are vacancies in my friend's restaurant. Base is above minimum and the tips are for keeps.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Could you have purchased the whole land or not?
> I read that if a mineral is found on your land, the owner does not own the right to mine, but the Duchy does. Is it accurate?



You are spot on. It would have to be a Community Buyout (part of Scotland's Land Reform Act 2016) and we'd have approach the Community Trust.

Our region is full of minerals and the Duke owns all the rights, including under my house and full garden. However, I did a mining survey and no existing mines or seams run under my house (unlike some other houses in the area). It's a clause we all have to sign in this area, I'm not sure if that would change under a Community Buyout.


----------



## floatinglili

^^ @papertiger the end point of pure meritocracy has always seemed like hell to me.
I have a chinese-born acquaintance who thought nothing of forcing her eight year son to sit from 7pm to midnight in the weeks leading up to a piano exam, mostly practicing just a single scale he had trouble with. No toilet breaks allowed.
’Meritocracy’, taken to the edge, is dangerous to humanitarian or creative concerns. The frenzied ant climb is neither pleasant nor dignified. I’ll have a pinch of upper class grace mixed in, thank you!


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> You are spot on. It would have to be a Community Buyout (part of Scotland's Land Reform Act 2016) and we'd have approach the Community Trust.
> 
> Our region is full of minerals and the Duke owns all the rights, including under my house and full garden. However, I did a mining survey and no existing mines or seams run under my house (unlike some other houses in the area). It's a clause we all have to sign in this area, I'm not sure if that would change under a Community Buyout.


Are people upset about it?
It seems archaic and feudal.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> ^^ @papertiger the end point of pure meritocracy has always seemed like hell to me.
> I have a chinese-born acquaintance who thought nothing of forcing her eight year son to sit from 7pm to midnight in the weeks leading up to a piano exam, mostly practicing just a single scale he had trouble with. No toilet breaks allowed.
> ’Meritocracy’, taken to the edge, is dangerous to humanitarian or creative concerns. The frenzied ant climb is neither pleasant nor dignified. I’ll have a pinch of upper class grace mixed in, thank you!


That is child abuse.this has nothing to do with meritocracy or nationality for the matter.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Are people upset about it?
> It seems archaic and feudal.



The deeds of my house go back to 1780 so I guess it's not surprising. Freemen always worked in this area and built their own houses so unlike most other places not tied to their employment. If the landowners care about the place it's not so bad, unfortunately most live in Edinburgh (or England) and never even visit.

I am grateful for the opportunity of our garden though.

For balance have a look with what Prince Charles did for Dumfries House and the surrounding area/community.


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> The deeds of my house go back to 1780 so I guess it's not surprising. Freemen always worked in this area and built their own houses so unlike most other places not tied to their employment. If the landowners care about the place it's not so bad, unfortunately most live in Edinburgh (or England) and never even visit.
> 
> I am grateful for the opportunity of our garden though.
> 
> For balance have a look with what Prince Charles did for Dumfries House and the surrounding area/community.


This is simply fascinating.


----------



## daisychainz

rose60610 said:


> It's ironic that attention-loving Meghan who couldn't get enough of the cameras even when she complained about the "mean media", begged out of royal duties yet begged for continuing Crown cash, fled to Canada to rejoin stashed Archie. Yet she could pick up friends at the airport (pictures!) and take a pap walk half-holding her baby with dogs and a psycho smile plastered on her face, and now? Where is she? I can't believe Harry suggested she tone down the pap sightings without getting pressure from back home as in: "you want to keep getting money on your 'venture to independence', then make all the pap sightings disappear for a while".  Maybe she shut up (for once) in light of the upcoming TV interviews.
> 
> Meghan must be beside herself not to be able to gloat in front of cameras. When she emerges, will we get "weird smile face" or "pity me because I'm lonely" face?


I think maybe we'll get Meghan and Harry together for the next outing. I'm guessing they have hooked up with some organization in Canada and they will be at the facility for a photo op together, like baking cakes or cooking dinner. Something that looks like a former royal duty they had. I don't think we'll get Meghan alone on walks anymore - Harry seems to have stopped that?! Just guessing... they'll be around soon. You can't keep an actress in hiding for too long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The deeds of my house go back to 1780 so I guess it's not surprising.



Does it have a name? A family friend lived in the UK for a while at the cottage she rented had no house number, but a name.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I think maybe we'll get Meghan and Harry together for the next outing. I'm guessing they have hooked up with some organization in Canada and they will be at the facility for a photo op together, like baking cakes or cooking dinner. Something that looks like a former royal duty they had.* I don't think we'll get Meghan alone on walks anymore - Harry seems to have stopped that?! *Just guessing... they'll be around soon. You can't keep an actress in hiding for too long.



I don't think it's that Harry stopped it as much as she knows she can't get away with it when he's there. He would wonder why they had to go for a walk at a particular time, at a particular place. It was easy to arrange all that while he was away. I believe she did it without his knowledge.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does it have a name? A family friend lived in the UK for a while at the cottage she rented had no house number, but a name.



Yes it does!

The house I grew up in also had a name but no numder.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does it have a name? A family friend lived in the UK for a while at the cottage she rented had no house number, but a name.


A lot of houses just have names, especially in older houses in rural areas. It's pretty common. Most of my village is like that so the address would look like this
House name
Road or Lane name (not always) 
Village name
County name
Country (Wales, Scotland, N. Ireland, England)
UK
Post Code.

We have loooooong addresses, [emoji23]


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> I don't think it's that Harry stopped it as much as she knows she can't get away with it when he's there. He would wonder why they had to go for a walk at a particular time, at a particular place. It was easy to arrange all that while he was away. I believe she did it without his knowledge.


I wonder when he will get that aha moment....if it hasn't hit him yet.  When he realizes what he traded his life for....


----------



## Sharont2305

imgg said:


> I wonder when he will get that aha moment....if it hasn't hit him yet.  When he realizes what he traded his life for....


Sometime soon I hope, before it affects Archie too much.


----------



## imgg

Sharont2305 said:


> Sometime soon I hope, before it affects Archie too much.


Seriously!


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> I wonder when he will get that aha moment....if it hasn't hit him yet.  When he realizes what he traded his life for....



I suppose it will depend on what they are like together when no one else is around, the same as with any marriage. If he gave everything up for her and she still isn't happy, I don't know what else he can do. Meghan doesn't seem like someone who is ever satisfied with what she has, she is always reaching for more.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> I suppose it will depend on what they are like together when no one else is around, the same as with any marriage. If he gave everything up for her and she still isn't happy, I don't know what else he can do. Meghan doesn't seem like someone who is ever satisfied with what she has, she is always reaching for more.


At some point, I would imagine Harry will need to re-evaluate his own happiness, not just Meghan's.


----------



## byzina

tiktok said:


> https://www.newyorker.com/culture/o...buy-a-piece-of-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle
> ... the odds are low that the royal couple will come out of the gate hawking body lotion and sticky notes. “I think the British public would recoil at that, and even in the U.S. people may see it as a sellout, an overcommercialization of their status,” he told me. Rather, he said, “I think the initial objective should be to establish their brand as a purpose-driven brand and their careers as purpose-driven careers. That’s what their generation is looking for.” They could do this through continued charity work, and the tasteful forms of cashing in exemplified by the Obamas: a book deal, speaking engagements, producing TV shows about worthy topics.



I'm reading _Becoming _at the moment and I don't believe H&M will be successful in the *****'s path. I mean Michelle was involved into management far before her work as a First Lady. She has proper education and work experience, and she did everything herself. I really admire her determination and she was an excellent First Lady for 8 years though it was hard for her. H&M couldn't make it in the RF even though everything was organized for them by the staff. Meghan got tired only in 1,5 years. What will their book be about? A sad story of privileged life in the palace? Insider's royal gossip? No matter what they write, it will be scandalous for the rest of the RF. As for charity, if they really wanted to make the world better, they would stay in the RF and work.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't think it's that Harry stopped it as much as she knows she can't get away with it when he's there. He would wonder why they had to go for a walk at a particular time, at a particular place. It was easy to arrange all that while he was away. I believe she did it without his knowledge.


I don't think Harry gets to tell her what to do or not to do


----------



## bag-mania

Ideally, I think Harry would like to be paid half a million dollars to go around giving 15-minute speeches about the environment and spend the rest of his time living a life of leisure.  Meghan needs more attention. She will want to be more visible.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't think Harry gets to tell her what to do or not to do



She's definitely in control but I don't think it's by using an iron fist. I'm guessing she finesses him to get her way.


----------



## CobaltBlu

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-summer-Los-Angeles-source-tells-E-News.html

er........  

'They've reached out to people in L.A. and would like to assemble a team of locals.'

Meghan reportedly has two stipulations for their Californian home - one of which is that it is suitable for holding meetings."

That's smart because there are literally no places to hold meetings in LA so you pretty much have to to it at your house.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She's definitely in control but I don't think it's by using an iron fist. I'm guessing she finesses him to get her way.


a nice way of saying she manipulates him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-summer-Los-Angeles-source-tells-E-News.html
> 
> er........
> 
> 'They've reached out to people in L.A. and would like to assemble a team of locals.'
> 
> Meghan reportedly has two stipulations for their Californian home - one of which is that it is suitable for holding meetings."
> 
> That's smart because there are literally no places to hold meetings in LA so you pretty much have to to it at your house.



Maybe she's getting ready to run for a political office. Good luck California!


----------



## Clearblueskies

I wonder if “reaching out” means they’re looking for someone to offer to loan them a property- it wouldn’t surprise me.  I read that they haven't got the funds to pay for anything the like of which they’re currently squatting in.  I’m also puzzled why they feel the need to interview for security teams, I thought we were already paying for their security?


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I wonder if “reaching out” means they’re looking for someone to offer to loan them a property- it wouldn’t surprise me.  I read that they haven't got the funds to pay for anything the like of which they’re currently squatting in.  I’m also puzzled why they feel the need to interview for security teams, I thought we were already paying for their security?


I wonder how long this level of attention and privilege (staying in mansions for free) will last.  Surely not forever.  Oh, never mind - they are going to be "earning" huge money.  But aren't they expected to donate that money to the causes they are interested in?


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> But aren't they expected to donate that money to the causes they are interested in?


I thought so too, it’ll be interesting to see whether that stated intention ever comes to anything or just fades away.  They also seem intent on running up significant lifestyle expenses which will eat into a lot of any money they might make. (Not that they’ve made any money yet obvs)


----------



## bag-mania

I'm sure it's understood that any charitable donations would only occur after their personal expenses have been met. And we can safely assume their expenses will be extremely high.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure it's understood that any charitable donations would only occur after their personal expenses have been met. And we can safely assume their expenses will be extremely high.


ha


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure it's understood that any charitable donations would only occur after their personal expenses have been met. And we can safely assume their expenses will be extremely high.


It will be interesting to see how this plays out.  If they don't do something major - not just showing up at a bakery - will they eventually run out of the goodwill they're getting from all the US media?  Can they sustain the attention just with being beautiful (in some people's opinion) and formerly royal?  Can she get get herself some Angelina Jolie-type jobs?  But Angie still makes money acting.  Lots of questions.

Does the US media give them all this positive attention because they think that's what the public wants to see?  Or because they really believe what they are spouting?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I suppose it will depend on what they are like together when no one else is around, the same as with any marriage. If he gave everything up for her and she still isn't happy, I don't know what else he can do. Meghan doesn't seem like someone who is ever satisfied with what she has, she is always reaching for more.



You nailed it! 

I wondered which fairytale these two were living. Now we know. Pushkin's the Fisherman and the Fish. Read it if you don't believe...


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> It will be interesting to see how this plays out.  If they don't do something major - not just showing up at a bakery - will they eventually run out of the goodwill they're getting from all the US media?  Can they sustain the attention just with being beautiful (in some people's opinion) and formerly royal?  Can she get get herself some Angelina Jolie-type jobs?  But Angie still makes money acting.  Lots of questions.
> 
> Does the US media give them all this positive attention because they think that's what the public wants to see?  Or because they really believe what they are spouting?


M&H are associated with Oprah W.. her team will make sure that EVERYBODY is making money.
See what is happening with “American Dirt”...


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> You nailed it!
> 
> I wondered which fairytale these two were living. Now we know. Pushkin's the Fisherman and the Fish. Read it if you don't believe...


It would be hard to read without basic Russian language skills.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> M&H are associated with Oprah W.. her team will make sure that EVERYBODY is making money.
> See what is happening with “American Dirt”...


I'm not familiar with American Dirt....yes if Oprah sticks with them.  I think her O network took awhile to become successful?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Ideally, I think Harry would like to be paid half a million dollars to go around giving 15-minute speeches about the environment and spend the rest of his time living a life of leisure.  Meghan needs more attention. She will want to be more visible.



Perhaps Harry could apply to be Santa/Father Christmas. That way he could save up all his airmiles for an around the world trip (in one evening) only have to work one day a year and everyone will always be delighted to see him.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> It will be interesting to see how this plays out.  If they don't do something major - not just showing up at a bakery - will they eventually run out of the goodwill they're getting from all the US media?  Can they sustain the attention just with being beautiful (in some people's opinion) and formerly royal?  Can she get get herself some Angelina Jolie-type jobs?  But Angie still makes money acting.  Lots of questions.
> *Does the US media give them all this positive attention because they think that's what the public wants to see?  Or because they really believe what they are spouting?*



I think it's both. The US media doesn't expect much from celebrities. As long as they don't commit any heinous crimes or say anything politically incorrect, the media will support them. After all, the news media and the entertainment media are practically one and the same here.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think it's both. The US media doesn't expect much from celebrities. As long as they don't commit any heinous crimes or say anything politically incorrect, the media will support them. After all, the news media and the entertainment media are practically one and the same here.


yes, I'm always "surprised" when I see some show like entertainment tonight reporting on a news story that has nothing to do with celebs


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> It would be hard to read without basic Russian language skills.



Many translations of the poem. The Brothers Grimm called it The Fisherman and His Wife. You'll love it. A tale for all times. Obviously, the roles could be reversed or same sex in modern versions


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Perhaps Harry could apply to be Santa/Father Christmas. That way he could save up all his airmiles for an around the world trip (in one evening) only have to work one day a year and everyone will always be delighted to see him.



He doesn't want to work that hard even for one day.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I'm not familiar with American Dirt....yes if Oprah sticks with them.  I think her O network took awhile to become successful?


Oprah completely sold out when OWN started to flounder. She hired a not so ethical team to make beaucoup bucks.
As far as American Dirt, it is a fictional book about the Latino/immigration story written by a woman who has no ties to the community.
It is full of stereotypes and fallacies.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...an-dirt-jeanine-cummins-controversy-explained


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, I'm always "surprised" when I see some show like entertainment tonight reporting on a news story that has nothing to do with celebs



What's worse is when your local news broadcast devotes an entire segment to that night's episode of The Masked Singer or American Idol or whatever show needs promoting. Entertainment has become news. They do it because 1) they are promoting shows on their channel for ratings purposes, and 2) it's the kind of story people care about, which is really sad.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Oprah completely sold out when OWN started to flounder. She hired a not so ethical team to make beaucoup bucks.
> As far as American Dirt, it is a fictional book about the Latino/immigration story written by a woman who has no ties to the community.
> It is full of stereotypes and fallacies.
> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...an-dirt-jeanine-cummins-controversy-explained


looks like Oprah made a mistake there.  You'd think she would have a team to extensively vet something like this before "promoting" it.  In spite of this and some other info posted here about Oprah (being cold and nasty) I think she has done some good things.  You can't really take that school success away from her.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> What's worse is when your local news broadcast devotes an entire segment to that night's episode of The Masked Singer or American Idol or whatever show needs promoting. Entertainment has become news. They do it because 1) they are promoting shows on their channel for ratings purposes, and 2) it's the kind of story people care about, which is really sad.


Marshall McLuhan and later Neil postman predicted this phenomenon. It is insane that we are actually living it.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> looks like Oprah made a mistake there.  You'd think she would have a team to extensively vet something like this before "promoting" it.  In spite of this and some other info posted here about Oprah (being cold and nasty) I think she has done some good things.  You can't really take that school success away from her.


She is not cold and nasty. She had no financial leeway, after Own.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> She is not cold and nasty. She had no financial leeway, after Own.


I don't know her.....someone here a while back said she wasn't nice to staff....have heard similar about Ellen


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> She is not cold and nasty. She had no financial leeway, after Own.


Talk to some folks who have worked for Oprah in the past, essential mantra is "it's my way [Oprah's] _or the highway_"!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure it's understood that any charitable donations would only occur after their personal expenses have been met. And we can safely assume their expenses will be extremely high.



This entire spectacle of MM's dissatisfaction with royal life and her need to rear-end and give the finger to all concerned is a bit illogical to the extreme.

Am assuming that MM's desire to be an actress was based on her need to be the center of attention while earning handfuls of cash, and she was a B-list ( or less) actress at best when she married Harry. In a nano-second, her dreams are realized by marrying Harry -> she receives instant adulation and mountains of money from the BRF, maybe not in cash paid directly to her bank account but $20M for her wedding and $2.4M for renos is definitely above her previous pay grade.

So why was this a problem going forward for MM?  Why the lawsuits in the UK with her father involved? Why is MM living in someone else's Chicken McMansion without paying rent and the owner, whom owns the house through a shell company - dig a little, reader and you will find this same set of facts - why is this okay but Frogmore Cottage after $2.4M in renos is not livable? Why the need for financial independence when you already have what took centuries, not years to build? Why is taking money from your stans okay if it is linked to your celebrity status but financial gains by being a visible role model for the UK is not acceptable? 

My guess is that Harry will spend his remaining years being MM's pimp and doing the talk show route.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Talk to some folks who have worked for Oprah in the past, essential mantra is "it's my way [Oprah's] _or the highway_"!


she may not be as "nice" as she appears on TV.  But then again, is she being criticized for being a strong woman boss, whereas a man would not get the same criticism?  Just asking.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> she may not be as "nice" as she appears on TV.  But then again, is she being criticized for being a strong woman boss, whereas a man would not get the same criticism?  Just asking.



This is not a defense of this behavior, but I think all innovators and empire heads get this reputation and do frequently get criticized for it. Like Elon, Jobs, Gates, Bezos, etc. I think it's kind of par for the course for people in that position to be at best very opinionated and at worst "my way or the highway." And to bring it back to topic... this includes the queen!


----------



## bag-mania

Another myth busted.

*Meghan Markle Isn’t ‘Very Close’ With Mom Doria Ragland*

Meghan Markle and mom Doria Ragland’s relationship isn’t as tight-knit as it may seem, multiple sources tell_ Us Weekly._

“She’s not very close with her mom,” one source tells _Us_.

A second insider notes that the 63-year-old yoga teacher, who lives in Los Angeles, “has no plans to relocate to Canada or anywhere for that matter” to be closer to her 38-year-old daughter.

“She is currently giving private yoga lessons to a select few clients,” the source says. “Doria would only see Meghan once or twice a year while filming _Suits_ in Toronto. Meghan isn’t as close to her mom as is known.”

Ragland did, however, attend Meghan’s May 2018 nuptials to Prince Harry in Windsor, England. The _Suits_ alum’s dad, Thomas Markle, for his part, didn’t walk his daughter down the aisle after he was caught staging photos with the paparazzi. While Thomas slammed Meghan and Harry’s decision to step back from the royal family earlier this month, Ragland has yet to publicly comment on the news.

Queen Elizabeth II confirmed on January 13 that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be spending more time in Canada and would no longer be using their HRH royal titles.

“Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family. Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives,” the 93-year-old monarch said in a statement. “It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.”

While Meghan and Harry, who share 8-month-old son, Archie, don’t have family around them in Canada, a source previously told _Us_ that the duchess feels “free” after the couple’s royal exit.

“She has never been happier. She’s happy to be out of London,” the source said. “She was surprised at how quickly everything happened. They knew they’d have to relinquish their titles, but the pace it happened surprised everyone.”

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/meghan-markle-isnt-very-close-with-mom-doria-ragland/


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Another myth busted.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Isn’t ‘Very Close’ With Mom Doria Ragland*
> 
> Meghan Markle and mom Doria Ragland’s relationship isn’t as tight-knit as it may seem, multiple sources tell_ Us Weekly._
> 
> “She’s not very close with her mom,” one source tells _Us_.
> 
> A second insider notes that the 63-year-old yoga teacher, who lives in Los Angeles, “has no plans to relocate to Canada or anywhere for that matter” to be closer to her 38-year-old daughter.
> 
> “She is currently giving private yoga lessons to a select few clients,” the source says. “Doria would only see Meghan once or twice a year while filming _Suits_ in Toronto. Meghan isn’t as close to her mom as is known.”
> 
> Ragland did, however, attend Meghan’s May 2018 nuptials to Prince Harry in Windsor, England. The _Suits_ alum’s dad, Thomas Markle, for his part, didn’t walk his daughter down the aisle after he was caught staging photos with the paparazzi. While Thomas slammed Meghan and Harry’s decision to step back from the royal family earlier this month, Ragland has yet to publicly comment on the news.
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II confirmed on January 13 that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be spending more time in Canada and would no longer be using their HRH royal titles.
> 
> “Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family. Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives,” the 93-year-old monarch said in a statement. “It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.”
> 
> While Meghan and Harry, who share 8-month-old son, Archie, don’t have family around them in Canada, a source previously told _Us_ that the duchess feels “free” after the couple’s royal exit.
> 
> “She has never been happier. She’s happy to be out of London,” the source said. “She was surprised at how quickly everything happened. They knew they’d have to relinquish their titles, but the pace it happened surprised everyone.”
> 
> https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/meghan-markle-isnt-very-close-with-mom-doria-ragland/



I don't know if they're close or not, but the conclusion they're drawing based on these factors is bogus. Your parent(s) aren't close to you if they don't uproot their lives and move where you are? Umm, I take offense to that and I'm sure many here did not ask or expect their parents to move states (US) much less countries for them when they had kids. And it does not say anything about your relationship or how much they care about you.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Another myth busted.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Isn’t ‘Very Close’ With Mom Doria Ragland*
> 
> Meghan Markle and mom Doria Ragland’s relationship isn’t as tight-knit as it may seem, multiple sources tell_ Us Weekly._
> 
> “She’s not very close with her mom,” one source tells _Us_.
> 
> A second insider notes that the 63-year-old yoga teacher, who lives in Los Angeles, “has no plans to relocate to Canada or anywhere for that matter” to be closer to her 38-year-old daughter.
> 
> “She is currently giving private yoga lessons to a select few clients,” the source says. “Doria would only see Meghan once or twice a year while filming _Suits_ in Toronto. Meghan isn’t as close to her mom as is known.”
> 
> Ragland did, however, attend Meghan’s May 2018 nuptials to Prince Harry in Windsor, England. The _Suits_ alum’s dad, Thomas Markle, for his part, didn’t walk his daughter down the aisle after he was caught staging photos with the paparazzi. While Thomas slammed Meghan and Harry’s decision to step back from the royal family earlier this month, Ragland has yet to publicly comment on the news.
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II confirmed on January 13 that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be spending more time in Canada and would no longer be using their HRH royal titles.
> 
> “Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working Members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family. Harry and Meghan have made clear that they do not want to be reliant on public funds in their new lives,” the 93-year-old monarch said in a statement. “It has therefore been agreed that there will be a period of transition in which the Sussexes will spend time in Canada and the UK.”
> 
> While Meghan and Harry, who share 8-month-old son, Archie, don’t have family around them in Canada, a source previously told _Us_ that the duchess feels “free” after the couple’s royal exit.
> 
> “She has never been happier. She’s happy to be out of London,” the source said. “She was surprised at how quickly everything happened. They knew they’d have to relinquish their titles, but the pace it happened surprised everyone.”
> 
> https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/meghan-markle-isnt-very-close-with-mom-doria-ragland/


Not a shock is it?


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> This is not a defense of this behavior, but I think all innovators and empire heads get this reputation and do frequently get criticized for it. Like Elon, Jobs, Gates, Bezos, etc. I think it's kind of par for the course for people in that position to be at best very opinionated and at worst "my way or the highway." And to bring it back to topic... this includes the queen!


Couldn't agree with you more; Martha Stewart is another one who is very-much like this and was oftentimes disliked for her "behavior".  Heck, in my workplace .. we women Exec's used to have a mantra "_better to be a B!tch than a Babe_" .. because we knew that many of our male colleagues for sure called us the 'B' word, but that is also how we got into those position (that and affirmative action).  However, one thing that I would never do is use someone else's work and call it my own -or- not give credit where it is due .. to do either are MAJOR PET-PEEVES of mine!! 

While I do indeed know people who bristled under Oprah's behavior, in some cases .. it was (somewhat) to be expected, but in other cases it was her prima-donna behavior.  Now, that being said, given that MM and Oprah both have 'alpha' personalities, what if they disagree on something??  I think the only reason why Gayle King has been Oprah's friend for so long, is that she knows that if she attempts to go up against Oprah, well .. you just don't do that!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Maybe someone posted this already but I guess former friends have started to sell off some photos. Someone who was close to her also said she was a yacht girl from time to time. I like the one with the rugby players - she was totally looking for a British 'star.' Poor Harry!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ghan-Markle-glam-life-return-post-Megxit.html


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't know if they're close or not, but the conclusion they're drawing based on these factors is bogus. Your parent(s) aren't close to you if they don't uproot their lives and move where you are? Umm, I take offense to that and I'm sure many here did not ask or expect their parents to move states (US) much less countries for them when they had kids. And it does not say anything about your relationship or how much they care about you.



True. But if you were here right after the wedding and when the pregnancy was announced, there were many people who thought Doria would drop everything and move to England because the media kept reporting how they were so close. It was the press quoting unnamed sources at that time just the same as they are now.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> True. But if you were here right after the wedding and when the pregnancy was announced, there were many people who thought Doria would drop everything and move to England because the media kept reporting how they were so close. It was the press quoting unnamed sources at that time just the same as they are now.



The fact that Doria continued in her day job after all that tells me she's a woman who really likes her life and isn't going to give it up for anyone. Fair enough, to me!


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Maybe someone posted this already but I guess former friends have started to sell off some photos. Someone who was close to her also said she was a yacht girl from time to time. I like the one with the rugby players - she was totally looking for a British 'star.' Poor Harry!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ghan-Markle-glam-life-return-post-Megxit.html



She sure loves to preen and pose for the cameras, as bad as a teenager. But then we already knew she was an egomaniac.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I don't know if they're close or not, but the conclusion they're drawing based on these factors is bogus. Your parent(s) aren't close to you if they don't uproot their lives and move where you are? Umm, I take offense to that and I'm sure many here did not ask or expect their parents to move states (US) much less countries for them when they had kids. And it does not say anything about your relationship or how much they care about you.


HA - right???  I was beyond thrilled when my parents moved across the country (even though we were in different states)!!!  While I understand some parents / children do uproot, I don't think it's always a good idea!


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> Maybe someone posted this already but I guess former friends have started to sell off some photos. Someone who was close to her also said she was a yacht girl from time to time. I like the one with the rugby players - she was totally looking for a British 'star.' Poor Harry!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ghan-Markle-glam-life-return-post-Megxit.html


A "yacht" girl??? .. oh, that is not good (some of the reality star gals on Southern Charm were also "yacht" girls .. cough-cough)!!  I'm surprised someone hasn't provided "receipts" of that because that could bring big $$$ (not that I think it's 'acceptable' per se).


----------



## lalame

daisychainz said:


> Maybe someone posted this already but I guess former friends have started to sell off some photos. Someone who was close to her also said she was a yacht girl from time to time. I like the one with the rugby players - she was totally looking for a British 'star.' Poor Harry!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ghan-Markle-glam-life-return-post-Megxit.html



Doesn't look like these photos were sold... they're from old social media posts that people have realized you can still find even though MM took down her personal Twitter and Insta.


----------



## Chagall

floatinglili said:


> @papertiger, interesting points about class vs other elements such as culture or ethnic heritage.
> In my view there are several elements to judging who is ‘in’, and who is out. Obviously family aristocratic lineage is one important factor to the ‘in’ club.
> ‘Polish’ (that old school tie manner of cultural knowledge, etiquette knowledge and the right accent) is another. Even today, it is said that the most important element of a private school education is’polish’. Polish is how the upper middle class recognise and screen each other. MM would have made a bad impression with her assertive manners, pushing in front of H in a rush to introduce herself, disdain for royal tradition etc.
> The values of the aristocracy are different from the middle class. It amuses me greatly to see the ongoing debate about MM work habits vs the ‘work shy’ Kate. Until very recently, the idea of an upper class woman being judged on work history and  output would have been seen as incredibly vulgar. Higher ups are not there on merit, but God’s grace.
> I find these long involved discussions on the ‘work’ of these upper class women, their work history and general usefulness to be quite amusing.
> These conversations prove to me the inexorable weakening of the aristocratic class and their self-serving values.
> In the modern age the aristocrats are publicly judged according to lower class merit-based values of ‘work’ . Oops!


Kate wasn’t from upper class. She was from a working class background and what is often called ‘new money’. Her parents worked their party favors company into becoming a success. Her behaviour, however, after marrying into the BRF has been pure class.


----------



## Megs

So, I am guessing there would be some sort of special arrangement, but Harry is not a citizen of the US, he couldn't stay here for more than 6 months. I guess that's why they'd keep their "borrowed" Canada mansion, so they could go back and forth and he wouldn't need to apply for another citizenship. Anyone know if he can do what he wants via special arrangements with different countries governments? 

Can't ya see I'm reaching here....


----------



## maryg1

Yes, you can’t judge a parents/children relationship from the fact they don’t live near one another.
Does Doria have other children?


----------



## tiktok

Megs said:


> So, I am guessing there would be some sort of special arrangement, but Harry is not a citizen of the US, he couldn't stay here for more than 6 months. I guess that's why they'd keep their "borrowed" Canada mansion, so they could go back and forth and he wouldn't need to apply for another citizenship. Anyone know if he can do what he wants via special arrangements with different countries governments?
> 
> Can't ya see I'm reaching here....



Since he's not in any diplomatic capacity he can't work in the US unless he applies for a green card, which he can do quite easily via his marriage to a US citizen (or works for a company that applied for a work visa on his behalf). If he spends extended periods of time in the US and works for a US company without work authorization that's a no-no for immigration purposes and he could be deported (which would never happen of course). In order to work in the US as a citizen of another country without work authorization he has to show that his life is truly based in that other country and he's just in the US temporarily (e.g. for a business trip), and be employed in that other country. That wouldn't be true if he resides mainly in the US with trips to Canada. At least that's how it works for us plebs...

EDIT: He could also apply for an investor visa, which means he can stay in the US if he invests $1M and employes a certain number of people, but again there's a formal process involved, he can't just breeze into the US and work freely.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> A "yacht" girl??? .. oh, that is not good (some of the reality star gals on Southern Charm were also "yacht" girls .. cough-cough)!!  I'm surprised someone hasn't provided "receipts" of that because that could bring big $$$ (not that I think it's 'acceptable' per se).



I know what a chalet girl is, but what is a yacht girl?


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> Kate wasn’t from upper class. She was from a working class background and what is often called ‘new money’. Her parents worked their party favors company into becoming a success.


With a little help from Uncle Gary, it is alleged.


----------



## Flatsy

I have a feeling taxes are going to play a big role in the country Harry and Meghan choose to be residents of.


----------



## Lodpah

One thing you have give MM credit. She a sly fox. Get Harry to CA which is a communal state. Divorce Harry there and she can take half his personal money. She probably can take Prince Charles money by proving that he supports her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Even in a community property state, what one party has previously to the marriage is usually safe. It is anything that is produced during the marriage that is split down the middle. Now, if you take the previous held assets and put them into joint ventures, that restarts the clock. Any interest, dividends, capital gains etc is part of the marriage income. Not sure how the UK deals with this. I am willing to bet there are some safety measures in place.
I may be totally wrong since it has been awhile.


----------



## Flatsy

Lodpah said:


> One thing you have give MM credit. She a sly fox. Get Harry to CA which is a communal state. Divorce Harry there and she can take half his personal money. She probably can take Prince Charles money by proving that he supports her.


All of Harry's personal money is in the form of inheritances, which she cannot touch, even in California.  UNLESS: she gets Harry to buy them a big expensive house in Malibu using his inheritance.   Any money Harry takes out of his inheritance and puts toward marital assets (such as houses) then becomes community property that they will split in the event of a divorce.

I don't think she has any claim on Charles's money and the "allowances" he has provided them.

But the thing is, royal divorces are generally not negotiated in court.  They probably aren't going to be battling anything out according to the law.  They are going to have an internal summit and come to an agreement about what amount of money it will take to make Meghan go away quietly and not restrict Harry's access to Archie.  And then Granny will fork it over.


----------



## Flatsy

papertiger said:


> I know what a chalet girl is, but what is a yacht girl?


You know how Leonardo DiCaprio goes to Cannes every year and you see pictures of him and his buddies on a huge yacht surrounded by dozens and dozens of scantily clad women who are hanging all over them?  And then Leo will hold a fundraiser for his foundation on the yacht and there will be mostly young women who look like models + a couple of old billionaires?  That's the yacht girl scene.  They are, um.... hospitality girls to the rich and famous.

I don't think Meghan ever had anything to do with that, but it's a common accusation that gets thrown around a lot on tumblr.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> One thing you have give MM credit. She a sly fox. Get Harry to CA which is a communal state. Divorce Harry there and she can take half his personal money. She probably can take Prince Charles money by proving that he supports her.


maybe she really loves him and they will stay married.  but if it comes to a divorce, I think harry won't me a match for her -- she - who has been plotting, climbing, etc., all her life.  He, having been pretty much sheltered from responsibility (except for his military service) would probably cave to most of what she would want.


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> Since he's not in any diplomatic capacity he can't work in the US unless he applies for a green card, which he can do quite easily via his marriage to a US citizen (or works for a company that applied for a work visa on his behalf). If he spends extended periods of time in the US and works for a US company without work authorization that's a no-no for immigration purposes and he could be deported (which would never happen of course). In order to work in the US as a citizen of another country without work authorization he has to show that his life is truly based in that other country and he's just in the US temporarily (e.g. for a business trip), and be employed in that other country. That wouldn't be true if he resides mainly in the US with trips to Canada. At least that's how it works for us plebs...
> 
> EDIT: He could also apply for an investor visa, which means he can stay in the US if he invests $1M and employes a certain number of people, but again there's a formal process involved, he can't just breeze into the US and work freely.


Which brings up the other question .. if they are to reside in the US, can the IRS look at the BRF's "books"???  I  know that there has been some speculation on that, and knowing the IRS, I'm sure they would LOVE to get their hands on that!


----------



## papertiger

Flatsy said:


> You know how Leonardo DiCaprio goes to Cannes every year and you see pictures of him and his buddies on a huge yacht surrounded by dozens and dozens of scantily clad women who are hanging all over them?  And then Leo will hold a fundraiser for his foundation on the yacht and there will be mostly young women who look like models + a couple of old billionaires?  That's the yacht girl scene.  They are, um.... hospitality girls to the rich and famous.
> 
> I don't think Meghan ever had anything to do with that, but it's a common accusation that gets thrown around a lot on tumblr.



Ah, OK... Nothing like a chalet girl then. Sounds like a very 'retro' scene.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe she really loves him and they will stay married.  but if it comes to a divorce, I think harry won't me a match for her -- she - who has been plotting, climbing, etc., all her life.  He, having been pretty much sheltered from responsibility (except for his military service) would probably cave to most of what she would want.


Let's hope she loves him. If there's a divorce it seems like it would come from her because as things stand I don't see him leaving her. He's that in love/dependent/stubborn.


----------



## Lodpah

Flatsy said:


> All of Harry's personal money is in the form of inheritances, which she cannot touch, even in California.  UNLESS: she gets Harry to buy them a big expensive house in Malibu using his inheritance.   Any money Harry takes out of his inheritance and puts toward marital assets (such as houses) then becomes community property that they will split in the event of a divorce.
> 
> I don't think she has any claim on Charles's money and the "allowances" he has provided them.
> 
> But the thing is, royal divorces are generally not negotiated in court.  They probably aren't going to be battling anything out according to the law.  They are going to have an internal summit and come to an agreement about what amount of money it will take to make Meghan go away quietly and not restrict Harry's access to Archie.  And then Granny will fork it over.


Thanks. I’ve read of cases where the supporter had to pay the child support, ie. grandparents, step fathers and such. I even remember a case where the grandparents had to sell property to pay back child stuff. I don’t know the legality tho,


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> maybe she really loves him and they will stay married.  but if it comes to a divorce, I think harry won't me a match for her -- she - who has been plotting, climbing, etc., all her life.  He, having been pretty much sheltered from responsibility (except for his military service) would probably cave to most of what she would want.



I think Harry would do whatever he had to do in order to make sure he had plenty of access to Archie so, yes, a large divorce settlement forked over by the Queen or Charles to get shared custody of Archie, or something like that.  But, after Archie is 12 or so, Meghan loses a lot of control.  Archie would be able to express himself at that point and make it known with whom he'd rather spend the majority of his time.  

I don't think though that there will be a divorce anytime soon.  It would be humiliating for Harry.  He's going to work hard to make it work.  Meghan, though, wouldn't hesitate to divorce him if things don't go precisely the way she wants.


----------



## marthastoo

hellosunshine said:


> Jessica never referenced Kate. Cambridge fans embarrassingly assumed she was taking a dig at Kate. My opinion but deep down I think Cambridge fans know the truth about Kate - she’s mediocre, insincere, vapid, incompetent and insecure. Why else would they get all caught up in their feelings over this? Jessica's comments had nothing to do with that boring, bland bowl of oatmeal (Kate).


I never got any of that from Kate.  She's far from incompetent, nor would I say she's insincere.  What she does seem, however, is on the quiet side and I have said this many times in the past.  I think Kate is on the shy side but is forced by her position to constantly be outgoing.  Kudos for her for going a great job despite what I think is are introvert tendencies.

I will say I do get a hint of the insecurity whenever I hear her give a speech.  She sounds fine and always does a nice job, but there's a quality in her voice that makes me feel she's going to give it the old college try, but would much rather be home with the kids or alone taking photos or something.


----------



## mdcx

I believe the yacht girl scene often centres around Middle Eastern billionaires who select girls from a catalogue almost and pay for their company on their super yachts when berthed in luxury ports.
Lots of B & C list American actresses rumoured to participate. I imagine a lot of the “sexy” Insta shots and magazine shoots drive up their demand/ price.
Not sure if there is direct prostitution involved, but it is very transactional.


----------



## bisousx

mdcx said:


> I believe the yacht girl scene often centres around Middle Eastern billionaires who select girls from a catalogue almost and pay for their company on their super yachts when berthed in luxury ports.
> Lots of B & C list American actresses rumoured to participate. I imagine a lot of the “sexy” Insta shots and magazine shoots drive up their demand/ price.
> Not sure if there is direct prostitution involved, but it is very transactional.



This. I know of a few ordinary women who used to lead normal lives and careers, only to one day throw it away in order to have a taste of this lifestyle (and these women have confirmed having their extravagant vacations and trips funded by sponsors). It’s not a nasty rumor if MM or any actress/model is a yacht girl... it’s very likely, as it’s a way of life that’s not commonly talked about.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This book is fascinating if you’re interested in the Middle East scene.  

Some Girls: My Life in a Harem https://www.amazon.com/dp/0452296315/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_8blnEb519T601


----------



## daisychainz

CeeJay said:


> A "yacht" girl??? .. oh, that is not good (some of the reality star gals on Southern Charm were also "yacht" girls .. cough-cough)!!  I'm surprised someone hasn't provided "receipts" of that because that could bring big $$$ (not that I think it's 'acceptable' per se).


I believe they reported she would go on yachts with other women (maybe friends?) to try and meet millionaires. I know some women get paid for it but she isn't in *that* category.


----------



## Mrs.Z

When someone says yacht girl they mean high class call-girl / prostitute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> When someone says yacht girl they mean high class call-girl / prostitute.


.. YUP, and isn't just specific to Yachts!  Case in point, my niece's husband is in the Hotel business (_as was my niece - hence how they met_) .. and when they were based in Dubai, they saw *A LOT *of these actresses / singers, IG 'stars'/'influencers' show up to "party" with these very wealthy men (_who were oftentimes married so THEY didn't want their pictures taken_)!  The objective? .. to find a rich man  (_not Married - marry him / Married = become his Mistress_)!!  So, these men would (*sometimes*) gift these women with very high-end clothing, handbags, jewelry, etc., in some cases - purchase an apartment/condo such that the mistress would stay there  -or-   straight-out pay them.  So was there sex; according to my niece's husband "_does a Bear sh!t in the woods_?"  Heck, I've seen similar situations when shopping at the high-end stores in Beverly Hills and to be honest, on a few occasions, it made me sick to my stomach (_Old man & very young woman, or worse - fat/greasy/slob with a beautiful young girl_) .. how these gals can do this for a Hermes bag or Jewelry is .. beyond me 

Would I be shocked if we found out that Meghan was on this circuit; I wouldn't .. especially in those times when she was not working and (_on her blog_) noted that after getting rejection after rejection, she would go home and cry herself in bed while eating junk food!  That can't be easy .. to get rejected all the time, and we do know that there are some actresses who have used the "casting couch" as their means to get on a show / movie (_of course, after that they will oftentimes not do that again_)!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. YUP, and isn't just specific to Yachts!  Case in point, my niece's husband is in the Hotel business (_as was my niece - hence how they met_) .. and when they were based in Dubai, they saw *A LOT *of these actresses / singers, IG 'stars'/'influencers' show up to "party" with these very wealthy men (_who were oftentimes married so THEY didn't want their pictures taken_)!  The objective? .. to find a rich man  (_not Married - marry him / Married = become his Mistress_)!!  So, these men would (*sometimes*) gift these women with very high-end clothing, handbags, jewelry, etc., in some cases - purchase an apartment/condo such that the mistress would stay there  -or-   straight-out pay them.  So was there sex; according to my niece's husband "_does a Bear sh!t in the woods_?"  Heck, I've seen similar situations when shopping at the high-end stores in Beverly Hills and to be honest, on a few occasions, it made me sick to my stomach (_Old man & very young woman, or worse - fat/greasy/slob with a beautiful young girl_) .. how these gals can do this for a Hermes bag or Jewelry is .. beyond me
> 
> Would I be shocked if we found out that Meghan was on this circuit; I wouldn't .. especially in those times when she was not working and (_on her blog_) noted that after getting rejection after rejection, she would go home and cry herself in bed while eating junk food!  That can't be easy .. to get rejected all the time, and we do know that there are some actresses who have used the "casting couch" as their means to get on a show / movie (_of course, after that they will oftentimes not do that again_)!


interesting and kinda sad


----------



## altigirl88

Thank 


Sharont2305 said:


> A lot of houses just have names, especially in older houses in rural areas. It's pretty common. Most of my village is like that so the address would look like this
> House name
> Road or Lane name (not always)
> Village name
> County name
> Country (Wales, Scotland, N. Ireland, England)
> UK
> Post Code.
> 
> We have loooooong addresses, [emoji23]



Thank you for sharing! I didn’t ever know this before! PurseForum is so eye-opening, not just about bags


----------



## altigirl88

bag-mania said:


> What's worse is when your local news broadcast devotes an entire segment to that night's episode of The Masked Singer or American Idol or whatever show needs promoting. Entertainment has become news. They do it because 1) they are promoting shows on their channel for ratings purposes, and 2) it's the kind of story people care about, which is really sad.


I remember when my local news would show Masked Singer mess and then they’d feature comments from viewers, it seemed like there was always one person saying, “The lion is Rumer Willis”


----------



## altigirl88

bag-mania said:


> What's worse is when your local news broadcast devotes an entire segment to that night's episode of The Masked Singer or American Idol or whatever show needs promoting. Entertainment has become news. They do it because 1) they are promoting shows on their channel for ratings purposes, and 2) it's the kind of story people care about, which is really sad.


I remember when my local news would show Masked Singer mess and then they’d feature comments from viewers, it seemed like there was always one person saying, “The lion is Rumer Willis”


----------



## mdcx

Just think - at this moment, MM could have been living a rather dreamy, dignified, luxe life at FrogCott (or somewhere even nicer if she had played her cards right). Clothing budget, beauty and hair budget, staff for everything, privacy, security, travel. All she had to do was follow the rules and make a few appearances...


----------



## Lexgal

QEII is playing the long game, especially since she holds all the cards with custody of Archie.


----------



## CobaltBlu

They will be in a huge IRS tax mess if they EVER co-mingle their funds, no matter where they live.  Marry a US citizen and mix your money and the hammer comes down.  it will be a mess if they are not careful.


----------



## PatsyCline

lalame said:


> And also, no one here HATES her... we're just speculating, opining, and sharing. It's a gossip thread. Of course none of us know what is REALLY going on with Meghan... we're just drawing conclusions based on what we see in the media which is pretty much par for the course of all celebrities.


Haha, best laugh I’ve heard all day. No one here hates her....


----------



## PatsyCline

CobaltBlu said:


> They will be in a huge IRS tax mess if they EVER co-mingle their funds, no matter where they live.  Marry a US citizen and mix your money and the hammer comes down.  it will be a mess if they are not careful.


The IRS taxes you on your income NOT your wealth. Unless H&M earn money from future ventures, the IRS doesn’t have a claim. Meghan, being American, is subject to taxation on anything she makes, regardless where she earns it, where Harry is only subject to taxation on money earned in the USA. 

Meghan can renounce her American citizenship (become a British citizen) but she would be subject to a tax on her wealth upon renouncement.


----------



## Megs

tiktok said:


> Since he's not in any diplomatic capacity he can't work in the US unless he applies for a green card, which he can do quite easily via his marriage to a US citizen (or works for a company that applied for a work visa on his behalf). If he spends extended periods of time in the US and works for a US company without work authorization that's a no-no for immigration purposes and he could be deported (which would never happen of course). In order to work in the US as a citizen of another country without work authorization he has to show that his life is truly based in that other country and he's just in the US temporarily (e.g. for a business trip), and be employed in that other country. That wouldn't be true if he resides mainly in the US with trips to Canada. At least that's how it works for us plebs...
> 
> EDIT: He could also apply for an investor visa, which means he can stay in the US if he invests $1M and employes a certain number of people, but again there's a formal process involved, he can't just breeze into the US and work freely.



I know all about immigration for us plebs, Vlad and I went thru it when he wanted to live in the US before we got married and then married. 

I more meant wonder if there is some sort of other set up because he's part of the most notable royal families in the world. The $1mil investment seems like it would be easy for them, but it's also more what will the Royal Family allow. Do they have other family members who have ever done this?!


----------



## chowlover2

What I can't figure out is what Megan was up to between her college graduation, 6 week internship in Argentina, and Suits. Bit roles in a few films are not going to pay the bills.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Just think - at this moment, MM could have been living a rather dreamy, dignified, luxe life at FrogCott (or somewhere even nicer if she had played her cards right). Clothing budget, beauty and hair budget, staff for everything, privacy, security, travel. All she had to do was follow the rules and make a few appearances...


Right?! I bet a lot of us would put on some pantyhose for the life she hated.


----------



## cafecreme15

chowlover2 said:


> What I can't figure out is what Megan was up to between her college graduation, 6 week internship in Argentina, and Suits. Bit roles in a few films are not going to pay the bills.


----------



## bag-mania

chowlover2 said:


> What I can't figure out is what Megan was up to between her college graduation, 6 week internship in Argentina, and Suits. Bit roles in a few films are not going to pay the bills.



She started seeing Trevor back in 2004. If she lived with him he may have paid most of the bills.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

PatsyCline said:


> Haha, best laugh I’ve heard all day. No one here hates her....


 Hate is a strong word.


----------



## lalame

chowlover2 said:


> What I can't figure out is what Megan was up to between her college graduation, 6 week internship in Argentina, and Suits. Bit roles in a few films are not going to pay the bills.


She did calligraphy in between acting gigs and probably lived at home until she earned enough money.


----------



## threadbender

Has she even lived in the states at all recently?
Was she a resident of Canada and/or the UK? Was she living in the US at some point in there? I admit to not having paid much attention. lol
Just thinking there might be tax consequences (if there is income, gifts, bartering) and possibly Archie's citizenship.


----------



## prettyprincess

lalame said:


> Hate is a strong word.


It’s a strong word, but apropos based on what’s being said here. I mean people are basically implying she was a prostitute.


----------



## lalame

prettyprincess said:


> It’s a strong word, but apropos based on what’s being said here. I mean people are basically implying she was a prostitute.



This is just gossip. I doubt anyone here actually carries strong personal feelings about these public figures outside of disdaining their actions or personalities. But it doesn’t even really matter... what matters is how it makes _you_ feel. If you don’t like what you see, just don’t engage or continue coming. I don’t agree with everything I see and I just don’t engage with those things. Or be more vocal about the positive things you see. It can go both ways.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Just think - at this moment, MM could have been living a rather dreamy, dignified, luxe life at FrogCott (or somewhere even nicer if she had played her cards right). Clothing budget, beauty and hair budget, staff for everything, privacy, security, travel. All she had to do was follow the rules and make a few appearances...


Exactly this.
(I think Frogmore Cottage looks lovely, an ideal home for a family, very private)


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> It’s a strong word, but apropos based on what’s being said here. I mean people are basically implying she was a prostitute.


While there is really no evidence/fact to show that she really was a prostitute/yacht girl, she is in good company.
Grace Kelly, Denise Richards, Marilyn Monroe and on and on and on have been suspected/accused of engaging in those behaviors.
It comes with the territory of being an actress. It does not make it right so.
One of my female boss was rumored to have slept with the CEO to advance her career which was totally unfounded.
She was prettier than the average and had married into a very well known American Business family. 
Sound familiar?


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly this.
> (I think Frogmore Cottage looks lovely, an ideal home for a family, very private)



I think they were still too PO they weren't allowed to live at Windsor castle as they'd wanted.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> I think they were still too PO they weren't allowed to live at Windsor castle as they'd wanted.


Oh definitely.  Hence all the fuss they made about security (I think Frogmore now has 3 fences around it), in the hope it would get them a wing in the big house.


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Right?! I bet a lot of us would put on some pantyhose for the life she hated.



Take me, I'm ready


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> I think they were still too PO they weren't allowed to live at Windsor castle as they'd wanted.


I thought it was their decision that they wanted to live at Frogmore.


----------



## Chagall

I read that they decided on their own that they didn’t want to live at Windsor Castle, they wanted more privacy and that William and Kate were actually offended.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> I thought it was their decision that they wanted to live at Frogmore.




They turned down an apartment at Kensington Palace where W&K live.
W&K raised an eyebrow because it's where they 'all' live and already have mega security and staff/servants on tap.
H&M asked for Windsor castle where basically they'd have the run of the place because it's only visited once in a while.
QEII said nope, but here's a 'cottage' on the Windsor estate.


----------



## Chagall

This was back when they decided they no longer were going to be the ‘fab four’ any more insofar as working on charities together. At that time they decided they did not want to live near K and W and announced they were moving to Frogmore. That may have been to save face but it’s how I remember it.


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> They turned down an apartment at Kensington Palace where W&K live.
> W&K raised an eyebrow because it's where they 'all' live and already have mega security and staff/servants on tap.
> H&M asked for Windsor castle where basically they'd have the run of the place because it's only visited once in a while.
> QEII said nope, but here's a 'cottage' on the Windsor estate.


Oh OK so it was Kensington they turned down. Hard to keep this straight haha. They offended W and K as I remember.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> I think they were still too PO they weren't allowed to live at Windsor castle as they'd wanted.


I don't think anyone is "allowed" to live at Windsor Castle, apart from the monarch


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> I thought it was their decision that they wanted to live at Frogmore.


I thought this too, as It's more homely than Kensington Palace.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I have a hard time believing they’d want to live in Windsor castle. There was a report earlier this week that talked about how the castles are not as glamorous as they may seem. They are so old and so preserved that the heating is archaic, furniture is creaky and wallpaper is peeling. 
I have a friend who moved into an old family home of her husband and was expected to keep the furniture and layout relatively how it always was, and had a hard time getting comfortable because it was so stuffy. And that was just “American” old. I think Windsor castle would be like that times 100. 
I’d believe in an instant that Harry and Meghan had visions of what they’d get living wise and were miffed to not get what they wanted. But I have a hard time believing they dreamed of Windsor castle.


----------



## CobaltBlu

IF they file jointly he is subject to tax in his worldwide income, he is a nonresident alien for tax purposes.  Including investment income.  

Here’s a summary 
https://www.americansabroad.org/nonamerican-spouse-us-tax-implications/



PatsyCline said:


> The IRS taxes you on your income NOT your wealth. Unless H&M earn money from future ventures, the IRS doesn’t have a claim. Meghan, being American, is subject to taxation on anything she makes, regardless where she earns it, where Harry is only subject to taxation on money earned in the USA.
> 
> Meghan can renounce her American citizenship (become a British citizen) but she would be subject to a tax on her wealth upon renouncement.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I have a hard time believing they’d want to live in Windsor castle. There was a report earlier this week that talked about how the castles are not as glamorous as they may seem. They are so old and so preserved that the heating is archaic, furniture is creaky and wallpaper is peeling.
> I have a friend who moved into an old family home of her husband and was expected to keep the furniture and layout relatively how it always was, and had a hard time getting comfortable because it was so stuffy. And that was just “American” old. I think Windsor castle would be like that times 100.
> I’d believe in an instant that Harry and Meghan had visions of what they’d get living wise and were miffed to not get what they wanted. But I have a hard time believing they dreamed of Windsor castle.


It's 11th century old, lol


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> It's 11th century old, lol


Wow that really is old. Although I love old homes that is a bit extreme.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> Wow that really is old. Although I love old homes that is a bit extreme.[emoji38]


The pub near me is a 13th century building, well, part of it, [emoji23]


----------



## duna

I think the Queen keeps all her residences im top shape, they're all old buildings although some are older than others. I can't imagine wallpaper peeling or any other kind of neglect.


----------



## duna

My family house in Sussex had been bought by my grandparents in the early 1930's and it's 17th century.


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I think the Queen keeps all her residences im top shape, they're all old buildings although some are older than others. I can't imagine wallpaper peeling or any other kind of neglect.


might be kinda damp and musty though?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> might be kinda damp and musty though?


She's well known with being frugal with the heating, I believe Balmoral is quite draughty.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> She's well known with being frugal with the heating, I believe Balmoral is quite draughty.



Yes, that's probably why they only go to Balmoral in the summer, but I bet it's pretty cold even then!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> She's well known with being frugal with the heating, I believe Balmoral is quite draughty.


might not be very comfortabel for a woman who grew up in So Cal


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> The pub near me is a 13th century building, well, part of it, [emoji23]


Here 150 years is considered ancient. Our harsh climate is very hard on buildings.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well, since we are wandering around ancient buildings waiting for the Sussexes to do something fascinating, I will share that my art studio is in a charming large house that began its life 475 years ago, and is still owned by the same family, though now it is mostly shops and offices.  Viva México!  I just moved out of a 350 year old little casita that used to be a farmhouse.  Thank goodness we have preservation here, the new owners of the property had to preserve the little houses on their lot, though they were allowed to remodel the interiors within guidelines. 

Here is a photo of Them to keep it marginally on topic. This color looks good on her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Well, since we are wandering around ancient buildings waiting for the Sussexes to do something fascinating, I will share that my art studio is in a charming large house that began its life 475 years ago, and is still owned by the same family, though now it is mostly shops and offices.  Viva México!  I just moved out of a 350 year old little casita that used to be a farmhouse.  Thank goodness we have preservation here, the new owners of the property had to preserve the little houses on their lot, though they were allowed to remodel the interiors within guidelines.
> 
> Here is a photo of Them to keep it marginally on topic. This color looks good on her.


those properties in Mexico sound beautiful...any pics?


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think anyone is "allowed" to live at Windsor Castle, apart from the monarch



Wasn't me that asked


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I think the Queen keeps all her residences im top shape, they're all old buildings although some are older than others. I can't imagine wallpaper peeling or any other kind of neglect.



Most of them are not hers per se but the Crown's (so collectively 'ours', OK, we just pay for their upkeep).


----------



## Awillow

duna said:


> I think the Queen keeps all her residences im top shape, they're all old buildings although some are older than others. I can't imagine wallpaper peeling or any other kind of neglect.


I work with a lot of historic structures.  My guess is deferred maintenance across the properties is pretty significant.  I remember this being an issue raised publicly about 10 years ago.  This was a 2009 report.  There were also several articles. (Granted, I take issue with the "beyond repair" characterization.)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/6178067/Royal-palaces-are-beyond-repair.html


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Most of them are not hers per se but the Crown's (so collectively 'ours', OK, we just pay for their upkeep).


Agree, the Monarch owns Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle because they are the Monarch, therefore yes, they're "ours" but Sandringham and Balmoral are owned personally.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Agree, the Monarch owns Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle because they are the Monarch, therefore yes, they're "ours" but Sandringham and Balmoral are owned personally.



If you mean Monarch = The Crown Estate then correct. The Crown Estates is a trust, the Monarch _is_ QEII. 

The Crown Estate owns and manages the entire Windsor Estate https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/what-we-do/on-the-land/windsor/ which is why we probably ended-up paying for Frogmore in the first instance. The fact that the refurb and specs was way past structural is why H has now offered to pay it back as The Crown Estates finances are accountable and subject to scrutiny, including through the Freedom of Information Act > Publication and the need for transparency of how they reach decisions including Case 1094 30 June 2019 https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/me...ogmore-renovations-ownership-nr-lichfield.pdf


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> If you mean Monarch = The Crown Estate then correct. The Crown Estates is a trust, the Monarch _is_ QEII.
> 
> The Crown Estate owns and manages the entire Windsor Estate https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/what-we-do/on-the-land/windsor/ which is why we probably ended-up paying for Frogmore in the first instance. The fact that the refurb and specs was way past structural is why H has now offered to pay it back as The Crown Estates finances are accountable and subject to scrutiny, including through the Freedom of Information Act > Publication and the need for transparency of how they reach decisions including Case 1094 30 June 2019 https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/me...ogmore-renovations-ownership-nr-lichfield.pdf


I know, I'm British, [emoji23]


----------



## mrsinsyder

I see she’s doing big things


----------



## lalame

I could see them wanting to live in Frogmore because it was in such bad shape they knew they could renovate it and make it more fitting to their style. Whereas the other options were already done up by someone else. And the style of Kensington in photos I’ve seen are quite old and traditional, probably not to Meghan’s taste having not grown up in it.


----------



## tiktok

mrsinsyder said:


> I see she’s doing big things
> 
> View attachment 4654612



Either this is complete fabrication or she’s really dumb, and I don’t think she is. That would kill her brand before she even started.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, she’s sure changing the world!


----------



## threadbender

CobaltBlu said:


> IF they file jointly he is subject to tax in his worldwide income, he is a nonresident alien for tax purposes.  Including investment income.
> 
> Here’s a summary
> https://www.americansabroad.org/nonamerican-spouse-us-tax-implications/


I believe he would be able to deduct any taxes they pay elsewhere on their income. But, yes, he would be considered a non-resident alien. Is she a non-resident as well? I would think she would be considered a resident of the UK for the TY2019. And, what is taxable income? If they were gifted over a certain amount, that is taxable, along with investment income and any salaries. I think the IRS will be combing that return very carefully when it is filed. Probably not til August, though.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> I see she’s doing big things
> 
> View attachment 4654612


She snubs off being a royal to hang out with the likes of Jessica Mulroney. HA! No accounting for taste.


----------



## Morgan R

mrsinsyder said:


> I see she’s doing big things
> 
> View attachment 4654612



This has already been denied


----------



## mrsinsyder

Morgan R said:


> This has already been denied



Sounds like Jessica night be using her friend for press. Birds of a feather...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> I see she’s doing big things
> 
> View attachment 4654612


She has been married three times.  What is that saying? Third time is the trick?


----------



## mia55

mrsinsyder said:


> Sounds like Jessica night be using her friend for press. Birds of a feather...



Looks like Jessica will be ghosted out next. I really hope she does that as this woman is a disaster for her and Harry’s brand.


----------



## limom

Funny video.
WARNING NSFW:


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> She snubs off being a royal to hang out with the likes of Jessica Mulroney. HA! No accounting for taste.


An affirmation of what we've been saying for years .. "Money DOES NOT buy Taste"!!!


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Funny video.
> WARNING NSFW:




God, to be a fly on the wall when someone had to brief the BRF on things like this...


----------



## Chagall

threadbender said:


> I believe he would be able to deduct any taxes they pay elsewhere on their income. But, yes, he would be considered a non-resident alien. Is she a non-resident as well? I would think she would be considered a resident of the UK for the TY2019. And, what is taxable income? If they were gifted over a certain amount, that is taxable, along with investment income and any salaries. I think the IRS will be combing that return very carefully when it is filed. Probably not til August, though.


Complicated.


----------



## lalame

Okay, I've found H+M's next career... and there's a royal precedence! Last heir to Italy now lives in LA running a food truck, having also done stints in TV (Dancing with the Stars, Miss Italy)... Wouldn't we all like to see a Duke of Sussex fish and chip truck?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

"Daily Mail reports that the Queen offered to hold Beatrice's wedding reception at Buckingham Palace...it will be the first wedding celebration at Buckingham Palace since William and Catherine's in 2011. This also comes after news that Beatrice and her sister Princess Eugenie might be the ones stepping in for Meghan and Harry." 
Is this supposed to be a present for stepping up? I didn't think reception venues meant very much but Harry and Meghan had theirs at Frogmore - this seems like an upgrade given for the granddaughter for some reason.


----------



## chowlover2

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Daily Mail reports that the Queen offered to hold Beatrice's wedding reception at Buckingham Palace...it will be the first wedding celebration at Buckingham Palace since William and Catherine's in 2011. This also comes after news that Beatrice and her sister Princess Eugenie might be the ones stepping in for Meghan and Harry."
> Is this supposed to be a present for stepping up? I didn't think reception venues meant very much but Harry and Meghan had theirs at Frogmore - this seems like an upgrade given for the granddaughter for some reason.


I’m sure Harkles will see it as a slap in the face since W & K had their reception there.


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "Daily Mail reports that the Queen offered to hold Beatrice's wedding reception at Buckingham Palace...it will be the first wedding celebration at Buckingham Palace since William and Catherine's in 2011. This also comes after news that Beatrice and her sister Princess Eugenie might be the ones stepping in for Meghan and Harry."
> Is this supposed to be a present for stepping up? I didn't think reception venues meant very much but Harry and Meghan had theirs at Frogmore - this seems like an upgrade given for the granddaughter for some reason.


It's probably logistics rather than a present for stepping up. Beatrice and fiancee have obviously chosen somewhere in London to marry.


----------



## maryg1

lalame said:


> Okay, I've found H+M's next career... and there's a royal precedence! Last heir to Italy now lives in LA running a food truck, having also done stints in TV (Dancing with the Stars, Miss Italy)... Wouldn't we all like to see a Duke of Sussex fish and chip truck?



I still don’t understand why we call him a Prince...he is heir of nothing since he has no land to reign on, and the last king of Italy was his grandfather.
Off topic I know, but the fact he is called prince while for the Italian Constitution he is at my very same level annoys me.
Now back to the real HRHs!


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Most of them are not hers per se but the Crown's (so collectively 'ours', OK, we just pay for their upkeep).



Yes, exactly.


----------



## floatinglili

Chagall said:


> Kate wasn’t from upper class. She was from a working class background and what is often called ‘new money’. Her parents worked their party favors company into becoming a success. Her behaviour, however, after marrying into the BRF has been pure class.


Sorry for late reply. Yes I wonder whether her long, long pre-engagement was due to her more humble bloodlines / social status. The family was very slow to roll out the welcome mat, in spite of Kate’s impeccable manners and willingness to play by the royal rules.  The Brits can be eye watering snobs, even as the aristocratic pool shrinks around them. 
Ironically, many would say that in hindsight, a great deal more old-fashioned snobbishness was required in sizing up and welcoming in MM.


----------



## Chagall

floatinglili said:


> Sorry for late reply. Yes I wonder whether her long, long pre-engagement was due to her more humble bloodlines / social status. The family was very slow to roll out the welcome mat, in spite of Kate’s impeccable manners and willingness to play by the royal rules.  The Brits can be eye watering snobs, even as the aristocratic pool shrinks around them.
> Ironically, many would say that in hindsight, a great deal more old-fashioned snobbishness was required in sizing up and welcoming in MM.


Agree with everything you said regarding Kate. I do think that the BRF seemed to bend over backwards to welcome MM. She was afforded many more privileges in the beginning that took a long time in coming for Kate.


----------



## doni

maryg1 said:


> I still don’t understand why we call him a Prince...he is heir of nothing since he has no land to reign on, and the last king of Italy was his grandfather.
> Off topic I know, but the fact he is called prince while for the Italian Constitution he is at my very same level annoys me.
> Now back to the real HRHs!


Titles are independent from civil matters or the organization of the state, they have their own rules and you don’t need to be reigning to be a prince. Europe is packed with princes and princesses. My daughter goes to school with one. It is the same as having the one Duke with an institutional role in Luxembourg but a Duke or a Count would typically no longer own/rule over the Duchy or County of their name... It doesn’t mean anything as per itself  except for those to whom it means something.

Amazed to see Emanuele of Savoy as the pasta prince. I remember seeing him in Hello magazine when he was young all the time... I also remember his wedding to Clotilde Corau (are they still married?). He seems to be happy making pasta, good for him. Sorry for the OT.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Chagall said:


> Agree with everything you said regarding Kate. I do think that the BRF seemed to bend over backwards to welcome MM. She was afforded many more privileges in the beginning that took a long time in coming for Kate.


William’s wife was a very important role to fill though. Harry’s wife was a largely decorative role in contrast, though still needed to be someone who would follow the rules (obvs a mistake was made assuming MM would do this).
The screening process for Kate was naturally more intense due to the significance of her being the future Queen Consort.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Do we think Harry will be on Paris today for the France v England match?


----------



## Megs

Since no H&M sightings, news media will be digging. Anyone else see this?

*'I was such a fraud!' Newly-unearthed clip shows Meghan Markle admitting she lied to casting directors by 'pretending' to be in an actor's union to get a part early in her career"*

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-admits-lied-casting-directors-land-part.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Megs said:


> Since no H&M sightings, news media will be digging. Anyone else see this?
> 
> *'I was such a fraud!' Newly-unearthed clip shows Meghan Markle admitting she lied to casting directors by 'pretending' to be in an actor's union to get a part early in her career"*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-admits-lied-casting-directors-land-part.html



Some things don't change, do they.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is who they’re following this month.  Which is fine, but maybe something for Black History Month would have been nice?


----------



## queennadine

lanasyogamama said:


> This is who they’re following this month.  Which is fine, but maybe something for Black History Month would have been nice?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4655351



Agreed! But it doesn’t surprise me. That link takes you to a site that sells t-shirts. Real deep stuff


----------



## Mrs.Z

One of the stories says UK company gives their staff “hangover days” when they need them!


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> One of the stories says UK company gives their staff “hangover days” when they need them!


That is kinda true


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Supposedly this is her first acting gig, ever. It came up as recommended on my YouTube feed and I have no idea why - I've never even watched GH or MM videos on there??!!


----------



## prettyprincess

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Supposedly this is her first acting gig, ever. It came up as recommended on my YouTube feed and I have no idea why - I've never even watched GH or MM videos on there??!!



Aww, she looks so young here! 
I also recognized the Butler from She-Devil, great movie


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Supposedly this is her first acting gig, ever. It came up as recommended on my YouTube feed and I have no idea why - I've never even watched GH or MM videos on there??!!



Everyone has to start someplace.  Not exactly Shakespeare.  Some soap actors are never able to break away from it.  Meg Ryan is one of the few.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Everyone has to start someplace.  Not exactly Shakespeare.  Some soap actors are never able to break away from it.  Meg Ryan is one of the few.


actually there are quite a few I think
Julianne Moore is another one
Both much more accomplished in acting than Meghan


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> actually there are quite a few I think
> Julianne Moore is another one
> Both much more accomplished in acting than Meghan


Oh right!  I have to admit that I remember watching JM on the soaps back in the day


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Everyone has to start someplace.  Not exactly Shakespeare.  Some soap actors are never able to break away from it.  Meg Ryan is one of the few.



I totally agree with this and I don't give her any shade for that. Heck, Brad Pitt used to take gigs as the El Pollo Loco mascot, in chicken suit, before he got his big break.


----------



## mdcx

Lol. 15 security officers! Poor guys having to be so far from home. MMs PR doesn't grasp the optics on this! 5.2k comments already.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Woof.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

OMG thank you so much for the blast from the past...I used to love GH! I remember watching Demi Moore and John Stamos. And Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos on All My Children.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> OMG thank you so much for the blast from the past...I used to love GH! I remember watching Demi Moore and John Stamos. And Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos on All My Children.


do you remember kate mulgrew on ryan's hope (I'm dating myself here)?


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4655620
> View attachment 4655621
> View attachment 4655622


This is cheap and tacky.  Awful.


----------



## mia55

It looks fake, probably someone trying to con money from overly eager people to have Prince Harry at their event.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mia55 said:


> It looks fake, probably someone trying to con money from overly eager people to have Prince Harry at their event.


I hope you’re right


----------



## Chagall

There is a comment on the Canadian online weather channel that says ground hog day results has taken our minds off wanting to see a glimpse of Harry and Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just read an interesting statement from a German "royalty expert" (AKA society journalist) who said: 

"They define themselves through resistance to third parties."

Didn't he hit the nail on the head!


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> do you remember kate mulgrew on ryan's hope (I'm dating myself here)?


I do.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4655595
> 
> 
> Lol. 15 security officers! Poor guys having to be so far from home. MMs PR doesn't grasp the optics on this! 5.2k comments already.


*THIS IS DISGUSTING*; that's not why they are there .. and wouldn't H&M have staff to do these tasks????  When I was living in Washington, DC .. one of my colleagues' boyfriend was a Secret Service Agent whose job was to protect the President at that time.  Under NO circumstances whatsoever was he called on to do something like this!  Yes, those guys are 'on call' 24/7, but they wouldn't get a phone call to go pick up groceries and/or coffee!!!  Seriously? .. these 2 are so petrified of the media that they are going to get papped doing "menial" tasks?!?!  Maybe they SHOULD do that; would make them seem more down-to-earth .. and isn't that what they wanted to do .. you know, preach to all their fans???


----------



## mrsinsyder

mia55 said:


> It looks fake, probably someone trying to con money from overly eager people to have Prince Harry at their event.


This guy does PR for tons of huge names (Kardashians, JLo, etc).


----------



## tiktok

mrsinsyder said:


> This guy does PR for tons of huge names (Kardashians, JLo, etc).



These kinds of gigs are done by many A-listers (Lady Gaga singing at some oligarch’s wedding or whatever) but they’re usually not posted on Instagram. Let’s hope these guys at least pretend to have a bit more class than that...


----------



## gracekelly

tiktok said:


> These kinds of gigs are done by many A-listers (Lady Gaga singing at some oligarch’s wedding or whatever) but they’re usually not posted on Instagram. Let’s hope these guys at least pretend to have a bit more class than that...


You're right.  Many A+ artists do these private parties and celebrations and you never hear about it for many reasons.  One reason is because they don't want their fans to know that they did it as it cheapens their image.  In effect, it is saying that they can be bought.


----------



## lalame

There's just something sad about BRF going the normal celebrity route, with product endorsements, paid appearances, or performances. It does cheapen their image. I'd like to keep seeing them as a regal and traditional institution.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> There's just something sad about BRF going the normal celebrity route, with product endorsements, paid appearances, or performances. It does cheapen their image. I'd like to keep seeing them as a regal and traditional institution.


Totally agree and that what makes me wonder about QEII and Prince Charles noting that the 'agreement' will be revisited.  If H&M truly do what they said they were going to do, then I supposed nothing will change .. but, if they go the more commercial look and, in fact, look to "cheapen" the BRF, then I think QEII and Prince Charles may just take some things away.  Time will tell ..


----------



## mia55

mrsinsyder said:


> This guy does PR for tons of huge names (Kardashians, JLo, etc).





mrsinsyder said:


> This guy does PR for tons of huge names (Kardashians, JLo, etc).



Lol really? Thanks for letting us know, I had no clue. Sad to see how the mighty has fallen in such a short time.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> do you remember kate mulgrew on ryan's hope (I'm dating myself here)?


Oh yes, I do!  I was glad to see her on "Orange is the New Black." She is a terrific actress.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lmao


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4655620
> View attachment 4655621
> View attachment 4655622



I hope this isn’t true.  It’s such a low blow for a prince... but then you have the pasta prince....


----------



## PewPew

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4655595
> 
> 
> Lol. 15 security officers! Poor guys having to be so far from home. MMs PR doesn't grasp the optics on this! 5.2k comments already.



Currently British taxpayers have to foot the bill for their “security” ($10 million/yr), but H&M (excuse me, Papa Charles) would have to pay the salaries if they have an extensive staff. So if the story is legit, it does make sense that they outsource chores to the security detail.  I do believe they have a large security detail. It’s harder to have leaks from smaller teams b/c they could figure out the leak. But the larger the detail (& security’s disgruntled families), the increased risk of leaks.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *THIS IS DISGUSTING*; that's not why they are there .. and wouldn't H&M have staff to do these tasks????  When I was living in Washington, DC .. one of my colleagues' boyfriend was a Secret Service Agent whose job was to protect the President at that time.  Under NO circumstances whatsoever was he called on to do something like this!  Yes, those guys are 'on call' 24/7, but they wouldn't get a phone call to go pick up groceries and/or coffee!!!  Seriously? .. these 2 are so petrified of the media that they are going to get papped doing "menial" tasks?!?!  Maybe they SHOULD do that; would make them seem more down-to-earth .. and isn't that what they wanted to do .. you know, preach to all their fans???


they can't go to the store themselves....oh wait, Kate does...and she's the future queen


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmao
> 
> View attachment 4655909



Awkward laugh. Awkward clapping - Will really looked like he was caught off-guard by the comment too. 



Too funny!


----------



## mdcx

Is this bc Harry/Megs are too cheap to pay for an assistant?
On another note, how long will they bunk down in the mansion? We’re on month 3 now!
I do wonder what their next move is. I would guess Meghan is a bit confused herself as to that one.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Awkward laugh. Awkward clapping - Will really looked like he was caught off-guard by the comment too.
> 
> 
> 
> Too funny!



It would definitely be awkward having your embarrassing messy relatives brought up like that. 

Too bad, Harry has become nothing more than a punchline.


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> It would definitely be awkward having your embarrassing messy relatives brought up like that.
> 
> Too bad, Harry has become nothing more than a punchline.



Not really a punchline. People are very sympathetic towards Harry tonight and he is coming off well under the BAFTA hashtag on Twitter. William's getting roasted though.


----------



## mdcx

It is fairly funny.

ETA the protocol when W&K enter! The audience stands, and remains standing until W&K are seated. MM must miss that part.


----------



## tiktok

Interesting framework to look at the psychology of the whole H&M situation and how they could have prevented the backlash. No new info, but I learned something about psychology


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> they can't go to the store themselves....oh wait, Kate does...and she's the future queen


Yes!! This!!! Including food shopping and to the cheap shops to, like The Range.


----------



## papertiger

Mrs.Z said:


> One of the stories says UK company gives their staff “hangover days” when they need them!



That would be every day in my office


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes!! This!!! Including food shopping and to the cheap shops to, like The Range.


I mean, Kate with not one, but two future kings in tow could go to a soccer game and simply sit down amidst the crowd instead of having cleared a whole section and having her security snap at people for taking pictures of themselves.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree and that what makes me wonder about QEII and Prince Charles noting that the 'agreement' will be revisited.  If H&M truly do what they said they were going to do, then I supposed nothing will change .. but, if they go the more commercial look and, in fact, look to "cheapen" the BRF, then I think QEII and Prince Charles may just take some things away.  Time will tell ..





lalame said:


> There's just something sad about BRF going the normal celebrity route, with product endorsements, paid appearances, or performances. It does cheapen their image. I'd like to keep seeing them as a regal and traditional institution.



And this is why they did not cut them off without a penny or take away their titles. It's all bargaining power for further down the road.


----------



## papertiger

scarlet555 said:


> I hope this isn’t true.  It’s such a low blow for a prince... but then you have the pasta prince....



I like the pasta prince. I thought good for him


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Kate with not one, but two future kings in tow could go to a soccer game and simply sit down amidst the crowd instead of having cleared a whole section and having her security snap at people for taking pictures of themselves.


And calling herself Mrs Cambridge when she'd forgotten her purse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And calling herself Mrs Cambridge when she'd forgotten her purse.



Instead of "me, a member of the royal family"


----------



## Clearblueskies

William and Kate managed it well, but it’s humiliating for Harry to be the subject of a lame joke at which everyone is laughing, and so soon too.  It makes clear that any gloss on H and M comes from their association with the RF not from anything they’ve done themselves.  Oh to be a fly on the wall when Harry and Meghan watched this part of the awards - bet they weren’t laughing much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> William and Kate managed it well, but it’s humiliating for Harry to be the subject of a lame joke at which everyone is laughing, and so soon too.  It makes clear that any gloss on H and M comes from their association with the RF not from anything they’ve done themselves.  Oh to be a fly on the wall when Harry and Meghan watched this part of the awards - bet they weren’t laughing much.



It must be a sore spot for them too - they lost their brother/close friend to an overbearing wife after all, and the distance doesn't make it better.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It must be a sore spot for them too - they lost their brother/close friend to an overbearing wife after all, and the distance doesn't make it better.


When you put it like that, it's quite sad, for William and for Harry.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It must be a sore spot for them too - they lost their brother/close friend to an overbearing wife after all, and the distance doesn't make it better.


Very true


----------



## jehaga

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4655956
> 
> It is fairly funny.
> 
> ETA the protocol when W&K enter! The audience stands, and remains standing until W&K are seated. MM must miss that part.


 Imagine the ranting and raving poor Harry must be enduring at the oligarch’s house. MM thought she was going to steamroll over Kate when she joined the family, and when it didn’t happen, she became obsessed with trying to overshadow Kate. Sure, kudos to MM for nabbing a prince, but everything she has done afterwards has been shortsighted, petty and transparent. Maybe she thinks she’s too old to play the long game, hence the urgency to cash in so she could move on to her next conquest. Harry, honestly, is neither rich nor powerful enough to propel her to the status she desires.

All of this is a shame. I still remember thinking how wonderfully she was going to be able to handle herself publicly as Harry’s wife because of her so-called “acting” background. Ugh.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It must be a sore spot for them too - they lost their brother/close friend to an overbearing wife after all, and the distance doesn't make it better.


I agree with this to a large extent but Harry is a grown man and should be capable of making his own decisions. His decision making proved to be questionable long  before MM came on the scene. She played a huge part no question but don’t let spoilt brat Harry off the hook completely.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> I agree with this to a large extent but Harry is a grown man and should be capable of making his own decisions. His decision making proved to be questionable long  before MM came on the scene. She played a huge part no question but don’t let spoilt brat Harry off the hook completely.



Oh I agree. Still, having grown up with a narcisstic mother and an enabling stepfather I feel quite a bit familiar with the dynamics. Stepfather is smart (just not able to detect manipulative behavior even if it bites him), way more educated, is super accomplished professionally, earns a ton of money and is a really likeable guy, yet she's somehow convinced him he's worthless, unattractive, has no friends (when in fact she changes "friends" like dirty socks as soon as they stop fawning over her and the friendships he's lost is due to her deciding she didn't like the people) and should worship the ground she walks on. Now that I think of it, he barely sees his sister who has been his favourite sibling for 60+ years. Why you wonder? Oh, she wasn't fond of my mother's antics (rightfully so) and said so once, that was the end of frequent visits from either side.

So yes, they're grown men who should grow a backbone and put their foot down, but having watched our family scenario for 25+ years I feel it's a bit like telling a victim of domestic abuse to just walk away. The grip the other party has over them while still coming across as charming and devoted to outsiders who don't look verrry closely is insane.


----------



## doni

Apparently Rebel Wilson also made some Harry wisecrack at the Baftas?
I wonder whether these two will end up becoming a joke _a la_ Dukes of Windsor, here uneasily posing in the mock coronation party Willis' friends surprised them with at a New York club... I do hope not.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’ve got to assume MM and H will reappear at the Oscars.


----------



## mrsinsyder

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve got to assume MM and H will reappear at the Oscars.


I’m expecting them to show out in the next few days for sure.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jehaga said:


> Imagine the ranting and raving poor Harry must be enduring at the oligarch’s house. MM thought she was going to steamroll over Kate when she joined the family, and when it didn’t happen, she became obsessed with trying to overshadow Kate. Sure, kudos to MM for nabbing a prince, but everything she has done afterwards has been shortsighted, petty and transparent. Maybe she thinks she’s too old to play the long game, hence the urgency to cash in so she could move on to her next conquest. Harry, honestly, is neither rich nor powerful enough to propel her to the status she desires.
> 
> All of this is a shame. I still remember thinking how wonderfully she was going to be able to handle herself publicly as Harry’s wife because of her so-called “acting” background. Ugh.



That has to be Meghan's greatest weakness and she has many. She's incredibly impatient. She has to have everything perfect for her, now, now, NOW! If things aren't the way she wants it, she bails. Just ask her first husband, who she blindsided with a long-distance divorce request and sent the wedding/engagement rings to him via registered mail. Not a classy move for sure.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve got to assume MM and H will reappear at the Oscars.


there is no reason for them to be there....will see


----------



## bag-mania

I see things are heating up this week.

*Palace Breaks Silence On Claim Meghan Markle Is Working With Kim Kardashian's Endorsement Company*

Buckingham Palace rarely comments on stories, but in the weeks following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step down as senior royal family members, the Palace has been speaking out more to set the record straight on their future. This weekend, the Palace responded to reports circulating that Meghan and Harry are now working with Sheeraz Inc., an endorsement firm that works with clients like Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Lopez, and Zendaya to arrange brand deals and appearances.

Sheeraz boldly claimed on its Instagram that it is accepting offers for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The company wrote, "Sheeraz, Inc is now taking appearance and endorsement requests for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle @sussexroyal Sheeraz, Inc clients from Middle East, India, US and Asia can send us official offers and we will take them directly to their representatives."

Buckingham Palace told _The Sun _that Meghan and Harry working with Sheeraz Inc., as indicated by the company's Instagram, is "categorically untrue." Despite the Palace's denial, the Instagram remains on Sheeraz's page.

The company posted a response to the Palace's denial on its Instagram Story and Twitter, insisting that Meghan is definitely still working with them. "Always remember Meghan Markle was an actress in Hollywood before becoming a Princess," Sheeraz Inc.'s founder Sheeraz Hasan wrote. "Now she is coming back to LA and of course I have been in contact with her inner team for brand and appearances deals as I have a global network of buyers for talent. When celebrities need global media or global brand opportunities, I always get the calls."

Perhaps most telling is Meghan and Harry's lack of response to all of this. Silence speaks volumes.

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...han-markle-prince-harry-sheeraz-inc-response/


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> I see things are heating up this week.
> 
> *Palace Breaks Silence On Claim Meghan Markle Is Working With Kim Kardashian's Endorsement Company*
> 
> Buckingham Palace rarely comments on stories, but in the weeks following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step down as senior royal family members, the Palace has been speaking out more to set the record straight on their future. This weekend, the Palace responded to reports circulating that Meghan and Harry are now working with Sheeraz Inc., an endorsement firm that works with clients like Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Lopez, and Zendaya to arrange brand deals and appearances.
> 
> Sheeraz boldly claimed on its Instagram that it is accepting offers for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The company wrote, "Sheeraz, Inc is now taking appearance and endorsement requests for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle @sussexroyal Sheeraz, Inc clients from Middle East, India, US and Asia can send us official offers and we will take them directly to their representatives."
> 
> Buckingham Palace told _The Sun _that Meghan and Harry working with Sheeraz Inc., as indicated by the company's Instagram, is "categorically untrue." Despite the Palace's denial, the Instagram remains on Sheeraz's page.
> 
> The company posted a response to the Palace's denial on its Instagram Story and Twitter, insisting that Meghan is definitely still working with them. "Always remember Meghan Markle was an actress in Hollywood before becoming a Princess," Sheeraz Inc.'s founder Sheeraz Hasan wrote. "Now she is coming back to LA and of course I have been in contact with her inner team for brand and appearances deals as I have a global network of buyers for talent. When celebrities need global media or global brand opportunities, I always get the calls."
> 
> Perhaps most telling is Meghan and Harry's lack of response to all of this. Silence speaks volumes.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...han-markle-prince-harry-sheeraz-inc-response/


Hahahahaha what a mess. This guy runs a huge brand so I'm guessing BP is clueless about what they're up to.


----------



## mia55

200k for an appearance by a royal prince is pretty low IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Perhaps most telling is Meghan and Harry's lack of response to all of this. Silence speaks volumes.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...han-markle-prince-harry-sheeraz-inc-response/



Wouldn't it be time for another public complaint or even lawsuit? I mean, I would take measures if someone said something potentially harmful on their Instagram if it was all made up.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I see things are heating up this week.
> 
> *Palace Breaks Silence On Claim Meghan Markle Is Working With Kim Kardashian's Endorsement Company*
> 
> Buckingham Palace rarely comments on stories, but in the weeks following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step down as senior royal family members, the Palace has been speaking out more to set the record straight on their future. This weekend, the Palace responded to reports circulating that Meghan and Harry are now working with Sheeraz Inc., an endorsement firm that works with clients like Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Lopez, and Zendaya to arrange brand deals and appearances.
> 
> Sheeraz boldly claimed on its Instagram that it is accepting offers for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The company wrote, "Sheeraz, Inc is now taking appearance and endorsement requests for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle @sussexroyal Sheeraz, Inc clients from Middle East, India, US and Asia can send us official offers and we will take them directly to their representatives."
> 
> Buckingham Palace told _The Sun _that Meghan and Harry working with Sheeraz Inc., as indicated by the company's Instagram, is "categorically untrue." Despite the Palace's denial, the Instagram remains on Sheeraz's page.
> 
> The company posted a response to the Palace's denial on its Instagram Story and Twitter, insisting that Meghan is definitely still working with them. "Always remember Meghan Markle was an actress in Hollywood before becoming a Princess," Sheeraz Inc.'s founder Sheeraz Hasan wrote. "Now she is coming back to LA and of course I have been in contact with her inner team for brand and appearances deals as I have a global network of buyers for talent. When celebrities need global media or global brand opportunities, I always get the calls."
> 
> Perhaps most telling is Meghan and Harry's lack of response to all of this. Silence speaks volumes.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...han-markle-prince-harry-sheeraz-inc-response/


They’re a sly pair of ingrates are they not?


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Hahahahaha what a mess. This guy runs a huge brand so I'm guessing BP is clueless about what they're up to.


They’re probably not used to dealing with money grabbing opportunism on this level.


----------



## bag-mania

mia55 said:


> 200k for an appearance by a royal prince is pretty low IMO.



Well, he is a second born son and he gave it up. So, who are they really? Two people who don't have any original ideas to share or anything of importance to say. Looking at it that way, anyone who pays 200 grand for that is getting ripped off royally (pun intended)!


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Well, he is a second born son and he gave it up. So, who are they really? Two people who don't have any original ideas to share or anything of importance to say. Looking at it that way, anyone who pays 200 grand for that is getting ripped off royally (pun intended)!


Nicki Minaj made $125k to show up at some super bowl party, at least she can rap


----------



## limom

Dang Cardi B makes one Million to perform in Africa!
Bird/stripper for the win.
And she can’t rap.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Nicki Minaj made $125k to show up at some super bowl party, at least she can rap



Mega rich people love to buy celebrities for their parties. Maybe Meghan and Harry can work up an act. Could they sing? Do standup comedy? Teach royal etiquette? Harry would need to do that one, since Meghan wasn't around long enough to learn it herself.


----------



## TC1

I don't think anyone would want to pay 200K to have MM and H show up and tell their story of woe. I mean truly. How can one manage? Just existing? But, "you know she does voice overs?"


----------



## zen1965

For someone who wanted to first hit the ground running and then be financially independent they have been idle an awful lot.


----------



## kipp

If these celebrity appearances are what they are going to do to raise $$$$, then it seems that their (or at least Harry's) wish to lead a "normal life" is disingenuous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

zen1965 said:


> For someone who wanted to first hit the ground running and then be financially independent they have been idle an awful lot.



That has been the problem the entire time. Her actions did not match her words. She wants credit for doing all the things she only said she was going to do.


----------



## byzina

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve got to assume MM and H will reappear at the Oscars.



I was 100% sure they would do it. And they probably will despite the risk of new jokes. I think Brad really brought them down.



TC1 said:


> I don't think anyone would want to pay 200K to have MM and H show up and tell their story of woe. I mean truly. How can one manage? Just existing? But, "you know she does voice overs?"



They can still be guests at sheikhs' or oligarchs' parties/weddings/children's birthdays 
Looks like Meghan made the agreement behind Harry's back and he and BP know nothing about it yet.


----------



## limom

TC1 said:


> I don't think anyone would want to pay 200K to have MM and H show up and tell their story of woe. I mean truly. How can one manage? Just existing? But, "you know she does voice overs?"


Can they do it barefoot?
There might be a market for that.


----------



## papertiger

jehaga said:


> Imagine the ranting and raving poor Harry must be enduring at the oligarch’s house. MM thought she was going to steamroll over Kate when she joined the family, and when it didn’t happen, she became obsessed with trying to overshadow Kate. Sure, kudos to MM for nabbing a prince, but everything she has done afterwards has been shortsighted, petty and transparent. Maybe she thinks she’s too old to play the long game, hence the urgency to cash in so she could move on to her next conquest. Harry, honestly, is neither rich nor powerful enough to propel her to the status she desires.
> 
> All of this is a shame. I still remember thinking how wonderfully she was going to be able to handle herself publicly as Harry’s wife because of her so-called “acting” background. Ugh.



I don't think she's ever heard of the 'long game'


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> That has to be Meghan's greatest weakness and she has many. She's incredibly impatient. She has to have everything perfect for her, now, now, NOW! If things aren't the way she wants it, she bails. Just ask her first husband, who she blindsided with a long-distance divorce request and *sent the wedding/engagement rings to him via registered mail.* Not a classy move for sure.



I guess he's lucky she sent them back at all


----------



## papertiger

byzina said:


> I was 100% sure they would do it. And they probably will despite the risk of new jokes. I think Brad really brought them down.
> 
> 
> 
> *They can still be guests at sheikhs' or oligarchs' parties/weddings/children's birthdays*
> Looks like Meghan made the agreement behind Harry's back and he and BP know nothing about it yet.



Could be potentially be politically damaging. BRF may have to use their aces (finance/titles) sooner than first thought yet.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Could be potentially be politically damaging. BRF may have to use their aces (finance/titles) sooner than first thought yet.


I’m thinking someone needs to rip the plaster off quickly


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I see things are heating up this week.
> 
> *Palace Breaks Silence On Claim Meghan Markle Is Working With Kim Kardashian's Endorsement Company*
> 
> Buckingham Palace rarely comments on stories, but in the weeks following Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step down as senior royal family members, the Palace has been speaking out more to set the record straight on their future. This weekend, the Palace responded to reports circulating that Meghan and Harry are now working with Sheeraz Inc., an endorsement firm that works with clients like Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Lopez, and Zendaya to arrange brand deals and appearances.
> 
> Sheeraz boldly claimed on its Instagram that it is accepting offers for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The company wrote, "Sheeraz, Inc is now taking appearance and endorsement requests for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle @sussexroyal Sheeraz, Inc clients from Middle East, India, US and Asia can send us official offers and we will take them directly to their representatives."
> 
> Buckingham Palace told _The Sun _that Meghan and Harry working with Sheeraz Inc., as indicated by the company's Instagram, is "categorically untrue." Despite the Palace's denial, the Instagram remains on Sheeraz's page.
> 
> The company posted a response to the Palace's denial on its Instagram Story and Twitter, insisting that Meghan is definitely still working with them. "Always remember Meghan Markle was an actress in Hollywood before becoming a Princess," Sheeraz Inc.'s founder Sheeraz Hasan wrote. "Now she is coming back to LA and of course I have been in contact with her inner team for brand and appearances deals as I have a global network of buyers for talent. When celebrities need global media or global brand opportunities, I always get the calls."
> 
> Perhaps most telling is Meghan and Harry's lack of response to all of this. Silence speaks volumes.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...han-markle-prince-harry-sheeraz-inc-response/


Talk about tacky! .. and since when did Meghan become a "Princess"?  Uh, nope ..


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Talk about tacky! .. and since when did Meghan become a "Princess"?  Uh, nope ..



When the smarmy owner of an endorsement company thinks that being married to a prince automatically makes you a princess. Meghan probably loves it!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I agree. Still, having grown up with a narcisstic mother and an enabling stepfather I feel quite a bit familiar with the dynamics. Stepfather is smart (just not able to detect manipulative behavior even if it bites him), way more educated, is super accomplished professionally, earns a ton of money and is a really likeable guy, yet she's somehow convinced him he's worthless, unattractive, has no friends (when in fact she changes "friends" like dirty socks as soon as they stop fawning over her and the friendships he's lost is due to her deciding she didn't like the people) and should worship the ground she walks on. Now that I think of it, he barely sees his sister who has been his favourite sibling for 60+ years. Why you wonder? Oh, she wasn't fond of my mother's antics (rightfully so) and said so once, that was the end of frequent visits from either side.
> 
> So yes, they're grown men who should grow a backbone and put their foot down, but having watched our family scenario for 25+ years I feel it's a bit like telling a victim of domestic abuse to just walk away. The grip the other party has over them while still coming across as charming and devoted to outsiders who don't look verrry closely is insane.


WOW .. this sounds EXACTLY like what is going on in their household!!!  Those rumors about Will and Harry's friends pulling him aside before he married Meghan sounds like they saw through her and knew exactly what she was doing (manipulating Harry).  To bad he didn't listen because now he's stuck with her ..


----------



## eunaddict

hellosunshine said:


> Not really a punchline. People are very sympathetic towards Harry tonight and he is coming off well under the BAFTA hashtag on Twitter. William's getting roasted though.



All I see is Al Pacino falling on the stairs, Joaquin Phoenix being praised for calling out systemic racism (), Gillian Anderson looking like a goddess and Will and Kate being complimented and responding super adoringly on the red carpet. Where's the roasting? >.> Where's the sympathy for Harry? <.<


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> That has to be Meghan's greatest weakness and she has many. She's incredibly impatient. She has to have everything perfect for her, now, now, NOW! If things aren't the way she wants it, she bails. Just ask her first husband, who she blindsided with a long-distance divorce request and sent the wedding/engagement rings to him via registered mail. Not a classy move for sure.



Remember too, one of her favorite inspirational quotes, which she apparently picked up from her ex-husband is:
_"Don't give it 5 minutes if you're not going to give it 5 years."_  So, once she decided that she didn't like the life, which seemed like hardly more than 5 minutes, she was out of there.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> Remember too, one of her favorite inspirational quotes, which she apparently picked up from her ex-husband is:
> _"Don't give it 5 minutes if you're not going to give it 5 years."_  So, once she decided that she didn't like the life, which seemed like hardly more than 5 minutes, she was out of there.


She liked the life well enough, she didn’t like that it wasn’t all about Meghan Markle.  So she flounced out.


----------



## mrsinsyder

It must be killing her that she can't notify the paps while Harry is in close proximity. 

Funny how privacy is easy to come by when they actually try to live privately.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It must be killing her that she can't notify the paps while Harry is in close proximity.
> 
> Funny how privacy is easy to come by when they actually try to live privately.


The difference is stark isn’t it?  Harry’s home....no smiley prearranged pap photos.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> The difference is stark isn’t it?  Harry’s home....no smiley prearranged pap photos.....


wonder how long that will last


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> wonder how long that will last


I’m sure she’s climbing the walls


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> wonder how long that will last


I'd say maybe he'll go out to pick up friends from the airport, but his friends have all been Markle'd


----------



## Chagall

Someone up thread mentioned that they didn’t know how to rap. That can’t be too hard to learn. They could afford lessons. They could rap together barefoot about carbon footprints with their private jet Idling in the background .


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> Someone up thread mentioned that they didn’t know how to rap. That can’t be too hard to learn. They could afford lessons. They could rap together barefoot about carbon footprints with their private jet Idling in the background .


Someone on Twitter suggested they start a Canadian plumbing company and call it Royal Flush


----------



## mdcx

After watching the ITV “Harry and Meghan - A Royal Crisis” documentary, Meghan really got Tom Bradby wrapped around her little finger imo. That must have been the acting performance of her life.
I get the feeling she does the whole “damsel in distress” act with every useful man she meets.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> After watching the ITV “Harry and Meghan - A Royal Crisis” documentary, Meghan really got Tom Bradby wrapped around her little finger imo. That must have been the acting performance of her life.
> I get the feeling she does the whole “damsel in distress” act with every useful man she meets.


I'm still hoping that at some point, Harry will wake up and smell the Cappuccino .. see how she really operates and then comes to his senses.  At present, she has bewitched him into thinking that she is that damsel in distress, but we all saw that the minute Harry was not "in the picture", it took her no time whatsoever to get those smiling pap pictures up there!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I'm still hoping that at some point, Harry will wake up and smell the Cappuccino .. see how she really operates and then comes to his senses.  At present, she has bewitched him into thinking that she is that damsel in distress, but we all saw that the minute Harry was not "in the picture", it took her no time whatsoever to get those smiling pap pictures up there!



If he possessed any sort of perception at all he would already have a clue. I think she feeds and bolsters his ego and he likes that. And as long as he is getting what he needs from her maybe he doesn't look too closely at whatever else she is doing.


----------



## LittleStar88

zen1965 said:


> For someone who wanted to first hit the ground running and then be financially independent they have been idle an awful lot.



Daddy is paying their way right now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> If he possessed any sort of perception at all he would already have a clue. I think she feeds and bolsters his ego and he likes that. And as long as he is getting what he needs from her maybe he doesn't look too closely at whatever else she is doing.



But at some point that will stop. She's already started subtly belittling him in public (anyone remember the video from a shared appearance where she was shooing him around like a servant? Painful to watch even though she sold it as being funny).


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But at some point that will stop. She's already started subtly belittling him in public (anyone remember the video from a shared appearance where she was shooing him around like a servant? Painful to watch even though she sold it as being funny).



It will stop the first time he has the cajones to tell her "no" when she wants to do something. When and if that happens, he will have a problem.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Daddy is paying their way right now.


Right, for sure .. BUT, at what point will Charles say "no more" .. you got to figure that by now, he has her "number" and has figured out the "real Meghan Markle".  Obviously, if he were to cut them off, it would put a big strain on his relationship with Harry, and that is where it gets to be a sticky wicket.  Some have already said that he needs to do what QEII's father did with the Duke of Windsor; as in "see 'ya, buh-bye" .. but I'm not sure Charles has the cajones to do that!


----------



## mdcx

I feel like Meghan’s motto is “Daddy pays...”
First it was her actual dad Thomas, then hubby Trevor paid her way it sounds like. Then she’s onto Daddy-in-law Charles footing the bill.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m sure she’s climbing the walls


reminds me of a guy we know whose wife caught him fooling around with another woman.  she laid down the law and he behaved for a couple of months......leopard doesn't change his/her stripes


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> Hahahahaha what a mess. This guy runs a huge brand so I'm guessing BP is clueless about what they're up to.


I'm confused - why is the palace still issuing statements on their behalf?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm confused - why is the palace still issuing statements on their behalf?


Only 1 reason in my book = Damage Control!  BUT, if indeed .. Meghan is doing things behind their back and they are finding out about it via Social Media, then this should get very interesting.  As I said before, QEII and Prince Charles made it very clear that there was going to be "review" .. now, the question becomes, will that be moved up?!?!  Heck, they haven't even gotten to the date where some of these changes were supposed to be put into effect (what was it - the Beginning of Spring 2020) and if they start pulling this type of stuff, who knows.  Not bright IMO, but so many people have said "how bright Meghan is .."; well there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between book smart and "life smart"!!!


----------



## TC1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm confused - why is the palace still issuing statements on their behalf?


I feel like they're so used to trying to squash stories..they just decided to step in once again. I imagine there were lots of stories, pics..etc that were stopped before they got out of hand once H started seeing MM. I also can't see the majority of the BRF wanting to be in the same sentence as 'kardashian" LOL


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> I feel like they're so used to trying to squash stories..they just decided to step in once again. I imagine there were lots of stories, pics..etc that were stopped before they got out of hand once H started seeing MM. I also can't see the majority of the BRF wanting to be in the same sentence as 'kardashian" LOL



The palace thinks this guy is really bad news on several levels. Basically they don’t want Hsrry associating with self promoting people like this who have questionable associations.   They are more concerned about Harry being tainted than they are about her.


----------



## PewPew

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm confused - why is the palace still issuing statements on their behalf?



The official palace statement seems like a misguided attempt at controlling & quashing the opportunism around Harry, but what works in the UK will not work everywhere. Obviously the palace wants no association with a sleezy company its questionable dealings with “high wealth individuals” in the Middle East. But it’s a move that often backfires with celebrities. When you make an official statement of denial, then ALL subsequent crazy deal rumors gain more traction unless there’s an official denial.

H&M’s team have used anonymous “friends” to make statements to the press in the past. They don’t have to make an official statement to deny the sleezy deal, they can have friends categorically deny it. But they haven’t. It’s a really strange situation.


----------



## altigirl88

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4655620
> View attachment 4655621
> View attachment 4655622



Man that KimK pic so old, lol. She used to look so pretty.


----------



## altigirl88

doni said:


> Apparently Rebel Wilson also made some Harry wisecrack at the Baftas?
> I wonder whether these two will end up becoming a joke _a la_ Dukes of Windsor, here uneasily posing in the mock coronation party Willis' friends surprised them with at a New York club... I do hope not.
> 
> View attachment 4656102


Oh my, I’ve never seen this, this is awesome, lol


----------



## ccbaggirl89

PewPew said:


> The official palace statement seems like a misguided attempt at controlling & quashing the opportunism around Harry, but what works in the UK will not work everywhere. Obviously the palace wants no association with a sleezy company its questionable dealings with “high wealth individuals” in the Middle East. But it’s a move that often backfires with celebrities. When you make an official statement of denial, then ALL subsequent crazy deal rumors gain more traction unless there’s an official denial.
> 
> H&M’s team have used anonymous “friends” to make statements to the press in the past. They don’t have to make an official statement to deny the sleezy deal, they can have friends categorically deny it. But they haven’t. It’s a really strange situation.


I guess my understanding was that after they were no longer senior royals they would not have palace PR, especially when they are in another country.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I still say QEII should have locked them in the tower while they were still on her turf.


----------



## bisousx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I guess my understanding was that after they were no longer senior royals they would not have palace PR, especially when they are in another country.



well I think it’s more about saving the BRF’s face and less about defending H&M...


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm confused - why is the palace still issuing statements on their behalf?


Have they? I haven't seen anything recently

ETA, BP haven't said anything over the weekend about the Sheeraz business.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I agree. Still, having grown up with a narcisstic mother and an enabling stepfather I feel quite a bit familiar with the dynamics. Stepfather is smart (just not able to detect manipulative behavior even if it bites him), way more educated, is super accomplished professionally, earns a ton of money and is a really likeable guy, yet she's somehow convinced him he's worthless, unattractive, has no friends (when in fact she changes "friends" like dirty socks as soon as they stop fawning over her and the friendships he's lost is due to her deciding she didn't like the people) and should worship the ground she walks on. Now that I think of it, he barely sees his sister who has been his favourite sibling for 60+ years. Why you wonder? Oh, she wasn't fond of my mother's antics (rightfully so) and said so once, that was the end of frequent visits from either side.
> 
> So yes, they're grown men who should grow a backbone and put their foot down, but having watched our family scenario for 25+ years I feel it's a bit like telling a victim of domestic abuse to just walk away. The grip the other party has over them while still coming across as charming and devoted to outsiders who don't look verrry closely is insane.


You are so right. Narcissists definitely control their targets. Subtlety implanting ideas in their heads. They do isolate their victims so they (the narc) are the only one the person has to turn to. But Harry has chosen to treat the people that were very accommodating to him poorly. At some level he had to know the strain this whole thing has had on the Queen and Philip. What I’m trying to say is that Harry may have only been in control of 10% of the decision making but he still had that 10%.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> You are so right. Narcissists definitely control their targets. Subtlety implanting ideas in their heads. They do isolate their victims so they (the narc) are the only one the person has to turn to. But Harry has chosen to treat the people that were very accommodating to him poorly. At some level he had to know the strain this whole thing has had on the Queen and Philip. What I’m trying to say is that Harry may have only been in control of 10% of the decision making but he still had that 10%.



Can't disagree with you here! At the end of the day, it's his family he's kicking in the face (especially a grandmother who has bent protocoll more than once for him - remember the outcry when Diana died and she chose to stay in Balmoral with the boys for a few more days to let it sink in? Onlookers have said that was the one time she put family matters over duty in her whole life) while MM is just some woman he married and who treated her own family as disposables, why would anyone think she'd hesitate walking all over her in-laws.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m going with balloon animals. Useful


ccbaggirl89 said:


> I guess my understanding was that after they were no longer senior royals they would not have palace PR, especially when they are in another country.



Their new situation doesn’t kick in until Spring. Also, this “collaboration” is dangerous to the BRF. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if BP issued a statement to prevent such a relationship from continuing.


----------



## LibbyRuth

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m going with balloon animals. Useful
> 
> 
> Their new situation doesn’t kick in until Spring. Also, this “collaboration” is dangerous to the BRF. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if BP issued a statement to prevent such a relationship from continuing.


I had the same thought.  The denial is read as a "silly promotions company trying to use Meghan's name" but could very well have been a "oh no, you're not going to go down that route we set rules" slap back at Meghan instead.


----------



## bag-mania

I actually feel a bit sorry for Harry. Yes, he brought it on himself with his particularly poor skills at handling conflict resolution. However, he is in the unenviable position of being caught in the middle between two strong forces he loves, his wife and his family. He wants to please both and he can't. He chose his wife and most people would support that, but you know he isn't happy right now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Roxanna

bag-mania said:


> I actually feel a bit sorry for Harry. Yes, he brought it on himself with his particularly poor skills at handling conflict resolution. However, he is in the unenviable position of being caught in the middle between two strong forces he loves, his wife and his family. He wants to please both and he can't. He chose his wife and most people would support that, but you know he isn't happy right now.


I guess the situation is slightly more complicated. There must be something that he contributed as well as they were most definitely not that ostracized as they claimed. All that situation could have been avoided.  Especially is the issue was really with media and pressure. There must be something else at play there...I hope BRF finds way to address it.


----------



## bag-mania

Roxanna said:


> I guess the situation is slightly more complicated. There must be something that he contributed as well as they were most definitely not that ostracized as they claimed. All that situation could have been avoided.  Especially is the issue was really with media and pressure. There must be something else at play there...I hope BRF finds way to address it.



When you live with someone who is addicted to drama, every little thing becomes a huge deal. I think someone saw slights where none were intended. She felt left out when she wasn't being treated as being special anymore post-wedding. Maybe she became so agitated she pointed out each instance of perceived victimhood and escalated its impact. He is her only sounding board and he has to hear all of it. Plus, perhaps he feels bad because she wasn't like that before the wedding and he thinks it's his fault. Never underestimate a narcissist's ability to lay a thick guilt trip on a spouse.


----------



## cafecreme15

mdcx said:


> After watching the ITV “Harry and Meghan - A Royal Crisis” documentary, Meghan really got Tom Bradby wrapped around her little finger imo. That must have been the acting performance of her life.
> I get the feeling she does the whole “damsel in distress” act with every useful man she meets.


Not very feminist of her, I might add!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

This post will probably not be well received but in my heart of hearts, after all of the anguish these two fools surely have caused their families, I do not feel the least bit sorry for either MM or H

Will repeat my sentiment in case it is not clear: no pity, no wet hankies, no jokes, no media coverage will change my opin about this undeserving and ungrateful couple

My final conclusion? 
_" jeter des perles aux pourceaux"*_

*Middle French text, 1402
Quality offered to those who cannot appreciate it


----------



## bag-mania

I accidentally posted this before in the wrong thread. 

_What do you do when you are a has-been icon and you are desperate to get your name back in the press? Offer to rent your apartment to Harry and Meghan.

Way to go, Madge! You've never been a classy woman and you aren't about to start now._

*Madonna offers to rent NYC apartment to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle*

If Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are looking to decamp to New York, Madonna is offering up her multimillion-dollar apartment — for a price.

The pop star posted a video on Instagram early Tuesday captioned, “Do Megan and Prince Harry want to sublet my apartment on Central Park West??” In it, she disses their current home in Canada and talks up her $7.3 million Upper West Side co-op apartment.

“Hey, Harry — don’t run off to Canada. It’s boring there,” she explains. “I’ll let them sublet my apartment on Central Park West.” She then gave the couple a half-serious pitch on why they should live in her pad: “It’s two-bedroom, it’s got the best view of Manhattan. Incredible balcony … No, Buckingham Palace has got nothing on CPW.”

It’s interesting that Madonna would (even jokingly) offer to sublet her apartment at Harperley Hall at West 64th Street and Central Park West. In 2018, she lost her nearly three-year legal battle against the co-op, after a new board rule forbade her children and domestic help from living in the apartment unless she was “in residence” too.

But according to an owners’ handbook for the co-op available online, subletting is allowed — although the co-op “prefers that each apartment be occupied by its Shareholder.” In order to sublet, prior written approval from the board of directors is required, among other stipulations.

Meanwhile, Meghan, 38, Harry, 35, and their baby boy, Archie, have been living on Vancouver Island since announcing last month that they were stepping back from their senior royal duties. They said at the time that they’d be spending time in both North America and the UK.

https://pagesix.com/2020/02/04/mado...-apartment-to-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/


----------



## mrsinsyder

From one fame wh*re to another.


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> This post will probably not be well received but in my heart of hearts, after all of the anguish these two fools surely have caused their families, I do not feel the least bit sorry for either MM or H
> 
> Will repeat my sentiment in case it is not clear: no pity, no wet hankies, no jokes, no media coverage will change my opin about this undeserving and ungrateful couple
> 
> My final conclusion?
> _" jeter des perles aux pourceaux"*_
> 
> *Middle French text, 1402
> Quality offered to those who cannot appreciate it


Omg, at first I read Puceaux.


----------



## scarlet555

I can't help but feel Harry is being stringed along... off meds and all... Hope that's not it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Someone is laying in the bed they made...


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone is laying in the bed they made...
> 
> View attachment 4657140


I figured it would be a tough transition for Harry.  I wonder what the heck they are doing every day!  Being holed up in a mansion on Vancouver Island ....hmmm....when’s the last time they left the house!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> I figured it would be a tough transition for Harry.  I wonder what the heck they are doing everyday!  Being holed up in a mansion on Vancouver Island ....hmmm....when’s the last time they left the house!


I’ve been thinking the same thing.  I bet he’d kill for a polo game right now.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> I figured it would be a tough transition for Harry.  I wonder what the heck they are doing every day!  Being holed up in a mansion on Vancouver Island ....hmmm....when’s the last time they left the house!



I'm hoping he's spending lots of quality time with Archie while Meghan hustles some business opportunities with her LA agents.


----------



## SouthTampa

I wonder if any of you have reached the point I am at.   I was so excited for the wedding.   Got up at a god
awful time on a Saturday.   Thought the ceremony was stunningly beautiful.  Wished them only the best.    Then 
I was thrilled with the new addition.    Archie is adorable.    Even grew to love the name (haha).  

Now, I don’t know.    I guess I am over the whole conversation.    I hope the family finds happiness,  but I
am out.   I think a lot of people feel as I do.  Not so sure that they will have an easy time staying
relevant.


----------



## bag-mania

SouthTampa said:


> Not so sure that they will have an easy time staying
> relevant.



Since they gave up the royal title there's no place to go but down. They aren't talented at anything anyone would pay to see. I suppose they could demean themselves and go the fully pimped-out Kardashian route and allow millions to mock them while they laugh all the way to the bank. Other than that, they have maybe a year or two where people will care what happens to them before everyone moves on as you have.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’ve noticed over the years that the more access you have to people, the less interesting they become.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gimmethebag

bag-mania said:


> Since they gave up the royal title there's no place to go but down. They aren't talented at anything anyone would pay to see. I suppose they could demean themselves and go the fully pimped-out Kardashian route and allow millions to mock them while they laugh all the way to the bank. Other than that, they have maybe a year or two where people will care what happens to them before everyone moves on as you have.



I think where Meghan’s brand will struggle is that her animosity towards Will and Kate forces connections to choose and Hollywood by nature is social-climbing. Why would anyone want to blackball themselves to access of the future King and Queen?


----------



## doni

Clearblueskies said:


> I’ve been thinking the same thing.  I bet he’d kill for a polo game right now.



Funny, just read in the news that Nacho Figueras, the polo player, has said he talked on the phone with Harry since he is in Canada, and said that he has suffered a lot from what people are saying and that he sees the whole story as him ‘trying to protect his wife and child.’
I think that’s plausible, that this is what it makes it bearable, the conviction that he is protecting two beings he feels responsible for?


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Funny, just read in the news that Nacho Figueras, the polo player, has said he talked on the phone with Harry since he is in Canada, and said that he has suffered a lot from what people are saying and that he sees the whole story as him ‘trying to protect his wife and child.’
> I think that’s plausible, that this is what it makes it bearable, the conviction that he is protecting two beings he feels responsible for?


I think he was on the ABC special about them saying something similar


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> Funny, just read in the news that Nacho Figueras, the polo player, has said he talked on the phone with Harry since he is in Canada, and said that he has suffered a lot from what people are saying and that he sees the whole story as him ‘trying to protect his wife and child.’
> I think that’s plausible, that this is what it makes it bearable, the conviction that he is protecting two beings he feels responsible for?


I saw that too and just thought to myself "what a mess"!  I'm beginning to think that the real situation was that Meghan wanted to do things her way and that bottom line, the BRF said "nope".  I'm sure that the BRF had their ideas about Archie's upbringing, school, etc. - and that she was just not going to accept that and then started her "woe is me" routine with Harry and as such, he feels he needs to "protect" them from the only thing he really knows!  I would imagine at this point that he's likely going out of his mind; can you imagine .. going from a life where pretty much everything is done for you, appointments, engagements, etc. - to then .. what?  They send the security out to get them groceries and coffee, etc. - and then she makes dinner for them?  That may be fun in the beginning, but how long will that last?  He spent 35 years in the BRF; I can't imagine that that is an easy thing to shake.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I saw that too and just thought to myself "what a mess"!  I'm beginning to think that the real situation was that Meghan wanted to do things her way and that bottom line, the BRF said "nope".  I'm sure that the BRF had their ideas about Archie's upbringing, school, etc. - and that she was just not going to accept that and then started her "woe is me" routine with Harry and as such, he feels he needs to "protect" them from the only thing he really knows!  I would imagine at this point that he's likely going out of his mind; can you imagine .. going from a life where pretty much everything is done for you, appointments, engagements, etc. - to then .. what?  They send the security out to get them groceries and coffee, etc. - and then she makes dinner for them?  That may be fun in the beginning, but how long will that last?  He spent 35 years in the BRF; I can't imagine that that is an easy thing to shake.


while it's noble for him to want to "protect" his wife, there's a question as to whether she really needs that protection (IMO)


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I saw that too and just thought to myself "what a mess"!  I'm beginning to think that the real situation was that Meghan wanted to do things her way and that bottom line, the BRF said "nope".  I'm sure that the BRF had their ideas about Archie's upbringing, school, etc. - and that she was just not going to accept that and then started her "woe is me" routine with Harry and as such, he feels he needs to "protect" them from the only thing he really knows!  I would imagine at this point that he's likely going out of his mind; can you imagine .. going from a life where pretty much everything is done for you, appointments, engagements, etc. - to then .. what?  They send the security out to get them groceries and coffee, etc. - *and then she makes dinner for them?  *That may be fun in the beginning, but how long will that last?  He spent 35 years in the BRF; I can't imagine that that is an easy thing to shake.



The image of Meghan doing any household duties makes me laugh but it's unlikely. They are still on Charles' payroll for the time being. In addition to the nannies and bodyguards, I bet they have a full complement of cooks and maids to attend to them.


----------



## Tivo

Gimmethebag said:


> I think where Meghan’s brand will struggle is that her animosity towards Will and Kate forces connections to choose and Hollywood by nature is social-climbing. Why would anyone want to blackball themselves to access of the future King and Queen?


You just hit it right on the head. She was at the top of the food chain and chose to fall back down to common, cheap Hollywood.
And Hollywood doesn’t understand hustling backwards.


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Funny, just read in the news that Nacho Figueras, the polo player, has said he talked on the phone with Harry since he is in Canada, and said that he has suffered a lot from what people are saying and that he sees the whole story as him ‘trying to protect his wife and child.’
> I think that’s plausible, that this is what it makes it bearable, the conviction that he is protecting two beings he feels responsible for?


He must be feeling very mixed up emotionally.  Perhaps this is a reference point he comes back to try to make sense of what’s happening to him and retain some sense of control amidst the craziness?  And Archie really does need protecting for sure.  
Problem is Meghan isn’t a victim, she’s a player manipulating events (by that I mean orchestrating appearances, instagram, photographers etc.) and using those events to take them in a direction contrary to their stated intention of leading a more private life.


----------



## Mrs.Z

doni said:


> Funny, just read in the news that Nacho Figueras, the polo player, has said he talked on the phone with Harry since he is in Canada, and said that he has suffered a lot from what people are saying and that he sees the whole story as him ‘trying to protect his wife and child.’
> I think that’s plausible, that this is what it makes it bearable, the conviction that he is protecting two beings he feels responsible for?


I read this too and sorry the word “suffering” irked me...you have your health, you have wealth, a family....there are people really suffering in this world.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I read this too and sorry the word “suffering” irked me...you have your health, you have wealth, a family....there are people really suffering in this world.


well at least Harry isn't telling a reporter he's suffering


----------



## mdcx

MM convinced H that she and Archie were being targeted by the press and that he had to protect them or else the worst may happen....Pushed his Diana button and here we are imo.
They will struggle for relevance I think. To many, MM is a common grifter who essentially broke up the BRF and laughed in the face of a world of privilege for life, saying “I can do better, dummies!” 
Not sure what she can do to repair that.
Meanwhile K & W keep on carrying on.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> He must be feeling very mixed up emotionally.  Perhaps this is a reference point he comes back to try to make sense of what’s happening to him and retain some sense of control amidst the craziness?  And Archie really does need protecting for sure.
> Problem is Meghan isn’t a victim, she’s a player manipulating events (by that I mean orchestrating appearances, instagram, photographers etc.) and using those events to take them in a direction contrary to their stated intention of leading a more private life.


YES .. what a Cluster-F he has got himself into it.  At this point, I don't really see any of MM's celebrity friends truly backing her now, I think there's been too much out there now and most of it has not been positive.  I do think that somehow MM had convinced that (somehow) they could be "Hollywood celebrities" .. albeit, somewhat higher up the echelon.  Voiceovers and bit-parts are not going to recoup the $$$ that they would see from the BRF!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> YES .. what a Cluster-F he has got himself into it.  At this point, I don't really see any of MM's celebrity friends truly backing her now, I think there's been too much out there now and most of it has not been positive.  I do think that somehow MM had convinced that (somehow) they could be "Hollywood celebrities" .. albeit, somewhat higher up the echelon.  Voiceovers and bit-parts are not going to recoup the $$$ that they would see from the BRF!



Here's what I wonder. Did the Queen and Charles decide to cut them off because they assume she'll drop Harry as soon as all the attention goes away and the money dries up? They may be not-so-secretly hoping for such an outcome. Then they could take him back into the fold, hopefully a bit wiser for the experience.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> YES .. what a Cluster-F he has got himself into it.  At this point, I don't really see any of MM's celebrity friends truly backing her now, I think there's been too much out there now and most of it has not been positive.  I do think that somehow MM had convinced that (somehow) they could be "Hollywood celebrities" .. albeit, somewhat higher up the echelon.  Voiceovers and bit-parts are not going to recoup the $$$ that they would see from the BRF!


They could end up in no mans land.  Neither Royal nor A-list.



bag-mania said:


> Here's what I wonder. Did the Queen and Charles decide to cut them off because they assume she'll drop Harry as soon as all the attention goes away and the money dries up? They may be not-so-secretly hoping for such an outcome. Then they could take him back into the fold, hopefully a bit wiser for the experience.


I think that’s why they haven’t yet cut them off.  They’ve left a door open for Harry if Meghan dumps him or he has regrets, and if they should stay together it’s leverage because H&M want brand Sussexroyal and need the money.


----------



## scarlet555

Clearblueskies said:


> They could end up in *no mans land*.  *Neither Royal nor A-list.*
> 
> 
> I think that’s why they haven’t yet cut them off.  They’ve left a door open for Harry if Meghan dumps him or he has regrets, and if they should stay together it’s leverage because H&M want brand Sussexroyal and need the money.



Welcome to my world... civilians! 

MM:  Noooooo....... not again!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

> ”Hey, Harry — don’t run off to Canada. It’s boring there” -Madonna



This is hilariously tone deaf for someone who’s currently facing worldwide criticism for her world tour. There have been multiple late cancellations & very little actual music —she auctions her stuff for cash (for Malawi) & does a lot of “comedy”.

It’s ironic that she calls an entire country boring, when people are so bored they are leaving her show early and even getting refunds from some credit card companies.


----------



## lulu212121

Gimmethebag said:


> I think where Meghan’s brand will struggle is that her animosity towards Will and Kate forces connections to choose and Hollywood by nature is social-climbing. Why would anyone want to blackball themselves to access of the future King and Queen?


I have been thinking the same since H and Megan decided to leave. ABC news wouldn't even do the report they had on Andrew because of being afraid they would lose future access to Will and Kate interviews. I think they will be iced out. Hollywood/ American media may say they don't care about the Monarch, but they also don't want to be left out.


----------



## lazeny

LittleStar88 said:


> Daddy is paying their way right now.



This is so distasteful and embarrassing. They're grown, and I assume capable adults. Meghan used to work and Harry must have some employable skills. It's just so distasteful to me that these late 30's couple is so immature freeloaders and expects Charles to pay their way.


----------



## chowlover2

PewPew said:


> This is hilariously tone deaf for someone who’s currently facing worldwide criticism for her world tour. There have been multiple late cancellations & very little actual music —she auctions her stuff for cash (for Malawi) & does a lot of “comedy”.
> 
> It’s ironic that she calls an entire country boring, when people are so bored they are leaving her show early and even getting refunds from some credit card companies.


Madonna can bearly walk, She hobbles. Wendy Williams had a clip of her getting ready for a performance. Sitting in multiple ice baths, massages and a guy who followed her up the steps to the stage in case she fell. The show went on, but I can imagine the pain she is in. I only needed one knee replaced and it was excruciating. If it is her knees her performing career would be over. Knee implants are fantastic, but her’s would probably worn out after a year on the road.


----------



## mdcx

chowlover2 said:


> Madonna can bearly walk, She hobbles. Wendy Williams had a clip of her getting ready for a performance. Sitting in multiple ice baths, massages and a guy who followed her up the steps to the stage in case she fell. The show went on, but I can imagine the pain she is in. I only needed one knee replaced and it was excruciating. If it is her knees her performing career would be over. Knee implants are fantastic, but her’s would probably worn out after a year on the road.


This is so sad. I hope she’s not performing bc she needs $$$. I’d imagined she was very wealthy, and at that age I would just be enjoying a superior quality of life, getting some tasteful cosmetic adjustments here and there, hair done every few days, lots of luxury touches! 
On topic - imo MM could have had that life herself, but imagines she can leverage herself up to Michelle ***** status somehow, rather than being content to be a aristo trophy wife, essentially.
Interest in MM does seem to be dropping off.


----------



## pixiejenna

Wow I had no idea that Madonna s health is that poor that she’s canceling the majority of her shows.  I would also imagine that she should be wealthy enough to never have to really work again. I wonder how she hurt her knee or if it’s just a side effect of dancing so much for so long. I know a few people who have had knee replacements and it’s a insanely rough and painful recovery.


----------



## lanasyogamama

There is no way that she needs the money, maybe in the sense of not wanting to make lifestyle adjustments, but she’s not going to starve to death trying to live just on her Social Security.

I’m not even sure she has the most lavish lifestyle in the world. I remember in an interview once she said that she sees the way the Versaces live, surrounded by gold and priceless art, and she said that she knew she could live that way, but that it didn’t really interest her.

Anyway, back to Megan, she has to be dying to post a picture or release a Pap shot by now.


----------



## limom

So now, Madonna does her own PR/ Real Estate work?


----------



## bag-mania

Don't worry about Madonna's finances, ladies. According to Forbes, last year her estimated net worth was at least $570 million. In her lifetime she has made about $1.2 billion in concerts alone. 

Anyone who has ever watched her knows Madonna revels in the fan adoration. If she's performing it's because she can't give that up. In that sense she is like Meghan. The important difference being Madonna legitimately has decades of fame from her incredibly prolific music career. And Meghan has... <crickets>


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> So now, Madonna does her own PR/ Real Estate work?



It was an Instagram post, likely meant as a joke. Madge always tries to stay current and this was her (somewhat lame) attempt to sound like she's on top of things.


----------



## kemilia

This is what they both (did she ever actually say it though?) wanted--a quiet, no media life with time to do charitable stuff on their terms and raise their child. 

I would think H ever getting used to being a civilian will be really hard--this ain't no Hallmark "he's really a prince!" movie. His great uncle Edward never got used to leaving the royal life, even with Wallis by his side (from what I've read). 

It must be such a totally different life than I/we can imagine--it's not just like winning a huge lotto and being rich beyond your wildest dreams, it's that plus being in a very rigid, tradition-ruled family (centuries!) that the whole world is very much aware of, under the microscope at all times. I hope H can walk away from all of this in a healthy way.


----------



## daisychainz

It's been a while since Harry returned and it's eerily quiet. I'm beginning to think maybe they've left Canada for the US (or elsewhere) for another vacation. Perhaps when they emerge it'll be to announce something.


----------



## imgg

daisychainz said:


> It's been a while since Harry returned and it's eerily quiet. I'm beginning to think maybe they've left Canada for the US (or elsewhere) for another vacation. Perhaps when they emerge it'll be to announce something.


Was thinking the same thing.  Maybe with Harry around Meghan can't call the press...


----------



## daisychainz

Gimmethebag said:


> I think where Meghan’s brand will struggle is that her animosity towards Will and Kate forces connections to choose and Hollywood by nature is social-climbing. Why would anyone want to blackball themselves to access of the future King and Queen?


It's a bit of the Elton John struggle. He was close friends with Harry and started to loan H&M his plane and vacation spots and speak in their defense, but he has ultimate allegiance to the Queen and backed off during their troubles. I think if people in celebrity-land have to choose it's obvious you can't hang with the outliers and need to pass on associations with them, unless you're maybe in D/C-class status looking to rise up. The A-list celebs will be careful.


----------



## limom

^^
It also depends how successfully, they can transition into the civilian life and what type of projects, they will sign on, imho.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

imgg said:


> Was thinking the same thing.  Maybe with Harry around Meghan can't call the press...


Too coincidental that when H arrives, radio silence occurs. I still think Charles said Enough!


----------



## bag-mania

They are busy making their big plans for the future. We won't hear anything for awhile and then suddenly the sh*t will hit the fan.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Yesterday I wondered what they were up to and today the cover of People.com let me know they were ok, chilling out, hanging with Archie and the dogs, enjoying home life and the weight that’s been lifted.  (Now you know somebody called People in order for them to run such a silly story)


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> They are busy making their big plans for the future. We won't hear anything for awhile and then suddenly the sh*t will hit the fan.


Or, they will show up at the Oscars to cheers and standing ovations.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Yesterday I wondered what they were up to and today the cover of People.com let me know they were ok, chilling out, hanging with Archie and the dogs, enjoying home life and the weight that’s been lifted.  (Now you know somebody called People in order for them to run such a silly story)



Oh, _People_ is totally in their pocket, just like most of the US entertainment magazines. They must have lots of anonymous sources phoning in.


----------



## limom

threadbender said:


> Or, they will show up at the Oscars to cheers and standing ovations.


We should all start a poll:
Will they?
Wont’t they?
I am in for YES they will show up at the Oscars, their official coming out party.


----------



## daisychainz

limom said:


> We should all start a poll:
> Will they?
> Wont’t they?
> I am in for YES they will show up at the Oscars, their official coming out party.


I'm a Yes.


----------



## threadbender

I am a yes and I think they will be welcomed with open arms (fake, of course but it is HW).
I want to be proven wrong.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> We should all start a poll:
> Will they?
> Wont’t they?
> I am in for YES they will show up at the Oscars, their official coming out party.


I don't know if they will show up but IMO they have no business being there


----------



## Clearblueskies

I think Meghan will go - I think she’d do anything to be there.  But will the dress fit is more the question??  (Someone had to say it lol )


----------



## bag-mania

I don't know, but I'm sure Meghan would love to be there. If they do go, don't expect them to have good seats anywhere near the front. Those are reserved for Hollywood royalty.


----------



## jehaga

limom said:


> We should all start a poll:
> Will they?
> Wont’t they?
> I am in for YES they will show up at the Oscars, their official coming out party.



Yes, and the academy is going to give MM a lifetime achievement award. Actually a little surprised she hasn’t won the Nobel peace prize yet.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think it is a near guarantee.  It’s a win / win. The Oscars wants the media circus of having them there and she wants the media circus. And it’s also an unobjectionable appearance give that W/ K attended the BAFTAs


----------



## Clearblueskies

jehaga said:


> Yes, and the academy is going to give MM a lifetime achievement award. Actually a little surprised she hasn’t won the Nobel peace prize yet.


Come on, it is Olympic year - there’s only so much a girl can do!


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it is a near guarantee.  It’s a win / win. The Oscars wants the media circus of having them there and she wants the media circus. And it’s also an unobjectionable appearance give that W/ K attended the BAFTAs


right, but  William and Kate had a legit reason to be at the BAFTAs

If they do go, wonder if they will just be in the audience.   Probably at some point they would be acknowledged at which point Meghan can get tears in her eyes.  An acting opportunity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it is a near guarantee.  It’s a win / win. The Oscars wants the media circus of having them there and she wants the media circus. And it’s also an unobjectionable appearance give that W/ K attended the BAFTAs


William is chairman of BAFTA though, so there’s a reason he’s there


----------



## mrsinsyder

IDK, I feel like they want to be the biggest celebs in the room and that’s not possible at the Oscars. But they love them some attention so maybe.


----------



## bag-mania

Come on, let's be optimistic. Meghan wants her red carpet stroll, and what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> IDK, I feel like they want to be the biggest celebs in the room and that’s not possible at the Oscars. But they love them some attention so maybe.


Meghan's people would probably have to try to gauge how much support they have in the community.  If they think they can get a big reception, they would probably go.  She would have to kid herself into believing she deserves to be there.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Come on, let's be optimistic. Meghan wants her red carpet stroll, and what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


haven't heard from the Meghan lovers here on this issue?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> haven't heard from the Meghan lovers here on this issue?



Some may have moved on to boards with more like-minded members where they can rejoice in the glory that is Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Some may have moved on to boards with more like-minded members where they can rejoice in the glory that is Meghan.


seems like a good idea to me


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Some may have moved on to boards with more like-minded members where they can rejoice in the glory that is Meghan.


Too funny, thank you for the chuckle


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Come on, let's be optimistic. Meghan wants her red carpet stroll, and what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


Perfect emoji


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Perfect emoji



That's what I imagine being cooped up in a house with her is like. Poor Harry, no mere mansion is large enough to hold the frustration.


----------



## TC1

Perhaps an Oscar after party? I don't see them attending the actual awards. Does Elton still host one?


----------



## rose60610

M&H have been so quiet that it's eerie. Somebody muzzled them for sure. If their plans and marriage fizzle, who'll get the blame? Why do I get the feeling Meghan would turn to Harry and shout: "You would have been nothing without ME!" And if he hasn't shaken off the Stockholm Syndrome yet, he might agree. How do you de-program that?


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Yesterday I wondered what they were up to and today the cover of People.com let me know they were ok, chilling out, hanging with Archie and the dogs, enjoying home life and the weight that’s been lifted.  (Now you know somebody called People in order for them to run such a silly story)


Did they happen to mention if he was still suffering or able to get out of bed?  Inquiring minds need to know. 

I think she would love. to be at the Oscars and/or a party   We shall see!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Would showing up at a party make it obvious that she wasn’t invited to the actual awards show though?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Some may have moved on to boards with more like-minded members where they can rejoice in the glory that is Meghan.


They have, they post the same comments on multiple forums. It’s not surprising, if you look at their Instagram comments it’s a lot of the same stuff from new bot accounts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Would showing up at a party make it obvious that she wasn’t invited to the actual awards show though?



It might not matter. The most important thing is to be seen and acknowledged positively by the press. Hey, they could spin it that they didn't have time in their busy schedule for the awards ceremony, but they always make time for <insert whatever celebrity party host here>.


----------



## mrsinsyder

DailyMail is reporting they’re loving a quiet life in Canada now. 

So basically they’re laying around doing nothing. But I thought they were the hardest working royals ever? What a joke.


----------



## bag-mania

They have to walk a fine line. Do they appear as thirsty attention-seekers or do they appear as reclusive deadbeats living off the generosity of some sketchy billionaire?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

bag-mania said:


> Some may have moved on to boards with more like-minded members where they can rejoice in the glory that is Meghan.



I'd already blocked them anyway.


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it is a near guarantee.  It’s a win / win. The Oscars wants the media circus of having them there and she wants the media circus. And it’s also an unobjectionable appearance give that W/ K attended the BAFTAs


I'm not so sure about that .. there is enough of a Security disaster when the Oscars are going on (don't even get me started on teh traffic and assorted other BS that goes around in LA at that time), but then add in that additional security would have to be done for them .. I'm not sure that the Oscars would want to do that!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Would showing up at a party make it obvious that she wasn’t invited to the actual awards show though?


A lot of big stars just go to the Vf party I think


----------



## mdcx

The comments section is brutal! 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 Did she really expect sympathy???
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7970059/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-feel-weight-lifted-enjoying-quiet-life.html


----------



## CeeJay

.. and meanwhile, can't recall which place I read it (_might have been the express.uk?_) .. that a bunch of folks in LA have said "DO NOT move here"!!!!  There are still rumors that they (Meghan) wants to, but I really do think that might bring about a whole new set of issues.


----------



## bag-mania

Wait a sec. That photo of Meghan and the dogs is OLD. The brown dog is Bogart, the poor dog she dumped when she found out she was marrying a prince. Look at him snuggled up with her. Poor little soul didn't realize how disposable she thought he was.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Wait a sec. That photo of Meghan and the dogs is OLD. The brown dog is Bogart, the poor dog she dumped when she found out she was marrying a prince. Look at him snuggled up with her. Poor little soul didn't realize how disposable she thought he was.


Poor Bogart, he got Markled  
What was his crime??  Who knows - perhaps he wasn’t photogenic enough, or maybe she was scared he’d fart in front of her Maj, but he certainly deserved better, poor boy.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Wonder why the are 'hoping to spend the summer in LA'. If you want to spend the summer in LA, don't you just go there? Or rather do they mean, hopping some rich benefactor lets them live in another opulent mansion?


----------



## Rouge H

I’ve had enough of these two- just go away.......please


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Poor Bogart, he got Markled
> What was his crime??  Who knows - perhaps he wasn’t photogenic enough, or maybe she was scared he’d fart in front of her Maj, but he certainly deserved better, poor boy.



The Queen loves dogs. Bogart would only have been an asset there. Frankly, Bogart's only crime was being an inconvenience to Meghan. The way they played it was that Bogart was "too old" to travel to England. However, he was only six which is middle-aged for a dog. Just one of several things said by Meghan's camp over the past few years that doesn't stand up to the smell test when examined closely.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> The Queen loves dogs. Bogart would only have been an asset there. Frankly, Bogart's only crime was being an inconvenience to Meghan. The way they played it was that Bogart was "too old" to travel to England. However, he was only six which is middle-aged for a dog. Just one of several things said by Meghan's camp over the past few years that doesn't stand up to the smell test when examined closely.


I know , it was a rhetorical question (I should’ve used the sarcasm font), because it makes me very angry.  I’ve had dogs since I was a child.  My present dog (a rescue as a youngster) is now 10, fairly fit, is currently snuggled up to me on the sofa and I wouldn’t betray his trust for the world.
There’s little about any of Meghan’s claims, qualifications or self aggrandisement that bears close examination IMO.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Allisonfaye said:


> Wonder why the are 'hoping to spend the summer in LA'. If you want to spend the summer in LA, don't you just go there? Or rather do they mean, hopping some rich benefactor lets them live in another opulent mansion?


 #anglingforafreebie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> #anglingforafreebie


if that is the case, what a shame for a prince to be doing this


----------



## Gimmethebag

I believe Meghan will be at the Oscars. I read a blind that her people asked if she could present an award, and they countered back that they wanted Harry to introduce 1917. 

But the big question will be, who dresses her? The big designers that every actress clamors for isn’t going to loan her a gown (free) when they’ll risk a future red carpet moment and publicity (paid) by the Duchess of Cambridge/soon to be Princess of Wales.

I predict she’ll walk the red carpet looking like Jessica Mulroney styled her (because she’s obviously not going to hire Brad Goreski ) and other than 2-3 publications hyping it up, she’ll be roasted in the press for 1. Looking sloppy and 2. Not having a legitimate reason to be there.

Also, lots of blinds the morning after.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Gary Janetti FTW


----------



## cafecreme15

lanasyogamama said:


> Gary Janetti FTW
> 
> View attachment 4658390


“PLUS Prince George’s Oscar picks”


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I think they'll go to the Oscars as presenters, so they don't need seats or to stay. They have done that a few times before, brought in super surprise guests for a single award - no red carpet, no parties, but an appearance. So I vote a Yes, they'll be around.


----------



## doni

Hola/Hello Magazine reports they are looking for a house in LA, a focus being security and that it is good for receiving.

What I don’t get is, according to Harry himself they were eager to do royal work, but what made them unhappy was unfair reporting and criticism of the UK press. This has not changed, if anything, it has gotten worse. Plus now they have paparazzi, which they were spared before. So why exactly would they be happy?


----------



## mshermes

I think they would be outstanding seat fillers at the Oscars.


----------



## gelbergirl

I need an update on the dogs.
Which dogs does she have?  She dragged one from Canada and he's with her now?
Is one from England?  Has Bogart been seen?


----------



## arnott

doni said:


> *Hola/Hello Magazine reports they are looking for a house in LA, a focus being security and that it is good for receiving.*



Oh please be true.    I want them out of my country!


----------



## arnott

bag-mania said:


> The Queen loves dogs. Bogart would only have been an asset there. Frankly, *Bogart's only crime was being an inconvenience to Meghan. The way they played it was that Bogart was "too old" to travel to England. However, he was only six which is middle-aged for a dog.* Just one of several things said by Meghan's camp over the past few years that doesn't stand up to the smell test when examined closely.



Horrible!     Poor  Dog.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I vote No on an Oscar appearance, simply because they don’t belong there and it would be sooooo thirsty!  

I agree with Gary J, they have to be bored in Canada, how can you not leave the house, it’s not healthy!


----------



## LibbyRuth

I don't buy the notion that they are not leaving the house. I agree fully with those who suggested that before Harry got there, we were seeing a lot of pap pictures of Meghan because she was tipping them off. Harry got there and the paps stopped being tipped off. Without the tips, they can move about unnoticed because no one is begging others to take note.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Harry the hairdresser


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't buy the notion that they are not leaving the house. I agree fully with those who suggested that before Harry got there, we were seeing a lot of pap pictures of Meghan because she was tipping them off. Harry got there and the paps stopped being tipped off. Without the tips, they can move about unnoticed because no one is begging others to take note.


don't they have acres on the estate to walk around on?


----------



## daisychainz

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Harry the hairdresser



I can just hear the conversations she must have had with him about this!!! He looks so well-trained to watch over her hair lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

daisychainz said:


> I can just hear the conversations she must have had with him about this!!! He looks so well-trained to watch over her hair lol


OK, do you really think she told him to do this?  or does he just like her hair?


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't buy the notion that they are not leaving the house. I agree fully with those who suggested that before Harry got there, we were seeing a lot of pap pictures of Meghan because she was tipping them off. Harry got there and the paps stopped being tipped off. Without the tips, they can move about unnoticed because no one is begging others to take note.



Here’s an insidious thought. The timing of those dog walking photos being made public was only a couple of days before Harry came back. He had spent several days longer in England than anticipated to fulfill his obligations. Maybe Meghan was worried about him reconsidering what he was doing while he was away from her influence. What if she staged the pap event to show how badly she needed him to come back and protect her from the big, bad media? “Archie and I are being hunted like Diana! Come back right now (and before anyone there can change your mind about what we’re doing).”

I fully realize such a ridiculous level of manipulation sounds like a villainess from an old soap opera. But considering who we are talking about...


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Here’s an insidious thought. The timing of those dog walking photos being made public was only a couple of days before Harry came back. He had spent several days longer in England than anticipated to fulfill his obligations. Maybe Meghan was worried about him reconsidering what he was doing while he was away from her influence. What if she staged the pap event to show how badly she needed him to come back and protect her from the big, bad media? “Archie and I are being hunted like Diana! Come back right now (and before anyone there can change your mind about what we’re doing).”
> 
> I fully realize such a ridiculous level of manipulation sounds like a villainess from an old soap opera. But considering who we are talking about...


I'm with you on this thought.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm with you on this thought.



It’s so crazy it just might be true.


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> I need an update on the dogs.
> Which dogs does she have?  She dragged one from Canada and he's with her now?
> Is one from England?  Has Bogart been seen?



From the pap photos, they still have Guy the beagle (I am assuming he is the same beagle she had before). The other dog is a Lab they adopted in 2018. The current whereabouts of Bogart are unknown. She had left him with someone in Canada when she moved to England.


----------



## youngster

I'm going to vote "no" on them attending the Oscars. I totally believe MM would_ love_ to be there but it would not be consistent with their statements about wanting to live a more quiet, private life. It's too soon since their great escape and they'd just be roasted in the press.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm with you on this thought.


and to  make an analogy ... 
Yes, Diana was a magnet for paparazzi, but she also used the press, eg she provided the background for Morton's book and knew her photo would be published anytime she wore an amazing outfit - if she did not want Charles in the spotlight, she captured the spotlight via some unforgettable new outfit - dress less conspicuously and the press will not be interested - do that repeatedly, and the press will learn to ignore you 
Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice get limited press, after all, they are not the fashionistas that Diana was, and it probably works to their advantage to eliminate photogs, there is a downside to having the best stylist in the world
Anyway, back to D and M , I  think M has her late mother-in-law's proclivity for trying to use the press to her advantage


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> and to  make an analogy ...
> Yes, Diana was a magnet for paparazzi, but she also used the press, eg she provided the background for Morton's book and knew her photo would be published anytime she wore an amazing outfit - if she did not want Charles in the spotlight, she captured the spotlight via some unforgettable new outfit - dress less conspicuously and the press will not be interested - do that repeatedly, and the press will learn to ignore you
> Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice get limited press, after all, they are not the fashionistas that Diana was, and it probably works to their advantage to eliminate photogs, there is a downside to having the best stylist in the world
> Anyway, back to D and M , I  think M has her late mother-in-law's proclivity for trying to use the press to her advantage



The difference is Diana didn’t start out that way. In the early years of her marriage the media was brutal to her and she had absolutely no defense. I remember the tabloids calling that beautiful 20-year-old girl fat and worse. It was only after several years she figured out that if she wanted her version of the story to be heard she was going to have to give it to the press herself. She learned to use the media and by willingly giving them something to print sometimes, it ensured she would be left alone at other times.

Meghan didn’t wait around long enough to work out an accommodation with the press. She bolted.


----------



## duna

youngster said:


> I'm going to vote "no" on them attending the Oscars. I totally believe MM would_ love_ to be there but it would not be consistent with their statements about wanting to live a more quiet, private life. It's too soon since their great escape and they'd just be roasted in the press.



I agree, I don't think they'll go to the Oscars, they have nothing to do with the Oscars....  She's just a D list actress of TV series and that's about it. But what do I know? I have no idea how and on what grounds people are invited or not at the Oscars, besides major actors, directors ecc.... of course.

In any event if H&M do show up they certainly will get roasted by the press and quite rightly so. JMHO.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> The difference is Diana didn’t start out that way. In the early years of her marriage the media was brutal to her and she had absolutely no defense. I remember the tabloids calling that beautiful 20-year-old girl fat and worse. It was only after several years she figured out that if she wanted her version of the story to be heard she was going to have to give it to the press herself. She learned to use the media and by willingly giving them something to print sometimes, it ensured she would be left alone at other times.
> 
> Meghan didn’t wait around long enough to work out an accommodation with the press. She bolted.


Agree
Diana at 20 years old was different from the 37 year old Diana
Implicitly, I guess, I was comparing women of similar age - Meghan and 37 year old Diana


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I agree, I don't think they'll go to the Oscars, they have nothing to do with the Oscars....  She's just a D list actress of TV series and that's about it. But what do I know? I have no idea how and on what grounds people are invited or not at the Oscars, besides major actors, directors ecc.... of course.
> 
> In any event if H&M do show up they certainly will get roasted by the press and quite rightly so. JMHO.


The Brad Pitt joke about Harry at the BAFTAs ...
William and Kate laughed, a perfect response in public, but it must have hurt at least a bit - stiff upper lip and all of that, they handled it perfectly 
I think of the upcoming INVICTUS games, and wonder how nice the press will be for that uncomfortable situation, I doubt the press will be charitable


----------



## youngster

duna said:


> I agree, I don't think they'll go to the Oscars, they have nothing to do with the Oscars....  She's just a D list actress of TV series and that's about it. But what do I know? I have no idea how and on what grounds people are invited or not at the Oscars, besides major actors, directors ecc.... of course.



MM also isn't a member of the Academy.  You have to be invited to become a member and sponsored by a couple of Academy members for that membership, unless you received an acting nomination, in which case you have a faster track to membership. I've got no idea how likely it is for a non-Academy member to be a presenter, it probably has happened but not often.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> MM also isn't a member of the Academy.  You have to be invited to become a member and sponsored by a couple of Academy members for that membership, unless you received an acting nomination, in which case you have a faster track to membership. I've got no idea how likely it is for a non-Academy member to be a presenter, it probably has happened but not often.


she may not be a member of the academy but thanks to her snagging a prince she is now a household name, for which she is totally ungrateful it seems


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> MM also isn't a member of the Academy.  You have to be invited to become a member and sponsored by a couple of Academy members for that membership, unless you received an acting nomination, in which case you have a faster track to membership. I've got no idea how likely it is for a non-Academy member to be a presenter, it probably has happened but not often.



The Academy is a self-serving group and if the planners think having Harry and Meghan there would be good for them they will make it happen. I think the popularity of awards shows in general has declined in recent years. It might spark a bit of interest.


----------



## Jayne1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Harry the hairdresser



Yes... but... there's another aspect to his adjusting her hair.  She's on camera and must look regal.  Same with helping her on with her coat and holding her hand in such a way to keep her steady when walking in spiky heels on gravel.  She can't look clumsy or disheveled.

So gentlemanly yes, but he knows the drill. He has to make sure she looks like a polished member of the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> The difference is Diana didn’t start out that way. In the early years of her marriage the media was brutal to her and she had absolutely no defense. I remember the tabloids calling that beautiful 20-year-old girl fat and worse. It was only after several years she figured out that if she wanted her version of the story to be heard she was going to have to give it to the press herself. She learned to use the media and by willingly giving them something to print sometimes, it ensured she would be left alone at other times.
> 
> Meghan didn’t wait around long enough to work out an accommodation with the press. She bolted.


Diana only had a short period when she was awkward, like posing in sunlight with a sheer skirt and wearing that black strapless dress she was bursting out of.  That was all before the wedding. She lost a huge amount of weight during that time, her wedding dress had to be repeatedly taken in and she got very media savvy, really fast.  She also started dressing cute real quick.

So, in my opinion, she didn't have a terrible time with the press for very long -- until she went off script and tried to change the monarchy's way of doing things to suit herself.

Back to topic -- I'm of the opinion the Oscars would be a stupid look for H&M and they know it.


----------



## mia55

gelbergirl said:


> I need an update on the dogs.
> Which dogs does she have?  She dragged one from Canada and he's with her now?
> Is one from England?  Has Bogart been seen?


I can try to answer the last part for Bogart. If he was surrendered to shelter, he must have been put down by now (if not adopted) as owner surrenders are the first ones to go. I help my local animal shelter and rescues around me and it’s always a sad scenario when there’s an owner surrender


----------



## kemilia

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Harry the hairdresser



OMG--these pics are nuts! Easy to see who rules in that fam.


----------



## kemilia

I vote no to the Oscars--they dump out on all their royal engagements & charitable duties and then go the glitzy Oscars?--they would be roasted alive by the British press, and rightly so. 

Though it would be fun to see what ill-fitting gown she would wear, gotta admit.


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> I vote no to the Oscars--
> 
> *Though it would be fun to see what ill-fitting gown she would wear, gotta admit.*


 She is never going to be forgotten for her wedding snafu, is she?
Diana’s dress was awful too and ill fitting as well....


----------



## A1aGypsy

mia55 said:


> I can try to answer the last part for Bogart. If he was surrendered to shelter, he must have been put down by now (if not adopted) as owner surrenders are the first ones to go. I help my local animal shelter and rescues around me and it’s always a sad scenario when there’s an owner surrender



you’d be hard pressed to find a kill shelter in Toronto. But I understand her friends have / had him. Hopefully that is true and he is living a happy life.


----------



## mia55

A1aGypsy said:


> you’d be hard pressed to find a kill shelter in Toronto. But I understand her friends have / had him. Hopefully that is true and he is living a happy life.


I hope the same, wish he’s happy and safe wherever he is.


----------



## lanasyogamama

kemilia said:


> I vote no to the Oscars--they dump out on all their royal engagements & charitable duties and then go the glitzy Oscars?--they would be roasted alive by the British press, and rightly so.
> 
> Though it would be fun to see what ill-fitting gown she would wear, gotta admit.



She’ll  wear a fancy sleeveless trench dress!


----------



## hellosunshine

eunaddict said:


> All I see is Al Pacino falling on the stairs, Joaquin Phoenix being praised for calling out systemic racism (), Gillian Anderson looking like a goddess and Will and Kate being complimented and responding super adoringly on the red carpet. *Where's the roasting? >.> Where's the sympathy for Harry? <.<*



Late reply - I've been busy with life, but below are the screenshots you're requesting.


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> She is never going to be forgotten for her wedding snafu, is she?
> Diana’s dress was awful too and ill fitting as well....


But, to put Diana's wedding  dress in perspective , yes, it has not stood the test of time , too much ...
But, that was the style of the times , see anything from Yves Saint Laurent from the early 1980s, people applauded his collections at the time
The difference between YSL and Diana is that her dress is regularly shown today in the press, whereas the famous YSL Russian collection is not remembered. Her dress is immortal, his collection is long forgotten 
The 1980s had a nickname - the Dynasty - Diana days (from original Dynasty TV show with Linda Evans and Joan Collins etc), the whole decade was over the top


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> But, to put Diana's wedding  dress in perspective , yes, it has not stood the test of time , too much ...
> But, that was the style of the times , see anything from Yves Saint Laurent from the early 1980s, people applauded his collections at the time
> The difference between YSL and Diana is that her dress is regularly shown today in the press, whereas the famous YSL Russian collection is not remembered. Her dress is immortal, his collection is long forgotten
> The 1980s had a nickname - the Dynasty - Diana days (from original Dynasty TV show with Linda Evans and Joan Collins etc), the whole decade was over the top


Diana’s dress was wrinkled and she was panned for it, if I recall correctly... by the French press.
She was not wearing YSL but a small English designer...
YSL forgotten? By whom?


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> She is never going to be forgotten for her wedding snafu, is she?
> Diana’s dress was awful too and ill fitting as well....


I was thinking of that black dress with the sheer bodice top--the "lion king" dress when H is pimping her out to the head of Disney--that dress needed to go up a size, though the wedding gown needed help too. She's always worn great shoes though, can't always say that about her SIL.


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> I was thinking of that black dress with the sheer bodice top--the "lion king" dress when H is pimping her out to the head of Disney--that dress needed to go up a size, though the wedding gown needed help too. She's always worn great shoes though, can't always say that about her SIL.


Thanks.


----------



## Flatsy

marietouchet said:


> But, to put Diana's wedding dress in perspective , yes, it has not stood the test of time , too much ...
> But, that was the style of the times , see anything from Yves Saint Laurent from the early 1980s, people applauded his collections at the time


I don't agree that it really reflected the fashion of the time.  The poof sleeves were four times poofier than poof sleeves have ever been.  The skirt was so huge it looked like a toilet paper cozy.  It had some late 70s/early 80s elements, but they were very over the top.  And it was never supposed to be wrinkled all over.

I was a little kid in the 80s who had a Diana paper doll book so I understand how iconic the dress became *after* she wore it.  But when she stepped out of the carriage, many people at the time thought it was a curious gown that was clearly chosen by a very young bride.


----------



## Murphy47

limom said:


> Diana’s dress was wrinkled and she was panned for it, if I recall correctly... by the French press.
> She was not wearing YSL but a small English designer...
> YSL forgotten? By whom?



Designer was Emmanuel. 
The fabric was wrinkled because it wouldn’t fit in the carriage and the footman/pageboy started stuffing yards of it in the carriage Willy nilly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

I had an 8th grade prom dress that was a little later into the 80's but it had lots of Diana Wedding Dress style - poofy sleeves, poofy, dress... everything that makes me cringe now. I was fairly clueless. My mom somehow made me get the dress and I remember really hating it. So many things that were "quintessential 80's" and not in a good way. I hated Diana's dress but that was what I would expect for the time period.

But that was just the style. Only compounded by it being a big deal wedding so I am sure everything had to be larger than life.

Meghan's dress was pretty, but I feel like the fabric could have used some kind of something to keep the shape and not stretch out, or get creases at the waist and elbows. I know not a lot of people liked it, but I enjoyed the simplicity and clean lines.


----------



## Murphy47

Flatsy said:


> I don't agree that it really reflected the fashion of the time.  The poof sleeves were four times poofier than poof sleeves have ever been.  The skirt was so huge it looked like a toilet paper cozy.  It had some late 70s/early 80s elements, but they were very over the top.  And it was never supposed to be wrinkled all over.
> 
> I was a little kid in the 80s who had a Diana paper doll book so I understand how iconic the dress became *after* she wore it.  But when she stepped out of the carriage, many people at the time thought it was a curious gown that was clearly chosen by a very young bride.



I was an adult at the time of her wedding. 
The sleeves are not over the top in any way for the time. I was bridesmaid 3 different times back then, one before and two after with sleeves just as large.


----------



## youngster

Wonder if H&M will show up for Beatrice's wedding in May?  Harry might go but I doubt MM will.  I've read that Harry has always been on good terms with both Eugenie and Bea.  If he shows up, it will be interesting to read the body language amongst them all.


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> Wonder if H&M will show up for Beatrice's wedding in May?  Harry might go but I doubt MM will.  I've read that Harry has always been on good terms with both Eugenie and Bea.  If he shows up, it will be interesting to read the body language amongst them all.



I think it will look mean spirited if she doesn’t go.


----------



## mdcx

I was a child at the time of her wedding, and thought the dress was dreamy and romantic. All that volume was very ‘80s. It could have been worse!


I am v curious about MM’s next move. She must be dying at the lack of pap snap opportunities. Obviously someone has put the kibosh on that!


----------



## Murphy47

mdcx said:


> I was a child at the time of her wedding, and thought the dress was dreamy and romantic. All that volume was very ‘80s. It could have been worse!
> View attachment 4659145
> 
> I am v curious about MM’s next move. She must be dying at the lack of pap snap opportunities. Obviously someone has put the kibosh on that!



Some of those designs worked out better than others. 
The wide A line skirts were flattering on many girls. 
The hairstyles, what a flashback.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> Wonder if H&M will show up for Beatrice's wedding in May?  Harry might go but I doubt MM will.  I've read that Harry has always been on good terms with both Eugenie and Bea.  If he shows up, it will be interesting to read the body language amongst them all.



She will be "busy" with some "pre-arranged engagement". Baby not feeling well so last-minute drop out. Meghan not feeling well so drop out. 

I hope she will go and I hope it would be televised.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> I was a child at the time of her wedding, and thought the dress was dreamy and romantic. All that volume was very ‘80s. It could have been worse!
> View attachment 4659145
> 
> I am v curious about MM’s next move. She must be dying at the lack of pap snap opportunities. Obviously someone has put the kibosh on that!


Wow, I am so glad I wasn't born into this era... this is  Was this fashionable?? They look like old-time saloon girls from Westerns or something.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m DECEASED.


----------



## chowlover2

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Wow, I am so glad I wasn't born into this era... this is  Was this fashionable?? They look like old-time saloon girls from Westerns or something.


I was thinking Civil War bridesmaids! But that was the style back then, I remember it well.


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m DECEASED.
> 
> View attachment 4659157


----------



## Mrs.Z

TMZ just showed their house, they are taking bizarre measures for privacy like covering the iron gate in plastic and hanging giant tarps.  It looked horrendous and frankly like they might be losing it.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> TMZ just showed their house, they are taking bizarre measures for privacy like covering the iron gate in plastic and hanging giant tarps.  It looked horrendous and frankly like they might be losing it.


Seriously, who wants to harm them?  I think they are nuts with an elevated sense of self importance. It's not like Meg is taking out the garbage wearing a nightgown.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> Seriously, who wants to harm them?  I think they are nuts with an elevated sense of self importance. It's not like Meg is taking out the garbage wearing a nightgown.


There have been no recent pics so why are they now on lockdown.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Found the pics, they are definitely doomsday prepping in there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Having trouble uploading the tarp pic but it’s absolutely hideous


----------



## PewPew

PR wise, walking the Oscars red carpet would be risky as they are still negotiating funds etc with the palace. Instead, I can see either of them being asked to present a “serious” award (for philanthropy, the annual film about entertainers who have died, or the foreign film). H&M’s people could negotiate that there not be any jokes about them in the opening “comedic” monologue by the host. If they are there, it will be interesting to see how they are presented title wise.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Mrs.Z said:


> Found the pics, they are definitely doomsday prepping in there.



Wow that is really weird!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m DECEASED.
> 
> View attachment 4659157


This is sooo funny


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Found the pics, they are definitely doomsday prepping in there.


Have the meals-ready-to-eat and the hazmat suits been delivered yet?  Digging the underground bunker? May e Vladimir Putin is paying a visit to see his new asset?


----------



## threadbender

PewPew said:


> PR wise, walking the Oscars red carpet would be risky as they are still negotiating funds etc with the palace. Instead, I can see either of them being asked to present a “serious” award (for philanthropy, the annual film about entertainers who have died, or the foreign film). H&M’s people could negotiate that there not be any jokes about them in the opening “comedic” monologue by the host. If they are there, it will be interesting to see how they are presented title wise.


I don't think there is a host, is there? Even so, perhaps any hosts/presenters could be controlled but the winners' speeches, not so much.

I think that covering on the gate has been there awhile. I am sure I have seen that photo previously.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This is sooo funny


Charlotte was going to contribute, but she decided that she would rather put the money towards a new soccer ball or a Barbie dolll outfit.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Mrs.Z said:


> Found the pics, they are definitely doomsday prepping in there.



omg this is seriously one of the most bloviated crazy strange pics that I have ever seen and to think it is actually a member of the BRF that went ghetto simply blows my mind.

My brain is trying to get around the fact that though Harry grew up with a golden spoon in his mouth and probably should have learned about  aesthetics with his family’s heritage of priceless works of art, design, architecture - like wtf?

Harry, no-one wants to climb over your driveway gate. Your grandmum would like you to go back on your meds, paranoia is a serious mental disorder.


----------



## lalame

I think the tarp is more to block photography than actual prowlers (and clearly people do walk up to the gate to take photos). They probably spend time on the grounds and don’t want to be photographed all the time. Agree it looks pretty ghetto but I suppose there’s not much else they can do to shield themselves from cameras... not like they can grow a hedge or erect a wall on a rental.


----------



## chowlover2

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m DECEASED.
> 
> View attachment 4659157


" dead "


----------



## TC1

Can you imagine coming home to your 50 million dollar mansion to find your squatters have put up a bunch of tarps and a Home Depot "No trespassing" sign?


----------



## lalame

TC1 said:


> Can you imagine coming home to your 50 million dollar mansion to find your squatters have put up a bunch of tarps and a Home Depot "No trespassing" sign?



I don’t feel sorry for them! Bet you when time comes to sell, they’ll find a way to market this as a “royals’ hideaway” or “vacation home to royalty” or some such.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> But, to put Diana's wedding  dress in perspective , yes, it has not stood the test of time , too much ...
> But, that was the style of the times , see anything from Yves Saint Laurent from the early 1980s, people applauded his collections at the time
> The difference between YSL and Diana is that her dress is regularly shown today in the press, whereas the famous YSL Russian collection is not remembered. Her dress is immortal, his collection is long forgotten
> The 1980s had a nickname - the Dynasty - Diana days (from original Dynasty TV show with Linda Evans and Joan Collins etc), the whole decade was over the top


I remember waiting to see the dress and it was shocking. Like rumpled kleenex and I loved the '80s at the time, not so much now, but at the time, bigger was better, yet that dress was a mess.  Huge mess. 

Also, the Emanuels said she kept losing weight, right up until the big day and they kept taking it in, but they said it was still loo big when she wore it.

The Emanuels only wished they could design like YSL, who was alive at the time and at the peak of his genius. 

No one mentions her hair, which fell flat due to the weather? A bit frizzy too. That looked bad too.

She started dressing super cute, as I mentioned before, right after.  I loved her '80s stuff, not so much the sleeveless, slim column gowns that came later.


----------



## mdcx

Some more tmz snaps:


----------



## mdcx

The neighbours must be fairly over it. As the”proposal” that H&M made to Her Maj about collaborating (lol) was largely thrown out, I imagine Meghan is in a state of panic about the future. She’s largely been shut out of the BRF, her public image has taken a beating due to her witchy behaviour, her future as a wealthy celeb looks questionable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

mdcx said:


> Some more tmz snaps:
> 
> View attachment 4659302
> View attachment 4659303


What have they done to that beautiful home?? They were much better off safely hidden away in the UK. This is way more work for privacy!


----------



## Lodpah

Those measures are troubling. What Meghan is doing is feeding into Harry’s mental issues if he has one. They have security guards, etc. I wonder if Meghan is doing this to keep people talking about her. Child Protective Services should really check into the welfare of Archie.

This is not normal and are paps really waiting outside her house?


----------



## zinacef

I wonder what would the HOA say or the coop to this tarp shenanigans, how much would the fine be like $25 a day? I know my HOA will serve me a fine or a summon for a meeting!


----------



## jess236

*Bookmakers bet that H&M are more likely to divorce than return to the BRF

The “Megxit” Fallout, Day 7: What The British Bookmakers Are Saying With Their Odds On A Divorce For Prince Harry
https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...s-on-a-divorce-for-prince-harry/#48106e273018

Meghan Markle’s Potential $100M Earnings Spark Divorce Rumors; Sussexes’ Separation ‘Certain’?

https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...rk-divorce-rumors-sussexes-separation-2917418
*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jess236 said:


> *Bookmakers bet that H&M are more likely to divorce than return to the BRF
> 
> The “Megxit” Fallout, Day 7: What The British Bookmakers Are Saying With Their Odds On A Divorce For Prince Harry
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...s-on-a-divorce-for-prince-harry/#48106e273018
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Potential $100M Earnings Spark Divorce Rumors; Sussexes’ Separation ‘Certain’?
> 
> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...rk-divorce-rumors-sussexes-separation-2917418*



Yeah I can see him eventually return probably after she got fed up with him (can't see him leaving as he's still smitten with her), but she will never return and agree to play by the rules.


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> I remember waiting to see the dress and it was shocking. Like rumpled kleenex and I loved the '80s at the time, not so much now, but at the time, bigger was better, yet that dress was a mess.  Huge mess.
> 
> Also, the Emanuels said she kept losing weight, right up until the big day and they kept taking it in, but they said it was still loo big when she wore it.
> 
> The Emanuels only wished they could design like YSL, who was alive at the time and at the peak of his genius.
> 
> No one mentions her hair, which fell flat due to the weather? A bit frizzy too. That looked bad too.
> 
> She started dressing super cute, as I mentioned before, right after.  I loved her '80s stuff, not so much the sleeveless, slim column gowns that came later.


I loved the 80’s too. Those shoulder pads hid multiple of sins...The colors, the jewelry....My mother and her friends were so glamorous....


----------



## Corneto

VigeeLeBrun said:


> omg this is seriously one of the most bloviated crazy strange pics that I have ever seen and to think it is actually a member of the BRF *that went ghetto* simply blows my mind.
> .



”Went ghetto?” Please clarify as this is skating really close to a line I’m sure you don’t mean to cross.


----------



## Corneto

lalame said:


> I think the tarp is more to block photography than actual prowlers (and clearly people do walk up to the gate to take photos). They probably spend time on the grounds and don’t want to be photographed all the time. *Agree it looks pretty ghetto* but I suppose there’s not much else they can do to shield themselves from cameras... not like they can grow a hedge or erect a wall on a rental.



Again with the “ghetto.”  If Meghan were a blue eyed blonde, would this be the image you’re using. I’m not a fan of the woman, but I can smell micro aggressions a mile away.
Again, please clarify.


----------



## Mrs.Z

From the Urban Dictionary: 
When someone is to be described as "ghetto" - it is used to describe that persons STATE OF MIND. "Ghetto" can be both a noun and an adjective. So, in this case, it is used as an adjective where white and Asian people can be just as "ghetto" as black people. Normally, this results from the poor living and upbringing conditions. "Ghetto" is a derogatory term used towards individuals who lack the standards of manners and ethics. 

For some reason, "ghetto" is normally directed towards black individuals. However, it is believed and has been proven that other individuals of a different color can and have acted just as poorly. 

"Ghetto" is NOT black or being black. "Ghetto" is how an individual looks at the world and acts accordingly to the "ghetto" belief. "Ghetto" is how one presents themselves in how they dress, act, and speak that acquires itself from the poor conditionings of a "ghetto" (ref. ghetto-.noun) up-bringing.

——————————————————

I personally agree that it’s trashy to hang tarps from your trees or cover your fence in plastic, move for more privacy if you need to.....how about a gated community?  A house set back from the public street?  I have an entire border of evergreens in my backyard and no one can see in or out.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> ——————————————————
> 
> I personally agree that it’s trashy to hang tarps from your trees or cover your fence in plastic, move for more privacy if you need to.....how about a gated community?  A house set back from the public street?  I have an entire border of evergreens in my backyard and no one can see in or out.



Or by moving back to Frogmore Cottage, having all the privacy you want.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Corneto said:


> Again with the “ghetto.”  If Meghan were a blue eyed blonde, would this be the image you’re using. I’m not a fan of the woman, but I can smell micro aggressions a mile away.
> Again, please clarify.



Corneto, save the pc talk for someone else. Thirty-five years ago - after a bevy of marriage proposals under my belt and much to many friends bewilderedness - I married a man from a third-world country with a different skin color from myself and had children. Yes, he was one of those legal “dark-skinned” immigrants that was tossed out of “white” restaurants, bars and clubs, etc.

Just sayin’ do not try that PC sh&t with me bc I was at the front-line fighting for looking at an individual’s character and not the color of a person’s skin.

Yes, a member posted the Urban Dictionary’s definition of “ghetto” and that’s exactly what I meant. Keep your racist insinuations to yourself, bc what you are implying has no place on these boards.

mods, please feel free to remove this post and all others that are OT. Just wanted to clear the air as far as my reputation on tPF.


----------



## mdcx

https://pagesix.com/2020/02/07/prin...le-make-first-public-appearance-since-megxit/


----------



## TC1

zinacef said:


> I wonder what would the HOA say or the coop to this tarp shenanigans, how much would the fine be like $25 a day? I know my HOA will serve me a fine or a summon for a meeting!


It's private property..so there's no HOA. You can file a complaint with the city/town you live in if you're a neighbour that has issue...but that's about it.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Some more tmz snaps:
> 
> View attachment 4659302
> View attachment 4659303



This is what happens when you piss off your employees and they are THIS close to quitting. The security staff was probably ordered to put up a barrier to keep paparazzi from taking pictures of the compound. That was not in their job description and they are giving it the bare minimum effort.


----------



## Sharont2305

TC1 said:


> It's private property..so there's no HOA. You can file a complaint with the city/town you live in if you're a neighbour that has issue...but that's about it.


A Brit here, what's HOA?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Sharont2305 said:


> A Brit here, what's HOA?


Home Owners Association. It's an american thing..they enforce rules for condo's and community properties, etc.


----------



## cafecreme15

mdcx said:


> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/07/prin...le-make-first-public-appearance-since-megxit/


I’m disappointed that an organization like JP Morgan would give these two unqualified spoiled fools any air time or platform to discuss...what exactly??


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Wonder if H&M will show up for Beatrice's wedding in May?  Harry might go but I doubt MM will.  I've read that Harry has always been on good terms with both Eugenie and Bea.  If he shows up, it will be interesting to read the body language amongst them all.


maybe she'll have a bump to show off by then



cafecreme15 said:


> I’m disappointed that an organization like JP Morgan would give these two unqualified spoiled fools any air time or platform to discuss...what exactly??


if they don't have anything relevant to say will their offers dry up?  how long will people want to see them out of curiousity?



Mrs.Z said:


> TMZ just showed their house, they are taking bizarre measures for privacy like covering the iron gate in plastic and hanging giant tarps.  It looked horrendous and frankly like they might be losing it.


the neighbors won't like this


----------



## bag-mania

cafecreme15 said:


> I’m disappointed that an organization like JP Morgan would give these two unqualified spoiled fools any air time or platform to discuss...what exactly??



They are a novelty and JPMorgan got them first. I have no idea what they could have talked about. In an exclusive event like that every person listening probably had more money than they do. On the other hand, it was a good opportunity to kiss up to wealthy folks to try to score their next mansion to crash in for a few months.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> maybe she'll have a bump to show off by then


Was thinking exactly the same


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are a novelty and JPMorgan got them first. I have no idea what they could have talked about. In an exclusive event like that every person listening probably had more money than they do. On the other hand, it was a good opportunity to kiss up to wealthy folks to try to score their next mansion to crash in for a few months.


again, so sad that a prince has sunk to the level of "begging" for a place to stay for free.....oh, never mind - soon they will be "earning" millions and millions


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> if they don't have anything relevant to say will their offers dry up?  how long will people want to see them out of curiousity?





bag-mania said:


> They are a novelty and JPMorgan got them first. I have no idea what they could have talked about. In an exclusive event like that every person listening probably had more money than they do. On the other hand, it was a good opportunity to kiss up to wealthy folks to try to score their next mansion to crash in for a few months.


I’m certain that whoever was in that room to ostensibly hear them speak would have been much more qualified to give the talk themselves!


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> I’m certain that whoever was in that room to ostensibly hear them speak would have been much more qualified to give the talk themselves!


esp if it had to do with finance - but I doubt it did....maybe they talked about how "unfair" everyone in Britain was to her


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> esp if it had to do with finance - but I doubt it did....maybe they talked about how "unfair" everyone in Britain was to her


Without knowing who was in that audience, I just do not know who on earth would have sympathy for the position they've put themselves in...


----------



## Mrs.Z

cafecreme15 said:


> I’m certain that whoever was in that room to ostensibly hear them speak would have been much more qualified to give the talk themselves!


This 100% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## limom

cafecreme15 said:


> Without knowing who was in that audience, I just do not know who on earth would have sympathy for the position they've put themselves in...


It is not sympathy , it is networking. Plain and simple.


----------



## daisychainz

We have several neighbors who do this weird gate and tree tenting stuff, it looks just like what H&M are doing. The thing is, when passerbys walk by they want to look inside and the tarp stuff always gets holes punched in it so people can peek in. And when the gardeners come it always disturbs the tarp. It doesn't work long-term. It's usually only covering expansive gardens because main houses are so far up from main gates. There are at least 4 homes in my area that 'tarp' the gates and trees of their mansions but the residents are not actually living there. Maybe H&M have moved on?


----------



## cafecreme15

limom said:


> It is not sympathy , it is networking. Plain and simple.


I think the bald-faced-ness (not a word, I know) of all of this just beggars belief.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> Without knowing who was in that audience, I just do not know who on earth would have sympathy for the position they've put themselves in...


Well, every time I've seen anyone reporting on US TV, they're sympathetic....I don't know if that reflects the public's view (or the wealthy people who would be at an event like that)


----------



## duna

Flatsy said:


> I don't agree that it really reflected the fashion of the time.  The poof sleeves were four times poofier than poof sleeves have ever been.  The skirt was so huge it looked like a toilet paper cozy.  It had some late 70s/early 80s elements, but they were very over the top.  And it was never supposed to be wrinkled all over.
> 
> I was a little kid in the 80s who had a Diana paper doll book so I understand how iconic the dress became *after* she wore it.  But when she stepped out of the carriage, many people at the time thought it was a curious gown that was clearly chosen by a very young bride.



Maybe because I was more or less Diana's age and I had also got married very young, but I LOVED her wedding dress!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## AB Negative

Lodpah said:


> Those measures are troubling. What Meghan is doing is feeding into Harry’s mental issues if he has one. They have security guards, etc. I wonder if Meghan is doing this to keep people talking about her. Child Protective Services should really check into the welfare of Archie.
> 
> This is not normal and are paps really waiting outside her house?


Yes, since TMZ took these pictures most likely.


----------



## Madrose

TC1 said:


> It's private property..so there's no HOA. You can file a complaint with the city/town you live in if you're a neighbour that has issue...but that's about it.



The house could still be in a HOA.  HOA's are not exclusive to condo/townhomes or gated communities.


----------



## CobaltBlu

TC1 said:


> It's private property..so there's no HOA. You can file a complaint with the city/town you live in if you're a neighbour that has issue...but that's about it.



Any development can have an HOA, it doesnt matter how large or small the acreage, it is basically a set of agreements you make when you purchase as to what you can and cannot do on your own private property, and also a way to fund and manage public spaces, security, utilities within the development, etc. The HOA collects dues, and uses it for infrastructure, and in some cases utilities like water if they are private and not connected to the city.  It is not just a US thing, It is pretty common in Mexico, and it can be in place even when the houses and properties are large like this one, where people have their own private security, helipad, etc.  When it works it also helps protect property values, for example you can have a rule against loud music, livestock, hunting, de-frocked Royals, etc. 

Back to H&M  ... no pics from Miami?  I hope someone asked her how she is doing....


----------



## duna

Mrs.Z said:


> TMZ just showed their house, they are taking bizarre measures for privacy like covering the iron gate in plastic and hanging giant tarps.  It looked horrendous and frankly like they might be losing it.



These two have serious problems


----------



## CobaltBlu

I just read that for privacy they are looking at a place in Malibu Colony.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I just read that for privacy they are looking at a place in Malibu Colony.


oh, she can be near the real movie stars 
Wonder if this will suit "H"......redheads don't do well in the sun


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh, she can be near the real movie stars
> *Wonder if this will suit "H".*.....redheads don't do well in the sun



He can use sunscreen. Let's put it this way, it better suit him or they will be separated by the end of the year. Remember his mantra: what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He can use sunscreen. Let's put it this way, it better suit him or they will be separated by the end of the year. Remember his mantra: what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


I guess he can stay in the house


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Was thinking exactly the same



She didn't even have a bump the last time around, she just chose to dress extra suspiciously so people would ask questions. She was photographed on the following trip cradling a nonexistant belly because she was like 8 weeks along max at Eugenie's wedding.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> I guess he can stay in the house



Yes, H can sit at home out of the Cali sun and pimp MM out on his phone 24/7

duna, totally agree with you 1000% Serious mental issues at play here after observing their recent actions

When I state “sick” referring to H&M, I mean it literally: paranoid, narcissistic, delusional, etc


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't even have a bump the last time around, she just chose to dress extra suspiciously so people would ask questions. She was photographed on the following trip cradling a nonexistant belly because she was like 8 weeks along max at Eugenie's wedding.


it would be ironic if she did that again.....maybe they won't invite her


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> oh, she can be near the real movie stars
> Wonder if this will suit "H"......redheads don't do well in the sun


He can hang out with Ryan o Neil....


----------



## redney

CobaltBlu said:


> I just read that for privacy they are looking at a place in Malibu Colony.


From the same article about the JP Morgan appearance: 
"Michael Hess, the husband of Meghan's best friend, Misha Nonoo, has already offered them a place to stay in the gated Malibu Colony"


----------



## A1aGypsy

Madrose said:


> The house could still be in a HOA.  HOA's are not exclusive to condo/townhomes or gated communities.



They are extremely rare in Canada and do not overrule legislation that exists.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> From the same article about the JP Morgan appearance:
> "Michael Hess, the husband of Meghan's best friend, Misha Nonoo, has already offered them a place to stay in the gated Malibu Colony"


I had forgotten who this Misha was and about her huge wedding.  Just googled her.  She is - like Meghan - a very ambitious and hugely successful networker.
quote from DB:
A source said: ‘You can’t help but admire her. She is like Meghan, supremely confident, immaculately turned out. But there is a steely drive and ambition.’


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

I thought the whole separation from the RF thing was happening only in the “spring”. 
Interesting business model, get paid while taxpayers (I’m not sure in what country anymore) foot your security bill.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I had forgotten who this Misha was and about her huge wedding.  Just googled her.  She is - like Meghan - a very ambitious and hugely successful networker.
> quote from DB:
> A source said: ‘You can’t help but admire her. She is like Meghan, supremely confident, immaculately turned out. But there is a steely drive and ambition.’


Meghan included one (several?) of Misha's designs in that capsule clothing collection from last summer or so.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Meghan included one (several?) of Misha's designs in that capsule clothing collection from last summer or so.


wonder if they are really friends in the conventional sense or more business friends......probably business friends are the most valuable to both of them


----------



## Emeline

A1aGypsy said:


> They are extremely rare in Canada and do not overrule legislation that exists.


M&H are really pushing the limits of polite neighborliness.
Regardless of association or not, nearby homeowners would certainly find the new "landscape decor"  totally unacceptable.


----------



## Allisonfaye

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-100-million-simon-huck
*Meghan Markle could make '$100 million' this year, media*


----------



## maryg1

Corneto said:


> Again with the “ghetto.”  If Meghan were a blue eyed blonde, would this be the image you’re using. I’m not a fan of the woman, but I can smell micro aggressions a mile away.
> Again, please clarify.


Pretty sure it was used to describe a place that is closed, a place you are recluded in, on a voluntary or forced basis. This is the original meaning of the word.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-100-million-simon-huck
> *Meghan Markle could make '$100 million' this year, media*


If they can make money good for them and for Charles
Mentioning them in the same breath as the Obamas irritates the h-ll out of me


----------



## Clearblueskies

Can’t wait to see how much they pass on to their so-called charity from this little shindig.  Hopefully there’ll be transparency there or they’ll lose the last shred of their credibility.  And apparently they were flown there in a private jet


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Can’t wait to see how much they pass on to their so-called charity from this little shindig.  Hopefully there’ll be transparency there or they’ll lose the last shred of their credibility.  And apparently they were flown there in a private jet


well if you read the link Alison Faye posted above, I guess credibility doesn't matter with them.
However, it just frosts me that they are mentioned with the Obamas, who are highly educated, highly intelligent and Worked for what they got.
Why even mention them together?  Because she is bi-racial?


----------



## Megs

sdkitty said:


> I had forgotten who this Misha was and about her huge wedding.  Just googled her.  She is - like Meghan - a very ambitious and hugely successful networker.
> quote from DB:
> A source said: ‘You can’t help but admire her. She is like Meghan, supremely confident, immaculately turned out. But there is a steely drive and ambition.’



Vlad met Misha and we did a What's in Her Bag feature if any of you are interested!


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Can’t wait to see how much they pass on to their so-called charity from this little shindig.  Hopefully there’ll be transparency there or they’ll lose the last shred of their credibility.  *And apparently they were flown there in a private jet*



Of course they were. Hypocrites to the end. I'm sure JPMorgan had to foot the bill for that as well.


----------



## youngster

Allisonfaye said:


> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-100-million-simon-huck
> *Meghan Markle could make '$100 million' this year, media*



She might. But, about 45 - 50% or so will go to taxes and another 10+% or so to agents, PR, etc.  All of a sudden that $100 million is down to $35 or $40 million. Not enough for a billionaire lifestyle. ETA: And, that is if she can actually produce that kind of revenue.  Sustaining it too, year after year, is another matter entirely.


----------



## pursegirl3

Megs I totally want to see what's in her bag . What was she like ? The only speech that would make sense at that JP Morgan meeting is from Prince Harry on Manners ! .


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> Of course they were. Hypocrites to the end. I'm sure JPMorgan had to foot the bill for that as well.



I honestly can't imagine what they would speak about at a financial event like this....


----------



## Megs

pursegirl3 said:


> Megs I totally want to see what's in her bag . What was she like ? The only speech that would make sense at that JP Morgan meeting is from Prince Harry on Manners ! .



@Vlad - he said Misha was really nice! She was really easy to work with, photograph, and talk to. She was kind! No mention of MM and this is when they were engaged, but we didn't ask


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-100-million-simon-huck
> *Meghan Markle could make '$100 million' this year, media*



You can never trust the smoke and mirrors of the media. This man is making that claim based on supposed offers he is getting, though he says he is not representing them. Could it be this Simon Huck just wants to get his name and his agency in the news for free by opining on Meghan?


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> I honestly can't imagine what they would speak about at a financial event like this....



Well, everyone loves money so that is one mutual interest they all had.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/07/prin...le-make-first-public-appearance-since-megxit/


Well, well, well .. isn't that interesting?!?!?!  Well, Jamie Diamond is by no means a 'saint' (JPM CEO), but to have these 2 at an AIS (Alternative Investments) Summit?  Alternative Investments are - Hedge Funds, Private Equity and Real Estate assets that are not publicly traded.  Private and Institutional Investors invest in these vehicles, some legit (new ventures) and some .. well, let's just say a bit 'sketchy'.  I can only assume that they were there to try to see what Investors might be interested in some of their (potential) funds/Investments.  Will they get some interested Investors? .. yes, likely .. BUT, in most cases nowadays, these Investors are not interested in providing 'angel $$$' .. they want a 3-year ROI on their Investment.  All I can say, is that they better have a VERY GOOD CFO and others who will be doing a lot of AML work because these investments could be rife for fraud!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Allisonfaye said:


> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-100-million-simon-huck
> *Meghan Markle could make '$100 million' this year, media*



And a fat tax bill, too!


----------



## Jayne1

Madrose said:


> The house could still be in a HOA.  HOA's are not exclusive to condo/townhomes or gated communities.


Are we still talking about their place in BC?  Because it is very rare to have a HOA in Canada.  Condominiums may have them but not a lot of neighbourhoods although I think (historic) Cabbagetown in Toronto has a CRA, but that's something else.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Well, everyone loves money so that is one mutual interest they all had.



+1 if you know what this is from...


----------



## CeeJay

CobaltBlu said:


> I just read that for privacy they are looking at a place in Malibu Colony.


Well, that is certainly NOT going to be cheap by any means, but it puts HER in close proximity to quite a few of the Movie Stars (e.g., Jennifer Anniston, etc.).  If they get beachfront property, they WILL NOT be able to put up anything that would prevent folks from gaining access to the beaches; this has been a HUGE FIGHT in California that the homeowners are NOT winning!


----------



## rose60610

JP Morgan...Miami...Investments Summit...close to The Cayman's (another British territory and renowned tax haven)...wonder if M&H got themselves a nice little offshore Ponzi scheme started.


----------



## limom

Panama papers part deux.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, that is certainly NOT going to be cheap by any means, but it puts HER in close proximity to quite a few of the Movie Stars (e.g., Jennifer Anniston, etc.).  If they get beachfront property, they WILL NOT be able to put up anything that would prevent folks from gaining access to the beaches; this has been a HUGE FIGHT in California that the homeowners are NOT winning!


Jenn is known for throwing good parties.  Harry would fit in but Meghan seems like a downer......Jenn likes to serve alcohol I think


----------



## pixiejenna

According to this daily fail article Megan introduced Harry. And Harry spoke about how he started therapy 10 years ago to deal with the loss of his mom. He also touched on their exit from the family and how he had to do it to protect his family so his kids wouldn't have to go through what he did. I'm all for people talking about mental health and quite frankly I couldn't even imagine what kind of speech they would be even remotely qualified to give at a financial event. I hope that this doesn't become the main topic of speeches because I feel like having to relive this on repeat as their main source of income is going to be emotionally exhausting for Harry to do. It will be interesting to see what thier next engagement entails. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-speech-exclusive-JPMorgan-event-Miami.html


----------



## bag-mania

pixiejenna said:


> According to this daily fail article Megan introduced Harry. And Harry spoke about how he started therapy 10 years ago to deal with the loss of his mom. He also touched on their exit from the family and how he had to do it to protect his family so his kids wouldn't have to go through what he did. I'm all for people talking about mental health and quite frankly I couldn't even imagine what kind of speech they would be even remotely qualified to give at a financial event. I hope that this doesn't become the main topic of speeches because I feel like having to relive this on repeat as their main source of income is going to be emotionally exhausting for Harry to do. It will be interesting to see what thier next engagement entails.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-speech-exclusive-JPMorgan-event-Miami.html



Wow. Doesn't this confirm that they have a codependent relationship? He is now publicly defining himself by his mental illness to the point where he is giving paid speeches about it. In return she is "taking care" of him by being his biggest cheerleader and making the decisions.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> JP Morgan...Miami...Investments Summit...close to The Cayman's (another British territory and renowned tax haven)...wonder if M&H got themselves a nice little offshore Ponzi scheme started.


Yes, sadly .. since Switzerland have to finally give up the goods re: private Investments, etc. - the Cayman Islands have (somewhat) taken their place.  There are WAY TOO many sketchy (ahem) "offshore" investments that occur there.  They have ZERO clue what they are getting into and don't think for a minute that any of the Investments are not going to be fully vetted.  The last thing the BRF wants/needs, is to be involved in a fraudulent investment(s) where it appears as though the Investor(s) have tried to get 'favors' from the government.  Honestly, if I were QEII or Prince Charles, I would totally unload these two .. and NOW!


----------



## mdcx

Imo “money grubbing trash” pretty much sums up the situation.
H will bleat his “poor me, I had to leave to protect the woman I love” routine. M will beam from the audience at the fact it is all about her, she was important enough to make H dump the BRF. 
The BRF will watch all this and say “Well, we were right. Bottoms up chaps!” 
Archie gets lost in the mix. M rolls around in her stacks of cash and H wonders if he will ever see his English fam again.
It’s all very gauche and unsurprising.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Megs said:


> Vlad met Misha and we did a What's in Her Bag feature if any of you are interested!



*Megs*, spill!!! 

Apologies! Just read your follow-up post, Megs 

Refreshing to hear that Misha was down-to-earth and friendly


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pixiejenna said:


> According to this daily fail article Megan introduced Harry. And Harry spoke about how he started therapy 10 years ago to deal with the loss of his mom. He also touched on their exit from the family and how he had to do it to protect his family so his kids wouldn't have to go through what he did.



Honestly I'm over it. This is a 35yo man who can't get over his mother's untimely death. There are tons of children sharing this traumatic experience without the soft cushion of an obscenely rich family and every ressource one could want to work through this. Time to lay off the self-pity.


----------



## mdcx

pixiejenna said:


> According to this daily fail article Megan introduced Harry. And Harry spoke about how he started therapy 10 years ago to deal with the loss of his mom. He also touched on their exit from the family and how he had to do it to protect his family so his kids wouldn't have to go through what he did. I'm all for people talking about mental health and quite frankly I couldn't even imagine what kind of speech they would be even remotely qualified to give at a financial event. I hope that this doesn't become the main topic of speeches because I feel like having to relive this on repeat as their main source of income is going to be emotionally exhausting for Harry to do. It will be interesting to see what thier next engagement entails.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-speech-exclusive-JPMorgan-event-Miami.html


Yes, being solely defined by your mental illness and victim status is not healthy. Based on my own experience with lifelong major depression, now managed with medical care, medication and professional therapy, doing paid speeches about it could be dangerous territory. It could be very triggering for even the most stable and H is not appearing to be the most stable. Suddenly moving countries speaks to acting on impulse, not on thoughtful self-care. I hope he is taking mental health advice from professionals, not M.


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Megs*, spill!!!
> 
> Apologies! Just read your follow-up post, Megs
> 
> Refreshing to hear that Misha was down-to-earth and friendly


Is her adorable dog named after a Margaret Thatcher?


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Yes, being solely defined by your mental illness and victim status is not healthy. Based on my own experience with lifelong major depression, now managed with medical care, medication and professional therapy, doing paid speeches about it could be dangerous territory. It could be very triggering for even the most stable and H is not appearing to be the most stable. Suddenly moving countries speaks to acting on impulse, not on thoughtful self-care. I hope he is taking mental health advice from professionals, not M.



Let's not forget he has isolated himself from everybody and everything he has ever known. There is only Meghan now. Well, there's Archie and the dogs, but they can't talk and they don't get to make any decisions. Meghan is doing the thinking for all of them.


----------



## limom

Is Harry really alone though?
No attorney, butler, counselor around?
Nope, not buying that narrative.


----------



## Jayne1

pixiejenna said:


> According to this daily fail article Megan introduced Harry. And Harry spoke about how he started therapy 10 years ago to deal with the loss of his mom. He also touched on their exit from the family and how he had to do it to protect his family so his kids wouldn't have to go through what he did. I'm all for people talking about mental health and quite frankly I couldn't even imagine what kind of speech they would be even remotely qualified to give at a financial event. I hope that this doesn't become the main topic of speeches because I feel like having to relive this on repeat as their main source of income is going to be emotionally exhausting for Harry to do. It will be interesting to see what thier next engagement entails.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-speech-exclusive-JPMorgan-event-Miami.html


Is he so isolated and protected that he doesn't realize millions of others have gone through much worse?

Was he raised in a squalid daycare?  Did he go hungry at the end of every month waiting for the government cheque to arrive?  Did he have to quit school at 16 to go to work and give up his dream of a university education? 

I was just reading about the professor at Eton College who had to help Harry (meaning write and take) his homework and exams.

I could go on and on but this guy is feeling a bit too sorry for himself and he may need professional help to appreciate all the gifts he has been given.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

limom said:


> Is Harry really alone though?
> No attorney, butler, counselor around?
> Nope, not buying that narrative.



omg, *limom* your post made me pause for a second

Yes, I imagine H does have team but I wonder which one of them is reporting all of H&M’s activities back to his father and grandmum?

Duplicity has always had a place throughout history in palace intrigue 

“The best prophet of the future is the past”*
♥️

*Lord Byron


----------



## Aminamina

pixiejenna said:


> According to this daily fail article Megan introduced Harry. And Harry spoke about how he started therapy 10 years ago to deal with the loss of his mom. He also touched on their exit from the family and how he had to do it to protect his family so his kids wouldn't have to go through what he did. I'm all for people talking about mental health and quite frankly I couldn't even imagine what kind of speech they would be even remotely qualified to give at a financial event. I hope that this doesn't become the main topic of speeches because I feel like having to relive this on repeat as their main source of income is going to be emotionally exhausting for Harry to do. It will be interesting to see what thier next engagement entails.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...te-speech-exclusive-JPMorgan-event-Miami.html


La Grande Belezza(The Great Beauty) film by Paolo Sorrentino...Rent-a-noble couple Count and Contessa Colonna is what I think of H&M. What are you selling, Harry?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Is Harry really alone though?
> No attorney, butler, counselor around?
> Nope, not buying that narrative.



I didn't mean he never sees other people. But employees who are being paid do not necessarily have his best interest at heart. Many celebrities like to surround themselves with "yes men" who make their lives easier. It isn't an employee's place to question what he's doing or make sure he's getting therapy or taking his meds or anything like that. They are only paid to do their jobs.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I didn't mean he never sees other people. But employees who are being paid do not necessarily have his best interest at heart. Many celebrities like to surround themselves with "yes men" who make their lives easier. It isn't an employee's place to question what he's doing or make sure he's getting therapy or taking his meds or anything like that. They are only paid to do their jobs.


I don’t know about that.
Many people have a sober coach..
A psychologist/psychiatrist.
In his case a butler/valet would take care of him.... for money but still.
The royal employees are a special bunch, imho.


----------



## mdcx

I hope he has a psychologist because doing this speech could be very destabilising. M does not strike me as someone who wants H in top mental form, at full confidence, making clear decisions.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> I don’t know about that.
> Many people have a sober coach..
> A psychologist/psychiatrist.
> In his case a butler/valet would take care of him.... for money but still.
> The royal employees are a special bunch, imho.



Did any of those people sign on for the job though? It was one thing to go with them to Canada for the six week vacation. That was a temporary position. It's another for those people to uproot their own lives and actually follow Harry to live in another country. When it was announced the move would be permanent I expect they will have to hire new staff, if they haven't already.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Jayne1 said:


> Is he so isolated and protected that he doesn't realize millions of others have gone through much worse?
> 
> Was he raised in a squalid daycare?  Did he go hungry at the end of every month waiting for the government cheque to arrive?  Did he have to quit school at 16 to go to work and give up his dream of a university education?
> 
> I was just reading about the professor at Eton College who had to help Harry (meaning write and take) his homework and exams.
> 
> I could go on and on but this guy is feeling a bit too sorry for himself and he may need professional help to appreciate all the gifts he has been given.


Yes, yes, all of this!!!  Now to make it relevant today ....he has fled the Royal Family to save his own family!  Hmmm, Will, Kate & kids seem to be doing just fine.  Harry, you did not flee a fascist dictatorship!!  Get over yourself!


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Did any of those people sign on for the job though? It was one thing to go with them to Canada for the six week vacation. That was a temporary position. It's another for those people to uproot their own lives and actually follow Harry to live in another country. When it was announced the move would be permanent I expect they will have to hire new staff, if they haven't already.


Don’t worry, M will hire a staff that is well equipped to help her achieve her goals. As for Harry...


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Don’t worry, M will hire a staff that is well equipped to help her achieve her goals. As for Harry...



True. We know she already has agents and PR people hard at work on her behalf. At least Harry can spend time with Archie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I hope he has a psychologist because doing this speech could be very destabilising. M does not strike me as someone who wants H in top mental form, at full confidence, making clear decisions.


I can’t imagine what kind of febrile nonsense she’s filled his head with that makes him believe this is an acceptable and dignified way to behave in public.  Or a healthy one for that matter.


----------



## Lounorada

mdcx said:


> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/07/prin...le-make-first-public-appearance-since-megxit/


_"A spokeswoman for the Sussexes declined to comment, saying: “We do not comment on their private schedule.”_


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Did any of those people sign on for the job though? It was one thing to go with them to Canada for the six week vacation. That was a temporary position.* It's another for those people to uproot their own lives and actually follow Harry to live in another country. *When it was announced the move would be permanent I expect they will have to hire new staff, if they haven't already.



I've wondered about this too, how many of Harry's long time, trusted staff did he leave behind in the UK because they were not willing to move to Vancouver or L.A.?  Their lives, families, careers are based in the UK and I'd imagine the majority did not choose to relocate with Harry and don't ever intend to move to Canada or the U.S. They might still be involved to an extent, for now, helping to coordinate any of his future appearances back in the UK, though I'd think that would be only very part time duties. That likely means he has, or will have, an entirely new staff of people who won't really know him at all for quite some time.  

It's be an interesting article for one of the tabloids: what's happened to Harry's long time UK staff?  Who went with him (if anyone) and who stayed behind.


----------



## CeeJay

Okay .. why in God's name would they have Harry at an Alternative Investments conference, and then get up to talk about his Mental Health? .. WHAT????  Is the plan that H&M are going to create a fund "Harry's Mental Health Investment", because if that is the case, then FOR SURE .. it would be a MEGA Hedge Fund (no returns on your Investment, dude)!!!


----------



## pixiejenna

The more I think about it, honestly it comes off as a PMK kind of move making your husband giving speeches and you sit back and counting the money coming in. How long can they cash in on this? I agree with many of the statements made here which is why I hope this isn’t the only speech he has up his sleeve because he’s going to end up having a breakdown sooner rather than later.  He’s possibly off his medication, away from all of his family and friends, moved to another country,   filing multiple lawsuits all because of Megan. This is not stable behavior at all, this behavior is alarming especially to those that would be closest to him. Perhaps this is a part of Megan’s plan to leave him, she breaks him down to the point of no return. Then she can claim that she was his biggest supporter but can’t stay with him any longer because it’s not healthy for her/kid(s). Sounds kind of sinister but her track record speaks for it’s self.


----------



## Megs

I know majority of us here question H&M and are not fans of the way they've handled things, but for those that are fans of her/him, what are your thoughts on this first money making activity they chose to speak at? 

I rarely partake in gossip threads like this, typically just pop in and out, but these two are the center of the world stage right now with their choice to leave the most prominent and followed royal family and their first engagement is speaking at a financial summit. 

I mean, it just rings phony for everything they've said!


----------



## MizGemma

My head is spinning at all these twists and turns. I never thought any of this would happen in May 2018 when they married.

It sounds like two immature, entitled people got married on the world stage. I don't think there are any secret plans. The way the wind blows or the way they feel like when they wake up is what happens.  

I hope the money and attention dries up soon so these two finally grow up for the sake of their son.  That what is important. 

Am sick of H&M and will tune out very soon.


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> esp if it had to do with finance - but I doubt it did....maybe they talked about how "unfair" everyone in Britain was to her


Inside Edition said JP Morgan flew them to FL and back on their private jet. Meghan spoke about how she loves her husband and Harry spoke about losing his Mom and his mental health.


----------



## PewPew

Lounorada said:


> _"A spokeswoman for the Sussexes declined to comment, saying: “We do not comment on their private schedule.”_



Translation: We comment on H&M’s schedule and “initiative” when the PR will be favorable, but otherwise we release information through select channels. Stay tuned for those comments to be published as “friends close to the couple...”. For example: “Friends say the couple was honored to be asked to speak & so many prominent people thanked them for the important work they are doing. It’s a shame the BRF didn’t let them blossom in their natural role as a powerhouse couple for peace & perfection.”


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. why in God's name would they have Harry at an Alternative Investments conference, and then get up to talk about his Mental Health? .. WHAT????  Is the plan that H&M are going to create a fund "Harry's Mental Health Investment", because if that is the case, then FOR SURE .. it would be a MEGA Hedge Fund (no returns on your Investment, dude)!!!


Because he is a prince. Americans have a fascination for the royals.

old song from the time of Edward Prince of Wales (later Duke of Windsor):

_I danced with a man who danced with a girl who danced with the Prince of  Wales. _


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Good to know interest in these two are waning.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Right, so their first gig is at a banker's conference for Ultra High Net Worthies where the Prince emerges from the barricaded island fortress with his wife slash carer to talk about his ongoing mental health problems (due to the tragic death of his oh so famous mother, lest we forget, namely She Who Must be Mentioned at every Paying Opportunity ). 
Flown in by J P Morgan private jet and stayed at Serena's place overnight.

What a show!  Gossip fodder for the super rich attendees and pin money for H & M.
Tacky and embarrassing IMO


----------



## Megs

Straight-Laced said:


> Right, so their first gig is at a banker's conference for Ultra High Net Worthies where the Prince emerges from the barricaded island fortress with his wife slash carer to talk about his ongoing mental health problems (due to the tragic death of his oh so famous mother, lest we forget, namely She Who Must be Mentioned at every Paying Opportunity ).
> Flown in by J P Morgan private jet and stayed at Serena's place overnight.
> 
> What a show!  Gossip fodder for the super rich attendees and pin money for H & M.
> Tacky and embarrassing IMO



Serena's house is in Palm Beach County too I believe, which is a solid 1.5 hr drive. To think, I could have driven by them on the highway. Would have loved to be given a royal wave LOLZ


----------



## tiktok

Straight-Laced said:


> Right, so their first gig is at a banker's conference for Ultra High Net Worthies where the Prince emerges from the barricaded island fortress with his wife slash carer to talk about his ongoing mental health problems (due to the tragic death of his oh so famous mother, lest we forget, namely She Who Must be Mentioned at every Paying Opportunity ).
> Flown in by J P Morgan private jet and stayed at Serena's place overnight.
> 
> What a show!  Gossip fodder for the super rich attendees and pin money for H & M.
> Tacky and embarrassing IMO



Emphasis on the private jet yet again. Gotta love how dedicated they are to the environment. If the papers call them out on that yet again it must be because the media is mean and racist.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Megs said:


> Serena's house is in Palm Beach County too I believe, which is a solid 1.5 hr drive. To think, I could have driven by them on the highway. Would have loved to be given a royal wave LOLZ


Are we sure they took the Tesla out on the highway?
Could have been a helicopter ride


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Because he is a prince. Americans have a fascination for the royals.
> 
> old song from the time of Edward Prince of Wales (later Duke of Windsor):
> 
> _I danced with a man who danced with a girl who danced with the Prince of  Wales. _


Oh, I "get that" .. but at this type of conference, absolutely NOT!!!!  The purpose of these types of conferences is to discuss various new ventures, new vehicles (_no - not talking about cars here_), etc. -- all in the name of those Bankers making more money off of everyone (_I know this personally as I was in this business for many, many years_).  Maybe because I was never the hoi polloi, did these conferences and these 'new' ventures make me sick (_as in - yet another opportunity to rip off the uneducated consumer_), but to have Harry get up to talk about his Mental Health????  I can only think that the plan is to create some type of "foundation" that will have Investors (_especially those that WANT to say that they are investing in Prince Harry's fund_) pour in some $$$ .. in essence, to line the pockets of those two.  Makes ME SICK!  As I said before, they better have VERY GOOD, respectable people on their staff (_although sad to say, I have not seen too many of "honest" Bankers_) to vet these investments because receiving funds from shady investors (_hello - the Russian who is letting them use his house in Vancouver_) will just open them up for more controversy.   Anyone remember Kimora Lee Simmons husband - the Banker who was in Singapore???  YUP - big time shady deal, oh yeah .. and wasn't he with JP Morgan???  UFB ..


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. why in God's name would they have Harry at an Alternative Investments conference, and then get up to talk about his Mental Health? .. WHAT????  Is the plan that H&M are going to create a fund "Harry's Mental Health Investment", because if that is the case, then FOR SURE .. it would be a MEGA Hedge Fund (no returns on your Investment, dude)!!!



*Ceejay*, you are on FIRE today, grl!!!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Ceejay*, you are on FIRE today, grl!!!


You betcha .. because that is a business I know EXTREMELY well and this just stinks of them being money-hungry sloths!  If they create their Foundation and said investments in the US, then they will have to go through a rigorous AML program!


----------



## mdcx

It would be very curious - attending a dry finance conference, “oh here’s an emotionally broken British prince to talk about his dead mum”. 
I suppose it was meant to be along the lines of an out of the ordinary speaker to break the monotony, but it’s a bit of a huge downer isn’t it?


----------



## lalame

Honestly not even surprised at all about them speaking at this conference. Companies bring in random celebs all the time to keynote events that they know nothing about (and it drives me crazy). For example, Reese Witherspoon was the keynote speaker at the Adobe conference several years ago, and Will Smith at the Marketo conference. What do those guys have to do with enterprise software? Other than one wants $$$, and the other has $$$. 

That being said I can't believe they're not more aware of the optics of this... A JP Morgan conference? Yikes, don't y'all see what they did to Hillary, the Obamas, etc.... and at least those people DID have somewhat relevant qualifications.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Honestly not even surprised at all about them speaking at this conference. Companies bring in random celebs all the time to keynote events that they know nothing about (and it drives me crazy). For example, Reese Witherspoon was the keynote speaker at the Adobe conference several years ago, and Will Smith at the Marketo conference. What do those guys have to do with enterprise software? Other than one wants $$$, and the other has $$$.
> 
> That being said I can't believe they're not more aware of the optics of this... A JP Morgan conference? Yikes, don't y'all see what they did to Hillary, the Obamas, etc.... and at least those people DID have somewhat relevant qualifications.


BINGO .. so true, I remember having "keynote" speakers at various Finance and Tech conferences who knew squat .. so, YUP .. all about the semolians ($$$).  But, I also DO believe that just like Harry pressing the Disney CEO re: "my wife does voiceovers", I do believe there was an agenda .. to get those in this business to think about setting up Funds/Investments to fuel into these 2 pockets.  Gosh, I wish I was there .. *only to call BS*!!!


----------



## Lodpah

Harry keeps espousing that he wants privacy for his family so why does not just shut up already? Go away and live their paranoid lives?

I do want to say that Meghan must have some dark secrets she does not want to be outed to the media thus she is suing papers trying to mitigate or intimidate.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Harry keeps espousing that he wants privacy for his family so why does not just shut up already? Go away and live their paranoid lives?
> 
> I do want to say that Meghan must have some dark secrets she does not want to be outed to the media thus she is suing papers trying to mitigate or intimidate.


If she does have secrets I'd be willing to bet they'll come out eventually


----------



## Straight-Laced

Are they back on Vancouver Island?
Or still in the US taking another 'well earned break'  
Waiting for the Oscars maybe ... ?


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> It would be very curious - attending a dry finance conference, “oh here’s an emotionally broken British prince to talk about his dead mum”.
> I suppose it was meant to be along the lines of an out of the ordinary speaker to break the monotony, but it’s a bit of a huge downer isn’t it?


ha
When he and Will first talked about how difficult it was dealing with Diana's death it was touching and relevant (could relate to others in similar situations, etc).  But how many times can the same story be told?


----------



## bag-mania

As long as companies are willing to pony up big money to hear him talk, I think Harry will be more than willing to continue telling his tale of emotional trauma. Who knows? Maybe repeating it over and over will desensitize him and allow him to finally move on.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Seems to me that the late Diana plays a central role in the Sussex family's glamour, prestige and money making potential.  
Perhaps Harry will only move on when that well runs dry?


----------



## rose60610

Well, we all know Meghan loves drama. Making Harry recite his mother's death over and over in front of an audience must fill the coffers quite handsomely.  Nothing like monetizing one of the world's most famous car crash fatalities to line your pockets. Especially if it was your late mother-in-law's. No wonder they broke off from the BRF if they think they can pimp Diana's death to even more riches.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chowlover2 said:


> Inside Edition said JP Morgan flew them to FL and back on their private jet. Meghan spoke about how she loves her husband and Harry spoke about losing his Mom and his mental health.


Access Hollywood said Gayle King was there and gave Meghan's introduction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> ha
> When he and Will first talked about how difficult it was dealing with Diana's death it was touching and relevant (could relate to others in similar situations, etc).  But how many times can the same story be told?



As many times as "I was an activist for women's rights at age 11 and my little voice changed the world".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As many times as "I was an activist for women's rights at age 11 and my little voice changed the world".



Wait is that really a direct quote? Groan...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Wait is that really a direct quote? Groan...


 I summarized. She does use the exact same words each time she brings it up but I was too lazy to find and copy it. The real quote has "magnitude of my actions" in it, too.


----------



## mshermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I summarized. She does use the exact same words each time she brings it up but I was too lazy to find and copy it. The real quote has "magnitude of my actions" in it, too.


I believe this is what you are referencing. Interesting that her father encouraged her...
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/li...meghan-markle-on-the-map-20181009-p508lb.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mshermes said:


> I believe this is what you are referencing. Interesting that her father encouraged her...
> https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/li...meghan-markle-on-the-map-20181009-p508lb.html



In fact, what she always conveniently forgets to mention (but former classmates have come forward) is that this was a freaking school project. I don't know about other people, but I never feel the need to talk at length about what I did in junior high school *shrugs* Also, I did find the story endearing the first time around, not so much the 4th or 5th.


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if the JP Morgan event being on the table was what inspired Meg to kick off Megxit early? Didn’t want to mi$$ out.


----------



## marthastoo

A few things -   Many hundreds of pages ago, people on this thread wished they would go away.  Okay, they went away.  But no, it's not the fact they went away, it's the manner in which they did it. Okay.  People had long wished for them stop spending so much tax payer money (flights, renos, clothing).  Okay, they want to make their own way in the world and not rely on public funds.  So when they want to make their own money, it's not okay.  Or, it's only okay what they think the employment is acceptable.  And what is that?  McDonalds?  Cutting ribbons?  That doesn't pay well.  Clearly, paid speaking engagements will be part of them earning money in their post royal life since Harry never really had a job other than the military (and he's done with that) and people's heads will explode if Meghan goes back to acting.  I really don't have a problem with them (or anyone) getting paid for giving speeches as long as it's not to white supremacists, or other unsavory types.  If someone would pay me $$$ for speaking, I'd be the first to line up for that line of work. Who knows what they're going to talk about - leadership? mental health?  Even when we do find out, I truly do not see what the pearl clutching is all about.  And hold on to your hats - I predict they will be book authors in the future (another easy way for them to make real money).

Then they're complaining that they're too quiet now, and are coming up with all sorts of snarky hypotheses.  I keep reading "thank God people are losing interest in them (or the poster is "so over them and won't buy/read/comment on them anymore").  Yet, here we are page 1414 and counting.  Each day this thread grows by 12-20 pages.  Face it - to quote Mariah Carey, "Why are you so obsessed with me?"    So in the meantime until there is authentic actual news, I'll log in, catch up on the 15 pages of hate postings, and go on with my day.


----------



## mshermes

marthastoo said:


> A few things -   Many hundreds of pages ago, people on this thread wished they would go away.  Okay, they went away.  But no, it's not the fact they went away, it's the manner in which they did it. Okay.  People had long wished for them stop spending so much tax payer money (flights, renos, clothing).  Okay, they want to make their own way in the world and not rely on public funds.  So when they want to make their own money, it's not okay.  Or, it's only okay what they think the employment is acceptable.  And what is that?  McDonalds?  Cutting ribbons?  That doesn't pay well.  Clearly, paid speaking engagements will be part of them earning money in their post royal life since Harry never really had a job other than the military (and he's done with that) and people's heads will explode if Meghan goes back to acting.  I really don't have a problem with them (or anyone) getting paid for giving speeches as long as it's not to white supremacists, or other unsavory types.  If someone would pay me $$$ for speaking, I'd be the first to line up for that line of work. Who knows what they're going to talk about - leadership? mental health?  Even when we do find out, I truly do not see what the pearl clutching is all about.  And hold on to your hats - I predict they will be book authors in the future (another easy way for them to make real money).
> 
> Then they're complaining that they're too quiet now, and are coming up with all sorts of snarky hypotheses.  I keep reading "thank God people are losing interest in them (or the poster is "so over them and won't buy/read/comment on them anymore").  Yet, here we are page 1414 and counting.  Each day this thread grows by 12-20 pages.  Face it - to quote Mariah Carey, "Why are you so obsessed with me?"    So in the meantime until there is authentic actual news, I'll log in, catch up on the 15 pages of hate postings, and go on with my day.


----------



## Compass Rose

This happens when you have a forum.  It is like the planet we live on.  Ever changing with many cycles that are predictable.  Enjoy the ride.


----------



## LittleStar88

marthastoo said:


> A few things -   Many hundreds of pages ago, people on this thread wished they would go away.  Okay, they went away.  But no, it's not the fact they went away, it's the manner in which they did it. Okay.  People had long wished for them stop spending so much tax payer money (flights, renos, clothing).  Okay, they want to make their own way in the world and not rely on public funds.  So when they want to make their own money, it's not okay.  Or, it's only okay what they think the employment is acceptable.  And what is that?  McDonalds?  Cutting ribbons?  That doesn't pay well.  Clearly, paid speaking engagements will be part of them earning money in their post royal life since Harry never really had a job other than the military (and he's done with that) and people's heads will explode if Meghan goes back to acting.  I really don't have a problem with them (or anyone) getting paid for giving speeches as long as it's not to white supremacists, or other unsavory types.  If someone would pay me $$$ for speaking, I'd be the first to line up for that line of work. Who knows what they're going to talk about - leadership? mental health?  Even when we do find out, I truly do not see what the pearl clutching is all about.  And hold on to your hats - I predict they will be book authors in the future (another easy way for them to make real money).
> 
> Then they're complaining that they're too quiet now, and are coming up with all sorts of snarky hypotheses.  I keep reading "thank God people are losing interest in them (or the poster is "so over them and won't buy/read/comment on them anymore").  Yet, here we are page 1414 and counting.  Each day this thread grows by 12-20 pages.  Face it - to quote Mariah Carey, "Why are you so obsessed with me?"    So in the meantime until there is authentic actual news, I'll log in, catch up on the 15 pages of hate postings, and go on with my day.



Welcome to the interwebz!


----------



## marthastoo

Oh, and another thing while I'm posting my observations and thoughts.... as someone who works with people and has a child with mental health issues, I cannot stand when people joke or throw around phrases like "double your meds," or one is "off your meds."  It's demeaning, casually cruel, and perpetuates a harmful attitude toward mental illness. Taking psychotropic medication is real, serious, and not something to be weaponized against vulnerable people.  When asking someone seriously if they are being compliant with medication, say "Have you been taking your medication?" not "Are you on your meds?"  Just ask those two variations to someone who is on medication for serious mental illness.

That is all.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I summarized. She does use the exact same words each time she brings it up but I was too lazy to find and copy it. The real quote has "magnitude of my actions" in it, too.


really?  uugh


----------



## lanasyogamama

https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rince-harry-turn-down-appearance-oscars-2020/

Hmm..


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rince-harry-turn-down-appearance-oscars-2020/
> 
> Hmm..


For BEST PICTURE?!?!

Lmaoooo their publicist could have at least made the lie believable.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> For BEST PICTURE?!?!
> 
> Lmaoooo their publicist could have at least made the lie believable.


really.....I could see them attending but presenting best picture?  no


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> really.....I could see them attending but presenting best picture?  no


I’d imagine something more like “best piano score in a foreign comedy film” or something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I’d imagine something more like “best piano score in a foreign comedy film” or something.


LOL
when I googled it I found one of their favorite outlets Harpers Bazaar was reporting it


----------



## lalame

marthastoo said:


> A few things -   Many hundreds of pages ago, people on this thread wished they would go away.  Okay, they went away.  But no, it's not the fact they went away, it's the manner in which they did it. Okay.  People had long wished for them stop spending so much tax payer money (flights, renos, clothing).  Okay, they want to make their own way in the world and not rely on public funds.  So when they want to make their own money, it's not okay.  Or, it's only okay what they think the employment is acceptable.  And what is that?  McDonalds?  Cutting ribbons?  That doesn't pay well.  Clearly, paid speaking engagements will be part of them earning money in their post royal life since Harry never really had a job other than the military (and he's done with that) and people's heads will explode if Meghan goes back to acting.  I really don't have a problem with them (or anyone) getting paid for giving speeches as long as it's not to white supremacists, or other unsavory types.  If someone would pay me $$$ for speaking, I'd be the first to line up for that line of work. Who knows what they're going to talk about - leadership? mental health?  Even when we do find out, I truly do not see what the pearl clutching is all about.  And hold on to your hats - I predict they will be book authors in the future (another easy way for them to make real money).
> 
> Then they're complaining that they're too quiet now, and are coming up with all sorts of snarky hypotheses.  I keep reading "thank God people are losing interest in them (or the poster is "so over them and won't buy/read/comment on them anymore").  Yet, here we are page 1414 and counting.  Each day this thread grows by 12-20 pages.  Face it - to quote Mariah Carey, "Why are you so obsessed with me?"    So in the meantime until there is authentic actual news, I'll log in, catch up on the 15 pages of hate postings, and go on with my day.



It’s not that big of a mystery. They’re royals and there is a certain expectation people have about how they should behave and how they should earn money (reinforced by the family itself). They’re not just any people... I don’t care if a random person or celebrity starts a YouTube channel hawking products, but I’d certainly care if the president, a PM, or yes the BRF did it! (Just an example - not saying they have). It would be very distasteful. And corporate conferences to me are distasteful when you have nothing to do with the subject matter. It’s clearly a money grab only offered to the most privileged people... yet this couple keeps saying they want a regular, private life... do regular, private people get paid huge speaking sums without having earned expertise? Or just to talk abut their dang lives?

I mean the royal family itself has basically said this has been a trying time for them and this whole situation has posed sort of an existential question for them... but it’s weird that we basically agree with them that this is a mess?


----------



## duna

marthastoo said:


> Oh, and another thing while I'm posting my observations and thoughts.... as someone who works with people and has a child with mental health issues, I cannot stand when people joke or throw around phrases like "double your meds," or one is "off your meds."  It's demeaning, casually cruel, and perpetuates a harmful attitude toward mental illness. Taking psychotropic medication is real, serious, and not something to be weaponized against vulnerable people.  When asking someone seriously if they are being compliant with medication, say "Have you been taking your medication?" not "Are you on your meds?"  Just ask those two variations to someone who is on medication for serious mental illness.
> 
> That is all.



I suffered from panic attacks and anxiety and was on meds, and I have absolutely no problem with talking or even joking about it! And I seriously think these two should go to a good shrink!


----------



## marthastoo

lalame said:


> It’s not that big of a mystery. They’re royals and there is a certain expectation people have about how they should behave and how they should earn money (reinforced by the family itself). They’re not just any people... I don’t care if a random person or celebrity starts a YouTube channel hawking products, but I’d certainly care if the president, a PM, or yes the BRF did it! (Just an example - not saying they have). It would be very distasteful. And corporate conferences to me are distasteful when you have nothing to do with the subject matter. It’s clearly a money grab only offered to the most privileged people... yet this couple keeps saying they want a regular, private life... do regular, private people get paid huge speaking sums without having earned expertise? Or just to talk abut their dang lives?
> 
> I mean the royal family itself has basically said this has been a trying time for them and this whole situation has posed sort of an existential question for them... but it’s weird that we basically agree with them that this is a mess?



Fine - let's talk when the Sussex Royal Youtube channel or a Goop-like Sussex Royal website is actually launched.  At this point, all we have is snarky speculation about what products people are preemptively refusing to buy or dignify with a click. I'll be right there with everyone else's disapproving ire about cheesy hawking of merchandise when and if it happens. 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about paid speaking engagements.  I think it can be done well and done poorly.  There are many topics that the Sussexes can speak on that is appropriate for JP Morgan.  One doesn't have to be in the financial sector to speak at their conferences.   As someone to frequents conferences in my industry, I've seen a range of speaker topics that have "nothing" to do directly with my industry, but absolutely affects employee morale, etc. such as wellness, mental illness, leadership,  education, relationship-building, etc.  We'll see what the topic is.


----------



## rose60610

Is Meghan wearing her rings? Does she have her hands splayed weirdly her thighs for all the world to see to make sure? Now that she has broken off from that awful BRF in supposedly in large part to media scrutiny, she's put herself out there again days after "the letter" with doggies and Archie for a stroll. And now a paid chat with a JP Morgan deep pocket audience discussing Harry's mother's death. Over the years Harry has mentioned Diana's death now and then, but not that often. Since he's met Meghan, Diana's death is like front and center, always ready to be trotted out for huge audience pity parties, reminding everyone that he's a poor hapless victim. Well I guess if you have to find ways to pay the bills after telling the BRF to go to hell you can always find a silver lining (and a mega payday) in your own mother's tragic death.  Whether or not Harry has any sort of mental illness he's certainly found a way to exploit the hell out of mental illness--and his own mother's death-- for their financial gain.


----------



## lalame

marthastoo said:


> Fine - let's talk when the Sussex Royal Youtube channel or a Goop-like Sussex Royal website is actually launched.  At this point, all we have is snarky speculation about what products people are preemptively refusing to buy or dignify with a click. I'll be right there with everyone else's disapproving ire about cheesy hawking of merchandise when and if it happens.
> 
> I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about paid speaking engagements.  I think it can be done well and done poorly.  There are many topics that the Sussexes can speak on that is appropriate for JP Morgan.  One doesn't have to be in the financial sector to speak at their conferences.   As someone to frequents conferences in my industry, I've seen a range of speaker topics that have "nothing" to do directly with my industry, but absolutely affects employee morale, etc. such as wellness, mental illness, leadership,  education, relationship-building, etc.  We'll see what the topic is.



I have too... and I think it’s terrible. I don’t like when anyone does it, and did call out people like Reese Witherspoon and Will Smith. It’s not like Ike targeting the Sussexes. I have no problem with the topics of mental health, leadership, wellness, etc.... but what qualifications do they have for speaking on those topics that millions of other non-privileged people don’t have? There are so many legitimate experts on this topic, it’s clear they only chose these two because of their celebrity. And yes, I roll my eyes at every conference that happens with. (In a few weeks, I’ll be talking to Sheryl Crow about cyber security! Wheeee)

This is just another flavor of hawking wares on YouTube (if you’re only being brought in for your celebrity factor), in my opinion.


----------



## marthastoo

lalame said:


> I have too... and I think it’s terrible. I don’t like when anyone does it, and did call out people like Reese Witherspoon and Will Smith. It’s not like Ike targeting the Sussexes. I have no problem with the topics of mental health, leadership, wellness, etc.... but what qualifications do they have for speaking on those topics that millions of other non-privileged people don’t have? There are so many legitimate experts on this topic, it’s clear they only chose these two because of their celebrity. And yes, I roll my eyes at every conference that happens with. (In a few weeks, I’ll be talking to Sheryl Crow about cyber security! Wheeee)
> 
> This is just another flavor of hawking wares on YouTube (if you’re only being brought in for your celebrity factor), in my opinion.


I don't have a problem with the "celebrity" element to public speaking.  Obviously, people want a speaker with some cache who will be a draw.  If Meghan gave a speech on collateralize debt obligation, obviously she has no expertise on the matter.  If, however, either of them gave a speech on the role of media in creating a narrative about oneself or a corporation - then, okay.  They have relevant experience about that.  Are they the foremost expert in that field?  No, but who's going to create more buzz for JP Morgan - Professor Smith of Harvard or the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?


----------



## lalame

marthastoo said:


> I don't have a problem with the "celebrity" element to public speaking.  Obviously, people want a speaker with some cache who will be a draw.  If Meghan gave a speech on collateralize debt obligation, obviously she has no expertise on the matter.  If, however, either of them gave a speech on the role of media in creating a narrative about oneself or a corporation - then, okay.  They have relevant experience about that.  Are they the foremost expert in that field?  No, but who's going to create more buzz for JP Morgan - Professor Smith of Harvard or the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?



A conference isn’t supposed to be a hot, exclusive party. But I suppose this is just a difference of opinion. My overall gripe is celebrities keep finding new and more creative ways to earn large sums of money not even open to normal people who actually have earned expertise. Beauty sells so that’s fine if they’re advertising products but dang, they’re now infiltrating our professional spaces? I think it’s lame. And especially so coming from a couple who insists they want a private, normal life and go around talking about wealth inequality and such... only to make their money in ways literally only available for the wealthy or extremely lucky by way of birth lottery.

btw, of course it’s fine if YOU don’t find an issue with this. But you essentially asked why other people do and I’ve explained why they do. We don’t have to agree but ya know, it’s not like some illogical reason to disdain them. This is a divisive issue in general, whether you’re talking abut them or any other celebrity.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

duna said:


> I suffered from panic attacks and anxiety and was on meds, and I have absolutely no problem with talking or even joking about it! And I seriously think these two should go to a good shrink!



Ditto this!  Taking meds for depression, anxiety, and panic attacks is what makes it possible to talk and joke about it, which helps normalize the issue.  My biggest hope for Harry is that he finds a way to better cope with his life.......professional help!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Over the years Harry has mentioned Diana's death now and then, but not that often. Since he's met Meghan, Diana's death is like front and center, always ready to be trotted out for huge audience pity parties, reminding everyone that he's a poor hapless victim.



Right. While I was going back to what I said earlier - that I'm kind of over him not dealing with his mother's dead more than 20 years later as a grown man I paused and thought it hadn't been that extreme before. I feel Meghan must trigger him big time...and even if she doesn't, would a good spouse not make one sit back, take a breath and find ways to cope other from talking, talking, talking about it in public? This is painful in the true word sense to watch.

Or maybe he's really just so distasteful to exploit a personal tragedy, but I don't want to believe that quite yet.


----------



## lalame

IMO, Harry needs to solidify his “expertise” in order to build his brand. He’s not going to go around talking about royal life, so what else is he going to be seen as an expert on? He’s been making mental health and climate change his “thing” through all sorts of speeches over the years. I don’t think he’s going to stop anytime soon.

I actually don’t have a problem with him talking about those topics if they interest him but I do have a problem when we enter a bizzaro world where a celeb can talk about anything and suddenly be seen as an expert on that topic. What next, Kim Kardashian starts keynoting legal conferences? Oh boy, I’m probably not far off.


----------



## CeeJay

marthastoo said:


> Oh, and another thing while I'm posting my observations and thoughts.... as someone who works with people and has a child with mental health issues, I cannot stand when people joke or throw around phrases like "double your meds," or one is "off your meds."  It's demeaning, casually cruel, and perpetuates a harmful attitude toward mental illness. Taking psychotropic medication is real, serious, and not something to be weaponized against vulnerable people.  When asking someone seriously if they are being compliant with medication, say "Have you been taking your medication?" not "Are you on your meds?"  Just ask those two variations to someone who is on medication for serious mental illness.
> 
> That is all.


I don't think that I have seen a single instance of someone saying that on this thread.  I agree, as someone who had a mother who was institutionalized for most of my young adult life, I can relate to those that have serious mental health issues and always try to help out as much as I can (_sadly, it runs rampant in my family_).   None of us know the depth of Harry's pain, and I do feel for him, but it does concern me that he might be used just to line her pockets .. let's face it, he can always go back to the BRF.


----------



## lalame

The more I think about it, the more I’m embarrassed for the BRF. Does any other royal family out there do product advertisements (a la milk ad), give paid corporate speeches, etc??


----------



## CeeJay

marthastoo said:


> I don't have a problem with the "celebrity" element to public speaking.  Obviously, people want a speaker with some cache who will be a draw.  If Meghan gave a speech on collateralize debt obligation, obviously she has no expertise on the matter.  If, however, either of them gave a speech on the role of media in creating a narrative about oneself or a corporation - then, okay.  They have relevant experience about that.  Are they the foremost expert in that field?  No, but who's going to create more buzz for JP Morgan - Professor Smith of Harvard or the Duke and Duchess of Sussex?


While I agree to a certain extent that having a well-known speaker (_and not necessarily an expert on any of the topics_) is always somewhat of a draw (_I've attended many conferences where we've had celeb speakers .. and yes, sometimes it's rather entertaining_).  If this was an event for - let's say, a Medical Conference especially related to Mental Illness, then for sure .. Harry would be great there.  However, what I see in this is .. an attempt for them to get wealthy investors (_whether it be private or institutional_) to "potentially" invest *IN THEM*.  Now, do we know for sure? .. no, but to me, there is really NO reason whatsoever for them to be there other than to '_sniff around_' to see about the possibility of setting up a Fund in the name of Harry's mental illness .. and THAT is where I have a problem.  Instead of setting up a fund to line the pockets of these two (_and from what I've heard based on reading many other articles - Meghan will be the CEO of these "Foundations" which means that, in essence, she will get the majority of the $$$_) .. why not FUND the Mental Health organizations .. you know, those that are doing all this research to HELP those that suffer?  I saw my mother being put through some horrible "treatments" until FINALLY, towards the end of her life, they figured out the right medications for her to be on .. can't even say what a blessing that was to the entire family.  Let's not make money to make others rich, let's put that money to use (_and sadly, the "Foundation" is only required to give 5% .. and that stinks_)!!!


----------



## lalame

Okay I’m actually getting more worked up thinking about this lol. It seems so ridiculous to have Prince Harry be the poster child for mental health... and I get it, he lost a parent prematurely (so did I as a matter of fact). But there are so many more insightful and experienced people who can speak in a nuanced way on this topic. Anderson cooper? Stephen Colbert? Demi Lovato? Heck, Charlamagne tha’ god? Not to mention so many celebrities or CEOs have been vocal about mental health, fame, addiction, etc. They chose Harry and Meghan because they’re the hot celebrities of the moment.... no other reason.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Okay I’m actually getting more worked up thinking about this lol. It seems so ridiculous to have Prince Harry be the poster child for mental health... and I get it, he lost a parent prematurely (so did I as a matter of fact). But there are so many more insightful and experienced people who can speak in a nuanced way on this topic. Anderson cooper? Stephen Colbert? Demi Lovato? Heck, Charlamagne tha’ god? Not to mention so many celebrities or CEOs have been vocal about mental health, fame, addiction, etc. They chose Harry and Meghan because they’re the hot celebrities of the moment.... no other reason.


BINGO!!!!!  Look, no one wants to lose a parent prematurely, but .. there are so many others who have gone through much worse experiences .. for instance, I have a dear friend whose own son (sadly - he had major mental health issues and is now finally in the right institution getting the right help) .. shot his father as he was having an episode.  Not only did he shoot his own father, but then went around to shoot his siblings; thankfully, he did not succeed.  Try going through something like that!  Given Harry's situation, with the BRF's wealth and people who would have been able to get him the BEST therapists, etc. in England, it's kind of hard for me to think this situation with the 2 of them going to a conference like this is 'okay'.  My opinion, but like I said before, you want money for Mental Health? .. great, but have those funds GO DIRECTLY to the organizations that actually CAN help!!!


----------



## limom

Was a transcript of the speech made available?
For all we know, he was fundraising for his foundation...
Chase has deep pockets and I read somewhere (WSJ?) that James was interested into humanity endeavors.
Something about income inequalities...


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> IMO, Harry needs to solidify his “expertise” in order to build his brand. He’s not going to go around talking about royal life, so what else is he going to be seen as an expert on? He’s been making mental health and climate change his “thing” through all sorts of speeches over the years. I don’t think he’s going to stop anytime soon.
> 
> I actually don’t have a problem with him talking about those topics if they interest him but I do have a problem when we enter a bizzaro world where a celeb can talk about anything and suddenly be seen as an expert on that topic. What next, Kim Kardashian starts keynoting legal conferences? Oh boy, I’m probably not far off.


Well Kimmy is in law school.....


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> Okay I’m actually getting more worked up thinking about this lol. It seems so ridiculous to have Prince Harry be the poster child for mental health... and I get it, he lost a parent prematurely (so did I as a matter of fact). But there are so many more insightful and experienced people who can speak in a nuanced way on this topic. Anderson cooper? Stephen Colbert? Demi Lovato? Heck, Charlamagne tha’ god? Not to mention so many celebrities or CEOs have been vocal about mental health, fame, addiction, etc. They chose Harry and Meghan because they’re the hot celebrities of the moment.... no other reason.


Agree the choice of speakers was a PR choice on behalf of JP Morgan 
HandM are hot, hot , hot and heck banks spend all kinds of money on speakers, often Obamas or *******s, but this choice was good for oodles of press
Heck why not harry instead of Chelsea ******* , six of one, half a dozen of the other ...
When was the last time you remember JP Morgan in the press ?


----------



## V0N1B2

mrsinsyder said:


> I’d imagine something more like “best piano score in a foreign comedy film” or something.


Or “Best Exit Stage Left”. I mean Snaglepuss cant possibly present every year, can he?
Heavens to Murgatroyd!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I'm surprised at the surprise about key note speakers at industrials. The celebs aren't presented as or pretending to be experts they are there for star power and entertainment. And if the price is right it's easy work for them...plus possibly a vacation (for example I'm thinking about one meeting quite a few years ago in Hawaii featuring Colin Powell). I'm not saying it's right for H & M just that they wouldn't be the first or last to speak at a conference without any real connection to the product or business.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Agree the choice of speakers was a PR choice on behalf of JP Morgan
> HandM are hot, hot , hot and heck banks spend all kinds of money on speakers, often Obamas or *******s, but this choice was good for oodles of press
> Heck why not harry instead of Chelsea ******* , six of one, half a dozen of the other ...
> When was the last time you remember JP Morgan in the press ?



I know, I get it but I guess... I didn’t see royals as “hot celebs of the moment”... until now! But considering the “moment” is due to all the chaos in the family, it also feels weird to profit from that chaos. Guess this is a side of royalty we will just have to get used to.


----------



## mdcx

I do wonder if MMs angle on having H dredge up his dead mother issues is not sympathy per se, but just to invoke the “Princess Diana” thing. Everyone loved Diana, many cried on hearing the news if her death, it touched people deeply. All of those pre-existing positive associations could be monetised!
Bluntly, I don’t know that M is prioritising Hs mental health here.

As for conference speakers, I’m all for a random interesting entertaining competent speaker. H talking about his mum grief and how they were bullied out of the BRF doesn’t cut it. It’s basically a criticism hedge in this context - child of dead mother.


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> ha
> When he and Will first talked about how difficult it was dealing with Diana's death it was touching and relevant (could relate to others in similar situations, etc).  But how many times can the same story be told?


Until M meets her short and long term financial goals, I feel.


----------



## Milosmum0307

There’s a certain level of unintended hilarity in the fact that the former fourth or fifth lead in a low-rated basic cable television legal soap and a guy who a few years ago was forced to undergo mandatory sensitivity training for using racial slurs in talking about his fellow soldiers are now being paid six or seven figures to drool over the corpse of the latter’s dead mother.  What a world ...


----------



## threadbender

I am wondering how this event even happened. Who was organizing this conference and decided to contact them to have Harry speak? It seems out of left field.


----------



## mdcx

marthastoo said:


> Oh, and another thing while I'm posting my observations and thoughts.... as someone who works with people and has a child with mental health issues, I cannot stand when people joke or throw around phrases like "double your meds," or one is "off your meds."  It's demeaning, casually cruel, and perpetuates a harmful attitude toward mental illness. Taking psychotropic medication is real, serious, and not something to be weaponized against vulnerable people.  When asking someone seriously if they are being compliant with medication, say "Have you been taking your medication?" not "Are you on your meds?"  Just ask those two variations to someone who is on medication for serious mental illness.
> 
> That is all.


I am on meds for serious mental illness(major depression) and will be for life. My life falls apart if I stop taking them, and there was a rough time when I was on the wrong dose. My loved ones and friends have been asked by me to step in if I seem “off” and might have gone off my meds. There are no requirements about how they talk about it, and humour is an essential element of dealing with such a big issue imo. 
My therapist and doctor are the team that manage my depression. Where is this in H’s life? He frankly doesn’t seem mentally or emotionally stable and I don’t believe M has a true understanding of his mental health needs, or she would not be allowing some of this triggering/stressful stuff to occur. Talking about the traumatic events that kicked off your PTSD and depression is risky, and is best done with professionals or trusted friends who have the life skills to support you. Financial conference audiences - not so much.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> I am wondering how this event even happened. Who was organizing this conference and decided to contact them to have Harry speak? It seems out of left field.



It could have been as simple as getting them before any other company/organization did. Perhaps there’s bragging rights in that for JPMorgan. There will likely never be as much demand for H&M as there is right now. Most people in the US never get a chance to see royalty in the flesh. Of course, mediocre actresses we have here in abundance.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

threadbender said:


> I am wondering how this event even happened. Who was organizing this conference and decided to contact them to have Harry speak? It seems out of left field.


The topic was primarily about black wealth and urban investment - maybe because of Meghan being half African American? Two major speakers/attendees last year were Magic Johnson and Arod/JLo, so Meghan and Gayle King make some sense. Perhaps it was an Oprah/Gayle connection that got them the spot? Apparently Gayle introduced Meghan who then introduced Harry.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> I am on meds for serious mental illness(major depression) and will be for life. My life falls apart if I stop taking them, and there was a rough time when I was on the wrong dose. My loved ones and friends have been asked by me to step in if I seem “off” and might have gone off my meds. There are no requirements about how they talk about it, and humour is an essential element of dealing with such a big issue imo.
> My therapist and doctor are the team that manage my depression. Where is this in H’s life? He frankly doesn’t seem mentally or emotionally stable and I don’t believe M has a true understanding of his mental health needs, or she would not be allowing some of this triggering/stressful stuff to occur. Talking about the traumatic events that kicked off your PTSD and depression is risky, and is best done with professionals or trusted friends who have the life skills to support you. Financial conference audiences - not so much.


Thank you. You’re very brave to share your story.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I am on meds for serious mental illness(major depression) and will be for life. My life falls apart if I stop taking them, and there was a rough time when I was on the wrong dose. My loved ones and friends have been asked by me to step in if I seem “off” and might have gone off my meds. There are no requirements about how they talk about it, and humour is an essential element of dealing with such a big issue imo.
> My therapist and doctor are the team that manage my depression. Where is this in H’s life? He frankly doesn’t seem mentally or emotionally stable and I don’t believe M has a true understanding of his mental health needs, or she would not be allowing some of this triggering/stressful stuff to occur. Talking about the traumatic events that kicked off your PTSD and depression is risky, and is best done with professionals or trusted friends who have the life skills to support you. Financial conference audiences - not so much.


I couldn't agree with you more, and sorry to hear about your situation as I went through that with my mother .. big hugs!!!


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The topic was primarily about black wealth and urban investment - maybe because of Meghan being half African American? Two major speakers/attendees last year were Magic Johnson and Arod/JLo, so Meghan and Gayle King make some sense. Perhaps it was an Oprah/Gayle connection that got them the spot? Apparently Gayle introduced Meghan who then introduced Harry.


Like Harry would know about urban development? .. puhleeze!!!!!  Frankly, I have to side-eye Meghan's "true" knowledge of urban development as well, given that she didn't grow up in poverty and certainly never lived in the horrible (and yes they are here) sections of LA.  I think it had everything to do about the notoriety right now ..


----------



## Straight-Laced

*Harry and Meghan ‘earn $1m’ for speech in Florida*

*The couple are to bring Archie back to Britain for a final round of royal duties after enjoying a big payday*
Roya Nikkhah, Royal Correspondent
Sunday February 09 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times

_They have taken their first steps on the lucrative corporate speaking circuit — reportedly earning $1m for an appearance in Florida — but there will be no big cheque awaiting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their return to Britain next month.

The Queen has asked Harry and Meghan to join the rest of the royal family for the Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey on March 9. The couple are expected to arrive in the UK with Archie, who will be 10 months old, for a final round of official engagements before returning to their new base in Canada.

Their appearance on Commonwealth Day will be in marked contrast to their attendance last week at a Florida investment summit sponsored by JP Morgan, part of America’s biggest banking group.

In Miami, Harry spoke to an audience of 425 bankers and celebrities about dealing with the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales and his decision to give up his role as a frontline royal. Meghan spoke of her love for her husband.

There was no confirmation of whether the Sussexes were paid a fee, but there were reports that their first joint public appearance since moving to Canada earned them $1m (£760,000).

In London they will briefly resume their former royal lives, attending the service as president and vice-president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust.

The Queen is said by friends to be “remarkably relaxed” and “unfazed” by the Sussexes’ new arrangements, and has stated that the monarchy must not stand in their way. She has told friends: “If that’s what they want, if they want to go, we must let them go.”

Negotiations are said to be continuing over the couple’s financial and other arrangements, with the question of their use of the Sussex Royal brand for commercial projects still unresolved. Palace aides remain concerned that the couple may be seen to be “cashing in”.

Meghan’s return to North America, where she was previously best known for her role in the television drama Suits, has stirred a flurry of speculation in Hollywood that she might return to acting.

At an awards ceremony last week, Paul Feig, director of Bridesmaids, said he would love to cast Meghan in a film but warned she might not find it easy. Having a famous name “can get you in the door, but once you’re in the door, they are hard on you, they don’t care who you are”, he said. The Oscar-winning screenwriter Charles Randolph added: “She has got to deliver and knock it out of the park.”_


----------



## threadbender

I wonder if Meghan was disappointed in it not being a red carpet, flashy affair? It was extremely private. No photos or IG or anything?

I have no problem with them making their own way. Hypocrites are everywhere. They will be 2 of many. I don't even wish them to fail. I do find it cringe-worthy that titles are used and they are attending events where the accidents of their births are their, seemingly, only qualifications. lol I would be embarrassed to even be there, knowing I was basically a circus clown for others' entertainment. But, I am not in their circle so.....

If they would truly be independent and not accept security or moneys from the BRF or any government, I would be applauding their efforts.

My only real concern is for Archie. His parents seem a mess and he deserves better.


----------



## Straight-Laced

From The Sunday Times (UK) today. Kind of a side issue but since Harry quit someone had to take over his work with the Royal Marines.  
Go Princess Anne   

*


Anne takes Harry’s marines role*
Roya Nikkhah
Sunday February 09 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times

_Princess Anne is already associated with 65 military organisations and is often named as one of the hardest-working royals.

Now, after the departure of the Duke of Sussex for Canada, the Princess Royal is in line to become the first female captain-general of the Royal Marines. Anne, 69, is expected to add to her many royal duties when her nephew gives up his military commands in the spring.

Harry is expected to return to Britain next month for a farewell engagement with the Royal Marines little more than two years after he took over as captain-general from the Duke of Edinburgh. Anne will also attend.

*Prince Philip, 98, held the role for 64 years until 2017, when he retired from public duties. He was understood to be particularly keen for Anne to take over from Harry.*
_
*The prestigious honorary role for Anne is likely to be seen as an inspiration for women considering signing up as marines. Only one enrolled for the gruelling commando course last year, despite more than 1,000 having registered an interest. Of the estimated 600 recruits for this year’s course, all are men.*
_
The Queen is expected to announce the appointment in due course._


----------



## mdcx

Straight-Laced said:


> *Harry and Meghan ‘earn $1m’ for speech in Florida*
> 
> *The couple are to bring Archie back to Britain for a final round of royal duties after enjoying a big payday*
> Roya Nikkhah, Royal Correspondent
> Sunday February 09 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
> 
> _They have taken their first steps on the lucrative corporate speaking circuit — reportedly earning $1m for an appearance in Florida — but there will be no big cheque awaiting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their return to Britain next month.
> 
> The Queen has asked Harry and Meghan to join the rest of the royal family for the Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey on March 9. The couple are expected to arrive in the UK with Archie, who will be 10 months old, for a final round of official engagements before returning to their new base in Canada.
> 
> Their appearance on Commonwealth Day will be in marked contrast to their attendance last week at a Florida investment summit sponsored by JP Morgan, part of America’s biggest banking group.
> 
> In Miami, Harry spoke to an audience of 425 bankers and celebrities about dealing with the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales and his decision to give up his role as a frontline royal. Meghan spoke of her love for her husband.
> 
> There was no confirmation of whether the Sussexes were paid a fee, but there were reports that their first joint public appearance since moving to Canada earned them $1m (£760,000).
> 
> In London they will briefly resume their former royal lives, attending the service as president and vice-president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust.
> 
> The Queen is said by friends to be “remarkably relaxed” and “unfazed” by the Sussexes’ new arrangements, and has stated that the monarchy must not stand in their way. She has told friends: “If that’s what they want, if they want to go, we must let them go.”
> 
> Negotiations are said to be continuing over the couple’s financial and other arrangements, with the question of their use of the Sussex Royal brand for commercial projects still unresolved. Palace aides remain concerned that the couple may be seen to be “cashing in”.
> 
> Meghan’s return to North America, where she was previously best known for her role in the television drama Suits, has stirred a flurry of speculation in Hollywood that she might return to acting.
> 
> At an awards ceremony last week, Paul Feig, director of Bridesmaids, said he would love to cast Meghan in a film but warned she might not find it easy. Having a famous name “can get you in the door, but once you’re in the door, they are hard on you, they don’t care who you are”, he said. The Oscar-winning screenwriter Charles Randolph added: “She has got to deliver and knock it out of the park.”_


The amount of money I would give to witness the reunion of Kate and Meghan!
Megs will truly understand what “getting the cold shoulder” means..,


----------



## mdcx

DM comment:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7982341/Harry-Meghans-risk-seen-tacky-taking-JP-Morgan-gig.html


----------



## Sophisticatted

I don’t think Meghan cares if he self-destructs or falls flat on his face.  It will give her a “reason” to ditch him and a “story” to tell (for publicity) when the divorce is over.

I secretly hope that the Queen refuses to let Archie leave the country again.  Sadly, I feel that , at her age and with all she’s weathered over the decades, that she will just let them all go.  These things are all just footnotes in the histories that have already been written about her life and career.


----------



## melissatrv

I wish they were truly stripped of their titles - Duke and Duchess of Sussex.  This not being able to use the style HRH publicly is just a wrist slap.  Especially when it well known they plan to commercialize the "brand".  Personally I think it wasn't done, because the royal family knows they will end up divorced and want Harry to come back into the fold after.  Also think if he was not Diana's son AND that the picture of little Harry walking behind the casket was not still etched in people's brains, the public would have been much less tolerant and sympathetic for as long as they have.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> It could have been as simple as getting them before any other company/organization did. Perhaps there’s bragging rights in that for JPMorgan. There will likely never be as much demand for H&M as there is right now. Most people in the US never get a chance to see royalty in the flesh. Of course, mediocre actresses we have here in abundance.


I read the guest list for the event ... lots of celebs ... the only ones that I remember off hand are JLO and AROD, something tells me they were paid too, they have financial advisors to go listen to boring financial lectures
But the celebs help JPM attract the CEOs that are the intended audience , and the CEOs have partners tagging along just to gawk at the celebs


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Personally, I wouldn't walk across the street to see them.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I read the guest list for the event ... lots of celebs ... the only ones that I remember off hand are JLO and AROD, something tells me they were paid too, they have financial advisors to go listen to boring financial lectures
> But the celebs help JPM attract the CEOs that are the intended audience , and the CEOs have partners tagging along just to gawk at the celebs



So the purpose of it was mainly to schmooze with celebrities. It has certainly received plenty of coverage. 

I’m surprised they had the good sense to turn down the Oscars.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Looks like they ended up exactly where most of us thought they would...


----------



## lalame

Harry's been hobnobbing with celebrities for awhile now so this is probably nbd to him. Meghan must be ecstatic though to reach this level of fame and network. 

Anyone know what happened to Priyanka? They seemed to be good friends, at least that's what was said around royal wedding, but they've never been seen together since.


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> DM comment:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ans-risk-seen-tacky-taking-JP-Morgan-gig.html
> 
> View attachment 4660876



This whole article sums it up for me. And looking at that guest list, any one of those celebrities would've been a more interesting speaker - having actually worked to get their success rather than simply being born into it or marrying into it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> So the purpose of it was mainly to schmooze with celebrities. It has certainly received plenty of coverage.
> 
> I’m surprised they had the good sense to turn down the Oscars.



Who said they turned down the Oscars? We'll see tomorrow...


----------



## mdcx

If they show to the Oscars, look out for some superior shade being thrown by the Brits. I predict lots of “looks”, from eye rolls to grimaces and possibly some sarcastic overly enthusiastic applause.
ETA: some DM comments on Harry’s appearance:


----------



## lazeny

mdcx said:


> If they show to the Oscars, look out for some superior shade being thrown by the Brits. I predict lots of “looks”, from eye rolls to grimaces and possibly some sarcastic overly enthusiastic applause.
> ETA: some DM comments on Harry’s appearance:




That was sad and cringey. It shows their lack of self awareness. I actually feel secondhand embarrassment for them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> If they show to the Oscars, look out for some superior shade being thrown by the Brits. I predict lots of “looks”, from eye rolls to grimaces and possibly some sarcastic overly enthusiastic applause.
> ETA: some DM comments on Harry’s appearance:



Ugh. Please BRF kidnap him and let him stay at an expensive private clinic for a while. Deal with MM later, I'm sure she'll help shovel her own grave in the meanwhile.


----------



## doni

The thing I find the funniest about this conference is this Meghan introducing Harry... I guess so that the JP Morgan folks would know who he is? Or what’s the logic?

I do find it very sad, that he has come to the point where he is resorting to selling the story of his mother for money, even if the angle is the damage it caused him, which of course I get. But this is no different from giving an exclusive in Hello magazine, it just pays better.


----------



## doni

lalame said:


> This whole article sums it up for me. And looking at that guest list, any one of those celebrities would've been a more interesting speaker - having actually worked to get their success rather than simply being born into it or marrying into it.


But none of them badly needed the cash...


----------



## mdcx

Whew! We can all sleep easier knowing this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7983525/Meghan-Markle-feels-stressed-returning-Canada-source-told-People-magazine.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I'm also less stressed when I do nothing all day long and have staff to clean and rund errands.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That said, I somehow can believe she was losing sleep. The narcissist in my life would stay up nights when they felt unappreciated and not worshipped enough to ponder all the wrongdoings they had to endure. So I guess the mean BRF expecting her to fit in and do her job instead of playing queen bee and the evil British press not fawning over her anymore was really enough to make her pretty miserable.


----------



## LittleStar88

mdcx said:


> Whew! We can all sleep easier knowing this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rning-Canada-source-told-People-magazine.html
> 
> View attachment 4661099



Haha stress from what? Her own dumb choices? She is completely detached from reality.


----------



## akoko

Although I find it ridiculous that they were key note speakers at this event, I do think it was a smart move on their part - to start with something that is not public or in the entertainment industry.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Were they the keynote speakers? I read that they spoke but it was not the keynote speech


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't even have a bump the last time around, she just chose to dress extra suspiciously so people would ask questions. She was photographed on the following trip cradling a nonexistant belly because she was like 8 weeks along max at Eugenie's wedding.



I found this one of the most obnoxious things she did to publicize her pregnancy.  To intentionally take away attention from the bride -- really low behavior.  Of course, it was just the beginning of her 7 months of highlighting her pregnancy in any way possible, including the infamous bump cradle to repeatedly moving her coat aside to reveal and highlight her bump.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So the purpose of it was mainly to schmooze with celebrities. It has certainly received plenty of coverage.
> 
> I’m surprised they had the good sense to turn down the Oscars.


that's assuming they were invited


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> that's assuming they were invited



I believe they were. It’s exactly the kind of attention-grabbing stunt the  motion picture academy wants and needs. The Oscars is generally a long, boring parade of celebrities congratulating themselves. But this year we could watch all the fake love for H&M coming from Hollywood’s elite! 

Like them or not, people would tune in to see H&M, giving the ratings a much needed boost. I bet there will be people who watch the Oscars tonight anyway who weren’t planning to, just in case they really do show up. I won’t be among them though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I believe they were. It’s exactly the kind of attention-grabbing stunt the  motion picture academy wants and needs. The Oscars is generally a long, boring parade of celebrities congratulating themselves. But this year we could watch all the fake love for H&M coming from Hollywood’s elite!
> 
> Like them or not, people would tune in to see H&M, giving the ratings a much needed boost. I bet there will be people who watch the Oscars tonight anyway who weren’t planning to, just in case they really do show up. I won’t be among them though.


I'm in denial on this


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm in denial on this



If you want to read something that will really have you shaking your head, some stan who writes for Harpers Bazaar wrote an article  yesterday about how Harry and Meghan turning down the Oscars was “crushing her dreams.” That was her exact quote and I’m not making it up.


----------



## mshermes

It’s simply incredible the amount of privacy one can have when the paps are not summoned. Couldn’t go for a walk without them and now can go to Miami, speak, go to dinner, etc. and not one pic.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> I believe they were. It’s exactly the kind of attention-grabbing stunt the  motion picture academy wants and needs. The Oscars is generally a long, boring parade of celebrities congratulating themselves. But this year we could watch all the fake love for H&M coming from Hollywood’s elite!
> 
> Like them or not, people would tune in to see H&M, giving the ratings a much needed boost. I bet there will be people who watch the Oscars tonight anyway who weren’t planning to, just in case they really do show up. I won’t be among them though.


But didn't they say they needed to step back?
I got the message they felt totally overwrought and needed a very quiet life away from GB and all the stresses of Royal life.  You know, the occasional expected appearances at events, charities and such.
Popping up at the Oscars  might make them look like they have been fibbing.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If you want to read something that will really have you shaking your head, some stan who writes for Harpers Bazaar wrote an article  yesterday about how Harry and Meghan turning down the Oscars was “crushing her dreams.” That was her exact quote and I’m not making it up.


anyone whose dreams are crushed by this ought to see a shrink (IMO)


----------



## rose60610

Could it be that they "declined" the Oscars because The Palace said: "Don't you dare if you want to continue our money gravy train" ?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Could it be that they "declined" the Oscars because The Palace said: "Don't you dare if you want to continue our money gravy train" ?


I haven't heard that anyone from the academy confirmed or denied this.  of course if the truth is they were not invited, they might not want to embarass them by saying that


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I believe they were. It’s exactly the kind of attention-grabbing stunt the  motion picture academy wants and needs. The Oscars is generally a long, boring parade of celebrities congratulating themselves. But this year we could watch all the fake love for H&M coming from Hollywood’s elite!
> 
> Like them or not, people would tune in to see H&M, giving the ratings a much needed boost. I bet there will be people who watch the Oscars tonight anyway who weren’t planning to, just in case they really do show up. I won’t be among them though.


People would certainly tune to watch - they’ve become a freak show


bag-mania said:


> If you want to read something that will really have you shaking your head, some stan who writes for Harpers Bazaar wrote an article  yesterday about how Harry and Meghan turning down the Oscars was “crushing her dreams.” That was her exact quote and I’m not making it up.


These people are ridiculous


----------



## ccbaggirl89

"[The Queen has] requested that the couple return [to England] for the annual Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey on March 9, according to The Sunday Times."


----------



## kemilia

mshermes said:


> It’s simply incredible the amount of privacy one can have when the paps are not summoned. Couldn’t go for a walk without them and now can go to Miami, speak, go to dinner, etc. and not one pic.


Me thinks the "not one pic" was orders from headquarters, if you know what I mean.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> If you want to read something that will really have you shaking your head, some stan who writes for Harpers Bazaar wrote an article  yesterday about how Harry and Meghan turning down the Oscars was *“crushing her dreams.*” That was her exact quote and I’m not making it up.



As if she had any chance of ever being invited had she not married Harry.  If those were her dreams, she clearly had plans to suck everything she could out of this marriage before it even happened.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> As if she had any chance of ever being invited had she not married Harry.  If those were her dreams, she clearly had plans to suck everything she could out of this marriage before it even happened.


 Meghan is hardly averse to trampling over everyone else’s feelings.  Husband dumped - rings returned in the post, attention stealing from bride on wedding day etc etc etc. She’s made a career out of it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

ccbaggirl89 said:


> "[The Queen has] requested that the couple return [to England] for the annual Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey on March 9, according to The Sunday Times."


Subtle power play. I like it.


----------



## threadbender

Every time I see the Thrive vitamins commercial, I think of M&H.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, I somehow can believe she was losing sleep. The narcissist in my life would stay up nights when they felt unappreciated and not worshipped enough to ponder all the wrongdoings they had to endure. So I guess the mean BRF expecting her to fit in and do her job instead of playing queen bee and the evil British press not fawning over her anymore was really enough to make her pretty miserable.


I think you *REALLY* hit the nail on the head!!!!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I believe they were. It’s exactly the kind of attention-grabbing stunt the  motion picture academy wants and needs. The Oscars is generally a long, boring parade of celebrities congratulating themselves. But this year we could watch all the fake love for H&M coming from Hollywood’s elite!
> 
> Like them or not, people would tune in to see H&M, giving the ratings a much needed boost. I bet there will be people who watch the Oscars tonight anyway who weren’t planning to, just in case they really do show up. I won’t be among them though.


THE ONLY THING that I want to see is the fashion .. that's it (oh - plus a friend's hilarious quips about 'said' fashion choices .. that is really my favorite).  Once I've seen that, I'm done ..


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> As if she had any chance of ever being invited had she not married Harry.  If those were her dreams, she clearly had plans to suck everything she could out of this marriage before it even happened.


Didn't one of her "former" friends (_ghosted after 'trying' to counsel Meghan on a marriage to Harry_) say that Meghan was *DEAD SET* on marrying him .. end of story.  She obviously saw him as her meal ticket to greater "fame" in the Hollywood world.  That's sick IMO ...


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## mrsinsyder

Don’t the stans swear he’s the attractive brother?


----------



## PewPew

I haven’t followed his hairline, but balding is traumatic enough for some men without the media spotlight & marrying someone very image conscious (understandably, given her job). On the flip side, his overall physical appearance became increasingly disheveled last year, which is what led many to worry he was drinking heavily again or struggling with his mental health. (Obviously new parents can be dishelved, but his wife & the BRF are so image conscious, he would have had help with his clothing before engagements).


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> Don’t the stans swear he’s the attractive brother?
> 
> View attachment 4661415


I'm wondering now, in retrospect, if this is why he was looking so disheveled .


----------



## marietouchet

On the JPMorgan gig 
Yes lots of blowback
Personally, when I heard of it, I thought - well this is a serious forum and the job should be relatively uncontroversial, less controversial than doing straight advertising,
I was wrong ... unfortunately everyone caught on that his presentation was a fluff piece, at least for that audience ... and yes the talk about current issues getting over Diana''s death, hmmm 22 years after the fact
I did note that Meghan was there only to introduce Harry and the UK press says Tony Blair was also at the conference but, being such a busy man, did not have time to see them hmmmm


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> I'm wondering now, in retrospect, if this is why he was looking so disheveled .


I have noticed him being disheveled since the New Year began, hair is flat-out messy not fashionably messy, rings under eyes, sallow complexion, no smile, outfits are less well put-together etc


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> As if she had any chance of ever being invited had she not married Harry.  If those were her dreams, she clearly had plans to suck everything she could out of this marriage before it even happened.



It was the author who claimed her own dreams were crushed, not Meghan’s. That’s the side of the fandom who absolutely adore her and believe she can do no wrong. This woman believes Meghan’s presence would have greatly enhanced the awards. Here’s the article I mentioned.

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a30813886/prince-harry-meghan-markle-oscars/


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4661455


Looks like Charles imo


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just scrolled through the first comments under their newest Insta post. There is. Not. A. Single. Positive. One and that with people indicating their team were busy deleting left and right again.


----------



## Sharont2305

It's 9:30pm here in the UK and off I go to bed. Will I wake up to about 100 new posts about M&H at, the Oscars I wonder? If they're going. It is tonight isn't it?


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just scrolled through the first comments under their newest Insta post. There is. Not. A. Single. Positive. One and that with people indicating their team were busy deleting left and right again.


That’s interesting. The top comment is about them buying followers. Maybe the paychecks stopped coming and the stans moved on.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> That’s interesting. The top comment is about them buying followers. Maybe the paychecks stopped coming and the stans moved on.


I remember reading something about them automatically adding followers on insta?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Their Insta is brutal, still a few delusional stans though:


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> It's 9:30pm here in the UK and off I go to bed. Will I wake up to about 100 new posts about M&H at, the Oscars I wonder? If they're going. It is tonight isn't it?


YES .. and it's raining here (HA HA)!!!  During the Oscar weekend, the HB and I pretty much forget about going anywhere in town because it is a NIGHTMARE!  Made the mistake one year of going to a well-known Jewelry boutique (had made a previous appointment but didn't realize it was the same weekend as the Oscars) .. anyhow, WHAT A ZOO!!!  I would need more than 2 hands to count the number of celebs I saw that day ..


----------



## Mrs.Z

Wow, the comments on their Instagram are savage


----------



## lalame

Mrs.Z said:


> Wow, the comments on their Instagram are savage



If even TPFers are saying it's savage, I can only imagine. 

Regarding Meghan introducing Harry.... what's really bizarre is I read Gayle introduced Meghan!! How many introductions does one need? It seems so pompous.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Wow, the comments on their Instagram are savage


GOOD .. the truth hurts!!!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> If even TPFers are saying it's savage, I can only imagine.
> 
> Regarding Meghan introducing Harry.... what's really bizarre is I read Gayle introduced Meghan!! How many introductions does one need? It seems so pompous.


Oh, it is .. whoa!!!  Many are saying "close the Account", "don't use your titles", etc.  Of course, you get the 'stans' who try to rebut what is being said, but it obviously appears that most folks feel that H&M are a joke!


----------



## eunaddict

lulilu said:


> I found this one of the most obnoxious things she did to publicize her pregnancy.  To intentionally take away attention from the bride -- really low behavior.  Of course, it was just the beginning of her 7 months of highlighting her pregnancy in any way possible, including the infamous bump cradle to repeatedly moving her coat aside to reveal and highlight her bump.



This was probably my turning point with her and her attention-seeking nonsense too. Everyone knows you give the bride all the attention on the wedding day. Their excuse was apparently that all the family members were together, but you know...they’ll be together the next day for breakfast too. AND it’s not like they don’t have Whatsapp groups. How many people actually have to announce pregnancies in-person to their entire immediate, extended and in-lawed family?

Meh. Thought that was pretty obnoxious.


----------



## CeeJay

eunaddict said:


> This was probably my turning point with her and her attention-seeking nonsense too. Everyone knows you give the bride all the attention on the wedding day. Their excuse was apparently that all the family members were together, but you know...they’ll be together the next day for breakfast too. AND it’s not like they don’t have Whatsapp groups. How many people actually have to announce pregnancies in-person to their entire immediate, extended and in-lawed family?
> 
> Meh. Thought that was pretty obnoxious.


I agree, and apparently, Fergie was more than mildly BS that Meghan did that; as you said .. she couldn't wait until later on to tell folks???  That just reeks to me that she CANNOT STAND not being the center of attention (_which goes 100% in line with what my friends who have known the Markles since her high-school days have said about her_)!


----------



## Straight-Laced

lalame said:


> If even TPFers are saying it's savage, I can only imagine.
> 
> Regarding Meghan introducing Harry.... what's really bizarre is I read Gayle introduced Meghan!! How many introductions does one need? It seems so pompous.


So. Pompous.  
And I can just imagine Meghan basking in the glow of being introduced to that big end crowd as "THE DUCHESS" ...


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> I agree, and apparently, Fergie was more than mildly BS that Meghan did that; as you said .. she couldn't wait until later on to tell folks???  That just reeks to me that she CANNOT STAND not being the center of attention (_which goes 100% in line with what my friends who have known the Markles since her high-school days have said about her_)!


And in case you did not know Fergie just launched a line of items for sale, the brand name is DUCHESS


----------



## Straight-Laced

I don't know much detail about the life and times of the Kardashian-Jenner crowd but Camilla Long in The Sunday Times yesterday pointed out one similarity here :

*Harry’s fate is to speak up with the Kardashians*
_*"It appears that Prince Harry has now reached Bruce Jenner circa 1992 in his journey from national treasure to fully monetised victim*.

Giving big-dollar speeches to bankers in tragic Florida hotels about crushing life events is exactly where the Kardashian empire began. Kris Kardashian, then married to Bruce, who is now Caitlyn, would send him out as the former Olympic decathlete and sporting hero. By the early 1990s he was giving six speeches a day.

Jenner later wrote that he would repeat the same words, the same message, with “the same feigned enthusiasm”, while wearing “panties and a bra and pantyhose” under his dark blue suit.

*Is this heartless treadmill what lies in wait for Harry — to be mercilessly wheeled out, day in, day out, to tell his sad story, pausing only for the occasional big-ticket red carpet appearance or gurning reality overshare? Imagine being auctioned off in front of “business titans”, as he was at the 1 Hotel South Beach in Miami on Thursday.*

Bring back Sussex Royal and the lines of tea towels and branded royal tat asap."_

Very grim picture.  
What would William be thinking about his mother's death being used like this for the lucrative Sussex hustle???


----------



## mrsinsyder

Well... Blac Chyna is at the Oscars so I guess the invites weren’t hard to come by.


----------



## Megs

Sorry I haven't posted the last few days. I have to tell you all something. Vlad introduced me, I introduced Gayle, Gayle introduced Meghan, and then Meghan introduced Harry.

After seeing this thread they thought Vlad and I would be great lead ins. I was busy practicing my royal wave.

(Jk, it was our little guy's 1st birthday party this weekend. I posted a pic and more pics of him and Millie on our inst stories!)


----------



## Swanky




----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Well... Blac Chyna is at the Oscars so I guess the invites weren’t hard to come by.


*RIGHT???* .. *RIGHT???*  I just saw that and thought "_OMG .. they'll invite anyone nowadays_"!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pursegirl3

All I can say is Well Done  Meg's ! You had me going up until the end of the Post !!


----------



## Gimmethebag

I thought it was awesome that Disney had all the Elsas perform on stage together.

But the shade of the Academy for having all the princesses invited but that one, hahaha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

By the way are we betting money if Meghan makes it back to the UK on request of the Queen? I'll be honest I'll be very surprised if she does.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> By the way are we betting money if Meghan makes it back to the UK on request of the Queen? I'll be honest I'll be very surprised if she does.


I think she will, all the senior Royals will be there and because of what's been happening, all the focus press wise will be on her.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she will, all the senior Royals will be there and because of what's been happening, all the focus press wise will be on her.



I don't think she'll be back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she will, all the senior Royals will be there and because of what's been happening, all the focus press wise will be on her.



Yes, but at this point I doubt the press focus will be all that kind. Dunno.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but at this point I doubt the press focus will be all that kind. Dunno.


Good, she then might show some humility.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Good, she then might show some humility.



A girl can dream


----------



## eunaddict

Sharont2305 said:


> Good, she then might show some humility.




Since when has she ever. That word does not exist in her world.

We all know if the press ignores her, she'll hate it and find SOME way to draw attention - I'm taking bets on Baby Sussex 2, electric boogaloo. Then, if/when they're positive, she'll call it manipulation to pull them back. If/when they're negative, she'll whine about her re-traumatization at the terrifyingly furious, typing fingertips of the British press.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My guess is another dog walk, this time with a crop top on.


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> We all know if the press ignores her, she'll hate it and find SOME way to draw attention - I'm taking bets on Baby Sussex 2, electric boogaloo. Then, if/when they're positive, she'll call it manipulation to pull them back. If/when they're negative, she'll whine about her re-traumatization at the terrifyingly furious, typing fingertips of the British press.



They have had lots of time for appointments at the fertility clinic. I don't know if she wants another child though. She already has Harry locked down with his own insecurities plus one baby. Besides, her current pap shots looked awkward enough. Imagine her trying to look oh so ecstatic for the cameras while holding a toddler's hand, two dog leashes, and the front hanging baby harness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don't know if she wants another child though.



Yeah she doesn't strike me as very motherly, but who knows.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> They have had lots of time for appointments at the fertility clinic. I don't know if she wants another child though. She already has Harry locked down with his own insecurities plus one baby. Besides, her current pap shots looked awkward enough. Imagine her trying to look oh so ecstatic for the cameras while holding a toddler's hand, two dog leashes, and the front hanging baby harness.


She just needed her anchor baby. I'd be beyond shocked if they had another.


----------



## limom

Anchor baby is such an ugly term, imho.


----------



## pixiejenna

I'm also curious if she'll actually go back the UK not only for this event but also Princess Beas wedding as well. I could see her avoiding it in fear that Queen Elizabeth Elizabeth decided to keep Archie. Even though she has the power I don't see her exercising it. I feel like it's too much trouble to waste her time on. She knows that the marriage will implode no need to be a part of that mess. I also think that Megan would love to have all the attention on her by going. I could also see her announcing at this wedding that she's pregnant like she did the last one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4661455


I remember once reading a comment he made about his brother's hair loss, this was a few years ago when Harry's hair was still full. While the comment was in jest, I thought "boy, that is kinda rude," especially since it got in the news. And I also thought "you just wait, Harry."  Well, the wait is over.


----------



## lulilu

kemilia said:


> I remember once reading a comment he made about his brother's hair loss, this was a few years ago when Harry's hair was still full. While the comment was in jest, I thought "boy, that is kinda rude," especially since it got in the news. And I also thought "you just wait, Harry."  Well, the wait is over.



I love how it is being reported that Harry is being treated at a super posh/expensive salon for "hair thickening" treatments -- what they mean is hair plugs which, according to the article, is the only real way to achieve it.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> They have had lots of time for appointments at the fertility clinic. I don't know if she wants another child though. She already has Harry locked down with his own insecurities plus one baby. Besides, her current pap shots looked awkward enough. Imagine her trying to look oh so ecstatic for the cameras while holding a toddler's hand, two dog leashes, and the front hanging baby harness.



Am sure that Maleficent MM has read all the stats and she will keep the #MMbaby-making #MMcash-cow  #MMopenformorebusiness until she has a boy*

*Studies have stated that men are less likely to divorce if they father sons**
**Not that I believe this, lol


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry face backlash after attending Miami summit*

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — usually outspoken on environmental issues — are taking heat for attending a ritzy summit hosted by JP Morgan, which has been accused of pumping billions into fossil fuel firms, according to a new report.

The investment giant is believed to have paid the Sussexes up to 775,000 British pounds — more than $1 million — to attend its exclusive Alternative Investment Summit in Miami last week, their first engagement since leaving the royal family, the Sun reported.

Experts and Twitter users alike criticized the pair — who have previously denounced “fossil fuel emissions … jeopardizing” the Earth and spoken of a “ticking clock to save the planet” — for supporting a firm like JP Morgan.

The investment giant is said to have pumped about $67 billion into companies behind fracking, as well as Arctic oil and gas exploration, the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) said in its Banking on Climate Change 2019 report.

British PR guru and author Mark Borkowski told the Sun that the Sussexes’ association with JP Morgan was “not the best look.”

“How they accept money, and from whom, is going to be a challenge going forward,” Borkowski said.

“They need to be careful,” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told the outlet. “If you preach, you should practice what you preach. When it comes to the rich and famous, there is an awful lot of hypocrisy over climate change.”

Twitter users also voiced their disapproval.

“Financing led by JP Morgan has provided more than $700bn of new investment for fossil fuel companies, most aggressively expanding in new coal, oil and gas projects,” one user wrote. “Harry and Meghan need to choose wisely.”

“They better not say another word about being good to the environment if this is who they are going to hang with,” another posted.

JP Morgan declined to comment to the Sun about RAN’s allegations. Representatives for both RAN and the Sussexes did not respond to requests for comment.

Harry spoke at the Thursday summit about his mental health, sharing that he has been in therapy for the past three years as he continues to cope with the death of his mother, Princess Diana.

https://pagesix.com/2020/02/10/megh...y-face-backlash-after-attending-miami-summit/


----------



## kemilia

pixiejenna said:


> I'm also curious if she'll actually go back the UK not only for this event but also Princess Beas wedding as well. I could see her avoiding it in fear that Queen Elizabeth Elizabeth decided to keep Archie. Even though she has the power I don't see her exercising it. I feel like it's too much trouble to waste her time on. She knows that the marriage will implode no need to be a part of that mess. I also think that Megan would love to have all the attention on her by going. I could also see her announcing at this wedding that she's pregnant like she did the last one.


Leaving H all alone with all the BRF? Or staying in Canada (or wherever they are) with Archie. Or going with H but leaving Archie in Canada (baby is sick with cold, can't fly, blah blah), which will work better. Hmmm.


----------



## threadbender

I would think Archie has been in Canada awhile. He is a UK citizen. How long can he stay there legally? I guess if they were to take him the US, it might be a different story. Is MM a UK resident?


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Leaving H all alone with all the BRF? Or staying in Canada (or wherever they are) with Archie. Or going with H but leaving Archie in Canada (baby is sick with cold, can't fly, blah blah), which will work better. Hmmm.



I'm guessing she'll leave Archie behind so she has a ready-made excuse for a quick getaway if she wants one. I think she's a bit too cowardly to face the family in a private setting after all of this, but she might show up for the public events. If she stays home we can expect new pap shots within a few days.


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> I'm also curious if she'll actually go back the UK not only for this event but also Princess Beas wedding as well. I could see her avoiding it in fear that Queen Elizabeth Elizabeth decided to keep Archie. Even though she has the power I don't see her exercising it. I feel like it's too much trouble to waste her time on. She knows that the marriage will implode no need to be a part of that mess. I also think that Megan would love to have all the attention on her by going. I could also see her announcing at this wedding that she's pregnant like she did the last one.


no way is the queen going to tear that baby from his mother.....there would be huge outrage


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry face backlash after attending Miami summit*
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — usually outspoken on environmental issues — are taking heat for attending a ritzy summit hosted by JP Morgan, which has been accused of pumping billions into fossil fuel firms, according to a new report.
> 
> The investment giant is believed to have paid the Sussexes up to 775,000 British pounds — more than $1 million — to attend its exclusive Alternative Investment Summit in Miami last week, their first engagement since leaving the royal family, the Sun reported.
> 
> Experts and Twitter users alike criticized the pair — who have previously denounced “fossil fuel emissions … jeopardizing” the Earth and spoken of a “ticking clock to save the planet” — for supporting a firm like JP Morgan.
> 
> The investment giant is said to have pumped about $67 billion into companies behind fracking, as well as Arctic oil and gas exploration, the Rainforest Action Network (RAN) said in its Banking on Climate Change 2019 report.
> 
> British PR guru and author Mark Borkowski told the Sun that the Sussexes’ association with JP Morgan was “not the best look.”
> 
> “How they accept money, and from whom, is going to be a challenge going forward,” Borkowski said.
> 
> “They need to be careful,” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told the outlet. “If you preach, you should practice what you preach. When it comes to the rich and famous, there is an awful lot of hypocrisy over climate change.”
> 
> Twitter users also voiced their disapproval.
> 
> “Financing led by JP Morgan has provided more than $700bn of new investment for fossil fuel companies, most aggressively expanding in new coal, oil and gas projects,” one user wrote. “Harry and Meghan need to choose wisely.”
> 
> “They better not say another word about being good to the environment if this is who they are going to hang with,” another posted.
> 
> JP Morgan declined to comment to the Sun about RAN’s allegations. Representatives for both RAN and the Sussexes did not respond to requests for comment.
> 
> Harry spoke at the Thursday summit about his mental health, sharing that he has been in therapy for the past three years as he continues to cope with the death of his mother, Princess Diana.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/10/megh...y-face-backlash-after-attending-miami-summit/


They had better start doing their homework before making appearances


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> They had better start doing their homework before making appearances


Pfft, they don't care. All they see now are dollar signs.


----------



## marietouchet

threadbender said:


> I would think Archie has been in Canada awhile. He is a UK citizen. How long can he stay there legally? I guess if they were to take him the US, it might be a different story. Is MM a UK resident?


I have read conflicting info on this
Meghan cannot be a UK citizen - that takes 3 years - she is a US citizen, but may have/had special visa(s) for Canada and UK for long term stays or diplomatic status - see below
Archie, certainly has UK citizenship, some people say that M being a US citizen entitled him to US citizenship too, I am not sure of that - conflicting stories about whether he has automatic right to US citizenship, he does not need a VISA for UK, but may have/had special visa(S) for US and Canada long term stays
As to Harry, UK  citizenship for sure, but does he still have still diplomatic status as representative of the Queen ? Has it been revoked yet ? Without it he would need a VISA to work in the US - at JPM summit


----------



## TC1

lulilu said:


> I love how it is being reported that Harry is being treated at a super posh/expensive salon for "hair thickening" treatments -- what they mean is hair plugs which, according to the article, is the only real way to achieve it.


Harry should get a referral from Gordon Ramsay. Whoever did his plugs did a really great job (IMO) I've posted numerous times that I'm surprised he hadn't had something done sooner. Just needed a push from someone as vain as his wife I guess.


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4661455


The aged Harry is a Dwight Eisenhower doppelganger lol


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> I have read conflicting info on this
> Meghan cannot be a UK citizen - that takes 3 years - she is a US citizen, but may have/had special visa(s) for Canada and UK for long term stays or diplomatic status - see below
> Archie, certainly has UK citizenship, some people say that M being a US citizen entitled him to US citizenship too, I am not sure of that - conflicting stories about whether he has automatic right to US citizenship, he does not need a VISA for UK, but may have/had special visa(S) for US and Canada long term stays
> As to Harry, UK  citizenship for sure, but does he still have still diplomatic status as representative of the Queen ? Has it been revoked yet ? Without it he would need a VISA to work in the US - at JPM summit



As the son of a US citizen Archie is eligible for citizenship (via naturalization). Also Harry doesn’t need employment authorization in the US to do a gig like this for a US company, he only needs it if he’s permanently employed by the company in the US, which he isn’t.


----------



## BeautyAddict58

marietouchet said:


> I have read conflicting info on this
> Meghan cannot be a UK citizen - that takes 3 years - she is a US citizen, but may have/had special visa(s) for Canada and UK for long term stays or diplomatic status - see below
> Archie, certainly has UK citizenship, some people say that M being a US citizen entitled him to US citizenship too, I am not sure of that - conflicting stories about whether he has automatic right to US citizenship, he does not need a VISA for UK, but may have/had special visa(S) for US and Canada long term stays
> As to Harry, UK  citizenship for sure, but does he still have still diplomatic status as representative of the Queen ? Has it been revoked yet ? Without it he would need a VISA to work in the US - at JPM summit


Yes, Archie is absolutely entitled to US citizenship as his mother is a citizen who has lived in the US for at least 5 years after turning 18. Harry would qualify for a Green Card since he is married to a US citizen. He would not need a Visa. Megan would qualify for UK residency since she is married to a UK citizen. How they can all stay in Canada and for how long??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Am sure that Maleficent MM has read all the stats and she will keep the #MMbaby-making #MMcash-cow  #MMopenformorebusiness until she has a boy*
> 
> *Studies have stated that men are less likely to divorce if they father sons**
> **Not that I believe this, lol


On an evolutionary stand, it makes sense that men stay when they have sons, their mini me.
Also women initiate divorce more than men...
So they did not make it to the Oscars nor the parties after all...
A bit disappointing...
Regarding immigration/naturalization status, can an American citizen have a British title?


----------



## marietouchet

BeautyAddict58 said:


> Yes, Archie is absolutely entitled to US citizenship as his mother is a citizen who has lived in the US for at least 5 years after turning 18. Harry would qualify for a Green Card since he is married to a US citizen. He would not need a Visa. Megan would qualify for UK residency since she is married to a UK citizen. How they can all stay in Canada and for how long??


You are correct ... A and H could have US green cards and citizenship. But did they apply? I dont know
I wonder if the applications were submitted while they were royal ? The Firm might not have approved of that  (eg the Queen's great grand children should only be UK citizens ...) or it might have complicated/impossible with their diplomatic status as the Queen's representatives ... who knows ...


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan going up against the Queen of England who comes from a long line of strong women like Queen Elizabeth I who saved her people from the Spanish Armada? I don’t think so. Whatever fantastical notion she thinks she is doing will truly backfire on her, economically and  banishment from the BRF. She’s just going to a footnote in history of the monarchy, a very small font size footnote.

Harry is just like his great, great uncle with the leanings towards sympathizing with nazism (I don’t buy that crap about him not knowing any better). He’s been totally schooled on protocol. He should have known from history that the fall of France in the early century has been credited to his great uncle who was presumably a spy for the Nazis along with Wallis Simpson, and fed intelligence reports to the Nazis during WW2.

My belief is that she will be the most hated woman in the realm of monarchies. And that’s really sad. You see, although Princess Diana was not perfect she endeared herself to the people. Meghan could have done the same thing and be wildly as popular in a good way  but Meghan has nefarious intentions.  If she had endeared herself to be like Princess Diana and had been a ‘peoples’ princess’ she would have been an excellent representative of what the BRF displays. She divided and bailed out, but IMHO, I truly believe she was forced out. She simply did not want to adapt all the responsibilities of being a royal. Harry of course most likely knew he made a mistake and to save face and in his fragile state of mind was easily manipulated to go along with Meghan’s wicked machinations of her mind. There’s something seriously wrong with her.

I looked at that picture again of her out walking and I believe someone said she looked maniacal. I totally agree. She’s unhinged. Not because she’s “free” but because she knows that she was forced out. These were precarious times for England like Brexit and this little twit from nowhere thinks she’s more important.

I believe Meghan also never really wanted to go to Africa. As gorgeous as Africa is, she would be far away from the trappings of celebrity life and what she craved and lusted after: fame and fortune. That’s sad because Harry loves Africa.

When she and Harry released their Coat of Arms and the Queen approved it, the Queen was no dummy. A coat of arms should signify strength and nobility but the Disneyesque coat of arms was very telling that the Queen was way ahead of Meghan. It was a flimsy and cartoonish coat of arms. For over a 1000 years heraldry in the design of coat of arms are a serious thing to design. and was very important for Royal Families to signify their position and strength and tells a story and history. Each jot and tittle or in this case each figure is carefully considered. The joke was on Meghan, not the Royal Family.

There’s a strong spiritual power behind Monarchies, and it is ordained. Without getting into a much deeper realm, from Queen Elizabeth I and after her death the British Monarchy gave birth to an influence to the world in 1604 which solidified her many blessings, divine appointments and protection.  They gave the world a new understanding that has carried on till today. So yeah, MM’s gates of hell will never prevail against the Monarchy.

And that thing about Meghan modernizing the Monarchy? Well guess what? Prince Phillip did that already.


tiktok said:


> As the son of a US citizen Archie is eligible for citizenship (via naturalization). Also Harry doesn’t need employment authorization in the US to do a gig like this for a US company, he only needs it if he’s permanently employed by the company in the US, which he isn’t.[/QUOT
> 
> Are you sure about the fact that Harry does not need a special tax certificate? I’m absolutely positive he needs one due to the 1099 he’s going to be receiving. A musician, DJ, special engagements need to have the special visa for that. I’m positively sure.


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Meghan going up against the Queen of England who comes from a long line of strong women like Queen Elizabeth I who saved her people from the Spanish Armada? I don’t think so. Whatever fantastical notion she thinks she is doing will truly backfire on her, economically and  banishment from the BRF. She’s just going to a footnote in history of the monarchy, a very small font size footnote.
> 
> Harry is just like his great, great uncle with the leanings towards sympathizing with nazism (I don’t buy that crap about him not knowing any better). He’s been totally schooled on protocol. He should have known from history that the fall of France in the early century has been credited to his great uncle who was presumably a spy for the Nazis along with Wallis Simpson, and fed intelligence reports to the Nazis during WW2.
> 
> My belief is that she will be the most hated woman in the realm of monarchies. And that’s really sad. You see, although Princess Diana was not perfect she endeared herself to the people. Meghan could have done the same thing and be wildly as popular in a good way  but Meghan has nefarious intentions.  If she had endeared herself to be like Princess Diana and had been a ‘peoples’ princess’ she would have been an excellent representative of what the BRF displays. She divided and bailed out, but IMHO, I truly believe she was forced out. She simply did not want to adapt all the responsibilities of being a royal. Harry of course most likely knew he made a mistake and to save face and in his fragile state of mind was easily manipulated to go along with Meghan’s wicked machinations of her mind. There’s something seriously wrong with her.
> 
> I looked at that picture again of her out walking and I believe someone said she looked maniacal. I totally agree. She’s unhinged. Not because she’s “free” but because she knows that she was forced out. These were precarious times for England like Brexit and this little twit from nowhere thinks she’s more important.
> 
> I believe Meghan also never really wanted to go to Africa. As gorgeous as Africa is, she would be far away from the trappings of celebrity life and what she craved and lusted after: fame and fortune. That’s sad because Harry loves Africa.
> 
> _When she and Harry released their Coat of Arms and the Queen approved it, the Queen was no dummy. A coat of arms should signify strength and nobility but the Disneyesque coat of arms was very telling that the Queen was way ahead of Meghan. It was a flimsy and cartoonish coat of arms. For over a 1000 years heraldry in the design of coat of arms are a serious thing to design. and was very important for Royal Families to signify their position and strength and tells a story and history. Each jot and tittle or in this case each figure is carefully considered. The joke was on Meghan, not the Royal Family.
> 
> There’s a strong spiritual power behind Monarchies, and it is ordained. Without getting into a much deeper realm, from Queen Elizabeth I and after her death the British Monarchy gave birth to an influence to the world in 1604 which solidified her many blessings, divine appointments and protection.  They gave the world a new understanding that has carried on till today. So yeah, MM’s gates of hell will never prevail against the Monarchy._
> 
> And that thing about Meghan modernizing the Monarchy? Well guess what? Prince Phillip did that already.


Please elaborate, this sounds fascinating!


----------



## Megs

So Harry and Archie could get green cards, but to become a US citizen takes a while plus to get green cards they need to apply, wait for interviews, etc. Plus, they'd have to be in the US at that time and can't leave the US for a while after while waiting. If they are to leave while waiting to see if they are granted a green card, they can't come back. 

*** This is based off what happened with Vlad and I after we got married and he was getting his green card. I said in the thread many pages ago I'm unsure if Harry's status would change things etc.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> Pfft, they don't care. All they see now are dollar signs.


Maybe that is why they skipped the Oscars, they wouldn't get paid for showing up.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Lodpah said:


> Meghan going up against the Queen of England who comes from a long line of strong women like Queen Elizabeth I who saved her people from the Spanish Armada? I don’t think so. Whatever fantastical notion she thinks she is doing will truly backfire on her, economically and  banishment from the BRF. She’s just going to a footnote in history of the monarchy, a very small font size footnote.
> 
> Harry is just like his great, great uncle with the leanings towards sympathizing with nazism (I don’t buy that crap about him not knowing any better). He’s been totally schooled on protocol. He should have known from history that the fall of France in the early century has been credited to his great uncle who was presumably a spy for the Nazis along with Wallis Simpson, and fed intelligence reports to the Nazis during WW2.
> 
> My belief is that she will be the most hated woman in the realm of monarchies. And that’s really sad. You see, although Princess Diana was not perfect she endeared herself to the people. Meghan could have done the same thing and be wildly as popular in a good way  but Meghan has nefarious intentions.  If she had endeared herself to be like Princess Diana and had been a ‘peoples’ princess’ she would have been an excellent representative of what the BRF displays. She divided and bailed out, but IMHO, I truly believe she was forced out. She simply did not want to adapt all the responsibilities of being a royal. Harry of course most likely knew he made a mistake and to save face and in his fragile state of mind was easily manipulated to go along with Meghan’s wicked machinations of her mind. There’s something seriously wrong with her.
> 
> I looked at that picture again of her out walking and I believe someone said she looked maniacal. I totally agree. She’s unhinged. Not because she’s “free” but because she knows that she was forced out. These were precarious times for England like Brexit and this little twit from nowhere thinks she’s more important.
> 
> I believe Meghan also never really wanted to go to Africa. As gorgeous as Africa is, she would be far away from the trappings of celebrity life and what she craved and lusted after: fame and fortune. That’s sad because Harry loves Africa.
> 
> When she and Harry released their Coat of Arms and the Queen approved it, the Queen was no dummy. A coat of arms should signify strength and nobility but the Disneyesque coat of arms was very telling that the Queen was way ahead of Meghan. It was a flimsy and cartoonish coat of arms. For over a 1000 years heraldry in the design of coat of arms are a serious thing to design. and was very important for Royal Families to signify their position and strength and tells a story and history. Each jot and tittle or in this case each figure is carefully considered. The joke was on Meghan, not the Royal Family.
> 
> There’s a strong spiritual power behind Monarchies, and it is ordained. Without getting into a much deeper realm, from Queen Elizabeth I and after her death the British Monarchy gave birth to an influence to the world in 1604 which solidified her many blessings, divine appointments and protection.  They gave the world a new understanding that has carried on till today. So yeah, MM’s gates of hell will never prevail against the Monarchy.
> 
> And that thing about Meghan modernizing the Monarchy? Well guess what? Prince Phillip did that already.



Yes, *Lodpah*, if you care to elaborate on any or all of your aforementioned subjects, that will be a pleasure to read

Am always interested in watching QEII's strategies play out on the global stage bc even when her decisions regarding an important issue turns public opinion against her or the BRF <for example, Diana's death and the BRF's silence> QEII has the wisdom to recognize this immediately and pivots

Her handling of the H&M "crisis" as it unfolds will surely save me from re-reading "the Art of War" and "The Prince"


----------



## CeeJay

daisychainz said:


> Maybe that is why they skipped the Oscars, they wouldn't get paid for showing up.


Could be, but it appears that they were likely paid for their 'speech' at the JPM Conference.  As such, that will have to go into their taxable income .. UNLESS, they try to put that into their "Foundation".  Even if Meghan or Harry place themselves as CEO in their Foundation, they will still have to report their income.  The IRS is going to love that if they co-mingle their funds!!!


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Maybe that is why they skipped the Oscars, they wouldn't get paid for showing up.



I think Meghan has the sense to know they don't want to cheapen their "brand" by going full-on Hollywood in the first month. Now, by next year's Oscars all bets are off.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I think Meghan has the sense to know they don't want to cheapen their "brand" by going full-on Hollywood in the first month. Now, by next year's Oscars all bets are off.


Eh .. I'm not so sure about that, more and more tidbits are coming forward indicating that H&M are looking at properties in SoCal and just knowing how she is so darn impatient, I think the "logical" side of her will be pushed to the back-burner in lieu of her going after her "dream" (cough-cough-sputter-sputter)!!!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Could be, but it appears that they were likely paid for their 'speech' at the JPM Conference.  As such, that will have to go into their taxable income .. UNLESS, they try to put that into their "Foundation".  Even if Meghan or Harry place themselves as CEO in their Foundation, they will still have to report their income.  The IRS is going to love that if they co-mingle their funds!!!


They could take a page from the *******s - being paid officers of their foundation


----------



## mrsinsyder

Now the stans will believe what the Daily Mail writes


----------



## Lodpah

Lodpah said:


> Meghan going up against the Queen of England who comes from a long line of strong women like Queen Elizabeth I who saved her people from the Spanish Armada? I don’t think so. Whatever fantastical notion she thinks she is doing will truly backfire on her, economically and  banishment from the BRF. She’s just going to a footnote in history of the monarchy, a very small font size footnote.
> 
> Harry is just like his great, great uncle with the leanings towards sympathizing with nazism (I don’t buy that crap about him not knowing any better). He’s been totally schooled on protocol. He should have known from history that the fall of France in the early century has been credited to his great uncle who was presumably a spy for the Nazis along with Wallis Simpson, and fed intelligence reports to the Nazis during WW2.
> 
> My belief is that she will be the most hated woman in the realm of monarchies. And that’s really sad. You see, although Princess Diana was not perfect she endeared herself to the people. Meghan could have done the same thing and be wildly as popular in a good way  but Meghan has nefarious intentions.  If she had endeared herself to be like Princess Diana and had been a ‘peoples’ princess’ she would have been an excellent representative of what the BRF displays. She divided and bailed out, but IMHO, I truly believe she was forced out. She simply did not want to adapt all the responsibilities of being a royal. Harry of course most likely knew he made a mistake and to save face and in his fragile state of mind was easily manipulated to go along with Meghan’s wicked machinations of her mind. There’s something seriously wrong with her.
> 
> I looked at that picture again of her out walking and I believe someone said she looked maniacal. I totally agree. She’s unhinged. Not because she’s “free” but because she knows that she was forced out. These were precarious times for England like Brexit and this little twit from nowhere thinks she’s more important.
> 
> I believe Meghan also never really wanted to go to Africa. As gorgeous as Africa is, she would be far away from the trappings of celebrity life and what she craved and lusted after: fame and fortune. That’s sad because Harry loves Africa.
> 
> When she and Harry released their Coat of Arms and the Queen approved it, the Queen was no dummy. A coat of arms should signify strength and nobility but the Disneyesque coat of arms was very telling that the Queen was way ahead of Meghan. It was a flimsy and cartoonish coat of arms. For over a 1000 years heraldry in the design of coat of arms are a serious thing to design. and was very important for Royal Families to signify their position and strength and tells a story and history. Each jot and tittle or in this case each figure is carefully considered. The joke was on Meghan, not the Royal Family.
> 
> There’s a strong spiritual power behind Monarchies, and it is ordained. Without getting into a much deeper realm, from Queen Elizabeth I and after her death the British Monarchy gave birth to an influence to the world in 1604 which solidified her many blessings, divine appointments and protection.  They gave the world a new understanding that has carried on till today. So yeah, MM’s gates of hell will never prevail against the Monarchy.
> 
> And that thing about Meghan modernizing the Monarchy? Well guess what? Prince Phillip did that already.


I will do that soon. It’s truly fascinating.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> Please elaborate, this sounds fascinating!


I’ll do it soon.


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> Now the stans will believe what the Daily Mail writes
> View attachment 4662160


Who presented the Oscar for best film ? Who was the academy’s second choice lol ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

marietouchet said:


> Who presented the Oscar for best film ? Who was the academy’s second choice lol ?


Jane Fonda


----------



## marietouchet

Mrs.Z said:


> Jane Fonda


Thank you , I tried and failed to look it up
Ah yes, best picture presenter is typically a previous multiple-Oscar winner , that lets HandM out, the Oscar story is bogus, I bet


----------



## mdcx

After what happened at this year’s Oscars, I think it’s fair to say the business is evolving and being more inclusive. I don’t see how ”born rich and royal” or “married rich and royal” quite fit into that scene on their own. Now, if they become financial backers of films or are associated with films to do with popular causes, maybe.
Just being rich and biracial is not enough imo. Maybe that’s another reason why MM pushes H to talk about his mental health(imo), it’s their “angle”, along with press intrusion, racism and scientific developments in the field of hyper realistic artificial infants


----------



## Mrs.Z

marietouchet said:


> Thank you , I tried and failed to look it up
> Ah yes, best picture presenter is typically a previous multiple-Oscar winner , that lets HandM out, the Oscar story is bogus, I bet


Exactly, I thought it was bogus too, for the reason you just stated


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Thinking about the H&M rumor that they were asked to be presenters during the Academy Award ceremony last night, and I think that rumor is quite bogus

My educated guess is that MM or her mangers, public relations reps or assistants thought up this falsehood and spread it around to simply stay in the news by leeching off the next shiny event in the industry

After watching the show last night, reviewing the presenters and what they brought to the table -all were pretty much 100% non-controversial celebs and even Hanoi Jane kept a lid on her political views

Am very sure that actors presenting or in the running for an award were forewarned to steer clear of all even remotely “touchy” subjects 

Well, if in fact H&M’s names were tossed about to be in the running as presenters, one look by an Academy Award casting director at H&M’s Insta page and there would be NO DOUBT that these two complete fools - Hollywood understands money-grubbing but NOT STUPIDITY - would NEVER be asked to present this year

The Academy is extremely sensitive about optics and appealing to the greatest TV ratings going forward is a priority, anyone in the least bit derisive would not be welcome 

Let alone a D-List actress and her new Duke of Windsor 

♥️


----------



## bag-mania

Lying about being invited would certainly have backfired on them. There's no reason why the Academy would cover for them by allowing the claim to stand if it didn't actually happen. Let's not confuse the Motion Picture Academy with being a respectable, dignified organization. They make mistakes and do dumb stuff all the time. Just last week they tweeted their own "predictions" for the winners in each category. They quickly took them down and claimed they were fan predictions that they accidentally posted. 

PS: Many of the Academy predictions turned out to be correct. I wonder why.


----------



## Sharont2305

OT but just read that Peter and Autumn Phillips are splitting up. Sad if this is true.
I've posted this on here as, according to the story I've read, Meghan and Harry's recent shenanigans may have influenced Autumn. Peter is devastated


----------



## threadbender

marietouchet said:


> I have read conflicting info on this
> Meghan cannot be a UK citizen - that takes 3 years - she is a US citizen, but may have/had special visa(s) for Canada and UK for long term stays or diplomatic status - see below
> Archie, certainly has UK citizenship, some people say that M being a US citizen entitled him to US citizenship too, I am not sure of that - conflicting stories about whether he has automatic right to US citizenship, he does not need a VISA for UK, but may have/had special visa(S) for US and Canada long term stays
> As to Harry, UK  citizenship for sure, but does he still have still diplomatic status as representative of the Queen ? Has it been revoked yet ? Without it he would need a VISA to work in the US - at JPM summit


I know Meghan cannot be a UK citizen but I believe she can be a resident. Just like Harry can be a resident alien here in the US if he lives here, legally. Meghan can be a non-resident US citizen.


----------



## limom

Granted, she was someone plus one, but if BC can get herself on the Oscars red carpet, it is anybody’s game, at this point.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> They could take a page from the *******s - being paid officers of their foundation


Well .. I'm sure that is what they will do, but remember .. the "foundation" only need to give 5% .. which means that they get to line their pockets with ALL the rest.  I think that is what she has wanted to do ALL along ..


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Now the stans will believe what the Daily Mail writes
> View attachment 4662160


FEH .. who gave them this crap, their "boy" Omid Scobie?!?!!


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Granted, she was someone plus one, but if BC can get herself on the Oscars red carpet, it is anybody’s game, at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4662252


*WHAT?? *.. *Plus one to whom???*  I'm sorry, NOT a fan of BC and when I saw her picture (as the top-rated worst dressed), I had to think .. "WTF are they doing?"


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *WHAT?? *.. *Plus one to whom???*  I'm sorry, NOT a fan of BC and when I saw her picture (as the top-rated worst dressed), I had to think .. "WTF are they doing?"


have to confess - IDK who she is?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> have to confess - IDK who she is?



*sdkitty*, consider your yourself lucky that you do not know who she is, wish I could say the same
♥️


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *sdkitty*, consider your yourself lucky that you do not know who she is, wish I could say the same
> ♥️


ok, who is she?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

sdkitty said:


> ok, who is she?


She is a former stripper who has a child with Rob Kardashian


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> She is a former stripper who has a child with Rob Kardashian


oh
thanks


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> have to confess - IDK who she is?


No clue what she actually does for a living, she is the baby mom of Rob Kardashian’s daughter
My imagination is going overtime, it would have been a great photo op - HandM and Blac Chyna , with her body at just the right 3/4 profile to maximize the view


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *sdkitty*, consider your yourself lucky that you do not know who she is, wish I could say the same
> ♥️


 ... HA, the best evah!!!!  Right? .. wish I didn't know who she was either!


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> No clue what she actually does for a living, she is the baby mom of Rob Kardashian’s daughter
> My imagination is going overtime, it would have been a great photo op - HandM and Blac Chyna , with her body at just the right 3/4 profile to maximize the view


I've never watched the Kardshians on tv so while I've heard of this woman, I wouldn't recognize her if she bumped into me.  From what little I've picked up about Rob, I think he's kind of a sad character.  Was not profitable for momanger like the girls


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> She is a former stripper who has a child with Rob Kardashian


Let us not forget HOW she met the Kar-trashian clan to begin with .. she was the baby momma for Kylie's "first" boyfriend, the (sic) rapper Tyga.  The whole lot .. PLEASE GO AWAY!


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> OT but just read that Peter and Autumn Phillips are splitting up. Sad if this is true.
> I've posted this on here as, according to the story I've read, Meghan and Harry's recent shenanigans may have influenced Autumn. Peter is devastated



OT:  Oh, I hope this isn't true, they looked like a lovely couple.  Is this being widely reported or just the DM?
Ok, back to MM and Harry  . . .


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I've never watched the Kardshians on tv so while I've heard of this woman, I wouldn't recognize her if she bumped into me.  From what little I've picked up about Rob, I think he's kind of a sad character.  Was not profitable for momanger like the girls


I once watched a Kardashian episode in a hotel room when I needed junk food for the brain ... and unfortunately the only mags at hairdresser are the tabloids, ok ! People etc and they have no WiFi, my bad lol


----------



## muchstuff

bag-mania said:


> I think Meghan has the sense to know they don't want to cheapen their "brand" by going full-on Hollywood in the first month. Now, by next year's Oscars all bets are off.


We also don’t know for certain if they were asked...


----------



## muchstuff

marietouchet said:


> Who presented the Oscar for best film ? Who was the academy’s second choice lol ?


.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking about how this thread is very active ... wow ... lots of posts 
It is really easy to nitpick the lives of the royals , who were born into the job


----------



## Chagall

From what we know of thirsty MM if she had been asked she would have been there. Jane Fonda as second choice? Dosen’t make sense!


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> From what we know of thirsty MM if she had been asked she would have been there. Jane Fonda as second choice? Dosen’t make sense!


Jane has morphed from being Hanoi Jane to Eco-Warrior  Queen.   Hard to top that. Plus her old Hollywood family history.


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> Jane has morphed from being Hanoi Jane to Eco-Warrior  Queen.   Hard to top that. Plus her old Hollywood family history.


Makes absolutely no sense that she would be selected AFTER Meghan and Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> Makes absolutely no sense that she would be selected AFTER Meghan and Harry.


I was agreeing with you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

youngster said:


> OT:  Oh, I hope this isn't true, they looked like a lovely couple.  Is this being widely reported or just the DM?
> Ok, back to MM and Harry  . . .


The story appears in The Times UK today as well, but no comment from anyone official yet. 
If true it is sad for the family, especially if they’re split between Canada and Britain.


----------



## mdcx

I did wonder if Peter picked up the merching your royal-ness thing from Meghan, and if this was a bone of contention with him and Autumn. Just speculating that as Autumn is Canadian, and reasonably high status, she may have known some interesting goss on MM.


----------



## mdcx

Oh it does seem to be a thing, how sad:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lips-daughters-Savannah-Isla-live-Canada.html


----------



## tiktok

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7970597/Meghan-Markle-taking-steps-relaunch-career-work-Disney-far-over.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> I did wonder if Peter picked up the merching your royal-ness thing from Meghan, and if this was a bone of contention with him and Autumn. Just speculating that as Autumn is Canadian, and reasonably high status, she may have known some interesting goss on MM.



Yeah, no. They got critisized for selling pictures of their wedding back in 2008 when MM was a complete nobody.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7970597/Meghan-Markle-taking-steps-relaunch-career-work-Disney-far-over.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4662641


I can't get over that smug grin she sported at that Canada thing back in London when she da*n well knew which bomb was going to drop on the BRF later that day.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

marietouchet said:


> They could take a page from the *******s - being paid officers of their foundation



The *******s are not paid by their foundation.


----------



## Corneto

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Corneto, save the pc talk for someone else. Thirty-five years ago - after a bevy of marriage proposals under my belt and much to many friends bewilderedness - I married a man from a third-world country with a different skin color from myself and had children. Yes, he was one of those legal “dark-skinned” immigrants that was tossed out of “white” restaurants, bars and clubs, etc.
> 
> Just sayin’ do not try that PC sh&t with me bc I was at the front-line fighting for looking at an individual’s character and not the color of a person’s skin.
> 
> Yes, a member posted the Urban Dictionary’s definition of “ghetto” and that’s exactly what I meant. Keep your racist insinuations to yourself, bc what you are implying has no place on these boards.
> 
> mods, please feel free to remove this post and all others that are OT. Just wanted to clear the air as far as my reputation on tPF.



Thanks for your response. A couple of comments.
1. Your shared history, while compelling, hasn’t a thing to do with my assertion.
2. The “Urban Dictionary” response was inevitable. I’m not talking about literary definition - I’m talking about word usage and perceptions. 
3. I stand by my post.


----------



## limom

And I stand by the power of the ignore button.


----------



## mdcx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, no. They got critisized for selling pictures of their wedding back in 2008 when MM was a complete nobody.


I didn’t realise that until today. Must be a huge temptation to take the $$ being offered.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Corneto said:


> Thanks for your response. A couple of comments.
> 1. Your shared history, while compelling, hasn’t a thing to do with my assertion.
> 2. The “Urban Dictionary” response was inevitable. I’m not talking about literary definition - I’m talking about word usage and perceptions.
> 3. I stand by my post.


Since we’re evidently in nit-picking territory I feel compelled to point out that’s 3 comments


----------



## doni

mdcx said:


> Oh it does seem to be a thing, how sad:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lips-daughters-Savannah-Isla-live-Canada.html
> 
> View attachment 4662620



I don't understand the comparision beyond the Canadian connection. Meghan didn't take her son to Canada, they are all three living there as a family.
In divorces, it is extremely rare a judge would allow a change of country residence for the kids against one parent's views. As long as parents don't agree on a change, the staying where they are is the default rule. The nationality of the kids is immaterial.


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> The *******s are not paid by their foundation.


Sorry, I misspoke, yes they receive no salary per se - that was on Hillary's tax returns where she also donated $1M to CGI - but it is not known how much of their expenses -  staff - Hillary traveled ca 2016 with a minimum staff of about 10 people - even for speaking engagements,  private jets & security - were paid by the foundation while they were on foundation business (where they may taken the opportunity to do a bit of private stuff on the side), nothing improper about that, simply a question of optics
It is after all, the transportation and security for H&M which has been subject to much debate, those are big ticket items


----------



## Sharont2305

Seeing as the new "Fab Four" Charles, Camilla, William and Catherine have made a joint appearance here in the UK today, I wonder if we'll have a pap walk or instagram post in the next few hours?


----------



## LittleStar88

tiktok said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7970597/Meghan-Markle-taking-steps-relaunch-career-work-Disney-far-over.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4662641



HAHAHA! I wish I could just swan about for weeks/months on end making baby food, doing yoga, and staging nature walk photo ops while I figure out what I want to do with my life.

Must be nice to have your life bankrolled while you do nothing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> HAHAHA! I wish I could just swan about for weeks/months on end making baby food, doing yoga, and staging nature walk photo ops while I figure out what I want to do with my life.
> 
> Must be nice to have your life bankrolled while you do nothing.


I bet they’re bored out of their minds by now.


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> I don't understand the comparision beyond the Canadian connection. Meghan didn't take her son to Canada, they are all three living there as a family.
> In divorces, it is extremely rare a judge would allow a change of country residence for the kids against one parent's views. As long as parents don't agree on a change, the staying where they are is the default rule. The nationality of the kids is immaterial.


The press may have blown the Canadian connection way out of proportion, after all, the Oscars buzz was surely bogus, not just blown out of proportion


----------



## mshermes

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Return to U.K. for Final Royal Engagements Next Month*
*https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...for-final-royal-engagements-next-month-141179*

If true, this should prove interesting. 
*https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...for-final-royal-engagements-next-month-141179*
*https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...for-final-royal-engagements-next-month-141179*


----------



## mrsinsyder

mshermes said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Return to U.K. for Final Royal Engagements Next Month*
> *https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...for-final-royal-engagements-next-month-141179*
> 
> If true, this should prove interesting.


Yawn. They're just a side show now.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Return to U.K. for Final Royal Engagements Next Month*
> *https://www.etonline.com/prince-har...for-final-royal-engagements-next-month-141179*
> 
> If true, this should prove interesting.


Stiff upper lips all round I expect!
ETA - wonder who’ll be the first to ask Meghan if she’s alright?


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> I bet they’re bored out of their minds by now.


I’m sure they are very bored by now. That is another reason they would have presented at the academy awards if asked.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> I’m sure they are very bored by now. That is another reason they would have presented at the academy awards if asked.


That was just another “Doria gets special invite for Christmas” plant by Markles pr camp IMO


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> HAHAHA! I wish I could just swan about for weeks/months on end making baby food, doing yoga, and staging nature walk photo ops while I figure out what I want to do with my life.
> 
> Must be nice to have your life bankrolled while you do nothing.



She could have done that in Windsor


----------



## cafecreme15

LittleStar88 said:


> HAHAHA! I wish I could just swan about for weeks/months on end making baby food, doing yoga, and staging nature walk photo ops while I figure out what I want to do with my life.
> 
> Must be nice to have your life bankrolled while you do nothing.


Where do I sign up for this life?!

Seriously, the nerve of her to say let alone think “women really can have it all!” in this circumstance (assuming there is truth to this article, which there may not be).


----------



## CeeJay

WHOOOA-WHEEEE .. I guess we aren't the only ones who have questioned her "true love" for Harry! 
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10927863/meghan-markle-faking-love-prince-harry-germaine-greer/

Her actions make it so questionable; keeping all those Hollywood contacts, lawyers, PR Agents, etc. -- unless, of course, Harry has known all along and wanted this with her????


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow, even Prince Harry's official biographer is speaking out against her. 

Angela Levin, who on Sunday claimed the Duke’s bid to make his wife happy was “to the detriment of himself,” and that Meghan’s focus on celebrity was to blame for her unpopularity – not racism.

Levin said: “I think a lot of the criticism has come about because she sort of lectures the public on how they should behave, but not do it herself.”

"We shouldn't fly, but she can go off on private jets to Elton John and see the Clooney’s and all that sort of thing.”


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, even Prince Harry's official biographer is speaking out against her.
> 
> Angela Levin, who on Sunday claimed the Duke’s bid to make his wife happy was “to the detriment of himself,” and that Meghan’s focus on celebrity was to blame for her unpopularity – not racism.”



This, absolutely.


----------



## threadbender

So, will Archie be in the UK also?
Honestly, he is the only one I care about. I want to believe his parents love him and cherish him and are the biggest part of his life. Not sure I do, though. I would like him to be able to be close to his cousins and enjoy being a baby/toddler.

ETA I see, in the article, that he will be. I hope so much that he gets to spend quality time with his extended family.


----------



## Megs

Vlad and I were talking about it last night: marriage is a contract. Each couple's contract may vary greatly, some marry for love and because they want to spend their lives growing with their partner, others marry for status, others for money. 

I think majority get the feeling Meghan married for status/fame. And if that is their contract and Harry understands that and it works for him and her, that's great, enjoy. 

BUT, it's the hypocrisy of her words versus her actions that has so many people far more invested and opinionated than they would normally be (I'm totally lumping myself in this group). The ONLY reason she was asked to speak at this JP Morgan event was because of the drama surrounding their situation and who she married - it's not about her, and she knows it. That is why I think she has to keep things VERY interesting, to make them about herself. Because marrying Harry, she will always be behind him, behind his brother, her niece and nephews (literally and figuratively). That is simply what it is to marry a Royal in line to the throne. 

I am sure everyone (again, myself included) will be waiting to see what it looks like when they make their final official Royal appearances. And I do note, it's sad that Archie won't really know his cousins. There were multiple outlets reporting that they had only been together a handful of times before they abandoned ship.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Megs said:


> Vlad and I were talking about it last night: marriage is a contract. Each couple's contract may vary greatly, some marry for love and because they want to spend their lives growing with their partner, others marry for status, others for money.
> 
> I think majority get the feeling Meghan married for status/fame. And if that is their contract and Harry understands that and it works for him and her, that's great, enjoy.



Absolutely. But when one party pretended to care about the actual person and this person fell for it that's just sh*tty. 

He seems to be actually smitten with her while she's been so over the top affectionate it never looked genuine from day 1...trying way too hard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

As near as I can tell she has no obvious purpose unless it is representing herself as being a crutch to support Harry. From what I've heard about the JPMorgan event, she introduced Harry and went on about how much she loved him. That's it. Maybe she was able to stretch that sentiment out for a few minutes but it certainly would have been a weird speech to listen to.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> HAHAHA! I wish I could just swan about for weeks/months on end making baby food, doing yoga, and staging nature walk photo ops while I figure out what I want to do with my life.
> 
> Must be nice to have your life bankrolled while you do nothing.



i think I could live very happily like that!


----------



## sdkitty

Megs said:


> Vlad and I were talking about it last night: marriage is a contract. Each couple's contract may vary greatly, some marry for love and because they want to spend their lives growing with their partner, others marry for status, others for money.
> 
> I think majority get the feeling Meghan married for status/fame. And if that is their contract and Harry understands that and it works for him and her, that's great, enjoy.
> 
> BUT, it's the hypocrisy of her words versus her actions that has so many people far more invested and opinionated than they would normally be (I'm totally lumping myself in this group). The ONLY reason she was asked to speak at this JP Morgan event was because of the drama surrounding their situation and who she married - it's not about her, and she knows it. That is why I think she has to keep things VERY interesting, to make them about herself. Because marrying Harry, she will always be behind him, behind his brother, her niece and nephews (literally and figuratively). That is simply what it is to marry a Royal in line to the throne.
> 
> I am sure everyone (again, myself included) will be waiting to see what it looks like when they make their final official Royal appearances. And I do note, it's sad that Archie won't really know his cousins. There were multiple outlets reporting that they had only been together a handful of times before they abandoned ship.


Harry must realize that being a prince gave him an advantage.  But I think for him it was love and he probably believed it was for her too.


----------



## altigirl88

I must say, I’m very disappointed in how all this has turned out.  I’m biracial,too, and  my husband is actually also tall with red hair, lol. I was excited to see them get together because I’d never seen a BRF member with someone similar to me. I was looking forward to seeing  them doing engagements, etc, together


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> As near as I can tell she has no obvious purpose unless it is representing herself as being a crutch to support Harry. From what I've heard about the JPMorgan event, she introduced Harry and went on about how much she loved him. That's it. Maybe she was able to stretch that sentiment out for a few minutes but it certainly would have been a weird speech to listen to.


See .. what really bugged me, is that .. IMO, the JP Morgan conference was just not the right place for Harry to talk about his mental health issues as they relate to the death of his Mother.  Should Mental Health be discussed? .. absolutely .. BUT, here's the thing .. do you think that the folks that truly may need 'help' (_the "worker-bee minions" who have to work massive hours, who get to miss precious time with their families, travel non-stop, etc._) are any of these attendees??? .. *HA, don't make me laugh*!!!   
People who attend these types of conferences aren't those that have to put those "new Investments/new Vehicles" into action; they are only those THAT TALK ABOUT IT .. oftentimes, they have ZERO CLUE as to what the "normal" workday is all about no less what the "worker-bee minions" actually do!! 

I say, yes .. indeed, talk about Mental Health and talk about what tools, help, etc. that a Company can provide to their employees .. but getting personal to the point of discussing the "why" (_in Harry's case - the death of his mother_), uh .. NO, because it is way beyond that as we all know there are many other reasons for one to be/get depressed.  

Okay .. so, what is my point?  To someone like me, who used to be in this business (_and yes - I was in the Alternative Investments biz_) and with talking to my former colleagues (_most still in the Alternatives biz_), we all agree that this really was no more than an attempt by H&M to get investors to pump in $$$ into their "Foundation".  So, then one begs the question .. why even have Meghan there? .. oh yeah, she had to '*ACT*' to show how much she loves her money (_oooops - I mean Harry_)!!!  *PUHLEEZE*!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> WHOOOA-WHEEEE .. I guess we aren't the only ones who have questioned her "true love" for Harry!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10927863/meghan-markle-faking-love-prince-harry-germaine-greer/
> 
> Her actions make it so questionable; keeping all those Hollywood contacts, lawyers, PR Agents, etc. -- unless, of course, Harry has known all along and wanted this with her????


interesting what germain greer said about what if Meghan was faking her love.  I hadn't really thought about it but that would get exhausting.  eventually her real feelings would surface.  could be heartbreaking for "H"


----------



## Aminamina

CeeJay said:


> See .. what really bugged me, is that .. IMO, the JP Morgan conference was just not the right place for Harry to talk about his mental health issues as they relate to the death of his Mother.  Should Mental Health be discussed? .. absolutely .. BUT, here's the thing .. do you think that the folks that truly may need 'help' (_the "worker-bee minions" who have to work massive hours, who get to miss precious time with their families, travel non-stop, etc._) are any of these attendees??? .. *HA, don't make me laugh*!!!
> People who attend these types of conferences aren't those that have to put those "new Investments/new Vehicles" into action; they are only those THAT TALK ABOUT IT .. oftentimes, they have ZERO CLUE as to what the "normal" workday is all about no less what the "worker-bee minions" actually do!!
> 
> I say, yes .. indeed, talk about Mental Health and talk about what tools, help, etc. that a Company can provide to their employees .. but getting personal to the point of discussing the "why" (_in Harry's case - the death of his mother_), uh .. NO, because it is way beyond that as we all know there are many other reasons for one to be/get depressed.
> 
> Okay .. so, what is my point?  To someone like me, who used to be in this business (_and yes - I was in the Alternative Investments biz_) and with talking to my former colleagues (_most still in the Alternatives biz_), we all agree that this really was no more than an attempt by H&M to get investors to pump in $$$ into their "Foundation".  So, then one begs the question .. why even have Meghan there? .. oh yeah, she had to '*ACT*' to show how much she loves her money (_oooops - I mean Harry_)!!!  *PUHLEEZE*!


I think at this point we should just sit back, relax and KEEP UP WITH the SUSSEXES.


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> WHOOOA-WHEEEE .. I guess we aren't the only ones who have questioned her "true love" for Harry!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10927863/meghan-markle-faking-love-prince-harry-germaine-greer/



Germaine Greer calls herself a "feminist" yet continuously takes cheap shots at various women with power. Germaine's husband left her for Maya Angelou...I wonder if that is the true origins of her dislike for Michelle ***** and now..Meghan? This lady has some unresolved issues.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> See .. what really bugged me, is that .. IMO, the JP Morgan conference was just not the right place for Harry to talk about his mental health issues as they relate to the death of his Mother.  Should Mental Health be discussed? .. absolutely .. BUT, here's the thing .. do you think that the folks that truly may need 'help' (_the "worker-bee minions" who have to work massive hours, who get to miss precious time with their families, travel non-stop, etc._) are any of these attendees??? .. *HA, don't make me laugh*!!!
> People who attend these types of conferences aren't those that have to put those "new Investments/new Vehicles" into action; they are only those THAT TALK ABOUT IT .. oftentimes, they have ZERO CLUE as to what the "normal" workday is all about no less what the "worker-bee minions" actually do!!
> 
> I say, yes .. indeed, talk about Mental Health and talk about what tools, help, etc. that a Company can provide to their employees .. but getting personal to the point of discussing the "why" (_in Harry's case - the death of his mother_), uh .. NO, because it is way beyond that as we all know there are many other reasons for one to be/get depressed.
> 
> Okay .. so, what is my point?  To someone like me, who used to be in this business (_and yes - I was in the Alternative Investments biz_) and with talking to my former colleagues (_most still in the Alternatives biz_), we all agree that this really was no more than an attempt by H&M to get investors to pump in $$$ into their "Foundation".  So, then one begs the question .. why even have Meghan there? .. oh yeah, she had to '*ACT*' to show how much she loves her money (_oooops - I mean Harry_)!!!  *PUHLEEZE*!



It makes you wonder what was the true purpose of the speech? Exposing his personal pain and vulnerability to a room full of strangers who came to a high-end event for the social atmosphere likely didn't make any impact on the audience at all. Maybe it's purpose was purely the voyeurism of seeing royalty and knowing he is every bit as f*cked up mentally as anyone else.


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> Germaine Greer calls herself a "feminist" yet continuously takes cheap shots at various women with power. Germaine's husband left her for Maya Angelou...I wonder if that is the true origins of her dislike for Michelle ***** and now..Meghan? This lady has some unresolved issues.


You really just said because her husband married a black woman that means she dislikes all black women, plus Meghan?

That’s not a reach at all.

Also being a feminist doesn’t mean you have to support all women. Especially ones who act like Meghan.


----------



## wisconsin

altigirl88 said:


> I must say, I’m very disappointed in how all this has turned out.  I’m biracial,too, and  my husband is actually also tall with red hair, lol. I was excited to see them get together because I’d never seen a BRF member with someone similar to me. I was looking forward to
> seeing  them doing engagements, etc, together




Exactly this!
As a person of color, what could have been inspirational went awry, at least that’s how I felt.


----------



## mdcx

So, what will Meghan’s next photo opportunity be and when?
I suspect she’s trying to get as slim as possible and will do some kind of “come back” photo shoot for People magazine etc. Either Harry has said no to pap strolls, or she is trying to drum up interest by going awol for a bit.


----------



## Jujuma

I (think) I remember reading on the cover of some grocery store tabloid (credibility issue) that the “love of Harry’s life” was that blonde from South Africa he was with for quite a long time. They had similar back grounds (wealth, schooling, etc) but when push came to shove she said no to marriage because she would not be happy living a “royal lifestyle”... if, big if because of source, this is true don’t you think he would of had a huge talk with Meghan about being a royal before getting engaged and married?? I think for anyone the first year of marriage can be a difficult transition. What did Meghan try for? Five minutes? I liked her on Suits, she must be a better actress than I thought because I don’t think she’s anything like her character. For her, and Harry, not to take Archie to see his great grandparents after being gone over the holidays for an extended period is disgusting. (Sorry if this was already discussed.)


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Germaine Greer calls herself a "feminist" yet continuously takes cheap shots at various women with power. Germaine's husband left her for Maya Angelou...I wonder if that is the true origins of her dislike for Michelle ***** and now..Meghan? This lady has some unresolved issues.


I didn't say I was a fan, but numerous publications have put this out there .. just sayin' ..


----------



## CeeJay

Aminamina said:


> I think at this point we should just sit back, relax and KEEP UP WITH the SUSSEXES.


I wish they would DO what they said and GO AWAY AND LIVE PRIVATELY!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mdcx said:


> So, what will Meghan’s next photo opportunity be and when?
> I suspect she’s trying to get as slim as possible and will do some kind of “come back” photo shoot for People magazine etc. Either Harry has said no to pap strolls, or she is trying to drum up interest by going awol for a bit.



You are being too kind, *mdcx*, assuming that Harry even knew that his new bride and Archie's "strolls" <along with the dogs, security guards, phone, broken baby carrier, etc> were indeed staged for the paps

Am inclined to believe that Harry is either/or: 1) totally naive 2) blindly in love 3) sub-par below average mentality (just to adhere to new US "woke" pc correctness, I am not shaming anyone's IQ here)

Also, narcissistic celebs, <yes, MM fits this definition perfectly but there are many celebs that are not> that are absent for any length of time are usually doing so bc: 1) it's time for a little nip-tuck between projects 2) drumming up public interest by going AWOL, as stated by *mdcx* 3) a very personal event has recently taken place - a birth, death, etc  4) they are on location working

Circling back around to Harry and this alt investments fiasco, have only one comment about it -
As much as I loved Princess Di back in the day, I have ZERO, ZILTCH, NADA, NON, NEIN interest in this subject now

It seems that the general shelf-life on the Princess Di conversation expired long before 2020, if judging by the general public's interest in Harry's speech
Furthermore,  he is such a big-deal that his D-list actress wife has to introduce him to speak to a bunch of bankers?
ie my DH was COO of a large regional FI, knows JD and would not recognize this clown couple if all of his money depended on it - just not happening

Am sure that there is already a media road map set and agreed upon by MM, H seems like he is probably out of the loop and out of step with time


----------



## Sharont2305

Jujuma said:


> I (think) I remember reading on the cover of some grocery store tabloid (credibility issue) that the “love of Harry’s life” was that blonde from South Africa he was with for quite a long time. They had similar back grounds (wealth, schooling, etc) but when push came to shove she said no to marriage because she would not be happy living a “royal lifestyle”... if, big if because of source, this is true don’t you think he would of had a huge talk with Meghan about being a royal before getting engaged and married?? I think for anyone the first year of marriage can be a difficult transition. What did Meghan try for? Five minutes? I liked her on Suits, she must be a better actress than I thought because I don’t think she’s anything like her character. For her, and Harry, not to take Archie to see his great grandparents after being gone over the holidays for an extended period is disgusting. (Sorry if this was already discussed.)


Yep, Chelsy Davy. She was around long enough, 7 years, to realise that the Royal life wasn't for her. I think he was the love of her life too. She's also friendly with Eugenie and Beatrice I believe so she's still within the circle as it were. 
I think she might end up being Harry's Camilla.


----------



## doni

hellosunshine said:


> Germaine Greer calls herself a "feminist" yet continuously takes cheap shots at various women with power. Germaine's husband left her for Maya Angelou...I wonder if that is the true origins of her dislike for Michelle ***** and now..Meghan? This lady has some unresolved issues.


Germaine Greer has more than gained the right to call herself a feminist and any woman who thinks herself a feminist is indebted to her work which has had enormous influence.
Maybe she is not a nice person or someone you would hang out with, but that’s beyond the point. The thing about Greer is that she is an old-school feminist who doesn’t believe the mere fact of being a woman is an excuse for any type of behavior. She is also not afraid of being un-pc, like when she talked about power charged sexual abuse long before it was trendy. She has opinions, she can express them. To suggest that the ethnicity of the person her husband got off with should forever deprive her from the right to talk about any woman sharing that ethnicity so as not to be perceived as jealous or resentful is just so _not_ feminist...

Back to topic. I find those rumors that they were asked to present the Oscars (best film no less!) so unbelievable... But if course, the Academy is not going to even acknowledge them so it is a safe rumor to spread. It does suggest PR people hard at work...


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, Chelsy Davy. She was around long enough, 7 years, to realise that the Royal life wasn't for her. I think he was the love of her life too. She's also friendly with Eugenie and Beatrice I believe so she's still within the circle as it were.
> I think she might end up being Harry's Camilla.


I do think in Meghan Harry thought he had found the anti-Chelsy and someone engaged and accomplished who would support him in his role. I mean, that’s all they talked about in their engagement interview. Wasn’t there this story about how in their first date they had bonded over their enthusiasm for the same philanthropic causes? (Meghan: I once went on TV and convinced P&G to withdraw a sexist commercial; Harry: I once went to a party dressed as a nazi... ups, not that one). They kept talking about how much they were looking forward to the job... Funny how things have turned up. Harry could have just quitted and moved to South Africa with Chelsy to spend his days playing rugby and polo, instead he is in Florida asking men in suits to pay him money to talk about his traumas...


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7994491/Prince-Harry-talks-banking-giant-Goldman-Sachs.html


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> It makes you wonder what was the true purpose of the speech? Exposing his personal pain and vulnerability to a room full of strangers who came to a high-end event for the social atmosphere likely didn't make any impact on the audience at all. Maybe it's purpose was purely the voyeurism of seeing royalty and knowing he is every bit as f*cked up mentally as anyone else.



I think it was just a case of being able to get and the kudos of having H as a speaker, his first engagement after 'disengagement', and what he was going to talk about was left to him.

I would have said that talking about "creating" The Invictus Games would be a better choice, but then I highly doubt he could talk about it because he probably just doodled on a pad in front of him at a few meetings before the first event, put his name on paper and came along for photo ops on the day.

It indicates he doesn't seem to have much currency in the business world beyond 'I am Prince Harry'. So long as it makes him money I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What would Goldman Sachs pay him 1 billion for, though? He has no expertise in finance or investment whatsoever.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What would Goldman Sachs pay him 1 billion for, though? He has no expertise in finance or investment whatsoever.



But he's 'Prince Harry' (and QEII isn't open to offers)

I think it's nonsense - but I also fear I'll be eating my words.


----------



## mdcx

I think the gist is he talks at their event, which then leads to other $$$$ jobs built on connections made there.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What would Goldman Sachs pay him 1 billion for, though? He has no expertise in finance or investment whatsoever.


Beats me, but I find this far more believable than the Oscars story. See here a Financial Times article about "The Rise of Celebrity Financial Endorsements". Apparently, an American TV celeb, Jojo Fletcher, who I had never heard off, is working for Goldmans.

https://www.ft.com/content/ca7005fb-e901-3600-9cfc-e464873fadcf


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What would Goldman Sachs pay him 1 billion for, though? He has no expertise in finance or investment whatsoever.


He’s probably the entertainment at the end of a heavy conference talking about making pots of money.  I expect it helps ensure people stick around to the end of the day.
Whether this is sustainable as a money earner for Harry in the long term is doubtful IMO.  I mean who wants to listen to him whining about his mother, or the sheer awfulness of being a pampered prince 20 years on from now?  And he doesn’t have anything else to offer as far as I can see. (And before anyone jumps on me, I lost a parent suddenly and unexpectedly when I was his age).


----------



## limom

Diana the musical is being advertised in the NYT, perhaps they will be making an appearance at the premier
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/theater/reviews/la-et-cm-diana-review-20190305-story.html
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/theater/reviews/la-et-cm-diana-review-20190305-story.html

It opens March 2nd in the Longacre Theater....


----------



## Clearblueskies

limom said:


> Diana the musical is being advertised in the NYT, perhaps they will be making an appearance at the premier
> https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/theater/reviews/la-et-cm-diana-review-20190305-story.html
> https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/theater/reviews/la-et-cm-diana-review-20190305-story.html
> 
> It opens March 2nd in the Longacre Theater....


Oh what?!  A musical ffs   They should let the poor woman rest in peace.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lol please. Even huge celebrities aren’t worth nearly a billion dollars. They need to stop.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m honestly going to be so annoyed if MM comes out a billionaire from this mess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Thought a lot about the speech about his mental health ..
H had done that topic for a while, opening up a bit more each time, and yes he still hurts , he has a mental health issue and is working it - with therapist  GOOD
He has previously spoken on the subject with other sufferers with needs, eg military with PTSD, showing he can relate to them, has similar issues and he is only human GOOD
Speaks of his mental health battles at conference of financial tycoons/ sharks - Type A people who will eat you for lunch if you show weakness, not a sympathetic audience to pour out your heart, all you want from that audience is for them to get out the checkbooks - Not the audience I would have chosen for admitting my flaws, SAD for him


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m honestly going to be so annoyed if MM comes out a billionaire from this mess.


If so, which I completely doubt, she'll be a billionaire who has completely abandoned everyone who ever cared about her. Not worth it, IMO.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> If so, which I completely doubt, she'll be a billionaire who has completely abandoned everyone who ever cared about her. Not worth it, IMO.


Billionaire is used casually nowadays....
Meagan might have the capability to launch a billion dollars brand.  However, that does not mean that she will be worth one billion.
Same with the Jenner girl, she became extremely wealthy thanks to PMK, but she still is not worth a billion.


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> I do think in Meghan Harry thought he had found the anti-Chelsy.
> 
> Funny how things have turned up. Harry could have just quitted and moved to South Africa with Chelsy to spend his days playing rugby and polo, instead he is in Florida asking men in suits to pay him money to talk about his traumas...



He did find the anti-Chelsy, just not in the way he thought. Chelsy wasn’t so narcissistic as to expect Harry should give it all up for her and go live wherever she wanted. Meghan was. The fact that it apparently never occurred to Harry  to leave his princely duties behind and go follow his true love before proves to me that Megxit was 100% Meghan’s idea.  Now that he finally has a family, he’s afraid to lose it and will do whatever it takes to keep it together.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, Chelsy Davy. She was around long enough, 7 years, to realise that the Royal life wasn't for her. I think he was the love of her life too. She's also friendly with Eugenie and Beatrice I believe so she's still within the circle as it were.
> I think she might end up being Harry's Camilla.



You have to wonder why stepping away from the BRF as Harry has done now was not an option when he was dating Chelsea? Or maybe he is pained by letting her go and wasn't going to lose a second chance at love and a life with someone so he agreed to bailing this time.

Harry strikes me as the type who may have a codependency in a relationship - looking to replace the mother figure (caring, loving, nurturing) that he lost when Diana died.


----------



## Julide

doni said:


> Beats me, but I find this far more believable than the Oscars story. See here a Financial Times article about "The Rise of Celebrity Financial Endorsements". Apparently, an American TV celeb, Jojo Fletcher, who I had never heard off, is working for Goldmans.
> 
> https://www.ft.com/content/ca7005fb-e901-3600-9cfc-e464873fadcf


The investment world has been using “props” to land clientele for years. I am surprised that celebrity were not used before...*runs back into hiding*


----------



## CeeJay

Julide said:


> The investment world has been using “props” to land clientele for years. I am surprised that celebrity were not used before...*runs back into hiding*


Oh, they have been .. and not just in that circle, also had "celebs" at Tech conferences, Management Consulting conferences, etc.  I 100% agree with what @Clearblueskies said; JPM likely had Harry at the end such that the attendees would stick around.  

However, all that .. to  now hear that apparently H&M were having discussions with other Banking/Financial Services organizations, uggh .. that pretty much firms it up for me .. that the plan all along has been to use this "celebrity" status to make their $$$ (_oh wait - but they were only giving up that measly 5%, what about the rest of the 95%_).   Now that I think about it, think about what Harry has said re: "_being the spare_"??  I think Meghan played into that aspect, and from what it seems, Harry didn't like playing 2nd fiddle to William and so now the plan is to 'attempt' to outshine them from a 'celebrity' perspective.  How pathetic .. I really think that QEII and Prince Charles need to take away those titles and let them truly be on their own (no paid-for security, no monies from the BRF, etc.) if that is what they want!


----------



## PewPew

LittleStar88 said:


> You have to wonder why stepping away from the BRF as Harry has done now was not an option when he was dating Chelsea?
> 
> 
> 
> Or maybe he is pained by letting her go and wasn't going to lose a second chance at love and a life with someone so he agreed to bailing this time.
> 
> Harry strikes me as the type who may have a codependency in a relationship - looking to replace the mother figure (caring, loving, nurturing) that he lost when Diana died.



He was very close to Will when he was dating Chelsy. I also think it was inconceivable to walk away when he was “the spare heir.” Not that Harry wanted to be King, but his “importance” within the family and monarchy declined when Will got married and had kids. Now Will is taking on more responsibility and has demonstrably more clout, the distance might have come naturally even without MM. Ironically Harry’s popularity soared during the years before he married as he was seen joking at events with Will & Kate, and took on more patronages and there stopped being so many party and social faux pas pics.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Oh, they have been .. and not just in that circle, also had "celebs" at Tech conferences, Management Consulting conferences, etc.  I 100% agree with what @Clearblueskies said; JPM likely had Harry at the end such that the attendees would stick around.
> 
> However, all that .. to  now hear that apparently H&M were having discussions with other Banking/Financial Services organizations, uggh .. that pretty much firms it up for me .. that the plan all along has been to use this "celebrity" status to make their $$$ (_oh wait - but they were only giving up that measly 5%, what about the rest of the 95%_).   Now that I think about it, think about what Harry has said re: "_being the spare_"??  I think Meghan played into that aspect, and from what it seems, Harry didn't like playing 2nd fiddle to William and so now the plan is to 'attempt' to outshine them from a 'celebrity' perspective.  How pathetic .. I really think that QEII and Prince Charles need to take away those titles and let them truly be on their own (no paid-for security, no monies from the BRF, etc.) if that is what they want!



But honestly though, the people they get to do these closing keynotes are often times not A-list. Unless you are Facebook, Google, etc. And those big companies can get bigger and better names for their keynotes than Harry and Meghan, and everyone else gets folks from the lower rungs of celebrity (usually closing keynotes happen after most people have left the event and gone home).


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> He was very close to Will when he was dating Chelsy. I also think it was inconceivable to walk away when he was “the spare heir.” Not that Harry wanted to be King, but his “importance” within the family and monarchy declined when Will got married and had kids. Now Will is taking on more responsibility and has demonstrably more clout, the distance might have come naturally even without MM. Ironically Harry’s popularity soared during the years before he married as he was seen joking at events with Will & Kate, and took on more patronages and there stopped being so many party and social faux pas pics.


So true, but something happened .. and it appears to have happened when MM came into the picture because all of a sudden, Harry seemed to be displeased with being the 2nd fiddle and wanted as much "attention" as Will & Kate .. or at least it appeared that way!  Personally, I don't get it .. one would think that NOT having to be the constant center of attention would better for someone who "supposedly" has issues with the Press!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

More info on the GS deal, it's unpaid. From E news.

"Prince Harry might have a new job lined up, following his departure as a senior royal from the British royal family.

It’s been reported that the 35-year-old old is in talks for an online interview series from Goldman Sachs.

CNBC is reporting that he’s “in discussions” to be featured as a guest speaker for the “Talks at GS” interview series, that is available on YouTube and as a podcast on Spotify.

“Harry is not yet confirmed. However, as a person familiar, I can tell you we have been in discussions,” a source told E! News about the new role.

This is an exciting new opportunity for Harry, however, he won’t be compensated for it. “*Goldman Sachs does not pay those that participate in Talks at GS*,” the source added."


----------



## limom

Who cares if he participates in those types of events?
He can talk to his heart’s content.....And work his way out of dependency from the crown and the British people...
You all should be happy that  he is finally earning a paycheck at 35. 
It is a win for the people.
Goldman Sachs might not be paying him(which I don’t believe) but they would be delighted to offer him a job as a managing director in order to get access to his Rolodex, j/s
He wouldn’t be the first nor the last incompetent banker, imho.


----------



## myown

wow this thread is still going strong. thought it would be dead by now


----------



## Tootsie17

myown said:


> wow this thread is still going strong. thought it would be dead by now


This is the first thread I check every day. The opinions expressed are so fascinating and funny!


----------



## marietouchet

ccbaggirl89 said:


> More info on the GS deal, it's unpaid. From E news.
> 
> "Prince Harry might have a new job lined up, following his departure as a senior royal from the British royal family.
> 
> It’s been reported that the 35-year-old old is in talks for an online interview series from Goldman Sachs.
> 
> CNBC is reporting that he’s “in discussions” to be featured as a guest speaker for the “Talks at GS” interview series, that is available on YouTube and as a podcast on Spotify.
> 
> “Harry is not yet confirmed. However, as a person familiar, I can tell you we have been in discussions,” a source told E! News about the new role.
> 
> This is an exciting new opportunity for Harry, however, he won’t be compensated for it. “*Goldman Sachs does not pay those that participate in Talks at GS*,” the source added."


Who knows the truth but GS reminded me of something ...
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/goldman-sachs-paid-hillary-675000-for-this/ 
The speech was 2013, and who knows if $675k was the speaking fee or included (or not) expenses, H travelled with a staff of about 10 people around that time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Goldman Sachs has a close relationship with Apple too; they manage the new Apple credit card.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I also saw that Jameela Jamil, who has defended MM a lot and was in her Vogue issue, was busted lying about a peanut allergy. This is why MM and H need to slow down and think about who they decide to cuddle up with. Birds of a feather I guess. 


*Jameela Jamil, 33, has come under fire for posting peanut butter snacks online, despite previously telling fans that she has a peanut allergy*
*She posted on her Instagram story peanut butter filled pretzel nuggets*
*The post sparked backlash among followers because she previously claimed she suffered from a peanut allergy and spoke about it in a 2016 interview*
*On Tuesday and Wednesday Jamil was accused by an online troll of making up accidents in her past and inventing health scares to gain attention *
*Critics accused her of suffering Munchhausen syndrome or fictitious disorder *
*She addressed claims Wednesday saying allergies 'cleared up' as she got older*


----------



## Emeline

marietouchet said:


> Who knows the truth but GS reminded me of something ...
> https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/goldman-sachs-paid-hillary-675000-for-this/
> The speech was 2013, and who knows if $675k was the speaking fee or included (or not) expenses, H travelled with a staff of about 10 people around that time


It's a  bit different situation with Hillary  because she  isn't financially supported by  the RF.
However PH decides to market himself, it's going to be tricky.  
Much of this "stepping back" decision really doesn't seem carefully planned.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That JJ story was wild.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> That JJ story was wild.


She sounds unhinged. Meghan needs to pick better allies.


----------



## Blyen

lanasyogamama said:


> That JJ story was wild.


She cray.
Too bad because I liked her in the good place.


----------



## imgg

Blyen said:


> She cray.
> Too bad because I liked her in the good place.


She is obsessed over the Kardashians.  She constantly posts about them, there is definitely something not right with this girl.  She is great on Good Place though....


----------



## Sharont2305

I've got my wires crossed here I think, isn't it Jamelia who's been "defending" MM and not Jameela??


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> I've got my wires crossed here I think, isn't it Jamelia who's been "defending" MM and not Jameela??


Yes, after Meghan picked her to feature in her Vogue article.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes, after Meghan picked her to feature in her Vogue article.


Ah, OK, Jamelia has been vocal about mm too.


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> Goldman Sachs has a close relationship with Apple too; they manage the new Apple credit card.


COOL, ALL THE SPEAKERS CAN GET FREE IPHONES LOL


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> I also saw that Jameela Jamil, who has defended MM a lot and was in her Vogue issue, was busted lying about a peanut allergy. This is why MM and H need to slow down and think about who they decide to cuddle up with. Birds of a feather I guess.
> 
> 
> *Jameela Jamil, 33, has come under fire for posting peanut butter snacks online, despite previously telling fans that she has a peanut allergy*
> *She posted on her Instagram story peanut butter filled pretzel nuggets*
> *The post sparked backlash among followers because she previously claimed she suffered from a peanut allergy and spoke about it in a 2016 interview*
> *On Tuesday and Wednesday Jamil was accused by an online troll of making up accidents in her past and inventing health scares to gain attention *
> *Critics accused her of suffering Munchhausen syndrome or fictitious disorder *
> *She addressed claims Wednesday saying allergies 'cleared up' as she got older*



She might have Munchausen syndrome but those people usually pretend to be sick, symptoms and all, to garner sympathy and attention. Jameela could just be a big liar who is so accustomed to lying she doesn't expect to be called out for it.


----------



## daisychainz

Emeline said:


> It's a  bit different situation with Hillary  because she  isn't financially supported by  the RF.
> However PH decides to market himself, it's going to be tricky.
> Much of this "stepping back" decision really doesn't seem carefully planned.


I agree. And I wonder how he'd ever get back into the royal family after a new life spent hobnobbing with companies and people that support specific political agendas. The royals are careful not to mix in politics but Harry is being paid now by companies with specific leanings, they are accepting favors (like housing and transportation) from people - it seems very messy. He would take those connections back with him when he and Meghan split. Everything they have done so far easily links back to an association with Oprah/*******/***** in some way. I don't see their new life as an improvement at all.


----------



## bag-mania

Speaking of being called out...

*It didn’t take long for Harry and Meghan to prove they are hypocrites*

Well, that was fast.

Just weeks after slamming the door on Buckingham Palace, declaring their suffering as wealthy, pampered, world-famous senior royals so unbearable that they must take their leave and flee to the Canadian woods in search of privacy, humility, a slower way of life, time to think about which noble eco-warrior causes to support (while flying private, of course) and to create normalcy for themselves and their baby, Harry and Meghan are out on the stroll, selling their goods and services — whatever those may be — to the highest bidder.

You’d think, for appearances’ sake, they would have held out a little longer. It’s not as if they’re suddenly destitute. Harry and Meghan are, after all, still on the royal payroll through at least May, after which Prince Charles has vowed to support them.

And since decamping Britain, they’ve been freeloading, staying indefinitely at a $14 million Vancouver mansion (a deal brokered by music producer David Foster) and at Serena Williams’ Palm Beach estate during a recent trip to Florida.

That trip, by the way, was to attend a summit hosted by JP Morgan Chase. Harry, a 35-year-old man who knows little of the real world, let alone macro- and micro-economics or likely how to work an ATM, spoke to an audience including former Prime Minister Tony Blair, Patriots owner Robert Kraft and architect Sir Norman Foster.

Neither side will say whether he was paid, though experts say it’s likely he was compensated substantially. And to speak of what exactly?

The grief he still suffers from his mother’s death 20 years ago.

To get this right: Harry, as he said in his last public statement as a working royal, had “no other option” given the “many years of challenges” he has faced, the result of losing his mother, his forced march behind her casket as a 12-year-old boy, and the ongoing mental health challenges from which he suffers.

“Every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash,” he said last year, “it takes me straight back.”

So, as he said in his farewell speech, he was forced to “step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life.”

But for the right price, he’ll dredge up all that deeply personal emotional chaos, held sacred for decades, to a room full of global powerbrokers — despite zero chance any of it will elucidate or ameliorate a single real-world problem.

To cap off this inaugural foray into life as working commoners, Harry and Meghan reportedly had dinner with two of the most philanthropic and publicity-shy people on the planet, Jennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez.

Now they’re reportedly house-hunting in LA and New York City — exactly where celebrities seeking seclusion go — and have been in talks with Goldman Sachs since at least November, months before announcing their plans to “step back.”

It’s been estimated that such vague partnerships could net the couple a billion-dollar empire. Clearly, the only difference between life inside and outside palace walls is a profit margin.

The argument that they can do so much more now for their dearest causes, freed from palace restraints, is nothing but a cynical fiction.

Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, did more to change public attitudes towards AIDS patients as a working royal than anyone, and it was precisely because she was doing things no royal had ever done — handhold and hug and kiss those dying from the disease — that her activism had such enormous impact.

And when Diana did something else a future queen of England had never done — get a divorce — she didn’t commodify her brand or sell her secrets. She recognized her platform as inherently rare and valuable, made more so by her refusal to monetize it.

SussexRoyal?! Diana would never.

Contrast his mother’s approach with the recent video, since taken down, of Harry cornering Disney chief Bob Iger at a private event, begging him to hire Meghan for voiceover work while Beyoncé looks on, mortified.

When, as a royal, you literally put yourself in supplication to a titan of capitalism, you have shown no scruples, no self-awareness, no shame. Now you’re just another hustler out to make a buck, and there’s nothing special about that.

https://nypost.com/2020/02/12/it-didnt-take-long-for-harry-and-meghan-to-prove-they-are-hypocrites/


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of being called out...
> 
> *It didn’t take long for Harry and Meghan to prove they are hypocrites*
> 
> Well, that was fast.
> 
> Just weeks after slamming the door on Buckingham Palace, declaring their suffering as wealthy, pampered, world-famous senior royals so unbearable that they must take their leave and flee to the Canadian woods in search of privacy, humility, a slower way of life, time to think about which noble eco-warrior causes to support (while flying private, of course) and to create normalcy for themselves and their baby, Harry and Meghan are out on the stroll, selling their goods and services — whatever those may be — to the highest bidder.
> 
> You’d think, for appearances’ sake, they would have held out a little longer. It’s not as if they’re suddenly destitute. Harry and Meghan are, after all, still on the royal payroll through at least May, after which Prince Charles has vowed to support them.
> 
> And since decamping Britain, they’ve been freeloading, staying indefinitely at a $14 million Vancouver mansion (a deal brokered by music producer David Foster) and at Serena Williams’ Palm Beach estate during a recent trip to Florida.
> 
> That trip, by the way, was to attend a summit hosted by JP Morgan Chase. Harry, a 35-year-old man who knows little of the real world, let alone macro- and micro-economics or likely how to work an ATM, spoke to an audience including former Prime Minister Tony Blair, Patriots owner Robert Kraft and architect Sir Norman Foster.
> 
> Neither side will say whether he was paid, though experts say it’s likely he was compensated substantially. And to speak of what exactly?
> 
> The grief he still suffers from his mother’s death 20 years ago.
> 
> To get this right: Harry, as he said in his last public statement as a working royal, had “no other option” given the “many years of challenges” he has faced, the result of losing his mother, his forced march behind her casket as a 12-year-old boy, and the ongoing mental health challenges from which he suffers.
> 
> “Every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash,” he said last year, “it takes me straight back.”
> 
> So, as he said in his farewell speech, he was forced to “step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life.”
> 
> But for the right price, he’ll dredge up all that deeply personal emotional chaos, held sacred for decades, to a room full of global powerbrokers — despite zero chance any of it will elucidate or ameliorate a single real-world problem.
> 
> To cap off this inaugural foray into life as working commoners, Harry and Meghan reportedly had dinner with two of the most philanthropic and publicity-shy people on the planet, Jennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez.
> 
> Now they’re reportedly house-hunting in LA and New York City — exactly where celebrities seeking seclusion go — and have been in talks with Goldman Sachs since at least November, months before announcing their plans to “step back.”
> 
> It’s been estimated that such vague partnerships could net the couple a billion-dollar empire. Clearly, the only difference between life inside and outside palace walls is a profit margin.
> 
> The argument that they can do so much more now for their dearest causes, freed from palace restraints, is nothing but a cynical fiction.
> 
> Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, did more to change public attitudes towards AIDS patients as a working royal than anyone, and it was precisely because she was doing things no royal had ever done — handhold and hug and kiss those dying from the disease — that her activism had such enormous impact.
> 
> And when Diana did something else a future queen of England had never done — get a divorce — she didn’t commodify her brand or sell her secrets. She recognized her platform as inherently rare and valuable, made more so by her refusal to monetize it.
> 
> SussexRoyal?! Diana would never.
> 
> Contrast his mother’s approach with the recent video, since taken down, of Harry cornering Disney chief Bob Iger at a private event, begging him to hire Meghan for voiceover work while Beyoncé looks on, mortified.
> 
> When, as a royal, you literally put yourself in supplication to a titan of capitalism, you have shown no scruples, no self-awareness, no shame. Now you’re just another hustler out to make a buck, and there’s nothing special about that.
> 
> https://nypost.com/2020/02/12/it-didnt-take-long-for-harry-and-meghan-to-prove-they-are-hypocrites/



Harry will just do the Debbie Downer 2020 tour? And MM can do the Wokeness tour 2020. 

I am sure the only takeaway from his speaking session at GS is "ooohhhh, Prince Harry came and spoke". Not what it was about but that it was Prince Harry. 

They are a bright, shiny object right now but soon people will tire of them and reach for the new bright, shiny object that will eventually come along.

Good luck to them both.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> Goldman Sachs has a close relationship with Apple too; they manage the new Apple credit card.


Yep, all roads lead back to Apple....
how soon are they going to flash their I-phone 11?


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of being called out...
> 
> *It didn’t take long for Harry and Meghan to prove they are hypocrites*
> 
> Well, that was fast.
> 
> Just weeks after slamming the door on Buckingham Palace, declaring their suffering as wealthy, pampered, world-famous senior royals so unbearable that they must take their leave and flee to the Canadian woods in search of privacy, humility, a slower way of life, time to think about which noble eco-warrior causes to support (while flying private, of course) and to create normalcy for themselves and their baby, Harry and Meghan are out on the stroll, selling their goods and services — whatever those may be — to the highest bidder.
> 
> You’d think, for appearances’ sake, they would have held out a little longer. It’s not as if they’re suddenly destitute. Harry and Meghan are, after all, still on the royal payroll through at least May, after which Prince Charles has vowed to support them.
> 
> And since decamping Britain, they’ve been freeloading, staying indefinitely at a $14 million Vancouver mansion (a deal brokered by music producer David Foster) and at Serena Williams’ Palm Beach estate during a recent trip to Florida.
> 
> That trip, by the way, was to attend a summit hosted by JP Morgan Chase. Harry, a 35-year-old man who knows little of the real world, let alone macro- and micro-economics or likely how to work an ATM, spoke to an audience including former Prime Minister Tony Blair, Patriots owner Robert Kraft and architect Sir Norman Foster.
> 
> Neither side will say whether he was paid, though experts say it’s likely he was compensated substantially. And to speak of what exactly?
> 
> The grief he still suffers from his mother’s death 20 years ago.
> 
> To get this right: Harry, as he said in his last public statement as a working royal, had “no other option” given the “many years of challenges” he has faced, the result of losing his mother, his forced march behind her casket as a 12-year-old boy, and the ongoing mental health challenges from which he suffers.
> 
> “Every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash,” he said last year, “it takes me straight back.”
> 
> So, as he said in his farewell speech, he was forced to “step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life.”
> 
> But for the right price, he’ll dredge up all that deeply personal emotional chaos, held sacred for decades, to a room full of global powerbrokers — despite zero chance any of it will elucidate or ameliorate a single real-world problem.
> 
> To cap off this inaugural foray into life as working commoners, Harry and Meghan reportedly had dinner with two of the most philanthropic and publicity-shy people on the planet, Jennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez.
> 
> Now they’re reportedly house-hunting in LA and New York City — exactly where celebrities seeking seclusion go — and have been in talks with Goldman Sachs since at least November, months before announcing their plans to “step back.”
> 
> It’s been estimated that such vague partnerships could net the couple a billion-dollar empire. Clearly, the only difference between life inside and outside palace walls is a profit margin.
> 
> The argument that they can do so much more now for their dearest causes, freed from palace restraints, is nothing but a cynical fiction.
> 
> Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, did more to change public attitudes towards AIDS patients as a working royal than anyone, and it was precisely because she was doing things no royal had ever done — handhold and hug and kiss those dying from the disease — that her activism had such enormous impact.
> 
> And when Diana did something else a future queen of England had never done — get a divorce — she didn’t commodify her brand or sell her secrets. She recognized her platform as inherently rare and valuable, made more so by her refusal to monetize it.
> 
> SussexRoyal?! Diana would never.
> 
> Contrast his mother’s approach with the recent video, since taken down, of Harry cornering Disney chief Bob Iger at a private event, begging him to hire Meghan for voiceover work while Beyoncé looks on, mortified.
> 
> When, as a royal, you literally put yourself in supplication to a titan of capitalism, you have shown no scruples, no self-awareness, no shame. Now you’re just another hustler out to make a buck, and there’s nothing special about that.
> 
> https://nypost.com/2020/02/12/it-didnt-take-long-for-harry-and-meghan-to-prove-they-are-hypocrites/


Great article.


----------



## mia55

Lol they’re losing American love too. I thought MM was supposed to be the smartest woman ever born


----------



## TC1

First of all LOL'd at the "probably doesn't know how to use and an ATM"
Second..."every time I hear a click or see a flash, it takes me back" Uhh...you weren't being chased by the paps daily..your mom was. Something your new wife should realize every time she calls them.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> First of all LOL'd at the "probably doesn't know how to use and an ATM"
> Second..."every time I hear a click or see a flash, it takes me back" Uhh...you weren't being chased by the paps daily..your mom was. Something your new wife should realize every time she calls them.


and I thought the problem with "M" was the (racist) way she was treated by the media, not stalking


----------



## kemilia

imgg said:


> She is obsessed over the Kardashians.  She constantly posts about them, there is definitely something not right with this girl.  She is great on Good Place though....


Now that I know her info, I feel she was good on The Good Place because she was just playing herself, no acting necessary!


----------



## jcnc

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of being called out...
> 
> *It didn’t take long for Harry and Meghan to prove they are hypocrites*
> 
> Well, that was fast.
> 
> Just weeks after slamming the door on Buckingham Palace, declaring their suffering as wealthy, pampered, world-famous senior royals so unbearable that they must take their leave and flee to the Canadian woods in search of privacy, humility, a slower way of life, time to think about which noble eco-warrior causes to support (while flying private, of course) and to create normalcy for themselves and their baby, Harry and Meghan are out on the stroll, selling their goods and services — whatever those may be — to the highest bidder.
> 
> You’d think, for appearances’ sake, they would have held out a little longer. It’s not as if they’re suddenly destitute. Harry and Meghan are, after all, still on the royal payroll through at least May, after which Prince Charles has vowed to support them.
> 
> And since decamping Britain, they’ve been freeloading, staying indefinitely at a $14 million Vancouver mansion (a deal brokered by music producer David Foster) and at Serena Williams’ Palm Beach estate during a recent trip to Florida.
> 
> That trip, by the way, was to attend a summit hosted by JP Morgan Chase. Harry, a 35-year-old man who knows little of the real world, let alone macro- and micro-economics or likely how to work an ATM, spoke to an audience including former Prime Minister Tony Blair, Patriots owner Robert Kraft and architect Sir Norman Foster.
> 
> Neither side will say whether he was paid, though experts say it’s likely he was compensated substantially. And to speak of what exactly?
> 
> The grief he still suffers from his mother’s death 20 years ago.
> 
> To get this right: Harry, as he said in his last public statement as a working royal, had “no other option” given the “many years of challenges” he has faced, the result of losing his mother, his forced march behind her casket as a 12-year-old boy, and the ongoing mental health challenges from which he suffers.
> 
> “Every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash,” he said last year, “it takes me straight back.”
> 
> So, as he said in his farewell speech, he was forced to “step my family back from all I have ever known, to take a step forward into what I hope can be a more peaceful life.”
> 
> But for the right price, he’ll dredge up all that deeply personal emotional chaos, held sacred for decades, to a room full of global powerbrokers — despite zero chance any of it will elucidate or ameliorate a single real-world problem.
> 
> To cap off this inaugural foray into life as working commoners, Harry and Meghan reportedly had dinner with two of the most philanthropic and publicity-shy people on the planet, Jennifer Lopez and Alex Rodriguez.
> 
> Now they’re reportedly house-hunting in LA and New York City — exactly where celebrities seeking seclusion go — and have been in talks with Goldman Sachs since at least November, months before announcing their plans to “step back.”
> 
> It’s been estimated that such vague partnerships could net the couple a billion-dollar empire. Clearly, the only difference between life inside and outside palace walls is a profit margin.
> 
> The argument that they can do so much more now for their dearest causes, freed from palace restraints, is nothing but a cynical fiction.
> 
> Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, did more to change public attitudes towards AIDS patients as a working royal than anyone, and it was precisely because she was doing things no royal had ever done — handhold and hug and kiss those dying from the disease — that her activism had such enormous impact.
> 
> And when Diana did something else a future queen of England had never done — get a divorce — she didn’t commodify her brand or sell her secrets. She recognized her platform as inherently rare and valuable, made more so by her refusal to monetize it.
> 
> SussexRoyal?! Diana would never.
> 
> Contrast his mother’s approach with the recent video, since taken down, of Harry cornering Disney chief Bob Iger at a private event, begging him to hire Meghan for voiceover work while Beyoncé looks on, mortified.
> 
> When, as a royal, you literally put yourself in supplication to a titan of capitalism, you have shown no scruples, no self-awareness, no shame. Now you’re just another hustler out to make a buck, and there’s nothing special about that.
> 
> https://nypost.com/2020/02/12/it-didnt-take-long-for-harry-and-meghan-to-prove-they-are-hypocrites/


I am (pleasantly) surprised to see such an article by a US agency. Looks like even the American Media is done with the honeymoon phase for H&M


----------



## Mrs.Z

Well they can always do a cabaret show like another person who felt the need to use her title despite living in the US where we do not use titles


----------



## bag-mania

jcnc said:


> I am (pleasantly) surprised to see such an article by a US agency. Looks like even the American Media is done with the honeymoon phase for H&M



It's a start. The NY Post is considered a tabloid and this article was an opinion piece. It may take a while longer for the mainstream to outright criticize H&M. The media here has been so full of themselves by extolling their narrative of racism and "Harry and Meghan escaping the evils of being royal" they will be reluctant to give that up.


----------



## Chagall

LittleStar88 said:


> Harry will just do the Debbie Downer 2020 tour? And MM can do the Wokeness tour 2020.
> 
> I am sure the only takeaway from his speaking session at GS is "ooohhhh, Prince Harry came and spoke". Not what it was about but that it was Prince Harry.
> 
> They are a bright, shiny object right now but soon people will tire of them and reach for the new bright, shiny object that will eventually come along.
> 
> Good luck to them both.


I have already tired of them.


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Who cares if he participates in those types of events?
> He can talk to his heart’s content.....And work his way out of dependency from the crown and the British people...
> You all should be happy that  he is finally earning a paycheck at 35.
> It is a win for the people.
> Goldman Sachs might not be paying him(which I don’t believe) but they would be delighted to offer him a job as a managing director in order to get access to his Rolodex, j/s
> *He wouldn’t be the first nor the last incompetent banker*, imho.


*HA HA HA* @limom .. you made my day with that because I would say that a *GOOD PORTION* of those in that business are only there because *nepotism is rife* .. but, they seem to be very good at finding others (_sadly - usually a woman_) to do their job for them. 

Yeah, he won't get paid for this .. BUT, you better believe that it's all about (_again_) getting investors to fund/invest in whatever H&M come up with re: "foundations".  Honestly, this kind of pisses me off, thinking about how hard I worked (_80-hour work-week was the norm_) and how crappy we were treated .. yet, we were the folks that kept the business running!


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Well they can always do a cabaret show like another person who felt the need to use her title despite living in the US where we do not use titles


HA HA HA HA .. and to think this "Countess" is from the very same SMALL town in Connecticut that I'm from, it's HILARIOUS beyond belief and a great topic of conversation when my friends and I get together!!!


----------



## Megs

I missed this thread yesterday, Vlad is out of town and of course our kids were next level yesterday... but not nearly as next level as Jameela Jamil... just caught up on that! 

And that op piece while an opinion, is precisely how I feel. I guess as I've gotten older I've become far more annoyed at people crying 'poor me' while having asolutely nothing wrong. I know it's all relative, but man, it rubs me the wrong way - and put that on the world stage and you have Harry and Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> I missed this thread yesterday, Vlad is out of town and of course our kids were next level yesterday... but not nearly as next level as Jameela Jamil... just caught up on that!
> 
> And that op piece while an opinion, is precisely how I feel. I guess as I've gotten older I've become *far more annoyed at people crying 'poor me' while having asolutely nothing wrong*. I know it's all relative, but man, it rubs me the wrong way - and put that on the world stage and you have Harry and Meghan.



That is what gets me too. Harry and Meghan have the luxury of doing whatever they like, going anywhere they want, and they want for nothing. They are better off than all but the tiniest percentage of the people in the world. And they want us to feel sorry for them?


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> I missed this thread yesterday, Vlad is out of town and of course our kids were next level yesterday... but not nearly as next level as Jameela Jamil... just caught up on that!
> 
> And that op piece while an opinion, is precisely how I feel. I guess as I've gotten older I've become far more annoyed at people crying 'poor me' while having asolutely nothing wrong. I know it's all relative, but man, it rubs me the wrong way - and put that on the world stage and you have Harry and Meghan.


@Megs .. trust me, you are not the only one that feels that way; it annoys the ever-living sh#t out of me, especially since I used to work in the Financial Services sector and busted my a@@ in that business .. so this "woe is me" really grates on my last nerve!  Corporate America gets worse every year; the male executives make all the $$$ (_and yes - I was one of the very few women at that level but somehow I never got the $$$ that the men did .. and now, guess how many of the women at that level are left - YUP, ZERO_!), and the 'worker-bees' get screwed over more & more every year.  Having just talked to some of my former colleagues, and to hear that some of them have now had to take on 2nd jobs just to afford their wickedly-expensive Health "insurance", is just unbelievable to me.  When you work/live in NYC or Boston, trust me .. it's not cheap one bit, so to hear these two .. living in a $14m+ "mansion"??? .. ARRGGHH!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Mrs.Z said:


> Well they can always do a cabaret show like another person who felt the need to use her title despite living in the US where we do not use titles


 OMG is this Countess Luann from Real Housewives? Her song sends me into a fit of giggles every time I hear it (and for some reason her song reminds me of the Tan Mom song).


----------



## limom

While he very much suffered as a child and deserves some compassion in that regard, he is now a grown ass man who has a family of his own.
Grow a pair, take thee to therapy and for the love of the damn Union Jack, stop whining.
Between him and another subject who shall remain nameless, I am sick and tired of privileged men crying victims.
Basta.


----------



## Mrs.Z

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG is this Countess Luann from Real Housewives? Her song sends me into a fit of giggles every time I hear it (and for some reason her song reminds me of the Tan Mom song).


Yes!


----------



## Sharont2305

And..... here she is.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG is this Countess Luann from Real Housewives? Her song sends me into a fit of giggles every time I hear it (and for some reason her song reminds me of the Tan Mom song).


YUP .. right???  Like I said above, she is from the same town that I am from in Connecticut, so this whole "Countess" BS is just that .. BS!!!  When she is on RHoNY and with her antics, my friends and I are in fits of giggles and eye-rolling; trust me .. she is NO Countess!!!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Why are they sharing this now ?


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> And..... here she is.



He has to keep bringing this up because Vogue is not selling like it use to!  Enough .. !!!


----------



## Aminamina

Sharont2305 said:


> And..... here she is.



I cringe...WHY was all that so over-the-edge...needed? Who needed all that BS...her involvment, his high-pitched excitemenet over her "neverbeforeneededinvolment"(ha)


----------



## LittleStar88

Mrs.Z said:


> Why are they sharing this now ?



Notice meeeeeeeeeeeeeee! I am still heeeeeeere! 

I like that they have to recycle old stuff since nothing they are doing now (Debbie Downer tour, pap strolls in the forest, suckling dad's financial teat) has any relevance or substance.


----------



## Tivo

It’s always all about her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Not a single cent to charity for that issue. Just as a reminder.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> And..... here she is.



How sickly, and not at all scripted of course


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> And..... here she is.



Gosh, their admin has been hard at work deleting comments on that post! Not a negative comment to found!


----------



## cafecreme15

Mrs.Z said:


> Well they can always do a cabaret show like another person who felt the need to use her title despite living in the US where we do not use titles


Gosh this photo is so retouched I barely recognized Luann!

Also after her disastrous and embarrassing short lived second marriage, she is no longer a countess.


----------



## CeeJay

.. and more DM articles, talking about how 'impulsive' Harry is and then .. H&M's "supposed" discussion with Stanford to 'brainstorm' re: their charities .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-personally-Prince-William-level-headed.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...anford-University-brainstorming-sessions.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

cafecreme15 said:


> Gosh this photo is so retouched I barely recognized Luann!
> 
> Also after her disastrous and embarrassing short lived second marriage, she is no longer a countess.


CORRECT, and can't remember where I read it, but her ex-husband (the Count) told her that she was an embarrassment and to STOP using the "Countess" title!


----------



## cafecreme15

CeeJay said:


> CORRECT, and can't remember where I read it, but her ex-husband (the Count) told her that she was an embarrassment and to STOP using the "Countess" title!


Should Harry and Meghan's marriage ever go south, I could imagine Meghan behaving similarly in that she would milk that Duchess title for as much as it's worth. I don't think she'd stoop quite to the cabaret levels, but after watching Fergie, who really knows.


----------



## limom

Prince Harry is a Virgo which is a super emotional sign who wants to be the hero...
Prince William, on the other hand is a cancer. They are family oriented and hold grudges forever.
Meaghan being a Leo is not compatible with either, imho. They need to dominate and be admired at all times.
We have one of those in my family, she is freaking unbearable.
Signed. Madame Soleil.


----------



## cafecreme15

limom said:


> Prince Harry is a Virgo which is a super emotional sign who wants to be the hero...
> Prince William, on the other hand is a cancer. They are family oriented and hold grudges forever.
> Meaghan being a Leo is not compatible with either, imho. They need to dominate and be admired at all times.
> We have one of those in my family, she is freaking unbearable.
> Signed. Madame Soleil.


Funny, everything I've always read about Virgos (I am one too) has said that lead traits are hyper logical and rational, always like to be right and be in control, super organized and diligent, etc. Not that I believe in astrology, but these traits do not sound like Harry at all!


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG is this Countess Luann from Real Housewives? Her song sends me into a fit of giggles every time I hear it (and for some reason her song reminds me of the Tan Mom song).


I couldn't believe it was LuAnn either! And how apropos--"money can't buy you claa-aass". But they're trying, both of them.
And love Tan Mom--another trainwreck that totally believes in herself.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> Gosh, their admin has been hard at work deleting comments on that post! Not a negative comment to found!


I looked at the comments also and whoa, they were so positive it was not normal.....”Meghan my Queen”, people said they cried over the issue, people saying it changed their life.....ummmm, really?


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Why are they sharing this now ?


Because he is one step away from losing his job and she is dying of withdrawal and can't stand not having a picture out there and being noticed.  Plus when the NY papers are calling you hypocrites, you have to come back with something that is considered a positive.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> Because he is one step away from losing his job and she is dying of withdrawal and can't stand not having a picture out there and being noticed.  Plus when the NY papers are calling you hypocrites, you have to come back with something that is considered a positive.



dying of withdrawal


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Prince Harry is a Virgo which is a super emotional sign who wants to be the hero...
> Prince William, on the other hand is a cancer. They are family oriented and hold grudges forever.
> Meaghan being a Leo is not compatible with either, imho. They need to dominate and be admired at all times.
> We have one of those in my family, she is freaking unbearable.
> Signed. Madame Soleil.


Too funny ... I am a Virgo, sis is Leo and mom is Cancer , and yes relations are hard , you explained my entire life to me YES, astrology rocks


----------



## ccbaggirl89

They're in California y'all... (from the lovely TMZ)

"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are continuing their public engagements ever since announcing that they’ll be stepping back from their royal duties.

The couple visited Stanford University on Tuesday (February 11) to attend “a brainstorming session over several hours with professors and academics,” according to a palace source to TODAY.

The meeting was to help them establish a new charity organization following their move to Canada.

Harry and Meghan flew commercial from Canada, and were personally greeted by the university’s president, Marc Tessier-Lavigne."


----------



## hermes_lemming

Sharont2305 said:


> And..... here she is.



This the most pretentious piece of crap I've ever seen in quite some time.  Good gawd


----------



## tiktok

ccbaggirl89 said:


> They're in California y'all... (from the lovely TMZ)
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are continuing their public engagements ever since announcing that they’ll be stepping back from their royal duties.
> 
> The couple visited Stanford University on Tuesday (February 11) to attend “a brainstorming session over several hours with professors and academics,” according to a palace source to TODAY.
> 
> The meeting was to help them establish a new charity organization following their move to Canada.
> 
> Harry and Meghan flew commercial from Canada, and were personally greeted by the university’s president, Marc Tessier-Lavigne."



Gotta love the fact that the two environmentalists flew private so often that they need to highlight the fact that they flew commercial for once (on the arduous two hour flight from Vancouver to SF).


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

limom said:


> Prince Harry is a Virgo which is a super emotional sign who wants to be the hero...
> Prince William, on the other hand is a cancer. They are family oriented and hold grudges forever.
> Meaghan being a Leo is not compatible with either, imho. They need to dominate and be admired at all times.
> We have one of those in my family, she is freaking unbearable.
> Signed. Madame Soleil.





cafecreme15 said:


> Funny, everything I've always read about Virgos (I am one too) has said that lead traits are hyper logical and rational, always like to be right and be in control, super organized and diligent, etc. Not that I believe in astrology, but these traits do not sound like Harry at all!





marietouchet said:


> Too funny ... I am a Virgo, sis is Leo and mom is Cancer , and yes relations are hard , you explained my entire life to me YES, astrology rocks



So funny about astro, Wills, Harry & MM 
Have one of each signs in my immediate family plus a loving lil'scorpio
If I believed in the stars would say that emotional Vigo Harry is going to find domineering Leo MM a dead weight before much time goes by and will flee from their drama
just knows what goes on in my family


----------



## ccbaggirl89

tiktok said:


> Gotta love the fact that the two environmentalists flew private so often that they need to highlight the fact that they flew commercial for once (on the arduous two hour flight from Vancouver to SF).


If it was commercial we need the pics as proof. Surely someone saw them??


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If it was *commercial* we need the pics as proof. Surely someone saw them??



The days of my believing EVERYTHING that I read/hear are long over
Bottom line?
Do NOT believe that they flew COMMERCIAL, NO WAY!
Will have to see firm proof of that fact to change my mind


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> I looked at the comments also and whoa, they were so positive it was not normal.....”Meghan my Queen”, people said they cried over the issue, people saying it changed their life.....ummmm, really?


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Prince Harry is a Virgo which is a super emotional sign who wants to be the hero...
> Prince William, on the other hand is a cancer. They are family oriented and hold grudges forever.
> Meaghan being a Leo is not compatible with either, imho. They need to dominate and be admired at all times.
> We have one of those in my family, she is freaking unbearable.
> Signed. Madame Soleil.


OMG .. did not know that about Leo's, but that was 100% both of my parents (their birthdays were 1 week apart)!


----------



## mshermes

marietouchet said:


> Too funny ... I am a Virgo, sis is Leo and mom is Cancer , and yes relations are hard , you explained my entire life to me YES, astrology rocks


I am a Virgo as well and every Leo I have ever met has never passed a mirror that they didn't look and admire themselves ad nauseam.


----------



## Frivole88

*Megxit bloodbath: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry AXE all 15 of their UK staff in surest sign yet they will never return to Britain to live - as shocked Palace sources 'say it's a difficult time for very loyal team'*

*Couple closing their office in Buckingham Palace with the loss of all 15 jobs*
*Among royal aides leaving are Marnie Gaffney, David Watkins & Julie Burley  *
*The royal household will reabsorb some of them but others will face severance *
By REBECCA ENGLISH, ROYAL EDITOR and RICHARD KAY EDITOR AT LARGE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 17:04 EST, 13 February 2020 | UPDATED: 18:29 EST, 13 February 2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8001857/Shock-Harry-Meghan-axe-15-UK-staff.html

Harry and Meghan are axing 15 staff and closing their Buckingham Palace office.
It is the surest sign yet that the couple and their son Archie are unlikely ever to return to the UK to live.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex broke the news to their team in person in January following the announcement that they were stepping down as senior working royals.
While one or two may be absorbed back into the royal household, most are now negotiating redundancy packages.
They are the latest casualties of Harry and Meghan's bombshell decision to move to North America and make their fortunes outside the Royal Family.
Last night Buckingham Palace said it did not comment on staffing matters but it is understood senior royals, including the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are aware of the office closure and redundancies.

A source told the Mail: 'Given their decision to step back, an office at Buckingham Palace is no longer needed. While the details are still being finalised and efforts are being made to redeploy people within the royal household, unfortunately there will be some redundancies.'

Among those to lose their jobs are the couple's newly appointed private secretary, Fiona Mcilwham – although she is on secondment from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and is likely to be found in a role in Whitehall – and their hugely experienced communications chief Sara Latham.
Harry's long-standing programme co-ordinator Clara Loughran, who was so well regarded by the prince that she was asked to hand Meghan her bouquet in church on her wedding day, will go.

As well as Miss Latham – who previously worked for the Obamas and was Hillary *******'s senior campaign adviser – her deputy, assistant communications secretary Marnie Gaffney, is understood to be leaving.

A much-loved and long-serving member of Buckingham Palace press staff, she played a major role in supporting Harry on his military work and organised his and Meghan's hugely successful official tours to Australia and Africa,
The Queen made her a member of the Royal Victorian Order because of her devoted service.
The other press officer to lose her job is Julie Burley, who worked for Harry, William and Kate on their successful mental health campaign Heads Together.

The assistant communications secretary was headed-hunted by Harry and Meghan and led the press team on his Invictus Games. She has also managed the media side of many of the couple's domestic engagements and patronages.

David Watkins, poached from fashion house Burberry in August as the couple's social media expert, is also out.
The source insisted that while 'Megxit' had come as a complete shock to the team, most accept their fate. 'The Duke and Duchess have a small team, less than 15 people. The team are very loyal to the Sussexes and understand and respect the decision they have taken,' the source said.

'They are all close and supporting each other. The team are busy helping to set their Royal Highnesses up for the future and working on a series of final engagements.'

It is understood that this includes the Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall on March 7, which will be Harry's last engagement as Captain-General of the Royal Marines. He and Meghan are also expected to attend the Commonwealth Day service on March 9.
One or two other engagements are being scheduled before the couple return to Canada to embark on their new life. When they announced their decision to step back in early January, Harry and Meghan insisted they would be splitting their time between the UK and North America. But this latest move suggests that any trips back to the UK will be limited. One source said: 'I do think they will be back a little bit. They genuinely do plan to keep their patronages and maintain that work in the UK.'
Some of the outgoing staff started working with Harry long before his marriage to Meghan.

One royal source told the Mail: 'I don't think it will comes as surprise to anyone that these have been incredibly trying circumstances for their team, who have experienced some very difficult times of late. They are all good people, very loyal and brilliant at their jobs, and everyone feels incredibly sorry for them.'

Another insider made clear that the couple's decision to hire a team of US-based agents and publicists, many of whom worked for Meghan when she was an actress, had made life incredibly difficult for their Palace staff.

The couple have been organising private engagements and briefings with the US team and hired a Canadian designer to create a new website without any involvement from the royal advisers.
This has led to a number of embarrassing blunders. 'There are several instances when advice was clearly been given to them by the Palace team and wasn't listened to,' the source revealed. 'They have done the best they possibly could against a backdrop of multiple international advisers, publicists and high-profile friends.'

'Harry and Meghan's team are so loyal, probably to a fault sometimes. They are firefighting for the couple while knowing they are about to lose their jobs. Efforts are being made to redeploy some people. But in truth that will be a small fraction of the total staff.'

A small team will continue to be employed privately in London to mastermind Harry's new eco-friendly travel initiative, Travalyst, launched last year.
It is thought that the redundancies will be concluded by the time Harry and Meghan's 'transition' in stepping down as senior royals is formally concluded
This is likely to be around mid to late March, when they return for their final official duties.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Kay: So much for keeping ties to Britain

No one can truly say they didn't see this coming. The die, after all, was cast at that historic Sandringham summit when it was announced that Harry and Meghan were forsaking their royal life for a future that may yet prove to be elusive.

Even so there was a ruthlessness to the news that they have given marching orders to virtually all their Palace staff whose only crime had been to serve the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with nothing short of absolute devotion.

How hollow those reassuring words, issued just a month ago on behalf of the couple that they would divide their time – and their responsibilities – between the UK and Canada, now sound.

For the only interpretation to be drawn from the Daily Mail's revelation is that the idea of a half-in, half-out existence – with them choosing what they would do to help the Queen and when they would do it – was nothing less than half-baked.

It now looks like little more than a slice of royal deception, sold to us to make their departure from these shores somehow more palatable.
Privately, many in the royal household questioned how practical such an arrangement could possibly be. For the staff, who even yesterday were still fire-fighting on Harry and Meghan's behalf, notably over reports that the Prince was cosying up to Goldman Sachs, the world's most powerful investment bank, their sackings are, of course, a personal tragedy.

Many had been recruited in the heady excitement that surrounded the couple following their 2018 wedding, attracted by their promise to be the most forward-looking and modern members of the Royal Family ever.
Some had given up other posts, and it is likely that only a few can be absorbed into other palace roles. But while they will have every reason to feel bitterly disappointed at how their loyalty has been rewarded, the implications of these substantial domestic changes are profound.

Courtiers believe they do not just signal an ending of the Sussexes' links to Britain, but also a 'power shift' towards Meghan. In a little over a month Harry has lost a terrifying amount. He has broken with his family, his friends and his way of life. He will never again wear the military uniform he so treasured. By parting company with his dedicated London secretariat he is now effectively severing his royal connections, too.

There will also be speculation about what this means for the couple's son, Archie, and his education. Will he become the first of the Queen's great-grandchildren to be schooled abroad?

Harry's wife, meanwhile, has secured her move back to her adopted home of Canada where she has in place a team of mainly US professionals who helped her develop her career as an actress.

It is they who will now be guiding the couple. They include a sharp-elbowed US public relations company, Sunshine Sachs, along with Meghan's former agent, lawyer and business manager.

Without the familiarity of his London advisors, Harry is likely to become ever more dependent on Meghan's team.

And with such figures at the helm there is every chance that the couple will be making more appearances of the kind they conducted last week when they were guests at a conference for the bank JP Morgan in Florida, where they rubbed shoulders with some of America's richest figures.

In her statement a month ago, Harry's grandmother spoke carefully and precisely about the discussion she'd had 'on the future of my grandson and his family'.

By allowing a transition period for both sides to adjust and by refusing to strip the couple of their HRH titles – though they will not use them – the Queen was making clear, despite her sadness, that the door was still open.

The inescapable conclusion is that, by issuing redundancy notices to their staff, Harry and Meghan have themselves slammed the door shut.


----------



## mshermes

ccbaggirl89 said:


> They're in California y'all... (from the lovely TMZ)
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are continuing their public engagements ever since announcing that they’ll be stepping back from their royal duties.
> 
> The couple visited Stanford University on Tuesday (February 11) to attend “a brainstorming session over several hours with professors and academics,” according to a palace source to TODAY.
> 
> The meeting was to help them establish a new charity organization following their move to Canada.
> 
> Harry and Meghan flew commercial from Canada, and were personally greeted by the university’s president, Marc Tessier-Lavigne."





ccbaggirl89 said:


> They're in California y'all... (from the lovely TMZ)
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are continuing their public engagements ever since announcing that they’ll be stepping back from their royal duties.
> 
> The couple visited Stanford University on Tuesday (February 11) to attend “a brainstorming session over several hours with professors and academics,” according to a palace source to TODAY.
> 
> The meeting was to help them establish a new charity organization following their move to Canada.
> 
> Harry and Meghan flew commercial from Canada, and were personally greeted by the university’s president, Marc Tessier-Lavigne."



No problem with the privacy issue once again. No pics?


----------



## Emeline

kristinlorraine said:


> *Megxit bloodbath: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry AXE all 15 of their UK staff in surest sign yet they will never return to Britain to live - as shocked Palace sources 'say it's a difficult time for very loyal team'*
> 
> *Couple closing their office in Buckingham Palace with the loss of all 15 jobs*
> *Among royal aides leaving are Marnie Gaffney, David Watkins & Julie Burley  *
> *The royal household will reabsorb some of them but others will face severance *
> By REBECCA ENGLISH, ROYAL EDITOR and RICHARD KAY EDITOR AT LARGE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> PUBLISHED: 17:04 EST, 13 February 2020 | UPDATED: 18:29 EST, 13 February 2020
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8001857/Shock-Harry-Meghan-axe-15-UK-staff.html
> 
> Harry and Meghan are axing 15 staff and closing their Buckingham Palace office.
> It is the surest sign yet that the couple and their son Archie are unlikely ever to return to the UK to live.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex broke the news to their team in person in January following the announcement that they were stepping down as senior working royals.
> While one or two may be absorbed back into the royal household, most are now negotiating redundancy packages.
> They are the latest casualties of Harry and Meghan's bombshell decision to move to North America and make their fortunes outside the Royal Family.
> Last night Buckingham Palace said it did not comment on staffing matters but it is understood senior royals, including the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are aware of the office closure and redundancies.
> 
> A source told the Mail: 'Given their decision to step back, an office at Buckingham Palace is no longer needed. While the details are still being finalised and efforts are being made to redeploy people within the royal household, unfortunately there will be some redundancies.'
> 
> Among those to lose their jobs are the couple's newly appointed private secretary, Fiona Mcilwham – although she is on secondment from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and is likely to be found in a role in Whitehall – and their hugely experienced communications chief Sara Latham.
> Harry's long-standing programme co-ordinator Clara Loughran, who was so well regarded by the prince that she was asked to hand Meghan her bouquet in church on her wedding day, will go.
> 
> As well as Miss Latham – who previously worked for the Obamas and was Hillary *******'s senior campaign adviser – her deputy, assistant communications secretary Marnie Gaffney, is understood to be leaving.
> 
> A much-loved and long-serving member of Buckingham Palace press staff, she played a major role in supporting Harry on his military work and organised his and Meghan's hugely successful official tours to Australia and Africa,
> The Queen made her a member of the Royal Victorian Order because of her devoted service.
> The other press officer to lose her job is Julie Burley, who worked for Harry, William and Kate on their successful mental health campaign Heads Together.
> 
> The assistant communications secretary was headed-hunted by Harry and Meghan and led the press team on his Invictus Games. She has also managed the media side of many of the couple's domestic engagements and patronages.
> 
> David Watkins, poached from fashion house Burberry in August as the couple's social media expert, is also out.
> The source insisted that while 'Megxit' had come as a complete shock to the team, most accept their fate. 'The Duke and Duchess have a small team, less than 15 people. The team are very loyal to the Sussexes and understand and respect the decision they have taken,' the source said.
> 
> 'They are all close and supporting each other. The team are busy helping to set their Royal Highnesses up for the future and working on a series of final engagements.'
> 
> It is understood that this includes the Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall on March 7, which will be Harry's last engagement as Captain-General of the Royal Marines. He and Meghan are also expected to attend the Commonwealth Day service on March 9.
> One or two other engagements are being scheduled before the couple return to Canada to embark on their new life. When they announced their decision to step back in early January, Harry and Meghan insisted they would be splitting their time between the UK and North America. But this latest move suggests that any trips back to the UK will be limited. One source said: 'I do think they will be back a little bit. They genuinely do plan to keep their patronages and maintain that work in the UK.'
> Some of the outgoing staff started working with Harry long before his marriage to Meghan.
> 
> One royal source told the Mail: 'I don't think it will comes as surprise to anyone that these have been incredibly trying circumstances for their team, who have experienced some very difficult times of late. They are all good people, very loyal and brilliant at their jobs, and everyone feels incredibly sorry for them.'
> 
> Another insider made clear that the couple's decision to hire a team of US-based agents and publicists, many of whom worked for Meghan when she was an actress, had made life incredibly difficult for their Palace staff.
> 
> The couple have been organising private engagements and briefings with the US team and hired a Canadian designer to create a new website without any involvement from the royal advisers.
> This has led to a number of embarrassing blunders. 'There are several instances when advice was clearly been given to them by the Palace team and wasn't listened to,' the source revealed. 'They have done the best they possibly could against a backdrop of multiple international advisers, publicists and high-profile friends.'
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan's team are so loyal, probably to a fault sometimes. They are firefighting for the couple while knowing they are about to lose their jobs. Efforts are being made to redeploy some people. But in truth that will be a small fraction of the total staff.'
> 
> A small team will continue to be employed privately in London to mastermind Harry's new eco-friendly travel initiative, Travalyst, launched last year.
> It is thought that the redundancies will be concluded by the time Harry and Meghan's 'transition' in stepping down as senior royals is formally concluded
> This is likely to be around mid to late March, when they return for their final official duties.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Richard Kay: So much for keeping ties to Britain
> 
> No one can truly say they didn't see this coming. The die, after all, was cast at that historic Sandringham summit when it was announced that Harry and Meghan were forsaking their royal life for a future that may yet prove to be elusive.
> 
> Even so there was a ruthlessness to the news that they have given marching orders to virtually all their Palace staff whose only crime had been to serve the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with nothing short of absolute devotion.
> 
> How hollow those reassuring words, issued just a month ago on behalf of the couple that they would divide their time – and their responsibilities – between the UK and Canada, now sound.
> 
> For the only interpretation to be drawn from the Daily Mail's revelation is that the idea of a half-in, half-out existence – with them choosing what they would do to help the Queen and when they would do it – was nothing less than half-baked.
> 
> It now looks like little more than a slice of royal deception, sold to us to make their departure from these shores somehow more palatable.
> Privately, many in the royal household questioned how practical such an arrangement could possibly be. For the staff, who even yesterday were still fire-fighting on Harry and Meghan's behalf, notably over reports that the Prince was cosying up to Goldman Sachs, the world's most powerful investment bank, their sackings are, of course, a personal tragedy.
> 
> Many had been recruited in the heady excitement that surrounded the couple following their 2018 wedding, attracted by their promise to be the most forward-looking and modern members of the Royal Family ever.
> Some had given up other posts, and it is likely that only a few can be absorbed into other palace roles. But while they will have every reason to feel bitterly disappointed at how their loyalty has been rewarded, the implications of these substantial domestic changes are profound.
> 
> Courtiers believe they do not just signal an ending of the Sussexes' links to Britain, but also a 'power shift' towards Meghan. In a little over a month Harry has lost a terrifying amount. He has broken with his family, his friends and his way of life. He will never again wear the military uniform he so treasured. By parting company with his dedicated London secretariat he is now effectively severing his royal connections, too.
> 
> There will also be speculation about what this means for the couple's son, Archie, and his education. Will he become the first of the Queen's great-grandchildren to be schooled abroad?
> 
> Harry's wife, meanwhile, has secured her move back to her adopted home of Canada where she has in place a team of mainly US professionals who helped her develop her career as an actress.
> 
> It is they who will now be guiding the couple. They include a sharp-elbowed US public relations company, Sunshine Sachs, along with Meghan's former agent, lawyer and business manager.
> 
> Without the familiarity of his London advisors, Harry is likely to become ever more dependent on Meghan's team.
> 
> And with such figures at the helm there is every chance that the couple will be making more appearances of the kind they conducted last week when they were guests at a conference for the bank JP Morgan in Florida, where they rubbed shoulders with some of America's richest figures.
> 
> In her statement a month ago, Harry's grandmother spoke carefully and precisely about the discussion she'd had 'on the future of my grandson and his family'.
> 
> By allowing a transition period for both sides to adjust and by refusing to strip the couple of their HRH titles – though they will not use them – the Queen was making clear, despite her sadness, that the door was still open.
> 
> The inescapable conclusion is that, by issuing redundancy notices to their staff, Harry and Meghan have themselves slammed the door shut.


Thank you for posting this. What an unpleasant way to treat folks working hard on their behalf.
It isn't wise, long term, to burn so many bridges.
They seem to think they will be gifted endless patience, goodwill and cash by the RF.
We shall see.


----------



## youngster

kristinlorraine said:


> *Megxit bloodbath: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry AXE all 15 of their UK staff in surest sign yet they will never return to Britain to live - as shocked Palace sources 'say it's a difficult time for very loyal team'*
> 
> *Couple closing their office in Buckingham Palace with the loss of all 15 jobs*
> *Among royal aides leaving are Marnie Gaffney, David Watkins & Julie Burley  *
> *The royal household will reabsorb some of them but others will face severance *
> By REBECCA ENGLISH, ROYAL EDITOR and RICHARD KAY EDITOR AT LARGE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> PUBLISHED: 17:04 EST, 13 February 2020 | UPDATED: 18:29 EST, 13 February 2020
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8001857/Shock-Harry-Meghan-axe-15-UK-staff.html
> 
> Another insider made clear that the couple's decision to hire a team of US-based agents and publicists, many of whom worked for Meghan when she was an actress, had made life incredibly difficult for their Palace staff.
> 
> The couple have been organising private engagements and briefings with the US team and hired a Canadian designer to create a new website without any involvement from the royal advisers.
> *This has led to a number of embarrassing blunders. 'There are several instances when advice was clearly been given to them by the Palace team and wasn't listened to,' t*he source revealed. 'They have done the best they possibly could against a backdrop of multiple international advisers, publicists and high-profile friends.'
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan's team are so loyal, probably to a fault sometimes. They are firefighting for the couple while knowing they are about to lose their jobs. Efforts are being made to redeploy some people. But in truth that will be a small fraction of the total staff.'
> 
> A small team will continue to be employed privately in London to mastermind Harry's new eco-friendly travel initiative, Travalyst, launched last year.
> It is thought that the redundancies will be concluded by the time Harry and Meghan's 'transition' in stepping down as senior royals is formally concluded
> This is likely to be around mid to late March, when they return for their final official duties.



Very interesting.  This is what I've wondered about, what would happen to Harry's long time UK staff. I figured Harry and MM  wouldn't keep a large staff in the UK if they were hardly ever there and none of those people were going to give up their lives to move to L.A and Vancouver. Clearly, Meghan is calling the shots.  We'll see how long Harry lasts in his new normal.  I think it will be fun and like a vacation for him for a year or so, and then the strain of having to prove and maintain their relevancy, as well as fill the family coffers will take a toll, especially if things don't go quite as planned and they aren't as successful as they think they should be.


----------



## Lodpah

You know any Meghan chose today to release stuff? Cause Eugenia announced she prefers guests donate to charity in lieu of gifts. 

Also her and Harry fires 15 people today.


----------



## Milosmum0307

There aren’t enough eye rolls for that Stanford University ego trip.  I can just imagine what Harry the Dim has to offer in a conversation with academics, though I’m sure he pulls from his roster of speech circuit goodies:  1) How to exploit your mother’s tragic death for personal gain (a tried-and-true fan favorite); 2) The emotional and financial bribery potential in your father’s guilt over his infidelity; 3) How to trivialize your grandmother’s entire life’s work; 4) What I learned from mandatory sensitivity  training for publicly using racial slurs when referring to my military comrades; 5) How to use people of color as convenient props in your IG photos when you need some good press in a pinch, but then actually spend your entire life moving almost exclusively in elite white circles; 6) Have I mentioned my dead mother?  I’m the one who wrote “Mummy” on that card on her casket.  That was my idea; 7) Naked Billiards; 8) Private jets, and how to get someone else to pay for them; 9) Did you know that my wife does voiceovers?;  10) How to keep proposing marriage to a succession of women until you finally find one ambitious enough to say yes, aka How to Smell Desperation; 11) Perpetual Victimhood: A Grifter’s Guide to the Art of Emotional Manipulation; 12) Nazi Cosplay; 13) How to quit because #omgsohard #sotoxic #gimmemymoney, with guest speaker Sarah Palin.  Meghan is a human eye roll in a bad weave, but I think a slow clap is due there.  She managed to turn being a bumbling, low-IQ prince’s third choice - the Spare’s spare - into a lucrative gig and a veneer of relevance so credible that the presidents of elite universities are embarrassing themselves to pant at her.  She’s enterprising.  Harry, on the other hand, is a vast wasteland of privilege almost devoid of meaningful accomplishment, and he’ll be riding the Invictus Games like Seabiscuit until he dies.  (Hero Harry!  So Dutiful!  So Much Philanthropy!  Veterans!  DISABLED Veterans!  Queen and Country!  Yay!)  He is the true entertainment in this mutually talentless Vaudeville act of twin terribles.


----------



## mdcx

Should we expect another Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos situation? Please tell me people are not going to wildly throw investment money at MM because she’s pretty and married a prince...


----------



## lazeny

I wonder if Meghan is so woke and confident and assertive, why was she still a little known  D-list actress?  She hired her former agent and business manager. If she and they're so good she should have been on the level of fame the likes of pre-Frozen Kristen Bell.


----------



## Sharont2305

hermes_lemming said:


> This the most pretentious piece of crap I've ever seen in quite some time.  Good gawd


Yeah, and you don't address her as Duchess. That was so cringe worthy, like Beyonce addressing her as "my princess" having never met her before.


----------



## PewPew

lazeny said:


> I wonder if Meghan is so woke and confident and assertive, *why was she still a little known  D-list actress?* She hired her former agent and business manager. If she and they're so good she should have been on the level of fame the likes of pre-Frozen Kristen Bell.



Because U.S. casting agents are “racist”, so the brave humanitarian-since childhood-Megan had to suffer through Canadian winters for “quality” acting opportunities.


----------



## Clearblueskies

kristinlorraine said:


> *Megxit bloodbath: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry AXE all 15 of their UK staff in surest sign yet they will never return to Britain to live - as shocked Palace sources 'say it's a difficult time for very loyal team'*
> 
> *Couple closing their office in Buckingham Palace with the loss of all 15 jobs*
> *Among royal aides leaving are Marnie Gaffney, David Watkins & Julie Burley  *
> *The royal household will reabsorb some of them but others will face severance *
> By REBECCA ENGLISH, ROYAL EDITOR and RICHARD KAY EDITOR AT LARGE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> PUBLISHED: 17:04 EST, 13 February 2020 | UPDATED: 18:29 EST, 13 February 2020
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8001857/Shock-Harry-Meghan-axe-15-UK-staff.html
> 
> Harry and Meghan are axing 15 staff and closing their Buckingham Palace office.
> It is the surest sign yet that the couple and their son Archie are unlikely ever to return to the UK to live.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex broke the news to their team in person in January following the announcement that they were stepping down as senior working royals.
> While one or two may be absorbed back into the royal household, most are now negotiating redundancy packages.
> They are the latest casualties of Harry and Meghan's bombshell decision to move to North America and make their fortunes outside the Royal Family.
> Last night Buckingham Palace said it did not comment on staffing matters but it is understood senior royals, including the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are aware of the office closure and redundancies.
> 
> A source told the Mail: 'Given their decision to step back, an office at Buckingham Palace is no longer needed. While the details are still being finalised and efforts are being made to redeploy people within the royal household, unfortunately there will be some redundancies.'
> 
> Among those to lose their jobs are the couple's newly appointed private secretary, Fiona Mcilwham – although she is on secondment from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and is likely to be found in a role in Whitehall – and their hugely experienced communications chief Sara Latham.
> Harry's long-standing programme co-ordinator Clara Loughran, who was so well regarded by the prince that she was asked to hand Meghan her bouquet in church on her wedding day, will go.
> 
> As well as Miss Latham – who previously worked for the Obamas and was Hillary *******'s senior campaign adviser – her deputy, assistant communications secretary Marnie Gaffney, is understood to be leaving.
> 
> A much-loved and long-serving member of Buckingham Palace press staff, she played a major role in supporting Harry on his military work and organised his and Meghan's hugely successful official tours to Australia and Africa,
> The Queen made her a member of the Royal Victorian Order because of her devoted service.
> The other press officer to lose her job is Julie Burley, who worked for Harry, William and Kate on their successful mental health campaign Heads Together.
> 
> The assistant communications secretary was headed-hunted by Harry and Meghan and led the press team on his Invictus Games. She has also managed the media side of many of the couple's domestic engagements and patronages.
> 
> David Watkins, poached from fashion house Burberry in August as the couple's social media expert, is also out.
> The source insisted that while 'Megxit' had come as a complete shock to the team, most accept their fate. 'The Duke and Duchess have a small team, less than 15 people. The team are very loyal to the Sussexes and understand and respect the decision they have taken,' the source said.
> 
> 'They are all close and supporting each other. The team are busy helping to set their Royal Highnesses up for the future and working on a series of final engagements.'
> 
> It is understood that this includes the Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall on March 7, which will be Harry's last engagement as Captain-General of the Royal Marines. He and Meghan are also expected to attend the Commonwealth Day service on March 9.
> One or two other engagements are being scheduled before the couple return to Canada to embark on their new life. When they announced their decision to step back in early January, Harry and Meghan insisted they would be splitting their time between the UK and North America. But this latest move suggests that any trips back to the UK will be limited. One source said: 'I do think they will be back a little bit. They genuinely do plan to keep their patronages and maintain that work in the UK.'
> Some of the outgoing staff started working with Harry long before his marriage to Meghan.
> 
> One royal source told the Mail: 'I don't think it will comes as surprise to anyone that these have been incredibly trying circumstances for their team, who have experienced some very difficult times of late. They are all good people, very loyal and brilliant at their jobs, and everyone feels incredibly sorry for them.'
> 
> Another insider made clear that the couple's decision to hire a team of US-based agents and publicists, many of whom worked for Meghan when she was an actress, had made life incredibly difficult for their Palace staff.
> 
> The couple have been organising private engagements and briefings with the US team and hired a Canadian designer to create a new website without any involvement from the royal advisers.
> This has led to a number of embarrassing blunders. 'There are several instances when advice was clearly been given to them by the Palace team and wasn't listened to,' the source revealed. 'They have done the best they possibly could against a backdrop of multiple international advisers, publicists and high-profile friends.'
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan's team are so loyal, probably to a fault sometimes. They are firefighting for the couple while knowing they are about to lose their jobs. Efforts are being made to redeploy some people. But in truth that will be a small fraction of the total staff.'
> 
> A small team will continue to be employed privately in London to mastermind Harry's new eco-friendly travel initiative, Travalyst, launched last year.
> It is thought that the redundancies will be concluded by the time Harry and Meghan's 'transition' in stepping down as senior royals is formally concluded
> This is likely to be around mid to late March, when they return for their final official duties.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Richard Kay: So much for keeping ties to Britain
> 
> No one can truly say they didn't see this coming. The die, after all, was cast at that historic Sandringham summit when it was announced that Harry and Meghan were forsaking their royal life for a future that may yet prove to be elusive.
> 
> Even so there was a ruthlessness to the news that they have given marching orders to virtually all their Palace staff whose only crime had been to serve the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with nothing short of absolute devotion.
> 
> How hollow those reassuring words, issued just a month ago on behalf of the couple that they would divide their time – and their responsibilities – between the UK and Canada, now sound.
> 
> For the only interpretation to be drawn from the Daily Mail's revelation is that the idea of a half-in, half-out existence – with them choosing what they would do to help the Queen and when they would do it – was nothing less than half-baked.
> 
> It now looks like little more than a slice of royal deception, sold to us to make their departure from these shores somehow more palatable.
> Privately, many in the royal household questioned how practical such an arrangement could possibly be. For the staff, who even yesterday were still fire-fighting on Harry and Meghan's behalf, notably over reports that the Prince was cosying up to Goldman Sachs, the world's most powerful investment bank, their sackings are, of course, a personal tragedy.
> 
> Many had been recruited in the heady excitement that surrounded the couple following their 2018 wedding, attracted by their promise to be the most forward-looking and modern members of the Royal Family ever.
> Some had given up other posts, and it is likely that only a few can be absorbed into other palace roles. But while they will have every reason to feel bitterly disappointed at how their loyalty has been rewarded, the implications of these substantial domestic changes are profound.
> 
> Courtiers believe they do not just signal an ending of the Sussexes' links to Britain, but also a 'power shift' towards Meghan. In a little over a month Harry has lost a terrifying amount. He has broken with his family, his friends and his way of life. He will never again wear the military uniform he so treasured. By parting company with his dedicated London secretariat he is now effectively severing his royal connections, too.
> 
> There will also be speculation about what this means for the couple's son, Archie, and his education. Will he become the first of the Queen's great-grandchildren to be schooled abroad?
> 
> Harry's wife, meanwhile, has secured her move back to her adopted home of Canada where she has in place a team of mainly US professionals who helped her develop her career as an actress.
> 
> It is they who will now be guiding the couple. They include a sharp-elbowed US public relations company, Sunshine Sachs, along with Meghan's former agent, lawyer and business manager.
> 
> Without the familiarity of his London advisors, Harry is likely to become ever more dependent on Meghan's team.
> 
> And with such figures at the helm there is every chance that the couple will be making more appearances of the kind they conducted last week when they were guests at a conference for the bank JP Morgan in Florida, where they rubbed shoulders with some of America's richest figures.
> 
> In her statement a month ago, Harry's grandmother spoke carefully and precisely about the discussion she'd had 'on the future of my grandson and his family'.
> 
> By allowing a transition period for both sides to adjust and by refusing to strip the couple of their HRH titles – though they will not use them – the Queen was making clear, despite her sadness, that the door was still open.
> 
> The inescapable conclusion is that, by issuing redundancy notices to their staff, Harry and Meghan have themselves slammed the door shut.


I feel sorry for those staff, they’ve been badly let down.  Meghan posting a Eulogy to Self on Instagram on the same day this news came out is in poor taste.  But as we know she’s deaf to anything but her own self interest and self promotion, and Harry is unrecognisable from the man we thought we knew.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I was amazed that all those “force for change” women just happened to be in to take Meghan’s phone call while they were filming.  What a truly happy coincidence - (fake) fates align and all that s*it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

lazeny said:


> I wonder if Meghan is so woke and confident and assertive, why was she still a little known  D-list actress?  She hired her former agent and business manager. If she and they're so good she should have been on the level of fame the likes of pre-Frozen Kristen Bell.



Considering how Meghan is mediocre in every way yet she has succeeded in climbing the social ladder, I say the team is very good.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kristinlorraine said:


> *Megxit bloodbath: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry AXE all 15 of their UK staff in surest sign yet they will never return to Britain to live - as shocked Palace sources 'say it's a difficult time for very loyal team'*



Is she taking her silly popcorn machine (or was it ice cream?) with her?


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> OMG .. did not know that about Leo's, but that was 100% both of my parents (their birthdays were 1 week apart)!


Astrology might be silly to some, however there is no denying that some signs are truly PIA.
In trying times, as today, apparently astrology is making a come back...
Also, the first horoscope was in a British newspaper and is related to Princess Margaret who was born at the height of the great depression.
And yes, she was a Leo.

https://www.astrologysource.com/astrology-articles/first-newspaper-horoscopes/


----------



## marietouchet

Just thinking about what role royals should play ... 
See Royalty Fashion thread for pix of CP Victoria greeting a cancer suffering little girl at the palace, beautiful setting flowers, incredible room - kind of a MAKE YOUR WISH moment for the little girl who got to visit with a real princess
https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/royalty-fashion-thread.904519/page-1346#post-33615152
Pss Madeleine of Sweden did a similar thing, she invited a sick little girl to tea and Madeleine made a huge effort - wore a gorgeous gown and tiara - princess moment 
Granting princess moments to suffering children is such a cool way to use all the trappings of royalty. The royals have the palaces and tiaras and sharing them is an effective use of these (obsolete) signs of royalty/power/prestige.
I like the idea of the royal moments for sick children, only royals can do that - a Hollywood celebrity cannot do this 
And it does not have to be just about girls, any suffering child can visit the cannons, guards and horses, the grounds,. the polo ponies, the collections 
I like the idea of owning/sharing  one's royal status and making the most of it, rather than repudiating it completely like H & M


----------



## LittleStar88

ccbaggirl89 said:


> They're in California y'all... (from the lovely TMZ)
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are continuing their public engagements ever since announcing that they’ll be stepping back from their royal duties.
> 
> The couple visited Stanford University on Tuesday (February 11) to attend “a brainstorming session over several hours with professors and academics,” according to a palace source to TODAY.
> 
> The meeting was to help them establish a new charity organization following their move to Canada.
> 
> Harry and Meghan flew commercial from Canada, and were personally greeted by the university’s president, Marc Tessier-Lavigne."



Here I am sitting not far from where they are at Stanford in Palo Alto - not a single peep about it. In a place where *everyone* has mobile phones and major wokeness on that campus with students who would love to share a photo they captured on the sly, and the news is desperate for a tidbit that is NOT about Covid-19, not a single peep about it?

Just more proof that the issue they had with the media was them, not the media. They are so full of it.


----------



## limom

Pictures or it did not happen...
Stamford is really slumming with those two...


----------



## LittleStar88

limom said:


> Pictures or it did not happen...
> Stamford is really slumming with those two...



Kind of sounds like everyone involved with them is looking for a resume bullet opportunity at Stanford.


----------



## limom

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of sounds like everyone involved with them is looking for a resume bullet opportunity at Stanford.


According to the article, it was the head of the department..
Anyways, that place is well known for networking...
Weren’t they involved in the pay for study scandal?


----------



## bag-mania

Milosmum0307 said:


> Meghan is a human eye roll in a bad weave, but I think a slow clap is due there.  She managed to turn being a bumbling, low-IQ prince’s third choice - the Spare’s spare - into a lucrative gig and a veneer of relevance so credible that the presidents of elite universities are embarrassing themselves to pant at her.  She’s enterprising.



Yes, we have to give credit where it's due. Through ambition, manipulation, and chutzpah, Meghan has somehow managed to steamroll her way to getting what she wants (for the most part). She isn't going to make friends along the way but I doubt she cares. Having superficial celebrity friends and important contacts who can help her reach her goals are all she needs.


----------



## marietouchet

Slash and burn , I finally get it ... 
No U.K. staff , layoffs are sad 
Not going to uncle Andrew’s Bday party supposedly , but who knows the truth about that invite list ...
But even if the story of the invite is bogus, they could invent a reason to return
Going back to the U.K. privately for a family excuse eg for tea and Archie and Louis playdate might be a nice ice breaker to defrost chilly family relationship, missed opportunity


----------



## limom

She is the second coming of Willis, seriously.
She really did not have much going for herself and yet she had the king abdicate and live in exile.
It is deja vu, all over again!


----------



## Emeline

limom said:


> She is the second coming of Willis, seriously.
> She really did not have much going for herself and yet she had the king abdicate and live in exile.
> It is deja vu, all over again!


 Indeed. 
I doubt PH really understood what he signed up for when he stepped back. Thankfully a wise grandmother left the door open for him to return.


----------



## imgg

Emeline said:


> Indeed.
> I doubt PH really understood what he signed up for when he stepped back. *Thankfully a wise grandmother left the door open for him to return*.


  I don't think he deserves this honestly.....


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> Indeed.
> I doubt PH really understood what he signed up for when he stepped back. Thankfully a wise grandmother left the door open for him to return.



If Harry changes his mind down the road he better hope his grandmother is still alive to take him back. I don't know if his father and brother will be so inclined to just forgive and forget.


----------



## Sharont2305

imgg said:


> I don't think he deserves this honestly.....


I don't either, I feel he's been manipulated by her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't either, I feel he's been manipulated by her.


True, but he is a grown man and needs to be accountable for his own actions.  It is _his _family he is disrespecting.


----------



## Sharont2305

imgg said:


> True, but he is a grown man and needs to be accountable for his own actions.  It is _his _family he is disrespecting.


Oh, I agree on both counts. I am very surprised at what he's done and, quite frankly, how disrespectful it is.


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> I don't think he deserves this honestly.....





bag-mania said:


> If Harry changes his mind down the road he better hope his grandmother is still alive to take him back. I don't know if his father and brother will be so inclined to just forgive and forget.


I don't disagree with either point. He's really pushed it for sure with his family. 
But while she is invigorated jetting to the next pitch meeting,  he may quickly tire of that lifestyle for both him and Archie.  
I would think, particularly with Archie in mind, the RF door will stay open awhile.


----------



## LittleStar88

imgg said:


> True, but he is a grown man and needs to be accountable for his own actions.  It is _his _family he is disrespecting.



He made his bed and time to lay in it. 

He is a man in his mid-30's. Not a young 20-something venturing out on his own for the first time. So he will need to own his choices and not rely on Dad or Grandma. Up to them if they desire to "take him back" but he should not bet on it.


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> I don't disagree with either point. He's really pushed it for sure with his family.
> But while she is invigorated jetting to the next pitch meeting,  *he may quickly tire of that lifestyle* for both him and Archie.
> I would think, particularly with Archie in mind, the RF door will stay open awhile.



I wonder if we know enough about who the "real" Harry is yet. He might secretly love schmoozing with financiers, meeting with publicity agents, and hanging out with celebrities. Maybe the Harry we knew before was only a mask he wore because he had to maintain a dignified demeanor for his position as prince. For all we know Meghan may have unleashed a publicity-hungry, attention-seeking monster much like herself!


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> He made his bed and time to lay in it.
> 
> He is a man in his mid-30's. Not a young 20-something venturing out on his own for the first time. So he will need to own his choices and not rely on Dad or Grandma. Up to them if they desire to "take him back" but he should not bet on it.


He IS that man in his early 20s I think, all his adult life he's had his life meticulously planned, in the army and as a full time Royal. His life was mapped out in a diary, he knew 6 months in advance what engagement he would be doing on a specific date.
He has no clue.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if we know enough about who the "real" Harry is yet. He might secretly love schmoozing with financiers, meeting with publicity agents, and hanging out with celebrities. Maybe the Harry we knew before was only a mask he wore because he had to maintain a dignified demeanor for his position as prince. For all we know Meghan may have unleashed a publicity-hungry, attention-seeking monster much like herself!


I don’t think he has ever hidden his true personality at all. he was always a bratty light weight, imho.
It is just that familiarity breeds contempt..
And with SM, this happens at warp speed, imho.


----------



## DD101

I feel Harry has no clue who he really is. His life has been behind palace walls, it all being thought out for him - for better or worse. Yes he is a grown adult man, but what life has he really experienced so far? Surely one of privilege and money. But that does not an experienced life make.

I feel the Queen is a very smart lady and I am sure she loves her grandson and would welcome him back. I feel the same of Charles and I think he is handling this in a smart way. Charles was denied the right to pursue Camilla as a young man, so he knows what it feels like to be told what to do, and having to do it. His past experience is allowing him to give Harry his freedom. I think that's a good thing.

I don't know what's transpired between the brothers Harry and Wills.....I hope nothing too horrible. I hope they can come together again and be friends and brothers who really love and care about each other.

Meghan - I don't quite know what to think.  But I can clearly see that living as a part of the royal family, you have to loose a bit of yourself, and maybe more than just a bit. I see the sometimes matronly way they dress, the way they have to look, the way they stay un political. It would be very hard for me to try to convert to any of those things, and did Meghan try? Who knows. 

I've always been a huge Princess Diana fan, and always had a soft spot for her boys. So I am curious to see how this all plays out. And for Harry's sake I hope Meghan turns out to not be a horrible person.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if we know enough about who the "real" Harry is yet. He might secretly love schmoozing with financiers, meeting with publicity agents, and hanging out with celebrities. Maybe the Harry we knew before was only a mask he wore because he had to maintain a dignified demeanor for his position as prince. For all we know Meghan may have unleashed a publicity-hungry, attention-seeking monster much like herself!


I have a sneaking suspicion that Harry likely is enjoying this 'attention' that he is getting; remember .. it appeared as though in the last year, he had a bug up his a@@ that he was the "_2nd fiddle_" to Wills and given that Prince Charles made it clear that he wanted to downsize the BRF, I think Harry (_with Meghan's help of course_) likely thought "_well - I'm not going to like that_"!  Does he know anything about Investments or 'truly' setting up a Charity? .. highly doubtful, but you have to figure that those that are getting to meet him are going to be rubbing their hands as in "_whoa - I'm meeting a 'real' Prince_"!


----------



## pursegirl3

The only people I feel sorry for in this Harry and Meghan self created mess is The Queen . If I ever had disrespected my beloved Grandmother one tenth of the way that Harry has , I would  have been called out and disowned by everyone in the family. Rightfully so . The rest of the Royal family who has had to pick up the Slack . Especially  Princess Beatrice who is a working Royal herself and  planning her own wedding and now she has to step in for them . Like she doesn't have enough on her plate already with her Father .


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, and you don't address her as Duchess. That was so cringe worthy, like Beyonce addressing her as "my princess" having never met her before.



Considering fashion professional Enninful has previously, incorrectly dubbed Karl Lagerfeld Creative Director of Chanel and not Head Designer in a Vogue editor's letter recently, I suppose we should be grateful he was kinda 'ballpark' with Duchess. Someone find that guy an(other) assistant.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I have a sneaking suspicion that Harry likely is enjoying this 'attention' that he is getting; remember .. it appeared as though in the last year, he had a bug up his a@@ that he was the "_2nd fiddle_" to Wills and given that Prince Charles made it clear that he wanted to downsize the BRF, I think Harry (_with Meghan's help of course_) likely thought "_well - I'm not going to like that_"!  Does he know anything about Investments or 'truly' setting up a Charity? .. highly doubtful, but you have to figure that those that are getting to meet him are going to be rubbing their hands as in "_whoa - I'm meeting a 'real' Prince_"!


I always had a soft spot for those two "boys" after the loss of their mother.  But not so much for Harry these days.  I think the idea of them meeting with academics is interesting.  He doesn't seem very smart and she seems more crafty than intelligent.


----------



## bag-mania

There must be some psychology behind H&M's PR agency's decisions. I guess they wanted to have cute fluffy stories for Valentine's Day but since there was nothing new they had to dig deep into the archive. These articles are at least a year old and they are being released today as if they were new. Maybe it is meant cover up all of the articles about them dumping their staff.

https://www.click2houston.com/enter...n-markle-and-prince-harrys-healthy-lifestyle/

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a30929983/meghan-markle-prince-harry-nicknames/


----------



## gracekelly

lazeny said:


> I wonder if Meghan is so woke and confident and assertive, why was she still a little known  D-list actress?  She hired her former agent and business manager. If she and they're so good she should have been on the level of fame the likes of pre-Frozen Kristen Bell.


Maybe rehired them because she was never good enough to move up the ladder to a better agent and business manager. Turkeys fly with turkeys. Plus theyare used to her bad manners


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> Pictures or it did not happen...
> Stamford is really slumming with those two...


Just being whorish and looking for money. Grant money from wherever is always welcome.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Here I am sitting not far from where they are at Stanford in Palo Alto - not a single peep about it. In a place where *everyone* has mobile phones and major wokeness on that campus with students who would love to share a photo they captured on the sly, and the news is desperate for a tidbit that is NOT about Covid-19, not a single peep about it?
> 
> Just more proof that the issue they had with the media was them, not the media. They are so full of it.


No sightings at Peet’s coffee or Starbucks eating vegan muffins?  So disappointed!


----------



## bag-mania

Isn't there a soup kitchen or womens' shelter near Stanford where they can offer some (heavily covered) royal encouragement? Or is that too old school for them now?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Isn't there a soup kitchen or womens' shelter near Stanford where they can offer some (heavily covered) royal encouragement? Or is that too old school for them now?



It is really hard to get a volunteer spot around here. It's The Thing for companies around here to do team volunteering and usually they are booked. Also, many will charge you anywhere from $500 - $3500 if you want to come and do volunteer work. 

It would not surprise me to see them do some kind of Stanford Childrens Hospital photo op.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Isn't there a soup kitchen or womens' shelter near Stanford where they can offer some (heavily covered) royal encouragement? Or is that too old school for them now?


An unpaid appearance?!?! Never again! The whole reason they walked away was to make $$$$ and more $$$$. I don't think there is an authentic humanitarian bone in Meghan's body.


----------



## Mrs.Z

These articles.....I can’t even....
https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...-with-each-other-amid-royal-exit-says-source/


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> These articles.....I can’t even....
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...-with-each-other-amid-royal-exit-says-source/


Lol isn’t that how normal newlyweds SHOULD be? Where’s the story?


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol isn’t that how normal newlyweds SHOULD be? Where’s the story?


They actually keep running the same story but they change the headline and first paragraph....it’s unreal


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> They actually keep running the same story but they change the headline and first paragraph....it’s unreal


The more of this gush they put out, the more I’m certain things aren’t all sunshine and flowers in Canada


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh they are going to have houses in Canada and LA? Paid for by whom?


----------



## Coconuts40

I just watched the video on Instagram of Meghan and British Vogue Editor in Chief, Edward Enninful and I am just appalled by this!  Same day as letting go of their 15 employees in the UK, they post this celebratory self promoting video.  For someone who claims to be meticulous in her planning and execution of matters, there is no way this was an error in timing.  It is just poor taste!  I also had no idea she essentially asked him to be guest editor - as if he would say no!
I have lost all respect for Meghan, and even for Harry.  I just don't understand how the Queen can still stand by them, and likely only doing so for the love of Harry and Archie.  

I also never thought I would agree with her sister Samantha and her father, but now I see they were right all along.  She is nothing but a social climber and has not remorse for taking anyone down that may be in her path.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> These articles.....I can’t even....
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...-with-each-other-amid-royal-exit-says-source/


.. and BOOM, that's why they need all this $$$$ .. they have to 'buy-off' all these magazine folks .. People, Harper's Bazaar .. you know, the ones that right such glowing reviews of these two .. gag me with a spoon!


----------



## bag-mania

Here's my favorite line from the _People_ article: 
_*Harry and Meghan —or H and M, as they call each other — are enjoying undivided time with their son Archie*_

"Undivided time," is that the undivided time they spent in Florida performing for the banking bigwigs? Or was that the undivided time they spent on the Stanford campus trying to figure out the best way to earn big bucks while making it look like a charity. 

Funny, I think there's been a lot of Archie's time that has been divided.


----------



## mdcx

The calling people by their initial thing comes from Meghan right? I think she called Edward Enniful “E” in the video. Strikes me as one of the deliberate “look at how quirky I am” choices.
It’s possible Harry is enjoying watching Meghan ruffle the BRFs feathers. He does strike me as immature and angry enough.

As for Miss M - every time I see one of her nonsensical “hysterical laughter” pics (so quirky) I imagine a maniacal evil laugh emanating from her. I would speculate her mood swings are probably a bit legendary. Maybe H views that as exciting now, but she doesn’t really seem cut from the cloth of stable long term commitment.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Here's my favorite line from the _People_ article:
> _*Harry and Meghan —or H and M, as they call each other — are enjoying undivided time with their son Archie*_
> 
> "Undivided time," is that the undivided time they spent in Florida performing for the banking bigwigs? Or was that the undivided time they spent on the Stanford campus trying to figure out the best way to earn big bucks while making it look like a charity.
> 
> Funny, I think there's been a lot of Archie's time that has been divided.


I do wonder about Meghan’s view of “normal” when it comes to child rearing.


----------



## Aminamina

mdcx said:


> The calling people by their initial thing comes from Meghan right? I think she called Edward Enniful “E” in the video. Strikes me as one of the deliberate “look at how quirky I am” choices.
> It’s possible Harry is enjoying watching Meghan ruffle the BRFs feathers. He does strike me as immature and angry enough.
> 
> As for Miss M - every time I see one of her nonsensical “hysterical laughter” pics (so quirky) I imagine a maniacal evil laugh emanating from her. I would speculate her mood swings are probably a bit legendary. Maybe H views that as exciting now, but she doesn’t really seem cut from the cloth of stable long term commitment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> The calling people by their initial thing comes from Meghan right? I think she called Edward Enniful “E” in the video. Strikes me as one of the deliberate “look at how quirky I am” choices.
> It’s possible Harry is enjoying watching Meghan ruffle the BRFs feathers. He does strike me as immature and angry enough.
> 
> As for Miss M - every time I see one of her nonsensical “hysterical laughter” pics (so quirky) I imagine a maniacal evil laugh emanating from her. I would speculate her mood swings are probably a bit legendary. Maybe H views that as exciting now, but she doesn’t really seem cut from the cloth of stable long term commitment.


Nope .. it's not necessarily a Meghan thing .. and this is from my male colleagues from way back .. oftentimes, men will refer to their "latest conquest" by a first initial or the term "babe" .. because they don't oftentimes remember all the various people that they've met (and some sales folk that I've worked with in the past have told me that they have also done this).  So, by Meghan doing this, she doesn't have to remember their full name .. how convenient, right?


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> The calling people by their initial thing comes from Meghan right? I think she called Edward Enniful “E” in the video. Strikes me as one of the deliberate “look at how quirky I am” choices.
> It’s possible Harry is enjoying watching Meghan ruffle the BRFs feathers. He does strike me as immature and angry enough.
> 
> As for Miss M - every time I see one of her nonsensical “hysterical laughter” pics (so quirky) I imagine a maniacal evil laugh emanating from her. I would speculate her mood swings are probably a bit legendary. Maybe H views that as exciting now, but she doesn’t really seem cut from the cloth of stable long term commitment.


A lot of time is spent analyzing Harry. It could be that he is what he so often has shown himself to be, a jerk!! Plain and simple. There is no shortage of them in this world so it is no stretch to think that Harry is a jerk also.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> A lot of time is spent analyzing Harry. It could be that he is what he so often has shown himself to be, a jerk!! Plain and simple. There is no shortage of them in this world so it is no stretch to think that Harry is a jerk also.


Don't disagree, but as we've all seen (oftentimes with the Celebrities), being a jerk hasn't stopped a lot of them!  In Harry's case, being a part of the BRF is a huge bonus, and IMO .. no wonder why Meghan wanted to glom onto him like white on rice!  At first, I was hoping that Harry would wake up and smell the coffee; now? .. not so sure and am beginning to think that maybe this is what he wanted all along .. to (in whatever way he could) "show up" Prince William and Kate? .. they sure seem like they enjoy doing that!


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh they are going to have houses in Canada and LA? Paid for by whom?



Harry's daddy.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Don't disagree, but as we've all seen (oftentimes with the Celebrities), being a jerk hasn't stopped a lot of them!  In Harry's case, being a part of the BRF is a huge bonus, and IMO .. no wonder why Meghan wanted to glom onto him like white on rice!  At first, I was hoping that Harry would wake up and smell the coffee; now? .. not so sure and am beginning to think that maybe this is what he wanted all along .. to (in whatever way he could) "show up" Prince William and Kate? .. they sure seem like they enjoy doing that!


Well I think we all pegged MM as being a narcissist. Some of us have had very close associations with narcissists so are in a good position to be able to spot them. Certainly she had an effect on Harry BUT I think Harry had a real inclination towards being a very ‘not nice’ person (jerk) long before he met her. His treatment of the queen and other members of TRF  has been unconshonable!


----------



## Coconuts40

Even if Harry woke up one day and realized this marriage was a mistake, I doubt he would walk away now that he has Archie.  Can you imagine the logistics of it all - they no longer live in the UK, Archie is a US citizen, I'm sure they will eventually settle in L.A..  Meghan knows exactly what she is doing here.  She has Harry wrapped around her finger now.


----------



## gracekelly

From Blind Gossip


*She Floated Her Buyout Number*

FEBRUARY 14, 2020 
Happy Valentines Day.  lol!
Love for sale.  Everything has a price. Too bad for her  they didn’t want to pay her ludicrous and ridiculous price.


----------



## Emeline

gracekelly said:


> From Blind Gossip
> 
> 
> *She Floated Her Buyout Number*
> 
> FEBRUARY 14, 2020
> Happy Valentines Day.  lol!
> Love for sale.  Everything has a price. Too bad for her  they didn’t want to pay her ludicrous and ridiculous price.


OMG. I realize it's a gossip site, but if true....
Might explain why the RF sort of shrugged, and basically wished them the best.  They knew what they were dealing with.
The step backers don't hold all the cards, though. Next move PC. Maybe the checks will be somewhat generous, maybe not so much.  Because really, if you want to be independent, be independent.


----------



## mrsinsyder

She must have done the budget veneers. Yikes.


----------



## chowlover2

I watched that ABC special on Jodi Arias tonight. All I could think was how much alike Meghan and Jodi are, really creepy.


----------



## tiktok

Now they’re back to being eviscerated in the Instagram comments.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just looked over the comments and one was mocking that apparently she said in the video (which I refuse to watch, there's only so much MM I can take) "I didn't know if someone had ever guest edited...". Does this woman like to play dumb? Even if she really didn't know - just as she "didn't know" that Harry was one of the most eligible bachelors in the freaking WORLD - wouldn't you find out before making your move on them (I did find some pleasure in the fact that apparently she wasn't contacted by Vogue but pushed herself on them)? Also I don't believe that for one minute with a control freak like her.


----------



## mdcx

The Queen’s strategy seems to be working  - give MM enough rope etc.
MM really seems to have no idea how badly her PR efforts are coming off.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just looked over the comments and one was mocking that apparently she said in the video (which I refuse to watch, there's only so much MM I can take) "I didn't know if someone had ever guest edited...". Does this woman like to play dumb? Even if she really didn't know - just as she "didn't know" that Harry was one of the most eligible bachelors in the freaking WORLD - wouldn't you find out before making your move on them (I did find some pleasure in the fact that apparently she wasn't contacted by Vogue but pushed herself on them)? Also I don't believe that for one minute with a control freak like her.


I did watch  - not to the end, but I did hear that bit and was very surprised by it.  The narrative put out was always that Meghan had been specially chosen, not that she ASKED to do it.  She’s untruthful.  I wish she’d go away, make her money, find her next man - whatever, take the wretched stan culture with her and leave the BRF alone.


----------



## carmen56

If that Blind Gossip item is true, and having seen how Markle operates, I have no reason to believe it isn’t, how cold hearted and calculating can you get?  Machiavelli has nothing on this woman!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

carmen56 said:


> If that Blind Gossip item is true, and having seen how Markle operates, I have no reason to believe it isn’t, how cold hearted and calculating can you get?  Machiavelli has nothing on this woman!


I read yesterday she researched Diana’s favourite perfume and wore it on their first date together


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I read yesterday she researched Diana’s favourite perfume and wore it on their first date together


Omg, if that's true then that's disgusting


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Omg, if that's true then that's disgusting


I think so too


----------



## limom

Clearblueskies said:


> I did watch  - not to the end, but I did hear that bit and was very surprised by it.  The narrative put out was always that Meghan had been specially chosen, not that she ASKED to do it.  She’s untruthful.  I wish she’d go away, make her money, find her next man - whatever, take the wretched stan culture with her and leave the BRF alone.


Is Elan Musk available these days?


----------



## LittleStar88

limom said:


> Is Elan Musk available these days?



She is too old for Elon. Also, he’s dating Grimes (and she is expecting his 6th [?] child)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I did watch  - not to the end, but I did hear that bit and was very surprised by it.  The narrative put out was always that Meghan had been specially chosen, not that she ASKED to do it.  She’s untruthful.  I wish she’d go away, make her money, find her next man - whatever, take the wretched stan culture with her and leave the BRF alone.


Yeah, just like she and her pregnant belly were having lunch with Michelle ***** until Michelle said that never happened. At this point Meghan could be my best friend in the world and I'd be fed up with her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I read yesterday she researched Diana’s favourite perfume and wore it on their first date together



I think this is the first time that I wish from the bottom of my heart mean gossip is just that. If this is true, I want to throw up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> From Blind Gossip
> 
> 
> *She Floated Her Buyout Number*
> 
> FEBRUARY 14, 2020
> Happy Valentines Day.  lol!
> Love for sale.  Everything has a price. Too bad for her  they didn’t want to pay her ludicrous and ridiculous price.



What does that mean...divorce settlement or lump sum to finally shut up? Or?


----------



## imgg

mdcx said:


> The Queen’s strategy seems to be working  - give MM enough rope etc.
> MM really seems to have no idea how badly her PR efforts are coming off.


True and sadly they will still make millions.  Even though people seem to really dislike this couple, they are a very hot topic and that sells.  Money however does not bring happiness and I don't think anything will fill that blackhole she has.....


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What does that mean...divorce settlement or lump sum to finally shut up? Or?


Money to go away.  Paying her off, and ensuring she shuts up.  I’m guessing they assumed they couldn’t trust her even they handed over the £££



imgg said:


> True and sadly they will still make millions.  Even though people seem to really dislike this couple, they are a very hot topic and that sells.  Money however does not bring happiness and I don't think anything will fill that blackhole she has.....


In the short term they’ll make money.  I don’t think it’ll last.  And a lot depends on how their charity (which seems forever stuck in the *about to be something really big, but not actually doing anything at all* phase ) performs.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Just thinking about what role royals should play ...
> See Royalty Fashion thread for pix of CP Victoria greeting a cancer suffering little girl at the palace, beautiful setting flowers, incredible room - kind of a MAKE YOUR WISH moment for the little girl who got to visit with a real princess
> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/royalty-fashion-thread.904519/page-1346#post-33615152
> Pss Madeleine of Sweden did a similar thing, she invited a sick little girl to tea and Madeleine made a huge effort - wore a gorgeous gown and tiara - princess moment
> Granting princess moments to suffering children is such a cool way to use all the trappings of royalty. The royals have the palaces and tiaras and sharing them is an effective use of these (obsolete) signs of royalty/power/prestige.
> I like the idea of the royal moments for sick children, only royals can do that - a Hollywood celebrity cannot do this
> And it does not have to be just about girls, any suffering child can visit the cannons, guards and horses, the grounds,. the polo ponies, the collections
> I like the idea of owning/sharing  one's royal status and making the most of it, rather than repudiating it completely like H & M


Reread my post and felt I needed to add something .. 
A lot of the trappings of royalty are over-the-top kinda useless erg QEII has hundreds of historical diamond pins, and wears one every day but some of the bling never seems to get worn, the palace - only QEII lives in delapidated Buck House - how many rooms does she need ?? 
So, I ask the question - how do you make the most out of all this useless hoarded stuff ? Well, it is complicated, the royals cannot sell this stuff 
My answer: make Buck House into a museum, and lend out all the jewels to exhibitions - all of which the royals do, but the MAKE A WISH Princess moments are another good way to make use of all the stuff, that they ALREADY have


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Don't disagree, but as we've all seen (oftentimes with the Celebrities), being a jerk hasn't stopped a lot of them!  In Harry's case, being a part of the BRF is a huge bonus, and IMO .. no wonder why Meghan wanted to glom onto him like white on rice!  At first, I was hoping that Harry would wake up and smell the coffee; now? .. not so sure and am beginning to think that maybe this is what he wanted all along .. to (in whatever way he could) "show up" Prince William and Kate? .. they sure seem like they enjoy doing that!


they may be trying to show up William and Kate but I think they're failing


----------



## michellem

Clearblueskies said:


> I read yesterday she researched Diana’s favourite perfume and wore it on their first date together


Omg if that’s true that’s super creepy!


----------



## sdkitty

Coconuts40 said:


> Even if Harry woke up one day and realized this marriage was a mistake, I doubt he would walk away now that he has Archie.  Can you imagine the logistics of it all - they no longer live in the UK, Archie is a US citizen, I'm sure they will eventually settle in L.A..  Meghan knows exactly what she is doing here.  She has Harry wrapped around her finger now.


don't disagree but Archie was born in England so he isn't a US citizen, right?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

michellem said:


> Omg if that’s true that’s super creepy!



*michelle & Clearblueskies*, if true, that is a sick mind at work
Who in their "right" mind would wear a man's dead mother's perfume on a first date with him?
Really?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *michelle & Clearblueskies*, if true, that is a sick mind at work
> Who in their "right" mind would wear a man's dead mother's perfume on a first date with him?
> Really?


Agreed.


----------



## Chagall

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *michelle & Clearblueskies*, if true, that is a sick mind at work
> Who in their "right" mind would wear a man's dead mother's perfume on a first date with him?
> Really?


I would love to know if that was true. If so it would make her ‘certifiable’. IMO.


----------



## lulilu

Born of a US parent or on US soil entitles one to citizenship.


----------



## imgg

Clearblueskies said:


> Money to go away.  Paying her off, and ensuring she shuts up.  I’m guessing they assumed they couldn’t trust her even they handed over the £££
> 
> 
> *In the short term they’ll make money.*  I don’t think it’ll last.  And a lot depends on how their charity (which seems forever stuck in the *about to be something really big, but not actually doing anything at all* phase ) performs.


I  thought that about the Kardashians as well.. Part of the popularity of the Kardashian family is they have so many sisters and half sisters, Meghan has no one, so you may be right.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *michelle & Clearblueskies*, if true, that is a sick mind at work
> Who in their "right" mind would wear a man's dead mother's perfume on a first date with him?
> Really?


but that sounds like it may be fiction IMO


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> Born of a US parent or on US soil entitles one to citizenship.


I knew about the born on US soil part but born of a US parent?  does that make him a US citizen automatically?


----------



## L etoile

sdkitty said:


> I knew about the born on US soil part but born of a US parent?  does that make him a US citizen automatically?



Yes.


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> I knew about the born on US soil part but born of a US parent?  does that make him a US citizen automatically?


Basically yes. There is some standard paperwork that has to be taken care of.
Assuming the requirements are met and paperwork is submitted on the US side, Archie should have dual US/UK citizenship.


----------



## limom

LittleStar88 said:


> She is too old for Elon. Also, he’s dating Grimes (and she is expecting his 6th [?] child)


With his dating history, he seems attracted to high drama/instable women....She fits the bill there...
I guess there is always Bezos....who likes them both cray and age appropriate...


----------



## LittleStar88

limom said:


> With his dating history, he seems attracted to high drama/instable women....She fits the bill there...
> I guess there is always Bezos....who likes them both cray and age appropriate...



yeah but in both cases their current significant others have one aspect Meghan is lacking: fun.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> they may be trying to show up William and Kate but I think they're failing


Couldn't agree with more!!


----------



## Lounorada

Clearblueskies said:


> I read yesterday she researched Diana’s favourite perfume and wore it on their first date together








That's a sick and twisted thing to do, if it's true.


----------



## Sharont2305

OT but a an ex girlfriend of Harry, Caroline Flack has apparently killed herself. They briefly dated in 2009 or 2010.
Reminder, please be kind to each other. 
Rip Flackers


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> OT but a an ex girlfriend of Harry, Caroline Flack has apparently killed herself. They briefly dated in 2009 or 2010.
> Reminder, please be kind to each other.
> Rip Flackers
> View attachment 4666531


Oh WOW .. she had dated some major men in her day, but from what I recall, she (sadly) had some problems in the past.  So sad ..


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just looked over the comments and one was mocking that apparently she said in the video (which I refuse to watch, there's only so much MM I can take) *"I didn't know if someone had ever guest edited...". Does this woman like to play dumb?* Even if she really didn't know - *just as she "didn't know" that Harry was one of the most eligible bachelors in the freaking WORLD* - wouldn't you find out before making your move on them (I did find some pleasure in the fact that apparently she wasn't contacted by Vogue but pushed herself on them)? Also I don't believe that for one minute with a control freak like her.





Clearblueskies said:


> I read yesterday she researched Diana’s favourite perfume and wore it on their first date together



In addition to claiming she didn’t know who Harry was when they met, she also said didn’t know much about Princess Diana because “in America the BRF aren’t followed”. Even back when I was really supporting the couple, this struck me as disingenuous b/c Diana was always of interest (on magazine covers etc) here. MM’s nearly 40 and old enough to remember all the tributes when Diana passed, as well as see news on the anniversaries of her death which was definitely covered in the US & Canada. As a former lifestyle blogger and actress, she also would have known a lot about Diana from a style icon point of view.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> In addition to claiming she didn’t know who Harry was when they met, she also said didn’t know much about Princess Diana because “in America the BRF aren’t followed”. Even back when I was really supporting the couple, this struck me as disingenuous b/c Diana was always of interest (on magazine covers etc) here. MM’s nearly 40 and was definitely old enough to remember all the tributes when Diana passed, as well as see news on the anniversaries of her death which was definitely covered in the US & Canada. As a former lifestyle blogger and actress, she also would have known a lot about Diana from a style icon point of view.


Let's face it (and yes, I'm being mean here) .. she's just a lying sack of sh#t!!  When they got engaged, I was really hopeful that they would be happy and that she would bring new life to the BRF .. I have ZERO respect for her now and my "respect" for Harry is declining every day!   If the story is true that she, indeed, wore the same perfume .. that is not only sick, but extremely manipulative and cunning .. this is not attributes that are 'stan' worthy!


----------



## imgg

PewPew said:


> In addition to claiming she didn’t know who Harry was when they met, she also said didn’t know much about Princess Diana because “in America the BRF aren’t followed”. Even back when I was really supporting the couple, this struck me as disingenuous b/c Diana was always of interest (on magazine covers etc) here. MM’s nearly 40 and old enough to remember all the tributes when Diana passed, as well as see news on the anniversaries of her death which was definitely covered in the US & Canada. As a former lifestyle blogger and actress, she also would have known a lot about Diana from a style icon point of view.


That’s ridiculous because there is a picture of her when she was young maybe early twenties/late teens in front of Buckingham Palace. She is pathological.


----------



## Sharont2305

imgg said:


> That’s ridiculous because there is a picture of her when she was young maybe early twenties/late teens in front of Buckingham Palace. She is pathological.


For once I'll stick up for her, she might not have known much at that age about the Royal Family lol.


----------



## lulilu

Sharont2305 said:


> For once I'll stick up for her, she might not have known much at that age about the Royal Family lol.



Impossible.  The funeral and related shows were on tv, every channel, for days, weeks.  She is a lying liar face.  If I believed in Karma, I'd be waiting for her to get bit in the ass.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> For once I'll stick up for her, she might not have known much at that age about the Royal Family lol.


But were there comments made that during her teen years she had been obsessed by the BRF???  I know that I read that somewhere and I believe it was from her friends back in her school days!


----------



## marietouchet

imgg said:


> That’s ridiculous because there is a picture of her when she was young maybe early twenties/late teens in front of Buckingham Palace. She is pathological.


MM is 38 years old, approx. 
Diana died 23 years ago when MM was 15 - she was old enough then to have seen Diana on every magazine cover on the planet - there was escaping Di in those days
If the 15 year old MM had any interest in celebrities, fashion etc, she would have known all about Diana


----------



## mdcx




----------



## mdcx

Photos via Backgrid:


----------



## PewPew

Haha, ever PR conscious MM is carrying a professional looking leather portfolio (or laptop / tablet case) off the plane, instead of putting it back in there bags. “Let’s show the world we’re working hard, even on the flight, in preparation for our business meeting with university leaders, while flying commercial.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Making sure to keep merching for Away suitcases, who sponsored the baby shower.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Terrifying and looking like a mess. Per usual.


----------



## mdcx

Looks like this shirt:
https://mishanonoo.com/products/the-husband-shirt-blue-stripe


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Looks like this shirt:
> https://mishanonoo.com/products/the-husband-shirt-blue-stripe
> 
> View attachment 4666652


lol of course it is. They’re so gross.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> In addition to claiming she didn’t know who Harry was when they met, she also said didn’t know much about Princess Diana because “in America the BRF aren’t followed”. Even back when I was really supporting the couple, this struck me as disingenuous b/c Diana was always of interest (on magazine covers etc) here. MM’s nearly 40 and old enough to remember all the tributes when Diana passed, as well as see news on the anniversaries of her death which was definitely covered in the US & Canada. As a former lifestyle blogger and actress, she also would have known a lot about Diana from a style icon point of view.



of course....Diana's death and funeral were huge news here.....what BS


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> of course....Diana's death and funeral were huge news here.....what BS


I can  go back farther than that.  I recall vividly being at my summer job and watching the investiture of Prince Charles as Prince of Wales.  It was on every  TV station and as I was doing my patient rounds, I watched it from room to room.  The US has always shown things like this on TV and it certainly would be on the nightly news.  You couldn't avoid it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I can  go back farther than that.  I recall vividly being at my summer job and watching the investiture of Prince Charles as Prince of Wales.  It was on every  TV station and as I was doing my patient rounds, I watched it from room to room.  The US has always shown things like this on TV and it certainly would be on the nightly news.  You couldn't avoid it.


yes, agree
I don't recall that about Charles and Meghan would have been too young.  But she would have been around 20 when Diana died.


----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


> Making sure to keep merching for Away suitcases, who sponsored the baby shower.
> View attachment 4666647


I wonder how much they were paid to use the Away suitcase.

Apparently Serena is a spokesperson. Don’t they share the same manager?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> Terrifying and looking like a mess. Per usual.
> View attachment 4666651


At least we're seeing the real Meghan now ; her clothing and hairstyles for royal functions all looked so wrong on her.


----------



## justwatchin

So what’s happened to Archie? I wonder where he’s been stashed?


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> At least we're seeing the real Meghan now ; her clothing and hairstyles for royal functions all looked so wrong on her.


Yes, and that Vancouver humidity is not doing her hair well at all!  On another note, she would have never been able to wear her "blouse/shirt" like that when "in the BRF"!  Lastly, does anyone else notice the staircase of the plane? .. that does not look like a commercial flight where you typically get off via a jetway directly into the airport.  The only time I've departed a plane like that was when I had to take "private" flights .. HMMMMM!


----------



## Megs

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and that Vancouver humidity is not doing her hair well at all!  On another note, she would have never been able to wear her "blouse/shirt" like that when "in the BRF"!  Lastly, does anyone else notice the staircase of the plane? .. that does not look like a commercial flight where you typically get off via a jetway directly into the airport.  The only time I've departed a plane like that was when I had to take "private" flights .. HMMMMM!



I've rarely had to do it for smaller flights or random international flights, but I'm guessing it was their smaller puddle jumper plane Harry was spotted taking before and they probably had all the seats on it for their "staff" of "protection" because they are "hounded" by the media. 

So then they can claim it was commercial. Just commercial with only them on it...!


----------



## mrsinsyder

justwatchin said:


> So what’s happened to Archie? I wonder where he’s been stashed?


Who?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting that Harry is running around getting paid to talk about how much he misses his mom while leaving Archie behind left and right. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> I've rarely had to do it for smaller flights or random international flights, but I'm guessing it was their smaller puddle jumper plane Harry was spotted taking before and they probably had all the seats on it for their "staff" of "protection" because they are "hounded" by the media.
> 
> So then they can claim it was commercial. Just commercial with only them on it...!


HA - good point!  Yes, the only time I've had to do it is on very small flights that you had to book private because there were no commercial airlines going there at that time (this was years ago) - the Caribbean and in Europe.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and that Vancouver humidity is not doing her hair well at all!  On another note, she would have never been able to wear her "blouse/shirt" like that when "in the BRF"!  Lastly, does anyone else notice the staircase of the plane? .. that does not look like a commercial flight where you typically get off via a jetway directly into the airport.  The only time I've departed a plane like that was when I had to take "private" flights .. HMMMMM!


If you take Southwest from Burbank to Oakland, you get treated to the outside stairway going up and coming back.  the only good thing they were forced to do is have a ramp now too.  Makes it easier when both hands are full.  Victoria is small plane territory.  I took a seaplane once from Victoria to Vancouver.  Once was enough hahahaha!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> If you take Southwest from Burbank to Oakland, you get treated to the outside stairway going up and coming back.  the only good thing they were forced to do is have a ramp now too.  Makes it easier when both hands are full.  Victoria is small plane territory.  I took a seaplane once from Victoria to Vancouver.  Once was enough hahahaha!


Oh wow .. didn't know that, but then again .. yeah, can kind of see it re: Oakland!  Yes, I am NOT a fan of having to use those stairways boarding or departing, and don't even get me started when there has been ice .. NOT FUN!


----------



## redney

Some Embraer regional jets many airlines fly, and the Bombardier Dash 8 Q400s Alaska Airlines flies sometime use stairs to board and disembark.


----------



## bag-mania

Check out what I saw in the supermarket tonight. The Enquirer outdid themselves. If only it were true…


----------



## justwatchin

mrsinsyder said:


> Who?


Ha! Exactly


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Check out what I saw in the supermarket tonight. The Enquirer outdid themselves. If only it were true…
> 
> View attachment 4666827


I’ve said it before I used to work for a top attorney specializing in FAR  and he told me tabloids like National Enquire tend to be spot on. They don’t lose a lose of cases.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lodpah said:


> I’ve said it before I used to work for a top attorney specializing in FAR  and he told me tabloids like National Enquire tend to be spot on. They don’t lose a lose of cases.


Just read Catch and Kill by Ronan Farrow - he said the same.


----------



## mdcx

Interesting:

Most  people would fall over themselves to name a prince as godfather to their precious first-born. But ahead of the imminent birth of his child, Tom ‘Skippy’ Inskip has rejected the opportunity of asking his childhood pal Harry to do the honours – and insiders are speculating it is because he and wife Lara are still smarting over the ‘hijacking’ of their 2017 wedding.

The two men used to be inseparable, with Skippy known as Harry’s wingman thanks to their wild holidays together.

Harry was an usher at Skippy’s wedding to literary agent Lara in Jamaica but the couple now believe that Meghan’s presence – one of her first appearances with the Prince – unfairly took the spotlight off them.

  A source says: ‘Although they said they didn’t mind at the time, Lara and Skippy are now telling friends they are furious with Meghan and Harry because, on reflection, they believe their wedding was hijacked by their presence and their demands, including asking for guests not to use their mobile phones. It would have been fine were it not for the fact that they were then left off the list for the Royal Wedding evening reception a year later.

Some friends hoped that the birth of his first child would have been an opportunity for Skippy to extend an olive branch to Harry. But instead of asking him to be a godfather, he has decided to keep the door closed.’

To make matters worse, Meghan and Harry are love-bombing another of their old circle – Charlie van Straubenzee and wife Daisy – ahead of the birth of their first child.

Another source adds: ‘Meghan has reportedly been sending Daisy some of Archie’s old baby clothes and has made it clear she or Harry would love to be called up for godparent duties. Lara and Tom can’t work out why another couple are feeling the love and they aren’t. Skippy bent over backwards for Harry.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...LK-TOWN-Chums-snub-Harry-Meghan-hijacker.html


----------



## muchstuff

.


----------



## mdcx

Well, well:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-8008153/TALK-TOWN-Chums-snub-Harry-Meghan-hijacker.html


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> yes, agree
> I don't recall that about Charles and Meghan would have been too young.  But she would have been around 20 when Diana died.


She wasn't even born then, this was in 1969. 
She was 16 when Diana died


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> Making sure to keep merching for Away suitcases, who sponsored the baby shower.
> View attachment 4666647



Notice H looking down as if not wanting to be photographed and M smiling away at the camera!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and that Vancouver humidity is not doing her hair well at all!  On another note, she would have never been able to wear her "blouse/shirt" like that when "in the BRF"!  Lastly, does anyone else notice the staircase of the plane? .. that does not look like a commercial flight where you typically get off via a jetway directly into the airport.  The only time I've departed a plane like that was when I had to take "private" flights .. HMMMMM!


I've been on a few planes like that when flying within the UK. Some only have about 36 seats.


----------



## limom

mdcx said:


> Well, well:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...LK-TOWN-Chums-snub-Harry-Meghan-hijacker.html
> 
> View attachment 4666966


Not a big fan of slut-shaming. They were both over 30 when they married.
Obviously, they had partners prior to getting together....


----------



## mdcx

limom said:


> Not a big fan of slut-shaming. They were both over 30 when they married.
> Obviously, they had partners prior to getting together....


Slut shaming? I didn’t see it that way. I understood it more that she might have encountered some of Harry’s pals whilst yachting, or in a more transactional sense, and he was unaware of this aspect of her. The friend who advised him of this was then blanked.


----------



## limom

mdcx said:


> Slut shaming? I didn’t see it that way. I understood it more that she might have encountered some of Harry’s pals whilst yachting, or in a more transactional sense, and he was unaware of this aspect of her. The friend who advised him of this was then blanked.


Is there any evidence that she even worked as a prostitute/yacht girl?
It is 2020. Totally uncool.
Such an old nasty stereotype against women, imho.
One can go on a yacht without being a sex worker...
In anycase, there is nothing wrong with being a sex worker as long as it is voluntary.


----------



## joyeaux

lulilu said:


> Impossible.  The funeral and related shows were on tv, every channel, for days, weeks.  She is a lying liar face.  If I believed in Karma, I'd be waiting for her to get bit in the ass.



Ok I just have to say “lying liar face” may just be my new favorite term and I’m officially adding it to my vocabulary, stat.

And to keep on topic, I totally agree. She really is a lying liar face


----------



## Chagall

lulilu said:


> Impossible.  The funeral and related shows were on tv, every channel, for days, weeks.  She is a lying liar face.  If I believed in Karma, I'd be waiting for her to get bit in the ass.


----------



## Chagall

lulilu said:


> Impossible.  The funeral and related shows were on tv, every channel, for days, weeks.  She is a lying liar face.  If I believed in Karma, I'd be waiting for her to get bit in the ass.


Just to be perfectly clear here, who exactly is the lying liar face?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Just saw this on a private instagram. She smokes? Is that something she still does - anyone know?? Not sure what year the pic is, but she's obviously older in it, like 30s. Maybe it's photoshopped, I can't tell.


----------



## mrsinsyder

She gave out blunts as party favors at her first wedding so I’m sure she smokes lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Just saw this on a private instagram. She smokes? Is that something she still does - anyone know?? Not sure what year the pic is, but she's obviously older in it, like 30s. Maybe it's photoshopped, I can't tell.
> View attachment 4667190


she may have given it up...drinking too I see


----------



## myown

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and that Vancouver humidity is not doing her hair well at all!  On another note, she would have never been able to wear her "blouse/shirt" like that when "in the BRF"!  Lastly, does anyone else notice the staircase of the plane? .. that does not look like a commercial flight where you typically get off via a jetway directly into the airport.  The only time I've departed a plane like that was when I had to take "private" flights .. HMMMMM!


In Europe itbis pretty common. I even exited an stlantic flight like that


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> In Europe itbis pretty common. I even exited an stlantic flight like that


It is fairly common in mainland Europe in my experience, especially the smaller airports.


----------



## LittleStar88

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Just saw this on a private instagram. She smokes? Is that something she still does - anyone know?? Not sure what year the pic is, but she's obviously older in it, like 30s. Maybe it's photoshopped, I can't tell.
> View attachment 4667190



probably smoking weed.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> probably smoking weed.


could be but the way she's holding it looks more like a ciggie to me


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> probably smoking weed.





sdkitty said:


> could be but the way she's holding it looks more like a ciggie to me


It totally wouldn't surprise me if it was a Cigarette; a lot of the actresses smoke to keep their weight down.  That's why I major-league side-eye certain celebrities with their "healthy" lifestyles because they are big-time smokers (Kate Hudson is one of them)!


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and that Vancouver humidity is not doing her hair well at all!  On another note, she would have never been able to wear her "blouse/shirt" like that when "in the BRF"!  Lastly, does anyone else notice the staircase of the plane? .. that does not look like a commercial flight where you typically get off via a jetway directly into the airport.  The only time I've departed a plane like that was when I had to take "private" flights .. HMMMMM!


Our airport here on the island is small and has no jetways. All planes commercial and private you exit directly onto the tarmac and walk into the airport building.  What they are taking from our tax dollars to pay their security would more than cover the cost of maybe getting us some jetways or many other things for Canadians and not go to this rich entitled pair.


----------



## tiktok




----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Cali really does not need any more weirdos, go figure H&M have moved here
fyi, selling the condo here bc it has become so strange!
ie, example: my Uber driver on Friday afternoon cheerfully explained how he beat-up a homeless man in a fast-food restaurant :shocker:
Over it!!!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Cali really does not need any more weirdos, go figure H&M have moved here
> fyi, selling the condo here bc it has become so strange!
> ie, example: my Uber driver on Friday afternoon cheerfully explained how he beat-up a homeless man in a fast-food restaurant :shocker:
> Over it!!!


ABSOLUTELY!!! .. alas, I bet anything those 2 will end up here in CA, hopefully I'll be gone then (as in leaving the state as are so many others)!


----------



## mdcx

limom said:


> Is there any evidence that she even worked as a prostitute/yacht girl?
> It is 2020. Totally uncool.
> Such an old nasty stereotype against women, imho.
> One can go on a yacht without being a sex worker...
> In anycase, there is nothing wrong with being a sex worker as long as it is voluntary.


Um, there are very strong rumours that she yachted. 
Yachted is rather different than got on a yacht once in her life.
Our personal views on s-x work are the same - it’s a personal choice, not a moral issue to me. 
The point here is that if one of Hs friends had “met” her in that context, either directly or by just observing it, it does add a level of awkwardness to their dating. 

The fact that he was iced out indicates that either yachting was in fact not cool to H or M convinced him the friend was lying.


----------



## Milosmum0307

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Just saw this on a private instagram. She smokes? Is that something she still does - anyone know?? Not sure what year the pic is, but she's obviously older in it, like 30s. Maybe it's photoshopped, I can't tell.
> View attachment 4667190


Prior to the engagement announcement, there were plenty of photos to be found of MM smoking tobacco cigarettes.  Cigarettes are an effective appetite suppressant and a common part of the Hollywood Diet.  I’ve been told Kate (Duchess of Cambridge) smoked in her twenties before having children, but I don’t know if that’s true (I didn’t follow her at all back then).  MM’s smoking habit is the reason I scratched my head with befuddlement at all of those “she’s totally cleaning up Harry’s unhealthy diet and habits, and now he does yoga and sucks down green juice!” rumors.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> ABSOLUTELY!!! .. alas, I bet anything those 2 will end up here in CA, hopefully I'll be gone then (as in leaving the state as are so many others)!



Absolutely, H&M will end up here!
Unlike us, leaving the state now ♥️


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Milosmum0307 said:


> Prior to the engagement announcement, there were plenty of photos to be found of MM smoking tobacco cigarettes.  Cigarettes are an effective appetite suppressant and a common part of the Hollywood Diet.  I’ve been told Kate (Duchess of Cambridge) smoked in her twenties before having children, but I don’t know if that’s true (I didn’t follow her at all back then).  MM’s smoking habit is the reason I scratched my head with befuddlement at all of those “she’s totally cleaning up Harry’s unhealthy diet and habits, and now he does yoga and sucks down green juice!” rumors.


Thanks! This is the first photo I saw of her smoking so I didn't know either way. I figured someone into yoga and health wouldn't be a smoker.   Maybe she stopped.


----------



## TC1

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Thanks! This is the first photo I saw of her smoking so I didn't know either way. I figured someone into yoga and health wouldn't be a smoker.   Maybe she stopped.


There are a lot of celebs that appear to preach health and wellness that smoke. Jen Aniston is one of them (although i read she quit a few years ago..but had been a smoker for 20+ years)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Thanks! This is the first photo I saw of her smoking so I didn't know either way. I figured someone into yoga and health wouldn't be a smoker.   Maybe she stopped.


Wasn't this pic from the wedding in Jamaica of Harry's best friend (at the time but since Markled) that she attended? 

That's what I thought, could be wrong. If she has since quit, that could explain why she isn't bone skinny anymore (not fat shaming or anything).


----------



## Sophisticatted

The smoking photos are from a trip to Greece she took with two of her girl friends.


----------



## CeeJay

TC1 said:


> There are a lot of celebs that appear to preach health and wellness that smoke. Jen Aniston is one of them (although i read she quit a few years ago..but had been a smoker for 20+ years)


Same with Gwyneth Paltrow; who has also since quit, but she was a big-time smoker for many years.  Oftentimes, when I see the celebs in town, they are smoking.


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> View attachment 4667324
> View attachment 4667325



Um, alliterate?  That's a pretty funny typo.  I believe them both but I think they're reaching with the illiterate claim... what does that even have to do with that topic?


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> Um, alliterate?  That's a pretty funny typo.  I believe them both but I think they're reaching with the illiterate claim... what does that even have to do with that topic?



Alliterate has to do with the first letters of her name -- *M*eghan *M*arkle.


----------



## mshermes

Sophisticatted said:


> The smoking photos are from a trip to Greece she took with two of her girl friends.


Is that the trip with the topless pics of her?


----------



## lalame

lulilu said:


> Alliterate has to do with the first letters of her name -- *M*eghan *M*arkle.


Omg  Okay that IS pretty funny.


----------



## Sophisticatted

mshermes said:


> Is that the trip with the topless pics of her?


Yes


----------



## Megs

Up with our “baby” right now (aka 1 yr old who’s huge but still wants mom love in the middle of the night), so not as easy to post, but anyone see the pics of them inside of the plane? I read some blurry ones surfaced, I need to look and share!


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Cali really does not need any more weirdos, go figure H&M have moved here
> fyi, selling the condo here bc it has become so strange!
> ie, example: my Uber driver on Friday afternoon cheerfully explained how he beat-up a homeless man in a fast-food restaurant :shocker:
> Over it!!!


Crazy. Talk about over sharing!


CeeJay said:


> ABSOLUTELY!!! .. alas, I bet anything those 2 will end up here in CA, hopefully I'll be gone then (as in leaving the state as are so many others)!


Is this really this dreadful?



VigeeLeBrun said:


> Absolutely, H&M will end up here!
> Unlike us, leaving the state now ♥️


Where are all the people leaving California going?

I was actually thinking about getting a place there... 


Megs said:


> Up with our “baby” right now (aka 1 yr old who’s huge but still wants mom love in the middle of the night), so not as easy to post, but anyone see the pics of them inside of the plane? I read some blurry ones surfaced, I need to look and share!


Hate to tell you but it does not really end. My college son is texting me NOW!
I am hoping that by 30, he will be independent


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Is this really this dreadful?
> Where are all the people leaving California going?
> I was actually thinking about getting a place there...



Depends on your age bracket and social circle. Most people I know are moving to Austin, Denver or Seattle.  Would love to join them but I’m tied to the job market here.


----------



## lalame

I just don’t get why they would move to LA. I doubt she’s going to go back to the acting circuit so there are so many other places they could be with more “privacy.” I don’t get those two.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> I just don’t get why they would move to LA. I doubt she’s going to go back to the acting circuit so there are so many other places they could be with more “privacy.” I don’t get those two.


They want the life of a movie star/celebrity, imho.
She is already doing voice over...They are getting into producing.
Also, it would be the easiest way for them to make a great living.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> They want the life of a movie star/celebrity, imho.
> She is already doing voice over...They are getting into producing.
> Also, it would be the easiest way for them to make a great living.



They could probably live anywhere and still get those opportunities... lots of actual movie stars don’t live in LA and enjoy a more private lifestyle. The only explanation I can think of is like you said, they want the celeb “scene”... don’t think it has anything to do with the professional opportunities. Seems like Harry has had lots of celeb friends for awhile (just saw some story about him and Margot Robbie) so he’s embracing that side of being rich and fabulous.


----------



## lalame

Well I can already feel my interest dying at the thought of these two going around giving speeches about their childhoods (H) and dime-a-dozen thoughts about women empowerment (M) without actually achieving anything substantial themselves. Without the interesting events and sightings related to BRF duties... what else is going to sustain the public interest in these two after the scandal dies down?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

limom said:


> Crazy. Talk about over sharing!
> 
> Is this really this dreadful?
> 
> 
> Where are all the people leaving California going?
> 
> I was actually thinking about getting a place there...
> 
> Hate to tell you but it does not really end. My college son is texting me NOW!
> I am hoping that by 30, he will be independent



California has its pros and cons and many people (myself included) still think the pros make up for the cons. It’s not dreadful at all in many ways, but homelessness and income inequality are definitely major challenges. If you’re not struggling financially it can be as close to paradise as you can find in terms of weather, natural beauty, outdoor activities, diversity, food, employment opportunities, progressive liberal policies that encourage everyone to be who they are (gender / sexual orientation etc.)... but it’s very expensive, especially in the SF Bay Area and LA metropolitan area. The comment earlier in the thread about a driver boasting about beating a homeless person is definitely an exception - everyone I personally know in CA would consider that just as horrible and criminal as anyone elsewhere in the world would.

As for H&M, I’m sure they’ll have the means to live very comfortably in some LA mansion and be oblivious to any financial concerns the average person has.


----------



## Grande Latte

I hope they don't live in SF Bay Area or LA metropolitan area, I don't want to be stuck in traffic because of their entourage. Everyone (well LOTS of people are rich) in these areas, nobody wants to put up with their royal ****.


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> I just don’t get why they would move to LA. I doubt she’s going to go back to the acting circuit so *there are so many other places they could be with more “privacy.”* I don’t get those two.



They don't really want privacy.  They just want iife on their terms.


----------



## doni

lalame said:


> I just don’t get why they would move to LA. I doubt she’s going to go back to the acting circuit so there are so many other places they could be with more “privacy.” I don’t get those two.


But if they retire to a ranch in New Mexico a la Julia Roberts, they will be soon forgotten and money is going to run out pretty fast... To be fair, LA is where Meghan comes from, it is home. But also, their subsistence is going to depend on networking (if they want to thrive not just exist). I don't think she has a big career as an actress ahead of her, and given that they have no other skills, profession or assets, they are going to have to hustle. Hello magazine (which is rather reliable) reports that their main memo for their house search in LA is that it has to be good for receiving. And in the end that is what they will do, put people together who have no other connection that wanting to dine with a Prince and see what comes out of it...


----------



## limom

doni said:


> But if they retire to a ranch in New Mexico a la Julia Roberts, they will be soon forgotten and money is going to run out pretty fast... To be fair, LA is where Meghan comes from, it is home. But also, their subsistence is going to depend on networking (if they want to thrive not just exist). I don't think she has a big career as an actress ahead of her, and given that they have no other skills, profession or assets, they are going to have to hustle. Hello magazine (which is rather reliable) reports that their main memo for their house search in LA is that it has to be good for receiving. And in the end that is what they will do, put people together who have no other connection that wanting to dine with a Prince and see what comes out of it...


Right out of the Windsor/Willis playbook.
If they can make a living out of it, more power to them.
If she is marketed correctly, she can carve herself a niche out of cartoons voice over. It is lucrative and relatively uncontroversial. (PG material).
He can peddle his life as HRH till the end of time....there will always be a market here and abroad....
This never ending thread inspired me to binge watch The Crown....
History really repeats itself...


----------



## limom

Grande Latte said:


> I hope they don't live in SF Bay Area or LA metropolitan area, I don't want to be stuck in traffic because of their entourage. Everyone (well LOTS of people are rich) in these areas, nobody wants to put up with their royal ****.


Hope they don’t come to NYC either. It is already a mess as it is.


----------



## lulilu

CNN is doing a series on the House of Windsor.  Last night showing the similarities to H and his great uncle -- the embarrassing things he did etc.


----------



## uhpharm01

lalame said:


> Depends on your age bracket and social circle. Most people I know are moving to Austin, Denver or Seattle.  Would love to join them but I’m tied to the job market here.


They are all over Texas and now the rent is Texas is going up now. SMH.


----------



## LittleStar88

Grande Latte said:


> I hope they don't live in SF Bay Area or LA metropolitan area, I don't want to be stuck in traffic because of their entourage. Everyone (well LOTS of people are rich) in these areas, nobody wants to put up with their royal ****.



We are already stuck in traffic LOL! 

Let them live in SF - they can get a side gig cleaning human poop off the sidewalks.


----------



## lulilu

From twitter:


----------



## Emeline

lulilu said:


> From twitter:


Wow. Those comparison shots are bizarrely similar.


----------



## scarlet555

you don't come to California if you want privacy and no paps.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Emeline said:


> Wow. Those comparison shots are bizarrely similar.


No kidding. Now is this image (and other similar images to Diana) just really random or is it purposeful?


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> No kidding. Now is this image (and other similar images to Diana) just really random or is it purposeful?


either it's random or she's crazy


----------



## limom

This is really a boring, casual outfit.
We all have worn a version of it throughout the years..
Now if she cuts her hair... it is a wrap. She is loco....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

lulilu said:


> From twitter:


Maybe she's auditioning for a role in Single White Female 2.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Right out of the Windsor/Willis playbook.
> If they can make a living out of it, more power to them.
> If she is marketed correctly, she can carve herself a niche out of cartoons voice over. It is lucrative and relatively uncontroversial. (PG material).
> He can peddle his life as HRH till the end of time....there will always be a market here and abroad....
> This never ending thread inspired me to binge watch The Crown....
> History really repeats itself...


this reminds me - did anyone watch the CNN special about the Windsors last night?  the Duke of Windsor story was remarkably similar to today's drama


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> you don't come to California if you want privacy and no paps.



Exactly! If I were them I’d settle in a nice, quiet town in upstate NY or southwestern CT a la the *******s, Jay-z & Beyoncé, etc. I suppose the Bay Area would be more private but I don’t see anything for them there.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Exactly! If I were them I’d settle in a nice, quiet town in upstate NY or southwestern CT a la the *******s, Jay-z & Beyoncé, etc. I suppose the Bay Area would be more private but I don’t see anything for them there.


Harry may want privacy but I think she wants to be part of the Hollywood elite that she could never have dreamed of being w/o finding "H"


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> Harry may want privacy but I think she wants to be part of the Hollywood elite that she could never have dreamed of being w/o finding "H"


Yes, "H" is her ticket to Hollywood.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> this reminds me - did anyone watch the CNN special about the Windsors last night?  the Duke of Windsor story was remarkably similar to today's drama


What did they emphasize?
The fact that the Duke was staying in various residences for free or that he sold access to his person toward the end of his empty life?
Did they show how tacky and bitter he was?
Was the show any good? Any revelation?
This morning on ABC they had a segment on the royales again... it is getting a bit too much, imho.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, "H" is her ticket to Hollywood.


speaking of "H" - now he calls her "M"?  are they teenagers in terms of emotional IQ?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Harry may want privacy but I think she wants to be part of the Hollywood elite that she could never have dreamed of being w/o finding "H"


Bologna, if he wanted privacy he would not hang out with celebs and sponsored such public events as the invictus games..


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> What did they emphasize?
> The fact that the Duke was staying in various residences for free or that he sold access to his person toward the end of his empty life?
> Did they show how tacky and bitter he was?
> Was the show any good? Any revelation?
> This morning on ABC they had a segment on the royales again... it is getting a bit too much, imho.


Ha
they talked about how even when he was very young and his father had the ceremony making him the future king, he didnt' like the pomp and cirumstance....and then of course him falling in love with the american divorcee


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Bologna, if he wanted privacy he would not hang out with celebs and sponsored such public events as the invictus games..


probably right - I just said he "may" want privacy


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Ha
> they talked about how even when he was very young and his father had the ceremony making him the future king, he didnt' like the pomp and cirumstance....and then of course him falling in love with the american divorcee


Sounds like very much like Harry, the wife was the one who gave the Duke the courage to leave....


----------



## Sharont2305

Us Brits were hoping that she wasn't going to be like the "other American Duchess"


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Us Brits were hoping that she wasn't going to be like the "other American Duchess"


am I recalling right that the first duchess wasn't that anxious to marry the duke?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> am I recalling right that the first duchess wasn't that anxious to marry the duke?


If I'm right in thinking, she did have cold feet and she realised he was serious about abdicating she felt that she had to go through with marrying him. I think she liked being his plaything and would have carried on being that with him still being King. A mistress of sorts without him being married to someone else...... or him marrying someone else and her being a real mistress.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> If I'm right in thinking, she did have cold feet and she realised he was serious about abdicating she felt that she had to go through with marrying him. I think she liked being his plaything and would have carried on being that with him still being King. A mistress of sorts without him being married to someone else...... or him marrying someone else and her being a real mistress.


She had the right idea, imo
They would have both had more fun....and a more fulfilling life imho..
I have to say that the Windsor stayed in many houses on Long Island, NY and many families still publicized the fact that they slept there.
He stayed in Mansions and not the glamorous houses... kinda odd.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

lulilu said:


> From twitter:


Diana always looked so effortlessly fabulous, even in a simple outfit like jeans and a shirt.
Meghan looks an absolute mess.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> Diana always looked so effortlessly fabulous, even in a simple outfit like jeans and a shirt.
> Meghan looks an absolute mess.


She’d look better if she did something with her hair.  I get the impression that when she looks in the mirror she doesn't see what we see.


----------



## queennadine

Yeah, there’s nothing effortless or chic about MM. Sloppy and disheveled is more like it.


----------



## bag-mania

This is a sad piece of news. A woman Harry briefly dated committed suicide this past weekend. Maybe some of our British members knew who she was. 

*‘Love Island’ host Caroline Flack once had a fling with Prince Harry*






Tragic “Love Island” host Caroline Flack — who took her own life Saturday — once had a brief fling with Britain’s Prince Harry, which ended when tabloids got wind of the romance.

“Once the story got out, that was it. We had to stop seeing each other,” the UK TV personality wrote in her 2014 memoir, “Storm in a C Cup.”

“I was no longer Caroline Flack, TV presenter, I was Caroline Flack, Prince Harry’s bit of rough.”

Harry was 25 years old and still serving in the armed forces at the time of the 2009 fling — while Caroline had found fame as the co-host of the British TV show “Gladiators.”

The presenter said the pair struck up a relationship after being set up by their mutual friend Caroline Pinkham, who had previously dated Harry.

“I knew (Caroline Pinkham) was friends with Prince Harry, and I’d never met him, so I thought, ‘Oh that’s quite exciting’, and for a moment I perked up,” Flack wrote. “So I was just sitting there and he arrived with a few others in tow and we all spent the evening chatting and laughing.”

The TV personality, who also previously dated singer Harry Styles, took her own life at her London home in the run-up to her trial for the alleged assault of her boyfriend Lewis Burton.

She was 40.

Her worried friend, stylist Lou Teasdale, who was staying with her, left her alone briefly while she went to the store.

However, Teasdale couldn’t get back into the apartment when she returned. She called Flack’s father, Ian, who gained entry to the flat where he found the star’s body.
https://pagesix.com/2020/02/17/love-island-host-caroline-flack-once-had-a-fling-with-prince-harry/


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> This is a sad piece of news. A woman Harry briefly dated committed suicide this past weekend. Maybe some of our British members knew who she was.
> 
> *‘Love Island’ host Caroline Flack once had a fling with Prince Harry*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tragic “Love Island” host Caroline Flack — who took her own life Saturday — once had a brief fling with Britain’s Prince Harry, which ended when tabloids got wind of the romance.
> 
> “Once the story got out, that was it. We had to stop seeing each other,” the UK TV personality wrote in her 2014 memoir, “Storm in a C Cup.”
> 
> “I was no longer Caroline Flack, TV presenter, I was Caroline Flack, Prince Harry’s bit of rough.”
> 
> Harry was 25 years old and still serving in the armed forces at the time of the 2009 fling — while Caroline had found fame as the co-host of the British TV show “Gladiators.”
> 
> The presenter said the pair struck up a relationship after being set up by their mutual friend Caroline Pinkham, who had previously dated Harry.
> 
> “I knew (Caroline Pinkham) was friends with Prince Harry, and I’d never met him, so I thought, ‘Oh that’s quite exciting’, and for a moment I perked up,” Flack wrote. “So I was just sitting there and he arrived with a few others in tow and we all spent the evening chatting and laughing.”
> 
> The TV personality, who also previously dated singer Harry Styles, took her own life at her London home in the run-up to her trial for the alleged assault of her boyfriend Lewis Burton.
> 
> She was 40.
> 
> Her worried friend, stylist Lou Teasdale, who was staying with her, left her alone briefly while she went to the store.
> 
> However, Teasdale couldn’t get back into the apartment when she returned. She called Flack’s father, Ian, who gained entry to the flat where he found the star’s body.
> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/17/love-island-host-caroline-flack-once-had-a-fling-with-prince-harry/


Yeah, I posted this in Saturday.
Very very sad.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, I posted this in Saturday.
> Very very sad.



Sorry for the repost, I must have missed it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> This is a sad piece of news. A woman Harry briefly dated committed suicide this past weekend. Maybe some of our British members knew who she was.
> 
> *‘Love Island’ host Caroline Flack once had a fling with Prince Harry*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tragic “Love Island” host Caroline Flack — who took her own life Saturday — once had a brief fling with Britain’s Prince Harry, which ended when tabloids got wind of the romance.
> 
> “Once the story got out, that was it. We had to stop seeing each other,” the UK TV personality wrote in her 2014 memoir, “Storm in a C Cup.”
> 
> “I was no longer Caroline Flack, TV presenter, I was Caroline Flack, Prince Harry’s bit of rough.”
> 
> Harry was 25 years old and still serving in the armed forces at the time of the 2009 fling — while Caroline had found fame as the co-host of the British TV show “Gladiators.”
> 
> The presenter said the pair struck up a relationship after being set up by their mutual friend Caroline Pinkham, who had previously dated Harry.
> 
> “I knew (Caroline Pinkham) was friends with Prince Harry, and I’d never met him, so I thought, ‘Oh that’s quite exciting’, and for a moment I perked up,” Flack wrote. “So I was just sitting there and he arrived with a few others in tow and we all spent the evening chatting and laughing.”
> 
> The TV personality, who also previously dated singer Harry Styles, took her own life at her London home in the run-up to her trial for the alleged assault of her boyfriend Lewis Burton.
> 
> She was 40.
> 
> Her worried friend, stylist Lou Teasdale, who was staying with her, left her alone briefly while she went to the store.
> 
> However, Teasdale couldn’t get back into the apartment when she returned. She called Flack’s father, Ian, who gained entry to the flat where he found the star’s body.
> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/17/love-island-host-caroline-flack-once-had-a-fling-with-prince-harry/


She was as much known for her troubled love life as her TV and radio career, sadly.  But she was very talented.  I remember her winning Strictly Come Dancing - she was fantastic.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> She was as much known for her troubled love life as her TV and radio career, sadly.  But she was very talented.  I remember her winning Strictly Come Dancing - she was fantastic.


My favourite Charleston was her and Pashas "Istanbul"


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Sorry for the repost, I must have missed it.




More bad news for th Queen, her nephew Earl of Snowdon, Princess Margaret's son, has split from his wife of 26 years Serena. Goodness me


----------



## lalame

Lounorada said:


> Diana always looked so effortlessly fabulous, even in a simple outfit like jeans and a shirt.
> Meghan looks an absolute mess.





Clearblueskies said:


> She’d look better if she did something with her hair.  I get the impression that when she looks in the mirror she doesn't see what we see.





queennadine said:


> Yeah, there’s nothing effortless or chic about MM. Sloppy and disheveled is more like it.



I think she’s really into that disheveled Los Angeles look. This seems normal to me so I can’t really say anything here. The British elite as a whole have a more “polished” style than Californians who are more into the tousled hair and distressed/all natural vibe. I like them both imo... just different.


----------



## lalame

Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.


from what I know about them I'm not a fan
But she did have some fab jewelry


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.



OMG the insta comments are hilarious:  '... she was a spy for the nazi', 'She only married to be queen and was furious when abdicated,'

Um, Cartier, what is up with the rumored openly nazi supporters?  That might be ok back in the 30's but not 'nowaday'.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.


I saw a doc about them and it claimed that Wallis wanted out--she never meant for the relationship to go as far as it did; she really loved her first hubbie. 

It seems that back in the old and wealthy days, these hi-falutin' folk wife swapped a lot (at these country houses) and hubbie was ok with Wallis sleeping with Edward but Edward got besotted (sound familiar?) and Wallis' marriage unraveled. So this great love story maybe really wasn't. The documentary showed some of Wallis' letters that seemed to support this, who knows for sure though. And I agree about her jewels.


----------



## lalame

kemilia said:


> I saw a doc about them and it claimed that Wallis wanted out--she never meant for the relationship to go as far as it did; she really loved her first hubbie.
> 
> It seems that back in the old and wealthy days, these hi-falutin' folk wife swapped a lot (at these country houses) and hubbie was ok with Wallis sleeping with Edward but Edward got besotted (sound familiar?) and Wallis' marriage unraveled. So this great love story maybe really wasn't. The documentary showed some of Wallis' letters that seemed to support this, who knows for sure though. And I agree about her jewels.



It has been so widely reported already that the marriage was really troubled so I don’t know why companies still try to portray it as some romantic fairy tale. Not to mention their own, um, flaws as individuals hardly make them role models anyway. But i bet this is how history will remember H & M too... people conveniently forget the details when it’s an attractive couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> What did they emphasize?
> The fact that the Duke was staying in various residences for free or that he sold access to his person toward the end of his empty life?
> Did they show how tacky and bitter he was?
> Was the show any good? Any revelation?
> This morning on ABC they had a segment on the royales again... it is getting a bit too much, imho.


I watched, but I found it lacking. Like they were afraid to offend anyone.

The Duke and Wallis were famous for their S&M relationship but I don't think the special wanted to touch on what he got out of the relationship.  lol


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> More bad news for th Queen, her nephew Earl of Snowdon, Princess Margaret's son, has split from his wife of 26 years Serena. Goodness me


Yes, it looks like the family is doing spring cleaning in the marriage dept.  I've seen his furniture up close and it really is something.  My SIL thought she could buy a small table, and then she saw the price lol!


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I watched, but I found it lacking. Like they were afraid to offend anyone.
> 
> The Duke and Wallis were famous for their S&M relationship but I don't think the special wanted to touch on what he got out of the relationship.  lol


right....my understanding is she was basically his dominatrix....not a very romantic story to me.....and I'm glad Cartier got backlash on this ad


----------



## Jayne1

By the way, it just occurred to me-- what were the paps doing at the airport?  Did they know M&H were arriving?

Meg's hand to her hair pose is a giveaway that she knew she was being photographed. I think.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> By the way, it just occurred to me-- what were the paps doing at the airport?  Did they know M&H were arriving?
> 
> Meg's hand to her hair pose is a giveaway that she knew she was being photographed. I think.


I'm losing track....is that photo of her wearing the blouse like Diana's a recent A/P pic?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

limom said:


> Crazy. Talk about over sharing!
> 
> Is this really this dreadful?
> 
> 
> Where are all the people leaving California going?
> 
> I was actually thinking about getting a place there...
> 
> Hate to tell you but it does not really end. My college son is texting me NOW!
> I am hoping that by 30, he will be independent


Yes, *limom*, it has dissolved to that level of dreadful out here <West Coast> 
We have homes on both coasts and the change out here during the past five (5) years has been insane, literally 

Our family is doing a mass exodus, might take a year before real estate is sold, new jobs, etc  ~ a shame bc I ♥️ H Rodeo  ~ but that is our direction -> outta here!

Where are people moving? 
Mountains: Montana, Colorado
East Coast: South & Florida 

♥️


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> Yes, it looks like the family is do





sdkitty said:


> right....my understanding is she was basically his dominatrix....not a very romantic story to me.....and I'm glad Cartier got backlash on this ad


I heard he liked to dress as a baby... Diapers and all.

Both were anorexic. Edward was obsessed with exercise and Wallis only consumed an orange a day. Of course they drank like fishes.


----------



## V0N1B2

Jayne1 said:


> By the way, it just occurred to me-- what were the paps doing at the airport?  Did they know M&H were arriving?
> 
> Meg's hand to her hair pose is a giveaway that she knew she was being photographed. I think.


Apparently they may have been "found out" on their flight from SFO to SEA.
You know, if these two azzholes want to sponge of the goodwill (and tax dollars) of the Canadian people, the least they can do is SUPPORT their so-called adopted home of Canada by flying one of our major airlines.
WestJet flies from SFO to Victoria, as I'm sure Air Canada does as well.


----------



## Straight-Laced

gracekelly said:


> Yes, it looks like the family is doing spring cleaning in the marriage dept.  I've seen his furniture up close and it really is something.  My SIL thought she could buy a small table, and then she saw the price lol!


Long time ago when I was first working in London I used to take a bus home that went right past his furniture studio/workshop (in Chelsea I think).  The bus would often stop for a while directly outside, caught up in traffic, and many times I saw him at work building large tables and similar


----------



## Straight-Laced

lalame said:


> Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.


Ugh.  Incredibly misguided of Cartier.  'Arguably the most romantic act of the century'? Arguably not!
I'm a big fan of fabulous things from Cartier but having read a small pile of books on 'WE' it's a very strange choice for them to use this famously vain pair of nasties who obsessively wore and collected very smart clothes and jewels. 
They don't look good from here in 2020, Cartier!  Appeasement lost its glamour some time last century and too much is known now about the *WE*ird dynamic of their relationship.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Yes, it looks like the family is doing spring cleaning in the marriage dept.  I've seen his furniture up close and it really is something.  My SIL thought she could buy a small table, and then she saw the price lol!


Some comments on twitter are hilarious....
"come on Harry, make it a hat-trick"
"not the couple we wanted to hear about divorcing, H & m next"
Oops


----------



## duna

chowlover2 said:


> I heard he liked to dress as a baby... Diapers and all.
> 
> Both were anorexic. Edward was obsessed with exercise and *Wallis only consumed an orange a day*. Of course they drank like fishes.



Yes, there's a saying which allegedly Wallis had come up with " one can never be too rich or too thin".


----------



## jen943

Looks like Cartier removed the tone-deaf "WE" post from Instagram.


----------



## Mrs.Z

jen943 said:


> Looks like Cartier removed the tone-deaf "WE" post from Instagram.


Ha ...they did!  Maybe next time no love stories involving Nazi sympathizers.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Some comments on twitter are hilarious....
> "come on Harry, make it a hat-trick"
> "not the couple we wanted to hear about divorcing, H & m next"
> Oops


last night one of the entertainment reporting TV shows had Diana's psychic (at least she claimed to be) on.  She said Diana would have been apalled at H&M's behavior.  And she predicted they won't make it to their third anniversary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.



Dear me


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> last night one of the entertainment reporting TV shows had Diana's psychic (at least she claimed to be) on.  She said Diana would have been apalled at H&M's behavior.  And she predicted they won't make it to their third anniversary.


I agree, on both counts. I've seen a lot of "Diana would have been so proud of them" comments elsewhere, I disagree. We know she wasn't perfect but she respected the traditions and history her sons were born into and would have been upset at what Harry has done, to the Queen especially.
Regarding Meghan, I think she would have told Harry not to rush into marriage so quickly, just like William  supposedly told him. I also think she would have been wary of Meghan too. 
I see a divorce too.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree, on both counts. I've seen a lot of "Diana would have been so proud of them" comments elsewhere, I disagree. We know she wasn't perfect but she respected the traditions and history her sons were born into and would have been upset at what Harry has done, to the Queen especially.
> Regarding Meghan, I think she would have told Harry not to rush into marriage so quickly, just like William  supposedly told him. I also think she would have been wary of Meghan too.
> I see a divorce too.


will be interesting to see what happens
I don't think Meghan will retain the public's great interest w/o "H"


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree, on both counts. I've seen a lot of "Diana would have been so proud of them" comments elsewhere, I disagree. We know she wasn't perfect but she respected the traditions and history her sons were born into and would have been upset at what Harry has done, to the Queen especially.
> Regarding Meghan, I think she would have told Harry not to rush into marriage so quickly, just like William  supposedly told him. I also think she would have been wary of Meghan too.
> I see a divorce too.


 IMO Diana would’ve seen Meghan off at an early stage of the relationship


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> IMO Diana would’ve seen Meghan off at an early stage of the relationship


unfortunately we'll never know


----------



## kemilia

I remember reading around engagement time, that Harry felt his mother & M would have been as thick as thieves--they would have gotten along so well.


----------



## cafecreme15

lalame said:


> Speaking of “WE,” did anyone see Cartier’s latest insta lost about them?  A bit tone deaf these days... and the commenters let them know it too.


Slightly off topic but I recently received the Van Cleef & Arpels assouline book in the mail as a client gift and they also described them in a very similar tone! Apparently Wallis inspired the famous zipper design necklace. I thought it was extremely revisionist and tone deaf there as well.


----------



## limom

While she was a woman full of perfidy, Willis had an incredible collection of Jewels and excellent taste, imho.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I remember reading around engagement time, that Harry felt his mother & M would have been as thick as thieves--they would have gotten along so well.



A book could be written about how little understanding Harry has about human nature. Almost every move he makes shows he doesn't get it when it comes to his interactions with people. He could have made his exit in a quiet, orderly, less hurtful to his family way. Instead he went about it in the most clumsy and public way possible. 

He was 12 when Diana died. How many people can honestly say they understood their parents at that young age? As usual he's talking out his @ss.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree, on both counts. I've seen a lot of "Diana would have been so proud of them" comments elsewhere, I disagree. We know she wasn't perfect but she respected the traditions and history her sons were born into and would have been upset at what Harry has done, to the Queen especially.
> Regarding Meghan, I think she would have told Harry not to rush into marriage so quickly, just like William  supposedly told him. I also think she would have been wary of Meghan too.
> I see a divorce too.


I so DISAGREE re: Meghan!  One of her 'former' friends (who was later 'markled') very specifically said (and this article was published - just can't find it) .. that Meghan told her that she would do just about anything to 'SNAG' Harry.  When her friend advised her to "take her time", that's when Meghan pretty much told her that "you're done" (aka:  'markled')!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Yeah, I agree - Meghan seems like one of those people who can be anything YOU want them to be in order to get their way. Then it all changes once her desire changes or after she attains her goal.

Harry is enchanted by the memory of his mother - *his* memory of her - which can be different from the reality of it from a young boy's point of view. Seems his only identity to the outside world - the poor little boy who lost his mum in a very tragic and public fashion. And he is only cementing that typecast and inability to become someone else so long as that is all he talks about.

I also see a divorce - a lot of different reasons to push them there. Hopefully for him he can go back to BRF and do good works and recreate his brand and image.

Meghan is just a hustler.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm linking this example of how the media routinely manipulates their readers by presenting blatant advertisements as if they were stories. At least this "article" by _People_ includes a line about how they _may be_ getting a commission (they 100% are). Since it is a Meghan article I wonder if she is also getting kickbacks from the shoe company.

https://people.com/style/meghan-markle-merino-rothys-flats/


----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> I remember reading around engagement time, that Harry felt his mother & M would have been as thick as thieves--they would have gotten along so well.


Maybe they would have been close.  Both have/had a conniving streak, a willingness to do things their own way and to try and modernize the monarchy.

Unless, two of a kind cannot possibly get along, being so similar.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I'm linking this example of how the media routinely manipulates their readers by presenting blatant advertisements as if they were stories. At least this "article" by _People_ includes a line about how they _may be_ getting a commission (they 100% are). Since it is a Meghan article I wonder if she is also getting kickbacks from the shoe company.
> 
> https://people.com/style/meghan-markle-merino-rothys-flats/



I love my Rothy's and own many pairs. I am sure Rothy's sent her the shoes for free.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> While she was a woman full of perfidy, Willis had an incredible collection of Jewels and excellent taste, imho.


right, she was a style icon
but I don't think their's was a great love story.....unless you like S&M


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> I'm linking this example of how the media routinely manipulates their readers by presenting blatant advertisements as if they were stories. At least this "article" by _People_ includes a line about how they _may be_ getting a commission (they 100% are). Since it is a Meghan article I wonder if she is also getting kickbacks from the shoe company.
> 
> https://people.com/style/meghan-markle-merino-rothys-flats/


100% !! Markle’s getting a cut, People’s getting a cut...it’s all an advertisement


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh snap!!!!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Way to go, Gan Gan!


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if there is any way they can get around it. The copyright was filed in the UK but did they also file one in the US? The Queen's proclamation would have little pull here.


----------



## bag-mania

They just need to tweak their trademark a bit.

#SussexDeadbeats
#SussexRunaways


----------



## Emeline

The Queen putting a hard no on using Sussex Royal for their own financial gain is going to make stepping back much more complicated and expensive. Good.
The are going to have to increase the number of those pitch meetings. 
Hope M has her binder handy. She's going to need to rework the master plan.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh snap!!!!


BOO-YAH!!!  YES, YES and YES .. way to go QEII!!!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh snap!!!!


It’s about time.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh to be a fly on the wall for the conversation between H&M going on right at this moment!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Oh to be a fly on the wall for the conversation between H&M going on right at this moment!


I think the odds on a divorce just shortened somewhat.


----------



## sdkitty

is DM reliable?  I don't see it reported elsewhere


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> is DM reliable?  I don't see it reported elsewhere



It can go either way with them. If none of the others picks it up then it's probably not.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> is DM reliable?  I don't see it reported elsewhere


There is this as well, but also the Daily Mail .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...DMAN-Queen-loves-Harry-Meghan-stand-firm.html

I found this part of the above article to be interesting .. 
"_The Queen is actually governed by several pieces of legislation, including the Trade Marks Act 1994 and even the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property of 1883.  The Sussexes have not picked a fight with the Queen but with the law of the land_."


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> is DM reliable?  I don't see it reported elsewhere


TMZ just posted about it along with pics of Harry out grabbing sandwiches over the weekend. Apprently that's news, lol


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> TMZ just posted about it along with pics of Harry out grabbing sandwiches over the weekend. Apprently that's news, lol


TMZ is usually accurate but in this case possibly they are just repeating what the DM said?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

Their website is no longer working...

https://sussexroyal.com/


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Mrs.Z said:


> 100% !! Markle’s getting a cut, People’s getting a cut...it’s all an advertisement



*Mrs Z*, your pic of MM, her eyes are simply C R A Z Y


----------



## mrsinsyder

imgg said:


> Their website is no longer working...
> 
> https://sussexroyal.com/


Lmaooooo


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

From H&M’s website:
_
“Update: 18th of January 2020

In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.“
_
Also, there is the statement from QEII on insta 
♥️


----------



## xobellavidaxo

VigeeLeBrun said:


> From H&M’s website:
> _
> “Update: 18th of January 2020
> 
> In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.“
> _
> Also, there is the statement from QEII on insta
> ♥️




Did they put the wrong month?!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Picking up some groceries on Vancouver Island yesterday. TMZ is following them, does that make them real celebs now?


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’re not stopping with the Duke and Duchess titles until they reach that deadline, huh?


----------



## Lodpah

Well Meghan has surely turned her prince into a frog. 
I imagine Meghan doing a SWF act on Harry right now.


----------



## bag-mania

xobellavidaxo said:


> Did they put the wrong month?!



Yes, the poor kid they hired to be their webmaster must have been nervous when typing.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> From H&M’s website:
> _
> “Update: 18th of January 2020
> 
> In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of Their Royal Highnesses.“
> _
> Also, there is the statement from QEII on insta
> ♥️


the can't use Sussex Royal but they can call themselves Royal Highnesses?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> the can't use Sussex Royal but they can call themselves Royal Highnesses?


RIGHT???  Confused about that!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT???  Confused about that!


maybe they can use for for a limited time?  I can't keep up


----------



## mdcx

Markle residence right now:


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Markle residence right now:
> 
> View attachment 4669118


----------



## altigirl88

I sent my sister the TMZ sandwich article, she said maybe he’s delivering for Ubereats lmbo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh snap!!!!


----------



## youngster

It seems so obvious that they would not be allowed to use (and profit from) "Sussex Royal" after walking away.  

What I don't understand is how _Harry_ doesn't appear to have understood this. I mean, he's been brought up in the family and in the Firm. He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?


----------



## floodette

youngster said:


> It seems so obvious that they would not be allowed to use (and profit from) "Sussex Royal" after walking away.
> 
> What I don't understand is how _Harry_ doesn't appear to have understood this. I mean, he's been brought up in the family and in the Firm. He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?



or maybe Meghan is that stubborn and sure of her own importance?


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think back to the balcony scene where he had to repeatedly tell her to “turn around” because the anthem was about to start.  I think she is stubborn and tiresome and doesn’t want to listen.


----------



## gracekelly

Just blind arrogance and naïveté . How they thought they would get away with this without the royal gatekeepers noticing is beyond me. Harry should have known better and that nothing would be allowed to sully the Windsors in any manner shape or form.


----------



## Lodpah

Someone pointedly our their logo features M more prominently than H. You can hardly discern H on the logo.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> They just need to tweak their trademark a bit.
> 
> #SussexDeadbeats
> #SussexRunaways


#SussexWannabeNobodies


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Some comments on twitter are hilarious....
> "come on Harry, make it a hat-trick"
> "not the couple we wanted to hear about divorcing, H & m next"
> Oops



I shouldn't laugh, but...



imgg said:


> Their website is no longer working...
> 
> https://sussexroyal.com/



Works for me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I think back to the balcony scene where he had to repeatedly tell her to “turn around” because the anthem was about to start.  I think she is stubborn and tiresome and doesn’t want to listen.



Probably the only time he ever told her what to do. I was just stunned he had to do it SEVERAL times...what could have been so important that she had to say it that very moment?


----------



## limom

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Picking up some groceries on Vancouver Island yesterday. TMZ is following them, does that make them real celebs now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4669088


Royals, they are just like us!
If Harry is confused about what is going to happen with him and Meaghan, he should watch The Crown. They spell it out quite well.
He will be HRH and she will be nothing, just a Duchess. 
The queen will make sure that the crown will win at all cost.
Imho, he has overplayed his position. Why? Because, he is infatuated with himself and his dreams.
Game of thrones, without the bloodshed....


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh snap!!!!



YESSSSS!! Good ole Queeny


----------



## duna

VigeeLeBrun said:


> From H&M’s website:
> _
> “Update: 18th of January 2020
> 
> In line with the statement by Her Majesty The Queen, information on the roles and work of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be updated on this website in due course. We appreciate your patience and invite you to explore the site to see the current works of *Their Royal Highnesses.“*
> _
> Also, there is the statement from QEII on insta
> ♥️



Why do they say "Their Royal Hignesses" ? The first thing that they had to give up was HRH.....


----------



## eunaddict

mdcx said:


> Markle residence right now:
> 
> View attachment 4669118




That picture, that face. It looks like she's trying to "force-squeeze" someone into the ground ala sith lords. (That's my nerd side showing)


----------



## Sharont2305

They are and still will be Their Royal Highnesses, they just won't be using it as of spring.


----------



## eunaddict

youngster said:


> He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?



Yeah, but we also know he's more than a bit spoiled and thinks he can get away with more than he actually can - see Exhibit A: his shock and disappointment when he was stripped of his military appointments. I think he thinks that granny has a soft spot for him (they've both agreed to this point multiple times), so she'll let him get away with more. But, I think granny, or someone close to her, has wisen up to his ways.



Sharont2305 said:


> They are and still will be Their Royal Highnesses, they just won't be using it as of spring.


Huh. I always thought (and it was widely reported) that part of the Megxit agreement was that they had to drop their HRH titles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

Meghan and Harry (but I mainly say Meghan here) can only keep up with this “we’re so happy” shtick for a bit longer before it all starts to crumble. They’re losing the power and prestige that comes with being part of the monarchy and majority of the public has turned on them . Things are going to start to get dicey as Meghan realizes her “modernizing the monarchy” doesn’t involve her at all and I do think one day Harry will wake up in this random mansion away from family and friends and have an oh Sh* moment.


----------



## Sharont2305

eunaddict said:


> Huh. I always thought (and it was widely reported) that part of the Megxit agreement was that they had to drop their HRH titles.



They're dropping it as in they're not going to be using it, it hasn't been taken away from them. This is why some people in this country (UK) are cross because they want to walk away from Royal life but will be keeping but not using the HRH and still be using the Duke and Duchess title.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> It seems so obvious that they would not be allowed to use (and profit from) "Sussex Royal" after walking away.
> 
> What I don't understand is how _Harry_ doesn't appear to have understood this. I mean, he's been brought up in the family and in the Firm. He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?


The Queen bent the rules for him in the past - allowing him to wear a beard in army uniform, his casual dressing, booze, the scrapes he got into. I think it never crossed his mind that it wouldn’t be ok.


----------



## limom

ABC good morning America, reported that they will not be allowed to use the moniker. Sussex royals.
Imho, it is now a fact.
The mouse knows it all


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> They're dropping it as in they're not going to be using it, it hasn't been taken away from them. This is why some people in this country (UK) are cross because they want to walk away from Royal life but will be keeping but not using the HRH and still be using the Duke and Duchess title.


I understood it was only Harry since he is born royal.
How can she be HRH when she still has her American citizenship?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> I understood it was only Harry since he is born royal.
> How can she be HRH when she still has her American citizenship?


She's always been HRH since marriage.
I think the only thing they can't take away from Harry is the Prince title because, like you say, he's born Royal, its his title from birth.
If they forgone their Duke and Duchess title he will still be Prince Henry of Wales and she will be Mrs Meghan Mountbatten Windsor, or possibly Meghan Wales.


----------



## kemilia

altigirl88 said:


> I sent my sister the TMZ sandwich article, she said maybe he’s delivering for Ubereats lmbo


Or DoorDash.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Yes, the poor kid they hired to be their webmaster must have been nervous when typing.


As of this morning, it's still January. Soooo professional.


----------



## eunaddict

Sharont2305 said:


> They're dropping it as in they're not going to be using it, it hasn't been taken away from them. This is why some people in this country (UK) are cross because they want to walk away from Royal life but will be keeping but not using the HRH and still be using the Duke and Duchess title.



Interesting, a lot of the press articles involving Megxit implied that it was part of the deal that they would no longer be able to use it. And that it wasn't their choice to drop it either.

Disappointing if that wasn't the case.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if there is any way they can get around it. The copyright was filed in the UK but did they also file one in the US? The Queen's proclamation would have little pull here.


But keep in mind--Daddy's still paying the bills, best to do what the grownups say while still "living in the basement."


----------



## doni

This was long due, the not using the Sussex Royal monicker. But I guess the Crown knows the reasons for their timing.



youngster said:


> It seems so obvious that they would not be allowed to use (and profit from) "Sussex Royal" after walking away.
> 
> What I don't understand is how _Harry_ doesn't appear to have understood this. I mean, he's been brought up in the family and in the Firm. He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?



Would seem logical but, remember, this is the royal who chose a nazi uniform to go to a party. Yes, I know this has been usually justified or dismissed by reason of him being young (I believe he was in his 20s). But now that I have teenage kids I find it only more extraordinary. I cannot even imagine that they would even remotely consider dressing this way for fun and they are just normal kids. They are not highly and carefully educated princes of a country that fought against nazism in WWII and of a royal house that has made a lot of effort to play down both their German ancestry and the nazi sympathies of some of their members. Really, his level of awareness as to the role and significance of the monarchy seems to be appallingly low...


----------



## kemilia

doni said:


> This was long due, the not using the Sussex Royal monicker. But I guess the Crown knows the reasons for their timing.
> 
> 
> 
> Would seem logical but, remember, this is the royal who chose a nazi uniform to go to a party. Yes, I know this has been usually justified or dismissed by reason of him being young. I believe he was in his 20s. But now that I have teenage kids I find it only more extraordinary. I cannot even imagine that they would even remotely consider dressing this way for fun and they are just normal kids. They are not highly and carefully educated princes of a country that fought against nazism in WWII and of a royal house that has made a lot of effort to play down both their German ancestry and the nazi sympathies of some of their members. Really, his level of awareness as to the role and significance of the monarchy seems to be appallingly low...


I honestly do not believe H has much in the way of smarts--all of what you stated (Nazi sympathies, ancestry--heck they even changed their name to remove the German surname) was either a FU or stupidity or alcohol. 

The JPM stunt may have been the straw that broke QEII's back (so to speak).

The Firm does not play around.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe she’ll lose it in the divorce


----------



## lanasyogamama

x


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe she’ll lose it in the divorce


She will, Diana lost her HRH but kept the Princess of Wales bit, and she's the mother of a future King.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

Is January 18 when BP put out the Sandringham Summit statement? Maybe that’s why that date is on the website. Trying to give them the benefit of the doubt for some reason, lol.
I’m so glad HM finally laid down the law on the Sussex Royal bs. They obviously can’t be allowed to use it for financial gain. DUH. There’s a blind item that they spent millions in trademarks sooooo I bet MM is not so happy right now.


----------



## doni

kemilia said:


> I honestly do not believe H has much in the way of smarts--all of what you stated (Nazi sympathies, ancestry--heck they even changed their name to remove the German surname) was either a FU or stupidity or alcohol.
> .



I think too much is made of his alleged lack of wit... I am ready to believe he is no Einstein, but should be smart enough plus a good education compensates for a lot. No, I think basically he was spoiled rotten. Which to some extent is quite understandable given at what age he lost his mum and what we now know about his psychological trauma and problems.


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> It seems so obvious that they would not be allowed to use (and profit from) "Sussex Royal" after walking away.
> 
> What I don't understand is how _Harry_ doesn't appear to have understood this. I mean, he's been brought up in the family and in the Firm. He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?


"Dim” or defiant?


----------



## limom

doni said:


> This was long due, the not using the Sussex Royal monicker. But I guess the Crown knows the reasons for their timing.
> 
> 
> 
> Would seem logical but, remember, this is the royal who chose a nazi uniform to go to a party. Yes, I know this has been usually justified or dismissed by reason of him being young (I believe he was in his 20s). But now that I have teenage kids I find it only more extraordinary. I cannot even imagine that they would even remotely consider dressing this way for fun and they are just normal kids. They are not highly and carefully educated princes of a country that fought against nazism in WWII and of a royal house that has made a lot of effort to play down both their German ancestry and the nazi sympathies of some of their members. Really, his level of awareness as to the role and significance of the monarchy seems to be appallingly low...


The Nazi part runs in his family. 
Who do they think that they are fooling? There were even pictures of QE and Margaret doing the heil Hitler signs as children. (Not that they knew the significance but still)

I suspect that he is slightly dim. He only barely has a high school education.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think Meghan thinks it’s best to use the HRH and Duchess titles as long as possible to make it stick. She’s probably thinking that Diana lost the a title, but everyone still thought of her as princess Diana, the difference is Diana was around much much longer.


----------



## imgg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I shouldn't laugh, but...
> 
> 
> 
> Works for me.


It wasn't working earlier....maybe too many people checking all at once...


----------



## imgg

lanasyogamama said:


> I think Meghan thinks it’s best to use the HRH and Duchess titles as long as possible to make it stick. She’s probably thinking that Diana lost the a title, but everyone still thought of her as princess Diana, the difference is Diana was around much much longer.


and people liked Princess Di


----------



## limom

lanasyogamama said:


> I think Meghan thinks it’s best to use the HRH and Duchess titles as long as possible to make it stick. She’s probably thinking that Diana lost the a title, but everyone still thought of her as princess Diana, the difference is Diana was around much much longer.


Is she also going to claim the people’s duchess?
Diana did the work for many years.....
Was British to start with.
I wonder if they all will go to England for Commonwealth day or will they celebrate from Canada?


----------



## imgg

Lodpah said:


> Someone pointedly our their logo features M more prominently than H. You can hardly discern H on the logo.


Same with their IG account, has a lot more Meghan.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I hope H&M the fashion group sues them as well!  For cheapening their brand!


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> What I don't understand is how _Harry_ doesn't appear to have understood this. I mean, he's been brought up in the family and in the Firm. He knows the rules. He could have prevented all the time, effort, and expense of the website and trademarking and all that with a simple _"Granny will never agree to it. Trust me on this, M."  _So, why didn't he?  Is he really that dim?



It's not that he's _that_ stupid. But I think Meghan persuaded him that she was experienced in such matters and she has been the one working with the publicists, patent lawyers, etc. He trusts her and he's given her free rein. That is his biggest mistake, blind trust. Meghan likes to talk big and doesn't necessarily have anything to back up her words.



Lodpah said:


> Someone pointedly our their logo features M more prominently than H. You can hardly discern H on the logo.



Well, we know who was dictating the design of the logo and who had the final sign off on it.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> It's not that he's _that_ stupid. But I think Meghan persuaded him that she was experienced in such matters and she has been the one working with the publicists, patent lawyers, etc. He trusts her and he's given her free rein. That is his biggest mistake, blind trust. Meghan likes to talk big and doesn't necessarily have anything to back up her words.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, we know who was dictating the design of the logo and who had the final sign off on it.


Nah, he is stupid and entitled. Deadly combination.
Plus, he is in love/lust with Meghan and would do anything to keep her happy, for now.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> It's not that he's _that_ stupid. But I think Meghan persuaded him that she was experienced in such matters and she has been the one working with the publicists, patent lawyers, etc. He trusts her and he's given her free rein. That is his biggest mistake, blind trust. Meghan likes to talk big and doesn't necessarily have anything to back up her words.



I think he's so used to have a highly professional, experienced, royal savvy UK staff (who also knew how to handle him) that his instinct is to trust the people around him and basically just show up.  That's all he's had to do for years. Just show up when the schedule says to show up and give the speech that was drafted for him.  (I know that's probably not completely fair to him.)  But, his staff basically knew his strengths and how to display them well and knew what was acceptable and what was not.


----------



## Emeline

youngster said:


> I think he's so used to have a highly professional, experienced, royal savvy UK staff (who also knew how to handle him) that his instinct is to trust the people around him and basically just show up.  That's all he's had to do for years. Just show up when the schedule says to show up and give the speech that was drafted for him.  (I know that's probably not completely fair to him.)  But, his staff basically knew his strengths and how to display them well and knew what was acceptable and what was not.


Totally agree.  In addition, I think he's generally been surrounded by family and staff who have his best interests at heart.
He's playing a whole new ballgame now, and unfortunately I think he doesn't really understand the rules he's signed up for. 
He's going to pay a price for this, and he should.


----------



## limom

Luckily for him, the Queen generously and wisely left the door ajar for her grandson and greatgrandson.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

From the Daily Beast
So she gets to keep her role as patron of the national theatre?  Again, I don't get it

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Banned From Trading Off Sussex Royal Name*

BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD

More than two years of careful branding looks set to be consigned to the trash today as the Queen forbids Harry and Meghan from using the name Sussex Royal for commercial ventures.




*Tom Sykes*
Updated Feb. 19, 2020 11:03AM ET / Published Feb. 19, 2020 7:58AM ET





*WPA Pool*

_If you love The Daily Beast’s royal coverage, then we hope you’ll enjoy The Royalist, a members-only series for Beast Inside. Become a member to get The Royalist in your inbox every Sunday._

Shortly after their marriage, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle began hatching plans to walk out of the royal family and their thoughts inevitably turned to their post-royal commercial future.

*Harry and Meghan Felt ‘Totally Unwelcome’ in Royal Family*
THEIR WAY
*Tom Sykes, *
*Tim Teeman*



Having been given the title the Duke and Duchess of Sussex upon their marriage, and having already christened their Instagram page and charitable vehicle Sussex Royal, Harry and Meghan apparently decided that it would make sense to use the same brand name for their commercial ventures.

They took out a vast range of copyright protections on a bewildering array of potential  products and services, from pajamas to magazines to counseling services.

At the time the royals briefed that this was being done simply to stop imitators appropriating the name of their brand to dupe unsuspecting members of the public into buying fake Harry and Meghan-ware, but after they announced they were leaving the royal fold, they launched their own website, sussexroyal.com, which made it quite clear they intended to trade off their names to make money, and that the Sussex Royal brand would be the umbrella for their commercial activities.

That dream now appears to be over, with an extensive report in the _Daily Mail_ detailing exactly how the Sussexes have been told in no uncertain terms that they simply cannot use the term royal in their business activities.

The _Mail_ quotes a source as saying: “If they aren’t carrying out official duties and are now seeking other commercial opportunities, they simply cannot be allowed to market themselves as royals.”

The palace refused to confirm or deny the reports to The Daily Beast, however a source told us, somewhat tersely: “Discussions are ongoing.” 
Given that Meghan and Harry are clearly not stupid, one can only wonder how on earth they thought they would get away with it.

It seems likely  the coterie of American advisers who Meghan and Harry entrusted with their plans (understandably, they couldn’t bring any palace staff into the loop) failed to understand the absolute abhorrence felt by Queen when it comes to the notion of individuals profiting from the royal name. 

Meghan and Harry have wasted no time cashing in on their newfound independence with Harry reportedly pocketing a fee of $1m for making a speech to a room of JP Morgan bankers.


*Palace Denies Harry and Meghan ‘Bullied’ by William and Kate*
TOO FAR
*Tom Sykes*



Harry, who said in a recent interview that camera flashes of press photographers bring back traumatic memories of his mother, allegedly spoke about how he has been in therapy for several years to help him cope with his mother’s death.

*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*Where Are Harry, Meghan, and Archie? Enjoying the Quiet Life*



*Charles and William Build Bridges with ‘Fragile’ Harry*



*Meghan & Harry Decline Invite to Present Best Picture Oscar*
Meanwhile it is being reported that Meghan has told the National Theatre she will continue in her role as patron of the organization.

Artistic director Rufus Norris told _The Telegraph_: “There has been no indication at all from her that her engagement with us would be anything other than business as usual. She has proven to be a very engaged patron and we look forward to working with her. She has star reach, she understands the nature of what we’re trying to do.”


----------



## limom

How?
They are based in Canada.
The delusion is strong with this one.
To have that type of Chutzpah!!!
It is almost enviable.


----------



## kemilia

Is she gonna skype her patronage? Or maybe facetime, hmmm.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> How?
> They are based in Canada.
> The delusion is strong with this one.
> To have that type of Chutzpah!!!
> It is almost enviable.


I guess Chutzpah is a good word for this.
Hate to give her credit but she dreamed big and has succeeded.  What a social networker


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> It seems likely the coterie of American advisers who Meghan and Harry entrusted with their plans (understandably, they couldn’t bring any palace staff into the loop) failed to understand the absolute abhorrence felt by Queen when it comes to the notion of individuals profiting from the royal name.



This is what happens when you hire people and assume they must know everything because they are successful.


----------



## byzina

limom said:


> Is she also going to claim the people’s duchess?
> Diana did the work for many years.....
> Was British to start with.
> I wonder if they all will go to England for Commonwealth day or will they celebrate from Canada?



Diana was young and naive when she got married. When she learnt that Charles loved another woman, that must have been a serious blow for her. No one can judge her for believing in fairy tales being only 20 years old. And she worked a lot to help and support people. Unlike Meghan she didn't focus on glamorous projects but chose something psychologically more challenging. She tried to show that people with AIDS are safe for others and must be treated like everyone else. We all know that now but at that time it wasn't obvious for many people. She did the same for people with leprosy. She went to hospices and hospitals to see injured children. She helped people all over the world, India, Russia, Africa.
I mean how can Meghan's work be compared to it? Meghan's so self-focused.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> ABC good morning America, reported that they will not be allowed to use the moniker. Sussex royals.
> Imho, it is now a fact.
> The mouse knows it all



Two reputable German media outlets are reporting it too, but admittedly one said they got their info from the Daily Mail.


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> I think too much is made of his alleged lack of wit... I am ready to believe he is no Einstein, but should be smart enough plus a good education compensates for a lot. No, I think basically he was spoiled rotten. Which to some extent is quite understandable given at what age he lost his mum and what we now know about his psychological trauma and problems.


But it's been reported that his teachers had to do his homework for him.

A regular person with a good education is not the same thing as a prince that coasts through his education.

Just a thought...


----------



## limom

April’s fools!
https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...led-major-new-details-about-their-royal-exit/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> April’s fools!
> https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...led-major-new-details-about-their-royal-exit/


So their royal duties will end March 31st, but they've been hanging around with nearly full pay doing nothing since early January? I want their life. Entitled brats.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So their royal duties will end March 31st, but they've been hanging around with nearly full pay doing nothing since early January? I want their life. Entitled brats.


No - since November!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> No - since November!!


Ah yes...but that was their much needed, well deserved VACATION!


----------



## Straight-Laced

The Royal correspondent for The Times UK reported today that SussexRoyal branding is no longer. 
Also that Harry and Meghan lose their Buckingham Palace offices on March 31.
Losing the SussexRoyal brand and such a prestigious business address in London must sting!
At this stage it’s really not working out the way they wanted with freedom to live and hustle offshore while trading on the Royal brand.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah yes...but that was their much needed, well deserved VACATION!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Does People even have grammar checkers or are they just rushing to spew this nonsense out?

_Any changes will be revealed once the Sussexes their new charity organization, which was reportedly going to be named “Sussex Royal, the Charity Foundation.”_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

limom said:


> April’s fools!
> https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...led-major-new-details-about-their-royal-exit/



I found this part of that article the most interesting:


> Starting April 1, Harry and Meghan will no longer hold an office at Buckingham Palace and will instead be represented by their U.K. charity foundation team.



And also that Meghan has a lot of time in the U.K. lined up.  It seems like the purse-strings might be dependent upon it.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> But it's been reported that his teachers had to do his homework for him.
> 
> A regular person with a good education is not the same thing as a prince that coasts through his education.
> 
> Just a thought...



A good education I mean in the broad sense. Of manners, history (at his finger prints), relationships, exposure to certain things. He’s obviously learnt how to talk, present, interact with others and many other skills.. that makes for a lot. You can even get voice over jobs for your wife if you apply yourself.
His teacher doing his homework for him might mean that he wasn’t bright, or that he was spoilt rotten, or both


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I still don't see her showing up and doing the job in the UK. But we'll see.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't see her showing up and doing the job in the UK. But we'll see.


I can't see her coming back here any time soon tbh.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sharont2305 said:


> I can't see her coming back here any time soon tbh.


Eta, just read they're coming back to do a "flurry of engagements" here.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I can't see her coming back here any time soon tbh.


Right! .. how would the UK citizens react to her?  Just based on the comments that I’ve seen on these 2, I can’t imagine that she would be favorably received!!


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I think he's so used to have a highly professional, experienced, royal savvy UK staff (who also knew how to handle him) that his instinct is to trust the people around him and basically just show up.  That's all he's had to do for years. Just show up when the schedule says to show up and give the speech that was drafted for him.  (I know that's probably not completely fair to him.)  But, his staff basically knew his strengths and how to display them well and knew what was acceptable and what was not.



You WERE being fair to him. All he ever had to was to show up and was briefed on the way.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Right! .. how would the UK citizens react to her?  Just based on the comments that I’ve seen on these 2, I can’t imagine that she would be favorably received!!


Personally, I don't want to see her on these shores again.
Harry? Yes, when he sees sense.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think it’s a way of applying pressure.  If she wants the money, she will have to “walk the gauntlet” and deal with the negative reactions.  If she doesn’t join Harry, then that may Hasten her leaving him.  I also feel that this may in part have something to do with Archie.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Eta, just read they're coming back to do a "flurry of engagements" here.



There must be a limited amount of engagements they must do to earn their allowance.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> They are and still will be Their Royal Highnesses, they just won't be using it as of spring.



Ahh, Ok, so they'll "squeeze the lemon" as much as they can untill spring....


----------



## Clearblueskies

Harry and Meghan really must be wishing they’d approached this differently.  They’ve been left looking like naive fools begging for pocket money and favours, rather than significant players on the world stage.


----------



## bag-mania

Interesting financial view of the current situation by Forbes.

*Megxit’s Financial Aftershocks: Queen Elizabeth Reported To Forbid Meghan Markle And Harry From Using Their “Sussex Royal” Brand*

As the tectonic shifts under the Pacific create tsunamis, so the conditions of Megxit will make some havoc-wreaking waves, not the least of which crashed yesterday in London with the news that Buckingham Palace has, reportedly, enjoined Prince Harry and Meghan Markle from using their already-trademarked "Sussex Royal" brand. The Palace position is that the couple is, by choice, no longer 'royal.' Although Harry and his wife do, officially, retain their HRH titles, the titles are held in abeyance and the couple refrains from from using them. That policy is now thought to extend to their brand.

A decision such as this can only come from the very highest reaches of the monarchy, meaning, from the Queen and Charles. William will likely have been consulted. Boiled down, the message for Harry is: You can't declare that you don't want to be royal – especially in the way that you have done it – and then market yourself as royal.

It's not an insurmountable difficulty, but it is a pointed commercial blow for Vancouver Island's three new tenants, counting young Master Archie. It will affect not just the infamous joint Instagram account, although it also does that. The Queen's move will change every single thing that the couple have trademarked in their once-secret "Megxit laboratory" prior to their sudden announcement of retreat in early January. That will include: clothing (t-shirts, sweaters and the like), books, stationery, china, and what's being described as 'teaching materials.' Their nascent foundation, which was, also, planned to carry the Sussex Royal name, will have to bear a different one.

The negotiations with the Queen and the courtiers who have been responsible for the decision have been described as quite "complex," as well they should have been. Unclear at the moment is when the actual decision fell, but be that as it may, the operative nightmare "marketing" precedent for the Queen, Charles and the Court of St. James is, glaringly, front-and-center at every large royal family gathering and can be summed up in two words: Sarah Ferguson.

In Sarah Ferguson's constant striving for the — in her limited view — pot of gold, she has led her branch of the royal family down what can be diplomatically described as a rocky road. She was, infamously, trapped in a video sting by an undercover tabloid-newspaper team actually selling access to Prince Andrew. Her shilling for Weight Watchers and her commercial lines of merchandise, which have collapsed, have been more than a simple embarrassment to the Crown. Famously, even though it took a decade or so for her to worm her way back into the royal graces, Prince Philip, God bless him, would not be in the same room with her. By loosening the leash on Prince Harry and Meghan, the Queen and every courtier working for her and for Charles will be very mindful of the last quarter-century of unnecessary Ferguson havoc.

The basic contradiction in Harry's posture at the moment is obvious to the lowliest rag-and-bone man in London – which is precisely the Queen's problem with it. In essence, the couple were saying to the Queen: _No, your Majesty, we'll no longer be visiting the old-age homes in Liverpool or rubbing noses with the Maori for you, it's far too much stress. But we'll be keeping the teacup and cookie-tin lines going, thank you very much._

Today's news means that the Queen and Charles were having none of that. We could fairly ask what might the prince and Meghan Markle have been thinking by trademarking their brand as a "royal" or even a royally-accented thing while, simultaneously, hatching their plan to no longer perform, or be, of the rank. But the vast tangle of Megxit, largely created by the prince and Ms. Markle, has spun well beyond that question now. It would now be reasonable to ask whether the process might be going more smoothly and generously had they not chosen to announce their departure as a _fait accompli_, without consulting Charles or the Queen. That seems to have been the crucial mistake. It robbed the process in which they are now engaged of generosity, flexibility and mercy, in other words, all the qualities in the negotiations that both Prince Harry and Meghan Markle most need at this exact point.

Note to Meghan Markle's 11,000,000 Instagram followers: You'll want to get to work on your commemorative selfies with background screenshots of the "Sussex Royal" Instagram account today, because the thing is just not going to be around much longer.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...-using-their-sussex-royal-brand/#5bb2c3dfae1d


----------



## Tivo

This is not a good look for Meghan’s “celebrity” image. 
Hope all her “close” friends don’t abandon her.


----------



## Megs

Looks like we'll be seeing them both soon according to this article from Town & Country....

"
Before the new arrangement takes effect, several public appearances are planned for the couple which will be covered by media in the usual way with a royal rota in place. Harry will make a visit to see the Invictus Games Choir at a recording session on February 28th, and he and Meghan will attend the Endeavour Fund Awards on March 5th to recognize wounded, injured, and sick service personnel and veterans who have gone on to use sport and adventurous challenge as part of their recovery.

Harry will also join Lewis Hamilton at the official opening of immersive museum the Silverstone Experience on March 6th. And he and Meghan will attend the Mountbatten Music Festival on March 7th at the Royal Albert Hall to raise money for the Royal Marines Charity and CLIC Sargent. Meghan will make a public appearance to Mary International Women’s Day on March 8th, and they will both attend the Commonwealth Service on March 9th with the Queen and the rest of the royal family.

Once the new working model takes effect, the couple will attend the Invictus Games in May, and Harry is also expected to be at the London Marathon in April in his capacity as patron."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> Right! .. how would the UK citizens react to her?  Just based on the comments that I’ve seen on these 2, I can’t imagine that she would be favorably received!!


We don't want her here, we don't care for Harry either but he's still British so we can't stop him. Please can Canada keep these 2 coz we really don't want them here!


----------



## Tivo

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry and Meghan really must be wishing they’d approached this differently.  They’ve been left looking like naive fools begging for pocket money and favours, rather than significant players on the world stage.


I agree. Did they really not think this was a possibility? Queen Granny has been around a long time. She knows the game. She knows what Meghan is after, and it ain’t privacy.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Personally, I don't want to see her on these shores again.
> Harry? Yes, when he sees sense.



Same here.


----------



## scarlet555

To me it would seem that exiting the royal duties and England would not constitute a victory as far as popularity contest goes (for those who want to be famous anyway.)  But who knows in the end, if it was truly voluntary, maybe they were given the chance to make it look voluntary.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Straight-Laced said:


> The Royal correspondent for The Times UK reported today that SussexRoyal branding is no longer.
> Also that Harry and Meghan lose their Buckingham Palace offices on March 31.
> Losing the SussexRoyal brand and such a prestigious business address in London must sting!
> At this stage it’s really not working out the way they wanted with freedom to live and hustle offshore while trading on the Royal brand.



Website is still up.


----------



## Tivo

I’m willing to bet Meghan doesn’t make it through all those events next month. It will be a nightmare


----------



## bag-mania

Tivo said:


> I agree. Did they really not think this was a possibility? Queen Granny has been around a long time. She knows the game. She knows what Meghan is after, and it ain’t privacy.



Meghan must look like such a tacky, self-absorbed, useless bit of fluff to the Queen.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tivo said:


> I’m willing to bet Meghan doesn’t make it through all those events next month. It will be a nightmare


I'm especially interested in the Commonwealth Service one when she is with "the family she never had"


----------



## Clearblueskies

Tivo said:


> I’m willing to bet Meghan doesn’t make it through all those events next month. It will be a nightmare


Well she ducked out of what were supposed to be joint events with Harry in January and scooted back to Canada. She left him to cope with the fallout from their announcement on his own.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Well she ducked out of what were supposed to be joint events with Harry in January and scooted back to Canada. She left him to cope with the fallout from their announcement on his own.



Yeah, she threw him under the bus on that one. She's kind of a coward. She instigates the havoc within his family then runs away because facing them would be too hard for her.


----------



## Mrs.Z

That People mag article seemed like a bit of a walk back.....or since People is their mouthpiece was it just H & M being petulant children?   We will retain the HRH status but we won’t use it.  We are using Sussex Royal right now, but we’re not sure we can or will use it in the future.  We’re still doing engagements and representing the Commonwealth even though it makes no sense and no one understands why.  Harry is keeping his military titles but not the honorary ones.  In or out!  They are desperate to have their cake and eat it too!


----------



## limom

As we all predicted:
*
”The Duke and Duchess will be spending their time in both the United Kingdom and North America,” the spokesperson adds.”*
Not Canada, North America.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Megs said:


> Looks like we'll be seeing them both soon according to this article from Town & Country....
> 
> "
> Before the new arrangement takes effect, several public appearances are planned for *the couple which will be covered by media in the usual way with a royal rota in place. *



LOL!


----------



## Chagall

chicinthecity777 said:


> We don't want her here, we don't care for Harry either but he's still British so we can't stop him. Please can Canada keep these 2 coz we really don't want them here!


Why should Canada take them? Neither one of them is Canadian. Meghan is American. Why can’t the states take them.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Also, scheduling so many activities back to back means that Archie should probably not be left behind in Canada as an excuse to make a quick exit.  Although part of me wonders if the security would put him on a plane and bring him back to the U.K. should Meghan try that again.  Sometimes I think that the security is more to ensure that Meghan doesn’t try to smuggle Archie out of the Commonwealth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sophisticatted said:


> LOL!


  Well spotted!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chagall said:


> Why should Canada take them? Neither one of them is Canadian. Meghan is American. Why can’t the states take them.


Well they did decide to live in Canada! Lol! You guys may be stuck for a while! Take one for the team!


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> As we all predicted:
> *
> ”The Duke and Duchess will be spending their time in both the United Kingdom and North America,” the spokesperson adds.”*
> Not Canada, North America.


 So much for "longing for privacy" blah blah blah!


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Why should Canada take them? Neither one of them is Canadian. Meghan is American. Why can’t the states take them.



Because we've already got too many celebrities. H&M don't have a chance in hell of standing out or being special here. Besides, as I've said before, we took Bieber for you, give us this!


----------



## Sharont2305

The thing is, they have all the privacy they want at Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Clearblueskies said:


> Well she ducked out of what were supposed to be joint events with Harry in January and scooted back to Canada. She left him to cope with the fallout from their announcement on his own.



For me, that spoke volumes about her character.


----------



## CeeJay

Tivo said:


> I’m willing to bet Meghan doesn’t make it through all those events next month. It will be a nightmare


Right?? .. if she thought it was stressful before, just think now that they've played their cards (_and BADLY_) with the BRF and the British public???  I know that the British folks are much more polite than a lot of Americans, but if it was me, I would give her this "salute" . .. and I KNOW you Brits know EXACTLY what I mean!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> Why should Canada take them? Neither one of them is Canadian. Meghan is American. Why can’t the states take them.


WE DON'T WANT THEM EITHER .. but alas, I'm afraid that they will end up in California - Los Angeles area.  UGGH


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Right?? .. if she thought it was stressful before, just think now that they've played their cards (_and BADLY_) with the BRF and the British public???  I know that the British folks are much more polite than a lot of Americans, but if it was me, I would give her this "salute" . .. and I KNOW you Brits know EXACTLY what I mean!!!
> View attachment 4669617


YESSS! Always makes me laugh when I see non Brits do that, never do that in polite company ha ha


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> YESSS! Always makes me laugh when I see non Brits do that, never do that in polite company ha ha


Agreed .. it drives me nuts that so many "celebrities" (Justin Bieber in particular) constantly do this with absolutely no idea what it means across the pond!  I never did this; found out about it from my Brit colleagues when I was working in London and did see them do it in the office (to some of their staff .. but always as a joke)!


----------



## kemilia

Ok, gotta admit--seeing her traipse back to the UK for all those appearances will be interesting. I doubt the baby will go though, he's her way out.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Ok, gotta admit--seeing her traipse back to the UK for all those appearances will be interesting. I doubt the baby will go though, he's her way out.



I fully expect her to have a last minute excuse for why she won't be able to go back. If there was a gambling pool for guessing, my pick would be "the baby is sick."


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> Ok, gotta admit--seeing her traipse back to the UK for all those appearances will be interesting. I doubt the baby will go though, he's her way out.


You'd think they would bring Archie, when was the last time Prince Charles saw his grandson? When will he see him next?


----------



## LittleStar88

Sophisticatted said:


> I found this part of that article the most interesting:
> 
> 
> And also that Meghan has a lot of time in the U.K. lined up.  It seems like the purse-strings might be dependent upon it.



I have an idea on how they can make money in the UK...


----------



## scarlet555

Cavalier Girl said:


> For me, that spoke volumes about her character.



Or another possibility, she left so he alone could reasonably plead with the BRF for both of them to be allowed back into the BRF.   I doubt Meghan would leave England without Harry unless it could benefit her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Because we've already got too many celebrities. H&M don't have a chance in hell of standing out or being special here. Besides, as I've said before, we took Bieber for you, give us this!


Well, we have always been very grateful to you for taking Bieber. But keeping these two would be two for one and not entirely a fair trade.


----------



## LittleStar88

Megs said:


> Looks like we'll be seeing them both soon according to this article from Town & Country....
> 
> "
> Before the new arrangement takes effect, several public appearances are planned for the couple which will be covered by media in the usual way with a royal rota in place. Harry will make a visit to see the Invictus Games Choir at a recording session on February 28th, and he and Meghan will attend the Endeavour Fund Awards on March 5th to recognize wounded, injured, and sick service personnel and veterans who have gone on to use sport and adventurous challenge as part of their recovery.
> 
> Harry will also join Lewis Hamilton at the official opening of immersive museum the Silverstone Experience on March 6th. And he and Meghan will attend the Mountbatten Music Festival on March 7th at the Royal Albert Hall to raise money for the Royal Marines Charity and CLIC Sargent. Meghan will make a public appearance to Mary International Women’s Day on March 8th, and they will both attend the Commonwealth Service on March 9th with the Queen and the rest of the royal family.
> 
> Once the new working model takes effect, the couple will attend the Invictus Games in May, and Harry is also expected to be at the London Marathon in April in his capacity as patron."



And how do these folks feel, knowing that Harry and Meghan don't want to be there - _too stressful!_ - and are just showing up because they have to contractually?


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> WE DON'T WANT THEM EITHER .. but alas, I'm afraid that they will end up in California - Los Angeles area.  UGGH


I think you may be right. That has probably been M’s plan all along. My condolences!


----------



## Chagall

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well they did decide to live in Canada! Lol! You guys may be stuck for a while! Take one for the team!




​


----------



## scarlet555

I can't help feeling bad for Harry.  Something about him and his whole upbringing with his mother's death, life in the pubic eye, and now kind of self-exile(Or not).


----------



## LittleStar88

scarlet555 said:


> Or another possibility, she left so he alone could reasonably plead with the BRF for both of them to be allowed back into the BRF.   I doubt Meghan would leave England without Harry unless it could benefit her.



I cannot imagine how much time it would take for her to undo the damage she has done to her and Harry's image. Maybe the BRF would let them back, but it is the public who really matter.

That said, the humbling experience of groveling would do her some good.


----------



## altigirl88

kemilia said:


> Or DoorDash.


I thought of that, too, lol


----------



## Mrs.Z

Another article to remind us that H & M are happy......they are happy now and people are finally leaving them alone......did I mention how HAPPY they are.....so HAPPY
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...rry-meghan-markles-different-world-in-canada/


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I cannot imagine how much time it would take for her to undo the damage she has done to her and Harry's image. Maybe the BRF would let them back, but it is the public who really matter.
> 
> That said, the humbling experience of groveling would do her some good.


Personally, I don't think she ever will be able to un-do the damage, certainly not from the BRF's perspective!  While I think QEII left the door open for Harry, I'm not sure that extends to Meghan.  It's pretty obvious, that she was scheming from a very early stage in the Marriage to make $$$ off of their "royal-dom" and I can't see either the Queen or Prince Charles being favorable to that one bit.  She has bitten the hands that are currently feeding her (and Harry); I don't think the BRF will forget that!


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> Another article to remind us that H & M are happy......they are happy now and people are finally leaving them alone......did I mention how HAPPY they are.....so HAPPY
> https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...rry-meghan-markles-different-world-in-canada/


But is she OK though? [emoji1787]


----------



## Mrs.Z

Sharont2305 said:


> But is she OK though? [emoji1787]


I don’t know!  No one asked!!!!!!!!!


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Eta, just read they're coming back to do a "flurry of engagements" here.


I could see her backing out at the last minute citing some snuffles of Archie and needing to stay behind with him sending Harry off while she does a few more pap walks in his absence.


----------



## bellecate

Tivo said:


> This is not a good look for Meghan’s “celebrity” image.
> Hope all her “close” friends don’t abandon her.


She might end up getting 'Markled' .


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> I cannot imagine how much time it would take for her to undo the damage she has done to her and Harry's image. Maybe the BRF would let them back, but it is the public who really matter.
> 
> That said, the humbling experience of groveling would do her some good.


(Unbelievably) it’s less than 2 years since the wedding - when British people (including me) were happy for them both, and their role within the BRF.  We thought Meghan would be an asset - what a joke that turned out to be.
And there’s been so much cr*p and nonsense from Meghan and Harry since then that I don’t believe there’s any undoing it.  Most people - the kind of people with mortgages and jobs and kids, have more important things to think about than Royals indulging in gratuitous self pity.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t know!  No one asked!!!!!!!!!


Not even their stans. Nary a peep from them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Not even their stans. Nary a peep from them.


HA - yes, haven't heard a peep from them!!!


----------



## mdcx

A fair few engagements with Meghan's name on them. Wonder if she will show up to any?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rkle-lose-Buckingham-Palace-office-April.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Never mind, I misread.


----------



## Annawakes

This whole drama is so crazy.  I’m so glad the Queen dropped the hammer on the “Sussex Royal”.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t know!  No one asked!!!!!!!!!


I didn't read the article you posted earlier. But I will say is that people are truly happy don't have the need to go around and constantly telling people that they are happy. Happiness comes from within which either of those two are capable of. They are way too self-involved to be truly happy. There is never enough attention, never enough money, never enough fame ...the list goes on... for these two!


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> A fair few engagements with Meghan's name on them. Wonder if she will show up to any?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rkle-lose-Buckingham-Palace-office-April.html
> 
> View attachment 4669690



She might show up if a significant amount of cash is tied to her fulfilling these engagements. I don't know that other companies are lining up to give them lucrative speaking deals like JP Morgan did.


----------



## Julide

mrsinsyder said:


> Not even their stans. Nary a peep from them.


Apologies, but what is “stans”? I have seen it mentioned several times, I first thought it was typo, but I now don’t think it is...


----------



## pixiejenna

Stan is a combo of stalker + fan; someone who is obsessed with a celebrity.


----------



## kemilia

Julide said:


> Apologies, but what is “stans”? I have seen it mentioned several times, I first thought it was typo, but I now don’t think it is...


I didn't know either until someone in an earlier thread explained it is from an Eminem song meaning obsessed fans. 

And now--someone please tell me what "ETA" means! (when used on this site, not in an airport). Thanks in advance!


----------



## Sophisticatted

ETA = edited to add


----------



## Lounorada

Tivo said:


> I agree. Did they really not think this was a possibility? Queen Granny has been around a long time. She knows the game. She knows what Meghan is after, and it ain’t privacy.





This. QE2 be knowin'... Also, I feel someone needs to give the Queen a clip-on ponytail so she can do a hair flick for being the ultimate boss 



Sharont2305 said:


> I'm especially interested in the Commonwealth Service one when she is with "the family she never had"


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> Is she gonna skype her patronage? Or maybe facetime, hmmm.


That would be too easy. More their style to fly the people from the patronage to them in 'North America' on a private jet for a meeting that will last an hour or so and then fly them back to the U.K. the same day.


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> That would be too easy. More their style to fly the people from the patronage to them in 'North America' on a private jet for a meeting that will last an hour or so and then fly them back to the U.K. the same day.


hahahahaha!  So woke!  Not!


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Not even their stans. Nary a peep from them.


Their stans want the monarchy destroyed, which is pretty interesting because 5 min ago they wanted her to be Queen.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't read the article you posted earlier. But I will say is that people are truly happy don't have the need to go around and constantly telling people that they are happy. Happiness comes from within which either of those two are capable of. They are way too self-involved to be truly happy. There is never enough attention, never enough money, never enough fame ...the list goes on... for these two!


I have a rule of thumb when it comes to relationships and homes being displayed.  If a couple screams from the roof tops that they are soooo in love, things are not good.  Example:  Richard Gere and Cindy Crawford taking out a full page ad in the paper stating how in love and together they were.  Right after came the divorce filing.  As soon as the home of a celeb appears in a shelter magazine or in InStyle, you know it will be available for sale the following week.  

As for the Harkles, just waiting.  Won't be long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I have a rule of thumb when it comes to relationships and homes being displayed. * If a couple screams from the roof tops that they are soooo in love, things are not good*.  Example:  Richard Gere and Cindy Crawford taking out a full page ad in the paper stating how in love and together they were.  Right after came the divorce filing.  As soon as the home of a celeb appears in a shelter magazine or in InStyle, you know it will be available for sale the following week.
> 
> As for the Harkles, just waiting.  Won't be long.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

I just saw this tripe in The Times!  Written by the celebrity news reporter, not the Royal Correspondent, so obviously Sussex people gave it to him. 

*Sussex Royal may be banned as a brand but Meghan’s nous will sell*
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...-a-brand-but-meghans-nous-will-sell-q83mljt0v
_With the use of the word “royal” under review, Piers Bracher, a deputy managing director at Four Communications, said that they could drop it without losing recognition.

“The spotlight is even further on them. *Rather weirdly they’ve increased their brand value because of it.*”

*He said that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge had a brand of reliability that was comparable to the department store John Lewis but that the Sussexes were more like Marmite. “You get talking about it either way. They have an enormous amount of sympathy from people in or below their age group but for those older than them the word ‘tiresome’ springs to mind...*
_
*...Mr Bracher said that there was likely to be tension as the duke established his new identity. “By creating the Marmite brand they’ve made something more powerful, which will irritate a lot of other people, including his brother.”*

So shade towards 'older' people and Prince William/the Cambridges, and apparently Harry and Meghan are an even better brand _without_ that 'Royal' encumbrance ... ROFL
Also they're 'like Marmite', which logically means they're destined for great things ...
Who knew ???


----------



## Emeline

Straight-Laced said:


> I just saw this tripe in The Times!  Written by the celebrity news reporter, not the Royal Correspondent, so obviously Sussex people gave it to him.
> 
> *Sussex Royal may be banned as a brand but Meghan’s nous will sell*
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...-a-brand-but-meghans-nous-will-sell-q83mljt0v
> _With the use of the word “royal” under review, Piers Bracher, a deputy managing director at Four Communications, said that they could drop it without losing recognition.
> 
> “The spotlight is even further on them. *Rather weirdly they’ve increased their brand value because of it.*”
> 
> *He said that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge had a brand of reliability that was comparable to the department store John Lewis but that the Sussexes were more like Marmite. “You get talking about it either way. They have an enormous amount of sympathy from people in or below their age group but for those older than them the word ‘tiresome’ springs to mind...*
> _
> *...Mr Bracher said that there was likely to be tension as the duke established his new identity. “By creating the Marmite brand they’ve made something more powerful, which will irritate a lot of other people, including his brother.”*
> 
> So shade towards 'older' people and Prince William, and apparently Harry and Meghan are an even better brand _without_ that 'Royal' encumbrance ... ROFL
> Also they're just 'like Marmite', which logically means they're destined for great things ...
> Who knew ???
> 
> View attachment 4669869


Such an thoroughly  unpleasant article/advert.
And the message? What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Cue foot stomp.
We will see.


----------



## bag-mania

Straight-Laced said:


> _*They have an enormous amount of sympathy from people in or below their age group but for those older than them the word ‘tiresome’ springs to mind.*_



It makes me wonder what the age is of the average Meghan and Harry fan. Teens? Tweens?


----------



## Straight-Laced

Emeline said:


> Such an thoroughly  unpleasant article/advert.
> And the message? What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Cue foot stomp.
> We will see.


Unpleasant yes, there's that, but I also found it profoundly stupid !!!
So ridiculously transparent.


----------



## Straight-Laced

bag-mania said:


> It makes me wonder what the age is of the average Meghan and Harry fan. Teens? Tweens?


Funny, back when Meghan and Harry returned to London in January following their long break (Brown Turtleneck Day) one of the fans here posted the Sussex instagram on that day and it was so odd.  Of course everything happened so fast after that but the lovey dovey instagram post with music was like it came from a teeny bopper group for their teeny bopper fan base, not from professional Royals in their mid to late thirties. That's how it struck me at the time anyway.
*FROM JANUARY 8*


No disrespect to the music or the band by the way (Canadian?), just how it was used on that Sussex insta post.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4669765
> 
> This. QE2 be knowin'... Also, I feel someone needs to give the Queen a clip-on ponytail so she can do a hair flick for being the ultimate boss [emoji23]
> 
> 
> View attachment 4669764


Pass me the popcorn, lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I must say I initially thought the Queen was very mild (I surely would not have made a public announcement how I loved Meghan and how well she did adjusting), but it seems under the soft grandmotherly demeanor is still a character of steel.


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must say I initially thought the Queen was very mild (I surely would not have made a public announcement how I loved Meghan and how well she did adjusting), but it seems under the soft grandmotherly demeanor is still a character of steel.


It's looking like she took an approach of being gentle in public if they behaved, knowing that if they got out of line she could pull public humiliation into the playbook.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> As we all predicted:
> *
> ”The Duke and Duchess will be spending their time in both the United Kingdom and North America,” the spokesperson adds.”*
> Not Canada, North America.



These two are about as deep and complex as a puddle


----------



## papertiger

Straight-Laced said:


> I just saw this tripe in The Times!  Written by the celebrity news reporter, not the Royal Correspondent, so obviously Sussex people gave it to him.
> 
> *Sussex Royal may be banned as a brand but Meghan’s nous will sell*
> https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...-a-brand-but-meghans-nous-will-sell-q83mljt0v
> _With the use of the word “royal” under review, Piers Bracher, a deputy managing director at Four Communications, said that they could drop it without losing recognition.
> 
> “The spotlight is even further on them. *Rather weirdly they’ve increased their brand value because of it.*”
> 
> *He said that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge had a brand of reliability that was comparable to the department store John Lewis but that the Sussexes were more like Marmite. “You get talking about it either way. They have an enormous amount of sympathy from people in or below their age group but for those older than them the word ‘tiresome’ springs to mind...*
> _
> *...Mr Bracher said that there was likely to be tension as the duke established his new identity. “By creating the Marmite brand they’ve made something more powerful, which will irritate a lot of other people, including his brother.”*
> 
> So shade towards 'older' people and Prince William/the Cambridges, and apparently Harry and Meghan are an even better brand _without_ that 'Royal' encumbrance ... ROFL
> Also they're 'like Marmite', which logically means they're destined for great things ...
> Who knew ???
> 
> View attachment 4669869



Someone should tell Piers Bracher Marmite's own marketing has moved on. 

Also infamy does not necessarily generate cash if lovers are not the one's with spending power. Ask Katie Price - supposedly a 'marmite figure' and now a bankrupt. Celebs that spend more time in the tabloids than at home appear naff or outdated pretty quickly.


----------



## duna

I might be the only one at this point, but I still think M won't turn up at the soon to be Royal events. 

We'll see.....where's the popcorn emoticon?


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> It makes me wonder what the age is of the average Meghan and Harry fan. Teens? Tweens?


My 13 year old niece loves H & M, she is also a bit sheltered, so she probably has no idea what they are really up to.


----------



## papertiger

Mrs.Z said:


> My 13 year old niece loves H & M, she is also a bit sheltered, so she probably has no idea what they are really up to.



How much spending power does she have (coz that's all they're interested in)?


----------



## Mrs.Z

papertiger said:


> How much spending power does she have (coz that's all they're interested in)?


Ha.....very little!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

Has any royal sold cups and PJ's for profit?  I am surprised sussexroyal got as far as it did, seems like Harry should have known better.  There is definitely a huge disconnect between Harry and his grandmother.

They should lose the Sussex part too since they have almost zero affiliation with it, other than being gifted it for wanting to be working royals that lasted 5 minutes.


----------



## Megs

Again,  thinking about this a lot. But can we discuss the fact that Meghan and Harry took Archie away from his extended family - his grandfather, grandmother, great grandmother, aunt, uncle, cousins. Meghan has no relationship with her family aside from her mom (which where has she been after they pushed the narrative of how close they are?!). I am assuming Meghan's reasoning is how terrible the family is, but I have a truly hard time believing any of that. The Royal Family welcomed her and even the Queen made statements about how they were close and invited her to be JUST WITH HER for a planned event. 

All that aside, Archie has 3 cousins he barely will know. The Royal Family, if anything, is about family - because that is what keeps them alive. Without family, there is no Royal Family, and Meghan came in and destroyed their branch of it in an incredibly short time. It's sad for Archie. 

Will be interesting if Archie makes the trip to the UK, and I, like others here, would not be surprised if somehow Meghan couldn't make it. She wants to be adored and given attention for how strong and amazing she is, and the British people and people all over the world are not backing her anymore. 

And truly, Harry must be in a state. Before Meghan, he and William and Kate were the best of friends. You can't fake the smiles they shared at events. In comes Meghan, and now his family is terrible and he won't even have his son be around his family and his cousins? It's just all so sad and bizarre.


----------



## papertiger

imgg said:


> Has any royal sold cups and PJ's for profit?  I am surprised sussexroyal got as far as it did, seems like Harry should have known better.  There is definitely a huge disconnect between Harry and his grandmother.
> 
> They should lose the Sussex part too since they have almost zero affliction with it, other than being gifted it for wanting to be working royals that lasted 5 minutes.



Very good point. 

These two have proven that they can work the system, sliding between the letter of the law and the meaning behind it, bestowed titles and shirking duty. What ever happened to Noblesse oblige?  Honestly, if he were my son or grandson I'd operate a strict system of 'tough love'. Let him sleep in the bed he's made. He must be very well loved by his family - which makes it all the sadder really.


----------



## imgg

papertiger said:


> Very good point.
> 
> These two have proven that they can work the system, sliding between the letter of the law and the meaning behind it, bestowed titles and shirking duty. What ever happened to Noblesse oblige?  Honestly, if he were my son or grandson I'd operate a strict system of 'tough love'. Let him sleep in the bed he's made. He must be very well loved by his family - which makes it all the sadder really.


It's baffling.  Is Harry that desperate to be loved he is willing to give up everything including all common sense.


----------



## LittleStar88

QEII is giving them just enough rope to hang themselves with, and they are doing a grand job of just that.

Megs, I think about that also - the huge disservice they are doing to Archie. I believe one you have a kid your life is no longer about your own best interests, it is about the best interests of the child. Really unfortunate.


----------



## daisychainz

imgg said:


> It's baffling.  Is Harry that desperate to be loved he is willing to give up everything including all common sense.


If he has any form of mental illness the choices he makes will often defy logic.


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> And truly, Harry must be in a state. Before Meghan, he and William and Kate were the best of friends. You can't fake the smiles they shared at events. In comes Meghan, and now his family is terrible and he won't even have his son be around his family and his cousins? It's just all so sad and bizarre.



Harry must be extremely easy to manipulate, or at least influence. He has issues. If he had come into the marriage with complete confidence in who he was as a person, he wouldn't have felt he had to change everything about himself to please his wife.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Look, I don’t think anyone can over estimate the lengths that someone will go to in order to not feel lonely and to have a family. Harry was not much alone in his formative years but it is clear, after his mother died, he was terribly lonely.

And I also don’t think you can underestimate how s***** being the “spare” can truly be.  It isn’t a coincidence that the older spare is desperate to cling to terrible people that he thought were his friends and he still lives with his ex-wife.

And, quite frankly, there is honour in wanting to protect your family and your wife. I just think he is being manipulated by a group far wider than just MM and he is spinning.


----------



## kemilia

Sophisticatted said:


> ETA = edited to add


Thank you!


----------



## Annawakes

I conjecture that *IF* M does return to the U.K. for the engagements, the RF will be all smiles when she appears with them.

They will leave the backlash to the crowds.  The more M and H act like this, the more impressed I am with the rest of the RF.


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> Pass me the popcorn, lol


Yes, to that!


----------



## LittleStar88

Harry wanted a mom figure - someone to comfort him, coddle him, and lead the way. Meghan fits the bill! But for how long will she be content to being a mother to a child and a husband?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Harry must be extremely easy to manipulate, or at least influence. He has issues. If he had come into the marriage with complete confidence in who he was as a person, he wouldn't have felt he had to change everything about himself to please his wife.


He is the one in the marriage who is the royal so he should be the smart one on how to navigate their way into the life they want.  I don't know them personally of course but it appears to me that he is rather a man-boy and she is the dominating force in the marriage.


----------



## Aminamina

I bet Meghan will return to the UK and will attend all the engagements and more - she meeds to accelerate her association with the BRF to the max. It allowed her that money-making/celebrity-reaching status she put so much effort into obtainig. I am quite sure we are to witness performance of Meghan's life.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> He is the one in the marriage who is the royal so he should be the smart one on how to navigate their way into the life they want.  I don't know them personally of course but it appears to me that he is rather a man-boy and she is the dominating force in the marriage.



I agree he's a man-child. As a royal he's never had to be the smart one. His elders made all of the important decisions about his early life. As an adult he has always had a staff to rely on for his day to day needs and to keep him on schedule. He doesn't appear to be a particularly ambitious or assertive man so I think he's happy enough to take a backseat and watch Meghan do her thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Annawakes said:


> I conjecture that *IF* M does return to the U.K. for the engagements, the RF will be all smiles when she appears with them.
> 
> They will leave the backlash to the crowds.  The more M and H act like this, the more impressed I am with the rest of the RF.


Actually I am not that impressed with the rest of the RF! All the divorces, the mistress, the recent Andrew scandal, the Nazi association. People are the sum total of their environment! I must admit that I do feel sorry for the Queen and Philip because of their advanced age. But that’s it.


----------



## imgg

Chagall said:


> Actually I am not that impressed with the rest of the RF! All the divorces, the mistress, the recent Andrew scandal, the Nazi association. People are the sum total of their environment! I must admit that I do feel sorry for the Queen and Philip because of their advanced age. But that’s it.


I think the Queen has done an amazing job over the past what 7 decades?  Despite being royal, they are also human.  The Queen has done a good job when they step out of line, imo.

It's hard for some siblings to see other siblings get all the attention.  Like celebrity siblings, royal siblings etc. they can't handle their success so act out.


----------



## youngster

Aminamina said:


> I bet Meghan will return to the UK and will attend all the engagements and more - she meeds to accelerate her association with the BRF to the max. It allowed her that money-making/celebrity-reaching status she put so much effort into obtainig. I am quite sure we are to witness performance of Meghan's life.



Yesterday, I thought nope, she'll never show up in the UK, there will be some excuse that will keep her in Canada like "Archie has a cold" or "Meghan has laryngitis", something a 10 year would come up with to get out of taking a math test. But, now, I think you may be right. She needs to keep that connection with the family and show that she is still a royal, still on the inside with the family, pretend that she cares about the UK and her remaining patronages and charities.  So, I think she may show up and smile and smile and smile, and so will all the other members of the family.  But, I think she better be prepared for many regular common folks to purposely show up outside any events she attends and boo and catcall her _and_ Harry.


----------



## V0N1B2

chicinthecity777 said:


> We don't want her here, we don't care for Harry either but he's still British so we can't stop him. Please can Canada keep these 2 coz we really don't want them here!


How dare yoooooou!!!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Yesterday, I thought nope, she'll never show up in the UK, there will be some excuse that will keep her in Canada like "Archie has a cold" or "Meghan has laryngitis", something a 10 year would come up with to get out of taking a math test. But, now, I think you may be right. She needs to keep that connection with the family and show that she is still a royal, still on the inside with the family, pretend that she cares about the UK and her remaining patronages and charities.  So, I think she may show up and smile and smile and smile, and so will all the other members of the family.  But, I think she better be prepared for many regular common folks to purposely show up outside any events she attends and boo and catcall her _and_ Harry.


anyone who shows up and boos them will be called racist (IMO)


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> anyone who shows up and boos them will be called racist (IMO)


The stans will return.


----------



## TC1

Chagall said:


> Actually I am not that impressed with the rest of the RF! All the divorces, the mistress, the recent Andrew scandal, the Nazi association. People are the sum total of their environment! I must admit that I do feel sorry for the Queen and Philip because of their advanced age. But that’s it.


I think it's just more difficult to hide all the indiscretions these days. A lot of folks think the "new" royals are useless and can't wait to see them knocked down a peg.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> Yesterday, I thought nope, she'll never show up in the UK, there will be some excuse that will keep her in Canada like "Archie has a cold" or "Meghan has laryngitis", something a 10 year would come up with to get out of taking a math test. But, now, I think you may be right. She needs to keep that connection with the family and show that she is still a royal, still on the inside with the family, pretend that she cares about the UK and her remaining patronages and charities.  So, I think she may show up and smile and smile and smile, and so will all the other members of the family.  But, I think she better be prepared for many regular common folks to purposely show up outside any events she attends and boo and catcall her _and_ Harry.


I think their visit here will coincide with a relaunch of The Brand under its new name to maximise publicity.


----------



## Aminamina

youngster said:


> Yesterday, I thought nope, she'll never show up in the UK, there will be some excuse that will keep her in Canada like "Archie has a cold" or "Meghan has laryngitis", something a 10 year would come up with to get out of taking a math test. But, now, I think you may be right. She needs to keep that connection with the family and show that she is still a royal, still on the inside with the family, pretend that she cares about the UK and her remaining patronages and charities.  So, I think she may show up and smile and smile and smile, and so will all the other members of the family.  But, I think she better be prepared for many regular common folks to purposely show up outside any events she attends and boo and catcall her _and_ Harry.


Yeah. Remember what Prince Charle's reportedly nicknamed her - "Tungsten"?


----------



## limom

Tungsten as in stone?


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh god! Cringe!


----------



## chicinthecity777

V0N1B2 said:


> How dare yoooooou!!!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh god! Cringe!



Wow, that was BAD


----------



## Aminamina

limom said:


> Tungsten as in stone?


From www.merriam-webster.com/
*tungsten*
noun 
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.

Log In 

tung·sten | \ ˈtəŋ-stən  

 \
*Definition of tungsten*
*: *a gray-white heavy high-melting ductile hard polyvalent metallic element that resembles chromium and molybdenum in many of its properties and is used especially in carbide materials and electrical components (such as lamp filaments) and in hardening alloys (such as steel)  — see Chemical Elements Table


----------



## Aminamina

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh god! Cringe!



Is this for real? ETA: I see there's a disclaimer but still, WTF? Are they totally lacking any sence of class and kind of taste, these royals?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Tungsten as in stone?



A metal actually, one of the toughest metals and unyielding. Charles didn't realize that Meghan's unyielding nature would be used against his family soon enough.


----------



## TC1

Aminamina said:


> Yeah. Remember what Prince Charle's reportedly nicknamed her - "Tungsten"?


LOL, to me that's not a "nickname" that's an insult..and a mouthful


----------



## justwatchin

LittleStar88 said:


> Harry wanted a mom figure - someone to comfort him, coddle him, and lead the way. Meghan fits the bill! But for how long will she be content to being a mother to a child and a husband?


Not sure about the child. Have we seen Archie since the awkward pic when he was strapped crossbody while she walked the dogs?


----------



## imgg

Aminamina said:


> Is this for real? ETA: I see there's a disclaimer but still, WTF? Are they totally lacking any sence of class and kind of taste, these royals?


I don’t understand.... this is on their IG. Are they making a joke?


----------



## LittleStar88

justwatchin said:


> Not sure about the child. Have we seen Archie since the awkward pic when he was strapped crossbody while she walked the dogs?


----------



## lanasyogamama

justwatchin said:


> Not sure about the child. Have we seen Archie since the awkward pic when he was strapped crossbody while she walked the dogs?



cross body!!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh god! Cringe!



OMG that’s too lame for words.  Is it meant to be funny?  We really are in teenage territory aren't we  and I’m having a nails on chalkboard moment.


----------



## jen943

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh god! Cringe!




Pretty corny!


----------



## bellecate

Aminamina said:


> I bet Meghan will return to the UK and will attend all the engagements and more - she meeds to accelerate her association with the BRF to the max. It allowed her that money-making/celebrity-reaching status she put so much effort into obtainig. I am quite sure we are to witness performance of Meghan's life.


If she does go to the UK with Harry I wonder what kind of a Miss Independence performance she would put on. Stand out clothing showing she can do as she pleases, no bows or curtsey's, messy hair, low buttoned shirts?


----------



## Mrs.Z

bellecate said:


> If she does go to the UK with Harry I wonder what kind of a Miss Independence performance she would put on. Stand out clothing showing she can do as she pleases, no bows or curtsey's, messy hair, low buttoned shirts?


Yes it will be interesting to see if her style changes at all


----------



## Aminamina

bellecate said:


> If she does go to the UK with Harry I wonder what kind of a Miss Independence performance she would put on. Stand out clothing showing she can do as she pleases, no bows or curtsey's, messy hair, low buttoned shirts?


I think her Miss Independence grand performance should be expected on March the 8th - International Women's Day


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> I don’t understand.... this is on their IG. Are they making a joke?


I think they believe they are the super cool royals.  
They are going their own unique way, we should all be impressed!  See-they are entertainment insiders!
It's rather silly and immature, but that's sort of where they have chosen to play for the moment.


----------



## limom

@Aminamina
Wow, Charles has a way around....nickname.


----------



## Aminamina

limom said:


> @Aminamina
> Wow, Charles has a way around....nickname.


Oh yes, indeed! Obviously, his mama taught him well...enough


----------



## scarlet555

Clearblueskies said:


> OMG that’s too lame for words.  Is it meant to be funny?  We really are in teenage territory aren't we  and I’m having a nails on chalkboard moment.



they want to be relatable?  that's all I gather... but still... Harry must not be using a public relation adviser.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

A1aGypsy said:


> Look, I don’t think anyone can over estimate the lengths that someone will go to in order to not feel lonely and to have a family. Harry was not much alone in his formative years but it is clear, after his mother died, he was terribly lonely.
> 
> And I also don’t think you can underestimate how s***** being the “spare” can truly be.  It isn’t a coincidence that the older spare is desperate to cling to terrible people that he thought were his friends and he still lives with his ex-wife.
> 
> And, quite frankly, there is honour in wanting to protect your family and your wife. I just think he is being manipulated by a group far wider than just MM and he is spinning.



I will never understand what it's like to be in the public eye as Harry is let alone be 'the spare' in line for the throne. None of us will. So of course it's easy to cast judgement and make it seem simpler than I am sure it is. 

Totally agree there is honor in protecting your family and child - I think every parent/partner should do that! And if the RF really treated Harry, Meghan and Archie terribly, then by all means he should remove them from the situation. But I don't see it as that. Meghan was welcomed by the Queen, invited to events just with her and the Queen, had many kind words shared. 

Being treated terribly and not getting along with your family are two very separate things. I think everyone can say that their family and them get in arguments, don't agree on issues, and get annoyed with one another. Hell, I am sure plenty don't like in-laws or even siblings or parents. But, all the images and video of Harry with William and Kate before Meghan showed them genuinely getting along. It's not just photos, it's video too. And no matter how great an actor, it's hard to fake that kind of love. 

Meghan has no family, all are on the outs with her (almost seems like her mom is too?!). She seems to want to be isolated with Harry and Archie, and that to me is worrisome. And for sure, I am sure it is not just Meghan. I'm sure this is plenty of people they've surrounded themselves with to get to this place.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> If she does go to the UK with Harry I wonder what kind of a Miss Independence performance she would put on. Stand out clothing showing she can do as she pleases, no bows or curtsey's, messy hair, low buttoned shirts?


She will still have to curtsey, if its private or public, to a higher rank than her.
The difference she will notice is that lower ranked members of the RF ( the Queen's other children for example) may not have to bow or curtsey to her. Up until the end of march they still may have to but may not do it.


----------



## Aminamina

This whole H&M saga keeps reminding me of this iconic verdict. I think that's why we all care about them.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Megs said:


> I will never understand what it's like to be in the public eye as Harry is let alone be 'the spare' in line for the throne. None of us will. So of course it's easy to cast judgement and make it seem simpler than I am sure it is.
> 
> Totally agree there is honor in protecting your family and child - I think every parent/partner should do that! And if the RF really treated Harry, Meghan and Archie terribly, then by all means he should remove them from the situation. But I don't see it as that. Meghan was welcomed by the Queen, invited to events just with her and the Queen, had many kind words shared.
> 
> Being treated terribly and not getting along with your family are two very separate things. I think everyone can say that their family and them get in arguments, don't agree on issues, and get annoyed with one another. Hell, I am sure plenty don't like in-laws or even siblings or parents. But, all the images and video of Harry with William and Kate before Meghan showed them genuinely getting along. It's not just photos, it's video too. And no matter how great an actor, it's hard to fake that kind of love.
> 
> Meghan has no family, all are on the outs with her (almost seems like her mom is too?!). She seems to want to be isolated with Harry and Archie, and that to me is worrisome. And for sure, I am sure it is not just Meghan. I'm sure this is plenty of people they've surrounded themselves with to get to this place.



I agree with everything you have said. I was responding to those who said his actions are non-sensical and not logical. There is a logic to them, if you put them in the right context. It may be a horribly unhealthy one but it still “explains” why he has gone down this crazy road either following MM or walking in step with her.


----------



## gracekelly

Aminamina said:


> I think her Miss Independence grand performance should be expected on March the 8th - International Women's Day


If she does go back, which I am still doubting since she is a coward, it will be an Oscar worthy attempt. I don’t know if her acting ability is up to it. It certainly be interesting to see what happens.   I would expect lots of imaginary conversations as she will be frozen out.


----------



## Megs

A1aGypsy said:


> I agree with everything you have said. I was responding to those who said his actions are non-sensical and not logical. There is a logic to them, if you put them in the right context. It may be a horribly unhealthy one but it still “explains” why he has gone down this crazy road either following MM or walking in step with her.



Ah ya, agreed! 

I know this can just come off as bashing, and honestly, I am not ever meaning to do that. It's just hard to watch this as an outsider and for some reason I'm filled with so many opinions! Again, I think it's because they did this all so publicly. Wonder if they regret any of how they've let this play out!


----------



## Aminamina

gracekelly said:


> If she does go back, which I am still doubting since she is a coward, it will be an Oscar worthy attempt. I don’t know if her acting ability is up to it. It certainly be interesting to see what happens.   I would expect lots of imaginary conversations as she will be frozen out.


Coward or tungsten she's going to shape up her best to hold onto her royalnes. Her acting ability is what keeps us so entertained. I thank her for that.


----------



## TC1

Megs said:


> I will never understand what it's like to be in the public eye as Harry is let alone be 'the spare' in line for the throne. None of us will. So of course it's easy to cast judgement and make it seem simpler than I am sure it is.
> 
> Totally agree there is honor in protecting your family and child - I think every parent/partner should do that! And if the RF really treated Harry, Meghan and Archie terribly, then by all means he should remove them from the situation. But I don't see it as that. Meghan was welcomed by the Queen, invited to events just with her and the Queen, had many kind words shared.
> 
> Being treated terribly and not getting along with your family are two very separate things. I think everyone can say that their family and them get in arguments, don't agree on issues, and get annoyed with one another. Hell, I am sure plenty don't like in-laws or even siblings or parents. But, all the images and video of Harry with William and Kate before Meghan showed them genuinely getting along. It's not just photos, it's video too. And no matter how great an actor, it's hard to fake that kind of love.
> 
> Meghan has no family, all are on the outs with her (almost seems like her mom is too?!). She seems to want to be isolated with Harry and Archie, and that to me is worrisome. And for sure, I am sure it is not just Meghan. I'm sure this is plenty of people they've surrounded themselves with to get to this place.


I dunno Megs. You got me when you said "Meghan has no family" it seems she was doing just fine with both of her parents before she geared up to marry Harry and immediately she was this poor unloved orphan (because that suited her) Sure her step siblings may not have been close to her...but meh..who cares. She seemed to have a great relationship with her parents until she wanted to spin the narrative. Of course, IMO
ETA- I did think it awful that her own family wanted to sell stories to the tabloids


----------



## Milosmum0307

Aminamina said:


> Yeah. Remember what Prince Charle's reportedly nicknamed her - "Tungsten"?


I completely misread/misunderstood that as Tunguska, as in the Tunguska Event when an interplanetary object exploded above a Russian forest and flattened over 2,000 kilometers, killing everything in its wake, and I thought, “Sounds about right.”


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> LOL, to me that's not a "nickname" that's an insult..and a mouthful



Supposedly it was a compliment, like saying she is incredibly strong. Of course, ol' Charles isn't known for being a smooth talker as those of us old enough to remember "Camillagate" know. He was recorded in a phone call telling Camilla he wanted to live inside her trousers like a tampon.


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh god! Cringe!


----------



## threadbender

I must be slow. I don't get it.


----------



## V0N1B2

Megs said:


> I will never understand what it's like to be in the public eye as Harry is let alone be 'the spare' in line for the throne. None of us will. So of course it's easy to cast judgement and make it seem simpler than I am sure it is.


I agree, but I feel like Harry really fumbled the bag.  You're born into one of the most famous families in the world, and even if you're born "the spare" you have so many opportunities that a regular person just doesn't have.  Especially when it comes to education.  Okay so maybe Harry didn't have a great GPA but he still had the opportunity to get an education in the finest Universities money could buy - with or without the help of a tutor - and not had to worry about how he would pay for it.  He may not have had the smarts to become a neurophysicist but I'm sure he's good at something - maybe he's mechanically inclined? He could have studied Sociology, History, PolySci...  He could have worked with something like Doctors Without Borders, you don't have to be a physician to volunteer with them.  If he didn't want to go the post-secondary route, he could have gone to Africa or India or Australia and worked with charities or start his own foundation to save wildlfe from extinction/poaching etc.  People who do these types of things aren't doing it for the money, but Harry didn't need to worry about that.  He could have still earned (lol) a paycheque from the family and volunteered his time helping others if that's what he really wanted. 

As for Meghan, like Harry, it was just a boatload of missed opportunities.  She could have done so much for minorities and/or specifically women minorities in England.  The platform she would have had as a member of the Royal Family to make a difference or ahem "shine a light" on whatever cause tickled her fancy... man, what a joke.  She wanted fame.  Thought she could two-step into the RF and be this "force for change".  Pfft.  Personally, I don't think she liked having privacy at Frogmore and having the (I'm sorry I don't remember what it's called Royal Rotunda or something?) where the reporters and photogs respect your privacy and only get a limited access to you... She wanted to be the new Lady Di and instead she's Wallace Simpson 2.0.

Imagine having your family pay your way through everything in life.  What would you do with that?  What opportunities would you take advantage of?  Would you get a Master's Degree? Save the animals? Work on leaving the planet in better shape than when you entered it? Have a monthly documentary program on the BBC highlighting a different charity each month? Maybe an Anthony Bourdain type of program?



> Meghan has no family, all are on the outs with her (almost seems like her mom is too?!). She seems to want to be isolated with Harry and Archie, and that to me is worrisome. And for sure, I am sure it is not just Meghan. I'm sure this is plenty of people they've surrounded themselves with to get to this place.


People say this is because she is a raging narcissist.  I'm not familiar with this personality disorder, but separating people from their family & friends and making them entirely dependent on you is (from what I understand) one of the hallmarks of a Narcissistic personality.


----------



## Sharont2305

V0N1B2 said:


> I agree, but I feel like Harry really fumbled the bag.  You're born into one of the most famous families in the world, and even if you're born "the spare" you have so many opportunities that a regular person just doesn't have.  Especially when it comes to education.  Okay so maybe Harry didn't have a great GPA but he still had the opportunity to get an education in the finest Universities money could buy - with or without the help of a tutor - and not had to worry about how he would pay for it.  He may not have has the smarts to become a neurophysicist but I'm sure he's good a something - maybe he's mechanically inclined? He could have studied Sociology, History, PolySci...  He could have worked with something like Doctors Without Borders, you don't have to be a physician to volunteer with them.  If he didn't want to go the post-secondary route, he could have gone to Africa or India or Australia and worked with charities or start his own foundation to save wildlfe from extinction/poaching etc.  People who do these types of things aren't doing it for the money, but Harry didn't need to worry about that.  He could have still earned (lol) a paycheque from the family and volunteered his time helping others if that's what he really wanted.
> 
> As for Meghan, like Harry, it was just a boatload of missed opportunities.  She could have done so much for minorities and/or specifically women minorities in England.  The platform she would have had as a member of the Royal Family to make a difference or ahem "shine a light" on whatever cause tickled her fancy... man, what a joke.  She wanted fame.  Thought she could two-step into the RF and be this "force for change".  Pfft.  Personally, I don't think she liked having privacy at Frogmore and having the (I'm sorry I don't remember what it's called Royal Rotunda or something?) where the reporters and photogs respect your privacy and only get a limited access to you... She wanted to be the new Lady Di and instead she's Wallace Simpson 2.0.
> 
> Imagine having your family pay your way through everything in life.  What would you do with that?  What opportunities would you take advantage of?  Would you get a Master's Degree? Save the animals? Work on leaving the planet in better shape than when you entered it? Have a monthly documentary program on the BBC highlighting a different charity each month? Maybe an Anthony Bourdain type of program?
> 
> 
> People say this is because she is a raging narcissist.  I'm not familiar with this personality disorder, but separating people from their family & friends and making them entirely dependent on you is (from what I understand) one of the hallmarks of a Narcissistic personality.


Spot on, but here in the UK if you haven't got certain grades, then you don't get into University.


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> I agree, but I feel like Harry really fumbled the bag.  You're born into one of the most famous families in the world, and even if you're born "the spare" you have so many opportunities that a regular person just doesn't have.  Especially when it comes to education.  Okay so maybe Harry didn't have a great GPA but he still had the opportunity to get an education in the finest Universities money could buy - with or without the help of a tutor - and not had to worry about how he would pay for it.  He may not have had the smarts to become a neurophysicist but I'm sure he's good at something - maybe he's mechanically inclined? He could have studied Sociology, History, PolySci...  He could have worked with something like Doctors Without Borders, you don't have to be a physician to volunteer with them.  If he didn't want to go the post-secondary route, he could have gone to Africa or India or Australia and worked with charities or start his own foundation to save wildlfe from extinction/poaching etc.  People who do these types of things aren't doing it for the money, but Harry didn't need to worry about that.  He could have still earned (lol) a paycheque from the family and volunteered his time helping others if that's what he really wanted.
> 
> As for Meghan, like Harry, it was just a boatload of missed opportunities.  She could have done so much for minorities and/or specifically women minorities in England.  The platform she would have had as a member of the Royal Family to make a difference or ahem "shine a light" on whatever cause tickled her fancy... man, what a joke.  She wanted fame.  Thought she could two-step into the RF and be this "force for change".  Pfft.  Personally, I don't think she liked having privacy at Frogmore and having the (I'm sorry I don't remember what it's called Royal Rotunda or something?) where the reporters and photogs respect your privacy and only get a limited access to you... She wanted to be the new Lady Di and instead she's Wallace Simpson 2.0.
> 
> Imagine having your family pay your way through everything in life.  What would you do with that?  What opportunities would you take advantage of?  Would you get a Master's Degree? Save the animals? Work on leaving the planet in better shape than when you entered it? Have a monthly documentary program on the BBC highlighting a different charity each month? Maybe an Anthony Bourdain type of program?
> 
> 
> People say this is because she is a raging narcissist.  I'm not familiar with this personality disorder, but separating people from their family & friends and making them entirely dependent on you is (from what I understand) one of the hallmarks of a Narcissistic personality.


*YES .. to all of this!!!!  *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> I agree, but I feel like Harry really fumbled the bag.  You're born into one of the most famous families in the world, and even if you're born "the spare" you have so many opportunities that a regular person just doesn't have.  Especially when it comes to education.  Okay so maybe Harry didn't have a great GPA but he still had the opportunity to get an education in the finest Universities money could buy - with or without the help of a tutor - and not had to worry about how he would pay for it.  He may not have had the smarts to become a neurophysicist but I'm sure he's good at something - maybe he's mechanically inclined? He could have studied Sociology, History, PolySci...  He could have worked with something like Doctors Without Borders, you don't have to be a physician to volunteer with them.  If he didn't want to go the post-secondary route, he could have gone to Africa or India or Australia and worked with charities or start his own foundation to save wildlfe from extinction/poaching etc.  People who do these types of things aren't doing it for the money, but Harry didn't need to worry about that.  He could have still earned (lol) a paycheque from the family and volunteered his time helping others if that's what he really wanted.
> 
> As for Meghan, like Harry, it was just a boatload of missed opportunities.  She could have done so much for minorities and/or specifically women minorities in England.  The platform she would have had as a member of the Royal Family to make a difference or ahem "shine a light" on whatever cause tickled her fancy... man, what a joke.  She wanted fame.  Thought she could two-step into the RF and be this "force for change".  Pfft.  Personally, I don't think she liked having privacy at Frogmore and having the (I'm sorry I don't remember what it's called Royal Rotunda or something?) where the reporters and photogs respect your privacy and only get a limited access to you... She wanted to be the new Lady Di and instead she's Wallace Simpson 2.0.
> 
> Imagine having your family pay your way through everything in life.  What would you do with that?  What opportunities would you take advantage of?  Would you get a Master's Degree? Save the animals? Work on leaving the planet in better shape than when you entered it? Have a monthly documentary program on the BBC highlighting a different charity each month? Maybe an Anthony Bourdain type of program?


You’re absolutely right.  I remember reading how Harry whisked Meghan off to Botswana within a few days of meeting her.  All organised for him by palace staff.  How many people (even mega wealthy people) have that sort of opportunity and resource at their fingertips?  And he had time - biggest luxury of all - to do exactly as he wanted.  Meghan could have had that life.
There’s a lot of talk about Harry being jealous of William, and Meghan of Kate - and I believe they are.  I think it’s at the root of a lot that’s playing out here.  All the same I think the “spare” has the best life - all of the privilege and none of the responsibility of duty.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Megs said:


> Ah ya, agreed!
> 
> I know this can just come off as bashing, and honestly, I am not ever meaning to do that. It's just hard to watch this as an outsider and for some reason I'm filled with so many opinions! Again, I think it's because they did this all so publicly. Wonder if they regret any of how they've let this play out!



I fully agree! And I’m full of opinions as well. And I don’t see it as bashing at all


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> There’s a lot of talk about Harry being jealous of William, and Meghan of Kate - and I believe they are.  I think it’s at the root of a lot that’s playing out here.  All the same *I think the “spare” has the best life - all of the privilege and none of the responsibility of duty.*



That is so true. It is possible to keep a low profile if that was what they wanted. As I see it Meghan only wanted the glamor and fame but she had no interest in doing the grunt work, the boring ceremonies and visits to schools and nursing homes, etc.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> That is so true. It is possible to keep a low profile if that was what they wanted. As I see it Meghan only wanted the glamor and fame but she had no interest in doing the grunt work, the boring ceremonies and visits to schools and nursing homes, etc.


But she didn’t have to.  She was given the option by the Queen to carry on acting and not be a working Royal.


----------



## queennadine

sdkitty said:


> He is the one in the marriage who is the royal so he should be the smart one on how to navigate their way into the life they want.  I don't know them personally of course but it appears to me that he is rather a man-boy and she is the dominating force in the marriage.



Agreed! I’ve seen so many video clips of her arm around his back, guiding him to wherever. It’s so strange to me. That’s something men do, IMO. Or she’ll put her arm out indicating he can go first...again, role reversal. Especially when she’s not the senior person there. Super odd behavior, and definitely makes me think she’s in charge in that relationship.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> You’re absolutely right.  I remember reading how Harry whisked Meghan off to Botswana within a few days of meeting her.  All organised for him by palace staff.  How many people (even mega wealthy people) have that sort of opportunity and resource at their fingertips?  And he had time - biggest luxury of all - to do exactly as he wanted.  Meghan could have had that life.
> There’s a lot of talk about Harry being jealous of William, and Meghan of Kate - and I believe they are.  I think it’s at the root of a lot that’s playing out here.  All the same I think the “spare” has the best life - all of the privilege and none of the responsibility of duty.


.. and yet, I keep on coming back to the same thought in regards to how things appeared to have "cooled" considerably when Harry attended Tom Inskip's wedding (_in Jamaica I believe_)?  Certainly, the pictures of the two of them at that time, did not really show a couple "so in love", and what was reported was that indeed, Harry did not want to continue the relationship with Meghan (_she was a +1 invite who Harry didn't expect to show up, yet .. she did - quelle surprise_)!! 

So given all this .. *WHAT HAPPENED*???  How did she brainwash him into what later occurred? .. him being infatuated with her?  All I remember, is her "clinging" on to him (_I used to refer to it as the 'double-pawing'_) .. reminded me of LeAnn Rimes and Eddie Cribian and it just used to make us refer to her LeAnn as major-league clingy.  When I asked this before, someone here intimated that maybe her 'bedroom skills' turned him around???  Hmmmmm ..


----------



## kemilia

Sophisticatted said:


> ETA = edited to add


Thank you!


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> But she didn’t have to.  She was given the option by the Queen to carry on acting and not be a working Royal.



Then I have no clue what her problem was. Something about the job wasn't the way she wanted it to be so she bailed out and took Harry with her. Maybe the poor frail little flower really was so distraught that some of the British media wrote mean things about her. Of course the bad press won't stop. In fact they have only invited the media from Canada and the US to pile on by showing them how easy it is to get to them.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and yet, I keep on coming back to the same thought in regards to how things appeared to have "cooled" considerably when Harry attended Tom Inskip's wedding (_in Jamaica I believe_)?  Certainly, the pictures of the two of them at that time, did not really show a couple "so in love", and what was reported was that indeed, Harry did not want to continue the relationship with Meghan (_she was a +1 invite who Harry didn't expect to show up, yet .. she did - quelle surprise_)!!
> 
> So given all this .. *WHAT HAPPENED*???  How did she brainwash him into what later occurred? .. him being infatuated with her?  All I remember, is her "clinging" on to him (_I used to refer to it as the 'double-pawing'_) .. reminded me of LeAnn Rimes and Eddie Cribian and it just used to make us refer to her LeAnn as major-league clingy.  When I asked this before, someone here intimated that maybe her 'bedroom skills' turned him around???  Hmmmmm ..


wouldn't be the first time bedroom skills were helpful


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Then I have no clue what her problem was. Something about the job wasn't the way she wanted it to be so she bailed out and took Harry with her. Maybe the poor frail little flower really was so distraught that some of the British media wrote mean things about her. Of course the bad press won't stop. In fact they have only invited the media from Canada and the US to pile on by showing them how easy it is to get to them.


Her problem was that she realised she was never going to be the star of the show, couldn't hack the fact she had to toe the party line and also be second fiddle to Catherine.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> .. and yet, I keep on coming back to the same thought in regards to how things appeared to have "cooled" considerably when Harry attended Tom Inskip's wedding (_in Jamaica I believe_)?  Certainly, the pictures of the two of them at that time, did not really show a couple "so in love", and what was reported was that indeed, Harry did not want to continue the relationship with Meghan (_she was a +1 invite who Harry didn't expect to show up, yet .. she did - quelle surprise_)!!
> 
> So given all this .. *WHAT HAPPENED*???  How did she brainwash him into what later occurred? .. him being infatuated with her?  All I remember, is her "clinging" on to him (_I used to refer to it as the 'double-pawing'_) .. reminded me of LeAnn Rimes and Eddie Cribian and it just used to make us refer to her LeAnn as major-league clingy.  When I asked this before, someone here intimated that maybe her 'bedroom skills' turned him around???  Hmmmmm ..


Those Jamaican wedding pics do NOT show a besotted in-love Prince Harry, imo. He looks miserable and not at all in to her. Yes, what happened?


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> So given all this .. *WHAT HAPPENED*???  How did she brainwash him into what later occurred? .. him being infatuated with her? ... When I asked this before, someone here intimated that maybe her 'bedroom skills' turned him around???  Hmmmmm ..


Oh noes doll!  You haven’t heard?
She has _Magical Boobs_.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Spot on, but here in the UK if you haven't got certain grades, then you don't get into University.


That’s the same here. You have to have the grades to go to university. I thought that was universal.


----------



## bisousx

I guess the RF can’t or refuses to Aunt Becky their offspring into uni


----------



## Tootsie17

V0N1B2 said:


> I agree, but I feel like Harry really fumbled the bag.  You're born into one of the most famous families in the world, and even if you're born "the spare" you have so many opportunities that a regular person just doesn't have.  Especially when it comes to education.  Okay so maybe Harry didn't have a great GPA but he still had the opportunity to get an education in the finest Universities money could buy - with or without the help of a tutor - and not had to worry about how he would pay for it.  He may not have had the smarts to become a neurophysicist but I'm sure he's good at something - maybe he's mechanically inclined? He could have studied Sociology, History, PolySci...  He could have worked with something like Doctors Without Borders, you don't have to be a physician to volunteer with them.  If he didn't want to go the post-secondary route, he could have gone to Africa or India or Australia and worked with charities or start his own foundation to save wildlfe from extinction/poaching etc.  People who do these types of things aren't doing it for the money, but Harry didn't need to worry about that.  He could have still earned (lol) a paycheque from the family and volunteered his time helping others if that's what he really wanted.
> 
> As for Meghan, like Harry, it was just a boatload of missed opportunities.  She could have done so much for minorities and/or specifically women minorities in England.  The platform she would have had as a member of the Royal Family to make a difference or ahem "shine a light" on whatever cause tickled her fancy... man, what a joke.  She wanted fame.  Thought she could two-step into the RF and be this "force for change".  Pfft.  Personally, I don't think she liked having privacy at Frogmore and having the (I'm sorry I don't remember what it's called Royal Rotunda or something?) where the reporters and photogs respect your privacy and only get a limited access to you... She wanted to be the new Lady Di and instead she's Wallace Simpson 2.0.
> 
> Imagine having your family pay your way through everything in life.  What would you do with that?  What opportunities would you take advantage of?  Would you get a Master's Degree? Save the animals? Work on leaving the planet in better shape than when you entered it? Have a monthly documentary program on the BBC highlighting a different charity each month? Maybe an Anthony Bourdain type of program?
> 
> 
> People say this is because she is a raging narcissist.  I'm not familiar with this personality disorder, but separating people from their family & friends and making them entirely dependent on you is (from what I understand) one of the hallmarks of a Narcissistic personality.


Well said! Kudos to you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Her problem was that she realised she was never going to be the star of the show, couldn't hack the fact she had to toe the party line and also be second fiddle to Catherine.



She must have known that going in though. For a pre-planner like her, she couldn't have been so delusional and vain as to think she would outshine those higher than her in the line of succession. I definitely see her balking at having to answer to anyone or control her behavior. She does as she pleases.


----------



## Tivo

bag-mania said:


> She must have known that going in though. *For a pre-planner like her, she couldn't have been so delusional and vain as to think she would outshine those higher than her in the line of succession.* I definitely see her balking at having to answer to anyone or control her behavior. She does as she pleases.



I believe it. She likes to talk a lot and is long winded, but has nothing to say. She cuts Harry off a lot in interviews. I imagine people tire of her quickly in a short amount of time.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> She must have known that going in though. For a pre-planner like her, she couldn't have been so delusional and vain as to think she would outshine those higher than her in the line of succession. I definitely see her balking at having to answer to anyone or control her behavior. She does as she pleases.


She probably thought she was different, you know, being the TV star she was [emoji849]


----------



## Lodpah

kemilia said:


> Those Jamaican wedding pics do NOT show a besotted in-love Prince Harry, imo. He looks miserable and not at all in to her. Yes, what happened?


Simple. I believe she did the native thing and literally bewitched him. His energy was open to it so she did it, I don’t understand why people don’t know that it happens. Meghan will do anything to achieve her goal.


----------



## zinacef

CeeJay said:


> .. and yet, I keep on coming back to the same thought in regards to how things appeared to have "cooled" considerably when Harry attended Tom Inskip's wedding (_in Jamaica I believe_)?  Certainly, the pictures of the two of them at that time, did not really show a couple "so in love", and what was reported was that indeed, Harry did not want to continue the relationship with Meghan (_she was a +1 invite who Harry didn't expect to show up, yet .. she did - quelle surprise_)!!
> 
> So given all this .. *WHAT HAPPENED*???  How did she brainwash him into what later occurred? .. him being infatuated with her?  All I remember, is her "clinging" on to him (_I used to refer to it as the 'double-pawing'_) .. reminded me of LeAnn Rimes and Eddie Cribian and it just used to make us refer to her LeAnn as major-league clingy.  When I asked this before, someone here intimated that maybe her 'bedroom skills' turned him around???  Hmmmmm ..


Just like Wallis skills, I believe.


----------



## Chagall

I wonder if she’ll mail his rings back to him.


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> She probably thought she was different, you know, being the TV star she was [emoji849]


Ok, that was funny!


----------



## jcnc

Clearblueskies said:


> You’re absolutely right.  I remember reading how Harry whisked Meghan off to Botswana within a few days of meeting her.  All organised for him by palace staff.  How many people (even mega wealthy people) have that sort of opportunity and resource at their fingertips?  And he had time - biggest luxury of all - to do exactly as he wanted.  Meghan could have had that life.
> There’s a lot of talk about Harry being jealous of William, and Meghan of Kate - and I believe they are.  I think it’s at the root of a lot that’s playing out here.  *All the same I think the “spare” has the best life - all of the privilege and none of the responsibility of duty.*


Totally agree. I knew this even as a 12 year old. Thats when i had decided if given the opportunity, i would grow up to marry Harry and not william. Become a princess without the extra extra pressure to be a queen one day
But i guess the H and M couldn’t handle not being #1. They complain now.. imagine what they would have done if they wefe the future king and queen?!?!


----------



## LittleStar88

Maybe MM felt that visiting elderly, the sick, the needy... Not fun and probably beneath her.


----------



## michellem

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't be the first time bedroom skills were helpful


----------



## Megs

TC1 said:


> I dunno Megs. You got me when you said "Meghan has no family" it seems she was doing just fine with both of her parents before she geared up to marry Harry and immediately she was this poor unloved orphan (because that suited her) Sure her step siblings may not have been close to her...but meh..who cares. She seemed to have a great relationship with her parents until she wanted to spin the narrative. Of course, IMO
> ETA- I did think it awful that her own family wanted to sell stories to the tabloids



Oh ya that's what I meant. She now has 'no family' but again, it seems to only be no family when it fits the narrative. Many stories show it was her dad who raised her and supported her financially. Then her mom comes in and they say it's the best relationship ever, but now it doesn't seem she and Meghan are together. Because we'd hear about it ya know?! ha


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> If she does go back, which I am still doubting since she is a coward, it will be an Oscar worthy attempt. I don’t know if her acting ability is up to it. It certainly be interesting to see what happens.   I would expect lots of imaginary conversations as she will be frozen out.



I think Kate will be kind and inclusive towards her if she shows up. Though by now she knows exactly who she is dealing with and will be watching her back and the Family's.


----------



## bellecate

Milosmum0307 said:


> I completely misread/misunderstood that as Tunguska, as in the Tunguska Event when an interplanetary object exploded above a Russian forest and flattened over 2,000 kilometers, killing everything in its wake, and I thought, “Sounds about right.”


----------



## sdkitty

Megs said:


> Oh ya that's what I meant. She now has 'no family' but again, it seems to only be no family when it fits the narrative. Many stories show it was her dad who raised her and supported her financially. Then her mom comes in and they say it's the best relationship ever, but now it doesn't seem she and Meghan are together. Because we'd hear about it ya know?! ha


I'm not necessarily buying that she's very close to her mother, which doesn't make one a bad person - just sayin


----------



## imgg

Emeline said:


> I think they believe they are the super cool royals.
> They are going their own unique way, we should all be impressed!  See-they are entertainment insiders!
> It's rather silly and immature, but that's sort of where they have chosen to play for the moment.


Thanks for explaining, it was so immature I thought I was missing a deeper meaning, but see that I wasn't!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Someone in the DM comments often posts about the”Botswana Eff Fest”. I think its fair to guess she did what was needed to capture his interest.

Megs thought she would come in like a breath of fresh air and blow out all the cobwebs and “shake things up” for the BRF imo.


----------



## Milosmum0307

bag-mania said:


> Then I have no clue what her problem was. Something about the job wasn't the way she wanted it to be so she bailed out and took Harry with her. Maybe the poor frail little flower really was so distraught that some of the British media wrote mean things about her. Of course the bad press won't stop. In fact they have only invited the media from Canada and the US to pile on by showing them how easy it is to get to them.


Meghan is impervious to bed press, remember?  She doesn’t read her own press, but she does read the Economist! (So.  Many.  Eye-rolls.)  Yeah, I wonder if maybe it’s a bit naive to search for a “reason“ for Meghan and Harry’s departure from the family?  They spent the duration of their short tenure as “working royals” constructing a narrative of persecution and harassment to justify what they had probably been planning from very shortly after the wedding, if not before.  I think it started with Harry’s self-indulgent “leave my transatlantic girlfriend alone!” open letter to the press, echoed later in the riveting masterpiece that was his tantrum statement after they filed their frivolous lawsuit over the letter MM wrote to her father (in calligraphy, the contents of which her “friends” gleefully leaked to the press, and which betrays the diction of a woman who read Edith Wharton novels in her formative years and still thinks they’re the height of sophistication and polish ... but it was totally meant to stay private, you guys!).  They lay the groundwork early for these allegations of press intrusion and fed the rumors of familial strife to foreshadow the “toxic family” subplot.  The almost immediate splitting of their court from William and Catherine’s, the early demand for their own independent office and the planned formation of their own “charitable foundation” all foretold that the couple had no intention of functioning within the established framework.  I don’t think things soured; I think MM and Harry were determined to fail and blame everyone else for that failure.  Why all the Machiavellian scheming if Meghan could simply have taken the boost to her celebrity that marrying Harry had given her and continued her acting career without the dreadful obligations of toxic royalty?  Because Meghan knew that those titles and their status as royalty were where the real lucre lay.  Oprah wouldn’t attend the wedding of Prince Nazi Cosplay and Some Very Private Basic Cable Thespian, but she would (and did) show up for a Duke and Duchess.  A decade and a half of hustling had gotten Meghan to the lofty height of “aging ingenue grilling burgers in a lace bra for a men’s magazine”; whereas a few months of marriage to Harry the Dumb got her the illustrious title of “Princess of the United Kingdom,” as per Archie’s birth certificate. She knew what she was doing from the moment that ginger moron asked for her digits.  Sure, it might be tinfoil hat-level conspiracy theorizing to interpret their behavior over the past two years as some grand Masterplan to exit stage left with all the family silver, but given that these people literally published an actual extortion letter in the form of a website, complete with an FAQ page that read like a ransom note, I wouldn’t put much past them.  And just as well.  We now have some marquee moments to cherish, like Harry looking dazed and unwashed on numerous official engagements, pregnancy announcements at other people’s weddings followed by pathological belly-cupping, a chronically bedraggled Meghan in ill-fitting couture, two middle-aged attention-whores pawing at each other like lusty teenagers while representing the actual Queen of England, and - my personal favorite- Meghan showing up with bare arms and a stripper weave to a mosque.  Without these grifters, we would have to wince through the Prince Andrew horror without any much-needed comic relief.  In terms of cringey whatthef*ckery, these two are a gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Chagall said:


> That’s the same here. You have to have the grades to go to university. I thought that was universal.


Theoretically that’s true in the U.S., but we have many, many colleges and universities, both public and private and at various levels of prestige and academic difficulty, and there’s a place for many, if not most, students, including those with middling and even poor grades and/or low standardized test scores.  And, of course, there’s no overstating where and what the right pedigree or connections can get you. I went to a top-tier law school and knew a couple of “legacy” kids who were there not so much for their academic brilliance as for the prominence of their alumni parents (who were no doubt also generous contributors to the endowment).  They languished in the bottom quintile, content in their mediocrity and basking in the noxious fumes of nepotism.  Speaking of Prince Harry ...


----------



## threadbender

When is the lawsuit supposed to be going forward?


----------



## chloebagfreak

Milosmum0307 said:


> Meghan is impervious to bed press, remember?  She doesn’t read her own press, but she does read the Economist! (So.  Many.  Eye-rolls.)  Yeah, I wonder if maybe it’s a bit naive to search for a “reason“ for Meghan and Harry’s departure from the family?  They spent the duration of their short tenure as “working royals” constructing a narrative of persecution and harassment to justify what they had probably been planning from very shortly after the wedding, if not before.  I think it started with Harry’s self-indulgent “leave my transatlantic girlfriend alone!” open letter to the press, echoed later in the riveting masterpiece that was his tantrum statement after they filed their frivolous lawsuit over the letter MM wrote to her father (in calligraphy, the contents of which her “friends” gleefully leaked to the press, and which betrays the diction of a woman who read Edith Wharton novels in her formative years and still thinks they’re the height of sophistication and polish ... but it was totally meant to stay private, you guys!).  They lay the groundwork early for these allegations of press intrusion and fed the rumors of familial strife to foreshadow the “toxic family” subplot.  The almost immediate splitting of their court from William and Catherine’s, the early demand for their own independent office and the planned formation of their own “charitable foundation” all foretold that the couple had no intention of functioning within the established framework.  I don’t think things soured; I think MM and Harry were determined to fail and blame everyone else for that failure.  Why all the Machiavellian scheming if Meghan could simply have taken the boost to her celebrity that marrying Harry had given her and continued her acting career without the dreadful obligations of toxic royalty?  Because Meghan knew that those titles and their status as royalty were where the real lucre lay.  Oprah wouldn’t attend the wedding of Prince Nazi Cosplay and Some Very Private Basic Cable Thespian, but she would (and did) show up for a Duke and Duchess.  A decade and a half of hustling had gotten Meghan to the lofty height of “aging ingenue grilling burgers in a lace bra for a men’s magazine”; whereas a few months of marriage to Harry the Dumb got her the illustrious title of “Princess of the United Kingdom,” as per Archie’s birth certificate. She knew what she was doing from the moment that ginger moron asked for her digits.  Sure, it might be tinfoil hat-level conspiracy theorizing to interpret their behavior over the past two years as some grand Masterplan to exit stage left with all the family silver, but given that these people literally published an actual extortion letter in the form of a website, complete with an FAQ page that read like a ransom note, I wouldn’t put much past them.  And just as well.  We now have some marquee moments to cherish, like Harry looking dazed and unwashed on numerous official engagements, pregnancy announcements at other people’s weddings followed by pathological belly-cupping, a chronically bedraggled Meghan in ill-fitting couture, two middle-aged attention-whores pawing at each other like lusty teenagers while representing the actual Queen of England, and - my personal favorite- Meghan showing up with bare arms and a stripper weave to a mosque.  Without these grifters, we would have to wince through the Prince Andrew horror without any much-needed comic relief.  In terms of cringey whatthef*ckery, these two are a gift that keeps on giving.


Wow! Please tell me you are famous writer taking a break in the purse forum. Not only is your writing so funny and totally on point-it is fabulous!! I thoroughly enjoyed reading that!
I have been fascinated by this story only from the behavior of Megan, and her issues with family. The idea of isolating from two families is incredibly sad and dysfunctional. I feel bad for her son, especially if he misses out on all of the relatives and cousins. As an only child, I treasure most of my family and extended relatives.


----------



## V0N1B2

Milosmum0307 said:


> Meghan is impervious to bed press, remember?  She doesn’t read her own press, but she does read the Economist! (So.  Many.  Eye-rolls.)  Yeah, I wonder if maybe it’s a bit naive to search for a “reason“ for Meghan and Harry’s departure from the family?  They spent the duration of their short tenure as “working royals” constructing a narrative of persecution and harassment to justify what they had probably been planning from very shortly after the wedding, if not before.  I think it started with Harry’s self-indulgent “leave my transatlantic girlfriend alone!” open letter to the press, echoed later in the riveting masterpiece that was his tantrum statement after they filed their frivolous lawsuit over the letter MM wrote to her father (in calligraphy, the contents of which her “friends” gleefully leaked to the press, and which betrays the diction of a woman who read Edith Wharton novels in her formative years and still thinks they’re the height of sophistication and polish ... but it was totally meant to stay private, you guys!).  They lay the groundwork early for these allegations of press intrusion and fed the rumors of familial strife to foreshadow the “toxic family” subplot.  The almost immediate splitting of their court from William and Catherine’s, the early demand for their own independent office and the planned formation of their own “charitable foundation” all foretold that the couple had no intention of functioning within the established framework.  I don’t think things soured; I think MM and Harry were determined to fail and blame everyone else for that failure.  Why all the Machiavellian scheming if Meghan could simply have taken the boost to her celebrity that marrying Harry had given her and continued her acting career without the dreadful obligations of toxic royalty?  Because Meghan knew that those titles and their status as royalty were where the real lucre lay.  Oprah wouldn’t attend the wedding of Prince Nazi Cosplay and Some Very Private Basic Cable Thespian, but she would (and did) show up for a Duke and Duchess.  A decade and a half of hustling had gotten Meghan to the lofty height of “aging ingenue grilling burgers in a lace bra for a men’s magazine”; whereas a few months of marriage to Harry the Dumb got her the illustrious title of “Princess of the United Kingdom,” as per Archie’s birth certificate. She knew what she was doing from the moment that ginger moron asked for her digits.  Sure, it might be tinfoil hat-level conspiracy theorizing to interpret their behavior over the past two years as some grand Masterplan to exit stage left with all the family silver, but given that these people literally published an actual extortion letter in the form of a website, complete with an FAQ page that read like a ransom note, I wouldn’t put much past them.  And just as well.  We now have some marquee moments to cherish, like Harry looking dazed and unwashed on numerous official engagements, pregnancy announcements at other people’s weddings followed by pathological belly-cupping, a chronically bedraggled Meghan in ill-fitting couture, two middle-aged attention-whores pawing at each other like lusty teenagers while representing the actual Queen of England, and - my personal favorite- Meghan showing up with bare arms and a stripper weave to a mosque.  Without these grifters, we would have to wince through the Prince Andrew horror without any much-needed comic relief.  In terms of cringey whatthef*ckery, these two are a gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Milosmum0307 said:


> Meghan is impervious to bed press, remember?  She doesn’t read her own press, but she does read the Economist! (So.  Many.  Eye-rolls.)  Yeah, I wonder if maybe it’s a bit naive to search for a “reason“ for Meghan and Harry’s departure from the family?  They spent the duration of their short tenure as “working royals” constructing a narrative of persecution and harassment to justify what they had probably been planning from very shortly after the wedding, if not before.  I think it started with Harry’s self-indulgent “leave my transatlantic girlfriend alone!” open letter to the press, echoed later in the riveting masterpiece that was his tantrum statement after they filed their frivolous lawsuit over the letter MM wrote to her father (in calligraphy, the contents of which her “friends” gleefully leaked to the press, and which betrays the diction of a woman who read Edith Wharton novels in her formative years and still thinks they’re the height of sophistication and polish ... but it was totally meant to stay private, you guys!).  They lay the groundwork early for these allegations of press intrusion and fed the rumors of familial strife to foreshadow the “toxic family” subplot.  The almost immediate splitting of their court from William and Catherine’s, the early demand for their own independent office and the planned formation of their own “charitable foundation” all foretold that the couple had no intention of functioning within the established framework.  I don’t think things soured; I think MM and Harry were determined to fail and blame everyone else for that failure.  Why all the Machiavellian scheming if Meghan could simply have taken the boost to her celebrity that marrying Harry had given her and continued her acting career without the dreadful obligations of toxic royalty?  Because Meghan knew that those titles and their status as royalty were where the real lucre lay.  Oprah wouldn’t attend the wedding of Prince Nazi Cosplay and Some Very Private Basic Cable Thespian, but she would (and did) show up for a Duke and Duchess.  A decade and a half of hustling had gotten Meghan to the lofty height of “aging ingenue grilling burgers in a lace bra for a men’s magazine”; whereas a few months of marriage to Harry the Dumb got her the illustrious title of “Princess of the United Kingdom,” as per Archie’s birth certificate. She knew what she was doing from the moment that ginger moron asked for her digits.  Sure, it might be tinfoil hat-level conspiracy theorizing to interpret their behavior over the past two years as some grand Masterplan to exit stage left with all the family silver, but given that these people literally published an actual extortion letter in the form of a website, complete with an FAQ page that read like a ransom note, I wouldn’t put much past them.  And just as well.  We now have some marquee moments to cherish, like Harry looking dazed and unwashed on numerous official engagements, pregnancy announcements at other people’s weddings followed by pathological belly-cupping, a chronically bedraggled Meghan in ill-fitting couture, two middle-aged attention-whores pawing at each other like lusty teenagers while representing the actual Queen of England, and - my personal favorite- Meghan showing up with bare arms and a stripper weave to a mosque.  Without these grifters, we would have to wince through the Prince Andrew horror without any much-needed comic relief.  In terms of cringey whatthef*ckery, these two are a gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Megs thought she would come in like a breath of fresh air and blow out all the cobwebs and “shake things up” for the BRF imo.


I think she thought she’d have the Queen drinking green smoothies and praising the “healthy west coast lifestyle” on the Christmas Day broadcast


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> We now have some marquee moments to cherish, like Harry looking dazed and unwashed on numerous official engagements, pregnancy announcements at other people’s weddings followed by pathological belly-cupping, a chronically bedraggled Meghan in ill-fitting couture, two middle-aged attention-whores pawing at each other like lusty teenagers while representing the actual Queen of England, and - my personal favorite- Meghan showing up with bare arms and a stripper weave to a mosque.



That mosque "outfit" was so disrespectful with the rag she apparently thought would do as a hijab wrapped sloppily over messy hair and naked arms (compare pics of Kate in Pakistan to really see the contrast). Also, I never thought the PDA was cute because that's their da*n job. Most people don't do their job grabbing their spouse and flirting but whatever.

But have to say you're a great writer with an eye for details!


----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> I'm not necessarily buying that she's very close to her mother, which doesn't make one a bad person - just sayin


She did choose to live with her father, which doesn’t means she doesn’t have a good relationship with her mother, but there is that.
I have to say, when you see them so easily jumping between UK, Canada and the US when they have a baby, you do have to wonder, than in two years prior the wedding they didn’t find one ocasión to visit her dad (to whom she was arguably so close) to introduce Harry to him...


----------



## Tivo

Milosmum0307 said:


> Meghan is impervious to bed press, remember?  She doesn’t read her own press, but she does read the Economist! (So.  Many.  Eye-rolls.)  Yeah, I wonder if maybe it’s a bit naive to search for a “reason“ for Meghan and Harry’s departure from the family?  They spent the duration of their short tenure as “working royals” constructing a narrative of persecution and harassment to justify what they had probably been planning from very shortly after the wedding, if not before.  I think it started with Harry’s self-indulgent “leave my transatlantic girlfriend alone!” open letter to the press, echoed later in the riveting masterpiece that was his tantrum statement after they filed their frivolous lawsuit over the letter MM wrote to her father (in calligraphy, the contents of which her “friends” gleefully leaked to the press, and which betrays the diction of a woman who read Edith Wharton novels in her formative years and still thinks they’re the height of sophistication and polish ... but it was totally meant to stay private, you guys!).  They lay the groundwork early for these allegations of press intrusion and fed the rumors of familial strife to foreshadow the “toxic family” subplot.  The almost immediate splitting of their court from William and Catherine’s, the early demand for their own independent office and the planned formation of their own “charitable foundation” all foretold that the couple had no intention of functioning within the established framework.  I don’t think things soured; I think MM and Harry were determined to fail and blame everyone else for that failure.  Why all the Machiavellian scheming if Meghan could simply have taken the boost to her celebrity that marrying Harry had given her and continued her acting career without the dreadful obligations of toxic royalty?  Because *Meghan knew that those titles and their status as royalty were where the real lucre lay.  Oprah wouldn’t attend the wedding of Prince Nazi Cosplay and Some Very Private Basic Cable Thespian, but she would (and did) show up for a Duke and Duchess.*  A decade and a half of hustling had gotten Meghan to the lofty height of “aging ingenue grilling burgers in a lace bra for a men’s magazine”; whereas a few months of marriage to Harry the Dumb got her the illustrious title of “Princess of the United Kingdom,” as per Archie’s birth certificate. She knew what she was doing from the moment that ginger moron asked for her digits.  Sure, it might be tinfoil hat-level conspiracy theorizing to interpret their behavior over the past two years as some grand Masterplan to exit stage left with all the family silver, but given that these people literally published an actual extortion letter in the form of a website, complete with an FAQ page that read like a ransom note, I wouldn’t put much past them.  And just as well.  We now have some marquee moments to cherish, like Harry looking dazed and unwashed on numerous official engagements, pregnancy announcements at other people’s weddings followed by pathological belly-cupping, a chronically bedraggled Meghan in ill-fitting couture, two middle-aged attention-whores pawing at each other like lusty teenagers while representing the actual Queen of England, and - my personal favorite- Meghan showing up with bare arms and a stripper weave to a mosque.  Without these grifters, we would have to wince through the Prince Andrew horror without any much-needed comic relief.  In terms of cringey whatthef*ckery, these two are a gift that keeps on giving.


And this is why i don't think she has a big career ahead of her.
All this drama, when it's clear as day she's in it for the prestige of those titles and the celebrity access.
But the titles are the only thing interesting about her.
As you said, Oprah (and everyone else) showed up for a Duke and Duchess.
Celebrities love pomp and circumstance.
If Meghan can somehow diminish the Royal Family, what is there for the average, thirsty, celebrity social climber to aspire to?


----------



## limom

And the free entertainment/meal


----------



## Megs

Tivo said:


> And this is why i don't think she has a big career ahead of her.
> All this drama, when it's clear as day she's in it for the prestige of those titles and the celebrity access.
> But the titles are the only thing interesting about her.
> As you said, Oprah (and everyone else) showed up for a Duke and Duchess.
> Celebrities love pomp and circumstance.
> If Meghan can somehow diminish the Royal Family, what is there for the average, thirsty, celebrity social climber to aspire to?



This. I think plenty of the guests of their wedding weren’t actual friends. I remember some high profile fashion editors from the US there. But if you get an invitation to a Royal Wedding, you show up for sure. 

Now Harry will still be seen as a royal IMO, he was born into it. But Meghan married into it and then was the big part of leaving the family, they are ruining that allure. Now she’s just an actress from a tv show that wasn’t seen at Hollywood events previously that will get more invites because of who she married. 

Hollywood is filled with people like that as it is. It’s not special. The hype will die down and if they stay out of the royal family, the allure of her being a “royal” (I mean the queen is taking that from them!), will diminish as well!


----------



## limom

If they can make money for Hollywood, they will be in.
The minute, the money stops, they are goners.
It really is that simple.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Ugh, their latest IG post, more cringe, such try hards.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Megs said:


> This. I think plenty of the guests of their wedding weren’t actual friends. I remember some high profile fashion editors from the US there. But if you get an invitation to a Royal Wedding, you show up for sure.
> 
> Now Harry will still be seen as a royal IMO, he was born into it. But Meghan married into it and then was the big part of leaving the family, they are ruining that allure. Now she’s just an actress from a tv show that wasn’t seen at Hollywood events previously that will get more invites because of who she married.
> 
> Hollywood is filled with people like that as it is. It’s not special. The hype will die down and if they stay out of the royal family, the allure of her being a “royal” (I mean the queen is taking that from them!), will diminish as well!


This is why I don’t get Meghan at all.  Celebs are two a penny, and very disposable.  Royalty is something else.  Yet she aches to be a celeb


----------



## queennadine

WillstarveforLV said:


> Ugh, their latest IG post, more cringe, such try hards.



The fake Bon Jovi texts?  CRINGE.


----------



## lulilu

queennadine said:


> The fake Bon Jovi texts?  CRINGE.



Remember they did that awkward filmed advert with Harry and the famous red-haired singer?  That was so stilted and cringeworthy as well.  Ed someoneorother.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Clearblueskies said:


> This is why I don’t get Meghan at all.  Celebs are two a penny, and very disposable.  Royalty is something else.  Yet she aches to be a celeb



I asked my husband what he thought, to which he responded -
Anyone can be a celebrity. No amount of money can buy 1000 years of history.


----------



## duna

chloebagfreak said:


> Wow*! Please tell me you are famous writer taking a break in the purse forum. Not only is your writing so funny and totally on point-it is fabulous!! I *thoroughly enjoyed reading that!
> I have been fascinated by this story only from the behavior of Megan, and her issues with family. The idea of isolating from two families is incredibly sad and dysfunctional. I feel bad for her son, especially if he misses out on all of the relatives and cousins. As an only child, I treasure most of my family and extended relatives.



Exactly what I thought!!


----------



## altigirl88

RAINDANCE said:


> I asked my husband what he thought, to which he responded -
> Anyone can be a celebrity. No amount of money can buy 1000 years of history.


 This reminds me of the words of Mary Crawley from Downton Abbey, to that reptilian dude she almost married, when he was talking about buying furnishings and art for their house- Your kind _buys_ it, mine _inherits _it


----------



## daisychainz

RAINDANCE said:


> I asked my husband what he thought, to which he responded -
> Anyone can be a celebrity. No amount of money can buy 1000 years of history.


Except that her marriage and son have assured her a place in royal history forever.


----------



## Lounorada

chloebagfreak said:


> Wow! Please tell me you are famous writer taking a break in the purse forum. Not only is your writing so funny and totally on point-it is fabulous!! I thoroughly enjoyed reading that!


Totally agree with this! 

@Milosmum0307, I love reading your posts! They're always so well written, straight to the point, no nonsense and a good dose of humour


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> This is why I don’t get Meghan at all.  Celebs are two a penny, and very disposable.  Royalty is something else.  *Yet she aches to be a celeb*



I assume she formed her aspirations when she was a little girl growing up in Hollywood. I'm sure she saw lots of celebrities and their lives seemed glamorous and they were universally loved. Celebrities don't need to do a heavy schedule of charity work, maybe visit a shelter or hospital twice a year and the press will gush over them like they are Mother Teresa. That's the life Meghan idealized and wanted.


----------



## Sharont2305

daisychainz said:


> Except that her marriage and son have assured her a place in royal history forever.


Alas, not very favourably.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
#tungstenisharderthansteel


----------



## queennadine

If she’s so concerned with “protecting” the Royal name, then she won’t mind the BRF protecting it from her and Harry.


----------



## duna

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
> #tungstenisharderthansteel



This woman really has no shame.......


----------



## cafecreme15

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
> #tungstenisharderthansteel


Imagine so flippantly dismissing the Queen of England as a "naysayer" and essentially telling her to piss off while saying "nananana you can't stop meeee"
This woman is truly, truly unhinged.


----------



## imgg

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
> #tungstenisharderthansteel


That would burn a bridge with the RF forever.  Hopefully that's a line Harry is not willing cross at the expense of his greedy wife.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gimmethebag

They deserve to get cut-off. According to Blind Gossip, the “this is what the Sussex Royal brand is worth” number was really a pay-off invitation through third parties. 

That only makes sense to me because how are Meghan and Harry’s speeches worth $400M - $1B?


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan is a queen in her own mind. She doesn't have time for hubby's granny trying to lay down any rules. 

Is there any legal recourse for the BRF to keep them from using the title? If Charles cuts off all of the money and left them to flounder it would serve them right.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh well, looks like we won't be seeing her in March then.
To me this is the final nail in the coffin.
Harry, wake up!


----------



## Clearblueskies

altigirl88 said:


> This reminds me of the words of Mary Crawley from Downton Abbey, to that reptilian dude she almost married, when he was talking about buying furnishings and art for their house- Your kind _buys_ it, mine _inherits _it


My mother used to tell me of a wealthy and ambitious politician - that those in the party who thought he was getting above himself would apparently sneer that he “bought all his own furniture”.  


bag-mania said:


> Meghan is a queen in her own mind. She doesn't have time for hubby's granny trying to lay down any rules.
> 
> Is there any legal recourse for the BRF to keep them from using the title? If Charles cuts off all of the money and left them to flounder it would serve them right.


The Queen could strip them of the Sussex title.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> The Queen could strip them of the Sussex title.



Then they wouldn't be "Sussex" or "Royal" but is there any way they could be legally prevented from using a name they trademarked? A name is just a name and they have some crap to sell!


----------



## Emeline

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
> #tungstenisharderthansteel


Meg isn't happy with boundaries, so she's putting the RF on notice. 
She still hasn't figured out she doesn't have the upper hand. 
I wouldn't be surprised if she uses this manufactured conflict as a reason not to make the trip back to GB.  
She will be 39 this year.  Maybe time to ease up on the insufferable petulance?


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> The Queen could strip them of the Sussex title.



At this point, I wish she would.
Somehow Mrs Mountbatten Windsor doesn't have the same allure.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> At this point, I wish she would.



SO DO I!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> Meg isn't happy with boundaries, so she's putting the RF on notice.
> S*he still hasn't figured out she doesn't have the upper hand. *
> I wouldn't be surprised if she uses this manufactured conflict as a reason not to make the trip back to GB.
> She will be 39 this year.  Maybe time to ease up on the insufferable petulance?



She still has the threats of a tell-all book in her back pocket. Remember there were rumors she was keeping a diary the entire time she was there. Now she's a liar so we know there would be lots of embellishments but I bet the book would sell well among her loyal stans.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Then they wouldn't be "Sussex" or "Royal" but is there any way they could be legally prevented from using a name they trademarked? A name is just a name and they have some crap to sell!


I don’t know, I bet there are legal people working on it.  Meghan putting messages out in the underhand way she does puts Harry in an invidious position though.  I feel sad for him.  She’s going to have a hard time making herself look like the victim when all this is done, but I’m sure she’ll have a good try.


----------



## PewPew

Sharont2305 said:


> She probably thought she was different, you know, being the TV star she was [emoji849]



Remember she’s been a humanitarian for decades, having realized she was changing the world in middle school (via a school project— that part gets conveniently left out).  I think when you’re coddled and told you’re AMAZING by your dad (in childhood), publicists, handlers, and sycophants for so long (this goes for both H&M), you believe in your greatness without having any evidence. It’s not entirely their fault, as so many celebrities, politicians, companies have been so eager to ride their coattails for publicity, with all the public statements after the Africa documentary & Megxit announcement.

You had international figures extolling Megan’s “humanity” without further details about she has earned that praise.  I think this inflated sense of self is what causes both H&M to behave so cluelessly in public. For example, M pushing H out of the way and interjecting herself into talks with political leaders while they cringe. And H talking like a PR guy for his wife on the red carpet. And both of them make these long-winded statements that have no meaning.

It’s sometimes shocking that they’re college educated, given some of the tone deaf, empty comments they are on camera making, while sympathetic interviewers smile & nod. (Hmm..Do the BRF give training on how to use a lot of words to say nothing because both Kate and Will have been guilty of the long-winded nothingness, though they seem more self aware?)


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> Remember she’s been a humanitarian for decades, having realized she was changing the world in middle school (via a school project— that part gets conveniently left out).  I think when you’re coddled and told you’re great by handlers and sycophants for so long (this goes for both H&M), you believe in your greatness without having any evidence. It’s not entirely their fault, as so many celebrities, politicians, companies have been so eager to ride their coattails for publicity, with all the public statements after the Africa documentary & Megxit announcement. You had international figures extolling Megan’s “humanity” without further details about she has earned that praise (beyond photo ops for the BRF and haphazardly supporting causes one day & acting differently after the photo op (animal advocate one day & Ellen friend who also gives away her dogs & wears leather while saying she tries to be vegan, etc)


It’s all smoke and mirrors isn’t it, pretty pictures, with no substance to anything.  Either that or it’s someone else’s effort she’s taking the credit for.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> She still has the threats of a tell-all book in her back pocket. Remember there were rumors she was keeping a diary the entire time she was there. Now she's a liar so we know there would be lots of embellishments but I bet the book would sell well among her loyal stans.


True, but that can cut both ways.  I’m sure there’s plenty of people who could tell shocking stories about Meghan.  For instance there are rumours already about the way she treats Harry away from the cameras.


----------



## Lounorada

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
> #tungstenisharderthansteel


'_She said they know what their true intentions are and that's all that matters_'

 Uhm, no luv. That doesn't apply when you're both delusional and selfish AF.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> She still has the threats of a tell-all book in her back pocket. Remember there were rumors she was keeping a diary the entire time she was there. Now she's a liar so we know there would be lots of embellishments but I bet the book would sell well among her loyal stans.


Yes, she may have done this .. BUT, I'm not sure that something like this would EVER see the light of day!!!  In addition, if in fact, she did something like this, she would truly piss off the BRF!  Now, would Harry support this? .. I wonder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Yes, she may have done this .. BUT, I'm not sure that something like this would EVER see the light of day!!!  In addition, if in fact, she did something like this, she would truly piss off the BRF!  Now, would Harry support this? .. I wonder.


That would be part of a divorce settlement I'm sure, that she never tells.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Yes, she may have done this .. BUT, I'm not sure that something like this would EVER see the light of day!!!  In addition, if in fact, she did something like this, she would truly piss off the BRF!  Now, would Harry support this? .. I wonder.



It depends. If Harry is no longer in the picture by the time a book gets published, HE could very well be the subject of most of it. Whatever it is, we know Meghan will be the heroine and everybody else will be horrible/jealous/racist.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> Imagine so flippantly dismissing the Queen of England as a "naysayer" and essentially telling her to piss off while saying "nananana you can't stop meeee"
> This woman is truly, truly unhinged.


sounds like stuff she might say but we never know with these "sources"
If true, how arrogant can you get?  and how could Harry support this attitude?  he'd have to really be under her thumb


----------



## Mrs.Z

“Meghan said the global projects they are working on speak for themselves”.   I’m sorry what?  Which ones?


----------



## bag-mania

Here's the latest on their house-hunting endeavors. 

*Prince Harry, Meghan Markle eyeing $7M Malibu mansion once owned by David Charvet*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are California dreamin’ — setting their sights set on a sprawling $7 million Malibu mansion previously owned by “Baywatch” star David Charvet and his now-ex-wife wife Brooke Burke, according to new reports.



The Sun reported.

If they settle into the lavish digs, the couple and their 9-month-old son Archie would also have easy access to Markle’s 63-year-old mom, Doria Ragland, who is only 30 miles away in the Windsor Hills, the Daily Mail reported.

The beach is a stone’s throw away, and so are the homes of Hollywood stars Robert Downey Jr., Mel Gibson, Dick Van Dyke and Caitlyn Jenner, according to the report.

Jenner, 70, was the first to break the news that the couple had been eyeing California properties during her appearance on the talk show “Loose Women” last month.

“I heard they were looking for a house in Malibu,” she said. “It must have been tough. Everyone deserves to be happy.”

She also said she supports Markle following the bombshell Megxit decision.

“It was a big shock to her, she’s probably had enough,” Jenner said. “Good for them, we’ll see how it goes.”

The news of the potential move comes after Harry and Meghan attended a “brainstorming session” with Stanford University professors and academics Tuesday, to help them with their work to develop a new charitable organization, “Today” reported.

The couple revealed this week that they will officially wrap up Megxit next month — with their new royal-free life formally starting on April Fool’s Day.

Prince Harry has been developing a new mental health-focused docuseries with Oprah Winfrey at California’s Apple headquarters, according to The Sun.

Markle, known for her role in the hit legal drama “Suits,” is also attempting to step back into the acting waters, the outlet reported.

https://pagesix.com/2020/02/21/prin...m-malibu-mansion-once-owned-by-david-charvet/


----------



## LittleStar88

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh snap....here we go.....buckle up.....
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...legally-stopping-using-Sussex-Royal-name.html
> #tungstenisharderthansteel



HAHAHA  Fightin' words... She and countess Luann can hang out together now.


----------



## RAINDANCE

bag-mania said:


> Then they wouldn't be "Sussex" or "Royal" but is there any way they could be legally prevented from using a name they trademarked? A name is just a name and they have some crap to sell!



In the UK there are restricted names if you wish to form a company or other registered entity such as charity. 
When the Sussex Foundation was first registered as The Foundation of their Royal Highness's the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, they would have been entitled to use Royal in the name. 
But by way of example you can't just form a company that has a restricted name without supplying the Companies Registry - Companies House in E&W -  (effectively the Government) with third party proof of entitlement to use that word in your company or charity name. This is common sense and to ensure people don't pass themselves off as, for example, having a professional qualification that they do not have. The use of restricted words is therefore not simply a matter for the Queen to decide - it's a government / legal issue. Any UK business advisers would have been able to tell H+M this at the outset.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Here's the latest on their house-hunting endeavors.
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle eyeing $7M Malibu mansion once owned by David Charvet*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are California dreamin’ — setting their sights set on a sprawling $7 million Malibu mansion previously owned by “Baywatch” star David Charvet and his now-ex-wife wife Brooke Burke, according to new reports.
> 
> View attachment 4671263
> 
> The Sun reported.
> 
> If they settle into the lavish digs, the couple and their 9-month-old son Archie would also have easy access to Markle’s 63-year-old mom, Doria Ragland, who is only 30 miles away in the Windsor Hills, the Daily Mail reported.
> 
> The beach is a stone’s throw away, and so are the homes of Hollywood stars Robert Downey Jr., Mel Gibson, Dick Van Dyke and Caitlyn Jenner, according to the report.
> 
> Jenner, 70, was the first to break the news that the couple had been eyeing California properties during her appearance on the talk show “Loose Women” last month.
> 
> “I heard they were looking for a house in Malibu,” she said. “It must have been tough. Everyone deserves to be happy.”
> 
> She also said she supports Markle following the bombshell Megxit decision.
> 
> “It was a big shock to her, she’s probably had enough,” Jenner said. “Good for them, we’ll see how it goes.”
> 
> The news of the potential move comes after Harry and Meghan attended a “brainstorming session” with Stanford University professors and academics Tuesday, to help them with their work to develop a new charitable organization, “Today” reported.
> 
> The couple revealed this week that they will officially wrap up Megxit next month — with their new royal-free life formally starting on April Fool’s Day.
> 
> Prince Harry has been developing a new mental health-focused docuseries with Oprah Winfrey at California’s Apple headquarters, according to The Sun.
> 
> Markle, known for her role in the hit legal drama “Suits,” is also attempting to step back into the acting waters, the outlet reported.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/21/prin...m-malibu-mansion-once-owned-by-david-charvet/



I am guessing they will run the ownership of this house through their "foundation" or whatever. I can't imagine their tax liabilities with his income, their future income, etc. and both US and UK requiring a big chunk...


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> True, but that can cut both ways.  I’m sure there’s plenty of people who could tell shocking stories about Meghan.  For instance there are rumours already about the way she treats Harry away from the cameras.


.. and let us not forget, the "yachting" rumors ..


----------



## lanasyogamama

I mean, I guess she can call herself  whatever she wants, a la Prince, Queen Latifah, Queen (the band), Countess Luann, doesn’t make it mean she’s important.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Here's the latest on their house-hunting endeavors.
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle eyeing $7M Malibu mansion once owned by David Charvet*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are California dreamin’ — setting their sights set on a sprawling $7 million Malibu mansion previously owned by “Baywatch” star David Charvet and his now-ex-wife wife Brooke Burke, according to new reports.
> 
> View attachment 4671263
> 
> The Sun reported.
> 
> If they settle into the lavish digs, the couple and their 9-month-old son Archie would also have easy access to Markle’s 63-year-old mom, Doria Ragland, who is only 30 miles away in the Windsor Hills, the Daily Mail reported.
> 
> The beach is a stone’s throw away, and so are the homes of Hollywood stars Robert Downey Jr., Mel Gibson, Dick Van Dyke and Caitlyn Jenner, according to the report.
> 
> Jenner, 70, was the first to break the news that the couple had been eyeing California properties during her appearance on the talk show “Loose Women” last month.
> 
> “I heard they were looking for a house in Malibu,” she said. “It must have been tough. Everyone deserves to be happy.”
> 
> She also said she supports Markle following the bombshell Megxit decision.
> 
> “It was a big shock to her, she’s probably had enough,” Jenner said. “Good for them, we’ll see how it goes.”
> 
> The news of the potential move comes after Harry and Meghan attended a “brainstorming session” with Stanford University professors and academics Tuesday, to help them with their work to develop a new charitable organization, “Today” reported.
> 
> The couple revealed this week that they will officially wrap up Megxit next month — with their new royal-free life formally starting on April Fool’s Day.
> 
> Prince Harry has been developing a new mental health-focused docuseries with Oprah Winfrey at California’s Apple headquarters, according to The Sun.
> 
> Markle, known for her role in the hit legal drama “Suits,” is also attempting to step back into the acting waters, the outlet reported.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/02/21/prin...m-malibu-mansion-once-owned-by-david-charvet/


.. saw this this morning and had a good LA chuckle .. "_the couple and their 9-month-old son Archie would also have easy access to Markle’s 63-year-old mom, Doria Ragland, who is only 30 miles away in the Windsor Hills_" .. HA HA HA HA!!!   

Obviously these folks have ZERO clue about LA Traffic, especially when having to schlep down from Malilbu into Santa Monica, the West Side .. and DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED on how long it would take to get to Burbank (Disney)!!!!   Case in point - I live 15 miles away from Burbank (I'm in the Valley) .. and in the morning traffic (101 to the 134), you are talking a good hour .. bumper-to-bumper!!!  Going down the PCH in the morning .. would pretty much be the same, although they would likely have to jump over Topanga Canyon to get on the 101 and then the 134.  Her mother is on the West Side, still a schlep .. not a mere 30 minutes!!!  Still laughing ..


----------



## CeeJay

RAINDANCE said:


> In the UK there are restricted names if you wish to form a company or other registered entity such as charity.
> When the Sussex Foundation was first registered as The Foundation of their Royal Highness's the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, they would have been entitled to use Royal in the name.
> But by way of example you can't just form a company that has a restricted name without supplying the Companies Registry - Companies House in E&W -  (effectively the Government) with third party proof of entitlement to use that word in your company or charity name. This is common sense and to ensure people don't pass themselves off as, for example, having a professional qualification that they do not have. The use of restricted words is therefore not simply a matter for the Queen to decide - it's a government / legal issue. Any UK business advisers would have been able to tell H+M this at the outset.


Hmmmm .. so, does this mean that they try to use it here in the US???


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. saw this this morning and had a good LA chuckle .. "_the couple and their 9-month-old son Archie would also have easy access to Markle’s 63-year-old mom, Doria Ragland, who is only 30 miles away in the Windsor Hills_" .. HA HA HA HA!!!
> 
> Obviously these folks have ZERO clue about LA Traffic, especially when having to schlep down from Malilbu into Santa Monica, the West Side .. and DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED on how long it would take to get to Burbank (Disney)!!!!   Case in point - I live 15 miles away from Burbank (I'm in the Valley) .. and in the morning traffic (101 to the 134), you are talking a good hour .. bumper-to-bumper!!!  Going down the PCH in the morning .. would pretty much be the same, although they would likely have to jump over Topanga Canyon to get on the 101 and then the 134.  Her mother is on the West Side, still a schlep .. not a mere 30 minutes!!!  Still laughing ..


maybe they can use a helicopter


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. saw this this morning and had a good LA chuckle .. "_the couple and their 9-month-old son Archie would also have easy access to Markle’s 63-year-old mom, Doria Ragland, who is only 30 miles away in the Windsor Hills_" .. HA HA HA HA!!!
> 
> Obviously these folks have ZERO clue about LA Traffic, especially when having to schlep down from Malilbu into Santa Monica, the West Side .. and DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED on how long it would take to get to Burbank (Disney)!!!!   Case in point - I live 15 miles away from Burbank (I'm in the Valley) .. and in the morning traffic (101 to the 134), you are talking a good hour .. bumper-to-bumper!!!  Going down the PCH in the morning .. would pretty much be the same, although they would likely have to jump over Topanga Canyon to get on the 101 and then the 134.  Her mother is on the West Side, still a schlep .. not a mere 30 minutes!!!  Still laughing ..



I laughed at that too. Doria is just as safe from unexpected visits as she would be if they were in Canada.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe they can use a helicopter



OOOO! Too soon!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

*EXCLUSIVE: My name is Meg – but you must call me 'Your Royal Highness!' Enchanting birthday party video shows royal bride-to-be playing Queen for a day... and, yes, she's wearing a CROWN!*

*A video shot in 1990 shows an eight-year-old Meghan Markle wearing a gold crown while dressed as a queen*
*The charming never-before-seen footage was recorded at the birthday party of her best friend Ninaki Priddy*
*The young Meghan is the 'Queen' of a royal household in the footage which was recorded at the Priddy home*
*I would say this was the beginning of M’s aspirations. She basically hijacked her best friend’s birthday party at eight years of age. She had her servants and was ordering them to do what she wanted. If you care to see the video:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5539893/Meghan-Markle-video-1990-shows-dressed-Queen.html
*


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> OOOO! Too soon!


ooh
no offense meant....not wishing them to crash or anything like that


----------



## Milosmum0307

PewPew said:


> It’s sometimes shocking that they’re college educated, given some of the tone deaf, empty comments they are on camera making, while sympathetic interviewers smile & nod. (Hmm..Do the BRF give training on how to use a lot of words to say nothing because both Kate and Will have been guilty of the long-winded nothingness, though they seem more self aware?)


All good observations, but I’ll meekly point out that Harry isn’t college/university educated.  Unlike West Point, Sandhurst is not a university.  Dude couldn’t even get through Eton without his teachers feeling compelled to help him cheat, so higher education was certainly not his calling.  There’s a reason his “charisma” and “humanity” and “charm” were so heavily emphasized over any intellectual acumen by the tireless drones of the BRF’s PR machine.  And golly, I wonder what a woman who credits herself as a high-minded, well-educated intellectual (you guys, she totally went to Northwestern and reads The Economist, OKAY?) sees in a guy who until recently was universally acknowledged as being almost defiantly stupid and incurious?  Such a mystery, isn’t it?


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> maybe they can use a helicopter



Was gonna say this is why 24 used a helicopter. The traffic is horrible, soul-sucking, and time consuming. Of course, there are some real risks using a helicopter via car...


----------



## queennadine

They’re getting to be more and more awful. I’ll be FURIOUS if our U.S. taxpayer $ goes towards these clowns in any way.


----------



## LittleStar88

Milosmum0307 said:


> All good observations, but I’ll meekly point out that Harry isn’t college/university educated.  Unlike West Point, Sandhurst is not a university.  Dude couldn’t even get through Eton without his teachers feeling compelled to help him cheat, so higher education was certainly not his calling.  There’s a reason his “charisma” and “humanity” and “charm” were so heavily emphasized over any intellectual acumen by the tireless drones of the BRF’s PR machine.  And golly, I wonder what a woman who credits herself as a high-minded, well-educated intellectual (you guys, she totally went to Northwestern and reads The Economist, OKAY?) sees in a guy who until recently was universally acknowledged as being almost defiantly stupid and incurious?  Such a mystery, isn’t it?



She is an opportunist. Playing him like a fiddle.


----------



## sdkitty

Milosmum0307 said:


> All good observations, but I’ll meekly point out that Harry isn’t college/university educated.  Unlike West Point, Sandhurst is not a university.  Dude couldn’t even get through Eton without his teachers feeling compelled to help him cheat, so higher education was certainly not his calling.  There’s a reason his “charisma” and “humanity” and “charm” were so heavily emphasized over any intellectual acumen by the tireless drones of the BRF’s PR machine.  And golly, I wonder what a woman who credits herself as a high-minded, well-educated intellectual (you guys, she totally went to Northwestern and reads The Economist, OKAY?) sees in a guy who until recently was universally acknowledged as being almost defiantly stupid and incurious?  Such a mystery, isn’t it?


she's high minded all right


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ooh
> no offense meant....not wishing them to crash or anything like that



Oh okay. I guess helicopters are popular for celebrities in LA, at least they were.


----------



## queennadine

I think at this point, that act of Parliament is needed to strip these two of that title. And frankly, all of the titles bestowed upon them after their marriage. I get that PH will always retain his, but she needs to be cut off. 

I don’t know all of the legalities, but do they actually “own” those titles?


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> Actually I am not that impressed with the rest of the RF! All the divorces, the mistress, the recent Andrew scandal, the Nazi association. People are the sum total of their environment! I must admit that I do feel sorry for the Queen and Philip because of their advanced age. But that’s it.


Prince Charles and Jimmy Saville.  Andrew and Libya. Lots of recent unpleasant stuff with the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

I know some believe Harry was completely on board with all the planning and scheming pre-Megxit but I'm having a hard time buying that. To me he really seems like a passive puppet. Maybe it's because all of the news about them comes from her sources. He is isolated from his friends and family and nobody is talking from his side.


----------



## TC1

queennadine said:


> I think at this point, that act of Parliament is needed to strip these two of that title. And frankly, all of the titles bestowed upon them after their marriage. I get that PH will always retain his, but she needs to be cut off.
> 
> I don’t know all of the legalities, but do they actually “own” those titles?



You know...when the Queen goes and deliberates of what "titles" these folks should have, then announces it publicly is so odd to me. So, she goes and looks over a map and decides on some nonsense moniker. I'm sure Sussex was doing just fine without a Duke and Duchess all these years


----------



## LittleStar88

TC1 said:


> You know...when the Queen goes and deliberates of what "titles" these folks should have, then announces it publicly is so odd to me. So, she goes and looks over a map and decides on some nonsense moniker. I'm sure Sussex was doing just fine without a Duke and Duchess all these years



I think it is more about bestowing an honor and responsibility to those receiving the titles. And H&M just shat all over it. Tradition, pomp, etc...


----------



## Lodpah

The Queen is doing exactly what she should be doing. Be silent and let those two insufferables keep complaining. It’s a form of psychological warfare. People will see how low they go, pretty soon they won’t have nothing to complain about and I think if Meghan sues the queen for the name Royal Sussex she’s not suing the Queen per se but the whole of Great Britain. So sit back, enjoy the show because what is hidden in the dark (Meghan’s dark and evil ulterior motive) will come out in the light). I’m praying for the Queen.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> I know some believe Harry was completely on board with all the planning and scheming pre-Megxit but I'm having a hard time buying that. To me he really seems like a passive puppet. Maybe it's because all of the news about them comes from her sources. *He is isolated from his friends and family and nobody is talking from his side.[*/QUOTE]


I'm sure the RF realizes he's isolated.  Maybe giving him some time with family and friends is part of the reason for the March 9th order?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sgj99

i agree, take all the titles but the one Harry was born with, not just inability to HRH but take it and the Sussex dukedom too


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Was gonna say this is why 24 used a helicopter. The traffic is horrible, soul-sucking, and time consuming. Of course, there are some real risks using a helicopter via car...


SOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUE!!!!!  Thank god LA has the bus system, because that is THE ONLY way I would do that type of commute, and to think that I used to think that the Boston rush-hour traffic was bad ... DONK!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> For instance there are rumours already about the way she treats Harry away from the cameras.



Do tell!


----------



## sdkitty

imagine how crushed she would be if people like Oprah lost interest in them?  of course they already have a deal with O so it's not happening yet.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do tell!


The one I read was from their stay at an official residence in Australia.  Staff were warned not to talk about Meghan’s behaviour towards Harry.  I didn’t save the article.


----------



## bellecate

daisychainz said:


> Except that her marriage and son have assured her a place in royal history forever.



A negative history, she won't be remembered positively or fondly.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> imagine how crushed she would be if people like Oprah lost interest in them?  of course they already have a deal with O so it's not happening yet.


Deal or no, any project can be put on the back burner ...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> imagine how crushed she would be if people like Oprah lost interest in them?  of course they already have a deal with O so it's not happening yet.



I believe the deal was with Harry only, Meghan's name wasn't listed as being part of it. Of course she'll be right there if cameras are on. Since the subject is mental health, she'll probably weasel her way on screen to describe how Harry struggles and how she does her best to help him. Meghan to the rescue again!


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh well, looks like we won't be seeing her in March then.
> To me this is the final nail in the coffin.
> Harry, wake up!


What really gets me is the rumor that they planned their separation prior to the actual marriage. They planned the trademarking of SussexRoyal, planned to use it to make F you money and take off. This was all discussed and agreed by the two of them as their plan for life together!!  Boggles my mind. It makes it sound more like a business deal than a marriage and when business  deals go belly up, the partnership usually does as well.  Only chink here is that there is a baby involved. Remember him Meghan and Harry?


----------



## gracekelly

cafecreme15 said:


> Imagine so flippantly dismissing the Queen of England as a "naysayer" and essentially telling her to piss off while saying "nananana you can't stop meeee"
> This woman is truly, truly unhinged.


Unhinged and she really doesn’t understand. That makes her delusional and  dangerous. I hope there was some type of prenup or agreement In place to prevent a tell all book from her.


----------



## cafecreme15

Harry and Meghan will abandon use of Sussex Royal mark starting in Spring 2020.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> Harry and Meghan will abandon use of Sussex Royal mark starting in Spring 2020.
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708


That’s good news


----------



## muchstuff

queennadine said:


> The fake Bon Jovi texts?  CRINGE.



This, in one of Vancouver's two daily papers, in the tabloid section...


----------



## Lodpah

Lol the Queen’s advisors shut her down quickly. Meghan should know all the people who advise the Queen that they ARE PROFFESSIONALS and will do whatever to protect the Crown.


----------



## LittleStar88

cafecreme15 said:


> Harry and Meghan will abandon use of Sussex Royal mark starting in Spring 2020.
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Yes, she may have done this .. BUT, I'm not sure that something like this would EVER see the light of day!!!  In addition, if in fact, she did something like this, she would truly piss off the BRF!  Now, would Harry support this? .. I wonder.



It wouldn't happen. When Diana called the BRF 'The Firm' she wasn't talking about a public company that filed their figures annually.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I believe the deal was with Harry only, Meghan's name wasn't listed as being part of it. Of course she'll be right there if cameras are on. Since the subject is mental health, she'll probably weasel her way on screen to describe how Harry struggles and how she does her best to help him. Meghan to the rescue again!


I can't imagine her not being part of it
An opportunity for her to show her big hurt eyes


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine her not being part of it
> An opportunity for her to show her big hurt eyes



Yes, the poor baby has been roughing it so. The estate where they are currently crashing only has eight bedrooms! How does she bear it?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, the poor baby has been roughing it so. The estate where they are currently crashing only has eight bedrooms! How does she bear it?


no one told her it would be so hard


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## bag-mania

Looks like the "Express" is earning lots of ad money by racking up hits on their site by placing redundant stories trying to connect Meghan to Beatrice's wedding. They know their audience!


----------



## Corygal

I bet they're trying for another baby. But the marriage will be over before he or she is born. Such a shame.


----------



## LittleStar88

Corygal said:


> I bet they're trying for another baby. But the marriage will be over before he or she is born. Such a shame.



I expect if they break up he will wonder why he has such poor luck with women. His picker is broken.


----------



## cafecreme15

LittleStar88 said:


> I expect if they break up he will wonder why he has such poor luck with women. His picker is broken.


Well this is a blast from the past!


----------



## sgj99

i would suspect any kind of divorce settlement would include a non-disclosure clause of some kind so she'd be forbidden to speak about the BRF, seems like that would only make sense, so if she wants any money she'd have to keep her mouth shut.


----------



## mdcx

I would guess the “bedroom skills” are on the back burner permanently now that Queenie has banned them from using “Royal”.

Megs forgets that people like Oprah had solid careers years in the making, building up goodwill, appearing genuine and caring. Yes Oprah now has a rep for being very business like behind the scenes, but she did slog away at it for years.

Imo Megs thought marrying Harry and popping out Archie would be her equivalent of Kim K’s s-x tape: give her the notoriety to monetise the heck out of everything forever more.

I doubt she will return to the UK.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> I mean, I guess she can call herself  whatever she wants, a la Prince, Queen Latifah, Queen (the band), Countess Luann, doesn’t make it mean she’s important.



I read a quote from a writer, can't remember who it was or when other than it was a long time ago, but basically the gist of it was that many, many celebrities confuse being famous with being important.


----------



## Emeline

Flatsy said:


> Trooping the Color is the annual event where the whole family appears on the balcony and this is considered a family event.  Stepping down from royal duties should not affect this at all, unless Harry and Meghan decide they don't want to fly back to attend.


Trooping the Colour 2020--I think  June 13th 2020 for is the date for the Queen's Birthday Parade.


----------



## youngster

TC1 said:


> You know...when the Queen goes and deliberates of what "titles" these folks should have, then announces it publicly is so odd to me. So, she goes and looks over a map and decides on some nonsense moniker. I'm sure Sussex was doing just fine without a Duke and Duchess all these years



From Anna Victoria Clark:
*If anyone has a right to be mad at Harry and Meghan it's the people of Sussex, who have been left leaderless without their Duke and who are now defenseless against incursions from Hampshire and Kent.

Whomst shall hear the petitions of the town folk? Whomst shall oversee the collection of tithes and enforcement of contracts? I say ye WHOMST?!*


----------



## Corygal

The Royal trademark is important to Meghan because on divorce she'll lose her royal titles but any trademarks she gets can't be touched. 

The RF and their advisers are acting with the, er, future in mind, believe me. When Edward quit & married Mrs Simpson all the exit negotiations were made with the assumption that the marriage would only last a couple of years. 

Edward was having a breakdown and they knew Wallis didn't love him, so the advisers were really planning for the post-Wallis years. Remind you of anyone? 

The couple were stuck with each other and rapidly made fools of themselves doing ridiculously damaging public appearances (famously as Hitler fans). 

Let's hope lessons have been learned.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

NEWS at 10 (ITV UK)

"Harry and Megan confirm they've been stripped of their royal title" 

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-02-21/harry-and-meghan-confirm-they-will-drop-the-name-sussex-royal/

"The SussexRoyal name had also been trademarked on various items from clothing to souvenirs and digital applications.

However their spokesperson has clarified that Harry and Meghan “do not intend to use ‘SussexRoyal’ in any territory post Spring 2020”.

They added: “Therefore the trademark applications that were filed as protective measures, acting on advice from and following the same model for The Royal Foundation, have been removed.”"

"While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."

Apologies if this is old news. This thread moves quicker than H&M's minds change.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I read a quote from a writer, can't remember who it was or when other than it was a long time ago, but basically the gist of it was that many, many celebrities confuse being famous with being important.



I blame our current celebrity-obsessed culture. When we put them up on pedestals they are going to believe the hype. It's no wonder celebrities think their opinions are important and we should listen to them spout on about the economy, politics, the environment, and everything else.


----------



## chowlover2

Corygal said:


> The Royal trademark is important to Meghan because on divorce she'll lose her royal titles but any trademarks she gets can't be touched.
> 
> The RF and their advisers are acting with the, er, future in mind, believe me. When Edward quit & married Mrs Simpson all the exit negotiations were made with the assumption that the marriage would only last a couple of years.
> 
> Edward was having a breakdown and they knew Wallis didn't love him, so the advisers were really planning for the post-Wallis years. Remind you of anyone?
> 
> The couple were stuck with each other and rapidly made fools of themselves doing ridiculously damaging public appearances (famously as Hitler fans).
> 
> Let's hope lessons have been learned.


The allure of Hitler was that he promised David he would be installed as a king ( puppet ) with Wallis as his Queen. I don't think David was any kind of braintrust either. Much like Harry it seems he was a party boy who lived for his own pleasure.


----------



## Lounorada

cafecreme15 said:


> Harry and Meghan will abandon use of Sussex Royal mark starting in Spring 2020.
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51593708





papertiger said:


> NEWS at 10 (ITV UK)
> 
> "Harry and Megan confirm they've been stripped of their royal title"
> 
> https://www.itv.com/news/2020-02-21/harry-and-meghan-confirm-they-will-drop-the-name-sussex-royal/
> 
> "The SussexRoyal name had also been trademarked on various items from clothing to souvenirs and digital applications.
> 
> However their spokesperson has clarified that Harry and Meghan “do not intend to use ‘SussexRoyal’ in any territory post Spring 2020”.
> 
> They added: “Therefore the trademark applications that were filed as protective measures, acting on advice from and following the same model for The Royal Foundation, have been removed.”"
> 
> "While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."
> 
> Apologies if this is old news. This thread moves quicker than H&M's minds change.


Good.


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> "While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."
> .



This is so unnecessary. Of course there isn’t any jurisdiction... but to phrase things as so to suggest that it is _their_ decision not to use the name ‘Royal’...
I am fascinated by the language they keep using in their website. Takes phoney to a whole new level.


----------



## mdcx

Megs strikes me as a micro-manager. And we all know they have to have the last word.


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> Megs strikes me as a micro-manager. And we all know they have to have the last word.





doni said:


> This is so unnecessary. Of course there isn’t any jurisdiction... but to phrase things as so to suggest that it is _their_ decision not to use the name ‘Royal’...
> I am fascinated by the language they keep using in their website. Takes phoney to a whole new level.



 it's that first _and_ last word thing, like it was their decision. Everything is their decision. It's a chronic affliction, they can't seem to help themselves. No humbleness, no humility, no awareness outside their wants. Control feeeeekiness.


----------



## imgg

Seems weird they keep playing their cards to the public before discussing with the Queen.  I don't understand Harry.  He grew up in this environment.  He should know the Queen was not going to allow them to use the Royal name for profit.  He is really this dumb?  They look like idiots sharing all these things publicly before getting the ok from grandma.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like the rebranding is going to rely heavily on the word Sussex.


----------



## Annawakes

I hope so hard the Queen strips them of Sussex too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Annawakes said:


> I hope so hard the Queen strips them of Sussex too.


That would be a delight


----------



## Sol Ryan

Hopefully someone is out there trademarking all iterations of Harry, Megan, Sussex and Foundation just to keep it entertaining...


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Hopefully someone is out there trademarking all iterations of Harry, Megan, Sussex and Foundation just to keep it entertaining...



Hell, if I had the money I’d be doing it myself. Then I’d sell the rights to them for a big fat profit and retire. That would be livin’ the dream.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Hell, if I had the money I’d be doing it myself. Then I’d sell the rights to them for a big fat profit and retire. That would be livin’ the dream.



I admit I would be doing it to if I had the money to play around with lol.


----------



## doni

Sol Ryan said:


> Hopefully someone is out there trademarking all iterations of Harry, Megan, Sussex and Foundation just to keep it entertaining...



Oh no, because you see:

_As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a 'foundation', but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally_

And again, _that _language. They could say, we are doing this, but no, they feel the need to correct the people at large.
Plus,  ‘foundations’ (note the inverted commas) are perfectly ‘excellent’ things. For other people. They are very much beneath them though. No, Harry and Meghan are not starting some old foundation but a whole ‘_new way to effect change.’  _Plus, they had already told you so. In January! Don’t you listen?

I though what they wrote in January was that they were embarking in a whole new way of supporting the Queen as royals. But never mind.
The pomposity is extraordinary...  I bet this was all written in calligraphy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

By now they have wasted 4 whole months without effecting anything.


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Oh no, because you see:
> 
> _As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a 'foundation', but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally_
> 
> And again, _that _language. They could say, we are doing this, but no, they feel the need to correct the people at large.
> Plus,  ‘foundations’ (note the inverted commas) are perfectly ‘excellent’ things. For other people. They are very much beneath them though. No, Harry and Meghan are not starting some old foundation but a whole ‘_new way to effect change.’  _Plus, they had already told you so. In January! Don’t you listen?
> 
> I though what they wrote in January was that they were embarking in a whole new way of supporting the Queen as royals. But never mind.
> The pomposity is extraordinary...  I bet this was all written in calligraphy.


If there isn’t going to be a foundation, where is the money going to go?  How will there be transparency over money donated?  Or is the good cause Harry and Meghan Markle?


----------



## papertiger

zen1965 said:


> By now they have wasted 4 whole months without effecting anything.



...but they are "genuinely happy" ...that's the main thing. We need to know that. 

...and it's not just 4 months. How much money and time went into that blah Sussex Royal branding TM etc? Average bloke of street could have told them their plans had more holes than a sieve.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> If there isn’t going to be a foundation, where is the money going to go?  How will there be transparency over money donated?  Or is the good cause Harry and Meghan Markle?



They'll develop a new way and let us know...sometime...

“As part of the process to transition The Duke and Duchess of Sussex into their new chapter - planning has been well underway around the launch of their new non-profit organisation. Details will be shared in due course.”


----------



## mdcx

Meg doesn’t really know who she’s dealing with if she thinks that attempting to talk down to the BRF and Brit Commonwealth is advisable.
We can all see through you Meg, and know it is all about the dosh. The supremely aristo types in the UK she will encounter if she dares go back there will have some interesting ways of putting her in her place.


----------



## limom

> The allure of Hitler was that he promised David he would be installed as a king ( puppet ) with Wallis as his Queen. I don't think *David was any kind of braintrust either.* Much like Harry it seems he was a party boy who lived for his own pleasure.


All that inbreeding, it was bound to happen. Play with genetics, and get lames, imho.


----------



## mdcx

That headline!


----------



## limom

They are total idiots. Wtf, are they thinking?
Why bite the hands that fed them so generously for years?
A trainwreck


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They really did complain publicly? I have no words.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Never mind, just read up the statement. These two really can't shut the piehole for once and show some dignity, can they? Instead they need to put out a statement that suggests they a) generously agreed to something we all know they had no real choice to not accept and b) as if they had the upper hand dealing with the QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM. 

At this point I honestly wonder if Harry has lost his da*n mind. Good thing we've seen him buy sandwiches or I would fear he's locked in a basement while Meghan goes wild. 

If I was Charles I'd stop any payments now, let those idiots fend for themselves.


----------



## limom

By the time, the Queen is done, if there was any justice, he would be working behind the Deli counter...
What made them think that they could prevail against the Queen of England?
She is a tough old birdie and her husband while nearing one hundred is even tougher....
Anxious, to witness the Harkles next move...


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> They'll develop a new way and let us know...sometime...
> 
> “As part of the process to transition The Duke and Duchess of Sussex into their new chapter - planning has been well underway around the launch of their new non-profit organisation. Details will be shared in due course.”


I read their statement  - it wasn’t there and then it was back, which shows they’re editing on the hoof - and interestingly there’s no mention of working towards financial independence.  Presumably that concept is slipping into the past, as their global force for change innovative and ground breaking non-profit entity slips farther away into the future 
They also refer to Prince Charles as a “funding mechanism” I can imagine Camilla had a good chortle over that one


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Never mind, just read up the statement. These two really can't shut the piehole for once and show some dignity, can they? Instead they need to put out a statement that suggests they a) generously agreed to something we all know they had no real choice to not accept and b) as if they had the upper hand dealing with the QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM.
> 
> At this point I honestly wonder if Harry has lost his da*n mind. Good thing we've seen him buy sandwiches or I would fear he's locked in a basement while Meghan goes wild.
> 
> If I was Charles I'd stop any payments now, let those idiots fend for themselves.


It’s written in American English and sounds like Meghan bashed it out on her laptop in a fit of pique.  Reminds me of those emails you type out and wait a day before deleting without sending (if you have the good sense).  Unfortunately Meghan sent hers.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> I read their statement  - it wasn’t there and then it was back, which shows they’re editing on the hoof - and interestingly there’s no mention of working towards financial independence.  Presumably that concept is slipping into the past, as their global force for change innovative and ground breaking non-profit entity slips farther away into the future
> *They also refer to Prince Charles as a “funding mechanism” I can imagine Camilla had a good chortle over that one*



 

I guess for them he is *shrugs*


----------



## mdcx

Someone in the DM comments described Meghan and Harry’s behaviour as “antagonistic” and that seems pretty accurate to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Antagonistic is putting it mildly. It is turning into a war of words and wills, imho.
Nuts.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Never mind, just read up the statement. These two really can't shut the piehole for once and show some dignity, can they? Instead they need to put out a statement that suggests they a) generously agreed to something we all know they had no real choice to not accept and b) as if they had the upper hand dealing with the QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM.
> 
> At this point I honestly wonder if Harry has lost his da*n mind. Good thing we've seen him buy sandwiches or I would fear he's locked in a basement while Meghan goes wild.
> 
> If I was Charles I'd stop any payments now, let those idiots fend for themselves.


Thank you for saying Queen of the United Kingdom. Much appreciated [emoji4]


----------



## limom

In French/France , we say Queen of England, is it a poke at her majesty?


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> In French/France , we say Queen of England, is it a poke at her majesty?


No, it's a poke at the rest of the UK, who usually seem forgotten. Lol


----------



## duna

mdcx said:


> That headline!
> View attachment 4671936



Ahhh, poor little souls, has anyone asked them if they're OK??


----------



## mia55

Wow they’re going against the Queen, they’ve totally lost it. Unbelievable


----------



## Mrs.Z

These two are more of a hot mess than I originally thought ....unreal!!!!


----------



## Blyen

Where can I find the statement?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Blyen said:


> Where can I find the statement?


The Daily Mail has it in their cover story


----------



## Clearblueskies

Blyen said:


> Where can I find the statement?


It’s also on their website


----------



## queennadine

If they think they can beat HM and the BRF, they’re more delusional than I thought. As other people have mentioned, TQ is TOUGH. She has seen and dealt with it all, stayed put in BP while London was getting bombed, etc. 

Plus the way in which they pointed out that the neither the Monarchy nor the Cabinet Office have jurisdiction overseas of use of the word “Royal”...WOW. 

Sure, they can “brand” themselves what they want here in the U.S. I think they should become the “Freeloaders Formerly Known As Royals.”

These two and their hubris 

The only ‘force’ they’ll end up effectuating is being forced out of that oligarch’s home at some point, and maybe a country or two that’s sick of them. 

Again, I say: please STFO of the U.S.


----------



## limom

Whomever is advising them is no genius either.
Let’s see... 
Will bankers and CEOS side with the two woke/broke unroyal couple or with the BRF and all its wealthy and influential allies?
It really is amateur hour.


----------



## closeted

I came straight here just to read ur comments


----------



## Clearblueskies

limom said:


> Whomever is advising them is no genius either.
> Let’s see...
> Will bankers and CEOS side with the two woke/broke unroyal couple or with the BRF and all its wealthy and influential allies?
> It really is amateur hour.


They’re picking a fight with the British Monarchy and Establishment  using American lawyers to advise them on British constitutional minutiae. It’s insanely stupid.


----------



## Tivo

Give this a watch now in light of everything.
One of H/M/K&W’s first joint interview.
I knew she was a fraud. 

Meghan is clearly uncomfortable and can’t hold eye contact with Kate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Owl15

Why are they lying about never telling the world they would start a sussex royal foundation?
She is on camera talking about how excited she is about it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yet there are stans all over Twitter saying the Queen is a horrible grandmother and being nitpicky. Uhm, do they expect the law to be changed for those two? Someone whined how poor little Archie is no prince...apparently they were not around when his parents refused any title for him and also didn't get the memo he will be  prince once Charles becomes king because then he's a grandson of the monarch. While it's hard for me to understand how they still garner sympathy I am seriously confused how people are so opinionated without having put 5 mins into researching the basics.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Owl15 said:


> Why are they lying about never telling the world they would start a sussex royal foundation?
> She is on camera talking about how excited she is about it




And another sign for the raging narcissm. Narcissists will deny anything that makes them look bad, and they will insist everyone else is in the wrong, even if five people share the very same memory of the incident in question. It's not even they are lying about it consciously, they just cannot make sense of them being anything but flawless. I just wonder how that works when there's actual video footage.


----------



## imgg

Its disgusting how they are trying to get the public on their side against the Queen by using the media.  Harry, I hope they never take you back.  Ever.  You are a coward and your wife is a toxic narcissistic opportunist.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Tivo said:


> Give this a watch now in light of everything.
> One of H/M/K&W’s first joint interview.
> I knew she was a fraud.
> 
> Meghan is clearly uncomfortable and can’t hold eye contact with Kate.



She’s also just talking about herself and how great she is


----------



## Chagall

Owl15 said:


> Why are they lying about never telling the world they would start a sussex royal foundation?
> She is on camera talking about how excited she is about it



Because as someone up thread said, she’s a ‘lying liar face’!


----------



## imgg

The way they are say in their statement Harry is still 6th in line to the throne- do they have plans for the other 5?  Makes one wonder....


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> Because as someone up thread said, she’s a ‘lying liar face’!


We need an emoji for *lying liar face* I think


----------



## imgg

She loves attention, even negative attention.  I am starting to wonder if she has borderline personality traits.


----------



## Mrs.Z

imgg said:


> The way they are say in their statement Harry is still 6th in line to the throne- do they have plans for the other 5?  Makes one wonder....


Can the Queen remove someone from the order of Succession??


----------



## papertiger

Tivo said:


> Give this a watch now in light of everything.
> One of H/M/K&W’s first joint interview.
> I knew she was a fraud.
> 
> Meghan is clearly uncomfortable and can’t hold eye contact with Kate.




Yup, in contrast to H looking at her (M) while listening to her, M cannot look at K easily. I don't think she's listening and then Kate talks about the beginnings of the idea and  "all 3 of us at the time" and M goes BLINK. One standard opening "it's incredibly exciting" and bang, M's RESUME MMMMMMMMMM.

And then there's "*working behind the scenes quietly*" (summarising a bit, but if you say you have been, you're no longer entitled to say it).  Especially if you say it *TWICE*.

"...meeting with right people" = Basically saying she's been the one who has the contacts or has knowledge of the _right _contacts. She's implying she's the one already been doing all the work that makes the difference, thanklessly and quietly, of course. 

 "I certainly know how passionate I am" = why not just "I'm passionate" what's with all this objectification of the self?

I know I may be over-analysing, but it does seem she gives herself away because she is a bit odd in many ways.


----------



## imgg

Mrs.Z said:


> Can the Queen remove someone from the order of Succession??


I'm not sure.  What a horrible place to put your 93 yo grandma.  I always thought Charles was a wimp, but after showing Meghan to her car early, at an event where she was trying to overshadow Camilla, maybe he has more *alls than I expected and can rewrite the succession.  But then again, he is still financially supporting them.


----------



## tiktok

Their statements are astoundingly stupid every single time. It’s like they have a team of advisors sitting together all day thinking “how can we shoot ourselves in the foot” every time they say anything.
They both must be really dim. There’s no other explanation for this.


----------



## cafecreme15

doni said:


> Oh no, because you see:
> 
> _As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a 'foundation', but rather intend to develop a new way to effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally_
> 
> And again, _that _language. They could say, we are doing this, but no, they feel the need to correct the people at large.
> Plus,  ‘foundations’ (note the inverted commas) are perfectly ‘excellent’ things. For other people. They are very much beneath them though. No, Harry and Meghan are not starting some old foundation but a whole ‘_new way to effect change.’  _Plus, they had already told you so. In January! Don’t you listen?
> 
> I though what they wrote in January was that they were embarking in a whole new way of supporting the Queen as royals. But never mind.
> The pomposity is extraordinary...  I bet this was all written in calligraphy.





Clearblueskies said:


> I read their statement  - it wasn’t there and then it was back, which shows they’re editing on the hoof - and interestingly there’s no mention of working towards financial independence.  Presumably that concept is slipping into the past, as their global force for change innovative and ground breaking non-profit entity slips farther away into the future
> They also refer to Prince Charles as a “funding mechanism” I can imagine Camilla had a good chortle over that one





papertiger said:


> Yup, in contrast to H looking at her (M) while listening to her, M cannot look at K easily. I don't think she's listening and then Kate talks about the beginnings of the idea and  "all 3 of us at the time" and M goes BLINK. One standard opening "it's incredibly exciting" and bang M's RESUME MMMMMMMMMM.
> 
> And then there's "*working behind the scenes quietly*" (summarising a bit, but if you say you have been, you're no longer entitled to say it).  Especially if you say it TWICE.
> 
> "...meeting with right people" = Basically saying she's been the one who has the contacts or has knowledge of the _right _contacts. She's implying she's the one already been doing all the work that makes the difference, thanklessly and quietly.
> 
> "I certainly know how passionate I am" = why not just "I'm passionate" what's with all this objectification of the self?
> 
> I know I may be over-analysing, but it does seem she gives herself away because she is a bit odd in many ways.


Isn’t it absolutely incredible how much there is to be gleaned from a little bit of rhetorical analysis? Truly so eye opening. The truth is out there in plain sight for anyone who is capable of a little critical thinking.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m just grateful they have been forced to acknowledge that what they intended to do actually breached the laws in the UK and that the whole SussexRoyal thing has been pulled.  Although I am highly suspicious of the “not a foundation” business. I suspect they intend to make money lending their “star power” to non-profits. But we shall see.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> We need an emoji for *lying liar face* I think


Great idea. We could certainly put it to use on this thread.


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> I'm not sure.  What a horrible place to put your 93 yo grandma.  I always thought Charles was a wimp, but after showing Meghan to her car early, at an event where she was trying to overshadow Camilla, maybe he has more *alls than I expected and can rewrite the succession.  But then again, he is still financially supporting them.


I totally agree about how little respect H's grandmother has been shown. It's shocking, really.  
Going forward....
Maybe it's one step at a time? First, H&M are firmly told the boundaries.    
Then, Charles has options.  He may gradually slow or reduce the checks as he sees fit.


----------



## PewPew

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m just grateful they have been forced to acknowledge that what they intended to do actually breached the laws in the UK and that the whole SussexRoyal thing has been pulled.  Although I am highly suspicious of the “not a foundation” business. I suspect they intend to make money lending their “star power” to non-profits. But we shall see.



I’d be so irritated if I were from Sussex. Here’s a woman who briefly visited once & was only around the BRF (minus Harry) for 1.5 yrs, but she’s SO fixed in her RIGHT to be the Duchess of Sussex. 

Just counting the days till Meghan does a fashion shoot that exclaims “Sussexy Meg is back!”


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> By now they have wasted 4 whole months without effecting anything.


and why wait until Spring?  why not stop using Royal immediately?


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> All that inbreeding, it was bound to happen. Play with genetics, and get lames, imho.


speaking of genetics - this is a bit OT but wasn't it said that Diana's blood was more British royal than the Windsor's German blood?


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> I'm not sure.  What a horrible place to put your 93 yo grandma.  I always thought Charles was a wimp, but after showing Meghan to her car early, at an event where she was trying to overshadow Camilla, maybe he has more *alls than I expected and can rewrite the succession.  But then again, he is still financially supporting them.


I'm not aware of this incident....must have infuriated Meghan.....no wonder she couldn't stay in GB


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm not aware of this incident....must have infuriated Meghan.....no wonder she couldn't stay in GB


 It was the garden party the day after the wedding. I tried to give the benefit of the doubt, maybe they were released early because of that, but the face she makes in the departing car is quite sullen.


----------



## sdkitty

seems like Harry is almost being stripped of his identity......might give him emotional health issues even he doesn't already have them


----------



## TC1

mdcx said:


> That headline!
> View attachment 4671936


I can hear Megs now "Harry, of course we can still call ourselves Royals..do you think Queen Latifah is really a Queen?"


----------



## pursegirl3

Harry and Meghan 0 the Queen 1000 .


----------



## youngster

The one patronage that I think MM would fight tooth and nail to hold on to is the National Theatre, since it would actually give her some credibility in Hollywood and NY, and a couple days ago the Artistic Director there said it'd be business as usual with Meghan as patron.  Now, Nica Burns (who produced Harry Potter and the Cursed Child among other very successful London productions) said that MM should be given a chance until Easter but should step down if it appears obvious that her new life doesn't allow her to actually fulfill the obligations of the position.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...al-Patron-National-Theatre-says-producer.html


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> The one patronage that I think MM would fight tooth and nail to hold on to is the National Theater, since it would actually give her some credibility in Hollywood and NY, and a couple days ago the Artistic Director there said it'd be business as usual with Meghan as patron.  Now, Nica Burns (who produced Harry Potter and the Cursed Child among other very successful London productions) said that MM should be given a chance until Easter but should step down if it appears obvious that her new life doesn't allow her to actually fulfill the obligations of the position.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...al-Patron-National-Theatre-says-producer.html


I'd like it if the queen took back that patronage


----------



## youngster

doni said:


> Oh no, because you see:
> 
> _As shared in early January on this website, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not plan to start a 'foundation', but rather intend to develop *a new way to effect change *and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally_.



I can't wait to hear what they've come up with.  What have they thought of that nobody else in the philanthropic community has ever thought of?  To be fair, there are ways that they could truly "complement the efforts" of others. Find those charities that are doing great work and achieving results and help _them_, instead of reinventing the wheel and starting their own, but there is no way that the two of them are actually going to work for other foundations, behind the scenes, for free.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I can't wait to hear what they've come up with.  What have they thought of that nobody else in the philanthropic community has ever thought of?  To be fair, there are ways that they could truly "complement the efforts" of others. Find those charities that are doing great work and achieving results and help _them_, instead of reinventing the wheel and starting their own, but there is no way that the two of them are actually going to work for other foundations, behind the scenes, for free.


I picture Harry just sitting around waiting for Meghan to tell him what her next great idea is


----------



## youngster

queennadine said:


> Plus the way in which they pointed out that the neither the Monarchy nor the Cabinet Office have jurisdiction overseas of use of the word “Royal”...WOW.
> 
> Sure, they can “brand” themselves what they want here in the U.S. *I think they should become the “Freeloaders Formerly Known As Royals.*”



About 500 pages ago in this thread, someone came up with "*Suss Ex-Royal*".  Maybe they could trademark that!  (Can't remember who originally posted that as it was so many pages ago!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I picture Harry just sitting around waiting for Meghan to tell him what her next great idea is



 Sitting around waiting to be dispatched for another sandwich run.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Sitting around waiting to be dispatched for another sandwich run.


Yup inbetween trying on his old military uniforms.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I knew it wasn’t all sunshine and rainbows. The queen just has more patience than they do.


----------



## youngster

_"*While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas*, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."  _

These two.  Really.  Her Majesty the Queen and government apparently do not own the word "Royal".  Have to point that out. Have to make sure to have the last word.  Have to make sure that everyone knows that outside the UK, they could use the word "Royal" as much as they wanted to 'cause Meghan is always right and she knows what she's doing at all times and she's the smartest person in that Palace and don't you people forget it!


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> _"*While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas*, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."  _
> 
> These two.  Really.  Her Majesty the Queen and government apparently do not own the word "Royal".  Have to point that out. Have to make sure to have the last word.  Have to make sure that everyone knows that outside the UK, they could use the word "Royal" as much as they wanted to 'cause Meghan is always right and she knows what she's doing at all times and she's the smartest person in that Palace and don't you people forget it!


That last paragraph, I was reading that (in my head) a la Donald *****!!!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> _"*While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas*, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."  _
> 
> These two.  Really.  Her Majesty the Queen and government apparently do not own the word "Royal".  Have to point that out. Have to make sure to have the last word.  Have to make sure that everyone knows that outside the UK, they could use the word "Royal" as much as they wanted to 'cause Meghan is always right and she knows what she's doing at all times and she's the smartest person in that Palace and don't you people forget it!


talk about disrespect
After the queen welcomed her so warmly to the family


----------



## lanasyogamama

They really are throwing away any good will they had left. And honestly, she can’t even tuck in her shirt???


----------



## mrsinsyder

Also a non-profit has significantly less oversight than a foundation. Just sayin’.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Annawakes said:


> I hope so hard the Queen strips them of Sussex too.


Ditto. It's actually the right thing to do, seeing as how their residence is no longer in Britain and Meghan, in particular, has zero affiliation or knowledge of Sussex. Maybe it will happen through other means, like a petition/public outrage.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lanasyogamama said:


> They really are throwing away any good will they had left. And honestly, she can’t even tick in her shirt???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4672195



I rarely go here, but really what kills me about this image... can she tuck in her fly tab?

It’s the only thing I always check when I leave the the bathroom other than, is there TP on my shoe?


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Also a non-profit has significantly less oversight than a foundation. Just sayin’.



I bet they were informed of that when they were having their “brainstorming” session at Stanford a couple weeks back.


----------



## Aminamina

lanasyogamama said:


> They really are throwing away any good will they had left. And honestly, she can’t even tuck in her shirt???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4672195


She aint your plain Jane - she's uber stylish. It is called The Half Tuck. From  the FrontDoorFashion:
* 3. The Half Tuck

*

This may be the only time when half the effort equates to double the effect. “This look is super easy to rock,” Kate explains. “All you have to do is just front tuck only one side of a button down shirt to achieve a stylish and unique look.” For best results, go ahead and front tuck your shirt just as described above, but make sure the bottom two or three buttons are unfastened. After you’ve fully tucked the top, loosen one side of the tuck completely from just above the belt to your hip, and adjust accordingly.


----------



## Chagall

Aminamina said:


> She aint your plain Jane - she's uber stylish. It is called The Half Tuck. From  the FrontDoorFashion:
> * 3. The Half Tuck
> 
> *
> 
> This may be the only time when half the effort equates to double the effect. “This look is super easy to rock,” Kate explains. “All you have to do is just front tuck only one side of a button down shirt to achieve a stylish and unique look.” For best results, go ahead and front tuck your shirt just as described above, but make sure the bottom two or three buttons are unfastened. After you’ve fully tucked the top, loosen one side of the tuck completely from just above the belt to your hip, and adjust accordingly.


I don’t find that stylish, it looks foolish. Anyway I highly doubt that was the look M was going for. She is just sloppy.


----------



## chicinthecity777

The Windsors season 3 starting on Tuesday 25th Feb. I saw some clips of H & M in it and it's just hilarious! For those U.S. folks, this is a satirical show about the BRF based on current events made by British Channel 4 TV.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Meghan has no idea who she is dealing with.....QE has been playing the long game since forever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Windsors season 3 starting on Tuesday 25th Feb. I saw some clips of H & M in it and it's just hilarious! For those U.S. folks, this is a satirical show about the BRF based on current events made by British Channel 4 TV.


I didn't watch the first two but I'm certainly going to watch this one. The trailer is hilarious.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't watch the first two but I'm certainly going to watch this one. The trailer is hilarious.


It was!!! I am watching older seasons on All 4 and the first episode of S2 was when Harry introduced Meghan to Charles. Meghan couldn't stop mentioning that she was an actress in Suits. LOL!


----------



## queennadine

Can we stream anywhere here in the U.S.?


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was!!! I am watching older seasons on All 4 and the first episode of S2 was when Harry introduced Meghan to Charles. Meghan couldn't stop mentioning that she was an actress in Suits. LOL!


Lol, I'll have a look.


----------



## chicinthecity777

queennadine said:


> Can we stream anywhere here in the U.S.?


I did a search and looks like S1&2 are available on Netflix.


----------



## akoko

I was reading the article in the Dailymail where Meghan supposedly says (though her friends) that since Harry and Archie are "blood" royal, they will always be considered royalty as a family. I'm finding it such a contradiction that someone who just came in the royal family and has repeatedly stated her aim was to modernise it, to speak of  blood rights. While in the other hand, the Queen, is actually taking the modern approach, by saying if you are not working as a royal, you don't get the perks and the tittles. 

Overall, I think they are coming off as huge babies with enormous egos and completely out of touch with reality -and are probably losing allies with those statements.


----------



## Aminamina

Chagall said:


> I don’t find that stylish, it looks foolish. Anyway I highly doubt that was the look M was going for. She is just sloppy.


I don't either but this "style" has been around for awhile. Mind you, I did try it but never left home. It just doesn't work as there's a fatal error in the look and you can't ignore it.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

limom said:


> Whomever is advising them is no genius either.
> Let’s see...
> Will bankers and CEOS side with the two woke/broke unroyal couple or with the BRF and all its wealthy and influential allies?
> It really is amateur hour.



Especially when the high payers will be doing so for the association/introduction leverage (I mean really, what else would high paying companies want access to them for, business acumen and experience??) and they’re burning bridges right left and centre.


----------



## Clearblueskies

This is weird - the statement on their website has disappeared again


----------



## Aminamina

Kim O'Meara said:


> Especially when the high payers will be doing so for the association/introduction leverage (I mean really, what else would high paying companies want access to them for, business acumen and experience??) and they’re burning bridges right left and centre.


That's why I am a believer that they are returning to the UK to put on the 
'we are the royals very much" show to rub in as much royalnes as they could - for resale to the high payers later.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Aminamina said:


> She aint your plain Jane - she's uber stylish. It is called The Half Tuck. From  the FrontDoorFashion:
> * 3. The Half Tuck
> 
> *
> 
> This may be the only time when half the effort equates to double the effect. “This look is super easy to rock,” Kate explains. “All you have to do is just front tuck only one side of a button down shirt to achieve a stylish and unique look.” For best results, go ahead and front tuck your shirt just as described above, but make sure the bottom two or three buttons are unfastened. After you’ve fully tucked the top, loosen one side of the tuck completely from just above the belt to your hip, and adjust accordingly.


You’re right, that is what she was going for! I don’t think it works here, it’s just looking sloppy.


----------



## viciel

youngster said:


> _"*While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas*, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."  _



These two are just vulgar. Completely out of their minds. You can take the person out of the trailer park but you can't take the trailer park out of the person, what's her face is at the end of the day just another wanna be. Please Q just help them in fulfilling their philanthropic causes by giving them a hand and take away all titles please.


----------



## josieblime

doni said:


> I bet this was all written in calligraphy.



Still laughing over this


----------



## Emeline

This is the headline about them in The Telegraph today:
*Bitter and desperate, it's clear that Harry and Meghan don’t plan to quit the Firm quietly*
They may be lucky to find a charity or foundation that would have them.  They really have given themselves quite the reputation. 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/02/22/bitter-desperate-clear-harry-meghan-dont-plan-quit-firm-quietly/


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> If they think they can beat HM and the BRF, they’re more delusional than I thought. As other people have mentioned, TQ is TOUGH. She has seen and dealt with it all, stayed put in BP while London was getting bombed, etc.
> 
> Plus the way in which they pointed out that the neither the Monarchy nor the Cabinet Office have jurisdiction overseas of use of the word “Royal”...WOW.
> 
> Sure, they can “brand” themselves what they want here in the U.S. I think they should become the “Freeloaders Formerly Known As Royals.”
> 
> These two and their hubris
> 
> The only ‘force’ they’ll end up effectuating is being forced out of that oligarch’s home at some point, and maybe a country or two that’s sick of them.
> 
> Again, I say: please STFO of the U.S.





limom said:


> Whomever is advising them is no genius either.
> Let’s see...
> Will bankers and CEOS side with the two woke/broke unroyal couple or with the BRF and all its wealthy and influential allies?
> It really is amateur hour.


Hmmmmm .. it's going to be interesting, but I can tell you from experience, that many on the East Coast are from European extraction, many English, Irish, Scottish, etc. - and as such, I do not think H&M will be very welcome on that side of the country given their antics.  Yes, while the Revolutionary War occurred in New England and states below, there are still quite a few folks who watch/follow the BRF with interest.

All that being said, it would be smarter for them to stay in California (especially around LA) .. given the "celebrity" connections, but I truly wonder how long that will last, especially with those that are English or Australian (can't see the Aussies behind these 2 as well).  Truly, I am now 100% convinced that Harry is as sharp as a spoon and that Meghan is driving the bus .. but that bus is going to crash at some point!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> This is weird - the statement on their website has disappeared again



They're getting a lot of negative reaction because of their foolish, sulky statement so probably pulling it down and editing again and then will re-post something else almost as foolish and sulky.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'd like it if the queen took back that patronage


100% AGREE .. IMO, you're either IN or OUT!  They chose to leave their "senior" positions (still SMH at that), so why should they have anything to do with patronages at this point?  She needs to go ..


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> They're getting a lot of negative reaction because of their foolish, sulky statement so probably pulling it down and editing again and then will re-post something else almost as foolish and sulky.


It’s like amateur hour


----------



## mrsinsyder

Still nothing from their stans?


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s like amateur hour



It really is. One of the things Meghan apparently missed was being able to post or tweet at will about anything. She wanted unfiltered access to the public. She didn't want to have to have things vetted or edited by the Palace.  So, now we're seeing the un-filtered, real Meghan and the real Harry, so entitled, so full of themselves, so very sour and sulky!  That statement they put out is just nuts.  Let's remind everyone that the Queen doesn't own the word "royal" and that Harry is still 6th in line for the throne!  And, we still require all you little people to keep paying for our extensive and expensive security because we're still really, really important!


----------



## Mrs.Z

I find this reminder (from Meghan) that Harry is the Queen’s grandson to be simply beyond!  Yes we know he is the Queen’s grandson, that cannot be changed you fool...but also who cares that he is 6th in line to the throne, it means NOTHING, he will never be King.  You were desperate to leave the soul crushing Royal Family and now you appear hopelessly desperate to cling to their coattails.


----------



## Mrs.Z

And don’t forget the “Duchess’ own independent profile” requires her to have millions in security protection bc without Harry she would require same?  No....nothing you have done independently requires this.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> It really is. One of the things Meghan apparently missed was being able to post or tweet at will about anything. She wanted unfiltered access to the public. She didn't want to have to have things vetted or edited by the Palace.  So, now we're seeing the un-filtered, real Meghan and the real Harry, so entitled, so full of themselves, so very sour and sulky!  That statement they put out is just nuts.  Let's remind everyone that the Queen doesn't own the word "royal" and that Harry is still 6th in line for the throne!  And, we still require all you little people to keep paying for our extensive and expensive security because we're still really, really important!


Well they appear to have taken it down, but too late - the horse has well and truly bolted!  I think publishing that statement is the stupidest thing they’ve done yet.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> I find this reminder (from Meghan) that Harry is the Queen’s grandson to be simply beyond!  Yes we know he is the Queen’s grandson, that cannot be changed you fool...but also who cares that he is 6th in line to the throne, it means NOTHING, he will never be King.  You were desperate to leave the soul crushing Royal Family and now you appear hopelessly desperate to cling to their coattails.


To me, this shows someone who is EXTREMELY immature, and I've known people like this in the past .. and yes, they've been "markled" .. too much DRAMA!


----------



## Sharont2305

What's with the 'official duties' in inverted commas? To me that seems like they are taking the p**s out of the work the rest of the family do.


----------



## mia55

The most important thing is they’re the smartest people alive and that’s why they’re starting their official independent life on fools day.


----------



## youngster

So, in the above statements that @Mrs.Z quoted . . . we little people are reminded that they will be allowed to maintain their patronages, even those classified as "royal patronages".  But, they seem to be assuming that those institutions and organizations (like the National Theatre) will want them to continue as patrons. 

But, why would a UK organization or institution want a royal patron, who is on the outs with the royal family, who is living basically full time in California or Vancouver? The time difference alone would make it tough. They better prepare themselves to lose those patronages and be replaced over the next 6 months to a year, if not sooner.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am rarely left speechless, but this whole mess just keeps imploding. It is just so...bizarre.


----------



## youngster

Everytime I think I'm done, I've got serious Meghan and Harry fatigue, I'm going to stay away from this thread for a week or two or three . . .  the two of them go off and do something even more foolish and I get reeled back in.  That, and the fact that so many of my favorite TPF peeps are posting on this thread and I  them and their hilarious comments!


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> So, in the above statements that @Mrs.Z quoted . . . we little people are reminded that they will be allowed to maintain their patronages, even those classified as "royal patronages".  But, they seem to be assuming that those institutions and organizations (like the National Theatre) will want them to continue as patrons.
> 
> But, why would a UK organization or institution want a royal patron, who is on the outs with the royal family, who is living basically full time in California or Vancouver? The time difference alone would make it tough. They better prepare themselves to lose those patronages and be replaced over the next 6 months to a year, if not sooner.


THIS!!! .. like I said up-thread, to me .. they are either IN or *OUT *and if I were part of the National Theatre, I would say *buh-bye* to those 2!!!  You wanted to leave the BRF, then *scoot*!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Everytime I think I'm done, I've got serious Meghan and Harry fatigue, I'm going to stay away from this thread for a week or two or three . . .  the two of them go off and do something even more foolish and I get reeled back in.  That, and the fact that so many of my favorite TPF peeps are posting on this thread and I  them and their hilarious comments!


The problem is, that .. you just can't stay away~  Sad to say, people always follow a train-wreck, and their's is becoming epic.  Just when you think you've seen it all, *POOF* .. up comes another bone-head comment/remark!   Agree re: the TPF peeps ..


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Everytime I think I'm done, I've got serious Meghan and Harry fatigue, I'm going to stay away from this thread for a week or two or three . . .  the two of them go off and do something even more foolish and I get reeled back in.  That, and the fact that so many of my favorite TPF peeps are posting on this thread and I  them and their hilarious comments!



I’m not ashamed to say I pretty much live here now. I can’t remember the last time I’ve enjoyed the drama of a thread this much and we’ve had some lively ones over the years. My only regret is that most of the stans have moved on, because I would love to see how they could try to defend this nonsense.


----------



## limom

This is approaching Kimmy’s the early years, train wreck’s territory..


----------



## mdcx

Imo M is hoping public dislike of her is so great in the UK that it wouldn’t be “safe” for her to go back there. Excuse sorted!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just reread the tone of that announcement on the site.  It’s unbelievably petulant.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I cannot believe they took it down.


----------



## Clearblueskies

A1aGypsy said:


> I cannot believe they took it down.


Mystery solved - they’ve moved it.  There’s now a whole section called Spring 2020 and it’s there.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> The problem is, that .. *you just can't stay away*~  Sad to say, people always follow a train-wreck, and their's is becoming epic.  Just when you think you've seen it all, *POOF* .. up comes another bone-head comment/remark!   Agree re: the TPF peeps ..



You're so right.  It's ridiculously fascinating to watch unfold. Two loose cannons, both of whom don't realize they aren't nearly as bright as they think they are.  I feel for the Queen, who does not deserve this, and for the British public.  This is just a big ridiculous distraction from more important issues.

If these two really wanted to go out into the world and focus on doing good and living a more private life, they wouldn't care at all about their titles and their trademarks.  They'd find some worthy charities that are already doing effective work and figure out what they could do to help, besides just showing up for fundraisers and photo ops, and jump in both feet.  They'd get tons of great press over time if they actually did this.  But, that wouldn't make them billionaires, now would it?


----------



## queennadine

chicinthecity777 said:


> I did a search and looks like S1&2 are available on Netflix.



Thank you!! (My DH won’t be thankful since he hates this topic )


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> You're so right.  It's ridiculously fascinating to watch unfold. Two loose cannons, both of whom don't realize they aren't nearly as bright as they think they are.  I feel for the Queen, who does not deserve this, and for the British public.  This is just a big ridiculous distraction from more important issues.
> 
> *If these two really wanted to go out into the world and focus on doing good and living a more private life, they wouldn't care at all about their titles and their trademarks*.  They'd find some worthy charities that are already doing effective work and figure out what they could do to help, besides just showing up for fundraisers and photo ops, and jump in both feet.  They'd get tons of great press over time if they actually did this.  But, that wouldn't make them billionaires, now would it?


So agree, but .. based on what we've seen, it appears that Meghan had a "plan" all along, heck .. how long did it take before they started this trademarking business?  I think it's obvious, that she is ALL ABOUT THE $$$ .. that Harry could bring her.  He's just the stupid pawn here, and it really makes me wonder about those discussions that his friends and his brother (William) had with him before he (Harry) asked Meghan to marry him.  What I wonder now, is .. how much would she be satisfied with ($$$$) .. and what about Archie (that poor child)?  Is her plan to just suck the BRF dry, make tons of $$$ .. OR .. is her plan to divorce Harry, keep Archie such that she can continue to suck the blood ($$$) out of them???


----------



## justwatchin

So this paragraph from their website referencing a 12 month review, does this give them a way “back in” should they not be able to support themselves after a year? Also, is it odd to refer to the royal family as “the institution”?

While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## bellecate

I...….just...….can't...….look...….away...…...
Yes, more of a trainwreck than any of the RealHousewives shows or other 'reality' shows out there.


----------



## gracekelly

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rjmjKLfZazh7RgKz7JTzYQEe3wyzPx8sQC8g8102Q2PjE

Interesting.  Jessica better be careful.

*Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is 'setting up new international charities in her and Harry's name'*

*Fashion stylist registered website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday*
*Mulroney registered it through her charity, which supports vulnerable women*
*Came after Duke and Duchess were told they could not use Sussex Royal brand*
By MAIL ON SUNDAY REPORTER

PUBLISHED: 17:06 EST, 22 February 2020 | UPDATED: 17:19 EST, 22 February 2020





The Duchess of Sussex's best friend has begun making plans for a series of international charities in Harry and Meghan's name.

Fashion stylist Jessica Mulroney, whose children were pageboys and a flower girl at the Duke and Duchess's wedding in 2018, registered the website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday through her charity the Shoebox Project Foundation, which supports vulnerable women. 

It comes after the Duke and Duchess were told they would no longer be able to use their Sussex Royal brand when they officially quit the monarchy next month. 

Earlier this year, The Mail on Sunday revealed how Andrew Meyer, the Duchess's US business manager, registered two websites, archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org, on October 23, 2018 – just eight days after Meghan revealed she was pregnant.

In September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog which was shut down in 2017.


----------



## gracekelly

Looks like her business manager knew she was pregnant before Prince Charles did.  Hmmmmm.  Yes, Toto, we're not in Kansas anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Mrs.Z said:


> I find this reminder (from Meghan) that Harry is the Queen’s grandson to be simply beyond!  Yes we know he is the Queen’s grandson, that cannot be changed you fool...but also who cares that he is 6th in line to the throne, it means NOTHING, he will never be King.  You were desperate to leave the soul crushing Royal Family and now you appear hopelessly desperate to cling to their coattails.



and what's with the 'inverted commas' they _were_ official duties, they _are_ Royal patronages...? Never mind, tomorrow there will be a statement stating H & M are 'genuinely' 'happy' 'working' 'behind the scenes' 'quietly' for the 'good' of all 'mankind'.


----------



## chicinthecity777

gracekelly said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rjmjKLfZazh7RgKz7JTzYQEe3wyzPx8sQC8g8102Q2PjE
> 
> Interesting.  Jessica better be careful.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is 'setting up new international charities in her and Harry's name'*
> 
> *Fashion stylist registered website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday*
> *Mulroney registered it through her charity, which supports vulnerable women*
> *Came after Duke and Duchess were told they could not use Sussex Royal brand*
> By MAIL ON SUNDAY REPORTER
> 
> PUBLISHED: 17:06 EST, 22 February 2020 | UPDATED: 17:19 EST, 22 February 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's best friend has begun making plans for a series of international charities in Harry and Meghan's name.
> 
> Fashion stylist Jessica Mulroney, whose children were pageboys and a flower girl at the Duke and Duchess's wedding in 2018, registered the website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday through her charity the Shoebox Project Foundation, which supports vulnerable women.
> 
> It comes after the Duke and Duchess were told they would no longer be able to use their Sussex Royal brand when they officially quit the monarchy next month.
> 
> Earlier this year, The Mail on Sunday revealed how Andrew Meyer, the Duchess's US business manager, registered two websites, archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org, on October 23, 2018 – just eight days after Meghan revealed she was pregnant.
> 
> In September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog which was shut down in 2017.


This is beyond shocking!!! MM has friends???


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> What's with the 'official duties' in inverted commas? To me that seems like they are taking the p**s out of the work the rest of the family do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4672357



Sorry, I read your post after I asked too. Throwing shade in formal English, totally infantile.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is beyond shocking!!! MM has friends???


hahahahahahaha!  Not for long.


----------



## gracekelly

So she isn't going back.. Gee what a surprise. @Aminamina sorry, I know you really thought she would.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...elizabeth-II-sussex-event-royal-family-latest


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> You're so right.  It's ridiculously fascinating to watch unfold. Two loose cannons, both of whom don't realize they aren't nearly as bright as they think they are.  I feel for the Queen, *who does not deserve this, and for the British public.  This is just a big ridiculous distraction from more important issues.*
> 
> If these two really wanted to go out into the world and focus on doing good and living a more private life, they wouldn't care at all about their titles and their trademarks.  They'd find some worthy charities that are already doing effective work and figure out what they could do to help, besides just showing up for fundraisers and photo ops, and jump in both feet.  They'd get tons of great press over time if they actually did this.  But, that wouldn't make them billionaires, now would it?


Nah! Not to worry. They don't get a lot of air time with main stream media here at all. 
I was never interested in those 2 until things started to go south. Now I get all my information from this thread and all my laughs here too!


----------



## PewPew

gracekelly said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rjmjKLfZazh7RgKz7JTzYQEe3wyzPx8sQC8g8102Q2PjE
> 
> Interesting.  Jessica better be careful.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is 'setting up new international charities in her and Harry's name'*
> 
> *Fashion stylist registered website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday*
> *Mulroney registered it through her charity, which supports vulnerable women*
> *Came after Duke and Duchess were told they could not use Sussex Royal brand*
> By MAIL ON SUNDAY REPORTER
> 
> PUBLISHED: 17:06 EST, 22 February 2020 | UPDATED: 17:19 EST, 22 February 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's best friend has begun making plans for a series of international charities in Harry and Meghan's name.
> 
> Fashion stylist Jessica Mulroney, whose children were pageboys and a flower girl at the Duke and Duchess's wedding in 2018, registered the website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday through her charity the Shoebox Project Foundation, which supports vulnerable women.
> 
> It comes after the Duke and Duchess were told they would no longer be able to use their Sussex Royal brand when they officially quit the monarchy next month.
> 
> Earlier this year, The Mail on Sunday revealed how Andrew Meyer, the Duchess's US business manager, registered two websites, archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org, on October 23, 2018 – just eight days after Meghan revealed she was pregnant.
> 
> In September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog which was shut down in 2017.



It’ll be interesting if they go back to hiding behind the word “charity” for their organization. They moved towards referring to their foundation as an “initiative” instead of a charity when they were called out last year for how it was set up as a for-profit business.

I was just thinking of how Edward, Andrew & Fergie have had various failed ventures. On the whole, the BRF doesn’t have much independent business success, so I’m not sure why Harry thought it was going to be so easy


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> So this paragraph from their website referencing a 12 month review, does this give them a way “back in” should they not be able to support themselves after a year? Also, is it odd to refer to the royal family as “the institution”?
> 
> While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.



Yes it does. 

The Queen has left the door open for a review April 2021.


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And another sign for the raging narcissm. Narcissists will deny anything that makes them look bad, and they will insist everyone else is in the wrong, even if five people share the very same memory of the incident in question. It's not even they are lying about it consciously, they just cannot make sense of them being anything but flawless. I just wonder how that works when there's actual video footage.


This. Reminds me of my ex-boss who I spoke about before on here who was a complete and utter narcissist, the worst I had ever seen/experienced. 



LittleStar88 said:


> Sitting around waiting to be dispatched for another sandwich run.


I laughed out loud at this 


gracekelly said:


> Yup inbetween trying on his old military uniforms.


and this 



mia55 said:


> The most important thing is they’re the smartest people alive and that’s why they’re starting their official independent life on fools day.


The glorious...


----------



## chicinthecity777

It's just so fitting that their "new life" starts April fool's day! 
I wish you folks in the US can watch The Windsors. You can see Harry is portrayed as a complete thicko! So in other words, he's infamous for being not very bright.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's just so fitting that their "new life" starts April fool's day!
> I wish you folks in the US can watch The Windsors. You can see Harry is portrayed as a complete thicko! So in other words, he's infamous for being not very bright.


now I wonder who picked that date?  Someone with a wicked sense of humor.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think MM will surpass Fergie to become the most pathetic unpopular ex-loyal of all time in BRF recent history very soon!


----------



## Lounorada

Clearblueskies said:


> We need an emoji for *lying liar face* I think


I can't give you an emoji but I do have a gif...


----------



## Lounorada

Mrs.Z said:


> I find this reminder (from Meghan) that Harry is the Queen’s grandson to be simply beyond!  Yes we know he is the Queen’s grandson, that cannot be changed you fool...but also who cares that he is 6th in line to the throne, it means NOTHING, he will never be King.  You were desperate to leave the soul crushing Royal Family and now you appear hopelessly desperate to cling to their coattails.


That statement is so passive-aggressive in tone. They are so bitter and petulant.


----------



## Aminamina

gracekelly said:


> So she isn't going back.. Gee what a surprise. @Aminamina sorry, I know you really thought she would.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...elizabeth-II-sussex-event-royal-family-latest


My Red Queen, I salute you  A coward as you said, and no more.
I have no words for this vanity level on border with a brain damage. So much for being a reliable patron of your charity in the UK (or are there charities for Meghan left to care over)? These two, they are really changing this world for the better, you can just tell. Kardashian's, move over - Sassexes have landed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think MM will surpass Fergie to become the most pathetic unpopular ex-loyal of all time in BRF recent history very soon!



I think you're right.


----------



## imgg

gracekelly said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rjmjKLfZazh7RgKz7JTzYQEe3wyzPx8sQC8g8102Q2PjE
> 
> Interesting.  Jessica better be careful.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is 'setting up new international charities in her and Harry's name'*
> 
> *Fashion stylist registered website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday*
> *Mulroney registered it through her charity, which supports vulnerable women*
> *Came after Duke and Duchess were told they could not use Sussex Royal brand*
> By MAIL ON SUNDAY REPORTER
> 
> PUBLISHED: 17:06 EST, 22 February 2020 | UPDATED: 17:19 EST, 22 February 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's best friend has begun making plans for a series of international charities in Harry and Meghan's name.
> 
> Fashion stylist Jessica Mulroney, whose children were pageboys and a flower girl at the Duke and Duchess's wedding in 2018, registered the website sussexglobalcharities.com last Wednesday through her charity the Shoebox Project Foundation, which supports vulnerable women.
> 
> It comes after the Duke and Duchess were told they would no longer be able to use their Sussex Royal brand when they officially quit the monarchy next month.
> 
> Earlier this year, The Mail on Sunday revealed how Andrew Meyer, the Duchess's US business manager, registered two websites, archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org, on October 23, 2018 – just eight days after Meghan revealed she was pregnant.
> 
> In September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog which was shut down in 2017.


Sounds like material for an upcoming episode of American Greed.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> So she isn't going back.. Gee what a surprise. @Aminamina sorry, I know you really thought she would.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...elizabeth-II-sussex-event-royal-family-latest


If she doesn’t return to the UK it’s a great time for Harry to be kidnapped and deprogrammed by Will & Charles (and of course a few trained professionals)


----------



## mdcx

Mulroney will find out she’s been ghosted when she reads about it in the Daily Mail.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> If she doesn’t return to the UK it’s a great time for Harry to be kidnapped and deprogrammed by Will & Charles (and of course a few trained professionals)


HA - yes, but you know she's is going to keep Archie behind as her "security blanket"!!!


----------



## michellem

Lounorada said:


> I can't give you an emoji but I do have a gif...
> View attachment 4672531


----------



## pursegirl3

So  Today I run errands with DH . Can't find phone . Pour out contents of Bottega Belly on back seat of car still no phone. Remember I left it at home on front table. DH is on his phone talking to his brother . I make him get off phone so he can bring up this thread . Clutch his phone throughout Lowe's and CVS like it is a winning lottery ticket .  "Hi my name is Pursegirl3 and I am addicted to TPF s Harry and Meghan thread "


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Mulroney will find out she’s been ghosted when she reads about it in the Daily Mail.


I wonder if we have it all wrong and it's the friends who have dumped Meghan along the way. Maybe she just spins it to make it seem that she left them.


----------



## Tootsie17

pursegirl3 said:


> So  Today I run errands with DH . Can't find phone . Pour out contents of Bottega Belly on back seat of car still no phone. Remember I left it at home on front table. DH is on his phone talking to his brother . I make him get off phone so he can bring up this thread . Clutch his phone throughout Lowe's and CVS like it is a winning lottery ticket .  "Hi my name is Pursegirl3 and I am addicted to TPF s Harry and Meghan thread "


You are not alone in your addiction and please pass the popcorn! I LOVE THIS THREAD. The sharp wit and intelligence from each and every thread member is greatly appreciated.


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I wonder if we have it all wrong and it's the friends who have dumped Meghan along the way. Maybe she just spins it to make it seem that she left them.


Uh no .. according to my friends who knew the Markles when Meghan was in high school, SHE was the one that would 'markle' someone when they were of no continued use to her "climbing"!


----------



## Jktgal

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Ditto. It's actually the right thing to do, seeing as how their residence is no longer in Britain and Meghan, in particular, has zero affiliation or knowledge of Sussex. Maybe it will happen through other means, like a petition/public outrage.



There was already a petition by Sussex people. Not sure what has come to that episode.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ate-stripping-Meghan-Harry-Sussex-titles.html


----------



## CeeJay

Jktgal said:


> There was already a petition by Sussex people. Not sure what has come to that episode.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ate-stripping-Meghan-Harry-Sussex-titles.html


I remember that .. but yes, don't recall seeing any additional information on it!


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think MM will surpass Fergie to become the most pathetic unpopular ex-loyal of all time in BRF recent history very soon!


Fergie was never malignant.  She did stupid things and paid the consequences and have to love her that she still kept an upbeat attitude and a smile on her face.  She was treated harshly by the family in many ways, but stood her ground and took it.  I have new found admiration for her, but please Fergie, find a nice hat and dress for the upcoming wedding and don't come as a clown.


----------



## Emeline

CeeJay said:


> I remember that .. but yes, don't recall seeing any additional information on it!


I had a bit of time so I went looking for any further petition information. According to the article below, it was dismissed.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...nd-hove-petition-duchess-of-sussex-royal-news


----------



## gracekelly

Aminamina said:


> My Red Queen, I salute you  A coward as you said, and no more.
> I have no words for this vanity level on border with a brain damage. So much for being a reliable patron of your charity in the UK (or are there charities for Meghan left to care over)? These two, they are really changing this world for the better, you can just tell. Kardashian's, move over - Sassexes have landed.



Oh, you were being hopeful.  Nothing wrong with that.  lol!  Deep down inside, I think you knew it would turn out this way.  I believe the palace thought it would turn out this way too.  They just played along acting like the nice guys so they would come out on top.  Can't beat the folks who know how to play the long game.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

pursegirl3 said:


> So  Today I run errands with DH . Can't find phone . Pour out contents of Bottega Belly on back seat of car still no phone. Remember I left it at home on front table. DH is on his phone talking to his brother . I make him get off phone so he can bring up this thread . Clutch his phone throughout Lowe's and CVS like it is a winning lottery ticket .  "Hi my name is Pursegirl3 and I am addicted to TPF s Harry and Meghan thread "


My husband told me that he is going to have my IQ checked because he can't believe that I am following this so closely. hahaha!


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> My husband told me that he is going to have my IQ checked because he can't believe that I am following this so closely. hahaha!


My male coworkers ask for weekly updates because they can’t believe I’m this involved with this thread.... I just can’t stop watching this train wreck...

(And by trainwreeck, I mean the entitled grifters... not my fellow posters... lol)


----------



## Milosmum0307

gracekelly said:


> Fergie was never malignant.  She did stupid things and paid the consequences and have to love her that she still kept an upbeat attitude and a smile on her face.  She was treated harshly by the family in many ways, but stood her ground and took it.  I have new found admiration for her, but please Fergie, find a nice hat and dress for the upcoming wedding and don't come as a clown.


I’ve been lurking gleefully today with nothing to say because you’re all basically taking the words right out of my mouth, but I’ll pop in just to cringe-snort at the fact that these two bumbling grifters are actually making even the irredeemable Sarah Ferguson look good by comparison.  Prince Andrew is a deplorable human being, and Fergie is his most vocal defender and enthusiastic enabler.


----------



## bag-mania

They are letting down lots of people from the charities that already exist. 

*Supporters of Prince Harry’s pet charity ‘bloody angry’ over move to Canada*
Donors to Prince Harry’s pet charity project are reportedly fuming over he and wife Meghan Markle’s decision to take a step back from palace life in London.

Supporters of the Duke’s Invictus Games Foundation — which he started in 2014 to benefit wounded soldiers returning from the war in Afghanistan — reportedly said he left them feeling abandoned when he moved to Canada earlier this year.

“I am just bloody angry,” one supporter who has given thousands to the charity told the Sunday Times of London. “There is this expectation that we go out and flog ourselves and find support bringing in cash for Invictus. He could make this a whole lot easier if he did something as well. He could text anyone.”

Another volunteer claimed he made his Megxit without thanking Invictus supporters or reassuring them that he was committed to the charity.

“Everybody has been unwavering until now, but everybody feels they have been dropped like a bad habit,” the second volunteer said.

Harry and Meghan announced on Jan. 8 they would take a step back from daily royal duties and raise their young son Archie in North America.

In a move that highlighted the severity of the family feud inside Buckingham Palace, the Queen yanked “royal” from their title last week.

Despite backlash from volunteers, charity bosses are publicly supporting Harry.

“We are proud to have the Duke of Sussex as our patron. The Invictus Games was founded by him, has been built on his ideas and he remains committed to the games and the foundation,” CEO Dominic Reid said.

Harry is scheduled to return to London next week when rocker Jon Bon Jovi re-records his hit single “Unbroken” at Abbey Road studios in an effort to raise $2.6 million for the charity.
https://www.pagesix.com/2020/02/22/supporters-of-prince-harrys-pet-charity-bloody-angry-over-move-to-canada


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They are letting down lots of people from the charities that already exist.
> 
> *Supporters of Prince Harry’s pet charity ‘bloody angry’ over move to Canada*
> Donors to Prince Harry’s pet charity project are reportedly fuming over he and wife Meghan Markle’s decision to take a step back from palace life in London.
> 
> Supporters of the Duke’s Invictus Games Foundation — which he started in 2014 to benefit wounded soldiers returning from the war in Afghanistan — reportedly said he left them feeling abandoned when he moved to Canada earlier this year.
> 
> “I am just bloody angry,” one supporter who has given thousands to the charity told the Sunday Times of London. “There is this expectation that we go out and flog ourselves and find support bringing in cash for Invictus. He could make this a whole lot easier if he did something as well. He could text anyone.”
> 
> Another volunteer claimed he made his Megxit without thanking Invictus supporters or reassuring them that he was committed to the charity.
> 
> “Everybody has been unwavering until now, but everybody feels they have been dropped like a bad habit,” the second volunteer said.
> 
> Harry and Meghan announced on Jan. 8 they would take a step back from daily royal duties and raise their young son Archie in North America.
> 
> In a move that highlighted the severity of the family feud inside Buckingham Palace, the Queen yanked “royal” from their title last week.
> 
> Despite backlash from volunteers, charity bosses are publicly supporting Harry.
> 
> “We are proud to have the Duke of Sussex as our patron. The Invictus Games was founded by him, has been built on his ideas and he remains committed to the games and the foundation,” CEO Dominic Reid said.
> 
> Harry is scheduled to return to London next week when rocker Jon Bon Jovi re-records his hit single “Unbroken” at Abbey Road studios in an effort to raise $2.6 million for the charity.
> https://www.pagesix.com/2020/02/22/supporters-of-prince-harrys-pet-charity-bloody-angry-over-move-to-canada



This is probably the worst thing from all of this.  The Invictis people have every right to be upset, but they shouldn't be surprised after Harry shined off the military patronage event last summer to go to the Disney opening instead.  The military patronages  are just sitting for the next 12 months.  I thought that Princess Anne was taking the Marines, but apparently the decision is that it all is in limbo for the next 12 months.  12 months of waiting to see if Harry regains his sanity and wants to rejoin his family.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Milosmum0307 said:


> I’ve been lurking gleefully today with nothing to say because you’re all basically taking the words right out of my mouth, but I’ll pop in just to cringe-snort at the fact that these two bumbling grifters are actually making even the irredeemable Sarah Ferguson look good by comparison.  Prince Andrew is a deplorable human being, and Fergie is his most vocal defender and enthusiastic enabler.


ITA!  Though no longer married Andrew and Sarah are still a disreputable, toxic pair and Sarah stays close to her disgraceful Prince because of the social and financial benefits.  But compared to Meghan,  Sarah is mild and manageable.


----------



## Straight-Laced

bag-mania said:


> They are letting down lots of people from the charities that already exist.
> 
> *Supporters of Prince Harry’s pet charity ‘bloody angry’ over move to Canada*
> Donors to Prince Harry’s pet charity project are reportedly fuming over he and wife Meghan Markle’s decision to take a step back from palace life in London.
> 
> Supporters of the Duke’s Invictus Games Foundation — which he started in 2014 to benefit wounded soldiers returning from the war in Afghanistan — reportedly said he left them feeling abandoned when he moved to Canada earlier this year.
> 
> “I am just bloody angry,” one supporter who has given thousands to the charity told the Sunday Times of London. “There is this expectation that we go out and flog ourselves and find support bringing in cash for Invictus. He could make this a whole lot easier if he did something as well. He could text anyone.”
> 
> Another volunteer claimed he made his Megxit without thanking Invictus supporters or reassuring them that he was committed to the charity.
> 
> “Everybody has been unwavering until now, but everybody feels they have been dropped like a bad habit,” the second volunteer said.
> 
> Harry and Meghan announced on Jan. 8 they would take a step back from daily royal duties and raise their young son Archie in North America.
> 
> In a move that highlighted the severity of the family feud inside Buckingham Palace, the Queen yanked “royal” from their title last week.
> 
> Despite backlash from volunteers, charity bosses are publicly supporting Harry.
> 
> “We are proud to have the Duke of Sussex as our patron. The Invictus Games was founded by him, has been built on his ideas and he remains committed to the games and the foundation,” CEO Dominic Reid said.
> 
> Harry is scheduled to return to London next week when rocker Jon Bon Jovi re-records his hit single “Unbroken” at Abbey Road studios in an effort to raise $2.6 million for the charity.
> https://www.pagesix.com/2020/02/22/supporters-of-prince-harrys-pet-charity-bloody-angry-over-move-to-canada


Just goes to show that if you don't have any expectations of Harry then you won't be disappointed. 
Now that he's working almost sort of full-time to fill his own coffers I hope he has enough time to fund raise for the Sentebale charity project ...


----------



## pixiejenna

Tivo said:


> Give this a watch now in light of everything.
> One of H/M/K&W’s first joint interview.
> I knew she was a fraud.
> 
> Meghan is clearly uncomfortable and can’t hold eye contact with Kate.




I noticed immediately was how much William kept saying umm. For someone who has given as many public speeches as he has that’s extremely frustrating to hear. Megan not only couldn’t look Kate in the eyes when she was speaking she basically sat and fidgeted the whole time until she was able to talk and make it all about her.



chicinthecity777 said:


> It's just so fitting that their "new life" starts April fool's day!
> I wish you folks in the US can watch The Windsors. You can see Harry is portrayed as a complete thicko! So in other words, he's infamous for being not very bright.



QE planned it that way make no mistake their first day of “freedom” on April fools is very intentional.


----------



## Straight-Laced

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's just so fitting that their "new life" starts April fool's day!
> I wish you folks in the US can watch The Windsors. You can see Harry is portrayed as a complete thicko! So in other words, he's infamous for being not very bright.


I love The Windsors, my DH loves The Windsors!  I honestly thought everybody here watched The Windsors


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> I can't give you an emoji but I do have a gif...
> View attachment 4672531


----------



## mdcx

I wonder what Megs will “shine a light on” next?
Really curious how she will play out her refusal to return to the UK next week. I’m assuming she will do anything to avoid face to face with the BRF.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I wonder what Megs will “shine a light on” next?
> Really curious how she will play out her refusal to return to the UK next week. I’m assuming she will do anything to avoid face to face with the BRF.


It’s going to be interesting to see how Meghan plays this. There’s also the court case coming up.  Another layer of drama - as if we needed it


----------



## elvisfan4life

Not sure if this has been posted before as I try not to look at this thread on the basis that if i ignore her she might disappear back into obscurity but this made me laugh - it was entitled how it really is


----------



## Sharont2305

If she comes over, I belive the only time we will see her with the Royal Family is the Commonwealth Service. I hope there are no boos for her from the crowd out of respect for the Queen but, as far as the other engagements go, I hope that there are boos for her.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Yes it does.
> 
> *The Queen has left the door open for a review April 2021.*




....After they have separated: I wouldn't be surprised AT ALL!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

Sharont2305 said:


> If she comes over, I belive the only time we will see her with the Royal Family is the Commonwealth Service. I hope there are no boos for her from the crowd out of respect for the Queen but, as far as the other engagements go, I hope that there are boos for her.


So she will complain at how people treat her badly and make her miserable


----------



## Sharont2305

maryg1 said:


> So she will complain at how people treat her badly and make her miserable


Yes, but she has brought this upon herself. Look at any engagement that she has done on her own or with Harry and the crowds have been nothing but nice to her, cheering etc. The majority of the UK, give or take a few idiots, have been behind them all the way since the start, myself included. Yes, I've commented about her faux pas ( barging in front of Harry, the constant hand holding, clinging on to him, the back rub, talking over him etc) but hoped she'd learn.
This is different, being disrespectful to the Queen is a big no no in my book.
Nope, I'm done with her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> So she isn't going back.. Gee what a surprise. @Aminamina sorry, I know you really thought she would.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...elizabeth-II-sussex-event-royal-family-latest



Colour me surprised...not. I should have bet money.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Sorry if this was posted earlier. Harry's biographer blames Meghan for putting 'ice in his heart' ...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...GELA-LEVIN-fears-Meghan-sliver-ice-heart.html


----------



## Kim O'Meara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Colour me surprised...not. I should have bet money.


I am surprised I have to say, but pleased for Harry. The door is being left open for him with his family, he can keep it open or slam it shut. Either way he won’t do anything of any good with MM there. 

I thought she’d use it as an opportunity to look sad and play the victim and if the BRF (which they would) acted polite etc, she’d say it wasn’t like that behind the scenes ‘feel sorry for me’ style. It tells me that statement was all her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

So Jessica Mulroney is registering charity sites in M&H’s name?  How odd.  Does Harry even know?  
Perhaps MM’s fully employed deleting critical comments on their Instagram and can’t get round to it


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s going to be interesting to see how Meghan plays this. There’s also the court case coming up.  Another layer of drama - as if we needed it


Ohhhh yes - the court case against the tabloids ...pretty awful that she may be in the same room as her father - if they are both called as witnesses...more on that - but I think a HUGE issue will be taxes to be paid to the US government - based on worldwide income- I think that is a sticking point that most people are unaware of ...and I’m not sure if H will have to pay tax on his inheritance from his mother - as his global assets would be worth over a threshold...not sure if anyone is aware of that ? It will be a shocking slap in the face- and as an aussie in the US- the amount of unpaid taxes carry both hefty penalties and interest... I think it would actually be better that M abandons her US citizenship and apply for Canadian citizenship...even Prince Charles contribution may fall short ...need to think this through - the tax implications, I think are enormous ...! Oh well ..welcome to the real world !


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

Kim O'Meara said:


> I am surprised I have to say, but pleased for Harry. The door is being left open for him with his family, he can keep it open or slam it shut. Either way he won’t do anything of any good with MM there.
> 
> I thought she’d use it as an opportunity to look sad and play the victim and if the BRF (which they would) acted polite etc, she’d say it wasn’t like that behind the scenes ‘feel sorry for me’ style. It tells me that statement was all her.


QE2 knows that she has to be the more mature one here - public opinion is a pendulum- and he is after all ,her blood relative ...of something were to happen where he became unhealthy...and garnered sympathy - her taking the stern position may cause a backlash that may be harder for the family to come back from - best to let them do that to themselves...best advice to give anyone behaving emotionally and impetuously ...time will tell ...


----------



## PewPew

duna said:


> ....After they have separated: I wouldn't be surprised AT ALL!



If this ever happens, there will be a joint statement of mutual love & friendship stating it was 100% due to the pressures of the unsupportive BRF (ex-“family she never had”) and the racist & dangerous media (because she’s Diana #2), so M has to save herself and her son.

If M is thinking logically, she cannot skip out on many upcoming UK events because they’re under review & are SO dependent on the BRF / Charles for their extravagant lifestyle. They need to maintain an appearance of connection to enhance their “ex-royal-but-only-because-we-say-so brand”.  She and Harry will still spin any development with petulant statements about everything being THEIR decision. Their “friends” will contact the media about how H is disappointed in the UK for being racist b/c they boo his Nobel-prize-deserving wife.


----------



## maryg1

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, but she has brought this upon herself. Look at any engagement that she has done on her own or with Harry and the crowds have been nothing but nice to her, cheering etc. The majority of the UK, give or take a few idiots, have been behind them all the way since the start, myself included. Yes, I've commented about her faux pas ( barging in front of Harry, the constant hand holding, clinging on to him, the back rub, talking over him etc) but hoped she'd learn.
> This is different, being disrespectful to the Queen is a big no no in my book.
> Nope, I'm done with her.


Yes, but one must be smart and humble to understand that, and M is neither of them.


----------



## Sharont2305

maryg1 said:


> Yes, but one must be smart and humble to understand that, and M is neither of them.


Very true


----------



## maryg1

I’ve re-read their last statement and boy, it looks like something a 15 y.o. in full teenager “war with parents” phase could have written.


----------



## mia55

maryg1 said:


> I’ve re-read their last statement and boy, it looks like something a 15 y.o. in full teenager “war with parents” phase could have written.


That’s exactly what they are, I’ve not seen a grain of maturity in their actions or words. They’re playing a dangerous game which is way beyond their mental capabilities.

Also all these statements, foundations/charities/ no foundation but innovative entity etc, shows that there was no year long planning or any thorough thoughts were given to their departure and next steps to make a living (they’re accepting offers which are thrown to them without evaluating its implications like JPM and Goldman Sachs) .I wonder if they were thrown out of the BRF because of MMs behavior/past and now trying to save face by leaking news that it was all planned since the beginning.


----------



## eunaddict

If we're talking comments (ala Twitter ones), then everything I've seen so far on the FB post are very, very negative. The vast majority basically saying that they want to leave, they should do so and stay out of the spotlight like they wanted; things like you can't be both in and out, pick one side and move on with your lives etc. 

"Rich young parasites upset about not being rich enough or sufficiently bowed and scraped to."

^ This was one of my favourite. 

There's also a very commonly posted gif in response to most of the H&M news posts that compares MM to Yoko Ono. 
*-----
Harry and Meghan's bitter salvo shows they don't intend to go quietly


London: Friends insist they have no misgivings over the controversial decision to step down as senior members of the royal family.

Yet the latest outpouring from the Sussexes more than hints at an undercurrent of bitterness.






The couple have announced they are giving up their plans to build a personal foundation.CREDIT:CHRIS JACKSON COLLECTION

If Harry and Meghan were truly content with how things have turned out, they surely would not have felt the need to publish a 1033-word "update" on their website, laced with thinly veiled barbs at "The Firm".

No regrets? The couple's markedly pointed reaction to being stripped of their royal status smacks of that infamous celebrity catchphrase: "Don't you know who I am?"


It's not just the insistence that they "retain their HRH prefix", pointing out that even though they can't use it beyond spring, they "formally remain known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex".

Should anyone be left in any doubt of their ongoing status, they remind us that "as the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of the Prince of Wales", Harry is sixth-in-line to the throne while the Duchess has her "own independent profile". That they remain a "valued part" of Her Majesty's family is underlined for effect.






Similarly, the suggestion that their "preference was to continue to represent and support the Queen" albeit in a more limited capacity, has echoes of Harry's misjudged Sentebale speech blaming the monarchy for refusing to allow them to have their royal cake and eat it.

It isn't their fault their office has had to be wound up with the loss of 15 staff - it was down to Prince Charles's "primary funding mechanism" drying up, they claim, reminding readers they were prepared to give up the Sovereign Grant (but not, it seems, Daddy's Duchy dosh).

They only trademarked the "Sussex Royal" brand "as a protective measure", they insist, suggesting the Cambridges had done the same for their foundation. (The fact that applications were made for goods from clothing and books to stationery and bandannas is conspicuous by its absence - although apparently William and Kate trademarked teatowels and the like).


Even the concession that they "do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'royal' in any territory" after the end of March, is not made without a degree of rancour. They selflessly agreed to drop the "royal' even though "there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas".

There is a certain irony about their claim that the sharply worded salvo is to "mitigate any confusion and subsequent misreporting" when in fact all it serves to do is confirm the accuracy of what has been reported.




There is no disguising the couple's contempt for the media as they once again question the "supposed public interest justification for intrusion into their lives" - while in the same breath insisting they must retain their taxpayer-funded bodyguards.

Rebutting claims they plan to start a "Foundation", despite their website stating that they are "actively working to create... a charitable entity", the couple's quest to "effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally" appears conveniently ambiguous.


All we know is that the "non profit" entity will not be called "royal" with details expected after March 31.

Whatever form their future takes, what is certain from this latest communique is that Harry and Meghan don't plan to go quietly.

*


----------



## imgg

eunaddict said:


> If we're talking comments (ala Twitter ones), then everything I've seen so far on the FB post are very, very negative. The vast majority basically saying that they want to leave, they should do so and stay out of the spotlight like they wanted; things like you can't be both in and out, pick one side and move on with your lives etc.
> 
> "Rich young parasites upset about not being rich enough or sufficiently bowed and scraped to."
> 
> ^ This was one of my favourite.
> 
> There's also a very commonly posted gif in response to most of the H&M news posts that compares MM to Yoko Ono.
> *-----
> Harry and Meghan's bitter salvo shows they don't intend to go quietly
> 
> 
> London: Friends insist they have no misgivings over the controversial decision to step down as senior members of the royal family.
> 
> Yet the latest outpouring from the Sussexes more than hints at an undercurrent of bitterness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The couple have announced they are giving up their plans to build a personal foundation.CREDIT:CHRIS JACKSON COLLECTION
> 
> If Harry and Meghan were truly content with how things have turned out, they surely would not have felt the need to publish a 1033-word "update" on their website, laced with thinly veiled barbs at "The Firm".
> 
> No regrets? The couple's markedly pointed reaction to being stripped of their royal status smacks of that infamous celebrity catchphrase: "Don't you know who I am?"
> 
> 
> It's not just the insistence that they "retain their HRH prefix", pointing out that even though they can't use it beyond spring, they "formally remain known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex".
> 
> Should anyone be left in any doubt of their ongoing status, they remind us that "as the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of the Prince of Wales", Harry is sixth-in-line to the throne while the Duchess has her "own independent profile". That they remain a "valued part" of Her Majesty's family is underlined for effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Similarly, the suggestion that their "preference was to continue to represent and support the Queen" albeit in a more limited capacity, has echoes of Harry's misjudged Sentebale speech blaming the monarchy for refusing to allow them to have their royal cake and eat it.
> 
> It isn't their fault their office has had to be wound up with the loss of 15 staff - it was down to Prince Charles's "primary funding mechanism" drying up, they claim, reminding readers they were prepared to give up the Sovereign Grant (but not, it seems, Daddy's Duchy dosh).
> 
> They only trademarked the "Sussex Royal" brand "as a protective measure", they insist, suggesting the Cambridges had done the same for their foundation. (The fact that applications were made for goods from clothing and books to stationery and bandannas is conspicuous by its absence - although apparently William and Kate trademarked teatowels and the like).
> 
> 
> Even the concession that they "do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'royal' in any territory" after the end of March, is not made without a degree of rancour. They selflessly agreed to drop the "royal' even though "there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas".
> 
> There is a certain irony about their claim that the sharply worded salvo is to "mitigate any confusion and subsequent misreporting" when in fact all it serves to do is confirm the accuracy of what has been reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no disguising the couple's contempt for the media as they once again question the "supposed public interest justification for intrusion into their lives" - while in the same breath insisting they must retain their taxpayer-funded bodyguards.
> 
> Rebutting claims they plan to start a "Foundation", despite their website stating that they are "actively working to create... a charitable entity", the couple's quest to "effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally" appears conveniently ambiguous.
> 
> 
> All we know is that the "non profit" entity will not be called "royal" with details expected after March 31.
> 
> Whatever form their future takes, what is certain from this latest communique is that Harry and Meghan don't plan to go quietly.
> *


I do not like how she used Archie in the statement to "remind" the Queen.  I wouldn't be surprised if she wrote the update on IG on a whim and Harry made her remove it.  I don't like  children being used as an Ace.

Why are they so set on a "non-profit" when its apparent all they want is profit.  Lots of non-taxable monies can go through non-profits.   The world already sees them for who they are, they are not the charity type.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

"there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas".

Indeed. In "non-jurisdiction" countries they shall be known as Mr and Mrs Markle.


----------



## limom

They are becoming truly tiresome! What kind of a marketing strategy is this?


----------



## CuTe_ClAsSy

Harry was always disrespectful and entitled in his youth, but I thought he had grown up. Apparently not.


----------



## imgg

What do you think the real working Royals are saying right now? I would love to be a fly on the wall!  
I am sure they are aghast at M & H behavior.


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> If we're talking comments (ala Twitter ones), then everything I've seen so far on the FB post are very, very negative. The vast majority basically saying that they want to leave, they should do so and stay out of the spotlight like they wanted; things like you can't be both in and out, pick one side and move on with your lives etc.
> 
> "Rich young parasites upset about not being rich enough or sufficiently bowed and scraped to."
> 
> ^ This was one of my favourite.
> 
> There's also a very commonly posted gif in response to most of the H&M news posts that compares MM to Yoko Ono.
> *-----
> Harry and Meghan's bitter salvo shows they don't intend to go quietly
> 
> 
> London: Friends insist they have no misgivings over the controversial decision to step down as senior members of the royal family.
> 
> Yet the latest outpouring from the Sussexes more than hints at an undercurrent of bitterness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The couple have announced they are giving up their plans to build a personal foundation.CREDIT:CHRIS JACKSON COLLECTION
> 
> If Harry and Meghan were truly content with how things have turned out, they surely would not have felt the need to publish a 1033-word "update" on their website, laced with thinly veiled barbs at "The Firm".
> 
> No regrets? The couple's markedly pointed reaction to being stripped of their royal status smacks of that infamous celebrity catchphrase: "Don't you know who I am?"
> 
> 
> It's not just the insistence that they "retain their HRH prefix", pointing out that even though they can't use it beyond spring, they "formally remain known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex".
> 
> Should anyone be left in any doubt of their ongoing status, they remind us that "as the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of the Prince of Wales", Harry is sixth-in-line to the throne while the Duchess has her "own independent profile". That they remain a "valued part" of Her Majesty's family is underlined for effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Similarly, the suggestion that their "preference was to continue to represent and support the Queen" albeit in a more limited capacity, has echoes of Harry's misjudged Sentebale speech blaming the monarchy for refusing to allow them to have their royal cake and eat it.
> 
> It isn't their fault their office has had to be wound up with the loss of 15 staff - it was down to Prince Charles's "primary funding mechanism" drying up, they claim, reminding readers they were prepared to give up the Sovereign Grant (but not, it seems, Daddy's Duchy dosh).
> 
> They only trademarked the "Sussex Royal" brand "as a protective measure", they insist, suggesting the Cambridges had done the same for their foundation. (The fact that applications were made for goods from clothing and books to stationery and bandannas is conspicuous by its absence - although apparently William and Kate trademarked teatowels and the like).
> 
> 
> Even the concession that they "do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'royal' in any territory" after the end of March, is not made without a degree of rancour. They selflessly agreed to drop the "royal' even though "there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas".
> 
> There is a certain irony about their claim that the sharply worded salvo is to "mitigate any confusion and subsequent misreporting" when in fact all it serves to do is confirm the accuracy of what has been reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no disguising the couple's contempt for the media as they once again question the "supposed public interest justification for intrusion into their lives" - while in the same breath insisting they must retain their taxpayer-funded bodyguards.
> 
> Rebutting claims they plan to start a "Foundation", despite their website stating that they are "actively working to create... a charitable entity", the couple's quest to "effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally" appears conveniently ambiguous.
> 
> 
> All we know is that the "non profit" entity will not be called "royal" with details expected after March 31.
> 
> Whatever form their future takes, what is certain from this latest communique is that Harry and Meghan don't plan to go quietly.
> *


funny how she's so eager to keep the titles she has only had for less than two years - and in a position that has been So Hard and So Unfair.....why not go back to just being MM?  Oh, you were just a B-list actress then


----------



## purseproblm

The new play is having her bestie register the “charity” in her name. The money grab and that petulant statement are childish in the extreme.


----------



## Emeline

purseproblm said:


> The new play is having her bestie register the “charity” in her name. The money grab and that petulant statement are childish in the extreme.


It's just bizarre. M and J are adults, yet they approach business decisions like the are working on a student council project.


----------



## Tivo

Emeline said:


> It's just bizarre. M and J are adults, yet they approach business decisions like the are working on a student council project.


They’re playing games. That’s what phonies do. 

Meghan got checkmated and wasn’t expecting that move from the Queen.


----------



## purseproblm

No she expected sweet 93 year old Gan Gan to take the line of BS and keep moving but HM gave them enough rope to hang themselves.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> funny how she's so eager to keep the titles she has only had for less than two years - and in a position that has been So Hard and So Unfair.....why not go back to just being MM?  Oh, you were just a B-list actress then


B-List?!?  That’s giving her much too much credit!  In my book, she’s a Z-LIST actress!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> B-List?!?  That’s giving her much too much credit!  In my book, she’s a Z-LIST actress!


not very successful actress but star social climber


----------



## limom

^^
For sure. She is a genius at social climbing, will she be able to keep the bag, though?


----------



## purseproblm

I think so because he doesn’t want to be like his parents. Will and Kate look so stable too despite the rumors that he can’t be the one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I obviously give this way too much thought, but...why didn't they take it slow and eased into everything? Will and Kate did it by living away from London for a bit when newly married, and guess what, they were not haunted by the press who relentlessly chased Kate when she was just a royal girlfriend. Heck, even the Queen and Philip lived in Malta as newlyweds. But those two nutjobs (or really, that one nutjob) jumped into it like there was no tomorrow, eager to show their importance, and then whined how "hard" it all was. 

And I'm still in disbelief Harry would treat his own family like this...is he on drugs, is he so under MM's spell he'd jump off a bridge if she told him so, or does he really outright hate them?

Also, interesting how suddenly Archie is of royal blood when earlier they insisted he was just a private citizen.


----------



## gracekelly

These two are living in their own little bubble.  Their "friends" just agree with everything they say so there will never be any understanding of the situation they have created for themselves.  The only thing that will burst the bubble is money and the lack of it.  If Charles closes the Bank of Dad, then they will be in a real pickle.  Either Harry has already squandered all his money or he is just too cheap to spend any of it.  I don't think that Meghan ever had as much as was touted.  She wasn't  destitute, but she wasn't a multimillionaire either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> These two are living in their own little bubble.  Their "friends" just agree with everything they say so there will never be any understanding of the situation they have created for themselves.  The only thing that will burst the bubble is money and the lack of it.  If Charles closes the Bank of Dad, then they will be in a real pickle.  Either Harry has already squandered all his money or he is just too cheap to spend any of it.  I don't think that Meghan ever had as much as was touted.  She wasn't  destitute, but she wasn't a multimillionaire either.


Yes, I personally think it’s time for Charles to shut this circus down....it’s embarrassing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I obviously give this way too much thought, but...why didn't they take it slow and eased into everything? Will and Kate did it by living away from London for a bit when newly married, and guess what, they were not haunted by the press who relentlessly chased Kate when she was just a royal girlfriend. Heck, even the Queen and Philip lived in Malta as newlyweds. But those two nutjobs (or really, that one nutjob) jumped into it like there was no tomorrow, eager to show their importance, and then whined how "hard" it all was.
> 
> And I'm still in disbelief Harry would treat his own family like this...is he on drugs, is he so under MM's spell he'd jump off a bridge if she told him so, or does he really outright hate them?
> 
> Also, interesting how suddenly Archie is of royal blood when earlier they insisted he was just a private citizen.


Only a minute ago she was single-handedly modernising the monarchy and now she’s chirruping on about royal blood, and the line of succession


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, I personally think it’s time for Charles to shut this circus down....it’s embarrassing.


I agree, he should make them financially independent - after all that’s what they want, no?  I wonder what tack William will take when he’s Prince of Wales and in control of the Duchy of Cornwall estate.


----------



## marietouchet

H&M must have filled a position for manifesto writer ...  
that job description has not been around since the 1960 - 1970 s protest era 
I said it a month ago, this is the story that keeps on giving ...


----------



## limom

> These two are living in their own little bubble. Their "friends" just agree with everything they say so there will never be any understanding of the situation they have created for themselves. The only thing that will burst the bubble is money and the lack of it. If Charles closes the Bank of Dad, then they will be in a real pickle. Either Harry has already squandered all his money or he is just too cheap to spend any of it. I don't think that Meghan ever had as much as was touted. She wasn't destitute, but she wasn't a multimillionaire either.


Agreed, it is a textbook example of folie à deux.
Years from now, psych students will be studying those two.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Either Harry has already squandered all his money or he is just too cheap to spend any of it.  I don't think that Meghan ever had as much as was touted.  She wasn't  destitute, but she wasn't a multimillionaire either.



Supposedly she has a net worth of $5 million. I’m sure she still has money, because you know an opportunist like her hasn’t spent a penny from her own bank account since marrying Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

As I see it “Sussex Global Charities” will basically be a stand alone GoFundMe page for them. I feel sorry for anyone naive enough to be bamboozled by these two fake philanthropists.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> As I see it “Sussex Global Charities” will basically be a stand alone GoFundMe page for them. feel sorry for anyone bamboozled by these two.


Ugh, it’s gruesome


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly she has a net worth of $5 million. I’m sure she still has money, because you know an opportunist like her hasn’t spent a penny from her own bank account since marrying Harry.


five mil wouldn't last a month with these two


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> five mil wouldn't last a month with these two



She will need it to tide her over during the period after the separation but before her big divorce settlement comes through.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I obviously give this way too much thought, but...why didn't they take it slow and eased into everything? Will and Kate did it by living away from London for a bit when newly married, and guess what, they were not haunted by the press who relentlessly chased Kate when she was just a royal girlfriend. Heck, even the Queen and Philip lived in Malta as newlyweds. But those two nutjobs (or really, that one nutjob) jumped into it like there was no tomorrow, eager to show their importance, and then whined how "hard" it all was.
> 
> And I'm still in disbelief Harry would treat his own family like this...is he on drugs, is he so under MM's spell he'd jump off a bridge if she told him so, or does he really outright hate them?
> 
> Also, interesting how suddenly Archie is of royal blood when earlier they insisted he was just a private citizen.


If they had dated for a year, or two, or even five, do you really think she would still be in his life? Heck no, everyone - including Harry -would have all had time to see through her. Time was Meghan's enemy.  She needed him locked down at warp speed to avoid intense scrutiny. She acted loads in order to get that proposal and marriage asap.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She will need it to tide her over during the period after the separation but before her big divorce settlement comes through.


she could probably manage for awhile with it if she has a free place to stay


----------



## sdkitty

this is probably her dad's fault for spoiling her when she was a kid


----------



## cafecreme15

Mrs.Z said:


> I find this reminder (from Meghan) that Harry is the Queen’s grandson to be simply beyond!  Yes we know he is the Queen’s grandson, that cannot be changed you fool...but also who cares that he is 6th in line to the throne, it means NOTHING, he will never be King.  You were desperate to leave the soul crushing Royal Family and now you appear hopelessly desperate to cling to their coattails.


God I can basically hear the angry typing and foot stomping from across the continent! I am the DUCHESS of SUSSEX and married to GRANDSON OF THE QUEEN PRINCE HARRY I AM IMPORTANT I AM A GOD BOW DOWN LITTLE PEOPLE. *hits send*


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If they had dated for a year, or two, or even five, do you really think she would still be in his life? Heck no, everyone - including Harry -would have all had time to see through her. Time was Meghan's enemy.  She needed him locked down at warp speed to avoid intense scrutiny. She acted loads in order to get that proposal and marriage asap.


Yeah, even when he proposed she cut across him and said something like "can I say yes?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> God I can basically hear the angry typing and foot stomping from across the continent! I am the DUCHESS of SUSSEX and married to GRANDSON OF THE QUEEN PRINCE HARRY I AM IMPORTANT I AM A GOD BOW DOWN LITTLE PEOPLE. *hits send*


The one good thing about this mess is that in losing her temper over the word “royal”, Meghan completely lost composure, and has shown her true colours in public.


----------



## andrashik

purseproblm said:


> I think so because he doesn’t want to be like his parents. Will and Kate look so stable too despite the rumors that he can’t be the one.


May I ask, what rumors?


----------



## cafecreme15

This BBC headline just popped up in my Facebook feed. BARF


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly she has a net worth of $5 million. I’m sure she still has money, because you know an opportunist like her hasn’t spent a penny from her own bank account since marrying Harry.


HA - not buying that one bit (I had also seen $3m, but huge  at that as well).


----------



## Allisonfaye

imgg said:


> I do not like how she used Archie in the statement to "remind" the Queen.  I wouldn't be surprised if she wrote the update on IG on a whim and Harry made her remove it.  I don't like  children being used as an Ace.
> 
> Why are they so set on a "non-profit" when its apparent all they want is profit.  Lots of non-taxable monies can go through non-profits.   The world already sees them for who they are, they are not the charity type.





eunaddict said:


> If we're talking comments (ala Twitter ones), then everything I've seen so far on the FB post are very, very negative. The vast majority basically saying that they want to leave, they should do so and stay out of the spotlight like they wanted; things like you can't be both in and out, pick one side and move on with your lives etc.
> 
> "Rich young parasites upset about not being rich enough or sufficiently bowed and scraped to."
> 
> ^ This was one of my favourite.
> 
> There's also a very commonly posted gif in response to most of the H&M news posts that compares MM to Yoko Ono.
> *-----
> Harry and Meghan's bitter salvo shows they don't intend to go quietly
> 
> 
> London: Friends insist they have no misgivings over the controversial decision to step down as senior members of the royal family.
> 
> Yet the latest outpouring from the Sussexes more than hints at an undercurrent of bitterness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The couple have announced they are giving up their plans to build a personal foundation.CREDIT:CHRIS JACKSON COLLECTION
> 
> If Harry and Meghan were truly content with how things have turned out, they surely would not have felt the need to publish a 1033-word "update" on their website, laced with thinly veiled barbs at "The Firm".
> 
> No regrets? The couple's markedly pointed reaction to being stripped of their royal status smacks of that infamous celebrity catchphrase: "Don't you know who I am?"
> 
> 
> It's not just the insistence that they "retain their HRH prefix", pointing out that even though they can't use it beyond spring, they "formally remain known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex".
> 
> Should anyone be left in any doubt of their ongoing status, they remind us that "as the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of the Prince of Wales", Harry is sixth-in-line to the throne while the Duchess has her "own independent profile". That they remain a "valued part" of Her Majesty's family is underlined for effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Similarly, the suggestion that their "preference was to continue to represent and support the Queen" albeit in a more limited capacity, has echoes of Harry's misjudged Sentebale speech blaming the monarchy for refusing to allow them to have their royal cake and eat it.
> 
> It isn't their fault their office has had to be wound up with the loss of 15 staff - it was down to Prince Charles's "primary funding mechanism" drying up, they claim, reminding readers they were prepared to give up the Sovereign Grant (but not, it seems, Daddy's Duchy dosh).
> 
> They only trademarked the "Sussex Royal" brand "as a protective measure", they insist, suggesting the Cambridges had done the same for their foundation. (The fact that applications were made for goods from clothing and books to stationery and bandannas is conspicuous by its absence - although apparently William and Kate trademarked teatowels and the like).
> 
> 
> Even the concession that they "do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'royal' in any territory" after the end of March, is not made without a degree of rancour. They selflessly agreed to drop the "royal' even though "there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas".
> 
> There is a certain irony about their claim that the sharply worded salvo is to "mitigate any confusion and subsequent misreporting" when in fact all it serves to do is confirm the accuracy of what has been reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no disguising the couple's contempt for the media as they once again question the "supposed public interest justification for intrusion into their lives" - while in the same breath insisting they must retain their taxpayer-funded bodyguards.
> 
> Rebutting claims they plan to start a "Foundation", despite their website stating that they are "actively working to create... a charitable entity", the couple's quest to "effect change and complement the efforts made by so many excellent foundations globally" appears conveniently ambiguous.
> 
> 
> All we know is that the "non profit" entity will not be called "royal" with details expected after March 31.
> 
> Whatever form their future takes, what is certain from this latest communique is that Harry and Meghan don't plan to go quietly.
> *





imgg said:


> I do not like how she used Archie in the statement to "remind" the Queen.  I wouldn't be surprised if she wrote the update on IG on a whim and Harry made her remove it.  I don't like  children being used as an Ace.
> 
> Why are they so set on a "non-profit" when its apparent all they want is profit.  Lots of non-taxable monies can go through non-profits.   The world already sees them for who they are, they are not the charity type.



One thing I have learned over the last few years is that with the possible exception of Bill Gates, 'foundation' is just a euphemism for tax free slush fund.


----------



## marietouchet

cafecreme15 said:


> This BBC headline just popped up in my Facebook feed. BARF


Yes but ... there was a gag order in the U.K. about Mrs Simpson in the  30s, the UK press were not allowed to cover the topic at all while they were dating , the topic was in the US press though at the time , different times
So yes the UK press was nicer to Wallis, they never spoke of her 
And confusingly/curiously, by leaving the BRF , H and M are  no longer subject to the rota , strict guidelines about where the modern UK press can go concerning the BRF, so, the press problem gets worse ... it is open game on H and M now


----------



## Tivo

CeeJay said:


> HA - not buying that one bit (I had also seen $3m, but huge  at that as well).


I doubt Suits is paying like that


----------



## Tivo

Her “dear friend” Amal is presenting the first-ever Amal Clooney Award for female empowerment this year, on behalf of Prince Charles and his charity, The Prince’s Trust.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a26858523/amal-clooney-prince-charles-award-female-empowerment/


----------



## purseproblm

There were the Will is cheating with one of Kate’s friends rumors and Kate has ostracized her from her friend group and OMG look how unhappy they look now and she brushed his hand away during the Mary Berry special. A lot of reaching for folks that don’t like the Cambridge clan.


----------



## bag-mania

Tivo said:


> I doubt Suits is paying like that



Supposedly she made $50,000 per episode and about $450,000 per year.


----------



## youngster

WhyMrBabcock! said:


> Ohhhh yes - the court case against the tabloids ...pretty awful that she may be in the same room as her father - if they are both called as witnesses...more on that - but I think a HUGE issue will be taxes to be paid to the US government - based on worldwide income- *I think that is a sticking point that most people are unaware of ...and I’m not sure if H will have to pay tax on his inheritance from his mother - as his global assets would be worth over a threshold...not sure if anyone is aware of that ?* It will be a shocking slap in the face- and as an aussie in the US- the amount of unpaid taxes carry both hefty penalties and interest... I think it would actually be better that M abandons her US citizenship and apply for Canadian citizenship...even Prince Charles contribution may fall short ...need to think this through - the tax implications, I think are enormous ...! Oh well ..welcome to the real world !



Harry's inheritance from Diana would be safe, the U.S. government could not touch that since it has been more than 20 years since he inherited those assets and he was not in any way, shape or form a U.S. citizen at the time.  However, the _income_ generated from his personal assets and anything he earns giving speeches and such on U.S. soil, yes, that potentially will be subject to U.S. taxation should he perform this work in the U.S, whether he is a part time resident or full time resident.  Definitely, the tax implications of living in 3 countries will keep their chartered accountants and CPA's plenty busy and racking up the fees.


----------



## bellecate

"Canada splitting security bill with UK. If they are not conducting royal duties in Canada, why are Canadians paying? Are they destitute? Why not divert $ to native kids? Prince Harry and Meghan Markle WILL stop using 'Sussex Royal' "
From Twitter Licensing Municipal Substandards.
Our local paper has also said that Canada will be paying for half their security while in Canada. Guess they forgot to ask Canadians if this was how we wanted to waste our tax dollars.


----------



## Lodpah

Tivo said:


> Her “dear friend” Amal is presenting the first-ever Amal Clooney Award for female empowerment this year, on behalf of Prince Charles and his charity, The Prince’s Trust.
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...oney-prince-charles-award-female-empowerment/
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...oney-prince-charles-award-female-empowerment/


Meghan must be fuming at this. Poor Amal she will be markled. Did Meghan really think these friends will choose sides?


----------



## Chagall

bellecate said:


> "Canada splitting security bill with UK. If they are not conducting royal duties in Canada, why are Canadians paying? Are they destitute? Why not divert $ to native kids? Prince Harry and Meghan Markle WILL stop using 'Sussex Royal' "
> From Twitter Licensing Municipal Substandards.
> Our local paper has also said that Canada will be paying for half their security while in Canada. Guess they forgot to ask Canadians if this was how we wanted to waste our tax dollars.


Waste our money is correct. With so many homeless and living in shelters with 14 year waiting lists for subsidized housing this is an abomination! There are kids going hungry and people not getting adequate medical care. The fact we have to spend our tax money on these Idiots makes my blood boil!


----------



## Straight-Laced

cafecreme15 said:


> God I can basically hear the angry typing and foot stomping from across the continent! I am the DUCHESS of SUSSEX and married to GRANDSON OF THE QUEEN PRINCE HARRY I AM IMPORTANT I AM A GOD BOW DOWN LITTLE PEOPLE. *hits send*


Sounds like a classic case of *MEGalomania* :  "*an unnaturally strong wish for power and control, or the belief that you are very much more important and powerful than you really are"
*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> Meghan must be fuming at this. Poor Amal she will be markled. Did Meghan really think these friends will choose sides?



This story is a year old.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly she made $50,000 per episode and about $450,000 per year.


Yes, could be .. but she would have had to pay rent (and from what I understand, she did not live in a cheap part of Toronto), buy groceries, trips back/forth to LA (and her other trips to perpetuate her social climb), etc. - so at the end of the day, how much would she have netted by year-end???  So, like I said before .. MAJOR SIDE-EYE at the $5m, unless [ahem] .. her $$$ were being augmented in 'other' ways!  Yes, being snarky here ..


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> "Canada splitting security bill with UK. If they are not conducting royal duties in Canada, why are Canadians paying? Are they destitute? Why not divert $ to native kids? Prince Harry and Meghan Markle WILL stop using 'Sussex Royal' "
> From Twitter Licensing Municipal Substandards.
> Our local paper has also said that Canada will be paying for half their security while in Canada. Guess they forgot to ask Canadians if this was how we wanted to waste our tax dollars.


I can't blame you for being mighty pissed off about this, as I've said before .. if they "truly" didn't want to be part of the BRF anymore, then fine .. you're either IN or OUT.  Pay for your own freakin' security ..


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> Waste our money is correct. With so many homeless and living in shelters with 14 year waiting lists for subsidized housing this is an abomination! There are kids going hungry and people not getting adequate medical care. The fact we have to spend our tax money on these Idiots makes my blood boil!


.. and what happens if they come to LA????  I believe we now have the highest percentage of homeless in the country, what about services for them???  What about all our folks doing without the appropriate medical care???  

Oh yeah .. but they're 'eyeing' property in Malibu where they will be in a gated community .. BUT, that beach (if they get a beachfront property) is BY LAW .. NOT THEIRS!!!!  

Although, I have to say .. given our current President, I kind of doubt that he would "okay" the cost of US security to watch over someone like her!


----------



## queennadine

^ We can only hope!


----------



## Milosmum0307

CeeJay said:


> .. Although, I have to say .. given our current President, I kind of doubt that he would "okay" the cost of US security to watch over someone like her!


The US is not a commonwealth country, and they would not be here for any diplomatic purpose but as Totally OMG So Private Citizens, so this is a non-issue.  There is no earthly, infinitesimal possibility that they would be provided security by the government of the United States or any of its states, municipalities or territories.


----------



## AB Negative

The President commented a couple of weeks ago when asked that the Queen has done a remarkable job and has NEVER made a mistake as Queen and that he was so disappointed that she had to be put through this (without naming names of course).  President ***** and the Queen have a very cordial relationship and he is extremely family oriented also.  If H&M are no longer in the US in an official capacity they are not entitled to Secret Service protection.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Meghan must be fuming at this. Poor Amal she will be markled. Did Meghan really think these friends will choose sides?


Looks like Amal knew which side of the room to stick with.


----------



## closeted

But they are entitled to an island surely, so they can bump themselves royally into a throne and hence under no juristdiction can anyone not claim they are anything but royal and so be royally protected.
Coming soon a link on their website so all their subjects might crowdfund them.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> "Canada splitting security bill with UK. If they are not conducting royal duties in Canada, why are Canadians paying? Are they destitute? Why not divert $ to native kids? Prince Harry and Meghan Markle WILL stop using 'Sussex Royal' "
> From Twitter Licensing Municipal Substandards.
> Our local paper has also said that Canada will be paying for half their security while in Canada. Guess they forgot to ask Canadians if this was how we wanted to waste our tax dollars.


This is so unfair.  People should be writing and calling their local representatives to complain about this.


----------



## gracekelly

closeted said:


> But they are entitled to an island surely, so they can bump themselves royally into a throne and hence under no juristdiction can anyone not claim they are anything but royal and so be royally protected.
> Coming soon a link on their website so all their subjects might crowdfund them.


I have been suggesting an ice floe in the northern territories for quite some time.


----------



## bag-mania

Jessica Mulroney is claiming she did not register any charity web sites for them. If true, she is probably sorry she’s getting sucked into their drama.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney is claiming she did not register any charity web sites for them. If true, she is probably sorry she’s getting sucked into their drama.


She has a new TV show starting..she probably loves the attention.


----------



## Lodpah

Yahoo has an article stating the Her Majesty, the Queen is done with them. It's going to be show time soon. The comments were brutal against Harry and Meghan. Meghan is on the offensive and she's going to want the last word but Meghan will lose royally (pardon the pun). I seriously think most of her celebrity friends are probably shying away since most likely Sir Elton John's loyalty I believe will always be to the Monarchy. 

I read the people of Tonga are against Meghan as she treated the Tongan Royal family disrespectfully. The Queen had a long standing and great relationship with them. 

I imagine Samantha is just sitting back and saying I told you all. 

Everyday those two scumbags have to retaliate back at the Queen and it's getting personal. I wonder how the British people feel about all this.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> This is so unfair.  People should be writing and calling their local representatives to complain about this.


True!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

closeted said:


> But they are entitled to an island surely, so they can bump themselves royally into a throne and hence under no juristdiction can anyone not claim they are anything but royal and so be royally protected.
> Coming soon a link on their website so all their subjects might crowdfund them.


Perhaps this one would do? And, they make love socks there. Sounds like a match made in , well, the ocean! Personally, I think it is too good for them but.....
http://www.slate.com/blogs/atlas_ob...the_world_s_most_remote_inhabited_island.html


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm still confused about why they are doing all this, all in aid of privacy? I've said it before and I'll say it again, they had all the privacy they wanted at Frogmore Cottage, plus the security of that privacy between the RF and the press with the silent agreement they would be left alone (on the whole)
Take this last week for example, here in the UK it's been half term, school holidays and we've not had a peep or a clue what the Cambridge children have been doing. OK, we may hear in time if they've been spotted somewhere but we haven't seen pictures either via the press or from a private individual.

That thing they call privacy, it can be done!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm still confused about why they are doing all this, all in aid of privacy? I've said it before and I'll say it again, they had all the privacy they wanted at Frogmore Cottage, plus the security of that privacy between the RF and the press with the silent agreement they would be left alone (on the whole)
> Take this last week for example, here in the UK it's been half term, school holidays and we've not had a peep or a clue what the Cambridge children have been doing. OK, we may hear in time if they've been spotted somewhere but we haven't seen pictures either via the press or from a private individual.
> 
> That thing they call privacy, it can be done!


Because none of this has anything to do with wanting privacy, at all! They wanted the media to sing ODE to them but they didn't get that. So MM didn't get what she wanted so she threw an tantrum! Those 2 don't want privacy, quite the opposite! They want attention! The worst form of attention seekers! If they really wanted privacy, they would have f*cked off wherever quietly, no public statements required and we, the majority of the British public wouldn't give a rat's *ss and wouldn't even know the difference!

Now they have made fools of themselves publically and I think a lot more people here hate them and wish them can just f*ck off. They are nothing but narcissist spoilt brats who want to have their cake and eat it!


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm still confused about why they are doing all this, all in aid of privacy? I've said it before and I'll say it again, they had all the privacy they wanted at Frogmore Cottage, plus the security of that privacy between the RF and the press with the silent agreement they would be left alone (on the whole)
> Take this last week for example, here in the UK it's been half term, school holidays and we've not had a peep or a clue what the Cambridge children have been doing. OK, we may hear in time if they've been spotted somewhere but we haven't seen pictures either via the press or from a private individual.
> 
> That thing they call privacy, it can be done!


They move to LA, hang out with celebrities and the powerful, and launch a new way to effect change ‘globally’ for the sake of privacy? Nay, you do that for notoriety, not privacy.

One thing that strikes me about their statement, surely if they make all those arguments there is because they had made them before in the negotiation process. Meaning, they actually went to the Queen and threatened: Hey Grandma, you do realize you don’t own the word ‘royal’ overseas don’t you?

No, they are not wallflowers these two. Maybe Harry believes his own story, that they were not able to carry their work because of scrutiny and criticism. But are they being less criticized now? On the contrary...  Yet we have reports that they are very happy. Why would that be?


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I obviously give this way too much thought, but...*why didn't they take it slow and eased into everything? Will and Kate did it by living away from London for a bit when newly married*, and guess what, they were not haunted by the press who relentlessly chased Kate when she was just a royal girlfriend. Heck, even the Queen and Philip lived in Malta as newlyweds. But those two nutjobs (or really, that one nutjob) jumped into it like there was no tomorrow, eager to show their importance, and then whined how "hard" it all was.
> 
> And I'm still in disbelief Harry would treat his own family like this...is he on drugs, is he so under MM's spell he'd jump off a bridge if she told him so, or does he really outright hate them?
> 
> Also, interesting how suddenly Archie is of royal blood when earlier they insisted he was just a private citizen.



Can you imagine if they had to live a year in seclusion after the engagement announcement or wedding? Part of the draw to marrying Harry WAS the attention for M. Unlike Chelsy, M was eager to rush into marriage & BE ROYAL and visible, starting with the $50million wedding.

They still went on holiday a lot during their 1.5 yrs as “working” royals, but they stayed visible. If it’s true that M started planning Megxit before the wedding, then it was even more important for them to be in public as the Royal Sussexes “early and often”. Her business manager trademarking Archie-related things before the pregnancy was announced suggests at least M had no intention of hanging around. I doubt she would have even stayed around for a long engagement (though partly the urgency may be due to her age & wanting to start a family.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PewPew said:


> Can you imagine if they had to live a year in seclusion after the engagement announcement or wedding? Part of the draw to marrying Harry WAS the attention for M. Unlike Chelsy, M was eager to rush into marriage & BE ROYAL and visible, starting with the $50million wedding.



You're right of course. My thoughts only applied if they (her) were even the slightest bit genuine and not hungry for fame.


----------



## closeted

Am pretty sure those 2 haven't the slightest idea what they actually want or need


----------



## limom

> Am pretty sure those 2 haven't the slightest idea what they actually want or need


The only thing that they know for sure, is that they will continue to live in luxury at the expense of someone else, imho.


----------



## Clearblueskies

They don’t want privacy, that’s an outright lie.  They want attention and money and control.  The only thing in doubt is which of those matters most to them.


----------



## mia55

I hope it's a warning from BRF to H and M that the well is going to dry soon. Pretty sure when William starts managing Duchy, Harry won't be able to free load.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...sington-palace-Duchy-of-Cornwall-royal-family


----------



## Clearblueskies

mia55 said:


> I hope it's a warning from BRF to H and M that the well is going to dry soon. Pretty sure when William starts managing Duchy, Harry won't be able to free load.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...sington-palace-Duchy-of-Cornwall-royal-family


Lets hope so


----------



## mdcx

I am beginning to wonder if Chelsy and Cressida were put off not only by the realities of royal life but also by Harry’s plan of “revenge”. He seems obsessed and M obviously used that her ends.


----------



## limom

> I am beginning to wonder if Chelsy and Cressida were put off not only by the realities of royal life but also by Harry’s plan of “revenge”. He seems obsessed and M obviously used that her ends.


Agreed, he must have been disgruntled for quite a while.
A British girl wouldn’t  want to take on the monarchy nor the British public so this would make sense.
Who wants to be around such a negative, big baby/man?


----------



## Tivo

Allisonfaye said:


> This story is a year old.


Amal is presenting the award this year, 2020. She was selected by Charles last year.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CeeJay said:


> .. and what happens if they come to LA????  I believe we now have the highest percentage of homeless in the country, what about services for them???  What about all our folks doing without the appropriate medical care???
> 
> Oh yeah .. but they're 'eyeing' property in Malibu where they will be in a gated community .. BUT, that beach (if they get a beachfront property) is BY LAW .. NOT THEIRS!!!!
> 
> Although, I have to say .. given our current President, I kind of doubt that he would "okay" the cost of US security to watch over someone like her!



Especially in light of the fact that she said should wouldn't move back to the US as long as he is President.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> Agreed, he must have been disgruntled for quite a while.
> A British girl wouldn’t  want to take on the monarchy nor the British public so this would make sense.
> Who wants to be around such a negative, big baby/man?



This is a good point. For all Harry’s past talk of “wanting out” of the BRF and spotlight, he wasn’t independent or motivated enough to do anything on his own. To leave the BRF, he really needed to marry someone outside of the UK (or someone who didn’t care about her family), because there would’ve been tremendous backlash towards the family if a local girl behaved like M (not just Megxit, but various slights against the Queen).

This reminds me of how Edward (David) was looking for a way out of his responsibilities & Wallis Simpson being a twice-divorced American was the perfect vehicle for that. Like Edward & Wallis, Harry & M seem to have grossly overestimated the public’s willingness to put up with their antics. Edward expected to be welcomed back after a few years exile & to receive far more monetary support from his brother King George and then QE2.


----------



## limom

> Especially in light of the fact that she said should wouldn't move back to the US as long as he is President.I


So much for being neutral as a Royal.
I wonder if secretly, the Queen is not relieved by her departure.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> So much for being neutral as a Royal.
> I wonder if secretly, the Queen is not relieved by her departure.



The Queen won’t truly be relieved until they shut up and quit whining.  From what we’ve seen so far that won’t be happening anytime soon.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Meghan must be fuming at this. Poor Amal she will be markled. Did Meghan really think these friends will choose sides?


With what's going on now, it's more likely it'll be the other way around, the Markler will be Clooneyd, lol


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> This is a good point. For all Harry’s past talk of “wanting out” of the BRF and spotlight, he wasn’t independent or motivated enough to do anything on his own. To leave the BRF, he really needed to marry someone outside of the UK (or someone who didn’t care about her family), because there would’ve been tremendous backlash towards the family if a local girl behaved like M (not just Megxit, but various slights against the Queen).
> 
> This reminds me of how Edward (David) was looking for a way out of his responsibilities & Wallis Simpson being a twice-divorced American was the perfect vehicle for that. Like Edward & Wallis, Harry & M seem to have grossly overestimated the public’s willingness to put up with their antics. Edward expected to be welcomed back after a few years exile & to receive far more monetary support from his brother King George and then QE2.


I watched part of the CNN series on the Windsors last night.  The subject was Edward leaving and marrying Wallis.  The queen mother didn't like Wallis at all and saw to it she was not allowed to be designated as royal.  The current queen was a teenager at the time and had just been designated as heir to the throne.  So she would remember all of this.  While she tried to welcome "M" to the family for Harry's sake, I'm thinking after all that's gone down, she must be recalling the prior scenario.  Wonder if it's hardened her heart.  Too bad for Harry but he seems like a dolt.


----------



## limom

Hot prince ginger had an incredible glow down.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> With what's going on now, it's more likely it'll be the other way around, the Markler will be Clooneyd, lol


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Meghan must be fuming at this. Poor Amal she will be markled. Did Meghan really think these friends will choose sides?


The article is dated spring 2019 , long before Megxit but the award will be awarded 2020



mia55 said:


> I hope it's a warning from BRF to H and M that the well is going to dry soon. Pretty sure when William starts managing Duchy, Harry won't be able to free load.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...sington-palace-Duchy-of-Cornwall-royal-family


What is interesting is that Charles has a lot less personal fortune (than at one time) - Diana took him to the cleaners in the divorce, 20 years ago - the story was that she wanted to provide for Harry - William would get Dad's stuff and Harry would get Mum's
So, Harry has 30 odd million pounds thanks to his mother and father - he has been taken care of ...


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Meghan must be fuming at this. Poor Amal she will be markled. Did Meghan really think these friends will choose sides?


Amal is the real deal - an actual human rights attorney.  Meghan would love to have these type of credentials.  She won't Markle her.


----------



## CeeJay

threadbender said:


> Perhaps this one would do? And, they make love socks there. Sounds like a match made in , well, the ocean! Personally, I think it is too good for them but.....
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/atlas_ob...the_world_s_most_remote_inhabited_island.html


NUTS .. that defeats my plan to go there!! .. HA, kidding .. but when my parents were really bad, I thought .. "oh, I'll just move to Tristan da Cunha"!


----------



## CeeJay

TC1 said:


> She has a new TV show starting..she probably loves the attention.


To do what? .. talk about all the Plastic Surgery she's had  -OR-  her 'fashion' sense??  Either way .. not going to be watchin' that!


----------



## 1LV

elvisfan4life said:


> Not sure if this has been posted before as I try not to look at this thread on the basis that if i ignore her she might disappear back into obscurity but this made me laugh - it was entitled how it really is


Ouch!


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Lol the Queen’s advisors shut her down quickly. Meghan should know all the people who advise the Queen that they ARE PROFFESSIONALS and will do whatever to protect the Crown.


Diana used to call them "The Suits" and she hated them. lol


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> So, Harry has 30 odd million pounds thanks to his mother and father - he has been taken care of ...



Very true, and MM supposedly has somewhere around $3 - $5 million of her own from working on Suits.  I'd be surprised if it was actually $5 million, much more likely to be closer to $3 million, if that. So, their combined wealth is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to continue enjoying. It would be plenty, of course, if they were actually interested in living a quiet, mostly private life, focused on charitable endeavors, out in the British countryside.  But, MM wants to be a celebrity with a billion dollar lifestyle with houses in multiple countries, full time staff, and 24/7 security.   

Btw, about that 24/7 security, I'd be surprised if they can hang on to government provided security for very long. I think Charles or the Queen is going to have to step in and pay for it, especially when they are out of the UK, which will probably be 95% of the time.  Can't imagine that taxpayers in the UK and Canada will tolerate picking up the tab for the two of them when they are out exploiting their royal "brand" but not working for the UK or Commonwealth public.   

But, it's been really interesting to see how they keep bringing up the security issue, and how insistent they were in that statement about retaining their government provided security.  Certainly, 24/7 security is obviously massively expensive, millions each year, and there is no way they want to pay for that themselves.  But I also think it is because any private security they might be forced to hire would not be nearly the caliber or the prestige that they receive from the Royalty Protection Group.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Very true, and MM supposedly has somewhere around $3 - $5 million of her own from working on Suits.  I'd be surprised if it was actually $5 million, much more likely to be closer to $3 million, if that. So, their combined wealth is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to continue enjoying. It would be plenty, of course, if they were actually interested in living a quiet, mostly private life, focused on charitable endeavors, out in the British countryside.  But, MM wants to be a celebrity with a billion dollar lifestyle with houses in multiple countries, full time staff, and 24/7 security.
> 
> Btw, about that 24/7 security, I'd be surprised if they can hang on to government provided security for very long. I think Charles or the Queen is going to have to step in and pay for it, especially when they are out of the UK, which will probably be 95% of the time.  Can't imagine that taxpayers in the UK and Canada will tolerate picking up the tab for the two of them when they are out exploiting their royal "brand" but not working for the UK or Commonwealth public.
> 
> But, it's been really interesting to see how they keep bringing up the security issue, and how insistent they were in that statement about retaining their government provided security.  Certainly, 24/7 security is obviously massively expensive, millions each year, and there is no way they want to pay for that themselves.  But I also think it is because any private security they might be forced to hire would not be nearly the caliber or the prestige that they receive from the Royalty Protection Group.


I don't think Harry has a clue about anything or has any idea of reality.  He has led a sheltered life.  And she is just raw ambition.  What a pair.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Very true, and MM supposedly has somewhere around $3 - $5 million of her own from working on Suits.  I'd be surprised if it was actually $5 million, much more likely to be closer to $3 million, if that. So, their combined wealth is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to continue enjoying. It would be plenty, of course, if they were actually interested in living a quiet, mostly private life, focused on charitable endeavors, out in the British countryside.  But, MM wants to be a celebrity with a billion dollar lifestyle with houses in multiple countries, full time staff, and 24/7 security.
> 
> Btw, about that 24/7 security, I'd be surprised if they can hang on to government provided security for very long. I think Charles or the Queen is going to have to step in and pay for it, especially when they are out of the UK, which will probably be 95% of the time.  Can't imagine that taxpayers in the UK and Canada will tolerate picking up the tab for the two of them when they are out exploiting their royal "brand" but not working for the UK or Commonwealth public.
> 
> But, it's been really interesting to see how they keep bringing up the security issue, and how insistent they were in that statement about retaining their government provided security.  Certainly, 24/7 security is obviously massively expensive, millions each year, and there is no way they want to pay for that themselves.  But I also think it is because any private security they might be forced to hire would not be nearly the caliber or the prestige that they receive from the Royalty Protection Group.


There was a discussion about this previously where someone indicated how much she got paid per episode.  Unless she led an EXTREMELY frugal life during her time on Suits, I highly doubt that she has millions stashed away .. maybe $1m or $2m at most.  As I noted before, she would have had to pay rent (in an apartment that was not in a cheap area of Toronto), she would have had to pay for any staff working for her (publicist, Manager, etc.) - and let us not forget, that she would have likely been flying to/from all the various places to continue her ambitious social climbing .. as well as visiting her "family" (cough-cough) here in LA.  So, with Harry, she got her meal-ticket (as well as that poor child Archie). 

If they decide to move to LA, I really wonder if Charles will continue paying for their security .. certainly, the US is not going to kick in any $$$ on that!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> There was a discussion about this previously where someone indicated how much she got paid per episode.  Unless she led an EXTREMELY frugal life during her time on Suits, I highly doubt that she has millions stashed away .. maybe $1m or $2m at most.  As I noted before, she would have had to pay rent (in an apartment that was not in a cheap area of Toronto), she would have had to pay for any staff working for her (publicist, Manager, etc.) - and let us not forget, that she would have likely been flying to/from all the various places to continue her ambitious social climbing .. as well as visiting her "family" (cough-cough) here in LA.  So, with Harry, she got her meal-ticket (as well as that poor child Archie).
> 
> If they decide to move to LA, I really wonder if Charles will continue paying for their security .. certainly, the US is not going to kick in any $$$ on that!



I can believe she still has a few million as long as she invested her _Suits_ salary wisely and didn't make a lot of wasteful purchases. Remember, she was married to Trevor for the first couple of years of Suits and it's possible, even likely, he paid for her rent and expenses during that time. We know Meghan "strong, independent" Markle would have no problem having her husband pay her bills.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> There was a discussion about this previously where someone indicated how much she got paid per episode.  Unless she led an EXTREMELY frugal life during her time on Suits, I highly doubt that she has millions stashed away .. maybe $1m or $2m at most.  As I noted before, she would have had to pay rent (in an apartment that was not in a cheap area of Toronto), she would have had to pay for any staff working for her (publicist, Manager, etc.) - and let us not forget, that she would have likely been flying to/from all the various places to continue her ambitious social climbing .. as well as visiting her "family" (cough-cough) here in LA.  So, with Harry, she got her meal-ticket (as well as that poor child Archie).
> 
> If they decide to move to LA, I really wonder if Charles will continue paying for their security .. certainly, the US is not going to kick in any $$$ on that!


Lets not forget about taxes!  Especially is that wage bracket.


----------



## Allisonfaye

imgg said:


> Lets not forget about taxes!  Especially is that wage bracket.



And in California.


----------



## youngster

And she was working in Canada so she'd pay both Canadian taxes and part-year resident California taxes plus federal income taxes.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> And she was working in Canada so she'd pay both Canadian taxes and part-year resident California taxes plus federal income taxes.


who knows?
it's possible she put the max into a retirment account and accumulated millions .....but we're only talking a few years of Suits so maybe not


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> who knows?
> it's possible she put the max into a retirment account and accumulated millions .....but we're only talking a few years of Suits so maybe not


Anything is possible. 
Still, she doesn't strike me as the kind of gal who see the benefit of thoughtful investments and delayed gratification.


----------



## youngster

Yeah, she was only on Suits for 7 or 8 years, so I doubt she accumulated millions.   I think someone said she was paid about $50,000/episode (?) and that was probably at the end of the run of the Suits, not from the start and the series had something around 130 episodes total, not all of which she was in. And, 50% of her salary was likely eaten up in agent fees, manager fees, Canadian taxes and U.S. taxes and then she had living expenses too and she was operating that lifestyle blog/site for awhile too.  She also may have had other gigs that she was paid for though, in between seasons of Suits, and accumulated some money that way too.


----------



## queennadine

Not to mention all of her personal travel costs to the U.K. to try to land a guy (Ashley Cole, anyone?)...


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> But, it's been really interesting to see how they keep bringing up the security issue,..


They first claimed to be Internationally Protected Persons ie Diplomats - a claim withdrawn from their site
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Diplomats_Convention 
But, not representing the Queen anymore, that explanation does not hold water anymore
And Justin Trudeau must be kicking himself for ever suggesting Canada pick up the tab
Security is a huge expense when you travel, you have to haul all the bodyguards around - $$$$$$$


----------



## CobaltBlu

They should move to Mexico.  Their savings can qualify them, they can have all the privacy of a narco, and...
You can get boatloads of armed security in suburbans for pennies on the dollar.  Plus, tacos.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> There was a discussion about this previously where someone indicated how much she got paid per episode.  Unless she led an EXTREMELY frugal life during her time on Suits, I highly doubt that she has millions stashed away .. maybe $1m or $2m at most.  As I noted before, she would have had to pay rent (in an apartment that was not in a cheap area of Toronto), she would have had to pay for any staff working for her (publicist, Manager, etc.) - and let us not forget, that she would have likely been flying to/from all the various places to continue her ambitious social climbing .. as well as visiting her "family" (cough-cough) here in LA.  So, with Harry, she got her meal-ticket (as well as that poor child Archie).
> 
> If they decide to move to LA, I really wonder if Charles will continue paying for their security .. certainly, the US is not going to kick in any $$$ on that!



I imagine through clever accounting all of those expenses were written off as business expenses.

Harry is a rung in her ladder. Though she seems to be screwing it up. These two are losing so much credibility and look like major freeloaders.

When they start making their own money, I hope the tax man (US, UK, Canada) are all first in line looking to get a piece.

Really cannot look away from this glorious train wreck!

Poor Archie. Thank goodness he is too young to recall this nonsense and his UK family is waiting for him with open arms when this sh*te show implodes. Unless H&M plan to use him as a prop when panhandling on the side of the road?


----------



## jennlt

CobaltBlu said:


> They should move to Mexico.  Their savings can qualify them, they can have all the privacy of a narco, and...
> You can get boatloads of armed security in suburbans for pennies on the dollar.  Plus, tacos.



In all fairness, tacos should have been first.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Very true, and MM supposedly has somewhere around $3 - $5 million of her own from working on Suits.  I'd be surprised if it was actually $5 million, much more likely to be closer to $3 million, if that. So, their combined wealth is not enough for the lifestyle they wish to continue enjoying. It would be plenty, of course, if they were actually interested in living a quiet, mostly private life, focused on charitable endeavors, out in the British countryside.  But, MM wants to be a celebrity with a billion dollar lifestyle with houses in multiple countries, full time staff, and 24/7 security.
> 
> Btw, about that 24/7 security, I'd be surprised if they can hang on to government provided security for very long. I think Charles or the Queen is going to have to step in and pay for it, especially when they are out of the UK, which will probably be 95% of the time.  Can't imagine that taxpayers in the UK and Canada will tolerate picking up the tab for the two of them when they are out exploiting their royal "brand" but not working for the UK or Commonwealth public.
> 
> But, it's been really interesting to see how they keep bringing up the security issue, and how insistent they were in that statement about retaining their government provided security.  Certainly, 24/7 security is obviously massively expensive, millions each year, and there is no way they want to pay for that themselves.  But I also think it is because any private security they might be forced to hire would not be nearly the caliber or the prestige that they receive from the Royalty Protection Group.


At this point, I think they need security to keep away the folks who are going to throw rotten tomatoes at them.  Seriously, they have proven themselves to not be special at all so the security is just for their ego.


----------



## cafecreme15

youngster said:


> Yeah, she was only on Suits for 7 or 8 years, so I doubt she accumulated millions.   I think someone said she was paid about $50,000/episode (?) and that was probably at the end of the run of the Suits, not from the start and the series had something around 130 episodes total, not all of which she was in. And, 50% of her salary was likely eaten up in agent fees, manager fees, Canadian taxes and U.S. taxes and then she had living expenses too and she was operating that lifestyle blog/site for awhile too.  She also may have had other gigs that she was paid for though, in between seasons of Suits, and accumulated some money that way too.


After all of this I'd be surprised if she just broke even!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think the security team makes her feel like an A-lister.  A VIP.

I wonder if Harry goes to the U.K. for engagements and she stays behind, if security will be pulled from her.


----------



## CeeJay

CobaltBlu said:


> They should move to Mexico.  Their savings can qualify them, they can have all the privacy of a narco, and...
> You can get boatloads of armed security in suburbans for pennies on the dollar.  Plus, tacos.


.. but that's where Meghan's father is ..


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> .. but that's where Meghan's father is ..


He could baby sit for them. hahahahahahaha!


----------



## youngster

Sophisticatted said:


> *I think the security team makes her feel like an A-lister.*  A VIP.
> 
> I wonder if Harry goes to the U.K. for engagements and she stays behind, if security will be pulled from her.



Yes, and its _government_ provided security via the Royalty Protection Group which is part of the Metropolitan Police Service so that must make her feel very special.  These are excellent, seriously trained professionals which is all Harry has ever known and I'm sure MM is quite liking it.  If they have to go the private security route, I don't think they could duplicate that level of professionalism and training.


----------



## tiktok

youngster said:


> Yeah, she was only on Suits for 7 or 8 years, so I doubt she accumulated millions.   I think someone said she was paid about $50,000/episode (?) and that was probably at the end of the run of the Suits, not from the start and the series had something around 130 episodes total, not all of which she was in. And, 50% of her salary was likely eaten up in agent fees, manager fees, Canadian taxes and U.S. taxes and then she had living expenses too and she was operating that lifestyle blog/site for awhile too.  She also may have had other gigs that she was paid for though, in between seasons of Suits, and accumulated some money that way too.



According to Google she had 3M followers when she shut down her Instagram account. That’s a number where you start making very real money from sponsorships and such. I think all the points made here re expenses and taxes stand but I wonder if a substantial (and unaccounted for in the media math) part of her income was from her blog/Instagram audience.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I think the security team makes her feel like an A-lister.  A VIP.
> 
> I wonder if Harry goes to the U.K. for engagements and she stays behind, if security will be pulled from her.



But she'll keep her pawn, uhm, baby. I guess the baby is still dear to the family.


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But she'll keep her pawn, uhm, baby. I guess the baby is still dear to the family.



Yes.  And that, I think, is one of the reasons why she doesn’t want to accompany Harry in the next few weeks.  Not just as a symbolic F U to the royal family, but also to have an excuse to keep Archie in Canada.


----------



## Emeline

Sophisticatted said:


> Yes.  And that, I think, is one of the reasons why she doesn’t want to accompany Harry in the next few weeks.  Not just as a symbolic F U to the royal family, but also to have an excuse to keep Archie in Canada.


I agree. She does live to play games, doesn't she? 
It would be less bothersome if there wasn't a baby involved. 
Bless the nanny. What a job!


----------



## cafecreme15

Emeline said:


> I agree. She does live to play games, doesn't she?
> It would be less bothersome if there wasn't a baby involved.
> Bless the nanny. What a job!


Now THAT'S a tell all book I'd pay good money to read! Not whatever propaganda MM would try to put out in the event of a separation or to make good on a threat...


----------



## youngster

tiktok said:


> According to Google she had 3M followers when she shut down her Instagram account. That’s a number where you start making very real money from sponsorships and such. I think all the points made here re expenses and taxes stand but I wonder if a substantial (and unaccounted for in the media math) part of her income was from her blog/Instagram audience.



Didn't she have all those followers because she had been dating Harry for a year or so?  I'd be curious to know what she had before she started dating Harry.


----------



## lulilu

Sophisticatted said:


> I think the security team *makes her feel like an A-lister.  A VIP.*
> I wonder if Harry goes to the U.K. for engagements and she stays behind, if security will be pulled from her.



I think all the claims about being entitled to/needing security just reflects how delusional they are about their importance in this world.


----------



## threadbender

How long is Archie allowed to stay in Canada?


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> Didn't she have all those followers because she had been dating Harry for a year or so?  I'd be curious to know what she had before she started dating Harry.


I also would like to formally request this number.


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> They should move to Mexico.  Their savings can qualify them, they can have all the privacy of a narco, and...
> You can get boatloads of armed security in suburbans for pennies on the dollar.  Plus, tacos.


Plus her dad is nearby !


----------



## imgg

tiktok said:


> According to Google she had 3M followers when she shut down her Instagram account. That’s a number where you start making very real money from sponsorships and such. I think all the points made here re expenses and taxes stand but I wonder if a substantial (and unaccounted for in the media math) part of her income was from her blog/Instagram audience.


It's so easy to buy followers.   With an ego like hers, I would bet money a lot of her followers are fake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

Emeline said:


> Anything is possible.
> Still, she doesn't strike me as the kind of gal who see the benefit of thoughtful investments and delayed gratification.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Comment in The Times UK today :
*Infantile Harry and Meghan have let down the Queen*
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...-and-meghan-have-let-down-the-queen-jpqbv9qs3   MELANIE PHILLIPS

"When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex agreed the terms on which they would relinquish their royal duties, few surely thought this would be an end to the matter. The ultimatum they had previously laid down, which meant milking the royal brand while undertaking few of the responsibilities involved, indicated they would hardly take kindly to being told they couldn’t publicly use their HRH titles.

When they were told last Friday that in addition they could no longer use their brand name “SussexRoyal”, a renewed hissy fit was on the cards; and so it proved just a few hours later. The statement the couple put up on their website was petty, bitter and spiteful. It was also supremely disrespectful to the Queen.

In a remarkable eruption of arrogance, they suggested that a ban on using the word “royal” was unenforceable abroad since there was “not any jurisdiction by the monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘royal’ overseas”. In other words, they were doing the Queen a big favour by agreeing to drop it. Having thus condescended to the monarch from their apparently more elevated position, they saw fit to remind everyone that Prince Harry remained sixth in line to the throne.

Moreover, although they would no longer “actively use” their HRH titles, as had been agreed, they would nevertheless retain their HRH prefix, “thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex”. *What on earth does this mean? That they won’t describe themselves as HRH but everyone else must do so?*

Then they complained that they were being treated differently from other royals, sniffing: “While there is precedent for other titled members of the royal family to seek employment outside of the institution, for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a 12-month review period has been put in place.”

*What? They are being treated differently because they have behaved differently. No other royal has tried to exploit their position by ripping off the monarchy to promote and market their endeavours while disdaining even the most minimal relationship with the public demanded of the immediate royal family*."


----------



## imgg

The Queen needs to put a stop to this nonsense now.  Take away their titles, financial support and security.  Let them live the high life in S. California and be the celebrities they feel entitled to be.  The only ones who want them now are the weirdo Hollywood type and that will probably be short lived.


----------



## Milosmum0307

All this guesstimating at MM’s personal fortune with emphasis on Suits and social media influencing ... YOU GUYS.  How can we discuss this exquisite thespian’s assets without taking into consideration all that Hallmark Channel lucre?  The Second Coming of Grace Kelly was totally tearing it up with her scorching (made-for-television-but-not-the-prestigious-paid-subscription-kind) film career!  According to her fans, she could totally afford to pay for the million dollar wardrobe she flounced around in during her first year of marriage; and I for one believe them, because clearly a woman who forgets to remove the price tags from a dress during an actual, honest-to-g*d royal tour is finger-snappin’ competent enough to amass a gigantic fortune.  Also, for what it’s worth, while she was only making the prime time minimum for her dazzling theatrical labors on a basic cable legal drama, I believe she was probably making some good money as an influencer.  Those influencers with a significant following can make a weird, surprising amount of money (because we live in a really exasperating world right now).  And let’s face it, Megs had some riveting content - yoga poses, candles, spooning bananas and other discreet hints at romance with a certain low-IQ casual racist ... I mean prince ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## hermes_lemming

Am I the only one amused by the fact that all of MM's celebrity friends went silent? You could literally hear a pin drop across the pond.

P.S. Long live the Queen!


----------



## Tootsie17

Milosmum0307 said:


> All this guesstimating at MM’s personal fortune with emphasis on Suits and social media influencing ... YOU GUYS.  How can we discuss this exquisite thespian’s assets without taking into consideration all that Hallmark Channel lucre?  The Second Coming of Grace Kelly was totally tearing it up with her scorching (made-for-television-but-not-the-prestigious-paid-subscription-kind) film career!  According to her fans, she could totally afford to pay for the million dollar wardrobe she flounced around in during her first year of marriage; and I for one believe them, because clearly a woman who forgets to remove the price tags from a dress during an actual, honest-to-g*d royal tour is finger-snappin’ competent enough to amass a gigantic fortune.  Also, for what it’s worth, while she was only making the prime time minimum for her dazzling theatrical labors on a basic cable legal drama, I believe she was probably making some good money as an influencer.  Those influencers with a significant following can make a weird, surprising amount of money (because we live in a really exasperating world right now).  And let’s face it, Megs had some riveting content - yoga poses, candles, spooning bananas and other discreet hints at romance with a certain low-IQ casual racist ... I mean prince ¯\_(ツ)_/¯



As someone else mentioned on this thread, you are an exquisite writer.  You are able to put so eloquently into words what my crazy comedic brain thinks.


----------



## youngster

imgg said:


> It's so easy to buy followers.   With an ego like hers, I would bet money a lot of her followers are fake.





lanasyogamama said:


> I also would like to formally request this number.



I think the number of followers she had increased massively when she started dating him and exploded when the rumors of an engagement started.  I would think she might have had 5% of that number before her first date with Harry.

But, yeah, @Milosmum0307 lolol, I totally forgot to consider:
_How can we discuss this exquisite thespian’s assets without taking into consideration all that Hallmark Channel lucre? _


----------



## Lodpah

I finally perked at their website. What a bunch of baloney. I laughed. I would send them a check for $00.00 cents. Self-serving, delusional and totally laughable. Who in the world will take them seriously.


----------



## Lodpah

imgg said:


> The Queen needs to put a stop to this nonsense now.  Take away their titles, financial support and security.  Let them live the high life in S. California and be the celebrities they feel entitled to be.  The only ones who want them now are the weirdo Hollywood type and that will probably be short lived.


The Queen will, in her sweet time and most judicious way. The blowback from those two with their rants . . . will be awesome. Meghan has no fury like a woman scorned. Sorry I meant hell . . . sorry I meant Meghan.


----------



## CobaltBlu

"we live in a really exasperating world right now"

Yes.....but these two make it a tad more entertaining at least. Though I do feel for HRH QE II.   



Milosmum0307 said:


> All this guesstimating at MM’s personal fortune with emphasis on Suits and social media influencing ... YOU GUYS.  How can we discuss this exquisite thespian’s assets without taking into consideration all that Hallmark Channel lucre?  The Second Coming of Grace Kelly was totally tearing it up with her scorching (made-for-television-but-not-the-prestigious-paid-subscription-kind) film career!  According to her fans, she could totally afford to pay for the million dollar wardrobe she flounced around in during her first year of marriage; and I for one believe them, because clearly a woman who forgets to remove the price tags from a dress during an actual, honest-to-g*d royal tour is finger-snappin’ competent enough to amass a gigantic fortune.  Also, for what it’s worth, while she was only making the prime time minimum for her dazzling theatrical labors on a basic cable legal drama, I believe she was probably making some good money as an influencer.  Those influencers with a significant following can make a weird, surprising amount of money (because we live in a really exasperating world right now).  And let’s face it, Megs had some riveting content - yoga poses, candles, spooning bananas and other discreet hints at romance with a certain low-IQ casual racist ... I mean prince ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## chaneljewel

I truly feel badly for the queen.  She’s been more than kind and accommodating to Harry’s unpredictable behavior over the years.  This has to be a pit in her stomach. Meghan is a pathetic person...egotistical and selfish.  I’m sorry that I ever supported her when the relationship started and after the marriage.  Meghan acted so good for Harry, BUT, it was definitely an ACT!  Both H and M are totally disrespecting the BRF, and thinking they can “win”.  Go for it as both of them will find out how cold and lonely they will be when all of this finally dies down.  Little Archie is ultimately the one who will lose out since he’s away from his grandparents, aunts,uncles, and cousins.  Shame on you H and M!    And shame again on you Harry for allowing this mongrel Meghan to destroy your relationships with your family!


----------



## mdcx

Definitely agree that Megs is fighting to keep security because it makes her feel like a celeb and she can use them as gofers or to “smooth the way” for her when she goes somewhere e.g. “tell them the Duchess of Sussex is coming and to clear the store of plebs!”
Poor security detail staff -  assume they are all Brits away from home.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mdcx said:


> Definitely agree that Megs is fighting to keep security because it makes her feel like a celeb and she can use them as gofers or to “smooth the way” for her when she goes somewhere e.g. “tell them the Duchess of Sussex is coming and to clear the store of plebs!”
> Poor security detail staff -  assume they are all Brits away from home.



How could poor Megs lose her security with all the imminent threats against her and Harry - you know the ones they can’t disclose due to the “sensitivity” as clearly stated in their ridiculous “statement” to their followers. They really need to get over themselves. 6th in line to the throne in this day and age means nothing!


----------



## doni

LVSistinaMM said:


> How could poor Megs lose her security with all the imminent threats against her and Harry - you know the ones they can’t disclose due to the “sensitivity” as clearly stated in their ridiculous “statement” to their followers. They really need to get over themselves. 6th in line to the throne in this day and age means nothing!



Oh, but you are forgetting “her own independent profile”... apparently the source of security threats too.

Actually, I can’t believe how disingenuous that statement is... If indeed and as according to themselves, part of the security threats are due to her “own independent profile” and _not_ to her position relative to those in the line of the throne, shouldn’t they pay for the corresponding security costs? Why should the public pay for risks related to people’s independent profiles...?
They are lucky the other side are not willing to play them at their own game...


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> *I finally perked at their website*. What a bunch of baloney. I laughed. I would send them a check for $00.00 cents. Self-serving, delusional and totally laughable. Who in the world will take them seriously.



You know what? I still haven't had the courage to check their website..... Having grown up in Sussex and being, as most Sussex people, glad that they had been made Dukes of Sussex, now, only to hear or read the word SUSSEX associated to these two morons, makes me cringe. To read all the bull s**t they write would make me too angry and I don't want to ruin my day, I've got enough on my plate as it is!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Ironic  is that her family came across as crass and sometimes trashy early on, but they have turned out to be truth sayers. Selfish, manipulative, discards the people she crawls over when they hit their expiration dates for how useful they can be to her. My biggest cringe was Harry effectively pimping her out to the Disney execs for voice over work. He’s increasingly becoming emasculated and should be ashamed for his treatment of his grandmother, done at Meghan’s bidding it seems.


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Obviously gossip, but...it does sound like her, doesn't it. Also, the moment she thought she'd made it with the Suits gig she mailed back her wedding rings. Interesting timeline. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-husband-prince-harry-royal-family-latest-spt


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously gossip, but...it does sound like her, doesn't it. Also, the moment she thought she'd made it with the Suits gig she mailed back her wedding rings. Interesting timeline.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-husband-prince-harry-royal-family-latest-spt





> However, eventually Meghan landed a role in the legal drama Suits and suddenly her success went through the roof.


 This statement is a joke, right? What roof is that? A bungalow? 
She is just a social climber through and through. I kinda feel a bit sorry for Harry. He's nothing but another stepping stone in her life.


----------



## Aminamina

*"My admiration for well-read women will never fade. Perhaps that's why I don't miss Meghan." (The New Pope)*
*

*


----------



## limom

Ouch.
Is it a parody or was it really a line in the movie?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Ouch.
> Is it a parody or was it really a line in the movie?



It's part of the show. I haven't seen it but apparently there is a running gag that pokes fun at Meghan.

*'The New Pope' makes fun of Meghan in new season*
The cheeky smash-hit Vatican drama that saw Jude Law's dishy American pope struck down by a heart attack in the first series, has Markle bombarding his replacement with demands for fashion advice in the second.

"What a nuisance!" barks the fictional Pope John Paul III played by Hollywood star John Malkovich as his butler fields another call supposedly from Markle.

"Wear the yellow Dior because it plays up the contrasts with your complexion," Sir John Brannox, the aristocratic English prelate played by Malkovich tells Markle in one scene.

"No, Meghan I am adamant, wear the yellow," he adds.

"She calls me 25 times a day for beauty tips. She thinks I'm gay," he later confesses to the Vatican's spin doctor.

While Markle - who wore Dior for the baptism of son Archie in July - does not appear herself, she is a recurring presence in the series' early episodes.

"They want to be influencers but they have no idea of colour combinations," Malkovich's character adds in one of many takedowns aimed at Markle.

In the series, Brannox is voted pope after Law's immediate replacement, Pope Francis II, dies in mysterious circumstances after threatening to give away all the Church's riches.

"What will Meghan do without me?" Malkovich sighs after he finally agrees to be pontiff.

Its award-winning Italian director Paolo Sorrentino insisted he "has nothing against Meghan. But to make people laugh I am ready to detest anyone."

https://www.channel24.co.za/TV/News/the-new-pope-makes-fun-of-meghan-in-new-season-20200114-2


----------



## Lounorada

Milosmum0307 said:


> All this guesstimating at MM’s personal fortune with emphasis on Suits and social media influencing ... YOU GUYS.  How can we discuss this exquisite thespian’s assets without taking into consideration all that Hallmark Channel lucre?  The Second Coming of Grace Kelly was totally tearing it up with her scorching (made-for-television-but-not-the-prestigious-paid-subscription-kind) film career!  According to her fans, she could totally afford to pay for the million dollar wardrobe she flounced around in during her first year of marriage; and I for one believe them, because clearly a woman who forgets to remove the price tags from a dress during an actual, honest-to-g*d royal tour is finger-snappin’ competent enough to amass a gigantic fortune.  Also, for what it’s worth, while she was only making the prime time minimum for her dazzling theatrical labors on a basic cable legal drama, I believe she was probably making some good money as an influencer.  Those influencers with a significant following can make a weird, surprising amount of money (because we live in a really exasperating world right now).  And let’s face it, Megs had some riveting content - yoga poses, candles, spooning bananas and other discreet hints at romance with a certain low-IQ casual racist ... I mean prince ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


This post has me...


----------



## CobaltBlu

hahahahah!!!  This line!  "Its award-winning Italian director Paolo Sorrentino insisted he "has nothing against Meghan. *But to make people laugh I am ready to detest anyone.""*


----------



## Aminamina

limom said:


> Ouch.
> Is it a parody or was it really a line in the movie?


It's a line in the show, said by the new Pope played by John Malkovich. I just saw the 4th part and laughed aloud then Googled for you dear ladies, to share. They do "detest" our DucheSS dearest quite a lot in the show.


----------



## sdkitty

Aminamina said:


> It's a line in the show, said by the new Pope played by John Malkovich. I just saw the 4th part and laughed aloud then Googled for you dear ladies, to share. They do "detest" our DucheSS dearest quite a lot in the show.


this will make them fume.....I'm guessing being laughed at will be worse then being hated to Duchess M


----------



## Aminamina

sdkitty said:


> this will make the fume.....I'm guessing being laughted at will be worse then being hated to Duchess M


Should be comforting for her that it's being done in Paolo Sorrentino style


----------



## LittleStar88

Lounorada said:


>




Non-Profit? They should just stop the jig and call it what it is: Go Fund Me account.


----------



## daisychainz

youngster said:


> Didn't she have all those followers because she had been dating Harry for a year or so?  I'd be curious to know what she had before she started dating Harry.


Maybe the same as a comparable Suits actor/actress like Sarah Rafferty? She has 2.x M, I would think Meghan had around the same, perhaps a bit more because of her personal website.


----------



## imgg

LittleStar88 said:


> Non-Profit? They should just stop the jig and call it what it is: Go Fund Me account.


True.  So many scams in non-profits.  Not having to pay any taxes. Board members with high salaries, while very little goes to the charity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

This is their business model: let’s sit in a room with people far more intelligent than we are and hope they come up with some up good stuff $$$


----------



## Luvluxx098

Milosmum0307 said:


> The US is not a commonwealth country, and they would not be here for any diplomatic purpose but as Totally OMG So Private Citizens, so this is a non-issue.  There is no earthly, infinitesimal possibility that they would be provided security by the government of the United States or any of its states, municipalities or territories.


It was reported that she received local and federal security


doni said:


> They move to LA, hang out with celebrities and the powerful, and launch a new way to effect change ‘globally’ for the sake of privacy? Nay, you do that for notoriety, not privacy.
> 
> One thing that strikes me about their statement, surely if they make all those arguments there is because they had made them before in the negotiation process. Meaning, they actually went to the Queen and threatened: Hey Grandma, you do realize you don’t own the word ‘royal’ overseas don’t you?
> 
> No, they are not wallflowers these two. Maybe Harry believes his own story, that they were not able to carry their work because of scrutiny and criticism. But are they being less criticized now? On the contrary...  Yet we have reports that they are very happy. Why would that be?


they’re happy because they are freeloading and living off other people’s money. People who can’t “do” complain a lot about the work of people who “do” and denigrate them and their work but never have it in them to show them up because they are not able to “do” real work. And deep down they know it.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> This is their business model: let’s sit in a room with people far more intelligent than we are and hope they come up with some up good stuff $$$



I hope those advisors are being paid very well, because we know if they do come up with a lucrative business model H&M will not give credit to those who actually did the work.


----------



## scarlet555

Lounorada said:


>




At this point, them wanting to use the Royal Sussex title *for any reason *is super embarrassing, get a hold of yourself Harry!  Wow, those claws Meghan has on that title is ridiculous!  I mean, if you wanted out, get the Fck out, and be done with it, don't play games.  

That's why I'm thinking they were kicked out, rather than left on their own, their actions would suggest that to me anyways.  They were paid to leave of sorts,  with Charles 'agreeing' (bribing them) to continue some sort of payment if they left England.


----------



## queennadine

I follow an Insta account that posted on their stories that supposedly (that was wordy, lol) Harry flew by himself from Vancouver to London last night.


----------



## CeeJay

Hmmmm .. well, according to this DM article, there are already discussions re: H&M's security "not workable"!!!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-Markles-security-branded-unworkable.html


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> That's why I'm thinking they were kicked out, rather than left on their own, their actions would suggest that to me anyways.  They were paid to leave of sorts,  with Charles 'agreeing' (bribing them) to continue some sort of payment if they left England.



They were delusional enough to believe they could be half-in and half-out of the royal family and they were genuinely stunned when they were told they couldn't have it both ways. Since their dumb plan was shut down everything they have done has been a muddled, nonsensical mess.

They could be paid off, but only if they can swallow their pride and follow the rules laid out by the Queen/Charles. They are both too egotistical to do that so far.


----------



## Luvluxx098

They’re such great role models- either be born into complete privilege and wealth or marry into it- wow great lessons for our time. Achieve nothing on your own.
If she was making that much money on Suits then we should all quit and become cable tv actresses.


----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. well, according to this DM article, there are already discussions re: H&M's security "not workable"!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-Markles-security-branded-unworkable.html



This is just sickening The cheek of these two is just unlimited! They want to become "private citizens" but with their titles, their police security 24/7 payed my UK tax payers, all the privileges that come with beying a Royal......If I were The Queen I would strip them of EVERYTHING, NOW!!!


----------



## Lodpah

https://madworldnews.com/meghan-royal-title-downgraded/


----------



## imgg

duna said:


> This is just sickening The cheek of these two is just unlimited! They want to become "private citizens" but with their titles, their police security 24/7 payed my UK tax payers, all the privileges that come with beying a Royal......If I were The Queen I would strip them of EVERYTHING, NOW!!!


I know, their audacity is quite embarrassing.  From communicating with the Queen via their Instagram account to demanding a title that was gifted and they rejected, but want to keep for profit and to demand paid security of 12 guards because they want to live the high life in LA.   Insanity.

This is why I am not sure the Beyoncé's and Oprah's will want the association.  They worked hard for their success.  Meghan married into it, but feels so entitled.  Harry didn't really earn it either, he was born with it.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> *They were delusional enough to believe they could be half-in and half-out of the royal family* and they were genuinely stunned when they were told they couldn't have it both ways. Since their dumb plan was shut down everything they have done has been a muddled, nonsensical mess.



They probably thought they could since so many people talked about them "single handedly modernizing the monarchy" which I always thought was a bizarre claim.  What exactly does that mean?  Not marrying someone from the British upper classes but a divorced American?  Duh, Uncle David did that about 90 years ago. _So_ last century, Harry!) 

I guess profiting off their royal titles, yet stepping back from the public duties and relocating to the other side of the world, is what they think the modern monarchy should look like?  If anything, for the monarchy to survive, it likely needs to be more duties, more commitment to the public, not less. I could see Meghan though, selling that to Harry, about how their actions would pull the monarchy into the 21st century with their royal "brand", connecting with "the people" through instagram and twitter, mixing charity with royalty with profit, don't forget the profit!


----------



## youngster

The Security issue is going to be huge.  No way should the Canadian or UK taxpayer be forced to foot this bill, especially with these new security cost estimates.
_
Now an internal memo seen by The Mirror has revealed that there is a staffing crisis within the team that supports the Royals and that Scotland Yard is facing increasing demand from them.
*
It calculated that estimations of £3 million to £6 million a year were 'inadequate' and that Harry and Meghan would need at least 12 protection officers, who earn salaries of £106,000.

It is believed to have stated that the Met has been told to deliver the calculations to the Government and that costs could reach £20 million.*_

£20 million per year just to protect them 24/7?  This is ridiculous. I don't think even the Queen or Charles could afford this annually.  It's crazy.  Frankly, both Meghan and Harry should be horrified by the thought of passing this cost on to taxpayers, to ordinary citizens, who they claim to want to help.  Imagine the good that money could do if it were used to actually help people.


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> https://madworldnews.com/meghan-royal-title-downgraded/


A 2018 article, after wedding , pre Archie, pre Megxit


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> The Security issue is going to be huge.  No way should the Canadian or UK taxpayer be forced to foot this bill, especially with these new security cost estimates.
> _
> Now an internal memo seen by The Mirror has revealed that there is a staffing crisis within the team that supports the Royals and that Scotland Yard is facing increasing demand from them.
> *
> It calculated that estimations of £3 million to £6 million a year were 'inadequate' and that Harry and Meghan would need at least 12 protection officers, who earn salaries of £106,000.
> 
> It is believed to have stated that the Met has been told to deliver the calculations to the Government and that costs could reach £20 million.*_
> 
> £20 million per year just to protect them 24/7?  This is ridiculous. I don't think even the Queen or Charles could afford this annually.  It's crazy.  Frankly, both Meghan and Harry should be horrified by the thought of passing this cost on to taxpayers, to ordinary citizens, who they claim to want to help.  Imagine the good that money could do if it were used to actually help people.


Billionaire Kylie Jenner ... her sister Kendall stated that Kylie spends about  $ 600k per month  on security which is $7.2 M per year , dollars not pounds ... 
Kylie is worth enough to try and kidnap , extort etc


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Milosmum0307

Luvluxx098 said:


> It was reported that she received local and federal security
> 
> Sure, that’s definitely true under the current status quo (Meghan received protection during her staged New York pap walk ... er baby shower, and certainly during her trips to the US to watch tennis and to attend the paid speaking gig in Miami), but for that to continue after March 31st, after they officially step down as working royals representing the monarchy of the UK, they will still need to be classed as protected persons to entitle them to a Diplomatic Security Service in the US.  It is difficult to see how that would be justified given the arrangement to which the couple agreed.  This may be part of the reason they want this “half in, half out” hybrid status:  Instead of fully relinquishing or “abdicating” their roles as working royals representing the monarch, they were careful to portray their decision in their public extortion letter/website as a “new progressive role” arguably still under the umbrella of the Royal Family (as opposed to just members of the extended royal family related by blood and marriage but absent certain perks, like diplomatic status).  By rights, they should get the same level of taxpayer-funded security as Princess Beatrice (a Princess by birth, who retains her HRH, but a private citizen on these shores) when she was working in NYC - that is, none.  I guess it all hinges on whether their “part-time” status as “working royals” continues to be viewed by the US as sufficient to afford their current protected status.  If they live in the US for large swathes of time and continue to have little to no professional contact with the UK and retain only tenuous threads to the Commonwealth, such a security detail would be wildly expensive and difficult/impossible to justify in the long term.  As for California, perhaps the state’s government will be magnanimous and give them security because cheap celebrities are super rare there, and so the local rubes might get overly dazzled and excited to be graced by their presence (I kid, obviously), but I think it would be doing so without sufficient justification. In the end, it all hinges on what their eventual role will look like, what happens after the 12-month review, if they are Members of the Royal family, or just members of the royal family.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Luvluxx098 said:


> It was reported that she received local and federal security
> 
> they’re happy because they are freeloading and living off other people’s money. People who can’t “do” complain a lot about the work of people who “do” and denigrate them and their work but never have it in them to show them up because they are not able to “do” real work. And deep down they know it.


Sure, that’s definitely true under the current status quo (Meghan received protection during her staged New York pap walk ... er baby shower, and certainly during her trips to the US to watch tennis and to attend the paid speaking gig in Miami), but for that to continue after March 31st, after they officially step down as working royals representing the monarchy of the UK, they will still need to be classed as protected persons to entitle them to a Diplomatic Security Service in the US. It is difficult to see how that would be justified given the arrangement to which the couple agreed. This may be part of the reason they want this “half in, half out” hybrid status: Instead of fully relinquishing or “abdicating” their roles as working royals representing the monarch, they were careful to portray their decision in their public extortion letter/website as a “new progressive role” arguably still under the umbrella of the Royal Family (as opposed to just members of the extended royal family related by blood and marriage but absent certain perks, like diplomatic status). By rights, they should get the same level of taxpayer-funded security as Princess Beatrice (a Princess by birth, who retains her HRH, but a private citizen on these shores) when she was working in NYC - that is, none. I guess it all hinges on whether their “part-time” status as “working royals” continues to be viewed by the US as sufficient to afford their current protected status. If they live in the US for large swathes of time and continue to have little to no professional contact with the UK and retain only tenuous threads to the Commonwealth, such a security detail would be wildly expensive and difficult/impossible to justify in the long term. As for California, perhaps the state’s government will be magnanimous and give them security because cheap celebrities are super rare there, and so the local rubes might get overly dazzled and excited to be graced by their presence (I kid, obviously), but I think it would be doing so without sufficient justification. In the end, it all hinges on what their eventual role will look like, what happens after the 12-month review, if they are Members of the Royal Family, or just members of the royal family.


----------



## mshermes

HARRY'S BACK
*Prince Harry arrives back in Britain ahead of final round of engagements before Megxit*
prince-harry-back-in-britain

Looks like he is back in the UK....alone.


----------



## Milosmum0307

oh, wow, I very much screwed up my last attempted post.  Head-scratching ...


----------



## daisychainz

Wouldn't Archie be worth kidnapping, as a royal baby? Maybe they can argue the protection money is needed for him.


----------



## youngster

These extra security costs would not be at all necessary, or would not be nearly as huge, if they were living on the grounds at Kensington Palace or at Frogmore and falling under the umbrella of the protection already in place at these locations.  It's crazy to say "we're withdrawing from being senior royals but we still want you all to pay for stellar security for us with a team of Scotland Yard officers 24/7/365 whilst we shuttle about the world as we see fit".   They should get the same level of protection, or non-protection, as Beatrice and Eugenie and Zara and Peter and all the other Queen's grandchildren who are not senior royals.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> These extra security costs would not be at all necessary, or would not be nearly as huge, if they were living on the grounds at Kensington Palace or at Frogmore and falling under the umbrella of the protection already in place at these locations.  It's crazy to say "we're withdrawing from being senior royals but we still want you all to pay for stellar security for us with a team of Scotland Yard officers 24/7/365 whilst we shuttle about the world as we see fit".   They should get the same level of protection, or non-protection, as Beatrice and Eugenie and Zara and Peter and all the other Queen's grandchildren who are not senior royals.


Yep! As an UK tax payer, I would be furious if we have to fund MM's overseas security! It would not go down well here!


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yep! As an UK tax payer, I would be furious if we have to fund MM's overseas security! It would not go down well here!


+ 1 
If they choose a peripatetic lifestyle which results in additional security costs, they should foot the bill themselves.  These two need to learn to take responsibility for the consequences of the decisions they make.


----------



## hermes_lemming

Lodpah said:


> I finally perked at their website. What a bunch of baloney. I laughed. I would send them a check for $00.00 cents. Self-serving, delusional and totally laughable. Who in the world will take them seriously.


I just cant.  The whole thing is a farce IMHO.


----------



## bag-mania

They have overplayed their hand. If they had hoped to use Archie as leverage I think that plan will fail too. The Queen has many grandchildren and great-grandchildren, with more likely to be born in the next few years. She doesn't need to bend over backwards for any of them, particularly those several rungs down in the line of succession.


----------



## limom

> Wouldn't Archie be worth kidnapping, as a royal baby? Maybe they can argue the protection money is needed for him.


Agreed 100%. The baby needs protection.
However, as a US taxpayer, I am not willing to fund a. $20 million/year expense for those two bozos.
Maybe they can move in the British Embassy in DC, where there is security already.
Those two haven’t thought of anything, except for their selfish desire to escape their own condition.
They suck!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> HARRY'S BACK
> *Prince Harry arrives back in Britain ahead of final round of engagements before Megxit*
> prince-harry-back-in-britain
> 
> Looks like he is back in the UK....alone.


We’ll be seeing Meghan home alone photos soon then


----------



## doni

youngster said:


> These extra security costs would not be at all necessary, or would not be nearly as huge, if they were living on the grounds at Kensington Palace or at Frogmore and falling under the umbrella of the protection already in place at these locations.  .



Of course, it is not even about _keeping_ their security costs, it is about quitting and then _multiplying_ them. That was clear from the first brief, when they proposed they’d live between two continents. As if that was merely a personal choice than then citizens have to finance. As it is, they seem to hardly ever be the three of them in the same place, so the abuse on security is outrageous... if they do indeed start earning money, I don’t see how taxpayers would accept financing the security bill for their lifestyle...
Good that they are not paying any rent... I’d be embarrassed to borrow a home for so long (while having want for nothing).

At least their entertainment value does not die down... they could start a subscription service for that, I’d pay...


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Billionaire Kylie Jenner ... her sister Kendall stated that Kylie spends about  $ 600k per month  on security which is $7.2 M per year , dollars not pounds ...
> Kylie is worth enough to try and kidnap , extort etc


She also has her own money to pay for it and isn't asking for handouts.


----------



## CeeJay

Not that I should have wasted any brain cells on these two, *BUT *.. in this case with Harry traveling to Edinburgh for this Travelyst Discussion/Conference, *WHY *did he even need to attend *IN* *PERSON*?  With the technology we have nowadays, and if (in fact) this is really more discussion-based, is there really a need for him to be there in-person?  If the mission of this initiative is to 'save' the environment, then why the heck couldn't he have done this via a Conference Call / WebEx, whatevs .. such that he wouldn't be flying all over the place to get there?!?!  Save carbon emissions, save the planet, save $$$ ..

Not sure about flights from Canada, but when I worked in Edinburgh, I always had to fly BA from Boston to Heathrow ("Death-row") and then from there to Edinburgh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

CeeJay said:


> Not that I should have wasted any brain cells on these two, *BUT *.. in this case with Harry traveling to the Edinburgh for this Travelyst Discussion/Conference, *WHY *did he even need to attend *IN* *PERSON*?  With the technology we have nowadays, and if (in fact) this is really more discussion-based, is there really a need for him to be the in-person?  If the mission of this initiative is to 'save' the environment, then why the heck couldn't he have done this via a Conference Call / WebEx, whatevs .. such that he wouldn't be flying all over the place to get there?!?!  Save carbon emissions, save the planet, save $$$ ..



Because DON’T YOU SEE: he had to fly there to talk to people about how bad flying is so he can then tell the world’s peasants not to fly...before he flies to England...and then flies back “home” to Canada. DUH!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Not that I should have wasted any brain cells on these two, *BUT *.. in this case with Harry traveling to the Edinburgh for this Travelyst Discussion/Conference, *WHY *did he even need to attend *IN* *PERSON*?  With the technology we have nowadays, and if (in fact) this is really more discussion-based, is there really a need for him to be the in-person?  If the mission of this initiative is to 'save' the environment, then why the heck couldn't he have done this via a Conference Call / WebEx, whatevs .. such that he wouldn't be flying all over the place to get there?!?!  Save carbon emissions, save the planet, save $$$ ..



Call me a cynic but I'm guessing Harry is being PAID to host the conference. So he can't just phone it in.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Call me a cynic but I'm guessing Harry is being PAID to host the conference. So he can't just phone it in.


Absolutely, I think this whole silly Travelyst thing is their first business venture attempt.  There is actually an article I believe I posted weeks ago written by someone basically stating it’s a vague idea with no concrete direction or purpose.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Absolutely, I think this whole silly Travelyst thing is their first business venture attempt.  There is actually an article I believe I posted weeks ago written by someone basically stating* it’s a vague idea with no concrete direction or purpose.*



That statement describes the entire Meghan and Harry show up to now.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Call me a cynic but I'm guessing Harry is being PAID to host the conference. So he can't just phone it in.



I feel that they have been *Phoning It In *for a while now...


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel that they have been *Phoning It In *for a while now...



Yes and the various patronages and charities assigned to them have grown tired of their obvious detachment.


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry flew to Heathrow, wonder if he popped in to see Granny then went to Edinburgh by train.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry flew to Heathrow, wonder if he popped in to see Granny then went to Edinburgh by train.


You might be right.  He doesn’t look good.


----------



## imgg

Another opportunity slips though Megs fingers....

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...utive-Robert-Chapek-replace-him.html#comments


----------



## bag-mania

He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. Has he lost weight?


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. Has he lost weight?
> 
> View attachment 4675071


Eating at local sandwich shops probably isn't the same as what he's used to for a diet..prepared by people who wait on you hand and foot.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Eating at local sandwich shops probably isn't the same as what he's used to for a diet..prepared by people who wait on you hand and foot.



Hey, if anything eating at sandwich shops should be making him fatter. But losing weight? Why it's almost as though he is going through some stress at home.


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> Another opportunity slips though Megs fingers....
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...utive-Robert-Chapek-replace-him.html#comments


HA HA HA HA .. have you read the comments???  Hilarious!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. Has he lost weight?
> 
> View attachment 4675071


Yeah, he does .. well, we will for certain see it when he dresses in suits for some of his other engagements ..


----------



## mia55

LittleStar88 said:


> She also has her own money to pay for it and isn't asking for handouts.



She (Kylie Jenner) also has  genuine 150 mil followers on instagram unlike MM and Harry who have bloated ego with only 11 mil. Compared to these two, the Kardashian clan looks like an angel


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA HA .. have you read the comments???  Hilarious!


I wonder what happened?


----------



## LittleStar88

mia55 said:


> She (Kylie Jenner) also has  genuine 150 mil followers on instagram unlike MM and Harry who have bloated ego with only 11 mil. Compared to these two, the Kardashian clan looks like an angel



I enjoy my share of Kardashian trash talk, but at least they have their own money making hustle going on and not relying on the pocketbook and generosity of others to finance their expensive lifestyle. They may not be my cup of tea but gotta respect their hustle.

**Yes, I have heard about how Kanye and Kim owe a ton, but they aren't asking family to pay their way so...


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, he does .. well, we will for certain see it when he dresses in suits for some of his other engagements ..


The stress looks like its getting to him.

All the things Meghan probably told him would happen if he listened to her- Progressive new roles within the Royal family, endless Hollywood offers, all the $$$ that would come in, the branding opportunities etc.  how's that working for you now Harry?  I almost want to feel sorry for him, but can't.  He went from hero to zero in a very short time.


----------



## mdcx

The realities of being an adult without an army of servants anticipating your every need is probably a shock to him.
“Replace my own loo roll? What?”


----------



## tiktok

mshermes said:


> HARRY'S BACK
> *Prince Harry arrives back in Britain ahead of final round of engagements before Megxit*
> prince-harry-back-in-britain
> 
> Looks like he is back in the UK....alone.



Photos by Splash News. Hmmm...


----------



## kemilia

Clearblueskies said:


> You might be right.  He doesn’t look good.


He hasn't looked good for a while now. Marriage must suit him.


----------



## kemilia

I read a headline that said he flew private. He wouldn't, I hope. If he did, the hypocrisy is frightening (hope the headline is wrong).

I'm surprised that M would let him be alone with the RF. If I were her, I certainly wouldn't! They might talk some reason into him.


----------



## kemilia

tiktok said:


> Photos by Splash News. Hmmm...


Circus is back in town!


----------



## Lounorada

I'm not surprised Meghan hasn't flown back to the UK because she has already shown how much of a coward she is, but _IF_ she leaves H (for a second time) to face his family and  deal with the mess alone (the mess that they have created within his family) then Harry should get 'idiot' tattooed across his forehead because that man-child will have shown the world just how much of a blind-folded imbecile he really is.
If at the first sign of trouble your wife runs for the hills, doesn't stand by your side as support for one another and instead throws you out to the wolves, alone, then it's pretty obvious she does't really care about you all that much...


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. Has he lost weight?
> 
> View attachment 4675071


He even dresses like a man-child.


----------



## Annawakes

mdcx said:


> “Replace my own loo roll? What?”




I can imagine him trying to figure it out.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I'm not surprised Meghan hasn't flown back to the UK because she has already shown how much of a coward she is, but _IF_ she leaves H (for a second time) to face his family and  deal with the mess alone (the mess that they have created within his family) then Harry should get 'idiot' tattooed across his forehead because that man-child will have shown the world just how much of a blind-folded imbecile he really is.
> If at the first sign of trouble your wife runs for the hills, doesn't stand by your side as support for one another and instead throws you out to the wolves, alone, then it's pretty obvious she does't really care about you all that much...


I don't think she was welcome at that meeting?


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. Has he lost weight?
> 
> View attachment 4675071


He’s too skinny especially since the camera adds pounds. What is Meghan doing? Stressing him out tremendously. I believe she gives him marching orders and bullies him.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Has anyone checked on the stans 

But really, do they have any support left? What a mess they’ve made.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m now convinced Harry is certifiably dumb and stupid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Has anyone checked on the stans
> 
> But really, do they have any support left? What a mess they’ve made.


I can't believe her loyal admireres are gone....I expect any day now we will see something in her defense here on the PF


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> I don't think she was welcome at that meeting?


Maybe not, we don't know for sure.
Although she practically left footprints on the tarmac leaving as fast as she did right after that announcment of them stepping down from royal duties and just left Harry to deal with everything. She was gone long before the meeting happened, which is probably why she wasn't welcome in the meeting via skype or a phonecall. I'm sure if she'd have stayed in the UK alongside H the whole time, she would have been included in the meeting with the Queen/family/staff.


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Maybe not, we don't know for sure.
> Although she practically left footprints on the tarmac leaving as fast as she did right after that announcment of them stepping down from royal duties and just left Harry to deal with everything. She was gone long before the meeting happened, which is probably why she wasn't welcome in the meeting via skype or a phonecall. I'm sure if she'd have stayed in the UK alongside H the whole time, she would have been included in the meeting with the Queen/family/staff.



And Harry could have insisted she be included if she wanted to be. No, she ran because she wanted to. It was easier for her to leave it all to him and not deal with the unpleasantness. She is selfish to the core.


----------



## scarlet555

Lounorada said:


> I'm not surprised Meghan hasn't flown back to the UK because she has already shown how much of a coward she is, but _IF_ she leaves H (for a second time) to face his family and  deal with the mess alone (the mess that they have created within his family) then Harry should get 'idiot' tattooed across his forehead because that man-child will have shown the world just how much of a blind-folded imbecile he really is.
> If at the first sign of trouble your wife runs for the hills, doesn't stand by your side as support for one another and instead throws you out to the wolves, alone, then it's pretty obvious she does't really care about you all that much...



Best case scenario:  Only Meghan was banned from the Royal Castle, that's why she can't come back and that's why she won't let baby Archie go with Harry.  I mean, she needs some type of security.


----------



## Jaxion

Lodpah said:


> He’s too skinny especially since the camera adds pounds. What is Meghan doing? Stressing him out tremendously. I believe she gives him marching orders and bullies him.


It could be as simple as this is the first time he's regularly eating a diet that's different from what's been provided for him for all of his life. Just not having enough protein anymore would be enough to make him lose a significant amount of mass. Though with all the general shabbiness in his appearance over the last few years since he's been with her it's hard to believe that it's just the diet change that's causing this. It's definitely a worrying sign.

Also given that Meghan has talked about her diet a few times before I think it's pretty much a certainty that Meghan is the one that gets to choose what food they eat and maybe her mostly plant based diet doesn't suit his needs well since that's something that varies a lot based on genetics.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Has anyone checked on the stans
> 
> But really, do they have any support left? What a mess they’ve made.


They're probably too afraid to admit that they are still 'fans' given everything that has transpired as of late .. what positive(s) are there to report?   I have to say though, that how QUICKLY this all happened is still rather surprising to me ..


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s have some guesses as to what kind of paparazzi photos we will see in the coming days while Harry is out of town.

Will she strap on the baby harness and leash up the dogs again? Or has she spent the past few weeks concocting a brand new scenario for her to be “caught” in by the photographers?


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> Let’s have some guesses as to what kind of paparazzi photos we will see in the coming days while Harry is out of town.
> 
> Will she strap on the baby harness and leash up the dogs again? Or has she spent the past few weeks concocting a brand new scenario for her to be “caught” in by the photographers?



I imagine her fake Archie doll will have doubled in size to show how healthy and growing her real boy is in the next batch of non-staged Canadian happy-go-lucky strolling in the woods pictures. 

(JK I'm just fueling the fire now, I know some people thought it was a dupe baby, he did look suspiciously large)


----------



## queennadine

Possible upcoming pap photos of MM and Archie:

1. Jogging through the forest but Archie's seat will face her for "privacy"
2. Going to or leaving Mommy & Me yoga; yoga mat thrown over one shoulder, Archie over the other
3. Soup kitchen with Archie where she claims he pronounces exotic fruit and vegetable names
4. A vehicle shot where she's smiling at the camera; Archie's cat seat will look unsafe and then she'll claim "mom shaming"


----------



## A1aGypsy

Wait. How is Millie three????!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> I imagine her fake Archie doll will have doubled in size to show how healthy and growing her real boy is in the next batch of non-staged Canadian happy-go-lucky strolling in the woods pictures.
> 
> (JK I'm just fueling the fire now, I know some people thought it was a dupe baby, he did look suspiciously large)



There needs to be a video released showing Archie moving his arms and legs so the doll conspiracy theory can be put to rest.

I’m a bit surprised Meghan didn’t arrange for pap photos of her  driving Harry to the airport to show how they are just like any other ordinary couple. (Of course she wouldn’t actually drive him since she’s not very happy at the moment.) I suppose that chore was left for  one of the security guards.


----------



## bag-mania

I want to see her do an old-school celebrity pap photo, one where she is walking out of a trendy store wearing sunglasses while holding a big shopping bag and a Starbucks cup with a distracted expression on her face.


----------



## chloebagfreak

Maybe while Harry is gone she will stage something...a la Gone Girl...then say THIS is why we need 15 bodyguards


----------



## youngster

I wonder if she will stage another photo op at a women's shelter or maybe a food bank while he's gone?


----------



## lanasyogamama

So happy! So much privacy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chloebagfreak

Then there’s this...@sussexglobalenterprise


----------



## Tootsie17

lanasyogamama said:


> So happy! So much privacy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4675270



I believe his eyes say he is miserable. Didn't take M long to suck the joy out of him.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t know, following all those yucky royals doesn’t seem like their style.


----------



## Lodpah

I just realize something and actually it makes sense. The way she holds him, grabs him to sit, her hands wrapped around his hands in a unusual way, etc. reminds of abusers and controllers. 
If you have a chance look at videos of her holding his hand, grabbing him to sit, the wrap around the wrist to the hand holding, the constant touching as they turn away after Archie  was displayed, it’s not good, across the back, it’s not insecurity it’s abuse probably when they are alone.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> So happy! So much privacy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4675270


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-mania said:


> Let’s have some guesses as to what kind of paparazzi photos we will see in the coming days while Harry is out of town.
> 
> Will she strap on the baby harness and leash up the dogs again? Or has she spent the past few weeks concocting a brand new scenario for her to be “caught” in by the photographers?


I'm super curious to see if we get some, that would be a complete giveaway she's doing the pap stuff solo. Harry seems to have some amount of control


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> So happy! So much privacy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4675270
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUO


----------



## csshopper

It’s his new Mr. Markle face.


----------



## Emeline

csshopper said:


> It’s his new Mr. Markle face.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Guess she doesn’t have pregnancy to steal the thunder again. It’s gross how she clearly can’t stand not being the center of attention.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Honestly, the rest of the family would probably be happier if they weren’t there...

“Here’s your invite, don’t feel obligated to come...no really, stay home.... we don’t need a gift either...”


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I can't believe her loyal admireres are gone....I expect any day now we will see something in her defense here on the PF


No, they hover over the other Duke and Duchess thread and try and bring them down with petty observations. You know the ones I mean, the ones doing the job they are supposed to do.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> No, they hover over the other Duke and Duchess thread and try and bring them down with petty observations. You know the ones I mean, the ones doing the job they are supposed to do.


Not if you use the ignore button there too!! It's a much nicer place!


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Not if you use the ignore button there too!! It's a much nicer place!


How weird, I've just replied to your post over there and you've replied to mine over here! [emoji12]


----------



## Clearblueskies

imgg said:


> The stress looks like its getting to him.
> 
> All the things Meghan probably told him would happen if he listened to her- Progressive new roles within the Royal family, endless Hollywood offers, all the $$$ that would come in, the branding opportunities etc.  how's that working for you now Harry?  I almost want to feel sorry for him, but can't.  He went from hero to zero in a very short time.


Meghan will eventually start holding Harry (and through him the RF) responsible for why it’s not happening for her.  And that’ll be her out of the marriage game.  Then it will become all about the severance money.  Because that’s how narcissists operate.  Nothing is EVER their fault.  



kemilia said:


> I read a headline that said he flew private. He wouldn't, I hope. If he did, the hypocrisy is frightening (hope the headline is wrong).
> 
> I'm surprised that M would let him be alone with the RF. If I were her, I certainly wouldn't! They might talk some reason into him.


I hope they do help him.  I think he looks very sad and unhappy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan will eventually start holding Harry (and through him the RF) responsible for why it’s not happening for her.  And that’ll be her out of the marriage game.  Then it will become all about the severance money.  Because that’s how narcissists operate.  Nothing is EVER their fault.
> 
> 
> I hope they do help him.  I think he looks very sad and unhappy.


He does, the last time I saw him this sad was when he had to come back early from Afghanistan as the Australian press published that he was there. All the press knew he was there but kept it quiet for security reasons.

I do hope he sees his father and brother on this trip,  privately, apart from seeing them officially at the Commonwealth Service (with Meghan, ugh!)


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> He does, the last time I saw him this sad was when he had to come back early from Afghanistan as the Australian press published that he was there. All the press knew he was there but kept it quiet for security reasons.
> 
> I do hope he sees his father and brother on this trip,  privately, apart from seeing them officially at the Commonwealth Service (with Meghan, ugh!)


Making a business out of talking of your trauma and sadness cannot help... I remember when he first talked about his issues with his mother’s death, and how he had been able to overcome them with the support of his brother who had encouraged him to seek professional help. He seemed happy then and finding comfort on how Diana would have been proud of the work he was doing for the Royal family. Instead he has now turned his pain into paranoia and cut ties with his roots. Radical change is not easy on someone who’s psychologically fragile, more so one in such a unique and sheltered position as his, he must feel rather lost...
But maybe he is happy, what do we know....


----------



## duna

mshermes said:


> HARRY'S BACK
> *Prince Harry arrives back in Britain ahead of final round of engagements before Megxit*
> prince-harry-back-in-britain
> 
> *Looks like he is back in the UK....alone.[/QUOTE
> *
> I knew it!!!


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. *Has he lost weight*?
> 
> View attachment 4675071



That's the first thing that crossed my mind, I thought his face looks thinner than usual.....


----------



## Chagall

lanasyogamama said:


> So happy! So much privacy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4675270


He does look thinner but what I noticed when I first looked at this picture of Harry was the pain and confusion in his eyes. Eyes are the windows to the soul, they hide nothing.


----------



## Sharont2305

Wow, he does look gaunt.


----------



## PewPew

kemilia said:


> I read a headline that said he flew private. He wouldn't, I hope. If he did, the hypocrisy is frightening (hope the headline is wrong).



Look. People need to understand why they are forced to fly private. They have no choice:

1) H&M are global humanitarians with hitmen pursuing them around every corner (hence the $20+millon annual security).

2) Harry flies to the tiny village of London, where there simply aren’t  commercial flights to get Harry where he needs to be in a timely fashion.

3) On commercial flights, they have to stow their electronics, but H&M need WIFI 24/7 to promote the Great Awakening. (Recent example:  Their Royal Highnesses bravely issued a statement reminding the Queen & the world that Harry is 6th in the line of succession. WE MUST NEVER FORGET! *wipes tear*)

4) They once “paid” (courtesy of Elton John) a nebulous amount of money to “offset” their carbon emissions. That money is not just any money. Ex-Royal Sussex money remains in the ozone layer specifically to extract H&M’s emissions.

#GetEducated


----------



## PewPew

chloebagfreak said:


> Then there’s this...@sussexglobalenterprise



Oh thank goodness! 

From their last “neener-neener” public service announcement (“The Queen can’t regulate the word Royal overseas...”), I half expected them to come up with a new title on the order of notorious megalomaniac & dictator Idi Amin — “...Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire..."


----------



## Roxanna

Hmmm... it can be that MM is trying to shed baby weight,  so they are dieting all together.   Let's hope it doesn't effect baby Archie. While it would be kind of good for MM and we will  see her very soon as for  Harry it doesn't look good.


----------



## Jktgal

sdkitty said:


> I can't believe her loyal admireres are gone....I expect any day now we will see something in her defense here on the PF



A stan once said here that the more people 'hate' Mr & Mrs Markle, the more she loves them. Right now they must be busy building an altar of sorts.


----------



## Grande Latte

Harry can't get out of this marriage even if he wants to now. He'll be seen as a global buffoon.


----------



## limom

> Harry can't get out of this marriage even if he wants to now. He'll be seen as a global buffoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too late!
> That ship has sailed long, long ago...
Click to expand...


----------



## TC1

Grande Latte said:


> Harry can't get out of this marriage even if he wants to now. He'll be seen as a global buffoon.


Some of us believe he's there already.


----------



## bag-mania

For the most part the US media has lost interest in them. Entertainment magazines like _People_ and _Vanity Fair_ are still posting upbeat articles but even they are being a little less "hooray for them" than before.


----------



## Megs

A1aGypsy said:


> Wait. How is Millie three????!!!



I KNOW.  Hold, I'll share pics!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Sol Ryan said:


> Honestly, the rest of the family would probably be happier if they weren’t there...
> 
> “Here’s your invite, don’t feel obligated to come...no really, stay home.... we don’t need a gift either...”


We've all issued those, haven't we? I have anyway. 'We'd love to have you but know you have commitments and the cost of travel etc, so don't feel obligated *(please)*'.


----------



## daisychainz

Is Harry planning to stay for several weeks, through March 9? Or is he going to go back and forth in a small span of time?


----------



## duna

daisychainz said:


> Is Harry planning to stay for several weeks, through March 9? Or is he going to go back and forth in a small span of time?



He may well go back and forth, just to increase his carbon footprint: I'm sure he thinks "the bigger the better"!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Alright it seems I was mistaken when I said the US media lost interest in them. The _Washington Post_ is giving all the feels over how Harry just wants to be treated like a regular guy, as if it was all his choice not to use his royal title. 


*Prince Harry asks to ‘just be called Harry’ at event in Scotland*
He may be sixth in line to the British throne, but Prince Harry asked simply to be referred to as “Harry” as he arrived back in the United Kingdom from Canada to speak at an event on Wednesday.

His request to drop his royal title while at a conference promoting his new eco-friendly travel partnership in Edinburgh, Scotland, followed weeks of heated speculation over the future of Harry and his wife, Meghan, as members of Britain’s royal family.

Also known as the duke and duchess of Sussex, the pair announced in January that they would be stepping back from the royal family and working to become financially independent. Last week, it was confirmed they would give up their “Sussex Royal” branding along with their royal responsibilities as of spring.



“He’s made it clear that we are all just to call him Harry,” host Ayesha Hazarika told those in attendance at the Travalyst event on Wednesday. “So, ladies and gentlemen, please give a big, warm, Scottish welcome to Harry,” she urged as Harry took to the stage to discuss the future of sustainable travel.

Speaking at the event, Harry said Travalyst’s goal was to “transform the future of tourism and travel,” while also hailing Scotland for its green approach to tourism.

“Scotland is one of the fastest-growing tourism destinations worldwide, and it’s at the forefront of a more sustainable approach, which is why your insight into these issues is so incredibly valuable,” he said.

On March 31, Meghan and Harry will officially scale back their official duties. At the end of next month, their office at Buckingham Palace will also close.

The couple have expressed a desire to split their time between North America and the U.K., along with their son, Archie-Harrison. Their decision stunned and divided many in Britain, with some critics saying it’s a step too far. Others, have hailed the couple for taking steps to regain control of their lives after years of incessant hounding from the notorious British tabloids.

“It’s intended to shock” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams said of Harry’s decision in an email to The Washington Post on Wednesday. “People will lose patience with this posturing,” he predicted.

“If they ultimately don’t want to be royal they don’t have to be, and perhaps after a year they will opt out of the royal family officially. Megxit begins on 31st March. Until then it would only be reasonable behavior to abide by the arrangement that has been agreed with the queen,” he said.

Author Matt Haig tweeted another take on Wednesday. “I think it is great that a man called Harry is going to be called Harry and is happy to be called Harry,” he wrote.

During the next few weeks, Harry and Meghan are expected to make an appearance for at least six events before they officially step down from being senior royals.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ry-asks-just-be-called-harry-edinburgh-event/


----------



## Sol Ryan

duna said:


> He may well go back and forth, just to increase his carbon footprint: I'm sure he thinks "the bigger the better"!!!



That’s what the non-profit is for: donations so other people can pay for his offsets...


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Alright it seems I was mistaken when I said the US media lost interest in them. The _Washington Post_ is giving all the feels over how Harry just wants to be treated like a regular guy, as if it was all his choice not to use his royal title.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry asks to ‘just be called Harry’ at event in Scotland*
> He may be sixth in line to the British throne, but Prince Harry asked simply to be referred to as “Harry” as he arrived back in the United Kingdom from Canada to speak at an event on Wednesday.
> 
> His request to drop his royal title while at a conference promoting his new eco-friendly travel partnership in Edinburgh, Scotland, followed weeks of heated speculation over the future of Harry and his wife, Meghan, as members of Britain’s royal family.
> 
> Also known as the duke and duchess of Sussex, the pair announced in January that they would be stepping back from the royal family and working to become financially independent. Last week, it was confirmed they would give up their “Sussex Royal” branding along with their royal responsibilities as of spring.
> View attachment 4675585
> 
> 
> “He’s made it clear that we are all just to call him Harry,” host Ayesha Hazarika told those in attendance at the Travalyst event on Wednesday. “So, ladies and gentlemen, please give a big, warm, Scottish welcome to Harry,” she urged as Harry took to the stage to discuss the future of sustainable travel.
> 
> Speaking at the event, Harry said Travalyst’s goal was to “transform the future of tourism and travel,” while also hailing Scotland for its green approach to tourism.
> 
> “Scotland is one of the fastest-growing tourism destinations worldwide, and it’s at the forefront of a more sustainable approach, which is why your insight into these issues is so incredibly valuable,” he said.
> 
> On March 31, Meghan and Harry will officially scale back their official duties. At the end of next month, their office at Buckingham Palace will also close.
> 
> The couple have expressed a desire to split their time between North America and the U.K., along with their son, Archie-Harrison. Their decision stunned and divided many in Britain, with some critics saying it’s a step too far. Others, have hailed the couple for taking steps to regain control of their lives after years of incessant hounding from the notorious British tabloids.
> 
> “It’s intended to shock” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams said of Harry’s decision in an email to The Washington Post on Wednesday. “People will lose patience with this posturing,” he predicted.
> 
> “If they ultimately don’t want to be royal they don’t have to be, and perhaps after a year they will opt out of the royal family officially. Megxit begins on 31st March. Until then it would only be reasonable behavior to abide by the arrangement that has been agreed with the queen,” he said.
> 
> Author Matt Haig tweeted another take on Wednesday. “I think it is great that a man called Harry is going to be called Harry and is happy to be called Harry,” he wrote.
> 
> During the next few weeks, Harry and Meghan are expected to make an appearance for at least six events before they officially step down from being senior royals.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ry-asks-just-be-called-harry-edinburgh-event/


Harry: "My mother, er, I mean Meaghan says you all should call me just "Harry". That'll show those old meanies in the RF! But please remember to add the "Wales" when addressing envelopes so my checks from Daddy get delivered to the right address!


----------



## mrsinsyder

“Just Harry”? B-tch you *are *just Harry! Please have several seats.


----------



## youngster

So, dropping his Prince title. _Just call me Harry_.  What a sulky shot at his family and the Queen due to the Queen not allowing him the use of SussexRoyal or letting him and Meghan design their own "progressive new role within the monarchy" so that they could have their titles and make half a billion dollars off it too.  
_
So there granny, I'll just be Harry now, not a prince, just a regular guy, getting my own sandwiches, squatting in a $14 million dollar mansion with a round the clock Scotland Yard security detail, jetting around the world at will, contemplating beachfront Malibu property while telling other people how to live to save the planet. See!  Just a regular guy!_


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Alright it seems I was mistaken when I said the US media lost interest in them. The _Washington Post_ is giving all the feels over how Harry just wants to be treated like a regular guy, as if it was all his choice not to use his royal title.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry asks to ‘just be called Harry’ at event in Scotland*
> He may be sixth in line to the British throne, but Prince Harry asked simply to be referred to as “Harry” as he arrived back in the United Kingdom from Canada to speak at an event on Wednesday.
> 
> His request to drop his royal title while at a conference promoting his new eco-friendly travel partnership in Edinburgh, Scotland, followed weeks of heated speculation over the future of Harry and his wife, Meghan, as members of Britain’s royal family.
> 
> Also known as the duke and duchess of Sussex, the pair announced in January that they would be stepping back from the royal family and working to become financially independent. Last week, it was confirmed they would give up their “Sussex Royal” branding along with their royal responsibilities as of spring.
> View attachment 4675585
> 
> 
> “He’s made it clear that we are all just to call him Harry,” host Ayesha Hazarika told those in attendance at the Travalyst event on Wednesday. “So, ladies and gentlemen, please give a big, warm, Scottish welcome to Harry,” she urged as Harry took to the stage to discuss the future of sustainable travel.
> 
> Speaking at the event, Harry said Travalyst’s goal was to “transform the future of tourism and travel,” while also hailing Scotland for its green approach to tourism.
> 
> “Scotland is one of the fastest-growing tourism destinations worldwide, and it’s at the forefront of a more sustainable approach, which is why your insight into these issues is so incredibly valuable,” he said.
> 
> On March 31, Meghan and Harry will officially scale back their official duties. At the end of next month, their office at Buckingham Palace will also close.
> 
> The couple have expressed a desire to split their time between North America and the U.K., along with their son, Archie-Harrison. Their decision stunned and divided many in Britain, with some critics saying it’s a step too far. Others, have hailed the couple for taking steps to regain control of their lives after years of incessant hounding from the notorious British tabloids.
> 
> “It’s intended to shock” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams said of Harry’s decision in an email to The Washington Post on Wednesday. “People will lose patience with this posturing,” he predicted.
> 
> “If they ultimately don’t want to be royal they don’t have to be, and perhaps after a year they will opt out of the royal family officially. Megxit begins on 31st March. Until then it would only be reasonable behavior to abide by the arrangement that has been agreed with the queen,” he said.
> 
> Author Matt Haig tweeted another take on Wednesday. “I think it is great that a man called Harry is going to be called Harry and is happy to be called Harry,” he wrote.
> During the next few weeks, Harry and Meghan are expected to make an appearance for at least six events before they officially step down from being senior royals.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ry-asks-just-be-called-harry-edinburgh-event/


so kinda like Oprah and Whoopi?  sad really - all his life he has been Prince Harry....I'm thinking he picked the wrong wife


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would be very happy If they stopped with the “their Royal highnesses”. Now they can just be mad at hm.com


----------



## bag-mania

All I can think is Meghan has somehow convinced him that his family doesn't want what's best for him and she is the only person he can trust. Shame on him for being a weak-minded fool!


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> All I can think is Meghan has somehow convinced him that his family doesn't want what's best for him and she is the only person he can trust. Shame on him for being a weak-minded fool!



The two of them have a siege mentality, fostered by Meghan, because this wouldn't be happening if she weren't in the picture. It's them against the royal family and their silly rules (aka the laws of the land).  With this mentality, he'll believe that his grandmother and father and brother don't really love him and don't want the best for him. Pointing out those pesky "laws of the land" and trying to have a logical, calm discussion with him is likely impossible at this point.  MM's really done a number on him, really done an amazing job of isolating him and alienating him from his former life. He was definitely vulnerable to someone like her though, not the brightest fellow, easily influenced and harboring lots of resentment and anger over his mother who he (and Meghan) have turned into some kind of saint in his mind at least.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> All I can think is Meghan has somehow convinced him that his family doesn't want what's best for him and she is the only person he can trust. Shame on him for being a weak-minded fool!


Shame on her for being a narcissist!


----------



## PewPew

An interesting interview with longtime Royal Photographer Arthur Edwards, who believes Harry will ultimately rejoin the BRF


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> Alright it seems I was mistaken when I said the US media lost interest in them. The _Washington Post_ is giving all the feels over how Harry just wants to be treated like a regular guy, as if it was all his choice not to use his royal title.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry asks to ‘just be called Harry’ at event in Scotland*
> He may be sixth in line to the British throne, but Prince Harry asked simply to be referred to as “Harry” as he arrived back in the United Kingdom from Canada to speak at an event on Wednesday.
> 
> His request to drop his royal title while at a conference promoting his new eco-friendly travel partnership in Edinburgh, Scotland, followed weeks of heated speculation over the future of Harry and his wife, Meghan, as members of Britain’s royal family.
> 
> Also known as the duke and duchess of Sussex, the pair announced in January that they would be stepping back from the royal family and working to become financially independent. Last week, it was confirmed they would give up their “Sussex Royal” branding along with their royal responsibilities as of spring.
> View attachment 4675585
> 
> 
> “He’s made it clear that we are all just to call him Harry,” host Ayesha Hazarika told those in attendance at the Travalyst event on Wednesday. “So, ladies and gentlemen, please give a big, warm, Scottish welcome to Harry,” she urged as Harry took to the stage to discuss the future of sustainable travel.
> 
> Speaking at the event, Harry said Travalyst’s goal was to “transform the future of tourism and travel,” while also hailing Scotland for its green approach to tourism.
> 
> “Scotland is one of the fastest-growing tourism destinations worldwide, and it’s at the forefront of a more sustainable approach, which is why your insight into these issues is so incredibly valuable,” he said.
> 
> On March 31, Meghan and Harry will officially scale back their official duties. At the end of next month, their office at Buckingham Palace will also close.
> 
> The couple have expressed a desire to split their time between North America and the U.K., along with their son, Archie-Harrison. Their decision stunned and divided many in Britain, with some critics saying it’s a step too far. Others, have hailed the couple for taking steps to regain control of their lives after years of incessant hounding from the notorious British tabloids.
> 
> “It’s intended to shock” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams said of Harry’s decision in an email to The Washington Post on Wednesday. “People will lose patience with this posturing,” he predicted.
> 
> “If they ultimately don’t want to be royal they don’t have to be, and perhaps after a year they will opt out of the royal family officially. Megxit begins on 31st March. Until then it would only be reasonable behavior to abide by the arrangement that has been agreed with the queen,” he said.
> 
> Author Matt Haig tweeted another take on Wednesday. “I think it is great that a man called Harry is going to be called Harry and is happy to be called Harry,” he wrote.
> 
> During the next few weeks, Harry and Meghan are expected to make an appearance for at least six events before they officially step down from being senior royals.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ry-asks-just-be-called-harry-edinburgh-event/



Oh please, give me a break. You use a full paragraph in your own website to remind us that whatever happens you are in the line of the throne and that your son is of royal blood and then go around asking "just call me Harry"?

Plus no one goes around by the name of 'Harry', or is announced in a conference by their first name. Even Oprah has a surname. If you want to be a normal guy go get yourself one...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Well, we have Beyonce, JLo, Madonna, Oprah, Cher, Prince, Shakira... lots of celebs are one-namers. Maybe just-call-me-Harry is part of a new plan they have cooking.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I desperately want to look away from the train wreck but the meanderings of the unhinged narcissist won’t allow me to!


----------



## Madrose

doni said:


> Even Oprah has a surname. If you want to be a normal guy go get yourself one...



As someone who knows very little about royal custom and only recently started following this drama, may I ask what is the royal family surname?  Is it Windsor?  Thank you.


----------



## doni

daisychainz said:


> Well, we have Beyonce, JLo, Madonna, Oprah, Cher, Prince, Shakira... lots of celebs are one-namers. Maybe just-call-me-Harry is part of a new plan they have cooking.


Oprah has Winfrey, JLo incorporates the surname and the rest are artistic names, maybe he wants to start a singing career...


----------



## imgg

Its always the ones who say they don't want drama are surrounded by drama, will "rise above" the pettiness, are the ones being petty.


----------



## doni

Madrose said:


> As someone who knows very little about royal custom and only recently started following this drama, may I ask what is the royal family surname?  Is it Windsor?  Thank you.


The name used for male descendents in the line of the throne who don't carry a Prince title, like with Archie, is Mountbatten-Windsor. It is a made up name, the Duke of Edimborough adopted the name Mountbatten after abandoning his Prince title and before marrying the now Queen because Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg didn't sound that hot in the wake of WWII...


----------



## Emeline

doni said:


> Oprah has Winfrey, JLo incorporates the surname and the rest are artistic names, maybe he wants to start a singing career...


She probably spent many hours with a furrowed brow, glass of Tig in hand, "inventing" this first name idea. 
No wonder they are still couch surfing. Brilliant marketing takes time!


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> “Just Harry”? B-tch you *are *just Harry! Please have several seats.


Right?!? but yet Meghan is saying  ..  “just call Harry ‘Harry’ but when talking to me, you MUST SAY ‘your Royal Highness’ Meghan”


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Alright it seems I was mistaken when I said the US media lost interest in them. The _Washington Post_ is giving all the feels over how Harry just wants to be treated like a regular guy, as if it was all his choice not to use his royal title.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry asks to ‘just be called Harry’ at event in Scotland*
> He may be sixth in line to the British throne, but Prince Harry asked simply to be referred to as “Harry” as he arrived back in the United Kingdom from Canada to speak at an event on Wednesday.
> 
> His request to drop his royal title while at a conference promoting his new eco-friendly travel partnership in Edinburgh, Scotland, followed weeks of heated speculation over the future of Harry and his wife, Meghan, as members of Britain’s royal family.
> 
> Also known as the duke and duchess of Sussex, the pair announced in January that they would be stepping back from the royal family and working to become financially independent. Last week, it was confirmed they would give up their “Sussex Royal” branding along with their royal responsibilities as of spring.
> View attachment 4675585
> 
> 
> “He’s made it clear that we are all just to call him Harry,” host Ayesha Hazarika told those in attendance at the Travalyst event on Wednesday. “So, ladies and gentlemen, please give a big, warm, Scottish welcome to Harry,” she urged as Harry took to the stage to discuss the future of sustainable travel.
> 
> Speaking at the event, Harry said Travalyst’s goal was to “transform the future of tourism and travel,” while also hailing Scotland for its green approach to tourism.
> 
> “Scotland is one of the fastest-growing tourism destinations worldwide, and it’s at the forefront of a more sustainable approach, which is why your insight into these issues is so incredibly valuable,” he said.
> 
> On March 31, Meghan and Harry will officially scale back their official duties. At the end of next month, their office at Buckingham Palace will also close.
> 
> The couple have expressed a desire to split their time between North America and the U.K., along with their son, Archie-Harrison. Their decision stunned and divided many in Britain, with some critics saying it’s a step too far. Others, have hailed the couple for taking steps to regain control of their lives after years of incessant hounding from the notorious British tabloids.
> 
> “It’s intended to shock” royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams said of Harry’s decision in an email to The Washington Post on Wednesday. “People will lose patience with this posturing,” he predicted.
> 
> “If they ultimately don’t want to be royal they don’t have to be, and perhaps after a year they will opt out of the royal family officially. Megxit begins on 31st March. Until then it would only be reasonable behavior to abide by the arrangement that has been agreed with the queen,” he said.
> 
> Author Matt Haig tweeted another take on Wednesday. “I think it is great that a man called Harry is going to be called Harry and is happy to be called Harry,” he wrote.
> 
> During the next few weeks, Harry and Meghan are expected to make an appearance for at least six events before they officially step down from being senior royals.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ry-asks-just-be-called-harry-edinburgh-event/



For a minute I read 'Untitled Kingdom'


----------



## Mrs.Z

Wait what....is this the Tig Tungsten connection?  Is this some Illuminati s#%* or have I had too much Champagne at lunch


----------



## lanasyogamama

daisychainz said:


> Well, we have Beyonce, JLo, Madonna, Oprah, Cher, Prince, Shakira... lots of celebs are one-namers. Maybe just-call-me-Harry is part of a new plan they have cooking.



I think that’s totally it. 



Mrs.Z said:


> I desperately want to look away from the train wreck but the meanderings of the unhinged narcissist won’t allow me to!



The victim once again.


----------



## mshermes

Mrs.Z said:


> Wait what....is this the Tig Tungsten connection?  Is this some Illuminati s#%* or have I had too much Champagne at lunch


Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?

She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!


----------



## CobaltBlu

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!



Wait, what?  I, I am just....I don't even know what to say about this overshare of hers. Not usually speechless but..... My mind just went blank.


----------



## CobaltBlu

y'all   https://graziadaily.co.uk/celebrity/news/meghan-markle-the-tig-archive/


----------



## CobaltBlu

*11. Her favourite drink? Red wine hot chocolate*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!


Ohhhh my goodness.....thank you for this explanation!!!!! You say drunk, I say pretentious....let’s call the whole thing off!!!! #cheers


----------



## TC1

Flying around the world to promote "sustainable travel" FFS could they be more obtuse?


----------



## maryg1

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!


You always learn something...I’m Italian and never heard of this wine. I must send some to Canada with a “thank you” note for having enlightened me!


----------



## Mrs.Z

maryg1 said:


> You always learn something...I’m Italian and never heard of this wine. I must send some to Canada with a “thank you” note for having enlightened me!


I think Tignanello is a brand of Sangiovese .... are the Italians paying her for this #ad


----------



## Bag*Snob

So how do you pronounce her website - tee?  Since the g in silent in Tignanello?


----------



## chloebagfreak

Mrs.Z said:


> Wait what....is this the Tig Tungsten connection?  Is this some Illuminati s#%* or have I had too much Champagne at lunch


Actually yes, there is a tig pulse arc welder. I’m considering getting one for my jewelry designs that cannot stand the heat of a torch. It creates a electrical plasma that connects the metal together, but does not have the capillary flow that soldered metal gets
Way TMI, but there must be another less complicated reason she uses it


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I want to see her do an old-school celebrity pap photo, one where she is walking out of a trendy store wearing sunglasses while holding a big shopping bag and a Starbucks cup with a distracted expression on her face.


And holding a phone to her ear pretending to be so busy and talking to someone.  lol


----------



## Mrs.Z

Bag*Snob said:


> So how do you pronounce her website - tee?  Since the g in silent in Tignanello?


Oh Geez, this I did not realize......so it’s a witty super evolved obscure way of calling her blog The Tea......if something witty  happens in a forest and no one gets it did it really happen?


----------



## duna

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!





maryg1 said:


> You always learn something...I’m Italian and never heard of this wine. I must send some to Canada with a “thank you” note for having enlightened me!



Mary, non ci posso credere (I can't believe it) you don't know Tignanello????? Well, lets say it's good but there are many better reds in Italy!!


----------



## mshermes

Her little Tig...no silent G....You Tube. Gosh...she is just so adorable....
This woman is a treasure trove of personality disorders.


----------



## Luvluxx098

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!


Oh my that is so pretentious. I would actually be embarrassed to have said that. But then again I am a normal human being. 
So much posturing and phony self importance. Can’t stand that in a person.


----------



## gracekelly

Roxanna said:


> Hmmm... it can be that MM is trying to shed baby weight,  so they are dieting all together.   Let's hope it doesn't effect baby Archie. While it would be kind of good for MM and we will  see her very soon as for  Harry it doesn't look good.


I think it is simply a case of depression and feeling miserable. Very common to lose appetite when feeling this way. Things have  to gone the way they expected in their delusional world.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> The two of them have a siege mentality, fostered by Meghan, because this wouldn't be happening if she weren't in the picture. It's them against the royal family and their silly rules (aka the laws of the land).  With this mentality, he'll believe that his grandmother and father and brother don't really love him and don't want the best for him. Pointing out those pesky "laws of the land" and trying to have a logical, calm discussion with him is likely impossible at this point.  MM's really done a number on him, really done an amazing job of isolating him and alienating him from his former life. He was definitely vulnerable to someone like her though, not the brightest fellow, easily influenced and harboring lots of resentment and anger over his mother who he (and Meghan) have turned into some kind of saint in his mind at least.


He has become a member of the Cult of Meghan. The royals need to feed him a roast beef sandwich and get a deprorgammer for him.


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!


So pretentious. So full of BS.


----------



## mshermes

gracekelly said:


> He has become a member of the Cult of Meghan. The royals need to feed him a roast beef sandwich and get a deprorgammer for him.


No joke!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> And holding a phone to her ear pretending to be so busy and talking to someone.  lol


Haha!  I thought of that too,  like Reese’s Witherspoon.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!


She’s never not posing is she?


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!



Ugh. Leave it to her to pretend to come up with something original that was already an old trend when she started it. How many variations of "women like wine" or "moms drinking wine" have we seen over the past decade on everything from Facebook memes to literally any kind of accessory it can be printed on? But no, Meghan has a wine moment and we all must relate because we're women and we love wine!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> Her little Tig...no silent G....You Tube. Gosh...she is just so adorable....
> This woman is a treasure trove of personality disorders.



“an inspired lifestyle” 
OMG what a load of b*llocks


----------



## daisychainz

I thought Tignanello was a line of purses at department stores and QVC. I think someone at my work carries that brand.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh goodness, this has me deep in my feelings....remember when your parents said they weren’t mad at you, they were just “disappointed”


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> I thought Tignanello was a line of purses at department stores and QVC. I think someone at my work carries that brand.



It's that too. Maybe Meghan carried one in her more modest days before she aspired to become a brand herself.


----------



## CeeJay

chloebagfreak said:


> Actually yes, there is a tig pulse arc welder. I’m considering getting one for my jewelry designs that cannot stand the heat of a torch. It creates a electrical plasma that connects the metal together, but does not have the capillary flow that soldered metal gets
> Way TMI, but there must be another less complicated reason she uses it


WAIT .. WHAT?? .. you're a Jeweler as well and in LA???  Same here .. although my "line" is still in the creation phase!!!  How cool is that???


----------



## chloebagfreak

CeeJay said:


> WAIT .. WHAT?? .. you're a Jeweler as well and in LA???  Same here .. although my "line" is still in the creation phase!!!  How cool is that???


Hey CeeJay Yes, I’ve been making jewelry for nearly 30 years, but have only recently learned metal smithing!  Yes, mine is always in the creation phase!
That’s so exciting that you are too!

 Balenciaga obsessed too
Of course you are the Queen of Bal!!


----------



## maryg1

duna said:


> Mary, non ci posso credere (I can't believe it) you don't know Tignanello????? Well, lets say it's good but there are many better reds in Italy!!


Nope! and my father is a sommelier, but I don’t give him great satisfactions in the wine field!


----------



## maryg1

So, if she called her blog The Tig after the Tignanello, she is probably spelling it “Teeg-nanello”, and she is spelling it wrong


----------



## Frivole88

*EXCLUSIVE: 'If anyone should be insulted, it's us!' Meghan says she and Harry are being 'picked on' and the restrictions put on them are 'payback' for wanting to be independent but they will 'rise above pettiness'*

*Meghan Markle told her close friends that she believes that she and Prince Harry are being treated unfairly, DailyMail.com can exclusively reveal *
*'She feels like they are being picked on and that the restrictions put on them are payback for wanting to be independent,' an insider said *
*Meghan grumbled to her inner circle last week over the Queen banning the couple from using the word 'royal' in their 'branding'*
*The two later issued an extraordinary statement seemingly complaining the palace was treating them differently to other royal family members *
*'Meghan said if anyone should feel insulted, it should be them. To insinuate they were somehow abusing their privileges is absurd,' the friend added*
*She also believes the Queen was 'under pressure to make those demands' because Harry is the Queen's 'favorite and others just can't deal with it' *
*Harry is now back in the UK for his last round of engagements as a working royal, and the insider said Meghan has no qualms about being in the UK*

PUBLISHED: 11:49 EST, 26 February 2020 | UPDATED: 14:30 EST, 26 February 2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8047051/Meghan-says-Harry-picked-restrictions-payback.html


----------



## Lounorada

CobaltBlu said:


> *11. Her favourite drink? Red wine hot chocolate*


I love me some red wine, but red wine hot chocolate?  Sounds repulsive. I can't imagine putting good red wine into hot chocolate. Nope. Stop the madness.



TC1 said:


> Flying around the world to promote "sustainable travel" FFS could they be more obtuse?


This.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> Her little Tig...no silent G....You Tube. Gosh...she is just so adorable....
> This woman is a treasure trove of personality disorders.



and people were interested in this pre "H"?


----------



## Lodpah

Not my comment but from someone on Quora:


kristinlorraine said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: 'If anyone should be insulted, it's us!' Meghan says she and Harry are being 'picked on' and the restrictions put on them are 'payback' for wanting to be independent but they will 'rise above pettiness'*
> 
> *Meghan Markle told her close friends that she believes that she and Prince Harry are being treated unfairly, DailyMail.com can exclusively reveal *
> *'She feels like they are being picked on and that the restrictions put on them are payback for wanting to be independent,' an insider said *
> *Meghan grumbled to her inner circle last week over the Queen banning the couple from using the word 'royal' in their 'branding'*
> *The two later issued an extraordinary statement seemingly complaining the palace was treating them differently to other royal family members *
> *'Meghan said if anyone should feel insulted, it should be them. To insinuate they were somehow abusing their privileges is absurd,' the friend added*
> *She also believes the Queen was 'under pressure to make those demands' because Harry is the Queen's 'favorite and others just can't deal with it' *
> *Harry is now back in the UK for his last round of engagements as a working royal, and the insider said Meghan has no qualms about being in the UK*
> 
> PUBLISHED: 11:49 EST, 26 February 2020 | UPDATED: 14:30 EST, 26 February 2020
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8047051/Meghan-says-Harry-picked-restrictions-payback.html


She called the Queen petty? That right there is her downfall to end all downfalls. Insulting the Queen? 

I do believe she leaks through her friends. 

I’m a praying woman so let me go to my closet and pray for Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## michellem

mrsinsyder said:


> “Just Harry”? B-tch you *are *just Harry! Please have several seats.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please someone make it stop. If I have to read one more word of selfindulgent nonsense I'll implode.


----------



## bag-mania

OMG the conceit she has! Of course she believes anyone who doesn't think she's wonderful must be jealous. From _Vanity Fair_:

"According to the friend, the situation hasn’t lessened Meghan’s respect for her husband. “She said she will continue to champion Harry because out of everyone, he has the most integrity and the most loyalty,” the source said. “*She said she and Harry will continue to rise above jealousy and pettiness and focus on the good they are creating* and on being the best parents to Archie.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/02/meghan-markle-rise-above-jealousy-and-pettiness


----------



## mdcx

Regards the Tig/TIG/Tungsten nickname given her by Prince Charles - pretty sure tungsten is him taking the pi$$ out of her having a pretentious lifestyle blog.
“Oh her little blog is called Tig, which also stands for tungsten, lets call the little madam that then, tee hee.”
Megs probably thinks it’s a complement.


----------



## mdcx

Who is jealous of Meghan’s wreck of a life exactly? There are plenty of beautiful, wealthy, happily married women out there discretely enjoying their lives for us to be jealous of. Meghan is not one of them.

I still think Harry is off meds or under-medicated. He does not seem well.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> I love me some red wine, but red wine hot chocolate?  Sounds repulsive. I can't imagine putting good red wine into hot chocolate. Nope. Stop the madness.
> 
> 
> This.
> View attachment 4675817


I've had something once that was chocolate red wine and it wasn't that bad. Different but good, but nothing that I look for in stores or anything.


----------



## PewPew

> Tig" is short for the name of Markle's favorite full-bodied Italian red wine, Tignanello. And when she sipped it for the first time, she had an "Aha" moment, now referred to as "Tig" moments for her. "Suddenly I understood what people meant by the body, legs, structure of wine," she wrote. "From that point on, any new awareness, any new discovery or 'ohhhhh, I get it!' moment was a '_Tig' _moment." Sweet, right?
> 
> She thinks she is absolutely brilliant!



This is fascinating. Megan has a history of pretentiously receiving miraculous insights after mundane events...which then make her an authority on a subject.

M&H have both used the rhetoric of “the great epiphany” in their speeches and posts— on animal rights/shelters, the environment, women’s issues, mental health, and in M’s reflections on her childhood (where she had an epiphany that she was changing the world — via a middle school assignment).

Spreading the gospel of an epiphany is *intended* to inspire the masses— But really it’s a lazy way to be an activist without being active. Much like their pompous Instagram “wise quotes” (that were ironically rife with attribution and quotation errors.) Grandiose thinking makes people believe they have achieved far more than they have.

When you indulge such thinking in children, they become entitled adults. This may be why H&M are so shocked by the Megxit response, and complain about “unfair treatment.”  They’re the kids who cry that a game is unfair b/c they lost...because they’re so used to people letting them win.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> OMG the conceit she has! Of course she believes anyone who doesn't think she's wonderful must be jealous. From _Vanity Fair_:
> 
> "According to the friend, the situation hasn’t lessened Meghan’s respect for her husband. “She said she will continue to champion Harry because out of everyone, he has the most integrity and the most loyalty,” the source said. “*She said she and Harry will continue to rise above jealousy and pettiness and focus on the good they are creating* and on being the best parents to Archie.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/02/meghan-markle-rise-above-jealousy-and-pettiness


Meghan digs a bigger hole for herself.  She’ll never be able to rise above jealousy and pettiness when it’s consuming her and dripping from every vindictive statement she issues.
She wanted to leave, but she just won’t go.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> “*She said she will continue to champion Harry because out of everyone, he has the most integrity and the most loyalty,”* the source said. “*She said she and Harry will continue to rise above jealousy and pettiness and focus on the good they are creating* and on being the best parents to Archie.”


----------



## mia55

Are they actually getting work as after that random JPM event,  there's nothing. No wonder they're publishing idiotic stuff on their website or leaking stupidity to stay in news.


----------



## mdcx

They may want to work a little harder on parenting and a little less on PR.


----------



## altigirl88

doni said:


> Oprah has Winfrey, JLo incorporates the surname and the rest are artistic names, maybe he wants to start a singing career...


He could go by his last name and call himself “The Windz “. He does have that song coming out with Bon Jovi, after all


----------



## mia55

altigirl88 said:


> He could go by his last name and call himself “The Windz “. He does have that song coming out with Bon Jovi, after all


This is the best advice he can ever get


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> I've had something once that was chocolate red wine and it wasn't that bad. Different but good, but nothing that I look for in stores or anything.


I mean, I like to eat chocolate when drinking red wine, but the thought of drinking it in hot chocolate... hmm, nope! I can't do it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> OMG the conceit she has! Of course she believes anyone who doesn't think she's wonderful must be jealous. From _Vanity Fair_:
> 
> "According to the friend, the situation hasn’t lessened Meghan’s respect for her husband. “She said she will continue to champion Harry because out of everyone, he has the most integrity and the most loyalty,” the source said. “*She said she and Harry will continue to rise above jealousy and pettiness and focus on the good they are creating* and on being the best parents to Archie.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/02/meghan-markle-rise-above-jealousy-and-pettiness


 And why would it. The man deserves an award to put up with her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lounorada said:


> I mean, I like to eat chocolate when drinking red wine, but the thought of drinking it in hot chocolate... hmm, nope! I can't do it!



I didn’t realize there wasn’t an “or” between the two beverages until about my fourth time reading it.


----------



## V0N1B2

Local radio station taking the p!ss out of Harry and Meghan 
*I just heard about this today


----------



## V0N1B2

If you have to open a new ID to get stuff off your chest... um, okay. 
We see you


----------



## V0N1B2

Mongoose2020 said:


> TLDR: who cares this much about the British monarchy? Completely odd behavior.


British people?





by the way, I am insulted by the too much time on our hands comment. I for one, am very very busy doing things. Important things. Like roasting a chicken, shining a light on stuff, like things that need more light? bringing awareness to things that are important - like women. And women things. Creating recipes for my blog like the proper dressing for word salad...  I’M VERY BUSY DOING THINGS!  Working behind the scenes. 
::stomps feet and pouts off::


----------



## Annawakes

This is my favorite thread.  

By the way.  I don’t hate M or H.  I find them incredibly entertaining.  The news about what they’re up to, and the commentary here, are the comic relief to my day.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Mmmhmmm. Anyway....

Coincidence?  Merely excellent timing?  Or a perfect place for a quiet life...

https://people.com/royals/edward-vi...me-is-on-sale-for-8-5-million-see-the-photos/


----------



## lanasyogamama

cafecreme15 said:


> I would have hoped that with all of her *prestigious* education Meghan would have had better grammar than that!



not from what we saw in the Vogue issue.


----------



## poopsie

God I love this thread


----------



## V0N1B2

cafecreme15 said:


> I would have hoped that with all of her *prestigious* education Meghan would have had better grammar than that!


Doll, you know if she had written it in French....


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan’s legacy song



Burning Bridges

Friends all tried to warn me
But I held my head up high
All the time they warned me
But I only passed them by

They all tried to tell me
But I guess I didn't care
I turned my back and
Left them standing there

All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore

Joey tried to help me find a job
A while ago
When I finally got it I didn't want to go
The party Mary gave for me
When I just walked away
Now there's nothing left for me to say

All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore

Years have passed and I keep thinking
What a fool I've been
I look back into the past and
Think of way back then
I know that I lost everything I thought I that could win
I guess I should have listened to my friends

All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore

Burning bridges lost forevermore


----------



## zinacef

Bed time!


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> Mmmhmmm. Anyway....
> 
> Coincidence?  Merely excellent timing?  Or a perfect place for a quiet life...
> 
> https://people.com/royals/edward-vi...me-is-on-sale-for-8-5-million-see-the-photos/



That is excellent timing. Can’t blame the owner for taking advantage of the opportunity to get free advertising from the media.


----------



## A1aGypsy

bag-mania said:


> That is excellent timing. Can’t blame the owner for taking advantage of the opportunity to get free advertising from the media.



Right?  I have to admire the ingenuity. Genius.


----------



## tiktok

Mongoose2020 said:


> Greedy? Self entitled? I haven’t seen that anywhere. The only places reporting all this negative stuff are tabloids. I don’t believe tabloid media.



Hmm... I’m sorry but the only source needed for determining these two are self entitled greedy brats are their own statements on their website and in their friend’s “documentary”. No tabloid required.
I was a big fan until they started saying and posting this stuff and insulting our intelligence by expecting us to buy their fake humanitarian claims when they can’t even say one sentence without feeling sorry for their over-privileged life or show compassion for a 93 year old woman who’s done so much for them.
Maybe you’ll add that to your research...


----------



## chaneljewel

Lodpah said:


> I think now you are here to just harass people. You probably did not read all the posts. If you go to the beginning you will see lots of supporters of her in the beginning but Meghan’s greedy and disrespectful and self entitled attitude has changed a lot of minds. We don’t reward naughty children for their foot stomping when they don’t get their way. Nothing you say or post and you are getting nasty will change my mind.
> 
> What is it are you trying to achieve here? Instead of attacking other members state your love of Meghan in a way that you want but don’t attack others for what they say.


This is well said.   I was totally a Meghan supporter until all of her disrespect started towards the BRF.   If she and Harry want their privacy, then so be it but don’t expect fame and fortune using royal titles.  I’m tired of H and M’s theatrics, and the poor pitiful me attitude.  The Queen has far more important issues than to continually deal with this childish behavior. If H and M don’t want the public opinion, then STOP posting their angry words.  They’re the ones that are keeping the public informed of their unhappiness with the BRF. Stay private like they keep saying they want.  That means to stop publicly whining and discussing your unfair life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well that was a hoot.  Back to the topic, which is Harry and Meghan.  A reminder that this is a gossip thread, as was pointed out.  So onward and upward.  Good times.


----------



## Lodpah

Ok I heard the latest. You know how nothing gets past the Queen?  I think in the next few days it will be announced that Meghan was planning a Princess Meghan American tv show and that is one of the reasons I think Meghan is upset about being stripped of the title. Don’t know if it’s true or not but more likely, maybe true than but true. 

Meghan dear, the Queen is head of government including M16 (international) and MI5 (domestic) plus those Scotland Yard security? They have a duty to report if there is something askew.

I’ll apologize if the news does not come out soon or it is erroneous.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan, we need another pap stroll and another attempt at you wrangling the (hopefully for his own sake!) fake Archie into that harness...


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

Word is they have chosen Beverly Hills as their new home, not Malibu.  A $7 million home in the Hills of Beverly, which is not an area one goes to in order to lead a private life.  Here come the new Beverly Hillbillies y'all.

As a side note, in passing, I saw Lamar Odom and his girlfriend twice in one day today in BH - once on a jog, and a second time shopping on Rodeo.  That book money is rollin in with homeboy shopping at LV and Harry Winston!


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> And just like that she is gone. Well it was fun while it lasted!


Damn, I missed it!!! [emoji12]


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> OMG the conceit she has! Of course she believes anyone who doesn't think she's wonderful must be jealous. From _Vanity Fair_:
> 
> "According to the friend, the situation hasn’t lessened Meghan’s respect for her husband. “She said she will continue to champion Harry because out of everyone, he has the most integrity and the most loyalty,” the source said. “*She said she and Harry will continue to rise above jealousy and pettiness and focus on the good they are creating* and on being the best parents to Archie.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/02/meghan-markle-rise-above-jealousy-and-pettiness



I don’t know whether these reports are true or come from Meghan through friends (so far I have only critizised these two on the basis of their own declarations which are more than enough fodder; I strongly believe most of their supporters do not read their website...). But supposing the source is good, the unsettling thing, to me, about this statement is that it puts it out there that it would be within the realm of reason to expect that Meghan would have less respect for Harry after what has happened. But no, her respect has not lessened, she will continue to support him (for now) because you see, he is loyal.
Has anyone suggested that her respect for her husband should lessen? What would be the reason? That he lost the battle against the Queen?
Maybe crazy, but is this actually a thinly veiled criticism of Harry, or even a warning now that he is ‘back home’?


----------



## Clearblueskies

threadbender said:


> Oh, they came from elsewhere. I can tell from some of the words used. lol
> 
> Back on topic: will Megs actually show up in the UK?


I think it’s in the balance whether she’ll turn up here or not.  Meghan likes to fire her salvos from a safe distance, and narcissists hate to go back.  But on the other hand she needs a few photo ops for Instagram - posting things from the past is starting to look silly.  So she might do a few “secret” visits.
She literally ran away in January don’t forget - leaving Harry to face the furore and the press alone, which IMO showed she’s pretty gutless beneath all the grandstanding.


----------



## pukasonqo

Lodpah said:


> Meghan’s legacy song
> 
> 
> 
> Burning Bridges
> 
> Friends all tried to warn me
> But I held my head up high
> All the time they warned me
> But I only passed them by
> 
> They all tried to tell me
> But I guess I didn't care
> I turned my back and
> Left them standing there
> 
> All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
> All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
> Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
> Burning bridges lost forevermore
> 
> Joey tried to help me find a job
> A while ago
> When I finally got it I didn't want to go
> The party Mary gave for me
> When I just walked away
> Now there's nothing left for me to say
> 
> All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
> All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
> Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
> Burning bridges lost forevermore
> 
> Years have passed and I keep thinking
> What a fool I've been
> I look back into the past and
> Think of way back then
> I know that I lost everything I thought I that could win
> I guess I should have listened to my friends
> 
> All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
> All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
> Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
> Burning bridges lost forevermore
> 
> Burning bridges lost forevermore




I like this one from the Gyspsy Kings (I know they are flamenco light but)
It’s called “Tu quieres volver” and loosely translates as “You want to come back”

https://lyricstranslate.com/en/tu-quieres-volver-you-want-come-back.html


----------



## duna

mshermes said:


> Her little Tig...no silent G....You Tube. Gosh...she is just so adorable....
> This woman is a treasure trove of personality disorders.




O.M.G..... I have no words


----------



## kemilia

A1aGypsy said:


> Mmmhmmm. Anyway....
> 
> Coincidence?  Merely excellent timing?  Or a perfect place for a quiet life...
> 
> https://people.com/royals/edward-vi...me-is-on-sale-for-8-5-million-see-the-photos/


Doesn't look Tiggy enough. (but I like it!)


----------



## daisychainz

pukasonqo said:


> I like this one from the Gyspsy Kings (I know they are flamenco light but)
> It’s called “Tu quieres volver” and loosely translates as “You want to come back”
> 
> https://lyricstranslate.com/en/tu-quieres-volver-you-want-come-back.html



Oooh, a fellow fan!? We went to their concert about 4 years ago, it was probably one of the wildest concerts I've ever been too. I was shocked lol


----------



## mrsinsyder

Someone PM me and tell me what I missed


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Damn, I missed it!!! [emoji12]



It was glorious. Meghan inspires some very strong reactions.


----------



## queennadine

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it’s in the balance whether she’ll turn up here or not.  Meghan likes to fire her salvos from a safe distance, and narcissists hate to go back.  But on the other hand she needs a few photo ops for Instagram - posting things from the past is starting to look silly.  So she might do a few “secret” visits.
> She literally ran away in January don’t forget - leaving Harry to face the furore and the press alone, which IMO showed *she’s pretty gutless beneath all the grandstanding.*



Truth. She’s not the strong woman she claims to be.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone PM me and tell me what I missed


Same, lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Goodfrtune

Sharont2305 said:


> Same, lol


Me three!


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> British people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> by the way, I am insulted by the too much time on our hands comment. I for one, am very very busy doing things. Important things. Like roasting a chicken, shining a light on stuff, like things that need more light? bringing awareness to things that are important - like women. And women things. Creating recipes for my blog like the proper dressing for word salad...  I’M VERY BUSY DOING THINGS!  Working behind the scenes.
> ::stomps feet and pouts off::






Sharont2305 said:


> Damn, I missed it!!! [emoji12]


Ditto 


mrsinsyder said:


> Someone PM me and tell me what I missed


Yes!


Goodfrtune said:


> Me three!


Me four, please  I suffer terribly from FOMO


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone PM me and tell me what I missed


And me!


----------



## CeeJay

This thread is the first thing I read every day just to keep up and it never disappoints!


----------



## CeeJay

Also wanted to add that, early on when Meghan first came into the picture, I was very supportive and REALLY side-eyed her half-sister Samantha’s comments. But after having discussions with my friends that knew Meghan and her Dad through her teenage years, how he spoiled her, how she markle’d people even then and had the reputation of “me, me, me” .. well, let’s just say that when I read Samantha’s comments now?!? .. not so much eye-roll now!


----------



## mshermes

Lounorada said:


> Ditto
> 
> Yes!
> 
> Me four, please  I suffer terribly from FOMO


For all who missed it....we had what I believe was a recycled with new name....mongoose2020....who was preaching to "us" how we are horrid individuals....blah....blah....blah. Same sh*t, different name. New as of yesterday with three posts.  As a fellow TPFer stated....someone who was possibly publicly spanked. Gone....poof!


----------



## CobaltBlu

Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.

This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!

A reminder of happier times...or not? :


----------



## Compass Rose

daisychainz said:


> Oooh, a fellow fan!? We went to their concert about 4 years ago, it was probably one of the wildest concerts I've ever been too. I was shocked lol


10,000 LIKES!


----------



## mrsinsyder

CobaltBlu said:


> said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful f


tell me things I don't know


----------



## Sharont2305

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.
> 
> This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!
> 
> A reminder of happier times...or not? :


This is the face I'm imagining the Queen has all to often these days when it comes to Meghan


----------



## V0N1B2

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.
> 
> This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!
> 
> A reminder of happier times...or not? :


You are a true humanitarian, CB. Forever thinking of others; the disadvantaged, disenfranchised, dissatisfied, oh and Meghan. Bless you my child.


----------



## bag-mania

I feel a little sorry for Helen Mirren. _Variety_ gave her an interview about her career, women in film, and her lifetime achievement award. Yet the magazine made the headline and the first part of the story all about about Meghan! (Helen likes her.) The article does eventually get around to discussing Helen. 

*Helen Mirren Says Meghan Markle Was a ‘Fantastic Addition to the Royal Family’*
Helen Mirren, who won an Oscar for her performance as Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II in “The Queen,” says Meghan Markle was “a fantastic addition to the royal family,” and she “applauds” Markle and Prince Harry’s decision to step back from royal duties, she tells _Variety_.

Mirren, who is the subject of an homage at the Berlin Film Festival this week and will receive the festival’s Honorary Golden Bear for Lifetime Achievement on Thursday, says of the couple’s decision to withdraw from the royal family: “I think their instincts are absolutely right, and I applaud them for it. Hugely actually. Of course, it is complicated.”

She adds: “Meghan Markle was a fantastic addition to the royal family – charming, did everything right, was gracious, was sweet natured, and seemed to be … Wow! What a lovely addition. Didn’t seem to be neurotic…

https://variety.com/2020/film/festi...eth-ii-meghan-markle-prince-harry-1203517351/


----------



## 1LV

Sorry I missed it.  Not so much the boo-hoo post, but the replies!


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> .....supposing the source is good, the unsettling thing, to me, about this statement is that it puts it out there that it would be within the realm of reason to expect that Meghan would have less respect for Harry after what has happened. But no, her respect has not lessened, she will continue to support him (for now) because you see, he is loyal.
> ....Maybe crazy, but is this actually a thinly veiled criticism of Harry, or even a warning now that he is ‘back home’?


Yes, I think it is.  This statement implies two things 1.That Meghan’s continued support for her husband is conditional  And 2. That Harry *needs *her to champion him. 
Why put this out there precisely when he’s making a (to him) important and high profile speech?  The timing is questionable, the sentiment is just not normal IMO.  Is it that she can’t even bear to share the limelight with her own husband?


----------



## CeeJay

Ooooooh - the comments on the “SussexRoyal” IG page where, of course, they refer to Harry as the “Duke of Sussex” .. well, let us say that their folks are going to be busy deleting a LOT of comments!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

V0N1B2 said:


> You are a true humanitarian, CB. Forever thinking of others; the disadvantaged, disenfranchised, dissatisfied, oh and Meghan. Bless you my child.



Thanks doll, your support literally means the world to me. *wipes tear of gratitude *hair toss


----------



## CobaltBlu

Sharont2305 said:


> This is the face I'm imagining the Queen has all to often these days when it comes to Meghan



Right?!  This photo is like a wonderful Onion of feelings, you keep discovering more under the layers. Like...who is everyone looking at, actually?  I noted that QEII looks great in yellow. And poor Meghan was just existing.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I feel a little sorry for Helen Mirren. _Variety_ gave her an interview about her career, women in film, and her lifetime achievement award. Yet the magazine made the headline and the first part of the story all about about Meghan! (Helen likes her.) The article does eventually get around to discussing Helen.
> 
> *Helen Mirren Says Meghan Markle Was a ‘Fantastic Addition to the Royal Family’*
> Helen Mirren, who won an Oscar for her performance as Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II in “The Queen,” says Meghan Markle was “a fantastic addition to the royal family,” and she “applauds” Markle and Prince Harry’s decision to step back from royal duties, she tells _Variety_.
> 
> Mirren, who is the subject of an homage at the Berlin Film Festival this week and will receive the festival’s Honorary Golden Bear for Lifetime Achievement on Thursday, says of the couple’s decision to withdraw from the royal family: “I think their instincts are absolutely right, and I applaud them for it. Hugely actually. Of course, it is complicated.”
> 
> She adds: “Meghan Markle was a fantastic addition to the royal family – charming, did everything right, was gracious, was sweet natured, and seemed to be … Wow! What a lovely addition. Didn’t seem to be neurotic…
> 
> https://variety.com/2020/film/festi...eth-ii-meghan-markle-prince-harry-1203517351/


Interesting that all the celebs (as far as I know) are still very supportive of H&M.....that must give her great comfort, esp since they had no idea who she was two years ago


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> Interesting that all the celebs (as far as I know) are still very supportive of H&M.....that must give her great comfort, esp since they had no idea who she was two years ago


Can you imagine how empty that must feel? To have people who wouldn't even spit in your direction before you started snogging a member of the royal family, now act like they're your biggest fans? 

I hate fake adulation.


----------



## jennlt

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.
> 
> This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!
> 
> A reminder of happier times...or not? :



This looks like a picture of Dante's first circle of H*ll (Limbo) - where everyone avoids eye contact! 
Here are the rest  - some may sound familiar:
Second - Lust
Third - Gluttony
Fourth - Greed
Fifth -  Anger
Sixth -  Heresy
Seventh - Violence
Eighth - Fraud
Ninth - Treachery


----------



## Clearblueskies

jennlt said:


> This looks like a picture of Dante's first circle of H*ll (Limbo) - where everyone avoids eye contact!


*Interesting body language* someone once said


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Interesting that all the celebs (as far as I know) are still very supportive of H&M.....that must give her great comfort, esp since they had no idea who she was two years ago



I think many celebrities think like Meghan does so they wouldn't see anything wrong with her behavior. The number of narcissists in LA alone must be phenomenal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CobaltBlu said:


> Right?!  This photo is like a wonderful Onion of feelings, you keep discovering more under the layers. Like...who is everyone looking at, actually?  I noted that QEII looks great in yellow. And poor Meghan was just existing.


Reminds me of the lift scene in Revenge of the Pink Panther.......


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Can you imagine how empty that must feel? To have people who wouldn't even spit in your direction before you started snogging a member of the royal family, now act like they're your biggest fans?
> 
> I hate fake adulation.


IDK but I think it probably feels pretty good to her.  Imagine a d-list actress being elevated to a first name household word?


----------



## Sharont2305

Just seen this


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Just seen this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4676395


great news...they're getting the independence they wanted


----------



## scarlet555

[


sdkitty said:


> great news...they're getting the independence they wanted



Independence, freedom, freedom is not free...    
I sure hope US or ***** does not have to provide any security if they visit or live here.


----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


> Can you imagine how empty that must feel? To have people who wouldn't even spit in your direction before you started snogging a member of the royal family, now act like they're your biggest fans?
> 
> I hate fake adulation.


That's the problem with fake adulation and surrounding yourself with fake (paid) friends, you start believing your own hype.  Like thinking you have the authority to tell the Queen of England in a mere IG post whats what.


----------



## imgg

scarlet555 said:


> [
> 
> 
> Independence, freedom, freedom is not free...
> I sure hope US or ***** does not have to provide any security if they visit or live here.


I doubt it since they are not royalty anymore.


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> Independence, freedom, freedom is not free...
> I sure hope US or ***** does not have to provide any security if they visit or live here.



Didn't she say she wouldn't live here as long as ***** was president?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Just seen this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4676395



Will be super interesting to see what the UK Metropolitan Police Service does in response.  Will they send more of their officers?  Will they cut back and provide the same level of protection as Eugenie, Bea, Zara, etc. receive, which is to say, very little or none, unless they are at an official event in the UK?  The protection of these two overseas has already put a huge strain on the Met, from what I've read.  

So, private security may be the future for them and won't that be a shock to H, after the highly professional, highly trained officers he's had around him his whole life.  I'm sure there are some great private security firms and people out there but they are not cheap and 24/7 coverage?  What a huge, huge bill that will be.


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> Will be super interesting to see what the UK Metropolitan Police Service does in response.  Will they send more of their officers?  Will they cut back and provide the same level of protection as Eugenie, Bea, Zara, etc. receive, which is to say, very little or none, unless they are at an official event in the UK?  The protection of these two overseas has already put a huge strain on the Met, from what I've read.
> 
> So, private security may be the future for them and won't that be a shock to H, after the highly professional, highly trained officers he's had around him his whole life.  I'm sure there are some great private security firms and people out there but they are not cheap and 24/7 coverage?  What a huge, huge bill that will be.



Archie has to be protected so I hope the Queen says he is to return and get the protection in the UK. I don’t know if the Brits will want to absorb the 20 million or more in protection for those two. The Queen will be sensitive to what the people want.

Meghan’s grand plan isn’t working out is it?


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> [
> 
> 
> Independence, freedom, freedom is not free...
> I sure hope US or ***** does not have to provide any security if they visit or live here.


better not


----------



## lanasyogamama

But, but...it’s nOt FaIR!!!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lodpah said:


> Archie has to be protected so I hope the Queen says he is to return and get the protection in the UK. I don’t know if the Brits will want to absorb the 20 million or more in protection for those two. The Queen will be sensitive to what the people want.
> 
> Meghan’s grand plan isn’t working out is it?


There was a plan??  
Nope, not this Briton.  There are services here that need investment, £20m a year would go a long way.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Didn't she say she wouldn't live here as long as ***** was president?



How many idiot actors have said that?  I wish they would do what they say or just shut up about that...


----------



## Sharont2305

scarlet555 said:


> How many idiot actors have said that?  I wish they would do what they say or just shut up about that...


It's done over here too, every time we have a General Election you get the same rich tax dodgers saying "if so and so gets in, I'm leaving"


----------



## imgg

Lodpah said:


> Archie has to be protected so I hope the Queen says he is to return and get the protection in the UK. I don’t know if the Brits will want to absorb the 20 million or more in protection for those two. The Queen will be sensitive to what the people want.
> 
> Meghan’s grand plan isn’t working out is it?


Does Archie have to be protected if his parents are no longer royalty?  I'm not thinking that's England's responsibility, but I am no expert on this matter.


----------



## youngster

Lodpah said:


> Archie has to be protected so I hope the Queen says he is to return and get the protection in the UK. I don’t know if the Brits will want to absorb the 20 million or more in protection for those two. The Queen will be sensitive to what the people want.



The Queen's other grandchildren handle security by living in one of the many already secure, protected places like apartments at Kensington Palace or St. James Palace.  Or, like Peter Phillips and Zara Tindall, they live on the grounds of Princess Anne's estate.  I read that even separating from his wife, Peter Phillips is going to continue to live on the grounds there, just in a separate house from Autumn Phillips and his children.  Lady Louise and Viscount James are underage, of course, and live with their parents for now. But, the point is that the other grandchildren live where there is already security in place and aren't causing a bigger security headache than necessary for anyone.


----------



## Lounorada

Clearblueskies said:


> *Interesting body language* someone once said


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> Does Archie have to be protected if his parents are no longer royalty?  I'm not thinking that's England's responsibility, but I am no expert on this matter.



Since they are no longer royal then Archie is just a kid, albeit a celebrity's kid. His parents should protect him the way other celebrities protect their children, by hiring private security.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.
> 
> This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!
> 
> A reminder of happier times...or not? :


Haha you took out the Dyson!  My Dyson is failing to pick up the tiny specks on the carpet so I bought a Shark. I swear this is the truth!    

Not a fan of their blaming The Queen.  for a debacle that they started.   Failure to think things through and childishness has put them. in their present situation.   All these “friends” who are leaking like a sieve to the DM are doing her no favors. Actually I think the leaks are coming straight from the horse’s mouth. Or should I say a*s**s


----------



## DoggieBags

Thank you all for this thread. It’s been a source of endless entertainment . Btw Canada will stop paying for their security in the next few weeks. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...7/harry-meghan-canada-stop-providing-security


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t think she is even trying to hide the fact that she is “leaking” information.


----------



## muchstuff

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.
> 
> This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!
> 
> A reminder of happier times...or not? :


Oh wow, look at Harry and Her Maj’s expressions...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muchstuff

DoggieBags said:


> Thank you all for this thread. It’s been a source of endless entertainment . Btw Canada will stop paying for their security in the next few weeks. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...7/harry-meghan-canada-stop-providing-security


YASSSSS!!!


----------



## Lounorada

mshermes said:


> For all who missed it....we had what I believe was a recycled with new name....mongoose2020....who was preaching to "us" how we are horrid individuals....blah....blah....blah. Same sh*t, different name. New as of yesterday with three posts.  As a fellow TPFer stated....someone who was possibly publicly spanked. Gone....poof!





CobaltBlu said:


> Here is what happened. Normally we don’t comment but since so many of you are curious and since we haven’t heard from the Sussexes...  Someone came on and said everyone here is mean and shallow and awful for all the terrible things said about Meghan, and people Should find better things to do with their time.  And our members responded, some hilariously, but at the end of the day it was off topic by about a million miles in a private jet so I, CB deleted it all because can you imagine how Meghan would feel if the topic changed from her to...um....us all?  I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place even though most folks were respectful and as usual, funny.
> 
> This is a gossip thread but the topic is the super woke Sussexes and not the conversation about them.  So, carry on!
> 
> A reminder of happier times...or not? :



Thanks for the info ladies, much appreciated! Sounded like a night where a few drinks would have helped make it go by a little easier...


----------



## Sharont2305

Before she flies in, I really hope Harry sees his dad and brother.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I think many celebrities think like Meghan does so they wouldn't see anything wrong with her behavior. The number of narcissists in LA alone must be phenomenal.


.. YES, INDEED .. and especially those that are of the 'Z' talent!!!  Have always been amazed at their attitude in particular .. as in "what? .. don't YOU see how 'special' I am???" and/or "do YOU expect ME to do that?" (like opening the dayum door - no, they want YOU to do it .. which I WILL NOT)!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Before she flies in, I really hope Harry sees his dad and brother.



He needs an intervention and several weeks of deprogramming. It's the only way he will turn away from the cult of Meghan.


----------



## Chagall

imgg said:


> Does Archie have to be protected if his parents are no longer royalty?  I'm not thinking that's England's responsibility, but I am no expert on this matter.


My goodness what a mess they have created for themselves. No it’s not England’s responsibility any more nor is it Canada’s. They are not even Canadian citizens. Why should Canadians pay for the security of non citizens who have opted out of Royal Duties. To heck with the whole commonwealth thing. They will probably leave for the States now. Feel so sorry for baby Archie. He is looking more and more like the forgotten pawn in all this.


----------



## V0N1B2

CobaltBlu said:


> ...I took out a Dyson and made a pretty clean sweep of the place...


Talk about SOFA KING MARKLED... 



Sharont2305 said:


> *Before she flies in, *I really hope Harry sees his dad and brother.


Wait, what? Do you think she’s going to show up? Why wouldn’t they travel together, you know for the environment and stuff (even though planes are flying there anyway, so whatever) but what about whatshisface? Is she gonna carry him on the plane in that ill-fitting baby thing? Will he get left behind? While we’re on the subject of Archie, one thing has been giving me a case of the hmmmms.  Didn't she (or was it Jessica?) register that website Arche Foundation before she announced her pregnancy? Did she know she was having a boy and did she already have the name picked out? ‘Cause Archie - not Archibald - is awfully close to Arche. 
For the record, I honestly thought she’d give her kid a Hollywood name like Cedar or Ruxsack.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Megs said:


> I KNOW.  Hold, I'll share pics!




Acc-ccck-hem....


----------



## Sharont2305

V0N1B2 said:


> Talk about SOFA KING MARKLED...
> 
> 
> Wait, what? Do you think she’s going to show up? Why wouldn’t they travel together, you know for the environment and stuff (even though planes are flying there anyway, so whatever) but what about whatshisface? Is she gonna carry him on the plane in that ill-fitting baby thing? Will he get left behind? While we’re on the subject of Archie, one thing has been giving me a case of the hmmmms.  Didn't she (or was it Jessica?) register that website Arche Foundation before she announced her pregnancy? Did she know she was having a boy and did she already have the name picked out? ‘Cause Archie - not Archibald - is awfully close to Arche.
> For the record, I honestly thought she’d give her kid a Hollywood name like Cedar or Ruxsack.


Well, he's already here and they have a joint engagement at Endeavour so I'm assuming so.
Part of me thinks Archie will be "ill" so that's her excuse not to come over, as a precaution as Coronavirus has been diagnosed here.
As an add on, there's a worry about it in George and Charlotte's school, a child/parent or teacher was in Italy last week

ETA, it's 4 pupils.


----------



## mdcx

Somehow Eugenie managed to live and work in NYC for several years whilst still having security. Paid for by Andrew I believe?
Imo the fact that someone, anyone except them is paying $20 million/yr to protect them must send M into fits of ecstasy. The same way she wanted the most expensive clothing possible when she had the Royal clothing budget. It all points to her arrogance on one hand, but also fragile self esteem on the other. I think she needs all of this in order to feel special, and without it she might have to face up to some of the day to day consequences of her actions.
Shame that H is notoriously tight with money.

ETA I wonder if Megs is trying to get security and who pays sorted so that when she bunks off to LA by herself, she will continue to get paid security for life. Makes her feel like an important celeb.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Zara Phillips will be the excuse.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> *For the record, I honestly thought she’d give her kid a Hollywood name like Cedar or Ruxsack*.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> Zara Phillips will be the excuse.


What did she do?


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What did she do?



went to Italy skiing and has refused to self-isolate.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Zara Phillips will be the excuse.


Lol, I bet she'd tell Meghan a few home truths!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Part of me thinks Archie will be "ill" so that's her excuse not to come over, as a precaution as Coronavirus has been diagnosed here.
> As an add on, there's a worry about it in George and Charlotte's school, a child/parent or teacher was in Italy last week
> 
> ETA, it's 4 pupils.



If she has to go coronavirus would be a good excuse to fly on a private jet. I'll be surprised if she goes, she hasn't followed through on any obligation since they went on their permanent vacation.


----------



## PewPew

mdcx said:


> Somehow Eugenie managed to live and work in NYC for several years whilst still having security. Paid for by Andrew I believe?
> Imo the fact that someone, anyone except them is paying $20 million/yr to protect them must send M into fits of ecstasy. The same way she wanted the most expensive clothing possible when she had the Royal clothing budget. It all points to her arrogance on one hand, but also fragile self esteem on the other. I think she needs all of this in order to feel special, and without it she might have to face up to some of the day to day consequences of her actions.
> Shame that H is notoriously tight with money.
> 
> ETA I wonder if Megs is trying to get security and who pays sorted so that when she bunks off to LA by herself, she will continue to get paid security for life. Makes her feel like an important celeb.



The Palace has always said “we cannot comment on security matters” when the issue of costs comes up. But there were U.S. news programs reporting that British taxpayers spent $150million USD in 2016 to protect over 100 members of the extended royal family. We will never know how it breaks down & who all is covered, but FAR more is spent than people realize to protect various relatives that people don’t know or care about. Because it’s still a big deal if the Queen’s second cousin’s son is kidnapped while on holiday.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m gonna go conspiracy here. Meghan was pregnant when she got married thus all the secrecy about Archie. Harry had to marry her due to him being a senior royal and that would have been a greater humiliation to Meghan if she had baby out of wedlock. That Inskip wedding they did not look happy together so they probably bumped a few times and she got pregnant and drew her card.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I’m gonna go conspiracy here. Meghan was pregnant when she got married thus all the secrecy about Archie.



If that were true we would have had lots of belly cradling wedding dress photos. She wouldn't miss that opportunity for attention and speculation.


----------



## Lodpah

I think that’s the ace she drew. She wanted the royal wedding and married in the church so she probably restrained herself. The church has gone liberal by allowing people divorced but not sure about pregnancy. 

William and Kate probably know and that’s what caused the rift but the Queen didn’t. Anything is possible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I think that’s the ace she drew. She wanted the royal wedding and married in the church so she probably restrained herself. The church has gone liberal by allowing people divorced but not sure about pregnancy.
> 
> William and Kate probably know and that’s what caused the rift but the Queen didn’t. Anything is possible.



But Archie was born a year after the wedding.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Well, I’m gonna go with the BRF conspiracy theory that H’s head was an emotional ball & chain, and M was his Houdini that could release him, lol
♥️


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> I’m gonna go conspiracy here. Meghan was pregnant when she got married thus all the secrecy about Archie. Harry had to marry her due to him being a senior royal and that would have been a greater humiliation to Meghan if she had baby out of wedlock. That Inskip wedding they did not look happy together so they probably bumped a few times and she got pregnant and drew her card.



I think she might have  said she was to get things going and then conveniently has a miscarriage.    The timing is off when you look at when Archie was born.  The wedding dress was too big for her so perhaps made  with extra room for a bump factored in?,  Perhaps she kept that fiction going as long as she could.  A person on another site made a very interesting comment that really has me scratching my head.  The comment was that the poster watched the Kate/William wedding, and the Harkles wedding and she felt that Harry looked very happy at the Cambridge wedding and at his own he look ashamed!  Yikes!  Ashamed!  I can't even wrap my head around that.  Ashamed that he married her?  Ashamed for his family?  What?  Does anyone here understand this?


----------



## Lodpah

Newlyweds usually look happy together


QueenofWrapDress said:


> But Archie was born a year after the wedding.


That’s what they said. The doctors, the birth certificate and the delay in notifying the Queen, all these deceitfulness has to be planned.


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> Somehow Eugenie managed to live and work in NYC for several years whilst still having security. Paid for by Andrew I believe?
> Imo the fact that someone, anyone except them is paying $20 million/yr to protect them must send M into fits of ecstasy. The same way she wanted the *most expensive clothing possible when she had the Royal clothing budget*. It all points to her arrogance on one hand, but also fragile self esteem on the other. I think she needs all of this in order to feel special, and without it she might have to face up to some of the day to day consequences of her actions.
> Shame that H is notoriously tight with money.
> 
> ETA I wonder if Megs is trying to get security and who pays sorted so that when she bunks off to LA by herself, she will continue to get paid security for life. Makes her feel like an important celeb.



I had to look it up, and I fainted, poor civilian me... an article in glamour list her clothing cost in 2018 to be about 1/2 million dollars compared to Kate $89 000.00. 

I had no idea... daily mail says her clothing cost 944,000 pounds since marrying prince Harry....  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kles-wardrobe-cost-massive-944-146-royal.html

https://www.glamour.com/story/meghan-markle-most-expensive-royal-wardrobe-2018

*Meghan Markle Had the Most Expensive Royal Wardrobe in 2018—by a Landslide*
By Christopher Rosa

January 6, 2019





Getty Images


Meghan Markle had a ton of major fashion moments in 2018, so it's no surprise she had the most expensive royal wardrobe of the year. This tidbit comes from the royal fashion blog UFO No More ("UFO" standing for "unidentified fashion object," naturally), which added up all the new items that the 13 royal women—including Markle, Kate Middleton, and Princess Eugenie—added to their closets last year. The Duchess of Sussex had the priciest duds by a landslide, with her new purchases reportedly adding up to $508,258. This number includes her Cartier Reflection wedding bracelet and earrings, but not her custom Givenchy wedding gown (perhaps because it's a one-off piece she's not expected to rewear).


By contrast, Middleton's new clothes in 2018 reportedly cost $85,097, a mere fraction to Markle's wardrobe. Even less than that is what the newly married Princess Eugenie spent on fashion: $39,818 (this also doesn't include her wedding gown).

But let's keep some perspective, shall we? Spending nearly $40,000 on clothes in a year is still luxe AF. Just because your wardrobe price tag isn't in the six figures doesn't mean you aren't chic! Maybe Princess Eugenie just loves a good bargain or coupon! If so, I respect her hustle.






Getty Images
To be honest, it makes sense that Markle had the most expensive royal closet in 2018—no need to stir up any drama here. Ever since joining Prince Harry's circle in 2017, she's had to completely change the way she dresses, and a next-level royal wardrobe comes at a cost. It's very possible Princess Eugenie and Middleton already had the staples in their wardrobes that Markle had to purchase. After all, how many of these giant and extremely well-coordinated pink hats (below) do you think Markle had before meeting Prince Harry?





Getty Images

Hey, being a duchess isn't cheap, people.


----------



## Lodpah

Think about it, when you break off with someone, do you fall madly in love back with them? There’s a pic of Meghan staring down at Harry over at the Harry Markle site and she looked angry. Also she could have terminated the pregnancy and got pregnant again very fast. 

If you look at the evidence and timing she chased after him. A Prince getting someone pregnant would be a scandal already. Harry is in deep. He should just confess people are forgiving when they do that but for her she will be and already is considered a grifter.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Newlyweds usually look happy together
> 
> That’s what they said. The doctors, the birth certificate and the delay in notifying the Queen, all these deceitfulness has to be planned.


True, that whole thing is very shady, however, as was pointed out at another site, this is part of their MO.  Keep people guessing, it breeds interest and it all is topped off with the "we like to do things our way."  There were no court physicians present at Archie's birth.  There were  four when George was born, but of course there would be for an heir.  Still, so much murkiness and the birth certificate isn't even signed off.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lodpah said:


> I’m gonna go conspiracy here. Meghan was pregnant when she got married thus all the secrecy about Archie. Harry had to marry her due to him being a senior royal and that would have been a greater humiliation to Meghan if she had baby out of wedlock. That Inskip wedding they did not look happy together so they probably bumped a few times and she got pregnant and drew her card.


OMG! I never thought of that. Oh, what drama.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lodpah said:


> Newlyweds usually look happy together
> 
> That’s what they said. The doctors, the birth certificate and the delay in notifying the Queen, all these deceitfulness has to be planned.



I absolutely LOVE this thread!  You all are such good detectives.


----------



## Lodpah

Another thing, as any legal person here would know, you research and research, you do discovery and sometimes truth is greater than fiction.

Meghan didn’t want to hang around the family there they would know Archie is much older. Thus the demand for privacy for him.

The woman lives for fame. Diana theory was just a ruse I believe. She loves the camera.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Tootsie17 said:


> OMG! I never thought of that. Oh, what drama.


Do you notice she knows exactly where the cameras are primed? She’s estatic while Harry always looks miserable.


----------



## gracekelly

I know I have said this before:  my feeling is that for many outfits, there was no actual money changing hands. The clothing budget numbers are telephone numbers in their exaggeration.   If there was a transaction, the money ended up in her pocket.  I think she has turned out to show herself as a completely avaricious person.  Anything to make a buck, a pound, or a euro.  Why else would she be at important events with dresses that didn't fit, price tags still attached and wearing things that were not for her body type.  Merching and payoffs. It all had to be given back.   She thought she was going to be a presenter at the Oscars last year when pregnant.  The Morocco trip was hastily arranged because the grey men weren't going for it.    She subsequently wore the Dior dress that supposedly cost 75k to a simple reception. It was totally inappropriate for the event.    I don't think Dior was paid for the dress.  I think the deal was wear it on the red carpet and tell the talking head it was Dior just like all the celebs do every year when they get their dresses for free.    She had to wear it in Morocco so Dior got their 15 min of fame and PR.

One of the latest comments was that she felt uncomfortable having to get dressed up on the current  trip to the UK.  I believe that.  She has no clothes that fit and no one is standing on line to outfit her.  Maybe if she became ultra thin again, she is in Toronto right this minute going through Jessica's closet to see what she can borrow.  

I still don't think she will show up willingly and will come up with an excuse.  If she makes an appearance, you know that PC or TQ are demanding it and there is money involved.  I would love to see her get up the nerve to face TQ in person.  She's such a coward.


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> Well, he's already here and they have a joint engagement at Endeavour so I'm assuming so.
> Part of me thinks Archie will be "ill" so that's her excuse not to come over, as a precaution as Coronavirus has been diagnosed here.
> As an add on, there's a worry about it in George and Charlotte's school, a child/parent or teacher was in Italy last week
> 
> ETA, it's 4 pupils.





bag-mania said:


> If she has to go coronavirus would be a good excuse to fly on a private jet. I'll be surprised if she goes, she hasn't followed through on any obligation since they went on their permanent vacation.


Not only the private jet, but just think, she can obscure his face by putting a mask on her doll Archie.
It adds to the drama factor. She can look all frazzled and doe-eyed complaining that no one asked her if she was okay after making the arduous journey (unaided, dontchaknow) across the pond all the while battling airborne death particles from the planet Covid-19. 
She didn’t know it was gonna be so haaard y’all. :cry:


----------



## gracekelly

One more thought.  Showing up looking like a train wreck, and that goes for both of them, is disrespectful.  Many of the posters on this thread also post or look at the Royalty Fashion thread, which is wonderfully curated by @lovehgss1.  We make comments all the time as to whether we like or dislike what various royals are wearing.  I don't recall ever thinking that any major royal figure looked slovenly or sloppy even if I thought the outfit was atrocious.  Too many times MM has looked like she rolled out of bed even when wearing a designer dress and hat and Harry worse than that with dirty and wrinkled clothing. Shoes with holes in the soles *sigh* He just looked like a homeless person on his current trip back to the UK.  Oh right, just call me Harry who looks like he just hit the 7-11 for a six pack.


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> I think she might have  said she was to get things going and then conveniently has a miscarriage.    The timing is off when you look at when Archie was born.  The wedding dress was too big for her so perhaps made  with extra room for a bump factored in?,  Perhaps she kept that fiction going as long as she could.  A person on another site made a very interesting comment that really has me scratching my head.  The comment was that the poster watched the Kate/William wedding, and the Harkles wedding and she felt that Harry looked very happy at the Cambridge wedding and at his own he look ashamed!  Yikes!  Ashamed!  I can't even wrap my head around that.  Ashamed that he married her?  Ashamed for his family?  What?  Does anyone here understand this?



I have posted years ago here that she was hiding a baby bump at the wedding because of the looseness of the dress at the belly, don't know that many bride that would have it tailored to look like that.  If anything, we are willing to wear spandex to look flat as a board and starve to some nonsense to look like the perfect bride.  

Who gets not one but two dresses from chest to stomach to look like that?  It's ill fitting, and that's the type of design I usually opt for to go to the buffet.  What I call my 'buffet dress'.  

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion...g-dress-clare-waight-keller-givenchy-designs/








from:
https://www.marthastewartweddings.c...ing-dress-stella-mccartney-royal-wedding-2018
reiber 
May 19, 2018
PinFB


----------



## Annawakes

gracekelly said:


> I know I have said this before:  my feeling is that for many outfits, there was no actual money changing hands. The clothing budget numbers are telephone numbers in their exaggeration.   If there was a transaction, the money ended up in her pocket.  I think she has turned out to show herself as a completely avaricious person.  Anything to make a buck, a pound, or a euro.  Why else would she be at important events with dresses that didn't fit, price tags still attached and wearing things that were not for her body type.  Merching and payoffs. It all had to be given back.   She thought she was going to be a presenter at the Oscars last year when pregnant.  The Morocco trip was hastily arranged because the grey men weren't going for it.    She subsequently wore the Dior dress that supposedly cost 75k to a simple reception. It was totally inappropriate for the event.    I don't think Dior was paid for the dress.  I think the deal was wear it on the red carpet and tell the talking head it was Dior just like all the celebs do every year when they get their dresses for free.    She had to wear it in Morocco so Dior got their 15 min of fame and PR.
> 
> One of the latest comments was that she felt uncomfortable having to get dressed up on the current  trip to the UK.  I believe that.  She has no clothes that fit and no one is standing on line to outfit her.  Maybe if she became ultra thin again, she is in Toronto right this minute going through Jessica's closet to see what she can borrow.
> 
> I still don't think she will show up willingly and will come up with an excuse.  If she makes an appearance, you know that PC or TQ are demanding it and there is money involved.  I would love to see her get up the nerve to face TQ in person.  She's such a coward.


All this makes a ton of sense to me.  I was wondering, if she did own $500k worth of designer clothes, will we be seeing them again?  In LA perhaps?  

But if she doesn’t truly own them, then I’m not surprised she never wears them again.  Hence the baggy sweater at the women’s shelter??

This was a great post. Thank you!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Didn't she say she wouldn't live here as long as ***** was president?


She and many others.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Newlyweds usually look happy together
> 
> That’s what they said. The doctors, the birth certificate and the delay in notifying the Queen, all these deceitfulness has to be planned.



Ok, going with the story...where did they hide the real baby for three months? Not talking about the public, but the RF. And the obviously newborn they introduced to the Queen and press...borrowed? The logistics seem hard to pull off.


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe that’s why Archie looks so huge in those pap photos from the “walk”


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Talk about SOFA KING MARKLED...
> 
> 
> Wait, what? Do you think she’s going to show up? Why wouldn’t they travel together, you know for the environment and stuff (even though planes are flying there anyway, so whatever) but what about whatshisface? Is she gonna carry him on the plane in that ill-fitting baby thing? Will he get left behind? While we’re on the subject of Archie, one thing has been giving me a case of the hmmmms.  Didn't she (or was it Jessica?) register that website Arche Foundation before she announced her pregnancy? Did she know she was having a boy and did she already have the name picked out? ‘Cause Archie - not Archibald - is awfully close to Arche.
> For the record, I honestly thought she’d give her kid a Hollywood name like Cedar or Ruxsack.


I think she had a game plan before Archie was even conceived.  I also think naming him Archie was another act of defiance on her part.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, going with the story...where did they hide the real baby for three months? Not talking about the public, but the RF. And the obviously newborn they introduced to the Queen and press...borrowed? The logistics seem hard to pull off.


Good question. The baby was induced early and for the Royal family keeping other family hidden is well documented. When Meghan bent 
down in her late Pregnancy someone slo-mo the picture where her stomach showed the whatever slipping down and uneven. Her stomach was at some times different sizes. I know women can bend down when pregnant but to spontaneously bend down without a little off balance you have do that carefully.


----------



## Lodpah

Also I think many of their staff quit cause they did not want to be complicit. I’m sure they signed NDAs. The nannies too.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> True, that whole thing is very shady, however, as was pointed out at another site, this is part of their MO.  Keep people guessing, it breeds interest and it all is topped off with the "we like to do things our way."  There were no court physicians present at Archie's birth.  There were  four when George was born, but of course there would be for an heir.  Still, so much murkiness and the birth certificate isn't even signed off.





gracekelly said:


> True, that whole thing is very shady, however, as was pointed out at another site, this is part of their MO.  Keep people guessing, it breeds interest and it all is topped off with the "we like to do things our way."  There were no court physicians present at Archie's birth.  There were  four when George was born, but of course there would be for an heir.  Still, so much murkiness and the birth certificate isn't even signed off.


The reason I think they did that is because they had to keep the press and others clueless. Harry looks miserable. He may not be the brightest but I’m sure he knows that what they did was wrong. You know, when knows something is morally wrong and hidden it will eat them alive.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lodpah said:


> Good question. The baby was induced early and for the Royal family keeping other family hidden is well documented. When Meghan bent
> down in her late Pregnancy someone slo-mo the picture where her stomach showed the whatever slipping down and uneven. Her stomach was at some times different sizes. I know women can bend down when pregnant but to spontaneously bend down without a little off balance you have do that carefully.


She can balance herself well because of all that yoga she does. LOL!


----------



## Lodpah

Tootsie17 said:


> She can balance herself well because of all that yoga she does. LOL!


True but what about other evidence?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

I am here for all of this mess.


----------



## lalame

Oh boy, when I thought I had gotten these 2 out of my system (for the week atleast ) this whole public statement with “Royal” starts blowing up the news cycle. I just don’t. Get. Them. Why make the statement they made, which they must have known people would read into... people, if you want to leave, just go away silently into the good night. They could happily lead a private life, donate to charities, take money from papa Cornwall, etc without all this drama!! I had empathy for their privacy push in the beginning but oh brother. 

“I want the simpler life... so I’m going to move to LA, do a Disney movie, give 2 big corporate speaking engagements a quarter, and issue public statements on controversial topics,” said no one ever.


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


> I am here for all of this mess.



Me too. But, I feel badly for the Queen who does not deserve this stress at all.  I also feel badly for Prince Charles. Yes, he made some awful decisions back in the 80's and 90's with Diana and Camilla and that whole mess. I was definitely Team Diana back then.  But, he has worked tirelessly for years and I think has tried to be a good father to both boys. In fact, I read that he was actually closer to Harry than to William, up until this whole mess. He also made something close to 550 appearances in 2019. That is a huge number and has to be exhausting. He's 71 now too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She looked so great in that yellow dress.  It feels like she purposely started dressing in drab clothes in the first year of the marriage.


----------



## V0N1B2

I just want to know what @Vlad has going on with TPTB advertising Illuminati here. I mean, this is the ad showing up on my phone?
How do they know to insert themselves into our lumbersexual dreamboat’s thread? 



Stop the madness!!!!


----------



## needlv

Just adding to the conspiracy theories here - but don't you remember that photo where they were alleging the bump had slipped?


----------



## CobaltBlu

She looks like a red had wannabe...without the hat.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

needlv said:


> Just adding to the conspiracy theories here - but don't you remember that photo where they were alleging the bump had slipped?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4676744



Okay, this pic stopped me in my tracks - thanks, *needlv*! Hmm, I am pretty fluent in PhotoShop and I would love to state that this pic has been doctored but it’s just not reasonable.

One of the facts that does not make sense is that quite frankly if I had a pillow hanging mid-thigh, I surely would not be smiling, walking and waving at the general public - so is M really an Oscar worthy actress?

Also, came across this headline from our fav, Daily Mail UK:

*”Canada refuses to pay for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Vancouver security once they step down as full-time Royals (so WHO will?)”*

*https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...urity-costs-wont-paid-Canadian-taxpayers.html*


----------



## DesigningStyle

scarlet555 said:


> I have posted years ago here that she was hiding a baby bump at the wedding because of the looseness of the dress at the belly, don't know that many bride that would have it tailored to look like that.  If anything, we are willing to wear spandex to look flat as a board and starve to some nonsense to look like the perfect bride.
> 
> Who gets not one but two dresses from chest to stomach to look like that?  It's ill fitting, and that's the type of design I usually opt for to go to the buffet.  What I call my 'buffet dress'.
> 
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion...g-dress-clare-waight-keller-givenchy-designs/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from:
> https://www.marthastewartweddings.c...ing-dress-stella-mccartney-royal-wedding-2018
> reiber
> May 19, 2018
> PinFB


I said the exact same thing.  Agree 100%


----------



## needlv

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, this pic stopped me in my tracks - thanks, *needlv*! Hmm, I am pretty fluent in PhotoShop and I would love to state that this pic has been doctored but it’s just not reasonable.
> 
> One of the facts that does not make sense is that quite frankly if I had a pillow hanging mid-thigh, I surely would not be smiling, walking and waving at the general public - so is M really an Oscar worthy actress?
> 
> Also, came across this headline from our fav, Daily Mail UK:
> 
> *”Canada refuses to pay for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Vancouver security once they step down as full-time Royals (so WHO will?)”*
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...urity-costs-wont-paid-Canadian-taxpayers.html*



Yes I think this was the pic that started rumours that there was a surrogate involved and she was wearing a “moon bump”.  

Maybe it’s just the way the dress moves when she walks?  Hard to tell...


----------



## wisconsin

The baby conspiracy theories are veering too far from reality. I know this is a gossip thread but these are beyond that. Lol


----------



## needlv

wisconsin said:


> Error



Yes there are some crazy theories around.  I am sure sometimes if it’s mean people trolling....


----------



## Clearblueskies

Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs 
He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs
> He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!



I mean, I'm sure it's an adjustment. He's never not been a high ranking member of the BRF while the gold digger could only have dreamed of setting foot into these kind of circles until she somehow managed to make him marry her which in hindsight was a really bad idea (for him and everyone else but her).


----------



## PewPew

Clearblueskies said:


> Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs
> He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!



Dear Harry,

“Just call me Harry” is just rhetoric & hypocrisy when you continue your entitled way of life. Canada may stop funding you, but you know Daddy Charles & the British taxpayers won’t because *everything* can be twisted into “it’s a matter of security & the Monarchy doesn’t comment on security matters, but Parliament provides for security funding, so it’s really legit...”

I get it, no one wants to have someone post a cellphone pic of them without permission, but YOU need to pay for the privilege of seclusion, not the taxpayers (Let’s be honest, you know Daddy didn’t make most of the fortune your grown-man allowance comes from.)

AND DON’T ACT shocked & complain of “unfair press” when you try bill yourself as an environmental activist. Blocking off entire sections of a train under the guise of “traveling commercial” is just as awful as flying private and having Elton John issue a statement that he paid to “offset” your carbon emissions. Stop banking on people’s fondness for your mother and their compassion for her little boys. You’re 35 with a kid. If you’re going to issues global statements about being independent, THEN BE INDEPENDENT.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I just came across people rewarming the story of Pippa's wedding, where MM was only welcome to one of two events and people made her once again the victim. Kate was evil too for not speaking up on her behalf. Uhm...why would Pippa have to invite a random girlfriend, not even a fiancée at that time and not around for years like Kate (or like Chelsey having grown up around these circles)? And why would Kate interfere with her sister's wedding? Why is it that apparently every single rule anyone might have must be bent for the mighty Meghan?

My brother has a university friend who's part of Germany's nobility (and as you might know, Germany's nobility lost their privilege a while ago plus these people in question lost most of their belongings in WW2), and their motto is: "If you don't ring it, don't bring it".


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs
> He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!


And he did this on his own without MM being anywhere around. He pays lip service to wanting to be a regular guy concerned about carbon footprints taking up a whole coach so more coaches would be needed for the regular masses! Sometimes I think poor Harry is right on board with Meghan. He might have an attitude adjustment and rude awakening in store for him.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I just came across people rewarming the story of Pippa's wedding, where MM was only welcome to one of two events and people made her once again the victim. Kate was evil too for not speaking up on her behalf. Uhm...why would Pippa have to invite a random girlfriend, not even a fiancée at that time and not around for years like Kate (or like Chelsey having grown up around these circles)? And why would Kate interfere with her sister's wedding? Why is it that apparently every single rule anyone might have must be bent for the mighty Meghan?
> 
> My brother has a university friend who's part of Germany's nobility (and as you might know, Germany's nobility lost their privilege a while ago plus these people in question lost most of their belongings in WW2), and their motto is: "If you don't ring it, don't bring it".


Unless you were particular close, from Pippas perspective, why would you invite your sister's husband's brother's new(ish) girlfriend?
In real life, how many would?


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs
> He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!



Yeah, the whole “I take public transit like everyone else” thing is a bit futile when you book out the entire section... though at least in this case he’s paying it back into a UK public entity (I assume)... better than a private jet or luxury goods or something.


----------



## Corneto

needlv said:


> Yes there are some crazy theories around.  I am sure sometimes if it’s mean people trolling....



While I certainly agree that some of the negative narrative is troll based, the reason this topic won’t die down IMO is that from the very beginning something just felt a bit off about the whole pregnancy/birth narrative.

In the interest of time I won’t rehash all the pros and cons on the bump, the process, the registrations, etc. I can’t throw a stake in the ground on surrogacy or on what was actually in that child carrier during the infamous “pap walk” a few weeks ago. 

I’m curious to see how Archie is going to be used in the”separation process” we’ll be witnessing over the next couple of weeks. Certainly he’s the centerpiece in the “we need security” discussion. But I have not noticed anything other than the most perfunctory references to him from the BRF side and, distance from the throne notwithstanding, it will be interesting to see whether the terms of his education, residency and affiliation with his British relatives, etc. are factors that will influence the terms of their departure.

And while I have become reluctant to predict anything about this fiasco, I do believe that we don’t have the whole story on this. But if there is dirty laundry to be aired, I’m fairly confident it will happen during this much anticipated “transition” period.

Stay tuned.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Yeah, the whole “I take public transit like everyone else” thing is a bit futile when you book out the entire section... though at least *in this case he’s paying it back into a UK public entity (I assume)*... better than a private jet or luxury goods or something.


No, UK train companies are not publicly owned, only publicly regulated.


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry at Abbey Road studios where Jon Bon Jovi is recording a charity single for Invictus.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry at Abbey Road studios where Jon Bon Jovi is recording a charity single for Invictus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4677060
> View attachment 4677061
> View attachment 4677062
> View attachment 4677063



Can't he hold his own umbrella? "Call me Harry" and having someone holding a brolly over you seems rather a contradicition.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry at Abbey Road studios where Jon Bon Jovi is recording a charity single for Invictus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4677060
> View attachment 4677061
> View attachment 4677062
> View attachment 4677063


Never realised Bon Jovi was so ickle #crushed


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Never realised Bon Jovi was so ickle #crushed


Lol, he's still got it..... swoooooon [emoji7]


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, he's still got it..... swoooooon [emoji7]


----------



## PewPew

duna said:


> Can't he hold his own umbrella? "Call me Harry" and having someone holding a brolly over you seems rather a contradicition.



Of course he can hold an umbrella.
In fine weather.
When used as a walking stick.

Stay tuned for the Sussex website statement explaining that it’s too dangerous for the-6th-in-the-succession line to be opening & wielding his own umbrella in inclement weather. This is yet another reason a massive international security detail is required. (And also why UK security must pick up M’s dry cleaning in Canada. Such danger. Much wow.)


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think there is a big difference between suggesting someone might have taken a decoy out for a walk in the interests of not putting the baby in harm’s way during a publicity stunt and suggesting that the pregnancy was faked. I would need a lot more evidence to accept that the entire BRF partook in that.


----------



## Sharont2305

Recreating the famous Abbey Road shot


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs
> He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!


The money is gonna run out quick! We love to see it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Frivole88

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry DROP bid to trademark Sussex Royal name for commercial or charity activities (though they still want to use it on toiletries, sporting goods, toys, beer and jewellery)*

*Request to use Sussex Royal and Sussex Royal Foundation in UK was removed *
*Followed Queen's decision they could not use 'Royal' label after stepping down*
*An application to use the title on goods sold in Europe is still currently active *

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have abandoned their bid to trademark the Sussex Royal brand in Britain to cash in on their links to the monarch.

Documents filed at the Intellectual Property Office show a request to use the names Sussex Royal and Sussex Royal Foundation for commercial and charity activities in the UK had been removed.

It followed the Queen's decision that they could not use the 'Royal' label after deciding to step down as working royals and move to North America.

An application to use the royal trademark on toiletries, beer, toys, jewellery and sporting goods in Europe is still active, with an address in Italy listed on the application.

That is despite the couple saying last weekend that they would not use the word 'Royal' overseas.

The Queen's ruling on the trademark came after lengthy and complex talks, it is understood.

Harry and Meghan had already spent tens of thousands of pounds on a new Sussex Royal website to complement their hugely popular Instagram feed.

A statement they released on Saturday struck a more hostile tone in some sections, and said that neither the government nor the Queen herself own the word 'royal' internationally - but they would nonetheless stop using the title.

The statement read: 'While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word 'Royal' overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use 'Sussex Royal' or any iteration of the word 'Royal' in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020.'

They also appeared to complain that the palace is treating them differently to other family members.

The statement continued: 'While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.

'Per the agreement The Duke and Duchess of Sussex understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties and not undertake representative duties on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen.'

A statement issued by the palace last month stated that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer use their HRH titles.

Meghan and Harry's statement states, however, that they will keep the prefixes His and Her Royal Highness.

The couple faced another blow last night after Canada refused to keep guarding them when they step down as working royals.

In what will be seen as a humiliation for the couple, the Mounties said they would no longer pay for their security after March 31.

This means the cost of round-the-clock protection for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and baby son Archie – which could run to millions of pounds – will fall on UK taxpayers.

It is the first time Canada has confirmed it has been helping to guard Harry and Meghan since they settled on Vancouver Island last November. But last night it announced this would cease from April in keeping with their 'change in status'.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ce-Harry-DROP-bid-trademark-Sussex-Royal.html


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> One more thought.  Showing up looking like a train wreck, and that goes for both of them, is disrespectful.  Many of the posters on this thread also post or look at the Royalty Fashion thread, which is wonderfully curated by @lovehgss1.  We make comments all the time as to whether we like or dislike what various royals are wearing.  I don't recall ever thinking that any major royal figure looked slovenly or sloppy even if I thought the outfit was atrocious.  Too many times MM has looked like she rolled out of bed even when wearing a designer dress and hat and Harry worse than that with dirty and wrinkled clothing. Shoes with holes in the soles *sigh* He just looked like a homeless person on his current trip back to the UK.  Oh right, just call me Harry who looks like he just hit the 7-11 for a six pack.


I remember the hole in his shoe, I could not believe it. When I commented here about it, one of the stans had a ridiculous explanation for why he would wear a shoe with a huge hole. 

He's been sliding down an emotional hill for some time, I think; we've just recently noticed it.


----------



## TC1

Harru can sing? Meghan can do voice overs? Hollywood awaits folks!


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> True but what about other evidence?


One odd thing stood out to me was when Archie's name was announced. Beside thinking it was an odd choice for a Royal (but not for any LA celeb--"Psalm" anyone?), I remember Prince George was said to want to be called Archie, it was one of those cute little royal stories that was in the cute news months before Archie's birth. 

I wondered "it this the 'it' name in the UK and George grabbed onto it, as kid's do in a make-believe kid world?" or was there another "kid" around named Archie?

Just my bit to the conspiracy pool.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Recreating the famous Abbey Road shot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4677096
> View attachment 4677098


Oh dear.  Can’t stand the Beatles at the best of times, but this is really lame.


----------



## pursegirl3

O.k. so now the new score is The Queen 100,00 Meghan and Harry -100,000 since they have now lost Canadian Security. These two are losing more than they started with on a daily basis..


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh dear.  Can’t stand the Beatles at the best of times, but this is really lame.


It looks pretty stupid with the hundreds of people in the background. I'm guessing they'll scrub them out of existence, Markle-style.


----------



## Clearblueskies

kemilia said:


> One odd thing stood out to me was when Archie's name was announced. Beside thinking it was an odd choice for a Royal (but not for any LA celeb--"Psalm" anyone?), I remember Prince George was said to want to be called Archie, it was one of those cute little royal stories that was in the cute news months before Archie's birth.
> 
> I wondered "it this the 'it' name in the UK and George grabbed onto it, as kid's do in a make-believe kid world?" or was there another "kid" around named Archie?
> 
> Just my bit to the conspiracy pool.


I know several dogs and one cat called Archie


----------



## mrsinsyder

pursegirl3 said:


> O.k. so now the new score is The Queen 100,00 Meghan and Harry -100,000 since they have now lost Canadian Security. These two are losing more than they started with on a daily basis..


I wouldn't be surprised if we see some type of set-up "threat" so that they can force someone else into paying for security again.


----------



## daisychainz

kemilia said:


> One odd thing stood out to me was when Archie's name was announced. Beside thinking it was an odd choice for a Royal (but not for any LA celeb--"Psalm" anyone?), I remember Prince George was said to want to be called Archie, it was one of those cute little royal stories that was in the cute news months before Archie's birth.
> 
> I wondered "it this the 'it' name in the UK and George grabbed onto it, as kid's do in a make-believe kid world?" or was there another "kid" around named Archie?
> 
> Just my bit to the conspiracy pool.


In light of everything we have come to see and know these past few months I think anyone's conspiracy theory can easily become more of a genuine possibility.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> It looks pretty stupid with the hundreds of people in the background. I'm guessing they'll scrub them out of existence, Markle-style.


It does look stupid, and this is perhaps the one time when it would make sense for justcallmeHarry to be barefoot, and he ain’t.


----------



## Megs

V0N1B2 said:


> I just want to know what @Vlad has going on with TPTB advertising Illuminati here. I mean, this is the ad showing up on my phone?
> How do they know to insert themselves into our lumbersexual dreamboat’s thread?
> View attachment 4676701
> 
> 
> Stop the madness!!!!



Hahahahahahahahahaha!!! 


Boy oh boy, ad game strong!


----------



## Lounorada

Clearblueskies said:


> Reports this morning that “just call me Harry” booked out an entire coach of first class seats on the train from London to Edinburgh, so he wouldn’t be distracted by the plebs
> He’s not quite got the hang of the whole *just a regular guy* thing yet has he?  What a twerp!


Booking an entire 1st class coach is such a pretentious thing to do 
Surely if you didn't want to be around the public or bothered by peasants it would have been cheaper and more convenient to not use public transport and maybe, you know, drive or be driven to Edinburgh. Crazy idea, I know. 



kristinlorraine said:


> An application to *use the royal trademark on* *toiletries, beer, toys, jewellery and sporting goods* in Europe is still active, with an address in Italy listed on the application.


I feel embarrassed for anyone who would want to spend their money on that crap.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> It does look stupid, and this is perhaps the one time when it would make sense for justcallmeHarry to be barefoot, and he ain’t.



To be fair, Harry being barefoot wouldn't be quite appropriate since Harry was in George's place in line and not Paul's. The real question is why did Bon Jovi choose to take Ringo's spot? 

I guess every tourist who visits Abbey Road recreates that cover.


----------



## Lounorada

Also I'm  at everyone calling him 'just call me Harry/call me Harry'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

Guess the clicking cameras didn't affect his Diana PTSD this time? Oh the things our erstwhile Prince will do for (the) love (of money). 

I've been lurking here for a while now, but am absolutely giddy that we (Canadian taxpayers) will not be paying to secure these losers. Pay your own damn way MEH.


----------



## mia55

I feel bad for Harry as everyone liked him before his marriage (downfall), he was so happy and breath of fresh air wherever he went. He was actually more liked than Williams. This marriage is unfortunate for everyone except MM. I hope he grows up and realizes his mistakes.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Guess the clicking cameras didn't affect his Diana PTSD this time? Oh the things our erstwhile Prince will do for (the) love (of money).
> 
> I've been lurking here for a while now, but am absolutely giddy that we (Canadian taxpayers) will not be paying to secure these losers. Pay your own damn way MEH.


Unfortunately it looks like the British taxpayer is expected to make up the deficit.  I plan on writing a snotogram to my MP   I do NOT wish to prop up these ungrateful and greedy fools.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> Unfortunately it looks like the British taxpayer is expected to make up the deficit.  I plan on writing a snotogram to my MP   I do NOT wish to prop up these ungrateful and greedy fools.


We should all contact our MPs. And/or start a petition!


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> I had to look it up, and I fainted, poor civilian me... an article in glamour list her clothing cost in 2018 to be about 1/2 million dollars compared to Kate $89 000.00.
> 
> I had no idea... daily mail says her clothing cost 944,000 pounds since marrying prince Harry....  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kles-wardrobe-cost-massive-944-146-royal.html
> 
> https://www.glamour.com/story/meghan-markle-most-expensive-royal-wardrobe-2018
> 
> *Meghan Markle Had the Most Expensive Royal Wardrobe in 2018—by a Landslide*
> By Christopher Rosa
> 
> January 6, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle had a ton of major fashion moments in 2018, so it's no surprise she had the most expensive royal wardrobe of the year. This tidbit comes from the royal fashion blog UFO No More ("UFO" standing for "unidentified fashion object," naturally), which added up all the new items that the 13 royal women—including Markle, Kate Middleton, and Princess Eugenie—added to their closets last year. The Duchess of Sussex had the priciest duds by a landslide, with her new purchases reportedly adding up to $508,258. This number includes her Cartier Reflection wedding bracelet and earrings, but not her custom Givenchy wedding gown (perhaps because it's a one-off piece she's not expected to rewear).
> 
> 
> By contrast, Middleton's new clothes in 2018 reportedly cost $85,097, a mere fraction to Markle's wardrobe. Even less than that is what the newly married Princess Eugenie spent on fashion: $39,818 (this also doesn't include her wedding gown).
> 
> But let's keep some perspective, shall we? Spending nearly $40,000 on clothes in a year is still luxe AF. Just because your wardrobe price tag isn't in the six figures doesn't mean you aren't chic! Maybe Princess Eugenie just loves a good bargain or coupon! If so, I respect her hustle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> To be honest, it makes sense that Markle had the most expensive royal closet in 2018—no need to stir up any drama here. Ever since joining Prince Harry's circle in 2017, she's had to completely change the way she dresses, and a next-level royal wardrobe comes at a cost. It's very possible Princess Eugenie and Middleton already had the staples in their wardrobes that Markle had to purchase. After all, how many of these giant and extremely well-coordinated pink hats (below) do you think Markle had before meeting Prince Harry?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> 
> Hey, being a duchess isn't cheap, people.


It must have irritated the sh-t out of her when Kate outshone her


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry at Abbey Road studios where Jon Bon Jovi is recording a charity single for Invictus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4677060
> View attachment 4677061
> View attachment 4677062
> View attachment 4677063


LOL...so he's a singer?  Bon Jovi looks the worst I've ever seen him .....probably just bad pics


----------



## pukasonqo

Clearblueskies said:


> I know several dogs and one cat called Archie


My son went to school w an Archie


----------



## scarlet555

Lounorada said:


> Also I'm  at everyone calling him 'just call me Harry/call me Harry'.



That takes the attention away from MM...  Hmmm, wonder what other concoction MM will come up with now that 'just call me Harry' has been getting some tempo.


----------



## bag-mania

There is still a lot of love for Meghan and Harry in the US media. Yesterday there was a conspiracy theory article in the _New York Times_ which analyzed the Instagram accounts of both SussexRoyal and Kensington Palace. Whether the theory has truth to it or not the comments are telling. Most of the readers are still buying the victim rhetoric.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> There is still a lot of love for Meghan and Harry in the US media. Yesterday there was a conspiracy theory article in the _New York Times_ which analyzed the Instagram accounts of both SussexRoyal and Kensington Palace. Whether the theory has truth to it or not the comments are telling. Most of the readers are still buying the victim rhetoric.


They'll figure it out, eventually.


----------



## cafecreme15

I never thought that Archie was a particularly dignified or mature name that one can grow into. Thought it was a bizarre choice then and still do!


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> I never thought that Archie was a particularly dignified or mature name that one can grow into. Thought it was a bizarre choice then and still do!


It's actually quite a British name


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> I remember the hole in his shoe, I could not believe it. When I commented here about it, one of the stans had a ridiculous explanation for why he would wear a shoe with a huge hole.
> 
> He's been sliding down an emotional hill for some time, I think; we've just recently noticed it.


That reminds me of a neighbor when I was growing up.  The family was INSANELY wealthy, yet the son dressed like a hobo .. always rips/holes in his sweaters, but my favorite was the tape & elastics around his Sperry Boat shoes (major Preppy thing back in the day - maybe just Connecticut?).  Anyhow, he went on to invent some Teen pimple remedy and is even more rich than before, yet .. last time at our reunion, OMG!!!  We all thought he was a bum until another classmate said "OMG - isn't that nnnnnn?"!!!


----------



## queennadine

“Just call me Harry but hold this umbrella over my head and I’m certainly not sharing an entire rail car with the regular folk...”

So much side eye. 

And IF Sparkles is truly planning on going, she should have flown over with him. Her and Archie could have stayed at Frogmore. I mean, it IS their home over there, isn’t it?

I can imagine a million excuses for why she won’t come, or that she will and try to make it her PR extravaganza. 

I’m so sick of their attitudes but also can’t turn away from the train wreck.


----------



## kemilia

When is the next balcony appearance of the RF? Is it a part of the Commonwealth event generally?

ETA: This where I do NOT expect to see M ever again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

kemilia said:


> When is the next balcony appearance of the RF? Is it a part of the Commonwealth event generally?
> 
> ETA: This where I do NOT expect to see M ever again.


I believe the date is June 13 2020.


----------



## cafecreme15

Sharont2305 said:


> It's actually quite a British name


Have heard that it is common but it strikes me as a cute little kid name only. Could just be because it's not very common here in the US so I don't really have a frame of reference.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> There is still a lot of love for Meghan and Harry in the US media. Yesterday there was a conspiracy theory article in the _New York Times_ which analyzed the Instagram accounts of both SussexRoyal and Kensington Palace. Whether the theory has truth to it or not the comments are telling. Most of the readers are still buying the victim rhetoric.


When the SussexRoyal IG page came up on my IG feed, I was surprised because I'm pretty sure that I don't follow them (given everything that has transpired).  It was a clip of Harry singing with Bon Jovi (and no, I was not going to listen to it).  The comments were pathetic .. all their stans and honestly, many of them seem "very young" in their text & responses.


----------



## CeeJay

cafecreme15 said:


> Have heard that it is common but it strikes me as a cute little kid name only. Could just be because it's not very common here in the US so I don't really have a frame of reference.


I have heard it as a nickname - typically for Archibald and/or (in some cases) Arthur .. however, this could be a New England Yankee thing since there are a lot of folks with English ancestry in that area.


----------



## pixiejenna

bag-mania said:


> He's looking a bit scrawny for a guy wearing a big puffy jacket. Has he lost weight?
> 
> View attachment 4675071



I was shocked how thin he was when he was photographed getting sandwiches he's lost a lot of weight.



Roxanna said:


> Hmmm... it can be that MM is trying to shed baby weight,  so they are dieting all together.   Let's hope it doesn't effect baby Archie. While it would be kind of good for MM and we will  see her very soon as for  Harry it doesn't look good.



Doubt it has anything to do with megan working to lose the baby weight.  It's most likely due too his (possibly unmedicated) depression.  People who suffer depression tend to loose weight because they aren't eating much.  Harry was never over weight and now he looks gaunt. Between depression, the stress of being a new parent, and the stress of leaving the BRF is clearly taking a significant toll on his physical health as well as his mental health. Also everything in his life was planned out for him including his diet, he no longer has this privilege. So whatever he is eating now is probably no where as nutritionally dense as before.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> I never thought that Archie was a particularly dignified or mature name that one can grow into. Thought it was a bizarre choice then and still do!


I don't really like it either but when they announced it most people seemed to think it was adorable (as with everything H&M)


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> When the SussexRoyal IG page came up on my IG feed, I was surprised because I'm pretty sure that I don't follow them (given everything that has transpired).  It was a clip of Harry singing with Bon Jovi (and no, I was not going to listen to it).  The comments were pathetic .. all their stans and honestly, many of them seem "very young" in their text & responses.


seeming very young and actually being very young could be two different things in this case


----------



## mia55

I grew up reading Archie, Betty and Veronica so I kind of like this name


----------



## Milosmum0307

I knew coverage of these grifters would accelerate with their last few official engagements, and I intended on a self-imposed information blackout because I’m BUSY, but my ears perked up yesterday.  Canada’s reported decision to remove their protected persons status (as I stated a few days ago I expect the U.S. to do after 3/31 as well) was a bit of an unexpected gift.  It seems bizarre in hindsight that there was ever an expectation that another government would gamely agree to subsidize the personal, for-profit business ventures of these OMG So Private Citizens.  Perhaps someone with a molecule of good sense figured that the RCMP would be wiser to spend its resources on matters of actual public interest, like, say, investigating unsolved/neglected murders of indigenous women?  I expect that the UK will continue to fund their security, which they totally need because, for the love of all that is right and good on this earth, who else will fetch their lattes?  In other news, I don’t think I have the energy to conjure the appropriate amount of ridicule for Harry’s cringey jam session with Jon Bon Jovi.  A subset of humanity will undoubtedly find it cutesy and endearing, but I suppose I’m just incapable of swallowing Harry’s “personable lad” schtick.  Even if you could chalk up the Nazi uniform to “youth,” he’ll always be to me the guy who spoke mockingly of his grandmother and her corgis (un-f*cking-forgivable) and used racial slurs (on video, no less, because Genius), exploited a royal tour of a troubled and often impoverished region to whine about the pitfalls of his own extensive privilege, and spoke to the dedicated civil servants who work on behalf of his grandmother The Queen as if they were his own personal, subservient vassals because they had the temerity to decline the demand for an emerald tiara to adorn the bedraggled weave of the imperious monster he was about to marry (ALLEGEDLY).  If there is a silver lining in this shambolic situation, it’s that the Hero Harry/People’s Prince mask has been removed, and the public (or at least those members who are clear-headed, sober and at least minimally discerning) is finally beginning to see him for the petty, entitled, mediocre half-wit he is and has always been, which, honestly, was a reality that was never actually well-hidden ‾\_(ツ)_/‾


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> It must have irritated the sh-t out of her when Kate outshone her





sdkitty said:


> It must have irritated the sh-t out of her when Kate outshone her


----------



## Sharont2305

cafecreme15 said:


> Have heard that it is common but it strikes me as a cute little kid name only. Could just be because it's not very common here in the US so I don't really have a frame of reference.


I'd only heard it as an older person's name up until my son started school. One of his classmates was called Archie and I thought it was very old fashioned at that time. They are now in their early 20s and since then there are more and more Archie's around. I know of about 4 now, not personally but people I know who have had children or grandchildren.
Old fashioned names are on the up over here.


----------



## bag-mania

Milosmum0307 said:


> Even if you could chalk up the Nazi uniform to “youth,” *he’ll always be to me the guy who spoke mockingly of his grandmother and her corgis (un-f*cking-forgivable) *and used racial slurs (on video, no less, because Genius), exploited a royal tour of a troubled and often impoverished region to whine about the pitfalls of his own extensive privilege, and spoke to the dedicated civil servants who work on behalf of his grandmother The Queen as if they were his own personal, subservient vassals because they had the temerity to decline the demand for an emerald tiara to adorn the bedraggled weave of the imperious monster he was about to marry (ALLEGEDLY).



As always your post is chock-full of insight. I never knew he mocked his grandmother and her doggies and that makes me think even less of him than I did before and I didn't think that was possible.


----------



## muchstuff

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry at Abbey Road studios where Jon Bon Jovi is recording a charity single for Invictus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4677060
> View attachment 4677061
> View attachment 4677062
> View attachment 4677063


Oh Gawd, can the manchild even sing?


----------



## Aminamina

Quis question: What could be so unbearable in the royal household, deadly dangerous for a new mother and father that caused them to unroot their baby and turn the whole world upside down? Hint: don't mind baby's interests.


----------



## Emeline

Aminamina said:


> Quis question: What could be so unbearable in the royal household, deadly dangerous for a new mother and father that caused them to unroot their baby and turn the whole world upside down? Hint: don't mind baby's interests.


I would love to hear your thoughts on the possibilities. 
I've only gotten this far in my musings:
Were they motivated by sheer greed or something else? Or was it a combo of sorts?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

cafecreme15 said:


> Have heard that it is common but it strikes me as a cute little kid name only. Could just be because it's not very common here in the US so I don't really have a frame of reference.


I think our only frames of reference are Archie Bunker and Archie comic books.


----------



## CeeJay

Emeline said:


> I would love to hear your thoughts on the possibilities.
> I've only gotten this far in my musings:
> Were they motivated by sheer greed or something else? Or was it a combo of sorts?


IMO .. it's a combination of wanting to be the CENTER OF ATTENTION and GREED.  Certainly, in Meghan's personality is that REQUIREMENT to be the center of attention, and she exhibited that MANY years ago.  Sadly, I'm not so sure about Harry, although some have said that he wasn't happy being 2nd fiddle to William, however, I certainly didn't see that before Meghan came on-board.  As far as the Greed, it has been rumored that Harry is a huge tight-a$$ re: money and just speculation about Meghan, growing up in LA and seeing very wealthy people .. that can affect some in that they HATE to look like they cannot afford something.


----------



## gracekelly

Aminamina said:


> Quis question: What could be so unbearable in the royal household, deadly dangerous for a new mother and father that caused them to unroot their baby and turn the whole world upside down? Hint: don't mind baby's interests.


Nothing.  Poor Archie is just a tool to be used by this rapacious duo. Keeping him out of the public eye was just to generate interest in him so they could merch him. Fortunately he is too young to really appreciate the effects of moving around. As long as he has the stability of his nanny, a warm cot and a warm bottle, he is fine.


----------



## daisychainz

Emeline said:


> I would love to hear your thoughts on the possibilities.
> I've only gotten this far in my musings:
> Were they motivated by sheer greed or something else? Or was it a combo of sorts?


Meghan's ambition and desire for control. Can't get too far with that inside the palace gates. I blame Harry for lots, but not running away from his country and family, that's all Meghan.


----------



## Aminamina

Emeline said:


> I would love to hear your thoughts on the possibilities.
> I've only gotten this far in my musings:
> Were they motivated by sheer greed or something else? Or was it a combo of sorts?


From the perspective of a new(first time!) parent...let me try. Wouldn't both parents, espesially the new mom - be so infinitely happy to be arownd, cover with love and care their child of "ehternal love" - on the premises of _Frogmore Cottage_ with all the securiy, servants, nannies, doctors and you just name whoever to attend to your and your child tiniest need? Could they just postpone singlehandedly changing the world, the monarchy, creating all sorts of BS and focus on one the most important little human being they actually created?


----------



## Aminamina

gracekelly said:


> Nothing.  Poor Archie is just a tool to be used by this rapacious duo. Keeping him out of the public eye was just to generate interest in him so they could merch him. Fortunately he is too young to really appreciate the effects of moving around. As long as he has the stability of his nanny, a warm cot and a warm bottle, he is fine.


That I can not fathom. How come their newborn hasn't been their priority and humbling experience. Hm...they are so caring for the mankind!..hm..


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Meghan's ambition and desire for control. Can't get too far with that inside the palace gates. I blame Harry for lots, but not running away from his country and family, that's all Meghan.



I blame Harry for not having the cojones to stand up to her if that's the case. He goes along with everything she wants. Maybe he is so averse to taking responsibility that he is secretly grateful to have someone else making all the decisions for him. Meghan like to take charge and control and Harry likes to be controlled, it's the key to their codependency.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I blame Harry for not having the cojones to stand up to her if that's the case. He goes along with everything she wants. Maybe he is so averse to taking responsibility that he is secretly grateful to have someone else making all the decisions for him. Meghan like to take charge and control and Harry likes to be controlled, it's the key to their codependency.


I think she’s sold him on the idea that she can lead him to a new life in which he’s #1 not always #2.


----------



## CeeJay

Aminamina said:


> From the perspective of a new(first time!) parent...let me try. Wouldn't both parents, espesially the new mom - be so infinitely happy to be arownd, cover with love and care their child of "ehternal love" - on the premises of _Frogmore Cottage_ with all the securiy, servants, nannies, doctors and you just name whoever to attend to your and your child tiniest need? Could they just postpone singlehandedly changing the world, the monarchy, creating all sorts of BS and focus on one the most important little human being they actually created?


Someone like Meghan who is an EPIC narcissist?!?! .. Archie is not going to be the center of her life .. it will ALWAYS BE HER!  I agree that what you've stated .. SHOULD be the case, but I really doubt that exists in Meghan, I do believe that she had Archie as her cement to Harry and the BRF (in other words, her 'meal ticket').  Just given what I've heard about her and the way that she had treated people who were supposedly her BFF's, just confirms that she is ALL ABOUT HERSELF.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’m still so grateful she didn’t have a girl.


----------



## marietouchet

i FI


kemilia said:


> One odd thing stood out to me was when Archie's name was announced. Beside thinking it was an odd choice for a Royal (but not for any LA celeb--"Psalm" anyone?), I remember Prince George was said to want to be called Archie, it was one of those cute little royal stories that was in the cute news months before Archie's birth.
> 
> I wondered "it this the 'it' name in the UK and George grabbed onto it, as kid's do in a make-believe kid world?" or was there another "kid" around named Archie?
> 
> Just my bit to the conspiracy pool.


About the exact choice of name, neither M nor H uses their legal first names  -Henry and Rachel (sic), so, I guess they chose the diminuative Archie rather Archibald so that the child would have the same legal name as what he is called ... 
Yes, Archie/Archibald has not made the top ten list in recent memory not has Psalm


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> I’m still so grateful she didn’t have a girl.



With a narcissist that could have gone one of two ways. Either she could have treated her like a little mini-me and considered her an extension of herself. Or, more likely she would have considered her to be competition for attention and kept her in the background whenever possible.


----------



## gracekelly

Aminamina said:


> That I can not fathom. How come their newborn hasn't been their priority and humbling experience. Hm...they are so caring for the mankind!..hm..


They're not normal people.  Totally self centered.  You can only feel sorry for the child.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Unless you were particular close, from Pippas perspective, why would you invite your sister's husband's brother's new(ish) girlfriend?
> In real life, how many would?



Exactly!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I blame Harry for not having the cojones to stand up to her if that's the case. He goes along with everything she wants. Maybe he is so averse to taking responsibility that he is secretly grateful to have someone else making all the decisions for him. Meghan like to take charge and control and Harry likes to be controlled, it's the key to their codependency.


if that's the case, they are similar to the duke and duchess of windsor.
I have a feeling that right now (deep down if he's not admitting it) Harry is miserable.  He is totally out of his element.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I blame Harry for not having the cojones to stand up to her if that's the case. He goes along with everything she wants. Maybe he is so averse to taking responsibility that he is secretly grateful to have someone else making all the decisions for him. Meghan like to take charge and control and Harry likes to be controlled, it's the key to their codependency.


Totally agree!  Plus when everything heads south he can pat himself on the back and think to himself that it wasn't his idea and therefore, not his fault.  Baby and a wuss.


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> With a narcissist that could have gone one of two ways. Either she could have treated her like a little mini-me and considered her an extension of herself. Or, more likely she would have considered her to be competition for attention and kept her in the background whenever possible.



For sure I'd think she'd consider a daughter competition. There are quite a few bloggers that have kids who share their kids all the time and you can see the parent doing it for the 'gram and the likes, while also having subtle digs are their daughter because they will not have anyone steal their shine.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> if that's the case, they are similar to the duke and duchess of windsor.
> I have a feeling that right now (deep down if he's not admitting it) Harry is miserable.  He is totally out of his element.


I think the difference is that the Duke of Windsor actually thought that he could still be an active member of the family.  He wanted to live in England and his brother said there was only room for one King and David wasn't it.  Making him live out of the country was the unkindest cut of all to him.  So he and Harry may share misery, but it actually looks as if it is for opposite reasons.


----------



## gracekelly

Megs said:


> For sure I'd think she'd consider a daughter competition. There are quite a few bloggers that have kids who share their kids all the time and you can see the parent doing it for the 'gram and the likes, while also having subtle digs are their daughter because they will not have anyone steal their shine.


Absolutely!  And when the daughter was old enough, she would try to live off her spotlight.


----------



## gracekelly

Aminamina said:


> From the perspective of a new(first time!) parent...let me try. Wouldn't both parents, espesially the new mom - be so infinitely happy to be arownd, cover with love and care their child of "ehternal love" - on the premises of _Frogmore Cottage_ with all the securiy, servants, nannies, doctors and you just name whoever to attend to your and your child tiniest need? Could they just postpone singlehandedly changing the world, the monarchy, creating all sorts of BS and focus on one the most important little human being they actually created?


Firstly congrats on the baby!!
Yes, it is odd that they don't seem to be babycentric in the least.  Some first time parents are baby drunk lol!  Their little one is the cutest, smartest and going to save the world and cure cancer and give us world peace.  Not these two that we can see.  Archie is just an accessory just like the latest fad handbag.  Oh wait!  Harry is the latest fad handbag.  But not for long.  The style is changing soon and he will be gone.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> i FI
> 
> About the exact choice of name, neither M nor H uses their legal first names  -Henry and Rachel (sic), so, I guess they chose the diminuative Archie rather Archibald so that the child would have the same legal name as what he is called ...
> Yes, Archie/Archibald has not made the top ten list in recent memory not has Psalm


It could be worse. She could have named him after a fruit or vegetable.


----------



## Aminamina

gracekelly said:


> Firstly congrats on the baby!!
> Yes, it is odd that they don't seem to be babycentric in the least.  Some first time parents are baby drunk lol!  Their little one is the cutest, smartest and going to save the world and cure cancer and give us world peace.  Not these two that we can see.  Archie is just an accessory just like the latest fad handbag.  Oh wait!  Harry is the latest fad handbag.  But not for long.  The style is changing soon and he will be gone.


Aww thank you. My son is 5,5 y.o now but you are right on the spot about being babycentric IN THE LEAST. I am pretty sober of a parent(I hope!) but I know my child needs most of my attention, involvment, creativity, humanity and time untill I can let him go to school by himself and focus on my Hermes bags, lol. OK, perhaps I am not that sober but still. First couple of years who would think of divorsing the 1500 y.o monarchy when they have a firsborn to adore *shrugs*
ETA: No one asked have I opened an orange box for the last 6 years?


----------



## Tootsie17

queennadine said:


> “Just call me Harry but hold this umbrella over my head and I’m certainly not sharing an entire rail car with the regular folk...”
> 
> So much side eye.
> 
> And IF Sparkles is truly planning on going, she should have flown over with him. Her and Archie could have stayed at Frogmore. I mean, it IS their home over there, isn’t it?
> 
> I can imagine a million excuses for why she won’t come, or that she will and try to make it her PR extravaganza.
> 
> I’m so sick of their attitudes but also can’t turn away from the train wreck.


Maybe he is being careful with the caronovirus scare and


sdkitty said:


> if that's the case, they are similar to the duke and duchess of windsor.
> I have a feeling that right now (deep down if he's not admitting it) Harry is miserable.  He is totally out of his element.



I agree 100%.  I think Harry is used to others governing his life and now he only has Megan, who likes to be in total control. (I bet she is loving every minute of being his boss)  As we all intuitively know, she's only about her best interest and I think she could really care less about Harry. Heaven help the poor chap and Archie as well.  I do have hope that Harry will wake up and return to the BRF with Archie. I only hope it's not ten years from now.


----------



## Chagall

I must say that in the pictures of Harry singing with Bon Jovi he looks to be full of himself and loving the attention. Bon Jovi refers to him as the artist *formerly known as Prince* lol. You have to admit that, good or bad he is getting way more attention now that he who will be king-Wills.


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> Maybe he is being careful with the caronovirus scare and
> 
> 
> I agree 100%.  I think Harry is used to others governing his life and now he only has Megan, who likes to be in total control. (I bet she is loving every minute of being his boss)  As we all intuitively know, she's only about her best interest and I think she could really care less about Harry. Heaven help the poor chap and Archie as well.  I do have hope that Harry will wake up and return to the BRF with Archie. I only hope it's not ten years from now.


What amazed me rather early on in their 'public' displays (although honestly, it shouldn't have now to think about it) .. was how Meghan would go ahead of Harry and/or (somewhat) push him into place!  To me, that showed who wears the britches in that family, and it's not him.  However, to do that publicly??? .. whoa!  So, then I wondered .. was she schooled in any protocol in regards to this, as in:  "Harry should always go first .."?  Could be, but yet she just can't help her narcissistic tendencies  -OR-  she doesn't really give a rat's a$$ and again .. ME, ME, ME-GHAN!


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> With a narcissist that could have gone one of two ways. Either she could have treated her like a little mini-me and considered her an extension of herself. Or, more likely she would have considered her to be competition for attention and kept her in the background whenever possible.


Somewhat like Angelina Jolie and the way her daughters have been raised to dress down and not outshine her.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I must say that in the pictures of Harry singing with Bon Jovi he looks to be full of himself and loving the attention. Bon Jovi refers to him as the artist **formerly known as Prince** lol. You have to admit that, good or bad he is getting way more attention now that he who will be king-Wills.


Funny but .. !   I prefer:


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> That reminds me of a neighbor when I was growing up.  The family was INSANELY wealthy, yet the son dressed like a hobo .. always rips/holes in his sweaters, but my favorite was the tape & elastics around his Sperry Boat shoes (major Preppy thing back in the day - maybe just Connecticut?).  Anyhow, he went on to invent some Teen pimple remedy and is even more rich than before, yet .. last time at our reunion, OMG!!!  We all thought he was a bum until another classmate said "OMG - isn't that nnnnnn?"!!!


Omg CeeJay, I had to pull out my copy of The Official Preppy Handbook and sure enough, pg 48 taped up Sperrys!


On topic, where is Megs????? You know she has to be DYING at the lack of pap attention. Wonder if she was put on a ban?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chagall said:


> Bon Jovi refers to him as the artist *formerly known as Prince* lol.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Omg CeeJay, I had to pull out my copy of The Official Preppy Handbook and sure enough, pg 48 taped up Sperrys!
> View attachment 4677440
> 
> On topic, where is Megs????? You know she has to be DYING at the lack of pap attention. Wonder if she was put on a ban?


*HA HA HA HA HA* .. oh yup, 100% .. now, in the summertime, you would still have that Blue Blazer (gold buttons mandatory), but instead of the Khaki's, it would be Madras shorts!   Both of my sisters were MAJOR-LEAGUE prep's, me? .. I was always the "downtown" Artsy type (which drove my parents CRAZY)!!!  When I first saw that book, I really wondered "okay, who has been following us"????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> I must say that in the pictures of Harry singing with Bon Jovi he looks to be full of himself and loving the attention. Bon Jovi refers to him as the artist *formerly known as Prince* lol. You have to admit that, good or bad he is getting way more attention now that he who will be king-Wills.


He does look happy to be with a celebrity in the spotlight.


----------



## PewPew

gracekelly said:


> It could be worse. She could have named him after a fruit or vegetable.



So true. She really should be commended for resisting the celeb name trends. We might have had Eggplant “Eggie” Mountbatten-Windsor, 7th in line for the throne


----------



## Lounorada

PewPew said:


> So true. She really should be commended for resisting the celeb name trends. We might have had Eggplant “Eggie” Mountbatten-Windsor, 7th in line for the throne


----------



## Milosmum0307

mdcx said:


> On topic, where is Megs????? You know she has to be DYING at the lack of pap attention. Wonder if she was put on a ban?


There’s been some grumbling about diary conflicts and the Markles being scheduled for engagements while the Cambridges are on their tour of Ireland, leading to concerns of the former receiving more press attention than the latter.  If Megalomania has any hesitation about showing up to the UK for her swan song, the promise of breathless press coverage and pulling focus from her in-laws should be enough motivation for her to show up.  Anyone who wears a maternity coat to a wedding five minutes after peeing on a stick in order to provoke speculation and then announces the pregnancy at said wedding surely salivates at the idea of overshadowing others.  My guess is she doesn’t want to pull attention from Harry’s... whatever it is Harry is actually doing in the UK right now, but we’ll probably see some commissioned OMG So Candid pap shots once there’s a lull in coverage.  If we don’t, it will be because she’s breaking in new oversized shoes and prepping her wig for her upcoming engagements.   At least, that’s what I hope.  I’m looking forward to some new rumpled, sweat-stained appearances from The People’s Duchess.

(Edited repeatedly because I can’t spell.)


----------



## BlueCherry

My brother is married to a woman like Meghan. He can’t stand her at times, praises her to the hilt at others, he has affairs and they don’t sleep in the same room, she doesn’t let him answer the phone to family when he’s home, she belittles him in public - she admits she just wants his money so she doesn’t have to work... such a s**t life for him but he won’t leave her and it’s been nearly 30 years. 

She pushes him so far and then reels him back in with sweet nothings and he loves affection so laps it up and all is well for another while. 

The mind boggles at how weak and susceptible people can be when it’s matters of the heart


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> That reminds me of a neighbor when I was growing up.  The family was INSANELY wealthy, yet the son dressed like a hobo .. always rips/holes in his sweaters, but my favorite was the tape & elastics around his Sperry Boat shoes (major Preppy thing back in the day - maybe just Connecticut?).  Anyhow, he went on to invent some Teen pimple remedy and is even more rich than before, yet .. last time at our reunion, OMG!!!  We all thought he was a bum until another classmate said "OMG - isn't that nnnnnn?"!!!


Topsider's were a thing in Philly too. Maybe a Northeast thing??? Along with Lacoste polo shirts and Bermuda bags. I am old...LOL![/QUOTE]


----------



## Tootsie17

Jayne1 said:


> He does look happy to be with a celebrity in the spotlight.


Yes, I agree.  His mini vaca away from Meghan might also add to his happy demeanor.


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> I think our only frames of reference are Archie Bunker and Archie comic books.



UM......GK....Did you forget the Archies and their hit song Sugar Sugar??


----------



## CeeJay

OH YES .. Lacoste shirts, Bermuda or Nantucket Bags and then the obligatory Tiffany Shell bracelet!!!  I'm cringing right now ...


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> OH YES .. Lacoste shirts, Bermuda or Nantucket Bags and then the obligatory Tiffany Shell bracelet!!!  I'm cringing right now ...


And married men wore flashy pants in hot pink with frogs embroidered all over. Canvas in summer and corduroy in winter.


----------



## CobaltBlu

and seersucker, good grief biff and muffy, don't forget seersucker


----------



## CeeJay

chowlover2 said:


> And married men wore flashy pants in hot pink with frogs embroidered all over. Canvas in summer and corduroy in winter.





CobaltBlu said:


> and seersucker, good grief biff and muffy, don't forget seersucker



I'm HOWLING because OMG .. this is such familiar territory to me, and get this @CobaltBlu .. had a neighbor by the name of Biff and know someone named Muffie!!!! .. and does anyone else remember during the College years, when those girls had their pearl nip & notch so those Pearls would NEVER come off her neck!!! 

@chowlover2 .. were Bass Weejuns popular in Philly?  EVERYONE wore them (and if you had the nubbed leather versions - you had $$$)!!!  Of course, you HAD to put the Penny in the 'slot'!!!


----------



## queennadine

CeeJay said:


> What amazed me rather early on in their 'public' displays (although honestly, it shouldn't have now to think about it) .. was how Meghan would go ahead of Harry and/or (somewhat) push him into place!  To me, that showed who wears the britches in that family, and it's not him.  However, to do that publicly??? .. whoa!  So, then I wondered .. was she schooled in any protocol in regards to this, as in:  "Harry should always go first .."?  Could be, but yet she just can't help her narcissistic tendencies  -OR-  she doesn't really give a rat's a$$ and again .. ME, ME, ME-GHAN!



YES YES YES. It always seemed so odd to me that she would lead him by having her arm around his back and signaling for him to go through a door first, or pat a couch for him to sit. The strangest behavior. 

And I’m loving all of these prep references


----------



## Vintage Leather

I didn't know that this was where all the cool kids are hanging out these days!  Hi!!

Okay, I have thoughts. I feel like no one actually planned out their exit strategy - something must have happened behind the scenes to cause them to go this far off the rails.

Honestly, I'm really disappointed in Harry and Meghan.

I had actually bet cookies that Sussex Royal would start off their "brand" with a television series "highlighting their charities" and the "work of the royal family." (She _was_ a star of Suits, you know)

I got this vibe from the way they plastered the South Africa pictures, well, everywhere.  They felt so... tv publicity shot worthy?

This show would have required them to create a production company, needing all sorts of government sponsorship (a la Edward demanding a ridiculously large estate in the late 90s, early 2000s for "his production company" because he was going to "be an ordinary man of the people".)

After some dramatic scandals and the show bombs, citing the "overwhelming attention of the press" , they divorce, and Megxit happens at the 4 year point, with the newly minted Miss M positioning herself as an a la Angelina Jolie "philanthropist". And because people happen to _love_ her sense of style, she might collaborate with a few brands "For charity, dolls"

Like, did they seriously go into this con without an exit strategy?! I'm really not getting how they are planning on monitizing this Sussex Royal road apples without having product to sell.  It's like the difference between Kylie Cosmetics and Dash


----------



## CobaltBlu

VL!!  Welcome doll!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> I'm HOWLING because OMG .. this is such familiar territory to me, and get this @CobaltBlu .. had a neighbor by the name of Biff and know someone named Muffie!!!! .. and does anyone else remember during the College years, when those girls had their pearl nip & notch so those Pearls would NEVER come off her neck!!!
> 
> @chowlover2 .. were Bass Weejuns popular in Philly?  EVERYONE wore them (and if you had the nubbed leather versions - you had $$$)!!!  Of course, you HAD to put the Penny in the 'slot'!!!
> View attachment 4677589


Yes, we had Bass Weejuns, I nearly forgot about them. Seersucker everything. Boston and Philly are like twins. Only difference here is the way the city is laid off. I know they said cows laid out the roads in Boston, but Philly is easy to get around. Unless you go to the great Northeast which I think cows laid out too.


----------



## chowlover2

Hopefully the dirt will come out in a few weeks. I was reading another thread and in it they had a quote from Richard Porter a well known royal reporter. He said we have barely seen the tip of the iceberg because of they injunction they have. If it’s dropped all he$$ will break loose.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chowlover2 said:


> Hopefully the dirt will come out in a few weeks. I was reading another thread and in it they had a quote from Richard Porter a well known royal reporter. He said we have barely seen the tip of the iceberg because of they injunction they have. If it’s dropped all he$$ will break loose.



Dirt on the RF or on the Sussexes?


----------



## Grande Latte

bag-mania said:


> I blame Harry for not having the cojones to stand up to her if that's the case. He goes along with everything she wants. Maybe he is so averse to taking responsibility that he is secretly grateful to have someone else making all the decisions for him. Meghan like to take charge and control and Harry likes to be controlled, it's the key to their codependency.



Yes. They are a sick combo.


----------



## 1LV

mrsinsyder said:


> It looks pretty stupid with the hundreds of people in the background. I'm guessing they'll scrub them out of existence, Markle-style.


So right!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t understand. Does Harry actually play guitar or is he just letting himself be photographed holding one?


----------



## kemilia

Emeline said:


> I believe the date is June 13 2020.


Thank you!


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder if we might see the brothers together next week, Wales are playing England in the Six Nations. William is Patron of the Wales Rugby Union and Harry is Patron of the England one. Its on the 7th.


----------



## imgg

CobaltBlu said:


> UM......GK....Did you forget the Archies and their hit song Sugar Sugar??



Love this song.....


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if we might see the brothers together next week, Wales are playing England in the Six Nations. William is Patron of the Wales Rugby Union and Harry is Patron of the England one. Its on the 7th.



I wonder too.....I wouldn't be surprised if they both go and don't sit next to each other...... I hope they do though, the press would go wild if they don't!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I wonder too.....I wouldn't be surprised if they both go and don't sit next to each other......



I would think Charles would tell them to sit together.  Hopefully Harry can keep the pout off his face.


----------



## Chagall

What are the chances of ‘M’ showing up in the UK for the scheduled upcoming events. I don’t see it happening but who knows.


----------



## queennadine

^ I can’t even make a guess as to whether or not she’ll show. 

I can see it going both ways, honestly. She doesn’t go and blames it on Coronavirus or Archie. Or she goes for the Insta content. 

No clue!


----------



## queennadine

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...arkle-Royal-Family-security-clash-news-latest


----------



## lanasyogamama

Coronavirus gave her a great excuse to not show up. I think the brothers have to sit together, it would look really bad if they didn’t.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

queennadine said:


> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...arkle-Royal-Family-security-clash-news-latest


Good news if true. 
Welcome to the real world "Just Harry."
Most of us have to deal with some sort of budget.
Maybe Meg can put an extra tab in her binder and you two can crunch some numbers.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I imagine the Queen loves to have the real costs of her family splashed all over the media for tax payers to see and consider.


----------



## Aminamina

A1aGypsy said:


> I imagine the Queen loves to have the real costs of her family splashed all over the media for tax payers to see and consider.


And Prince Charles, too! They are single-handedly bringing the monarchy down. Talking about "sawing off the _branch you_'re _sitting on" _


----------



## sdkitty

Aminamina said:


> And Prince Charles, too! They are single-handedly bringing the monarchy down. Talking about "sawing off the _branch you_'re _sitting on" _


I think he's going to be sorry - if he isn't already


----------



## PewPew

queennadine said:


> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...arkle-Royal-Family-security-clash-news-latest



Brace yourself. In response, the persecuted Megatron may be forced to post another stern public service announcement on the Sussex website to remind the Queen that Harry is:

1) 6th IN LINE TO THE THRONE
2) a gosh darn PRINCE
3) Historically the Queen’s most favorite grandchild
4) has a son who is 7th IN LINE TO THE THRONE
5) has red hair

Thus they are divinely ENTITLED to “basic” security amounting to $20 million per annum while living OUTSIDE the UK. (They cannot help that they can “only exist, but not truly LIVE” in the UK because everyone there is racist, sexist, mean & unfair.)

Ironically they could have kept so much funding and perks if they just quietly stepped back from being “working” royals or (just scaled back their relatively few engagements). By issuing a public decree of “woe is me, we’re leaving,” the Queen has no choice but to be firm because all of this is public.


----------



## kemilia

queennadine said:


> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...arkle-Royal-Family-security-clash-news-latest


It says M will be back in the UK on March 5; circle your calendars, buy your popcorn now!


----------



## kemilia

PewPew said:


> Brace yourself. In response, the persecuted Megatron may be forced to post another stern public service announcement on the Sussex website to remind the Queen that Harry is:
> 
> 1) 6th IN LINE TO THE THRONE
> 2) a gosh darn PRINCE
> 3) Historically the Queen’s most favorite grandchild
> 4) has a son who is 7th IN LINE TO THE THRONE
> 5) has red hair
> 
> Thus they are divinely ENTITLED to “basic” security amounting to $20 million per annum while living OUTSIDE the UK. They cannot help that they can “only exist, but not truly LIVE” in the UK.
> 
> Ironically if they could have kept so much funding and perks if they just stepped back from being “working” royals or (just scaled back their relatively few engagements) and didn’t issue a public decree of “woe is me, we’re leaving.”  The Queen has no choice but to be firm because all of this is public.


How can they really believe that they are entitled to this security, this is so embarrassing for them, showing both of them as the childish, entitled brats that they are. And then having these $$ numbers splashed all over the news--the last thing the RF needs at this point, yikes.


----------



## Aminamina

kemilia said:


> How can they really believe that they are entitled to this security, this is so embarrassing for them, showing both of them as the childish, entitled brats that they are. And then having these $$ numbers splashed all over the news--the last thing the RF needs at this point, yikes.


----------



## youngster

PewPew said:


> Ironically they could have kept so much funding and perks if they just quietly stepped back from being “working” royals or (just scaled back their relatively few engagements). By issuing a public decree of “woe is me, we’re leaving,” *the Queen has no choice but to be firm because all of this is public*.



So true, they could have handled their withdrawal with so much more maturity and discretion. Maybe they planned to make a big, splashy exit (right before Kate's birthday too) and thought they could control the narrative and spin and generate sympathy and wouldn't listen to anyone about the real consequences. 

They might also be incredibly out of touch with the actual amount of the massive financial support they receive (paid staff, paid government security, Charles' annual income distribution to them, etc.). After all, that's what they have staff for, right?  People who crunch numbers, organize events, write speeches, and tell Harry when to show up. I could see the two of them meeting with staff in their Vancouver bunker and Harry telling the staff to get busy developing a billion dollar business for him and the Duchess!  Can't be that hard, right?  Meghan told him the money would just come rolling in.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So true, they could have handled their withdrawal with so much more maturity and discretion. Maybe they planned to make a big, splashy exit (right before Kate's birthday too) and thought they could control the narrative and spin and generate sympathy and wouldn't listen to anyone about the real consequences.
> 
> They might also be incredibly out of touch with the actual amount of the massive financial support they receive (paid staff, paid government security, Charles' annual income distribution to them, etc.). After all, that's what they have staff for, right?  People who crunch numbers, organize events, write speeches, and tell Harry when to show up. I could see the two of them meeting with staff in their Vancouver bunker and Harry telling the staff to get busy developing a billion dollar business for him and the Duchess!  Can't be that hard, right?  Meghan told him the money would just come rolling in.



Delusional duo.   I think you may be onto something. He definitely as no clue about real life costs, but she should.  She worked, paid taxes rent and clothed herself. No excuse for her to not see the huge amounts of money being paid for them. I think he is oblivious or he wouldn’t be renting out entire first  class train carriages round trip. That came to about 28k GBP. Kate and William just took the train and sat with the common folk. .


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Delusional duo.   I think you may be onto something. He definitely as no clue about real life costs, but she should.  She worked, paid taxes rent and clothed herself. No excuse for her to not see the huge amounts of money being paid for them. I think he is oblivious or he wouldn’t be renting out entire first  class train carriages round trip. That came to about 28k GBP. Kate and William just took the train and sat with the common folk. .



That's what I thought, that Meghan would be the more practical one, more grounded in reality about finances, but based on the amount she spent on clothes . . . _mamma mia!  _That was just an obscene amount of money even if she was starting a royal and maternity wardrobe from nothing. I also think that, once you obtain a certain level of success in Hollywood, lots of free stuff starts rolling in and I think she's gotten used to the freebies over time.


----------



## Clearblueskies

They just hadn’t thought any of it through.  It’s all very well having an overall objective and some lofty ideas, but someone has to think about details in order to make it happen, and it seems that neither imstillanHRHanddontUforgetit or justcallmeHarry bothered to.


----------



## Aminamina

youngster said:


> That's what I thought, that Meghan would be the more practical one, more grounded in reality about finances, but based on the amount she spent on clothes . . . _mamma mia!  _That was just an obscene amount of money even if she was starting a royal and maternity wardrobe from nothing. I also think that, once you obtain a certain level of success in Hollywood, lots of free stuff starts rolling in and I think she's gotten used to the freebies over time.


That makes them horrendous hippocrates. Then they go arownd "bringing awareness" asking regular people to donate their dollars or pounds to the charities they "support"..


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> That's what I thought, that Meghan would be the more practical one, more grounded in reality about finances, but based on the amount she spent on clothes . . . _mamma mia!  _That was just an obscene amount of money even if she was starting a royal and maternity wardrobe from nothing. I also think that, once you obtain a certain level of success in Hollywood, lots of free stuff starts rolling in and I think she's gotten used to the freebies over time.


She thought the bank was always going to be open and the vaults were bottomless.  Rather a naive view of the BRF but not unusual from what I’ve seen here.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> That's what I thought, that Meghan would be the more practical one, more grounded in reality about finances, but based on the amount she spent on clothes . . . _mamma mia!  _That was just an obscene amount of money even if she was starting a royal and maternity wardrobe from nothing. I also think that, once you obtain a certain level of success in Hollywood, lots of free stuff starts rolling in and I think she's gotten used to the freebies over time.


I don't think she ever reached the freebie level in Hollywood.  Top level actresses receive boxes of clothes from designers.  I don't think she ever qualified.  As I mentioned in a previous post, I never thought that amount of money was actually spent on her clothes post marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Taking 20 million GBP from the budget of the Metropolitan Police Service is a huge amount that directly impacts the safety of UK citizens. That's money that could be used for patrol officers, investigating crimes, public outreach, training and education for officers, all kinds of things directly related to public safety.  To demand that this money be spent on three people who reside _outside_ of the UK, engaged in private money making ventures, is just unconscionable. This is not a battle they are going to win, it's a PR disaster.  The sooner they recognize that the better.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I don't think she ever reached the freebie level in Hollywood.  Top level actresses receive boxes of clothes from designers.  I don't think she ever qualified.  As I mentioned in a previous post, I never thought that amount of money was actually spent on her clothes post marriage.



That's right, I remember your post now, about how many of her clothes in the past year or so were likely free in exchange for wearing them to red carpet type events.  That makes sense.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Taking 20 million GBP from the budget of the Metropolitan Police Service is a huge amount that directly impacts the safety of UK citizens. That's money that could be used for patrol officers, investigating crimes, public outreach, training and education for officers, all kinds of things directly related to public safety.  To demand that this money be spent on three people who reside _outside_ of the UK, engaged in private money making ventures, is just unconscionable. This is not a battle they are going to win, it's a PR disaster.  The sooner they recognize that the better.



Now that this has hit the tabloids, there will be and should be a huge outcry over spending this amount of money.  It is so unrealistic!  The idea that these people should be allowed to have separate security teams simply because one of them  likes to traverse a continent or an ocean is ridiculous!  I fail to see what is so special about any of them in general.  They should pay their own way if they are feeling threatened and I think the "threats" are imaginary and self created to magnify their self importance.  If a person needs a security guy by their side to make them feel important, then that person has much bigger issues and should get some help.  They must have been children who needed mom or dad to look under the bed or inspect the closet for bogey men before they could go to sleep.  As for personal assistants, they can pay for those as well.


----------



## Jayne1

chowlover2 said:


> Topsider's were a thing in Philly too. Maybe a Northeast thing??? Along with Lacoste polo shirts and Bermuda bags. I am old...LOL!


Topsiders were huge in Toronto too, but I also remember at first having to go to Buffalo to get them.  lol


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> .. were Bass Weejuns popular in Philly?  EVERYONE wore them (and if you had the nubbed leather versions - you had $$$)!!!  Of course, you HAD to put the Penny in the 'slot'!!!
> View attachment 4677589


Yes, yes, yes!  Penny loafers.  Toronto here  - that's all I wore in high school.


----------



## Aminamina

OK. I have a suggestion for the Su$$exes to trademark "Meghan Prince kit"


----------



## chowlover2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dirt on the RF or on the Sussexes?


Dirt on the Sussexes!


----------



## gracekelly

chowlover2 said:


> Dirt on the Sussexes!


Why do I think it is related to Archie?


----------



## chowlover2

I keep waiting for a prank ala the Kardashians to prove the Successes need the security ( and attention ) Remember when KK had someone hit her with a sack of flour on the red carpet?


----------



## Chagall

kemilia said:


> It says M will be back in the UK on March 5; circle your calendars, buy your popcorn now!


I will believe it when I see it!


----------



## Chagall

A1aGypsy said:


> I imagine the Queen loves to have the real costs of her family splashed all over the media for tax payers to see and consider.


If I were the queen I would be absolutely seething at this point.


----------



## bag-princess

*It's Official: Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Will Keep Their Titles*

One of the major questions following Meghan and Harry's announcement that they wanted to step back from their "senior" roles in the royal family revolved around their titles. Would they remain his and her royal highness? What about Duke and Duchess of Sussex?

Here's what we know about what their future plans mean for their royal titles:

While they will retain their His and Her Royal Highness titles, they will no longer actively use them.
In mid-January, Buckingham Palace issued a statement clarifying that beginning this spring, Harry and Meghan will step back from official royal duties and no longer use the titles His Royal Highness and Her Royal Highness. They will continue to use the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Read the statement in full here:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are grateful to Her Majesty and the Royal Family for their ongoing support as they embark on the next chapter of their lives.

As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties.

With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations. While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.

The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home.

Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security.

This new model will take effect in the Spring of 2020.

When Harry and Meghan first shared their plans, they signed the initial statement as "Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex," indicating that they wanted to keep their royal status and titles while "starting to carve out a progressive new role."
Their website, titled Sussex Royal was another indication that they hoped to both keep and continue to use their titles.

As the Sussexes point out on their website, there have been other royals, who have retained their HRH status while earning a professional income.

"Yes, there is precedent for this structure and applies to other current members of the Royal Family who support the monarch and also have full time jobs external to their commitment to the monarchy," reads their description.

But it should be noted that a scenario exactly like Harry and Meghan's, in which a senior member of the royal family wants to become financially independent but still have some royal duties, is unprecedented.

In February, the Sussexes clarified their titles moving forward on their website.
"As agreed and set out in January, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will retain their “HRH” prefix, thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex," they wrote.

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer actively use their HRH titles as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020."

They will no longer use the name Sussex Royal.
While Harry and Meghan's Instagram and website used the branding Sussex Royal, they will no longer use that name following their transition out of their senior royal roles.

"Given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word ‘Royal’, it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation will not utilise the name ‘Sussex Royal’ or any other iteration of ‘Royal,’" the couple wrote on their website.

"While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/official-prince-harry-meghan-markle-133100309.html


----------



## kemilia

So they're going to be like other "royals" that have a title but really aren't anything--Lee Radziwell and "The Countess" come to mind. Harry being SIXTH IN SUCCESSION is getting pretty watered down day by day ...


----------



## lanasyogamama

I suddenly hope Kate has 4 more kids!!


----------



## michellem

lanasyogamama said:


> I suddenly hope Kate has 4 more kids!!


 Right?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> I suddenly hope Kate has 4 more kids!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lmaoooo


----------



## chicinthecity777

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmaoooo
> View attachment 4678285


Wait!!! I thought they wanted privacy!
BTW, anybody who don't want to bomb their movie would not want to touch that!!!


----------



## bag-princess

kemilia said:


> So they're going to be like other "royals" that have a title but really aren't anything--Lee Radziwell and "The Countess" come to mind.* Harry being SIXTH IN SUCCESSION is getting pretty watered down day by day ...*




i don't think he minds that at all.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> *It's Official: Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Will Keep Their Titles*
> 
> One of the major questions following Meghan and Harry's announcement that they wanted to step back from their "senior" roles in the royal family revolved around their titles. Would they remain his and her royal highness? What about Duke and Duchess of Sussex?
> 
> Here's what we know about what their future plans mean for their royal titles:
> 
> While they will retain their His and Her Royal Highness titles, they will no longer actively use them.
> In mid-January, Buckingham Palace issued a statement clarifying that beginning this spring, Harry and Meghan will step back from official royal duties and no longer use the titles His Royal Highness and Her Royal Highness. They will continue to use the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Read the statement in full here:
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are grateful to Her Majesty and the Royal Family for their ongoing support as they embark on the next chapter of their lives.
> 
> As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties.
> 
> With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations. While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.
> 
> The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home.
> 
> Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security.
> 
> This new model will take effect in the Spring of 2020.
> 
> When Harry and Meghan first shared their plans, they signed the initial statement as "Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex," indicating that they wanted to keep their royal status and titles while "starting to carve out a progressive new role."
> Their website, titled Sussex Royal was another indication that they hoped to both keep and continue to use their titles.
> 
> As the Sussexes point out on their website, there have been other royals, who have retained their HRH status while earning a professional income.
> 
> "Yes, there is precedent for this structure and applies to other current members of the Royal Family who support the monarch and also have full time jobs external to their commitment to the monarchy," reads their description.
> 
> But it should be noted that a scenario exactly like Harry and Meghan's, in which a senior member of the royal family wants to become financially independent but still have some royal duties, is unprecedented.
> 
> In February, the Sussexes clarified their titles moving forward on their website.
> "As agreed and set out in January, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will retain their “HRH” prefix, thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex," they wrote.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer actively use their HRH titles as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020."
> 
> They will no longer use the name Sussex Royal.
> While Harry and Meghan's Instagram and website used the branding Sussex Royal, they will no longer use that name following their transition out of their senior royal roles.
> 
> "Given the specific UK government rules surrounding use of the word ‘Royal’, it has been therefore agreed that their non-profit organisation will not utilise the name ‘Sussex Royal’ or any other iteration of ‘Royal,’" the couple wrote on their website.
> 
> "While there is not any jurisdiction by The Monarchy or Cabinet Office over the use of the word ‘Royal’ overseas, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex do not intend to use ‘Sussex Royal’ or any iteration of the word ‘Royal’ in any territory (either within the UK or otherwise) when the transition occurs Spring 2020."
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/official-prince-harry-meghan-markle-133100309.html


this is ridiculous and annoying to me.  she marries a prince, they basically quite their "jobs" as royals in less than two years and she - the American - gets to keep her royal title?  She's not royalty to me.


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmaoooo
> View attachment 4678285


You have got to be kidding right. This is getting way beyond ridiculous. A super hero!


----------



## Straight-Laced

*Sorry, great-grandma, but Meghan is leaving Prince Archie in Canada for this trip*
ROYA NIKKHAH Sunday March 01 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...ince-archie-in-canada-for-this-trip-pfsmkrpmh
"While Boris Johnson and his fiancée, Carrie Symonds, wait for their baby to arrive, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor will not be filling the void of sweet celebrity baby sightings.

When the Duchess of Sussex returns to the UK from Canada for a final round of engagements with Prince Harry, who arrived last week, she is expected — again — to leave behind their nine-month-old son.

The news will be disappointing for the Queen and the royal family, who are understood to be “very sad” that they have seen so little of Archie since his birth.

The Queen, 93, and the Duke of Edinburgh, 98, first met their eighth great-grandchild in May, when he was two days old at Windsor Castle. They did not attend his christening at the castle two months later, however, as it clashed with a private weekend they host annually at Sandringham.

Archie is understood to have first met his cousins, Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, in July at a polo match that Prince William and Harry played in, but contact since is said to have been minimal.

The last official sighting of Archie was a photograph of Harry holding his son, published on the Sussex Royal Instagram account on New Year’s Eve.

Archie has yet to set foot on British soil this year, having spent the past three months in Canada, where Harry and Meghan have been staying in a mansion in Vancouver Island. It is thought he will remain in Canada with the Sussexes’ nanny, and with Meghan’s friend Jessica Mulroney, while they are in the UK.

If he remains in Canada, he is also set to miss out on meeting a new playmate. Harry’s closest friend, Charlie van Straubenzee, and his wife, Daisy, have had their first child. Their daughter, Clover, was born on Wednesday, and Harry is expected to be her godfather."


----------



## 1LV

It appears MM is ruthlessly ambitious, Harry is her lap dog and Archie is collateral damage.  If this is true and there really such a thing as karma...


----------



## cafecreme15

Straight-Laced said:


> The Queen, 93, and the Duke of Edinburgh, 98, first met their eighth great-grandchild in May, when he was two days old at Windsor Castle. They did not attend his christening at the castle two months later, however, as it clashed with a private weekend they host annually at Sandringham.



Would anyone be surprised in the least if her leaving Archie behind every time she goes to the UK and deprives his family of time with him was payback for the above?


----------



## Annawakes

I’m still confused about the “having” the titles but not “using” them.  What exactly does that mean?  People are not to *call* them HRH verbally but in *writing* they can be referred to as HRH?


----------



## 1LV

cafecreme15 said:


> Would anyone be surprised in the least if her leaving Archie behind every time she goes to the UK and deprives his family of time with him was payback for the above?


Wouldn’t be surprised in the least.  I would be more surprised if she took him at all as long as the queen is alive.


----------



## bag-mania

cafecreme15 said:


> Would anyone be surprised in the least if her leaving Archie behind every time she goes to the UK and deprives his family of time with him was payback for the above?



The joke's on them. I don't think anyone feels deprived of time with Archie. There are already lots of grandkids and great-grandkids in the family and they have barely met Archie. 

Archie is the one who will be deprived of knowing his relatives on both sides, with the possible exception of Doria. I hope whichever nanny is actually doing all of the work caring for him is fond of the boy.


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> The joke's on them. I don't think anyone feels deprived of time with Archie. There are already lots of grandkids and great-grandkids in the family and they have barely met Archie.
> 
> Archie is the one who will be deprived of knowing his relatives on both sides, with the possible exception of Doria. I hope whichever nanny is actually doing all of the work caring for him is fond of the boy.




I don’t care how many grandchildren there are - they can’t replace another one. That’s not how it works.  And I am speaking as a grandmother myself. A much younger one than the Queen and I have only one right now but if I had a dozen even one missing would be a big hole!


----------



## Vintage Leather

Only one of the three Sussexes isn’t covered in sh— after this fiasco, and I’m pretty sure it’s the one who’s still pooping himself every few hours. 

Don’t know about you, but can Archie come to the UK, and MsSuperhero and justcallmeHarry stay in Vancouver?


----------



## 1LV

bag-princess said:


> I don’t care how many grandchildren there are - they can’t replace another one. That’s not how it works.  And I am speaking as a grandmother myself. A much younger one than the Queen and I have only one right now but if I had a dozen even one missing would be a big hole!


Exactly!  And if Harry is as special to The Queen as it seems he is then I would imagine her not seeing his child is heartbreaking.  Shame on MM and shame on Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

bag-princess said:


> I don’t care how many grandchildren there are - they can’t replace another one. That’s not how it works.  And I am speaking as a grandmother myself. A much younger one than the Queen and I have only one right now but if I had a dozen even one missing would be a big hole!



Perhaps. But Archie is a great-grandson who was barely taken to see the Queen before he moved out of the country at six-months-old. I’m sure she does regret not being allowed to form a relationship with him.


----------



## bag-princess

bag-mania said:


> Perhaps. But Archie is a great-grandson who was barely taken to see the Queen before he moved out of the country at six-months-old. I’m sure she does regret not being allowed to form a relationship with him.




 barely having a relationship with someone doesn't make you love them or miss them any less.    i think it would make it even more hurtful to her - she rarely saw him before he moved out of the country and now he is on the other side of the pond. believe me she feels it.  out of sight does not mean out of mind in this situation.   and if she is the kind of woman that could dismiss a baby that easily because of how things happened with his parents - i don't blame them for not wanting any part of that.  but i don't think she is that cold hearted.  no matter how much she keeps the stiff upper lip in public and press releases  i would bet big money she is missing being able to have archie around like the others.   it's awful that they have taken him away from them.


----------



## mdcx

Re. Archie, she is a vindictive little miss isn’t she?
Jess M is some of bodyguard/spy imo, to report back to Meghan in case anyone unauthorised tries to see Archie.


----------



## bag-mania

bag-princess said:


> barely having a relationship with someone doesn't make you love them or miss them any less.    i think it would make it even more hurtful to her - she rarely saw him before he moved out of the country and now he is on the other side of the pond. believe me she feels it.  out of sight does not mean out of mind in this situation.   and if she is the kind of woman that could dismiss a baby that easily because of how things happened with his parents - i don't blame them for not wanting any part of that.  but i don't think she is that cold hearted.  no matter how much she keeps the stiff upper lip in public and press releases  i would bet big money she is missing being able to have archie around like the others.   it's awful that they have taken him away from them.



It ticks me off that they are using Archie as a pawn like that. IF  Meghan actually goes back I think she’s supposed to be there for at least two weeks, isn’t she? That’s a long time for parents to be away from their baby.


----------



## chaneljewel

Meghan will NEVER be considered royal to me.  She’s an opportunist at best.


----------



## lulilu

Milosmum0307 said:


> There’s been some grumbling about diary conflicts and the Markles being scheduled for engagements while the Cambridges are on their tour of Ireland, leading to concerns of the former receiving more press attention than the latter.  If Megalomania has any hesitation about showing up to the UK for her swan song, the promise of breathless press coverage and pulling focus from her in-laws should be enough motivation for her to show up.  *Anyone who wears a maternity coat to a wedding five minutes after peeing on a stick in order to provoke speculation and then announces the pregnancy at said wedding surely salivates at the idea of overshadowing others.  *My guess is she doesn’t want to pull attention from Harry’s... whatever it is Harry is actually doing in the UK right now, but we’ll probably see some commissioned OMG So Candid pap shots once there’s a lull in coverage.  If we don’t, it will be because she’s breaking in new oversized shoes and prepping her wig for her upcoming engagements.   At least, that’s what I hope.  I’m looking forward to some new rumpled, sweat-stained appearances from The People’s Duchess.
> 
> (Edited repeatedly because I can’t spell.)



The minute I knew who she really is.  What a horrid thing to do.


----------



## purseproblm

Think of all the times she’s left him for trivial things like tennis matches that she wasn’t wanted for. Honestly he’s her Get out of Britain card. I can’t be separated from him for this long and since the Cam kids may have been exposed to covid-19 we can’t risk it. I have to stay and or go back earlier than Harry.


----------



## Jayne1

I'm a huge Queen admirer, but the fact is, she had very little time for her children, let alone her grandchildren, so I think not seeing one of her many great-grandchildren (royal and common) may not be that huge to her.


----------



## cafecreme15

Jayne1 said:


> I'm a huge Queen admirer, but the fact is, she had very little time for her children, let alone her grandchildren, so I think not seeing one of her many great-grandchildren (royal and common) may not be that huge to her.


Again also would not surprise me if Meghan thought the Queen was losing sleep over this when the only person she is really hurting in the long term is Archie.


----------



## threadbender

It isn't like Archie is with other family or anything, either. Maybe, if they had gone somewhere that he had cousins or grandparents etc, it might not look so bad. But, he has aunts, uncles, grandparents, great-grandparents cousins all in the UK and he has no interaction with them. It is beyond sad.

If Meg thought it through, she would bring him and act like it is so important to her and Harry that Archie be close to his family. That they could work together as a family even if not at the "job". The positive optics would be amazing. What kind of actress is she? It would be so easy and beneficial. As it is, preventing any sort of connection to his elderly great-grandparents makes her look like the petty woman she is. If she wanted to get some big positive press, she would bring that little boy to the UK and play up how gracious and forgiving she is. She will deal with the "toxicity" and try to create a loving relationship for her son. smh


----------



## Straight-Laced

I think Meghan continuing to keep Archie away from his British family is showing a cruel streak, but a lot of narcissists are cruel so not unexpected.

Right now she could pull any stunt.  Obvious things like suddenly arriving with Archie (_OMG Archie's here_, so all focus on Meghan), or she could not come at all, or turn up showing her 'independence' by wearing something inappropriate and/or pointedly not follow protocols re bowing and curtsying etc, etc.  Not turn up and contrive some distraction at home. Or she could turn up and perform her very best Duchess act ever, to remind everyone of her status ...
She'll do whatever gets her most attention.  It's so tired now but Meghan just has to do the unexpected, and be defiant, and try to keep everyone guessing.  It's a feature of her 'problematic' personality.


----------



## Emeline

One thing for certain, M is always planning  something unpleasant to stir the pot. It's how she lives.
I continue to hope the nanny is kind and truly enjoys caring for Archie.


----------



## lalame

chaneljewel said:


> Meghan will NEVER be considered royal to me.  She’s an opportunist at best.



If you don’t lose your royalty card when you leave royal duties, you definitely do when you become a Marvel superhero!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmaoooo
> View attachment 4678285


This has made my day.  Hilarious  


bag-princess said:


> barely having a relationship with someone doesn't make you love them or miss them any less.    i think it would make it even more hurtful...


I’m sure Meghan’s father could vouch for the truth of this.


----------



## maryg1

youngster said:


> That's right, I remember your post now, about how many of her clothes in the past year or so were likely free in exchange for wearing them to red carpet type events.  That makes sense.


Soon after the January “we want to be free” statement, I watched a TV show where a journalist (I think) said he received almost everyday e-mails from fashion houses or PR stating what Megan was wearing, just like any other celeb, and he stressed multiple times this had never happened before with any other royal. He clearly hinted that Megan PR was behind this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Straight-Laced said:


> The last official sighting of Archie was a photograph of Harry holding his son, published on the Sussex Royal Instagram account on New Year’s Eve.


sssshhhade


----------



## lulilu

Leaving Archie behind is a pure in-your-face power play.  Nothing she does surprises me at this point.  And you know they will raise fear of  coronavirus if challenged (especially now that people expect them to fly commercial lol). 

I just get the sense she is sitting all day plotting and planning.  Sick weirdo.


----------



## kemilia

purseproblm said:


> Think of all the times she’s left him for trivial things like tennis matches that she wasn’t wanted for. Honestly he’s her Get out of Britain card. I can’t be separated from him for this long and since the Cam kids may have been exposed to covid-19 we can’t risk it. I have to stay and or go back earlier than Harry.


She cradled her belly for every photo op for the entire pregnancy yet has no qualms about leaving him with others for stuff like you mentioned--she is such a total fake.


----------



## PewPew

threadbender said:


> It isn't like Archie is with other family or anything, either. Maybe, if they had gone somewhere that he had cousins or grandparents etc, it might not look so bad



On a few occasions “friends” have disclosed Archie was in the safe and loving care of stylist BFF Jessica Mulroney— modern day Mary Poppins. But Jess does have nannies and a lot of help for her own kids, so whoever is actually watching Archie is likely competent. (Provided there are no faux-pap opportunities, in which case a carefully styled Meg will step in to sling the baby around in a poorly adjusted carrier... while walking two dogs ...with one hand ...while 2 UK-funded securitymen watch. Total Supermom who must do it all, poor dear.)


----------



## LittleStar88

PewPew said:


> On a few occasions “friends” have disclosed Archie was in the safe and loving care of stylist BFF Jessica Mulroney— modern day Mary Poppins. But Jess does have nannies and a lot of help for her own kids, so whoever is actually watching Archie is likely competent. (Provided there are no faux-pap opportunities, in which case a carefully styled Meg will step in to sling the baby around in a poorly adjusted carrier... while walking two dogs ...with one hand ...while 2 UK-funded securitymen watch. Total Supermom who must do it all, poor dear.)



one of the dudes was on the phone and not paying attention to anything around him.

This whole thing makes me sad for the direction it is heading. She really let them all think she was down for the BRF role but she was scheming the whole time.


----------



## queennadine

It’s so incredibly nasty of her not to bring Archie. When is Charles going to see his grandson again? Will TQ and PP see him before they pass?

This is just beyond. She should have flown over with Harry and camped out at Frogmore. That IS their home there after all, isn’t it?

The only role she qualifies for in a superhero movie is the most conniving villain of all time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You know...20 years from now Archie will hate her. My mother pulled the same sh*t as in refusing contact to relatives for completely selfish reasons, and it took me well into adulthood to process, but once I did it hasn't helped our relationship. I just don't get Harry's role in this anymore at all.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I know that it would be a catastrophe of epic proportions for the BRF if they were to follow through, but I’m not sure I would be taking my son back to a place where my MIL has full legal right to grab him. Especially after I had just orchestrated a power play against her. 

What a mess they have made.


----------



## imgg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know...20 years from now Archie will hate her. My mother pulled the same sh*t as in refusing contact to relatives for completely selfish reasons, and it took me well into adulthood to process, but once I did it hasn't helped our relationship. I just don't get Harry's role in this anymore at all.


Harry role:  Happy Wife Happy Life, so he thinks now....

She holds the cards with that baby and knows it.


----------



## Tivo

Meghan’s vindictiveness is starting to resemble her sister Samantha’s. Just different target.


----------



## imgg

Tivo said:


> Meghan’s vindictiveness is starting to resemble her sister Samantha’s. Just different target.


True- and different methods.  Meghan is the silent deadly one you don't see coming, Samantha you see (or hear) a mile a way.....


----------



## mshermes

Well....if this happens to be true, Megs is now in seventh heaven....

Interesting statement in the DM article: 'Meghan is keen to step out occasionally without Harry so that she can establish herself once more in Hollywood.'

*Meghan Markle will attend the star-studded Met Gala alongside Vogue editor Edward Enninful in May after quitting royal life  *


----------



## purseproblm

mshermes said:


> Well....if this happens to be true, Megs is now in seventh heaven....
> *Meghan Markle will attend the star-studded Met Gala alongside Vogue editor Edward Enninful in May after quitting royal life  *


Of course she is. She’s been dropping those hints recently with the super cringeworthy videos on insta that she was going.


----------



## 1LV

mshermes said:


> Well....if this happens to be true, Megs is now in seventh heaven....
> *Meghan Markle will attend the star-studded Met Gala alongside Vogue editor Edward Enninful in May after quitting royal life  *


“Living well is the best revenge“, but I’m still counting on karma to come through in the long run!


----------



## limom

The Duchess wants to be cast as a super hero:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html
Marvel is having a hard time casting for she-hulk...


win-win


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Milosmum0307

mshermes said:


> Well....if this happens to be true, Megs is now in seventh heaven....
> *Meghan Markle will attend the star-studded Met Gala alongside Vogue editor Edward Enninful in May after quitting royal life  *


Oh, please, Lord Mithra, let this be true.  The People’s Ex-Duchess with her bedraggled weave and pit-stains on the Met Gala red carpet???  It would be an early Christmas.  The only disappointing bit about this is the suggestion that she would be Enninful’s date rather than appearing with her lap dog ... er, husband.  Maybe Private Citizen Harry can tag along to hold her umbrella?  It would be a prime opportunity for Mr. Markle to model a fancy new toupee and try his hand again at groveling to Hollywood power players to give his wife a job?  Since it’s a costume ball, she can dispense with subtlety and wear a cape or even a full-on superhero costume to advertise her charitable, philanthropic availability for the next big comic book blockbuster (because if anything says “A-lister who can carry a special effects-heavy action movie with a $300million dollar budget” it is SURELY “the aging ingenue from Suits who did sex scenes in supply closets” ... again, PLEASE LET THIS RUMOR BE TRUE.)


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> It’s so incredibly nasty of her not to bring Archie. When is Charles going to see his grandson again? Will TQ and PP see him before they pass?
> 
> This is just beyond. She should have flown over with Harry and camped out at Frogmore. That IS their home there after all, isn’t it?
> 
> The only role she qualifies for in a superhero movie is the most conniving villain of all time.



When Archie is older, all Charles, The Queen and Prince Philip will be to him are people of history. Even if he is still young when they pass, he'll never have any memories of them. One of my grandfathers died when I was 4 and I have fond memories of him, not many but I do.
Looks like Archie will never have that.


----------



## Clearblueskies

limom said:


> The Duchess wants to be cast as a super hero:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html
> Marvel is having a hard time casting for she-hulk...
> View attachment 4678771
> 
> win-win


They’d have to shoot her from the knees up, nope 


Milosmum0307 said:


> Oh, please, Lord Mithra, let this be true.  The People’s Ex-Duchess with her bedraggled weave and pit-stains on the Met Gala red carpet???  It would be an early Christmas.  The only disappointing bit about this is the suggestion that she would be Enninful’s date rather than appearing with her lap dog ... er, husband.  Maybe Private Citizen Harry can tag along to hold her umbrella?  It would be a prime opportunity for Mr. Markle to model a fancy new toupee and try his hand again at groveling to Hollywood power players to give his wife a job?  Since it’s a costume ball, she can dispense with subtlety and wear a cape or even a full-on superhero costume to advertise her charitable, philanthropic availability for the next big comic book blockbuster (because if anything says “A-lister who can carry a special effects-heavy action movie with a $300million dollar budget” it is SURELY “the aging ingenue from Suits who did sex scenes in supply closets” ... again, PLEASE LET THIS RUMOR BE TRUE.)


I know, literally cannot wait to see what god-awful outfit she turns up in 



Sharont2305 said:


> When Archie is older, all Charles, The Queen and Prince Philip will be to him are people of history. Even if he is still young when they pass, he'll never have any memories of them. One of my grandfathers died when I was 4 and I have fond memories of him, not many but I do.
> Looks like Archie will never have that.


I think it’s a miscalculation on the wanna be a movie stars part.  By not allowing Archie (poor little puppet) to associate and be pictured with the real Royals, he’s kind of less royal seeming.  We don’t even see him with JCMH do we?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> Oh, please, Lord Mithra, let this be true.



It would be entertaining for sure, but I just feel if the universe was at least a tiny bit fair it wouldn't allow for this awful person to go to fun events and feel important.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Diana changed things by refusing to leave her children behind when they were very young.  Meg is the anti-Diana.


----------



## Emeline

Sophisticatted said:


> Diana changed things by refusing to leave her children behind when they were very young.  *Meg is the anti-Diana*.


Indeed.
M could certainly bring him along and let nanny manage all the actual care.
But, that risks photos of him, I suppose.
What's the scheme here?
Is she planning to sell photos of him periodically and needs to keep interest and offers high?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Emeline said:


> Indeed.
> M could certainly bring him along and let nanny manage all the actual care.
> But, that risks photos of him, I suppose.
> What's the scheme here?
> Is she planning to sell photos of him periodically and needs to keep interest and offers high?


We’ll be seeing a lot of Archie in Tig2 I’m sure


----------



## Corneto

Emeline said:


> Indeed.
> M could certainly bring him along and let nanny manage all the actual care.
> But, that risks photos of him, I suppose.
> What's the scheme here?
> Is she planning to sell photos of him periodically and needs to keep interest and offers high?



Perhaps. One of the most popular speculations is that this is all holding out for the first birthday photos. And if that is the case, someone will bite. But again, that’s a one shot, short term venture, motivated by greed and entitlement, and won’t morph into a long term income stream.

Personally i don’t believe MM gives a green fig for young Archie beyond his merchandising value. Which is why once again I think she’s grossly miscalculating the best use of the one credible bargaining chip she’s got left. Refusing to take him on this trip is not a demonstration of maternal concern for the risk of the Corona virus - it’s just another one of her “up yours” gestures that will do even more damage to her already shredded credibility. 

It is also possible that Archie’s real value to the BRF is not as high as anyone wants to believe - not necessarily that they’re particularly “cold hearted” but in the succession game, he’s not a player. Again I think we’ll have a better idea of how important they think he is once the real “separation package” is finalized.

And then again, they might surprise them all and send MI6 in there one night and simply bring Archibald home...
You never know...


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> Indeed.
> M could certainly bring him along and let nanny manage all the actual care.
> But, that risks photos of him, I suppose.
> What's the scheme here?
> Is she planning to sell photos of him periodically and needs to keep interest and offers high?


maybe from her stans.....personally I couldn't care less.....I'll take it a step further (not trying to be mean - this is true).  I think he's a cute enough baby but that Charlotte is adorable.  Love pics of her.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

mshermes said:


> Well....if this happens to be true, Megs is now in seventh heaven....
> 
> Interesting statement in the DM article: 'Meghan is keen to step out occasionally without Harry so that she can establish herself once more in Hollywood.'
> 
> *Meghan Markle will attend the star-studded Met Gala alongside Vogue editor Edward Enninful in May after quitting royal life  *


This is made even funnier by the fact she only has the Vogue connection because she was a part of the BRF. They weren’t banging on her door before then.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know...20 years from now Archie will hate her. My mother pulled the same sh*t as in refusing contact to relatives for completely selfish reasons, and it took me well into adulthood to process, but once I did it hasn't helped our relationship. I just don't get Harry's role in this anymore at all.


YES!!  I was thinking the same, such rich history on his fathers side, yet .. MM is denying him the opportunity to be with them because she is a narcissistic spiteful biatch!


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> Well....if this happens to be true, Megs is now in seventh heaven....
> 
> Interesting statement in the DM article: 'Meghan is keen to step out occasionally without Harry so that she can establish herself once more in Hollywood.'
> 
> *Meghan Markle will attend the star-studded Met Gala alongside Vogue editor Edward Enninful in May after quitting royal life  *


HA! .. once more in Hollywood - HA!!  Dream on, dream on ..


----------



## Tivo

imgg said:


> True- and different methods.  Meghan is the silent deadly one you don't see coming, Samantha you see (or hear) a mile a way.....


I think Meghan is pretty vocal, on the Sussex IG page, in the statements on their website, the way she rambles on during interviews, trying to sound like the smartest person in the room, to her actions with Archie (which will follow him years from now)
There is an undercurrent of “seething” that is similar to Samantha’s


----------



## Tivo

limom said:


> The Duchess wants to be cast as a super hero:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html
> Marvel is having a hard time casting for she-hulk...
> View attachment 4678771
> 
> win-win


The offers must not be rolling in if she’s advertising herself this way. 
Trying to let everyone know - despite all the drama, she’s available for roles out there that she wants. 
Lol


----------



## kemilia

Emeline said:


> Indeed.
> M could certainly bring him along and let nanny manage all the actual care.
> But, that risks photos of him, I suppose.
> What's the scheme here?
> Is she planning to sell photos of him periodically and needs to keep interest and offers high?


I think you hit the nail on the head. Keep the Archie interest high, it's the only thing she has that anyone cares about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Am I missing something here or is MM totally deluded about herself. I see a middle aged, not particularly pretty or fit woman, and she sees a superhero. Her fulfillment is right underneath her nose, *Archie*!! and she wants to bound around in a mask and cape. It’s just absolutely laughable.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> HA! .. once more in Hollywood - HA!!  Dream on, dream on ..


Maybe her costume will come with a full crown, ya' know.... to remind the plebes.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Am I missing something here or is MM totally deluded about herself. I see a middle aged, not particularly pretty or fit woman, and she sees a superhero. Her fulfillment is right underneath her nose, *Archie*!! and she wants to bound around in a mask and cape. It’s just absolutely laughable.


is this for real?  I have to admit I don't read everything here......I agree with what someone said above--they'd have to shoot her from the knees up 

or pad those legs and put tights on them


----------



## imgg

Tivo said:


> I think Meghan is pretty vocal, on the Sussex IG page, in the statements on their website, the way she rambles on during interviews, trying to sound like the smartest person in the room, to her actions with Archie (which will follow him years from now)
> There is an undercurrent of “seething” that is similar to Samantha’s


Meghan is vocal, but in a more passive-aggressive way, while Samantha is just aggressive.  I think that's why Meghan was able to fool a lot of people initially. What we see of Meghan's actions thus far, is so much more obnoxious than her loud-mouthed half sister.


----------



## imgg

Kim O'Meara said:


> This is made even funnier by the fact she only has the Vogue connection because she was a part of the BRF. They weren’t banging on her door before then.


She doesn't see it that way.  She feels entitled, this is the life that she is supposed to have. She does not care how it happened, just the fact it is happening.

I would love to know how many eyerolls she is getting in Hollywood.  Wonder if they are capable of seeing things the way we do.


----------



## kemilia

Kim O'Meara said:


> This is made even funnier by the fact she only has the Vogue connection because she was a part of the BRF. They weren’t banging on her door before then.


She will take any crumb that is offered. 

Based on the ill-fitting outfits she's worn in the past 1-1/2 years, I look forward to seeing what she throws on for this event.


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> She doesn't see it that way.  She feels entitled, this is the life that was supposed have. She does not care how it happened, just the fact it is happening.
> 
> I would love to know how many eyerolls she is getting in Hollywood.  Wonder if they are capable of seeing things the way we do.


I don't think so....based on what Helen Mirren said recently seems she still has a lot of support at least publicly.  Even if there were some women in Hollywood who thought she didn't earn the adulation she's gotten, they probably wouldn't dare say so publicly in fear of looking anti-feminist.

Now, Rose McGowan might say something if she had a different opinion but I don't think anyone has asked her

oops, how could I forget?  don't want to look racist by criticizing the duchess


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> is this for real?  I have to admit I don't ready everything here......I agree with what someone said above--they'd have to shoot her from the knees up
> 
> or pad those legs and put tights on them


I remember when she wore knee high boots they were always baggy, looking like they were gonna fall down. Yes, shoot from the knees up.


----------



## imgg

sdkitty said:


> I don't think so....based on what Helen Mirren said recently seems she still has a lot of support at least publicly.  Even if there were some women in Hollywood who thought she didn't earn the adulation she's gotten, they probably wouldn't dare say so publicly in fear of looking anti-feminist.


I agree.  I think most people sold their soul to get to HW, so what Meghan is doing is just par for the course. She is one of them now....welcome to the dark side.


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> I know that it would be a catastrophe of epic proportions for the BRF if they were to follow through, but I’m not sure I would be taking my son back to a place where my MIL has full legal right to grab him. Especially after I had just orchestrated a power play against her.
> 
> What a mess they have made.



The Queen would never do that in a million years. She’s far too smart to incite media turmoil by being called a child snatcher. Plus, why would she do it? She has absolutely no reason to want to force Archie to stay in England.


----------



## A1aGypsy

bag-mania said:


> The Queen would never do that in a million years. She’s far too smart to incite media turmoil by being called a child snatcher. Plus, why would she do it? She has absolutely no reason to want to force Archie to stay in England.



I conceded that. However, If I were a parent, I’m still not sure I would be taking my child into a turbulent situation if it was even a possibility, no matter how remote it was.


----------



## Tivo

*“She is said to have agreed to record a voiceover for Disney in exchange for a donation to charity after Prince Harry was filmed telling studio boss Bob Iger at the UK premiere of The Lion King last summer that his wife was available for such work. Disney sources said discussions are ongoing. One top Disney executive told The Mail on Sunday: 'Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. She's a controversial figure.”*

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html


She has a pattern of always nagging somebody about giving her something.


----------



## Tivo

.


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get Harry's role in this anymore at all.


Hint:


----------



## imgg

Tivo said:


> *“She is said to have agreed to record a voiceover for Disney in exchange for a donation to charity after Prince Harry was filmed telling studio boss Bob Iger at the UK premiere of The Lion King last summer that his wife was available for such work. Disney sources said discussions are ongoing. One top Disney executive told The Mail on Sunday: 'Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. She's a controversial figure.”*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html
> 
> 
> She has a pattern of always nagging somebody about giving her something.


Would love to know what was going through Beyoncé's mind during this interaction.  I can't tell if its admiration or disgust.

I say give her a starring role. Lets see how much money they can lose in one movie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> I conceded that. However, If I were a parent, I’m still not sure I would be taking my child into a turbulent situation if it was even a possibility, no matter how remote it was.


The turbulent situation is Meghan IMHO, [emoji23]


----------



## Milosmum0307

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would be entertaining for sure, but I just feel if the universe was at least a tiny bit fair it wouldn't allow for this awful person to go to fun events and feel important.


Yeah, I have to look for the silver lining.  The only thing more mind-boggling than the transparency of her pursuit of the sort of celebrity neither her “talent” nor even her decade and a half of Herculean hustling had been able to secure before her marriage to Dim is her stans’ level of mass delusion at denying it. I suspect that the only thing she has ever really wanted to “shine a light on” was her own headshot.  It’s annoying that her Machiavellian scheming is bearing the fruit she clearly wanted, but at least we can enjoy the unintended comedy that reliably accompanies her public appearances.


----------



## V0N1B2

Tivo said:


> She has a pattern of always nagging somebody about giving her something.


Sure, how do you think she got the ring?


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> The Queen would never do that in a million years. She’s far too smart to incite media turmoil by being called a child snatcher. Plus, why would she do it? She has absolutely no reason to want to force Archie to stay in England.


As things stand this would take Archie away from his father as well.  No one’s going to do that.


----------



## youngster

imgg said:


> She doesn't see it that way.  She feels entitled, this is the life that she is supposed to have. She does not care how it happened, just the fact it is happening.
> 
> I would love to know how many eyerolls she is getting in Hollywood.  Wonder if they are capable of seeing things the way we do.



I think she will get a shot in Hollywood, they'll give her a chance to see what she can do. Is she a legit draw on TV or at the box office beyond just a one-time novelty?  Does she do a great acting job given the chance? She might be able to build a TV career again filled with guest starring type parts.  That's not what she wants of course.  She hopes for a major motion picture career and prestigious indie productions but that is highly unlikely.  She doesn't have the screen presence, charisma, or acting talent plus she's almost 40.  She is competing with so many in that age range like Scarlett Johansson, Anne Hathaway, Natalie Portman, etc.  But, everyone in Hollywood thinks they could win an Oscar if only given the opportunity so she likely thinks so too.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> When Archie is older, all Charles, The Queen and Prince Philip will be to him are people of history. Even if he is still young when they pass, he'll never have any memories of them. One of my grandfathers died when I was 4 and I have fond memories of him, not many but I do.
> Looks like Archie will never have that.


He has two other grandparents he doesn't see either and they're significantly younger than the royal bunch. Meghan dislikes her own family so much it seemed extremely obvious she'd not care about taking away Archie's family ties. She'll probably let Harry have Archie in the end. Her interest in family and motherhood seem rather minimal and for financial gain.


----------



## imgg

Tivo said:


> *“She is said to have agreed to record a voiceover for Disney in exchange for a donation to charity after Prince Harry was filmed telling studio boss Bob Iger at the UK premiere of The Lion King last summer that his wife was available for such work. Disney sources said discussions are ongoing. One top Disney executive told The Mail on Sunday: 'Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. She's a controversial figure.”*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html
> 
> 
> She has a pattern of always nagging somebody about giving her something.


Maybe this is why she is going back to the UK, to show Hollywood she is still in with the Royals.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Tivo said:


> *“One top Disney executive told The Mail on Sunday: 'Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. She's a controversial figure.”  *



That’s a death knell in the industry. They aren’t going to be welcome anywhere soon.


----------



## youngster

imgg said:


> Maybe this is why she is going back to the UK, to show Hollywood she is still in with the Royals.



Oh, for sure, she has to maintain the impression that she still has that connection and that they are still "much loved" members of the Queen's family.  There will be lots of pasted-on smiles for a few days while she is there.  Can't imagine the awkward silences when they are around the rest of the family, which will probably be very limited.  Maybe they can talk about the weather.  It would be a natural thing to ask about Archie and if he is walking or whatever, but I can imagine that could be really awkward too so they might avoid that topic as well.  I think the rest of the family will want to be in as few photos with them as possible, though some are likely inevitable especially from the Commonwealth Service.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> The turbulent situation is Meghan IMHO, [emoji23]



I wholeheartedly agree with that! Or, well, I’d through Harry in as well. I don’t give him a pass.


----------



## Milosmum0307

A1aGypsy said:


> I know that it would be a catastrophe of epic proportions for the BRF if they were to follow through, but I’m not sure I would be taking my son back to a place where my MIL has full legal right to grab him. Especially after I had just orchestrated a power play against her.
> 
> What a mess they have made.


Though it has been widely reported and speculated upon, it is not really true that the Queen or Charles have a legal right to “grab” Archie, that the monarch has legal custody of all direct heirs in the UK, etc.  It’s an exaggeration, at least.  It’s is a misunderstanding/misapplication of a law enacted under George I when he and his heir were engaged in an infamous pissing competition of great historical magnitude, and I believe most legal scholars dismiss it as having any practical application today.  It last became an issue during Chuck and Di’s divorce, when supposedly she floated the idea of raising Her Boys abroad, and this ancient law was dusted off to dissuade her.  In this case we are not talking about the heir to the throne as we were when it came to William.  Archie is so far down the line of succession that neither the Queen nor a future King Charles would bother to risk the PR nightmare of invoking this ancient, context-specific law in order to detain him in the UK and make a martyr out of MM.  (Though she could sell the movie rights and play herself in a grand Hallmark Channel made-for-TV film spectacular reminiscent of Sally Field’s “Not Without My Daughter.”  I would totally watch!  I have basic cable.)  If Megster and Dim want to keep their child away from a family they find truly “toxic,” that’s fair enough, I guess, but losing custody of their kid is probably not a real concern.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Milosmum0307 said:


> Though it has been widely reported and speculated upon, it is not really true that the Queen or Charles have a legal right to “grab” Archie, that the monarch has legal custody of all direct heirs in the UK, etc.  It’s an exaggeration, at least.  It’s is a misunderstanding/misapplication of a law enacted under George I when he and his heir were engaged in an infamous pissing competition of great historical magnitude, and I believe most legal scholars dismiss it as having any practical application today.  It last became an issue during Chuck and Di’s divorce, when supposedly she floated the idea of raising Her Boys abroad, and this ancient law was dusted off to dissuade her.  In this case we are not talking about the heir to the throne as we were when it came to William.  Archie is so far down the line of succession that neither the Queen nor a future King Charles would bother to risk the PR nightmare of invoking this ancient, context-specific law in order to detain him in the UK and make a martyr out of MM.  (Though she could sell the movie rights and play herself in a grand Hallmark Channel made-for-TV film spectacular reminiscent of Sally Field’s “Not Without My Daughter.”  I would totally watch!  I have basic cable.)  If Megster and Dim want to keep their child away from a family they find truly “toxic,” that’s fair enough, I guess, but losing custody of their kid is probably not a real concern.



I don’t agree that it is an exaggeration or does not exist, the prerogative was properly enacted and is still in effect today. So the legal right is there. However, I do agree with you (as I have said) that she would be bonkers to enact it.  That being said, Diana was prevented from heading to Australia and Fergie had difficulties accessing her daughters when they were in disfavour with the Crown.  So the Crown can be quite persuasive it seems. And, as I have said, regardless of what the threat is, I don’t see a parent readily walking into a scenario like that.

Assuming the prerogative didn’t apply and you were a plan old married couple who had married and had a baby in the UK and then left for Canada on an extended stay. If you both re-entered the UK and your husband then decided he wasn’t going back, you could have a hard time removing the child. And who knows what their relationship is right now.

I’ll fully concede that there is spit involved. But I also suspect it is a bit more than that.  But who knows? We shall see in a couple days.  Maybe she will surprise us all and the two of them will be there with bells on.

Also, the Hallmark channel IS looking for a star right now. They have a space open...  This could be a true blessing.


----------



## 1LV

Milosmum0307 said:


> Though it has been widely reported and speculated upon, it is not really true that the Queen or Charles have a legal right to “grab” Archie, that the monarch has legal custody of all direct heirs in the UK, etc.  It’s an exaggeration, at least.  It’s is a misunderstanding/misapplication of a law enacted under George I when he and his heir were engaged in an infamous pissing competition of great historical magnitude, and I believe most legal scholars dismiss it as having any practical application today.  It last became an issue during Chuck and Di’s divorce, when supposedly she floated the idea of raising Her Boys abroad, and this ancient law was dusted off to dissuade her.  In this case we are not talking about the heir to the throne as we were when it came to William.  Archie is so far down the line of succession that neither the Queen nor a future King Charles would bother to risk the PR nightmare of invoking this ancient, context-specific law in order to detain him in the UK and make a martyr out of MM.  (Though she could sell the movie rights and play herself in a grand Hallmark Channel made-for-TV film spectacular reminiscent of Sally Field’s “Not Without My Daughter.”  I would totally watch!  I have basic cable.)  If Megster and Dim want to keep their child away from a family they find truly “toxic,” that’s fair enough, I guess, but losing custody of their kid is probably not a real concern.


You do have a way with shade, and I’m thoroughly enjoying it.


----------



## Milosmum0307

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t agree that it is an exaggeration or does not exist, the prerogative was properly enacted and is still in effect today. So the legal right is there. However, I do agree with you (as I have said) that she would be bonkers to enact it.  That being said, Diana was prevented from heading to Australia and Fergie had difficulties accessing her daughters when they were in disfavour with the Crown.  So the Crown can be quite persuasive it seems. And, as I have said, regardless of what the threat is, I don’t see a parent readily walking into a scenario like that.
> 
> Assuming the prerogative didn’t apply and you were a plan old married couple who had married and had a baby in the UK and then left for Canada on an extended stay. If you both re-entered the UK and your husband then decided he wasn’t going back, you could have a hard time removing the child. And who knows what their relationship is right now.
> 
> I’ll fully concede that there is spit involved. But I also suspect it is a bit more than that.  But who knows? We shall see in a couple days.  Maybe she will surprise us all and the two of them will be there with bells on.
> 
> Also, the Hallmark channel IS looking for a star right now. They have a space open...  This could be a true blessing.


Is there a possibility for a prime photo opp for Archie like the Desmond Tutu encounter?  Something to advance their self-proclaimed “progressive” narrative?  If so, perhaps we’ll catch a glimpse of the little curtain crawler!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her only chance is if she absolutely kills it in these upcoming appearances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I think she will get a shot in Hollywood, they'll give her a chance to see what she can do. Is she a legit draw on TV or at the box office beyond just a one-time novelty?  Does she do a great acting job given the chance? She might be able to build a TV career again filled with guest starring type parts.  That's not what she wants of course.  She hopes for a major motion picture career and prestigious indie productions but that is highly unlikely.  She doesn't have the screen presence, charisma, or acting talent plus she's almost 40.  She is competing with so many in that age range like Scarlett Johansson, Anne Hathaway, Natalie Portman, etc.  But, everyone in Hollywood thinks they could win an Oscar if only given the opportunity so she likely thinks so too.



I agree somebody will give her a chance. Notoriety sells tickets just like any other aspect of fame. I seriously doubt she'll get a starring role in a feature film but I can see a supporting role for sure. She has plenty of fangirls here in the US and the media here are still being extremely supportive for the most part.


----------



## Lounorada

Tivo said:


> * One top Disney executive told The Mail on Sunday: 'Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. She's a controversial figure.”*


That last part must have stung M so much to hear. Oh dear...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Courtesy of Daily Mail UK, another red-carpet event bites the dust, oh man! ♥️
*
“The Duchess of Sussex, 38, will reportedly attend the 2020 Met Gala in New York”

*


----------



## mrsinsyder

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Courtesy of Daily Mail UK, another red-carpet event bites the dust, oh man! ♥️
> *
> “The Duchess of Sussex, 38, will reportedly attend the 2020 Met Gala in New York”
> *


This has been a shameless attention ho event for some time now. 

Hopefully this year’s theme is “spent a lot of money but still look tragic”


----------



## michellem

V0N1B2 said:


> Hint:
> View attachment 4678886


----------



## A1aGypsy

Milosmum0307 said:


> Is there a possibility for a prime photo opp for Archie like the Desmond Tutu encounter?  Something to advance their self-proclaimed “progressive” narrative?  If so, perhaps we’ll catch a glimpse of the little curtain crawler!



Now now, her progressive narrative is going to fully realized by her appearance at the Met Gala. She’s so beyond needing a Tutu at this point...


----------



## marietouchet

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Courtesy of Daily Mail UK, another red-carpet event bites the dust, oh man! ♥️
> *
> “The Duchess of Sussex, 38, will reportedly attend the 2020 Met Gala in New York”
> *


Fake news ? I don’t buy it ... she is too controversial at the moment ... could be wrong 
yesterday’s fake news was her having ginormous contract with Disney


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> Leaving Archie behind is a pure in-your-face power play.  Nothing she does surprises me at this point.  And you know they will raise fear of  coronavirus if challenged (especially now that people expect them to fly commercial lol).
> 
> I just get the sense she is sitting all day plotting and planning.  Sick weirdo.



Yes, Mrs Machiavelli





kemilia said:


> She cradled her belly for every photo op for the entire pregnancy yet has no qualms about leaving him with others for stuff like you mentioned--she is such a total fake.



She held Archie more then than she does now. 


Sharont2305 said:


> When Archie is older, all Charles, The Queen and Prince Philip will be to him are people of history. Even if he is still young when they pass, he'll never have any memories of them. One of my grandfathers died when I was 4 and I have fond memories of him, not many but I do.
> Looks like Archie will never have that.



People in a history book and nothing more. 


kemilia said:


> She will take any crumb that is offered.
> 
> Based on the ill-fitting outfits she's worn in the past 1-1/2 years, I look forward to seeing what she throws on for this event.


 
Only major designers at the Gala and they will want a woman who can wear the clothes. She definitely  doesn’t  qualify.   


imgg said:


> Maybe this is why she is going back to the UK, to show Hollywood she is still in with the Royals.



This is a very interesting thought. She has no value without a royal connection.   She needs to be seen on good terms with The Queen. The question is will TQ be nice and allow this after all that has happened?  If she totally goes for the surprise move and takes Archie she will win major points.


----------



## Gal4Dior

V0N1B2 said:


> Hint:
> View attachment 4678886


Oh wow, that is unnecessarily gruesome to look at.  I guess he has his amazing personality to fall back on...oh wait...


----------



## Gal4Dior

bag-mania said:


> I agree somebody will give her a chance. Notoriety sells tickets just like any other aspect of fame. I seriously doubt she'll get a starring role in a feature film but I can see a supporting role for sure. She has plenty of fangirls here in the US and the media here are still being extremely supportive for the most part.


I see her being a part of an off brand version of The View, providing her woke word salad on the daily on top of fashion and lifestyle segments.  A bunch of D list celebrities at a round table discussin’ the “news.”

That, along with a social media presence will propel her to be the next off brand Goop! Just think about all the celebrities she would rub elbows with? All the free goodies, red carpet moments (probably her reporting on them, but on the red carpet all the same lol), freedom to merch her little heart out, and plenty of time to do TV spots, commercials, and bit parts in movies. 

All she needed was a nice stream of cash coming in to help her. First it was Trevor’s, now it’s from Harry/Papa Charles. When she makes it “big,” watch how soon the BRF, especially her faithful Hubs who gave it all up for love, will be Markled!


----------



## PewPew

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Courtesy of Daily Mail UK, another red-carpet event bites the dust, oh man! ♥️
> *
> “The Duchess of Sussex, 38, will reportedly attend the 2020 Met Gala in New York”*



Remember how the Sussexes issued a peevish statement where they insisted they require global security because of Harry’s birthright and *“the Duchess’ own independent profile”? And the world said “What independent profile??!”*

Until now, her “profile” (even to most of America) was as Harry’s companion. The Met Gala is a splashy way to launch that “independent” profile. It must be a drag to know you’re in high demand... to introduce Harry & say how much you love your husband, before he gives a $1million corporate talk about his dead mother.

The Met event is a critical, calculated move for her image. It’s known for over-the-top costumes & international press coverage and high-fashion interest. She’s likely been working out, speaking to designers & planning since the 2020 theme was announced in Nov 2019 (Theme —About Time: Fashion and Duration). She’ll easily fit in with the pretentiousness of the event.  It’s a coveted invite, even among A-listers, and the amount of hot air released by interviewees that night is hilarious.


----------



## bag-princess

PewPew said:


> Haha. Remember how the Sussexes issued a peevish statement where they insisted they require global security because of Harry’s birthright and *“the Duchess’ own independent profile”?*
> 
> Well until now, her “profile” (even to most of America) was as Harry’s companion. The Met Gala is a way to actually start building that “independent” profile. Since right now, she’s being invited to introduce Harry & say how much she loves her husband, before he gives a $1million corporate talk about his dead mother.
> 
> The Met event is a critical, calculated move for her image. It’s known for over-the-top costumes & international press coverage. *She’s likely been working out, speaking to designers & planning since the 2020 theme was announced in Nov 2019 (Theme —About Time: Fashion and Duration)*. She just needs to nail the look, since we know she’ll easily mesh with the pretentiousness of a high-fashion, costume event.




i guarantee you that she wouldn't be the only one this applies to!   from the interviews with people that have attended through the years they don't mind telling you how long they planned everything.  so i don't understand why she would be any different.


----------



## bag-mania

PewPew said:


> The Met event is a critical, calculated move for her image. It’s known for over-the-top costumes & international press coverage. She’s likely been working out, speaking to designers & planning since the 2020 theme was announced in Nov 2019 (Theme —About Time: Fashion and Duration). She just needs to nail the look, since we know she’ll easily mesh with the pretentiousness of a high-fashion, costume event.



But, but... all of the support they have received was over their right to be left alone! Meghan pimping herself out among the fashion, celebs, and paparazzi, does not synch up with their demand for aloneness. This may confuse their clueless fans.


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> This has been a shameless attention ho event for some time now.
> 
> Hopefully this year’s theme is “spent a lot of money but still look tragic”


Once Kim started attending, it went down the toilet.


----------



## Lounorada

We'll find out in May if she actually attends or not, but I have a feeling the Met Gala is another one of those rumours put out into the media by M and her minions (like the presenting at the Oscars rumour) as a type of ego boost to make her feel like she's important and sought-after enough to attend these big events but also as a public reminder/hint-dropper to the people involved in the guestlist for these events that she should be there, in her opinion.
She seems to love to talk about herself in a way where it almost forces the other person to compliment or praise her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> Once Kim started attending, it went down the toilet.


Kim _and_ her siblings.


----------



## CeeJay

Tivo said:


> *“She is said to have agreed to record a voiceover for Disney in exchange for a donation to charity after Prince Harry was filmed telling studio boss Bob Iger at the UK premiere of The Lion King last summer that his wife was available for such work. Disney sources said discussions are ongoing. One top Disney executive told The Mail on Sunday: 'Meghan needs Disney more than Disney needs Meghan. She's a controversial figure.”*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sex-tells-agent-role-Hollywood-superhero.html
> 
> 
> She has a pattern of always nagging somebody about giving her something.


.. and Iger just stepped down as the Disney CEO, so ...


----------



## purseproblm

CeeJay said:


> .. and Iger just stepped down as the Disney CEO, so ...


He got Markled... Like so many before him and like many after


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I think she will get a shot in Hollywood, they'll give her a chance to see what she can do. Is she a legit draw on TV or at the box office beyond just a one-time novelty?  Does she do a great acting job given the chance? She might be able to build a TV career again filled with guest starring type parts.  That's not what she wants of course.  She hopes for a major motion picture career and prestigious indie productions but that is highly unlikely.  She doesn't have the screen presence, charisma, or acting talent plus she's almost 40.  She is competing with so many in that age range like Scarlett Johansson, Anne Hathaway, Natalie Portman, etc.  But, everyone in Hollywood thinks they could win an Oscar if only given the opportunity so she likely thinks so too.


Just knowing how highly she thinks of herself, how much you want to bet that she would ask for more $$$$ than she’s worth?  Many of the studios are adverse to spending a lot of money if they don’t have a “sure thing” .. then again, her stans would likely see it multiple times!


----------



## Jayne1

PewPew said:


> On a few occasions “friends” have disclosed Archie was in the safe and loving care of stylist BFF Jessica Mulroney— modern day Mary Poppins. But Jess does have nannies and a lot of help for her own kids, so whoever is actually watching Archie is likely competent. (Provided there are no faux-pap opportunities, in which case a carefully styled Meg will step in to sling the baby around in a poorly adjusted carrier... while walking two dogs ...with one hand ...while 2 UK-funded securitymen watch. Total Supermom who must do it all, poor dear.)


That's what confuses me.  Jess watching Archie while her own children (very cute, I might add) are on another coast. 

And it's not like Jess isn't busy.  She's always up to something, so how could she travel to BC to babysit someone else's baby?


----------



## lulilu

Jayne1 said:


> That's what confuses me.  Jess watching Archie while her own children (very cute, I might add) are on another coast.
> 
> And it's not like Jess isn't busy.  She's always up to something, so how could she travel to BC to babysit someone else's baby?



I don't believe for a second that Jess is watching Archie.  I am sure there is a babysitter/nanny of some sort.  Why would Jess leave her children like that?


----------



## HiromiT

lulilu said:


> I don't believe for a second that Jess is watching Archie.  I am sure there is a babysitter/nanny of some sort.  Why would Jess leave her children like that?


Of course Jess isn’t babysitting Archie. She has her own kids, a husband, and a job while living on the opposite coast. But by claiming that Jess is Archie’s babysitter,  Meghan hopes it gives people a more favourable impression than leaving him behind with an army of nannies while she traverses the globe. She always held him so awkwardly that you could tell she doesn’t spend much time with him. That poor kid is a pawn in her game.


----------



## bag-mania

So Harry and Meghan have been apart for a few days. I wonder what they are both feeling right now. Is it separation anxiety, relief, loss of control, or something else?

I am imagining Meghan blowing up Harry’s phone with about 100 texts a day.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> So Harry and Meghan have been apart for a few days. I wonder what they are both feeling right now. Is it separation anxiety, relief, loss of control, or something else?
> 
> I am imagining Meghan blowing up Harry’s phone with about 100 texts a day.


----------



## duna

I still don't think she'll turn up in the UK......Time will tell....


----------



## mdcx

There’s still time for her to get ”sick”, or be advised by “experts” that it is safer for her not to travel bc Coronavirus.


----------



## Chagall

Apparently M isn’t taking Archie back to the UK with her in March. Won’t this increase the cost of security as the baby will need security in Canada and Meghan would need it in the UK. I’m not sure which country would be paying for what. Is Canada paying here until they step down in the spring and the UK when she is over there?


----------



## mdcx

I honestly think that the higher the security bill gets, the more ecstatic M gets. It’s a measure of her “worth” in an obviously twisted way.


----------



## Sharont2305

From Buckingham Palace, on paper.... she's attending.


----------



## Allisonfaye

As we said...

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-superhero


Meghan Markle aiming for superhero blockbuster movie role: Report


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

V0N1B2 said:


> Hint:
> View attachment 4678886


Give it a hair cut, rub off a bald spot and it would be a perfect depiction of the doofus Pimping Prince of Markleville, you know the one who used to be a real man before the witch cast her spell.


----------



## queennadine

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rry-Meghan-Markle-stay-1-100-week-Airbnb.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> From Buckingham Palace, on paper.... she's attending.




I want to say this is what BP thinks is happening. I wouldn't put it past her to pull a last minute stunt.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I want to say this is what BP thinks is happening. I wouldn't put it past her to pull a last minute stunt.


Lol, this is why I said on paper. I still think she won't be there.


----------



## imgg

gracekelly said:


> Yes, Mrs Machiavelli
> 
> This is a very interesting thought. She has no value without a royal connection.   She needs to be seen on good terms with The Queen. The question is will TQ be nice and allow this after all that has happened?  If she totally goes for the surprise move and takes Archie she will win major points.


My guess the Queen will greet her with open arms, like she did previously.  She doesn't want to be on bad terms with Harry or Harry's wife.  She is able to separate her personal opinion of Meghan for the sake of getting along.  Meghan on the other hand will use her pervious antics as a bargaining chip, knowing the Queen doesn't want the press and will probably get a bit more than she should, like keeping her title.


----------



## Vintage Leather

So, since justcallmeHarry and MsSuperhero aren’t Royal any more, do they really need protection? 

A 2-3 man team on an infant Archie will be fine, and they can stay in the residence! 

see, I just saved taxpayers $19.8 million.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Yes, Mrs Machiavelli
> 
> This is a very interesting thought. She has no value without a royal connection.   She needs to be seen on good terms with The Queen. The question is will TQ be nice and allow this after all that has happened?  If she totally goes for the surprise move and takes Archie she will win major points.


Agree  
The family disputes on both sides - Markle and BRF - are painful to hear - think nails on a chalk board - and my initial reaction was to hope he comes -  let Gan Gan & Philip see him - that would be a tiny step in the right direction ... I am one for compromise and meeting half way, as a general rule - that is me, which is irrelevant 
But, then, I thought that A is a pawn in this mess, maybe he should be out of it, I dunno , he should NOT be part of a major photo op just tea with the Queen would be nice to hear about


----------



## marietouchet

Got to thinking about Met Gala 
The British Vogue editor may want to extend an invite but... it is up to Anna Wintour - she keeps it about fashion and clothes not politics or family squabbles 
Wintour invites ********ic-leaning people, Meghan qualifies but AW picks people who contribute quietly like Beyonce, Karlie Kloss etc WIntour does not invite overtly political people or candidates - I doubt we will see Michael Bloomberg either at the Ball


----------



## daisychainz

I believe Meghan will go to the upcoming UK events. By showing up we are reminded she is part of the royal family. Her royal ties are very important for any future projects so showing up keeps that image of royalty alive for future $/projects. I imagine she also wants to show off how she is thriving since the move. And she probably has no idea she is disliked, she might be under some illusion that the world admires her and wants to see her. No freebie pics of Archie, so I think he stays behind or hidden away. I can't imagine they'd want her at Beatrice's wedding, but she'll probably go.


----------



## Grande Latte

She's gone from famous to infamous now. I check out this thread from time to time, but really since they moved on, the world just doesn't really care about these two anymore.


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> Got to thinking about Met Gala
> The British Vogue editor may want to extend an invite but... it is up to Anna Wintour - she keeps it about fashion and clothes not politics or family squabbles
> Wintour invites ********ic-leaning people, Meghan qualifies but AW picks people who contribute quietly like Beyonce, Karlie Kloss etc WIntour does not invite overtly political people or candidates - I doubt we will see Michael Bloomberg either at the Ball



Why in the world does Anna Wintour invite the Kardashians?? I guess if they go ANYONE can go, even MM the Duchess


----------



## youngster

Chagall said:


> Apparently M isn’t taking Archie back to the UK with her in March. Won’t this increase the cost of security as the baby will need security in Canada and Meghan would need it in the UK. I’m not sure which country would be paying for what. Is Canada paying here until they step down in the spring and the UK when she is over there?



I read that if they leave Archie behind, it will cost £50,000 for the security that has to be left behind.  That's an insane amount of money that could be used for so many other things in the UK.  That cost alone should have pushed them into taking Archie with them.  But, no no, those two are too important to be bothered with petty things like saving UK taxpayers massive amounts of money that could be used to help ordinary citizens.  

Also, MM wouldn't have the excuse she needs to rush back to Canada and avoid as much interaction with the rest of the family as possible. If Archie were there, there would be pressure to get together with the Queen and everyone to see him.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think she will get a shot in Hollywood, they'll give her a chance to see what she can do. Is she a legit draw on TV or at the box office beyond just a one-time novelty?  Does she do a great acting job given the chance? She might be able to build a TV career again filled with guest starring type parts.  That's not what she wants of course.  She hopes for a major motion picture career and prestigious indie productions but that is highly unlikely.  She doesn't have the screen presence, charisma, or acting talent plus she's almost 40.  She is competing with so many in that age range like Scarlett Johansson, Anne Hathaway, Natalie Portman, etc.  But, everyone in Hollywood thinks they could win an Oscar if only given the opportunity so she likely thinks so too.


right....and the other actresses in that age range who are big stars became movie stars in their twenties


----------



## bag-mania

It’s now or never for her. If she doesn’t secure some other form of fame or notoriety, interest in her will fade within a year. Meghan will not let that happen!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’s now or never for her. If she doesn’t secure some other form of fame or notoriety, interest in her will fade within a year. Meghan will not let that happen!


I don't think it's going to happen as a movie star......she should probably hold on to H


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> I don't think it's going to happen as a movie star......she should probably hold on to H


I totally agree.
But I doubt she will figure that out in time.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> I totally agree.
> But I doubt she will figure that out in time.


I think she will always be financially secure with that little meal ticket Archie.  But as far as fame and adulation - time will tell


----------



## CeeJay

LVSistinaMM said:


> I see her *being a part of an off brand version of The View*, providing her woke word salad on the daily on top of fashion and lifestyle segments.  A bunch of D list celebrities at a round table discussin’ the “news.”


OH NO .. *please don't give her any ideas* .. I think she would LOVE this venture: 

Look at HOW SMART I am! 
I need to WOKE you all up! 
Look at all the Charities we are giving $$$ to (and/or promoting)! 
Blah, Blah, Blah ...


----------



## CeeJay

purseproblm said:


> He got Markled... Like so many before him and like many after


NO, it was his choice .. he said that he "wasn't having fun anymore" (he used to be the head of the Disney Parks).


----------



## PewPew

imgg said:


> *My guess the Queen will greet her with open arms*, like she did previously.  She doesn't want to be on bad terms with Harry or Harry's wife.  She is able to separate her personal opinion of Meghan for the sake of getting along.  Meghan on the other hand will use her pervious antics as a bargaining chip, knowing the Queen doesn't want the press and will probably get a bit more than she should, like keeping her title.



Exactly! In 65+ years as Queen, she has interacted with all sorts of odd & difficult personalities, ranging from dictators to the most narcissistic figures in politics, business & the arts. While she may be privately disappointed in H&M, there’s nothing Megan can say or do that will publically ruffle QE2.

There will also be massive attention on the Sussex-Cambridge interactions, but Kate & Will have had a decade of training and won’t publicly snub H&M, no matter how peevishly the latter behave. If there is a weak link in the core BRF reactions, it might be Camilla, only because her natural smile can look like a smirk even when she’s happy!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't think it's going to happen as a movie star......she should probably hold on to H



She should but I doubt she will. She’s always reaching for more. I think she’ll get bored with him and screw up a good thing.


----------



## Sharont2305

PewPew said:


> Exactly! In 65+ years as Queen, she has interacted with all sorts of odd & difficult personalities, ranging from dictators to the most narcissistic figures in politics, business & the arts. While she may be privately disappointed in H&M, there’s nothing Megan can say or do that will publically ruffle QE2.
> 
> There will also be massive attention on in interactions between the Sussexes & Cambridges, but Kate & Will have had a decade of training and aren’t going to publically snub H&M, no matter how peevishly the latter behave. If there is a weak link in the core BRF’s public reactions, it might be Camilla, only because her natural smile can look like a smirk even when she’s happy!


Yeah, though Will has had a lifetime of training compared to Catherine


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> OH NO .. *please don't give her any ideas* .. I think she would LOVE this venture:
> 
> Look at HOW SMART I am!
> I need to WOKE you all up!
> Look at all the Charities we are giving $$$ to (and/or promoting)!
> Blah, Blah, Blah ...


She probably thinks she's too important for this type of venture - at least for now


----------



## Sophisticatted

I know it would never happen, but I would love it if the Queen had the security team bring Archie back to the U.K. 

Remember when the Queen cancelled Megs theatre meeting?  I would love to see her head pop off if Archie were presented to her.  Of course, that would be a disaster in the long run.


----------



## Aminamina

I recently watched MasterClass trailer on fb and Anna Wintour simply explained her choice of KK and Kanie on the cover and at MET Gala. So it seems to me there is a writing on the wall Meghan and +1  will attend. Here's a link to the article about it:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/benhenry/anna-wintour-masterclass-kim-kanye-vogue-cover


----------



## bag-mania

Aminamina said:


> I recently watched MasterClass trailer on fb and Anna Wintour simply explained her choice of KK and Kanie on the cover and at MET Gala. So it seems to me there is a writing on the wall Meghan and +1  will attend. Here's a link to the article about it:
> https://www.buzzfeed.com/benhenry/anna-wintour-masterclass-kim-kanye-vogue-cover



In the end these decisions are based on who will get them the most attention which equates to money. They can tell everyone it’s a super elite list but that’s only to make it more desirable to the celebrities they want to attract.


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> Why in the world does Anna Wintour invite the Kardashians?? I guess if they go ANYONE can go, even MM the Duchess



A youtube  AW interview on the subject revealed why Anna did it  ... the Kardashians are a HUGE force in the fashion industry ($$$$$$) esp Kylie's makeup, Yeezy, SKIMS etc  like it or not, they are BIG BUSINESS - they are major PLAYERS in the fashion world

AW invites players who have market presence and money but is careful not to invite anyone too controversial - who will hog all the publicity for the evening 
Donald ***** has famously gone in the past - when he was less controversial, but AW has famously stated she will never invite him again, yet, he is a major PLAYER but an example of someone who is too controversial to go now

MM is not a player in the fashion market (she might be later..) and is too controversial 

Pss Beatrice has gone to the Met ball, not sure how she finagled the invite (surely she did not BUY the ticket herself , it is upwards of $25k these days, she was given a ticket ... ), surely, AW did not invite her personally, B was invited to sit at someone's table and Anna Ok'd it, that is my guess (I could be wrong..)  B could have been invited by British Vogue.  And B appeared before her father's mess with Epstein so she was not controversial when she attended 
MM is just too controversial at the moment ... B is not gonna get an invite this year either... 

Designers buy entire tables for the event, then invite friends/muses eg the Gucci table - overseen by Alessandro Michele has had Dakota Johnson, Charlotte Casiraghi, Jared Leto & Harry Styles  - all of whom collaborated (worked for, were paid by...) with Gucci at the time of the invite (CC no longer represents G, she now does Saint Laurent)
Versace famously has it own table etc and I think Donatella did the Kylie/Kendall outfits for last year - the orange and lilac dresses 
Givenchy does not seem to have a big Met Ball presence like the Kardashians, Gucci & Versace 
Yup the Ks probably have their own table at the ball


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think she’ll be there.


----------



## Aminamina

bag-mania said:


> In the end these decisions are based on who will get them the most attention which equates to money. They can tell everyone it’s a super elite list but that’s only to make it more desirable to the celebrities they want to attract.


In that trailer Anna said
*"Acknowledging that it was a “deeply controversial” decision, she continued: “Kim and Kanye were a part of the conversation of the day, and for Vogue not to recognise that would’ve been a big misstep.” *
just replace the names and there you have our couple - on the same page with Kardashians. Meghan has arrived and Harry should be proud.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> OH NO .. *please don't give her any ideas* .. I think she would LOVE this venture:
> 
> Look at HOW SMART I am!
> I need to WOKE you all up!
> Look at all the Charities we are giving $$$ to (and/or promoting)!
> Blah, Blah, Blah ...


#2- I need to WOKE you all up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

According to Hello, M will not attend Met Gala:  https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a31192172/meghan-markle-met-gala-2020-rumors-explained/


----------



## Chagall

lanasyogamama said:


> I think she’ll be there.





lanasyogamama said:


> I think she’ll be there.


Someone on this thread should set up a method of voting whether she will be there or not.
I for one vote ‘no’ or if she does go she’ll bail early.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lulilu said:


> AW invites players who have market presence and money but is careful not to invite anyone too controversial - who will hog all the publicity for the evening
> Donald ***** has famously gone in the past - when he was less controversial, but AW has famously stated she will never invite him again, yet, he is a major PLAYER but an example of someone who is too controversial to go now
> 
> l



I am sure he has better things to do now.


----------



## imgg

lulilu said:


> According to Hello, M will not attend Met Gala:  https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a31192172/meghan-markle-met-gala-2020-rumors-explained/


She probably started the rumor.


----------



## Aminamina

lulilu said:


> According to Hello, M will not attend Met Gala:  https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a31192172/meghan-markle-met-gala-2020-rumors-explained/


Oh well if it's so but how pompous is the explanation and sussexroyal.com address


----------



## marietouchet

imgg said:


> She probably started the rumor.


We need to keep track of how many times this story flip flops lol 
The whole subject is so compelling despite being made of hot air not truth


----------



## marietouchet

Just dawned one me, there is finally a bigger news subject than H&M - coronavirus ...
This deep thought was after noticing a Megzit video -issued today - titled something like - are the Sussexes toxic ?
Deeply compelling analogy .... 
ROTFL


----------



## Clearblueskies

imgg said:


> She probably started the rumor.


It’s the Oscars all over again


----------



## Emeline

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s the Oscars all over again


Yep. At least we know the pattern. We know what to expect in the future.


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> She probably started the rumor.


.. as well as the one with she & Harry presenting one of the Oscars at that ceremony!  Definitely don't put it past her to do something like this!


----------



## doni

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s the Oscars all over again


It all started with Doria being invited to Christmas in Balmoral.
One year down the line and they were no longer spending Christmas in Balmoral. Or with Doria for that matter.

On the subject of Archie. Actually corona virus is the least risky for children and infants. I understand that for small children it seems to be even less dangerous than normal flu, which has experts dumbfounded. Instead, right now the possibility that you are left stranded in one country or continent and unable to fly for a while is not unthinkable. I am not sure it is the best time for both parents to be on the other side of the world from their infant... Oh well, I guess they reckon they can always borrow a jet from Elton and bypass any restrictions because, didn’t you know, the Duke is the 6th in line of the throne and they still keep their HRH titles even if they don’t use them...


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> It all started with Doria being invited for Christmas in Balmoral.
> One year down the line and they were no longer spending Christmas in Balmoral. Or with Doria for that matter.
> 
> On the subject of Archie. Actually corona virus is the least risky for children and infants. I understand that for small children it seems to be even less dangerous than normal flu, which has experts dumbfounded. Instead, right now the possibility that you are left stranded in one country or continent and unable to fly for a while is not unthinkable. I am not sure it is the best time for both parents to be on the other side of the world from their infant... Oh well, I guess they reckon they can always borrow a jet from Elton and bypass any restrictions because, didn’t you know, the Duke is the 6th in line of the throne and they still keep their HRH titles even if they don’t use them...


It actually started with her childhood “activism” didn’t it?  The infamous letter that was part of a school project and (surprise surprise) not even her idea   She’s a liar.


----------



## Genie27

Clearblueskies said:


> It actually started with her childhood “activism” didn’t it?  The infamous letter that was part of a school project and (surprise surprise) not even her idea   She’s a liar.


That's because she believes her own PR. I'll bet she used the story in her college application essay as well.....


----------



## PewPew

Lounorada said:


> We'll find out in May if she actually attends or not, but *I have a feeling the Met Gala is another one of those rumours put out into the media by M and her minions (like the presenting at the Oscars rumour) as a type of ego boost to make her feel like she's important and sought-after enough to attend these big events* but also as a public reminder/hint-dropper to the people involved in the guestlist for these events that she should be there, in her opinion.
> She seems to love to talk about herself in a way where it almost forces the other person to compliment or praise her.



@Lounorada nailed it with her prediction that the Met Gala rumor was bogus. The Met, the “superhero movie” & the Oscars rumors have all been effective in getting headlines for Megan alone (independent of the BRF and Harry). I think we’ll see more of this type of rumor to keep her in the public interest. She has to know that *any* film role outside of a voiceover or documentary host is too risky right now, given her skillset & public opinion.

I can see her first big “independent” event being some solo humanitarian appearance. She views herself as far bigger than “just” a movie star or a royal (note: she will always consider herself a HRH). M & her fans speak as if she has the resume of Oprah or a Nobel Peace Prizewinner, and she can’t maintain that pretense while playing a superhero in a saturated film genre.


----------



## marietouchet

Emeline said:


> Yep. At least we know the pattern. We know what to expect in the future.


Yeah we are good at this now , yesterday I was ready to believe about the superhero movie. 
This story just keeps giving , it is better than reality TV


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

I can only imagine what tacky shenanigans they’ll pull at the Commonwealth Day event...


----------



## poopsie

Clearblueskies said:


> It actually started with her childhood “activism” didn’t it?  The infamous letter that was part of a school project and (surprise surprise) not even her idea   She’s a liar.




hmmmmppphhhh.................I got sent home from school in 69/70 for being one of the organizers of a sit-in on the 8th grade lawn so that girls could wear pants to school. The heights I could have ascended to had I been savvy enough to market myself accordingly


----------



## Straight-Laced

poopsie said:


> hmmmmppphhhh.................I got sent home from school in 69/70 for being one of the organizers of a sit-in on the 8th grade lawn so that girls could wear pants to school. The heights I could have ascended to had I been savvy enough to market myself accordingly


You should have been Princess Poopsie


----------



## gracekelly

She thinks she is very clever with her PR formula, but it has been overused so peeps are on to her and know it is all bogus.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> hmmmmppphhhh.................I got sent home from school in 69/70 for being one of the organizers of a sit-in on the 8th grade lawn so that girls could wear pants to school. The heights I could have ascended to had I been savvy enough to market myself accordingly


But Poopsie, you were shining a light on pants!  You would have had your own foundation non profit billion dollar empire!


----------



## poopsie

Straight-Laced said:


> You should have been Princess Poopsie


Bwahahahaha.....YES!


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> But Poopsie, you were shining a light on pants!  You would have had your own foundation non profit billion dollar empire!



IKR! What a fool I was


----------



## Sharont2305

Apparently Harry had lunch with The Queen on Sunday. Oh, to have been a fly on the wall then.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I keep seeing SussexRoyal posts and there is nothing but adulation in their comments. Gives me a weird creepy vibe that they actually spend so much time cleaning up the negative ones! Yikes! Talk about revisionist history!


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently Harry had lunch with The Queen on Sunday. Oh, to have been a fly on the wall then.


In my quest for the journalistic truth - NO MORE FAKE NEWS - detective work alert ...
I did see that article from the British press  - 2/3/2020 - hmm
Is that date US or Euro style ? Is it Feb 3 2020 (US style, month first ) or Mar 2 2020 (Euro style day  then month)?
And since yesterday was the second of March, not the third, my vote is that the article was published LAST MONTH ON 3 Feb 
So, I think the article pertains to last month's lunch
I want NEW FAKE NEWS not last month's recycled stuff lol
But, if anyone has the menu from the lunch, pls share we need to know


----------



## mrsinsyder

LVSistinaMM said:


> I keep seeing SussexRoyal posts and there is nothing but adulation in their comments. Gives me a weird creepy vibe that they actually spend so much time cleaning up the negative ones! Yikes! Talk about revisionist history!


It's not like Meghan has anything else to do...


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> In my quest for the journalistic truth - NO MORE FAKE NEWS - detective work alert ...
> I did see that article from the British press  - 2/3/2020 - hmm
> Is that date US or Euro style ? Is it Feb 3 2020 (US style, month first ) or Mar 2 2020 (Euro style day  then month)?
> And since yesterday was the second of March, not the third, my vote is that the article was published LAST MONTH ON 3 Feb
> So, I think the article pertains to last month's lunch
> I want NEW FAKE NEWS not last month's recycled stuff lol
> But, if anyone has the menu from the lunch, pls share we need to know


British style, which is the same as Europe lol


----------



## Annawakes

I fill my husband in on this thread lol.  His take:

“Her PR team puts out rumors like the superhero movie to test the waters.  When the response is ridicule, they backpedal and it’s just a rumor.  If and when they get a positive response then they’ll really try to make it happen.”

hehe.  From the perspective of a completely disinterested male.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Clearblueskies said:


> It actually started with her childhood “activism” didn’t it?  The infamous letter that was part of a school project and (surprise surprise) not even her idea   She’s a liar.


Similarly, I won a statewide Mother’s Day writing contest in the Third Grade (subject: “Why I Love My Mommy”), and so it’s perfectly accurate and correct for me to put “Award-Winning Published Author” on my CV (I won a plaque that I still hang in the study next to my JD, as well as tickets to the circus that I couldn’t use because I contracted chicken pox, and I had my essay published in the paper, so, again, ACCURATE).  Anyway, yeah.  I totally feel Meghan on that one.


----------



## queennadine

Annawakes said:


> I fill my husband in on this thread lol.  His take:
> 
> “Her PR team puts out rumors like the superhero movie to test the waters.  When the response is ridicule, they backpedal and it’s just a rumor.  If and when they get a positive response then they’ll really try to make it happen.”
> 
> hehe.  From the perspective of a completely disinterested male.



I keep my DH updated as well (also disinterested male) but he agrees with us. They’re spoiled snowflakes. So glad I have y’all and this thread!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> It's not like Meghan has anything else to do...



If she wants to star in a superhero movie she'd better be working out 10 hours a day. Those costumes are unforgiving.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> British style, which is the same as Europe lol





Sharont2305 said:


> British style, which is the same as Europe lol


Agree but not sure whether the BRF had changed the national convention to suit American MM, and/or whether article was before or after BREXIT


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> Similarly, I won a statewide Mother’s Day writing contest in the Third Grade (subject: “Why I Love My Mommy”), and so it’s perfectly accurate and correct for me to put “Award-Winning Published Author” on my CV (I won a plaque that I still hang in the study next to my JD, as well as tickets to the circus that I couldn’t use because I contracted chicken pox, and I had my essay published in the paper, so, again, ACCURATE).  Anyway, yeah.  I totally feel Meghan on that one.



On a similar note, AOC clapped back at someone critizising her by mentioning she got some Harvard award for achievements in bio-chemistry or something. I looked it up because I had it in the back of my head she only has bachelor's degree, an lo and behold, she did win that thing, but in high school. I don't usually walk around waving my school achievements (in fact I still haven't gotten around to get my master's framed) but eh, maybe it's a thing?


----------



## queennadine

QueenofWrapDress said:


> On a similar note, AOC clapped back at someone critizising her by mentioning she got some Harvard award for achievements in bio-chemistry or something. I looked it up because I had it in the back of my head she only has bachelor's degree, an lo and behold, she did win that thing, but in high school. I don't usually walk around waving my school achievements (in fact I still haven't gotten around to get my master's framed) but eh, maybe it's a thing?



When that’s all you have...


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Agree but not sure whether the BRF had changed the national convention to suit American MM, and/or whether article was before or after BREXIT


[emoji23][emoji23]


----------



## viciel

I have always thought of Anna Wintour as a patriotic Briton, that she's an admirer of the Q, not to mention having been made a dame, would she really let them attend the Met Gala if she can help it? I'm asking because I don't know enough about how the gymnastics about it.


----------



## kemilia

Annawakes said:


> I fill my husband in on this thread lol.  His take:
> 
> “Her PR team puts out rumors like the superhero movie to test the waters.  When the response is ridicule, they backpedal and it’s just a rumor.  If and when they get a positive response then they’ll really try to make it happen.”
> 
> hehe.  From the perspective of a completely disinterested male.


Yeah, but he has a good take on things--keep him around for more MM interpretations.


----------



## PewPew

LVSistinaMM said:


> I keep seeing SussexRoyal posts and there is nothing but adulation in their comments. Gives me a weird creepy vibe that they actually spend so much time cleaning up the negative ones! Yikes! Talk about revisionist history!



Fake social media comments are big business in the PR world. (This is coming to light more as politicians are caught having paid for these services during campaigns). It’s not just hiring firms to clean up content. There are sophisticated bots that join websites & generate a variety of favorable comments / likes/ shares to “show support” for a celeb, a cause or a politician.

You even see this bot-driven fawning on Instagram for people who have a surprising number of followers and hardcore stans, despite objectivity poor content. Fortunately for PR firms, the greater public still thinks of bots and AI-generated content as the easy-to-spot robo language and cringey nonsense you see in fake Amazon reviews. (Eight years ago, I had a roommate with a full-time job writing reviews for various consumer products that she researched but never used, but that business has dramatically reduced as bots are cheaper and can generate thousands of positive impressions in a short amount of time)


----------



## queennadine

So the 1 account that their IG is following is Tank Sinatra’s “good news” account. His main account is memes and he posted this one less than one month ago!


----------



## lanasyogamama

queennadine said:


> So the 1 account that their IG is following is Tank Sinatra’s “good news” account. His main account is memes and he posted this one less than one month ago!
> 
> View attachment 4680417


They really don’t do their homework


----------



## limom

> When that’s all you have...


AOC is a member of the House of Representatives. That is way more than I was doing at 30!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> AOC is a member of the House of Representatives. That is way more than I was doing at 30!


Which makes it extra weird! She has so much more to throw out there.


----------



## justwatchin

Honestly, in the beginning I thought H and M, had a sweet, modern, shake up the royal status quo love story, and people were being overly critical.
But, this couple is a train wreck and I can’t look away!


----------



## Lounorada

Annawakes said:


> I fill my husband in on this thread lol.  His take:
> 
> “*Her PR team puts out rumors like the superhero movie to test the waters.  When the response is ridicule, they backpedal and it’s just a rumor.  If and when they get a positive response then they’ll really try to make it happen*.”
> 
> hehe.  From the perspective of a completely disinterested male.


Spot on! Your husband may be disinterested in these two fools, but he sure is accurate on what they are up to!



bag-mania said:


> If she wants to star in a superhero movie she'd better be working out 10 hours a day. Those costumes are unforgiving.


True. I was thinking about this when that 'wanting to be in a superhero movie' rumour popped up. The months of dedication, training and hard work that goes into preparing for and playing those action roles is insane. M strikes me as someone who doesn't like to do much work at all. So the thought of her playing a superhero is laughable.


----------



## Lounorada

viciel said:


> *I have always thought of Anna Wintour as a patriotic Briton, that she's an admirer of the Q, not to mention having been made a dame, would she really let them attend the Met Gala if she can help it*? I'm asking because I don't know enough about how the gymnastics about it.


I thought the same thing. I think because of her respect for the Queen, she won't let either of them anywhere near the Met Gala, but then again I could be wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> They really don’t do their homework


They’re such lightweights


----------



## bag-mania

Nicely played! By leaving the door wide open the Queen is removing any future self-victimization by Harry and Meghan. 

*The Queen reportedly told Prince Harry that he and Meghan Markle are 'always welcome' to return to the royal family*
Queen Elizabeth reportedly held a private "Megxit" meeting with Prince Harry where she told her grandson that he and Meghan Markle would be welcomed back to the royal family if they wanted to return.

The Sun's Dan Wotton spoke to an anonymous royal source about the pair's reported four-hour lunch at Windsor Castle.

According to the source, Her Majesty told the duke that they "will always be welcomed back."

Buckingham Palace could not confirm the meeting when contacted by Insider, saying it "wouldn't comment on how members of the royal family spend their time."

When the couple officially step back in April, they will undergo a 12-month transitional period, which will then be reviewed by palace officials.

"Harry and Meghan's choice of independence seems completely clear at the moment," Richard Fitzwilliams, a royal commentator, previously told Insider.

Speaking on the possibility that Harry and Markle could return to royal life, he said: "However, no one can predict the future with any certainty.

"And the Queen, having released a statement after the Sandringham Summit confirming that they will not use their royal titles and will step down from royal duties but remain members of the royal family, wisely allowed for a reassessment of the situation after a year."

It wouldn't be unusual for the monarch to allow the duke and duchess to return to their duties after the trial period. She previously allowed another couple, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, to resume their full duties after they attempted to pursue private careers in the early 2000s.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...ome-to-return-to-the-royal-family/ar-BB10FYaF


----------



## Megs

What is with their Tank Sinatra follow.... how is that modernizing the monarchy and making great changes for the better?!


----------



## Lounorada

queennadine said:


> So the 1 account that their IG is following is Tank Sinatra’s “good news” account. His main account is memes and he posted this one less than one month ago!
> View attachment 4680417





WTF?! So out of alllllll the pages on Instagram, the only ONE they follow is a meme account?
These two really are a pair of dumb f***ing fools.
How about following some accounts for charities, your patronages, inspiring people or I dunno, your fellow royal family members?
Oh no, silly me I forgot you're clueless and ignorant. My bad.


----------



## tiktok

Megs said:


> What is with their Tank Sinatra follow.... how is that modernizing the monarchy and making great changes for the better?!



Modernizing the monarchy one Instagram account at a time...


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lounorada said:


> Spot on! Your husband may be disinterested in these two fools, but he sure is accurate on what they are up to!
> 
> 
> True. I was thinking about this when that 'wanting to be in a superhero movie' rumour popped up. The months of dedication, training and hard work that goes into preparing for and playing those action roles is insane. M strikes me as someone who doesn't like to do much work at all. So the thought of her playing a superhero is laughable.



I think in her mind, she skipped past all the hard work and was picturing the magazine  bylines “a superhero both on and off screen…” 

Oh Honey, you tried!


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> What is their reasoning not to bring him? I think, no matter what we've speculated, it's clear his grandmother is not going to take him. He should be able to see his grandparents, greatgrandparents, cousins, aunt, uncle, etc. To keep him from that is such a selfish move.



Since we have nothing else to go by all we can do is speculate. Meghan doesn't seem to be particularly maternal and she may be using the trip as a vacation from Archie. Besides babies are such a drag when you are trying to work out the details of your multimillion dollar brand.


----------



## queennadine

The Tank Sinatra thing still has me 

I feel so bad for Archie. Locked up all day with a nanny or two, never around family. That poor baby. And now there’s this little gem: 
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...rince-harry-sussex-royal-family-latest-update


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> So more thoughts...
> 
> 
> *Leaving Archie behind*.
> .*What is their reasoning not to bring him?*


@Megs  .. synthesized your previous post .. I've said this before, but I will say it again .. IMO, Meghan had Archie to secure her meal-ticket (_Kanye West - "18 years, 18 years" comes to mind_)!  I do not see a "maternal" person; heck - look at the way she "holds" Archie!!!   As such, I believe from her perspective "_who cares that Archie is away from his Mother_" (_I doubt that she even thinks about "what about the Father_") .. after all, she's a *100% narcissist* who *ONLY* cares about *HERSELF*!!!  Meghan:  "_Oh boy, all the media attention_ (adulation only) _that I will get_"!!!!


----------



## doni

Megs said:


> And you can't use the coronavirus excuse. Every medical professional has some out to say that it's not impacting babies/kids - not to say they can't get it - but they are not even being seen to have symptoms really. It's puzzling the medical world and scientists. I digress, but clearly, that can't be used as the reason.


Exactly. If anything, the coronavirus would be a reason _not to_ leave a baby so far away for so long. With restrictions to movement being an everyday situation, and the uncertainty of what may happen with air travel, do you really want to have your baby in the opposite extreme of another continent with not one family connection nearby or indeed anywhere less than thousands of kilometers away?
Very bizarre...


----------



## Jayne1

viciel said:


> I have always thought of Anna Wintour as a patriotic Briton, that she's an admirer of the Q, not to mention having been made a dame, would she really let them attend the Met Gala if she can help it? I'm asking because I don't know enough about how the gymnastics about it.


Wintour loves controversy.  Drives sales.  That's almost all she cares about.


----------



## justwatchin

CeeJay said:


> @Megs  .. synthesized your previous post .. I've said this before, but I will say it again .. IMO, Meghan had Archie to secure her meal-ticket (_Kanye West - "18 years, 18 years" comes to mind_)!  I do not see a "maternal" person; heck - look at the way she "holds" Archie!!!   As such, I believe from her perspective "_who cares that Archie is away from his Mother_" (_I doubt that she even thinks about "what about the Father_") .. after all, she's a *100% narcissist* who *ONLY* cares about *HERSELF*!!!  Meghan:  "_Oh boy, all the media attention_ (adulation only) _that I will get_"!!!!


I’m also going to assume that Harry is not exactly into the daddy role either.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> I’m also going to assume that Harry is not exactly into the daddy role either.



It does seem that way. We don't even get any carrying the doll photos with him. 
I suppose he could be a doting daddy behind the scenes but...


----------



## Tootsie17

queennadine said:


> The Tank Sinatra thing still has me
> 
> I feel so bad for Archie. Locked up all day with a nanny or two, never around family. That poor baby. And now there’s this little gem:
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...rince-harry-sussex-royal-family-latest-update


 I guess she will announce her pregnancy at Beatrice's wedding. What better way to try and upstage the bride.  Score one for Meghan the star!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Tootsie17 said:


> I guess she will announce her pregnancy at Beatrice's wedding. What better way to try and upstage the bride.  Score one for Meghan the star!


I’ll think she’ll float the pregnancy rumour in every possible way - it’s a useful distraction from the f-ups she’s made and an attention seeking ploy - but I’d be very surprised if it’s true.  She’s focussed on herself going forward and in making herself a big star without Harry.  Losing another 12 months through pregnancy and getting back into shape?  Nope, she hasn’t got the time.  Woman in a hurry our Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

A pregnant superhero...............................you really _have_ come a loooooooong way, baby


----------



## Annawakes

Can you imagine her thought process?

“_should I get pregnant again?”
“Or should I make a superhero movie??”
What to do, what to do......._


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Nicely played! By leaving the door wide open the Queen is removing any future self-victimization by Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *The Queen reportedly told Prince Harry that he and Meghan Markle are 'always welcome' to return to the royal family*
> Queen Elizabeth reportedly held a private "Megxit" meeting with Prince Harry where she told her grandson that he and Meghan Markle would be welcomed back to the royal family if they wanted to return.
> 
> The Sun's Dan Wotton spoke to an anonymous royal source about the pair's reported four-hour lunch at Windsor Castle.
> 
> According to the source, Her Majesty told the duke that they "will always be welcomed back."
> 
> Buckingham Palace could not confirm the meeting when contacted by Insider, saying it "wouldn't comment on how members of the royal family spend their time."
> 
> When the couple officially step back in April, they will undergo a 12-month transitional period, which will then be reviewed by palace officials.
> 
> "Harry and Meghan's choice of independence seems completely clear at the moment," Richard Fitzwilliams, a royal commentator, previously told Insider.
> 
> Speaking on the possibility that Harry and Markle could return to royal life, he said: "However, no one can predict the future with any certainty.
> 
> "And the Queen, having released a statement after the Sandringham Summit confirming that they will not use their royal titles and will step down from royal duties but remain members of the royal family, wisely allowed for a reassessment of the situation after a year."
> 
> It wouldn't be unusual for the monarch to allow the duke and duchess to return to their duties after the trial period. She previously allowed another couple, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, to resume their full duties after they attempted to pursue private careers in the early 2000s.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...ome-to-return-to-the-royal-family/ar-BB10FYaF


*TRANSLATION* = "_Harry, you can always come back to the BRF, and bring Archie .. but leave MM in Canada/Los Angeles (wherever she lands) so she can do all her PR and 'marketing' stuff_"


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> I’ll think she’ll float the pregnancy rumour in every possible way - it’s a useful distraction from the f-ups she’s made and an attention seeking ploy - but I’d be very surprised if it’s true.  She’s focussed on herself going forward and in making herself a big star without Harry.  Losing another 12 months through pregnancy and getting back into shape?  Nope, she hasn’t got the time.  Woman in a hurry our Meghan.


.. and hence the reason why H&M 'floated' the idea of possible adoption!  Meghan can then continue to hoe her "_star status_" in H-Wood and *WOKE* us all up as in "_look what we've done, we've adopted a child INTO the BRF_"


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> I think in her mind, she skipped past all the hard work and was picturing the magazine  bylines “a superhero both on and off screen…”
> 
> Oh Honey, you tried!


Even in her daydreams she's avoiding doing any work 



Jayne1 said:


> Wintour loves controversy.  Drives sales.  That's almost all she cares about.


This is also true.

I don't think M will be invited to the Met Gala, but if she is, I will laugh if she'll be dressed in something hideous like Kim K's first Met Gala in that grandmas floral couch ensemble.


----------



## marietouchet

Lounorada said:


> Even in her daydreams she's avoiding doing any work
> 
> 
> This is also true.
> 
> I don't think M will be invited to the Met Gala, but if she is, I will laugh if she'll be dressed in something hideous like Kim K's first Met Gala in that grandmas floral couch ensemble.


The 2020 Met Gala theme is Fashion and Duration ... hmm ... where does MM fit in ? Duration ?


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Since we have nothing else to go by all we can do is speculate. Meghan doesn't seem to be particularly maternal and she may be using the trip as a vacation from Archie. Besides babies are such a drag when you are trying to work out the details of your multimillion dollar brand.


Taking baby on trip thing ... 
hmm I wondered what was up when she went to Africa with Archie. The trip was stated to be built around Archie’s schedule - whatever that means , and she and A stayed put out of sight for 3 days while H went to another venue ..
I assumed that she was breast feeding and that would have perfectly explained the schedule, but maybe I invented that , she supposedly wanted a home birth so I assumed ... but the trip had a bit of an odd schedule and she has a nanny 
So, the first of many times when A was/ was not traveling quite as expected


----------



## mia55

That smirk sum up how proud she is for the mess she created


----------



## bag-mania

Regarding Meghan wanting a role as a superhero, I read that Disney+ is in the process of casting for a She-Hulk series. How would Meghan look in green, ALL green?


----------



## Lodpah

Good article from Princess Diana’s ex secretary 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...kle-prince-harry-struggle-royal-logistics.amp


----------



## PewPew

Lodpah said:


> Good article from Princess Diana’s ex secretary
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...kle-prince-harry-struggle-royal-logistics.amp



This part is both hilarious & sad for our brave “independent” heroes—
_
According to Diana’s former private secretary, Prince Harry and Meghan *are still in need of...the luxury that comes along with being a royal*.
"They *need* *the stuff only wealth can provide*, but chafe at the obligations and scrutiny of royalty," he wrote. "Yet without royal status, their long-term earning potential could be in doubt—and the power of their celebrity may also diminish the longer they stay away from Buckingham Palace."_

H (by virtue of birth) & M (by virtue of self-importance) really cannot distinguish between a need and a want, which is why they keep issuing public statements about their rough, unfair life & their right to $20million security from the taxpayers. It’s funny how entitled M is after less then 2 years of marriage, but a $50million wedding and $500,000 wardrobe budget would hyperinflate anyone’s ego.

People have a soft spot for Diana & want to believe the best in Harry, but the Megxit demands make him sound just as out of touch with reality and entitled as his Uncle Andy, who truly believes in his (and his daughters’) God-given right to the wealth, titles and perks of the Monarchy. One good thing to come from Megxit is the public is learning just how much taxpayer money (ex. an estimated $150million/year for extended BRF security) sustains the Monarchy, on top of their individual “salaries,” wardrobes, travel, home renovations and other perks.

At some point, perhaps when Charles is King, it’ll be ludicrous to keep telling the public how critical the spendy BRF is for “tradition” and “morale,” when there are such long waitlists for critical healthcare services and so many other problems.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world?


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so *where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world*?



Hmmm, well she does report having had a lot of near-miraculous epiphanies (practically messages from God, right?). Like when she realized she was already changing the world in middle school ...via a school project.

Wait no, by age 8, she was telling the guests at *someone else’s* birthday party to call her “Your Royal Highness”. (This was childhood BFF Ninaki’s bday, but who knows maybe everyone got to be Queen that day?). It does amuse me that as an American at age 8, I wouldn’t know how to address royalty beyond maybe “Your majesty” from a movie, and the bday party was way before The Princess Diaries & widespread internet. Maybe M was truly was born with the supreme confidence & entitlement one usually finds in actual royals!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5539893/Meghan-Markle-video-1990-shows-dressed-Queen.html


----------



## Grande Latte

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world?



Psychosis. There ARE people who think they are superior without basis.


----------



## daisychainz

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world?


She wants everything the royal family has - money, prestige, title, connections, but not the actual family. So she's entitled to their stuff but doesn't want wany real connection to them. It's just completely mind-blowing. I suppose marrying Harry was her ticket, that was all, that's her entitlement.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world?



I'm guessing she has always been a princess in her own mind. That isn't too uncommon. I bet there are many families that have one member who believes he/she deserves far more than what they have. Spoiled children believe they are better and we have heard that Meghan was spoiled.


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world?


Thomas raised her to think she was god's gift to earth, then she tossed him off to the side. Seems to be a pattern.


----------



## Vintage Leather

If I remember the press release from the Frogmore Cottage renovation announcement: 

"Frogmore Cottage will continue to be the property of Her Majesty the Queen. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to use Frogmore Cottage – with the permission of Her Majesty The Queen – as their official residence *as they continue to support the Monarchy*,"

In that they aren't supporting the Monarchy any more, can we use the building? Like, a recuperation and nursing center for citizens who have been on the NHS list for years?  Or, even better yet - the Chelsea Pensioners place isn't handicap accessible and kinda drafty - they are selling a musical single to try to pay for renovations.  We'll take MsSuperhero's clothing budget to renovate, do one wing at a time, and the people who live in that wing can stay in Frogmore while renovations are ongoing.

See, dolls, I'm totally a fixer. So good at giving people exactly what they asked for. 

Hmm... maybe I should start a nonprofit multi-million dollar empire.  We can call it VintageNotRoyal.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan's entitlement really surprises me way more than Harry's. For him, it's all he's ever known, but MM was a nobody up to two years ago, so where does the idea come from she is somehow God's gift to the world?


Not surprised a bit, remember.. a full-on narcissist fully believe in their utter importance!!


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Thomas raised her to think she was god's gift to earth, then she tossed him off to the side. Seems to be a pattern.


THIS!!!! According to my friend who knew the Markles during Meghan’s high school days, her father spoiled her rotten (likely due to being so busy with the Married with Children show) .. and as a result, she viewed herself as “worth it”. Remember too, that Doria wasn’t around at that time (not until late in Meghan’s Senior high school year), so unfortunately she got Narcissistic advanced training early on. Once she has used you, she spits you out and moves on without caring a single bit about your feelings.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Harry was back at the palace today.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry was back at the palace today.



I wonder if he's secretly glad to be back in the environment he knows and understands. He's never going to receive this level of attention squatting in a borrowed mansion across the world.


----------



## Clearblueskies

How much longer are they going to freebie in the Russian’s Canadian dacha?


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if he's secretly glad to be back in the environment he knows and understands. He's never going to receive this level of attention squatting in a borrowed mansion across the world.


.. and while it surprises me (as I would never do it) .. I guess I shouldn't be that surprised that these 2 grifters are STILL living in that mansion and who knows if they are paying for it!  I bet from Meghan's standpoint, she's "WORTH IT"!  Gah ..


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and while it surprises me (as I would never do it) .. I guess I shouldn't be that surprised that these 2 grifters are STILL living in that mansion and who knows if they are paying for it!  I bet from Meghan's standpoint, she's "WORTH IT"!  Gah ..



I guess the billionaire owner doesn't have any immediate plans for the house so he's okay with letting the royal deadbeats hang out until they get their money-making ventures worked out and are back on their feet. Must be nice.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I guess the billionaire owner doesn't have any immediate plans for the house so he's okay with letting the royal deadbeats hang out until they get their *money-making ventures* worked out and are back on their feet. Must be nice.


----------



## Milosmum0307

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry was back at the palace today.


“Please, Ma’am, I want some more.”


----------



## doni

I think it is nothing short of disgraceful that these two (supposedly still working members of the royal family) are receiving a millionaire allowance while accepting hospitality to live for free in a mansion that the British public still doesn’t know whom it belongs to...


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> .. and while it surprises me (as I would never do it) .. I guess I shouldn't be that surprised that these 2 grifters are STILL living in that mansion and who knows if they are paying for it!  I bet from Meghan's standpoint, she's "WORTH IT"!  Gah ..


Have L'Oréal been in touch yet?


----------



## bag-mania

D'oh! 

*Meghan Markle Is a Preposterous Mascot for International Women’s Day*
As International Women’s Day rolls around every March, I take time to honor the women who have been inspirational to me. Meghan Markle is never on that list.

Why would she be? Her fame is built on the very thing that women have been fighting against for decades.

Reliance on men.

A recent survey asked 5,000 British women who they believe to be the most inspiring woman. You would think that we’d see mention of Jane Austen, one of the first modern-era feminists and a hugely influential author.

What about Emmeline Pankhurst? The head of the British Suffragette movement was a political activist long before Greta Thunberg. Or even Rosalind Franklin?

No, none of these pioneers made the list. They rarely do.

The top three in the vote are Meghan Markle, Greta Thunberg, and Rihanna. Oh, and Katie Price was given an honorable mention as well.

As we head into 2020, it’s clear to me that women still have a long way to go.

*Let’s Look At What Meghan Markle Has Accomplished*
Since Meghan Markle tops this list, let’s have a look at the foundation upon which she has built her fame and brand.

Back in 2004, Meghan was a nobody. She was an actress with a small one-episode role as a nurse in a soap opera.

One thing I’ve always said about Meghan is that she’s cunning. If you’re not getting the breaks on your own, find an influential man. Enter actor and producer Trevor Engelson.

But even smarter than finding a man who can help your career is knowing when to cut him loose.

Once Meghan landed her role in Suits, she became something of a minor celebrity. She dumped her new husband “out of the blue” and sent back her wedding and engagement rings in the post.

Classy, indeed! I’m already feeling inspired by her.

*Next Up? Access To Higher Levels Of Society*
A year after she FedEx-ed poor Trevor his rings back, Meghan had begun dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello.

Owner of one of Toronto’s trendiest restaurants, Vitiello was Meghan’s gateway to the social elite. Charity galas and other social events attended by high society followed.

Remember, though: It’s all about knowing when to cut someone loose if you see an opportunity to level up.

Meghan Markle broke up with Cory Vitiello the same month that Prince Harry asked for her phone number at one of these social events. Coincidence, I’m sure.

The rest is history.

*If Meghan Markle Is What Women Aspire To Be, Then We’re Doing It Wrong*
Meghan has managed to use her looks and intelligence to work her way up the social ladder.

Well done!

But she wouldn’t be where she is without the help of the various men in her life. And she certainly wouldn’t be topping any lists of inspirational women.

https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-is-a-preposterous-mascot-for-international-womens-day/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Thomas raised her to think she was god's gift to earth, then she tossed him off to the side. Seems to be a pattern.


Unfortunately many in that generation were spoiled rotten. That is why there are so many estrangements between them and their loving parents. Apparently it is epidemic. Once the decent parents are no longer of use to them they get discarded.


----------



## cafecreme15

bag-mania said:


> D'oh!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is a Preposterous Mascot for International Women’s Day*
> As International Women’s Day rolls around every March, I take time to honor the women who have been inspirational to me. Meghan Markle is never on that list.
> 
> Why would she be? Her fame is built on the very thing that women have been fighting against for decades.
> 
> Reliance on men.
> 
> A recent survey asked 5,000 British women who they believe to be the most inspiring woman. You would think that we’d see mention of Jane Austen, one of the first modern-era feminists and a hugely influential author.
> 
> What about Emmeline Pankhurst? The head of the British Suffragette movement was a political activist long before Greta Thunberg. Or even Rosalind Franklin?
> 
> No, none of these pioneers made the list. They rarely do.
> 
> The top three in the vote are Meghan Markle, Greta Thunberg, and Rihanna. Oh, and Katie Price was given an honorable mention as well.
> 
> As we head into 2020, it’s clear to me that women still have a long way to go.
> 
> *Let’s Look At What Meghan Markle Has Accomplished*
> Since Meghan Markle tops this list, let’s have a look at the foundation upon which she has built her fame and brand.
> 
> Back in 2004, Meghan was a nobody. She was an actress with a small one-episode role as a nurse in a soap opera.
> 
> One thing I’ve always said about Meghan is that she’s cunning. If you’re not getting the breaks on your own, find an influential man. Enter actor and producer Trevor Engelson.
> 
> But even smarter than finding a man who can help your career is knowing when to cut him loose.
> 
> Once Meghan landed her role in Suits, she became something of a minor celebrity. She dumped her new husband “out of the blue” and sent back her wedding and engagement rings in the post.
> 
> Classy, indeed! I’m already feeling inspired by her.
> 
> *Next Up? Access To Higher Levels Of Society*
> A year after she FedEx-ed poor Trevor his rings back, Meghan had begun dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello.
> 
> Owner of one of Toronto’s trendiest restaurants, Vitiello was Meghan’s gateway to the social elite. Charity galas and other social events attended by high society followed.
> 
> Remember, though: It’s all about knowing when to cut someone loose if you see an opportunity to level up.
> 
> Meghan Markle broke up with Cory Vitiello the same month that Prince Harry asked for her phone number at one of these social events. Coincidence, I’m sure.
> 
> The rest is history.
> 
> *If Meghan Markle Is What Women Aspire To Be, Then We’re Doing It Wrong*
> Meghan has managed to use her looks and intelligence to work her way up the social ladder.
> 
> Well done!
> 
> But she wouldn’t be where she is without the help of the various men in her life. And she certainly wouldn’t be topping any lists of inspirational women.
> 
> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-is-a-preposterous-mascot-for-international-womens-day/


YAAASSSSS to all of this!!


----------



## Milosmum0307

bag-mania said:


> D'oh!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is a Preposterous Mascot for International Women’s Day*
> As International Women’s Day rolls around every March, I take time to honor the women who have been inspirational to me. Meghan Markle is never on that list.
> 
> Why would she be? Her fame is built on the very thing that women have been fighting against for decades.
> 
> Reliance on men.
> 
> A recent survey asked 5,000 British women who they believe to be the most inspiring woman. You would think that we’d see mention of Jane Austen, one of the first modern-era feminists and a hugely influential author.
> 
> What about Emmeline Pankhurst? The head of the British Suffragette movement was a political activist long before Greta Thunberg. Or even Rosalind Franklin?
> 
> No, none of these pioneers made the list. They rarely do.
> 
> The top three in the vote are Meghan Markle, Greta Thunberg, and Rihanna. Oh, and Katie Price was given an honorable mention as well.
> 
> As we head into 2020, it’s clear to me that women still have a long way to go.
> 
> *Let’s Look At What Meghan Markle Has Accomplished*
> Since Meghan Markle tops this list, let’s have a look at the foundation upon which she has built her fame and brand.
> 
> Back in 2004, Meghan was a nobody. She was an actress with a small one-episode role as a nurse in a soap opera.
> 
> One thing I’ve always said about Meghan is that she’s cunning. If you’re not getting the breaks on your own, find an influential man. Enter actor and producer Trevor Engelson.
> 
> But even smarter than finding a man who can help your career is knowing when to cut him loose.
> 
> Once Meghan landed her role in Suits, she became something of a minor celebrity. She dumped her new husband “out of the blue” and sent back her wedding and engagement rings in the post.
> 
> Classy, indeed! I’m already feeling inspired by her.
> 
> *Next Up? Access To Higher Levels Of Society*
> A year after she FedEx-ed poor Trevor his rings back, Meghan had begun dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello.
> 
> Owner of one of Toronto’s trendiest restaurants, Vitiello was Meghan’s gateway to the social elite. Charity galas and other social events attended by high society followed.
> 
> Remember, though: It’s all about knowing when to cut someone loose if you see an opportunity to level up.
> 
> Meghan Markle broke up with Cory Vitiello the same month that Prince Harry asked for her phone number at one of these social events. Coincidence, I’m sure.
> 
> The rest is history.
> 
> *If Meghan Markle Is What Women Aspire To Be, Then We’re Doing It Wrong*
> Meghan has managed to use her looks and intelligence to work her way up the social ladder.
> 
> Well done!
> 
> But she wouldn’t be where she is without the help of the various men in her life. And she certainly wouldn’t be topping any lists of inspirational women.
> 
> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-is-a-preposterous-mascot-for-international-womens-day/


Oh, I’m so glad there was honorable mention of Megster’s intelligence toward the end of this article, because as I was reading this my anxiety kept mounting, and finally I blurted, “BUT WHAT ABOUT HER INTELLIGENCE?”  She went to Northwestern, and, you guys, she reads the Economist.  Whenever Meghan finally reappears on British soil, I’m hoping that the refined faux-British Mid-Atlantic accent that she tried once (REMEMBER THAT???) reappears as well.  Personally, watching that video was the moment I knew that we had a rare and exquisite talent on our hands, not to mention a woman of great intellectual fortitude (because smart people sound like Katherine Hepburn, you know?).  Also, it worked for Grace Kelly, and as we’re all keenly aware, Meghan Markle, Supporting Player on an Ensemble Cast of a Low-Rated Basic Cable Legal Drama and Aspiring Superhero Movie Maven = Grace Kelly, Oscar Winner and Hitchcock Muse.  I also hope she has an opportunity to make at least one speech.  My soul rests easier knowing that Megster’s well-used thesaurus is getting yet another a thumb-through in service to the Markles’ solemn Humanitarian Quest to Change the World.


----------



## cafecreme15

Milosmum0307 said:


> Oh, I’m so glad there was honorable mention of Megster’s intelligence toward the end of this article, because as I was reading this my anxiety kept mounting, and finally I blurted, “BUT WHAT ABOUT HER INTELLIGENCE?”  She went to Northwestern, and, you guys, she reads the Economist.  Whenever Meghan finally reappears on British soil, I’m hoping that the refined faux-British Mid-Atlantic accent that she tried once (REMEMBER THAT???) reappears as well.  Personally, watching that video was the moment I knew that we had a rare and exquisite talent on our hands, not to mention a woman of great intellectual fortitude (because smart people sound like Katherine Hepburn, you know?).  Also, it worked for Grace Kelly, and as we’re all keenly aware, Meghan Markle, Supporting Player on an Ensemble Cast of a Low-Rated Basic Cable Legal Drama and Aspiring Superhero Movie Maven = Grace Kelly, Oscar Winner and Hitchcock Muse.  I also hope she has an opportunity to make at least one speech.  My soul rests easier knowing that Megster’s well-used thesaurus is getting yet another a thumb-through in service to the Markles’ solemn Humanitarian Quest to Change the World.


You really should be writing for The Onion!


----------



## chowlover2

Milosmum0307 said:


> Oh, I’m so glad there was honorable mention of Megster’s intelligence toward the end of this article, because as I was reading this my anxiety kept mounting, and finally I blurted, “BUT WHAT ABOUT HER INTELLIGENCE?”  She went to Northwestern, and, you guys, she reads the Economist.  Whenever Meghan finally reappears on British soil, I’m hoping that the refined faux-British Mid-Atlantic accent that she tried once (REMEMBER THAT???) reappears as well.  Personally, watching that video was the moment I knew that we had a rare and exquisite talent on our hands, not to mention a woman of great intellectual fortitude (because smart people sound like Katherine Hepburn, you know?).  Also, it worked for Grace Kelly, and as we’re all keenly aware, Meghan Markle, Supporting Player on an Ensemble Cast of a Low-Rated Basic Cable Legal Drama and Aspiring Superhero Movie Maven = Grace Kelly, Oscar Winner and Hitchcock Muse.  I also hope she has an opportunity to make at least one speech.  My soul rests easier knowing that Megster’s well-used thesaurus is getting yet another a thumb-through in service to the Markles’ solemn Humanitarian Quest to Change the World.


I love reading your posts!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> D'oh!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is a Preposterous Mascot for International Women’s Day*
> As International Women’s Day rolls around every March, I take time to honor the women who have been inspirational to me. Meghan Markle is never on that list.
> 
> Why would she be? Her fame is built on the very thing that women have been fighting against for decades.
> 
> Reliance on men.
> 
> A recent survey asked 5,000 British women who they believe to be the most inspiring woman. You would think that we’d see mention of Jane Austen, one of the first modern-era feminists and a hugely influential author.
> 
> What about Emmeline Pankhurst? The head of the British Suffragette movement was a political activist long before Greta Thunberg. Or even Rosalind Franklin?
> 
> No, none of these pioneers made the list. They rarely do.
> 
> The top three in the vote are Meghan Markle, Greta Thunberg, and Rihanna. Oh, and Katie Price was given an honorable mention as well.
> 
> As we head into 2020, it’s clear to me that women still have a long way to go.
> 
> *Let’s Look At What Meghan Markle Has Accomplished*
> Since Meghan Markle tops this list, let’s have a look at the foundation upon which she has built her fame and brand.
> 
> Back in 2004, Meghan was a nobody. She was an actress with a small one-episode role as a nurse in a soap opera.
> 
> One thing I’ve always said about Meghan is that she’s cunning. If you’re not getting the breaks on your own, find an influential man. Enter actor and producer Trevor Engelson.
> 
> But even smarter than finding a man who can help your career is knowing when to cut him loose.
> 
> Once Meghan landed her role in Suits, she became something of a minor celebrity. She dumped her new husband “out of the blue” and sent back her wedding and engagement rings in the post.
> 
> Classy, indeed! I’m already feeling inspired by her.
> 
> *Next Up? Access To Higher Levels Of Society*
> A year after she FedEx-ed poor Trevor his rings back, Meghan had begun dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello.
> 
> Owner of one of Toronto’s trendiest restaurants, Vitiello was Meghan’s gateway to the social elite. Charity galas and other social events attended by high society followed.
> 
> Remember, though: It’s all about knowing when to cut someone loose if you see an opportunity to level up.
> 
> Meghan Markle broke up with Cory Vitiello the same month that Prince Harry asked for her phone number at one of these social events. Coincidence, I’m sure.
> 
> The rest is history.
> 
> *If Meghan Markle Is What Women Aspire To Be, Then We’re Doing It Wrong*
> Meghan has managed to use her looks and intelligence to work her way up the social ladder.
> 
> Well done!
> 
> But she wouldn’t be where she is without the help of the various men in her life. And she certainly wouldn’t be topping any lists of inspirational women.
> 
> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-is-a-preposterous-mascot-for-international-womens-day/


Who conducted the survey and who are these 5000 women? From the sound of it, they hand picked some snowflake wannabes brats for this survey! I don't know any woman in my circle would pick those 3. BTW, Greta is not even a woman, she is a teenager and should be in school!!!
Rant over!


----------



## Milosmum0307

cafecreme15 said:


> You really should be writing for The Onion!


I try to keep my tone light and facetious because, as an American, I have the luxury of finding these grifters merely entertaining.  No public resources are being siphoned from my community to subsidize their exploits, so I leave the genuine outrage to the long-suffering British public.  What does irk me about Our Lady of Relentless Social-Climbing and her half-wit sidekick is their habit of paying lip service to (and trying to exploit) values that I genuinely believe in - feminism, mental health awareness, racial equality, environmentalism, etc.  Some people, in some places, are persecuted and even risking their bodily safety for such causes, and these two cynical opportunists are using them to score PR brownie points.  It’s gross.  And speaking of gross, if the Queen really is “leaving the door open” for Harry to return someday, she is a better and far less bitter person than I would be in her shoes.  Less than two years ago William was standing up as Harry’s best man at their wedding, and Charles walked her down the aisle.  They were given a large house refurbished to their specifications at a cost of millions of dollars.  Meghan was allowed to spend money on clothes like a nouveau-riche Florida gator hunter who just won Powerball.  The Queen and Prince Philip even allowed themselves to be used as props in H&M’s “introducing Master Archie Markle to the grandfolks” photo with Doria.  Their reward for welcoming Harry’s unconventional choice into the family?  To be labeled “toxic” and so unbearable that the poor martyrs have to move to another continent to escape them.  To me as an American, and evidently to Meghan as well, the royal family seems like a fusty anachronism, but to some in the UK the monarchy represents stability, heritage and cultural pride.  It must be frustrating to see H&M treat the institution with so much contempt while also wanting to reserve their right to use their titles like an ATM card.


----------



## Milosmum0307

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who conducted the survey and who are these 5000 women? From the sound of it, they hand picked some snowflake wannabes brats for this ! I don't know any woman in my circle would pick those 3. BTW, Greta is not even a woman, she is a teenager and should be in school!!!
> Rant over!


To be fair, when I read that Katie Price got an honorable mention on this list of illustrious Aspiration Beings With Uteri, I thought, “Yeah, sounds about right.”  Enquire no further.


----------



## Emeline

Milosmum0307 said:


> To be fair, when I read that Katie Price got an honorable mention on this list of illustrious Aspiration Beings With Uteri survey, I thought, “Yeah, sounds about right.”  Enquire no further.


Your posts are spot on and amusing. Excellent combo!


----------



## queennadine

Is tomorrow her first public appearance? Somewhat surprised we saw no pap pics of her travels. If she did, indeed, travel...


----------



## Tootsie17

Vintage Leather said:


> If I remember the press release from the Frogmore Cottage renovation announcement:
> 
> 
> "Frogmore Cottage will continue to be the property of Her Majesty the Queen. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to use Frogmore Cottage – with the permission of Her Majesty The Queen – as their official residence *as they continue to support the Monarchy*,"
> 
> In that they aren't supporting the Monarchy any more, can we use the building? Like, a recuperation and nursing center for citizens who have been on the NHS list for years?  Or, even better yet - the Chelsea Pensioners place isn't handicap accessible and kinda drafty - they are selling a musical single to try to pay for renovations.  We'll take MsSuperhero's clothing budget to renovate, do one wing at a time, and the people who live in that wing can stay in Frogmore while renovations are ongoing.
> 
> See, dolls, I'm totally a fixer. So good at giving people exactly what they asked for.
> 
> Hmm... maybe I should start a nonprofit multi-million dollar empire.  We can call it VintageNotRoyal.


Love the name of your n


queennadine said:


> Is tomorrow her first public appearance? Somewhat surprised we saw no pap pics of her travels. If she did, indeed, travel...



Maybe this time she arrived on her broomstick!


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> THIS!!!! According to my friend who knew the Markles during Meghan’s high school days, her father spoiled her rotten (likely due to being so busy with the Married with Children show) .. and as a result, she viewed herself as “worth it”. Remember too, *that Doria wasn’t around at that time (not until late in Meghan’s Senior high school year),* so unfortunately she got Narcissistic advanced training early on. Once she has used you, she spits you out and moves on without caring a single bit about your feelings.


Why was she living only with her dad?


----------



## gracekelly

Milosmum0307 said:


> I try to keep my tone light and facetious because, as an American, I have the luxury of finding these grifters merely entertaining.  No public resources are being siphoned from my community to subsidize their exploits, so I leave the genuine outrage to the long-suffering British public.  What does irk me about Our Lady of Relentless Social-Climbing and her half-wit sidekick is their habit of paying lip service to (and trying to exploit) values that I genuinely believe in - feminism, mental health awareness, racial equality, environmentalism, etc.  Some people, in some places, are persecuted and even risking their bodily safety for such causes, and these two cynical opportunists are using them to score PR brownie points.  It’s gross.  And speaking of gross, if the Queen really is “leaving the door open” for Harry to return someday, she is a better and far less bitter person than I would be in her shoes.  Less than two years ago William was standing up as Harry’s best man at their wedding, and Charles walked her down the aisle.  They were given a large house refurbished to their specifications at a cost of millions of dollars.  Meghan was allowed to spend money on clothes like a nouveau-riche Florida gator hunter who just won Powerball.  The Queen and Prince Philip even allowed themselves to be used as props in H&M’s “introducing Master Archie Markle to the grandfolks” photo with Doria.  Their reward for welcoming Harry’s unconventional choice into the family?  To be labeled “toxic” and so unbearable that the poor martyrs have to move to another continent to escape them.  To me as an American, and evidently to Meghan as well, the royal family seems like a fusty anachronism, but to some in the UK the monarchy represents stability, heritage and cultural pride.  It must be frustrating to see H&M treat the institution with so much contempt while also wanting to reserve their right to use their titles like an ATM card.


So beautifully said.  I just shake my head at the two of them.


----------



## CobaltBlu

@Milosmum0307 I bow to your greatness. Your ability to turn a phrase and then whittle it into perfection is a thing of beauty to behold.


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> Is tomorrow her first public appearance? Somewhat surprised we saw no pap pics of her travels. If she did, indeed, travel...



Maybe she’s keeping us in suspense so that when she finally appears it will garner maximum attention. She won’t allow any random photos to be taken. She likes to control how she looks, as when she was smiling right at the paparazzi during her dog walk in January.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Why was she living only with her dad?


At that time, yes ..


----------



## lalame

Milosmum0307 said:


> Meghan was allowed to spend money on clothes like a nouveau-riche Florida gator hunter who just won Powerball.



LMAO! You really do have a way with words. 



limom said:


> Why was she living only with her dad?


Always wondered this too... anyone know why?


----------



## lalame

I agree with the person who said it’s astonishing how M has gotten so accustomed to the royal lifestyle (err, royal pocketbook) and be so ambitious for more so quickly... when she wasn’t exactly living large before that. That is, if the reports were true that her income pre marriage was in the $500k-750k range and she rented her home. That’s not peanuts but that’s normal people-wealthy, not celebrity wealthy.


----------



## MACBA

don't know if this is going to end well...


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> D'oh!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is a Preposterous Mascot for International Women’s Day*
> As International Women’s Day rolls around every March, I take time to honor the women who have been inspirational to me. Meghan Markle is never on that list.
> 
> Why would she be? Her fame is built on the very thing that women have been fighting against for decades.
> 
> Reliance on men.
> 
> A recent survey asked 5,000 British women who they believe to be the most inspiring woman. You would think that we’d see mention of Jane Austen, one of the first modern-era feminists and a hugely influential author.
> 
> What about Emmeline Pankhurst? The head of the British Suffragette movement was a political activist long before Greta Thunberg. Or even Rosalind Franklin?
> 
> No, none of these pioneers made the list. They rarely do.
> 
> The top three in the vote are Meghan Markle, Greta Thunberg, and Rihanna. Oh, and Katie Price was given an honorable mention as well.
> 
> As we head into 2020, it’s clear to me that women still have a long way to go.
> 
> *Let’s Look At What Meghan Markle Has Accomplished*
> Since Meghan Markle tops this list, let’s have a look at the foundation upon which she has built her fame and brand.
> 
> Back in 2004, Meghan was a nobody. She was an actress with a small one-episode role as a nurse in a soap opera.
> 
> One thing I’ve always said about Meghan is that she’s cunning. If you’re not getting the breaks on your own, find an influential man. Enter actor and producer Trevor Engelson.
> 
> But even smarter than finding a man who can help your career is knowing when to cut him loose.
> 
> Once Meghan landed her role in Suits, she became something of a minor celebrity. She dumped her new husband “out of the blue” and sent back her wedding and engagement rings in the post.
> 
> Classy, indeed! I’m already feeling inspired by her.
> 
> *Next Up? Access To Higher Levels Of Society*
> A year after she FedEx-ed poor Trevor his rings back, Meghan had begun dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello.
> 
> Owner of one of Toronto’s trendiest restaurants, Vitiello was Meghan’s gateway to the social elite. Charity galas and other social events attended by high society followed.
> 
> Remember, though: It’s all about knowing when to cut someone loose if you see an opportunity to level up.
> 
> Meghan Markle broke up with Cory Vitiello the same month that Prince Harry asked for her phone number at one of these social events. Coincidence, I’m sure.
> 
> The rest is history.
> 
> *If Meghan Markle Is What Women Aspire To Be, Then We’re Doing It Wrong*
> Meghan has managed to use her looks and intelligence to work her way up the social ladder.
> 
> Well done!
> 
> But she wouldn’t be where she is without the help of the various men in her life. And she certainly wouldn’t be topping any lists of inspirational women.
> 
> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-is-a-preposterous-mascot-for-international-womens-day/



How depressing


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Why was she living only with her dad?


I have always wondered this. Doria has never come across to me as particularly interested in her daughter.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> I have always wondered this. Doria has never come across to me as particularly interested in her daughter.


Or anyone else for that matter.  Perhaps what we’ve all assumed was serenity is just a lack of engagement?


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> Or anyone else for that matter.  Perhaps what we’ve all assumed was serenity is just a lack of engagement?


I agree on that. What often happens in a child’s life is that if one parent is not terribly invested or there for a child, the remaining parent over compensates and spoils the child. This may be part of what compelled Thomas to spoil Megan rotten. This can cause the child to develop narcissistic tendencies. If they have been raised to think they are all important, they believe it.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> At that time, yes ..


Without exposing too much private infos, what was the mother doing?
Was she not in her daughter’s life?


----------



## Lounorada

Milosmum0307 said:


> I try to keep my tone light and facetious because, as an American, I have the luxury of finding these grifters merely entertaining.  No public resources are being siphoned from my community to subsidize their exploits, so I leave the genuine outrage to the long-suffering British public.  What does irk me about Our Lady of Relentless Social-Climbing and her half-wit sidekick is their habit of paying lip service to (and trying to exploit) values that I genuinely believe in - feminism, mental health awareness, racial equality, environmentalism, etc.  Some people, in some places, are persecuted and even risking their bodily safety for such causes, and these two cynical opportunists are using them to score PR brownie points.  It’s gross.  And speaking of gross, if the Queen really is “leaving the door open” for Harry to return someday, she is a better and far less bitter person than I would be in her shoes.  Less than two years ago William was standing up as Harry’s best man at their wedding, and Charles walked her down the aisle.  They were given a large house refurbished to their specifications at a cost of millions of dollars.  Meghan was allowed to spend money on clothes like a nouveau-riche Florida gator hunter who just won Powerball.  The Queen and Prince Philip even allowed themselves to be used as props in H&M’s “introducing Master Archie Markle to the grandfolks” photo with Doria.  Their reward for welcoming Harry’s unconventional choice into the family?  To be labeled “toxic” and so unbearable that the poor martyrs have to move to another continent to escape them.  To me as an American, and evidently to Meghan as well, the royal family seems like a fusty anachronism, but to some in the UK the monarchy represents stability, heritage and cultural pride.  It must be frustrating to see H&M treat the institution with so much contempt while also wanting to reserve their right to use their titles like an ATM card.


Again, so well said!





This part made me laugh out loud...
_'Meghan was allowed to spend money on clothes like a nouveau-riche Florida gator hunter who just won Powerball.'_


----------



## doni

limom said:


> Why was she living only with her dad?


I think I read it was _her_ choice? Her being already a teenager (a so close to Doria...).


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I guess the billionaire owner doesn't have any immediate plans for the house so he's okay with letting the royal deadbeats hang out until they get their money-making ventures worked out and are back on their feet. Must be nice.



He'll call in the favour later...


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who conducted the survey and who are these 5000 women? From the sound of it, they hand picked some snowflake wannabes brats for this survey! I don't know any woman in my circle would pick those 3. BTW, Greta is not even a woman, she is a teenager and should be in school!!!
> Rant over!



I was going to read something motivational on how professional women can breakthrough the glass ceiling, never mind. 

Off to read Cinderella and Pippi Longstocking instead....


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who conducted the survey and who are these 5000 women? From the sound of it, they hand picked some snowflake wannabes brats for this survey! I don't know any woman in my circle would pick those 3. BTW, Greta is not even a woman, she is a teenager and should be in school!!!
> Rant over!



I'd like to see the data and methodology. Shall I ask for it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF. German yellow press is reporting MM told the Queen to drop dead. Apparently their source is the National Enquirer. I don't know, that seems bold - and stupid - even for MM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

I know there's been a lot of talk about how sad it is the family can't see Archie, but especially for Prince Phillip. He's obviously not going to be around forever; it's so sad.


----------



## daisychainz

limom said:


> Why was she living only with her dad?


Her dad was on a Hollywood film set every day and her mom was a yoga teacher and social worker? As a young teen it would be far more interesting to meet celebrities and hang out in that environment after school every day. I imagine it was probably loads more fun to be with her dad, and maybe less restrictive.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> He'll call in the favour later...



He'd better not hold his breath. Meghan hasn't proven to be reliable in following through on commitments she actually agreed to, she's not going to be doing future favors for someone she's already used and doesn't need anymore.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her first appearance should be in a few hours, right?


----------



## queennadine

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11106576/meghan-markle-returns-uk-megxit/

They can't stay at their taxpayer-funded renovated "home?"


----------



## LittleStar88

doni said:


> I think it is nothing short of disgraceful that these two (supposedly still working members of the royal family) are receiving a millionaire allowance while accepting hospitality to live for free in a mansion that the British public still doesn’t know whom it belongs to...



At what point do they need to claim the benefit of living there on their taxes? I think it stopped being a vacation back in January?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Her first appearance should be in a few hours, right?



Yes, she's back. And she needs two men to hold umbrellas over her.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Yes, she's back. And she needs two men to hold umbrellas over her.
> 
> View attachment 4682359
> 
> View attachment 4682360



Guy holding the umbrella - the look on his face haha


----------



## lanasyogamama

The guy on the right represents my feelings.


----------



## bag-mania

Yeah, he's just doing his job but his expression is priceless.


----------



## mrsinsyder

queennadine said:


> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11106576/meghan-markle-returns-uk-megxit/
> 
> They can't stay at their taxpayer-funded renovated "home?"


Of course not. You can't be papped there.


----------



## doni

They are staying in a hotel?!

Oh well, I guess they don’t know many people with spare  guest rooms in London and whereabouts...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her nose looks... longer? Is she becoming an actual Pinocchio?


----------



## bag-mania

Don't know about her nose, but I think her face is going to hurt from the enormous smile she's going to keep pasted on for the entire visit.


----------



## lulu212121

Someone in the dailymail's comments section asked where they were living because the Russian's mansion has had all the privacy screens gone for about 4 weeks now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

I might sound harsh but her face doesn't look that pretty anymore, she looks like any other rich middle aged woman with nothing special.


----------



## Megs

So they were spotted leaving this ultra posh, expensive hotel. Wonder who paid for that....


----------



## imgg

queennadine said:


> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11106576/meghan-markle-returns-uk-megxit/
> 
> They can't stay at their taxpayer-funded renovated "home?"


Another subtle dig to the RF and British people....


----------



## imgg

Megs said:


> So they were spotted leaving this ultra posh, expensive hotel. Wonder who paid for that....


I assume the taxpayers since they are still "royal" until the end of March.


----------



## doni

Megs said:


> So they were spotted leaving this ultra posh, expensive hotel. Wonder who paid for that....


with all the money they saved in rent in the last months 



imgg said:


> I assume the taxpayers since they are still "royal" until the end of March.


As far as I am aware they will continue to receive 95% of their allowance after the end of March. They will only loose the sovereign grant which according to themselves accounted for 5% of their allowance. This is what they defined as financial independence in that first version of their website. There has been no indication they will loose the support from the Duchy of Cornwall state.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Twitter sources are saying they're only at the hotel for a meeting, not staying there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'll give her that, she surprised me. I would have bet money she wouldn't make it back.


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll give her that, she surprised me. I would have bet money she wouldn't make it back.


She loves attention too much. Now she gets the attention without really having to follow any of the rules.


----------



## imgg

doni said:


> with all the money they saved in rent in the last months
> 
> They sacked all the staff remember? Who would make them coffee?
> 
> A*s far as I am aware they will continue to receive 95% of their allowance after the end of March. They will only loose the sovereign grant which according to themselves accounted for 5% of their allowance. This is what they defined as financial independence in that first version of their website. There has been no indication they will loose the support from the Duchy of Cornwall state*.



I did not realize this.  No wonder the British dislike them so much.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Megs said:


> So they were spotted leaving this ultra posh, expensive hotel. Wonder who paid for that....


No room at Buckingham Palace, too small


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Yes, she's back. And she needs two men to hold umbrellas over her.
> 
> View attachment 4682359
> 
> View attachment 4682360


Still grabbing at that hair--some things never change.

She's either lost a lot of weight or/and had "work" done, not looking as attractive as she has before.


----------



## Blyen

I find her beautiful, and I actually like the outfit in those pics, but that darn grin gets on my nerves. She's so proud of the mess she created, it's disgusting.


----------



## Aminamina

That woman is back to rub elbows with the family she "never had". The Royal Family I must add.
I want to say I told you so but social etiquette doesn't allow it


----------



## Megs

Blyen said:


> I find her beautiful, and I actually like the outfit in those pics, but that darn grin gets on my nerves. She's so proud of the mess she created, it's disgusting.



I think she's really beautiful as well!

But man, that smirk!


----------



## chloebagfreak

Megs said:


> I think she's really beautiful as well!
> 
> But man, that smirk!


I agree she is beautiful. She has a beautiful smile, but yes, it is a sh*t eating grin if I ever saw one.
I do like her little handbag too. I wonder what brand it is? The shoes are darling, but not for the rain

All that beauty, but seemingly no ability to keep connected to those around- like friends and family


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

chloebagfreak said:


> I agree she is beautiful. She has a beautiful smile, but yes, it is a sh*t eating grin if I ever saw one.
> I do like her little handbag too. I wonder what brand it is? The shoes are darling, but not for the rain
> 
> All that beauty, but seemingly no ability to keep connected to those around- like friends and family



I keep trying to figure out the bag she's carry, shoes are Aquazzura (which if you like them, they are much cheaper on farfetch here!).


----------



## youngster

I like her coat and her shoes, she looks good, but most everyone would coming off a 4 month vacation at a $14 million dollar estate that you didn't have to pay a dime (or a pence) for.


----------



## melissatrv

Harry is going to be blindsided when she leaves him in the dust too.  I give it another 3 years and one more baby max.  Plus she never actually became a British citizen (as far as I know) so there is a child custody battle waiting to happen



CeeJay said:


> THIS!!!! According to my friend who knew the Markles during Meghan’s high school days, her father spoiled her rotten (likely due to being so busy with the Married with Children show) .. and as a result, she viewed herself as “worth it”. Remember too, that Doria wasn’t around at that time (not until late in Meghan’s Senior high school year), so unfortunately she got Narcissistic advanced training early on. Once she has used you, she spits you out and moves on without caring a single bit about your feelings.


----------



## melissatrv

I think she wants to leave the door open for Harry to come back after the inevitable divorce.




bag-mania said:


> Nicely played! By leaving the door wide open the Queen is removing any future self-victimization by Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *The Queen reportedly told Prince Harry that he and Meghan Markle are 'always welcome' to return to the royal family*
> Queen Elizabeth reportedly held a private "Megxit" meeting with Prince Harry where she told her grandson that he and Meghan Markle would be welcomed back to the royal family if they wanted to return.
> 
> The Sun's Dan Wotton spoke to an anonymous royal source about the pair's reported four-hour lunch at Windsor Castle.
> 
> According to the source, Her Majesty told the duke that they "will always be welcomed back."
> 
> Buckingham Palace could not confirm the meeting when contacted by Insider, saying it "wouldn't comment on how members of the royal family spend their time."
> 
> When the couple officially step back in April, they will undergo a 12-month transitional period, which will then be reviewed by palace officials.
> 
> "Harry and Meghan's choice of independence seems completely clear at the moment," Richard Fitzwilliams, a royal commentator, previously told Insider.
> 
> Speaking on the possibility that Harry and Markle could return to royal life, he said: "However, no one can predict the future with any certainty.
> 
> "And the Queen, having released a statement after the Sandringham Summit confirming that they will not use their royal titles and will step down from royal duties but remain members of the royal family, wisely allowed for a reassessment of the situation after a year."
> 
> It wouldn't be unusual for the monarch to allow the duke and duchess to return to their duties after the trial period. She previously allowed another couple, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, to resume their full duties after they attempted to pursue private careers in the early 2000s.
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...ome-to-return-to-the-royal-family/ar-BB10FYaF


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## mrsinsyder

That looks like a JCrew dress I have in four different colors for work... but I guess at least her bra isn't showing and there's no ratty hair bun.

Her cat got the cream face is definitely seeking out the cameras though


----------



## Blyen

Looks good, finds all the cameras as usual


----------



## mrsinsyder

Blyen said:


> Looks good, finds all the cameras as usual


----------



## Lounorada

I must be in the minority, but I've never thought of her as being beautiful. She's average looking IMO.

That fake smile plastered across her face today is eye-roll-inducing. There's a deranged look in her eyes, it's creepy (especially in the pics she's wearing the blue dress)


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4682539
> View attachment 4682540



She is true to form. Harry is looking straight ahead, she's turning her head and locking her eyes on the camera. She has her usual death grip on his arm.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lounorada said:


> I must be in the minority, but I've never thought of her as being beautiful. She's average looking IMO.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> I must be in the minority, but I've never thought of her as being beautiful. She's average looking IMO.
> 
> That fake smile plastered across her face today is eye-roll-inducing.


I agree, she owes a lot to heavy makeup and veneers.  And she’s gawping at the camera as per


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Without exposing too much private infos, what was the mother doing?
> Was she not in her daughter’s life?


From what I understand, at that time, Doria was living outside of CA and as such, did not have a lot of time to spend with Meghan.  She was; however, living full-time with her father at the time and given that she (at a young age) pursued a career in Hollywood, I'm sure living with her father and going on-set (which she did sometimes) was much more 'fun' than assisting Doria in her social work career or as a Yoga instructor.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I would find it unacceptable if my dress fit like this, pulling and bunching all over the place.
Aside from that (major distraction) I do think she is very attractive and love the color.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> She is true to form. Harry is looking straight ahead, she's turning her head and locking her eyes on the camera. She has her usual death grip on his arm.


Apparently there were some cheers and a loud boo on their arrival


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4682547


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> I would find it unacceptable if my dress fit like this, pulling and bunching all over the place.
> Aside from that (major distraction) I do think she is very attractive and love the color.


 She’s doing that thing politicians do where they pretend to recognise someone in the crowd, and mug at them


----------



## gazoo

Of course she came back. She needs fresh photos for Insta and she needs to underscore her "Royalness" by attending events with the BRF.

I've always thought she has a beautiful face. Her clothing though, meh. Why does everything always looks off? The hem on that coat earlier? The shoes that always look too big. Bless her, I know she has alien long middle toes, likely making her have to size way up when shoe shopping.

Harry's eyes are getting so close together he will be a cyclops soon.


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> So they were spotted leaving this ultra posh, expensive hotel. Wonder who paid for that....


.. and let's not forget, that her "glam squad" flew in just to do her make-up and hair; who PAID FOR THAT?????


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> She is true to form. Harry is looking straight ahead, she's turning her head and locking her eyes on the camera. She has her usual death grip on his arm.


Like the cat who got the cream


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> .. and let's not forget, that her "glam squad" flew in just to do her make-up and hair; who PAID FOR THAT?????


If she wanted too-heavy black eyeliner she should have just had Kate do it


----------



## imgg

Lounorada said:


> I must be in the minority, but I've never thought of her as being beautiful. She's average looking IMO.
> 
> That fake smile plastered across her face today is eye-roll-inducing. There's a deranged look in her eyes, it's creepy (especially in the pics she's wearing the blue dress)


  Yes!  I don't care how "pretty" someone is, if they have an ugly personality that is all I see.  Pretty is as pretty does and this does not apply to Ms. Markel.

Looks like she has been preparing for this day for a while- longer extensions, tighter face.


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> I must be in the minority, but I've never thought of her as being beautiful. She's average looking IMO.
> 
> That fake smile plastered across her face today is eye-roll-inducing. There's a deranged look in her eyes, it's creepy (especially in the pics she's wearing the blue dress)



I agree, looks like she's been spending the 4 months practicing smiling in the mirror


----------



## lanasyogamama

Are the earrings Jennifer Meyer?  I kid!


----------



## piperdog

CeeJay said:


> .. and let's not forget, that her "glam squad" flew in just to do her make-up and hair; who PAID FOR THAT?????


So wait, she brought the makeup artist, but not the baby? I know I shouldn't be surprised, but wow.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Like the cat who got the cream



A cat who is in love with herself. 
On the plus side at least there won't be any belly cradling this trip. There's no trace of a baby bump.


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> I think she's really beautiful as well!
> 
> But man, that is a sh* eating grin if I've ever seen one!!





chloebagfreak said:


> I agree she is beautiful. She has a beautiful smile, but yes, it is a sh*t eating grin if I ever saw one.
> I do like her little handbag too. I wonder what brand it is? The shoes are darling, but not for the rain
> 
> All that beauty, but seemingly no ability to keep connected to those around- like friends and family



I guess I'm the weirdo, but to me .. one's personality & traits have a LOT to do with being labeled "beautiful".  I had a friend way back in High School who was not really "attractive" per se, but she had the most ABSOLUTE BEST personality ever .. and as a result, she was never without a man in her life!  At that time, I realized that it's not all about physical appearance, but .. alas (and sadly) many men don't even get to that point.  

With Meghan, she reminds me of my cousin's first wife who was very beautiful physically (face, figure, what she wore, etc.) .. but she was the MOST dishonest, cheat, despicable person that I ever met .. and as a result, each time I saw her .. I thought "wow - why did I think she was beautiful".  That, to me .. defines Meghan ..


----------



## Clearblueskies

piperdog said:


> So wait, she brought the makeup artist, but not the baby? I know I shouldn't be surprised, but wow.


I know, says all you need to know about Meghan and Harry’s priorities


----------



## mrsinsyder

piperdog said:


> So wait, she brought the makeup artist, but not the baby? I know I shouldn't be surprised, but wow.


He's a bigger thirst trap than she is (is that possible?)

I expect he'll be posting aRtSy photos all over IG soon.


----------



## Annawakes

gazoo said:


> harry’s eyes are getting so close together he will be a cyclops soon.



I literally burst into laughter at this!! Lollllll


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Annawakes said:


> I literally burst into laughter at this!! Lollllll


He looks worse every time I see him. How can you have hair that's frizzy and unkempt but thinning at the same time?


----------



## doni

I think Meghan is extremely pretty, and she looks very good here, much better than at her last appearance in London.
The only thing is her nose, I think she would look good with her original one too, I find it odd and distracting how much it resembles Harry’s nose, but she got hers before she met him right?


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> I agree, looks like she's been spending the 4 months practicing smiling in the mirror


......I think we’re auditioning for the Hollywood action hero part we’re desperate for....


----------



## Lounorada

imgg said:


> Yes! * I don't care how "pretty" someone is, if they have an ugly personality that is all I see.*  Pretty is as pretty does and this does not apply to Ms. Markel.


This is so true. An unpleasant personality overshadows any good looks a person might have.


----------



## Blyen

I saw a couple of videos on Instagram, she keeps pulling him and walking ahead of him,as usual.
She even pulled at his arm when he stopped to put the umbrella down


----------



## mrsinsyder

Blyen said:


> I saw a couple of videos on Instagram, she keeps pulling him and walking ahead of him,as usual.
> She even pulled at his arm when he stopped to put the umbrella down


I saw that too - as soon as they're inside, she plows ahead of him as usual.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Blyen said:


> I saw a couple of videos on Instagram, she keeps pulling him and walking ahead of him,as usual.
> She even pulled at his arm when he stopped to put the umbrella down


#freeHarry


----------



## chloebagfreak

CeeJay said:


> I guess I'm the weirdo, but to me .. one's personality & traits have a LOT to do with being labeled "beautiful".  I had a friend way back in High School who was not really "attractive" per se, but she had the most ABSOLUTE BEST personality ever .. and as a result, she was never without a man in her life!  At that time, I realized that it's not all about physical appearance, but .. alas (and sadly) many men don't even get to that point.
> 
> With Meghan, she reminds me of my cousin's first wife who was very beautiful physically (face, figure, what she wore, etc.) .. but she was the MOST dishonest, cheat, despicable person that I ever met .. and as a result, each time I saw her .. I thought "wow - why did I think she was beautiful".  That, to me .. defines Meghan ..


I think objectively she has nice features- thanks to new nose and teeth. But if we factor inside beauty...no way. Their good looks get people to like and trust them per the Halo effect


----------



## Blyen




----------



## scarlet555

OMG, the she smile has in all the pictures... that smile...  it's kinda of scary


----------



## Annawakes

So weird she has to keep a hand on him at all times.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Blyen said:


>



That looks like major nervous behavior to me.  Also, she pulled the dress down twice, because it does NOT fit properly!


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> OMG, the she smile has in all the pictures... that smile...  it's kinda of scary



She wants to make sure we know she is deliriously happy and everything is going exactly as she planned. No mistakes here!


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> ......I think we’re auditioning for the Hollywood action hero part we’re desperate for....



certainly not Wonder Woman


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> That looks like major nervous behavior to me.  Also, she pulled the dress down twice, because it does NOT fit properly!


I know I should get a life but this video really annoyed me.
Meghan, he's been doing this all his life, you don't need to direct him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> certainly not Wonder Woman


Blunder Woman


----------



## Corneto

Lounorada said:


> I must be in the minority, but I've never thought of her as being beautiful. She's average looking IMO.
> 
> That fake smile plastered across her face today is eye-roll-inducing. There's a deranged look in her eyes, it's creepy (especially in the pics she's wearing the blue dress)



Agreed on the eyes. I actually thought possessed...


----------



## lulu212121

Lounorada said:


>





gazoo said:


> Of course she came back. She needs fresh photos for Insta and she needs to underscore her "Royalness" by attending events with the BRF.
> 
> I've always thought she has a beautiful face. Her clothing though, meh. Why does everything always looks off? The hem on that coat earlier? The shoes that always look too big. Bless her, I know she has alien long middle toes, likely making her have to size way up when shoe shopping.
> 
> *Harry's eyes are getting so close together he will be a cyclops soon*.



 You all are the best!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> That looks like major nervous behavior to me.  Also, she pulled the dress down twice, because it does NOT fit properly!


Ffs, if you’re going to draw attention to a clingy dress - make sure it fits


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I know I should get a life but this video really annoyed me.
> Meghan, he's been doing this all his life, you don't need to direct him



Obviously he hasn't been doing it right all this life and Meghan has to set him straight. This is a woman who is used to bossing her husband around.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Blunder Woman



It would have been very nice if she'd brought Archie home with her. I don't have any children but I wouldn't leave my baby the other side of the world.


----------



## csshopper

Corneto said:


> Agreed on the eyes. I actually thought possessed...


She needs to go to Acting school, because today's performance just didn't "work."  

Read the "crowd" to greet them was about 50 which may be the reason she was so anxious to get inside and not
 draw attention to the lack of interest. And somebody booed.......


----------



## Aminamina

Having manifested how unbearable the sort of work she had to do before she left the BRF and now coming back with the utterly happy smile and the old routine makes me cringe again. At least I was expecting some change from her - some hint of genuine anything coming from her. Alas
ETA: I caught myself thinking why on Earth would I be expecting anything from MM? Guess it's her attempting to live up to who SHE thinks she is - is what would be interesting to whitnes. But no such luck.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> So weird she has to keep a hand on him at all times.



_That's_ nerves and it gives her away


----------



## mrsinsyder

I see comments on fan sites saying they look so unbothered. Why wouldn't they be? They're riding high while grifting off of others; what do they have to worry about?


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> She’s doing that thing politicians do where they pretend to recognise someone in the crowd, and mug at them



Funny -- and true!

From the back, I thought she was a twin for Jess M.  That colour blue, the tight-ish fit of the dress and the type of heels, plus that sleekly pulled back pony tail of extensions are all Jess. Jess is on TV here in Canada and I see that look on her a lot.


----------



## queennadine

Love the color of the dress, and her hair and makeup look good (better than on her wedding day...ugh) but the entire look isn’t dressy enough IMO. 

It looks like she left Pearson Spector Litt at the end of the day in a hurry and forgot to grab her coat and maybe some dressier accessories.


----------



## TC1

She flew a hair team in for a ponytail? Groundbreaking.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> Funny -- and true!
> 
> From the back, I thought she was a twin for Jess M.  That colour blue, the tight-ish fit of the dress and the type of heels, plus that sleekly pulled back pony tail of extensions are all Jess. Jess is on TV here in Canada and I see that look on her a lot.


She’s got Jessica’s nose now


----------



## imgg

Aminamina said:


> Having manifested how unbearable the sort of work she had to do before she left the BRF and now coming back with the utterly happy smile and the old routine makes me cringe again. At least I was expecting some change from her - some hint of genuine anything coming from her. Alas


She is not capable....  She can't see anything past herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Can't wait to see how she behaves with the rest of the family


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> Her nose looks... longer? Is she becoming an actual Pinocchio?


She apparently gets something called a “liquid nose job”. Fillers injected in to smooth out the dent/bump.
I see various facial tweaks, teeth updated, weight loss due to who knows what.


----------



## Lounorada

Mrs.Z said:


> That looks like major nervous behavior to me.  Also, she pulled the dress down twice, because it does NOT fit properly!


It's far too tight. I saw a video elsewhere where she's inside sitting down signing a visitors book or something and when she moves to stand up, lawd is it tight and she has to pull it down on both sides. That looks extremely unprofessional when someone is tugging at their clothes. Not to mention it's so tight you can see the waistband of her shapewear


----------



## Sharont2305

https://t.co/YD50fokHV0
Far too tight. Hope that zip isn't a workable one.


----------



## bag-mania

chloebagfreak said:


> I do like her little handbag too. I wonder what brand it is? The shoes are darling, but not for the rain





Megs said:


> I keep trying to figure out the bag she's carry, shoes are Aquazzura (which if you like them, they are much cheaper on farfetch here!).



According to Page Six the bag is a Loewe small postal box tote ($2,250).


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> https://t.co/YD50fokHV0
> Far too tight. Hope that zip isn't a workable one.


The zip makes the dress not Royal appropriate as it gives a somewhat suggestive look, and it is too tight. But MM picked it for that reason Im sure.
I would say the last month has been spent starving, getting cosmetic, dental and hair treatments and practicing walking in heels. 

Wouldn't be surprised if Jess coached M, video taped her and analysed the tapes etc. It all looks extremely rehearsed.

Needless to say, not a hint of modesty or remorse.


----------



## youngster

gazoo said:


> Of course she came back. She needs fresh photos for Insta and she needs to underscore her "Royalness" by attending events with the BRF.



Asbsolutely right. She had to show up.  Also, their positions in the Commonwealth Trust are some of the few they are going to be allowed to hang on to, so to not show up for the Commonwealth Service would not be good.  I also think she and Harry are likely working behind the scenes to try and hang on to their remaining patronages. That National Theatre patronage is not one that MM is going to want to have stripped.  I think it ultimately will be though.


----------



## youngster

I agree with the general consensus, the blue dress is a pretty color and her hair looks nice but the dress is not a good fit. Too tight and emphasizes that she hasn't gotten her pre-baby body back.  But, agree, pure Jessica M styling, ugh.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> I would find it unacceptable if my dress fit like this, pulling and bunching all over the place.
> Aside from that (major distraction) I do think she is very attractive and love the color.


THIS picture speaks volumes to me .. Harry is focused forward and Meghan?!?! .. "_wait, wait, wait Harry .. I want to show everyone how beautiful I look because [you know] my glam squad flew in from the US to help me .. Harry, wait_"!!!!  She is 100% focused on that click-click-click (camera).


----------



## csshopper

TC1 said:


> She flew a hair team in for a ponytail? Groundbreaking.


  I can picture a liveried servant, in full breeches and white wig ceremoniously carrying a leather box and approaching Ms Sussex, delivering it with a bow, while a flunky behind her opens  it to reveal the pony tail, then whips out a few hair pins and viola it' time to face the cameras.

She didn't need to bring Archie because she has her other little boy, who needs leading around with her.


----------



## imgg

I made the mistake of watching a few seconds of the video of her presenting an award. It was so rehearsed and her tone is so over the top, like she is the most important person on earth. Seemed like she caught herself mid-way through, probably wasn't getting the audience reaction she was hoping for.


----------



## scarlet555

[/QUOTE]

I may be too critical but she does not seem  genuine.  What's with the accent?  (Madonna)


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> I made the mistake of watching a few seconds of the video of her presenting an award. It was so rehearsed and her tone is so over the top, like she is the most important person on earth. Seemed like she caught herself mid-way through, probably wasn't getting the audience reaction she was hoping for.



Is it just me or *WTF *with that eye makeup????  Glam squad?? .. where???


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> https://t.co/YD50fokHV0
> Far too tight. Hope that zip isn't a workable one.


Ugh. The way she stands at 0.06 & 0.13 in that video ... not flattering, at all.

I couldn't imagine wearing a dress that fitted/tight to a serious work event (this is basically a 'work' event for them). No one wants to be looking at you wiggling around trying to walk/move in a dress that's too tight, you're there to be professional. Save a dress like that for your personal life like dinner/night out with your other half or your girlfriends... or for a Hollywood red carpet event or premiere that she so desperately wants to be attending again.


----------



## Flatsy

imgg said:


> I made the mistake of watching a few seconds of the video of her presenting an award. It was so rehearsed and her tone was so over the top, like she is the most important person on earth.


_[fake laugh]aaalll the way in Canada [fake laugh]
_
It's rare of her not to be over the top and phony.  You are right - when she stopped trying to be cutesy and make it about herself, she just got on with it and was perfectly fine.  She's got a good voice for public speaking and the poise to be good at ceremonial work.  It's her phony personality that gets in the way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

As far as her 'accent', I didn't hear one .. although you can definitely see that she had her "SPEAKER" voice going!


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Is it just me or *WTF *with that eye makeup????  Glam squad?? .. where???



i was thinking the same, what is up with that eye make-up?  Way, way too heavy!!


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> _[fake laugh]aaalll the way in Canada [fake laugh]
> _
> It's rare of her not to be over the top and phony.  You are right - when she stopped trying to be cutesy and make it about herself, she just got on with it and was perfectly fine.  She's got a good voice for public speaking and the poise to be good at ceremonial work.  It's her phony personality that gets in the way.


Us Brits didn't need reminding that they were aaalll the way in Canada. Its not as though she was on a long Royal tour meeting the Commonwealth was it? Considering the fallout here, not a very wise thing to say.


----------



## doni

Ouch, that was painful to watch... she looks much better in pics than in movement or talking I have to say...
Plus, how did she think it was appropriate to make a joke about them watching the videos _all the way back in Canada_? Really!? She is clueless...
And what is about her husband asking to be introduced as “just Harry” as a speaker, and her being referred to pointedly as HRH? 
These two...


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> Why was she living only with her dad?





CeeJay said:


> From what I understand, at that time, Doria was living outside of CA and as such, did not have a lot of time to spend with Meghan.  She was; however, living full-time with her father at the time and given that she (at a young age) pursued a career in Hollywood, I'm sure living with her father and going on-set (which she did sometimes) was much more 'fun' than assisting Doria in her social work career or as a Yoga instructor.



I forgot how glowingly she used to speak of her father (remember the “happy family time” tributes she used to post around holidays as a lifestyle blogger?). She did say Doria was more strict and her dad let her “be herself” during her rebellious teen years (unclear if she was actually a rebel, or if this was just being “edgy” in retrospect for Hollywood).


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> I can picture a liveried servant, in full breeches and white wig ceremoniously carrying a leather box and approaching Ms Sussex, delivering it with a bow, while a flunky behind her opens  it to reveal the pony tail, then whips out a few hair pins and viola it' time to face the cameras.
> 
> She didn't need to bring Archie because she has her other little boy, who needs leading around with her.



If she had Archie with her, everyone would pay attention to him and ask how he is doing, rather than to her....


----------



## StylishMD

youngster said:


> i was thinking the same, what is up with that eye make-up?  Way, way too heavy!!


Her whole outfit and appearance was just wholly inappropriate IMO. Too tight, too revealing, too over the top


----------



## mdcx

I believe that heavy music as Meghan was announced was to cover up any potential lack of applause/boos.
Her manner is very cutesy to me. “Look at how breathless/overwhelmed/pretty” I am. You didn’t win an Oscar, Meghan. Be professional.


----------



## PewPew

Lounorada said:


> It's far too tight. I saw a video elsewhere where she's inside sitting down signing a visitors book or something and when she moves to stand up, lawd is it tight and she has to pull it down on both sides. That looks extremely unprofessional when someone is tugging at their clothes. Not to mention it's so tight you can see the waistband of her shapewear



She must be dying to show off her new body & refreshed face after some really unfortunate looks pre-Megxit. This is NOT digging at her post-pregnancy body. She was just wearing unflattering, too-small coats and dresses last summer and fall. (Actually, looking at her pre-Harry pics, too-small dresses/skirts may just be her signature look.)


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I believe that heavy music as Meghan was announced was to cover up any potential lack of applause/boos.
> Her manner is very cutesy to me. “Look at how breathless/overwhelmed/pretty” I am. You didn’t win an Oscar, Meghan. Be professional.


Got to admit she did her best to make it about her


----------



## Emeline

scarlet555 said:


>




I may be too critical but she does not seem  genuine.  What's with the accent?  (Madonna)[/QUOTE]
Agree.
She reeks of insincerity.  Between the over the top eye makeup, the Canada comment, all all the cutesy mannerisms, it's just awful to watch.  
It's kind of what you might expect from a 19 year old who is rather impressed with herself.


----------



## Emeline

LittleStar88 said:


> If she had Archie with her, everyone would pay attention to him and ask how he is doing, rather than to her....


Exactly right.
Plus she'd have to  wear her hair in the "I'm holding the baby today" tight bun.


----------



## imgg

Flatsy said:


> _[fake laugh]aaalll the way in Canada [fake laugh]
> _
> It's rare of her not to be over the top and phony.  You are right - when she stopped trying to be cutesy and make it about herself, she just got on with it and was perfectly fine.  She's got a good voice for public speaking and the poise to be good at ceremonial work.  It's her phony personality that gets in the way.


Such a world of difference from the meek voice she had when she said "no one asked me if I am doing okay"


----------



## jess236

Mrs.Z said:


> I would find it unacceptable if my dress fit like this, pulling and bunching all over the place.
> Aside from that (major distraction) I do think she is very attractive and love the color.


If I'm going to be picky, she still hasn't regained her pre-baby figure.


----------



## bag-mania

She's been missing the limelight for the past several weeks and she wants to make up for it now. I think we are going to be in for an interesting March. Pass the popcorn!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

I watched some of the video and don't understand why she had to specifically point out that they watched the videos _"alllll the way in Canada",_ other than to remind everyone that_ they've been in Canada!_  Which everybody already knows!  

Who cares where they watched the videos?  She uses this moment to draw attention to herself and then rushes into announcing the winner and doesn't pause at all, to give the name of the winner any emphasis.  Very poorly done of her.


----------



## Mrs.Z

The blue dress is Victoria Beckham....discuss....

....now we know why it doesn’t fit.....

...her line is failing ......will this help?


----------



## lanasyogamama

The dress really does look like a basic womenswear mall dress for a business lady from Ann Taylor, J.Crew, Macy’s, etc. I guess I’m thankful that it’s not another sleeveless wrap dress?


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> The blue dress is Victoria Beckham....discuss....
> 
> ....now we know why it doesn’t fit.....
> 
> ...her line is failing ......will this help?


Nope. Beckham’s clothing is made for women with her body type so it doesn’t fit 95% of the buying public. That’s why her brand is not making money and she should have realized that by now.  Her husband is tired of keeping it afloat and she has had to try and pull in other investors. The day will come when she has too many and no say and they will close her down. That has happened to  many designers and some far more famous than she  
Even though the dress is tight, this is one of her better looks. That’s not saying much.


----------



## imgg

youngster said:


> I watched some of the video and don't understand why she had to specifically point out that they watched the videos _"alllll the way in Canada",_ other than to remind everyone that_ they've been in Canada!_  Which everybody already knows!
> 
> Who cares where they watched the videos?  She uses this moment to draw attention to herself and then rushes into announcing the winner and doesn't pause at all, to give the name of the winner any emphasis.  Very poorly done of her.


She doesn't give a flying cow about the winner.  Like always, it has to be about _her.  _She probably forgot she was presenting an award and not accepting one.


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe Harry likes to see her in tight, ill-fitting dresses. It might be what attracted him to her in the first place.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Also, they are sure hanging on to those HRH intros until the very last minute.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> Nope. Beckham’s clothing is made for women with her body type so it doesn’t fit 95% of the buying public. That’s why her brand is not making money and she should have realized that by now.  Her husband is tired of keeping it afloat and she has had to try and pull in other investors. The day will come when she has too many and no say and they will close her down. That has happened to  many designers and some far more famous than she
> Even though the dress is tight, this is one of her better looks. That’s not saying much.


This is exactly what I heard about the brand...spot on!


----------



## imgg

She is probably so happy with herself right now.  Her main concern- is Hollywood watching? This is the performance she has been waiting for.  See if she can win back the Royals, so offers come rolling in.


----------



## 1LV

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4682547


Yikes!


----------



## TC1

Allllll the way in Canada. You know where I left what's-his-name with the nannies.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Us Brits didn't need reminding that they were aaalll the way in Canada. Its not as though she was on a long Royal tour meeting the Commonwealth was it? Considering the fallout here, not a very wise thing to say.


*YES* .. what the he$$ was that for, just to piss people off more???  I wonder if she wrote the speech, or had someone else write it .. regardless, that was NOT a well-thought out comment!!


----------



## jess236

CeeJay said:


> *YES* .. what the he$$ was that for, just to piss people off more???  I wonder if she wrote the speech, or had someone else write it .. regardless, that was NOT a well-thought out comment!!



She's definitely drawing attention to their split from the BRF.  Maybe she feels it's empowering to highlight that she got her way.  Still making digs.


----------



## 1LV

The remark about being in Canada - I see it as a dig rather than a joke.  I think she knew exactly what she was doing.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> If she had Archie with her, everyone would pay attention to him and ask how he is doing, rather than to her....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lazeny

Does her stylist hate her or she's just a mediocre stylist? She has access to a skilled stylist and that's the best they can do. I guess they're going for a minimalist look but the dress is ill fitting. I know she's a little thicker in the middle but a skilled seamstress can make that dress look sleek and fit regardless of her body shape.

As for being handsy, I know a lot of people like that. Like they don't know what to do with their hands and arms and it's their way of making their hands busy. It can be a lack of confidence.


----------



## Lounorada

Also find the control she has over H quite disturbing, not that it's the first time it's been spotted.
That video link that @Sharont2305 shared a few pages back shows how H was talking to people, she obviously felt she was sick of waiting and it was her turn to be centre of attention so ran her hand up his back to his shoulder pinched/clenched his shoulder and he practically jumps to get out of her way.
If this was a reverse of the sexes and H was showing controlling behaviour towards M then people would be outraged. People need to show the same energy for when a woman is showing controlling behaviour towards a man, it is possible. She's a narcissist and he seems like a passive person so she has him right where she wants him, under her control like a puppet on a string. It's quite creepy to see it happening openly at public events, I can only imagine what it's like behind closed doors between them.


----------



## marietouchet

No hose, lotsa of makeup , ponytail ,  what is the world coming to ?
I liked the navy suede shoes
I failed to notice , did she wear colored nail varnish ?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh nooooo


----------



## Shopgirl1996

CeeJay said:


> *YES* .. what the he$$ was that for, just to piss people off more???  I wonder if she wrote the speech, or had someone else write it .. regardless, that was NOT a well-thought out comment!!



I was thinking that she did it to see if she had any supporters in the audience, but she said it "jokingly" or whatever to cover it up. If I didn't see the video, I wouldn't have believed she would have tried to do that. What a train wreck!


----------



## Shopgirl1996

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh nooooo
> 
> View attachment 4682860



Ugh! What an awful closeup! You can see the smeared eyeshadow and the glue from the fake lashes.


----------



## Coconuts40

Sharont2305 said:


> https://t.co/YD50fokHV0
> Far too tight. Hope that zip isn't a workable one.



I just can't get over how manipulative she is!  The hand gestures that caution Harry to get out of her way.  'Me First ' is her motto.  She has turned Harry into mush as he cowers to her.  It's so difficult to watch her manipulation.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> The blue dress is Victoria Beckham....discuss....
> 
> ....now we know why it doesn’t fit.....
> 
> ...her line is failing ......will this help?


WHAT??? .. well, that couldn't have been cheap then!  But, but, but .. wait .. didn't H&M have a fall-out with David and Victoria, something along the lines of one of them making an unfavorable comment about Meghan???


----------



## michellem

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh nooooo
> 
> View attachment 4682860


Oh my!


----------



## Tivo

lanasyogamama said:


> The dress really does look like a basic womenswear mall dress for a business lady from Ann Taylor, J.Crew, Macy’s, etc. I guess I’m thankful that it’s not another sleeveless wrap dress?


I immediately thought New York & Co.


----------



## AB Negative

gracekelly said:


> Nope. Beckham’s clothing is made for women with her body type so it doesn’t fit 95% of the buying public. That’s why her brand is not making money and she should have realized that by now.  Her husband is tired of keeping it afloat and she has had to try and pull in other investors. The day will come when she has too many and no say and they will close her down. That has happened to  many designers and some far more famous than she
> Even though the dress is tight, this is one of her better looks. That’s not saying much.


The dress is beautiful, but cut for someone taller with a longer waist.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I just don’t understand why she can’t get the dress in a size that fits? It’s not like she’s big enough that she’s maxing out the size range.... I’d get it If she was plus sized, but she’s not...


----------



## Flatsy

Lounorada said:


> That video link that @Sharont2305 shared a few pages back shows how H was talking to people, she obviously felt she was sick of waiting and it was her turn to be centre of attention so ran her hand up his back to his shoulder pinched/clenched his shoulder and he practically jumps to get out of her way.


At the beginning, I thought all of the touching was affection and nonverbal cooperation.  But after a few appearances, it became clear that it's her nonverbally controlling him on a constant basis.  If he doesn't sit down next to her fast enough, she touches him to tell him to sit down (even if he's being a gentleman and waiting for the other ladies present to sit - see Canada House).  If he doesn't walk when she wants him to, or stand where she wants him to, or look at her when she wants him to, she puts her hands on him to tell him what to do.

Some guys like that sort of controlling behavior - they equate it with attentiveness.


----------



## Mrs.Z

CeeJay said:


> WHAT??? .. well, that couldn't have been cheap then!  But, but, but .. wait .. didn't H&M have a fall-out with David and Victoria, something along the lines of one of them making an unfavorable comment about Meghan???


Yes, another reason I thought she wore the dress.....allegedly Harry confronted David and accused Posh Spice of leaking things about Markle to the press in the beginning..... Perhaps this is a public way to say there is no bad blood


----------



## chaneljewel

Did she definitely have someone do her eye makeup?   Sure it wasn’t Archie????   It looks silly and ridiculous...like going to a costume party.  And the dress...pretty color but waaaaaaaaayyyy tooooooooo tight!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

It’s a nice color
No pit stains
No bra exposed
Hair not a complete raggedy mess
but...
Bad fit
Wrong undergarments 
Awful makeup


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Harry likes to see her in tight, ill-fitting dresses. It might be what attracted him to her in the first place.


Supposedly, he likes her a@@ !!!


----------



## jess236

...


----------



## jess236

CeeJay said:


> Supposedly, he likes her a@@ !!!


TMI


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> Also find the control she has over H quite disturbing, not that it's the first time it's been spotted.
> That video link that @Sharont2305 shared a few pages back shows how H was talking to people, she obviously felt she was sick of waiting and it was her turn to be centre of attention so ran her hand up his back to his shoulder pinched/clenched his shoulder and he practically jumps to get out of her way.
> If this was a reverse of the sexes and H was showing controlling behaviour towards M then people would be outraged. People need to show the same energy for when a woman is showing controlling behaviour towards a man, it is possible. She's a narcissist and he seems like a passive person so she has him right where she wants him, under her control like a puppet on a string. It's quite creepy to see it happening openly at public events, I can only imagine what it's like behind closed doors between them.


Hmmmm .. a dominatrix like her predecessor Wallis Simpson????


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> Supposedly, he likes her a@@ !!!


I’d heard it was the other way around


----------



## jess236

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. a dominatrix like her predecessor Wallis Simpson????



Somehow I don't believe this about Wallis Simpson. I saw a few interviews with her, she seemed very sweet. I think it was part of the hostility towards her at the time that many rumors were spread about her IMHO.


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Is it just me or *WTF *with that eye makeup????  Glam squad?? .. where???


My teen age granddaughter does a better job.
Of course, it may be deliberate to separate herself from the more subtley hued Royal women. To me it screamed Hollywood and In Your Face Your Majesty, since I have read the Queen prefers a lighter more discreet hand with make up.


----------



## CeeJay

Shopgirl1996 said:


> Ugh! What an awful closeup! You can see the smeared eyeshadow and the glue from the fake lashes.


See, now I didn't catch the fake eyelashes because I've NEVER worn them!  Yuck ..


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Also find the control she has over H quite disturbing, not that it's the first time it's been spotted.
> That video link that @Sharont2305 shared a few pages back shows how H was talking to people, she obviously felt she was sick of waiting and it was her turn to be centre of attention so ran her hand up his back to his shoulder pinched/clenched his shoulder and he practically jumps to get out of her way.
> If this was a reverse of the sexes and H was showing controlling behaviour towards M then people would be outraged. People need to show the same energy for when a woman is showing controlling behaviour towards a man, it is possible. She's a narcissist and he seems like a passive person so she has him right where she wants him, under her control like a puppet on a string. It's quite creepy to see it happening openly at public events, I can only imagine what it's like behind closed doors between them.


She treats him like a child and he is happy to let her do it.  Creepy.  In this particular situation where there is a certain protocol to follow, this is actually rude, but it is just Meghan not abiding by the rules that dictate how the royals act.  She doesn't want to do it or understand it.  It just is not important to her or on her radar or feels that it applies to her, however, forget her title or failure to use the HRH whilst she still has it, and she won't be happy.


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> Also find the control she has over H quite disturbing, not that it's the first time it's been spotted.
> That video link that @Sharont2305 shared a few pages back shows how H was talking to people, she obviously felt she was sick of waiting and it was her turn to be centre of attention so ran her hand up his back to his shoulder pinched/clenched his shoulder and he practically jumps to get out of her way.
> If this was a reverse of the sexes and H was showing controlling behaviour towards M then people would be outraged. People need to show the same energy for when a woman is showing controlling behaviour towards a man, it is possible. She's a narcissist and he seems like a passive person so she has him right where she wants him, under her control like a puppet on a string. It's quite creepy to see it happening openly at public events, I can only imagine what it's like behind closed doors between them.


You are not the only one who is bugged by this!!!  Sad that the dim-wit (Harry) doesn't get it - heck, he probably thinks this is how she is "loving him so much"


----------



## gracekelly

Shopgirl1996 said:


> Ugh! What an awful closeup! You can see the smeared eyeshadow and the glue from the fake lashes.


Why does she stay with this makeup guy?  He just slops it on.  A real artist would be using HD makeup knowing that she would be photographed and videoed.  She must be paying him a pittance or not at all and he is working for her just so he can put this on his CV.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Why does she stay with this makeup guy?  He just slops it on.  A real artist would be using HD makeup knowing that she would be photographed and videoed.  She must be paying him a pittance or not at all and he is working for her just so he can put this on his CV.


OR .. it could be that they have an 'arrangement' .. in that he gets to advertise the fact that he does her makeup.  If I recall, he did that after their wedding.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Why does she stay with this makeup guy?  He just slops it on.  A real artist would be using HD makeup knowing that she would be photographed and videoed.  She must be paying him a pittance or not at all and he is working for her just so he can put this on his CV.


This makeup artist did do her minimalist wedding makeup, clearly she has asked him for something more va va voom this time


----------



## lalame

I thought she looked beautiful (and appropriate) leaving that hotel. Nothing wrong there. I thought she looked great in all the professional photos I saw with the blue dress, but there weren’t many that came up on my feed... now I come here and see those awful close up shots and yikes. Idk what happened, it seems like she lost hold of a make up artist (thought she always “did her own makeup” though??) or stylist. I’m shocked she wore a dress so I’ll-fitting... she normally wore much looser clothing in general before.

The super heavy makeup and tight dress... all seems so unlike her. What happened?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> This makeup artist did do her minimalist wedding makeup, clearly she has asked him for something more va va voom this time


Yes he did and that wasn't such a great idea either.  He doesn't know how to go half way.  She should have obtained a Bobbi Brown makeup artist for the wedding if she wanted a fresh look.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The makeup is unfortunate but she looks better with the hair and dress than she did at many events, so... a very lukewarm thumbs up for effort.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> OR .. it could be that they have an 'arrangement' .. in that he gets to advertise the fact that he does her makeup.  If I recall, he did that after their wedding.


That's what I was going for, but you said it better lol!


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh nooooo
> 
> View attachment 4682860



i thought I saw this mess in the you tube still shot.  Yikes!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is a pretty pic, I’ll admit it.


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> This is a pretty pic, I’ll admit it.


That grip tho. It’s downright controlling.


----------



## chaneljewel

I’m just done with both of them.  I feel that most of this visit is for show only, and am appalled that baby Archie was left in Canada. Why wouldn’t his relatives want to see him?  So selfish of both H and M.  I honestly can’t wait for the two of them to go back to their hiding place and stay.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sol Ryan said:


> I just don’t understand why she can’t get the dress in a size that fits? It’s not like she’s big enough that she’s maxing out the size range.... I’d get it If she was plus sized, but she’s not...



she seems to insist upon dressing for the body she wants, not the body she has. And she will fire you if you don’t tell her she looks amazing (repeatedly).


----------



## Sol Ryan

LittleStar88 said:


> she seems to insist upon dressing for the body she wants, not the body she has. And she will fire you if you don’t tell her she looks amazing (repeatedly).



I feel bad for Posh... it’s a pretty dress, if not appropriate for the event. It’s a shame she’s wearing it so badly...

I just can’t imagine having it folding and bunching up like in the pictures and her underwear lines showing through it with all those people watching... it seems horrific.


----------



## PewPew

Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, another reason I thought she wore the dress.....allegedly Harry confronted David and accused Posh Spice of leaking things about Markle to the press in the beginning..... *Perhaps this is a public way to say there is no bad blood*



This is a great point. Even if there was no confrontation btwn Harry & David, the story is out there, so wearing a VB dress will be news in the UK. It’s also also a strategic move for someone aspiring to be a mega celeb, since VB has tons of connections on both sides of the pond.


----------



## threadbender

As far as I am concerned, they could both be perfectly styled, speak impeccably and they would still be losers on this trip. They left their child, the Queen's great-grandson, somewhere (does anyone know where they have been staying? It appears the place on the island is no longer on lock-down/privacy overload) as they went back to the UK. Not acceptable. Period. That poor child. He will never know his paternal family.


----------



## Alena21

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4682547


Yeah, massive head on a short neck plus uproportionate long body on shapeless bowed legs. Small eyes with a massive jaw. Very mismatched features.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Harry likes to see her in tight, ill-fitting dresses. It might be what attracted him to her in the first place.


Fine. Wear them in the bedroom, not to public events.


----------



## jess236

...


----------



## chicinthecity777

chaneljewel said:


> I’m just done with both of them.  I feel that most of this visit is for show only, and am appalled that baby Archie was left in Canada. Why wouldn’t his relatives want to see him?  So selfish of both H and M.  I honestly can’t wait for the two of them to go back to their hiding place and stay.


This!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> The super heavy makeup and tight dress... all seems so unlike her. What happened?



The "I'm baaaaaaaack, and this'll get ME on the front page, rather than the other Duchess" look


----------



## chicinthecity777

chaneljewel said:


> I’m just done with both of them.  I feel that most of this visit is for show only, and am appalled that baby Archie was left in Canada. Why wouldn’t his relatives want to see him?  So selfish of both H and M.  I honestly can’t wait for the two of them to go back to their hiding place and stay.


I do feel incredibly sorry for Archie! He's nothing to MM but another pawn in her social climbing game! Harry is another dumb f*ck who don't know how to be a father! I don't care what nanny, "friends" or what have you is caring for Archie where they left him! The baby needs his parents FFS!


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fine. Wear them in the bedroom, not to public events.



But without cameras, a tight dress merely exists & cannot truly live *sob*


----------



## Grande Latte

Her whole existence is predicated on her marrying into the royal family. Now that she's excluded herself, she holds no market value. Disney isn't stupid enough to give her a role so a high budget movie can FLOP. She can't act. She has no real talents. Entertainment business is about making money.

Does she even know that no one really cares about her at this point? And in reality, back to pre-pregnancy weight or not, she's just not THAT beautiful or attractive. She's manipulative and toxic.

And Harry is an international fool.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently there were some cheers and a loud boo on their arrival



Yes, I saw it on the Celeb style thread, I hope they'll have more booos in the coming events!


----------



## doni

I really don’t think she wants a Hollywood career. Even before meeting Harry she realized that was not going to work, hence the focus on high level networking and search for a suitable husband...

No, they want to do what they say they want to do. Establish a global brand in the field of philanthropy, where they can make money a feel good about it too. Not being able to use Sussex Royal as a name is a set back but won’t deter them. Their credentials is that he has previous experience in charity work, a mother who excelled at it and is in the process of overcoming mental illness caused by trauma related to that megastar mother. On her side, she has an _independent profile_ that includes fighting for gender equality at the age of 12, patronizing a soup kitchen in Toronto and being the target of racist abuse.

Meghan’s role model is, I believe, Amal Clooney (and further down the line Oprah). Who was in fact the first person she contacted in London when the engagement became official to ‘ask for advice’ and offer her friendship. The Clooneys were duly invited to the wedding. Of course, Amal’s independent profile includes being a human rights lawyer for one of the top London firms in the field but no matter, that’s just details.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

marietouchet said:


> This makeup artist did do her minimalist wedding makeup, clearly she has asked him for something more va va voom this time



Yep. Froma distance I just noticed the lip colour. Up close, yeesh, it's like she showed her make up artist an episode of The Simpsons when Homer designed a make up gun. 

The dress colour is gorgeous though.


----------



## doni

I really don’t think she wants a Hollywood career. Even before meeting Harry she realized that was not going to happen, hence the focus on high level networking and search for a suitable husband...

No, they want to do what they say they want to do. Establish a global brand in the field of philanthropy, where they can make money a feel good about it too. Not being able to use Sussex Royal as a name is a set back but won’t deter them. Their credentials are that he has previous experience in charity work, a mother who excelled at it and is in the process of overcoming mental illness caused by trauma related to that megastar mother. On her side, she has an _independent profile_ that includes fighting for gender equality at the age of 12, patronizing a soup kitchen in Toronto and being the target of racist abuse.

Meghan’s role model is, I believe, Amal Clooney (and further down the line Oprah). Who was in fact the first person she contacted in London when the engagement became official to ‘ask for advice’ and offer her friendship. The Clooneys were duly invited to the wedding. Of course, Amal’s own independent profile includes being a human rights lawyer for one of the top London chambers in the field but no matter, that’s just details.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> Meghan’s role model is, I believe, Amal Clooney (and further down the line Oprah).



Meghan doesn't ever play in the same league, though.


----------



## Alena21

Kim O'Meara said:


> Yep. Froma distance I just noticed the lip colour. Up close, yeesh, it's like she showed her make up artist an episode of The Simpsons when Homer designed a make up gun.
> 
> The dress colour is gorgeous though.


The make up is garish, the dress is the wrong dress for the event, not for her body type and the colour doesn't suit her skin tone as it brings out the yellow in it. She should have gone with the orange colour but again the dress is not for this occasion.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan doesn't ever play in the same league, though.


Come on now, as a member of the Royal family, her station in life was at an equivalent level.
There is a reason why those two women showed up and fraternized with Meghan.
Amal and Oprah are very, very shrewd women, networking is essential in their businesses.


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> _That's_ nerves and it gives her away


Not so sure that is nerves. Lots of people are nervous in social situations in a large venue and never direct their partners  around by putting their arm on their back. It’s a very odd thing for a woman to do also. To me it seems more like control. Poor H seems to shrink under her touch.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> Not so sure that is nerves. Lots of people are nervous in social situations in a large venue and never direct their partners  around by putting their arm on their back. It’s a very odd thing for a woman to do also. To me it seems more like control. Poor H seems to shrink under her touch.



I agree but I think (over-)controlling comes from fear.

When I look at her behaviour in the vids and pics she is obsessed by being only inches away from H, this is done so they are in every frame together (learnt) but her constant touching of him is for reassurance (and signifies to all onlookers ownership). We see this a lot in teens and young lovers, lots of public displays of affection which doesn't signify any real closeness of the couple away from the public eye  but emphasises "look at _my_ GF/BF" to all onlookers. Hanging off his arm or holding an umbrella together are cliched ('movie moments') and again look tutored but touches to direct are a) because she can't go anywhere without him incase she's 'papped' apart but also b) there is an obsession with H, ergo she fears she_ is_ nothing without him.

Never mind the dress (wrong for the event, whatever) _put a coat on_


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I agree but I think (over-)controlling comes from fear.
> 
> When I look at her behaviour in the vids and pics she is obsessed by being only inches away from H, this is done so they are in every frame together (learnt) but her constant touching of him is for reassurance (and signifies to all onlookers ownership). We see this a lot in teens and young lovers, lots of public displays of affection which doesn't signify any real closeness of the couple away from the public eye  but emphasises "look at _my_ GF/BF" to all onlookers. Hanging off his arm or holding an umbrella together are cliched ('movie moments') and again look tutored but touches to direct are a) because she can't go anywhere without him incase she's 'papped' apart but also b) there is an obsession with H, ergo she fears she_ is_ nothing without him.
> 
> Never mind the dress (wrong for the event, whatever) _put a coat on_


Agreed 100% that she is insecure with her relationship.
In addition, she is not Harry’s physical type at all.
For all, we know he is in contact with former girlfriends.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Rumor is, she pitched a fit that she wasn’t being curtseyed to last night. Apparently they also insisted the HRH be used in the intro.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Agreed 100% that she is insecure with her relationship.
> In addition, she is not Harry’s physical type at all.
> For all, we know he is in contact with former girlfriends.



He seemed to be very caring towards his former GFs so it wouldn't surprise - bet that doesn't go down well in some quarters


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Rumor is, she pitched a fit that she wasn’t being curtseyed to last night. Apparently they also insisted the HRH be used in the intro.


Well, she better milk it for the next 25 days.  And I’m rolling my eyes at the curtsying.


----------



## Annawakes

I would love to know what the woman who accepted the award thought, when she saw M up close....what she thought of the heavy heavy makeup....I would probably be thinking, Ewww....


----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


> Rumor is, she pitched a fit that she wasn’t being curtseyed to last night. Apparently they also insisted the HRH be used in the intro.


She really does think very highly of herself.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Rumor is, she pitched a fit that she wasn’t being curtseyed to last night. Apparently they also insisted the HRH be used in the intro.


Where did you read this? Just curious.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> He seemed to be very caring towards his former GFs so it wouldn't surprise - bet that doesn't go down well in some quarters


I've said it before and I'll say it again, Chelsy is his Camilla. I'm not saying that he will have an affair with her, Meghan won't leave him out of her sight plus it will be difficult when they're aaaallllllllll the way back in Canada or wherever. But, a divorce is not going to surprise me and Chelsy will be back on the scene at some point.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again, Chelsy is his Camilla. I'm not saying that he will have an affair with her, Meghan won't leave him out of her sight plus it will be difficult when they're aaaallllllllll the way back in Canada or wherever. But, a divorce is not going to surprise me and Chelsy will be back on the scene at some point.



We should bookmark this post


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> I've said it before and I'll say it again, Chelsy is his Camilla. I'm not saying that he will have an affair with her, Meghan won't leave him out of her sight plus it will be difficult when they're aaaallllllllll the way back in Canada or wherever. But, a divorce is not going to surprise me and Chelsy will be back on the scene at some point.


At the end of the day, Camilla and Charles look truly, truly in synch together. It is actually touching to see them together, they look like two peas in a pod.
Can’t fake that, imho.
Harry likes English women who reminds him of Diana. She is the end all. 
Obviously, Meg can’t compete with that ever...


----------



## Clearblueskies

It’s noticeable how much more relaxed Harry looks at Silverstone without HRH Meg hanging off his arm or pushing him aside


----------



## rose60610

.....So M comes in a pretty dress that's a gorgeous color but ill fitting.  I'd cut her some slack due to nervous eating and/or jet bloat, but she had to have known those effects and not chosen such a dress. Her makeup was great until she looked down at the script and exposed those severe eyeshadow creases. Once again she had to have known the cameras were on her close up.
I noticed that she wore her nails short and in a neutral approved color.  To me that speaks of "Grandma, I'm being respectful here so please unleash some serious Crown money for us. It isn't easy lining up security and all the stuff we took for granted and I don't want to look like I'm begging but....  Besides, you don't want Meal Tic (ahem) Archie to suffer, do you?  It was cheaper to have one nanny watch him in Canada than to bring several childcare people on this trip because I'm SO respectful of Crown expenditures. Look how pretty I am, Grandma! Besides, denying our request for money could make YOU look bad!  See! I calculated everything I could think of.  I'll bring Archie next time only if you'll agree to fork out a few (dozen) millions that you'll never miss. We're well on our way to woke the world. If only they'd listen! After you wire the money we'll be out of your way. We'll be back if we need more. Cheerio!"


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> I thought she looked beautiful (and appropriate) leaving that hotel. Nothing wrong there. I thought she looked great in all the professional photos I saw with the blue dress, but there weren’t many that came up on my feed... now I come here and see those awful close up shots and yikes. Idk what happened, it seems like she lost hold of a make up artist (thought she always “did her own makeup” though??) or stylist. I’m shocked she wore a dress so I’ll-fitting... she normally wore much looser clothing in general before.
> 
> The super heavy makeup and tight dress... all seems so unlike her. What happened?


Yes--I heard over and over that she did her own makeup for her wedding and how wonderful it was! But that was back in the "Meghan-is-the-best-thing-EVER-to-hit-the-RF" days, which are long gone.

That blue dress needed to be at least a size bigger, and aren't those zipper dresses over?


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> she seems to insist upon dressing for the body she wants, not the body she has. And she will fire you if you don’t tell her she looks amazing (repeatedly).


That's exactly how she sees it. That was said over and over about Kim K back in the day too--is everyone afraid to tell her how bad she looks (Kim)?

MM does not have the model body that Kate has (Kate would look great in the blue dress) but continues to dress like she does. 

And lordy that eye makeup! Was there anything left on the shadow palette when she was done glopping it on?


----------



## Sharont2305

From last night, Ross Kemp's tears are real, she's just "acting"
Fake


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> At the end of the day, Camilla and Charles look truly, truly in synch together. It is actually touching to see them together, they look like two peas in a pod.
> Can’t fake that, imho.
> Harry likes English women who reminds him of Diana. She is the end all.
> Obviously, Meg can’t compete with that ever...


Totally agree re: Chas & Cam--they look so darn happy together, like they've been through it all (they have), came out the other side intact and YAY for them. I was totally anti-Camilla back in the day but seeing them now and my own views maturing changed all that.

M found (imo) a wounded bird (H) and grabbed him tight. Once again--IMO--she isn't the "one" and this will cause problems some day though M was very smart (calculating?) and LUCKY to get pregnant right away. Archie will always be her meal ticket.

And I have no doubt that when she saw the e-ring H "created" for her, her heart dropped to the pit of her stomach. She is definitely the J-Lo e-ring type of gal (imo). Seeing Diana's huge sapphire on Kate's finger probably makes her seethe each time she sees it--"THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MINE!" (it was originally given to Harry after his mom's death and he very kindly gave it to Will for Kate). You can see that ring easily in every photo and remember Diana; M's ring--not so much.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> From last night, Ross Kemp's tears are real, she's just "acting"
> Fake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683304


Yep.  Faker than a fake thing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Come on now, as a member of the Royal family, her station in life was at an equivalent level.
> There is a reason why those two women showed up and fraternized with Meghan.
> Amal and Oprah are very, very shrewd women, networking is essential in their businesses.


 
I'm talking accomplishments. Amal is a human rights lawyer who has defended prestigious causes, and guess what? All before becoming Mrs. Clooney. In fact I remember an award George got where the laudator went on about her impressive accomplishments, then jokingly said "Yet it's her husband we're giving an award to tonight".

Meghan's main accomplishment is seducing Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> This is a pretty pic, I’ll admit it.



Except it is lies, all lies! 
Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken at the same time, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> Except it is lies, all lies!
> Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken seconds later below, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.
> 
> View attachment 4683306
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683305


It's the identical effect they used with William and Catherine during the Christmas holidays. It's beautiful! Is it a filter?


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Except it is lies, all lies!
> Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken seconds later below, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.
> 
> View attachment 4683306
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683305


Willing to bet bet Meghan’s not planning to sue over this bit of press flakery #doublestandards


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> Never mind the dress (wrong for the event, whatever) _put a coat on_



This. Thank you.  It was pouring rain last night and likely about 40°F.
ETA: But as @bag-mania  pointed out, it wasn't raining all that much lol.  I guess drizzling enough for an umbrella.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> It's the identical effect they used with William and Catherine during the Christmas holidays. It's beautiful! Is it a filter?
> View attachment 4683319



The one with William and Kate is a filter. H&M's is a little different but it's an effect you can achieve with Photoshop. Just as it's easy to put different people in the background to make it look like spectators are taking photos of them.


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> The one with William and Kate is a filter. H&M's is a little different but it's an effect you can achieve with Photoshop. Just as it's easy to put different people in the background to make it look like spectators are taking photos of them.


I love this effect, it's just so magical


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> From last night, Ross Kemp's tears are real, she's just "acting"
> Fake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683304


Ah that’s Grant Mitchell, I hadn’t realized!


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> Except it is lies, all lies!
> Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken at the same time, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.
> 
> View attachment 4683306
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683305



@Vlad - calling in photogs for thoughts on this dreamy, rainy, perfectly lit photo! Photoshopped to enhance what's going on?!

It was crazy to see that photo which looks SO different from any other photo from the evening. They all had the same access, so I don't know if that was a one in a million shot or what, but it is just SO different from anything else. And of course, plastered on the front page of every website and paper (as it should be, it is a great photo!)


----------



## Vlad

bag-mania said:


> Except it is lies, all lies!
> Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken at the same time, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.
> 
> View attachment 4683306
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683305



The first picture is backlit by accident. This will happen frequently when there are a lot of event photographers unloading their barrage of shots while their flashes pop frantically. You'll get some accidental backlit photos when your open shutter catches another photog's flash going off across the scene. It's a cool effect that can elevate a scene, which is why it was chosen for publication, no doubt.

The reason why you see the rain in the first and not second image is that it's simply backlit. Both photos are accurately showing reality, taken mere seconds apart, just differently lit. No photo manipulation here, just a lucky coincidence.


----------



## bag-mania

Vlad said:


> The first picture is backlit by accident. This will happen frequently when there are a lot of event photographers unloading their barrage of shots while their flashes pop frantically. You'll get some accidental backlit photos when your open shutter catches another photog's flash going off across the scene. It's a cool effect that can elevate a scene, which is why it was chosen for publication, no doubt.
> 
> The reason why you see the rain in the first and not second image is that it's simply backlit. Both photos are accurately showing reality, taken mere seconds apart, just differently lit. No photo manipulation here, just a lucky coincidence.



Take a close look at the halo around Meghan and Harry. They were cut out of the original and placed on a layer on top of the tweaked background.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Some other visit yesterday


----------



## TC1

I'm sorry..but that pic with the umbrella?..it looks like her jaw is going to detach and she's going to swallow him whole. Over smiling, crazed, fanatical look in her eyes too *shudder*
She has two facial expressions. Teary eyed puss and boots fake sympathy and fatal attraction eyes.


----------



## marietouchet

Kim O'Meara said:


> Yep. Froma distance I just noticed the lip colour. Up close, yeesh, it's like she showed her make up artist an episode of The Simpsons when Homer designed a make up gun.
> 
> The dress colour is gorgeous though.


THE DRESS COLOR MATCHED THE EVENT COLORS - NICE


----------



## Vlad

bag-mania said:


> Take a close look at the halo around Meghan and Harry. They were cut out of the original and placed on a layer on top of the tweaked background.



I disagree, this is most certainly not digitally manipulated (aside from maybe some contrast boost in post). The halo comes from from the backlit flash going off. The light wraps around the edges, emphasizing the boundaries of the subject and causing the halo you see. As it was a powerful flash (relative to the photographer's wide opened aperture), the effect is more pronounced.

This _rim light_ technique is often used in dramatic portraiture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Vlad

This photo actually shows the lens of the photographer whose flash went off in the other scene, you can clearly see the reflection of the ambient lighting on the front lens element:




Hence the reflection of the flash off the car's hood in the other shot and the red umbrella on the left of the scene.


----------



## limom

The Aussies morning news are ruthless..


----------



## daisychainz

limom said:


> The Aussies morning news are ruthless..



Those two are definitely not MM fans!


----------



## bag-mania

Vlad said:


> This photo actually shows the lens of the photographer whose flash went off in the other scene, you can clearly see the reflection of the ambient lighting on the front lens element:
> 
> View attachment 4683388
> 
> 
> Hence the reflection of the flash off the car's hood in the other shot and the red umbrella on the left of the scene.



Not to beat a dead horse but I have to respectfully disagree. Look at the thin white line that surrounds only Meghan and Harry. That is a tell-tale sign of using the "magic wand" or quick selection tool in Photoshop. No amount of light behind them will do that. It is an overlay because they did a lot of work on the background and they didn't want to alter the color or lighting on Meghan and Harry themselves.


----------



## Vlad

bag-mania said:


> [...] No amount of light behind them will do that. It is an overlay because they did a lot of work on the background and they didn't want to alter the color or lighting on Meghan and Harry themselves.



Look, I got no skin in the game here, but this is no Photoshop selection / background swap or textured overlay. You can clearly see her fine arm hair backlit on her right arm. It would be intensely tedious to accurately fake this scene, including the blurred rain drops in the scene foreground/background, the reflection of the flash on the hood (and resulting lens glare), and the (physically accurate) rim light on the subjects.

The physics don't lie, no matter how you feel about her.


----------



## bag-mania

Vlad said:


> Look, I got no skin in the game here, but this is no Photoshop selection / background swap or textured overlay. You can clearly see her fine arm hair backlit on her right arm. It would be intensely tedious to accurately fake this scene, including the blurred rain drops in the scene foreground/background, the reflection of the flash on the hood (and resulting lens glare), and the (physically accurate) rim light on the subjects.
> 
> The physics don't lie, no matter how you feel about her.



I can assure you Photoshop is that good now and it doesn't take long at all to drastically alter an image. I can isolate a person, including every hair, and remove them like they were never there. But I think it's time for me to shut up now.


----------



## justwatchin

mrsinsyder said:


> Some other visit yesterday
> 
> View attachment 4683377


Uh oh, looks like she’s going for the belly! Pregnant or just sparking some speculation? I vote the latter


----------



## Vlad

bag-mania said:


> I can assure you Photoshop is that good now and it doesn't take long at all to drastically alter an image. I can isolate a person, including every hair, and remove them like they were never there. But I think it's time for me to shut up now.



I know, I use PS 2020 on the daily. 

But then your logic fails in your argument. You said that the halo is a sign of selection done in PS, but then if I wanted to fake a scene, wouldn't the program make it easy for me to make an accurate selection, isolate the subject _without_ the halo? You're contradicting yourself in claiming a sloppy digital alteration while praising the prowess of Photoshop.

Aside from this argument, where and when were these pictures published? In the modern publishing world, the pressure to be the first to publish is intense (particularly for mega popular subjects and events), so much so that modern flagship dSLRs have dedicated high speed wired and wireless ports, allowing photogs to instantly send the captured moments to the publisher. Pictures of high profile celebs published first means more money. I highly doubt anyone spent any significant time manipulating this image for publication.


----------



## green.bee

mrsinsyder said:


> Some other visit yesterday
> 
> View attachment 4683377



another unflattering and ugly outfit, this time on a frumpy side.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh nooooo
> 
> View attachment 4682860



Looks like HRH-too-big-for-her-britches was doing a screen test for The Joker - watch out Joaquin Phoenix! ♥️


----------



## Megs

Vlad said:


> I know, I use PS 2020 on the daily.
> 
> But then your logic fails in your argument. You said that the halo is a sign of selection done in PS, but then if I wanted to fake a scene, wouldn't the program make it easy for me to make an accurate selection, isolate the subject _without_ the halo? You're contradicting yourself in claiming a sloppy digital alteration while praising the prowess of Photoshop.
> 
> Aside from this argument, where and when were these pictures published? In the modern publishing world, the pressure to be the first to publish is intense (particularly for mega popular subjects and events), so much so that modern flagship dSLRs have dedicated high speed wired and wireless ports, allowing photogs to instantly send the captured moments to the publisher. Pictures of high profile celebs published first means more money. I highly doubt anyone spent any significant time manipulating this image for publication.



Ya, pretty sure that photo showed up immediately after it was taken. It came out with the others.



bag-mania said:


> I can assure you Photoshop is that good now and it doesn't take long at all to drastically alter an image. I can isolate a person, including every hair, and remove them like they were never there. But I think it's time for me to shut up now.



People work insane magic with photoshop! I wasn't meaning to bring Vlad in to go against you or anyone, I was curious on his take knowing that he is highly skilled in photography and photoshop. Plus, he is going to give us an unbiased opinion, he doesn't follow or care about H & M or any royal family members for that matter!


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> I can assure you Photoshop is that good now and it doesn't take long at all to drastically alter an image. I can isolate a person, including every hair, and remove them like they were never there. But I think it's time for me to shut up now.



But if the person who would have done this were so good at photoshop (for example to be able to replicate so perfectly and convincingly the arm hair) they could easily have avoided the white halo right?
Whereas in back-lit rainy pictures you get that white halo effect with the camera...

In any event, isn’t it fascinating, how photography was all about reflecting reality and now we are no longer certain about real and fiction?

Back to topic, this whole happy-last-days-as-royals story is all about fiction for sure!


----------



## Megs

Also speaking of that photo, it really sells the narrative of how happy they are. I can't knock that, it's a stunning photo, it just is, and they do look happy. No matter how much I don't like how Harry and Meghan have gone about all of this, they both look happy in that picture, even if it's forced. And then they get that perfect, backlit, rain showing, under the umbrella, love shot... now they can really be like SEE. EVEN THE GODS OF PHOTOGRAPHY SEE HOW HAPPY WE ARE.


----------



## cafecreme15

Megs said:


> Also speaking of that photo, it really sells the narrative of how happy they are. I can't knock that, it's a stunning photo, it just is, and they do look happy. No matter how much I don't like how Harry and Meghan have gone about all of this, they both look happy in that picture, even if it's forced. And then they get that perfect, backlit, rain showing, under the umbrella, love shot... now they can really be like SEE. EVEN THE GODS OF PHOTOGRAPHY SEE HOW HAPPY WE ARE.


I generally believe the harder you have to work to convince someone that something is true, the less likely it is, in fact, to be true.


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> I generally believe the harder you have to work to convince someone that something is true, the less likely it is, in fact, to be true.


Exactly this.  And there were several shots that caught them looking miserable under that umbrella, when the false smiles were switched off for a moment or two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Megs said:


> ...they both look happy in that picture, even if it's forced. And then they get that perfect, backlit, rain showing, under the umbrella, love shot... now they can really be like SEE. EVEN THE GODS OF PHOTOGRAPHY SEE HOW HAPPY WE ARE.



They look well rested, as anyone should after months of free vacation.

[munch on popcorns]


----------



## Tivo

Not gonna lie she looks gorgeous in these pictures. And together they look like a lovely couple, but she also looks like such a phony. 

This is her movie star audition to the industry. I think she wants the power to pick and choose her projects but she doesn’t seem to have it like that so she’s reminding everyone that she’s still pretty.

Sadly, her eyes look desperate and give her away.


----------



## Clearblueskies

And seriously - yet another set of photos, in b/w and colour, carefully posed etc, documenting a so-called SECRET visit?  I guess the rest of them will be drip dripped in “never before seen” releases over the next few months.  Repetitive, tedious pattern of self promotion


----------



## youngster

I agree that it's a really pretty photo. They may be deliriously happy together in truth, but that doesn't change that they have rejected their duties and turned their backs on the UK, while trying to fleece the UK taxpayer for millions of pounds for their ridiculous, overseas security demands, while also planning to profit off their royal connections.  I don't care how much Harry talks about returning occasionally or continuing on with x, y, and z activities for the Queen.  His and Meghan's focus will be on making lots and lots of money which is going to be much harder to pull off than they realize.


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> People work insane magic with photoshop! I wasn't meaning to bring Vlad in to go against you or anyone, I was curious on his take knowing that he is highly skilled in photography and photoshop. Plus, he is going to give us an unbiased opinion, he doesn't follow or care about H & M or any royal family members for that matter!



That's okay. I didn't intend to argue with or rile up Vlad. Sorry about that.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I don't buy the argument that Harry and Meghan are trying hard to make it look as though they're in love.  I believe they are, in fact, in love.  Harry has always been a "touchy/feely" kinda guy, and. like most Americans, Meghan is the same.


----------



## mrsinsyder

tacky tacky tacky

*Meghan Markle sends Twitter into meltdown as viewers think she ‘pushed’ Harry out the way*
MEGHAN MARKLE has been caught on camera appearing to push Harry out of the way, as he chatted with an award attendee at the Endeavour Fund Awards last night.

“That isn’t PDA. That was Meghan interrupting their conversation, pulling him back so she could step in front of him to take over the conversation. I don’t care, it’s their marriage and I will never judge about that. But the video is clear, please don’t mislead or sugar coat."

Another replied: “ Always pushing herself in front of Harry. RUDE.”
*video: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...chess-pushes-duke-uproar-uk-news-royal-family*


----------



## piperdog

Megs said:


> Also speaking of that photo, it really sells the narrative of how happy they are. I can't knock that, it's a stunning photo, it just is, and they do look happy. No matter how much I don't like how Harry and Meghan have gone about all of this, they both look happy in that picture, even if it's forced. And then they get that perfect, backlit, rain showing, under the umbrella, love shot... now they can really be like SEE. EVEN THE GODS OF PHOTOGRAPHY SEE HOW HAPPY WE ARE.


All true, though I prefer to think of it as: How nice that there was this pretty photo taken of them because they have very little else going for them right now.


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> tacky tacky tacky
> 
> *Meghan Markle sends Twitter into meltdown as viewers think she ‘pushed’ Harry out the way*
> MEGHAN MARKLE has been caught on camera appearing to push Harry out of the way, as he chatted with an award attendee at the Endeavour Fund Awards last night.
> 
> “That isn’t PDA. That was Meghan interrupting their conversation, pulling him back so she could step in front of him to take over the conversation. I don’t care, it’s their marriage and I will never judge about that. But the video is clear, please don’t mislead or sugar coat."
> 
> Another replied: “ Always pushing herself in front of Harry. RUDE.”
> *video: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...chess-pushes-duke-uproar-uk-news-royal-family*


She's trained him well--"when I place my hand on your back--MOVE IT!"


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> The one with William and Kate is a filter. H&M's is a little different but it's an effect you can achieve with Photoshop. Just as it's easy to put different people in the background to make it look like spectators are taking photos of them.


They gave him more hair as well....


----------



## csshopper

So she went on a photo op school visit.
How lovely it would have been if she and the absent  Archie could have spent that time visiting his great grandmother at the Palace. But the limited number of pics it might have produced would be a deal breaker to her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From Twitter:

"Harry used to be a Prince, now he's an accessory."

Pretty much nailed it.


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> I agree but I think (over-)controlling comes from fear.
> 
> When I look at her behaviour in the vids and pics she is obsessed by being only inches away from H, this is done so they are in every frame together (learnt) but her constant touching of him is for reassurance (and signifies to all onlookers ownership). We see this a lot in teens and young lovers, lots of public displays of affection which doesn't signify any real closeness of the couple away from the public eye  but emphasises "look at _my_ GF/BF" to all onlookers. Hanging off his arm or holding an umbrella together are cliched ('movie moments') and again look tutored but touches to direct are a) because she can't go anywhere without him incase she's 'papped' apart but also b) there is an obsession with H, ergo she fears she_ is_ nothing without him.
> 
> Never mind the dress (wrong for the event, whatever) _put a coat on_


She has an enormous ego so I have a hard time thinking she is in anyway insecure. Perhaps you are right but someone that ruthlessly ambitious, which she appears to be, usually is pretty secure in themselves. I think she wants to control Harry. Those videos of her pushing herself in front of him to get the attention of the circle of people he was talking to. I can’t remember ever seeing anyone acting like that before. Maybe you can read insecurity into her but she sure ain’t shy.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> tacky tacky tacky
> 
> *Meghan Markle sends Twitter into meltdown as viewers think she ‘pushed’ Harry out the way*
> MEGHAN MARKLE has been caught on camera appearing to push Harry out of the way, as he chatted with an award attendee at the Endeavour Fund Awards last night.
> 
> “That isn’t PDA. That was Meghan interrupting their conversation, pulling him back so she could step in front of him to take over the conversation. I don’t care, it’s their marriage and I will never judge about that. But the video is clear, please don’t mislead or sugar coat."
> 
> Another replied: “ Always pushing herself in front of Harry. RUDE.”
> *video: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...chess-pushes-duke-uproar-uk-news-royal-family*


I didn't see it until now, but her foot clearly goes forward in front of him to take over. But she's done it before - taken over from him at events. If he wants to be the follower... ok.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

mrsinsyder said:


> tacky tacky tacky
> 
> *Meghan Markle sends Twitter into meltdown as viewers think she ‘pushed’ Harry out the way*
> MEGHAN MARKLE has been caught on camera appearing to push Harry out of the way, as he chatted with an award attendee at the Endeavour Fund Awards last night.
> 
> “That isn’t PDA. That was Meghan interrupting their conversation, pulling him back so she could step in front of him to take over the conversation. I don’t care, it’s their marriage and I will never judge about that. But the video is clear, please don’t mislead or sugar coat."
> 
> Another replied: “ Always pushing herself in front of Harry. RUDE.”
> *video: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...chess-pushes-duke-uproar-uk-news-royal-family*


It looks like she put a Vulcan nerve pinch on his shoulder and then he practically curtsies? WTF?


----------



## 1LV

Lounorada said:


>



I love Gary Janetti!


----------



## 1LV

Chagall said:


> She has an enormous ego so I have a hard time thinking she is in anyway insecure. Perhaps you are right but someone that ruthlessly ambitious, which she appears to be, usually is pretty secure in themselves. I think she wants to control Harry. Those videos of her pushing herself in front of him to get the attention of the circle of people he was talking to. I can’t remember ever seeing anyone acting like that before. Maybe you can read insecurity into her but she sure ain’t shy.


I think she’s displaying possessiveness, territorial.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Except it is lies, all lies!
> Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken at the same time, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.
> View attachment 4683306
> 
> View attachment 4683305


I apologize for starting up this discussion again.  lol I keep my 2015 because it's simple.  Can't see the difference between 2019 and 2020...

Anyway, my initial perusal was... PS for sure!! But looking at the dark side of the umbrella and no line around H's left arm, I'm starting to think Vlad is correct.  There would be a tremendous amount to do, with arm hair and pony tail hair, like why bother.  So I asked my hubby who works with PS even more than me and he eventually agreed with Vlad too, for various reasons.

It does look fake though, doesn't it!  Her smile is fake, certainly no one can argue with that! lol


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From Twitter:
> "Harry used to be a Prince, now he's an accessory."
> 
> Pretty much nailed it.



Ironically, this is exactly the type of press that strengthens their bond (“it’s us against the cruel, unfair, racist world!”). People compare M and Wallis Simpson so often, but the similar temperaments of Harry and the Duke of Windsor are more fascinating & why I think H will never leave her (barring him getting “Markled”). So much of Harry’s identity since Day 1 has been about being her “protector,” even though she’s older, more worldly and media savvy.

Heck, many of us were taken in by that narrative too. From their earliest “candid” photo ops, she was the innocent, slim waif, clinging to her strong hero-Prince. No woman has brought Harry such a sense of noble purpose as Megan, who came at a critical time when Will’s kids pushed H farther out of “importance.” Remember how he was going to give his fiancee the love & family she never had? Then he starts suing the evil UK newspapers & gave a teary speech about needing to protect his wife from the people who killed his mother.

Then on the Africa tour we learn he also needs to protect her from the BRF who aren’t properly asking if M is OK, so H makes a public statement of “Will and I are on different paths.” Now, his post-Megxit life launches with a $1 million speech about his dead mother...that was introduced by HRH Meg professing her love for her husband and protector.

So it’s really not just a mean dig to say that H is an accessory. Being M’s protector is just as vital to his identity as marrying royalty was to Megan’s “independent profile.” (Ironically, though he talks like her champion, in practice she clearly mothers him. And any bad press just reinforces their need for these roles.)


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> I apologize for starting up this discussion again.  lol I keep my 2015 because it's simple.  Can't see the difference between 2019 and 2020...
> 
> Anyway, my initial perusal was... PS for sure!! But looking at the dark side of the umbrella and no line around H's left arm, I'm starting to think Vlad is correct.  There would be a tremendous amount to do, with arm hair and pony tail hair, like why bother.  So I asked my hubby who works with PS even more than me and he eventually agreed with Vlad too, for various reasons.
> 
> It does look fake though, doesn't it!  Her smile is fake, certainly no one can argue with that! lol


Some are saying that the shot was pre arranged. Something to do with wedding shot.
It would be interesting to hear from the freelance photographer.


----------



## jess236

kemilia said:


> She's trained him well--"when I place my hand on your back--MOVE IT!"



Clearly I am not a fan of Meghan's but I didn't see a clear cut interruption; I might have to look more closely.
 But I do have a huge pet peeve about her constantly putting her arm on his back - especially when  leave a room (like when they presented Archie for the first time). It looks like she wants to be the man.  There is something about it that really gets on my nerves.


----------



## jess236

PewPew said:


> Ironically, this is exactly the type of press that strengthens their bond (“it’s us against the cruel, unfair, racist world!”). People compare M and Wallis Simpson so often, but the similar temperaments of Harry and the Duke of Windsor are more fascinating & why I think H will never leave her (barring him getting “Markled”). So much of Harry’s identity since Day 1 has been about being her “protector,” even though she’s older, more worldly and media savvy.
> 
> Hell many of us were taken in by that narrative, as well. From their earliest “candid” photo ops, she was the innocent, slim waif clinging to her strong, hero Prince. No woman has brought him such a sense of noble purpose as Megan, who came at a critical time when Will’s kids pushed H farther out of “importance.” Remember how he was going to give his fiancee the love & family she never had? Then he starts suing the evil UK newspapers & had a teary speech about needing to protect his wife from the people who killed his mother.
> 
> Then on the Africa tour we learn he needs to protect her from the BRF who aren’t asking if M is OK, so H makes a brave statement of “Will and I are on different paths.” Now his post-Megxit life launches with a $1 million speech about his dead mother...that was introduced by HRH Meg discussing her love for her husband and protector.
> 
> So it’s really not just a mean dig to say that H is an accessory. Being M’s protector is just as vital to his identity as marrying royalty was to Megan’s “independent profile.” (Ironically, though he talks like her protector, in practice she clearly mothers him. And any bad press just reinforces the need for these roles.)



I agree that being with her is key to his identity. He definitely won't leave her anytime soon.  I wonder how this will play out.  Will they come back to the BRF after one year? This would be a defeat for Meghan so probably unlikely.
I guess they will continue trying to make it outside the BRF until Meghan gets tired of it.  The question is how long is that going to be?


----------



## lalame

Did you guys see all the coverage of this "secret" visit Meg made the other day? That's the term they kept using... "secret visit." First of all, clearly it wasn't such a secret with a bunch of photographers there. Second of all... secret low key visit where you do a whole glam outfit change between engagements? Why would you need to change if it's a secret. 

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...f-her-patronages-in-an-ethereal-white-blouse/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...SIX-UK-labels-matter-hours-return-London.html


----------



## Jayne1

That smile.  I hate her new veneers.  I guess it's mostly because the old ones (not the original ones, they are cheap) but the Suits veneers, were so pretty.

How many times can one redo veneers?  Does more of the tooth get taken off, or is it just paste on what was there before?


----------



## Grande Latte

youngster said:


> I agree that it's a really pretty photo. They may be deliriously happy together in truth, but that doesn't change that they have rejected their duties and turned their backs on the UK, while trying to fleece the UK taxpayer for millions of pounds for their ridiculous, overseas security demands, while also planning to profit off their royal connections.  I don't care how much Harry talks about returning occasionally or continuing on with x, y, and z activities for the Queen.  His and Meghan's focus will be on making lots and lots of money which is going to be much harder to pull off than they realize.



Yeah, WHY do they both think making money is SO EASY? Because they are both delusional.


----------



## lalame

Grande Latte said:


> Yeah, WHY do they both think making money is SO EASY? Because they are both delusional.


Sadly I think it will be easy for them. It’s easy for any celebrity these days... they got their foot in the door (by birth/drama) and now companies are paying them to give speeches, I’m sure at some point they’ll cave to endorsement deals, books, paid events, etc. not to mention Charles will kick in a few million each year. My money is on them making more money than Wills/Kate or anyone who honors the royal arrangement.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Except it is lies, all lies!
> Okay, as a graphic designer who spends her days making photos look better I must give away the secret of their "magical photo." Look at the sloppy white halo around Meghan and Harry. They are basically paper dolls being placed in front of an exciting background filled with the flashing lights of photographers because they are oh so famous. It was meant to make them look like they are full of joy in the rain. It isn't real, it isn't even raining. Compare it to an accurate photo taken at the same time, no photo flashes, no rain, the people in the background aren't looking in their direction. I'm calling out all the add-ons done to the image because I don't want anyone to believe this is how it really was.
> 
> View attachment 4683306
> 
> 
> View attachment 4683305


What really strikes me is how their pseudo smiles look _rehearsed, _as though Meghan gave Harry strict instructions to turn and smile on her cue. Possibly her desperate grip on him is, once again, for a specific purpose, such as "When I squeeze your arm, turn your head and smile at me while I unleash my radiant smile for the benefit of my adoring public."
The inauthentic expressions of the subjects lend a false air to the whole picture.


----------



## PewPew

jess236 said:


> But I do have a huge pet peeve about her constantly putting her arm on his back - especially when  leave a room (like when they presented Archie for the first time). It looks like she wants to be the man.  There is something about it that really gets on my nerves.



Yes! I remember thinking how odd it was that Megan was actually rubbing her hand up and down Harry’s back when they knew they were being filmed walking away. At the time, I thought she must just feel really uncomfortable in front of the press so soon after having a baby, as most of us would feel.

But in retrospect, the back rubbing seems less like a nervous gesture & more like a calculated public display of affection (possession?) because she clung to his arm per usual when they were facing the press & the back rubbing came when they turned their backs to the press & were filmed walking away, per prior arrangement (their office led the set up and press clearances). Part of why it felt off was that it wasn’t a quick caress or just an arm around your partner. The conspicuous rubbing is such a mothering gesture (literally something my mom did to soothe the kids when we were sad or sick). So it incongruently looked like she was comforting the Prince while they were walking away from this happy announcement.


----------



## eunaddict

They got booed by some in the crowd. That gives me some hope.

But also, her pushing him aside to get involved in the action isn't a new behaviour, she's been doing it since they were newlyweds at their first few public appearances.

Being away hasn't changed her one bit.

Edit: I can't put my finger on it, but her face has changed a little. Could be makeup. But something's different.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

Another "upstaging" incident---https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-camilla-at-war-21648430


----------



## tiktok

Her latest Instagram post about the visit to the royal theater looks like a Vogue spread. Clearly she cares so much about the cause...


----------



## Jayne1

PewPew said:


> Yes! I remember thinking how odd it was that Megan was actually rubbing her hand up and down Harry’s back when they knew they were being filmed walking away. At the time, I thought she must just feel really uncomfortable in front of the press so soon after having a baby, as most of us would feel.
> 
> But in retrospect, the back rubbing seems less like a nervous gesture & more like a calculated public display of affection (possession?) because she clung to his arm per usual when they were facing the press & the back rubbing came when they turned their backs to the press & were filmed walking away, per prior arrangement (their office led the set up and press clearances). Part of why it felt off was that it wasn’t a quick caress or just an arm around your partner. The conspicuous rubbing is such a mothering gesture (literally something my mom did to soothe the kids when we were sad or sick). So it incongruently looked like she was comforting the Prince while they were walking away from this happy announcement.


The back rubbing stuck with me too. And annoyed me for some reason. You made a great explanation which I think makes sense.


----------



## Alena21

kemilia said:


> Totally agree re: Chas & Cam--they look so darn happy together, like they've been through it all (they have), came out the other side intact and YAY for them. I was totally anti-Camilla back in the day but seeing them now and my own views maturing changed all that.
> 
> M found (imo) a wounded bird (H) and grabbed him tight. Once again--IMO--she isn't the "one" and this will cause problems some day though M was very smart (calculating?) and LUCKY to get pregnant right away. Archie will always be her meal ticket.
> 
> And I have no doubt that when she saw the e-ring H "created" for her, her heart dropped to the pit of her stomach. She is definitely the J-Lo e-ring type of gal (imo). Seeing Diana's huge sapphire on Kate's finger probably makes her seethe each time she sees it--"THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MINE!" (it was originally given to Harry after his mom's death and he very kindly gave it to Will for Kate). You can see that ring easily in every photo and remember Diana; M's ring--not so much.


Yeah she didn't like her e-ring at all.  She even redesign it. What a joke!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Jayne1 said:


> That smile.  I hate her new veneers.  I guess it's mostly because the old ones (not the original ones, they are cheap) but the Suits veneers, were so pretty.
> 
> How many times can one redo veneers?  Does more of the tooth get taken off, or is it just paste on what was there before?


It's supposed to be every 3 years for some touch-ups, but they do need to be re-done at some point cuz they don't last forever. My mom got some a few months ago so I got my veneer lessons recently.


----------



## youngster

eunaddict said:


> Edit: I can't put my finger on it, but her face has changed a little. Could be makeup. But something's different.



I agree. I thought the same. She has lost some of the pregnancy weight, but her face looks different.  Just slightly, can't quite figure it out. Maybe some fillers?


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I agree. I thought the same. She has lost some of the pregnancy weight, but her face looks different.  Just slightly, can't quite figure it out. Maybe some fillers?



Me three... I thought maybe she’s wearing a lighter shade of foundation and it’s heavier than usual (all the makeup is heavier than usual)... but I can’t place it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> She has an enormous ego so I have a hard time thinking she is in anyway insecure. Perhaps you are right but someone that ruthlessly ambitious, which she appears to be, usually is pretty secure in themselves. I think she wants to control Harry. Those videos of her pushing herself in front of him to get the attention of the circle of people he was talking to. I can’t remember ever seeing anyone acting like that before. Maybe you can read insecurity into her but she sure ain’t shy.


I think she’s a supremely confident person who’s found herself in a situation and position that makes her very nervous.  She hasn’t been able to master carrying out royal visits without looking awkward or gauche, or making a faux pas.  The clothes are a mess.  She and Harry usually look like they’re tripping over each other when they approach to greet people.  Partly explains why she’s dumped it all to me, to make it a case of “don’t want to” rather than “can’t hack it, it’s harder than I thought”


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> That smile.  I hate her new veneers.  I guess it's mostly because the old ones (not the original ones, they are cheap) but the Suits veneers, were so pretty.
> 
> How many times can one redo veneers?  Does more of the tooth get taken off, or is it just paste on what was there before?


They look too big now.  Really fake looking.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I think she’s a supremely confident person who’s found herself in a situation and position that makes her very nervous.  She hasn’t been able to master carrying out royal visits without looking awkward or gauche, or making a faux pas.  The clothes are a mess.  She and Harry usually look like they’re tripping over each other when they approach to greet people.  Partly explains why she’s dumped it all to me, to make it a case of “don’t want to” rather than “can’t hack it, it’s harder than I thought”



It's easy, lol, all you need to do is step back and let your husband who is a higher rank than you greet them first. It's not rocket science. Yup, she can't hack it and is not willing to learn. She probably sees it as being demeaning.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> I think she’s a supremely confident person who’s found herself in a situation and position that makes her very nervous.  She hasn’t been able to master carrying out royal visits without looking awkward or gauche, or making a faux pas.  The clothes are a mess.  She and Harry usually look like they’re tripping over each other when they approach to greet people.  Partly explains why she’s dumped it all to me, to make it a case of “don’t want to” rather than “can’t hack it, it’s harder than I thought”


It could be that she does find it too hard . But how difficult can it be to walk beside her husband, smile, maybe extend her hand for a handshake. Politicians wives do this all the time with little or no experience. She’s an actress also which should help. There is something else going on here. Perhaps she is even trying to upstage him. If I’m really nervous I’m far more likely to keep to myself rather than to cling on my partner like she does to poor H and direct him around. She is a narcissist and they always find ways to constantly draw attention to themselves.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> It's easy, lol, all you need to do is step back and let your husband who is a higher rank than you greet them first. It's not rocket science. Yup, she can't hack it and is not willing to learn. She probably sees it as being demeaning.


It is hard if you can’t accept having the supporting actor role (although she was fine with that in Suits...), which in the royal family it would have always been the case, they would always be second to William and Kate, and she would always be second to her husband whatever her merits.
To me she even gave this away in the last statement in their website where they insist that her security costs are on account of her ‘own independent profile’. That is, they are making the point she doesn’t need the security because a wife of Harry and mother to Archie... Which I still can’t believe how disingenuous it is because in that case, why would the British public finance it? But they had to make the point, which shows just how much it matters to her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> It could be that she does find it too hard . But how difficult can it be to walk beside her husband, smile, maybe extend her hand for a handshake. Politicians wives do this all the time with little or no experience. She’s an actress also which should help. There is something else going on here. Perhaps she is even trying to upstage him. If I’m really nervous I’m far more likely to keep to myself rather than to cling on to poor H and direct him around. She is a narcissist and they always find ways to constantly draw attention to themselves.


She is a narcissist.  They reject or belittle anything or anyone they can’t master.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> She is a narcissist.  They reject or belittle anything or anyone they can’t master.


Yes they reject, and demean the person they can’t master, or think of some way to bring the person down to make them more “manageable”.


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> It's easy, lol, all you need to do is step back and let your husband who is a higher rank than you greet them first. It's not rocket science. Yup, she can't hack it and is not willing to learn. She probably sees it as being demeaning.





doni said:


> It is hard if you can’t accept having the supporting actor role (although she was fine with that in Suits...), which in the royal family it would have always been the case, they would always be second to William and Kate, and she would always be second to her husband whatever her merits.
> To me she even gave this away in the last statement in their website where they insist that her security costs are on account of her ‘own independent profile’. That is, they are making the point she doesn’t need the security because a wife of Harry and mother to Archie... Which I still can’t believe how disingenuous it is because in that case, why would the British public finance it? But they had to make the point, which shows just how much it matters to her.



my theory is she was ok being in a supporting role in Suits because that’s all she had known. She didn’t have a taste of being a star yet. But when she started dating H, the media were giving her SO much attention and she was getting so much access to stars. She then saw herself as a star too and once you get to that point it’s hard to accept you’re just a supporting person (I mean hard for someone who really wants fame).

By contrast I don’t think the other ladies in the royal family let this happen to them because they didn’t strive for fame to begin with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

kipp said:


> Another "upstaging" incident---https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-camilla-at-war-21648430




Wow, what a little b**ch!  I am no fan of Camilla, but this was obviously something very important to her and something that she worked hard on.  Bad enough to have to be specifically asked not to do anything to upstage someone - that should have gone without saying.  But then to blatantly ignore such a request.  

Not clear why MM thinks that upsetting people upon whom you are financially dependent is a good strategy.  Her ego is so completely out of control.  Ugh...


----------



## eunaddict

kipp said:


> Another "upstaging" incident---https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-camilla-at-war-21648430



She really doesn't know how to play the long game. Is it REALLY worth shooting off a final zinger at the wife of the man who is currently financially supporting you? H may be Charles' kid but Charles spent his entire adult life adoring Camilla and at some point, all parents of wayward kids realize they can't support the waywardness any longer.

It's almost like she can't help herself.


Edit: I think she's had some sort of dermal injectables that gave some "face lift" type effect. Everything's just really weirdly tight around the forehead and eyes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> Edit: I think she's had some sort of dermal injectables that gave some "face lift" type effect. Everything's just really weirdly tight around the forehead and eyes.



I thought it might have been too much Botox like before the engagement announcement. That pic of her in the white outfit laughing hysterically because oh so funny? Nothing moved but the ruffled nose.


----------



## mdcx

eunaddict said:


> She really doesn't know how to play the long game. Is it REALLY worth shooting off a final zinger at the wife of the man who is currently financially supporting you? H may be Charles' kid but Charles spent his entire adult life adoring Camilla and at some point, all parents of wayward kids realize they can't support the waywardness any longer.
> 
> It's almost like she can't help herself.
> 
> 
> Edit: I think she's had some sort of dermal injectables that gave some "face lift" type effect. Everything's just really weirdly tight around the forehead and eyes.


Looks like forehead, vertical 11’s between eyes, crows feet all Botoxed, left bunny lines alone so some movement. Cheek fillers, liquid nose job. Some kind of skin resurfacing too I think.


----------



## imgg

Vlad said:


> I know, I use PS 2020 on the daily.
> 
> But then your logic fails in your argument. You said that the halo is a sign of selection done in PS, but then if I wanted to fake a scene, wouldn't the program make it easy for me to make an accurate selection, isolate the subject _without_ the halo? You're contradicting yourself in claiming a sloppy digital alteration while praising the prowess of Photoshop.
> 
> Aside from this argument, where and when were these pictures published? In the modern publishing world, the pressure to be the first to publish is intense (particularly for mega popular subjects and events), so much so that modern flagship dSLRs have dedicated high speed wired and wireless ports, allowing photogs to instantly send the captured moments to the publisher. Pictures of high profile celebs published first means more money. I highly doubt anyone spent any significant time manipulating this image for publication.


I wonder if Meghan's team hired the photographer to take these photos?   Seem like a great edit compared to  some of the photos taken of them at this event.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m recognize I’m deep down the rabbit hole now but I wonder if this hand on the back, shove in front is re-training. 

He’s use to always going first by way of his status. She’s not into that and told him she’s not walking five steps behind. She’s told him a gentlemen let’s a lady go first (what a feminist) and she keeps reminding him.  Otherwise (due to his stature) she gets stuck awkwardly behind him and outside of the conversation.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the insistence on going first before Harry is some sort of message to the monarchy and the world that she is not lesser than him.


----------



## imgg

Chagall said:


> She has an enormous ego so I have a hard time thinking she is in anyway insecure. Perhaps you are right but someone that ruthlessly ambitious, which she appears to be, usually is pretty secure in themselves. I think she wants to control Harry. Those videos of her pushing herself in front of him to get the attention of the circle of people he was talking to. I can’t remember ever seeing anyone acting like that before. Maybe you can read insecurity into her but she sure ain’t shy.


Usually people with huge egos and narcissists are very insecure at the core and this is their way of masking it, by overcompensating.


----------



## Jktgal




----------



## Annawakes

She must have been working out and dieting like crazy these past few months.  Comparing the recent blue dress to the pleated skirt picture posted above.

I mean, how many inches less is that?


----------



## A1aGypsy

That pleated skirt was a month after she gave birth though so that’s not really fair.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the insistence on going first before Harry is some sort of message to the monarchy and the world that she is not lesser than him.


Which I don’t disagree with... but why would you marry into the institution if you don’t agree with it


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I think Meghan is extremely pretty, and she looks very good here, much better than at her last appearance in London.
> The only thing is her nose, I think she would look good with her original one too, I find it odd and distracting how much it resembles Harry’s nose, but she got hers before she met him right?


I noticed they both have those sloping noses. Didn’t know that wasn’t her original


----------



## Annawakes

A1aGypsy said:


> That pleated skirt was a month after she gave birth though so that’s not really fair.


Ah, quite right.  I didn’t realize about the pleated skirt.


----------



## Vintage Leather

mrsinsyder said:


> Which I don’t disagree with... but why would you marry into the institution if you don’t agree with it



THIS!  This is the thing I don't get about Megan.

Do I think that Megan has been treated unfairly in the press? Yes, yes I do.
Do I think that some members of the Royal Family were not welcoming? (:cough: Princess Michael :cough: ) Yes, yes I do.

Could EVERYONE have told you this would happen before you even started dating this guy? Hell yeah.
You can pretty much assume that all these things will happen within fifteen minutes of glancing through British newspapers.  Add that to fun things like "finding out your fiancé's nickname when he was three in the gift-shop of his Grandmother's place"... you know your life won't be your own.

It she hates the game, why is she playing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Which I don’t disagree with... but why would you marry into the institution if you don’t agree with it


I 100% agree!


----------



## Tootsie17

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m recognize I’m deep down the rabbit hole now but I wonder if this hand on the back, shove in front is re-training.
> 
> He’s use to always going first by way of his status. She’s not into that and told him she’s not walking five steps behind. She’s told him a gentlemen let’s a lady go first (what a feminist) and she keeps reminding him.  Otherwise (due to his stature) she gets stuck awkwardly behind him and outside of the conversation.


I agree with your analysis. Every time I see a photo of her barging him it makes me cringe.


----------



## scarlet555

Tootsie17 said:


> I agree with your analysis. Every time I see a photo of her barging him it makes me cringe.



It is in fact extremely difficult to watch.  I don’t care about stature, more about how she is treating and manipulating him-in public and recorded!

There are many reasons for not bringing Archie, taking the attention away from M, punishing the family for treating her badly, whatever whiny tune you want to string including the corona virus, but none are good enough.  I find it odd to leave your child with just a nanny in terms of safety and perhaps a couple of body guards. At least when she traveled to places and lived in England baby was surround by the royal staff and a secured home.


----------



## marthastoo

Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

imgg said:


> I wonder if Meghan's team hired the photographer to take these photos?   Seem like a great edit compared to  some of the photos taken of them at this event.


This is the photographer. Looks like he has a record if taking photos using light behind.

 (Apologies for the PM reference, it’s just he tagged the photographer in).


----------



## CobaltBlu

Here is an article about the photograph.  Well played, Mr. Hussein!
https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/...umbrella-photo-endeavour-awards-a4380151.html


"As they walked towards me, I noticed a flash going off from a camera in the crowd behind them. I knew that if that light could be lined up to be right behind as they walked then it could create a dramatic photo, acting like a back light in a studio shot. I managed to manoeuvre myself to line up the flash behind them and then had to work quickly, with just a second or two to get the shot, as they smiled at each other.

Immediately, I downloaded the photos onto my laptop and that image jumped straight out at me. I held my breath as I zoomed in to check if it was sharp (with the rain pouring and many flashes firing, it's easy to end up with soft images). Thankfully, it was sharp and I knew I had a truly special shot.

I've photographed the royals for over 12 years, but this photo really resonates. I've taken many photos I'm really proud of, but in terms of the huge interest in the subjects and the response I've had this is probably the most iconic photo I've taken.

It's a one in a million when all the elements you could wish for as a photographer come together - perfect timing, great lighting, strong symbolism and amazing subjects make this a magical photo I am extremely proud of.”  

_Samir Hussein is a photographer for Getty Images_


----------



## Jktgal

Annawakes said:


> Ah, quite right.  I didn’t realize about the pleated skirt.



Agree the original is not a fair comparison, but to me that response to the blue dress is funny. Social media is polarised when it comes to Meghan (though what's not polarising these days), but I find the contra Meghan responses hilarious. The pro Meghan camp tends to be monotonous and self-righteous. Maybe it takes one to know one...


----------



## Lounorada

eunaddict said:


> Edit: I think she's had some sort of dermal injectables that gave some "face lift" type effect. *Everything's just really weirdly tight around the forehead and eyes*.


Also her cheeks look uncomfortably tight, especially to smile.


----------



## Lounorada

imgg said:


> Usually people with huge egos and narcissists are very insecure at the core and this is their way of masking it, by overcompensating.


I totally agree with this, was going to say the same thing.
My _extremely_ narcissistic ex-boss was highly insecure and me and my old colleagues really saw the insecurity show itself when someone ever (even slightly) criticised for her work, bad-mouthed or disagreed with her ideas or even made an innocent comment about something that most people would just ignore, but she would take the highest offence to it and that's when the pettiness and spitefulness would rear it's ugly head.
She liked to think she was Queen Bee, wanted to be praised for her work and her business reputation and if someone showed her anything less than an adoration acceptable to her, then she became a horrible b**ch, like her world was falling apart- no joke. Her ego was more important than anything else. The amateur dramatics were insufferable.
I could probably write a book on the things she did and said becasue when I worked for her my friends and family found it hard to believe the things I told them about her!
MM and her behaviour reminds me so much of my ex-boss. Ugh.


----------



## prettyprincess

marthastoo said:


> Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.


Stop making sense, it interferes with all of the logic suspending bashing lol.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> I totally agree with this, was going to say the same thing.
> My _extremely_ narcissistic ex-boss was highly insecure and me and my old colleagues really saw the insecurity show itself when someone ever (even slightly) criticised for her work, bad-mouthed or disagreed with her ideas or even made an innocent comment about something that most people would just ignore, but she would take the highest offence to it and that's when the pettiness and spitefulness would rear it's ugly head.
> She liked to think she was Queen Bee, wanted to be praised for her work and her business reputation and if someone showed her anything less than an adoration acceptable to her, then she became a horrible b**ch, like her world was falling apart- no joke. Her ego was more important than anything else. The amateur dramatics were insufferable.
> I could probably write a book on the things she did and said becasue when I worked for her my friends and family found it hard to believe the things I told them about her!
> MM and her behaviour reminds me so much of my ex-boss. Ugh.


OMG--we must have had the same boss person! I guess they're all over, sad. I got back at her in the end though. Inadvertently, but still I still revel in making her run and hide from me ever after.

On the plus side, it was a good lesson on human nature;


----------



## duna

marthastoo said:


> Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.



Being the mother of 4 and grandma of 6 I would definately take my 10 month old child with me and not leave him/her on the other side of the world with a nanny. It's not like he would hang around in crowds and risk catching the virus, he would be at home (Frogmore Cottage? or whatever) and he would be safe.


----------



## Roxanna

marthastoo said:


> Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.


I assume she did not fly commercial airline. She obviously did not take into consideration the risk that baby could be stranded  with granted, hopefully  professional  caregivers,  but on other continent far away from parents in such uncertain times. I doubt she had baby wellbeing in mind when she and PH made decision to leave him behind.
Also on the other point I sorf of believe  that MM is intentionally  trying to insult and provoke Camilla and PC. It is part of the game for her. I wonder though why PH  goes along with this .


----------



## caramelize126

marthastoo said:


> Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.



the consensus from the CDC right now is that virus appears to not be affecting children and young people in general. He would’ve been fine. I certainly wouldn’t have left my child on another continent with a nanny.


----------



## Emeline

caramelize126 said:


> the consensus from the CDC right now is that virus appears to not be affecting children and young people in general. He would’ve been fine. I certainly wouldn’t have left my child on another continent with a nanny.


This. He would  have been fine at Frogmore Cottage with nanny.
I still can't wrap my brain around M bringing her makeup guy, but leaving her baby.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

caramelize126 said:


> the consensus from the CDC right now is that virus appears to not be affecting children and young people in general. He would’ve been fine. I certainly wouldn’t have left my child on another continent with a nanny.


Exactly, what if H & M have to self isolate? That's another 2 plus weeks before they can go back to him!!


----------



## youngster

marthastoo said:


> Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.



I wouldn't personally take a 10 month old baby on _any_ airplane trip if I could avoid it lol.  But, I never had a nanny and a full staff plus security guards.  The way they travel is no comparison to the way the vast majority of people travel.  Even if they decided not to fly private in this one situation and flew commercial, they'd be in first class with a nanny, the bodyguards, the personal assistant, etc.  Harry bought out a first class train car so why not buy out first class on an airplane?  He spends whatever he wants and someone else always pays.  They also can enter and exit the plane first and don't go through any of the usual lines that everyone else does.  Get in their private car on the tarmac and whisk away to Frogmore cottage where they have total security and privacy.  Air filtration systems on planes are excellent. The germs come from the tray table, the seat handles, the lav door handles, etc. That can all be wiped down in advance along with the extra precautions the airlines are taking in any case.  And, this is only if they flew commercial.


----------



## VickyB

Jktgal said:


> View attachment 4684113


The zipper going up her bum is too good.


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> Which I don’t disagree with... but why would you marry into the institution if you don’t agree with it



Perhaps Meggy thought: "HERE'S the ultimate opportunity that I can manipulate and prove to the world that I'm the greatest WOKER of them all.  Dimwit Harry won't know what hit him.  All I have to do is get the huge televised wedding, sponge off the Crown until I'm world famous enough, crank out Meal Ticket before forcing Harry to break off from his purpose in life, line up Cha-Ching projects, then tell the Queen--thanks but no thanks--and the whole world will worship the ground I walk on."   

But her clothes still don't fit. Woking must be hard work.


----------



## Clearblueskies

The child is in Canada, or LA, or with Doria/Jessica, or wherever else they’ve plonked him this week because Meghan's priority is grabbing an acting role, and this farewell tour is her best opportunity to audition.  She hasn’t spent the last 4 months glamming up, getting fillers and losing the baby weight, to have everyone focus on Archie and not on her.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall


----------



## poopsie

Jktgal said:


> Agree the original is not a fair comparison, but to me that response to the blue dress is funny. Social media is polarised when it comes to Meghan (though what's not polarising these days), but I find the contra Meghan responses hilarious. The pro Meghan camp tends to be monotonous and self-righteous. Maybe it takes one to know one...



birds of a feather


----------



## poopsie

Sharont2305 said:


> Mountbatten Festival at the Royal Albert Hall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4684418
> View attachment 4684420
> View attachment 4684421
> View attachment 4684422



OMG she looks just like the Peloton wife in the second picture!


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> The child is in Canada, or LA, or with Doria/Jessica, or wherever else they’ve plonked him this week because Meghan's priority is grabbing an acting role, and this farewell tour is her best opportunity to audition.  She hasn’t spent the last 4 months glamming up, getting fillers and losing the baby weight, to have everyone focus on Archie and not on her.


Good point, she wouldn't have spent so much effort in getting glam for nothing.  And Archie would grab all the attention.

I don't think Meg would fly the baby to Toronto for the  Mulroney's nanny to take care of and I doubt Jess flew all the way to the west coast to babysit.  My bet is that the baby is at (the Russian's) home in BC cared for by a nanny.  Doria hasn't looked after Meg or the child yet, why start now.


----------



## youngster

I rather like this red dress she wore to the Mountbatten Festival but wish she carried something other than a red bag. It's too much red for me: shoes, bag, dress, Harry's coat, all the same shade of red.


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> OMG--we must have had the same boss person! I guess they're all over, sad. I got back at her in the end though. Inadvertently, but still I still revel in making her run and hide from me ever after.
> 
> On the plus side, it was a good lesson on human nature;


Oh no! Unfortunately there's more of them around than I care to think about  
I agree about it being a good lesson on human nature! It definitely made me so much more aware of certain peoples intentions (behind their actions & words), to not be afraid of standing up to that sh***y behaviour and most importantly not to take their cr*p personally because at the end of the day it's_ their issues_ that are making them behave that way and the people around them just happen to be the target of making them feel better about themselves, as dreadful as that is.
Good for you for getting back at her (inadvertently- even better)! We came out of those jobs unscathed and both way better off than the horrible ex-bosses, so cheers to us


----------



## Tivo

eunaddict said:


> She really doesn't know how to play the long game. Is it REALLY worth shooting off a final zinger at the wife of the man who is currently financially supporting you? H may be Charles' kid but Charles spent his entire adult life adoring Camilla and at some point, all parents of wayward kids realize they can't support the waywardness any longer.
> 
> It's almost like she can't help herself.
> 
> 
> Edit: I think she's had some sort of dermal injectables that gave some "face lift" type effect. Everything's just really weirdly tight around the forehead and eyes.


Meghan Markle doesn’t want anyone controlling how she promotes herself. But without the British royal family who is she? She has accomplished very little outside seducing Harry and using his and the BRF’s connections for her come up. She and Harry have no skill or talent.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## limom

God, those Mountbatten men age badly.
Hopefully Archie takes after Meagan...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Dress Info - 
Safiyaa Kalika Long Dress $1,693
https://www.safiyaa.com/products/kalika-long-dress


----------



## Chagall

imgg said:


> Usually people with huge egos and narcissists are very insecure at the core and this is their way of masking it, by overcompensating.


 I have read the recent thinking is that narcissists really and truly believe they are superior. The roots of narcissistic and psychopathic behaviour can be the result of bad parenting or care giver quality or even genetic. So they may have started out feeling inferior because of mummy (or daddy) dearest making them feel that way, but they bury that so deeply in their mind because it is so painful, and replace it with feelings of superiority that they really and truly believe. Or they were spoiled rotten and believe they are what their misguided parents led them to believe, that they are perfect.


----------



## queennadine

Love the dress! Don’t care for her hair, shoes, or accessories. 




marthastoo said:


> Schools are closed, airplanes empty, vacations canceled.  I ask if you had a 10 month old baby - would you bring him in a plane to visit oversees?  I wouldn't.



Yup, sure would. Planning on taking my 10 month old to Europe shortly to meet her grandpa for the first time, actually.


----------



## Blyen

She looks beautiful, and the dress, incredibly, fits!
He looks just bad.


----------



## Lounorada

That's a lot of red  I'm guessing it was intentional...
Harry looks like a man-child playing dress-up in his dad/grandfathers uniform (in this particular uniform).


----------



## Tivo

Do I detect....shade? 

No mention of the Duchess anywhere. Didn’t she supposedly choose all the women featured in that British Vogue issue?
“Queen Elizabeth Hall?”
I see you Salma!


----------



## csshopper

mdcx said:


> Looks like forehead, vertical 11’s between eyes, crows feet all Botoxed, left bunny lines alone so some movement. Cheek fillers, liquid nose job. Some kind of skin resurfacing too I think.


Look at old pictures of Bob Hope. He was often caricatured as having a “Ski nose”. Meaghan now has the same “slope”. I think we are now seeing why there were so few actual sightings of her in Canada. They were spaced out between procedures/healing....


----------



## bisousx

Chagall said:


> I have read the recent thinking is that narcissists really and truly believe they are superior. The roots of narcissistic and psychopathic behaviour can be the result of bad parenting or care giver quality or even genetic. So they may have started out feeling inferior because of mummy (or daddy) dearest making them feel that way, but they bury that so deeply in their mind because it is so painful, and replace it with feelings of superiority that they really and truly believe. Or they were spoiled rotten and believe they are what their misguided parents led them to believe, that they are perfect.



As a child of a narcissist, my opinion is sometimes they are simply born that way. I don’t know if spoiling your child would cause them to become permanently delusional. And yes, narcs are hardwired to believe they are superior and aren’t afraid to remind you. They also won’t hesitate to remind you how humble, smart, generous, desirable they are as well.  The worst part about having a narcissist in your life is that they can selectively turn on and off their crazy, so unless one spends a good amount of time with a narcissist, to the rest of the world they are charming and incapable of doing wrong. But that’s for another topic.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Man, 10 months is one of the sweetest ages, they’re just so enamored by the world. If I had to do a long work trip, and had the option bringing my baby, I would 100% do it, just so I wouldn’t miss as much.


----------



## Chagall

bisousx said:


> As a child of a narcissist, my opinion is sometimes they are simply born that way. I don’t know if spoiling your child would cause them to become permanently delusional. And yes, narcs are hardwired to believe they are superior and aren’t afraid to remind you. They also won’t hesitate to remind you how humble, smart, generous, desirable they are as well.  The worst part about having a narcissist in your life is that they can selectively turn on and off their crazy, so unless one spends a good amount of time with a narcissist, to the rest of the world they are charming and incapable of doing wrong. But that’s for another topic.


Yes they can absolutely have been born that way. There is a very strong genetic component. My narc came from a family of them. I used to feel so sorry for him because of his terrible family. It took me years to figure out that he was exactly like them, or worse, but was just extremely adept at hiding what he was.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Tivo

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4684588


I feel like she longs for the “freedom” on the right.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lounorada said:


> That's a lot of red  I'm guessing it was intentional...
> Harry looks like a man-child playing dress-up in his dad/grandfathers uniform (in this particular uniform).


I agree. It's too much red, especially since he's in red, too.  One of her accessory items in a different color would have been a good break for the eye.


----------



## queennadine

Her hair would have looked beautiful in a chignon. But I guess she has to get her $ worth out of those extensions.


----------



## lalame

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4684490
> 
> View attachment 4684491
> 
> View attachment 4684492
> 
> View attachment 4684496
> 
> View attachment 4684502



She looks gorgeous in these and much more herself than that blue dress. Harry looks ridiculous in that outfit but I’m sure it’s purposeful. It’s a lot of red but it’s a good color on her... don’t think I’ve seen her wear it before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

She looks nice. 

Thank goodness there wasn’t a Disney premiere or they’d have had to ditch the military again.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> She looks gorgeous in these and much more herself than that blue dress. Harry looks ridiculous in that outfit but I’m sure it’s purposeful. It’s a lot of red but it’s a good color on her... don’t think I’ve seen her wear it before.


Harry’s wearing uniform


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> She looks gorgeous in these and much more herself than that blue dress. Harry looks ridiculous in that outfit but I’m sure it’s purposeful. It’s a lot of red but it’s a good color on her... don’t think I’ve seen her wear it before.


Why does he look ridiculous in a Royal Marines uniform?


----------



## threadbender

lanasyogamama said:


> Man, 10 months is one of the sweetest ages, they’re just so enamored by the world. If I had to do a long work trip, and had the option bringing my baby, I would 100% do it, just so I wouldn’t miss as much.


My friend's little boy will be 1 May 1st. He is amazing! He absorbs everything and reacts. The giggles, the smiles, the questioning looks, all so enchanting. To think they are missing these moments is so very sad.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> Why does he look ridiculous in a Royal Marines uniform?


Why does he look so scruffy in his uniform all the time? In the US our military guys have strict requirements to be very neat with hair and face when wearing their uniform. Is that not a requirement over there - being freshly cut and shaved in order to be in uniform? Harry doesn't look clean and neat, it's a bad presentation imo


----------



## Eva1991

International Women's day is just around the corner and all I see in this thread is extreme negativity towards a woman expressed by other women! Meghan's been called a narcissist, a psychopath, an unhinged person, that she carried a doll instead of Archie, that she faked her pregancy and baby bump, that she's trying to manipulate Harry and that she'll dump him and Archie over a Hollywood billionaire / A list celeb. Even her mother has been negatively commented here! 

All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side. 

As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother. 

I guess we need International Women's day more than ever!


----------



## Lounorada

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I agree. It's too much red, especially since he's in red, too.  One of her accessory items in a different color would have been a good break for the eye.


Agreed! Even the clutch in a burgundy colour like her earrings would have broken it up a bit.


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Why does he look so scruffy in his uniform all the time? In the US our military guys have strict requirements to be very neat with hair and face when wearing their uniform. Is that not a requirement over there - being freshly cut and shaved in order to be in uniform? Harry doesn't look clean and neat, it's a bad presentation imo


It is a requirement within our forces I'm sure, but he's not a current serving officer.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> It is a requirement within our forces I'm sure, but he's not a current serving officer.


Wasn't that one of the items that the Queen eliminated from his 'roster' of duties (and if I recall, he was rather surprised and upset by it).  As such, even makes me wonder .. why? .. would he even wear the uniform???


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> It is a requirement within our forces I'm sure, but he's not a current serving officer.


Exception was made for Harry by the Queen I believe, so that he could keep the beard


CeeJay said:


> Wasn't that one of the items that the Queen eliminated from his 'roster' of duties (and if I recall, he was rather surprised and upset by it).  As such, even makes me wonder .. why? .. would he even wear the uniform???


Harry is Captain General of the marines - it’s one of the military roles he’s relinquishing.  It’s probably the last time he’ll be wearing a military uniform.


----------



## youngster

Eva1991 said:


> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> !



If I am judging them, it's on the basis of their behavior since last year and both of them are to blame: Harry and Meghan. They go overseas to third world countries and complain about their lot in life, taking attention away from the issues and concerns they were meant to highlight on their trip.  They've picked fights with the press over ridiculous things like refusing to name the Godparents and then are _shocked_ when the press hits back. They want to pick and choose among their duties and obligations, cast aside all the boring stuff, and dictate to the Queen what they will and will not do and post on instagram, apparently without discussing details first with either the Queen or Prince Charles.  They walk away from the UK, it's so very "toxic", yet expect to continue to profit off their royal titles and connections to make as much money as possible while sticking UK taxpayers with the continued, enormous bill for their overseas security.  So, the pretty photos are quite nice but the behavior is most decidedly _not_.


----------



## rose60610

She does look great in the red dress, I'll give her that.  And it actually fits, so see, Meghan, it CAN be done! The detail on the bag is identical to the detail on Manolo Hangisi's.  Hmmm, the first big photo op outfit was the blue dress, now she's in red, wanna bet her next major outfit will be white? Some kind of homage to Old Glory and the Union Jack rolled into one, is she trying to tie together the country she screwed to the one she wants to flee to? Meal Ticket Archie currency can be cashed in either one.


----------



## eunaddict

mrsinsyder said:


> Which I don’t disagree with... but why would you marry into the institution if you don’t agree with it




To single-handedly update the institution and drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century. To modernize the royal family.

Duh.



Eva1991 said:


> International Women's day is just around the corner and all I see in this thread is extreme negativity towards a woman expressed by other women! Meghan's been called a narcissist, a psychopath, an unhinged person, that she carried a doll instead of Archie, that she faked her pregancy and baby bump, that she's trying to manipulate Harry and that she'll dump him and Archie over a Hollywood billionaire / A list celeb. Even her mother has been negatively commented here!
> 
> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> 
> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother.
> 
> I guess we need International Women's day more than ever!


ETA: With regards to International Womens' Day. Meh, I've never believed that being a woman should excuse poor behaviour from being called out. People are calling out poor, rude, unbecoming behaviour...and that's fair. Gender shouldn't come into play when we're talking about etiquette and ethics.

Excusing bad behaviour from women under the umbrella of "Women should be supporting women" is counterproductive to the feminism cause. It opens the door for criticism of the movement more than anything else.

In addition, the *VAST* majority of women leave their infants at home because they have to, because they need to return to work. Let's be clear, MM isn't your average, everyday working mother. She has the choice of taking her infant with her everywhere she goes in relative security and comfort, because of a privilege afforded to her by marriage, but constantly chooses not to. There seems to be a pretty clear distinction here for me.

It would be more appropriate to compare her decisions to Kate's - Will and Kate have taken their infants with them everywhere, until George and Charlotte hit school age, they were photographed arriving in multiple countries because both parents did not want to leave either behind. In fact, there was a flurry of press about George flying with his parents because old rules dictated that no 2 heirs could fly together and W&K insisted on breaking that tradition.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think if I liked her, I would like the red outfit.


----------



## scarlet555

lanasyogamama said:


> I think if I liked her, I would like the red outfit.



Well said...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Eva1991 said:


> International Women's day is just around the corner and all I see in this thread is extreme negativity towards a woman expressed by other women! Meghan's been called a narcissist, a psychopath, an unhinged person, that she carried a doll instead of Archie, that she faked her pregancy and baby bump, that she's trying to manipulate Harry and that she'll dump him and Archie over a Hollywood billionaire / A list celeb. Even her mother has been negatively commented here!
> 
> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> 
> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother.
> 
> I guess we need International Women's day more than ever!



What the eff does MM  have to do with Women's Day? Are you even remotely suggesting that she is a model of modern female empowerment? The only thing she is a rep for is the Cult of the Bimbo. She is the antithesis of feminism. Of course, it is rampant in our culture------- there are probably more boob jobs than BAs/BSs. Recently there was more support for Free the Nipple than protecting reproductive rights or passing the ERA.
I am in my 60's so I remember what it was like before the modern women's movement started making what limited progress we 'enjoy' now. I remember when women couldn't have their own credit-----all my mom's credit cards had Mrs. John Doe on them. There were no open avenues to birth control pills. Title IX was passed while i was in high school so I didn't get to take advantage of it. I took Women's Studies in college and have strived to practice what I believe.
In truth I am very disappointed that women haven't advanced further than we have..........do I think MM is the one to take us where we need to go? Let me think............................ummmmmmmmm.................not just no but oh hail to the no


----------



## lulilu

Eva1991 said:


> International Women's day is just around the corner and all I see in this thread is extreme negativity towards a woman expressed by other women! Meghan's been called a narcissist, a psychopath, an unhinged person, that she carried a doll instead of Archie, that she faked her pregancy and baby bump, that she's trying to manipulate Harry and that she'll dump him and Archie over a Hollywood billionaire / A list celeb. Even her mother has been negatively commented here!
> 
> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> 
> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother.
> 
> I guess we need International Women's day more than ever!



I was going to respond, but there are already some good responses.  This whole women being lectured for not blindly supporting other women is bull.


----------



## Lounorada

A friend sent me this from Twitter, made me laugh out loud. Definitely has new teeth...


----------



## doni

Eva1991 said:


> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother.



I feel the criticism about not taking Archie hasn’t been so much about models of motherhood as much as about the lack of connection with his royal family (while not having many connections on Meghan’s side either), so the Brits may have expected to see him and for him to interact with his cousins, Queen etc.

In any event, as a parent, right now I wouldn’t leave a baby on the other side of the world with no family around _because of_ the Coronavirus. The possibility of travel restrictions and quarantines is very real. So you may find your baby stranded with no possibility to get to him for days or even weeks... As to the baby health safety in traveling, keep in mind that Coronavirus is supposed to affect infants even less than the normal flue, they don’t seem to develop symptoms, so why would that be an issue?

In the wake of International Women Day and as a feminist that I am, I think it is a good sign of the times when simply marrying a powerful or influential male no longer grants a woman the privilege of admiration from other females.

I like Meghan in that capelet dress, she looks great in red (he doesn’t).


----------



## Vintage Leather

Eva1991 said:


> International Women's day is just around the corner and all I see in this thread is extreme negativity towards a woman expressed by other women! Meghan's been called a narcissist, a psychopath, an unhinged person, that she carried a doll instead of Archie, that she faked her pregancy and baby bump, that she's trying to manipulate Harry and that she'll dump him and Archie over a Hollywood billionaire / A list celeb. Even her mother has been negatively commented here!
> 
> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> 
> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother.
> 
> I guess we need International Women's day more than ever!



We definitely need an International Women’s Day more than ever!

We need to judge people on their merits and their actions rather than on their similarities to ourselves. For centuries, white Christian cis males have had their accomplishments celebrated - because they looked just like the leaders of society.

My favorite way of judging a person or an action is to put the same action in a different context.

For example, if your popular, pretty in-law stood up at your wedding reception and she announced “I’m seven weeks pregnant!!” - what would you think?
Would you say, “That’s okay. I don’t mind being second fiddle at my own damn wedding?”
Or would you say, “She couldn’t wait a day?”

If you were celebrating your birthday and that in-law announced - “We’re quitting our jobs in the family firm!”
Would you say, “That’s okay, I don’t mind taking on her share of the work as well as my own! I only have 3 kids at home and a full schedule!” Or would you say, “Worst Birthday Present Ever!”


----------



## mdcx

Eva1991 said:


> International Women's day is just around the corner and all I see in this thread is extreme negativity towards a woman expressed by other women! Meghan's been called a narcissist, a psychopath, an unhinged person, that she carried a doll instead of Archie, that she faked her pregancy and baby bump, that she's trying to manipulate Harry and that she'll dump him and Archie over a Hollywood billionaire / A list celeb. Even her mother has been negatively commented here!
> 
> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> 
> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on? Or that maybe such a long haul transantlantic flight from Vancouver to London would be too much for his routine? And since when does a mother have to be 24/7 with her child and if she leaves them for a few days (under proper care of course) is a bad mother who doesn't love or care for her child? It's 2020, not 1800. Women leave their babies all the time to go to work, socialize etc. You don't have to have your baby attached to you in order to be a good mother.
> 
> I guess we need International Women's day more than ever!


Are you absolutely joking? Women’s rights are about equality with men in terms of opportunity, pay etc and about reducing the imbalance against women by addressing realistically things like maternal health, maternity leave and childcare.

Someone criticising a desperate famewh-re for things she does in her endless quest for all the fame and all the $$$ is not anti-woman FGS! Get back to me when we have gender equality and then we can worry about whether criticising someone’s mothering is feminist or not.


----------



## Jktgal

Eva1991 said:


> All I see is a happy looking couple. She looks stunning in the last two appearances and Harry looks happy that she's by his side.
> 
> As far as Archie is concerned, has anyone of you thought that maybe they didn't want to travel with him due to the worldwide coronavirus outbreak going on?



I'm with you, but VERY surprised they look stunning and happy, and not worse for wear after months of free vacation, private workouts, free staycations during vacation, a shabby cottage to return to in the UK, and guarantee of future income stream from Daddy.

I think they're definitely concerned about corona, that's why they have only very few (like, ONLY 12, the incovenience!) Scotland Yard people regularly flying in from UK in shifts to protect them...


----------



## CobaltBlu

This and this and this times a million.

I believe that feminism means supporting women and their choices. Stay at home mom, bimbo, professional, all three, anything in between, by all means, do it...I am here for all of it. But I can also spot a user and narcissist, and and while whoring in general is an honorable profession, fame-whoring purely for the sake of it is not, especially when children and family, and people less fortunate by a factor of, say, a million,  are pawns in the game. At best MM is ridiculous. 




youngster said:


> If I am judging them, it's on the basis of their behavior since last year and both of them are to blame: Harry and Meghan. T*hey go overseas to third world countries and complain about their lot in life, taking attention away from the issues and concerns they were meant to highlight on their trip. * They've picked fights with the press over ridiculous things like refusing to name the Godparents and then are _shocked_ when the press hits back. They want to pick and choose among their duties and obligations, cast aside all the boring stuff, and dictate to the Queen what they will and will not do and post on instagram, apparently without discussing details first with either the Queen or Prince Charles.  *They walk away from the UK, it's so very "toxic", yet expect to continue to profit off their royal titles and connections to make as much money as possible while sticking UK taxpayers with the continued, enormous bill for their overseas security.  *So, the pretty photos are quite nice but the behavior is most decidedly _not_.





poopsie said:


> What the eff does MM  have to do with Women's Day? Are you even remotely suggesting that she is a model of modern female empowerment? The only thing she is a rep for is the Cult of the Bimbo. She is the antithesis of feminism. Of course, it is rampant in our culture------- there are probably more boob jobs than BAs/BSs. Recently there was more support for Free the Nipple than protecting reproductive rights or passing the ERA.
> *I am in my 60's so I remember what it was like before the modern women's movement started making what limited progress we 'enjoy' now. I remember when women couldn't have their own credit-----all my mom's credit cards had Mrs. John Doe on them. There were no open avenues to birth control pills. Title IX was passed while i was in high school so I didn't get to take advantage of it. I took Women's Studies in college and have strived to practice what I believe.*
> In truth I am very disappointed that women haven't advanced further than we have..........do I think MM is the one to take us where we need to go? Let me think............................ummmmmmmmm.................*not just no but oh hail to the no*


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> If I am judging them, it's on the basis of their behavior since last year and both of them are to blame: Harry and Meghan. They go overseas to third world countries and complain about their lot in life, taking attention away from the issues and concerns they were meant to highlight on their trip.  They've picked fights with the press over ridiculous things like refusing to name the Godparents and then are _shocked_ when the press hits back. They want to pick and choose among their duties and obligations, cast aside all the boring stuff, and dictate to the Queen what they will and will not do and post on instagram, apparently without discussing details first with either the Queen or Prince Charles.  They walk away from the UK, it's so very "toxic", yet expect to continue to profit off their royal titles and connections to make as much money as possible while sticking UK taxpayers with the continued, enormous bill for their overseas security.  So, the pretty photos are quite nice but the behavior is most decidedly _not_.


Wonderful post.  These two clearly reside in the realm of the ridiculous.


----------



## queennadine

Equality means we call out BS equally, too. And that’s what I see in MM.

Like I’ve said, I gave her the benefit of the doubt and wanted to buy into the fairy tale. But her actions and lack of character have changed my mind.

With regards to leaving a baby behind: I’m an attorney and most of my friends are attorneys. I’m blessed enough to now be a SAHM, while my friends have gone back to work. I will say that every single one of them would stay home if they could. Taking care of a baby is hard work, but I can’t even imagine the luxury of having a nanny/nannies and all of the money and help you need at a moment’s notice. No excuse whatsoever to not bring him so you can at least see him in the morning and then give him a kiss goodnight before going to an event. No mother would fault that. But it’s cold to your baby and his family to leave him on another continent with a veritable stranger.

Back to the red dress event: this is my new favorite pic 



ETA: Harry’s hair, facial hair, and PDA while in uniform is very unbecoming. He does not show the bearing of a military officer.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Wow that picture is like a bad opera


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4684418
> View attachment 4684420
> View attachment 4684421
> View attachment 4684422



In those first two pictures the vibe I get is her saying to Harry 'Here I am, aren't I the most beautiful one of all, aren't you the luckiest man alive'.


----------



## bellecate

queennadine said:


> Equality means we call out BS equally, too. And that’s what I see in MM.
> 
> Like I’ve said, I gave her the benefit of the doubt and wanted to buy into the fairy tale. But her actions and lack of character have changed my mind.
> 
> With regards to leaving a baby behind: I’m an attorney and most of my friends are attorneys. I’m blessed enough to now be a SAHM, while my friends have gone back to work. I will say that every single one of them would stay home if they could. Taking care of a baby is hard work, but I can’t even imagine the luxury of having a nanny/nannies and all of the money and help you need at a moment’s notice. No excuse whatsoever to not bring him so you can at least see him in the morning and then give him a kiss goodnight before going to an event. No mother would fault that. But it’s cold to your baby and his family to leave him on another continent with a veritable stranger.
> 
> Back to the red dress event: this is my new favorite pic
> View attachment 4684774
> 
> 
> ETA: Harry’s hair, facial hair, and PDA while in uniform is very unbecoming. He does not show the bearing of a military officer.



Yes that private moment captured on film shows what a happy loving couple they are.


queennadine said:


> Equality means we call out BS equally, too. And that’s what I see in MM.
> 
> Like I’ve said, I gave her the benefit of the doubt and wanted to buy into the fairy tale. But her actions and lack of character have changed my mind.
> 
> With regards to leaving a baby behind: I’m an attorney and most of my friends are attorneys. I’m blessed enough to now be a SAHM, while my friends have gone back to work. I will say that every single one of them would stay home if they could. Taking care of a baby is hard work, but I can’t even imagine the luxury of having a nanny/nannies and all of the money and help you need at a moment’s notice. No excuse whatsoever to not bring him so you can at least see him in the morning and then give him a kiss goodnight before going to an event. No mother would fault that. But it’s cold to your baby and his family to leave him on another continent with a veritable stranger.
> 
> Back to the red dress event: this is my new favorite pic
> View attachment 4684774
> 
> 
> ETA: Harry’s hair, facial hair, and PDA while in uniform is very unbecoming. He does not show the bearing of a military officer.


----------



## wisconsin

People here are for the most part  judging her based on her character, not race or sex.
There are both men and women with bad character.


----------



## Lucille68

Harry looks terrible.  His eyes look so sad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> Why does he look ridiculous in a Royal Marines uniform?



The dramatic and stately red and black uniform, contrasted with his scruffy hair and casual posture... it’s like a mismatch of outfit and demeanor.


----------



## lalame

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Why does he look so scruffy in his uniform all the time? In the US our military guys have strict requirements to be very neat with hair and face when wearing their uniform. Is that not a requirement over there - being freshly cut and shaved in order to be in uniform? Harry doesn't look clean and neat, it's a bad presentation imo



You said it better than I did... that’s why he looks ridiculous to me. Like he played a game of baseball, got hammered at a dive bar and then put on that uniform right after.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Look at old pictures of Bob Hope. He was often caricatured as having a “Ski nose”. Meaghan now has the same “slope”. I think we are now seeing why there were so few actual sightings of her in Canada. They were spaced out between procedures/healing....


Oh yes, Bob Hope's ski jump nose.  An tiny upturned nose was a very popular rhinoplasty in the 60s, but no one looked good with it.  Too silly and unnatural. 

Meghan's nose, in my opinion, is one of her best assets.  It suits her because it's almost what she was born with, just more refined now.

I've noticed a return to women wanting an upturned tip and I thought perhaps Meg's popularity at the time, had something to do with it.


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4684588


Too much red for me, but it's the high neckline that looks like she's choking is really what I don't like.


----------



## Grande Latte

I think the red looks nice on her. Nothing screams "look at me" than a full-length, head to toe red gown. I don't care for her hair on this trip. Too long and too straight. She looks more like a performer than a former royal.

It's too obvious why she didn't bring Archie. She purposely left baby behind so none of his relatives can see him. She's raging war, meanwhile calling all attention to herself. She knows full well that none of the royal family members wants to see her, they only want to see Harry and Archie!!!


----------



## lalame

MM stopped by a school assembly championing women’s equality, specifically to celebrate the event that led to the UK’s Equal Pay Act. Seems a bit... on the nose for Meghan to stand for women demanding more pay. In their case, equal pay to fellow male factory workers... in her case, more pay than literal royalty. 

This quote just hit me the wrong way... She began her speech by saying, “When we thought about what I wanted to do for International Women’s Day this year, ...” When “we” becomes “I” -  so symbolic. (Ok I studied English literature, micro-analyzing words comes with the territory)


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> Back to the red dress event: this is my new favorite pic
> View attachment 4684774


Oh Dear.  Future looks bright.


----------



## Tivo

Poor Archie has no family connection with anyone. It’s easy to shrug it off now, but one day it will matter.

Harry looks exhausted.


----------



## Straight-Laced

mrsinsyder said:


> .. but why would you marry into the institution if you don’t agree with it


I think this is an essential part of the "grand narrative" of their relationship that's going to be be played out sooner or later when Meghan gets safely clear of the BRF (with or without H) and gives her version of history : that is that modern Meghan never wanted to marry into such a horribly archaic and oppressive institution as the BRF ... but her love for H was SO BIG and his love for her was SO BIG that she had to overcome her profound reservations and GO WITH HER HEART and marry into Harry's 'awkward' family - sacrificing her freedoms and career for Harry's duty to his family and nation - and make the best of a difficult situation for the sake of their great big love. 

I think that Harry bought this version of events too - that Meghan was a reluctant bride who loved him _despite_ the fact he was a British Prince.  So the escape plan was hatched as part of the marriage agreement and if things became unbearable for Meghan because of her great sacrifice he would do the right thing and sacrifice his birth family and duty for her happiness. Because of LOVE. 

She wants the story of their relationship to go down in history as one of The Great Love Stories of All Time.  Iconic.  So the money, fame and status Meghan gained by marrying Harry are barely worth a passing mention compared to their grand story of love and sacrifice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

queennadine said:


> View attachment 4684774



Seems like Harry has become a great actor. I did buy the "Look, I'm so happy and in love" schtick, but here he just looks empty and sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> She wants the story of their relationship to go down in history as one of The Great Love Stories of All Time.  Iconic.  So the money, fame and status Meghan gained by marrying Harry are barely worth a passing mention compared to their grand story of LOVE and SACRIFICE.



Remember the big interview she gave shortly after the news dropped they were dating?

She said, and that's a direct quote, "I personally love a great love story." Who on earth says that about their own (and new!) relationship? So full of it.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Great work from Camilla Long in The Sunday Times 

It’s a picture of bliss. But Meghan and Harry are never going to have it this good again
Camilla Long
Sunday March 08 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times

"You’d be mad not to have loved the extraordinary picture of Meghan and Harry returning triumphantly to London on Thursday. The blue dress, the flashing smiles, the rain that fell, as someone breathed, like “diamonds”.It was indeed “magical” and “glowing” and somehow otherworldly, as if someone had created a poster for a Richard Curtis film: Is it Still Raining? I Hadn’t Noticed.

There couldn’t have been a person in the country who didn’t see that picture and think: why can’t these shallow and self-obsessed people just loosen up and enjoy this? Why reject love and kindness for a life in North America stripped of all this glossy royal branding? You won’t get this level of glamour crying for money at an all-you-can-eat JP Morgan “business attire” event at a hotel in Florida.

It’s weird and sad to think that people could be so unhappy that they’d hate the life they were living so well in that picture. I’d still like to ask them, to their faces, what it was about royal life they despised so much. Was it the free cars or the free bodyguards or the free air travel, or the £2.4m of artisan doorknobs and pre-distressed flagstones at Frogmore Cottage that we flung at them as taxpayers — a sum now to be paid back? Or being showered with money and the support and adoration of the general public?

Even last Thursday people couldn’t stop raving about how beautiful and happy and “in love” they looked, which is hardly the behaviour of media that are “cynical” and a nation that is “racist” — and that’s after they told us to sling it. I don’t think there is anything that either of them could say that would make the average person on the street feel: “Oh, I understand what you went through and why you did it.” The slicked hair, the aggressive dress, the power smiles, the rictus laughter, all angry and fake. Take another look at the pictures and you’ll see she didn’t even want to be there.

Meghan came and saw and took what she wanted, having pretended she cared about British things and British people, which she didn’t. Now she’s scraped Harry’s goolies into a Gucci tote () and run off to North America to a situation that suits her — but not anyone else — better and still thinks there should be no backlash against that.

In fact, when you receive anything in life it comes with responsibilities. When we get paid it comes on the understanding that we have done our job properly. If we want to get a pension, it comes as a result of paying national insurance for most of our lives. When you have 24-hour security paid for at vast expense by the taxpayer because you’re royal, you don’t engage in a public slanging match with the Queen or get nasty when she tries to take your titles away, having spent ages pretending that you’re not bothered about the trappings of royal life when you are. It has been awful.

However glossy and glamorous Meghan’s final trolling lap of the country may seem, let us never forget the appalling and destructive and grasping manner in which she left. Let us never forget that she effectively threatened the Queen, hinting that she and Harry could give a television interview in which the royal family would be revealed as “racist and sexist”.

It astonishes me that anyone can forget this simply by looking at a “great” and “iconic” “look of love” photo — what does Harry and Meghan being “in love” have to do with anything anyway? Bonnie and Clyde were in love; so were Fred and Rosemary West. Gushing over pictures and images without questioning motives is lazy, the sort of thinking that allows scandals such as the one involving Harvey Weinstein to happen. We all loved his glorious films and glossy lifestyle with starlets, but didn’t those pictures hide terrible realities? People in power should always be questioned, and none more than cavilling royals."


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> Great work from Camilla Long in The Sunday Times
> 
> It’s a picture of bliss. But Meghan and Harry are never going to have it this good again
> Camilla Long
> Sunday March 08 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
> 
> "You’d be mad not to have loved the extraordinary picture of Meghan and Harry returning triumphantly to London on Thursday. The blue dress, the flashing smiles, the rain that fell, as someone breathed, like “diamonds”.It was indeed “magical” and “glowing” and somehow otherworldly, as if someone had created a poster for a Richard Curtis film: Is it Still Raining? I Hadn’t Noticed.
> 
> There couldn’t have been a person in the country who didn’t see that picture and think: why can’t these shallow and self-obsessed people just loosen up and enjoy this? Why reject love and kindness for a life in North America stripped of all this glossy royal branding? You won’t get this level of glamour crying for money at an all-you-can-eat JP Morgan “business attire” event at a hotel in Florida.
> 
> It’s weird and sad to think that people could be so unhappy that they’d hate the life they were living so well in that picture. I’d still like to ask them, to their faces, what it was about royal life they despised so much. Was it the free cars or the free bodyguards or the free air travel, or the £2.4m of artisan doorknobs and pre-distressed flagstones at Frogmore Cottage that we flung at them as taxpayers — a sum now to be paid back? Or being showered with money and the support and adoration of the general public?
> 
> Even last Thursday people couldn’t stop raving about how beautiful and happy and “in love” they looked, which is hardly the behaviour of media that are “cynical” and a nation that is “racist” — and that’s after they told us to sling it. I don’t think there is anything that either of them could say that would make the average person on the street feel: “Oh, I understand what you went through and why you did it.” The slicked hair, the aggressive dress, the power smiles, the rictus laughter, all angry and fake. Take another look at the pictures and you’ll see she didn’t even want to be there.
> 
> Meghan came and saw and took what she wanted, having pretended she cared about British things and British people, which she didn’t. Now she’s scraped Harry’s goolies into a Gucci tote () and run off to North America to a situation that suits her — but not anyone else — better and still thinks there should be no backlash against that.
> 
> In fact, when you receive anything in life it comes with responsibilities. When we get paid it comes on the understanding that we have done our job properly. If we want to get a pension, it comes as a result of paying national insurance for most of our lives. When you have 24-hour security paid for at vast expense by the taxpayer because you’re royal, you don’t engage in a public slanging match with the Queen or get nasty when she tries to take your titles away, having spent ages pretending that you’re not bothered about the trappings of royal life when you are. It has been awful.
> 
> However glossy and glamorous Meghan’s final trolling lap of the country may seem, let us never forget the appalling and destructive and grasping manner in which she left. Let us never forget that she effectively threatened the Queen, hinting that she and Harry could give a television interview in which the royal family would be revealed as “racist and sexist”.
> 
> It astonishes me that anyone can forget this simply by looking at a “great” and “iconic” “look of love” photo — what does Harry and Meghan being “in love” have to do with anything anyway? Bonnie and Clyde were in love; so were Fred and Rosemary West. Gushing over pictures and images without questioning motives is lazy, the sort of thinking that allows scandals such as the one involving Harvey Weinstein to happen. We all loved his glorious films and glossy lifestyle with starlets, but didn’t those pictures hide terrible realities? People in power should always be questioned, and none more than cavilling royals."


Can’t *like* this enough!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> Great work from Camilla Long in The Sunday Times
> 
> It’s a picture of bliss. But Meghan and Harry are never going to have it this good again
> Camilla Long
> Sunday March 08 2020, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
> 
> "You’d be mad not to have loved the extraordinary picture of Meghan and Harry returning triumphantly to London on Thursday. The blue dress, the flashing smiles, the rain that fell, as someone breathed, like “diamonds”.It was indeed “magical” and “glowing” and somehow otherworldly, as if someone had created a poster for a Richard Curtis film: Is it Still Raining? I Hadn’t Noticed.
> 
> There couldn’t have been a person in the country who didn’t see that picture and think: why can’t these shallow and self-obsessed people just loosen up and enjoy this? Why reject love and kindness for a life in North America stripped of all this glossy royal branding? You won’t get this level of glamour crying for money at an all-you-can-eat JP Morgan “business attire” event at a hotel in Florida.
> 
> It’s weird and sad to think that people could be so unhappy that they’d hate the life they were living so well in that picture. I’d still like to ask them, to their faces, what it was about royal life they despised so much. Was it the free cars or the free bodyguards or the free air travel, or the £2.4m of artisan doorknobs and pre-distressed flagstones at Frogmore Cottage that we flung at them as taxpayers — a sum now to be paid back? Or being showered with money and the support and adoration of the general public?
> 
> Even last Thursday people couldn’t stop raving about how beautiful and happy and “in love” they looked, which is hardly the behaviour of media that are “cynical” and a nation that is “racist” — and that’s after they told us to sling it. I don’t think there is anything that either of them could say that would make the average person on the street feel: “Oh, I understand what you went through and why you did it.” The slicked hair, the aggressive dress, the power smiles, the rictus laughter, all angry and fake. Take another look at the pictures and you’ll see she didn’t even want to be there.
> 
> Meghan came and saw and took what she wanted, having pretended she cared about British things and British people, which she didn’t. Now she’s scraped Harry’s goolies into a Gucci tote () and run off to North America to a situation that suits her — but not anyone else — better and still thinks there should be no backlash against that.
> 
> In fact, when you receive anything in life it comes with responsibilities. When we get paid it comes on the understanding that we have done our job properly. If we want to get a pension, it comes as a result of paying national insurance for most of our lives. When you have 24-hour security paid for at vast expense by the taxpayer because you’re royal, you don’t engage in a public slanging match with the Queen or get nasty when she tries to take your titles away, having spent ages pretending that you’re not bothered about the trappings of royal life when you are. It has been awful.
> 
> However glossy and glamorous Meghan’s final trolling lap of the country may seem, let us never forget the appalling and destructive and grasping manner in which she left. Let us never forget that she effectively threatened the Queen, hinting that she and Harry could give a television interview in which the royal family would be revealed as “racist and sexist”.
> 
> It astonishes me that anyone can forget this simply by looking at a “great” and “iconic” “look of love” photo — what does Harry and Meghan being “in love” have to do with anything anyway? Bonnie and Clyde were in love; so were Fred and Rosemary West. Gushing over pictures and images without questioning motives is lazy, the sort of thinking that allows scandals such as the one involving Harvey Weinstein to happen. We all loved his glorious films and glossy lifestyle with starlets, but didn’t those pictures hide terrible realities? People in power should always be questioned, and none more than cavilling royals."


 Spot on.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Wasn't that one of the items that the Queen eliminated from his 'roster' of duties (and if I recall, he was rather surprised and upset by it).  As such, even makes me wonder .. why? .. would he even wear the uniform???


Yes, comes into effect on the 1st of April, when they will be "freed"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> If I am judging them, it's on the basis of their behavior since last year and both of them are to blame: Harry and Meghan. They go overseas to third world countries and complain about their lot in life, taking attention away from the issues and concerns they were meant to highlight on their trip.  They've picked fights with the press over ridiculous things like refusing to name the Godparents and then are _shocked_ when the press hits back. They want to pick and choose among their duties and obligations, cast aside all the boring stuff, and dictate to the Queen what they will and will not do and post on instagram, apparently without discussing details first with either the Queen or Prince Charles.  They walk away from the UK, it's so very "toxic", yet expect to continue to profit off their royal titles and connections to make as much money as possible while sticking UK taxpayers with the continued, enormous bill for their overseas security.  So, the pretty photos are quite nice but the behavior is most decidedly _not_.


In a nutshell, very well put [emoji122]


----------



## Tivo

I think there was a British Vogue Forces for Change event in London this weekend. Salma Hayek’s IG thanked British Vogue and Edward Enninful for choosing her but never mentioned Megan.

I checked the British Vogue IG, and take a look...there is no mention of Meghan’s contribution there either.



After making such a big deal about her “guest editing,” and “working so hard” on the issue and picking celebs for the cover, Meghan doesn’t warrant a mention?


----------



## Sharont2305

Lucille68 said:


> Harry looks terrible.  His eyes look so sad.


Maybe realisation is kicking in as what he will actually miss. All the military stuff is what he enjoys the most.


----------



## doni

Straight-Laced said:


> I think that Harry bought this version of events too - that Meghan was a reluctant bride who loved him _despite_ the fact he was a British Prince.  So the escape plan was hatched as part of the marriage agreement and if things became unbearable for Meghan because of her great sacrifice he would do the right thing and sacrifice his birth family and duty for her happiness. Because of LOVE.





Straight-Laced said:


> Great work from Camilla Long in The Sunday Times
> It’s weird and sad to think that people could be so unhappy that they’d hate the life they were living so well in that picture. I’d still like to ask them, to their faces, what it was about royal life they despised so much. "



Only that this was blatantly not the case?

At the time of their engagement, all the talk was about how well suited she was for the position. At their first date, they had bonded, they said, over their common interest for the same philanthropic causes. This working together on causes was in fact the major theme of their relationship. Harry’s old flame Chelsy had not wanted to move forward because she honestly doubted that she could cope with royal life. There was at the time no question of quitting or even just trying as, as per his own account, Harry had found that focusing on royal work was his path to overcome the trauma of his mother’s death.  With Meghan it was pretty obvious that Harry was ecstatic that on top of love he had found someone who was perfect for (and eager to do) the job.

What happened? Well, Meghan became accounted with all the in and outs of this job and it was not all glamour and roses. I am sure she expected the stiffness and protocol. But she likely hadn’t registered their lack of agency or choice. Plus to what extent they were going to always be second fiddle to William and Kate, no matter how hard she tried, this was no meritocracy (alas the definition of the contrary). The Fab 4 went to sleep and Harry’s close relationship with his sister in law out of the window. And Meghan probably hadn’t realized that a big part of the job was trips to Tooting Bec or Whitley Bay to open an old people’s home that smelled of fish and chips and to where the assigned London journalist couldn’t be bothered to come because it was raining cats and dogs. She probably hadn’t realized that places like Tooting Bec or Whitley Bay existed. On top, when they got to do the fun stuff, like flying to Ibiza in Elton John’s jet after participating in a Google organized climate change conference, they were relentlessly attacked by the press. What, even the public seemed to have stopped blindingly adoring them. She looked around and saw Princess Anne, and Princess Beatrice, and Sara Ferguson and the Duchess of Wessex which when you think about it sounds very much like Sussex..., and started to understand what her place would be. Not such a fun place, specially if you are not into horses.

So did they decide they wanted to leave the royal family? Not at all! One thing you cannot say of these two is that they haven’t been clear of their intentions. They went to America and talked to American lawyers which looked at everything inside out came up with a great American lawyer analysis and solution: the reason you two cannot do as you please is that you are first line royals and as such directly financed by tax money. Give up that sovereign grant and then you can pick and choose. It is easy because it only accounts for 5% of your income (the rest will keep coming from daddy) and doesn’t include security. Then you can cherrypick your causes, live in Frogmore _and_ the US, choose when to support the Queen and on what, come and go, and most importantly, make your own money, create your own brand (Sussex Royal!), go big, go global, let William and Kate be the Kings of their little United Kingdom, you are going to conquer the world.

That is exactly what they wanted, they had no intention to give up royal life for good. But what happened was that the Queen may not have jurisdiction over the use of the world ‘royal’ overseas but doesn’t give a jot about the arguments of American lawyers no matter how well paid and so she went and told them they could not have their cake and eat it. And they decided to eat it.

At that point I think they felt there was no other choice. Time will tell if they got it right. But this narrative that from the beginning they wanted out... I don’t buy buy it.


----------



## maryg1

View attachment 4684904

Pls someone tells her that, if she is so upset with Archie getting the coronavirus, this is the best way to get it herself too. Unless she thinks that she is so superior to viruses, other than the RF.
Spoiler to the Dutchess: viruses are ********ic, they attack anyone not making distinctions on sex, beauty and money. So unless you’d like to spend the next 14 days detached from your child after your return to Canada, you’d better keep distances from other people. But I know, these pictures are better for Instagram...


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Only that this was blatantly not the case?
> 
> At the time of their engagement, all the talk was about how well suited she was for the position. At their first date, they had bonded, they said, over their common interest for the same philanthropic causes. This working together on causes was in fact the major theme of their relationship. Harry’s old flame Chelsy had not wanted to move forward because she honestly doubted that she could cope with royal life. There was at the time no question of quitting or even just trying as, as per his own account, Harry had found that royal work Was his path to overcome the trauma of his mother’s death.  With Meghan it was pretty obvious that Harry was ecstatic that on top of love he had found someone who was perfect for (and eager to do) the job.
> 
> What happened? Well, Meghan became accounted with all the in and outs of this job and it was not all glamour and roses. I am sure she expected the stiffness and protocol. But she likely hadn’t registered their lack of agency or choice. Plus to what extent they were going to always be second fiddle to William and Kate, no matter how hard she tried, this was no meritocracy (alas the definition of the contrary). The Fab 4 went to sleep and Harry’s close relationship with his sister in law out of the window. And Meghan probably hadn’t realized that a big part of the job was trips to Tooting Bec or Whitley Bay to open an old people’s home that smelled of fish and chips and to where the assigned London journalist couldn’t be bothered to come because it was raining cats and dogs. She probably hadn’t realized that places like Tooting Bec or Whitley Bay existed. On top, when they got to do the fun stuff, like flying to Ibiza in Elton John’s jet after participating in a Google organized climate change conference, they were relentlessly attacked by the press. What, even the public seemed to have stopped blindingly adoring them. She looked around and saw Princess Anne, and Princess Beatrice, and Sara Ferguson and the Duchess of Wessex which when you think about it sounds very much like Sussex..., and started to understand what her place would be. Not such a fun place, specially if you are not into horses.
> 
> So did they decide they wanted to leave the royal family? Not at all! One thing you cannot say of these two is that they haven’t been clear of their intentions. They went to America and talked to American lawyers which looked at everything inside out came up with a great American lawyer analysis and solution: the reason you two cannot do as you please is that you are first line royals and as such directly financed by tax money. Give up that sovereign grant and then you can pick and choose. It is easy because it only accounts for 5% of your income (the rest will keep coming from daddy) and doesn’t include security. Then you can cherrypick your causes, live in Frogmore _and_ the US, choose when to support the Queen and on what, come and go, and most importantly, make your own money, create your own brand (Sussex Royal!), go big, go global, let William and Kate be the Kings of their little United Kingdom, you are going to conquer the world.
> 
> That is exactly what they wanted, they had no intention to give up royal life for good. But what happened was that the Queen may not have jurisdiction over the use of the world ‘royal’ overseas but doesn’t give a jot about the arguments of American lawyers no matter how well paid and so she went and told them they could not have their cake and eat it. And they decided to eat it.
> 
> At that point I think they felt there was no other choice. Time will tell if they got it right. But this narrative that from the beginning they wanted out... I don’t buy buy it.


 They wanted 95% of the money to do just the glam 5% of the duties (of their choosing and at their convenience), whilst making extra money on the side from monetising the Royal Family’s brand and the connections it gave them.  Simples. 
Now let me see, what was so wrong with that.............?


----------



## doni

Clearblueskies said:


> They wanted 95% of the money to do just the glam 5% of the duties (of their choosing and at their convenience), whilst making extra money on the side from monetising the Royal Family’s brand and the connections it gave them.  Simples.
> Now let me see, what was so wrong with that.............?


Exactly and in a nutshell.
So I don’t get all that coverage saying they wanted out, that they want privacy, seclusion... they wanted nothing of the sort...


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Why does he look ridiculous in a Royal Marines uniform?



Actually the only thing I'll miss of Harry is when he wears his various uniforms, men look so dashing in uniforms!


----------



## duna

youngster said:


> If I am judging them, it's on the basis of their behavior since last year and both of them are to blame: Harry and Meghan. They go overseas to third world countries and complain about their lot in life, taking attention away from the issues and concerns they were meant to highlight on their trip.  They've picked fights with the press over ridiculous things like refusing to name the Godparents and then are _shocked_ when the press hits back. They want to pick and choose among their duties and obligations, cast aside all the boring stuff, and dictate to the Queen what they will and will not do and post on instagram, apparently without discussing details first with either the Queen or Prince Charles.  They walk away from the UK, it's so very "toxic", yet expect to continue to profit off their royal titles and connections to make as much money as possible while sticking UK taxpayers with the continued, enormous bill for their overseas security.  So, the pretty photos are quite nice but the behavior is most decidedly _not_.



Amen to this!


----------



## duna

eunaddict said:


> To single-handedly update the institution and drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century. To modernize the royal family.
> 
> Duh.
> 
> 
> ETA: With regards to International Womens' Day. Meh, I've never believed that being a woman should excuse poor behaviour from being called out. People are calling out poor, rude, unbecoming behaviour...and that's fair. Gender shouldn't come into play when we're talking about etiquette and ethics.
> 
> Excusing bad behaviour from women under the umbrella of "Women should be supporting women" is counterproductive to the feminism cause. It opens the door for criticism of the movement more than anything else.
> 
> *In addition, the VAST majority of women leave their infants at home because they have to, because they need to return to work. Let's be clear, MM isn't your average, everyday working mother. She has the choice of taking her infant with her everywhere she goes in relative security and comfort, because of a privilege afforded to her by marriage, but constantly chooses not to. There seems to be a pretty clear distinction here for me.*
> 
> It would be more appropriate to compare her decisions to Kate's - Will and Kate have taken their infants with them everywhere, until George and Charlotte hit school age, they were photographed arriving in multiple countries because both parents did not want to leave either behind. In fact, there was a flurry of press about George flying with his parents because old rules dictated that no 2 heirs could fly together and W&K insisted on breaking that tradition.



Being of a "certain age" I very clearly remember when Charles and Diana went on a tour of Australia when William was about the same age as Archie. They took him with them, it was the first time the 2 heirs to the throne travelled together. There was an adorable photo of the 3 of them sitting on a lawn. Diana broke the rule because she wanted her child with her. These are the Royal rules that I like being broken, as Will and Kate have also done since.


----------



## Straight-Laced

doni said:


> Only that this was blatantly not the case?
> 
> At the time of their engagement, all the talk was about how well suited she was for the position. At their first date, they had bonded, they said, over their common interest for the same philanthropic causes. This working together on causes was in fact the major theme of their relationship. Harry’s old flame Chelsy had not wanted to move forward because she honestly doubted that she could cope with royal life. There was at the time no question of quitting or even just trying as, as per his own account, Harry had found that focusing on royal work was his path to overcome the trauma of his mother’s death.  With Meghan it was pretty obvious that Harry was ecstatic that on top of love he had found someone who was perfect for (and eager to do) the job.
> 
> What happened? Well, Meghan became accounted with all the in and outs of this job and it was not all glamour and roses. I am sure she expected the stiffness and protocol. But she likely hadn’t registered their lack of agency or choice. Plus to what extent they were going to always be second fiddle to William and Kate, no matter how hard she tried, this was no meritocracy (alas the definition of the contrary). The Fab 4 went to sleep and Harry’s close relationship with his sister in law out of the window. And Meghan probably hadn’t realized that a big part of the job was trips to Tooting Bec or Whitley Bay to open an old people’s home that smelled of fish and chips and to where the assigned London journalist couldn’t be bothered to come because it was raining cats and dogs. She probably hadn’t realized that places like Tooting Bec or Whitley Bay existed. On top, when they got to do the fun stuff, like flying to Ibiza in Elton John’s jet after participating in a Google organized climate change conference, they were relentlessly attacked by the press. What, even the public seemed to have stopped blindingly adoring them. She looked around and saw Princess Anne, and Princess Beatrice, and Sara Ferguson and the Duchess of Wessex which when you think about it sounds very much like Sussex..., and started to understand what her place would be. Not such a fun place, specially if you are not into horses.
> 
> So did they decide they wanted to leave the royal family? Not at all! One thing you cannot say of these two is that they haven’t been clear of their intentions. They went to America and talked to American lawyers which looked at everything inside out came up with a great American lawyer analysis and solution: the reason you two cannot do as you please is that you are first line royals and as such directly financed by tax money. Give up that sovereign grant and then you can pick and choose. It is easy because it only accounts for 5% of your income (the rest will keep coming from daddy) and doesn’t include security. Then you can cherrypick your causes, live in Frogmore _and_ the US, choose when to support the Queen and on what, come and go, and most importantly, make your own money, create your own brand (Sussex Royal!), go big, go global, let William and Kate be the Kings of their little United Kingdom, you are going to conquer the world.
> 
> That is exactly what they wanted, they had no intention to give up royal life for good. But what happened was that the Queen may not have jurisdiction over the use of the world ‘royal’ overseas but doesn’t give a jot about the arguments of American lawyers no matter how well paid and so she went and told them they could not have their cake and eat it. And they decided to eat it.
> 
> At that point I think they felt there was no other choice. Time will tell if they got it right. But this narrative that from the beginning they wanted out... I don’t buy it.


I can’t know but I don’t believe Meghan was ever in for the long haul.
More like from early on she was thinking ahead and had planted the idea in Harry’s mind that just in case she found her new working life in the BRF stifling and soul destroying then it shouldn’t have to be a life sentence, and being madly in love Harry agreed that they would leave together if the situation wasn’t working for Meghan and she was unhappy, because Meghan and their marriage would come before duty to the BRF. Love before duty.
I don’t think there was a clear cut plan to definitely leave (not one that Meghan had admitted to anyway) but I do think there was probably an option agreed on prior to the wedding and when things got tough for Meghan they set their reckless, ambitious plan B in motion. And neither expected to have to give up so much (especially Harry obviously) but that could be seen as part of the love story anyway (great sacrifice).


----------



## Chagall

maryg1 said:


> View attachment 4684904
> 
> Pls someone tells her that, if she is so upset with Archie getting the coronavirus, this is the best way to get it herself too. Unless she thinks that she is so superior to viruses, other than the RF.
> Spoiler to the Dutchess: viruses are ********ic, they attack anyone not making distinctions on sex, beauty and money. So unless you’d like to spend the next 14 days detached from your child after your return to Canada, you’d better keep distances from other people. But I know, these pictures are better for Instagram...


 I am very surprised at the British publics apparent lack of annoyance with them for their actions and abandonment of everything royalty stands for. Hope they don’t bring the virus back to Canada if they must return here.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> I am very surprised at the British publics apparent lack of annoyance with them for their actions and abandonment of everything royalty stands for. Hope they don’t bring the virus back to Canada if they must return here.



This. I just read they were given standing ovations at the Royal Albert Hall. Why???


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I just read they were given standing ovations at the Royal Albert Hall. Why???


Standing ovations! Why in the world would that happen. I was expecting they would be given a very chilly reception at best back in the UK. Their behaviour has been atrocious- why would that be rewarded? People never cease to amaze me.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> I am very surprised at the British publics apparent lack of annoyance with them for their actions and abandonment of everything royalty stands for. Hope they don’t bring the virus back to Canada if they must return here.


Believe me, there are a lot of annoyed Brits here, myself included. I do think the annoyance has died down a bit now though, we just want to get rid of (in my case, her) and not have this "farewell events" Just go. We are more annoyed at the way it's been done, trying to belittle the Queen, still wanting the titles, money etc.
It could have been so different, they could have said they wanted a hiatus for a couple of years to be with Archie. To me, that would have been fine. 
The Queen, as Princess Elizabeth was in Malta for the first five years of her marriage as Prince Philip was stationed there. She lived a normal naval life there as a wife and mother.
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent a few years before and after marriage here on Anglesey when William had a normal job with the RAF Search and Rescue where they were left alone to get on with married life while doing some Royal duties. Then on to the Air Ambulance in Norfolk, before giving that up to become a full time Royal.
It can be done. I think Harry will regret this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I just read they were given standing ovations at the Royal Albert Hall. Why???





Chagall said:


> Standing ovations! Why in the world would that happen. I was expecting they would be given a very chilly reception at best back in the UK. Their behaviour has been atrocious- why would that be rewarded? People never cease to amaze me.


I think those in uniform would stand as a sign of respect for Harrys military rank - he is Capt General, and not for him as such.  Maybe partners followed suit?  It was a formal occasion, with a defined audience it doesn’t surprise me that people were polite and behaved as normal.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Believe me, there are a lot of annoyed Brits here, myself included. I do think the annoyance has died down a bit now though, we just want to get rid of (in my case, her) and not have this "farewell events" Just go. We are more annoyed at the way it's been done, trying to belittle the Queen, still wanting the titles, money etc.
> It could have been so different, they could have said they wanted a hiatus for a couple of years to be with Archie. To me, that would have been fine.
> The Queen, as Princess Elizabeth was in Malta for the first five years of her marriage as Prince Philip was stationed there. She lived a normal naval life there as a wife and mother.
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent a few years before and after marriage here on Anglesey when William had a normal job with the RAF Search and Rescue where they were left alone to get on with married life while doing some Royal duties. Then on to the Air Ambulance in Norfolk, before giving that up to become a full time Royal.
> It can be done. I think Harry will regret this.


I think from some of the looks captured on his face recently he’s already having regrets.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Believe me, there are a lot of annoyed Brits here, myself included. I do think the annoyance has died down a bit now though, we just want to get rid of (in my case, her) and not have this "farewell events" Just go. We are more annoyed at the way it's been done, trying to belittle the Queen, still wanting the titles, money etc.
> It could have been so different, they could have said they wanted a hiatus for a couple of years to be with Archie. To me, that would have been fine.
> The Queen, as Princess Elizabeth was in Malta for the first five years of her marriage as Prince Philip was stationed there. She lived a normal naval life there as a wife and mother.
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent a few years before and after marriage here on Anglesey when William had a normal job with the RAF Search and Rescue where they were left alone to get on with married life while doing some Royal duties. Then on to the Air Ambulance in Norfolk, before giving that up to become a full time Royal.
> It can be done. I think Harry will regret this.



This so much. It can be done, there was no public outrage (and why would there be), but of course that wasn't good enough for special snowflake Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I think those in uniform would stand as a sign of respect for Harrys military rank - he is Capt General, and not for him as such.  Maybe partners followed suit?  It was a formal occasion, with a defined audience it doesn’t surprise me that people were polite and behaved as normal.



That does make sense. I am still so outraged at their rude behaviour towards everyone who bent over backwards for them I want to see punishment LOL


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> I think those in uniform would stand as a sign of respect for Harrys military rank - he is Capt General, and not for him as such.  Maybe partners followed suit?  It was a formal occasion, with a defined audience it doesn’t surprise me that people were polite and behaved as normal.


Yes they should have been polite and applauded, but is a standing ovation expected. Maybe it is, I have never been to an event attended by royals.


----------



## Chagall

There was a lot of speculation on this thread as to wether she would be able to “show her face” back in the UK. Many, including me wondered if she would go back for these events for that very reason. Well that has been answered and I for one was wrong. Maybe she is smarter than we thought and knew there would be no repercussions for what many thought was reprehensible behaviour especially to QE2.


----------



## gelbergirl

duna said:


> Actually the only thing I'll miss of Harry is when he wears his various uniforms, men look so dashing in uniforms!



Agree.  It's a personal tragedy for Harry - he loved the military and it loved him back.  Meghan can never understand this.  I hope he continues to maintain his connection with the men and women with whom he served, those that continue to serve, and memorializing those that gave their lives.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> Believe me, there are a lot of annoyed Brits here, myself included. I do think the annoyance has died down a bit now though, we just want to get rid of (in my case, her) and not have this "farewell events" Just go. We are more annoyed at the way it's been done, trying to belittle the Queen, still wanting the titles, money etc.
> It could have been so different, they could have said they wanted a hiatus for a couple of years to be with Archie. To me, that would have been fine.
> The Queen, as Princess Elizabeth was in Malta for the first five years of her marriage as Prince Philip was stationed there. She lived a normal naval life there as a wife and mother.
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spent a few years before and after marriage here on Anglesey when William had a normal job with the RAF Search and Rescue where they were left alone to get on with married life while doing some Royal duties. Then on to the Air Ambulance in Norfolk, before giving that up to become a full time Royal.
> It can be done. I think Harry will regret this.


Being a navy wife? Spending time with Archie? The last thing these two wish for is a normal life... Remember they wanted to give up the sovereign grant to show the world a whole new way of being royal and go global... Royalty was only too small for them.


----------



## Eva1991

mdcx said:


> Are you absolutely joking? Women’s rights are about equality with men in terms of opportunity, pay etc and about reducing the imbalance against women by addressing realistically things like maternal health, maternity leave and childcare.
> 
> Someone criticising a desperate famewh-re for things she does in her endless quest for all the fame and all the $$$ is not anti-woman FGS! Get back to me when we have gender equality and then we can worry about whether criticising someone’s mothering is feminist or not.



Women's rights are more than what you're mentioning.

This thread keeps bashing Meghan and portraying Harry as a child unable to make decisions for himself and being manipulated by his narcissist wife. That's the stereotypical portrayal of "nasty, manipulative women who take adantage of good men" that feminism, amongst other things, is trying to fight.


----------



## Vintage Leather

We’ve speculated a few times on - what’s the long game here?

But how long will it be until the family is tired of this ish?

My question is - in the far distant future when William is Duke of Cornwall, is he going to be willing to supply Harry with 100% of his income?
Especially with three kids when his brother is off doing commercial ventures?

Will George be willing to keep Archie in private planes, especially if they have limited contact?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Eva1991 said:


> Women's rights are more than what you're mentioning.
> 
> This thread keeps bashing Meghan and portraying Harry as a child unable to make decisions for himself and being manipulated by his narcissist wife. That's the stereotypical portrayal of "nasty, manipulative women who take adantage of good men" that feminism, amongst other things, is trying to fight.


Please stop preaching, this is a gossip thread.


----------



## mdcx

I believe the ovation would be more as a mark of respect to Harry and all that he is giving up. Many in the audience probably think he will regret it.

On another note, it looks to me like M also got lip fillers. Definitely the top one looks like it. That plus the new veneers really make her smile different.


----------



## doni

Eva1991 said:


> Women's rights are more than what you're mentioning.
> 
> This thread keeps bashing Meghan and portraying Harry as a child unable to make decisions for himself and being manipulated by his narcissist wife. That's the stereotypical portrayal of "nasty, manipulative women who take adantage of good men" that feminism, amongst other things, is trying to fight.



Because women cannot be nasty? Because women are not smart enough to manipulate? Because women can only possibly be _nice_? And that’s not stereotypical?

I thought we were fighting nasty, manipulative men who take advantage of (and abuse, and belittle, and discriminate) good women, but whatever. Happy Women’s Day to everyone!


----------



## Eva1991

Clearblueskies said:


> Please stop preaching, this is a gossip thread.



I'll say what I want in a gossip thread.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Eva1991 said:


> I'll say what I want in a gossip thread.


Yes, you’re free to be as sanctimonious as you like provided you’re discussing the topic of the thread, which is Meghan and Harry, not how horrible you think other posters here are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

Straight-Laced said:


> I think this is an essential part of the "grand narrative" of their relationship that's going to be be played out sooner or later when Meghan gets safely clear of the BRF (with or without H) and gives her version of history : that is that modern Meghan never wanted to marry into such a horribly archaic and oppressive institution as the BRF ... but her love for H was SO BIG and his love for her was SO BIG that she had to overcome her profound reservations and GO WITH HER HEART and marry into Harry's 'awkward' family - sacrificing her freedoms and career for Harry's duty to his family and nation - and make the best of a difficult situation for the sake of their great big love.
> 
> I think that Harry bought this version of events too - that Meghan was a reluctant bride who loved him _despite_ the fact he was a British Prince.  So the escape plan was hatched as part of the marriage agreement and if things became unbearable for Meghan because of her great sacrifice he would do the right thing and sacrifice his birth family and duty for her happiness. Because of LOVE.
> 
> She wants the story of their relationship to go down in history as one of The Great Love Stories of All Time.  Iconic.  So the money, fame and status Meghan gained by marrying Harry are barely worth a passing mention compared to their grand story of love and sacrifice.


The only problem with this narrative for Meghan is she is the one who insisted she receive the title from the Queen.  She was able to complete some of the duties, just enough to prove to the Queen she deserved a title and to be called Royal.  Then she bailed.


----------



## maryg1

Eva1991 said:


> Women's rights are more than what you're mentioning.
> 
> This thread keeps bashing Meghan and portraying Harry as a child unable to make decisions for himself and being manipulated by his narcissist wife. That's the stereotypical portrayal of "nasty, manipulative women who take adantage of good men" that feminism, amongst other things, is trying to fight.


But we can’t deny that there are women who are nasty, manipulative and take advantage of good men. While I don’t think H is totally dumb, MM falls into the nasty and manipulative women section in my book.
I’d also like to add that feminist tried to teach that women don’t need to marry a man to reach success, but the feminist MM must have skipped those lines.


----------



## imgg

Looking at Meghan and Kate's outfits I have this observation.  It seems like with Meghan, the outfit wears her, almost defines her.  Where as with Kate, she wears the outfits.  Says a lot about their personalities and priorities.  Meghan seems like someone who only cares about how things appear, less about the cause, as long as she looks good and its about her.  Even when entering a building, Meghan has to look back to see who is looking at her.  She must be exhausting.


----------



## imgg

maryg1 said:


> But we can’t deny that there are women who are nasty, manipulative and take advantage of good men. While I don’t think H is totally dumb, MM falls into the nasty and manipulative women section in my book.
> I’d also like to add that feminist tried to teach that women don’t need to marry a man to reach success, but the feminist MM must have skipped those lines.


I personally am sick of the current narrative that all men are bad and all women are good.  There is a great blend of good people with all different races and genders and same with bad people.


----------



## 1LV

maryg1 said:


> But we can’t deny that there are women who are nasty, manipulative and take advantage of good men. While I don’t think H is totally dumb, MM falls into the nasty and manipulative women section in my book.
> I’d also like to add that feminist tried to teach that women don’t need to marry a man to reach success, but the feminist MM must have skipped those lines.


This is assuming she could have achieved this level of fame and fortune on her own.  I don’t think so, and I think she was smart enough to know it.  Harry was a means to an end, and a royal baby would be her ace in the hole.


----------



## duna

queennadine said:


> Equality means we call out BS equally, too. And that’s what I see in MM.
> 
> Like I’ve said, I gave her the benefit of the doubt and wanted to buy into the fairy tale. But her actions and lack of character have changed my mind.
> 
> With regards to leaving a baby behind: I’m an attorney and most of my friends are attorneys. I’m blessed enough to now be a SAHM, while my friends have gone back to work. I will say that every single one of them would stay home if they could. Taking care of a baby is hard work, but I can’t even imagine the luxury of having a nanny/nannies and all of the money and help you need at a moment’s notice. No excuse whatsoever to not bring him so you can at least see him in the morning and then give him a kiss goodnight before going to an event. No mother would fault that. But it’s cold to your baby and his family to leave him on another continent with a veritable stranger.
> 
> Back to the red dress event: this is my new favorite pic
> View attachment 4684774
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Harry’s hair, facial hair, and PDA while in uniform is very unbecoming. He does not show the bearing of a military officer.



This pic says it all: M ranting at him and H looking blank.... I bet that's pretty much what goes on in Vancouver. "Harry, go and buy sandwiches!" " Ok, in a minute Darling!" "NOW!"


----------



## marthastoo

Eva1991 said:


> Women's rights are more than what you're mentioning.
> 
> This thread keeps bashing Meghan and portraying Harry as a child unable to make decisions for himself and being manipulated by his narcissist wife. That's the stereotypical portrayal of "nasty, manipulative women who take adantage of good men" that feminism, amongst other things, is trying to fight.


I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.  

I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.

The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.


----------



## imgg

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.


That's not the reason people dislike Meghan.  I don't think anyone here hates her (that's a strong word).  If you read all the posts, there is a long list of reasons of dislike- most coming from statements or actions from Meghan, not surface stuff like Botox etc.


----------



## marthastoo

imgg said:


> That's not the reason people dislike Meghan.  I don't think anyone here hates her (that's a strong word).  If you read all the posts, there is a long list of reasons, most coming from statements or actions from Meghan, not surface stuff like Botox etc.



Oh, I am well aware of why they hate her (yes, I'll use that word).  I've read every single page of this 1,579 page thread.  I'm saying stick to behaviors that you dislike, not her appearance.  IMO, natch.


----------



## Chagall

As far as WID is concerned, it is about how women are treated right across the board. By men and other women. Often women treat other women terribly due to jealousy in many many forms.That is NOT REMOTELY what is going on here. She is disliked because of her behaviour!


----------



## imgg

marthastoo said:


> Oh, I am well aware of why they hate her (yes, I'll use that word).  I've read every single page of this 1,579 page thread.  I'm saying stick to behaviors that you dislike, not her appearance.  IMO, natch.


Yeah, but this is a gossip site.  Everyone comments on celebrities about what they have or have not had done.  Even the ones you like.


----------



## Sharont2305

They went to church in Windsor with the Queen today
H... "Now, remember to behave appropriately darling"
M... "Oh, whatever!"


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4685148


They are like little kids playing dress up.


----------



## marthastoo

imgg said:


> Yeah, but this is a gossip site.  Everyone comments on celebrities about what they have or have not had done.  Even the ones you like.


I get that.  I'm just responding to Eva's comment about IWD and what I've noticed about how a large group of (presumably almost all) women use language and syntax that assume if a woman does something to alter her appearance or physique, it's something to be sneered at and mocked.  JMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4684505
> 
> View attachment 4684506
> 
> View attachment 4684507


Too much red for me too.....even the lipstick is the same shade.  but I do like the earrings


----------



## imgg

marthastoo said:


> I get that.  I'm just responding to Eva's comment about IWD and what I've noticed about how a large group of (presumably almost all) women use language and syntax that assume if a woman does something to alter her appearance or physique, it's something that to be sneered at and mocked.  JMO


Yeah, I hear what you're saying.  So many people alter their appearance these days, you can't help but notice.  It's not as big of deal as it used to be.  Everyone where I live has fish lips.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4685148



At the danger of being anti-feminist and hostile, I'm so, so tired of the sh*t they are pulling. And I don't have a freaking idea why Harry goes along with it. After all he was raised within the firm and knows how things work, and does he really HAVE to push to the limit with his very patient and accomodating family the 5 days he's in the country?


----------



## Blyen

Sharont2305 said:


> They went to church in Windsor with the Queen today
> H... "Now, remember to behave appropriately darling"
> M... "Oh, whatever!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4685143


Harry looks exhausted...


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> A friend sent me this from Twitter, made me laugh out loud. Definitely has new teeth...



why would she get new teeth?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Oh yes, Bob Hope's ski jump nose.  An tiny upturned nose was a very popular rhinoplasty in the 60s, but no one looked good with it.  Too silly and unnatural.
> 
> Meghan's nose, in my opinion, is one of her best assets.  It suits her because it's almost what she was born with, just more refined now.
> 
> I've noticed a return to women wanting an upturned tip and I thought perhaps Meg's popularity at the time, had something to do with it.


no offense to anyone who was born with a ski jump nose, but I can't see creating one if you don't have it....it's not one of her best features IMO.  but I also don't find her beautiful....good looking, yes but not beautiful to me


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> I think this is an essential part of the "grand narrative" of their relationship that's going to be be played out sooner or later when Meghan gets safely clear of the BRF (with or without H) and gives her version of history : that is that modern Meghan never wanted to marry into such a horribly archaic and oppressive institution as the BRF ... but her love for H was SO BIG and his love for her was SO BIG that she had to overcome her profound reservations and GO WITH HER HEART and marry into Harry's 'awkward' family - sacrificing her freedoms and career for Harry's duty to his family and nation - and make the best of a difficult situation for the sake of their great big love.
> 
> I think that Harry bought this version of events too - that Meghan was a reluctant bride who loved him _despite_ the fact he was a British Prince.  So the escape plan was hatched as part of the marriage agreement and if things became unbearable for Meghan because of her great sacrifice he would do the right thing and sacrifice his birth family and duty for her happiness. Because of LOVE.
> 
> She wants the story of their relationship to go down in history as one of The Great Love Stories of All Time.  Iconic.  So the money, fame and status Meghan gained by marrying Harry are barely worth a passing mention compared to their grand story of love and sacrifice.


you jest but there are people who believe that she fell in love with a man who just happened to be a prince.  I saw some actress on TV saying just that


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At the danger of being anti-feminist and hostile,


I guess this is the new version of “if you don’t like them you’re racist”...


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> why would she get new teeth?


All the time she was supposed to be spending family time quietly with Harry and Archie she was running around like a chicken with her head cut off getting plastic surgery (perhaps) Botox and new teeth. These procedures take time. Hope it didn’t cut in too much with her bonding time with Archie.


----------



## mia55

sdkitty said:


> why would she get new teeth?


Omg, looks like a person trying to get adjusted with their new dentures


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> All the time she was supposed to be spending family time quietly with Harry and Archie she was running around like a chicken with her head cut off getting plastic surgery (perhaps) Botox and new teeth. These procedures take time. Hope it didn’t cut in too much with her bonding time with Archie.


She also arrived to the UK on Monday, four days before their engagements started. Archie really did get left in the dust.


----------



## limom

Eva1991 said:


> Women's rights are more than what you're mentioning.
> 
> This thread keeps bashing Meghan and portraying Harry as a child unable to make decisions for himself and being manipulated by his narcissist wife. That's the stereotypical portrayal of "nasty, manipulative women who take adantage of good men" that feminism, amongst other things, is trying to fight.


There are women who are con artists and narcissistic.
Being a feminist does not mean excusing bad behaviors from women.
Plus this is a gossip thread, none of us really knows her at all.
I don’t think that he is a good man being manipulated, I think that he is a willing moron.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> A friend sent me this from Twitter, made me laugh out loud. Definitely has new teeth...



Thanks for this, really points out the new chompers and how she isn't used to them. Reminds me when I got braces--everything felt weird.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4685148


wow.....Harry would have to know what they were doing


----------



## kemilia

Lucille68 said:


> Harry looks terrible.  His eyes look so sad.


Whatever sparkle he had is gone, pretty darn sad. Wonder what she's grimacing at.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> Whatever sparkle he had is gone, pretty darn sad. Wonder what she's grimacing at.


He probably said no


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Thanks for this, really points out the new chompers and how she isn't used to them. Reminds me when I got braces--everything felt weird.


I don't get it....I think someone said she had pretty white veneers years ago.  why mess with a good thing?  and for a biracial woman to make her lips fuller?  seems unnecessary to me.  but what do I know?  
If this speculation on all the work she has had done it true, then it would seem she is pretty insecure.  she must know her prince charming is losing his looks but she is so concerned about keeping hers?


----------



## kemilia

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.


1. I don't hate Meghan, not crazy about her based on what I'd read BEFORE finding this thread.
2. I don't get Botox.
3. What I do hate is generalizations.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> Too much red for me too.....even the lipstick is the same shade.  but I do like the earrings


Earrings are great. Her bag and shoes should have been black, needed contrast against the dress, which fits finally.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it....I think someone said she had pretty white veneers years ago.  why mess with a good thing?  and for a biracial woman to make her lips fuller?  seems unnecessary to me.  but what do I know?
> If this speculation on all the work she has had done it true, then it would seem she is pretty insecure.  she must know her prince charming is losing his looks but she is so concerned about keeping hers?


Someone earlier said veneers need to be replaced/updated every couple of years, that's the way they are. These look like pretty clunky replacements, imo. Her smile was better before.


----------



## Roxanna

Sharont2305 said:


> They went to church in Windsor with the Queen today
> H... "Now, remember to behave appropriately darling"
> M... "Oh, whatever!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4685143


He looks really either tired or not well. She, on the other hand looks blossoming and like she's having fun. I wonder what caused  such disposition...


----------



## Tootsie17

1LV said:


> This is assuming she could have achieved this level of fame and fortune on her own.  I don’t think so, and I think she was smart enough to know it.  Harry was a means to an end, and a royal baby would be her ace in the hole.


My thoughts exactly!


----------



## sdkitty

Roxanna said:


> He looks really either tired or not well. She, on the other hand looks blossoming and like she's having fun. I wonder what caused  such disposition...


she's enjoying all the attention?  but then why leave all this?


----------



## Jktgal

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.



The whole forum is group think - that's the point of subforums. I'd be you in one of the Hermes threads.


----------



## lalame

doni said:


> Exactly and in a nutshell.
> So I don’t get all that coverage saying they wanted out, that they want privacy, seclusion... they wanted nothing of the sort...



I think this is a bit of politics on the media’s part. Though H & M won’t get to be part of the royal rota and get those protections after leaving, I’m sure journalists still feel they need to play nice or hold back punches so they don’t alienate relationships with the other royals. So they continue on with the “official story.” 

In America, I don’t really see a desire to go below the surface with this. Pretty girl, royalty, women’s rights blah blah... it’s like we’ll gladly just take all the good stuff and build on that for good feels. But the veneer is starting to crack... I’m seeing more salty coverage than I used to.


----------



## lalame

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.



I think you’re taking it a little too seriously. I hate on her behavior here, then go dig her style choices or lewks in her style thread. All can be true, no one deserves unequivocal hate or love all the time. Regarding PS this is what I’m witnessing:

Everyone: looks like she may have had botox/veneers in Vancouver. Doesn’t quite look right.
You: why are you hating on plastic surgery?? People do it all the time and it’s OKAY! You’re an awful groupthinking hive.

Okay...


----------



## Coconuts40

If Katie Holmes could get away from Tom Cruise which I think was one of the best masterminded separations, then Harry can get away from Meghan.  The BRF can help get Harry out of this mess if he just asks for help.  This is not going to end well for Harry.  His eyes say it all and I do worry for him.


----------



## Sharont2305

Coconuts40 said:


> If Katie Holmes could get away from Tom Cruise which I think was one of the best masterminded separations, then Harry can get away from Meghan.  The BRF can help get Harry out of this mess if he just asks for help.  This is not going to end well for Harry.  His eyes say it all and I do worry for him.



I worry for him too to be honest. He's already looks worn down.


----------



## Jktgal

It's incredibly impressive how her word salad can make my head AND eyes hurt...

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...n-markle-school-visit-internation-womens-day/


----------



## sdkitty

Coconuts40 said:


> If Katie Holmes could get away from Tom Cruise which I think was one of the best masterminded separations, then Harry can get away from Meghan.  The BRF can help get Harry out of this mess if he just asks for help.  This is not going to end well for Harry.  His eyes say it all and I do worry for him.


yes, if and when he's ready to get out.....I'm speculating of course but I think while he may not be happy, he is still probably under her control....and now there is a child involved


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

Coconuts40 said:


> If Katie Holmes could get away from Tom Cruise which I think was one of the best masterminded separations, then Harry can get away from Meghan.  The BRF can help get Harry out of this mess if he just asks for help.  This is not going to end well for Harry.  His eyes say it all and I do worry for him.





Sharont2305 said:


> I worry for him too to be honest. He's already looks worn down.


This behavior doesn't get better only worse.  The more you allow one person to take such strong dominance in a relationship, the harder it is to make changes.  You have to draw your boundaries early with this type of personality, which Harry clearly did not.  You can tell he is smitten with her, but I think some of the glitter is already fading.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I can’t help but wonder why Kate doesn’t get the same defense when Markle stans drag her left and right? 

Alas.


----------



## Emeline

Sharont2305 said:


> I worry for him too to be honest. He's already looks worn down.


He really does look weary. 
I think all the shananagins with M were  exciting, new and edgy.  Look at us!!! 
And it was really fun until it wasn't anymore.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jktgal said:


> It's incredibly impressive how her word salad can make my head AND eyes hurt...
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...n-markle-school-visit-internation-womens-day/


Is the article making fun?  because transcribing it word for word like this shows just how vacuous it is


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m starting to wonder if Harry is on drugs.


----------



## Sterntalerli

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m starting to wonder if Harry is on drugs.


How come?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

kemilia said:


> Thanks for this, really points out the new chompers and how she isn't used to them. Reminds me when I got braces--everything felt weird.


Maybe she got those clear braces? It definitely looks awkward, but I'm not a dental person, I don't know why


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m starting to wonder if Harry is on drugs.


I would hope its prescription medication if he is.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sterntalerli said:


> How come?


He looks skinny, unkempt, and emotional.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> In America, I don’t really see a desire to go below the surface with this. Pretty girl, royalty, women’s rights blah blah... it’s like we’ll gladly just take all the good stuff and build on that for good feels. But the veneer is starting to crack... I’m seeing more salty coverage than I used to.



That's it exactly, the coverage in America is glossy and lasts all of 10 seconds. _Pretty pictures!_ Then on to the next pretty picture of some other celebrity.  The challenge they have ahead of them to build a business and a not-for-profit in the U.S. is that they'll be fighting and competing for press attention in the same way as all other celebrities.  They aren't going to be representing the UK and the Queen on American soil. They won't be going to official events or dinners with top of the news coverage.

For awhile, they will definitely be interesting curiosities in the U.S. _Look, there's the regular guy formerly known as Prince Harry. _So, they'll get quite a bit of coverage when they do their interview on Ellen or wherever or Meghan's first acting gig.  Harry will give lots of paid speeches for the first year. Then, afterwards, we'll see how it goes, when they join the pantheon of celebrities in a huge country with a huge number of celebrities and a collective short attention span.  Are they interesting enough, talented enough, relevant enough to be invited back for more speeches and better, higher profile acting gigs?  Are they an interesting interview and do they have anything at all interesting and relevant to say? Do they actually establish a not-for-profit that works and isn't just about photo opp philanthropy and paying some of their expenses?  So, I look at the two of them, Harry in particular, and think_ have you lost your mind?_  You gave up your life and family in the UK, your official role in the country, along with the privilege of serving the public, to become just another celebrity in a country filled with them and at which you are going to have to work, like you've never had to work, to maintain.

I expect they will be calling up Granny every few months to say they happen to have an opening in their schedule and are there any events they can _collaborate_ on, and show up in the UK, to refresh their royalness and remind everyone that Harry is still 6th in line for the throne!


----------



## muchstuff

kemilia said:


> Someone earlier said veneers need to be replaced/updated every couple of years, that's the way they are. These look like pretty clunky replacements, imo. Her smile was better before.


I’ve had my veneers for fifteen years, replacement  is usually about the ten year mark.


----------



## imgg

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Maybe she got those clear braces? It definitely looks awkward, but I'm not a dental person, I don't know why


My bet is she has new veneers.  They are much whiter than the previous ones, which I liked better because they looked more natural.  Since they are fairly new, it takes a while for your mouth to get used to it.


----------



## threadbender

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.


I don't hate anyone. I do not care for their actions. I really dislike how they appear to use others and to disregard their child for celebrity. But, I do not hate them.


----------



## threadbender

Coconuts40 said:


> If Katie Holmes could get away from Tom Cruise which I think was one of the best masterminded separations, then Harry can get away from Meghan.  The BRF can help get Harry out of this mess if he just asks for help.  This is not going to end well for Harry.  His eyes say it all and I do worry for him.


And, she got away with her child. Just sayin' Although, even these days, for some reason, it doesn't look good for a father to "take" the child from the mother.


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> I don't hate anyone. I do not care for their actions. I really dislike how they appear to use others and to disregard their child for celebrity. But, I do not hate them.


agree....I would not spend my energy hating someone I don't even know and whose actions don't impact me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Coconuts40 said:


> If Katie Holmes could get away from Tom Cruise which I think was one of the best masterminded separations, then Harry can get away from Meghan.  The BRF can help get Harry out of this mess if he just asks for help.  This is not going to end well for Harry.  His eyes say it all and I do worry for him.


That was the best escape ever!


----------



## scarlet555

threadbender said:


> I don't hate anyone. I do not care for their actions. I really dislike how they appear to use others and to disregard their child for celebrity. But, I do not hate them.



On a gossip forum, most commenters don’t ‘hate’, that’s what I believe because I don’t hate her.  Some of us might comment on a b!tchy move she makes and become critical of her because of what she says and point out any hypocrisy or lies she wants us to believe.  I wouldn’t be surprised if most of us hoped we were imagining most of what she was doing... but we don’t seem to be.  Yes we don’t know her personally, but there is a lot of information on her out there online that we are just pointing out.


----------



## scarlet555

kemilia said:


> That was the best escape ever!



I thought it was a contract expiration more than an escape!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I just read they were given standing ovations at the Royal Albert Hall. Why???


THANK YOU!!! .. when I saw this in the Daily Mail, I asked exactly that question .. WHY????


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> On a gossip forum, most commenters don’t ‘hate’, that’s what I believe because I don’t hate her.  Some of us might comment on a b!tchy move she makes and become critical of her because of what she says and point out any hypocrisy or lies she wants us to believe.  I wouldn’t be surprised if most of us hoped we were imagining most of what she was doing... but we don’t seem to be.  Yes we don’t know her personally, but there is a lot of information on her out there online that we are just pointing out.


I don't know her but from what I have seen, it seems to me that she's an opportunist and I don't like that kind of person.  But again, I don't hate her.  Why would I waste that kind of energy on a person I don't know and who may be a better person than what I believe her to be?


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!!! .. when I saw this in the Daily Mail, I asked exactly that question .. WHY????



tbh that doesn’t surprise me. People tend to get into the celebratory mood for events and especially when a celebrity is there... and a standing ovation is infectious, like the wave (). I wouldn’t be surprised if half the people standing up clapping went home and gossiped about the couple later. I know I’ve done that before, like stood up just to show my respect for people coming but it wasn’t a gesture of personal support of anything.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!!! .. when I saw this in the Daily Mail, I asked exactly that question .. WHY????





lalame said:


> tbh that doesn’t surprise me. People tend to get into the celebratory mood for events and especially when a celebrity is there... and *a standing ovation is infectious,* like the wave (). I wouldn’t be surprised if half the people standing up clapping went home and gossiped about the couple later. I know I’ve done that before, like stood up just to show my respect for people coming but it wasn’t a gesture of personal support of anything.


This.
And was alcohol involved?


----------



## redney

I'm late to the pics in this thread but noticed Harry's hair looks fuller, at least from these angles.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

scarlet555 said:


> I thought it was a contract expiration more than an escape!


It was an escape, her father (an attorney) had some hand in it.


----------



## Eva1991

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.



Thank you *marthastoo*.

I thought a bit before posting here because it seems like this is not a gossip thread anymore; it's a hate MM thread.

TBH, I'm not a huge MM fan. But the diagnoses being made here (that MM has narcissistic personality disorder for example) are unsolicited to say the least. I doubt the posters here are all certified therapists _and _have examined Meghan in order to come up with such a diagnosis.

In a gossip thread, all opinions are (supposed to be) welcome; in this thread however it seems that whoever doesn't agree with the majority is attacked post after post. No wonder most MM supporters don't post here!

As *marthastoo *said, not everyone hates MM (or Harry for that matter). It seems even the Queen likes them! They were together at church this morning! The press and some passionate commentators have blown Megxit out of proportion. The BRF seems to be doing fine.


----------



## queennadine

Good Lord, I don’t think any of us HATE her. No, I’m not a doctor just like I’m not a fashion expert of cosmetologist, but I can comment about her outward actions and appearances and draw inferences based on both. 

I certainly welcome all sorts of opinions in this thread. Frankly, I’d love to know what people like about her. Honestly. 

Just because I personally don’t buy the feminist/diversity-driven/philanthropist spiel she’s trying cram down everyone’s throat doesn’t make me a hater. 

What I DON’T want to read about is posts bashing those of us who dare criticize her.


----------



## lalame

Eva1991 said:


> Thank you *marthastoo*.
> 
> I thought a bit before posting here because it seems like this is not a gossip thread anymore; it's a hate MM thread.
> 
> TBH, I'm not a huge MM fan. But the diagnoses being made here (that MM has narcissistic personality disorder for example) are unsolicited to say the least. I doubt the posters here are all certified therapists _and _have examined Meghan in order to come up with such a diagnosis.
> 
> In a gossip thread, all opinions are (supposed to be) welcome; in this thread however it seems that whoever doesn't agree with the majority is attacked post after post. No wonder most MM supporters don't post here!
> 
> As *marthastoo *said, not everyone hates MM (or Harry for that matter). It seems even the Queen likes them! They were together at church this morning! The press and some passionate commentators have blown Megxit out of proportion. The BRF seems to be doing fine.



I totally have empathy for what you are saying. It can seem overwhelming when one opinion greatly outnumbers another in one thread. I came in here pretty surprised myself about the negativity and did feel attacked too. But since then I’ve agreed with many of the observations here, disagreed with some, shared some positive thoughts about MM, etc and still live to tell the tale. No one is attacking you... there are just a lot of dissenting opinions to yours on certain topics, and to feel less attacked, keep it about the topic and not about the posters’ motivations, axes to grind, etc. E.g. I don’t believe anyone has called you a Stan simply for sharing some positive messages, so by that logic, ya know, don’t call people haters. Let’s make it about H&M, not about each other.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I just read they were given standing ovations at the Royal Albert Hall. Why???


I finally figured that out.  This was his patronage given to him by Prince Philip.  I would have hoped that they would be silent in light of the fact that he blew off the charity concert of this patronage so they could go to the Disney premiere and beg Bob Iger for a job.

@Straight-Laced Totally agree with your post.  I think she showed what a hypocrite she was regarding the archaic family as she certainly enjoyed the prestige  and the curtsies given to her.  I do believe that she may not have known all the intricacies of protocol, but that's on her and Harry and rush job wedding and no  preparation.    The problem was that reality of  royal life didn't match up to her imagined royal life and that is what her disappointment stems from.  She thought she would get a tiara with her morning tea in bed.  

I have never understood how she could not cope and exhibit proper behavior at any event. (No wonder she was not a success in the acting world if she could not adapt to situations and new people, which are all requirements of getting an acting job.) The pushing and shoving of her (willing) husband and outright rudeness should have been dealt with immediately.  Perhaps it was, and she was so angered by it, she resolved not to change her behavior in any way and speed up the plans for an exit.  At any rate, she hasn't changed that a bit and is still doing it.  Her behavior at Royal Albert Hall was, according to those who are familiar with military protocol, inappropriate.  The companions of the military are not supposed to wear red, which she did.  The companions are not supposed to hold hands, hold onto or lean on the uniform wearing person.  She did all of the above.  All it did was look very awkward and he looked like a child dressed up in his father's uniform (which actually was the case) and it didn't fit him very well either.


----------



## bellecate

Jktgal said:


> It's incredibly impressive how her word salad can make my head AND eyes hurt...
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...n-markle-school-visit-internation-womens-day/



This line in her speech tells me how highly she thinks of herself. " I encourage and empower each of you to really stand in your truth, to stand for what is right—to continue to respect each other."
That 'she' empowers them.


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> This line in her speech tells me how highly she thinks of herself. " I encourage and empower each of you to really stand in your truth, to stand for what is right—to continue to respect each other."
> That 'she' empowers them.


I caught that, too.  Awfully nice of her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

^ So much ICK.


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> This line in her speech tells me how highly she thinks of herself. " I encourage and empower each of you to really *stand in your truth*, to stand for what is right—to continue to respect each other."
> That 'she' empowers them.


HA  - oh the irony ..


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> This line in her speech tells me how highly she thinks of herself. " I encourage and empower each of you to really stand in your truth, to stand for what is right—to continue to respect each other."
> That 'she' empowers them.



Superwoman!  That's why she was wearing the cape.



1LV said:


> I caught that, too.  Awfully nice of her.



This little speech is an explanation for the exit.  She is standing for her truth, and what is right, but I'm not sure about the respect for each other.  lol!  Once again it is all about HER.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I worry for him too to be honest. He's already looks worn down.


I think the event yesterday resonated with him in a painful way.  No more pints with the military boys.  No more uniforms and playing soldier. No more salutes.   It should have made him ashamed that when he had the chance to do something for the families of the fallen, he blew them off for an event that only made them laughingstock.


----------



## ladysarah

Eva1991 said:


> Thank you *marthastoo*.
> 
> I thought a bit before posting here because it seems like this is not a gossip thread anymore; it's a hate MM thread.
> 
> TBH, I'm not a huge MM fan. But the diagnoses being made here (that MM has narcissistic personality disorder for example) are unsolicited to say the least. I doubt the posters here are all certified therapists _and _have examined Meghan in order to come up with such a diagnosis.
> 
> In a gossip thread, all opinions are (supposed to be) welcome; in this thread however it seems that whoever doesn't agree with the majority is attacked post after post. No wonder most MM supporters don't post here!
> 
> As *marthastoo *said, not everyone hates MM (or Harry for that matter). It seems even the Queen likes them! They were together at church this morning! The press and some passionate commentators have blown Megxit out of proportion. The BRF seems to be doing fine.


I like them too!  And wish them all the best. I don’t really follow or post in the gossip threads, and stumbled on this accidentally, but I will say they are still fairly popular in my circle of acquaintances...


----------



## lalame

bellecate said:


> This line in her speech tells me how highly she thinks of herself. " I encourage and empower each of you to really stand in your truth, to stand for what is right—to continue to respect each other."
> That 'she' empowers them.



Ugh this tone annoys me so much. Megs, you were a regular actress just 3 years ago (not even a particularly well-respected one) and marrying into a family conferred you with a sense of authority. You decided to "give up" that authority... so why are you talking to people as if you still retain this position. There are many stars who are UNICEF spokespeople or whatnot and they manage to deliver the same message without the sanctimonious tone. One example, from my IG feed:


----------



## marthastoo

ladysarah said:


> I like them too!  And wish them all the best. I don’t really follow or post in the gossip threads, and stumbled on this accidentally, but I will say they are still fairly popular in my circle of acquaintances...


I swore I wasn't going to post again, but what the hell.  I knew that as soon as I said people hate Meghan, there'd be about 10 people who will huffily write back that they don't.  It's the totality of the tone on this thread.  Um, sorry, but if you tell us you wake up in the middle of the night to post some random thought waxing poetic about your diagnosis of her narcissism, crackling about her pit stains, snarkily commenting about how's she's still fat (oh, sorry, I mean how she still hasn't lost her baby weight), or how you're personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection and she better clear out of your country goshdarnit - I'm going to go out on a limb and say you pretty much hate her. 

I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me. 

This thread is an unmitigated hatefest and for those who keep asking, golly, where are all her "stans?" Well, they don't feel welcomed to post.  Not that I would calll myself a stan (such a stupid word).  I definitely have problems with some of things she has done, but I honestly do not understand that crazed dislike for her.  I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol


----------



## Katel

I had not seen examples of her insisting to be first until these. She’s training him very well.




Sorry HM lovers, I can’t resist lol - take it with a grain of salt pls


(there are so many others, I can’t attach them all... there’s one of them with her doing it just after the wedding!)


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> I swore I wasn't going to post again, but what the hell.  I knew that as soon as I said people hate Meghan, there'd be about 10 people who will huffily write back that they don't.  It's the totality of the tone on this thread.  Um, sorry, but if you tell us you wake up in the middle of the night to post some random thought waxing poetic about your diagnosis of her narcissism, crackling about her pit stains, snarkily commenting about how's she's still fat (oh, sorry, I mean how she still hasn't lost her baby weight), or how you're personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection and she better clear out of your country goshdarnit - I'm going to go out on a limb and say you pretty much hate her.
> I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me.
> 
> This thread is an unmitigated hatefest and for those who keep asking, golly, where are all her "stans?" Well, they don't feel welcomed to post.  Not that I would calll myself a stan (such a stupid word).  I definitely have problems with some of things she has done, but I honestly do not understand that crazed dislike for her.  I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol



right, people here wake up in the middle of the night and post nasty things about "M"....
If you say so
Posting catty or even judgmental comments doesn't necessarily equal hate.  Hate is strong word.
I for one would never lose sleep over this woman.....just come here for entertainment


----------



## lalame

marthastoo said:


> I swore I wasn't going to post again, but what the hell.  I knew that as soon as I said people hate Meghan, there'd be about 10 people who will huffily write back that they don't.  It's the totality of the tone on this thread.  Um, sorry, but if you tell us you wake up in the middle of the night to post some random thought waxing poetic about your diagnosis of her narcissism, crackling about her pit stains, snarkily commenting about how's she's still fat (oh, sorry, I mean how she still hasn't lost her baby weight), or how you're personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection and she better clear out of your country goshdarnit - I'm going to go out on a limb and say you pretty much hate her.
> 
> I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me.
> 
> This thread is an unmitigated hatefest and for those who keep asking, golly, where are all her "stans?" Well, they don't feel welcomed to post.  Not that I would calll myself a stan (such a stupid word).  I definitely have problems with some of things she has done, but I honestly do not understand that crazed dislike for her.  I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol



You're making a lot of assumptions here. You know there is a wide range of people here, from different time zones and travel experiences posting right? What reads as middle of the night to you was my morning 2 weeks ago and other posters' afternoon.

Secondly, I'm not sure what your hating the Kardashians has anything to do with this. Yes, that's "you" - what does it have to do with me? There are many women who love and work in fashion but wouldn't "waste their time" on a forum to discuss purses. What conclusion can be drawn about whether someone does or doesn't participate in a forum. 

Seriously, if you think it's a waste of time for us to comment in this forum.. why are you wasting your time reading it just to stew??? IDGI.


----------



## Mrs.Z

OMG the Megxit Remix was HILARIOUS!


----------



## mdcx

Wow, those are horrible ways for M to manhandle H. Reminds me of a mother who is like “no Johnny we don’t have time to look in the toy shop window, let’s GO!”
And she knows people can see her, right? But she doesn’t care that she is degrading him in front of his people.


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> He looks skinny, unkempt, and emotional.


In one of the Bon Jovi pics, his jeans were so baggy (no butt pretty much) and he even pulled them up, which I thought was pretty sad BUT he is "just call me Harry" now and pulling up baggy jeans is what  guys do. Losing weight and having an unkempt appearance--ummm, not good, something's going on (IMO).


----------



## bisousx

Katel said:


> I had not seen examples of her insisting to be first until these. She’s training him very well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry HM lovers, I can’t resist lol - take it with a grain of salt pls




Ahahahaha @ the megxit remix. The guy who made it is a true artist.. so entertaining with the queen and all.


----------



## mdcx

I think it makes some people feel superior to fly into a gossip thread, drop their “you are all jealous/unattractive/poor/single (or whatever the insult of the day is), you are hating on a poor innocent flower, shame on you, do something good for humanity instead, women supporting women, caramel frappuccino, avocado toast, word salad...” and fly out again feeling all shiny and clean.
Personally, I make solid use of the ignore button so don’t see most of these special posts


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pixiejenna

Emeline said:


> This. He would  have been fine at Frogmore Cottage with nanny.
> I still can't wrap my brain around M bringing her makeup guy, but leaving her baby.



It’s pretty simple Megan’s #1 priority is Megan and anything that stands in the way of her own attention will be left behind. If she brought Archie the attention would be on him and not her.



hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4684490
> 
> View attachment 4684491
> 
> View attachment 4684492
> 
> View attachment 4684496
> 
> View attachment 4684502



Man she should be dazzling in these photos a perfect opportunity to show off her acting chops, her phony forced smile is barely Hallmark channel worthy. 



Blyen said:


> Harry looks exhausted...



I think it’s a combination of dealing with Megan and the realization of what he’s giving up is finally hitting him at the same time.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> Wow, those are horrible ways for M to manhandle H. Reminds me of a mother who is like “no Johnny we don’t have time to look in the toy shop window, let’s GO!”
> And she knows people can see her, right? But she doesn’t care that she is degrading him in front of his people.


I just see it as her wanting to be the leader and for him to follow her and introduce her first, etc. It comes across that she is superior and more important than him. So bizarre. I wonder how they come across as a couple in-person. Do people they are in the company of see it the same way?


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I just see it as her wanting to be the leader and for him to follow her and introduce her first, etc. It comes across that she is superior and more important than him. So bizarre. I wonder how they come across as a couple in-person. Do people they are in the company of see it the same way?


seems pretty undeniable from these videos she wants to be in charge....he wants to step over and talk to someone and she hangs on his arm, stopping him from going there?  what?


----------



## Katel

^ This is the 4:05 minute clip...


Sorry for the repeat... Not adept at gifs and such LOL but there are just so many available out there and I had not seen them until today.

My opinion is she never wanted to be in the royal family (like the remix says  ) and she and Harry plotted their exit waaay before the wedding. Problem - it has not turned out the way they planned -and Harry is screwed.


----------



## lalame

Is it perhaps a royal decorum thing - like men stand up when a woman enters the room - for him to let her go first? Edit: ok watched ALL the gifs here.... even if it is, yes, the way they do it is really awkward and seems scripted.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> ^ This is the 4:05 minute clip...
> 
> 
> Sorry for the repeat... Not adept at gifs and such LOL but there are just so many available out there and I had not seen them until today.
> 
> my opinion is she never wanted to be in the royal family (like the remix says  ) and she and Harry plotted their exit waaay before the wedding. Problem - it has not turned out the way they planned -and Harry is screwed.



are super successful networkers usually this pushy?  I can't believe he doesn't mind all this pushing and pulling - pulling him back, stepping front of him.....


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Is it perhaps a royal decorum thing - like men stand up when a woman enters the room - for him to let her go first?


and if he doesn't, she reminds him by stepping in front of him?


----------



## Chagall

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m starting to wonder if Harry is on drugs.


Perhaps it is because he has gone off his anti-depressants which causes anti depressant withdrawel syndrome.


----------



## mdcx

Harry should go first as he is the Royal and they are at these events as Royals.


----------



## mdcx

Chagall said:


> Perhaps it is because he has gone off his anti-depressants which causes anti depressant withdrawel syndrome.


He does not look well. Ime with depression, not looking well is often a sign that things are falling apart. I really hope he is under the care of professionals regards his mental health.


----------



## Katel

To those who love Meghan, you may have realized that I’m not a fan of her behavior.  Not much of a fan of Harry‘s behavior anymore either. Ahh, I had such high hopes for them.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Harry should go first as he is the Royal and they are at these events as Royals.


Absolutely, this is protocol. The blood Royal goes first be it man or woman. Commander Timothy Lawrence is always greeted after his wife Princess Anne. Though I don't think I've seen it myself as yet, I'm sure Jack is greeted after Princess Eugenie. The same with Beatrice and her fiancé.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marthastoo said:


> I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me. I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol



Wow, you are so superior to the rest of us in the thread. Should we all clear our reasons for posting here with you before we reply?

Also, in the Kim K thread...
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
so can we stop preaching?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I wonder if Harry has seen his brother since he's been back.


----------



## Sharont2305

Cavalier Girl said:


> I wonder if Harry has seen his brother since he's been back.


If he has it was probably before Meghan graced this country with her presence.
Tomorrow will be interesting, it's the Commonwealth Service. I think it's live on TV so I shall be watching, and hopefully not grimacing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, this is protocol. The blood Royal goes first be it man or woman. Commander Timothy Lawrence is always greeted after his wife Princess Anne. Though I don't think I've seen it myself as yet, I'm sure Jack is greeted after Princess Eugenie. The same with Beatrice and her fiancé.


I guess no one told her......or she doesn't agree with the custom 
In any case, when she pushes in front of her husband he graciously steps back for her


----------



## threadbender

scarlet555 said:


> I thought it was a contract expiration more than an escape!


I think the not publicly dating after the divorce for a certain amount of time was the contract.


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> I think the not publicly dating after the divorce for a certain amount of time was the contract.


Katie had to escape from not only her husband but a powerful and evil organzation.....Harry's  biggest challenge in leaving her would likely be little Archie and who would get custody


----------



## CeeJay

*personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection* _Do you live in the UK?  If so, you might just feel a little bit different about this as it's pretty darn expensive to live there, so yeah .. it is their HARD-EARNED money and WHY should they have to spend it on 2 people who have turned their backs on the institution for which protection is provided?_
*she better clear out of your country goshdarnit* _Do you live in Canada?  Again, if you did, how would you feel if you had to start paying for their protection out of the taxes that you pay into your country .. and not originally for the protection of 2 people who could really give a rats-a@@ about the Country and what the needs are of the 'real' Canadian people?!?!_
I loathe Kim Kardashian  _Loathe and Hate?? .. very different meanings and for that matter, yes .. I am not a fan of the Kardashian's .. do I loathe them? .. no, but I do get annoyed when I have to reschedule my work because they happen to be in the area .. they are a nuisance to me_.
I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her   _HA - debunked, see above!_
.I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol   _Then carry on ._


----------



## threadbender

marthastoo said:


> I swore I wasn't going to post again, but what the hell.  I knew that as soon as I said people hate Meghan, there'd be about 10 people who will huffily write back that they don't.  It's the totality of the tone on this thread.  Um, sorry, but if you tell us you wake up in the middle of the night to post some random thought waxing poetic about your diagnosis of her narcissism, crackling about her pit stains, snarkily commenting about how's she's still fat (oh, sorry, I mean how she still hasn't lost her baby weight), or how you're personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection and she better clear out of your country goshdarnit - I'm going to go out on a limb and say you pretty much hate her.
> 
> I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me.
> 
> This thread is an unmitigated hatefest and for those who keep asking, golly, where are all her "stans?" Well, they don't feel welcomed to post.  Not that I would calll myself a stan (such a stupid word).  I definitely have problems with some of things she has done, but I honestly do not understand that crazed dislike for her.  I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol


I do not believe I responded "huffily" but I certainly feel "huffy" now.
Please do not assume anything about me.
I have actually, at times, had positive things to say about Meghan and Harry. However, the negatives, in my opinion, far outweigh the positives. My concerns are mostly about Archie and how they have insulted the BRF. They quit their jobs but expected to continue the lifestyle. I couldn't grasp that. Sorry. The rest just piled on, making me a non-fan. I re-iterate. I do not hate them.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Katel said:


> To those who love Meghan, you may have realized that I’m not a fan of her behavior.  Not much of a fan of Harry‘s behavior anymore either. Ahh, I had such high hopes for them.



I believe this picture is going to end up being super iconic. The one with the raindrop effect was nice but this shows the reality - we'll see it a lot when the divorce comes around.. it was right there, the unhappiness, didn't we all see it then, etc. Like many of the unhappy Diana photos during her marriage - her unhappiness is all documented in photos. This'll be one of those.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I just see it as her wanting to be the leader and for him to follow her and introduce her first, etc. It comes across that she is superior and more important than him. So bizarre. I wonder how they come across as a couple in-person. Do people they are in the company of see it the same way?


I'm beginning to think either "H" is very passive or he must be miserable....what man (never mind the prince part) wants to be pushed around this way?


----------



## jehaga

mrsinsyder said:


> Also, in the Kim K thread...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4685677
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so can we stop preaching?



Checkmate.


----------



## sdkitty

going to church with the queen (from Page 6)
again, Harry looking serious while "M" smiles.....a pattern emerging?
*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry arrive at church to meet Queen Elizabeth*
By Lee Brown

March 8, 2020 | 1:25pm


Enlarge Image





Prince Harry and Meghan MarkleJames Whatling / MEGA
*MORE ON:*
*MEGHAN MARKLE*
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle winding down UK farewell tour*

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry dazzle in matching red outfits at music festival*

*Meghan Markle & Prince Harry throw UK staff emotional farewell lunch*

*Meghan Markle 'infuriated' Camilla after upstaging her with Instagram post*
A beaming Meghan Markle smiled on her way to church on Sunday — her first time seeing Queen Elizabeth II since announcing Megxit.

The Duchess of Sussex, wearing a fascinator-style headpiece, looked happy and relaxed as her more-serious looking husband, Prince Harry, 35, drove her to The Royal Chapel of All Saints in Windsor.

They were met by the Queen, who has not seen Markle, 38, since the Sussexes’ bombshell announcement in January that they were quitting the royals, according to The Sun.

“It was a really sweet gesture that the Queen asked them to church,” a source told People magazine.

The invite was the 93-year-old monarch’s way of proving her earlier claim that her grandson and his wife “will always be much loved members” of the Queen’s family, the source said.

“It’s telling in the sense that these two are still her family. And as a family, they all love each other,” the source told People.

Harry, however, has seen his grandmother a number of times since making the announcement — including a historic summit to discuss the terms, as well as a recent four-hour lunch where she reportedly told him they will always be welcomed back.

The couple will join even more senior royals on Monday, where they are due to appear alongside the Queen as well as Harry’s father, Prince Charles, and brother, Prince William, at the Commonwealth Day service in Westminster Abbey.

It will be their first time with the almost all of the royal family since Megxit — and their final official engagement before officially becoming commoners on April 1.

One member of the family will be missing, however: Prince Andrew, whose scandalous ties to late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein saw him dumped from royal duties last year.

FILED UNDER MEGHAN MARKLE ,  MEGXIT ,  PRINCE HARRY ,  QUEEN ELIZABETH II ,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Her behavior at Royal Albert Hall was, according to those who are familiar with military protocol, inappropriate.  The companions of the military are not supposed to wear red, which she did.  The companions are not supposed to hold hands, hold onto or lean on the uniform wearing person.  She did all of the above.



I know I've been asking the same question over and over again, but I just can't wrap my mind around this. Forget self-absorbed Meghan who does not respect anything, but Harry? He knows ALL of this, why is he so disrespectful to allow this to happen? It just baffles me.


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know I've been asking the same question over and over again, but I just can't wrap my mind around this. Forget self-absorbed Meghan who does not respect anything, but Harry? He knows ALL of this, why is he so disrespectful to allow this to happen? It just baffles me.



This is a guy who dressed up as a Nazi. I’d expect nothing less.


----------



## jehaga

Apologies if this has been shared already.


----------



## prettyprincess

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, you are so superior to the rest of us in the thread. Should we all clear our reasons for posting here with you before we reply?
> 
> Also, in the Kim K thread...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4685677
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so can we stop preaching?



Calling someone thirsty and what’s being said in this thread is a little different. Page after page you guys rip her looks to shreds, criticize her mothering skills, call her names, etc. 
And when someone brings it up, the inevitable response is “hate is a strong word.”
Lol, you hate her, just own it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also the dark circles under his eyes...not only after a long day at the RAH event, but the next morning to church too. He does not look good at all.


----------



## Katel

gracekelly said:


> I finally figured that out.  This was his patronage given to him by Prince Philip.  I would have hoped that they would be silent in light of the fact that he blew off the charity concert of this patronage so they could go to the Disney premiere and beg Bob Iger for a job.
> 
> 
> ...
> Her behavior at Royal Albert Hall was, according to those who are familiar with military protocol, inappropriate.  The companions of the military are not supposed to wear red, which she did.  The companions are not supposed to hold hands, hold onto or lean on the uniform wearing person.  She did all of the above.  All it did was look very awkward and he looked like a child dressed up in his father's uniform (which actually was the case) and it didn't fit him very well either.




ahhh... that’s why she wore all red. It was obvious to anyone who enjoys fashion, even slightly, that black or gold or nude shoes/ bag/ jewelry -some kind of contrast -would’ve really made the outfit ... It just screams too much red...now, perhaps we know why.

hahaha! Edit to add - I have no idea why this turned out all red - I did not do this intentionally!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

prettyprincess said:


> Calling someone thirsty and what’s being said in this thread is a little different. Page after page you guys rip her looks to shreds, criticize her mothering skills, call her names, etc.
> And when someone brings it up, the inevitable response is “hate is a strong word.”
> Lol, you hate her, just own it.


nope, I reserve my haterade for those who truly deserves it.
I could give you an example but would get banned as the subject is forbidden here.


----------



## 1LV

I do not hate MM. I just think she’s an a$$hole.


----------



## mrsinsyder

prettyprincess said:


> Calling someone thirsty and what’s being said in this thread is a little different. Page after page you guys rip her looks to shreds, criticize her mothering skills, call her names, etc.
> And when someone brings it up, the inevitable response is “hate is a strong word.”
> Lol, you hate her, just own it.


What’s with being so invested in how other people feel about Meghan or Harry? Why do you care?

She’s not worth hating IMO. They’re just a fantastic train wreck to watch.


----------



## limom

I can’t stop laughing! She thinks that she is the second coming of MLK.


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Calling someone thirsty and what’s being said in this thread is a little different. Page after page you guys rip her looks to shreds, criticize her mothering skills, call her names, etc.
> And when someone brings it up, the inevitable response is “hate is a strong word.”
> Lol, you hate her, just own it.


I don't hate her but I'll admit the more I see of the way she treats Harry, the more she annoys me


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know I've been asking the same question over and over again, but I just can't wrap my mind around this. Forget self-absorbed Meghan who does not respect anything, but Harry? He knows ALL of this, why is he so disrespectful to allow this to happen? It just baffles me.


you're assuming he has any kind of control over her behavior?


----------



## bellecate

marthastoo said:


> I swore I wasn't going to post again, but what the hell.  I knew that as soon as I said people hate Meghan, there'd be about 10 people who will huffily write back that they don't.  It's the totality of the tone on this thread.  Um, sorry, but if you tell us you wake up in the middle of the night to post some random thought waxing poetic about your diagnosis of her narcissism, crackling about her pit stains, snarkily commenting about how's she's still fat (oh, sorry, I mean how she still hasn't lost her baby weight), or how you're personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection and she better clear out of your country goshdarnit - I'm going to go out on a limb and say you pretty much hate her.
> 
> I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me.
> 
> This thread is an unmitigated hatefest and for those who keep asking, golly, where are all her "stans?" Well, they don't feel welcomed to post.  Not that I would calll myself a stan (such a stupid word).  I definitely have problems with some of things she has done, but I honestly do not understand that crazed dislike for her.  I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol



I dislike when people want to put words in my mouth. I don’t hate Meghan. I don’t like many things she has done and I really am opposed to the my and other hard workingCanadians tax dollars going to pay for their protection. There are so many much needed places in Canada that money could have been used for.  I come to this ‘gossip’ thread for some escapism and not to be scolded for my views.


----------



## scarlet555

1LV said:


> I do not hate MM. I just think she’s an a$$hole.



You with the name calling...  What kind of... person are...  How dare.... Actually, I agree with you!


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> I can’t stop laughing! She thinks that she is the second coming of MLK.



She’s getting called out on Twitter for using people of color as props in her “savior” work. As she should be.


----------



## scarlet555

limom said:


> I can’t stop laughing! She thinks that she is the second coming of MLK.



wtf... self promotion... people can really believe anything... this is so sad...


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> I can’t stop laughing! She thinks that she is the second coming of MLK.



Her ego is out of control. Was looking at some of the comments on her IG and her team and paid bots are working overtime.


----------



## prettyprincess

mrsinsyder said:


> What’s with being so invested in how other people feel about Meghan or Harry? Why do you care?
> 
> She’s not worth hating IMO. They’re just a fantastic train wreck to watch.



The level of vitriol, and then the denial of it, is fascinating.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s getting called out on Twitter for using people of color as props in her “savior” work. As she should be.


The choice of the song, she can’t be serious, right?
This is so absurd.
She gotta be trolling.


----------



## Katel

limom said:


> The choice of the song, she can’t be serious, right?
> This is so absurd.
> She gotta be trolling.



omg - what? That was her original music?!? I thought it was a spoof lol!


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> omg - what? That was her original music?!? I thought it was a spoof lol!


me too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

prettyprincess said:


> The level of vitriol, and then the denial of it, is fascinating.


Sorry to ruin your attempt at painting everyone in the thread with one brush.


----------



## limom

Katel said:


> omg - what? That was her original music?!? I thought it was a spoof lol!


Straight out of the website.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Sorry to ruin your attempt at painting everyone in the thread with one brush.


Looks like another round of 'IGNORE' ..


----------



## Katel

limom said:


> Straight out of the website.


Wow. What a statement about her.
Thought for sure it was a parody.


----------



## lalame

Wow that social media post was so pompous and over the top. I rarely see her in motion (just photos) but watching this, I'm struck by her exaggerated body language like reaching out to grab people by the forearms, hand on their shoulder, hand on the back, etc... it just seems like such an affect instead of an authentic way to communicate.

I can only imagine the team choreographing these shots with the kids for the picture perfect video. Eurgh.


----------



## Tootsie17

Katel said:


> ^ This is the 4:05 minute clip...
> 
> 
> Sorry for the repeat... Not adept at gifs and such LOL but there are just so many available out there and I had not seen them until today.
> 
> My opinion is she never wanted to be in the royal family (like the remix says  ) and she and Harry plotted their exit waaay before the wedding. Problem - it has not turned out the way they planned -and Harry is screwed.




By allowing her to go first, I believe it was Meghan's way of trying to modernize the royal family.  Maybe everyone else was not on board, but Harry sure was, unfortunately for him.


----------



## Tootsie17

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, you are so superior to the rest of us in the thread. Should we all clear our reasons for posting here with you before we reply?
> 
> Also, in the Kim K thread...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4685677
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so can we stop preaching?


I have such admiration for all the ladies who post on this thread and defend their beliefs to the fullest. I may be down the rabbit hole, but I'm totally in and please pass the carrots and popcorn. Love Y'all!


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> Wow that social media post was so pompous and over the top. I rarely see her in motion (just photos) but watching this, I'm struck by her exaggerated body language like reaching out to grab people by the forearms, hand on their shoulder, hand on the back, etc... it just seems like such an affect instead of an authentic way to communicate.
> 
> I can only imagine the team choreographing these shots with the kids for the picture perfect video. Eurgh.



Imagine a male royal giving a huge rubbing bear hug to a teenaged girl.


----------



## Megs

Wanted to pop in here as both a commenter in this thread and admin of the forum. Last thing I want is this thread to upset members or ignite arguments, so hoping to answer some of this to help a bit! First and foremost, everyone is welcome to post: fans and non-fans alike! I always ask that you be respectful of other posters, don’t call posters names. I know it’s hard when we have such strong opinions, but how we share thoughts matters so much. 



Eva1991 said:


> Thank you *marthastoo*.
> 
> I thought a bit before posting here because it seems like this is not a gossip thread anymore; it's a hate MM thread.
> 
> TBH, I'm not a huge MM fan. But the diagnoses being made here (that MM has narcissistic personality disorder for example) are unsolicited to say the least. I doubt the posters here are all certified therapists _and _have examined Meghan in order to come up with such a diagnosis.
> 
> In a gossip thread, all opinions are (supposed to be) welcome; in this thread however it seems that whoever doesn't agree with the majority is attacked post after post. No wonder most MM supporters don't post here!
> 
> As *marthastoo *said, not everyone hates MM (or Harry for that matter). It seems even the Queen likes them! They were together at church this morning! The press and some passionate commentators have blown Megxit out of proportion. The BRF seems to be doing fine.



Anyone is welcome to post in this thread! I realize it’s probably not a thread that’s easy to come into as a M&H fan as majority (myself included) are not fans. But I do think that’s the interesting and fun part of a forum: all of us with different opinions can come together to share. I do ask posters be respectful, and I do think many of you have done a good job at that. It’s hard when people have strong opinions to then hear the other side and not feel attacked. 



lalame said:


> I totally have empathy for what you are saying. It can seem overwhelming when one opinion greatly outnumbers another in one thread. I came in here pretty surprised myself about the negativity and did feel attacked too. But since then I’ve agreed with many of the observations here, disagreed with some, shared some positive thoughts about MM, etc and still live to tell the tale. No one is attacking you... there are just a lot of dissenting opinions to yours on certain topics, and to feel less attacked, keep it about the topic and not about the posters’ motivations, axes to grind, etc. E.g. I don’t believe anyone has called you a Stan simply for sharing some positive messages, so by that logic, ya know, don’t call people haters. Let’s make it about H&M, not about each other.



This was a great post and what I always ask of members! It’s totally fine to disagree with others on topics, but please do keep it about the topic and not about the posters. I don’t like to have a heavy hand at deleting posts as I like to allow conversations to flow, but I don’t want to see personal attacks on other members. 



marthastoo said:


> I swore I wasn't going to post again, but what the hell.  I knew that as soon as I said people hate Meghan, there'd be about 10 people who will huffily write back that they don't.  It's the totality of the tone on this thread.  Um, sorry, but if you tell us you wake up in the middle of the night to post some random thought waxing poetic about your diagnosis of her narcissism, crackling about her pit stains, snarkily commenting about how's she's still fat (oh, sorry, I mean how she still hasn't lost her baby weight), or how you're personally offended about your hard earned tax money is going to pay for her protection and she better clear out of your country goshdarnit - I'm going to go out on a limb and say you pretty much hate her.
> 
> I loathe Kim Kardashian.  I own it.  But, I have never once wasted my time going on to a thread to talk about her.  I wouldn't dignify an article about anyone of that clan with a click.  lol But that's me.
> 
> This thread is an unmitigated hatefest and for those who keep asking, golly, where are all her "stans?" Well, they don't feel welcomed to post.  Not that I would calll myself a stan (such a stupid word).  I definitely have problems with some of things she has done, but I honestly do not understand that crazed dislike for her.  I read this thread mostly to shake my head.  lol



I definitely posted in the middle of the night once when I was up nursing my little guy, I admit it! I guess celebrity threads/gossip is an escape for me and many others. We all can only “know” what is released by the celeb, their teams, insiders, etc. I think for many it’s a fascination with what’s different as well as an escape of sorts. I suppose I feel like it’s better than gossiping about people I know, and truth be told, I would never want to be a celebrity. Would be terrible to be open to discussion even like this, I admit that. But it comes with the territory. You and I aren’t going to get paid $1mil for an evening talking to people, and unfortunately for those that are, typically it means the rest of their life is scrutinized in a different way. It’s just kinda how it all shakes out, it’s not entirely “fair”, but it’s part of the package. Of course they’ll have fans too, and fans are welcome to post here, but at this point in time a lot of people are annoyed with many actions they’ve taken so we take to discussing with others. 



prettyprincess said:


> Calling someone thirsty and what’s being said in this thread is a little different. Page after page you guys rip her looks to shreds, criticize her mothering skills, call her names, etc.
> And when someone brings it up, the inevitable response is “hate is a strong word.
> Lol, you hate her, just own it.



It’s easy to discuss someone’s parenting, looks, etc who is in the spotlight. If you wanted to make a comment on my parenting, it would be harder as you don’t know or see as much about me. None of us really know who has Archie or how she or Harry are as parents; but I think majority of parents have strong feelings about parenting (I know I do). It’s easy for me to say I’d never leave my kids behind in this situation, because I wouldn’t. But, and a big but, I and others are making observations based on what we’ve seen, stories that have been released, etc. I don’t think any poster here is personal friends or a super insider, so that’s what makes this a gossip thread.


----------



## queennadine

With regards to the constant “signaling” Harry to let her go first or pushing in front of him: you can tell he’s not into it. Otherwise, it would come naturally. He knows the protocol and deep down wants to follow it. That’s why she always has to “remind” him to do it differently.

So she may have tried to woke Harry into that, but I say he doesn’t appear to like it.


----------



## imgg

queennadine said:


> With regards to the constant “signaling” Harry to let her go first or pushing in front of him: you can tell he’s not into it. Otherwise, it would come naturally. He knows the protocol and deep down wants to follow it. That’s why she always has to “remind” him to do it differently.
> 
> So she may have tried to woke Harry into that, but I say he doesn’t appear to like it.


When you really love someone, you don’t ask that person to change their whole life/ identity.  If that person is already depressed losing their identity will only make things worse.  Harry needs to wake up!


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> By allowing her to go first, I believe it was Meghan's way of trying to modernize the royal family.  Maybe everyone else was not on board, but Harry sure was, unfortunately for him.


.. if that was what she thought it would do, then she's as dumb as a box of rocks!  Think about it, you are an American .. how much do you know about protocol, no less .. British and Royal protocol?!?!  .. ah, yes .. *NOTHING*!  So, instead of respecting their customs or hierarchy (_and as others have pointed out - there is one_), you just believe that you know better and are going to disrespect it and just about everyone else that adheres to it .. !

The sure-fire way to piss off people in another country, especially when you must interact with them (_business or otherwise_), is to adhere to your old ways, learn nothing about how they do things (_heaven forbid - even when in THEIR countr_y) and just go about and act as though what you do is "progressive" or "cute" or "endearing", etc. -- UGGH!  Having spent many years working overseas, the FIRST thing that I did was educate myself in regards to their customs, etc.  .. as I always used to tell my American colleagues "_just because we speak the same language does not by any means that what 'we' do (as Americans) is correct and proper_"!!!   But, obviously, Meghan believes (_as a true Narcissist does_) that she is just so much smarter than all those other dummies ...


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> Wanted to pop in here as both a commenter in this thread and admin of the forum. Last thing I want is this thread to upset members or ignite arguments, so hoping to answer some of this to help a bit! First and foremost, everyone is welcome to post: fans and non-fans alike! I always ask that you be respectful of other posters, don’t call posters names. I know it’s hard when we have such strong opinions, but how we share thoughts matters so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone is welcome to post in this thread! I realize it’s probably not a thread that’s easy to come into as a M&H fan as majority (myself included) are not fans. But I do think that’s the interesting and fun part of a forum: all of us with different opinions can come together to share. I do ask posters be respectful, and I do think many of you have done a good job at that. It’s hard when people have strong opinions to then hear the other side and not feel attacked.
> 
> 
> 
> This was a great post and what I always ask of members! It’s totally fine to disagree with others on topics, but please do keep it about the topic and not about the posters. I don’t like to have a heavy hand at deleting posts as I like to allow conversations to flow, but I don’t want to see personal attacks on other members.
> 
> 
> 
> I definitely posted in the middle of the night once when I was up nursing my little guy, I admit it! I guess celebrity threads/gossip is an escape for me and many others. We all can only “know” what is released by the celeb, their teams, insiders, etc. I think for many it’s a fascination with what’s different as well as an escape of sorts. I suppose I feel like it’s better than gossiping about people I know, and truth be told, I would never want to be a celebrity. Would be terrible to be open to discussion even like this, I admit that. But it comes with the territory. You and I aren’t going to get paid $1mil for an evening talking to people, and unfortunately for those that are, typically it means the rest of their life is scrutinized in a different way. It’s just kinda how it all shakes out, it’s not entirely “fair”, but it’s part of the package. Of course they’ll have fans too, and fans are welcome to post here, but at this point in time a lot of people are annoyed with many actions they’ve taken so we take to discussing with others.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s easy to discuss someone’s parenting, looks, etc who is in the spotlight. If you wanted to make a comment on my parenting, it would be harder as you don’t know or see as much about me. None of us really know who has Archie or how she or Harry are as parents; but I think majority of parents have strong feelings about parenting (I know I do). It’s easy for me to say I’d never leave my kids behind in this situation, because I wouldn’t. But, and a big but, I and others are making observations based on what we’ve seen, stories that have been released, etc. I don’t think any poster here is personal friends or a super insider, so that’s what makes this a gossip thread.


Thanks @Megs , but geez .. no one here should have to apologize for the time (HH:MM:SS) that they post; it is what it is!!!


----------



## tiktok

Megs said:


> Wanted to pop in here as both a commenter in this thread and admin of the forum. Last thing I want is this thread to upset members or ignite arguments, so hoping to answer some of this to help a bit! First and foremost, everyone is welcome to post: fans and non-fans alike! I always ask that you be respectful of other posters, don’t call posters names. I know it’s hard when we have such strong opinions, but how we share thoughts matters so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone is welcome to post in this thread! I realize it’s probably not a thread that’s easy to come into as a M&H fan as majority (myself included) are not fans. But I do think that’s the interesting and fun part of a forum: all of us with different opinions can come together to share. I do ask posters be respectful, and I do think many of you have done a good job at that. It’s hard when people have strong opinions to then hear the other side and not feel attacked.
> 
> 
> 
> This was a great post and what I always ask of members! It’s totally fine to disagree with others on topics, but please do keep it about the topic and not about the posters. I don’t like to have a heavy hand at deleting posts as I like to allow conversations to flow, but I don’t want to see personal attacks on other members.
> 
> 
> 
> I definitely posted in the middle of the night once when I was up nursing my little guy, I admit it! I guess celebrity threads/gossip is an escape for me and many others. We all can only “know” what is released by the celeb, their teams, insiders, etc. I think for many it’s a fascination with what’s different as well as an escape of sorts. I suppose I feel like it’s better than gossiping about people I know, and truth be told, I would never want to be a celebrity. Would be terrible to be open to discussion even like this, I admit that. But it comes with the territory. You and I aren’t going to get paid $1mil for an evening talking to people, and unfortunately for those that are, typically it means the rest of their life is scrutinized in a different way. It’s just kinda how it all shakes out, it’s not entirely “fair”, but it’s part of the package. Of course they’ll have fans too, and fans are welcome to post here, but at this point in time a lot of people are annoyed with many actions they’ve taken so we take to discussing with others.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s easy to discuss someone’s parenting, looks, etc who is in the spotlight. If you wanted to make a comment on my parenting, it would be harder as you don’t know or see as much about me. None of us really know who has Archie or how she or Harry are as parents; but I think majority of parents have strong feelings about parenting (I know I do). It’s easy for me to say I’d never leave my kids behind in this situation, because I wouldn’t. But, and a big but, I and others are making observations based on what we’ve seen, stories that have been released, etc. I don’t think any poster here is personal friends or a super insider, so that’s what makes this a gossip thread.



To build on what Megs and others said - for those lurking H&M fans, I would be truly curious to hear why you continue to be fans - do you read the spirit and the tone of what they posted on their website differently than those of us who are critical of them? Do you see their recent super-polished Instagram posts as less showy and PR-like and more authentic and trying to make a difference in the world? I think the conversation would be a lot more interesting if you could help us non-fans interpret their actions in a much more positive light. So far H&M fans mostly attacked us personally, but I haven't heard a lot of arguments that take what they write / how they behave and put it in a different light for us to consider. If anyone would like to do that I would love to read what they have to say.


----------



## Jktgal

Sharont2305 said:


> Commander Timothy Lawrence is always greeted after his wife Princess Anne.



The true feminist.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Clearblueskies said:


> Is the article making fun?  because transcribing it word for word like this shows just how vacuous it is



The reporter probably could not make head or tail out of what she was saying, so decided to write it down verbatim. Many people think she is articulate though, and I always wonder why. When I saw the term 'word salad' in this thread, I understand why, aka they are the people who like food that I find gross.

Edit, I just saw the Megxit mix. Hilarious!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

CeeJay said:


> Thanks @Megs , but geez .. no one here should have to apologize for the time (HH:MM:SS) that they post; it is what it is!!!


100%!  I was actually quite peeved at that negative comment about posting in the middle of the night!
How do y'all know when the middle of the night is anyway?  It's just after 1pm right now where I am on the east coast of Australia but it's the middle of the night/very early morning in the UK...
This is a global forum and like rust, Harry and Meghan thread on TPF never sleeps  
I try hard not to post late at night my time or before I've had a coffee in the morning, but sometimes I do anyway ... so what ???
As you say, it is what it is


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> To build on what Megs and others said - for those lurking H&M fans, I would be truly curious to hear why you continue to be fans - do you read the spirit and the tone of what they posted on their website differently than those of us who are critical of them? Do you see their recent super-polished Instagram posts as less showy and PR-like and more authentic and trying to make a difference in the world? I think the conversation would be a lot more interesting if you could help us non-fans interpret their actions in a much more positive light. So far H&M fans mostly attacked us personally, but I haven't heard a lot of arguments that take what they write / how they behave and put it in a different light for us to consider. If anyone would like to do that I would love to read what they have to say.



I was just talking to my friends about this. "Fan" is a big word for them but I think for many Americans at least, we don't get all the nuanced exposure of the royal family that people in Europe likely get. A lot of the coverage is laudatory, so people like her based on those sound bites. Like "Meghan stuns in new royal engagement" or "Meghan celebrates women's empowerment at girls' school"... what's there to dislike if that's all you see? And then when they see negativity from commenters/users, they feel like it's bullying as how can you be so negative about someone who does so many good things... unless it's just due to her race. And you know what that does to people... makes them like her even more since she's a sympathetic figure on top of it.


----------



## lalame

I see a lot of interviews with celebrities where they describe what it's like to be at an event with the BRF - the royal handlers prep everyone and tell them what to say or not to say or do, etc. Many celebs have called it overwhelming/nerve-wracking. I can only imagine the effect of being told what to do when meeting the royals, when the royals themselves (Meghan and Harry) don't even follow the protocol.


----------



## jess236

Shamelessly petty here but does anyone else find her accent really annoying? I think she is trying to over articulate and sound particularly American to highlight her non-British accent.  I cringe every time she speaks.


----------



## sunflower9999

jess236 said:


> Shamelessly petty here but does anyone else find her accent really annoying? I think she is trying to over articulate and sound particularly American to highlight her non-British accent.  I cringe every time she speaks.


She sounds pretty normal to me.


----------



## Vintage Leather

lalame said:


> I was just talking to my friends about this. "Fan" is a big word for them but I think for many Americans at least, we don't get all the nuanced exposure of the royal family that people in Europe likely get. A lot of the coverage is laudatory, so people like her based on those sound bites. Like "Meghan stuns in new royal engagement" or "Meghan celebrates women's empowerment at girls' school"... what's there to dislike if that's all you see? And then when they see negativity from commenters/users, they feel like it's bullying as how can you be so negative about someone who does so many good things... unless it's just due to her race. And you know what that does to people... makes them like her even more since she's a sympathetic figure on top of it.



Honestly, I do think she has received a fair piece of racial discrimination from the beginning.

 Remember her first big engagement as Harry's girlfriend, when the queen's cousin (Princess Michael, who happens to be my least favorite royal - at least before Prince Andrew showed his true colors) showed up in a blackamoor brooch, and published a glowing article about how much she loves Africans and lived in Africa for a while?

And every time Megan touched her bump there was an article about how she was attention seeking, when the article about Kate touching her bump talked about how she'd be a good mother?

And of course, the loathsome PM, who still is published despite his dumpster-diving past, writing an article with a "Straight outta Compton" reference?

That's why I gave her a pass when she and Harry started suing the press.  That's why I shrugged when they started curating their social outreach in such an odd way. And I understood when they tried to control the narrative. Thought they were crazy, but I understood.

I'm wasn't a fan of hers, but then, I'm not really the "fan" sort of person.  I can see how someone would empathize with her, and give her pass after pass when confronted with her behaving badly.

I also thought fairly well of Harry, with his military record and involvement with the Invictus Games.


My personal opinions of them as a couple suffered with their timing for different announcements.  I know I've harped on this a time or two before, but seriously - who announces they are having a baby before the end of the first trimester? At 7 weeks, I had friends who didn't even know they were pregnant yet.  AND who, in their right mind, announces it at a wedding reception?! I really can't give anyone a pass on that one.

As for the last few months, I believe that if someone asks for something, you should respect them enough to give it to them. 
If they ask to not be royal any more, they shouldn't have to deal with the patronages, the money, the taxpayer protection, the titles, the free estate. Too much hassle, obviously.


----------



## lalame

Vintage Leather said:


> Honestly, I do think she has received a fair piece of racial discrimination from the beginning.



You're right of course - that was definitely something that was in the air. But then it started becoming an overreaction in the public where if you didn't like her for _any _reason, it was pinned on the racism.


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!!! .. when I saw this in the Daily Mail, I asked exactly that question .. WHY????


I think getting standing ovations is an indication to H of what he has chosen to turn his back on ...how sad is it that people show you how they adore you - and you have decided it’s just not worthy of your perseverance ? Time will tell how this all plays out - the Queen cannot afford to put a foot wrong here -public opinion is fickle and the international press are talking about “a crisis in the house of Windsor “ I frankly think that the scandal of Prince Andrew and any associated cover up (100% there was one) will be more explosive and will rock the RF -Time will tell ...


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

Vintage Leather said:


> Honestly, I do think she has received a fair piece of racial discrimination from the beginning.
> 
> Remember her first big engagement as Harry's girlfriend, when the queen's cousin (Princess Michael, who happens to be my least favorite royal - at least before Prince Andrew showed his true colors) showed up in a blackamoor brooch, and published a glowing article about how much she loves Africans and lived in Africa for a while?
> 
> And every time Megan touched her bump there was an article about how she was attention seeking, when the article about Kate touching her bump talked about how she'd be a good mother?
> 
> And of course, the loathsome PM, who still is published despite his dumpster-diving past, writing an article with a "Straight outta Compton" reference?
> 
> That's why I gave her a pass when she and Harry started suing the press.  That's why I shrugged when they started curating their social outreach in such an odd way. And I understood when they tried to control the narrative. Thought they were crazy, but I understood.
> 
> I'm wasn't a fan of hers, but then, I'm not really the "fan" sort of person.  I can see how someone would empathize with her, and give her pass after pass when confronted with her behaving badly.
> 
> I also thought fairly well of Harry, with his military record and involvement with the Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> My personal opinions of them as a couple suffered with their timing for different announcements.  I know I've harped on this a time or two before, but seriously - who announces they are having a baby before the end of the first trimester? At 7 weeks, I had friends who didn't even know they were pregnant yet.  AND who, in their right mind, announces it at a wedding reception?! I really can't give anyone a pass on that one.
> 
> As for the last few months, I believe that if someone asks for something, you should respect them enough to give it to them.
> If they ask to not be royal any more, they shouldn't have to deal with the patronages, the money, the taxpayer protection, the titles, the free estate. Too much hassle, obviously.


I think back to the engagement interview and how ridiculous she sounded about how little she knew about the BRF ...that in itself was when I turned off her ...I knew she would do a runner - but not in less than 20 months !


----------



## jess236

sunflower9999 said:


> She sounds pretty normal to me.


Unfortunately, I find her pretty annoying.


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> Wow that social media post was so pompous and over the top. I rarely see her in motion (just photos) but watching this, I'm struck by her exaggerated body language like reaching out to grab people by the forearms, hand on their shoulder, hand on the back, etc... it just seems like such an affect instead of an authentic way to communicate.
> 
> I can only imagine the team choreographing these shots with the kids for the picture perfect video. Eurgh.


The blonde lady near the end, she was one of the women from 1968 who went on strike at the Ford factory in Dagenham to demand equal pay for women which was brought in 2 years later. This story was made into a film "Made in Dagenham"
Anyway, looked like Meghan was going in for a hug but she didn't reciprocate.


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> With regards to the constant “signaling” Harry to let her go first or pushing in front of him: you can tell he’s not into it. Otherwise, it would come naturally. He knows the protocol and deep down wants to follow it. That’s why she always has to “remind” him to do it differently.
> 
> So she may have tried to woke Harry into that, but I say he doesn’t appear to like it.


No, I don't think he likes it either, you can tell in his face sometimes. I'm all for equality and also gentelmanly behaviour in letting a lady go first, or opening a door etc, it's a nice feeling when it happens to me. But this is different, it's protocol, the higher rank (blood Royal husband in this case) goes first.
I bet she's dying to go ahead of William and Catherine, It would have been interesting if Meghan and Catherine had a joint engagement, would she push ahead of a higher rank non blood Royal then?


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> Wow that social media post was so pompous and over the top. I rarely see her in motion (just photos) but watching this, I'm struck by her exaggerated body language like reaching out to grab people by the forearms, hand on their shoulder, hand on the back, etc... it just seems like such an affect instead of an authentic way to communicate.
> 
> I can only imagine the team choreographing these shots with the kids for the picture perfect video. Eurgh.


I thought this was a send up, it’s so over the top.  I wonder how many takes they had to do till Meghan had the shots she wanted?



Sharont2305 said:


> The blonde lady near the end, she was one of the women from 1968 who went on strike at the Ford factory in Dagenham to demand equal pay for women which was brought in 2 years later. This story was made into a film "Made in Dagenham"
> Anyway, looked like Meghan was going in for a hug but she didn't reciprocate.


Well good for her  she’s a genuine activist, who put her neck on the line.


----------



## floatinglili

I’m surprised there hasnt been a large backlash against the draped-in-red dress. As one wag commenter wrote, “I’m surprised she didn’t pin Harry’s medals to her chest”. 
Major faux pas, deliberately done and very rude. 
How and why did Harry go along with that choice of gown?
It seems she loves to deride the historic traditions even as she revels in them. All the better to monetise them, I suppose.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

floatinglili said:


> I’m surprised there hasnt been a large backlash against the draped-in-red dress. As one wag commenter wrote, “I’m surprised she didn’t pin Harry’s medals to her chest”.
> Major faux pas, deliberately done and very rude.



I for one really didn't know before someone here mentioned it. At this point I'm just speechless at the gall.



> How and why did Harry go along with that choice of gown?



That's what I'm asking myself all the time. Does he really hate his family and upbringing so much? (and even if...you still want Daddy to fund your bills, don't bite the hand that feeds you) Did she turn him into a voodoo zombie? What the hell is going on with these two?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

As someone else said earlier: to the Meghan fans, please speak up. I really want to understand how you can watch someone being deliberarely rude and disrespectful (to her own husband, her in-laws, her adopted country's traditions, etc.), making up stories (e.g. "I had lunch with Michelle *****" - Michelle "That never happened" or "Vogue chose me" and then Vogue says she pitched them which generally as a journalist I don't hate on, I do it all the time, I just don't walk around saying I was approached) and still have her back? As in, a lot of things she does would not be ok for anyone in just a simple every day social setting. I bet if it was your neighbour you'd not be thrilled with their antics. So why the excuses for Meghan?


----------



## Blyen

I don't hate Meghan, I actually wanted to like her so badly at first! But I've always had a gut feeling about her, that something was wrong and not genuine.
I got frustrated at the beginning because of how blatantly she seemed to disregard the protocol of the Royal family, shoving herself in front of Harry, not wearing an hat when the Queen was wearing one, even trivial things like not wearing thighs... I mean, are thighs really going to make you less empowered? It just irked me to no ends that she would marry into such a family and just do as she pleased. Then after the pregnancy announcement and the tour, she slowly started to look more and more disheveled, like she couldn't even be bothered to fake caring about what she was doing anymore. That's when I knew they were going to opt out.
Honestly I am disappointed in both of them... They had enormous potential, they would have never ranked higher that Kate and Will, but they would have been the media and public favorites, had they been patient and played their cards right.


----------



## Sharont2305

Blyen said:


> Honestly I am disappointed in both of them... They had enormous potential, they would have never ranked higher that Kate and Will, but they would have been the media and public favorites, had they been patient and played their cards right.



I agree with everything you said, re William and Catherine I think H & M would have been a great asset to them when William is King. He needs someone to support him 100% other than his wife. It's a role Harry was born to do, indeed to support his father when he becomes King as well. It wouldn't surprise me that William becomes King in the next 7 - 10 years to be honest. 
Yes, I know Harry is far down the line in succession but as a son and brother to future Kings he is very important, especially until the Cambridge children are old enough to become full time working Royals. Had all this Megxit not happened he would have been a good adviser to the two spares, Charlotte and Louis.


----------



## Alena21

floatinglili said:


> I’m surprised there hasnt been a large backlash against the draped-in-red dress. As one wag commenter wrote, “I’m surprised she didn’t pin Harry’s medals to her chest”.
> Major faux pas, deliberately done and very rude.
> How and why did Harry go along with that choice of gown?
> It seems she loves to deride the historic traditions even as she revels in them. All the better to monetise them, I suppose.


I didn't bother to see the latest pics but I'm curious why is the dress against protocol?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Alena21 said:


> I didn't bother to see the latest pics but I'm curious why is the dress against protocol?



Because red is apparently reserved for the military members. Just like it's the bridal colour in some Asian cultures and guests better not wear a red dress.


----------



## lightofurlife

Can someone explain what Meghan does that warrants all of these strong negative opinions?? Goodness gracious.

She is beautiful, talented, driven, and kind and Harry loves her. Why are you all mad at everything she does?? This is so odd to me.

It’s like you all literally think sis is plotting to destroy the Royal family. After how the Queen treated Diana, Andrews nasty behind, and the Queens husband coming from a family of Nazis y’all really think the worse thing in the royal family is wearing the wrong clothes??

You are forgiving of the mistreatment of people by royal family members but not forgiving of wearing the wrong outfit?? Huh??

Make it make sense.


----------



## limom

lightofurlife said:


> Can someone explain what Meghan does that warrants all of these strong negative opinions?? Goodness gracious.
> 
> She is beautiful, talented, driven, and kind and Harry loves her. Why are you all mad at everything she does?? This is so odd to me.
> 
> It’s like you all literally think sis is plotting to destroy the Royal family. After how the Queen treated Diana, Andrews nasty behind, and the Queens husband coming from a family of Nazis y’all really think the worse thing in the royal family is wearing the wrong clothes??
> 
> You are forgiving of the mistreatment of people by royal family members but not forgiving of wearing the wrong outfit?? Huh??
> 
> Make it make sense.


What is the the title of the thread?
Go check Andrew’s thread and see how beloved he is there.


----------



## Sharont2305

It's been confirmed that the Harry and Meghan will not be part of the Queen's procession through Westminster Abbey at the start of the Commonwealth Service as they make their final official appearance as senior Royals.
They will be conducted to their seats rather than waiting for the Queen's arrival and walking through the Abbey with the Queen and other senior Royals.

Ouch, this is going to hurt Harry, though it'll probably be "leaked" that they wanted it this way

ETA  just read the Wessexes will be pre seated too, probably so that Meghan can't moan it's just them


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> It's been confirmed that the Harry and Meghan will not be part of the Queen's procession through Westminster Abbey at the start of the Commonwealth Service as they make their final official appearance as senior Royals.
> They will be conducted to their seats rather than waiting for the Queen's arrival and walking through the Abbey with the Queen and other senior Royals.
> 
> Ouch, this is going to hurt Harry, though it'll probably be "leaked" that they wanted it this way


I thought that they would be out by April 1st?
The Queen does not play...


----------



## lightofurlife

limom said:


> What is the the title of the thread?
> Go check Andrew’s thread and see how beloved he is there.



There are several messages in this thread, titled for Meghan, about how great Camilla is. Yet Camilla was a whole mistress having phone sex with someone’s husband and her behavior is honorable and she’s better than Meghan??

Has Meghan slept with a married man? Killed anyone? Cursed anyone out???

Because the British Royals have done all of the above so they’re all worse than what you’re claiming Meghan is.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lightofurlife said:


> Can someone explain what Meghan does that warrants all of these strong negative opinions?? Goodness gracious.
> 
> She is beautiful, talented, driven, and kind and Harry loves her. Why are you all mad at everything she does?? This is so odd to me.
> 
> It’s like you all literally think sis is plotting to destroy the Royal family. After how the Queen treated Diana, Andrews nasty behind, and the Queens husband coming from a family of Nazis y’all really think the worse thing in the royal family is wearing the wrong clothes??
> 
> You are forgiving of the mistreatment of people by royal family members but not forgiving of wearing the wrong outfit?? Huh??
> 
> Make it make sense.


The reasons people dislike her have been posted in this thread many times.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

lightofurlife said:


> There are several messages in this thread, titled for Meghan, about how great Camilla is. Yet Camilla was a whole mistress having phone sex with someone’s husband and her behavior is honorable and she’s better than Meghan??
> 
> Has Meghan slept with a married man? Killed anyone? Cursed anyone out???
> 
> Because the British Royals have done all of the above so they’re all worse than what you’re claiming Meghan is.


I am fairly certain history shows that Camilla displays style and fortitude under fire. She was harassed for years upon years by the public and press for what she did  and yet continued to show up at events. And was hated within the family, much like Meghan is. Yet Camilla remained standing through it all. She shows a strength of character that Meghan doesn't seem to have - Meghan is opportunistic and wanted money and a title, bailing from everything at the first opportunity.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I don’t think anyone has given Camilla a pass for having an affair and breaking up marriages.  I think people have simply moved on from it and there is respect for her since she appears to be a very good and supportive partner for the future King.  Like Kate she always seems appropriate and executes her role exceedingly well.  

If one desires insight into some of the negative feelings toward H & M they could start with the insanely condescending, arrogant and entitled “Megxit” statement on their website.  Their desire to leave the Royal Family is not what is upsetting people it’s the spectacularly disrespectful way they have gone about it that has shocked people.


----------



## mia55

I sometimes feel people favor them against their best judgement only to get their 5 minutes of fame either on comments section or on a forum. No one in their right mind can defend the way Mexit was announced and other disrespectful actions MM has done against a country's culture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lightofurlife

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am fairly certain history shows that Camilla displays style and fortitude under fire. She was harassed for years upon years by the public and press for what she did  and yet continued to show up at events. And was hated within the family, much like Meghan is. Yet Camilla remained standing through it all. She shows a strength of character that Meghan doesn't seem to have - Meghan is opportunistic and wanted money and a title, bailing from everything at the first opportunity.



So being a mistress is acceptable behavior and admirable. But wearing the wrong thing makes you a bad person.

Got it. Meghan go sleep with a married man so you can be just like Camilla!!!


Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t think anyone has given Camilla a pass for having an affair and breaking up marriages.  I think people have simply moved on from it and there is respect for her since she appears to be a very good and supportive partner for the future King.  Like Kate she always seems appropriate and executes her role exceedingly well.
> 
> If one desires insight into some of the negative feelings toward H & M they could start with the insanely condescending, arrogant and entitled “Megxit” statement on their website.  Their desire to leave the Royal Family is not what is upsetting people it’s the spectacularly disrespectful way they have gone about it that has shocked people.



If they are so disrespectful shouldn’t people be glad they’re leaving??

Shouldn’t the world be rejoicing that they don’t have to have that disrespect around the royal family anymore??

I don’t know, when people disrespect me I just cut them off to save my peace of mind.


----------



## queennadine

Typing while nursing so this is just off the top of my head:

1. I don’t care if someone is “beautiful.” She’s objectively attractive, but I don’t even see that anymore. Not a reason to like someone. Well, a shallow reason I guess.
2. Completely cutting her dad off after his heart attack and pap incidents. That was so cold. And she pulls the same publicity stunts herself (!).
3. Overshadowing Eugenie’s wedding with preggo rumors and then announcing at her wedding reception.
4. Crying “no one has asked me if I’m ok” while on the most poverty-stricken continent on the planet, after spending £1 million freaking pounds on designer maternity couture.
5. Not meeting with *****. Politics aside, that was extremely bad form and W&K would have gotten major backlash for not meeting with the O’s.
6. Announcing they would step back despite the Queen having asked them not to until a consensus was reached.
7. The statement on their website that “despite the BRR not having jurisdiction overseas with regards to the world Royal...” (paraphrasing) HOW PETTY.
8. Demanding taxpayer funded security indefinitely on a different continent, and for up to 3 different people (requiring 3 different security teams) at a time.

So this is a quickly cobbled together list of actions that MM (plus H) have undertaken that I do not like.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I really wish folks would stop trying to turn this into a "other royals have done worse" thread. It's tiresome and pointless since it's possible to dislike more than one person at a time.


----------



## queennadine

lightofurlife said:


> So being a mistress is acceptable behavior and admirable. But wearing the wrong thing makes you a bad person.
> 
> Got it. Meghan go sleep with a married man so you can be just like Camilla!!!
> 
> 
> If they are so disrespectful shouldn’t people be glad they’re leaving??
> 
> Shouldn’t the world be rejoicing that they don’t have to have that disrespect around the royal family anymore??
> 
> I don’t know, when people disrespect me I just cut them off to save my peace of mind.



I don’t think anyone will ever think that what Charles and Camilla did was ok. Just like the affairs Diana had were not ok.

Buuuuut since we’re going down that rabbit hole, the timeline of when MM and H started dating doesn’t really add up with regards to when she stopped dating her previous bf. Not as bad as adultery if that’s the case, but still.

In terms of her attire: it’s that she’s worn or not worn things that are protocol. Black, tights, no hat, etc. That’s a respect issue, not a fashion one.


----------



## Jktgal

queennadine said:


> With regards to the constant “signaling” Harry to let her go first or pushing in front of him: you can tell he’s not into it. Otherwise, it would come naturally. He knows the protocol and deep down wants to follow it. That’s why she always has to “remind” him to do it differently.
> 
> So she may have tried to woke Harry into that, but I say he doesn’t appear to like it.



At least if it doesn't come naturally, shouldn't they have an agreement beforehand as an SOP? Come 1 April I think Call Me Harry Arm Candy will consistently be relegated to come last and we will see reduced signaling.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Emeline

mia55 said:


> I sometimes feel people favor them against their best judgement only to get their 5 minutes of fame either on comments section or on a forum. No one in their right mind can defend the way Mexit was announced and other disrespectful actions MM has done against a country's culture.


Indeed. 
And I think it's perfectly acceptable to discuss both the positive and the unflattering aspects of H&M in this thread.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> Is it spring break?



Actually it is here. The traffic was lovely this morning!

When is the Commonwealth Day event? I can't wait to see this one.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, this is protocol. The blood Royal goes first be it man or woman. Commander Timothy Lawrence is always greeted after his wife Princess Anne. Though I don't think I've seen it myself as yet, I'm sure Jack is greeted after Princess Eugenie. The same with Beatrice and her fiancé.


One of the gifs show Camilla following Charles (she knows the protocol) and then H stepping back so M can go first (like he had a choice ever!).


----------



## Annawakes

I think the Andrew thread isn’t as long because, after his disgusting actions came to light, he has pretty much faded away into the background and no one cares about him anymore.

Whereas M continues to entertain with cheesy videos on her IG posts, breaking dress protocol, not being neat and well groomed (for an official event!).....these things are endlessly entertaining.  And warrant much discussion, in my opinion.


----------



## mrsinsyder

FYI - someone (not hard to guess who) posted this thread on another forum so expect an influx today.


----------



## limom

Well, the ignore button is going to be used today!


----------



## Jktgal

lightofurlife said:


> At me next time. There are 1500+ pages of hate about Meghan yet the Andrew thread is how many pages?
> 
> You are hypocrites and you don’t keep the same energy for male Royals or white royals.



The thread started in 2006 for the white male royal now known as Arm Candy Markles. It's equal opportunity here lol.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Her thirsty makeup artist is so predictable...


----------



## queennadine

Sooooo anywho. 

Can’t wait to see what everyone wears today! And how they behave


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Now we know why Harry looked (appropriately) somber. Of course she was cheesing for the cameras no matter what.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Actually it is here. The traffic was lovely this morning!
> 
> When is the Commonwealth Day event? I can't wait to see this one.


It's just after 2pm here in the UK, TV coverage starts in a few minutes.


----------



## kemilia

prettyprincess said:


> The level of vitriol, and then the denial of it, is fascinating.


You fascinate easily.


----------



## Alena21

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because red is apparently reserved for the military members. Just like it's the bridal colour in some Asian cultures and guests better not wear a red dress.


Thank you for your reply. Good to know.  In this case this is very rude and inconsiderate.


----------



## kemilia

Jktgal said:


> At least if it doesn't come naturally, shouldn't they have an agreement beforehand as an SOP? Come 1 April I think Call Me Harry Arm Candy will consistently be relegated to come last and we will see reduced signaling.


"Harry Arm Candy"--that's a visual I cannot unsee (Hairy)!


----------



## imgg

floatinglili said:


> I’m surprised there hasnt been a large backlash against the draped-in-red dress. As one wag commenter wrote, “I’m surprised she didn’t pin Harry’s medals to her chest”.
> Major faux pas, deliberately done and very rude.
> How and why did Harry go along with that choice of gown?
> It seems she loves to deride the historic traditions even as she revels in them. All the better to monetise them, I suppose.


Honestly, her IG says it all.  It's titled sussexroyal yet she chooses not to follow any Royals.  I don't believe her story of only wanting positive posts.  I follow the Royals (not Meghan) and that's Harry's family posting, nothing but positive posts.  For her not to follow says everything imo especially since this is how she communicates.


----------



## Sharont2305

No hand holding, see, it can be done. But they did walk into the Abbey holding hands


----------



## Vintage Leather

lightofurlife said:


> Can someone explain what Meghan does that warrants all of these strong negative opinions?? Goodness gracious.
> 
> She is beautiful, talented, driven, and kind and Harry loves her. Why are you all mad at everything she does?? This is so odd to me.
> 
> It’s like you all literally think sis is plotting to destroy the Royal family. After how the Queen treated Diana, Andrews nasty behind, and the Queens husband coming from a family of Nazis y’all really think the worse thing in the royal family is wearing the wrong clothes??
> 
> You are forgiving of the mistreatment of people by royal family members but not forgiving of wearing the wrong outfit?? Huh??
> 
> Make it make sense.



You must be new here.

This is a fashion forum. Even when we love a celebrity, we still give serious side-eye to people when they show up badly dressed.  :cough: anyone notice how Kate's been looking like the reincarnation of Nancy Regan? :cough: It's worse when they are using fashion to give someone the symbolic middle finger. 

I agree that Megan is beautiful, driven, and while I know nothing about their relationship, I like to think that Harry loves her.

Why do you believe her to be kind?


----------



## Sharont2305

Not sure if Catherine did but William said hello to them


----------



## mrsinsyder

I love capes so I can't hate on her cape outfits.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> No hand holding, see, it can be done. But they did walk into the Abbey holding hands
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686122


Does Harry only have the one suit?  Or does he have racks of identical blue suits?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Vintage Leather said:


> anyone notice how Kate's been looking like the reincarnation of Nancy Regan?


 it's so true though.


----------



## mrsinsyder

@Sharont2305 thank you for the pics!


----------



## imgg

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am fairly certain history shows that Camilla displays style and fortitude under fire. She was harassed for years upon years by the public and press for what she did  and yet continued to show up at events. And was hated within the family, much like Meghan is. Yet Camilla remained standing through it all. She shows a strength of character that Meghan doesn't seem to have - Meghan is opportunistic and wanted money and a title, bailing from everything at the first opportunity.


Charles was always in love with Camilla.  Camilla was always in love with Charles.  Charles and Diana had an arranged marriage.  I am sure that was a tough pill for all parties involved- Camilla, Diana & Charles.

What is happening to Harry is the reason the Monarchy had arranged marriages.  There is no good solution when it comes to matters of the heart and trying to preserve an institution.  Thank goodness there is Will & Kate.


----------



## kemilia

Vintage Leather said:


> You must be new here.
> 
> This is a fashion forum. Even when we love a celebrity, we still give serious side-eye to people when they show up badly dressed.  :cough: anyone notice how Kate's been looking like the reincarnation of Nancy Regan? :cough: It's worse when they are using fashion to give someone the symbolic middle finger.
> 
> I agree that Megan is beautiful, driven, and while I know nothing about their relationship, I like to think that Harry loves her.
> 
> Why do you believe her to be kind?


I totally agree re: the fashion. Like when I watch the House Wives shows--I so do not care about the drama, show me more Birkin stuffed closets (and I don't even like Birkins), Kyle's makeup area (wowza), Yolada's kitchen, etc. 

I am really liking M's use of color for this last rodeo; in the beginning, when she seemed to only wear blush pink, beige, more blush pink it was so blah.  And excellent Kate/Nancy comparison, You hit it right on the nose!

Now back to our regular scheduled programming ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

imgg said:


> Charles was always in love with Camilla.  Camilla was always in love with Charles.  Charles and Diana had an arranged marriage.  I am sure that was a tough pill for all parties involved- Camilla, Diana & Charles.
> 
> What is happening to Harry is the reason the Monarchy had arranged marriages.  There is no good solution when it comes to matters of the heart and trying to preserve an institution.  Thank goodness there is Will & Kate.


I've said it before and I will say it again--thank goodness William was first born.


----------



## Lounorada

floatinglili said:


> I’m surprised there hasnt been a large backlash against the draped-in-red dress. As one wag commenter wrote, “I’m surprised she didn’t pin Harry’s medals to her chest”.
> Major faux pas, deliberately done and very rude.
> How and why did Harry go along with that choice of gown?
> It seems she loves to deride the historic traditions even as she revels in them. All the better to monetise them, I suppose.


Yes, I agree. I was surprised at the lack of comments on her wearing head-to-toe red the other night. So rude and attention seeking. Heaven forbid that the military being celebrated would get more attention than her. She could have worn_ any other colour_, but red.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> As someone else said earlier: to the Meghan fans, please speak up. I really want to understand how you can watch someone being deliberarely rude and disrespectful (to her own husband, her in-laws, her adopted country's traditions, etc.), making up stories (e.g. "I had lunch with Michelle *****" - Michelle "That never happened" or "Vogue chose me" and then Vogue says she pitched them which generally as a journalist I don't hate on, I do it all the time, I just don't walk around saying I was approached) and still have her back? As in, a lot of things she does would not be ok for anyone in just a simple every day social setting. I bet if it was your neighbour you'd not be thrilled with their antics. So why the excuses for Meghan?


IMO, I don't think there is much, if anything to say in defence of H&M and their behaviour, that's why the personal attacks on members here and non-fans/supporters in general are an easier thing to comment on. It's pretty tiresome TBH.


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> Typing while nursing so this is just off the top of my head:
> 
> 1. I don’t care if someone is “beautiful.” She’s objectively attractive, but I don’t even see that anymore. Not a reason to like someone. Well, a shallow reason I guess.
> 2. Completely cutting her dad off after his heart attack and pap incidents. That was so cold. And she pulls the same publicity stunts herself (!).
> 3. Overshadowing Eugenie’s wedding with preggo rumors and then announcing at her wedding reception.
> 4. Crying “no one has asked me if I’m ok” while on the most poverty-stricken continent on the planet, after spending £1 million freaking pounds on designer maternity couture.
> 5. Not meeting with *****. Politics aside, that was extremely bad form and W&K would have gotten major backlash for not meeting with the O’s.
> 6. Announcing they would step back despite the Queen having asked them not to until a consensus was reached.
> 7. The statement on their website that “despite the BRR not having jurisdiction overseas with regards to the world Royal...” (paraphrasing) HOW PETTY.
> 8. Demanding taxpayer funded security indefinitely on a different continent, and for up to 3 different people (requiring 3 different security teams) at a time.
> 
> So this is a quickly cobbled together list of actions that MM (plus H) have undertaken that I do not like.


The "no one has asked me if I'm ok" alone is enough for me.  Ungrateful, insensitive - just unforgiveable to me


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> @Sharont2305 thank you for the pics!


Lol, you're welcome, I'm watching it live so I thought I may as well take pics off my TV. [emoji1787]


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Now we know why Harry looked (appropriately) somber. Of course she was cheesing for the cameras no matter what.
> 
> View attachment 4686077


what an idiot....really can't figure out there are times not to smile?


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> what an idiot....really can't figure out there are times not to smile?


LOL, she can't even give up couture muumuus for the country she married into, let alone understand making the ultimate sacrifice.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sorry for the pic avalanche, Harry staring into the distance while Alexandra Burke sings the last few lines of "Ain't no mountain high enough"
I found it quite poignant


----------



## mrsinsyder

Some more

















Always finding the camera...


----------



## limom




----------



## mrsinsyder

WHY DOESN'T HER DRESS FIT

EVER


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is she wearing a strapless bra again?


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> Is she wearing a strapless bra again?


Yes.

Makes no sense? You could wear a sports bra with that dress.


----------



## daisychainz

mrsinsyder said:


> I love capes so I can't hate on her cape outfits.


I think she hired a stylist to help her for this trip. I don't like her choices at all, but they do seem much elevated from anything we've seen before. Like serious effort has been made for her to look good at events.


----------



## limom

She needs to get fitted for undergarments. The color is fantastic and she is wearing pantyhose, but she also needs a slip so the dress doesn't cling to her body.
WTF is dressing her?
The make up looks really pretty imho.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Remember the discussion if Meghan is trying to copy Diana's outfits or if it's all a big coincidence? Just saw a collage on Instagram, guess who's worn a bright red cape evening gown that really resembles Meghan's outfit before.

Also saw footage of the standing ovation, Harry looked like he was about to cry while Meghan was bathing in the attention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, you're welcome, I'm watching it live so I thought I may as well take pics off my TV. [emoji1787]


Thank you for the effort


----------



## lanasyogamama

[QUOTE="QueenofWrapDress, post: 33665007, member: 689574]

Also saw footage of the standing ovation, Harry looked like he was about to cry while Meghan was bathing in the attention.[/QUOTE]

That was so crazy, it was like she truly didn’t understand that the standing ovation wasn’t for her.


----------



## imgg

daisychainz said:


> I think she hired a stylist to help her for this trip. I don't like her choices at all, but they do seem much elevated from anything we've seen before. Like serious effort has been made for her to look good at events.


I think she wants Hollywood to take notice and she just craves attention.


----------



## limom

Apparently the lining of his suit matches her dress.


----------



## limom

View from the back...


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Some more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always finding the camera...


It must kill her to have Kate show up looking so great all the time


----------



## limom

Nah, she thinks that she looks great...


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> Apparently the lining of his suit matches her dress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686162


That's kinda cool.


----------



## Clearblueskies

limom said:


> View from the back...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686165


It needs shortening at the waist


----------



## csshopper

mrsinsyder said:


> WHY DOESN'T HER DRESS FIT
> 
> EVER


Maybe she needs to friend the Kardashians and try some of their tricks for smoothing all the bits....not a K fan, but they seem to know how to do it.


----------



## limom

csshopper said:


> Maybe she needs to friend the Kardashians and try some of their tricks for smoothing all the bits....not a K fan, but they seem to know how to do it.


She needs a professional stylist who has eyes, imho.
It is not that hard. She is tiny, pretty and young.


----------



## purseproblm

Clearblueskies said:


> It needs shortening at the waist




It feels like everything she wears is always just off. Never quite right. There is no reason for her to look so sloppy going out representing Her Majesty. Heck herself.


----------



## duna

I don't know if it's just me but this holding hands all the time really gets on my nerves, like when we saw her holding her belly for 9 months or when she puts her hand on his back. Maybe it's my British education, stiff upper lip, no body contact in public etc......


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> View from the back...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686165


She truly needs better undergarments, the dress is all bunchy, maybe wearing a slip (or whatever) would make the dress not cling. But great color, and while I think the hats "they" all wear are nuts, hers looks good (though I still think those things are crazy no matter who wears them).


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Sorry for the pic avalanche, Harry staring into the distance while Alexandra Burke sings the last few lines of "Ain't no mountain high enough"
> I found it quite poignant
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686142


strange pic....he looks so much larger than her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

The make up is very good. Her face looks flawless


----------



## queennadine

I like this last look overall. Like someone else mentioned, there's always something "off" though. BUT this is definitely a regal and respectful outfit choice.


----------



## sdkitty

I'll say one thing for this thread - it's a lot more fun than reading the news these days


----------



## queennadine

limom said:


> The make up is very good. Her face looks flawless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686201



I will forever compare her good makeup looks to her wedding day...Her face looks great here!


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I'll say one thing for this thread - it's a lot more fun than reading the news these days


Yep between the market and the corona virus....


----------



## Clearblueskies

purseproblm said:


> It feels like everything she wears is always just off. Never quite right. There is no reason for her to look so sloppy going out representing Her Majesty. Heck herself.


I don’t get it, there’s no reason for things not to fit her properly.  They just look lumpy and crumpled, the pair of them.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> strange pic....he looks so much larger than her


I think the pic was of the TV, and that could make it odd.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I don't know if it's just me but this holding hands all the time really gets on my nerves, like when we saw her holding her belly for 9 months or when she puts her hand on his back. Maybe it's my British education, stiff upper lip, no body contact in public etc......



I'm not British and it drives me nuts. There's a place and time for everything. A work function (because yes, that's their freaking job) or church services are neither.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not British and it drives me nuts. There's a place and time for everything. A work function (because yes, that's their freaking job) or church services are neither.


This!


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> The make up is very good. Her face looks flawless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686201


I don't like it--she has freckles that have always made her look real and cute (wedding pics) and this looks like just too much foundation. Just my opinion though, too plastic looking for me. Could the freckles have been lasered off or something else PS-wise?


----------



## doni

lightofurlife said:


> There are several messages in this thread, titled for Meghan, about how great Camilla is. Yet Camilla was a whole mistress having phone sex with someone’s husband and her behavior is honorable and she’s better than Meghan??


First, I really welcome diverging opinions in this thread. Makes things more interesting.

I for one prefer Camilla to Meghan. The way I look at it is this: unfaithfulness is wrong depending on the expectations of the parties involved. I do believe in Europe we tend to be more tolerant of affairs and less of divorce than the US (although this has changed of late). So for people high in office to be unfaithful to their partners... I don’t very much care or mind... It is true that in this case Diana suffered, so I guess it was morally wrong, and someone should have explained the girl what she was getting into. But Charles and Camilla were in love long before he married Diana, so in my mind, it was Camilla he was unfaithful to. I also think the only reason Charles and Camilla did not become the love story of the century is that they are both, let’s say not particularly good looking (well, and those awful telephone conversations...).

In any event, whatever Camilla did, at this point it is pretty obvious it was out of love. Plus I don’t even judge. Those are personal morals. Their business, not mine. With Meghan and Harry I judge because the things I don’t like about them have to do with the use of public funds, conflict of interest, abuse of power, privilege, greed, spin, how everything gets commercialized or branded nowadays, celebrity culture, etc. Things that interest me and where I feel entitled to judge. I pay attention to try and judge based on facts and their own words, which have been many, but no one is perfect.

As for criticizing the clothes, what is the point of gossip if one is not going to criticize the clothes (be them Camilla’s, Meghan or whoever)? I don’t think I really gossip about anyone else but royalty. Having been brought up in a monarchic system, I kind of think this is part of the deal. They are the gossip scapegoat so that we can be nice to anyone else who was not born in privilege. Gossiping about royals, including dissecting their clothes, hair and habits, is a long standing tradition.


----------



## Sharont2305

Me again with my TV pics, lol


----------



## green.bee

limom said:


> View attachment 4686149


I like the green lining of Harry's jacket.


----------



## scarlet555

Clearblueskies said:


> It needs shortening at the waist


How can you not have time for a tailor, knowing there will be photographs of you at all angles.  I don't understand this, where did she get these clothes?  You don't need a stylist to tell you, the back of your dress is bunching up, please get it fitted.


----------



## doni

daisychainz said:


> I think she hired a stylist to help her for this trip. I don't like her choices at all, but they do seem much elevated from anything we've seen before. Like serious effort has been made for her to look good at events.



Yes, a stylist well acquainted with the Queen’s tricks: To stand out, dress in one single block of a bright color.
I like the dress. I have liked all her choices this trip. But I know what my mother would have said, it is in the details. No need for a heavily reinforced strapless bra when you are wearing a high neck dress... but oh well, I guess the stylist did not intervine there. And those details are becoming less relevant nowadays...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

limom said:


> Nah, she thinks that she looks great...


 lol!


----------



## purseproblm

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t get it, there’s no reason for things not to fit her properly.  They just look lumpy and crumpled, the pair of them.


They need a stylist. But she knows best and it leads to them looking messy and unprepared consistently. Her face actually looks good too. The Endeavor Awards she was as I read elsewhere stolen from Clueless.. She's a full-on Monet. […] It's like a painting, see. From far away it's okay, but up close it's a big ol' mess


----------



## limom

doni said:


> Yes, a stylist well acquainted with the Queen’s tricks: To stand out, dress in one single block of a bright color.
> I like the dress. I have liked all her choices this trip. But I know what my mother would have said, it is in the details. No need for a heavily reinforced strapless bra when you are wearing a high neck dress... but oh well, I guess the stylist did not intervine there. And those details are becoming less relevant nowadays...


Why only looks ok when she could look flawless?
I just noticed the earrings, fab.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> I love capes so I can't hate on her cape outfits.


 how about the back of green cape dress?  I love the cape look too, but please you are not that poor or desolate if you can afford this dress, you can afford to get it altered to fit you properly.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> I think the pic was of the TV, and that could make it odd.


Yes, obviously the TV camera was looking down on them and I took the pic at an angle so you didn't see my reflection, lol


----------



## lanasyogamama

green.bee said:


> I like the green lining of Harry's jacket.


Me too, I love it.


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> Me again with my TV pics, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686206
> View attachment 4686207
> View attachment 4686208
> View attachment 4686209
> View attachment 4686210


 I guess she likes this handbag brand, or was gifted two? It looks like the same bag she wore once before in brown, the Gabriele Hearst Nina ($2K). Now that she's not a senior royal can she accept gifts?


----------



## HiromiT

scarlet555 said:


> How can you not have time for a tailor, knowing there will be photographs of you at all angles.  I don't understand this, where did she get these clothes?  You don't need a stylist to tell you, the back of your dress is bunching up, please get it fitted.


Exactly, a good tailor is what she desperately needs. She has a nice figure but not the proportions to wear clothes off the rack. She needs tweaks and tucks here and there so the garment fits HER properly. The bunching at the back of the green dress is horrible. She knew she’d be photographed from every direction.
 With all that money, it’s entirely possible to look impeccable. Heck, even I will endeavour to have my coat sleeves shortened by a mere 1/2 inch because the right sleeve length looks more polished. And no one is photographing or scrutinizing my appearance lol.

Kate may be chanelling Nancy Reagan these days, but all her garments fit perfectly and that’s half the battle.


----------



## scarlet555

limom said:


> The make up is very good. Her face looks flawless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686201



I love being able to see people freckles come through their make up.
With her though, it was never the face that was annoying or imperfect or annoying or self righteous, but what's behind it.  Anyone can look good with money, make up helps a ton, fancy clothing, but what you decide to do with it, people will see through you when you have that many eyes on you.  It's different than being a Hollywood star where they can project how the world portrays you and it's arranged, even then, people find out the truth nowadays.


----------



## mrsinsyder

scarlet555 said:


> how about the back of green cape dress?  I love the cape look too, but please you are not that poor or desolate if you can afford this dress, you can afford to get it altered to fit you properly.


Yeah I like it less after seeing more pics. The cape is a bit too heavy and I hate the fit. But I still love a cape


----------



## Lounorada

Hello Anthony Joshua 

Harry's suit jacket looks too small for him. Looks like he's conscious of it too, like he's trying to hold the buttons closed (even though he seems to fidget with his jacket a lot when in public, it's more than usual today).


----------



## limom




----------



## limom

Just because,


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> View attachment 4686244


Harry looks fully angry.


----------



## CobaltBlu

He looks like he is seething in most of the pictures.  He really looks unhappy to the core.
Meghan came close with the green dress, but it did not fit. I also agree she looked so cute with the freckles showing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry looks fully angry.


Everytime the camera was on him he looked lost. He greeted his dad an brother with a smile and a hi. He looked the most animated when speaking to Craig David and Anthony Joshua and all the children outside.


----------



## limom

What she is wearing:


----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry looks fully angry.


They all look stressed, except Meghan.


----------



## limom




----------



## imgg

limom said:


> View attachment 4686244


This picture you can really see the divide.  Harry is one of them, Meghan is not.  Harry has to be thinking, _what have I done._

Will, Harry  & Kate seem to be reflecting the situation.  Sadness, stress, anger.    Meghan is just happy as can be with all that she accomplished.


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> This picture you can really see the divide.  Harry is one of them, Meghan is not.  Harry has to be thinking, what have I done.


This is not the look of love...


----------



## Emeline

mrsinsyder said:


> Harry looks fully angry.


If he comes to realize her long term goals are not his,  he will have to steel himself through the process of big changes.
He has seen what happens when someone doesn't follow her orders. She doesn't seem to look for middle ground or reasonable compromise.
Time will tell with these two.


----------



## bisousx

limom said:


> View attachment 4686244



Once Meghan sees these photos, Harry will need to be reprogrammed again.


----------



## imgg

bisousx said:


> Once Meghan sees these photos, Harry will need to be reprogrammed again.


I'm starting to feel sorry for him for some reason, even though I shouldn't.


----------



## Alena21

sdkitty said:


> The "no one has asked me if I'm ok" alone is enough for me.  Ungrateful, insensitive - just unforgiveable to me


Let's not forget that she was whining and saying this while standing outside African orphanage where there is no assurance the kids would have food for the next day. I was trully appalled at the time that she was so self-absorbed and has lost touch with reality and this was the turning point for me!


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think *if* things do go wrong, the BRF will welcome him back and close ranks, they know how to do that. Plus everyone loves a comeback story. She will be frozen out and will have to console herself with a book deal and perhaps do theatre off Broadway.  He looks like a ticking time bomb, and especially considering he knows very well there are cameras everywhere, and he knows how to put on a game face. It looks like he has lost the ability to do that. She is in her own little world, it looks like.


----------



## sdkitty

Alena21 said:


> Let's not forget that she was whining and saying this while standing outside African orphanage where there is no assurance the kids would have food for the next day. I was trully appalled at the time that she was so self-absorbed and has lost touch with reality and this was the turning point for me!


yes, the ridiculous insensitivity along with those big doe eyes....


----------



## imgg

CobaltBlu said:


> I think *if* things do go wrong, the BRF will welcome him back and close ranks, they know how to do that. Plus everyone loves a comeback story. She will be frozen out and will have to console herself with a book deal and perhaps do theatre off Broadway.  He looks like a ticking time bomb, and especially considering he knows very well there are cameras everywhere, and he knows how to put on a game face. It looks like he has lost the ability to do that. She is in her own little world, it looks like.


She just doesn't care.  The sadness Kate, Will and Harry all have in their eyes.  Meghan again is smug.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I think *if* things do go wrong, the BRF will welcome him back and close ranks, they know how to do that. Plus everyone loves a comeback story. She will be frozen out and will have to console herself with a book deal and perhaps do theatre off Broadway.  He looks like a ticking time bomb, and especially considering he knows very well there are cameras everywhere, and he knows how to put on a game face. It looks like he has lost the ability to do that. She is in her own little world, it looks like.


if this happens she'll have to do some big networking - her strong suit


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> WHY DOESN'T HER DRESS FIT
> 
> EVER


Don’t even get me started! I can’t!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

imgg said:


> She just doesn't care.  The sadness Kate, Will and Harry all have in their eyes.  Meghan again is smug.


All the comments about how she's won and she looks so happy make me sick. It's obvious this family has been ripped apart, and that's not a happy thing no matter how crappy they may have been.


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> View attachment 4686270


This picture says it all really.


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> She just doesn't care.  The sadness Kate, Will and Harry all have in their eyes.  Meghan again is smug.


we're assuming things based on photos and videos.  but from what I'm seeing I'm liking her less and less.  First big blow for me was the Africa "no one is asking how I am". 
 Second one for me is the recent videos of her pulling and tugging on Harry and pushing in front of him.  Not saying a woman needs to be subservient to her husband but he should not have to be pushed around by her.  He's a friggin prince.  Look at what you are doing to your prize  catch woman.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> All the comments about how she's won and she looks so happy make me sick. It's obvious this family has been ripped apart, and that's not a happy thing no matter how crappy they may have been.


What exactly has she won?
Those people saying that she won, have to be orphans, or morons or both.


----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


> All the comments about how she's won and she looks so happy make me sick. It's obvious this family has been ripped apart, and that's not a happy thing no matter how crappy they may have been.


The energy of these photos is very telling and sad.  I hope Harry gets his sh*t together before its too late.


----------



## mshermes

limom said:


> View attachment 4686270


The look on Harry’s face......yikes!


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> What exactly has she won?


A balding, Nazi man-child with no actual skills or real education?


----------



## imgg

sdkitty said:


> we're assuming things based on photos and videos.  but from what I'm seeing I'm liking her less and less.  First big blow for me was the Africa "no one is asking how I am".
> Second one for me is the recent videos of her pulling and tugging on Harry and pushing in front of him.  Not saying a woman needs to be subservient to her husband but he should not have to be pushed around by her.  He's a friggin prince.  Look at what you are doing to your prize  catch woman.


I think you can tell a lot from photos.  Not everything, but photos capture a lot of emotions.


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> I think you can tell a lot from photos.  Not everything, but photos capture a lot of emotions.


The main point to me is that he was attending a special service of joy and celebration. 
He looked a combination of sad, angry and wistful. 
I  feel sorry for him.


----------



## imgg

Emeline said:


> The main point to me is that he was attending a special service of joy and celebration.
> He looked a combination of sad, angry and wistful.
> I  feel sorry for him.


I do too, but shouldn't.  It was his own doing.  Sometimes the grass isn't always greener, but tempting when you feel stagnate in life.  If only he waited a little longer for someone who could have supported him or at least each other.  Giving up everything he knows is not in his best interest.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> Some more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always finding the camera...


Could someone please get that woman some proper undergarments? Seriously.


----------



## youngster

I don't hate either Harry or Meghan. I'm sure I'll continue to check out this thread from time to time but they won't be that interesting to me when they are just celebrities. I watch the royals for the state events, the historic jewels, the gowns, the historic services, and because it's fun to see them show up to cut ribbons or shake hands in places like Plumpton or Pucklechurch.  I like the Queen very much too.  At 93, she's amazing.

My general feeling about the two of them is amusement coupled with exasperation.  What a cool, lavish life it would be, all in exchange for showing up at a wide variety of interesting events and locations around the UK and the world, meeting people, listening to people talk about their lives and their concerns, helping the military and their families, hanging out with school children, bringing attention to some area or some event. Maybe some of the events and locations aren't so interesting, but the people are.  They all have stories to share and it would be a privilege to be the one to go and meet them.  They could have all the privacy and security they need by living at Frogmore cottage or have Charles buy them a different country home further from London.  Security, privacy . . . solved! Meghan could have cut back her appearances to the bare minimum, spent tons of time with Archie, explained it as her settling in to her new country and motherhood and people would understand. William and Kate did this in the first, early years of their marriage.   

Instead, we have their "pursuit of financial independence".  Harry would rather give paid speeches to JP Morgan talking about his mother.  Meghan would rather do some acting gig that will be forgotten after its aired.  They want to sit in a chair next to Ellen and talk about  . . . what? Their latest money making venture?  It makes them both appear shallow at heart, with a side helping of "grass is greener" syndrome.  It's ironic too, that Meghan couldn't handle living in another country, even a first world, English speaking country, after all the emphasis about her open, woke mind, her travel, and degree in international relations. Turns out moving to another country requires effort and the desire to understand the culture, customs and history. Instead, global citizen Meghan runs back to Canada to get back to the familiar and comfortable and easy.  So, I'm both amused and exasperated with the two of them.


----------



## lightofurlife

Vintage Leather said:


> You must be new here.
> 
> This is a fashion forum. Even when we love a celebrity, we still give serious side-eye to people when they show up badly dressed.  :cough: anyone notice how Kate's been looking like the reincarnation of Nancy Regan? :cough: It's worse when they are using fashion to give someone the symbolic middle finger.
> 
> I agree that Megan is beautiful, driven, and while I know nothing about their relationship, I like to think that Harry loves her.
> 
> Why do you believe her to be kind?



I understand! I understand criticizing too because when you’re in the public light you’re going to have people who don’t agree with you.

The stark contrasts of everyone else is perfect and only Meghan messes up just caught me off guard.

I respect everyone’s opinions though. I just personally don’t think Meghan is the anti christ though.

I think she is kind because as she pursues her duties, and even prior too, she made an effort to show women who look like me we can be in spaces we have never been allowed in. 

Whether that’s in her acting spaces or even in royal spaces. It warms my heart that she tells me I can do it too because I look like her and she did it.

She looks beautiful in her green dress!


----------



## Annawakes

mrsinsyder said:


> Some more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always finding the camera...


That’s interesting.  The lining of H’s suit jacket is green to match her dress.  Must have been a newly made suit for him?


----------



## Alena21

mrsinsyder said:


> All the comments about how she's won and she looks so happy make me sick. It's obvious this family has been ripped apart, and that's not a happy thing no matter how crappy they may have been.


Indeed! If she trully loved him she would have never uprooted him.  She took advantage of his Oedipus complex but he still loves his relatives and country. The Royal Family bend over backwards for her.  They put up with her screwed up family situation, Prince Charles even walked her down the aisle, the Queen gave her one of her best aide to teach her the ropes. She only showed massive ingratitude towards all of them. Heart wrenching! She didn't EVEN try. A true malignant narcissist. She doesn't seem to care about the baby eithe . Somewhere here I saw pple call him Meal Ticket. That's what it is for her.  I don't think she is an example to follow. Quite the opposite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Alena21

threadbender said:


> Could someone please get that woman some proper undergarments? Seriously.


She always looks undone and frumpy, there is always something off.Lacks elegance and class. Pple are right one can't buy them.


----------



## Sharont2305

Part 1


----------



## imgg

lightofurlife said:


> I understand! I understand criticizing too because when you’re in the public light you’re going to have people who don’t agree with you.
> 
> The stark contrasts of everyone else is perfect and only Meghan messes up just caught me off guard.
> 
> I respect everyone’s opinions though. I just personally don’t think Meghan is the anti christ though.
> 
> I think she is kind because as she pursues her duties, and even prior too, she made an effort to show women who look like me when can be in spaces we have never been allowed in. Whether that’s in her acting spaces or even in royal spaces. It warms my heart that she tells me I can do it too because I look like her and she did it.
> 
> She looks beautiful in her green dress!


It's not Meghan per se, it's the fact she disrupted a long standing intuition and did it with such disrespect.  If anyone else did exactly what Meghan has done, it would be the same negative talk.  Had Meghan married a big time Hollywood producer and was just as obnoxious as she is now, no one would care nearly as much.


----------



## Sharont2305

Part 2 Compare and contrast this with the Kensington Royal post which was 10 pics which represented the service well imo
Two pictures, both have Meghan in it.


----------



## Vlad

My favorite online photo publication actually has a write up on the rain photo photo that was discussed here a few days ago:

https://petapixel.com/2020/03/09/th...arry-and-meghan-was-lit-by-a-strangers-flash/

Full, uncropped image:


----------



## lightofurlife

imgg said:


> It's not Meghan per se, it's the fact she disrupted a long standing intuition and did it with such disrespect.  If anyone else did exactly what Meghan has done, it would be the same negative talk.  Had Meghan married a big time Hollywood producer and was just as obnoxious as she is now, no one would care nearly as much.



Got it, I understand what you mean. She came in and did not do things the right way instead of either deciding not to join the institution or respecting it.

Do you all think Harry is partly responsible for allowing it?

I can admit I don’t know much about royal protocol because I’m American so I was not aware that she was breaking the rules. I genuinely thought things were hard for her and she was in love so she was doing her best to have both the love of her life and be away from something that was taxing on her.


----------



## imgg

lightofurlife said:


> Got it, I understand what you mean. She came in and did not do things the right way instead of either deciding not to join the institution or respecting it.
> 
> Do you all think Harry is partly responsible for allowing it?
> 
> I can admit I don’t know much about royal protocol because I’m American so I was not aware that she was breaking the rules. I genuinely thought things were hard for her and she was in love so she was doing her best to have both the love of her life and be away from something that was taxing on her.


Harry is absolutely responsible, probably more so.  I'm all for them walking away, it was just how they did it (via Instagram) telling the Queen what work they will and will not do, trying to profit off the Royal name after they wanted to walk away.  Earlier on, not respecting basic instructions like not taking photos of BP.  I am American too, but if I am told to not take photos inside an historic building and I am dating a member of that family, I am going to show some respect.  There's a huge list...


----------



## mrsinsyder

I guess posting TPF screenshots on another forum wasn't interesting enough 

The new theory is that the courtiers were forcing Meghan to wear bad clothes and that's why she looks much better all of a sudden. Hmm.


----------



## lightofurlife

imgg said:


> Harry is absolutely responsible, probably more so.  I'm all for them walking away, it was just how they did it (via Instagram) telling the Queen what work they will and will not do, trying to profit off the Royal name after they wanted to walk away.  Earlier on, not respecting basic instructions like not taking photos of BP.  I am American too, but if I am told to not take photos inside an historic building and I am dating a member of that family, I am going to show some respect.  There's a huge list...



Thank you for educating me, I need to go back and look at her works knowing the protocols, my perspective will be different I’m sure.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Just saw this on twitter, think it's been doing the rounds over the last few days, from last year's Commonwealth service.



And this is from today:


----------



## imgg

lightofurlife said:


> Thank you for educating me, I need to go back and look at her works knowing the protocols, my perspective will be different I’m sure.


Yeah, for sure.  Meghan was really given every opportunity and the Queen I feel has bent over backwards to try and accommodate her.  Meghan did not want to respect the Royal traditions and felt she was entitled to anything she wanted.  Harry is absolutely the one to blame.


----------



## Alena21

imgg said:


> Yeah, for sure.  Meghan was really given every opportunity and the Queen I feel has bent over backwards to try and accommodate her.  Meghan did not want to respect the Royal traditions and felt she was entitled to anything she wanted.  Harry is absolutely the one to blame.


The saying " you can take the peasant out of the village but can't take the village out of him/her" turns out to be true.


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess posting TPF screenshots on another forum wasn't interesting enough
> 
> The new theory is that the courtiers were forcing Meghan to wear bad clothes and that's why she looks much better all of a sudden. Hmm.


Which forum is it?
I need a laugh today!


----------



## Jayne1

I haven't liked her recent outfits but then, I tend to only like her casual style, in general.

She has been covered up to her neck both times and it doesn't suit her (IMO) and looks odd. Like a mummy. Unless it's a coat, and her dresses haven't been, have they?


----------



## lalame

She looked gorgeous today! Especially in this photo:




Yas girl, go on with your bad self in a dress that actually fits and makes your skin tone pop! I think she wore some of her better outfits this trip than she had in awhile (minus ill fitting zipper one). Though I’ve noticed she started wearing more dramatic lip colors and I think true nudes suit her much better.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think she is trying to look as ROYAL as possible this visit, since her future depends on it.  

Since the Queen allowed her to keep her acting career, it’s a shame she has such tunnel-vision for Hollywood and Instagram.


----------



## PewPew

mrsinsyder said:


> The new theory is that the courtiers were forcing Meghan to wear bad clothes and that's why she looks much better all of a sudden. Hmm.



I know money can’t buy taste, but the courtier sabotage theory is particularly absurd given 1) the $500,000 wardrobe budget, and 2) how carefully MM crafted her image and PR long before marriage. She may have been out of her comfort zone dressing for court (tbh no one could be intrinsically prepared for the cray hat life), but she definitely made her own choices.


----------



## lalame

Sophisticatted said:


> I think she is trying to look as ROYAL as possible this visit, since her future depends on it.
> 
> Since the Queen allowed her to keep her acting career, it’s a shame she has such tunnel-vision for Hollywood and Instagram.



Yeah I agree... the outfits definitely slanted a bit more "mature"/heavy (matronly to some) than usual. The color has helped them look a bit fresh but the style choices are a message imo. In some ways I think it is more age and station-appropriate than her natural way of dressing... thinking of that reformation dress with the slit yikes (I know, totally different occasion).


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> The new theory is that the courtiers were forcing Meghan to wear bad clothes and that's why she looks much better all of a sudden. Hmm.


Ugh that’s so silly.  So she’s strong, independent, driven, Hollywood A list, blah blah, but forced to wear ugly ill fitting clothes?  Make your mind up - what a joke!


----------



## Sharont2305

Camillas smirk(ish)
I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


Harry’s face tho!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think this will be their Instagram post on March 31st. 


Their Royal highnesses

Sixth in line

Royal 

Their Royal highnesses

Sixth in line

Royal

Their Royal highnesses

Sixth in line

Royal

Their Royal highnesses

Sixth in line

Royal

Their Royal highnesses

Sixth in line

Royal

Their Royal highnesses

Sixth in line


----------



## maryg1

lightofurlife said:


> Do you all think Harry is partly responsible for allowing it?


Definitely, because she barely spent one year and a half and she didn’t even try to adjust to protocol etc, but probably Harry wasn’t strong enough to make her understand that things could be adjusted, but with patience, time and respect. 
I’ve always had the feeling she found the protocol old and dusty, and she was always “I know things better than you, so you adjust to my behavior”.
As you can see, people in this thread are ready to applaud a nice makeup, outfit or jewelry, only she doesn’t seem to get a dress fit properly.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


Meghan Still looking at the camera 
Interesting range of expressions caught there.


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> I guess posting TPF screenshots on another forum wasn't interesting enough
> 
> The new theory is that the courtiers were forcing Meghan to wear bad clothes and that's why she looks much better all of a sudden. Hmm.


I have not been there for a couple of days. Not sure I should. lol So many threads are unreadable!

The clothes are not so bad. They just do not fit her or she is not wearing proper under garments. The red at the military event was a blatant act of disrespect. I cannot imagine anyone "forcing" her to wear anything she did not wish to wear.


----------



## mia55

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


I want to know why Harry is so mad in this pic.


----------



## CeeJay

Emeline said:


> The main point to me is that he was attending a special service of joy and celebration.
> He looked a combination of sad, angry and wistful.
> I  feel sorry for him.


Can't remember where I read it, but one of his 'close' friends commented on how .. at this time, Harry was starting to realize what he is giving up and that he was very wistful.  Alas, a little too late!


----------



## Sharont2305

mia55 said:


> I want to know why Harry is so mad in this pic.


Probably thinking what the hell am I doing?


----------



## lanasyogamama

mia55 said:


> I want to know why Harry is so mad in this pic.


Himself?!

oops, read that as who


----------



## Sharont2305

I really feel for Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

limom said:


> Just because,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686245


He is too fine 


limom said:


> View attachment 4686270


Harry looking like he's about to blow a fuse.


Sharont2305 said:


> Part 2 Compare and contrast this with the Kensington Royal post which was 10 pics which represented the service well imo
> Two pictures, both have Meghan in it.



According to Meghan, there is an *' I '* in team  Harry just looks like a bystander in the photos, she's main focus, of course. Couldn't even manage to post a picture of hmm, I dunno... the QUEEN!!


mrsinsyder said:


> I guess posting TPF screenshots on another forum wasn't interesting enough
> *The new theory is that the courtiers were forcing Meghan to wear bad clothes and that's why she looks much better all of a sudden. Hmm*.


----------



## imgg

Sharont2305 said:


> I really feel for Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686411


Meghan looks like she is just playing another role.


----------



## Tivo

Sharont2305 said:


> This picture says it all really.


WOW


----------



## lalame

Maybe Meghan is one of those people who have a style and can't dress out of that style, like have bad taste outside of their signature style.


----------



## Lounorada

Kim O'Meara said:


> Just saw this on twitter, think it's been doing the rounds over the last few days, from last year's Commonwealth service.
> 
> And this is from today:



That _look_ by M in the first video, excuse me...







Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


OMG, Harry with the face like thunder.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> That _look_ by M in the first video, excuse me...


If looks could kill


----------



## Vintage Leather

Lounorada said:


> According to Meghan, there is an *' I '* in team
> View attachment 4686414


 
There is! The i is hidden in the A hole.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think this marriage will implode, no amicable divorce here


----------



## jess236

prettyprincess said:


> Calling someone thirsty and what’s being said in this thread is a little different. Page after page you guys rip her looks to shreds, criticize her mothering skills, call her names, etc.
> And when someone brings it up, the inevitable response is “hate is a strong word.”
> Lol, you hate her, just own it.


 I don't think it's hate. It's more incredulity. She's just not that special to have this much attention on her and it's annoying.  I think if anyone is to blame for this whole mess, it's Harry. As many posters have mentioned, Meghan might be clueless about the BRF, but Harry should have known better. I guess he's just a troublemaker and attention seeker.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So it begins.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> So it begins.
> View attachment 4686461


*$16k a night????* .. that will blow through his money in no time and I doubt that Prince Charles is going to pony up the rest!!!  WTF are they thinking???


----------



## limom

It is just BS, imho.
They might be dumb but not that dumb, imho


----------



## lalame

Whoa, at first I was like “oh that’s not too bad...” but then I noticed it said PER NIGHT! Wtf, are they also housing a full household of chef, butler, valet, nanny, driver, etc...? Hope for that money they’ll at least let Doria stay over!


----------



## jess236

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing, but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.



I don't think it's about hating MM personally, it's rather that she stands for a type that we all know - people who are not talented or special but have a high opinion of themselves. The type that will use any means to further themselves at the expense of others.  She is that person.  

All her “fans’ are people that don’t see her poor character or are like her and she serves as a role model for their gold-digging dreams .  She is a conniving person that found the weakness in someone in a social league above her own. We all know someone like this! No one likes to be faced with an immoral and unjust situation without commenting.


----------



## maryg1

Sharont2305 said:


> I think this marriage will implode, no amicable divorce here


When they married, I was giving them 5 years marriage. But now I’m not so sure they will end up divorcing, that would mean like admitting people were right about telling them to wait before getting married, and they don’t seem to be on the wrong.
Unless she gets tired and files for divorce, of course trying to paint herself like the victim and saying she had no choice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


Meghan is the only one that looks remotely happy. I think she just doesn't understand what's going on, she isn't British or interested in this royal stuff, it probably makes no sense to her. Just show up and smile.


----------



## lalame

Harry seems to have a rebellious streak so I imagine at some point he’ll hit his breaking point with this. He was probably swept away in the beginning, then indignant to other people’s criticism, and that solidified his resolve to stay. But you’re starting to see him grit his teeth a bit here... it’s only a matter of time.


----------



## youngster

maryg1 said:


> When they married, I was giving them 5 years marriage. But now I’m not so sure they will end up divorcing, that would mean like admitting people were right about telling them to wait before getting married, and they don’t seem to be on the wrong.
> Unless she gets tired and files for divorce, of course trying to paint herself like the victim and saying she had no choice.



It will be interesting.  Time will tell.  I read an opinion piece that said since Harry has literally given up everything (family, friends, his life work, his country), she needs to make it worth it, which is a tall, tall order, almost impossible really.  Now, you can say that she did the same two years ago, gave up her friends, work, and country to move to the UK. However, she wasn't leaving behind all that he is leaving behind.  Her TV series was ending, she has only one family member that she speaks to, and she has a tendency to replace friends frequently.  

Still, I think Harry will hang in there as long as Archie is little, maybe until he's even 8 or 10 years old.  It would be so humiliating for him otherwise and you know that he doesn't want to live across an ocean from Archie, at least until Archie is older.  I guess it will depend on how difficult she really is behind closed doors, and how much financial success they can achieve.  Tough time to be starting up a not-for-profit or a brand or whatever they plan to do. I'm not sure how many businesses are going to be lining up to pay him $1 million/speech in this environment.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

WELCOME BACK to the USA Harry and Meg!

Thought this thread would be on page 5 or more since nobody cares about them.


----------



## imgg

I'm going to go on a limb and give it two years tops.  When the dust settles and he no longer has his family or friends and is depending 100% on someone who only has their own best interest at heart, it is going to spiral out of control and he will go back to England.


----------



## mia55

I’m giving five years max. Once the media moves on, ventures fail,Charles is king and Williams controls dutchy, Harry will be back.


----------



## youngster

BagOuttaHell said:


> WELCOME BACK to the USA Harry and Meg!
> 
> Thought this thread would be on page 5 or more since nobody cares about them.



If this thread were on page 5, it'd be 2009. Page 1 was started in 2006.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

youngster said:


> If this thread were on page 5, it'd be 2009. Page 1 was started in 2006.



I meant page 5 of this forum.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Kim O'Meara said:


> Just saw this on twitter, think it's been doing the rounds over the last few days, from last year's Commonwealth service.



This is downright scary.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Honestly, Harry's face in those pictures breaks my heart. Yes he is lying in the bed he made, but...yeah.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I think this marriage will implode, no amicable divorce here


At this point, I hope so for Harry's sake. I don't even know what makes me feel so strongly about some celebrity couple, but I do.


----------



## rose60610

Once M&H announced they'd "step back" there was bound to be all the publicity about it, so nobody is surprised at that.  Even if Harry is regretful about it now, he has to save face and go through with the whole plan until it's official. I haven't heard of any list of Cha-Ching projects. Maybe they have many? Some? None? 

My guess, H&M will split within a year. M will pretend to be oh-so-protective of Harry for the cameras and leverage him for every dollar/pound she can get. Harry will run back to the Crown before his grandparents die and wedge himself back into royal life. Meghan will do some freak out things like Britany Spears did because she won't be able to tolerate not being covered every day. 

What ever happens, it'll be a train wreck, and Meghan is head engineer. Choo-Choo!


----------



## Blyen

I think he will go back as soon as one of his grandparents passes.
Sadly I don't think he will be ready to admit if he's unhappy before it comes to that.


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> I will forever compare her good makeup looks to her wedding day...Her face looks great here!


while I don't hate her, I do dislike her to the extent that I find it hard to compliment her ......I can say she's attractive.  that's about as far as I can go.


----------



## kissmysass

To those that keep coming in this thread saying "why would you keep commenting on someone you do not like"?
That is what a forum is for. Sure the comments can be OTT but I am sure MM is not coming in here reading everything said about her.
Us commenting on her is no different than the other celebrity based threads.
Her fans seem to think that she should be exempt from any harsh criticism and unfortunately that is not the case.
Almost all celebrities get it....why should she be different?
It is quite sad that when Kate first married in to the family she was getting flack as well but I do not remember people pointing out how unfair the treatment was.
With MM it is like we must praise her for everything....you guys do that enough for all of us


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Once M&H announced they'd "step back" there was bound to be all the publicity about it, so nobody is surprised at that.  Even if Harry is regretful about it now, he has to save face and go through with the whole plan until it's official. I haven't heard of any list of Cha-Ching projects. Maybe they have many? Some? None?
> 
> My guess, H&M will split within a year. M will pretend to be oh-so-protective of Harry for the cameras and leverage him for every dollar/pound she can get. Harry will run back to the Crown before his grandparents die and wedge himself back into royal life. Meghan will do some freak out things like Britany Spears did because she won't be able to tolerate not being covered every day.
> 
> What ever happens, it'll be a train wreck, and Meghan is head engineer. Choo-Choo!


No doubt she is the head engineer, but I honestly don't think she thought this through its entirety.  I think she thought she was "smarter" than the BRF, and up to this point, nope .. and I don't think it's going to get any easier.  The plan of having Harry talk at various "wealthy" Investors or Financial Services meetings?!?! .. uh, not now .. especially in light of the virus!  In addition, with the market votality? - again, nope. 

What I saw in the last few days is Harry seeming to really reflect on what he will be leaving behind.  Meghan? .. nope, I think she just thought "_oh, whatever .. just paste a smile on my face and get it done with_".  Yes, we all know that if either grandparent becomes ill to the point of impending death, Harry will be back in the UK in a heartbeat.  Will Meghan? .. I doubt it.  To me, that would be the perfect time to talk some sense into him; I just wonder how much of this is his 'rebellious' streak vis-a-vis - "_you all are not going to tell me that I can't marry Meghan or that I have to take more time_".  I could totally see that .. but now?   Yeah, the holidays and the first few weeks in January might have been a nice change, but let's face it .. the pageantry, the rituals, the life of a British royal is extremely seeped into his bloodstream and I suspect that as time goes on, he's going to come to the revelation of "_what the heck did I get myself into_"???   Yes, I totally see him coming back into the fold .. but then there is Archie, and therein lies a whole new can of fish and I suspect that will be a rotten situation to deal with.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> No doubt she is the head engineer, but I honestly don't think she thought this through its entirety.  I think she thought she was "smarter" than the BRF, and up to this point, nope .. and I don't think it's going to get any easier.  The plan of having Harry talk at various "wealthy" Investors or Financial Services meetings?!?! .. uh, not now .. especially in light of the virus!  In addition, with the market votality? - again, nope.
> 
> What I saw in the last few days is Harry seeming to really reflect on what he will be leaving behind.  Meghan? .. nope, I think she just thought "_oh, whatever .. just paste a smile on my face and get it done with_".  Yes, we all know that if either grandparent becomes ill to the point of impending death, Harry will be back in the UK in a heartbeat.  Will Meghan? .. I doubt it.  To me, that would be the perfect time to talk some sense into him; I just wonder how much of this is his 'rebellious' streak vis-a-vis - "_you all are not going to tell me that I can't marry Meghan or that I have to take more time_".  I could totally see that .. but now?   Yeah, the holidays and the first few weeks in January might have been a nice change, but let's face it .. the pageantry, the rituals, the life of a British royal is extremely seeped into his bloodstream and I suspect that as time goes on, he's going to come to the revelation of "_what the heck did I get myself into_"???   Yes, I totally see him coming back into the fold .. but then there is Archie, and therein lies a whole new can of fish and I suspect that will be a rotten situation to deal with.


I don't think either of them thought this through very well, was going lighting speed all on emotion, that's why I think it will crash and burn in less than two years.

I agree with the poster who said Harry & Meghan as celebrities will not be that interesting.


----------



## lalame

Can you imagine the divorce settlement on that? Oh boy... wouldn't be surprised if the royals gave the whole bag away to avoid financial disclosures and etc.


----------



## mia55

They did think of a plan which included part time royal and getting all the security and allowance etc along with doing other gigs and making billions as everyone knows Harry is queens favorite and got away with things others didn’t. 

However I believe they never thought they’ll land in this kind of mess and queen will kick them out. It’ll get more interesting now considering how clueless both of them are.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Can you imagine the divorce settlement on that? Oh boy... wouldn't be surprised if the royals gave the whole bag away to avoid financial disclosures and etc.


.. and frankly, I think that is what Meghan has wanted all along .. MONEY!  I honestly do not see her as a very motherly figure, which I find very sad for poor Archie.  I do hope, somehow, they would be able to get that boy away from her, but I doubt that she would ever let that happen .. I worry about how that boy will end up having a narcissistic mother like that!


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Can you imagine the divorce settlement on that? Oh boy... wouldn't be surprised if the royals gave the whole bag away to avoid financial disclosures and etc.



There is very, very likely a prenup in place as well as a NDA that Meghan had to sign.  They've got a lot of experience with this and have been through the divorces of Diana, Sarah Ferguson, etc.  They have to remember all the crazy, cheesy stuff that Sarah Ferguson has done over the past 2 decades.  Weight Watchers, children's books, autobiography, expensive offices in New York, speeches, etc.  Sarah's tried it all pretty much and ended up mostly broke and back to living with Andrew.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> No doubt she is the head engineer, but I honestly don't think she thought this through its entirety.  I think she thought she was "smarter" than the BRF, and up to this point, nope .. and I don't think it's going to get any easier.  *The plan of having Harry talk at various "wealthy" Investors or Financial Services meetings?!?! .. uh, not now *.. especially in light of the virus!  In addition, with the market votality? - again, nope.



This is exactly what I was thinking too.  Not in this environment.  Not only are meetings and seminars and big group events been postponed or cancelled, many companies will dial that sort of completely discretionary spending way down.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> This is exactly what I was thinking too.  Not in this environment.  Not only are meetings and seminars and big group events been postponed or cancelled, many companies will dial that sort of completely discretionary spending way down.


Yes, I'm already seeing it.  In addition to these meetings being canceled, many companies are canceling any out-of-office trips ('bout time in my opinion, we have the technology to do quite a bit in the office - hello?!?!  WebEx, teleconferencing, etc.)!!!  

Mostly to me though, seriously? .. how long did they think his "sob" story (and don't mean to be harsh here .. but) would go on?  Also, that cannot be healthy for him, constantly having to rehash what happened, his feeling, etc. - I know that I couldn't do that related to sad parts of my life!  I think that is why they really wanted to use the "SussexRoyal" as a brand name, so that they could sell a bunch of 'stuff' under that name.  Of course, what I initially heard was things like books, calculators, etc. - but wait??? .. why would one buy it from them as opposed to so many other companies that make deals with you if you buy in bulk???  In addition, if this was to provide $$$ to underprivileged youth, schools (for instance - in South Africa), then .. wait .. why don't you just GIVE IT TO THEM???  The whole thing just never made any sense to me ..


----------



## Katel

lalame said:


> She looked gorgeous today! Especially in this photo:
> 
> View attachment 4686357
> 
> 
> Yas girl, go on with your bad self in a dress that actually fits and makes your skin tone pop! I think she wore some of her better outfits this trip than she had in awhile (minus ill fitting zipper one). Though I’ve noticed she started wearing more dramatic lip colors and I think true nudes suit her much better.



No shade intended lalame, but I’m not sure this one fit either ...


and what’s with the 5 o’clock shadow?



Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391



these pics of the BRF are so somber, sad. Megs has her Cheshire on tho (and Camilla’s smirk). The non-bloods...says a lot. At least Kate gets it.


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> No shade intended lalame, but I’m not sure this one fit either ...
> View attachment 4686634
> 
> and what’s with the 5 o’clock shadow?
> 
> 
> 
> these pics of the BRF are so somber, sad. Megs has her Cheshire on tho (and Camilla’s smirk). The non-bloods...says a lot. At least Kate gets it.


I think the color is beautiful, and it looked great (color-wise) on her, that bra of hers just stands out like a major-league sore thumb to me!!!  Why?, why?, why? .. wear that bra with that dress???  I don't get it ..


----------



## lalame

^ I don't know why she likes wearing those strapless bras... they're awful. I hate strapless bras! They're only a necessary evil with strapless dresses.... but for dresses like this?! Looks to maybe be a strapless bodysuit that's also bunching up fabric at the waist area? Ok, I'll give you that one.

I'm not gonna go there with the five o'clock shadow. Glass houses.


----------



## lalame

Would've thought she learned her lesson from this one... at least this one makes somewhat sense. Before I get any hate, I make these fashion mistakes sometimes too, and I'm embarrassed for myself in those moments... and now I'm embarrassed for her.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Would've thought she learned her lesson from this one... at least this one makes somewhat sense. Before I get any hate, I make these fashion mistakes sometimes too, and I'm embarrassed for myself in those moments... and now I'm embarrassed for her.


Yes!!! .. another huge mistake!  Look, we all make them .. BUT, we are not having to show our faces, fashion, etc. - to a plethora of photographers, etc.  Someone should really take her aside and say "NO MORE"!!!


----------



## youngster

Katel said:


> these pics of the BRF are so somber, sad. Megs has her Cheshire on tho (and Camilla’s smirk). The non-bloods...says a lot. At least Kate gets it.



According to the tabloids, at the service today, 2,000 programs were pre-printed which had the procession order as the Queen, then Charles and Camilla walking in behind her, then Will and Kate behind them.  Before the procession, Meghan and Harry were to take their seats with Prince Edward and Sophie.  Meghan and Harry threw a fit (or "became emotional")  at being left out of the VIP party and, to smooth things over and get them gone, Will and Kate volunteered to walk in with them and be seated at the same time, instead of walking in behind Charles and Camilla.  But, there was no time to re-print the programs of course.  This is according to the tabloids.  Seriously, those two are burning every bridge they have to the family.  Who would invite them back to anything?  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...in-Harry-Meghan-minute-Westminster-Abbey.html


----------



## Megs

Late to all of the chatter about her green ensemble today, but I am with the others who think the color is stunning on her. I really do think she is beautiful, but I like her with less makeup - she's naturally really pretty. 

The fit, well, it was just off. I guarantee you my bras don't fit well nor would look good in a dress like that after 3+ years of nursing. But, I don't know about a public appearance months in advance and have a stylist/team to dress and prep me. I don't get how any of her outfits can fit anything but perfectly, she has the team and means to get it done. Plus, she has a great figure, she can wear clothes really well, so I don't get why the fit is off on many of her looks. 

But she picked great colors for herself (not going to get into the red at the event for Harry, I know some say protocol says she shouldn't have worn that color, but I don't know that for a fact), and if she got the fit right, she would have knocked it out of the park.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## wisconsin

She is very pretty and her dresses are all striking. However, I just can’t see past the unhappiness she has created. It appears that only her wishes, her desires and her happiness matter to her. Also how she pulls Harry back from trying to greet people in that one picture and practically treating him like a child in public. I am sorry but I can’t see past that.
Maybe she will grow up and change her outlook and ways.


----------



## gracekelly

imgg said:


> Meghan looks like she is just playing another role.


Exactly.  This short trip was nothing more than a three act play for her to show the royals what they would be missing once she is gone.  Note that I only referred to her and not him.  He has only looked happy once or twice this trip.  It's hitting him hard.

I think changing the procession was a huge mistake, but I think I understand it.  There was such a huge Harkle hissy fit that it was decided to move W& K out of it so H&M wouldn't look as excluded.  The suits are walking on egg shells because they don't want to give them reasons to point fingers and say the Harkles were badly treated.  I think it was insulting to W&K to be seated instead of walking.  He WILL be King someday and she WILL be Queen.  What is so hard to understand about this?  I will diverge for a moment and say this is the mistake they have been making with Harry all along with excuses for his bad behavior.  How are they going to excuse that nonsense put on their website 2 weeks ago?  

Get them out of town and keep them out of town.  Meghan  couldn't even follow the requests not to   release pictures on the day of Camilla's speech.  She has been insulting to Cam  and even Charles in the past.  What a way to treat the hand that feeds you.  Even arrogant people can have common sense, but these two are devoid of even that.

One last thought:  I think the temperature around those two rows was below zero.  Good on Kate for ignoring Meghan.  If you watch the video, it is definitely seen to be that way.


----------



## Jktgal

Tee hee...


----------



## rose60610

rose60610 said:


> Once M&H announced they'd "step back" there was bound to be all the publicity about it, so nobody is surprised at that.  Even if Harry is regretful about it now, he has to save face and go through with the whole plan until it's official. I haven't heard of any list of Cha-Ching projects. Maybe they have many? Some? None?
> 
> My guess, H&M will split within a year. M will pretend to be oh-so-protective of Harry for the cameras and leverage him for every dollar/pound she can get. Harry will run back to the Crown before his grandparents die and wedge himself back into royal life. Meghan will do some freak out things like Britany Spears did because she won't be able to tolerate not being covered every day.
> 
> What ever happens, it'll be a train wreck, and Meghan is head engineer. Choo-Choo!




Oopsie-Daisie, I meant to say that M will pretend to be oh-so-protective of *Archie.  *Just as she couldn't stop cradling her bump but now ditches Archie every chance she gets. He serves her purpose (meal ticket leverage) no matter where he's cooped up.


----------



## Luvbolide

Clearblueskies said:


> Does Harry only have the one suit?  Or does he have racks of identical blue suits?




This suit has a bright green lining - they seem to be doing the matching colors thing !


----------



## Alena21

And just to throw this out here.
 For the International Women's Day her posting pictures of herself....mind boggling...narcissistic level 1000


----------



## sdkitty

they are still getting positive coverage in the US.  I saw something on US TV - Inside Edition maybe - where a British "reporter" was talking about how Meghan was sparkling, etc. at the recent events.


----------



## melissatrv

Annawakes said:


> That’s interesting.  The lining of H’s suit jacket is green to match her dress.  Must have been a newly made suit for him?


I am sure it was planned and made to look accidental.  Everything with them is painstakingly calculated


----------



## Alena21

Aussies can't stand them


----------



## gracekelly

Alena21 said:


> Aussies can't stand them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686715


Tell it like it is mate!  No time for useless poms!


----------



## melissatrv

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


Megan did not want to spend the rest of her life looking at Kate's back and being at the end of the line


----------



## gracekelly

melissatrv said:


> Megan did not want to spend the rest of her life looking at Kate's back and being at the end of the line


Then she shouldn't have married into this family because that is the way of things with this crowd.


----------



## imgg

Jktgal said:


> Tee hee...
> 
> View attachment 4686703


Her next prey?


----------



## melissatrv

mia55 said:


> I’m giving five years max. Once the media moves on, ventures fail,Charles is king and Williams controls dutchy, Harry will be back.


I give it 5 years and one more baby.  Harry will never leave her though.  You can tell he loves her more than she loves him; she is in the power position.  He also does not want to hear "I told you so" from William and others who tried to talk sense into him (that he jumped into this too soon).  He will go back to the UK, but only after Megan blindsides him with divorce papers (after meeting with her lawyer for a year secretly to come up with an exit strategy).  The Queen knows this is inevitable and that is why she did not strip his Duke title or HRH style altogether but left the door open.


----------



## melissatrv

gracekelly said:


> Then she shouldn't have married into this family because that is the way of things with this crowd.


Yup.  That is what I meant by it.  But she thought she was going to "modernize" the monarchy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## prettyprincess

jess236 said:


> I don't think it's hate. It's more incredulity. She's just not that special to have this much attention on her and it's annoying.  I think if anyone is to blame for this whole mess, it's Harry. As many posters have mentioned, Meghan might be clueless about the BRF, but Harry should have known better. I guess he's just a troublemaker and attention seeker.



I guess we’ll forever agree to disagree.
Maybe mods should consider having a separate Meghan and Harry fan thread or a Meghan fashion thread for people who want to enjoy them without having to go through 80 pages of the negative stuff.


----------



## muchstuff

prettyprincess said:


> I guess we’ll forever agree to disagree.
> Maybe mods should consider having a separate Meghan and Harry fan thread or a Meghan fashion thread for people who want to enjoy them without having to go through 80 pages of the negative stuff.


There is a Meghan fashion thread .


----------



## prettyprincess

muchstuff said:


> There is a Meghan fashion thread .


Just saw it, thank you


----------



## jess236

prettyprincess said:


> I guess we’ll forever agree to disagree.
> Maybe mods should consider having a separate Meghan and Harry fan thread or a Meghan fashion thread for people who want to enjoy them without having to go through 80 pages of the negative stuff.



I thought the only fan of Meghan's was Meghan.


----------



## prettyprincess

jess236 said:


> I thought the only fan of Meghan's was Meghan.


It’s safe to say (I think) I’m also a big fan


----------



## jess236

prettyprincess said:


> It’s safe to say (I think) I’m also a big fan


We all know that, Meghan. Thanks for dropping by


----------



## prettyprincess

jess236 said:


> We all know that, Meghan. Thanks for dropping by


Haha!! So...if I’m the princess does that make everyone else the peasants?? 
Jk, jk, put the pitchforks down.


----------



## jess236

prettyprincess said:


> Haha!! So...if I’m the princess does that make everyone else the peasants??
> Jk, jk, put the pitchforks down.



Hmmm, did you forget that you left the BRF and that your titles were taken away. Nevertheless, even before your fall from grace, you were never a Princess my dear.  Still delusions of grandeur that have no basis in reality.


----------



## Jktgal

prettyprincess said:


> It’s safe to say (I think) I’m also a big fan



I'm also a fan of the Markles!! I've had so much laughs in this thread and some mornings it made my day. Those Cambridges, Yorkses, etc are yaaaawn, give me the Sparkles any day!!


----------



## Jktgal

imgg said:


> Her next prey?



Nah, she only dates hairy white guys...


----------



## scarlet555

Funny, I’ve had so much laugh on this thread too, not as a fan! Makes me appreciate Kate Middleton much more and I did not look once at her before this.  I guess that’s what perseverance does, especially when others run off of their royal duties, makes you look so much better.  Ah the joys of patience.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> There is very, very likely a prenup in place as well as a NDA that Meghan had to sign.



Prenups are not legally binding in the UK.


----------



## Lodpah

Just checking in to read if Meghan the man-eater is still behaving badly. Like someone says all the time here, carry on.


----------



## hedur

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391



I have to laugh because this photo seems to sum up what I think about the whole situation.

This is partly tongue in cheek because a photo, being just a moment in time, can never tell us what’s really happening…but from everything I’ve seen I think this one is just a little spot on.

Everyone in this photo is natural. Everyone except Meghan. She’s putting on a show. The Queen, Charles, Camilla, Willian, and Kate, are just living their lives. Harry is angry because of his situation. He let it all happen but I can’t blame him for being upset. At least he’s honest in the moment. But Meghan can never be honest in public.  She will always be acting for the cameras. It’s who she is.

The contrast between the videos on instagram of Meghan and Kate recently are striking. Kate is natural and genuine... Meghan is…forced. It’s awkward to watch.

I hope Harry really loves her and is finding some happiness for now. I also hope he can swallow his pride and return to those who truly value him when she inevitably leaves.

Just a yank who doesn’t have to pay for their lives sharing her thoughts…


----------



## Alena21

With her short neck covered by the green shawl it looks like her head is stuck directly on her body. This is an outfit for a woman with long elegant neck. Not the short stub she has.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Interesting article on Daily Beast with a breakdown of the awkward seating and vibe between the “No-longer-fab” four. Some snippets:

This could, so easily—with the merest set of smiles and waves, or even the barest of conversations—have been an occasion of reconciliation in front of the cameras (real or not). Instead, it was an excruciating ignore-a-thon, a masterclass of social distancing.

This was despite the fact that, intelligently, steps had been taken to eliminate awkward standing-around-together time and the two warring couples were led directly to their seats on arrival.
—-
Yes, that’s right: two brothers and their wives, involved in one of the most public falling-outs of the year, couldn’t bring themselves to even pretend to say:

“How are you doing?”

“Yeah alright man,” and smile.

That is literally all it would have taken to nudge the narrative onto a different trajectory.​


----------



## psychedelic

This is hilarious 
Seems like she’s not welcome in America too


----------



## doni

prettyprincess said:


> Haha!! So...if I’m the princess does that make everyone else the peasants??
> .



No, makes us subjects Your Royal Highness


----------



## Clearblueskies

psychedelic said:


> This is hilarious
> Seems like she’s not welcome in America too



Brilliant!


----------



## andrashik

The thing that makes me chuckle is the fact that I have seen some users here asking Meghan's fans to share their views on her behavior captured on cameras and not only - pushing Harry around, breaking protocol, the statements on their website showing entitlement etc, yet none of them even tried to explain, only resorting to say that everyone here hates her.


----------



## Grande Latte

Not green on the last day! Much prefer Kate's all red ensemble. She looks like she's celebrating.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391



I think they're all pretty much p****d off, Harry looks downright angry: the only one smiling all over the place is M. She probably thinks "thank God this is the last I'll see of these horrible people!"

I bet she's flying back today.....


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I really feel for Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686411



Agree.

God she looks so smug in this pic, well in all of them actually!


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> I think they're all pretty much p****d off, Harry looks downright angry: the only one smiling all over the place is M. She probably thinks "thank God this is the last I'll see of these horrible people!"
> 
> I bet she's flying back today.....


Look at Charles face, poor man.
I wonder how often, in the coming months Harry will come over to visit. Logistically it's going to be a nightmare, they probably don't see each other enough already given their (especially Charles) schedules, never mind being on another continent. William is on record, on film, saying he wished he and the children saw more of their granddad, and they live in London!


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> She probably thinks "thank God this is the last I'll see of these horrible people!"



These "horrible people" who have paid for... 
.... this outfit I'm wearing
.... the jewellery I'm wearing
.... the majority of my wardrobe
.... my veneers
.... any work I've done to my face
.... my wedding
.... the renovation of the house I've hardly lived in

Yes, these are horrible people.... toxic, but as long as your "okay" then that's fine.


----------



## mdcx

lalame said:


> Would've thought she learned her lesson from this one... at least this one makes somewhat sense. Before I get any hate, I make these fashion mistakes sometimes too, and I'm embarrassed for myself in those moments... and now I'm embarrassed for her.


And she has basically a wardrobe mistress at her disposal to fit things, advise on undergarments, advise on dress code etc. It’s really another way to say FU imo, blatantly disregarding all the expertise there to guide her.


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> Camillas smirk(ish)
> I'd really love to know her thoughts on all this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4686391


I would guess:
“Well this is a right bloody co*k up. The little madam really has us in a lather. She better be on the next flight out or there’ll be carnage.”


----------



## mdcx

Personally I think M will break H down until he’s basically incapable of functioning, then message the BRF Head Nurse to come and get her boy. Oh, and she will strip his assets as much as poss before such time.
Then it’s not overtly M’s “fault” that the marriage ended. Just Harry is so unwell, you see.
Poor Kate, M really seems to view her as an enemy.

ETA I read a comment on the DM that M had sent K a knife as a Christmas gift! I would hope not, but she does give off some very nasty vibes toward K.


----------



## lanasyogamama

You nailed it. I couldn’t figure out what was bothering me about the outfit, because the color is so beautiful. It’s that the outfit completely swallowed her neck.


----------



## mdcx

lanasyogamama said:


> You nailed it. I couldn’t figure out what was bothering me about the outfit, because the color is so beautiful. It’s that the outfit completely swallowed her neck.


M is short waisted I believe. Thus she needs a fair bit of the length from collarbone to crotch of a standard fit garment removed, essentially. Otherwise the excess “height” in the garment will bunch up through the torso area.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Grande Latte said:


> Not green on the last day! Much prefer Kate's all red ensemble. She looks like she's celebrating.
> 
> View attachment 4686833


Just realizing this is an all-red too as Meghan tried the other night, yet this comes off better - maybe because the coat isn't full-length so her legs give a color-break?


----------



## Clearblueskies

duna said:


> I think they're all pretty much p****d off, Harry looks downright angry: the only one smiling all over the place is M. She probably thinks "thank God this is the last I'll see of these horrible people!"
> 
> I bet she's flying back today.....


I bet she’s gathering more piccies for the Instagram acc first.


Sharont2305 said:


> These "horrible people" who have paid for...
> .... this outfit I'm wearing
> .... the jewellery I'm wearing
> .... the majority of my wardrobe
> .... my veneers
> .... any work I've done to my face
> .... my wedding
> .... the renovation of the house I've hardly lived in
> 
> Yes, these are horrible people.... toxic, but as long as your "okay" then that's fine.


Aka the family she never had, only a short while back 


mdcx said:


> M is short waisted I believe. Thus she needs a fair bit of the length from collarbone to crotch of a standard fit garment removed, essentially. Otherwise the excess “height” in the garment will bunch up through the torso area.


It’s funny and sad, these were intended to be her big F-you to the Royal Family - “see what I can do when I can be bothered to, look I’m so much better than you” outfits.  And nothing fitted.  Matching red - big error.  And whilst she’s grinning away for the camera Harry looks like he’s struggling to hang on to his composure.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> And whilst she’s grinning away for the camera Harry looks like he’s struggling to hang on to his composure.



He looked more animated and like the old fun loving Harry we loved when he was outside afterwards talking with the children.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> He looked more animated and like the old fun loving Harry we loved when he was outside afterwards talking with the children.


Yes a little, I think he was trying hard.  You have to wonder what’ll happen for him next though.  Plans for the foundation or charity or whatever it is, still seem unformed.  Meghan has plans but they’re all for herself.  He’s more of a spare now than he ever was IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> He’s more of a spare now than he ever was IMO.



You know, that whole spare talk. I think people are significantly underestimating the role he would have had. Had he stayed close to his brother, eventually he'd been the 2nd most important man in the UK because William would have heavily leaned on him to have his back and also for advice. Maybe not a glamorous role, but man, he wasn't raised as a circus clown anyway.


----------



## nanou3175

melissatrv said:


> I am sure it was planned and made to look accidental.  Everything with them is painstakingly calculated



Of course. The first suit he wore this trip had a blue lining to match her blue dress ( with à zip)


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, that whole spare talk. I think people are significantly underestimating the role he would have had. Had he stayed close to his brother, eventually he'd been the 2nd most important man in the UK because William would have heavily leaned on him to have his back and also for advice. Maybe not a glamorous role, but man, he wasn't raised as a circus clown anyway.



Hand of the King pin in the mail for Harry (if he wants it)


----------



## LittleStar88

Here's my two cents. Meghan turned up to make a huge final appearance. The choice of dress style and especially color... Hair and makeup improved. Aside from poor choice of bra there was improvements in fit.

I am not a fan but have to say she did an acceptable job of improving her appearance. I liked the choice of colors (despite fit and red dress taboo). 

Meghan got her final 15 minutes - mission accomplished. She won't get that kind of attention in her new life going forward...


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, that whole spare talk. I think people are significantly underestimating the role he would have had. Had he stayed close to his brother, eventually he'd been the 2nd most important man in the UK because William would have heavily leaned on him to have his back and also for advice. Maybe not a glamorous role, but man, he wasn't raised as a circus clown anyway.


I think you’re right about this.  But he/they/Meghan saw it as playing second fiddle.  They tried to establish a second Court right from the start, and the Queen couldn’t have that.


----------



## Alena21

Just fresh from the Oz TV. Surely there is no love lost ....


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, that whole spare talk. I think people are significantly underestimating the role he would have had. Had he stayed close to his brother, eventually he'd been the 2nd most important man in the UK because William would have heavily leaned on him to have his back and also for advice. Maybe not a glamorous role, but man, he wasn't raised as a circus clown anyway.


This is more or less what I've said in a few posts. Before Meghan came along I thought as the brothers were so close, there'd be 2 Kings on the throne when the time comes, obviously not literally, but Harry would be a close advisor. A very important role IMHO.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> Here's my two cents. Meghan turned up to make a huge final appearance. The choice of dress style and especially color... Hair and makeup improved. Aside from poor choice of bra there was improvements in fit.
> 
> I am not a fan but have to say she did an acceptable job of improving her appearance. I liked the choice of colors (despite fit and red dress taboo).
> 
> Meghan got her final 15 minutes - mission accomplished. She won't get that kind of attention in her new life going forward...


You're so right, how many of us in the past have said when seeing her at engagements "not black/navy agaaaiiin" lol


----------



## lanasyogamama

I predict there will be some curated paparazzi pictures of her looking cute in casual clothes in the next few days, as if to say that they are so so so happy to be done with all that stuffiness.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Or perhaps it’s time for a “well-deserved break“ to someplace warm.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prenups are not legally binding in the UK.



Interesting!  Did not know that.  Are there other legal arrangements that can be made in advance, possibly special rules for the Crown and the heirs?  I've got no idea.  Just wondering.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> You're so right, how many of us in the past have said when seeing her at engagements "not black/navy agaaaiiin" lol


That was her Audrey Hepburn phase


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> Interesting!  Did not know that.  Are there other legal arrangements that can be made in advance, possibly special rules for the Crown and the heirs?  I've got no idea.  Just wondering.


Would you trust her anyway?  I think there’ll be a book(s) and lots of soul bearing soft sofa interviews in due course.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> That was her Audrey Hepburn phase


Only Audrey did it better [emoji23]


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Only Audrey did it better [emoji23]


As did Di


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Look at Charles face, poor man.
> I wonder how often, in the coming months Harry will come over to visit. Logistically it's going to be a nightmare, they probably don't see each other enough already given their (especially Charles) schedules, never mind being on another continent. William is on record, on film, saying he wished he and the children saw more of their granddad, and they live in London!



Do you think that Charles and William will likely spend more time together now?  They both have busy schedules of course but I could see this bringing the two of them closer.  They both have to feel hurt.   Will has to feel abandoned too, by the person he thought would be by his side, to help shoulder the burden when he becomes King.  I agree with your post from yesterday or the day before, that Will could easily be king in 10 years.  Charles doesn't look as healthy as his mother or father unfortunately.  This Harry situation has to be causing him a lot of stress and grief too.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> Do you think that Charles and William will likely spend more time together now?  They both have busy schedules of course but I could see this bringing the two of them closer.  They both have to feel hurt.   Will has to feel abandoned too, by the person he thought would be by his side, to help shoulder the burden when he becomes King.  I agree with you post from yesterday or the day before, that Will could easily be king in 10 years.  Charles doesn't look as healthy as his mother or father unfortunately.  This Harry situation has to be causing him a lot of stress and grief too.


I hope so, I really do. And I agree, Charles doesn't look too good. He needs both his sons with him when he's King, not just William.


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> Would you trust her anyway?  I think there’ll be a book(s) and lots of soul bearing soft sofa interviews in due course.



No, I wouldn't actually, I think she'll run right up to the edge of whatever the NDA allows.  But, I think she and Harry also have to be careful not to burn their bridge back completely, in case they don't make half a billion dollars in the first year or two and if they still want their annual allowance from Charles, which I am sure they do.


----------



## Alena21

At all these events Harry looks broken. He is an easy pray as he doesn't know his a** from his elbow and he is used to have everything being taken care for him. I am sceptical if he could adjust to normal life at all.


----------



## Emeline

youngster said:


> No, I wouldn't actually, I think she'll run right up to the edge of whatever the NDA allows.  But, I think she and Harry also have to be careful not to burn their bridge back completely, in case they don't make half a billion dollars in the first year or two and if they still want their annual allowance from Charles, which I am sure they do.


I think M&H have always counted on the allowance, plus whatever they can cobble together. 
I do hope that Charles leaves the tax bill for them to figure out.  They get x amount, period.  Not x amount plus extra to cover all their tax liability.


----------



## imgg

Emeline said:


> I think M&H have always counted on the allowance, plus whatever they can cobble together.
> I do hope that Charles leaves the taxes for them to figure out.  They get x amount, period.  Not x amount plus extra to cover all the tax they are going to owe.


Still baffled he would get an allowance as a grown man with his own trust.


----------



## sdkitty

Alena21 said:


> At all these events Harry looks broken. He is an easy pray as he doesn't know his a** from his elbow and he is used to have everything being taken care for him. I am sceptical if he could adjust to normal life at all.


wouldn't it be funny if he resisted her pulling, tugging, pushing in front of him and they had a scuffle?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be funny if he resisted her pulling, tugging, pushing in front of him and they had a scuffle?



Now you've got me imagining Harry as a surly toddler not wanting to leave the toy store with Meghan as the mom struggling to get him back in the stroller. Thanks for that!


----------



## daisychainz

lanasyogamama said:


> Or perhaps it’s time for a “well-deserved break“ to someplace warm.


Exactly! She worked 3 days - time for some vacation!!


----------



## Alena21

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be funny if he resisted her pulling, tugging, pushing in front of him and they had a scuffle?


It is bizzare for a mature woman and self- proclaimed feminist to be so clingy.


----------



## sdkitty

Alena21 said:


> It is bizzare for a mature woman and self- proclaimed feminist to be so clingy.


in the recent videos I've seen here, she looks more controlling


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

Any updates on MM's lawsuit against The Mail on Sunday? 
Will she have to appear at some point?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Now you've got me imagining Harry as a surly toddler not wanting to leave the toy store with Meghan as the mom struggling to get him back in the stroller. Thanks for that!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I hope the Crown Jewels are under heavy guard until they leave the country.  Which can't be soon enough for me.


----------



## bag-mania

daisychainz said:


> Exactly! She worked 3 days - time for some vacation!!



I had the impression their final engagements for the royal family were supposed to be more extensive. Was it always going to be only a few days?


----------



## limom

How do you like that?


----------



## daisychainz

bag-mania said:


> I had the impression their final engagements for the royal family were supposed to be more extensive. Was it always going to be only a few days?


I *thought* it was reported their official duties end March 31/April 1, but since there is nothing more significant/public to attend, this is it. Perhaps they'll come to the wedding?


----------



## DoraSilky

This is very insightful, a good explanation of love bombing and how victims react.  From the outside it's looking worrying for Harry.


----------



## RueMonge

Alena21 said:


> The saying " you can take the peasant out of the village but can't take the village out of him/her" turns out to be true.



I am not a fan of M, but I find this saying offensive as  applied to anyone. Maybe just my sloppy American belief that we can all make what we want of ourselves, regardless of our beginnings.


----------



## duna

DoraSilky said:


> This is very insightful, a good explanation of love bombing and how victims react.  From the outside it's looking worrying for Harry.




This is really scary!


----------



## limom

duna said:


> This is really scary!


I think that it is not very realistic. Harry is not that super bright, super man, kind of man...
Although if he really was involved in combat, he could be suffering from PTSD and that could explain a lot.


----------



## mia55

Always looking at William with those hungry expressions


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Interesting!  Did not know that.  Are there other legal arrangements that can be made in advance, possibly special rules for the Crown and the heirs?  I've got no idea.  Just wondering.



His money will probably tied up in a legal trust. He won't be able to get hold of it all at once - nor will she if they get divorced. I know megawatt lawers who specialise in trusts, it's better than a prenup.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Sharont2305 said:


> This is more or less what I've said in a few posts. Before Meghan came along I thought as the brothers were so close, there'd be 2 Kings on the throne when the time comes, obviously not literally, but Harry would be a close advisor. A very important role IMHO.



For her role in their relationship breakdown, she should be ashamed. Or karma should right the wrong. It’s unforgivable.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

youngster said:


> No, I wouldn't actually, I think she'll run right up to the edge of whatever the NDA allows.  But, I think she and Harry also have to be careful not to burn their bridge back completely, in case they don't make half a billion dollars in the first year or two and if they still want their annual allowance from Charles, which I am sure they do.



They must be pretty stupid to be doing everything possible to make Charles choose between his wife and them. I’m not saying people should choose their partner over their kids, but I mean who wants to pay loose cannons with no respect for agreements. It’s like they think the 95% of cash from the duchy is guaranteed.


----------



## Frivole88

omg, i was about to say this! i don't really comment about M&H's relationship, but if this video proves to be right about Meghan's motive....oh you poor, poor, poor Harry.  He should have used his common sense and should have listened to his family and friends and waited at least a bit longer before deciding to get married so early.
Especially for a prince like him, it's rather harder to know the real, genuine intention of the person. He should've take things slower with Meghan, everything happened so fast like there's no time for tomorrow. In my opinion, he was definitely love bombed. 



duna said:


> This is really scary!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Alena21 said:


> At all these events Harry looks broken. He is an easy pray as he doesn't know his a** from his elbow and he is used to have everything being taken care for him. I am sceptical if he could adjust to normal life at all.



I’ve felt sorry for him but really, if they had a boo hoo tantrum yesterday, meaning W&K sat instead of walked in in the procession, then he really hasn’t started to learn his lesson.


----------



## bisousx

papertiger said:


> His money will probably tied up in a legal trust. He won't be able to get hold of it all at once - nor will she if they get divorced. I know megawatt lawers who specialise in trusts, it's better than a prenup.



unless Meg extorts the family, at which point they might happily hand over cash to keep her mouth shut


----------



## limom

Do you all believe that Megan was not investigated prior to marrying Harry?
Come on now...
This is the Queen’s grandson, we are talking about here.....


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  This short trip was nothing more than a three act play for her to show the royals what they would be missing once she is gone.  Note that I only referred to her and not him.  He has only looked happy once or twice this trip.  It's hitting him hard.
> 
> I think changing the procession was a huge mistake, but I think I understand it.  There was such a huge Harkle hissy fit that it was decided to move W& K out of it so H&M wouldn't look as excluded.  The suits are walking on egg shells because they don't want to give them reasons to point fingers and say the Harkles were badly treated.  I think it was insulting to W&K to be seated instead of walking.  He WILL be King someday and she WILL be Queen.  What is so hard to understand about this?  I will diverge for a moment and say this is the mistake they have been making with Harry all along with excuses for his bad behavior.  How are they going to excuse that nonsense put on their website 2 weeks ago?
> 
> Get them out of town and keep them out of town.  Meghan  couldn't even follow the requests not to   release pictures on the day of Camilla's speech.  She has been insulting to Cam  and even Charles in the past.  What a way to treat the hand that feeds you.  Even arrogant people can have common sense, but these two are devoid of even that.
> 
> One last thought:  I think the temperature around those two rows was below zero.  Good on Kate for ignoring Meghan.  If you watch the video, it is definitely seen to be that way.[/QUOTE
> 
> gk: absolutely agree with you, Kate was being genuine, Meghan was trying to give the performance of her life, but as a "B" grade actress the smile was so pasted on and she never took the measure of the event to realize that it was often inappropriate. Harry has a real nerve thinking he can stab those who have tolerated his behaviors for so many years in the back and then be expected to be welcomed with open arms. His brother lost the same mother, but doesn't use her death to try to fund his wife's lifestyle.


----------



## Tootsie17

I hope Harry wakes up and leaves her before they have more children.  I can't stand the thought of someone so manipulative being responsible for raising a child or two.  I know she could be a wonderful mom, but based on the photos and seeing how she apparently controls Harry with all the hand holding, back rubbing, and shoulder tugs, I seriously doubt it.  I may have to take a break from this thread, I think I need a drink!  I just want to scream at Harry to grow a pair and WAKE UP! Don't let M ruin your life.


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> unless Meg extorts the family, at which point they might happily hand over cash to keep her mouth shut



She can try.

Personally, I don't think there's much milage in kiss and tell. What are book deals worth? Interviews are just youtube fodder etc.

Her best bet is to keep Archie in with the family and hope they don't cut her out completely. After all, almost certainly Harry will get married again and have another family.


----------



## Sharont2305

bisousx said:


> unless Meg extorts the family, at which point they might happily hand over cash to keep her mouth shut


Extort them on what though, they have treated her impeccably throughout


----------



## bisousx

Sharont2305 said:


> Extort them on what though, they have treated her impeccably throughout



People lie all the time in divorce cases to embarrass and wear down the other party. She doesn’t need to tell the truth, it would depend on what kind of embarrassment the other side is willing to suffer through. I was thinking specifically she would threaten the Queen with releasing “insider” gossip about Andrew.


----------



## Sharont2305

bisousx said:


> People lie all the time in divorce cases to embarrass and wear down the other party. She doesn’t need to tell the truth, it would depend on what kind of embarrassment the other side is willing to suffer through. I was thinking specifically she would threaten the Queen with releasing “insider” gossip about Andrew.


If that's the case then she really is a nasty piece of work
Plus, I don't think the Royal legal team will put up with any nonsense


----------



## Tivo

Where has Prince Philip been?


----------



## bisousx

Sharont2305 said:


> If that's the case then she really is a nasty piece of work



I really liked Meghan in the beginning and was excited to see this beautiful woman in the news. Hate being proven wrong, but I had to concede when I saw that she hand wrote her Daddy Dearest letter meant for public release. That’s when it was clear she’s a nutcase. Meghan’s the type that thinks she’s cunning, so she’ll definitely try her hand at extorting the family but we’ll see how they deal with it when the time comes. I’m here waiting for the pending lawsuit gossip and to watch her dad take the stand lol


----------



## RueMonge

Tivo said:


> Where has Prince Philip been?


I think he’s retired from public life because of age and infirmity. Which means he doesn’t have to dress up and go to this stuff anymore. I wonder if he misses it.


----------



## Jayne1

Tivo said:


> Where has Prince Philip been?


Retired, but I also think he's just not well.


----------



## Jayne1

Here's something positive for me to say today: I've always liked her short nails and I like her hair pulled back.  Any kind of pulled back hair because when it's down, it looks awful. I don't really care about the bra.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> . I don't really care about the bra.
> View attachment 4687155



She clearly loves it, because she wears it with everything...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> Here's something positive for me to say today: I've always liked her short nails and I like her hair pulled back.  Any kind of pulled back hair because when it's down, it looks awful. I don't really care about the bra.
> View attachment 4687155



I actually like her hair down; I think she has nice hair.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Now you've got me imagining Harry as a surly toddler not wanting to leave the toy store with Meghan as the mom struggling to get him back in the stroller. Thanks for that!


for now, he's not surly, but very obedient


Tivo said:


> Where has Prince Philip been?


is he still ailing?


----------



## poopsie

Alena21 said: ↑
The saying " you can take the peasant out of the village but can't take the village out of him/her" turns out to be true.


RueMonge said:


> I am not a fan of M, but I find this saying offensive as  applied to anyone. Maybe just my sloppy American belief that we can all make what we want of ourselves, regardless of our beginnings.


Like it or not we are _all  _products of our experiences/environments. Can't unring that bell. You can rise to whatever heights you want, but that humble beginning is still a part of you.
When I was 9 my parents dragged me clean across the country to SoCal. In the 50+ years I have been here I have managed to adapt, But I will ALWAYS have a 'back East' outlook/sense of humor etc on life. I _still  _have the urge every Sept to buy a coat.
While you are  offended at the can't take the village/peasant statement I find it interesting that you refer to  American belief as "sloppy".


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone see Alex Rodriguez on Jimmy Fallon this week? The first question was about the double date he and Jennifer Lopez had with Harry and Meghan. Alex doesn't answer and says he signed a non-disclosure agreement.


----------



## mdcx

Well I now revise my timeline on the M&H divorce until after Megs releases a coffee table book called ‘The Look of Love’. All giant, heavily retouched cliched snaps of the two of them gazing at each other. Plenty of material gathered on this trip.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone see Alex Rodriguez on Jimmy Fallon this week? The first question was about the double date he and Jennifer Lopez had with Harry and Meghan. Alex doesn't answer and says he signed a non-disclosure agreement.




He seems kinda serious too! Is that normal??


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Alena21 said: ↑
> The saying " you can take the peasant out of the village but can't take the village out of him/her" turns out to be true.
> 
> Like it or not we are _all  _products of our experiences/environments. Can't unring that bell. You can rise to whatever heights you want, but that humble beginning is still a part of you.
> When I was 9 my parents dragged me clean across the country to SoCal. In the 50+ years I have been here I have managed to adapt, But I will ALWAYS have a 'back East' outlook/sense of humor etc on life. I _still  _have the urge every Sept to buy a coat.
> While you are  offended at the can't take the village/peasant statement I find it interesting that you refer to  American belief as "sloppy".


as much as I hate to defend her, "M" didn't really come from particularly humble beginnings.....her dad was in show biz and she grew up on the set of a pretty successful sit-com; he also sent her to private school....not saying the family was that classy but anyway....


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I actually like her hair down; I think she has nice hair.


you mean a nice weave or extensions?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> He seems kinda serious too! Is that normal??



I have no idea. It may be normal for Harry and Meghan. When they were first hiding out in Vancouver I remember hearing that neighbors around the mansion were asked to sign NDAs.


----------



## chloebagfreak

I’m a bit baffled about the terms duchess vs princess. Since I’ve never studied anything about the royals I was curious since her fans call her a princess, and on the David Spade show they called her one too.
Any clarification would be great!
Thanks


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Do you all believe that Megan was not investigated prior to marrying Harry?
> Come on now...
> This is the Queen’s grandson, we are talking about here.....


she may have been but I doubt anything they found would have stopped Harry


----------



## carmen56

chloebagfreak said:


> I’m a bit baffled about the terms duchess vs princess. Since I’ve never studied anything about the royals I was curious since her fans call her a princess, and on the David Spade show they called her one too.
> Any clarification would be great!
> Thanks



Technically, Markle’s title is Princess Henry of Wales.  HMQ made them Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their marriage.  I believe Archie’s birth certificate has Princess of the U.K. listed as the mother’s occupation.


----------



## chloebagfreak

carmen56 said:


> Technically, Markle’s title is Princess Henry of Wales.  HMQ made them Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their marriage.  I believe Archie’s birth certificate has Princess of the U.K. listed as the mother’s occupation.


Thank you!


----------



## Suncatcher

For a woman who a mere two years ago would have had to line up to buy tickets to enter Westminster Abbey (or booked online to avoid the line ups) like us mere plebes, to complain about having to walk in early instead of in a royal procession is a bit rich. Also, it is interesting to compare pictures of Kate laughing when she is interacting with children to her rigid stone cold face-forward look at Westminster Abbey. Kate was definitely not acknowledging Meghan with any warmth whatsoever and in fact appeared to ignore her altogether. I also think there is no way Meghan could ever upstage Kate. Just because Meghan may have worn an outfit liked by social media does not mean that the person wearing the outfit is a likeable or an honourable person. Bye bye Meghan: don’t let the door hit you on the way out! So happy to see you in my rear view mirror.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> she may have been but I doubt anything they found would have stopped Harry


Princess Margaret was “convinced” not to marry her divorce. 
The same type of pressure could have been applied to Harry, imho.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Princess Margaret was “convinced” not to marry her divorce.
> The same type of pressure could have been applied to Harry, imho.


maybe but that was a different era and from what little I know about it, that situation is viewed now as sad and possibly wrong


----------



## Katel

mia55 said:


> Always looking at William with those hungry expressions


I cannot get over how ridiculous she looks in all these pictures - her expression and that dress  ...
the comment about the neckline helped explain a lot, because the hat on her head makes that silhouette into a bigger ball, just stuck on her shoulders, and that cape on one arm, for the life of me, looks exactly like a sling for a broken arm.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> I cannot get over how ridiculous she looks in all these pictures - her expression and that dress  ...
> the comment about the neckline helped explain a lot, because the hat on her head makes that silhouette into a bigger ball, just stuck on her shoulders, and that cape on one arm, for the life of me, looks exactly like a sling for a broken arm.
> View attachment 4687184


now that you mention it, that cape does look like a sling


----------



## PewPew

sdkitty said:


> for now, he's not surly, but very obedient
> 
> is he still ailing?



When 98 year old Prince Philip was hospitalized for several days before Christmas, the palace said it was to check up on routine health issues & Charles jokingly said something like “well at his age, nothing works that well.” We understandably never get detailed health info, but he has been “retired” in Sandringham in recent years. He gave up his drivers license early last year when he flipped his Land Rover, injuring a woman in another car. On the few occasions he is seen, he still looks stately and well dressed (like when he left the hospital.)


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> now that you mention it, that cape does look like a sling



I thought it looked like a giant bib, the kind they give you when you are eating something messy.


----------



## Handbag1234

I’m wondering if the sudden appearance of all these capes is M practicing for her ‘pending’ super hero action role her team are er ‘in negotiations’ for.......


----------



## Straight-Laced

PewPew said:


> When 98 year old Prince Philip was hospitalized for several days before Christmas, the palace said it was to check up on routine health issues & Charles jokingly said something like “well at his age, nothing works that well.” We understandably never get detailed health info, but he has been “retired” in Sandringham in recent years. He gave up his drivers license early last year when he flipped his Land Rover, injuring a woman in another car. On the few occasions he is seen, he still looks stately and well dressed (like when he left the hospital.)


I just saw this in The Telegraph UK today, in a story about how coronavirus might affect Beatrice's wedding :  
_"Prince Philip, who turns 99 in June, is currently living in a state of self-imposed isolation at Wood Farm on the Sandringham estate while the 93-year-old monarch is dividing her time between Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle.
Having been admitted to hospital over the Christmas period for treatment of a pre-existing condition, the Duke is now understood to be spending his days reading and sorting through paperwork.
Royal author Phil Dampier, who has written three books about the Queen’s husband, said: “If the coronavirus reaches Italian proportions in the UK, I seriously doubt the Duke would run the risk of travelling to London for Beatrice’s wedding. He has not been coming into contact with many people in recent weeks."_


----------



## sdkitty

as much as many of us may dislike "M" she still gets plenty of support in the US.  Today on The View they showed a clip of a British woman referring to Meghan as something like 5 steps from trailer trash.  Everyone on the panel found this offensive and racist.  And to take it a step further, they all agreed that this is the type of racism that drove H&M to break from the monarchy - and justifiably so.
On at least one occasion in the past, Joy Behar was a bit cynical about Meghan but today they were all on the "poor Meghan victim of racism" bandwagon.  Wonder if someone told Joy this was the position she ought to take.


----------



## Vintage Leather

chloebagfreak said:


> I’m a bit baffled about the terms duchess vs princess. Since I’ve never studied anything about the royals I was curious since her fans call her a princess, and on the David Spade show they called her one too.


Every country has their own sets of rules, but for the UK, the rule is that the grandchild of a monarch is a prince or princess. It is considered a courtesy title, without income. The one exception to this is that the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would be a prince or princess.  (Technically, Charlotte and Louis are not princesses or princes. However...)

Duchesses do have precedence over courtesy princesses, and it is considered a more prestigious title.


----------



## Lodpah

I think Harry will bail soon. Meghan segregating him, he has time to contemplate what’s going on. He looks absolutely miserable at the events and maybe Grandma and her advisors had stern words or words of wisdom with him. I give it 3 months and the divorce will be the divorce of the century. Meghan’s claws will be long and curved.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I think Harry will bail soon. Meghan segregating him, he has time to contemplate what’s going on. He looks absolutely miserable at the events and maybe Grandma and her advisors had stern words or words of wisdom with him. I give it 3 months and the divorce will be the divorce of the century. Meghan’s claws will be long and curved.


If they divorce she will get everything she can.  But she will want to still look like the victim, not the predator.  May be tricky.  A lot of people still like Harry


----------



## DoggieBags

Nobody, not even a supermodel, has a perfect body. Considering that Meghan was a reasonably successful actress in LA and then presumably had the advantage of personal tailors, stylists, and consultants on appropriate clothing for all occasions after she married Harry, she still seems unable to grasp what clothing styles play to her strengths. She often picks clothes that emphasize her flaws. She’s a pretty woman but she usually looks so rumpled, like an unmade bed. Kate, on the other hand, has the ability to look impeccably turned out no matter what she wears. I may not like all the outfits Kate’s worn over the years but whatever she wears, it all fits her body perfectly with no wrinkling, bunching, unsightly underwear lines, etc. I’ve liked quite a few of the outfits meghan’s worn in the short time she’s been married to Harry, but she manages to make the most gorgeous outfit look cheap because the clothes almost always fit her so poorly. When watching celebrities walk the red carpet at the Oscars or other high profile events there are always a few standouts that just look fabulous while the rest range from decent to should not have been allowed to leave their house looking like that. The standouts usually are standouts at almost every event I’ve seen pictures of them at. So it’s clearly a talent. Imo Kate has this talent and Meghan doesn’t.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> If they divorce she will get everything she can.  But she will want to still look like the victim, not the predator.  May be tricky.  A lot of people still like Harry


I think perception of her will not be good. I do think she’s pretty but she’s coming across as ugly in pics due to her nature. I watched the love bomb video and it was on point.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Speculation on my favorite jewelry blog is that the earrings Kate wore on Commonwealth Day were part of a wedding gift from Harry.  (she has a matching necklace and bracelet)



DoggieBags said:


> Nobody, not even a supermodel, has a perfect body. Considering that Meghan was a reasonably successful actress in LA and then presumably had the advantage of personal tailors, stylists, and consultants on appropriate clothing for all occasions after she married Harry, she still seems unable to grasp what clothing styles play to her strengths. She often picks clothes that emphasize her flaws. She’s a pretty woman but she usually looks so rumpled, like an unmade bed. Kate, on the other hand, has the ability to look impeccably turned out no matter what she wears. I may not like all the outfits Kate’s worn over the years but whatever she wears, it all fits her body perfectly with no wrinkling, bunching, unsightly underwear lines, etc. I’ve liked quite a few of the outfits meghan’s worn in the short time she’s been married to Harry, but she manages to make the most gorgeous outfit look cheap because the clothes almost always fit her so poorly. When watching celebrities walk the red carpet at the Oscars or other high profile events there are always a few standouts that just look fabulous while the rest range from decent to should not have been allowed to leave their house looking like that. The standouts usually are standouts at almost every event I’ve seen pictures of them at. So it’s clearly a talent. Imo Kate has this talent and Meghan doesn’t.



Is it talent though, or the willingness to listen to and take advice?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> as much as many of us may dislike "M" she still gets plenty of support in the US.  Today on The View they showed a clip of a British woman referring to Meghan as something like 5 steps from trailer trash.  Everyone on the panel found this offensive and racist.  And to take it a step further, they all agreed that this is the type of racism that drove H&M to break from the monarchy - and justifiably so.
> On at least one occasion in the past, Joy Behar was a bit cynical about Meghan but today they were all on the "poor Meghan victim of racism" bandwagon.  Wonder if someone told Joy this was the position she ought to take.


I was shocked when Sunny revealed that WG was a friend of Harry.
Did I hear correctly?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Vintage Leather said:


> Speculation on my favorite jewelry blog is that the earrings Kate wore on Commonwealth Day were part of a wedding gift from Harry.  (she has a matching necklace and bracelet)
> 
> 
> 
> Is it talent though, or the willingness to listen to and take advice?


Kate had a long time to accustom herself to her role and is wise enough to listen to good advice
 Plus, there is no denying that her figures are a great advantage, also,


----------



## CobaltBlu

so were they Diana's, do you think?  Kate wearing earrings gifted by Harry? If that is the case, well, these ladies sure do know how to let their jewelry do the talking, don't they?



Vintage Leather said:


> Speculation on my favorite jewelry blog is that the earrings Kate wore on Commonwealth Day were part of a wedding gift from Harry.  (she has a matching necklace and bracelet)


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> I was shocked when Sunny revealed that WG was a friend of Harry.
> Did I hear correctly?


I heard that too.....Whoppi seems to have a lot of friends


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> Speculation on my favorite jewelry blog is that the earrings Kate wore on Commonwealth Day were part of a wedding gift from Harry.  (she has a matching necklace and bracelet)
> 
> 
> 
> Is it talent though, or the willingness to listen to and take advice?


or taste?


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> so were they Diana's, do you think?  Kate wearing earrings gifted by Harry? If that is the case, well, these ladies sure do know how to let their jewelry do the talking, don't they?


I may be reaching here but wonder if M was jealous that Kate got Diana's engagement ring


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, that whole spare talk. I think people are significantly underestimating the role he would have had. Had he stayed close to his brother, eventually he'd been the 2nd most important man in the UK because William would have heavily leaned on him to have his back and also for advice. Maybe not a glamorous role, but man, he wasn't raised as a circus clown anyway.



This reminds of the Kennedys.  Bobby was a close adviser to Jack.



LittleStar88 said:


> Hand of the King pin in the mail for Harry (if he wants it)



Not if she gets it first.



youngster said:


> I thought it looked like a giant bib, the kind they give you when you are eating something messy.



The DH saw the green dress on the news this morning, turned to me and said "what the h*ll is she wearing"



Vintage Leather said:


> Every country has their own sets of rules, but for the UK, the rule is that the grandchild of a monarch is a prince or princess. It is considered a courtesy title, without income. The one exception to this is that the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would be a prince or princess.  (Technically, Charlotte and Louis are not princesses or princes. However...)
> 
> Duchesses do have precedence over courtesy princesses, and it is considered a more prestigious title.



Beg to differe  According to this, The Queen changed it for Prince William's children.

Per Wikipedia:  
On 31 December 2012, Queen Elizabeth II declared that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, at that time Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, would have the title Prince or Princess and the style _Royal Highness_.[10] Accordingly, the Duke's eldest son, born on 22 July 2013, is styled _His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge_. His daughter, born on 2 May 2015, is styled _Her Royal Highness Princess Charlotte of Cambridge_. His second son, born on 23 April 2018, is styled _His Royal Highness Prince Louis of Cambridge_.

As far as the order of precedence for a Duchess and a Princess, it can get more complicated.  In theory, the Duchess of Cambridge is supposed to curtsy to Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie if Prince William *is not present * because they are blood Princesses and she is a commoner by birth*.*  If Prince William is present, then the Duchess takes his rank and they have to curtsy to her.  At last report none  of the three women were happy with this arrangement and the Duchess is not curtsying to the Princesses and I'm not sure how the Princesses are handling it.  I suspect they are doing the same.  To further muddy the waters, Princess Michael of Kent is what you would call a courtesy princess.  I think she has to curtsy to all of the above, however her husband is a blood Prince so.......That's as far as i go lol!


----------



## Vintage Leather

CobaltBlu said:


> so were they Diana's, do you think?  Kate wearing earrings gifted by Harry? If that is the case, well, these ladies sure do know how to let their jewelry do the talking, don't they?



They were purchased new. Palace confirmed that they were a wedding present.

The reason for the "gift from Harry" argument is that prior to Commonwealth she had only worn them when she and Harry did events together.


----------



## CeeJay

DoraSilky said:


> This is very insightful, a good explanation of love bombing and how victims react.  From the outside it's looking worrying for Harry.



WOW, WOW, WOW, WOW .. man .. to me, this just NAILS it .. 100%


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Got my Kohls ad today - these two look eerily similar to some other folks we know.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I may be reaching here but wonder if M was jealous that Kate got Diana's engagement ring


She didn't like the one Harry gave her and had it redone in a year.  I'm sure she would have preferred Diana's ring.  I have never bought the story that Harry had it.  Shortly after her death, prince William clearly stated that he wanted it, I don't know why he would have taken her watch instead.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Lodpah said:


> I think Harry will bail soon. Meghan segregating him, he has time to contemplate what’s going on. He looks absolutely miserable at the events and maybe Grandma and her advisors had stern words or words of wisdom with him. I give it 3 months and the divorce will be the divorce of the century. Meghan’s claws will be long and curved.


I actually find Harry an enigma.  My view of him has changed so much over the past couple of years (especially since the Africa tour) that I can't work out what kind of person he really is or where he's at right now.
Looking miserable at these final public events (while his wife by his side was looking _so triumphantly serene!_) could be because he blames everyone else - his family and the British media especially - for basically forcing them to leave. So he's emotional and angry with everyone except for Meghan, who in Harry's view is being gutsy and putting on a brave show while surrounded by undeserved hostility.


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be funny if he resisted her pulling, tugging, pushing in front of him and they had a scuffle?



I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.

 

Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Beg to differe  According to this, The Queen changed it for Prince William's children.
> 
> Per Wikipedia:
> On 31 December 2012, Queen Elizabeth II declared that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, at that time Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, would have the title Prince or Princess and the style _Royal Highness_.[10] Accordingly, the Duke's eldest son, born on 22 July 2013, is styled _His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge_. His daughter, born on 2 May 2015, is styled _Her Royal Highness Princess Charlotte of Cambridge_. His second son, born on 23 April 2018, is styled _His Royal Highness Prince Louis of Cambridge_.
> 
> As far as the order of precedence for a Duchess and a Princess, it can get more complicated.  In theory, the Duchess of Cambridge is supposed to curtsy to Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie if Prince William *is not present * because they are blood Princesses and she is a commoner by birth*.*  If Prince William is present, then the Duchess takes his rank and they have to curtsy to her.  At last report none  of the three women were happy with this arrangement and the Duchess is not curtsying to the Princesses and I'm not sure how the Princesses are handling it.  I suspect they are doing the same.  To further muddy the waters, Princess Michael of Kent is what you would call a courtesy princess.  I think she has to curtsy to all of the above, however her husband is a blood Prince so.......That's as far as i go lol!


Agree with all of the above on precedence, titles, styles
I would add every generation has someone who does not quite fit the pattern , and rules are officially changed about every 30 years or so.
Examples of the rule changes -  princesses of the blood , codified some 10 years ago 
And only one curtsy a day is required , first time the ladies meet, and that can be off camera. Meghan was reported as the only one curtsying to QE2 at Commonwealth Service, Kate did not in public, but we don’t know if Kate had seen the Queen earlier . Reporters can go bananas over the lack of curtsies, but they have been known to incorrectly interpret the curtsies


----------



## ccbaggirl89

needlv said:


> I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!



Looks like he's saying he needs to stand up/stay standing. An instance where he knows proper protocol and she doesn't. You can definitely see she was scolded and didn't like it. Like on the balcony.


----------



## gracekelly

Very interesting read and analysis of yesterday.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...owed-to-march-in-with-the-queen/#2772597e37e7


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

youngster said:


> I thought it looked like a giant bib, the kind they give you when you are eating something messy.


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!








Well that was awkward. Harry looks so anxious _and_ angry, like he's both holding back tears and could punch a wall.
The womans face behind them! I wonder did she hear what H said to M.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Agree with all of the above on precedence, titles, styles
> I would add every generation has someone who does not quite fit the pattern , and rules are officially changed about every 30 years or so.
> Examples of the rule changes -  princesses of the blood , codified some 10 years ago
> And only one curtsy a day is required , first time the ladies meet, and that can be off camera. Meghan was reported as the only one curtsying to QE2 at Commonwealth Service, Kate did not in public, but we don’t know if Kate had seen the Queen earlier . Reporters can go bananas over the lack of curtsies, but they have been known to incorrectly interpret the curtsies


Ps and Charles will change the rules yet again when he is King
Camilla , no matter her official title Queen Consort, Princess Consort or whatever , will be given precedence over Anne, B and E and Alexandra at all times
Titles are nice but precedence is what counts, Camilla may never be Queen but Charles can edict that she be given respect


----------



## Mrs.Z

What is going on here, they are getting a standing ovation and Markle is trying to make him sit down ?


----------



## RueMonge

poopsie said:


> Alena21 said: ↑
> The saying " you can take the peasant out of the village but can't take the village out of him/her" turns out to be true.
> 
> Like it or not we are _all  _products of our experiences/environments. Can't unring that bell. You can rise to whatever heights you want, but that humble beginning is still a part of you.
> When I was 9 my parents dragged me clean across the country to SoCal. In the 50+ years I have been here I have managed to adapt, But I will ALWAYS have a 'back East' outlook/sense of humor etc on life. I _still  _have the urge every Sept to buy a coat.
> While you are  offended at the can't take the village/peasant statement I find it interesting that you refer to  American belief as "sloppy".


I was referring to me as sloppy to take the sting out of my offense. Still offended


----------



## Chagall

What is so difficult about getting a bra that fits.


----------



## PewPew

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Got my Kohls ad today - these two look eerily similar to some other folks we know.
> 
> View attachment 4687341



Wow, the advertisement didn’t pull any punches with the hand-holding & smug smile! Faux-Harry looks much happier than we saw in the original on this recent trip, but hopefully he’ll find joy in whatever the next step is for his family.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Ps and Charles will change the rules yet again when he is King
> Camilla , no matter her official title Queen Consort, Princess Consort or whatever , will be given precedence over Anne, B and E and Alexandra at all times
> Titles are nice but precedence is what counts, Camilla may never be Queen but Charles can edict that she be given respect


When he is present she will always have precedence over the other people.  I suspect that Kate will curtsy to her and Sophie even if he is not in the room, though Camilla doesn't strike me as the sort of person who will make a big deal about this.  Anne makes her own rules and I don't think that anyone argues with her lol!


----------



## Coconuts40

needlv said:


> I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!




I love the expression on the lady to the right of Harry - just priceless, as she caught on to what was happening!

There are so many videos now surfacing showing her controlling behaviour, it's despicable.


----------



## Genie27

Katel said:


> View attachment 4687184


Why does it look like Harry got his suit from one of the local Canadian “made-to-measure” suit shops that are all over Toronto? Cheap fabric, shoddy workmanship and very bad cut. He looks dumpy here - the jacket proportions are so off. 

It’s embarrassing moreso because he’s the former prince of the land of bespoke. 

No further comment is needed on the jolly green giant and her ill-fitting super-hero costume.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh. My. God. Where’s everyone who swore they’re so smart???


----------



## queennadine

https://www.ibtimes.com/prince-harr...son-archie-la-visit-grandmother-doria-2937125


----------



## mrsinsyder

queennadine said:


> https://www.ibtimes.com/prince-harr...son-archie-la-visit-grandmother-doria-2937125


And as we all knew...


----------



## queennadine

He got pranked  Wonder if their assistant with the Hotmail account “vetted” this convo? DYING.

ETA: Even if you thought you were really speaking to Greta, why would you unload all of that BS on a CHILD when you’re almost 40?!

TQ and PC need to cut them off. Now.


----------



## justwatchin

Clearblueskies said:


> Yes a little, I think he was trying hard.  You have to wonder what’ll happen for him next though.  Plans for the foundation or charity or whatever it is, still seem unformed.  Meghan has plans but they’re all for herself.  He’s more of a spare now than he ever was IMO.


Well he’s left the country where he was well known and popular to come to the US and/or Canada, where they are currently a blip on TMZ, a morning talk show and People magazine for how long? She has delusions, oh excuse me, aspirations, of being in a super hero movie, after a “stellar” career on a cable series. 
And even if they divorce and Harry heads back home, there is no way she is popular enough or talented enough, to sustain any continuing interest from the public on her own.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh. My. God. Where’s everyone who swore they’re so smart???
> View attachment 4687412



The transcript from this is unreal.  You'd almost think this was a parody from The Onion!  

Without a lot of common sense and the protection of the Palace, he's going to be a mark for every shady character out there.  So interesting to hear him actually say that "small steps and handing out prizes" is meaningless.  I guess that's the angle Meghan took, that what they were doing was (not only boring) but meaningless. It's them against the press!  She's really got him convinced of that apparently.  The two of them are strong enough to take the press on, take everybody on!  So, I guess he's gonna go change the world now. One million dollar speech to JP Morgan at a time. 

Harry says:
'_From the moment that I found a wife that was strong enough to be able to stand up for what we believe in together, has basically scared them so much that they’ve now come out incredibly angry, they’ve come out fighting, and all they will try and do now is try and destroy our reputation and try and, you know, sink us. 'But what they don’t understand is the battle we are fighting against them is far more than just us._


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> you mean a nice weave or extensions?



Ha well whatever it is, I think it looks pretty good.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> The transcript from this is unreal.  You'd almost think this was a parody from The Onion!
> 
> Without a lot of common sense and the protection of the Palace, he's going to be a mark for every shady character out there.  So interesting to hear him actually say that "small steps and handing out prizes" is meaningless.  I guess that's the angle Meghan took, that what they were doing was (not only boring) but meaningless. It's them against the press!  She's really got him convinced of that apparently.  The two of them are strong enough to take the press on, take everybody on!  So, I guess he's gonna go change the world now. One million dollar speech to JP Morgan at a time.
> 
> Harry says:
> '_From the moment that I found a wife that was strong enough to be able to stand up for what we believe in together, has basically scared them so much that they’ve now come out incredibly angry, they’ve come out fighting, and all they will try and do now is try and destroy our reputation and try and, you know, sink us. 'But what they don’t understand is the battle we are fighting against them is far more than just us._


Whhhat?? Is that for real? Why would he even say all that to Greta of all people?? Hardly a convo that’s normal to have with a child?


----------



## mia55

youngster said:


> The transcript from this is unreal.  You'd almost think this was a parody from The Onion!
> 
> Without a lot of common sense and the protection of the Palace, he's going to be a mark for every shady character out there.  So interesting to hear him actually say that "small steps and handing out prizes" is meaningless.  I guess that's the angle Meghan took, that what they were doing was (not only boring) but meaningless. It's them against the press!  She's really got him convinced of that apparently.  The two of them are strong enough to take the press on, take everybody on!  So, I guess he's gonna go change the world now. One million dollar speech to JP Morgan at a time.
> 
> Harry says:
> '_From the moment that I found a wife that was strong enough to be able to stand up for what we believe in together, has basically scared them so much that they’ve now come out incredibly angry, they’ve come out fighting, and all they will try and do now is try and destroy our reputation and try and, you know, sink us. 'But what they don’t understand is the battle we are fighting against them is far more than just us._


If this unbelievable transcript is true, Harry has been love bombed for sure. So unreal, he has no chance in the real world.


----------



## imgg

youngster said:


> The transcript from this is unreal.  You'd almost think this was a parody from The Onion!
> 
> Without a lot of common sense and the protection of the Palace, he's going to be a mark for every shady character out there.  So interesting to hear him actually say that "small steps and handing out prizes" is meaningless.  I guess that's the angle Meghan took, that what they were doing was (not only boring) but meaningless. It's them against the press!  She's really got him convinced of that apparently.  The two of them are strong enough to take the press on, take everybody on!  So, I guess he's gonna go change the world now. One million dollar speech to JP Morgan at a time.
> 
> Harry says:
> '_From the moment that I found a wife that was strong enough to be able to stand up for what we believe in together, has basically scared them so much that they’ve now come out incredibly angry, they’ve come out fighting, and all they will try and do now is try and destroy our reputation and try and, you know, sink us. 'But what they don’t understand is the battle we are fighting against them is far more than just us._


Meghan really has him believing it’s them against the world.  Pretty sad.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Whhhat?? Is that for real? Why would he even say all that to Greta of all people?? Hardly a convo that’s normal to have with a child?



The article said he thought he was talking to Greta and her father.  Crazy stuff, if true. He has some serious delusions of grandeur and seems to think himself quite the martyr.  All while living in a $14 million dollar mansion with a gigantic carbon footprint.  No wonder the Queen and Charles said go on, go ahead, go forth and save the world. There is probably no talking with him at all right now.

Here is the link at the DM:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-victim-hoaxers-reveals-thoughts-Megxit.html


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!




I read that a deaf lip reader said that he said “cut that s@@t out”. Who knows if that’s true. 



Chagall said:


> What is so difficult about getting a bra that fits.



Maybe Meg will have an AKA on insta soon and we can ask!



Genie27 said:


> Why does it look like Harry got his suit from one of the local Canadian “made-to-measure” suit shops that are all over Toronto? Cheap fabric, shoddy workmanship and very bad cut. He looks dumpy here - the jacket proportions are so off.
> 
> It’s embarrassing moreso because he’s the former prince of the land of bespoke.
> 
> No further comment is needed on the jolly green giant and her ill-fitting super-hero costume.



well, he has been in Canada for months!


----------



## lightofurlife

Even if it were Greta on the phone, why would Harry tell all of this to a teenager??


----------



## Straight-Laced

lanasyogamama said:


> I read that a deaf lip reader said that he said “cut that s@@t out”. Who knows if that’s true.


lol well I'd _like _to think that's what he said!


----------



## PewPew

youngster said:


> Without a lot of common sense and the protection of the Palace, he's going to be a mark for every shady character out there.  *So interesting to hear him actually say that "small steps and handing out prizes" is meaningless*.  I guess that's the angle Meghan took, that what they were doing was (not only boring) but meaningless. It's them against the press!  She's really got him convinced of that apparently_._



*This is just as thick as M saying they’re “merely existing” while touring Africa. * How coddled is Harry not to know that saying such things to even to a legit interviewer would get out b/c it is newsworthy? (In the past, royal interviewers would self-censor because it would harm the interviewer & publication if a major royal looked too bad.) Harry’s mouth may ultimately prove to be the Achilles heel in their plans—

1) *The value of “small steps” * is EXACTLY what H&M (and other “leaders”) preach to others in their “do what I say, not as I do” word-salad speeches on issues like the climate.

2) *“handing out prizes” *and medals are a big part of what royalty & civic organizations around the word do. It’s about celebrating the people and causes who’ve earned them, not toasting the guy who gives them out! He comes across as so infantile, unintelligent & ungrateful, especially as H&M claim they want to keep some patronages.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I really think they need time in the Tower. I know they don't do that any more but it would really benefit these two. I know this because I watched the Tudors.   But seriously. Harry is a mess.


----------



## hedur

needlv said:


> I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!




Whoa.

Honestly, most of the other videos I've seen can be taken a couple different ways. Is it weird that she always seems to be putting her arm on him and pulling him back in order to step in front of him? Yes, but maybe she's just trying to get him to be more gentlemanly. Maybe she sees the love of her life as someone younger and more immature that she can help in these social situations. Not the most functional of relationships but whatevs...I've seen worse. We're all flawed people.

But this video? Criminy. She is clearly so incensed that he didn't sit when she wanted her rage is bleeding through her eyes. Tyra taught us to smile with our eyes but Megs has taken that lesson to a dark, dark place.


----------



## lazeny

That green looks good on her. It makes her skin pop. But I agree that she doesn't dress for her body type. This dress is still ill-fitting on her. I wish she'd be able to find a great tailor. 

I also agree that she's naturally beautiful, her coloring is great, her face is much more memorable than Kate IMO. But Kate looks more genuine and kind.


----------



## AB Negative

Could Megan be borrowing these clothes just for the occasions and then having to return them to the designer?  If so, that could be why they fit so poorly.  She is not tall enough to pull off the styles she is wearing that are better fitted on a tall model type.


----------



## AB Negative

I think Harry is telling Meghan he has to stand while being applauded.  Thank God she played along.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Prufrock613

I’ve never viewed this thread-(before giving a or ) but I’m im ready to be shamed...why did M & H not bring A?

they have enough security to take them in and out of U.K.   is this a big f u to the royals ?
Sorry my emojis didn’t show up in convos- I forgot this didn’t work here


----------



## scarlet555

Prufrock613 said:


> I’ve never viewed this thread-(before giving a or ) but I’m im ready to be shamed...why did M & H not bring A?
> 
> they have enough security to take them in and out of U.K.   is this a big f u to the royals ?
> Sorry my emojis didn’t show up in convos- I forgot this didn’t work here



Some believe it’s because she wants all the attention to herself.
Some believe it’s because she wants to punish the British Royals by keeping A away.
Some believe it is not safe for A to travel b/c of Corona virus.  

Yeah it’s a big F U to the royals!


----------



## Prufrock613

scarlet555 said:


> Some believe it’s because she wants all the attention to herself.
> Some believe it’s because she wants to punish the British Royals by keeping A away.
> Some believe it is not safe for A to travel b/c of Corona virus.
> 
> Yeah it’s a big F U to the royals!


TY!
The day I I ever kept my son from his gparents - is the day I dig my own grave - I get corona, but these are/is your family


----------



## jehaga

needlv said:


> I think he did.  I found this on Twitter.  She pulls his arm down and he doesn't follow her instructions to sit.  Then he says something.  Look at her face after he says it.  The mask slips for a moment, then she goes back to smiling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I'm not as tech abled to work out how to upload the video!


----------



## Straight-Laced

I just heard extracts from the Greta prank and if it’s not Harry it’s a very credible sounding imposter IMO.
He hasn’t denied it yet either.
Very interested to know what posters in Britain are thinking about this episode.
Is it real or fake? And if real, just how gullible and indiscreet is Harry?


----------



## hellosunshine

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan hosted a special conversation at Buckingham Palace for *Queens Commonwealth Trust*.


----------



## lalame

hellosunshine said:


> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan hosted a special conversation at Buckingham Palace for *Queens Commonwealth Trust*.
> 
> View attachment 4687580
> 
> View attachment 4687581
> 
> View attachment 4687582
> 
> View attachment 4687583



I watched the social media post for this (with video) and I couldn’t help but compare her “charity event persona” to Kate’s. She definitely doesn’t give off a “I’m here to support my husband” vibe, which is so different compared to how Kate comes across during these things. She’s front row and center, literally in the seating arrangement, and she does a lot of the talking. You can so easily imagine how displeased she must’ve been to learn she was supposed to have a supporting role, and that’s what Kate’s is. I know it is an honor for members of the public to meet royals, but her tone of speaking to them is always so... “aren’t you honored we’re honoring you.” I can almost hear her saying, in her head, “I was born to confer honor upon the underprivileged.”


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Some believe it’s because she wants all the attention to herself.
> Some believe it’s because she wants to punish the British Royals by keeping A away.
> Some believe it is not safe for A to travel b/c of Corona virus.
> 
> Yeah it’s a big F U to the royals!



I really doubt it’s a fear of the coronavirus. Was that just a fan speculation or did they actually say that? IMO, the only plausible explanation aside from the big F U is they’re trying to minimize as much media access to the baby as possible. They probably weren’t sure if they’d get papped or something with the baby during their time there or in transit and didn’t want to risk it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> What is going on here, they are getting a standing ovation and Markle is trying to make him sit down ?


Her triumphant smile while he's barely holding it together is so gross.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh. My. God. Where’s everyone who swore they’re so smart???
> View attachment 4687412


Why would he say that to Greta Thunberg though. Not buying it.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Agree with all of the above on precedence, titles, styles
> I would add every generation has someone who does not quite fit the pattern , and rules are officially changed about every 30 years or so.
> Examples of the rule changes -  princesses of the blood , codified some 10 years ago
> And only one curtsy a day is required , first time the ladies meet, and that can be off camera. Meghan was reported as the only one curtsying to QE2 at Commonwealth Service, Kate did not in public, but we don’t know if Kate had seen the Queen earlier . Reporters can go bananas over the lack of curtsies, but they have been known to incorrectly interpret the curtsies


Catherine did curtsey to the Queen, as did Sophie, then Meghan curtseyed as the Queen passed her. 
Meghan curtseyed to Charles too, Catherine didn't so obviously they'd seen eachother earlier in the day.


----------



## arnott

queennadine said:


> He got pranked  Wonder if their assistant with the Hotmail account “vetted” this convo? DYING.
> 
> ETA: Even if you thought you were really speaking to Greta, why would you unload all of that BS on a CHILD when you’re almost 40?!
> 
> TQ and PC need to cut them off. Now.



35 is almost 40?   17 is close to being an adult.


----------



## duna

hedur said:


> Whoa.
> 
> Honestly, most of the other videos I've seen can be taken a couple different ways. Is it weird that she always seems to be putting her arm on him and pulling him back in order to step in front of him? Yes, but maybe she's just trying to get him to be more gentlemanly. Maybe she sees the love of her life as someone younger and more immature that she can help in these social situations. Not the most functional of relationships but whatevs...I've seen worse. We're all flawed people.
> 
> But this video? Criminy. She is clearly so incensed that he didn't sit when she wanted her rage is bleeding through her eyes. Tyra taught us to smile with our eyes but Megs has taken that lesson to a dark, dark place.



I can't see this video, can someone help?? TIA


----------



## Megs

duna said:


> I can't see this video, can someone help?? TIA


 Video isn’t working for me either. I wonder if it’s from the night he was honored for his military leadership. She looked to me as she was about to curtesy to him but then stood back up, it appeared weird to me. But not sure what the video is of, it’s not there anymore!


----------



## duna

Megs said:


> Video isn’t working for me either. I wonder if it’s from the night he was honored for his military leadership. She looked to me as she was about to curtesy to him but then stood back up, it appeared weird to me. But not sure what the video is of, it’s not there anymore!



Ah, thanks Megs


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Blyen

From minute 1.04.
She first tries to sit down and Harry stops her. She waits a few seconds then grabs his arm and he tells her something that has her face freeze and the lady behind them make a stunned face.


----------



## dribbelina

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hand-Duchess-Sussex-reaching-touch-Harry.html

Just wanted to share[emoji28]


----------



## doni

AB Negative said:


> Could Megan be borrowing these clothes just for the occasions and then having to return them to the designer?  If so, that could be why they fit so poorly.  She is not tall enough to pull off the styles she is wearing that are better fitted on a tall model type.


No, she was still a working royal in these events, she would not be allowed to accept clothes to borrow.


----------



## duna

dribbelina said:


> View attachment 4687679
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hand-Duchess-Sussex-reaching-touch-Harry.html
> 
> Just wanted to share[emoji28]



Thanks!

God all this touching and pushing him around drives me crazy


----------



## doni

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh. My. God. Where’s everyone who swore they’re so smart???
> View attachment 4687412


Wow, is this true!? 
_I have a man in the North Pole_? 
Has anyone heard it?
If it is true, Harry is gone...


----------



## Chagall

lazeny said:


> That green looks good on her. It makes her skin pop. But I agree that she doesn't dress for her body type. This dress is still ill-fitting on her. I wish she'd be able to find a great tailor.
> 
> I also agree that she's naturally beautiful, her coloring is great, her face is much more memorable than Kate IMO. But Kate looks more genuine and kind.


How can she be “naturally” beautiful when she has had all that work done. Nose, teeth and who knows what else. She wears gobs of make-up much to heavily applied. I know people who have never had work done and wear little makeup who are naturally beautiful. The end result may impress some but it definitely isn’t natural beauty.


----------



## RAINDANCE

duna said:


> Thanks!
> 
> God all this touching and pushing him around drives me crazy


Me, too
I am sure all the hand holding is (not so silent) signalling that we are in love and a team against the world. Which is fine, in and of itself and outside of work, but IMO totally inappropriate at the formal events they have been at this last week.
BUT did you notice that Meghan always stands to the right of her husband (so the she is always ahead/ in front of him by default). I get that Harry is being a gentleman by allowing this but the order of presentation to guests is actually about respect for the Institution, (most particularly when he is the Royal in attendance at a function where he is representing the Crown) not the individual and he can't not know that.  All the other royal ladies of the UK, Spain, Denmark, Holland, Luxembourg, Japan, Bhutan, ( shall i go on ?) can manage to stand to the left ? Except of course CP Victoria ...


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would he say that to Greta Thunberg though. Not buying it.



I couldn’t believe it either when I saw the Daily Mirror article, but the BBC and mainstream outlets are reporting on it this morning. Apparently the pranksters have a YouTube show where they’ve previously pranked the PM (Boris Johnson) & US Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51831374


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> I couldn’t believe it either when I saw the Daily Mirror article, but the BBC and mainstream outlets are reporting on it this morning. Apparently the pranksters have a YouTube show where they’ve previously pranked the PM (Boris Johnson) & US Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51831374


Meghan must be tearing her extensions about this - with the realisation she married a complete dolt.


----------



## Chagall

I have never seen anyone maul their partner to such a great extent. Never, other than young teenagers. She just can’t keep her hands to herself. It is really weird and totally inappropriate.


----------



## 1LV

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan must be tearing her extensions about this - with the realisation she married a complete dolt.


I agree about tearing out the extensions, but I think she knew he was a dolt when she married him.  That’s what makes it work for her, and why The Queen left the door open for his return.


----------



## kissmysass

Does anyone know why reports keep saying "their last engagement as royals" when unfortunately they are still invited to events and Henry still has scheduled events?

They are still royals who get outside money no? Which is fine but the way they went about it was just so disrespectful.

So...how come we taxpayers have to pay for their security if they are getting their own money, money from the engagements they attend and Charles' money?

Is that not selfish and greedy?


----------



## kissmysass

Chagall said:


> I have never seen anyone maul their partner to such a great extent. Never, other than young teenagers. She just can’t keep her hands to herself. It is really weird and totally inappropriate.



Okay because I thought I was going to sound horrible to say this. Even Hollywood couples do not hold onto each other as much as these two.

They seem to be either too co-dependent or overcompensating for something...or both really.

In a professional setting, I would never do this. It just does not look.... professional at all.


----------



## Sharont2305

kissmysass said:


> Okay because I thought I was going to sound horrible to say this. Even Hollywood couples do not hold onto each other as much as these two.
> 
> They seem to be either too co-dependent or overcompensating for something...or both really.
> 
> In a professional setting, I would never do this. It just does not look.... professional at all.


It is very unprofessional, especially in their roles. When they were newly engaged and she did her first engagements with him I thought it was sweet, maybe a comforter for her, a little hand squeeze from him to say 'you're doing well, I'm here, it's okay' etc. But then it got annoying, all the blooming time.
We see William and Catherine do it very very rarely, yes at Sandringham on Christmas Day, but in essence is a private family gathering. Maybe at very casual sporting engagements, but not clinging all the time. I think the only time I recall seeing them hold hands at a serious royal event was a service at St Paul's Cathedral (I think) where there were a lot of steps to walk down. He held her hand, she was heavily pregnant at the time.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh. My. God. Where’s everyone who swore they’re so smart???
> View attachment 4687412


Drinking my coffee...is this real????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

Mrs.Z said:


> Drinking my coffee...is this real????


BBC and The Guardian are reporting it so it must be?
Why on earth would he speak about this stuff with Greta and her father?
Happily believing that they think it is perfectly reasonable they take so many planes for the safety of the family?
He says that not being able to use his title to make money is ‘_a technicality within the family’_?
Each thing he says is more bizarre than the previous one. Is he well?


----------



## queennadine

arnott said:


> 35 is almost 40?   17 is close to being an adult.



If the phone call took place on NYE, she was 16. 35 is a heck of a lot closer to 40 than a teenager. Highly inappropriate.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

MrsJDS said:


> For a woman who a mere two years ago would have had to line up to buy tickets to enter Westminster Abbey (or booked online to avoid the line ups) like us mere plebes, to complain about having to walk in early instead of in a royal procession is a bit rich. Also, it is interesting to compare pictures of Kate laughing when she is interacting with children to her rigid stone cold face-forward look at Westminster Abbey. Kate was definitely not acknowledging Meghan with any warmth whatsoever and in fact appeared to ignore her altogether. I also think there is no way Meghan could ever upstage Kate. Just because Meghan may have worn an outfit liked by social media does not mean that the person wearing the outfit is a likeable or an honourable person. Bye bye Meghan: don’t let the door hit you on the way out! So happy to see you in my rear view mirror.



Yeah I think the era of pretence is over. I think last year they were still trying to convince the media all was well and Kate kissed her cheek when they met somewhere, but really, you can't convince the media of anything when the other person and their team is constantly going after you and your family via the media. No one's buying it and I don't blame Kate for just being done in front of the cameras.


----------



## chicinthecity777

OK I am late to the party but I really don't like the red or the green dresses on her at all! But I hate capes so maybe I am biased. I do feel like she's modelling herself to be a superhero! Delusional much???

On the hatred towards them, it really depends on how you define hate. I don't hate MM because of her race or Harry because of his hair colour! I can say I hate that they are hypocritical, they don't practise what they preach! How can you claim to try to modernise the British Monarchy while at the same time try to cling on every single bits of that Monarchy! Do we need to be reminded that Harry is 6th in line to the throne (which is completely pointless BTW)? Don't even get me started with their royal titles or whatnot! How can you be self-claimed environmental activists while living in multi-million £ properties across the globe? Why do a 3-people household need this excess, even if they have a few more children???

I hate it that I as a UK taxpayer (highest band payer here while at it!) My hard earned money have to pay for these pair of self-important brats' security!

So if you think that's called hate, then yes i hate them!


----------



## chicinthecity777

BTW, I hate all hypocrites, not just those 2!


----------



## mrsinsyder

So... this "prank" phone call got me wondering...

What if these are questions Harry wanted to answer, but since no one was asking, he figured this was a way to get his "side" out? I'm wondering if maybe this was leaked for attention...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow I'm definitely thinking he's on something now...

*Bizarre exchange on Greta marrying Prince George*

Fake Greta says she a distant member of the Swedish royal family

Harry replies with a chuckle: "Oh wow, so we are related?’

Greta says: "Yeah its true, and if it will help me in fighting for climate change, should I arrange a dynastic marriage, do you think? I think it'll help."

The prince is heard responding: "I am certain it'll help’

The giggling 'Greta' - aged 17 - then says: "I found some candidates that suits me - James Windsor and Prince George. "Their ages I think are very suitable for my marriage. It will help.."

Harry then replies laughing: "I am sure I can help."

*On moving penguins to the North Pole*

A Russian translation of the words shows her asking: "Now we are dealing with an issue of moving penguins from Belarus to their native land, the North Pole.

"About 50 penguins were stuck at customs in Belarus.

"That's terrible. And we are searching for some ship maybe to transport these poor penguins to their native land."

Greta's fake father then said: "North Pole...perhaps you have some contacts for people who can help us?"

Harry replies: "I do have a man who deals with the North Pole.

"He is in Norway, he can help as maybe he knows all the right people. I'll give you the contacts on email.

'This recording ends with 'Greta' saying: "That's nice. That's good".


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow I'm definitely thinking he's on something now...
> 
> *Bizarre exchange on Greta marrying Prince George*
> 
> Fake Greta says she a distant member of the Swedish royal family
> 
> Harry replies with a chuckle: "Oh wow, so we are related?’
> 
> Greta says: "Yeah its true, and if it will help me in fighting for climate change, should I arrange a dynastic marriage, do you think? I think it'll help."
> 
> The prince is heard responding: "I am certain it'll help’
> 
> The giggling 'Greta' - aged 17 - then says: "I found some candidates that suits me - James Windsor and Prince George. "Their ages I think are very suitable for my marriage. It will help.."
> 
> Harry then replies laughing: "I am sure I can help."
> 
> *On moving penguins to the North Pole*
> 
> A Russian translation of the words shows her asking: "Now we are dealing with an issue of moving penguins from Belarus to their native land, the North Pole.
> 
> "About 50 penguins were stuck at customs in Belarus.
> 
> "That's terrible. And we are searching for some ship maybe to transport these poor penguins to their native land."
> 
> Greta's fake father then said: "North Pole...perhaps you have some contacts for people who can help us?"
> 
> Harry replies: "I do have a man who deals with the North Pole.
> 
> "He is in Norway, he can help as maybe he knows all the right people. I'll give you the contacts on email.
> 
> 'This recording ends with 'Greta' saying: "That's nice. That's good".


Why was a Russian translator/translation needed?
Is this an hoax?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh Harry, do you miss your bubble yet?


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> Why was a Russian translator/translation needed?
> Is this an hoax?


The transcript was originally shared in Russian, since that's where the hoaxers are from.


----------



## limom

Wow, he really is a moron, then!
He is going to have to grow the f@#$ up real quick.
I almost feel sorry for him at this point...


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> The transcript was originally shared in Russian, since that's where the hoaxers are from.


I remember back a while ...  I may not remember the exact details of the story ... on getting  taken by by the hoaxers ...
Sophie Wessex was taken and blurted out something not very correct - Saudi business men and she was too candid about finances , again I may have the details wrong but she has erred
But, she is now considered exemplary - she did learn and never showed hubris at any time in the last 20 years, she simply committed a faux pas , we all do,  so I forgive Harry - he was the victim of sleezy people
But yes, he should have been less candid. One would have thought that H had learned not to bare his soul to (relative) strangers by now
Mike Tindall was recently asked  by reporters about Megxit - his reply might have been brusque but it certainly was effective and shut down the questions - he said Megxit is a NO GO ZONE for questions

OF COURSE, the story of being taken by the Russians may be entirely FAKE NEWS


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't get this narrative of "having to protect my son". What would have happened to him? What exactly is happening to the actual heir to the throne, George? As far as I can tell he's a happy child whose parents manage to give him a pretty normal childhood.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't get this narrative of "having to protect my son". What would have happened to him? What exactly is happening to the actual heir to the throne, George? As far as I can tell he's a happy child whose parents manage to give him a pretty normal childhood.


This! [emoji122][emoji122]


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't get this narrative of "having to protect my son". What would have happened to him? What exactly is happening to the actual heir to the throne, George? As far as I can tell he's a happy child whose parents manage to give him a pretty normal childhood.


Yes, and how long has he been left with the Nanny in the 10 months since he was born?  Quite a bit seems to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't get this narrative of "having to protect my son". What would have happened to him? What exactly is happening to the actual heir to the throne, George? As far as I can tell he's a happy child whose pareI nts manage to give him a pretty normal childhood.



George is blessed with parents who are adults.  His parents understand the importance of stability in a young child's life.

Archie? His parents appear  totally wrapped up in themselves and whatever their next great idea is.  Aha, I have a drop of wisdom!  To the Instagram!
I think the "protect" thing has turned out to be as ridiculous as it sounded.  If that had been a sincere goal, they would have stayed in the UK.  

The nannies have their work cut out for them.  I hope they are able to navigate the tricky waters of keeping the parents happy while at the same time caring for Archie.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> The transcript was originally shared in Russian, since that's where the hoaxers are from.


They even sound Russian  so what the h*ll was he thinking?  I’m surprised he didn’t suspect it was a reporter given his paranoia about the press.
I hope this is a fake Harry on the line, but I don’t think it is.  It’s the same people who’ve duped other celebs, Elton John was one other who fell for it.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't get this narrative of "having to protect my son". What would have happened to him? What exactly is happening to the actual heir to the throne, George? As far as I can tell he's a happy child whose parents manage to give him a pretty normal childhood.


Also, the only pics we have seen of Archie are the ones they themselves released mainly through Instagram and, on one ocasión, pap pictures taken in... Canada. So how is he more protected now? Paparazzi would have never hunted for Archie pictures in the UK.

Could it be this story is fake news even if serious outlets are picking it? It sounds all so incredible...

If true, one does feel sorry for him.
I remember the time when he became universally adored. He was always so warm and had such a frank smile. He gave that interview talking about Diana and his trauma over her death, how for years he was closing down and partying. He talked about how it was his brother who came to the rescue and insisted he went to a therapist. They appeared so close then and he obviously adored Kate too... He explained how his royal work had been his escape route, all that travelling he did to Africa (a place he seemed to genuinely love so much and he is now moving so far away from) and how he found meaning in all that. He talked about the confort of imagining how proud his mother would have been to see him continuing her work.
How do you go from that to this?!


----------



## TC1

How are these radio pranksters getting direct contact with these people? Seems odd that so many people have fallen for it.


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't get this narrative of "having to protect my son". What would have happened to him? .



Harry believes the media would have killed his son & wife like they killed his mother. He legitimately believes in a vast conspiracy to bring him & M down. (Primary bad guys are the media, the BRF, the royal courtiers & staff, some of Harry’s former friends & the racist public).

The faux-Greta interview gets at how deeply he blames his family & he equates Meg and Megxit with survival. All actions can be justified if you feel your cause is so noble... It can take years & even decades for someone to realize that “If everyone around me is a jerk, maybe I’m the jerk...”



> How are these radio pranksters getting direct contact with these people? Seems odd that so many people have fallen for it.



It’s seems impossible, but keeps happening. Comedian Sasha Baron Cohen (Borat & Ali G)  launched to international stardom by pranking celebs around the world. Ashton Kucher’s Punked series was also massively popular. Usually there’s a combination of connections, celeb naivete (or hubris/arrogance), carefully researched “lures”.

 “Greta” was the perfect lure for Harry last December, when he was planning Megxit & getting public ridicule for his hypocritical climate speeches. Access is often via an official looking message to a friend of the celeb, or management. (We know the sussexroyal media team can be pretty unsophisticated —use hotmail to arrange secret meetings, have socially tone-deaf announcements, etc). Greta’s also known for being off the grid often & awkward— all this works in a prankster’s favor. (I also wonder if the Russian pranksters had any connections via the purported Russian owner of their Canadian hideout?)


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone ever get a sense that he felt persecuted or victimized before he met Meghan? If he did he kept it well hidden. I think she put that bug in his ear and repeated it often. It helped make him dependent on her.


----------



## Emeline

TC1 said:


> How are these radio pranksters getting direct contact with these people? Seems odd that so many people have fallen for it.


Someone near the "celebrity"  gives them the numbers. I would guess there is a lot of deception combined with flattery. 

In H&M's case there is another possibility.  This might be one of the many consequences  that comes from deciding to stay "rent free" at the home of a Russian oligarch.   Nothing is free, really. 
They probably had to give the owner contact #'s. Over time, those #'s  may have been passed along.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I may be reaching here but wonder if M was jealous that Kate got Diana's engagement ring


I commented a few jillion pages back that heck yeah, I'm pretty sure M isn't happy that K got D's ring (Harry gave it to Will to use as the e-ring). 

That is pretty much the most recognized piece of ring jewelry around--it stands out very boldly being big and blue. 

Giant diamonds are wonderful (I personally would not know ) but they don't jump out from a distance like THAT ring does. And based on what we've seen, that would have suited M very well. Every time she see's it, does she think "that shoulda been mine!"?


----------



## TC1

William is the oldest son, and found love first. He should have had the ring..the way Harry was behaving back then?...who knew where he would land.


----------



## limom

It makes more sense for Kate to be wearing it imho.
D. Would have been Queen one day (if the marriage had worked out) and Kate will be queen one day(hopefully)
I wonder why the queen did not give a piece of jewelry herself...


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> She didn't like the one Harry gave her and had it redone in a year.  I'm sure she would have preferred Diana's ring.  I have never bought the story that Harry had it.  Shortly after her death, prince William clearly stated that he wanted it, I don't know why he would have taken her watch instead.


The story on the watch I heard was D taught W how to tell time using her watch and he had fond memories of it and wanted it.


----------



## kemilia

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Got my Kohls ad today - these two look eerily similar to some other folks we know.
> 
> View attachment 4687341


OMG. They nailed it, good for Kohl's!


----------



## Aminamina

I'm amazed at how removed Harry is from real life and how the real world operates. It is sad really, to watch him becoming a caricature. And not a nice one. He should have stayed in his bubble, indeed. As for his wife, I wonder who fed her delusional grandeur to the extent it seems quite often her mental institution hospitalization is overdue?
I go back to my seat, relax and watch it all unwrap further. My ladies, I salute you!


----------



## youngster

This prank "interview" by the Russians pulled on Harry, if it really was Harry and not a fake Harry, could also be one of the reasons he looked so pulled about last week at various times.  Maybe he or his people finally figured out that it wasn't really Greta and her father on the phone and they knew this was going to be released.   

I could totally imagine that the Russians contacted him through usual channels, saying that Greta and her father would love to arrange a phone call and his new, possibly less experienced staff didn't do the usual checking and vetting.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone ever get a sense that he felt persecuted or victimized before he met Meghan? If he did he kept it well hidden. I think she put that bug in his ear and repeated it often. It helped make him dependent on her.


No, I never got that feeling at all. To me he seemed like he was defining his role as a supporter of the Monarchy in readiness for a bigger role when his father and later on his brother becomes King.
And loving it, total enjoyment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> I commented a few jillion pages back that heck yeah, I'm pretty sure M isn't happy that K got D's ring (Harry gave it to Will to use as the e-ring).
> 
> That is pretty much the most recognized piece of ring jewelry around--it stands out very boldly being big and blue.
> 
> Giant diamonds are wonderful (I personally would not know ) but they don't jump out from a distance like THAT ring does. And based on what we've seen, that would have suited M very well. Every time she see's it, does she think "that shoulda been mine!"?


Absolutely, it's the most famous e ring in the world.
If you ask a number of random people (probably women, lol) how many of them would be able to describe the Queens engagement ring for example?  Not many, unless you're an avid fan. Nearly everyone knows who Diana was, and I would say the majority knows that ring.
It's stunning by the way, and pictures do not do it justice.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> No, I never got that feeling at all. To me he seemed like he was defining his role as a supporter of the Monarchy in readiness for a bigger role when his father and later on his brother becomes King.
> And loving it, total enjoyment.


No way, if he really loved being a Spare/Prince he would have not given up so quickly.
There is just so much a good lay can do.....


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I could totally imagine that the Russians contacted him through usual channels, saying that Greta and her father would love to arrange a phone call and his new, possibly less experienced staff didn't do the usual checking and vetting.



It makes me wonder if Meghan knew about the phone call and encouraged him to take it. (We know she didn't discourage him because if she had I doubt he would have done it.)


----------



## cafecreme15

Apologies if this has already been shared here (I haven’t been able to keep up the last few days due to a family emergency) but my how humiliating for Harry...

Harry had been tricked by Russian pranksters into thinking he was speaking with climate activist Greta Thunberg, and gave comments on Megxit, the climate, politicians, etc.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11144...reta-thunberg/amp/?__twitter_impression=true#


----------



## kemilia

lazeny said:


> That green looks good on her. It makes her skin pop. But I agree that she doesn't dress for her body type. This dress is still ill-fitting on her. I wish she'd be able to find a great tailor.
> 
> I also agree that she's naturally beautiful, her coloring is great, her face is much more memorable than Kate IMO. But Kate looks more genuine and kind.


I think we can agree (after seeing pic after pic) that this cape dress is a great color on her but the style itself--not so much. Add the mushroom cap hat to her head and--it's a nope for me. Whoever noted that covering up her short neck didn't look good was right on. I have a short neck and do not look good wearing scarves (but living in Chicago-land in the winter--I gotta wear scarves!).


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I commented a few jillion pages back that heck yeah, I'm pretty sure M isn't happy that K got D's ring (Harry gave it to Will to use as the e-ring).
> 
> That is pretty much the most recognized piece of ring jewelry around--it stands out very boldly being big and blue.
> 
> Giant diamonds are wonderful (I personally would not know ) but they don't jump out from a distance like THAT ring does. And based on what we've seen, that would have suited M very well. Every time she see's it, does she think "that shoulda been mine!"?


yes that sapphire ring is iconic.....Meghans ring is beautiful but in a less uniqe way.  but Kate was there first and is going to be queen.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> No, I never got that feeling at all. To me he seemed like he was defining his role as a supporter of the Monarchy in readiness for a bigger role when his father and later on his brother becomes King.
> And loving it, total enjoyment.


And a large chunk of their engagement interview was all about how they were looking forward as a couple to their Royal duty and how fortunate Harry felt to have found a wife so accomplished and willing to take on the task.


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow I'm definitely thinking he's on something now...
> 
> *Bizarre exchange on Greta marrying Prince George*
> 
> Fake Greta says she a distant member of the Swedish royal family
> 
> Harry replies with a chuckle: "Oh wow, so we are related?’
> 
> Greta says: "Yeah its true, and if it will help me in fighting for climate change, should I arrange a dynastic marriage, do you think? I think it'll help."
> 
> The prince is heard responding: "I am certain it'll help’
> 
> The giggling 'Greta' - aged 17 - then says: "I found some candidates that suits me - James Windsor and Prince George. "Their ages I think are very suitable for my marriage. It will help.."
> 
> Harry then replies laughing: "I am sure I can help."
> 
> *On moving penguins to the North Pole*
> 
> A Russian translation of the words shows her asking: "Now we are dealing with an issue of moving penguins from Belarus to their native land, the North Pole.
> 
> *"About 50 penguins were stuck at customs in Belarus*.
> 
> "*That's terrible. And we are searching for some ship maybe to transport these poor penguins to their native land."*
> 
> *Greta's fake father then said: "North Pole...perhaps you have some contacts for people who can help us?"*
> 
> Harry replies: "I do have a man who deals with the North Pole.
> 
> "He is in Norway, he can help as maybe he knows all the right people. I'll give you the contacts on email.
> 
> 'This recording ends with 'Greta' saying: "That's nice. That's good".



Besides the whole phone call which sounds totally surreal, but this part caught my eye: there are NO penguins in the North Pole, only in the South Pole, surely they must have known?? It must be totally fake, no? I get that Harry isn't the brightest guy but surely he knows that there are no penguins in the NP.....


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> Besides the whole phone call which sounds totally surreal, but this part caught my eye: there are NO penguins in the North Pole, only in the South Pole, surely they must have known?? It must be totally fake, no? I get that Harry isn't the brightest guy but surely he knows that there are no penguins in the NP.....


Apparently not!


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> Apologies if this has already been shared here (I haven’t been able to keep up the last few days due to a family emergency) but my how humiliating for Harry...
> 
> Harry had been tricked by Russian pranksters into thinking he was speaking with climate activist Greta Thunberg, and gave comments on Megxit, the climate, politicians, etc.
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11144...reta-thunberg/amp/?__twitter_impression=true#


so do we know if Harry really did have this conversation?


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> And a large chunk of their engagement interview was all about how they were looking forward as a couple to their Royal duty and how fortunate Harry felt to have found a wife so accomplished and willing to take on the task.


yes, in addition to whatever beauty, bedroom talents, etc. she had, I think her "activism" impressed him and was a big part of her charm


----------



## lalame

People is reporting the phone call too... oh to be a fly on the wall in _those_ royal conversations right now. If true, it’s stunning how candid he is to strangers... wonder how on earth more dirt hasn’t come out sooner if he’s giving his story to everybody who comes up (but could explain why some celebs have come out with so much sympathy).

Can you imagine being Wills and Kate now, after enduring a week of cringey reports on your bad family relations, and then this right out of his mouth.


----------



## kemilia

Chagall said:


> How can she be “naturally” beautiful when she has had all that work done. Nose, teeth and who knows what else. She wears gobs of make-up much to heavily applied. I know people who have never had work done and wear little makeup who are naturally beautiful. The end result may impress some but it definitely isn’t natural beauty.


Her hair is also treated to be straight, has been for a long while. I don't call that "natural." And then the extensions/weave added on ...


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Can you imagine being Wills and Kate now, after enduring a week of cringey reports on your bad family relations, and then this right out of his mouth.



Imagine how much more awkward those events where they appeared together would have been if this information had been released earlier.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> People is reporting the phone call too... oh to be a fly on the wall in _those_ royal conversations right now. If true, it’s stunning how candid he is to strangers... wonder how on earth more dirt hasn’t come out sooner if he’s giving his story to everybody who comes up (but could explain why some celebs have come out with so much sympathy).
> 
> Can you imagine being Wills and Kate now, after enduring a week of cringey reports on your bad family relations, and then this right out of his mouth.


and Charles


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Her hair is also treated to be straight, has been for a long while. I don't call that "natural." And then the extensions/weave added on ...


would love to see her with her natural hair


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> Imagine how much more awkward those events where they appeared together would have been if this information had been released earlier.


Is it possible at least Charles knew? 
Assuming they were aware, would M&H's security detail report bizarre and or worrisome breaches to higher ups? And then in turn, might they give a heads up to Charles?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Very interesting read and analysis of yesterday.
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...owed-to-march-in-with-the-queen/#2772597e37e7


Great article - it really shows the importance of precedence for the royals eg who gets to be front row and /or walk in the procession
and the whole procession bit was written in the programme reinforcing its importance


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> would love to see her with her natural hair


I doubt that will ever happen, unless she can monetize it. Her long straight hair is a major part of her identity. She's always touching it, pushing it back only for it to fall back. 
And in that extended video, the one where H won't sit down like a good boy, umm hubbie, when the lights go down she is messing with her hair and the top of the red cape. She must have thought that it was dark and no one would she her adjusting everything. All that time in the royal spotlight and she never learned that eyes are always on them.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> People is reporting the phone call too... oh to be a fly on the wall in _those_ royal conversations right now. If true, it’s stunning how candid he is to strangers... wonder how on earth more dirt hasn’t come out sooner if he’s giving his story to everybody who comes up (but could explain why some celebs have come out with so much sympathy).
> 
> Can you imagine being Wills and Kate now, after enduring a week of cringey reports on your bad family relations, and then this right out of his mouth.


The cringe worthy call of Harry’s , if it is indeed true and not bogus, reminds me of a previous call ...
Charles and Camilla were carrying on during his marriage to Diana and the press got hold of a call of Charles to Camilla, where he said he wanted to be between her legs
OK, I sanitized the story, you can go google for the tawdry bit, but even the sanitized version is cringe worthy


----------



## limom

It is a good think Prince Phillip is mellower and older, I believe that PH would have gotten a well deserved animated  talk.
I would love to know what Camilla and Prince Phillip really think about the couple......


----------



## lalame

We could probably count on our hands how many naturally pretty celebs there are in all of Hollywood these days... But imo someone is pretty or they're not, you shouldn't have to do research to have an opinion on someone's looks. These days, you never know...


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> I doubt that will ever happen, unless she can monetize it. Her long straight hair is a major part of her identity. She's always touching it, pushing it back only for it to fall back.
> And in that extended video, the one where H won't sit down like a good boy, umm hubbie, when the lights go down she is messing with her hair and the top of the red cape. She must have thought that it was dark and no one would she her adjusting everything. All that time in the royal spotlight and she never learned that eyes are always on them.


The trend is with natural hair....
Tons of famous women come out with their own line..(Tracée Ellis Ross being the latest)..
Can’t wait for this new version of Meg...

Meg is naturally pretty. Look at her as a child.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Imagine how much more awkward those events where they appeared together would have been if this information had been released earlier.



I'm wondering if they knew at the Commonwealth Service that this was going to be coming out, so that the solemn faces were not just about placating the two of them about the order of procession and seating.


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> Is it possible at least Charles knew?
> Assuming they were aware, would M&H's security detail report bizarre and or worrisome breaches to higher ups? And then in turn, might they give a heads up to Charles?



I doubt the security employees would have any knowledge of the nature of their phone calls. H&M made such a fuss over their need for privacy after all.

I see that Harry took two phone calls from the fake Greta lasting for a total of about 45 minutes. That's a long time and he was duped twice by the Russian pranksters. Even old Bernie Sanders caught on after 12 minutes of talking to them, although they said much more outrageous things to him.


----------



## Aminamina

An interesting bit about Wills and HM relationship at the moment
https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...nversation-commonwealth-day-lip-reading.html/


----------



## youngster

_Harry reportedly said in the calls, . . . We operate in a way of inclusivity and we are focusing on community. And so we are completely separate from the majority of my family.”_

What a nice thing to say, especially about your granny.   I guess he's convinced himself that his previous royal life was silly and meaningless. OK, then, renounce your titles as prince and duke of Sussex and go full on "regular guy".  But, no no, he's still going to point out that he's 6th in line and they should have been included in the VIP procession into the Commonwealth Service and they need their taxpayer provided 24/7 security wherever they travel throughout the world plus their huge allowance from Prince Charles and the Duchy.


----------



## cafecreme15

Aminamina said:


> An interesting bit about Wills and HM relationship at the moment
> https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...nversation-commonwealth-day-lip-reading.html/


The hand gel comment LOL I would have been thinking the same if I were William in that situation.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Great article - it really shows the importance of precedence for the royals eg who gets to be front row and /or walk in the procession
> and the whole procession bit was written in the programme reinforcing its importance


interesting
so William showed himself to be the bigger person.  and they were mollified.  but the truth came out so in the end, the Sussexes looked worse for it.  Apparently they aren't as clever as they think they are.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> The trend is with natural hair....
> Tons of famous women come out with their own line..(Tracée Ellis Ross being the latest)..
> Can’t wait for this new version of Meg...
> 
> Meg is naturally pretty. Look at her as a child.


yes, the famous picture of her at the birthday party waving some sort of wand over her "subjects"....she had big curly hair


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

_Prince Harry’s full quote which he is claimed to have said to Meghan was: “He literally said: ‘Hello, Harry’ and that was it and he didn’t say anything more than that.”_

That makes it sound like Meghan asked Harry to report back to her exactly what William said to him. She was probably trying to figure out how offended they should be.


----------



## bisousx

Oh Meghan. That’s the trouble with dimwitted guys. If she thought it was an accomplishment to manipulate her husband, she’s in for a treat now that she realizes how easily anyone can manipulate him. Her hard work crafting their image as a power couple will fall apart. No more young Obamas, new Brangelina.
Unless she keeps her firm grip on him (literally), he’s open season for anyone smarter than him. He has the words SCAM ME written all over his forehead.


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> Princess Margaret was “convinced” not to marry her divorce.
> The same type of pressure could have been applied to Harry, imho.


Margaret would have had to give up all the perks of royalty to marry and she wasn't about to do that.  Work for a living? No jewels to wear and palace to live in?  No one curtsying to her, no servants, no jetting around aimlessly?  No way.


----------



## Aminamina

bag-mania said:


> _Prince Harry’s full quote which he is claimed to have said to Meghan was: “He literally said: ‘Hello, Harry’ and that was it and he didn’t say anything more than that.”_
> 
> That makes it sound like Meghan asked Harry to report back to her exactly what William said to him. She was probably trying to figure out how offended they should be.


Yes! You took it off my tongue )). As in a job description, he has to report back to his superior.
ETA: I have a nickname for Meghan - Moriarti. She certainly thinks of herself sitting in the middle of web


----------



## scarlet555

Pruft corona said:


> I really doubt it’s a fear of the coronavirus. Was that just a fan speculation or did they actually say that? IMO, the only plausible explanation aside from the big F U is they’re trying to minimize as much media access to the baby as possible. They probably weren’t sure if they’d get papped or something with the baby during their time there or in transit and didn’t want to risk it.



Corona virus speculation was on this forum...  
Personally, I'd either take my child with me or stay with him, but definitely  not separate from him if it was corona virus concerns.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> as much as many of us may dislike "M" she still gets plenty of support in the US.  Today on The View they showed a clip of a British woman referring to Meghan as something like 5 steps from trailer trash.  Everyone on the panel found this offensive and racist.  And to take it a step further, they all agreed that this is the type of racism that drove H&M to break from the monarchy - and justifiably so.
> On at least one occasion in the past, Joy Behar was a bit cynical about Meghan but today they were all on the "poor Meghan victim of racism" bandwagon.  Wonder if someone told Joy this was the position she ought to take.


They, or the producers, must want something or have an agenda.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> They, or the producers, must want something or have an agenda.


who knows?  
generally they have different views......Meghan conservative, Sunny alway very supportive of POC, etc.  this time they all agreed.  I can see them all agreeing about the comment being racist.  not so much about that being what they had to endure and what made them leave the monarchy


----------



## scarlet555

Sharont2305 said:


> It is very unprofessional, especially in their roles. When they were newly engaged and she did her first engagements with him* I thought it was sweet*, maybe a comforter for her, a little hand squeeze from him to say 'you're doing well, I'm here, it's okay' etc. But then it got annoying, all the blooming time.
> We see William and Catherine do it very very rarely, yes at Sandringham on Christmas Day, but in essence is a private family gathering. Maybe at very casual sporting engagements, but not clinging all the time. I think the only time I recall seeing them hold hands at a serious royal event was a service at St Paul's Cathedral (I think) where there were a lot of steps to walk down. He held her hand, she was heavily pregnant at the time.



agree with this.  at first I thought people criticizing them for these gestures were petty, but now looking at the whole picture, it's not about being a couple, these moves seem to be about M wanting to control H with her cues.  Horrid to watch!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I may be reaching here but wonder if M was jealous that Kate got Diana's engagement ring


I thought for sure that ring would be jinxed, so I would not have wanted it.  It brings me back to scenes of so much anguish and manipulation whenever I see it.

Meg's new ring (replaced/upgraded immediately after the first) is really pretty, I think.


----------



## Emeline

Apparently today WHO has declared the covid19 situation a pandemic. 

I believe this will have a huge affect on the woke couples employment opportunities in the coming months.
I wonder if they will opt for Canada, California, or start to consider returning to the earlier unthinkable  Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## scarlet555

I honestly can't keep up with this thread and work full time.  Therefore, I'm going to have to set my alarm to get up in the middle of the night (lol).


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> I honestly can't keep up with this thread and work full time.  Therefore, I'm going to have to set my alarm to get up in the middle of the night (lol).


LOL
please post in the middle of the night


----------



## duna

Jayne1 said:


> I* thought for sure that ring would be jinxed, so I would not have wanted it.  It brings me back to scenes of so much anguish and manipulation whenever I see it.*
> 
> Meg's new ring (replaced/upgraded immediately after the first) is really pretty, I think.



I agree with you, I would never have wanted it!


----------



## TC1

Emeline said:


> Apparently today WHO has declared the covid19 situation a pandemic.
> 
> I believe this will have a huge affect on the woke couples employment opportunities in the coming months.
> I wonder if they will opt for Canada, California, or start to consider returning to the earlier unthinkable  Frogmore Cottage.


There are a number of cases in B.C. Perhaps they should have thought about that and taken Archie with. I feel sad and have anxiety leaving my 16 year old for a week. Let alone now week(S) for poor Arch with the staff.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought that this part of the transcript was telling. 

'But sometimes the right decision isn't always the easy one. I can assure you, marrying a Prince or Princess is not all it's made out to be!‘

It sounds like Meghan has spent a lot of time telling him how hard it is to be married to him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

duna said:


> I agree with you, I would never have wanted it!


My mom told me that when she and my dad got engaged the jeweler showed them a larger diamond for a very good price. When dad asked  why the bargain price, the jeweler said it was from a broken engagement. My mom said no way do I want that ring!!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I thought that this part of the transcript was telling.
> 
> 'But sometimes the right decision isn't always the easy one. I can assure you, marrying a Prince or Princess is not all it's made out to be!‘
> 
> It sounds like Meghan has spent a lot of time telling him how hard it is to be married to him.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> There are a number of cases in B.C. Perhaps they should have thought about that and taken Archie with. I feel sad and have anxiety leaving my 16 year old for a week. Let alone now week(S) for poor Arch with the staff.


he may be more bonded with his nanny than with his parents


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> would love to see her with her natural hair






Keratin treatments, good blow out and flat iron. I have hair very similar to this.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> View attachment 4687933
> View attachment 4687932


thanks....I meant I'd like to see her wear her hair natural now


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> thanks....I meant I'd like to see her wear her hair natural now


I don’t think you will see that happen.


----------



## mia55

She does have very beautiful hair.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> I don’t think you will see that happen.


I have curly hair and it's my biggest asset.  Love to see women with their NC hair.  To each her own


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I have curly hair and it's my biggest asset.  Love to see women with their NC hair.  To each her own


Same here. I went curly a while back and I love it!
As far as the View remember, it is a Disney/ABC product. They are not about to let go of any connection. Period.


----------



## lalame

Re: the View, I think it's just a matter of the woman's quote being pretty tacky imo. I mean... "5 steps from trailer trash"? I did a double take when I saw that headline come up on my newsfeed too. IDK about racist but it's just unnecessarily nasty. We can dislike people without describing them in nasty ways. Everyone has a different bar for this but I assume this is what the debate was about, rather than pandering to anything per se.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> How can she be “naturally” beautiful when she has had all that work done. Nose, teeth and who knows what else. She wears gobs of make-up much to heavily applied. I know people who have never had work done and wear little makeup who are naturally beautiful. The end result may impress some but it definitely isn’t natural beauty.


According to my friends who knew Meghan back in her High School days, they said she DEFINITELY had work done, most specifically the nose and of course, her teeth.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Re: the View, I think it's just a matter of the woman's quote being pretty tacky imo. I mean... "5 steps from trailer trash"? I did a double take when I saw that headline come up on my newsfeed too. IDK about racist but it's just unnecessarily nasty. We can dislike people without describing them in nasty ways. Everyone has a different bar for this but I assume this is what the debate was about, rather than pandering to anything per se.


Agreed but we were discussing on how Joy flipped her view on M/H.
That cow was beyond crazy and racist. What did she even mean by 5 clicks away from trash?


----------



## lalame

I know nothing about weaves but is her hair really a weave?? I thought some ladies with super curly hair like these just get it straightened professionally.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> I know nothing about weaves but is her hair really a weave?? I thought some ladies with super curly hair like these just get it straightened professionally.


It always looks so dry and stringy I assumed there were extensions.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Re: the View, I think it's just a matter of the woman's quote being pretty tacky imo. I mean... "5 steps from trailer trash"? I did a double take when I saw that headline come up on my newsfeed too. *IDK about racist but it's just unnecessarily nasty.* We can dislike people without describing them in nasty ways. Everyone has a different bar for this but I assume this is what the debate was about, rather than pandering to anything per se.



Yeah, calling someone trailer trash is certainly horrible but I can't say that it's racist. I've only ever heard it as a slur used against poor white people. Maybe the woman was insulting the Thomas side of Meghan and not the Doria side. Though those women on The View tend to get themselves all worked up and saying it was racist fits their self-righteousness better than just saying it was really mean.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, calling someone trailer trash is certainly horrible but I can't say that it's racist. I've only ever heard it used against poor white people. Maybe the woman was insulting the Thomas side of Meghan and not the Doria side. Though those women on The View tend to get themselves all worked up and saying it was racist fits their self-righteousness better than just saying it was really mean.


right....that woman's language was bad.  but the part that I was commenting was that they all agreed that M suffered from a lot of racism and that was the reason they had to leave the monarchy.  In the past, certainly Sunny would have agreed with that.  but Joy had expressed something along the lines of all the privilege M got with the marriage.  Whoppi often stays kinda neutral on race (compared to Sunny anyhow)


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> right....that woman's language was bad.  but the part that I was commenting was that they all agreed that M suffered from a lot of racism and that was the reason they had to leave the monarchy.  In the past, certainly Sunny would have agreed with that.  but Joy had expressed something along the lines of all the privilege M got with the marriage.  Whoppi often stays kinda neutral on race (compared to Sunny anyhow)


Is Joy in negotiation right now?
Today, she could barely hold it together with Elizabeth. I had to change the channel...
You know ABC is hoping for the first interview with the Royal/Unroyal couple....


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone ever get a sense that he felt persecuted or victimized before he met Meghan? If he did he kept it well hidden. I think she put that bug in his ear and repeated it often. It helped make him dependent on her.


See .. this is where what is going on now with him, makes no sense to me .. except now for that "Love Bomb" video which seems so spot on!  

Harry's relationship with Will (and Kate) seemed truly genuine, friendly, etc. - and then all of a sudden, Meghan comes on board and everything then goes south???  Just doesn't make any sense to me.  In addition, I keep bringing this up (I know, I know ..) but that wedding that they (H & M) attended in Jamaica (Tom Inskip?) where Meghan was the +1 .. to me, showed that Harry wasn't so "in love" with her (at least not at that time) .. so what in bloody hell happened after that???  Meghan must be an expert at that Love Bombing technique to get Harry to be the way he is now!


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Is Joy in negotiation right now?
> Today, she could barely hold it together with Elizabeth. I had to change the channel...
> You know ABC is hoping for the first interview with the Royal/Unroyal couple....


cannot stand elizabeth.....aside from not agreeing with what she says, almost all the time, she is shrill.
I had to wonder what Meghan who always praises her thought sitting with her today


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> See .. this is where what is going on now with him, makes no sense to me .. except now for that "Love Bomb" video which seems so spot on!
> 
> Harry's relationship with Will (and Kate) seemed truly genuine, friendly, etc. - and then all of a sudden, Meghan comes on board and everything then goes south???  Just doesn't make any sense to me.  In addition, I keep bringing this up (I know, I know ..) but that wedding that they (H & M) attended in Jamaica (Tom Inskip?) where Meghan was the +1 .. to me, showed that Harry wasn't so "in love" with her (at least not at that time) .. so what in bloody hell happened after that???  Meghan must be an expert at that Love Bombing technique to get Harry to be the way he is now!


so "H" has been brainwashed?  funny, not funny


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> My mom told me that when she and my dad got engaged the jeweler showed them a larger diamond for a very good price. When dad asked  why the bargain price, the jeweler said it was from a broken engagement. My mom said no way do I want that ring!!


I understand because I'm pretty superstitious.  but most diamonds aren't new.....it's not like they come straight from the mine and are set into rings (of course you're talking about a ring, not just the stone)


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> cannot stand elizabeth.....aside from not agreeing with what she says, almost all the time, she is shrill.
> I had to wonder what Meghan who always praises her thought sitting with her today


Same here MeeMeeMee is annoying enough, bringing back Elizabeth was just too much for my nerves....
She is simply nuts.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> See .. this is where what is going on now with him, makes no sense to me .. except now for that "Love Bomb" video which seems so spot on!
> 
> Harry's relationship with Will (and Kate) seemed truly genuine, friendly, etc. - and then all of a sudden, Meghan comes on board and everything then goes south???  Just doesn't make any sense to me.  In addition, I keep bringing this up (I know, I know ..) but that wedding that they (H & M) attended in Jamaica (Tom Inskip?) where Meghan was the +1 .. to me, showed that Harry wasn't so "in love" with her (at least not at that time) .. so what in bloody hell happened after that???  Meghan must be an expert at that Love Bombing technique to get Harry to be the way he is now!


I also agree with the "Love Bomb" video.  I have been with a controlling person and this is what they do, they try to isolate you and make you 100% dependent on them.  Family who you had a good relationship with you start second guessing.  It would be easy to put that bug in his ear since 1. he is known for dealing with depression 2. he will never be son  #1 and that has to hurt.  Here comes Meghan, all Hollywood smiles showing him there is a better life out there where he will be #1 and they can have it all- money, respect, titles anything they want.  Just toss your entire existence and follow my lead, we will be unstoppable.  He bought it hook, line and sinker.


----------



## limom

This will not end well.


----------



## AB Negative

doni said:


> No, she was still a working royal in these events, she would not be allowed to accept clothes to borrow.


Thank you!


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Same here MeeMeeMee is annoying enough, bringing back Elizabeth was just too much for my nerves....
> She is simply nuts.


I don't necessarily agree with everything Meghan says but at least she seems to come from some kind of actual information


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I don't necessarily agree with everything Meghan says but at least she seems to come from some kind of actual information


oops....guess we're going OT


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I understand because I'm pretty superstitious.  but most diamonds aren't new.....it's not like they come straight from the mine and are set into rings (of course you're talking about a ring, not just the stone)


It could have just the stone, but my mom was also superstitious.   It probably was shown to her in a setting with the promise of a new setting if purchased.  I wouldn’t care for the vibe of that myself.   I completely avoided all of that with my diamond being presented to me in the tissue paper and unset.   Yay!  No bad juju attached!


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> It could have just the stone, but my mom was also superstitious.   It probably was shown to her in a setting with the promise of a new setting if purchased.  I wouldn’t care for the vibe of that myself.   I completely avoided all of that with my diamond being presented to me in the tissue paper and unset.   Yay!  No bad juju attached!


I would have saged the sapphire, get it blessed and right on my finger it goes.
Diana’s sapphire ring is too spectacular for juju, Imo.


----------



## marietouchet

scarlet555 said:


> agree with this.  at first I thought people criticizing them for these gestures were petty, but now looking at the whole picture, it's not about being a couple, these moves seem to be about M wanting to control H with her cues.  Horrid to watch!


Well today’s story is that a friend of M , ie a solid gold source, said that M wanted out because the BRF objected to hugs , presumably in lieu of curtsy
OK, but weird thing to come out during the brouhaha about coronavirus 
And curtsies come with the territory. Those who receive curtsies get front row seats, and if you throw curtsies out the window then expect some unexpected people to want to sit front row too
Nobility is not a system of equals, it never has been, never will be, it is about the accidents of birth


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

marietouchet said:


> Well today’s story is that a friend of M , ie a solid gold source, said that M wanted out because the BRF objected to hugs , presumably in lieu of curtsy
> OK, but weird thing to come out during the brouhaha about coronavirus
> And curtsies come with the territory. Those who receive curtsies get front row seats, and if you throw curtsies out the window then expect some unexpected people to want to sit front row too
> Nobility is not a system of equals, it never has been, never will be, it is about the accidents of birth


My guess she wanted out because she couldn't control the people around her and she needed a tighter grasp on Harry.  If this is the best story she could come up with than she is not super bright.


----------



## queennadine

H’s remark in the Russian prank call about “small steps” seems to be a dig at Granny...


----------



## Chagall

lalame said:


> Re: the View, I think it's just a matter of the woman's quote being pretty tacky imo. I mean... "5 steps from trailer trash"? I did a double take when I saw that headline come up on my newsfeed too. IDK about racist but it's just unnecessarily nasty. We can dislike people without describing them in nasty ways. Everyone has a different bar for this but I assume this is what the debate was about, rather than pandering to anything per se.


That was a nasty comment on many levels. Not everyone who lives in a trailer park is trash. They may not be wealthy but keep their trailers neat and clean and are upstanding citizens.


----------



## Chagall

imgg said:


> I also agree with the "Love Bomb" video.  I have been with a controlling person and this is what they do, they try to isolate you and make you 100% dependent on them.  Family who you had a good relationship with you start second guessing.  It would be easy to put that bug in his ear since 1. he is known for dealing with depression 2. he will never be son  #1 and that has to hurt.  Here comes Meghan, all Hollywood smiles showing him there is a better life out there where he will be #1 and they can have it all- money, respect, titles anything they want.  Just toss your entire existence and follow my lead, we will be unstoppable.  He bought it hook, line and sinker.


So welll stated!


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> That was a nasty comment on many levels. Not everyone who lives in a trailer park is trash. They may not be wealthy but keep their trailers neat and clean and are upstanding citizens.


It is not because she is a commoner that she is trash.
I would say that Andrew is trash personified, imho.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> It is not because she is a commoner that she is trash.
> I would say that Andrew is trash personified, imho.



Andrew is totally trash - no trailer residents need get pulled into that one.


----------



## gazoo

The messaging is all over the place. "Just call me Harry", informal hugging of strangers as they're attempting to curtsy, the lecturing language on their very own website informing all and sundry that Harry and Archie are of Royal blood and will always be Royal (no matter what!), that he is still in the line of succession, SIXTH IN LINE EVERYONE(!), seeking financial independence, whilst snarkily bemoaning that others in the Royal family make money and are still Royal, trademarking everything to Sussex Royal, claiming it's THEIR choice to not use the word _Royal,_ that they are titled HRH, but that they're not titled HRH, giving up the measly Sovereign Grant, but still happily taking the Cornwall Duchy Funds from Prince Charles. My head is spinning.

Harry talks like there are boogeymen after Archie, that he MUST protect his family. From what? From negative press? From sharp poking tiaras? From the subjects of the realm that come out in the wind and rain to try to meet them? From the courtiers that Meghan's friends keep whispering are double crossing Harry and Meghan in favor of the actual heir to the throne? So many questions.

I'd respect them both if they just said, hey, uncle Andrew is a perv and we cannot abide by the Firm's protecting him so we're done, we're giving up all funding, tax funded security and titles. That would be impressive. But no, it's wanting to keep all the perks and privileges and bearing no responsibility as they traipse their way around the world seeking millions for speaking engagements that will allegedly change the world in a big shocking way.

Meghan is beautiful, IMO. The camera loves her. At the church, her interaction with Prince Edward and later on in the video the complete freeze out between her and Sophie was chilling. Kate's behavior at the church was chilling. Harry's face is scary. This is the messiest mess ever. It makes the Diana/Charles/Camilla debacle seem quaint.

One thing is for sure, if she and he truly want to create an empire of wealth and change the world, they need to get their story straight. I can't imagine many investors being willing to graciously "donate" mega bucks when the messaging is this murky.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone ever get a sense that he felt persecuted or victimized before he met Meghan? If he did he kept it well hidden. I think she put that bug in his ear and repeated it often. It helped make him dependent on her.



I think it really goes back to his childhood. He couldn't save his real mother so he's 'saving' his wife.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> would love to see her with her natural hair


You can see it in some old pictures of her .. it was VERY curly!


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> I commented a few jillion pages back that heck yeah, I'm pretty sure M isn't happy that K got D's ring (Harry gave it to Will to use as the e-ring).
> 
> That is pretty much the most recognized piece of ring jewelry around--it stands out very boldly being big and blue.
> 
> Giant diamonds are wonderful (I personally would not know ) but they don't jump out from a distance like THAT ring does. And based on what we've seen, that would have suited M very well. Every time she see's it, does she think "that shoulda been mine!"?



Personally I think that Diana's Asprey ring should have been mine!!! 

Of course it went to Will, so of course it should be worn by Kate. 

"just call me Harry" can commission a copy as Asprey still have the moulds and he has enough dosh. Meghan would have only had it remodelled anyway.


----------



## limom

this Asprey ring?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I think it really goes back to his childhood. He couldn't save his real mother so he's 'saving' his wife.



If getting married is what triggered a total personality change then maybe marriage isn't right for him. Being married isn't good for everyone.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If getting married is what triggered a total personality change then maybe marriage isn't right for him. Being married isn't good for everyone.


in his case, it seems he was better off single.....seems to me (and again, I don't know her) that she is toxic.....and now he has a child to think about.  so even if he came to his senses, it wouldn't be that simple to get away from her


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> You can see it in some old pictures of her .. it was VERY curly!


I'd like to see her wear it that way now.....if it's good enough for Oprah.....


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, calling someone trailer trash is certainly horrible but I can't say that it's racist. I've only ever heard it as a slur used against poor white people. Maybe the woman was insulting the Thomas side of Meghan and not the Doria side. Though those women on The View tend to get themselves all worked up and saying it was racist fits their self-righteousness better than just saying it was really mean.



British people have no idea what an insult 'trailer trash' actually is to anyone American because they don't actually know what it means


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> View attachment 4688073
> 
> 
> this Asprey ring?


I wonder what will happen to this ring should they divorce, it was a wedding gift to Meghan from Harry.
It has no "Royal" history as such, I believe Diana had it commissioned post divorce. Indeed, the Diana connection makes it, in itself, historic.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder what will happen to this ring should they divorce, it was a wedding gift to Meghan from Harry.
> It has no "Royal" history as such, I believe Diana had it commissioned post divorce. Indeed, the Diana connection makes it, in itself, historic.



She’ll keep it. No reason for her not to unless she really wants to put the knife in and sell it on him.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> View attachment 4688073
> 
> 
> this Asprey ring?



That's a different Asprey (aquamarine) ring commissioned in 1997

The original sapphire engagement ring was when the company was called Asprey & Garrard Ltd and created in 1981


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> The cringe worthy call of Harry’s , if it is indeed true and not bogus, reminds me of a previous call ...
> Charles and Camilla were carrying on during his marriage to Diana and the press got hold of a call of Charles to Camilla, where he said he wanted to be between her legs
> OK, I sanitized the story, you can go google for the tawdry bit, but even the sanitized version is cringe worthy


ha......I kinda recall he wanted to live in her panties or some weird thing like that?


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> _Harry reportedly said in the calls, . . . We operate in a way of inclusivity and we are focusing on community. And so we are completely separate from the majority of my family.”_
> 
> What a nice thing to say, especially about your granny.   I guess he's convinced himself that his previous royal life was silly and meaningless. OK, then, renounce your titles as prince and duke of Sussex and go full on "regular guy".  But, no no, he's still going to point out that he's 6th in line and they should have been included in the VIP procession into the Commonwealth Service and they need their taxpayer provided 24/7 security wherever they travel throughout the world plus their huge allowance from Prince Charles and the Duchy.


I'd like to see the two of them live like "regular" people, earning an income of say $50-100,000 a year (I'm being generous here; lots of people would Love to earn $100K a year).  He has No Idea.  And she is far too greedy.

Yes, I'm sure behaving like a royal can be challenging but how about worrying about paying your rent, buying food, paying for doctor bills?  Harry has never had to think about these things.  He is truly clueless. And she is a master manipulator (from what I can see).


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> ha......I kinda recall he wanted to live in her panties or some weird thing like that?


It was more personal and intimate than that [emoji2960]


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> It was more personal and intimate than that [emoji2960]


I don't need to recall exactly what it was....it made him look silly from what  I remember


----------



## RueMonge

sdkitty said:


> ha......I kinda recall he wanted to live in her panties or some weird thing like that?


Worse, Charles is no poet.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> View attachment 4688073
> 
> 
> this Asprey ring?



This ring looked gorgeous on M imo. Her skin tone really made it pop. Jewel toned colors are her colors. Diana's engagement ring just looks so perfect on Kate... couldn't imagine it on anyone else.


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> ha......I kinda recall he wanted to live in her panties or some weird thing like that?



Oh, I'll just say it! That incident was called tampon-gate because he said he wanted to be her tampon. *shudders*


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Personally I think that Diana's Asprey ring should have been mine!!!
> 
> Of course it went to Will, so of course it should be worn by Kate.
> 
> "just call me Harry" can commission a copy as Asprey still have the moulds and he has enough dosh. Meghan would have only had it remodelled anyway.


So which ring are we talking about if not the aquamarine?  I do like that one a lot!

"Meghan would have only had it remodelled anyway." -- Very funny!


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh, I'll just say it! That incident was called tampon-gate because he said he wanted to be her tampon. *shudders*


I couldn't stand it...just looked it up.  both of them were pretty ridiculous IMO


----------



## arnott

queennadine said:


> If the phone call took place on NYE, she was 16. 35 is a heck of a lot closer to 40 than a teenager. Highly inappropriate.



I was just trying to say that Greta is much closer to being an adult than Harry is to being 40!


----------



## LittleStar88

Ok - so maybe I missed it. Was it confirmed to be Harry on the prank Greta call??


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Ok - so maybe I missed it. Was it confirmed to be Harry on the prank Greta call??


I wondered that.....is everyone just taking the word of these two russians?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> So which ring are we talking about if not the aquamarine?  I do like that one a lot!
> 
> "Meghan would have only had it remodelled anyway." -- Very funny!



Kate has Diana's sapphire and diamond engagement ring. According to some sources, until 2010 Harry actually had it but when Will became engaged....

It looks darker in these pictures than it is. It's a beautiful bright, deep blue.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Sapphire e ring was bought at Garrards the Crown Jewellers
Asprey and Garrards merged on 1990
Diana commissioned the aquamarine ring in 96/97 from them
Asprey and Garrards split in 2002


----------



## A1aGypsy

I hate that ring - it feels like such a dated design and such bad karma- and felt bad for Kate that she got stuck with such an albatross around her finger. I’m glad to hear other people like it. Maybe she does as well.

<ducks>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why is he so paranoid? And I don't mean it in a judgemental way, I find it worrisome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> I hate that ring - it feels like such a dated design and such bad karma- and felt bad for Kate that she got stuck with such an albatross around her finger. I’m glad to hear other people like it. Maybe she does as well.
> 
> <ducks>



I like it, but not as an engagement ring. For something to wear daily it is too big and too bold for my taste. As a cocktail ring, great.


----------



## Sharont2305

I hate the way she blinks [emoji57]


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I wondered that.....is everyone just taking the word of these two russians?



It's being reported by lots of major news outlets. More importantly, Harry hasn't issued a statement denying that it was him.  Could be a prank of course.  The BBC hasn't been able to verify the authenticity of the calls which supposedly took place on New Years Eve and then later in January.  You'd think if it were a "fake Harry", he would have said more outrageous, funnier things.


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> It's being reported by lots of major news outlets. More importantly, Harry hasn't issued a statement denying that it was him.  Could be a prank of course.  The BBC hasn't been able to verify the authenticity of the calls which supposedly took place on New Years Eve and then later in January.  You'd think if it were a "fake Harry", he would have said more outrageous, funnier things.


Plus there’s a recording. If it’s not him it’s someone who is incredible at voice faking.


----------



## Katel

hellosunshine said:


> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan hosted a special conversation at Buckingham Palace for *Queens Commonwealth Trust*.
> 
> View attachment 4687580
> 
> View attachment 4687581
> 
> View attachment 4687582
> 
> View attachment 4687583



Her behavior is shocking and this whole thing is a tragic sad train wreck. Cannot believe Harry fell for that prank (and for her lol!)

I’m going to switch to the clothing choices because it’s less bewildering...to me, this is a sad and ugly blanket look.




The sleeveless blue (in the video above with the Uni students and Queen Miriam Makeba) seems attractive. Her looks can’t help the fact that she comes across so forced and false and fakey.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I hate the way she blinks [emoji57]



The patronizing way she speaks to people drives me nuts. The faces she makes, like talking to a small child or a pet.


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> I hate the way she blinks [emoji57]




Lmao  Okay no judgment but this is a new one - hating the way someone blinks!

But YES, to poster above ^ she really does have a way of coming across so patronizing. I swear, she must think she was born to be in a role where she can "enlighten" people.


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> Lmao [emoji38] Okay no judgment but this is a new one - hating the way someone blinks!



LOL, might be a British thing, or at least from certain parts of the UK. Better than saying I hate the way she breathes. I've heard that being said about colleagues, lol.
I agree with the rest of what you and the previous poster said too


----------



## Mrs.Z

I’m sick of it!  Not only has no one asked Meghan how she is doing....no one has hugged her!!!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...irmation-Harry-right-choice-parting-ways.html


----------



## Sophisticatted

Like a two-faced narcissist she is spinning the story that she is the victim of a stuffy family and an evil sister-in-law.  The venom she feels for Kate is clearly evident.

Love how she keeps insisting she’s friends with the *****’s, which has already been debunked.  Love how she insists on portraying herself as mother of the year.  Ugh!

And there is no bright and lucrative future outside the royal family for them!


----------



## Emeline

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sick of it!  Not only has no one asked Meghan how she is doing....no one has hugged her!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...irmation-Harry-right-choice-parting-ways.html


Classic Meg. She regularly throws out intentional digs, while pretending to be innocent and hurt.  This is 15 yo high school stuff.
She is exhausting and manipulative.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Emeline said:


> Classic Meg. She regularly throws out intentional digs, while pretending to be innocent and hurt.  This is 15 yo high school stuff.
> She is exhausting and manipulative.


Seriously, the articles right now on the Daily Mail are just soooo sour grapes, childish and mean.  I mean maybe DM is making up these stories or maybe Markle and her friends are calling them hourly with this crap.  It’s soooooo petty!


----------



## scarlet555

mshermes said:


> View attachment 4687933
> View attachment 4687932
> 
> Keratin treatments, good blow out and flat iron. I have hair very similar to this.



The nose job was a nice touch, would love to see her with her natural hair.  I would have gone with the loose hair on my wedding day, it would have been such a beautiful entrance!  She should own it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I would be so happy if less people in this world felt entitled to hug. 


(I have a hard time believing Kate would not hug her nephew)


----------



## lalame

Kate hugs literal strangers so yeah, I'm not buying that one.


----------



## chaneljewel

Good riddance M!   I’m so tired of your patronizing attitude.  Please stay in hiding!!!


----------



## imgg

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sick of it!  Not only has no one asked Meghan how she is doing....no one has hugged her!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...irmation-Harry-right-choice-parting-ways.html


Says the girl who disowned her family. She is fooling no one but Harry with this victim mentality.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> I hate that ring - it feels like such a dated design and such bad karma- and felt bad for Kate that she got stuck with such an albatross around her finger. I’m glad to hear other people like it. Maybe she does as well.
> <ducks>


I never liked it either.  It photographs dull and flat and old fashioned, but not old fashioned in a good way.

It looks nice on Kate though. Proper and a bit boring, just the way royalty should be.



Sharont2305 said:


> I hate the way she blinks [emoji57]



Oh no.  Now I'm going to notice it and be annoyed too. lol


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s my favorite part of the Daily Mail article: _Meghan also shed light on her fears of the coronavirus, admitting she 'hasn't had the time to fully educate herself' on the disease plaguing the world. _

She hasn’t had the time? What the hell has she been doing? If anybody has plenty of time to catch up on the news, it’s Meghan. It’s not like she has a job to do  or a place she needs to be. She has nothing but time.

I guess gripping onto Harry’s arm, feeding his insecurities, and obsessing over what her in-laws are doing is filling her days. Poor dear.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> View attachment 4688073
> 
> 
> this Asprey ring?


Beautiful aquamarine ring. I remember her wearing that ring after her divorce. Love her hair in this picture. Even after all these years. Pure class!


----------



## PewPew

lalame said:


> But YES, to poster above ^ she really does have a way of coming across so patronizing. I swear, *she must think she was born to be in a role where she can "enlighten" people*.



Definitely true. She says things like “* I empower you...*” in her speeches. The Queen doesn’t even say things like that.



bag-mania said:


> Here’s my favorite part of the Daily Mail article: _Meghan also shed light on her fears of the coronavirus, admitting she 'hasn't had the time to fully educate herself' on the disease plaguing the world. _
> 
> She hasn’t had the time? What the hell has she been doing? If anybody has plenty of time to catch up on the news, it’s Meghan. It’s not like she has a job to do  or a place she needs to be. She has nothing but time.
> 
> I guess gripping onto Harry’s arm, feeding his insecurities, and obsessing over what her in-laws are doing is filling her days. Poor dear.



I don’t know anyone with small children who isn’t worried about COVID-19. But fear not! Her “independent profile” & being the wife of the 6th in line to the throne confers immunity from pandemics, which are for the tiresome common man.


----------



## Chagall

RueMonge said:


> Worse, Charles is no poet.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> Here’s my favorite part of the Daily Mail article: _Meghan also shed light on her fears of the coronavirus, admitting she 'hasn't had the time to fully educate herself' on the disease plaguing the world. _
> 
> She hasn’t had the time? What the hell has she been doing?



She hasn't had time to educate herself on the role she will be in saving the world from the virus. Heck, ALL virus! Who she should work with - WHO? Universities? CDC? Soap manufacturers? How - a handwashing PSA for the Commonwealth? Once she's done with her education, surely the world will be bestowed with her wisdom.


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> Kate has Diana's sapphire and diamond engagement ring. According to some sources, until 2010 Harry actually had it but when Will became engaged....
> 
> It looks darker in these pictures than it is. It's a beautiful bright, deep blue.


Diana’s engagement ring was a salon sapphire. They are a beautiful blue, clear and not to dark!


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> She hasn't had time to educate herself on the role she will be in saving the world from the virus. Heck, ALL virus! Who she should work with - WHO? Universities? CDC? Soap manufacturers? How - a handwashing PSA for the Commonwealth? Once she's done with her education, surely the world will be bestowed with her wisdom.



I think we both know the best way for Meghan to educate the ignorant masses. She needs to pick up a Sharpie and get to work writing as many inspirational messages on bananas as she can. She won’t want to tinker with a proven plan of action that has been so successful in the past for her.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> Here’s my favorite part of the Daily Mail article: _Meghan also shed light on her fears of the coronavirus, admitting she 'hasn't had the time to fully educate herself' on the disease plaguing the world. _
> 
> She hasn’t had the time? What the hell has she been doing? If anybody has plenty of time to catch up on the news, it’s Meghan. It’s not like she has a job to do  or a place she needs to be. She has nothing but time.
> 
> I guess gripping onto Harry’s arm, feeding his insecurities, and obsessing over what her in-laws are doing is filling her days. Poor dear.


Now you know she hasn't had time. She's been extremely busy getting new teeth and making up fake positive instagram posts on Sussexroyal!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> ha......I kinda recall he wanted to live in her panties or some weird thing like that?


Yeah it was weird, worse than in her panties


----------



## youngster

The UK is likely going to go through a rough time with coronavirus, like every other country, and Harry is just walking away.  He could actually do some good during what will likely be a difficult and challenging time over the next few weeks and months.  The Queen, Prince Charles, Camilla, Princess Anne, and the Queen's cousins are all well over 65.  This leaves William and Kate and Edward and Sophie, with Bea and Eugenie possibly, to continue making appearances.

So ironic that Harry talks about making a difference, having an impact in a big way, and he'll be running back to Canada to hide out with Meghan until this particular, looming crisis has passed.  Once Meghan reads up on the virus (now that she has time!), she's going to realize they pulled the trigger on their departure a year too early. Not only because launching themselves, and getting front page attention, is going to be very difficult in this environment but they could have generated some serious goodwill and respect if they had stayed and helped during the crisis.

I wonder how Harry will feel, sitting in Vancouver, watching this unfold in the UK and wonder if that is where he should be, standing next to his brother.


----------



## scarlet555

youngster said:


> The UK is likely going to go through a rough time with coronavirus, like every other country, and Harry is just walking away.  He could actually do some good during what will likely be a difficult and challenging time over the next few weeks and months.  The Queen, Prince Charles, Camilla, Princess Anne, and the Queen's cousins are all well over 65.  This leaves William and Kate and Edward and Sophie, with Bea and Eugenie possibly, to continue making appearances.
> 
> So ironic that Harry talks about making a difference, having an impact in a big way, and he'll be running back to Canada to hide out with Meghan until this particular, looming crisis has passed.  Once Meghan reads up on the virus (now that she has time!), she's going to realize they pulled the trigger on their departure a year too early. Not only because launching themselves, and getting front page attention, is going to be very difficult in this environment but they could have generated some serious goodwill and respect if they had stayed and helped during the crisis.
> 
> I wonder how Harry will feel, sitting in Vancouver, watching this unfold in the UK and wonder if that is where he should be, standing next to his brother.



Well listen, if you’re the last man standing, you get to be king, Harry has it all figured out... coward move though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sick of it!  Not only has no one asked Meghan how she is doing....no one has hugged her!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...irmation-Harry-right-choice-parting-ways.html



I just can't. The rude sh*t that comes out of her mouth - while still being financially dependent on Charles! - is unbelievable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also I was thinking...how bad does it have to be that these people who are skilled to be restrained in public and show no emotion but broad smiles can be seen like this? If they couldn't muster up the strength to pretend for an hour all was well and "Meghan is still a beloved member of the family" you know it must be really bad.

And yeah, not buying the Kate narrative. In all those years there were never reports she was difficult, divalike or had a mean streak.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The patronizing way she speaks to people drives me nuts. The faces she makes, like talking to a small child or a pet.


In every clip I see she’s speechifying at helplessly polite people.  Holding forth and dishing out word salad bullsh*t.


Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sick of it!  Not only has no one asked Meghan how she is doing....no one has hugged her!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...irmation-Harry-right-choice-parting-ways.html


This is the thing I hate about Meghan, and I do mean hate.  The cruel, sneaky way in which she gets her barbs into people through “friends” or “sources”.  The woman is a harpy, no wonder people shied away from hugging her.


----------



## hellosunshine

A1aGypsy said:


> I hate that ring - it feels like such a dated design and such bad karma- and felt bad for Kate that she got stuck with such an albatross around her finger. I’m glad to hear other people like it.



I hate it as well. I'm convinced it's a cursed ring - I'm glad Harry gave it to William.


----------



## Clearblueskies

scarlet555 said:


> Well listen, if you’re the last man standing, you get to be king, Harry has it all figured out... coward move though.


No country is safe from the virus.  Some are further along the epidemic curve than others at the moment.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> Diana’s engagement ring was a salon sapphire. They are a beautiful blue, clear and not to dark!



Do you mean Ceylon? Some of the best rubies and sapphires are from there (now of course Shri Lanka).


----------



## papertiger

hellosunshine said:


> I hate it as well. I'm convinced it's a cursed ring - I'm glad Harry gave it to William.
> 
> View attachment 4688513



sorry, which brother is cursed?


----------



## Sharont2305

Tootsie17 said:


> Now you know she hasn't had time. She's been extremely busy getting new teeth and making up fake positive instagram posts on Sussexroyal!


Soon ro be named SussexNotSoRoyal


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> sorry, which brother is cursed?



She is known for wishing horrible things on Kate and Wills. I believe she wanted to say she's happy the cursed ring will ultimately ruin William's marriage and not Harry's.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> No country is safe from the virus.  Some are further along the epidemic curve than others at the moment.


OT but Tom Hanks and his wife have confirmed they have it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> OT but Tom Hanks and his wife have confirmed they have it.


Yes, I just saw that  he has diabetes, I hope he’ll be ok.


----------



## Jktgal

"The visit to the National was ‘secret’ therefore, was it an official visit given no press were there? Why was the release of the images delayed, why was the visit secret, why weren’t the press invited, why even bother visiting the venue? The answer was simple, it was used as a means for a photo op that she could leak at will when she so desired. Her ‘patronage’ adds no value at all, and in fact devalues the integrity of the National."
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/03/08/the-sussex-games-06-03-20-disrespect-and-sneaky-leaks/

Wow that website is really thorough. It goes back to 2018. Wonder who is behind it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is known for wishing horrible things on Kate and Wills. I believe she wanted to say she's happy the cursed ring will ultimately ruin William's marriage and not Harry's.



Oh wow, that's not nice at all. 
I think ultimately, those kind of wishes boomerang back on the the wisher.


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> Here’s my favorite part of the Daily Mail article: _Meghan also shed light on her fears of the coronavirus, admitting she 'hasn't had the time to fully educate herself' on the disease plaguing the world. _
> 
> She hasn’t had the time? What the hell has she been doing? If anybody has plenty of time to catch up on the news, it’s Meghan. It’s not like she has a job to do  or a place she needs to be. She has nothing but time.
> .



In his conversation with ‘_Greta_’, Harry also said he was not knowledgeable about the crisis in Chunga-Changa because he has stopped looking at the news, as they are so depressing that they spoil his day.

For two people who are on their way to device a _whole new way_ to implement change on a global scale, the lack of interest in current affairs is rather remarkable....

In any event, the US has already stopped flights from Europe. Canada will soon follow suit. Close call, they could have easily have found themselves stranded from Archie for weeks...


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> I understand because I'm pretty superstitious.  but most diamonds aren't new.....it's not like they come straight from the mine and are set into rings (of course you're talking about a ring, not just the stone)



I'm not particularly superstitious but I am about diamonds, I don't wear any, I think they bring bad luck (I know, silly of me)


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> Do you mean Ceylon? Some of the best rubies and sapphires are from there (now of course Shri Lanka).


Oops yes I do.  Love ‘ceylon’ sapphires. My mother and sister both had Ceylon sapphire engagement rings. Neither wanted diamonds haha.


----------



## duna

A1aGypsy said:


> I hate that ring - it feels like such a dated design and such bad karma- and felt bad for Kate that she got stuck with such an albatross around her finger. I’m glad to hear other people like it. Maybe she does as well.
> 
> <ducks>



If you mean the sapphire engament ring, I've never liked it either, ever since Diana's engament.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

youngster said:


> The UK is likely going to go through a rough time with coronavirus, like every other country, and Harry is just walking away.  He could actually do some good during what will likely be a difficult and challenging time over the next few weeks and months.  The Queen, Prince Charles, Camilla, Princess Anne, and the Queen's cousins are all well over 65.  This leaves William and Kate and Edward and Sophie, with Bea and Eugenie possibly, to continue making appearances.
> 
> So ironic that Harry talks about making a difference, having an impact in a big way, and he'll be running back to Canada to hide out with Meghan until this particular, looming crisis has passed.  Once Meghan reads up on the virus (now that she has time!), she's going to realize they pulled the trigger on their departure a year too early. Not only because launching themselves, and getting front page attention, is going to be very difficult in this environment but they could have generated some serious goodwill and respect if they had stayed and helped during the crisis.
> 
> I wonder how Harry will feel, sitting in Vancouver, watching this unfold in the UK and wonder if that is where he should be, standing next to his brother.



Yep. And so many businesses are losing so much on the stock market they’ll pull back on certain things, like talks from people who won’t benefit them because they know nothing about the real world, or aren’t specialists in anything really useful.


----------



## Chagall

I think the fact that Harry gave his mother’s engagement ring to William shows that they were once close. Pity that had to change.


----------



## Luvbolide

I’m not a huge royal follower, but I used to really enjoy seeing pix of Will, Kate and Harry together.  They clearly were supportive and very fond of each other and pretty much always looked like they were having a good time.  I had hoped for Harry that he would find a wife who would fit right in.  Sadly, instead of adding a fourth, MM seems to have blown the entire thing up.  

Poor little Archie.  Imagine your grandfather and your uncle being kings, but you have barely met them.  He will probably have to look on Wikipedia to even see what they look like.  Not to mention cousins...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> In any event, the US has already stopped flights from Europe. Canada will soon follow suit. Close call, they could have easily have found themselves stranded from Archie for weeks...



I think she left already and only Harry stayed in the UK until March 31st.


----------



## limom

Wow, speechless.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> Oops yes I do.  Love ‘ceylon’ sapphires. My mother and sister both had Ceylon sapphire engagement rings. Neither wanted diamonds haha.



They are the sacred stone after all - why not? I have a Ceylonese star sapphire ring (somewhere) no diamonds. A good stone needs no embellishment 

My E-ring is sapphire and diamonds, but totally different to the Royals, it's the other way round, square central diamond, sapphire baguettes as a border). It's also much older and _much_ smaller than Di's/K's and as an antique who knows who had it befor me? I hope they had a happy marriage/life, not the ring's fault if they didn't.

We have to switch our heads' to positive and  count our blessings, that's what gets you through the bad times. Nearly everyone has terrible times in their life. Compared to lot of people in this world, Diana had a privileged, good life which was unfortunately cut far too short. She had 2 lovely children with secure futures (no worries of 0-hour contracts for them), a charitable purpose she carved out for herself against the odds, enjoyed the culture and events that easily came her way. I don't see her as cursed, I just think she wasn't a great judge of men.


----------



## sgj99

It think it’s a gorgeous ring and it’s fitting that Diana’s oldest son gave it to his future wife.   Maybe someday we’ll see Prince George propose to some lovely lady using the same ring.


----------



## Tivo

limom said:


> Wow, speechless.



I don't understand what this is supposed to be?
How do we know the reporter is talking about Meghan?


----------



## limom

Tivo said:


> I don't understand what this is supposed to be?
> How do we know the reporter is talking about Meghan?


She cuts in front of just Harry to greet  king Mohammad of Morocco.
Who else would the reporter be talking about?


----------



## mdcx

I feel like Meghan is empty inside, no true identity or authenticity. Everything is for show, or because she has figured out it is the most efficient at getting her what she wants.
Straight hair always, because it’s more “commercial”, nose job, teeth job, boob job(later removed). She wants to look like your generic pretty actress of vaguely exotic ethnicity. I think M only identifies as mixed-race when it suits her ends e.g. pushing the racism narrative.

As for her relentless PR push via People mag - give it a rest woman! People are on edge over how to prepare for Coronavirus, and whiny rich people are not the thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Ugh, so now they’re reported as saying they felt pushed into Megxit and it’s all so unnecessary and cruel.  No one in the family has stood up for them.  Boo hoo.

If memory serves me right Meghan and Harry precipitated their own crisis publicly and without forewarning the Queen in January.  
They’d been craftily planning it for more than a year. They’ve been mean, sneaky and rude.  All the same, they’ve been told they can go back.  They’re still receiving 95% of their unearned income and a hugely expensive security service from the RF and courtesy of the UK taxpayer.  The entitlement is unbelievable.

Obviously the ££££ offers aren’t rolling in, and things are finally sinking in for these two ingrates.


----------



## limom

It sure is bad timing for them..
Maybe they can ask for an extension?
Did they leave yet?
Where is Archie?


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> They are the sacred stone after all - why not? I have a Ceylonese star sapphire ring (somewhere) no diamonds. A good stone needs no embellishment
> 
> My E-ring is sapphire and diamonds, but totally different to the Royals, it's the other way round, square central diamond, sapphire baguettes as a border). It's also much older and _much_ smaller than Di's/K's and as an antique who knows who had it for me? I hope they had a happy marriage/life, not the ring's fault if they didn't.
> 
> We have to switch our heads' to positive and  count our blessings, that's what gets you through the bad times. Nearly everyone has terrible times in their life. Compared to lot of people in this world, Diana had a privileged, good life which was unfortunately cut far too short. She had 2 lovely children with secure futures (no worries of 0-hour contracts for them), a charitable purpose she carved out for herself against the odds, enjoyed the culture and events that easily came her way. I don't see her as cursed, I just think she wasn't a great judge of men.


Agree. For the most part she lived a very charmed life. Her choice in men, Charles and her many boyfriends, was very poor and it cost her dearly. Life can be hard even if you make very careful choices, things that are out of your control can go wrong. All her men seemed on the sleazy side to me and often ended up treating her poorly. My family was of British origin, and I think there was more of an inclination to choose non diamond engagement rings, emeralds ruby sapphire etc. They are a lovely choice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Ugh, so now they’re reported as saying they felt pushed into Megxit and it’s all so unnecessary and cruel.  No one in the family has stood up for them.  Boo hoo.
> 
> If memory serves me right Meghan and Harry precipitated their own crisis publicly and without forewarning the Queen in January.
> They’d been craftily planning it for more than a year. They’ve been mean, sneaky and rude.  All the same, they’ve been told they can go back.  They’re still receiving 95% of their unearned income and a hugely expensive security service from the RF and courtesy of the UK taxpayer.  The entitlement is unbelievable.
> 
> Obviously the ££££ offers aren’t rolling in, and things are finally sinking in for these two ingrates.



Well said.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Ugh, so now they’re reported as saying they felt pushed into Megxit and it’s all so unnecessary and cruel.  No one in the family has stood up for them.  Boo hoo.



The Queen should just have handed over her crown to Meghan and made Kate her lady-in-waiting. Very inconsiderate of those Windsors.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen should just have handed over her crown to Meghan and make Kate her lady-in-waiting. Very inconsiderate of those Windsors.


 Yes!  I think that might just about have been enough.
Meghan’s clearly had a couple of days to think about what she’s brought about, and she’s not a happy woman


----------



## Emeline

limom said:


> It sure is bad timing for them..
> Maybe they can ask for an extension?
> Did they leave yet?
> *Where is Archie*?


I think I read she left after her last event and headed to Canada to be reunited with Archie.
It sounded like H is still in the UK.


----------



## chicinthecity777

The truth is those 2 are not anything if they are not royals. Harry has achieved nothing much in life. Never needed to earn a penny in his life. Has no specific talent (unless you count drinking and partying as talents) and has a charm of a potato! She was a minor actress on a mild successful TV show which was not watched by many, especially here in the UK. I have to admit that I don't know what she has achieved as a "humanitarian". But I don't get the feeling that she's doing much of that lately. What's her credentials? She's pretty but not amazingly beautiful. There are many many women are a lot more beautiful and more charismatic than her.

So without being royals, what exactly would they be selling that they think people are going to buy??? What is their USP? Please enlighten me! I must be missing something ...


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> In his conversation with ‘_Greta_’, Harry also said he was not knowledgeable about the crisis in Chunga-Changa because he has stopped looking at the news, as they are so depressing that they spoil his day.
> 
> For two people who are on their way to device a _whole new way_ to implement change on a global scale, the lack of interest in current affairs is rather remarkable....
> 
> In any event, the US has already stopped flights from Europe. Canada will soon follow suit. Close call, they could have easily have found themselves stranded from Archie for weeks...


From what I understand its only mainland Europe, it doesn't include the UK or the Republic of Ireland.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> From what I understand its only mainland Europe, it doesn't include the UK or the Republic of Ireland.


Well, they can always fly private also. What's adding another massive carbon footprint to an already big balance on their account!


----------



## Sharont2305

sgj99 said:


> It think it’s a gorgeous ring and it’s fitting that Diana’s oldest son gave it to his future wife.   Maybe someday we’ll see Prince George propose to some lovely lady using the same ring.


I think that it will go to Charlotte, not as an engagement ring obviously, but as the nearest and only female blood Royal to Diana it would be extra fitting. Actually, she would be the only blood Royal to wear it.


----------



## Emeline

Clearblueskies said:


> Yes!  I think that might just about have been enough.
> Meghan’s clearly had a couple of days to think about what she’s brought about, and she’s not a happy woman


Meg is going to be  annoyed for awhile.
Her word salad-- I'm empowering you motivational speeches really aren't marketable for the foreseeable future.
A pandemic forces organizations to tighten up their plans and cancel just for fun events. 
I guess she can always reboot the Tig.


----------



## mdcx

I feel like Harry will be copping it from M going forward. No more “shared enemy” of the BRF to unite them. Instead M’s problems will somehow be his fault. 

I also cannot imagine what they will be selling. She seems deceptive and inauthentic, he immature and troubled. Not super appealing as spokespeople.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> From what I understand its only mainland Europe, it doesn't include the UK or the Republic of Ireland.



Indeed. I saw that afterwards. But the point is, restrictions can be imposed at any moment currently. I’d never in a million years leave my baby in another country, let alone another continent, in the middle of this corona situation...
But okay, I understand, they don’t follow the news so they didn’t know what was going on.



chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, they can always fly private also. What's adding another massive carbon footprint to an already big balance on their account!



The restrictions are on planes arriving from whatever country. It shouldn’t matter whether they are commercial or private...


----------



## Grande Latte

chicinthecity777 said:


> The truth is those 2 are not anything if they are not royals. Harry has achieved nothing much in life. Never needed to earn a penny in his life. Has no specific talent (unless you count drinking and partying as talents) and has a charm of a potato! She was a minor actress on a mild successful TV show which was not watched by many, especially here in the UK. I have to admit that I don't know what she has achieved as a "humanitarian". But I don't get the feeling that she's doing much of that lately. What's her credentials? She's pretty but not amazingly beautiful. There are many many women are a lot more beautiful and more charismatic than her.
> 
> So without being royals, what exactly would they be selling that they think people are going to buy??? What is their USP? Please enlighten me! I must be missing something ...



They are two airheads with no business plan. But they want to make millions/ billions riding on their distant relations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> Indeed. I saw that afterwards. But the point is, restrictions can be imposed at any moment currently. I’d never in a million years leave my baby in another country, let alone another continent, in the middle of this corona situation...
> But okay, I understand, they don’t follow the news so they didn’t know what was going on.
> 
> 
> 
> The restrictions are on planes arriving from whatever country. It shouldn’t matter whether they are commercial or private...


Like another member has already posted, there is no restriction from the UK. Even if the airlines cancel the flights, they can chart private jets to fly from the UK to the US.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Emeline said:


> I guess she can always reboot the Tig.


Oh I’m sure that project’s already underway....


----------



## gelbergirl

A1aGypsy said:


> I hate that ring - it feels like such a dated design and such bad karma- and felt bad for Kate that she got stuck with such an albatross around her finger. I’m glad to hear other people like it. Maybe she does as well.
> 
> <ducks>



I'm not comfortable with the karma of that ring either.
Kate's been a good egg to wear it.  If it were me, I'd have to have several psychiatrist sessions just about the ring.
She should drag it out for state occasions only and get a ring that they pick out together.

I mean= bad marriage, Camilla the Mistress, he never loved her, unhappiness, Diana scared she'd lose the kids in a divorce, and the possibility that the Prince of Wales can not divorce.  Awful Ring. (I had to get all that off my chest)


----------



## Luvluxx098

Harry thinks he is normal but he has never had a single responsibility that wasn’t catered to him or managed for him, including his career. Housing, medical care, bills- etc- cars, security, errands. Never done them but he does have a man in the North Pole, like all good one percenters! 
I liked her clothing and style this trip. I have the Preen dress, it is not the most flattering on everyone, but for some reason makes you feel good. I have no problem with wearing things that aren’t perfect but make you feel a certain way. Not a fan of bold color, but she pulled it off.


----------



## BeautyAddict58

sgj99 said:


> It think it’s a gorgeous ring and it’s fitting that Diana’s oldest son gave it to his future wife.   Maybe someday we’ll see Prince George propose to some lovely lady using the same ring.


Diana left it to Harry specifically. William asked Harry to give it to him and he agreed.
But keep in mind that this ring was one of several presented to Diana (she was rumored to have chosen it because it was the biggest one) by Charles because he did not bother to pick one himself. Also, it is not a custom ring and was available for purchase in the jeweler's catalog so Charles received a lot of criticism at the time. 
Ultimately though it became a symbol of a failed marriage with sentimental value to both Harry and William since it belonged to their mother.


----------



## Luvluxx098

gelbergirl said:


> I'm not comfortable with the karma of that ring either.
> Kate's been a good egg to wear it.  If it were me, I'd have to have several psychiatrist sessions just about the ring.
> She should drag it out for state occasions only and get a ring that they pick out together.
> 
> I mean= bad marriage, Camilla the Mistress, he never loved her, unhappiness, Diana scared she'd lose the kids in a divorce, and the possibility that the Prince of Wales can not divorce.  Awful Ring. (I had to get all that off my chest)


It would be the same for me, but from W’s perspective, maybe he thinks it was the best time of their time together, which after all produced him and his brother. So maybe he sees the good parts when he decided to give it to her. She also doesn’t seem to be the type to ‘want’ a lot of specific things catered to her, she was happy to accept whatever he chose.


----------



## marietouchet

gelbergirl said:


> I'm not comfortable with the karma of that ring either.
> Kate's been a good egg to wear it.  If it were me, I'd have to have several psychiatrist sessions just about the ring.
> She should drag it out for state occasions only and get a ring that they pick out together.
> 
> I mean= bad marriage, Camilla the Mistress, he never loved her, unhappiness, Diana scared she'd lose the kids in a divorce, and the possibility that the Prince of Wales can not divorce.  Awful Ring. (I had to get all that off my chest)


Yeah, ring has bad karma, but William loved his mother, and THE RING worn by the most famous royal ever was a touching welcoming gift to Kate, who was born neither royal nor an aristocrat, a symbol that she belonged , and maybe an attempt to change the bad karma
Or at least that I how I choose to think of things but I agree the whole story of C C and D is icky


----------



## Luvluxx098

Clearblueskies said:


> Ugh, so now they’re reported as saying they felt pushed into Megxit and it’s all so unnecessary and cruel.  No one in the family has stood up for them.  Boo hoo.
> 
> If memory serves me right Meghan and Harry precipitated their own crisis publicly and without forewarning the Queen in January.
> They’d been craftily planning it for more than a year. They’ve been mean, sneaky and rude.  All the same, they’ve been told they can go back.  They’re still receiving 95% of their unearned income and a hugely expensive security service from the RF and courtesy of the UK taxpayer.  The entitlement is unbelievable.
> 
> Obviously the ££££ offers aren’t rolling in, and things are finally sinking in for these two ingrates.


Getting duped by fake greta is a wake up call.


----------



## bag-mania

Let's be realistic here. The marriage of Charles and Diana was doomed before that giant, gorgeous sapphire was ever cut. The ring was not cursed. The curse comes when two people marry for the wrong reasons and that can happen whether you are a prince or a pauper.


----------



## Flatsy

BeautyAddict58 said:


> Diana left it to Harry specifically. William asked Harry to give it to him and he agreed


Diana left her jewelry to William and Harry and they split it up amongst themselves.  Originally, Harry selected the sapphire engagement ring and William selected her gold Cartier Tank Francaise watch.  According to Harry, he and William agreed that even though he was taking the sapphire ring, whichever one of them got engaged first would ultimately take it.  So, when William wanted to propose to Kate, they swapped.


----------



## marietouchet

And now that it dawns on me 
THE RING - about the only piece of jewelry that Charles ever gave Diana ... or that she ever wore ... or that we noticed - there may have been some small earrings - D was known for wearing fakes 
photogs could not get such amazing closeups in the days of D, with instant recognition of manufacturer and price
Whereas Charles has given Camilla lot of bling - snake necklace, Keppel tiara etc Very noticeable large pieces


----------



## mia55

Grande Latte said:


> They are two airheads with no business plan. But they want to make millions/ billions riding on their distant relations.


Summed up so accurately


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I'm not particularly superstitious but I am about diamonds, I don't wear any, I think they bring bad luck (I know, silly of me)


I hadn't heard that one.  Someone told me years ago she thought butterflies were bad luck.  I heard opals were unlucky but later heard I think it was just black opals.


----------



## imgg

Luvluxx098 said:


> Getting duped by fake greta is a wake up call.


Honestly, I doubt it.  They are so far gone up their own a$$es nothing is going to faze them.  Their life is fueled by negativity and victim mentality, they thrive off it.  Good riddance.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Whereas Charles has given Camilla lot of bling - snake necklace, Keppel tiara etc Very noticeable large pieces



The Keppel tiara was originally a gift from Edward VII to his mistress Alice Keppel – Camilla’s great-grandmother. She was given loads of jewellery by him which were eventually sold off, Charles has managed to buy some pieces back but the Keppel tiara has always stayed in the family and handed down.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> The truth is those 2 are not anything if they are not royals. Harry has achieved nothing much in life. Never needed to earn a penny in his life. Has no specific talent (unless you count drinking and partying as talents) and has a charm of a potato! She was a minor actress on a mild successful TV show which was not watched by many, especially here in the UK. I have to admit that I don't know what she has achieved as a "humanitarian". But I don't get the feeling that she's doing much of that lately. What's her credentials? She's pretty but not amazingly beautiful. There are many many women are a lot more beautiful and more charismatic than her.
> 
> So without being royals, what exactly would they be selling that they think people are going to buy??? What is their USP? Please enlighten me! I must be missing something ...[ /QUOTE]




agree with everything you said...and that TV show wasn't watched by many here in the US either.  I was aware of the existence of the show but had Never heard of her before she got involved with "H"[/QUOTE]


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Indeed. I saw that afterwards. But the point is, restrictions can be imposed at any moment currently. I’d never in a million years leave my baby in another country, let alone another continent, in the middle of this corona situation...
> But okay, I understand, they don’t follow the news so they didn’t know what was going on.
> 
> 
> 
> The restrictions are on planes arriving from whatever country. It shouldn’t matter whether they are commercial or private...


I thought the restrictions on Europe didn't include GB?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I thought the restrictions on Europe didn't include GB?


You're right, it's just mainland Europe


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> I'm not comfortable with the karma of that ring either.
> Kate's been a good egg to wear it.  If it were me, I'd have to have several psychiatrist sessions just about the ring.
> She should drag it out for state occasions only and get a ring that they pick out together.
> 
> I mean= bad marriage, Camilla the Mistress, he never loved her, unhappiness, Diana scared she'd lose the kids in a divorce, and the possibility that the Prince of Wales can not divorce.  Awful Ring. (I had to get all that off my chest)


Obviously Kate sees it as special being from Diana and not as bad luck.  Otherwise I don't think she'd be wearing it all the time.  She could, as you said, just drag it out once in awhile


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Here’s my favorite part of the Daily Mail article: _Meghan also shed light on her fears of the coronavirus, admitting she 'hasn't had the time to fully educate herself' on the disease plaguing the world. _
> 
> She hasn’t had the time? What the hell has she been doing? If anybody has plenty of time to catch up on the news, it’s Meghan.* It’s not like she has a job to do  or a place she needs to be*. She has nothing but time.
> 
> I guess gripping onto Harry’s arm, feeding his insecurities, and obsessing over what her in-laws are doing is filling her days. Poor dear.


Or a baby to care for. I don't get how they can be away from their baby so long.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I can't wait to hear they've left the UK.  Their behavior is beyond the pale.  What makes me turn to ice is the way they've treated William and Catherine.  And, I mostly blame Meghan for that. They could have made a huge impact by simply supporting the future king and queen, but somehow, she convinced Harry a supporting role wasn't enough.

Don't get me wrong, Harry carries plenty of responsibility for this whole debacle.  If he hadn't already been susceptible to what Meghan was selling, none of this would have happened.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Let's be realistic here. The marriage of Charles and Diana was doomed before that giant, gorgeous sapphire was ever cut. The ring was not cursed. The curse comes when two people marry for the wrong reasons and that can happen whether you are a prince or a pauper.



Yes, it was no Hope diamont when it was bought, but I'm superstitious in a way thinking unhappiness etc. can attach itself to things. Just no good vibes. Dunno, I would have had it thoroughly cleaned LOL (as in, smudge that thing with sage like there's no tomorrow)


----------



## mrsinsyder

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left crushed by 'unnecessarily cruel Megxit and 'it might have been different' if another family member stood up for them', says royal expert*

*Expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit *
*Omid Scobie accompanied couple on final tour and spoke of their emotions*
*Said Harry was devastated to give up military honours and Meghan shed tears when bidding farewell to staff*
*Explained how the couple felt pushed into the decision and felt unsupported *
A royal expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit.

Bazaar.com's royal editor-at-large Omid Scobie revealed how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt their exit from royal life 'wasn't necessary', but how they felt forced into it - especially after they were left to 'fend for themselves' during Meghan's pregnancy.

According to Omid, Harry, 35, was 'heartbroken' at having to give up his military honours after serving 10 years in the British army, while Meghan, 38, shed tears at the farewell party the couple threw for their staff.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Agree. For the most part she lived a very charmed life. Her choice in men, Charles and her many boyfriends, was very poor and it cost her dearly. Life can be hard even if you make very careful choices, things that are out of your control can go wrong. All her men seemed on the sleazy side to me and often ended up treating her poorly. My family was of British origin, and I think there was more of an inclination to choose non diamond engagement rings, emeralds ruby sapphire etc. They are a lovely choice.


she was so young when she married charles.  and her choice of men after the marriage would have been pretty limited - people in her world - servants of some sort, etc.  the doctor she supposedly really loved seemed decent.  She was a flawed person (who isn't?) but overall I liked her.


----------



## queennadine

.


----------



## queennadine

mrsinsyder said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left crushed by 'unnecessarily cruel Megxit and 'it might have been different' if another family member stood up for them', says royal expert*
> 
> *Expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit *
> *Omid Scobie accompanied couple on final tour and spoke of their emotions*
> *Said Harry was devastated to give up military honours and Meghan shed tears when bidding farewell to staff*
> *Explained how the couple felt pushed into the decision and felt unsupported *
> A royal expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit.
> 
> Bazaar.com's royal editor-at-large Omid Scobie revealed how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt their exit from royal life 'wasn't necessary', but how they felt forced into it - especially after they were left to 'fend for themselves' during Meghan's pregnancy.
> 
> According to Omid, Harry, 35, was 'heartbroken' at having to give up his military honours after serving 10 years in the British army, while Meghan, 38, shed tears at the farewell party the couple threw for their staff.



Beat me to it!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> sorry, which brother is cursed?


that post is disgusting.....I've had things deleted that were far less offensive


----------



## gelbergirl

Flatsy said:


> Diana left her jewelry to William and Harry and they split it up amongst themselves.  Originally, Harry selected the sapphire engagement ring and William selected her gold Cartier Tank Francaise watch.  According to Harry, he and William agreed that even though he was taking the sapphire ring, whichever one of them got engaged first would ultimately take it.  So, when William wanted to propose to Kate, they swapped.



Does Meghan wear the watch??  Anyone know??
Interesting that it was a "whoever gets engaged first kind of thing" on the ring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left crushed by 'unnecessarily cruel Megxit and 'it might have been different' if another family member stood up for them', says royal expert*



Read: we didn't get our way which we fully expected because we are special snowflakes*.*

*[**quote] Meghan shed tears when bidding farewell to staff [/quote]
*
Yeah right. Probably squeezed out a few tears so it could be leaked to the press because this woman doesn't employ real feelings like normal people*. *Did she cry each time she fired someone or made them quit?

I'm so done with the whining and the claims of having been mistreated...two grown adults cannot expect everyone to bend over for them and their over the top needs and their addiction to attention, can they?


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> that post is disgusting.....I've had things deleted that were far less offensive


Mhmm...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Meghan, 38, shed tears at the farewell party the couple threw for their staff.


This all about trying to offset the bad press from the way their staff were dumped on in January.  It might (just might) carry some weight if Meghan hadn’t previously been filmed boasting about her ability to summon up tears on demand for her directors


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also what really bugs me is that enough people will buy the sob story because they never spent that much time following their insanity e.g. postings on their website, unreal demands to the Queen etc.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> Does Meghan wear the watch??  Anyone know??
> Interesting that it was a "whoever gets engaged first kind of thing" on the ring.


I'd wear it....and since she seems to like the Audrey Hepburn aesthetic you'd think she would


----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> I thought the restrictions on Europe didn't include GB?


That’s right, and it is restrictions in the US, not Canada. But the point was, those restrictions were not there yesterday and tomorrow Canada may come up with some that include the UK. Totally plausible scenario. Not the time to leave a baby in another continent, imo.
I mean, I have a friend with two teenage kids doing a year abroad in the west of Canada, and she is worried sick if anything happens to them or they need anything, she might not be able to get there. And she is not even the worrying type.

On that report, I believe something it says is true: they _never_ wanted to leave the royal family and royal work. From their first communication it was obvious they wanted to play the game but on their own rules and making money out of it to boot. It is very revealing that Harry told ‘Greta’ they cannot use their titles because of a ‘_technicality within the royal family_’. That’s how he has chosen to understand the whole thing, that they don’t let them do what they want because of ‘technicalities’. And he is puzzled his dear brother didn’t come to his rescue to say, there, there, let little Harry play in peace.... He really has no clue and no sense of his own position. At this point Charles is more to blame than anyone, his son obviously did not received the education he should have...


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> That’s right, and it is restrictions in the US, not Canada. But the point was, those restrictions were not there yesterday and tomorrow Canada may come up with some that include the UK. Totally plausible scenario. Not the time to leave a baby in another continent, imo.
> I mean, I have a friend with two teenage kids doing a year abroad in the west of Canada, and she is worried sick if anything happens to them or they need anything, she might not be able to get there. And she is not even the worrying type.
> 
> On that report, I believe something it says is true: they never wanted to leave the royal family and the royal work. From their first communication it was obvious they wanted to play the game but on their own rules and making money out of it to boot. It is very revealing that Harry told ‘Greta’ they cannot use their titles because of a ‘technicality within the royal family’. That’s how he has chosen to understand the whole thing, that they don’t let them do what they want because of ‘technicalities’ and he is puzzled his dear brother didn’t come to his rescue to say, there, there, let little Harry play in peace.... He really has no clue and no sense of his own position. At this point Charles is more to blame than anyone, his son was obviously not educated properly...


You mis-understood my post. My post was supposed to be sarcastic. Not practical.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I hadn't heard that one.  Someone told me years ago she thought butterflies were bad luck.  I heard opals were unlucky but later heard I think it was just black opals.



There are a bunch of superstitions about opals. I remember hearing it was back luck to wear them if you weren't born in October. I think the bad luck rumor is because opals are more fragile than other stones so they are more susceptible to breaking.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left crushed by 'unnecessarily cruel Megxit and 'it might have been different' if another family member stood up for them', says royal expert*
> 
> *Expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit *
> *Omid Scobie accompanied couple on final tour and spoke of their emotions*
> *Said Harry was devastated to give up military honours and Meghan shed tears when bidding farewell to staff*
> *Explained how the couple felt pushed into the decision and felt unsupported *
> A royal expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit.
> 
> Bazaar.com's royal editor-at-large Omid Scobie revealed how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt their exit from royal life 'wasn't necessary', but how they felt forced into it - especially after they were left to 'fend for themselves' during Meghan's pregnancy.
> 
> According to Omid, Harry, 35, was 'heartbroken' at having to give up his military honours after serving 10 years in the British army, while Meghan, 38, shed tears at the farewell party the couple threw for their staff.


Are they totally changing the narrative again?!?!


----------



## imgg

I feel really bad for Kate.  Meghan must of been a nightmare for her.   Knowing that she could never compete with Kate, is now trying to make her out as this stiff unlikable person, by feeding the media via her friends.  I can only imagine what went on behind closed doors.  Kate did not deserve any of it and hope the Queen makes it so they can never come back as a couple.


----------



## jehaga

https://blindgossip.com/the-popularity-contest/


----------



## mia55

They’re really dumb, they don’t realize it won’t be long once William gets hold of duchy and then they’re done. Making money is not that easy even when they’re super famous. They may get 2-3 speaking gigs an year but they’re no way close to *****’s or others who actually have achieved something in their life. Their achievement is marrying a prince and sob story of moms death. How much can these topics be dragged.

if Harry stayed he’d have had a better life than being on a leash with MM on the other side. I saw that appalling video where Meghan pulled Harry while he was talking to someone and honestly I behave better with my dog than she does with Harry. It’s a disaster, can’t believe how the mighty has fallen.


----------



## imgg

mia55 said:


> They’re really dumb, they don’t realize it won’t be long once William gets hold of duchy and then they’re done. Making money is not that easy even when they’re super famous. They may get 2-3 speaking gigs an year but they’re no way close to *****’s or others who actually have achieved something in their life. Their achievement is marrying a prince and sob story of moms death. How much can these topics be dragged.
> 
> if Harry stayed he’d have had a better life than being on a leash with MM on the other side. I saw that appalling video where Meghan pulled Harry while he was talking to someone and honestly I behave better with my dog than she does with Harry. It’s a disaster, can’t believe how the mighty has fallen.


They are playing the short game.  They thought they would have titles and could cash in.  They still think they will be billionaires and won't need Will or Kate.  Life has a funny way of changing.  I don't think Meghan is aware of how much people dislike her and can see through her.  Harry knows, that's why he is so sensitive of the topic of Meghan.  He is too weak to do anything about it right now.


----------



## bag-mania

jehaga said:


> https://blindgossip.com/the-popularity-contest/



Nobody who is paying attention will have any difficulty believing this. An egomaniac cannot stand when she isn't the center of attention and has to try to bring down those she considers to be in her way.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> I'd wear it....and since she seems to like the Audrey Hepburn aesthetic you'd think she would


Maybe Harry hasn't given the watch to Meghan yet.  Saving it for his future daughter?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Team Markle Sparkle is hard at work today, they are competing with a pandemic and managing to stay on the front page.  The Daily Mail is a rag but I don’t think they are coming up with all these absurd stories on their own.  They sound like they are coming straight from a five year old.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

jehaga said:


> https://blindgossip.com/the-popularity-contest/



Cold. Especially for the kids. Those rumours are in print, they’ll be a part of their story for generations to come, history tells us this. Shame on Harry, he must know the source of them.

I hope karma exists. I don’t believe everyone always gets their comeuppance, especially when they’re deluded and everything is always someone else’s fault.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> I feel really bad for Kate.  Meghan must of been a nightmare for her.   Knowing that she could never compete with Kate, is now trying to make her out as this stiff unlikable person, by feeding the media via her friends.  I can only imagine what went on behind closed doors.  Kate did not deserve any of it and hope the Queen makes it so they can never come back as a couple.


All Kate has to think about, is how she will be queen one day and her son will be king as well.
Megan, who?


----------



## bag-mania

Kim O'Meara said:


> Cold. Especially for the kids. Those rumours are in print, they’ll be a part of their story for generations to come, history tells us this. Shame on Harry, *he must know the source of them.*
> 
> I hope karma exists. I don’t believe everyone always gets their comeuppance, especially when they’re deluded and everything is always someone else’s fault.



I wonder if Harry lives in a bubble and doesn't read anything except when Meghan brings it to his attention. He comes off as being so clueless about what is going on.


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> All Kate has to think about, is how she will be queen one day and her son will be king as well.
> Megan, who?


Kate seems to be deeper than that though!


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Harry lives in a bubble and doesn't read anything except when Meghan brings it to his attention. He comes off as being so clueless about what is going on.


I read he would not allow anyone to speak negative of Meghan.  It was a sore subject.  That means to me he knows, but refuses to accept.


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> All Kate has to think about, is how she will be queen one day and her son will be king as well.
> Megan, who?[emoji3]


Exactly this


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m sick of it!  Not only has no one asked Meghan how she is doing....no one has hugged her!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...irmation-Harry-right-choice-parting-ways.html


WOW .. how *utterly stupid is this*??? .. again, telling her news-telling "friends" (_amazed she has any_) .. about her "issues" with Will and especially Kate!!!  From what I've seen (_and read_), the British folks (_and UK friends - please chime in_) .. love Kate and feel in some respects, that she has been one of the major reasons why people still view the Royal family favorably!!!  So, stupid Meghan goes ahead and bashes them publicly?? .. and she's *supposedly SO SMART*?!?!?!   IMO .. this will not go down well!


----------



## Love Of My Life

limom said:


> All Kate has to think about, is how she will be queen one day and her son will be king as well.
> Megan, who?



+1   Sad but soooooooooooooo true


----------



## Emeline

limom said:


> All Kate has to think about, is how she will be queen one day and her son will be king as well.
> Megan, who?


Absolutely true.
But in the meantime, I love that Kate truly enjoys watching her children grow.  She understands how precious this time is.


----------



## scarlet555

Oh Harry!  
It's all over the news.  
It's really time for introspective investigation little prince.  
He can't be taking it well with all the memes of M pushing him out of the way. 
I'd be so mad if I was Prince William seeing how Harry is being treated in public...  but then maybe Harry is one of those 'ya just don't listen!'  I am not related to him and my eyes hurt.


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> Kate seems to be deeper than that though!


Kate is living her version of a fairytale.
This is the choice Kate has made and she appears very happy in her life.
Meg was in her life a very short time, how invested can she be in the relationship?
Now I can see Kate missing Just Harry but meg? Nah.


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> You're right, it's just mainland Europe


Well, as of today at 9:45am PST anyway.  
That could all change in a matter of days - if not hours.


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> I read he would not allow anyone to speak negative of Meghan.  It was a sore subject.  That means to me he knows, but refuses to accept.



She has somehow convinced him that nobody else understands and loves him like she does. He is stuck in a morass of intense Meghan need and he feels bound to "protect" her. Poor pathetic sap!


----------



## Aminamina

*From The Telegraph. Amazingly cheesy article. I had to copy since you must sign in order to read it.*
*Behind the scenes, I witnessed the profound sadness of Harry and Meghan's exit*

BRYONY GORDON
There is half an hour before the woman who will shortly be known as Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, carries out her last
private engagement as a working royal, and there is very clearly something in her in her eye.
We are standing in a room at Buckingham Palace as she prepares to make her way to Westminster Abbey for the Commonwealth service and then onwards to Canada for her new life, and it is time to say goodbye. Tears glisten in those bright friendly eyes that have charmed and endeared so many during recent days. But behind the scenes the Duchess of Sussex is not as buoyant as she has appeared to be in public. In fact, she appears to be quietly devastated.

I had been invited along to the Palace to sit in on a meeting with young scholars from the Commonwealth, but now it is over she comes in for a hug that lasts a little longer than normal, a hold, really, before moving on for a final embrace with two of her staff, both of whom also have something in their eyes. Then she is gone – for how long, nobody knows.

Since Harry and Meghan announced their intention to step back from the royal family in early January, much has been written about ruptures, recriminations and rancour. The truth, as ever, is slightly less sensational than that. The pervading emotion on Monday, as I watched the Duchess carry out her final private engagement, seemed to be profound sadness. Sadness that it had come to this; sadness that they could not make it work and sadness that less than two years since that glittering fairy tale wedding, the first person of colour to join the British royal family was off. How ironic that her final engagement was to be a Commonwealth service that celebrated diversity, uniqueness, and the strength we draw from embracing each other and our differences.

I had been invited to Buckingham Palace to observe Meghan’s meeting with 23 young students and academics who had won scholarships from the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU), an organisation the Duchess will continue to be a patron of. These were some of the brightest minds from around the globe, whose work on climate change, health care, sustainability and technological innovation is leading the way in higher education. There were conversations about cancer care in Rwanda, climate research projects in India, and yes, how to prevent the spread of coronavirus throughout the globe (the decision to leave Archie behind in Canada came not out of petty spite, as reported in some areas, but out of concern for his health during the threat of a global pandemic).


Each of the students was unequivocal in their admiration for the Duchess, who was genned up on all of their specialist subjects: this was a woman whose passion for the work she does had never, ever been in doubt, despite reports in some sections of the media that ‘Megxit’ is about a yearning for a glitzier, more Hollywood life. Halima Ali, a lawyer from Kenya who is researching energy and natural resources at Queen Mary University of London, echoed her peers when she said that “for Commonwealth and African countries, to see her, her interest, her participation means a lot to us.”

The plan that Harry and Meghan have always had has been quite simple, and far less contrived than some would have us believe. It is, say sources close to the couple, a story that needn’t ever have been more complicated than ‘two people fall in love, fly the flag, have a baby, and spend the rest of their lives doing charity work and representing the monarchy.’ But there is a feeling that they have been hung out to dry in the tabloid media. Those who are aware of what has gone on behind the scenes say that she took her role seriously, and was not just prepared but _proud_ to deliver whatever was asked of her.


But on Monday another ending to the fairytale was in motion. Meghan caught a flight out of this country she had tried to adopt as her home, back to the Canada, the country she has temporarily adopted as her new one. Watching from the sidelines, her departure seemed bittersweet and tinged with huge sadness – not for herself, but for her husband, who at the Mountbatten Festival of Music on Saturday wore for perhaps the last time his bright red mess uniform and the two medals he earned for his tours of Afghanistan, in his final outing as Captain General of the Royal Marines.

I imagine it is this that has upset Meghan the most – the idea that her husband, in trying to protect the mental health of his wife, has had to sacrifice the thing he loves most outside his family. The loss of titles and other royal privileges will not, I think, bother the couple at all – they are sacrifices they will readily make for the happiness of their young family – but stepping back from Harry’s ceremonial military appointments has been difficult. His commitment to the military community remains unwavering.

I glimpsed Harry only briefly on Monday, as he swept his wife off for the final public engagement. While not tearful like Meghan, his face seemed etched with sadness. I know the couple only a little, but enough to see the very human toll of life as a modern day royal. How could they stand up and talk about the importance of focusing on mental health, while simultaneously ignoring their own? Their decision to step back as working members of the royal family may not be popular – and I am pretty sure it was not the outcome they had hoped for when they walked down the aisle of St George’s Chapel in Windsor on that bright May Day not even two years ago.


But it is the right one for the mental health of their own little family, and as a final act of public duty, I cannot think of anything more poignant or perfect.


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> Kate is living her version of a fairytale.
> This is the choice Kate has made and she appears very happy in her life.
> Meg was in her life a very short time, how invested can she be in the relationship?
> Now I can see Kate missing Just Harry but meg? Nah.


I wasn't implying that Kate would miss Meg.  I do think she was hurt the way Meg treated her.  Hurt that she no longer has Harry in her life.  I imagine Kate would love to have a fabulous 4 where she could have another female to lean on a bit.  

What I meant is I don't think Kate is so superficial that all she cares about is the crown.  She has a lot more dimension than single-minded Meghan.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left crushed by 'unnecessarily cruel Megxit and 'it might have been different' if another family member stood up for them', says royal expert*
> 
> *Expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit *
> *Omid Scobie accompanied couple on final tour and spoke of their emotions*
> *Said Harry was devastated to give up military honours and Meghan shed tears when bidding farewell to staff*
> *Explained how the couple felt pushed into the decision and felt unsupported *
> A royal expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit.
> 
> Bazaar.com's royal editor-at-large Omid Scobie revealed how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt their exit from royal life 'wasn't necessary', but how they felt forced into it - especially after they were left to 'fend for themselves' during Meghan's pregnancy.
> 
> According to Omid, Harry, 35, was 'heartbroken' at having to give up his military honours after serving 10 years in the British army, while Meghan, 38, shed tears at the farewell party the couple threw for their staff.



Do they really think we’re going to believe this?!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

lanasyogamama said:


> Do they really think we’re going to believe this?!!!


It’s all for Hollywood.  Like at the Disney premier when she was caught on camera telling Pharrell how 'hard' it is for her then 5 minutes later her lap dog trying pimp her out for roles.  Then she saying _“Why do you think we are here, for the pitch”    _Everything they do is calculated.


----------



## Aminamina

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...le-buckingham-palace-youth-leaders-qct-video/

"There is no way that the older generation are going to be able to change their mindset unless it's their children who are influencing the change," Prince Harry can be heard saying at one point in the clip.

*Meghan also noted the importance of preventing issues before they start. "Let's not wait until there's a problem, and try to fix it let's try to prevent the problem from happening to begin with," the Duchess said.



I can't with these "fixers". Totally the Emperor's new clothes these two. How don't people see them through...*


----------



## queennadine

They’re so delusional, they’re definitely drinking their own koolaid. 

I love how now MM’s mental health is being trotted out as needing protecting and saving when they pushed so hard to make her seem like the most stable, able-minded and able-bodied workhorse to ever enter the BRF. 

The narrative constantly changes with these two. They don’t genuinely want to help other people at the expense of their own luxe lifestyle. If they did, they would have moved to an impoverished nation, happily renounced their titles, and never been photographed again.


----------



## Mrs.Z

queennadine said:


> They’re so delusional, they’re definitely drinking their own koolaid.
> 
> I love how now MM’s mental health is being trotted out as needing protecting and saving when they pushed so hard to make her seem like the most stable, able-minded and able-bodied workhorse to ever enter the BRF.
> 
> The narrative constantly changes with these two. They don’t genuinely want to help other people at the expense of their own luxe lifestyle. If they did, they would have moved to an impoverished nation, happily renounced their titles, and never been photographed again.


They are DESPERATE to stay in the headlines.


----------



## Jayne1

Was this posted?  Ready to roll your eyes?  What's all this work they've been doing and what exactly did they sacrifice? Bolded mine:

*Inside Duchess Meghan’s Emotional Farewell to Royal Life at a Private Engagement*

It was supposed to be a quiet day off in the countryside until my phone went berserk—the staccato buzz I set for palace correspondence almost sending it off the table. “His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales is delighted to announce the engagement of Prince Harry to Ms. Meghan Markle,” the November 27, 2017, email read, followed by a note inviting royal correspondents to join the couple for a special photo call to mark the occasion. A few road rules may have been bent to make the 80-ish mile drive from Oxfordshire to Kensington Palace—in traffic—but it was worth it. Standing by the lily-covered Sunken Pond as Harry shared his joy at finally finding his teammate, it was the perfect start to a chapter that would finally bring the royal family into the 21st century.

Over the months and years that followed, I closely shadowed the work of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, getting to know the couple better through their humanitarian endeavors, engagements, and overseas visits. Their high-energy work ethic and passion for social justice attracted a new, more diverse demographic of royal watcher to the scene. As a young(ish), biracial royal correspondent, the change was exciting. And as their popularity grew around the world, so did a new golden era for the House of Windsor.

Never did I expect that less than two and half years later I would be standing in one of the State Rooms at Buckingham Palace as *the Duchess of Sussex emotionally bids much-loved aides farewell, with her flight “home” to Canada leaving in a matter of hours. But then, neither did the couple. After starting the year with a formal proposal to move into part-time working royal roles, and bring some much-needed privacy and safety to their family life, Harry and Meghan’s hopes were quickly dashed by an institution seemingly unable to accept change as a viable option (even though some royals across Europe—and even other members of the British royal family—have succeeded in balancing duties to the crown and individual careers). *

*To say they were crushed is an understatement. It’s a decision that the couple still feel wasn’t necessary, but also wasn’t a surprise, given the lack of support they received as they were relentlessly attacked by sections of the British press with almost daily mistruths and hateful commentary. While recent tabloid coverage has made it seem like the Sussexes’ half-in-half-out bid was about wanting it all, the reality was a couple who were left with no other choice but to create their own change after being left to fend for themselves against impossible circumstances—even during her pregnancy. They knew something had to change, but they also didn’t want to stop supporting the queen. One can’t help but wonder if things might have been different if a family member or two had stood up for them during the darkest times.*

Despite the pain and difficulties behind the scenes, work has continued to be a priority for the duchess, who is excited to be carrying over her four royal patronages into the Sussexes’ new chapter. It’s also the reason why I was at Buckingham Palace's 1844 Room on Monday, having been invited alongside two other journalists to cover Meghan’s final engagement as a senior working royal: meeting 22 students who have received scholarships from the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU). As their royal patron—a role she took overfrom the queen in 2019—Meghan will continue to prioritize the organization even after officially stepping back on March 31, especially given her position as the vice president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and a former scholarship student herself. In fact, Meghan’s time at Illinois’s prestigious Northwestern University, where she majored in international relations and theater, is what drew her to the ACU in the first place. “The value and importance of higher education is why it should be accessible to everyone, no matter your background,” she says.

For Commonwealth Day, March 9, the ACU brought together some of their brightest minds for a private meeting with the duchess, ahead of their attendance at Westminster Abbey’s Commonwealth Service, where some would bear the flags of their countries. The students are all studying masters or Ph.D.'s in the U.K. after receiving scholarships from the ACU’s three programs—Commonwealth Scholars, Chevening Scholars, and the ACU Blue Charter Fellow. “That’s what so powerful,” says Meghan, a long-time champion of the importance of universal access to higher education. “This incredible union and the ability to gain so much knowledge and to be able to take that back home.”

Chatting with the scholars, the duchess is eager to hear more about how their studies will contribute to tackling the many challenges our world faces today. As she talks with the students, it becomes clear that she’s already done her research on why each guest was invited. *It’s inspiring to seeing someone so prepared for these types of engagements, as opposed to just showing up for the photographs. But Meghan doesn’t know any other way of doing it. “I think it’s so important to actually engage with people,” she explains. “I care about these things!”*

The ACU has seen over 90,000 scholars come through their administered programs, and those invited to Monday’s meeting represent 11 Commonwealth countries in total. Halima Ali, a lawyer from Kenya who is currently studying for her masters in energy and natural resources law at London’s Queen Mary University, says Meghan’s role as patron is hugely important. “For Commonwealth and also African countries,” she says, “to see her, her interest, her participation, means a lot to us.”

Meghan seems particularly impressed as she chats with Archana Kaliyaraj Selva Kumar, a chemistry student at Oxford University, who has devoted much of her time to using her research to create a new sustainable energy-storing battery that can help communities back in India without wired power. She is also an advocate for helping more women get into science. “What an incredible role model you are,” Meghan tells her. “And seeing is believing. Others see you and ... seeing someone in that space is so inspiring.”

During a conversation with a female Ph.D. student from Kenya, Meghan’s eyes light up when the subject of sustainable travel comes up. “That’s something my husband is incredibly passionate about,” she tells the Sheffield Hallam University student. “During our travels to Botswana and different parts of Africa, we’ve seen the link between tourism and how much money is going outside of the country instead of back to communities. There has to be a symbiotic relationship.” *For her own travels with Harry, Meghan prefers to move around in a way that allows them to integrate with the locals. “When we go to Botswana, we grab a backpack and pitch a tent!” Meghan laughs. “It’s not much, but that’s how we like it!”*

Standing at the side of the room, I spot Secretary General of the ACU Joanna Newman looking on proudly. She came to know the duchess well from their numerous ACU engagements and meetings together, and is excited about their relationship continuing long into the future.

“She has been a fantastic amplifier of ACU messages to much broader audiences for us,” she tells me, adding that her patronage has given the ACU coverage in places they could have never reached before, including _Harper's BAZAAR_. She calls Meghan a powerful spokesperson, recalling how she started public conversations about the lack of Black professors and even period poverty. “The headlines haven’t been about what our patron is wearing or the official engagement started at this time and ended at that time and there was a cup of tea in the middle, it’s about why we are doing what we do and why ACU exists. She’s been a real champion of the work that universities do.”

The ACU meeting came at the end of what Sussex aides have nicknamed a “farewell tour” for Harry and Meghan—a chance to tie up loose ends at the palace while taking on a slew of final royal engagements. The itinerary has been packed, starting when I joined the Duke of Sussex in Edinburgh, Scotland, on February 26 as his sustainable travel initiative, Travalyst, entered its next development phase. The ambitious project will be a key component of the Sussexes’ philanthropic portfolio, and it’s become extremely clear just how important the cause is to Harry, who regularly takes part in meetings behind the scenes. Chatting with him one-on-one recently, I was struck by how knowledgeable he has become in this field; his many trips to Botswana inspired the beginnings of the initiative more than a year ago. As one of the attendees at the Edinburgh work summit whispered to me after his speech, “He’s about to change the game for good.”

Reuniting after five days apart, Harry and Meghan’s showstopping arrival at the Endeavour Fund Awards served as a reminder of their ability to command the world’s attention. “Nothing to see here, just Meghan Markle showing the **** out during her final round of royal duties,” wrote a Twitter user, as the pictures of the couple beaming under their umbrella went viral around the world. Inside the ceremony, the focus was firmly on the veterans being honored, all speaking highly of the duke, or Captain Wales, as he’s better known in the veteran community. It’s that mission to support servicemen and servicewomen that has seen Harry pledge to continue to support the community in his new non-working royal life, not just in the United Kingdom but in North America too. The first task? Bringing the work of the Endeavour Fund and Invictus Games, both of which he helped establish, closer together. Harry’s lifelong commitment is why Saturday’sMountbatten Festival of Music was a particularly difficult moment, wearing his Captain General of the Royal Marines uniform for the last time. Giving up his royal duties has resulted in his military honors coming to an end—a particularly tough pill to swallow and something that has been just as difficult for his wife to witness. It is, a source close to the couple tells me, a wound that will take time to heal for Harry.

Meghan’s surprise appearance at an East London school for International Women’s Day and more traditional royal engagements such as Harry opening an immersive British motorsport museum alongside Lewis Hamilton (“There's nothing better than officially opening a building that is very much open,” the duke joked about the Silverstone Experience, which first opened its doors in October 2019) rounded out what has been a roller coaster of a farewell visit for the Sussexes. Getting on with the work has always been what it’s been about for Harry and Meghan, but behind the smiles of the photos has been a vulnerable couple who are still very much hurting.

*Back at Buckingham Palace, the ACU students now en route to Westminster Abbey and Harry quietly slipping through the door to say hello, the reality—and the emotions—finally set in as I give Meghan a goodbye hug. She’s flying back to Canada on the last commercial flight of the day, eager to be back in Vancouver Island by the morning before Archie wakes up. For a couple who only ever wanted to focus on their work and bring good to the world, it seems like an unnecessarily cruel ending to their royal lives. Forced to give up roles they’re incredibly proud of after sacrificing so much to get there.*

*At this point, the 1844 Room is almost empty and tears that the duchess had been bravely holding back are free to flow among familiar faces. As she embraces some of the loyal staff she will most likely not see again, I can’t help but feel sad for the dedicated team members whose tireless efforts—to promote the couple’s work, launch landmark projects, and deal with the near-daily crises brought on by tabloid lies—have come to an abrupt end. Compared to other royal households, it was a smaller operation, with less resources than the more sophisticated offices at Clarence House and Kensington Palace, but in the short space of a year since setting up, Team Sussex had become like a family, looking out for the couple as much as they could. *

*While the weeks and months ahead will no doubt present new challenges for the Sussexes, the couple genuinely feel a sense of excitement about what’s to come, which includes the freedom to work at a pace that suits them, no longer weighed down by protocol or threatened by toxic agendas. And while much has been (incorrectly) speculated about specific commercial endeavors they might be taking on, both Harry and Meghan are eager to get stuck into their work, which will still revolve around their humanitarian efforts and helping amplify the voices of young people around the world on a wide gamut of issues.

“The terrain may be a little different but their priorities are exactly the same as before,” a well-placed source tells me. “Keeping the family, most importantly Archie, safe is what will make all of this worth it.”*

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a31405025/meghan-markle-transition-out-of-royal-life/


----------



## tiktok

queennadine said:


> They’re so delusional, they’re definitely drinking their own koolaid.
> 
> I love how now MM’s mental health is being trotted out as needing protecting and saving when they pushed so hard to make her seem like the most stable, able-minded and able-bodied workhorse to ever enter the BRF.
> 
> The narrative constantly changes with these two. They don’t genuinely want to help other people at the expense of their own luxe lifestyle. If they did, they would have moved to an impoverished nation, happily renounced their titles, and never been photographed again.



Actually if they truly wanted to help other people they would have stayed and done the work from the inside to make sure they have greater impact on the causes and charities they support. They could have worked to make it about more than cutting ribbons, worked with global leaders etc., especially since they have more freedom as they're not the future king and queen. But that's not really what they were after... Look at the Invictus Games and how much reach and impact that initiative has. The whole notion that they can't have impact within the royal family and it's just about visiting nursing homes is just an excuse.


----------



## piperdog

limom said:


> Kate is living her version of a fairytale.
> This is the choice Kate has made and she appears very happy in her life.
> Meg was in her life a very short time, how invested can she be in the relationship?
> Now I can see Kate missing Just Harry but meg? Nah.


I keep thinking of the clip of Camila's response to a question about missing Harry and Meghan - hmmm, of course


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> This all about trying to offset the bad press from the way their staff were dumped on in January.  It might (just might) carry some weight if Meghan hadn’t previously been filmed boasting about her ability to summon up tears on demand for her directors


WOW - didn't know that!!! .. but, alas, some folks will likely just believe that BS!


----------



## limom

What is the deal with Archie being safe?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Allison Pearson has written a few balanced and well observed pieces over the last few weeks. about the Sussexes. It's one thing when the tabloid have a go at you but when the grown ups at the Telegraph are critical, it's surely time to have a bit of introspection ?


A not-so fond farewell to Harry and Meghan!
by ALLISON PEARSON
Telegraph 
10 MARCH 2020 • 7:00PM

They say parting is such sweet sorrow, but, if you ask me, Harry and Meghan’s final appearance as working members of the Royal family seemed distinctly short on sweetness. It wasn’t quite Murder in the Cathedral, more looking daggers in the Abbey.

You didn’t need a doctorate in body language to gather that things are just a teensy bit tense right now among the Windsor clan. The Cambridges could hardly bring themselves to acknowledge the Sussexes. The Wessexes acted as a buffer zone.

Prince Edward made animated small talk with Meghan on his right, while Sophie Wessex on his left pretended to be incredibly interested in the Order of Service. No Order of Service has ever been more fascinating than the one for the Queen’s Commonwealth Service as far as Sophie was concerned. If she needed to memorise every single hymn, and sing it nude, then she would do it rather than make eye contact with that bloody actress.

Meghan had arrived dressed as a peapod with matching pillbox hat in jealous green. Like all her glamorous outfits on this “Farewell, Stuffy Royals, Hello Disney Princess!” tour, this one almost seemed designed to make her sister-in-law look frumpy. Kate isn’t frumpy, she just looks Royal, something Meghan never really understood.

Harry’s jacket had a green-silk lining to match his wife’s dress, which was either a nice touch or evidence of rampant control-freakery by She Who Says We Must Live in Canada and Won’t Let Archie Back in His Birthplace in Case He’s Abducted by MI5 and Shut in the Tower Before the Divorce.

Harry seemed pensive and pained by his brother’s curt: “Hello.” He looked as if he’d rather be anywhere else. Afghanistan, perhaps.

At the entrance to the Abbey, Meghan did her “I’m so glowing and compassionate, me” routine with a receiving line of enraptured clergymen when she noticed Prince William come in and hastily scuttled along. No love lost there.

Meghan Markle: inspirational, self-assured, bi-racial humanitarian who has brought joy to lost, motherless boy and sticks up for what she thinks is right? Or fame-hungry, scorch-the-earth people-dumper dragging poor Harry down a dark path? Honestly, your guess is as good as mine. At least there is little doubt what William thinks.

You could tell how anxious things were because Buckingham Palace was forced to make a last-minute change to avoid upsetting the swansong couple. Harry and Meghan were supposed to be shown to their seats while the Cambridges joined the Queen’s procession.

Instead, faced with the dread news that the Sussexes were “emotional and upset” at being excluded from the Royal line-up, *the one they had chosen to leave*, William and Kate defused the situation by dropping out of the procession and also being taken to their seats. There was no time to re-print the 2,000 orders of service which stated clearly that the Cambridges would enter with the Queen and the Prince of Wales.

*Once seated, everyone looked tense and utterly miserable except the person who had done most to cause the tension and misery*. Meghan kept her newly-whitened smile on full-beam lest she damage the brand by appearing unhappy in the photographs.

Boy, I have seen some awkward family gatherings in my time, but this one took the Bath Oliver. It will be just one year ten months and 12 days since Meghan joined the Firm on 31st March, the day that she and Harry bow out of Royal life. A remarkably short period of time to have sown such discord. Princess Diana would be devastated to see her boys so coldly estranged.

Perhaps Harry was always looking for a way to leave the life he thought had murdered his mother. Fair enough. I get that. Given time, people would have respected his decision. But it has been done so impatiently and with such arrogant obliviousness towards the Queen. *It was Her Majesty who, upon their marriage, appointed the Sussexes as youth ambassadors to her beloved Commonwealth, a thoughtful gift that, at Monday’s lovely ceremony, they threw back in her face.*

I count myself a Harry fan, but I find I now care very little that he is leaving our national life. I am not impressed, not at all, and I suspect a lot of people feel the same way. One day, the prince may have cause to reflect that, in pursuit of love, he carelessly squandered the affection of millions.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> What is the deal with Archie being safe?



They realized that Archie provides a good excuse and garners sympathy. Everyone can understand being protective of a child. Whether the danger to that child is real or imagined doesn't matter. Saying that they want Archie to be safe will have their fans clapping like trained seals.


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> *It was Her Majesty who, upon their marriage, appointed the Sussexes as youth ambassadors to her beloved Commonwealth, a thoughtful gift that, at Monday’s lovely ceremony, they threw back in her face.*


It has been written that the ambassadorship is a plum assignment that William had sought (fake news??)
It is nevertheless a major position since QE2 remains the head of state in most  (if not all) of the Commonwealth eg Canada , NZ and Australia, so one represents HM in the role 
It is a real ambassador role - conferring diplomatic privileges - the role should go to a senior royal, and too bad, if H&M lost their privileged/protected/high and mighty person status and thus security when they lost the role


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Sharont2305 said:


> Soon ro be named SussexNotSoRoyal



Oh I thought it would be DukeandDuchessChungaChanga


----------



## Kim O'Meara

WillstarveforLV said:


> Oh I thought it would be DukeandDuchessChungaChanga



I wonder what their Instagram handle will be changed to?


----------



## Emeline

WillstarveforLV said:


> Oh I thought it would be DukeandDuchessChungaChanga


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

mdcx said:


> I feel like Harry will be copping it from M going forward. No more “shared enemy” of the BRF to unite them... *I also cannot imagine what they will be selling. She seems deceptive and inauthentic, he immature and troubled. Not super appealing as spokespeople.*



Perceived access was going to be their biggest seller, so they’re still reeling from the loss of their “sussexroyal” & HRH usage, which seems to be the true sin of the BRF, not “disallowing hugs”.

*H&M’s own words & behavior have limited their prospects more than any external forces.* They didn’t have to be so publicly peevish in saying “we’re independent & only expect to lose 5% of our ‘by birthright’ funding”.  Harry has said “small steps & handing out prizes” are meaningless, and both he & Meghan have admitted on a few occasions to not following world news (She’s been “too busy” & he finds it “too negative” & depressing.) *Their big seller will have to be their aura & “INSIGHTS”. But their $peeches rely on her “epiphanies,” his dead mother, & their preaching rather than knowledge or experience.*

It really seemed to hit Harry hard (he looked uncomfortable with the standing ovation while Meg beemed) — this is last time he’ll be in military dress in an official capacity ... unless they change their minds (they’re lucky to be “under review” for a year & QE2 said he’s always welcome back). But how can they go back after they’ve both cast his family as boo-hoo-cruel by direct statement, the hoax interview & “friends” in the press?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Kim O'Meara said:


> I wonder what their Instagram handle will be changed to?


Oops_inc


----------



## Jayne1

I was watching one of the Windsor specials, either CNN, BBC or Netflix, can't remember which one, but what really stood out was Diana's private secretary complaining at the time, not in retrospect, that Diana felt no one was supporting her, giving her hugs or comforting her.

Harry is definitely his mother's son. They seem to share the same struggles.


----------



## PewPew

Jayne1 said:


> I was watching one of the Windsor specials, either CNN, BBC or Netflix, can't remember which one, but what really stood out was Diana's private secretary complaining at the time, not in retrospect, that Diana felt no one was supporting her, giving her hugs or comforting her.
> 
> Harry is definitely his mother's son. They seem to share the same struggles.



I really feel for Diana entering that situation at 19, already abandoned as a child (her mother had an affair & left her father). She thought she married for love & when she found out about Camilla, it was a double blow that his entire family & HER grandmother knew about the affair pre-marriage. They expected her to suck it up b/c she’d be queen consort & royal men cheat.

I also see Harry as more like Diana than William, but Meghan and Harry weren’t naive and helpless. They were mid-30’s. He knew his family and the UK press (and the backlash over his many youthful follies), as well as witnessing the scrutiny Kate, Sophie and Camilla got in the Aughties. Sophie & Camilla were absolutely roasted. He had ample experience & info, which he may or may not have fully disclosed to Meghan pre-marriage (or they may have just had blinders on in rushing into engagement/marriage).


----------



## Chagall

Kim O'Meara said:


> Cold. Especially for the kids. Those rumours are in print, they’ll be a part of their story for generations to come, history tells us this. Shame on Harry, he must know the source of them.
> 
> I hope karma exists. I don’t believe everyone always gets their comeuppance, especially when they’re deluded and everything is always someone else’s fault.


I unfortunately no longer believe in karma always catching up with people. I have seen so many people get away with deplorable behaviour that I think karma can sometimes be something that people choose to believe to make themselves feel better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

imgg said:


> I feel really bad for Kate.  Meghan must of been a nightmare for her.   Knowing that she could never compete with Kate, is now trying to make her out as this stiff unlikable person, by feeding the media via her friends.  I can only imagine what went on behind closed doors.  Kate did not deserve any of it and hope the Queen makes it so they can never come back as a couple.



This hatred for Kate baffles me. MM really is a sick person. The Blind Item sounds awfully like what I always thought...but what really threw me off were the videos posted from MM staring at Kate in such a hateful way it gave me goosebumps. I used to find MM annoying, but at this point I feel something is seriously off with this woman.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Remember the rumors that she brought Kate to tears at Charlotte’s dress fitting?  True colors even then.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This hatred for Kate baffles me. MM really is a sick person. The Blind Item sounds awfully like what I always thought...but what really threw me off were the videos posted from MM staring at Kate in such a hateful way it gave me goosebumps. I used to find MM annoying, but at this point I feel something is seriously off with this woman.


she is jealous of Kate.  period.  Kate will be queen and Kate even looks better than she does.  With "M" being a "star" or actress or whatever she is, that must frost her.


----------



## Emeline

Sophisticatted said:


> Remember the rumors that she brought Kate to tears at Charlotte’s dress fitting?  True colors even then.


That was an early warning in retrospect, wasn't it?
 I mean, who behaves that way around some sweet littles and their moms? M was  gifted a dream wedding. And yet she never was satisfied or appreciative.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> I unfortunately no longer believe in karma always catching up with people. I have seen so many people get away with deplorable behaviour that I think karma can sometimes be something that people choose to believe to make themselves feel better.


Absolutely -- and innocent, lovely people die horrendous deaths, while the deplorables die peacefully in their beds after a long, 'successful' life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I want share my thoughts on the positions Harry was given. Both the Commonwealth ambassador and the military position are hugely prestigeous positions...the military position was previously held by several kings and Philip, the Commonwealth ambassador comes with diplomatic honours.

And they are given to the poor mistreated Harry nobody cares about and nobody wants to see thrive? Who always just plays second fiddle and what not? This man was given everything by his family. How ungrateful can you be.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Absolutely -- and innocent, lovely people die horrendous deaths, while the deplorables die peacefully in their beds after a long, 'successful' life.


well, not Jeffrey Epstein or Harvey Weinstein anyway


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I want share my thoughts on the positions Harry was given. Both the Commonwealth ambassador and the military position are hugely prestigeous positions...the military position was previously held by several kings and Philip, the Commonwealth ambassador comes with diplomatic honours.
> 
> And they are given to the poor mistreated Harry nobody cares about and nobody wants to see thrive? Who always just plays second fiddle and what not? This man was given everything by his family. How ungrateful can you be.


I don't know him but from what I see IMO he is probably a man-child


----------



## CeeJay

Yes, even Diana at one point indicated that Will was more like Charles, but she worried about Harry because he was very sensitive like her.  What a mess they have made ..


----------



## Sharont2305

It's going to be a looong lonely flight back to Canada for Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

mrsinsyder said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left crushed by 'unnecessarily cruel Megxit and 'it might have been different' if another family member stood up for them', says royal expert*
> 
> *Expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit *
> *Omid Scobie accompanied couple on final tour and spoke of their emotions*
> *Said Harry was devastated to give up military honours and Meghan shed tears when bidding farewell to staff*
> *Explained how the couple felt pushed into the decision and felt unsupported *
> A royal expert has said Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were left 'crushed' by Megxit.
> 
> Bazaar.com's royal editor-at-large Omid Scobie revealed how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt their exit from royal life 'wasn't necessary', but how they felt forced into it - especially after they were left to 'fend for themselves' during Meghan's pregnancy.
> 
> According to Omid, Harry, 35, was 'heartbroken' at having to give up his military honours after serving 10 years in the British army, while Meghan, 38, shed tears at the farewell party the couple threw for their staff.



What is he talking about when he said "left to fend for themselves" during her pregnancy?


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Chagall said:


> I unfortunately no longer believe in karma always catching up with people. I have seen so many people get away with deplorable behaviour that I think karma can sometimes be something that people choose to believe to make themselves feel better.



Yeah, ditto. On one hand I hope, on the other I know better.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> It's going to be a looong lonely flight back to Canada for Harry


When exactly, is he supposed to go back? .. right now??  Just thinking (_too many Bond movies_) .. if they want to "re-program" Harry, now might be the perfect time to do it.  Obviously, the whole situation with losing the Military patronages seemed to affect him.  I wonder what trained psychiatrists would think about him, Meghan and his situation???


----------



## CeeJay

Kim O'Meara said:


> Yeah, ditto. On one hand I hope, on the other I know better.


SAME here .. I've always wanted to believe it, and it has happened a few times .. but in general, those sh!t-heads always seem to 'win' .. which, obviously, is not fair .. but that's life, right?!?!


----------



## lanasyogamama

limom said:


> What is the deal with Archie being safe?


Who?


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> When exactly, is he supposed to go back? .. right now??  Just thinking (_too many Bond movies_) .. if they want to "re-program" Harry, now might be the perfect time to do it.  Obviously, the whole situation with losing the Military patronages seemed to affect him.  I wonder what trained psychiatrists would think about him, Meghan and his situation???


I don't know, but I'm sure I've read he's here till near the end of March.
Is that enough time to "re-programme him? [emoji1787]


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't know, but I'm sure I've read he's here till near the end of March.
> Is that enough time to "re-programme him? [emoji1787]


I'm betting that she is texting or face timing him whenever she is not around to physically grab and "guide" him


----------



## CobaltBlu

justwatchin said:


> What is he talking about when he said "left to fend for themselves" during her pregnancy?



They  had to hunt for their food, grow their own fruits and vegetables, cook and clean for themselves, sew their clothes with needles made of the bones of the chickens they raised. Stuff like that.  Bring water from the well, construct a hut from reeds and twigs, learn to make fire with just a couple of sticks. Super hard stuff.


----------



## bellecate

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Ready to roll your eyes?  What's all this work they've been doing and what exactly did they sacrifice? Bolded mine:
> 
> *Inside Duchess Meghan’s Emotional Farewell to Royal Life at a Private Engagement*
> 
> It was supposed to be a quiet day off in the countryside until my phone went berserk—the staccato buzz I set for palace correspondence almost sending it off the table. “His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales is delighted to announce the engagement of Prince Harry to Ms. Meghan Markle,” the November 27, 2017, email read, followed by a note inviting royal correspondents to join the couple for a special photo call to mark the occasion. A few road rules may have been bent to make the 80-ish mile drive from Oxfordshire to Kensington Palace—in traffic—but it was worth it. Standing by the lily-covered Sunken Pond as Harry shared his joy at finally finding his teammate, it was the perfect start to a chapter that would finally bring the royal family into the 21st century.
> 
> Over the months and years that followed, I closely shadowed the work of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, getting to know the couple better through their humanitarian endeavors, engagements, and overseas visits. Their high-energy work ethic and passion for social justice attracted a new, more diverse demographic of royal watcher to the scene. As a young(ish), biracial royal correspondent, the change was exciting. And as their popularity grew around the world, so did a new golden era for the House of Windsor.
> 
> Never did I expect that less than two and half years later I would be standing in one of the State Rooms at Buckingham Palace as *the Duchess of Sussex emotionally bids much-loved aides farewell, with her flight “home” to Canada leaving in a matter of hours. But then, neither did the couple. After starting the year with a formal proposal to move into part-time working royal roles, and bring some much-needed privacy and safety to their family life, Harry and Meghan’s hopes were quickly dashed by an institution seemingly unable to accept change as a viable option (even though some royals across Europe—and even other members of the British royal family—have succeeded in balancing duties to the crown and individual careers). *
> 
> *To say they were crushed is an understatement. It’s a decision that the couple still feel wasn’t necessary, but also wasn’t a surprise, given the lack of support they received as they were relentlessly attacked by sections of the British press with almost daily mistruths and hateful commentary. While recent tabloid coverage has made it seem like the Sussexes’ half-in-half-out bid was about wanting it all, the reality was a couple who were left with no other choice but to create their own change after being left to fend for themselves against impossible circumstances—even during her pregnancy. They knew something had to change, but they also didn’t want to stop supporting the queen. One can’t help but wonder if things might have been different if a family member or two had stood up for them during the darkest times.*
> 
> Despite the pain and difficulties behind the scenes, work has continued to be a priority for the duchess, who is excited to be carrying over her four royal patronages into the Sussexes’ new chapter. It’s also the reason why I was at Buckingham Palace's 1844 Room on Monday, having been invited alongside two other journalists to cover Meghan’s final engagement as a senior working royal: meeting 22 students who have received scholarships from the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU). As their royal patron—a role she took overfrom the queen in 2019—Meghan will continue to prioritize the organization even after officially stepping back on March 31, especially given her position as the vice president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and a former scholarship student herself. In fact, Meghan’s time at Illinois’s prestigious Northwestern University, where she majored in international relations and theater, is what drew her to the ACU in the first place. “The value and importance of higher education is why it should be accessible to everyone, no matter your background,” she says.
> 
> For Commonwealth Day, March 9, the ACU brought together some of their brightest minds for a private meeting with the duchess, ahead of their attendance at Westminster Abbey’s Commonwealth Service, where some would bear the flags of their countries. The students are all studying masters or Ph.D.'s in the U.K. after receiving scholarships from the ACU’s three programs—Commonwealth Scholars, Chevening Scholars, and the ACU Blue Charter Fellow. “That’s what so powerful,” says Meghan, a long-time champion of the importance of universal access to higher education. “This incredible union and the ability to gain so much knowledge and to be able to take that back home.”
> 
> Chatting with the scholars, the duchess is eager to hear more about how their studies will contribute to tackling the many challenges our world faces today. As she talks with the students, it becomes clear that she’s already done her research on why each guest was invited. *It’s inspiring to seeing someone so prepared for these types of engagements, as opposed to just showing up for the photographs. But Meghan doesn’t know any other way of doing it. “I think it’s so important to actually engage with people,” she explains. “I care about these things!”*
> 
> The ACU has seen over 90,000 scholars come through their administered programs, and those invited to Monday’s meeting represent 11 Commonwealth countries in total. Halima Ali, a lawyer from Kenya who is currently studying for her masters in energy and natural resources law at London’s Queen Mary University, says Meghan’s role as patron is hugely important. “For Commonwealth and also African countries,” she says, “to see her, her interest, her participation, means a lot to us.”
> 
> Meghan seems particularly impressed as she chats with Archana Kaliyaraj Selva Kumar, a chemistry student at Oxford University, who has devoted much of her time to using her research to create a new sustainable energy-storing battery that can help communities back in India without wired power. She is also an advocate for helping more women get into science. “What an incredible role model you are,” Meghan tells her. “And seeing is believing. Others see you and ... seeing someone in that space is so inspiring.”
> 
> During a conversation with a female Ph.D. student from Kenya, Meghan’s eyes light up when the subject of sustainable travel comes up. “That’s something my husband is incredibly passionate about,” she tells the Sheffield Hallam University student. “During our travels to Botswana and different parts of Africa, we’ve seen the link between tourism and how much money is going outside of the country instead of back to communities. There has to be a symbiotic relationship.” *For her own travels with Harry, Meghan prefers to move around in a way that allows them to integrate with the locals. “When we go to Botswana, we grab a backpack and pitch a tent!” Meghan laughs. “It’s not much, but that’s how we like it!”*
> 
> Standing at the side of the room, I spot Secretary General of the ACU Joanna Newman looking on proudly. She came to know the duchess well from their numerous ACU engagements and meetings together, and is excited about their relationship continuing long into the future.
> 
> “She has been a fantastic amplifier of ACU messages to much broader audiences for us,” she tells me, adding that her patronage has given the ACU coverage in places they could have never reached before, including _Harper's BAZAAR_. She calls Meghan a powerful spokesperson, recalling how she started public conversations about the lack of Black professors and even period poverty. “The headlines haven’t been about what our patron is wearing or the official engagement started at this time and ended at that time and there was a cup of tea in the middle, it’s about why we are doing what we do and why ACU exists. She’s been a real champion of the work that universities do.”
> 
> The ACU meeting came at the end of what Sussex aides have nicknamed a “farewell tour” for Harry and Meghan—a chance to tie up loose ends at the palace while taking on a slew of final royal engagements. The itinerary has been packed, starting when I joined the Duke of Sussex in Edinburgh, Scotland, on February 26 as his sustainable travel initiative, Travalyst, entered its next development phase. The ambitious project will be a key component of the Sussexes’ philanthropic portfolio, and it’s become extremely clear just how important the cause is to Harry, who regularly takes part in meetings behind the scenes. Chatting with him one-on-one recently, I was struck by how knowledgeable he has become in this field; his many trips to Botswana inspired the beginnings of the initiative more than a year ago. As one of the attendees at the Edinburgh work summit whispered to me after his speech, “He’s about to change the game for good.”
> 
> Reuniting after five days apart, Harry and Meghan’s showstopping arrival at the Endeavour Fund Awards served as a reminder of their ability to command the world’s attention. “Nothing to see here, just Meghan Markle showing the **** out during her final round of royal duties,” wrote a Twitter user, as the pictures of the couple beaming under their umbrella went viral around the world. Inside the ceremony, the focus was firmly on the veterans being honored, all speaking highly of the duke, or Captain Wales, as he’s better known in the veteran community. It’s that mission to support servicemen and servicewomen that has seen Harry pledge to continue to support the community in his new non-working royal life, not just in the United Kingdom but in North America too. The first task? Bringing the work of the Endeavour Fund and Invictus Games, both of which he helped establish, closer together. Harry’s lifelong commitment is why Saturday’sMountbatten Festival of Music was a particularly difficult moment, wearing his Captain General of the Royal Marines uniform for the last time. Giving up his royal duties has resulted in his military honors coming to an end—a particularly tough pill to swallow and something that has been just as difficult for his wife to witness. It is, a source close to the couple tells me, a wound that will take time to heal for Harry.
> 
> Meghan’s surprise appearance at an East London school for International Women’s Day and more traditional royal engagements such as Harry opening an immersive British motorsport museum alongside Lewis Hamilton (“There's nothing better than officially opening a building that is very much open,” the duke joked about the Silverstone Experience, which first opened its doors in October 2019) rounded out what has been a roller coaster of a farewell visit for the Sussexes. Getting on with the work has always been what it’s been about for Harry and Meghan, but behind the smiles of the photos has been a vulnerable couple who are still very much hurting.
> 
> *Back at Buckingham Palace, the ACU students now en route to Westminster Abbey and Harry quietly slipping through the door to say hello, the reality—and the emotions—finally set in as I give Meghan a goodbye hug. She’s flying back to Canada on the last commercial flight of the day, eager to be back in Vancouver Island by the morning before Archie wakes up. For a couple who only ever wanted to focus on their work and bring good to the world, it seems like an unnecessarily cruel ending to their royal lives. Forced to give up roles they’re incredibly proud of after sacrificing so much to get there.*
> 
> *At this point, the 1844 Room is almost empty and tears that the duchess had been bravely holding back are free to flow among familiar faces. As she embraces some of the loyal staff she will most likely not see again, I can’t help but feel sad for the dedicated team members whose tireless efforts—to promote the couple’s work, launch landmark projects, and deal with the near-daily crises brought on by tabloid lies—have come to an abrupt end. Compared to other royal households, it was a smaller operation, with less resources than the more sophisticated offices at Clarence House and Kensington Palace, but in the short space of a year since setting up, Team Sussex had become like a family, looking out for the couple as much as they could. *
> 
> *While the weeks and months ahead will no doubt present new challenges for the Sussexes, the couple genuinely feel a sense of excitement about what’s to come, which includes the freedom to work at a pace that suits them, no longer weighed down by protocol or threatened by toxic agendas. And while much has been (incorrectly) speculated about specific commercial endeavors they might be taking on, both Harry and Meghan are eager to get stuck into their work, which will still revolve around their humanitarian efforts and helping amplify the voices of young people around the world on a wide gamut of issues.
> 
> “The terrain may be a little different but their priorities are exactly the same as before,” a well-placed source tells me. “Keeping the family, most importantly Archie, safe is what will make all of this worth it.”*
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a31405025/meghan-markle-transition-out-of-royal-life/


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, even Diana at one point indicated that Will was more like Charles, but she worried about Harry because he was very sensitive like her.  What a mess they have made ..


I suppose Harry's emotional growth could have been stunted when his mother died - he was 10 or so?


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> They  had to hunt for their food, grow their own fruits and vegetables, cook and clean for themselves, sew their clothes with needles made of the bones of the chickens they raised. Stuff like that.  Bring water from the well, construct a hut from reeds and twigs, learn to make fire with just a couple of sticks. Super hard stuff.


LOL
and take a basin down to the creek to do the wash


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I suppose Harry's emotional growth could have been stunted when his mother died - he was 10 or so?


Couple of weeks before his 13th birthday


----------



## Lounorada

RAINDANCE said:


> Prince Edward made animated small talk with Meghan on his right, while Sophie Wessex on his left pretended to be incredibly interested in the Order of Service. *No Order of Service has ever been more fascinating than the one for the Queen’s Commonwealth Service as far as Sophie was concerned. If she needed to memorise every single hymn, and sing it nude, then she would do it rather than make eye contact with that bloody actress.*
> 
> *Meghan had arrived dressed as a peapod with matching pillbox hat in jealous green.* Like all her glamorous outfits on this “Farewell, Stuffy Royals, Hello Disney Princess!” tour, this one almost seemed designed to make her sister-in-law look frumpy. Kate isn’t frumpy, she just looks Royal, something Meghan never really understood.
> 
> *Harry’s jacket had a green-silk lining to match his wife’s dress, which was either a nice touch or evidence of rampant control-freakery by She Who Says We Must Live in Canada and Won’t Let Archie Back in His Birthplace in Case He’s Abducted by MI5 and Shut in the Tower Before the Divorce.*


Good article, thanks for posting! The bolded above were my fav parts  Dressed as a peapod 


Chagall said:


> I unfortunately no longer believe in karma always catching up with people. I have seen so many people get away with deplorable behaviour that I think karma can sometimes be something that people choose to believe to make themselves feel better.


Agreed.


CobaltBlu said:


> They  had to hunt for their food, grow their own fruits and vegetables, cook and clean for themselves, sew their clothes with needles made of the bones of the chickens they raised. Stuff like that.  Bring water from the well, construct a hut from reeds and twigs, learn to make fire with just a couple of sticks. Super hard stuff.


----------



## lalame

Oh my word has Meghan really only been in the family for 1 year, 10 months? It seems like ages. At least you’d think so considering how tortured they were about it.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Couple of weeks before his 13th birthday


seems about right for a guy beind led around by the hand like he is


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> Was this posted?  Ready to roll your eyes?  What's all this work they've been doing and what exactly did they sacrifice? Bolded mine:
> 
> *Inside Duchess Meghan’s Emotional Farewell to Royal Life at a Private Engagement*
> 
> It was supposed to be a quiet day off in the countryside until my phone went berserk—the staccato buzz I set for palace correspondence almost sending it off the table. “His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales is delighted to announce the engagement of Prince Harry to Ms. Meghan Markle,” the November 27, 2017, email read, followed by a note inviting royal correspondents to join the couple for a special photo call to mark the occasion. A few road rules may have been bent to make the 80-ish mile drive from Oxfordshire to Kensington Palace—in traffic—but it was worth it. Standing by the lily-covered Sunken Pond as Harry shared his joy at finally finding his teammate, it was the perfect start to a chapter that would finally bring the royal family into the 21st century.
> 
> Over the months and years that followed, I closely shadowed the work of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, getting to know the couple better through their humanitarian endeavors, engagements, and overseas visits. Their high-energy work ethic and passion for social justice attracted a new, more diverse demographic of royal watcher to the scene. As a young(ish), biracial royal correspondent, the change was exciting. And as their popularity grew around the world, so did a new golden era for the House of Windsor.
> 
> Never did I expect that less than two and half years later I would be standing in one of the State Rooms at Buckingham Palace as *the Duchess of Sussex emotionally bids much-loved aides farewell, with her flight “home” to Canada leaving in a matter of hours. But then, neither did the couple. After starting the year with a formal proposal to move into part-time working royal roles, and bring some much-needed privacy and safety to their family life, Harry and Meghan’s hopes were quickly dashed by an institution seemingly unable to accept change as a viable option (even though some royals across Europe—and even other members of the British royal family—have succeeded in balancing duties to the crown and individual careers). *
> 
> *To say they were crushed is an understatement. It’s a decision that the couple still feel wasn’t necessary, but also wasn’t a surprise, given the lack of support they received as they were relentlessly attacked by sections of the British press with almost daily mistruths and hateful commentary. While recent tabloid coverage has made it seem like the Sussexes’ half-in-half-out bid was about wanting it all, the reality was a couple who were left with no other choice but to create their own change after being left to fend for themselves against impossible circumstances—even during her pregnancy. They knew something had to change, but they also didn’t want to stop supporting the queen. One can’t help but wonder if things might have been different if a family member or two had stood up for them during the darkest times.*
> 
> Despite the pain and difficulties behind the scenes, work has continued to be a priority for the duchess, who is excited to be carrying over her four royal patronages into the Sussexes’ new chapter. It’s also the reason why I was at Buckingham Palace's 1844 Room on Monday, having been invited alongside two other journalists to cover Meghan’s final engagement as a senior working royal: meeting 22 students who have received scholarships from the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU). As their royal patron—a role she took overfrom the queen in 2019—Meghan will continue to prioritize the organization even after officially stepping back on March 31, especially given her position as the vice president of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust and a former scholarship student herself. In fact, Meghan’s time at Illinois’s prestigious Northwestern University, where she majored in international relations and theater, is what drew her to the ACU in the first place. “The value and importance of higher education is why it should be accessible to everyone, no matter your background,” she says.
> 
> For Commonwealth Day, March 9, the ACU brought together some of their brightest minds for a private meeting with the duchess, ahead of their attendance at Westminster Abbey’s Commonwealth Service, where some would bear the flags of their countries. The students are all studying masters or Ph.D.'s in the U.K. after receiving scholarships from the ACU’s three programs—Commonwealth Scholars, Chevening Scholars, and the ACU Blue Charter Fellow. “That’s what so powerful,” says Meghan, a long-time champion of the importance of universal access to higher education. “This incredible union and the ability to gain so much knowledge and to be able to take that back home.”
> 
> Chatting with the scholars, the duchess is eager to hear more about how their studies will contribute to tackling the many challenges our world faces today. As she talks with the students, it becomes clear that she’s already done her research on why each guest was invited. *It’s inspiring to seeing someone so prepared for these types of engagements, as opposed to just showing up for the photographs. But Meghan doesn’t know any other way of doing it. “I think it’s so important to actually engage with people,” she explains. “I care about these things!”*
> 
> The ACU has seen over 90,000 scholars come through their administered programs, and those invited to Monday’s meeting represent 11 Commonwealth countries in total. Halima Ali, a lawyer from Kenya who is currently studying for her masters in energy and natural resources law at London’s Queen Mary University, says Meghan’s role as patron is hugely important. “For Commonwealth and also African countries,” she says, “to see her, her interest, her participation, means a lot to us.”
> 
> Meghan seems particularly impressed as she chats with Archana Kaliyaraj Selva Kumar, a chemistry student at Oxford University, who has devoted much of her time to using her research to create a new sustainable energy-storing battery that can help communities back in India without wired power. She is also an advocate for helping more women get into science. “What an incredible role model you are,” Meghan tells her. “And seeing is believing. Others see you and ... seeing someone in that space is so inspiring.”
> 
> During a conversation with a female Ph.D. student from Kenya, Meghan’s eyes light up when the subject of sustainable travel comes up. “That’s something my husband is incredibly passionate about,” she tells the Sheffield Hallam University student. “During our travels to Botswana and different parts of Africa, we’ve seen the link between tourism and how much money is going outside of the country instead of back to communities. There has to be a symbiotic relationship.” *For her own travels with Harry, Meghan prefers to move around in a way that allows them to integrate with the locals. “When we go to Botswana, we grab a backpack and pitch a tent!” Meghan laughs. “It’s not much, but that’s how we like it!”*
> 
> Standing at the side of the room, I spot Secretary General of the ACU Joanna Newman looking on proudly. She came to know the duchess well from their numerous ACU engagements and meetings together, and is excited about their relationship continuing long into the future.
> 
> “She has been a fantastic amplifier of ACU messages to much broader audiences for us,” she tells me, adding that her patronage has given the ACU coverage in places they could have never reached before, including _Harper's BAZAAR_. She calls Meghan a powerful spokesperson, recalling how she started public conversations about the lack of Black professors and even period poverty. “The headlines haven’t been about what our patron is wearing or the official engagement started at this time and ended at that time and there was a cup of tea in the middle, it’s about why we are doing what we do and why ACU exists. She’s been a real champion of the work that universities do.”
> 
> The ACU meeting came at the end of what Sussex aides have nicknamed a “farewell tour” for Harry and Meghan—a chance to tie up loose ends at the palace while taking on a slew of final royal engagements. The itinerary has been packed, starting when I joined the Duke of Sussex in Edinburgh, Scotland, on February 26 as his sustainable travel initiative, Travalyst, entered its next development phase. The ambitious project will be a key component of the Sussexes’ philanthropic portfolio, and it’s become extremely clear just how important the cause is to Harry, who regularly takes part in meetings behind the scenes. Chatting with him one-on-one recently, I was struck by how knowledgeable he has become in this field; his many trips to Botswana inspired the beginnings of the initiative more than a year ago. As one of the attendees at the Edinburgh work summit whispered to me after his speech, “He’s about to change the game for good.”
> 
> Reuniting after five days apart, Harry and Meghan’s showstopping arrival at the Endeavour Fund Awards served as a reminder of their ability to command the world’s attention. “Nothing to see here, just Meghan Markle showing the **** out during her final round of royal duties,” wrote a Twitter user, as the pictures of the couple beaming under their umbrella went viral around the world. Inside the ceremony, the focus was firmly on the veterans being honored, all speaking highly of the duke, or Captain Wales, as he’s better known in the veteran community. It’s that mission to support servicemen and servicewomen that has seen Harry pledge to continue to support the community in his new non-working royal life, not just in the United Kingdom but in North America too. The first task? Bringing the work of the Endeavour Fund and Invictus Games, both of which he helped establish, closer together. Harry’s lifelong commitment is why Saturday’sMountbatten Festival of Music was a particularly difficult moment, wearing his Captain General of the Royal Marines uniform for the last time. Giving up his royal duties has resulted in his military honors coming to an end—a particularly tough pill to swallow and something that has been just as difficult for his wife to witness. It is, a source close to the couple tells me, a wound that will take time to heal for Harry.
> 
> Meghan’s surprise appearance at an East London school for International Women’s Day and more traditional royal engagements such as Harry opening an immersive British motorsport museum alongside Lewis Hamilton (“There's nothing better than officially opening a building that is very much open,” the duke joked about the Silverstone Experience, which first opened its doors in October 2019) rounded out what has been a roller coaster of a farewell visit for the Sussexes. Getting on with the work has always been what it’s been about for Harry and Meghan, but behind the smiles of the photos has been a vulnerable couple who are still very much hurting.
> 
> *Back at Buckingham Palace, the ACU students now en route to Westminster Abbey and Harry quietly slipping through the door to say hello, the reality—and the emotions—finally set in as I give Meghan a goodbye hug. She’s flying back to Canada on the last commercial flight of the day, eager to be back in Vancouver Island by the morning before Archie wakes up. For a couple who only ever wanted to focus on their work and bring good to the world, it seems like an unnecessarily cruel ending to their royal lives. Forced to give up roles they’re incredibly proud of after sacrificing so much to get there.*
> 
> *At this point, the 1844 Room is almost empty and tears that the duchess had been bravely holding back are free to flow among familiar faces. As she embraces some of the loyal staff she will most likely not see again, I can’t help but feel sad for the dedicated team members whose tireless efforts—to promote the couple’s work, launch landmark projects, and deal with the near-daily crises brought on by tabloid lies—have come to an abrupt end. Compared to other royal households, it was a smaller operation, with less resources than the more sophisticated offices at Clarence House and Kensington Palace, but in the short space of a year since setting up, Team Sussex had become like a family, looking out for the couple as much as they could. *
> 
> *While the weeks and months ahead will no doubt present new challenges for the Sussexes, the couple genuinely feel a sense of excitement about what’s to come, which includes the freedom to work at a pace that suits them, no longer weighed down by protocol or threatened by toxic agendas. And while much has been (incorrectly) speculated about specific commercial endeavors they might be taking on, both Harry and Meghan are eager to get stuck into their work, which will still revolve around their humanitarian efforts and helping amplify the voices of young people around the world on a wide gamut of issues.
> 
> “The terrain may be a little different but their priorities are exactly the same as before,” a well-placed source tells me. “Keeping the family, most importantly Archie, safe is what will make all of this worth it.”*
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a31405025/meghan-markle-transition-out-of-royal-life/





I can't roll my eyes enough at this bull*s**t.
I'm guessing this is the type of vomit-inducing nonsene they wanted written about them all the time. They are completely delusional.


----------



## imgg

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This hatred for Kate baffles me. MM really is a sick person. The Blind Item sounds awfully like what I always thought...but what really threw me off were the videos posted from MM staring at Kate in such a hateful way it gave me goosebumps. I used to find MM annoying, but at this point I feel something is seriously off with this woman.


My couch diagnosis is Meghan has borderline personality and narcissistic traits.  The worst combination for personality disorder.


----------



## bag-mania

All I can say is Harry and Meghan better pay Omid Scobie very well for being a one-man cheerleading squad for them. Nobody else gushes and waxes poetic over them like that guy.

His comment here makes me wonder though. Who do Meghan and Harry actually trust? They have cut off almost all relatives on both sides and their only pretense of friendships are fellow celebrities. Do they trust anyone?
_Royal expert Omid Scobie said the Duke, 35, and Duchess Sussex, 38, would focus on being with people 'they trust and like to be around' after stepping down as senior royals._

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...picking-places-feel-safe-heard-respected.html


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> All I can say is Harry and Meghan better pay Omid Scobie very well for being a one-man cheerleading squad for them. Nobody else gushes and waxes poetic over them like that guy.
> 
> His comment here makes me wonder though. Who do Meghan and Harry actually trust? They have cut off almost all relatives on both sides and their only pretense of friendships are fellow celebrities. Do they trust anyone?
> _Royal expert Omid Scobie said the Duke, 35, and Duchess Sussex, 38, would focus on being with people 'they trust and like to be around' after stepping down as senior royals._
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...picking-places-feel-safe-heard-respected.html



That’s obvious: Faux Greta....


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> That’s obvious: Faux Greta....



 She will always be there for them!


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> That’s obvious: Faux Greta....


and her stylist friend, whatever her name is - who apparently has the same nose and leaks info for her - jessica something?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and her stylist friend, whatever her name is - who apparently has the same nose and leaks info for her - jessica something?



Jessica Mulroney, the woman Archie might mistakenly call mommy one day if you believe all the gossip about her taking care of him so much.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan needs to woman up and stop  the clap back every time she does not get her way. What an odious woman.


----------



## PewPew

justwatchin said:


> What is he talking about when he said "left to fend for themselves" during her pregnancy?



Who knows what happened behind the scenes, but the “fend for themselves” sounds childish given what the public saw. They “announced” their pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding by M’s craddling her nonexistent bump throughout the day, which understandably may have upset some family. (Oh dear, were hugs witheld that day?)

They got a ton of support in the form of additional staff after they split their offices from William. They still had lots of people to write their speeches and take care of the mundane. They got additional renovations to Frogmore. They had a seemingly unlimited travel & wardrobe budget with lots of public statements of “well-deserved” vacations interspersed with public appearances, with M wearing things like a $100,000 pregnancy caftan worn for 2 hrs.

Harry & Meghan will never have to “fend for themselves” in a traditional sense, but he’s in for a rude awakening when he realizes just how coddled he was by the BRF.


----------



## lalame

Yeah, what a joke to say you had to "fend for yourselves" - with all the hired help money can buy, family members begging you to talk to them on one side and a horde of family in the immediate vicinity on the other side, not to mention all the celebrities coming out with sympathy for you. What more emotional, financial, or any other support can one get.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> Who knows what happened behind the scenes, but the “fend for themselves” sounds childish given what the public saw. They “announced” their pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding by M’s craddling her nonexistent bump throughout the day, which understandably may have upset some family. (Oh dear, were hugs witheld that day?)
> 
> They got a ton of support in the form of additional staff after they split their offices from William. They still had lots of people to write their speeches and take care of the mundane. They got additional renovations to Frogmore. They had a seemingly unlimited travel & wardrobe budget with lots of public statements of “well-deserved” vacations interspersed with public appearances, with M wearing things like a $100,000 pregnancy caftan worn for 2 hrs.
> 
> Harry & Meghan will never have to “fend for themselves” in a traditional sense, but he’s in for a rude awakening when he realizes just how coddled he was by the BRF.


I guess Harry may have had a small sample of "real life" when he served in the military.....not that he had to worry about money but I expect he had to do real work and be part of a team.  Other than that he has no idea.


----------



## zinacef

Meghan gonna have to put on her cooking and cleaning outfit.  I don’t think Harry has ever made a sandwich for himself or even put his dirty clothes up into the hamper.  There will be some home ec class to attend  for him.  Meghan knows how to do this stuff plus they don’t trust anybody to be around the privacy of their home so there’s gonna be nobody.  It will be super hard , I say, household work is fultime plus you have to do daily yoga, make baby foods, Pilates class, but at least they don’t actually have to have an actual job just maybe a monthly allowance. Just can imagine having an actual royal born husband who has no clue about how simple household stuff work like the kitchen aid or the vitamix or the wash/dry.  Do you just go on or lose your s@#$& sometimes or maybe you just have to cry yourself to sleep like a Hallmark tv show.


----------



## Lodpah

zinacef said:


> Meghan gonna have to put on her cooking and cleaning outfit.  I don’t think Harry has ever made a sandwich for himself or even put his dirty clothes up into the hamper.  There will be some home ec class to attend  for him.  Meghan knows how to do this stuff plus they don’t trust anybody to be around the privacy of their home so there’s gonna be nobody.  It will be super hard , I say, household work is fultime plus you have to do daily yoga, make baby foods, Pilates class, but at least they don’t actually have to have an actual job just maybe a monthly allowance. Just can imagine having an actual royal born husband who has no clue about how simple household stuff work like the kitchen aid or the vitamix or the wash/dry.  Do you just go on or lose your s@#$& sometimes or maybe you just have to cry yourself to sleep like a Hallmark tv show.


The Crown don’t play. What happened to his uncle Harry should have taken notes.


----------



## Coconuts40

chicinthecity777 said:


> The truth is those 2 are not anything if they are not royals. *Harry has achieved nothing much in life. Never needed to earn a penny in his life. Has no specific talent (unless you count drinking and partying as talents) and has a charm of a potato! *She was a minor actress on a mild successful TV show which was not watched by many, especially here in the UK. I have to admit that I don't know what she has achieved as a "humanitarian". But I don't get the feeling that she's doing much of that lately. What's her credentials? She's pretty but not amazingly beautiful. There are many many women are a lot more beautiful and more charismatic than her.
> 
> So without being royals, what exactly would they be selling that they think people are going to buy??? What is their USP? Please enlighten me! I must be missing something ...



Wow you are a tough critic, those are harsh statements.  After all he was an Apache pilot commander and fought in the Army and found the Invictus Games.  But I guess to some that isn't a big achievement


----------



## Vintage Leather

I just want to take over as TeamSparkle's publicist. 

I could totally spin this in a way where they look sympathetic.  All they need to do is follow two simple rules, and talk about their causes rather than their feelings for 6 months.  Publicize the heck out of their "causes."  No speeches. You aren't good at them. Just don't.  If you need to be the center of attention, make a documentary.  Post-production will make you sound much more rational.

Rule 1: 
If you are tempted to use the word "I"? 
Don't.  

Rule 2:
If anyone asks you about your family?
SAY NOTHING!! If you have to say anything: You adore granny, you respect your father, you love your brother.  That's it.

After six months of them working without drawing attention to their lavish expenses and reading about their demands, then I'll be ready to watch a "24 years since my mother died, and my life's been tough and I love my Mama and people are as mean to Meggie as they were to her" interview. Until then, you just come across as a spoiled brat. 
In 2021, Megan can be a Disney princess, and you can be your family's and the press's darling again.  Give people time to heal. These articles are like picking at an open wound.


All they need to do is shut their fool mouth.  But god forbid we go 6 months without a "Meanies! Everyone's Meanies!" article.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

I’m actually re-watching The Crown and there is this poignant scene where the abdicated Duke of Windsor was playing the bagpipe in the garden in tears on the day of QE2 coronation. If it actually happened, looks like he has some regrets or crying for the past life where he was of importance and had a lot of money.  I doubt Harry really know the back and side story of the Wallis Simpson affair and marriage.  In the end, when the reality of us against the world  theme they so lovingly choose now  settles in —- there will be a lot of so what do we do now. Back to the drawing board.  There will be no more ceremonies, no fancy gowns or matching stuff.  All that Meghan wanted to be and they’re all gone.  But both can live on love, right? On a budget.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I guess Harry may have had a small sample of "real life" when he served in the military.....not that he had to worry about money but I expect he had to do real work and be part of a team.  Other than that he has no idea.


From what I understand, while he likes to think that he was "out there in the open", uh .. no, not so much.  They kept pretty close tabs on his whereabouts and apparently, there were a few times where he had more preferential treatment than most.  However, since he did 'mix' in with the men, they liked him for that.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney, the woman Archie might mistakenly call mommy one day if you believe all the gossip about her taking care of him so much.


I really wonder how much Jessica will be "friends" with her; let's face it, Jessica is trying to build up a business of her own and that usually takes A LOT of time.  She isn't really going to have time to deal with "Harpy Harry" and "malodorous Meghan" carrying on about their woe-is-me life!!!  We've all probably had someone like that in our life, and that can get VERY tiresome ..


----------



## Mrs.Z

CeeJay said:


> I really wonder how much Jessica will be "friends" with her; let's face it, Jessica is trying to build up a business of her own and that usually takes A LOT of time.  She isn't really going to have time to deal with "Harpy Harry" and "malodorous Meghan" carrying on about their woe-is-me life!!!  We've all probably had someone like that in our life, and that can get VERY tiresome ..


Exactly, Jessica is hustling, she is NOT babysitting Archie


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I really wonder how much Jessica will be "friends" with her; let's face it, Jessica is trying to build up a business of her own and that usually takes A LOT of time.  She isn't really going to have time to deal with "Harpy Harry" and "malodorous Meghan" carrying on about their woe-is-me life!!!  We've all probably had someone like that in our life, and that can get VERY tiresome ..



I’m sure Jessica must’ve felt that knowing them would be beneficial to her. She may come to the conclusion that it is more trouble than it’s worth.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Coconuts40 said:


> Wow you are a tough critic, those are harsh statements.  After all he was an Apache pilot commander and fought in the Army and found the Invictus Games.  But I guess to some that isn't a big achievement


All because he was a royal! You think he could have founded the Invictus Games if he wasn't a prince? **snot**

And many many people in the army have achieved a lot more than him!


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## scarlet555

imgg said:


> My *couch* diagnosis is Meghan has borderline personality and narcissistic traits.  The worst combination for personality disorder.



With the corona virus news, I read it as COUGH diagnosis... lol
She has to be a bit of a sociopath too with her lack of conscience, literally pushing her husband out of the way...any chance she gets.


----------



## imgg

scarlet555 said:


> With the corona virus news, I read it as COUGH diagnosis... lol
> She has to be a bit of a sociopath too with her lack of conscience, literally pushing her husband out of the way...any chance she gets.


Great call! You’re absolutely right, she totally has a lack of conscience.


----------



## bellecate

Just saw this headline " U.K. Abandons Effort to Contain Virus as 10,000 May Be Infected " don't know how accurate it is but if true, Britain could you please hang on to Harry . Don't want him bringing it back to my small community. The Firm could use this time well and get the poor lad some much needed help.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 4689185


I love Gary Janetti!


----------



## mdcx

jehaga said:


> https://blindgossip.com/the-popularity-contest/


Maybe I’m extra emotional bc of all the Coronavirus business, but this just about made me cry for Kate. Imagine someone targeting you like this...


----------



## bellecate

*For her own travels with Harry, Meghan prefers to move around in a way that allows them to integrate with the locals. “When we go to Botswana, we grab a backpack and pitch a tent!” Meghan laughs. “It’s not much, but that’s how we like it!”*
Does she seriously think people believe this tripe and aren't picturing the caravan of help that are doing absolutely everything for them.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney, the woman Archie might mistakenly call mommy one day if you believe all the gossip about her taking care of him so much.


I really can't see that she has been taking care of him as her new TV show starts almost immediately.


----------



## mdcx

bellecate said:


> *For her own travels with Harry, Meghan prefers to move around in a way that allows them to integrate with the locals. “When we go to Botswana, we grab a backpack and pitch a tent!” Meghan laughs. “It’s not much, but that’s how we like it!”*
> Does she seriously think people believe this tripe and aren't picturing the caravan of help that are doing absolutely everything for them.


Total b*llocks! Is she a compulsive liar or what?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I really can't see that she has been taking care of him as her new TV show starts almost immediately.



True. They like to say that Archie is  staying with a friend when they travel. Since Jessica is the closest thing to a friend that Meghan has it usually falls on her as the likely suspect. If they were truthful and said they left him with nannies they would get more criticism.


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> I hate it as well. I'm convinced it's a cursed ring - I'm glad Harry gave it to William.
> 
> View attachment 4688513



yeah, well we part ways on that.


----------



## Coconuts40

chicinthecity777 said:


> All because he was a royal! You think he could have founded the Invictus Games if he wasn't a prince? **snot**
> 
> And many many people in the army have achieved a lot more than him!


 
Just because others have achieved more than him doesn't mean he hasn't achieved anything at all.  That isn't a good argument.  He had a platform and utilized it.  But to say he hasn't done anything as a royal isn't necessarily true.


----------



## tiktok

bellecate said:


> *For her own travels with Harry, Meghan prefers to move around in a way that allows them to integrate with the locals. “When we go to Botswana, we grab a backpack and pitch a tent!” Meghan laughs. “It’s not much, but that’s how we like it!”*
> Does she seriously think people believe this tripe and aren't picturing the caravan of help that are doing absolutely everything for them.



They like to rough it:


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> True. They like to say that Archie is  staying with a friend when they travel. Since Jessica is the closest thing to a friend that Meghan has it usually falls on her as the likely suspect. If they were truthful and said they left him with nannies they would get more criticism.



Yep, Jessica runs a business, travels for work & lives on the other coast of Canada (and has nannies for her kids). She’s not babysitting Archie, nor is Doria stopping her life to babysit in Canada, when she’s used to seeing her own daughter once a year.


----------



## lalame

I get the impression Meghan's idea of "roughing it" = what I'd need a groupon to buy.  

Also "It's not much! But it's how we like it" - like the $17k/DAY mansion in Malibu?


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> When exactly, is he supposed to go back? .. right now??  Just thinking (_too many Bond movies_) .. if they want to "re-program" Harry, now might be the perfect time to do it.  Obviously, the whole situation with losing the Military patronages seemed to affect him.  I wonder what trained psychiatrists would think about him, Meghan and his situation???


I’m surprised Meghan left him alone.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Coconuts40 said:


> Wow you are a tough critic, those are harsh statements.  After all he was an Apache pilot commander and fought in the Army and found the Invictus Games.  But I guess to some that isn't a big achievement


True!  He was a pilot, and he did do his duty and serve in a war zone.  The consensus was that he was never in any substantial danger, but I assume that’s relative in an actual war zone (inherently dangerous place, so credit where it is due).  As for the Invictus Games, true again!  Harry saw the Warrior Games in the US (established a few years before Invictus), and brightly said, “We need to do pretty much that exact same thing for the UK’s armed forces,” and got it done.  His achievements and importance are often exaggerated, but sure, let’s not minimize them, either.  They’re a good indication of how much value he could have brought to his family and his country if he had decided to take another path.


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> They like to rough it:
> 
> View attachment 4689212


HA!! .. and uh, a dear friend of mine back East knew of this "tourist Africa" business quite well as his brother was/is in that "luxury" business.  When I told him that I really wanted to go to South Africa, he showed me pictures and all the brochures, and I remember my reaction was "WHAT?? .. boy, that's a lot nicer than the tents I used to put up in my backyard in the summer"!!!  I seriously doubt that Meghan has EVER pitched a tent!!!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA!! .. and uh, a dear friend of mine back East knew of this "tourist Africa" business quite well as his brother was/is in that "luxury" business.  When I told him that I really wanted to go to South Africa, he showed me pictures and all the brochures, and I remember my reaction was "WHAT?? .. boy, that's a lot nicer than the tents I used to put up in my backyard in the summer"!!!  I seriously doubt that Meghan has EVER pitched a tent!!!


More likely that she pitched a fit that the tent wasn't good enough.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Illness has befallen the members of my little household in quick succession (regular, run-of-the-mill illness, not the more alarming illness in the news these days), first afflicting my husband, then my preschooler, then me.  We’ve also been packing and preparing to move into our new home whilst also painting and making repairs to the old home in order to ready it for the real estate market.  (GREAT TIMING, no?)  We had to ditch plans for a Disney Cruise to celebrate my little noodle’s upcoming birthday, and on the possible chopping block is our ten-year-anniversary trip and vow renewal in Italy.  I shuffled into the office this morning and was immediately greeted by emergency meetings regarding the viral outbreak that has now reached my state, and to social distancing mandates.  I work in the financial services sector, and calls from anxious clients kept everyone busy.  SO … it’s actually a rather delightful respite to peruse photos of The People’s Duchess in her green half-cape costume (If Poison Ivy Were an Episcopalian) and beret-like hat that made her look like a literal comic book supervillain.  All that was missing was a mustache for her to twirl.  And seeing so many self-serving PR leaks from “friends” appearing in the press at a time when literally no one in their right mind gives a fermented fig about these entitled grifters and their arrogant, impressively out-of-touch quest to reduce their own relevance … well, it proves these two are a gift that keeps on giving, even through political and public health crises.  Indeed, like a dove the Markles emerge from the cloud of mass hysteria to preen in their uselessness.  To be honest, though, I did, in earnest, appreciate the Gabriela Hearst handbag.  (Back in the day when Megster was just an OMG So Famous, A-list basic cable thespian of the highest caliber, and I thought she was just a fellow Latina – I WAS WRONG about that, btw – who was weirdly dating a casual racist from England, I was more aware of her handbag collection than her IMDb page).  Long may she live in her insular, weirdly self-obsessed formerly-royal splendor.  As the global markets melt I hope we’re treated to more breathless speculation by “sources’ (who are totally not named Meghan Markle) about the hundreds of millions of dollars HRH Forever In Her Own Mind and Just Call Him Harry are going to make by talking about his dead Mom.  Keep calm and carry on.

On another note, this observation I read recently (can’t remember the source, unfortunately, but it is not a line of my own creation) made me chuckle:  “Today, the monarchy's most important role is to be a highly visible incarnation of ancient inequalities.”  Indeed.  So the clutching-with-bloody-fingernails determination with which America’s Woke Duchess tries to hold onto her title and “royal” stature is absolutely, positively consistent with her professed values, right?  (Not enough eyerolls in the world, my friends.)

So, anyway, yeah.  Glad to check in and see you’re all just as clever and biting as I remember.


----------



## threadbender

scarlet555 said:


> With the corona virus news, I read it as COUGH diagnosis... lol
> She has to be a bit of a sociopath too with her lack of conscience, literally pushing her husband out of the way...any chance she gets.


Hoping that doesn't end up as a Snapped episode.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Harry changes his phone number ...  
*Prince Harry forced to change phone number and email address after hoaxers' 'wake-up call' prank*
*The Telegraph 12 March 2020
*
The Duke of Sussex has had to change his personal email address and phone number after inadvertently giving them to pranksters. Prince Harry was advised to take heightened security measures after falling victim to a hoax by Russian YouTuberswho pretended to be Greta Thunberg and prompted him to discuss issues including the difficulties surrounding his decision to leave the Royal family and his opinion of Donald ***** in two phone calls.

He was also duped into sympathising with the plight of the fictional island of Chunga-Changa and offering to help rescue imaginary penguins from land-locked Belarus.

Buckingham Palace aides have said they hope the humiliating prank acts as a timely "wake-up call" and a "salutary reminder" of the potential dangers lying in wait in his new life abroad.

*The hoaxers, Vladimir Kuznetsov and Alexei Stolyarov, succeeded in contacting the Duke after emailing an intermediary who appeared to have forwarded the message without any checks. *

*Under the heading "Call or meeting with Greta Thunberg", the message purported to be from Ms Thunberg's director and was set up in the name of Ueli Maurer, then President of the Swiss Confederation.*

*To the astonishment of the Russian duo, the Duke made contact, via his personal email address, in December from the property he is renting with Meghan Markle on Vancouver Island. He later called them from his mobile without withholding his number.*

*Mr Stolyarov told The Sun: "We were shocked when he emailed us. No one ever checked us out to see who we really were."*


----------



## Grande Latte

The real world is a very different place.


----------



## byzina

Straight-Laced said:


> Harry changes his phone number ...
> *Prince Harry forced to change phone number and email address after hoaxers' 'wake-up call' prank*
> *The Telegraph 12 March 2020
> *
> The Duke of Sussex has had to change his personal email address and phone number after inadvertently giving them to pranksters. Prince Harry was advised to take heightened security measures after falling victim to a hoax by Russian YouTuberswho pretended to be Greta Thunberg and prompted him to discuss issues including the difficulties surrounding his decision to leave the Royal family and his opinion of Donald ***** in two phone calls.
> 
> He was also duped into sympathising with the plight of the fictional island of Chunga-Changa and offering to help rescue imaginary penguins from land-locked Belarus.
> 
> Buckingham Palace aides have said they hope the humiliating prank acts as a timely "wake-up call" and a "salutary reminder" of the potential dangers lying in wait in his new life abroad.
> 
> *The hoaxers, Vladimir Kuznetsov and Alexei Stolyarov, succeeded in contacting the Duke after emailing an intermediary who appeared to have forwarded the message without any checks. *
> 
> *Under the heading "Call or meeting with Greta Thunberg", the message purported to be from Ms Thunberg's director and was set up in the name of Ueli Maurer, then President of the Swiss Confederation.*
> 
> *To the astonishment of the Russian duo, the Duke made contact, via his personal email address, in December from the property he is renting with Meghan Markle on Vancouver Island. He later called them from his mobile without withholding his number.*
> 
> *Mr Stolyarov told The Sun: "We were shocked when he emailed us. No one ever checked us out to see who we really were."*



I don't approve of hoaxes but Harry must be living in a royal bubble where the world is polite, friendly and full of private jets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

Grande Latte said:


> The real world is a very different place.





byzina said:


> I don't approve of hoaxes but Harry must be living in a royal bubble where the world is polite, friendly and full of private jets.





byzina said:


> I don't approve of hoaxes but Harry must be living in a royal bubble where the world is polite, friendly and full of private jets.


ITA, hoaxing is very nasty.  But it's out there in the real world and Harry is - or was - a prime target. 
I bet he's steaming mad about it.  Makes him look foolish and he's extremely sensitive to that.


----------



## Jktgal

Thanks all who copied verbatim The Telegraph articles - which are behind a paywall. Not surprised that the prank call turns out real. That may explain the RF glum faces. I hope we get to hear the live recording soon. All hail the King and Queen of Chunga-Changa (looks like a nice kingdom befitting of the royal highnesses).
https://www.agoda.com/villa-chunga-changa-kuta/hotel/bali-id.html


----------



## PewPew

It’s a pity that H&M don’t follow world news (Meghan was too busy to know about coronavirus & Harry finds current events too depressing). Because they might find comfort from the world pandemic and instability coverage, since it means few people will ultimately remember Harry’s hoax interview, Meg dragging Harry around events & their tone deaf statements.

They really could be golden in the future— IF they can just pretend to have some humility, empathy, & tact.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> Total b*llocks! Is she a compulsive liar or what?


Seeing how often she's been caught actually lying - my fave still being Obamagate where Michelle put out a statement declining Meghan's claims - I'll go with yes.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Coconuts40 said:


> Just because others have achieved more than him doesn't mean he hasn't achieved anything at all.  That isn't a good argument.  He had a platform and utilized it.  But to say he hasn't done anything as a royal isn't necessarily true.


I said he wouldn't be anything if he wasn't a royal! Total difference thing! That's the whole point of my original post!  thank you for prove my post was right! He wouldn't be anything if he wasn't a prince. And doing a job which was pretty much handed it to you is not an achievement in my book! 
Off you go on my ignore list!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Just love the "ignore" feature here!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> Illness has befallen the members of my little household in quick succession (regular, run-of-the-mill illness, not the more alarming illness in the news these days), first afflicting my husband, then my preschooler, then me.  We’ve also been packing and preparing to move into our new home whilst also painting and making repairs to the old home in order to ready it for the real estate market.  (GREAT TIMING, no?)  We had to ditch plans for a Disney Cruise to celebrate my little noodle’s upcoming birthday, and on the possible chopping block is our ten-year-anniversary trip and vow renewal in Italy.  I shuffled into the office this morning and was immediately greeted by emergency meetings regarding the viral outbreak that has now reached my state, and to social distancing mandates.  I work in the financial services sector, and calls from anxious clients kept everyone busy.  SO … it’s actually a rather delightful respite to peruse photos of The People’s Duchess in her green half-cape costume (If Poison Ivy Were an Episcopalian) and beret-like hat that made her look like a literal comic book supervillain.  All that was missing was a mustache for her to twirl.  And seeing so many self-serving PR leaks from “friends” appearing in the press at a time when literally no one in their right mind gives a fermented fig about these entitled grifters and their arrogant, impressively out-of-touch quest to reduce their own relevance … well, it proves these two are a gift that keeps on giving, even through political and public health crises.  Indeed, like a dove the Markles emerge from the cloud of mass hysteria to preen in their uselessness.  To be honest, though, I did, in earnest, appreciate the Gabriela Hearst handbag.  (Back in the day when Megster was just an OMG So Famous, A-list basic cable thespian of the highest caliber, and I thought she was just a fellow Latina – I WAS WRONG about that, btw – who was weirdly dating a casual racist from England, I was more aware of her handbag collection than her IMDb page).  Long may she live in her insular, weirdly self-obsessed formerly-royal splendor.  As the global markets melt I hope we’re treated to more breathless speculation by “sources’ (who are totally not named Meghan Markle) about the hundreds of millions of dollars HRH Forever In Her Own Mind and Just Call Him Harry are going to make by talking about his dead Mom.  Keep calm and carry on.
> 
> On another note, this observation I read recently (can’t remember the source, unfortunately, but it is not a line of my own creation) made me chuckle:  “Today, the monarchy's most important role is to be a highly visible incarnation of ancient inequalities.”  Indeed.  So the clutching-with-bloody-fingernails determination with which America’s Woke Duchess tries to hold onto her title and “royal” stature is absolutely, positively consistent with her professed values, right?  (Not enough eyerolls in the world, my friends.)
> 
> So, anyway, yeah.  Glad to check in and see you’re all just as clever and biting as I remember.



I missed your poignant posts! Also sorry to hear your plans might fall flat. My baby brother is currently held hostage by his university abroad, not the nicest feeling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Frederik and Mary of Denmark cut a family vacation short "to be with our people in this trying times". What a stark contrast.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan and Harry’s protection officers would probably like to back in the UK close to family, but instead...


----------



## Chagall

So is Harry still in the UK. You would think he would want to be with his son Archie at such a scary time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> So is Harry still in the UK. You would think he would want to be with his son Archie at such a scary time.


I have a feeling MM controls that relationship as well.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

lalame said:


> Yeah, what a joke to say you had to "fend for yourselves" - with all the hired help money can buy, family members begging you to talk to them on one side and a horde of family in the immediate vicinity on the other side, not to mention all the celebrities coming out with sympathy for you. What more emotional, financial, or any other support can one get.



Exactly. It's so me, me, me. Other people have young families, commitments and they moved out of the Kensington Palace bubble. Move away and you're literally distancing yourself, yourself.

Maybe someone didn't respond to a WhatsApp message once.


----------



## Chagall

Milosmum0307 said:


> Illness has befallen the members of my little household in quick succession (regular, run-of-the-mill illness, not the more alarming illness in the news these days), first afflicting my husband, then my preschooler, then me.  We’ve also been packing and preparing to move into our new home whilst also painting and making repairs to the old home in order to ready it for the real estate market.  (GREAT TIMING, no?)  We had to ditch plans for a Disney Cruise to celebrate my little noodle’s upcoming birthday, and on the possible chopping block is our ten-year-anniversary trip and vow renewal in Italy.  I shuffled into the office this morning and was immediately greeted by emergency meetings regarding the viral outbreak that has now reached my state, and to social distancing mandates.  I work in the financial services sector, and calls from anxious clients kept everyone busy.  SO … it’s actually a rather delightful respite to peruse photos of The People’s Duchess in her green half-cape costume (If Poison Ivy Were an Episcopalian) and beret-like hat that made her look like a literal comic book supervillain.  All that was missing was a mustache for her to twirl.  And seeing so many self-serving PR leaks from “friends” appearing in the press at a time when literally no one in their right mind gives a fermented fig about these entitled grifters and their arrogant, impressively out-of-touch quest to reduce their own relevance … well, it proves these two are a gift that keeps on giving, even through political and public health crises.  Indeed, like a dove the Markles emerge from the cloud of mass hysteria to preen in their uselessness.  To be honest, though, I did, in earnest, appreciate the Gabriela Hearst handbag.  (Back in the day when Megster was just an OMG So Famous, A-list basic cable thespian of the highest caliber, and I thought she was just a fellow Latina – I WAS WRONG about that, btw – who was weirdly dating a casual racist from England, I was more aware of her handbag collection than her IMDb page).  Long may she live in her insular, weirdly self-obsessed formerly-royal splendor.  As the global markets melt I hope we’re treated to more breathless speculation by “sources’ (who are totally not named Meghan Markle) about the hundreds of millions of dollars HRH Forever In Her Own Mind and Just Call Him Harry are going to make by talking about his dead Mom.  Keep calm and carry on.
> 
> On another note, this observation I read recently (can’t remember the source, unfortunately, but it is not a line of my own creation) made me chuckle:  “Today, the monarchy's most important role is to be a highly visible incarnation of ancient inequalities.”  Indeed.  So the clutching-with-bloody-fingernails determination with which America’s Woke Duchess tries to hold onto her title and “royal” stature is absolutely, positively consistent with her professed values, right?  (Not enough eyerolls in the world, my friends.)
> 
> So, anyway, yeah.  Glad to check in and see you’re all just as clever and biting as I remember.


You are such an incredible writer, I look forward to your posts. The financial sector is lucky to have you but I think you missed your calling.


----------



## Grande Latte

Harry's still in the UK? I think Harry might be secretly checking out of this marriage, but is just being a coward in the meantime. His capacity and tolerance for love isn't that strong. So he's just laying low until it's the right time to call it quits. Or she dumps him first.

But either way, if they start spending time away from each other more and more,....that says something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Grande Latte said:


> Harry's still in the UK? I think Harry might be secretly checking out of this marriage, but is just being a coward in the meantime. His capacity and tolerance for love isn't that strong. So he's just laying low until it's the right time to call it quits. Or she dumps him first.
> 
> But either way, if they start spending time away from each other more and more,....that says something.



One can only wish, and I don't say that to be spiteful but because clearly these two are not better together. Her ego has inflated to a point where I wonder how she can still walk upright under the weight of her own importance, and Harry is an unwell mess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Grande Latte said:


> Harry's still in the UK? I think Harry might be secretly checking out of this marriage, but is just being a coward in the meantime. His capacity and tolerance for love isn't that strong. So he's just laying low until it's the right time to call it quits. Or she dumps him first.
> 
> But either way, if they start spending time away from each other more and more,....that says something.


Maybe H is hoping that Canada closes their borders, then he “has” to stay in the UK rather than it being his choice. I can’t imagine he’s really in a hurry to hole back up with M in that isolated mansion after all this. Poor little Archie though.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Maybe H is hoping that Canada closes their borders, then he “has” to stay in the UK rather than it being his choice. I can’t imagine he’s really in a hurry to hole back up with M in that isolated mansion after all this. Poor little Archie though.


I was just thinking the same.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Grande Latte said:


> Harry's still in the UK? I think Harry might be secretly checking out of this marriage, but is just being a coward in the meantime. His capacity and tolerance for love isn't that strong. So he's just laying low until it's the right time to call it quits. Or she dumps him first.
> 
> But either way, if they start spending time away from each other more and more,....that says something.


I read an article today that said he’s going back to Canada after the London marathon - but that’s towards the end of April (assuming it goes ahead of course) - seems like a long time for the lovebirds to be apart??  Perhaps he’s worried about criticism of his frequent flying, who knows


----------



## Suncatcher

All of the news about Covid-19, including news about the global markets, has made news about Meghan trite and irrelevant (if it wasn’t already so). With a ban on public gatherings for the foreseeable future it also makes her ability to get in front of large, important audiences impossible. Very few will pay attention to her now with so much more to worry about.


----------



## doni

Trudeau’s wife has corona. It is a question of minutes before Canada starts taking measures...


----------



## Roxanna

Grande Latte said:


> Harry's still in the UK? I think Harry might be secretly checking out of this marriage, but is just being a coward in the meantime. His capacity and tolerance for love isn't that strong. So he's just laying low until it's the right time to call it quits. Or she dumps him first.
> 
> But either way, if they start spending time away from each other more and more,....that says something.


You nailed it. I feel so sorry for baby Archie though.


----------



## Goodfrtune

Aminamina said:


> *From The Telegraph. Amazingly cheesy article. I had to copy since you must sign in order to read it.*
> *Behind the scenes, I witnessed the profound sadness of Harry and Meghan's exit*
> 
> BRYONY GORDON
> There is half an hour before the woman who will shortly be known as Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, carries out her last
> private engagement as a working royal, and there is very clearly something in her in her eye.
> We are standing in a room at Buckingham Palace as she prepares to make her way to Westminster Abbey for the Commonwealth service and then onwards to Canada for her new life, and it is time to say goodbye. Tears glisten in those bright friendly eyes that have charmed and endeared so many during recent days. But behind the scenes the Duchess of Sussex is not as buoyant as she has appeared to be in public. In fact, she appears to be quietly devastated.
> 
> I had been invited along to the Palace to sit in on a meeting with young scholars from the Commonwealth, but now it is over she comes in for a hug that lasts a little longer than normal, a hold, really, before moving on for a final embrace with two of her staff, both of whom also have something in their eyes. Then she is gone – for how long, nobody knows.
> 
> Since Harry and Meghan announced their intention to step back from the royal family in early January, much has been written about ruptures, recriminations and rancour. The truth, as ever, is slightly less sensational than that. The pervading emotion on Monday, as I watched the Duchess carry out her final private engagement, seemed to be profound sadness. Sadness that it had come to this; sadness that they could not make it work and sadness that less than two years since that glittering fairy tale wedding, the first person of colour to join the British royal family was off. How ironic that her final engagement was to be a Commonwealth service that celebrated diversity, uniqueness, and the strength we draw from embracing each other and our differences.
> 
> I had been invited to Buckingham Palace to observe Meghan’s meeting with 23 young students and academics who had won scholarships from the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU), an organisation the Duchess will continue to be a patron of. These were some of the brightest minds from around the globe, whose work on climate change, health care, sustainability and technological innovation is leading the way in higher education. There were conversations about cancer care in Rwanda, climate research projects in India, and yes, how to prevent the spread of coronavirus throughout the globe (the decision to leave Archie behind in Canada came not out of petty spite, as reported in some areas, but out of concern for his health during the threat of a global pandemic).
> 
> 
> Each of the students was unequivocal in their admiration for the Duchess, who was genned up on all of their specialist subjects: this was a woman whose passion for the work she does had never, ever been in doubt, despite reports in some sections of the media that ‘Megxit’ is about a yearning for a glitzier, more Hollywood life. Halima Ali, a lawyer from Kenya who is researching energy and natural resources at Queen Mary University of London, echoed her peers when she said that “for Commonwealth and African countries, to see her, her interest, her participation means a lot to us.”
> 
> The plan that Harry and Meghan have always had has been quite simple, and far less contrived than some would have us believe. It is, say sources close to the couple, a story that needn’t ever have been more complicated than ‘two people fall in love, fly the flag, have a baby, and spend the rest of their lives doing charity work and representing the monarchy.’ But there is a feeling that they have been hung out to dry in the tabloid media. Those who are aware of what has gone on behind the scenes say that she took her role seriously, and was not just prepared but _proud_ to deliver whatever was asked of her.
> 
> 
> But on Monday another ending to the fairytale was in motion. Meghan caught a flight out of this country she had tried to adopt as her home, back to the Canada, the country she has temporarily adopted as her new one. Watching from the sidelines, her departure seemed bittersweet and tinged with huge sadness – not for herself, but for her husband, who at the Mountbatten Festival of Music on Saturday wore for perhaps the last time his bright red mess uniform and the two medals he earned for his tours of Afghanistan, in his final outing as Captain General of the Royal Marines.
> 
> I imagine it is this that has upset Meghan the most – the idea that her husband, in trying to protect the mental health of his wife, has had to sacrifice the thing he loves most outside his family. The loss of titles and other royal privileges will not, I think, bother the couple at all – they are sacrifices they will readily make for the happiness of their young family – but stepping back from Harry’s ceremonial military appointments has been difficult. His commitment to the military community remains unwavering.
> 
> I glimpsed Harry only briefly on Monday, as he swept his wife off for the final public engagement. While not tearful like Meghan, his face seemed etched with sadness. I know the couple only a little, but enough to see the very human toll of life as a modern day royal. How could they stand up and talk about the importance of focusing on mental health, while simultaneously ignoring their own? Their decision to step back as working members of the royal family may not be popular – and I am pretty sure it was not the outcome they had hoped for when they walked down the aisle of St George’s Chapel in Windsor on that bright May Day not even two years ago.
> 
> 
> But it is the right one for the mental health of their own little family, and as a final act of public duty, I cannot think of anything more poignant or perfect.


I think I threw up a little in my mouth.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Grande Latte said:


> Harry's still in the UK? I think Harry might be secretly checking out of this marriage, but is just being a coward in the meantime. His capacity and tolerance for love isn't that strong. So he's just laying low until it's the right time to call it quits. Or she dumps him first.
> 
> But either way, if they start spending time away from each other more and more,....that says something.


I don't think he's checking out - I think it's more like he's trying to secure his future. From what we see of his behavior and body language, I think that in Meghan he's found someone who will fully validate his self-centered feelings and he likes that. He knows though that he's got to play nice and behave within the family or he'll be cutoff to a point where he really will have to make it in the world on his own. I think he's terrified of that, so he'll go through the motions of respecing his grandmother and dad so he continues to have the cash rolling in.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I was just thinking the same.


There has to be more details to work out on THE DEAL, esp. financial and security - who pays what for how long ... the idea that they wont get free security has really gelled only  in the last month , then there is paying for Frogmore 
Maybe they did/did not stay there recently, I can see that they would have gone at least briefly to make sure the house is emptied out correctly, but they held a party for ex-employees at London Hotel not Frogmore - no servants left for the party and  the silverware has already gone lol 
It is remotely possible that THE DEAL has morphed a bit behind the scenes - there are two crises going on - we dont hear about the second ie Andrew, but he too has bills to pay, does he get free security anymore ? Lawyer bills ... 
But the Hand M mess is connected to the A mess - I am sure that H and M and A each say "but the other got blah-blah, why not me 
I CHOOSE to think that H will spend a bit of time with family - dad and brother, maybe playing polo or shooting grouse, I am probablyt silly


----------



## marietouchet

Another deep thought occurred ... with regards to comparing Megxit and the abdication ... 
Yes, H has money but has no idea of the cost of his jet set lifestyle - the money wont last at the current burn rate. 
But, Edward VIII AKA Duke of Windsor  (E8/DoW) had ***** cards that H lacks. 
As king, E8/DoW owned Balmoral and Sandringham out right. QE2 has inherited them via her father, George VI. 
Grorge VI purchased those properties from his brother after the abdication. Those properties paid for Wallis' substantial jewels 
So E8/DoW had a much bigger piggy bank than H and M combined


----------



## TC1

doni said:


> Trudeau’s wife has corona. It is a question of minutes before Canada starts taking measures...


We have cancelled a lot of things here. Some universities are doing only online clasees, all sporting events, some schools are closed..etc. I'm sure Harry would fly private back to Van and expect the rules to not apply. Even current suggestions are to self isolate for 14 days after returning home...so he'd probably prefer to stay where he's waited on hand and foot than come back here where he can't even make sandwich runs.


----------



## sdkitty

zinacef said:


> Meghan gonna have to put on her cooking and cleaning outfit.  I don’t think Harry has ever made a sandwich for himself or even put his dirty clothes up into the hamper.  There will be some home ec class to attend  for him.  Meghan knows how to do this stuff plus they don’t trust anybody to be around the privacy of their home so there’s gonna be nobody.  It will be super hard , I say, household work is fultime plus you have to do daily yoga, make baby foods, Pilates class, but at least they don’t actually have to have an actual job just maybe a monthly allowance. Just can imagine having an actual royal born husband who has no clue about how simple household stuff work like the kitchen aid or the vitamix or the wash/dry.  Do you just go on or lose your s@#$& sometimes or maybe you just have to cry yourself to sleep like a Hallmark tv show.


But he's very obedient and I'm sure willing to learn whatever she wants to teach him   Look at the way he steps back when she jumps in front of him.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 4689185


little george doesn't look too happy


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> I just want to take over as TeamSparkle's publicist.
> 
> I could totally spin this in a way where they look sympathetic.  All they need to do is follow two simple rules, and talk about their causes rather than their feelings for 6 months.  Publicize the heck out of their "causes."  No speeches. You aren't good at them. Just don't.  If you need to be the center of attention, make a documentary.  Post-production will make you sound much more rational.
> 
> Rule 1:
> If you are tempted to use the word "I"?
> Don't.
> 
> Rule 2:
> If anyone asks you about your family?
> SAY NOTHING!! If you have to say anything: You adore granny, you respect your father, you love your brother.  That's it.
> 
> After six months of them working without drawing attention to their lavish expenses and reading about their demands, then I'll be ready to watch a "24 years since my mother died, and my life's been tough and I love my Mama and people are as mean to Meggie as they were to her" interview. Until then, you just come across as a spoiled brat.
> In 2021, Megan can be a Disney princess, and you can be your family's and the press's darling again.  Give people time to heal. These articles are like picking at an open wound.
> 
> 
> All they need to do is shut their fool mouth.  But god forbid we go 6 months without a "Meanies! Everyone's Meanies!" article.


agree except I never want to hear them whine again....six months isn't enough.  Maybe I'd be willing to hear him complain that he made a mistake by not appreciating what he had (her too)


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> They like to rough it:
> 
> View attachment 4689212


is this a tent they used?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Harry changes his phone number ...
> *Prince Harry forced to change phone number and email address after hoaxers' 'wake-up call' prank*
> *The Telegraph 12 March 2020
> *
> The Duke of Sussex has had to change his personal email address and phone number after inadvertently giving them to pranksters. Prince Harry was advised to take heightened security measures after falling victim to a hoax by Russian YouTuberswho pretended to be Greta Thunberg and prompted him to discuss issues including the difficulties surrounding his decision to leave the Royal family and his opinion of Donald ***** in two phone calls.
> 
> He was also duped into sympathising with the plight of the fictional island of Chunga-Changa and offering to help rescue imaginary penguins from land-locked Belarus.
> 
> Buckingham Palace aides have said they hope the humiliating prank acts as a timely "wake-up call" and a "salutary reminder" of the potential dangers lying in wait in his new life abroad.
> 
> *The hoaxers, Vladimir Kuznetsov and Alexei Stolyarov, succeeded in contacting the Duke after emailing an intermediary who appeared to have forwarded the message without any checks. *
> 
> *Under the heading "Call or meeting with Greta Thunberg", the message purported to be from Ms Thunberg's director and was set up in the name of Ueli Maurer, then President of the Swiss Confederation.*
> 
> *To the astonishment of the Russian duo, the Duke made contact, via his personal email address, in December from the property he is renting with Meghan Markle on Vancouver Island. He later called them from his mobile without withholding his number.*
> 
> *Mr Stolyarov told The Sun: "We were shocked when he emailed us. No one ever checked us out to see who we really were."*


Litterally laughing out loud about the Chunga Chunga and the rescuing pengins.  Was he going to physically rescue them or just donate?


----------



## piperdog

sdkitty said:


> Litterally laughing out loud about the Chunga Chunga and the rescuing pengins.  Was he going to physically rescue them or just donate?


Perhaps he was going to send his guy in the North Pole to do it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Litterally laughing out loud about the Chunga Chunga and the rescuing pengins.  Was he going to physically rescue them or just donate?





piperdog said:


> Perhaps he was going to send his guy in the North Pole to do it.



I'm dating myself here but that prank call reminded me of an old Bugs Bunny cartoon. Bugs finds a lost baby penguin and risks life and limb to get it back to the South Pole, only to discover at the end that that particular penguin made his home in Hoboken, NJ.


----------



## Luvluxx098

PewPew said:


> Who knows what happened behind the scenes, but the “fend for themselves” sounds childish given what the public saw. They “announced” their pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding by M’s craddling her nonexistent bump throughout the day, which understandably may have upset some family. (Oh dear, were hugs witheld that day?)
> 
> They got a ton of support in the form of additional staff after they split their offices from William. They still had lots of people to write their speeches and take care of the mundane. They got additional renovations to Frogmore. They had a seemingly unlimited travel & wardrobe budget with lots of public statements of “well-deserved” vacations interspersed with public appearances, with M wearing things like a $100,000 pregnancy caftan worn for 2 hrs.
> 
> Harry & Meghan will never have to “fend for themselves” in a traditional sense, but he’s in for a rude awakening when he realizes just how coddled he was by the BRF.


How on earth can he say something like that. How delusional and self important. They had the best of everything- health care, flexible jobs, no worries about income, new homes and cars- family and friends- but they are still missing something. Seems like what they are missing is on the inside and no one can fill that empty space.


----------



## sdkitty

Luvluxx098 said:


> How on earth can he say something like that. How delusional and self important. They had the best of everything- health care, flexible jobs, no worries about income, new homes and cars- family and friends- but they are still missing something. Seems like what they are missing is on the inside and no one can fill that empty space.


really....she wants maybe to be as important as or more important than Kate?  but then would she want to be equal with the queen?  and he can't get over his mother's death?  It was very tragic.  but I don't see the problems M had with the media as the same thing.  Her issue was being criticized and people being racist.  Not being chased (I don't think).  and she probably doesn't have a drunk chauffer.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> little george doesn't look too happy


Funny although clearly photoshopped


----------



## threadbender

Can I please take Archie? He really needs someone who wants to spend time with him, take care of him, love on him. I could not care any less about M or H. But, that innocent little boy breaks my heart.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Funny although clearly photoshopped


oh, I was buying it


----------



## Luvluxx098

Milosmum0307 said:


> True!  He was a pilot, and he did do his duty and serve in a war zone.  The consensus was that he was never in any substantial danger, but I assume that’s relative in an actual war zone (inherently dangerous place, so credit where it is due).  As for the Invictus Games, true again!  Harry saw the Warrior Games in the US (established a few years before Invictus), and brightly said, “We need to do pretty much that exact same thing for the UK’s armed forces,” and got it done.  His achievements and importance are often exaggerated, but sure, let’s not minimize them, either.  They’re a good indication of how much value he could have brought to his family and his country if he had decided to take another path.


Yes, people with his privilege can effect a lot of good if they choose this path.


----------



## Aminamina

Goodfrtune said:


> I think I threw up a little in my mouth.


I know! Their PR is working over time. The Cosmopolitan, you should read this...Kate is to blame...HA
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...ry-loved-members-royal-family-church-service/


----------



## lulilu

US magazines are falling all over themselves to compliment and paint them as victims.  It's mind boggling and disgusting.


----------



## CeeJay

Meanwhile, the DM is reporting that Kate has now surpassed MM re: bigger fashion influencer!!!  Oh, that will piss off Meghan big-time .. let the fireworks begin!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...n-Markle-biggest-fashion-influencer-2020.html


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> US magazines are falling all over themselves to compliment and paint them as victims.  It's mind boggling and disgusting.


.. and hence the reason why I WILL NOT be purchasing ANY!!!


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> oh, I was buying it


It's a meme. That account posts royal family memes, they're hilarious.


----------



## lulilu

CeeJay said:


> .. and hence the reason why I WILL NOT be purchasing ANY!!!



I've already written to Elle about the fawning, bullsh*t articles they publish by Omid.  What a joke to suggest to its readers that he is a true reporter (despite some little thing that he knows them or something).  Outrageous and told them I will never buy Elle again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> I know! Their PR is working over time. The Cosmopolitan, you should read this...Kate is to blame...HA
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...ry-loved-members-royal-family-church-service/



The Queen is not "very much on their side", the Queen is doing damage control. I doubt someone as dutiful as she is has any sympathy for their spoiled shenanigans and disrespect.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> Maybe H is hoping that Canada closes their borders, then he “has” to stay in the UK rather than it being his choice. I can’t imagine he’s really in a hurry to hole back up with M in that isolated mansion after all this. Poor little Archie though.


So far the other way around.

I'm not in BC, I'm in Ontario, but I was listening to the news yesterday and TPTB stated they were asking anyone who is flying into BC to self isolate for 2 weeks upon arriving.


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> I've already written to Elle about the fawning, bullsh*t articles they publish by Omid.  What a joke to suggest to its readers that he is a true reporter (despite some little thing that he knows them or something).  Outrageous and told them I will never buy Elle again.


Same here, but also because they fired E Jean because of her lawsuit ..


----------



## kkfiregirl

threadbender said:


> Can I please take Archie? He really needs someone who wants to spend time with him, take care of him, love on him. I could not care any less about M or H. But, that innocent little boy breaks my heart.



I'm sure Archie is receiving good, loving care, even if not from his parents.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> really....she wants maybe to be as important as or more important than Kate?  but then would she want to be equal with the queen?  and he can't get over his mother's death?  It was very tragic.  but I don't see the problems M had with the media as the same thing.  Her issue was being criticized and people being racist.  Not being chased (I don't think).  and she probably doesn't have a drunk chauffer.



Unless you have personally experienced racism yourself, I wouldn't trivialize their claims of racism directed at M by the British tabloids.


----------



## ladysarah

marthastoo said:


> I don't really reply too much on this thread because it's like talking to a tight circle of personally offended women clutching torches and pitchforks tearing one person to pieces, who like to cite the comment section of the Daily Mail as a legitimate new source.  In other words, you're not likely to make one whit of difference and very likely will get blocked anyway for disagreeing with groupthink.
> 
> I will add something that I find disheartening that echoes what you said.  Ok, I get people (on this thread at least) really, really, really hate Meghan.  But some of the language used - she must have been starving herself, the *obsession with the "work" she got done which frankly, I don't see any evidence of all the fillers, veneers, nose job, botox, etc that some are seeing,* but whatever.  And even if she did - SO WHAT?  That's what Eva is talking about.  Women have to cattily tear down a woman for losing the baby weight (a.k.a. starving herself) or getting some botox.  Everyone gets botox, including Kate. lol  NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
> 
> The problem with spending time exclusively with people who agree with you is that you're shocked, shocked I say, when you discover the entire world is not lock step with you in your opinion.  Yes, many, many people still like Meghan and Harry.  Yes, they got and will continue to get cheers and standing ovations.  The  public is more than just this thread and the Mirror's comment section.


I can’t see those either. All I see is a beautiful woman with style and finesse. She stays fit by going to yoga.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> Unless you have personally experienced racism yourself, I wouldn't trivialize their claims of racism directed at M by the British tabloids.


I'm sure there was some racism directed towards her.  But I don't think that outweighs all the privilege she attained when she married H.  Surely growing up biracial and with a black mother, she was aware of the existence of racism.
  Please don't flame me.  I'm not a racist and I think you would see that if you could read the now deleted forum subforum here where the murder of trayvon martin was discussed.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure there was some racism directed towards her.  But I don't think that outweighs all the privilege she attained when she married H.  Surely growing up biracial and with a black mother, she was aware of the existence of racism.
> Please don't flame me.  I'm not a racist and I think you would see that if you could read the now deleted forum subforum here where the murder of trayvon martin was discussed.



I am not flaming you nor would I call you a racist - I don't know you personally! 

You are right that she is living a charmed and privileged life, but knowing about racism and having experienced it in the past doesn't make it any less hurtful when it happens.


----------



## DoraSilky

piperdog said:


> Perhaps he was going to send his guy in the North Pole to do it.


Anyone who knows about wildlife and conservation knows that penguins are not found in the northern hemisphere (or should be re-located to it). I hoped Harry knew enough to know that


----------



## lalame

ladysarah said:


> I can’t see those either. All I see is a beautiful woman with style and finesse. She stays fit by going to yoga.



None of those things is mutually exclusive.  Lots of beautiful women get veneers, nose jobs, etc. No judgment there... IDK if Meghan has though; I can never tell if someone has or hasn't, so I didn't comment on that.


----------



## lalame

I think Meghan definitely faced/faces some racism from the public, and we saw some of it in the press too, but that's not mutually exclusive with the person having bad (or good) conduct themselves. I think the US media at some point seized on the racism angle and got some good reaction from their audiences with that so now we must be sympathetic to everything she does or deals with. It went too far IMO.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I think Meghan definitely faced/faces some racism from the public, and we saw some of it in the press too, but that's not mutually exclusive with the person having bad (or good) conduct themselves. I think the US media at some point seized on the racism angle and got some good reaction from their audiences with that so now we must be sympathetic to everything she does or deals with. It went too far IMO.


No doubt that she has faced racism at some point, but personally .. I really don't care about the color of your skin, your gender, etc. - what I care about is sincerity and honesty!!!  Those are HUGE to me and given what I have heard (from my friends) and what has been going on?!?! .. she get's a big-ole' *F* from me.  I might be weird here, but to me, when someone is dishonest, doesn't give a care about others just about themselves,etc. - then they are NO LONGER attractive at all to me -- PERIOD!!


----------



## Tootsie17

CeeJay said:


> No doubt that she has faced racism at some point, but personally .. I really don't care about the color of your skin, your gender, etc. - what I care about is sincerity and honesty!!!  Those are HUGE to me and given what I have heard (from my friends) and what has been going on?!?! .. she get's a big-ole' *F* from me.  I might be weird here, but to me, when someone is dishonest, doesn't give a care about others just about themselves,etc. - then they are NO LONGER attractive at all to me -- PERIOD!!


Why did she have to lie about having lunch with Michelle *****?  Wouldn't she realize that untruth would be easy to fact check?


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> Why did she have to lie about having lunch with Michelle *****?  Wouldn't she realize that untruth would be easy to fact check?


.. and that's only ONE of her many lies to-date!  It gets to a point when you simply don't believe anything that comes out of one's mouth if they lie and then continually get caught!  Here's the thing, if she truly wants to be in the "public eye", she better be prepared for this type of 'research' to be done and then once everyone knows (she gets 'debunked') .. then truly, what is she really going to provide????  That's another thing that OBVIOUSLY, these 2 have not thought about!!!


----------



## Chagall

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said he is considering closing the Canadian border. Harry had better hustle!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

Chagall said:


> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said he is considering closing the Canadian border. Harry had better hustle!



Surely, rules don’t apply to HRH THE SIXTH IN LINE to the throne, who has a HRH wife of extraordinary “independent profile”?!... I wonder how many coronavirus tests could have been purchased with the funds Canada has given to subsidize H&M’s security team. (That funding should end on April 1, when Megxit is complete.)


----------



## Sophisticatted

I hope she realizes that pap walks during a quarantine are a really bad idea!  I do hope it gives Harry more time to spend with his family and to deprogram.


----------



## prettyprincess

threadbender said:


> Can I please take Archie? He really needs someone who wants to spend time with him, take care of him, love on him. I could not care any less about M or H. But, that innocent little boy breaks my heart.


What makes you think he doesn’t have loving attentive parents? Bc his mother didn’t take him on a trip during a global epidemic??


----------



## melissatrv

youngster said:


> Interesting!  Did not know that.  Are there other legal arrangements that can be made in advance, possibly special rules for the Crown and the heirs?  I've got no idea.  Just wondering.


Not sure how true it is, but also heard that Non-disclosure agreements are not standard.  Why so many ex-staffers have written books etc.  Unless this has changed.


----------



## melissatrv

Alena21 said:


> At all these events Harry looks broken. He is an easy pray as he doesn't know his a** from his elbow and he is used to have everything being taken care for him. I am sceptical if he could adjust to normal life at all.



I think he needed and subconsciously sought a mother figure.  In Megan, he definitely found that.


----------



## melissatrv

limom said:


> Do you all believe that Megan was not investigated prior to marrying Harry?
> Come on now...
> This is the Queen’s grandson, we are talking about here.....


I don't think she was....if so, they would have had some inkling about her family dynamics and all the pre-wedding drama could have been avoided.


----------



## melissatrv

Katel said:


> I cannot get over how ridiculous she looks in all these pictures - her expression and that dress  ...
> the comment about the neckline helped explain a lot, because the hat on her head makes that silhouette into a bigger ball, just stuck on her shoulders, and that cape on one arm, for the life of me, looks exactly like a sling for a broken arm.
> View attachment 4687184


I think her glam squad is still the same team who advised her to wear that poop emoji hat on the Christmas before the wedding.  Don't even get me started about that wedding dress...


----------



## melissatrv

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Got my Kohls ad today - these two look eerily similar to some other folks we know.
> 
> View attachment 4687341


Aaahh!  And they are holding hands!!!


----------



## Sophisticatted

I don’t think Harry could have been deterred.  His brother tried to warn him.  I wonder whether William was acting alone, or whether he was nominated as the person Harry would most likely listen to.  Hopefully, he gets a clue and wants out at some point.  I think they will do everything to help him at that time.


----------



## marietouchet

melissatrv said:


> Not sure how true it is, but also heard that Non-disclosure agreements are not standard.  Why so many ex-staffers have written books etc.  Unless this has changed.


These  days, BRF employees sign NDAs when they start working at the palace but how far down that goes I don’t know , does Princess Anne require of her employees ? Zara ? Etc


----------



## muchstuff

sdkitty said:


> Litterally laughing out loud about the Chunga Chunga and the rescuing pengins.  Was he going to physically rescue them or just donate?



It’s Chunga CHANGA. Please get your fictitious geography straight.


----------



## scarf1

Wonder if Meghan and Archie will be encouraged to come back to frog more during this Coronavirus thing.


----------



## mdcx

melissatrv said:


> I think he needed and subconsciously sought a mother figure.  In Megan, he definitely found that.


I think M likely acted like “warm lovely Mummy” at the start but has now transitioned into “hard to please, critical Mummy.” Nothing about it screams “emotionally healthy”.


----------



## mdcx

scarf1 said:


> Wonder if Meghan and Archie will be encouraged to come back to frog more during this Coronavirus thing.


Imo both are hoping for border closures so they can stay where they are 
Somehow I don’t this UK trip strengthened their marriage!


----------



## SWlife

Imo, Harry is emotionally fragile. Meghan is a walking Gossip Girl cast member living out among us.
My daughter has been in the Navy for 12 years now and I know how much her career means to her. So I do feel that losing his military life/ranking is a devastation for H. It’s his own fault, of course, but now obviously it’s tearing him apart.
I do like M’s handbags, very much. And that’s all I like about her.
That’s all I got.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

melissatrv said:


> I think her glam squad is still the same team who advised her to wear that poop emoji hat on the Christmas before the wedding.  Don't even get me started about that wedding dress...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4689671


I will never, ever, ever look at this hat the same way again.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I think M likely acted like “warm lovely Mummy” at the start but has now transitioned into “hard to please, critical Mummy.” Nothing about it screams “emotionally healthy”.


Is it just me or the whole "Mummy" thing .. kind of creepy, no?!?! .. having sex with your Mummy (like Nero - and we all know how that turned out)!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Is this BS? A report that Harry and Meghan are very concerned about their extremely close friend Sophie Trudeau having coronavirus. Are they really friends with the Trudeaus and why the hell is this a story? 

https://pagesix.com/2020/03/13/megh...phie-trudeau-after-coronavirus-diagnosis/amp/


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Is this BS? A report that Harry and Meghan are very concerned about their extremely close friend Sophie Trudeau having coronavirus. Are they really friends with the Trudeaus and why the hell is this a story?
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/13/megh...phie-trudeau-after-coronavirus-diagnosis/amp/


They found a way to take advantage of her misfortune.  Anything in the paper works for them.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> Is this BS? A report that Harry and Meghan are very concerned about their extremely close friend Sophie Trudeau having coronavirus. Are they really friends with the Trudeaus and why the hell is this a story?
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/13/megh...phie-trudeau-after-coronavirus-diagnosis/amp/


Their endless attention seeking is nauseating.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> Is this BS? A report that Harry and Meghan are very concerned about *their extremely close friend Sophie Trudeau having coronavirus. Are they really friends with the Trudeaus and why the hell is this a story?*
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/13/megh...phie-trudeau-after-coronavirus-diagnosis/amp/



HAHAHA! Sophie Trudeau is their close friend in the same way Michelle ***** was Meghan’s dear lunch companion (which MM boldly wrote about & had to backtrack when Michelle said she’d only met MM briefly during a book tour). And Oprah and Amal Clooney were supposedly Meg’s friends before meeting Harry *eyeroll*. These are fantasies that blossom in the minds of the ambitious celeb and/or PR team.

*Here’s the real connection — Meg’s current BFF Jess Mulroney is a stylist for Sophie Trudeau*. And both Justin Trudeau and Jess’s husband Ben are the sons of former Canadian PMs. Jess is believed to have asked Sophie to encourage her husband to give H&M special consideration in terms of security (manpower and funding), and streamlining red tape during their Canadian stay and travel.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Is this BS? A report that Harry and Meghan are very concerned about their extremely close friend Sophie Trudeau having coronavirus. Are they really friends with the Trudeaus and why the hell is this a story?
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/13/megh...phie-trudeau-after-coronavirus-diagnosis/amp/


I've seen photos of the 3 of them (Jess, Meg and Sophie) but as mentioned above, it's really a Jess/Sophie relationship and I think Meg is more of an acquaintance.


----------



## chowlover2

Did Meghan fly back to Canada with Sophie T?


----------



## Clearblueskies

prettyprincess said:


> What makes you think he doesn’t have loving attentive parents? Bc his mother didn’t take him on a trip during a global epidemic??


Most parents would keep their child with them, and if that wasn’t an option would choose not to travel.  There was nothing essential about this trip, other than an opportunity for Meghan to preen and Harry to sign off.
The global crisis makes these two fools look silly and irrelevant.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

prettyprincess said:


> What makes you think he doesn’t have loving attentive parents? Bc his mother didn’t take him on a trip during a global epidemic??



I'm solely speaking from experience, but people so self-absorbed and drama loving usually don't have much capacities to be very attentive to someone else's needs. On top of their own issues for each of them they also seem to be intertwined in their unhealthy relationship pattern.


----------



## doni

prettyprincess said:


> What makes you think he doesn’t have loving attentive parents? Bc his mother didn’t take him on a trip during a global epidemic??


I don’t judge people’s parenting and I don’t like that standards of attachment are imposed on mothers. But leaving your baby in another town (let alone another country, let alone another _continent_) during a global epidemic is, imo, a completely utterly _crazy_ thing to do. I cannot even phantom it. At that time it was already very clear that the risk of movement restrictions and quarantines was very high. Indeed, it is so unfathomable that she seems to have given the excuse that she hadn’t informed herself about the crisis (and he admits he doesn’t follow the news) which would indeed be one reason. It is not conceivable that they would have taken such a decision if they had been properly informed. She has been extremely lucky.


----------



## 1LV

Once again doing things her way and to hell with potential fallout.
Reported by the BBC... (Commonwealth Day service)
”Prince Harry bumped forearms with singer Craig David when they met at the end of the service - while Meghan opted to hug him.
Members of the congregation had been advised not to shake hands in greeting, to help reduce the spread of the coronavirus, a spokeswoman for Westminster Abbey said.”


----------



## wisconsin

1LV said:


> Once again doing things her way and to hell with potential fallout.
> Reported by the BBC... (Commonwealth Day service)
> ”Prince Harry bumped forearms with singer Craig David when they met at the end of the service - while Meghan opted to hug him.
> Members of the congregation had been advised not to shake hands in greeting, to help reduce the spread of the coronavirus, a spokeswoman for Westminster Abbey said.”



This is crazy. Just to prove her point on hugging,
Please do namaste instead. Your mom is a yoga teacher.


----------



## LibbyRuth

doni said:


> I don’t judge people’s parenting and I don’t like that standards of attachment are imposed on mothers. But leaving your baby in another town (let alone another country, let alone another _continent_) during a global epidemic is, imo, a completely utterly _crazy_ thing to do. I cannot even phantom it. At that time it was already very clear that the risk of movement restrictions and quarantines was very high. Indeed, it is so unfathomable that she seems to have given the excuse that she hadn’t informed herself about the crisis (and he admits he doesn’t follow the news) which would indeed be one reason. It is not conceivable that they would have taken such a decision if they had been properly informed. She has been extremely lucky.



I agree with you that most mother’s instinct in a time like this is to stay near their babies. But most mothers would do that staying near home - cancelling a business trip to be with the baby rather than taking the baby on a tour of offices. Is it possible that this was Meghans instinct but she knew with the circumstances she helped create, not making the trip was not an option?


----------



## doni

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree with you that most mother’s instinct in a time like this is to stay near their babies. But most mothers would do that staying near home - cancelling a business trip to be with the baby rather than taking the baby on a tour of offices. Is it possible that this was Meghans instinct but she knew with the circumstances she helped create, not making the trip was not an option?



Mmm... These are the people who announced to the world their scheme to step down as ‘senior royals’ without even warning the Queen and thereafter gave up on royal work... Do I think she is going to put the expectation that she attends three royal events before the safety of her baby and risk being separated 1000s of miles from him weeks or even months during a global pandemic? I personally don’t see it.

And then, even if that was the case, they’d still have the option to take him with them, which would have been safer given the circumstances.

But I suspect the reason advanced by ‘her sources’ is probably the right one. That she was clueless about the epidemic as she had no time to inform herself and read the news because she is so busy (with their plans for a revolutionary charity and reading the gossip columns instead, presumably). We know from Harry’s own account that he doesn’t read the news either, to the extent that he finds perfectly plausible that there’s is revolution going on in Chunga-Changa and a bunch of North Pole penguins are stranded in Belarus... And they no longer had the support of royal staffers. So I find it believable (if simultaneously incredible) that they just didn’t have a clue and took nothing of this into account when deciding what to do with Archie...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

melissatrv said:


> I think her glam squad is still the same team who advised her to wear that poop emoji hat on the Christmas before the wedding.  Don't even get me started about that wedding dress...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4689671


I always saw this hat as a mushroom cap, but seeing it from this angle--HYSTERICAL!


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> Once again doing things her way and to hell with potential fallout.
> Reported by the BBC... (Commonwealth Day service)
> ”Prince Harry bumped forearms with singer Craig David when they met at the end of the service - while Meghan opted to hug him.
> Members of the congregation had been advised not to shake hands in greeting, to help reduce the spread of the coronavirus, a spokeswoman for Westminster Abbey said.”


She also hugged Alexandra Burke.


----------



## kemilia

doni said:


> I don’t judge people’s parenting and I don’t like that standards of attachment are imposed on mothers. But leaving your baby in another town (let alone another country, let alone another _continent_) during a global epidemic is, imo, a completely utterly _crazy_ thing to do. I cannot even phantom it. At that time it was already very clear that the risk of movement restrictions and quarantines was very high. Indeed, it is so unfathomable that she seems to have given the excuse that she hadn’t informed herself about the crisis (and he admits he doesn’t follow the news) which would indeed be one reason. It is not conceivable that they would have taken such a decision if they had been properly informed. She has been extremely lucky.


H has lived in a bubble all his life, probably whatever his staff told him is the extent of what he knew--he was the "spare" and a party boy. M, on the other hand, has been in this wonderful (IMO--no money worries, couture clothing, free private travel, etc.) also but not nearly as long.

It will take a while for her to decompress; him--don't know if he will ever be able to live the simple life.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Mmm... These are the people who announced to the world their scheme to step down as ‘senior royals’ without even warning the Queen and thereafter gave up on royal work... Do I think she is going to put the expectation that she attends three royal events before the safety of her baby and risk being separated 1000s of miles from him weeks or even months during a global pandemic? I personally don’t see it.
> 
> And then, even if that was the case, they’d still have the option to take him with them, which would have been safer given the circumstances.
> 
> But I suspect the reason advanced by ‘her sources’ is probably the right one. That she was clueless about the epidemic as she had no time to inform herself and read the news because she is so busy (with their plans for a revolutionary charity and reading the gossip columns instead, presumably). We know from Harry’s own account that he doesn’t read the news either, to the extent that he finds perfectly plausible that there’s is revolution going on in Chunga-Changa and a bunch of North Pole penguins are stranded in Belarus... And they no longer had the support of royal staffers. So I find it believable (if simultaneously incredible) that they just didn’t have a clue and took nothing of this into account when deciding what to do with Archie...


I don't understand how they can be so relevant and plan to enrich themselves through social causes but don't follow the news?


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> H has lived in a bubble all his life, probably whatever his staff told him is the extent of what he knew--he was the "spare" and a party boy. M, on the other hand, has been in this wonderful (IMO--no money worries, couture clothing, free private travel, etc.) also but not nearly as long.
> 
> It will take a while for her to decompress; him--don't know if he will ever be able to live the simple life.


you're kidding, right?  you don't think she wants a simple life


----------



## Grande Latte

kemilia said:


> I always saw this hat as a mushroom cap, but seeing it from this angle--HYSTERICAL!



Poop emoji, poop emoji, poop emoji. 
Now I can't get that image out of my mind too.


----------



## mdcx

How jealous must M be of the Coronavirus epidemic right now, stealing attention from her.
I have to say I am hopeful that M does something “special” soon because this pandemic really has me looking for distractions.


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> She also hugged Alexandra Burke.


The gift that keeps on giving


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> How jealous must M be of the Coronavirus epidemic right now, stealing attention from her.
> I have to say I am hopeful that M does something “special” soon because this pandemic really has me looking for distractions.


totally
I'm so tired of all the bad news


----------



## prettyprincess

Clearblueskies said:


> Most parents would keep their child with them, and if that wasn’t an option would choose not to travel.  There was nothing essential about this trip, other than an opportunity for Meghan to preen and Harry to sign off.
> The global crisis makes these two fools look silly and irrelevant.



Bringing Archie with her would’ve been wildly irresponsible and selfish, and you know it! 

Had she done that, you guys would have skewered her. She did the right thing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

prettyprincess said:


> Bringing Archie with her would’ve been wildly irresponsible and selfish, and you know it!
> 
> Had she done that, you guys would have skewered her. She did the right thing.


No it wouldn’t.  But if Meghan believed it to be the case she could’ve and should’ve stayed in Canada with him.  That’s the point.


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Bringing Archie with her would’ve been wildly irresponsible and selfish, and you know it!
> 
> Had she done that, you guys would have skewered her. She did the right thing.


since you are clearly an admirer can you please give your thoughts on why they don't follow the news?  seems such a socially conscious couple would know about world and national affairs


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand how they can be so relevant and plan to enrich themselves through social causes but don't follow the news?



That’s why it’s a bunch of BS.  Both of them BS BS BS.  

They have the means to travel w son and did not to piss off the BRF:  That was their plan.   Of course they had to blame the Coronavirus and lack of news knowledge, how else to garner the pathetic sympathy of their gullible audiences and fans.   Who believes that an educated person like Harry and a fame whore like M doesn’t follow the news?   

And you can’t even hide from Coronavirus news. 

But seriously, what normal parents *separate* themselves from their child during an imminent outbreak?


----------



## mshermes

Mb89700 said:


> x


Uh.....I don’t think so. Bad link.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> Uh.....I don’t think so. Bad link.


I'm afraid to try to open a link from a brand new member


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

scarlet555 said:


> That’s why it’s a bunch of BS.  Both of them BS BS BS.
> 
> They have the means to travel w son and did not to piss off the BRF:  That was their plan.   Of course they had to blame the Coronavirus and lack of news knowledge, how else to garner the pathetic sympathy of their gullible audiences and fans.   Who believes that an educated person like Harry and a fame whore like M doesn’t follow the news?
> 
> And you can’t even hide from Coronavirus news.
> 
> But seriously, what normal parents *separate* themselves from their child during an imminent outbreak?


......and would they insist on hugging people when advised not to shake hands??  Ridiculous.  Great way to carry any bugs home to baby.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Hey, thanks!  That one did not get reported but I saw your comments and made it go poof.   Good job. 
Here's a pressie for each of you. 








mshermes said:


> Uh.....I don’t think so. Bad link.





sdkitty said:


> I'm afraid to try to open a link from a brand new member


----------



## doni

prettyprincess said:


> Bringing Archie with her would’ve been wildly irresponsible and selfish, and you know it!
> 
> Had she done that, you guys would have skewered her. She did the right thing.


I respect your opinion, but allow me to have mine.
There has been not one single infant badly affected by Coronavirus. They are the safest group.
That means there are hundreds if not thousands of things that could happen to Archie right now that are statistically more dangerous for him than Coronavirus. To separate yourself from your baby such a long distance and leave him with no family near with a high probability you cannot get back to him really is unfathomable to me.

Personally I might have chosen to stay, but taking him would have made more sense. If they had to isolate, Frogmore cottage is not the worst choice, and I guarantee you they’d have access to best available healthcare.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Hey, thanks!  That one did not get reported but I saw your comments and made it go poof.   Good job.
> Here's a pressie for each of you.


thanks


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> How jealous must M be of the Coronavirus epidemic right now, stealing attention from her.
> I have to say I am hopeful that M does something “special” soon because this pandemic really has me looking for distractions.


right.....being a private person myself it's hard for me to imagine living in her skin - thriving on all the attention she can get


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Slightly OT, I know May is quite a bit to go, but I really feel for Beatrice. She's had an awful run with her engagement thanks to all the scandals (mostly her dad to blame, though) and now her wedding is endangered.


----------



## mshermes

CobaltBlu said:


> Hey, thanks!  That one did not get reported but I saw your comments and made it go poof.   Good job.
> Here's a pressie for each of you.


Odd.....I did report it. Thanks for the speedy removal! Why do people do things like that?


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> Odd.....I did report it. Thanks for the speedy removal! Why do people do things like that?


same reason we all get fraudulent email links every day?


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> same reason we all get fraudulent email links every day?


I am inundated with emails but just not expecting it here.


----------



## marietouchet

I am betting that Harry gets trapped in  the UK due to the coronavirus, either due to the UK not letting him out or due to the Canadians not wanting to let him in 
It would be such bad optics to let him through due to special considerations, heck we are all being inconvenienced and his granny has room to take him in indefinitely, no hardship there


----------



## CobaltBlu

mshermes said:


> Odd.....I did report it. Thanks for the speedy removal! Why do people do things like that?


Actually I saw it here in the thread before I saw the report, after I posted here, yess indeed I saw that you had made report. Thank you!

You would not believe the massive amount of spam that comes through our fashionable gates at PF, most of it gets caught, but a lot we have to delete manually and we depend on your reports for that so thank you!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’re closing the Ireland and UK border.


----------



## mshermes

marietouchet said:


> I am betting that Harry gets trapped in  the UK due to the coronavirus, either due to the UK not letting him out or due to the Canadians not wanting to let him in
> It would be such bad optics to let him through due to special considerations, heck we are all being inconvenienced and his granny has room to take him in indefinitely, no hardship there


Yahoo, MSN, and Hello have reported that he is back in Canada.

Prince Harry was spotted on a commercial flight with his security team, travelling to Victoria International Airport on Thursday, according to a fellow passenger on Twitter.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> I am inundated with emails but just not expecting it here.


I look at the new replies on the side of the screen and see threads that are really advertising (not necessarily dangerous I guess) all the time


----------



## Jktgal

I think someone is trying to get papped...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-two-hour-walks-woods-Canada-kind-locals.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

doni said:


> I respect your opinion, but mine is the opposite.
> There has been not one single infant badly affected by Coronavirus. They are the safest group.
> That means there are hundreds if not thousands of things that could happen to Archie right now that are statistically more dangerous for him than Coronavirus. To separate yourself from your baby such a long distance and leave him with no family near with a high probability you cannot get back to him really is unfathomable to me.
> 
> Personally I might have chosen to stay, but taking him would have made more sense. If they had to isolate, Frogmore cottage is not the worst choice, and I guarantee you they’d have access to best available healthcare.



What bothers me is she left him with no family.


----------



## mia55

No one can break a family unless there’s already a crack, I think the relationship was already broken and MM facilitated the separation. People ignore Harry’s fault as MM is already a very despicable person but in this case he deserves the equal blame. No matter how dumb a person is, they can’t be be made against their family unless they’re already willing to do so. It’s just unfortunate that there’s a baby as well in this mess.


----------



## skarsbabe

Just caught up on over 100 pages in this thread, all to still not see anything about them taking care of their child. It's just so bizarre to me they'd parade about the media instead of raise their young boy!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Some news on Archie - The Times UK is reporting that Archie will be visiting the Queen at Balmoral this summer. Meghan and Harry have accepted an invitation to Balmoral this summer and Archie will be with them. 

Some good news for a change


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> What bothers me is she left him with no family.


well she has no family except her mother who's in CA and clearly has her own life


----------



## Straight-Laced

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/baby-archie-to-holiday-with-queen-at-balmoral-s6j6tqwgb
*Baby Archie to holiday with Queen at Balmoral*
*Harry and Meghan have accepted a summer invitation to the Scottish castle, and this time they plan to bring their son*
"His absence from the country of his birth and his wider family is understood to have left the Queen feeling “very sad”.

But Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, who turns one in May, will finally return to these shores this summer. I*t could be his first trip this year, although he may accompany his parents to Britain in June when they attend trooping the colour.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are believed to have accepted the Queen’s invitation to visit her this summer at Balmoral, her Scottish retreat, and are planning to take their son with them. They are also expected to spend time with the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall at Birkhall, Charles’s retreat on the Balmoral estate.*

Archie remained in Canada last week with the Sussexes’ nanny and Meghan’s friend Jessica Mulroney while Harry and Meghan completed their final official engagements in the UK.

Last September the Queen was said to have been “disappointed” when the Sussexes turned down her invitation to Balmoral. At the time, royal sources said Harry and Meghan felt their four-month-old son was too young for the trip. The explanation was said to have puzzled some members of the royal family, as the couple had taken Archie on holiday to Ibiza and to Sir Elton John’s villa in the south of France earlier in the summer.

The news that Harry, Meghan and Archie will spend some time with the Queen and the royal family this year is likely to come as a relief in royal circles, after comments understood to have been made by Harry about his family during a hoax phone call that emerged last week."


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if this decision was in response to the hoax, to get them some good press.


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> I think someone is trying to get papped...
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-two-hour-walks-woods-Canada-kind-locals.html



It’s more like she wants to go on record as saying she spends time with her son. I’d be surprised if she actually goes for two hour walks in the woods with Archie every day though, unless they live near a large national forest or else she walks the same trail 20 times.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if this decision was in response to the hoax, to get them some good press.


maybe that along with the fact that the corona virus has changed the world for now and they're far less likely to be successful in any venture they were thinking about


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> well she has no family except her mother who's in CA and clearly has her own life


And they don't appear to be all that close. Mom probably knows her daughter well.


----------



## 1LV

Mending fences in light of the debacle they’ve created?


----------



## kemilia

Straight-Laced said:


> Some news on Archie - The Times UK is reporting that Archie will be visiting the Queen at Balmoral this summer. Meghan and Harry have accepted an invitation to Balmoral this summer and Archie will be with them.
> 
> Some good news for a change


Yay! Seriously--YAY! 

Good news in the midst of a lot of bad news. Hopefully by summer things will be looking up all over the planet. Seeing the royal kids always makes me smile.


----------



## Clearblueskies

1LV said:


> Mending fences in light of the debacle they’ve created?


Maybe someone did some sums


----------



## Emeline

Clearblueskies said:


> Maybe someone did some sums


Yup.
Adult life comes at you fast!


----------



## marietouchet

Straight-Laced said:


> Some news on Archie - The Times UK is reporting that Archie will be visiting the Queen at Balmoral this summer. Meghan and Harry have accepted an invitation to Balmoral this summer and Archie will be with them.
> 
> Some good news for a change


Hmmm they were supposed to be at  Balmoral summer 2019 but were no shows


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> And they don't appear to be all that close. Mom probably knows her daughter well.


well she can probably take some of the credit or blame.  but some personality traits can just be natural born - not environmental.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m surprised it was announced this quickly they would go to Balmoral. The reports about their recent visit would have you believe it didn’t go well. I have no doubt they were invited and maybe Harry agreed but we’ll see if it actually happens in a few months.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I’m surprised it was announced this quickly they would go to Balmoral. The reports about their recent visit would have you believe it didn’t go well. I have no doubt they were invited and maybe Harry agreed but we’ll see if it actually happens in a few months.


they need some positive press


----------



## HiromiT

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm they were supposed to be at  Balmoral summer 2019 but were no shows



I also don’t think they will go. Maybe Harry but not Megs or Archie. This is a PR story aimed to minimize any impression of Meg’s estrangement from the BRF and to bolster her tenuous hold on royal status. If Kate, William, Sophie, et al. wouldn’t even acknowledge them at the Commonwealth ceremony, why would they want to spend extended private time with them at all? In fact, the Queen is under no obligation to invite them to Balmoral after the mess they created.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they need some positive press



They do but it contradicts their attitude. You know the one, “we don’t need you, but we need your money.”


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They do but it contradicts their attitude. You know the one, “we don’t need you, but we need your money.”


maybe they're starting to think that attitude isn't working so well.....IDK.
Just read some article in the daily beast praising Meghan for setting boundaries.   so she still has plenty of admirers


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> since you are clearly an admirer can you please give your thoughts on why they don't follow the news?  seems such a socially conscious couple would know about world and national affairs


I don’t know what they follow, but she and Harry made the right decision by not traveling with him. I promise you had she taken him, people in this thread would lose their sh*t. They’d say he was a prop, and that she’s using him, and she’s so irresponsible, blah blah blah. 

As it were, there are moms in here acting horrified that she left him at home, as if she left him on some deserted island somewhere to fend for himself. It’s just another way for moms to act morally and ethically superior.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> maybe they're starting to think that attitude isn't working so well.....IDK.
> Just read some article in the daily beast praising Meghan for setting boundaries.   so she still has plenty of admirers


NEWSLETTERSJOIN

JOIN
EXCLUSIVE CONTENT
MY ACCOUNT
LOG OUT
JOIN NOW




CORONAVIRUS
CHEAT SHEET
POLITICS
ENTERTAINMENT
WORLD NEWS
HALF FULL
CULTURE
U.S. NEWS
SCOUTED
TRAVEL



*Alaina Demopoulos*
Style Writer

Published Mar. 14, 2020 5:31AM ET 





*Photo Illustration by Kristen Hazzard/The Daily Beast / Photo Getty*

Did anyone have a better Monday than Meghan Markle? Doubtful. The former actress spent her last day at what some might call the most thankless job she’s ever had looking positively giddy, as one tends to when leaving a toxic gig. (Except she did so looking less business casual and more _Downton Abbey _revival in an emerald cape dress and fishnet fascinator.) For many, it served as a victory lap for a woman who had placed her happiness and sanity above any perceived duties. 

“The smile of a woman who set boundaries and won her happiness back,” the life coach and author Michelle Elman wrote on Twitter, utilizing a b-word that has been dominating the online therapy-speak world and pop culture for much of this emotionally fraught year. 


ADVERTISING
You can see boundary-setting in action from Meghan’s decision to prioritize her personal life over her allegedly miserable professional one. Or on _The Bachelor_, which always has a finger on the pulse of pop psych culture, when Hannah Ann first told Peter how wrongly he had behaved, and later when Madison Prewett stood up to her boyfriend’s overbearing mother. And after spending much of her adulthood in front of a reality TV crew, Kourtney Kardashian has decided to film less of herself and young children. 


*The Way We’ve Started Talking About Mental Health Is Crazy*
ALL TALK
*Alaina Demopoulos*



And, very physically and practically right now, the novel coronavirus means people are rationing their movements and interactions with care. Boundaries are everywhere. 

“Most of the time when you teach someone how to set boundaries for the first time, they will respond with ‘I can’t do that,’ or ‘I can’t say that,’” Elman told The Daily Beast. “Meghan Markle’s situation is such a good example because it completely proves this sentiment wrong and contradicts the idea that just because you've not done it before, doesn't mean you can't do it.”

In January, Meghan and Harry announced they would “step back” from official royal duties, and moved to Canada, where the actress lived while filming _Suits_. It was a surprise, unprecedented decision that left many people, but mostly Piers Morgan, spiraling over their supposed flaunting of tradition and disrespect of their family. 

“It’s the perfect example that you get to decide the rules in your own life, even if it’s never been done before,” Elman added. To be fair, and quite unfortunately, Meghan already had practice cutting harmful family members out of her life—despite her father Thomas’ public pleas for attention, she has kept up a difficult estrangement. 


“When your boundaries are continually being crossed, the final consequence is having no contact and cutting them out of your life”
“When your boundaries are continually being crossed, the final consequence is having no contact and cutting them out of your life,” Elman said. “It’s something that people believe is not possible. Especially when it is discussed in the context of family, there is a lot of shame around it.” 


ADVERTISING
Brené Brown, the University of Houston research professor and TED Talk-famous “vulnerability” extoller, has long lauded the virtues of boundary-setting. She has previously described the practice as setting up “simple what’s OK and what’s not OK.” 

“When we don’t set boundaries, we let people do things that are not OK,” Brown said last year. “Then we’re just resentful and hateful. I’d rather be loving and generous and very straightforward with what’s OK and what’s not OK.” 

Easier said than done, maybe, especially for women, who can be vilified simply for saying “no.” As Dr. Deborah Serani, a professor of psychology at Adelphi University, said, “Boundary-setting is about confrontation, and some people are afraid of that. When you say no to somebody, they may not be happy, and you have to accept and be OK with it. It can appear you’re being selfish, when really you’re being self-caring.” 

Elly Belle is a freelance writer from New York who calls herself “a huge boundary person.” In a recent, popular tweet, Belle explained how she asked a new girlfriend if she was free one day, and the date responded she would love to hang out, but could not that day due to “life things to take care of.”




Elly Belle 
	



@literElly
https://twitter.com/literElly/status/1237047756952395782

I asked the girl I'm dating if she was free today because I really want to kiss her and she told me all she wants to do is kiss me but she has life things to take care of and an article to finish writing, and honestly I just want to say people with boundaries are so hot


99.8K
9:09 AM - Mar 9, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

9,331 people are talking about this



*RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*



*Meghan and Harry Wow London, for What Could Be the Last Time*



*Meghan Markle Tells Children to ‘Speak Up For What Is Right’*



*Harry and Meghan Bid a Hideously Awkward Royal Farewell*
“Honestly, I just want to say people with boundaries are so hot,” Belle wrote. “yeah baby respectfully turn me down and openly communicate to me that it isn't personal you just know what you need for yourself right now, that's the stuff, uhhhhhhhhhuhhhhhhhhh.”

“I love it when people are able to set boundaries with me, because I think it means that the person not only respects themselves enough, but also respects me enough to say exactly what they need,” Belle told The Daily Beast. “They know who they are, know what they want and what’s good for them, and are able to stick to that.”

Dr. Serani often talks about boundary-setting with her clients, especially around the new year and spring. “People like to emerge from the winter, start to do an inventory and think, I want to change this and that,” she said. “I think Meghan leaving the monarchy is a huge story about self-care, and when a high profile individual talks about something, it sets off a ripple effect.” 





https://www.thedailybeast.com/giann...oses-billionaire-nba-owners-coronavirus-greed
*‘*


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> I don’t know what they follow, but she and Harry made the right decision by not traveling with him. I promise you had she taken him, people in this thread would lose their sh*t. They’d say he was a prop, and that she’s using him, and she’s so irresponsible, blah blah blah.
> 
> As it were, there are moms in here acting horrified that she left him at home, as if she left him on some deserted island somewhere to fend for himself. It’s just another way for moms to act morally and ethically superior.


thank you for posting but that business about leaving the baby isn't what I was asking about.  I was asking how could this couple who plan to capitalize on being socially conscious not follow the news?


----------



## prettyprincess

sdkitty said:


> thank you for posting but that business about leaving the baby isn't what I was asking about.  I was asking how could this couple who plan to capitalize on being socially conscious not follow the news?



I’m sorry, what are you referring to exactly?


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> It’s more like she wants to go on record as saying she spends time with her son. I’d be surprised if she actually goes for two hour walks in the woods with Archie every day though, unless they live near a large national forest or else she walks the same trail 20 times.


The trails around Horth Hill would not take 2 hours unless she’s stopping every 5 minutes to pose for a photo op.  And I don’t imagine she could carry Archie up the actual trail to the top.


----------



## Straight-Laced

I think the Balmoral visit story might be bigger than simply PR for the Sussexes, who are probably beginning to realise that they need more royal lustre than they thought they did.  And continuing negotiations for their so called independence might mean that they actually need to meet some obligations to the BRF in exchange for funding, titles etc. 

The Balmoral visit story came from Roya Nikkhah, The Sunday Times Royal Correspondent who gets scoops from the Palace.  It might be approved from the very top.  I think it's a deliberately placed good news story in the face of the overwhelming virus crisis.  A reminder that despite the uncertain weeks and months ahead much is proceeding as normal, the Queen will be at Balmoral this summer as usual and this year the Sussexes will be there with Archie.  The mention of Archie gets the attention for 'business as usual', otherwise there's nothing to report.   It's a positive distraction and shows the BRF doing what they do best.
This story is part Sussex deal/Sussex PR and part Palace PR for the nation IMO.


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> I always saw this hat as a mushroom cap, but seeing it from this angle--HYSTERICAL!





Grande Latte said:


> Poop emoji, poop emoji, poop emoji.
> Now I can't get that image out of my mind too.



Tumblr




mdcx said:


> How jealous must M be of the Coronavirus epidemic right now, stealing attention from her.
> I have to say I am hopeful that M does something “special” soon because this pandemic really has me looking for distractions.


Seeing as they are so full of sh*t and with the current worldwide crisis (and toilet paper shortage) it would be a great time for them to create their own toilet paper brand, they could have their faces embossed on the sheets. Worldwide publicity _instantly_ right there...


----------



## mshermes

prettyprincess said:


> As it were, there are moms in here acting horrified that she left him at home, as if she left him on some deserted island somewhere to fend for himself. It’s just another way for moms to act morally and ethically superior.


Are you judging the mothers on this forum "to act morally and ethically superior"?


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> I’m sorry, what are you referring to exactly?


post 24606 re "H" being fooled by the Russian hoaxers
post 24694 and 24662.....
seems his excuse for not knowing about environmental issues is he doesn't follow the news


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

Lounorada said:


> Seeing as they are so full of sh*t and with the current worldwide crisis (and toilet paper shortage) it would be a great time for them to create their own toliet paper brand, they could have their faces embossed on the sheets. Worldwide publicity _instantly_ right there...


 
You own this thread today with this advice


----------



## Lounorada

mia55 said:


> You own this thread today with this advice


 

Thanks for quoting me because it made me spot a spelling mistake that I could go back and fix


----------



## CeeJay

Hmmmm .. just saw this pop up on my iPhone .. 
https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...the-couples-divorce-royal-expert-claims.html/


----------



## prettyprincess

mshermes said:


> Are you judging the mothers on this forum "to act morally and ethically superior"?


Saying she doesn’t love her son or that he’s somehow neglected bc she did something differently than you would do is mom shaming. It’s priggish and it’s self righteous.


----------



## sdkitty

prettyprincess said:


> Saying she doesn’t love her son or that he’s somehow neglected bc she did something differently than you would do is mom shaming. It’s priggish and it’s self righteous.


name calling isn't cool here


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. just saw this pop up on my iPhone ..
> https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...the-couples-divorce-royal-expert-claims.html/


interesting - yes Meghan is very famous but only because of who she married...saying Harry will end up as a butler - guess that was kidding.  seems like a pretty biased POV.  maybe these two bring this out in people.


----------



## scarlet555

Meghan being mom shamed would first  require her to behave like a mom.  Which I admit maybe she does in private when she has time, the poor thing doesn’t even have time to catch up on the Coronavirus.  

Discussing about posters here and judging them is also different than discussing or criticizing Meghan Markle, this is her thread and people are welcome to call her out.


----------



## prettyprincess

scarlet555 said:


> *Meghan being mom shamed would first  require her to behave like a mom.  *Which I admit maybe she does in private when she has time, the poor thing doesn’t even have time to catch up on the Coronavirus.
> 
> Discussing about posters here and judging them is also different than discussing or criticizing Meghan Markle, this is her thread and people are welcome to call her out.


What you just wrote is completely baffling. How would one have to “behave” to appease you, or to prove to you that she’s enough of a “mom?”


----------



## scarlet555

Please take time to read the whole post before replying and bolding what you want to acknowledge only and ignoring the rest of the post.   No one knows the truth about anyone.  We are not the New York Times!!! This is a gossip thread.  Have fun or move on my lovelies.


----------



## lalame

Mom skills aside, I don't get the decision not to take Archie with them logically. If they're out meeting a ton of strangers and attending big events, it's just as likely Archie could catch it - from them when they return. Or from whoever is taking care of Archie in their absence...


----------



## tiktok

https://nypost.com/2020/03/14/megxi...racial-people-who-saw-meghan-as-a-role-model/
*Megxit is a major blow for biracial people who saw Meghan as a role model*
By David Kaufman

When Meghan Markle first announced her engagement to Prince Harry in November 2017, she had no bigger fan than myself. As I wrote at the time, Markle — the outspoken daughter of a black mother and white father — was “the biracial hero I’d always wanted.”

Because unlike President Barack ***** — who conceded his mixed-race heritage but ran as “black” for political expediency — Markle was proudly biracial, writing in Elle in 2016, “My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I’m half black and half white.”

Not only was Markle open about her struggles fitting in to both communities, she used her unusual profile — actress, socialite, Sussex — as a platform for a subtle, millennial form of progressive politicking at every stage of her evolution. How else to describe a Windsor Castle wedding pairing pomp and protocol with a full gospel choir in May 2018.

Barely six months later, Markle’s transformative powers were on full display when she and the duke visited Fiji and the South Pacific. Unlike during the early part of their tour in Australia, the crowds in Fiji were as brown-hued as Meghan — which made for a potent and unprecedented site: a princess-of-color embracing her subjects-of-color. With a perfectly posed wave and megawatt smile, it was a beautiful act of racial reconciliation after centuries of British colonialism.

Most crucially, on that trip — and on later visits to Africa — Markle stood as a role model for the billions of women (and men) of color who desperately need to see themselves represented at the highest reaches of society. And there is no higher reach than the British Royal Family.

But owing to Megxit, Markle is royal no more and no one could be more disappointed than myself. Because in leaving Britain to chart a path of personal and financial independence, Markle may think she’s freeing herself up to do the work she always wanted, but she’s forgotten one key thing: You can’t be a role model if you don’t have a role. And with her legal drama “Suits” canceled, her lifestyle blog shuttered and the Sussex Royal brand effectively banned by the Queen, Markle desperately needs to find her next gig.

In less than two years, she has gone from pioneering and maverick-like to craven, calculating and potentially irrelevant. Of course, life under the royal lens can be tough; early on Meghan was subjected to a level of race-based abuse rarely seen in the British media. But Markle was hardly cajoled into walking down the aisle with Harry. More importantly, she failed to even reach her second anniversary as a duchess — barely enough time to convincingly claim royal life had rendered her not “OK.” And despite some initial racist attacks, there was little evidence that, as The New York Times wrote, Markle was a victim of systemic British racism.

The most frustrating (if not infuriating) element of Markle’s return to North America is that it feels like a slap in the face to those of us — her biracial brothers and sisters and other folks of color — who don’t have the option of simply quitting our lives and retreating to a fortress of luxury.

We have to show up, day in and day out, and face the challenges of likely being the only minorities in our respective workplaces, social circles and even families. As she waved from the balcony of Buckingham Palace, we saw Markle also doing this work. Despite the carriages and security teams and million-pound wardrobes, she, too, was an “only one” — perhaps, the ultimate only one — and in this we thought we’d found an ally, a princess and finally a role model.

But Megxit has been a heart-sinking twist for a community like mine which has so few public faces. Because, even in 2020, it’s rare for a person of her stature to enthusiastically embrace being both black and white.


----------



## Jktgal

lalame said:


> Mom skills aside, I don't get the decision not to take Archie with them logically. If they're out meeting a ton of strangers and attending big events, it's just as likely Archie could catch it - from them when they return. Or from whoever is taking care of Archie in their absence...



And don't forget the legions of Scotland Yard people flying back and forth. Markle also didn't seem to self isolate after her return, which is irresposible imo.


----------



## mshermes

prettyprincess said:


> Saying she doesn’t love her son or that he’s somehow neglected bc she did something differently than you would do is mom shaming. It’s priggish and it’s self righteous.


That isn’t what you wrote, is it? BTW....priggish is synonymous with self righteous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> NEWSLETTERSJOIN
> 
> JOIN
> EXCLUSIVE CONTENT
> MY ACCOUNT
> LOG OUT
> JOIN NOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CORONAVIRUS
> CHEAT SHEET
> POLITICS
> ENTERTAINMENT
> WORLD NEWS
> HALF FULL
> CULTURE
> U.S. NEWS
> SCOUTED
> TRAVEL
> 
> 
> 
> *Alaina Demopoulos*
> Style Writer
> 
> Published Mar. 14, 2020 5:31AM ET
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Photo Illustration by Kristen Hazzard/The Daily Beast / Photo Getty*
> 
> Did anyone have a better Monday than Meghan Markle? Doubtful. The former actress spent her last day at what some might call the most thankless job she’s ever had looking positively giddy, as one tends to when leaving a toxic gig. (Except she did so looking less business casual and more _Downton Abbey _revival in an emerald cape dress and fishnet fascinator.) For many, it served as a victory lap for a woman who had placed her happiness and sanity above any perceived duties.
> 
> “The smile of a woman who set boundaries and won her happiness back,” the life coach and author Michelle Elman wrote on Twitter, utilizing a b-word that has been dominating the online therapy-speak world and pop culture for much of this emotionally fraught year.
> 
> 
> ADVERTISING
> You can see boundary-setting in action from Meghan’s decision to prioritize her personal life over her allegedly miserable professional one. Or on _The Bachelor_, which always has a finger on the pulse of pop psych culture, when Hannah Ann first told Peter how wrongly he had behaved, and later when Madison Prewett stood up to her boyfriend’s overbearing mother. And after spending much of her adulthood in front of a reality TV crew, Kourtney Kardashian has decided to film less of herself and young children.
> 
> 
> *The Way We’ve Started Talking About Mental Health Is Crazy*
> ALL TALK
> *Alaina Demopoulos*
> 
> 
> 
> And, very physically and practically right now, the novel coronavirus means people are rationing their movements and interactions with care. Boundaries are everywhere.
> 
> “Most of the time when you teach someone how to set boundaries for the first time, they will respond with ‘I can’t do that,’ or ‘I can’t say that,’” Elman told The Daily Beast. “Meghan Markle’s situation is such a good example because it completely proves this sentiment wrong and contradicts the idea that just because you've not done it before, doesn't mean you can't do it.”
> 
> In January, Meghan and Harry announced they would “step back” from official royal duties, and moved to Canada, where the actress lived while filming _Suits_. It was a surprise, unprecedented decision that left many people, but mostly Piers Morgan, spiraling over their supposed flaunting of tradition and disrespect of their family.
> 
> “It’s the perfect example that you get to decide the rules in your own life, even if it’s never been done before,” Elman added. To be fair, and quite unfortunately, Meghan already had practice cutting harmful family members out of her life—despite her father Thomas’ public pleas for attention, she has kept up a difficult estrangement.
> 
> 
> “When your boundaries are continually being crossed, the final consequence is having no contact and cutting them out of your life”
> “When your boundaries are continually being crossed, the final consequence is having no contact and cutting them out of your life,” Elman said. “It’s something that people believe is not possible. Especially when it is discussed in the context of family, there is a lot of shame around it.”
> 
> 
> ADVERTISING
> Brené Brown, the University of Houston research professor and TED Talk-famous “vulnerability” extoller, has long lauded the virtues of boundary-setting. She has previously described the practice as setting up “simple what’s OK and what’s not OK.”
> 
> “When we don’t set boundaries, we let people do things that are not OK,” Brown said last year. “Then we’re just resentful and hateful. I’d rather be loving and generous and very straightforward with what’s OK and what’s not OK.”
> 
> Easier said than done, maybe, especially for women, who can be vilified simply for saying “no.” As Dr. Deborah Serani, a professor of psychology at Adelphi University, said, “Boundary-setting is about confrontation, and some people are afraid of that. When you say no to somebody, they may not be happy, and you have to accept and be OK with it. It can appear you’re being selfish, when really you’re being self-caring.”
> 
> Elly Belle is a freelance writer from New York who calls herself “a huge boundary person.” In a recent, popular tweet, Belle explained how she asked a new girlfriend if she was free one day, and the date responded she would love to hang out, but could not that day due to “life things to take care of.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elly Belle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @literElly
> 
> I asked the girl I'm dating if she was free today because I really want to kiss her and she told me all she wants to do is kiss me but she has life things to take care of and an article to finish writing, and honestly I just want to say people with boundaries are so hot
> 
> 
> 99.8K
> 9:09 AM - Mar 9, 2020
> Twitter Ads info and privacy
> 
> 9,331 people are talking about this
> 
> 
> 
> *RELATED IN ARTS AND CULTURE*
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan and Harry Wow London, for What Could Be the Last Time*
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle Tells Children to ‘Speak Up For What Is Right’*
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan Bid a Hideously Awkward Royal Farewell*
> “Honestly, I just want to say people with boundaries are so hot,” Belle wrote. “yeah baby respectfully turn me down and openly communicate to me that it isn't personal you just know what you need for yourself right now, that's the stuff, uhhhhhhhhhuhhhhhhhhh.”
> 
> “I love it when people are able to set boundaries with me, because I think it means that the person not only respects themselves enough, but also respects me enough to say exactly what they need,” Belle told The Daily Beast. “They know who they are, know what they want and what’s good for them, and are able to stick to that.”
> 
> Dr. Serani often talks about boundary-setting with her clients, especially around the new year and spring. “People like to emerge from the winter, start to do an inventory and think, I want to change this and that,” she said. “I think Meghan leaving the monarchy is a huge story about self-care, and when a high profile individual talks about something, it sets off a ripple effect.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *‘*



Even if I agreed with the narrative that poor victim Meghan had to set boundaries with the evil BRF - there's a difference between setting healthy boundaries and wrecking havoc on others with rude, disrespectful and entirely selfish behaviour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> https://nypost.com/2020/03/14/megxi...racial-people-who-saw-meghan-as-a-role-model/
> *Megxit is a major blow for biracial people who saw Meghan as a role model*
> By David Kaufman
> 
> When Meghan Markle first announced her engagement to Prince Harry in November 2017, she had no bigger fan than myself. As I wrote at the time, Markle — the outspoken daughter of a black mother and white father — was “the biracial hero I’d always wanted.”
> 
> Because unlike President Barack ***** — who conceded his mixed-race heritage but ran as “black” for political expediency — Markle was proudly biracial, writing in Elle in 2016, “My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I’m half black and half white.”
> 
> Not only was Markle open about her struggles fitting in to both communities, she used her unusual profile — actress, socialite, Sussex — as a platform for a subtle, millennial form of progressive politicking at every stage of her evolution. How else to describe a Windsor Castle wedding pairing pomp and protocol with a full gospel choir in May 2018.
> 
> Barely six months later, Markle’s transformative powers were on full display when she and the duke visited Fiji and the South Pacific. Unlike during the early part of their tour in Australia, the crowds in Fiji were as brown-hued as Meghan — which made for a potent and unprecedented site: a princess-of-color embracing her subjects-of-color. With a perfectly posed wave and megawatt smile, it was a beautiful act of racial reconciliation after centuries of British colonialism.
> 
> Most crucially, on that trip — and on later visits to Africa — Markle stood as a role model for the billions of women (and men) of color who desperately need to see themselves represented at the highest reaches of society. And there is no higher reach than the British Royal Family.
> 
> But owing to Megxit, Markle is royal no more and no one could be more disappointed than myself. Because in leaving Britain to chart a path of personal and financial independence, Markle may think she’s freeing herself up to do the work she always wanted, but she’s forgotten one key thing: You can’t be a role model if you don’t have a role. And with her legal drama “Suits” canceled, her lifestyle blog shuttered and the Sussex Royal brand effectively banned by the Queen, Markle desperately needs to find her next gig.
> 
> In less than two years, she has gone from pioneering and maverick-like to craven, calculating and potentially irrelevant. Of course, life under the royal lens can be tough; early on Meghan was subjected to a level of race-based abuse rarely seen in the British media. But Markle was hardly cajoled into walking down the aisle with Harry. More importantly, she failed to even reach her second anniversary as a duchess — barely enough time to convincingly claim royal life had rendered her not “OK.” And despite some initial racist attacks, there was little evidence that, as The New York Times wrote, Markle was a victim of systemic British racism.
> 
> The most frustrating (if not infuriating) element of Markle’s return to North America is that it feels like a slap in the face to those of us — her biracial brothers and sisters and other folks of color — who don’t have the option of simply quitting our lives and retreating to a fortress of luxury.
> 
> We have to show up, day in and day out, and face the challenges of likely being the only minorities in our respective workplaces, social circles and even families. As she waved from the balcony of Buckingham Palace, we saw Markle also doing this work. Despite the carriages and security teams and million-pound wardrobes, she, too, was an “only one” — perhaps, the ultimate only one — and in this we thought we’d found an ally, a princess and finally a role model.
> 
> But Megxit has been a heart-sinking twist for a community like mine which has so few public faces. Because, even in 2020, it’s rare for a person of her stature to enthusiastically embrace being both black and white.



Probably the one time I'm kind of siding with MM - the author is entitled to his feelings of course, but I don't think she owes the biracial community something (as opposed to, say, her in-laws who really did a lot for her). I feel slightly uneasy when a movement or community tries to take ownership of a person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Coronavirus latest here in the UK, over 70s may need to self isolate for 4 months!
Obviously the Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla would all come under this. Maybe we will see MM come back and be the super hero she is and keep the Monarchy afloat.... if there aren't any flight restrictions between Canada and the UK that is.


----------



## Grande Latte

Sharont2305 said:


> Coronavirus latest here in the UK, over 70s may need to self isolate for 4 months!
> Obviously the Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla would all come under this. Maybe we will see MM come back and be the super hero she is and keep the Monarchy afloat.... if there aren't any flight restrictions between Canada and the UK that is.



4 months? 

I was thinking the monarchy is getting old. William and Kate will have to step forward and keep things afloat. Don't count on MM. She's unreliable and self-interested. Come to think of it, Harry's the same way.


----------



## marthastoo

If you're up for a long article, here a good read.  She does a really nice job of explaining Harry, IMO.

*Meghan and Harry Overplayed Their Hand*
Megxit is the most complicated, self-involved, grandiose, shortsighted, letter of partial, fingers-crossed resignation in history.

Caitlin Flanagan
Contributing writer at _The Atlantic_ and author of _Girl Land_





In 1940, in the second month of the Blitz, the announcer of a BBC Radio program called _Children’s Hour_ told listeners that they were about to hear the most important episode in the show’s history: Princess Elizabeth was going to address the children of the empire.

Fourteen years old, her voice clear and piping, Elizabeth told the evacuated children of England that she, too, was away from her family: “My sister, Margaret Rose, and I feel so much for you, as we know from experience what it means to be away from those we love most of all.” She reminded England’s children that they were engaged in something noble: “We are trying, too, to bear our own share of the danger and sadness of war.” But more important, “we know—everyone of us—that in the end all will be well.”

In the final, desperate months of the war came an announcement from Buckingham Palace: “The Princess wishes to throw herself heart and soul into the job,” said a spokesman, and for once you could hear someone’s voice in an official communiqué: Elizabeth, now 18 years old, was about to join the Auxiliary Territorial Service, where she was given a new title, Second Subaltern Windsor, and where she learned to drive and repair ambulances and trucks.

Elizabeth’s responsibility during the war years was the same as that of her parents and also of every Englishman, woman, and child: to be unbroken. your courage, your cheerfulness, your resolution will bring us victory read one of the famous posters created by the Ministry of Information. Germany had tried to demoralize the English people, but their morale would not be broken. In the fetid Underground stations, they put children to bed in hammocks suspended between the tracks, they passed around cups of tea, and they sang music-hall songs and songs from the Great War: “What’s the point of worrying? It never was worthwhile.” In Buckingham Palace—which was shelled on 16 occasions—the King waited impatiently for the air warden to sound the all clear so that he could go out to the streets to inspect the damage and to console and inspire the people of London.

Princess Elizabeth broadcast a speech to British girls and boys evacuated overseas on October 22, 1940. She was joined by her sister, Princess Margaret Rose. (AP)
It was not sangfroid, exactly, because there was no bravado to it. It was simply the real thing: courage. “As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me,” goes the famous opening sentence of George Orwell’s _The Lion and the Unicorn_. His was an appeal for a socialist state, not exactly what Her Royal Highness called for on the _Children’s Hour_. But the two were united by a habit of mind that once defined the British character: a willingness to face great hardship with equanimity.


“I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip,” Meghan Markle said in the fall. “I tried, I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging.”

“I’ve said for a long time to ‘H’—that’s what I call him—it’s not enough to just _survive_ something, right? Like, that’s not the point of life.”

This was not courage, cheerfulness, resolution. This was the therapeutic mindset, feelings, California.

Here is Elizabeth Windsor, age 14, telling the children of the empire: “In the end all will be well.”

Here is Meghan Markle, age 38, explaining her worldview: “Like, that’s not the point of life.”

Meghan made these remarks in a documentary released in Britain on October 20 of last year. Although _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey_ was nominally about the couple’s recent tour of Africa, it was principally about their shared misery. Just over two months later, they announced Megxit: their intention to reshape royal life so that it conformed to Meghan’s definition of thriving and happiness.


But don’t blame Meghan for bringing Hollywood levels of self-involvement to a country devoted to courage, cheerfulness, and resolution. Her desire to get out of the hard parts of life could be the most English thing about her. Or at least the most modern-English thing about her. The Queen is one of the last members of a remarkable generation, and Meghan has come to her great fame in an almost entirely different culture. With her chin trembling—and her simultaneous determination to grab hold of exactly what she wants—she fits right in.

Newly appraising eyes fell on me. Both of my parents had occasion to say to me—several times each, or so it seemed— “She’s _your age_!” This wasn’t like when they noted that Nadia Comăneci (five Olympic gold medals) was “your age!” or that Jodie Foster (nominated for an Academy Award at 14) was “almost your age!” Here was a girl who hadn’t accomplished anything except to exist in female form for 19 years—something I myself had accomplished. I was the Nadia Comăneci of being 19 years old.

I, however, was not interested in the news. Who would want to marry Prince Charles? I liked Tom Petty.

But very quickly, I became mesmerized by Diana. It was because of her beauty, her glass coach, and her endless wardrobe, of course—but it wasn’t only because of those things. It was because she stood so powerfully on the side of emotions, and because she inhabited the world of sentiment that is—or once was—the true home of a teenage girl. And it was because she refused to allow that world to be crushed. Not by her cruel and unloving husband, not by the rigidity of the royal family, not by becoming a woman, and not even by the tabloids, which she loathed and which ultimately killed her. She was a classic figure from fairy tales and folklore: the persecuted heroine, and she raged against her tormentors not with aggression, but with feelings. You knew when she was happy, and you knew when she was suffering. And this deep emotional availability combined with her kindness for anyone meek allowed her to forge an unbreakable bond with the British people.

She would walk into charity wards and shelters, trailed by her complicated, rich woman’s problems, dressed to the nines, and on her way to aromatherapy or lunch or some other diversion of the well-heeled and self-involved, and instantly—mysteriously, against all odds—connect with the people she visited. They recognized her not just as Britain’s biggest celebrity but, improbably, as one of them. She was someone who suffered, someone who was trapped.

She did not believe in the stiff upper lip. She kneeled down so that she could talk with people in wheelchairs eye to eye. She hugged children and pulled them onto her lap. When many people considered AIDS highly contagious, she visited patients ravaged by it, grabbing their hands and bantering with them. She treated them as human beings, not as carriers of a shameful disease.

Five hundred miles from London, in the green-velvet silence of the Scottish Highlands, two people for whom this disaster constituted an actual crisis were asleep in their beds when their mother was killed. William, age 15, and Harry, 12, were visiting their father and grandparents at Balmoral Castle, and when the terrible call came through, the shocked adults allowed them to sleep a few more hours before waking them. In one stroke they had to accept, as best they could, two truths: Their mother was dead, and they did not have the luxury of crying in the streets.

Twenty years after their mother’s death, the princes commissioned a documentary to commemorate the anniversary. In _Diana: 7 Days That Shook the World_, the young men spoke publicly for the first time about their experiences during that week.

I thought Meghan was the best thing that had ever happened to the royal family because in a diverse Britain, she had done the impossible: made the crowd on the Buckingham Palace balcony just a bit diverse. Finally the country had a princess who looked like an awful lot of young English girls—and who was willing to speak openly with them about race and belonging. In the Africa documentary, she addressed a group of South African women by saying that she wasn’t there only as a member of the royal family. She was also there “as a woman of color and as your sister.” The cheer that went up sounded to me like a possible renewal of the lease that the Windsors have on the ridiculous, outrageous, marvelous monarchy.

Meghan and Harry met when he was in the midst of a reevaluation of his life and a growing understanding of how much of it had been shaped by the profound trauma of his childhood, and by the depression that had haunted him ever since.

Like many adults who suffered a childhood bereavement, Harry survived it by shutting it away, refusing to think about it. He has said that in all his life, he has cried only twice about losing his mother. Whenever he thought about her, he would push the thought away—it would only make him sadder and it could never bring her back. He served in the army—including a deployment to Afghanistan, where he flew Apache helicopters—with the kind of courage on which military forces depend: a form of extreme, young male courage that borders on recklessness. It was, he once said, the best “escape” he ever had from royal life. He was headed for a breakdown, and it came, right on schedule, when he left active duty.


It was two years of “total chaos.” Harry kept himself from punching someone by taking up boxing in a gym. His brother was so concerned that he urged him to seek professional help and, at last, he did—during which he realized how deeply depressed he had been for so much of his life. On the other side of “Keep calm and carry on” was a secret that used to be known only within English families, something that was rarely discussed in public: the unexpressed sorrow that reshapes a life.

Therapy was a revelation to him; he began to heal. He became an advocate for ending the stigma around seeking help for mental-health problems. He began to speak openly about the problems he had suffered, and he started a charity with his brother and sister-in-law, Heads Together, devoted to that cause.

The foundation of the plan was sound: They would step back from being “senior” royals, which is a sort of HR designation indicating members of the family who work full-time for the Crown. And they would forfeit all public money and pay back the government for the renovations they had made to their English home, Frogmore Cottage. All of this might have provided them some small protection from the British tabloids. It would free them of the Royal Rota, a pool system for covering the family that includes the tabloids, and also allow them to make a case that they were not the sort of state-funded public figures whose doings were therefore a matter of public significance.

But everything else about the plan was focused on making them more famous than ever—so they hardly planned to lower their public profile. Moreover, they clearly saw their royal status as a value proposition that they could exploit to become independently wealthy. They had filed papers to trademark the term _Sussex Royal_ on more than 100 consumer goods, including pajamas, hoodies, and pencils. Just how long can you be understood as royal when you’re hawking pencils?

And Meghan’s Hollywood dreams loom large over the project. They are rumored to have looked at Malibu rentals for a summer of A-listing it at the beach; they monetized Harry’s depression (a surprise speech about it to some bewildered JP Morgan heavy hitters at a Miami conference; a docuseries on mental health that he is executive producing with Oprah Winfrey); there was talk of a Netflix deal. This is what it means, apparently, to carve out “progressive roles” within the monarchy.

The whole scheme depended on the public’s understanding that the couple remains tightly braided with, and utterly essential to, the Royal Family. The lavishly beautiful website Sussex Royal shows three prongs of their endeavor:

Supporting Community: Connecting with the people and organisations that make the world a better place. [In a photo, we see Harry striding delightedly along a beach in the company of two people of color, one of them elderly]

Serving the Monarchy: Honouring the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II [Harry and Meghan in an open coach, him in the frock-coat uniform of the Blues and Royals, her in a peach dress and matching hat]

Strengthening the Commonwealth: Supporting the Commonwealth and its role in our shared future [Harry and Meghan smiling beneficently at a child in traditional clothing]

They make it clear elsewhere on the website that these plans would not interfere with their solemn commitment to “fully support Her Majesty The Queen”; to “honour our duty to The Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages”; “to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen, The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Cambridge, and all relevant parties.”

How does the Queen feel about all this? At the time of the announcement, she issued a rare personal statement: She gave her blessing to the young couple, who would now be free “to create a new life as a young family … while remaining a valued part of my family.” As for the deal points, she said, “These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.”

But the Queen has had one main objective for all of her seven-decade reign: protecting and preserving the monarchy for future generations. When the final deal points were announced, the couple learned what Oliver Cromwell and others might have taught them: There is no such thing as a “progressive role” in a monarchy. Meghan and Harry lost out on almost everything they had presumed was theirs. They were forbidden from performing any royal duties; they were not to represent the Commonwealth in any way; they were not to use the term _royal_ on anything they were selling or branding; their Buckingham Palace office would be closed; and they were not to use their highest titles, Royal Highness.

The couple’s future isn’t certain. They are hugely appealing and glamorous. Everyone in Hollywood is eager to host them. The first few years of this plan are going to be heady. But—as Harry has often said—as soon as William’s three children become old enough to emerge as individual figures, the klieg lights will immediately turn to them.

Harry and Meghan, it seems, have overplayed their hand severely. The Queen doesn’t need them, not at the price they were asking. Even in a Dianafied world, she still believes in certain ideals, foremost among them dignity and duty. And even now, when almost all is lost, she is still able to inspire it.

More than 1 million people lined the streets of London on the day of Diana’s funeral. It was the last day of the Passion and they wanted to bear witness to the still unbelievable sight of her coffin. “As flowers rained down onto the cortege from bystanders,” said an early report in the _Independent_, “the sound of shrieks and wailing filled the air.” “Diana!” they shouted. “God bless you!”

In Hyde Park, masses of people had camped out to get a good spot from which to watch the funeral on the giant screens that had been installed. They sat on the grass and clung to one another and, as they watched Diana’s coffin projected on the screens, they sobbed. They sobbed as they saw it arrive at Westminster Abbey, and they sobbed when her two unbearably sad boys walked behind it, into the church.

And then they heard the first sound of the service—several notes played on the grand organ that had been installed for the coronation of Elizabeth’s father, George VI. At first these notes were merely blasts of sound, but after the first measure, they organized themselves unmistakably: “God Save the Queen.”

Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her Other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

She has never once put her personal desires ahead of her duty; she has presided calmly over the end of the empire, accepted change with equanimity, and—against all odds—kept the monarchy a vital institution in modern Britain.

In Hyde Park, the national anthem poured out of loudspeakers, and there was a moment in which the Dianified mourners seemed not to know what to do. But suddenly—following some instinct that was older than feelings—everyone in that massive crowd scrambled to their feet, and for that one minute, they stood tall, and they did not cry out. For that one brave and decent minute, they remembered who they were.


----------



## marthastoo

I have always found some of Meghan and Harry's behaviors problematic.  Unlike most people on this thread, I am unwilling to accept as fact anything I read from "palace insiders" or "unnamed friend."  I have always felt that the anti-Meghan narrative that's being pushed is almost always from anonymous sources, and I take everything with a giant grain of salt.  If the tabloid media all have it in for her, it's extremely easy to shape a public persona that may or may not be true.  I judge based on primary sources -  direct interviews, posts on the Sussex Royal website, etc. And as a contrarian, I especially do not like nasty pile ons.

Meghan and Harry deserve some criticism, to be sure. _ I _wouldn't have done any of what Meghan and Harry have done.  There's still many things I like and find sympathetic about the two of them.  However, I have not had their lived experiences, so I'm going to continue to root for them, sit back, and see how it all unfolds.


----------



## marietouchet

Straight-Laced said:


> I think the Balmoral visit story might be bigger than simply PR for the Sussexes, who are probably beginning to realise that they need more royal lustre than they thought they did.  And continuing negotiations for their so called independence might mean that they actually need to meet some obligations to the BRF in exchange for funding, titles etc.
> 
> The Balmoral visit story came from Roya Nikkhah, The Sunday Times Royal Correspondent who gets scoops from the Palace.  It might be approved from the very top.  I think it's a deliberately placed good news story in the face of the overwhelming virus crisis.  A reminder that despite the uncertain weeks and months ahead much is proceeding as normal, the Queen will be at Balmoral this summer as usual and this year the Sussexes will be there with Archie.  The mention of Archie gets the attention for 'business as usual', otherwise there's nothing to report.   It's a positive distraction and shows the BRF doing what they do best.
> This story is part Sussex deal/Sussex PR and part Palace PR for the nation IMO.


Agree probably not fake news, esp due to mention of Archie, good catch !


----------



## DesigningStyle

Sharont2305 said:


> Coronavirus latest here in the UK, over 70s may need to self isolate for 4 months!
> Obviously the Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla would all come under this.



When was this announced?


----------



## Sharont2305

DesigningStyle said:


> When was this announced?


Hasn't been announced yet, the Health Secretary has said that it may happen a few weeks down the line
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51895873


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marthastoo said:


> If you're up for a long article, here a good read.  She does a really nice job of explaining Harry, IMO.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry Overplayed Their Hand*
> Megxit is the most complicated, self-involved, grandiose, shortsighted, letter of partial, fingers-crossed resignation in history.
> 
> Caitlin Flanagan
> Contributing writer at _The Atlantic_ and author of _Girl Land_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1940, in the second month of the Blitz, the announcer of a BBC Radio program called _Children’s Hour_ told listeners that they were about to hear the most important episode in the show’s history: Princess Elizabeth was going to address the children of the empire.
> 
> Fourteen years old, her voice clear and piping, Elizabeth told the evacuated children of England that she, too, was away from her family: “My sister, Margaret Rose, and I feel so much for you, as we know from experience what it means to be away from those we love most of all.” She reminded England’s children that they were engaged in something noble: “We are trying, too, to bear our own share of the danger and sadness of war.” But more important, “we know—everyone of us—that in the end all will be well.”
> 
> In the final, desperate months of the war came an announcement from Buckingham Palace: “The Princess wishes to throw herself heart and soul into the job,” said a spokesman, and for once you could hear someone’s voice in an official communiqué: Elizabeth, now 18 years old, was about to join the Auxiliary Territorial Service, where she was given a new title, Second Subaltern Windsor, and where she learned to drive and repair ambulances and trucks.
> 
> Elizabeth’s responsibility during the war years was the same as that of her parents and also of every Englishman, woman, and child: to be unbroken. your courage, your cheerfulness, your resolution will bring us victory read one of the famous posters created by the Ministry of Information. Germany had tried to demoralize the English people, but their morale would not be broken. In the fetid Underground stations, they put children to bed in hammocks suspended between the tracks, they passed around cups of tea, and they sang music-hall songs and songs from the Great War: “What’s the point of worrying? It never was worthwhile.” In Buckingham Palace—which was shelled on 16 occasions—the King waited impatiently for the air warden to sound the all clear so that he could go out to the streets to inspect the damage and to console and inspire the people of London.
> 
> Princess Elizabeth broadcast a speech to British girls and boys evacuated overseas on October 22, 1940. She was joined by her sister, Princess Margaret Rose. (AP)
> It was not sangfroid, exactly, because there was no bravado to it. It was simply the real thing: courage. “As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me,” goes the famous opening sentence of George Orwell’s _The Lion and the Unicorn_. His was an appeal for a socialist state, not exactly what Her Royal Highness called for on the _Children’s Hour_. But the two were united by a habit of mind that once defined the British character: a willingness to face great hardship with equanimity.
> 
> 
> “I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip,” Meghan Markle said in the fall. “I tried, I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging.”
> 
> “I’ve said for a long time to ‘H’—that’s what I call him—it’s not enough to just _survive_ something, right? Like, that’s not the point of life.”
> 
> This was not courage, cheerfulness, resolution. This was the therapeutic mindset, feelings, California.
> 
> Here is Elizabeth Windsor, age 14, telling the children of the empire: “In the end all will be well.”
> 
> Here is Meghan Markle, age 38, explaining her worldview: “Like, that’s not the point of life.”
> 
> Meghan made these remarks in a documentary released in Britain on October 20 of last year. Although _Harry and Meghan: An African Journey_ was nominally about the couple’s recent tour of Africa, it was principally about their shared misery. Just over two months later, they announced Megxit: their intention to reshape royal life so that it conformed to Meghan’s definition of thriving and happiness.
> 
> 
> But don’t blame Meghan for bringing Hollywood levels of self-involvement to a country devoted to courage, cheerfulness, and resolution. Her desire to get out of the hard parts of life could be the most English thing about her. Or at least the most modern-English thing about her. The Queen is one of the last members of a remarkable generation, and Meghan has come to her great fame in an almost entirely different culture. With her chin trembling—and her simultaneous determination to grab hold of exactly what she wants—she fits right in.
> 
> Newly appraising eyes fell on me. Both of my parents had occasion to say to me—several times each, or so it seemed— “She’s _your age_!” This wasn’t like when they noted that Nadia Comăneci (five Olympic gold medals) was “your age!” or that Jodie Foster (nominated for an Academy Award at 14) was “almost your age!” Here was a girl who hadn’t accomplished anything except to exist in female form for 19 years—something I myself had accomplished. I was the Nadia Comăneci of being 19 years old.
> 
> I, however, was not interested in the news. Who would want to marry Prince Charles? I liked Tom Petty.
> 
> But very quickly, I became mesmerized by Diana. It was because of her beauty, her glass coach, and her endless wardrobe, of course—but it wasn’t only because of those things. It was because she stood so powerfully on the side of emotions, and because she inhabited the world of sentiment that is—or once was—the true home of a teenage girl. And it was because she refused to allow that world to be crushed. Not by her cruel and unloving husband, not by the rigidity of the royal family, not by becoming a woman, and not even by the tabloids, which she loathed and which ultimately killed her. She was a classic figure from fairy tales and folklore: the persecuted heroine, and she raged against her tormentors not with aggression, but with feelings. You knew when she was happy, and you knew when she was suffering. And this deep emotional availability combined with her kindness for anyone meek allowed her to forge an unbreakable bond with the British people.
> 
> She would walk into charity wards and shelters, trailed by her complicated, rich woman’s problems, dressed to the nines, and on her way to aromatherapy or lunch or some other diversion of the well-heeled and self-involved, and instantly—mysteriously, against all odds—connect with the people she visited. They recognized her not just as Britain’s biggest celebrity but, improbably, as one of them. She was someone who suffered, someone who was trapped.
> 
> She did not believe in the stiff upper lip. She kneeled down so that she could talk with people in wheelchairs eye to eye. She hugged children and pulled them onto her lap. When many people considered AIDS highly contagious, she visited patients ravaged by it, grabbing their hands and bantering with them. She treated them as human beings, not as carriers of a shameful disease.
> 
> Five hundred miles from London, in the green-velvet silence of the Scottish Highlands, two people for whom this disaster constituted an actual crisis were asleep in their beds when their mother was killed. William, age 15, and Harry, 12, were visiting their father and grandparents at Balmoral Castle, and when the terrible call came through, the shocked adults allowed them to sleep a few more hours before waking them. In one stroke they had to accept, as best they could, two truths: Their mother was dead, and they did not have the luxury of crying in the streets.
> 
> Twenty years after their mother’s death, the princes commissioned a documentary to commemorate the anniversary. In _Diana: 7 Days That Shook the World_, the young men spoke publicly for the first time about their experiences during that week.
> 
> I thought Meghan was the best thing that had ever happened to the royal family because in a diverse Britain, she had done the impossible: made the crowd on the Buckingham Palace balcony just a bit diverse. Finally the country had a princess who looked like an awful lot of young English girls—and who was willing to speak openly with them about race and belonging. In the Africa documentary, she addressed a group of South African women by saying that she wasn’t there only as a member of the royal family. She was also there “as a woman of color and as your sister.” The cheer that went up sounded to me like a possible renewal of the lease that the Windsors have on the ridiculous, outrageous, marvelous monarchy.
> 
> Meghan and Harry met when he was in the midst of a reevaluation of his life and a growing understanding of how much of it had been shaped by the profound trauma of his childhood, and by the depression that had haunted him ever since.
> 
> Like many adults who suffered a childhood bereavement, Harry survived it by shutting it away, refusing to think about it. He has said that in all his life, he has cried only twice about losing his mother. Whenever he thought about her, he would push the thought away—it would only make him sadder and it could never bring her back. He served in the army—including a deployment to Afghanistan, where he flew Apache helicopters—with the kind of courage on which military forces depend: a form of extreme, young male courage that borders on recklessness. It was, he once said, the best “escape” he ever had from royal life. He was headed for a breakdown, and it came, right on schedule, when he left active duty.
> 
> 
> It was two years of “total chaos.” Harry kept himself from punching someone by taking up boxing in a gym. His brother was so concerned that he urged him to seek professional help and, at last, he did—during which he realized how deeply depressed he had been for so much of his life. On the other side of “Keep calm and carry on” was a secret that used to be known only within English families, something that was rarely discussed in public: the unexpressed sorrow that reshapes a life.
> 
> Therapy was a revelation to him; he began to heal. He became an advocate for ending the stigma around seeking help for mental-health problems. He began to speak openly about the problems he had suffered, and he started a charity with his brother and sister-in-law, Heads Together, devoted to that cause.
> 
> The foundation of the plan was sound: They would step back from being “senior” royals, which is a sort of HR designation indicating members of the family who work full-time for the Crown. And they would forfeit all public money and pay back the government for the renovations they had made to their English home, Frogmore Cottage. All of this might have provided them some small protection from the British tabloids. It would free them of the Royal Rota, a pool system for covering the family that includes the tabloids, and also allow them to make a case that they were not the sort of state-funded public figures whose doings were therefore a matter of public significance.
> 
> But everything else about the plan was focused on making them more famous than ever—so they hardly planned to lower their public profile. Moreover, they clearly saw their royal status as a value proposition that they could exploit to become independently wealthy. They had filed papers to trademark the term _Sussex Royal_ on more than 100 consumer goods, including pajamas, hoodies, and pencils. Just how long can you be understood as royal when you’re hawking pencils?
> 
> And Meghan’s Hollywood dreams loom large over the project. They are rumored to have looked at Malibu rentals for a summer of A-listing it at the beach; they monetized Harry’s depression (a surprise speech about it to some bewildered JP Morgan heavy hitters at a Miami conference; a docuseries on mental health that he is executive producing with Oprah Winfrey); there was talk of a Netflix deal. This is what it means, apparently, to carve out “progressive roles” within the monarchy.
> 
> The whole scheme depended on the public’s understanding that the couple remains tightly braided with, and utterly essential to, the Royal Family. The lavishly beautiful website Sussex Royal shows three prongs of their endeavor:
> 
> Supporting Community: Connecting with the people and organisations that make the world a better place. [In a photo, we see Harry striding delightedly along a beach in the company of two people of color, one of them elderly]
> 
> Serving the Monarchy: Honouring the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II [Harry and Meghan in an open coach, him in the frock-coat uniform of the Blues and Royals, her in a peach dress and matching hat]
> 
> Strengthening the Commonwealth: Supporting the Commonwealth and its role in our shared future [Harry and Meghan smiling beneficently at a child in traditional clothing]
> 
> They make it clear elsewhere on the website that these plans would not interfere with their solemn commitment to “fully support Her Majesty The Queen”; to “honour our duty to The Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages”; “to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen, The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Cambridge, and all relevant parties.”
> 
> How does the Queen feel about all this? At the time of the announcement, she issued a rare personal statement: She gave her blessing to the young couple, who would now be free “to create a new life as a young family … while remaining a valued part of my family.” As for the deal points, she said, “These are complex matters for my family to resolve, and there is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days.”
> 
> But the Queen has had one main objective for all of her seven-decade reign: protecting and preserving the monarchy for future generations. When the final deal points were announced, the couple learned what Oliver Cromwell and others might have taught them: There is no such thing as a “progressive role” in a monarchy. Meghan and Harry lost out on almost everything they had presumed was theirs. They were forbidden from performing any royal duties; they were not to represent the Commonwealth in any way; they were not to use the term _royal_ on anything they were selling or branding; their Buckingham Palace office would be closed; and they were not to use their highest titles, Royal Highness.
> 
> The couple’s future isn’t certain. They are hugely appealing and glamorous. Everyone in Hollywood is eager to host them. The first few years of this plan are going to be heady. But—as Harry has often said—as soon as William’s three children become old enough to emerge as individual figures, the klieg lights will immediately turn to them.
> 
> Harry and Meghan, it seems, have overplayed their hand severely. The Queen doesn’t need them, not at the price they were asking. Even in a Dianafied world, she still believes in certain ideals, foremost among them dignity and duty. And even now, when almost all is lost, she is still able to inspire it.
> 
> More than 1 million people lined the streets of London on the day of Diana’s funeral. It was the last day of the Passion and they wanted to bear witness to the still unbelievable sight of her coffin. “As flowers rained down onto the cortege from bystanders,” said an early report in the _Independent_, “the sound of shrieks and wailing filled the air.” “Diana!” they shouted. “God bless you!”
> 
> In Hyde Park, masses of people had camped out to get a good spot from which to watch the funeral on the giant screens that had been installed. They sat on the grass and clung to one another and, as they watched Diana’s coffin projected on the screens, they sobbed. They sobbed as they saw it arrive at Westminster Abbey, and they sobbed when her two unbearably sad boys walked behind it, into the church.
> 
> And then they heard the first sound of the service—several notes played on the grand organ that had been installed for the coronation of Elizabeth’s father, George VI. At first these notes were merely blasts of sound, but after the first measure, they organized themselves unmistakably: “God Save the Queen.”
> 
> Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her Other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.
> 
> She has never once put her personal desires ahead of her duty; she has presided calmly over the end of the empire, accepted change with equanimity, and—against all odds—kept the monarchy a vital institution in modern Britain.
> 
> In Hyde Park, the national anthem poured out of loudspeakers, and there was a moment in which the Dianified mourners seemed not to know what to do. But suddenly—following some instinct that was older than feelings—everyone in that massive crowd scrambled to their feet, and for that one minute, they stood tall, and they did not cry out. For that one brave and decent minute, they remembered who they were.



Thank you for posting, this was a great balanced article. Also, when all this started, I thought the Queen was being mild and indulgent with them. As it turns out, not so much.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Hasn't been announced yet, the Health Secretary has said that it may happen a few weeks down the line
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51895873


Coronavirus will have a huge effect on all


----------



## chaneljewel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you for posting, this was a great balanced article. Also, when all this started, I thought the Queen was being mild and indulgent with them. As it turns out, not so much.


Read every word of the article.  Wonderful.  Shows the true devotion and sacrifice of being in the BRF.


----------



## prettyprincess

mshermes said:


> That isn’t what you wrote, is it? BTW....priggish is synonymous with self righteous.


Yes, it’s what I wrote and I understand perfectly what the words I use mean


----------



## wisconsin

I too have been a critic and I think we should give them both a break. I feel really bad for Harry but now he needs to keep his family together. He has no choice in his position at least as of now. There is a child involved and there are other issues in the world. Maybe Meghan will learn some humility and grace and forgiveness (for how she says she was wronged) and maybe she won’t.


----------



## Aminamina

Wow, the Guardian article sounds as if Meghan herself dictated it. So unfare and nasty to Kate and the main thought is that the BRF OWES Meghan everything.
https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...al-duty-bearing-a-grudge-against-harry-meghan
And thanks to Cosmopolitan for explaining the real reason for not bringing Archie to the UK to see his family. No, it's not to keep a baby away from the Queen! Coronavirus, you guessed right. The one his parents failed or did not have a time to educate themselves about.


----------



## lulilu

Aminamina said:


> Wow, the Guardian article sounds as if Meghan herself dictated it. So unfare and nasty to Kate and the main thought is that the BRF OWES Meghan everything.
> https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...al-duty-bearing-a-grudge-against-harry-meghan
> And thanks to Cosmopolitan for explaining the real reason for not bringing Archie to the UK to see his family. No, it's not to keep a baby away from the Queen! Coronavirus, you guessed right. The one his parents failed or did not have a time to educate themselves about.



A sickening article.  What nonsense.


----------



## marthastoo

The Guardian is a left-leaning paper, so not surprised at the tone.  I do think it's missing the point in that I don't think Kate and William's chilliness is any coordinated Royal effort to be mean to Meghan and Harry.  I think William doesn't approve of Harry's decisions and Kate 1.) is being the loyal wife and backing up her hubby  (which I would do 100% as well in my family situation), and 2.) she most likely agrees with his opinion on the situation anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> Wow, the Guardian article sounds as if Meghan herself dictated it. So unfare and nasty to Kate and the main thought is that the BRF OWES Meghan everything.
> https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...al-duty-bearing-a-grudge-against-harry-meghan
> And thanks to Cosmopolitan for explaining the real reason for not bringing Archie to the UK to see his family. No, it's not to keep a baby away from the Queen! Coronavirus, you guessed right. The one his parents failed or did not have a time to educate themselves about.


Yeah right, Kate is the jerk. Give me a break. 

Where have these people been during all the drama where the Sussexes publicly made fools out of themselves and showed their entitlement in their own words on their infamous website?


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> The Guardian is a left-leaning paper, so not surprised at the tone.  I do think it's missing the point in that I don't think Kate and William's chilliness is any coordinated Royal effort to be mean to Meghan and Harry.  I think William doesn't approve of Harry's decisions and Kate 1.) is being the loyal wife and backing up her hubby  (which I would do 100% as well in my family situation), and 2.) she most likely agrees with his opinion on the situation anyway.


you may be right about the Guardian but I'm far from right leaning and I'm no fan of H&M - I like William & Kate much better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marthastoo said:


> The Guardian is a left-leaning paper, so not surprised at the tone.  I do think it's missing the point in that I don't think Kate and William's chilliness is any coordinated Royal effort to be mean to Meghan and Harry.  I think William doesn't approve of Harry's decisions and Kate 1.) is being the loyal wife and backing up her hubby  (which I would do 100% as well in my family situation), and 2.) she most likely agrees with his opinion on the situation anyway.



I mean, haven't we all had that one relative that was sucking the life out of us with the constant drama? At some point, even wellmannered royals must be fed up and exhausted. And to be honest, seeing what the Sussexes have said and done in public I can only wonder what they've piled on in private.


----------



## marthastoo

Aminamina said:


> Wow, the Guardian article sounds as if Meghan herself dictated it. So unfare and nasty to Kate and the main thought is that the BRF OWES Meghan everything.
> https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...al-duty-bearing-a-grudge-against-harry-meghan
> And thanks to Cosmopolitan for explaining the real reason for not bringing Archie to the UK to see his family. No, it's not to keep a baby away from the Queen! Coronavirus, you guessed right. The one his parents failed or did not have a time to educate themselves about.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, haven't we all had that one relative that was sucking the life out of us with the constant drama? At some point, even wellmannered royals must be fed up and exhausted. And to be honest, seeing what the Sussexes have said and done in public I can only wonder what they've piled on in private.


I don't think it's that they're fed up.  I do think both William and Kate are extremely disciplined in what they share, their facial expressions, nonverbal cues,etc.  I think it was a very deliberate move on both their parts to show the world their displeasure with Sussexes. If they wanted to put on the public happy face, they definitely could have.


----------



## mshermes

prettyprincess said:


> Yes, it’s what I wrote and I understand perfectly what the words I use mean


No....this is what you wrote:

As it were, there are moms in here acting horrified that she left him at home, as if she left him on some deserted island somewhere to fend for himself. It’s just another way for *moms to act morally and ethically superior.*


----------



## prettyprincess

mshermes said:


> No....this is what you wrote:
> 
> As it were, there are moms in here acting horrified that she left him at home, as if she left him on some deserted island somewhere to fend for himself. It’s just another way for *moms to act morally and ethically superior.*



Right. what’s your point?


----------



## Flatsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At some point, even wellmannered royals must be fed up and exhausted. And to be honest, seeing what the Sussexes have said and done in public I can only wonder what they've piled on in private.


Fed up, exhausted, and maybe not capable of the level of phoniness it would require at this point.  The Sussexes have no problem being nasty to the family in private and through the press, but they (especially Meghan) still act sweet and nice in public.  There's putting a good face on things, and then there is being disgustingly insincere.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Fed up, exhausted, and maybe not capable of the level of phoniness it would require at this point.  The Sussexes have no problem being nasty to the family in private and through the press, but they (especially Meghan) still act sweet and nice in public.  *There's putting a good face on things, and then there is being disgustingly insincere*.


AMEN to that, and that "attribute" is not something that I personally tolerate .. fool me once, but you do not get a 2nd chance at that!  That all being said, their Royal mouthpiece has penned another article indicating that H&M have a 'fearful' future .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...uture-outside-Royal-Family-expert-claims.html


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> since you are clearly an admirer can you please give your thoughts on why they don't follow the news?  seems such a socially conscious couple would know about world and national affairs


It’s shocking to me that Harry dosent follow the news because it depresses him. What a lightweight airhead. I am sure it depresses the hell out of all of us but we don’t have the luxury of ignoring it. This is a global pandemic that has not been seen for 100 or so years. How irresponsible of him.


----------



## shiba

He better start. He needs to self-isolate now that he returned from the UK. It isn't mandatory (yet) but there will be public uproar if they are out pap walking.


----------



## Chagall

shiba said:


> He better start. He needs to self-isolate now that he returned from the UK. It isn't mandatory (yet) but there will be public uproar if they are out pap walking.


He does not want to bother his silly head about this. He has grandparents in their 90’s. The heads of countries are getting it. The royals are not exempt.


----------



## shiba

Chagall said:


> He does not want to bother his silly head about this. He has grandparents in their 90’s. The heads of countries are getting it. The royals are not exempt.



I am not suggesting that he self-isolate for his own good - I hope that is not how my post came across.
In Canada all international travelers are asked to self-isolate for 14 days to prevent spread. He could have already contracted the virus from being in the UK, just as Sophie did. It would be selfish to be out pap strolling or getting sandwiches.


----------



## CeeJay

shiba said:


> I am not suggesting that he self-isolate for his own good - I hope that is not how my post came across.
> In Canada all international travelers are asked to self-isolate for 14 days to prevent spread. He could have already contracted the virus from being in the UK, just as Sophie did. It would be selfish to be out pap strolling or getting sandwiches.


.. and let's not forget that he could also infect all those "security" personnel who are still stuck there 'protecting' them until the end of the Month!!!  Speaking from experience, one of the WORST things is when you are away from home but sick as heck!!!


----------



## lulilu

Chagall said:


> It’s shocking to me that Harry dosent follow the news because it depresses him. What a lightweight airhead. I am sure it depresses the hell out of all of us but we don’t have the luxury of ignoring it. This is a global pandemic that has not been seen for 100 or so years. How irresponsible of him.



He's lying.  (She is too--she's *either* too busy to read the news to learn about covid crisis, or she left Archie home because of covid.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> He's lying.  (She is too--she's *either* too busy to read the news to learn about covid crisis, or she left Archie home because of covid.)



Yeah, I always wondered how she could simultaneously claim to not read anything written about her but be hurt by how mean (read: not sucking up enough) the press was.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> The Guardian is a left-leaning paper, so not surprised at the tone.  I do think it's missing the point in that I don't think Kate and William's chilliness is any coordinated Royal effort to be mean to Meghan and Harry.  I think William doesn't approve of Harry's decisions and Kate 1.) is being the loyal wife and backing up her hubby  (which I would do 100% as well in my family situation), and 2.) she most likely agrees with his opinion on the situation anyway.


I think Kate has a bit more reason to be upset with Meghan.  Yes, these  reports are on gossip sites, but it is becoming increasingly believed that the rumors that William was having an affair with Rose Hanbury stemmed from Meghan.  Additionally, she probably thinks that Harry should have remained a senior royal and supported the family and William with his future responsibilities.  His renouncing his position puts more of a burden on William and on her as well.  Kate and Sophie are going to shoulder a lot of the work in coming years and  Harry's wife could have helped.  One can see even now, that George and Charlotte will be a team when they are old enough to contribute to The Firm.  This is what William expected of Harry, that they would be a team. A team has one captain and  Harry always knew that due to birth order, William would call the shots, and should have resigned himself to that long ago and he had done so, he would have been a happier individual.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> A sickening article.  What nonsense.


I second the thought.  Is she on the SS payroll?  Did they promise her a weekend with celebs in Palm Desert?  

Revenge dressing?  Don't get me started on that..  Tons of photoshopped pictures of dresses that were over the top, poorly fitted and overwhelming for her frame.  A smile plastered on her face so that should a camera snap, she was photo ready.  Her husband didn't get that memo and remained his petulant self most of the time.  

I hope they self quarantine and just stay home.  Really sick of these two.  For people that wanted to be private, they have turned into total attention seekers.


----------



## marthastoo

gracekelly said:


> I think Kate has a bit more reason to be upset with Meghan.  Yes, these  reports are on gossip sites, but it is becoming increasingly believed that the rumors that William was having an affair with Rose Hanbury stemmed from Meghan.  Additionally, she probably thinks that Harry should have remained a senior royal and supported the family and William with his future responsibilities.  His renouncing his position puts more of a burden on William and on her as well.  Kate and Sophie are going to shoulder a lot of the work in coming years and a Harry's wife could have helped.  One can see even now, that George and Charlotte will be a team when they are old enough to contribute to The Firm.  This is what William expected of Harry, that they would be a team. A team has one captain and  Harry always knew that due to birth order, William would call the shots, and should have resigned himself to that long ago and he had done so, he would have been a happier individual.



Well, I'm a skeptic when it comes to rumors, especially something like blaming Meghan for starting the rumor about William's affair. However, totally agree with you on the burden placed on the Cambridges right on down the line to the children.  I mean, I get why William and Kate are pissed at them, and not just because it means more work for the rest of the family.

I find Kate to be particularly inscrutable, even after watching her fairly closely over the past decade or so.  She really plays her cards close to her chest.  That said, I never got the feeling she ever liked Meghan, right from the start.  Yes, she smiled and was pleasant in public (as she is particularly skilled at being non-offensive and mild), but I think William's opinion about the speed of the marriage and Meghan herself really made for a not-very-close relationship to begin with.  I also think Meghan is someone whom Kate would never be friends with anyway.


----------



## sdkitty

marthastoo said:


> Well, I'm a skeptic when it comes to rumors, especially something like blaming Meghan for starting the rumor about William's affair. However, totally agree with you on the burden placed on the Cambridges right on down the line to the children.  I mean, I get why William and Kate are pissed at them, and not just because it means more work for the rest of the family.
> 
> I find Kate to be particularly inscrutable, even after watching her fairly closely over the past decade or so.  She really plays her cards close to her chest.  That said, I never got the feeling she ever liked Meghan, right from the start.  Yes, she smiled and was pleasant in public (as she is particularly skilled to be non-offensive and mild), but I think William's opinion about the speed of the marriage and Meghan herself really made for a not-very-close relationship to begin with.  I also think Meghan is someone whom Kate would never be friends with anyway.


Probably good she didn't let Meghan get close to her.


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> Well, I'm a skeptic when it comes to rumors, especially something like blaming Meghan for starting the rumor about William's affair. However, totally agree with you on the burden placed on the Cambridges right on down the line to the children.  I mean, I get why William and Kate are pissed at them, and not just because it means more work for the rest of the family.
> 
> I find Kate to be particularly inscrutable, even after watching her fairly closely over the past decade or so.  She really plays her cards close to her chest.  That said, I never got the feeling she ever liked Meghan, right from the start.  Yes, she smiled and was pleasant in public (as she is particularly skilled at being non-offensive and mild), but I think William's opinion about the speed of the marriage and Meghan herself really made for a not-very-close relationship to begin with.  I also think Meghan is someone whom Kate would never be friends with anyway.



It's funny, I always had the feeling that because Kate and Pippa were so close, she would be good at relationships with other women.  She certainly bonded with Sophie from all reports.  Kate dragged Pippa along when they all went to Wimbledon and that was probably to use her as a buffer and make the group look convivial.  I could believe that Kate's opinion of Meghan was colored by her husband's opinion.   

Kate listened to the advice given to her by the BP minders.  You have to develop a public persona and demeanor in order to do this job.  She was young enough at the time to listen and what she learned stuck.  When you are 35, and have lived your life a certain way, as did Meghan, it is much harder to do this.  i don't think she ever cared to learn or to change.


----------



## Chagall

She is such a poser. She is not a ‘friend’ of Justin and Sophie Trudeau. In times like this all she can think of is self promotion and social climbing.


----------



## DS2006

I don't think I've posted on this thread, but I do enjoy reading it now and then!  I am sure what I am about to say has been said 1000 times, at least!

I was skeptical about Meghan in the role of Prince Harry's wife from the very beginning. Her friends warned her not to marry him, but she did it anyway. She decided she could have him and the life SHE wanted! So extremely selfish!!! I think Harry is sad. He is having to give up the only life he has ever known. I realize he probably didn't love all of it, but after all, he did try to arrange for it to be part-time royal rather than not at all. The queen was wise in how she handled it, IMO. Bottom line, Meghan didn't like Kate being in the spotlight more than her.

Kate is total class. I hope William appreciates her. I think since she used to be close to Harry, she may have been skeptical about Meghan fitting into that role. If so, she was certainly right. I would think the whole family blames Meghan for the whole fiasco.


----------



## bag-mania

As far as how William and Kate reacted to Meghan, maybe it’s as simple as this. One of the factors that helps you decide whether you like your family member’s new love is seeing what effect she has on him. Has his personality changed from the guy you’ve known for years? Does he no longer care about things that were once very important to him? Is he as gregarious as he once was or is he withdrawn? Does she bring out the best in him or the worst?

The answers to those questions likely determined just how friendly a reception Meghan received from the family last week.


----------



## sdkitty

DS2006 said:


> I don't think I've posted on this thread, but I do enjoy reading it now and then!  I am sure what I am about to say has been said 1000 times, at least!
> 
> I was skeptical about Meghan in the role of Prince Harry's wife from the very beginning. Her friends warned her not to marry him, but she did it anyway. She decided she could have him and the life SHE wanted! So extremely selfish!!! I think Harry is sad. He is having to give up the only life he has ever known. I realize he probably didn't love all of it, but after all, he did try to arrange for it to be part-time royal rather than not at all. The queen was wise in how she handled it, IMO. Bottom line, Meghan didn't like Kate being in the spotlight more than her.
> 
> Kate is total class. I hope William appreciates her. I think since she used to be close to Harry, she may have been skeptical about Meghan fitting into that role. If so, she was certainly right. I would think the whole family blames Meghan for the whole fiasco.


Harry may have thought he wanted out but doesn't mean he isn't having regrets now


----------



## muchstuff

bag-mania said:


> As far as how William and Kate reacted to Meghan, maybe it’s as simple as this. One of the factors that helps you decide whether you like your family member’s new love is seeing what effect she has on him. Has his personality changed from the guy you’ve known for years? Does he no longer care about things that were once very important to him? Is he as gregarious as he once was or is he withdrawn? Does she bring out the best in him or the worst?
> 
> The answers to those questions likely determined just how friendly a reception Meghan received from the family last week.


Just have to say, your avatar .


----------



## marthastoo

bag-mania said:


> As far as how William and Kate reacted to Meghan, maybe it’s as simple as this. One of the factors that helps you decide whether you like your family member’s new love is seeing what effect she has on him. Has his personality changed from the guy you’ve known for years? Does he no longer care about things that were once very important to him? Is he as gregarious as he once was or is he withdrawn? Does she bring out the best in him or the worst?
> 
> The answers to those questions likely determined just how friendly a reception Meghan received from the family last week.


It wasn't just Meghan that got an arctic reception.  Harry was very pointedly snubbed as well.  His facial expression summed up how well he was taking it.


----------



## jennalovesbags

I just watched the Diana doc “in her own words,” and while it was clear she was dealing with some mental health issues, it did make me think that MM’s experience may have been similar to Diana’s. I don’t agree with everything either one of them did, but it made me feel more empathy.


----------



## queennadine

Seeing how close Kate and Harry appeared to be, I would assume that she was initially looking forward to gaining another “sister” and hopefully getting close to her. 

But she also went through the ringer, waited a long time before getting engaged and married, saw her parents drug through the mud, underwent all of the training and education, etc. 

So I can see how an outsider essentially disregarding that and having an attitude of “I can’t wait to hit the ground running and help people see the world in the correct sense” while not listening to any of the advice and shunning protocol would chap her hide.


----------



## DS2006

I don't think Diana and Meghan can even be compared. Diana was only about 19 when she was engaged and 20 when she married!  Her husband did not ever love her. He married out of duty to produce an heir. I am sure it was devastating for her to realize that at some point. Then his unfaithfulness had to make it even worse.  Meghan had none of that. She was 35 and should have had much more maturity than a 20 year old. She had plenty of knowledge on the media scrutiny. Plus, she has a husband who seems to love her very much. I think their situations have very little in common other than the stress of being in the public eye.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Three of four looked miserable and one looked quite happy.  Quite consistent with the supposed row and acquiescence that allegedly occurred behind the scenes just before they all walked out. 

I thought she was going to be such a great fresh addition and her behaviour has repeatedly demonstrated a sense of entitlement coupled with a complete lack of interest in contributing and it also feels like a desire to instigate.  It’s disappointing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marthastoo said:


> It wasn't just Meghan that got an arctic reception.  Harry was very pointedly snubbed as well.  His facial expression summed up how well he was taking it.


Yes, I think he was totally shocked by his brother's greeting, or I should say the paucity of it.  It just shows that Harry really doesn't understand what he has done and how raw William is feeling.


----------



## bag-mania

marthastoo said:


> It wasn't just Meghan that got an arctic reception.  Harry was very pointedly snubbed as well.  His facial expression summed up how well he was taking it.



Yes, they appear to be mad at him as well. Of course we don’t know everything that went on between them and what might have been said behind closed doors. One thing is certain, they were not in the mood to fake a smile and pretend everything was fine when it wasn’t.


----------



## Jktgal

https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...e-hugs-everyones-uptight-royal-family-2939549

You are estranged from your family except for your mother. Your father is likely to go to court against you. He who paid  for your education don't  get introduced to your husband. You had one family member at your wedding and invited thousands of strangers. 
And you think their family is WEIRD??


----------



## Jayne1

queennadine said:


> Seeing how close Kate and Harry appeared to be, I would assume that she was initially looking forward to gaining another “sister” and hopefully getting close to her.
> 
> But she also went through the ringer, waited a long time before getting engaged and married, saw her parents drug through the mud, underwent all of the training and education, etc.
> 
> So I can see how an outsider essentially disregarding that and having an attitude of “I can’t wait to hit the ground running and help people see the world in the correct sense” while not listening to any of the advice and shunning protocol would chap her hide.


I never assumed the bothers were close, other than they went through a lot of stuff together.  Their personalities seem so different.  

We did see photos of them laughing together, but did that mean they were best friends?  I never thought so.


----------



## Jayne1

DS2006 said:


> I don't think Diana and Meghan can even be compared. Diana was only about 19 when she was engaged and 20 when she married!  Her husband did not ever love her. He married out of duty to produce an heir. I am sure it was devastating for her to realize that at some point. Then his unfaithfulness had to make it even worse.  Meghan had none of that. She was 35 and should have had much more maturity than a 20 year old. She had plenty of knowledge on the media scrutiny. Plus, she has a husband who seems to love her very much. I think their situations have very little in common other than the stress of being in the public eye.


Diana didn't really love him either, she barely knew him and she wasn't very understanding of his personality.  The guy was raised to be King. It takes a certain kind of love to deal with that.  Like Camilla's.  She never seems to put herself first.

I do think the situations are similar in that apparently you don't get much guidance when you enter the BRF.  You either sink or swim and both kinda sunk. Kate endured and only got better with time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jktgal said:


> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...e-hugs-everyones-uptight-royal-family-2939549
> 
> You are estranged from your family except for your mother. Your father is likely to go to court against you. He who paid  for your education don't  get introduced to your husband. You had one family member at your wedding and invited thousands of strangers.
> And you think their family is WEIRD??


This so much.


----------



## mia55

Jktgal said:


> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...e-hugs-everyones-uptight-royal-family-2939549
> 
> You are estranged from your family except for your mother. Your father is likely to go to court against you. He who paid  for your education don't  get introduced to your husband. You had one family member at your wedding and invited thousands of strangers.
> And you think their family is WEIRD??



Wow, I really really wish there was a way this comment can get pass to Harry and MM.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jktgal said:


> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...e-hugs-everyones-uptight-royal-family-2939549
> 
> You are estranged from your family except for your mother. Your father is likely to go to court against you. He who paid  for your education don't  get introduced to your husband. You had one family member at your wedding and invited thousands of strangers.
> And you think their family is WEIRD??


I want to like this 100 times


----------



## mdcx

Random, but while we wait for Meghan’s next misadventure - best wishes to everyone in dealing with coronavirus in your country.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mdcx said:


> Random, but while we wait for Meghan’s next misadventure - best wishes to everyone in dealing with coronavirus in your country.


This thread is truly one of the only escapes from it.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> I never assumed the bothers were close, other than they went through a lot of stuff together.  Their personalities seem so different.
> 
> .



We cannot know. But Harry himself said he could only deal with the trauma of her mother’s loss because of the support of his brother. He was the one who convinced him to go to therapy too. You have to be pretty close for that. Going through stuff together can be more bonding than having the same personality type... Harry and Kate’s relationship seemed pretty genuine too. No one expects you to be best friends with your sister in law, so there was no incentive to fake that.


----------



## mdcx

I definitely think Harry loved Kate in a platonic way, Meghan got jealous, and set to work breaking that relationship up asap.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> I definitely think Harry loved Kate in a platonic way, Meghan got jealous, and set to work breaking that relationship up asap.



I’ll go so far as to say that Meghan feels threatened by anyone Harry loves other than her. Not only does she crave being the center of attention in general, she _needs_ to be the center of his attention.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> I do think the situations are similar in that apparently you don't get much guidance when you enter the BRF.  You either sink or swim and both kinda sunk. Kate endured and only got better with time.



Kate and William also had some time, right after their marriage, where they lived very quietly in Wales for several years, had George, with William working as an air ambulance pilot.  I think this gave Kate time to settle in.  Meghan could have done this too.  Had the baby, lived quietly at Frogmore or at another place in the country, and settled in to both motherhood and her duties.  The public would have understood and so would the family.  She could have taken on more over the years as Archie grew and as she got to know her new country.  Clearly, that was not on her agenda ever.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Kate definitely got some slack for those more quiet years, with a lot of people saying that she didn’t do enough work. It definitely worked out for the best though, she has such maturity and grace, and is well able to deal with her duties, which are only going to increase with time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> Kate and William also had some time, right after their marriage, where they lived very quietly in Wales for several years, had George, with William working as an air ambulance pilot.  I think this gave Kate time to settle in.  Meghan could have done this too.  Had the baby, lived quietly at Frogmore or at another place in the country, and settled in to both motherhood and her duties.  The public would have understood and so would the family.  She could have taken on more over the years as Archie grew and as she got to know her new country.  Clearly, that was not on her agenda ever.


Sorry to correct you, while he was here on Anglesey he was a search and rescue pilot. He was an air ambulance pilot once they moved to Norfolk [emoji16]


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Sorry to correct you, while he was here on Anglesey he was a search and rescue pilot. He was an air ambulance pilot once they moved to Norfolk [emoji16]



Thanks for the correction!  Good to know. I didn't realize he had been a search and rescue pilot.


----------



## kemilia

marthastoo said:


> Well, I'm a skeptic when it comes to rumors, especially something like blaming Meghan for starting the rumor about William's affair. However, totally agree with you on the burden placed on the Cambridges right on down the line to the children.  I mean, I get why William and Kate are pissed at them, and not just because it means more work for the rest of the family.
> 
> I find Kate to be particularly inscrutable, even after watching her fairly closely over the past decade or so.  She really plays her cards close to her chest.  That said, I never got the feeling she ever liked Meghan, right from the start.  Yes, she smiled and was pleasant in public (as she is particularly skilled at being non-offensive and mild), but I think William's opinion about the speed of the marriage and Meghan herself really made for a not-very-close relationship to begin with.  I also think Meghan is someone whom Kate would never be friends with anyway.


Kate is already in Queen mode--inscrutable. As for maybe never taking to Meghan--there are people that I never really like and they may not like me, that's just the way it is. 

And with M being an actress, that may have added to the mix--being actors/actresses they are trained to play roles and be convincing. But I never watched Suits so I don't know what she was like.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I’ll go so far as to say that Meghan feels threatened by anyone Harry loves other than her. Not only does she crave being the center of attention in general, she _needs_ to be the center of his attention.



I could imagine that Harry sang the praises of Kate too, how great she was and how Meghan could learn so much from her, and Meghan probably didn't like that one bit.  

There is also no way that Kate would have included Meghan in her inner circle from the start.  Too risky with a complete stranger and they don't even know each other, so why would she take that chance?  So, Kate was likely polite and cordial to Meghan but also adopted a wait-and-see attitude.  I think she'd want to get to know Meghan, see how they got along, and see if she could be trusted. That all takes time, years even, to build a close relationship and it was probably set back right from the start, what with Meghan bringing Kate to tears over Charlotte's bridesmaid dress and then her alleged high-handed treatment of Kate's staff.


----------



## kemilia

Jktgal said:


> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...e-hugs-everyones-uptight-royal-family-2939549
> 
> You are estranged from your family except for your mother. Your father is likely to go to court against you. He who paid  for your education don't  get introduced to your husband. You had one family member at your wedding and invited thousands of strangers.
> And you think their family is WEIRD??


This sums her up TOTALLY! Thank you


----------



## queennadine

kemilia said:


> Kate is already in Queen mode--inscrutable. As for maybe never taking to Meghan--there are people that I never really like and they may not like me, that's just the way it is.
> 
> And with M being an actress, that may have added to the mix--being actors/actresses they are trained to play roles and be convincing. *But I never watched Suits so I don't know what she was like.*



DH and I actually watched it and were somewhat entertained by it, probably cause we're both attorneys. It's definitely cheesy, though. 

But her character basically only switched between damsel in distress and condescending know-it-all...so not far off from real life, it seems!


----------



## imgg

kemilia said:


> Kate is already in Queen mode--inscrutable. As for maybe never taking to Meghan--there are people that I never really like and they may not like me, that's just the way it is.
> 
> And with M being an actress, that may have added to the mix--being actors/actresses they are trained to play roles and be convincing. But I never watched Suits so I don't know what she was like.


My DH and I watched too, the first couple seasons, than it became unwatchable.  She is not a good actress, but improved a bit with Suits.  Made the mistake of watching a few minutes of a movie she was in prior to Suits, can't remember the name but she was awful  So full of herself if was seething through on my tv screen.   Had to turn it off.


----------



## rose60610

For somebody who was warmly welcomed with open arms into the world's most prestigious family and got off to a great start, Meghan quickly burned every bridge she could find. She had everything going for her, including enthusiastic public opinion and much one-on-one interaction with the Queen, but somehow decided she must burn it all to the ground. Sure, there was the wench Princess Michael of Kent who wore the black brooch, but come on, you always run into some clods, MM had overwhelming public favoritism. 

 Maybe she thought that since she was given so much adulation she could get away with virtually anything and everything. The first signs of criticism sent her into turbo self pity mode. When she couldn't pity her way out of criticism she doubled down and dug her hole deeper. She couldn't understand that her once-adoring public thought "Huh? Walking into and enjoying all the trappings, travel and luxuries of the BRF with servants galore in exchange for showing up at events in designer clothes and a plastered-on smile is excruciatingly hard? And we're supposed to feel sorry for you? Our taxes from working OUR a**es off pay for you to live in La-La Land and you complain? You're not thriving, only existing?" 

Of course there's more behind the scenes to Royal Life, but unlike Charles and Will's lives where more protocols are taken, all Harry and Meghan + children had to do is show up at events in nice clothes after servants basically wipe their butts.  Harry was never expected to do any heavy lifting, that was reserved for the throne holders. 

Even though the olive branch of coming back into the royal fold was extended, it will be very hard for them to do so. Archie is Meghan's only life line to a permanent meal ticket. I wonder if MM realizes the world no longer adores her. If they do return to the BRF, MM will just pout and not understand why she isn't seated at the head of the table, even if they do get divorced. Alas, she'll only be existing.


----------



## CeeJay

Well, quelle surprise .. NOT; this has been her plan all along .. and I for one, don't want them here!!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8117415/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-looking-houses-LA.html


----------



## lanasyogamama

I probably said this before, but it’s amazing to me that they don’t even try to hide the fact that they are basically speaking directly to DM.


----------



## kemilia

Just read that the Met Gala is postponed. 

Hope she hadn't already bought her caped outfit (I assume capes are her thing now).


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Well, quelle surprise .. NOT; this has been her plan all along .. and I for one, don't want them here!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8117415/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-looking-houses-LA.html


So this article says they may want a house in both Van & Malibu?! Who the heck will pay for all this? Such entitled brats.


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> So this article says they may want a house in both Van & Malibu?! Who the heck will pay for all this? Such entitled brats.


Well, I'm assuming that they are HOPING that they will get a similar arrangement as they have in Vancouver .. you know, "free" housing!  Certainly, there are plenty of Russian emigre's who are out here in CA, so wouldn't that be just perfect for them?!?! 

Speaking of which, can't remember where I read the article, but it mentioned 'concern' about these two (more Harry though) and being put into a compromising situation -- especially as it relates to their 'rental' of that Vancouver property and the person who owns it.  I knew that Harry wasn't the brightest bulb in the world, but his stupidity being displayed as of late is epic.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I could imagine that Harry sang the praises of Kate too, how great she was and how Meghan could learn so much from her, and Meghan probably didn't like that one bit.
> 
> There is also no way that Kate would have included Meghan in her inner circle from the start.  Too risky with a complete stranger and they don't even know each other, so why would she take that chance?  So, Kate was likely polite and cordial to Meghan but also adopted a wait-and-see attitude.  I think she'd want to get to know Meghan, see how they got along, and see if she could be trusted. That all takes time, years even, to build a close relationship and it was probably set back right from the start, what with Meghan bringing Kate to tears over Charlotte's bridesmaid dress and then her alleged high-handed treatment of Kate's staff.


I thought that it was telling that Kate was a no-show at the baby shower


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, I'm assuming that they are HOPING that they will get a similar arrangement as they have in Vancouver .. you know, "free" housing!  Certainly, there are plenty of Russian emigre's who are out here in CA, so wouldn't that be just perfect for them?!?!
> 
> Speaking of which, can't remember where I read the article, but it mentioned 'concern' about these two (more Harry though) and being put into a compromising situation -- especially as it relates to their 'rental' of that Vancouver property and the person who owns it.  I knew that Harry wasn't the brightest bulb in the world, but his stupidity being displayed as of late is epic.


if they are putting this info out they're really tone deaf....they don't know that most of the world is worrying about living, eating, paying the bills with this virus thing going on?  we are all but locked in our houses (and that's the ones who are lucky enough to not be sick).  these two are just so self-centered and entitled it's disgusting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> if they are putting this info out they're really tone deaf....they don't know that most of the world is worrying about living, eating, paying the bills with this virus thing going on?  we are all but locked in our houses (and that's the ones who are lucky enough to not be sick).  these two are just so self-centered and entitled it's disgusting


COULD NOT agree with you more!!!!  Many of my artisan friends are besides themselves as they will (in essence) have zero funds coming in; same with folks who work in restaurants, etc. -- and yet these two - UGGH!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> COULD NOT agree with you more!!!!  Many of my artisan friends are besides themselves as they will (in essence) have zero funds coming in; same with folks who work in restaurants, etc. -- and yet these two - UGGH!


right....they need not one but two luxurious homes....and need to tell us all about it?


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> right....they need not one but two luxurious homes....and need to tell us all about it?



Need to tell everyone about it, just like their Instagram Megxit announcement.  They can’t afford this kind of lifestyle, though.  Sounds like the UK visit to close out their duties did not go well and she’s crazily posting about all of their bright futures and plans in crazy retaliation.


----------



## Grande Latte

They wanted out and still receive all the entitlements. Put the RF through international embarrassment.


mdcx said:


> I definitely think Harry loved Kate in a platonic way, Meghan got jealous, and set to work breaking that relationship up asap.



You nailed it.


----------



## Genie27

sdkitty said:


> right....they need not one but two luxurious homes....and need to tell us all about it?


Now, now, they need to thrive, ya know, not just survive. We must all do our part to make this happen. 

I will personally empower them by shining a light on their plight as they stand in their truth. Go megs and just-call-me-Harry. You’ve earned this!


----------



## scrpo83

gracekelly said:


> It's funny, I always had the feeling that because Kate and Pippa were so close, she would be good at relationships with other women.  She certainly bonded with Sophie from all reports.  Kate dragged Pippa along when they all went to Wimbledon and that was probably to use her as a buffer and make the group look convivial.  I could believe that Kate's opinion of Meghan was colored by her husband's opinion.
> 
> Kate listened to the advice given to her by the BP minders.  You have to develop a public persona and demeanor in order to do this job.  She was young enough at the time to listen and what she learned stuck.  When you are 35, and have lived your life a certain way, as did Meghan, it is much harder to do this.  i don't think she ever cared to learn or to change.



Pippa is Kate's best friend i think. Kate never had close women friends and kept close to her family. Early in the marriage, Pippa and Carol is everywhere with Kate and there are some pap shots of Pippa and Kate at Anglesey together. 
I don't think Kate listened much to the minders in the beginning.. I mean there are a lot of pics of Kate with her skirt flying upwards and some asinine comment like 'Can you test the smell by smelling it?' but the Cambridges got a new team in place after Prince Philip retire from public life and this team has been good to them.. and I think as they grew older and expanded their brood, they both accepted their responsibilty and get on with it.


----------



## Freak4Coach

I usually just lurk here. I just can't stop  I just watched Mehgan Markle Escaping the Crown. I wondered if anyone else here has watched it and what their take on it was. Anyone?


----------



## chowlover2

Freak4Coach said:


> I usually just lurk here. I just can't stop  I just watched Mehgan Markle Escaping the Crown. I wondered if anyone else here has watched it and what their take on it was. Anyone?


I watched it and it is 44 min of my life I won’t get back. I think Meghan or maybe Scooby Doo wrote it as is very favorable to her and JH.

Coronavirus couldn’t come at a better time to derail their plans. I wonder how long it will take for them to run back to the oppressive Crown?


----------



## Lodpah

Let's say their expenses are 5m a month (give or take a couple of millions), and with everyone limiting attendances at events to no more than 10 people, theaters closing down, meetings canceled, work being put on "shelter in place", people worrying about buying toiletries, food, etc., the Queen went into self quarantine or something to that effect, people might lose income, my question is where is their money coming from and where do they expect to be invited to give talks?  How long will Prince Charles pay for their upkeep?

I hope her and Just Harry continue their whining cause people quarantined in their homes would absolutely have no sympathy for them. My advice to her is she absolutely cannot push against a dead bolt. That dead bolt is the Crown. They've seen her kind of manipulations come and go.  Sigh . . . if only she was patient for awhile.

To those who say she has the right blah, blah, blah, they forget that is her job! Like JOB job to be at events, etc. that is how they earn their money (some of it at least).  SMH.


----------



## Lodpah

chowlover2 said:


> I watched it and it is 44 min of my life I won’t get back. I think Meghan or maybe Scooby Doo wrote it as is very favorable to her and JH.
> 
> Coronavirus couldn’t come at a better time to derail their plans. I wonder how long it will take for them to run back to the oppressive Crown?



Probably faster than the speed of light if this pandemic lasts a long time. Like who is having big events now, and will they pay them millions to show face and talk about really nothing? Seriously I don't think they will be popular much longer. They are simply now just "regular" people and most would want to be on the Monarchy's side I believe.


----------



## doni

CeeJay said:


> Well, quelle surprise .. NOT; this has been her plan all along .. and I for one, don't want them here!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8117415/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-looking-houses-LA.html


Hello reported on this a while back 


kemilia said:


> So this article says they may want a house in both Van & Malibu?! Who the heck will pay for all this? Such entitled brats.


If that if the case, and if they are still keeping patronages in the UK, that is a lot of moving around. Just for the living part. I found it extraordinary what Harry told ‘Greta’ about their traveling and which has not been very much discussed (but then, Chunga-Changa and the penguins rightly got center stage). That they don’t travel half as much as all those people taking planes every weekend to go on holidays. Apart of the question of how does one keep a straight face while telling this to a girl who crosses the Ocean in a boat not to catch a plane, which people is he taking about? What world is he in? Hilarious.

But I don’t believe they’d keep a house in Vancouver. They are just buying time to find a plausible explanation for wanting to live in LA, you know, given they are seeking privacy and all that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Let's say their expenses are 5m a month (give or take a couple of millions), [...]How long will Prince Charles pay for their upkeep?



He gives them around 2 million pounds A YEAR. So I doubt even Ms. Lavish spends 5 millions a month. But yes, good point you are raising, they don't seem to adapt a more modest lifestyle - quite the opposite - while not earning 1 penny on their own, so I really want to know how this will turn out.


----------



## limom

doni said:


> Hello reported on this a while back
> 
> If that if the case, and if they are still keeping patronages in the UK, that is a lot of moving around. Just for the living part. I found it extraordinary what Harry told ‘Greta’ about their traveling and which has not been very much discussed (but then, Chunga-Changa and the penguins rightly got center stage). That they don’t travel half as much as all those people taking planes every weekend to go on holidays. Apart of the question of how does one keep a straight face while telling this to a girl who crosses the Ocean in a boat not to catch a plane, which people is he taking about? What world is he in? Hilarious.
> 
> But I don’t believe they’d keep a house in Vancouver. They are just buying time to find a plausible explanation for wanting to live in LA, you know, given they are seeking privacy and all that.


They will invoke Archie and Meg insisting that he has an “American education” and experience, imo.
After all, Archie is Anglo-American not Anglo-Canadian.


----------



## PewPew

CeeJay said:


> Well, quelle surprise .. NOT; this has been her plan all along .. and I for one, don't want them here!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8117415/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-looking-houses-LA.html



Yep this was the plan, despite “friends” insisting Meghan would never live in the U.S. while ***** is president. Now, there’s no point to the guise of a Canadian life since Canada will stop subsidizing their security April 1. When they planned Megxit, their attorneys were so careful to say H&M would live in “North America,” expecting that living in a Commonwealth country would enable them to keep more royal perks, including funding, security and their titles. (Ironically, Canada doesn’t recognize titles for its citizens... but H&M weren’t really even planning to be “non-citizen residents” there).


----------



## Chagall

Doug Ford, premiere of Ontario, Canada’s largest province has just declared a state of emergency. My main concern is that H and M ore OK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Chagall said:


> Doug Ford, premiere of Ontario, Canada’s largest province has just declared a state of emergency. My main concern is that H and M ore OK.


They are ok, they are on the phone with the Daily Mail as we speak.  Apparently Harry stands by what he said in his prank phone call but feels violated?  Really Harry, even the part about the penguins?  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-calls-felt-violated-royal-expert-claims.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Doug Ford, premiere of Ontario, Canada’s largest province has just declared a state of emergency. My main concern is that H and M ore OK.


If the Corona situation wasn't so bad I'd laugh out loud


----------



## lulilu

Mrs.Z said:


> They are ok, they are on the phone with the Daily Mail as we speak.  Apparently Harry stands by what he said in his prank phone call but feels violated?  Really Harry, even the part about the penguins?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-calls-felt-violated-royal-expert-claims.html



Always the victim...


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> They are ok, they are on the phone with the Daily Mail as we speak.  Apparently Harry stands by what he said in his prank phone call but feels violated?  Really Harry, even the part about the penguins?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-calls-felt-violated-royal-expert-claims.html


IDK if this is legit but if it is, it makes Harry look even more like an idiot.  Time to shut up (or have your "sources and friends" shut up.  What is that photo of him standing with the phone in a large room full of men?


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> Always the victim...



Both of them. I swear they must feed each other's mental victimhood. They can't get it through their thick skulls that they have an easy life of luxury. All they had to do was not mess it up. But they had to feel sorry for themselves and they want to remind everyone else that we should feel sorry for them too. Screw them!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Both of them. I swear they must feed each other's mental victimhood. They can't get it through their thick skulls that they have an easy life of luxury. All they had to do was not mess it up. But they had to feel sorry for themselves and they want to remind everyone else that we should feel sorry for them too. Screw them!


Harry has maybe a bit of an excuse.  He has never had to earn a living and doesn't really understand how "regular" people work and live.  But Meghan was raised middle class (or maybe upper middle class).  She may have been in LA and exposed to show biz, sent to private school.  But her parents still had to work.  So there is no excuse for her being so ridiculously tone deaf (while trying to represent herself as some sort of champion of liberal causes). 
She should probably be worrying about her dad, down in Mexico where they are doing nothing about the virus and with a heart condition.  Now that might be some good presss for her 

But on the brighter side - as despicable as they are, they do give us something to talk about in these very stressful times.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The only good thing about Coronavirus is that it may take these two down a few notches.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> Both of them. I swear they must feed each other's mental victimhood. They can't get it through their thick skulls that they have an easy life of luxury. All they had to do was not mess it up. But they had to feel sorry for themselves and they want to remind everyone else that we should feel sorry for them too. Screw them!


Ugh. They seem to be happiest when they are whining, complaining and lecturing.
I hope the nannies are having fun with Archie. He's probably crawling and starting to pull himself up. Babies grow up fast.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> IDK if this is legit but if it is, it makes Harry look even more like an idiot.  Time to shut up (or have your "sources and friends" shut up.  What is that photo of him standing with the phone in a large room full of men?


This was a picture of him fundraising for invictus, IIRC.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Well, quelle surprise .. NOT; this has been her plan all along .. and I for one, don't want them here!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8117415/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-looking-houses-LA.html



At least the border is closed. That will hold off their invasion for a while.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> At least the border is closed. That will hold off their invasion for a while.



Peasant rules don’t apply to the SIXTH IN LINE for the throne & She-of-extraordinary-INDEPENDENT PROFILE ...(in their minds). Fear of bad publicity, though, will be a huge motivator to stay in. Expect some heartfelt preaching and epiphanies from their HRH’s website before they lose the use of their titles in a few weeks. The A-list celeb couples are starting to donate to CV-19 related causes. It would be an actual humanitarian gesture & good PR for H&M to make a donation from their personal wealth (her $5million & his $40million)


----------



## TC1

Lodpah said:


> Let's say their expenses are 5m a month (give or take a couple of millions), and with everyone limiting attendances at events to no more than 10 people, theaters closing down, meetings canceled, work being put on "shelter in place", people worrying about buying toiletries, food, etc., the Queen went into self quarantine or something to that effect, people might lose income, my question is where is their money coming from and where do they expect to be invited to give talks?  How long will Prince Charles pay for their upkeep?
> 
> I hope her and Just Harry continue their whining cause people quarantined in their homes would absolutely have no sympathy for them. My advice to her is she absolutely cannot push against a dead bolt. That dead bolt is the Crown. They've seen her kind of manipulations come and go.  Sigh . . . if only she was patient for awhile.
> 
> To those who say she has the right blah, blah, blah, they forget that is her job! Like JOB job to be at events, etc. that is how they earn their money (some of it at least).  SMH.


In these unprecedented times...the monarchy should be reversing the roles..not taking money from the taxpayers, but giving it BACK. The economy is going to be in shambles, but by all means lets make sure M can wear $3000 outfits and live in a 15m estate.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lol. Now they care...


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol. Now they care...
> 
> View attachment 4692227


Such hypocrites Just another sound bite so people won’t forget them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do they really have staffers?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

bag-mania said:


> At least the border is closed. That will hold off their invasion for a while.



not between the US and Canada yet. And they are citizens. You can have them.


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> Do they really have staffers?



I can't imagine either can get through the day without someone else doing the mundane stuff.


----------



## PewPew

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol. Now they care...
> 
> View attachment 4692227



Dear faux-environmental crusaders H & M,

Please educate yourself before issuing these edicts. Demanding staffers wear latex gloves is not only awful for the environment (and a poor example for the world you’re trying to “inspire”), but it also is NOT going to prevent infection in this setting— Are staffers changing their gloves 20+ times a day (after each bathroom use and after every time they are within 1 meter of someone else)?.  Worldwide, health experts are recommending frequent handwashing, avoiding face-touching, social distancing, and responsible quarantines.

But we get it, the virus behaves differently for ROYALTY.  I feel sorry for the staffers and security team who are away from their families during this scary time, in order to make your “existing, but not living” life more comfortable.

Perhaps Elton John will make another donation to “offset” your unnecessary landfill usage, like he paid to “offset” your carbon emissions for the private jet trip to an environmental conference & Euroholiday.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol. Now they care...
> 
> View attachment 4692227


Anything to grab a headline, even at times like this.  What about your own father Meghan?


----------



## CeeJay

Sophisticatted said:


> Need to tell everyone about it, just like their Instagram Megxit announcement.  They can’t afford this kind of lifestyle, though.  Sounds like the UK visit to close out their duties did not go well and she’s crazily posting about all of their bright futures and plans in crazy retaliation.


But then again, their mouthpiece Omid .. seems to be posting about their "fear" of the unknown (translation = "_Harry, this d#mn coronavirus is taking away news ABOUT US .. we need to stop that, so we need to make sure to have Omid post something every da_y ..").  While this is a great distraction from the 'news', these 2 are SO getting on my last nerves!!!


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> not between the US and Canada yet. And they are citizens. You can have them.



Damn. I didn't realize there was an exemption. Well, I hope they stay put until the COVID-19 crisis is over. Staying in must be killing Meghan.


----------



## 1LV

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol. Now they care...
> 
> View attachment 4692227


He’s probably afraid they might die from coronavirus, and she’s probably afraid they won’t.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> He’s probably afraid they might die from coronavirus, and she’s probably afraid they won’t.



And five days ago she was *****ing because she didn't get enough hugs from everyone. Late to the party.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Such hypocrites Just another sound bite so people won’t forget them.


*B*-*I*-*N*-*G*-*O* .. spot-on!!!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> And five days ago she was *****ing because she didn't get enough hugs from everyone. Late to the party.


Yeah, it seems her words keep coming back to bite her.


----------



## Genie27

Is Harry truly concerned, or counting up to fourth-in-line-to-the-throne?! I notice he's not worried about Grandpa Phil...


----------



## TC1

mrsinsyder said:


> Lol. Now they care...
> 
> View attachment 4692227


If they were concerned about "staffers" you think they would be concerned about them being away from THEIR families..not there to "protect" and wait on your spoiled azzes.


----------



## Aminamina

This is the royal work in action. HM are going to feel like nobody especially in light of coronavirus. Be careful of what you wish for, Harry.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...een-health-update-coronavirus-UK-COVID-19/amp


----------



## CeeJay

Genie27 said:


> Is Harry truly concerned, or counting up to fourth-in-line-to-the-throne?! I notice he's not worried about Grandpa Phil...


She's just flapping-her-trap, making sure they aren't "forgotten" amidst what is going on in the world!  I just wish they would both just SHUT-UP already; we don't freakin' care about you two nim-nulls!!!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> Harry has maybe a bit of an excuse.  He has never had to earn a living and doesn't really understand how "regular" people work and live.  But Meghan was raised middle class (or maybe upper middle class).  She may have been in LA and exposed to show biz, sent to private school.  But her parents still had to work.  So there is no excuse for her being so ridiculously tone deaf (while trying to represent herself as some sort of champion of liberal causes).
> She should probably be worrying about her dad, down in Mexico where they are doing nothing about the virus and with a heart condition.  Now that might be some good presss for her
> 
> But on the brighter side - as despicable as they are, they do give us something to talk about in these very stressful times.


They are the gift that keeps on giving (that phone call was the best).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> Harry has maybe a bit of an excuse.  He has never had to earn a living and doesn't really understand how "regular" people work and live.  But Meghan was raised middle class (or maybe upper middle class).  She may have been in LA and exposed to show biz, sent to private school.  But her parents still had to work.  So there is no excuse for her being so ridiculously tone deaf (while trying to represent herself as some sort of champion of liberal causes).
> She should probably be worrying about her dad, down in Mexico where they are doing nothing about the virus and with a heart condition.  Now that might be some good presss for her
> 
> But on the brighter side - as despicable as they are, they do give us something to talk about in these very stressful times.


They are the gift that keeps on giving (that phone call was the best).


gracekelly said:


> Such hypocrites Just another sound bite so people won’t forget them.


EXACTLY!


----------



## Aminamina

CeeJay said:


> She's just flapping-her-trap, making sure they aren't "forgotten" amidst what is going on in the world!  I just wish they would both just SHUT-UP already; we don't freakin' care about you two nim-nulls!!!


Shut up or hire Kris Jenner already to manage their kit


----------



## bagshopr

I was hoping they would be out of the news by now. Losers.


----------



## queennadine

Harry feels violated? 

I’m sure millions of tax payers feel violated for having their hard earned £ wasted on these two.


----------



## PewPew

Aminamina said:


> *This is the royal work in action.* HM are going to feel like nobody especially in light of coronavirus. Be careful of what you wish for, Harry.
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...een-health-update-coronavirus-UK-COVID-19/amp



So Just-call-me-Harry said he stands by his views in the hoax interview, which included saying “small steps & handing out prizes” are meaningless. What a fool. The following DOES have meaning, just as it meant something to the public when the Queen Mum refused to flee when London was bombed in WW2 —

Quote from the article:
*“THE Royal Family's "symbolic presence" within the United Kingdom has given them an opportunity to be "leaders for the country" during the COVID-19 pandemic ...”*


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> So Just-call-me-Harry said he stands by his views in the hoax interview, which included saying “small steps & handing out prizes” are meaningless. What a fool. The following DOES have meaning, just as it meant something to the public when the Queen Mum refused to flee when London was bombed in WW2 —
> 
> *“THE Royal Family's "symbolic presence" within the United Kingdom has given them an opportunity to be "leaders for the country" during the COVID-19 pandemic ...”*


He’s contradicting himself.  I recall one of the (many) platitudes they plastered on their Instagram being about all our small steps making a difference.  It was about the time of the private jet hypocrisy when they were doing what the hell they liked whilst preaching at everyone else to make sacrifices.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> He’s contradicting himself.  I recall one of the (many) platitudes they plastered on their Instagram being about all our small steps making a difference.  It was about the time of the private jet hypocrisy when they were doing what the hell they liked whilst preaching at everyone else to make sacrifices.


.. and I hope that folks were posting on their IG account that they are nothing more than "pathetic grifters" .. unfortunately, they get deleted, but if we inundate them .. (hee hee)


----------



## lulilu

This article in InStyle calling Queen Letizia the most stylish royal won't sit well with MM:

https://www.instyle.com/fashion/que...utm_content=031720&cid=502036&mid=30997199035


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> This article in InStyle calling Queen Letizia the most stylish royal won't sit well with MM:
> 
> https://www.instyle.com/fashion/que...utm_content=031720&cid=502036&mid=30997199035



She was not considered worthy of a mention. I doubt even the most diehard fans could argue that Meghan is competitive when it comes to fashion. With all those expensive clothes it's still always hit or miss with her.


----------



## Chagall

Mrs.Z said:


> They are ok, they are on the phone with the Daily Mail as we speak.  Apparently Harry stands by what he said in his prank phone call but feels violated?  Really Harry, even the part about the penguins?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-calls-felt-violated-royal-expert-claims.html


That is the first time I have seen Harry decently dressed in a long time. His hair looks thicker. Looks like M wasn’t the only one making improvements during their quality family time.


----------



## mdcx

What if Mr. Markle passed away from the virus down in Mexico, would they even go to the funeral? All M’s posturing and media manipulation look very selfish in this moment where most people are just wanting to keep safe.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> She was not considered worthy of a mention. I doubt even the most diehard fans could argue that *Meghan is competitive when it comes to fashion.*With all those expensive clothes it's *still always hit or miss with her*.



I agree. Meghan has the potential to be a style icon. I think the hit/miss comes from a tendency to “dress the body you want instead of the body you have.”  The recent blue Victoria Beckham zipper dress was an example of this. A size bigger & proper tailoring would have resulted in a better look that also wouldn’t bunch & draw attention to her shorter waist.

I do think her style will improve post-BRF b/c she can wear shorter dresses to emphasize her long legs. But she really must chuck out the poorly fitting, visible strapless bras she favors, even under tiight, sleeved dresses. (She did this even before having Archie, so I don’t think it’s necessarily post-partum change.)


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> What if Mr. Markle passed away from the virus down in Mexico, would they even go to the funeral? All M’s posturing and media manipulation look very selfish in this moment where most people are just wanting to keep safe.


RIGHT? .. I was just thinking of this!!!  

I think in this case, they would be super foolish to not go (_based on what I've read in regards to all the bodies in Italy, there has been no indication whatsoever that the virus is spread once the infected has deceased_).   He is, alas, in the high-risk category ..


----------



## jennlt

1LV said:


> He’s probably afraid they might die from coronavirus, and she’s probably afraid they won’t.



She wants to get her hands on that in-Harry-tance to keep funding her woke life and "independent" profile


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> This article in InStyle calling Queen Letizia the most stylish royal won't sit well with MM:
> 
> https://www.instyle.com/fashion/que...utm_content=031720&cid=502036&mid=30997199035


queen letizia is very impressive - beautiful and stylish
Wonder if Meghan will see this an be embarassed by her soyanara zara party - not her finest moment anyway


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She was not considered worthy of a mention. I doubt even the most diehard fans could argue that Meghan is competitive when it comes to fashion. With all those expensive clothes it's still always hit or miss with her.


I have to disagree with you there.  I think her diehard fans will still think she can do no wrong.


----------



## Flatsy

1LV said:


> He’s probably afraid they might die from coronavirus, and she’s probably afraid they won’t.


She needs to hope the Queen and Charles survive!  If King William takes over any time soon, I think the Sussex allowance is going to get cut right off.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> She needs to hope the Queen and Charles survive!  If King William takes over any time soon, I think the Sussex allowance is going to get cut right off.


Hmmmm .. Harry is still William's brother, so I'm not sure of that .. BUT, there might just be some additional "rules" especially in relation to Meghan.  If it comes to that, I think there will be a higher probability that they will divorce .. the question then becomes, what of Archie (that poor child)!


----------



## Genie27

Chagall said:


> That is the first time I have seen Harry decently dressed in a long time. His hair looks thicker. Looks like M wasn’t the only one making improvements during their quality family time.


It looks like an older picture of Harry. Much more hair and energy than his recent pics.


----------



## 1LV

Flatsy said:


> She needs to hope the Queen and Charles survive!  If King William takes over any time soon, I think the Sussex allowance is going to get cut right off.


This is someone who has cut her nose off to spite her face at almost every step tho’.  Probably hasn’t thought that far ahead.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> This is someone who has cut her nose off to spite her face at almost every step tho’.  Probably hasn’t thought that far ahead.


and her husband's nose too


----------



## Sophisticatted

If the Queen dies and Charles becomes King, then there is no more duchy allowance for them.  The Cambridges are NOT amused!


----------



## imgg

Meghan must  be in charge of their Instagram account. Every post is of Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> Meghan must  be in charge of their Instagram account. Every post is of Meghan.


OF COURSE she is!!!!!  Honestly, she found the perfect pawn for her act of world dominance, but her other actions (especially with her father and "former" friends that she Markled) .. well, karma may just come back and bite her a@@ (I'm kind of hoping)!!!


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> OF COURSE she is!!!!!  Honestly, she found the perfect pawn for her act of world dominance, but her other actions (especially with her father and "former" friends that she Markled) .. well, karma may just come back and bite her a@@ (I'm kind of hoping)!!!


Regardless if you like her or not, she is what everyone is talking about, which only means $$.  I hope she fades away like the interest in this thread.  Tired of these entitled, self-righteous narcissists.


----------



## Chagall

Genie27 said:


> It looks like an older picture of Harry. Much more hair and energy than his recent pics.


You could be right. He lookes well dressed and ‘fresher’. Why recycle an old picture.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> You could be right. He lookes well dressed and ‘fresher’. Why recycle an old picture.


Yeah, that seemed rather odd .. it was when he was at one of the well-known Investment Houses in London to pitch a Fund for the Invictus Games.  Oh geez .. I sure hope to heck he doesn't think that because he was able to do that in London, that he would be able to "lend his name" to something like that in the US (and he could always use the Invictus Games as a ruse for them to fill their pockets).  Then again, if he did (or some Investment firm wanted him to), it would not be advantageous to be in Los Angeles (the majority of them are in NYC or Boston).  NUTZ .. hope they don't read this 'cos I may have given "*the Supreme Grift-ah*" her new angle!!!


----------



## Freak4Coach

chowlover2 said:


> I watched it and it is 44 min of my life I won’t get back. I think Meghan or maybe Scooby Doo wrote it as is very favorable to her and JH.
> 
> Coronavirus couldn’t come at a better time to derail their plans. I wonder how long it will take for them to run back to the oppressive Crown?



It's good to know I'm not the only one here that didn't enjoy it. My DH was willing to watch it, Thought it would be interesting. I still wonder why chose the people they did to interview. The whole thing was so one-sided that I kept thinking who produced this thing and then it hit me (in the Dana Carvey Church Lady voice) - could it be ummmmmm Meghan?!? I found the show to be a big turn off. It was so one-sided that all I could think of the more I watched was PROPAGANDA.


----------



## queennadine

Border now closed between the U.S. and Canada for all non-essential traffic. So there go their CA plans.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh my, she can't help herself, she's still found a way to make it ALL ABOUT MEGHAN. Look at her! Acknowledge all she is doing to help our mental health! 

An excerpt from Page Six:

_Markle, meanwhile, makes “everyone on their team, the people who buy groceries and run errands, wear latex gloves at all times and are to follow a strict hygiene protocol,” the friend told the site.

“Only a select few will be able to interact with her, Harry and Archie. She said she’s keeping it to a bare minimum.”

Despite finding their final royal tour of the UK “bittersweet,” the Sussexes are “grateful” they got to spend time with Harry’s family “before all this insanity began,” the insider told the site.

The 38-year-old duchess is determined to help with the crisis, the friend said.

“Meghan said just because they are isolating themselves, it doesn’t mean they can’t help. They aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing,” the friend told the Mail.

“Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis.

“She said they are working with a mental health nonprofit to create some sort of online support system for those most vulnerable, like new mothers suffering from postpartum depression.

“People who lack support systems need reassurance that they are not alone.”

_
https://pagesix.com/2020/03/18/prince-harry-feels-helpless-so-far-from-family-on-lockdown-in-canada/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

^^^^ oh, brother.


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> Oh my, she can't help herself, she's still found a way to make it ALL ABOUT MEGHAN. Look at her! Acknowledge all she is doing to help our mental health!
> 
> 
> An excerpt from Page Six:
> 
> _Markle, meanwhile, makes “everyone on their team, the people who buy groceries and run errands, wear latex gloves at all times and are to follow a strict hygiene protocol,” the friend told the site.
> 
> “Only a select few will be able to interact with her, Harry and Archie. She said she’s keeping it to a bare minimum.”
> 
> Despite finding their final royal tour of the UK “bittersweet,” the Sussexes are “grateful” they got to spend time with Harry’s family “before all this insanity began,” the insider told the site.
> 
> The 38-year-old duchess is determined to help with the crisis, the friend said.
> 
> “Meghan said just because they are isolating themselves, it doesn’t mean they can’t help. They aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing,” the friend told the Mail.
> 
> “Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis.
> 
> “She said they are working with a mental health nonprofit to create some sort of online support system for those most vulnerable, like new mothers suffering from postpartum depression.
> 
> “People who lack support systems need reassurance that they are not alone.”
> 
> _
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/18/prince-harry-feels-helpless-so-far-from-family-on-lockdown-in-canada/


Good grief!  This reeks of desperation!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Oh my, she can't help herself, she's still found a way to make it ALL ABOUT MEGHAN. Look at her! Acknowledge all she is doing to help our mental health!
> 
> An excerpt from Page Six:
> 
> _Markle, meanwhile, makes “everyone on their team, the people who buy groceries and run errands, wear latex gloves at all times and are to follow a strict hygiene protocol,” the friend told the site.
> 
> “Only a select few will be able to interact with her, Harry and Archie. She said she’s keeping it to a bare minimum.”
> 
> Despite finding their final royal tour of the UK “bittersweet,” the Sussexes are “grateful” they got to spend time with Harry’s family “before all this insanity began,” the insider told the site.
> 
> The 38-year-old duchess is determined to help with the crisis, the friend said.
> 
> “Meghan said just because they are isolating themselves, it doesn’t mean they can’t help. They aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing,” the friend told the Mail.
> 
> “Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis.
> 
> “She said they are working with a mental health nonprofit to create some sort of online support system for those most vulnerable, like new mothers suffering from postpartum depression.
> 
> “People who lack support systems need reassurance that they are not alone.”
> 
> _
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/18/prince-harry-feels-helpless-so-far-from-family-on-lockdown-in-canada/


 What do the world do without her!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Oh my, she can't help herself, she's still found a way to make it ALL ABOUT MEGHAN. Look at her! Acknowledge all she is doing to help our mental health!
> 
> An excerpt from Page Six:
> 
> _Markle, meanwhile, makes “everyone on their team, the people who buy groceries and run errands, wear latex gloves at all times and are to follow a strict hygiene protocol,” the friend told the site.
> 
> “Only a select few will be able to interact with her, Harry and Archie. She said she’s keeping it to a bare minimum.”
> 
> Despite finding their final royal tour of the UK “bittersweet,” the Sussexes are “grateful” they got to spend time with Harry’s family “before all this insanity began,” the insider told the site.
> 
> The 38-year-old duchess is determined to help with the crisis, the friend said.
> 
> “Meghan said just because they are isolating themselves, it doesn’t mean they can’t help. They aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing,” the friend told the Mail.
> 
> “Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis.
> 
> “She said they are working with a mental health nonprofit to create some sort of online support system for those most vulnerable, like new mothers suffering from postpartum depression.
> 
> “People who lack support systems need reassurance that they are not alone.”
> 
> _
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/18/prince-harry-feels-helpless-so-far-from-family-on-lockdown-in-canada/


Thanks for the laugh  “...they aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing..” well it sounds like they’re rootling around for another good cause and someone else’s effort, that they can hitch their wagon to and get the credit for.  Same old 

Working for these two fools sounds like a right barrel of laughs   Behind the scenes the staff will all be trying hard not to be one of the *select few* no doubt.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Good grief!  This reeks of desperation!





chicinthecity777 said:


> What do the world do without her!!!



Yes, for someone who admitted little more than a week ago that she didn't know much about coronavirus, she's now all caught up and wanting to school us on what we should be doing. Whatever would we do without her?


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> Border now closed between the U.S. and Canada for all non-essential traffic. So there go their CA plans.


Poor Meghan, foiled again!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Yes, for someone who admitted little more than a week ago that she didn't know much about coronavirus, she's now all caught up and wanting to school us on what we should be doing. Whatever would will do without her?


----------



## Sharont2305

Are there any flight restrictions between Canada and the UK? If there isn't as yet, at this point I think they'd be better off here in the UK, just incase something happens to the Queen, DofE or Charles.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Meanwhile, in other news today the Sussex Royal Foundation is quietly being closed down, having achieved absolutely nothing, whilst costing ?? - well, I’d love to know how much it’s cost in salaries and expenses


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Are there any flight restrictions between Canada and the UK? If there isn't as yet, at this point I think they'd be better off here in the UK, just incase something happens to the Queen, DofE or Charles.



I'm not convinced having them there would be helpful. It seems their presence causes stress among the family and nobody needs that right now. Harry and Meghan quit, so they are exactly where they want to be.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm not convinced having them there would be helpful. It seems their presence causes stress among the family and nobody needs that right now. Harry and Meghan quit, so they are exactly where they want to be.


or where they thought they wanted to be


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> Oh my, she can't help herself, she's still found a way to make it ALL ABOUT MEGHAN. Look at her! Acknowledge all she is doing to help our mental health!
> 
> An excerpt from Page Six:
> 
> _Markle, meanwhile, makes “everyone on their team, the people who buy groceries and run errands, wear latex gloves at all times and are to follow a strict hygiene protocol,” the friend told the site.
> 
> “Only a select few will be able to interact with her, Harry and Archie. She said she’s keeping it to a bare minimum.”
> 
> Despite finding their final royal tour of the UK “bittersweet,” the Sussexes are “grateful” they got to spend time with Harry’s family “before all this insanity began,” the insider told the site.
> 
> The 38-year-old duchess is determined to help with the crisis, the friend said.
> 
> “Meghan said just because they are isolating themselves, it doesn’t mean they can’t help. They aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing,” the friend told the Mail.
> 
> “*Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis.*
> 
> “She said they are working with a mental health nonprofit to create some sort of online support system for those most vulnerable, like new mothers suffering from postpartum depression.
> 
> “People who lack support systems need reassurance that they are not alone.”
> 
> _
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/18/prince-harry-feels-helpless-so-far-from-family-on-lockdown-in-canada/


Right now it is in a medical crisis.  She is an idiot. 

Meghan should not be the face of any mental health platform.  She is not a professional, she is of an enabler and opportunist. 
People of sound mind do not seek partners who are mentally ill.  People find each other where they are in life and this is true for M & H.  Both are mentally unbalanced and the world really doesn't need to know what they are doing.  Being over exposed in the media can backfire and hope it does for them.


----------



## Suncatcher

queennadine said:


> Border now closed between the U.S. and Canada for all non-essential traffic. So there go their CA plans.


I bet they are already in the US ... would not surprise me if they got advance warning of this news which has been a couple of days in the making ...


----------



## Tootsie17

MrsJDS said:


> I bet they are already in the US ... would not surprise me if they got advance warning of this news which has been a couple of days in the making ...


Oh the horror of them being already here.  When will the madness end!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Yes, for someone who admitted little more than a week ago that she didn't know much about coronavirus, she's now all caught up and wanting to school us on what we should be doing. Whatever would we do without her?


I mean, she hasn't quite caught up or she'd know latex gloves won't do much.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Clearblueskies said:


> Thanks for the laugh  “...they aren’t just sitting around at home doing nothing..” well it sounds like they’re rootling around for another good cause and someone else’s effort, that they can hitch their wagon to and get the credit for.  Same old
> 
> Working for these two fools sounds like a right barrel of laughs   Behind the scenes the staff will all be trying hard not to be one of the *select few* no doubt.


I feel badly for the UK citizen's having to pay "staff" so these losers can just do nothing though I imagine grifting does take some work ...


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I feel badly for the UK citizen's having to pay "staff" so these losers can just do nothing though I imagine grifting does take some work ...


I can't keep up.....are they still getting security from UK?  for how long?  assume charles will be supporting them longer term?
If they are getting support from UK taxpayers I would think there would be a public outcry at this time of crisis.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I can't keep up.....are they still getting security from UK?  for how long?  assume charles will be supporting them longer term?
> If they are getting support from UK taxpayers I would think there would be a public outcry at this time of crisis.


I I thought things don't get turned off til April 1.


----------



## jennlt

chicinthecity777 said:


> What do the world do without her!!!



 I think we'd all like to find out!


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I think we'd all like to find out!


funny....two years ago she was a minor actress that most people never heard of....now she has managed to piss off millions of people in multiple countries....what a networker


----------



## CeeJay

So, it appears that H&M's 'visit' to Standford University was for them (SU) to come up with the plans for their "foundation" and the coup-de-grace is that it will be based in the US!  HA .. won't the IRS just love that!  Unbelievable that these two are still planning this amidst everything going on .. just goes to show you the *level of ignorance* of these two.  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8124323/Sussex-Royal-foundation-wound-up.html


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> “Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis.
> 
> “She said they are working with a mental health nonprofit to create some sort of online support system for those most vulnerable, like new mothers suffering from postpartum depression.
> 
> “People who lack support systems need reassurance that they are not alone.”
> [/COLOR][/I]
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/18/prince-harry-feels-helpless-so-far-from-family-on-lockdown-in-canada/



All hail!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> So, it appears that H&M's 'visit' to Standford University was for them (SU) to come up with the plans for their "foundation" and the coup-de-grace is that it will be based in the US!  HA .. won't the IRS just love that!  Unbelievable that these two are still planning this amidst everything going on .. just goes to show you the *level of ignorance* of these two.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8124323/Sussex-Royal-foundation-wound-up.html


I wonder if Stanford will still want to do it?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if Stanford will still want to do it?


If it's their MBA students, then yes .. likely they would want to get their hands wet on something like this, not so sure about the other folks.  To a certain degree, attachment to a "Royal" (using the term lightly here) will, unfortunately, make many think of "prestige".  Personally, it's not something I would want to endeavor as I have a very high "no BS" meter and if their purpose is strictly to line their pockets (which IMO is the intent), then I would have ZERO interest in it .. alas, there are many that will likely not feel that way.  What will be interesting to me, is if they do indeed set it up in the US, then they will have to report on the Financials and that might just become a sticky-wicket!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wish I could ask them who they think they are, but I guess if I did it would be a lot of:
- 6th in line
- Royal highnesses 
- independent profile 
- d & d


----------



## tiktok

Discuss


----------



## Mrs.Z

tiktok said:


> Discuss



My thoughts are GO AWAY!  You’re not the news, you’re not experts, you don’t have ANY qualifications, you don’t know what you’re talking about.  You’re pretending to be a real resource and you are not, it’s borderline irresponsible.  Too harsh?  Not harsh enough?  They’re jumping in on a Pandemic and it doesn’t sit well with me.


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> Discuss



I so smell Meghan's 'word-salad' here ..    .. just SHUT UP and go have that PRIVACY you so "needed"!


----------



## maryg1

tiktok said:


> Discuss



Pls explain to me what does this statement means...English is not my native language so this sounds like a bunch of nice words put together with absolutely no meaning.
Not joking


----------



## Clearblueskies

maryg1 said:


> Pls explain to me what does this statement means...English is not my native language so this sounds like a bunch of nice words put together with absolutely no meaning.
> Not joking


Means nothing to me and English IS my native language.  This is just Meghan all over - fake sentiment, meaningless words, constant self promotion


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

maryg1 said:


> Pls explain to me what does this statement means...English is not my native language so this sounds like a bunch of nice words put together with absolutely no meaning.
> Not joking


As @CeeJay says you have just defined a “word-salad” ...saying a lot without really saying anything


----------



## Sol Ryan

lanasyogamama said:


> I wish I could ask them who they think they are, but I guess if I did it would be a lot of:
> - 6th in line
> - Royal highnesses
> - independent profile
> - d & d



Ya know, I’ve never cared if Kate had another kid, but now I kinda hope she does if only so that statement on the Sussex website has to be updated to say Seventh in line ... I don’t know why it popped in my head, but it did and now I can’t stop giggling in the hope it comes true...


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> Pls explain to me what does this statement means...English is not my native language so this sounds like a bunch of nice words put together with absolutely no meaning.
> Not joking



You are not missing anything. A bunch of meaningless words put together to STRESS how very IMPORTANT everything MEGHAN says IS.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I can’t get over the arrogance of this statement.  Do Meghan and Harry seriously believe we’ll all be looking to them and their Instagram account for guidance in this crisis?  The Instagram account dominated by pictures of her royal Meghanness?   
They quit the only role they had.  They have NO qualifications.  They sponge from others to maintain their extravagant lifestyle whilst the rest of us actually are financially independent.  And let’s face it - one of them doesn’t know north from south.  They’re just a pair of self absorbed airheads


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sol Ryan said:


> Ya know, I’ve never cared if Kate had another kid, but now I kinda hope she does if only so that statement on the Sussex website has to be updated to say Seventh in line ... I don’t know why it popped in my head, but it did and now I can’t stop giggling in the hope it comes true...


I hope it’s twins!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Clearblueskies said:


> I hope it’s twins!



You beat me to it !


----------



## lanasyogamama

Can someone remind me where their medical or public health degrees are from?


----------



## Tivo

tiktok said:


> Discuss



Have they donated to the cause they care so truly and deeply about? Maybe that’s the info they plan to release in the coming weeks.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> Can someone remind me where their medical or public health degrees are from?


University of Cloud 9


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Can someone remind me where their medical or public health degrees are from?



It comes from their FEELINGS. It doesn't matter that they have zero knowledge about anything.  As long as they have good intentions then that means they are special, lovely people that we should all admire.

Admire them, lanasyogamama! We should all grovel in the wonder that is Meghan and Harry (but especially Meghan). I'm sure their tween fans eat up this nonsense.


----------



## maryg1

bag-mania said:


> _“Meghan told her inner circle that what’s happening in the world right now is a mental health crisis._
> /


Seriously? This statement makes coronavirus look like something caused by people’s hysteria, not a pandemic.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> It comes from their FEELINGS. It doesn't matter that they have zero knowledge about anything.  As long as they have good intentions then that means they are special, lovely people that we should all admire.
> 
> Admire them, lanasyogamama! We should all grovel in the wonder that is Meghan and Harry (but especially Meghan). I'm sure their tween fans eat up this nonsense.


Which is EXACTLY why it’s irresponsible....if you’re scared, struggling, looking for information or resources the Sussex Royal Instagram is NOT where you should be!


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Which is EXACTLY why it’s irresponsible....if you’re scared, struggling, looking for information or resources the Sussex Royal Instagram is NOT where you should be!



I thought they weren't supposed to use "Sussex Royal" anymore. Are they allowed to use it up until April Fool's Day?


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> I thought they weren't supposed to use "Sussex Royal" anymore. Are they allowed to use it up until April Fool's Day?


Yes, I do think their deadline was April 1...what ever will they change it to!


----------



## limom

Who knew that Canada has the best weed?
Those two are high, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> I wish I could ask them who they think they are, but I guess if I did it would be a lot of:
> - 6th in line
> - Royal highnesses
> - independent profile
> - d & d


By “d & d” do you mean Dumb & Dumber?


----------



## jehaga

tiktok said:


> Discuss



Whew, now I know everything will be ok!!!


----------



## Katel

Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, I do think their deadline was April 1...what ever will they change it to!


Indeed! I’ll go...how ‘bout
“So Sucks Foundation”
or
The “Ruling in our Minds” Foundation

whatever will its name be ?!?


----------



## gracekelly

So it looks like they will change the name of the website from SussexRoyal to SussexKnowItAll.  On their new site they will solve all the worlds problems with virtual hugs and mental health directives. There will be numerous pictures of Meghan giving lectures and waving  her hands about  (wearing latex gloves)   via YouTube since they are sheltering in place.   Harry will be seen in the corner on his toy telephone calling all the people who used to be his friends before marriage or trying to get his father on the phone.


----------



## Suncatcher

In response to their IG post I have the following questions for Meghan: (1) let’s talk about compassion: how is your dad? (2) why don’t you donate some part of your substantial wealth to a charity in need like so many other celebrities are doing? (3) Where are your qualifications to speak about  mental health or Covid-19? (4) why would you think any of us would care about what you have to say on Covid-19?  Unless you are Dr Anthony Fauci or his equivalent, STFU.


----------



## Aminamina

Clearblueskies said:


> I can’t get over the arrogance of this statement.  Do Meghan and Harry seriously believe we’ll all be looking to them and their Instagram account for guidance in this crisis?  The Instagram account dominated by pictures of her royal Meghanness?
> They quit the only role they had.  They have NO qualifications.  They sponge from others to maintain their extravagant lifestyle whilst the rest of us actually are financially independent.  And let’s face it - one of them doesn’t know north from south.  They’re just a pair of self absorbed airheads


Exactly! With such arrogance, lack of conscience and preaching mania they should found a church or cult of sorts. Paid divine lectures, anyone?


----------



## LittleStar88

limom said:


> Who knew that Canada has the best weed?
> Those two are high, right?



They're probably trying for CA since Canada doesn't. Her brother is in the cannabis industry. Then she can get her stuff for free... I have not seen either strain available so not sure where or whom he sells to.

https://www.ladbible.com/entertainm...s-her-name-to-build-cannabis-company-20190915

Tyler Dooley, the Duchess of Sussex's nephew, has a sprawling new 1,000-acre ranch in Oregon, where cannabis has been legal since 2015.

*He launched 'Markle Sparkle' a while back with the tagline 'So strong it will blow your crown off', with the description on the company's website reading: "Noble families often inspire their country persons to craft and dedicate products to them.*

However, he has since revealed he's also growing a new hybrid strain of cannabis named after Meghan and Harry's son -* his second cousin - named 'Archie Sparkie'*.

Tyler added: "People have labelled Meghan's American family as hillbillies and a freak show but I'm building a business the old-fashioned way with hard work and lots of sweat.

*"The farm is organic and sustainable. It's ironic my aunt and Prince Harry go on about being such great eco-warriors and yet they carry on jetting around on private planes. I think we're doing more for the planet than my aunt Meghan is."*

While Tyler refused to say exactly how much he is worth, he reckons his cannabis business Blue Line Hemp has an 'expected revenue' of up to $200 million (£160m) a year - which obviously isn't too shabby, even for the relative of a royal. 

He also said he has been distancing himself from producing marijuana containing the mind-bending compound THC, and will instead be turning his attention to products containing cannabidiol (CBD).

Tyler added: "CBD products are where the future lies. We are selling our product to several of the leading importers into the UK. We're planning to flood the market."​


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Discuss



I'll be sure to go there for information and support


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> While Tyler refused to say exactly how much he is worth, he reckons his cannabis business Blue Line Hemp has an 'expected revenue' of up to $200 million (£160m) a year - which obviously isn't too shabby, even for the relative of a royal.



How funny would it be if her pot-growing relative makes more money than they do this year?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> How funny would it be if her pot-growing relative makes more money than they do this year?



I bet they would make a fortune partnering with her relative. They already don't care about optics. May as well get in on the easy cash grab.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I bet they would make a fortune partnering with her relative. They already don't care about optics. May as well get in on the easy cash grab.



If she gets wind of it she'll probably sue him for using the name Archie. That was _her_ name, she should get a share of the profits.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> If she gets wind of it she'll probably sue him for using the name Archie. That was _her_ name, she should get a share of the profits.


So should George then... lol


----------



## CeeJay

You know her postings on their IG account really make me scratch my head in regards to her University education.  I had thought that the University she attended was a fairly decent one, but from the nonsense she continues to post I have to wonder to myself, "did she take the Basket-Weaving courses" instead of her core classes?  It's such DRIVEL and NONSENSE .. obviously, she thinks that it's so "smart" but I find her 'word-salad' to sound INCREDIBLY STUPID .. about the same level of education as to when she had her "epiphany" that she could HELP THE WORLD!!!  Saint-Meghan ..


----------



## limom

I love that she keeps us entertained in those uncertain times....
Could her staff be part of the Bragart team?
In anycase , I stan!


----------



## youngster

I've been wondering how on earth did those two Russian pranksters get a hold of Harry?  The DM answered this:

_Earlier this week, it was revealed Harry had been duped into taking the calls from pranksters Vladimir Kuznetsov and Alexei Stolyarov because the former head of his royal foundation inadvertently put them in contact

Lorraine Heggessey unwittingly acted as the bridge between the Duke and the frauds, who posed as Thunberg and her father Svante, by forwarding their message to Harry's personal email, believing it was genuine.
_
I don't know much about her, Lorraine Heggessey, but she appears to have a background in broadcasting and TV and producing.  It's almost more embarrassing that it happened this way.  You'd think she'd have done some background checking herself before forwarding it to Harry. Still, she left the foundation last October so they aren't paying her any longer, so why should she check?  This is what happens when you jettison your loyal, professional, experienced staff.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

tiktok said:


> Discuss



Good, now I have a place to go for reliable information on the corona epidemic...

...but hang on, a week ago they hadn’t had the time to inform themselves about the issue and now they are the experts?!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Am I the only one who sees a weird squid like thing on their IG. I know it’s a logo but my eye just doesn’t seem to want to drop the sea monster. 

It’s super annoying.


----------



## V0N1B2

limom said:


> Who knew that Canada has the best weed?
> Those two are high, right?


Doll, _everybody_ knows that.  <— stoner emoji


----------



## Tootsie17

gracekelly said:


> So it looks like they will change the name of the website from SussexRoyal to SussexKnowItAll.  On their new site they will solve all the worlds problems with virtual hugs and mental health directives. There will be numerous pictures of Meghan giving lectures and waving  her hands about  (wearing latex gloves)   via YouTube since they are sheltering in place.   Harry will be seen in the corner on his toy telephone calling all the people who used to be his friends before marriage or trying to get his father on the phone.



Thank you for the best laughs I've had all day!


----------



## V0N1B2

A1aGypsy said:


> Am I the only one who sees a weird squid like thing on their IG. I know it’s a logo but my eye just doesn’t seem to want to drop the sea monster.
> It’s super annoying.


Yes! I always see a jellyfish when I do a quick glance at the posts here that show screen caps of the Instagram page


----------



## mdcx

Keep the dim witted vague statements coming Meghan!
We could use the laughs in this moment where people are worried for their lives.


----------



## LittleStar88

Wait, what? Has anyone else heard about this? Article is from 2018.

https://www.potnetwork.com/news/mtv-air-weed-show-starring-distant-royal-family


*MTV To Air Weed Show Starring Distant Royal Family*
Jul 23, 2018
RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA
By Sean McCaughan
Sure, it’s good to be King, but it’s also good to be the nephew of the Duchess of Sussex. Duchess Meghan Markle’s nephew, Tyler Dooley is an American cannabis farmer and certainly isn’t shy of taking advantage of his royal connection to sell some weed or even go on TV. His legal grow operation, Royally Grown, already released a strand of mary jane named after the Duchess, called Markle Sparkle. Now he’s been given his own reality TV show by MTV. Herb reports:

“The show is set for production by MTV and is scheduled to feature Dooley’s legal grow-op, which he conveniently named ‘Royally Grown.’ It will feature Dooley’s mother, Tracy, his girlfriend, Sandra, and his brother Tom as recurring cast members. Dooley and his family captured MTV’s attention because of how different their lives are compared to the Royal Family.”

MTV hasn’t released an announcement yet on when the show will air.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait, what? Has anyone else heard about this? Article is from 2018.
> 
> https://www.potnetwork.com/news/mtv-air-weed-show-starring-distant-royal-family
> 
> 
> *MTV To Air Weed Show Starring Distant Royal Family*
> Jul 23, 2018
> RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA
> By Sean McCaughan
> Sure, it’s good to be King, but it’s also good to be the nephew of the Duchess of Sussex. Duchess Meghan Markle’s nephew, Tyler Dooley is an American cannabis farmer and certainly isn’t shy of taking advantage of his royal connection to sell some weed or even go on TV. His legal grow operation, Royally Grown, already released a strand of mary jane named after the Duchess, called Markle Sparkle. Now he’s been given his own reality TV show by MTV. Herb reports:
> 
> “The show is set for production by MTV and is scheduled to feature Dooley’s legal grow-op, which he conveniently named ‘Royally Grown.’ It will feature Dooley’s mother, Tracy, his girlfriend, Sandra, and his brother Tom as recurring cast members. Dooley and his family captured MTV’s attention because of how different their lives are compared to the Royal Family.”
> 
> MTV hasn’t released an announcement yet on when the show will air.


ha....I'll bet this will piss her off


----------



## queennadine

These two are the LAST people who should be providing any input on mental health. They ping pong all over the place and are clearly unreliable. No thanks.


----------



## A1aGypsy

V0N1B2 said:


> Yes! I always see a jellyfish when I do a quick glance at the posts here that show screen caps of the Instagram page



oh good.


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> Am I the only one who sees a weird squid like thing on their IG. I know it’s a logo but my eye just doesn’t seem to want to drop the sea monster.



I don’t think so. Oh wait, now I see it.


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> Discuss




Who even has time to pay attention to this? It's a pandemic; we need information, not a lecture on compassion from 2 ex-royals. We're _living_ the lesson on compassion. Whichever poster said before that this couple lives to complain, lecture, or whine was so right on.


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> Who even has time to pay attention to this? It's a pandemic; we need information, not a lecture on compassion from 2 ex-royals. We're _living_ the lesson on compassion. *Whichever poster said before that this couple lives to complain, lecture, or whine was so right on*.



Yes............but at least they are LIVING while they are complaining/lecturing/whining and not just EXISTING!


----------



## mrsinsyder

prettyprincess said:


> x


Considering one of these posts was deleted and one wasn’t, I wouldn’t be so quick to say the moderators are biased.

Anyway it must be killing M and H that no one cares about them now. They could run naked through Vancouver and still be on the third page of the papers. What a fright.


----------



## muchstuff

mrsinsyder said:


> Considering one of these posts was deleted and one wasn’t, I wouldn’t be so quick to say the moderators are biased.
> 
> Anyway it must be killing M and H that no one cares about them now. They could run naked through Vancouver and still be on the third page of the papers. What a fright.


I live in Vancouver. That was a visual I could do without.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

Surely one of H&M’s “friends” (PR & legal dream team) can save them from themselves? It is insane:

-To use a world pandemic to push a post-partum mental health platform. No one denies mental health is important, but limiting spread & increasingly the supply chain for medical supplies is critical now.

-To lecture about compassion during a pandemic when a week ago they admitted not to have time (Meghan) or fortitude (Harry) to read about the virus & current events. When they recently visited the UK, QE2 and other world leaders had already discouraged handshaking, but M’s “friends” just released a statement about how the BRF was cold and didn’t hug... So of course M needed to hug everyone for the cameras.

How comforting to be told that H&M are continuing to work out how to save the world while they’re in isolation. Reading their statement brought to mind another phenomenon—

*Folie à deux* *is a disorder where symptoms of a delusional belief are transmitted from one individual to another.* Harry is equally responsible for his current situation, but from his hoax interview comments (& the fact that he stands by them) it’s clear that M is not the only one with visions of grandeur.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think so. Oh wait, now I see it.
> View attachment 4693188


Cracking met gala outfit  maybe next year....


----------



## Chagall

MrsJDS said:


> In response to their IG post I have the following questions for Meghan: (1) let’s talk about compassion: how is your dad? (2) why don’t you donate some part of your substantial wealth to a charity in need like so many other celebrities are doing? (3) Where are your qualifications to speak about  mental health or Covid-19? (4) why would you think any of us would care about what you have to say on Covid-19?  Unless you are Dr Anthony Fauci or his equivalent, STFU.


But Harry won’t read about the news or Covid-19. It depresses him!  Oh well, I supposed he can be an expert anyway!


----------



## Chagall

Come on Kate, I know your clock is ticking but you can still do it. Make this nimrod 7th in line, or as someone said, pray for twins and push the dipstick to number 8.


----------



## chowlover2

Chagall said:


> Come on Kate, I know your clock is ticking but you can still do it. Make this nimrod 7th in line, or as someone said, pray for twins and push the dipstick to number 8.


I am hoping for the same thing!


----------



## duna

tiktok said:


> Discuss


----------



## Jktgal

tiktok said:


> Discuss


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Even her handwriting is attention seeking.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even her handwriting is attention seeking.



Like in the letter she wrote to her father -- both content and form of handwriting was totally obnoxious.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even her handwriting is attention seeking.





lulilu said:


> Like in the letter she wrote to her father -- both content and form of handwriting was totally obnoxious.


She must take half an hour to write a shopping list


----------



## PewPew

Clearblueskies said:


> She must take half an hour to write a shopping list



Noooo, not since marriage. HRH dictates her needs to her staff, who take notes (now while wearing latex gloves!) & translate the word salad for the shopping team— also known as UK-funded security. (They also pick up H&Ms dry cleaning.)


----------



## scarlet555

Chagall said:


> Come on Kate, I know your clock is ticking but you can still do it. Make this nimrod 7th in line, or as someone said, pray for twins and push the dipstick to number 8.



Yes, to this....  I say Do it, do it, do it, do it, do it, do it, do it...     Kate have a set of twins or triplets....  The kingdom depends on you....   we will cheer you on...  It will be easier, especially with everyone rooting for you


----------



## bag-mania

Poor Kate. She's probably satisfied with having three kids and here we are wanting her to have a litter!


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Poor Kate. She's probably satisfied with having three kids and here we are wanting her to have a litter!



Right?? And she has horrible pregnancies!  But like, duty and all that, amiright?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Right?? And she has horrible pregnancies!  But like, duty and all that, amiright?



Yeah, but it seems like she genuinely loves being a mom. Otherwise, I think she would have stopped at two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Who are they to preach about Covid-19? Harry & Meghan flew from the UK and I don't believe either of them went into the 14 day quarantine officials are asking of every traveler. Again, can't be bothered to practice what they preach.


----------



## 1LV

lulilu said:


> Like in the letter she wrote to her father -- both content and form of handwriting was totally obnoxious.


Hmmm... almost as if it might be seen by who knows how many people.


----------



## CeeJay

So, the Daily Mail is saying that Prince William might be stepping in for QEII and Prince Charles .. this should be interesting if true!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...amid-coronavirus-crisis-plan-say-experts.html


----------



## CeeJay

.. and unfortunately, Prince Albert (Monaco) has tested positive for COVID-19, and he had met with Prince Charles 9 days earlier in London, this isn't good!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Albert-Monaco-tests-positive-coronavirus.html


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> .. and unfortunately, Prince Albert (Monaco) has tested positive for COVID-19, and he had met with Prince Charles 9 days earlier in London, this isn't good!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Albert-Monaco-tests-positive-coronavirus.html


Head of state
La principauté is a tiny , Winnie city... Albert’s wife always looks so sad and miserable....It is not so fun to be there, imho..


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Head of state
> La principauté is a tiny , Winnie city... Albert’s wife always looks so sad and miserable....It is not so fun to be there, imho..


Oh yes, been there (although it was by far the CLEANEST place I have ever been to)!!!  Yes, sad how his wife always looks so sad!


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...AY-Harry-Meghan-miles-away-Queens-wisdom.html


----------



## lanasyogamama

limom said:


> Head of state
> La principauté is a tiny , Winnie city... Albert’s wife always looks so sad and miserable....It is not so fun to be there, imho..





CeeJay said:


> Oh yes, been there (although it was by far the CLEANEST place I have ever been to)!!!  Yes, sad how his wife always looks so sad!



Well, didn’t she try to run away before the wedding?


----------



## 1LV

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...AY-Harry-Meghan-miles-away-Queens-wisdom.html
> 
> View attachment 4693781


Spot on.


----------



## limom

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, didn’t she try to run away before the wedding?


She did. It was the strangest story.
Both Princess Grace and Princess Stephanie had a hard time...
Princess Grace was incredibly confused at times...
Stephanie was a hot mess...
The Grimaldis are a mess.
Albert has a wondering eyes, she is not his type whatsoever....


----------



## PewPew

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, didn’t she try to run away before the wedding?



Yes, and Princess Charlene probably wishes she could have a “Megxit”!

“_French weekly L'Express reported that Charlene tried to leave Monaco on Tuesday, 28 June, after rumors surfaced that Albert had fathered a third illegitimate child. The report claimed that Monaco Police intercepted her at Nice Côte d'Azur Airport, confiscated her passport, and that it took "intense convincing" by Albert and palace officials for her to agree to stay.”_

I can’t imagine what restrictions she agreed to. She has recently said she knows people think she looks sad & that’s because she’s homesick. She’s only had a few trips back & her 5 year old children have only recently been allowed to visit her native South Africa (it’s not clear if they actually went yet). Her brother’s family have moved to Monoco to be close to her.

Prince Albert has a lot of illegitimate children, but only one heir, so the restrictions on Charlene’s son must be fierce. He’s also a twin, so his sister must be particularly aware of double standards. It seems she’ll stay around until the children are grown.

OK, back to H&M!


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> .. and unfortunately, Prince Albert (Monaco) has tested positive for COVID-19, and he had met with Prince Charles 9 days earlier in London, this isn't good!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Albert-Monaco-tests-positive-coronavirus.html


Has anyone seen the video where Charles gets out of a car, goes to shake hands (automatic response) is told not to, laughs because it's awkward. meets another guy, goes to shake hands, is told not to. Laughs because he keeps forgetting. He's on automatic pilot.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Oh yes, been there (although it was by far the CLEANEST place I have ever been to)!!!  Yes, sad how his wife always looks so sad!





PewPew said:


> Yes, and Princess Charlene probably wishes she could have a “Megxit”!
> 
> “_French weekly L'Express reported that Charlene tried to leave Monaco on Tuesday, 28 June, after rumors surfaced that Albert had fathered a third illegitimate child. The report claimed that Monaco Police intercepted her at Nice Côte d'Azur Airport, confiscated her passport, and that it took "intense convincing" by Albert and palace officials for her to agree to stay.”_
> 
> I can’t imagine what restrictions she agreed to. She has recently said she knows people think she looks sad & that’s because she’s homesick. She’s only had a few trips back & her 5 year old children have only recently been allowed to visit her native South Africa (it’s not clear if they actually went yet). Her brother’s family have moved to Monoco to be close to her.
> 
> Prince Albert has a lot of illegitimate children, but only one heir, so the restrictions on Charlene’s son must be fierce. He’s also a twin, so his sister must be particularly aware of double standards. It seems she’ll stay around until the children are grown.
> 
> OK, back to H&M!


Okay, another 'has anyone seen' video -- but if anyone hasn't seen the wedding ceremony of Charlene and Albert, it's worth a look.  She was crying. Not tears of joy either. It was so uncomfortable to watch.


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...AY-Harry-Meghan-miles-away-Queens-wisdom.html
> 
> View attachment 4693781



Exactly!! Geez, what a time to pipe up and lecture people on compassion as if anyone needed that.


----------



## Tootsie17

Jayne1 said:


> Okay, another 'has anyone seen' video -- but if anyone hasn't seen the wedding ceremony of Charlene and Albert, it's worth a look.  She was crying. Not tears of joy either. It was so uncomfortable to watch.


You are so right!  I have never seen a bride so sad and my heart aches for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Vintage Leather

I could see if MsSuperhero was going on about "Stress weakens your immune system, so ... limit your news diet, healthy exercise while staying away from people who need you, and take time for you!"

which is actually decent advice and god knows that's one thing she's shown the world she's good at.


----------



## Lodpah

I happened upon this answer from a psychologist on Meghan:

NO. I do not believe that they are happy. Meghan pulls and pushes Harry whenever she is with him. She clings to him endlessly. She never allows him to have any freedom to talk with his friends or anyone else for that matter.

She has narcissistic behaviors which dominates, controls, and dictates. She is the boss in the family. He obeys. This couple burns down too many bridges, rather than builds them. Too much work, not enough patience. Too many loose ends, less concrete plans, and a lot of choices, for them. I do not believe that they planned their exit wisely. For this couple, they act first, and they think second.


----------



## scrpo83

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, but it seems like she genuinely loves being a mom. Otherwise, I think she would have stopped at two.


Nahh..there were rumours circulating that Kate wants 3 kids just like her mother..so personal aspiration achieved she now can concentrate on her duties as duchess..my opinion anyway


----------



## Chagall

So Harry is back in Canada and the borders are closed. How will it feel to him to not be able to return to the UK even if he wanted to? Would a private jet be able to cross borders? If not the finality of his decision must be sinking in hard.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> So Harry is back in Canada and the borders are closed. How will it feel to him to not be able to return to the UK even if he wanted to? Would a private jet be able to cross borders? If not the finality of his decision must be sinking in hard.


Especially seeing the rest of the family, and William in particular, carrying on without him.  Puts the Sussex antics in perspective, and shows how much they messed up IMO.


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> Has anyone seen the video where Charles gets out of a car, goes to shake hands (automatic response) is told not to, laughs because it's awkward. meets another guy, goes to shake hands, is told not to. Laughs because he keeps forgetting. He's on automatic pilot.


Someone added a humorous narration to it here:


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> Exactly!! Geez, what a time to pipe up and lecture people on compassion as if anyone needed that.


Compassion from someone who abandon her own father.  Does she really think she is fooling anyone?  I can't imagine having that huge of an ego.


----------



## limom

God forbids, something happened to one of his family members, JustHarry will feel bad for the rest of his life, imho.
What a mistake!


----------



## marietouchet

imgg said:


> Compassion from someone who abandon her own father.  Does she really think she is fooling anyone?  I can't imagine having that huge of an ego.


I used to think that she had ONE difficult family - the Markles - and gave her the benefit of the doubt


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Especially seeing the rest of the family, and William in particular, carrying on without him.  Puts the Sussex antics in perspective, and shows how much they messed up IMO.



He probably doesn't know. I am imagining him cloistered away in a room somewhere in the mansion, playing video games and watching movies. What else does he have to do? Meghan does the thinking for both of them.


----------



## lulilu

scrpo83 said:


> Nahh..there were rumours circulating that Kate wants 3 kids just like her mother..so personal aspiration achieved she now can concentrate on her duties as duchess..my opinion anyway



I read not that long ago that Kate said she'd like another but William said no.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> Especially seeing the rest of the family, and William in particular, carrying on without him.  Puts the Sussex antics in perspective, and shows how much they messed up IMO.


Absolutely, they messed up big time. ‘Antics’ is the perfect way of describing their behaviour. They must feel like absolute fools. They can’t even go to the US because our border is now closed to the US -the only exception being trucks for food and medical supplies going either way. Surely H would rather be safely in the UK with Archie.


----------



## kipp

Chagall said:


> Absolutely, they messed up big time. ‘Antics’ is the perfect way of describing their behaviour. They must feel like absolute fools. They can’t even go to the US because our border is now closed to the US -the only exception being trucks for food and medical supplies going either way. Surely H would rather be safely in the UK with Archie.



Absolutely they messed up.  However, I disagree that they must feel like absolute fools.  If they felt that way, surely they (or she) would stop posting pretentious, somewhat sanctimonious, and irrelevant word salad on their IG and website.  I think they are clueless.


----------



## Chagall

kipp said:


> Absolutely they messed up.  However, I disagree that they must feel like absolute fools.  If they felt that way, surely they (or she) would stop posting pretentious, somewhat sanctimonious, and irrelevant word salad on their IG and website.  I think they are clueless.


I suppose I could have said should feel like absolute fools. Like most ‘normal’ people.


----------



## bagshopr

I keep hoping that these two will just GO AWAY like they said they wanted to, but I keep clicking here to get updates so I guess I'm part of the problem too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

This was from the Daily Mail but an article discussing William and Bea stepping up in light of current world events also mentioned Harry possibly returning to help.  I wondered who put this narrative out there??


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Absolutely they messed up.  However, I disagree that they must feel like absolute fools.  If they felt that way, surely they (or she) would stop posting pretentious, somewhat sanctimonious, and irrelevant word salad on their IG and website.  I think they are clueless.



I doubt Meghan believes she has ever made a mistake.


----------



## Annawakes

I guess they’ll be squatting in the Russian mansion for another 6 months.  The owner is very generous isn’t he?


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I guess they’ll be squatting in the Russian mansion for another 6 months.  The owner is very generous isn’t he?



Whoever he is, he likely can't use it himself at the moment. I would hope they are paying rent. Being known as the royal deadbeats or the royal squatters isn't good for their brand.


----------



## doni

Annawakes said:


> I guess they’ll be squatting in the Russian mansion for another 6 months.  The owner is very generous isn’t he?


Indeed, it is nice to see how in these times of crisis there are people who pull their weight so that the homeless can have a protective roof over their heads.
But as two foreigners don’t you need some kind of permit to live in Canada when you don’t even have a job or an occupation there? I didn’t know Canadian immigration rules were so lax.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I mean, the problem is, as I have said before, rules only apply to the masses. They have been allowed to stay in Canada  and I have no doubt, if he wanted to, a private jet would be allowed to whisk him off to the UK.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


>




Today I feel ---- 
like punching you Meghan, I feel like punching you. She's right, it does make you feel better.


----------



## scarlet555

Sharont2305 said:


>




DO NOT open this glass door Meghan!


----------



## mrsinsyder

We know.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Today I feel ----
> like punching you Meghan, I feel like punching you. She's right, it does make you feel better.


Lol!!!


----------



## threadbender

Sharont2305 said:


>



I am going to throw up now. That is how I "feel" after seeing that.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4694038
> 
> 
> *We know.*



lol


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


>



Saint Meg has the superpower to annoy an entire nation from the other side of the ocean  
Imagine if you rang and she was volunteering on the line, you’d never get a word in.


----------



## scarlet555

a


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> Today I feel ----
> like punching you Meghan, I feel like punching you. She's right, it does make you feel better.



Such pomposity in the text of the Instagram post!

Harry has to feel bad leaving his family and country during this crisis. But I wonder if M is exhilarated knowing that HRH SIXTH IN LINE to the throne may become relevant again? QE2, Phillip & the first 4 in line to the throne are the Counselors of State, but only Will is now available of the 6.

QE2, Phillip & Charles (#1 heir) are in precautionary isolation due to their ages.
Will (#2) is doing the face to face meetings.
# 3-5 (Wills kids) & #7 (Archie) are too young.
 #8 Prince Andrew is too smarmy.
#9 Princess Beatrice may be asked to serve as a counselor of state with Parliament’s lower permission. Who could’ve imagined we’d need to be discussing the 9th in the line!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...amid-coronavirus-crisis-plan-say-experts.html


----------



## bag-mania

I hope Harry reads this part. It's not too late to get help, Harry.


----------



## kemilia

mdcx said:


> Someone added a humorous narration to it here:



Thank you--I needed a good laugh this morning!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Sharont2305 said:


>




oh ffs.... for real? They need to go away...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4694038
> 
> 
> We know.



Jup.


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4694038
> 
> 
> We know.


I read this earlier today - I don't agree with it at all.  It's basically saying that Meghan is lazy and didn't want to work.  Neither has ever been true of her.  She was very gung ho about working when she started (and I do believe that she probably wore out her staff and didn't respect the existing work culture and boundaries.)  

Her problem is she just doesn't understand* royal *work.  Never did.  Never tried to learn.  She wanted to do her own thing - writing messages on bananas and posting inspo quotes about kindness on instagram.  The Sussex coronavirus post compared to the Cambridge coronavirus post just shows how off-target the Sussexes still are.  They don't get it.  

Meghan is probably in Vancouver Googling like crazy searching for potential instagram content.   She's probably having her staff (whatever that consists of these days) doing double duty round the clock to help her.  But this is pointless celebrity behavior masquerading as royal work.  It's all about her looking like Ms. Eager Beaver Who Wants to Help and, ultimately, try to be the biggest influencer.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Sharont2305 said:


>




Here's the comment I posted in response.  Wonder how long before it's deleted.

"



What absolute tripe. All this from a man who abandoned his own family when they most needed him. Shame on you both. You're not helping anyone in your borrowed mansion. You're just trying to appear relevant. Guess what, neither of you are.
Now


----------



## Sharont2305

Meghan, Harry, this is what you should be doing.


----------



## Megs

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan, Harry, this is what you should be doing.




People need some sense of 'normalcy' and assurance right now, and this a great display of that during such a terrifying time for the entire world.


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan, Harry, this is what you should be doing.


Yes!  This is the heart and soul of royal work.  They showed up to give recognition and respect to people who are working hard during a crisis.  That's it!  They aren't making it about themselves.  Kate didn't go extra and show up with homemade muffins so we would all marvel about how thoughtful she is.  They aren't laying it on thick with hugs and big phony expressions.  They just showed up dressed appropriately and did their jobs.


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Her problem is she just doesn't understand* royal *work.  Never did.  Never tried to learn.  She wanted to do her own thing - writing messages on bananas and posting inspo quotes about kindness on instagram.  The Sussex coronavirus post compared to the Cambridge coronavirus post just shows how off-target the Sussexes still are.  They don't get it.



She thought she would work in the same way that pretentious Hollywood celebrities "work." Meaning it would consist of a lot of fluffy messages of encouragement to the common folk, first about the environment and now Covid-19.

This week a good example of that kind of tone-deafness came from Gal Gadot. She and a bunch of other rich Hollywood celebs thought they would inspire us by singing John Lennon's _Imagine_ from the comfort of their self-quarantined mansions. They are being slammed for being cringeworthy and horribly out-of-touch.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

tiktok said:


> Discuss



w
is this addressed for the Republic of Chunga Changa and all the penguins in the North Pole?


----------



## CeeJay

Cavalier Girl said:


> Here's the comment I posted in response.  Wonder how long before it's deleted.
> 
> "
> 
> 
> 
> What absolute tripe. All this from a man who abandoned his own family when they most needed him. Shame on you both. You're not helping anyone in your borrowed mansion. You're just trying to appear relevant. Guess what, neither of you are.
> Now


LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this!!!!!


----------



## Flatsy

WillstarveforLV said:


> is this addressed for the Republic of Chunga Changa and all the penguins in the North Pole?


The poor penguins are still stranded in Belarus.  Harry's Norwegian guide never sent the ship for them.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan, Harry, this is what you should be doing.



but they aren't in a position to be doing this - thanks to their own decisions


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Flatsy said:


> The poor penguins are still stranded in Belarus.  Harry's Norwegian guide never sent the ship for them.


Chunga Changa!


----------



## WillstarveforLV

QUOTE="Flatsy, post: 33687461, member: 588791"]The poor penguins are still stranded in Belarus.  Harry's Norwegian guide never sent the ship for them.[/QUOTE]


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan, Harry, this is what you should be doing.



I'm not sure if this is what they should be doing. They have in my eyes proven themselves useless to follow any of the proper protocols to be representing the Royal family.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> I'm not sure if this is what they should be doing. They have in my eyes proven themselves useless to follow any of the proper protocols to be representing the Royal family.


Sorry, but that's only happened since Meghan joined. Up until then Harry had proved himself, after a few misdemeanours, to be a vital part of the RF.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Sorry, but that's only happened since Meghan joined. Up until then Harry had proved himself, after a few misdemeanours, to be a vital part of the RF.


100% agree!!! .. Harry had to cancel the Invictus Games for this year.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Sorry, but that's only happened since Meghan joined. Up until then Harry had proved himself, after a few misdemeanours, to be a vital part of the RF.


Who knows who Harry really is?
A man of honor does not become a derelict within a year or so, imho.
Until recently, I could not have imagined prince  Andrew being that vile and depraved.
Greedy and a crook? Yes, but a rapist? I had no clue.
I think that Meg revealed him for all to see....


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Who knows who Harry really is?
> A man of honor does not become a derelict within a year or so, imho.
> Until recently, I could not have imagined prince  Andrew being that vile and depraved.
> Greedy and a crook? Yes, but a rapist? I had no clue.
> I think that Meg revealed him for all to see....



The less you know about somebody the easier it is to like them.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Who knows who Harry really is?
> A man of honor does not become a derelict within a year or so, imho.
> Until recently, I could not have imagined prince  Andrew being that vile and depraved.
> Greedy and a crook? Yes, but a rapist? I had no clue.
> I think that Meg revealed him for all to see....[/
> maybe not a rapist but a pedophile?


----------



## limom

An hebephile, a freak whatever. The young women were underaged, sex trafficked  and could not give consent.
So he is a rapist, imho.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


>



This is unbelievable.  Who knew that you could get a psychology degree and license to practice in the space of a day?  I hope they are roundly smacked for this nonsense. The only people that will think it is brilliant are their remaining 150 real people fans and 3 million bots. Oh and Omid Scobie.


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> This is unbelievable.  Who knew that you could get a psychology degree and license to practice in the space of a day?  I hope they are roundly smacked for this nonsense. The only people that will think it is brilliant are their remaining 150 real people fans and 3 million bots. Oh and Omid Scobie.



Indeed they are being roundly smacked in the comments for the stupidity and irresponsibility of their suggestions and desperate desire to stay relevant despite the fact that they're... not. At all.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> This is unbelievable.  Who knew that you could get a psychology degree and license to practice in the space of a day?  I hope they are roundly smacked for this nonsense. The only people that will think it is brilliant are their remaining 150 real people fans and 3 million bots. Oh and Omid Scobie.


It’s something to do if you’re bored


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> It’s something to do if you’re bored



If she is bored, she could take online acting lessons.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Who and who? I completely forgot these two existed for quite some time already. It's been awesome


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I've never, ever commented on a strangers Instagram, but this last bit of grandiosity plucked my last nerve.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

Cavalier Girl said:


> I've never, ever commented on a strangers Instagram, but this last bit of grandiosity plucked my last nerve.



Yes indeed.  As someone said on this thread before...they are the gift that keeps on giving.  I find them quite amusing and nauseating.


----------



## V0N1B2

gracekelly said:


> If she is bored, she could take online acting lessons.


----------



## queennadine

Yeah, the audacity of them to suggest that you could become a counselor online if you’re bored...

Pretty sure people go to school for a lot of years, undergo clinical supervision, maintain licensing, etc. to be able to provide proper, professional treatment to those in need. 

Beyond tone deaf, immature, and just UGH. They keep getting worse and worse.


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> Yeah, the audacity of them to suggest that you could become a counselor online if you’re bored...
> 
> Pretty sure people go to school for a lot of years, undergo clinical supervision, maintain licensing, etc. to be able to provide proper, professional treatment to those in need.
> 
> Beyond tone deaf, immature, and just UGH. They keep getting worse and worse.


wonder how long before they become widely disliked or irrelevant.  I know most of us on this thread already view this this way but they still have lots of fans and support from celebs last I heard.


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> Yeah, the audacity of them to suggest that you could become a counselor online if you’re bored...
> 
> Pretty sure people go to school for a lot of years, undergo clinical supervision, maintain licensing, etc. to be able to provide proper, professional treatment to those in need.
> 
> Beyond tone deaf, immature, and just UGH. They keep getting worse and worse.


Most have to have (at least) a Masters Degree; a friend of mine is going for her PhD!  But, then again .. Meghan probably thinks that since her Mother was a Social Worker, then well .. she knows all of that by osmosis!


----------



## pukasonqo

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree!!! .. Harry had to cancel the Invictus Games for this year.


I thought the cancellation was because of COVID-19


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Most have to have (at least) a Masters Degree; a friend of mine is going for her PhD!  But, then again .. Meghan probably thinks that since her Mother was a Social Worker, then well .. she knows all of that by osmosis!


 3k hours and 2 years that are supervised by a licensed psychologist.  1500 hours after you receive your doctorate.
I don't know if she can fit this into her busy schedule with pap walks, banana writing and word salad compositions.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> The less you know about somebody the easier it is to like them.



This totally sums up my relationship with meghan. God, I wish I could go back in time to when I just liked this “pretty princess lady” because now it annoys me whenever I see her pop up.


----------



## PewPew

sdkitty said:


> wonder how long before they become widely disliked or irrelevant.  I know most of us on this thread already view this this way but they still have lots of fans and support from celebs last I heard.



The longer H&M go on with their tone-deaf statements, more fans will recognize  that even if they got unfair treatment by the BRF or press, they are also entitled, selfish, ignorant individuals. 

I didn’t know about Meg pre-engagement & was on Team H&M for a long time. I bought into to “fresh, modern monarchy” hype & really sympathized with them after Princess Micheal’s insensitive comments. But after the “poor us, we’re just existing” Africa documentary, the veil was lifted and I couldn’t buy into the fairy tale any longer.


----------



## mdcx

M is so wise. Unfortunately people who need professional therapy, or professional services of any sort, are questioning how wise it is to have close contact appointments with anyone right now. Switching to a random barely trained Meghan fan online- why didn’t I think of that?
This current climate really is showing M to be utterly clueless.


----------



## pukasonqo

It makes you wonder doesn’t it? I sort of expect H to be totally clueless as he was raised in an extremely privileged and sheltered environment but M??? She lived (or merely existed) in the nitty gritty struggle of the real world 
No excuse for either, I started supporting her (not a fan of royalty) but her tone deaf statements are really something


----------



## Megs

To me it comes off as Meghan thinking that because she married into the most well-known and beloved Royal family, she now got a fast pass to everything and whatever she says or does shall be gold forevermore. That’s not how life works, and though many do fall into the trap of finding someone “famous” aspirational in the character their portray, when push comes to shove (especially during a worldwide crisis), I don’t think people are going to be looking to Meghan for guidance.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> Most have to have (at least) a Masters Degree; a friend of mine is going for her PhD!  But, then again .. Meghan probably thinks that since her Mother was a Social Worker, then well .. she knows all of that by osmosis!


Not putting down social workers but there is a huge educational gap and training between a social worker and a clinical psychologist.  BA vs PsyD (PhD).  You can become a therapist (Mft etc.) at Masters level.


----------



## imgg

Cavalier Girl said:


> Here's the comment I posted in response.  Wonder how long before it's deleted.
> 
> "
> 
> 
> 
> What absolute tripe. All this from a man who abandoned his own family when they most needed him. Shame on you both. You're not helping anyone in your borrowed mansion. You're just trying to appear relevant. Guess what, neither of you are.
> Now


Previously they deleted all the negative comments, I noticed there are ton still there, guess their staff can't keep up trying to delete them all while posting gushing responses.  What a shallow existence.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Most have to have (at least) a Masters Degree; a friend of mine is going for her PhD!  But, then again .. Meghan probably thinks that since her Mother was a Social Worker, then well .. she knows all of that by osmosis!


Just look how much she has helped her husband, he hasn't looked better! (yeah right)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

I think she went to the school of.....throw enough sh** on the wall and see what sticks. COVID-19 is turning out to be a huge inconvenience to her and her worst nightmare....never mind what suffering is going on. After all, it is all about her.


----------



## Emeline

mshermes said:


> I think she went to the school of.....throw enough sh** on the wall and see what sticks. COVID-19 is turning out to be a huge inconvenience to her and her worst nightmare....never mind what suffering is going on. After all, it is all about her.


She seems to truly believe that abundant  enthusiasm is equal to actual competence.
Covid-19 has totally turned life upside down.  We are all just trying to get through it one day at a time.
At this point Team Sussex are irrelevant and their Instagram posts look ridiculous.


----------



## youngster

Princess Margaret's close friend, Lady Anne Glenconner, has written a UK best selling book about her time as a lady-in-waiting to Margaret, but it is also about so much more.  She's had a fascinating life herself, definitely filled with some personal tragedies of her own and she is very clever and witty.  She's supposed to have a big Tina Brown launch party for the book in the U.S. at some point.  She did an interview where she mentions Meghan:

_I’d been warned beforehand not to ask about Meghan Markle so I ask instead if, having spent so much time with Margaret, she has extra empathy for the other spares, Princes Andrew and Harry. But Glenconner knows what I’m up to: “You’re edging closer to asking me about Meghan Markle,” she tuts. “I’m going to put another log on the fire before I answer that!”

Markle’s mistake, she says, was to not understand that all the royals, even the spares, work hard: “I think she thought she could drive around in a golden coach. But it’s actually quite boring. Princess Margaret did so much charity work, and without any photographers, unlike the Princess of Wales.” (Glenconner is a staunch royalist, but her sympathies are with the more traditional branches of the family; even Princes William and Harry, she says, “go on about their mother the whole time. I think it’s a bit much.”)_


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> I think she went to the school of.....throw enough sh** on the wall and see what sticks. COVID-19 is turning out to be a huge inconvenience to her and her worst nightmare....never mind what suffering is going on. After all, it is all about her.


I'm sure they have some sort of minions to send to the store to stand in line for their TP and food......he was born into the privilege.  she just got lucky.  or was a super talented networker.  but they don't appreciate the privilege they have.  that's is what frosts me.  even with all the crap they're spouting now (confess I don't read much of it) do they every acknowledge that they are not suffering as others are?


----------



## joyeaux

Y’all I just can’t with these latest Instagram posts. So. Tone. Deaf.

Does anyone have any guesses to what their new “brand”  name will be once March 31st rolls around and SussexRoyal is no more?


----------



## PewPew

Megs said:


> To me it comes off as *Meghan thinking that because she married into the most well-known and beloved Royal family, she now got a fast pass to everything and whatever she says or does shall be gold forevermore.* That’s not how life works, and though many do fall into the trap of finding someone “famous” aspirational in the character their portray, when push comes to shove (especially during a worldwide crisis), I don’t think people are going to be looking to Meghan for guidance.



I think this hits the nail on the head. It might have been different had she been married for more than 18 months before dramatically announcing Megxit, while clinging to her new titles. How can we take the “Duchess if Sussex” seriously, when she’s only been to Sussex once?

Meghan bills herself as a “strong, independent woman” of extraordinary “independent profile,” yet she is banking on the cachet and connections of her husband & the celebrity and compassion of his dead mother.


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> Not putting down social workers but there is a huge educational gap and training between a social worker and a clinical psychologist.  BA vs PsyD (PhD).  You can become a therapist (Mft etc.) at Masters level.


Oh, I know that .. I was merely saying that given that M's mother was formerly a Social Worker, you know .. M probably just thinks that she knows as much and likely may not even know the difference between the two!!


----------



## lalame

joyeaux said:


> Y’all I just can’t with these latest Instagram posts. So. Tone. Deaf.
> 
> Does anyone have any guesses to what their new “brand”  name will be once March 31st rolls around and SussexRoyal is no more?



"JustSussex"?


----------



## lalame

I think Meghan is genuinely interested in charity and social causes but at some point she realized that could be a differentiator for her as an aspiring celebrity, especially since it's so "in" now in show business. And then when it becomes baked into your image and thus livelihood, it's now morphed into a totally gratuitous shtick. She probably thought marrying into the BRF was a perfect match to amplify that but... the royal tradition isn't to Hollywoodify it so now what she does just comes off so fake. And she doesn't get it.


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> the royal tradition isn't to Hollywoodify it so now what she does just comes off so fake. And she doesn't get it.



She should have married into Hollywood Royalty rather than real Royalty. Better suited, IMHO, she can spout all she wants in that situation


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> She should have married into Hollywood Royalty rather than real Royalty. Better suited, IMHO, she can spout all she wants in that situation



She probably would've if she could've...  H wouldn't have had a shot against someone like Chris Evans, Michael B Jordan, etc etc.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> She should have married into Hollywood Royalty rather than real Royalty. Better suited, IMHO, she can spout all she wants in that situation


Totally agree, but she was very low on that Totem pole and for reasons unbeknownst to me, she told her friends in Canada that she wanted to meet a British man (preferably very wealthy), hence the reason why she kept on going over there and originally "friended" Piers Morgan!


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, but she was very low on that Totem pole and for reasons unbeknownst to me, she told her friends in Canada that she wanted to meet a British man (preferably very wealthy), hence the reason why she kept on going over there and originally "friended" Piers Morgan!



i think it made her feel all Global Citizen-y, to date someone British, and she maybe thought she would attempt to make it on British TV.   It amazes me that she went out of her way to go to the UK, to hopefully meet someone British, and then runs away when she got what she was looking for (on quite a grand scale) because the life was too difficult and too different.  Imagine that, _Ms. Degree-In-International-Relations with your Independent Profile_, the UK isn't exactly like the U.S. or Canada but with lovely, refined accents.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> i think it made her feel all Global Citizen-y, to date someone British, and she maybe thought she would attempt to make it on British TV.   It amazes me that she went out of her way to go to the UK, to hopefully meet someone British, and then runs away when she got what she was looking for (on quite a grand scale) because the life was too difficult and too different.  Imagine that, _Ms. Degree-In-International-Relations with your Independent Profile_, the UK isn't exactly like the U.S. or Canada but with lovely, refined accents.


She had a fairy tale idea of what it would be like to live in a foreign country. but not so foreign that they still spoke English.  The reality was a bit of a shock.  Just another reason why Williams advice to Harry to take it slower would have give her more time to understand where she was living.  Her impatience, lack of research and delusions have really sunk her.


----------



## hellosunshine

* Simon Rex once offered $70K to say he ‘hooked up’ with Meghan Markle *




Before her life as a royal, Meghan Markle was a working actress in Hollywood. One of her previous co-stars, Simon Rex, recently revealed that several British tabloids offered him up to $70,000 to lie about their relationship by saying they “hooked up.”

Rex, 45, explained on The Hollywood Raw podcast, * “Nothing happened. We never even kissed. It was just like, we hung out once in a very non-datey way. She was just someone I had met on a TV show and, like, we got lunch. That was the extent of it.”*

Markle, 38, previously starred on USA comedy “Suits.”

When their one-time hangout session was made public, Rex says he was contacted by UK media looking for a scoop.

*“The tabloids, actually, when that story broke, a couple British tabloids offered to pay me a lot of money to say a lie that we actually hooked up,” he said. “And dude. I said no to a lot of money because I didn’t feel right lying and f–king up the royal f–king family …”*

Markle sued the owner of The Daily Mail in October, with husband Prince Harry accusing the “British tabloid press” of waging a “ruthless campaign” against his wife that echoed the treatment of his mother, Princess Diana.

https://pagesix.com/2020/03/20/simon-rex-once-offered-70k-to-say-he-hooked-up-with-meghan-markle/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

They probably made the $70K offer to the wrong person.


----------



## lanasyogamama

joyeaux said:


> Y’all I just can’t with these latest Instagram posts. So. Tone. Deaf.
> 
> Does anyone have any guesses to what their new “brand”  name will be once March 31st rolls around and SussexRoyal is no more?



I think it will be Sussex or Sussex Charities, something like that.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> She should have married into Hollywood Royalty rather than real Royalty. Better suited, IMHO, she can spout all she wants in that situation


don't think any Hollywood royalty would have been interested in her (before H)


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She had a fairy tale idea of what it would be like to live in a foreign country. but not so foreign that they still spoke English.  The reality was a bit of a shock.  Just another reason why Williams advice to Harry to take it slower would have give her more time to understand where she was living.  Her impatience, lack of research and delusions have really sunk her.


sunk her and her husband....he should have taken his brother's advice


----------



## HiromiT

TPF (and especially this thread) has always been my escape and guilty pleasure but it has become more so than ever before. I thank each one of you for sharing your opinions, insight, and wit. More importantly, I hope you all stay safe and healthy!


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> * Simon Rex once offered $70K to say he ‘hooked up’ with Meghan Markle *
> 
> View attachment 4694886
> 
> 
> Before her life as a royal, Meghan Markle was a working actress in Hollywood. One of her previous co-stars, Simon Rex, recently revealed that several British tabloids offered him up to $70,000 to lie about their relationship by saying they “hooked up.”
> 
> Rex, 45, explained on The Hollywood Raw podcast, * “Nothing happened. We never even kissed. It was just like, we hung out once in a very non-datey way. She was just someone I had met on a TV show and, like, we got lunch. That was the extent of it.”*
> 
> Markle, 38, previously starred on USA comedy “Suits.”
> 
> When their one-time hangout session was made public, Rex says he was contacted by UK media looking for a scoop.
> 
> *“The tabloids, actually, when that story broke, a couple British tabloids offered to pay me a lot of money to say a lie that we actually hooked up,” he said. “And dude. I said no to a lot of money because I didn’t feel right lying and f–king up the royal f–king family …”*
> 
> Markle sued the owner of The Daily Mail in October, with husband Prince Harry accusing the “British tabloid press” of waging a “ruthless campaign” against his wife that echoed the treatment of his mother, Princess Diana.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/03/20/simon-rex-once-offered-70k-to-say-he-hooked-up-with-meghan-markle/


Hmmmm .. out-of-work "actor" (who didn't star in anything great) looking to up HIS profile by putting out this  eye-rolling story .. yeah, okay ..


----------



## Mrs.Z

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. out-of-work "actor" (who didn't star in anything great) looking to up HIS profile by putting out this  eye-rolling story .. yeah, okay ..


my thoughts exactly...who cares who Meghan dated before Harry


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> my thoughts exactly...who cares who Meghan dated before Harry


He was probably PISSED that they ONLY offered him $70k!!!


----------



## lalame

I could believe that story... wouldn't put it past tabloids to pay anyone for dirt. Heck some of them dug up literally childhood friends of Meghan's to comment on her childhood so... a potential hookup would be a juicy lead for them.


----------



## lalame

I took a peek at H+M's latest instagram post to see how the commenters took it. This one made me LOL:


----------



## bisousx

* 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...c-breath-snogged-end-date-says-Simon-Rex.html*
*Meghan Markle dumped me over my garlic breath after we snogged at end of romantic dinner, reveals the porn star who dated Prince Harry's bride-to-be*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...c-breath-snogged-end-date-says-Simon-Rex.html
An award winning porn star turned Hollywood actor reveals she dumped him because he had garlic breath when they snogged at the end of their date. 

Simon Rex, 43, who made his name in the Scary Movie franchise, speculated that she might have avoided him because she found out about his adult movies too. 


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...c-breath-snogged-end-date-says-Simon-Rex.html


----------



## bisousx

Article is from 2018, but I knew there was something fishy when I saw the name Simon Rex - what was she doing on a date with a porn star? Classy move for a professional social climber.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> don't think any Hollywood royalty would have been interested in her (before H)


Catherine Zeta Jones managed it, lol.
Yeah, she was a reasonably famous actress here in the UK, lol


----------



## doni

lalame said:


> I took a peek at H+M's latest instagram post to see how the commenters took it. This one made me LOL:
> 
> View attachment 4694973


And it is totally on point isn’t it? I mean, the message they throw shows not the slightest awareness that through this an enormous amount of  people are working from home, while many are still working outside (among whom the health workers whom the Dukes of Cambridge visited). The message blatantly assumes that _everyone_ is in the same situation as themselves... They just have no clue...

Today I feel... like I want them to continue posting in their Instagram account because we can all do with a bit of nonsense to keep us entertained.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I think Meghan is genuinely interested in charity and social causes



See, and I genuinely believe she likes the *image* of a philanthrophist. She couldn't care less about the people actually involved, but the Mother Teresa image is appealing to her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> See, and I genuinely believe she likes the *image* of a philanthrophist. She couldn't care less about the people actually involved, but the Mother Teresa image is appealing to her.


She realised very early on it was a great way to raise her profile and differentiate her from other wannabe famous actresses, without a lot of effort on her part.  That’s why she keeps bringing up that wretched school project letter at every opportunity, and latches on to projects that are already producing good results.  I find it very cynical.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Catherine Zeta Jones managed it, lol.
> Yeah, she was a reasonably famous actress here in the UK, lol


Zeta Jones was an A list actress at the time it the US (Zorro movie) and she still had to marry a man over 20 years her senior plus Michael Douglas bedded anyone and everyone and if he still can, he is probably still at it. 
That is a huge price to pay...


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. out-of-work "actor" (who didn't star in anything great) looking to up HIS profile by putting out this  eye-rolling story .. yeah, okay ..



Good point


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> See, and I genuinely believe she likes the *image* of a philanthrophist. She couldn't care less about the people actually involved, but the Mother Teresa image is appealing to her.



Exactly. That's why she admired Diana. Not what Diana did or what she achieved but the adulation.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> *Oh, I know that *.. I was merely saying that given that M's mother was formerly a Social Worker, you know .. M probably just thinks that she knows as much and likely may not even know the difference between the two!!


I was just tagging off your post, not implying you didn't know the different types of mental health professionals.  My hubby is a psychologist, I am always blown away by what he picks up on.  He actually used to comment when we briefly watched Suits that something was off with Meghan.


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> Zeta Jones was an A list actress at the time it the US (Zorro movie) and she still had to marry a man over 20 years her senior plus Michael Douglas bedded anyone and everyone and if he still can, he is probably still at it.
> That is a huge price to pay...


I was always blown away by this.  Catherine could have married anyone she was gorgeous. I remember reading a quote where she said he is MICHAEL DOUGLAS and I am just the girl from Zorro.  Sad status came above everything else. She should of held out.


----------



## LittleStar88

imgg said:


> I was always blown away by this.  Catherine could have married anyone she was gorgeous. I remember reading a quote where she said he is MICHAEL DOUGLAS and I am just the girl from Zorro.  Sad status came above everything else. She should of held out.



I believe she suffers from mental illness. Maybe she doesn’t regard herself as highly?


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> I was always blown away by this.  Catherine could have married anyone she was gorgeous. I remember reading a quote where she said he is MICHAEL DOUGLAS and I am just the girl from Zorro.  Sad status came above everything else. She should of held out.





LittleStar88 said:


> I believe she suffers from mental illness. Maybe she doesn’t regard herself as highly?


She had low self esteem as a  young woman and was later on diagnosed as bipolar.
He is just an absolute pig... it runs in the family.
I don’t know her from a doorknob, but I believe that she could have married a  better man.
When he joked that he got throat cancer from having oral with her, I could have sworn that she would have left the man out of embarrassment....
Nope, she was later outed as bipolar.. WTF knows what goes on there?
I have known many people driven to insanity by their partners, J/S.


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> I was just tagging off your post, not implying you didn't know the different types of mental health professionals.  My hubby is a psychologist, I am always blown away by what he picks up on.  He actually used to comment when we briefly watched Suits that something was off with Meghan.


Huh? How can someone diagnosed someone on TV who is playing a role?
Is it even possible?


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> Huh? How can someone diagnosed someone on TV who is playing a role?
> Is it even possible?


Pretty sure I didn't use the word diagnosed anywhere in my post.


----------



## imgg

LittleStar88 said:


> I believe she suffers from mental illness. Maybe she doesn’t regard herself as highly?


Sad.  She never seemed the same after marring KD.


----------



## limom

imgg said:


> Pretty sure I didn't use the word diagnosed anywhere in my post.


It is pretty much the same you wrote that he knew that something was wrong from watching suits a few time, what else Is it supposed to mean?


----------



## Sol Ryan

limom said:


> It is pretty much the same you wrote that he knew that something was wrong from watching suits a few time, what else Is it supposed to mean?


She’s not a good actress? 

sorry... I had to... I couldn’t resist.... I tried for a whole two seconds....hehe


----------



## imgg

limom said:


> It is pretty much the same you wrote that he knew that something was wrong from watching suits a few time, what else Is it supposed to mean?


No its not the same.  Diagnosed is when someone has been formally evaluated by a professional.  Saying someone seems off is an opinion.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post




Patronizing coming from someone who wants nothing to do with the U.K...


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Catherine Zeta Jones managed it, lol.
> Yeah, she was a reasonably famous actress here in the UK, lol


really?  was Suits on TV there?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> really?  was Suits on TV there?


No, I was talking about CZJ.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> No, I was talking about CZJ.


oh, sorry
yes, I think she was pretty popular here....not a Meryl Streep but certainly considered very beautiful and had some roles is pretty big movies....did I understand you correctly that she was friends with Meghan pre-H?


----------



## Sol Ryan

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post



That sounds like something stolen from a crappy card from Dollar General... like Hallmark probably rejected that BS...


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> oh, sorry
> yes, I think she was pretty popular here....not a Meryl Streep but certainly considered very beautiful and had some roles is pretty big movies....did I understand you correctly that she was friends with Meghan pre-H?


I don't think they've even met.


----------



## rose60610

This thread does have several Meghan critics, but let's give some credit where credit is due. 

Currently we're all supposed to be practicing "social distancing" in light of COVID-19. Meghan, better than anyone, has shown us how to alienate basically everyone she has come into contact with. She is actually ahead of her time with social distancing. M is probably the safest person in the world from contracting any infectious disease.  Give her time to realize that and gloat to the rest of us: "SEE! I told you so! Social distancing works!" 

Ah well. They'll always have Chunga Changa. Penguins make lovely pets.


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> I was just tagging off your post, not implying you didn't know the different types of mental health professionals.  My hubby is a psychologist, I am always blown away by what he picks up on.  He actually used to comment when we briefly watched Suits that something was off with Meghan.


No worries!! .. interesting that you husband said that something is "off" with Meghan .. not reallly surprised!


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> This thread does have several Meghan critics, but let's give some credit where credit is due.
> 
> Currently we're all supposed to be practicing "social distancing" in light of COVID-19. Meghan, better than anyone, has shown us how to alienate basically everyone she has come into contact with. She is actually ahead of her time with social distancing. M is probably the safest person in the world from contracting any infectious disease.  Give her time to realize that and gloat to the rest of us: "SEE! I told you so! Social distancing works!"
> 
> Ah well. They'll always have Chunga Changa. Penguins make lovely pets.


Now, let's just hope that Meghan *NEVER *sees this because you'll give her the idea that *SHE *came up with the idea!!!


----------



## zen1965

Everything they post is just so incredibly cheesy and juvenile.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Some of the stories in this are awful... I know we’ve said it before in this thread but Ellen isn’t the best person for the Markles to associate with. Birds of a feather, I guess.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4695315
> 
> 
> Some of the stories in this are awful... I know we’ve said it before in this thread but Ellen isn’t the best person for the Markles to associate with. Birds of a feather, I guess.


so funny how celebs can seem so nice on tv and then you hear this kind of stuff.....


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> so funny how celebs can seem so nice on tv and then you hear this kind of stuff.....


Yes, Ellen, Martha Stewart and Oprah .. same categories!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, Ellen, Martha Stewart and Oprah .. same categories!


Martha was always viewed as kinda cold, wasn't she?  I think since she got out of prison her image was somewhat rehabbed
I know that's been said about Oprah before.....don't like to believe it but I guess maybe most women in leaderhip positons at her level are going to be "mean" sometimes

I had three women bosses (all CEOs).  One was pretty nasty (one of her fave sayings was "that's just who I am".  next one I got along great with but I think people who got on her bad side would see her differently.  third one was very moody.  I got along with her quite well for a couple of years before she turned on me (which she did with most of her direct reports).  Not saying this behavior is exclusive to women but that's who we're talking about at the moment.


----------



## Megs

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post




Guys, does this remind anyone of the Family Guy episode where Stewie is calling for Lois?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post



This is disappointing. It is so unoriginal, basic and bland there is really nothing to say...
Will they stop using the crown come April,1st? They sure love putting that thing on top of everything...


----------



## bag-mania

Am I the only one who expected a little more from her? This is Meghan’s first Mother's Day as a mother after all. I fully expected a big photo of her and Archie with an accompanying sappy paragraph about how having him has changed her life. It would all be nonsense of course but I can’t believe she resisted the opportunity to milk it for all it was worth. Maybe she’s waiting for American Mother’s Day to really lay it on thick.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Am I the only one who expected a little more from her? This is Meghan’s first Mother's Day as a mother after all. I fully expected a big photo of her and Archie with an accompanying sappy paragraph about how having him has changed her life. It would all be nonsense of course but I can’t believe she resisted the opportunity to milk it for all it was worth. Maybe she’s waiting for American Mother’s Day to really lay it on thick.


Pics of Archie do not come free!!!!!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Pics of Archie do not come free!!!!!!!!



That is an important consideration to be sure. She could have gotten around it by having a black-and-white photo just showing a close-up of her hand holding Archie’s little hand. Then she could be pretentiously artsy as well as being a doting mother. It could have been a two-fer.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Must admit, thought we’d see a body part, or maybe the back of the kids head


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Am I the only one who expected a little more from her? This is Meghan’s first Mother's Day as a mother after all. I fully expected a big photo of her and Archie with an accompanying sappy paragraph about how having him has changed her life. It would all be nonsense of course but I can’t believe she resisted the opportunity to milk it for all it was worth. Maybe she’s waiting for American Mother’s Day to really lay it on thick.


Personally (and yes - this is my opinion), she had Archie so quickly to ensure that she gets that BRF meal-ticket for as long as she can.  I do not see someone who truly has a motherly instinct, after all .. it's ALL ABOUT HER!!!  Heck, look at how she treats her husband!  Hazza (Harry) is a dolt for marrying her, but I feel SO BAD for that poor child!


----------



## Lounorada

lalame said:


> I took a peek at H+M's latest instagram post to see how the commenters took it. This one made me LOL:
> View attachment 4694973










Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post



I know their tacky looking mongram is supposed to feature both their initials entwined, but all I see is 'M'... I guess that was intentional.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lounorada said:


> I know their tacky looking mongram is supposed to feature both their initials entwined, but all I see is 'M'... I guess that was intentional.


That's funny co I always see the 'H' first.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I know their tacky looking mongram is supposed to feature both their initials entwined, but all I see is 'M'... I guess that was intentional.


agree - see M too


----------



## Corneto

bag-mania said:


> Am I the only one who expected a little more from her? This is Meghan’s first Mother's Day as a mother after all. I fully expected a big photo of her and Archie with an accompanying sappy paragraph about how having him has changed her life. It would all be nonsense of course but I can’t believe she resisted the opportunity to milk it for all it was worth. Maybe she’s waiting for American Mother’s Day to really lay it on thick.



Archie spent the day with his real mother.... (wink, wink)


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Am I the only one who expected a little more from her? This is Meghan’s first Mother's Day as a mother after all. I fully expected a big photo of her and Archie with an accompanying sappy paragraph about how having him has changed her life. It would all be nonsense of course but I can’t believe she resisted the opportunity to milk it for all it was worth. Maybe she’s waiting for American Mother’s Day to really lay it on thick.


I think she is waiting for May. She doesn't seem to have an affinity for the UK.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Personally (and yes - this is my opinion), she had Archie so quickly to ensure that she gets that BRF meal-ticket for as long as she can.  I do not see someone who truly has a motherly instinct, after all .. it's ALL ABOUT HER!!!  Heck, look at how she treats her husband!  Hazza (Harry) is a dolt for marrying her, but I feel SO BAD for that poor child!



I agree she doesn’t appear to have much in the way of motherly instincts. She does have a healthy exploitation instinct however, and that’s what I thought would kick in for her Mother’s Day message.


----------



## pixiejenna

LittleStar88 said:


> Patronizing coming from someone who wants nothing to do with the U.K...



she’s been out of the spotlight for a few days so she needed to remind everyone that she’s a mom.


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> she’s been out of the spotlight for a few days so she needed to remind everyone that she’s a mom.


hard to compete with the corona virus for attention


----------



## 1LV

Noticed Harry is on the cover of People magazine, but she isn’t.  Very few mentions of her anywhere.  I don’t think it’s because of the coronavirus either.  In with a bang, out with a whimper?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Just a thought ... no judgments 
While social distancing, been watching the old 1950s-1970s etc videos of the reign of QEII, Search on youtube for BRITISH PATHE 
Oh my gosh, there used to be such royal hoopla. 
As, an example, at the death of a "minor" royal eg the a cousin of King George VI (QEII father) the whole capital would turn out for the funeral, hundreds of mounted cavalry men to accompany the interminable procession , lots of carriages , piles of royals
Or, when a head of state would come to town, eg the King of Greece, QEII and the whole BRF would turn out at the train station on a red carpet. Some courtiers wearing elaborate gold chains of office and knee britches (sorry dont know correct term..). These men were straight out of a Jane Austen novel.. 

Anyway, royal ceremony has been considerably simplified over the reign of QEII, that is obvious from the videos. 
The current system of curtseys may seem out-of-date but it is nothing relative to the hoopla at the start of her reign.
So, the monarchy has been considerably modernized by QEII. There is video evidence of that. 

Back to H&M who wanted to modernize the BRF... the Queen has been busy working on that for years, even though hugs may not be the current approved protocol. Gotta give credit to the Queen a bit


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Noticed Harry is on the cover of People magazine, but she isn’t.  Very few mentions of her anywhere.  I don’t think it’s because of the coronavirus either.  In with a bang, out with a whimper?


hard to believe....maybe she's making herself scarce in preparation for a big comeback.....


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> hard to believe....maybe she's making herself scarce in preparation for a big comeback.....


No M on the cover? I thought People was in their pocket, their mouthpiece pretty much. Wonder if People is pushing for an Archie pic--no baby, no M?


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> No M on the cover? I thought People was in their pocket, their mouthpiece pretty much. Wonder if People is pushing for an Archie pic--no baby, no M?



As obsequious as _People_ has been they still need to have something to write about. Meghan and Harry are sheltered safely away in their borrowed mansion with a staff to run out and risk illness to bring them whatever they need. There is absolutely nothing to say about them.

We’ll know they are desperate when we start seeing them digging up photos from a year ago to show as if they were new.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> hard to believe....maybe she's making herself scarce in preparation for a big comeback.....


You’re probably right.


----------



## queennadine

sdkitty said:


> hard to believe....maybe she's making herself scarce in preparation for a big comeback.....



Maybe a big 'Archie 1st Bday' shoot or a US Mother's Day one.


----------



## kemilia

queennadine said:


> Maybe a big 'Archie 1st Bday' shoot or a US Mother's Day one.


With what's going on in the world, May seems like a long time away.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, please don’t let this mean she’s getting the cover of Vogue


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe she got Corona virus with all her non-protocol, non-social-distancing hugging.

Of course, then there would be the obligatory, I’m famous and I have the virus! message everyone seems to be putting out these days....


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 4695804
> 
> 
> Ugh, please don’t let this mean she’s getting the cover of Vogue


Damn


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 4695804
> 
> 
> Ugh, please don’t let this mean she’s getting the cover of Vogue


Who is this guy?


----------



## Chagall

Mrs.Z said:


> my thoughts exactly...who cares who Meghan dated before Harry


We we have to hand it to M. If she does love attention as much as she has repeatedly proven, she now has it. Before her hook up with Harry I had never even heard of her. I never heard her discussed. or saw her in a magazine. I never saw her gracing the front cover of anything. Now she is everywhere. She is nothing special in any way! Just an average looking also ran mediocre actress. How things have changed. You have to hand it to her, she played it cleverly. Up until she and H exploded out of the BRF. Not a swift move but one that garnered her yet even more attention.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Who is this guy?


 
A celebrity hair stylist.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone posted this in response to Babaii's tweet. Shall we say her original face is not quite as cute as her upgraded one.


----------



## Flatsy

It's usually not a hairstylist who lets the cat out of the bag regarding upcoming Vogue covers, especially when it's one that would come with a lot of publicity.  But it makes sense that she would use Vogue to try to launch her new life as a celebrity.  Can't wait to hear all the whining, grievances, complaints and shade at Harry's family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also several comments say the pic Babaii posted is old. Seems two masters of blowing hot air have united.


----------



## zen1965

Who cares about Vogue covers since the Kardashians graced them? It really does not make a difference one  way or the other.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Flatsy said:


> It's usually not a hairstylist who lets the cat out of the bag regarding upcoming Vogue covers, especially when it's one that would come with a lot of publicity.  But it makes sense that she would use Vogue to try to launch her new life as a celebrity.  Can't wait to hear all the whining, grievances, complaints and shade at Harry's family.


Apparently he's  GHD brand ambassador. Wonder if she's doing a hair care collab? She has terrible hair so I'd hope not.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 4695804
> 
> 
> Ugh, please don’t let this mean she’s getting the cover of Vogue


This is an old picture from 2016.


----------



## Flatsy

gracekelly said:


> This is an old picture from 2016.


Good!


----------



## Mrs.Z

This comment on his Instagram, sorry we all need a laugh


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> This comment on his Instagram, sorry we all need a laugh


ouch!


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone posted this in response to Babaii's tweet. Shall we say her original face is not quite as cute as her upgraded one.


She looks like a different person


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone posted this in response to Babaii's tweet. Shall we say her original face is not quite as cute as her upgraded one.


Yup .. now, let me say that according to my friends who knew the Markles back in her High School days, that she had *MANY *procedures done to make her look like she does today .. and guess who paid for them??? .. yes, her father who she has "markled"!  Pathetic ..


----------



## CeeJay

zen1965 said:


> Who cares about Vogue covers since the Kardashians graced them? It really does not make a difference one  way or the other.


THIS!!!  In addition to the Kardashian's, some of the other choices US Vogue has made in regards to who they put on the cover??? .. nope, rarely buy this magazine anymore.  I do oftentimes purchase the UK Vogue because in addition to not plastering it with various celebrities, they actually have very interesting articles!


----------



## Sharont2305

The Foreign Office are advising British citizens to return home as the option to return home may not be there in the future.


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> The Foreign Office are advising British citizens to return home as the option to return home may not be there in the future.



Well, this should be interesting.  Will Harry chose to go back to the UK to help in some way or will he stay safely tucked away in his isolated, free, waterfront mansion?


----------



## Emeline

youngster said:


> Well, this should be interesting.  Will Harry chose to go back to the UK to help in some way or will he stay safely tucked away in his isolated, free, waterfront mansion?


Good question. 
They left a nice, safe home in the UK to couch surf in Canada. Not sure what they are going to do when their Russian benefactor decided he wants his house back.
If they had an ounce of sense they would fly back to  to the UK tomorrow (with Archie) and wait out the virus at Frogmore.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan reminds me of Addie Monroe. Let her and perpetual dog collared Harry be ensconced for weeks together. It’s a true test. Lol after 4 days I want my hubby on the other side of the house but then again, we truly love each other.


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Meghan reminds me of Addie Monroe. Let her and perpetual dog collared Harry be ensconced for weeks together. It’s a true test. Lol after 4 days I want my hubby on the other side of the house but then again, we truly love each other.


Addie Monroe? The hair pioneer?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

I hope if the stay they don’t get special treatment to get back into the U.K...


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> Addie Monroe? The hair pioneer?



Only in the context of the series. Not the actual person per se. Addie did create a stunning product but she was not portrayed accurately in the series. I should have clarified that.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Just a thought ... no judgments
> While social distancing, been watching the old 1950s-1970s etc videos of the reign of QEII, Search on youtube for BRITISH PATHE
> Oh my gosh, there used to be such royal hoopla.
> As, an example, at the death of a "minor" royal eg the a cousin of King George VI (QEII father) the whole capital would turn out for the funeral, hundreds of mounted cavalry men to accompany the interminable procession , lots of carriages , piles of royals
> Or, when a head of state would come to town, eg the King of Greece, QEII and the whole BRF would turn out at the train station on a red carpet. Some courtiers wearing elaborate gold chains of office and knee britches (sorry dont know correct term..). These men were straight out of a Jane Austen novel..
> 
> Anyway, royal ceremony has been considerably simplified over the reign of QEII, that is obvious from the videos.
> The current system of curtseys may seem out-of-date but it is nothing relative to the hoopla at the start of her reign.
> So, the monarchy has been considerably modernized by QEII. There is video evidence of that.
> 
> Back to H&M who wanted to modernize the BRF... the Queen has been busy working on that for years, even though hugs may not be the current approved protocol. Gotta give credit to the Queen a bit



Good point -- it's been said that Harry and Will wanted to modernize the monarchy, but to what end?  If they're ordinary people, why should the monarchy exist.


----------



## zen1965

He cannot not go back. How will he ever be able to show his face in the UK again?


----------



## CeeJay

zen1965 said:


> He cannot not go back. How will he ever be able to show his face in the UK again?


HA - I doubt he views it that way; he probably thinks they would welcome him back with open arms!!!  I remember reading some blurb (and it might have been the Daily Fail) .. that there was some discussion about him coming back to "help" Wills with the COVID-19 virus issue (since QEII and Prince Charles will be going into isolation).  If he did, and truly made it about the virus and the people, I do think some folks would view him differently .. but, I doubt that Meghan will let him leave.


----------



## sdkitty

from People.  Meghan no longer using royal on smartworks.  would suit me fine if she also didn't use duchess.

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...utm_content=032320&cid=504399&mid=31250031392


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> from People.  Meghan no longer using royal on smartworks.  would suit me fine if she also didn't use duchess.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...utm_content=032320&cid=504399&mid=31250031392



Well without being Royal, she is nothing more than Duchess LuAnn Nobody.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Well without being Royal, she is nothing more than Duchess LuAnn Nobody.


LOL


----------



## hellosunshine

*Harry and Meghan’s ‘backwater’ is heaven compared with London*

*

*

Britain’s Daily Mail, one of the more trashy tabloids in a country devoted to rags of that sort, is slamming North Saanich as a “characterless backwater.”

What led to this trash talking, more of which in a moment, was the decision by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to begin a new life on Vancouver Island. Now I’m not sure that decision still holds — there’s been talk they might prefer Hollywood, a genuinely characterless backwater.

But apparently, the thought of losing what it calls “one of the world’s glamorous couples” was more than the paper could stomach.

Hence we get this: the “relatively young couple seem anxious to escape the restrictions of the UK monarchy … so picking … underpopulated Vancouver Island, with fir trees in every direction, freezing winters and a brief six-week summer might seem understandable … in reality, it’s just plain weird. Instead of Lake Como they’ve got a rocky beach with grey skies overhead ... Have we Brits really upset the Duke and Duchess of Sussex so much they prefer the hum drum [sic] existence of downtown Victoria, with its limited choice of fine dining and trendy cafés?”

And: “If Canada is so fabulous, how come so many famous Canadians live elsewhere?”

Then again: “What cuisine has Canada given the world — apart from maple syrup, bacon and a disgusting dish called poutine, which consists of cheese curds, chips and brown sauce.”

Plus “The average age [Canadians] start drinking is 13 and there’s a huge alcohol problem — maybe it’s the lack of things to do.”

Actually, the country with a “huge alcohol problem” is Britain, where the locals down 20 per cent more per capita than we do.

So let’s turn this around. First off, I’m fairly confident the ex-royal couple fled Britain to get away from outfits such as the Daily Mail, famous for scantily clad “models” and bare-faced rumour-mongering.

As well, if Britain is so fabulous, how come so many Brits live abroad? According to the 2016 census, a third of Canadians list their ethnic origin as English or Scottish.

And sliming weather on Vancouver Island when you’re writing for a newspaper based in England, home to one of the dreariest climates on the planet, takes nerve. The U.K. has been blasted with unprecedented gale-force winds, torrential rain and flooding in recent weeks.

But let’s get to the heart of the matter. I assume the author of this hit piece, Janet Street-Porter, lives in London, where the paper is published. Though in passing, she confesses to having spent two weeks once upon a time on Gabriola Island, where “pooing in a composting toilet has scarred me for life.”

In any event, traffic in London is now so hellish, you have to pay a $20 fee just to drive into town. There are indeed fine dining establishments and trendy cafés, but you would need a bank loan to eat at one.

And don’t think of buying a house — average price $1.4 million for an ancient pile built in the 1800s, with lousy wiring and a kitchen the size of a broom closet. Even a one-bedroom apartment can set you back $3,000 a month in rent.

Mangy foxes roam the streets and even mangier pigeons decorate your parked car with droppings. That is, if you can find somewhere to park it in the first place.

By general agreement, London’s underground — the Tube — is dirty, smelly and crowded, perhaps the worst of its kind in Europe.

And the city’s crime rate, at 96 offences per thousand residents, is 10 times the level on Vancouver Island, and rising rapidly.

In short, life in a “characterless backwater” such as North Saanich is heaven compared with eking out an existence in the concrete jungle Street-Porter calls home.

However, if she cares to pay us a visit, I’m sure we can find her a place with an indoor toilet, something you still can’t count on in that Sceptred Isle.

https://www.timescolonist.com/opini...ter-is-heaven-compared-with-london-1.24103129


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> from People.  Meghan no longer using royal on smartworks.  would suit me fine if she also didn't use duchess.
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...utm_content=032320&cid=504399&mid=31250031392



I don't get why they're even using those titles. Surely they are not legally obligated to??? It just seems weird that "Just Harry" and wife want to modernize the monarchy blah blah yet still want to hold onto the old-fashioned trappings that reward _them_.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't get why they're even using those titles. Surely they are not legally obligated to??? It just seems weird that "Just Harry" and wife want to modernize the monarchy blah blah yet still want to hold onto the old-fashioned trappings that reward _them_.


the same reason she was to happy to marry a prince?


----------



## PewPew

sdkitty said:


> from People.  Meghan no longer using royal on smartworks. * would suit me fine if she also didn't use duchess.*



It’s hilarious how attached Modern Meghan is to her Duchess of Sussex title when she’s only been to Sussex once. But it occurrs to me that for her, a half-day spent anywhere makes her a PhD-level expert on the area. (Normally, instead of studying a place or issue, she reports having a sudden epiphany that gives her insight into an issue or place she gives a lecture about.)


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone posted this in response to Babaii's tweet. Shall we say her original face is not quite as cute as her upgraded one.


The Meghan today is certainly not a ‘natural’ beauty.


----------



## Chagall

youngster said:


> Well, this should be interesting.  Will Harry chose to go back to the UK to help in some way or will he stay safely tucked away in his isolated, free, waterfront mansion?


I don’t know if travel restrictions would prevent H from returning to the UK or not. Would he be exempt, which he shouldn’t be, or is he stranded. He has shown a real character deficit so either way he will probably stay nice and safe in his borrowed country and mansion.


----------



## Chagall

Chagall said:


> I don’t know if travel restrictions would prevent H from returning to the UK or not. Would he be exempt, which he shouldn’t be, or is he stranded. He has shown a real character deficit so either way he will probably stay nice and safe in his borrowed country and mansion.


If he did manage to travel Harry would probably break quarantine as he is ‘special’ and rules don’t apply to him!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

It would look very bad for him to travel right now.


----------



## limom

Many countries are recalling their citizens and while it would look bad, he could possibly spin it as an awakening...
However, what would the couple do about Archie?
Their situation stinks.
No matter what, they will be the villains in that familial drama.
Those royals, they are just as messy as us!


----------



## Grande Latte

Emeline said:


> Good question.
> They left a nice, safe home in the UK to couch surf in Canada. Not sure what they are going to do when their Russian benefactor decided he wants his house back.
> If they had an ounce of sense they would fly back to  to the UK tomorrow (with Archie) and wait out the virus at Frogmore.



But Harry is a very irresponsible man who turned his back on his family and country. I don't expect much from this clown.


----------



## LittleStar88

Grande Latte said:


> But Harry is a very irresponsible man who turned his back on his family and country. I don't expect much from this clown.



THIS! 

Harry should be home with his family and stepping up in this time of need for his country. What a dishonor to his family and country. 

These two have timed this so badly - they are now irrelevant in the wake of a global pandemic, and without the BRF to carry the interest, they will struggle for relevance after all of this is over.

Best thing they could do is go to the UK and do the right thing - that would help their brand immensely. Instead they are freeloaders hunkering down and contributing nothing to society. Any average person with an IG account can post inspirational or dumb stuff - they should be leading with actions, not IG posts that someone on the staff probably put together for them.

What are they doing with themselves all day???


----------



## Clearblueskies

Grande Latte said:


> But Harry is a very irresponsible man who turned his back on his family and country. I don't expect much from this clown.


Me neither.  He needs to grow up.



LittleStar88 said:


> THIS!
> 
> Harry should be home with his family and stepping up in this time of need for his country. What a dishonor to his family and country.
> 
> These two have timed this so badly - they are now irrelevant in the wake of a global pandemic, and without the BRF to carry the interest, they will struggle for relevance after all of this is over.
> 
> Best thing they could do is go to the UK and do the right thing - that would help their brand immensely. Instead they are freeloaders hunkering down and contributing nothing to society. Any average person with an IG account can post inspirational or dumb stuff - they should be leading with actions, not IG posts that someone on the staff probably put together for them.
> 
> What are they doing with themselves all day???


I wonder what they’re doing all day as well.  Not buying the *we’re real homebodies* stories for a nanosecond   Suspect they spend lots of time googling themselves and checking Insta.  Hi Meghan!


----------



## Sol Ryan

LittleStar88 said:


> THIS!
> 
> Harry should be home with his family and stepping up in this time of need for his country. What a dishonor to his family and country.
> 
> These two have timed this so badly - they are now irrelevant in the wake of a global pandemic, and without the BRF to carry the interest, they will struggle for relevance after all of this is over.
> 
> Best thing they could do is go to the UK and do the right thing - that would help their brand immensely. Instead they are freeloaders hunkering down and contributing nothing to society. Any average person with an IG account can post inspirational or dumb stuff - they should be leading with actions, not IG posts that someone on the staff probably put together for them.
> 
> What are they doing with themselves all day???



yeah, but if they went home, don’t they have to self quarantine again? (If they’re even doing that?) 

Besides, all we’d get from them is gratuitous pictures of Megan hugging people because her great compassion trumps science and within two days she’d be out because someone she hugged had it or we’d find out she had it kept it quiet and was a super-spreader because she wanted to hit the ground running...


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is already with his family, he's with the family he CHOSE. Harry and Meghan wanted to walk away and they did. Seriously, those two frail, needy personalities could not handle it when everything was going their way. They absolutely cannot be counted on to be productive in a crisis. Better to have them off by themselves where they can do no harm.

The last thing the Queen and Charles needs is for Harry and Meghan to show up and make a mess of things with their attention-seeking. That's pretty much all they are capable of these days.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> It’s hilarious how attached Modern Meghan is to her Duchess of Sussex title when she’s only been to Sussex once. But it occurrs to me that for her, a half-day spent anywhere makes her a PhD-level expert on the area. (Normally, instead of studying a place or issue, she reports having a sudden epiphany that gives her insight into an issue or place she gives a lecture about.)


pretty sure it's the Duchess part she likes - not the Sussex


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> It’s hilarious how attached Modern Meghan is to her Duchess of Sussex title when she’s only been to Sussex once. But it occurrs to me that for her, a half-day spent anywhere makes her a PhD-level expert on the area. (Normally, instead of studying a place or issue, she reports having a sudden epiphany that gives her insight into an issue or place she gives a lecture about.)


I wonder how her brain works.  She was an American, married into the royal family and bailed in less than two years.  Does she really think of herself as a Duchess?  Is she thinking "I'm a Duchess.  I'm royalty"?  If she wanted that, she should have tried harder.  I don't know her obviously but I'm thinking every time she hears herself described as duchess it makes her so happy.  would love to see the money from charles and the rest of the family cut off and see how happy they are.  Let them budget their $30mil.


----------



## youngster

hellosunshine said:


> So let’s turn this around. First off, I’m fairly confident the ex-royal couple fled Britain to get away from outfits such as the Daily Mail, famous for scantily clad “models” and bare-faced rumour-mongering.
> 
> As well, *if Britain is so fabulous, how come so many Brits live abroad? According to the 2016 census, a third of Canadians list their ethnic origin as English or Scottish*.



I'm not going to post a response to every one of your claims (about how dreary London is, awful this, awful that, which I disagree with because I personally love London and, yes, it's expensive but so is Paris, Zurich, New York and L.A. among others and Vancouver can be just as dreary as London. Take it from me, I live in the PNW) . . . but this one statement I can't let go by.

Just because someone lists their "ethnic origin" as English or Scottish doesn't mean that person was born in either England or Scotland and has ever lived any part of their life there.  I doubt 1/3 of the 2016 Canadian population (about 12 million people) recently emigrated from England and Scotland to get away from England and Scotland.  The majority of those people have likely never set foot in either country ever, or maybe once or twice on vacation.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I'm not going to post a response to every one of your claims (about how dreary London is, awful this, awful that, which I disagree with because I personally love London and, yes, it's expensive but so is Paris, Zurich, New York and L.A. among others and Vancouver can be just as dreary as London. Take it from me, I live in the PNW) . . . but this one statement I can't let go by.
> 
> Just because someone lists their "ethnic origin" as English or Scottish doesn't mean that person was born in either England or Scotland and has ever lived any part of their life there.  I doubt 1/3 of the 2016 Canadian population (about 12 million people) recently emigrated from England and Scotland to get away from England and Scotland.  The majority of those people have likely never set foot in either country ever, or maybe once or twice on vacation.


That was a ridiculous article and can’t be taken seriously.   Why even post it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That was a ridiculous article and can’t be taken seriously.   Why even post it?


It's her thing. When she isn't over at the Cambridge thread dragging a completely inoffensive Kate that is.


----------



## Jayne1

I remember the hoopla when all the big rockstars left the UK because of the high taxes they had to pay. Abandoning ship and all for the sake of their bank accounts. Is that still a thing?

I wish Meg would do a pap walk so we could have something to talk about while we're all sheltering in place.


----------



## Chagall

Sol Ryan said:


> yeah, but if they went home, don’t they have to self quarantine again? (If they’re even doing that?)
> 
> Besides, all we’d get from them is gratuitous pictures of Megan hugging people because her great compassion trumps science and within two days she’d be out because someone she hugged had it or we’d find out she had it kept it quiet and was a super-spreader because she wanted to hit the ground running...


I wouldn’t be surprised if M or H contracted the virus. She did a lot of hugging and hand shaking. It is extremely easy to pass on to someone else.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if M or H contracted the virus. She did a lot of hugging and hand shaking. It is extremely easy to pass on to someone else.


.. but, but, but .. THAT would get her in the NEWS!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Its alright folks, she has spoken


----------



## CeeJay

Oh, I see Meghan's mouthpiece Omid .. couldn't resist posting SOMETHING about her, and WHO CARES about what people thought on the set of Suits??? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rkles-nickname-Suits-Meghan-gets-sh-done.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Its alright folks, she has spoken



 Silly tart!


----------



## Sol Ryan

They can’t resist adding some noise can they?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sol Ryan said:


> They can’t resist adding some noise can they?


Desperate to be seen as relevant


----------



## zen1965

But, but, but... they educate the masses. Don‘t you know that their gazillion of followers turn to them exclusively for some sound and solid advice??? 
Not like the stupid Cambridges who reside in filthy London, who do not hug / are internally damaged due to Stiff-Upper-Lip syndrome & who actively keep emergency workers from doing their jobs! When will you and the Cambridges see the light. Geeze, gals.

On second thought: preposterous as ever. Interesting comments on their Instagram, though.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> Its alright folks, she has spoken




Breaking news


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Its alright folks, she has spoken



I'm so relieved!  Hey wait!  She didn't ask me if I am OK!!


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> Its alright folks, she has spoken



And then she hugged everyone.


----------



## mia55

1LV said:


> And then she hugged everyone.


----------



## Annawakes

“You may have seen or heard these before”



If they think people haven’t seen these guidelines a thousand times over for the past several months....they’re really slow.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> .. but, but, but .. THAT would get her in the NEWS!!!!


Well frankly we could do with some ‘news’ from her. We need the distraction right now.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Annawakes said:


> “You may have seen or heard these before”
> 
> 
> 
> If they think people haven’t seen these guidelines a thousand times over for the past several months....they’re really slow.


Well, he doesn’t read the news and she didn’t do any research so it’s probably new and fascinating to them...


----------



## PewPew

Sol Ryan said:


> Well, he doesn’t read the news and she didn’t do any research so it’s probably new and fascinating to them...



Remember how 2 posts ago, H&M assured us that they weren’t just hanging out during the quarantine— they were working hard on ways to help the world?

Well, I’m so proud of them for learning how to google month-old Covid tips for us b/c their recent “I feel _____” and odes to hugging (after QE2 started avoiding handshaking!) were embarrassingly ignorant & farcical.


----------



## jehaga

Sharont2305 said:


> Its alright folks, she has spoken




OMG, the _world _thanks you, Duchess Meghan! We would all be dead were it not for your sage and encouraging words! Awaiting anxiously for further instructions on how to weather this storm! You’re a true humanitarian! KUTGW!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is this just the ill-fitting dress, or did she seriously show up wired? I will say that I find that Twitter theory crazy, but it does look weird.


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince Charles has tested positive. Statement from Clarence House


----------



## Sharont2305

Apparently Charles an Camilla went up to their Birkhall home on the Balmoral Estate in Scotland on Sunday, NOT on a scheduled flight, he was tested on Monday and had the results last night. He last saw the Queen on the 12th March.


----------



## limom

Oh boy, hoping for the best for all the senior citizens there.


----------



## doni

Hoping for the best, also for the Queen, whom of course is high risk.


----------



## Jktgal

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I see Meghan's mouthpiece Omid .. couldn't resist posting SOMETHING about her, and WHO CARES about what people thought on the set of Suits???
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rkles-nickname-Suits-Meghan-gets-sh-done.html



It's obvious by now that Sparkles gets s*** DONE!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Charles has tested positive. Statement from Clarence House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4696899


I just read the headlines. I hope everyone is safe, especially elderly Philip!


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read the headlines. I hope everyone is safe, especially elderly Philip!


Just saw this. I wonder when he was last in contact with the Queen. She is at high risk.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> Just saw this. I wonder when he was last in contact with the Queen. She is at high risk.


12th March. Buckingham Palace have said the Queen is well.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> 12th March. Buckingham Palace have said the Queen is well.


So tomorrow March 26 is two weeks. She should be OK then.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Prayers for Charles, I want that succession order to stay as is!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh, here we go, her Mother's Day inspirational post



Hallmark would be ashamed if anybody put that on their card!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chagall said:


> So tomorrow March 26 is two weeks. She should be OK then.


That is the last time she saw Charles, we don't know if it's the last time she saw a human being who had it. Unless she was in isolation since then? Just thinking.


----------



## Chagall

ccbaggirl89 said:


> That is the last time she saw Charles, we don't know if it's the last time she saw a human being who had it. Unless she was in isolation since then? Just thinking.


Right. Anyone who was around Charles   could be a potential carrier.


----------



## bag-princess

chicinthecity777 said:


> Hallmark would be ashamed if anybody put that on their card!




what exactly is wrong with it??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## hellosunshine

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Charles has tested positive. Statement from Clarence House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4696899



*"I bet everyone's like, 'I've got coronavirus, I'm dying,' and you're like, 'No, you've just got a cough' (...) It does seem quite dramatic about coronavirus at the moment. Is it being a little hyped up, do you think, by the media?" - Prince William, 4 March 2020.

*


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chagall said:


> Right. Anyone who was around Charles   could be a potential carrier.


Or the Queen's staff, too. I have read many political leaders are getting it via staff. I don't know how well she has been protected, but hope she stays very very well!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-princess said:


> what exactly is wrong with it??


It's so original, not! She is just so desperate to stay relevant and failing big time because she has no substance!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sounds like people are hoping Charles dies so they can make more vitriol from William's joke.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-princess said:


> what exactly is wrong with it??


You really don't get sarcasm, do you? Hallmark is way wittier than her!


----------



## bag-princess

chicinthecity777 said:


> You really don't get sarcasm, do you? Hallmark is way wittier than her!



what i don't get is the constant need to be sarcastic.


----------



## doni

Looking at the Instagram page of SussexRoyal. Those three last posts together are like the definition of banality.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> As obsequious as _People_ has been they still need to have something to write about. Meghan and Harry are sheltered safely away in their borrowed mansion with a staff to run out and risk illness to bring them whatever they need. There is absolutely nothing to say about them.
> 
> We’ll know they are desperate when we start seeing them digging up photos from a year ago to show as if they were new.


Yes agree People needs content
Read somewhere that during confinement , three things sell - guns groceries and news


----------



## marietouchet

1LV said:


> And then she hugged everyone.


Coronavirus is SOOOOOO different from SARS, AIDS etc 
COVID transmits so easily .... Hugs are bad
SOCIAL DISTANCING rocks


----------



## 1LV

marietouchet said:


> Coronavirus is SOOOOOO different from SARS, AIDS etc
> COVID transmits so easily .... Hugs are bad
> SOCIAL DISTANCING rocks


For sure!  I wonder when it finally dawned on her.


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> For sure!  I wonder when it finally dawned on her.


Even at the Commonwealth Wealth Service it hadn't.


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> Even at the Commonwealth Wealth Service it hadn't.


Exactly!


----------



## hellosunshine

I wish Charles a speedy recovery; however I do think it was a poor decision of him to travel to his Highland Home despite pleas from the Scottish Government to stay away if you had a 2nd home in the region.

Also, it's being reported that Charles dined across from Prince Albert of Monaco on the 10th of March. Albert was diagnosed with Coronavirus 9 days later -on the 19th of March. At this point, the virus was decimating Italy & Spain. Charles, then left for Scotland on March 22nd. Speechless...really.


----------



## bisousx

Oh no!!!! Prince Charles tested positive for covid-19. I hope he will be OK.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-princess said:


> what i don't get is the constant need to be sarcastic.


You don't have to read my posts! And I don't really care whether you get or not. Please put me on your ignore, problem solved for you! Bye!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

*From the Daily Beast:*
*Sarah Ferguson Tweets That Coronavirus Is Mother Nature’s Punishment of Mankind Just as Royal Family is Hit*

IMPECCABLE TIMING

Prince Andrew’s ex took to social media just hours before it was announced that Prince Charles had contracted COVID-19.




*Tom Sykes*
Updated Mar. 25, 2020 8:26AM ET / Published Mar. 25, 2020 7:49AM ET 





*Jeff Spicer*

In this uncertain world, one thing we can always trust to be a constant is unerring ability of Sarah Ferguson, the ex-wife of Prince Andrew, to say utterly bizarre things.

On Tuesday she was at it again, tweeting a pair of extraordinary messages suggesting that “Mother Nature” had unleashed the coronavirus on humankind to punish us for not looking after the planet.


Advertisement
Little did she know at the time of her social media fusillade, her former brother-in-law Prince Charles was already suffering from the virus. Charles had seen the Queen two weeks earlier, prompting fears that the virus could spread within the royal household.

One of Fergie’s tweets was accompanied by a charming picture of a cherry tree in full blossom that looks like it was taken at the massive private estate, Royal Lodge, where she lives rent-free with her ex-husband.

We have embedded the tweets below, but, just in case the duchess (as she still insists on calling herself) wakes up this morning with a furry tongue, and a crashing case of tweeter’s regret once she sees that her host family is among the victims, and hastens to hit the delete button, fear not, we have the screenshots for posterity.




Sarah Ferguson

✔@SarahTheDuchess
https://twitter.com/SarahTheDuchess/status/1242563967991586820

Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms.. like the spoilt children we are. She gave us time and she gave us warnings. She was so patient with us. She gave us fire and floods, she tried to warn us but in the end she took back control.





1,136
2:28 PM - Mar 24, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

192 people are talking about this






Sarah Ferguson

✔@SarahTheDuchess
https://twitter.com/SarahTheDuchess/status/1242564020797935616

She has sent us to our rooms and when she is finished clearing up our mess. She will let us out to play again. How will we use this time? xxxx





458
2:28 PM - Mar 24, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

58 people are talking about this



Of course, these kind of rambling theories about how the coronavirus is actually good for the world have become something of a fad on social media in the past few days.

But there is a pretty clear line between remarking on silver linings (We can hear the birdsong in cities! Pollution is down! I don’t need to charge my phone every night!) and feeling out the path for a Gaia death cult which believes that a killer virus is a good thing that’s going to “clean up” the planet.

These remarks, Sarah, are best saved for your creepy, ultra-right wing crystal therapist.


----------



## Chagall

hellosunshine said:


> *"I bet everyone's like, 'I've got coronavirus, I'm dying,' and you're like, 'No, you've just got a cough' (...) It does seem quite dramatic about coronavirus at the moment. Is it being a little hyped up, do you think, by the media?" - Prince William, 4 March 2020.
> 
> *


Right. Check out Italy, Iran and NYC.


----------



## Chagall

Jktgal said:


> It's obvious by now that Sparkles gets s*** DONE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4696902


MM is definitely an APPLE.


----------



## Milosmum0307

During these troubling and unprecedented times, it’s comforting to hold onto whatever vestiges of normalcy one can find.  To that end, the royal and formerly-royal family are a gift.  True to form, the Markles’ tireless PR drones have leaked a “Duchess World Savior and that guy she married might move to the Cotswolds!” story; and if anything makes us fondly remember the Old World Order it’s a new installment of Where’s Waldo: Luxury Real Estate Edition featuring Grift and Dim.

Similarly, Fergie continues to be an absolute f*cking moron, and I still can’t understand why the BRF tolerates her.  Clearly, Andrew is an unmitigated grease fire that needs to be cut off like a cancer, which would also solve the Sarah Ferguson Problem, but it seems that won’t happen while Her Majesty continues to draw breath (and may she do so for many years more).

William asked the same question many others were asking on March 4, and I’m sure he regrets it.  Things changed quickly and dramatically for those of us in countries that were not yet consumed by the crisis.  X

I wish Charles a quick recovery, not only because he’s a human being and I want all human beings to emerge healthy from this situation, but because the world is enough of a sh*tshow right now without moving Henry the Dumb a step closer to the throne (MM’s head would positively explode from self-importance, and I’m too stressed out to find even her amusing right now).

Stay safe, everyone.  I think there will be a relatively robust recovery for most of us financially/economically when this is over, and although our shared hobby is a trivial matter I’ll feel comforted when we’re all sharing gratuitous luxury handbag purchases again.


----------



## Sharont2305

Milosmum0307 said:


> Stay safe, everyone.  I think there will be a relatively robust recovery for most of us financially/economically when this is over, and although it’s a trivial matter I’ll feel comforted when we’re all sharing gratuitous luxury handbag purchases again.



One thing this has taught me is life is precious, I've been wanting a certain bag for a while now and after all this is over (or sooner) I'm going to blimmin well buy it. Don't know why Ive held back as I can afford it, I've never spent more than £200 for a bag.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> One thing this has taught me is life is precious, I've been wanting a certain bag for a while now and after all this is over (or sooner) I'm going to blimmin well buy it. Don't know why Ive held back as I can afford it, I've never spent more than £200 for a bag.


if you're considering preloved now may be a good time to buy


----------



## Chagall

I still change my bags out frequently. I now have one of my ‘Spring’ bags loaded up and sitting on my dresser ready to be taken out. ​


----------



## Milosmum0307

My apologies to the moderator for having to scrub my post of unnecessary politics.  I usually know better.  I meant only to convey, in William’s defense, that in the United States, which is fully engulfed in the crisis now, there is still debate between people as to the seriousness of the pandemic, whether the response is disproportionate to the threat, whether much of the turmoil has been due to media sensationalism.  Such thoughts were even more common when William made that statement weeks ago.  I hope I’ve not again crossed the line.  I’m actually not feeling very political right now.  I hope we all pull together and protect the most vulnerable members of our society, and that when it’s over we can all go back to buying handbags.  MM has a pretty interesting bag collection, so I look forward to all of her future prearranged pap walks (followed by lavish complaints about “media intrusion”).  Again, stay safe, folks.


----------



## bag-princess

chicinthecity777 said:


> You don't have to read my posts! And I don't really care whether you get or not. Please put me on your ignore, problem solved for you! Bye!




you do the same!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Sounds like people are hoping Charles dies so they can make more vitriol from William's joke.


But it’s all William’s fault didn’t you know??  And everything that isn’t William’s fault is down to Kate


----------



## Jayne1

hellosunshine said:


> *"I bet everyone's like, 'I've got coronavirus, I'm dying,' and you're like, 'No, you've just got a cough' (...) It does seem quite dramatic about coronavirus at the moment. Is it being a little hyped up, do you think, by the media?" - Prince William, 4 March 2020.
> 
> *


Here's hoping Charles makes a speedy recovery.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

According to Page Six (New York Post), Prince Charles called Prince William and Prince Harry after being told that he had contracted coronavirus


----------



## lanasyogamama

Cosmopolitan said:


> According to Page Six (New York Post), Prince Charles called Prince William and Prince Harry after being told that he had contracted coronavirus


How thoughtful of him.


----------



## Flatsy

Prior to the Sussexes wreaking havoc on Harry's family relationships, I would have assumed that Charles and his sons were in frequent communication and that his sons would be among the first to know if he contracted a potentially fatal illness.

This is what it's come to that it's newsworthy when a phone call is placed.


----------



## hellosunshine

Flatsy said:


> This is what it's come to that it's newsworthy when a phone call is placed.



Well, they are all technically in different regions, so a phone call makes sense. Charles' in Scotland, William/Kate in Norfolk, and Harry/Meghan in British Columbia.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

hellosunshine said:


> Well, they are all technically in different regions, so a phone call makes sense. Charles' in Scotland, William/Kate in Norfolk, and Harry/Meghan in British Columbia.


They are, the majority of times in different regions.


----------



## Flatsy

I would assume most parents and their adult children communicate by phone or other electronic means most of the time, even when they are in the same place.  What's weird is that the media actually needs to confirm that Charles officially communicated the news of his illness to his sons, as if that wasn't a given.


----------



## Chagall

Flatsy said:


> I would assume most parents and their adult children communicate by phone or other electronic means most of the time, even when they are in the same place.  What's weird is that the media actually needs to confirm that Charles officially communicated the news of his illness to his sons, as if that wasn't a given.


When was Charles last around his sons?


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I would assume most parents and their adult children communicate by phone or other electronic means most of the time, even when they are in the same place.  What's weird is that the media actually needs to confirm that Charles officially communicated the news of his illness to his sons, as if that wasn't a given.



It must be purely to have something to write about. The British media seems to depend on the royals for content no matter how obvious or inane the subject is.


----------



## Flatsy

Chagall said:


> When was Charles last around his sons?


Can't say when they were around each other in private, but the family was last together in public on March 12th at the Commonwealth service at Westminster Abbey.  That would be the service where Charles made an effort to reduce physical contact by greeting people with a bow and a "namaste", and the one where Meghan made an effort to touch and hug as many strangers as possible per her usual act.

Perhaps we should applaud William and Kate for protecting the Sussexes by socially distancing and only greeting them with a nod.  Very responsible of them.


----------



## AB Negative

marietouchet said:


> Yes agree People needs content
> Read somewhere that during confinement , three things sell - guns groceries and news


You forgot booze...


----------



## CeeJay

Well, that didn't take long .. Meghan had to tell "her friends" (still amazed that she has any) that she absolutely FORBIDS Harry from going back to the UK, but of course .. then she has to lessen the burden on society by adopting yet another dog .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...going-UK-Prince-Charles-plans-foster-lab.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> Well, that didn't take long .. Meghan had to tell "her friends" (still amazed that she has any) that she absolutely FORBIDS Harry from going back to the UK, but of course .. then she has to lessen the burden on society by adopting yet another dog ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...going-UK-Prince-Charles-plans-foster-lab.html


Worried he won’t go back??


----------



## CeeJay

.. uh, wait .. I thought Meghan HATED the UK, so why would they want to build something there???  What would happen to Frogmore Cottage; wow .. all that wasted $$$ ..
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...m-Costwolds-bolthole-near-Soho-Farmhouse.html


----------



## Annawakes

CeeJay said:


> .. uh, wait .. I thought Meghan HATED the UK, so why would they want to build something there???  What would happen to Frogmore Cottage; wow .. all that wasted $$$ ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...m-Costwolds-bolthole-near-Soho-Farmhouse.html


M is suddenly interested in living in the U.K. again, after poor Prince Charles’ news.  She sees potential in H now, much more than just “sixth in line”.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The Beckhams have a home near there, IIRC.  She needs his and her connections.  This “independent profile”/“North America” stuff ain’t working for them.

Plus, if Charles croaks from COVID-19, there goes the allowance.

ETA: al old blog post where I got the Beckham infohttps://cotedetexas.blogspot.com/2018/06/harry-meghans-new-house-pssst-i-found.html


----------



## Sharont2305

Didn't they have a house there, practically in the next field to where the Beckham have a house?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Well, that didn't take long .. Meghan had to tell "her friends" (still amazed that she has any) that she absolutely FORBIDS Harry from going back to the UK, but of course .. then she has to lessen the burden on society by adopting yet another dog ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...going-UK-Prince-Charles-plans-foster-lab.html



She's not even adopting the dog, she's "looking into" fostering one. That's a way for her to get the credit and goodwill for doing something helpful when she may end up not doing it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> She's not even adopting the dog, she's "looking into" fostering one. That's a way for her to get the credit and goodwill for doing something helpful when she may end up not doing it.


Ditto charitable foundation


----------



## chicinthecity777

And building another house? I call it bull crap! They don't have the money to pay for it! And don't forget they were supposed to be some kind of environmental activists? Just how much resources would be wasted on those houses for a 3-people household? They really can't get their story straight! 

Oh my bad, they have an army of helpers they need to house...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> M is suddenly interested in living in the U.K. again, after poor Prince Charles’ news.  She sees potential in H now, much more than just “sixth in line”.


I think the story of the cotswold house is OLD news getting mixed with NEW news 
They went there when engaged or shortly after marriage, it is not on the radar nowadays


----------



## lanasyogamama

How can they think that anyone has any patience for this nonsense with everything going on in the world?


----------



## sdkitty

Cosmopolitan said:


> According to Page Six (New York Post), Prince Charles called Prince William and Prince Harry after being told that he had contracted coronavirus


that's news?  wouldn't that just be expected in most families?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, that didn't take long .. Meghan had to tell "her friends" (still amazed that she has any) that she absolutely FORBIDS Harry from going back to the UK, but of course .. then she has to lessen the burden on society by adopting yet another dog ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...going-UK-Prince-Charles-plans-foster-lab.html


glad she's fostering the dog; she's not great at giving animals a forever home


----------



## Straight-Laced

sdkitty said:


> glad she's fostering the dog; she's not great at giving animals a forever home


Nicely understated ...


----------



## Straight-Laced

*As a future king, Charles could take no chances when he started suffering from symptoms of coronavirus*
THE TELEGRAPH 25 MARC H 2020 CAMILLA TOMINEYASSOCIATE EDITOR

"… the grim truth remains that in a constitutional monarchy, Charles is the next in line to the British throne.

*Indeed he and the Duke of Cambridge are currently the only two of the Queen’s four ‘Counsellors of State’ who could effectively stand in for her should she become ill or incapacitated (since the other two are recently-exiled Princes Andrew and Harry).*"

Meghan must be all aquiver at the potential ramifications for her status and importance.  Given the current crisis and outlook for their global branding (now in a comatose heap), will she be considering how she might sell a possible return to the UK as her/their noble self-sacrifice for the good of the BRF and the United Kingdom?
H & M to the rescue!  Duty calls and all that sort of thing ... 
We shall see.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Well, that didn't take long .. Meghan had to tell "her friends" (still amazed that she has any) that she absolutely FORBIDS Harry from going back to the UK, but of course .. then she has to lessen the burden on society by adopting yet another dog ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...going-UK-Prince-Charles-plans-foster-lab.html



Aw, isn't it cute how she carries around his ... in her purse.


----------



## Straight-Laced

hellosunshine said:


> *"I bet everyone's like, 'I've got coronavirus, I'm dying,' and you're like, 'No, you've just got a cough' (...) It does seem quite dramatic about coronavirus at the moment. Is it being a little hyped up, do you think, by the media?" - Prince William, 4 March 2020.
> 
> *



"In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation" - Prince Philip, 1988


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> And building another house? I call it bull crap! They don't have the money to pay for it! And don't forget they were supposed to be some kind of environmental activists? Just how much resources would be wasted on those houses for a 3-people household? They really can't get their story straight!
> 
> Oh my bad, they have an army of helpers they need to house...



Regardless of the truth of the story, I'm not sure either one is really getting the fundamentals of sustainability or conservation - other than name-checking the terms within a word-salad (thank you @CeeJay ). These two take hypocrisy to a new level, practically an (abstract) art-form, or perhaps, in their case, statement of intent.


----------



## Clearblueskies

They are however, managing to sit around on their arses whilst simultaneously Standing In Their Truth   I guess that’s where the yoga comes in handy


----------



## Chagall

Straight-Laced said:


> "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation" - Prince Philip, 1988


Good old Prince Phillip. His mouth is very used to accommodating his foot.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry would die if he saw his name next to the Andrew’s  and the term “recently exiled”


----------



## Tivo

Straight-Laced said:


> "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation" - Prince Philip, 1988


What an evil thing to say. Wow.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone here have Disney+ ?

If you do you have the glorious opportunity to watch the nature documentary Meghan narrated. You remember the one Harry was pestering the Disney CEO to give her at the Lion King premiere last summer. "Meghan does voiceovers!"


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation" - Prince Philip, 1988


Philip has always been a mean, stubborn jerk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Philip has always been a mean, stubborn jerk.


I don’t know anything about Philip’s true character. He definitely has the old school upper class british sense of humour. It’s very irreverent and tongue in cheek and not to be taken literally. It is almost never understood by the rest of the world, especially Americans or even the younger generation of Brits. I grew up with a father like this and actually find it quite funny, but definitely not to be taken seriously.


----------



## PewPew

Straight-Laced said:


> "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to *contribute something to * *solving overpopulation*" - Prince Philip, 1988



... Says the guy who had 4 legitimate children & who knows how many others in his wild days. 

BRF men have a long history of tone-deaf, hypocritical “do as I say, not as I do” statements. So it’s no surprise that Harry doesn’t realize just how crazy & cringey some of the things he & Meghan says are. But they’re still fairly young. Prince Phillip never learned, but Prince Charles has vastly improved since his “darling, I want to be your tampon” days.


----------



## bag-mania

It should to be taken into account that he said that back in 1988. Much has changed in 32 years and people are far more sensitive to the words of others today. Back then gallows humor or dark comedy was popular.


----------



## hellosunshine




----------



## Tivo

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4697814


How in the world did you manage to screenshot that IG story 26 seconds after it was posted?​


----------



## LittleStar88

OMG LOL the comments from people on their IG... Wow. Do H&M's minions report back on the ratio of negative vs. legit positive comments?


----------



## Sharont2305

Reminding us they're not here [emoji122]


----------



## imgg

Tivo said:


> How in the world did you manage to screenshot that IG story 26 seconds after it was posted?​


Pretty sure this poster is on the payroll.


----------



## mia55

imgg said:


> Pretty sure this poster is on the payroll.


Or MM herself  as the hatred/jealousy towards Williams and Kate is real.


----------



## Sharont2305

America! They are amongst you! Apparently they are indeed in LA


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> America! They are amongst you! Apparently they are indeed in LA


Yep, it was confirmed by People mag.
Thanks god, they are not in NYC!
Sorry, west coast purseforumers!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Sharont2305 said:


> America! They are amongst you! Apparently they are indeed in LA


Ugh...really?......safe time to relocate!


----------



## hellosunshine

Tivo said:


> How in the world did you manage to screenshot that IG story 26 seconds after it was posted?



It's not my screenshot. I grabbed it from Twitter.




imgg said:


> Pretty sure this poster is on the payroll.


----------



## Luvbolide

Hmmm...taking a private jet and moving to LA doesn't seem like the wisest move since Calif. is in lockdown mode per the order of the Governor.  Wonder how many were required to stop following the stay-at-home order to accomplish this.  Talk about selfish...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Announced through People magazine


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## mrsinsyder

Amazing how predictable they are! Some of us called this long ago and the stans swore they WOULD NEVER.


----------



## limom

hellosunshine said:


> It's not my screenshot. I grabbed it from Twitter.


Wow, you are truly dedicated.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Announced through People magazine


Strange how this has come out now, not long after (couple of hours) we see the Cambridge children, the Wessex family and indeed Charles and Camilla (in isolation apart) clapping for our carers. Hmmm, coincidence?


----------



## Chagall

Luvbolide said:


> Hmmm...taking a private jet and moving to LA doesn't seem like the wisest move since Calif. is in lockdown mode per the order of the Governor.  Wonder how many were required to stop following the stay-at-home order to accomplish this.  Talk about selfish...


You mean they have Markled the *Great White North*.That is so heartbreaking to us igloo dwellers. Well the saga continues....


----------



## Sol Ryan

Hope she gets her taxes filed on time....


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sol Ryan said:


> Hope she gets her taxes filed on time....


Please, they're like all the other frauds who are too good for that.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chagall said:


> You mean they have Markled the *Great White North*.That is so heartbreaking to us igloo dwellers. Well the saga continues....




I imagine many Canadians will be distraught - not!  Hope they stay in LA and don't venture to Northern California - we definitely don't need a couple of grifters looking for a free place to stay up here!


----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan came to pick up her stimulus check


----------



## youngster

I think the image of them hiding out in a waterfront Vancouver mansion in the midst of this crisis was terrible for them and their image.  Harry looked as if he abandoned the UK on the edge of the pandemic.  At least in L.A., they can pretend that they are "riding out the virus with the masses", though in a beachfront Malibu mansion.  

It will be interesting to see which celebrity/billionaire's house they managed to have "loaned" to them or if they are actually paying rent themselves for a place.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan came to pick up her stimulus check


She legit might be eligible!


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is the last straw between me and people magazine. I am not renewing, even though I used to enjoy reading it while I eat cereal in the morning.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> I think the image of them hiding out in a waterfront Vancouver mansion in the midst of this crisis was terrible for them and their image.  Harry looked as if he abandoned the UK on the edge of the pandemic.  At least in L.A., they can pretend that they are "riding out the virus with the masses", though in a beachfront Malibu mansion.
> 
> It will be interesting to see which celebrity/billionaire's house they managed to have "loaned" to them or if they are actually paying rent themselves for a place.



I kind of feel like the optics will be the same. Wherever they end up I will hazard a guess that it will be another loaner house and not something they actually pay for.

Flew here via private jet? Of course! Do as we say not as we do, plebs!


----------



## mrsinsyder

So... where are the defenders who swore she had given up her glittery Hollywood career to reinvent the British monarchy and single handedly save the world?


----------



## youngster

The question I'd like answered as a taxpaying American  . . . who is paying for their Security when in America?  I assume they will have private security as of 4/1.  There is no way that anyone here would tolerate a single dollar being spent on these two from the budget of the City of L.A. or L.A. County, especially now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

They’re so predictable, yet at the same time utterly unbelievable.

TQ and PP are in quarantine, PC has been confirmed positive, the rest of the family is working hard to be the face of positivity for the UK...and these two were busy scheduling a private jet pickup to get them to the country they swore they wouldn’t move to for the time being.

Utterly disgusting. They better not get American taxpayer funded ANYTHING.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> So... where are the defenders who swore she had given up her glittery Hollywood career to reinvent the British monarchy and single handedly save the world?



There is one over in the Will & Kate thread.

Now that Meghan is in SoCal, maybe at some point she will allow her father to meet his grandson?


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> America! They are amongst you! Apparently they are indeed in LA


All I can say is shucks !


----------



## PewPew

Sharont2305 said:


> Reminding us they're not here [emoji122]



Exactly. It’s so funny the Sparkles insist they are a “global” enterprise, working on solutions to save the world in quarantine... yet they still traveled on 4 international flights & X domestic flights this month, with all their handlers, security and the private air crew being potentially exposed. (In addition to the NHS, it would have been easy to hashtag support the Canadian / U.S. healthcare workers, but maybe H&M didn’t want us to know they keep traveling despite the ban).

H&M — if you put up enough clapping emojis, maybe people will forget that you’re blatantly making MORE potential patients for healthcare services by not following the WHO Covid/quarantine guidelines you lectured about in your last post... But silly us, why would we expect their HRHs to start practicing what they preach?


----------



## hellosunshine

mrsinsyder said:


> So... where are the defenders who swore she had given up her glittery Hollywood career to reinvent the British monarchy and single handedly save the world?



I don't know who said those exact words but I'm not surprised that they've relocated to LA (if this is true) as she's from the area and I assume they want to be closer to Doria. In all honesty, I don't care - they are private citizens now, they're free to do as they please.


----------



## zen1965

To move house in these kind of times to be in a state that is particularly hard hit. How idiotic can one get?


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> I don't know who said those exact words but I'm not surprised that they've relocated to LA (if this is true) as she's from the area and I assume they want to be closer to Doria. In all honesty, I don't care - they are private citizens now, they're free to do as they please.


Private citizens have private security paid for by taxpayers?

Also, it’s utterly delusional to think they give two licks about Doria. Lmaoooooo.


----------



## Katel

Tivo said:


> How in the world did you manage to screenshot that IG story 26 seconds after it was posted?​


She is staff?


----------



## 1LV

Someone needs to remind her that she said she would never live in the US as long as T was president.  Cameras...?  *****....?  Cameras...?  *****....?  Cameras win! Big surprise, right?


----------



## PewPew

mrsinsyder said:


> Private citizens have private security paid for by taxpayers?
> 
> Also, it’s utterly delusional to think they give two licks about Doria. Lmaoooooo.



And all those government-paid security and staff are flouting international WHO guidelines and local travel bans.

These are NOT people behaving as “private citizens”. (My friends are stranded away from their families because THEY are private citizens following the rules. My friend’s mom has stage 4 cancer & she can’t just hop on a flight to see her b/c she “wants to see her mom” in a pandemic.)

Edit:  They probably wanted to move before they (or Daddy Charles) has to start paying for more of their staff on April 1. The UK WILL actually still be paying for their security, but per QE2 it’s not going to be the estimated $20million per year they expect.


----------



## Mrs.Z

lanasyogamama said:


> This is the last straw between me and people magazine. I am not renewing, even though I used to enjoy reading it while I eat cereal in the morning.


I broke up with People a few weeks ago (I can’t say why, it’s semi-political)
They are a pathetic celebrity mouthpiece


----------



## mdcx

Well, she’s had the cosmetic enhancements done, has the money secured, has her PR team pumping out stories, has the public profile and now lives in LA.
So, technically nothing is standing in the way of Meghan becoming a Hollywood STAH!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Smh.


----------



## Genie27

hellosunshine said:


> View attachment 4697814


Remarkable



mdcx said:


> Well, she’s had the cosmetic enhancements done, has the money secured, has her PR team pumping out stories, has the public profile and now lives in LA.
> So, technically nothing is standing in the way of Meghan becoming a Hollywood STAH!


Can’t wait!


----------



## mia55

mdcx said:


> Well, she’s had the cosmetic enhancements done, has the money secured, has her PR team pumping out stories, has the public profile and now lives in LA.
> So, technically nothing is standing in the way of Meghan becoming a Hollywood STAH!


Well looks like her heart is set to become a Hollywood celebrity and she doesn't care how many pawns/husbands she ends up sacrificing to reach there. Whatever she is but her passion is admirable.
On the other hand it'll be interesting to see what she does when she fails in this venture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

I’m waiting for her to post a makeup-free “woe is us” selfie video, as the rest of those clowns have been doing.


----------



## Genie27

queennadine said:


> I’m waiting for her to post a makeup-free “woe is us” selfie video, as the rest of those clowns have been doing.


She probably has to wait until she’s off BRF payroll on Wednesday to release her clip.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4697875


*NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
*We're watching .. *
*

*


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> *NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
> *We're watching .. *
> *
> View attachment 4697959
> *


THEYRE COMING FOR YA


----------



## CeeJay

Luvbolide said:


> Hmmm...taking a private jet and moving to LA doesn't seem like the wisest move since Calif. is in lockdown mode per the order of the Governor.  Wonder how many were required to stop following the stay-at-home order to accomplish this.  Talk about selfish...


Oh, "*Mr. & Mrs. Environmental*" .. took yet *ANOTHER* Private Jet???  Worse off.. it landed in my neck of the woods (_Van Nuys Airport - it is now the largest Private Airport in the LA area_)! 

Yes, we in the LA area (_well, all of CA_) are in *full lockdown*, so how did they get to come in here???  Wait till I tell my neighbors this tidbit of info, because we have *ALL been questioning WHY that Airport is STILL open* if no one is supposed to be going out unless for the "essentials".  *Now I'm PISSED, and when I am .. watch out!!!    *


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> She legit might be eligible!


No, she will not .. only those under $95k are eligible


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> So... where are the defenders who swore she had given up her glittery Hollywood career to reinvent the British monarchy and single handedly save the world?


*MARKLE'd .. *


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> The question I'd like answered as a taxpaying American  . . . who is paying for their Security when in America?  I assume they will have private security as of 4/1.  There is no way that anyone here would tolerate a single dollar being spent on these two from the budget of the City of L.A. or L.A. County, especially now.


My understanding is that the US would only kick in some $$$ if/when they were visiting as part of a "State" Visit representing the BRF.  Since they no longer are, then they would be responsible for their own security cost just like all those other celebrities (of which they are not IMO)!!!


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> Oh, "*Mr. & Mrs. Environmental*" .. took yet *ANOTHER* Private Jet???  Worse off.. it landed in my neck of the woods (_Van Nuys Airport - it is now the largest Private Airport in the LA area_)!
> 
> Yes, we in the LA area (_well, all of CA_) are in *full lockdown*, so how did they get to come in here???  Wait till I tell my neighbors this tidbit of info, because we have *ALL been questioning WHY that Airport is STILL open* if no one is supposed to be going out unless for the "essentials".  *Now I'm PISSED, and when I am .. watch out!!!    *


You know a “source” will reveal where exactly in LA Meghan is living to People mag in the next few days, so that might provide some relief! And when the lockdown is over, the pap strolls will be on, so there will be another list of locations to avoid!


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

Beverly Hills!


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> You know a “source” will reveal where exactly in LA Meghan is living to People mag in the next few days, so that might provide some relief! And when the lockdown is over, the pap strolls will be on, so there will be another list of locations to avoid!


To be honest, I and a few of my friends out here have been SERIOUSLY talking about getting out of this state .. I'm going to be opening up that discussion with the HB right after I tell him this latest "news".

In the meantime, I kid you not .. I live in an area that is not far from Van Nuys Airport and the air traffic has become RIDICULOUS in the last 5 years, to the point that we are all complaining about the noise & fumes (let me tell you, it is NOT fun when you are in your swimming pool in the summer and those stinkin' / noisy Lear Jets are flying not far above you).  Even though we have very strict rules about where those pilots are supposed to fly, they CONSTANTLY abuse it (similar to Kobe Bryant's Helicopter Pilot).  As I said, myself and the other neighbors have been asking "why is Van Nuys operational at all?"  I can understand medical supplies coming in, but Private Jets? .. HE!! NO!!!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> You know a “source” will reveal where exactly in LA Meghan is living to People mag in the next few days, so that might provide some relief! And when the lockdown is over, the pap strolls will be on, so there will be another list of locations to avoid!


COVID probably ruined the Mother Theresa (with wisps of hair framing the face, naturally) photo op of handing out gluten-free bread loaves on Skid Row.


----------



## poopsie

As tone deaf as their responses have been to this crisis, who here _really _thinks that the pap strolls and charitable photo ops will be forgone by these bozos? I personally can't_ wait  _for the obligatory Wal Mart tp/pt line post. hilarious


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> COVID probably ruined the Mother Theresa (with wisps of hair framing the face, naturally) photo op of handing out gluten-free bread loaves on Skid Row.


Oh no .. she WOULD NEVER venture to that part of the world, especially here in LA!  Even the LAPD sectioned off a big part of their building due to rat infestation, et. al (because of all the extra garbage, human excrement, etc. in those tent cities).  No, she would only show her face at those "celebrity-friendly" soup kitchens which are hardly the truly downtrodden homeless population here.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> As tone deaf as their responses have been to this crisis, who here _really _thinks that the pap strolls and charitable photo ops will be forgone by these bozos? I personally can't_ wait  _for the obligatory Wal Mart tp/pt line post. hilarious


Don't hold your breath for that; they will send out their minions to do those "lowly" chores for them ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

They better hope they never run into me in one of the high-end stores out here, or they will have an "episode" like mine with Gwyneth Paltrow or Kyle Richards!  If they try to pull that "elitist" BS, they will be roundly called out!!!


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> Oh, "*Mr. & Mrs. Environmental*" .. took yet *ANOTHER* Private Jet???  Worse off.. it landed in my neck of the woods (_Van Nuys Airport - it is now the largest Private Airport in the LA area_)!
> 
> Yes, we in the LA area (_well, all of CA_) are in *full lockdown*, so how did they get to come in here???  Wait till I tell my neighbors this tidbit of info, because we have *ALL been questioning WHY that Airport is STILL open* if no one is supposed to be going out unless for the "essentials".  *Now I'm PISSED, and when I am .. watch out!!!   *


Umm excuse me!
Meghan is A DUCHESS!!!!
and JustCallMeHarry is SIXTH IN LINE!!!
Like, hello?


----------



## Luvbolide

mrsinsyder said:


> Smh.
> View attachment 4697957




Oh hey, an edict like that never causes a strain in marriages.  God forbid something worse happens to Charles, or any of the rest of them. Why should just H have any guilt or regret if he didn't make an effort to see his own family.  She probably would like just H to have the same relationship with his family as she has with hers.  Markle the whole lot of them!!  Except, oooops, his control the purse strings!


----------



## youngster

What is so crazy to me is that multiple people, on this thread and other threads, predicted this move to L.A. more than a year ago. They said this was MM's ultimate goal, to get back to L.A. and live the A list Hollywood life. 

I thought no way would Harry ever give up his life in the UK, his duties and obligations, and want to live some meaningless celebrity existence in L.A, dodging paps on Starbucks runs. I can still hardly believe it, except its actually happened!  Well done, those of you who saw through MM from the start.


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> Umm excuse me!
> Meghan is A DUCHESS!!!!
> and JustCallMeHarry is SIXTH IN LINE!!!
> Like, hello?




Yes, the very, very unroyal duchess Meg.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> They better hope they never run into me in one of the high-end stores out here, or they will have an "episode" like mine with Gwyneth Paltrow or Kyle Richards!  If they try to pull that "elitist" BS, they will be roundly called out!!!


i'm intrigued....you had episodes with gwyneth and kyle?


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> Umm excuse me!
> Meghan is A "*DOUCHE-A$$*" and "*JustCallMe-HAZ-DUH*"  !!!!
> and JustCallMeHarry is SIXTH IN LINE!!!
> Like, hello?


Fixed it for 'ya doll ..


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Don't hold your breath for that; they will send out their minions to do those "lowly" chores for them ..



We know Prince Harry likes to go out for a sandwich run now and then. You might get a chance to say “hey neighbor” to him at the local Subway.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> i'm intrigued....you had episodes with gwyneth and kyle?


I never told you about those???  Gwyneth happened when I was at Barneys NY (Madison Ave), when I had the "audacity" to purchase "her" earrings (earrings that she had worn in a Photo shoot for 'whatever' magazine - how would I know)!  First, she laid into the Sales Associate (who also happened to be a dear friend of mine) and then proceeded to take the boxed-up earring box directly out of my hands while spouting the "don't YOU KNOW WHO I AM"? crap-oh-la!  

Kyle was in the Gelson's in Encino, where she "attempted" to cut the line at the Prepared Foods area, telling all of us "minions" standing around patiently that she had a party that evening (in 15 minutes) .. and that was why she had to go in front of all of us!  When I spoke up to tell her "uh - no, you will take a number and wait your turn like all of the rest of us" (this was right before one of the Jewish holidays so it was very busy there), I got the same "don't YOU KNOW WHO I AM"? crap-oh-la! 

HA - well, I DO NOT suffer fools gladly and having had to deal with some pretty horrible CEO's, CIO's, CFO's and the like in the Corporate America world, they were both rather surprised when I took them to task for their behavior!!!  Gwyneth was not married at the time, so no kids .. but Kyle??? .. spouting off F-bombs like there was no tomorrow in front of her daughter Portia?? .. well, she also got called out for her "wonderful (sic) & motherly (sic) behavior"!!  

Amazing .. in both cases, I got rounds of applause by the other shoppers!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> No, she will not .. only those under $95k are eligible



Well, what did she earn? Didn’t the BRF money likely go just to Harry?


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, what did she earn? Didn’t the BRF money likely go just to Harry?


She might have gotten residuals from the TV Show; bottom line .. if she wants that check, she would have to file taxes and then .. guess what? .. everyone is going to know!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I never told you about those???  Gwyneth happened when I was at Barneys NY (Madison Ave), when I had the "audacity" to purchase "her" earrings (earrings that she had worn in a Photo shoot for 'whatever' magazine - how would I know)!  First, she laid into the Sales Associate (who also happened to be a dear friend of mine) and then proceeded to take the boxed-up earring box directly out of my hands while spouting the "don't YOU KNOW WHO I AM"? crap-oh-la!
> 
> Kyle was in the Gelson's in Encino, where she "attempted" to cut the line at the Prepared Foods area, telling all of us "minions" standing around patiently that she had a party that evening (in 15 minutes) .. and that was why she had to go in front of all of us!  When I spoke up to tell her "uh - no, you will take a number and wait your turn like all of the rest of us" (this was right before one of the Jewish holidays so it was very busy there), I got the same "don't YOU KNOW WHO I AM"? crap-oh-la!
> 
> HA - well, I DO NOT suffer fools gladly and having had to deal with some pretty horrible CEO's, CIO's, CFO's and the like in the Corporate America world, they were both rather surprised when I took them to task for their behavior!!!  Gwyneth was not married at the time, so no kids .. but Kyle??? .. spouting off F-bombs like there was no tomorrow in front of her daughter Portia?? .. well, she also got called out for her "wonderful (sic) & motherly (sic) behavior"!!
> 
> Amazing .. in both cases, I got rounds of applause by the other shoppers!!!


good for you   who got the earrings?


----------



## PewPew

youngster said:


> What is so crazy to me is that multiple people, on this thread and other threads, predicted this move to L.A. more than a year ago. They said this was MM's ultimate goal, to get back to L.A. and live the A list Hollywood life.
> 
> I thought no way would Harry ever give up his life in the UK, his duties and obligations, and want to live some meaningless celebrity existence in L.A, dodging paps on Starbucks runs. I can still hardly believe it, except its actually happened!  Well done, those of you who saw through MM from the start.



So many of us underestimated the size of Harry’s “hero complex.”  I didn’t know anything about Meghan before the engagement & assumed she was much younger by how she clung to him in all photos, and the fact that Harry was going to give this poor waif “the family she never had.” But from the hoax interview, it’s looking like Harry is actually the naive one.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> good for you   who got the earrings?



I want to know this too @CeeJay!   Did you end up with the earrings or did our precious Gwyneth?


----------



## eunaddict

mrsinsyder said:


> Smh.
> View attachment 4697957



I mean I dislike her greatly, and I think the whole forbidding your partner to do XYZ is ridiculous in adult relationships but come on, NO ONE should be traveling internationally right now and NO ONE should be waltzing in to visit relatives with Covid-19. If Harry had gone home to visit Charles, he would definitely need to be self-isolated for 2 weeks (which would have put a dent in their move to So-Cal plans) and he'd put all his staff and everyone he comes into contact with while flying back at unnecessary risk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

I hope they've chronicled all these private flights and crossing closed borders for us minions to be preached at for Travalyst


----------



## threadbender

So, who pays for their security in the US? How long is JH able to stay?
What happens April 1st?
Are they keeping all of the UK employees basically hostage in NA?


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> My understanding is that the US would only kick in some $$$ if/when they were visiting as part of a "State" Visit representing the BRF.  Since they no longer are, then they would be responsible for their own security cost just like all those other celebrities (of which they are not IMO)!!!


It wouldn't be classed as a state visit, it's only a state visit if a head of state (the Queen in our case) invites another head of state. And only one state visit per term of office. I know ***** has been here twice, the first time it wasn't a state visit, second one was. Should Charles or William become King and ***** is still in office, he could be invited for another state visit as it would be under a different monarch?


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> I want to know this too @CeeJay!   Did you end up with the earrings or did our precious Gwyneth?


I want to know this too? Who won? You or Gwynnie? [emoji1787] [emoji1787]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I want to know this too? Who won? You or Gwynnie? [emoji1787] [emoji1787]


I have no doubt who won! Our CeeJay is not one to mess with!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no doubt who won! Our CeeJay is not one to mess with!


I know, I just need it to be confirmed, [emoji23]


----------



## SWlife

CeeJay said:


> I never told you about those???  Gwyneth happened when I was at Barneys NY (Madison Ave), when I had the "audacity" to purchase "her" earrings (earrings that she had worn in a Photo shoot for 'whatever' magazine - how would I know)!  First, she laid into the Sales Associate (who also happened to be a dear friend of mine) and then proceeded to take the boxed-up earring box directly out of my hands while spouting the "don't YOU KNOW WHO I AM"? crap-oh-la!
> 
> Kyle was in the Gelson's in Encino, where she "attempted" to cut the line at the Prepared Foods area, telling all of us "minions" standing around patiently that she had a party that evening (in 15 minutes) .. and that was why she had to go in front of all of us!  When I spoke up to tell her "uh - no, you will take a number and wait your turn like all of the rest of us" (this was right before one of the Jewish holidays so it was very busy there), I got the same "don't YOU KNOW WHO I AM"? crap-oh-la!
> 
> HA - well, I DO NOT suffer fools gladly and having had to deal with some pretty horrible CEO's, CIO's, CFO's and the like in the Corporate America world, they were both rather surprised when I took them to task for their behavior!!!  Gwyneth was not married at the time, so no kids .. but Kyle??? .. spouting off F-bombs like there was no tomorrow in front of her daughter Portia?? .. well, she also got called out for her "wonderful (sic) & motherly (sic) behavior"!!
> 
> Amazing .. in both cases, I got rounds of applause by the other shoppers!!!


Good on ya! Boorish behavior needs to be called out.


----------



## PewPew

> NO ONE should be traveling internationally right now and NO ONE should be waltzing in to visit relatives with Covid-19.



Exactly. This week there have been refrigerated trucks picking up dead bodies in NEW YORK because the morgues are full. No amount of clapping emojis for the NHS on Instagram makes up for the irresponsible decision to fly their HRHs, staff and security internationally.


----------



## duna

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4697875



Yet again flying private......Just to increase a bit more their carbon footprint....I'm sure they think "the bigger the better!"


----------



## rcy

so she leaves london to get away from the press and moves the epicenter of all things photog?? at least in europe, aren't there laws against photographing children or showing their faces? def not so in the us.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> i'm intrigued....you had episodes with gwyneth and kyle?


Yes she did, I loved the Kyle incident!


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> Smh.
> View attachment 4697957


If the LA story is true, I hope it is not, I am gobsmacked/shocked/speechless , trying not to use 4 letter words , that they chose to travel 
Heck Elton john is staying home, their buddy, and doing concerts for everyone


----------



## imgg

I am shocked Meghan hasn't hijacked the Invictus Games yet.  I know it was cancelled, but still a lot of promo with Harry and Bon Jovi.  Can't believe she didn't sneak her nose in there.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan wants what she wants when she wants it. I'm sure as soon as she got wind that the border was closing she pushed them to get out. She's super impatient that she has had to delay joining the celebrity set and launching their phony money-grab charity.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

It dawns on me - they no longer have FREE RCMP security as of 01 Apr 2020, not that is an excuse to move under the current pandemic
I cant get over the move NOW, the excuse of keeping Archie safe does not work, by travelling they are putting others at risk
End of rant


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wants what she wants when she wants it. I'm sure as soon as she got wind that the border was closing she pushed them to get out. She's super impatient that she has had to delay joining the celebrity set and launching their phony money-grab charity.
> 
> View attachment 4698220


Indeed.  See this: https://pagesix.com/2020/03/27/meghan-and-harry-poach-top-melinda-gates-staffer-to-lead-new-charity/


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Indeed.  See this: https://pagesix.com/2020/03/27/meghan-and-harry-poach-top-melinda-gates-staffer-to-lead-new-charity/



Ugh. I didn't expect to see it in print this quickly. I love how the quote says it won't be a "traditional charity" and how Harry and Meghan are making it their own in the same article where it outright says they hired an expert to do all the work for them. They want to take the credit for being do-gooders but don't expect them to actually do anything.

_As we revealed, Harry and Meghan’s new venture is not a foundation, as a source said: “It’s not likely to be a traditional charity. Harry and Meghan want to find their own way of giving back and new ways to make change.”_


----------



## chicinthecity777

I didn't know there are many different forms of charity. I would like some clarification on what they all are. I thought charity means non-for-profit. But pease enlighten me!


----------



## imgg

Dang, Netflix  cancelled The Crown.  Probably for the best since Meghan nearly ruined the Royal Family.  Loved the younger Queen Elizabeth, she did a spectacular job.


----------



## cafecreme15

imgg said:


> Dang, Netflix  cancelled The Crown.  Probably for the best since Meghan nearly ruined the Royal Family.


You mean it’s done after the 5th season? I think we knew that! If it’s sooner I’ll be devastated!


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. I didn't expect to see it in print this quickly. I love how the quote says it won't be a "traditional charity" and how Harry and Meghan are making it their own in the same article where it outright says they hired an expert to do all the work for them. They want to take the credit for being do-gooders but don't expect them to actually do anything.
> 
> _As we revealed, Harry and Meghan’s new venture is not a foundation, as a source said: “It’s not likely to be a traditional charity. Harry and Meghan want to find their own way of giving back and new ways to make change.”_



Meghan and Harry are the charity recipients under the guise of something made up.  Remember Seinfeld? _Money for People  _


----------



## imgg

cafecreme15 said:


> You mean it’s done after the 5th season? I think we knew that! If it’s sooner I’ll be devastated!


Aahhh, you're right!  I didn't read the fine print, thought they were cancelling the upcoming season. Glad they won't get to the Markles on this series, so well done you Netflix.


----------



## Roxanna

zen1965 said:


> To move house in these kind of times to be in a state that is particularly hard hit. How idiotic can one get?


Ha, didn't we all forget that she did not take baby to UK because of virus...Now she took him into badly effected place. 
 Did she versed herself deeply into epidemiology and took all precautions? 
Unreal.


----------



## queennadine

I wonder what happened to all of their staff. I would assume they’re British citizens. Were they able to fly into the US?


----------



## zen1965

Considering their staff turnover, a fairly daft move by Ms St.-Laurent to leave a most likely secure job at the Gates Foundation to join volatile JHMM.


----------



## youngster

kipp said:


> Indeed.  See this: https://pagesix.com/2020/03/27/meghan-and-harry-poach-top-melinda-gates-staffer-to-lead-new-charity/



I guess we've moved on from modeling the Obamas to the Gates!  I've got no clue how the two of them can emulate Bill and Melinda Gates any better than Barack and Michelle *****. They have no real money of their own, nor do they have the business and life experience, and massive political and economic connections of either of those couples. The Gates Foundation is worth about $40 billion and was funded by Bill Gates massively successful Microsoft.  That's why it's powerful and meaningful. And,  Bill Gates is a really, really smart guy and so is his wife.  Almost all the great private foundations of the world were built by incredibly successful, innovative, business people who acquired huge personal fortunes (Ford, Rockefeller, Getty, Gates, etc.).  Any foundation/not-for-profit that MM and Harry build will be miniscule in comparison and will likely duplicate and take money from much more effective charities and foundations out there already.


----------



## arnott

I'm just happy they've FINALLY left my country/province!    Woo freaking hoo!        Americans,  they're your problem now!


----------



## PewPew

rcy said:


> so she leaves london to get away from the press and moves the epicenter of all things photog?? at least in europe, aren't there laws against photographing children or showing their faces? def not so in the us.



In the Africa documentary, M got teary about how she didn’t expect the UK press to be as they are because “we don’t have tabloids in America.”  *eyeroll*  Granted she lived in Canada to film her show & was not big enough for paparazzi before Harry.

But she grew up in LA, on the set of Married with Children, where people and photogs hung around for hours for a glimpse of Christina Applegate. HRH also didn’t always have personal shoppers. She knows from the supermarket checkouts that we have “I had an alien baby” tabloids too.



zen1965 said:


> Considering their staff turnover, a fairly daft move by Ms St.-Laurent to leave a most likely secure job at the Gates Foundation to join volatile JHMM.



I wonder how astronomical a wage Ms. St.Laurent was offered. Remember how H&M’s PR people were floating articles about how they’ll earn $100+million a year (pre-Covid market value). It’s not like she or Harry will be paying Ms St. Laurent from their own pockets. She’s used to working with billions— Her performance bonuses will be substantial & any out-of-pocket (haha) expenses for H&M will be reimbursed by their new-age FBMH* “charity”

*For the Benefit of Meghan & Harry


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. I didn't expect to see it in print this quickly. I love how the quote says it won't be a "traditional charity" and how Harry and Meghan are making it their own in the same article where it outright says they hired an expert to do all the work for them. They want to take the credit for being do-gooders but don't expect them to actually do anything.
> 
> _As we revealed, Harry and Meghan’s new venture is not a foundation, as a source said: “It’s not likely to be a traditional charity. Harry and Meghan want to find their own way of giving back and new ways to make change.”_


These two are so cute, I know they want to reinvent the wheel but kids you need to play by the rules of the United States Government with respect to how charitable institutions are set up etc.  There are only so many ways to do this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I am gonna cry ... 
latest silly news story talks about Los Angeles move will allow Doria greater access to Archie ... 
I don’t care if it is true, but, I don’t want to hear of them violating stay-at-home orders today , pu-lezzzzzzzz
In case no one noticed, H and M sat behind Charles a few weeks ago and C has it .... maybe his son got it from dad or from Boris .... 
a two week quarantine would be good


----------



## kemilia

arnott said:


> I'm just happy they've FINALLY left my country/province!    Woo freaking hoo!        Americans,  they're your problem now!


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> These two are so cute, I know they want to reinvent the wheel but kids you need to play by the rules of the United States Government with respect to how charitable institutions are set up etc.  There are only so many ways to do this.



Have you noticed how they are always just a little bit late to everything they try? This is the absolute worst time to try to launch a generic "we don't know exactly what it is yet" charity. If the economy is thrown into a recession, corporations are going to be fighting for survival. There is not going to be millions of dollars to give to "feel good" programs the way H&M are counting on.


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> Have you noticed how they are always just a little bit late to everything they try? This is the absolute worst time to try to launch a generic "we don't know exactly what it is yet" charity. If the economy is thrown into a recession, corporations are going to be fighting for survival. There is not going to be millions of dollars to give to "feel good" programs the way H&M are counting on.


EXACTLY.  In fact, the hubris to do/publicize this now is unbelievable.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They were more than a tiny bit late with the Corona advice.


----------



## marietouchet

threadbender said:


> So, who pays for their security in the US? How long is JH able to stay?
> What happens April 1st?
> Are they keeping all of the UK employees basically hostage in NA?


 They are no longer royal as of 1 Apr, no longer traveling for Queen , so they no longer qualify for free security as diplomats of sorts
Canada may have been doing a favor (to the crown/Queen) by helping out til Apr 1 with security, they had been in Canada for like 6 months, and Canada finally refused to foot the bill 
They pay for their own security in the US using whatever allowance Charles is still giving them 
They probably planned the move long ago as part of downsizing but the optics are awful given coronavirus


----------



## youngster

Mrs.Z said:


> These two are so cute, I know they want to reinvent the wheel but kids you need to play by the rules of the United States Government with respect to how charitable institutions are set up etc.  There are only so many ways to do this.



This!  Totally true.  There are very specific rules regarding the establishment of a not-for-profit organization or foundation in the U.S. under a 501(c)(3) designation.  The IRS and the California Franchise Tax Board will need to approve their tax-exempt status and they will, of course, be subject to examination and audits.  They could spend millions, if they are hiring people like Ms. St. Laurent to run it, just to set it up and hire staff and rent office space.  Perhaps they already have initial commitments from various people for some of this start up money, since I can't see Harry digging into his own pockets to fund it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> This!  Totally true.  There are very specific rules regarding the establishment of a not-for-profit organization or foundation in the U.S. under a 501(c)(3) designation.  The IRS and the California Franchise Tax Board will need to approve their tax-exempt status and they will, of course, be subject to examination and audits.  They could spend millions, if they are hiring people like Ms. St. Laurent to run it, just to set it up and hire staff and rent office space.  Perhaps they already have initial commitments from various people for some of this start up money, since I can't see Harry digging into his own pockets to fund it.


Another question I have is, does Harry need a work visa/permit to do paid work in the U.S.? I mean he's not a U.S. citizen.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Have you noticed how they are always just a little bit late to everything they try? This is the absolute worst time to try to launch a generic "we don't know exactly what it is yet" charity. If the economy is thrown into a recession, corporations are going to be fighting for survival. There is not going to be millions of dollars to give to "feel good" programs the way H&M are counting on.


Yep, always a day late, dollar short scenario. But that's what happens when you think you are the smartest one in the room--and you are so NOT.

It's pretty much a done deal that the US economy is going to tank big time--no one can work, the unemployment offices are overrun with claims, we're all pretty much under quarantine (yesterday Chicago's mayor closed all the beaches and parks)--the list goes on. That Gates woman made a bad move, imo. She'll be Markle'd eventually.


----------



## jcnc

chicinthecity777 said:


> Another question I have is, does Harry need a work visa/permit to do paid work in the U.S.? I mean he's not a U.S. citizen.


I think he qualifies to apply for a green card as the spouse of an American Citizen. Maybe they applied a while back?!


----------



## youngster

chicinthecity777 said:


> Another question I have is, does Harry need a work visa/permit to do paid work in the U.S.? I mean he's not a U.S. citizen.



Since they are married, there are different rules in place and he could potentially have a path to citizenship, if he wanted on for some reason, which I doubt.  I think he'll keep his UK citizenship.

Still, their federal and California tax situation has to be a tangled mess. (I'm an accountant so I know of what I speak.)  If they operate in numerous states, even for just a single well paid speech or to raise money, they will need to file annually in those states as well. Literally, potentially dozens of annual tax returns under different state rules. My fellow CPA's are going to make serious bucks on these two.


----------



## queennadine

I was watching Schitt’s Creek the other night and Catherine O’Hara’s character made a mention of having worked with the “the most profitable non-profits” and I immediately thought of MM and H. 

That’s exactly what they’ll try to set up. Not a true charitable bone in either of their bodies.


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> I was watching Schitt’s Creek the other night and Catherine O’Hara’s character made a mention of having worked with the “the most profitable non-profits” and I immediately thought of MM and H.
> 
> That’s exactly what they’ll try to set up. Not a true charitable bone in either of their bodies.


It’s a vanity project


----------



## tiktok

Mrs.Z said:


> These two are so cute, I know they want to reinvent the wheel but kids you need to play by the rules of the United States Government with respect to how charitable institutions are set up etc.  There are only so many ways to do this.





youngster said:


> This!  Totally true.  There are very specific rules regarding the establishment of a not-for-profit organization or foundation in the U.S. under a 501(c)(3) designation.  The IRS and the California Franchise Tax Board will need to approve their tax-exempt status and they will, of course, be subject to examination and audits.  They could spend millions, if they are hiring people like Ms. St. Laurent to run it, just to set it up and hire staff and rent office space.  Perhaps they already have initial commitments from various people for some of this start up money, since I can't see Harry digging into his own pockets to fund it.



No no no. You clearly don’t get it. Meghan is going to modernize the US tax system too, just like she did the monarchy. You’re just not thinking big enough.


----------



## PewPew

It’s really tacky to leak/announce the poaching of someone from the Gates Foundation during the pandemic. The deal was probably done long before the pandemic escalated, but the announcement is riding on the good press of Gates and the Gates Foundation aiding test distribution worldwide and working on long term strategies for global recovery. But I do understand that good associations are everything in PR.



lanasyogamama said:


> They were more than a tiny bit late with the Corona advice.



Being a month-late to post the WHO recommendations was bad, but it DID show they were learning after getting slammed in the comments for having staff go latexpalooza & their tone-deaf quarantine “lifestyle” posts.

But again they backslide — why post a “go NHS” gram of a thousand emojis to support UK healthcare workers... before flouting all health regulations and flying their team internationally. If they’re this brazen about being “special” and breaking rules during a world crisis, how shady are their post-pandemic dealings going to be, when people are too busy rebuilding to notice their myriad hypocrisies?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

While Harry isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, I don't believe he'd travel internationally in light of all the current restrictions anyway. Meghan's "forbidding" Harry to travel was just a lame desperate excuse to get publicity. I can't wait for her to come out with tips on being a new mom.  They'd be along the lines of: "It's really easy! Just get a royal nanny to raise your child and pop in every once in a while to keep tabs on what he looks like. That way, when his picture appears in the media, you don't go "Who's that?" "


----------



## marietouchet

queennadine said:


> I wonder what happened to all of their staff. I would assume they’re British citizens. Were they able to fly into the US?


I doubt they have any British staff anymore


----------



## gazoo

Today I feel... 
         sick if this blind is true.

https://blindgossip.com/a-shocking-accident/
This actress is pretending to be all concerned about the health of her husband’s family members.

What a crock.

She mentioned this movie, [redacted], where the entire family was wiped out in a freak accident.

The freak accident was certainly shocking, and it allowed someone unexpected to ascend to power and take over the “family firm.” The main character went from being a nobody to being king of the hill.

The movie was a comedy that came out in the 1990s. It wasn’t particularly good, but we can see why she found it memorable after her luxurious wedding to one of the members of a prominent family.

She recently asked someone if they had seen it.

She was laughing about it and saying that it was one of her favorite movies.

Does she actually think that movie premise could become her reality?

Is that the real reason she is telling her husband to physically stay away from his family?


----------



## CeeJay

First of all, to answer all your questions in regards to *WHO got the earrings*?!?! .. c'mon now, who do you think??? .. *ME, ME and ME*!!!  [Like I would let Gwynnie have them - HA!!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> First of all, to answer all your questions in regards to *WHO got the earrings*?!?! .. c'mon now, who do you think??? .. *ME, ME and ME*!!!  [Like I would let Gwynnie have them - HA!!


Yay, well done, [emoji23]


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> First of all, to answer all your questions in regards to *WHO got the earrings*?!?! .. c'mon now, who do you think??? .. *ME, ME and ME*!!!  [Like I would let Gwynnie have them - HA!!


I hate that "do you know who I am" sh-t.  It took me years to get over that with Reese Witherspoon and the drunk driving arrest
Good for you CeeJay


----------



## bag-mania

gazoo said:


> Today I feel...
> sick if this blind is true.
> 
> https://blindgossip.com/a-shocking-accident/
> This actress is pretending to be all concerned about the health of her husband’s family members.
> 
> What a crock.
> 
> She mentioned this movie, [redacted], where the entire family was wiped out in a freak accident.
> 
> The freak accident was certainly shocking, and it allowed someone unexpected to ascend to power and take over the “family firm.” The main character went from being a nobody to being king of the hill.
> 
> The movie was a comedy that came out in the 1990s. It wasn’t particularly good, but we can see why she found it memorable after her luxurious wedding to one of the members of a prominent family.
> 
> She recently asked someone if they had seen it.
> 
> *She was laughing about it and saying that it was one of her favorite movies.*
> 
> Does she actually think that movie premise could become her reality?
> 
> Is that the real reason she is telling her husband to physically stay away from his family?



I'm shocked Meghan would admit to anyone that "King Ralph" is one of her favorite movies.


----------



## Aminamina

bag-mania said:


> I'm shocked Meghan would admit to anyone that "King Ralph" is one of her favorite movies.


Why? This Royal exSussex oozes class.


----------



## bag-mania

Aminamina said:


> Why? This Royal exSussex oozes class.



I expect her to only say she likes pretentious, award-winning movies. Of course that movie came out when she was still a kid so...


----------



## sdkitty

gazoo said:


> Today I feel...
> sick if this blind is true.
> 
> https://blindgossip.com/a-shocking-accident/
> This actress is pretending to be all concerned about the health of her husband’s family members.
> 
> What a crock.
> 
> She mentioned this movie, [redacted], where the entire family was wiped out in a freak accident.
> 
> The freak accident was certainly shocking, and it allowed someone unexpected to ascend to power and take over the “family firm.” The main character went from being a nobody to being king of the hill.
> 
> The movie was a comedy that came out in the 1990s. It wasn’t particularly good, but we can see why she found it memorable after her luxurious wedding to one of the members of a prominent family.
> 
> She recently asked someone if they had seen it.
> 
> She was laughing about it and saying that it was one of her favorite movies.
> 
> Does she actually think that movie premise could become her reality?
> 
> Is that the real reason she is telling her husband to physically stay away from his family?


I don't like her but I also don't put much stock in a blind item


----------



## Aminamina

bag-mania said:


> I expect her to only say she likes pretentious, award-winning movies. Of course that movie came out when she was still a kid so...


She was set to become a princess since she was a kid so...)


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I'm shocked Meghan would admit to anyone that "King Ralph" is one of her favorite movies.


HA - her feelings of *GRANDEUR* waaaaaaaaaaay overwhelm her sensibilities (_wait? .. does she EVEN have tha_t???).  I'm not surprised by her actions anymore, it's almost as though she doesn't want to be 'transparent' in her quest to be "Queen"!  

On that note, I spoke to my friends last night (_the ones that knew the Markles back in the day when she was in High School_), and they are BEYOND appalled (_in regards to H&M traveling from Canada to LA_); although, interestingly enough .. *NOT SURPRISED* that she is back in LA.  My friend pretty much confirmed what I said above, and told me that when Meghan was over their house to rehearse the play with her son (_as he was her counterpart in the play_) that she on more than a few occasions would have "a chat" (_my friend is very much like me - SPEAKS THE TRUTH_) with Meghan re: "*the REAL world*"!  She also told me that there were also a few occasions where she would scold her in regards to Meghan's "me-me-me" behavior!  So, while my friend does try to think positively about most people, she also said that she does not see this ending well for Harry .. given her experience with Meghan.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> I doubt they have any British staff anymore


The only thing left in the UK is an answering machine 
Why would they move their UK staff to Canada/LA ? that would mean paying for the move, it is cheaper to fire them and hire new - people who are already in LA


----------



## bag-mania

I bet they go through staff quickly in LA. She doesn't seem like she would be easy to work for, high maintenance would be an understatement.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I bet they go through staff quickly in LA. She doesn't seem like she would be easy to work for, high maintenance would be an understatement.


 Not only that, her so called rank is nothing here and she not of the star stature of Julia Roberts or Reese.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SWlife

From TLo o

_The Sussexes have said goodbye to Canada, at least for the time being. According to multiple outlets, Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and baby Archie have moved to Meghan’s hometown of Los Angeles, where her mother, Doria Ragland, still lives._

And TLo’s comment is-
DORIA!!!!!!! Mama _won_ that battle. Although we think there’s a not-insignificant part of Harry that loves the idea of driving everyone back home nuts by running off to America to live with his black family. Now. How long before Meghan launches her political career?


----------



## Tivo

I think Meghan is bored and anxious.
The Hollywood offers aren’t rolling in the way she wants.
And why would they? Hollywood is nothing but social climbers and with that stupid Marvel story she’s basically told the actors/actresses that she’s coming for their jobs.

ETA
I also feel Meghan is one of those people who is always “in the process of” when it comes to doing anything.
Has she ever seen a project through to the end?
What are her accomplishments?


----------



## marietouchet

Tivo said:


> I think Meghan is bored and anxious.
> The Hollywood offers aren’t rolling in the way she wants.
> And why would they? Hollywood is nothing but social climbers and with that stupid Marvel story she’s basically told the actors/actresses that she’s coming for their jobs.


Anxious yes ... acting a bit erratic also 
why move the family during the COVID crisis? That makes NO SENSE given the "keep the family safe" mantra that started all of this 
I was going to write that they have enough family clout to get an extension in Vancouver ... but, I guess they burned that bridge


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Anxious yes ... acting a bit erratic also
> why move the family during the COVID crisis? That makes NO SENSE given the "keep the family safe" mantra that started all of this
> I was going to write that they have enough family clout to get an extension in Vancouver ... but, I guess they burned that bridge


Of course it makes no sense, but their 6 months ran out on the house and the isolation was driving  both of them crazy.  The entire notion of privacy was a smokescreen for MM to gat back into shape and stage the move to LA. Moving here was always her long game. She thinks she is going to springboard to some fabulous career?  That pure Canadian air has given her too much of a high. 40 year old D listers go nowhere by themselves. His title may help a little for social purposes,  but that’s it.


----------



## bag-mania

Tivo said:


> I also feel Meghan is one of those people who is always “in the process of” when it comes to doing anything.
> Has she ever seen a project through to the end?
> What are her accomplishments?



She's all talk and has done absolutely nothing to back up her words. If she actually did even half of the things she said she was going to do, then maybe she would earn some respect.


----------



## V0N1B2

PewPew said:


> ....why post a “go NHS” gram of a thousand emojis....


They haven’t lived in jolly ol’ England for over four months, why not applaud/shout out to the local health care workers? Why still hang on to patronages and act like you have these ties to England when you made it so clear you hate it there?
I guess it’s because she still styles herself as Royal?


----------



## Flatsy

Tivo said:


> ETA
> I also feel Meghan is one of those people who is always “in the process of” when it comes to doing anything.
> Has she ever seen a project through to the end?
> What are her accomplishments?


You are right on the money about so many things! Looking back at some of the earlier pages of this thread around the time of the wedding, it's uncanny how accurate your predictions were.  I didn't agree back then, but wow were you right.

Anyway, you hit the nail on the head here too.  I'll include Harry and say that the Sussexes are always in a frenzy of gonna, gonna, gonna, but then drop almost everything and come up with a brand new list of gonnas.  I think the only thing they followed through on was renovating a house and moving in - which was a necessity because they needed a place to live.  And obviously, they abandoned the place 8 months later...


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Of course it makes no sense, but their 6 months ran out on the house and the isolation was driving  both of them crazy.  The entire notion of privacy was a smokescreen for MM to gat back into shape and stage the move to LA. Moving here was always her long game. She thinks she is going to springboard to some fabulous career?  That pure Canadian air has given her too much of a high. 40 year old D listers go nowhere by themselves. His title may help a little for social purposes,  but that’s it.


Well, they are not going to be able to go out & about around here since we are all in self-isolation!


----------



## Mrs.Z

CeeJay said:


> First of all, to answer all your questions in regards to *WHO got the earrings*?!?! .. c'mon now, who do you think??? .. *ME, ME and ME*!!!  [Like I would let Gwynnie have them - HA!!


Totally off topic but the other day my husband (who pays attention to nothing) said “Do you think Gwyneth Paltrow is mad she didn’t come up with the term “social distancing”


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> Totally off topic but the other day my husband (who pays attention to nothing) said “Do you think Gwyneth Paltrow is mad she didn’t come up with the term “social distancing”


That's hilarious, it does actually sound like something she'd say


----------



## CeeJay

Just saw in the Rihanna thread that her Foundation donated $5m to the Coronavirus effort!  Now, wouldn't it be nice if H&M said "_you know, yeah .. we were going to pay back for the renovations to Frogmore, but instead .. we are going to DONATE that $$$ to the Coronavirus effort_"!!!  But no, all they do is put up SILLY crap on their IG; seriously .. how can anyone still be a STAN for these 2 grifters????


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I hate that "*do you know who I am*" sh-t.  It took me years to get over that with Reese Witherspoon and the drunk driving arrest
> Good for you CeeJay



When I am asked that question, the answer is always no 

I am glad you didn't take that crap, CeeJay!


----------



## sdkitty

according to People magazine, her sources say they are in a secluded compound in LA
also that she got a job narrating an Disney elephant documentary.  and that Harry is not looking back......very flattering since his father is ill as well his grandfather

*eghan Markle and Prince Harry Have Left Canada and Are Now Settled in L.A.*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have moved to Los Angeles

By Monique Jessen, Simon Perry and Erin Hill 
March 26, 2020 05:10 PM
Each product we feature has been independently selected and reviewed by our editorial team. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.
FBTweet

Current Time 0:27
/
Duration 1:52
Loaded: 80.25%





YOU MIGHT LIKE

MEMBERS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY HAVE LEFT LONDON TO SELF-ISOLATE AMID OFFICIAL UK LOCKDOWN
×
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left Vancouver Island in Canada for the U.S., a source tells PEOPLE.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex moved from the home they were staying in on Vancouver Island and are now settled in the U.S., the source says. They are in Los Angeles — Meghan’s hometown. They have been living in a secluded compound and haven’t ventured out amid the coronavirus pandemic.

A representative for the couple had no comment.

Although the couple and their 10-month-old son Archie had been living in Canada since announcing they were stepping back from their royal roles in January, sources told PEOPLE that they had been making plans to spend time in L.A.

Meghan, 38, has a big support system in L.A., including her mother Doria Ragland, who works as a social worker and yoga instructor, and several friends who visited the couple on Vancouver Island.


A person in their circle previously told PEOPLE that they were “looking at houses in L.A.”

*RELATED: Prince William, Kate Middleton, Queen Elizabeth and All of U.K. Now on Official Lockdown*

“Harry is looking straight ahead at his future with his family,” another source said. “They will be spending time in California…He’s not looking back.”






Prince Harry and Meghan Markle

DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS/AFP VIA GETTY
On Wednesday, it was announced that Harry’s father Prince Charles, 71, tested positive for the coronavirus.

Prince Charles has spoken to his sons Prince William and Prince Harry to share the news of his positive coronavirus diagnosis, the palace confirms.

*RELATED: When Did Prince Charles Last See His Mother the Queen Before Testing Positive for Coronavirus?*





KARWAI TANG/WIREIMAGE
Charles was last with his sons William and Harry in public on March 9 at the annual Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey. The event marked Harry and wife Meghan Markle’s last official royal event in the U.K. before they officially step down as senior working royals on March 31.






The royal family on March 9

PHIL HARRIS/POOL/AFP VIA GETTY
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared messages of support amid the coronavirus pandemic.

“These are uncertain times. And now, more than ever, we need each other. We need each other for truth, for support, and to feel less alone during a time that can honestly feel quite scary,” they wrote on Instagram last week. “There are so many around the world who need support right now, who are working tirelessly to respond to this crisis behind the scenes, on the frontline, or at home. Our willingness, as a people, to step up in the face of what we are all experiencing with COVID-19 is awe-inspiring. This moment is as true a testament there is to the human spirit.”

_*Can’t get enough of *_*PEOPLE*_*‘s Royals coverage? Sign up for our free Royals newsletter to get the latest updates on Kate Middleton, Meghan Markle and more!*_

On Monday, they paid tribute to healthcare workers in a post, saying: “Around the world, the response from people in every walk of life, to protect and look out for their communities has been inspiring. None more so than the brave and dedicated healthcare workers on the frontline, risking their own well-being to care for the sick and fight COVID-19. Wherever you are in the world, we are all incredibly grateful.”

Meghan’s first post-royal gig was announced on Thursday. The Duchess of Sussex has provided the narration for the upcoming Disneynature documentary, _Elephants_, streaming on April 3 on Disney+.


----------



## LittleStar88

Tivo said:


> I think Meghan is bored and anxious.
> The Hollywood offers aren’t rolling in the way she wants.
> And why would they? Hollywood is nothing but social climbers and with that stupid Marvel story she’s basically told the actors/actresses that she’s coming for their jobs.
> 
> ETA
> I also feel Meghan is one of those people who is always “in the process of” when it comes to doing anything.
> Has she ever seen a project through to the end?
> What are her accomplishments?



She can play someone's mom. Since Aunt Becky has been tied up with possible jail time, Hallmark Channel could use a new mom-type.


----------



## Chagall

People coming from the states (Canadians) since the border was closed have to self isolate for a full two weeks. I assume the reverse would be true. Wonder if Megan and her side kick are adhering to this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> When I am asked that question, the answer is always no
> 
> I am glad you didn't take that crap, CeeJay!


Actually, when Kyle Richards pulled that crap with me (the Gelson's incident), I said to her "_yes, sadly .. and YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED at your behavior .. being such a PUBLIC FIGURE and all_"!!!  I guess all those years in the Debate Club really did pay off for me because I'm actually at my best when standing on my two feet and get sh#t like that!!  I always warn people not to get into a verbal spar with me ..


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> First of all, to answer all your questions in regards to *WHO got the earrings*?!?! .. c'mon now, who do you think??? .. *ME, ME and ME*!!!  [Like I would let Gwynnie have them - HA!!


Can you post a pic of them? 

And YAY for you, cannot stand Goopy even if there's a candle that smells like her hey-nanoo-nanoo. She is a real piece of work.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I hate that "do you know who I am" sh-t.  It took me years to get over that with Reese Witherspoon and the drunk driving arrest
> Good for you CeeJay


I never saw Reese in the same way again; just another dumb celeb that doesn't know when to keep their mouth shut.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I don't like her but I also don't put much stock in a blind item


Yeah, but she wore that smirk the entire time she was in the UK for the Commonwealth event so I wouldn't be surprised if that thought doesn't bubble to the top occasionally.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I never saw Reese in the same way again; just another dumb celeb that doesn't know when to keep their mouth shut.


that really turned me off but I recently watched Big Little Lies and liked her in that.  so I guess I'm somewhat over being mad at her


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> that really turned me off but I recently watched Big Little Lies and liked her in that.  so I guess I'm somewhat over being mad at her


I like her in BLL also,, but she's showed her true colors. Plus she played a entitled, cheating brat so ...


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Totally off topic but the other day my husband (who pays attention to nothing) said “Do you think Gwyneth Paltrow is mad she didn’t come up with the term “social distancing”


Wow is he smart of what!  He's right since GP came up with the term conscious uncoupling!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Comment in The Telegraph UK today :

*William, Harry, and coronavirus: A tale of two royal brothers and their reactions to a crisis*
While the Sussexes head to LA, the Cambridges are bolstering under pressure staff during the coronavirus pandemic
_By_Camilla Tominey,  ASSOCIATE EDITOR 27 March 2020 •

"The moment could not have been more emblematic of the divide between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the rest of the Royal family.

As Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis were being filmed joining in a national round of applause for NHS heroes, Harry and Meghan were more than 5,000-miles away, posting clapping emoji on Instagram from their new base in California.

“Thank you for all that you continue to do,” read the message on the Sussex Royal Instagram story. “Applauding you from across the pond.”

While obviously well meaning, the digital communiqué appeared a little hollow compared to the heartwarming sight of the three Cambridge children, aged six, four and one, taking part in the #ClapForOurCarers initiative just a day after their own grandfather, Prince Charles, announced he too had tested positive for Covid-19.

Having boarded one of the last flights into the US from Canada, where they have been staying on Vancouver Island since splitting from the Firm, the exiled couple are now in their own form of self-imposed royal isolation in Los Angeles.

Friends say they are staying at a secluded compound in the Hollywood area of Meghan’s home town, where she has a support system including her mother Doria, who was spotted walking her dogs on Thursday.

One source told the US magazine, People: “Harry is looking straight ahead at his future with his family. They will be spending time in California… he’s not looking back.”

The move has not only left their nearest and dearest “stunned and horrified”, having thought they might return with their 10-month-old son Archie to be with their relatives during the global pandemic, Canadians are also up in arms, accusing them of using the Commonwealth country as a “smokescreen” for their long-planned assault on America.

Some are now starting to question whether they ever had any intention of supporting Queen and Commonwealth, or always had their sights firmly fixed on Hollywood.

Yet with coronavirus dominating the airwaves both in the UK and the US – where more people are now infected than the 81,000 in China – the couple’s Stateside relaunch, which once promised fireworks, now appears in danger of turning into more of a damp squib, as the March 31 deadline signalling their formal royal exit fast approaches.

They undeniably have an impregnable and enthusiastic fan base in Meghan’s native country, but is anyone going to take much notice while the US is clocking up the most cases of coronavirus in the world...? 

If their latest efforts are anything to go by, they stand little chance of winning the battle of the headlines in the UK either, not least with William, 37, and Kate, 38, regarded as “playing a blinder” in their absence.

And whether the couples like it or not, comparisons are certainly being made (which perhaps explains why so many of the Sussexes’ online updates are still coinciding with their brother and sister-in-law’s royal activities).

As Harry announced the postponement of the Invictus Games, the Cambridges were being lauded for making a “real” difference by making a morale-boosting visit to a 111 call centre. Dressed in a pink trouser suit from Marks and Spencer, the future queen told hard-pressed staff: “It’s amazing. You’re doing such a great job bringing everyone together and providing that, the support system for the whole public.”

William, himself a former air ambulance pilot who has worked on the front line, later praised the health service as representing “the very best of our country and society”, as he thanked staff on behalf of the Royal family. Although the couple faced some criticism from those who felt their presence was a distraction, the general consensus was that they were right to do their bit.

Sources close to the couple say they will continue to offer support and are liaising with the Government and their charities in a bid to decide when and where they would be most “useful”. With the Queen self-isolating at Windsor Castle and the heir to the throne in quarantine at Birkhall on the Balmoral estate in Scotland, the Cambridges are now at the top of the royal roll call.

But observers cannot fail to have noticed how depleted the Royal family now looks without the Sussexes on side. As a former Army captain who revels in rolling up his sleeves in a crisis, the outbreak would have provided Harry with the perfect opportunity to do what he does best – geeing up the public in the face of adversity.

Remember the flood relief efforts in 2014, when the royal brothers donned waterproofs and waders to help the Household Cavalry unload sandbags from military trucks?

Instead the 35-year-old royal, who twice fought for Queen and country in Afghanistan, has been reduced to sharing the World Health Organisation’s online advice and inviting fans to share their feelings via a rather trite: “Today I Feel…” Instagram post. They had hoped to create a “community” around coronavirus but instead appear to have sparked a controversy with what one critic described as meaningless “word salad”, rather than affirmative action.

Meanwhile, Meghan, 38, being signed up to narrate the new Disney documentary Elephant – after Harry touted her talents to executive chairman, Bob Iger – has only served to make their efforts to appear one of “us” rather than one of “them” seem even more cynical.

Summing up the mood among royal watchers, Joe Little, editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, said: “From the time they said they were going to Canada, I always saw it as a stopgap for them hopping over the border – a softener because it was a Commonwealth country.

“While some are saying they’ve only gone to the US to escape coronavirus, it doesn’t make sense. Surely you would be much safer on Vancouver Island than in LA? This was always about Meghan being back on her patch and that master plan is now in place.”

Agreeing that Harry “would certainly have mucked in and done everything he could to help”, Little added: “But now he is in a different world. From Wednesday they will no longer be working members of the Royal family, so we have to start looking at them in a different way. They have got their own agenda, which is such a shame when you consider how useful they could have been to the British monarchy at this time of national emergency.”

“You have to give something back, you can’t just sit there,” Harry famously insisted in an echo of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales when speaking about his Army training. Having passed out of Sandhurst with flying colours, he appeared the epitome of the military academy’s motto: “Serve to lead.”

Yet as he and Meghan embark on a new life in America, fans will be hoping that the newly rebranded Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not forget the royal roots that helped Harry to become one of the most effective campaigners of his generation."


----------



## Straight-Laced

Mrs.Z said:


> Totally off topic but the other day my husband (who pays attention to nothing) said “Do you think Gwyneth Paltrow is mad she didn’t come up with the term “social distancing”


lol "_conscious distancing_"


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I like her in BLL also,, but she's showed her true colors. Plus she played a entitled, cheating brat so ...


I know
I haven't forgotten what she did, just got over it for the most part


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Comment in The Telegraph UK today :
> 
> *William, Harry, and coronavirus: A tale of two royal brothers and their reactions to a crisis*
> While the Sussexes head to LA, the Cambridges are bolstering under pressure staff during the coronavirus pandemic
> _By_Camilla Tominey,  ASSOCIATE EDITOR 27 March 2020 •
> 
> "The moment could not have been more emblematic of the divide between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the rest of the Royal family.
> 
> As Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis were being filmed joining in a national round of applause for NHS heroes, Harry and Meghan were more than 5,000-miles away, posting clapping emoji on Instagram from their new base in California.
> 
> “Thank you for all that you continue to do,” read the message on the Sussex Royal Instagram story. “Applauding you from across the pond.”
> 
> While obviously well meaning, the digital communiqué appeared a little hollow compared to the heartwarming sight of the three Cambridge children, aged six, four and one, taking part in the #ClapForOurCarers initiative just a day after their own grandfather, Prince Charles, announced he too had tested positive for Covid-19.
> 
> Having boarded one of the last flights into the US from Canada, where they have been staying on Vancouver Island since splitting from the Firm, the exiled couple are now in their own form of self-imposed royal isolation in Los Angeles.
> 
> Friends say they are staying at a secluded compound in the Hollywood area of Meghan’s home town, where she has a support system including her mother Doria, who was spotted walking her dogs on Thursday.
> 
> One source told the US magazine, People: “Harry is looking straight ahead at his future with his family. They will be spending time in California… he’s not looking back.”
> 
> The move has not only left their nearest and dearest “stunned and horrified”, having thought they might return with their 10-month-old son Archie to be with their relatives during the global pandemic, Canadians are also up in arms, accusing them of using the Commonwealth country as a “smokescreen” for their long-planned assault on America.
> 
> Some are now starting to question whether they ever had any intention of supporting Queen and Commonwealth, or always had their sights firmly fixed on Hollywood.
> 
> Yet with coronavirus dominating the airwaves both in the UK and the US – where more people are now infected than the 81,000 in China – the couple’s Stateside relaunch, which once promised fireworks, now appears in danger of turning into more of a damp squib, as the March 31 deadline signalling their formal royal exit fast approaches.
> 
> They undeniably have an impregnable and enthusiastic fan base in Meghan’s native country, but is anyone going to take much notice while the US is clocking up the most cases of coronavirus in the world...?
> 
> If their latest efforts are anything to go by, they stand little chance of winning the battle of the headlines in the UK either, not least with William, 37, and Kate, 38, regarded as “playing a blinder” in their absence.
> 
> And whether the couples like it or not, comparisons are certainly being made (which perhaps explains why so many of the Sussexes’ online updates are still coinciding with their brother and sister-in-law’s royal activities).
> 
> As Harry announced the postponement of the Invictus Games, the Cambridges were being lauded for making a “real” difference by making a morale-boosting visit to a 111 call centre. Dressed in a pink trouser suit from Marks and Spencer, the future queen told hard-pressed staff: “It’s amazing. You’re doing such a great job bringing everyone together and providing that, the support system for the whole public.”
> 
> William, himself a former air ambulance pilot who has worked on the front line, later praised the health service as representing “the very best of our country and society”, as he thanked staff on behalf of the Royal family. Although the couple faced some criticism from those who felt their presence was a distraction, the general consensus was that they were right to do their bit.
> 
> Sources close to the couple say they will continue to offer support and are liaising with the Government and their charities in a bid to decide when and where they would be most “useful”. With the Queen self-isolating at Windsor Castle and the heir to the throne in quarantine at Birkhall on the Balmoral estate in Scotland, the Cambridges are now at the top of the royal roll call.
> 
> But observers cannot fail to have noticed how depleted the Royal family now looks without the Sussexes on side. As a former Army captain who revels in rolling up his sleeves in a crisis, the outbreak would have provided Harry with the perfect opportunity to do what he does best – geeing up the public in the face of adversity.
> 
> Remember the flood relief efforts in 2014, when the royal brothers donned waterproofs and waders to help the Household Cavalry unload sandbags from military trucks?
> 
> Instead the 35-year-old royal, who twice fought for Queen and country in Afghanistan, has been reduced to sharing the World Health Organisation’s online advice and inviting fans to share their feelings via a rather trite: “Today I Feel…” Instagram post. They had hoped to create a “community” around coronavirus but instead appear to have sparked a controversy with what one critic described as meaningless “word salad”, rather than affirmative action.
> 
> Meanwhile, Meghan, 38, being signed up to narrate the new Disney documentary Elephant – after Harry touted her talents to executive chairman, Bob Iger – has only served to make their efforts to appear one of “us” rather than one of “them” seem even more cynical.
> 
> Summing up the mood among royal watchers, Joe Little, editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, said: “From the time they said they were going to Canada, I always saw it as a stopgap for them hopping over the border – a softener because it was a Commonwealth country.
> 
> “While some are saying they’ve only gone to the US to escape coronavirus, it doesn’t make sense. Surely you would be much safer on Vancouver Island than in LA? This was always about Meghan being back on her patch and that master plan is now in place.”
> 
> Agreeing that Harry “would certainly have mucked in and done everything he could to help”, Little added: “But now he is in a different world. From Wednesday they will no longer be working members of the Royal family, so we have to start looking at them in a different way. They have got their own agenda, which is such a shame when you consider how useful they could have been to the British monarchy at this time of national emergency.”
> 
> “You have to give something back, you can’t just sit there,” Harry famously insisted in an echo of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales when speaking about his Army training. Having passed out of Sandhurst with flying colours, he appeared the epitome of the military academy’s motto: “Serve to lead.”
> 
> Yet as he and Meghan embark on a new life in America, fans will be hoping that the newly rebranded Duke and Duchess of Sussex will not forget the royal roots that helped Harry to become one of the most effective campaigners of his generation."


This doesn't seem to be working out very well for "H".  IDK if he's just following her or if this was what they both wanted but it's making him look bad and maybe making him feel irrelevant.  Sad really


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Does anyone know the location of the house/neighborhood? I just saw the report today that they'd relocated to LA, so is this their own home they purchased or another rental/loaner? My first ever telecommute week is finally over so this is the first time I got to read some MM and H gossip


----------



## V0N1B2

.


----------



## Annawakes

***Whose*** secluded compound??  I’m dying to know too!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

*https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/why-harry-and-meghan-ditched-canada-for-california-c73892hwn*
*Why Harry and Meghan ditched Canada for California*
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have left Canada permanently to settle in California in part because of the question of how they will manage their security, The Times understands.

The couple, who had been living on Vancouver Islandsince announcing that they intended to step back from royal duties, are living in a temporary home near Los Angeles while they make arrangements for a permanent residence.

A source confirmed that the couple had always planned to make the move. They said last month that they would spend their time “in both the United Kingdom and North America”. They have acted more quickly because of the Canadian government’s decision to cease providing close protection officers and the spread of Covid-19 in Canada*.*

Bill Blair, Canada’s minister of public safety, said on February 28 that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police would wind down protection “in the coming weeks”. This was interpreted as meaning the end of March, when the duke and duchess will begin a 12-month transition period to a new relationship with Buckingham Palace.

Future security arrangements are undecided, but it would be easier for private bodyguards to carry weapons in the US than in Canada."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

They left for LA because Canada terminated their security costs. Grifters to the max these two. Shameful couple.


----------



## CeeJay

Secluded compound in Hollyweird - HA!!!! They must be in the hills because Hollywood itself (in the immortal words of Bette Davis), is A DUMP!!!  So much for the “privacy” BS these 2 grifters have been puking up, just wait until someone spills the beans about their location and then they will be on that infamous “celebrity homes map” that every rubbernecker bus will stop at!  Oh boy, what their reaction will be when they hear the driver talking over a megaphone about them .. and then all those cameras clicking away. If Hazza had issues with the British media, just wait!  Such an EPIC farce, and you bet I’m gonna do my part to spread the word ...


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> They undeniably have an impregnable and enthusiastic fan base in Meghan’s native country, but is anyone going to take much notice while the US is clocking up the most cases of coronavirus in the world...?


I always find it interesting that they keep on saying that we Americans are SO supportive of them because I have yet to find any that like these two!


----------



## CeeJay

Okay, I’m going to put this out there .. bets on a “reality” show with these two????


----------



## V0N1B2

Straight-Laced said:


> A source confirmed that the couple had always planned to make the move....*and the spread of Covid-19.*


1. We all already knew they planned all along to move to LA
2. The spread of Covid-19? Bish, please. How stupid do they think people are? That we can’t check stats? Let’s see... as of posting this, California has something like 3800 cases. BC has 792 (57 of them on Vancouver Island).  BC is over twice the size (in area) and has a population density of 13 people/sq.mile compared to California’s 253 people/sq.mile. 

Do I have to write it on a banana for her?


----------



## needlv

CeeJay said:


> Okay, I’m going to put this out there .. bets on a “reality” show with these two????



I literally said this to DH this morning!!  

We should be betting on what they are going to call it?

Let’s face it, the Sussexes are for $ale ....


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> First of all, to answer all your questions in regards to *WHO got the earrings*?!?! .. c'mon now, who do you think??? .. *ME, ME and ME*!!!  [Like I would let Gwynnie have them - HA!!



I’m back...  had to keep my full time job like I said, had to sleep as well....  most intrigued by your story CeeJay, love you for stepping up!  Hate watching a silent movie where the bad guys do what they want, please people always speak up and stand up for yourselves!!! Hate those two b!tches for acting bigger than thou and all, .  Love you for this!   As for Meghan and her minion and Archie moving to LA from canada, with her woos of COVID 19 and too much paparazzi- so predictable that if everything else about her is predictable as TPF has so far, then ... we already know the ending to this story.  It’s one of those stories where you have to watch the end to the beginning for a happy ending.  

CeeJay why can’t you give more details...  what did GOOPY say when you snatched the earrings back from her foolish arrogant prying hands.  It satisfies my heart when the bad guy loses....  Come on, we on lock down....


----------



## chowlover2

LittleStar88 said:


> She can play someone's mom. Since Aunt Becky has been tied up with possible jail time, Hallmark Channel could use a new mom-type.


I think Candace Cameron Bure will take Aunt Becky's place on the Hallmark channel.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't know there are many different forms of charity. I would like some clarification on what they all are. I thought charity means non-for-profit. But pease enlighten me!



There are different types of charities in the US, and even within these categories there are different ways of doing things... like social enterprises, nonprofit joint ventures, just a fiscal sponsorship, etc. I took her statement to mean it’s not going to be a charity in the most common understanding, which is a nonprofit that runs its own programs like Boys and Girls Club or Gates Foundation. It could just be a private family foundation that funds other charities.


----------



## arnott

Lodpah said:


> They left for LA because *Canada terminated their security costs*. Grifters to the max these two. Shameful couple.



GOOD!


----------



## Clearblueskies

They’re always so sneaky and underhand aren’t they?  Slinking here and there till the Duchess of Me gets what she wants.
It gives the lie to Harry’s claim he’s protecting his child - who the hell moves their baby away from a safe area just to be nearer their publicists?  I didn’t think my opinion of these two could get any lower but here we are.
The Queen should strip them of the Sussex title, and Meghan of the HRH, pronto.  They can’t be trusted not to abuse it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> There are different types of charities in the US, and even within these categories there are different ways of doing things... like social enterprises, nonprofit joint ventures, just a fiscal sponsorship, etc. I took her statement to mean it’s not going to be a charity in the most common understanding, which is a nonprofit that runs its own programs like Boys and Girls Club or Gates Foundation. It could just be a private family foundation that funds other charities.


I get that. Again my question is rhetorical. It doesn't matter how you run it, a charity is a charity. Like any other businesses, there a million ways to run something. But ultimately a charity has some fundamental rules one has to follow. My point is that they are just so desperate to be above it all while really they are not. This kind of message they put out screams desperate attention seeking, making a headline out of absolutely trivial things.


----------



## Chagall

Civil alert:
Travelers returning to Ontario are required by law to self isolate for 14 days.
-do not visit family or friends
-do not visit stores
-do not be around other people
Wherever H and M are I hope they are following these instructions strictly despite their ‘specialness’ as I am sure the US requires this also.


----------



## chicinthecity777

And what happened to people magazine? Are they now H&M's payroll? I don't subscribe it but my Samsung phone has a default notification for their headlines. I thought they were half decent until now. Are they just like any other tabloids now?


----------



## mdcx

I think Meghan has had her PR planting stories in People mag for a while now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

Flatsy said:


> You are right on the money about so many things! Looking back at some of the earlier pages of this thread around the time of the wedding, it's uncanny how accurate your predictions were.  I didn't agree back then, but wow were you right.
> 
> Anyway, you hit the nail on the head here too.  I'll include Harry and say that the Sussexes are always in a frenzy of gonna, gonna, gonna, but then drop almost everything and come up with a brand new list of gonnas.  I think the only thing they followed through on was renovating a house and moving in - which was a necessity because they needed a place to live.  And obviously, they abandoned the place 8 months later...


Thank you! 
I don’t think Meghan is very difficult to read tho. she’s a terrible actress.


----------



## 1LV

I wouldn’t be surprised if MM hauls her smarmy butt back to the UK w/Harry & Archie in tow as the transition period winds down if things (publicity & starring roles) don’t increase significantly.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> Okay, I’m going to put this out there .. bets on a “reality” show with these two????


She will do anything to stay in the limelight.

I am actually getting bored reading and commenting about them.  He is no longer royalty, she is just another smug almost forty something actress trying to make it a second time.  What is Harry going to take two bit parts in movies?  These two don't deserve our attention or energy.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I always find it interesting that they keep on saying that we Americans are SO supportive of them because I have yet to find any that like these two!



There are Americans who like them and it’s because they don’t know any of the details. They remember the wedding and think H&M are so in love and they were treated badly in the UK because that’s how the American media portrayed it. It’s still rare to find a really critical article about them in the US.


----------



## kemilia

imgg said:


> She will do anything to stay in the limelight.
> 
> I am actually getting bored reading and commenting about them.  He is no longer royalty, she is just another smug almost forty something actress trying to make it a second time.  What is Harry going to take two bit parts in movies?  These two don't deserve our attention or energy.


I do want to see this compound they're squatting in. No way they can afford Cali prices or rent. Oof, I forgot the TAXES.


----------



## LittleStar88

They’re like two kids who just moved away from mom and dad, making impulsive decisions and not understanding how to think through repercussions or what those repercussions and other responsibilities may be as a result of their decisions. 

I can see Bravo trying to cast her for RHOBH. California is filled with people like them and they will eventually fade into the background.

Cost of living and taxes will eat them alive if they don’t start bringing in some serious revenue soon. The lifestyle they have decided they require is not going to be cheap.


----------



## bag-mania

I expect TMZ will figure out where they’re squatting quickly enough.  The thing is, with the coronavirus pandemic, where Harry and Meghan are living isn’t a top-tier celebrity story for them. I’m sure they’ll get around to reporting it when they can.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I expect TMZ will figure out where they’re squatting quickly enough.  The thing is, with the coronavirus pandemic, where Harry and Meghan are living isn’t a top-tier celebrity story for them. I’m sure they’ll get around to reporting it when they can.



Wherever it is, probably another freeloading rent-free gig. At what point does it become a taxable benefit?


----------



## mrsinsyder

imgg said:


> *I am actually getting bored reading and commenting about them.*  He is no longer royalty, she is just another smug almost forty something actress trying to make it a second time.  What is Harry going to take two bit parts in movies?  These two don't deserve our attention or energy.


I agree. DM had a long article today about Megxit and it really shows how disgusting these two are. They could wind up richer than Jeff Bezos and they’d still be shameful grifters IMO. 

Their stans really have egg on their faces... they believed this whole “press intrusion” and racism nonsense then they pack up and move to the home of the paparazzi where there are very few restrictions on the press. These two want fame, money, and nothing more.


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> Wherever it is, probably another freeloading rent-free gig. At what point does it become a taxable benefit?


At what point do they start to feel some embarrassment at always being on the cadge for a favour?


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Wherever it is, probably another freeloading rent-free gig. At what point does it become a taxable benefit?



Who would be so generous to them and for what purpose? Supposedly they are staying where they are now while they are looking for a home to buy. I guess Charles will be footing the bill for that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Who would be so generous to them and for what purpose? Supposedly they are staying where they are now while they are looking for a home to buy. I guess Charles will be footing the bill for that.


Charles via the Duchy via the taxpayer.


----------



## PewPew

kemilia said:


> I do want to see this compound they're squatting in. No way they can afford Cali prices or rent. Oof, I forgot the TAXES.



Whatever problems H&M face, it will be because of their shared illness (foot-in-mouth disease) affecting public opinion, not money imo.

Taxes unfortunately won’t be a problem. Separate from what they get from Charles & the taxpayers (via the Duchy & QE2), they have a combined net worth of over $55 million (Harry got $40million + 25 years interest/investments from Diana, plus jewels, plus money from the Queen mum, plus Meghan’s money). They have fantastic accountants & money managers on both sides of the pond for both personal use and their “charity”. Corporations like Apple and Amazon, & business leaders with far less wealth get away with paying tiny amounts of taxes by various means.

Btw the UK taxpayers actually WILL still be paying towards H&M’s security, but QE2 won’t let it be the $20million/year they “need”. (Charles can’t pay for it with his “mere” $100million fortune). In 2016, one report estimated UK taxpayers funding $100+million per annum on protecting 130 members of the extended BRF. 

The exact figure is unclear because the Palace says “we cannot discuss matters of security, but Parliament provides for funds to protect the Monarchy”. (This is part of the “bloat” Charles is charged with reducing for the next generation). But currently since QE2’s second cousin gets a guard for his international holidays, Mr. 6th in Line certainly will b/c it’s bad for the UK if the Queen’s relative is abducted. (“Just call me Harry” knows that *basic* security funds have nothing to do with whether they are senior working royals.)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Clearblueskies said:


> At what point do they start to feel some embarrassment at always being on the cadge for a favour?



Never.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> They’re always so sneaky and underhand aren’t they?  Slinking here and there till the Duchess of Me gets what she wants.
> It gives the lie to Harry’s claim he’s protecting his child - who the hell moves their baby away from a safe area just to be nearer their publicists?  I didn’t think my opinion of these two could get any lower but here we are.
> The Queen should strip them of the Sussex title, and Meghan of the HRH, pronto.  They can’t be trusted not to abuse it.


queen is probably hoping H will come back to the fold eventually


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I do want to see this compound they're squatting in. No way they can afford Cali prices or rent. Oof, I forgot the TAXES.


well if they invested their $30 mil and budgeted.....but of course she didn't marry him to do that


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I agree. DM had a long article today about Megxit and it really shows how disgusting these two are. They could wind up richer than Jeff Bezos and they’d still be shameful grifters IMO.
> 
> Their stans really have egg on their faces... they believed this whole “press intrusion” and racism nonsense then they pack up and move to the home of the paparazzi where there are very few restrictions on the press. These two want fame, money, and nothing more.


I'm sure the stans still believe it


----------



## sdkitty

the US media is still putting a positive spin on everything they do.  From Vanit Fair:
after months of rumors that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were California-bound, reports emerged Thursday that the couple recently left Canada and arrived in Los Angeles. According to _People,_ Meghan and Harry are in a secluded compound and have not left because of the coronavirus crisis.

A friend of the couple’s confirmed the move to the _Sun,_ noting that they left before non-essential travel between the United States and Canada was restricted starting March 21. “Harry and Meghan have left Canada now for good. The borders were closing and flights were stopping. They had to get out,” the source said. “But this move was planned for some time. They realized Canada would not work out for various reasons and they want to be based in the Los Angeles area.”

The _Sun_’s source added that the couple chose Los Angeles because of their connections there. Meghan was raised in the city and her mother, Doria Ragland still lives there. “They have a big support network there,” the insider said. “It’s where their new team of Hollywood agents and PRs and business managers are based. Meghan has lots of friends there and, of course, her mum Doria.”
The move also comes as Canada becomes less hospitable and Meghan’s Hollywood career heats up. Last month, the Canadian government announced that as of April 1, they would no longer fund any of Meghan and Harry’s security costs, nor would they provide RCMP officers to assist the Metropolitan Police force assigned to the couple.

This week, Meghan’s long-rumored elephant documentary with Disney was officially confirmed. She has provided narration for _Elephant,_ about a pack that migrates across Africa, and it will come to Disney+ on April 3. Though some other rumors about Meghan’s future have been debunked, a source told the _Sun_ that her career would be unfolding in California. “For Meghan, this type of work is going to be coming out of Hollywood going forward,” the insider said. “She feels comfortable there around her people and has projects already planned like her children’s book.”

When the couple left the U.K. after their farewell tour earlier this month, they had plans to return for engagements over the next few months. Slowly but surely, those events have been canceled. First, Harry had planned to return for the London Marathon on April 4, before it was called off. He had also planned on visiting the Netherlands for the 2020 Invictus Games in May, but last week he announced that they would be postponed to 2021 in a video from his webcam.

Finally, the couple had planned to bring their son Archie Mountbatten-Windsor to visit his great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth at Balmoral and to stand on the balcony for Trooping the Colour, but on Friday, the palace announced that the queen’s birthday parade had been canceled “in its traditional form.”

Since they announced their desire to step down as senior royals in January, the couple has been dropping hints about their next move. As recently as February, they said that plans for a non-profit organization would be coming soon. Now that coronavirus has altered the work habits and travel plans of so many around the world, it’s not clear when that announcement will actually happen.


----------



## LittleStar88

I feel like they will burn through $55 million since it appears more money is going out than coming in. Like lottery winners who end up broke in a few years having blown through tens of millions.

H&M’s payroll and expenses must be huge. Unless everything is being comped to them. And I’m sure the folks working in the background on this nonsense are only in it for the possible cash cow opportunity, too. But as more time passes, they shuffle closer and closer to being a couple of people no one really cares about anymore.

As for taxes. Upon moving to the US, do they pay US and U.K. taxes? Being so high profile I’m thinking they probably can’t get away with creative write-offs with the increased risk of being audited. I’m guessing they have some kind of creative banking strategy, too?


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> Wherever it is, probably another freeloading rent-free gig. At what point does it become a taxable benefit?



This is an excellent question.  I have no idea about Canadian law, but in the U.S., if someone is not charging fair market value rent for a property, the property can lose its classification as rental property and the owner would lose all the related tax deductions, except for mortgage interest and property taxes.  The IRS also requires that the fair market value of the rent _that should have been received_ be included as taxable rental income for that year, even if the owner never receives a dime of it.  But, this is for property classified as rental property, which is unlikely in the case of the Vancouver mansion or whatever Malibu mansion MM and Harry are currently occupying. 

So, if MM and Harry are instead occupying a house that is considered a private residence and not classified as rental property, it gets more complicated.  You can have your friends stay with you and there is no law against that and nobody is going to run around and check who paid what to whom and when. However, when you let someone live in an extremely expensive piece of property for months, rent free, likely with some kind of written agreement in place, and you no longer have the use of your own property . . then there are some interesting issues. The use of the property, rent free, could be considered a gift to MM and Harry and subject to gift taxes and require the filing of a gift tax return by the owner. So, a complication for the owner of the property and a potential big tax bill depending on how it is handled and how long they stay and what the agreement actually is between them.  Are they there for just a few weeks or 6 months?  Like I said in an earlier post . . . lots of money for CPAs will be handed over by both MM and Harry and the owners of wherever they are living.


----------



## Compass Rose

Expert Lurker here.....for the pure entertainment value.......


----------



## amandacasey

Fellow Canadian here. Not a huge royal enthusiast, not against them either though they do seem entitled and hypocritical. Guess I’m more against than I realized lol Just wanted to say, read an article a while ago asking “who will pay for their security?” Ummm how about they do? Does Kylie Jenner pay her own security? Yes. So they can too


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like they will burn through $55 million since it appears more money is going out than coming in. Like lottery winners who end up broke in a few years having blown through tens of millions.
> 
> H&M’s payroll and expenses must be huge. Unless everything is being comped to them. And I’m sure the folks working in the background on this nonsense are only in it for the possible cash cow opportunity, too. But as more time passes, they shuffle closer and closer to being a couple of people no one really cares about anymore.
> 
> As for taxes. Upon moving to the US, do they pay US and U.K. taxes? Being so high profile I’m thinking they probably can’t get away with creative write-offs with the increased risk of being audited. I’m guessing they have some kind of creative banking strategy, too?


I'm pretty sure people like David Foster and the Russian who loaned them a house are not old friends.  So what motivates them?  If public opinion goes south will these new "friends" disappear?  So far, in spite of what we see here on the PF, they seem to have the public (at at least the media) on their side.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m so tired of celebs writing Children’s books.  I feel like it undermines actual authors ability to be successful in something they worked at for many years.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> This is an excellent question.  I have no idea about Canadian law, but in the U.S., if someone is not charging fair market value rent for a property, the property can lose its classification as rental property and the owner would lose all the related tax deductions, except for mortgage interest and property taxes.  The IRS also requires that the fair market value of the rent _that should have been received_ be included as taxable rental income for that year, even if the owner never receives a dime of it.  But, this is for property classified as rental property, which is unlikely in the case of the Vancouver mansion or whatever Malibu mansion MM and Harry are currently occupying.
> 
> So, if MM and Harry are instead occupying a house that is considered a private residence and not classified as rental property, it gets more complicated.  You can have your friends stay with you and there is no law against that and nobody is going to run around and check who paid what to whom and when. However, when you let someone live in an extremely expensive piece of property for months, rent free, likely with some kind of written agreement in place, and you no longer have the use of your own property . . then there are some interesting issues. The use of the property, rent free, could be considered a gift to MM and Harry and subject to gift taxes and require the filing of a gift tax return by the owner. So, a complication for the owner of the property and a potential big tax bill depending on how it is handled and how long they stay and what the agreement actually is between them.  Are they there for just a few weeks or 6 months?  Like I said in an earlier post . . . lots of money for CPAs will be handed over by both MM and Harry and the owners of wherever they are living.



Sounds like their life is so much more difficult and complicated than it needs to be. I still don’t understand what they’re doing, what is their plan... I actually feel exhausted at the prospect of it all.

so.... I have a former boss who is the CEO of a private company and receives a small salary BUT his expensive home, car, home expenses, etc are run through the business as business expense, clearly to dodge higher taxes... This is kinda what H&M plan to do?


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Wow is he smart of what!  He's right since GP came up with the term conscious uncoupling!


She didn't even come up with the phrase.  Katherine Woodward Thomas wrote a book or something, and it's her term, but G   is so famous, she gets the credit. 


CeeJay said:


> Secluded compound in Hollyweird - HA!!!! They must be in the hills because Hollywood itself (in the immortal words of Bette Davis), is A DUMP!!!  So much for the “privacy” BS these 2 grifters have been puking up, just wait until someone spills the beans about their location and then they will be on that infamous “celebrity homes map” that every rubbernecker bus will stop at!  Oh boy, what their reaction will be when they hear the driver talking over a megaphone about them .. and then all those cameras clicking away. If Hazza had issues with the British media, just wait!  Such an EPIC farce, and you bet I’m gonna do my part to spread the word ...


I love when you tell us about LA neighbourhoods, so all your speculation about where they're living is welcome!


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> so.... I have a former boss who is the CEO of a private company and receives a small salary BUT his expensive home, car, home expenses, etc are run through the business as business expense, clearly to dodge higher taxes... This is kinda what H&M plan to do?



He's playing a dangerous game.  If the IRS doesn't pick up on how he can afford to live in the neighborhood he live in on that salary, then he could easily be reported by relatives, former employees, or whoever and then they will go back _years _and when there is intent to defraud, not just a one time mistake, I don't know how he or his wife sleep at night.


----------



## rose60610

I'm wondering when one or both will appear on Dancing with the Stars. If their Tinseltown Dreams of Grandeur don't pan out it'll be the last stop before their groveling, bootlicking slither-crawl back to Frogmore where they'll leverage orchestrated pity for meal-ticket-Archie. After she finds out her shelf life has expired, Meghan will create a sob story that they were persecuted by American paparazzi so they must return to safety and refuge for Archie's sake.  Even Princess Lee Radziwill had her sister Jackie Kennedy to sponge money and fame off of after Prince Radziwill dumped her. Meghan's only safety nets are Harry and Archie. Her acting chops need polishing before she tries to ingratiate a return to the Crown. Harry would be welcomed back, bridge-burner-Meghan not so much.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> He's playing a dangerous game.  If the IRS doesn't pick up on how he can afford to live in the neighborhood he live in on that salary, then he could easily be reported by relatives, former employees, or whoever and then they will go back _years _and when there is intent to defraud, not just a one time mistake, I don't know how he or his wife sleep at night.



He is a narcissistic sociopath and I would feel confident in saying the wife has no clue about the finances.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I wonder if H would be welcomed back though... I sort of think they might publicly let him live in Frogmore, but I don’t think he’d ever be let off the naughty step with out a ton of groveling to the rest of the family....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

“Canada became less hospitable”


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> I get that. Again my question is rhetorical. It doesn't matter how you run it, a charity is a charity. Like any other businesses, there a million ways to run something. But ultimately a charity has some fundamental rules one has to follow. My point is that they are just so desperate to be above it all while really they are not. This kind of message they put out screams desperate attention seeking, making a headline out of absolutely trivial things.



Imo, just run of the mill buzz building.  people don’t usually start ventures by telling people “it’s like any other (insert business type)”. Rather it’s “we’re starting a fresh take on (business type) that no one is doing now.” Etc


----------



## lalame

I don’t worry for these guys’ finances. $55m can afford them the best financial planners, investment managers, accountants, etc. They can certainly afford a good place in LA.

More worried about the taxpayer losing a dime to support these self-entitled wealthy people!!


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I'm pretty sure people like David Foster and the Russian who loaned them a house are not old friends.  So what motivates them?  If public opinion goes south will these new "friends" disappear?  So far, in spite of what we see here on the PF, they seem to have the public (at at least the media) on their side.



I thought they had to pay rent for the Russian oligarch’s home? If not there are a lot of reasons a wealthy businessman would want to do favors for a member for the royal family, and that’s exactly why royals need to pay for everything they get!


----------



## V0N1B2

A1aGypsy said:


> “Canada became less hospitable”


Yeah, it's true - they asked "are you okay?" instead of their regular "I'm sorry, are you okay?"


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Imo, just run of the mill buzz building.  people don’t usually start ventures by telling people “it’s like any other (insert business type)”. Rather it’s “we’re starting a fresh take on (business type) that no one is doing now.” Etc


Agreed! of course that's what they were doing. But I hope they are fooling no one.


----------



## kemilia

Clearblueskies said:


> At what point do they start to feel some embarrassment at always being on the cadge for a favour?


Her? Never.

Remember her whining about just existing while visiting one of the poorest places on the planet, she has no shame.

And this move to Cali makes me think she may jettison her sidekick sooner than I thought.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I wonder if Harry will enjoy living in LA, it will certainly be culture shock.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I mean, either his talk about PTSD and camera clicks was either b*sh*t or she doesn’t care about putting him into a stressful environment. Neither reflects well.

I’m still gobsmacked at their sense of entitlement.


----------



## maryg1

Just a thought since I don’t live in the USA...
Wouldn’t New York be seen as a better place to start a foundation or whatever it is?
I rarely associate Hollywood or L.A. in general with philanthropy work.
I’m not saying that L.A. people are not into philanthropy, but I think the main business there is show?
I don’t buy they’re moving there just because Doria lives there and they need to be near her during the pandemic (I actually hope they don’t meet each other, that would put all of them in danger).


----------



## redney

maryg1 said:


> Just a thought since I don’t live in the USA...
> Wouldn’t New York be seen as a better place to start a foundation or whatever it is?
> I rarely associate Hollywood or L.A. in general with philanthropy work.
> I’m not saying that L.A. people are not into philanthropy, but I think the main business there is show?
> I don’t buy they’re moving there just because Doria lives there and they need to be near her during the pandemic (I actually hope they don’t meet each other, that would put all of them in danger).


She's not serious about philanthropy. She's serious about her Hollywood/celeb aspirations.


----------



## arnott

A1aGypsy said:


> “Canada became less hospitable”



Who said that?


----------



## Clearblueskies

maryg1 said:


> Just a thought since I don’t live in the USA...
> Wouldn’t New York be seen as a better place to start a foundation or whatever it is?
> I rarely associate Hollywood or L.A. in general with philanthropy work.
> I’m not saying that L.A. people are not into philanthropy, but I think the main business there is show?
> I don’t buy they’re moving there just because Doria lives there and they need to be near her during the pandemic (I actually hope they don’t meet each other, that would put all of them in danger).


I’m not convinced Meghan is close to Doria, we haven’t seen any evidence of it since the wedding.  I think the “extensive support network” Meghan’s talking about in the pieces she’s placed in the press this week are the PR and agent types on her payroll.


----------



## A1aGypsy

arnott said:


> Who said that?



the Vanity Fair article up stream.


----------



## maryg1

A1aGypsy said:


> I mean, either his talk about PTSD and camera clicks was either b*sh*t or she doesn’t care about putting him into a stressful environment. Neither reflects well.
> 
> I’m still godsmacked at their sense of entitlement.


We’ll see if he was showing his true feelings or not, it’s just a matter of months.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

redney said:


> She's not serious about philanthropy. She's serious about her Hollywood/celeb aspirations.



Agree, that’s basically going to be their moneymaker. Though between LA and NYC I’d go NYC all the way! I feel like NYC (or surrounding area) is where celebs who _actually_ want privacy spend most of their time.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> I wonder if Harry will enjoy living in LA, it will certainly be culture shock.



He may love it. They will be considered a novelty to the  celebrities in the entertainment industry for a time. Somebody on their staff is probably already working on getting them a slot as presenters at a major award show for next year. They’ll get invited to some fancy celebrity parties, again as a novelty. Harry will get lots of shallow approval from the gossip media. Nobody here expects him to have any responsibilities or to do anything of substance. The media will be happy to repeat his trite and hypocritical quotes and never bother to look any deeper or call him out because H&M aren’t real news after all. They will be treated like any other LA celebrity, for entertainment purposes only.

The fly in the ointment is the pandemic came at exactly the wrong time for them. By the time they’re ready for their big arrival parties, Hollywood will still be in recovery mode. Projects will be months behind schedule, some will be cut entirely. All the important people they want to schmooze up to will be occupied with much bigger concerns than H&M. How sad!


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder when the “1 year review” is.  One year after their Instagram announcement, or April 1, 2021?


----------



## mshermes

She is most definitely not as smart as she thinks she is. Give her enough rope......


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> He may love it. They will be considered a novelty to the  celebrities in the entertainment industry for a time. Somebody on their staff is probably already working on getting them a slot as presenters at a major award show for next year. They’ll get invited to some fancy celebrity parties, again as a novelty. Harry will get lots of shallow approval from the gossip media. Nobody here expects him to have any responsibilities or to do anything of substance. The media will be happy to repeat his trite and hypocritical quotes and never bother to look any deeper or call him out because H&M aren’t real news after all. They will be treated like any other LA celebrity, for entertainment purposes only.
> 
> The fly in the ointment is the pandemic came at exactly the wrong time for them. By the time they’re ready for their big arrival parties, Hollywood will still be in recovery mode. Projects will be months behind schedule, some will be cut entirely. All the important people they want to schmooze up to will be occupied with much bigger concerns than H&M. How sad!


Everything seems to come at the wrong time for them, maybe it's karma, I dunno.
She's got to bide her time in California for what, six months (?) until she can file for divorce?
Also, if they left for California just before the border closed, then she's only got a few more days of self-quarantine left.  I'm counting on seeing some Starbucks papwalks by the end of next week.  There's no way she can be out of the spotlight physically until this is over.  They'll be long forgotten by then.  Known as the woman who married that red-haired guy from the royal family.
For the record, I don't think for one minute they're worth $55M.  I think, much like her education, acting credits and cooking skills, it's a tad inflated. JMO.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mshermes said:


> She is most definitely not as smart as she thinks she is. Give her enough rope......


This is true, and her impatience keeps tripping her up.


----------



## redney

V0N1B2 said:


> Everything seems to come at the wrong time for them, maybe it's karma, I dunno.
> She's got to bide her time in California for what, six months (?) until she can file for divorce?
> Also, if they left for California just before the border closed, then she's only got a few more days of self-quarantine left.  I'm counting on seeing some Starbucks papwalks by the end of next week.  There's no way she can be out of the spotlight physically until this is over.  They'll be long forgotten by then.  Known as the woman who married that red-haired guy from the royal family.
> For the record, I don't think for one minute they're worth $55M.  I think, much like her education, acting credits and cooking skills, it's a tad inflated. JMO.


She won't be the one to file for divorce. Gotta hang onto her prince - without him/his title (even if no HRH), he's her link to the full allowance from Chuck. Even if they did divorce and she got custody of that poor child, she'd only get half....

California has shelter in place orders. She'll get reamed for any pap walks.


----------



## shiba

So they left March 21st, does anyone know when H returned to Canada? I think it is about 50 pages back.... Interested to know if he spent his 14 days in isolation before hopping a flight.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LOL this’ll go well.


----------



## PewPew

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m so tired of celebs writing Children’s books.  I feel like it undermines actual authors ability to be successful in something they worked at for many years.



It’s such a low risk, high reward way for celebs to get good publicity— a book tour, talk shows, and book signings, without the work and drama of a memoir. They all have professional ghost writers (it’ll be obvious if Meghan tries to insert her “voice” given her propensity for word-salad nothingness.)



lalame said:


> I thought they had to pay rent for the Russian oligarch’s home? If not there are a lot of reasons a wealthy businessman would want to do favors for a member for the royal family, and that’s exactly why royals need to pay for everything they get!



Another reason to let high-profile people stay on your property is that they will remain linked to it in people’s minds. My mom used to work in real estate in a posh area, and many houses were touted as the home where X celebrity stayed during filming Y. Or the place where Z stayed after benders etc. One lady during a showing was nearly in tears when she found out Burt Reynolds stayed in one particular condo when filming one of her favorite movies. Even hotel rooms where a mega star stayed one night will get people excited. 

This Canadian property will forever be the famous (infamous?) place where H&M “changed history” by plotting to break free of the BRF blah blah blah. (Some of the places where The Duke of Windsor & Wallis Simpson stayed are still places of interest.)


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don’t worry for these guys’ finances. $55m can afford them the best financial planners, investment managers, accountants, etc. They can certainly afford a good place in LA.
> 
> More worried about the taxpayer losing a dime to support these self-entitled wealthy people!!


but a home in LA may not be enough for them.....they had said they wanted multiple homes.....maybe one is enough for now with the borders being closed


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> LOL this’ll go well.
> View attachment 4699169


Helllll to the NOOOO!  This will NOT happen and if it does (which it won’t) I will march on Washington. #freeloaders


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> She won't be the one to file for divorce. Gotta hang onto her prince - without him/his title (even if no HRH), he's her link to the full allowance from Chuck. Even if they did divorce and she got custody of that poor child, she'd only get half....
> 
> California has shelter in place orders. She'll get reamed for any pap walks.


I'd like to see her divorce him and find out no one is very interested in the ex-wife of a prince (or ex-prince).....maybe she can be roomies with Fergie


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> Helllll to the NOOOO!  This will NOT happen and if it does (which it won’t) I will march on Washington. #freeloaders


You know ***** would love nothing more than a chance to be petty! Doesn’t meghan know how to NOT burn bridges?


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> Helllll to the NOOOO!  This will NOT happen and if it does (which it won’t) I will march on Washington. #freeloaders


I see no way the US is responsible...he is a prince from another country and she's a US citizen/ex-actress.....does not compute


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muchstuff

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah, it's true - they asked "are you okay?" instead of their regular "I'm sorry, are you okay?"


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I'd like to see her divorce him and find out no one is very interested in the ex-wife of a prince (or ex-prince).....maybe she can be roomies with Fergie


Except Fergie is (was?) still living in the same house as *her* prince!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'd like to see her divorce him and find out no one is very interested in the ex-wife of a prince (or ex-prince).....maybe she can be roomies with Fergie



Fergie can help her with her children’s books since she’s already done that back in the 80s and 90s. Nothing Meghan comes up with is at all original.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Except Fergie is (was?) still living in the same house as *her* prince!


yes....kinda creepy with him basically being a pedophile and her saying the virus is revenge on all us sinners or something of the sort.  she did have a moment where she became buddies with Oprah and had success with weight watchers.  but I'd be willing to bet "M" thinks she's way more relevant and way more glamorous than Fergie.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Fergie can help her with her children’s books since she’s already done that back in the 80s and 90s. Nothing Meghan comes up with is at all original.


If she ever had an original idea it died of loneliness.


----------



## kipp

All over the place.  This PR stuff smells of desperation.  
https://www.inquisitr.com/5967718/meghan-markle-cookbook/
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-reportedly-154000878.html


----------



## bisousx

mrsinsyder said:


> You know ***** would love nothing more than a chance to be petty! Doesn’t meghan know how to NOT burn bridges?



Right? Good luck with that, he'll remember being snubbed and won't hesitate to remind everyone.
Then again.. I've finished watching Tiger King in one day and now looking for more trash reality to entertain me.


----------



## poopsie

kipp said:


> All over the place.  This PR stuff smells of desperation.
> https://www.inquisitr.com/5967718/meghan-markle-cookbook/
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-reportedly-154000878.html



She's heading into KarJenner territory


----------



## 1LV

Gotta love Gary Janetti.


----------



## redney

poopsie said:


> She's heading into KarJenner territory


Was just thinking I bet PMK has already been on the phone with her. Markle is right up PMK's alley!


----------



## Emeline

kipp said:


> All over the place.  This PR stuff smells of desperation.
> https://www.inquisitr.com/5967718/meghan-markle-cookbook/
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-reportedly-154000878.html


Good grief. Sounds like she has a stack of not very original ideas and she's tossing them out to see if there is any interest.
Another baby? I think the nanny team are already plenty busy raising Archie.


----------



## lalame

Even Kevin Kwan (author of Crazy Rich Asians) drags them .


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> You know ***** would love nothing more than a chance to be petty! *Doesn’t meghan know how to NOT burn bridges*?


That would be a big fat _no._


----------



## Lounorada

This might have been seen/posted before but had to share. A friend sent me this from Twitter a few days ago, made me laugh


----------



## Julide

1LV said:


> If she ever had an original idea it died of loneliness.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan and Harry broke up with the Queen over email: report*

A shocking new report claims that Prince Harry and Meghan Marklebroke up with the Queen — over email.

The millennials also ran roughshod over palace staff while they strove for a showbiz-based lifestyle and old fashioned notions like “family first” flew out the window as Archie has only met his cousins twice in his short life.

One royal insider told the Daily Mail, “Harry has given up everything, literally everything. He has burnt every single bridge back at home. And Meghan? Well, I rather think she’s got what she wanted…”

The “self-absorbed” couple were furious that Markle was branded “difficult and demanding” — especially after she made Kate Middleton cry during wedding preparations — even though Markle refused to kowtow to protocol.

“One of the earliest signs that Meghan was determined to do it her way occurred when the Queen invited her to Chester after her wedding in June 2018,” the Mail wrote. “The Queen’s powerful personal assistant, Angela Kelly, sent a message that Her Majesty would be wearing a hat — polite Palace code for ‘you should be wearing one too’.  The message came back that Meghan preferred to go bareheaded.”

Later came the news that Harry and Megan’s staff was turning over at an alarming rate for several reasons, including Markle’s penchant for emailing at all hours of the night and demanding instant gratification while freaking out about clothing allowances and home renovations.

One aggrieved royal insider told the Mail: “People had bent over backwards. They were given the wedding they wanted, house they wanted, office they wanted, the money they wanted, staff they wanted, tours they wanted and had the backing of their family. What more did they want?”

Meanwhile, William and Harry had fallen out after William questioned Harry’s decision to marry Markle so soon after they’d met.

Harry and Meghan felt ostracized — their only unity being each other.

“They felt that the institution only wanted to trot them out to exploit their popularity when convenient. Otherwise it wanted to constrain because it was jealous and threatened by their popularity,” a source told the Mail, while another said, “They felt the family just couldn’t handle them. They felt trapped and believed senior Establishment figures, including William, were trying to derail them.”

After a “summer of hell” Harry and Meghan went to tour Africa — and gave a disastrous interview to ITVbemoaning their emotional health. Soon after, they left for a “vacation” in Canada – after introducing their son Archie to his cousins only twice. Within weeks, the couple decided to make the move permanent, emailing their decision to leave the family to Prince Charles and the Queen.

Prince Charles was concerned the couple had not thought through the ramifications of the decision.

“(the royal family) understood that (Harry) and Meghan wanted something different and were willing to help but it was complicated,” a family source told the Mail. “There were issues like security and funding, visas and tax, which neither of them had thought through. Harry was told to put his request in writing and come up with some ideas.”

Harry however, thought the family was stonewalling and “decided to push the nuclear button.”

“They didn’t even have clue what the term financially independent meant,” another insider told the Mail. “Unfortunately he was just too stubborn, blinkered and bitter to see sense.’ He believed he was being forced to play second fiddle to William when it was he – and Meghan – who had the star power.”

According to one courtier, “Her Majesty was shocked. People were angry the Queen had been so disrespected.”

Another senior royal source told the Mail: “Meghan had issued her husband with a stark ultimatum: Archie and me are your family. Harry had been hopeful of finding a way to marry his desire for more freedom with his royal heritage, but Meghan convinced him there was no other option, She forced him to choose. He has spent three months convincing himself he has done the right thing.”

And now they have even irked the notoriously nice Canadians — after slipping off to Los Angeles before the borders closed due to coronavirus to lead a Hollywood life.

‘The Queen doesn’t deserve to be treated in this way,” a source told the Mail. “It’s easy to say Harry and Meghan have made their bed, let them lie in it. But what they have done will have ramifications for possibly generations to come.

https://www.pagesix.com/2020/03/28/meghan-and-harry-broke-up-with-the-queen-over-email-report/amp/


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Helllll to the NOOOO!  This will NOT happen and if it does (which it won’t) I will march on Washington. #freeloaders


I’ll be joining you!!!


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> If she ever had an original idea it died of loneliness.


You mean it got “markle’d”!!!


----------



## V0N1B2

Lalaloopsy12345 said:


> I’m from New York but lived in la once upon a time, for a year. The culture is completely different...
> *Plus the weather is perfect there*.


Yeah, for her.
Poor ol' Haz gets a sunburn from a lava lamp so.... ::kanyeshrug::


----------



## lanasyogamama

Just when you thought it couldn’t get worse.  They’re def going to be the new Fergie. Laughing stock.


----------



## Annawakes

I love it.  So entertaining!


----------



## sgj99

Lounorada said:


> This might have been seen/posted before but had to share. A friend sent me this from Twitter a few days ago, made me laugh
> 
> View attachment 4699294



I think I hurt myself laughing!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

“Supposedly”, Charles and William are not happy hearing about H&M’s move to LA (IMO - should they really be that surprised) .. I REALLY wish that QEII, Charles and Will will cut these two off at the knees, take away the “Duke/Duchess”, take away the Duchy funding .. and truly make them pay for what they have done!  From what I’ve heard about Charles, he can be quite petty when people have crossed him .. wonder if he will extend that to his son?


----------



## mdcx

The RPOs will not be thrilled about having to work in LA imo. Culturally, Canada and the UK are very similar and in terms of welfare etc. The US is very different, particularly over the issues of being armed, the homeless, healthcare etc. I wouldn’t be surprised if some if the RPOs say no.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> “Supposedly”, Charles and William are not happy hearing about H&M’s move to LA (IMO - should they really be that surprised) .. I REALLY wish that QEII, Charles and Will will cut these two off at the knees, take away the “Duke/Duchess”, take away the Duchy funding .. and truly make them pay for what they have done!  From what I’ve heard about Charles, he can be quite petty when people have crossed him .. wonder if he will extend that to his son?



I think that QEII and Charles are smart enough to let these two crazy kids basically hang themselves.  They won't come across as mean or vindictive or petty if they just sit back and wish them well and say nice things, like how they are loved and valued family members.  In a few months, PC can say, well, Harry, the income from the Duchy has taken a huge hit due to the virus so your allowance is being cut by 30% this year and likely by another 40% next year.  So sorry, dear boy, but Will is having to economize as well, as am I.  Nothing for it.  

QEII and Charles can sit back and observe, take the long view.  After all, likelihood of MM becoming a wildly successful actress on this second go round through Hollywood?  Not high.  Likelihood of her cookbooks and lifestyle blog and children's books being wildly successful or even moderately successful over the long haul?  Also not high.  Likelihood of Harry running a successful business doing who knows what or establishing a successful not-for-profit or becoming a serial million dollar speaker?  Also not very likely, especially in a post-virus world which will take 2 or 3 years to get back to where we were.


----------



## CeeJay

They will need to hire their own security, there is NO WAY that the US would pay a penny for their security!


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> They will need to hire their own security, there is NO WAY that the US would pay a penny for their security!



Absolutely no way. I'd write my own congressman and senators and mayor and governor over it lol.


----------



## PewPew

> Later came the news that Harry and Megan’s staff was turning over at an alarming rate for several reasons, including Markle’s penchant for emailing at all hours of the night and demanding instant gratification while freaking out about clothing allowances and home renovations.



Can you imagine what their turnover rate will be in LA, without loyalty to the Queen making staff more willing to put up with BS? Expect Harry to start suing ex-staff for being racist & mean to his wife. (One rumors start, they may start suing over suspected violations of non-disclosure agreements.)

So do the UK taxpayers (via The Duchy) still pay Harry’s legal bills in the UK? They’ve been working on 2 lawsuits against newspapers for nearly a year. That can’t be cheap.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> They will need to hire their own security, there is NO WAY that the US would pay a penny for their security!



I certainly hope not we are not that desperate to host Ex Britain royalty in America and help pay for security, we are pretty busy spending emergency money to fight the damages of Covid 19 and paying for security for these two would really really piss America off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> “One of the earliest signs that Meghan was determined to do it her way occurred when the Queen invited her to Chester after her wedding in June 2018,” the Mail wrote. “The Queen’s powerful personal assistant, Angela Kelly, sent a message that Her Majesty would be wearing a hat — polite Palace code for ‘you should be wearing one too’.  The message came back that Meghan preferred to go bareheaded.”



This disrespect, especially so early on, makes me shudder. What was Harry thinking letting her run wild like this?

Also, what's with these people and their ego. Star appeal? Harry WAS the spare and Meghan was never a star until she married into the world's most famous family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

scarlet555 said:


> I certainly hope not we are not that desperate to host Ex Britain royalty in America and help pay for security, we are pretty busy spending emergency money to fight the damages of Covid 19 and paying for security for these two would really really piss America off.


Nobody should be paying for their security.  They have a generous allowance and money of their own.  They should pay for it themselves.
I’d be especially pissed if I were a Canadian taxpayer at reading they did a flit to avoid paying taxes in Canada


----------



## maryg1

I don’t see any divorce soon, unless they don’t get the success they want and obviously MM blames H for that, finds someone else who can give her a better lifestyle.
But I don’t think H mental sanity will benefit from this move and all the stress that comes along with it.


----------



## maryg1

Am I the only one which find this statement annoying?
“Borders were closing and they HAD to move”.
I don’t think they ended their quarantine in Canada at the time of their move, and they could spend the next weeks of shutdown in Canada, they weren’t stranded in an unknown land.
That is so irresponsible  and stinks of “We’re over the law because we’re Mr 6th in line and Mrs Independent Profile”. 
This attitude gets on my nerve really


----------



## chicinthecity777

The whole storyline about moving because of covid-19 or boarder closure is all bullsh1t they made up to try to find a way to go back to live in the US, retracting from what she said about not live in the U.S while ***** is the president! Canada had much smaller number of infections so why would you leave there and go to a country and area where there are many many more cases?


----------



## doni

Oh, so now she wants to be Gwyneth.


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> Oh, so now she wants to be Gwyneth.


Yep! So yesterday's news, so not original.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

maryg1 said:


> I don’t see any divorce soon, unless they don’t get the success they want and obviously MM blames H for that, finds someone else who can give her a better lifestyle.



Same. He's her lap dog and she just doesn't have better prospects right now.


----------



## Lodpah

I love this response from someone on Quora when question asked what was MM's biggest mistake: 

Her biggest mistake was rushing into marriage without any understanding of how the “Game of Thrones” works.

Under normal circumstances you would consider people in their mid-thirties to have enough life experience to be able to decide for themselves whether they want to marry, even if after a few weeks let alone months. But these were not normal circumstances.

What many people fail to understand is that as a Royal, your only *real* job is to support, promote and protect the monarchy. Yes, you can support worthy causes and make safe, pretty speeches, you can put your sons into the armed forces, and do all kinds of things to make yourself look good in the public eye. The Royals may be perfectly sincere about many of the causes they support, but even though they might put a lot of time and effort into them, they are not their real reason for existence.

I am sure she thought that as a middle-aged woman (and I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense), she would have far more autonomy. But she ran into the brick wall of a rigid hierarchical structure, and that structure is in place because it works. There is a strict pecking order, and you don’t try to buck the system. You can’t afford to be perceived as trying to compete with or outshine anyone higher up the pecking order even if that is not your intention. I would bet my last dollar that in the last couple of years, she has heard, “You can’t” more often than she ever had in her life up until then.

I think they would have been far wiser to be officially engaged for a year or two to let her see what it was really like to be in that spotlight, in “that fierce light that beats upon a throne” in fact. Then they could have decided together whether “Royal life” was what they really wanted after she had experienced some of it. I suspect if they had said before the marriage that it wasn’t for them, there would have been far less controversy about it as well. She would have been wiser to keep her head down and learn the ropes thoroughly before “hitting the ground running”. *No point in running anywhere until you know where you are running to (emphasis added).*

But it is what it is. What the future holds for them is anyone’s guess.


----------



## Lodpah

sgj99 said:


> I think I hurt myself laughing!!!!


That was  . . . vicious. Oh Harry, you are such a meme now. I feel bad that it has come to this. Your balls have definitely been cut off. Wake up man!


----------



## BlueCherry

hellosunshine said:


> It's not my screenshot. I grabbed it from Twitter.



In my personal life, defending the underdog against the masses would invoke passion in me, possibly even a slight degree of petulance in responding to “haters”. 

In my professional life I am calm and measured in every response because that’s business and business is money. 

Of course you’re on the payroll


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> well if they invested their $30 mil and budgeted.....but of course she didn't marry him to do that[/QUOT E]
> That investment has gone south now with people losing millions in their portfolios.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I suspect if they had said before the marriage that it wasn’t for them, there would have been far less controversy about it as well.



There wouldn't have been any controversy if they hadn't gone about it in the most impertinent, disrespectful and arrogant way possible.


----------



## PewPew

> Lodpah said: I think they would have been far wiser to be officially engaged for a year or two to let her see what it was really like to be in that spotlight, in “that fierce light that beats upon a throne” in fact. Then they could have decided together whether “Royal life” was what they really wanted after she had experienced some of it



You make a good point, but Meghan was likely rushing to marry for more reasons than advancing maternal age. During their short courtship before engagement, they had already had at least one breakup, during which Meghan showed up uninvited to the wedding of Harry’s former best friend Tom “Skippy” Inskip. (Harry’s friendship with Skippy was said by mutual friends to have cooled significantly since the latter encouraged Harry to wait longer before marriage.)


----------



## LittleStar88

PewPew said:


> You make a good point, but Meghan was likely rushing to marry for more reasons than advancing maternal age. During their short courtship before engagement, they had already had at least one breakup, during which Meghan showed up uninvited to the wedding of Harry’s former best friend Tom “Skippy” Inskip. (Harry’s friendship with Skippy was said by mutual friends to have cooled significantly since the latter encouraged Harry to wait longer before marriage.)



Did she really show up uninvited?!!


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> Did she really show up uninvited?!!


I think Harry was invited with Meghan as his +1, then they broke up but she turned up anyway, that's the story I heard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

BlueCherry said:


> In my personal life, defending the underdog against the masses would invoke passion in me, possibly even a slight degree of petulance in responding to “haters”.
> 
> In my professional life I am calm and measured in every response because that’s business and business is money.
> 
> Of course you’re on the payroll


THIS!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> I think Harry was invited with Meghan as his +1, then they broke up but she turned up anyway, that's the story I heard.



That was a big red flag and Harry must be too dense or desperate to see it.


----------



## CeeJay

Obviously, consider the source, but if this is true .. then this will be interesting 
https://www.newzit.com/?ito=MOL_IOS_related_Largethumbnail&startTab=entertainment


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I'm wondering when one or both will appear on Dancing with the Stars.



I’d like to see them turn up on The Masked Singer. It would be cool to see what their costumes would be. Maybe a maneless lion for Harry and a barracuda for Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Obviously, consider the source, but if this is true .. then this will be interesting
> https://www.newzit.com/?ito=MOL_IOS_related_Largethumbnail&startTab=entertainment



This has to be untrue. Meghan is much too full of herself with pride and stubbornness to ever beg for anything from anyone. And if she did she’d have one of her minions do it for her!  She’s just hoping we all forgot that she jumped on the bandwagon of hurling insults at the president back when she didn’t think she’d be returning to the US and ever needing anything from him.


----------



## kemilia

V0N1B2 said:


> Everything seems to come at the wrong time for them, maybe it's karma, I dunno.
> She's got to bide her time in California for what, six months (?) until she can file for divorce?
> Also, if they left for California just before the border closed, then she's only got a few more days of self-quarantine left.  I'm counting on seeing some Starbucks papwalks by the end of next week.  There's no way she can be out of the spotlight physically until this is over.  They'll be long forgotten by then.  Known as the woman who married that red-haired guy from the royal family.
> For the record, I don't think for one minute they're worth $55M.  I think, much like her education, acting credits and cooking skills, it's a tad inflated. JMO.


Even if that number is correct, it will start dropping fast.


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> You make a good point, but Meghan was likely rushing to marry for more reasons than advancing maternal age. During their short courtship before engagement, they had already had at least one breakup, during which Meghan showed up uninvited to the wedding of Harry’s former best friend Tom “Skippy” Inskip. (Harry’s friendship with Skippy was said by mutual friends to have cooled significantly since the latter encouraged Harry to wait longer before marriage.)


A “markle’d” (former) friend confirmed that Meghan was desperate to marry Harry, after all .. KA-CHING!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> This has to be untrue. Meghan is much too full of herself with pride and stubbornness to ever beg for anything from anyone. And if she did she’d have one of her minions do it for her!  She’s just hoping we all forgot that she jumped on the bandwagon of hurling insults at the president back when she didn’t think she’d be returning to the US and ever needing anything from him.


You know what, given all the other crap they’ve pulled up to this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did ask for this!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I’d like to see them turn up on The Masked Singer. It would be cool to see what their costumes would be. Maybe a maneless lion for Harry and a barracuda for Meghan.


Or court jesters.  Too obvious?


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Or court jesters.  Too obvious?



It’s a shame the Banana was already used. It would’ve been perfect for Meghan.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It’s a shame the Banana was already used. It would’ve been perfect for Meghan.


Lol!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Obviously, consider the source, but if this is true .. then this will be interesting
> https://www.newzit.com/?ito=MOL_IOS_related_Largethumbnail&startTab=entertainment


If it is up to ***** I don't thing the US will pay, nor do I think we should.  I imagine in these times when Americans are suffering there would be a huge backlash for spending money on these dolts.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> If it is up to ***** I don't thing the US will pay, nor do I think we should.  I imagine in these times when Americans are suffering there would be a huge backlash for spending money on these dolts.


Paying a fortune for security for these 2 wealthy clowns--I highly doubt it. H couldn't support his family if his life depended on it (though he probably could get decent tips doing Doordash).

They picked the wrong time to leave the safety of the UK/Palace.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> If it is up to ***** I don't thing the US will pay, nor do I think we should.  I imagine in these times when Americans are suffering there would be a huge backlash for spending money on these dolts.



They have millions on their own, not to mention an allowance from the Duchy. They can afford their own protection services and they will probably just run it through as a “business expense”. I will be livid if a dime of my taxes go to them for anything.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> You know what, given all the other crap they’ve pulled up to this point, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did ask for this!


I think they might ask but I don't think it would be them personally going directly to ***** and asking.  That part of the article is just for drama I think.
But do they want to spend their own money?  Hell no


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Is Harry still considered a diplomat? If he is, we are stuck with the bill, imho.


----------



## rose60610

No nation should shell out a single dime of protection for these dolts. It was THEIR choice to become "independent", a term which means, uh, "independent".  Which is hilarious because they still get an allowance from Chuck. They don't even have the decency to be embarrassed by that.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I think they might ask but I don't think it would be them personally going directly to ***** and asking.  That part of the article is just for drama I think.
> But do they want to spend their own money?  Hell no



I would LOVE for them to ask ***** for security, only to see what the response would be. It'd probably include "hell no" and "losers".   I've read where not even former U.S. VICE Presidents are provided with gov't security after they've left office.


----------



## LittleStar88

LOL she wants to be the next Goopy Paltrow. Where does Harry fit in all of this? He gets to be Mr Mom and get papped shuttling the kids to and from school?

https://dlisted.com/2020/03/27/prin...-are-making-plans-for-the-future/#more-365844


Somebody in their “_private circle_” says they’re looking at houses, so I suspect they are planning to stay awhile. Of course, we’re all planning to stay awhile, wherever that may be, for the foreseeable future. And just because we’re not sure there will be an “_economy_” in the future, doesn’t mean Meghan and Harry aren’t planning on some way to separate you from your government issued chits. According to Us Weekly, Meghan is hoping to restart her lifestyle blog, _The Tig_. She also wants to write another cookbook. I, for one, can’t wait for Meghan’s recipe for _One Single Solitary Bean for a Family of Eight_.

Next chapter! After leaving her life as a royal behind, Meghan Markle is thinking about her next career move.

The former _Suits_ actress, 38, is interested in writing another cookbook following 2018’s _Together: Our Community Cookbook_, a source reveals exclusively in the new issue of _Us Weekly_. In addition to this, the insider revealed that Meghan’s looking into relaunching her former lifestyle blog, The Tig, and potentially developing a kitchenware line.

In #theseuncertaintimes, I suggest she get right on trademarking _Meghan Markle Barely Living_. What the **** is a Tig anyway? Apparently, not even Vanity Fairknew what that was all about. (from 2017, which might as well have been 1917)

“Tig” refers to an American mispronunciation of Tignanello wine—don’t worry about it.) Markle purports on the site to provide a “hub for the discerning palate—those with a hunger for food, travel, fashion & beauty,” making it not dissimilar to, yep, a Goop or a (R.I.P.) Preserve.


----------



## V0N1B2

I rolled on over to the Cambo's thread and saw a photo of William in his (I assume) home office.
Harry looked like he was being held captive when he made the announcement to cancel the Invictus Games from his "home office".


VS. William's office:


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I rolled on over to the Cambo's thread and saw a photo of William in his (I assume) home office.
> Harry looked like he was being held captive when he made the announcement to cancel the Invictus Games from his "home office".
> 
> 
> VS. William's office:
> 
> View attachment 4699778



can't help it I'm laughing


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> LOL she wants to be the next Goopy Paltrow. Where does Harry fit in all of this? He gets to be Mr Mom and get papped shuttling the kids to and from school?
> 
> https://dlisted.com/2020/03/27/prin...-are-making-plans-for-the-future/#more-365844
> 
> 
> Somebody in their “_private circle_” says they’re looking at houses, so I suspect they are planning to stay awhile. Of course, we’re all planning to stay awhile, wherever that may be, for the foreseeable future. And just because we’re not sure there will be an “_economy_” in the future, doesn’t mean Meghan and Harry aren’t planning on some way to separate you from your government issued chits. According to Us Weekly, Meghan is hoping to restart her lifestyle blog, _The Tig_. She also wants to write another cookbook. I, for one, can’t wait for Meghan’s recipe for _One Single Solitary Bean for a Family of Eight_.
> 
> Next chapter! After leaving her life as a royal behind, Meghan Markle is thinking about her next career move.
> 
> The former _Suits_ actress, 38, is interested in writing another cookbook following 2018’s _Together: Our Community Cookbook_, a source reveals exclusively in the new issue of _Us Weekly_. In addition to this, the insider revealed that Meghan’s looking into relaunching her former lifestyle blog, The Tig, and potentially developing a kitchenware line.
> 
> In #theseuncertaintimes, I suggest she get right on trademarking _Meghan Markle Barely Living_. What the **** is a Tig anyway? Apparently, not even Vanity Fairknew what that was all about. (from 2017, which might as well have been 1917)
> 
> “Tig” refers to an American mispronunciation of Tignanello wine—don’t worry about it.) Markle purports on the site to provide a “hub for the discerning palate—those with a hunger for food, travel, fashion & beauty,” making it not dissimilar to, yep, a Goop or a (R.I.P.) Preserve.


so she thinks she's martha stewart?  I don't think so.  unless she has enough stans who will keep following her no matter what


----------



## kipp

Duh.  Even the normally gushing T&C magazine is sounding a bit different:  
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...han-markle-royal-life-coronavirus-transition/


----------



## lanasyogamama

My God, he looks awful.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I rolled on over to the Cambo's thread and saw a photo of William in his (I assume) home office.
> Harry looked like he was being held captive when he made the announcement to cancel the Invictus Games from his "home office".
> 
> 
> VS. William's office:
> 
> View attachment 4699778



Harry seems to be blinking a lot in that video.....don't know is this is his usual way of being or if it means anything (stress?)


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> I rolled on over to the Cambo's thread and saw a photo of William in his (I assume) home office.
> Harry looked like he was being held captive when he made the announcement to cancel the Invictus Games from his "home office".
> 
> 
> VS. William's office:
> 
> View attachment 4699778



Bbbutt....they’re FREEEE!!


----------



## sdkitty

another cloying piece from Cosmo.  wonder if at some point these media outlets are going to get the idea that the public isn't worshipping these two anymore.
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Reportedly "Committed to Having Another Baby"*


A sibling for little Archie!

by ALANNA LAUREN GRECO
 MAR 28, 2020






GETTY IMAGES

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly planning on having another baby.
According to a source, "They’ll be trying in earnest pretty soon."
If you're looking for some good news today (and honestly, aren't we all?), I'm happy to report that it looks like Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are def interested in expanding their family and having another baby.

Related Story



Meghan Juuust Might Relaunch 'The Tig,' Y'all
Even though little Archie Harrison is less than a year old, it seems as though Meghan and Harry are already thinking about baby #2! A source tells _Us Weekly_, "They’ll be trying in earnest pretty soon. They just want to get firmly settled into their new surroundings first and give Archie as much attention as they can." Aww!

The source also adds, "They’re still enjoying these precious early days with him. They’re committed to having another baby, but don’t want to put too much pressure on the situation." So basically, it sounds like while Meg and Harry aren't in a rush to have another kid, it's very much on their radar.

However, the couple just moved from Canada to Los Angeles, so they'll probably need a beat to settle in before making any other big changes. And if you're wondering why Meghan and Harry made the move, a source told _The Sun_:

Harry and Meghan have left Canada now for good. The borders were closing and flights were stopping. They had to get out. But this move was planned for some time. They realized Canada would not work out for various reasons and they want to be based in the Los Angeles area. They have a big support network there. It’s where their new team of Hollywood agents and PRs and business managers are based. Meghan has lots of friends there and, of course, her mum Doria.


----------



## 1LV

.


----------



## 1LV

Clearblueskies said:


> Bbbutt....they’re FREEEE!!


Free falling


----------



## tiktok

The lack of sensitivity in this community is disappointing. If you had to:
- Build a charity to save the world
- Change the charity to a foundation that will save the world
- Change the foundation to a new charitable entity that will save the world
- Rebuild The Tig into the next Goop
- Write a children's book
- Write a cookbook
- Move continents
- Move countries after moving continents
- Look for $20M houses, making sure they're close to enough big name celebrities AND can accommodate the help
- Spill your guts out to cold investment bankers for $1M
- Mentor a 17 year old girl by spilling your guts to her so she can learn from your experience
- Save the world's mental health in the face of COVID-19
- Check how the world feels today given COVID-19
- Be the #1 communication channel for month-old WHO messages on COVID-19
- Build a mental health platform for the world you're saving from COVID-19
- Make sure the NHS feels appreciated by Your Royal Highness
- Delete all those unsympathetic Instagram comments from disobedient, clearly mentally ill subjects
- Revise the latex glove and mask procedures of your staff on a daily basis (so hard to get good help these days!)
- Ensure there are at least 2 PR stories a day about all the amazing endeavors you're creating while facing massive hardships like cold-hearted prime ministers and presidents who don't give a @#$% about you
...WOULDN'T YOU BE ABSOLUTELY EXHAUSTED, PEOPLE???

ETA: And (how could we forget) having regular sex to make another baby! That's not easy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

tiktok said:


> The lack of sensitivity in this community is disappointing. If you had to:
> - Build a charity to save the world
> - Change the charity to a foundation that will save the world
> - Change the foundation to a new charitable entity that will save the world
> - Rebuild The Tig into the next Goop
> - Write a children's book
> - Write a cookbook
> - Move continents
> - Move countries after moving continents
> - Look for $20M houses, making sure they're close to enough big name celebrities AND can accommodate the help
> - Spill your guts out to cold investment bankers for $1M
> - Mentor a 17 year old girl by spilling your guts to her so she can learn from your experience
> - Save the world's mental health in the face of COVID-19
> - Check how the world feels today given COVID-19
> - Be the #1 communication channel for month-old WHO messages on COVID-19
> - Build a mental health platform for the world you're saving from COVID-19
> - Make sure the NHS feels appreciated by Your Royal Highness
> - Delete all those unsympathetic Instagram comments from disobedient, clearly mentally ill subjects
> - Revise the latex glove and mask procedures of your staff on a daily basis (so hard to get good help these days!)
> - Ensure there are at least 2 PR stories a day about all the amazing endeavors you're creating while facing massive hardships like cold-hearted prime ministers and presidents who don't give a @#$% about you
> ...WOULDN'T YOU BE ABSOLUTELY EXHAUSTED, PEOPLE???
> 
> ETA: And (how could we forget) having regular sex to make another baby! That's not eas



You’re right.  And I am so, so sorry for what all I’ve said.
(Not sorry )

PS  Love this!  Truly laughed out loud!


----------



## CeeJay

A Secret Service detail for them would be unprecedented. By leaving “the Firm”, they would not fit into the category of Diplomat or “representing” the Crown, so no SSD for them. When a Diplomat is in DC, they are secured by the Federal Protection Services (part of the Dept of Treasury) not the Secret Service (I lived across the street from the Russian Consulate so I knew those guys very well). All that being said, I don’t think they will get either and will just have to pony up the $$$ for their own security.. after all, THEY SAID that they were going to be INDEPENDENT!!!


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> another cloying piece from Cosmo.  wonder if at some point these media outlets are going to get the idea that the public isn't worshipping these two anymore.
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Reportedly "Committed to Having Another Baby"*
> 
> 
> A sibling for little Archie!
> 
> by ALANNA LAUREN GRECO
> MAR 28, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GETTY IMAGES
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly planning on having another baby.
> According to a source, "They’ll be trying in earnest pretty soon."
> If you're looking for some good news today (and honestly, aren't we all?), I'm happy to report that it looks like Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are def interested in expanding their family and having another baby.
> 
> Related Story
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Juuust Might Relaunch 'The Tig,' Y'all
> Even though little Archie Harrison is less than a year old, it seems as though Meghan and Harry are already thinking about baby #2! A source tells _Us Weekly_, "They’ll be trying in earnest pretty soon. They just want to get firmly settled into their new surroundings first and give Archie as much attention as they can." Aww!
> 
> The source also adds, "They’re still enjoying these precious early days with him. They’re committed to having another baby, but don’t want to put too much pressure on the situation." So basically, it sounds like while Meg and Harry aren't in a rush to have another kid, it's very much on their radar.
> 
> However, the couple just moved from Canada to Los Angeles, so they'll probably need a beat to settle in before making any other big changes. And if you're wondering why Meghan and Harry made the move, a source told _The Sun_:
> 
> Harry and Meghan have left Canada now for good. The borders were closing and flights were stopping. They had to get out. But this move was planned for some time. They realized Canada would not work out for various reasons and they want to be based in the Los Angeles area. They have a big support network there. It’s where their new team of Hollywood agents and PRs and business managers are based. Meghan has lots of friends there and, of course, her mum Doria.


Yeah yeah, for sure. She’s having another baby. She is definitely taking herself out of the picture of those Hollywood film executives as a bankable A-list movie star by taking a year off to have a baby. All the driven top-billed stars do that when they’re trying to reclaim their spot as a sultry starlet or the sexy sideswept bangs wearing paralegal on the number one network hit “Suits: Special Victims Unit”.  

Seriously. What suck up sap wrote that slop?
Another baby. Pfft. Either she’s that stupid or ain’t nobody making her any offers right now.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah yeah, for sure. She’s having another baby. She is definitely taking herself out of the picture of those Hollywood film executives as a bankable A-list movie star by taking a year off to have a baby. All the driven top-billed stars do that when they’re trying to reclaim their spot as a sultry starlet or the sexy sideswept bangs wearing paralegal on the number one network hit “Suits: Special Victims Unit”.
> 
> Seriously. What suck up sap wrote that slop?
> Another baby. Pfft. Either she’s that stupid or ain’t nobody making her any offers right now.


well, another baby would make her anchor on "H" stronger, right?


----------



## Emeline

Someone must have asked *****.  It's a NO for free security.  Guess M will have to go back to her binder for more ideas.

I can't believe he's tweeting about H&M during  this crisis, but here we are.  Sheesh.




(A journalist I follow posted the tweet. I don't follow him.)


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> Someone must have asked *****.  It's a NO for free security.  Guess M will have to go back to her binder for more ideas.
> 
> I can't believe he's tweeting about H&M during a this crisis, but here we are.  Sheesh.
> 
> " I am a great friend and admirer of the Queen & the United Kingdom. It was reported that Harry and Meghan, who left the Kingdom, would reside permanently in Canada. Now they have left Canada for the U.S. however, the U.S. will not pay for their security protection. They must pay!"
> 
> 
> 
> (A journalist I follow posted the tweet. I don't follow him.)



for once, I like what he's saying....LOL


----------



## Sharont2305

Emeline said:


> Someone must have asked *****.  It's a NO for free security.  Guess M will have to go back to her binder for more ideas.
> 
> I can't believe he's tweeting about H&M during  this crisis, but here we are.  Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (A journalist I follow posted the tweet. I don't follow him.)


"the Kingdom"
Sounds like I reside in a Disney film, lol
He has no idea!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Emeline said:


> Someone must have asked *****.  It's a NO for free security.  Guess M will have to go back to her binder for more ideas.
> 
> I can't believe he's tweeting about H&M during  this crisis, but here we are.  Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (A journalist I follow posted the tweet. I don't follow him.)



Oh good grief, I have a feeling he was asked about it more than once so felt the need to SHUT IT DOWN! #freeloaders


----------



## gracekelly

***** just tweeted that he won’t pay for their security! Yay!  Smoke would be coming out of my ears if he said the opposite!


----------



## Suncatcher

Fully agree with DJP’s tweet and for someone who is so thin skinned and likes to denigrate people who criticize him, he actually refrained from doing that to H&M and just kept the tweet above board. 

I wonder what they will do now? I read somewhere it means that they can’t have armed security unless they hire private security.  Welcome home, Meghan!!! LOL.

This is a good reminder that one should try hard to never burn bridges in life because you never know when the hand you bite might be the same hand that needs to feed you one day.


----------



## Genie27

MrsJDS said:


> This is a good reminder that one should try hard to never burn bridges in life because you never know when the hand you bite might be the same hand that needs to feed you one day.


She must have skipped that class in Diplomacy 101. Degree in international affairs, huh?


----------



## lanasyogamama

They have to be dipping into his inheritance, right?


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> They have to be dipping into his inheritance, right?


His father is probably paying


----------



## rose60610

So it took ***** all of three seconds to tell H&M the U.S. will not be patsies for their security.  

I'm appalled that H&M had the gall, DURING the COVID19 crisis, to even try to hit up our gov't for protection. That was pretty ballsy. I'm glad the answer was basically "are you kidding?". 

Sorry Meghan, I guess you're NOT any kind of American icon and have ZERO pull here. Please practice social distancing and self quarantine well after this virus subsides.


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah yeah, for sure. She’s having another baby. She is definitely taking herself out of the picture of those Hollywood film executives as a bankable A-list movie star by taking a year off to have a baby. All the driven top-billed stars do that when they’re trying to reclaim their spot as a sultry starlet or the sexy sideswept bangs wearing paralegal on the number one network hit “Suits: Special Victims Unit”.
> 
> Seriously. What suck up sap wrote that slop?
> Another baby. Pfft. Either she’s that stupid or ain’t nobody making her any offers right now.



They'll try for a bit then it will come out she is having trouble becoming pregnant and they are going the surrogate route thus enabling her to go after those oh so many offers  coming in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

For once I like what he tweeted.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> I rolled on over to the Cambo's thread and saw a photo of William in his (I assume) home office.
> Harry looked like he was being held captive when he made the announcement to cancel the Invictus Games from his "home office".
> 
> 
> VS. William's office:
> 
> View attachment 4699778



Harry looks dreadful 
Also, it looks like he's sitting in a utility/laundry room  That's honestly the best background he could find to film an important message like that in front of?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Emeline said:


> Someone must have asked *****.  It's a NO for free security.  Guess M will have to go back to her binder for more ideas.
> 
> I can't believe he's tweeting about H&M during  this crisis, but here we are.  Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (A journalist I follow posted the tweet. I don't follow him.)



LOL President Petty come through!


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> So it took ***** all of three seconds to tell H&M the U.S. will not be patsies for their security.
> 
> I'm appalled that H&M had the gall, DURING the COVID19 crisis, to even try to hit up our gov't for protection. That was pretty ballsy. I'm glad the answer was basically "are you kidding?".
> 
> Sorry Meghan, I guess you're NOT any kind of American icon and have ZERO pull here. Please practice social distancing and self quarantine well after this virus subsides.


I doubt anyone asked ***** at all given her antagonism towards ***** - esp. given Harry's comment to pseudo-Greta about ***** having blood on his hands about the coal industry
The whole security question keeps coming up in the news , and ***** was just putting it to bed once and for all , rather than let people think that is a good expense these days


----------



## Mrs.Z

It’s actually difficult to believe that H & M would think the US should pay for their security.  If they do believe this, one or both of them are suffering from delusions of grandeur.  If they don’t believe this, I’m not sure how the story gained such tremendous traction in light of current world events.


----------



## 1LV

Emeline said:


> Someone must have asked *****.  It's a NO for free security.  Guess M will have to go back to her binder for more ideas.
> 
> I can't believe he's tweeting about H&M during  this crisis, but here we are.  Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (A journalist I follow posted the tweet. I don't follow him.)



Based on the past I can believe it.  This time I like what he’s saying.


----------



## muchstuff

Clearblueskies said:


> Nobody should be paying for their security.  They have a generous allowance and money of their own.  They should pay for it themselves.
> I’d be especially pissed if I were a Canadian taxpayer at reading they did a flit to avoid paying taxes in Canada


I'm just glad they're gone...


----------



## PewPew

****** says Harry & Meghan “must pay!”*

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52086992
——————

Let’s be honest, this isn’t about diplomacy. ***** doesn’t care about that & has been mad at the UK’s reception & ridicule of him in the past. So H&M conceivably might have had support...

But there’s no way ***** was going to authorize security when Harry trashed ***** in his hoax interview & Meghan of course “refused to live in the U.S. while ***** is president”

***** holds grudges. If he’s really ticked & wants a distraction (provided the world doesn’t end via pandemic), I can see him encouraging the IRS to pay close attention to their “charity”


----------



## chicinthecity777

I wonder just how much security is needed for an ex-royal + Hollywood wannabe/has been actress. Someone mentioned Archie might be subject to being kidnapped but I actually think it's a very unlikely scenario. He's way too big of a profile target for kidnappers to get away from the crime. Stalkers maybe more likely.
They are allegedly worth $55m but it doesn't mean they have that much cash in the bank. If a lot of that is tied up in other investments they are probably devalued quite a bit now. So it all will still come down to bank of Daddy. So much for financial independence! Do we know whether they have paid back the money used for renovating Frogmore Cottage yet?


----------



## Welltraveled!




----------



## Jayne1

Welltraveled! said:


>



A Sussex representative -- meaning Meg.  lol


----------



## CeeJay

Oh brother, dim-O(wit) just HAD to respond that H&M didn’t ask the US Government about providing security for them .. and I call total BS on that!   I think H&M do believe that they ARE the Cats Meow and therefore, would likely think that they ARE WORTHY of Government protection!!!  It almost appears that the two of them jack each other up such that, they DO believe in their feeling of GRANDEUR!  How anyone could continue to like these two anymore is just beyond my comprehension; find your ultimate PRIVATE property and then STAY INSIDE forever to do us all a favor!


----------



## bag-mania

Whatever they are paying Omid Scobie, it isn’t enough. It’s like the man lives and breathes to defend them.


----------



## hellosunshine

So, today the Queen has picked up Sara Latham, who used to be Harry & Meghan's head of communications and their public relations consultant. Sara has also worked for *****, Hillary, and *****'s campaigns as lead strategist. Interesting change up considering all the hard Brexiteers over at Kensington Palace (William & Kate).


----------



## scarlet555

Welltraveled! said:


>




Well, yes they have no plans to ask, especially now that ***** made his useful twitter announcement.  Privately ‘Dad’ funds are paying for those, sure.  Wonder when those will run out, I mean do those two have any business incomes aside from their previous titles as Dukes?

This is so embarrassing for Prince Harry’s family, but it seems this is the only way to go.  I think Private Funds should stop from the family.  Prince Charles needs to stop the checks until he becomes “loyal to the royals.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

PewPew said:


> ****** says Harry & Meghan “must pay!”*
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52086992
> ——————
> 
> Let’s be honest, this isn’t about diplomacy. ***** doesn’t care about that & has been mad at the UK’s reception & ridicule of him in the past. So H&M conceivably might have had support...
> 
> But there’s no way ***** was going to authorize security when Harry trashed ***** in his hoax interview & Meghan of course “refused to live in the U.S. while ***** is president”
> 
> ***** holds grudges. If he’s really ticked & wants a distraction (provided the world doesn’t end via pandemic), I can see him encouraging the IRS to pay close attention to their “charity”




I don't see it that way.

Even if M&H sucked up to ***** six ways to Sunday there's no way he'd have allowed the U.S. gov't to provide security for them.  Since they're "independent" they're no longer representing any entity. They've chosen to LIVE in L.A. And they perhaps thought we'd be providing security for what? 50 more years? Suck it self-entitled-spoiled-do-nothings-except-whine-about-the-hardships-of-being-royals-so-you-HAD-to-ESCAPE-Crown-Slavery.   

If the IRS, as you say, are watching H&M, it doesn't need any prodding from anybody. Even if H&M are slimy in their finances, the Crown won't let that come to light and kindly pay any "misunderstandings" (from tax returns prepared by tax attorneys). 

H&M's contrived U.S. Gov't security dreams are about as realistic as Meghan's visions of winning twenty Oscars for Best Actress. 

Meghan literally married her way into a virtual fairy tale life.  Then burned every bridge associated with it.  The only fairy tale she's got left is whatever work she can get with Disney.  (Is her nose getting longer and longer and longer? Geppetto asking...)


----------



## rose60610

hellosunshine said:


> So, today the Queen has picked up Sara Latham, who used to be Harry & Meghan's head of communications and their public relations consultant. Sara has also worked for *****, Hillary, and *****'s campaigns as lead strategist. Interesting change up considering all the hard Brexiteers over at Kensington Palace (William & Kate).



Keep your friends close and enemies closer.  As long as Latham is employed by the Crown, she won't be allowed to publish any sensational crap about the BRF.  Whatever her salary is, it's a pittance compared to any garbage potentially to be spewed by "I'm so pissed the event was cancelled that I'm running and pouting while splaying my hands on my thighs without my rings Damn You Queen",  spoiled psycho brat Meghan would say.  

My guess, Latham will be paid six figures to serve coffee and tea to other staff.


----------



## A1aGypsy

hellosunshine said:


> So, today the Queen has picked up Sara Latham, who used to be Harry & Meghan's head of communications and their public relations consultant. Sara has also worked for *****, Hillary, and *****'s campaigns as lead strategist. Interesting change up considering all the hard Brexiteers over at Kensington Palace (William & Kate).



Well, sure. Given that the RF is likely on the hook for the wrongful dismissal action, it would make sense to employ her, rather than just pay out. Especially if you consider the moral aspect of the issue, as she likely moved to the UK to take the role.  Good on QE for stepping up when others ran off...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sorry Omid, we all know they asked. ***** has a bit on his plate right now and wouldn’t have tweeted that if they hadn’t.


----------



## queennadine

SO SO glad he tweeted that. Wonder what their next move is.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Keep your friends close and enemies closer.  As long as Latham is employed by the Crown, she won't be allowed to publish any sensational crap about the BRF.  Whatever her salary is, it's a pittance compared to any garbage potentially to be spewed by "I'm so pissed the event was cancelled that I'm running and pouting while splaying my hands on my thighs without my rings Damn You Queen",  spoiled psycho brat Meghan would say.
> 
> My guess, Latham will be paid six figures to serve coffee and tea to other staff.



I doubt the Queen picked her up just to leave her idle (or that a professional with that background would agree to it). It seems like a big professional step up from H+M, so why wouldn't she take the job?


----------



## lalame

hellosunshine said:


> So, today the Queen has picked up Sara Latham, who used to be Harry & Meghan's head of communications and their public relations consultant. Sara has also worked for *****, Hillary, and *****'s campaigns as lead strategist. Interesting change up considering all the hard Brexiteers over at Kensington Palace (William & Kate).



William & Kate are brexiteers? Is that widely known? I've never heard anything about that and am surprised to hear it if true...


----------



## PewPew

LittleStar88 said:


> _Meghan Markle Barely Living_.



  On the heels of that best-selling lifestyle/cooking book, we’ll get her children’s book: 
_I’m Not OK, You’re Not OK_


----------



## hellosunshine

lalame said:


> William & Kate are brexiteers? Is that widely known? I've never heard anything about that and am surprised to hear it if true...



Personally, I do not know. However, for whatever reason they've surrounded themselves with many former conservative-leaning government workers.


----------



## V0N1B2

LOL at this Disney+ thing.
It's a streaming channel? So it's kind of like the equivalent of a direct-to-video movie from back in the day?
The way her sugars are going on about it, you'd think there's some big premiere on Hollywood Blvd. complete with a sashay down the red carpet. 
So... it's on TV? I'll make sure to set my Beta to record it.


----------



## Grande Latte

Right call, Mr. President.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Comment in The Times UK today :
*Harry and Meghan have chosen celebrity over duty*
*By moving to California and not returning to a Britain in crisis, the Sussexes are splitting decisively from the royals*
Clare Foges   Monday March 30 2020, 12.00am BST, The Times

"Coronavirus: the great leveller. Infecting princes and prime ministers, making hermits of most, hushing the concrete council estate and the millionaires’ leafy square. And yet some still seem to soar above it all. Last week it was reported that, just before Trudeau and ***** closed the longest border in the world, a private jet soared over it, bearing our lately departed Duke and Duchess of Sussex from their hideout in Canada to their new home in California.

It is said that the couple are living in a compound near Hollywood, where they plan to settle permanently. Speaking of their hasty flight, a source declared that because “the borders were closing and flights were stopping”, Harry and Meghan “had to get out”, making Canada sound more like a chaotic war zone than a country of gentle folk and maple syrup pancakes.

The timing of this move might delicately be described as tactless. As Prince Charles fights Covid-19, as hundreds die and thousands grieve, and millions suffer distress and financial uncertainty; as a quarter of the world’s population are allowed little further than their own front door, the duke and duchess chose this moment to display their wealth and the freedom it can buy, to sever ties more definitively from crown and Commonwealth, to further their own interests.

Indeed, the timing is so crass that we have to wonder whether it was deliberate. Perhaps, to paraphrase that odious line coined on 9/11, the Sussexes thought this pandemic was “a good time to bury difficult news”? If this was the rationale, it was entirely wrong. Making the move to California, and making it now, only inflames the irritation many feel over the couple’s actions in recent months.

I am one of those who thought the union of Harry and Meghan an exciting thing for our country. The woman is beautiful, charismatic, blessed with Cleopatra-like poise. She glows as though lit from within by 1,000 watts. Harry’s discovery of Meghan seemed as great a boon to Britain as the uncovering of a fresh field of oil in the North Sea. Then came Megxit part 1: a disappointing rejection of this nation by those who had been offered all its riches on a plate. Still, we could find it in our hearts to understand their need for a life away from the spotlight; we could give them credit for staying within the Commonwealth, and we could be hopeful about their pledge to spend a lot of time in Britain.

Now Megxit part 2 has blown those charitable assumptions about part 1 out of the water. The couple who professed to hate media intrusion have headed to a place where their every move will be captured by paparazzi. The people who make so much of their bonds with the Commonwealth — and who reportedly toyed with a move to Africa — have moved out of it. The duke and duchess who still style their communications with a crown motif, whose brand is explicitly built on the back of the British royal family, have decided that in this moment of crisis they will leave the old firm to it.

According to the _Times_ report on the couple’s move, “the royal family is said to be disappointed that Prince Harry and Meghan have not returned to Britain to perform a supportive role.” Disappointed — exquisite understatement! The word carries the weight of 100 courtiers’ raised eyebrows, and the Queen’s own quiet despair. The theme of Her Majesty’s reign has been humility over haughtiness; whenever possible you stand beside your people, not above them. She learnt that from her mother, who insisted that she and King George VI stayed at Buckingham Palace during the Blitz, and who was “glad” when the Luftwaffe bombed the palace because it meant she could “look the East End in the face”.

Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor donned overalls in the Auxiliary Territorial Service and learned how to drive military trucks alongside other patriotic teenage girls. This is the record, so when her recent statement on coronavirus assured that “my family and I stand ready to play our part”, we knew she meant it. To such a woman, the decision of Harry and Meghan to move to California at this time must beggar belief. Showing solidarity through this crisis would not mean risking their lives or even leaving their home; just hunkering down at Frogmore Cottage and ordering in Deliveroo would have been enough for now, with perhaps a few hospital visits to praise NHS staff later on.

There will be those who argue that the couple have no obligation to this country at all, because their royal “contract” is now up. But the deal the Queen reached with the Sussexes left them with royal titles to enjoy, their security bill footed, the use of Frogmore Cottage — and thus a reasonable expectation that even though they might not be cutting ribbons on rainy days in Wigan, they would show some solidarity in a time of national crisis.

Simply staying in Canada would at least have been inconspicuous (and would have made more sense given that coronavirus is rampaging through Los Angeles). Instead they have chosen this time to move to Hollywood and lay the foundations for lucrative new careers, not out of the spotlight but firmly in it.

Toes across the nation curled recently when footage emerged from last year’s _The Lion King _premiere showing Prince Harry telling a stunned Disney boss that his wife was available for voiceover work. Last week we saw the result, as the studio released the trailer for a new wildlife documentary voiced by “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex”. Disney’s writers didn’t miss a trick in the film’s tagline: “Powerful stories that show just how far family can take you.” Indeed.

This is what rankles about the Sussexes. Not, for goodness sake, the duchess’s race. Not her sex. It is the hypocrisy. While they have publicly and rather disrespectfully rejected the “shackles” of being British royals, they are only too happy to exploit the status that comes with it. But the price for the Dior and diamonds and adulation should be duty. It should be showing solidarity when the nation needs it, not sweeping in only for a few grand occasions. Contrast their behaviour with that of William and Kate, who have lent their weight to Public Health England’s campaign to protect people’s mental health during the coronavirus crisis.

Still, the Sussexes have made their choice. By making this move, at this time, the break with the royal family feels decisive. There is a loose end, though. We must hope that as they embark on their new lives, Harry and Meghan do the decent thing and seek to cover their own security costs. For Britain to maintain protection for the US-based couple would always have been unpopular; in the light of the coronavirus hit on our economy it is inconceivable. If the Sussexes are no longer servants of the British people, they should no longer expect to be supported by us either."


----------



## marthastoo

Gosh, so glad the PPE and ventilators are all taken care of so he can tweet about the important stuff that literally no one asked him his opinion about.


----------



## ilovenicebags

I still don’t quite understand why anyone in their right mind would leave such a life of privilege and wealth and want to move to LA and be a Grade C celebrity. I get that Duke of Windsor abdicated because he wasn’t allowed to marry Wallis but QE2 let Harry marry his choice and it sounds like she’s been letting her grandkids do their own thing within reason.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bellecate said:


> They'll try for a bit then it will come out she is having trouble becoming pregnant and they are going the surrogate route thus enabling her to go after those oh so many offers  coming in.



100%


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Straight-Laced said:


> Comment in The Times UK today :
> *Harry and Meghan have chosen celebrity over duty*
> *By moving to California and not returning to a Britain in crisis, the Sussexes are splitting decisively from the royals*
> Clare Foges   Monday March 30 2020, 12.00am BST, The Times
> 
> "Coronavirus: the great leveller. Infecting princes and prime ministers, making hermits of most, hushing the concrete council estate and the millionaires’ leafy square. And yet some still seem to soar above it all. Last week it was reported that, just before Trudeau and ***** closed the longest border in the world, a private jet soared over it, bearing our lately departed Duke and Duchess of Sussex from their hideout in Canada to their new home in California.
> 
> It is said that the couple are living in a compound near Hollywood, where they plan to settle permanently. Speaking of their hasty flight, a source declared that because “the borders were closing and flights were stopping”, Harry and Meghan “had to get out”, making Canada sound more like a chaotic war zone than a country of gentle folk and maple syrup pancakes.
> 
> The timing of this move might delicately be described as tactless. As Prince Charles fights Covid-19, as hundreds die and thousands grieve, and millions suffer distress and financial uncertainty; as a quarter of the world’s population are allowed little further than their own front door, the duke and duchess chose this moment to display their wealth and the freedom it can buy, to sever ties more definitively from crown and Commonwealth, to further their own interests.
> 
> Indeed, the timing is so crass that we have to wonder whether it was deliberate. Perhaps, to paraphrase that odious line coined on 9/11, the Sussexes thought this pandemic was “a good time to bury difficult news”? If this was the rationale, it was entirely wrong. Making the move to California, and making it now, only inflames the irritation many feel over the couple’s actions in recent months.
> 
> I am one of those who thought the union of Harry and Meghan an exciting thing for our country. The woman is beautiful, charismatic, blessed with Cleopatra-like poise. She glows as though lit from within by 1,000 watts. Harry’s discovery of Meghan seemed as great a boon to Britain as the uncovering of a fresh field of oil in the North Sea. Then came Megxit part 1: a disappointing rejection of this nation by those who had been offered all its riches on a plate. Still, we could find it in our hearts to understand their need for a life away from the spotlight; we could give them credit for staying within the Commonwealth, and we could be hopeful about their pledge to spend a lot of time in Britain.
> 
> Now Megxit part 2 has blown those charitable assumptions about part 1 out of the water. The couple who professed to hate media intrusion have headed to a place where their every move will be captured by paparazzi. The people who make so much of their bonds with the Commonwealth — and who reportedly toyed with a move to Africa — have moved out of it. The duke and duchess who still style their communications with a crown motif, whose brand is explicitly built on the back of the British royal family, have decided that in this moment of crisis they will leave the old firm to it.
> 
> According to the _Times_ report on the couple’s move, “the royal family is said to be disappointed that Prince Harry and Meghan have not returned to Britain to perform a supportive role.” Disappointed — exquisite understatement! The word carries the weight of 100 courtiers’ raised eyebrows, and the Queen’s own quiet despair. The theme of Her Majesty’s reign has been humility over haughtiness; whenever possible you stand beside your people, not above them. She learnt that from her mother, who insisted that she and King George VI stayed at Buckingham Palace during the Blitz, and who was “glad” when the Luftwaffe bombed the palace because it meant she could “look the East End in the face”.
> 
> Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor donned overalls in the Auxiliary Territorial Service and learned how to drive military trucks alongside other patriotic teenage girls. This is the record, so when her recent statement on coronavirus assured that “my family and I stand ready to play our part”, we knew she meant it. To such a woman, the decision of Harry and Meghan to move to California at this time must beggar belief. Showing solidarity through this crisis would not mean risking their lives or even leaving their home; just hunkering down at Frogmore Cottage and ordering in Deliveroo would have been enough for now, with perhaps a few hospital visits to praise NHS staff later on.
> 
> There will be those who argue that the couple have no obligation to this country at all, because their royal “contract” is now up. But the deal the Queen reached with the Sussexes left them with royal titles to enjoy, their security bill footed, the use of Frogmore Cottage — and thus a reasonable expectation that even though they might not be cutting ribbons on rainy days in Wigan, they would show some solidarity in a time of national crisis.
> 
> Simply staying in Canada would at least have been inconspicuous (and would have made more sense given that coronavirus is rampaging through Los Angeles). Instead they have chosen this time to move to Hollywood and lay the foundations for lucrative new careers, not out of the spotlight but firmly in it.
> 
> Toes across the nation curled recently when footage emerged from last year’s _The Lion King _premiere showing Prince Harry telling a stunned Disney boss that his wife was available for voiceover work. Last week we saw the result, as the studio released the trailer for a new wildlife documentary voiced by “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex”. Disney’s writers didn’t miss a trick in the film’s tagline: “Powerful stories that show just how far family can take you.” Indeed.
> 
> This is what rankles about the Sussexes. Not, for goodness sake, the duchess’s race. Not her sex. It is the hypocrisy. While they have publicly and rather disrespectfully rejected the “shackles” of being British royals, they are only too happy to exploit the status that comes with it. But the price for the Dior and diamonds and adulation should be duty. It should be showing solidarity when the nation needs it, not sweeping in only for a few grand occasions. Contrast their behaviour with that of William and Kate, who have lent their weight to Public Health England’s campaign to protect people’s mental health during the coronavirus crisis.
> 
> Still, the Sussexes have made their choice. By making this move, at this time, the break with the royal family feels decisive. There is a loose end, though. We must hope that as they embark on their new lives, Harry and Meghan do the decent thing and seek to cover their own security costs. For Britain to maintain protection for the US-based couple would always have been unpopular; in the light of the coronavirus hit on our economy it is inconceivable. If the Sussexes are no longer servants of the British people, they should no longer expect to be supported by us either."


Read for filth!


----------



## CeeJay

hellosunshine said:


> Personally, I do not know. However, for whatever reason they've surrounded themselves with many former conservative-leaning government workers.


So then, why even mention that?


----------



## hellosunshine

CeeJay said:


> So then, why even mention that?



I mentioned it because it's in contrast to the political leanings of another royal household and I was geniunely surprised. People can surmise whatever they'd like from the info.


----------



## Emeline

hellosunshine said:


> Personally, I do not know. However, for whatever reason they've surrounded themselves with many former conservative-leaning government workers.



W&K are mature thoughtful adults and devoted parents, they seem to be able to think for themselves.

And isn't this particular thread  about the adventures of M&H?


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


> I mentioned it because *it's in contrast to the political leanings of another royal household* and I was geniunely surprised. People can surmise whatever they'd like from the info.



You are of course referring to that other royal household that was fooled by a fake Greta Thunberg, not once but twice? Spilling his guts for the amusement of all? They should probably stay in their own lane and do their best to schmooze up to Hollywood celebrities and leave politics to the grownups.


----------



## lalame

ilovenicebags said:


> I still don’t quite understand why anyone in their right mind would leave such a life of privilege and wealth and want to move to LA and be a Grade C celebrity. I get that Duke of Windsor abdicated because he wasn’t allowed to marry Wallis but QE2 let Harry marry his choice and it sounds like she’s been letting her grandkids do their own thing within reason.



She sees the pathway to being a grade A celebrity...


----------



## PewPew

> *By moving to California and not returning to a Britain in crisis*



Years from now, they may say how much they suffered when Covid & travel bans prevented them from helping UK or Prince Charles in crisis. And I hope the world will remind them how they moved to LA after local quarantines & travel bans...

Does anyone believe H&M and ALL their security and staff from Canada are self-quarantining for 14 days per guidelines & not meeting with any locals??


----------



## amandacasey

I’m so glad ***** echoed my sentiment when he posted on Twitter that usa would not be paying for their security


----------



## lalame

I totally agree with ***** on this but I was surprised he even said something... was that actually suggested somewhere that we MIGHT pay for it?? I thought that was just an issue in Canada because of their special arrangement with the UK.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> I totally agree with ***** on this but I was surprised he even said something... was that actually suggested somewhere that we MIGHT pay for it?? I thought that was just an issue in Canada because of their special arrangement with the UK.



It’s a diplomatic issue if you are visiting as an important person( foreign royal family, foreign president or prime minister etc) it’s another if you plan to move to live in America as a civilian or as a star persona, especially since you are relinquishing your royal duties, and are no longer allowed that title. 

Apparently it already cost US taxpayers a hefty amount for security, for M and H ‘s JP Morgan visit to Miami per this article, I did not cross check this articles with others yet.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-wont-*****-follow-canadas-lead-in-prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-security-costs?_amp=true

Here's a question: Why does an administration which prides itself on "America First!" allow Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to take the American taxpayer for a ride?

On this issue at least, Canada's liberal prime minister is the one who is putting Canada first. I say this in the context of Canada's announcement on Thursday that it will no longer pay for protecting the un-royal-by-choice couple.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have relocated to Canada on a part-time basis following their decision to abandon most duties for the British royal family. And up until now, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the law enforcement agency responsible for Canadian protective services, has been supporting the couple's protection alongside its British counterpart.

The cost announcement suggests that Britain will either have to compensate Canada for its continued security provision or provide its own protection officers.

_Canada is right. The costs here are significant, involving logistics, accommodation for protection teams, salaries for the multiple shifts required on a 24-hour basis, equipment such as armored vehicles, and a surveillance and monitoring post. Even more important, the royal couple can hardly now be regarded in the same light as their other royal counterparts and foreign government officials. They have decided, after all, to step back from royal duties and pursue a life of private jet adventures and highly paid speaking gigs.

Unfortunately, the ***** administration lacks Canada's courage on this issue. I am told that the Diplomatic Security Service, the State Department arm responsible for protecting foreign VIPs below the rank of head of state, provided protection for Harry and Meghan on a trip to a JPMorgan summit in Miami earlier this month. That trip apparently came with a rather nice $500,000 appearance paycheck for the royal couple, and you, dear taxpayer, helped make it possible.

This Miami trip alone likely cost the U.S. taxpayer tens of thousands of dollars. Adding to the complication here is the fact that Britain's Metropolitan Police Protection Command, responsible for protecting the royal family, takes advantage of U.S. security resources so as to offset its own costs. This fits with its unfortunate and dangerous tradition of underresourcing protective operations.

When I reached out to the DSS and the State Department press office, two separate State officials refused to comment on the Miami visit. This, both spokespersons said, is because "in keeping with longstanding security practice, we do not discuss details of our protective operations."
_
Sorry, but that's a garbage excuse. Of course the DSS does not comment on active protection missions, but it regularly advertises its protection of foreign dignitaries after their visits conclude. The DSS has even posted photos of its special agents protecting Prince Harry!

I suspect that the ***** administration is trying to avoid media scrutiny of taxpayer costs entailed in protection of the two prima donnas (as the _Sun_ reports, they appear to have been using their protection team for shopping runs at organic delicatessens).

The ***** administration's indulgence of their behavior should end. It's one thing to provide temporary protection for visiting foreign government officials on official business. It is altogether another thing to subsidize Harry and Meghan's money-earning jaunts.

If Harry and Meghan want to make frequent trips here or even live in the United States, we should welcome them and do it without paying for their security.


----------



## lalame

Well all I can say is I hope they continue buying all the expensive clothes, foods, everything they want and put money into the local economy during their time here. I hope they live the most expensive lifestyle royalty can buy! As long as taxpayers don’t foot any of their bills.


----------



## Jktgal

"Harry’s discovery of Meghan seemed as great a boon to Britain as the uncovering of a fresh field of oil in the North Sea. "

The best laugh I had in a few days.


----------



## Clearblueskies

ilovenicebags said:


> I still don’t quite understand why anyone in their right mind would leave such a life of privilege and wealth and want to move to LA and be a Grade C celebrity. I get that Duke of Windsor abdicated because he wasn’t allowed to marry Wallis but QE2 let Harry marry his choice and it sounds like she’s been letting her grandkids do their own thing within reason.


This!  So much effort and hustling from Meghan to get right back to where she started - but now a damaged reputation too?  I don’t get it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

hellosunshine said:


> *Personally, I do not know.* However, for whatever reason they've surrounded themselves with many former conservative-leaning government workers.


So really you don't know anything!
Who are these conservative-leaning government workers you seem to be so familiar with? I would like to see their names. And for your information, even conservative party members aren't all Brexiteers, let alone "former conservative-leaning government workers"!  I'd also think the staff were hired based on their ability to do the work rather than their political views. W&K are not running a political party after all!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> William & Kate are brexiteers? Is that widely known? I've never heard anything about that and am surprised to hear it if true...


It's not true! The poster just made it up and admitted that they don't know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> William & Kate are brexiteers? Is that widely known? I've never heard anything about that and am surprised to hear it if true...



Seeing the Royals never comment on politics, it's just a certain poster being full of it as usual.


----------



## gelbergirl

Obviously, they'll do a photo shoot inside of the new home.  Who will they sell the pics to?  People Magazine, Architectural Digest, Harpers Bazaar?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> This is what rankles about the Sussexes. Not, for goodness sake, the duchess’s race. Not her sex. It is the hypocrisy. While they have publicly and rather disrespectfully rejected the “shackles” of being British royals, they are only too happy to exploit the status that comes with it. But the price for the Dior and diamonds and adulation should be duty. It should be showing solidarity when the nation needs it, not sweeping in only for a few grand occasions. Contrast their behaviour with that of William and Kate, who have lent their weight to Public Health England’s campaign to protect people’s mental health during the coronavirus crisis.



This this this.


----------



## Chagall

MM said some very damning things about *****. ‘The Donald’ does not forget and can be quite vindictive. I wonder how they could get security paid for them in view of the crisis facing the US now. Or at any other time for that matter.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gelbergirl said:


> Obviously, they'll do a photo shoot inside of the new home.  Who will they sell the pics to?  People Magazine, Architectural Digest, Harpers Bazaar?


Sure they will, and it will all be “absolutely the right decision” for them - just like Canada was (for the brief period they were *permanently resident* there).  I predict we’ll be seeing much more of Archie too - he’ll be popping up all over the place.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> MM said some very damning things about *****. ‘The Donald’ does not forget and can be quite vindictive. I wonder how they could get security paid for them in view of the crisis facing the US now. Or at any other time for that matter.


They consider themselves internationally important people, and deserving of protection.  We might be shocked at the entitlement but it doesn’t stop them.  I bet they put out feelers, and I’m very glad ***** publicly slapped them down.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> They consider themselves internationally important people, and deserving of protection.  We might be shocked at the entitlement but it doesn’t stop them.  I bet they out feelers, and I’m very glad ***** publicly slapped them down.


Yes, good for *****. With the serious health crisis going on in the US right now I am surprised he even bothered to mention them. That gives them the importance they crave but don’t in any way deserve.


----------



## mia55

I wonder if they have any shame? I hope they do realize they look like a fool.


----------



## limom

If they don’t make it in LA, where will they go next?


----------



## mdcx

Personally I think M would be happy to be the wealthy ex wife who just lunches, shops and does vaguely “charitable” things that get her photo in the society page. She holds onto the actress thing because then she can still blather on about having a career. Basically she wants to live like one of the RHOBH.
She does seem to want some level of adulation, but I think her public have fallen away pretty substantially in the last few months.


----------



## doni

If the US is not paying for their security, who is?


----------



## PewPew

doni said:


> If the US is not paying for their security, who is?



Remember the Sparkles have only lost 5% (by their Megxit/Sussex website estimate) of direct taxpayer funding by leaving the BRF. A chunk of their expenses is paid for by Daddy, BUT the bulk of Prince Charles’ income comes from taxpayers via the Duchy. When they said they were going to repay the millions used to renovate Frogmore Cottage, few were impressed because it’s believed that money will come from Charles / the Duchy



> Harry and Meghan’s _*Miami trip alone likely cost the U.S. taxpayer tens of thousands of dollars.* Adding to the complication here is the fact that Britain's Metropolitan Police Protection Command, responsible for protecting the royal family, takes advantage of U.S. security resources so as to offset its own costs. This fits with its unfortunate and dangerous tradition of underresourcing protective operations._



Grrr, this burns me up so much.  Even though Harry was technically still a “working royal,” he came to Miami to talk at JP Morgan about his dead mother to make $1Million. It was a PERSONAL trip because the royal family is strictly prohibited from private enterprise while being “working royals”. These grifters have enjoyed the perks of both “working royal” & “independent freeloader” for 3 months (6 months if you date back to their escape to Canada in the wake of bad press last Fall). And they were so insanely entitled in their past statement about requiring UK-funded security due to Mr. 6th in Line’s birthright & her “independent profile”


----------



## limom

PewPew said:


> Remember the Sparkles have only lost 5% (by their Megxit estimate) of direct taxpayer funding by leaving the BRF. A chunk of their expenses is paid for by Daddy, BUT the bulk of Prince Charles’ income comes from taxpayers via the Duchy. When they said they were going to repay the millions used to renovate Frogmore Cottage, few were impressed because it’s believed that money will come from Charles / the Duchy
> 
> 
> 
> Grrr, this burns me up so much.  Even though Harry was technically still a “working royal,” he came to Miami to talk at JP Morgan about his dead mother to make $1Million. It was a PERSONAL trip because the royal family is strictly prohibited from private enterprise while being “working royals”.* These grifters have enjoyed the perks of both “working royal” & “independent freeloader” for 3 months (6 months if you date back to their escape to Canada in the wake of bad press last Fall*.


They are parasites. Period.
If the British want to keep their Royals, it is up to them. However, it is really nervy to expect Republics not part of the Commonwealth to pick up the tab.
What exactly are they bringing to the table?


----------



## pukasonqo

Time for a perfume launch?
“Existing” by Megan Markle


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> What exactly are they bringing to the table?



1) Health & lifestyle advice that they don’t follow, but we will benefit from

2) Environmental edicts that they don’t follow, but we will benefit from

3) World solutions that they insta-promised they would work on while in quarantine & while we are “bored at home” (it didn’t occur to them that we plebeians work from home now)

4) Their aura as Mr. 6th in Line & She-of-“independent profile” who paradoxically is credited as “Megan, Duchess of Sussex “ in promos for her voiceover role in the new movie

In light of the above, I shall write my congressman about the opportunity we lose by not supporting these humanitarians.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Compass Rose

doni said:


> If the US is not paying for their security, who is?


I have no doubt that they considered footing their own bill.....


----------



## lanasyogamama

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/blizzard-harry-and-meghan-acting-like-spoiled-brats

*BLIZZARD: Harry and Meghan acting like spoiled brats*

BY CHRISTINA BLIZZARD, SPECIAL TO TORONTO SUN
ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: MAR 29, 2020
_





Harry and Meghan arrive for the annual Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey in London, England, on March 9, 2020...._

_Email


Twitter
 

Facebook
 

Pinterest
 

Google+
 

Linkedin
_
_Well, thanks for nothing, Harry and Meghan,

We welcomed you to our shores, gave you the best security money can buy — our Mounties — and you leave without so much as a thank you?

What a couple of self-entitled, spoiled brats.

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived on Vancouver Island back in December, the locals embraced them. They protected them from prying eyes. The rest of Canada was thrilled to have them here.

Turns out we were just a safe bolt-hole for them to shirk their royal duties. As part of the Commonwealth, with the Queen as our head of state, we were acceptable to Buckingham Palace. The U.S. would have been a more controversial choice.
_


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t get the whole article to paste in, but it’s well worth a click


----------



## Mrs.Z

pukasonqo said:


> Time for a perfume launch?
> “Existing” by Megan Markle


She would never make a perfume, she would find a new way to communicate scent via an improved vehicle for olfactory perception.


----------



## zinacef

Sad to say but there will be people who will continue to support them as in rich people who wants the notoriety, of being friends with the “royalty”. They will be catered to like invited to live in mansions for free, travel per private jets for free, etc...  first class free-loaders at its best just like the abdicated king and Wallis Simpson. Just hanging out and having fun.


----------



## mdcx

lanasyogamama said:


> https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/blizzard-harry-and-meghan-acting-like-spoiled-brats
> 
> *BLIZZARD: Harry and Meghan acting like spoiled brats*
> 
> BY CHRISTINA BLIZZARD, SPECIAL TO TORONTO SUN
> ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED: MAR 29, 2020
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan arrive for the annual Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey in London, England, on March 9, 2020...._
> 
> _Email
> 
> 
> Twitter
> 
> 
> Facebook
> 
> 
> Pinterest
> 
> 
> Google+
> 
> 
> Linkedin
> _
> _Well, thanks for nothing, Harry and Meghan,
> 
> We welcomed you to our shores, gave you the best security money can buy — our Mounties — and you leave without so much as a thank you?
> 
> What a couple of self-entitled, spoiled brats.
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived on Vancouver Island back in December, the locals embraced them. They protected them from prying eyes. The rest of Canada was thrilled to have them here.
> 
> Turns out we were just a safe bolt-hole for them to shirk their royal duties. As part of the Commonwealth, with the Queen as our head of state, we were acceptable to Buckingham Palace. The U.S. would have been a more controversial choice._


This is a good point - they didn’t thank Canada for their very generous hosting, or say a nice goodbye but just slunk off in the night.


----------



## Chagall

Prince Charles tested positive and is out of isolation in 7 days.


----------



## Chagall

Chagall said:


> Prince Charles tested positive and is out of isolation in 7 days.


Whatever happened to the mandatory 14 days for the rest of the world.


----------



## chicinthecity777

zinacef said:


> Sad to say but *there will be people who will continue to support them as in rich people who wants the notoriety, of being friends with the “royalty”. They will be catered to like invited to live in mansions for free, travel per private jets for free, etc*...  first class free-loaders at its best just like the abdicated king and Wallis Simpson. Just hanging out and having fun.


I am not sure about that and if so how long it will last. They are nothing if they are not royalty and in 2 days they will not be "royalty" as in they will not be representing the Queen. They have nothing much to offer if they are not. Oh well she can continue to offer voice over work...


----------



## limom

Favorite part of the article:
*
“
Meghan and Harry have thought only of themselves. They’re freeloaders who’ve used and abused the generous, good nature of Canadians.

Good luck and God bless, Harry and Meghan. Don’t trip on your yoga mats on your way out the door.”
*
Where are they living right now?
Beverly Hills? Beverly Park?
They have to be in a gated community, imho.
Whose property are the squatting at?
Oprah?


----------



## doni

PewPew said:


> Remember the Sparkles have only lost 5% (by their Megxit estimate) of direct taxpayer funding by leaving the BRF. A chunk of their expenses is paid for by Daddy, BUT the bulk of Prince Charles’ income comes from taxpayers via the Duchy. When they said they were going to repay the millions used to renovate Frogmore Cottage, few were impressed because it’s believed that money will come from Charles / the Duchy



Oh no, I don’t believe for a minute that they pay the excess of security costs (so far financed by the Canadians) with their allowance. They have themselves made it very clear in their website that they consider these expenses are to be financed from taxes, plus it is just too expensive.


----------



## Aminamina

limom said:


> Favorite part of the article:
> *
> “
> Meghan and Harry have thought only of themselves. They’re freeloaders who’ve used and abused the generous, good nature of Canadians.
> 
> Good luck and God bless, Harry and Meghan. Don’t trip on your yoga mats on your way out the door.”
> *
> Where are they living right now?
> Beverly Hills? Beverly Park?
> They have to be in a gated community, imho.
> Whose property are the squatting at?
> Oprah?



Beyonce?


----------



## Clearblueskies

zinacef said:


> Sad to say but there will be people who will continue to support them as in rich people who wants the notoriety, of being friends with the “royalty”. They will be catered to like invited to live in mansions for free, travel per private jets for free, etc...  first class free-loaders at its best just like the abdicated king and Wallis Simpson. Just hanging out and having fun.


I wonder.  It all seems to have gone rather quiet on the Sussex celeb support front.  These sorts of friendships are transactional.  If you’ve nothing to offer, or you become controversial.....bye bye.


----------



## limom

Clearblueskies said:


> I wonder.  It all seems to have gone rather quiet on the Sussex celeb support front.  These sorts of friendships are transactional.  If you’ve nothing to offer, or you become controversial.....bye bye.


It depends how well the voice over Elephants gig goes...
If she does well, the offers will come....
If not, they will become royal has beens nomads... imho 
there are tons of them in sunny shady places all over the world...


----------



## rose60610

If anybody other than the RF should have paid for their security in Miami, it should have been JP Morgan Chase. They're the ones who hired them to hear Harry cry about his mother. Besides, what do they pay for Jamie Dimon's security 24/7, it can't be all that different or strategic in planning. 
If Beyonce, George Clooney, J LO, Bono,  (real A-Listers) and others (like billionaire hedge fund managers) can pay for their own security, why can't H&M?  Since they're the ones who requested to step down they should be on the hook themselves. The Crown did remind them and us that "it's complicated" but as time goes on their fall from grace deepens. In 1973, J Paul Getty's 17 yr old grandson was kidnapped for ransom and his ear cut off when it wasn't paid. After the ear, J Paul negotiated for a less ransom amount and the grandson was let go (a 5 month ordeal).  I suppose they're thinking of similar instances could happen to H,M & Archie, but then the Crown should pay for such security, not any other country.  I get that lots of people hate hate hate hate ***** and nothing he does/says will ever be given any credit regardless what it is.
Now H&M claim they never asked the U.S. Gov't to cover their security. Even if that's true, the rumors were flying and it's good ***** spent three seconds to tweet that we weren't footing the bill.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Bologna, somebody had to tell ***** about footing the bill.
Are they talking about them on fox?
I doubt that he thought about them out of the blue, imho.


----------



## rose60610

Obviously either H&M hit up the White House themselves or somebody informed ***** of the rumors. Either way, the answer was "Nope".  Then we get from H&M "Wha? we had no intention of asking the U.S. Gov't for security".  Oh. So who's going to protect Meghan when she goes on stage to collect all her Oscars?


----------



## youngster

Chagall said:


> Whatever happened to the mandatory 14 days for the rest of the world.



Oh, this was in the news last week, that PC tested positive. (Prince Albert of Monaco also tested positive a few days before PC and they were at the same event in March.)  I'm sure he's already well into his quarantine period and will do the full 14 days.


----------



## queennadine

I’m sorry, did I miss where politics are now allowed on TPF?

I’m seeing lots of “I never agree with him but...”; “I don’t follow him but...”; “all of his lies...”; etc. re *****’ tweet.

Are people of the opposite persuasion allowed to comment or is that off limits?


----------



## Chagall

youngster said:


> Oh, this was in the news last week, that PC tested positive. (Prince Albert of Monaco also tested positive a few days before PC and they were at the same event in March.)  I'm sure he's already well into his quarantine period and will do the full 14 days.


It was on our news this morning that he had completed 7 days and was out of quarantine. IF this is true it’s very irresponsible as even people who have not tested positive yet been exposed have to isolate 14 days.


----------



## Chagall

Chagall said:


> It was on our news this morning that he had completed 7 days and was out of quarantine. IF this is true it’s very irresponsible as even people who have not tested positive yet been exposed have to isolate 14 days.


Google it. Internet right this minute is full of him being out of quarantine after 7 days.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

mrsinsyder said:


> Sorry Omid, we all know they asked. ***** has a bit on his plate right now and wouldn’t have tweeted that if they hadn’t.



Well to be fair he also tweeted about the Bachelor finale ratings yesterday.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> Google it. Internet right this minute is full of him being out of quarantine after 7 days.


He’s out of self isolation.  I don’t think it means he’ll be leaving the house.


----------



## Chagall

Clearblueskies said:


> He’s out of self isolation.  I don’t think it means he’ll be leaving the house.


If he’s not leaving the house then I guess he is still under quarantine. Hope he does his full 14 days.


----------



## muchstuff

.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chagall said:


> If he’s not leaving the house then I guess he is still under quarantine. Hope he does his full 14 days.


Our rules may be different to yours?  Camilla has another 7 days to go, in case she’s incubating the virus.


----------



## marietouchet

Chagall said:


> Whatever happened to the mandatory 14 days for the rest of the world.


I think 7 days is the period when a sick person can infect another , Charles will no longer infect anyone after 7 days - the U.K. uses a 7 day rule for this 
While 14 days is how long it can take for a person to become sick , it might take Camilla 14 days to become sick After exposure to Charles - although she initially tested negative ,  so she has another 7 days alone per U.K. rules 
But then wasn’t Tom Hanks out of circulation for 14 days ?  could be diff rules in diff countries ,


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> Our rules may be different to yours? Camilla has another 7 days to go, in case she’s incubating the virus.


Yes, we Americans need to remember that guidelines are different in the rest of the world.  Our CDC guidelines seem to be stricter than a lot of what's recommended elsewhere.

The UK guideline is that people with COVID-19 should stay quarantined for 7 days from the onset of symptoms.  Likewise, the WHO social distance recommendation is (or was) only 1 metre, not 2 like in the US.

Charles being out of isolation probably won't mean he's back out shaking hands with the public, but it might mean he can have contact with his loved ones again.  

I just hope all of the royal servants and security are being treated with as much respect and value as the royals themselves and that they have worked out safe ways for people to do their jobs without being put into danger.


----------



## Jktgal

Chagall said:


> If he’s not leaving the house then I guess he is still under quarantine. Hope he does his full 14 days.



At the risk of being OOT: I have been following countries' covid policies and it is quite remarkable how different they are from one another. Anyway, I think for UK the gist is that if you show symptoms, you are required to self isolate for 7 days, and the rest of your household who has not shown symptoms, for 14 days. So DoCornwall who tested negative, actually has to self isolate longer than Charles!  I think the rationale is, if you exhibit symptoms then the infection happened 1-2 weeks ago, so if you get better in 7 days, then you are well on your way to recovery.  Whereas those in same household who tested negative could well be on their way to an infection, but if in 2 weeks they don't show symptoms, then likely they are ok.

Edit: this is a good illustration of the rule in the UK. 
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/c...417373_self_isolation_timetable_v3_640-nc.png


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> Yes, we Americans need to remember that guidelines are different in the rest of the world.  Our CDC guidelines seem to be stricter than a lot of what's recommended elsewhere.
> 
> The UK guideline is that people with COVID-19 should stay quarantined for 7 days from the onset of symptoms.  Likewise, the WHO social distance recommendation is (or was) only 1 metre, not 2 like in the US.
> 
> Charles being out of isolation probably won't mean he's back out shaking hands with the public, but it might mean he can have contact with his loved ones again.
> 
> I just hope all of the royal servants and security are being treated with as much respect and value as the royals themselves and that they have worked out safe ways for people to do their jobs without being put into danger.


It is indeed a 2 metre rule here in the UK too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh please!!!! [emoji57]


----------



## sdkitty

ilovenicebags said:


> I still don’t quite understand why anyone in their right mind would leave such a life of privilege and wealth and want to move to LA and be a Grade C celebrity. I get that Duke of Windsor abdicated because he wasn’t allowed to marry Wallis but QE2 let Harry marry his choice and it sounds like she’s been letting her grandkids do their own thing within reason.


because she thinks she is not a grade C celeb but a grade A.  will see how long that lasts


----------



## hellosunshine

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not true! The poster just made it up and admitted that they don't know.



I did not make it up. The info is available online within a simple search but just in case - I've posted the info for others over in their thread. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing the Royals never comment on politics, it's just a certain poster being full of it as usual.



I never said William & Kate are Brexit-supporters, I said that they've made it a point to hire and employ ex-Tory, Brexiteers, and conservative leaning people in very high positions within their royal household. That's a simple fact and the info is available online.


----------



## Chagall

Our prime ministers wife tested positive. She had to isolate for 14 days. Prime Minister Trudeau, with the advise of health experts, after being isolated for a full 14 days is still isolating himself in case he caught the virus at the tail end of Sophie’s 14 day quarantine. So I guess every country has different recommendations. Seeing how virulent Covid-19 is, we should err on the side of caution.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh please!!!! [emoji57]



Vomit inducing stuff


----------



## redney

Surprised no one has yet mentioned on this thread Boris Johnson, health secretary, and chief medical adviser have all tested positive (not political, I'm a Yank, don't really follow him other than general news articles).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/27/uk/uk-boris-johnson-coronavirus-gbr-intl/index.html


----------



## sdkitty

hellosunshine said:


> I did not make it up. The info is available online within a simple search but just in case - I've posted the info for others over in their thread.
> 
> 
> 
> I never said William & Kate are Brexit-supporters, I said that they've made it a point to hire and employ ex-Tory, Brexiteers, and conservative leaning people in very high positions within their royal household. That's a simple fact and the info is available online.


you said this.  you weren't implying William and Kate were Brexiteers?
Quote:  Interesting change up considering all the hard Brexiteers over at Kensington Palace (William & Kate).


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Vomit inducing stuff


well, it's addressed to their loyal followers


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> If they don’t make it in LA, where will they go next?



Maybe once Meghan has her expensive LA mansion purchased and some semblance of profit-making established, she’ll be ready to cut Harry loose. He can crawl back to his family with his tail between his legs, a failure but they’ll take him back because he’s family.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> you said this.  you weren't implying William and Kate were Brexiteers?
> Quote:  Interesting change up considering all the hard Brexiteers over at Kensington Palace (William & Kate).


I guess off topic political discussions are allowed for some.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> It was on our news this morning that he had completed 7 days and was out of quarantine. IF this is true it’s very irresponsible as even people who have not tested positive yet been exposed have to isolate 14 days.


I read that too. In the UK, it's a self-isolation period of seven days.  

Well glad to hear he's better.  I was worried we'd have to see Will on our banknotes. 



Sharont2305 said:


> It is indeed a 2 metre rule here in the UK too.


Yet no one seems to be distancing on the Tube.  Too crowded to do so.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> This is a good point - they didn’t thank Canada for their very generous hosting, or say a nice goodbye but just slunk off in the night.



Canada, consider yourselves Markled! I wish the US could say the same.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I read that too. In the UK, it's a self-isolation period of seven days.
> 
> Well glad to hear he's better.  I was worried we'd have to see Will on our banknotes.
> 
> 
> Yet no one seems to be distancing on the Tube.  Too crowded to do so.


Oh, I know, it's been awful, but the tube doesn't represent how the rest of the country are behaving, thankfully [emoji16]


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> well, it's addressed to their loyal followers


The stuff about how they won't appear to be working, but in fact will be working hard non-stop behind the scenes to make the world a better place, is particularly gross and manipulative.  But their followers have always lapped that message up in the past, so it serves them right to be fed more of the same.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh please!!!! [emoji57]




Wait, this faux-teary bye bye isn’t so they can say they’re not actively using royal after 31st, ie keeping this account in archive is it? Because to me it makes no difference if you’re active or inactive, it’s still your account and you’re still using the phrase royal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> The stuff about how they won't appear to be working, but in fact will be working hard non-stop behind the scenes to make the world a better place, is particularly gross and manipulative.  But their followers have always lapped that message up in the past, so it serves them right to be fed more of the same.


The self-serving freeloaders are really REALLY desperate not to look like self-serving freeloaders


----------



## chicinthecity777

hellosunshine said:


> I did not make it up. The info is available online within a simple search but just in case - I've posted the info for others over in their thread.


Of course! Thank you for the info. It's on the internet it must be true!


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Canada, consider yourselves Markled! I wish the US could say the same.


Yep we were Markled. Be patient your turn will come. There is always Mexico.


----------



## mia55

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh please!!!! [emoji57]




Well...they removed the comments feature, guess those were not very “supportive”, “inspirational” or “shared the same commitment to the good in the world.”


----------



## rose60610

I read their Instagram post twice, it doesn't even make sense. "that promise", --what promise? 
"...we are focusing this new chapter to understand how we can best contribute".  Even when the senseless word salad is tossed together they still find a way to make it all about THEM.
 "Finding solutions" is an abused over-tired phrase that every product company and PR firm spew out. 

My favorite: "the work continues".  The only work they're concerned with is how to look like they haven't screwed up. They won't succeed. 

I hope they're OK.


----------



## scarlet555

Is it horrible to think the best case scenario for Harry is the same fate as Olivia Wildes's first husband, also a prince.  Olivia Wilde was married to a prince at 19, then became famous and things didn't work out and divorced her first husband.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I read their Instagram post twice, it doesn't even make sense. "that promise", --what promise?
> "...we are focusing this new chapter to understand how we can best contribute".  Even when the senseless word salad is tossed together they still find a way to make it all about THEM.
> "Finding solutions" is an abused over-tired phrase that every product company and PR firm spew out.
> 
> My favorite: "the work continues".  The only work they're concerned with is how to look like they haven't screwed up. They won't succeed.
> 
> I hope they're OK.


wonder if she is really living now and not just existing


----------



## pukasonqo

The advantage of Oz being so far away is that they might never considered coming here (or NZ)


----------



## scarlet555

rose60610 said:


> I read their Instagram post twice, it doesn't even make sense. "that promise", --what promise?
> "...we are focusing this new chapter to understand how we can best contribute".  Even when the senseless word salad is tossed together they still find a way to make it all about THEM.
> "Finding solutions" is an abused over-tired phrase that every product company and PR firm spew out.
> 
> My favorite: "the work continues".  The only work they're concerned with is how to look like they haven't screwed up. They won't succeed.
> 
> I hope they're OK.



WTF, are these two delusional?  They need to simmer down:  Contribute by doing actual work and stop saying you are when you aren't.  These two are worse than..... the Kardashians, at least the K's are about self promotion and that they do.


----------



## bag-mania

mia55 said:


> Well...they removed the comments feature, guess those were not very “supportive”, “inspirational” or “shared the same commitment to the good in the world.”



If H&M were smart they might be getting the hint by now that maybe they are not as popular or special as they think they are. But of course that thought has likely never entered their heads.


----------



## doni

Oh so now they are taking a break from Instagram?
I get it, it must have been exhausting keeping that account existing, not living.
Hopefully but the time they have finished with the understanding on how they can contribute, this nightmare will be over.


----------



## arnott

mdcx said:


> This is a good point - they didn’t thank Canada for their very generous hosting, or say a nice goodbye but just slunk off in the night.



 I just read this:

"When living in Canada, which is part of the British Commonwealth, the Canadian government did for some time help foot the bill of the couple’s security, but that has since ended. A statement given to Yahoo News U.K. from the Canadian Office of the Minister of Public Safety read, “As the duke and duchess are currently recognized as Internationally Protected Persons, Canada has an obligation to provide security assistance on an as-needed basis.

“At the request of the Metropolitan Police, the RCMP has been providing assistance to the Met since the arrival of the duke and duchess to Canada intermittently since October 2019. The assistance will cease in the coming weeks, in keeping with their change in status.” The last day of their royal duties will be March 31."

As a Canadian taxpayer it irks me that we had to pay for any of their security!


----------



## rose60610

Can't they move to Chunga Changa? They won't have to worry about security there. Actually, if M just holed herself up in a closet and shut up for once in her life she wouldn't have to worry about security there, either.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh please!!!! [emoji57]



Where’s the VOMITORIUM?!?!


----------



## doni

rose60610 said:


> Can't they move to Chunga Changa? They won't have to worry about security there. Actually, if M just holed herself up in a closet and shut up for once in her life she wouldn't have to worry about security there, either.


But you forget, there is a revolution going on in Chunga Changa. Better that they go protect the penguins in the Artic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

zinacef said:


> Sad to say but there will be people who will continue to support them as in rich people who wants the notoriety, of being friends with the “royalty”. They will be catered to like invited to live in mansions for free, travel per private jets for free, etc...  first class free-loaders at its best just like the abdicated king and Wallis Simpson. Just hanging out and having fun.



I think you're right. I totally see it, at least for as long as she's still making front page headlines (tabloid or otherwise). Can you imagine the PR a <B actor gets by being papped with her? "John Smith buddies up with royalty" It'll happen. I doubt a tabloid will be long without some mention or other of them. Knowing their style, it'll be a "candid" pap shot or leaked "private" meeting etc etc.

If I see them inviting in Architectural Digest or something though I'm really going to roll my damn eyes. Sure, leave the UK for more privacy but invite millions for a tour inside your damn house.


----------



## TC1

doni said:


> But you forget, there is a revolution going on in Chunga Changa. Better that they go protect the penguins in the Artic.


Clearly the village of Chunga Changa is missing their idiots?


----------



## hellosunshine

*No other royal comms reps will act on behalf of Sussexes, “including Palace spokespeople, household representatives nor royal sources.” *


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh please!!!! [emoji57]



The _'You've been great!'_ part made me...


----------



## Blyen

hellosunshine said:


> *No other royal comms reps will act on behalf of Sussexes, “including Palace spokespeople, household representatives nor royal sources.” *



So they have officially left the only people who could (and cared about) save them from themselves... Good job H&M!


----------



## mrsinsyder

hellosunshine said:


> *No other royal comms reps will act on behalf of Sussexes, “including Palace spokespeople, household representatives nor royal sources.” *



What a massive L they've taken.


----------



## Annawakes

That’s interesting.  So they intend to vanish for a few months?  But don’t lets forget they are still working feverishly behind the scenes.


----------



## bag-mania

hellosunshine said:


>




I wonder if Omid Scobie ever finds it hard to breathe when he's got his nose so firmly planted up their butts like that?


----------



## Flatsy

Blyen said:


> So they have officially left the only people who could (and cared about) save them from themselves... Good job H&M!


No kidding.  They do an atrocious job when they speak for themselves.  Their website statements that were overwhelmingly perceived to be petulant and bitter are proof enough of that.

The upside is that they can no longer blame the evil royal family for undermining them and leaking about them, although I'm sure they will find a way. In 6 months Scobie will probably be complaining that the Sussexes "were just left on their own to fend for themselves!" as if that's not exactly what they demanded.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Blyen said:


> So they have officially left the only people who could (and cared about) save them from themselves... Good job H&M!


They’ll always have Omid 
Good to hear the little darlings are taking a break for a few months - a holiday is just the ticket when you’ve been hard at it


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> That’s interesting.  So they intend to vanish for a few months?  But don’t lets forget they are still working feverishly behind the scenes.



Well, the folks they hired at Stanford to do all of the work for them are forced to stay home for now. Since they cannot do anything for themselves they must wait until the people who actually know what to do can go back to work for them.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> No kidding.  They do an atrocious job when they speak for themselves.  Their website statements that were overwhelmingly perceived to be petulant and bitter are proof enough of that.
> 
> The upside is that they can no longer blame the evil royal family for undermining them and leaking about them, although I'm sure they will find a way. In 6 months Scobie will probably be complaining that the Sussexes "were just left on their own to fend for themselves!" as if that's not exactly what they demanded.


Meghan is a dreadful writer.  They’ll be authors of their own misfortune


----------



## gazoo

Prince Charles is raising rents in the Duchy. (Is that the right term?) The comments are worth a peek if anyone is bored whilst social distancing. I'd guess all the added expense of Harry and Meghan's situation is stretching his budget.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ll-estate-blasted-community-Scilly-Isles.html

*Prince Charles' Duchy of Cornwall estate is blasted by community in Scilly Isles as a 'money making machine' after it hiked annual rent on its land from £100 to £7,000*

*Prince Charles has been criticised for increasing rent for tenants on his freehold land - with claims one went up from £100 to £7,000. Locals on the Isles of Scilly says the hikes by the Duchy of Cornwall are costing them a fortune - and preventing them from buying their own land.*

*The Prince of Wales, 71, owns and leases land on the archipelago, which is located around four miles south of mainland Britain. As the estate is freehold locals can only occupy some properties as leaseholders - meaning they don't own the ground - and are charged a nominal rental fee. The BBC has alleged that annual sums have been increased in recent years in once case from £100 to £7,000 by the Duchy - which last year made £21m profit.*

*The Duchy said in response that large amounts of the rent were reinvested in the isles, conditions were advertised pre-sale and mitigation was offered to those affected. Alan and Glenda Davis bought the 99-year lease for their property near the Garrison on St Mary's - the largest island - in 1984. But when they enquired about buying the freehold they were told that wasn't an option - leaving them disappointed. Mr Davis claims he had no idea of the limitations when he made the purchase, of which the lease still has 75 years to run.*

*He said: 'I just want the same rights as everybody else. It needs to change.. The whole thing is medieval. 'For us it means we can't take money out of the house, we can't have equity release, we can't mortgage it. 'There's a campaign going on to abolish leaseholds and replace it commonholds. 'People are very fearful of the Duchy. They don't want to prejudice their position. I have been fighting since the late 1990s. 'It's got nothing to do with wanting the monarchy to be abolished - it's behaviour that's not acceptable. 'The Duchy have now said you can go to tribunal but the costs of that are enormous. 'A few years back we had a group who tried to bring some court action. I consulted some lawyers and QCs. But the outcome was: 'Don't do it'. 'The rent problem doesn't apply to me but it does seriously to others. One lady has jobs galore to pay the £7,000.'*

*It is thought that around 50 people are affected by the issue.*

*The Duchy of Cornwall owns 135,000 acres of land across the nation and made a £21 million profit last year.*

*Former Liberal ******** minister Norman Baker has authored a book on the monarchy, its finances and role in society. He said the freehold law benefited Prince Charles in a way 'unlike any other landowner'. He told the BBC: 'It's extraordinary in the year 2020 that a medieval throwback like the Duchy of Cornwall - which is simply a money-making machine for the Prince of Wales - can continue to exist in the way it does.'*

*Buying freehold land is a right enjoyed since 1967 and was reaffirmed in legislation in 2001, but the Duchy of Cornwall has been exempt from this right to buy.*

*Tim Dean, a councillor on the Isles of Scilly, added: 'I am not aware of this particular issue but there has always been a little bit of conflict here between the residents and the Duchy being such a large landowner. 'As far as I am aware they have handled most things well but will look into this.'*

*In response to the allegations, the Duchy told the BBC: 'Typically over 90 per cent of income from rents from the islands is reinvested on Scilly every year.*

*'In the off-islands and Garrison, some tenants are not able to acquire their freeholds and we ensure such restrictions are well advertised to potential buyers.*

*'For those who would normally have this option, the Duchy offers an extension to their lease of 50 years.' *

*Speaking today, a spokesperson for the Duchy of Cornwall said on freeholds: 'The Isles of Scilly have been part of the Duchy estate since the 14th century and we have always strived to protect and maintain the unique character of these islands.*

*'In areas where tenants are not able to acquire their freeholds, we ensure such restrictions are well advertised to potential buyers and offer these tenants 50 year lease extensions.'*

*On rent prices, they added: 'The Duchy follows the statutory formula for setting ground rents and if there is any disagreement, tenants can request that the rent is assessed by an independent rent tribunal.'*


----------



## Flatsy

Charles is going to need to raise those rents again!  That's the money he's using to pay for Harry and Meghan's security while they retire in Hollywood.


----------



## youngster

_"*While you may not see us here, the work continues."*_

I think this is my favorite sentence of their whole word-salad post.  So glad to read that Meghan and Harry are on the job!  Working hard on reviewing those Zillow listings for palatial estates around L.A., avoiding the paps, hiring a new security staff, and figuring out how to use Mint for budgeting.

Also, do they not employ a single person to proof read their posts and correct for grammar and poor sentence construction?  Apparently, not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> He may love it. They will be considered a novelty to the  celebrities in the entertainment industry for a time. Somebody on their staff is probably already working on getting them a slot as presenters at a major award show for next year. They’ll get invited to some fancy celebrity parties, again as a novelty. Harry will get lots of shallow approval from the gossip media. Nobody here expects him to have any responsibilities or to do anything of substance. The media will be happy to repeat his trite and hypocritical quotes and never bother to look any deeper or call him out because H&M aren’t real news after all. They will be treated like any other LA celebrity, for entertainment purposes only.
> 
> The fly in the ointment is the pandemic came at exactly the wrong time for them. By the time they’re ready for their big arrival parties, Hollywood will still be in recovery mode. Projects will be months behind schedule, some will be cut entirely. All the important people they want to schmooze up to will be occupied with much bigger concerns than H&M. How sad!


As I am actively looking for employment, I can tell you that every single opportunity presented to me by an entertainment company has either been CLOSED   -or-   placed ON HOLD!  Sadly, a number of independent contractors/consultants have been laid off or furloughed, so if H&M are expecting more "opportunities" in the entertainment industry, they better not be holding their breath!  In addition, Harry's "pitch" to Bob Iger may have provided an opportunity for Meghan at that time, Bob has since stepped down as the CEO of Disney.  From a purely business perspective, it makes total sense to me .. while movies, TV, etc. are enjoyable, it's not considered an "essential" business, and as long as the markets & profits are questionable, I don't see them wanted to spend any money unless it is viewed as "a true need".


----------



## Stansy

youngster said:


> _"*While you may not see us here, the work continues."*_
> 
> I think this is my favorite sentence of their whole word-salad post.  So glad to read that Meghan and Harry are on the job!  Working hard on reviewing those Zillow listings for palatial estates around L.A., avoiding the paps, hiring a new security staff, and figuring out how to use Mint for budgeting.
> 
> Also, do they not employ a single person to proof read their posts and correct for grammar and poor sentence construction?  Apparently, not.


They didn‘t say that they would work... just sayin


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Omid Scobie ever finds it hard to breathe when he's got his nose so firmly planted up their butts like that?


Who is this guy anyway? I had a look at his Twitter page and he looks around 18yrs old in his profile picture.


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Who is this guy anyway? I had a look at his Twitter page and he looks around 18yrs old in his profile picture.



From what I can find he's "Royal Editor at Large" for Harpers Bazaar and an occasional Royal Contributor for ABC News.

He's mainly Harry and Meghan's #1 fanboy!


----------



## Genie27

Annawakes said:


> That’s interesting.  So they intend to vanish for a few months?  But don’t lets forget they are still working feverishly behind the scenes.


It must be time yet again for a much needed “six-week-break” from all their onerous duties and responsibilities. 

Their posts always remind me of those awful word-count essay questions in school - the ability to word-salad to three hundred what could be said in fifty.


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> _"*While you may not see us here, the work continues."*_
> 
> I think this is my favorite sentence of their whole word-salad post.  So glad to read that Meghan and Harry are on the job!  Working hard on reviewing those Zillow listings for palatial estates around L.A., avoiding the paps, hiring a new security staff, and figuring out how to use Mint for budgeting.
> 
> Also, do they not employ a single person to proof read their posts and correct for grammar and poor sentence construction?  Apparently, not.



That sentence made me so angry!! I’ve never seen someone talk about how much work they are doing that has no visible results.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> From what I can find he's "Royal Editor at Large" for Harpers Bazaar and an occasional Royal Contributor for ABC News.
> 
> He's mainly Harry and Meghan's #1 fanboy!


Oh really, trashy Harper's Bazaar  I'm not surprised.
Royal Editor at Large  NotSoSussex Royal Kiss-A** more like.
'Fanboy' seems an accurate description alright, especially considering he looks like he could still be in high school.


----------



## Katel

(After the advert, sorry for it)


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> From what I can find he's "Royal Editor at Large" for Harpers Bazaar and an occasional Royal Contributor for ABC News.
> 
> He's mainly Harry and Meghan's #1 fanboy!



I think he's angling to be ex-Royal Editor at Large for HP, future Comms Director for ex-royals IYKWIM.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I think he's angling to be ex-Royal Editor at Large for HP, future Comms Director for ex-royals IYKWIM.



I suspect he may already be working for them, he just might not want it to be known yet so he can appear to be unbiased.


----------



## gelbergirl

Is she still an American Citizen or what?  Or is he a citizen because he married her?


----------



## 1LV

Katel said:


> (After the advert, sorry for it)



LoveLoveLoveLove this!  Hilarious!  Thanks for making my day!


----------



## zinacef

sdkitty said:


> wonder if she is really living now and not just existing


Living the dream, living the dream!


----------



## tiktok

gelbergirl said:


> Is she still an American Citizen or what?  Or is he a citizen because he married her?



She’s still a citizen (she never became a British citizen so definitely didn’t give up her US citizenship) and he can apply for permanent residency as her husband. He can apply for citizenship after 3 years as a permanent resident (assuming they’re still married at the time).


----------



## 1LV

Once the dust settles and the smoke clears it will be interesting to see if MM & Gomer turn TO each other or turn ON each other.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

Sure hate that we may run out of stuff to talk about now that it’s their last “royal days”. Or we probably might have a lot of paps pics like going to yoga class or coffee/tea runs or grocery shopping at Gelsons , Trader Joe’s , you know things that regular folks like us do except they get to sell pics. It’s a matter of time, kris Jenner I’m sure is getting excited for that phone call to come.


----------



## zen1965

gazoo said:


> Prince Charles is raising rents in the Duchy. (Is that the right term?) The comments are worth a peek if anyone is bored whilst social distancing. I'd guess all the added expense of Harry and Meghan's situation is stretching his budget.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ll-estate-blasted-community-Scilly-Isles.html



Couldn‘t resist taking a peek at the comments. As expected, lots of folks  up in arms.
Hazz and the Mog... Ginge and Nutmeg... Meghound... the revolting duo... Ginge and Cringe... dimwit and the huzzler... Meg and Mug....  
Oh, and one sunny poster put all the blame on Kate and Wills, the greedy pair, and the Middleton‘s who always had wanted Harry out of the way. 

To be fair the annual lease fees had been ridiculously low. I wouldn‘t blame the increase on Goofy and Goopy.


----------



## zen1965

I‘m on a roll tonight...
But... Kris Jenner has been mentioned a few times here. Now, let’s dwell on this for a moment. Considering the substandard stock Kris had to work with and the staggering financial success she made out of her bunch of airheads, H&M would be very well advised to obtain Kris‘ services.


----------



## bag-mania

zen1965 said:


> I‘m on a roll tonight...
> But... Kris Jenner has been mentioned a few times here. Now, let’s dwell on this for a moment. Considering the substandard stock Kris had to work with and the staggering financial success she made out of her bunch of airheads, H&M would be very well advised to obtain Kris‘ services.



I doubt even Mama Kris could help them. As you know H&M do not take direction well. They would need to do what she advised and they already believe they know it all. Everything has to be their way (and by their way, I mean Meghan’s way).


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> If anybody other than the RF should have paid for their security in Miami, it should have been JP Morgan Chase. They're the ones who hired them to hear Harry cry about his mother. Besides, what do they pay for Jamie Dimon's security 24/7, it can't be all that different or strategic in planning.
> If Beyonce, George Clooney, J LO, Bono,  (real A-Listers) and others (like billionaire hedge fund managers) can pay for their own security, why can't H&M?  Since they're the ones who requested to step down they should be on the hook themselves. The Crown did remind them and us that "it's complicated" but as time goes on their fall from grace deepens. In 1973, J Paul Getty's 17 yr old grandson was kidnapped for ransom and his ear cut off when it wasn't paid. After the ear, J Paul negotiated for a less ransom amount and the grandson was let go (a 5 month ordeal).  I suppose they're thinking of similar instances could happen to H,M & Archie, but then the Crown should pay for such security, not any other country.  I get that lots of people hate hate hate hate ***** and nothing he does/says will ever be given any credit regardless what it is.
> Now H&M claim they never asked the U.S. Gov't to cover their security. Even if that's true, the rumors were flying and it's good ***** spent three seconds to tweet that we weren't footing the bill.



I doubt the shareholders would be very happy about it. I am one. I wouldn't.


----------



## Luvluxx098

Ahh the lifestyles of the idle rich. Contributing so much to society, and yet nothing to the tax base.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> I read their Instagram post twice, it doesn't even make sense. "that promise", --what promise?
> "...we are focusing this new chapter to understand how we can best contribute".  *Even when the senseless word salad is tossed together they still find a way to make it all about THEM.*
> "Finding solutions" is an abused over-tired phrase that every product company and PR firm spew out.
> 
> My favorite: "the work continues".  The only work they're concerned with is how to look like they haven't screwed up. They won't succeed.
> 
> I hope they're OK.





Sharont2305 said:


> Oh please!!!! [emoji57]






Clearblueskies said:


> Vomit inducing stuff



Nailed it. You can substitute the word 'I' for 'we'. It's no different from other politicians who say nothing and make it all about themselves. One famous politician had his speeches analyzed for the use of the word 'I'. It was off the charts. And not who you think. 



mrsinsyder said:


> I guess off topic political discussions are allowed for some.



Always been that way. If you lean the correct way, it's ok.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Annawakes said:


> That’s interesting.  So they intend to vanish for a few months?  But don’t lets forget they are still working feverishly behind the scenes.



Damned CV was sucking all their press...


----------



## lalame

Luvluxx098 said:


> Ahh the lifestyles of the idle rich. Contributing so much to society, and yet nothing to the tax base.



I hope they're paying taxes (or will be)!!! You don't think so?


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I hope they're paying taxes (or will be)!!! You don't think so?


No... not at all. That the point of the charitable enterprise lol...


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> I doubt the shareholders would be very happy about it. I am one. I wouldn't.



I also doubt the shareholders were happy about JP Morgan Chase paying the dolts a million bucks to speak.  I've been to many a company rah-rah with some very terrific speakers.  H&M's audience at JPM were likely looking at each other like "huh? what's he talking about? I get the guy might have issues over his mom, but jeez, this is a bank conference, he's in his 30's, member of the BRF, worth at least tens of millions, hasn't a care in the world, servants galore, married a hottie, never has to lift a finger, and here he is crying over mommy?" 

On the other hand, companies that hire speakers for their masses can write off the fees. If the speaker has or needs a security detail he/she/they can make that a condition of contract of said speaking engagement to be paid by the company as well (and written off along with what they paid the speaker).


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> No... not at all. That the point of the charitable enterprise lol...


You can only deduct up to 30 or 50% percent of your AGI though. Now if they got into real estate....


----------



## mdcx

Lounorada said:


> Who is this guy anyway? I had a look at his Twitter page and he looks around 18yrs old in his profile picture.


Omid dated Markus Andersson of Soho House, one of Meghan’s BFFs.
Fair to say he is not objective.


----------



## mdcx

When M does re-emerge as Not Royal Just Rich Meghan, I expect a flurry of show-off insta pics ala Jess Mulroney. The kind she wasn’t allowed to post while officially in the BRF:


----------



## kemilia

gelbergirl said:


> Is she still an American Citizen or what?  Or is he a citizen because he married her?


Yes, I was wondering if she ever became a British Citizen or did that fall off the face of the earth too?

H would have to apply for a green card. Not a quick thing for regular people, lots of attys, $$$, etc. I think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

Allisonfaye said:


> Nailed it. You can substitute the word 'I' for 'we'. It's no different from other politicians who say nothing and make it all about themselves. *One famous politician had his speeches analyzed for the use of the word 'I'. It was off the charts. And not who you think. *



THANK YOU. I know exactly who you’re talking about.


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> As I am actively looking for employment, I can tell you that every single opportunity presented to me by an entertainment company has either been CLOSED   -or-   placed ON HOLD!  Sadly, a number of independent contractors/consultants have been laid off or furloughed, so if H&M are expecting more "opportunities" in the entertainment industry, they better not be holding their breath!  In addition, Harry's "pitch" to Bob Iger may have provided an opportunity for Meghan at that time, Bob has since stepped down as the CEO of Disney.  From a purely business perspective, it makes total sense to me .. while movies, TV, etc. are enjoyable, it's not considered an "essential" business, and as long as the markets & profits are questionable, I don't see them wanted to spend any money unless it is viewed as "a true need".


I'm curious as to what the COVID virus will do to movie theaters. Streaming brand new features at home may be the way to go.


----------



## mrsinsyder

In times like these, I wonder if they reflect on how lonely their lives are. They’ve isolated their entire families. Who do they send photos of Archie to? Doria? Elton John? This crisis has made so many families closer and they’ve just isolated further.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> Sure they will, and it will all be “absolutely the right decision” for them - just like Canada was (for the brief period they were *permanently resident* there).  I predict we’ll be seeing much more of Archie too - he’ll be popping up all over the place.


Sadly, I don't think we'll see him unless the 2 grifters get $$$ for it ..


----------



## lalame

Well we all know the paps are considered an essential service in LA  judging by how concerned they are with Ben Affleck and Ana de Armas's walks. I'd be surprised if we didn't catch a glimpse of them sometime this summer.


----------



## marietouchet

chowlover2 said:


> I'm curious as to what the COVID virus will do to movie theaters. Streaming brand new features at home may be the way to go.


Actually quite a few new movies are planning to bypass theatres in favor of streaming , it is happening now- a cosmic hedgehog movie was the first I read about - kid cartoon


----------



## queennadine

^ I’ve been wanting this forever! Especially with a baby, it’s so hard to get out to the movies.


----------



## viciel

Someone please help me understand, truly. Harry is obviously (and has always been) a wazzock, he's a man child who never really had anything substantial to contribute at the dinner table, so why is there the belief that he would leave Sparkle? As much as it would make most sense for him, doesn't that just create more drama to keep her in the spotlight playing the victim card over and over and over again? She certainly wouldn't leave him, a narcissist likes to always have someone to manipulate and gaslight, so he's easy enough of a target he'd never figure it out. Narcissist also makes terrible parents, just look at the Gerbers, the Smiths, the list goes on. So Archie will likely need some therapy if he ever gets out. Thoughts? TIA.


----------



## chowlover2

mrsinsyder said:


> In times like these, I wonder if they reflect on how lonely their lives are. They’ve isolated their entire families. Who do they send photos of Archie to? Doria? Elton John? This crisis has made so many families closer and they’ve just isolated further.


I wish we knew what the story was with Doria. If I had a child there is no way on this earth I could have kept my Mom away from him. They seem to have more of and Aunt & Niece relationship. What ever it is my Mom would have wanted pics and videos of everything. And if I was in the same city I for certain would be staying with my Mom.


----------



## chowlover2

Poor Archie should start therapy soon, he is going to need it! All that glitters is not gold, that is for sure. Look at the difference between the Gerber kids. I'm guessing Kaia is the spoiled favorite child while her brother gets a tattoo on his face that says disappointment.


----------



## mdcx

viciel said:


> Someone please help me understand, truly. Harry is obviously (and has always been) a wazzock, he's a man child who never really had anything substantial to contribute at the dinner table, so why is there the belief that he would leave Sparkle? As much as it would make most sense for him, doesn't that just create more drama to keep her in the spotlight playing the victim card over and over and over again? She certainly wouldn't leave him, a narcissist likes to always have someone to manipulate and gaslight, so he's easy enough of a target he'd never figure it out. Narcissist also makes terrible parents, just look at the Gerbers, the Smiths, the list goes on. So Archie will likely need some therapy if he ever gets out. Thoughts? TIA.


She will leave him once she has her next mark secured imo. The next one will be richer.


----------



## csshopper

mdcx said:


> She will leave him once she has her next mark secured imo. The next one will be richer.


Unfortunately for her Jeff Bezos seems to be already taken with his Joker look alike girlfriend.


----------



## CeeJay

chowlover2 said:


> I wish we knew what the story was with Doria. If I had a child there is no way on this earth I could have kept my Mom away from him. They seem to have more of and Aunt & Niece relationship. What ever it is my Mom would have wanted pics and videos of everything. And if I was in the same city I for certain would be staying with my Mom.


According to my friends that knew the Markle family years ago (when Meghan was in high school), it was Thomas who was active in her life at that time and unfortunately, he spoiled Meghan because he felt guilty working crazy hours on “Married with Children” TV show. They said that they never saw Doria, and they do not recall her even attending the plays Meghan was in in her High School days. They got the sense that Doria pretty much came & gone at her own leisure and became more involved when Meghan headed off to University. Doria had her career and various interests; Thomas was the more active participant at that time.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Comment in The Telegraph UK :

Meghan and Harry's LA move may be their worst yet 
CELIA WALDEN 30 MARCH 2020 • 7:00PM

"Fun fact: Petra Manor– the 12,249 sq. ft, £15 million Malibu mansion that Meghan and Harry are said to be “smitten by” – was once occupied by Kylie Jenner.

That’s the lilo-lipped youngest member of the Kardashian clan, should your pop culture need refreshing, a 22-year-old cosmetic “entrepreneur” whose inspirational quotes include: “I would want to hopefully start more businesses, and just be, like, a businesswoman.”

Why it should matter that the Sussexes would prefer to live there, and in LA, than in a historic British, Grade II country home commissioned by Queen Charlotte in 1801 – a royal retreat previously occupied by the father of novelist Henry James, whose own inspirational quotes included: “Three things in human life are important: the first is to be kind; the second is to be kind; and the third is to be kind” – I don’t know.

But I do know why the revelation that Meghan and Harry had “left Canada and are now settled in LA” on Friday has prompted the annoyance it has.

It is just annoyance; our anger currently being reserved for the spherical particle with a “corona” of spikes that’s killing tens of thousands across the world and has brought our lives to a standstill. Only not Harry and Meghan, you understand, who chose this moment to leave the Vancouver smokescreen of a bolthole they had been residing in since Megxit, and hop on a private jet to the place that had been their final destination all along: Hollywood.

It felt sneaky, because it was sneaky, like so many of the soon-to-be-ex royals’ actions – from the setting up of their own breakaway Royal faction and the assertion that they wanted to“step back”(and not forward, into a carefully choreographed and lucrative limelight of their own choosing), to the blurring of their intention “to balance our time between the United Kingdom and North America”.

Why not just come out and say it? Because, as I wrote in this very column three months ago: “If you rephrase that statement ‘We’ve had enough – we’re off to La La Land’, it confirms every ruthless social-climbing, celebrity-seeking stereotype Meghan has worked hard to rebut.”

Only in Los Angeles, I pointed out, can Meghan not so much have her cake and eat it, as scoop off the icing and cast the boring, dry part aside. Only there, can the couple ditch the duty and the criticism, whilst retaining all the status and the perks. Celebrity hypocrisy, it’s important to understand, isn’t just accepted in LA but de rigueur.

Only they’d overlooked one thing: namely that the President of the US has the memory of an elephant and the petulance of a toddler. He wasn’t about to forget Meghan calling him “divisive” and “misogynistic” on a talk show in 2016, just as he wasn’t about to forget the former actress’s assertion that she could never live in a Trumpian America.

So when he took to Twitter on Sunday to tell the world that, despite being “a great friend and admirer of the Queen & the United Kingdom […] the US will not pay for [Harry and Meghan’s]  security protection” – adding for emphasis: “They must pay!” – it was pretty clear that ***** wasn’t just talking about the estimated £8 million-a-year bill that has hitherto been covered by the British taxpayer.

 The couple hit back yesterday, saying they didn’t expect the US to pay, and that “privately funded security arrangements have been made”. But their pique was as obvious as it had been in their infamous response to the Queen telling them they could no longer sell themselves as “Royal” after stepping down.

That ban comes into force tomorrow, when the Duke and Duchess officially cease to be working royals. But anyone thinking this will impact either the couple’s social standing or their earning capacity is wrong. It’s not simply about who you are in LA, but who you know – and how good a performer you’ve proved yourself to be.

So just as a hefty percentage of Angelenos would probably curtsey to both Dame Helen Mirren and Olivia Colman, convinced that something Queen-like or royal must have rubbed off on them, people will continue to bow and curtsey to the Sussexes as they make their pots of cash and settle into the Malibu home that boasts “an enormous dedicated theatre room”, “full-size dance studio”, “culinary wonder” of a kitchen, and “vast pool and pool-side cabana”. 

But as the pair are branded “distant memories” in the UK by royal biographer Penny Junor - in stark contrast to the other members of the royal family, who are helping to combat the deadly coronavirus pandemic – and Canada mourns what it is branding “Megxit 2” (“It’s Canada that deserves to feel ‘stunned and horrified’,” the Toronto Star remarked after their hasty departure) – it seems unlikely that there won’t be more Megxits to come."


----------



## Tivo

Straight-Laced said:


> Comment in The Telegraph UK :
> 
> Meghan and Harry's LA move may be their worst yet
> CELIA WALDEN 30 MARCH 2020 • 7:00PM
> 
> "Fun fact: Petra Manor– the 12,249 sq. ft, £15 million Malibu mansion that Meghan and Harry are said to be “smitten by” – was once occupied by Kylie Jenner.
> 
> That’s the lilo-lipped youngest member of the Kardashian clan, should your pop culture need refreshing, a 22-year-old cosmetic “entrepreneur” whose inspirational quotes include: “I would want to hopefully start more businesses, and just be, like, a businesswoman.”
> 
> Why it should matter that the Sussexes would prefer to live there, and in LA, than in a historic British, Grade II country home commissioned by Queen Charlotte in 1801 – a royal retreat previously occupied by the father of novelist Henry James, whose own inspirational quotes included: “Three things in human life are important: the first is to be kind; the second is to be kind; and the third is to be kind” – I don’t know.
> 
> But I do know why the revelation that Meghan and Harry had “left Canada and are now settled in LA” on Friday has prompted the annoyance it has.
> 
> It is just annoyance; our anger currently being reserved for the spherical particle with a “corona” of spikes that’s killing tens of thousands across the world and has brought our lives to a standstill. Only not Harry and Meghan, you understand, who chose this moment to leave the Vancouver smokescreen of a bolthole they had been residing in since Megxit, and hop on a private jet to the place that had been their final destination all along: Hollywood.
> 
> It felt sneaky, because it was sneaky, like so many of the soon-to-be-ex royals’ actions – from the setting up of their own breakaway Royal faction and the assertion that they wanted to“step back”(and not forward, into a carefully choreographed and lucrative limelight of their own choosing), to the blurring of their intention “to balance our time between the United Kingdom and North America”.
> 
> *Why not just come out and say it? Because, as I wrote in this very column three months ago: “If you rephrase that statement ‘We’ve had enough – we’re off to La La Land’, it confirms every ruthless social-climbing, celebrity-seeking stereotype Meghan has worked hard to rebut.”*
> 
> Only in Los Angeles, I pointed out, can Meghan not so much have her cake and eat it, as scoop off the icing and cast the boring, dry part aside. Only there, can the couple ditch the duty and the criticism, whilst retaining all the status and the perks. Celebrity hypocrisy, it’s important to understand, isn’t just accepted in LA but de rigueur.
> 
> Only they’d overlooked one thing: namely that the President of the US has the memory of an elephant and the petulance of a toddler. He wasn’t about to forget Meghan calling him “divisive” and “misogynistic” on a talk show in 2016, just as he wasn’t about to forget the former actress’s assertion that she could never live in a Trumpian America.
> 
> So when he took to Twitter on Sunday to tell the world that, despite being “a great friend and admirer of the Queen & the United Kingdom […] the US will not pay for [Harry and Meghan’s]  security protection” – adding for emphasis: “They must pay!” – it was pretty clear that ***** wasn’t just talking about the estimated £8 million-a-year bill that has hitherto been covered by the British taxpayer.
> 
> The couple hit back yesterday, saying they didn’t expect the US to pay, and that “privately funded security arrangements have been made”. But their pique was as obvious as it had been in their infamous response to the Queen telling them they could no longer sell themselves as “Royal” after stepping down.
> 
> That ban comes into force tomorrow, when the Duke and Duchess officially cease to be working royals. But anyone thinking this will impact either the couple’s social standing or their earning capacity is wrong. It’s not simply about who you are in LA, but who you know – and how good a performer you’ve proved yourself to be.
> 
> So just as a hefty percentage of Angelenos would probably curtsey to both Dame Helen Mirren and Olivia Colman, convinced that something Queen-like or royal must have rubbed off on them, people will continue to bow and curtsey to the Sussexes as they make their pots of cash and settle into the Malibu home that boasts “an enormous dedicated theatre room”, “full-size dance studio”, “culinary wonder” of a kitchen, and “vast pool and pool-side cabana”.
> 
> But as the pair are branded “distant memories” in the UK by royal biographer Penny Junor - in stark contrast to the other members of the royal family, who are helping to combat the deadly coronavirus pandemic – and Canada mourns what it is branding “Megxit 2” (“It’s Canada that deserves to feel ‘stunned and horrified’,” the Toronto Star remarked after their hasty departure) – it seems unlikely that there won’t be more Megxits to come."


Whoever wrote this really nailed why these two irritate me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Katel said:


> (After the advert, sorry for it)




This is brilliant, tooo funny!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

Tivo said:


> Whoever wrote this really nailed why these two irritate me


Written by Piers Morgan's wife.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’re probably delighted that the RF will no longer comment on their activities, little do they realize how much that protected them.


----------



## mia55

She’s dying to respond to her dad and sis and pickup a fight.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## green.bee

"schmalz and cheesiness"  -  this description could apply to all they do


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## Milosmum0307

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4700797


I’m bemused that critics felt compelled to write actual reviews of work by a woman who can’t even make doe eyes or belly cup believably.  They could have written simply “Her performance is exactly what you would expect from a low-rent basic cable D-lister whose biggest aspiration a few years ago was landing an NHL player,” and everyone with a functioning brain cell who has seen her speak publicly would understand that to mean “florid incompetence.”  I’m disappointed that she apparently didn’t unleash her faux mid-Atlantic accent for this documentary.  The world was too quick to ridicule her “second coming of Katherine Hepburn“ elocution, so it disappeared as quickly as it appeared.  Clearly, we cannot be trusted to have nice things.  I think the problem with this documentary was that they did not use The Duchess in her full capacity.  The Duchess should have been allowed to call her trusty thesaurus to action and “correct” the script so that it says absolutely nothing of substance using the most syllables humanly possible and conjuring as many trendy woke phrases as the Google machine can yield in response to the search words “conservation, elephants, endangered, cat nip to faux environmentalists who habitually fly on private jets.”  Anyway, if anyone wants to take one for the team and listen to Meghalodon drool out some words to stunning images of cute elephants, I would be entertained to read your thoughts.


----------



## CeeJay

Milosmum0307 said:


> I’m bemused that critics felt compelled to write actual reviews of work by a woman who can’t even make doe eyes or belly cup believably.  They could have written simply “Her performance is exactly what you would expect from a low-rent basic cable D-lister whose biggest aspiration a few years ago was landing an NHL player,” and everyone with a functioning brain cell who has seen her speak publicly would understand that to mean “florid incompetence.”  I’m disappointed that she apparently didn’t unleash her faux mid-Atlantic accent for this documentary.  The world was too quick to ridicule her “second coming of Katherine Hepburn“ elocution, so it disappeared as quickly as it appeared.  Clearly, we cannot be trusted to have nice things.  I think the problem with this documentary was that they did not use The Duchess in her full capacity.  The Duchess should have been allowed to call her trusty thesaurus to action and “correct” the script so that it says absolutely nothing of substance using the most syllables humanly possible and conjuring as many trendy woke phrases as the Google machine can yield in response to the search words “conservation, elephants, endangered, cat nip to faux environmentalists who habitually fly on private jets.”  Anyway, if anyone wants to take one for the team and listen to Meghalodon drool out some words to stunning images of cute elephants, I would be entertained to read your thoughts.


Katherine Hepburn was from Hartford, CT so Meghan would have to copy the clear enunciation and elocution that Katherine did so well .. OH WAIT!!! .. I’m talking about a Z~class “actress” (cough, cough, sputter, sputter) here .. “waiter, bring me my word salad”!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hepburn is just another Kate that Meghan can’t keep up with.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Hepburn is just another Kate that Meghan can’t keep up with.


 SO TRUE!!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

She’s going to slap that title everywhere she can isn’t she?  
Notes for the milkman will say: 2 pints please, love and kisses xx, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Hollywood, LA, California, USA, The World, The Milky Way........


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> Hepburn is just another Kate that Meghan can’t keep up with.


Love it!


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Hepburn is just another Kate that Meghan can’t keep up with.



clever.  that is a Titanic comparison. oh! another Kate! (apologies)


----------



## sdkitty

viciel said:


> Someone please help me understand, truly. Harry is obviously (and has always been) a wazzock, he's a man child who never really had anything substantial to contribute at the dinner table, so why is there the belief that he would leave Sparkle? As much as it would make most sense for him, doesn't that just create more drama to keep her in the spotlight playing the victim card over and over and over again? She certainly wouldn't leave him, a narcissist likes to always have someone to manipulate and gaslight, so he's easy enough of a target he'd never figure it out. Narcissist also makes terrible parents, just look at the Gerbers, the Smiths, the list goes on. So Archie will likely need some therapy if he ever gets out. Thoughts? TIA.


learned a new word, wazzock.  fits him (sorry to say)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4700797


I'm a fan of elephants....sorry they got stuck with her cheesy narration


----------



## queennadine

The description of “their” Malibu home has me


----------



## zinacef

queennadine said:


> The description of “their” Malibu home has me


Apparently Kylie used to own the mansion.


----------



## Katel

green.bee said:


> "schmalz and cheesiness"  -  this description could apply to all they do



hahaha yes! Hereafter, the duchass of me-gain and her latest victim (had “confused ginger bit€h” but can’t quite) shall be also named “Schmaltz” and “Cheesy”, respectively.


----------



## youngster

Hollywood isn't a nice, kind place filled with supportive people looking to help you advance your career. Any producer, director, writer, or entertainment company will use the two of them to further their own interests, nothing less. They'll fawn over them for a bit and invite them to all kinds of events because, hey, publicity. Some of Meghan's fans might actually pay to watch something she appears in.  But, that will only last until a general consensus is formed about what the two of them can actually do in the industry, whether Harry is anything more than a man-child who was well managed by the Palace, and whether Meghan has any real acting talent or on-screen charisma.  So, they will judge them and decide whether they are worth any time or effort.  To their faces though, they'll shake hands warmly and hug and air-kiss, and tell them both how _amazing_ they are and how they can't wait to work with them on some project, in the future, they'll be in contact, right after hell freezes over.


----------



## lanasyogamama

zinacef said:


> Apparently Kylie used to own the mansion.



If they had an ounce of sense they would steer clear of that house just due to the optics of a Kardashian association.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4700797



Aw I'm sad that the movie itself didn't do better. Love nature movies, especially for kiddos. But "schmaltz and cheesiness" really does nail Meghan. Everything she says has such a syrupy affect.

I'm surprised she insists on being formally credited as "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" instead of just "Meghan Markle," her previous acting name. Not exactly "Just Meghan" is it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the reason they released it today is so that they could use the DoS title.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Aw I'm sad that the movie itself didn't do better. Love nature movies, especially for kiddos. But "schmaltz and cheesiness" really does nail Meghan. Everything she says has such a syrupy affect.
> 
> I'm surprised she insists on being formally credited as "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" instead of just "Meghan Markle," her previous acting name. Not exactly "Just Meghan" is it.


she likes that unearned and undeserved title


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Aw I'm sad that the movie itself didn't do better. Love nature movies, especially for kiddos. But "schmaltz and cheesiness" really does nail Meghan. Everything she says has such a syrupy affect.
> 
> I'm surprised she insists on being formally credited as "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" instead of just "Meghan Markle," her previous acting name. Not exactly "Just Meghan" is it.



I didn't think it had come out yet. It is supposed to be released April 3rd. Reviews usually come out a little early. If families are stuck at home they may watch it for the cute elephants and the beautiful scenery.

For those of us who don't have Disney + here is a taste of Meghan's work:

_For her part, Markle’s delivery of the commentary is wholesome and over-eager to please (“It’s time for a pool party!” “Wait a minute! Who’s this guy?” “Oh, look who’s cut in front of the line? Oh, Jomo!”) but just about stays the right side of annoying.
_
and 

_Meghan Markle does an inviting version of the wholesome but amused Disney narrator singsong as she delivers lines like, “Shani has already lost track of Jomo. There he is!” [Jomo twirls his trunk around in the water like a helicopter blade.] “What is he doing? It’s time for a pool party!” Which looks more like a happy mud party._


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I didn't think it had come out yet. It is supposed to be released April 3rd. Reviews usually come out a little early. If families are stuck at home they may watch it for the cute elephants and the beautiful scenery.
> 
> For those of us who don't have Disney + here is a taste of Meghan's work:
> 
> _For her part, Markle’s delivery of the commentary is wholesome and over-eager to please (“It’s time for a pool party!” “Wait a minute! Who’s this guy?” “Oh, look who’s cut in front of the line? Oh, Jomo!”) but just about stays the right side of annoying.
> _
> and
> 
> _Meghan Markle does an inviting version of the wholesome but amused Disney narrator singsong as she delivers lines like, “Shani has already lost track of Jomo. There he is!” [Jomo twirls his trunk around in the water like a helicopter blade.] “What is he doing? It’s time for a pool party!” Which looks more like a happy mud party._


Well to be fair, I'm sure she didn't write the script.   Not that I like to defend her but....


----------



## mia55

lanasyogamama said:


> If they had an ounce of sense they would steer clear of that house just due to the optics of a Kardashian association.


Honestly kardasians are more respected than them, they’re not free loaders like these guys who have no shame. Since I read about them I started liking kardasians, atleast they pay their bills by themselves.


----------



## maryg1

Well, I don’t think she wrote the comments of the documentary, so it’s not her fault if they’re not that great.
As for the acting, well...that all comes from her inside!


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> Well to be fair, I'm sure she didn't write the script. Not that I like to defend her but....


If the Sussex PR machine were up and running right now we probably would be told that Ms. Eager Beaver came in and rewrote all new narration for herself and came up with tons of new ideas for the filmmakers because she's a genius and she knows everything about elephants.  But alas.

Speaking of which, it's official that Sunshine Sachs are their PR people now.  So much for Sunshine Sachs just being hired by the Sussex Foundation to launch Travalyst, and not being undercover PR advisors for the Sussexes as they plotted a way out of the royal family and into Hollywood.


----------



## Milosmum0307

zinacef said:


> Apparently Kylie used to own the mansion.


So appropriate.  The association makes perfect sense:  Two social media-obsessed, talentless, fame-thirsty brunettes with questionable taste in men who used family connections to boost their profiles.   Of course, a major point of departure is that one appears to know how to make her own money, and the other just married into it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> Speaking of which, it's official that Sunshine Sachs are their PR people now.  So much for Sunshine Sachs just being hired by the Sussex Foundation to launch Travalyst, and not being undercover PR advisors for the Sussexes as they plotted a way out of the royal family and into Hollywood.



It's nice they announced it but that has been obvious for a long time now. The way _People _and certain other American entertainment magazines have been dutifully releasing pro-Harry and MEghan stories on a regular basis screams of an official agreement with their PR people. Sunshine Sachs has that kind of clout (i.e. regular payments) apparently.


----------



## PewPew

Clearblueskies said:


> She’s going to slap that title everywhere she can isn’t she?
> Notes for the milkman will say: 2 pints please, love and kisses xx, *Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Hollywood, LA, California, USA, The World, The Milky Way....*....



 This reminded me of the title of Ugandan dictator Idi Amin: His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, *Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular"*

The “Just call me Harry” act doesn’t work with “Megan, call me Duchess of Sussex”. 
She Markled her own last name


----------



## mshermes

My feelings about her as each day passes and new info comes to light: familiarity breeds contempt.


----------



## lalame

Milosmum0307 said:


> So appropriate.  The association makes perfect sense:  Two social media-obsessed, talentless, fame-thirsty brunettes with questionable taste in men who used family connections to boost their profiles.   Of course, a major point of departure is that one appears to know how to make her own money, and the other just married into it.



I can already hear Meghan responding, "Just give me time..."  shout out to this scene from the iconic Bridget Jones Diary:


----------



## Jayne1

The article said Kylie occupied the estate, not owned it.  The article said that 
David Charvet bought the place in 2012 and rebuilt it to what you see today, in 2014... and that he still owns it.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> If the Sussex PR machine were up and running right now we probably would be told that Ms. Eager Beaver came in and rewrote all new narration for herself and came up with tons of new ideas for the filmmakers because she's a genius and she knows everything about elephants.  But alas.
> 
> Speaking of which, it's official that Sunshine Sachs are their PR people now.  So much for Sunshine Sachs just being hired by the Sussex Foundation to launch Travalyst, and not being undercover PR advisors for the Sussexes as they plotted a way out of the royal family and into Hollywood.


maybe if it's successful she'll try to take credit and if not, it will be Disney's fault


----------



## CeeJay

I recall some time back, Caitlin Jenner mentioning that H&M were "looking" to buy something in Malibu.  At the time, I know I 'dismissed' it, just thinking that it was Caitlin talking out of the side of her mouth, but I guess not!!!  Which brings me to this tidbit (_and please God, make sure it doesn't happen_!!!!) .. Caitlin has been making it well known that she feels she would be a great 'new' housewife on the RHoBH Bravo show ..let's *SINCERELY* hope that she has *NOT* given Meghan any ideas about also being a new housewife on RHoBH!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## rose60610

Poor elephants. They can't catch a break. Forced to perform hard labor in forests, then the ivory poachers, the persecution by trophy hunters, and they're an endangered species. And now, of all people that could narrate a documentary, they get Meghan inflicted on them?  Worst of all--elephants don't forget.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I recall some time back, Caitlin Jenner mentioning that H&M were "looking" to buy something in Malibu.  At the time, I know I 'dismissed' it, just thinking that it was Caitlin talking out of the side of her mouth, but I guess not!!!  Which brings me to this tidbit (_and please God, make sure it doesn't happen_!!!!) .. Caitlin has been making it well known that she feels she would be a great 'new' housewife on the RHoBH Bravo show ..let's *SINCERELY* hope that she has *NOT* given Meghan any ideas about also being a new housewife on RHoBH!!!!!!!!!!!!


I would think Meghan feels she is above that
But if the money doesn't pour in I guess she might do it


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> Hepburn is just another Kate that Meghan can’t keep up with.





rose60610 said:


> Poor elephants. They can't catch a break. Forced to perform hard labor in forests, then the ivory poachers, the persecution by trophy hunters, and they're an endangered species. And now, of all people that could narrate a documentary, they get Meghan inflicted on them?  *Worst of all--elephants don't forget*.


----------



## Emeline

CeeJay said:


> I recall some time back, Caitlin Jenner mentioning that H&M were "looking" to buy something in Malibu.  At the time, I know I 'dismissed' it, just thinking that it was Caitlin talking out of the side of her mouth, but I guess not!!!  Which brings me to this tidbit (_and please God, make sure it doesn't happen_!!!!) .. Caitlin has been making it well known that she feels she would be a great 'new' housewife on the RHoBH Bravo show ..let's *SINCERELY* hope that she has *NOT* given Meghan any ideas about also being a new housewife on RHoBH!!!!!!!!!!!!


When I heard H&M moved to LA I thought it's just a matter of time till Meg is a Real
Housewife. She would adore the attention, parties, fashion and trips. 
I don't think she would understand the very likely downside.  
We will see.


----------



## zinacef

Ooohhhh she will be duchess Megan  to RHoNY Countess Luann!  You know Andy is gonna be on it.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I would think Meghan feels she is above that
> But if the money doesn't pour in I guess she might do it





Emeline said:


> When I heard H&M moved to LA I thought it's just a matter of time till Meg is a Real
> Housewife. She would adore the attention, parties, fashion and trips.
> I don't think she would understand the very likely downside.
> We will see.


EXACTLY what I was thinking!!!  At this point, this whole "foundation" nonsense doesn't look feasible (_especially given what is happening right now_); as such, if she could 'enroll' herself in RHoBH (_she would likely think she would be Lisa Vanderpump's replacement .. you know, having lived in London_ ) I'm sure she would view it as an opportunity to 'network' with more celebrities (_reality and others - given that the reality celebrities now seem to go to the Emmy's, etc._) for that "next step" - you know, a TV Series, a Movie (_oooooh - playing an action hero_) or better yet .a Talk Show where could not only exercise that wonderful (*SIC*) word-salad but more importantly, give all these people SUCH needed advice (_you know, given her supreme intellect_)!!!   

Based on what we've seen up to this point, these two don't seem to show any shame whatsoever, so I wouldn't put it past them to take every advantage that Hollyweird gives them!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I recall some time back, Caitlin Jenner mentioning that H&M were "looking" to buy something in Malibu.  At the time, I know I 'dismissed' it, just thinking that it was Caitlin talking out of the side of her mouth, but I guess not!!!  Which brings me to this tidbit (_and please God, make sure it doesn't happen_!!!!) .. Caitlin has been making it well known that she feels she would be a great 'new' housewife on the RHoBH Bravo show ..let's *SINCERELY* hope that she has *NOT* given Meghan any ideas about also being a new housewife on RHoBH!!!!!!!!!!!!


 Oh please oh please yes put Meghan on that show. I would love to see how she handles the drama!


----------



## zinacef

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY what I was thinking!!!  At this point, this whole "foundation" nonsense doesn't look feasible (_especially given what is happening right now_); as such, if she could 'enroll' herself in RHoBH (_she would likely think she would be Lisa Vanderpump's replacement .. you know, having lived in London_ ) I'm sure she would view it as an opportunity to 'network' with more celebrities (_reality and others - given that the reality celebrities now seem to go to the Emmy's, etc._) for that "next step" - you know, a TV Series, a Movie (_oooooh - playing an action hero_) or better yet .a Talk Show where could not only exercise that wonderful (*SIC*) word-salad but more importantly, give all these people SUCH needed advice (_you know, given her supreme intellect_)!!!
> 
> Based on what we've seen up to this point, these two don't seem to show any shame whatsoever, so I wouldn't put it past them to take every advantage that Hollyweird gives them!


The craziest is when she’ll have the Dorit or Madonna accent—- for sure having lived there and all, curtsied and bowed, having real servants and dined with Her Majesty. Whew!  That’s a real long  royal CV, she will really be Lisa V. Watch out Kyle—- the other one who wants to know if we know who she is!  We do Kyle, we know who you are, —— a star in Witch Mountain, Paris Hilton’s aunt.  Ooppsss , I’ve gone to the deep end. Sorry!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

We been knew.


----------



## mdcx

Emeline said:


> When I heard H&M moved to LA I thought it's just a matter of time till Meg is a Real
> Housewife. She would adore the attention, parties, fashion and trips.
> I don't think she would understand the very likely downside.
> We will see.


I can see her driving the other housewives insane with her condescending “shining a light on xyz” routine. So she’d add drama certainly.
But yes, she wouldn’t handle the critiques/memes/jokes well.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> We been knew.



Finally reading what I’ve been, what many have been observing... train wreck.

Wonder if she would think herself above real housewives material.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Maybe Harry has a thing for Malibu too?  A story from the Royal Correspondent in The Telegraph UK says that Diana was planning a move to Malibu not long before she died.  I remember gossip at the time that Diana could move to the US but I didn't know it was Malibu specifically. 
Anyway, no one will ever know what Diana might have done (with or without Dodi) or whether she'd discussed her plans with her sons but if Diana loved Malibu then Harry might feel a sentimental connection to Malibu ...

*Harry and Meghan eye Malibu properties close to where Princess Diana planned to live with Dodi Fayed*
*THE TELEGRAPH 31 MARCH 2020*
“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are househunting in the same area of Los Angeles where Diana, Princess of Wales planned to set down roots in 1997, it has emerged.

The couple are understood to be searching for a beachside home in Malibu to bring up their 10-month-old son Archie.

Harry’s mother planned to move there with her then boyfriend Dodi Fayed after he bought a palatial home in the area a few months before their death in a Paris car crash.

The Tuscan-style villa, set in five acres and boasting a private beach and 130 feet of ocean frontage, used to belong to Mary Poppins star Julie Andrews and her film director husband Blake Edwards.

In 2007, Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell confirmed she was planning to move to what he described as a “lovely house… in Malibu” adding that he had seen all the plans for it.

He told ABC News: "She said, 'This is our new life, just won't it be great, think of the lifestyle for the boys — nobody's judgmental here in America, you don't have the class system, you don't have the establishment."'

 …“Meghan has made it no secret to those in her life from even before meeting Harry she hoped to live on the beach eventually.”


----------



## Sharont2305

From that Mail Online article.
Where is your duty to your brother now Harry? Oh yeah, its been Markled !


----------



## mdcx

Straight-Laced said:


> Maybe Harry has a thing for Malibu too?  A story from the Royal Correspondent in The Telegraph UK says that Diana was planning a move to Malibu not long before she died.  I remember gossip at the time that Diana could move to the US but I didn't know it was Malibu specifically.
> Anyway, no one will ever know what Diana might have done (with or without Dodi) or whether she'd discussed her plans with her sons but if Diana loved Malibu then Harry might feel a sentimental connection to Malibu ...
> 
> *Harry and Meghan eye Malibu properties close to where Princess Diana planned to live with Dodi Fayed*
> *THE TELEGRAPH 31 MARCH 2020*
> “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are househunting in the same area of Los Angeles where Diana, Princess of Wales planned to set down roots in 1997, it has emerged.
> 
> The couple are understood to be searching for a beachside home in Malibu to bring up their 10-month-old son Archie.
> 
> Harry’s mother planned to move there with her then boyfriend Dodi Fayed after he bought a palatial home in the area a few months before their death in a Paris car crash.
> 
> The Tuscan-style villa, set in five acres and boasting a private beach and 130 feet of ocean frontage, used to belong to Mary Poppins star Julie Andrews and her film director husband Blake Edwards.
> 
> In 2007, Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell confirmed she was planning to move to what he described as a “lovely house… in Malibu” adding that he had seen all the plans for it.
> 
> He told ABC News: "She said, 'This is our new life, just won't it be great, think of the lifestyle for the boys — nobody's judgmental here in America, you don't have the class system, you don't have the establishment."'
> 
> …“Meghan has made it no secret to those in her life from even before meeting Harry she hoped to live on the beach eventually.”


Another step in Meghan’s single white female-ing of Diana. Does she view herself as Harry’s wife or his mother? In any case, I think people are now viewing celebs through a different lens. Some have improved their image by responding well to Coronavirus e.g. Kylie Jenner. Others just look awful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> He told ABC News: "She said, 'This is our new life, just won't it be great, think of the lifestyle for the boys — nobody's judgmental here in America, you don't have the class system, you don't have the establishment."'



Yeah right. Never in her life did Diana say that. She was maybe naive sometimes, but she knew exactly she would never have been allowed to take the heir to the throne and the spare to live the American dream in sunny Malibu.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah right. Never in her life did Diana say that. She was maybe naive sometimes, but she knew exactly she would never have been allowed to take the heir to the throne and the spare to live the American dream in sunny Malibu.


seems to me that from what I heard she really wasn't serious about Dodi....her true love was the doctor.....so I have my doubts as to whether she would have been planning to move to LA with Dodi


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seems to me that from what I heard she really wasn't serious about Dodi....her true love was the doctor.....so I have my doubts as to whether she would have been planning to move to LA with Dodi



Yeah, there were a lot of conflicting reports at the time. I remember Dodi's father was certain they were going to marry, but then he also believed Diana was pregnant at the time which I doubt was true. 

I don't think the relationship had advanced that far and we'll never know whether it would have.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, there were a lot of conflicting reports at the time. I remember Dodi's father was certain they were going to marry, but then he also believed Diana was pregnant at the time which I doubt was true.
> 
> I don't think the relationship had advanced that far and we'll never know whether it would have.


maybe Meghan can get herself a Dodi type next time


----------



## A1aGypsy

I agree, her relationship with Dodi was complicated.  I think this is another rumour dropped by their team to make this move seem more palatable given the terrible optics.

Invoke Diana is gross.


----------



## imgg

_Why on earth would these two clowns need a chief of staff.  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ff-hails-deep-commitment-improving-lives.html_


----------



## zen1965

Boy oh boy.
Since November they have done NAUGHT. Oh, sorry Meg visited that women‘s shelter for a photo op and did a voiceover, Harry gave a speech, and they attended a handful of royal events while in the UK. And that‘s it. 5 months of near nothingness. Calling that work shy is the understatement of the decade.
And that constant  drivel about wanting to improve the world at large, improve lives and society - they haven‘t got a clue. Sappy inarticulate Instagram posts change nothing. All they‘ve put on display is an incredible sense of entitlement and self-pity as well as a lack of basic intelligence (Chunga Changa anyone?). Even if their ever-changing staff came up with a brilliant concept who would put any faith in these two?


----------



## lulilu

It is clear that they plan to do nothing by their statement that, although no one will be able to see it, they will be working hard in secret.


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I agree, her relationship with Dodi was complicated.  I think this is another rumour dropped by their team to make this move seem more palatable given the terrible optics.
> 
> Invoke Diana is gross.


I *AGREE*, not only do I find this to be gross, but also find it *incredibly manipulative* and potentially harmful to Harry!!!  Think about it, his own mother looked at this house, so what is Meghan going to do .. pump that into Harry's head?!??!!  Their relationship is just plain weird, it's like she is playing his wife, but also his mother .. and given Harry's (somewhat) fragile state, that is like playing with fire.  It explains to me, why my friends view Meghan as a supreme "user" of other people with no regard to their feelings!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tivo

imgg said:


> _Why on earth would these two clowns need a chief of staff.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ff-hails-deep-commitment-improving-lives.html_


She will soon learn they are all talk. Meghan will have endless excuses for why they haven’t been able to get started.

Here is that dreadful Hello interview again. Scroll to 4:14 in, that’s her constant state...always In the process of of doing.


----------



## A1aGypsy

CeeJay said:


> I *AGREE*, not only do I find this to be gross, but also find it *incredibly manipulative* and potentially harmful to Harry!!!  Think about it, his own mother looked at this house, so what is Meghan going to do .. pump that into Harry's head?!??!!  Their relationship is just plain weird, it's like she is playing his wife, but also his mother .. and given Harry's (somewhat) fragile state, that is like playing with fire.  It explains to me, why my friends view Meghan as a supreme "user" of other people with no regard to their feelings!!



Yeah, I see no evidence that this is just her. He is the one who went and gave a talk about mummy for a million dollars. He is a very big boy and, no matter how fragile, could / can say no.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Meghan is so full of it   But it’s noticeable nothing gets done unless someone else is doing it.  By constantly being on the move she dodges accountability for any concrete outcomes IMO.


----------



## kemilia

Has anyone seen a pic of the LA house?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tivo said:


> She will soon learn they are all talk. Meghan will have endless excuses for why they haven’t been able to get started.
> 
> Here is that dreadful Hello interview again. Scroll to 4:14 in, that’s her constant state...always In the process of of doing.



“Quietly” and “behind the scenes”


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah right. Never in her life did Diana say that. She was maybe naive sometimes, but she knew exactly she would never have been allowed to take the heir to the throne and the spare to live the American dream in sunny Malibu.





sdkitty said:


> seems to me that from what I heard she really wasn't serious about Dodi....her true love was the doctor.....so I have my doubts as to whether she would have been planning to move to LA with Dodi


Yes, apparently Diana was just trying to make the guy she really loved (the doctor) jealous.  She contacted the paps to capture her every move when with Dodi and it was a scheme that went horribly wrong.

Doubt she would ever want to move to the States.  Even Margaret didn't do that.


----------



## cafecreme15

I'm on a tear watching old seasons of the TLC show 90 Day Fiance and the online streaming platform has continuous commercials for the Disney elephant film with a voice over by "Megan, Duchess of Sussex" and it is so grating to hear that every. single. commercial...


----------



## Lounorada

(swipe)


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> _Why on earth would these two clowns need a chief of staff.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ff-hails-deep-commitment-improving-lives.html_


really.....chief of staff indeed
and I watched that trailer for the elephant documentary....Meghan duchess of sussex?  this is all so pretentious to me.  Maybe the chief of staff can come up with something for them to do like actually give a sizeable monetary donation to something worthwhile


----------



## bag-mania

I cannot eyeroll this enough, but some were wondering how it would be set up so Harry can work in the US.

*Meghan Markle may have to sponsor Prince Harry to live in US*







Meghan Markle may have to sponsor Prince Harry so he can live and work in the US permanently, a top immigration attorney told Page Six.

As of Tuesday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are no longer working royals and are officially embarking on their new “financially independent” life in Los Angeles.

While the Queen’s grandson, 35, would have been able to work while the couple was living in Canada for the past few months as it’s part of the Commonwealth, the rules are completely different in the States, a top New York immigration attorney said.

Harry has three options to get a green card — he can either sponsor himself in the extraordinary ability category — or Markle, 38, can sponsor him as a U.S. citizen or a U.S. entity can sponsor him.

He would get a temporary work and travel permit after an initial approval like any regular applicant, the process to get a green card can currently take more than a year. After three years on a green card, Harry would be eligible to become a U.S. citizen. However, this means he would have to renounce his royal title as sixth in line to the throne, so that would be highly unlikely, the attorney said.

After their move to LA late last month, Harry could either be on a B1/B2 visa, which is a regular tourist visa, or possibly an A1 diplomatic visa, which are for government officials and diplomats. He can’t work on either of these visas, other than in a government or diplomatic capacity on an A1 visa.

However, following President *****’s sour tweet this weekend where he declared he would refuse to pay for their multi-million security bill, an A1 may not last too long. Harry could also be on or apply for an O-1 visa should he have potential contracts here or as someone with extraordinary ability.

The attorney said: “I would probably have Harry and Meghan’s nonprofit org sponsor him based on his history of high profile philanthropy and public works and activism. If the org is not established in the US they would need a US entity of the org as well.

“The org could also sponsor him for permanent residence under the EB1A extraordinary ability category as well, but currently things are faster and easier through spousal sponsorship.”
https://pagesix.com/2020/04/01/meghan-markle-may-have-to-sponsor-prince-harry-to-live-in-us/


----------



## Sharont2305

Kind of off topic but Andrew Parker Bowles, Camilla’s ex husband has tested positive for Coronavirus.
I wish him well.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> I cannot eyeroll this enough, but some were wondering how it would be set up so Harry can work in the US.
> 
> *Meghan Markle may have to sponsor Prince Harry to live in US*



Maybe they can be on the next season of *90 Day Fiance*...


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Maybe they can be on the next season of *90 Day Fiance*...


----------



## papertiger

Straight-Laced said:


> Maybe Harry has a thing for Malibu too?  A story from the Royal Correspondent in The Telegraph UK says that Diana was planning a move to Malibu not long before she died.  I remember gossip at the time that Diana could move to the US but I didn't know it was Malibu specifically.
> Anyway, no one will ever know what Diana might have done (with or without Dodi) or whether she'd discussed her plans with her sons but if Diana loved Malibu then Harry might feel a sentimental connection to Malibu ...
> 
> *Harry and Meghan eye Malibu properties close to where Princess Diana planned to live with Dodi Fayed*
> *THE TELEGRAPH 31 MARCH 2020*
> “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are househunting in the same area of Los Angeles where Diana, Princess of Wales planned to set down roots in 1997, it has emerged.
> 
> The couple are understood to be searching for a beachside home in Malibu to bring up their 10-month-old son Archie.
> 
> Harry’s mother planned to move there with her then boyfriend Dodi Fayed after he bought a palatial home in the area a few months before their death in a Paris car crash.
> 
> The Tuscan-style villa, set in five acres and boasting a private beach and 130 feet of ocean frontage, used to belong to Mary Poppins star Julie Andrews and her film director husband Blake Edwards.
> 
> In 2007, Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell confirmed she was planning to move to what he described as a “lovely house… in Malibu” adding that he had seen all the plans for it.
> 
> He told ABC News: "She said, 'This is our new life, just won't it be great, think of the lifestyle for the boys — nobody's judgmental here in America, you don't have the class system, you don't have the establishment."'
> 
> …“Meghan has made it no secret to those in her life from even before meeting Harry* she hoped to live on the beach eventually.*”



I have house on a beach. The UK is full of them, it's an island.  Ah sorry, I read that incorrectly, she doesn't want a house on _a _beach, she wants _the _house on_ the_ beach.


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> (swipe)



BUH-BYE and GOOD RIDDANCE!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

imgg said:


> Why on earth would these two clowns need a chief of staff.


I LOL'd when I read that.  Try _personal assistant_.  And we'll see how long she lasts, especially after she figures out that the Sussexes are going to work her round the clock taking care of their personal business and doing the heavy lifting for their non-profit.



lanasyogamama said:


> “Quietly” and “behind the scenes”


  She certainly "hit the ground running" when it came to hyping herself up.


----------



## papertiger

imgg said:


> _Why on earth would these two clowns need a chief of staff.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ff-hails-deep-commitment-improving-lives.html_






Flatsy said:


> I LOL'd when I read that.  Try _personal assistant_.  And we'll see how long she lasts, especially after she figures out that the Sussexes are going to work her round the clock taking care of their personal business and doing the heavy lifting for their non-profit.
> 
> 
> She certainly "hit the ground running" when it came to hyping herself up.





Perhaps they're going to set up a rival palace - on the beach


----------



## chowlover2

Did anyone else read the Blind Gossip that came out late last night? I think with it being April Fools they can say it was a joke, but it sure sounded like the truth to me. The article is titled " The Second Baby."


----------



## PewPew

zen1965 said:


> Boy oh boy.
> Since November they have done NAUGHT...*5 months of near nothingness. Calling that work shy is the understatement of the decade.
> And that constant  drivel about wanting to improve the world at large, improve lives and society - they haven‘t got a clue. Sappy inarticulate Instagram posts change nothing*. All they‘ve put on display is an incredible sense of entitlement and self-pity as well as a lack of basic intelligence (Chunga Changa anyone?).



Spot on, as always   Harry dared to say“ small steps & giving out prizes are meaningless” in his “Greta” interview. So they had BIG, MEANINGFUL plans for the world in January. But now, they have keep arrogantly telling us they don’t even know what they’re going to do, but it will be amazing (They’re “*focusing their* *work on understanding”* how they will change the world in private with their most special & rare “charity”).

So what changed since Harry’s Chunga Chunga interview where he was confident in their _ big, meaningful_ future plans? Well, the Queen said they can’t make bank on their titles. Remember these people tried to trademark “SussexRoyal” globally for a variety of consumer products in *including toilet paper*. Despite current events & the frenzy over TP, that hardly qualifies as a * “big, meaningful”* global initiative to the world.  Maybe the reason H&M felt the BRF’s “small steps” with patronages was meaningless because they were just going through the motions.

*Just as people who are chronically bored are boring people, those who cannot find meaning in “small steps,” tend to be meaningless, empty people.*


----------



## sdkitty

chowlover2 said:


> Did anyone else read the Blind Gossip that came out late last night? I think with it being April Fools they can say it was a joke, but it sure sounded like the truth to me. The article is titled " The Second Baby."


just found it....seems a bit farfetched to me.....anyone can say anything in a blind item.  I supposed anything is possible but do these blind items usually have some truth to them?


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> just found it....seems a bit farfetched to me.....anyone can say anything in a blind item.  I supposed anything is possible but do these blind items usually have some truth to them?


I think bits of it make a lot of sense. I think we will hear a lot more about them since the gloves are now off. The truth will come out eventually.


----------



## doni

Straight-Laced said:


> Maybe Harry has a thing for Malibu too?  A story from the Royal Correspondent in The Telegraph UK says that Diana was planning a move to Malibu not long before she died.  I remember gossip at the time that Diana could move to the US but I didn't know it was Malibu specifically.
> Anyway, no one will ever know what Diana might have done (with or without Dodi) or whether she'd discussed her plans with her sons but if Diana loved Malibu then Harry might feel a sentimental connection to Malibu ...
> 
> ”



I highly doubt Diana would have planned to move to the States and leave her young kids behind. But if that was the case, I don’t see how that would incite any good feelings on the child he’d planned to abandon.


----------



## Lodpah

When I first started posting on M&H thread, I said she was evil. Evil to the core. I got slammed. People don’t realize there is evil in this world and MM is one of them. Her pictures don’t lie. Anyway I read an article called about what happens when narcissistic people fall and it’s not pretty. Harry needs to be exorcised from her.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> When I first started posting on M&H thread, I said she was evil. Evil to the core. I got slammed. People don’t realize there is evil in this world and MM is one of them. Her pictures don’t lie. Anyway I read an article called about what happens when narcissistic people fall and it’s not pretty. Harry needs to be exorcised from her.


LOL
that's pretty extreme
I don't like her but don't claim to be able to really know her from pictures.
I think she is a user and it's very unfortunate that H got tangled up with her but as far as true evil that needs to be exorcised....not sure I'd go that far


----------



## V0N1B2

Dolls! It’s April 1st!  Sussex Emancipation Day.  
What is everyone doing to celebrate? I’m having a dinner party and you’re all invited. 
In honour of Just Meghan and Just Call Me Harry I am serving:
Word Salad
Roast Chicken (the vegetarian kind) 
Baked bananas for dessert YUM!

if someone wants to bring a side dish like... crow or something that would be great. 

No dress code but rumpled suits and ill-fitting dresses are welcome. Oh and don’t feel bad about not getting to the salon - just cover up your roots by styling your hair in a messy bun or better yet, wear a Panama hat! 
I can’t wait see you all chez V0N tonight! MWAH :kiss:


----------



## bisousx

She does have a disturbing, menacing look in her eyes - In the beginning, I thought her face was photoshopped by haters to look that way... but apparently the photos are all real and it's how she looks. I can see how some think she looks 'evil'.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> Dolls! It’s April 1st!  Sussex Emancipation Day.
> What is everyone doing to celebrate? I’m having a dinner party and you’re all invited.
> In honour of Just Meghan and Just Call Me Harry I am serving:
> Word Salad
> Roast Chicken (the vegetarian kind)
> Baked bananas for dessert YUM!
> 
> if someone wants to bring a side dish like... crow or something that would be great.
> 
> No dress code but rumpled suits and ill-fitting dresses are welcome. Oh and don’t feel bad about not getting to the salon - just cover up your roots by styling your hair in a messy bun or better yet, wear a Panama hat!
> I can’t wait see you all chez V0N tonight! MWAH :kiss:


----------



## Sol Ryan

cafecreme15 said:


> I'm on a tear watching old seasons of the TLC show 90 Day Fiance and the online streaming platform has continuous commercials for the Disney elephant film with a voice over by "Megan, Duchess of Sussex" and it is so grating to hear that every. single. commercial...



I have to admit to being tempted to just putting the Natalie Portman one on whenever I leave a room muted just so it gets more views...


----------



## Lodpah

I read somewhere that the documentary that MM did an A List actress had done the voiceover but was pushed aside for MM. Maybe Hollywood wouldn’t be so endearing her after all. Also maybe that is why that Disney CEO resigned?

Usually projects like these are planned out way in advance so yeah I think MM will step over anyone to get to the top.


----------



## muchstuff

V0N1B2 said:


> Dolls! It’s April 1st!  Sussex Emancipation Day.
> What is everyone doing to celebrate? I’m having a dinner party and you’re all invited.
> In honour of Just Meghan and Just Call Me Harry I am serving:
> Word Salad
> Roast Chicken (the vegetarian kind)
> Baked bananas for dessert YUM!
> 
> if someone wants to bring a side dish like... crow or something that would be great.
> 
> No dress code but rumpled suits and ill-fitting dresses are welcome. Oh and don’t feel bad about not getting to the salon - just cover up your roots by styling your hair in a messy bun or better yet, wear a Panama hat!
> I can’t wait see you all chez V0N tonight! MWAH :kiss:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

OMG, that blind. It can’t be true.


----------



## lalame

Flatsy said:


> I LOL'd when I read that.  Try _personal assistant_.  And we'll see how long she lasts, especially after she figures out that the Sussexes are going to work her round the clock taking care of their personal business and doing the heavy lifting for their non-profit.
> 
> 
> She certainly "hit the ground running" when it came to hyping herself up.



I read an article many years ago about how old fashioned butlers were very desirable among US celebrities and other wealthy people. Maybe that's what they're looking for. You know, "Just Harry and Meghan" with their Hollywood court.


----------



## muchstuff

A1aGypsy said:


> OMG, that blind. It can’t be true.


Reads like a load of crap to me .


----------



## mrsinsyder

That blind is amazing.


----------



## bag-mania

muchstuff said:


> Reads like a load of crap to me .



Yes, as much as I love a crazy blind item the whole thing is ridiculous and implausible.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> I read an article many years ago about how old fashioned butlers were very desirable among US celebrities and other wealthy people. Maybe that's what they're looking for. You know, "Just Harry and Meghan" with their Hollywood court.


Well, we did grow up watching “Mr. Belvedere”


----------



## gracekelly

Dinner at the Harkles this evening and served with some salad.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> That blind is amazing.



That was such a weird blind... you know what they say, truth is stranger than fiction.


----------



## Tivo

Looks like Charles is footing the security bill.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...arrys-security-costs-*****-refuses-report.amp

I’m not surprised. Actually I find it endearing that he is determined to take care of his son.


----------



## Jayne1

Tivo said:


> Looks like Charles is footing the security bill.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...arrys-security-costs-*****-refuses-report.amp
> 
> I’m not surprised. Actually I find it endearing that he is determined to take care of his son.


Yes, I guess it's endearing, but on the other hand, he's a grown man and daddy is still paying his way. How emasculating.

Also, how do the Brits feel about this I wonder.


----------



## Stansy

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle may have to sponsor Prince Harry to live in US*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the Queen’s grandson, 35, *would have been able to work while the couple was living in Canada* for the past few months as it’s part of the Commonwealth, the rules are completely different in the States, a top New York immigration attorney said.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/04/01/meghan-markle-may-have-to-sponsor-prince-harry-to-live-in-us/



would have been able to work as opposed to did work...!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I guess it's endearing, but on the other hand, he's a grown man and daddy is still paying his way. How emasculating.
> 
> Also, how do the Brits feel about this I wonder.


And how exactly is that achieving "financial independence" they claimed they were so eager to do? 
As long as it's not my tax money, Charles can do what he wants with his "own" money but if I were a parent and still paying my children's way when the said child was in his mid-30s then I'd consider myself failed to bring up a decent one!


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> And how exactly is that achieving "financial independence" they claimed they were so eager to do?
> As long as it's not my tax money, Charles can do what he wants with his "own" money but if I were a parent and still paying my children's way when the said child was in his mid-30s then I'd consider myself failed to bring up a decent one!


I haven’t heard Meghan and Harry use the term financial independence for a long time.  As an aspiration I think it’s gone out of the window.  It just sounded good, in the same way settling in Canada sounded good, but was never their genuine intention IMO.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> I haven’t heard Meghan and Harry use the term financial independence for a long time.  As an aspiration I think it’s gone out of the window.  It just sounded good, in the same way settling in Canada sounded good, but was never their genuine intention IMO.


I didn't believe it was their genuine intention for a second. It just highlights how hypocritical they are and how hollow they are! 2 nearly middle-aged adults can't even foot their own bill without "the firm". Embarrassing!


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't believe it was their genuine intention for a second. It just highlights how hypocritical they are and how hollow they are! 2 nearly middle-aged adults can't even foot their own bill without "the firm". Embarrassing!


“Just call me Hand-out Harry”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

Just a thought...Harry has never had to think about making a living, and he was not raised to do so.  That just might have something to do with Charles’ attitude in continuing to provide support to his son and grandson.


----------



## nautilia

That blind has to be a very entertaining April Fool's joke. At least I hope so, since it is too weird. But then again, this is H & M we are talking about!


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> I haven’t heard Meghan and Harry use the term financial independence for a long time. As an aspiration I think it’s gone out of the window. It just sounded good,


Rebecca English's lengthy recent article said when Buckingham Palace sat down with the Sussexes to work out the details of their plan, the Sussexes "had no idea what financial independence meant".  

I think they thought if they gave up that small chunk of money that paid for some of their staff, all of their other luxuries and perks would stay the same, but they would be able to tell the tabloids to suck it whenever they said "tax dollars are paying for that!"  Same reason they probably said they "want" to pay back the Frogmore renovations - it's just because the tabloids were harping on the tax money.

Actually paying their way in the world?  I don't think that's what they intended.  Their website always implied that the 95% of funding they get from Prince Charles was not what they intended to give up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Flatsy said:


> Rebecca English's lengthy recent article said when Buckingham Palace sat down with the Sussexes to work out the details of their plan, the Sussexes "had no idea what financial independence meant".
> 
> I think they thought if they gave up that small chunk of money that paid for some of their staff, all of their other luxuries and perks would stay the same, but they would be able to tell the tabloids to suck it whenever they said "tax dollars are paying for that!"  Same reason they probably said they "want" to pay back the Frogmore renovations - it's just because the tabloids were harping on the tax money.
> 
> Actually paying their way in the world?  I don't think that's what they intended.  Their website always implied that the 95% of funding they get from Prince Charles was not what they intended to give up.



I've said it before, I'll say it again. I can somehow understand Harry is so completely out of touch with reality, he has not had an even remotely normal upbringing. 

But socal climber Meghan who grew up in a middle class family who has held jobs in her life? Where does that sh*t come from?


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Yes, as much as I love a crazy blind item the whole thing is ridiculous and implausible.


I think they did a similar one last year--that one got me sucked in for a minute. Blind Gossip seems to have had her number all along. And like the saying goes "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck--it's a duck!"


----------



## zen1965

bisbee said:


> Just a thought...Harry has never had to think about making a living, and he was not raised to do so.  That just might have something to do with Charles’ attitude in continuing to provide support to his son and grandson.



Him being raised that way was, of course, done under the assumption of his livelong commitment to the Firm and him fulfilling his duties in the name of the BRF. Despite many of his fans here, he was never a hard worker (Princess Anne anyone?), he was enthusiastic about causes he personally embraced but not all the nitty-gritty handshaking and ribbon-cutting in Tumble-Upon-Weed.

If he truly wants to understand about financial independence he may want to contact Prince Constatijn. But then again,  Harry was a very low academic achiever (2 A-levels, a B in Art and a D (!) in geography), he has not mastered any significant civil-life skills since then and can be regarded as more or less unemployable by the private for-profit sector. I do not know how good his public speaking skills are, but even for that you need topics (and the topic of grieving his mother will not fill stadiums for decades and decades to come). In the past five overwhelmingly idle months we, the public, haven't learnt about one single charitable idea or concept from him. Supposedly, Meg and him work ever so hard behind the scenes - but where's the output?

In a nutshell I think he will not fare well in the set-up he supposedly chose for himself. As to his wife, the I-am-in-the-middle-of-Malawi-but-have-it-much-worse-than-the-locals philanthropist, I rest my case without saying more.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, I'll say it again. I can somehow understand Harry is so completely out of touch with reality, he has not had an even remotely normal upbringing.
> 
> But socal climber Meghan who grew up in a middle class family who has held jobs in her life? Where does that sh*t come from?


Yes, he’s had a privileged upbringing but not one totally divorced from normal life.  He went to school and Sandhurst.  He wasn’t educated at the palace by private tutors, and he had 10 years in the army for goodness sake.  He knows what financial independence means, and so does Meghan.  They’ve been planning this since right after the wedding, I think they’ve had plenty of time to think things through.


----------



## kemilia

Sadly, H will always be the kid that "lives in the basement." Can't support himself (at least in the way he's used to living).

They chose a really bad time to "step back"--no one knew the whole world would be turned upside down with this virus, least of all the 2 of them that either choose not to be informed (too depressing) or don't have enough time to get informed as to the world events. 

I was on a conference call/mtg yesterday and one of the participants (head of a large local business) said things are most likely going to change once we get the "all clear"--so many businesses, large and small will be wiped out and a primarily digital WFH world will most likely emerge. People very well may continue to do social distancing--very reluctant to be in crowded venues.

How will these 2 navigate this--the disposable $$$ won't be there? He's lucky he has his Daddy's money (i.e. basement) to rely on, so many people won't have anything.. 

#ShouldastayedatFrogmore.


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> Yes, he’s had a privileged upbringing but not one totally divorced from normal life. He went to school and Sandhurst. He wasn’t educated at the palace by private tutors, and he had 10 years in the army for goodness sake. He knows what financial independence means, and so does Meghan.


I disagree.  Eton doesn't teach anyone about normal life - particularly not princes whose teachers cheat for them just to get them to meet the bare minimum academic requirements.

As for his military experience, he never had to attempt to live on a military salary or juggle his military service with any real world responsibilities.  When he had time off, he retreated to the luxury of Clarence House and partied with his privileged friends.  I'm sure he never even knew who was paying for his food or his health insurance or any of his other needs; that stuff was just always there for him.  If he needed cash to buy clothes or go on a luxury holiday, he didn't need to think about it, he just had it.

I think it's pretty likely Harry had no idea what he and Meghan's lifestyle actually costs, or how much money they would need to bring in to pay for that lifestyle themselves.


----------



## lulilu

V0N1B2 said:


> Dolls! It’s April 1st!  Sussex Emancipation Day.
> What is everyone doing to celebrate? I’m having a dinner party and you’re all invited.
> In honour of Just Meghan and Just Call Me Harry I am serving:
> Word Salad
> Roast Chicken (the vegetarian kind)
> Baked bananas for dessert YUM!
> 
> if someone wants to bring a side dish like... crow or something that would be great.
> 
> No dress code but rumpled suits and ill-fitting dresses are welcome. Oh and don’t feel bad about not getting to the salon - just cover up your roots by styling your hair in a messy bun or better yet, wear a Panama hat!
> I can’t wait see you all chez V0N tonight! MWAH :kiss:



I am dying at the photo of William and Kate.  Too funny.



Clearblueskies said:


> I haven’t heard Meghan and Harry use the term financial independence for a long time.  As an aspiration I think it’s gone out of the window.  It just sounded good, in the same way settling in Canada sounded good, but was never their genuine intention IMO.



I think when they put it out there that they were looking for financial independence, they were hoping it would result in multiple offers of "jobs" that would pay them buckets of money.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> I disagree.  Eton doesn't teach anyone about normal life - particularly not princes whose teachers cheat for them just to get them to meet the bare minimum academic requirements.
> 
> As for his military experience, he never had to attempt to live on a military salary or juggle his military service with any real world responsibilities.  When he had time off, he retreated to the luxury of Clarence House and partied with his privileged friends.  I'm sure he never even knew who was paying for his food or his health insurance or any of his other needs; that stuff was just always there for him.  If he needed cash to buy clothes or go on a luxury holiday, he didn't need to think about it, he just had it.
> 
> I think it's pretty likely Harry had no idea what he and Meghan's lifestyle actually costs, or how much money they would need to bring in to pay for that lifestyle themselves.


We can disagree.  No big deal.


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> I am dying at the photo of William and Kate.  Too funny.
> 
> 
> 
> I think when they put it out there that they were looking for financial independence, they were hoping it would result in multiple offers of "jobs" that would pay them buckets of money.


Reminds me of children, any children ...  They hear your stories about making ends meet... they supposedly know ... but until they have worked, gotten a pay check stub with the unimaginablly-high deductions and pay taxes a year later ...AND they have paid their own credit cards it is not until then they that really get it
Further, H&M's portfolios are like the rest of them - they have all fallen a boat-load recently - they had a whole lot more money on 01 Mar 2020 than they do on 01 Apr 2020. 
Finally, who is going to the movies or large meetings anymore? Those business ops have dried up, no one needs them as speakers anymore, OK they can still  do Youtube ...   while paying the previously negotiated exorbitant salary for the Gates' manager


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I think they did a similar one last year--that one got me sucked in for a minute. Blind Gossip seems to have had her number all along. And like the saying goes "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck--it's a duck!"



If the blind item was true (which it isn't) it would put a whole new perspective on Meghan's performance at Eugenie's wedding. Instead of Meghan merely trying to get more attention than the bride by being pregnant, she would have been belly cradling Eugenie's little half brother. Imagine flaunting that in the bride's face!


----------



## Chagall

nautilia said:


> That blind has to be a very entertaining April Fool's joke. At least I hope so, since it is too weird. But then again, this is H & M we are talking about!


I just read the blind item about the baby. That is very weird, even for H and M. Was it an April fools joke I wonder. Usually blind posts have some elements of truth to them. Who knows.


----------



## Sharont2305

Flatsy said:


> I disagree.  Eton doesn't teach anyone about normal life - particularly not princes whose teachers cheat for them just to get them to meet the bare minimum academic requirements.
> 
> As for his military experience, he never had to attempt to live on a military salary or juggle his military service with any real world responsibilities.  When he had time off, he retreated to the luxury of Clarence House and partied with his privileged friends.  I'm sure he never even knew who was paying for his food or his health insurance or any of his other needs; that stuff was just always there for him.  If he needed cash to buy clothes or go on a luxury holiday, he didn't need to think about it, he just had it.
> 
> I think it's pretty likely Harry had no idea what he and Meghan's lifestyle actually costs, or how much money they would need to bring in to pay for that lifestyle themselves.


Health Insurance isn't a "thing" over here. It isn't essential


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Health Insurance isn't a "thing" over here. It isn't essential


True but it is a thing in the U.S. now he lives there.
But I think the royal family must have some sort of private health insurance here in the UK. I can't imagine them using the NHS. I have private via my work and I use both NHS and private health insurance for different things.


----------



## LittleStar88

Wait... Can someone please explain how it is possible that Harry has an estimated millions in inheritance (what was it? 15mil? 55mil?) but they somehow still need (demand?) financial support from the Duchy?

Does Harry not have access to this pile of money everyone says he has? Is it tied up somewhere and not able to access? What about her money? Combined they surely have enough to be truly financially independent and not need a dime from anyone else to pay their way. 

These two just need to keep it real here. Spend everyone else's money and sit on theirs?


----------



## Flatsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Health Insurance isn't a "thing" over here. It isn't essential


I thought private health insurance paid for the private hospitals and doctors the royal family seems to prefer?  (Not that they don't also employ their own physicians.)  I don't think any of them are sharing rooms in NHS facilities when they need something done.

Anyway, my point was that Harry has probably never played much of a role in his own daily personal affairs.  Other examples would be registering and maintaining his car, comparison shopping cell phone or TV packages, doing his taxes, etc etc etc (or substitute applicable UK equivalent).

However, I don't know why Meghan would suddenly be ignorant of basic financial realities, unless she just got used to that part of royal life very quickly.


----------



## Flatsy

LittleStar88 said:


> Spend everyone else's money and sit on theirs?


That's what Harry's always done.  He's notoriously cheap when it comes to spending his own money.  They should have enough money of their own to pay for a nice life, but not the type of life they want with $20 million Malibu mansions.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, I'll say it again. I can somehow understand Harry is so completely out of touch with reality, he has not had an even remotely normal upbringing.
> 
> But socal climber Meghan who grew up in a middle class family who has held jobs in her life? Where does that sh*t come from?


she has delusions of grandeur


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I just read the blind item about the baby. That is very weird, even for H and M. Was it an April fools joke I wonder. Usually blind posts have some elements of truth to them. Who knows.


I doubt it's true.....first of all, where would this blind item writer get the info?

but if it was true, it would become evident in time - look at the two daughters.  that face and those teeth would likely come through.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> True but it is a thing in the U.S. now he lives there.
> But I think the royal family must have some sort of private health insurance here in the UK. I can't imagine them using the NHS. I have private via my work and I use both NHS and private health insurance for different things.


they have cash to pay medical bills


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait... Can someone please explain how it is possible that Harry has an estimated millions in inheritance (what was it? 15mil? 55mil?) but they somehow still need (demand?) financial support from the Duchy?
> 
> Does Harry not have access to this pile of money everyone says he has? Is it tied up somewhere and not able to access? What about her money? Combined they surely have enough to be truly financially independent and not need a dime from anyone else to pay their way.
> 
> These two just need to keep it real here. Spend everyone else's money and sit on theirs?


you want them to spend harry's inheritance?  then they'd have no money


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> they have cash to pay medical bills


Of course they have cash but very few people in the UK just pay out of their pockets. Private care is very expensive here. I don't have any knowledge of their health care arrangements here.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Of course they have cash but very few people in the UK just pay out of their own pockets. Private care is very expensive here. I don't have any knowledge of their health care arrangements here.


I don't know what they do but a hospital bill wouldn't bankrupt them as it could a "regular" person in the US


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what they do but a hospital bill wouldn't bankrupt them as it could a "regular" person in the US


Of course not but anybody with any financial sense would get a platinum health insurance.
Since neither of us knows what they do then let's just stop the speculations.


----------



## Madrose

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait... Can someone please explain how it is possible that Harry has an estimated millions in inheritance (what was it? 15mil? 55mil?) but they somehow still need (demand?) financial support from the Duchy?



Exactly!  This needs to be brought up more.  If Harry received his inheritance more than 20 years ago and did not have to draw on those funds given his royalty, I would assume he had advisers looking after his portfolio which could easily have grown substantially to where he is worth multiples of his original inheritance.  They wanted independence, pay your own bills!


----------



## Tivo

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I guess it's endearing, but on the other hand, he's a grown man and daddy is still paying his way. How emasculating.
> 
> Also, how do the Brits feel about this I wonder.


On Harry’s part it is quite shameful. He should be able to provide for his own family. But he is a man-child. Raised to be a prince. Charles likely coddled him and took care of all his needs. He knows his son is spoiled, but that’s his son and he’ll help him out however he can, Meghan or no Meghan.
I dunno, there is something touching about how deep a parent’s instinct to protect their child can be.
The “Duchess” doesn’t care how shameful this is, she only cares about how she can benefit and live a life of luxury.

Everybody except Harry can see she’s using him.
Such a sad situation.


----------



## scarlet555

15 millions net worth, if you're not earning anymore money and have to pay for security yourself, that will be less than 8 years worth of security.   Even if they have daddy pay for that, that's not a lot of money for the yacht lifestyle, these people don't live like average Americans.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I guess it's endearing, but on the other hand, he's a grown man and daddy is still paying his way. How emasculating.
> 
> Also, how do the Brits feel about this I wonder.



Isn't that the way it has always been though? I assume Charles had been completely reliant on his mother for money for decades before more responsibility had been turned over to him. Maybe others who know more about the BRF would know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Madrose

scarlet555 said:


> 15 millions net worth, if you're not earning anymore money and have to pay for security yourself, that will be less than 8 years worth of security.   Even if they have daddy pay for that, that's not a lot of money for the yacht lifestyle, these people don't live like average Americans.



If he's worth north of $50 million now, they should be able to live quite luxuriously off the interest alone, including security.  Of course I can live off $15 million for the rest of my life and then some with no interest whatsoever, but I digress.


----------



## bag-mania

Madrose said:


> If he's worth north of $50 million now, they should be able to live quite luxuriously off the interest alone, including security.  Of course I can live off $15 million for the rest of my life and then some with no interest whatsoever, but I digress.



But, but $15 million would barely cover the cost of their first mansion. 

You can't expect them to live like common, ordinary rich people. They are celebrities! Meghan must never be photographed in the same designer outfit twice. Harry must be able to own five Lamborghinis. They need to have multiple residences in the most exotic locations around the world so that they can get away when their lives get too hard, which is often. $50 million cannot begin to provide them with the lifestyle they believe they deserve.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Madrose said:


> If he's worth north of $50 million now, they should be able to live quite luxuriously off the interest alone, including security.  Of course I can live off $15 million for the rest of my life and then some with no interest whatsoever, but I digress.


$50m is not going to fund the lifestyles they want. Not even close! And we don't know if and how much of it is cash, which they need to pay for security, staff, jets, property upkeep etc. etc. They don't live the lives of an average person in the suburbs. Don't confuse "worth $50m" with "has an income of $50m".


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Isn't that the way it has always been though? I assume Charles had been completely reliant on his mother for money for decades before more responsibility had been turned over to him. Maybe others who know more about the BRF would know.


True (and I'm not arguing, just a bit stir crazy at home) but Charles never threatened to quit the BRF. Yes, he has been dependant on his mother for finances, but he always willingly worked for the Firm.

Harry should be so embarrassed, wanting to be independent, but having daddy pay the bills... but if he's not, that shows how coddled, hypocritical, childish and maybe a bit broken he is.  But we know all that.


----------



## scarlet555

chicinthecity777 said:


> $50m is not going to fund the lifestyles they want. Not even close! And we don't know if and how much of it is cash, which they need to pay for security, staff, jets, property upkeep etc. etc. They don't live the lives of an average person in the suburbs. Don't confuse "worth $50m" with "has an income of $50m".



Agree, even with $1million worth of interest a year, many 'commoners' can live comfortably, but I don't think these two can live in the comfort they want at this level.   Imagine your security cost more than your net worth ...  this can become them one day.


----------



## Madrose

bag-mania said:


> But, but $15 million would barely cover the cost of their first mansion.
> 
> You can't expect them to live like common, ordinary rich people. They are celebrities! Meghan must never be photographed in the same designer outfit twice. Harry must be able to own five Lamborghinis. They need to have multiple residences in the most exotic locations around the world so that they can get away when their lives get too hard, which is often. $50 million cannot begin to provide them with the lifestyle they believe they deserve.



Quite right.  I was being silly, thinking living on an annual income of perhaps $3-5 million while retaining a +50 million net worth was luxurious.  H&M are really quite poor.  My apologies.


----------



## jbags07

V0N1B2 said:


> Dolls! It’s April 1st!  Sussex Emancipation Day.
> What is everyone doing to celebrate? I’m having a dinner party and you’re all invited.
> In honour of Just Meghan and Just Call Me Harry I am serving:
> Word Salad
> Roast Chicken (the vegetarian kind)
> Baked bananas for dessert YUM!
> 
> if someone wants to bring a side dish like... crow or something that would be great.
> 
> No dress code but rumpled suits and ill-fitting dresses are welcome. Oh and don’t feel bad about not getting to the salon - just cover up your roots by styling your hair in a messy bun or better yet, wear a Panama hat!
> I can’t wait see you all chez V0N tonight! MWAH :kiss:


This is one of the BEST posts ever


----------



## lalame

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait... Can someone please explain how it is possible that Harry has an estimated millions in inheritance (what was it? 15mil? 55mil?) but they somehow still need (demand?) financial support from the Duchy?
> 
> Does Harry not have access to this pile of money everyone says he has? Is it tied up somewhere and not able to access? What about her money? Combined they surely have enough to be truly financially independent and not need a dime from anyone else to pay their way.
> 
> These two just need to keep it real here. Spend everyone else's money and sit on theirs?



No other explanation than greed. I would somewhat sympathize if they truly had normal careers, like Beatrice and Eugenie (and by normal I mean normal-wealthy) since that really doesn't allow them to keep up with their family's lifestyle and such.

But with $50m net worth and a celebrity earning potential, I think it's pretty shameful to still be taking money from daddy. They absolutely could pay for their own lifestyle - they've already been set up with the platform and capital - but like you said, they'd rather spend daddy's money than their own.


----------



## PewPew

chicinthecity777 said:


> *$50m is not going to fund the lifestyles they want. Not even close! * And we don't know if and how much of it is cash, which they need to pay for security, staff, jets, property upkeep etc. etc. They don't live the lives of an average person in the suburbs. Don't confuse "worth $50m" with "has an income of $50m".



Exactly, they had very high expectations with respect to income and lifestyle. Soon after Megxit was announced, their PR (“friends” & “experts”) put out stories about how their star power and multimedia talents would eventually draw $100million PER YEAR. That’s Oprah level money. For perspective, last year, Ellen Degeneres made an estimated $87million and Lady GaGa made $36 million.

Ironically people making such bank can be the most stingy. Lady GaGa’s father started a GoFund me for $50,000 to have the public pay his restaurant staff’s wages for 2 weeks b/c of Covid. Not that his daughter has to pay his bills, but they are not estranged and he gets income from her, but he didn’t want to use his personal wealth to pay staff. She & her mother made him take down the GoFundMe, and he claimed did it b/c he saw others doing it & wanted to help foster community.


----------



## LittleStar88

scarlet555 said:


> 15 millions net worth, if you're not earning anymore money and have to pay for security yourself, that will be less than 8 years worth of security.   Even if they have daddy pay for that, that's not a lot of money for the yacht lifestyle, these people don't live like average Americans.



Maybe in eight years they will have figured it out and started earning some revenue!


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> $50m is not going to fund the lifestyles they want. Not even close! And we don't know if and how much of it is cash, which they need to pay for security, staff, jets, property upkeep etc. etc. They don't live the lives of an average person in the suburbs. Don't confuse "worth $50m" with "has an income of $50m".



That should be some incentive to work hard and earn nice things (like the rest of those who wish to be "financially independent")


----------



## Lounorada

LittleStar88 said:


> * Spend everyone else's money and sit on theirs*?


That's how they still have millions in the bank/tied-up somewhere else because they're too busy getting freebies and spending everyone elses money, they don't have to spend their own!


----------



## Madrose

PewPew said:


> Ironically people making such bank can be the most stingy.



This is so very true.


----------



## lalame

PewPew said:


> Ironically people making such bank can be the most stingy.



Very true and your statement reminds me of a comment that someone made in a different thread (Unpopular Chanel opinions or something like that) along the lines of, "People who buy second-hand can't really afford a luxury item." They got totally flamed for it but the reality is... wealthy people are usually quite frugal or stingy when it comes to certain things!


----------



## lanasyogamama

The HBO show “Succession” had a funny quote about this. It was something along the lines of “You’re not rich rich, you are house on Martha’s Vineyard rich.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Very true and your statement reminds me of a comment that someone made in a different thread (Unpopular Chanel opinions or something like that) along the lines of, "People who buy second-hand can't really afford a luxury item." They got totally flamed for it but the reality is... wealthy people are usually quite frugal or stingy when it comes to certain things!


I haven’t mentioned this before??  Can’t even begin to tell the stories of some VERY well known celebs who have thought it perfectly okay to EXPECT that YOU (artisan, store owner, etc.) either GIFT them with said expensive item -OR- they be kind enough to (at least) pay for ONLY the materials (etc - gold, diamonds) but not for the labor or anything else that allows YOU to put food on the table!  The irony, of course, is that these are those celebrities that are on the highest rung of their business who are the cheapest and they ABSOLUTELY believe they are deserving of this!!!  Have experienced this first hand ..


----------



## CeeJay

What still really slays me is .. the $20m Malibu Mansion; is that mansion $20m per Month???  Secondly, really??? .. you need THAT MUCH ROOM for 2 Adults and a baby???  Look, I get that they likely have 'staff', but how many times is the Pool going to be used? .. the Tennis Court? .. etc.?  They going to have cook-outs?  They going to set-up a party on the Beach?  (oh yeah - they might get a surprise there because if they think that they "OWN" that plot of land by the ocean?? .. think again, that is PUBLIC property (which - YES, means that the Paps can also set up camp out there - YIKES)!!!   I just don't get it; why not find a much smaller place?  I guess I'm thinking with my "lesser-class" mindset here - oh dear!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> What still really slays me is .. the $20m Malibu Mansion; is that mansion $20m per Month???  Secondly, really??? .. you need THAT MUCH ROOM for 2 Adults and a baby???  Look, I get that they likely have 'staff', but how many times is the Pool going to be used? .. the Tennis Court? .. etc.?  They going to have cook-outs?  They going to set-up a party on the Beach?  (oh yeah - they might get a surprise there because if they think that they "OWN" that plot of land by the ocean?? .. think again, that is PUBLIC property (which - YES, means that the Paps can also set up camp out there - YIKES)!!!   I just don't get it; why not find a much smaller place?  I guess I'm thinking with my "lesser-class" mindset here - oh dear!


And a pool can be a hasard for kids - tennis is probably OK,


----------



## scarlet555

Money is important but are these two doing well?  Like mentally?


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I haven’t mentioned this before??  Can’t even begin to tell the stories of some VERY well known celebs who have thought it perfectly okay to EXPECT that YOU (artisan, store owner, etc.) either GIFT them with said expensive item -OR- they be kind enough to (at least) pay for ONLY the materials (etc - gold, diamonds) but not for the labor or anything else that allows YOU to put food on the table!  The irony, of course, is that these are those celebrities that are on the highest rung of their business who are the cheapest and they ABSOLUTELY believe they are deserving of this!!!  Have experienced this first hand ..



I knew a gal who did the celeb gifting suites at the Oscars, Academy Awards, etc. Amazing that they GIVE all of this crap to people who can totally afford it. I can't imagine living in a world where people just give you super nice things just for being rich and famous (I get the idea behind why, still amazes me).

She thought it was the coolest thing ever to give crap to low-level celebs (she was not working in the lounge where A Listers go). Somehow she makes money doing this...


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Money is important but are these two doing well?  Like mentally?


Are you... asking if they're okay?


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> Are you... asking if they're okay?


----------



## LittleStar88

I bet she learned this look in acting class and practiced it a lot


----------



## CeeJay

scarlet555 said:


> Money is important but are these two doing well?  Like mentally?


I bet Harry is hurting; he's the one who seems to have some feelings (_rumor has it that he was actually quite upset when he learned that Charles had the virus_).  Meghan? .. seriously???? - hell NO!  That woman has *ZERO* feelings, it has always been about her and she is only going to have "feelings" if you are there for her GOOD or you done her bad.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I bet she learned this look in acting class and practiced it a lot



She likely uses this expression on Harry in order to keep him under her thumb. It's her "give me anything I want" look.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I knew a gal who did the celeb gifting suites at the Oscars, Academy Awards, etc. Amazing that they GIVE all of this crap to people who can totally afford it. I can't imagine living in a world where people just give you super nice things just for being rich and famous (I get the idea behind why, still amazes me).
> 
> She thought it was the coolest thing ever to give crap to low-level celebs (she was not working in the lounge where A Listers go). Somehow she makes money doing this...


YES!! .. THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!  Can't even begin to say how much this PISSES ME OFF; these people can freakin' afford all that crap, so why even bother (I've heard that it oftentimes gets "re-gifted" to various staff come holidays or Birthday - how nice )! 

I was flying back from Boston to LA (_lived in LA at the time_) and happened to sit next to a Hollywood Agent (_who represented many very well-known East Coast-based stars_).  Anyhow, when she saw my jewelry (_as I usually wear it - it's my "calling card" per se_), she inquired (_mind you - you could easily guess that this lady had $$$ - she had her very expensive Travel Chanel bag, her fur coat, a honkin' Diamond Ring and expensive Cartier jewelry and a HUGE Gold & Diamonds Rolex watch_).  

Anyhow, as we engaged in conversation, she told me that I needed to "*gift*" my pieces to various well-known Celebrities in order to get the items into various magazines; in other words "_get your work out there_"!  Then she tells me that I should *donate *it to one of the many (_didn't even know about this_) "*auctions*" where the celebs can get the work for pennies on the dollar, "_oh but the money goes to great charities_" .. really? .. "*which ones*" and got a blank stare.  I said to the lady "_and how do you expect the artist to get paid, you know - buying the materials, making the item, etc. - all takes $$$, especially when said item is high-karat Gold & Diamonds_"?.  She said "*oh well - that's their problem*" - *WHAT*??  

Needless to say, after all that, I told her "_well - you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry, NO DISCOUNTS FOR ANYONE, ESPECIALLY CELEBRITIES_"! .. we sat in silence until the plan hit the ground at LAX!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Well, the Dailly Fail has pretty much said what we've been saying all along .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-dreamt-living-blown-Hollywood-lifestyle.html


----------



## Tivo

bag-mania said:


> She likely uses this expression on Harry in order to keep him under her thumb. It's her "give me anything I want" look.


She also resorts to that same expression (except with a Cheshire Cat grin) to convey wide-eyed giddiness and joy. Lol. She is so fake, and not good at it either.

ETA
Funny thing is, there are far prettier and better D-List actresses in Hollyweird looking for a come up, who are just as shameless as Meghan...eye-balling a big dumb Prince. She’s shown them all how easy a mark Harry is. They’ll be circling him nonstop like a pack of vultures. How long before one of them “unlocks the code?”


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> YES!! .. THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!  Can't even begin to say how much this PISSES ME OFF; these people can freakin' afford all that crap, so why even bother (I've heard that it oftentimes gets "re-gifted" to various staff come holidays or Birthday - how nice )!
> 
> I was flying back from Boston to LA (_lived in LA at the time_) and happened to sit next to a Hollywood Agent (_who represented many very well-known East Coast-based stars_).  Anyhow, when she saw my jewelry (_as I usually wear it - it's my "calling card" per se_), she inquired (_mind you - you could easily guess that this lady had $$$ - she had her very expensive Travel Chanel bag, her fur coat, a honkin' Diamond Ring and expensive Cartier jewelry and a HUGE Gold & Diamonds Rolex watch_).
> 
> Anyhow, as we engaged in conversation, she told me that I needed to "*gift*" my pieces to various well-known Celebrities in order to get the items into various magazines; in other words "_get your work out there_"!  Then she tells me that I should *donate *it to one of the many (_didn't even know about this_) "*auctions*" where the celebs can get the work for pennies on the dollar, "_oh but the money goes to great charities_" .. really? .. "*which ones*" and got a blank stare.  I said to the lady "_and how do you expect the artist to get paid, you know - buying the materials, making the item, etc. - all takes $$$, especially when said item is high-karat Gold & Diamonds_"?.  She said "*oh well - that's their problem*" - *WHAT*??
> 
> Needless to say, after all that, I told her "_well - you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry, NO DISCOUNTS FOR ANYONE, ESPECIALLY CELEBRITIES_"! .. we sat in silence until the plan hit the ground at LAX!!!



Well said CeeJay, wtf with these celebrities and people who reps them.  Can they hear themselves talk all that non-sense?  I can just imagine, Meghan sitting next to the lady you spoke to on the plane and telling M how she can wear all these expensive donated hard working pieces from high end jewelers and jewelry makers for dirt cheap, and encourage celebrities like M to live in delusions of grandeur.  

Yes, I read somewhere, I don't remember anymore between the COVID 19 and these two, it's a blank for me, perhaps I read it in here, or not, that Harry was upset by Charles getting COVID 19.  But... then I got side tracked last night, reading the BLIND item and then sidetracked again reading about who the Harry's real father was!   I'm not sure who Harry's biological father is, because that red head guy and Diana admitted to having an affair, and Harry looks so much like this red head guy named James Hewitt.  

Me asking about these two, was more about Harry.  I feel like he is the one being tricked, but how long are we going to blame M for?


----------



## nanou3175

What on earth is he trying to do/show? [emoji848]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

nanou3175 said:


> View attachment 4702433
> 
> 
> 
> What on earth is he trying to do/show? [emoji848]



And more importantly, is that toilet paper in his cart?  I thought they limited TP to one pack(big or small) per customer?


----------



## Flatsy

nanou3175 said:


> What on earth is he trying to do/show?


This isn't a real photo; it was an April Fool's joke.


----------



## Mendocino

scarlet555 said:


> Well said CeeJay, wtf with these celebrities and people who reps them.  Can they hear themselves talk all that non-sense?  I can just imagine, Meghan sitting next to the lady you spoke to on the plane and telling M how she can wear all these expensive donated hard working pieces from high end jewelers and jewelry makers for dirt cheap, and encourage celebrities like M to live in delusions of grandeur.
> 
> Yes, I read somewhere, I don't remember anymore between the COVID 19 and these two, it's a blank for me, perhaps I read it in here, or not, that Harry was upset by Charles getting COVID 19.  But... then I got side tracked last night, reading the BLIND item and then sidetracked again reading about who the Harry's real father was!   I'm not sure who Harry's biological father is, because that red head guy and Diana admitted to having an affair, and Harry looks so much like this red head guy named James Hewitt.
> 
> Me asking about these two, was more about Harry.  I feel like he is the one being tricked, but how long are we going to blame M for?


----------



## Straight-Laced

LittleStar88 said:


> I bet she learned this look in acting class and practiced it a lot


Just adding to that : first she practiced on Daddy, then she perfected ‘the look’ with professional on camera training, and now here we are.


----------



## Mendocino

Hello everyone, this is my first post here and I want to thank you guys for offering a welcome distraction from self-isolation. Regarding Harry and his biological father, here's a photo of Prince Phillip from 1957 on the cover of a magazine and one taken of Harry on his wedding day.


----------



## Blyen

scarlet555 said:


> Well said CeeJay, wtf with these celebrities and people who reps them.  Can they hear themselves talk all that non-sense?  I can just imagine, Meghan sitting next to the lady you spoke to on the plane and telling M how she can wear all these expensive donated hard working pieces from high end jewelers and jewelry makers for dirt cheap, and encourage celebrities like M to live in delusions of grandeur.
> 
> Yes, I read somewhere, I don't remember anymore between the COVID 19 and these two, it's a blank for me, perhaps I read it in here, or not, that Harry was upset by Charles getting COVID 19.  But... then I got side tracked last night, reading the BLIND item and then sidetracked again reading about who the Harry's real father was!   I'm not sure who Harry's biological father is, because that red head guy and Diana admitted to having an affair, and Harry looks so much like this red head guy named James Hewitt.
> 
> Me asking about these two, was more about Harry.  I feel like he is the one being tricked, but how long are we going to blame M for?


Harry looks exactly like Charles IMHO, far more than William, who took after Diana.


----------



## lenie

LittleStar88 said:


> I bet she learned this look in acting class and practiced it a lot


She took acting classes?!


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> The HBO show “Succession” had a funny quote about this. It was something along the lines of “You’re not rich rich, you are house on Martha’s Vineyard rich.”


I *LOVE* 'Succession', that's such a great show. Can't wait for the next season!



LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4702421





LittleStar88 said:


> I bet she learned this look in acting class and practiced it a lot


That's the most try-hard sad face i've ever seen, from the woe-is-me interview.
The funny thing is she looks more believable 'sad' in the second picture and this is AcTiNg. Might need to work on your AcTiNg skills if you can't even fake a sad face in real life.


----------



## Mendocino

Sorry, I'll eventually learn the ropes of quoting, and I want to make it clear that in no way do I believe Diana and Phillip had an improper relationship. I believe Charles is definitely Harry's father.


----------



## CeeJay

Tivo said:


> ETA
> Funny thing is, there are far prettier and better D-List actresses in Hollyweird looking for a come up, who are just as shameless as Meghan...eye-balling a big dumb Prince. She’s shown them all how easy a mark Harry is. They’ll be circling him nonstop like a pack of vultures. How long before one of them “unlocks the code?”


Ooooooooh . good point, and wouldn't it be interesting if said D-List actress was also British as she might just be able to "convince" Harry about him missing the mother-land, etc.????


----------



## marietouchet

nanou3175 said:


> View attachment 4702433
> 
> 
> 
> What on earth is he trying to do/show? [emoji848]



Based on 10 lb bag of sugar in cart , he is not on a low carb diet
I vote for photoshopped , all the chic people in LA are wearing masks and gloves


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> And more importantly, is that toilet paper in his cart?  I thought they limited TP to one pack(big or small) per customer?


right....is this a real pic?
first of all you can't get TP at costco unless you line up at like 6am....and it's one to a customer; same with paper towels.  he has two of each?


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> What still really slays me is .. the $20m Malibu Mansion; is that mansion $20m per Month???  Secondly, really??? .. you need THAT MUCH ROOM for 2 Adults and a baby???  Look, I get that they likely have 'staff', but how many times is the Pool going to be used? .. the Tennis Court? .. etc.?  They going to have cook-outs?  They going to set-up a party on the Beach?  (oh yeah - they might get a surprise there because if they think that they "OWN" that plot of land by the ocean?? .. think again, that is PUBLIC property (which - YES, means that the Paps can also set up camp out there - YIKES)!!!   I just don't get it; why not find a much smaller place?  I guess I'm thinking with my "lesser-class" mindset here - oh dear!


If the rumours are true, and they are living in the home Kylie Jenner was renting from the owners (David Charvet and Brooke Burke), then it apparently rents for $14,500/night - so about $435,000/mo Malibu.
Their “millions” ain’t gonna last with those prices.


----------



## bag-mania

Tivo said:


> Funny thing is, there are far prettier and better D-List actresses in Hollyweird looking for a come up, who are just as shameless as Meghan...eye-balling a big dumb Prince. She’s shown them all how easy a mark Harry is. They’ll be circling him nonstop like a pack of vultures. How long before one of them “unlocks the code?”





CeeJay said:


> Ooooooooh . good point, and wouldn't it be interesting if said D-List actress was also British as she might just be able to "convince" Harry about him missing the mother-land, etc.????



I don’t think she’ll allow another pretty woman to get close to him. The way she keeps a death grip on his arm in public, it’ll be like she’s marking her territory and letting all the other golddiggers know she’s on to them.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> right....is this a real pic?
> first of all you can't get TP at costco unless you line up at like 6am....and it's one to a customer; same with paper towels.  he has two of each?



maybe he was SIXTH IN LINE that day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Shelter in place got me...


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Shelter in place got me...
> 
> View attachment 4702481


   .. GOOD JOB!!!   Heh-heh, yup Meggie .. we got your numba!!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think she’ll allow another pretty woman to get close to him. The way she keeps a death grip on his arm in public, it’ll be like she’s marking her territory and letting all the other golddiggers know she’s on to them.


and she has the anchor baby


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> If the rumours are true, and they are living in the home Kylie Jenner was renting from the owners (David Charvet and Brooke Burke), then it apparently rents for $14,500/night - so about $435,000/mo Malibu.
> Their “millions” ain’t gonna last with those prices.


they may get a discount


----------



## TC1

Who needs a plan for financial independence when you can just squeeze out a few tears for your mom in front of an audience for a cool mill?


----------



## lalame

Maybe I'm in the minority here but I don't think she was acting in that "No one's asked me if I'm okay" interview. She seems genuinely sad and I'm sure she does feel quite wronged or depressed. Whether it's your fault or not........ it would be hard for any human not to feel upset about literally millions of people world-wide heckling you!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Maybe I'm in the minority here but I don't think she was acting in that "No one's asked me if I'm okay" interview. She seems genuinely sad and I'm sure she does feel quite wronged or depressed. Whether it's your fault or not........ it would be hard for any human not to feel upset about literally millions of people world-wide heckling you!



I don't care if she was genuinely sad.....first of all even if the british tabloids were being racist or unfair to her, she still had plenty of people who liked her just fine.
and more importantly - whatever sadness she may have felt, it was not OK for her to cry aboout it on TV while visiting a country where many people have to worry about basic things like feeding their kids and surviving.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I don't care if she was genuinely sad.....first of all even if the british tabloids were being racist or unfair to her, she still had plenty of people who liked her just fine.
> and more importantly - whatever sadness she may have felt, it was not OK for her to cry aboout it on TV while visiting a country where many people have to worry about basic things like feeding their kids and surviving.



Just to be clear, I'm not saying she deserves sympathy OR that it was an appropriate (or not) venue for all that. Just saying it seemed to be real sadness to me, not acting.  I know I feel like crap when I am criticized, whether I deserve it or not - and usually it feels worse when it IS my fault.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Just to be clear, I'm not saying she deserves sympathy OR that it was an appropriate (or not) venue for all that. Just saying it seemed to be real sadness to me, not acting.


ok
I understand
But this was the tipping point for me - from indifference to dislike of her


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Maybe I'm in the minority here but I don't think she was acting in that "No one's asked me if I'm okay" interview. She seems genuinely sad and I'm sure she does feel quite wronged or depressed. Whether it's your fault or not........ it would be hard for any human not to feel upset about literally millions of people world-wide heckling you!


BUT, prior to that, she had said that "I don't read anything ..", in essence, referring to the fact that she wouldn't read anything negative about her!  Yeah, maybe she was lonely and it can't be easy being pregnant with no one around asking how you are doing, but what? .. she never talked to her Mom during that time, and what about her 'best friend' - Jessica?  I think what most folks got upset about was the fact that they were in a very poor country (although - my understanding was that she did not accompany Harry to Malawi), and it was then that she complained .. when in fact, there are many people in that country who go days without food, wondering where their next Rand will come from .. it was just NOT THE BEST TIME for her to complain!!!


----------



## lalame

I was actually okay with that, but that's just my personality - I am generally drawn to people who show that kind of vulnerability. Whether it was appropriate or not IDK but it's just an emotional response on my part. 

Where it went wrong is everything that happened after.... when the sadness somewhere turned into opportunism and taking advantage of the situation.  Makes me feel even more angry, like I was had.


----------



## bag-mania

Their publicists are working incredibly hard. Every day a new story of wonder. Today we are supposed to believe that Meghan has arranged for Archie to have “play dates” with other babies on FaceTime. Because everyone knows 10-month-olds can’t get enough of FaceTime. 

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/amp32017013/meghan-markle-son-archie-facetime-playdates/


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Their publicists are working incredibly hard. Every day a new story of wonder. Today we are supposed to believe that Meghan has arranged for Archie to have “play dates” with other babies on FaceTime. Because everyone knows 10-month-olds can’t get enough of FaceTime.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/amp32017013/meghan-markle-son-archie-facetime-playdates/



OMG that’s hilarious!!!


----------



## closeted

My issue is for a so called seasoned humanitarian, she can be so deaf. It is not enough to survive, well for a huge portion of humanity to be able to survive is a hugeee blessing. No one asked me if I am ok, again for a huge portion of humanity no one asked them wether they have enough to survive,  nevermind to "thrive".


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> Their publicists are working incredibly hard. Every day a new story of wonder. Today we are supposed to believe that Meghan has arranged for Archie to have “play dates” with other babies on FaceTime. Because everyone knows 10-month-olds can’t get enough of FaceTime.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/amp32017013/meghan-markle-son-archie-facetime-playdates/



That is such fantastic material for Gary Janetti. You just can’t get more ridiculous than that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I'm waiting with bated breath for Meghan to show us how to make macrame and loose stitch crochet face masks.  She'll be disappointed when large crowds don't gather tightly together to see her make one.


----------



## Sharont2305

scarlet555 said:


> Well said CeeJay, wtf with these celebrities and people who reps them.  Can they hear themselves talk all that non-sense?  I can just imagine, Meghan sitting next to the lady you spoke to on the plane and telling M how she can wear all these expensive donated hard working pieces from high end jewelers and jewelry makers for dirt cheap, and encourage celebrities like M to live in delusions of grandeur.
> 
> Yes, I read somewhere, I don't remember anymore between the COVID 19 and these two, it's a blank for me, perhaps I read it in here, or not, that Harry was upset by Charles getting COVID 19.  But... then I got side tracked last night, reading the BLIND item and then sidetracked again reading about who the Harry's real father was!   I'm not sure who Harry's biological father is, because that red head guy and Diana admitted to having an affair, and Harry looks so much like this red head guy named James Hewitt.
> 
> Me asking about these two, was more about Harry.  I feel like he is the one being tricked, but how long are we going to blame M for?


I've always thought it was ridiculous when the rumours started about James Hewitt being Harry's bio father. It would have been a miracle too as Diana didn't meet him till Harry was about 3!
As Harry has grown up he's looking more like Charles and Philip, same close set eyes and nose. He definitely takes after Philip's side of the family rather than the Queen's side.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Their publicists are working incredibly hard. Every day a new story of wonder. Today we are supposed to believe that Meghan has arranged for Archie to have “play dates” with other babies on FaceTime. Because everyone knows 10-month-olds can’t get enough of FaceTime.
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/amp32017013/meghan-markle-son-archie-facetime-playdates/


OMG that’s ridiculous - it makes it so obvious that she’s not at all a hands on mum


----------



## chicinthecity777

Oh MM is definitely sad! She's sad because she thought by landing a "rich" prince, her life would be so easy from then on while in reality it's not easy at all! All that planning, scheming and dreaming has resulted in something much much harder than she thought. Yes a great sense of loss for sure!


----------



## myown

Just saw this on Instagram. Is that really Harry?


----------



## Sharont2305

myown said:


> Just saw this on Instagram. Is that really Harry?


No, it was an April Fool in the newspaper


----------



## Lounorada

LittleStar88 said:


> Shelter in place got me...
> 
> View attachment 4702481


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> Just to be clear, I'm not saying she deserves sympathy OR that it was an appropriate (or not) venue for all that. Just saying it seemed to be real sadness to me, not acting.  I know I feel like crap when I am criticized, whether I deserve it or not - and usually it feels worse when it IS my fault.


My opinion is everything she does is an act.  She plays whatever role in life to manipulate the people around her to get what she wants.  She has no true identity, just morphs into whatever she feels will garnish the most attention.


----------



## imgg

chicinthecity777 said:


> Oh MM is definitely sad! She's sad because she thought by landing a "rich" prince, her life would be so easy from then on while in reality it's not easy at all! All that planning, scheming and dreaming has resulted in something much much harder than she thought. Yes a great sense of loss for sure!


I don't think she is sad all all, she got exactly everything she wanted, with the exception of keeping the royal title.  She does't care about public opinion, because she is living the high life in a borrowed house and probably has all her new celebrity "friends"  on speed dial.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mendocino said:


> Hello everyone, this is my first post here and I want to thank you guys for offering a welcome distraction from self-isolation. Regarding Harry and his biological father, here's a photo of Prince Phillip from 1957 on the cover of a magazine and one taken of Harry on his wedding day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4702441


Hi there!

Well, I never thought he did not look like a Mountbatten-Windsor and I think the rumours about his "real" father are nuts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> maybe he was SIXTH IN LINE that day.


LOL


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> maybe he was SIXTH IN LINE that day.


This has got me in stitches! Too funny!


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> I don't think she is sad all all, she got exactly everything she wanted, with the exception of keeping the royal title.  She does't care about public opinion, because she is living the high life in a borrowed house and probably has all her new celebrity "friends"  on speed dial.



Even though she got what she wanted I don't believe she'll be satisfied for long. Notice I said satisfied, not happy. I don't think she'll be happy unless she is adored by the masses and I don't see that happening. It's been two years since she hit the peak of her popularity at the wedding. She loved that attention. I don't think sitting in rented/borrowed homes looking at her pushover husband is going to keep that ego mollified. I'm willing to bet she's on the phone trying to hustle some high profile work with big name celebrities but given the circumstances she may not get what she really wants.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> Even though she got what she wanted I don't believe she'll be satisfied for long. Notice I said satisfied, not happy. I don't think she'll be happy unless she is adored by the masses and I don't see that happening. It's been two years since she hit the peak of her popularity at the wedding. She loved that attention. I don't think sitting in rented/borrowed homes looking at her pushover husband is going to keep that ego mollified. I'm willing to bet she's on the phone trying to hustle some high profile work with big name celebrities but given the circumstances she may not get what she really wants.


She will never be truly happy, I suspect she has a black hole and a true emptiness which is why she tries to find happiness in external things and is constantly chasing that emotional high.  However, I do not think she is sad, she is living pretty good right now.  Her ego won't accept criticism and just feels people are jealous of her superiority.


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> She will never be truly happy, I suspect she has a black hole and a true emptiness which is why she tries to find happiness in external things.  However, I do not think she is sad, she is living pretty good right now.  Her ego won't accept criticism and just feels people are jealous of her superiority.



I agree. I don't think she is sad but as you said above, she manipulates. I do believe she is disappointed and angry that Megxit didn't turn out the way she wanted. She thought they could still be royal and have all the money and prestige but they would have complete autonomy. Harry apparently thought that too. It shows they are both delusional.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> I agree. I don't think she is sad but as you said above, she manipulates. I do believe she is disappointed and angry that Megxit didn't turn out the way she wanted. *She thought they could still be royal *and have all the money and prestige but they would have complete autonomy. Harry apparently thought that too. It shows they are both delusional.


I agree she wanted that but she still has a title which she now uses for Hollywood credits, royal money and royal association.

She now has her eyes set on Hollywood.  Once they reject her that is when she will start unraveling. I suspect Hollywood will embrace her until she is no longer valuable for them.


----------



## myown

Sharont2305 said:


> No, it was an April Fool in the newspaper


Thanks for telling me


----------



## mshermes

listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex

A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


WOW, that is truly HORRIBLE!!!


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hi there!
> 
> Well, I never thought he did not look like a Mountbatten-Windsor and I think the rumours about his "real" father are nuts.



Hello! Yes, Harry didn't fall far from the Mountbatten tree.


----------



## Megs

I've been MIA from this thread for a while, life has been crazy as I am sure it is for all of you. With that being said, with all of the heaviness and scariness happening in the world, I would love some additional Royal silly stories right now to distract me. Wish she or he would dumbly step out and pap get a picture of her. It's not at all important, but I'd welcome the distraction greatly. 

And their last instagram post was just so much self-fluff, per usual. Rolleyes so hard.


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> WOW, that is truly HORRIBLE!!!


I can't bear to listen, still traumatized over listening a few minutes to the speech she made in England.


----------



## cafecreme15

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


Jesus this is bad. At least there’s no fake accent...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> WOW, that is truly HORRIBLE!!!


I won't listen, but is it like "aaaalll the waaay in Canada"?


----------



## Tivo

imgg said:


> I agree she wanted that but she still has a title which she now uses for Hollywood credits, royal money and royal association.
> 
> She now has her eyes set on Hollywood.  Once they reject her that is when she will start unraveling. I suspect *Hollywood will embrace her until she is no longer valuable for them*.


She’s no value to them now. 
Like that Disney Exec said, she needs them, they don’t need her. I think she has left a bad taste in many people’s mouths.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


oh gawd


----------



## Tivo

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


This is exactly what I expected


----------



## Tivo

LittleStar88 said:


> Shelter in place got me...
> 
> View attachment 4702481


The exact same expression for everything 
Lol! I can’t!


----------



## Tivo

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think she’ll allow another pretty woman to get close to him. The way she keeps a death grip on his arm in public, it’ll be like she’s marking her territory and letting all the other golddiggers know she’s on to them.


Ha! The gold diggers won’t care! They always find a way...just like miss Duchy.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Tivo said:


> She’s no value to them now.
> Like that Disney Exec said, she needs them, they don’t need her. I think she has left a bad taste in many people’s mouths.


Exactly! Hollywood don't need her AT ALL!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## imgg

Tivo said:


> She’s no value to them now.
> Like that Disney Exec said, she needs them, they don’t need her. I think she has left a bad taste in many people’s mouths.


I hope you're right!  I think she may have a temporary boost in Hollywood before it comes crashing down.  Because she is so popular, hate or love her she is what people are talking about and to Hollywood that means money.


----------



## muchstuff

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


Oh Gawd that’s awful.


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> Jesus this is bad. At least there’s no fake accent...


 That’s funny, because it sounds so fake to me!


----------



## chicinthecity777

imgg said:


> I hope you're right!  I think she may have a temporary boost in Hollywood before it comes crashing down.  Because she is so popular, hate or love her she is what people are talking about and to Hollywood that means money.


She's not very much talked about here in the UK. The mainstream media don't report that much about her before Megxit & covid-19 and even less now. The tabloids do a bit but it's not even the closest to the hottest topic in town, at all! This thread is where I get updates on them.


----------



## Tivo

Anybody else convinced Meghan is a poster on this site? Like Megan herself and not some handler? I wasn’t before but I am now.


----------



## rose60610

Looking back, it's the little things that stand out to me that foreshadowed Megxit. From MM's scolding of staff for tasting egg in a "macrobiotic" dish, insistence on air fresheners/atomizers in the church before the wedding, a Dec '18 account of MM reaming out Kate's staffer, her misbehavior at the Trooping of Colors, high staff turnover,  "existing, not living", various other things. Lots of dimwit minor things that didn't call for the over-reactions she gave.
For her to be upset over how the BRF operates is like an intern telling the CEO of a Fortune 500 company how to run the company. Why doesn't she call Tim Cook of Apple and tell him how to manage his 137,000 employees and how to make the next iPhone? Somehow she and Harry thought they would catapult themselves to leveraged greatness by turning their JP Morgan speech into a pity-fest about long-dead Mommy. A swing and a miss! 
Breaking off from the Crown to move to L.A. is like rejecting Michelin star meals to eat cold SpaghettiOs out of the can and trying to convince everyone how delicious it is. How hard is Harry kicking himself now? There's brave risk and then there's stupid risk. People with huge safety nets can afford to be stupid, and I think that's what we're seeing here.


----------



## sdkitty

Tivo said:


> Anybody else convinced Meghan is a poster on this site? Like Megan herself and not some handler? I wasn’t before but I am now.


interesting theory
why are you convinced of this?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Tivo said:


> Anybody else convinced Meghan is a poster on this site? Like Megan herself and not some handler? I wasn’t before but I am now.


I wouldn’t be surprised. There’s a poster here who makes the same posts on multiple Meghan forums. I don’t think s/he is Meghan but it’s odd. If you look at their Instagram, it’s clear they buy bots (all those weird emoji posts that are repetitive). 

I think their internet image is a big deal to them and they definitely try to work it as much as possible.


----------



## Tivo

sdkitty said:


> interesting theory
> why are you convinced of this?


Little things like writing style and tone. 
Also the timing of one post in particular.


----------



## bag-mania

TMZ posted the preview snippet of Meghan's narration skills and the comments section is brutal. Calling her the "Duchess of Suxx" is one of the kinder comments.


----------



## Tivo

mrsinsyder said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised. There’s a poster here who makes the same posts on multiple Meghan forums. I don’t think s/he is Meghan but it’s odd. If you look at their Instagram, it’s clear they buy bots (all those weird emoji posts that are repetitive).
> 
> I think their internet image is a big deal to them and they definitely try to work it as much as possible.


I doubt someone like Meghan can resist getting online to obsessively read about herself and tell off the haters.
She reminds me a lot of Bethenny Frankel


----------



## Flatsy

rose60610 said:


> Looking back, it's the little things that stand out to me that foreshadowed Megxit. From MM's scolding of staff for tasting egg in a "macrobiotic" dish, insistence on air fresheners/atomizers in the church before the wedding, a Dec '18 account of MM reaming out Kate's staffer, her misbehavior at the Trooping of Colors, high staff turnover, "existing, not living", various other things.


And I think that was just the start of it.  Vanity Fair said Meghan and Harry rejected the Queen's cakemaker and florist for their wedding and insisted on bringing in their own.  Can you imagine - the Queen's cakemaker and florist not being up to some basic cable actress's standards?  That's some cheek.

In Rebecca English's recent story, she said that before that engagement Meghan did with the Queen, the Queen's private dresser sent word to Meghan's office that the Queen would be wearing a hat.  Meaning: Meghan should wear a hat too.  Meghan sent word back that she would not wear a hat.

Why?  Why not be cooperative?  She joined a family and took on a job where that kind of thing was important and instead of trying to fit in and be agreeable, she had to insist upon doing everything her own way.  (And note: she should have worn a hat at that engagement - it would have covered up what a sweaty mess her hair became after the June sun beat down it all afternoon.  MAYBE after 93 years of doing this stuff, the Queen knows what she's doing!)

If she wasn't going to make any effort to play the game even in the very beginning....yeah, it was inevitable she wouldn't last.


----------



## zen1965

Tivo said:


> Anybody else convinced Meghan is a poster on this site? Like Megan herself and not some handler? I wasn’t before but I am now.


Did she like Bal bags before she met no. 6?


----------



## lalame

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......



Look, I hope a bajillion people are inspired to donate to Elephants Without Borders from all this press.

That being said..... Good God. I think we all could've imagined she'd sound like that - she just has that syrupy way of speaking. So cheesy and contrived. Even when she's speaking about serious issues, her tone is contrived, like it's how someone would learn to "talk sad" in Acting Class. I'm embarrassed for her. 

They really should've gotten someone with a deeper, more "narrator" voice not an "acting" voice. Like Benedict C, Morgan Freeman, Emma Thompson, etc.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I guess David Attenborough doesn’t need to worry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Sharont2305 said:


> I've always thought it was ridiculous when the rumours started about James Hewitt being Harry's bio father. It would have been a miracle too as Diana didn't meet him till Harry was about 3!
> As Harry has grown up he's looking more like Charles and Philip, same close set eyes and nose. He definitely takes after Philip's side of the family rather than the Queen's side.


When Harry was younger he was good looking..like a younger Phillip. He's rapidly careening toward Charles territory


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> When Harry was younger he was good looking..like a younger Phillip. He's rapidly careening toward Charles territory


yes, he kept his hair longer than Will but now that it's thinning he's not looking so great


----------



## bag-mania

They are resorting to repeating old, old stories in lieu of anything recent. Today Town & Country posted "The Story Behind Meghan Markle's Iconic Messy Bun Is Finally Revealed." 

As if anyone gives a rat's @ss about Meghan's damned messy hair, let alone considers it "iconic."


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> They are resorting to repeating old, old stories in lieu of anything recent. Today Town & Country posted "The Story Behind Meghan Markle's Iconic Messy Bun Is Finally Revealed."
> 
> As if anyone gives a rat's @ss about Meghan's damned messy hair, let alone considers it "iconic."


It's a typo. It's supposed to be ironic!


----------



## Flatsy

lalame said:


> I think we all could've imagined she'd sound like that - she just has that syrupy way of speaking. So cheesy and contrived. Even when she's speaking about serious issues, her tone is contrived, like it's how someone would learn to "talk sad" in Acting Class. I'm embarrassed for her.


Yes!  I actually think her narration is fine - syrupy is ok for this project.

But it's her real speaking that I can't stand.  I don't know how people can think she's genuine when everything she says and does is so badly playacted.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lmaoooooooo


----------



## Swanky

Reminder not to discuss members please.


----------



## lalame

Flatsy said:


> Yes!  I actually think her narration is fine - syrupy is ok for this project.
> 
> But it's her real speaking that I can't stand.  I don't know how people can think she's genuine when everything she says and does is so badly playacted.



Ugh I can't stand this. It's like she's acting instead of narrating, and badly at that. There should be a level of "omniscience" in the voice of a narrator... the narrator shouldn't sound like they're a character in the scene they're narrating. Very curious how Natalie Portman will do!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Honestly, at this point I’m not sure what’s worse, the acting or the rating. I think I have to go with the writing, it really makes my head hurt. 

I can’t believe she thinks any acting roles are “beneath” her.  She was on a USA network show, that’s it!!!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Ugh I can't stand this. It's like she's acting instead of narrating, and badly at that. There should be a level of "omniscience" in the voice of a narrator... the narrator shouldn't sound like they're a character in the scene they're narrating. Very curious how Natalie Portman will do!



She's using the principle of method narration. It is not enough to merely describe the elephant, one must _become_ the elephant.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmaoooooooo
> View attachment 4702860


..  and *BOOM*, now we ALL know the *REAL REASON* why Meghan married Harry, and *WHY* she was so hell-bent on getting back to LA!  Now, to think that she's going to get those parts? .. hmmmm, not so sure about that!  I would assume that even the A-list Directors would have her audition for the part.  Now, I think we all know that given her delusions of grandeur, she would likely say "_what? .. me audition?  Don't YOU know that I'm an A-List actress, so why would I audition_?"   Given that those Directors oftentimes have their pick of actors that they can work with/cast, I would imagine that that would just piss them off to the point of rejecting her.  More importantly, word gets around Hollywood VERY fast (_I have a dear friend who is primarily a TV & Theatre actress, and the stories she has told me - unbelievable_)!!!  

Would she emphasize the "title"? .. yeah, I can see that happening (_God, I SO wish that QEII had taken that away_)!!!  I think Oprah will continue to work with Harry on the Mental Health program that was in the works anyhow; not so sure about any of her other "celebrity" friends (_which seem to have disappeared from the picture - pun intended_)!!!  What amazes me, is *how transparent she truly is*, yet .. she likely thinks that all of this is "her little secret" - HA, NOPE!!!


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Lmaoooooooo
> View attachment 4702860


I can believe she thinks this but can't believe she says it for public consumption


----------



## imgg

CeeJay said:


> ..  and *BOOM*, now we ALL know the *REAL REASON* why Meghan married Harry, and *WHY* she was so hell-bent on getting back to LA!  Now, to think that she's going to get those parts? .. hmmmm, not so sure about that!  I would assume that even the A-list Directors would have her audition for the part.  Now, I think we all know that given her delusions of grandeur, she would likely say "_what? .. me audition?  Don't YOU know that I'm an A-List actress, so why would I audition_?"   Given that those Directors oftentimes have their pick of actors that they can work with/cast, I would imagine that that would just piss them off to the point of rejecting her.  More importantly, word gets around Hollywood VERY fast (_I have a dear friend who is primarily a TV & Theatre actress, and the stories she has told me - unbelievable_)!!!
> 
> Would she emphasize the "title"? .. yeah, I can see that happening (_God, I SO wish that QEII had taken that away_)!!!  I think Oprah will continue to work with Harry on the Mental Health program that was in the works anyhow; not so sure about any of her other "celebrity" friends (_which seem to have disappeared from the picture - pun intended_)!!!  What amazes me, is *how transparent she truly is*, yet .. she likely thinks that all of this is "her little secret" - HA, NOPE!!!


She has gotten everything she wanted. 

Married a Prince-check
Royal title- check
LA lifestyle- check
Spend other peoples money-check
Friends with A list celebrities-check
Voice-over for Disney-check
A list movie role -pending
Adoration- In her own mind


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> She has gotten everything she wanted.
> 
> Married a Prince-check
> Royal title- check
> LA lifestyle- check
> Spend other peoples money-check
> Friends with A list celebrities-check
> Voice-over for Disney-check
> A list movie role -pending
> Adoration- In her own mind


If the Directors had any 'smarts' (and I believe they are smarter than you think), they will be able to see right through her.  Will she get something? .. possibly, but I really don't think she is going to get what she thinks she deserves!


----------



## Lodpah

It’s MM hubris that will do her in. She’s like a carnival come to town and the hucksters trying to convince people to go in the tent and watch. That’s all. 
To Harry: how to bring down a narcissist. First you don’t acknowledge them, second, never compliment them, third, GTHOT.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Tivo said:


> Anybody else convinced Meghan is a poster on this site? Like Megan herself and not some handler? I wasn’t before but I am now.





Tivo said:


> I doubt someone like Meghan can resist getting online to obsessively read about herself and tell off the haters.
> She reminds me a lot of Bethenny Frankel


Yeah, she does remind me of Frankel as well and she was here as well.
My PM are open.. now dying to know...


----------



## rose60610

Wasn't it Prince Philip who told Harry "One steps out with actresses, one doesn't marry them"?   I don't think the BRF realized just how far Meghan would go to enforce her demands. She's gone downhill faster than Lindsey Vonn.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> If the Directors had any 'smarts' (and I believe they are smarter than you think), they will be able to see right through her.  Will she get something? .. possibly, but I really don't think she is going to get what she thinks she deserves!



If you are an A list director, who do you cast in your movie if you have a role for a 40 something actress?  You have a choice of Anne Hathaway, Scarlett Johansson, Amanda Seyfried, Lupita Nyong'o, Zoe Saldana . . . and that's just off the top of my head.  Would you choose MM over any one of them?  I don't think so.


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> I agree. I don't think she is sad but as you said above, she manipulates. I do believe she is disappointed and angry that Megxit didn't turn out the way she wanted. She thought they could still be royal and have all the money and prestige but they would have complete autonomy. Harry apparently thought that too*. It shows they are both delusional. *



Re the bolded, when they both last returned to the UK, they were obviously truly SHOCKED at QE2&PC&W&K being upset with them...one could tell by their reactions...they are completely self-absorbed and entitled and are oblivious to how they are perceived. They obviously think their behavior and actions are perfectly fine, and “What's wrong with everyone? Why are they overreacting? Why are they mad?”



Tivo said:


> The exact same expression for everything
> Lol! I can’t!



Haha not quite


----------



## Katel

limom said:


> Yeah, she does remind me of Frankel as well and she was here as well.
> My PM are open.. now dying to know...


Me too!!


----------



## poopsie

Katel said:


> Re the bolded, when they both last returned to the UK, they were obviously truly SHOCKED at QE2&PC&W&K being upset with them...one could tell by their reactions...they are completely self-absorbed and entitled and are oblivious to how they are perceived.
> 
> 
> 
> Haha not quite
> 
> View attachment 4702949




And I thought Kimmie Kakes had the worst crying face ever..........


----------



## Katel

poopsie said:


> And I thought Kimmie Kakes had the worst crying face ever..........



No one asked her if she’s OK...
	

		
			
		

		
	




credit LittleStar88 




LittleStar88 said:


> Shelter in place got me...
> 
> View attachment 4702481


----------



## lanasyogamama

limom said:


> Yeah, she does remind me of Frankel as well and she was here as well.
> My PM are open.. now dying to know...



Really? Wow


----------



## Lounorada

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


Why did I follow the link?! My poor ears... it's exactly how I thought it would sound. Cheesy, try-hard and painful to the ears.







Tivo said:


> Anybody else convinced Meghan is a poster on this site? Like Megan herself and not some handler? I wasn’t before but I am now.


Yep... been thinking that too.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......


I guess it sounds fine for a children's movie or documentary; I can imagine a teacher using that voice with kinder kids. I can't imagine her narration voice would be good for adult listening. I don't know who the film is aimed at, though.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Yeah, she does remind me of Frankel as well and she was here as well.
> My PM are open.. now dying to know...


I didn't know about frankel.....how do we know this?  what subforum was she on?  on her own thread?


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> If you are an A list director, who do you cast in your movie if you have a role for a 40 something actress?  You have a choice of Anne Hathaway, Scarlett Johansson, Amanda Seyfried, Lupita Nyong'o, Zoe Saldana . . . and that's just off the top of my head.  Would you choose MM over any one of them?  I don't think so.


EXACTLY!! .. and let's also not forget other over 40 OSCAR Winners: 

Reese Witherspoon 
Nicole Kidman 
Renee Zellweger 
Frances McDormand 
Julianne Moore 
Cate Blanchett 
So, yeah .. why in God's name would an A-List Director pick MM over one of these "proven" actresses???  Again, she has such delusions of grandeur that is just mind-boggling to me.  She was a D-List actress and will remain as such ..


----------



## threadbender

Katel said:


> No one asked her if she’s OK...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4702955
> 
> 
> credit LittleStar88


Don't forget this little nugget


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I didn't know about frankel.....how do we know this?  what subforum was she on?  on her own thread?


IIRC, she even bought a bag from a member.
Back in the days, the Aussie dude posted here too. He was a nice guy.
A lot of those celebs frequent forums.. even politicians..


----------



## elle woods

sdkitty said:


> I didn't know about frankel.....how do we know this?  what subforum was she on?  on her own thread?


Want to see something funny - look at the comment on this People instagram post


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Her voiceover reminds me of the narration from an HGTV show, maybe ‘House Hunters International’?
Regards M and reading about herself, for sure she does. Attention is like oxygen to her, good or bad attention is irrelevant.
Imo she does things that are deliberately divisive simply to get attention e.g. not following BRF protocol.
As far as acting, to put it kindly if she wasn’t slim and sexy she would never have gotten that role on Suits. No-one watched her in that and thought she was a great actress.
M right now:


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> ..  and *BOOM*, now we ALL know the *REAL REASON* why Meghan married Harry, and *WHY* she was so hell-bent on getting back to LA!  Now, to think that she's going to get those parts? .. hmmmm, not so sure about that!  I would assume that even the A-list Directors would have her audition for the part.  Now, I think we all know that given her delusions of grandeur, she would likely say "_what? .. me audition?  Don't YOU know that I'm an A-List actress, so why would I audition_?"   Given that those Directors oftentimes have their pick of actors that they can work with/cast, I would imagine that that would just piss them off to the point of rejecting her.  More importantly, word gets around Hollywood VERY fast (_I have a dear friend who is primarily a TV & Theatre actress, and the stories she has told me - unbelievable_)!!!
> 
> Would she emphasize the "title"? .. yeah, I can see that happening (_God, I SO wish that QEII had taken that away_)!!!  I think Oprah will continue to work with Harry on the Mental Health program that was in the works anyhow; not so sure about any of her other "celebrity" friends (_which seem to have disappeared from the picture - pun intended_)!!!  What amazes me, is *how transparent she truly is*, yet .. she likely thinks that all of this is "her little secret" - HA, NOPE!!!



Wouldn't she have to use the name she used when she was acting? I think the acting unions have rules and such.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY!! .. and let's also not forget other over 40 OSCAR Winners:
> 
> Reese Witherspoon
> Nicole Kidman
> Renee Zellweger
> Frances McDormand
> Julianne Moore
> Cate Blanchett
> So, yeah .. why in God's name would an A-List Director pick MM over one of these "proven" actresses???  Again, she has such delusions of grandeur that is just mind-boggling to me.  She was a D-List actress and will remain as such ..


so true


----------



## sdkitty

elle woods said:


> Want to see something funny - look at the comment on this People instagram post


love that


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> As far as acting, to put it kindly if she wasn’t slim and sexy she would never have gotten that role on Suits. No-one watched her in that and thought she was a great actress.
> M right now:
> View attachment 4703035



I loved Suits.... and I approve this message.


----------



## Katel

Tivo said:


> Little things like writing style and tone.
> Also the timing of one post in particular.





Lounorada said:


> Yep... been thinking that too.
> View attachment 4702968



the timing on that one reply - hmmm...how would staff know that fast? 

 Hi Me-Gain! Welcome!


----------



## rose60610

There's no way Meghan is a poster on this thread. We've given her so much fashion advice that she's obviously never followed. Had she been following us she could have avoided over one thousand fashion disasters, including sweaty armpits, terrible undergarments, ill-fitting dresses, weird colors, and other faux pas that the average high school prom  queen would have never done. She'd also have known better than to behave like a ruthless brat after all the constructive criticism we've given over various occasions, especially the ringless hands splayed on the thighs episode, how can anyone forget that?   You know, if she wanted to succeed in her royal role, all she had to do was ask us. Had she listened to us she wouldn't be a pariah on seven continents. We're only here to help.


----------



## Jayne1

Mendocino said:


> Hello everyone, this is my first post here and I want to thank you guys for offering a welcome distraction from self-isolation. Regarding Harry and his biological father, here's a photo of Prince Phillip from 1957 on the cover of a magazine and one taken of Harry on his wedding day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4702441


I'd rather compare Harry with no beard and hat to Philip with no beard and hat. That's the only photo anyone has ever used to say they look alike and half their faces are covered. 

Now you know who looks alike? (This comment should be in Will's thread) but George and his uncle Charles look alike. I think.


----------



## scarlet555

I started the debacle about Harry and the red head guy, glad to hear the speculation is sounding false.  Also read, Diana had red hair?  So who knows.  Now I don’t follow the royals in detail but had heard plenty through the years.  With famous people, anything is possible.

I’m not sure if I’m possessing an evil bias, but not being a fan of Meghan, hearing her voiceover was screeching and pretentious.  Everything about her is just not sounding sincere, even in interviews.  Her pushing Harry out of the way (multiple times-compilation available) to greet people seems so narcissistic and sociopathic, I can’t really get that out of my head.  She’s too hard to like at this point.  

In regards to her voice over, its about privilege and then later talent...  which I am not seeing unfortunately.  But I know she has fans, so I’d like to hear what they think.  Now Natalie Portman's voice is not a voice over voice to me either, so I don’t know how these people get picked.  Natalie has an annoying voice to me and I never found her acting to be impressive.  She’s just OK.  Meghan’s acting, only seen in parts of the show suits and was completely unimpressed don’t know how she got that role in the first place (Suits).  Some voices are just not made for documentaries-Hello Disney, talking to you...


----------



## scrpo83

bag-mania said:


> Isn't that the way it has always been though? I assume Charles had been completely reliant on his mother for money for decades before more responsibility had been turned over to him. Maybe others who know more about the BRF would know.


The bulk of Charles' money comes from the Duchy of Cornwall which is set up to fund the lifestyle of the heir of throne and will pass down to the next Duke of Cornwall (William)
https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/annual-review/2018-2019/income-expenditure-and-staff


----------



## Freak4Coach

mshermes said:


> listen-meghan-markle-narrating-disney-film-elephant-duchess-of-sussex
> 
> A snippet of Marple's voiceover. Cheesy was spot on......



Ok, had to pop in to say that was beyond cheesy. It was like that awkward baby/child talk some people have. It was so bad I couldn't even finish the snippet. I can't imagine a whole movie of that  Disney better hope the other documentary does well because Meghan isn't going to be adding to Disney profits. Hopefully they haven't signed her for anything else.


----------



## LittleStar88

If she can’t push her way back into acting... She can call Dana White and get herself into MMA.


----------



## youngster

If she and Harry have been planning this break from the family and move to L.A. for more than a year, there has been plenty of time for those A list acting parts to have been lined up.  The fact that there aren't any, no splashy announcements about MM in the next big movie by whoever, is interesting.  Producers, writers and directors likely still see her as an older cable tv actress of limited range and talent which is why she apparently is getting those "cheesy, beneath her" offers instead of the roles she covets.


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> If she can’t push her way back into acting... She can call Dana White and get herself into MMA.
> 
> View attachment 4703322


----------



## limom

youngster said:


> If she and Harry have been planning this break from the family and move to L.A. for more than a year, there has been plenty of time for those A list acting parts to have been lined up.  The fact that there aren't any, no splashy announcements about MM in the next big movie by whoever, is interesting.  Producers, writers and directors likely still see her as an older cable tv actress of limited range and talent which is why she apparently is getting those "cheesy, beneath her" offers instead of the roles she covets.


Producers are out there to make money. They are not going to waste resources on someone like MM, imho.
She is past her prime(for Hollywood) and is quite limited talent wise.
Her best bets would be behind the scenes as a producer.
I don’t know if she could raise capital but that would be her best bet, imho.
Maybe her buddy Oprah could hire her for one of her project on OWN. 
worst comes to worst, there is always Bravo or TLC...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

The Huffington Post must employ 14-year-old Meghan stans to write reviews for them. Not only does this “reviewer” love Meghan’s narration, she goes further and actually compares the elephant family to the BRF. Yes, naive HP writer, the Disney corporation actually created a nature program to explore parallels to Meghan’s life because she’s just that important!

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5e85f09bc5b60bbd73506ad5


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> The Huffington Post must employ 14-year-old Meghan stans to write reviews for them. Not only does this “reviewer” love Meghan’s narration, she goes further and actually compares the elephant family to the BRF. Yes, naive HP writer, the Disney corporation actually created a nature program to explore parallels to Meghan’s life because she’s just that important!
> 
> https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5e85f09bc5b60bbd73506ad5


Isn’t it her and Disney’s audience?


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think the only route for MM in Hollywood is reality TV show. She didn't make it big as an actress first time around, what is going to make her this time? Reality TV show is a complete different ball game and I can see her fitting right in!


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Isn’t it her and Disney’s audience?



The program is supposed to be for the entire family. I take that to mean that parents shouldn’t feel the urge to put a bullet in their head’s while their kids watch it.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> The program is supposed to be for the entire family. I take that to mean that parents shouldn’t feel the urge to put a bullet in their head’s while their kids watch it.


 I watched so many cringe worthy kids shows in my time.. starting with teletubbies..Barney ..nothing unusual for kids TV.


----------



## Flatsy

If Meghan were smart, she could be incredibly successful in Hallmark-style entertainment.  It's a booming business, everybody including Netflix and the major networks are trying to get in on it, and Hallmark recently lost one of their major stars, Lori Loughlin. 

A prestige project would require acting skills that she doesn't have, and her fame as a tabloid personality would detract.  

But her earnest, cheesy acting style is perfect for the Hallmark world, and the audience would absolutely eat up cute little plots that give a wink to her real life.  They could have her characters doing philanthropy and tossing in stuff about "women's empowerment" so Meghan can continue pretending she's doing "the work".


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Producers are out there to make money. They are not going to waste resources on someone like MM, imho.
> She is past her prime(for Hollywood) and is quite limited talent wise.
> Her best bets would be behind the scenes as a producer.
> I don’t know if she could raise capital but that would be her best bet, imho.
> Maybe her buddy Oprah could hire her for one of her project on OWN.
> worst comes to worst, there is always Bravo or TLC...


But, you see .. Meghan MUST BE in front of that camera !!!  Look at how we’ve all commented on the fact that Harry would be looking straight ahead and yet, there’s Meghan .. she found that camera and is looking right at it!!  If she worked for Oprah, those two would not get along and that would be the end of their “friendship”!


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> But, you see .. Meghan MUST BE in front of that camera !!!  Look at how we’ve all commented on the fact that Harry would be looking straight ahead and yet, there’s Meghan .. she found that camera and is looking right at it!!  If she worked for Oprah, those two would not get along and that would be the end of their “friendship”!


Well, if she must insist then Tyler Perry studio would be right up her alley.
If he found a way to employ Kim K, certainly he can hire MM, imho.
Please, please let her be in a Madea movie...(my guilty pleasure, pure cheesiness, best movies to watch high)...


----------



## threadbender

Flatsy said:


> If Meghan were smart, she could be incredibly successful in Hallmark-style entertainment.  It's a booming business, everybody including Netflix and the major networks are trying to get in on it, and Hallmark recently lost one of their major stars, Lori Loughlin.
> 
> A prestige project would require acting skills that she doesn't have, and her fame as a tabloid personality would detract.
> 
> But her earnest, cheesy acting style is perfect for the Hallmark world, and the audience would absolutely eat up cute little plots that give a wink to her real life.  They could have her characters doing philanthropy and tossing in stuff about "women's empowerment" so Meghan can continue pretending she's doing "the work".



Nooooooo! Hallmark is my guilty pleasure! Don't ruin it!

Can't believe I just admitted my addiction to the world.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Well, if she must insist then Tyler Perry studio would be right up her alley.
> If he found a way to employ Kim K, certainly he can hire MM, imho.
> Please, please let her be in a Madea movie...(my guilty pleasure, pure cheesiness, best movies to watch high)...


pretty sure tyler said no more Medea


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> If she can’t push her way back into acting... She can call Dana White and get herself into MMA.
> 
> View attachment 4703322



Your suggestion gave me an idea: I think MM should call another once world-renowned performer who self-destructed into oblivion. TONYA HARDING!*  Think of it!  Those two could join forces a la movie-musical "Chicago" like Roxy Hart (Renee Zellweger) and Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones).  Why not? HEY! Zellweger won BEST ACTRESS for that role! 

If Meghan DOES follow through on that idea, then it proves she IS a poster on this thread!  And I want an agent fee! I wouldn't put it past Meghan to kneecap Tonya from winning best actress for my brilliant idea, though it would be Karma.....

*Harding was a champion ice skater who literally kneecapped Nancy Kerrigan to knock her out of Olympic competition in 1994. She could get testy.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> pretty sure tyler said no more Medea


He says a lot of things but that humongous studio needs to run and make money...


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> If Meghan were smart, she could be incredibly successful in Hallmark-style entertainment.  It's a booming business, everybody including Netflix and the major networks are trying to get in on it, and Hallmark recently lost one of their major stars, Lori Loughlin.
> 
> A prestige project would require acting skills that she doesn't have, and her fame as a tabloid personality would detract.
> 
> But her earnest, cheesy acting style is perfect for the Hallmark world, and the audience would absolutely eat up cute little plots that give a wink to her real life.  They could have her characters doing philanthropy and tossing in stuff about "women's empowerment" so Meghan can continue pretending she's doing "the work".


no, that's not the type of prestige work she wants.....she wants to be up there with people like Leo DiCaprio, Meryl Streep et al.....money isn't everything you know.....if it was, wouldn't she have been happy to be part of the RF?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> no, that's not the type of prestige work she wants.....she wants to be up there with people like Leo DiCaprio, Meryl Streep et al.....money isn't everything you know.....if it was, wouldn't she have been happy to be part of the RF?


CORRECT .. she wants THE role which could provide her with the opportunity to win that coveted "Best Actress" Oscar!  HA - just thinking about that makes me laugh; she would likely be the #1 pick for the "Turkey" Awards (can't remember what they call them, but they are out there)!!  

Alas, I have to agree with the poster that said she would be best for Reality TV, after all .. she could probably beat out Camille Grammer for "MOST MEAN WOMAN"!!  I can TOTALLY see her scheming to be the "Queen Bee" (better watch out Kyle - you have nothing on this bish)!!!


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> CORRECT .. she wants THE role which could provide her with the opportunity to win that coveted "Best Actress" Oscar!  HA - just thinking about that makes me laugh; she would likely be the #1 pick for the "Turkey" Awards (can't remember what they call them, but they are out there)!!
> 
> Alas, I have to agree with the poster that said she would be best for Reality TV, after all .. she could probably beat out Camille Grammer for "MOST MEAN WOMAN"!!  I can TOTALLY see her scheming to be the "Queen Bee" (better watch out Kyle - you have nothing on this bish)!!!



Rotten Tomatoes, that's the award. Now that is something she could surely come first place in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> Rotten Tomatoes, that's the award. Now that is something she could surely come first place in.


 .. YUP, that's it .. THANK YOU!!!


----------



## poopsie

lenie said:


> She took acting classes?!



Is it too late to request a refund?  I'm sure they could use the money


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> CORRECT .. she wants THE role which could provide her with the opportunity to win that coveted "Best Actress" Oscar!  HA - just thinking about that makes me laugh; she would likely be the #1 pick for the "Turkey" Awards (can't remember what they call them, but they are out there)!!
> 
> Alas, I have to agree with the poster that said she would be best for Reality TV, after all .. she could probably beat out Camille Grammer for "MOST MEAN WOMAN"!!  I can TOTALLY see her scheming to be the "Queen Bee" (better watch out Kyle - you have nothing on this bish)!!!


yes, but we know reality TV is also way beneath her....she is a Duchess you know


----------



## Jayne1

I listened to some snippets of the Disney voice-over.

She sounds so insincere in real life and although she has a pretty speaking voice, she's just not speaking to the viewer.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> yes, but we know reality TV is also way beneath her....she is a Duchess you know


Yeah, she's as much a "Duchess" as I am .. she's more like a "Douche-(a)ss"!


----------



## CeeJay

This should be interesting, according to this Daily Fail article, there might be some Malibu residents who are not too keen on having H&M in the area, as it WILL definitely bring about more papparazzi.  It's pretty laid back in that part of the world, and that is one of the things that the celebs in that area like .. not having to get all 'fancied-up'!  This article also mentioned their interest in the Petra House, but apparently Misha Nonoo's father-in-law also has property there, so how much you bet that H&M get another "rental" (cough-cough-sputter-sputter) deal???


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> This should be interesting, according to this Daily Fail article, there might be some Malibu residents who are not too keen on having H&M in the area, as it WILL definitely bring about more papparazzi.  It's pretty laid back in that part of the world, and that is one of the things that the celebs in that area like .. not having to get all 'fancied-up'!  This article also mentioned their interest in the Petra House, but apparently Misha Nonoo's father-in-law also has property there, so how much you bet that H&M get another "rental" (cough-cough-sputter-sputter) deal???


I thought she said there were no paparazzi in the US?


----------



## DeMonica

scarlet555 said:


> I started the debacle about Harry and the red head guy, glad to hear the speculation is sounding false.  Also read, Diana had red hair?  So who knows.  Now I don’t follow the royals in detail but had heard plenty through the years.  With famous people, anything is possible.
> 
> I’m not sure if I’m possessing an evil bias, but not being a fan of Meghan, hearing her voiceover was screeching and pretentious.  Everything about her is just not sounding sincere, even in interviews.  Her pushing Harry out of the way (multiple times-compilation available) to greet people seems so narcissistic and sociopathic, I can’t really get that out of my head.  She’s too hard to like at this point.
> 
> In regards to her voice over, its about privilege and then later talent...  which I am not seeing unfortunately.  But I know she has fans, so I’d like to hear what they think.  Now Natalie Portman's voice is not a voice over voice to me either, so I don’t know how these people get picked.  Natalie has an annoying voice to me and I never found her acting to be impressive.  She’s just OK.  Meghan’s acting, only seen in parts of the show suits and was completely unimpressed don’t know how she got that role in the first place (Suits).  Some voices are just not made for documentaries-Hello Disney, talking to you...


Harry's uncle, Charles is a red head, so is Sarah McCorquodale. Harry's nose is exactly the same shape as his maternal grandfather's.  I can't see a strong resemblance to Prince Philip but it's hard to compare those BW photos to colour photos.


----------



## Mrs.Z

CeeJay said:


> This should be interesting, according to this Daily Fail article, there might be some Malibu residents who are not too keen on having H&M in the area, as it WILL definitely bring about more papparazzi.  It's pretty laid back in that part of the world, and that is one of the things that the celebs in that area like .. not having to get all 'fancied-up'!  This article also mentioned their interest in the Petra House, but apparently Misha Nonoo's father-in-law also has property there, so how much you bet that H&M get another "rental" (cough-cough-sputter-sputter) deal???


I read this on the Daily Fail, that Nonoo’s FIL has a three home compound there and this is where they are living now.  Also, I think Nonoo’s husband offered it up to them quite a long time ago.  Why can’t they buy a home like normal people????? Why?


----------



## Lodpah

Can someone tell MM and JCM Harry that they have been upstaged by the most searched, most sought after items on the internet is not them but it's . . . TOILET PAPER and HAND SANITIZERS. '

They've been upstaged by TOILET PAPER AND HAND SANITIZERS.  Just saying.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Can someone tell MM and JCM Harry that they have been upstaged by the most searched, most sought after items on the internet is not them but it's . . . TOILET PAPER and HAND SANITIZERS. '
> 
> They've been upstaged by TOILET PAPER AND HAND SANITIZERS.  Just saying.


HA HA HA HA .. thanks for the laugh!!!  SO TRUE!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> I read this on the Daily Fail, that Nonoo’s FIL has a three home compound there and this is where they are living now.  Also, I think Nonoo’s husband offered it up to them quite a long time ago.  Why can’t they buy a home like normal people????? Why?


Well remember, Harry has a reputation for being *C-H-E-A-P* and you don't think Meghan would use *HER* money do you????  I honestly think that the two of them feel they "deserve" to live in these mansions for free; shameful .. but obviously, these two don't feel that!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well remember, Harry has a reputation for being *C-H-E-A-P* and you don't think Meghan would use *HER* money do you????  I honestly think that the two of them feel they "deserve" to live in these mansions for free; shameful .. but obviously, these two don't feel that!


wonder how long they will have enough status for wealthy people to want to do them big favors like giving them mansions to stay in
We don't know for sure their next residence will be a "gift" or "favor" from a "friend"
But at some point this should be embarassing


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> wonder how long they will have enough status for wealthy people to want to do them big favors like giving them mansions to stay in
> We don't know for sure their next residence will be a "gift" or "favor" from a "friend"
> But at some point this should be embarassing


I totally agree, but there are some people who feel "entitled" (and my god, it seems to be rampant out here in LA)!!!  Heck, some people are just like that, my nephew mooched off of so many people until he was finally publicly embarrassed .. and only then did he finally stop mooching (although he still tries) .. however, some of us will never forget his behavior.  I'm sure Harry feels like he totally deserves it, Meghan shouldn't .. but then, who knows -- she's probably convinced herself that her "prior sooooo rough life" deserves this now!


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> Can someone tell MM and JCM Harry that they have been upstaged by the most searched, most sought after items on the internet is not them but it's . . . TOILET PAPER and HAND SANITIZERS. '
> 
> They've been upstaged by TOILET PAPER AND HAND SANITIZERS.  Just saying.



Don’t start!  Lol! M, she will come out of the woodwork.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> yes, but we know reality TV is also way beneath her....she is a Duchess you know



can’t you see her in reality tv show?  She could make it all about their charitable endeavour/ foundation or whatever it is, have cameras follow her around while she hugs children and “works” and then show the drama of the staff running around after her, finding the right dress, hairstyle etc...  and do the “poor me, the press is so mean” statements... drop some hints about how nasty the RF is and that gets the headlines.


----------



## chicinthecity777

needlv said:


> can’t you see her in reality tv show?  She could make it all about their charitable endeavour/ foundation or whatever it is, have cameras follow her around while she hugs children and “works” and then show the drama of the staff running around after her, finding the right dress, hairstyle etc...  and do the “poor me, the press is so mean” statements... drop some hints about how nasty the RF is and that gets the headlines.


Exactly! It's so her! And we know she'll do anything to get some easy bucks! I can just see the title - "the real house wife of ex-Sussex", "keeping up with the ex-Sussex" ... the list goes on. Since she showed up as Harry's fiance, she's created nothing but "car crash TV" type of drama.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly! It's so her! And we know she'll do anything to get some easy bucks! I can just see the title - "the real house wife of ex-Sussex", "keeping up with the ex-Sussex" ... the list goes on. Since she showed up as Harry's fiance, she's created nothing but "car crash TV" type of drama.


in spite of the lack of respect she showed to the RF and their traditons, I think she is very attached to the status she gained when she married into that family.  she now feels she is above almost everyone.  she won't lower herself to doing stuff like the suitcase girl thing she did years ago or a reality show - not any time soon anyway.  IMO of course


----------



## Mendocino

threadbender said:


> Nooooooo! Hallmark is my guilty pleasure! Don't ruin it!
> 
> Can't believe I just admitted my addiction to the world.



In light of reading this if while on Hallmark you come across a movie entitled "Dater's Handbook" I would advise you not to watch it.  BTW, the Hallmark Channel is one of my guilty pleasures as well.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly! It's so her! And we know she'll do anything to get some easy bucks! I can just see the title - "the real house wife of ex-Sussex", "keeping up with the ex-Sussex" ... the list goes on. Since she showed up as Harry's fiance, she's created nothing but "car crash TV" type of drama.



‘Meghan and Harry: A Whole New World’ (sounds of elephant’s trumpeting in the background)


----------



## Straight-Laced

According to The Sunday Times today :

*Can one take a rain check? Prince Harry puts US launch and citizenship on hold*
Sunday April 05 2020, 12.00am BST, The Sunday Times

"This may not be the best moment for a life-changing move to California, so the Duke of Sussex appears to be hedging his bets on a long-term commitment to living in America.

Prince Harry will not apply for a green card or US citizenship in the foreseeable future, according to a royal source. Although his status as the husband of a US citizen would smooth his path to permanent residence, the Sussexes’ plans to launch themselves in America are thought to be on hold because of the virus.

Harry and Meghan stepped down from royal life last week and left their former base in Canada to fly to Los Angeles with their son Archie, who will have his first birthday next month.

The couple are thought to be renting a house in California, one of the American states most affected by the virus, while hunting for a longer-term family home in the celebrity-packed beachfront enclave of Malibu.

The move from Canada raised new questions about Harry’s immigrant status, not least because of the frosty welcome he received from President Donald *****, who — like other politicians — was not invited to the couple’s wedding in Windsor. Meghan has described the president as “misogynistic” and “divisive”. It did not help that the prince was recently duped by Russian pranksters into accusing ***** of having “blood on his hands” over his environmental policies.

The royal source said: “The duke has not made an application for dual citizenship and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”

An application for US citizenship would require Harry to renounce his titles and would also expose him to US taxation on his earnings worldwide. It is not known whether he entered America under the 90-day visa waiver programme available to most Britons or whether he has a diplomatic or other special visa. Tourist visas forbid visitors from working.

Harry has previously been estimated to be worth £30m, although any investments are likely to have been battered by the worldwide economic shock and the collapse in share prices in recent weeks. Nonetheless, his wealth may qualify him for visas available to entrepreneurs willing to invest in America, with another option being the O-1 visa for “individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement”.

Karin Wolman, a US immigration lawyer, said: “Because of his own experience and speaking out on behalf of others about mental health, he might qualify.”

The couple’s new arrangements will be reviewed by the royal family in a year’s time."


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> According to The Sunday Times today :
> 
> *Can one take a rain check? Prince Harry puts US launch and citizenship on hold*
> Sunday April 05 2020, 12.00am BST, The Sunday Times
> 
> "This may not be the best moment for a life-changing move to California, so the Duke of Sussex appears to be hedging his bets on a long-term commitment to living in America.
> 
> Prince Harry will not apply for a green card or US citizenship in the foreseeable future, according to a royal source. Although his status as the husband of a US citizen would smooth his path to permanent residence, the Sussexes’ plans to launch themselves in America are thought to be on hold because of the virus.
> 
> Harry and Meghan stepped down from royal life last week and left their former base in Canada to fly to Los Angeles with their son Archie, who will have his first birthday next month.
> 
> The couple are thought to be renting a house in California, one of the American states most affected by the virus, while hunting for a longer-term family home in the celebrity-packed beachfront enclave of Malibu.
> 
> The move from Canada raised new questions about Harry’s immigrant status, not least because of the frosty welcome he received from President Donald *****, who — like other politicians — was not invited to the couple’s wedding in Windsor. Meghan has described the president as “misogynistic” and “divisive”. It did not help that the prince was recently duped by Russian pranksters into accusing ***** of having “blood on his hands” over his environmental policies.
> 
> The royal source said: “The duke has not made an application for dual citizenship and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”
> 
> An application for US citizenship would require Harry to renounce his titles and would also expose him to US taxation on his earnings worldwide. It is not known whether he entered America under the 90-day visa waiver programme available to most Britons or whether he has a diplomatic or other special visa. Tourist visas forbid visitors from working.
> 
> Harry has previously been estimated to be worth £30m, although any investments are likely to have been battered by the worldwide economic shock and the collapse in share prices in recent weeks. Nonetheless, his wealth may qualify him for visas available to entrepreneurs willing to invest in America, with another option being the O-1 visa for “individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement”.
> 
> Karin Wolman, a US immigration lawyer, said: “Because of his own experience and speaking out on behalf of others about mental health, he might qualify.”
> 
> The couple’s new arrangements will be reviewed by the royal family in a year’s time."


He WOULD NEVER give up his titles, nor would Meghan want him to (especially that Duke one)!  I have a sneaking suspicion (_just that they are both incredibly inpatient_) that within a years time if nothing comes to fruition on either side (_no "glamorous" movie role for her and him just sitting around with still no "foundation"_), that he will want to go back to the UK .. BUT, she likely will not leave California again .. this should get interesting!


----------



## Katel

Wow...they had this all figured out, didn’t they?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> He WOULD NEVER give up his titles, nor would Meghan want him to (especially that Duke one)!  I have a sneaking suspicion (_just that they are both incredibly inpatient_) that within a years time if nothing comes to fruition on either side (_no "glamorous" movie role for her and him just sitting around with still no "foundation"_), that he will want to go back to the UK .. BUT, she likely will not leave California again .. this should get interesting!


I wonder if her A-list work doesn't materialize if she'd consider going back to the UK.....this whole thing with them is ridiculous.  even though she has a lot of stans there must also be a lot of little girls who looked up to her and are disappointed now


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> no, that's not the type of prestige work she wants.....she wants to be up there with people like Leo DiCaprio, Meryl Streep et al.....money isn't everything you know.....if it was, wouldn't she have been happy to be part of the RF?



Very excellent point. 
M turned what would be most people's dream end goal into the bottom rung of the ladder.  She wants prestige in the community where at any given time 1/3 of its inhabitants are in rehab.  She must see something more worthy in the world of where "*APPEARANCE* is everything" vs the world of where "*THEY REALLY DO HAVE* everything".


----------



## CeeJay

Mendocino said:


> In light of reading this if while on Hallmark you come across a movie entitled "Dater's Handbook" I would advise you not to watch it.  BTW, the Hallmark Channel is one of my guilty pleasures as well.


WOW, she was in a fair amount of DRIVEL movies like that! .. HA, and now she expects to go to the front of the line to work with the top Directors!!


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> WOW, she was in a fair amount of DRIVEL movies like that! .. HA, and now she expects to go to the front of the line to work with the top Directors!!



I have to admit this was not the best Hallmark Channel movie I ever saw.


----------



## mrsinsyder

But they’re so close!!


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle’s real name and title revealed on Archie’s birth certificate*
_




_

_Who is Rachel, Princess of the United Kingdom?

Royal family fanatics were left scratching their heads when baby Archie’s birth certificate was finally made public this week.

Among the revelations in the document, registered by Prince Harry, were Meghan‘s real name, Rachel, her job description, “Princess of the United Kingdom, and where Archie was born, the $25,000 a night Portland Hospital in Westminster, England.

Fans were confused. Most thought Markle’s title — bestowed upon her by the Queen when she married Harry — was Duchess and not many were aware of her birth name. The couple have been notoriously close mouthed about where Archie was born.

As for her title, “while she was given the title the Duchess of Sussex by the Queen on her wedding day, she is also technically a princess, just not in her own name,” the Mirror noted.

She is Her Royal Highness Princess Henry of Wales through her husband, Harry.”

Meanwhile, the couple is now living in Los Angeles and royal commentator Angela Mollard told the Star it must be hard for Harry.

“He is separated from his family at a time when the rest of the world is using Zoom or Whatsapp to chat to each other – I can hardly see that happening,” Mollard said. “You know, they must feel very separate. He doesn’t have the friends in LA, she does. She has [her mother] Doria, she has her family, and while Meghan might have been feeling equally removed in the UK, for Harry, friends have been the people who have supported him, friends and his brother, through all of the years since his mother’s death — and to have that stripped away I think will be very discombobulating for him.”

Even more discombobulating is the fact that the press-hating couple moved to Los Angeles — the capital of the paparazzi. The irony of which was not lost on Sharon Osbourne who told the ladies of “The Talk,” “They actually moved to California…I don’t know why, it’s just so alien to me to think of the prince living here. If they were fed up with the press in the UK, they are really going to be fed up with the press living in LA.”

https://pagesix.com/2020/04/04/megh...le-revealed-on-archies-birth-certificate/amp/_


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> But they’re so close!!
> 
> View attachment 4703728


I guess since her mother is in the higher risk age group maybe it's better that they don't see her in person


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I guess since her mother is in the higher risk age group maybe it's better that they don't see her in person


For normal people I’d agree, but celebs seem to have no issues getting tested. My parents are of the same age and I’d love to have them in a place where I could help more than having them fend for themselves.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> For normal people I’d agree, but celebs seem to have no issues getting tested. My parents are of the same age and I’d love to have them in a place where I could help more than having them fend for themselves.



Getting tested is almost meaningless... even if you are confirmed to have it, there's no special course of treatment or vaccine or anything. You'd just have to wait to see if you end up hospitalized, and then it's a cr@pshoot. I think it's the right decision for her... I'm just skeptical this story is true, as they didn't even use caution with regards to traveling to LA when everyone else was cautioning against it.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle’s real name and title revealed on Archie’s birth certificate*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> _Who is Rachel, Princess of the United Kingdom?
> 
> Royal family fanatics were left scratching their heads when baby Archie’s birth certificate was finally made public this week.
> 
> Among the revelations in the document, registered by Prince Harry, were Meghan‘s real name, Rachel, her job description, “Princess of the United Kingdom, and where Archie was born, the $25,000 a night Portland Hospital in Westminster, England.
> 
> Fans were confused. Most thought Markle’s title — bestowed upon her by the Queen when she married Harry — was Duchess and not many were aware of her birth name. The couple have been notoriously close mouthed about where Archie was born.
> 
> As for her title, “while she was given the title the Duchess of Sussex by the Queen on her wedding day, she is also technically a princess, just not in her own name,” the Mirror noted.
> 
> She is Her Royal Highness Princess Henry of Wales through her husband, Harry.”
> 
> Meanwhile, the couple is now living in Los Angeles and royal commentator Angela Mollard told the Star it must be hard for Harry.
> 
> “He is separated from his family at a time when the rest of the world is using Zoom or Whatsapp to chat to each other – I can hardly see that happening,” Mollard said. “You know, they must feel very separate. He doesn’t have the friends in LA, she does. She has [her mother] Doria, she has her family, and while Meghan might have been feeling equally removed in the UK, for Harry, friends have been the people who have supported him, friends and his brother, through all of the years since his mother’s death — and to have that stripped away I think will be very discombobulating for him.”
> 
> Even more discombobulating is the fact that the press-hating couple moved to Los Angeles — the capital of the paparazzi. The irony of which was not lost on Sharon Osbourne who told the ladies of “The Talk,” “They actually moved to California…I don’t know why, it’s just so alien to me to think of the prince living here. If they were fed up with the press in the UK, they are really going to be fed up with the press living in LA.”
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/04/04/megh...le-revealed-on-archies-birth-certificate/amp/_



Details, details. They're so tedious!  I'm disappointed that she just didn't anoint herself QUEEN!  I mean, since "DUCHESS"  of Sussex was so beneath her, she might as well have promoted herself to her ulterior motive.  But then, they didn't aspire to any royal title for Archie, so it's a little confusing.  If the only way she can lay claim to "Princess" is through Henry, she has to keep him on a leash.  He's being played like a violin.  He can't divorce her right away without looking like a dumb fool commoner who fell for a gold-digger.  He's forced to go along with her sick delusions of grandeur of moving back to the land of plastic people to become their Idol.  Becoming a prominent part of the BRF and all their real-life luxurious trappings wasn't good enough for her.  She aspires to be the focal point of FantasyLand.  I think she warrants a 911 call to a psycho ward, but since she has a BRF Prince on a choke chain, they probably have other resources at their disposal that they're certainly not going to let the public find out about.


----------



## green.bee

_[...]

She is Her Royal Highness Princess Henry of Wales through her husband, Harry.”
_


the greatest accomplishment for a feminist like her


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> He WOULD NEVER give up his titles, nor would Meghan want him to (especially that Duke one)!  I have a sneaking suspicion (_just that they are both incredibly inpatient_) that within a years time if nothing comes to fruition on either side (_no "glamorous" movie role for her and him just sitting around with still no "foundation"_), that he will want to go back to the UK .. BUT, she likely will not leave California again .. this should get interesting!


I dislike Meghan.  From what we’ve seen of her behaviour she’s a deeply unpleasant and manipulative person.  But I’m afraid you’re right.  So I hope whatever she wants from LA she gets, because otherwise I’m afraid they’ll be creeping back here and trying it on all over again with the RF.


----------



## papertiger

Kim O'Meara said:


> ‘Meghan and Harry: A Whole New World’ (sounds of elephant’s trumpeting in the background)



Perhaps an elephant can narrate?


----------



## chicinthecity777

I'd respected them if they had just come out and said MM didn't like the royal life in the UK and she wanted to try to make it in Hollywood and hence they were moving there. The whole move was diabolical! Was just lies after lies after lies! I lost any tiny respect for them after this clusterf*ck!


----------



## Chagall

They must wish they were back at Frogmore. Far from the virus, a household full of servants, no money worries, support of their family and with all their titles.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> They must wish they were back at Frogmore. Far from the virus, a household full of servants, no money worries, support of their family and with all their titles.


Unfortunately, London and surrounding areas are a hot-spot for the virus here. It's the worst hit area.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Unfortunately, London and surrounding areas are a hot-spot for the virus here. It's the worst hit area.


I doubt very much the area of Windsor is that bad (Queen is at Windsor castle so it can't be that bad). Besides, they wouldn't need to be out while their staff can do all the work. And the cottage is big enough to keep distance.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Unfortunately, London and surrounding areas are a hot-spot for the virus here. It's the worst hit area.


So is Cali. Frogmore is in the country so that should afford them some protection. Plus they had round the clock security there.


----------



## Sharont2305

Windsor is only about 20 miles from the centre of London, that's why I said surrounding areas, it would include Windsor. There's about 500 cases in Berkshire, the county that Windsor is in. 
I was surprised that the Queen and Prince Philip went to Windsor actually and that she didn't join him at Sandringham, more remote there. But, they did go before it got really bad in London, and the rest of the country too.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Windsor is only about 20 miles from the centre of London, that's why I said surrounding areas, it would include Windsor. There's about 500 cases in Berkshire, the county that Windsor is in.
> I was surprised that the Queen and Prince Philip went to Windsor actually and that she didn't join him at Sandringham, more remote there. But, they did go before it got really bad in London, and the rest of the country too.


I get that. But I just don't think they have many opportunities to be exposed to the outside crowd. They have staff to do all the work for them and the space they have allow them to be distanced.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if the domestic staff for the royal family are working as normal. I know most people in my area are not having their weekly housecleaning done, but I know that is a whole different world.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> They must wish they were back at Frogmore. Far from the virus, a household full of servants, no money worries, support of their family and with all their titles.



Windsor's miles and world away


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I get that. But I just don't think they have many opportunities to be exposed to the outside crowd. They have staff to do all the work for them and the space they have allow them to be distanced.



Exactly, they could be out in the grounds all day without coming into contact with a member of the public.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’ve said this before but I think whomever said “she expected the gold carriage” had it. I think that she was fully intending to give up Hollywood for this whole other level of glamour and influence and lifestyle. 

And then she got there and it was a small apartment with her in laws on the property, “servants” telling her what to do, in a place that has much different weather than what she is used to and panty hoses and light nail polish and virtually no real jewels to call her own after the first few.  And she was supposed to follow the rules and smile and no one cared about her endless opinions on subjects.

And then when she tried to have what she thought it was going to be (an expensive dress, influencing and free stuff, jetting to European destinations, hanging with celebrities) she was panned.  

Let’s not forget, she was wooed by being whisked away to a glam tent in Botswana. False advertising if there ever was any.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> And then she got there and it was a small apartment with her in laws on the property, “servants” telling her what to do, in a place that has much different weather than what she is used to and panty hoses and light nail polish and *virtually no real jewels to call her own *after the first few.



I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. That woman acquired jewelry estimated to be worth a million in her first year of marriage. I wouldn't call that virtually nothing just because the Queen wouldn't let her play with the crown jewels.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. That woman acquired jewelry estimated to be worth a million in her first year of marriage. I wouldn't call that virtually nothing just because they Queen wouldn't let her play with the crown jewels.


Maybe that's her ticket to "financial independence".


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t disagree with you are all. But, if all the tea leaves are to be believed (tiara story etc) I have no doubt she expected to be putting the real stuff to good use. We can all agree a million is a pittance compared to what the BRF have in their vaults.

I also wonder how much of the items she wore were actually given to her or if she was allowed to wear them.


----------



## rose60610

I have a feeling Archie could appear in some baby product ads, or is being prepared for a TV role. The Olsen twins made a virtual fortune in their early TV days.  If Meghan isn't offered any A-Lister roles, Archie may have to pick up the slack.


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve said this before but I think whomever said “she expected the gold carriage” had it. I think that she was fully intending to give up Hollywood for this whole other level of glamour and influence and lifestyle.
> 
> And then she got there and it was a small apartment with her in laws on the property, “servants” telling her what to do, in a place that has much different weather than what she is used to and panty hoses and light nail polish and virtually no real jewels to call her own after the first few.  And she was supposed to follow the rules and smile and no one cared about her endless opinions on subjects.
> 
> And then when she tried to have what she thought it was going to be (an expensive dress, influencing and free stuff, jetting to European destinations, hanging with celebrities) she was panned.
> 
> Let’s not forget, she was wooed by being whisked away to a glam tent in Botswana. False advertising if there ever was any.


I totally agree, but here is where I fault HER .. duh, how dumb can you be????  She was marrying into one of the oldest institutions in the world, did she REALLY think that she could just come in and make her own way and that they would be 'okay' with that???  If so, then yes, she is TRULY DELUSIONAL -or- maybe Harry told her that she could do that? .. who knows???  Bottom line, here is where I would suspect, someone (and it shouldn't have been Katherine) would have tried to 'EDUCATE' her as to "this is the way it is .." and pretty much tell her 'SUCK IT UP - BUTTERCUP'!!!  So, for all those saying "how SMART' she was/is and look .. she has a degree in International Studies, well then .. she either didn't study that hard in University or she is truly THAT STUPID!!!  So, from that perspective, I have ZERO sympathy!  If she had had SOME patience, maybe down the road she could have made minor changes here and there and then continue to do so .. being patient to know that these things take time!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. That woman acquired jewelry estimated to be worth a million in her first year of marriage. I wouldn't call that virtually nothing just because they Queen wouldn't let her play with the crown jewels.


Well, yes .. but some of that Jewelry is "designer" stuff that doesn't carry over monetarily in the second market should she have to sell it (e.g., Jennifer Meyer and Pippa Small).  Their retail is outrageous, but I can tell you I see that stuff all the time on eBay, etc. for a pittance of what the retail was.  

Now, sadly .. where she could 'cash in' is on the jewels given to her by Harry that were worn by Princess Diana; the provenance alone would pretty much guarantee a good amount if they ever went up for Auction.  If Harry were smart (which we have all wondered), he would not gift her any more of his mother's jewelry.


----------



## Annawakes

rose60610 said:


> I have a feeling Archie could appear in some baby product ads, or is being prepared for a TV role. The Olsen twins made a virtual fortune in their early TV days.  If Meghan isn't offered any A-Lister roles, Archie may have to pick up the slack.


My goodness.  Don’t give her any ideas lol !  Poor baby has got enough to deal with, let alone a punishing acting schedule.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. That woman acquired jewelry estimated to be worth a million in her first year of marriage. I wouldn't call that virtually nothing just because they Queen wouldn't let her play with the crown jewels.


and the "apartment" was probably way larger than most of our homes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> and the "apartment" was probably way larger than most of our homes


I mean, I don't feel bad for her for a minute. I took the original post to mean Megs just is a spoiled brat who had expectations to the moon and sadly it didn't work out for her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Makes you wonder if Harry tried to give her a realistic expectations or not.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Pass the smelling salts lol


----------



## maryg1

https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/royals/meghan-markle-mum-coronavirus-lockdown/
She is now strictly following isolation rules to not put in danger her mum (rightly so), and has to let everyone know how painful it is for HER.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m sure everything plus now isolating together... lots of pressure for a new-ish marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

"Taking a break from performing??!!"


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> "Taking a break from performing??!!"


LOL


----------



## sdkitty

maryg1 said:


> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/royals/meghan-markle-mum-coronavirus-lockdown/
> She is now strictly following isolation rules to not put in danger her mum (rightly so), and has to let everyone know how painful it is for HER.


Oh, I'm not surprised they are committed to having another baby....anchor


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh, guys, just to let you know, I am taking a break from my supermodel career.


----------



## Vintage Leather

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. That woman acquired jewelry estimated to be worth a million in her first year of marriage. I wouldn't call that virtually nothing just because the Queen wouldn't let her play with the crown jewels.



I follow the royal family mostly for the jewels. 

One of QEII’s wedding gifts was a 22 million dollar pink diamond. Our dear duchess received some gorgeous pieces, but nothing at that level.

When a royal receives a wedding gift, it’s theirs. If they receive a gift while traveling, (like the Harry Winston Polar bears or those lavish Saudi parues) it’s the property of the crown with the receiver having a loan of it. So Camila’s ruby and sapphire bib necklaces - actually belong to the queen.

Anything Harry inherits from his family, he will have to pay inheritance taxes on. Anything William receives from his father will be tax free. Fair? Not fair? It’s how the BRF has kept its collections as intact as they are. 

No matter how much was spent on the former duchess, if she’s comparing herself to her former coworkers in the family business - she’s going to be disappointed


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh, guys, just to let you know, I am taking a break from my supermodel career.


me too
no makeup here


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> I follow the royal family mostly for the jewels.
> 
> One of QEII’s wedding gifts was a 22 million dollar pink diamond. Our dear duchess received some gorgeous pieces, but nothing at that level.
> 
> When a royal receives a wedding gift, it’s theirs. If they receive a gift while traveling, (like the Harry Winston Polar bears or those lavish Saudi parues) it’s the property of the crown with the receiver having a loan of it. So Camila’s ruby and sapphire bib necklaces - actually belong to the queen.
> 
> Anything Harry inherits from his family, he will have to pay inheritance taxes on. Anything William receives from his father will be tax free. Fair? Not fair? It’s how the BRF has kept its collections as intact as they are.
> 
> No matter how much was spent on the former duchess, if she’s comparing herself to her former coworkers in the family business - she’s going to be disappointed


aww.....feel for her.....sorry she was disappointed....Not


----------



## CeeJay

Annawakes said:


> My goodness.  Don’t give her any ideas lol !  Poor baby has got enough to deal with, let alone a punishing acting schedule.


I  don't think that would EVER happen, can you imagine the OUTRAGE that would bring against both of them???  Think about it; hiding Archie from the British public, but then having him WHOOSH .. on the Telly here in America!!!  I think even the Queen would have something to say about that!


----------



## Vintage Leather

sdkitty said:


> aww.....feel for her.....sorry she was disappointed....Not


What really boggles my mind is that this is the sort of information you can dig up after about 5 minutes on the internet. 
I mean, I’m a jewelry nerd so I don’t remember when I didn’t know this weird sort of stuff. But ... isn’t that the sort of thing you google? 
Like “Boyfriend’s net worth”? Or even “How much was Princess Margaret’s estate”?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I have a feeling Archie could appear in some baby product ads, or is being prepared for a TV role. The Olsen twins made a virtual fortune in their early TV days.  If Meghan isn't offered any A-Lister roles, Archie may have to pick up the slack.



Now you know Meghan isn’t about to have a “Star” in the family who isn’t her. No, I expect Archie will continue to be hidden away (unless someone ponies up a huge offer for a photo shoot that includes her).


----------



## Chagall

The queen addressed the UK and commonwealth in a speech that was broadcast today. She looked years younger than 94 and proved herself to be sharp and on point in her speech. Wonder how H and M felt about how they treated her. I am sure they watched the broadcast.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Now you know Meghan isn’t about to have a “Star” in the family who isn’t her. No, I expect Archie will continue to be hidden away (unless someone ponies up a huge offer for a photo shoot that includes her).


I really feel so bad for that little boy, because you know that he will likely need TONS of mental help later in life given his parents!


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> The queen addressed the UK and commonwealth in a speech that was broadcast today. She looked years younger than 94 and proved herself to be sharp and on point in her speech. Wonder how H and M felt about how they treated her. I am sure they watched the broadcast.


I wonder; would Meghan have "LET" Harry see it???  Remember, California is 8 hours behind London ..


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> The queen addressed the UK and commonwealth in a speech that was broadcast today. She looked years younger than 94 and proved herself to be sharp and on point in her speech. Wonder how H and M felt about how they treated her. I am sure they watched the broadcast.



I’m not sure they would have seen it yet. Has it been shown in the US? Even if they did see it I imagine they are still too busy feeling sorry for themselves to consider anybody else.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> I wonder; would Meghan have "LET" Harry see it???  Remember, California is 8 hours behind London ..


The speech was recorded Thursday and broadcast today. In Canada it was shown at 3:00 PM. It may have been broadcast at 12:00 noon in California as you are three hours behind us.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## joyeaux

Chagall said:


> The queen addressed the UK and commonwealth in a speech that was broadcast today. She looked years younger than 94 and proved herself to be sharp and on point in her speech. Wonder how H and M felt about how they treated her. I am sure they watched the broadcast.



I just watched it and wondered the same thing. They had no way of knowing there was a global pandemic coming, of course... but goodness, within the context of what's going on in the world right now, they look even more vapid, selfish, and petulant than ever. Watching QEII -- who is truly a piece of living history-- give that speech from the comfort of their California Barbie dream house, I wonder if it hit them just how willingly they squandered any time left with her by running off with barely as much as a goodbye.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure they would have seen it yet. Has it been shown in the US? Even if they did see it I imagine they are still too busy feeling sorry for themselves to consider anybody else.


It was recorded Thursday and shown in Canada at 3:00 PM today. I’m not sure if or when it’s being broadcast in the US. but I’m sure it will be.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Makes you wonder if Harry tried to give her a realistic expectations or not.


Are we talking about their living conditions and what not?  If so, according to Lainey's blinds, which were never really that blind, Meg stayed over in the palace with the rest of them, well before they were engaged.  

She must have seen what it was like.  She lived there when she had time off from her TV show.


----------



## Madrose

Chagall said:


> It was recorded Thursday and shown in Canada at 3:00 PM today. I’m not sure if or when it’s being broadcast in the US. but I’m sure it will be.



I don't know if this is the entire address:


----------



## redney

Here's the full address: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52176208


----------



## muchstuff

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure they would have seen it yet. Has it been shown in the US? Even if they did see it I imagine they are still too busy feeling sorry for themselves to consider anybody else.


We’ve seen it here in Canada. She looks great.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with everything you said but the bolded part. That woman acquired jewelry estimated to be worth a million in her first year of marriage. I wouldn't call that virtually nothing just because the Queen wouldn't let her play with the crown jewels.



Really, that much? I didn't even realize since all the attention is given to her pre-marriage Birks jewelry and 98473 twee little rings.


----------



## chowlover2

Vintage Leather said:


> I follow the royal family mostly for the jewels.
> 
> One of QEII’s wedding gifts was a 22 million dollar pink diamond. Our dear duchess received some gorgeous pieces, but nothing at that level.
> 
> When a royal receives a wedding gift, it’s theirs. If they receive a gift while traveling, (like the Harry Winston Polar bears or those lavish Saudi parues) it’s the property of the crown with the receiver having a loan of it. So Camila’s ruby and sapphire bib necklaces - actually belong to the queen.
> 
> Anything Harry inherits from his family, he will have to pay inheritance taxes on. Anything William receives from his father will be tax free. Fair? Not fair? It’s how the BRF has kept its collections as intact as they are.
> 
> No matter how much was spent on the former duchess, if she’s comparing herself to her former coworkers in the family business - she’s going to be disappointed


David gave Wallis many gorgeous pieces over the years. He had been King though and he had money of his own.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Really, that much? I didn't even realize since all the attention is given to her pre-marriage Birks jewelry and 98473 *twee little rings*.


 .. HA, thanks for that laugh!!! 

From what I recall, she had quite the ensemble of Pippa Small's jewelry not soon after their wedding.  Now, supposedly, it was a gift from Charles, but I do recall that it did not appear to be the line of vermeil, but that of her 18k work with Diamond Slices (or possibly Herkimer Diamonds).  Regardless, her 18k work is outrageously expensive .. after all, she has to pay those bills for her little gallery in the Brentwood Country Mart!!!  While I applaud what she has done by engaging craftsmen in other countries who have a rich tradition of metalsmithing and providing them with the opportunity to make goods.  However, from a Jeweler/Metalsmith perspective, the designs of very simplistic and the gemstones are hardly "super" expensive, so WHY the price???  Right .. because she, like Jennifer Meyer, has a great team of PR folks that make sure that they are in all the fashion magazines and on the Red Carpet.  Sadly, for us "regular" folk, most of the pieces are WAY beyond our price ranges!


----------



## Vintage Leather

chowlover2 said:


> David gave Wallis many gorgeous pieces over the years. He had been King though and he had money of his own.



Edward actually inherited the crown properties and then sold them to his brother to fund his lifestyle. 

The BRF doesn’t have a family foundation, so all the jewels, even those given as gifts, all the property and furnishings are the personal property of the monarch. 

I was thinking Princess Margaret would be the best comparison to H&M because if she was the only sibling of a monarch.


----------



## PewPew

green.bee said:


> _[...]
> She is Her Royal Highness Princess Henry of Wales through her husband, Harry.”_
> the greatest accomplishment for a feminist like her



Not a just a feminist, but also a humanitarian since 8th grade, with an extraordinary “independent profile”



A1aGypsy said:


> Let’s not forget, she was wooed by being whisked away to a glam tent in Botswana. False advertising if there ever was any.



I forgot this. It makes her sound even more disingenuous in that interview where she said something like, “H — that’s what I call him— when we’re in Africa, we’ll just go out with a tent. It’s not much, but that’s how we like it”

And all those planted reports about how they were considering living in Africa after marriage. Right, girl, you didn’t marry a Prince for that


----------



## bellecate

muchstuff said:


> We’ve seen it here in Canada. She looks great.



Looks great and is great. Meghan would have been so much more enriched in life if she had chosen the Queen to be her role model and emulate.


----------



## Lodpah

As I've always said. Meghan is an evil person. Children and animals can pick up on it. 

The media was not always unkind, they actually shielded her from some embarrassing moments. Take the picture of the little girl trying to get her attention until Harry say something and she puts on her acting face. 












But in reality, it was more like this:





How about the many beautiful pictures of children giving Meghan flowers. There are hundreds and hundreds of those pictures all over the net.





But has the British media shown you when kids do not want to give her flowers?





How about this lovely picture. The little boy is engaging, I wonder what wonderful conversations they are having:





In reality, the little boy wanted nothing to do with her:






Based of these pics/gifs alone, I can honestly say maybe the media does not dislike her at all, children do.


----------



## Swe3tGirl

I decided to check out the Elephants Documentary on Disney Plus; this was released on April 3rd after her official step down from the Royal family and was surprised to see her introduced as ‘HER ROYAL HIGHNESS’ in the subtitles. After a few minutes I stopped watching it...her enunciations are too exaggerated. 

I preferred Natalie Portman’s narration in the Dolphins documentary.


----------



## Grande Latte

If the Queen has to come out and make a speech, that means the country is facing extreme difficulties. It makes H&M look incredibly bad to be living abroad frivolously at this time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Regards H and no green card - my prediction is that this creates a situation where he regularly has to return to the UK then re-enter the US as a tourist again etc.
A situation which could easily lead to him spending more and more time in the UK and her remaining in the US. Until, surprise, they decide it’s too hard and they seperate.
Imo this is M’s ultimate plan, and she is fairly done with H at this point.

Regards children not liking her - they read people instantly and go with their instincts. Very interesting reactions there.


----------



## mdcx

Grande Latte said:


> If the Queen has to come out and make a speech, that means the country is facing extreme difficulties. It makes H&M look incredibly bad to be living abroad frivolously at this time.



Frivolous is the perfect word for it. Basically the opposite of duty and obligation.


----------



## mia55

Children and animals are never wrong about a person. She's def not a very good person, I'm sure Karma will bite her back.


----------



## mrsinsyder

WOW. This one sums her up perfectly.


----------



## Swanky

I have no dog in this race lol
But small children hate to be made to do anything in my experience. If you try and force  2, 3 or 4 yr old to stand still until another person walks out then tell them to give him/her flowers, most would react that way. They hate being put on the spot and get bashful or wanna bolt. Jmo.


----------



## Emeline

mrsinsyder said:


> WOW. This one sums her up perfectly.


Indeed.
I think she avoids any contact with babies or toddlers unless her hair is in the tight "touching a baby today" bun.

She seems quite protective of those apparent extensions.


----------



## Tivo

They are reportedly taking some time off from doing any work for the next few months. Not sure what work they could be doing since everything is shut down.
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/celebs/a32044311/prince-harry-meghan-markle-taking-break-after-ending-sussex-royal-brand/?_gl=1*1p9vvn1*_ga*YW1wLVQ2YVNYTzltUUpzdFJjejVmZ1hWNF9veXpNX2FvQVRYcnp4SWRTWkdLY0w2SnpHNVNkcU9xdjJjcEV3b2FaeHU.


----------



## LittleStar88

Tivo said:


> They are reportedly taking some time off from doing any work for the next few months. Not sure what work they could be doing since everything is shut down.
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...RYcnp4SWRTWkdLY0w2SnpHNVNkcU9xdjJjcEV3b2FaeHU.



Taking a break from taking a break?


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> Taking a break from taking a break?


They've been on a break since what, October?


----------



## Katel

Lodpah said:


> As I've always said. Meghan is an evil person. Children and animals can pick up on it.
> 
> The media was not always unkind, they actually shielded her from some embarrassing moments. Take the picture of the little girl trying to get her attention until Harry say something and she puts on her acting face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But in reality, it was more like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about the many beautiful pictures of children giving Meghan flowers. There are hundreds and hundreds of those pictures all over the net.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But has the British media shown you when kids do not want to give her flowers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about this lovely picture. The little boy is engaging, I wonder what wonderful conversations they are having:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In reality, the little boy wanted nothing to do with her:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based of these pics/gifs alone, I can honestly say maybe the media does not dislike her at all, children do.



thank you for this! Yes, kids and dogs know - they are drawn toward love and repelled by evil.



mdcx said:


> Regards H and no green card - my prediction is that this creates a situation where he regularly has to return to the UK then re-enter the US as a tourist again etc.
> A situation which could easily lead to him spending more and more time in the UK and her remaining in the US. Until, surprise, they decide it’s too hard and they seperate.
> *
> Imo this is M’s ultimate plan, and she is fairly done with H at this point.*
> 
> Regards children not liking her - they read people instantly and go with their instincts. Very interesting reactions there.



SO agree w/bold!



mia55 said:


> Children and animals are never wrong about a person. She's def not a very good person, I'm sure Karma will bite her back.



yep



Swanky said:


> I have no dog in this race lol
> But small children hate to be made to do anything in my experience. If you try and force  2, 3 or 4 yr old to stand still until another person walks out then tell them to give him/her flowers, most would react that way. They hate being put on the spot and get bashful or wanna bolt. Jmo.



I would like to see if people can find videos of that happening with Diana, or Kate (challenge to our stalwart me-gain lover)... yes, children do get bashful or do want to act perverse, but they are drawn to love - to that more so than the presence of evil. IMO. If all kids act that way, there should be lots of clips of kids pulling away from Kate or Diana, or anyone who wasn’t ill upstairs (IMO).


----------



## zen1965

Hard workers... 
They must be bored stiff.
In addition, I note that contrary to many of their fellow celeb humanitarians they have not donated anything towards fighting Covid19 except a couple of cringeworthy Instagram messages.


----------



## mrsinsyder

zen1965 said:


> Hard workers...
> They must be bored stiff.
> In addition, I note that contrary to many of their fellow celeb humanitarians they have not donated anything towards fighting Covid19 except a couple of cringeworthy Instagram messages.


Think of how many masks could be made from her $100,000 Dior muumuu.


----------



## Flatsy

I do not believe Meghan is evil and I agree with Swanky that kids are unpredictable.

I do think you will probably see fewer kids recoiling from Kate because she approaches them more gradually, talks to them a little bit and then asks them if it's ok for her to touch them or give them a hug.  They know exactly what to expect. Meghan walking up behind a little kid and putting her hands on him with no warning just to show off how affectionate she is will lead to those "WTF, lady!" moments.



zen1965 said:


> They must be bored stiff.


Most of us have been cooped up for 3 weeks or so.  They have been cooped up, off and on, going on 6 months.  Meghan can keep feeding People, US and Omid Scobie stories about how deliriously happy she and Harry are to nest with "baby Archie" but they must be at least a little bit stir crazy.

And they must be incredibly frustrated to see a lot of potential opportunities go down the drain with COVID-19 while they sit by helplessly.  They were in a "strike while the iron is hot" position and that iron has gone stone cold.


----------



## V0N1B2

They've been working behind the scenes shining lights on charities, developing a plan for their foundation and stepping back while moving forward for what, almost five months? and..... nothing.  Well other than inspirational quotes and PSAs on Instagram, of course.

James Dyson invents a ventilator in ten days.

You go Harry and Meghan, you're an inspiration to us all.


----------



## Swanky

Even my own kids near my precious grandmother would act like that lol
I’d be telling them to hug her or be friendly and they’d get sooo shy and turn away. nit an evil bone in her body


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> They've been working behind the scenes shining lights on charities, developing a plan for their foundation and stepping back while moving forward for what, almost five months? and..... nothing.  Well other than inspirational quotes and PSAs on Instagram, of course.
> 
> James Dyson invents a ventilator in ten days.
> 
> You go Harry and Meghan, you're an inspiration to us all.


RIGHT??? .. frankly, they should be embarrassed .. but then again, they think they are perfect, so that's never going to happen!


----------



## queennadine

C’mon guys, they’ve been working, like, SO hard.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, I mean, I’m incredibly unimpressed with their behaviour but to call her evil is... _to me..._ a stretch. She may be self absorbed and entitled and a host of other things but not evil. Or, at least, my definition of it anyway.

Kids get shy, play weird, don’t want to give up the lovely bouquet of flowers they have been holding forever and generally don’t act as their parents wish they would when they are expected to act a certain way. Im not certain any of this has to do with them seeing horns.

Although, the footage of her dodging that kid is awesome though. Some “people’s princess”. Lol.


----------



## Handbag1234

Apparently they were ‘so moved’ by the Queen’s speech on Sunday.  
Really? Are you still here? Go away. You’re both totally pointless.


----------



## A1aGypsy

People seems to have pivoted and is now quietly throwing shade. Oh look! They removed the ability to post comments and deleted allllll the comments from their now defunct IG account...  

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...pected-tweak-to-their-defunct-instagram-page/


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan doesn't get the big parts, doesn't slither back to Frogmore, doesn't get into pole dancing (it's officially a sport now, don't judge), will she become an influencer? Who would want to emulate her ill-fitting clothes with sweaty armpits? She'd be begging all the famous soccer players and models to appear with her just to get clicks. 
Earlier somebody jokingly said she could start a reality TV show. You know, it would not surprise me. I think it's plausible.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> Yeah, I mean, I’m incredibly unimpressed with their behaviour but to call her evil is... _to me..._ a stretch. She may be self absorbed and entitled and a host of other things but not evil. Or, at least, my definition of it anyway.
> 
> Kids get shy, play weird, don’t want to give up the lovely bouquet of flowers they have been holding forever and generally don’t act as their parents wish they would when they are expected to act a certain way. Im not certain any of this has to do with them seeing horns.
> 
> Although, the footage of her dodging that kid is awesome though. Some “people’s princess”. Lol.


agree, evil is a strong word.  I don't like her, don't like her sense of entitlement or the way she treats Harry.  I don't think she is good for him.  But can't go as far as saying she is evil


----------



## Katel

A1aGypsy said:


> Yeah, I mean, I’m incredibly unimpressed with their behaviour but to call her evil is... _to me..._ a stretch. She may be self absorbed and entitled and a host of other things but not evil. Or, at least, my definition of it anyway.
> 
> Kids get shy, play weird, don’t want to give up the lovely bouquet of flowers they have been holding forever and generally don’t act as their parents wish they would when they are expected to act a certain way. Im not certain any of this has to do with them seeing horns.
> 
> Although, the footage of her dodging that kid is awesome though. Some “people’s princess”. Lol.


I didn’t say and don’t think me-gain is evil. I think she has mental illness (IMO) that presents her unwellness more tangibly to kids, animals, and they’d just...rather not.


----------



## zinacef

LittleStar88 said:


> Taking a break from taking a break?


Exactly, it’s like we take off 1 day before a vacation trip , go on vacay trip for say 5 days then take 3 days recovery then head back to work for like another year(?).  For them , 6 months off and 3 weeks off every 4 weeks some like that, my math is obviously questionable LOL. I don’t think we would be able to calculate this right as we never can relate to this two.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Katel said:


> I didn’t say and don’t think me-gain is evil. I think she has mental illness (IMO) that presents her unwellness more tangibly to kids, animals, and they’d just...rather not.



No, it was the poster before you who brought up the kids thing who did.


----------



## lanasyogamama

*Revealed: Prince Harry and Meghan plan non-profit empire under the name Archewell, 'to do something of meaning'*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex tell the Telegraph: 'Before SussexRoyal, came the idea of Arche'

ByHannah Furness, ROYAL CORRESPONDENT6 April 2020 • 10:00pm
Premium





The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working on plans to run emotional support groups, a multi-media educational empire, and even launch a wellbeing website under a new non-profit organisation named Archewell. 

The Sussexes, who are setting up home in Los Angeles, have drawn up proposals for a vast and ambitious array of projects under the name Archewell, derived from the Greek word for “source of action” and the inspiration behind the name of their baby son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.

The couple told the Telegraph they wanted the organisation “to do something of meaning, to do something that matters”.

According to paperwork filed in the United States last month, the couple are considering how to create their own charity and volunteering services, wide-ranging website, and sharing “education and training materials” via films, podcasts and books....

*To continue reading this article..*
*https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-plan-non-profit-empire-name-archewell/
*


----------



## Sol Ryan

lanasyogamama said:


> *Revealed: Prince Harry and Meghan plan non-profit empire under the name Archewell, 'to do something of meaning'*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex tell the Telegraph: 'Before SussexRoyal, came the idea of Arche'
> 
> ByHannah Furness, ROYAL CORRESPONDENT6 April 2020 • 10:00pm
> Premium
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working on plans to run emotional support groups, a multi-media educational empire, and even launch a wellbeing website under a new non-profit organisation named Archewell.
> 
> The Sussexes, who are setting up home in Los Angeles, have drawn up proposals for a vast and ambitious array of projects under the name Archewell, derived from the Greek word for “source of action” and the inspiration behind the name of their baby son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> The couple told the Telegraph they wanted the organisation “to do something of meaning, to do something that matters”.
> 
> According to paperwork filed in the United States last month, the couple are considering how to create their own charity and volunteering services, wide-ranging website, and sharing “education and training materials” via films, podcasts and books....
> 
> *To continue reading this article..*
> *https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-plan-non-profit-empire-name-archewell/*


That sounds like the name of a diet cookie....


----------



## bag-mania

Well, that's sufficiently vague isn't it, "to do something of meaning?" By not stating what they actually intend to do, they can't be called out for not doing it. I consider paying my bills to have some meaning, I'm guessing that's the kind of meaning they have in mind.


----------



## limom

Emotional support groups?
For whom?
Influencers?
Vacationers?
What would they know about any of that stuff?
They are neither educators nor psychologists?
Oh well, arche well my friends.


----------



## scarlet555

lanasyogamama said:


> *Revealed: Prince Harry and Meghan plan non-profit empire under the name Archewell, 'to do something of meaning'*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex tell the Telegraph: 'Before SussexRoyal, came the idea of Arche'
> 
> ByHannah Furness, ROYAL CORRESPONDENT6 April 2020 • 10:00pm
> Premium
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working on plans to run emotional support groups, a multi-media educational empire, and even launch a wellbeing website under a new non-profit organisation named Archewell.
> 
> The Sussexes, who are setting up home in Los Angeles, have drawn up proposals for a vast and ambitious array of projects under the name Archewell, derived from the Greek word for “source of action” and the inspiration behind the name of their baby son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> The couple told the Telegraph they wanted the organisation “to do something of meaning, to do something that matters”.
> 
> According to paperwork filed in the United States last month, the couple are considering *how to create their own charity and volunteering services*, wide-ranging website, and sharing “education and training materials” via films, podcasts and books....
> 
> *To continue reading this article..*
> *https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-plan-non-profit-empire-name-archewell/*



These two are worrisome, usually I like to donate if I feel no greed is involved from the hosting foundation.  They are playing on Harry's royalty and yet denounce it.... again, WTF!  Fans, make me understand  what's going on.  Freedom and independence means some kind of work involved, volunteer work is usually reserved for the very wealthy and as an excuse for wine, not as a means to make money.  maybe i'm wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

“Multi media educational empire” was my favorite. What do they have, one Bachelors degree between them?


----------



## TC1

After Harry saying on that tape to fake Greta that they were tired of handing out "prizes" made me realize they had no intention of doing anything self-less, ever. Who in their right mind takes running foundations and having the Queen on your speed dial as something to be done begrudgingly?


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Emotional support groups?
> For whom?
> Influencers?
> Vacationers?
> What would they know about any of that stuff?
> They are neither educators nor psychologists?
> Oh well, arche well my friends.


maybe they will have staff.....maybe they think if Oprah can do it so can they.  But Oprah worked for many years before becoming the huge success she is.  What have they done?


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan doesn't get the big parts, doesn't slither back to Frogmore, doesn't get into pole dancing (it's officially a sport now, don't judge), will she become an influencer? Who would want to emulate her ill-fitting clothes with sweaty armpits? She'd be begging all the famous soccer players and models to appear with her just to get clicks.
> Earlier somebody jokingly said she could start a reality TV show. You know, it would not surprise me. I think it's plausible.



maybe this whole thing has been filmed all along...


----------



## Annawakes

lanasyogamama said:


> “Multi media educational empire” was my favorite. What do they have, one Bachelors degree between them?


 I love this, thanks for the laugh!!!!!!


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> As I've always said. Meghan is an evil person. Children and animals can pick up on it.
> 
> The media was not always unkind, they actually shielded her from some embarrassing moments. Take the picture of the little girl trying to get her attention until Harry say something and she puts on her acting face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But in reality, it was more like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about the many beautiful pictures of children giving Meghan flowers. There are hundreds and hundreds of those pictures all over the net.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But has the British media shown you when kids do not want to give her flowers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How about this lovely picture. The little boy is engaging, I wonder what wonderful conversations they are having:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In reality, the little boy wanted nothing to do with her:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based of these pics/gifs alone, I can honestly say maybe the media does not dislike her at all, children do.



This is definitely part of that media honeymoon period. I mean it makes sense, right? I do communications and often take and distribute photos of VIPs widely... they're going to be flattering photos. Doesn't mean they don't have unflattering moments or I'm biased towards those people (don't know a thing about them). But why would you share unflattering photos... that's just lame. I think this is the "neutral" stance of the media.

Now when you run afoul of the media or the public sentiment turns negative on you.... then you'll start seeing more and more people purposefully showing the unflattering bits. For someone as sensitive or approval-seeking as M+H, they better tread lightly.


----------



## Milosmum0307

lanasyogamama said:


> *Revealed: Prince Harry and Meghan plan non-profit empire under the name Archewell, 'to do something of meaning'*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex tell the Telegraph: 'Before SussexRoyal, came the idea of Arche'
> 
> ByHannah Furness, ROYAL CORRESPONDENT6 April 2020 • 10:00pm
> Premium
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are working on plans to run emotional support groups, a multi-media educational empire, and even launch a wellbeing website under a new non-profit organisation named Archewell.
> 
> The Sussexes, who are setting up home in Los Angeles, have drawn up proposals for a vast and ambitious array of projects under the name Archewell, derived from the Greek word for “source of action” and the inspiration behind the name of their baby son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> The couple told the Telegraph they wanted the organisation “to do something of meaning, to do something that matters”.
> 
> According to paperwork filed in the United States last month, the couple are considering how to create their own charity and volunteering services, wide-ranging website, and sharing “education and training materials” via films, podcasts and books....
> 
> *To continue reading this article..*
> *https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-plan-non-profit-empire-name-archewell/*


“Non-profit empire” is an oxymoron.  But honestly, I’m so thrilled to see that a theater major and a guy notorious for being stupid and who famously cheated at Eton are going to ride in like white knights and plant their flag in the fertile, untrodden educational landscape and “do something of meaning.”  (There aren’t enough eye rolls in the universe for the nebulous, inarticulate, marble-mouthed description of the Great Money-Grab of Grift and Dim.  Even they don’t know what their plan is, but they were in such a rush to publicize their website-cum-extortion letter that they didn’t bother to come up with one before scurrying out of the palace with the family silver).  On another note, I have a degree in classics (my concentration was, specifically, the classical languages Latin and ancient Greek), and I’ve always understood “arche” to mean simply “beginning,” with a secondary meaning of “source.”  (In philosophical writing you get a deeper sense like “fundamental substance,” etc).  You guys, Meghan reads The Economist, and if you weren’t sufficiently convinced of her uncommon genius, her knowledge of a totally commonplace Ancient Greek word (that is used often as a prefix in English words like archetype and archduke, btw) should totally show ya.  This chick studied for her verbal SATs, you know.  A real smartypants, Our Duchess.  It’s amusing, at least, to watch these two morons loftily explain to the plebeian masses how they cleverly gave their kid a (Germanic) name suitable for a dog and fell ass-backwards into a coincidental realization that it also sounds like An Important Greek Word (no doubt learned while Meghan was furiously thumbing through her trusty thesaurus to find a last-minute replacement for Sussex Royal, because these two idiots had no Actual Plan, so little respect do they have for any of the people and causes they’re allegedly so keen on helping).  They don’t know what they’re doing yet, but they have a name, and whatever it will be will be Important and Meaningful, and by commodifying philanthropy they will knock two birds with one stone - achieving “financial independence” while simultaneously virtue signaling.  And never forget:  So highly do the naked billiards champion and the aging basic cable ingenue think of themselves that not even the thousand-year-old British monarchy could provide them a sufficient platform or visibility for their Very Important Work, which has a name ... but is still currently undefined ... but will be so very meaningful.

(Edit:  no offense to theater majors.  One of my dearest friends went to Tisch, and she’s an actual genius.  I was snarking on The Duchess’s education for  rhetorical purposes.)


----------



## limom

Arche means ark in French. It is also a brand of comfortable shoes.
Why do they come with such wonky and pretentious names?
Couldn’t they just have kept simple?
The Sussex Foundation sounds better, imho.


----------



## Milosmum0307

limom said:


> Arche means ark in French. It is also a brand of comfortable shoes.
> Why do they come with such wonky and pretentious names?
> Couldn’t they just have kept simple?
> The Sussex Foundation sounds better, imho.


Perhaps the Sussex Foundation raises issues about the Markles marketing their titles and running afoul of their agreement with the palace, since it’s clear that this won’t actually be a charitable entity so much as a vehicle for personal enrichment? I don’t know.  What I do know is that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Reader of The Economist and Olympic Champion Belly-Cupper now has an opportunity to give us plebs an etymology lesson via the idiotic “Archewell.”  So glad I got out of bed this morning and saw that absolutely nothing stops this pair of insular, myopic, self-absorbed nitwits from pushing out a steady stream of PR nuggets.  Not even global pestilence will give us a respite from these morons.


----------



## sdkitty

Milosmum0307 said:


> Perhaps the Sussex Foundation raises issues about the Markles marketing their titles and running afoul of their agreement with the palace, since it’s clear that this won’t actually be a charitable entity so much as a vehicle for personal enrichment? I don’t know.  What I do know is that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Reader of The Economist and Olympic Champion Belly-Cupper now has an opportunity to give us plebs an etymology lesson via the idiotic “Archewell.”  So glad I got out of bed this morning and saw that absolutely nothing stops this pair of insular, myopic, self-absorbed nitwits from pushing out a steady stream of PR nuggets.  Not even global pestilence will give us a respite from these morons.


on the brighter side, they do give us something to talk about other than the pandemic


----------



## Milosmum0307

sdkitty said:


> on the brighter side, they do give us something to talk about other than the pandemic


Haha, this is true!  I am almost at the end of my tether working from home while dealing with a rambunctious three-year-old.  My news junkie habit is simply too unhealthy and stressful right now, so I check in on PurseForum occasionally to cheer myself up.  I practically cackle with delight when I see a lot of activity on this thread.  This cringey pair is entertaining, at least.


----------



## sdkitty

Milosmum0307 said:


> Haha, this is true!  I am almost at the end of my tether working from home while dealing with a rambunctious three-year-old.  My news junkie habit is simply too unhealthy and stressful right now, so I check in on PurseForum occasionally to cheer myself up.  I practically cackle with delight when I see a lot of activity on this thread.  This cringey pair is entertaining, at least.


LOL
I hear you about the news intake.
I ususally like watching Amanpour & Co. late at night for information and find it kind of relaxing.  Not these days.  All this talk about the pandemic is not condusive to a peacful night's sleep.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Two things:

a) I think using “Sussex” runs the risk that they will be ousted from that moniker as well, most likely by the actual (short suffering) people of Sussex;

b) I don’t believe this was a sudden pivot at all. I believe we now understand the odd name choice for their first born.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> I hear you about the news intake.
> I ususally like watching Amanpour & Co. late at night for information and find it kind of relaxing.  Not these days.  All this talk about the pandemic is not condusive to a peacful night's sleep.


Same here; I only check in the morning and then around 5-6pm and then NO MORE!


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Arche means ark in French. It is also a brand of comfortable shoes.
> Why do they come with such wonky and pretentious names?
> Couldn’t they just have kept simple?
> The Sussex Foundation sounds better, imho.


There is a pragmatic issue with trying to use Sussex, the Queen can rescind the title at anytime , if they annoy her, it is not exactly theirs permanently , it is theirs to lose
So, I get it, they picked something else
But avoided Harry and Meghan, heck Bill and Melinda is used by the Gates
Perhaps their own names are a bit toxic at the moment, but they should not have used their son’s name, keep him out of it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Okay .. so here I go .. 

What really truly IRKS me about their plans to set up this "foundation" to help those in need of Mental Health services, is that from one who knows all too well what it's like to go through significant mental health issues with a family member, the LAST THING that you need is to pay for ANYTHING to people who truly don't have a rat's a@@ clue as to what is involved other than Harry seeking help when he needed it.  That is just a SMALL FRAGMENT of Mental Health needs, and the fact that these two could potentially be making money on this??? .. DEPLORABLE!!!  I would much rather give my hard-earned $$$ to a concern that is staffed by people who study this (you know - like they ACTUALLY have a PhD in these disciplines, they actually have DONE the clinical work, they have ACTUAL EXPERIENCE dealing with MANY different types of mental illness)!!!  Let's face it, Harry is too stupid to see this as the despicable thing that it is, but Meghan should be ASHAMED of herself .. to make money off of people who really need help.  What are they going to do?  Create a Powerpoint presentation or create some Youtube videos to "teach" us minions about Mental Health and what & where & who we should see/go to???  I truly hope that others, like myself, call them out to be the FRAUDS that they are .. SHAME!!!


----------



## threadbender

queennadine said:


> C’mon guys, they’ve been working, like, SO hard.


I read that like the character in the Cricket commercial saying "super far". lol


----------



## lalame

My question is... why announce anything before it’s launched? During a pandemic, you need a pre-launch PR bump?


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> View attachment 4704986
> 
> My question is... why announce anything before it’s launched? During a pandemic, you need a pre-launch PR bump?



I mean, you can’t let the Queen have all the press.... what are you thinking?


----------



## 1LV

lalame said:


> View attachment 4704986
> 
> My question is... why announce anything before it’s launched? During a pandemic, you need a pre-launch PR bump?


Seems a little desperate.


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> The couple told the Telegraph they wanted the organisation “to do something of meaning, to do something that matters”.



"to do something of meaning"  

Well, that would be a first.  So.......what is it?


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. so here I go ..
> 
> What really truly IRKS me about their plans to set up this "foundation" to help those in need of Mental Health services, is that from one who knows all too well what it's like to go through significant mental health issues with a family member, the LAST THING that you need is to pay for ANYTHING to people who truly don't have a rat's a@@ clue as to what is involved other than Harry seeking help when he needed it.  That is just a SMALL FRAGMENT of Mental Health needs, and the fact that these two could potentially be making money on this??? .. DEPLORABLE!!!  I would much rather give my hard-earned $$$ to a concern that is staffed by people who study this (you know - like they ACTUALLY have a PhD in these disciplines, they actually have DONE the clinical work, they have ACTUAL EXPERIENCE dealing with MANY different types of mental illness)!!!  Let's face it, Harry is too stupid to see this as the despicable thing that it is, but Meghan should be ASHAMED of herself .. to make money off of people who really need help.  What are they going to do?  Create a Powerpoint presentation or create some Youtube videos to "teach" us minions about Mental Health and what & where & who we should see/go to???  I truly hope that others, like myself, call them out to be the FRAUDS that they are .. SHAME!!!



It’s not even that they’re not educated or professionally qualified to provide mental health assistance; the problem starts with them being so deep into their victim story (based on their statements alone), it’s clear they haven’t even gone through enough therapy to solve their own issues, not to mention help treat anyone else’s. And I can easily see this as someone who has no professional qualification so it’s not exactly difficult to spot...


----------



## PewPew

*H&M are royalty all right—  textbook drama queens.*

The verbal handwaving on the “meaning” of their new foundation name is reminiscent of M’s melodramatic explanation for Tig, the name of her lifestyle blog._ Tig was a mispronunciation of a truncated name of a wine that— in one sip— brought her an epiphany on the meaning of life, and an understanding of fine wine. _ She claimed she used Tig as a profound code word with friends, long before the blog.  Just like they’ve been meditating on Arche for. like. ever. ya’ll.



Milosmum0307 said:


> *”Non-profit empire”* is an oxymoron...  [The unqualified] ride in like white knights and plant their flag in the fertile, untrodden educational landscape and *“do something of meaning.” *



Many in the UK still have a soft spot for Harry & believe he was bamboozled. But he had an active role in the litany of lies surrounding Megxit.

Harry stood by his “Greta” remarks that “small steps and handing out prizes” via patronages was meaningless. The big bad BRF prevented H&M from doing “big, meaningful” things when they were senior royals. Now the cruel BRF are still preventing H&M from doing “big, meaningful” things as “independent” citizens, because they’re not allowed to bank on their titles or have taxpayers fund their security.

FINALLY— our brave heroes are now free of the racist UK, the press corp, the BRF, Canadian disdain, and security bills (Daddy’s paying), so what is the big, meaningful thing they’ve been planning for years to do????! They um...don’t know yet.... But it will be amazing... And they will *educate us* about...something. (The multimedia route & production are how entertainment moguls make megabucks. This is so transparent.)

They recently said in a dramatic insta-farewell that we won’t hear from them for a long time, but they are working! So why do they keep talking? Of course they must release new navel-gazing nonsense, just as the Queen issues a statement during a world crisis.


----------



## kipp

PewPew said:


> *H&M are royalty all right—  textbook drama queens.*
> 
> Did the verbal handwaving on the “meaning” of their new foundation name remind anyone of M’s melodramatic explanation of Tig, the name of her lifestyle blog? Tig is a mispronunciation of a shortened name of a wine that— in one sip— brought her an epiphany on the meaning & enjoyment of life, and an understanding of fine wine. She claimed she used Tig as this profound code word, long before the blog. Just like they’ve been meditating on Arche for. like. ever. ya’ll.
> 
> 
> 
> Many in the UK still have a soft spot for Harry & still believe he was a vulnerable guy bamboozled by a cunning American actress. But Harry had an active role in the litany of lies surrounding Megxit and their foundation.
> 
> Harry stood by his “Greta” remarks that patronage “small steps and handing out prizes” was meaningless. The big bad BRF prevented H&M from doing “big, meaningful” things when they were senior royals. Now the cruel BRF are still preventing H&M from doing “big, meaningful” things as “independent citizens”, because they’re not allowed to use their titles or have taxpayers fund their security.
> 
> FINALLY— our brave heroes are free of the racist UK, press, BRF, and security woes, and Canadian disdain, so what is the big, meaningful thing they’ve been planning for years to do?!.... They um...don’t know yet. But it will be amazing... And they will EDUCATE US about...: something. (The multimedia route & being on the production side of things is how many in entertainment moguls make megabucks. This is so transparent.)
> 
> A week ago they put up a dramatic insta-farewell about how we won’t hear from them for a long time, but they are working! So why do they keep talking? They released this navel-gazing nonsense (and removed their instagram comments), just after the Queen issued an important statement during a world crisis.



Indeed.  In fact, "Just like they’ve been meditating on Arche for. like. ever. ya’ll."  Somewhere I read that they came up with the name Arche early in M's pregnancy for their foundation/charity or whatever they were planning.  Will have to look for that source.


----------



## lalame

Can't wait to hear the announcement about the office address, first employee, first day on-site - and especially the brand colors... before launch. We're in for a long ride with this one.


----------



## rose60610

tiktok said:


> It’s not even that they’re not educated or professionally qualified to provide mental health assistance; the problem starts with them being so deep into their victim story (based on their statements alone), it’s clear they haven’t even gone through enough therapy to solve their own issues, not to mention help treat anyone else’s. And I can easily see this as someone who has no professional qualification so it’s not exactly difficult to spot...



Spot on.
They are reminding me of those kind of people who are such bitter losers that not only do they not want others to succeed, they must drag them down and squelch their dreams.  They wallow so much in their own perceived victimhood--Meghan's  "not many people ask me if I'm OK. I'm not living, only existing" then the fleeing from the cancelled theater event with flayed fingerless hands on thighs, and Harry's repeated pity grabs over his mother's death. Instead of helping and lifting others up, I think they'd rather drag other people down and convince them that they are victims of everything too. All this "We got a name for our important new venture but we don't know what we're going to do" bla bla bla is actually embarrassing. The Queen comes out with a rare appearance only yesterday in a global rallying-the-troops address and 24 hours later the Great Meghan says "I'm going to do something!".  Ugh. Really? CRINGE!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love Elizabeth Holmes, but she’s gotten to be a bit of an apologist for H and M, but I wanted to share these two caps from her story.


----------



## lalame

Since the paperwork was filed in the courts, they HAD to make a statement to a media outlet about why they chose the name? They HAD TO? Just couldn't... possibly.... say nothing... if they wanted the world to focus on coronavirus?


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> Since the paperwork was filed in the courts, they HAD to make a statement to a media outlet about why they chose the name? They HAD TO? Just couldn't... possibly.... say nothing... if they wanted the world to focus on coronavirus?


Their hand was forced!!


----------



## eunaddict

A1aGypsy said:


> b) I don’t believe this was a sudden pivot at all. I believe we now understand the odd name choice for their first born.




Omg. Same. I'd always thought the choice of Archie was weird AF. Archie is a nickname (the shortened version of the very stuffy Archibald), the name of a comic book redhead trapped between choosing a brunette or a blonde....and for some reason always brings to my mind a golden retriever.

Also, does anyone actually speak Greek here? What DOES Archewall actually mean (MM's pretentious interpretations of a language she doesn't speak aside)?

ETA: It also just struck me that his entire name's meaning is literally "The brave son of Harry Mountbatten-Windsor". As someone who grew up with an "interesting name" as well, my condolences to the kid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Sol Ryan said:


> I mean, you can’t let the Queen have all the press.... what are you thinking?


Ah yes, "perfect" timing yet again.


----------



## Sharont2305

eunaddict said:


> Omg. Same. I'd always thought the choice of Archie was weird AF. Archie is a nickname (the shortened version of the very stuffy Archibald), the name of a comic book redhead trapped between choosing a brunette or a blonde....and for some reason always brings to my mind a golden retriever.
> 
> Also, does anyone actually speak Greek here? What DOES Archewall actually mean (MM's pretentious interpretations of a language she doesn't speak aside)?
> 
> ETA: It also just struck me that his entire name's meaning is literally "The brave son of Harry Mountbatten-Windsor". As someone who grew up with an "interesting name" as well, my condolences to the kid.


Archie is actually a popular and quite a normal name here in the UK. Nothing weird at all. Lol


----------



## Gal4Dior

Funny how the papers continually “force” their hand for matters convenient to what they want. They are shameless grifters with no real life skills. They can have their Archewell Foundation and fail miserably at making it successful. Harry is a dimwit and Meghan has delusions of grandeur.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Perfect timing.  On one hand we have Queen Elizabeth, in her nineties, the embodiment of calm leadership, hope and fortitude in the midst of an unprecedented global crisis.  
On the other hand we have Meghan and her stooge, who choose that same moment to chirp up and give us what?  A silly name.  Nothing of substance behind it, but they felt “compelled” to announce it to the world.  Now.  Just another self-serving publicity hungry moment grabbed - demonstrating exactly what Royalty is not.


----------



## doni

Oh, I thought with what is going on we would not hear for a while about their charity plans, so grateful that is not the case, we are in need of light entertainment.

So, first thing that strikes me. Archie is one of the most popular names with the British posh right now (you know, Harry’s old friends he used to have), and it has been in the top-15 boy names in the UK for the last years, but did Harry and Meghan chose it because it is a popular name? Oh no, they actually went and look for the Ancient Greek word for “source of action”, as you do, and it so happened to sound like Archie! Isn’t that amazing? So awesome.

And what a stroke of good luck, that they would not be allowed to use the name Sussex Royal, with the licenses and all, so that they can use the name of their son in their charity, because, you know, it (almost) sounds like source of action in Ancient Greek, so amazing.

What I didn’t get is the “well” part. Is that inspired by the ancient English word meaning good. Or do they intend to call a second son Rockwell if they have one? Or Boswell? Or Maxwell? What if it is a girl: Welly? Wellhan?


----------



## duna

Jayne1 said:


> I'd rather compare Harry with no beard and hat to Philip with no beard and hat. That's the only photo anyone has ever used to say they look alike and half their faces are covered.
> 
> Now you know who looks alike? (This comment should be in Will's thread) but George and his uncle Charles look alike. I think.



I think George looks totally Spencer, Charles and his father ( and Di's father).


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Oh, I thought with what is going on we would not hear for a while about their charity plans, so grateful that is not the case, we are in need of light entertainment.
> 
> So, first thing that strikes me. Archie is one of the most popular names with the British posh right now (you know, Harry’s old friends he used to have), and it has been in the top-15 boy names in the UK for the last years, but did Harry and Meghan chose it because it is a popular name? Oh no, they actually went and look for the Ancient Greek word for “source of action”, as you do, and it so happened to sound like Archie! Isn’t that amazing? So awesome.
> 
> And what a stroke of good luck, that they would not be allowed to use the name Sussex Royal, with the licenses and all, so that they can use the name of their son in their charity, because, you know, it (almost) sounds like source of action in Ancient Greek, so amazing.
> 
> What I didn’t get is the “well” part. Is that inspired by the ancient English word meaning good. Or do they intend to call a second son Rockwell if they have one? Or Boswell? Or Maxwell? What if it is a girl: Welly? Wellhan?


I think it’s well such as you might see as a mirage in the desert.  It’s always shimmering on the horizon and promising everything you need, but in reality there’s nothing there.


----------



## doni

Second thing that strikes me: _they_ want the world focused on the corona virus pandemia. We, helpless souls, may want to focus on other things, but they are having none of that. So this and nothing else is the reason why they were not releasing the exciting news of their non-profit to the world. Because you know, if they did that, the excitement would be so great, we would stop focusing on the pandemia, to focus on them instead. And they would not want that, would they?

It must be so hard to bear such responsibilities...


----------



## Lounorada

doni said:


> Second thing that strikes me: _they_ want the world focused on the corona virus pandemia. We, helpless souls, may want to focus on other things, but they are having none of that. So this and nothing else is the reason why they were not releasing the exciting news of their non-profit to the world. Because you know, if they did that, the excitement would be so great, we would stop focusing on the pandemia, to focus on them instead. And they would not want that, would they?
> 
> It must be so hard to bear such responsibilities...


And of course it was the evil media *once again!* that made them feel forced to release the info about their non-profit-for-profit name to everyone because this information needed to be known for the good of the people.
Everything is always someone elses fault with these two...


----------



## Mrs.Z

If you move to the USA and still want to use your Royal Titles you look like damn FOOLS.  We don’t use titles here, get over yourselves.


----------



## zinacef

Mrs.Z said:


> If you move to the USA and still want to use your Royal Titles you look like damn FOOLS.  We don’t use titles here, get over yourselves.


Except if you’re  on RH shows like Countess Luann! Classy!


----------



## lanasyogamama

And how long did she serve as Duchess in UK? Eighteen months?  C’mon.


----------



## Milosmum0307

eunaddict said:


> Omg. Same. I'd always thought the choice of Archie was weird AF. Archie is a nickname (the shortened version of the very stuffy Archibald), the name of a comic book redhead trapped between choosing a brunette or a blonde....and for some reason always brings to my mind a golden retriever.
> 
> Also, does anyone actually speak Greek here? What DOES Archewall actually mean (MM's pretentious interpretations of a language she doesn't speak aside)?
> 
> ETA: It also just struck me that his entire name's meaning is literally "The brave son of Harry Mountbatten-Windsor". As someone who grew up with an "interesting name" as well, my condolences to the kid.


Arche is an ancient Greek word meaning beginning or source.  Its a common prefix in English words like archetype, and I’m 100% sure that’s the depth of The Duchess’s knowledge of that word.  They have explained quite tortuously (not torturously, though that description is also appropriate) that the name of their foundation (?) means “source of action”  - ‘*Archewell* is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon."’  It’s as half-assed and cobbled together as everything else they do.  Archie is a nickname for the Germanic name Archibald and I’m also 100% sure the resemblance is 100% coincidental.  Their public extortion letter/website initially outlined their plans to invent a “progressive new role” still WITHIN the royal family.  They intended on being styled HRH; they intended on running The Sussex Foundation; they intended on running the Sussex Royal IG page replete with the verbose musings of a pubescent Sylvia Plath wannabe.  As lame, tongue-tied and stupid as Archewell is, it is the slapdash product of the past several weeks since these two grifters realized that the “progressive new role” they envisioned for themselves within the royal family (all the perks, titles, tiaras, publicly funded security, couture wardrobe, high-profile patronages, cozy press relationships, royal tours, public adulation and glamorous engagements) with none of the responsibilities (meeting and touching old people, non-glamorous engagements, accountability and criticism, etc) will never actually materialize.  They overplayed their hands, and now we’re seeing the product of The Duchess’s feverish midnight realization that “Hey!  Archie sounds like an important Greek word!  Let’s use that!!!”


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> Since the paperwork was filed in the courts, they HAD to make a statement to a media outlet about why they chose the name? They HAD TO? Just couldn't... possibly.... say nothing... if they wanted the world to focus on coronavirus?


Yes they trademarked the name in mid March, and trademark applications are public domain
So their hand was forced, being kind here, they had to announce the day the PM went into the ICU (not!)

I got it  ! the foundation name came from a baby name book, they stumbled on Archie and said , ooh, word with cool Greek etymology ! let’s use it for our foundation

Ok, I still have it wrong -  feisty mood this morning, I hope you get a chuckle - they did not use a 5 syllable word like etymology ... I hope they read the last sentence of the definition 


Etymon *means* "origin of a *word*" in Latin, and comes from the *Greek word*etymon, *meaning* "literal *meaning* of a *word* according to its origin." *Greek etymon* in turn comes from etymos, which *means* "true." Be careful not to confuse *etymology* with the similar sounding entomology. ...

Merriam Webster dictionary


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Ah yes, "perfect" timing yet again.



I don't think Meghan knows how to operate other than as an actress/influencer constantly trying to raise her profile. She seems to approach everything from this perspective. To her, it likely seems natural to constantly be releasing and posting _something_, no matter how trivial, to keep their names out there, see themselves trending, and feed their followers.  She thinks like someone trying to build an internet following, not as a member of the royal family and spouse of one of the Queen's grandchildren.  Celebrity versus royal.  She doesn't understand the difference.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

rose60610 said:


> Spot on.
> They are reminding me of those kind of people who are such bitter losers that not only do they not want others to succeed, they must drag them down and squelch their dreams.  They wallow so much in their own perceived victimhood--Meghan's  "not many people ask me if I'm OK. I'm not living, only existing" then the fleeing from the cancelled theater event with flayed fingerless hands on thighs, and Harry's repeated pity grabs over his mother's death. Instead of helping and lifting others up, I think they'd rather drag other people down and convince them that they are victims of everything too. All this "We got a name for our important new venture but we don't know what we're going to do" bla bla bla is actually embarrassing. The Queen comes out with a rare appearance only yesterday in a global rallying-the-troops address and 24 hours later the Great Meghan says "I'm going to do something!".  Ugh. Really? CRINGE!


When I heard about the Queen's televised message, I thought "how long before the 2 knuckleheads come out with a very IMPORTANT announcement themselves?"--I didn't have to wait long. So predictable.


----------



## Mrs.Z

It’s also a mistake to name it something that is a challenge to pronounce....is it archie-well?.......arck-a-well? Arch-well?


----------



## kemilia

Mrs.Z said:


> It’s also a mistake to name it something that is a challenge to pronounce....is it archie-well?.......arck-a-well? Arch-well?


I just keep on thinking of those diet cookies, Snackwells. And then there is the cookie manufacturer Archway ...


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> I don't think Meghan knows how to operate other than as an actress/influencer constantly trying to raise her profile. She seems to approach everything from this perspective. To her, it likely seems natural to constantly be releasing and posting _something_, no matter how trivial, to keep their names out there, see themselves trending, and feed their followers.  She thinks like someone trying to build an internet following, not as a member of the royal family and spouse of one of the Queen's grandchildren.  Celebrity versus royal.  She doesn't understand the difference.


She’s never, ever, not competing


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> I just keep on thinking of those diet cookies, Snackwells. And then there is the cookie manufacturer Archway ...


I too am fixated on Archway,  not an A list brand of cookies, good for adding pounds though
I prefer Oreos


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I just keep on thinking of those diet cookies, Snackwells. *And then there is the cookie manufacturer Archway* ...



Meghan and Harry will never produce anything of value or importance that will match the joy provided by a simple Archway oatmeal cookie.


----------



## mshermes

The word pathetic comes to mind in her never ending attempts to become/stay relevant. This is never going to play out as she had hoped/planned.


----------



## duna

maryg1 said:


> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk/royals/meghan-markle-mum-coronavirus-lockdown/
> She is now strictly following isolation rules to not put in danger her mum (rightly so), and has to let everyone know how painful it is for HER.



That's what we're all doing: I haven't seen my kids for over 6 weeks!


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> ....and for some reason always brings to my mind a golden retriever.



My neighbor had a golden retriever named Archie years ago. Such a sweet dog.


----------



## LittleStar88

The more they just talk and have nothing to show for it, the more credibility they lose. 

They look disorganized, indecisive, and have no solid plan. Just acting and reacting, lurching from one "idea" to the next and no substance. 

Not to mention that they now look like nothing more than a family of fancy couch-surfers that keep promising they have something in the works but really do not.


----------



## LittleStar88

My company blocks archewell.com as a security threat! Haha!

Have they bought the domain name? Anyone care to do some domain name squatting?


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> My company blocks archewell.com as a security threat! Haha!
> 
> Have they bought the domain name? Anyone care to do some domain name squatting?



They would want to secure a domain name as a nonprofit so I'd expect them to want the .org extension for their site.


----------



## sdkitty

so maybe this has been discussed but if they have a charitable foundation in the US they will have to file tax returns.  those tax returns would show what they take in salary, etc.  Could the press access that information so that the public can see what they are doing?  
If they aren't taking large salaries from the foundation, where does the money come from to support their lavish lifestyle?  they said they want to be independent.  
Archewell is supposed to be a non-profit, right?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> They would want to secure a domain name as a nonprofit so I'd expect them to want the .org extension for their site.



archewell.org also blocked as a security threat for me.


----------



## LittleStar88

Checked from my phone. looks like the domain name is still available?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> so maybe this has been discussed but if they have a charitable foundation in the US they will have to file tax returns.  those tax returns would show what they take in salary, etc.  Could the press access that information so that the public can see what they are doing?
> If they aren't taking large salaries from the foundation, where does the money come from to support their lavish lifestyle?  they said they want to be independent.
> Archewell is supposed to be a non-profit, right?



Maybe they want to be "independent" from UK taxpayer money, not independent from bags of donated money.


----------



## imgg

sdkitty said:


> so maybe this has been discussed but if they have a charitable foundation in the US they will have to file tax returns.  those tax returns would show what they take in salary, etc.  Could the press access that information so that the public can see what they are doing?
> If they aren't taking large salaries from the foundation, where does the money come from to support their lavish lifestyle?  they said they want to be independent.
> Archewell is supposed to be a non-profit, right?


As a non-profit anyone can access this information.  I will see if I can find the site that lists all the non-profits and their revenues.  I am not sure if it shows salaries for board members, I can't remember offhand.  There are a TON of scams in non-profits.


----------



## V0N1B2

No one should be surprised by this.
She registered the name Arche long before her child was born, I assumed it was the reason behind his name. Now if she'd had a girl and named her Emily or something... that would have been a surprise.
According to reports, her "foundation" was registered in Delaware or something a week after announcing her pregnancy, so I'm sure the name was in the works for quite some time, no?
Lemme go look for the receipts. BRB.


----------



## V0N1B2

Found it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...undation-eight-days-announcing-pregnancy.html

Some snippets of the article, which appeared in the *DailyMail on January 25, 2020:*

The Duchess of Sussex began making secret plans for an American foundation just eight days after announcing she was pregnant, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Her long-time US business manager Andrew Meyer registered two websites – archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org – on October 23, 2018.
Five days later, an Instagram account called @archefoundation was created.
It has been inactive since and has only one follower, Janina Gavanker, an actress and close friend of Meghan who attended her wedding in Windsor.
Ms Gavanker, 39, also took the family photograph that appeared on the Sussex Christmas card last year.
The inspiration for the word 'arche' is unclear.
The couple's son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on May 6, 2019, so it is unlikely that Harry and Meghan would have known the sex of their unborn child in late October 2018.
Parents are usually only able to find out the gender of their baby after 16 weeks of pregnancy.
One possibility is that 'arche' comes from the Ancient Greek philosophical term meaning 'beginning' or 'origin'. Meghan reportedly has a fondness for Greek words, with some speculating that she picked the name Archie because it derives from Archon, the Greek name for leader.
It would also fit with the notion of the couple making a new start in North America.
Mr Meyer, whose clients also include Grey's Anatomy star Ellen Pompeo, has worked with Meghan for years and has been busy securing domain names for her.
Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsof sussexroyal.com.
It is not known whether the websites and social media sites are intended for charity or commercial ventures.
They were registered by Mr Meyer's firm Freemark Financial. Its website boasts that it is 'a pre-eminent wealth and business management firm for individuals as well as their companies in the television, film, music, production and publishing industries'.
Mr Meyer, who was named one of the 25 top business managers in showbusiness by the Hollywood Reporter newspaper in 2017, is also understood to have been involved in recently moving Meghan's company Frim Fram Inc from California to Delaware, a state where public access to financial information is heavily restricted.
A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night declined to comment.


----------



## Katel

Random thoughts ...

I’m also curious about tax implications for these two in the USA...

Yes! TU @V0N1B2- I remember reading that, thinking hmmm?

Why release info about The Arch now? Perhaps they are finally glimpsing (ever so slightly) the idea that they may be failing (at least in their public‘s eyes), so they have “lurched” out (love that @LittleStar88!) with something, ANYTHING, to show that they are truly worthy of ruling the world as its chief genius compassionate philanthropists (i.e., power/money grifter grabbers).

“ I do not approve“


----------



## Katel

Also random - can anyone comment on or enlighten: why does the BBC player have a date of March 5 for the Queen’s recent broadcast?


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> According to reports, *her "foundation" was registered in Delaware *or something a week after announcing her pregnancy, so I'm sure the name was in the works for quite some time, no?
> Lemme go look for the receipts. BRB.



That makes sense. By far Delaware is the the most corporation-friendly state. They don't require businesses to operate in Delaware and they won't require corporate income tax if the business operates in another state. So it's a tax dodge. At least they hired advisors (over a year ago) because we know H&M don't know enough about business to come up with the plan by themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Found it.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...undation-eight-days-announcing-pregnancy.html
> 
> Some snippets of the article, which appeared in the *DailyMail on January 25, 2020:*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex began making secret plans for an American foundation just eight days after announcing she was pregnant, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> Her long-time US business manager Andrew Meyer registered two websites – archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org – on October 23, 2018.
> Five days later, an Instagram account called @archefoundation was created.
> It has been inactive since and has only one follower, Janina Gavanker, an actress and close friend of Meghan who attended her wedding in Windsor.
> Ms Gavanker, 39, also took the family photograph that appeared on the Sussex Christmas card last year.
> The inspiration for the word 'arche' is unclear.
> The couple's son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on May 6, 2019, so it is unlikely that Harry and Meghan would have known the sex of their unborn child in late October 2018.
> Parents are usually only able to find out the gender of their baby after 16 weeks of pregnancy.
> One possibility is that 'arche' comes from the Ancient Greek philosophical term meaning 'beginning' or 'origin'. Meghan reportedly has a fondness for Greek words, with some speculating that she picked the name Archie because it derives from Archon, the Greek name for leader.
> It would also fit with the notion of the couple making a new start in North America.
> Mr Meyer, whose clients also include Grey's Anatomy star Ellen Pompeo, has worked with Meghan for years and has been busy securing domain names for her.
> Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsof sussexroyal.com.
> It is not known whether the websites and social media sites are intended for charity or commercial ventures.
> They were registered by Mr Meyer's firm Freemark Financial. Its website boasts that it is 'a pre-eminent wealth and business management firm for individuals as well as their companies in the television, film, music, production and publishing industries'.
> Mr Meyer, who was named one of the 25 top business managers in showbusiness by the Hollywood Reporter newspaper in 2017, is also understood to have been involved in recently moving Meghan's company Frim Fram Inc from California to Delaware, a state where public access to financial information is heavily restricted.
> A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night declined to comment.


a fondness for Greek words?  can we add pretentious to the adjectives to describe this woman?


----------



## Kim O'Meara

In the UK we have a teatime show on the BBC called Pointless. The idea is questions are put to 100 people and people in the studio guess the lowest answers given by those 100 people. So you get an idea of what people know, or don’t. 

On today’s show there was a category about MM. Some of the previous questions were for 2018/19 so it was probably filmed some time ago.

Regardless, here’s what 100 people knew about MM. These figures are how many people answered rightly.


----------



## V0N1B2

Katel said:


> Random thoughts ...
> I’m also curious about tax implications for these two in the USA...
> Yes! TU @V0N1B2- I remember reading that, thinking hmmm?


Me too, and the interesting part of the article (for me) was this sentence:


V0N1B2 said:


> Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. *Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsofsussexroyal.com.*


Four months before September 2019 would have been May 2019.  So the moment Archie was born she's got her manager registering websites in the US.  I guess they planned to move to the USA back in May '19?  I notice there's no canadianfriendsofsussexroyal or australianfriendsofsussexroyal, or even commonwealthfriendsofsusexroyal.  So just how long has she been scheming?  Some would say since that meeting she had in London (2013) with a reporter she tried to befriend in the hopes of meeting a British boyfriend.  I tend to agree with that.  Everyone knows that story, right?


bag-mania said:


> That makes sense. By far Delaware is the the most corporation-friendly state... *So it's a tax dodge.*


Quelle surprise, hmm?


----------



## lanasyogamama

A fondness for Greek words???  Make it stop!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> Me too, and the interesting part of the article (for me) was this sentence:
> 
> Four months before September 2019 would have been May 2019.  So the moment Archie was born she's got her manager registering websites in the US.  I guess they planned to move to the USA back in May '19?  I notice there's no canadianfriendsofsussexroyal or australianfriendsofsussexroyal, or even commonwealthfriendsofsusexroyal.  So just how long has she been scheming?  Some would say since that meeting she had in London (2013) with a reporter she tried to befriend in the hopes of meeting a British boyfriend.  I tend to agree with that.  Everyone knows that story, right?
> 
> Quelle surprise, hmm?


Interesting stuff, thanks for posting.  Wondering why she doesn’t just register MegsMachinations and be done with it 
But I’m agog for the new logo personally  wonder if the poncey little crown will make a comeback?


----------



## Genie27

lanasyogamama said:


> A fondness for Greek words???  Make it stop!!


Her vast Knowledge of Greek must come from reading The Economist. 

@Mrs.Z - I was trying to figure it out too:
Archewell =
Archay-well
Ar-chew-ell
Arc-hew-ull 
Arch-well

Grifters with a half assed plan for global domination the likes of which we’ve never seen before. Political, social, financial overthrow of establishment. Oh and don’t overlook a charitable endeavour of unparalleled reach and magnificence. 

We humbly bow before our most glorious, world-renowned, gracious leader of the new covid-free world, HRH JCMM TDoS and her Prince Consort JCMH Sixth in Line. 


At least I’m entertained.


----------



## Milosmum0307

V0N1B2 said:


> Found it.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...undation-eight-days-announcing-pregnancy.html
> 
> Some snippets of the article, which appeared in the *DailyMail on January 25, 2020:*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex began making secret plans for an American foundation just eight days after announcing she was pregnant, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> Her long-time US business manager Andrew Meyer registered two websites – archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org – on October 23, 2018.
> Five days later, an Instagram account called @archefoundation was created.
> It has been inactive since and has only one follower, Janina Gavanker, an actress and close friend of Meghan who attended her wedding in Windsor.
> Ms Gavanker, 39, also took the family photograph that appeared on the Sussex Christmas card last year.
> The inspiration for the word 'arche' is unclear.
> The couple's son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on May 6, 2019, so it is unlikely that Harry and Meghan would have known the sex of their unborn child in late October 2018.
> Parents are usually only able to find out the gender of their baby after 16 weeks of pregnancy.
> One possibility is that 'arche' comes from the Ancient Greek philosophical term meaning 'beginning' or 'origin'. Meghan reportedly has a fondness for Greek words, with some speculating that she picked the name Archie because it derives from Archon, the Greek name for leader.
> It would also fit with the notion of the couple making a new start in North America.
> Mr Meyer, whose clients also include Grey's Anatomy star Ellen Pompeo, has worked with Meghan for years and has been busy securing domain names for her.
> Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsof sussexroyal.com.
> It is not known whether the websites and social media sites are intended for charity or commercial ventures.
> They were registered by Mr Meyer's firm Freemark Financial. Its website boasts that it is 'a pre-eminent wealth and business management firm for individuals as well as their companies in the television, film, music, production and publishing industries'.
> Mr Meyer, who was named one of the 25 top business managers in showbusiness by the Hollywood Reporter newspaper in 2017, is also understood to have been involved in recently moving Meghan's company Frim Fram Inc from California to Delaware, a state where public access to financial information is heavily restricted.
> A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night declined to comment.


This article made me cringe-snort.  Archie is derived from Archibald and is of Germanic origin, not Greek.  Archon does indeed mean ruler in Ancient Greek (with a more specific sense in relation to archaic Athenian politics, but that’s neither here nor there), but the name Archie is not related to or derived from it.  Just because they look similar doesn’t mean they’re the same.  (Pronounced properly, the Greek arche has a hard K sound- the Greek character khi is usually transliterated into English with a ch - whereas Archie is pronounced with a soft “ch” like Chunga-Changa).  Arche is not a “Greek philosophical term,” it is just a word meaning beginning or source that is sometimes used in philosophical writing (and in philosophical writing may have a more nuanced sense).  Like the People’s Duchess, I, too, have a “fondness for Greek words,” but I can actually read Ancient Greek.  Lastly, they could have known the child’s sex much earlier than 16 weeks if they did IVF (I knew the sex of my noodle before he was even implanted in my uterus).  That’s not to say our doe-eyed People’s Duchess didn’t conceive naturally, but if she was already scheming up ways to cash in on her kid’s eventual name as soon as she peed on a stick, it would be a reasonable theory that they knew the sex much earlier than 16 weeks.  (Of course, as a geriatric pregnancy, a free cell DNA test to check for birth defects also would have been advised, so they would have done that at 9 or 10 weeks).  Is the reporting at the DM always this bad, or are they just regurgitating inaccurate information from H&M’s chatty “sources”?

If she was indeed scheming so early on and found a way to commodify even her child’s name, she exceeded my cynical expectations.  Slow clap ...


----------



## marietouchet

V0N1B2 said:


> Found it.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...undation-eight-days-announcing-pregnancy.html
> 
> Some snippets of the article, which appeared in the *DailyMail on January 25, 2020:*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex began making secret plans for an American foundation just eight days after announcing she was pregnant, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> Her long-time US business manager Andrew Meyer registered two websites – archefoundation.com and archefoundation.org – on October 23, 2018.
> Five days later, an Instagram account called @archefoundation was created.
> It has been inactive since and has only one follower, Janina Gavanker, an actress and close friend of Meghan who attended her wedding in Windsor.
> Ms Gavanker, 39, also took the family photograph that appeared on the Sussex Christmas card last year.
> The inspiration for the word 'arche' is unclear.
> The couple's son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on May 6, 2019, so it is unlikely that Harry and Meghan would have known the sex of their unborn child in late October 2018.
> Parents are usually only able to find out the gender of their baby after 16 weeks of pregnancy.
> One possibility is that 'arche' comes from the Ancient Greek philosophical term meaning 'beginning' or 'origin'. Meghan reportedly has a fondness for Greek words, with some speculating that she picked the name Archie because it derives from Archon, the Greek name for leader.
> It would also fit with the notion of the couple making a new start in North America.
> Mr Meyer, whose clients also include Grey's Anatomy star Ellen Pompeo, has worked with Meghan for years and has been busy securing domain names for her.
> Last September, he renewed the trademark for The Tig, her lifestyle blog that was shut down in 2017 after she began dating Prince Harry. Four months earlier, he registered two website names – americanfriendsofsussexroyal.com and theamericanfriendsof sussexroyal.com.
> It is not known whether the websites and social media sites are intended for charity or commercial ventures.
> They were registered by Mr Meyer's firm Freemark Financial. Its website boasts that it is 'a pre-eminent wealth and business management firm for individuals as well as their companies in the television, film, music, production and publishing industries'.
> Mr Meyer, who was named one of the 25 top business managers in showbusiness by the Hollywood Reporter newspaper in 2017, is also understood to have been involved in recently moving Meghan's company Frim Fram Inc from California to Delaware, a state where public access to financial information is heavily restricted.
> A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night declined to comment.


Great article, From the Mail, the bastion of accurate news , haha
M picked the name 8 days after preg test, before she could have known the sex ... I guess if it had been a girl, she too would have been an Archie ....
Maybe M will name all her kids Archie , like Michael Jackson named all his sons the same thing 
The H&M saga just keeps on giving ....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Milosmum0307

Genie27 said:


> Her vast Knowledge of Greek must come from reading The Economist.


BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA ...


----------



## V0N1B2

Meh, the DailyMail is considered factual and credible in you-know-who's thread, so you know what they say: what good for the future King is good for the sixth in line 
IDGAF about her kid or his name, TBH.  The only thing I know is this broad is shady AF, always and I mean always has an ulterior motive, and if you follow the breadcrumbs, the first few words of this epic run-on sentence become clearer than ever.


----------



## CeeJay

Genie27 said:


> Her vast Knowledge of Greek must come from reading The Economist.
> 
> @Mrs.Z - I was trying to figure it out too:
> Archewell =
> Archay-well
> Ar-chew-ell
> Arc-hew-ull
> Arch-well
> 
> Grifters with a half assed plan for global domination the likes of which we’ve never seen before. Political, social, financial overthrow of establishment. Oh and don’t overlook a charitable endeavour of unparalleled reach and magnificence.
> 
> We humbly bow before our most glorious, world-renowned, gracious leader of the new covid-free world, HRH JCMM TDoS and her Prince Consort JCMH Sixth in Line.
> 
> 
> At least I’m entertained.


HA HA HA HA .. thanks for the good laugh this morning, needed it!!!  

Sadly, I fear too many Americans will believe her ****e about the whole "Arche" BS (_speaking of which - like Greek, in Italian, the 'ch' would be a 'K' sound_).  Just going on that .. her "wine" - *Tignanello* .. *the 'G' is not a HARD G* .. as a matter of fact, you don't hear a 'G' at all .. it is pronounced TIN-YA-NELLO!  Just goes to show you how 'SMART' she is!  She probably also says TAG-LIA-TELLE instead of TAL-IA-TELLE (again - the G is silent)!!


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> Meh, the DailyMail is considered factual and credible in you-know-who's thread, so you know what they say: what good for the future King is good for the sixth in line
> IDGAF about her kid or his name, TBH.  The only thing I know is this broad is shady AF, always and I mean always has an ulterior motive, and if you follow the breadcrumbs, the first few words of this epic run-on sentence become clearer than ever.


.. and the thing is, that is EXACTLY what my friends told me about her when the news first got out about her and Harry!!!  So much for those that think that I was "lying" .. okay, whatcha think now????


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welp.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp.
> 
> View attachment 4705363


Do they need security?  It’s not like they have any money.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp.
> 
> View attachment 4705363


Now THIS HAS TO BE the most STUPID thing ever to put out .. given EVERYTHING going on and people losing their shirts (literally) because of COVID-19?? .. seriously?????  This just goes to show you how *THEY HAVE NO FREAKIN' CLUE* ...


----------



## Emeline

CeeJay said:


> Now THIS HAS TO BE the most STUPID thing ever to put out .. given EVERYTHING going on and people losing their shirts (literally) because of COVID-19?? .. seriously?????  This just goes to show you how *THEY HAVE NO FREAKIN' CLUE* ...



If they can't figure out how to pay their bills, guess what? They will need to abandon their Hollywood dreams and move back to Frogmore Cottage. They are very lucky to have that option.


----------



## Suncatcher

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp.
> 
> View attachment 4705363


This makes me so mad. There are people in North America who have lost their jobs and can’t even afford to pay their rent. There are people scrambling to apply for the government benefits. But two losers want others to pay for their security. And why? It is not like there is anywhere to go when we all have to shelter in place. Social distancing means we will all by necessity keep a distance from each other. No one is going to approach them!

The worse thing that can happen to them is becoming irrelevant and forgotten or having the masses turn against them. And Covid-19 is doing a wonderful job ensuring this will happen. Because the more they show up in the media the more they get trashed for being out of touch.  But they don’t show up in the media they will be forgotten.


----------



## LittleStar88

Isn't Harry sitting on a mountain of money? How are they surprised that life is expensive, especially theirs.

Anyone think there is a reason they might not be able to access it?


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Do they need security?  It’s not like they have any money.



They are literally "Keeping Up With the Kardashians." 
They want everything that other celebrities have or else their sense of self-worth is not fulfilled.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Now you know Meghan isn’t about to have a “Star” in the family who isn’t her. No, I expect Archie will continue to be hidden away (unless someone ponies up a huge offer for a photo shoot that includes her).



I mean, he's ok but William and Kate's kids are 1000x cuter.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> Isn't Harry sitting on a mountain of money? How are they surprised that life is expensive, especially theirs.
> 
> Anyone think there is a reason they might not be able to access it?


Their lapdog Omid Scobie wrote the piece so there has to be a reason behind it... trying to force Charles’ hand?


----------



## Sophisticatted

This occurred to me last night.  So, popping in belatedly to say, THE QUEEN WEARS GREEN BETTER!!!!


----------



## Milosmum0307

V0N1B2 said:


> Meh, the DailyMail is considered factual and credible in you-know-who's thread, so you know what they say: what good for the future King is good for the sixth in line
> IDGAF about her kid or his name, TBH.  The only thing I know is this broad is shady AF, always and I mean always has an ulterior motive, and if you follow the breadcrumbs, the first few words of this epic run-on sentence become clearer than ever.


Yeah, I don’t think anyone cares about the Markles as much as they wish we would, but they - and their relentless leaks, planted stories and statements - are a source of idle entertainment in otherwise troubling times.  To be honest, though, I’m especially enjoying the oft-incorrect media speculation about the origins of “Archewell”, and I’ll forever appreciate that someone actually thought the sentence “Meghan has a fondness for Greek words” was anything other than desperately pretentious and unintentionally hilarious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> I mean, he's ok but William and Kate's kids are 1000x cuter.



To be fair we really haven't seen Archie with the exception of the Christmas card photo. Other than that we've only seen the "limp doll" shots of his arms and legs in the photo shoot Meghan arranged earlier in the year.


----------



## lanasyogamama

No idea if this is true, but Enty had a podcast and said MM was obsessed with security.


----------



## cafecreme15

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp.
> 
> View attachment 4705363


I can hear the tiny violins now...


----------



## rose60610

If she registered "Archewell" before she announced her pregnancy, then how many other names did she register? Even before she got pregnant? She wrongly took for granted that she could use "royal sussex" to hawk trinkets etc, so she must have registered dozens of other names, some perhaps denoting girls' names in the event she had a girl, or twins. 

Very few people are going to associate "Archewell" with them unless it gets drilled over and over. Oh no. It's probably going to get drilled over and over. I guess enough people know that "Goop" is associated with Gwyneth Paltrow, so...

M would definitely resonate with most of the public if she titled a corp as "I Royally Susucked as a Duchess" .


----------



## gazoo

Hmmm, this gave me a much needed chuckle.

I googled "archewellfoundation.com".  PSML

(ETA: for some reason Kanye's Gold Digger video comes up.)


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> To be fair we really haven't seen Archie with the exception of the Christmas card photo. Other than that we've only seen the "limp doll" shots of his arms and legs in the photo shoot Meghan arranged earlier in the year.


Right? A photo of him in Africa, the christening picture, a Christmas card, the pic of Arch and Harry taken on Vancouver Island, and _something_ in an ill-fitting baby carrier. So, what... 4-5 photos of a child in about ten months?
Have we actually heard either of them say his name in public? I don't follow them that closely so I can't say for sure if Merch & Lurch are pronouncing his name as "Archie" or "Ark-keh".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> No idea if this is true, but Enty had a podcast and said MM was obsessed with security.


 How sad is it that my first thought was "Is she really that out of it or pretending to be to push Harry's buttons?"


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Right? A photo of him in Africa, the christening picture, a Christmas card, the pic of Arch and Harry taken on Vancouver Island, and _something_ in an ill-fitting baby carrier. So, what... 4-5 photos of a child in about ten months?
> Have we actually heard either of them say his name in public? I don't follow them that closely so I can't say for sure if Merch & Lurch are pronouncing his name as "Archie" or "Ark-keh".



I'll say this for them, they haven't exploited Archie for their own purposes. I've never seen first-time parents so hands-off and determined to NOT share their baby's cuteness with the world.

I'd like to see a current photo of baby Arky.


----------



## TC1

When I see and hear Ar-chie all I hear is the lady from Archie Bunker in my head


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp.
> 
> View attachment 4705363



THIS deserves a big F U !!!!
But I thought daddy, who has COVID 19, was paying for this?


----------



## scarlet555

Mrs.Z said:


> Do they need security?  It’s not like they have any money.



This gave me a big chuckle!  Thanks, I needed it after, 'they can't make money due to coronavirus ...can't pay for security..."  Even without coronavirus I didn't think they could make money.  Even before they were 'expelled' from England, they couldn't make money.   Ridiculous headlines....


----------



## CeeJay

gazoo said:


> Hmmm, this gave me a much needed chuckle.
> 
> I googled "archewellfoundation.com".  PSML
> 
> (ETA:* for some reason Kanye's Gold Digger video comes up*.)


Well, how perfect is that .. BOOM, right on the mark!


----------



## mshermes

If you go to whois.com and input all the various possible domain names, archewell.com, archewell.org, archewellfoundation.com, etc. it will show you when it was registered, where, etc. and what is available to purchase as a domain site. Interesting.....


----------



## WillstarveforLV

sdkitty said:


> a fondness for Greek words?  can we add pretentious to the adjectives to describe this woman?



Is she aware that Archidi means nut in Greek and used in slang to refer to testicles?


----------



## Straight-Laced

All of Rachel is in Archewell, as is most of Archie and even part of Harry - if you look hard enough ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Straight-Laced said:


> All of Rachel is in Archewell, as is most of Archie and even part of Harry - if you look hard enough ...


Ohhhhhhhh spooky Illuminati sh&t!


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> so maybe this has been discussed but if they have a charitable foundation in the US they will have to file tax returns.  those tax returns would show what they take in salary, etc.  Could the press access that information so that the public can see what they are doing?
> If they aren't taking large salaries from the foundation, where does the money come from to support their lavish lifestyle?  they said they want to be independent.
> Archewell is supposed to be a non-profit, right?



I don't think this is how that would happen. They will likely be putting money into the foundation, not taking money out of it unless they were literally on the staff - which is not really what wealthy philanthropists do so I can't imagine they'll do this. Foundations and non-profits can only make payments to staff (salaries), vendors, or to other non-profits... it can't pay out money to people like them.

And if the foundation wasn't getting its money from them, where would it get it?


----------



## lalame

imgg said:


> As a non-profit anyone can access this information.  I will see if I can find the site that lists all the non-profits and their revenues.  I am not sure if it shows salaries for board members, I can't remember offhand.  There are a TON of scams in non-profits.



Foundations shouldn't list salaries for board members... board members don't get salaries. They would list salaries of top executives though like CEO, CFO, etc.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't think this is how that would happen. They will likely be putting money into the foundation, not taking money out of it unless they were literally on the staff - which is not really what wealthy philanthropists do so I can't imagine they'll do this. Foundations and non-profits can only make payments to staff (salaries), vendors, or to other non-profits... it can't pay out money to people like them.
> 
> And if the foundation wasn't getting its money from them, where would it get it?


from selling stuff?
so how are they going to be financially independent?  by having the foundation and also a for-profit business selling stuff?  from her great acting career?  from making speeches about the loss of his mother?


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> from selling stuff?
> so how are they going to be financially independent?  by having the foundation and also a for-profit business selling stuff?  from her great acting career?  from making speeches about the loss of his mother?



A foundation isn't a source of income... it drains your income. I imagine they'll kick in money for their foundation and build it up but then rely on other people to donate into it. Not seeing how they can afford to maintain it AND their lifestyles any other way...


----------



## lalame

Does anyone remember the announcement of Jennifer Lawrence's foundation? Or Jennifer Lopez's? Charlize Theron?  No, likely not... guess they can do good without staking their image on it.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> A foundation isn't a source of income... it drains your income. I imagine they'll kick in money for their foundation and build it up but then rely on other people to donate into it. Not seeing how they can afford to maintain it AND their lifestyles any other way...


deleted


----------



## mrsinsyder

Perfect. 




Also my job is literally working with foundations all day so I’m happy to answer any burning questions


----------



## lalame

In another life, my job was to help HNW people/groups create foundations, or donor advised funds, or other charitable plans so also pretty familiar with the legalities and benefits.


----------



## Katel

V0N1B2 said:


> Right? A photo of him in Africa, the christening picture, a Christmas card, the pic of Arch and Harry taken on Vancouver Island, and _something_ in an ill-fitting baby carrier. So, what... 4-5 photos of a child in about ten months?
> Have we actually heard either of them say his name in public? I don't follow them that closely so I can't say for sure if *Merch & Lurch* are pronouncing his name as "Archie" or "Ark-keh".



hahaha merch & lurch! 



lanasyogamama said:


> No idea if this is true, but Enty had a podcast and said MM was obsessed with security.



It’s a foul thing if that bullet-proof vest story is true, and if she is using fear on Harry. Lots of “ifs,” but plausible - she is not right up there.


Meghan and Harry's Archewell foundation name mocked: 'Like a mix of Scientology and Goop'

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/life/1266140/Meghan-markle-news-archewell-harry-Archie-foundation


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> Foundations shouldn't list salaries for board members... board members don't get salaries. They would list salaries of top executives though like CEO, CFO, etc.


You don't get paid serving as a board member but you can for doing various other duties.  And yes, board members include CEO's and CFO's.  My whole point is that non-profits are public information and there is a site that list all this information.


----------



## lalame

Maybe this is the way they'll go with their foundation... 

*Even celebrities with charitable foundations in their names often aren’t all that generous, New York Post reports*
Shamed former “Today” host Matt Lauer’s nonprofit foundation spent all of its contributions on accounting and legal fees and nothing on charity, the latest tax filings for the Lauer Family Foundation show.

Lauer, who was one of the most highly compensated broadcasters in the U.S., earning $28 million a year before he was fired by the network in 2017 over allegations of sexual misconduct, donated $23,000 to the group, almost all of it spent on administrative fees, according to public filings. Lauer ran the charity with wife Annette Roque, who divorced him in September.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/e...hat-generous-new-york-post-reports-2020-01-06


----------



## lalame

imgg said:


> You don't get paid serving as a board member but you can for doing various other duties.  And yes, board members include CEO's and CFO's.  My whole point is that non-profits are public information and there is a site that list all this information.



I think there will be good visibility into how much they donate to it and how much money it gives out but I can't imagine there will be anything too interesting in terms of how much money they would get from the charity... you're right, they could get reimbursed if they performed any services or duties but I can't imagine that would be a big ticket item. Frankly I don't see them making any breathtaking gifts into it so, like in the article I posted above, it will probably be much ado about nothing - except PR.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Foundations shouldn't list salaries for board members... board members don't get salaries. They would list salaries of top executives though like CEO, CFO, etc.


Can't remember where I read it, but the 'plan' was that Meghan would be the CEO .. so, she would get $$$ out of it!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but the 'plan' was that Meghan would be the CEO .. so, she would get $$$ out of it!



I would hope she takes no salary then, otherwise that would be weird AF. Why would they put money into the foundation only to take some of it out to pay themselves salary  . Better just to keep that money in their pockets to begin with, and more of it. It would be very distasteful for them to fundraise for it and seek other people's money... can you imagine... but who knows. Theoretically if they get enough suckers donating in, and she were CEO, yes she could get money. But IDK, that's a whole new low... would they even dare? The optics alone...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I would hope she takes no salary then, otherwise that would be weird AF. Why would they put money into the foundation only to take some of it out to pay themselves salary  . Better just to keep that money in their pockets to begin with, and more of it. It would be very distasteful for them to fundraise for it and seek other people's money... can you imagine... but who knows. Theoretically if they get enough suckers donating in, and she were CEO, yes she could get money. But IDK, that's a whole new low... would they even dare? The optics alone...


oh, I think it's possible.....will see


----------



## arnott

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan doesn't get the big parts, doesn't slither back to Frogmore, doesn't get into pole dancing (it's officially a sport now, don't judge), will she become an influencer? Who would want to emulate her ill-fitting clothes with sweaty armpits? She'd be begging all the famous soccer players and models to appear with her just to get clicks.
> Earlier somebody jokingly said she could start a reality TV show. You know, it would not surprise me. I think it's plausible.



What sweaty armpits?


----------



## mrsinsyder

They can use it to launder money, which is probably why they appointed the Soho house person to help run the old foundation. Something sketchy is up for sure.


----------



## sdkitty

arnott said:


> What sweaty armpits?


here ya go


----------



## arnott

sdkitty said:


> here ya go



Thank you!


----------



## sdkitty

arnott said:


> Thank you!


you're welcome


----------



## Milosmum0307

lalame said:


> I think there will be good visibility into how much they donate to it and how much money it gives out but I can't imagine there will be anything too interesting in terms of how much money they would get from the charity... you're right, they could get reimbursed if they performed any services or duties but I can't imagine that would be a big ticket item. Frankly I don't see them making any breathtaking gifts into it so, like in the article I posted above, it will probably be much ado about nothing - except PR.


I was going to ask about that.  Was wondering if it is known with any certainty whether they are setting up a charitable foundation in the traditional sense, or if they are inventing a “progressive new role” in that arena as well?  If it will be used simply for head pats, as a tax shelter, or for actual altruistic purposes (yes, I know the lattermost suggestion is extravagantly naive)?  I’m getting mildly curious.  Obviously, if we’re getting so many headlines about their inability to pay for their own personal security, I assume they won’t be sinking a significant amount of their own money into the venture.  Perhaps their glamorous star power and royal-adjacent status will attract oodles of eager donors.  Weirder things have happened, I guess.  An actual prince of England married a low-level actress and former gameshow model with a “fondness for Greek words,” for example.  The universe can be funny sometimes.


----------



## bellecate

Mrs.Z said:


> Do they need security?  It’s not like they have any money.


I would imagine that having all that security around her makes her feel important. Plays into her warped feelings of being an important somebody.


----------



## bellecate

cafecreme15 said:


> I can hear the tiny violins now...


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I would imagine that having all that security around her makes her feel important. Plays into her warped feelings of being an important somebody.


She is a Duchess!
oops.....The Duchess


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> Does anyone remember the announcement of Jennifer Lawrence's foundation? Or Jennifer Lopez's? Charlize Theron?  No, likely not... guess they can do good without staking their image on it.



Yeah, but they have day jobs!


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s not forget that they have yet to finish any project they’ve started since marrying. If this foundation gets off the ground it will be due to the hard work of other people.


----------



## bag-mania

If anyone wants to understand the mindset of the average Meghan fan they need to only read some of the Twitter posts from fans about her performance in “Elephant.” One woman says her voice is “calming,” while another says she got chills listening to Meghan’s narration and called her her queen. 

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/24...n-disneys-elephant-and-people-cant-get-enough


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If anyone wants to understand the mindset of the average Meghan fan they need to only read some of the Twitter posts from fans about her performance in “Elephant.” One woman says her voice is “calming,” while another says she got chills listening to Meghan’s narration and called her her queen.
> 
> https://www.cinemablend.com/news/24...n-disneys-elephant-and-people-cant-get-enough


oh, I see the elephants' story correlates with her and what she's gone through!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> If anyone wants to understand the mindset of the average Meghan fan they need to only read some of the Twitter posts from fans about her performance in “Elephant.” One woman says her voice is “calming,” while another says she got chills listening to Meghan’s narration and called her her queen.
> 
> https://www.cinemablend.com/news/24...n-disneys-elephant-and-people-cant-get-enough



Alright, maybe they will get plenty of suckers donating to their charity...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Alright, maybe they will get plenty of suckers donating to their charity...



I want whatever this lady is smokin’


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> I want whatever this lady is smokin’
> 
> View attachment 4705563


She has to be in the payroll, no other explanation makes sense.


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> I would hope she takes no salary then, otherwise that would be weird AF. Why would they put money into the foundation only to take some of it out to pay themselves salary  . Better just to keep that money in their pockets to begin with, and more of it. It would be very distasteful for them to fundraise for it and seek other people's money... can you imagine... but who knows. Theoretically if they get enough suckers donating in, and she were CEO, yes she could get money. But IDK, that's a whole new low... would they even dare? The optics alone...


No taxes, paid travel, expenses and salaries for their “work”.   All in the name of a small percentage  going to charity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> Weirder things have happened, I guess.  An actual prince of England married a low-level actress and former gameshow model with a “fondness for Greek words,” for example.  The universe can be funny sometimes.



You're the Queen of Shade


----------



## viciel

Why do they need security? Who would want to harm them? I mean, realistically, if they need the money, they can easily cut out the security part. Especially if they'll be living in LA. Everyone is a celebrity, the girl that pours my drink and waits on my table has a reality tv show, the guy that parks my car is a film maker. And most other people who don't have an entourage of security have literally more zeros in their bank accounts than these two. Who are they trying to kid?


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> She has to be in the payroll, no other explanation makes sense.



I think to her devout fans Meghan is whatever they want her to be. They won’t see the reality because they bought into the fairytale and they are emotionally invested in it.


----------



## tiktok

mrsinsyder said:


> Perfect.
> View attachment 4705507
> 
> 
> 
> Also my job is literally working with foundations all day so I’m happy to answer any burning questions



The comments on the post are truly savage... Despite People Magazine's commendable efforts, I don't think they're particularly popular in the US either nowadays (I'm assuming Gary Janetti's followers are heavily skewed US).


----------



## lalame

imgg said:


> No taxes, paid travel, expenses and salaries for their “work”.   All in the name of a small percentage  going to charity.



The big question is if they'll ask people to donate to their charity, and get enough of them. If normal people don't put money in, there's nothing to pay for all that stuff.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I want whatever this lady is smokin’
> 
> View attachment 4705563


I'd love to hear her explanation of how Meghan's experience correlates with the elephant's


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> The big question is if they'll ask people to donate to their charity, and get enough of them. If normal people don't put money in, there's nothing to pay for all that stuff.


there's normal and then there's normal....apparently some people are so in love with her or the image they have of her they might give money (or buy stuff, the profit of which could go to the foundation)


----------



## lalame

Do people donate to the trust that the BRF use for expenses? To me, that would be so unsavory and I suppose I have the same feelings about H+M's charity. Like... donate to a charity... that MAY support a couple who are already wealthy, and get most of their income from the BRF?  Why. Like why would I donate to Bill Gates' foundation (NO comparison, I know, but for analogy only).


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I'd love to hear her explanation of how Meghan's experience correlates with the elephant's



Endangered animals chased out of their homes by poachers and other predators... wealthy royalty in first world country abandoning responsibilities to make even more money while doing less? The similarities are uncanny. Or maybe she was just talking about how they both like to have pool parties.


----------



## Lodpah

She likes Angelina Jolie.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> The big question is if they'll ask people to donate to their charity, and get enough of them. If normal people don't put money in, there's nothing to pay for all that stuff.



I can imagine they plan to hit up the common folk for small donations, because it would be a way to keep people interested and invested in them, but I think they were likely hoping to land numerous big corporate donations or donations from very wealthy people  in the half million or million dollar range.  Maybe a donation in exchange for Harry giving a speech or gracing some event with his presence? That's what they would need to really launch and maintain a foundation for the long haul.  They have no true fortune (like a billion dollars) of their own to fund this otherwise.  

This would have been tough to pull off before Covid19.  Now, it is likely just a fantasy. There will be a lot of corporate belt tightening, preserving of cash flow, and elimination of frivolous items, one of which would be paying the guy formerly known as Prince Harry a fortune to show up for a speech or make a donation to a charity run by two people who don't have any real business or charitable experience other than showing up and reading a speech and shaking hands.  I'm sure JP Morgan wishes it could have it's $750,000 back from that Florida gig a few months ago.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I can imagine they plan to hit up the common folk for small donations, because it would be a way to keep people interested and invested in them, but I think they were likely hoping to land numerous big corporate donations or donations from very wealthy people  in the half million or million dollar range.  Maybe a donation in exchange for Harry giving a speech or gracing some event with his presence? That's what they would need to really launch and maintain a foundation for the long haul.  They have no true fortune (like a billion dollars) of their own to fund this otherwise.
> 
> This would have been tough to pull off before Covid19.  Now, it is likely just a fantasy. There will be a lot of corporate belt tightening, preserving of cash flow, and elimination of frivolous items, one of which would be paying the guy formerly known as Prince Harry a fortune to show up for a speech or make a donation to a charity run by two people who don't have any real business or charitable experience other than showing up and reading a speech and shaking hands.  I'm sure JP Morgan wishes it could have it's $750,000 back from that Florida gig a few months ago.



I think you're totally right here in their intentions. Legally though, that is a whole legal quagmire that I have no confidence they would be on the right side of. For example, there wouldn't be much benefit to them of having a company donate money to the foundation in lieu of compensation for the speech. M&H would need to claim that donation as their personal income still and pay taxes on it. (they would be busted by the IRS if not) - see someone smarter than me explain this scenario 

And re: amassing any large benefits from their foundation, this is actually quite hard to do legally because of all the self-dealing rules that ensure people who have significant influence on a foundation don't personally benefit from the foundation's funds. Of course people do, and some get busted while others don't - Wyclef Jean and Madonna are some examples that come to mind over the last few years. I hope the IRS becomes their best friend.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> Do people donate to the trust that the BRF use for expenses? To me, that would be so unsavory and I suppose I have the same feelings about H+M's charity. Like... donate to a charity... that MAY support a couple who are already wealthy, and get most of their income from the BRF?  Why. Like why would I donate to Bill Gates' foundation (NO comparison, I know, but for analogy only).



If I were to take a guess as to why "little" or even wealthy people donate to the Gates' Foundation it'd be because of two main things: 1) the "ooh factor" of taking a sip of chardonnay at a cocktail party and saying: _I give my $$ to the Gates' Foundation"; _and/or 2) The Gates Foundation, in at least in my mind, has a reputation of funding on a macro scale--giving large sums to research and assist large scale problems such as cures or vaccinations for a disease, providing potable water for large populations, or providing computers for an entire school district while handling the dollars in a fiscally responsible manner.  Other charities I've researched seem to be little more than slush funds, and sadly many of them are for various types of cancers or other diseases. I was going to donate to a charity for paralysis research, but when I dug into that particular organization's history, the money went to a politician that "worked" to make more places accessible to the handicapped. Sounds OK in theory, but there are already FEDERAL LAWS that mandate handicapped accessibility to places. As far as I'm concerned, the money probably went to benefit his re-election campaigns so "he could do more good for paralyzed people" as in "work" to make laws that already exist. I don't think you get that level of cynicism with the Gates'. And maybe people justify that Gates is already so filthy rich, why does he need your crappy money to do something crappy with? 

As for donating to any charity of H&M's? I can't think of any reason unless you really like them. And I can't think of any reason to like them. IMHO.


----------



## Jayne1

Milosmum0307 said:


> Lastly, they could have known the child’s sex much earlier than 16 weeks if they did IVF (I knew the sex of my noodle before he was even implanted in my uterus).  That’s not to say our doe-eyed People’s Duchess didn’t conceive naturally, but if she was already scheming up ways to cash in on her kid’s eventual name as soon as she peed on a stick, it would be a reasonable theory that they knew the sex much earlier than 16 weeks.  (Of course, as a geriatric pregnancy, a free cell DNA test to check for birth defects also would have been advised, so they would have done that at 9 or 10 weeks).  Is the reporting at the DM always this bad, or are they just regurgitating inaccurate information from H&M’s chatty “sources”?
> 
> If she was indeed scheming so early on and found a way to commodify even her child’s name, she exceeded my cynical expectations.  Slow clap ...


She would be incredibly lucky to have conceived naturally at her age, at exactly the time she wanted to get pregnant.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> If I were to take a guess as to why "little" or even wealthy people donate to the Gates' Foundation it'd be because of two main things: 1) the "ooh factor" of taking a sip of chardonnay at a cocktail party and saying: _I give my $$ to the Gates' Foundation"; _and/or 2) The Gates Foundation, in at least in my mind, has a reputation of funding on a macro scale--giving large sums to research and assist large scale problems such as cures or vaccinations for a disease, providing potable water for large populations, or providing computers for an entire school district while handling the dollars in a fiscally responsible manner.  Other charities I've researched seem to be little more than slush funds, and sadly many of them are for various types of cancers or other diseases. I was going to donate to a charity for paralysis research, but when I dug into that particular organization's history, the money went to a politician that "worked" to make more places accessible to the handicapped. Sounds OK in theory, but there are already FEDERAL LAWS that mandate handicapped accessibility to places. As far as I'm concerned, the money probably went to benefit his re-election campaigns so "he could do more good for paralyzed people" as in "work" to make laws that already exist. I don't think you get that level of cynicism with the Gates'. And maybe people justify that Gates is already so filthy rich, why does he need your crappy money to do something crappy with?
> 
> As for donating to any charity of H&M's? I can't think of any reason unless you really like them. And I can't think of any reason to like them. IMHO.



You're right, though at least the Gates Foundation actively discourages normal (read: non-rich friends) from donating to the foundation, and instead give directly to the non-profits they make grants to. I think that speaks to the optical "ewwww" of rich people asking non-rich people to donate to their foundation. They recognize it, and I hope M&H would too especially considering the institution he came from. But who am I kidding.


----------



## Annawakes

Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.


This is so so weird.  Everything about her is so weird!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Annawakes said:


> This is so so weird.  Everything about her is so weird!


I think ideally that’s who she wants to model herself off of.. but she doesn’t have the cred to earn the fame as a humanitarian Angelina has so she tried to marry it in Harry....

Problem is that Angelina put the work in... Megan gets tired after a few days and needs 2 months of vacation...


----------



## lalame

Um interesting that all these articles _have_ to point out that they didn’t want to promote this... while promoting it.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> She would be incredibly lucky to have conceived naturally at her age, at exactly the time she wanted to get pregnant.


I conceived naturally at her age exactly at the time I wanted to get pregnant. It is that hard, really. It either works or it doesn’t. Most of the time it does.


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> Um interesting that all these articles _have_ to point out that they didn’t want to promote this... while promoting it.
> View attachment 4705655


  
"They feel awkward because this news has broken at a time when they want everyone's attention to be on the pandemic."
I can't even. I mean, really. I just can't.

This bish will not even let Boris Johnson in the ICU try to outshine her. "But H, we need to let everyone know about my FOUNDAYSHUN!!!!!"


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.


That’s plain creepy.  She’s even copied the jewellery.


lalame said:


> Um interesting that all these articles _have_ to point out that they didn’t want to promote this... while promoting it.
> View attachment 4705655


I can’t wait for the day someone publicly exposes details of them leaking their own stuff so they’re shamed for this behaviour.


----------



## PewPew

LittleStar88 said:


> The more they just talk and have nothing to show for it, the more credibility they lose.
> 
> *They look disorganized, indecisive, and have no solid plan. Just acting and reacting, lurching from one "idea" to the next and no substance*..



This is so true. Just a couple weeks ago they were telling us via instagram that the main problem with Covid was mental health (not limiting the spread), therefore they were going to work on fighting post-partum depression?! This was after their “I feel...” quarantine lifestyle posts and the news about their staff wasting latex gloves.

So then they react to the backlash by “educating” us with the month-old Covid precautions from the WHO to wash hands & quarantine...And then they travel internationally because the Sparkles have needs we peasants can’t possibly understand.



Milosmum0307 said:


> Lastly, they could have known the child’s sex much earlier than 16 weeks if they did IVF (I knew the sex of my noodle before he was even implanted in my uterus



Yep,and even without IVF, you can now find out the gender as early as 8-9 weeks pregnant via a blood test from private labs. There are a couple of national chain labs in the US doing it, so it’s becoming popular. (Fetal cells are circulating in the mother’s blood by then, so if a Y chromosome is detected it’s at least one boy. This also allows for early, non-invasive paternity tests.)


----------



## Grande Latte

youngster said:


> I can imagine they plan to hit up the common folk for small donations, because it would be a way to keep people interested and invested in them, but I think they were likely hoping to land numerous big corporate donations or donations from very wealthy people  in the half million or million dollar range.  Maybe a donation in exchange for Harry giving a speech or gracing some event with his presence? That's what they would need to really launch and maintain a foundation for the long haul.  They have no true fortune (like a billion dollars) of their own to fund this otherwise.



Corporations donate directly to their causes, or they utilize resources to produce necessary goods and services. There's no need to go through a conduit. Especially through a shady couple like H&M. We are in very critical times, no one has time for ********.


----------



## Grande Latte

Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.



I didn't know Angie is Meghan's style inspiration. Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Somehow it doesn’t surprise me that Duchess Megs fascination with old Greek words didn’t get her beyond the A’s.  Nor that it didn’t lead her into thinking that the Greeks might have a *cute* y’know GREEK way of pronouncing them??
I’m going be calling the 7th in line Arkie from now on


----------



## Sharont2305

If she was that interested in Greek words then maybe she should have spent more time (pre abandoning ship) with her Greek grandfather in law. I'm sure he would have helped her with some choice Greek words [emoji16]


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> I want whatever this lady is smokin’
> View attachment 4705563







Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.


That's creepy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.



OMG!


----------



## mrsinsyder

He won’t like this. He pouts when he’s not the center of attention.


----------



## imgg

lalame said:


> The big question is if they'll ask people to donate to their charity, and get enough of them. If normal people don't put money in, there's nothing to pay for all that stuff.


I think they are counting on people with deep pockets, like Disney, Chase etc. so they can claim they are doing something charitable when in reality it is just their personal slush fund.  If they get a few peasant people to donate along the way, which they will, then the more the merrier to them.  

That said, with COVID-19 this has affected almost everyone, so most people will be more cautious with money.  I still think she will come out a head with the foundation.  She has someone bigger to answer to though with all her shenanigans.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> He won’t like this. He pouts when he’s not the center of attention.
> View attachment 4705790


That article has some interesting info about how MM was worried tax implications.


----------



## imgg

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s plain creepy.  She’s even copied the jewellery.


This is signs of borderline personality.  They have no real identity so are constantly morphing into someone else.


----------



## Katel

Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.





Annawakes said:


> This is so so weird.  Everything about her is so weird!





Sol Ryan said:


> I think ideally that’s who she wants to model herself off of.. but she doesn’t have the cred to earn the fame as a humanitarian Angelina has so she tried to marry it in Harry....
> 
> Problem is that Angelina put the work in... Megan gets tired after a few days and needs 2 months of vacation...





imgg said:


> This is signs of borderline personality.  They have no real identity so are constantly morphing into someone else.



she looks so...plain, ordinary and unattractive ...next to a real star.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> He won’t like this. He pouts when he’s not the center of attention.
> View attachment 4705790



I'm not sure it will be a concern. LA is already chock full of needy, out-of-work actresses, there's nothing unique about Meghan. On the other hand, as a prince, Harry will be the novelty. Of course I'm not counting Meghan's fans, but they don't have much influence there unless maybe one of them is the daughter of a studio executive.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'd love to hear her explanation of how Meghan's experience correlates with the elephant's



I think she read it in one of the positive reviews where the writers went out of their way to come up with parallels to force a connection. From the older, female matriarch of the elephant family, to the succession of power, to other elephants being pushed away.


----------



## LittleStar88

Katel said:


> she looks so...plain, ordinary and unattractive ...next to a real star.
> View attachment 4705845



I am not a fan of Angelina Jolie as a person (I think she has major issues + she is putting Brad through some dumb crap right now). Interesting choice for Meghan to mirror herself after...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think she read it in one of the positive reviews where the writers went out of their way to come up with parallels to force a connection. From the older, female matriarch of the elephant family, to the succession of power, to other elephants being pushed away.


ohOK


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm not sure it will be a concern. LA is already chock full of needy, out-of-work actresses, there's nothing unique about Meghan. On the other hand, as a prince, Harry will be the novelty. Of course I'm not counting Meghan's fans, but they don't have much influence there unless maybe one of them is the daughter of a studio executive.


bingo....jennifer meyer


----------



## limom

There is a rumor that they bought Mel Gibson’s house in Malibu.
It is around 15 millions.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> She likes Angelina Jolie.


I do think she wants to be like Jolie.  As far as those pictures - eerie - could that be coincidence?  if she actually copied Jolie in that first pic/outfit, that would be pathological


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Well, I took a week off from this thread and after reading a few pages of the most recent posts, I must admit that my feelings for H&M have changed - maybe it is the onset of Covid-19 and its huge impact globally and everyone I know of all ages are appreciating all the good in their lives?
Yes, my feelings about H&M have changed 
Simply DISLIKE these SELFISH, GREEDY, GRIFTERS even more!!!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I think she read it in one of the positive reviews where the writers went out of their way to come up with parallels to force a connection. From the older, female matriarch of the elephant family, to the succession of power, to other elephants being pushed away.


Considering that this narration had been previously done by another actor, it is unlikely that they revised the script just for Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Well, I took a week off from this thread and after reading a few pages of the most recent posts, I must admit that my feelings for H&M have changed - maybe it is the onset of Covid-19 and its huge impact globally and everyone I know of all ages are appreciating all the good in their lives?
> Yes, my feelings about H&M have changed
> Simply DISLIKE these SELFISH, GREEDY, GRIFTERS even more!!!


LOL!  I think that as time goes on and they become more irrelevant, your feelings will turn to pure amusement!  For me, they are starring in their own s*h*i*t* show.


----------



## Katel

LittleStar88 said:


> I am not a fan of Angelina Jolie as a person (I think she has major issues + she is putting Brad through some dumb crap right now). Interesting choice for Meghan to mirror herself after...



like AJ or not (and I did not comment either way), she’s a star - especially when placed next to the duchass.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Considering that this narration had been previously done by another actor, it is unlikely that they revised the script just for Meghan.



Oh, now don't you go using common sense and logic at a time like this. The stans need to BELIEVE, whether they are writing the internet reviews or reading them.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Oh, now don't you go using common sense and logic at a time like this. The stans need to BELIEVE, whether they are writing the internet reviews or reading them.


haha!  Love to know which actor was paid and she took their place.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> haha!  Love to know which actor was paid and she took their place.


I'd howl if it was Angelina Jolie! Highly unlikely though


----------



## bag-mania

Supposedly Meghan didn't take a salary for the narration job and the money was to be donated to an elephant charity. If it is true then that was very nice of her. If it is untrue and was made up in an attempt to give her more credibility in the charitable PR department then that sucks.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Meghan didn't take a salary for the narration job and the money was to be donated to an elephant charity. If it is true then that was very nice of her. If it is untrue and was made up in an attempt to give her more credibility in the charitable PR department then that sucks.


I think its true, but imo I don't think she did it out of the goodness of her heart.  This was the first step in introducing herself as charitable, so when her foundation launches, people assume all the money is going to charity, when only a small proportion of it is.  Kind of like a ponzi scheme, when you first invest you make money, so you give more than its all gone.


----------



## papertiger

V0N1B2 said:


> "They feel awkward because this news has broken at a time when they want everyone's attention to be on the pandemic."
> I can't even. I mean, really. I just can't.
> 
> This bish will not even let Boris Johnson in the ICU try to outshine her. "But H, we need to let everyone know about my FOUNDAYSHUN!!!!!"



They'll promote it when they can remember what the foundation is for.

Or against.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Meghan didn't take a salary for the narration job and the money was to be donated to an elephant charity. If it is true then that was very nice of her. If it is untrue and was made up in an attempt to give her more credibility in the charitable PR department then that sucks.



Oh, now don't you go start giving Meghan credit and benefit of the doubt at a time like this.  For her not to take a salary for this particular gig simply means she had ulterior motives. It was a foot in the door. And a way she could be referred to as a Royal on the credits for posterity before she was forbidden to use the title. She knew millions of families and millennials with young kids would watch this, and they're a prime, soft, target rich audience to brainwash into thinking that she's some sort of kind person that cares about others. We all know she's quite the opposite.


----------



## lalame

I don’t get this narrative at all... what mediocrity exactly are they thinking she left? The BRF that she and her husband profess to still love and want to stay active in? The British public whose money they benefit from? Imagine if your “fans” badmouth your family and friends. Goodness.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Meghan didn't take a salary for the narration job and the money was to be donated to an elephant charity. If it is true then that was very nice of her. If it is untrue and was made up in an attempt to give her more credibility in the charitable PR department then that sucks.



*This isn’t altruism. When the work was recorded, Meghan was not allowed to take this kind of payment while receiving public funds to work as a senior royal* & still be billed as HRH etc. (Sophie & Edward had to give up their private businesses when they became senior working royals.). She’s slyly getting away with using her HRH Meghan Duchess of Sussex & Milky Way in the movie & promos since the work was done months ago, though there was plenty of time to re-Markle her in the credits.

The effusive PR spin about Meghan’s “generosity” with her donation is a little absurd, but it’s always nice to support a charity. She would have paid to do this job (remember Harry awkwardly talking her up to a Disney exec?), because this type of film enhances her “independent profile,” far better than an on-screen job would have, given her limited range.  This is also why a ghost-written Children’s Book & cookbook are on her to-do list— They are low-risk, high reward projects for celebs.

Technically they should not have been allowed to take the JP Morgan speech money as they were still “working royals.” but they were already deep in Megxit negotiations by then


----------



## mrsinsyder

.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Meghan didn't take a salary for the narration job and the money was to be donated to an elephant charity. If it is true then that was very nice of her. If it is untrue and was made up in an attempt to give her more credibility in the charitable PR department then that sucks.



imo I think this was probably a big PR spin. Legally, I imagine what happened was she donated services to this movie and received no compensation. Separately, the studio donated some funds to the charity because... duh it’s about elephants, obvious PR slam dunk. And they linked the two conveniently to make her look better.

I predict when it’s Natalie Portman’s time, the media are just going to mention she didn’t take a salary or something like that, period (or don’t publicize it at al). And Disney makes a donation to some related charity no matter what and/or Nat does.


----------



## lanasyogamama

imgg said:


> I think its true, but imo I don't think she did it at the goodness of her heart.  This was the first step in introducing herself as charitable, so when her foundation launches, people assume all the money is going to charity, when only a small proportion of it is.  Kind of like a ponzi scheme, when you first invest you make money, so you give more than its all gone.



My thoughts exactly. 



papertiger said:


> They'll promote it when they can remember what the foundation is for.
> 
> Or against.



It is “TO DO SOMETHING OF MEANING” whatever the eff that means


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> I conceived naturally at her age exactly at the time I wanted to get pregnant. It is that hard, really. It either works or it doesn’t. Most of the time it does.


What I meant was, it had to be her first time trying to conceive.  She couldn't be a pregnant bride walking down the aisle.  And she got pregnant immediately after the wedding.  LIke Diana actually, but Diana was a teenager and teenagers are very fertile.

After the age of 35 (and wasn't Meg 37?)  a woman is considered to be having a geriatric pregnancy.  To immediately get pregnant, during her first month of trying?  I wouldn't be surprised if some drugs and intervention was involved.

You were very fortunate to get pregnant at age 37, the first attempt, during the first month, I think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I predict when it’s Natalie Portman’s time, the media are just going to mention she didn’t take a salary or something like that, period (or don’t publicize it at al). And Disney makes a donation to some related charity no matter what and/or Nat does.



The dolphin documentary Natalie Portman narrated came out the same day as Meghan's elephant show. It didn't get nearly as much fanfare, maybe because Natalie is already a star and didn't need the hype. Or maybe because they couldn't find some way to equate Natalie's life experiences to that of the subjects of her particular nature show.


----------



## rose60610

If M wanted to do "something of meaning", she could throw a few dollars toward the defeat-the-virus effort. Her grandmother-in-law gave a poignant rally speech about it the other day, and it would have meaning.  Apparently M would rather throw other peoples' money at "something of meaning" since she "reluctantly" divulged the name of her new foundation. In the middle of a pandemic. Without knowing what it's for. If she tried to impress the public, she pretty much failed. I agree with a previous poster, it sounds like a Ponzi scheme.


----------



## imgg

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ebsite-link-redirects-Kanyes-Gold-Digger.html


----------



## Mrs.Z

imgg said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ebsite-link-redirects-Kanyes-Gold-Digger.html


#EPIC
#poeticjustice


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ebsite-link-redirects-Kanyes-Gold-Digger.html


So it looks like she forgot to purchase the domain, huh?
I'd love to hear how she's going to spin this little episode.
Maybe she will complain about how mean the interwebs are.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

imgg said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ebsite-link-redirects-Kanyes-Gold-Digger.html


 
*imgg*, just came here to post the same DM article headline ♥️

“*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new Archewell charitable foundation website is redirectly fans to a YouTube music video of Kanye West's Gold Digger*.”

As a prominent federal prosecutor once said to me, ”Truth has a ring to it”, and in this case it sure does!
So hey you two grifters, karma is a biatch!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *imgg*, just came here to post the same DM article headline ♥️
> 
> “*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new Archewell charitable foundation website is redirectly fans to a YouTube music video of Kanye West's Gold Digger*.”
> 
> As a prominent federal prosecutor once said to me, ”Truth has a ring to it”, and in this case it sure does!
> So hey you two grifters, karma is a biatch!


*The TRUTH HURTS!!! * I just love this ...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Katel said:


> she looks so...plain, ordinary and unattractive ...next to a real star.
> View attachment 4705845



Sure hope Angie is making little miss smugness pay licensing royalties for stealing every single detail of Angie’s red-carpet looks

My bet is MM probably ripped-off many other celeb looks and time will tell

Hairy looks simply GROSS
#notatypo


----------



## imgg

Emeline said:


> So it looks like she forgot to purchase the domain, huh?
> I'd love to hear how she's going to spin this little episode.
> Maybe she will complain about how mean the interwebs are.


Or it was hacked..... She has been so careful to ensure everything is trademarked, I doubt she missed this detail.  I wouldn't put it past her and her team to have done this- she is getting so much attention and this is another story that keeps her in the media.


----------



## mshermes

It appears that this domain was registered on April 7, 2020. If you look up the address in Canada it comes up Ting?


----------



## lalame

imgg said:


> Or it was hacked..... She has been so careful to ensure everything is trademarked, I doubt she missed this detail.  I wouldn't put it past her and her team to have done this- she is getting so much attention and this to another story that keeps her in the media.



I agree, there's gotta be something going on there... it just HAPPENED to redirect to Gold digger? No way, someone engineered that. I can't imagine they would've done it themselves, though... they are so sensitive to criticism or anything that makes them look bad.


----------



## Lounorada

lalame said:


> I don’t get this narrative at all... what mediocrity exactly are they thinking she left? The BRF that she and her husband profess to still love and want to stay active in? The British public whose money they benefit from? Imagine if your “fans” badmouth your family and friends. Goodness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4706083


Her/their stans sound so petulant and immature.

Also, that fake Royal Portrait of MM really irks me, I found it quite disrespectful to QEII and the senior members of the RF.
I really side eye Beyoncé & Jay for making that move at the Brit Awards last year, featuring it in their acceptance video... was in such poor taste.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Hope someone got the .org too....


----------



## scarlet555

mshermes said:


> It appears that this domain was registered on April 7, 2020. If you look up the address in Canada it comes up Ting?



good detective job, thanks for the post.

Hopefully Harry gets sick of being the plus 1 and goes home.  

Meghan, I wish her well with her foundations, I don't see it ending well for her.  Many can see right through her, I can't even imagine people not seeing her for what she is, but if i'm wrong, I hope it shows soon how sincere she is and that I am FABRICATING all these ideas of her here on TPF, and we all suffer from a 'folie a group.'  And perhaps maybe, she only wants to make the world a better place without any financial gain or malice.   But if she ever thought that she could live off of charity foundations with the lifestyle of a royal, while living off the charity of Prince's Charles, she is sick in the mind.


----------



## LittleStar88

Katel said:


> like AJ or not (and I did not comment either way), she’s a star - especially when placed next to the duchass.



I totally agree and don’t mind her in movies. But she seems to have some issues outside of that...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

Apparently the site was hijacked:
*MEGHAN & HARRY'ARCHEWELL' SITE HIJACKED ...Goes to Ye's 'Gold Digger'*
https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/08/meghan-and-harrys-archewell-url-hijacked-for-kanye-s-gold-digger/

Also, looked up archewellfoundation.org and that looks hinky...






Damn....she does good work!


----------



## LittleStar88

mshermes said:


> Apparently the site was hijacked:
> *MEGHAN & HARRY'ARCHEWELL' SITE HIJACKED ...Goes to Ye's 'Gold Digger'*
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/08/meghan-and-harrys-archewell-url-hijacked-for-kanye-s-gold-digger/
> 
> Also, looked up archewellfoundation.org and that looks hinky...
> View attachment 4706228
> View attachment 4706228
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn....she does good work!



registered in Panama??


----------



## Katel

mshermes said:


> Apparently the site was hijacked:
> *MEGHAN & HARRY'ARCHEWELL' SITE HIJACKED ...Goes to Ye's 'Gold Digger'*
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/08/meghan-and-harrys-archewell-url-hijacked-for-kanye-s-gold-digger/
> 
> Also, looked up archewellfoundation.org and that looks hinky...
> View attachment 4706228
> View attachment 4706228
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn....she does good work!



“namecheap.com” hahaha



LittleStar88 said:


> registered in Panama??



whaaaa?

also I just can’t help it...every time I see “archewell” I think of some yoga move...or something slightly disgusting...

...may have something to do with “namecheap”


----------



## imgg

LittleStar88 said:


> I totally agree and don’t mind her in movies. But she seems to have some issues outside of that...


Yes, another one that morphs into different personas....


----------



## mshermes

Sol Ryan said:


> Hope someone got the .org too....


I think they did.  This is what you get when you go to archewellfoundation.org....


----------



## tiktok

mshermes said:


> Apparently the site was hijacked:
> *MEGHAN & HARRY'ARCHEWELL' SITE HIJACKED ...Goes to Ye's 'Gold Digger'*
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/04/08/meghan-and-harrys-archewell-url-hijacked-for-kanye-s-gold-digger/
> 
> Also, looked up archewellfoundation.org and that looks hinky...
> View attachment 4706228
> View attachment 4706228
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damn....she does good work!



These aren’t necessarily shady registrations, they could just be private. Whenever you register a domain you have the option to pay a little extra (usually something like $10) for private registration, meaning your name isn’t publicly on the domain but instead there’s some middleman-type company on the public record. These company names are usually not particularly innovative.


----------



## mshermes

Katel said:


> “namecheap.com” hahaha
> 
> 
> 
> whaaaa?
> 
> also I just can’t help it...every time I see “archewell” I think of some yoga move...or something slightly disgusting...
> 
> ...may have something to do with “namecheap”


*Namecheap*
Domain Name Registrar



Namecheap, Inc. is an ICANN-accredited domain name registrar, which provides domain name registration and web hosting, based in Phoenix, Arizona. Namecheap is a budget hosting provider with 11 million registered users and 10 million domains.


----------



## Sol Ryan

mshermes said:


> I think they did.  This is what you get when you go to archewellfoundation.org....
> View attachment 4706257


Cool... I hope there is some little internet troll living their best life just registering domain names that are iterations on The Archewell Foundation lol...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

scarlet555 said:


> good detective job, thanks for the post.
> 
> Hopefully Harry gets sick of being the plus 1 and goes home.
> 
> Meghan, I wish her well with her foundations, I don't see it ending well for her.  Many can see right through her, I can't even imagine people not seeing her for what she is, but if i'm wrong, I hope it shows soon how sincere she is and that I am FABRICATING all these ideas of her here on TPF, and we all suffer from a 'folie a group.'  And perhaps maybe, she only wants to make the world a better place without any financial gain or malice.   But if she ever thought that she could live off of charity foundations with the lifestyle of a royal, while living off the charity of Prince's Charles, she is sick in the mind.



*scarlet*, there have been posts here and there on tPF about “all of the H&M stans” and their PR efforts are of course, gushing about what a large fan base these two grifters have, ie in order to negotiate the best deal these days, you gotta be a major social media influencer

Did 2-minutes of research on H&M’s brand ratings, Q-Ratings and their supposed HUGE fan base - discovered that they are not well-liked by the majority of the population, so probably most of their paid-insta followers, etc are just an illusion to pull in a bigger paycheck

MM, ex-Duchess Golddigger is just trying to negotiate the best business deal <more fans, bigger deals> to line her pockets with wads of cash before sunburnt Hairy has the imprint of her stiletto as she kicks him out the door of their Cali McMansion

Maybe here at tPF we are on to something and we sensed H&M’s total lack of authenticity and sense of entitlement? ♥️


----------



## Katel

mshermes said:


> *Namecheap*
> Domain Name Registrar
> 
> 
> 
> Namecheap, Inc. is an ICANN-accredited domain name registrar, which provides domain name registration and web hosting, based in Phoenix, Arizona. Namecheap is a budget hosting provider with 11 million registered users and 10 million domains.



I know it’s used to acquire domain names... but with all of the registrars out there, it’s so humorous they’ve chosen “namecheap.” 
(course, “godaddy” would also work.)


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hmm, I see that GoDaddy isn’t good enough for MM, and her refined intuitive good taste made her choose NameCheap

Also, Hairy will want to return to the Firm the day after his father tells him that the Golddigger and he are permanently persona non grata


----------



## lalame

Lounorada said:


> Her/their stans sound so petulant and immature.
> 
> Also, that fake Royal Portrait of MM really irks me, I found it quite disrespectful to QEII and the senior members of the RF.
> I really side eye Beyoncé & Jay for making that move at the Brit Awards last year, featuring it in their acceptance video... was in such poor taste.



That's a real thing? I don't think I've seen that portrait before this so I thought it may have been an official portrait. It looks ghastly, like a Lucian Freud painting.


----------



## 1LV

Someone said it before, but I’ll say it again... to be a fly on the wall.  I bet Harry is catching holy hell.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe she auditioned for this Go Daddy ad and didn’t get it, so she took her business to name cheap.


----------



## eunaddict

lalame said:


> I don’t get this narrative at all... what mediocrity exactly are they thinking she left? The BRF that she and her husband profess to still love and want to stay active in? The British public whose money they benefit from? Imagine if your “fans” badmouth your family and friends. Goodness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4706083



That's hilarious considering the first big "throw down" she (and by extension Harry) had with the RBF was over her wedding tiara. Of course tiaras matter to her. And I highly doubt she'd decline them if the opportunity were ever offered to her again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> Her/their stans sound so petulant and immature.
> 
> Also, that fake Royal Portrait of MM really irks me, I found it quite disrespectful to QEII and the senior members of the RF.
> I really side eye Beyoncé & Jay for making that move at the Brit Awards last year, featuring it in their acceptance video... was in such poor taste.


It is disrespectful, but mostly I just find it very silly and immature.  I don’t think Meghan or her stans bothered to understand anything about the British monarchy.  They’re heavily invested in a weird princess fantasy.


----------



## Lodpah

She has a radar for cameras.


----------



## Clearblueskies

^^ nice to see Harry in a decent suit


----------



## Lodpah

So I don't think Meghan is really a narcissist. I do believe she is indeed a psychopath.  There's a big difference. There's a book called "Snakes in A Suit" and I think Meghan fits the profile.  Not all psychopaths kill and maime. They are all over the corporate world. They know exactly how to woo someone to gain their trust, then dump them with no remorse whatsoever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

imgg said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ebsite-link-redirects-Kanyes-Gold-Digger.html


LOL


----------



## kemilia

I imagine W & K got a good laugh out of the Gold-digger story. 

But what a humiliation for H&M, but not really--they don't keep up on news so all's good in Malibu.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> That's hilarious considering the first big "throw down" she (and by extension Harry) had with the RBF was over her wedding tiara. Of course tiaras matter to her. And I highly doubt she'd decline them if the opportunity were ever offered to her again.


I mean, after the wedding tiara drama she asked to take a tiara to their first overseas trip, only to be told by Charles "Not really". Of course she cares, and I bet it didn't sit well with her Kate not only has three tiaras available to her but one of them was a favourite of Diana.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

How jealous would Meghan have been of Sophie here: 

In all seriousness, the main BRF account shares stuff from everyone’s visits and endeavours and M & H barely register because, when you look at what everyone else did and does, they did very little.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> She has a radar for cameras.
> View attachment 4706440



I like this photo on a couple of levels. Meghan always mugging for the camera is hilarious, but it looks like she's a puppeteer working her Harry marionette.


----------



## Vintage Leather

lalame said:


> That's a real thing? I don't think I've seen that portrait before this so I thought it may have been an official portrait. It looks ghastly, like a Lucian Freud painting.



There's a company that does "Make yourself look like a historical figure" paintings. I suspect that they are the ones behind that monstrosity.  

Interestingly enough, the tiara she's pictured with is commonly known as La Buena, and its part of the Spanish collection, and can only be worn by the queen of Spain. Not exactly a good choice, because it's so darn distinctive and so closely associated with a particular wearer.


----------



## LittleStar88

Vintage Leather said:


> *There's a company that does "Make yourself look like a historical figure" paintings.* I suspect that they are the ones behind that monstrosity.
> 
> Interestingly enough, the tiara she's pictured with is commonly known as La Buena, and its part of the Spanish collection, and can only be worn by the queen of Spain. Not exactly a good choice, because it's so darn distinctive and so closely associated with a particular wearer.



Kind of like the ones you can get with your pet?


----------



## bag-mania

Vintage Leather said:


> Interestingly enough, the tiara she's pictured with is commonly known as La Buena, and its part of the Spanish collection, and can only be worn by the queen of Spain. Not exactly a good choice, because it's so darn distinctive and so closely associated with a particular wearer.



Yeah, but it's not like the stans who love Meghan-as-queen art would know or care about history or actual royal customs. They could have made it look like one of the Disney princesses' crowns and they would have loved it just as much.


----------



## limom

Wtf, cares about a Tiara?
You want a tiara?
Buy one.
She is perfect for Harry, imho. They are at the same level, imho.
She is just prettier..
Where is Arkie?


----------



## Clearblueskies

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of like the ones you can get with your pet?


This reminds me, where’s the beagle I wonder


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> This reminds me, where’s the beagle I wonder



And what about the foster dog Meghan told the media she was going to take in to help during the COVID-19 crisis? If that dog ever existed at all he/she was abandoned back in Canada when they made their border-closing getaway.

Of course throwing dogs away is nothing new to Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> And what about the foster dog Meghan told the media she was going to take in to help during the COVID-19 crisis? If that dog ever existed at all he/she was abandoned back in Canada when they made their border-closing getaway.
> 
> Of course throwing dogs away is nothing new to Meghan.


.. * PEOPLE* ("_former friends_" - _if friends ever existed in her so intelligent_ [JOKE] _lexicon_")!!!


----------



## gracekelly

Well I guess they have gone completely LA.  The news on my google feed this morning was that they are going into the shoe and garment business. The Duke and Duchess of Garmento!   Some reporter is giving them some shade because clothing and shoes are listed amongst the trademarked items for Archewell.  Not to give them any ideas, but the name would work well with orthopedic shoes.  _Having problems with your fallen arches?  Try Archewell shoes for the perfect fit and great comfort!_


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Well I guess they have gone completely LA.  The news on my google feed this morning was that they are going into the shoe and garment business. The Duke and Duchess of Garmento!   Some reporter is giving them some shade because clothing and shoes are listed amongst the trademarked items for Archewell.  Not to give them any ideas, but the name would work well with orthopedic shoes.  _Having problems with your fallen arches?  Try Archewell shoes for the perfect fit and great comfort!_



Looking forward to their Target collaboration.


----------



## Sol Ryan

LittleStar88 said:


> Looking forward to their Target collaboration.


Noooooooo!


----------



## rose60610

Serious? Clothes and shoes? Are these different from why she was doing last year "for charity"?  I wondered if she'd go this route, after all, Jessica Simpson has made a huge fortune from her shoe and clothes lines. And Rhianna. And quite a few other celebrities. If this is true, perfume, a cosmetics line, and skincare line are sure to follow.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of like the ones you can get with your pet?



*LittleStar*, had to re-post this!!! You have truly outdone yourself here, rofling. Thx


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Looking forward to their Target collaboration.



Don't laugh.  Could happen.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Serious? Clothes and shoes? Are these different from why she was doing last year "for charity"?  I wondered if she'd go this route, after all, Jessica Simpson has made a huge fortune from her shoe and clothes lines. And Rhianna. And quite a few other celebrities. If this is true, perfume, a cosmetics line, and skincare line are sure to follow.


That's true that those ladies made a great deal of money, but their fan base was huge and the had been around for quite a while before doing this.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Serious? Clothes and shoes? Are these different from why she was doing last year "for charity"?  I wondered if she'd go this route, after all, Jessica Simpson has made a huge fortune from her shoe and clothes lines. And Rhianna. And quite a few other celebrities. If this is true, perfume, a cosmetics line, and skincare line are sure to follow.



I can absolutely see them having a clothing/shoes line. Of course all of their new designs will already be a few seasons out-of-date since they are late to every trend and idea they attempt.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> That's true that those ladies made a great deal of money, but their fan base was huge and the had been around for quite a while before doing this.


I don't see her as particularly interesting style-wise.  But I suppose to those who adore her, she is the icon of understated style and they would want to emulate her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I can absolutely see them having a clothing/shoes line. Of course all of their new designs will already be a few seasons out-of-date since they are late to every trend and idea they attempt.


Everything would be navy blue


----------



## pursegirl3

And still ill fitting !!


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> That's true that those ladies made a great deal of money, but their fan base was huge and the had been around for quite a while before doing this.





bag-mania said:


> I can absolutely see them having a clothing/shoes line. Of course all of their new designs will already be a few seasons out-of-date since they are late to every trend and idea they attempt.



Riiiiiiight, I agree, other celebrities had a large fan base, but I think M has gotten much more coverage than they have had. I think there's more $$ to be made on "affordable" clothes/shoes than with couture lines. Victoria Beckham and Olsen's may be an exception, but their clothes really are nice and took talent to pull off, something I'm afraid M will never have. She can't very well brand them as "Archewell", that'd be weird. If she really wanted to pull off a successful line she should do a dopey tongue-in-cheek name...like "Roy-chel" or "Hi!!nice" .  There's a good chance they would come to Target, vs a department store.  I don't know if the under 30 crowd identifies with her at all. Come to think of it, I don't know anyone who'd identify with her. Unless they're the sappy-victim/drama queen type.


----------



## Lounorada

lalame said:


> That's a real thing? I don't think I've seen that portrait before this so I thought it may have been an official portrait. It looks ghastly, like a Lucian Freud painting.


Oh yeah, it was real. Obviously made for the sole purpose of a big dose of attention.
Mimicking their music video for Apesh*t where they stood in front of the Mona Lisa, like there's even a comparison 
I remember watching that clip on the BRITS and it looked like _'We've just won a British music award and instead of a thank you, here's a big F**k You' _
Tumblr
_


_





gracekelly said:


> Well I guess they have gone completely LA.  The news on my google feed this morning was that they are going into the shoe and garment business. The Duke and Duchess of Garmento!   Some reporter is giving them some shade because clothing and shoes are listed amongst the trademarked items for Archewell.  *Not to give them any ideas, but the name would work well with orthopedic shoes.  *_*Having problems with your fallen arches?  Try Archewell shoes for the perfect fit and great comfort*!_


 @ the bolded


----------



## tiktok

rose60610 said:


> Riiiiiiight, I agree, other celebrities had a large fan base, but I think M has gotten much more coverage than they have had. I think there's more $$ to be made on "affordable" clothes/shoes than with couture lines. Victoria Beckham and Olsen's may be an exception, but their clothes really are nice and took talent to pull off, something I'm afraid M will never have. She can't very well brand them as "Archewell", that'd be weird. If she really wanted to pull off a successful line she should do a dopey tongue-in-cheek name...like "Roy-chel" or "Hi!!nice" .  There's a good chance they would come to Target, vs a department store.  I don't know if the under 30 crowd identifies with her at all. Come to think of it, I don't know anyone who'd identify with her. Unless they're the sappy-victim/drama queen type.



Maybe a good parallel is Ivanka ***** - not to get political but I think it’s fact not politics that there’s a not insignificant part of the US she’s not popular with to say the least, and she still sold quite a bit in mid-level department stores and I think was also quite successful in China. But I’m not sure how much these brands sell because of the name vs. a customer goes to Macy’s, sees a cute pair of inexpensive shoes that are a total designer knockoff just like they saw on Instagram and buys them, not caring much about the brand.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Gosh, Jay looks crazy with that hair...
Even Beyoncé can’t make him look good in that pic.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Come to think of it, I don't know anyone who'd identify with her. *Unless they're the sappy-victim/drama queen type*.



Unfortunately, there are plenty who fit in that demographic and some of them aren’t all that young either. Some women never outgrow the drama.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I can absolutely see them having a clothing/shoes line. Of course all of their new designs will already be a few seasons out-of-date since they are late to every trend and idea they attempt.


She would do better hooking up with a company that makes hair extensions.  She obviously uses them all the time.  Just sayin'
Harry could become a client of the Bosley Clinic or Hair Club for Men.  He can do before and after shots and/or make a commercial.  He could issue a nonroyal warrant.


----------



## poopsie

limom said:


> Wtf, cares about a Tiara?
> You want a tiara?
> Buy one.
> She is perfect for Harry, imho. They are at the same level, imho.
> She is just prettier..
> Where is Arkie?



Hmmmppphhh...........Amy Farrah Fowler does


----------



## rose60610

tiktok said:


> Maybe a good parallel is Ivanka ***** - not to get political but I think it’s fact not politics that there’s a not insignificant part of the US she’s not popular with to say the least, and she still sold quite a bit in mid-level department stores and I think was also quite successful in China. But I’m not sure how much these brands sell because of the name vs. a customer goes to Macy’s, sees a cute pair of inexpensive shoes that are a total designer knockoff just like they saw on Instagram and buys them, not caring much about the brand.



You raise some good points.  Meghan isn't exactly popular in a positive way on this thread, but she probably does have a number of fans. If M does make a clothes line, and they don't totally suck, she might make some sales. Perhaps enough to purchase some clothes that actually fit HER.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't see her as particularly interesting style-wise.  But I suppose to those who adore her, she is the icon of understated style and they would want to emulate her.


Do you recall the khaki color dress she wore to the polo match?  It was a huge shapeless tent.  I am not shading that aspect really because she had just had a baby, but the the comments of the sugars were amazing.  They thought it was so stylish, chic, fabulous and they wanted to know where they could get one.  It was a tent.  I will sleep in a tent if camping, but i don't want to wear one.  The GAP dress at Forest Hills for the tennis match.  Belted and shapeless and it sold out supposedly.  I don't call any of that style of any sort.  I channel surf through HSN and QVC and frankly, the middle America clothing that they feature is sometimes cuter has more style than anything I have seen her wear.  We have seen her repertoire of fashion, and it is boring, doesn't fit and nothing special.  I don't see how she is going to improve it.


----------



## bag-mania

As with everything else they have tried, their timing blows. They don’t know squat about fashion design and marketing. That means they would have to find some company willing to invest in them and do all the work while slapping their name on the product for their “celebrity appeal.” 

Companies in almost all industries are hurting during this crisis. Some small ones may go under. Who the hell is going to be foolish enough to take a chance on H&M for fashion?


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Do you recall the khaki color dress she wore to the polo match?  It was a huge shapeless tent.  I am not shading that aspect really because she had just had a baby, but the the comments of the sugars were amazing.  They thought it was so stylish, chic, fabulous and they wanted to know where they could get one.  It was a tent.  I will sleep in a tent if camping, but i don't want to wear one.  The GAP dress at Forest Hills for the tennis match.  Belted and shapeless and it sold out supposedly.  I don't call any of that style of any sort.  I channel surf through HSN and QVC and frankly, the middle America clothing that they feature is sometimes cuter has more style than anything I have seen her wear.  We have seen her repertoire of fashion, and it is boring, doesn't fit and nothing special.  I don't see how she is going to improve it.



Celebrity sells... it doesn't really have anything to do with "special," like it or not. I like some of her outfits... Can't deny she turned me onto Birks and a few other brands. Kate turned me onto some too that I like very much, though Kate's style isn't really my style at all. They're just so visible, the stuff they wear is bound to catch some interested eyeballs.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Do you recall the khaki color dress she wore to the polo match?  It was a huge shapeless tent.  I am not shading that aspect really because she had just had a baby, but the the comments of the sugars were amazing.  They thought it was so stylish, chic, fabulous and they wanted to know where they could get one.  It was a tent.  I will sleep in a tent if camping, but i don't want to wear one.  The GAP dress at Forest Hills for the tennis match.  Belted and shapeless and it sold out supposedly.  I don't call any of that style of any sort.  I channel surf through HSN and QVC and frankly, the middle America clothing that they feature is sometimes cuter has more style than anything I have seen her wear.  We have seen her repertoire of fashion, and it is boring, doesn't fit and nothing special.  I don't see how she is going to improve it.


depends on whether there are enough people who love it just because it's hers....and whether they can afford it....maybe Target would be a good place to market her stuff


----------



## Jktgal

Lounorada said:


> Oh yeah, it was real. Obviously made for the sole purpose of a big dose of attention.
> Mimicking their music video for Apesh*t where they stood in front of the Mona Lisa, like there's even a comparison
> I remember watching that clip on the BRITS and it looked like _'We've just won a British music award and instead of a thank you, here's a big F**k You' _
> Tumblr
> _
> View attachment 4706890
> View attachment 4706891
> _
> View attachment 4706895
> 
> 
> 
> @ the bolded



I thought this picture had a tone of racism. There are other black women who are on the podium due to her own merit, who are deserving of the crown. Yet B & Sidekick chose someone who got her fame and fortune through marriage, just because of her skin (if it was an American Chinese woman marrying the crown, I doubt they would do this). But Sparkles is not breaking barriers, she enforced the same priviledges as those inheriting the crown - a big f**k you to democracy, meritocracy. Unless of course that was what B & Sidekick meant with the portrait, in which case it was a veiled shade.


----------



## Chagall

I am surprised MM would go into the clothing business. I suppose the fact her clothes are not stylish and don’t fit her is not a concern as she wouldn’t be the designer. She would only sell the merchandise under her name.


----------



## mia55

Another lame marketing strategy. Maybe (I hope but I doubt)  she realized he's more bankable than her.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32093886/prince-harry-graffiti-los-angeles/


----------



## queennadine

I’m waiting for the report that Archie’s name was also inspired by the Ark of the Covenant.


----------



## youngster

Jktgal said:


> Yet B & Sidekick chose someone who got her fame and fortune through marriage, just because of her skin (if it was an American Chinese woman marrying the crown, I doubt they would do this). But Sparkles is not breaking barriers, she enforced the same privileges as those inheriting the crown - a big f**k you to democracy, meritocracy. Unless of course that was what B & Sidekick meant with the portrait, in which case it was a veiled shade.



That's kind of what I thought, it was shade.  The portrait is extremely unflattering to MM.


----------



## bag-mania

mia55 said:


> Another lame marketing strategy. Maybe (I hope but I doubt)  she realized he's more bankable than her.
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32093886/prince-harry-graffiti-los-angeles/
> 
> View attachment 4707229



Looking at it I think it is really nice street art, but it was nothing planned by our wannabe power couple. I could be wrong but if Meghan was behind it it would have been painted on a clean wall and have a pretentious message.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Looking at it I think it is really nice street art, but it was nothing planned by our wannabe power couple. I could be wrong but if Meghan was behind it it would have been painted on a clean wall and have a pretentious message.


If MM was behind it the picture would have been of her.


----------



## joyeaux

FWIW, I know the backstory of that portrait of Meghan with the crown on because I am familiar with the artist, Tim O'Brien. It was a commission for the cover of Kappa Kappa Gamma (her sorority) alumni magazine. Here's his Instagram, you can see he does a lot of pieces with pop culture and political subjects.

I remember reading when Beyonce and Jay Z did that clip, that O'Brien had no idea that was going to be happening. Here's an article from Vanity Fair (sorry for the wonky formatting):


> *The Artist Behind Beyoncé’s Viral Meghan Markle Portrait Was as Surprised as You Were by It*
> “It came out of nowhere,” Tim O’Brien says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BY JOSH DUBOFF
> 
> FEBRUARY 21, 2019
> 
> One imagines it will be hard for the Duchess of Sussex—or, well, anyone for that matter—to top the day she had on Wednesday. In New York City for a five-night trip, Meghan Markle was thrown an extremely fancy baby shower at the penthouse of the luxe Mark hotel, attended by her closest friends and co-hosted by Serena Williams and Amal Clooney. And then—and then!—later that day, during the BRIT Awards (the British equivalent of the Grammys), Beyoncé and Jay-Z accepted an award via a pre-recorded video, in which the _Mona Lisa_ imagery, of their recent “Apeshit” video, was replaced with a portrait of Meghan. Beyoncé explained the tribute on her Instagram account, writing, “In honor of Black History Month, we bow down to one of our Melanated Monas. Congrats on your pregnancy! We wish you so much joy.” (There was also a Meghan tribute posted on Beyoncé’s Web site.)
> 
> The painting of Meghan—initially commissioned for the cover of national sorority Kappa Kappa Gamma’s Summer 2018 alumni magazine (Meghan was a Kappa when she attended Northwestern University)—was created by Tim O’Brien, a Brooklyn-based illustrator and portraitist who has been published in a range of magazines, including _Time, Rolling Stone, GQ, National Geographic,_ and _New York_ magazine. He has won many awards as well, and has more than a dozen paintings in the National Gallery in Washington, D.C. Per his biography, he “has a knack for pop culture, often infusing it into artistic visions that simultaneously reveal its strangeness and familiarity.”
> 
> _Vanity Fair_ spoke to O’Brien on Wednesday evening to discuss his reaction to his work being used in this manner, the way the painting came about, and his feelings about the Carters not calling to get the rights to the image.
> 
> _Vanity Fair:_ How did you initially find out Beyoncé and Jay-Z had used your illustration? Was it a flood of messages?
> 
> _Tim O’Brien:_ Yeah, it just . . . I saw Instagram started to get crazy, and Twitter went crazy. I think it happened right at the moment the video played, I guess. And then I started getting contact from . . . I have a Web site and sell prints of it. And so suddenly a bunch of print orders came in. [Ed: O’Brien says a fulfillment company makes the prints and that they will not sell out, as “they’ll just make as many as they can.”]
> 
> 
> Did you have any advance warning that this was going to be happening? Or did it just come out of nowhere?
> 
> Yeah, it came out of nowhere. They didn’t contact me; they didn’t acquire the rights to it. I had no idea about it.
> 
> So what was your initial reaction when you did see what had happened?
> 
> Well, I’m a businessperson. So part of these things . . . that’s a usage. But I’m torn, because I respect Beyoncé as an artist so much. And I know that the publicity that kind of usage can provide is valuable. So I’m pretty sure it’ll be a positive thing no matter what. And it’s not like she made money doing this video. It was done as a backdrop for receiving an award. So I feel like it was a . . . I don’t feel too upset about it. [Ed: _Vanity Fair_ has reached out to the Carters’ rep for comment.]
> 
> Is there any sort of legal claim you would try to make or anything like that?
> 
> I might be able to. I’m not sure I would do that. But in this case, there’s not a lot to gain. You have to recognize when something is valuable, has other value, and I think it has other value.
> 
> Could you talk a little bit about the initial commission and how it come about, this idea? Did the Kappa Kappa Gamma magazine reach out to you?
> 
> Two designers out of Austin, Texas, Erin Mayes and Kate Collins, they contacted me and said they were commissioning a cover for _The Key,_ this magazine. They had pretty much decided what it was going to be, and we started to talk about the cover, and that it would be a princess. That she’d still have to look like her. They didn’t want her stylized in any way. So, I did a bunch of sketches, and refining all the different things she was wearing. And then finally got approval, and then I did the painting, an oil painting.
> 
> How long did that whole process take you to create it?
> 
> The sketch process is probably about a week, and then the painting several days.
> 
> Were you very familiar with Meghan and her global fame at that point when you took on the assignment?
> 
> Yeah, of course. I was aware of all the different ways that she was a new thing for England, and I was already intrigued by her. So it was an opportunity to make an interesting cover. And it came out, and then that was it. Then it sort of was reborn today.
> 
> Did you get feedback when it did initially come out?
> 
> About average feedback. It didn’t go viral or anything. There were some people who were members of the sorority who reached out, but it did nothing crazy. I mean, any time a celebrity touches something it sort of turns to gold.
> 
> You mentioned that your Instagram and everything are blowing up. What kind of feedback have you been getting?
> 
> Well, everyone loves Beyoncé, first of all. And so there are tons of those kinds of things on Instagram. But then there’s people who are fans of Meghan. There’s a bit of . . . I don’t know the opinion of Meghan in England. But I imagine just like any other country, there a back-and-forth about anybody, but mostly the comments on my social media have been positive.
> 
> And it was the day of her baby shower today as well, so it’s a celebratory kind of day.
> 
> [_Laughing_] Yeah, and no one invited me anywhere.
> 
> Well, maybe somehow this will be parlayed into, I don’t know, her next baby shower or something, and you can do an in-person portrait.
> 
> Right.


----------



## pixiejenna

Chagall said:


> I am surprised MM would go into the clothing business. I suppose the fact her clothes are not stylish and don’t fit her is not a concern as she wouldn’t be the designer. She would only sell the merchandise under her name.



I totally agree the way she dresses dose not want me to buy clothing from her, every thing is ill fitting and unflattering. Jessica Simpson is not the best dresser either but has built quite the clothing empire. I think that a big part of her success is her likability which is a trait that Megan dose not possess. Jessica may not be perfect but for the most part she’s much more relatable and she’s also been every size over the years and creates clothing for all sizes as well. If Megan can’t even dress her skinny self in clothing that fits I can’t even imagine what her plus size clothing would look like.


----------



## Lounorada

Jktgal said:


> I thought this picture had a tone of racism. There are other black women who are on the podium due to her own merit, who are deserving of the crown. Yet B & Sidekick chose someone who got her fame and fortune through marriage, just because of her skin (if it was an American Chinese woman marrying the crown, I doubt they would do this). But Sparkles is not breaking barriers, she enforced the same priviledges as those inheriting the crown - a big f**k you to democracy, meritocracy. *Unless of course that was what B & Sidekick meant with the portrait, in which case it was a veiled shade*.


Interesting point, I hope you're right. It would be quite comical if that stunt by Bey & Jay was veiled shade towards MM


----------



## sdkitty

from yahoo news.  apparently whoever wrote this thinks Meghan married H for love

*The expected website for Harry and Meghan's new foundation was redirecting to 'Gold Digger' after it was seemingly occupied by a cybersquatter*
https://www.yahoo.com/news/expected-website-harry-meghans-foundation-145725401.html


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> from yahoo news.  apparently whoever wrote this thinks Meghan married H for love
> 
> *The expected website for Harry and Meghan's new foundation was redirecting to 'Gold Digger' after it was seemingly occupied by a cybersquatter*
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/expected-website-harry-meghans-foundation-145725401.html



The comments section is a riot. Virtually every poster takes issue with the writer referring to Meghan as a "successful actress."


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder how it feels when your life's accomplishments are publicly forever tied to Meghan. Fashion designer Clare Waight Keller is out at Givenchy and the NYT decided that her greatest claim to fame was designing Meghan's wedding dress (and maybe it was).

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/style/clare-waight-keller-givenchy.html


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how it feels when your life's accomplishments are publicly forever tied to Meghan. Fashion designer Clare Waight Keller is out at Givenchy and the NYT decided that her greatest claim to fame was designing Meghan's wedding dress (and maybe it was).
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/style/clare-waight-keller-givenchy.html


Eh, she can go design some Archewells now lol....


----------



## kkfiregirl

Jktgal said:


> I thought this picture had a tone of racism. There are other black women who are on the podium due to her own merit, who are deserving of the crown. Yet B & Sidekick chose someone who got her fame and fortune through marriage, just because of her skin (if it was an American Chinese woman marrying the crown, I doubt they would do this). But Sparkles is not breaking barriers, she enforced the same priviledges as those inheriting the crown - a big f**k you to democracy, meritocracy. Unless of course that was what B & Sidekick meant with the portrait, in which case it was a veiled shade.



two black people chose to use a portrait of a black woman they admire (I assume) and because they didn’t use the photo of a more deserving (in your opinion) black woman, there are shades of racism?


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> I am surprised MM would go into the clothing business. I suppose the fact her clothes are not stylish and don’t fit her is not a concern as she wouldn’t be the designer. She would only sell the merchandise under her name.



I think the issue with her creating a fashion line is the people who she'd like to buy her clothes think she has no taste/style i.e. people with money who can buy whatever they like in an already saturated market. 

And then there's it's actually hard to run a fashion brand, even VB can't turn a profit and she actually goes to work.


----------



## limom

*“I thought this picture had a tone of racism. There are other black women who are on the podium due to her own merit, who are deserving of the crown. Yet B & Sidekick chose someone who got her fame and fortune through marriage, just because of her skin (if it was an American Chinese woman marrying the crown, I doubt they would do this). But Sparkles is not breaking barriers, she enforced the same priviledges as those inheriting the crown - a big f**k you to democracy, meritocracy. Unless of course that was what B & Sidekick meant with the portrait, in which case it was a veiled shade.”*

Stretchinggggggggggggggggg!!!'!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I *think the issue with her creating a fashion line is the people who she'd like to buy her clothes think she has no taste/style i.e. people with money who can buy whatever they like in an already saturated market. *
> 
> And then there's it's actually hard to run a fashion brand, even VB can't turn a profit and she actually goes to work.


Does she really care though?
She has to know that she is not the second coming of Coco. Her inspiration is more like a royal, charitable goop, imho.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how it feels when your life's accomplishments are publicly forever tied to Meghan. Fashion designer Clare Waight Keller is out at Givenchy and the NYT decided that her greatest claim to fame was designing Meghan's wedding dress (and maybe it was).
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/style/clare-waight-keller-givenchy.html



I feel incredibly sad because she's a wonderful designer and Givenchy's first female CD. I personally thought MM's wedding dress would have been fine -  if it fitted her.


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Does she really care though?
> She has to know that she is not the second coming of Coco. Her inspiration is more like a royal, charitable goop, imho.



Totally, I think she thinks she's way bigger than any one fashion company. She's gonna do 'something' really worthwhile and beyond business, something spectacular, and wonderful and BIG and _meaningful _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Does she really care though?
> She has to know that she is not the second coming of Coco. Her inspiration is more like a royal, charitable goop, imho.


she probably knows she's not a fashion designer....I think she would be satisfied to "curate" a line with her name on it which her stans can afford.  After all if Jenn Aniston can sell Avenno, they whey not Meghan sell reasonably priced clothing?


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> I think the issue with her creating a fashion line is the people who she'd like to buy her clothes think she has no taste/style i.e. people with money who can buy whatever they like in an already saturated market.
> 
> And then there's it's actually hard to run a fashion brand, even VB can't turn a profit and she actually goes to work.


And VB has a great sense of style And  designs beautiful clothes. No comparison to MM.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I feel incredibly sad because she's a wonderful designer and Givenchy's first female CD. I personally thought MM's wedding dress would have been fine -  if it fitted her.


wouldn't the fit be the designers responsibility?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't the fit be the designers responsibility?



Not always. The client would be advised by the designer how it is supposed to fit, the vendeuse on all the permutations and the Première (head seamstress) as what would flatter and what is possible, but the client ultimately decides what suits her.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Not always. The client would be advised by the designer how it is supposed to fit, the vendeuse on all the permutations and the Première (head seamstress) as what would flatter and what is possible, but the client ultimately decides what suits her.


it would make no sense to have a world famous couture designer make a gown for you and then to overrule them on the fit.....but anything is possible


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> it would make no sense to have a world famous couture designer make a gown for you and then to overrule them on the fit.....but anything is possible


It’s Meghan tho.... she may have thought she knew best... unfortunately we may never know.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> it would make no sense to have a world famous couture designer make a gown for you and then to overrule them on the fit.....but anything is possible



You'd be surprised (I worked in a couture house).  And since MM has no problem telling the Queen which tiara she'd rather wear or if and when _she'll _be wearing a hat, I don't think she'd give two hoots what 'some designer' envisioned.


----------



## Lounorada

limom said:


> Stretchinggggggggggggggggg!!!'!!!!!!!!!!!!


Yes to this.
I'm just gonna make it clear that I don't agree with the points that were made about Bey & Jay being racist by using a faux-Royal Portrait of MM during their award acceptance speech. Disrespectful? Yes. Racist? No.
It did make me think about it possibly being shade thrown at MM, but I can't think of a reason why they'd do that. So for now it still appears as a pathetic and rude way to garner some attention for themselves.


----------



## Mrs.Z

kkfiregirl said:


> two black people chose to use a portrait of a black woman they admire (I assume) and because they didn’t use the photo of a more deserving (in your opinion) black woman, there are shades of racism?


Seriously...what?  Everything is not racist.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> it would make no sense to have a world famous couture designer make a gown for you and then to overrule them on the fit.....but anything is possible


I worked for a well known French designer. 
The women who could afford the brand do not care, they are a special breed and this was RTW.
 They will not listen to the designer nor the couturière who would do the alterations. After a while, you just go along as you want to keep your sanity.
Plus in the case of the Givenchy designer, it was a make it or break it moment, it was not her own  line so imho she had to tow the line,  few  have the fortitude to tell their clients, it simply does not work.
YSL would have mini breakdowns with some of his clients.....
Those clients are tough and the designers need them more than the clients need the designers....Especially nowadays...


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> It’s Meghan tho.... she may have thought she knew best... unfortunately we may never know.


unless the dress was widely criticized and the designer wants to talk about it some day


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> unless the dress was widely criticized and the designer wants to talk about it some day


No way


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> Interesting point, I hope you're right. It would be quite comical if that stunt by Bey & Jay was veiled shade towards MM


It sure is a bad portrait, imo.


Sol Ryan said:


> It’s Meghan tho.... she may have thought she knew best... unfortunately we may never know.


It's been said before--she seems to dress for the body she wants, not the one she has. Many people do this--yeah, I've done it too!

I have no doubt she knows what's best in MANY things. That has to be the explanation for so many ill-fitting outfits. Like that black dress with the sheer fabric on the shoulders and arms--it pulled and squished her. A size larger would have been perfect (imo), it was a lovely dress--just size it up!


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> It sure is a bad portrait, imo.
> 
> It's been said before--she seems to dress for the body she wants, not the one she has. Many people do this--yeah, I've done it too!
> 
> I have no doubt she knows what's best in MANY things. That has to be the explanation for so many ill-fitting outfits. Like that black dress with the sheer fabric on the shoulders and arms--it pulled and squished her. A size larger would have been perfect (imo), it was a lovely dress--just size it up!


I think that she has a stylist who just get stuff and does not get it altered. Possible resale?


----------



## sdkitty

had the tv on one of the entertainment news shows - probably Entertainment Tonight.  They were reporting the news about Meghan only wanting to work with A-list directors.  What hubris.  I hope they all ignore her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

I saw that too. All I thought was want A-List actor or director is going to want to work with her? Her marriage into the Royal family did nothing to improve her acting skills.


----------



## lalame

I wonder how much more mileage she can get from PR plays without actually getting high quality acting jobs? Philanthropy is cool and all but if that's all you do, that's not going to get you the fame or glam you want.


----------



## Grande Latte

sdkitty said:


> had the tv on one of the entertainment news shows - probably Entertainment Tonight.  They were reporting the news about Meghan only wanting to work with A-list directors.  What hubris.  I hope they all ignore her.



They will ignore her. Her personality is bigger than her acting skills, you don't want to put together a movie and have people say, "oh that's Megan", and forget they're even watching a movie.


----------



## Genie27

Grande Latte said:


> They will ignore her. Her personality is bigger than her acting skills, you don't want to put together a movie and have people say, "oh that's Megan", and forget they're even watching a movie.


I can see the credits and promos now:
“And the part of HRH Meghan, TDOS, the whip-smart, feisty, American Cable TV actress and suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal, who single handedly took on and modernized the fusty British Royal Family,  will be played by HFormerlyRH Meghan, TDOS, Global philanthropist, soap activist, cookbook foreword writer, magazine editor, calligrapher and feminist compelled  with a desire to do something of meaning.

Watch till the end for crazy credits: talking head cameos by A listers like George and Amal, Ellen D, Elton John, Oprah, Serena W and Prince Harry as they talk about meeting the humble duchess for the first time.

I laughed, I cried, I laughed some more.”


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> I wonder how much more mileage she can get from PR plays without actually getting high quality acting jobs? Philanthropy is cool and all but if that's all you do, that's not going to get you the fame or glam you want.



They’re not even doing anything. Just talking about it. Credibility dwindling!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought Meghan had a good style when they got engaged, but it went downhill really really fast after the wedding, and especially after the pregnancy.


----------



## Katel

Genie27 said:


> I can see the credits and promos now:
> “And the part of HRH Meghan, TDOS, the whip-smart, feisty, American Cable TV actress and suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal, who single handedly took on and modernized the fusty British Royal Family,  will be played by HFormerlyRH Meghan, TDOS, Global philanthropist, soap activist, cookbook foreword writer, magazine editor, calligrapher and feminist compelled  with a desire to do something of meaning.
> 
> Watch till the end for crazy credits: talking head cameos by A listers like George and Amal, Ellen D, Elton John, Oprah, Serena W and Prince Harry as they talk about meeting the humble duchess for the first time.
> 
> I laughed, I cried, I laughed some more.”



...
_“I laughed, I cried, I laughed some more.”_

hahaha! Don’t forget “Then I vomited. A lot.”


----------



## chowlover2

Her voice is like nails on a blackboard to me.


----------



## bellecate

chowlover2 said:


> Her voice is like nails on a blackboard to me.


She has an underlying whine to her voice. Drives me batty.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> She has an underlying whine to her voice. Drives me batty.


but she has so much to whine about.....no one asked her how she is feeling


----------



## mdcx

I tend to think M went nuts when she got access to the Royal clothing budget and just bought the most expensive things possible, regardless of fit/flattery.
We know she did that horrible Sayonara To Zara party, so it’s fair to say she’s all about statu$ brands, not actual style. Plenty of people wear chain store clothes and look well more stylish than M after all.
As for not doing alterations etc, I agree it is to either do returns or resale.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I tend to think M went nuts when she got access to the Royal clothing budget and just bought the most expensive things possible, regardless of fit/flattery.
> We know she did that horrible Sayonara To Zara party, so it’s fair to say she’s all about statu$ brands, not actual style. Plenty of people wear chain store clothes and look well more stylish than M after all.
> As for not doing alterations etc, I agree it is to either do returns or resale.[/QUOT
> I notice you said horrible sayonara to zara party.....to me it seems so patronizing


----------



## queennadine

limom said:


> At least Macron has impeccable taste, graduated from elite schools on his own merits and has natural subdued make up....
> The struggles of the gilets jaunes were front and center every week-ends for many, many months.
> Do you watch TV 5 monde or perhaps do you read Le Monde?
> If you did, you would know that the French do not yield to the whims of a mere president....
> And we do not have the Murdoch’s telling us what to think.



Impeccable taste and elite schools...that’s what MM thinks of herself too 

I’ll stop with the political talk and get back in topic. I’m admittedly hormonal and preggo-ragey today (picked a fight with my poor hubs too) so I’ll simmer down.

Wonder if we’ll get a big ‘Archie Turns 1 in Quarantine!’ story and pics.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> At least Macron has impeccable taste, graduated from elite schools on his own merits and has natural subdued make up....
> The struggles of the gilets jaunes were front and center every week-ends for many, many months.
> Do you watch TV 5 monde or perhaps do you read Le Monde?
> If you did, you would know that the French do not yield to the whims of a mere president....
> And we do not have the Murdoch’s telling us what to think.


Macrons subdued makeup is a bit boring! I personally like a bit of drama. Something in maybe the orange spectrum.


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> Impeccable taste and elite schools...that’s what MM thinks of herself too
> 
> I’ll stop with the political talk and get back in topic. I’m admittedly hormonal and preggo-ragey today (picked a fight with my poor hubs too) so I’ll simmer down.
> 
> Wonder if we’ll get a big ‘Archie Turns 1 in Quarantine!’ story and pics.


Yes, she obviously does but she did not truly go to the top institutions.  She reminds me of a former colleague who would hear some 'new' word (examples:  'holistic', 'value-add', etc.) .. and then just HAD to use it in practically every sentence even though many times the word didn't even fit!  A personal pet peeve of mine is when people either mispronounce words, the word (in fact) does not exist or worse .. when it's used incorrectly!  Meghan does this crap with her word-salad nonsense!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> Wonder if we’ll get a big ‘Archie Turns 1 in Quarantine!’ story and pics.



I don’t know about Archie’s birthday, but I bet we’ll get lots of 2nd anniversary in quarantine stories. Because they’ll want to remind everyone that they are so in love and oh so happy!


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to get $1M for tell-all interview?*
_




_

_Well, that’s one classy way to make money.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave reportedly been offered over $1 million to do a sit down, tell-all interview — not unlike the famous interview Princess Diana did with Martin Bashir decades ago.

The underemployed couple, who just moved to Los Angeles and are looking for work, is said to be in talks with several networks to feature their new life, their new home and get them back in the spotlight.

In January, it was reported Markle had been in talks with Oprah and Ellen Degeneres to do a tell-all interview — and some suggested it was a way to get what they wanted out of Megxit. Now that Megxit is official, the couple is desperate for cash. They’ve been touring multi-million dollar homes in Malibu and will be stuck with a security detail that costs over $2.5 million a year (although Prince Charles has said he will donate $2 million of that).

“Sources close to the Duchess revealed Oprah Winfrey is a favorite to quiz Meghan on her bombshell exit with Harry from ‘the Firm,'” according to the Daily Star.

Markle, who took a lot of flak for getting Harry to ditch England, thinks it will be a good way to win back public support and wants to “allow cameras to film their home and family life, and Harry is said to be giving ‘serious consideration’ to the proposal.”

“Meghan wants to donate all the money to charity – probably the NHS after the incredible efforts of all the frontline workers,” the source added. Although, it could be funneled into their new charity, Archewell, named after baby Archie.

“When she was part of the Royal Family, it would have been unthinkable for her to do a solo interview with anyone about her life and how being a princess has changed her world,” the source told the Star. “But now she’s very much her own boss and it has put her under pressure feeling that the public have lost their ‘love’ for her and Harry after they took the big step of going on their own”.

The move is apparently weighing on Harry. His biographer, Angela Levin — who spent over a year accompanying the royal on his engagements — has slammed the Prince’s recent behaviorand described the Prince as once being “charismatic, intuitive and quick-witted but also restless and trouble.”

Levin now categorizes the behavior of the Sussexes as “increasingly self-centered,” with their recent decision to decamp to Los Angeles as proof. “Their choice of priorities smacks more of spoilt defiant teenagers than adults in their mid and late-thirties,” says Levin. “I see a Harry who has turned sour, callous even and is obviously stressed.”

Since the move, Markle found work with Disney, doing the voice-over for the Mouse House’s doc, “Elephant” — a gig Harry got for her after pitching his wife’s talents to then-Disney boss Bob Iger during the Lion King premiere.

https://www.pagesix.com/2020/04/11/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-to-get-1-million-for-tell-all-interview/amp/_


----------



## lanasyogamama

The underemployed couple!!!!


----------



## queennadine

I would hope that Charles would quickly rescind that $2m if they do such an interview.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> The underemployed couple!!!!



Yep! They’re going to give an interview which will end up being a big ol’ pity party for themselves. Maybe all of those Americans who are newly unemployed during this crisis should stop selfishly thinking of themselves and offer all of their compassion (and stimulus checks) to Harry and Meghan.


----------



## jcnc

Question: now that couple are in LA, were they to grt divorced, would Meghan be in a better position than she would have been in UK (legally speaking)

just curious if her move was also a step towards dumping Harry


----------



## chloebagfreak

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to get $1M for tell-all interview?*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> _Well, that’s one classy way to make money.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave reportedly been offered over $1 million to do a sit down, tell-all interview — not unlike the famous interview Princess Diana did with Martin Bashir decades ago.
> 
> The underemployed couple, who just moved to Los Angeles and are looking for work, is said to be in talks with several networks to feature their new life, their new home and get them back in the spotlight.
> 
> In January, it was reported Markle had been in talks with Oprah and Ellen Degeneres to do a tell-all interview — and some suggested it was a way to get what they wanted out of Megxit. Now that Megxit is official, the couple is desperate for cash. They’ve been touring multi-million dollar homes in Malibu and will be stuck with a security detail that costs over $2.5 million a year (although Prince Charles has said he will donate $2 million of that).
> 
> “Sources close to the Duchess revealed Oprah Winfrey is a favorite to quiz Meghan on her bombshell exit with Harry from ‘the Firm,'” according to the Daily Star.
> 
> Markle, who took a lot of flak for getting Harry to ditch England, thinks it will be a good way to win back public support and wants to “allow cameras to film their home and family life, and Harry is said to be giving ‘serious consideration’ to the proposal.”
> 
> “Meghan wants to donate all the money to charity – probably the NHS after the incredible efforts of all the frontline workers,” the source added. Although, it could be funneled into their new charity, Archewell, named after baby Archie.
> 
> “When she was part of the Royal Family, it would have been unthinkable for her to do a solo interview with anyone about her life and how being a princess has changed her world,” the source told the Star. “But now she’s very much her own boss and it has put her under pressure feeling that the public have lost their ‘love’ for her and Harry after they took the big step of going on their own”.
> 
> The move is apparently weighing on Harry. His biographer, Angela Levin — who spent over a year accompanying the royal on his engagements — has slammed the Prince’s recent behaviorand described the Prince as once being “charismatic, intuitive and quick-witted but also restless and trouble.”
> 
> Levin now categorizes the behavior of the Sussexes as “increasingly self-centered,” with their recent decision to decamp to Los Angeles as proof. “Their choice of priorities smacks more of spoilt defiant teenagers than adults in their mid and late-thirties,” says Levin. “I see a Harry who has turned sour, callous even and is obviously stressed.”
> 
> Since the move, Markle found work with Disney, doing the voice-over for the Mouse House’s doc, “Elephant” — a gig Harry got for her after pitching his wife’s talents to then-Disney boss Bob Iger during the Lion King premiere.
> 
> https://www.pagesix.com/2020/04/11/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-to-get-1-million-for-tell-all-interview/amp/_



_“Well, that’s one classy way to make money.“_
Haha!  Great way to start the article!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to get $1M for tell-all interview?*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> _Well, that’s one classy way to make money.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave reportedly been offered over $1 million to do a sit down, tell-all interview — not unlike the famous interview Princess Diana did with Martin Bashir decades ago.
> 
> The underemployed couple, who just moved to Los Angeles and are looking for work, is said to be in talks with several networks to feature their new life, their new home and get them back in the spotlight.
> 
> In January, it was reported Markle had been in talks with Oprah and Ellen Degeneres to do a tell-all interview — and some suggested it was a way to get what they wanted out of Megxit. Now that Megxit is official, the couple is desperate for cash. They’ve been touring multi-million dollar homes in Malibu and will be stuck with a security detail that costs over $2.5 million a year (although Prince Charles has said he will donate $2 million of that).
> 
> “Sources close to the Duchess revealed Oprah Winfrey is a favorite to quiz Meghan on her bombshell exit with Harry from ‘the Firm,'” according to the Daily Star.
> 
> Markle, who took a lot of flak for getting Harry to ditch England, thinks it will be a good way to win back public support and wants to “allow cameras to film their home and family life, and Harry is said to be giving ‘serious consideration’ to the proposal.”
> 
> “Meghan wants to donate all the money to charity – probably the NHS after the incredible efforts of all the frontline workers,” the source added. Although, it could be funneled into their new charity, Archewell, named after baby Archie.
> 
> “When she was part of the Royal Family, it would have been unthinkable for her to do a solo interview with anyone about her life and how being a princess has changed her world,” the source told the Star. “But now she’s very much her own boss and it has put her under pressure feeling that the public have lost their ‘love’ for her and Harry after they took the big step of going on their own”.
> 
> The move is apparently weighing on Harry. His biographer, Angela Levin — who spent over a year accompanying the royal on his engagements — has slammed the Prince’s recent behaviorand described the Prince as once being “charismatic, intuitive and quick-witted but also restless and trouble.”
> 
> Levin now categorizes the behavior of the Sussexes as “increasingly self-centered,” with their recent decision to decamp to Los Angeles as proof. “Their choice of priorities smacks more of spoilt defiant teenagers than adults in their mid and late-thirties,” says Levin. “I see a Harry who has turned sour, callous even and is obviously stressed.”
> 
> Since the move, Markle found work with Disney, doing the voice-over for the Mouse House’s doc, “Elephant” — a gig Harry got for her after pitching his wife’s talents to then-Disney boss Bob Iger during the Lion King premiere.
> 
> https://www.pagesix.com/2020/04/11/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-to-get-1-million-for-tell-all-interview/amp/_


These two make me sick.  I wish he'd go back to the family and she would just go away and hide.  Such opportunists.


----------



## rose60610

A lousy million for THE Tell-ALL interview?  I think that's "desperate" in all CAPS.  

And...tell what exactly? 

That the world's most famous, revered and wealthy family welcomed her with open arms, gave her the 50 million dollar world televised wedding, supplied her with the most luxurious of homes/furnishings/wardrobe/servants/ travel/everything, etc?  Were they THIS horrible? 

Face it, early on she was embraced with highly popular opinion and favoritism. Even I thought she was OK and presented herself well overall at the time. 

So what does she do? Burn every bridge imaginable. Including getting Harry to move to L.A. 

So what is she going to say? That the 93 year old queen didn't kiss her feet nearly enough? That Charles didn't replace Camilla with HER? That Queen Elizabeth didn't just hand over her crown and say "Here, run with it"? That she wasn't given all the Crown jewels so she could auction or pawn them off? Or that she was simply unhappy and no one cared (because they were exhausted at trying to make her happy). 

If MM bad mouths the Monarchy, she'll have a good number of detractors demanding proof or at the very least cross examining her supposed witnesses to whatever. I'll assume that her most vicious accusations will be of the "they said/she said" nature.  

This could well be the straw that breaks Harry's back. Or forces him to defend her in which case he incinerates the offer of returning to the Crown. If Harry confirms or even avoids contradicting anything negative MM says, he will be a Royal-Non-Grata.


----------



## Annawakes

Well, ***of course** all the proceeds from their tell-all interview will be donated to the Archewell foundation charity.  They started it so all of their “earnings” can go there and they can insist that every penny “earned” was donated.  Yuck yuck yuck.

I’m still unclear what charitable causes Archewell is supposed to support?


----------



## threadbender

Annawakes said:


> Well, ***of course** all the proceeds from their tell-all interview will be donated to the Archewell foundation charity.  They started it so all of their “earnings” can go there and they can insist that every penny “earned” was donated.  Yuck yuck yuck.
> 
> I’m still unclear what charitable causes Archewell is supposed to support?


Not sure but it seems that a lot of youtube videos are getting extra hits! lol There are some clever folks out there who grabbed some domains.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> I tend to think M went nuts when she got access to the Royal clothing budget and just bought the most expensive things possible, regardless of fit/flattery.



I was thinking about that the other day. Charles gives both sons about 2 millions a year for their living expenses, yet MM blew 1 million in 9 months or so on clothes. I guess he gave an extra allowance to set her up (as well as paying for the wedding reception and the furnishing of Frogmore). Wouldn't a normal person try to be ressourceful instead of going all out and buying 90000 pounds couture pregnancy kaftans that were worn for two hours? I'd be so ashamed greedily amassing stuff like she did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

queennadine said:


> I would hope that Charles would quickly rescind that $2m if they do such an interview.


So he's giving them now double of what the Cambridges - after all two heirs to the throne - get?


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know about Archie’s birthday, but I bet *we’ll get lots of 2nd anniversary in quarantine stories*. Because they’ll want to remind everyone that they are so in love and oh so happy!



Spot on 100%. Remember this couple released an announcement to mark the *2nd Anniversary of their Engagement Announcement*. Not their engagement, or their anniversary, but the _announcement of their engagement_.

Even if things were going well, they’d milk any good PR opportunity, but right now, their faux-fairytale lovestory is the only angle they can push to justify Megxit, since the backlash on their current approach— “we left to do big, meaningful things, but we don’t know what they are yet...we’re going to educate you about something.”  So they’ll go back to the martyr approach— H chose love & must protect M & Archie from the her original family, plus “the fam she never had” aka the BRF, and the press, and the UK, and Canada etc.

M’s “speech” at JP Morgan was to introduce Harry by talking about how much she loved her husband. They have to bank (literally) on that in the future, so expect an ode to their love on their anniversary. Btw it’s amusing how attached she still is to her British titles after spending the last 6 months of her <2yr marriage in North America, where titles aren’t recognized + going to Sussex once + living with Just-call-me-Harry-but-pay-for-my-security-cuz-Im-number-six.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to get $1M for tell-all interview?*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> _Well, that’s one classy way to make money.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave reportedly been offered over $1 million to do a sit down, tell-all interview — not unlike the famous interview Princess Diana did with Martin Bashir decades ago.
> 
> The underemployed couple, who just moved to Los Angeles and are looking for work, is said to be in talks with several networks to feature their new life, their new home and get them back in the spotlight.
> 
> In January, it was reported Markle had been in talks with Oprah and Ellen Degeneres to do a tell-all interview — and some suggested it was a way to get what they wanted out of Megxit. Now that Megxit is official, the couple is desperate for cash. They’ve been touring multi-million dollar homes in Malibu and will be stuck with a security detail that costs over $2.5 million a year (although Prince Charles has said he will donate $2 million of that).
> 
> “Sources close to the Duchess revealed Oprah Winfrey is a favorite to quiz Meghan on her bombshell exit with Harry from ‘the Firm,'” according to the Daily Star.
> 
> Markle, who took a lot of flak for getting Harry to ditch England, thinks it will be a good way to win back public support and wants to “allow cameras to film their home and family life, and Harry is said to be giving ‘serious consideration’ to the proposal.”
> 
> “Meghan wants to donate all the money to charity – probably the NHS after the incredible efforts of all the frontline workers,” the source added. Although, it could be funneled into their new charity, Archewell, named after baby Archie.
> 
> “When she was part of the Royal Family, it would have been unthinkable for her to do a solo interview with anyone about her life and how being a princess has changed her world,” the source told the Star. “But now she’s very much her own boss and it has put her under pressure feeling that the public have lost their ‘love’ for her and Harry after they took the big step of going on their own”.
> 
> The move is apparently weighing on Harry. His biographer, Angela Levin — who spent over a year accompanying the royal on his engagements — has slammed the Prince’s recent behaviorand described the Prince as once being “charismatic, intuitive and quick-witted but also restless and trouble.”
> 
> Levin now categorizes the behavior of the Sussexes as “increasingly self-centered,” with their recent decision to decamp to Los Angeles as proof. “Their choice of priorities smacks more of spoilt defiant teenagers than adults in their mid and late-thirties,” says Levin. “I see a Harry who has turned sour, callous even and is obviously stressed.”
> 
> Since the move, Markle found work with Disney, doing the voice-over for the Mouse House’s doc, “Elephant” — a gig Harry got for her after pitching his wife’s talents to then-Disney boss Bob Iger during the Lion King premiere.
> 
> https://www.pagesix.com/2020/04/11/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-to-get-1-million-for-tell-all-interview/amp/_


It was only a matter of time.  Disappointingly cheap and tacky all the same.  And it’s not actually that much money - it’s not going to last very long the way they haemorrhage cash.  Huge misjudgement IMO, I mean who isn’t going to look at them and think “what exactly have you got to moan about?” and the timing is woeful.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was thinking about that the other day. Charles gives both sons about 2 millions a year for their living expenses, yet MM blew 1 million in 9 months or so on clothes. I guess he gave an extra allowance to set her up (as well as paying for the wedding reception and the furnishing of Frogmore). Wouldn't a normal person try to be ressourceful instead of going all out and buying 90000 pounds couture pregnancy kaftans that were worn for two hours? I'd be so ashamed greedily amassing stuff like she did.


She thought she’d hit the jackpot.  Your average crackpot dictator shows more restraint than MM when it comes to splashing other people’s cash about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Compass Rose

Well...a million bucks will pay for 6 months of security, so...I'm sure they are fine with it.


----------



## Suncatcher

$1 million does not go far at all given that a portion goes to taxes, and then they have to pay agent and legal fees (among other fees). The net amount may be a good payday for many, but for them that kind of money will not go far when there are so many other lifestyle expenses to consider.  Also, a tell all interview is a one trick pony; you can only tell all once. It would be far more lucrative for Meghan and Harry to trade on (sell) talent, which neither of them have. (The elephants documentary review were tepid, to be overly generous.) Their are desperate for money, which makes them no different as D list reality actors trying to trade off of their 5 seconds of fame. Their mercenary nature is so unregal. Talk about a class study in how to royally bungle an exit, pun intended. It didn’t have to be this way.


----------



## Grande Latte

MrsJDS said:


> $1 million does not go far at all given that a portion goes to taxes, and then they have to pay agent and legal fees (among other fees). The net amount may be a good payday for many, but for them that kind of money will not go far when there are so many other lifestyle expenses to consider.  Also, a tell all interview is a one trick pony; you can only tell all once. It would be far more lucrative for Meghan and Harry to trade on (sell) talent, which neither of them have. (The elephants documentary review were tepid, to be overly generous.) Their are desperate for money, which makes them no different as D list reality actors trying to trade off of their 5 seconds of fame. Their mercenary nature is so unregal. Talk about a class study in how to royally bungle an exit, pun intended. It didn’t have to be this way.



You put my rambling thoughts together so well. After all, after all the taxes/ expenses, there's really not much left (for their kind of lifestyle). There was no need to break from the BRF in the first place. Megan is too greedy, her mercenary nature too transparent. These two makes me vomit.

There's a Wallis Simpson/ Edward interview I came across on YouTube. Edward VIII looked absolutely defeated, destroyed by this domineering woman, Harry will look the same in the very near future.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If MM bad mouths the Monarchy, she'll have a good number of detractors demanding proof or at the very least cross examining her supposed witnesses to whatever. I'll assume that her most vicious accusations will be of the "they said/she said" nature.
> 
> This could well be the straw that breaks Harry's back. Or forces him to defend her in which case he incinerates the offer of returning to the Crown. If Harry confirms or even avoids contradicting anything negative MM says, he will be a Royal-Non-Grata.



They won’t come right out and bad mouth the monarchy in the interview. They’ll leave that to the media and their fans to interpret from what they say.

They have both acted like professional victims so far and that’s the playbook they will follow. They will say how important it is to protect their family (of three) and how leaving was their only option. They will absolutely not elaborate on why that had to be. Meghan will tear up at least once as she describes how hard it was and Harry will sit there looking stoic and lifeless. It will get great ratings because who doesn’t love a train wreck?


----------



## jcnc

Grande Latte said:


> You put my rambling thoughts together so well. After all, after all the taxes/ expenses, there's really not much left (for their kind of lifestyle). There was no need to break from the BRF in the first place. Megan is too greedy, her mercenary nature too transparent. These two makes me vomit.
> 
> There's a Wallis Simpson/ Edward interview I came across on YouTube. Edward VIII looked absolutely defeated, destroyed by this domineering woman, Harry will look the same in the very near future.




looks like American brides aren’t the best match for the British royals!


----------



## CeeJay

Okay .. so (_and my opinion_), I'm not sure Oprah will want to touch this interview, because .. let's face it, Oprah does like to be thought of in a positive light and this could really backlash on her .. especially if the two of them come off as "woe is me" (_which I think we all know Meghan will likely do_).  So, I think it would be more likely to be Ellen, but again .. think about it, Ellen built her career on being a comedian, not a hard-hitting Journalist, so I can't see her questions being more than just "_how's the doggie_"?  

The other person who might potentially be in line for this would be Gayle King.  She is actually more of a Journalist than Oprah, and then Oprah wouldn't get her hands dirty.  However, Gayle just might ask some tough questions (_which personally - I would love to see_)!  This is where you have to ask the question .. *who the heck are their PR people*?????  Do they really think that this type of interview would go down well (_yes - agree that it will likely have high ratings since people will want to watch it_)?!?!  This could also be the nail in the coffin for these 2, especially if they go about bashing any of the Royal Family members.  Will it be more like "_oh - those horrible media people in the UK_ ...", that may go down a little bit better, but they have yet to experience the negative press that they can get here in the US and when the US media wants to 'nail you', they can be just as brutal if not worse!  

Overall, I am *THOROUGHLY disgusted* by these two .. and HA-HA-HA to the $1m, that's like pennies on the dollar out here in California!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. so (_and my opinion_), I'm not sure Oprah will want to touch this interview, because .. let's face it, Oprah does like to be thought of in a positive light and this could really backlash on her .. especially if the two of them come off as "woe is me" (_which I think we all know Meghan will likely do_).  So, I think it would be more likely to be Ellen, but again .. think about it, Ellen built her career on being a comedian, not a hard-hitting Journalist, so I can't see her questions being more than just "_how's the doggie_"?
> 
> The other person who might potentially be in line for this would be Gayle King.  She is actually more of a Journalist than Oprah, and then Oprah wouldn't get her hands dirty.  However, Gayle just might ask some tough questions (_which personally - I would love to see_)!  This is where you have to ask the question .. *who the heck are their PR people*?????  Do they really think that this type of interview would go down well (_yes - agree that it will likely have high ratings since people will want to watch it_)?!?!  This could also be the nail in the coffin for these 2, especially if they go about bashing any of the Royal Family members.  Will it be more like "_oh - those horrible media people in the UK_ ...", that may go down a little bit better, but they have yet to experience the negative press that they can get here in the US and when the US media wants to 'nail you', they can be just as brutal if not worse!
> 
> Overall, I am *THOROUGHLY disgusted* by these two .. and HA-HA-HA to the $1m, that's like pennies on the dollar out here in California!


I agree Gayle King would be in the running for this and would make it seem more serious than doing an interview with Ellen.  I hope you're right that Gayle might ask some tough questions but IDK - she was on the "friends" list.  She would likely have to weigh that against her inegrity as a journalist.  And would they insist on limiting the questions?


----------



## Mrs.Z

It’s going to backfire on them.  They will have a captive audience stuck at home but you know there will be a little pity party and people just aren’t going to have it right now.


----------



## queennadine

I’d love to do the interview. I used to question people, especially parents, who made bad decisions for a living. 

Hey MM, if you’re here: I’ll even do the interview for free!


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to get $1M for tell-all interview?*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> _Well, that’s one classy way to make money.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave reportedly been offered over $1 million to do a sit down, tell-all interview — not unlike the famous interview Princess Diana did with Martin Bashir decades ago.
> 
> The underemployed couple, who just moved to Los Angeles and are looking for work, is said to be in talks with several networks to feature their new life, their new home and get them back in the spotlight.
> 
> In January, it was reported Markle had been in talks with Oprah and Ellen Degeneres to do a tell-all interview — and some suggested it was a way to get what they wanted out of Megxit. Now that Megxit is official, the couple is desperate for cash. They’ve been touring multi-million dollar homes in Malibu and will be stuck with a security detail that costs over $2.5 million a year (although Prince Charles has said he will donate $2 million of that).
> 
> “Sources close to the Duchess revealed Oprah Winfrey is a favorite to quiz Meghan on her bombshell exit with Harry from ‘the Firm,'” according to the Daily Star.
> 
> Markle, who took a lot of flak for getting Harry to ditch England, thinks it will be a good way to win back public support and wants to “allow cameras to film their home and family life, and Harry is said to be giving ‘serious consideration’ to the proposal.”
> 
> “Meghan wants to donate all the money to charity – probably the NHS after the incredible efforts of all the frontline workers,” the source added. Although, it could be funneled into their new charity, Archewell, named after baby Archie.
> 
> “When she was part of the Royal Family, it would have been unthinkable for her to do a solo interview with anyone about her life and how being a princess has changed her world,” the source told the Star. “But now she’s very much her own boss and it has put her under pressure feeling that the public have lost their ‘love’ for her and Harry after they took the big step of going on their own”.
> 
> The move is apparently weighing on Harry. His biographer, Angela Levin — who spent over a year accompanying the royal on his engagements — has slammed the Prince’s recent behaviorand described the Prince as once being “charismatic, intuitive and quick-witted but also restless and trouble.”
> 
> Levin now categorizes the behavior of the Sussexes as “increasingly self-centered,” with their recent decision to decamp to Los Angeles as proof. “Their choice of priorities smacks more of spoilt defiant teenagers than adults in their mid and late-thirties,” says Levin. “I see a Harry who has turned sour, callous even and is obviously stressed.”
> 
> Since the move, Markle found work with Disney, doing the voice-over for the Mouse House’s doc, “Elephant” — a gig Harry got for her after pitching his wife’s talents to then-Disney boss Bob Iger during the Lion King premiere.
> 
> https://www.pagesix.com/2020/04/11/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-to-get-1-million-for-tell-all-interview/amp/_



Sure, make a charity, so you can donate most of your money to your own charity.   This is the beginning of reality tv for these two... it’s ridiculous and sadly some people will find interest in it.  There is a demographic for this kind of reality show...


----------



## CeeJay

queennadine said:


> I’d love to do the interview. I used to question people, especially parents, who made bad decisions for a living.
> 
> Hey MM, if you’re here: I’ll even do the interview for free!


HA!!! .. me too, I'm very much a facts & figures type of person, so you better be able to back up your comments WITH FACTS!!!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I agree Gayle King would be in the running for this and would make it seem more serious than doing an interview with Ellen.  I hope you're right that Gayle might ask some tough questions but IDK - she was on the "friends" list.  She would likely have to weigh that against her integrity as a journalist.  And would they insist on limiting the questions?


True, true .. BUT, it took Gayle some time (_and yes - certainly help from Oprah_) to get the position she has now.  In my opinion, if she goes easy on them, she will be called out for it.  I don't think she would go in on them like she has with some other interviews, but I think she would have to ask SOME tough questions.  What will be interesting, is the behavior of these two grifters .. will Meghan pull her "_I'm not okay ._." routine?? .. but I think Harry will be the more interesting person to watch; will he become petulant if asked a tough question or something he doesn't like .. but then again, *WHAT AM I THINKING???* .. Meghan will likely be the one who talks, not Hazza!!!


----------



## youngster

Like @MrsJDS said above, you can "tell all only once".  So, one million minus all the agent fees and taxes, is not that much.  Not the way they want to live.  They also can't say anything bad about Charles or the Queen since that is where their money is coming from.  I don't think even the two of them are stupid enough to bite the hand that is presently feeding them between 2 - 5 million GBP annually.  They might have done so, if they had all kinds of work and speeches lined up and were feeling confident and full of themselves. Alas, they likely are finally coming to grips with reality and that they ran away from the UK during a dark time to sit on a beach while trying to figure out how to profit from their association with the family and country that they (meaning Meghan) dislikes.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> True, true .. BUT, it took Gayle some time (_and yes - certainly help from Oprah_) to get the position she has now.  In my opinion, if she goes easy on them, she will be called out for it.  I don't think she would go in on them like she has with some other interviews, but I think she would have to ask SOME tough questions.  What will be interesting, is the behavior of these two grifters .. will Meghan pull her "_I'm not okay ._." routine?? .. but I think Harry will be the more interesting person to watch; will he become petulant if asked a tough question or something he doesn't like .. but then again, *WHAT AM I THINKING???* .. Meghan will likely be the one who talks, not Hazza!!!


I suspect you're right - she would do most of the talking.  and then he would have to cry again about how he has to protect his wife from the fate of his mother.  I had great sympathy for him re Diana but he's maybe milking it a bit too much for my taste.  As I've said before, there were other factors that contributed to her death.  Mainly having a drunk limo driver and then also not using a seatbelt.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I suspect you're right - she would do most of the talking.  and then he would have to cry again about how he has to protect his wife from the fate of his mother.  I had great sympathy for him re Diana but he's maybe milking it a bit too much for my taste.  As I've said before, there were other factors that contributed to her death.  Mainly having a drunk limo driver and then also not using a seatbelt.



I might be dim myself, but I do not understand how Meghan or Archie is at all at risk of suffering the same fate as Diana. Makes no sense to me and I don't get how Harry has linked this all in his mind.  There are laws now in the UK regarding the paparazzi.  Even if there weren't, they could easily avoid them by living at the Frogmore cottage or some other country home. (Of course, as you said, Diana would still be alive if her driver hadn't been impaired, if she'd been wearing a seat belt, and if they hadn't been speeding.)  Odds of this set of circumstances happening to either MM or the baby?  Pretty much zero.  

Even if Harry does fear they will be pursued to the ends of the earth by the paps, why oh why, do you move to Paparazzi Central in L.A. where there are no laws about this whatsoever?  Seems more like a convenient excuse to ditch the UK that he thought people might accept if they didn't look too deeply.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> I might be dim myself, but I do not understand how Meghan or Archie is at all at risk of suffering the same fate as Diana. Makes no sense to me and I don't get how Harry has linked this all in his mind.  There are laws now in the UK regarding the paparazzi.  Even if there weren't, they could easily avoid them by living at the Frogmore cottage or some other country home. (Of course, as you said, Diana would still be alive if her driver hadn't been impaired, if she'd been wearing a seat belt, and if they hadn't been speeding.)  Odds of this set of circumstances happening to either MM or the baby?  Pretty much zero.
> 
> Even if Harry does fear they will be pursued to the ends of the earth by the paps, why oh why, do you move to Paparazzi Central in L.A. where there are no laws about this whatsoever?  Seems more like a convenient excuse to ditch the UK that he thought people might accept if they didn't look too deeply.


I don't understand it, for the same reasons you've given. The safest place for them, paparazzi wise, is here in the UK.
The fact of the matter is, Meghan couldn't handle all the rules and protocols of being a fairly senior member of the Royal family and all it entails. She didn't like being guided (told) what to do and what is expected of her.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't understand it, for the same reasons you've given. The safest place for them, paparazzi wise, is here in the UK.
> The fact of the matter is, Meghan couldn't handle all the rules and protocols of being a fairly senior member of the Royal family and all it entails. She didn't like being guided (told) what to do and what is expected of her.


and his their big gripe about the media seemed to be racisism or general cruelty - not stalking or chasing.  so how does this correlate with Diana's death?


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't understand it, for the same reasons you've given. The safest place for them, paparazzi wise, is here in the UK.
> The fact of the matter is, Meghan couldn't handle all the rules and protocols of being a fairly senior member of the Royal family and all it entails. *She didn't like being guided (told) what to do and what is expected of her.*


*NAILED IT - 100%!!!!! * 

Personally, I think she has bamboozled Harry into "thinking" that she is in the same position as Diana, and sadly .. we all know that that is a huge touch-button for Hazza.  It's probably the best acting she's done in her entire career, but it's really eff'ing with someone else who truly doesn't deserve it.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't understand it, for the same reasons you've given. The safest place for them, paparazzi wise, is here in the UK.
> The fact of the matter is, Meghan couldn't handle all the rules and protocols of being a fairly senior member of the Royal family and all it entails. She didn't like being guided (told) what to do and what is expected of her.


Agree - M did not like the rules eg curtsy, hats, staying in the correct order ie the rules and protocols, by ignoring them she exposed herself to unkind comments, boo hoo
As for paparazzi, the UK has it under control for the royals but heck anyone in Los Angeles is snapped going to convenience store for gas, church, the market with the kids (who are off limits to me but not to photogs) or as you stumble off a plane jet lagged be it commercial or private
Hello it is full hair and makeup now 24/7


----------



## CeeJay

Well, the other thing is .. if they move into one of the Malibu enclaves, you have to HAVE THE ACCESS to get in and unless there is a Papparazzi who has access, then it's going to be virtually impossible for them to get any pictures!  So, that means that the only time pics could be taken are when the two of them go to an Event (like - the Oscars, Emmy's, etc.) .. and if they biatch about that, then they are both NUTZ!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, the other thing is .. if they move into one of the Malibu enclaves, you have to HAVE THE ACCESS to get in and unless there is a Papparazzi who has access, then it's going to be virtually impossible for them to get any pictures!  So, that means that the only time pics could be taken are when the two of them go to an Event (like - the Oscars, Emmy's, etc.) .. and if they biatch about that, then they are both NUTZ!!!


don't we see pics of celebs going grocery shopping a lot?  not sure if these two would do their own shopping but they might if they thought it would make them seem more likable


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> The other person who might potentially be in line for this would be Gayle King.  She is actually more of a Journalist than Oprah, and then Oprah wouldn't get her hands dirty.  However, Gayle just might ask some tough questions (_which personally - I would love to see_)!  This is where you have to ask the question .. *who the heck are their PR people*?????  Do they really think that this type of interview would go down well (_yes - agree that it will likely have high ratings since people will want to watch it_)?!?!  This could also be the nail in the coffin for these 2, especially if they go about bashing any of the Royal Family members.  Will it be more like "_oh - those horrible media people in the UK_ ...", that may go down a little bit better, but they have yet to experience the negative press that they can get here in the US and when the US media wants to 'nail you', they can be just as brutal if not worse!
> 
> Overall, I am *THOROUGHLY disgusted* by these two .. and HA-HA-HA to the $1m, that's like pennies on the dollar out here in California!





sdkitty said:


> I agree Gayle King would be in the running for this and would make it seem more serious than doing an interview with Ellen.  I hope you're right that Gayle might ask some tough questions but IDK - she was on the "friends" list.  She would likely have to weigh that against her inegrity as a journalist.  And would they insist on limiting the questions?



I have to disagree with Gayle King potentially giving a challenging  interview. Gayle got horribly burned only two months ago by daring to bring up Kobe Bryant’s rape allegations after he died.   After getting several death threats she has learned her lesson. She is not going to touch anything remotely controversial (i.e. unpopular) ever again.

At the beginning of the year the  mainstream US media declared Harry and Meghan left the royal family due to racism. That’s the story the media here is happy with and none of them are going to change that narrative and possibly be accused of being racist, or at least bullying, themselves. Finding out the truth about Meghan and Harry is not worth any potential backlash. Whoever does the interview will keep it nice and uplifting. No hard questions!


----------



## wisconsin

jcnc said:


> looks like American brides aren’t the best match for the British royals!




I am amazed that the women here being mostly American, do not support Meghans behavior.
That gives me faith that the stereotypes of American women that some cultures have is not  valid.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I have to disagree with Gayle King potentially giving a challenging  interview. Gayle got horribly burned only two months ago by daring to bring up Kobe Bryant’s rape allegations after he died.   After getting several death threats she has learned her lesson. She is not going to touch anything remotely controversial (i.e. unpopular) ever again.
> 
> At the beginning of the year the  mainstream US media declared Harry and Meghan left the royal family due to racism. That’s the story the media here is happy with and none of them are going to change that narrative and possibly be accused of being racist, or at least bullying, themselves. Finding out the truth about Meghan and Harry is not worth any potential backlash. Whoever does the interview will keep it nice and uplifting. No hard questions!


Yes, that was not the best for her to do, BUT .. I'm not so sure that H&M are truly that popular here in the US.  Heck, I can't even count on one hand how many people ever watched her in Suits, so I don't think that she was as "well-known" as the media likes to portray her.  Yes, right now .. she's got her PR people pumping out all "good" stuff about them in People Magazine and some of the other ones, but things can turn on a dime .. and from what I saw in the Grocery yesterday, not all the Pap magazines are fans (especially of her)!  They have continually had DEAF ears in regards to COVID-19 and so any whining about money from them .. in my opinion, will NOT garner any sympathy from the majority of folks especially those who have lost their jobs!  They need to tread very carefully with this and again, heck -- $1m gets you not much out here and as someone else noted, that's gross, not what they would actually take home.  Try finding a less than $500k house out here .. it will essentially be a shack!


----------



## Tootsie17

youngster said:


> I might be dim myself, but I do not understand how Meghan or Archie is at all at risk of suffering the same fate as Diana. Makes no sense to me and I don't get how Harry has linked this all in his mind.  There are laws now in the UK regarding the paparazzi.  Even if there weren't, they could easily avoid them by living at the Frogmore cottage or some other country home. (Of course, as you said, Diana would still be alive if her driver hadn't been impaired, if she'd been wearing a seat belt, and if they hadn't been speeding.)  Odds of this set of circumstances happening to either MM or the baby?  Pretty much zero.
> 
> Even if Harry does fear they will be pursued to the ends of the earth by the paps, why oh why, do you move to Paparazzi Central in L.A. where there are no laws about this whatsoever?  Seems more like a convenient excuse to ditch the UK that he thought people might accept if they didn't look too deeply.



My thoughts exactly, but you said it better than I could have.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, that was not the best for her to do, BUT .. I'm not so sure that H&M are truly that popular here in the US.  Heck, I can't even count on one hand how many people ever watched her in Suits, so I don't think that she was as "well-known" as the media likes to portray her.  Yes, right now .. she's got her PR people pumping out all "good" stuff about them in People Magazine and some of the other ones, but things can turn on a dime .. and from what I saw in the Grocery yesterday, not all the Pap magazines are fans (especially of her)!  They have continually had DEAF ears in regards to COVID-19 and so any whining about money from them .. in my opinion, will NOT garner any sympathy from the majority of folks especially those who have lost their jobs!  They need to tread very carefully with this and again, heck -- $1m gets you not much out here and as someone else noted, that's gross, not what they would actually take home.  Try finding a less than $500k house out here .. it will essentially be a shack!


here in SD $500K barely gets you a tract home eight ft from the neighbor


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't understand it, for the same reasons you've given. The safest place for them, paparazzi wise, is here in the UK.
> The fact of the matter is, *Meghan couldn't handle all the rules and protocols of being a fairly senior member of the Royal family and all it entails.* *She didn't like being guided (told) what to do and what is expected of her*.



I completely agree.  When they got engaged, and then were newly married, a lot of people (myself included) thought that Meghan was smart enough to realize that her acting career was likely going nowhere.  She'd hit the wall in Hollywood.  TV actresses hardly ever make the jump to films.  Her career was only going back to the never ending round of auditions and rejections and occasional guest parts or supporting roles.  Marrying Harry gave her financial security and a level of permanent fame and press coverage that she would otherwise never have achieved. I figured she'd be thrilled and throw herself into the new life with enthusiasm.  Clearly, not the case, she couldn't handle it, couldn't handle not being the center of attention or doing exactly what she wanted.  So, she ends up markle-ing the entire BRF, except Harry, and I'm pretty sure she would have markled him too and taken Archie with her (and the sizeable child support payments) if he didn't fall in line and go with her.  Hence, the made up excuses of why they left.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I completely agree.  When they got engaged, and then were newly married, a lot of people (myself included) thought that Meghan was smart enough to realize that her acting career was likely going nowhere.  She'd hit the wall in Hollywood.  TV actresses hardly ever make the jump to films.  Her career was only going back to the never ending round of auditions and rejections and occasional guest parts or supporting roles.  Marrying Harry gave her financial security and a level of permanent fame and press coverage that she would otherwise never have achieved. I figured she'd be thrilled and throw herself into the new life with enthusiasm.  Clearly, not the case, she couldn't handle it, couldn't handle not being the center of attention or doing exactly what she wanted.  So, she ends up markle-ing the entire BRF, except Harry, and I'm pretty sure she would have markled him too and taken Archie with her (and the sizeable child support payments) if he didn't fall in line and go with her.  Hence, the made up excuses of why they left.


Having read this some time back, I recall an article from a markle'd (former) friend of Meghan's who very specifically said that Meghan made it very clear to her friends that she wanted to find & marry a British guy with very good financial means.  Of course, when she got hooked up with Harry, she made sure (persistent) that he would marry her .. and when her friend remarked "you don't really know what you are getting into", that's when Meghan told her that she didn't care .. that she would do ANYTHING to have Harry propose to her and then, of course, she markle'd her friend.  I'm going to have to look for that article again ..


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I might be dim myself, but I do not understand how Meghan or Archie is at all at risk of suffering the same fate as Diana. Makes no sense to me and I don't get how Harry has linked this all in his mind.  There are laws now in the UK regarding the paparazzi.  Even if there weren't, they could easily avoid them by living at the Frogmore cottage or some other country home. (Of course, as you said, Diana would still be alive if her driver hadn't been impaired, if she'd been wearing a seat belt, and if they hadn't been speeding.)  Odds of this set of circumstances happening to either MM or the baby?  Pretty much zero.
> 
> Even if Harry does fear they will be pursued to the ends of the earth by the paps, why oh why, do you move to Paparazzi Central in L.A. where there are no laws about this whatsoever?  Seems more like a convenient excuse to ditch the UK that he thought people might accept if they didn't look too deeply.



I could see the paparazzi danger, because they could follow them around while they travel and etc. just like with Diana. I totally "got" their decision in the beginning because this made sense to me. But that was when I thought leaving the royal family = living a quiet life out of the public eye. 

Since then, they've done pap walks, given big paid speeches, kept up their social media, done freakin Disney movies, and moved to paparazzi central.  So obviously their reason was just an easy out - and quite offensive actually considering the very real danger Diana was in.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I could see the paparazzi danger, because they could follow them around while they travel and etc. just like with Diana. I totally "got" their decision in the beginning because this made sense to me. But that was when I thought leaving the royal family = living a quiet life out of the public eye.
> 
> Since then, they've done pap walks, given big paid speeches, kept up their social media, done freakin Disney movies, and moved to paparazzi central.  So obviously their reason was just an easy out - and quite offensive actually considering the very real danger Diana was in.


I would suspect, that after Diana's tragedy, the BRF firmed up their security .. so, that's what I totally DO NOT GET with the 2 of them saying that they were 'afraid', especially if they were living at Frogmore!  Now, they HAVE put themselves on the front-line, and for sure, Papparazzi could wait outside the gates of their Malibu enclave and then chase them down the PCH or whatever (obviously, the Paps would need to know the car that they drive!).  I doubt very much that we will see any pap shots of either of them going to the Grocery store in the Malibu area; rarely do we see pap shots of any of the celebs up there (exception = Caitlin Jenner when she has gone out to Starbucks).  Most of the celebs that get the pap shots at the grocery store live either in BH or the West Side.  Heck, I've seen plenty of celebs at one  of our favorite Deli's in Beverly Glen, and most of the folks don't bother them one bit (I don't, although sometimes I may sneak a pic)!  

All that being said,  I think I mentioned this before but one time .. some paps thought my husband was on that TV Show "The Office" and all of a sudden we were SURROUNDED .. and let me tell you, that WAS NOT FUN .. scare the bejezus out of me!!!  However, H&M are going to have "security" remember, so I really don't think they will ever have that type of episode.  

Personally, I still think Meghan is playing Hazza, with this "I'm not safe" BS.  She sure as heck made sure she was hobnobbing around before him, and let's face it .. she LOVES that camera, so I'm just NOT buying  this crap!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I could see the paparazzi danger, because they could follow them around while they travel and etc. just like with Diana. I totally "got" their decision in the beginning because this made sense to me. But that was when I thought leaving the royal family = living a quiet life out of the public eye.



if they really wanted to live a quiet, private life, they'd be in the UK tucked away in their Frogmore Cottage or in another country estate.  Charles would have bought them one, somewhere peaceful and beautiful.  Meghan could have stayed home and done the occasional appearance while Harry kept on as normal.  Archie would have been totally protected and they could have had as much privacy as they wanted.  (You hardly ever see pics of George or Charlotte or Louis unless they are released officially and a lot of the pics are taken by Kate herself)   But, that wasn't what Meghan wanted, she wanted a ticket to the A list and the Met Gala and the Oscars and a billion dollar lifestyle, so there they are in L.A.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> All that being said,  I think I mentioned this before but one time .. some paps thought my husband was on that TV Show "The Office" and all of a sudden we were SURROUNDED .. and let me tell you, that WAS NOT FUN .. scare the bejezus out of me!!!  However, H&M are going to have "security" remember, so I really don't think they will ever have that type of episode.
> 
> Personally, I still think Meghan is playing Hazza, with this "I'm not safe" BS.  She sure as heck made sure she was hobnobbing around before him, and let's face it .. she LOVES that camera, so I'm just NOT buying  this crap!



I don't think it's fun for anyone to get caught up in that, whether you have security or not. I've seen paps swarm around celebs on the street and it was obviously very uncomfortable for everyone. But like you said, it's about choices... people who don't want that will take active steps not to live in certain areas or go to certain places. I might have some more respect for H+M if I never saw them caught up in pap moments but we'll see.... if they "followed" her to the damn woods then something's wrong if they can't get to her in LA and I'm sure she'd be aware of that inconsistency...


----------



## Tootsie17

youngster said:


> I completely agree.  When they got engaged, and then were newly married, a lot of people (myself included) thought that Meghan was smart enough to realize that her acting career was likely going nowhere.  She'd hit the wall in Hollywood.  TV actresses hardly ever make the jump to films.  Her career was only going back to the never ending round of auditions and rejections and occasional guest parts or supporting roles.  Marrying Harry gave her financial security and a level of permanent fame and press coverage that she would otherwise never have achieved. I figured she'd be thrilled and throw herself into the new life with enthusiasm.  Clearly, not the case, she couldn't handle it, couldn't handle not being the center of attention or doing exactly what she wanted.  So, she ends up markle-ing the entire BRF, except Harry, and I'm pretty sure she would have markled him too and taken Archie with her (and the sizeable child support payments) if he didn't fall in line and go with her.  Hence, the made up excuses of why they left.


You are on fire and spot on again! Yes, yes to everything you said.


----------



## Tootsie17

youngster said:


> I completely agree.  When they got engaged, and then were newly married, a lot of people (myself included) thought that Meghan was smart enough to realize that her acting career was likely going nowhere.  She'd hit the wall in Hollywood.  TV actresses hardly ever make the jump to films.  Her career was only going back to the never ending round of auditions and rejections and occasional guest parts or supporting roles.  Marrying Harry gave her financial security and a level of permanent fame and press coverage that she would otherwise never have achieved. I figured she'd be thrilled and throw herself into the new life with enthusiasm.  Clearly, not the case, she couldn't handle it, couldn't handle not being the center of attention or doing exactly what she wanted.  So, she ends up markle-ing the entire BRF, except Harry, and I'm pretty sure she would have markled him too and taken Archie with her (and the sizeable child support payments) if he didn't fall in line and go with her.  Hence, the made up excuses of why they left.



You are on fire and spot on again! Yes, yes to everything you said.
Oops! I didn't mean to post twice. I was just fired up.


----------



## purseproblm

I can’t believe they haven’t at least gone back to the U.K. for the time being so that their nannies and guards can be with their families.. but nothing is important to them but them


----------



## rose60610

Even if one gave M the entire benefit of doubt of virtually everything she said, then WHY move to L.A. where the HQ of paparazzi reside?  Makes ZERO sense. And for Harry to "claim" that he is soooooo affected by his mother's death that he babbles about his heartbreak to a JP Morgan audience is beyond weird and the big side-eye. Sooooo, he moves to..... where? L.A.? Really????  Just because "what Meghan wants Meghan gets"??  Maaaay-beeeee he might want to re-think HER desires in light of his own supposed mental difficulties. It isn't as though he's short on family resources to help him on his road to mental recovery.  YO! Harry!  If your mental health is SOOOOOOO affected by paparazzi flashbulbs then you should shimmy your skinny a$$ back to Frogmore ASAP or you're just another hawkin' shill to feather your friggin' "Foundation" that yearns to "be something of meaning".  Sorry, M&H, your addiction to attention is more transparent and pathetic than a teenage drama queen's demand for the center stage camera.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Even if one gave M the entire benefit of doubt of virtually everything she said, then WHY move to L.A. where the HQ of paparazzi reside?  Makes ZERO sense. And for Harry to "claim" that he is soooooo affected by his mother's death that he babbles about his heartbreak to a JP Morgan audience is beyond weird and the big side-eye. Sooooo, he moves to..... where? L.A.? Really????  Just because "what Meghan wants Meghan gets"??  Maaaay-beeeee he might want to re-think HER desires in light of his own supposed mental difficulties. It isn't as though he's short on family resources to help him on his road to mental recovery.  YO! Harry!  If your mental health is SOOOOOOO affected by paparazzi flashbulbs then you should shimmy your skinny a$$ back to Frogmore ASAP or you're just another hawkin' shill to feather your friggin' "Foundation" that yearns to "be something of meaning".  Sorry, M&H, your addiction to attention is more transparent and pathetic than a teenage drama queen's demand for the center stage camera.



I gave this couple every benefit of the doubt until I just couldn't anymore. You nailed it.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> I would suspect, that after Diana's tragedy, the BRF firmed up their security .. so, that's what I totally DO NOT GET with the 2 of them saying that they were 'afraid', especially if they were living at Frogmore!  Now, they HAVE put themselves on the front-line, and for sure, Papparazzi could wait outside the gates of their Malibu enclave and then chase them down the PCH or whatever (obviously, the Paps would need to know the car that they drive!).  I doubt very much that we will see any pap shots of either of them going to the Grocery store in the Malibu area; rarely do we see pap shots of any of the celebs up there (exception = Caitlin Jenner when she has gone out to Starbucks).  Most of the celebs that get the pap shots at the grocery store live either in BH or the West Side.  Heck, I've seen plenty of celebs at one  of our favorite Deli's in Beverly Glen, and most of the folks don't bother them one bit (I don't, although sometimes I may sneak a pic)!
> 
> All that being said,  I think I mentioned this before but one time .. some paps thought my husband was on that TV Show "The Office" and all of a sudden we were SURROUNDED .. and let me tell you, that WAS NOT FUN .. scare the bejezus out of me!!!  However, H&M are going to have "security" remember, so I really don't think they will ever have that type of episode.
> 
> Personally, I still think Meghan is playing Hazza, *with this "I'm not safe" BS*.  She sure as heck made sure she was hobnobbing around before him, and let's face it .. she LOVES that camera, so I'm just NOT buying  this crap!



Agree with this, there were rumors pages back that she wore a bullet proof vest under her clothing?  Then why be in Papparazzi lens central LA?  If she truly feared for her life, she would live a more secluded life, people have done it, so obviously she doesn’t fear for her life.


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Agree with this, there were rumors pages back that she wore a bullet proof vest under her clothing?  Then why be in Papparazzi lens central LA?  If she truly feared for her life, she would live a more secluded life, people have done it, so obviously she doesn’t fear for her life.



I know, she really doesn't NEED to live there. Plenty of celebs don't keep primary residence in LA. And some people have said her mom lives there... but so? She hasn't lived in the same city as her mom for a looooooong time. Why would anything change now?


----------



## Chagall

Underneath it all I think M is hoping to become a very successful actress. Why else would she want to live in LA, especially Malibu. She was not able to achieve this in her prime which for an actress is much younger. I don’t think marrying H will change this for her. She needs a reality check.


----------



## mdcx

Chagall said:


> Underneath it all I think M is hoping to become a very successful actress. Why else would she want to live in LA, especially Malibu. She was not able to achieve this in her prime which for an actress is much younger. I don’t think marrying H will change this for her. She needs a reality check.


Maybe she’ll become one of those sad cases who funds her own vanity projects (films, tv etc) because no-one else will risk their money. I don’t see her giving up on her quest fir stardom any time soon.


----------



## Lounorada

youngster said:


> I might be dim myself, but I do not understand how Meghan or Archie is at all at risk of suffering the same fate as Diana. Makes no sense to me and I don't get how Harry has linked this all in his mind.  There are laws now in the UK regarding the paparazzi.  Even if there weren't, they could easily avoid them by living at the Frogmore cottage or some other country home. (Of course, as you said, Diana would still be alive if her driver hadn't been impaired, if she'd been wearing a seat belt, and if they hadn't been speeding.)  Odds of this set of circumstances happening to either MM or the baby?  Pretty much zero.
> 
> Even if Harry does fear they will be pursued to the ends of the earth by the paps, why oh why, do you move to Paparazzi Central in L.A. where there are no laws about this whatsoever?  Seems more like a convenient excuse to ditch the UK that he thought people might accept if they didn't look too deeply.





youngster said:


> I completely agree.  When they got engaged, and then were newly married, a lot of people (myself included) thought that Meghan was smart enough to realize that her acting career was likely going nowhere.  She'd hit the wall in Hollywood.  TV actresses hardly ever make the jump to films.  Her career was only going back to the never ending round of auditions and rejections and occasional guest parts or supporting roles.  Marrying Harry gave her financial security and a level of permanent fame and press coverage that she would otherwise never have achieved. I figured she'd be thrilled and throw herself into the new life with enthusiasm.  Clearly, not the case, she couldn't handle it, couldn't handle not being the center of attention or doing exactly what she wanted.  So, she ends up markle-ing the entire BRF, except Harry, and I'm pretty sure she would have markled him too and taken Archie with her (and the sizeable child support payments) if he didn't fall in line and go with her.  Hence, the made up excuses of why they left.





youngster said:


> if they really wanted to live a quiet, private life, they'd be in the UK tucked away in their Frogmore Cottage or in another country estate.  Charles would have bought them one, somewhere peaceful and beautiful.  Meghan could have stayed home and done the occasional appearance while Harry kept on as normal.  Archie would have been totally protected and they could have had as much privacy as they wanted.  (You hardly ever see pics of George or Charlotte or Louis unless they are released officially and a lot of the pics are taken by Kate herself)   But, that wasn't what Meghan wanted, she wanted a ticket to the A list and the Met Gala and the Oscars and a billion dollar lifestyle, so there they are in L.A.


Just doing a catch-up of posts from the last day or so and couldn't agree more with everything you said in these 3 posts! You are on a roll!


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chagall said:


> Underneath it all I think M is hoping to become a very successful actress. Why else would she want to live in LA, especially Malibu. She was not able to achieve this in her prime which for an actress is much younger. I don’t think marrying H will change this for her. She needs a reality check.



Meghan has done A LOT to show us that she has an idea in her mind of what a life of fortune and power looks like, and has worked hard to get it.  Taking into consideration that she would have formed those dreams while growing up in LA, I think it makes sense to think that a lot of what she thinks that life should look like would come from an LA-centric point of view. 
She thought she'd achieved what she dreamed of by becoming a Duchess and living in a castle. Then she discovered that came with a lot of things she didn't much care for, so she ran still in search of that life she'd dreamed of. She searched for it in Vancouver, and found that wasn't just right either. So now, she's heading for exactly where she imagined things would be great. She likely grew up in LA dreaming of a beautiful mansion in Malibu where life would be so wonderful - now she'll have it. 

Most people I've known in life who are constantly in the chase for the perfect life never find it, and keep growing more and more frustrated.  I have a feeling that the same will be true for Meghan, and in six months she'll be chasing it again.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Underneath it all I think M is hoping to become a very successful actress. Why else would she want to live in LA, especially Malibu. She was not able to achieve this in her prime which for an actress is much younger. I don’t think marrying H will change this for her. She needs a reality check.



Returning to LA makes perfect sense from Meghan’s POV. She was like a fish out of water in England and she had no intention  of adapting and learning to live in a different culture. She understands the Hollywood mentality, no one will call her out for self-absorption, phoniness, and hypocrisy there.

There is also likely bitterness in her that she wasn’t able to be a success when she trying to be an actress. Now she’s coming back more famous than those who passed her over for jobs. She wants to be a big deal. She wants to be invited to all the events she wasn’t ever considered for before. She doesn’t comprehend that marrying someone famous does not mean she is talented.

Harry is a spoiled fool. I used to have sympathy for him but that’s over. It appears she built up his ego, tapped into a sense of self-importance he likely always had but never understood why others around him didn’t see it. Manipulating him must be a piece of cake for her.

Let’s hope this LA/faux charity endeavor proves to be as disappointing to them as everything else they’ve tried.


----------



## youngster

Lounorada said:


> Just doing a catch-up of posts from the last day or so and couldn't agree more with everything you said in these 3 posts! You are on a roll!



 thank you, I have too much free time on my hands lol.  I'm usually throwing a big Easter brunch but not yesterday of course. At least, M & H have been somewhat of a distraction during these times. They can't seem to help themselves. Like me!  I can't stop following this thread!  I check in a few times a day to see what those crazy (middle aged) kids are up to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Hmmmmm - here’s a new tidbit
*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Divorce Rumors: Palace Reportedly Worried Duchess Will Dump Archie's Dad*

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=2ahUKEwiJyIe51uXoAhUDPH0KHQCWCdgQFjACegQIDRAN&url=https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-divorce-rumors-palace-reportedly-worried-duchess-will-dump-2956643?amp=1&usg=AOvVaw3JB4snbnKRA_PjgA5ZsUgv


----------



## CeeJay

.. and some news organizations are reporting that H&M have purchased Mel Gibson’s old place for a cool $12m ..


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> .. and some news organizations are reporting that H&M have purchased Mel Gibson’s old place for a cool $12m ..


They're gonna burn through that alleged $20 million in no time. Also, for such 'conservationists' that's a lot of house for two people and a baby.


----------



## mrsinsyder

This is Doria's half brother who was papped dropping off supplies at her house. The Markles can't Instacart some groceries over to her? Things are definitely amiss.


----------



## youngster

LibbyRuth said:


> Meghan has done A LOT to show us that she has an idea in her mind of what a life of fortune and power looks like, and has worked hard to get it.  Taking into consideration that she would have formed those dreams while growing up in LA, I think it makes sense to think that a lot of what she thinks that life should look like would come from an LA-centric point of view.



That's her dream though. What about Harry? I doubt it was his dream to live in L.A., socializing with the A and B list who are taking his measure with every breath, while dodging the paps, and giving up his country, his family, and most of his duties and obligations. To do what exactly?  To be a Malibu house husband in a post-pandemic environment?  He's likely reeling right now, feeling frustrated, guilty, confused, and angry with added pressure on her to make it worth it to him.  I doubt she's up to it.  She takes the easy path consistently and has no track record of working at relationships.  She dumps and moves on.  She won't dump him right away though.  She needs to get everything lined up, so that she thinks she doesn't need his royalness any longer.  So, a year or two.  The pandemic changes things perhaps, maybe stretches that out a bit longer.  If the acting goes nowhere, if the blog goes nowhere, if the foundation can't raise serious money, she might even stay married to him for several years.  

The good news for Harry is that he can go back to the UK.  His family will welcome him back and he can go back to being Prince Harry, after a time, not right away. I think people might even sympathize with him after a time if he handles it properly. She can live her dream life on the the child support and divorce settlement while trolling for a billionaire.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> They're gonna burn through that alleged $20 million in no time. Also, for such 'conservationists' that's a lot of house for two people and a baby.
> 
> View attachment 4709272


THANK YOU, 100% agree!!!  I know that it's me, but I ALWAYS think about the size of a house because no matter what, I end up doing a certain amount of cleaning (_I have 2 very long-haired cats_) regardless of the cleaning crew that (_I used to_) have come very 2 weeks.  So, do I want to spend my days cleaning?? .. heck no, but I'm sure that these 2 *will NEVER* clean-up on their own (_especially Harry_).  Also .. eh, there's a lot of bad karma/juju at Mel's old house, I wouldn't buy it!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> This is Doria's half brother who was papped dropping off supplies at her house. The Markles can't Instacart some groceries over to her? Things are definitely amiss.
> 
> View attachment 4709274



is that Arkie in the photo?


----------



## doni

mrsinsyder said:


> This is Doria's half brother who was papped dropping off supplies at her house. The Markles can't Instacart some groceries over to her? Things are definitely amiss.
> 
> View attachment 4709274


So, they have gone from the total privacy of Frogmore castle and  a protected life in the UK to having distant relatives who didn’t even get a wedding invite followed by papparazzi. Harry must be delighted given his traumas with the profession....


----------



## CeeJay

Tidbits of the article I posted ..

However, Woman’s Day Australia, in its upcoming April 13, 2020 issue, suggested that Prince Harry may not experience a happy ending after all as Meghan’s alleged “real scheming” begins. The entertainment news outlet reported that people in the Buckingham Palace are worried that there is more to the former “Suits” actress’ move than meets the eye. They, allegedly, fear that the younger son of Princess Diana would lose everything one day because of his own wife.

*“You can’t tell me that this wasn’t her plan all along, to bring her boys to America so she could live the celebrity life she’d always dreamed of. It all makes sense now why she was so uninterested in getting a British visa and was dead against giving Archie a royal title. But the scary thing is she now has Harry right where she wants him – isolated from his family in a country where she holds all the cards in terms of legal rights,” a source told the publication*.

“*He might be a prince but he’s inexperienced at the ways of the real world. His head must be spinning at how fast he went from a castle to Canada to the middle of LA – and the worry is, she might blindside him with a divorce, and he would lose everything – including his money and possibly even Archie,” it went on.*

The claims came just weeks after Meghan Markle and Prince Harry moved to Los Angeles, Calif. amid the threats posed by the coronavirus pandemic. People reported that the Sussex couple flew off to “The Golden State” before the U.S. closed its border on March 20. The publication added that Prince William’s younger brother is, now, focused more on his future with his family and is not looking back anymore.

Both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have yet to comment on these reports. However, with Woman’s Day Australia’s history of making up stories based on the accounts of its undependable and unknown sources, it could just be another fabricated report waiting to be squashed. So, devoted supporters of the Sussex pair should take these speculations with a huge grain of salt until everything is proven true and correct.


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> This is Doria's half brother who was papped dropping off supplies at her house. The Markles can't Instacart some groceries over to her? Things are definitely amiss.
> 
> View attachment 4709274



I am not buying the reason they are in Los Angeles is to be closer to Doria. A bunch of BS.


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> I am not buying the reason they are in Los Angeles is to be closer to Doria. A bunch of BS.



Totally agree.  Meghan is there because Hollywood is there and that's where she wants to be.  She'll probably see her Mom on occasion, that's a side benefit but, yeah, not the main reason they are in L.A. at all.


----------



## lalame

I think she and Doria probably have a fine and, God forbid, _normal _mother/daughter relationship. I think the media is cray with the "they're BFF" or "they secretly hate each other" narratives. Of course she didn't move to LA to be with Doria... if that was where her priorities were, she wouldn't have been in Toronto for so long, not to mention what would've been the point of Vancouver if that was her aim all along? LA is for her/their career, period.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> They're gonna burn through that alleged $20 million in no time. Also, for such 'conservationists' that's a lot of house for two people and a baby.
> 
> View attachment 4709272



You could say that about a LOT of their decisions. He's probably used to living on an _estate_ and I'm sure she's not too broken up about that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> You could say that about a LOT of their decisions. He's probably used to living on an _estate_ and I'm sure she's not too broken up about that.


I can't wait for them to tell us how to lower our carbon footprint while they use 80 million gallons of water a month to care for their grass.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I can't wait for them to tell us how to lower our carbon footprint while they use 80 million gallons of water a month to care for their grass.


it does look like they have grass, which not many in So Cal do these days.  It's possible the house has a well


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Daily Beast and TMZ are reporting it's not true that they bought Mel Gibson's home. Guess the search continues!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Daily Beast and TMZ are reporting it's not true that they bought Mel Gibson's home. Guess the search continues!


I heard they're renting.....probably got a good deal from a "friend"


----------



## Flatsy

The Sussexes did not buy Mel Gibson's house; a small-time realtor in LA tweeted this to get attention for himself, and then deleted the tweet.

If they are financially smart and thinking about the long-term, they will borrow or rent something reasonable until they have established their new income and can save up for something within their new means.

If Meghan is smart and thinking about her own future, she will encourage Harry to dip into his inheritance and buy a multi-million dollar home now.  There is no other way for her to access Harry's inheritance in a divorce than get him to start converting it into community property, such as homes.


lalame said:


> I think she and Doria probably have a fine and, God forbid, _normal _mother/daughter relationship. I think the media is cray with the "they're BFF" or "they secretly hate each other" narratives.


I read (I think US Weekly?) that prior to Harry, Meghan used to visit her mother about twice a year in LA and that was it.  That's a normal amount for a mother and daughter who have a good relationship but who lead very separate lives.  It's not the super close relationship that people were imagining when they were theorizing that Doria might ditch her life in LA and move to wherever Meghan is because she and Meghan can't get along without each other.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> The Sussexes did not buy Mel Gibson's house; a small-time realtor in LA tweeted this to get attention for himself, and then deleted the tweet.
> 
> If they are financially smart and thinking about the long-term, they will borrow or rent something reasonable until they have established their new income and can save up for something within their new means.
> 
> If Meghan is smart and thinking about her own future, she will encourage Harry to dip into his inheritance and buy a multi-million dollar home now.  There is no other way for her to access Harry's inheritance in a divorce than get him to start converting it into community property, such as homes.
> 
> I read (I think US Weekly?) that prior to Harry, Meghan used to visit her mother about twice a year in LA and that was it.  That's a normal amount for a mother and daughter who have a good relationship but who lead very separate lives.  It's not the super close relationship that people were imagining when they were theorizing that Doria might ditch her life in LA and move to wherever Meghan is because she and Meghan can't get along without each other.


I think she will have to be in a "neighborhood" where A-list celebs live.  Maybe not in a mansion.  We'll know soon enough.


----------



## bellecate

Article from GEONEWS
*Meghan Markle called 'scheming', accused of planning to break ties with Prince Harry *








Meghan Markle called 'scheming', accused of planning to break ties with Prince Harry 
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are currently on the receiving end of intense censure and bashing.

The former royals have found themselves surrounded by another claim suggesting that the Buckingham Palace is worried about Prince Harry getting ditched by Meghan.

“You can’t tell me that this wasn’t her plan all along, to bring her boys to America so she could live the celebrity life she’d always dreamed of. It all makes sense now why she was so uninterested in getting a British visa and was dead against giving Archie a royal title. But the scary thing is she now has Harry right where she wants him – isolated from his family in a country where she holds all the cards in terms of legal rights,” _Woman’s Day_ magazine quoted a source as saying.

“He might be a prince but he’s inexperienced at the ways of the real world. His head must be spinning at how fast he went from a castle to Canada to the middle of LA – and the worry is, she might blindside him with a divorce, and he would lose everything – including his money and possibly even Archie,” added the insider.

The claims were made after Harry and Meghan moved to Los Angeles and stepped down as members of the royal family. 


Similar articles seem to be popping up. Where there's smoke?


----------



## Jktgal

CeeJay said:


> Tidbits of the article I posted ..
> 
> However, Woman’s Day Australia, in its upcoming April 13, 2020 issue, suggested that Prince Harry may not experience a happy ending after all as Meghan’s alleged “real scheming” begins. The entertainment news outlet reported that people in the Buckingham Palace are worried that there is more to the former “Suits” actress’ move than meets the eye. They, allegedly, fear that the younger son of Princess Diana would lose everything one day because of his own wife.
> 
> *“You can’t tell me that this wasn’t her plan all along, to bring her boys to America so she could live the celebrity life she’d always dreamed of. It all makes sense now why she was so uninterested in getting a British visa and was dead against giving Archie a royal title. But the scary thing is she now has Harry right where she wants him – isolated from his family in a country where she holds all the cards in terms of legal rights,” a source told the publication*.
> 
> “*He might be a prince but he’s inexperienced at the ways of the real world. His head must be spinning at how fast he went from a castle to Canada to the middle of LA – and the worry is, she might blindside him with a divorce, and he would lose everything – including his money and possibly even Archie,” it went on.*
> 
> The claims came just weeks after Meghan Markle and Prince Harry moved to Los Angeles, Calif. amid the threats posed by the coronavirus pandemic. People reported that the Sussex couple flew off to “The Golden State” before the U.S. closed its border on March 20. The publication added that Prince William’s younger brother is, now, focused more on his future with his family and is not looking back anymore.
> 
> Both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have yet to comment on these reports. However, with Woman’s Day Australia’s history of making up stories based on the accounts of its undependable and unknown sources, it could just be another fabricated report waiting to be squashed. So, devoted supporters of the Sussex pair should take these speculations with a huge grain of salt until everything is proven true and correct.



Nah, very unlikely Mr Markle will lose Archie. Once he's had enough, Scotland Yard/M16 will just inject a banana to put M to sleep, and the two boys will fly back to UK. He'll lose a lot of money paying her off, but it'll be good for the (USA) economy.


----------



## lalame

Flatsy said:


> The Sussexes did not buy Mel Gibson's house; a small-time realtor in LA tweeted this to get attention for himself, and then deleted the tweet.
> 
> If they are financially smart and thinking about the long-term, they will borrow or rent something reasonable until they have established their new income and can save up for something within their new means.
> 
> If Meghan is smart and thinking about her own future, she will encourage Harry to dip into his inheritance and buy a multi-million dollar home now.  There is no other way for her to access Harry's inheritance in a divorce than get him to start converting it into community property, such as homes.
> 
> I read (I think US Weekly?) that prior to Harry, Meghan used to visit her mother about twice a year in LA and that was it.  That's a normal amount for a mother and daughter who have a good relationship but who lead very separate lives.  It's not the super close relationship that people were imagining when they were theorizing that Doria might ditch her life in LA and move to wherever Meghan is because she and Meghan can't get along without each other.



I gotta give Doria credit for that...  if my child became royalty in the UK, I'd be packing my bags so fast. Where's the butler?!?!?!

Someone asked earlier about whether moving to LA is advantageous for divorce reasons and you kind of touched on that. I would LOVE to learn more about this!!! Any legal (or divorce) experts here??


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I gotta give Doria credit for that...  if my child became royalty in the UK, I'd be packing my bags so fast. Where's the butler?!?!?!
> 
> Someone asked earlier about whether moving to LA is advantageous for divorce reasons and you kind of touched on that. I would LOVE to learn more about this!!! Any legal (or divorce) experts here??


I'm no expert but I'm quite sure if they buy a home it will be community property, whereas money from Charles being doled out by the month would not


----------



## lanasyogamama

If what everyone is saying - that she planned this break from the RF and move to LA the whole time is true, she is pretty brave. How did she know she would be end up like Princess Charlene of Monaco?


----------



## Flatsy

Once upon a time I thought that if they divorced, the custody and financial settlement would be negotiated privately by Buckingham Palace and everyone would exit with dignity.

But after seeing all of the mudslinging the Sussexes engaged in during Megxit, there's no way that will happen. It will go through the courts, and it will be messy.  Custody and finances will all be disputed.  There will be mudslinging in court documents and in the media.  And it will go on for years.  Meghan's going to fight for every penny and every advantage she can get, even if she loses more than she wins; Harry's hot-headed stubbornness will now be directed at her instead of his family.  

These days they are reminding me more and more of Paul McCartney and Heather Mills.  Most of us were happy to hear that Paul had found love again after the death of his first wife.  Then we started to get skeptical when she was on TV shrieking "nobody's heard of the Beatles" and "men need to be bossed!"  And then there were the rumors about fights and his family not liking her.  We wound up with a nasty divorce hearing playing out in the paper's and Heather dumping water on Paul's lawyer's head.  That's the type of circus I think the Sussex divorce will be.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Hmm...


----------



## Flatsy

lanasyogamama said:


> If what everyone is saying - that she planned this break from the RF and move to LA the whole time is true, she is pretty brave. How did she know she would be end up like Princess Charlene of Monaco?


Albert has a lot of power in Monaco and a lot to lose if Charlene blew their wedding and left him at the altar.  The BRF doesn't have a lot to lose if Meghan goes.  They will just be losing another Fergie.

Back when I thought the Sussexes were a great couple who would probably go the distance, I thought on the off-chance they divorced, Meghan would want to go back to LA and try to see if she could break back into the Hallmark scene.  

I completely misjudged the level of commitment she had to becoming part of the royal family, which turned out to be almost none.  I also underestimated the size of her ego, because she really seems to think she's destined to be the next Oprah and that she's way too good for her former life, in which she was LUCKY to land a Hallmark movie.

Like Shallon Lester said, Meghan planned to get the princess title and run back to Hollywood with it so she could be at the top of the heap.  It may not have been her Plan A, but I think it was a very vivid Plan B that she had far fewer qualms about pursuing than I ever imagined.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I gotta give Doria credit for that...  if my child became royalty in the UK, I'd be packing my bags so fast. Where's the butler?!?!?!
> 
> Someone asked earlier about whether moving to LA is advantageous for divorce reasons and you kind of touched on that. I would LOVE to learn more about this!!! Any legal (or divorce) experts here??



I'm not a divorce attorney (and I don't play one on TV), but California is a community property state.  Property acquired during the marriage (or property placed in joint accounts no matter where it came from) is divided jointly 50/50.  California is also a no-fault divorce state, meaning the reasons for the divorce do not matter.  You also have shorter residency requirements to file in California.  Being married 10 years or more is considered a long term marriage in California and generally grants much more favorable terms to the lower earning spouse.  I think a spouse is eligible for alimony after 10 years in California.  (It's one reason why Tom Cruise divorced Nicole Kidman just shy of their 10th anniversary.)  So MM is going to have to hang in there for another 8 years lol.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Once upon a time I thought that if they divorced, the custody and financial settlement would be negotiated privately by Buckingham Palace and everyone would exit with dignity.
> 
> But after seeing all of the mudslinging the Sussexes engaged in during Megxit, there's no way that will happen. It will go through the courts, and it will be messy.  Custody and finances will all be disputed.  There will be mudslinging in court documents and in the media.  And it will go on for years.  Meghan's going to fight for every penny and every advantage she can get, even if she loses more than she wins; Harry's hot-headed stubbornness will now be directed at her instead of his family.
> 
> These days they are reminding me more and more of Paul McCartney and Heather Mills.  Most of us were happy to hear that Paul had found love again after the death of his first wife.  Then we started to get skeptical when she was on TV shrieking "nobody's heard of the Beatles" and "men need to be bossed!"  And then there were the rumors about fights and his family not liking her.  We wound up with a nasty divorce hearing playing out in the paper's and Heather dumping water on Paul's lawyer's head.  That's the type of circus I think the Sussex divorce will be.


If they divorce and the royals get involved I don't think they will allow a circus.  But if Harry allows his temper to rule, then it could get messy.


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> I'm not a divorce attorney (and I don't play one on TV), but California is a community property state.  Property acquired during the marriage (or property placed in joint accounts no matter where it came from) is divided jointly 50/50.  California is also a no-fault divorce state, meaning the reasons for the divorce do not matter.  You also have shorter residency requirements to file in California.  Being married 10 years or more is considered a long term marriage in California and generally grants much more favorable terms to the lower earning spouse.  I think a spouse is eligible for alimony after 10 years in California.  (It's one reason why Tom Cruise divorced Nicole Kidman just shy of their 10th anniversary.)  So MM is going to have to hang in there for another 8 years lol.


Considering this is marriage number 3, I'm sure she knows the rules well


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

youngster said:


> I think a spouse is eligible for alimony after 10 years in California. (It's one reason why Tom Cruise divorced Nicole Kidman just shy of their 10th anniversary.) So MM is going to have to hang in there for another 8 years lol.


Small correction: If the marriage is under 10 years, the higher-earning spouse would still owe the lower-earning spouse alimony.  However, the higher-earning spouse would only pay alimony for a length of time equal to half the marriage.

Once the marriage goes over 10 years, it is considered a long-term marriage and the higher-earning spouse will need to pay alimony for LIFE (or until the other spouse remarries).  That's why Tom Cruise tried to dispute the date of their separation.  He wanted to say they were married for 9 years and pay Nicole alimony for 4.5 years.  If he admitted that they split up a month after their 10th anniversary, which they did (they had a big ceremony to renew their vows!) then he would have owed her alimony for life.

I'm also not a divorce attorney, I just followed the Cruise/Kidman divorce carefully.

And I don't know how this would apply to Harry and Meghan since neither of them earns any money.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> Small correction: If the marriage is under 10 years, the higher-earning spouse would still owe the lower-earning spouse alimony.  However, the higher-earning spouse would only pay alimony for a length of time equal to half the marriage.
> 
> Once the marriage goes over 10 years, it is considered a long-term marriage and the higher-earning spouse will need to pay alimony for LIFE (or until the other spouse remarries).  That's why Tom Cruise tried to dispute the date of their separation.  He wanted to say they were married for 9 years and pay Nicole alimony for 4.5 years.  If he admitted that they split up a month after their 10th anniversary, which they did (they had a big ceremony to renew their vows!) then he would have owed her alimony for life.
> 
> I'm also not a divorce attorney, I just followed the Cruise/Kidman divorce carefully.
> 
> And I don't know how this would apply to Harry and Meghan since neither of them earns any money.


Interesting question.  Neither earns money but he has a lot more than she does.  I'm sure a good attorney could help her get more than her fair share.  Esp with the little anchor (or anchors)


----------



## sdkitty

this is starting to look like a Lifetime movie


----------



## Flatsy

sdkitty said:


> If they divorce and the royals get involved I don't think they will allow a circus. But if Harry allows his temper to rule, then it could get messy.


The royals are going to have no choice.  Meghan is an American citizen with a legal right to file for divorce in California and pursue her full financial and custodial rights.  She can say whatever she wants in those papers and she can have her lawyer leak whatever she wants to TMZ.   

This won't be like the Charles-Diana divorce.  Diana may have had her grievances with the royal family, but she still respected the institution.  She respected the British class system and maintaining her status within it.  She cared about the future of her sons and their place in the monarchy.   

Meghan doesn't give a single **** about any of that stuff.  The royal family has absolutely no hold over her except money and if they aren't generous with the settlement offers, she has legal means to try to get it out of them.  

The only other thing the royal family has is her title, and the Sussexes already fired a warning shot on their website that the Queen doesn't have control over that stuff abroad.  Meghan can give herself whatever title she pleases in America.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> this is starting to look like a Lifetime movie



So......if Meghan's life does get turned into a movie.....who's going to play Meghan? It'll be another role she misses out on. But at least she'll be creating work for someone else.  But who can be that sappy?


----------



## Genie27

Flatsy said:


> Meghan can give herself whatever title she pleases in America.


So.....HRHTDOS4Life?


----------



## Genie27

rose60610 said:


> So......if Meghan's life does get turned into a movie.....who's going to play Meghan? It'll be another role she misses out on. But at least she'll be creating work for someone else.  But who can be that sappy?


Angelina Jolie, of course!


----------



## lalame

Flatsy said:


> Small correction: If the marriage is under 10 years, the higher-earning spouse would still owe the lower-earning spouse alimony.  However, the higher-earning spouse would only pay alimony for a length of time equal to half the marriage.
> 
> Once the marriage goes over 10 years, it is considered a long-term marriage and the higher-earning spouse will need to pay alimony for LIFE (or until the other spouse remarries).  That's why Tom Cruise tried to dispute the date of their separation.  He wanted to say they were married for 9 years and pay Nicole alimony for 4.5 years.  If he admitted that they split up a month after their 10th anniversary, which they did (they had a big ceremony to renew their vows!) then he would have owed her alimony for life.
> 
> I'm also not a divorce attorney, I just followed the Cruise/Kidman divorce carefully.
> 
> And I don't know how this would apply to Harry and Meghan since neither of them earns any money.



Charles is going to continue supporting them... IDK about "earned," but it would be considered income that I assume would need to be split.


----------



## bag-mania

In a hypothetical divorce, if Harry claimed he gave up much of his royal status (and all the money that included) FOR Meghan, to satisfy demands she made, couldn’t that limit how much money she would get?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm - here’s a new tidbit
> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Divorce Rumors: Palace Reportedly Worried Duchess Will Dump Archie's Dad*
> 
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=2ahUKEwiJyIe51uXoAhUDPH0KHQCWCdgQFjACegQIDRAN&url=https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-markle-prince-harry-divorce-rumors-palace-reportedly-worried-duchess-will-dump-2956643?amp=1&usg=AOvVaw3JB4snbnKRA_PjgA5ZsUgv



Why would they be worried, though...I imagine they'd throw a party and do a silly dance the day a separation is announced.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> In a hypothetical divorce, if Harry claimed he gave up much of his royal status (and all the money that included) FOR Meghan, to satisfy demands she made, wouldn’t that limit how much money she would get?



Not a lawyer, but highly doubt this would matter. His (or "their")  income is his income, no matter why he made the choices.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they be worried, though...I imagine they'd throw a party and do a silly dance the day a separation is announced.



I think because it would be an absolute cluster on the way down. The BRF also seems allergic to scandal (sadly scandal loves them)... can't even imagine what that would look like in the press not to mention all the money they would have to shell out. She's not going down without a fight. Heck, she didn't even go "up" without a fight!


----------



## youngster

Genie27 said:


> So.....*HRHTDOS4Life*?



That's won't fit on her car license plate.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Not a lawyer, but highly doubt this would matter. His (or "their")  income is his income, no matter why he made the choices.



True, but as of the 1st of this month his income has been greatly diminished. A divorce settlement would be based on what he has at the time it is filed. It couldn’t factor in that his relatives still have massive wealth, could it? They knowingly walked away from all that after all.


----------



## Emeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they be worried, though...I imagine they'd throw a party and do a silly dance the day a separation is announced.


Maybe it's the RF's way of taking away Meg's option for a "shock" announcement.
They are not really worried,
they are just getting to the discussion first with deliberate polite civility.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Flatsy

lalame said:


> Charles is going to continue supporting them... IDK about "earned," but it would be considered income that I assume would need to be split.


Charles currently pays many of their expenses (security, staff, designer wadrobe) and gives them many gifts (the interior fixtures Frogmore).  I don't think a California court can force Charles to continue paying out money to either of them.  I don't think he is legally obliged to give either of them anything.

Back when Harry and Meghan were working as part of the family business, I think the money from Charles could be classified as untaxable remuneration.  But Harry and Meghan renounced the family business, so now Charles is giving the money for nothing (perhaps only until next April).  I don't know how the California courts would classify "allowance from Dad".


----------



## youngster

I wonder if Harry and Meghan are operating under the assumption that Charles can continue to keep their allowance at the same level indefinitely?  

I'm sure the Duchy is somewhat diversified, but my understanding is that it is mostly comprised of property such as farms, residential and commercial property, quarries, forests, etc. Some of that likely produces a fairly stable source of income.  However, some of those residential and commercial tenants may not be able to pay their rent, or may require rent concessions, for quite a few months.  Here's a real life lesson for Harry:  Charles may have to cut their allowance at some point.  After all, would Charles rather be seen to belt tighten, reduce rents for people impacted by the virus, and prioritize funding his charities, or send millions to his son and DIL sitting on a beach in California?


----------



## LibbyRuth

youngster said:


> That's her dream though. What about Harry? I doubt it was his dream to live in L.A., socializing with the A and B list who are taking his measure with every breath, while dodging the paps, and giving up his country, his family, and most of his duties and obligations. To do what exactly?  To be a Malibu house husband in a post-pandemic environment?  He's likely reeling right now, feeling frustrated, guilty, confused, and angry with added pressure on her to make it worth it to him.  I doubt she's up to it.  She takes the easy path consistently and has no track record of working at relationships.  She dumps and moves on.  She won't dump him right away though.  She needs to get everything lined up, so that she thinks she doesn't need his royalness any longer.  So, a year or two.  The pandemic changes things perhaps, maybe stretches that out a bit longer.  If the acting goes nowhere, if the blog goes nowhere, if the foundation can't raise serious money, she might even stay married to him for several years.
> 
> The good news for Harry is that he can go back to the UK.  His family will welcome him back and he can go back to being Prince Harry, after a time, not right away. I think people might even sympathize with him after a time if he handles it properly. She can live her dream life on the the child support and divorce settlement while trolling for a billionaire.



In all honesty, I don't think the public has ever gotten a legitimate enough feel for who Harry is to truly know what his dreams are. Pre-Meghan, what we saw from him was for the most part towing the line and doing/saying what duty called on him to do and say. We got little hints and glimpses at times to believe that he didn't love everything about the life - suggestions that he'd thought about leaving the family, etc. He's left a lot of room for people to project on him what they want him to think / want / believe. But I don't think we've seen nearly enough genuine clues to have any idea what he truly wants.


----------



## Tootsie17

rose60610 said:


> So......if Meghan's life does get turned into a movie.....who's going to play Meghan? It'll be another role she misses out on. But at least she'll be creating work for someone else.  But who can be that sappy?


I think Paula Patton would be a great choice. She was married to Robin Thicke, so I think she already has a lot of experience to bring to the role.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> Meghan doesn't give a single **** about any of that stuff.  The royal family has absolutely no hold over her except money and if they aren't generous with the settlement offers, she has legal means to try to get it out of them.
> 
> The only other thing the royal family has is her title, and the Sussexes already fired a warning shot on their website that the Queen doesn't have control over that stuff abroad.  Meghan can give herself whatever title she pleases in America.


Yes, I suspect that she will go all-in for the $$$, BUT .. I bet one of the conditions will be that she relinqueshes that title that she seems to favor so much.  Remember, the Queen took away the 'HRH' from Diana 

While she can call herself whatever title she wants here in the US (_how about Queen-Delusional-Narcissist_), the US does not recognize titles per se (the Revolutionary War assured that).


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I wonder if Harry and Meghan are operating under the assumption that Charles can continue to keep their allowance at the same level indefinitely?
> 
> I'm sure the Duchy is somewhat diversified, but my understanding is that it is mostly comprised of property such as farms, residential and commercial property, quarries, forests, etc. Some of that likely produces a fairly stable source of income.  However, some of those residential and commercial tenants may not be able to pay their rent, or may require rent concessions, for quite a few months.  Here's a real life lesson for Harry:  Charles may have to cut their allowance at some point.  After all, would Charles rather be seen to belt tighten, reduce rents for people impacted by the virus, and prioritize funding his charities, or send millions to his son and DIL sitting on a beach in California?


My understanding, and don't recall where I read it, taxes were already increased in the Duchy and the residents WERE NOT happy about it!  In addition, I also thought I recall reading (somewhere) that Prince Charles indicated that he would monitor their expenditures and could (potentially) put a cap on it.  

I believe Camilla has wealth herself, but if I was in her position, I would be pretty pissed that my husband had to continue to fund his 35+ old son and his wife who can't seem to control her spending!  Remember, there is a 1-year review and H&M can do what they want right now, but based on their actions there could be ramifications down the line!


----------



## Annawakes

Can’t wait to fast forward one year and see what the Queen has to say about them then.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> True, but as of the 1st of this month his income has been greatly diminished. A divorce settlement would be based on what he has at the time it is filed. It couldn’t factor in that his relatives still have massive wealth, could it? They knowingly walked away from all that after all.





Flatsy said:


> Charles currently pays many of their expenses (security, staff, designer wadrobe) and gives them many gifts (the interior fixtures Frogmore).  I don't think a California court can force Charles to continue paying out money to either of them.  I don't think he is legally obliged to give either of them anything.
> 
> Back when Harry and Meghan were working as part of the family business, I think the money from Charles could be classified as untaxable remuneration.  But Harry and Meghan renounced the family business, so now Charles is giving the money for nothing (perhaps only until next April).  I don't know how the California courts would classify "allowance from Dad".



If they divorce, it wouldn't take into account how much his family has in assets... but it WOULD take into account how much Harry has in his name and any income that he received (from any sources, including his dad), during the time they were married. In the simplest case where Charles is literally depositing money regularly into H's accounts to support him, that would definitely be considered (imputed) income and count against him for alimony purposes. If Charles supports him every month for the entirety of their marriage and they divorce, the court would likely assume it's ongoing and award her a portion of that for alimony until Charles actually stops supporting Harry and he can prove it. 

It's like if you divorced anyone... the court would assume that person's job/earning potential will continue indefinitely and award you alimony based on that... until the person actually loses their job or goes broke or whatnot.


----------



## lalame

Though a big wildcard for alimony is if he actually earns more than her. At this point, I kind of doubt it... it seems like their shtick is either going to be her gigs or their joint appearances or whatnot. So I could see a scenario where she earns more than him and he ends up getting alimony... I'm sure she would be pulling the nuclear option (demand silence money from the family) in that scenario though.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> If they divorce, it wouldn't take into account how much his family has in assets... but it WOULD take into account how much Harry has in his name and any income that he received (from any sources, including his dad), during the time they were married. In the simplest case where Charles is literally depositing money regularly into H's accounts to support him, that would definitely be considered (imputed) income and count against him for alimony purposes. If Charles supports him every month for the entirety of their marriage and they divorce, the court would likely assume it's ongoing and award her a portion of that for alimony until Charles actually stops supporting Harry and he can prove it.
> 
> It's like if you divorced anyone... the court would assume that person's job/earning potential will continue indefinitely and award you alimony based on that... until the person actually loses their job or goes broke or whatnot.


BUT .. what about if that income is NOT put into US Accounts?  Nowadays, one doesn't have to have their Accounts in the same country as which they are living (I did it all the time when living in Europe - I would just draw Euros from my Account when I needed it).  Does that matter?


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> BUT .. what about if that income is NOT put into US Accounts?  Nowadays, one doesn't have to have their Accounts in the same country as which they are living (I did it all the time when living in Europe - I would just draw Euros from my Account when I needed it).  Does that matter?



No it wouldn't. Technically, any money made after they are married is 1/2 hers anyway... wherever the money resides. He could always try to hide them but I'm sure he has legit bankers and attorneys who wouldn't run afoul of the law on that.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Though a big wildcard for alimony is if he actually earns more than her. At this point, I kind of doubt it... it seems like their shtick is either going to be her gigs or their joint appearances or whatnot. So I could see a scenario where she earns more than him and he ends up getting alimony... I'm sure she would be pulling the nuclear option (demand silence money from the family) in that scenario though.



Maybe that’s part of why she donated that Disney money. In addition looking concerned for elephants it cut down on her personal income. Whether she gets a windfall alimony or not, she’ll still get an impressive amount in child support. She’ll be just fine, she’ll make sure of that.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Maybe that’s part of why she donated that Disney money. In addition looking concerned for elephants it cut down on her personal income. Whether she gets a windfall alimony or not, she’ll still get an impressive amount in child support. She’ll be just fine, she’ll make sure of that.



A shrewd poster here pointed out a few days ago that she didn't actually "donate" the money... She wasn't allowed to receive income since she did this while a member of the BRF, so it was never her money to donate in the first place. Disney donated the money they _would've_ paid her, if she were able to accept it.

And anyway even if she DID receive the money and donate it a minute later, it would still be considered her income for purposes of taxes and alimony calculations. Just like if your company pays you and you take the paycheck and donate it a minute after, that money was still your income.


----------



## imgg

Tootsie17 said:


> I think Paula Patton would be a great choice. She was married to Robin Thicke, so I think she already has a lot of experience to bring to the role.


I like Paula, so I hope it never happens, because I do not want to watch any movie about Meghan.


----------



## imgg

I hope Harry is getting advice about California law because it is a beast for divorces.  He probably thinks his marriage is going to last, poor chap.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> I hope Harry is getting advice about California law because it is a beast for divorces.  He probably thinks his marriage is going to last, poor chap.


I don't know them.  maybe she married for love and he just happened to be a prince.  ha ha.  there are people who think that.
I think she's like the fox who caught the rabbit.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> True, but as of the 1st of this month his income has been greatly diminished. A divorce settlement would be based on what he has at the time it is filed. It couldn’t factor in that his relatives still have massive wealth, could it? They knowingly walked away from all that after all.


Not really, the Sovereign Money was only 5%!


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't know them.  maybe she married for love and he just happened to be a prince.  ha ha.  there are people who think that.
> I think she's like the fox who caught the rabbit.



 In that she is slowly cutting off his air supply till she's done with him?


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> No it wouldn't. Technically, any money made after they are married is 1/2 hers anyway... wherever the money resides. He could always try to hide them but I'm sure he has legit bankers and attorneys who wouldn't run afoul of the law on that.


Oh, not so sure about that!!!  Had a U.K. colleague who his his plentiful assets in various trusts in Scotland and the Caymans. The ex-wife figured that he had hidden assets but she was NEVER able to prove it and, his accountants and barristers took his side because she was a roaring biatch (and sadly a Yank)!


----------



## lanasyogamama

*Prince Harry is 'finding life a bit challenging' in Los Angeles, says his friend Dr Jane Goodall*
By Xantha Leatham For The Daily Mail 19:00 EDT 13 Apr 2020 , updated 19:58 EDT 13 Apr 2020







*Duke of Sussex, 35, quit frontline royal duties to live in Los Angeles with Meghan*
*Dr Jane Goodall, 86, says she has 'been in touch' with Prince Harry since he left*
*Claimed the royal is finding life in the US with baby Archie 'a bit challenging' *
Prince Harry is finding life ‘a bit challenging’ following his move to North America, his friend Dr Jane Goodall has revealed.

The 86-year-old primatologist has ‘been in touch’ with Harry after he quit frontline royal duties to live in Canada and then Los Angeles with wife Meghan, 38, and baby Archie, 11 months.

The couple are both fans of the world-renowned activist and invited her to their Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor last summer. Dr Goodall believes she may have been one of the first people outside the family to hold Archie.

She is currently in lockdown in Bournemouth where she opened up about Harry and his new life. 

‘I don’t know how his career is going to map out, but, yes, I’ve been in touch – though I think he’s finding life a bit challenging right now,' she said, speaking to Radio Times.





Dr Jane Goodall, 86, told Radio Times she had 'been in touch' with Prince Harry since he quit royal duties and moved to Los Angeles (pictured together in 2019) 
Prince Harry and Jane Goodall demonstrate a chimpanzee greeting


At the suggestion that Harry and his brother William are champions of the natural world, she added: ‘Yes – except they hunt and shoot. But I think Harry will stop because Meghan doesn’t like hunting, so I suspect that is over for him.’

Last week Dr Goodall, who is best known for her studies on chimpanzees, told how the prince had hinted at stepping away from the Royal Family months before the bombshell announcement last year.

She recalled a conversation she had with him last summer at an event to raise awareness of her Roots & Shoots education programme at Windsor Castle.

Dr Goodall said: ‘I made Archie do the Queen’s wave, saying, “I suppose he’ll have to learn this”.





The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are both fans of the world-renowned activist and invited her to their Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor last summer. Pictured, at the Commonwealth Day Service 2020 on March 9, 2020 in London, 




Prince Harry and Meghan are currently living in Los Angeles with their baby son Archie. Pictured, on September 25, 2019 during their royal tour of South Africa 
‘Harry said: “No, he’s not growing up like that”.’ 

The veteran anthropologist added she was currently enjoying being at home, but replying to emails was more tiring than travelling the world. 

*Related Articles*

US-born aristocrat Lady Julie Montagu says being around 'emotionally open' Americans will be good for Prince Harry as he builds a new life in California with Meghan Markle  
Is this Megxit Mansion? Estate agent claims Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could buy Mel Gibson's £12million Malibu home - which comes with TWO pools and exclusive beach club membership 
Sabrina Elba reveals how Meghan and Harry's wedding transformed her fame - and says she's been enjoying 'intense' chess games with husband Idris during lock-down 
Prince Harry drops his royal surname in documents registering new eco-friendly tourism firm Travalyst after leaving Britain for California with Meghan Markle 
Asked whether she was getting restless, she said: ‘No, I hate travelling the way I do, but I still have a message to get out.

‘With all the emails and requests I’m getting, this is actually more exhausting than travelling.’

Dr Goodall’s latest documentary The Hope – on National Geographic – examines her 60-year legacy of fighting to save the planet. It also features Harry, who champions environmental issues.

At one point during the 90-minute programme, Dr Goodall is seen mimicking an intimate ape greeting with the prince.

Last September Harry interviewed Dr Goodall for British Vogue magazine, which was guest-edited by Meghan. 

During that interview he said he wanted ‘two children maximum’ and admitted he found what was happening to the environment ‘terrifying


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Oh, not so sure about that!!!  Had a U.K. colleague who his his plentiful assets in various trusts in Scotland and the Caymans. The ex-wife figured that he had hidden assets but she was NEVER able to prove it and, his accountants and barristers took his side because she was a roaring biatch (and sadly a Yank)!



That SHOULDN'T happen, but do some people break the law? Sure... but I was answering a question about what's legal, not what a criminal would do.  Not to mention, I don't see this happening with H+M. Too much paper trail, if it's money he earns from work or if the money is coming from dad via Duchy. It's not just the spouse lying, it's the spouse and his accountants, and his lawyers, and the same from the side of where he earned the money.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> *Prince Harry is 'finding life a bit challenging' in Los Angeles, says his friend Dr Jane Goodall*
> By Xantha Leatham For The Daily Mail 19:00 EDT 13 Apr 2020 , updated 19:58 EDT 13 Apr 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Duke of Sussex, 35, quit frontline royal duties to live in Los Angeles with Meghan*
> *Dr Jane Goodall, 86, says she has 'been in touch' with Prince Harry since he left*
> *Claimed the royal is finding life in the US with baby Archie 'a bit challenging' *
> Prince Harry is finding life ‘a bit challenging’ following his move to North America, his friend Dr Jane Goodall has revealed.
> 
> The 86-year-old primatologist has ‘been in touch’ with Harry after he quit frontline royal duties to live in Canada and then Los Angeles with wife Meghan, 38, and baby Archie, 11 months.
> 
> The couple are both fans of the world-renowned activist and invited her to their Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor last summer. Dr Goodall believes she may have been one of the first people outside the family to hold Archie.
> 
> She is currently in lockdown in Bournemouth where she opened up about Harry and his new life.
> 
> ‘I don’t know how his career is going to map out, but, yes, I’ve been in touch – though I think he’s finding life a bit challenging right now,' she said, speaking to Radio Times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr Jane Goodall, 86, told Radio Times she had 'been in touch' with Prince Harry since he quit royal duties and moved to Los Angeles (pictured together in 2019)
> Prince Harry and Jane Goodall demonstrate a chimpanzee greeting
> 
> 
> At the suggestion that Harry and his brother William are champions of the natural world, she added: ‘Yes – except they hunt and shoot. But I think Harry will stop because Meghan doesn’t like hunting, so I suspect that is over for him.’
> 
> Last week Dr Goodall, who is best known for her studies on chimpanzees, told how the prince had hinted at stepping away from the Royal Family months before the bombshell announcement last year.
> 
> She recalled a conversation she had with him last summer at an event to raise awareness of her Roots & Shoots education programme at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Dr Goodall said: ‘I made Archie do the Queen’s wave, saying, “I suppose he’ll have to learn this”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are both fans of the world-renowned activist and invited her to their Frogmore Cottage home in Windsor last summer. Pictured, at the Commonwealth Day Service 2020 on March 9, 2020 in London,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan are currently living in Los Angeles with their baby son Archie. Pictured, on September 25, 2019 during their royal tour of South Africa
> ‘Harry said: “No, he’s not growing up like that”.’
> 
> The veteran anthropologist added she was currently enjoying being at home, but replying to emails was more tiring than travelling the world.
> 
> *Related Articles*
> 
> US-born aristocrat Lady Julie Montagu says being around 'emotionally open' Americans will be good for Prince Harry as he builds a new life in California with Meghan Markle
> Is this Megxit Mansion? Estate agent claims Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could buy Mel Gibson's £12million Malibu home - which comes with TWO pools and exclusive beach club membership
> Sabrina Elba reveals how Meghan and Harry's wedding transformed her fame - and says she's been enjoying 'intense' chess games with husband Idris during lock-down
> Prince Harry drops his royal surname in documents registering new eco-friendly tourism firm Travalyst after leaving Britain for California with Meghan Markle
> Asked whether she was getting restless, she said: ‘No, I hate travelling the way I do, but I still have a message to get out.
> 
> ‘With all the emails and requests I’m getting, this is actually more exhausting than travelling.’
> 
> Dr Goodall’s latest documentary The Hope – on National Geographic – examines her 60-year legacy of fighting to save the planet. It also features Harry, who champions environmental issues.
> 
> At one point during the 90-minute programme, Dr Goodall is seen mimicking an intimate ape greeting with the prince.
> 
> Last September Harry interviewed Dr Goodall for British Vogue magazine, which was guest-edited by Meghan.
> 
> During that interview he said he wanted ‘two children maximum’ and admitted he found what was happening to the environment ‘terrifying


I don't necessarily like her being the boss of him but I am in agreement with her on hunting.


----------



## Tootsie17

imgg said:


> I like Paula, so I hope it never happens, because I do not want to watch any movie about Meghan.


I like Paula too, so I actually hope no one makes a movie about Meghan.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tootsie17 said:


> I like Paula too, so I actually hope no one makes a movie about Meghan.


I hope there is a movie, and it’s a super cheesy made for tv one with a nobody playing MM.


----------



## bag-mania

I feel bad for Jane Goodall. She has devoted her life to saving chimps. I’m sure the DM contacted her to give an interview about her work, then they slipped in a few questions about Harry. When the article comes out it’s all about Harry and Meghan, hardly a mention about her.

Never trust the media, Jane!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I feel bad for Jane Goodall. She has devoted her life to saving chimps. I’m sure the DM contacted her to give an interview about her work, then they slipped in a few questions about Harry. When the article comes out it’s all about Harry and Meghan, hardly a mention about her.
> 
> Never trust the media, Jane!



So true. Also my first thought when I read these articles was, "Geez, who ISN'T this guy complaining to?" Imagine you live in a literal palace and you complain to a woman who lived in the damn forest with monkeys about how challenging life is. SMDH


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope there is a movie, and it’s a super cheesy made for tv one with a nobody playing MM.



Let's go a step further. Let's hope like you say, and then the newly discovered "nobody" becomes a huge bonafide star because of it! And lands the A-lister roles. The fake Meghan becomes loved by Hollywood, the real one.......not so much.


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> Let's go a step further. Let's hope like you say, and then the newly discovered "nobody" becomes a huge bonafide star because of it! And lands the A-lister roles. The fake Meghan becomes loved by Hollywood, the real one.......not so much.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I feel bad for Jane Goodall. She has devoted her life to saving chimps. I’m sure the DM contacted her to give an interview about her work, then they slipped in a few questions about Harry. When the article comes out it’s all about Harry and Meghan, hardly a mention about her.
> 
> Never trust the media, Jane!


Yes but I think the interview was orchestrated by the H&M team , I doubt Jane did the interview without the prior consent of the team, the chat plays into the topic of African wildlife preservation, at the time of the Meghan elephant movie
Jane is rarely interviewed, she is discreet but as she says in the interview, she still has work to do, so, maybe she used an interview opportunity hoping to promote her work - I agree that was her motivation
But the bit about hunting was a gaffe on her part


----------



## Aminamina

[...I think Harry will stop because *Meghan doesn’t like *hunting*, so I suspect that is over for him.’*
- that and so much more , like the wise lady said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

It looks like a movie about these two grifters will be more like a Wallis & Edward re-tred, have absolutely no interest in it ~ nada, bada bling, bada boom

And the only thing I have to add at this point is thank goodness Harry was born the spare and not the heir

Am sure this same thought has crossed the minds of the BRF with a collective sigh of relief


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Yes but I think the interview was orchestrated by the H&M team , I doubt Jane did the interview without the prior consent of the team, the chat plays into the topic of African wildlife preservation, at the time of the Meghan elephant movie
> Jane is rarely interviewed, she is discreet but as she says in the interview, she still has work to do, so, maybe she used an interview opportunity hoping to promote her work - I agree that was her motivation
> But the bit about hunting was a gaffe on her part



There's no way to know for sure. Jane has a documentary for National Geographic coming out this month and she just had her 86th birthday. It's certainly conceivable, and even expected, that the press would contact her about the new show.

It's also possible DM did another article about her and getting information about Harry was a side benefit to them. Unlike H&M who only talk about saving animals, Jane Goodall has accomplished much to help chimps and their environment. I hate to think she was being used as a gossip source for the likes of Harry and Meghan.

Besides, I don't think Meghan would approve of the article about how challenging it is for Harry in the US considering she is the one and only reason he is facing those challenges.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> It looks like a movie about these two grifters will be more like a Wallis & Edward re-tred, have absolutely no interest in it ~ *nada, bada bling, bada boom*


Please make sure that you do the music for this re-tred!!!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> There's no way to know for sure. Jane has a documentary for National Geographic coming out this month and she just had her 86th birthday. It's certainly conceivable, and even expected, that the press would contact her about the new show.
> 
> It's also possible DM did another article about her and getting information about Harry was a side benefit to them. Unlike H&M who only talk about saving animals, Jane Goodall has accomplished much to help chimps and their environment. I hate to think she was being used as a gossip source for the likes of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> Besides, I don't think Meghan would approve of the article about how challenging it is for Harry in the US considering she is the one and only reason he is facing those challenges.


Agree M never would have approved post facto about the challenge ...


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Yes but I think the interview was orchestrated by the H&M team , I doubt Jane did the interview without the prior consent of the team, the chat plays into the topic of African wildlife preservation, at the time of the Meghan elephant movie
> Jane is rarely interviewed, she is discreet but as she says in the interview, she still has work to do, so, maybe she used an interview opportunity hoping to promote her work - I agree that was her motivation
> But the bit about hunting was a gaffe on her part





marietouchet said:


> Agree M never would have approved post facto about the challenge ...


oops...he must be in trouble with the boss


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> I completely agree.  When they got engaged, and then were newly married, a lot of people (myself included) thought that Meghan was smart enough to realize that her acting career was likely going nowhere.  She'd hit the wall in Hollywood.  TV actresses hardly ever make the jump to films.  Her career was only going back to the never ending round of auditions and rejections and occasional guest parts or supporting roles.  Marrying Harry gave her financial security and a level of permanent fame and press coverage that she would otherwise never have achieved. I figured she'd be thrilled and throw herself into the new life with enthusiasm.  Clearly, not the case, she couldn't handle it, *couldn't handle not being the center of attention *or doing exactly what she wanted.  So, she ends up markle-ing the entire BRF, except Harry, and I'm pretty sure she would have markled him too and taken Archie with her (and the sizeable child support payments) if he didn't fall in line and go with her.  Hence, the made up excuses of why they left.



I believe THIS sums it all up.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope there is a movie, and it’s a super cheesy made for tv one with a nobody playing MM.



maybe MM could do it then


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I wonder if Harry and Meghan are operating under the assumption that Charles can continue to keep their allowance at the same level indefinitely?
> 
> I'm sure the Duchy is somewhat diversified, but my understanding is that it is mostly comprised of property such as farms, residential and commercial property, quarries, forests, etc. Some of that likely produces a fairly stable source of income.  However, some of those residential and commercial tenants may not be able to pay their rent, or may require rent concessions, for quite a few months.  Here's a real life lesson for Harry:  Charles may have to cut their allowance at some point.  After all, would Charles rather be seen to belt tighten, reduce rents for people impacted by the virus, and prioritize funding his charities, or send millions to his son and DIL sitting on a beach in California?



The Duchy has a food line too, Duchy Original Organic . In 2017 it hit the 200M (BPS - my computer's not liking the pound note symbol atm ). I'm not saying that the figures won't be down this year (as everything everywhere may be) but it's all relative.


----------



## viciel

None of the state/country laws will make a bit of a difference in the event these two part their ways in terms of parceling assets. At the end of the day it's about protecting the firm. The firm was there long before Sparkle and the firm will still be there hundreds (dare I say thousands) of years after Sparkle. Sparkle will be around for, what, another 50 years if she's lucky? She'll get her big slice of pie up front essentially getting bought out so she couldn't dip her claws into the royal cookie jar later. It doesn't matter how much they'd be paying her, they'll give her what seems to be advantageous to her. If she's smart, she'll take her nice deal and run with it, if she pushes too much she'll get what's coming for her. Overestimating her worth and power has been her achilles heel. The problem is, a narcissist will never see what's clearly in front of them. They tend to have tunnel vision, one that focuses on them being the victim and them being more deserving than anyone else, and they will creative an entire narrative to fit into that storyline. How can you tell someone they're being super obvious at scheming when they firmly believe the world is blind? It must be exhausting to be Sparkle, to actually feel insecure deep down yet trying to overcompensate but not cool enough to pull that off. It's like trying to be all fancy and cutting a scone with a knife at tea time thinking she's being high society when the proper way is to just break off a piece and put it in your mouth love.


----------



## mia55

I bet by next year they’ll be back with the firm after failing miserably and blaming Covid-19 for everything.They’ll keep low for an year or so and will come back pretending nothing happened. After another kid they’ll divorce and MM will get her big pay check.


----------



## rose60610

Anything M would get in a divorce would be a plus for her. She was washed-up as a D list actress anyway. After clawing her way into the BRF just to throw it away was quite something.  She lived with Harry, learned was expected, agreed to it, married him, did it for a while, was immersed in all the prestige and privilege of it all, then poof! Not good enough?! The BRF should be glad to get rid of her, do an intervention on Harry and give him a swift kick in the head, then do a thorough vetting of his next bride to be.


----------



## CeeJay

mia55 said:


> I bet by next year they’ll be back with the firm after failing miserably and blaming Covid-19 for everything.They’ll keep low for an year or so and will come back pretending nothing happened. After another kid they’ll divorce and MM will get her big pay check.


Eeeeeh .. I'm not so sure they would want her coming back into the fold, I think Charles (and certainly William & Kate) have seen her "real" ways.  I also don't think that would go over well with the British public, many whom were not very happy having to fund the 2 of them.  If Harry wants to go back, yes .. they will likely take him back in the fold no issue .. just not seeing it with Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

viciel said:


> None of the state/country laws will make a bit of a difference in the event these two part their ways in terms of parceling assets. At the end of the day it's about protecting the firm. The firm was there long before Sparkle and the firm will still be there hundreds (dare I say thousands) of years after Sparkle. Sparkle will be around for, what, another 50 years if she's lucky? She'll get her big slice of pie up front essentially getting bought out so she couldn't dip her claws into the royal cookie jar later. It doesn't matter how much they'd be paying her, they'll give her what seems to be advantageous to her. If she's smart, she'll take her nice deal and run with it, if she pushes too much she'll get what's coming for her. Overestimating her worth and power has been her achilles heel. The problem is, a narcissist will never see what's clearly in front of them. They tend to have tunnel vision, one that focuses on them being the victim and them being more deserving than anyone else, and they will creative an entire narrative to fit into that storyline. How can you tell someone they're being super obvious at scheming when they firmly believe the world is blind? It must be exhausting to be Sparkle, to actually feel insecure deep down yet trying to overcompensate but not cool enough to pull that off. It's like trying to be all fancy and cutting a scone with a knife at tea time thinking she's being high society when the proper way is to just break off a piece and put it in your mouth love.


.. and you have hit the nail on the head, and how much you want to bet that she is going to ask for a LOT more than the BRF would want to give her???  They hold the power, not her .. regardless of the fact that she had Archie.  If she gets greedy, it will only hurt HER and I would imagine that in addition to the 'pay-out', she will have some significant restrictions (as in "keep your mouth shut") even though I'm sure she would want to spout off (especially about Prince Andrew).  If she then doesn't comply, I would imagine that they would have something drawn up which rescinds some of the $$$.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and you have hit the nail on the head, and how much you want to bet that she is going to ask for a LOT more than the BRF would want to give her???  They hold the power, not her .. regardless of the fact that she had Archie.  If she gets greedy, it will only hurt HER and I would imagine that in addition to the 'pay-out', she will have some significant restrictions (as in "keep your mouth shut") even though I'm sure she would want to spout off (especially about Prince Andrew).  If she then doesn't comply, I would imagine that they would have something drawn up which rescinds some of the $$$.



She'll threaten tell-all book/interviews to get maximum cash. They would have to have the settlement be distributed over time since her word cannot be trusted. You know she would have her "friends" leaking all sorts of gossip to the media unless there was some stipulation forcing her to not do it.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> She'll threaten tell-all book/interviews to get maximum cash. They would have to have the settlement be distributed over time since her word cannot be trusted. You know she would have her "friends" leaking all sorts of gossip to the media unless there was some stipulation forcing her to not do it.


Yes, that's what I was referring to .. they would have to draw up something that specifically says that she cannot talk about the BRF at all, and if they were smart (and she did "try to leak stuff" through her 'friends' - use that term lightly with her), that she would be punished financially - let's face it, that is what she's hedging her bets on (IMO)!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

The problem of MM taking on the BRF is that she doesn't have the financial means or resources like the BRF has and they will "squash" her without her even knowing it! Harry is in no hurry to give up his British citizenship and can come back any time to be a resident here.


----------



## jcnc

Interesting to see American media ids changing their tune on Meghan too :

*Meghan Markle's Celebrity *

*Background Reportedly Clashed With Buckingham Palace Staff Members*
*by STARR BOWENBANK *
*APR 13, 2020*
*




*



*

There's some new intel on how staff members at the Buckingham Palace really felt about Meghan Markle. 

Apparently, the Palace staff liked Meghan at first, but then they thought she became demanding and failed to recognize the royal traditions in place. https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...celebrity-background-buckingham-palace-staff/
*


----------



## queennadine

I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)

But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.


----------



## youngster

She also probably signed a NDA when she married Harry, plus who knows what other kind of legal agreements.  I can't imagine that you can just marry into the BRF without a ton of paperwork lol.


----------



## rose60610

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.



Meghan would say they're all guilty of not asking her if she was "OK" nearly enough and not gifting her all the Crown Jewels that should rightfully be hers, plus Buckingham Palace. And of not forcing the Media to adore her.


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.



She wasn’t around long enough to get to know them. The only way she might have any real dirt to sell is if she has interrogated Harry over time and got him to spill the tea. Even so, I doubt Harry knows any secrets of his elders.


----------



## lanasyogamama

You’d think she would already have been under an NDA, but she’s leakier than a faucet. So many “friends”.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> You’d think she would already have been under an NDA, but she’s leakier than a faucet. So many “friends”.



Maybe Harry balked at having her sign one. Going into a marriage there needs to be at least the illusion of trust.


----------



## lalame

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.



You're assuming the bombshells are truths though... there's plenty of ways to embarrass people if you really want to do it. Even if she just said something vague like, "I wasn't surprised about the William cheating rumors," it would create a media headache for that family.


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)



I'm sure these ones are true, lol.
Camilla, wouldn't surprise me
Kate, with 3 children who are almost 7, 5 and 2, who wouldn't be frazzled? They are kids, and just like any other kid, I bet they have their moments, lol


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.


It would be more damaging for Meghan than the RF if she chooses to follow that path.  The RF have bent over backwards to accommodate Harry and Meghan’s demands, so it’s hard to see what they could complain about.  They could end up like Paul Burrell or Captain whatever his name is, who get dragged out whenever the US channels want a comment on Royal wedding or event.  I’m not sure that’s what Meghan’s looking for career wise - she wants to be a Star.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.



Plus, unless Harry had a loose mouth I really can't see the others spilling the beans to Meghan.


----------



## Mrs.Z

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.


It would mostly be about how horribly cruel everyone treated her.


----------



## LittleStar88

A very long read, but fun...

*https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-fractured-fairy-tale*

*Judging by Harry’s recent remarks, it appears that, in the years since his mother’s death, Markle was the only person close to him who persuaded him to exchange a stiff upper lip for a trembling lower one. In a documentary that aired in July, 2017, twenty years after Diana’s death, Harry made the startling admission that, after her funeral, he’d cried “maybe only once.” A person’s motivations for falling in love are often mysterious, but it seems evident that Markle not only showed Harry the compassion he’d been deprived of when Diana died; she also gave him an opportunity to serve as the protector he hadn’t been able to be for his mother.
*


----------



## Flatsy

Showing him compassion and allowing him to confront his feelings would be a good thing.  The part about her playing the damsel in distress so he can play out a protector fantasy with his wife that he's unable to play out with his mother is soooooooooooo messed up.  But it's not like many of us hadn't already picked up on that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Flatsy said:


> Showing him compassion and allowing him to confront his feelings would be a good thing.  The part about her playing the damsel in distress so he can play out a protector fantasy with his wife that he's unable to play out with his mother is soooooooooooo messed up.  But it's not like many of us hadn't already picked up on that.



I feel like she plays his feelings and manipulates.


----------



## mia55

I can’t wait to see how it ends, it’s one of my fav soap operas


----------



## Megs

I took a hiatus from following/chatting about H&M, life has been crazy for us as I know all of you. But I'm BACCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKK. 

I feel like these two are the only ones who decide to move a big US city during a global pandemic. Wonder if their 'staff' is still having to get all their food so they can be safe. 

Catching up on it all so I can chat more!! Missed you all


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> A very long read, but fun...
> 
> *https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-fractured-fairy-tale*
> 
> *Judging by Harry’s recent remarks, it appears that, in the years since his mother’s death, Markle was the only person close to him who persuaded him to exchange a stiff upper lip for a trembling lower one. In a documentary that aired in July, 2017, twenty years after Diana’s death, Harry made the startling admission that, after her funeral, he’d cried “maybe only once.” A person’s motivations for falling in love are often mysterious, but it seems evident that Markle not only showed Harry the compassion he’d been deprived of when Diana died; she also gave him an opportunity to serve as the protector he hadn’t been able to be for his mother.*


Dunno about that story - yes amusing as it is. H and W were certainly emotionless at their mother's televised funeral despite the hoopla and they had no public response for 20 years til the documentary 
They may have been shielded from the hoopla - they were deliberately kept in seclusion at BalmoraL while the Queen and the PM had it out over the royal response, see the Queen movie with Helen Mirren for details, very amusing good movie , not necessarily accurate It was one of the four times (incl COVID) that the Queen addressed the nation, it was HUUUUUGE 
But there is no way they did not find out everything after the fact, they did a 20 year memorial  documentary for her death ...  they would have been faced with a rehash of all of that and seen the movie (LOL)
I think it is impossible to gauge his reactions over the last 20 years, and that was 20 freaking years ago, no one remembers with total accuracy , memories are inaccurate 20 years later


----------



## chicinthecity777

I assume by protecting, Harry meant protecting MM and Archie from the media. So they moved from the UK where the media has strict agreements with the royal family to LA where paparazzi run free! And abandoned their roles of being royals therefore protected by such agreements to be "Just call me Harry" so they are just another 2 D-listers in LA. Good call!


----------



## bag-mania

These are desperate times when you are an attention-hungry wannabe power couple. Therefore they are donating funds they promised two years ago to a charity and we must be told about their generosity. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Pledge £90,000 to a Hunger Charity During the Coronavirus Crisis*
Prince Harry and Meghan _have arranged for money generated from their wedding broadcast _to go toward feeding hungry children during the coronavirus pandemic.

The couple pledged just over £90,000 to the charity Feeding Britain for its programs across the UK, which provide families in need with hot meals and food packages. The funds have been called a "godsend" by the organization's national director, Andrew Forsey, and come from excess profits from the BBC's royal wedding broadcast.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, who presided over the Sussexes' May 2018 marriage, is President of Feeding Britain. Harry and Meghan told him they wanted the money to be donated to the organization during a phone call held around the time schools across the UK were closing their doors to most children.

A spokesperson for Harry and Meghan said they are “delighted” to see the money go to “such a great cause.”

*It had been agreed at the time of Harry and Meghan's wedding that if there were any excess profits from the BBC broadcast, that money would go to a charity nominated by the couple.* They were notified about the funds around the time the coronavirus pandemic was taking hold. It is understood the Sussexes thought it was fitting that funds generated from their wedding go to a charity supported by the Archbishop, who played such an important role on the day.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...y-coronavirus-feeding-britain-wedding-pledge/


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> These are desperate times when you are an attention-hungry wannabe power couple. Therefore they are donating funds they promised two years ago to a charity and we must be told about their generosity.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Pledge £90,000 to a Hunger Charity During the Coronavirus Crisis*
> Prince Harry and Meghan _have arranged for money generated from their wedding broadcast _to go toward feeding hungry children during the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> The couple pledged just over £90,000 to the charity Feeding Britain for its programs across the UK, which provide families in need with hot meals and food packages. The funds have been called a "godsend" by the organization's national director, Andrew Forsey, and come from excess profits from the BBC's royal wedding broadcast.
> 
> The Archbishop of Canterbury, who presided over the Sussexes' May 2018 marriage, is President of Feeding Britain. Harry and Meghan told him they wanted the money to be donated to the organization during a phone call held around the time schools across the UK were closing their doors to most children.
> 
> A spokesperson for Harry and Meghan said they are “delighted” to see the money go to “such a great cause.”
> 
> *It had been agreed at the time of Harry and Meghan's wedding that if there were any excess profits from the BBC broadcast, that money would go to a charity nominated by the couple.* They were notified about the funds around the time the coronavirus pandemic was taking hold. It is understood the Sussexes thought it was fitting that funds generated from their wedding go to a charity supported by the Archbishop, who played such an important role on the day.
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...y-coronavirus-feeding-britain-wedding-pledge/



Maybe they can just take some additional money from The Duchy to make up for it.


----------



## papertiger

^ this wedding broadcast charity donation comes after the JG 'Harry's having LA trouble' article (of which there are many spin-offs). In fact there 'suddenly' lots of pro-H&M articles today - funny that. 

My first thought £90K = peanuts. About week's worth of security for these 2 while self-broadcasting... I mean isolating 

My second thought was the wedding was 2018. What took them so long to donate? 

My third thought was, since they were never able to touch the money it's not really worthy of a mention as it hasn't cost them anything in real terms. They should match it with a real donation.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Their wedding's security cost taxpayers £millions so a mere £90,000! It's laughable!!

We are still waiting for the repayment of £2.4m cost to the taxpayers for the Frogmore Cottage renovation!!


----------



## lulilu

chicinthecity777 said:


> Their wedding's security cost taxpayers £millions so a mere £90,000! It's laughable!!
> 
> We are still waiting for the repayment of £2.4m cost to the taxpayers for the Frogmore Cottage renovation!!



They are making bigger fools of themselves every day.  They are donating money that's not theirs.  And it took them two years to do it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> They are making bigger fools of themselves every day.  They are donating money that's not theirs.  And it took them two years to do it.


Yep!


----------



## Flatsy

Megs said:


> I feel like these two are the only ones who decide to move a big US city during a global pandemic. Wonder if their 'staff' is still having to get all their food so they can be safe.


I'm wondering about their staff in general.  Is there a nanny quarantined with them?  I suspect there is.  They definitely still have security and other staff working for them, and I wonder how free their movement is right now, and whether they can be with their families or whether they are 24/7 with the Markles.  

I've been wondering that about other wealthy celebrities as well.  I've only caught wind of one actress (I forget who) alluding to staff who are bringing her medication because she has a major illness.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’ve really backed themselves into a corner, where they look like a$$holes no matter what they do.


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> They’ve really backed themselves into a corner, where they look like a$$holes no matter what they do.


Yep. And I took the comment made by Jane G. about H finding things challenging a polite way of saying "things ain't going so good!"


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> They’ve really backed themselves into a corner, where they look like a$$holes no matter what they do.


I know. I want to give them props for doing the right thing but everything they do now feels so contrived.

Regardless, money is going to people who need it so


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

mia55 said:


> I can’t wait to see how it ends, it’s one of my fav soap operas


Mine too, but I don't want Harry to be too mentally messed up at the end.  I want him to remarry and shove it in Meghan's face!


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> They are making bigger fools of themselves every day.  They are donating money that's not theirs.  And it took them two years to do it.


This!


----------



## Clearblueskies

£90,000?  What is that, a frock and a half?  Meghan spent more than that on her I’ll show ‘em wardrobe for their farewell tour.
They’d do better to sack their inept PR company and donate the £’000s saved.  Everybody wins.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tootsie17 said:


> Mine too, but I don't want Harry to be too mentally messed up at the end.  I want him to remarry and shove it in Meghan's face!


And for the second wife to behave like a member of the RF should.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> Mine too, but I don't want Harry to be too mentally messed up at the end.  I want him to remarry and shove it in Meghan's face!



Let's hope he'll learn something from the experience. He had it in his head that he would experience the "freedom" that regular people have. In reality he has exchanged one gilded cage for another kind of prison. Only his jailer now isn't an institution, it's his wife.


----------



## CeeJay

Flatsy said:


> I'm wondering about their staff in general.  Is there a nanny quarantined with them?  I suspect there is.  They definitely still have security and other staff working for them, and I wonder how free their movement is right now, and whether they can be with their families or whether they are 24/7 with the Markles.
> 
> I've been wondering that about other wealthy celebrities as well.  I've only caught wind of one actress (I forget who) alluding to staff who are bringing her medication because she has a major illness.


I would beg to say, absolutely, positively they have staff in there with them, the question is .. does that staff get to leave/do what they need to do for their families (_I bet not_).  I base this on seeing some of the comments in my Nextdoor Neighbor application, from those that live on the "better side" of the 101 Freeway.  The sad thing is that those poor people can't quarantine with their families!


----------



## rose60610

Tootsie17 said:


> Mine too, but I don't want Harry to be too mentally messed up at the end.  I want him to remarry and shove it in Meghan's face!



And then for William and his family deciding they all want to become poets and abdicate? 

Enter King Harry!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I would beg to say, absolutely, positively they have staff in there with them, the question is .. does that staff get to leave/do what they need to do for their families (_I bet not_).  I base this on seeing some of the comments in my Nextdoor Neighbor application, from those that live on the "better side" of the 101 Freeway.  The sad thing is that those poor people can't quarantine with their families!


and I wonder what other duties the nanny is asked to perform


----------



## Megs

mrsinsyder said:


> I know. I want to give them props for doing the right thing but everything they do now feels so contrived.
> 
> Regardless, money is going to people who need it so



Yep, I think that's the issue. It's also like, unless they donated all they made from that recent JP Morgan speech, there's little they can do for their public image right now. 

I think a lot of celebrities want to show off that they're helping, but sometimes it feels like it's just so little compared to what they actually have, so it's better they kept it to themselves and donated without needing head pats.


----------



## Chagall

Tootsie17 said:


> Mine too, but I don't want Harry to be too mentally messed up at the end.  I want him to remarry and shove it in Meghan's face!


I posted this before and still think it. Harry can’t be as naive as everyone thinks he is. I think he is a jerk, not the fun loving happy go lucky jester we thought he was. He did some very questionable things that anyone would think were wrong. Black face, Nazi uniform and way wild parties. He may not like the way things ultimately turned out for him but he was on board all along. Even his feelings about Diana seem a bit contrived. She courted the press non stop and went from man to man. She could have worn a seat belt. She could have spent more time with her sons. Harry is old enough to know this. He wanted only the best for himself, BRF be dammed! And it backfired, MM being the tool to assist, him in making that happen.


----------



## Sharont2305

Compare that £90,000 to Captain Tom Moore, an Army veteran who, at the age of 99 wanted to raise £1000 for the NHS in this crisis to thank them after recovering from cancer and a hip operation, by walking 100 laps of his garden by this Thursday. He started last week and as of now his fundraising page has raised over 8 MILLION POUNDS!!!! I think today alone its gone up by 4 million. [emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Let's hope he'll learn something from the experience. He had it in his head that he would experience the "freedom" that regular people have. In reality he has exchanged one gilded cage for another kind of prison. Only his jailer now isn't an institution, it's his wife.


As an alternative, he could grow a pair...


Chagall said:


> I posted this before and still think it. Harry can’t be as naive as everyone thinks he is. I think he is a jerk, not the fun loving happy go lucky jester we thought he was. He did some very questionable things that anyone would think were wrong. Black face, Nazi uniform and way wild parties. He may not like the way things ultimately turned out for him but he was on board all along. Even his feelings about Diana seem a bit contrived. She courted the press non stop and went from man to man. She could have worn a seat belt. She could have spent more time with her sons. Harry is old enough to know this. He wanted only the best for himself, BRF be dammed! And it backfired, MM being the tool to assist, him in making that happen.


Yep, he is a jerk and Meagan can only be responsible for so much, imho.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Compare that £90,000 to Captain Tom Moore, an Army veteran who, at the age of 99 wanted to raise £1000 for the NHS in this crisis to thank them after recovering from cancer and a hip operation, by walking 100 laps of his garden by this Thursday. He started last week and as of now his fundraising page has raised over 8 MILLION POUNDS!!!! [emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]


That video was something else!


----------



## Tootsie17

Chagall said:


> I posted this before and still think it. Harry can’t be as naive as everyone thinks he is. I think he is a jerk, not the fun loving happy go lucky jester we thought he was. He did some very questionable things that anyone would think were wrong. Black face, Nazi uniform and way wild parties. He may not like the way things ultimately turned out for him but he was on board all along. Even his feelings about Diana seem a bit contrived. She courted the press non stop and went from man to man. She could have worn a seat belt. She could have spent more time with her sons. Harry is old enough to know this. He wanted only the best for himself, BRF be dammed! And it backfired, MM being the tool to assist, him in making that happen.


I agree he is not totally innocent in their Megxit fiasco, but I do believe that he really loved her, in the beginning at least, and was blind to a lot of the manipulative things she did. I think he may now see how lucky he was to be born in to privilege and it ain't that bad given his new choices.  However, I do agree that he is no saint in all of this.


----------



## Sharont2305

https://www-dailymail-co-uk.cdn.amp...nger-royals-basics-Vanity-Fair-interview.html


Very wise woman


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> Compare that £90,000 to Captain Tom Moore, an Army veteran who, at the age of 99 wanted to raise £1000 for the NHS in this crisis to thank them after recovering from cancer and a hip operation, by walking 100 laps of his garden by this Thursday. He started last week and as of now his fundraising page has raised over 8 MILLION POUNDS!!!! I think today alone its gone up by 4 million. [emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]


This was a fantastic achievement. Well done to Captain Tom Moore, an incredible man!


----------



## Lodpah

I think it’s rather insensitive that their PR is putting it out there that they bought a 15million dollar home while the world is in crisis. I don’t hear other celebrities bragging right now. I think this info will not reflect well on the monarchy.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I think it’s rather insensitive that their PR is putting it out there that they bought a 15million dollar home while the world is in crisis. I don’t hear other celebrities bragging right now. I think this info will not reflect well on the monarchy.


did they?  I thought they were looking for a rental


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> As an alternative, he could grow a pair...



He's 35. If it hasn't happened by now it's not going to happen. Harry is never going to be an alpha.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> He's 35. If it hasn't happened by now it's not going to happen. Harry is never going to be an alpha.


See, what I don't get is .. how long has he known that he was "the spare", and WHY was it sooooooooooo hard for him to accept?  That's where I have to agree with some other posters that he's a JERK!  My god, you never have to get up each morning and schlep off to work, work a long (hours) day, sludge home, worry about paying your rent and bills, etc. -- but boo-hoo-hoo, he wasn't going to be King, my heart bleeds for you Hazza .. NOT!!!  Accept it and move on!


----------



## scarlet555

Can only blame M for so long, H is complicit from top to bottom.  You just wonder if he will ever wake up, sometimes they don't.  Sometimes they just get dumped or divorced if they're lucky.  Hope it doesn't end in tragedy; if H truly is off meds and suffering from mental illness, I can't imagine this has a good ending anyway.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> See, what I don't get is .. how long has he known that he was "the spare", and WHY was it sooooooooooo hard for him to accept?  That's where I have to agree with some other posters that he's a JERK!  My god, you never have to get up each morning and schlep off to work, work a long (hours) day, sludge home, worry about paying your rent and bills, etc. -- but boo-hoo-hoo, he wasn't going to be King, my heart bleeds for you Hazza .. NOT!!!  Accept it and move on!


This is the man who, when Prince George was born, was asked "how do you feel about being pushed down to 4th in line?" said "good, hope they have more!"
He also has said that "no one in the family wants to be Monarch."
I think he's always accepted that he's the spare tbh. I think it's Megan's delusion of grandeur and manipulation that makes people think he doesn't like being the spare.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> See, what I don't get is .. how long has he known that he was "the spare", and WHY was it sooooooooooo hard for him to accept?  That's where I have to agree with some other posters that he's a JERK!  My god, you never have to get up each morning and schlep off to work, work a long (hours) day, sludge home, worry about paying your rent and bills, etc. -- but boo-hoo-hoo, he wasn't going to be King, my heart bleeds for you Hazza .. NOT!!!  Accept it and move on!



That is why Diana used to take the boys along with her for some of her charity visits. She wanted them to understand that while they had privileged lives, most people are not so fortunate. Obviously Harry feels entitled to have anything he wants, which has been the typical attitude of royalty for centuries. In another period of time Harry might have plotted to kill his father and brother and take the crown. But those days are long in the past and of course Harry doesn't have the balls for it anyway. 

Can we all agree Harry is a jerk and so is Meghan?


----------



## Sharont2305

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40363063

From 2017


----------



## Flatsy

CeeJay said:


> See, what I don't get is .. how long has he known that he was "the spare", and WHY was it sooooooooooo hard for him to accept? That's where I have to agree with some other posters that he's a JERK!


I think he used to tell himself that it didn't matter he was the spare because he was most popular.  And that the only reason he third-wheeled it with the Cambridges is because he was a carefree bachelor living the good life, and that when he got married, he would come into his own.

Then he got married and the opposite happened.  He absurdly asked for his own court - and was told no, he would report to Buckingham Palace.  He asked for various grand residences and again was told no, he would get the cottage that was available, which was some ugly, dilapidated servant's quarters.  He thought he would get a budget and staff equal to William and Charles and got much less (which is something the Sussexes have complained about to many people, including Omid Scobie).  And he was told that he and his wife would have to work as a team with the rest of the family, which meant taking turns in the spotlight and not stepping on everyone else's projects.

He married an American with an ingrained belief that the world should be a meritocracy, and a Hollywood belief that popularity IS merit.  So the both of them stewed about how their popularity wasn't being properly rewarded and that brought Harry's resentment and jealousy to a boil.

And I think this is when Harry truly realized what he should have known his whole life - the monarchy is not a popularity contest, nor is it a meritocracy.  The monarchy is a hierarchy and he and his wife are never going to be as high up in that hierarchy as their egos feel they deserve to be, EVER.  End of story.


----------



## Allisonfaye

viciel said:


> None of the state/country laws will make a bit of a difference in the event these two part their ways in terms of parceling assets. At the end of the day it's about protecting the firm. The firm was there long before Sparkle and the firm will still be there hundreds (dare I say thousands) of years after Sparkle. Sparkle will be around for, what, another 50 years if she's lucky? She'll get her big slice of pie up front essentially getting bought out so she couldn't dip her claws into the royal cookie jar later. It doesn't matter how much they'd be paying her, they'll give her what seems to be advantageous to her. If she's smart, she'll take her nice deal and run with it, if she pushes too much she'll get what's coming for her. Overestimating her worth and power has been her achilles heel. The problem is, a narcissist will never see what's clearly in front of them. They tend to have tunnel vision, one that focuses on them being the victim and them being more deserving than anyone else, and they will creative an entire narrative to fit into that storyline. How can you tell someone they're being super obvious at scheming when they firmly believe the world is blind? It must be exhausting to be Sparkle, to actually feel insecure deep down yet trying to overcompensate but not cool enough to pull that off. It's like trying to be all fancy and cutting a scone with a knife at tea time thinking she's being high society when the proper way is to just break off a piece and put it in your mouth love.



To me, she seems like the kind of person who would take her settlement, blow through it in a few years and try to come back to the trough claiming some victimhood situation and ask for more $$.


----------



## Allisonfaye

queennadine said:


> I keep wondering what kind of 'tell all' she could really do. I mean, what info does she have on them? That TQ fed her corgis better food than the staff? PC doesn't always eat organic? Camilla cusses? Kate gets frazzled with her kids sometimes? (All speculation obviously.)
> 
> But I just don't see what kind of bombshells she could really drop. Maybe I'm naive and don't think they have many skeletons left in the closet. Knowledge of Randy Andy's perversions are about the only thing I can think of.



Totally agree. And I doubt they have a pedophile room at Buckingham Palace....


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> To me, she seems like the kind of person who would take her settlement, blow through it in a few years and try to come back to the trough claiming some victimhood situation and ask for more $$.



So she'll be Fergie 2.0, except unlike Fergie she will think she's too important to take lowly work like a contract with Weight Watchers.


----------



## Flatsy

I agree with the folks who say Meghan doesn't actually need anything concrete in order to make everyone in Harry's family sound bad.  She can put whatever spin on things she wants.  She can take things people said out of context.  

She can say that everyone made her FEEL out of place even though they were nice to her.  She can say she could SENSE that nobody liked her and nobody approved of her, even though they were polite.  She can claim that nobody called or visited ENOUGH and not actually say how often they did call and visit.  Every awkward moment she ever experienced with one of Harry's family members she can portray in the worst possible light.

There are plenty of people who would eat it up too.


----------



## Flatsy

bag-mania said:


> So she'll be Fergie 2.0, except unlike Fergie she will think she's too important to take lowly work like a contract with Weight Watchers.


She is SO Fergie 2.0.  People forget that Fergie was really famous and popular back in the day.

Other than Diana, who was a unique case, ex-royals have a very limited shelf life on the open market.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Flatsy said:


> I agree with the folks who say Meghan doesn't actually need anything concrete in order to make everyone in Harry's family sound bad.  She can put whatever spin on things she wants.  She can take things people said out of context.
> 
> She can say that everyone made her FEEL out of place even though they were nice to her.  She can say she could SENSE that nobody liked her and nobody approved of her, even though they were polite.  She can claim that nobody called or visited ENOUGH and not actually say how often they did call and visit.  Every awkward moment she ever experienced with one of Harry's family members she can portray in the worst possible light.
> 
> There are plenty of people who would eat it up too.



But two can play at that game. Once the gloves come off, anyone can say anything. That means all of the staff who have worked for her can drop anonymous statements to the gossip rags. That's when we find out about the real Meghan, the bridezilla, the momzilla, and the megalomanic. It will be glorious!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> But two can play at that game. Once the gloves come off, anyone can say anything. That means all of the staff who have worked for her can drop anonymous statements to the gossip rags. That's when we find out about the real Meghan, the bridezilla, the momzilla, and the megalomanic. It will be glorious!


TBH -- I'm surprised this hasn't already happened, but I would also imagine that those folks likely had to sign an NDA, the question is? .. is there a time-limit to that?


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> But two can play at that game. Once the gloves come off, anyone can say anything. That means all of the staff who have worked for her can drop anonymous statements to the gossip rags. That's when we find out about the real Meghan, the bridezilla, the momzilla, and the megalomanic. It will be glorious!





CeeJay said:


> TBH -- I'm surprised this hasn't already happened, but I would also imagine that those folks likely had to sign an NDA, the question is? .. is there a time-limit to that?



These stories are already out there, but the BRF wouldn’t say something themselves imo. They don’t play dirty in the press, and no matter who “wins” that public match, it would be very upsetting for that family. That in itself gives her a lot of leverage.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh FFS. Did she want a big inflatable Archie head too?


----------



## mdcx

Gosh, M just can't stop herself frantically pushing out these PR stories can she? Any semi-normal person would know this is absolutely not the time for trying to salvage a wrecked public image via relentless PR. 
Unless you are donating chunks of money to medical science or the NHS etc, zip it!


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh FFS. Did she want a big inflatable Archie head too?
> 
> View attachment 4710667


This IS soul crushing!


----------



## kipp

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh FFS. Did she want a big inflatable Archie head too?
> 
> View attachment 4710667


Surely they aren’t this stupid to leak this story—-right???


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Sharont2305 said:


> This is the man who, when Prince George was born, was asked "how do you feel about being pushed down to 4th in line?" said* "good, hope they have more!"*
> He also has said that *"no one in the family wants to be Monarch."*
> I think he's always accepted that he's the spare tbh. I think it's Megan's delusion of grandeur and manipulation that makes people think he doesn't like being the spare.



Those two quotes from Harry, along with his nazi, black-face*,* etc...yep, he is a complete a&&-h&le in my book

Case in point, everyone is entitled to a wild youth - while growing up, my friends in my posse and myself considered this country our oyster BUT none of us, not one person - and we were sons and daughters of ambassadors, ceos - we partied hard BUT we never heard or saw “jokes” made by our friends about WWII or slavery - DISGUSTING imo



lalame said:


> These stories are already out there, but the BRF wouldn’t say something themselves imo. They don’t play dirty in the press, and no matter who “wins” that public match, it would be very upsetting for that family. *That in itself gives her a lot of leverage*.



Have to disagree, *lalame*, thanks to social media and real-time online reporting, the relative truth comes out much quicker than in years before

The “word” <ha!> of these two grifters will not impact the BRF, not at all. In fact, Wills & Kate seem much more popular than ever before ♥️

Also, think it was a post by *SDKitty, *MM has been married three (3) times? This marriage to Harry is her third time down the aisle? Thought it was her second time?


----------



## threadbender

Also, think it was a post by *SDKitty, *MM has been married three (3) times? This marriage to Harry is her third time down the aisle? Thought it was her second time?[/QUOTE]
Her first one to _Joe_ Giuliano was annulled.
There are people who say they were never married but......


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Have to disagree, *lalame*, thanks to social media and real-time online reporting, the relative truth comes out much quicker than in years before
> 
> The “word” <ha!> of these two grifters will not impact the BRF, not at all. In fact, Wills & Kate seem much more popular than ever before ♥️



The BRF seem to be very troubled whenever there's salacious family drama about them in the press, like with Diana's divorce, Fergie's... toes, and William's cheating rumors. Popularity is one thing - I believe all these scandals made them more popular to the public - but that family suffers a lot of stress and turmoil. That's what I mean when I say she has a lot of leverage. They will probably pay her anything to keep from some allegations coming out.


----------



## lalame

threadbender said:


> Also, think it was a post by *SDKitty, *MM has been married three (3) times? This marriage to Harry is her third time down the aisle? Thought it was her second time?


Her first one to _Joe_ Giuliano was annulled.
There are people who say they were never married but......[/QUOTE]

Wow, you learn something new every day. I didn't know about this either.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> The BRF seem to be very troubled whenever there's salacious family drama about them in the press, like with Diana's divorce, Fergie's... toes, and William's cheating rumors. Popularity is one thing - I believe all these scandals made them more popular to the public - but that family suffers a lot of stress and turmoil. That's what I mean when I say she has a lot of leverage. They will probably pay her anything to keep from some allegations coming out.


True that the BRF don’t like to have bad things about them in the media, and it wouldn’t surprise me one but if that is what Meghan is hoping .. BUT, there are salacious bits about her too .. and they could use those, but of course they would never say it came from them!


----------



## chowlover2

Up until they were discussing Megxit, I thought it was all Meghan. Then when Harry came to discuss things with the Queen an hour early, and it hit me. He wanted things as much as she did and they were i this hot mess together. He has had plenty of opportunities to escape to GB. I just don't think it hit him until this last month that no one is interested in them. And with Coronavirus even more so. If they were to start making money hand over fist right now, he would be all in. I bet GB is looking better than it ever has before. I just hope Meghan choses to stay.


----------



## rose60610

Harry has to be kicking himself at this point. When they do split, Meghan will be kicking herself for screwing it all up. She'll be thinking "All I had to do is smile at events that somebody else set up for me to live a life of surreal luxury and never have to lift a finger. Cameras followed me and my designer wardrobe everywhere without me having to call them. I had servants to take my coat and open my doors. I had stupid Harry on a leash. How could I have been that dense to throw it away? Frogmore wasn't so crappy after all." 

Meghan is no Jackie Kennedy. She is not that caliber of a catch. There will be no Aristotle Onassis to snap her up and give her a billionaire lifestyle. Jackie had class and cachet.  Meghan demands pity while being the center of attention wherever she goes. She's exhausting. None of her super great wedding guest friends mention her.


----------



## mdcx

rose60610 said:


> Harry has to be kicking himself at this point. When they do split, Meghan will be kicking herself for screwing it all up. She'll be thinking "All I had to do is smile at events that somebody else set up for me to live a life of surreal luxury and never have to lift a finger. Cameras followed me and my designer wardrobe everywhere without me having to call them. I had servants to take my coat and open my doors. I had stupid Harry on a leash. How could I have been that dense to throw it away? Frogmore wasn't so crappy after all."
> 
> Meghan is no Jackie Kennedy. She is not that caliber of a catch. There will be no Aristotle Onassis to snap her up and give her a billionaire lifestyle. Jackie had class and cachet.  Meghan demands pity while being the center of attention wherever she goes. She's exhausting. None of her super great wedding guest friends mention her.


Agree that M doesn't have the class that is usually a component of marrying way up. I mean, H was none too bright so snatching him up was probably not a huge challenge. But anyone super-wealthy who was concerned with maintaining their public image/status would probably find M's predilection for relentless self-publicity to be worrisome.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> here in SD $500K barely gets you a tract home eight ft from the neighbor


It only got me a two bedroom two bath condo in OC. It’s rented out now, but it’s barely 1000 sq ft! Good luck to them for affording this lifestyle...


----------



## eunaddict

rose60610 said:


> Meghan is no Jackie Kennedy. She is not that caliber of a catch. There will be no Aristotle Onassis to snap her up and give her a billionaire lifestyle. Jackie had class and cachet.  Meghan demands pity while being the center of attention wherever she goes. She's exhausting. None of her super great wedding guest friends mention her.



Jackie also had the right "pedigree" - came from a line of bankers and socialites, born and raised in the "right neighbourhoods", went to the "right schools". These things are important to some people - that's why it's hard to break into the royal sphere or the hollywood elite sphere. Billionaire marriages tend to be about equality (in the beginnings before they made their money) or about leverage and marrying the "right last name" (once they've made the money) or about marrying the really young, really beautiful, really famous - MM has none of the above. 

Jackie also had a massive tragedy to carry. People are drawn to famous tragedy survivors, they empathize and they sympathize with them and they remember that outpouring of grief they were a part of - just look at how much leeway Harry has had in the British public opinion before Megxit. People STILL bring up the little withdrawn boy who walked in his mother's funeral procession. And people still excuse his poor behaviour NOW, as an extension of that tragedy.

MM though? No familial connections, no longer that young, was never really famous in her own right, and doesn't actually have her own tragedy - she's just been co-opting Harry's. On her own, she'll be very forgettable...especially if he remarries.

Side note: I'm surprised she has no/few connections from NorthWestern - she was in a sorority no?


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> Harry has to be kicking himself at this point. When they do split, Meghan will be kicking herself for screwing it all up. She'll be thinking "All I had to do is smile at events that somebody else set up for me to live a life of surreal luxury and never have to lift a finger. Cameras followed me and my designer wardrobe everywhere without me having to call them. I had servants to take my coat and open my doors. I had stupid Harry on a leash. How could I have been that dense to throw it away? Frogmore wasn't so crappy after all."
> 
> Meghan is no Jackie Kennedy. She is not that caliber of a catch. There will be no Aristotle Onassis to snap her up and give her a billionaire lifestyle. Jackie had class and cachet.  Meghan demands pity while being the center of attention wherever she goes. She's exhausting. None of her super great wedding guest friends mention her.


I don’t think either of them looks forward in time - say 15 or 20 years from now, at what their life will look like then.


----------



## Lodpah

I posted the comparison pictures of Meghan and Angelina Jolie. If you don't think MM is diabolical in her scheming then I don't know what to say:


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> Compare that £90,000 to Captain Tom Moore, an Army veteran who, at the age of 99 wanted to raise £1000 for the NHS in this crisis to thank them after recovering from cancer and a hip operation, by walking 100 laps of his garden by this Thursday. He started last week and as of now his fundraising page has raised over 8 MILLION POUNDS!!!! I think today alone its gone up by 4 million. [emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]




What a great story, thanks for telling us about it. Seems that he has raised $15 million (or 12 million pounds)!  How incredible!  And no pointless babbling like some people that I can think of!  Wonder how long it will take H & M to raise that kind of money!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And for the second wife to behave like a member of the RF should.


Can you imagine being her? Being side-eyed from day 1 because nobody forgot the mess Meghan made?


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can you imagine being her? Being side-eyed from day 1 because nobody forgot the mess Meghan made?


On the flip side, the bar will be set reaaaaaaaal low.


----------



## closeted

Anyone with an inkling would be very very wary of marrying H in the future. The bar might be low but H is still H, and he is at least partially for the mess he is in right now. Can u imagine H with even more excess bagage in the not so distant future?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Daily Mail UK
“Prince Harry has conducted a personal video call with families caring for seriously ill children at home.”

Hmmm not the most flattering comments and yes, Harry looks like he is about to “go beserk” as one reader kindly pointed out

Looks like H&M’s image rehabilitation is off to a weak start


----------



## Sharont2305

He looks older than William.


----------



## needlv

Sharont2305 said:


> He looks older than William.



He looks unkempt .... seriously did he even look in the mirror?


----------



## mia55

Things would have been so much better and easier for them if they had shown some maturity in their actions and acted cautiously. If they had some patience they’d have been still negotiating with RF and benefiting the most in this Covid-19 situation. 6months back they were popular and liked by most, so in this situation they must have been conducting more video calls and their popularity would have sky rocketed. Who knows even queen would have agreed for part time royal position if their initiatives had brought importance to RF. But they had to act like a spoiled brat and ruin everything for themselves.

Im really glad they exited early and everyone knows their real intentions and they ended up looking like fools.


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> Harry has to be kicking himself at this point. When they do split, Meghan will be kicking herself for screwing it all up. She'll be thinking "All I had to do is smile at events that somebody else set up for me to live a life of surreal luxury and never have to lift a finger. Cameras followed me and my designer wardrobe everywhere without me having to call them. I had servants to take my coat and open my doors. I had stupid Harry on a leash. How could I have been that dense to throw it away? Frogmore wasn't so crappy after all."
> 
> Meghan is no Jackie Kennedy. She is not that caliber of a catch. There will be no Aristotle Onassis to snap her up and give her a billionaire lifestyle. Jackie had class and cachet.  Meghan demands pity while being the center of attention wherever she goes. She's exhausting. None of her super great wedding guest friends mention her.



I would love if MM ate crow and realized she effed up, but I think people like her never put any blame on themselves.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Something does seem odd about the timing, that cabinet does not look high end at all, and H looks like hell.


----------



## Sharont2305

....meanwhile Prince William has opened the new NHS Nightingale Hospital constructed within the National Exib Centre Birmingham via video link


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> ....meanwhile Prince William has opened the new NHS Nightingale Hospital constructed within the National Exib Centre Birmingham via video link


Interesting, the coincidences keep coming 
Harry’s been transformed into the weird bloke everyone avoids sitting next to on the bus.


----------



## doni

They really seem to be loosing it big time. I didn’t expect this. I guess their careful planning by all those masters of spin did not cater for a global pandemia and now everything is falling apart.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Well I called this one... though I didn't think they'd become drivers  have they stopped to bring Doria anything?

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle volunteer to deliver food to people living with critical illnesses in Los Angeles after learning charity drivers were 'overloaded' and needed help*

*Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, delivered food in LA this week *
*Couple teamed up with a charity to deliver meals to people with critical illnesses*
*First volunteered on Easter Sunday and asked if they could return on Wednesday*
*Project Angel Food director said he was 'blown away' by the gesture*


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> Well I called this one... though I didn't think they'd become drivers  have they stopped to bring Doria anything?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle volunteer to deliver food to people living with critical illnesses in Los Angeles after learning charity drivers were 'overloaded' and needed help*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, delivered food in LA this week *
> *Couple teamed up with a charity to deliver meals to people with critical illnesses*
> *First volunteered on Easter Sunday and asked if they could return on Wednesday*
> *Project Angel Food director said he was 'blown away' by the gesture*


Quite surprised this hasn't beed "papped"

*via Meghan


----------



## mrsinsyder

This is what the stuff he says to parents of special needs kids... how hard things are with one 11-month old? And the fans swear Will says ridiculous things 

_Prince Harry has accused the Government of abandoning British families with vulnerable disabled children during the coronavirus lockdown in a video call from his luxury LA mansion. 

Harry told families he 'felt almost guilty' about how much family time he was having and 'one kid' was 'enough' for him to handle while being stuck at home.

But the 35-year-old claimed there are a 'hell of a lot of positives happening' for people back in the UK, adding: 'Being able to have family time - so I feel guilty. 

'But you have got to celebrate those moments when you are just rolling around on the floor in hysterics. _


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Quite surprised this hasn't beed "papped"
> 
> *via Meghan


There will be pictures.  Count on it.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> There will be pictures.  Count on it.


Caaaaan't wait *eyeroll


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sharont2305 said:


> Quite surprised this hasn't beed "papped"
> 
> *via Meghan


I'm also confused at how Archie couldn't travel because of Coronavirus but they are inserting themselves in with a high risk population? Nothing they do makes sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Man, I dunno. I know we are supposed to not feel sorry anymore for a grown man who is lying in the bed he made for himself, but he does look awful. All the while that woman is never seen without the happiest fake smile plastered on her smug face.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> There will be pictures.  Count on it.


Top comment on DM says they went with a full security team... I'd love to see it  do we think Splash will be the photog agency?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Man, I dunno. I know we are supposed to not feel sorry anymore for a grown man who is lying in the bed he made for himself, but he does look awful. All the while that woman is never seen without the happiest fake smile plastered on her smug face.


I honestly can’t get over how bad he looks.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> I honestly can’t get over how bad he looks.


He looks like a used Q-Tip.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Ah, as I suspected.

_When he opened it to receive meals from Project Angel Food for himself and his neighbor, Becky Lincoln, he thought the volunteers doing the delivery looked a bit familiar.

“They were both nice and very down-to earth people,” Tyrell said. “They had masks on, and they were dressed down with jeans, but very nice jeans.”

“I thought that tall red-headed guy looked pretty familiar, and that girl was very pretty. *Then I saw the large black SUVs with the security guards behind them.”*_


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Well I called this one... though I didn't think they'd become drivers  have they stopped to bring Doria anything?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle volunteer to deliver food to people living with critical illnesses in Los Angeles after learning charity drivers were 'overloaded' and needed help*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, delivered food in LA this week *
> *Couple teamed up with a charity to deliver meals to people with critical illnesses*
> *First volunteered on Easter Sunday and asked if they could return on Wednesday*
> *Project Angel Food director said he was 'blown away' by the gesture*



What about her dad? I'm sure he would love to hear from her in this scary time when he is in the high-risk category.

Brings food to strangers but can't even be bothered to check on her own father?


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> This is what the stuff he says to parents of special needs kids... how hard things are with one 11-month old? And the fans swear Will says ridiculous things
> 
> _Prince Harry has accused the Government of abandoning British families with vulnerable disabled children during the coronavirus lockdown in a video call from his luxury LA mansion.
> 
> Harry told families he 'felt almost guilty' about how much family time he was having and 'one kid' was 'enough' for him to handle while being stuck at home.
> 
> But the 35-year-old claimed there are a 'hell of a lot of positives happening' for people back in the UK, adding: 'Being able to have family time - so I feel guilty.
> 
> 'But you have got to celebrate those moments when you are just rolling around on the floor in hysterics. _



What the heck? Almost as though he can't manage to do things thoughtfully unless he has a script/outline and someone guiding him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> _“I thought that tall red-headed guy looked pretty familiar, and that girl was very pretty. *Then I saw the large black SUVs with the security guards behind them.”*_


They are so ridiculous.


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> Ah, as I suspected.
> 
> _When he opened it to receive meals from Project Angel Food for himself and his neighbor, Becky Lincoln, he thought the volunteers doing the delivery looked a bit familiar.
> 
> “They were both nice and very down-to earth people,” Tyrell said. “They had masks on, and they were dressed down with jeans, but very nice jeans.”
> 
> “I thought that tall red-headed guy looked pretty familiar, and that girl was very pretty. *Then I saw the large black SUVs with the security guards behind them.”*_


They just don't get it. Multiple security vehicles? Really? 

How about this--just send a couple of your security staff out in regular vans to deliver the meals and you 2 knuckleheads stay home with the kid. No one needs to know who is who. Pay for a large amount of the meals and leave it at that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are so ridiculous.


Imagine the procession they had to deliver a measly 20 meals. It would have been more effective to donate $200 to the place instead.

What about doing something like Lady Gaga has done? Or do they want to save all the private business earning potential for themselves?
*How Lady Gaga Became the Face of COVID-19 Relief*
https://www.vogue.com/article/lady-gaga-one-world-coronavirus-concert


----------



## lanasyogamama

Thanks for forcing all those security people to go out in the world unnecessarily H and M.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are so ridiculous.


And what about they _both go together_ to the door to handle the food? What the heck is that? In times of social distancing? Did they hold hands? Or maybe Harry couldn’t carry the pot of soup on his own?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> And what about they _both go together_ to the door to handle the food? What the heck is that? In times of social distancing? Did they hold hands? Or maybe Harry couldn’t carry the pot of soup on his own?



I mean, people would probably not recognize them if they weren't glued to each other.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I'm  on the comments for these two stories... with the Zoom call, the fans were cheering them for "following the social distancing rules rather than risking people's lives for an unhelpful photo op."

Then the food delivery story comes out. WOMP WOMP.


----------



## threadbender

lanasyogamama said:


> Something does seem odd about the timing, that cabinet does not look high end at all, and H looks like hell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4710954


Yes, it appears they have been in LA and, as such, did not have to "flee" before the borders would close. They had already been gone for awhile! So, I would imagine, they had opportunities to see Doria and other friends prior to being quarantined. Possibly.


----------



## Sophisticatted

With Meghan the phrase “pics or it didn’t happen” is all too true.


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> maybe MM could do it then


Ouch!!!  (“Good one!” is an understatement)


----------



## lanasyogamama

doni said:


> And what about they _both go together_ to the door to handle the food? What the heck is that? In times of social distancing? Did they hold hands? Or maybe Harry couldn’t carry the pot of soup on his own?


It took everything in her to not hug them!


----------



## 1LV

Flatsy said:


> I think he used to tell himself that it didn't matter he was the spare because he was most popular.  And that the only reason he third-wheeled it with the Cambridges is because he was a carefree bachelor living the good life, and that when he got married, he would come into his own.
> 
> Then he got married and the opposite happened.  He absurdly asked for his own court - and was told no, he would report to Buckingham Palace.  He asked for various grand residences and again was told no, he would get the cottage that was available, which was some ugly, dilapidated servant's quarters.  He thought he would get a budget and staff equal to William and Charles and got much less (which is something the Sussexes have complained about to many people, including Omid Scobie).  And he was told that he and his wife would have to work as a team with the rest of the family, which meant taking turns in the spotlight and not stepping on everyone else's projects.
> 
> He married an American with an ingrained belief that the world should be a meritocracy, and a Hollywood belief that popularity IS merit.  So the both of them stewed about how their popularity wasn't being properly rewarded and that brought Harry's resentment and jealousy to a boil.
> 
> And I think this is when Harry truly realized what he should have known his whole life - the monarchy is not a popularity contest, nor is it a meritocracy.  The monarchy is a hierarchy and he and his wife are never going to be as high up in that hierarchy as their egos feel they deserve to be, EVER.  End of story.


Wish I could give this more than one thumb up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just out of curiosity, which residences did he ask for?


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just out of curiosity, which residences did he ask for?


They wanted an apartment in Windsor castle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> They wanted an apartment in Windsor castle.



Ah yes, I remember. I wonder if they sabotaged themselves so they could blow up their victim narrative. Asking for an apartment in a residence where nobody but the Queen resides, then crying when they are being denied. Asking for their own court, which can't be topped in ridiculousness. And they really thought they'd be staffed better than #2 and 3 in line, you know, the actual future monarchs?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

No one gets an apartment at Windsor Castle!


----------



## Flatsy

Clearblueskies said:


> They wanted an apartment in Windsor castle.


And very early rumors indicated they wanted Frogmore House, not Frogmore Cottage.  If they had gotten their way and been granted their own court, they would have needed a far bigger place to house their court than a cottage.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s so crazy that he just didn’t tell her “oh, no, that’s not how it works in my fam.”


----------



## Flatsy

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s so crazy that he just didn’t tell her “oh, no, that’s not how it works in my fam.”


I think he did, and Meghan told him, "But that's how it SHOULD work in your fam" and Harry bought into that way of thinking.


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s so crazy that he just didn’t tell her “oh, no, that’s not how it works in my fam.”


And for her to say "yes dear"

It would have been soooo different.


----------



## chowlover2

eunaddict said:


> Jackie also had the right "pedigree" - came from a line of bankers and socialites, born and raised in the "right neighbourhoods", went to the "right schools". These things are important to some people - that's why it's hard to break into the royal sphere or the hollywood elite sphere. Billionaire marriages tend to be about equality (in the beginnings before they made their money) or about leverage and marrying the "right last name" (once they've made the money) or about marrying the really young, really beautiful, really famous - MM has none of the above.
> 
> Jackie also had a massive tragedy to carry. People are drawn to famous tragedy survivors, they empathize and they sympathize with them and they remember that outpouring of grief they were a part of - just look at how much leeway Harry has had in the British public opinion before Megxit. People STILL bring up the little withdrawn boy who walked in his mother's funeral procession. And people still excuse his poor behaviour NOW, as an extension of that tragedy.
> 
> MM though? No familial connections, no longer that young, was never really famous in her own right, and doesn't actually have her own tragedy - she's just been co-opting Harry's. On her own, she'll be very forgettable...especially if he remarries.
> 
> Side note: I'm surprised she has no/few connections from NorthWestern - she was in a sorority no?


Carole Middletown set both her daughters up right. Both went to the right schools and both have married extremely well!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Flatsy said:


> And very early rumors indicated they wanted Frogmore House, not Frogmore Cottage.  If they had gotten their way and been granted their own court, they would have needed a far bigger place to house their court than a cottage.



LOL

Starting to see the Queen's sense of humour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s so crazy that he just didn’t tell her “oh, no, that’s not how it works in my fam.”


Yes! I thought these ideas must have come from her because he knows better...but then, why did he go along with it?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes! I thought these ideas must have come from her because he knows better...but then, why did he go along with it?


To keep her happy, and quiet


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm also confused at how Archie couldn't travel because of Coronavirus but they are inserting themselves in with a high risk population? Nothing they do makes sense.



*They sit on a throne of lies!!!*


----------



## Flatsy

1LV said:


> Wish I could give this more than one thumb up.



And I really think the very final straw for Meghan and Harry was the pictures.  They thought they were going to be visible on the Queen's desk for her Christmas address every single year just because of their popularity and Harry's specialness with his grandmother.  They appeared in two photos in 2018!  And then 2019 - nothing.  Not even the birth of Archie got them a spot.

Because the Queen's photos in 2019 were all about emphasizing the line of succession and generational continuity of the monarchy.  Harry does not factor into that and barring some very extreme and unlikely circumstances, never will.   And he and Meghan took that as a personal affront even though Harry should have known that for 34 years.


----------



## sdkitty

Flatsy said:


> And I really think the very final straw for Meghan and Harry was the pictures.  They thought they were going to be visible on the Queen's desk for her Christmas address every single year just because of their popularity and Harry's specialness with his grandmother.  They appeared in two photos in 2018!  And then 2019 - nothing.  Not even the birth of Archie got them a spot.
> 
> Because the Queen's photos in 2019 were all about emphasizing the line of succession and generational continuity of the monarchy.  Harry does not factor into that and barring some very extreme and unlikely circumstances, never will.   And he and Meghan took that as a personal affront even though Harry should have known that for 34 years.


Meghan went in with plenty of fanfare and popularity.  Huge wedding which when you think about it, never would have happened for a divorcee years ago.  

After the wedding, she was lauded in the media for every simple outfit she showed up in.
She still has plenty of fans I'm sure.  Any loss of popularity is due to their own actions IMO.  It's a shame for Harry.  He was pretty much beloved by people in the US and Britain (and Europe?) all of his life.  Now he's looking like a fool (at least to some of us).


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> She still has plenty of fans I'm sure.  Any loss of popularity is due to their own actions IMO.  It's a shame for Harry.  He was pretty much beloved by people in the US and Britain (and Europe?) all of his life.  Now he's looking like a fool (at least to some of us).



I think most of the people who still like them are those who are not actively following them. They are unaware of all the hypocrisy and lies. They may see an upbeat story flash across their computer/phone screen every once in awhile and they have positive feelings about H&M. Familiarity breeds contempt. If you give them a close look most won't like what they see.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Is stateside media turning on them also?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think most of the people who still like them are those who are not actively following them. They are unaware of all the hypocrisy and lies. They may see an upbeat story flash across their computer/phone screen every once in awhile and they have positive feelings about H&M. Familiarity breeds contempt. If you give them a close look most won't like what they see.


then there are those who are actively following them and only want to see the positive things....some would call them stans


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> LOL
> 
> Starting to see the Queen's sense of humour.



Oh man, I have this probably-not-accurate-at-all scene playing in my head. H&M ask for Frogmore without specifying which, assuming, of course, that the 7th in line to the throne must surely get the house. QE goes "Excellent my dear boy, that's exactly what I had in mind." 

H&M show up Monday to the main house and get redirected to the cottage instead.

I know that's not how it works and not how it went down, but it tickles me.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Top comment on DM says they went with a full security team... I'd love to see it  do we think Splash will be the photog agency?


So wait .. what?? .. they "volunteer" but yet put their security team at risk  -AND-  have to pay them!   Okay, we all knew Hazza wasn't bright, but now I'm thinking .. neither is Meghan!  DOUBLE-DOLTS!!


----------



## Flatsy

mrsinsyder said:


> Is stateside media turning on them also?


US Weekly WAS.  I read a story about Megxit in US Weekly that had the nerve to admit that Meghan is not as super-close to her mother as many people believe, and that being estranged from family is something that is normal for Meghan because she has experienced it a lot.  Which is all truth.

A few weeks later, there was a very gushy cover story that was clearly fed to them by Meghan about how cozy and happy the Sussexes are, with "exclusive details" about their "date nights" and "baby Archie".  It was the type of story People normally does.

People Magazine will never turn on any royals.  They may report controversies, but they don't take sides and are always happy to do a fluff cover for whatever major royal wants one.


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> And what about they _both go together_ to the door to handle the food? What the heck is that? In times of social distancing? Did they hold hands? Or maybe Harry couldn’t carry the pot of soup on his own?


RIGHT?!?! .. I've been trying to order food from local restaurants here (to support them during this crisis) and NOT ONCE do they hand you the meal at your doorstep!!!  They knock on the door, leave the food and THEN you open the door after they have left and bring the food in!!!  WHAT BS, and all because those two JUST HAVE TO BE in the media!


----------



## Genie27

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?!?! .. I've been trying to order food from local restaurants here (to support them during this crisis) and NOT ONCE do they hand you the meal at your doorstep!!!  They knock on the door, leave the food and THEN you open the door after they have left and bring the food in!!!  WHAT BS, and all because those two JUST HAVE TO BE in the media!


Yes, but then HOW would the PUBLIC know it was THEM at the door? 

Without the security detail and black SUV entourage (and the very nice jeans) they could be any run of the mill do-gooder celeb going volunteering.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope “very nice jeans” sticks.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Is stateside media turning on them also?



The entertainment/gossip/tabloid magazines like to have headlines that stir the pot and inspire an impulsive purchase at the checkout line. The US news media has so far been hands-off. Their focus is rightly on the pandemic. H&M haven't done anything newsworthy and probably won't until the breakup is announced.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh geez. This is one the most painfully obsequious Meghan stories I've ever seen and of course it slips in how _they're delivering food to the needy_. Their PR people are hard at work placing the self-promoting, hooray-for-them articles. I'll copy a portion of it here, though I don't want it to get too much attention because they'll only write more gag-inducing crap like this if they get a lot of clicks. 

*Meghan Markle Is Finally "Starting to Feel Like Herself Again" After Stepping Back From Royal Duties*
*We love to see it.*

It's been a little over two weeks since Meghan Markle and Prince Harry completed their royal duties, can you believe it? In the time since then, Meghan's already been super busy getting her sh*t together, and she has yet to disappoint. She's already narrated the Disney+ movie, _Elephants_, has plans to possibly write another cookbook and relaunch her lifestyle blog, _The Tig, _and is currently living out her new monarchy-free life in sunny Los Angeles_. _These changes have been really good for Meghan, and she's feeling pretty all around fantastic, according to a new _Us Weekly_ report.

Of course, the move to Los Angeles wasn't all about Meghan—Harry reportedly seems happy about the change of scenery himself. “Harry and Meghan were really excited to move to L.A.,” _Us_' source said. “The timing is tricky of course, but this is something they’ve been hoping for and seriously planning for several months now.”

The change of scenery has been so good for Meghan that she's beginning to feel normal again now that she's left the monarchy. “They’ve been looking forward to [moving], and they’re very content and happy to finally be all settled in,” the source added. “And of course, Meghan feels more at home too and she’s really starting to feel like herself again.” Love to hear it!!
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...feel-like-herself-stepping-back-royal-duties/


----------



## mrsinsyder

I'd feel pretty happy too living in a house I'm not paying for, protected by security I'm not paying for, all while having to do absolutely no work.


----------



## scarlet555

OMG, these two with the food deliveries!  Seriously, help yourself and your family first before helping others...    Meegain is the right name for M, to be exact "Me!"gain.  
This is what happens when the governor doesn't ask you for a PSA 'a la Kim Kardashian':



Office of the Governor of California

✔@CAgovernor
https://twitter.com/CAgovernor/status/1249822327862202368

Staying at home means having so much fun with your kids! Just look at how much fun @KimKardashian & North West are having!

By staying home, you’re saving lives. Keep it up, California.




http://covid19.ca.gov  #StayHomeSaveLives





3,045
3:10 PM - Apr 13, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy

651 people are talking about this



.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Oh geez. This is one the most painfully obsequious Meghan stories I've ever seen and of course it slips in how _they're delivering food to the needy_. Their PR people are hard at work placing the self-promoting, hooray-for-them articles. I'll copy a portion of it here, though I don't want it to get too much attention because they'll only write more gag-inducing crap like this if they get a lot of clicks.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is Finally "Starting to Feel Like Herself Again" After Stepping Back From Royal Duties*
> *We love to see it.*
> 
> It's been a little over two weeks since Meghan Markle and Prince Harry completed their royal duties, can you believe it? In the time since then, Meghan's already been super busy getting her sh*t together, and she has yet to disappoint. She's already narrated the Disney+ movie, _Elephants_, has plans to possibly write another cookbook and relaunch her lifestyle blog, _The Tig, _and is currently living out her new monarchy-free life in sunny Los Angeles_. _These changes have been really good for Meghan, and she's feeling pretty all around fantastic, according to a new _Us Weekly_ report.
> 
> Of course, the move to Los Angeles wasn't all about Meghan—Harry reportedly seems happy about the change of scenery himself. “Harry and Meghan were really excited to move to L.A.,” _Us_' source said. “The timing is tricky of course, but this is something they’ve been hoping for and seriously planning for several months now.”
> 
> The change of scenery has been so good for Meghan that she's beginning to feel normal again now that she's left the monarchy. “They’ve been looking forward to [moving], and they’re very content and happy to finally be all settled in,” the source added. “And of course, Meghan feels more at home too and she’s really starting to feel like herself again.” Love to hear it!!
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...feel-like-herself-stepping-back-royal-duties/


In other words I have to keep convincing myself that I made the right choice. She’s so full of it that’s it’s obvious that she’s trying to make the royals jealous.


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> Something does seem odd about the timing, that cabinet does not look high end at all, and H looks like hell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4710954


At first glance they look the same, even the wall looks the same colour, but I think the cabinet doors are slightly different in both pictures?
Also, can he not find a single better background in the entire house to sit in front of for a video call? He looks lazy, no effort put in at all.



Clearblueskies said:


> Interesting, the coincidences keep coming
> *Harry’s been transformed into the weird bloke everyone avoids sitting next to on the bus*.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Oh geez. This is one the most painfully obsequious Meghan stories I've ever seen and of course it slips in how _they're delivering food to the needy_. Their PR people are hard at work placing the self-promoting, hooray-for-them articles. I'll copy a portion of it here, though I don't want it to get too much attention because they'll only write more gag-inducing crap like this if they get a lot of clicks.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is Finally "Starting to Feel Like Herself Again" After Stepping Back From Royal Duties*
> *We love to see it.*
> 
> It's been a little over two weeks since Meghan Markle and Prince Harry completed their royal duties, can you believe it? In the time since then, Meghan's already been super busy getting her sh*t together, and she has yet to disappoint. She's already narrated the Disney+ movie, _Elephants_, has plans to possibly write another cookbook and relaunch her lifestyle blog, _The Tig, _and is currently living out her new monarchy-free life in sunny Los Angeles_. _These changes have been really good for Meghan, and she's feeling pretty all around fantastic, according to a new _Us Weekly_ report.
> 
> Of course, the move to Los Angeles wasn't all about Meghan—Harry reportedly seems happy about the change of scenery himself. “Harry and Meghan were really excited to move to L.A.,” _Us_' source said. “The timing is tricky of course, but this is something they’ve been hoping for and seriously planning for several months now.”
> 
> The change of scenery has been so good for Meghan that she's beginning to feel normal again now that she's left the monarchy. “They’ve been looking forward to [moving], and they’re very content and happy to finally be all settled in,” the source added. “And of course, Meghan feels more at home too and she’s really starting to feel like herself again.” Love to hear it!!
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...feel-like-herself-stepping-back-royal-duties/



Like her old self?  Did I read Yatch girl on this thread as her old self?  Heading for a divorce, are we?  as the old self?  mmhmm.  We get it...Bye H....  feeling normal, like the no money normal?  Hunting for job normal?  Delivering food in a pandemic as a tabloid heist normal?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> In other words I have to keep convincing myself that I made the right choice. She’s so full of it that’s it’s obvious that she’s trying to make the royals jealous.



She is desperately craving popularity. Her worst nightmare must be that everyone forgets about her.


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> And what about they _both go together_ to the door to handle the food? What the heck is that? In times of social distancing? Did they hold hands? Or maybe Harry couldn’t carry the pot of soup on his own?


That's what I was thinking.  They went together?  What a waste, if indeed this story is true.



chowlover2 said:


> Carole Middletown set both her daughters up right. Both went to the right schools and both have married extremely well!


Pippa only got the chance to marry well because Kate was already Duchess of Cambridge.

Imagine Pippa trying to find a rich, well connected, heir to a title husband if she didn't have a Royal sister. She'd be struggling like any other girl in London.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lounorada said:


> At first glance they look the same, even the wall looks the same colour, but I think the cabinet doors are slightly different in both pictures?
> Also, can he not find a single better background in the entire house to sit in front of for a video call? He looks lazy, no effort put in at all.


Yeah, I see what you mean.  We will have to wait for the next video for more evidence.  
Can someone send him a ring light?


----------



## mrsinsyder

scarlet555 said:


> Like her old self?


Did someone say old Megs?


----------



## Chagall

mrsinsyder said:


> Did someone say old Megs?


She just exudes class.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Oh geez. This is one the most painfully obsequious Meghan stories I've ever seen and of course it slips in how _they're delivering food to the needy_. Their PR people are hard at work placing the self-promoting, hooray-for-them articles. I'll copy a portion of it here, though I don't want it to get too much attention because they'll only write more gag-inducing crap like this if they get a lot of clicks.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Is Finally "Starting to Feel Like Herself Again" After Stepping Back From Royal Duties*
> *We love to see it.*
> 
> It's been a little over two weeks since Meghan Markle and Prince Harry completed their royal duties, can you believe it? In the time since then, Meghan's already been super busy getting her sh*t together, and she has yet to disappoint. She's already narrated the Disney+ movie, _Elephants_, has plans to possibly write another cookbook and relaunch her lifestyle blog, _The Tig, _and is currently living out her new monarchy-free life in sunny Los Angeles_. _These changes have been really good for Meghan, and she's feeling pretty all around fantastic, according to a new _Us Weekly_ report.
> 
> Of course, the move to Los Angeles wasn't all about Meghan—Harry reportedly seems happy about the change of scenery himself. “Harry and Meghan were really excited to move to L.A.,” _Us_' source said. “The timing is tricky of course, but this is something they’ve been hoping for and seriously planning for several months now.”
> 
> The change of scenery has been so good for Meghan that she's beginning to feel normal again now that she's left the monarchy. “They’ve been looking forward to [moving], and they’re very content and happy to finally be all settled in,” the source added. “And of course, Meghan feels more at home too and she’s really starting to feel like herself again.” Love to hear it!!
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...feel-like-herself-stepping-back-royal-duties/



Oh like a thirsty Z list actress?


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Did someone say old Megs?


Yikes,  they look so fake. I can see why she had them removed.


----------



## mrsinsyder

gracekelly said:


> Yikes,  they look so fake. I can see why she had them removed.


Yeah... she had more in common with Victoria Beckham than she thought.


----------



## Handbag1234

I wonder if MEghan changed it up for the Covid-19 home deliveries? I’d love to know if the bananas had #staysafe #stayhome on them? Or maybe a really helpful ‘now wash your hands’. Or did she stick with the tried and tested ‘you are loved’?


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> This is what the stuff he says to parents of special needs kids... how hard things are with one 11-month old? And the fans swear Will says ridiculous things
> 
> _Prince Harry has accused the Government of abandoning British families with vulnerable disabled children during the coronavirus lockdown in a video call from his luxury LA mansion.
> 
> Harry told families he 'felt almost guilty' about how much family time he was having and 'one kid' was 'enough' for him to handle while being stuck at home.
> 
> But the 35-year-old claimed there are a 'hell of a lot of positives happening' for people back in the UK, adding: 'Being able to have family time - so I feel guilty.
> 
> 'But you have got to celebrate those moments when you are just rolling around on the floor in hysterics. _







They are so self-absorbed.



mrsinsyder said:


> Ah, as I suspected.
> 
> _When he opened it to receive meals from Project Angel Food for himself and his neighbor, Becky Lincoln, he thought the volunteers doing the delivery looked a bit familiar.
> 
> “They were both nice and very down-to earth people,” Tyrell said. “They had masks on, *and they were dressed down with jeans, but very nice jeans.”*
> 
> “I thought that tall red-headed guy looked pretty familiar, and that girl was very pretty. Then I saw the large black SUVs with the security guards behind them.”_



*"...they were dressed down with jeans, but very nice jeans.”


*
WTF?! Such an odd thing to say. Sounds like this person was told what to say.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Like I said before, if one is truly happy and content with their life, they don't feel the need to tell the world "how happy we are" every chance they get. Their PR machine is really over doing it and it's not fooling anyone. If you truly want to be away from the media, stop "leaking" stories via the "sources"!


----------



## Sharont2305

..... Meanwhile Prince William has written to Captain Tom Moore to congratulate him on raising £15.5 million for the NHS and has made a private donation to the fund.

*similar to my earlier post, lol


----------



## lalame

I really didn't mind the delivering food thing. I think it's great! Gemma Chan and Dominic Cooper also did that, except for NHS hospitals, and they shared some of the experiences on her instagram. I thought it was cute, and people seemed to have gotten a kick out of seeing celebrities deliver them (free) food.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Sharont2305 said:


> ..... Meanwhile Prince William has written to Captain Tom Moore to congratulate him on raising £15.5 million for the NHS and has made a private donation to the fund.
> 
> *similar to my earlier post, lol



omg, Harry's greasy fist has to leave an imprint on this too?
Hey there, #i'm-no-longer-royal-bc-I'm-too-greedy, do you think I actually care about you?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I was thinking.  They went together?  What a waste, if indeed this story is true.
> 
> 
> Pippa only got the chance to marry well because Kate was already Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Imagine Pippa trying to find a rich, well connected, heir to a title husband if she didn't have a Royal sister. She'd be struggling like any other girl in London.


well, maybe not like any old girl in London.  she did come from a wealthy family and went to the right school, etc.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I really didn't mind the delivering food thing. I think it's great! Gemma Chan and Dominic Cooper also did that, except for NHS hospitals, and they shared some of the experiences on her instagram. I thought it was cute, and people seemed to have gotten a kick out of seeing celebrities deliver them (free) food.


 IN the latest daily mail article , oh my gosh , has Harry  even chewing out the british government handling of special needs children, he looks like zombie in photo
Prince Harry's 'family time' in LA home under lockdown
https://mol.im/a/8224495 
pluhhh leees noooo, these are such difficult complicated times , stay out of it ... 
I have a friend , terminal case, expected to die in 2 mos, who was sent home from hospice care because it might be a safer place than hospice home , who knew ? complicated difficult times, 
Stirring the pot from 8000 miles away does not help 
My soul is crushed by this intervention of his 
up to this point, I think, maybe I had said nothing terribly negative about H&M , i mostly humorously ( striving for wit not condemnation )  stick to the facts not to commentary, so, in my mind this is a first 
Gobsmacked


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> ..... Meanwhile Prince William has written to Captain Tom Moore to congratulate him on raising £15.5 million for the NHS and has made a private donation to the fund.
> 
> *similar to my earlier post, lol



The Cambridges really do everything right. It is not that hard, is it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Cambridges really do everything right. It is not that hard, is it?


Nope, not hard at all.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> Like I said before, if one is truly happy and content with their life, they don't feel the need to tell the world "how happy we are" every chance they get. Their PR machine is really over doing it and it's not fooling anyone. If you truly want to be away from the media, stop "leaking" stories via the "sources"!


THIS!!! .. how many celebs have we seen dispute "rumors" about their marriages and then ~BOOM~ we find out that a divorce is imminent!  These 2 just make me want to vomit right now; you REALLY want to make a difference? .. DONATE YOUR $$$$!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> THIS!!! .. how many celebs have we seen dispute "rumors" about their marriages and then ~BOOM~ we find out that a divorce is imminent!  These 2 just make me want to vomit right now; you REALLY want to make a difference? .. DONATE YOUR $$$$!!!


every time I see an article or a tv piece showing how very happy a celeb  couple is I wonder how long before we see they are splitting.  Latest was last night on tv Camerion Diaz spouting how she and her husband are so happy being shut in together with their child.  Hopefully in her case it's not BS but I've become somewhat cynical.


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> Yeah, I see what you mean.  We will have to wait for the next video for more evidence.
> Can someone send him a ring light?


The walls look the exact same colour though, so it could be the same house, just different rooms!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I really didn't mind the delivering food thing. I think it's great! Gemma Chan and Dominic Cooper also did that, except for NHS hospitals, and they shared some of the experiences on her instagram. I thought it was cute, and people seemed to have gotten a kick out of seeing celebrities deliver them (free) food.



It's not that they delivered food to needy people that's the issue, it's their motive for doing it. Given their history it's hard not to question whether they would be doing it out of the goodness of their hearts if they weren't being given press coverage about it. If they didn't want a big fuss made about their act of kindness they could have asked to remain anonymous. I doubt the charity's CEO would have been on the phone talking to CNN if Harry and Meghan didn't encourage it.


----------



## tiktok

scarlet555 said:


> Like her old self?  Did I read Yatch girl on this thread as her old self?  Heading for a divorce, are we?  as the old self?  mmhmm.  We get it...Bye H....  feeling normal, like the no money normal?  Hunting for job normal?  Delivering food in a pandemic as a tabloid heist normal?



Hunting for a rich British husband normal! Maybe another zero in the bank account next time, though.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> It's not that they delivered food to needy people that's the issue, it's their motive for doing it. Given their history it's hard not to question whether they would be doing it out of the goodness of their hearts if they weren't being given press coverage about it. If they didn't want a big fuss made about their act of kindness they could have asked to remain anonymous. I doubt the charity's CEO would have been on the phone talking to CNN if Harry and Meghan didn't encourage it.


EXACTLY; these two are SO NEEDY for any press, that's what I really loathe about them!  

Oh yeah .. and on the 'heartbreak' of them not being able to invite their "CELEBRITY" friends to a 1-year Birthday party for Archie, are you effin' kidding me??????  Heaven forbid they invite their own freakin' family to meet the child, but NOOOOOOOOOOO .. they have to have their fake celebrity "friends" come to a birthday party for Archie!!!  So, would that be like the Baby Shower that was done for Meghan last year, with all her "celebrity friends"?  Have we even heard a peep from any of their "celebrity friends" about H&M??? ... ANSWER = NO, and that's the WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!  Hopefully, their "celebrity friends" have markle'd them!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> I really didn't mind the delivering food thing. I think it's great! Gemma Chan and Dominic Cooper also did that, except for NHS hospitals, and they shared some of the experiences on her instagram. I thought it was cute, and people seemed to have gotten a kick out of seeing celebrities deliver them (free) food.


Except Gemma and Dominic didn't need a truck load of security with them! Nor did they "leak" the story to the any press (I did saw Gemma's story on IG, it was really sweet). They are doing a real good deed without inconvenient others. Those 2 just want the "photo op" and doing it for PR only. They didn't have Archie with them and what exactly did they think would be so dangerous to need so much security for delivering food???


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY; these two are SO NEEDY for any press, that's what I really loathe about them!
> 
> Oh yeah .. and on the 'heartbreak' of them not being able to invite their "CELEBRITY" friends to a 1-year Birthday party for Archie, are you effin' kidding me??????  Heaven forbid they invite their own freakin' family to meet the child, but NOOOOOOOOOOO .. they have to have their fake celebrity "friends" come to a birthday party for Archie!!!  So, would that be like the Baby Shower that was done for Meghan last year, with all her "celebrity friends"?  Have we even heard a peep from any of their "celebrity friends" about H&M??? ... ANSWER = NO, and that's the WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!  Hopefully, their "celebrity friends" have markle'd them!!!


Exactly! Children that young don't care about celebrities! Hell they can't even remember anything at that age. The party would have been for them and them only! If they really want what's best for Archie, they wouldn't have moved so far away from his extended family like their grans, great grans, uncles, aunties and cousins!!!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> It's not that they delivered food to needy people that's the issue, it's their motive for doing it. Given their history it's hard not to question whether they would be doing it out of the goodness of their hearts if they weren't being given press coverage about it. If they didn't want a big fuss made about their act of kindness they could have asked to remain anonymous. I doubt the charity's CEO would have been on the phone talking to CNN if Harry and Meghan didn't encourage it.





chicinthecity777 said:


> Except Gemma and Dominic didn't need a truck load of security with them! Nor did they "leak" the story to the any press (I did saw Gemma's story on IG, it was really sweet). They are doing a real good deed without inconvenient others. Those 2 just want the "photo op" and doing it for PR only. They didn't have Archie with them and what exactly did they think would be so dangerous to need so much security for delivering food???



Fair enough... I thought it was sweet for Gemma to do that, so hard to reconcile liking one person doing it and not liking another person doing it.  I agree about the security, that's too much. Though did they even get a photo op?? I didn't see any photos of them actually delivering food.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Fair enough... I thought it was sweet for Gemma to do that, so hard to reconcile liking one person doing it and not liking another person doing it.  I agree about the security, that's too much. Though did they even get a photo op?? I didn't see any photos of them actually delivering food.


.. and here you go, you didn't HONESTLY think that these 2 wouldn't WANT to get papped doing this "FANTASTIC" deed, right??? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Markle-Prince-Harry-photographed-time-LA.html


----------



## lanasyogamama

Those don’t even look like jeans! Somebody needs to explain this!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> .. and here you go, you didn't HONESTLY think that these 2 wouldn't WANT to get papped doing this "FANTASTIC" deed, right???
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Markle-Prince-Harry-photographed-time-LA.html



Papped? These look like surveillance camera photos!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Papped? These look like surveillance camera photos!


Okay, okay .. BUT, someone had to ask for them, right????  Hmmmm .. maybe their PR team???


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Okay, okay .. BUT, someone had to ask for them, right????  Hmmmm .. maybe their PR team???



My guess is building security/admin sold the footage to the media after their PR team notified them it was even a thing. Then again, why would the media even bother paying for that... it's hardly exciting...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

The best he could do was a bandana? What on earth.


----------



## lalame

While I think it's a nice sentiment (again major benefit of the doubt that it was out of kindness), I don't know why these two bother. What would be more impactful is if they just donated money and maybe threw out a social media post or two about the charity. If you have to drag your security out and it's a whole thing, give back in other ways.

They must be sorry not to be in the UK again so it would be more natural for them to do what Wills and Kate have done - like remote visits and etc.


----------



## mia55

Do they even have any money to donate? They're jobless, living in rented/borrowed place, begging for security money and god knows what more. Looks like they're already in a bad shape.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> I posted the comparison pictures of Meghan and Angelina Jolie. If you don't think MM is diabolical in her scheming then I don't know what to say:
> 
> View attachment 4710818


So creepy.


----------



## mdcx

Bloody hell, donate some cold hard cash so that charities/organisations can keep doing what they are doing already. All this is is shining their own halos by making personal appearances, and no doubt those people will then be interviewed later and reveal how "down to earth and sweet" M was.
Transparent.


----------



## lalame

mia55 said:


> Do they even have any money to donate? They're jobless, living in rented/borrowed place, begging for security money and god knows what more. Looks like they're already in a bad shape.



They've got money, don't feel sorry for them. Half of those things you listed are just the perks of being a celebrity.


----------



## rose60610

If these two so much as gave stale bread to a stray cat they'd get PR and the paps involved. And, of course,  they'd be wearing "very nice" jeans. You know, to feed the (staged) "stray" cat.


----------



## Jktgal

Jayne1 said:


> Pippa only got the chance to marry well because Kate was already Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Imagine Pippa trying to find a rich, well connected, heir to a title husband if she didn't have a Royal sister. She'd be struggling like any other girl in London.



Pippa and Kate are rich girls who would have married other very rich people even without connections to the Crown. The 1% marry other 1%.


----------



## Genie27

Heck, it crossed my mind that they could even be using body doubles, but Chicken Bandy Legs can’t be duplicated.

Nice sloppy/baggy/oversized job channeling Diana’s white shirt/sunnies charity look while she recreates “Diana taking her boys to meet the less fortunate” - LA through the guise of philanthropy.

And the regular drivers deliver 50-60 meals during their shift and these two did 6? Ooh, how ****ing generous with their time.


----------



## Genie27

And another thing - wouldn’t security have to clear and sweep the area before the former-royal visit? So much for “surprise” “incognito” philanthropy.


----------



## mdcx

Saw this on another forum - the "security camera" pics are copyrighted to M's pap agency of choice - Backgrid....


----------



## PewPew

Genie27 said:


> And another thing - wouldn’t security have to clear and sweep the area before the former-royal visit? So much for “surprise” “incognito” philanthropy.



Yep, this was never going to be a secret humanitarian trip. This is high-stakes PR, with a couple in major reputation rehab following months of tone deaf words and actions. They’re at risk at losing out on the tens of millions of dollars that they expected to get annually post-Megxit. Of course, they needed to do something public. That’s the celeb way.

The PR team is the best money can buy. I’m all in support of good deeds, but this strategy is fairly transparent. H&M will do X and then a week later, PR will let the stories and pictures trickle out about how they “privately” did a good deed last week. But boo hoo the press ruined it & wouldn’t let them be altruistic in private. “Friends” say they do stuff like this aaaaaall the time for no recognition, but last week they were caught red-handed in the act of greatness.

They don’t consider the effect of their actions on their staff and security b/c they are modeling their public appearances here like the BRF showing up to a patronage in the UK. Just showing up is supposed to be meaningful & boost world morale. And that’s what the PR will reflect— interviews saying how amazing “Just-call-me-Harry & the duchess” are. 

Oh the irony of Harry saying the BRF’s “small steps & handing out prizes is meaningless.”  Well, they have great meaning for H&M now— reputation rescue!


----------



## Sharont2305

As per usual, she's steps ahead of him. And, where's the hand holding and clinging onto him to make sure we know how happy and in love you are? I suppose that doesn't matter when there's no public or cameras around huh? [emoji1787]


----------



## limom

Who is watching the baby?
Are we supposed to believe that they are driving a Toyota?
This type of volunteering is boloney, write a check people.


----------



## limom

mia55 said:


> Do they even have any money to donate? They're jobless, living in rented/borrowed place, begging for security money and god knows what more. Looks like they're already in a bad shape.


Fine, let’s pretend for one sec, they don’t have money. Auction off some of your items. Lots of regular people do it to help charity, heck even PMK did it for her fake church.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

mdcx said:


> Saw this on another forum - the "security camera" pics are copyrighted to M's pap agency of choice - Backgrid....
> View attachment 4711415


And poor Harry cannot afford a proper mask. Please.


----------



## Lounorada

mdcx said:


> Saw this on another forum - the "security camera" pics are copyrighted to M's pap agency of choice - Backgrid....
> View attachment 4711415


I think i'd decline the food if they were delivering it to me dressed like that. They look careless.
She's wearing a mask and a charity logo baseball cap, he's wearing his own cap and what looks like a rag tied around his face. Could they not get a second mask and cap?
Also, are they even wearing the basic disposable GLOVES!?  I see one glove on her and none on H. H also appears to cough or sneeze into his glove-less hand when all he has on is thin looking fabric covering his face. Uhm Harry, you could at least cover your nose too and has no one told you at this point that we are supposed to cough/sneeze into our elbow-fold or into a tissue and disgard the tissue straight away? Disgusting fool.
She looks a sloppy mess as usual and this appears as a staged PR stunt.

ETA: It's so weird to watch how he stands back from her all the time so she can take charge in everything.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Dragging a security team out with you.....I can’t!!!!!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting how the details of her outfit were released just from these grainy “surveillance photos.” And of course her shirt is a small LA designer  I can’t.


----------



## mrsinsyder

What on Earth?!?! Didn’t even mention the name now the brand is following me now.


----------



## Annawakes

mrsinsyder said:


> What on Earth?!?! Didn’t even mention the name now the brand is following me now.
> View attachment 4711581


Oh so creepy!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Annawakes said:


> Oh so creepy!!


Get out of my brain Meghan


----------



## limom

Wow, ruthless and truly in poor taste....


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sharont2305 said:


> As per usual, she's steps ahead of him. And, where's the hand holding and clinging onto him to make sure we know how happy and in love you are? I suppose that doesn't matter when there's no public or cameras around huh? [emoji1787]


They're in her hometown now - he is completely dependent on her and the roles are reversed. Such an odd life path - to marry up just to bring him right back down. I imagine she was disliked by some people she felt were important in LA and being back is her way of showing how much she achieved?? By scoring a former royal and a nicer house in Malibu? I think TMZ will provide many new opportunities to view them, they're relentless in their pursuit of celebs.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh look...... 
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...inspiration-women-feed-families-lockdown/amp/


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> At first glance they look the same, even the wall looks the same colour, but I think the cabinet doors are slightly different in both pictures?
> Also, can he not find a single better background in the entire house to sit in front of for a video call? He looks lazy, no effort put in at all.


I think the doors look diff (brass knob) due to angle, but I've heard that Zoom supplies backgrounds that people can use to block their private homes (though was this done through Zoom--I dunno). The crappy shirt seems the same, he just looks awful, wasted even. Oh yeah, the move and marriage are going _SUPER_ well!


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Saw this on another forum - the "security camera" pics are copyrighted to M's pap agency of choice - Backgrid....
> View attachment 4711415





doni said:


> And poor Harry cannot afford a proper mask. Please.



So they are fake security camera photos. Surely this is a new low, even for them.

And FFS Harry, learn how to wear the damn bandanna! His nose is completely uncovered making it totally useless as a mask.


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> I think the doors look diff (brass knob) due to angle, but I've heard that Zoom supplies backgrounds that people can use to block their private homes (though was this done through Zoom--I dunno). The crappy shirt seems the same, he just looks awful, wasted even. Oh yeah, the move and marriage are going _SUPER_ well!


Well Zoom should invest in the technology to make some appear more groomed and more awake.
Now that would be an improvement, we all could get behind nowadays.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh look......
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...inspiration-women-feed-families-lockdown/amp/


This is despicable.  She’s trying to gain credit from their generosity and community spirit - even trying to make it look as if she’s directing their work.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> This is despicable.  She’s trying to gain credit from their generosity and community spirit - even trying to make it look as if she’s directing their work.



We can add leech and credit-stealer to her long list of unpleasant personality traits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> I would love if MM ate crow and realized she effed up, but I think people like her never put any blame on themselves.



Agree 100%



mrsinsyder said:


> The best he could do was a bandana? What on earth.



The articles about this great act of charity said they both had on gloves and the 18 mask (ones needed in hospitals) but apparently not true.


----------



## lulilu

There are so many articles about them, I forget where I read things.  But, if you remember when she appeared with Archie at a polo match Harry played in soon after Archie's birth -- I read she heard his ex, Chelsey, was going to be there so she showed up unannounced.  This would explain why she looked so rumpled and had no carrier or whatever for Archie so just half-carried him with a blanket hanging off.  Purportedly, H was pissed and did not leave with her.


----------



## 1LV

lulilu said:


> There are so many articles about them, I forget where I read things.  But, if you remember when she appeared with Archie at a polo match Harry played in soon after Archie's birth -- I read she heard his ex, Chelsey, was going to be there so she showed up unannounced.  This would explain why she looked so rumpled and had no carrier or whatever for Archie so just half-carried him with a blanket hanging off.  Purportedly, H was pissed and did not leave with her.


How many times since then do you think he wishes he had kept walking?


----------



## Mrs.Z

So who violated resident security by releasing all this footage, it’s extensive.  I guess the recipient signed off on having his identity and various medical conditions publicized.  The way this was executed is all a bit creepy.


----------



## limom

Mrs.Z said:


> So who violated resident security by releasing all this footage, it’s extensive.  I guess the recipient signed off on having his identity and various medical conditions publicized.  The way this was executed is all a bit creepy.


Could it have been sold by the owner of the system?
If this is ring, everyone and their sisters have access.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> So who violated resident security by releasing all this footage, it’s extensive.  I guess the recipient signed off on having his identity and various medical conditions publicized.  The way this was executed is all a bit creepy.


Yup. They were from “we want privacy” to land of no-holds-barred privacy invasion.


----------



## bag-mania

I imagine the charity was extremely careful and cherry-picked where they sent them. No bad neighborhoods, no mentally ill residents who might behave unpredictably, everything nice and safe. The last thing the charity would want is for there to have been an incident that would make the news and have a negative impact.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Thank goodness we got an ID on the overpriced, oversized, shapeless, wrinkled plain old white shirt she’s wearing, I was looking to upgrade my quarantine wardrobe.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rt-LA-based-brand-volunteer-new-hometown.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> There are so many articles about them, I forget where I read things.  But, if you remember when she appeared with Archie at a polo match Harry played in soon after Archie's birth -- I read she heard his ex, Chelsey, was going to be there so she showed up unannounced.  This would explain why she looked so rumpled and had no carrier or whatever for Archie so just half-carried him with a blanket hanging off.  Purportedly, H was pissed and did not leave with her.


This is so weird. Why would she feel so insecure after just having had his baby, and wouldn't a normal husband be delighted to see his wife instead of being annoyed? So unhealthy.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY; these two are SO NEEDY for any press, that's what I really loathe about them!
> 
> Oh yeah .. and on the 'heartbreak' of them not being able to invite their "CELEBRITY" friends to a 1-year Birthday party for Archie, are you effin' kidding me??????  Heaven forbid they invite their own freakin' family to meet the child, but NOOOOOOOOOOO .. they have to have their fake celebrity "friends" come to a birthday party for Archie!!!  So, would that be like the Baby Shower that was done for Meghan last year, with all her "celebrity friends"?  Have we even heard a peep from any of their "celebrity friends" about H&M??? ... ANSWER = NO, and that's the WAY IT SHOULD BE!!!  Hopefully, their "celebrity friends" have markle'd them!!!


I didn't see that about the heartbreak of not having a party with celebs for a one-year-old who would not even understand what's going on....boo hoo


----------



## Megs

So I'll be the first to admit this will come off like H&M can't win, but I don't think this food delivery is wise. 

First and foremost, it's not like they started the organization and will be doing all of the delivering. I've read the stories of the group that started something like this in NYC, but they aren't doing a couple deliveries, they are doing them ALL. So with a delivery or two in a day, it simply looks like H&M are in it for the publicity. And right now, no publicity is needed by any star. I think seeing other celebs on clear pap walks are disgusting. There is no need for this from anyone right now. 

And like I said before, it's clear they are still employing a team. So that means Archie is with someone else so that his parents can go out and possibly be exposed. Meghan has a mask on and it looks like only one glove, while Harry looks ill prepared all together.

I just don't get it. It feels like they are wanting to have some good press, and even if we say they truly want to deliver food to people, there are other ways to do this. I mean you don't need 2 people to deliver one bag. No one needs to be chatting them up right now. It's just so weird.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and here you go, you didn't HONESTLY think that these 2 wouldn't WANT to get papped doing this "FANTASTIC" deed, right???
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Markle-Prince-Harry-photographed-time-LA.html


and I'd like to know how the person who said they were wearing nice jeans and she was very pretty could really see how pretty she was with that mask on.  So they delivered 20 meals out of 2,000.  that's nice.  did they contribute any of their own money?


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> and I'd like to know how the person who said they were wearing nice jeans and she was very pretty could really see how pretty she was with that mask on.  So they delivered 20 meals out of 2,000.  that's nice.  did they contribute any of their own money?


I just went out and I had on a cap and mask like she does. You can barely see any of your face! Smh.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Thank goodness we got an ID on the overpriced, oversized, shapeless, wrinkled plain old white shirt she’s wearing, I was looking to upgrade my quarantine wardrobe.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rt-LA-based-brand-volunteer-new-hometown.html



Hmm, someone in the comments section makes a good point. From the charity's website, they had stopped taking applications from new volunteers a while back due to the COVID-19 outbreak. So Harry and Meghan had to call to make special arrangements with them to go deliver their meals. Is there anybody who doesn't believe this was a "aren't we kind, wonderful, down-to-earth humanitarians?" kind of publicity stunt?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, someone in the comments section makes a good point. From the charity's website, they had stopped taking applications from new volunteers a while back due to the COVID-19 outbreak. So Harry and Meghan had to call to make special arrangements with them to go deliver their meals. Is there anybody who doesn't believe this was a "aren't we kind, wonderful, down-to-earth humanitarians?" kind of publicity stunt?


of course.  and I guess the charity got publicity out of it too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> of course.  and I guess the charity got publicity out of it too



Well, let's hope they get lots of donations as well. That's what they want and need. Making Meghan and Harry feel good about themselves isn't going to help hungry people.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Mrs.Z said:


> So who violated resident security by releasing all this footage, it’s extensive.  I guess the recipient signed off on having his identity and various medical conditions publicized.  The way this was executed is all a bit creepy.


Agree. I also saw some names and unit numbers? in one section of the video, and of course license plates on those front cars. No regard for the privacy of others, whoever released it.


----------



## V0N1B2

Megs said:


> First and foremost, it's not like they started the organization and will be doing all of the delivering.


Her fans and supporters will find a way to make it sound like Saint Meghan and Harry With The Nice Jeans started the whole movement.


----------



## melissatrv

bag-mania said:


> She'll threaten tell-all book/interviews to get maximum cash. They would have to have the settlement be distributed over time since her word cannot be trusted. You know she would have her "friends" leaking all sorts of gossip to the media unless there was some stipulation forcing her to not do it.



Honestly, I think she would make more money from a "tell-all" than she would from a settlement from the Royal Family.   Even if she signed an NDA, the consequences of violating one are monetary penalties.  Say she had to pay $1 million for violating the NDA, but gets paid $10 mil for the tell-all.  Meghan will take the latter.

Post-Harry, Meghan will be have plenty of offers to hawk cosmetics on late night infomercials, Dancing with the Stars, host a "lifestyle" talk show, or her own reality show.  Plus I can see her being a talking head / royal expert.  Similar to that Lady somebody with the white hair who was married to an English noble for all of a 6months who is pulled in for "expert insights" all the time.


----------



## Kim O'Meara

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, someone in the comments section makes a good point. From the charity's website, they had stopped taking applications from new volunteers a while back due to the COVID-19 outbreak. So Harry and Meghan had to call to make special arrangements with them to go deliver their meals. Is there anybody who doesn't believe this was a "aren't we kind, wonderful, down-to-earth humanitarians?" kind of publicity stunt?



So targeted for PR and the pap shots coming out the following day to extend the coverage stinks too.


----------



## bag-mania

melissatrv said:


> Honestly, I think she would make more money from a "tell-all" than she would from a settlement from the Royal Family.   Even if she signed an NDA, the consequences of violating one are monetary penalties.  Say she had to pay $1 million for violating the NDA, but gets paid $10 mil for the tell-all.  Meghan will take the latter.
> 
> Post-Harry, Meghan will be have plenty of offers to hawk cosmetics on late night infomercials, Dancing with the Stars, host a "lifestyle" talk show, or her own reality show.  Plus I can see her being a talking head / royal expert.  Similar to that Lady somebody with the white hair who was married to an English noble for all of a 6months who is pulled in for "expert insights" all the time.



No doubt she would make a lot of money from a book. But whoever writes the biographies about HER will make infinitely more. Andrew Morton has likely already conducted interviews with former staff, friends from her youth, people she worked with, and the Markles! I bet he'll be ready to spring on it when it's time.


----------



## LittleStar88

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Agree. I also saw some names and unit numbers? in one section of the video, and of course license plates on those front cars. No regard for the privacy of others, whoever released it.



I don't think you have privacy in public areas...


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> No doubt she would make a lot of money from a book. But whoever writes the biographies about HER will make infinitely more. Andrew Morton has likely already conducted interviews with former staff, friends from her youth, people she worked with, and the Markles! I bet he'll be ready to spring on it when it's time.


Andrew Morton and Kitty Kelly need to join force in that unauthorized transatlantic biography. JUICY!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't think you have privacy in public areas...


Weren't they in a housing complex that was gated? That,to me, is a private space if no one can enter without being buzzed in. Maybe I'm wrong, though.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> every time I see an article or a tv piece showing how very happy a celeb  couple is I wonder how long before we see they are splitting.  Latest was last night on tv Camerion Diaz spouting how she and her husband are so happy being shut in together with their child.  Hopefully in her case it's not BS but I've become somewhat cynical.


The vows renewal is usually the kiss of marriage death with celebs. When I see this or their house featured in AD, I know it's a-coming.


----------



## Madrose

kemilia said:


> The vows renewal is usually the kiss of marriage death with celebs. When I see this or their house featured in AD, I know it's a-coming.



 Hmm, Jennifer Aniston & Justin Theroux (AD) and Heidi Klum & Seal (vows) come to mind.  Who else? LOL


----------



## kemilia

doni said:


> And poor Harry cannot afford a proper mask. Please.


And it isn't covering his nose even! 

I HATE wearing my mask (fogged glasses) but I know it has to cover my nose and I don't even have a SEVENTH waiting for me at home, I mean Mansion.


----------



## kemilia

Madrose said:


> Hmm, Jennifer Aniston & Justin Theroux (AD) and Heidi Klum & Seal (vows) come to mind.  Who else? LOL


Ramona & Mario (RHONY) (vows), at the vows were at 17 years, which made no sense but nothing Ramona does makes sense.


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> Ramona & Mario (RHONY) (vows), at the vows were at 17 years, which made no sense but nothing Ramona does makes sense.


If we go down this train, Ramona, Vicky.


----------



## Mendocino

bag-mania said:


> No doubt she would make a lot of money from a book. But whoever writes the biographies about HER will make infinitely more. Andrew Morton has likely already conducted interviews with former staff, friends from her youth, people she worked with, and the Markles! I bet he'll be ready to spring on it when it's time.


I think he already wrote a book about her, but it would not surprise me to see him write a follow-up. There's so much that's happened since then.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> They didn't have Archie with them and what exactly did they think would be so dangerous to need so much security for delivering food???


If Meg was alone, wearing a baseball cap low on her forehead and also wearing a mask, she wouldn't need security because no one would recognize her or possibly think it was her.


----------



## gracekelly

Megs said:


> So I'll be the first to admit this will come off like H&M can't win, but I don't think this food delivery is wise.
> 
> First and foremost, it's not like they started the organization and will be doing all of the delivering. I've read the stories of the group that started something like this in NYC, but they aren't doing a couple deliveries, they are doing them ALL. So with a delivery or two in a day, it simply looks like H&M are in it for the publicity. And right now, no publicity is needed by any star. I think seeing other celebs on clear pap walks are disgusting. There is no need for this from anyone right now.
> 
> And like I said before, it's clear they are still employing a team. So that means Archie is with someone else so that his parents can go out and possibly be exposed. Meghan has a mask on and it looks like only one glove, while Harry looks ill prepared all together.
> 
> I just don't get it. It feels like they are wanting to have some good press, and even if we say they truly want to deliver food to people, there are other ways to do this. I mean you don't need 2 people to deliver one bag. No one needs to be chatting them up right now. It's just so weird.


Precisely my thought. The PR aspect of this was so obvious. The charity is being so trashed that they took down the original tweets and are receiving tons of negative comments.  I guess it is the Markle effect In action again


----------



## youngster

I look at that photo and almost feel sorry for Harry.  I wonder if he's thinking how he did he get himself into this mess and why is he, a Prince of the UK, on the streets of L.A., delivering food wearing a bandana and no gloves during a pandemic while a full security detail waits nearby?  It's just ludicrous.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> I look at that photo and almost feel sorry for Harry.  I wonder if he's thinking how he did he get himself into this mess and why is he, a Prince of the UK, on the streets of L.A., delivering food wearing a bandana and no gloves during a pandemic while a full security detail waits nearby?  It's just ludicrous.


When you see it written down like that, it's mind boggling. Unbelievable really


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I look at that photo and almost feel sorry for Harry.  I wonder if he's thinking how he did he get himself into this mess and why is he, a Prince of the UK, on the streets of L.A., delivering food wearing a bandana and no gloves during a pandemic while a full security detail waits nearby?  It's just ludicrous.


.. which just made me think, at what point will he realize "_you know what? .. I didn't have it so bad being part of the BRF_"!!!  Then again, this is Hazza we are talking about, and his dim-wit, well .. you know ..


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> Precisely my thought. The PR aspect of this was so obvious. The charity is being so trashed that they took down the original tweets and are receiving tons of negative comments.  I guess it is the Markle effect In action again


Really?  That is incredibly sad.  All the effort that went into this stunt when they simply could have posted on IG, here’s a great organization, they do this......please consider supporting them.  That is normal behavior, use your influence to promote good things, don’t orchestrate elaborate stunts that backfire on everyone.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> When you see it written down like that, it's mind boggling. Unbelievable really


I agree. Not to bash this charity but if you have people volunteering for you in this awful situation, I would definitely think they would have adequate PPE to supply to the people helping out especially high-profile people. M&H only having a glove and mask between them (as it looks) is total baloney. 

No matter who the volunteers are, and obviously, these 2 are super high visibility people which can make this charitable task go sideways really fast--Megxit, Canada, LA, JP Morgan, etc.--who wants to add Covid to the list? 

I know PPE is in short supply all over the US but not having adequate stuff for volunteers means, to me, you don't send them out poorly protected. And it's not because I think they are "worth" more than the rest of us (non-Royals) either. But the world's eyes are on them.

So maybe H&M just decided heck, we're doing this with 1 glove and 1 mask, we really need to help out somehow? Or did the charity try to steer them away but the good PR (for H&M) made it a valid risk? Boy, I'm being too cynical here. I don't want anyone getting this awful virus.


----------



## Sharont2305

Is this the privacy they wanted?


----------



## Sharont2305

Doesn't she know how to hold a dog lead? She's had plenty of practice keeping Harry on one.


----------



## mdcx

Comments on the DM suggest the “security camera” footage from their food delivery was actually handheld video footage cut together later to try and resemble security footage i.e. M’s PR waiting there to record it.
I would be unsurprised if the bandanas they are wearing are something they are merchandising.
As if they couldn’t get proper PPE.
Enjoy, Harry! This relentless schedule of PR seeking is your new life!

Can just imagine furious M pacing her situation room: “Wtf? How am I not as popular as Diana yet???? I did all the things!!!”

ETA Harry looks hot and bothered. Might take him awhile to get used to the new climate/style in LA.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Comments on the DM suggest the “security camera” footage from their food delivery was actually handheld video footage cut together later to try and resemble security footage i.e. M’s PR waiting there to record it.
> I would be unsurprised if the bandanas they are wearing are something they are merchandising.
> As if they couldn’t get proper PPE.
> Enjoy, Harry! This relentless schedule of PR seeking is your new life!
> 
> Can just imagine furious M pacing her situation room: “Wtf? How am I not as popular as Diana yet???? I did all the things!!!”


Oh god, if you're right about the security footage, I would say some of the most well known footage of Diana was security camera footage. Think about it..


----------



## V0N1B2

Wait. They’re driving a KIA?
Whaaaaaaaaat?
No shade to KIAs or their owners, but... whaaaaaaat?
WOW

I’m holding out hope that due to their involvement with these charities, that they might *gasp* #Markle the covid-19 virus


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> Comments on the DM suggest the “security camera” footage from their food delivery was actually handheld video footage cut together later to try and resemble security footage i.e. M’s PR waiting there to record it.
> I would be unsurprised if the bandanas they are wearing are something they are merchandising.
> As if they couldn’t get proper PPE.
> Enjoy, Harry! This relentless schedule of PR seeking is your new life!
> 
> Can just imagine furious M pacing her situation room: “Wtf? How am I not as popular as Diana yet???? I did all the things!!!”
> 
> ETA Harry looks hot and bothered. Might take him awhile to get used to the new climate/style in LA.


Interesting, I thought the still shots were incredibly clear.  Better than my system, which I’ve spent silly money upgrading only for it to be outdated every few years.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I look at that photo and almost feel sorry for Harry.  I wonder if he's thinking how he did he get himself into this mess and why is he, a Prince of the UK, on the streets of L.A., delivering food wearing a bandana and no gloves during a pandemic while a full security detail waits nearby?  It's just ludicrous.



I can't feel sorry for him. He got himself into this. When he thought he was escaping the dullness of visiting hospitals and schools in England, little did he know he would soon be volunteering for Meals-on-Wheels in LA. Instead of his grandmother or father giving him his daily assignments, it's his wife.


----------



## V0N1B2

V0N1B2 said:


> Wait. They’re driving a KIA?
> Whaaaaaaaaat?
> No shade to KIAs or their owners, but... whaaaaaaat?
> WOW
> 
> I’m holding out hope that due to their involvement with these charities, that they might *gasp* #Markle the covid-19 virus



oops nevermind. I see their car is parked in front of the silver KIA. My bad


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Is this the privacy they wanted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4711943
> View attachment 4711945
> View attachment 4711946
> View attachment 4711947
> View attachment 4711948
> View attachment 4711949



She looks more comfortable holding Guy than she does holding Archie.


----------



## Mrs.Z

It’s also a weird spot to walk your dog.  I do NOT know the area but it looks like lots of concrete and hills...dense residential....not a ton of green space.


----------



## TC1

When the paps won't come to you...so you go to them and DRIVE your dogs around to take them for a walk 
@VON1B2  i thought they were driving a KIA as well


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I look at that photo and almost feel sorry for Harry.  I wonder if he's thinking how he did he get himself into this mess and why is he, a Prince of the UK, on the streets of L.A., delivering food wearing a bandana and no gloves during a pandemic while a full security detail waits nearby?  It's just ludicrous.


Sad. This is a case of be careful what you wish for in regards to his giving up his position.


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> When the paps won't come to you...so you go to them and DRIVE your dogs around to take them for a walk
> @VON1B2  i thought they were driving a KIA as well


It was a KIA.   He doesn’t like to spend money.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> When the paps won't come to you...so you go to them and DRIVE your dogs around to take them for a walk
> @VON1B2  i thought they were driving a KIA as well



I thought at first maybe they rented a KIA so they could go about their charity work incognito. But of course since they want to be seen that didn't make sense.


----------



## TC1

gracekelly said:


> It was a KIA.   He doesn’t like to spend money.


I think the car they are in is in front of the Silver KIA.


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...told-friends-felt-good-connecting-people.html

Interesting:


----------



## kipp

^^^^ Very interesting and if true, not surprising. 
What is also interesting is that I can't load the website for Project Angel Food---it just goes poof!  Has anyone else had this happen?  Was curious about the organization...


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know I’m repeating myself.  I’ll try to stop!!


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> I think the car they are in is in front of the Silver KIA.


Yes. I saw another picture. It was a Porsche


----------



## limom

kipp said:


> ^^^^ Very interesting and if true, not surprising.
> What is also interesting is that I can't load the website for Project Angel Food---it just goes poof!  Has anyone else had this happen?  Was curious about the organization...


Nah it loads.
This is the front page


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Yes. I saw another picture. It was a Porsche



No! Seriously? I thought they would at least be driving a Tesla. Looks like Harry really is embracing his inner celebrity.


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, CNN doesn't even try to confirm the validity of what they put out there as news. You need only look at the photos to know that Meghan and Harry were not wearing N95 masks and they had maybe one glove between them. And why is a news outlet helping promote H&M anyway?


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have kept a low profile since leaving their senior royal roles and relocating to Los Angeles.

*They've kept so quiet that they managed to sneak out and deliver meals to L.A. residents in need* during the Covid-19 pandemic.

*Donning N95 masks and gloves*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dropped off a week's worth of perishable meals and three weeks' worth of shelf-stable foods to 20 of the charity's clients last week, Project Angel Food CEO Richard Ayoub told CNN.

The charity's client base, mostly people too sick to leave their homes to purchase food, has quickly swelled during the coronavirus pandemic, and the volume of calls -- up to 70 per day -- for help has overwhelmed drivers tasked with delivery, he said._

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/ente...ghan-deliver-food-los-angeles-trnd/index.html


----------



## melissatrv

V0N1B2 said:


> Wait. They’re driving a KIA?
> Whaaaaaaaaat?
> No shade to KIAs or their owners, but... whaaaaaaat?
> WOW
> 
> I’m holding out hope that due to their involvement with these charities, that they might *gasp* #Markle the covid-19 virus



I thought the same thing.  Plus shouldn't they be driving a hybrid since they are such environmentalists?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 4712012
> 
> 
> I know I’m repeating myself.  I’ll try to stop!!



Ha! He's a mess. I half expect him to gain 50 lbs. and stop showering.


----------



## kipp

limom said:


> Nah it loads.
> This is the front page
> View attachment 4712014


Thanks---I still can't get it to load on my computer when I google it, but it does load on my cell phone...  Strange.


----------



## pixiejenna

The article makes a point of saying that their  car is a Porsche however it's a great free plug for Kia lol. Must be loving their new life making $$$ for their pap strolls now. The food delivery is 100% staged for press nothing more nothing less. Thirsty AF.

Every one keeps asking if harry regrets being with Megan.  But has anyone else considered that this is his dream. His whole life has been a dog and pony show which he's expressed dislike of plenty of times before. Maybe he chose Meghan because she'll "work" while he can spend his time doing whatever he wants. He can be as lazy as he wants to be with minimal effort "work" wise on his part.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, CNN doesn't even try to confirm the validity of what they put out there as news. You need only look at the photos to know that Meghan and Harry were not wearing N95 masks and they had maybe one glove between them. And why is a news outlet helping promote H&M anyway?
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have kept a low profile since leaving their senior royal roles and relocating to Los Angeles.
> 
> *They've kept so quiet that they managed to sneak out and deliver meals to L.A. residents in need* during the Covid-19 pandemic.
> 
> *Donning N95 masks and gloves*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dropped off a week's worth of perishable meals and three weeks' worth of shelf-stable foods to 20 of the charity's clients last week, Project Angel Food CEO Richard Ayoub told CNN.
> 
> The charity's client base, mostly people too sick to leave their homes to purchase food, has quickly swelled during the coronavirus pandemic, and the volume of calls -- up to 70 per day -- for help has overwhelmed drivers tasked with delivery, he said._
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/ente...ghan-deliver-food-los-angeles-trnd/index.html


Sad and pathetic reporting when pictures tell the real story. UNREAL.


----------



## A1aGypsy

People. 

THE DOGS ARE ALIVE AND HEALTHY. 

Let’s have a moment for that.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> The vows renewal is usually the kiss of marriage death with celebs. When I see this or their house featured in AD, I know it's a-coming.


how about heidi klum and Seal.  I think they renewed their vows every year.  Until they split of course.


----------



## limom

How about Mariah Carey? Vows every year.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> How about Mariah Carey? Vows every year.


which husband?


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> How about Mariah Carey? Vows every year.





sdkitty said:


> how about heidi klum and Seal.  I think they renewed their vows every year.  Until they split of course.



Hollywood vows are like library books? If you don’t renew them, they expire.


----------



## Genie27

I wondered how the “security cameras” followed them around. Are the nest/ring type of cameras motion sensitive? 

And relatively high res as well?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow they went pap strolling sooner than I expected. Smfh.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> which husband?


Nick. She renewed in Disney one year.
Then poof. Divorce


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wait. They actually DROVE somewhere to walk the dogs a few feet?! Omg. And the big face masks when no one else is even around?

this is too good.


----------



## Genie27

Since they only have one mask and one pair of gloves, I wonder if it was only set up as her event, and she made him tag along too? And the charity didn’t have PPE for tag-along Harry? 

Too funny that they shared the pair of gloves, to go TOgeTHER instead of, I dunno, just going solo like other normal functioning adults.


----------



## sdkitty

Genie27 said:


> Since they only have one mask and one pair of gloves, I wonder if it was only set up as her event, and she made him tag along too? And the charity didn’t have PPE for tag-along Harry?
> 
> Too funny that they shared the pair of gloves, to go TOgeTHER instead of, I dunno, just going solo like other normal functioning adults.


she probably would not have been recognized w/o that tall red-haired guy beside her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Well......................who would _you_ rather have knocking at your door? A ROYAL PRINCE or a Z-list "actress"? 

In LA washed up thespians are a penny a pound. Now, royalty on the other hand.............. 
He is going to be the attraction ----not her


----------



## Lounorada

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...told-friends-felt-good-connecting-people.html
> 
> Interesting:
> 
> View attachment 4711980


Well, well, well... interesting indeed. Now the whole mess of it all makes sense.


----------



## Emeline

Lounorada said:


> Well, well, well... interesting indeed. Now the whole mess of it all makes sense.


Thank you for posting the link to the backstory. Much of the "delivery" looked  odd,  now we know why. SMH.


----------



## queennadine

They're so predictable and sad. Poor Archie is all I keep thinking.


----------



## Lounorada

Emeline said:


> Thank you for posting the link to the backstory. Much of the "delivery" looked  odd,  now we know why. SMH.


That was @mdcx who posted the link to the backstory


----------



## rose60610

So here's a high profile couple with a 11 month old stashed at home (presumably) that require security wherever they go. They put themselves out there to knock on strangers' doors wearing DIY masks, plus put their security team out there in a pandemic too. Their security people are forced to be stuck with them wherever they go.  They had to follow Meghan and Harry to pick up these meals, scope out threats and the workers who handed over the meals, follow them to however many homes, watch them ring doorbells and chat, and then follow back to their own home.  Contact with how many people? And then go home to Archie? Totally unnecessary. Sure it's nice to deliver meals, but then drag out and expose their security detail to it all also? In DIY masks?  To be so addicted to attention they force out others in a pandemic unnecessarily. It's not as though they are adding value anywhere, like healthcare personnel. They are complete dopes. Don't tell me they delivered 500 meals. Just enough to get the pictures! 

When this virus blows over they had better be front and center in every volunteer opportunity since they felt SOOOOO compelled to be out now, in this one. This strikes me as beyond desperate pandering for donations to their charity. Like, "Looky us, we're out in a pandemic because we really care!" (...even though they skipped the Royal Marines memorial to attend Lion King.) In other words, if they can't get huge charity donations they'll have to slither back to Frogmore with their tails between their legs. Or Harry will after he ditches Meghan (and it's about time).


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...told-friends-felt-good-connecting-people.html
> 
> Interesting:
> 
> View attachment 4711980



LOL the article says ‘they asked to be called Meghan and Harry’, seriously what other names would there be?  I thought they couldn’t use their royal titles, or is that only commercially, trade wise, type of thing?  Were they concern someone might call M Princess Megain? Secret wish I suppose.


----------



## bag-mania

Today’s photos are proof that Harry is 100% on board for all of Meghan’s schemes to get papped. There’s no way he would just be standing there calmly like a lump getting his picture taken if it bothered him in the least. And to think he was still telling people recently of the crippling anxiety he feels when he hears cameras snapping because of what happened to his mother.


----------



## scarlet555

V0N1B2 said:


> Wait. They’re driving a KIA?
> Whaaaaaaaaat?
> No shade to KIAs or their owners, but... whaaaaaaat?
> WOW
> 
> I’m holding out hope that due to their involvement with these charities, that they might *gasp* #Markle the covid-19 virus



When your security cost is over a million a year, you would think they aren’t driving Kias.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Those pics were taken by the same pap as the arranged Thomas Markle pics before the wedding. 

Let that sink in.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Today’s photos are proof that Harry is 100% on board for all of Meghan’s schemes to get papped. There’s no way he would just be standing there calmly like a lump getting his picture taken if it bothered him in the least. And to think he was still telling people recently of the crippling anxiety he feels when he hears cameras snapping because of what happened to his mother.


or he's very obedient....what Meghan wants Meghan gets


----------



## mdcx

I think we are seeing how desperately important PR is to M.
Most celebs are taking it down a notch or two, life is on pause, nesting at home, following guidelines about social isolation.
Not M - moves to LA mid pandemic and straight back on the pap stroll.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I think we are seeing how desperately important PR is to M.
> Most celebs are taking it down a notch or two, life is on pause, nesting at home, following guidelines about social isolation.
> Not M - moves to LA mid pandemic and straight back on the pap stroll.


she went from being a low level cable tv actress to being world famous....now she needs to try to maintain that.....Harry may or may not want this but I think she's the driving force


----------



## CarryOn2020

Noticed in the video of the food-delivery trip that he coughed into his ungloved right hand. Then, he used that hand to hand over the food bag. Ewww.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> No! Seriously? I thought they would at least be driving a Tesla. Looks like Harry really is embracing his inner celebrity.


Right!  or a Prius!  Many very wealthy celebs drive a Prius. All part of the socially conscious act.  They drive the Prius to Burbank to pick up their private jet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noticed in the video of the food-delivery trip that he coughed into his ungloved right hand. Then, he used that hand to hand over the food bag. Ewww.


Yucky!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Right!  or a Prius!  Many very wealthy celebs drive a Prius. All part of the socially conscious act.  They drive the Prius to Burbank to pick up their private jet



Doesn’t the British Royal Family get “free” cars from Range Rover, Audi, Jaguar, etc.?  
Ya kno, in exchange for the publicity *wink*.   Wonder if he ‘gave up’ that perk.


----------



## bag-mania

I’ll say this for their PR agency, they are doing an amazing job for H&M. They got the food delivery story placed on nearly all of the entertainment publication websites and many news sites. Several of them are also reporting on Meghan’s Zoom call. 

Are other celebrities using COVID-19 to promote themselves or is it just them?


----------



## sdkitty

we had the tv on while eating dinner - probably Inside Edition or Entertainment tonight.  A woman who had received a food delivery from H&M was on.  She said she didn't recognize them at first but then Meghan pulled down her mask!  what?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t the British Royal Family get “free” cars from Range Rover, Audi, Jaguar, etc.?
> Ya kno, in exchange for the publicity *wink*.   Wonder if he ‘gave up’ that perk.


Nothing British about a Porsche or a Kia hahaha!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> we had the tv on while eating dinner - probably Inside Edition or Entertainment tonight.  A woman who had received a food delivery from H&M was on.  She said she didn't recognize them at first but then Meghan pulled down her mask!  what?



WTF. This woman is so thirsty it's unreal.


----------



## pixiejenna

sdkitty said:


> we had the tv on while eating dinner - probably Inside Edition or Entertainment tonight.  A woman who had received a food delivery from H&M was on.  She said she didn't recognize them at first but then Meghan pulled down her mask!  what?



of course she did if she doesn’t get recognized it’s like it never happened. She would probably die inside doing good deeds without some sort of praise/reward.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More on the cars the royals drive — it truly is all about brand name. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1376067/Why-royals-drive-Audis-Could-60-discount.html
_Ian Stephens, of Saffron Brand Consultants, told the Times: 'Giving away cars is a bit sensitive.
'If you rent them at a discount you get around concerns over bribery or corruptions and still gain the association.'
'Audi are competing against other German and luxury brands that are established in the UK market, and they've always been outsiders. They are trying to buy their way into the establishment.'_

Last year, they were seen in an Audi e-car. So, did they fly the car over or just borrow/buy one here?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...oined-says-gender-equality-conversation-cant/

Kia is part of the game, too: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/16/tech/hyundai-kia-arrival-ev-startup/index.html

Seems like there is always a hidden agenda. 
Do other celebs get caught up in this much merchandising or is it just these 2?


----------



## poopsie

mary graff said:


> Britain's Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle handed out meals to sick people in Los Angeles. This was their first known public activity since moving to California. It happened at the start of the state's novel coronavirus lockdown.



Are you talking about the recent incident? Because we've been on lockdown since mid-March and I thought they were in Canada then.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Those pics were taken by the same pap as the arranged Thomas Markle pics before the wedding.
> 
> Let that sink in.


Wishing I’d never heard the name Markle.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Is this the privacy they wanted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4711943
> View attachment 4711945
> View attachment 4711946
> View attachment 4711947
> View attachment 4711948
> View attachment 4711949


Meghan gets what Meghan wants


----------



## maryg1

I’m in a different country so rules are different from LA but...did they really need to drive to a place so their dogs could take a walk? I mean, I’m pretty sure they live in a house with a pretty large garden, so no need to drive somewhere to walk your dogs. If you like your dogs to sniff different scents (and as a dog owner I totally understand that), you can walk out of your home, no need to use a car and produce pollution. In Italy I would get a fine for that, my whippets haven’t had a proper run for more than a month, but it’s the law and I stick to it.  the pups are lovely though!
The meals delivery is just unbelievable, I wouldn’t trust anyone delivering anything if they’re not wearing proper masks and gloves. 
Where’s Archie? It was dangerous to fly him in the UK but leaving him home with a stranger, walk around with no protection gear and go back to him is fine?


----------



## doni

So they want privacy but they move to a place where you have papparazi getting pictures even in times of confinement


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> So they want privacy but they move to a place where you have papparazi getting pictures even in times of confinement


Correct.
Yeah, I'm baffled by it all.


----------



## closeted

Let us ponder on this.
To make her feel good and reconnect.
Covid no covid this is still about her and only her.
No regards for her security team is one thing, but leaving her son in the middle of all this just to make her feel good about herself.
This is such a mockery to others who had to go out for basic supply or do actual work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

doni said:


> So they want privacy but they move to a place where you have papparazi getting pictures even in times of confinement



That is the weirdest thing. You don't see the BRF randomly out and about, you rarely see Zara or her family for example unless it's at an event. There is a way to be anonymous I think and do the job. Look at Sophie and Edward too, you rarely saw them for years. 

It wasn't about the privacy, was it. They (she) wanted to have her cake and eat it and cash in on anything and everything she wanted. No rules. And he either went along and agreed, or has been manipulated. He looks an idiot and disingenuous tool either way. I've no doubt what happened with his mum shaped him, but you can't say that then go into the eye of the storm willingly and expect to be taken seriously.

I was thinking about the church service a few weeks back when Kate virtually ignored them, on camera at least. Hugely unusual. That makes me think they (H&M) were saying things behind the scenes to get their own way that must have implied something in her direction or about her. It's just too unusual. In years gone by considering she's a higher status than Markle, she went out if her way, and out of protocol, to be OTT in front of the camera to stop the headlines being created. Pretty poor from H if that's the case, considering how close they used to be.


----------



## Megs

I’m with you all. I want to think that this was a move out of true care and wanting to help those in need during this pandemic, but it all rings off. 

And truly, they did not need to do this, there are plenty of people who are delivering food. To decide to deliver food, ill protected, during a pandemic and then go home to your young son and staff is selfish. I don’t see that as a heroic or charitable move. 

And the dog walk.... again... they left their home during a shelter in place order (wait CA is shelter in place right?) to go walk their dogs somewhere by car?! Again, where is Archie and why is this needed. Plus they had to go home to get the dogs. So that means they knew when they left paparazzi would be there to follow them to where they drove to go on this staged dog walk..... and she is even carrying one of the dogs! So she needed a dog carry, which surely they pup can be walked at their new mansion on its grounds. 

It’s all just so unnecessary on so many levels.


----------



## Genie27

I think the (staged) pup (pap) walks are to prove to Daddy Warbucks that they *need* the highest levels of security and super premium gated access housing.


----------



## beautymagpie

Genie27 said:


> I think the (staged) pup (pap) walks are to prove to Daddy Warbucks that they *need* the highest levels of security and super premium gated access housing.



Yep. We were even told we couldn’t know the newest dog’s name due to privacy - ever. It’s like a hilariously bad film.


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> Those pics were taken by the same pap as the arranged Thomas Markle pics before the wedding.
> 
> Let that sink in.







sdkitty said:


> we had the tv on while eating dinner - probably Inside Edition or Entertainment tonight.  A woman who had received a food delivery from H&M was on.  She said she didn't recognize them at first but then Meghan pulled down her mask!  what?


SMH, but not surprised. She was most likely insulted that the woman didn't recognise her. I would guess she loves to be recognised by people and have them fawn over her.


----------



## Aminamina

OK. In their apparent desperation and shameless stupidity H&M make COURTNEY STODDEN & DOUGH pale in comparison, really.


----------



## LittleStar88

The car (Porsche) is probably borrowed or loaned. Will be interesting to see what they end up buying (probably a Tesla is my guess).
People do drive places to walk their dog but in CA right now we are really just supposed to stay in our neighborhood which for them is probably perfectly nice for walking but likely no paparazzi.

Harry looks like he’s taken a role of the family dog, happy to tag along for the ride but doesn’t really know what’s going, what he’s supposed to be doing, or why he’s there.
Why was she wearing one ill-fitting, baggy lunch lady glove to deliver food?
Those cameras were strategically placed for this opportunity. If they wanted to do good work they could have without anyone knowing. What jerks for using this crisis for personal gain. I do not believe they did this food delivery thing for any selfless reason.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> Well, well, well... interesting indeed. Now the whole mess of it all makes sense.


Unreal.


----------



## limom

I would bet that they don’t even live in Malibu. 
They are in a gated community,Bel Air, BH Park?
Or even perhaps in the Valley.....
No way, would they risk being outed by their neighbors. Malibu is too small of a community. Someone would have talked already.
So they drive a Porsche? It could be the new hybrid one.
I guess they are still hanging for the big money shot with bebe Archie.
His one year b’day is approaching fast....
People mag. Imho. With the check going to their sucky foundation of course.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I’ve enjoyed their tram wreck but honestly the behavior of the last couple days is just at basic Kardashian level. 

How low they’ve sunk when even their “haters” are bored


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> we had the tv on while eating dinner - probably Inside Edition or Entertainment tonight.  A woman who had received a food delivery from H&M was on.  She said she didn't recognize them at first but then Meghan pulled down her mask!  what?


This was what appeared to be an elderly woman.  Maybe 70's.  She was excited to see "M".  But to take your mask off so an at-risk person can see your face and tell the world Meghan delivered her food?  Unbelievable.  I'm wondering where this train wreck will end.  Does Harry have any spine?


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> I would bet that they don’t even live in Malibu.
> They are in a gated community,Bel Air, BH Park?
> Or even perhaps in the Valley.....
> No way, would they risk being outed by their neighbors. Malibu is too small of a community. Someone would have talked already.
> So they drive a Porsche? It could be the new hybrid one.
> I guess they are still hanging for the big money shot with bebe Archie.
> His one year b’day is approaching fast....
> People mag. Imho. With the check going to their sucky foundation of course.


Interesting that they seem to have kept a secret where they are living.  I guess they want attention but on their terms.


----------



## Sol Ryan

mrsinsyder said:


> I’ve enjoyed their tram wreck but honestly the behavior of the last couple days is just at basic Kardashian level.
> 
> How low they’ve sunk when even their “haters” are bored


At this point, I’m start to think that’s an insult to the Kardashians... I think they’ve been staying home....


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-mania said:


> I’ll say this for their PR agency, they are doing an amazing job for H&M. They got the food delivery story placed on nearly all of the entertainment publication websites and many news sites. Several of them are also reporting on Meghan’s Zoom call.
> 
> Are other celebrities using COVID-19 to promote themselves or is it just them?


There are other celebs I have noticed who are definitely using it to their advantage. Pretty sure some celebs (like MM) can't stand the non-attention that covid has created.


----------



## CeeJay

Megs said:


> I’m with you all. I want to think that this was a move out of true care and wanting to help those in need during this pandemic, but it all rings off.
> 
> And truly, they did not need to do this, there are plenty of people who are delivering food. To decide to deliver food, ill protected, during a pandemic and then go home to your young son and staff is selfish. I don’t see that as a heroic or charitable move.
> 
> And the dog walk.... again... they left their home during a shelter in place order (wait CA is shelter in place right?) to go walk their dogs somewhere by car?! Again, where is Archie and why is this needed. Plus they had to go home to get the dogs. So that means they knew when they left paparazzi would be there to follow them to where they drove to go on this staged dog walk..... and she is even carrying one of the dogs! So she needed a dog carry, which surely they pup can be walked at their new mansion on its grounds.
> 
> It’s all just so unnecessary on so many levels.


The Dog walk is yet another "attempt" (IMO) .. for them to get papped - and let me tell you why. 

From what we understand (at this point), is that they are in one of the Malibu Colonies.  Those colonies are locked up, and in order to get in, you either need the appropriate security pass  -OR-  someone who lives there lets you in.  So, all that said .. if indeed they walked their dogs in the Malibu colony that they are in, then it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they let those paps in order to take the pictures and that *WILL NOT go down well* with their neighbors as many like the fact that the area is very 'secure'.  

If they went outside their community to walk the dogs, the question is "why"? .. and I think we ALL know Meghan's desperate need to have that attention.  So much for their "NEED" for top-level security; these two are just nuckin' futz!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Frivole88

the holding hands is back you guys


----------



## sdkitty

kristinlorraine said:


> the holding hands is back you guys
> 
> View attachment 4712416


wow


----------



## Mrs.Z

Hmmm


----------



## gracekelly

I agree those those who believe that they are not living in Malibu. 

So now they are merching an Escalade?  Or they are being driven by an Uber or car service?  The Kia is probably used by the protection guys. 

I think Harry is the bigger hypocrite here.  Everyone knows that she want to be seen, but with all his whining about camera clicks and light bulbs going off, he should be the one to say no to pap walks.  Obviously not the case when it suits him and he sees their future going down the loo.   Wonder how all this will play out with their law suit.  It would be awfully hard to find a jury who has not seen them in a tabloid at this point.  They will be asked directly if they alerted the paps and even money they will be untruthful.

@CeeJay Anyone who is willing to walk around delivering food doesn't need close security.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> Hmmm



Yep, that confirms that it was entirely staged. The sad thing is most people who heard about this will never know that part. The average person won’t ever question the articles, they’ll just think “Oh look, Meghan and Harry are doing their part to help. Aren’t they nice!”  

And that was the purpose of the entire sham.


----------



## bag-mania

kristinlorraine said:


> the holding hands is back you guys
> 
> View attachment 4712416



Ha! It says it all that Meghan is wearing the good mask while Harry has the loose bandanna barely hanging on his face. She is a mercenary to the end. If  anybody’s getting the ‘rona, it’s going to be Harry!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Yet Kylie Jenner went her whole pregnancy without being papped.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Yep, that confirms that it was entirely staged. The sad thing is most people who heard about this will never know that part. The average person won’t ever question the articles, they’ll just think “Oh look, Meghan and Harry are doing their part to help. Aren’t they nice!”
> 
> And that was the purpose of the entire sham.


I imagine some people are thinking we were asked to stay home why are these two suddenly all over the place, out and about.


----------



## mrsinsyder

This isn’t how you properly use gloves hun.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> This isn’t how you properly use gloves hun.
> 
> View attachment 4712441



Hey, at least she refrained from putting her hand on his ass. She was handling food after all.


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> I would bet that they don’t even live in Malibu.
> They are in a gated community,Bel Air, BH Park?
> Or even perhaps in the Valley.....
> No way, would they risk being outed by their neighbors. Malibu is too small of a community. Someone would have talked already.
> So they drive a Porsche? It could be the new hybrid one.
> I guess they are still hanging for the big money shot with bebe Archie.
> His one year b’day is approaching fast....
> People mag. Imho. With the check going to their sucky foundation of course.


*NO FREAKIN' WAY would Meghan live in the Valley!*!!!!!!!!  From an LA perspective, the Valley is (_predominantly_) thought of as the "cheap/less desirable" place to live (_although - it's getting more expensive every day_)!!!  She wants to live in a "glitzy" area here and believe it or not, the Malibu Colony is rated #1 as the best (_most expensive_) place to live.  It's followed by Beverly Hills (_and some of the 'neighborhoods' in BH - Trousdale, the Flats, etc_.).  The difference is that Malibu Colony is gated; many houses in BH have gating around their house, not necessarily a "community" .. but the LAST place she would want to be is in the Valley!


----------



## Annawakes

kristinlorraine said:


> the holding hands is back you guys
> 
> View attachment 4712416


What’s with the one glove again?  Is she trying to start a trend or something?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I agree those those who believe that they are not living in Malibu.
> 
> So now they are merching an Escalade?  Or they are being driven by an Uber or car service?  The Kia is probably used by the protection guys.
> 
> I think Harry is the bigger hypocrite here.  Everyone knows that she want to be seen, but with all his whining about camera clicks and light bulbs going off, he should be the one to say no to pap walks.  Obviously not the case when it suits him and he sees their future going down the loo.   Wonder how all this will play out with their law suit.  It would be awfully hard to find a jury who has not seen them in a tabloid at this point.  They will be asked directly if they alerted the paps and even money they will be untruthful.
> 
> @CeeJay Anyone who is willing to walk around delivering food doesn't need close security.


Couldn't agree with you more; I have been ordering food from various restaurants around our area to support them, but EVERY time, they knock on the door, leave the food and get back into their car.  They ALWAYS have on a mask and gloves!!!


----------



## poopsie

B!tch stole my look


----------



## Lounorada

Again with one proper face mask and one single glove between the two of them 
I bet those pics were taken the same day as the other ones and she did an outfit change (or 2) in the car, that way they get a few days of pics to release to the press. He seems to be wearing the same outfit in both sets of pics.

I can't help but laugh that this is what they chose to reduce themselves to being- one of _many_ attention seeking celebrity couples out for their arranged pap-stroll to make themselves feel important and sought after.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Again with one proper face mask and one single glove between the two of them
> I bet those pics were taken the same day as the other ones and she did an outfit change (or 2) in the car, that way they get a few days of pics to release to the press. He seems to be wearing the same outfit in both sets of pics.
> 
> I can't help but laugh that this is what they chose to reduce themselves to being- one of _many_ attention seeking celebrity couples out for their arranged pap-stroll to make themselves feel important and sought after.


I think you are right because there was an embargo regarding the picture releases.  How calculating!  She does this all the time.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> This isn’t how you properly use gloves hun.
> 
> View attachment 4712441



NOT that F***ing hand on H’s back again... before she pushes him out of the way for the pap walk this time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The TMZ photos and video show that she is driving the Escalade. Hmmm, their driver’s licenses are legal in CA?  Ok for her to jaywalk? Harry stands in the street to unload the vehicle?  Wish they would respect our laws.

Seriously, this “public savior” routine wore thin years ago. Most of the A list crowd, royals included, learned that important lesson long ago. Someone (Oprah?) should tell them that they have lost the message and now look very silly and, worse, desperate. Perhaps the Queen will send word — enough already.


----------



## mrsinsyder

That didn’t take long.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> The Dog walk is yet another "attempt" (IMO) .. for them to get papped - and let me tell you why.
> 
> From what we understand (at this point), is that they are in one of the Malibu Colonies.  Those colonies are locked up, and in order to get in, you either need the appropriate security pass  -OR-  someone who lives there lets you in.  So, all that said .. if indeed they walked their dogs in the Malibu colony that they are in, then it is HIGHLY LIKELY that they let those paps in order to take the pictures and that *WILL NOT go down well* with their neighbors as many like the fact that the area is very 'secure'.
> 
> If they went outside their community to walk the dogs, the question is "why"? .. and I think we ALL know Meghan's desperate need to have that attention.  So much for their "NEED" for top-level security; these two are just nuckin' futz!!!


Whose house do you think that they are staying at?
It is packed as sardines there and yet nobody said boo?
I hear you about the Valley being a non fashionable place to stay but the privacy in a double gated community can’t be beat.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> That didn’t take long.
> 
> View attachment 4712500



I guess it makes sense from a marketing perspective. Disney owns ABC and they want the huge  ratings they will get by having Meghan (and likely Harry since they are pretty much glued at the hip) on Good Morning America.  I’ll be surprised if they get around to talking much about the elephant documentary particularly since it’s already been out for over two weeks, but it makes for a nice cover for the interview.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I guess it makes sense from a marketing perspective. Disney owns ABC and they want the huge  ratings they will get by having Meghan (and likely Harry since they are pretty much glued at the hip) on Good Morning America.  I’ll be surprised if they get around to talking much about the elephant documentary particularly since it’s already been out for over two weeks, but it makes for a nice cover for the interview.


ABC is advertising and selling too much crap. I can no longer stomach GMA, the views as the view your deal and other crazy promotions completely dominate. 
Plus they are constantly cutting for commercials.
WTF happened to broadcast in the interest of the public???? 
Meagan the merch belongs there 100%.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> I guess it makes sense from a marketing perspective. Disney owns ABC and they want the huge  ratings they will get by having Meghan (and likely Harry since they are pretty much glued at the hip) on Good Morning America.  I’ll be surprised if they get around to talking much about the elephant documentary particularly since it’s already been out for over two weeks, but it makes for a nice cover for the interview.


I thought the same thing, this documentary has been out for a while, she just needs everyone to hear from her.


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Whose house do you think that they are staying at?
> It is packed as sardines there and yet nobody said boo?
> I hear you about the Valley being a non fashionable place to stay but the privacy in a double gated community can’t be beat.


Have no idea which house they are staying at, and no - highly unlikely that they would be packed in like Sardines.  However, remember .. those communities are rabid about their security and not happy when the paps come around (remember Jennifer Aniston when she married Brad Pitt .. it was done in their backyard, and yet the paps found out about it and were circling her yard in Helicopters!  She was smart though, she put up tenting that did not allow them to get their shots, and many celebrities who live up that way do exactly that when they have some 'event'. 

The Malibu Colonies are double-gated, so it is harder to get inside; that is not always the case in other parts of LA where just the house itself is gated.  

What I simply do not get (and this is just me - maybe???) .. if you are biatching about all this media attention but then move here to LA, why even bother to get yourself into a situation where you COULD potentially be papped?  It reminds me of the time that I saw Gabriel Aubrey and his daughter (with Halle Berry) at the Joans on 3rd in Studio City.  No big-deal; he didn't get much attention because he is pretty low-key and especially when he has his daughter.  Now, ask me about the time that Halle showed up at the same place (and let me tell you - parking is a premium around that area) .. before she came, the paps started rolling in and my friend and I were like "uh oh - who's going to be showing up"? .. and then FLASH-SNAP-FLASH-SNAP .. here comes Halle.  I guess some folks just have this incredible NEED to be papped; I just don't understand it because I am the exact opposite - HATE HAVING my picture taken!!!


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> That didn’t take long.
> 
> View attachment 4712500


Well, I hope that they are doing this at home since LA still has a "shelter-in-place" order!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Well, I'm sure she had big ideas about using Archie's first birthday party as her "California Coming Out" party.  I'm sure she wanted to invite the who's who and get a big publicity spread in a style mag.  However, Covid came to town and the offers aren't coming in.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Mrs.Z said:


> Sad and pathetic reporting when pictures tell the real story. UNREAL.



CNN isn't known for honest reporting.


----------



## Milosmum0307

A wealthy citizen in my state donated four million dollars to set up over two dozen day care centers for front-line medical workers, which obviously pales in comparison to the dazzling philanthropy of these two world-class humanitarians:  pre-arranged “charity” pap strolls (in rumpled clothing and holding hands like horny teenagers, because Never Change, Grifty), and planted tabloid stories gushing about their unparalleled happiness.  What a gift to humanity the Markles have become in this time of crisis.  These tireless, adorably irrelevant hustlers need to skip the line and pick up their Nobel Prizes, stat.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> So here's a high profile couple with a 11 month old stashed at home (presumably) that require security wherever they go. They put themselves out there to knock on strangers' doors wearing DIY masks, plus put their security team out there in a pandemic too. Their security people are forced to be stuck with them wherever they go.  They had to follow Meghan and Harry to pick up these meals, scope out threats and the workers who handed over the meals, follow them to however many homes, watch them ring doorbells and chat, and then follow back to their own home.  Contact with how many people? And then go home to Archie? Totally unnecessary. Sure it's nice to deliver meals, but then drag out and expose their security detail to it all also? In DIY masks?  To be so addicted to attention they force out others in a pandemic unnecessarily. It's not as though they are adding value anywhere, like healthcare personnel. They are complete dopes. Don't tell me they delivered 500 meals. Just enough to get the pictures!
> 
> When this virus blows over they had better be front and center in every volunteer opportunity since they felt SOOOOO compelled to be out now, in this one. This strikes me as beyond desperate pandering for donations to their charity. Like, "Looky us, we're out in a pandemic because we really care!" (...even though they skipped the Royal Marines memorial to attend Lion King.) In other words, if they can't get huge charity donations they'll have to slither back to Frogmore with their tails between their legs. Or Harry will after he ditches Meghan (and it's about time).



Not to mention, who watches Archie? Is it an employee that comes and goes?


----------



## jbags07

DH knows how much i enjoy reading this thread and snapped a pic of this while on a grocery run today....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Allisonfaye said:


> Not to mention, who watches Archie? Is it an employee that comes and goes?


I bet you the employee has a mask and TWO gloves!


----------



## scarlet555

jbags07 said:


> DH knows how much i enjoy reading this thread and snapped a pic of this while on a grocery run today....
> 
> 
> View attachment 4712553



Nice...


----------



## mdcx

Okay, the second round of food deliveries is not a huge shocker. H with his one set if clothes on repeat. But what is going on with M’s hair? I have plenty o bad hair days myself but am not ya know mega rich:


I am wondering what home life is like?


----------



## kipp

mdcx said:


> Okay, the second round of food deliveries is not a huge shocker. H with his one set if clothes on repeat. But what is going on with M’s hair? I have plenty o bad hair days myself but am not ya know mega rich:
> View attachment 4712593
> 
> I am wondering what home life is like?
> 
> 
> View attachment 4712595


I noticed M's hair on another photo posted previously.  My guess is that she routinely used to get a keratin treatment (like a Brazilian blowout) to straighten her hair and with COVID that hasn't been able to be done...


----------



## mdcx

This photo would likely not have been published while H was a senior royal. It might take him a while to realise that the rules are different now:


----------



## kkfiregirl

mdcx said:


> This photo would likely not have been published while H was a senior royal. It might take him a while to realise that the rules are different now:
> View attachment 4712602



they look like a housekeeping team getting ready to disinfect someone’s home.


----------



## kkfiregirl

kipp said:


> I noticed M's hair on another photo posted previously.  My guess is that she routinely used to get a keratin treatment (like a Brazilian blowout) to straighten her hair and with COVID that hasn't been able to be done...



Yeah, but sis, do you own a blow dryer? Can you do a bun? Something!! Her hair looks like mine before I go to bed.


----------



## Katel

kkfiregirl said:


> they look like a housekeeping team getting ready to disinfect someone’s home.


he looks like an invalid who needs help from his carer.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Katel said:


> Here he looks like an invalid who needs help from his carer.



True, he does look like a disabled person who needs help steadying himself.


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

Katel said:


> he looks like an invalid who needs help from his carer.
> 
> View attachment 4712605



Carer or career. A case can be made for both.


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

limom said:


> Whose house do you think that they are staying at?
> It is packed as sardines there and yet nobody said boo?
> I hear you about the Valley being a non fashionable place to stay but the privacy in a double gated community can’t be beat.



They are in Beverly Hills. I’ve been telling you ladies all along. I know whose house but can’t say. 

Malibu is too far from the action. They aren’t hiding out here, as evidenced by their PR stunts.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Why wouldn’t you be able to say?


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

A1aGypsy said:


> Why wouldn’t you be able to say?



Involved with people they know from a distance through work.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Alrighty then.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Well no one is going to track it back to you. Or, if they could, doesn't seem wise to raise it at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

A1aGypsy said:


> Well no one is going to track it back to you. Or, if they could, doesn't seem wise to raise it at all.



Just validating the location. No harm no foul


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> What I simply do not get (and this is just me - maybe???) .. if you are biatching about all this media attention but then move here to LA, why even bother to get yourself into a situation where you COULD potentially be papped?  It reminds me of the time that I saw Gabriel Aubrey and his daughter (with Halle Berry) at the Joans on 3rd in Studio City.  No big-deal; he didn't get much attention because he is pretty low-key and especially when he has his daughter.  Now, ask me about the time that Halle showed up at the same place (and let me tell you - parking is a premium around that area) .. before she came, the paps started rolling in and my friend and I were like "uh oh - who's going to be showing up"? .. and then FLASH-SNAP-FLASH-SNAP .. here comes Halle.  I guess some folks just have this incredible NEED to be papped; I just don't understand it because I am the exact opposite - HATE HAVING my picture taken!!!



I know... plenty of celebs know how to go about their business without getting papped so I don't know why this is still "happening to" them if they claim to hate it so much. Once I was having dinner at Katsu-ya in Studio City (THE best katsu-ya) and saw Charlize Theron with some friends waiting in line outside... no paps, no one said anything. And you hardly ever see some A-listers ever get papped.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very good point, lalame.

These 2 prove repeatedly that they are not A-listers. They never really were anything more than wanna-be’ s. They wanna-be humanitarians, they wanna-be A-listers, they wanna-be in politics, they wanna-be so very important, etc. If they continue with this pap-walk nonsense during our trying times, they will never be considered anything but a rude distraction.




lalame said:


> I know... plenty of celebs know how to go about their business without getting papped so I don't know why this is still "happening to" them if they claim to hate it so much. Once I was having dinner at Katsu-ya in Studio City (THE best katsu-ya) and saw Charlize Theron with some friends waiting in line outside... no paps, no one said anything. And you hardly ever see some A-listers ever get papped.


----------



## lalame

And IMO, I don't see them living in any gated community. That doesn't seem like their style. But there are plenty of places they can live to get privacy... not all celebs live in gated communities. If it were me, it'd be a compound up in the hills - any hills - with a long AF driveway that's gated, in a no-parking area.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Are they even still claiming to hate the photographers?


----------



## Sol Ryan

lanasyogamama said:


> Are they even still claiming to hate the photographers?


The flashbacks Harry must be having... poor guy...


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I know... plenty of celebs know how to go about their business without getting papped so I don't know why this is still "happening to" them if they claim to hate it so much. Once I was having dinner at Katsu-ya in Studio City (THE best katsu-ya) and saw Charlize Theron with some friends waiting in line outside... no paps, no one said anything. And you hardly ever see some A-listers ever get papped.



Anyone can see through their exaggerations and outright lies and can tell that fear of the paparazzi was never their issue. 

With the COVID-19 crisis the American media has mostly been ignoring them. They are getting antsy that they might be forgotten when they are eager to made their grand Hollywood debut. Setting up publicity stunts and getting papped reeks of their desperation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tom Cruise, then Eva Longoria, had a very secluded compound in BH. Photos on Google are stunning. 
Wouldn’t it be a hoot to find out the BRF actually owns a secluded compound in the area?!



lalame said:


> And IMO, I don't see them living in any gated community. That doesn't seem like their style. But there are plenty of places they can live to get privacy... not all celebs live in gated communities. If it were me, it'd be a compound up in the hills - any hills - with a long AF driveway that's gated, in a no-parking area.


----------



## bag-mania

Conversely, Queen Elizabeth announced today that she did not want any celebration of her birthday this year and the Trooping the Colour scheduled for June has been canceled. She did not consider it appropriate during the pandemic.


----------



## mdcx

Are they staying at Oprah's BH compound?
How come no paps have followed them home yet?


----------



## melissatrv

Don't you see the cameras?  Hold my hand dammit!!  And smile under that bandanna!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just too tired to comment about their nonsense.
Although these pandemic times require a healthy dose of at-home self care, when this ends, I’m headed for the spa, even before Hermes.   Take care, all.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Am I missing a new style for shirts to look bunched up and wrinkled? I don’t understand the way she dresses... It’s too tight or too long...

Clothes come in her size, why doesn’t she where the right sizes? As a plus sized person I just don’t understand why you would choose to look like your clothes don’t fit....


----------



## muchstuff

poopsie said:


> View attachment 4712479
> 
> 
> B!tch stole my look


Best post all day .


----------



## Clearblueskies

melissatrv said:


> Don't you see the cameras?  Hold my hand dammit!!  And smile under that bandanna!
> 
> View attachment 4712710


And where’s the glove?  Screwed up in her hand?  Renders it useless for infection control.  Might as well take the mask off and let your cameraman have his shot love.
Glad to hear the charity’s getting stick over this - it’s much worse than pandering to a pair of publicity hungry idiots.  It risks causing serious harm to the vulnerable clients they’re supposed to be helping shelter from the pandemic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

ilovehoneybleu said:


> They are in *Beverly Hills*. I’ve been telling you ladies all along. I know whose house but can’t say.
> Malibu is too far from the action. They aren’t hiding out here, as evidenced by their PR stunts.


Thought the same all along. 
Plus the houses in Malibu proper have no acreage and with very few exceptions are not large enough, imho.
How big of a house are they staying at?


----------



## beautymagpie

melissatrv said:


> Don't you see the cameras?  Hold my hand dammit!!  And smile under that bandanna!
> 
> View attachment 4712710



Do you ever think they don’t look comfortable holding hands? I watched the video of the recent military event (red dress one) and their fingers were so fidgety.


----------



## Sharont2305

beautymagpie said:


> Do you ever think they don’t look comfortable holding hands? I watched the video of the recent military event (red dress one) and their fingers were so fidgety.


But they have to prove they're in lurrrve [emoji1] What other way is there? [emoji1787]


----------



## Megs

melissatrv said:


> Don't you see the cameras?  Hold my hand dammit!!  And smile under that bandanna!
> 
> View attachment 4712710



It’s one thing to be home with your family and hugging right now, but these two are out to deliver food to vulnerable people. They shouldn’t be holding hands, she shouldn’t be patting him on the back with her single glove, he should be protecting his face/nose better, it’s just all so off. I mean, figuring out how to keep from potential spread of this isn’t that hard right now. 

I’ve become so aware of what I touch when I’m out to get our groceries (thankfully Vlad does most of those runs for us!). But these two are out during the height of this, delivering to those in need and vulnerable, and barely protecting themselves and others. 

And Archie..... he’s home with someone else watching him so they can deliver meals? That’s not necessary work they’re doing, can they not just stay with him. They’re volunteering for pap photos. Clearly this charity said they were set before these two came forward to take meals in bags while hand holding like Camila Cabello and Shawn Mendes/Ben Afleck and his new gal.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## Mrs.Z

Megs said:


> It’s one thing to be home with your family and hugging right now, but these two are out to deliver food to vulnerable people. They shouldn’t be holding hands, she shouldn’t be patting him on the back with her single glove, he should be protecting his face/nose better, it’s just all so off. I mean, figuring out how to keep from potential spread of this isn’t that hard right now.
> 
> I’ve become so aware of what I touch when I’m out to get our groceries (thankfully Vlad does most of those runs for us!). But these two are out during the height of this, delivering to those in need and vulnerable, and barely protecting themselves and others.
> 
> And Archie..... he’s home with someone else watching him so they can deliver meals? That’s not necessary work they’re doing, can they not just stay with him. They’re volunteering for pap photos. Clearly this charity said they were set before these two came forward to take meals in bags while hand holding like Camila Cabello and Shawn Mendes/Ben Afleck and his new gal.


Too funny, I thought the same thing yesterday, soon H & M will be kissing through their masks just like Ben Affleck and his new lady....I mean really....it’s absurd!


----------



## chicinthecity777

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4712815


Oh goodie! Pap-proof yet we see pap photos almost daily!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4712815


They don’t want to be papped at home having a row!!  Outside the house they can stage their “best life”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> They don’t want to be papped at home having a row!!  Outside the house they can stage their “best life”


I love that being close to Elton, not Doria, was their priority.


----------



## Lounorada

melissatrv said:


> Don't you see the cameras?  Hold my hand dammit!!  And smile under that bandanna!
> 
> View attachment 4712710


Their body language is quite telling here. Doesn't look all _picture-perfect-couple-look-we're-so-happy_ like they want people to believe.
Even with his face half covered, it's clear that H looks miserable.


----------



## Corneto

Sharont2305 said:


> But they have to prove they're in lurrrve [emoji1] What other way is there? [emoji1787]



“In Lurrrve”
Big LOL


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lounorada said:


> Even with his face half covered, it's clear that H looks miserable.


I agree. i wonder if he’s realizing that not all is as it seems.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> I love that being close to Elton, not Doria, was their priority.


I hope uncle Elton gives him a good talking to


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope uncle Elton gives him a good talking to


The blind leading the blind.


----------



## Sharont2305

Corneto said:


> “In Lurrrve”
> Big LOL


You have to say it in a Phoebe from Friends voice, lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I love that being close to Elton, not Doria, was their priority.


That point escaped me


----------



## Genie27

mrsinsyder said:


> I agree. i wonder if he’s realizing that not all is as it seems.


Like the insipid flickering of a low watt incandescent bulb about to go off.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> it's clear that H looks miserable.


He does.  He looks lost actually


----------



## Tootsie17

Clearblueskies said:


> He does.  He looks lost actually


Meghan has him right where she has wanted him all along. All to herself! He's isolated from his family, friends, or anyone who could contradict her web of manipulation. I hope the BRF is planning some type of intervention for him once self isolation is over.  Otherwise, Harry is going to be miserable for quite a while,  At least he has Archie to bring some joy into his life.


----------



## limom

Tootsie17 said:


> Meghan has him right where she has wanted him all along. All to herself! He's isolated from his family, friends, or anyone who could contradict her web of manipulation. I hope the BRF is planning some type of intervention for him once self isolation is over.  Otherwise, Harry is going to be miserable for quite a while,  At least he has Archie to bring some joy into his life.


Not buying the narrative as Hairy as a victim, he left his family and his country more than willingly.
What is it that when men behaving badly, somehow a woman gets the blame for it?
Now, MM is probably not a Saint but he made his own decision FFS.


----------



## Tootsie17

limom said:


> Not buying the narrative as Hairy as a victim, he left his family and his country more than willingly.
> What is it that when men behaving badly, somehow a woman gets the blame for it?
> Now, MM is probably not a Saint but he made his own decision FFS.


limom I agree with you he is not a victim.  If I thought she was being manipulated by him, I would be glad she planned Megxit. Maybe they really are two peas in a pod and rightfully deserve each other, as messed up as that sounds.


----------



## threadbender

The only victim I see is Archie.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4712815


I can see where it could take time to find your dream home, esp if you have a free mansion to stay at while you're looking


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I can see where it could take time to find your dream home, esp if you have a free mansion to stay at while you're looking


Are they really looking though?
Can they really afford what they (especially him) have been accustomed to?
Can they afford to PO the British public when the populace realizes that the Firm might be buying a mansion for two people who contribute nada to the British?
This will end up with them retrieving to GB in one year top, imho,
He will go into a mea culpa tour, go back to “his” charities and she will do whatever.
I don’t think anyone will care at that point.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Are they really looking though?
> Can they really afford what they (especially him) have been accustomed to?
> Can they afford to PO the British public when the populace realizes that the Firm might be buying a mansion for two people who contribute nada to the British?
> This will end up with them retrieving to GB in one year top, imho,
> He will go into a mea culpa tour, go back to “his” charities and she will do whatever.
> I don’t think anyone will care at that point.


you're right.....Harry's money would not cover the purchase, maintenance and property taxes for a large mansion with acreage for long.  and I think the British people would be outraged if their money was used for it.  that would leave Charles's personal fortune?  Oh wait - H&M are gonna be "earning" tons of money here in the US


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> that would leave Charles's personal fortune?



The thing is...how long will he indulge them? They wouldn't need a multimillion dollar mansion if they had stayed at Frogmore. They wouldn't need security paid for by him if they hadn't decided they wanted to quit the firm and basically go on welfare. At this point I feel he just can't keep stuffing money down their greedy throats.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Pretty much totally over these two v obvious grifters, just love eating popcorn and reading all of your comments here on this thread, ladies & gents

Looks like the media is bored with them bc for every positive story <w/100% negative reader comments>, there are at least 2+ negative stories written by the media

As far as how popular they are and all of their celeb friends - did I miss Meghan Markle at last night's WHO non-profit celeb-fundraiser? Did I blink for just a second and miss H&M? Their friends Sir Eton and Oprah were there, right?


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope uncle Elton gives him a good talking to


Why though? .. isn't he a fan of Meghan or was it just Harry?


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Pretty much totally over these two v obvious grifters, just love eating popcorn and reading all of your comments here on this thread, ladies & gents
> 
> Looks like the media is bored with them bc for every positive story <w/100% negative reader comments>, there are at least 2+ negative stories written by the media
> 
> As far as how popular they are and all of their celeb friends - did I miss Meghan Markle at last night's WHO non-profit celeb-fundraiser? Did I blink for just a second and miss H&M? Their friends Sir Eton and Oprah were there, right?


interesting point....you would think they would want to be involved with that


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Not buying the narrative as Hairy as a victim, he left his family and his country more than willingly.
> What is it that when men behaving badly, somehow a woman gets the blame for it?
> Now, MM is probably not a Saint but he made his own decision FFS.


I agree with you @limom !  At first, I thought it was more MM .. but now?!?! .. eh, not so much anymore!  However, if pictures don't lie, it does appear that she is pulling his hand into her bodyspace, but he seems to be walking not so close to her .. hmmmm!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Also, I would not be so sure that the Brits and their media will welcome Harry back with open arms, let alone H&M together

Just read this:
*Row as Prince Harry claims UK's coronavirus crisis is 'better than we are led to believe' by the media: 'Unqualified' Duke's comments are branded 'outrageous' by health experts who say he is 'deserting his country in its hour of need'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Ks-coronavirus-crisis-better-led-believe.html*

One last thought, just wait until H's brother is king and Charles is gone, there will prob be a nagging thought in the back of Will's mind, or an axe to grind, ie "my younger bro, who is the only other person that truly knows what I have gone through growing up, literally deserted me"
Don't laugh, know cases v similar to this with siblings ~ extreme circumstances with only two siblings present to support the grave reality of their situation ~ the silent person suffering in the room right now is prob his older brother, v sad


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> that would leave Charles's personal fortune?



But didn’t they essentially give a big public F*ck you to Charles and the entire BRF on their way out? He may love his son, but Charles can hold a grudge for sure. 

Harry and Meghan must be viewed  as being backstabbers to the family. I don’t think Harry will ever be able to make it up to them for making the family look bad. If they took him back it would be under conditions that MEghan would find intolerable. So if he returns it will definitely be solo.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> But didn’t they essentially give a big public F*ck you to Charles and the entire BRF on their way out? He may love his son, but Charles can hold a grudge for sure.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan must be viewed  as being backstabbers to the family.* I don’t think Harry will ever be able to make it up to them for making the family look bad. If they took him back it would be under conditions that MEghan would find intolerable. So if he returns it will definitely be solo.



THIS. Totally concur, *bag-mania *
Think about the laws of power
There are only three people that truly have power in the BRF ~  QEII, Charles, Wills ~ and whom can H rely on to welcome him back if he should ever change his mind? Only his father, the other two are most probably enraged at Harry's actions against not only themselves but their nation ~ the US over the UK? Money and a B-List actress over Duty? REALLY?
H&M will not be returning to the Firm unless it is on their strict terms, which I doubt will ever be offered to these two grifters imo


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...how long will he indulge them? They wouldn't need a multimillion dollar mansion if they had stayed at Frogmore. They wouldn't need security paid for by him if they hadn't decided they wanted to quit the firm and basically go on welfare. At this point I feel he just can't keep stuffing money down their greedy throats.


.. *CORRECT*, and I believe he did mention this (_I recall reading it somewhere_); and I think that may also be another reason why there will be a 1-year "review"!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> THIS. Totally concur, *bag-mania *
> Think about the laws of power
> There are only three people that truly have power in the BRF ~  QEII, Charles, Wills ~ and whom can H rely on to welcome him back if he should ever change his mind? Only his father, the other two are most probably enraged at Harry's actions against not only themselves but their nation ~ the US over the UK? Money and a B-List *Z-LIST* actress over Duty? REALLY?
> H&M will not be returning to the Firm unless it is on their strict terms, which I doubt will ever be offered to these two grifters imo


Fixed that TYPO for you!!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> Fixed that TYPO for you!!



*CeeJay*, you are so RIGHT!!!
Gonna need more butter on my popcorn with all the mis-steps these two #TotallyOutOfTouch grifters are making these days

Hey, didn’t they just hire one of Bill Gates top foundation non-profit execs? Just a few weeks back and now there is this poorly contrived publicity campaign? Hmmm, go figure, maybe I’m wrong?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Sorry to disappoint all.


----------



## bellecate

Tootsie17 said:


> Meghan has him right where she has wanted him all along. All to herself! He's isolated from his family, friends, or anyone who could contradict her web of manipulation. I hope the BRF is planning some type of intervention for him once self isolation is over.  Otherwise, Harry is going to be miserable for quite a while,  At least he has Archie to bring some joy into his life.



It strikes me that if the genders were reversed in this situation one would be thinking abuse. It does happen in reverse situations. Abuse comes in more forms than just physical.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Sorry to disappoint all.
> 
> View attachment 4713042


I used to like GMA (way back in the day); now?? .. not so much!  It's like having Entertainment Tonight but for your "get-up-in-the-morning" show .. NO THANKS!  Won't be watching, but you know I'll be checking up in here!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

mrsinsyder said:


> Sorry to disappoint all.
> 
> View attachment 4713042



Maybe the Queen (!) did indeed have a word.  Many thanks to whoever did!


----------



## mrsinsyder

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe the Queen (!) did indeed have a word.  Many thanks to whoever did!


She’s skipping part of her birthday celebration while these two are out attention seeking as much as they can. Smh.


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

limom said:


> Thought the same all along.
> Plus the houses in Malibu proper have no acreage and with very few exceptions are not large enough, imho.
> How big of a house are they staying at?



I don’t know the address of the home so not sure on the size of it. The family they are renting from is in the apparel business and although wealthy, fairly private.


----------



## zen1965

Crikey, his podcast. We are getting Harry-without-a-ghost-written-speech now. His limitations show.
I actually wonder how she puts up with him.


----------



## limom

ilovehoneybleu said:


> I don’t know the address of the home so not sure on the size of it. The family they are renting from is in the apparel business and although wealthy, fairly private.


Hum, Moroccan/French family?


----------



## youngster

VigeeLeBrun said:


> One last thought, just wait until H's brother is king and Charles is gone, there will prob be a nagging thought in the back of Will's mind, or an axe to grind, ie "*my younger bro, who is the only other person that truly knows what I have gone through growing up, literally deserted me"*
> Don't laugh, know cases v similar to this with siblings ~ extreme circumstances with only two siblings present to support the grave reality of their situation ~ the silent person suffering in the room right now is prob his older brother, v sad



This is one of the saddest parts of this whole situation, how alienated the two brothers likely are and how devastated William has to be. He likely thought he would have his brother next to him, supporting him, when he did eventually become King.  But, he's carrying on. Nobody has asked him if he's OK btw.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe the Queen (!) did indeed have a word.  Many thanks to whoever did!


I read that it's the same day that Kate is supposed to give a speech about mental health during this crisis.  It may be that the Queen is keeping a close eye on the foolishness of MM.


----------



## HiromiT

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Pretty much totally over these two v obvious grifters, just love eating popcorn and reading all of your comments here on this thread, ladies & gents
> 
> Looks like the media is bored with them bc for every positive story <w/100% negative reader comments>, there are at least 2+ negative stories written by the media
> 
> As far as how popular they are and all of their celeb friends - did I miss Meghan Markle at last night's WHO non-profit celeb-fundraiser? Did I blink for just a second and miss H&M? Their friends Sir Eton and Oprah were there, right?



I was thinking the same about the fundraiser. It must have killed them to not be a part of it when so many celebs were involved. I thought Uncle Elton might have recruited them. Were they not invited to begin with or did the timing not work out since they were holed up in Canada until recently? But since everyone was doing their part from their homes, H & M could have easily filmed their bits in Canada. And if they did take part, what would they do since neither has a talent??


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> Are they really looking though?
> Can they really afford what they (especially him) have been accustomed to?
> Can they afford to PO the British public when the populace realizes that the Firm might be buying a mansion for two people who contribute nada to the British?
> This will end up with them retrieving to GB in one year top, imho,
> He will go into a mea culpa tour, go back to “his” charities and she will do whatever.
> I don’t think anyone will care at that point.


Maybe scheming MM and JCMH are grifting homeowners for a year when they slink back to the UK? Problem solved. What ever happened to the 9 million MM gave her Doria? Where did that money come from? I wonder if she's doing a transfer surely but slowly (maybe part of her plan)? I mean with MM anything is possible.


----------



## Lounorada

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Just read this:
> *Row as Prince Harry claims UK's coronavirus crisis is 'better than we are led to believe' by the media: 'Unqualified' Duke's comments are branded 'outrageous' by health experts who say he is 'deserting his country in its hour of need'
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Ks-coronavirus-crisis-better-led-believe.html*


Wow... just wow SMFH. He sounds like one petulant little imbecile.
Outrageous comments indeed, also dangerous. Although it's probably a good thing that very few people are looking to this man-child for advice on a global pandemic. I hope.
Hey, Just-Harry! Why don't you...


----------



## Lodpah

melissatrv said:


> Don't you see the cameras?  Hold my hand dammit!!  And smile under that bandanna!
> 
> View attachment 4712710


That death grip MM has on Harry proves that she is in control. Harry has his hand over hers and usually when the initiator is the one who wants to hold hands the hand holding would be reversed instead. Harry is sending out subtle signals of distress   Look at his other hand his fingers are splayed and MM holding her water bottle is wicked. Ok, ok I'm reaching here


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

youngster said:


> This is one of the saddest parts of this whole situation, how alienated the two brothers likely are and how devastated William has to be. He likely thought he would have his brother next to him, supporting him, when he did eventually become King.  But, he's carrying on. Nobody has asked him if he's OK btw.



My thoughts exactly, *youngster*, after studying this type of sibling bond - it is the silent one who is most devastated, in this case, Wills - v sad, my heart goes out to him


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

limom said:


> Hum, Moroccan/French family?



Not Moroccan/French, but close in proximity. They are European.


----------



## Mrs.Z

What a complete and utter missed opportunity that they did not participate in the Covid fundraiser!  

They could have hummed Heal the World while holding a candle together with their one glove....makes me teary just thinking about it.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Maybe scheming MM and JCMH are grifting homeowners for a year when they slink back to the UK? Problem solved. What ever happened to the 9 million MM gave her Doria? Where did that money come from? I wonder if she's doing a transfer surely but slowly (maybe part of her plan)? I mean with MM anything is possible.


AH .. so you heard that as well??? .. I thought I had read that Doria got $9m, but then never heard anything again, so thought that maybe I didn't, in fact, see that!  Hmmmmmm ...


----------



## CeeJay

So .. what are the bets that MM has her hair all made-up for this???   I would so not put it pass her to do that, you know .. endanger someone else's life at her expense!


----------



## wisconsin

limom said:


> Not buying the narrative as Hairy as a victim, he left his family and his country more than willingly.
> What is it that when men behaving badly, somehow a woman gets the blame for it?
> Now, MM is probably not a Saint but he made his own decision FFS.



Nope, don’t agree. I have seen men being manipulated by women and women being manipulated by men. Even if he wanted to get away from the Royal family, I certainly don’t think it was in this way.  She has manipulated and manhandled it to a large extent.


----------



## wisconsin

bellecate said:


> It strikes me that if the genders were reversed in this situation one would be thinking abuse. It does happen in reverse situations. Abuse comes in more forms than just physical.


Exactly. Controlling and abusive if genders reversed.


----------



## Genie27

Heres the voiceover for the security footage.
“This just in - TDOS and her trusty sidekick JCMH were spotted feeding 500 of LAs downtrodden, single handedly, with seven loaves and two fi- what’s that? Sorry, my producer tells me that they fed SEVEN people, with two gloves shared between them, while posing for 500 paparazzi. Ah, that makes so much more sense.

And we are told that tomorrow we will bring you exclusive footage of their 20 mile drive from their gated estate to secretly walk two of their dogs for three minutes. Security forces were not visible in the area.

Stay tuned for the next thrilling instalment of When Merch met Lurch, followed by As The Glove Turns. The Bald and The Banal continues this time next week.”


----------



## 1LV

Genie27 said:


> Heres the voiceover for the security footage.
> “This just in - TDOS and her trusty sidekick JCMH were spotted feeding 500 of LAs downtrodden, single handedly, with seven loaves and two fi- what’s that? Sorry, my producer tells me that they fed SEVEN people, with two gloves shared between them, while posing for 500 paparazzi. Ah, that makes so much more sense.
> 
> And we are told that tomorrow we will bring you exclusive footage of their 20 mile drive from their gated estate to secretly walk two of their dogs for three minutes. Security forces were not visible in the area.
> 
> Stay tuned for the next thrilling instalment of When Merch met Lurch, followed by As The Glove Turns. The Bald and The Banal continues this time next week.”


Lmao!


----------



## sdkitty

HiromiT said:


> I was thinking the same about the fundraiser. It must have killed them to not be a part of it when so many celebs were involved. I thought Uncle Elton might have recruited them. Were they not invited to begin with or did the timing not work out since they were holed up in Canada until recently? But since everyone was doing their part from their homes, H & M could have easily filmed their bits in Canada. And if they did take part, what would they do since neither has a talent??


well she could have spouted her wisdom


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

ilovehoneybleu said:


> Not Moroccan/French, but close in proximity. They are European.


you mean they are actually renting now, not just squatting or being houseguests?


----------



## threadbender

HiromiT said:


> I was thinking the same about the fundraiser. It must have killed them to not be a part of it when so many celebs were involved. I thought Uncle Elton might have recruited them. Were they not invited to begin with or did the timing not work out since they were holed up in Canada until recently? But since everyone was doing their part from their homes, H & M could have easily filmed their bits in Canada. And if they did take part, what would they do since neither has a talent??


They have likely been in LA since prior to the planning of this fundraiser.
The Rolling Stones were a late addition, I think so, if they had been recruited, I am sure they could have managed. Wonder if maybe it might have something to do with the former Gates' employee. I mean B&M were a driving force along with Elton and Lady Gaga. I did not even watch more than a bit so, not sure if M&H would have even been suitable anyway.


----------



## cafecreme15

Oh my lord...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Are they CRAZY? 
♥️


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> you mean they are actually renting now, not just squatting or being houseguests?


.. and if that is the case, oh nellie .. will they go through those buck-a-roos very quickly being in BH!  What I've seen out here when you rent a house, is that while the homeowner normally pays for the Gardener and (maybe) the pool guy, you pay your utilities (power & water (they are lucky that it's not LADWP - they ROB you), your Gas, obviously your own insurance (house & car) and your Cable, Television and Security bills.  So, let's say that they are renting it for $8k a month (which would be cheap for BH), then add on all those bills .. you're likely talking (at minimum) $10k per month.  KA-CHING, KA-CHING, KA-CHING .. guess who is going to RACE through your money, Hazza??????


----------



## threadbender

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh my lord...


Is this for real? I am laughing so hard!


----------



## bellecate

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh my lord...



I find this highly amusing. Like these publications could care.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow! Pass the popcorn, please.
The HarkleDebacle is the gift that keeps on giving.

No legitimate A-lister will ever want to be associated with these blankety-blanks.


----------



## mrsinsyder

No one asked but ok? Release this letter anyway lol

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...k-tabloids-duke-duchess-sussex-sun-daily-mail


----------



## CeeJay

The letter ..


----------



## mrsinsyder

They keep releasing these statements no one is looking for and it just reeks of desperation. Just don’t work with them. Why keep announcing it? Oh, right, attention hoors. 

I notice TMZ, radar, etc. aren’t on the list.


----------



## cafecreme15

CeeJay said:


> The letter ..
> View attachment 4713192


Lest we forget they are the DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX!!!

These two disgust me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if they will sue TMZ for posting the pap-walks videos? 
LMAO


----------



## mrsinsyder

cafecreme15 said:


> Lest we forget they are the DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX!!!
> 
> These two disgust me.


How many times is that repeated


----------



## mrsinsyder

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they will sue TMZ for posting the pap-walks videos?
> LMAO


They’ll have to sue Beghan Barkle, the person who notified them of their locations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

I went to see Rob Lowe's standup show recently and he said no paps will bother you unless you _want _them to.


----------



## Allisonfaye

https://www.yahoo.com/news/meghan-markle-james-perse-pants-stan-smith-sneakers-002451208.html

*Meghan Markle wears $410 sweatpants while volunteering in L.A. — here's where you can buy them*

*...The 38-year-old paired her favourite Adidas Stan Smith sneakers ($110 CAD) with a simple black crewneck and an ultra-comfy looking pair of James Perse lounge pants, which retail for $410 CAD...*


----------



## mrsinsyder

$400 for rayon?! Lmaooooo


----------



## CarryOn2020

cafecreme15 said:


> Lest we forget they are the DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX!!!
> 
> These two disgust me.



Once again, they prove they were not, are not, will never be A-listers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> https://www.yahoo.com/news/meghan-markle-james-perse-pants-stan-smith-sneakers-002451208.html
> 
> *Meghan Markle wears $410 sweatpants while volunteering in L.A. — here's where you can buy them*
> 
> *...The 38-year-old paired her favourite Adidas Stan Smith sneakers ($110 CAD) with a simple black crewneck and an ultra-comfy looking pair of James Perse lounge pants, which retail for $410 CAD...*



Lounge pants?  
Reminds me of the Leisure Suit days. Haaaa.


----------



## Mrs.Z

As we are in the midst of a global health crisis the Duke and Duchess must work overtime to constantly remain in the headlines since most people currently give ZERO Fs about them!  

They are soooooo DELUSIONAL, I cannot wrap my mind around it at this point.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Are they CRAZY?
> ♥️


pretty arrogant.....wow, those tabloids are probably gonna go out of business now


----------



## CeeJay

Allisonfaye said:


> https://www.yahoo.com/news/meghan-markle-james-perse-pants-stan-smith-sneakers-002451208.html
> 
> *Meghan Markle wears $410 sweatpants while volunteering in L.A. — here's where you can buy them*
> 
> *...The 38-year-old paired her favourite Adidas Stan Smith sneakers ($110 CAD) with a simple black crewneck and an ultra-comfy looking pair of James Perse lounge pants, which retail for $410 CAD...*


OH BROTHER! .. I'm familiar with this brand, but never bought a single item because they are ridiculously expensive .. and it's simple T-Shirts, Leggings, etc.  However, there is an James Perse Outlet here in LA, but-but-but .. you need to know WHERE it is and it's not in the "best" part of town (I have not been to his outlet, but there are others in the area which I for sure have gone too and have bought items)!!!


----------



## threadbender

Mmmm, isn't her court case starting soon? Just sayin'


I skimmed the article so am just guessing that is the reason.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> .. and if that is the case, oh nellie .. will they go through those buck-a-roos very quickly being in BH!  What I've seen out here when you rent a house, is that while the homeowner normally pays for the Gardener and (maybe) the pool guy, you pay your utilities (power & water (they are lucky that it's not LADWP - they ROB you), your Gas, obviously your own insurance (house & car) and your Cable, Television and Security bills.  So, let's say that they are renting it for $8k a month (which would be cheap for BH), then add on all those bills .. you're likely talking (at minimum) $10k per month.  KA-CHING, KA-CHING, KA-CHING .. guess who is going to RACE through your money, Hazza??????



*CeeJay*, I’m in my eldest DD’s 2-bedroom condo right outside of Beverly Hills and it rents for $7500 monthly - no way would H&M be able to rent a decent house for less than double that amount! 
Who is going to cover their bills for any length of time here? Rude awakening coming? ♥️


----------



## CeeJay

.. and how many of us bet that Piers Morgan is going to have a field day with this "announcement"!  Can't stand the man per se, but sometimes he has written good articles about the nonsense of these two!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *CeeJay*, I’m in my eldest DD’s 2-bedroom condo right outside of Beverly Hills and it rents for $7500 monthly - no way would H&M be able to rent a decent house for less than double that amount!
> Who is going to cover their bills for any length of time here? Rude awakening coming? ♥️


HOLEY-MACK-A-ROLI!!!!!  I'm in the Valley (whoopie - I preferred Pasadena), and a full-house rental (my neighbors are renters) is anywhere from $3800 and up (especially if you have a pool)!  

But .. LOVE that there is another LA gal; too bad that we have the pandemic because otherwise, I would say "let's grab some coffee" (or one of my BH fave's Wally's)!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and if that is the case, oh nellie .. will they go through those buck-a-roos very quickly being in BH!  What I've seen out here when you rent a house, is that while the homeowner normally pays for the Gardener and (maybe) the pool guy, you pay your utilities (power & water (they are lucky that it's not LADWP - they ROB you), your Gas, obviously your own insurance (house & car) and your Cable, Television and Security bills.  So, let's say that they are renting it for $8k a month (which would be cheap for BH), then add on all those bills .. you're likely talking (at minimum) $10k per month.  KA-CHING, KA-CHING, KA-CHING .. guess who is going to RACE through your money, Hazza??????


but it must be worthy of their magnificence....that's what counts.....She is no longer a minor cable tv actress.  she is half o the duke and duchess


----------



## CeeJay

^^ oh, and let me add, that rent is oftentimes for a 2-bedroom and not much square feet - maybe about 1200 at most


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> but it must be worthy of their magnificence....that's what counts.....She is no longer a minor cable tv actress.  she is half o the duke and duchess


I so wish the Queen had taken those titles away, I am just beyond hearing her CONSTANTLY use that title .. she is truly getting to be like LuAnn on the RHoNY!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

threadbender said:


> Mmmm, isn't her court case starting soon? Just sayin'


Yep, Friday.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I so wish the Queen had taken those titles away, I am just beyond hearing her CONSTANTLY use that title .. she is truly getting to be like LuAnn on the RHoNY!


funny you mention that.  Luann was on WWHL the other night and she has apparently stopped using the title.  she was introduced as Luann and her last name (whatever that is)


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Yep, Friday.


let's get the popcorn


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry, it starts with the man in the mirror.  The universe does not need your negative vibes at a time like this.
For heaven’s sake, Neimans is preparing for bankruptcy!

Seee, this is how it’s done in 2020:  'Charlie Watts playing air drums is the kind of positivity we all need right now.’ #TogetherAtHome


----------



## lanasyogamama

Someone apparently isn’t happy with their press!


----------



## redney

Good grief, the LOOK AT MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE thirst is pathetic.


----------



## Frivole88

I've read from the Disney+ fb comment section that it was Meryl Streep who did the first voice-over for Elephants before she was replaced by Meghan. well if there's any truth to this...


----------



## sdkitty

kristinlorraine said:


> I've read from the Disney+ fb comment section that it was Meryl Streep who did the first voice-over for Elephants before she was replaced by Meghan. well if there's any truth to this...


Meryl is basically considered the greatest actress of our time.
if she was replaced I doubt it was because they wanted to use Meghan...possibly she wanted out due to a conflict or something and then they hired M?


----------



## melissatrv

CeeJay said:


> I so wish the Queen had taken those titles away, I am just beyond hearing her CONSTANTLY use that title .. she is truly getting to be like LuAnn on the RHoNY!


I keep saying this too.  My thoughts are that she did not want to alienate Harry too much in case he comes back into the fold post divorce.  He still would have been a Prince though and she would be Princess Henry...she would not like that, LOL


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

sdkitty said:


> you mean they are actually renting now, not just squatting or being houseguests?



It is my understanding that they are renting, although can’t confirm.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Apparently they called themselves the D+DoS 7 times in two pages!!!


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *CeeJay*, I’m in my eldest DD’s 2-bedroom condo right outside of Beverly Hills and it rents for $7500 monthly - no way would H&M be able to rent a decent house for less than double that amount!
> Who is going to cover their bills for any length of time here? Rude awakening coming? ♥️


I have the feeling that they are renting in Trousdale Estates.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> The letter ..
> View attachment 4713192


Oh I get it now, they are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.  It was repeated often enough.


----------



## zinacef

HiromiT said:


> I was thinking the same about the fundraiser. It must have killed them to not be a part of it when so many celebs were involved. I thought Uncle Elton might have recruited them. Were they not invited to begin with or did the timing not work out since they were holed up in Canada until recently? But since everyone was doing their part from their homes, H & M could have easily filmed their bits in Canada. And if they did take part, what would they do since neither has a talent??


Read her word salad essay with their iconic umbrella picture on the background or maybe she will surprise us with a song.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh my lord...



Ok.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> HOLEY-MACK-A-ROLI!!!!!  I'm in the Valley (whoopie - I preferred Pasadena), and a full-house rental (my neighbors are renters) is anywhere from $3800 and up (especially if you have a pool)!
> 
> But .. LOVE that there is another LA gal; too bad that we have the pandemic because otherwise, I would say *"let's grab some coffee" *(or one of my BH fave's Wally's)!!



Hey *CeeJay *when this is over, I'm all in for a coffee!
The only reason that I know the rental cost of my DD"s condo is right before the pandemic, my DD left for the East Coast and I stayed behind ~ we debated putting this condo up for rent but thought,  why bother? Then all hell broke loose~ could not wish for a better place to hang out, very pleasant


----------



## poopsie

This pretty much sums up my feelings about their pronouncements and sartorial selections


----------



## V0N1B2

mrsinsyder said:


> How many times is that repeated


Four, actually.  There are a total of eight sentences in that release, and it is mentioned that they are the DUKE and DUCHESS of Sussex in exactly half of them.  
Or 4/6 paragraphs
A touch much, no?


----------



## kipp

All this publicity over stuff that really doesn't matter is very annoying.  Are they trying to compete with the Covid virus?


----------



## cafecreme15

kipp said:


> All this publicity over stuff that really doesn't matter is very annoying.  Are they trying to compete with the Covid virus?


In a word, yes


----------



## bag-mania

I can’t express enough how much I love this thread. 

Just when I think it is virtually impossible for them to embarrass and disgrace themselves any more, here comes Harry and Meghan with a big ol’ “hold my beer.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is there a reason why they don’t use this title?  Welcome to the Dumbartons has a lovely ring to it. 
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-44180383
_He will be the third Earl of Dumbarton - a title that has strong military connections and one not used since 1749. 
On her marriage, Meghan Markle has become the Countess of Dumbarton.
_


----------



## cafecreme15

I just noticed the slip up in the first paragraph of the letter when Meghan (because we all know who wrote this) refers to themselves, the “Duke and Duchess of Sussex”, as “we” and elsewhere the “Duke and Duchess of Sussex” are referred to as “they.” Can’t you almost hear Meghan angrily banging this out on her keyboard from here??


----------



## cafecreme15

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is there a reason why they don’t use this title?  Welcome to the Dumbartons has a lovely ring to it.
> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-44180383
> _He will be the third Earl of Dumbarton - a title that has strong military connections and one not used since 1749.
> On her marriage, Meghan Markle has become the Countess of Dumbarton._


Duke and Duchess are higher ranking titles in the peerage, so that is traditionally what it used. However if they hadn’t flown the coop, they would have used the Dumbarton title when visiting Scotland and carrying out engagements there.


----------



## Genie27

There she goes shining her light again in para two, while standing in her own truthiness.

Let’s come up with some alternate catchphrases, Megsy. Sorry, that’s TDOS to me, I suppose, as we were reminded in *every* freaking paragraph of the manifesto.
Open the door?
Create a new paradigm?
Write your own golden ticket?
Unearth the corpse?


----------



## pixiejenna

The other thing that bugs me about the pap “charity work” beyond the obvious need for attention, disregard of proper PPE when visiting vulnerable people, and potentially exposing a 11 month Archie. Is the total disregard for their own security team who have to in advance vet out the situation for their safety and follow them just so they can have their pictures taken. I hope that they at least have proper PPE while out and about for this nonsense.


----------



## scarlet555

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh my lord...


Utterly ridiculous and truly embarrassing.  These two have no shame.  She obviously wrote this letter herself.  The grammar is like a mad draft.  Doesn’t she have anyone, to help her?  Even Harry could help her.  I mean unless she is typing this letter on her IPhone or android with two fingers, that’s the only time I don’t care about grammar.


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> The letter ..
> View attachment 4713192


Pompous fools!


----------



## mdcx

When M goes to Starbucks, she probably gives her name as The Duchess of Sussex!


ETA most decently classy people who have $$$, titles, doctorates, awards etc etc tend to not announce them first off but let you find out later when someone else fills you in. Imo.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Yep, Friday.


All the recent activity is about quickly preparing the ground ahead of the court case.  Because she’s superficial and slipshod MM thinks a couple of shots of her in angelic mode and a teary missive about unfair reporting will win the day.  You’d have thought she might’ve learnt a lesson from the way her last little essay went down, but it seems not 


lanasyogamama said:


> Apparently they called themselves the D+DoS 7 times in two pages!!!


Harry was always like this.  All casual and “call me Harry” when it suited him to be affable, yet very quick to get high handed when anything displeased him.  Explains why he has few friends IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Pompous fools!


Yes!  I just heard this on the radio news report.  9 minutes of solid Covid-19, then this tacked on the end.  I couldn’t believe they’d be so stupid.


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> When M goes to Starbucks, she probably gives her name as The Duchess of Sussex!
> 
> 
> ETA most decently classy people who have $$$, titles, doctorates, awards etc etc tend to not announce them first off but let you find out later when someone else fills you in. Imo.


Or Mrs Cambridge, as Catherine told someone in a shop near me when she asked for something to be put on hold for her so she could return home to get her purse (wallet) that she'd forgotten.

ETA, she didn't have security to help her out either.


----------



## Jktgal

CeeJay said:


> .. and how many of us bet that Piers Morgan is going to have a field day with this "announcement"!  Can't stand the man per se, but sometimes he has written good articles about the nonsense of these two!



I love him. He says it as it is. One time ke knocked down an Australian cabinet member on tv, that was so much fun.


----------



## poopsie

"Can’t you almost hear Meghan angrily banging this out on her keyboard from here??"


----------



## doni

CeeJay said:


> The letter ..
> View attachment 4713192



Good grief. They cannot say ‘we’ once, the justcallmeharrys, they have to use the title and the third person every freaking sentence?
As what is that about watching ‘complete strangers’ go into pieces? So weird. Also, what is the difference between complete and not-complete strangers? The whole statement is bizarre.
They don’t seem to have very good advisers. Either that or more likely are just following their own advice. I think this pandemic has caught them so by surprise, they cannot follow their original plans and they are like headless chickens right now.


----------



## beautymagpie

CeeJay said:


> I so wish the Queen had taken those titles away, I am just beyond hearing her CONSTANTLY use that title .. she is truly getting to be like LuAnn on the RHoNY!



I thought they were keeping the titles but not using them. But they’re D&D and on Travalyst (or whatever it’s called)’s forms he had Prince.

So I’m confused. What have they actually dropped?


----------



## Sharont2305

beautymagpie said:


> I thought they were keeping the titles but not using them. But they’re D&D and on Travalyst (or whatever it’s called)’s forms he had Prince.
> 
> So I’m confused. What have they actually dropped?


They haven't "dropped" anything really. They are still His and Her Royal Highness The Duke and Duchess of Sussex only they have chosen not to use the HRH bit. [emoji19]


----------



## beautymagpie

Sharont2305 said:


> They haven't "dropped" anything really. They are still His and Her Royal Highness The Duke and Duchess of Sussex only they have chosen not to use the HRH bit. [emoji19]



They are mad. 

My mum is a bit (lot) of a Meghan and I've seen this exact scenario, minus the royalty, millions in cash and tiaras bit, play out a couple of times. The first after my dad being the most extreme and most similar.

She turned him away from his friends and family, after making them think she was the second coming, turned his daughters away after bullying them and completely changed his personality. He was only concerned about her, what she wanted and what she thought. It's basically manipulated brainwashing - and they only realise the extent of what happened afterwards.

This will only end one way - her trying to manoeuvre her way out with someone or something 'better' in the wings. People like her grow restless quickly so I don't blame the BRF for keeping quiet publicly for Harry's sake but he's going to have a lot of making up to do Post-Meghan.


----------



## 1LV

The more I read about the Markles the more I’m inclined to think Prince Charles just might consider continued funding of them to be money well spent if it keeps them across the pond.


----------



## Lounorada

cafecreme15 said:


> Oh my lord...


 OMG hilarious... taking their petulance to an even higher level, a level you wouldn't even think possible for two grown adults.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they will sue TMZ for posting the pap-walks videos?
> LMAO









mrsinsyder said:


> They’ll have to sue Beghan Barkle, the person who notified them of their locations.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> I have the feeling that they are renting in Trousdale Estates.


Ha....me too....based on my extensive viewing of Million Dollar Listing LA. I remember one of the Josh’s saying Elton had a house there.


----------



## Mrs.Z

kipp said:


> All this publicity over stuff that really doesn't matter is very annoying.  Are they trying to compete with the Covid virus?


That is exactly what they are trying to do.


----------



## limom

wisconsin said:


> Nope, don’t agree. I have seen men being manipulated by women and women being manipulated by men. Even if he wanted to get away from the Royal family, I certainly don’t think it was in this way.  She has manipulated and manhandled it to a large extent.





wisconsin said:


> Exactly. Controlling and abusive if genders reversed.


He was not a kind, level headed individual to start with, so my sympathy resides with true victims of domestic violence.
There were many incidents where he showed his true colors.
Imo, he is an azz.


----------



## limom

Mrs.Z said:


> Ha....me too....based on my extensive viewing of Million Dollar Listing LA. I remember one of the Josh’s saying Elton had a house there.


This is why I thought that they would have rented the Marciano Estate.


----------



## Mrs.Z

poopsie said:


> "Can’t you almost hear Meghan angrily banging this out on her keyboard from here??"


This is what strikes me also, she is SO ANGRY!  I’m not sure why.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

On our news in the UK it said that the letter was sent to The Mirror, The Sun, The Mail and The Express, plus the online counterparts too.
Well, guess what Meghan, if you do decide you want to be a working Royal again, they are the papers your going to need to promote yourself.
Incidentally, the piece on the news was less than 50 seconds. More time was spent on the mass shooting that happened in Nova Scotia.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> This is what strikes me also, she is SO ANGRY!  I’m not sure why.



Because in her opinion the world owes her but fails to deliver.


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> This is what strikes me also, she is SO ANGRY!  I’m not sure why.



It’s because the world doesn’t adore her and it’s driving her insane. She thought volunteering for a few hours would gain her lots of attention and love but, frankly, their “work” was pathetically over covered by the media as it was.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> AH .. so you heard that as well??? .. I thought I had read that Doria got $9m, but then never heard anything again, so thought that maybe I didn't, in fact, see that!  Hmmmmmm ...


What is this 9 millions all about?


Allisonfaye said:


> I went to see Rob Lowe's standup show recently and he said no paps will bother you unless you _want _them to.


Rob Lowe is a stand up comic now?
What is his material all about?


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder what she has planned for this week, tomorrow is The Queens 93rd birthday and on the 23rd Prince Louis is going to be 2 which will have birthday photos released. 
How is she going to upstage those?


----------



## Tuned83

Sharont2305 said:


> On our news in the UK it said that the letter was sent to The Mirror, The Sun, The Mail and The Express, plus the online counterparts too.
> Well, guess what Meghan, if you do decide you want to be a working Royal again, they are the papers your going to need to promote yourself.
> Incidentally, the piece on the news was less than 50 seconds. More time was spent on the mass shooting that happened in Nova Scotia.


And rightfully so! I struggle to find anyone that has any ounce of respect, sympathy or solidarity for these two. They are delusional about their status in the world. For goodness sakes we are in the midst of a global pandemic! Who gives a rat's ar$e if you won't talk to the DM or the daily mirror. I have no words.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

The Daily Mail UK literally PULLED ALL STORIES ABOUT H&M last night after their letter was posted and this morning there is an entertainment headline:
“*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's letter to newspaper editors saying they will 'no longer engage' with the UK's most popular titles has today been blasted as censorship by the Society of Editors”*


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think we need to change that analogy about chess and checkers to something about tic tac toe.  These two have no vision.


----------



## Tootsie17

poopsie said:


> "Can’t you almost hear Meghan angrily banging this out on her keyboard from here??"


Thank you for my first Monday morning belly laugh!  It was a great way to start my day.


----------



## beautymagpie

Love that this has come out today. M&H are always trying to one up others, about time one of the others did it to them.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I know it's bad when I'm agreeing with Piers.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Hmm


----------



## Milosmum0307

I can’t believe even CNBC is reporting on these two sweat-stained idiots this morning.  Even the economic news is less depressing than Grift and Dim’s continued faith in their own perishing relevance.


----------



## Milosmum0307

mrsinsyder said:


> Hmm


So, in other words, Meghan The Duchess has expressly announced her intention to commit perjury.  Noted.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> They keep releasing these statements no one is looking for and it just reeks of desperation. Just don’t work with them. Why keep announcing it? Oh, right, attention hoors.
> 
> I notice TMZ, radar, etc. aren’t on the list.



It seems like she has a particular vendetta against these tabloids because of what they did with her father. 

I was reading some of the choice bits in their legal filing about how it all went down with her dad before her wedding. Is there even a hero to that story? Everyone seems like a jacka$$. I do have some sympathy for them with the dad situation because he’s so difficult but they did not handle that well. If I had all the money in the world, I’d just show up and talk in person instead of constant text and phone tag.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

poopsie said:


> "Can’t you almost hear Meghan angrily banging this out on her keyboard from here??"


Excdellent gif, Poopsie! All it needed was a bad weave whipping around.


----------



## lalame

Milosmum0307 said:


> So, in other words, Meghan The Duchess has expressly announced her intention to commit perjury.  Noted.



I’m more interested in the legal filings than what the tabloids have to say for this reason... there’s a higher standard for truth for sure. If they’re lying, the other side will be chomping at the bit to prove it.


----------



## Jktgal

I first read that as "stools" and did a double take lol (time to rest).


----------



## mdcx

Daily Mail taking the p!ss imo. M can look forward to more of this...


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Daily Mail taking the p!ss imo. M can look forward to more of this...
> View attachment 4713438



Apparently the "interview" was recorded last summer and in no way can it be called news. I forgot about GMA but it sounds like I didn't miss anything other than Meghan's pretentious claim that she understands elephants. Disney/ABC are just milking footage they already had.


----------



## imgg

These two remind me of Heidi and Spencer. They blew their life saving on Heidi's music career because they thought she was the next Beyoncé.  It took them years to realize how unimportant they are.  Meghan has a rude awakening ahead of her...Harry is just along for the ride.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if she is hoping he gets Covid.  Then she can sell stories about how she bravely nursed him back to health, or how she and Archie are bravely facing the future without him.  Ugh.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I think we need to change that analogy about chess and checkers to something about tic tac toe.  These two have no vision.



You are giving them too much credit. Tic tac toe requires a tiny bit of strategy. They are acting only on instinct, like a messy game of rock-paper-scissors.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> You are giving them too much credit. Tic tac toe requires a tiny bit of strategy. They are acting only on instinct, like a messy game of rock-paper-scissors.


Pin the tail on the donkey?


----------



## elvisfan4life

mrsinsyder said:


> I know it's bad when I'm agreeing with Piers.


so true I'm amazed this thread is still going no one can be interested in these two idiots with what is happening in the world fgs !!! Ignore them !!!!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

I find their letter to tabloids was totally bizarre! They said they would stop co-operating with them. That's means they were co-operating with them before??? So they thought they got bad press by "co-operating" with them before and now they expect it to be better??? None of this is making any sense at all! They surely can hire someone doing a better job than this!


----------



## limom

Milosmum0307 said:


> I can’t believe even CNBC is reporting on these two sweat-stained idiots this morning.  Even the economic news is less depressing than Grift and Dim’s continued faith in their own perishing relevance.


What was the story about?


elvisfan4life said:


> so true I'm amazed this thread is still going no one can be interested in these two idiots with what is happening in the world fgs !!! Ignore them !!!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> I find their letter to tabloids was totally bizarre! They said they would stop co-operating with them. That's means they were co-operating with them before??? So they thought they got bad press by "co-operating" with them before and now they expect it to be better??? None of this is making any sense at all! They surely can hire someone doing a better job than this!



You can always tell when they have strayed away from following the professionals’ advice. There’s no way the Sunshine Sachs agency vetted that missive before they released it.


----------



## Flatsy

When the tabloids are about to publish a story, they call the BRF to confirm or deny it.  The Sussexes are saying they and their staff will no longer entertain that type of communication with those four particular tabloids.  Which is something they didn't need to make this big deal about and could have accomplished this with one sentence the next time one of those tabloids called them.  

There was no need for them to issue a manifesto and try to grab a bunch of media coverage about how they are no longer engaging the media.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Except tomorrow is the beloved Queen’s 94th birthday.
This weekend’s criticism of the Project Angel Food gig which was arranged by the infallible Doria certainly did trigger a massive amount of jealousy.  Yes, I do believe H&M are that petty.




Flatsy said:


> When the tabloids are about to publish a story, they call the BRF to confirm or deny it.  The Sussexes are saying they and their staff will no longer entertain that type of communication with those four particular tabloids.  Which is something they didn't need to make this big deal about and could have accomplished this with one sentence the next time one of those tabloids called them.
> 
> There was no need for them to issue a manifesto and try to grab a bunch of media coverage about how they are no longer engaging the media.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

bag-mania said:


> Apparently the "interview" was recorded last summer and in no way can it be called news. I forgot about GMA but it sounds like I didn't miss anything other than Meghan's pretentious claim that she understands elephants. Disney/ABC are just milking footage they already had.


Yeah, I saw that - late June last year. Seems really pointless to give that interview over now; it seems it was likely tabled and just brought out to generate some interest in herself. Also shows how far back these projects were in the works. She was itching to do things from before "I do."


----------



## Milosmum0307

limom said:


> What was the story about?


The article was simply about their unsolicited, unnecessary announcement that they will not be cooperating with certain British tabloids.  It’s not clear if the Markles’ PR reps who have been feeding the tabloid press stories via unnamed “sources” will continue that practice or follow their clients’ official (or at least publicly proclaimed) stance.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just doing his job.....


----------



## sdkitty

Milosmum0307 said:


> I can’t believe even CNBC is reporting on these two sweat-stained idiots this morning.  Even the economic news is less depressing than Grift and Dim’s continued faith in their own perishing relevance.


on this one thing, I can't agree with you Milosmum


----------



## scarlet555

Sharont2305 said:


> Just doing his job.....



I"d like to see a picture of Harry following Megain around town unprotected and risking his bodyguards health like a pup for pap walks pretending to hand out food without gloves and proper PPE next to Prince Charles' PSA of the new hospital.  Harry is so despicable and desperate for pathetic attention.  Just think, Harry, you could be helping your father with this type of announcement instead of prancing around looking disheveled, like a rebel without a cause.  Foolish decision...


----------



## youngster

Can someone explain to me what they hoped to accomplish with this pronouncement, other than to grab a headline or two?  So, they aren't going to cooperate with the tabloids.  What does that mean?  I didn't think they were "cooperating" with them before, other than perhaps allowing their own sources to talk to them behind the scenes.  The tabloids buy photos and talk with sources and run their stories.  It's not like you'd ever see H or MM giving the Daily Mail an in depth, exclusive interview.


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> Can someone explain to me what they hoped to accomplish with this pronouncement, other than to grab a headline or two?  So, they aren't going to cooperate with the tabloids.  What does that mean?  I didn't think they were "cooperating" with them before, other than perhaps allowing their own sources to talk to them behind the scenes.  The tabloids buy photos and talk with sources and run their stories.  It's not like you'd ever see H or MM giving the Daily Mail an in depth, exclusive interview.


That's why the whole thing was so stupid. It's like me giving up soda for Lent when I don't drink it anyway.


----------



## tiktok

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Yeah, I saw that - late June last year. Seems really pointless to give that interview over now; it seems it was likely tabled and just brought out to generate some interest in herself. Also shows how far back these projects were in the works. She was itching to do things from before "I do."



If that’s the case that puts Harry’s conversation with Bob Iger in a totally different light - it wasn’t about pitching his wife’s skills but joking about something that was already a done deal... How naive of us to think at the time she was committed to being a royal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_They also want to be very clear: this is not in any way a blanket policy for all media._

Okaaay, right. Ellen, Oprah, and Gail are in the clear. No clickbait or extortion from them. Okaaay.
Got it.


----------



## beautymagpie

youngster said:


> Can someone explain to me what they hoped to accomplish with this pronouncement, other than to grab a headline or two?  So, they aren't going to cooperate with the tabloids.  What does that mean?  I didn't think they were "cooperating" with them before, other than perhaps allowing their own sources to talk to them behind the scenes.  The tabloids buy photos and talk with sources and run their stories.  It's not like you'd ever see H or MM giving the Daily Mail an in depth, exclusive interview.



It was a massive gamble. And one which will definitely back fire.

I think when you think about their friends/agency placed pieces, presumably they could be outed quite easily if the title/s chose to do this to them too.

It’s not the time, I don’t think it will enhance their court case, it’s just dumb.


----------



## sdkitty

document submitted to court.  From Reuters:
I don't think this trial is going to make anyone look good
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ore-wedding-document-shows-idUSKBN2221I3?il=0


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I don't think this trial is going to make anyone look good


Oh absolutely not.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh absolutely not.


Imagine the queen is cringing


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> Imagine the queen is cringing


And Philip going berserk!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And Philip going berserk!



Honestly I do hope he doesn't die from a heart attack because these two idiots are pulling stunt after stunt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> document submitted to court.  From Reuters:
> I don't think this trial is going to make anyone look good
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ore-wedding-document-shows-idUSKBN2221I3?il=0



I never understood this suit until now. To me, it seemed that the issue was publishing HER letter, hmmm .. you write a letter - then doesnt it become the property of the recipient?  Just as Diana's letters are now being seen in auction catalogs, sold by the recipients ... I am not a lawyer ... If Thomas wants to publish it, then it is his prerogative ? 

But, the article amplified the actual complaint, to quote from article 
“It was the defendant’s publication of these contents, and the highly manipulated, sensational and deliberately inflammatory way in which this was done that so deeply upset her, not the fact that the newspaper published ‘her father’s side of the dispute’ (a ‘dispute’ which the defendant itself created),” the papers said.
Her side of the story is the paper sensationalized the story - OK she has a right to her point of view. 

Feeble grounds for a lawsuit ? Her feelings were hurt...


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## chicinthecity777

I honestly don't think the rest of the BRF would care too much about this case. This is really between MM and her dad, plus a bit of Harry's occasional correspondence with her Dad. I would think the Queen wouldn't even pay that much attention. She's more worried about our country's fight with Covid-19 than anything else.

In fact I think these 2 thinks the rest of the BRF care about them way too much than they really do!


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicinthecity777 said:


> I honestly don't think the rest of the BRF would care too much about this case. This is really between MM and her dad, plus a bit of Harry's occasional correspondence with her Dad. I would think the Queen would even pay that much attention. She's more worried about our country's fight with Covid-19 than anything else.


There are grumblings that something will come out during the trial that the BRF doesn't want out.


----------



## Flatsy

marietouchet said:


> To me, it seemed that the issue was publishing HER letter, hmmm .. you write a letter - then doesnt it become the property of the recipient? Just as Diana's letters are now being seen in auction catalogs, sold by the recipients ... I am not a lawyer ... If Thomas wants to publish it, then it is his prerogative ?


Thomas owns the physical pieces of paper that Meghan sent to him and he can discuss what she wrote, show it to people, or sell those pieces of paper if he so chooses.  But Meghan owns her writing, and no one in possession of the letter is allowed to* publish *the content of her letter without her permission.  She has a pretty good case on the copyright violation portion because the Mail on Sunday published big chunks and images of the letter.  

However she's using the copyright claim as a jumping-off to get damages from the Mail for an ongoing campaign against her.  I'm not so sure about that one and I think it goes into freedom of the press territory.  She is also quibbling about which parts of the letter the Mail left out, which is up to the judge to decide whether they quoted from the letter in a way that was misleading.  And then if she wins various parts of the suit, it's up to the court how much she deserves in damages and what kind of apology she gets.  It probably won't be the crippling blow to the Mail that the Sussexes want.

I believe what the Sussexes are hoping for is a "super injunction" which would prevent the Mail from reporting on her, or at least reporting on certain topics, like her relationship with her Dad.  If they get the super injunction, the Mail won't ever be allowed to write anything else about her Dad, nor would they even be allowed to acknowledge that they aren't allowed to write about her Dad.  I don't think super injunctions would hold up in America under our 1st Amendment.  They should be accountable for what they write in the future, but banning a publication from covering a topic entirely is not freedom of the press as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## rose60610

There are people who'd have far more reason to be infuriated with some Media outlets than these self-perceived victims. I reserve my empathy for people who are truly suffering through no fault of their own and my admiration for people who slog through each day doing whatever it takes to keep a roof over their heads. For M&H to keep harping on how they felt slighted despite wallowing in gifted luxury, riches, servants etc is beyond the pale.  I wonder if they are going to wish H's grandmother a happy birthday and grumble about THEIR "hardships" in the same announcement.


----------



## bisousx

mrsinsyder said:


> There are grumblings that something will come out during the trial that the BRF doesn't want out.




As much as I love good drama, I doubt there’s anything Thomas can disclose about the BRF. He wasn’t close with Meghan and likely wasn’t privy to any juicy gossip.


----------



## chicinthecity777

mrsinsyder said:


> There are grumblings that something will come out during the trial that the BRF doesn't want out.



Based on what? A wild guess? Remember the rest of the BRF don't "kiss and tell" while H&M do. She would have spilled it long before this if she really had anything.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan will die from suffocation if the tabloids don’t write something about her or print a picture. This is what she lives for. Does Harry believe that he can control the press?  What delusions.


----------



## kipp

I haven't been following this whole issue with the Daily Mail all that closely but are H & M really looking for a $$$$$$$$ settlement?  It seems under the circumstances, that is what they might be after...


----------



## Lodpah

chicinthecity777 said:


> Based on what? A wild guess? Remember the rest of the BRF don't "kiss and tell" while H&M do. She would have spilled it long before this if she really had anything.


I don’t know about Great Britain laws but in America the trial will focus solely on the issues in the complaint. You’re right that in what basis.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Meghan will die from suffocation if the tabloids don’t write something about her or print a picture. This is what she lives for. Does Harry believe that he can control the press?  What delusions.


they're looking worse and worse.....I wonder what some of their "friends" are thinking.  Surely someone as smart as Ophrah (for one example) wouldn't think they're being smart with the food delivery photos, this lawsuit, etc.
Or maybe they are all still sympathetic to poor Meghan, victim of racism.


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> As much as I love good drama, I doubt there’s anything Thomas can disclose about the BRF. He wasn’t close with Meghan and likely wasn’t privy to any juicy gossip.


Agree, but he could potentially disclose some MM “skeletons in the closet” and IMO, that would be more worrying to her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know about Great Britain laws but in America the trial will focus solely on the issues in the complaint. You’re right that in what basis.


I am no lawyer but I know UK law and US law have the most similarities compared with other countries but I'd thought in most countries you will only focus on the issue at hand. Any evidence will need to show relevance to be introduced to court.


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> Can someone explain to me what they hoped to accomplish with this pronouncement, other than to grab a headline or two?  So, they aren't going to cooperate with the tabloids.  What does that mean?  I didn't think they were "cooperating" with them before, other than perhaps allowing their own sources to talk to them behind the scenes.  The tabloids buy photos and talk with sources and run their stories.  It's not like you'd ever see H or MM giving the Daily Mail an in depth, exclusive interview.


Everything they do is to upstage the BRF. With the Queen’s birthday what better time? These two should have the title ‘most hated couple in the world.”  Good thing tho is that most people adore the Queen so any backlash against the Queen from these two ineptitudes will gain them more criticism and more people will get angry at them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

kipp said:


> I haven't been following this whole issue with the Daily Mail all that closely but are H & M really looking for a $$$$$$$$ settlement?  It seems under the circumstances, that is what they might be after...


Under recently updated defamation law in the UK, you need to first prove your reputation has been seriously damaged and then be able to qualify the financial loss incurred because of it. Even if they win out right, there would hardly be any massive payouts. It probably won't even cover their annual security expenses. We shall see!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> Everything they do is to upstage the BRF. With the Queen’s birthday what better time? These two should have the title ‘most hated couple in the world.”  Good thing tho is that most people adore the Queen so any backlash against the Queen from these two ineptitudes will gain them more criticism and more people will get angry at them.


This is true and very evident in the UK. Queen is very respected here! Even people who don't believe in monarchy (myself included) respect her.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> View attachment 4713616



juicy one, and with Clooney, he already has money and a job...   not a prince, but hollywood royalty lol


----------



## kipp

chicinthecity777 said:


> Under recently updated defamation law in the UK, you need to first prove your reputation has been seriously damaged and then be able to qualify the financial loss incurred because of it. Even if they win out right, there would hardly be any massive payouts. It probably won't even cover their annual security expenses. We shall see!


Thank you for the clarification!


----------



## Sol Ryan

scarlet555 said:


> juicy one, and with Clooney, he already has money and a job...   not a prince, but hollywood royalty lol


She wishes.... like George would leave Amal for her... Amal’s got looks, class and real humanitarian cred...

Although she’d drop Harry in a hot second in there was a chance of it being true and he wouldn’t get the rings back in the mail.... lol


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Everything they do is to upstage the BRF. With the Queen’s birthday what better time? These two should have the title ‘most hated couple in the world.”  Good thing tho is that most people adore the Queen so any backlash against the Queen from these two ineptitudes will gain them more criticism and more people will get angry at them.


I can’t understand why Harry hates his family this much. They made life way too easy for him and this is the pay back.   Charles stop paying the rent


----------



## bag-mania

That lawsuit was their most shortsighted plan yet. Maybe they are hoping for a big settlement but I hope they don’t get a penny. 

Given everything that has happened since, the dustup with Thomas after the wedding is nothing.


----------



## Lodpah

Milosmum0307 said:


> So, in other words, Meghan The Duchess has expressly announced her intention to commit perjury.  Noted.


The thing is narcissistic people think they are above the law.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

All I can add at this point is, "WHERE ARE THEIR HANDLERS?"!!!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I can’t understand why Harry hates his family this much. They made life way too easy for him and this is the pay back.   Charles stop paying the rent


.. and (supposedly) he was the Queen's favorite grandson, and this is how he treats her???  Look, I get that he may have harbored bad feelings towards Charles given the affair and Diana's death, but my god .. you can so tell that Charles is so happy with Camilla and I've never seen or heard of anything where Camilla came down on Harry .. BUT, apparently, Camilla had some words with both Kate and Meghan to turn around and pay attention at one event.  

I just wonder how long Charles will continue to support them and Harry SHOULD BE worried about when his brother assumes the throne because I could see Wills cutting back that "support" a lot (especially too because he is not a fan of Meghan)!


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> All I can add at this point is, "WHERE ARE THEIR HANDLERS?"!!!



Either
A) They don’t have any because they think they know best. And by “they” of course I mean Meghan.
Or
B) They do have staff advising them and they choose to disregard the advice.


----------



## lalame

I don't think they have handlers in the traditional sense anymore. Also I think without layers and layers of bureaucracy between Harry and the public anymore, we're going to start seeing more of the "real" him... aka, an immature brat and insufferable faux-progressive.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> There are people who'd have far more reason to be infuriated with some Media outlets than these self-perceived victims. I reserve my empathy for people who are truly suffering through no fault of their own and my admiration for people who slog through each day doing whatever it takes to keep a roof over their heads. For M&H to keep harping on how they felt slighted despite wallowing in gifted luxury, riches, servants etc is beyond the pale.  I wonder if they are going to wish H's grandmother a happy birthday and grumble about THEIR "hardships" in the same announcement.



Yeah,  they're being exploited through constant sensationalized coverage that only benefits the tabloids. Meghan's also a billion times more famous, has a billion and a half times nicer lifestyle, and has such an improved career that she went from costar on Lifetime tv show to headlining Disney movie. The 2 are totally unrelated right. They're being exploited.


----------



## lalame

I would consider her complaints about the media totally valid.... if she didn't keep putting herself out there in the public eye time and time again, feeding the beast. You don't get to have it both ways, lady! I don't know about Lady Diana, but I highly doubt that woman was calling up the paps... she was genuinely harangued despite her steps to remove herself from the situation.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

hmmm, something tells me that this article in Google News might not be flattering
Did anyone ask how I feel?


*"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle gradually losing their money: financial expert"
https://www.geo.tv/latest/283838-pr...gradually-losing-their-money-financial-expert*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry drew a number of concerns after they announced their decision to quit the royal family to become more 'financially independent'.

And now, with their move across the pond, the couple seems to now be settling into the new life as they hunt for opportunities to gain financial stability.

However, many royal experts still believe that the two are in for some major struggle as they gradually lose the money that they have, especially given the current scenario of the world with the coronavirus pandemic having enveloped the globe.

Financial expert Brett Arends, writing for _Market Watch_ revealed that the biggest problem the two could face is that “Brexit has left the British pound very weak on international exchanges. As a result, Harry’s royal fortune… Will go a lot less far on this side of the pond than it would have a few years ago.”

That being said, the two are still reportedly seeking financial assistance from Prince Charles with $2.5 million this year that would help them cover the cost of security in their new home.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

VigeeLeBrun said:


> All I can add at this point is, "WHERE ARE THEIR HANDLERS?"!!!


I doubt Megain would listen to any handlers, even if she had any.  Many people can tell her letter to the tabloid was written out of sheer nonsense.  Who even thinks about writing to the tabloid?  Who in their right mind would give the tabloid the satisfaction of 'an easy shot'.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Either
> A) They don’t have any because they think they know best. And by “they” of course I mean Meghan.
> Or
> B) They do have staff advising them and they choose to disregard the advice.


MM is the handler.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> hmmm, something tells me that this article in Google News might not be flattering
> Did anyone ask how I feel?
> 
> 
> *"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle gradually losing their money: financial expert"
> https://www.geo.tv/latest/283838-pr...gradually-losing-their-money-financial-expert*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry drew a number of concerns after they announced their decision to quit the royal family to become more 'financially independent'.
> 
> And now, with their move across the pond, the couple seems to now be settling into the new life as they hunt for opportunities to gain financial stability.
> 
> However, many royal experts still believe that the two are in for some major struggle as they gradually lose the money that they have, especially given the current scenario of the world with the coronavirus pandemic having enveloped the globe.
> 
> Financial expert Brett Arends, writing for _Market Watch_ revealed that the biggest problem the two could face is that “Brexit has left the British pound very weak on international exchanges. As a result, Harry’s royal fortune… Will go a lot less far on this side of the pond than it would have a few years ago.”
> 
> That being said, the two are still reportedly seeking financial assistance from Prince Charles with $2.5 million this year that would help them cover the cost of security in their new home.


.. and BOOM!!! .. kind of what we were talking about the other day @VigeeLeBrun , the cost of renting a house in BH and all the other expenses they will incur? .. you have to have more than $2.5m coming in yearly and given Hazza's propensity for being cheap, well .. they may JUST have to go back to the UK to live in Frogmore! .. pass the popcorn!!!


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> .. and BOOM!!! .. kind of what we were talking about the other day @VigeeLeBrun , the cost of renting a house in BH and all the other expenses they will incur? .. you have to have more than $2.5m coming in yearly and given Hazza's propensity for being cheap, well .. they may JUST have to go back to the UK to live in Frogmore! .. pass the popcorn!!!



 don't need a financial expert for this forecast:  no job, no talent, limited income, high cost security, whiny pap hungry duo who blame the hate on everything else but themselves=is my royal seat taken yet?


----------



## Tivo

There have been shades that Hollywood is snubbing her since this whole debacle. 
Vogue U.K. held an event for the the issue Meghan guest edited while she was in London, and she didn’t attend. Salma Hayak posted about the event on her Insta and thanked everyone involved except Meghan, when Meghan choose the women! 
On top of it all...Salma made sure to list her location...Queen Elizabeth Hall.

I don’t think Hollywood is coming to save her.


----------



## beautymagpie

lalame said:


> I would consider her complaints about the media totally valid.... if she didn't keep putting herself out there in the public eye time and time again, feeding the beast. You don't get to have it both ways, lady! I don't know about Lady Diana, but I highly doubt that woman was calling up the paps... she was genuinely harangued despite her steps to remove herself from the situation.



There were rumours Diana did, I read something before she died about this in relation to gym visits or something. But I'm not certain on any of the details and who knows how true the rumours were.

Very often you see celebs call on the press then don't like it when they don't control the beast, so to speak. It seemed to happen with the Beckhams for years. The affairs rumours changed it. And their new balance seems to be ignore it because they cover the stuff they want PR for and they can charge extra in contracts for that. I'd imagine VB's Estée Lauder deal would be bumped up in price for the guaranteed PR they know they'll get as a result of it being her.

Our media do go way to far, the Diana incident did change it I think, at least for a while and I think they'd be far worse now if it weren't for that and then being reminded of it when they were bombarding Kate as a gf.

I think not all coverage of the Markles has been fair, but it probably could have been a lot worse since we're seeing how they handle themselves. They had a BRF barrier, and they don't now.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and BOOM!!! .. kind of what we were talking about the other day @VigeeLeBrun , the cost of renting a house in BH and all the other expenses they will incur? .. you have to have more than $2.5m coming in yearly and given Hazza's propensity for being cheap, well .. they may JUST have to go back to the UK to live in Frogmore! .. pass the popcorn!!!


but they would have to swallow their pride.  could she do that?  her choices might be eat humble pie or live as a rich but not super rich or super famous divorcee with a child in LA.  then what?  try to get a gig as a real housewife?  I don't think she's going to be an A-list actress.
who knows how this will play out


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> but they would have to swallow their pride.  could she do that?  her choices might be eat humble pie or live as a rich but not super rich or super famous divorcee with a child in LA.  then what?  try to get a gig as a real housewife?  I don't think she's going to be an A-list actress.
> who knows how this will play out


True, true .. but if the $$$ isn't coming in, then they may just have to go to more drastic measures.  Obviously, the smartest thing would be to go back to the UK and just suck-it-up, but while Harry (maybe) able to go back without as many issues (_however, based on some of the comments that I saw on the DM, it appears as though many Brits do not think highly of him now_); I just can't see that happening with Meghan.  

While she may (_at this time_) still be utter delusional that she can resurrect her career and work with the A-List, if that just does not come to fruition, who knows .. she may just want to be on a Housewives show (_however, I have to say that a lot of folks are getting very tired of those shows - I haven't watched them in SOME time_!!!).  So many of those gals (_hello - Dorito_) live a lot larger than they actually have, but that seems to be the case a lot out here in H-Wood!


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> That's why the whole thing was so stupid. It's like me giving up soda for Lent when I don't drink it anyway.


Oooh, I could not do the soda thing but beer--yep, easy peasy. 

Also been wanting to know--what are the 2 beverages in your avatar? They always look so yummy and make me think "how long until wine o'clock?"


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> True, true .. but if the $$$ isn't coming in, then they may just have to go to more drastic measures.  Obviously, the smartest thing would be to go back to the UK and just suck-it-up, but while Harry (maybe) able to go back without as many issues (_however, based on some of the comments that I saw on the DM, it appears as though many Brits do not think highly of him now_); I just can't see that happening with Meghan.
> 
> While she may (_at this time_) still be utter delusional that she can resurrect her career and work with the A-List, if that just does not come to fruition, who knows .. she may just want to be on a Housewives show (_however, I have to say that a lot of folks are getting very tired of those shows - I haven't watched them in SOME time_!!!).  So many of those gals (_hello - Dorito_) live a lot larger than they actually have, but that seems to be the case a lot out here in H-Wood!


I figure if Dorito can live such a large life with no dough (but plenty of lawsuits), so can M.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but they would have to swallow their pride.  could she do that?  her choices might be eat humble pie or live as a rich but not super rich or super famous divorcee with a child in LA.  then what?  try to get a gig as a real housewife?  I don't think she's going to be an A-list actress.
> who knows how this will play out



Not in a million years would she ever admit she made any mistakes. She will destroy them both before that ever happens!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Honestly, these two are as dumb as rocks.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

VigeeLeBrun said:


> That being said, the two are still reportedly seeking financial assistance from Prince Charles with $2.5 million this year that would help them cover the cost of security in their new home.



The idea that they need so much security is laughable.  If they had moved to Canada or the US, lived with a modicum of discretion, they largely would have been left alone.  Really, exactly who is going to be chasing down a whiny prince, and a third rate player who used to be on a cable show?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That man is a genius.


----------



## Mrs.Z

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That man is a genius.



Oh that is hilarious!!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Before I listened to the clip, I thought you've got to be forking kidding me!  But yes, brilliant!  Best laugh of the day.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That man is a genius.



Made my day, thank you


----------



## chicinthecity777

Cavalier Girl said:


> The idea that they need so much security is laughable.  If they had moved to Canada or the US, lived with a modicum of discretion, they largely would have been left alone.  Really, exactly who is going to be chasing down a whiny prince, and a third rate player who used to be on a cable show?


That was my question all along, who are they trying to be protected from???


----------



## zinacef

They’re not relevant here in the US, period, so wrong country to choose to make money.  Whatever their foundation wants to promote will not fare well as everybody has been hit financially by the COViD crisis. The JPmorgan paycheck was a fluke, pre-crisis. Nobody has that money anymore and people are becoming educated about  the scam that most foundation does. There will be nothing  here for them.  There is no more free money to these 2 who can’t even prove their worth.


----------



## mrsinsyder

kemilia said:


> Oooh, I could not do the soda thing but beer--yep, easy peasy.
> 
> Also been wanting to know--what are the 2 beverages in your avatar? They always look so yummy and make me think "how long until wine o'clock?"


Haha! It is rose-infused gin, lime, grapefruit, and thyme. Can’t wait to have one when the ‘rona has passed


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Haha! It is rose-infused gin, lime, grapefruit, and thyme. Can’t wait to have one when the ‘rona has passed


why wait?  can you make at home?


----------



## mdcx

I think the lawsuit etc are M’s attempts to fast-track herself toward an activist/saint identity, “shining a light” on the putrid world of journalism blah blah.
The fact that all her “saving the world” activities are transparently about stroking her own ego just shows where her thinking is at.
She might have been wily enough to lock down H but everything after that has been a disaster.
I expect her attempts to become more desperate/obvious as time goes on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Something very embarrassing is about to spill.  Guess they thought the publications would settle prior to the trial. 
Haha, wrong again!


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I think the lawsuit etc are M’s attempts to fast-track herself toward an activist/saint identity, “shining a light” on the putrid world of journalism blah blah.
> The fact that all her “saving the world” activities are transparently about stroking her own ego just shows where her thinking is at.
> She might have been wily enough to lock down H but everything after that has been a disaster.
> I expect her attempts to become more desperate/obvious as time goes on.


Totally agree, and I sincerely hope .. that she DOES NOT drag her Father or her Samantha (and yes - they have both had their "days") into this so that she can claim said "victim-hood"!  I find it rather interesting, that neither of them have said a "peep" in some time, good for them .. and they should continue doing that because Meghan will find her own rope to hang herself!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> Something very embarrassing is about to spill.  Guess they thought the publications would settle prior to the trial.
> Haha, wrong again!



Hi *CarryOn*, it’s a terribly boring afternoon here in Cali, spill!!  
“Something very embarrassing” about these two grifters will make my <shallow, lol> day! ♥️


----------



## mia55

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, and I sincerely hope .. that she DOES NOT drag her Father or her Samantha (and yes - they have both had their "days") into this so that she can claim said "victim-hood"!  I find it rather interesting, that neither of them have said a "peep" in some time, good for them .. and they should continue doing that because Meghan will find her own rope to hang herself!


They must have been paid to keep low till the case settles. She’s like her dads family so looks like once they divorce she’d need payment at regular intervals to keep shut.

I’m sure they’ll return to UK soon and MM will start working as if nothing happened with a grin similar to her last royal event.

Honestly they are appalling


----------



## mrsinsyder

Looks like the “friends” are distancing themselves.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the “friends” are distancing themselves.
> View attachment 4713814


Were they ever really close friends?


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the “friends” are distancing themselves.
> View attachment 4713814


.. and she's smart to distance herself from MM!!!  Remember some time back, Serena's husband appeared to have made a jab at MM, so it's very possible that he saw the truth.  I'm sure that MM, when first meeting Serena, "poured" on her charm but I really wonder "how close" MM is with any of her (supposed) friends???  Having a friend like Jessica, who was also styling MM at some point, did they get into "deep" conversations or was it always "light".  However, that being said, didn't H&M stay with Serena & family when they did their JPM schtick?  If that's the case, it could also have been that during the time that H&M stayed with them, Serena's husband (who is obviously very smart) - even more so realized that these 2 are not only grifters, but dumb-a$$es!  So, maybe he said to Serena, "do you really want to be associated with these two"?


----------



## kkfiregirl

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the “friends” are distancing themselves.
> View attachment 4713814



It’s because meghan is a mess, I would distance myself too! Look at how far she’s fallen ... from princess to petulant whiner and attention seeker.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

... and I truly do not think Meghan has any friends, which is sad considering that she’s 38 and has not made a single lasting connection with another human outside of her family. I don’t think she’s close to Archie either, so I hope his nanny mom gives him a lot of love.


----------



## CarryOn2020

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *CarryOn*, it’s a terribly boring afternoon here in Cali, spill!!
> “Something very embarrassing” about these two grifters will make my <shallow, lol> day! ♥️



Oh, if I knew any specifics, I would spill it because I have zero respect for this under-educated couple and their selfish behavior, especially in pandemic times [haven’t we all learned important lessons?]. All I know are rumors, so I will wait for the trial. Since the DM has posted about 5 stories just today, my guess is the publications will not settle. I’m here for all of it.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *CarryOn*, it’s a terribly boring afternoon here in Cali, spill!!
> “Something very embarrassing” about these two grifters will make my <shallow, lol> day! ♥️


I second that notion, *we need the dirt*!!!


----------



## zinacef

I don’t want to be friends with her either, you’ll be reduced to “friends who leak stuff” to the press, when in fact it’s just  her and her paid press people that’s doing it.  So much for being invited and spending money to attend the wedding and where is Priyanka girl now we know that Serena is “jokingly” not knowing her. And the rest of her squad, “friends”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has everyone seen this? He posted it in January. The comments are revealing, too. 

Alexis Ohanian Sr. 
_Over the course of your career, you'll encounter people who use strategic sycophancy in order to level themselves up, rather than, say, doing great work. Some will hit their inevitable ceiling early, but others will actually continue to thrive.
You will start to wonder if it'll ever catch up with them, but I've convinced myself that in the long-term, it's just not sustainable for them. Eventually enough people will see them for who they really are--charlatans.
I realize that's little satisfaction for those of you working toward your recognition, your due. But there is no more surefire way to be successful in your career than to do great work, take ownership for everything that goes wrong, and be kind to everyone, especially yourself.
I can only speak for the tech industry, of course, but I suspect this is largely universal. I've only been doing this 15 years now, but the highest-performers (and most respected folks) I've encountered actually get-****-done.
And while there are many people in the tech industry who seem to keep getting away with it, the more sunlight, the better._


----------



## marietouchet

Does anyone know ? When was the lawsuit filed by M against the tabloid ?
Curious to correlate the filing to what was going on at the time with H&M.  I can’t imagine Buck House approved the lawsuit, given what we now know now, the personal details are so cringe worthy  ie distracting from the work of the BRF, just wondering what was going on at the time just before the filing...

H&M. Use have filed without approval ... hmmm ?

Was the admonition by Pss Anne timed to happen before the court filings became available ? I think yes, Anne knows when to be quiet unless instructed by Buck House


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> Were they ever really close friends?


I never thought so.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Does anyone know ? When was the lawsuit filed by M against the tabloid ?



I think it was filed in the fall of 2018. The drama started right after the wedding and it hasn’t stopped since.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I have a feeling it will play out the defense arguing, “how could we have targeted poor Meghan and not published xxxx?” And that’s when all the tea will spill. 

They may not have wanted to touch the blind items and anger BP. But in a lawsuit, they can reveal it all and throw them their hands up that they were forced to by the court.


----------



## melissatrv

She can forget about A-list, Dancing with the Stars and the Home Shopping Network are in her future.  




CeeJay said:


> True, true .. but if the $$$ isn't coming in, then they may just have to go to more drastic measures.  Obviously, the smartest thing would be to go back to the UK and just suck-it-up, but while Harry (maybe) able to go back without as many issues (_however, based on some of the comments that I saw on the DM, it appears as though many Brits do not think highly of him now_); I just can't see that happening with Meghan.
> 
> While she may (_at this time_) still be utter delusional that she can resurrect her career and work with the A-List, if that just does not come to fruition, who knows .. she may just want to be on a Housewives show (_however, I have to say that a lot of folks are getting very tired of those shows - I haven't watched them in SOME time_!!!).  So many of those gals (_hello - Dorito_) live a lot larger than they actually have, but that seems to be the case a lot out here in H-Wood!


----------



## melissatrv

I wish someone would REALLY spill the dirt on her.  Not some anonymous source.   Her father and Samantha are not given much credence.  I wish her second ex-husband would write a tell-all. I am surprised he has not been offered a fortune to do so.  Or someone who worked with her on Suits would tell what she was really like.  




VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *CarryOn*, it’s a terribly boring afternoon here in Cali, spill!!
> “Something very embarrassing” about these two grifters will make my <shallow, lol> day! ♥️


----------



## lanasyogamama

I read somewhere that the email came from a Sussex royal email address even though they aren’t supposed to use that.


----------



## mdcx

Serena's husband co-founded Reddit. He is smart, into social justice, feminism etc etc. He refers to himself as Alexis Ohanian Sr because his daughter is now Alexis Ohanian. 
I doubt he has any time for phonies like M and I would guess because of how connected he is, he knows a bit of dirt on her also.


----------



## wisconsin

limom said:


> He was not a kind, level headed individual to start with, so my sympathy resides with true victims of domestic violence.
> There were many incidents where he showed his true colors.
> Imo, he is an azz.



All victims of abuse are not good people. They still don’t deserve to be controlled and abused.


----------



## Milosmum0307

VigeeLeBrun said:


> All I can add at this point is, "WHERE ARE THEIR HANDLERS?"!!!


This is the same couple that routinely uses people of color as props for their PR stunts and mawkish documentary.  The same couple that just days ago exploited a global pandemic for a photo op.  It’s not a matter of bad handlers or poor advice; these are two cynical, opportunistic parasites who are simply revealing their true colors.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Go to 27 seconds. 

https://globalnews.ca/video/3885335...round-during-first-interview-after-engagement


----------



## Lodpah

What I believe might happen is that one of 5 friends or maybe a couple will reveal that IT WAS Meghan who gave them the letter and gave permission to publish it and she might have even told them to go collectively to the papers.  I can see 2 or 3 lying to the court but all 5?  When you are under oath some will crumble and tell the truth (most tell the truth). The papers have done their due diligence and have most likely done background investigation and regular investigation (discovery).  It's war between Meghan and the press. No journalists want to be told to say only nice things.  MM might be able to drag Princess Harry around like a dog on a leash but not all men can be affected by MM.  MM has effectively (I believe) turned real journalists off.  All gloves are off. 

I also believe George Clooney might have had a tryst with her (not substantiated) and Amal being a lawyer can most likely see right through MM. 

MM's antics always backfires.


----------



## chowlover2

melissatrv said:


> She can forget about A-list, Dancing with the Stars and the Home Shopping Network are in her future.


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> I can’t imagine Buck House approved the lawsuit, given what we now know now, *the personal details are so cringe worthy  ie distracting from the work of the BRF, *just wondering what was going on at the time just before the filing...


Not really like that. It maybe annoying to them if this case was to do with Harry. But MM was never a royal by blood, she just married one. She was not really a true royal before and even less so now! Nobody here is going to look at how badly she has behaved and think she represented the BRF. Just not the case at all!


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Not really like that. It maybe annoying to them if this case was to do with Harry. But MM was never a royal by blood, she just married one. She was not really a true royal before and even less so now! Nobody here is going to look at how badly she has behaved and think she represented the BRF. Just not the case at all!


This!


----------



## carmen56

Now that they no longer represent the Royal Family, these two are an irrelevance.  All media outlets should stop giving them the oxygen of publicity.


----------



## Clearblueskies

The RF will take care of Harry no matter what.  Although that may not mean restoring him to his former status if he returns.  Meghan simply isn’t important as she isn’t royal.  Think Charles and Diana, Andrew and Sarah, Princess Anne and Cpt Mark Phillips/Tim Lawrence etc etc. They are quite ruthless.  By creating a separation and taking themselves outside RF protection and advisors, Meghan and Harry have made things easier for the RF.


----------



## PewPew

> "WHERE ARE THEIR HANDLERS?"!!!



It may seem like a small thing, but Meghan’s fashion choices always make me suspect she regularly disregards the handlers, however prestigious and high-paid they may be. She wore poorly-fitted, visible undergarments, too-small/tight dresses, and made deliberately disrespectful choices to be “unique” (wearing bright red to a UK military event with a spouse in his red uniform is a no-no; eschewing hats when the Queen requests them, etc).

Then, their tone-deaf, contradictory public statements are often of the peevish word-salad both M & H have become known for. Their PR people/ Sunshine Sachs must be so frustrated. Even Obie’s fawning tweets can’t save this couple from themselves.... Someone asked if at least Harry could proof-read what she writes, but his unscripted remarks and post-Megxit interviews have shown by omission how hard his royal handlers had to work to make him seem more intelligent & informed.


----------



## Lodpah

The second picture on the right is really troubling. Not only is she narcissistic and a psychopath, she's also  a manipulator and controlling person and Harry goes along with it. I sometimes think she was set up to do this by unseen people in the background to bring about whatever and Harry is a victim of some sort of MK Ultra programming by her and her "people." This is too bizarre. Harry is scared of her. Really scared of her. Where are his friends and his father? Why are they not helping him?


----------



## Mrs.Z

I never paid that much attention to the body language, yes she comes across as clingy and it’s juvenile BUT.....someone posted a video from an official event where they were holding hands walking into a room.  Harry sees someone to his right, he veers over to greet this person and she WILL NOT let go of his hand, she will also not walk toward the person.  They are linked as he continues to walk right as if she is not allowing him to greet someone, it was the most bizarre thing.  Most men would say let me go please.


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> The second picture on the right is really troubling. Not only is she narcissistic and a psychopath, she's also  a manipulator and controlling person and Harry goes along with it. I *sometimes think she was set up to do this by unseen people in the background to bring about whatever and Harry is a victim of some sort of MK Ultra programming by her and her "people." This is too bizarre. Harry is scared of her. Really scared of her. Where are his friends and his* father? Why are they not helping him?
> 
> View attachment 4714029



Thanks for the early morning laugh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> The second picture on the right is really troubling. Not only is she narcissistic and a psychopath, she's also  a manipulator and controlling person and Harry goes along with it. I sometimes think she was set up to do this by unseen people in the background to bring about whatever and Harry is a victim of some sort of MK Ultra programming by her and her "people." This is too bizarre. Harry is scared of her. Really scared of her. Where are his friends and his father? Why are they not helping him?
> 
> View attachment 4714029


Ugh this is seriously painful to watch.


----------



## Tivo

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like the “friends” are distancing themselves.
> View attachment 4713814


Wtf is wrong with Serena’s face?


----------



## 1LV

Tivo said:


> Wtf is wrong with Serena’s face?


Tongue planted firmly in cheek when talking about not knowing MM?


----------



## imgg

Lodpah said:


> The second picture on the right is really troubling. Not only is she narcissistic and a psychopath, she's also  a manipulator and controlling person and Harry goes along with it. I sometimes think she was set up to do this by unseen people in the background to bring about whatever and Harry is a victim of some sort of MK Ultra programming by her and her "people." This is too bizarre. Harry is scared of her. Really scared of her. Where are his friends and his father? Why are they not helping him?
> 
> View attachment 4714029


I am really curious if Harry knows his wife is staging these pap deeds or if he is so naive believes her when she says hey Harry, today lets go deliver food to 20 random people at their homes and he thinks its because she is such a good person and not a PR stunt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

Lodpah said:


> The second picture on the right is really troubling. Not only is she narcissistic and a psychopath, she's also  a manipulator and controlling person and Harry goes along with it. I sometimes think she was set up to do this by unseen people in the background to bring about whatever and Harry is a victim of some sort of MK Ultra programming by her and her "people." This is too bizarre. Harry is scared of her. Really scared of her. Where are his friends and his father? Why are they not helping him?
> 
> View attachment 4714029


That's been my belief all along that although Harry is not the brightest or kindest person, M saw that H was ripe for the picking and went to town on him. I think he was 'gaga in love' and believed almost anything she said. All the back rubbing, hand holding, intense stares he thought, was her way of showing how much she loved him and wanted to take care of him. Meanwhile, she has been using every narcissist trick in the book. I only feel sorry for Harry because he lost his mother and how has Archie to look after.  I don't know how this sorrid storybook will end, but it's been hella fun reading this thread three times a day and LMAO!


----------



## bag-mania

Cavalier Girl said:


> Honestly, these two are as dumb as rocks.



Even worse, they are dumb people who believe they are smarter than everyone else in the room. That's when things can get dangerous.


----------



## Flatsy

rudy_jacek said:


> In a real world Harry and Meghan would be just a newlywed couple, holding hands, PDA etc. Even in Hollywood reality it's great, it's sweet, and everyone is more than ok with it. I mean look at how they're talking about those two:


I thought at first that it was just newlywed PDA but soon realized it was much more than that.  She very consistently uses physical touch to non-verbally direct Harry what she wants him to do.  She puts her hand on his back to tell him to start walking, stop walking, stop talking to the person he's talking to, get out of her way, etc.  

Example:  See this video of Canada House visit starting at 0:15:    She's using her hand to tell Harry to sit down.   Harry, who is standing because he's a gentleman and there are several ladies who have not yet sat down, does what she tells him.  I know that one example is a small thing, but it's *constant *with the two of them.  

If Harry were constantly putting his hands on Meghan's back or arms to point her in the right direction or get her to stop talking, he would absolutely be accused of being controlling and secretly abusive.

Harry may very well like being constantly touched and controlled.  Some guys take it as attentiveness and affection (i.e., she's always taking care of me).  I think it's icky.


----------



## mrsinsyder




----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> The second picture on the right is really troubling. Not only is she narcissistic and a psychopath, she's also  a manipulator and controlling person and Harry goes along with it. I sometimes think she was set up to do this by unseen people in the background to bring about whatever and Harry is a victim of some sort of MK Ultra programming by her and her "people." This is too bizarre. Harry is scared of her. Really scared of her. Where are his friends and his father? Why are they not helping him?
> 
> View attachment 4714029



On the plus side, some of us are worried that Meghan is a cold, disinterested mother. These photos show she is fully capable of grabbing a toddler and steering him out of the street to safety if needed.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


>



OOOO! Let's play "caption this."

I'll go first: YOU WILL STOP TALKING AND PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!


----------



## imgg

mrsinsyder said:


>


This really sums it up.  She looks like she is trying to mind control him and getting pissed its not working.  She looks possessed.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Flatsy said:


> I thought at first that it was just newlywed PDA but soon realized it was much more than that.  She very consistently uses physical touch to non-verbally direct Harry what she wants him to do.  She puts her hand on his back to tell him to start walking, stop walking, stop talking to the person he's talking to, get out of her way, etc.
> 
> Example:  See this video of Canada House visit starting at 0:15:    She's using her hand to tell Harry to sit down.   Harry, who is standing because he's a gentleman and there are several ladies who have not yet sat down, does what she tells him.  I know that one example is a small thing, but it's *constant *with the two of them.
> 
> If Harry were constantly putting his hands on Meghan's back or arms to point her in the right direction or get her to stop talking, he would absolutely be accused of being controlling and secretly abusive.
> 
> Harry may very well like being constantly touched and controlled.  Some guys take it as attentiveness and affection (i.e., she's always taking care of me).  I think it's icky.



I noticed this at the time.  She plonks herself down too soon (people are still coming into the room) and signals him to sit to cover it up 


mrsinsyder said:


>


This is creepy, she’s very angry.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> OOOO! Let's play "caption this."
> 
> I'll go first: YOU WILL STOP TALKING AND PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!



 Best laugh of my day, so far.
Ok, I'll play along: LOOK INTO MY EYES AND CALL ME MUMMY!


----------



## Tivo

Clearblueskies said:


> I noticed this at the time.  She plonks herself down too soon (people are still coming into the room) and signals him to sit to cover it up
> 
> This is creepy, she’s very angry.


Damn she looks crazy af.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> OOOO! Let's play "caption this."
> 
> I'll go first: YOU WILL STOP TALKING AND PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!


“Just you wait till I get you home”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Clearblueskies said:


> “Just you wait till I get you home”


I'm surprised his fair skin didn't scorch from that stare.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm surprised his fair skin didn't scorch from that stare.



She was psychically frying his brain to make him compliant.


----------



## gazoo

*Meghan and Harry's pompous diatribe against the press plumbs new depths*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s letter to the tabloid press is staggering in its tone-deafness. At a time when relatives are saying tearful farewells over FaceTime and a shattered global economy has left millions fearing for the future, our vapid Prince and Princess across the water have chosen to launch a broadside against the media from their Hollywood hideout. 

Though they claim to value press freedom, their actions amount to a kind of censorship; it is obvious that they hope to trade in critical coverage for that of a more deferential flavour, delivered by journalists they have helped choose in advance. Both the self-pitying tone and unfortunate timing carry echoes of the Duke of Windsor, who spent much of World War Two holed up in comfy exile, furiously lobbying the Government to grant his wife HRH status. 

Most of Team Sussex’s output reads like a cross between a self-congratulatory _LinkedIn _post and a faux-profound lifestyle blog, and today’s instalment did not disappoint. Apart from the narcissism on display, the letter is replete with corporate gibberish (“to spotlight”, “policy being instated”) and pompous melodrama; no longer, they say, will they "offer themselves up as currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion". Given their desire for a less prominent role in public life, however, they seem rather too eager to mention that they remain a Duke and Duchess. The statement contains almost one reminder of their continued royal status per paragraph. 

Their PR strategy has always been a case of one step forward, ten steps back. Last year, the pair rounded off a triumphant tour of Africa, which had accrued countless positive UK media headlines, by launching legal action against the _Mail on Sunday_. Days ago, the couple were photographed delivering food to the needy in Los Angeles, looking down to earth and striking exactly the right note for the situation. Today’s developments will overshadow their good work once again. 

In recent years, their stock in Britain has plummeted, as overwhelming national goodwill and joy at their wedding gave way to irritation, then outright annoyance, at their hypocrisies. Yet this morning’s missive coincides with the Duchess’s first promotional interview since the pair shelved their royal duties, to discuss a new voiceover role in a Disney Plus documentary about elephants. (Meghan would know all about packing your trunk and saying goodbye to the circus.) While their disdain for the British people is increasingly obvious, choosing such a climactic moment to indulge in this bizarre rant seems calculated to boost their profile Stateside. 

The Sussexes’ failed attempt to combine their royal status with that of the celebrity influencer shows the tough predicament facing today’s royals. It is harder than ever for them to lead by example, in the style of previous royals such as Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, who used their platform to extol the domestic virtues of monogamy and family life. Society is simply less deferential, the press and public more alert to hypocrisy. Where once it guided morals and mores, the Royal Family is now more likely to influence fashion at best - and at worst, to mirror contemporary irritations back at us. 

In the Sussexes’ case, they have come to embody the excesses of identity politics. Their paranoid loathing of the press suggests they inhabit a world of perceived slights and victim status. Their demands for uncritical respect and supplication from the media, while complaining of mistreatment from a privileged position, reflects the combination of bullying and performative victimhood unique to these identitarian times. 

Their initial move to Canada gave the Sussexes the chance to combine duty with greater privacy. They could have lived a more retired life, while working on behalf of the Queen and promoting Commonwealth interests. Instead they’ve spent the time building a pair of vapid lifestyle brands, the now-defunct ‘Sussex Royal’ and ‘Archwell’, which sound like a cigarette manufacturer and a line of corrective footwear, respectively. Too woke even for Trudeau’s Canada, they scuttled out in a private jet just before full lockdown, proving that their goal was Los Angeles (a town famed for its privacy and modesty) and the lure of elephant voiceovers, all along. 

While the Sussexes were busy burning the last of their bridges with the British people, other family members are shining more brightly by contrast. The Queen’s dignified restraint as she consoled and encouraged her people amid one of the severest crises of her long reign was deeply moving. Prince Philip may have stepped back from public life on the grounds of his great age, but he still put out a stirring statement honouring unsung frontline workers earlier today. Despite their slightly earnest mode of speech, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge radiated genuine concern as they spoke to teachers via Zoom last week. The message from all of them – ‘It’s not just about Me.’

Source:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...atribe-against-press-plumbs-new-depths/&#8221


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Must admit, I'm viewing this on-going H&M show as a tPF Wharton School Business Study:
"HELP! We are stupid as all f**k, and want to start a business in Beverly Hills but first we are going to destroy our reputations,  alienate every single person we know,  and tell the media we don't need any of their help <the ROYAL "we", buddy. DON'T YOU KNOW IT'S ME, MEGHAN!!!>. Think that will bring us in an income of $100M annually? But first,  ask me how I'm feeling and.......Harry, WILL YOU PLS SIT DOWN & SHUT UP?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> OOOO! Let's play "caption this."
> 
> I'll go first: YOU WILL STOP TALKING AND PAY ATTENTION TO ME!!


“Mummy’s getting angry......”

But in all seriousness, I think this is very likely the dynamic of their relationship.H missing the mum he lost so young, M playacting that role to manipulate him...


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


>



Just do whatever it takes to make me Queen so I can call the shots and don't have to mingle with "all these people" who are clearly beneath me.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Now that they no longer represent the Royal Family, these two are an irrelevance.  All media outlets should stop giving them the oxygen of publicity.



It's true, they will quietly fade away to dust without the tabloid press, loved or hated they are kept current through the currency of the news media. Left to their Sussex Royal website alone they'll be a bland and boring anachronism.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> But in all seriousness, I think this is very likely the dynamic of their relationship.H missing the mum he lost so young, M playacting that role to manipulate him...



I am just about over cutting him slack about that. He was 12 when he lost his mother. Very young to be sure, but in the 23 years since you would think he would have come to terms with his mommy issues. Being attracted to a woman who likes to play mommy for him and make all his decisions is creepy as hell.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Oh my, the optics are shameful, the Daily Mail today:
*"Meghan Markle brands her own father a liar and DENIES knowing that her closest friends would give interviews criticizing Thomas Markle and revealing her intimate letter in run-up to Royal wedding"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...nowing-friends-interview-criticizing-him.html*


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> I am just about over cutting him slack about that. He was 12 when he lost his mother. Very young to be sure, but in the 23 years since you would think he would have come to terms with his mommy issues. Being attracted to a woman who likes to play mommy for him and make all his decisions is creepy as hell.


These things are really hardwired in people and whatever your childhood issues, it plays out throughout your life unless you're a strong person to recognize it and want to change the pattern.  I don't see Harry as a very strong individual.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> It's true, they will quietly fade away to dust without the tabloid press, loved or hated they are kept current through the currency of the news media. Left to their Sussex Royal website alone they'll be bland and boring anachronism.


 They’re truly desperate for publicity, and incredibly frustrated and angry the media isn't fawning over them in the way they think is their due.  
Trouble is we all recognise a stagey pap walk when we see one, and preaching one thing whilst doing the opposite shrieks of hypocrisy regardless of who’s doing the reporting.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just read that they, along with Archie have done a video call with The Queen to wish her a happy birthday.
So, who has leaked that?
As well as today, I'm sure that over the last few weeks she will have had video calls with other members of her family but we haven't heard about them. They are private, not really meant for us to know about surely?


----------



## Clearblueskies

The Queen and Prince Philip have sent their condolences to Canada following the recent mass shooting and loss of life.  Meghan and Harry seem to have mislaid their special connection with Canada for the mo.


----------



## PewPew

gazoo said:


> Most of Team Sussex’s output reads like a cross between a self-congratulatory _LinkedIn _post and a faux-profound lifestyle blog...
> The Sussexes inhabit a world of perceived slights and victim status...
> They’ve spent time building * vapid lifestyle brands, the now-defunct ‘Sussex Royal’ and ‘Archwell’, which sound like a cigarette manufacturer and a line of corrective footwear*, respectively.



Hello, 911? I’d like to report a severe burn.

Yes, the Telegraph has been attacking corrective footwear


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> I noticed this at the time.  She plonks herself down too soon (people are still coming into the room) and signals him to sit to cover it up
> 
> This is creepy, she’s very angry.


Prior in this thread, in regards to Meghan's father's responses to her allegations he said "*she is very controlling, but nic*e" .. BOOM (close to the horse's mouth)!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I never paid that much attention to the body language, yes she comes across as clingy and it’s juvenile BUT.....someone posted a video from an official event where they were holding hands walking into a room.  Harry sees someone to his right, he veers over to greet this person and she WILL NOT let go of his hand, she will also not walk toward the person.  They are linked as he continues to walk right as if she is not allowing him to greet someone, it was the most bizarre thing.  Most men would say let me go please.


that video was disturbing to me too


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> “Mummy’s getting angry......”
> 
> But in all seriousness, I think this is very likely the dynamic of their relationship.H missing the mum he lost so young, M playacting that role to manipulate him...


.. and sadly, I suspect .. Archie with no Mum/Mom!  I still do not see a single 'motherly' bone in this grifter's body; so feel for the child


----------



## CarryOn2020

They want privacy yet post their birthday call to the Queen.  
Such frauds! Such desperation!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if UC Berkeley has quietly stepped away from them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Just read that they, along with Archie have done a video call with The Queen to wish her a happy birthday.
> So, who has leaked that?
> As well as today, I'm sure that over the last few weeks she will have had video calls with other members of her family but we haven't heard about them. They are private, not really meant for us to know about surely?



But how would we ever know how awesome they are unless they told us? ... _repeatedly_.


----------



## marietouchet

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *CarryOn*, it’s a terribly boring afternoon here in Cali, spill!!
> “Something very embarrassing” about these two grifters will make my <shallow, lol> day! ♥️


Keeping you on tenter hooks since I don’t really have the beans to spill 
But agree with many of you.. it is gonna hit the fan soooooon
The lawsuit is a chess game , or a game of chicken - who blinks first 
H&M did not think this through , they hoped the papers would fold and they would be vindicated 
Did not think through the possible collateral damage of having all the court filings come out 
Friday is the first court date , stay tuned


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> But how would we ever know how awesome they are unless they told us? ... _repeatedly_.


this whole story is really bizarre when you think about it.....D-list cable TV supporting actress snags one of the most famous and rich bachelors in the world, has televised wedding watched by little girls all over the world, gains huge following....then quits....things aren't what she wanted.  now in a panic to try to stay relevant.  truth is stranger than fiction.
Really hard to predict how this ends.


----------



## Mrs.Z

marietouchet said:


> Keeping you on tenter hooks since I don’t really have the beans to spill
> But agree with many of you.. it is gonna hit the fan soooooon
> The lawsuit is a chess game , or a game of chicken - who blinks first
> H&M did not think this through , they hoped the papers would fold and they would be vindicated
> Did not think through the possible collateral damage of having all the court filings come out
> Friday is the first court date , stay tuned


Come on guys, withholding gossip during a time like this in inhuman....whoever has the info please just spill it.  I don’t even understand her lawsuit (did not pay much attention to it either). Is her Father a party?  Was he forced to retain counsel...legal bills?  Suing your family is LOW.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Come on guys, withholding gossip during a time like this in inhuman....whoever has the info please just spill it.  I don’t even understand her lawsuit (did not pay much attention to it either). Is her Father a party?  Was he forced to retain counsel...legal bills?  Suing your family is LOW.


Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal.  Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_).  Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry.  Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1.  Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come.  Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there.  To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time.  It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal.  Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_).  Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry.  Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1.  Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come.  Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there.  To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time.  It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


interesting question


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> But how would we ever know how awesome they are unless they told us? ... _repeatedly_.


Law of diminishing returns applies........


marietouchet said:


> Keeping you on tenter hooks since I don’t really have the beans to spill
> But agree with many of you.. it is gonna hit the fan soooooon
> The lawsuit is a chess game , or a game of chicken - who blinks first
> H&M did not think this through , they hoped the papers would fold and they would be vindicated
> Did not think through the possible collateral damage of having all the court filings come out
> Friday is the first court date , stay tuned


Never any winners in cases like this IMO - all parties come out of it looking grubby.  The press have little to lose but Meghan and Harry are damaging their “brand” - and the timing (as usual) is really bad.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Really hard to predict how this ends.



It ends badly. That much is guaranteed. Meghan's major downfall is her lack of focus. She's been  all over the board, constantly changing her mind about what she wants, and forever moving the goal post.

She was on target in her pursuit and acquisition of Harry. After that accomplishment the wheels fell off the wagon.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Law of diminishing returns applies........
> 
> Never any winners in cases like this IMO - all parties come out of it looking grubby.  The press have little to lose but Meghan and Harry are damaging their “brand” - and the timing (as usual) is really bad.


they are just so arrogant.....maybe harry was always that way and she brought it out in him more.....it seems like he has gone from being the "fun" prince to being the angry prince.  some have said he needs to do all these things to protect his family.  guess that's one way to look at it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

*dead*


----------



## LibbyRuth

I think that Harry has always been this way - I don't think it's a change brought about by Meghan.  I think he benefitted from some outstanding manging by the palace to make him look good in public, but has always been an entitled spoiled brat. There have been plenty of rumors out there about William also being rather rude - I can remember an item a few years ago about him being very dismissive of the staff of a museum he and Kate visited and Kate being embarassed by his behavior.
I don't know how you raise to boys to be the future king and future back up - being told that God chose them to rule and all the privilege that comes with that - and come out as down to earth regular guys. I think it's rather impossible, so I don't find a lot of fault in people for not achieving it. There was a lot of work done to make us believe that Diana devoted herself to giving them a normal childhood ... but sliding notes under the door to your crying mother is not normal.  So I accept that a great deal of that was marketing and image building.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> *dead*
> 
> View attachment 4714285


Not a fan of this man, but MAJOR-LEAGUE THUMBS UP on this one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe she told him she was pregnant and he better marry her.  Then, she “lost” the baby.  Could she be that devious?


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal.  Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_).  Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry.  Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1.  Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come.  Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there.  To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time.  It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


I think she probably did what any other self-respecting gold-digging narc would do. Told him she was pregnant.  Make him believe the lie just long enough for her to sink her claws into him and make him believe she was everything she claimed to be (humanitarian, big-time star, Diana...). Once she "miscarried' he was already hooked in.
JMO, as always.


----------



## V0N1B2

Annawakes said:


> Maybe she told him she was pregnant and he better marry her.  Then, she “lost” the baby.  Could she be that devious?


Looks like we posted at the same time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

V0N1B2 said:


> Looks like we posted at the same time


Wouldn’t it be wild if she paid off a doctor to fake blood test results at the time?  Pure speculation of course.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Annawakes said:


> Maybe she told him she was pregnant and he better marry her.  Then, she “lost” the baby.  Could she be that devious?



I think she is that devious but I don’t think she needed to do that. 

I honestly think all she had to do was stroke his ego, embellish her accomplishments, let him think he was calling the shots, and spend her own money in the beginning. 

Chelsy and Cressida didn’t want to give up their own dreams for Royal life. Supposedly, he and Cressida had issues over money as she couldn’t afford to do everything he wanted and he refused to pay for her. 

Stage left, enter Meghan who already has a career and said she would walk away from it.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Maybe she told him she was pregnant and he better marry her.  Then, she “lost” the baby.  Could she be that devious?





V0N1B2 said:


> I think she probably did what any other self-respecting gold-digging narc would do. Told him she was pregnant.  Make him believe the lie just long enough for her to sink her claws into him and make him believe she was everything she claimed to be (humanitarian, big-time star, Diana...). Once she "miscarried' he was already hooked in.
> JMO, as always.



While I wouldn't put it past her to do this in a soap-operaish villainess way, I don't think it happened based on timing. There had been gossip and then expectations of an engagement for at least a full year before they actually became engaged. She manipulated him and got her hooks in him. Of course she wanted the fairytale wedding where she was thin and beautiful without any trace of scandal which would have tainted it for her. She made up for it by making sure she became pregnant as quickly as possible once the vows were said.


----------



## 1LV

This is my question.  How much longer until her bird like ankles  >snap<  under the weight of her ego??


----------



## mrsinsyder

No one was fighting to marry Harry. I really don't think she had to do THAT much to hook him. Any smart woman would see a thousand different reasons he is not worth all the headache.


----------



## mia55

V0N1B2 said:


> I think she probably did what any other self-respecting gold-digging narc would do. Told him she was pregnant.  Make him believe the lie just long enough for her to sink her claws into him and make him believe she was everything she claimed to be (humanitarian, big-time star, Diana...). Once she "miscarried' he was already hooked in.
> JMO, as always.


And maybe she miscarried due to the stress caused by the mean media. She probably was having a little girl whom she planned to call “Diana” but the mean media couldn’t see Harry and her happy


----------



## Allisonfaye

CeeJay said:


> True, true .. but if the $$$ isn't coming in, then they may just have to go to more drastic measures.  Obviously, the smartest thing would be to go back to the UK and just suck-it-up, but while Harry (maybe) able to go back without as many issues (_however, based on some of the comments that I saw on the DM, it appears as though many Brits do not think highly of him now_); I just can't see that happening with Meghan.
> 
> While she may (_at this time_) still be utter delusional that she can resurrect her career and work with the A-List, if that just does not come to fruition, who knows .. she may just want to be on a Housewives show (_however, I have to say that a lot of folks are getting very tired of those shows - I haven't watched them in SOME time_!!!).  So many of those gals (_hello - Dorito_) live a lot larger than they actually have, but that seems to be the case a lot out here in H-Wood!



I think the Housewife shows are on their last leg. People aren't going to want to watch them with all that is going on...all the luxury and fighting. I know I quit.


----------



## CeeJay

Allisonfaye said:


> I think the Housewife shows are on their last leg. People aren't going to want to watch them with all that is going on...all the luxury and fighting. I know I quit.


Same here!!!!  I haven't watched any of them in a LONG time, and while I looked at the comments at the RHoBH thread, honestly, I'm still not sure that I really want to tune in!  I am looking forward to Million Dollar Listing - LA, but a big part of that is also because I live out here and can relate to the areas, but if they have a lot of Fredrik on (I'm not a fan), I may not continue with that either.  Some of the other 'new' Bravo shows are just absolutely DOWNRIGHT RIDICULOUS!!!


----------



## Allisonfaye

CeeJay said:


> Same here!!!!  I haven't watched any of them in a LONG time, and while I looked at the comments at the RHoBH thread, honestly, I'm still not sure that I really want to tune in!  I am looking forward to Million Dollar Listing - LA, but a big part of that is also because I live out here and can relate to the areas, but if they have a lot of Fredrik on (I'm not a fan), I may not continue with that either.  Some of the other 'new' Bravo shows are just absolutely DOWNRIGHT RIDICULOUS!!!



I can't say it would break my heart to see Cohen go down.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CeeJay said:


> Same here!!!!  I haven't watched any of them in a LONG time, and while I looked at the comments at the RHoBH thread, honestly, I'm still not sure that I really want to tune in!  I am looking forward to Million Dollar Listing - LA, but a big part of that is also because I live out here and can relate to the areas, but if they have a lot of Fredrik on (I'm not a fan), I may not continue with that either.  Some of the other 'new' Bravo shows are just absolutely DOWNRIGHT RIDICULOUS!!!



I have been watching Million D - LA, too but I am watching old episodes. I have no idea what season or how many there even are. When I was in LA in 2018ish, my friend who is a realtor took me on caravan with him. We saw some of those homes up to probably $15m. I think we were in one they featured on MDLA...the one that was built for the Doors drummer? Those houses all start to look alike after a while.


----------



## eunaddict

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52354898

Don't know if it's been posted but the text message exchanges that went on prior to the wedding were released in court documents as well.

Is it just me? I think what the news published paints a fair kinder image of them than the actual text messages in their entirety - succinct and to the point as opposed to the obsessive, threatening yet groveling tone of the actual messages.

_
"On 14 May 2018, it says, Mr Markle sent Meghan a text message to apologise and confirm that he would not be attending the wedding.

It says that around half an hour later, after several calls to Mr Markle went unanswered, Prince Harry sent the following messages to Mr Markle from Meghan's phone:

"Tom, it's Harry and I'm going to call you right now. Please pick up, thank you"

"Tom, Harry again! Really need to speak to u. U do not need to apologize, we understand the circumstances but "going public" will only make the situation worse. If u love Meg and want to make it right please call me as there are two other options which don't involve u having to speak to the media, who incidentally created this whole situation. So please call me so I can explain. Meg and I are not angry, we just need to speak to u. Thanks"

"Oh any speaking to the press WILL backfire, trust me Tom. Only we can help u, as we have been trying from day 1".

The legal document claimed the newspaper's summary of these messages contained "significant omissions" when it "merely" reported that the messages said "*Mr Markle did not need to apologise and that he should call"*.

It adds the description of another exchange "intentionally omits" any reference to Meghan or Prince Harry attempting to protect Mr Markle and ensure that he was safe."_


----------



## Mrs.Z

Allisonfaye said:


> I can't say it would break my heart to see Cohen go down.


I’m over him too, he’s a media whore, a lot like MM


----------



## mrsinsyder

“Only we can help you”? Oh come off it “H.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

Call them out DM


----------



## bag-mania

A writer for _Vanity Fair_ claims that Harry comes off looking good from those texts. Proof that looking good is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

mrsinsyder said:


> *dead*
> 
> View attachment 4714285


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> Call them out DM
> 
> View attachment 4714342


They really shouldn’t be using Zoom for chats with the Queen. They can’t afford a solid, secure system?


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> They really shouldn’t be using Zoom for chats with the Queen. They can’t afford a solid, secure system?


THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!  Recently, I was supposed to interview for a position in the Risk & Compliance Department with a major Bank here in LA, and when I was told that they would be using ZOOM to interview me, my response was "WHAT? .. you do know that they have been hacked, that would be the first thing that I would disable"!  Needless to say, I guess they didn't like my response, so .. yeah, okay .. go ahead and be hacked and I won't take any blame .. PERFECT!


----------



## muchstuff

mrsinsyder said:


> *dead*
> 
> View attachment 4714285


Ouch


----------



## marietouchet

PS on another subject ... thank you folk for this thread ... much amusement and DISTRACTION    ... PRICELESS
GOOD VIBES to all thank you


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!  Recently, I was supposed to interview for a position in the Risk & Compliance Department with a major Bank here in LA, and when I was told that they would be using ZOOM to interview me, my response was "WHAT? .. you do know that they have been hacked, that would be the first thing that I would disable"!  Needless to say, I guess they didn't like my response, so .. yeah, okay .. go ahead and be hacked and I won't take any blame .. PERFECT!


life is painfrul and stupid these days - be strong


----------



## CarryOn2020

They want their video call to leak.  So, they can write another epistle about privacy violations. 
Ya kno, because the world needs another lecture right now /sarcasm.



CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!  Recently, I was supposed to interview for a position in the Risk & Compliance Department with a major Bank here in LA, and when I was told that they would be using ZOOM to interview me, my response was "WHAT? .. you do know that they have been hacked, that would be the first thing that I would disable"!  Needless to say, I guess they didn't like my response, so .. yeah, okay .. go ahead and be hacked and I won't take any blame .. PERFECT!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!  Recently, I was supposed to interview for a position in the Risk & Compliance Department with a major Bank here in LA, and when I was told that they would be using ZOOM to interview me, my response was "WHAT? .. you do know that they have been hacked, that would be the first thing that I would disable"!  Needless to say, I guess they didn't like my response, so .. yeah, okay .. go ahead and be hacked and I won't take any blame .. PERFECT!



Risk and Compliance at a bank using Zoom


----------



## A1aGypsy

I mean, kind of seems to be scrapping the bottom of the barrel with a dull spoon if you feel you must leak that you called your 94yr old granny on her birthday and let her have a glimpse of her great grandson.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> life is painfrul and stupid these days - be strong


.. thank you, but .. alas (given my 'age' - okay, not old but "experienced") I do not suffer fools gladly, so to be honest .. I'm glad that it didn't go any further than that!


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I mean, kind of seems to be scrapping the bottom of the barrel with a dull spoon if you feel you must leak that you called your 94yr old granny on her birthday and let her have a glimpse of her great grandson.


That poor child; I sincerely hope that a lot of $$$$ is put away for all the psychiatric help that child will need later on in life between having these 2 as parents.  I doubt she really gives a rat's a$$ about that child, and Harry with his "issues" .. I just can't!  Having come from a *VERY* dysfunctional family, I know what it feels like .. as I used to say to friends of mine (who heard the family story), "it either breaks your or makes you stronger" .. and sadly, I've seen both.


----------



## Lounorada

Tivo said:


> Wtf is wrong with Serena’s face?


 I thought the same thing  She doesn't look herself.



Flatsy said:


> If Harry were constantly putting his hands on Meghan's back or arms to point her in the right direction or get her to stop talking, he would absolutely be accused of being controlling and secretly abusive.


This is so true.



mrsinsyder said:


>


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> *dead*
> 
> View attachment 4714285


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> I am just about over cutting him slack about that. He was 12 when he lost his mother. Very young to be sure, but in the 23 years since you would think he would have come to terms with his mommy issues. Being attracted to a woman who likes to play mommy for him and make all his decisions is creepy as hell.


Agreed, very creepy. I think they are both dysfunctional and he definitely could have addressed his mother issues via therapy etc but I am guessing he is in a victim mentality perhaps due to untreated MH issues. Not a healthy combo, both feeding off the other.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> A writer for _Vanity Fair_ claims that Harry comes off looking good from those texts. *Proof that looking good is in the eye of the beholder*.


Exactly.
He seems desperate in those texts. Desperate to convince her father to stay away from the big bad media wolf and follow along to the side of false security and manipulation with them, well, more so his daughter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> I mean, kind of seems to be scrapping the bottom of the barrel with a dull spoon if you feel you must leak that you called your 94yr old granny on her birthday and let her have a glimpse of her great grandson.



It is particularly disingenuous when you factor in that last year they barely took Archie to see his great-grandmother when they lived right there, presumably out of spite since she didn’t let them have their way. Their constant hypocrisy is tiring.


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal.  Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_).  Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry.  Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1.  Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come.  Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there.  To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time.  It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


CeeJay, you beauty!!!!


----------



## mdcx

When the DM mocks you right in the headline, you are kind of officially done.
Like, down to Katie Price or Luann de Lesseps level of “celebrity”.

Anyone looking for a fun LA real estate show, “Selling Sunset” is great.


----------



## Blyen

Don't know if this was already posted, but the Daily mail is on fire today!


----------



## CeeJay

Blyen said:


> Don't know if this was already posted, but the Daily mail is on fire today!


.. and BADA-BING; you want to "play" with us H&M, just 'watch'!!!   Other celebrities (although I don't want to imply that these 2 are anywhere close to celebrities) have tried to go up against these media outlets and have (in some degree) gotten them to back-off, but with what these two are doing .. it's GAME-ON!!!


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> When the DM mocks you right in the headline, you are kind of officially done.
> Like, down to Katie Price or Luann de Lesseps level of “celebrity”.
> 
> Anyone looking for a fun LA real estate show, “Selling Sunset” is great.


I am going to look for it right now!!!  The HB and I used to go to some of these ridiculously-priced houses just for yucks; we have seen some absolutely beautiful houses (with beyond scenery) and the most ABYSMAL pieces of architecture (if you can EVEN call it that) here in LA!  It is particularly mind-blowing to me when they destroy a perfectly beautiful house just to erect this boxy monstrosity!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors, rumors — only my opinion, I do not know any of these people. 
-Based on the photos on Google, the yacht girl story seems likely. Rumors are she may have been on Andrew’s boat. 
-Pretend preggers also seems likely. Easy enough to pull off for someone willing to sacrifice her integrity.
-The money angle with Cress is interesting. I have not heard that one before, but it makes sense. He has no real cash of his own, so he learned early to ‘let’ others pay for everything. Will chose well with dear Kate. H knew he needed someone to support his deep-carbon-footprint lifestyle. Chels and Cress said no. Presto, M pops up. She knows nothing about royalty. Perfect.
-The ‘strategic sycophancy’ also seems likely with her. As the yacht girl and z-list actress(?), she would have learned how to kiss up.  And this explains why she did not want H to meet her father. He knows the truth. How many marriages as well as other relevant details.
-After years of failed relationships, failed therapy, being jealous of William, Harry wanted out, but did not know how to leave. Chels and Cress were too smart (loyal to the Crown) to agree to leave, so he found the perfect foil, another Wallis, who makes W&K look beyond reproach.  Heck, this could have been the BRF strategy all along. Let H destroy the myth of Diana. Hmmm. 

We will know more after the trial. This latest pr stunt certainly makes them seem even dumber than we imagined. 
All of these rumors are out there, so we may not learn anything really new. No matter, Serena has never heard of them. 
This show is over.


----------



## Lounorada

Blyen said:


> Don't know if this was already posted, but the Daily mail is on fire today!


That is brilliant!


----------



## bag-mania

They can’t beat the press, they are too numerous and they have too great a reach. In court all sorts of embarrassing things may come out. 

If they think the American media will always be kind to them they are in for a rude awakening. They are the new shiny thing here and there is some interest, but their newness is overshadowed by the pandemic. By the time that is resolved the Sussex honeymoon period will also be over.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal.  Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_).  Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry.  Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1.  Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come.  Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there.  To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time.  It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


juicy story....we will probably never know the truth about that


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> Same here!!!!  I haven't watched any of them in a LONG time, and while I looked at the comments at the RHoBH thread, honestly, I'm still not sure that I really want to tune in!  I am looking forward to Million Dollar Listing - LA, but a big part of that is also because I live out here and can relate to the areas, but if they have a lot of Fredrik on (I'm not a fan), I may not continue with that either.  Some of the other 'new' Bravo shows are just absolutely DOWNRIGHT RIDICULOUS!!!



*CeeJay*, must comment on this and apologies for being OT ~
 Thought Bravo's HouseWives franchise was dead, but noooo!!!
What is the fav show to watch for my 30-year DD and her friends while in self-quarantine?
HONYC! Who would have thought!!!


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors, rumors — only my opinion, I do not know any of these people.
> -Based on the photos on Google, the yacht girl story seems likely. Rumors are she may have been on Andrew’s boat.
> -Pretend preggers also seems likely. Easy enough to pull off for someone willing to sacrifice her integrity.
> -The money angle with Cress is interesting. I have not heard that one before, but it makes sense. He has no real cash of his own, so he learned early to ‘let’ others pay for everything. Will chose well with dear Kate. H knew he needed someone to support his deep-carbon-footprint lifestyle. Chels and Cress said no. Presto, M pops up. She knows nothing about royalty. Perfect.
> -The ‘strategic sycophancy’ also seems likely with her. As the yacht girl and z-list actress(?), she would have learned how to kiss up.  And this explains why she did not want H to meet her father. He knows the truth. How many marriages as well as other relevant details.
> -After years of failed relationships, failed therapy, being jealous of William, Harry wanted out, but did not know how to leave. Chels and Cress were too smart (loyal to the Crown) to agree to leave, so he found the perfect foil, another Wallis, who makes W&K look beyond reproach.  Heck, this could have been the BRF strategy all along. Let H destroy the myth of Diana. Hmmm.
> 
> We will know more after the trial. This latest pr stunt certainly makes them seem even dumber than we imagined.
> All of these rumors are out there, so we may not learn anything really new. No matter, Serena has never heard of them.
> This show is over.


Awesome post.  Love it!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *CeeJay*, must comment on this and apologies for being OT ~
> Thought Bravo's HouseWives franchise was dead, but noooo!!!
> What is the fav show to watch for my 30-year DD and her friends to watch these days while in self-quarantine?
> HONYC! Who would have thought!!!


WOW .. no kidding!  I liked it when Bethanny wasn't on, but just haven't gotten back into it .. but get this (you'll have to tell DD about this) .. LuAnn is from the same TOWN as me (in Connecticut) - HA!!!!  She is a cousin of one of my classmates (who was also a beautiful gal), but .. uh, they are BY NO MEANS "royal" behaving!


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal.  Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_).  Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry.  Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1.  Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come.  Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there.  To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time.  It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


I think it's possible she lied and told him she was pregnant, then lost the child as the wedding approached. If he would have dumped her after a " miscarriage " he would have been labelled a cad.


----------



## kkfiregirl

chowlover2 said:


> I think it's possible she lied and told him she was pregnant, then lost the child as the wedding approached. If he would have dumped her after a " miscarriage " he would have been labelled a cad.



But would he be stupid enough to believe that without proof? I mean, she didn’t have any children with her ex-husband, so clearly she knows how to prevent unwanted pregnancies. I think he would at least want to see an ultrasound photo or something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

As much as I'm an non-stan of MM, I don't think she'd have faked a pregnancy. She was mid 30's with no kids after two husbands when she married H, it'd have been too unbelievable to spring the preggers trap. She's psychotic enough to have thought of a dozen other ways to snare the dullard. It's probably finally just dawned on the idiot to realize he'd been a fool to marry her. Delivering meals to a few strangers in the middle of a pandemic to then go back to his infant child likely wasn't his image of glamorous Hollywood. He couldn't even position his DIY kerchief correctly over his scruffy face (no servants to do it for him). If he hasn't regretted his marriage by now, then he's as nuts as she is and they deserve each other. In time there'll be a vaccine for coronavirus, unfortunately there won't be one for stupid.


----------



## Lodpah

Backlash from medi:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11437872/harry-meghan-media-coronavirus/amp/
https://www.cairnspost.com.au/sun-e...r/news-story/27908a622c54a7e65eee66d831f5f8c0


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Those yacht girl rumours...I wouldn't put it past MM, she would do just about anything to get what she wants. What I don't get is: if true, how could the BRF say yes to that marriage? They couldn't really trust everyone would keep quiet forever?


----------



## needlv

Lodpah said:


> Backlash from medi:
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11437872/harry-meghan-media-coronavirus/amp/
> https://www.cairnspost.com.au/sun-e...r/news-story/27908a622c54a7e65eee66d831f5f8c0



The final two paragraphs is brutal but so well put!


----------



## Lodpah

This lady sums it up nicely. MM and Harry always put something out to upstage the BRF, especially on the Queen's Birthday, now the texts. Interesting video. She puts it all together, by aligning up the photographer who took TM pictures and now this. She also goes into how the Angel Food planned paparazzi.


----------



## Lodpah

Wow, the journalist who broke the story on MM and JCMH relationship speaks up. She makes a lot of sense.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tomorrow is Prince Louis second birthday, wonder what Meghan will do to upstage it? Maybe a back of the head shot of Archie talking to Great Granny on Zoom? [emoji1787]


----------



## Lodpah

Of course she will upstage. She will come out how her planned Archie Day has been postponed or some pictures, maybe of his fingers or toes. She's holding out for the multimillion payout for exclusive pics (which I hope never happens as who is buying magazines now and sponsorships are quite down for papers).


----------



## Nutashha

bag-mania said:


> They can’t beat the press, they are too numerous and they have too great a reach. In court all sorts of embarrassing things may come out.
> 
> If they think the American media will always be kind to them they are in for a rude awakening. They are the new shiny thing here and there is some interest, but their newness is overshadowed by the pandemic. By the time that is resolved the Sussex honeymoon period will also be over.


Yeah! And it was hilarious (and kinda rude) when ***** made them feel a bit unwelcomed with his 'pay for your own security' remark! 

Also, they've hired bodyguards of Brad Pitt and Angelina lol

For the archive:

https://www.arentyouawesome.com/post/meghan-markle-prince-harry-bodyguards-brangelina


----------



## beautymagpie

These texts to Thomas really are bordering on threatening. I don't know how anyone could read and think they were send with 100% kindness. They're totally typed through gritted teeth:

'only we can help u' [really? how so? they've not proven themselves well at handling the media]
'as we have been trying from day 1 [read instead: because we know best - a now well known M&H state of mind]


----------



## Compass Rose

Nutashha said:


> Yeah! And it was hilarious (and kinda rude) when ***** made them feel a bit unwelcomed with his 'pay for your own security' remark!



Kinda political there, aren't ya?


----------



## Tootsie17

Lodpah said:


> Backlash from medi:
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11437872/harry-meghan-media-coronavirus/amp/
> https://www.cairnspost.com.au/sun-e...r/news-story/27908a622c54a7e65eee66d831f5f8c0


Well I guess that rumor about Meghan not being allowed to wear the tiara she wanted for her wedding is true. Oh the horror of it all!


----------



## doni

beautymagpie said:


> These texts to Thomas really are bordering on threatening. I don't know how anyone could read and think they were send with 100% kindness. They're totally typed through gritted teeth:
> 
> 'only we can help u' [really? how so? they've not proven themselves well at handling the media]
> 'as we have been trying from day 1 [read instead: because we know best - a now well known M&H state of mind]


It is all the more disturbing when you think they had never met in person, which is nothing short of bizarre actually.


----------



## beautymagpie

doni said:


> It is all the more disturbing when you think they had never met in person, which is nothing short of bizarre actually.



Yep. It all helps to sell a narrative (M to H) about a person if you don't meet them, and all you can go off of is what one specific person is telling you.


----------



## marietouchet

Got to thinking about this letter mess - cringe worthy not because anyone was so horrid (no one committed a crime - compare and contrast Andrew) , but because it airs painful issues in a family 
Yet the Queen says NOTHING personally, there is a mystery about her that is positive, I CHOOSE to think she is trying to reconcile all which would be impossible had she said something bland like she was not keen on things
I get the value of SILENCE AKA the stiff upper lip


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

H&M being being called out on Australian TV. So many people are disgusted with their antics.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> H&M being being called out on Australian TV. So many people are disgusted with their antics.



“..accidentally photographed”


----------



## rose60610

Global general public opinion about Markle is negative. She squandered her royal standing and turned it into a punch line.  Someone has to rescue Harry and knock some sense into him. Even so, he'll have years of image rehab work and always be considered the "royal gone rogue". I had high hopes for Meghan at the very beginning, now it's clear that she enjoys destroying everything she touches. I've seen this on a smaller scale with other people. It's as though when their life/career/relationship or whatever appears perfect in every way, they consciously or subconsciously MUST DO something to screw it up. Every time, it's always "something". They're not happy unless they've created a mess for themselves, then LOVE complaining about it, it's a weird compulsion. Meghan must be proud of herself to destroy a royal's relationship with his family, bring him to L.A. and make him drive somewhere to walk the dog for a pap blitz during a pandemic.  How demeaning can she get? And how stupid is Harry to go along with it? Harry has got to wise up, liberate himself and Archie, and let Meghan self-destruct. She is Hopeless and Vile.


----------



## Megs

I honestly don't know what these two expect as far as how people will feel about them with their antics. But I truly believe the leaving for California on a private plane, in the middle of a pandemic when Harry's own father was fighting coronavirus himself, was what did them in. 

The texts are so juvenile. I can't imagine 2 adults in the public eye like they are sending texts like this leading up to a massively televised event. How exactly did they think this was going to play out?!


----------



## imgg

I don't understand how Harry is okay with telling select "approved" media they had a conversation with the Queen on her birthday after the Queen asked everyone to keep that private.  It's time to disown, until he can find some sort of respect or decency.


----------



## marietouchet

imgg said:


> I don't understand how Harry is okay with telling select "approved" media they had a conversation with the Queen on her birthday after the Queen asked everyone to keep that private.


Yup WTMI , way too much info


----------



## ccbaggirl89

chowlover2 said:


> I think it's possible she lied and told him she was pregnant, then lost the child as the wedding approached. If he would have dumped her after a " miscarriage " he would have been labelled a cad.


This has always been our house theory - that she used that old trick to somehow trap him into staying with her. I don't know how it went down lol but I'd bet on the fact that she manufactured a false alarm in this relationship to hook him.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those yacht girl rumours...I wouldn't put it past MM, she would do just about anything to get what she wants. What I don't get is: if true, how could the BRF say yes to that marriage? They couldn't really trust everyone would keep quiet forever?


That is the major issue I’ve always had with those rumors, wouldn’t the BRF have vetted her beforehand?


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> That is the major issue I’ve always had with those rumors, wouldn’t the BRF have vetted her beforehand?


But what could the BRF have done? Forbid Harry to marry her? In this day and age, even the monarchy have to move on from arranged marriage etc. If they didn't approve, Harry would probably announce that he was leaving the monarchy and married her anyway. Marrying a girl who might have been a yacht-girl is not against the law and the BRF can't seek an injunction to stop him. 

For whatever the reason, he wanted to marry her so he did. He made his own bed now he needs to lie in it!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Megs said:


> I honestly don't know what these two expect as far as how people will feel about them with their antics. But I truly believe the leaving for California on a private plane, in the middle of a pandemic when Harry's own father was fighting coronavirus himself, was what did them in.
> 
> The texts are so juvenile. I can't imagine 2 adults in the public eye like they are sending texts like this leading up to a massively televised event. How exactly did they think this was going to play out?!



Quite agree with you *Megs*, the optics at any given point in time with these two grifters are increasingly insanely negative 

Am not quite sure why H&M has not read the memo: the only currency of interest is your connection with the BRF, the very force that you back-stabbed a few months ago - what have you achieved on your merit? Can’t even run a decent image rehab media campaign without shooting yourself in the foot and in the a&&

Also, the pics of MM with the angry/rage-filled facial expressions are downright spooky, swear she could be a poster child for an axe murderer series streaming now 

Thought MM was an actress? Ya’know like they keep their “real feelings” buried? 
♥️


----------



## youngster

I'm not a lawyer, so why isn't MM suing her five friends and People magazine?  Her friends are the ones who breached her privacy and spoke to People and People is the magazine that published their comments.  Why aren't the friends being named and asked to tell their version?  The 4 British tabloids just followed up on the whole thing. Her own father willingly gave the tabloids the letter that she wrote. The whole lawsuit seems ridiculous and frivolous right now.


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> I don't understand how Harry is okay with telling select "approved" media they had a conversation with the Queen on her birthday after the Queen asked everyone to keep that private.  It's time to disown, until he can find some sort of respect or decency.



It's because they saw it as a golden opportunity to promote themselves in a positive way and the Queen's wishes be damned. They are desperate to create their brand as wonderful, philanthropic ambassadors of all that is good! They want companies to not look closely at them and just write big fat checks to their "foundation."


----------



## bellecate

doni said:


> It is all the more disturbing when you think they had never met in person, which is nothing short of bizarre actually.





beautymagpie said:


> These texts to Thomas really are bordering on threatening. I don't know how anyone could read and think they were send with 100% kindness. They're totally typed through gritted teeth:
> 
> 'only we can help u' [really? how so? they've not proven themselves well at handling the media]
> 'as we have been trying from day 1 [read instead: because we know best - a now well known M&H state of mind]



The wordage is as if they are meant to be read at some later time to defend themselves and say they really tried.


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> The wordage is as if they are meant to be read at some later time to defend themselves and say they really tried.


I got the same impression.  It’s as tho’ they were covering their butts as they went.  Stating things that would already have been obvious to Thomas Markel, and establishing a time line of sorts.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> It's because they saw it as a golden opportunity to promote themselves in a positive way and the Queen's wishes be damned. They are desperate to create their brand as wonderful, philanthropic ambassadors of all that is good! They want companies to not look closely at them and just write big fat checks to their "foundation."


Just shows how far Harry has fallen.  Such a simple request from his Grandma, The Queen on her birthday.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Lodpah said:


> Wow, the journalist who broke the story on MM and JCMH relationship speaks up. She makes a lot of sense.



"U do not need to apologize, we...."
APOLOGIZE? 
With a "Z"?
A Brit wrote that?


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> "U do not need to apologize, we...."
> APOLOGIZE?
> With a "Z"?
> A Brit wrote that?



Naturally Meghan wrote it for him. She is the holder of his leash. The real question is, did she write it without Harry's knowledge or does she proofread all his texts and switched it to the American spelling?


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan and Harry undoubtedly both had major personality flaws before they met. As a couple they bring out the worst in each other and their personal weaknesses are exacerbated.


----------



## V0N1B2

I figured they just assumed they were the only people who ever heard of/downloaded the iFake text message app.
Wouldn't put it past her.


----------



## Sharont2305

V0N1B2 said:


> "U do not need to apologize, we...."
> APOLOGIZE?
> With a "Z"?
> A Brit wrote that?


Wow, well spotted.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> I figured they just assumed they were the only people who ever heard of/downloaded the iFake text message app.
> Wouldn't put it past her.



Good point. She's already shown there isn't much she wouldn't do.


----------



## tiktok

V0N1B2 said:


> "U do not need to apologize, we...."
> APOLOGIZE?
> With a "Z"?
> A Brit wrote that?



Well, to be fair, if it was her phone as reported, it is possible "apologise" was autocorrected to "apologize".


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> Just shows how far Harry has fallen.  Such a simple request from his Grandma, The Queen on her birthday.


Exactly this.  His 94 year old grandmother made an easy to follow request. Could M&H do as she asked?  Of course not.

Why? Because all their interactions are carefully calculated for their PR or merch potential. 
They don't even try to hide how craven they are.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> Exactly this.  His 94 year old grandmother made an easy to follow request. Could M&H do as she asked?  Of course not.
> 
> Why? Because all their interactions are carefully calculated for their PR or merch potential.
> They don't even try to hide how craven they are.


maybe I'm giving her too much credit but I picture her telling harry what they are going to do and him just agreeing


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm giving her too much credit but I picture her telling harry what they are going to do and him just agreeing


That's the way I'm seeing it now too; who would have ever thought we would see a (*worse*) repeat of Wallis & Edward?!?!


----------



## Madrose

Elle USA May 2020


----------



## Clearblueskies

Emeline said:


> Exactly this.  His 94 year old grandmother made an easy to follow request. Could M&H do as she asked?  Of course not.
> 
> Why? Because all their interactions are carefully calculated for their PR or merch potential.
> They don't even try to hide how craven they are.


Perhaps Elizabeth should sue Meghan for breaching her privacy?


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> I figured they just assumed they were the only people who ever heard of/downloaded the iFake text message app.
> Wouldn't put it past her.



 I didn't know that, sounds like her though.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CeeJay said:


> That is the major issue I’ve always had with those rumors, wouldn’t the BRF have vetted her beforehand?


I'm sure they did, but H&M probably said they'd run off and elope and leave the BRF with a huge scandal. H was determined to marry her, so what can you do. They tried to accept her and ... here we are


----------



## bag-mania

They are trying soooooo hard to be popular. Here is their daily _People_ magazine story which tells us they are home doing nothing. Yet they feel it is important we know they are doing nothing in exactly the right way, like Zoom chatting with charity workers. Hooray for them! 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Isolating in New Home with Archie: 'They Haven't Had Any Visitors'*

“They spend their evenings at home as a family," a source tells PEOPLE of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have now made a trio of deliveries for Project Angel Food, a non-profit charity in Los Angeles that cooks, prepares and delivers meals to people living with critical illnesses who are at greater risk during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Their visits on Easter (and again on April 15 and 17) marked the first time the Duke and Duchess have been spotted since their move to L.A. from Canada in March after announcing their departure from royal life.

Isolating in their new home with their son, Archie, who turns 1 on May 6, “they only leave their house for charity work,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue.

“They spend their evenings at home as a family. They haven’t had any visitors,” the source adds.

Meghan recently led a Zoom call with the women of the Hubb Community Kitchen, with whom she collaborated for a charity cookbook in 2018, and Harry video-chatted with parents and others involved with one of his longstanding charities, WellChild, which provides care for ill children in the U.K.

Day-to-day life is all about “morale,” Harry said during the candid call. “If morale is up, if you wake up in the morning and go, ‘Right, new day, got my whole family here, what are we going to do?’ Of course, there’s that fear of what might happen, but there’s so much that’s out of our control, and all of a sudden we’ve realized how small we are in the grand scheme of things.”

https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ome-with-archie-they-havent-had-any-visitors/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

It just occurred to me as I was looking at my sreen, I haven't seen stories or ads lately touting how one can buy whatever Meghan has been wearing.  Maybe her "stock" is devaluating


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Day-to-day life is all about “morale,” Harry said during the candid call. “If morale is up, if you wake up in the morning and go, ‘Right, new day, got my whole family here, what are we going to do?’ Of course, there’s that fear of what might happen, but there’s so much that’s out of our control, *and all of a sudden we’ve realized how small we are in the grand scheme of things*.”


"all of a sudden"??? .. GET USED TO IT!!!  You two were, are and will forever be .. SMALL!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> "all of a sudden"??? .. GET USED TO IT!!!  You two were, are and will forever be .. SMALL!



And shrinking a little bit every day. Their popularity in the media is skewed by those of us who don't like them but still Google them to see what the hell they are doing. It makes it look like they have more fans than they do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

“What they don’t like is the critical coverage of their hypocrisy.”
Bingo.

Elle’s article exposes the farce of Royalty.  Surprisingly it even mentions SoHo House, the place known for its depravity and debauchery. Rumors are that H&M have enjoyed good times there, especially with Markus Anderson (?). Who knows if we will ever know what really goes on. Years ago someone said the royal system depends on mystique. Pull back the curtain and we all see the ‘royals’ are just like us except they get away with stuff we can’t. 

What I don’t get is why the BRF was willing to spend lavishly on H’s wedding.  The idea that he is special because of his mother was wearing thin even back then. Now, with his incessant complaining and ill-conceived antics, it is completely gone. His story reads more and more like Wallis and Edward’s —
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...-morton-wallis-simpson-life-after-abdication/

https://www.vogue.com/article/what-happened-when-king-edward-viii-quit-the-royal-family




Madrose said:


> Elle USA May 2020
> View attachment 4715014
> View attachment 4715015
> View attachment 4715016


----------



## Katel

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This has always been our house theory - that she used that old trick to somehow trap him into staying with her. I don't know how it went down lol but I'd bet on the fact that she manufactured a false alarm in this relationship to hook him.



If he felt he was tricked, I’d have thought he’d be angry and looking for a way out before leaving the BRF?  Perhaps she’s done something even more devious and subtle with him.


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> “What they don’t like is the critical coverage of their hypocrisy.”
> Bingo.
> 
> Elle’s article exposes the farce of Royalty.  Surprisingly it even mentions SoHo House, the place known for its depravity and debauchery. Rumors are that H&M have enjoyed good times there, especially with Markus Anderson (?). Who knows if we will ever know what really goes on. Years ago someone said the royal system depends on mystique. Pull back the curtain and we all see the ‘royals’ are just like us except they get away with stuff we can’t.
> 
> What I don’t get is why the BRF was willing to spend lavishly on H’s wedding.  The idea that he is special because of his mother was wearing thin even back then. Now, with his incessant complaining and ill-conceived antics, it is completely gone. His story reads more and more like Wallis and Edward’s —
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...-morton-wallis-simpson-life-after-abdication/
> 
> https://www.vogue.com/article/what-happened-when-king-edward-viii-quit-the-royal-family



Can you imagine the cries of racism and discrimination if the BRF didn’t spend lavishly on the wedding?


----------



## Sharont2305

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm sure they did, but H&M probably said they'd run off and elope and leave the BRF with a huge scandal. H was determined to marry her, so what can you do. They tried to accept her and ... here we are[emoji2]


But they did accept her, but she threw it back in their faces when she realised she was only ever going to be a small cog in a big wheel


----------



## scarlet555

tiktok said:


> Can you imagine the cries of racism and discrimination if the BRF didn’t spend lavishly on the wedding?



Irregardless, she has shown the world:  she did not deserve this lavish wedding, in that church, nor to be walked by Prince Charles: the only thing she deserved: the ill fitted custom wedding dress.


----------



## kemilia

chicinthecity777 said:


> But what could the BRF have done? Forbid Harry to marry her? In this day and age, even the monarchy have to move on from arranged marriage etc. If they didn't approve, Harry would probably announce that he was leaving the monarchy and married her anyway. Marrying a girl who might have been a yacht-girl is not against the law and the BRF can't seek an injunction to stop him.
> 
> For whatever the reason, he wanted to marry her so he did. He made his own bed now he needs to lie in it!


I kinda doubt she would have married him if he said "I'm leaving you all!" She would have had no mega millions wedding, a royal title, etc. That's pretty much all he had going for himself, and she wanted IT. And maybe he knew that too. Yacht girl (hee hee).


----------



## Anna Rose

bellecate said:


> I didn't know that, sounds like her though.


The feeling I got when I read those texts was that Meghan wrote them saying she was Harry in an effort to get her father to answer her phone calls so that she could further manipulate him.


----------



## kemilia

scarlet555 said:


> Irregardless, she has shown the world:  she did not deserve this lavish wedding, in that church, nor to be walked by Prince Charles: the only thing she deserved: the ill fitted custom wedding dress.


I still remember the air-fresheners she wanted used in the church--a chapel at Windsor Castle, for cripes sake! It has seen centuries of history!!

That is maybe the first inkling I had that this Suits chick was gonna be trouble ,,, nope, it was the engagement interview where she talked over H constantly. I was so embarrassed since she was coming off as a loud, mouthy "I know everything!!" American.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Once and for all I want to know which tiara she threw a tantrum over????


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> They are trying soooooo hard to be popular. Here is their daily _People_ magazine story which tells us they are home doing nothing. Yet they feel it is important we know they are doing nothing in exactly the right way, like Zoom chatting with charity workers. Hooray for them!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Isolating in New Home with Archie: 'They Haven't Had Any Visitors'*
> 
> “They spend their evenings at home as a family," a source tells PEOPLE of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have now made a trio of deliveries for Project Angel Food, a non-profit charity in Los Angeles that cooks, prepares and delivers meals to people living with critical illnesses who are at greater risk during the COVID-19 pandemic.
> 
> Their visits on Easter (and again on April 15 and 17) marked the first time the Duke and Duchess have been spotted since their move to L.A. from Canada in March after announcing their departure from royal life.
> 
> Isolating in their new home with their son, Archie, who turns 1 on May 6, “they only leave their house for charity work,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue.
> 
> “They spend their evenings at home as a family. They haven’t had any visitors,” the source adds.
> 
> Meghan recently led a Zoom call with the women of the Hubb Community Kitchen, with whom she collaborated for a charity cookbook in 2018, and Harry video-chatted with parents and others involved with one of his longstanding charities, WellChild, which provides care for ill children in the U.K.
> 
> Day-to-day life is all about “morale,” Harry said during the candid call. “If morale is up, if you wake up in the morning and go, ‘Right, new day, got my whole family here, what are we going to do?’ Of course, there’s that fear of what might happen, but there’s so much that’s out of our control, and all of a sudden we’ve realized how small we are in the grand scheme of things.”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ome-with-archie-they-havent-had-any-visitors/



  Ya, no!   These two are so nauseating. And arrogant, to think people are so stupid to fall for their spiel.


----------



## TC1

So interesting to me that Harry saw no value in staying a BRF member and was disgusted by his position of "handing out prizes" Ummm. your WIFE has you followed by paps to HAND OUT food for a CHARITY.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I was so embarrassed since she was coming off as a loud, mouthy "I know everything!!" American.



I know. She personifies the worst stereotype of the ugly American. She does not represent us!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I really hope it's the tiara Princess Eugenie wore on her wedding day, since I'm quite sure Meghan considers her beneath her.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Cavalier Girl said:


> I really hope it's the tiara Princess Eugenie wore on her wedding day, since I'm quite sure Meghan considers her beneath her.


That’s what I thought....possibly Eugenie asked first....nothing to throw a fit over


----------



## chicinthecity777

kemilia said:


> I kinda doubt she would have married him if he said "I'm leaving you all!" She would have had no mega millions wedding, a royal title, etc. That's pretty much all he had going for himself, and she wanted IT. And maybe he knew that too. Yacht girl (hee hee).


Highly likely the case, yes! She would wanted the full royal package she thought she deserved until she didn't get what she wanted (and didn't deserve it) and threw a fit. 

MM just need to remember this, history has proved social climbers don't end up well when they denounce the people who can help the climbing! She will never be recognised as truly part of the family the way she's behaving! Take a leaf from Kate's book, she might had a chance!


----------



## justwatchin

I’m surprised they haven’t made their own YouTube channel. It could start as a fundraiser (for themselves) and when that doesn’t make enough they can post videos of:

Harry or H (whatever she is calling him now) doing her makeup
In the kitchen making avocado toast
M walking around with a shaky phone talking about being a mom
Harry tossing balls (real ones not his own since they’ve been removed) to the dogs (if they weren’t left in Canada)


----------



## 1LV

justwatchin said:


> I’m surprised they haven’t made their own YouTube channel. It could start as a fundraiser (for themselves) and when that doesn’t make enough they can post videos of:
> 
> Harry or H (whatever she is calling him now) doing her makeup
> In the kitchen making avocado toast
> M walking around with a shaky phone talking about being a mom
> Harry tossing balls (real ones not his own since they’ve been removed) to the dogs (if they weren’t left in Canada)


I’m shaking!  This is hilarious!!


----------



## Tootsie17

Cavalier Girl said:


> I really hope it's the tiara Princess Eugenie wore on her wedding day, since I'm quite sure Meghan considers her beneath her.


I believe you are correct.  I read that it was a tiara with large emeralds. It really shouldn't have been a big deal since there were so many beautiful tiaras to choose from. Meghan didn't get what she wanted that time. Score one for the Queen or Eugenie.


----------



## PewPew

youngster said:


> I'm not a lawyer, so *why isn't MM suing her five friends and People magazine*?  Her friends are the ones who breached her privacy and spoke to People and People is the magazine that published their comments.  Why aren't the friends being named and asked to tell their version?  The 4 British tabloids just followed up on the whole thing. Her own father willingly gave the tabloids the letter that she wrote. The whole lawsuit seems ridiculous and frivolous right now.



We might see it, since the Sparkles are biting at everything like baby snakes. But you don’t want People magazine against you if you’re trying to be a mega celeb. Legally going after her “friends” could also open up a can of worms. We don’t know if the 5 friends signed non-disclosure agreements, and they’ll know more damning things. In H&M’s arrogance, they don’t cover their tracks well because they always expect people to be in awe of them, like their PR narrrative is always people are wowed by a 5 second interaction with  “Just call me Harry” or seeing Meghan pull her face mask off to reveal her greatness (ugh they broke so many health guidelines with their charity pap stoll & single shared glove etc).

Given how impulsively and unintelligently they have spoken, for example in Zoom chats & the “Greta” interview, I think other “friends” will have plenty of stories to tell if H&Z go scorched earth through their contacts.


----------



## rose60610

kemilia said:


> I kinda doubt she would have married him if he said "I'm leaving you all!" She would have had no mega millions wedding, a royal title, etc. That's pretty much all he had going for himself, and she wanted IT. And maybe he knew that too. Yacht girl (hee hee).



At first I agreed, but then figured they were both in cahoots from the get go. Harry knew full well the huuuuuge wedding that would come, and M's title, and they figured the wedding, PR coverage for as long as it lasted, Frogmore and all the other royal trappings would goose their image for future ventures. M did register companies in the U.S. when Archie was in the oven or even before. As far as I'm concerned, M is much more than a yacht girl, she's an opportunist wh*re, played her cards better than a Vegas champ, and is likely currently in meltdown over the virus taking attention away from HER. I was also going to add that she's worried about her negative image, but she's such a narcissist that it might not register to her. But I'll give to her, she landed the grandson of QEII and played his demented head like putty in her hands. 

As for tiaras, aren't there enough to go around in the BRF? I wouldn't be surprised if M insisted on The Queen's coronation crown, then begrudgingly settled for Charles walking her down the aisle.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> We might see it, since the Sparkles are biting at everything like baby snakes. But you don’t want People magazine against you if you’re trying to be a mega celeb. Legally going after her “friends” could also open up a can of worms. We don’t know if the 5 friends signed non-disclosure agreements, and they’ll know more damning things. In H&M’s arrogance, they don’t cover their tracks well because they always expect people to be in awe of them, like their PR narrrative is always people are wowed by a 5 second interaction with  “Just call me Harry” or seeing Meghan pull her face mask off to reveal her greatness (ugh they broke so many health guidelines with their charity pap stoll & single shared glove etc).
> 
> Given how impulsively and unintelligently they have spoken, for example in Zoom chats & the “Greta” interview, I think other “friends” will have plenty of stories to tell if H&Z go scorched earth through their contacts.


I thought everything the "friends" or sources leaked was stuff Meghan wanted them to tell


----------



## V0N1B2

Tootsie17 said:


> I believe you are correct.  I read that it was a tiara with large emeralds. It really shouldn't have been a big deal since there were so many beautiful tiaras to choose from. Meghan didn't get what she wanted that time. Score one for the Queen or Eugenie.


Well, isn’t that why Petty Betty erm, I mean one-glove-meghan decided to “announce” her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding? What better way for a 37 year old emotionally secure woman married into Royalty to deliver the ultimate (in her mind) clap back to her husband’s cousin. lawd.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As the facts spill out and the ‘critical coverage’ increases, H&M will look more and more hypocritical.
Serena has already bailed on them. 



sdkitty said:


> I thought everything the "friends" or sources leaked was stuff Meghan wanted them to tell


----------



## melissatrv

Mrs.Z said:


> Once and for all I want to know which tiara she threw a tantrum over????



I hope it was the one Eugenie ended up wearing, LOL

Edit:  Someone posted this already.  To add, I wonder if it was not even one of the Queen's tiaras but the Spencer tiara?  She would have relished in the Diana comparisons so I would not be surprised.


----------



## melissatrv

I agree she very calculating and smart in a resourceful sort of way.  I am sure she has already consulted a team of lawyers to ensure she has a cushy landing when the inevitable divorce ensues.  And probably even making plans to have custody of Archie in the US.   Would not be surprised if she convinced Harry to give up his citizenship in the UK for US to facilitate this.   Even if does not happen for years she is well into the strategic planning phase for a 5+ year plan.  Plus I see her having another baby born in the US as both part of that plan and to rekindle the media attention. 




rose60610 said:


> At first I agreed, but then figured they were both in cahoots from the get go. Harry knew full well the huuuuuge wedding that would come, and M's title, and they figured the wedding, PR coverage for as long as it lasted, Frogmore and all the other royal trappings would goose their image for future ventures. M did register companies in the U.S. when Archie was in the oven or even before. As far as I'm concerned, M is much more than a yacht girl, she's an opportunist wh*re, played her cards better than a Vegas champ, and is likely currently in meltdown over the virus taking attention away from HER. I was also going to add that she's worried about her negative image, but she's such a narcissist that it might not register to her. But I'll give to her, she landed the grandson of QEII and played his demented head like putty in her hands.
> 
> As for tiaras, aren't there enough to go around in the BRF? I wouldn't be surprised if M insisted on The Queen's coronation crown, then begrudgingly settled for Charles walking her down the aisle.


----------



## melissatrv

Anyone ever see that Sex and the City episode where Trey's mother manipulated him to agree with her with a certain touch on the arm.  Charlotte observed this and used the same tactic to get Trey to agree to marry with an "alrighty then".   Megan was obviously paying attention to this episode.  Watch about 38 seconds in


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

bellecate said:


> The wordage is as if they are meant to be read at some later time to defend themselves and say they really tried.


Exactly my thoughts- the dates of these texts are a few days before the wedding - and it’s almost a last minute “oh sh&t! “ he’s really not going to come - if you recall- they were engaged for 6 months before they tied the knot- yes- I do believe it sounds like a last- ditch effort - or a last ditch effort before they could cut him off- knowing that their hands were forced ...so sad for her Dad- he still seems incredibly hurt - and perhaps a little shocked at his daughter’s behavior ??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

melissatrv said:


> Anyone ever see that Sex and the City episode where Trey's mother manipulated him to agree with her with a certain touch on the arm.  Charlotte observed this and used the same tactic to get Trey to agree to marry with an "alrighty then".   Megan was obviously paying attention to this episode.  Watch about 38 seconds in



And we all know how that marriage turned out


----------



## mdcx

I would be nervous if I was one of the five "friends" who spoke to People mag.
M seems like she has no hesitation at selling out whoever whenever in order to get ahead.
If she had to throw one of them in the deep end and claim that they spoke to People mag without her permission and lied, she would.


----------



## Madrose

V0N1B2 said:


> Well, isn’t that why Petty Betty erm, I mean one-glove-meghan decided to “announce” her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding? What better way for a 37 year old emWhoaotionally secure woman married into Royalty to deliver the ultimate (in her mind) clap back to her husband’s cousin. lawd.



I came into this thread after Megxit, is this true?  Did she really do that?  Was it a palace announcement?  I'd think not.


----------



## PewPew

Madrose said:


> I came into this thread after Megxit, is this true?  Did she really do that?  Was it a palace announcement?  I'd think not.



At Eugenie’s wedding, Meghan was dramatically cupping her flat belly throughout the wedding festivities (walking into the church in front of the press, afterwards, and at the reception etc), all when she knew she’d be photographed. Her dress also made her seem farther along than she really was. The wedding was early October 2018 & Archie was born May 2019.

Friends said Eugenie & Fergie were disappointed that Meghan had just had a massive wedding & was upstaging Harry’s cousin with her choice of attire & this early-pregnancy cupping show. (“This is what celebs do for attention, not royals, etc”.) Then H&M said they were “forced” to announce the pregnancy early due to the media...which of course, was fueled by her behavior. (Kate’s pregnancies were also revealed early, but that’s because she was hospitalized with hyperemesis.)

I didn’t follow H&M back then & gave her the benefit of the doubt as someone just excited to be a mom. I changed my mind totally after seeing Meghan going in public with splayed hands to show she wasn’t wearing her wedding rings while being cross with QE2 during Megxit. M is very press-savvy & knows what she’s doing... She also made a point of hugging people in front of cameras after QE2 said no handshakes due to Covid, & Meghan’s “friends” told media she left because the BRF were cold and didn’t hug.


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> That's the way I'm seeing it now too; who would have ever thought we would see a (*worse*) repeat of Wallis & Edward?!?!


I was thinking the same thing. The Queen must be yearning for the days of Wallis & David. And Wallis stayed with David til the end.


----------



## Sharont2305

melissatrv said:


> I hope it was the one Eugenie ended up wearing, LOL
> 
> Edit:  Someone posted this already.  To add, I wonder if it was not even one of the Queen's tiaras but the Spencer tiara?  She would have relished in the Diana comparisons so I would not be surprised.


The Queen wouldn't have a say in the Spencer tiara, it belongs to the Spencer family. Only Spencer women wear it, Diana and her 2 sisters wore it, as did the sisters daughters. The only non Spencer who wore it on her wedding day was Victoria, Charles Spencers first wife, only because Charles was heir and she would've been Countess one day.
I wonder if Charlotte would be allowed to wear it or she is to far away relative wise to be considered a Spencer? Mind you, the choices she will have will be immense. Lucky girl.

ETA, I do agree that Meghan would have wanted the  Spencer tiara for exactly the reason you said.


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> M is very press-savvy & knows what she’s doing... She also made a point of hugging people in front of cameras after QE2 said no handshakes due to Covid, & Meghan’s “friends” told media she left because the BRF were cold and didn’t hug.


I don't think she's media savvy at all, quite the opposite. Her actions are all driven by attention seeking and it's beyond obvious! Anybody with a bit of brain would see through it. If she really knew what she was doing the public opinion wouldn't be so against them now! She only _*thinks*_ she's clever but that's what narcissists do while in reality she's making a fool of both of them!
I was indifferent towards them before the wedding and my opinion of them has since gone massively downhill. Just look at where they are with the media now! Does it look like they/she managed it well? People magazine is practically on their pay roll so that doesn't count and we all know that.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think she's media savvy at all, quite the opposite. Her actions are all driven by attention seeking and it's beyond obvious! Anybody with a bit of brain would see through it. If she really knew what she was doing the public opinion wouldn't be so against them now! She only _*thinks*_ she's clever but that's what narcissists do while in reality she's making a fool of both of them!
> I was indifferent towards them before the wedding and my opinion of them has since gone massively downhill. Just look at where they are with the media now! Does it look like they/she managed it well? People magazine is practically on their pay roll so that doesn't count and we all know that.


I don’t think she’s media savvy either.  They were riding on a huge (global!) crest of popularity at the time of the wedding and have turned themselves into a controversial and isolated laughing stock.  It’s hard to think how that could be achieved in so short a space of time.  And now they’ve even got money worries as well.  Every step has been a misstep.


----------



## PewPew

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think she's media savvy at all, quite the opposite. Her actions are all driven by attention seeking and it's beyond obvious! Anybody with a bit of brain would see through it. If she really knew what she was doing the public opinion wouldn't be so against them now! She only _*thinks*_ she's clever but that's what narcissists do while in reality she's making a fool of both of them!.



You make a great distinction. Meghan is NOT media savvy in a global sense— she’s too short-sighted and peevish, which was reflected in the Sussex Royals statements.  She approached royal life & the media as a celebrity would— *savvy only in the sense that she knew what will get immediate attention*, which is high-currency in Hollywood. She knew keeping her hand on her abdomen throughout a function would get press speculation, just as she knows her outfits will be chronicled in detail. But she doesn’t think long-term, even in terms of the Hollywood stuff. She patterned whole ensembles including accessories after Diana (and Angelina Jolie) numerous times. At first it was an “inspired” tribute, and then it became hella creepy. Then when coverage turns on her, she lashes out in counterproductive fashion.

I wonder if both Harry & Meghan overestimated her ability to navigate the media since she was an actress for 15 yrs & had worked intensely with PR people for her brand and lifetime blog. Being an actress might actually be part of the problem— coming from “Hollywood” (acting, but also growing up on the set of Married with Children), she had a tremendous sense of self-importance that contributes to tone-deaf behavior. Right now we’re seeing so many celebs from A to Z list making one-deaf statements during their quarantine “look at me!” efforts. It must be really hard to keep perspective if that’s been your life & mindset for decades.


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> You make a great distinction. Meghan is NOT media savvy in a global sense— she’s too short-sighted and peevish, which was reflected in the Sussex Royals statements.  She approached royal life & the media as a celebrity would— savvy only in the sense that she knew what will get immediate attention, which is high-currency in Hollywood. She knew keeping her hand on her abdomen throughout a function would get press speculation, just as she knows her outfits will be chronicled in detail. But she doesn’t think long-term, even in terms of the Hollywood stuff. She patterned whole ensembles including accessories after Diana (and Angelina Jolie) numerous times. At first it was an “inspired” tribute, and then it became hella creepy. Then when coverage turns on her, she lashes out in counterproductive fashion.


Her actions screams attention seeking and her so-called good deeds are all PR stunts. Sooner or later (in her case it's already the case) people won't fall for it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think if money doesn't start to roll in she will go the "real housewife" route but will anybody want to watch it? I suppose train wreck TV is somewhat compulsory viewing...


----------



## PewPew

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think if money doesn't start to roll in she will go the "real housewife" route but will anybody want to watch it?



Piers Morgan & Obie, so between them we’ll get every possible human reaction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> The Queen wouldn't have a say in the Spencer tiara, it belongs to the Spencer family. Only Spencer women wear it, Diana and her 2 sisters wore it, as did the sisters daughters. The only non Spencer who wore it on her wedding day was Victoria, Charles Spencers first wife, only because Charles was heir and she would've been Countess one day.
> I wonder if Charlotte would be allowed to wear it or she is to far away relative wise to be considered a Spencer? Mind you, the choices she will have will be immense. Lucky girl.
> 
> ETA, I do agree that Meghan would have wanted the  Spencer tiara for exactly the reason you said.



I am an avid jewelry fan, and as far as I know, with tiaras it works like this: you wear a family tiara for your wedding, and if you don't have one (like Victoria, whose family is no member of the peerage...or Fergie, who received one as a wedding present, or Kate, who borrowed a tiara that had belonged to Queen Mum) you wear your husband's family tiara. Charlotte would wear something coming from William's side of the family because patriarchy.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am an avid jewelry fan, and as far as I know, with tiaras it works like this: you wear a family tiara for your wedding, and if you don't have one (like Victoria, whose family is no member of the peerage...or Fergie, who received one as a wedding present, or Kate, who borrowed a tiara that had belonged to Queen Mum) you wear your husband's family tiara. Charlotte would wear something coming from William's side of the family because patriarchy.


So, in that case, the Spencer tiara was a definite no no. Bet she tried though?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> So, in that case, the Spencer tiara was a definite no no. Bet she tried though?


Oh, I’d bet my house she did


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Diamondbirdie

I read the tiara M wanted was one with emeralds in it, but the “provenance” of the stones wasn’t certain (the article said they might be Russian). Thus the Queen didn’t want it worn in public. Although if you search online there are several emerald tiaras in the Queen’s collection, and she has worn some of them herself.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Diamondbirdie said:


> I read the tiara M wanted was one with emeralds in it, but the “provenance” of the stones wasn’t certain (the article said they might be Russian). Thus the Queen didn’t want it worn in public. Although if you search online there are several emerald tiaras in the Queen’s collection, and she has worn some of them herself.


That's what I heard. But honestly who did she think she was to demand/pick and choose from the royal collection of tiaras?


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's what I heard. But honestly who did she think she was to demand/pick and choose from the royal collection of tiaras?


As an add on, it took 2 years before Catherine was allowed to borrow another tiara.


----------



## beautymagpie

tiktok said:


> Can you imagine the cries of racism and discrimination if the BRF didn’t spend lavishly on the wedding?



The backlash would have been crazy, and played into what we now know is her MO (poor me, sad face). 

The BRF are terrified of the Diana effect too. As the youngest son, the media would have gone mad about how Diana would feel etc etc. They did the only thing they could really, let them have their day and let them reveal themselves later.


----------



## beautymagpie

kemilia said:


> I still remember the air-fresheners she wanted used in the church--a chapel at Windsor Castle, for cripes sake! It has seen centuries of history!!
> 
> That is maybe the first inkling I had that this Suits chick was gonna be trouble ,,, nope, it was the engagement interview where she talked over H constantly. I was so embarrassed since she was coming off as a loud, mouthy "I know everything!!" American.


 I didn't know that about the air fresheners, crazy.

I think that kind of thing is also why they were denied Frogmore House and given the cottage. One has a history that should remain goes and goes beyond their desires for a yoga studio, the other didn't matter as much.


----------



## mdcx

Regards tiaras, I would think the protocol is that you wait to be asked “would you like to wear x piece for your wedding?” etc.
If you wait and never get asked, that’s a bit of a message.
M asking outright, and for a particular tiara it seems, that really would not have gone down well. Kate would have been well-trained to know that was not how things were done.
But M had all the protocol advisors at her fingertips and chose to ignore them.


----------



## carmen56

Just wondering what H and M are planning to upstage Prince Louis birthday and photos.  Will they even call or Skype to wish him a happy birthday?


----------



## Genie27

carmen56 said:


> Just wondering what H and M are planning to upstage Prince Louis birthday and photos.  Will they even call or Skype to wish him a happy birthday?


“Happy birthday Louis” insta post with stock photo of b’day cake with a #2 candle? 

Release PR statement of their secret Zoom call to wish the tyke?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Genie27 said:


> “Happy birthday Louis” insta post with stock photo of b’day cake with a #2 candle?
> 
> Release PR statement of their secret Zoom call to wish the tyke?



I bet that in their transcript, Louis will confess his frustrations over George getting better attention as a future king than he does simply as the little brother and then Harry encourages him to move to America.


----------



## LizzieBennett

mdcx said:


> Regards tiaras, I would think the protocol is that you wait to be asked “would you like to wear x piece for your wedding?” etc.
> If you wait and never get asked, that’s a bit of a message.
> M asking outright, and for a particular tiara it seems, that really would not have gone down well. Kate would have been well-trained to know that was not how things were done.
> But M had all the protocol advisors at her fingertips and chose to ignore them.


Seems like you would just instinctively know that you don’t ask outright for a tiara.  I can’t imagine being that bold.  It’s so rude! Do you really need to be advised on protocols to know you shouldn’t do that?


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> That is the major issue I’ve always had with those rumors, wouldn’t the BRF have vetted her beforehand?


Yes, but ...  Harry could have done a Caroline of Monaco tantrum ...
CoM was like 20 years old when she met Philippe Junot - occupation = playboy , 18 years her senior, it was said Rainier agreed to the marriage only because CoM threatened to go off and live with him unwed - scandal at the time, the marriage lasted 2 years and the reasons for the divorce were not flattering to Junot - emotional distress or something along those lines
What did Machiavelli say - keep your friends close and your enemies closer.. So, at some point Buck House might have saidf it is better the have her here and under supervision
Dunno , good story though


----------



## marietouchet

LibbyRuth said:


> I bet that in their transcript, Louis will confess his frustrations over George getting better attention as a future king than he does simply as the little brother and then Harry encourages him to move to America.


Yes, and someone needs to put out a press release explaining the meaning of every color in his  adorable rainbow
Sometimes things are just rainbows - cute, not political statements


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Yes, but ...  Harry could have done a Caroline of Monaco tantrum ...
> CoM was like 20 years old when she met Philippe Junot - occupation = playboy , 18 years her senior, it was said Rainier agreed to the marriage only because CoM threatened to go off and live with him unwed - scandal at the time, the marriage lasted 2 years and the reasons for the divorce were not flattering to Junot - emotional distress or something along those lines
> What did Machiavelli say - keep your friends close and your enemies closer.. So, at some point Buck House might have saidf it is better the have her here and under supervision
> Dunno , good story though


And actually, now that I think of it ... Harry was accorded extraordinary privileges for M - they lived together at Kensington Palace openly and she got to go to Christmas services with the Queen
Eugenie's husband was not given those privileges, OK, I am sure he visited E at St James a lot, but he did NOT officially live there or go to church - Ditto for Edoardo
It was as if Buck Hosue had deliberately decided to keep M closer


----------



## lanasyogamama

One would wonder how Miss “I don’t  know much about the RF. Are they nice?” happen to know exactly which tiara they had to have.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> And actually, now that I think of it ... Harry was accorded extraordinary privileges for M - they lived together at Kensington Palace openly and she got to go to Christmas services with the Queen
> Eugenie's husband was not given those privileges, OK, I am sure he visited E at St James a lot, but he did NOT officially live there or go to church - Ditto for Edoardo
> It was as if Buck Hosue had deliberately decided to keep M closer


Edoardo was at church in Sandringham on Christmas Day....but we can't forget that Meghan was the first fiancee to attend, can we? Not even Catherine got that treatment. [emoji16]
View attachment 4715430


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> I would consider her complaints about the media totally valid.... if she didn't keep putting herself out there in the public eye time and time again, feeding the beast. You don't get to have it both ways, lady*! I don't know about Lady Diana, but I highly doubt that woman was calling up the paps... she was genuinely harangued despite her steps to remove herself from the situation*.



I thought it was well known that Diana arranged for the press to see her doing things all the time.



bag-mania said:


> A writer for _Vanity Fair_ claims that Harry comes off looking good from those texts. Proof that looking good is in the eye of the beholder.



It seems to me that every article in VF is cloying and gushing favorably about HM.


----------



## 1LV

mdcx said:


> I would be nervous if I was one of the five "friends" who spoke to People mag.
> M seems like she has no hesitation at selling out whoever whenever in order to get ahead.
> If she had to throw one of them in the deep end and claim that they spoke to People mag without her permission and lied, she would.


I wholeheartedly agree with you.  Unless she had a hand in the whole thing.  I’m inclined to believe she knew about the plan for her friends to speak out, and possibly orchestrated it.


----------



## Mrs.Z

lulilu said:


> I thought it was well known that Diana arranged for the press to see her doing things all the time.
> 
> 
> 
> It seems to me that every article in VF is cloying and gushing favorably about HM.



Yes, well known that Diana had a relationship with and used the press.


----------



## Mendocino

Diamondbirdie said:


> I read the tiara M wanted was one with emeralds in it, but the “provenance” of the stones wasn’t certain (the article said they might be Russian). Thus the Queen didn’t want it worn in public. Although if you search online there are several emerald tiaras in the Queen’s collection, and she has worn some of them herself.



I read this as well. Provenance is a very important aspect of artwork or jewelry. I remember seeing a Helen Mirren movie that dealt with this issue, "The Woman in Gold", I think it was called.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> You make a great distinction. Meghan is NOT media savvy in a global sense— she’s too short-sighted and peevish, which was reflected in the Sussex Royals statements.  She approached royal life & the media as a celebrity would— *savvy only in the sense that she knew what will get immediate attention*, which is high-currency in Hollywood. She knew keeping her hand on her abdomen throughout a function would get press speculation, just as she knows her outfits will be chronicled in detail. But she doesn’t think long-term, even in terms of the Hollywood stuff. She patterned whole ensembles including accessories after Diana (and Angelina Jolie) numerous times. At first it was an “inspired” tribute, and then it became hella creepy. Then when coverage turns on her, she lashes out in counterproductive fashion.
> 
> I wonder if both Harry & Meghan overestimated her ability to navigate the media since she was an actress for 15 yrs & had worked intensely with PR people for her brand and lifetime blog. Being an actress might actually be part of the problem— coming from “Hollywood” (acting, but also growing up on the set of Married with Children), she had a tremendous sense of self-importance that contributes to tone-deaf behavior. Right now we’re seeing so many celebs from A to Z list making one-deaf statements during their quarantine “look at me!” efforts. It must be really hard to keep perspective if that’s been your life & mindset for decades.


speaking of Married with children, wonder what  Ed O'Neil would have to say about "M" (in private)


----------



## Madrose

Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, well known that Diana had a relationship with and used the press.





lulilu said:


> I thought it was well known that Diana arranged for the press to see her doing things all the time.



Diana had massive press interest from the start.  I don't believe she used the press from the beginning.  Am I mistaken?


----------



## sdkitty

Diamondbirdie said:


> I read the tiara M wanted was one with emeralds in it, but the “provenance” of the stones wasn’t certain (the article said they might be Russian). Thus the Queen didn’t want it worn in public. Although if you search online there are several emerald tiaras in the Queen’s collection, and she has worn some of them herself.


Interesting that she claimed to not know much about Harry before they met but she knew about the various tairas?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Madrose said:


> Diana had massive press interest from the start.  I don't believe she used the press from the beginning.  Am I mistaken?


I don’t know about the beginning, seems more like later as things really began to fall apart and she wanted her voice heard.  

There was some kind of pro-Meghan propaganda show on last night that I watched for about four minutes before changing the channel.  They were speaking about Diana using the press and it was also discussed in the Elle piece posted a few pages back.  This TV program last night was unreal, two People mag editors basically reading pro Meghan sound bites that were so cheesy it was unreal!


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> They are trying soooooo hard to be popular. Here is their daily _People_ magazine story which tells us they are home doing nothing. Yet they feel it is important we know they are doing nothing in exactly the right way, like Zoom chatting with charity workers. Hooray for them!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Isolating in New Home with Archie: 'They Haven't Had Any Visitors'*
> 
> “They spend their evenings at home as a family," a source tells PEOPLE of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have now made a trio of deliveries for Project Angel Food, a non-profit charity in Los Angeles that cooks, prepares and delivers meals to people living with critical illnesses who are at greater risk during the COVID-19 pandemic.
> 
> Their visits on Easter (and again on April 15 and 17) marked the first time the Duke and Duchess have been spotted since their move to L.A. from Canada in March after announcing their departure from royal life.
> 
> Isolating in their new home with their son, Archie, who turns 1 on May 6, “they only leave their house for charity work,” a source tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue.
> 
> “They spend their evenings at home as a family. They haven’t had any visitors,” the source adds.
> 
> Meghan recently led a Zoom call with the women of the Hubb Community Kitchen, with whom she collaborated for a charity cookbook in 2018, and Harry video-chatted with parents and others involved with one of his longstanding charities, WellChild, which provides care for ill children in the U.K.
> 
> Day-to-day life is all about “morale,” Harry said during the candid call. “If morale is up, if you wake up in the morning and go, ‘Right, new day, got my whole family here, what are we going to do?’ Of course, there’s that fear of what might happen, but there’s so much that’s out of our control, and all of a sudden we’ve realized how small we are in the grand scheme of things.”
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...ome-with-archie-they-havent-had-any-visitors/



Coming in on this article late to say it is such a pet peeve of mine during this pandemic! "No visitors" is just a way they tried to reword it because there are people in their house. They at the very least have a nanny for Archie. Guessing she is a live in nanny so she can be with him 24/7 because they had a trio of charity work they HAD to complete and expose themselves and then their son and staff. 

There are so many celebrities and influencers trying to pull the 'just like you' narrative right now, but they have kept their help so they are just at home with help, versus traveling with help. Whatever, I'm not even mad at having help, but you aren't like everyone else barely keeping their heads out of water trying to work from home, cook, clean, and homeschool your kids every single day. 

Rant over.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I don’t know about the beginning, seems more like later as things really began to fall apart and she wanted her voice heard.
> 
> There was some kind of pro-Meghan propaganda show on last night that I watched for about four minutes before changing the channel.  They were speaking about Diana using the press and it was also discussed in the Elle piece posted a few pages back.  This TV program last night was unreal, two People mag editors basically reading pro Meghan sound bites that were so cheesy it was unreal!


pretty much everything I've seen on TV is like this


----------



## bag-mania

Is it customary in the publicity biz for agencies representing a celebrity to "pay to play" so to speak? The unusually high number of pointless articles about H&M that are appearing in magazines like People, Elle, Cosmopolitan, and Vanity Fair seem suspect.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> Is it customary in the publicity biz for agencies representing a celebrity to "pay to play" so to speak? The unusually high number of pointless articles about H&M that are appearing in magazines like People, Elle, Cosmopolitan, and Vanity Fair seem suspect.



It's not unusual, and sometimes it's on a campaign basis, but mostly it's on a retainer basis so you have someone to always have handle enquiries.


----------



## bag-mania

beautymagpie said:


> It's not unusual, and sometimes it's on a campaign basis, but mostly it's on a retainer basis so you have someone to always have handle enquiries.



Campaigning is what appears to be happening. There must be many people working hard behind the scenes to try and ensure Meghan and Harry become a thing. I wonder how many $$$ are being thrown into their popularity project.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> Campaigning is what appears to be happening. There must be many people working hard behind the scenes to try and ensure Meghan and Harry become a thing. I wonder how many $$$ are being thrown into their popularity project.



My suspicion is that this agency has a brief with two things:

1) capitalise on 'firsts' to keep their profile high to bring in work, ie 'we must have the Sparkles because they're everywhere right now' so it becomes a cycle

2) planting stories that makes them look like angels sent from heaven because of the court case.

They may be charging more for their work during a campaign, but they're probably on a retainer.

Having royalty as clients might help people forget Sunshine Sachs used to represent Weinstein. Always thought it was a weird move for M considering the Prince Andrew dislike leaks. 

And it's probably costing a fortune. But good PR is supposed to be silent and seamless. Harder to do in the modern world sometimes but still, you'd expect better and it's not impossible.

Mind you, clients in any walk who take no notice of you are trouble. I'd imagine M is a total nightmare and always knows best.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> speaking of Married with children, wonder what  Ed O'Neil would have to say about "M" (in private)



I had the same thought about Christina Applegate!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> The Queen wouldn't have a say in the Spencer tiara, it belongs to the Spencer family. Only Spencer women wear it, Diana and her 2 sisters wore it, as did the sisters daughters. The only non Spencer who wore it on her wedding day was Victoria, Charles Spencers first wife, only because Charles was heir and she would've been Countess one day.
> I wonder if Charlotte would be allowed to wear it or she is to far away relative wise to be considered a Spencer? Mind you, the choices she will have will be immense. Lucky girl.


Charles, at the funeral, made such a big deal about helping to raise the 2 boys, yet he was in South Africa and never really saw much of them after that.

How close can the boys be to the Spencers, I wonder.  Wearing the Spencer tiara that Diana was famously wearing might be a big deal to Meg, but I wonder how much the BRF cares about the family.



lulilu said:


> I thought it was well known that Diana arranged for the press to see her doing things all the time.


Yes, that's how they knew where she'd be all the time.  She even let them know she'd be in Paris, for what turned out to be her last days.


----------



## maryg1

And now
https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.u...harry-as-he-struggles-to-settle-into-la-life/
I wonder if this is one small step for M toward divorce...blaming H for missing home and not settling into LA, so she has the take the right decision for them both, that is letting Harry go back to his old life, alone.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> People magazine is practically on their pay roll so that doesn't count and we all know that.


People is *NOW*, but when word first got out about H&M, friends and even former classmates (_my friend's son_) were 'found out' and they were indeed contacted in regards to Meghan.  My friends, because they are in the music business here in LA all said "*no way*" were they going to comment .. smart move!


----------



## Mrs.Z

maryg1 said:


> And now
> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.u...harry-as-he-struggles-to-settle-into-la-life/
> I wonder if this is one small step for M toward divorce...blaming H for missing home and not settling into LA, so she has the take the right decision for them both, that is letting Harry go back to his old life, alone.


They make decisions and allow about five minutes for things to work out perfectly then they change course.  Soon Harry will be splitting his time between LA and UK...wait for it.


----------



## 1LV

maryg1 said:


> And now
> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.u...harry-as-he-struggles-to-settle-into-la-life/
> I wonder if this is one small step for M toward divorce...blaming H for missing home and not settling into LA, so she has the take the right decision for them both, that is letting Harry go back to his old life, alone.


It seems as tho her plans are unraveling so it could be the step that leads to eventually returning to the UK, allowing her to save face.  Doing it for Harry, you know.  Nothing to do with the smell coming from the bottom of her shoe.


----------



## Sharont2305

I don't think many of us Brits will welcome her back.


----------



## gracekelly

maryg1 said:


> And now
> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.u...harry-as-he-struggles-to-settle-into-la-life/
> I wonder if this is one small step for M toward divorce...blaming H for missing home and not settling into LA, so she has the take the right decision for them both, that is letting Harry go back to his old life, alone.


I am going to subtitle reports like this as “The Road Back to Frogmore.”


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think many of us Brits will welcome her back.


No one could blame you either!


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think many of us Brits will welcome her back.


Yay!  How about him with his tail between his legs?


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> They make decisions and allow about five minutes for things to work out perfectly then they change course.  Soon Harry will be splitting his time between LA and UK...wait for it.


I see her in a condo in Century City.


----------



## scarlet555

maryg1 said:


> And now
> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.u...harry-as-he-struggles-to-settle-into-la-life/
> I wonder if this is one small step for M toward divorce...blaming H for missing home and not settling into LA, so she has the take the right decision for them both, that is letting Harry go back to his old life, alone.



Yes, Harry is homesick, and sick of following M around, and sick of 'me, me, me' M. 
Before the wedding, I had no bad opinions of their unions, unlike most of his friends, who came to know her and saw right through her.  Now, had I been a friend of H, I would have risked the friendship to stop the wedding lol. H is, literally just a clown around town now.


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> It seems as tho her plans are unraveling so it could be the step that leads to eventually returning to the UK, allowing her to save face.  Doing it for Harry, you know.  Nothing to do with the smell coming from the bottom of her shoe.


See, I definitely do not see her going back to the UK - ever!  Remember, she is a *narcissist SUPREME*, so that would be an acknowledgement that she was wrong .. would she ever do that?  Secondly, she SO DESPERATELY wants that A-List Hollywood career that she's going to do pretty much everything she can to TRY to get that .. Harry and Archie be damned!   While I doubt she would ever give up Archie, given that he is her 'meal ticket', somehow I get the "_SUNSET BOULEVARD_" movie theme in my head when I think about what is likely going to happen to MM.  If/once she jettisons Harry, who knows .. maybe she will *TRY *to find some "successful" Hollywood Producer, but that's pretty hard to do given that there just don't seem to be many Spielberg's, Ron Howard's, etc. nowadays.  Of course, maybe her "skills" re: 'Yacht Girl' may be enough for her to score someone ..  !!!


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think many of us Brits will welcome her back.


I hope you'll all be just as frosty to Harry if he chooses to go back as well.  
He deserves nothing but contempt from the UK public and taxpayer, IMO.  He doesn't deserve any pity as he has gotten everything he (apparently) wanted for years now. I think Harry has proven himself to be quite an a$$hole. That likeable schtick that was fed to the media for years by palace PR was obviously just to cover up the fact that he's a petulant manchild.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> One would wonder how Miss “I don’t  know much about the RF. Are they nice?” happen to know exactly which tiara they had to have.


I KNOW HOW !!!!! 
i collect coffee table photograph books on jewelry - the Queen's collection is of course, terribly well documented
M went to the library , borrowed the books, and let her fingers do the walking through the shopping catalogs LOL


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> And now
> https://www.entertainmentdaily.co.u...harry-as-he-struggles-to-settle-into-la-life/
> I wonder if this is one small step for M toward divorce...blaming H for missing home and not settling into LA, so she has the take the right decision for them both, that is letting Harry go back to his old life, alone.



I'm going to call BS on that article. Think about it, there's no way in hell Meghan would tell "friends" that Harry was homesick. That would be admitting that he's not happy, which in her mind is impossible because Harry has all that he needs, HER! 

No narcissist of Meghan's caliber is ever going to say that life with her is lacking to her husband in any way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Yay!  How about him with his tail between his legs?


Personally, I think he'd be fine to come back on his own. I can't speak for everyone here but the anger and disgust is aimed at her.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Personally, I think he'd be fine to come back on his own. I can't speak for everyone here but the anger and disgust is aimed at her.


I do think the Brits would take back Archie as well but sans maman


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Personally, I think he'd be fine to come back on his own. I can't speak for everyone here but the anger and disgust is aimed at her.


I’m not so sure, I think he’s behaved appallingly - I wouldn’t want to see him come back here.  We’ve seen his real character since he met MM IMO and it’s not pretty.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m not so sure, I think he’s behaved appallingly - I wouldn’t want to see him come back here.  We’ve seen his real character since he met MM IMO and it’s not pretty.


See, two differing opinions already. [emoji1]


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> I do think the Brits would take back Archie as well but sans maman


I don't think she will ever give up Archie, that's her "meal Ticket"!  Poor kid, I think he would be better off with Harry ..


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> Is it customary in the publicity biz for agencies representing a celebrity to "pay to play" so to speak? The unusually high number of pointless articles about H&M that are appearing in magazines like People, Elle, Cosmopolitan, and Vanity Fair seem suspect.



Yes, definitely! H&M’s PR firm Sunshine Sachs is well-versed in this, as well as more subtle ways to influence the public. In 2015, they admitted they had been paying editors to remove negative things from their client’s Wikipedia articles. 

They & other PR firms also work with software developers to use bots to spam entertainment article comments and social media with positive comments about their clients. These are much more sophisticated and difficult to detect than the poorly written “bought” reviews you see on Amazon for knock off items. You can also get a lot of PR value for your dollar by sponsoring “blue check” (verified) influencers who get “sponsored” to write positive comments about M’s style & the elephant movie etc.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> See, two differing opinions already. [emoji1]


A third opinion ... LOL 
The boys could earn a welcome back after a number of years of service


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> I KNOW HOW !!!!!
> i collect coffee table photograph books on jewelry - the Queen's collection is of course, terribly well documented
> M went to the library , borrowed the books, and let her fingers do the walking through the shopping catalogs LOL



I can’t deny that sounds fun! But I like to think I could be more gracious given the opportunity.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> I don't think she will ever give up Archie, that's her "meal Ticket"!  Poor kid, I think he would be better off with Harry ..





Sharont2305 said:


> See, two differing opinions already. [emoji1]


Thank you to all for being no nice to each other here, there is room for many opinions, I love that !!!!
Cant find the correct EMOJI


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> I see her in a *condo in Century City*.



*gracekelly*, spot on!!! Dying of laughter!!! 
Forget the popcorn, is it 5 o’clock yet?
♥️


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t deny that sounds fun! But I like to think I could be more gracious given the opportunity.


Yes, a bit of discretion is always associated with the BRF bling, there is scads of the stuff, and these days it is trotted out only for state occasions - Parliament & visiting heads of state, no longer worn to James Bond  or Lion King film premieres 
There remains this huge mystery as to the exact composition of the collection  - recent example - no one knew there was a second emerald necklace from the Greville collection until a few months ago, it had been in the vaults for donkeys years until HM made a huge statement with it at a state dinner , a very I AM THE QUEEN moment of pure gravitas


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Thank you to all for being no nice to each other here, there is room for many opinions, I love that !!!!
> Cant find the correct EMOJI [emoji3][emoji813]


[emoji122][emoji16]


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I see her in a condo in Century City.


Thank you for the laughter - merci - priceless these days


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *gracekelly*, spot on!!! Dying of laughter!!!
> Forget the popcorn, is it 5 o’clock yet?
> ♥️


Okay, enlighten me here .. I can't see that AT ALL!  To me, MM is all about Beverly Hills or it's environs (BH Postal too), but Century City - why?   @gracekelly


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> See, I definitely do not see her going back to the UK - ever!  Remember, she is a *narcissist SUPREME*, so that would be an acknowledgement that she was wrong .. would she ever do that?  Secondly, she SO DESPERATELY wants that A-List Hollywood career that she's going to do pretty much everything she can to TRY to get that .. Harry and Archie be damned!   While I doubt she would ever give up Archie, given that he is her 'meal ticket', somehow I get the "_SUNSET BOULEVARD_" movie theme in my head when I think about what is likely going to happen to MM.  If/once she jettisons Harry, who knows .. maybe she will *TRY *to find some "successful" Hollywood Producer, but that's pretty hard to do given that there just don't seem to be many Spielberg's, Ron Howard's, etc. nowadays.  Of course, maybe her "skills" re: 'Yacht Girl' may be enough for her to score someone ..  !!!


You could very well be right.  I just never thought becoming a big time actress in all of this was her ultimate goal.  I also think you’re right to believe she will never admit she made a mistake, or that she underestimated or was outsmarted by the Royal Family.  That’s why I think IF she returns to Frogmore it will be - cue the violins - out of her selfless love for H, her willingness to put his needs and wants ahead of hers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> You could very well be right.  I just never thought becoming a big time actress in all of this was her ultimate goal.  I also think you’re right to believe she will never admit she made a mistake, or that she underestimated or was outsmarted by the Royal Family.  That’s why I think IF she returns to Frogmore it will be - cue the violins - out of her selfless love for H, her willingness to put his needs and wants ahead of hers.


But you see, that will never happen .. think about it; how many "friends" has she jettisoned when they no longer served her purpose (or ambition).  People like that just don't give up; it's ALWAYS about THEM!  I had an 'acquaintance' like this who was just a MAJOR-LEAGUE USER and I was very hurt when she used me, but she NEVER got an additional opportunity as I "markle'd" her first!


----------



## youngster

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *gracekelly*, spot on!!! Dying of laughter!!!
> Forget the popcorn, is it 5 o’clock yet?♥️



It's 5 o'clock somewhere.


----------



## maryg1

bag-mania said:


> I'm going to call BS on that article. Think about it, there's no way in hell Meghan would tell "friends" that Harry was homesick. That would be admitting that he's not happy, which in her mind is impossible because Harry has all that he needs, HER!
> 
> No narcissist of Meghan's caliber is ever going to say that life with her is lacking to her husband in any way.


Look carefully...she comes out as really worried and upset about her husband’s health, like a loving and caring wife. Nobody can deny H looks like a mess, she can’t come out and say “he’s doing great, he’s already met new friends and job opportunities that keep him busy” because anybody knows it’s not true, so she switched the Mother Therese button on.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think many of us Brits will welcome her back.


Absolutely not!!!


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> But you see, that will never happen .. think about it; how many "friends" has she jettisoned when they no longer served her purpose (or ambition).  People like that just don't give up; it's ALWAYS about THEM!  I had an 'acquaintance' like this who was just a MAJOR-LEAGUE USER and I was very hurt when she used me, but she NEVER got an additional opportunity as I "markle'd" her first!


It’s hard to top a prince.  And you’re right, it’s always going to be about her.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I'm going to call BS on that article. Think about it, there's no way in hell Meghan would tell "friends" that Harry was homesick. That would be admitting that he's not happy, which in her mind is impossible because Harry has all that he needs, HER!
> 
> No narcissist of Meghan's caliber is ever going to say that life with her is lacking to her husband in any way.


Unless maybe, she already has her site on Harry's replacement and needs him out of the way to make her move. I pity the fool she chooses.


----------



## Sophisticatted

When I see other articles and soundbites about other royals, I think the firm already is thinking ahead.  There is Princess Anne and her "back to basics" commentary mentioning her own royal status and work for the firm, but thinking that is was for the best that she left the rest of her family out of the titles and duties.

You have Prince Charles claiming that he wants a very stripped down royal working family in order to cut down on scandals and negative press.

You have the Queen requesting NO FUSS for her birthday and requesting PRIVATE communications from her family.  (A test IMO to see if H&M would cooperate.)

You have RETIRED Prince Phillip sending out letters of thanks to public workers, showing that you don't have to be a working royal to behave like one.  

A post-charity-gate, you have Charles talking about the food chain and the good works of many citizens during this crisis, in a way that overshadows H& M's recent Angel Food antics.

I think the writing on the wall is this: they will be welcomed back to the family, but not to the public life.   I'm sure they'd prefer Meghan stay in the states.  They'll get a place to live, that's it.  Even though Archie will be able to have a title of Prince once Charles becomes King, he probably won't get one so Meghan can't claim to be the mother of a prince.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> I'm going to call BS on that article. Think about it, there's no way in hell Meghan would tell "friends" that Harry was homesick. That would be admitting that he's not happy, which in her mind is impossible because Harry has all that he needs, HER!
> 
> No narcissist of Meghan's caliber is ever going to say that life with her is lacking to her husband in any way.


Now wait....I think it’s the second time we are hearing this, that Harry is having trouble adjusting,....so they could be building a new narrative.


----------



## CarryOn2020

To me, she is realizing he has serious issues that she cannot handle. Diana’s family has known issues with mental health. Guessing that early on she and Doria thought they could handle his issues. Based on his videos and the delivery photos, it looks like he is worse than in his 20s. To my eye, in the delivery photo, she wasn’t holding his hand, she was pulling him by the wrist. For a zillion reasons, she really should have listened to the Palace. They are better equipped to handle this, whatever it is. 

ETA: Did not know that Charles was in therapy for 14 years. 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-prince-charles-sir-john-batten-a7964551.html





maryg1 said:


> Look carefully...she comes out as really worried and upset about her husband’s health, like a loving and caring wife. Nobody can deny H looks like a mess, she can’t come out and say “he’s doing great, he’s already met new friends and job opportunities that keep him busy” because anybody knows it’s not true, so she switched the Mother Therese button on.


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> Look carefully...she comes out as really worried and upset about her husband’s health, like a loving and caring wife. Nobody can deny H looks like a mess, she can’t come out and say “he’s doing great, he’s already met new friends and job opportunities that keep him busy” because anybody knows it’s not true, so she switched the Mother Therese button on.



True. I'm unfamiliar with that publication. Do they have a fairly decent reputation? (I mean as much as a gossip rag can have a good reputation.)


----------



## Tootsie17

1LV said:


> You could very well be right.  I just never thought becoming a big time actress in all of this was her ultimate goal.  I also think you’re right to believe she will never admit she made a mistake, or that she underestimated or was outsmarted by the Royal Family.  That’s why I think IF she returns to Frogmore it will be - cue the violins - out of her selfless love for H, her willingness to put his needs and wants ahead of hers.


In my moments of playing devil's advocate, I devilishly believe that M tried to put the moves on William and was quickly and sternly rebuked. That's why Kate and William, I believe, don't like her and why M reportedly dislikes Kate.  I know I'm reaching, but it was such fun creating this folly. Can't you just see Meghan desperately wanting to be queen and actually thinking she deserves it?  Now I know how Stephen King feels when he gets a great story idea.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Tootsie17 said:


> In my moments of playing devil's advocate, I devilishly believe that M tried to put the moves on William and was quickly and sternly rebuked. That's why Kate and William, I believe, don't like her and why M reportedly dislikes Kate.  I know I'm reaching, but it was such fun creating this folly. Can't you just see Meghan desperately wanting to be queen and actually thinking she deserves it?  Now I know how Stephen King feels when he gets a great story idea.



Lol! She definitely acts like a woman scorned around them!


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> Unless maybe, she already has her site on Harry's replacement and needs him out of the way to make her move. I pity the fool she chooses.



She would want someone rich and probably famous too. What billionaire (milliionaire) would be so stupid?

Objectively, she's a pretty woman but she's not drop dead gorgeous by any means. She's almost 40 and there are plenty of younger, hotter actresses in Hollywood who don't have the baggage she has. Now maybe she could find herself a hot male gold digger who would be happy to be her gigolo.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Okay, enlighten me here .. I can't see that AT ALL!  To me, MM is all about Beverly Hills or it's environs (BH Postal too), but Century City - why?   @gracekelly


Let me answer that ...
Went to Los Angeles to visit a friend, and we stopped off at her husband's work in Century City. Home to many plastic surgeons to the stars.
We took a long elevator ride with a lady in athleisure.  She was at the center of the elevator.  She wore a form fitting garment to put her new derriere on display. Immense size - that was totally at odds with her thin, sylph-like figure. My GF and I were standing at the edges of the elevator . we could see each other as our jaws dropped. Impressive.
There is a lot more to LA than that, but somehow I cannot un-see that derriere...
But the story is quite amusing


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Okay, enlighten me here .. I can't see that AT ALL!  To me, MM is all about Beverly Hills or it's environs (BH Postal too), but Century City - why?   @gracekelly


Because there are large and beautiful condos there with security.  It is cheaper, but still prestigious address.  She won't have to deal with the upkeep of a house.

ETA:  you all thought I was making a funny!  I was serious!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Let me answer that ...
> Went to Los Angeles to visit a friend, and we stopped off at her husband's work in Century City. Home to many plastic surgeons to the stars.
> We took a long elevator ride with a lady in athleisure.  She was at the center of the elevator.  She wore a form fitting garment to put her new derriere on display. Immense size - that was totally at odds with her thin, sylph-like figure. My GF and I were standing at the edges of the elevator . we could see each other as our jaws dropped. Impressive.
> There is a lot more to LA than that, but somehow I cannot un-see that derriere...
> But the story is quite amusing


HA HA HA HA .. and I can relate to a fair amount of what you are saying!!!  The PS here in LA-LA land can be SO OVER THE TOP that I have tried *NOT *to gasp, but when I see a "*Barbie face*" on a 70+ year old, or *BOOBS* that look like Balloons on either a very petite or very thin lady, and then .. yup, I've seen the *KK a$$* way too many times!  As a matter of fact, I have seen the real KK a$$ when I was in Calabasas grocery shopping (_way back in the day when I rented a place at the top of Topanga Canyon_) .. and can I say OMG .. but I also wanted to vomit!  I have a very dear friend who has worked part-time at Decades for so many years, and she also knows a fair amount of celebs (her first husband was a musician, so she knows quite a few) .. and she told me that of all the PS that she had seen, by far .. KK's a$$ was absolutely the WORST and she gasped when she saw it (_and she almost NEVER does that_).  We laughed SO HARD!!! 

However, LA (_and pretty much everywhere_) .. is PS-a-GAGA .. it's everywhere but unfortunately, many folks don't go to the best because they are conscious of the $$$ .. and so then are the GASP-O-MATICs out here!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Because there are large and beautiful condos there with security.  It is cheaper, but still prestigious address.  She won't have to deal with the upkeep of a house.
> 
> ETA:  you all thought I was making a funny!  I was serious!


NO, I wasn't thinking it was a funny .. I was just interested as to why!!!  Way back in the day, when we used to 'visit' LA a lot, we rented a few vacation places in Century City .. the location is convenient as heck and there are many Financial Services companies there (my old FS company has their office there).  But as far as a 'pretty' place to live? .. well, not IMO - BH is much prettier!


----------



## bellecate

From the Washington Examiner
President’ Meghan Markle 2024? Gamblers bet on it
by Paul Bedard
 | April 22, 2020 10:18 


It’s a long shot and far off, but whisperings of a 2024 Meghan for President run are picking up, and now, political gamblers are placing bets on the Duchess of Sussex making a run.


The betting aggregator Oddschecker.com has picked up a noticeable surge in betting attention to Meghan Markle, who is married to Prince Harry and now living in Los Angeles.

In fact, her odds have jumped to a still long 1 in 100, but the site told Secrets that there is a trend in her direction.

Oddschecker spokesman Pete Watt told us, “Markle’s odds remain very high — a bet placed today of $10 would win a cool $1,000 — but if interest continues, then oddsmakers’ will begin to panic.”


Watt added, “We’ve had an actor in the Oval Office before, and it currently houses a television personality — but could we have both at the same time? Stranger things have happened.”

Her odds put her in the company of Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney, and Dwayne Johnson to be the 2024 winner in the presidential race, said Oddschecker.

Markle was a star on the series _Suits_. She remains a U.S. citizen even though she was working through the system for her British citizenship, which can take years, even for those marrying into royalty. She and Harry split from the royal family.

  This was a good one.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> NO, I wasn't thinking it was a funny .. I was just interested as to why!!!  Way back in the day, when we used to 'visit' LA a lot, we rented a few vacation places in Century City .. the location is convenient as heck and there are many Financial Services companies there (my old FS company has their office there).  But as far as a 'pretty' place to live? .. well, not IMO - BH is much prettier!


That's true, but you have to factor in the available funds.  I think he is going back to UK and she will be here.  Even if she keeps the baby here, they will never be able to afford a nice BH home that has property etc for security.  PC is not paying for that now.  She is better off in a condo. She can be neighbors with Candy Spelling.  I know of people who sold very large homes in BH and the kids have moved on and they purchased large condos in CC.  It is much closer to their price range.   I don't see her in a high rise on Wilshire Blvd.


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> That's true, but you have to factor in the available funds.  I think he is going back to UK and she will be here.  Even if she keeps the baby here, they will never be able to afford a nice BH home that has property etc for security.  PC is not paying for that now.  She is better off in a condo. She can be neighbors with Candy Spelling.  I know of people who sold very large homes in BH and the kids have moved on and they purchased large condos in CC.  It is much closer to their price range.   I don't see her in a high rise on Wilshire Blvd.


She cannot live in a Condo among people!  Major security and privacy concerns!!!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

So, now that we've had a momentous day of some lovely photos of Prince Louis on his birthday inc a lovely one with his grandfather, plus footage of Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges clapping for our carers, what will Meghan be plotting next?


----------



## Emeline

Mrs.Z said:


> She cannot live in a Condo among people!  Major security and privacy concerns!!!!!


Worse for her than the security and privacy concerns would be condo association rules. 
Unthinkable!  How dare the board  tell Meg what she can and cannot do!!


----------



## 1LV

Tootsie17 said:


> In my moments of playing devil's advocate, I devilishly believe that M tried to put the moves on William and was quickly and sternly rebuked. That's why Kate and William, I believe, don't like her and why M reportedly dislikes Kate.  I know I'm reaching, but it was such fun creating this folly. Can't you just see Meghan desperately wanting to be queen and actually thinking she deserves it?  Now I know how Stephen King feels when he gets a great story idea.


Lol!  I sure don’t think some little something like a wife would stop her from trying.


----------



## melissatrv

I keep waiting for a baby announcement.  What better way to bring herself back to the spotlight? I don't think I could bear another 9 months of that ridiculous bump cradling.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA HA .. and I can relate to a fair amount of what you are saying!!!  The PS here in LA-LA land can be SO OVER THE TOP that I have tried *NOT *to gasp, but when I see a "*Barbie face*" on a 70+ year old, or *BOOBS* that look like Balloons on either a very petite or very thin lady, and then .. yup, I've seen the *KK a$$* way too many times!  As a matter of fact, I have seen the real KK a$$ when I was in Calabasas grocery shopping (_way back in the day when I rented a place at the top of Topanga Canyon_) .. and can I say OMG .. but I also wanted to vomit!  I have a very dear friend who has worked part-time at Decades for so many years, and she also knows a fair amount of celebs (her first husband was a musician, so she knows quite a few) .. and she told me that of all the PS that she had seen, by far .. KK's a$$ was absolutely the WORST and she gasped when she saw it (_and she almost NEVER does that_).  We laughed SO HARD!!!
> 
> However, LA (_and pretty much everywhere_) .. is PS-a-GAGA .. it's everywhere but unfortunately, many folks don't go to the best because they are conscious of the $$$ .. and so then are the GASP-O-MATICs out here!


PS is one thing I wouldn't bargain shop for.  I watched a documentaory on HBO that told the stories three PS disasters.  I mean these people's lives were ruined.  There was one guy who had his nose done.  It wasn't done properly and he had three more surgeries to try to correct it.  His final surgeon was the famous Dr Nassif and even with that, the outcome was in question.  they said it would take six to twelve months before he would know if it was successful.


----------



## beautymagpie

I sort of feel she’s got all the value (bargaining power) she’s going to get from a royal baby, now it’s all back to her. Her career, her home country, just her.

I don’t think she’ll have another personally, not on purpose anyway.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> PS is one thing I wouldn't bargain shop for.  I watched a documentaory on HBO that told the stories three PS disasters.  I mean these people's lives were ruined.  There was one guy who had his nose done.  It wasn't done properly and he had three more surgeries to try to correct it.  His final surgeon was the famous Dr Nassif and even with that, the outcome was in question.  they said it would take six to twelve months before he would know if it was successful.


Oh yeah .. I've watched "Botched" many times, and most of those times I'm just aghast at what people have done to themselves!   To me, those folks have major-league body dysmophia.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Oh yeah .. I've watched "Botched" many times, and most of those times I'm just aghast at what people have done to themselves!   To me, those folks have major-league body dysmophia.


there seemed to be some of that on this documentary.  but one woman basically just picked the wrong provider - some mass production clinic - for her tummy tuck.  she ended up getting an infection that spread through her body and having both legs amputated.  scary.


----------



## poopsie

melissatrv said:


> I keep waiting for a baby announcement.  What better way to bring herself back to the spotlight? I don't think I could bear another 9 months of that ridiculous bump cradling.
> 
> View attachment 4715759


----------



## Chagall

scarlet555 said:


> Irregardless, she has shown the world:  she did not deserve this lavish wedding, in that church, nor to be walked by Prince Charles: the only thing she deserved: the ill fitted custom wedding dress.


No she didn’t deserve that lovely wedding. I have never been able to figure out how such a beautifully designed wedding dress was so ‘baggy’ around the waist! Most people would have insisted on having it fitted to ‘fit’!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://www.newsweek.com/what-expec...down-mail-sunday-experts-say-case-was-1499851
_Her action is based on privacy, copyright and data protection laws, but her lawyers have also included allegations the Mail on Sunday was deceitful in the way it pursued the story in February last year.
Now the newspaper's legal team is asking judge Mr. Justice Warby to exclude a series of those elements of her case.
Gavin Miller QC, of Doughty Street Chambers, told Newsweek: "This is always a big issue with these cases.
"People using privacy to run what is, in reality, a complaint about publicity they don't like and is going to damage their reputation. I think the way the claim has been pleaded is overblown._


o.u.c.h.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And now this from our intrepid reporter, Dan Wooten’s twitter - that British humor just cuts to the chase:


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> And now this from our intrepid reporter, Dan Wooten’s twitter - that British humor just cuts to the chase:
> View attachment 4715832


LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://www.newsweek.com/what-expec...down-mail-sunday-experts-say-case-was-1499851
> _Her action is based on privacy, copyright and data protection laws, but her lawyers have also included allegations the Mail on Sunday was deceitful in the way it pursued the story in February last year.
> Now the newspaper's legal team is asking judge Mr. Justice Warby to exclude a series of those elements of her case.
> Gavin Miller QC, of Doughty Street Chambers, told Newsweek: "This is always a big issue with these cases.
> "People using privacy to run what is, in reality, a complaint about publicity they don't like and is going to damage their reputation. I think the way the claim has been pleaded is overblown._
> 
> 
> o.u.c.h.



I read this snippet from the article and - oh my, how glorious the drama will be if it unfolds this way 


_Miller said Meghan is likely to overcome her first hurdle in the privacy aspect of the case, demonstrating the letter was private.

However, the Mail on Sunday's lawyers will then argue Markle Sr. had been attacked by a group of Meghan's celebrity friends in an article they did with People.

They will claim the friends mischaracterized the letter, sent by Meghan to her father in August 2018, as friendly and thereby make the case Markle Sr. had the right to defend himself offering the letter as proof.

Mark Stephens of Howard Kennedy has represented the likes of Princess Diana and Julian Assange. He told Newsweek not only will Meghan have to testify, but her anonymous friends may do too.

Stephens said: "There's a basic tenet of the law that if you attack somebody then they have the right to reply to that attack.

"So this has become a very high stakes game for Meghan because ultimately it gets into a situation of whether she's telling the truth. *All of her five friends are going to have to come into the case.* They're going to have to be cross-examined, she's going to have to be cross-examined. 

"The Mail on Sunday's QC is a brilliant cross-examiner. Even if she wins the case on a technicality she's going to lose the war. She's going to have huge lumps taken out of her reputationally."_


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> I read this snippet from the article and - oh my, how glorious the drama will be if it unfolds this way
> 
> 
> _Miller said Meghan is likely to overcome her first hurdle in the privacy aspect of the case, demonstrating the letter was private.
> 
> However, the Mail on Sunday's lawyers will then argue Markle Sr. had been attacked by a group of Meghan's celebrity friends in an article they did with People.
> 
> They will claim the friends mischaracterized the letter, sent by Meghan to her father in August 2018, as friendly and thereby make the case Markle Sr. had the right to defend himself offering the letter as proof.
> 
> Mark Stephens of Howard Kennedy has represented the likes of Princess Diana and Julian Assange. He told Newsweek not only will Meghan have to testify, but her anonymous friends may do too.
> 
> Stephens said: "There's a basic tenet of the law that if you attack somebody then they have the right to reply to that attack.
> 
> "So this has become a very high stakes game for Meghan because ultimately it gets into a situation of whether she's telling the truth. *All of her five friends are going to have to come into the case.* They're going to have to be cross-examined, she's going to have to be cross-examined.
> 
> "The Mail on Sunday's QC is a brilliant cross-examiner. Even if she wins the case on a technicality she's going to lose the war. She's going to have huge lumps taken out of her reputationally."_


can't wait


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan Markle is so ridiculously stupid. 

She could always marry a prince after Harry . . . plenty of them in SA. She could be wife No. 3 or 4. They get a lot of money and live in ultimate luxury.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Congratulations are in order — so much goodwill and  talent in the UK
Total respect.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-52379802


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> I read this snippet from the article and - oh my, how glorious the drama will be if it unfolds this way
> 
> 
> _Miller said Meghan is likely to overcome her first hurdle in the privacy aspect of the case, demonstrating the letter was private.
> 
> However, the Mail on Sunday's lawyers will then argue Markle Sr. had been attacked by a group of Meghan's celebrity friends in an article they did with People.
> 
> They will claim the friends mischaracterized the letter, sent by Meghan to her father in August 2018, as friendly and thereby make the case Markle Sr. had the right to defend himself offering the letter as proof.
> 
> Mark Stephens of Howard Kennedy has represented the likes of Princess Diana and Julian Assange. He told Newsweek not only will Meghan have to testify, but her anonymous friends may do too.
> 
> Stephens said: "There's a basic tenet of the law that if you attack somebody then they have the right to reply to that attack.
> 
> "So this has become a very high stakes game for Meghan because ultimately it gets into a situation of whether she's telling the truth. *All of her five friends are going to have to come into the case.* They're going to have to be cross-examined, she's going to have to be cross-examined.
> 
> "The Mail on Sunday's QC is a brilliant cross-examiner. Even if she wins the case on a technicality she's going to lose the war. She's going to have huge lumps taken out of her reputationally."_


Oooooooh, oooooooh, ooooooh .. this is going to get juicy!!!  

@gracekelly , @VigeeLeBrun , @sdkitty .. since we're all on the West Coast, maybe we should set up some *ZOOM-ZOOM-ZOOMs* to watch this .. let's see, Popcorn, Champagne, Wine, what other snacks can we have?????  

Again, I think this is a case where the two of them thought "we're smarter and we'll win", but 2 issues here .. one, they ARE NOT SMARTER and more importantly, if their legal team is US-based, do they know the UK law?  I saw this SO MANY times in my Financial Services career where business people would not do their due diligence; they would think in terms of US Finance not in terms of GLOBAL implications .. and yes, there were always ramifications when they "ASSUMED"!


----------



## Lounorada

justwatchin said:


> I’m surprised they haven’t made their own YouTube channel. It could start as a fundraiser (for themselves) and when that doesn’t make enough they can post videos of:
> 
> Harry or H (whatever she is calling him now) doing her makeup
> In the kitchen making avocado toast
> M walking around with a shaky phone talking about being a mom
> *Harry tossing balls (real ones not his own since they’ve been removed) to the dogs (if they weren’t left in Canada)*


The last one 


V0N1B2 said:


> I hope you'll all be just as frosty to Harry if he chooses to go back as well.
> He deserves nothing but contempt from the UK public and taxpayer, IMO.  He doesn't deserve any pity as he has gotten everything he (apparently) wanted for years now. I think Harry has proven himself to be quite an a$$hole. That likeable schtick that was fed to the media for years by palace PR was obviously just to cover up the fact that he's a petulant manchild.


I can't like this post enough! Totally agree.



Chagall said:


> No she didn’t deserve that lovely wedding. I have never been able to figure out how such a beautifully designed wedding dress was so ‘baggy’ around the waist! Most people would have insisted on having it fitted to ‘fit’!


Her wedding dress would have been so beautiful, if only the fit was perfection. You'd expect that from a couture piece. The way the fabric on the dress was thick, heavy and the fit baggy in all the wrong places made it look like a rushed job... not couture with attention to detail, as people would expect.


----------



## Lounorada

bisousx said:


> I read this snippet from the article and - oh my, how glorious the drama will be if it unfolds this way
> 
> 
> _Miller said Meghan is likely to overcome her first hurdle in the privacy aspect of the case, demonstrating the letter was private.
> 
> However, the Mail on Sunday's lawyers will then argue Markle Sr. had been attacked by a group of Meghan's celebrity friends in an article they did with People.
> 
> They will claim the friends mischaracterized the letter, sent by Meghan to her father in August 2018, as friendly and thereby make the case Markle Sr. had the right to defend himself offering the letter as proof.
> 
> Mark Stephens of Howard Kennedy has represented the likes of Princess Diana and Julian Assange. He told Newsweek not only will Meghan have to testify, but her anonymous friends may do too.
> 
> Stephens said: "There's a basic tenet of the law that if you attack somebody then they have the right to reply to that attack.
> 
> "So this has become a very high stakes game for Meghan because ultimately it gets into a situation of whether she's telling the truth. All of her five friends are going to have to come into the case. They're going to have to be cross-examined, she's going to have to be cross-examined.
> 
> "The Mail on Sunday's QC is a brilliant cross-examiner. Even if she wins the case on a technicality she's going to lose the war. She's going to have huge lumps taken out of her reputationally."_


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> I am going to subtitle reports like this as “The Road Back to Frogmore.”



And eventually there will be Frogmore: The Musical!


----------



## gracekelly

Mendocino said:


> And eventually there will be Frogmore: The Musical!


Oh yes with the singing and dancing paparazzi!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Oooooooh, oooooooh, ooooooh .. this is going to get juicy!!!
> 
> @gracekelly , @VigeeLeBrun , @sdkitty .. since we're all on the West Coast, maybe we should set up some *ZOOM-ZOOM-ZOOMs* to watch this .. let's see, Popcorn, Champagne, Wine, what other snacks can we have?????
> 
> Again, I think this is a case where the two of them thought "we're smarter and we'll win", but 2 issues here .. one, they ARE NOT SMARTER and more importantly, if their legal team is US-based, do they know the UK law?  I saw this SO MANY times in my Financial Services career where business people would not do their due diligence; they would think in terms of US Finance not in terms of GLOBAL implications .. and yes, there were always ramifications when they "ASSUMED"!


I'll pop for some shrimp to nibble on and parmesan cheese crackers that I make from scratch!  Nothing is too good for my thread friends!

All their problem have the same root.  They do not think things through completely.  This is the fatal flaw.  Of course the Covid would ruin it for anyone no matter how well planned their strategy happened to be.  Just bad luck.


----------



## gracekelly

melissatrv said:


> I keep waiting for a baby announcement.  What better way to bring herself back to the spotlight? I don't think I could bear another 9 months of that ridiculous bump cradling.
> 
> View attachment 4715759


Don't think this will happen for many reasons.  She still does not have her pre-baby figure back and that is bothering her as it would most women.   She wants to restart her career and pregnancy just doesn't fit in.


----------



## Lodpah

Ok those pregnant pics she copied from AJ and Beyoncé cause MM is a huge star on the same level as them.


melissatrv said:


> I keep waiting for a baby announcement.  What better way to bring herself back to the spotlight? I don't think I could bear another 9 months of that ridiculous bump cradling.
> 
> View attachment 4715759



I’m too lazy to post but this posture she took is exactly like Angelina Jolie’s picture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I'll pop for some shrimp to nibble on and parmesan cheese crackers that I make from scratch!  Nothing is too good for my thread friends!
> 
> All their problem have the same root.  They do not think things through completely.  This is the fatal flaw.  Of course the Covid would ruin it for anyone no matter how well planned their strategy happened to be.  Just bad luck.


and they're not as smart as they think they are.....they over-estimate themselves


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> She cannot live in a Condo among people!  Major security and privacy concerns!!!!!


Townhouse condo with security gate.


----------



## gracekelly

Emeline said:


> Worse for her than the security and privacy concerns would be condo association rules.
> Unthinkable!  How dare the board  tell Meg what she can and cannot do!!


LOL!  No kidding!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Don't think this will happen for many reasons.  She still does not have her pre-baby figure back and that is bothering her as it would most women.   She wants to restart her career and pregnancy just doesn't fit in.


does she really think she's going to be a big movie star?  if what she wanted was to be really famous and admired she should have kept the royal gig.  she's not going to match it with anything she does going forward IMO


----------



## Chagall

Lounorada said:


> The last one
> 
> I can't like this post enough! Totally agree.
> 
> 
> Her wedding dress would have been so beautiful, if only the fit was perfection. You'd expect that from a couture piece. The way the fabric on the dress was thick, heavy and the fit baggy in all the wrong places made it look like a rushed job... not couture with attention to detail, as people would expect.


I loved the simplicity of her dress, I thought it was beautiful. It is such a shame that the effort was not taken to make the fit correct. I don’t understand it because they had the time to make it perfect.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Okay let’s see if I have the timeline in place bc tomorrow don’t ya’know dat fur will be flying!!!

We’ll gather round with our special drinks and kanapees, and you know that EVERYONE, EVEN THE MEDIA, WILL SURELY SEE MY POINT IN COURT, I mean even my husband says, “what my yacht girl wants, my yacht girl gets!”
So okay, with my Ramona’s crazy eyes and my smirky-smirk “smile”, that’s still enough to jump-start my Bill Gates-type foundation, right?
♥️


----------



## Tootsie17

gracekelly said:


> I'll pop for some shrimp to nibble on and parmesan cheese crackers that I make from scratch!  Nothing is too good for my thread friends!
> 
> All their problem have the same root.  They do not think things through completely.  This is the fatal flaw.  Of course the Covid would ruin it for anyone no matter how well planned their strategy happened to be.  Just bad luck.


Me thinks it's Karma too.


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> Worse for her than the security and privacy concerns would be condo association rules.
> Unthinkable!  How dare the board  tell Meg what she can and cannot do!!



She would be campaigning to get elected condo board president so that she could be the one making the rules. Then after two months she would lose interest in the project and stop coming to the meetings.


----------



## Anna Rose

gracekelly said:


> All their problem have the same root.  They do not think things through completely.  This is the fatal flaw.  Of course the Covid would ruin it for anyone no matter how well planned their strategy happened to be. * Just bad luck.*


Or, you know... well-deserved Karma!

ETA: Oops, Tootsie17 beat me to it.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> does she really think she's going to be a big movie star?  if what she wanted was to be really famous and admired she should have kept the royal gig.  she's not going to match it with anything she does going forward IMO


100% agree .. if that is what she had truly wanted, was to be an A-List Movie Star, then she should have really practiced her Casting Couch skills, because .. let's face it, her acting "chops" are Grade Z!  As much as I HATE/LOATHE Weinstein and what he did, maybe she should have tried to 'network' with him ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree .. if that is what she had truly wanted, was to be an A-List Movie Star, then she should have really practiced her Casting Couch skills, because .. let's face it, her acting "chops" are Grade Z!  As much as I HATE/LOATHE Weinstein and what he did, maybe she should have tried to 'network' with him ..


lol


----------



## Swe3tGirl

Chagall said:


> I loved the simplicity of her dress, I thought it was beautiful. It is such a shame that the effort was not taken to make the fit correct. I don’t understand it because they had the time to make it perfect.



The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol


----------



## Genie27

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881


It looks like it’s made of fondant. The thick heavy inedible kind


----------



## Tootsie17

Anna Rose said:


> Or, you know... well-deserved Karma!
> 
> ETA: Oops, Tootsie17 beat me to it.


Great minds think alike!


----------



## mdcx

M must have really struggled when she realised that there already were pretty young women much more closely associated with the Diana and the Spencer name than she would ever be:


I have to say, Kate is really looking like a rock solid good egg in all of this. And that must make M doubly furious!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay let’s see if I have the timeline in place bc tomorrow don’t ya’know dat fur will be flying!!!
> 
> We’ll gather round with our special drinks and kanapees, and you know that EVERYONE, EVEN THE MEDIA, WILL SURELY SEE MY POINT IN COURT, *I mean even my husband says, “what my yacht girl wants, my yacht girl gets!”*
> So okay, with my Ramona’s crazy eyes and my smirky-smirk “smile”, that’s still enough to jump-start my Bill Gates-type foundation, right?
> ♥️



I am changing my status from trophy wife to yacht girl.  I makes me sound younger, even prettier and thinner!  I have a foundation, it has been funded by the husband so I can buy whatever I want, and this  allows me to keep my personal fortune untouched.   (And Meghan thought she was the only one with brains!)


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> M must have really struggled when she realised that there already were pretty young women much more closely associated with the Diana and the Spencer name than she would ever be:
> View attachment 4715903
> 
> I have to say, Kate is really looking like a rock solid good egg in all of this. And that must make M doubly furious!


I hadn't seen these girls before.. they kinda remind me of jessica simpson


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881


It really does look nice in that photo. I didn't think it looked good on her but this clearly shows it's a beautiful dress.


----------



## sdkitty

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881


it does hang smoother on the manequin


----------



## lalame

lulilu said:


> I thought it was well known that Diana arranged for the press to see her doing things all the time.





Mrs.Z said:


> Yes, well known that Diana had a relationship with and used the press.



Thanks for correcting me, ladies... though now I really don’t get Harry’s issue.  What happened to Diana was clearly terrible but it seems like a case of “play with fire, get burned”... if he was so fearful it would happen again, why even play with fire? No reason to hate the press if you actually just disappear and not light a match here and there.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Thanks for correcting me, ladies... though now I really don’t get Harry’s issue.  What happened to Diana was clearly terrible but it seems like a case of “play with fire, get burned”... if he was so fearful it would happen again, why even play with fire? No reason to hate the press if you actually just disappear and not light a match here and there.


and, as I've said before, the issue with Meghan is a different one....not that she is being stalked by photogs but that the press is being mean and racist toward her (allegedly)


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> and, as I've said before, the issue with Meghan is a different one....not that she is being stalked by photogs but that the press is being mean and racist toward her (allegedly)



Is he so sheltered and she so incredibly sensitive or entitled that they don't understand it's just the nature of the beast? The press, like society in general, IS kinda mean and racist... you're in today, out tomorrow, and if you're exposed to hundreds of millions of people, well, millions of them will dislike you. It's the price of accumulating vast amounts of money and fame with not much effort aside from a pretty face. If you feed the beast by putting yourself out there constantly, what do you really expect.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> Is he so sheltered and she so incredibly sensitive or entitled that they don't understand it's just the nature of the beast? The press, like society in general, IS kinda mean and racist... you're in today, out tomorrow, and if you're exposed to hundreds of millions of people, well, millions of them will dislike you. It's the price of accumulating vast amounts of money and fame with not much effort aside from a pretty face. If you feed the beast by putting yourself out there constantly, what do you really expect.



I just liked that she apparently thought the press would some how treat her special and be “fair”.  LOL What planet did she come from?


----------



## Swe3tGirl

Well said by Sharon Osborne [emoji122]





Sharon Osbourne weighed in on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s letter to British tabloids during Wednesday’s edition of “The Talk” on Global.

In their letter, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex targeted four U.K. tabloids that they will have no further dealings with, and will no longer “offer themselves up as currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion” for publishing stories about them that were “distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason.”

As Osbourne pointed out, not only will their letter probably make no difference, she also questioned the timing of sending it in the midst of a worldwide pandemic.

“I’m a bit confused about this. Firstly, I think the timing is really, you know, terrible to do something like this,” said Osbourne.

“And the thing is, cut yourself off, you can cut yourself off without sending a letter. You refuse all interviews. It’s an easy thing to do, but you can never stop the pap selling pictures to papers,” she added.

“That’s the way the world works these days regarding the press. So, they can’t do that, but just when they were really nice, low-key doing their thing, doing their charitable work, and then they go and send a letter like the one they sent. I’m like, I just don’t get why they needed to be so public about it. Just do it. Just tell your publicist or all the people around you, your staff, that you won’t have anything to do with them,” she continued.

“It’s simple that way… I get their frustration… but it would have been better to say nothing and carry on,” Osbourne said.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> Is he so sheltered and she so incredibly sensitive or entitled that they don't understand it's just the nature of the beast? The press, like society in general, IS kinda mean and racist... you're in today, out tomorrow, and if you're exposed to hundreds of millions of people, well, millions of them will dislike you. It's the price of accumulating vast amounts of money and fame with not much effort aside from a pretty face. If you feed the beast by putting yourself out there constantly, what do you really expect.



True, and if they were low-key and performed their royal duties quietly, no one would have much of anything to say, but they can't do that - they love theatrics!


----------



## kkfiregirl

mdcx said:


> I have to say, Kate is really looking like a rock solid good egg in all of this. And that must make M doubly furious!



Right?! A devoted and fun mom & wife who is actually observing the "stay at home" order while managing to perform her royal duties virtually.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Meghan Markle is so ridiculously stupid.
> 
> She could always marry a prince after Harry . . . plenty of them in SA. She could be wife No. 3 or 4. They get a lot of money and live in ultimate luxury.



She's too old for a Saudi prince though, plus she'd need to learn how to shut her pie hole.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's too old for a Saudi prince though, plus she'd need to learn how to shut her pie hole.


Oh my word, can you imagine if she had married a Saudi Prince? She'd have to stick to the rules there.


----------



## papertiger

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881



That's probably because the mannequin allowed the ateliers to alter it.


----------



## Chagall

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881


It looks so elegant on the model. No matter your body type you can get good tailoring. It’s almost like she couldn’t be bothered. Love the dress!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> So, now that we've had a momentous day of some lovely photos of Prince Louis on his birthday inc a lovely one with his grandfather, plus footage of Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges clapping for our carers, what will Meghan be plotting next?



You just wait  couple of weeks until *6 May* 

All insignificant members of the BRF, C-19 and global economic collapse will aaaaaaaaaaaall be forgotten


----------



## Diamondbirdie

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881


I think they didn’t account for the weight of the fabric and all the movement she would need to do. It looks fine when it’s completely still!


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> That's probably because the mannequin allowed the ateliers to alter it.



The dress was beautiful and perfect for the occasion. So bizarre the fitting thing... Also the veil, beautiful in all its symbology of the Commonwealth which now seems so redundant.

Sharon Osbourne is right. Who disengages from the press by sending a letter to the tabloids?!

So fascinating to watch, this whole debacle.


----------



## carmen56

I certainly won't be welcoming her back.  She can go wherever she likes, as long as she doesn't set foot on these shores again.  Good riddance to bad rubbish.


Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think many of us Brits will welcome her back.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This book about harem life was amazing. 

Some Girls: My Life in a Harem https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003NX7O64/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_PCTOEb4D3D4SV 

MM has actually made everyone else in the RF look good!


----------



## Lounorada

Swe3tGirl said:


> In their letter, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex targeted four U.K. tabloids that they will have no further dealings with, and will *no longer “offer themselves up as currency for an economy of clickbait and distortion” for publishing stories about them that were “distorted, false, or invasive beyond reason*.”


Just seeing that again makes me laugh, roll my eyes and think- what about the bullsh*t, _false and distorted_ stories/rumours she makes up on a daily basis and 'leaks' to the media via a 'sOuRcE' or a 'fRiEnD', which are the definition of clickbait? I think we can all be pretty damn sure that those stories won't stop being published, especially when I would guess about 90% of those stories come from H&M's camp (or just themselves)  The delusions by these two fools is just jaw-dropping.
They don't event realise that THEY are the problem.


----------



## cafecreme15

papertiger said:


> You just wait  couple of weeks until *6 May*
> 
> All insignificant members of the BRF, C-19 and global economic collapse will aaaaaaaaaaaall be forgotten


Sorry if I'm dense, but what is on May 6?


----------



## kemilia

cafecreme15 said:


> Sorry if I'm dense, but what is on May 6?


Archie's birthday.


----------



## cafecreme15

kemilia said:


> Archie's birthday.


Ah, of course! Thank you


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> Archie's birthday.





cafecreme15 said:


> Sorry if I'm dense, but what is on May 6?



The countdown had already begun - she, sorry an 'insider' started mentioning it to her favoured media journalists in March. Not one birthday party planned for A, but 2. Party one, a picnic on the lawn at Grandmama's Scottish retreat (Balmoral - _supremely_ optimistic re-weather for picnic in Scotland in early May, honestly laughable) and the the other in North America. I read it in Cosmo but here's the source they quoted from:

https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...n-markles-plans-for-son-archies-1st-birthday/

Not sure how A could have been in both countries on one day but I guess the time difference will work in his favour if he'd done the US later in the day.

This C-19 virus must be making her tear her hair out. Poor child. She will literally be dining out on that poor boy for the rest of his life. Expect 6,000,000 pics of A on royal rocking-horse.


----------



## LittleStar88

The wedding dress really is beautiful. I think it is the kind of fabric that stretches and wrinkles with any movement (my wedding dress did this - by the end of the night it was loose everywhere, grrrrr) so it will only look perfect if you just stand there and look pretty - no sitting, bending, moving. 

If my wedding were to be broadcast globally and photographed forever and I had someone creating the dress for me, I would definitely choose a fabric that doesn't stretch out or show any wrinkles. I think the fabric they used for M's dress may have been the issue.

But it does look like thick fondant


----------



## mrsinsyder

OK I need to do some research and I could be wrong but it was said to the court today that Meghan had no contact with her father for two years before all this... I swore she had posted a picture on IG saying she was at Thanksgiving with him?


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> The countdown had already begun - she, sorry an 'insider' started mentioning it to her favoured media journalists in March. Not one birthday party planned for A, but 2. Party one, a picnic on the lawn at Grandmama's Scottish retreat (Balmoral - _supremely_ optimistic re-weather for picnic in Scotland in early May, honestly laughable) and the the other in North America. I read it in Cosmo but here's the source they quoted from:
> 
> https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...n-markles-plans-for-son-archies-1st-birthday/
> 
> Not sure how A could have been in both countries on one day but I guess the time difference will work in his favour if he'd done the US later in the day.
> 
> This C-19 virus must be making her tear her hair out. Poor child. She will literally be dining out on that poor boy for the rest of his life. Expect 6,000,000 pics of A on royal rocking-horse.


Meghan’s probably given Archie 2 birthdays like the Queen


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan’s probably given Archie 2 birthdays like the Queen



and 2 wedding dresses for 1 wedding.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I was right, it was in 2016. Hmm...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> and 2 wedding dresses for 1 wedding.


Yeah, one with a waist, one without


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I was right, it was in 2016. Hmm...


So many porkies


----------



## lanasyogamama

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, one with a waist, one without


I really loved the second dress.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> I really loved the second dress.


I did too, I thought she looked great.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> I really loved the second dress.


I meant the one on the mannequin


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> You just wait  couple of weeks until *6 May*
> 
> All insignificant members of the BRF, C-19 and global economic collapse will aaaaaaaaaaaall be forgotten



I'm holding out for May 19th to be the bigger hullabaloo. In a year we've barely seen or heard anything about Archie. But right from the start we've been told so often how their love story is one for the ages.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I'm holding out for May 19th to be the bigger hullabaloo. In a year we've barely seen or heard anything about Archie. But right from the start we've been told so often how their love story is one for the ages.



Their GREAT love story, please. That's what she said in that Vanity Fair (?) interview.


----------



## Lounorada

mrsinsyder said:


> I was right, it was in 2016. Hmm...


For someone who seems to lie so much, she's terrible at keeping track of or remembering those lies. She should at least realise that in this day and age with everything documented on social media, it's pretty easy for people check back and call her out on lies she may have told.


----------



## lulilu

Is anyone else sick unto death of seeing their photos everywhere?  The engagement photo and the one with that green dress makes me want to punch her.  You can't get away from the photos.

And I am sick of the thoughts/statements attributed to her in the press (from sources no doubt), e.g., that they are "*CRUSHED*" because they can't have a big bash in LA for A's birthday.  *Crushed* over cancelled birthday party plans?  Really?  How dramatic and shallow?  With the problems others are suffering today?


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> Is anyone else sick unto death of seeing their photos everywhere?  The engagement photo and the one with that green dress makes me want to punch her.  You can't get away from the photos.
> 
> And I am sick of the thoughts/statements attributed to her in the press (from sources no doubt), e.g., that they are "*CRUSHED*" because they can't have a big bash in LA for A's birthday.  *Crushed* over cancelled birthday party plans?  Really?  How dramatic and shallow?  With the problems others are suffering today?



She is so ridiculous and clueless. I'm not going to blame Harry for this one because we know it's all her. As if any 1-year-old has ever remembered a birthday party. The party business is ALL ABOUT MEGHAN behaving like the spoiled little princess she believes she is.

Like sure people are dying but I can't have my party! Woe is me! Why is my life so hard?! Waaaaaah!


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> She is so ridiculous and clueless. I'm not going to blame Harry for this one because we know it's all her. As if any 1-year-old has ever remembered a birthday party. The party business is ALL ABOUT MEGHAN behaving like the spoiled little princess she believes she is.
> 
> Like sure people are dying but I can't have my party! Woe is me! Why is my life so hard?! Waaaaaah!



Not just a birthday party... but an A-Lister Birthday Party! Don’t you understand?! She suffers so!


----------



## threadbender

Around here, the fire departments are doing drive bys for birthdays. Maybe they can ask their local FD to do the same? lol


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> Is anyone else sick unto death of seeing their photos everywhere?  The engagement photo and the one with that green dress makes me want to punch her.  You can't get away from the photos.
> 
> And I am sick of the thoughts/statements attributed to her in the press (from sources no doubt), e.g., that they are "*CRUSHED*" because they can't have a big bash in LA for A's birthday.  *Crushed* over cancelled birthday party plans?  Really?  How dramatic and shallow?  With the problems others are suffering today?


I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Not just a birthday party... but an A-Lister Birthday Party! Don’t you understand?! She suffers so!



She should be happy it was cancelled. It saves her from the shame of finding out none of those A-listers she invited are going to show up for a baby birthday party. Honestly, what A-lister has time for such nonsense unless it is for family, close friends or they can get some business networking done? 

Meghan could attract a lot of D-listers to her party if she puts on a good spread and has an open bar.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!



I'm sorry about your aunt, Sharont2305.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


Right? Early February, when I'd already been to too many funerals than I'd cared for  for a completely new year I announced I wouldn't attend any more funerals in 2020 and whoever else wanted to die would have to do without me. I hadn't factored in there would be a freaking pandemic that would keep us from even going.

I'm sorry for your loss and the nasty circumstances *hugs*


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


I'm sorry for your loss, I hope you're doing ok. And I hope this thread provides some entertainment at least.


----------



## Sharont2305

Thank you @bag-mania @QueenofWrapDress
Thankfully it wasn't due to this horrible disease, natural causes.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> I'm sorry for your loss, I hope you're doing ok. And I hope this thread provides some entertainment at least.


Thank you @kemilia


----------



## papertiger

mrsinsyder said:


> I did too, I thought she looked great.



This is IMO only but I think she planned to wear the Stella McCartney but it obviously would not have been deemed suitable (no sleeves, bare shoulders) so had to get another too. I know there is a fashion to have 2 dresses, one ceremony and another for reception but that second one is just so close to a normal ceremonial one.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> Is anyone else sick unto death of seeing their photos everywhere?  The engagement photo and the one with that green dress makes me want to punch her.  You can't get away from the photos.
> 
> And I am sick of the thoughts/statements attributed to her in the press (from sources no doubt), e.g., that they are "*CRUSHED*" because they can't have a big bash in LA for A's birthday.  *Crushed* over cancelled birthday party plans?  Really?  How dramatic and shallow?  With the problems others are suffering today?


She’s “crushed” because she planned on having a MEGA-CELEB birthday bash for Archie!  You know, where she could invite all her (supposed) Celeb “friends”!!! .. I’m sure that’s so much more important than her son’s actual birthday!!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> She is so ridiculous and clueless. I'm not going to blame Harry for this one because we know it's all her. As if any 1-year-old has ever remembered a birthday party. The party business is ALL ABOUT MEGHAN behaving like the spoiled little princess she believes she is.
> 
> Like sure people are dying but I can't have my party! Woe is me! Why is my life so hard?! Waaaaaah!


I was just about to say the same - birthday parties given for infants are for the benefit of the parents not the kid.


papertiger said:


> This is IMO only but I think she planned to wear the Stella McCartney but it obviously would not have been deemed suitable (no sleeves, bare shoulders) so had to get another too. I know there is a fashion to have 2 dresses, one ceremony and another for reception but that second one is just so close to a normal ceremonial one.


That’s an intersting idea and might explain the dodgy fit!


----------



## V0N1B2

Lounorada said:


> For someone who seems to lie so much, she's terrible at keeping track of or remembering those lies. She should at least realise that in this day and age with everything documented on social media, it's pretty easy for people check back and call her out on lies she may have told.


Yep. Like all the blog posts on how amazing her father is/was. Lighting her school plays, taking her fishing, making a dark room for her when she was a teen, teaching her how to find her light etc. The most amazing father who sacrificed everything for her so she could live her dream...
It will be interesting to read how she'll be describing "H" in two years.


----------



## cafecreme15

For real! I can’t even say I’m “crushed” about my cancelled wedding. There are more important things afoot, and sometimes you have to sacrifice things in your own small life for the greater good. But can’t expect someone like Meg to understand that - it goes against everything she believes.


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> For someone who seems to lie so much, she's terrible at keeping track of or remembering those lies. She should at least realise that in this day and age with everything documented on social media, it's pretty easy for people check back and call her out on lies she may have told.


But, you see .. people like that lie SO much that they start to believe their own lies (my Father was like that), and even if you DO call them out with the facts, in their mind .. the 'lie' is truth!


----------



## doni

I wouldn’t take this crushed about the birthday party thing seriously. But I can easily believe Harry is having a hard time being away from the UK right now. I mean, that is all he knows, being part of the royal family and in his best moments, representing and supporting his country, whether in the arm forces or as a royal. And being very well loved for that. To see  that the UK is now going through what is possibly its darkest hour since he was born, and him not be part of it, while his whole family is out there, fulfilling their mission... It is all very well to bring meals around LA, but royals are bred to serve their country... Like are the military, his other education...  It has to be hard for him.


----------



## sdkitty

cafecreme15 said:


> For real! I can’t even say I’m “crushed” about my cancelled wedding. There are more important things afoot, and sometimes you have to sacrifice things in your own small life for the greater good. But can’t expect someone like Meg to understand that - it goes against everything she believes.


did she really say that?  
if so, she can't be very smart.  when people are dying?  and the kid isn't old enough to know what a birthday is?
she must ber nuts....and not taking advice from anyone


----------



## bellecate

Gosh, I wonder who he could be referring to?


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> Yep. Like all the blog posts on how amazing her father is/was. Lighting her school plays, taking her fishing, making a dark room for her when she was a teen, teaching her how to find her light etc. The most amazing father who sacrificed everything for her so she could live her dream...
> It will be interesting to read how she'll be describing "H" in two years.


Yes, and let’s not forget Bogart.  He featured a lot till he got inconvenient/less photogenic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cafecreme15

sdkitty said:


> did she really say that?
> if so, she can't be very smart.  when people are dying?  and the kid isn't old enough to know what a birthday is?
> she must ber nuts....and not taking advice from anyone


I mean who really knows what she actually said - I believe this is what a "source" communicated to the tabloids. But from the behavior we've seen I could legitimately see her thinking of a cancelled bday party as a travesty.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bellecate said:


> Gosh, I wonder who he could be referring to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4716385


 They keep making it so easy to take the pi$$ don’t they?


----------



## PewPew

bellecate said:


> Gosh, I wonder who he could be referring to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4716385



Haha! How dare the people who needed to have meals delivered be so preoccupied by their own situation not to recognize the Duchess from her amazing eyes and style?! HRH Megan was FORCED to pull down her mask, so the commonfolk could receive her blessings. After all, H&M sacrificed too much not to be recognized after dragging out a Daddy-funded security caravan and Sunshine Sachs (PR firm) arranging to edit video to look like security footage.


----------



## Lounorada

CeeJay said:


> But, you see .. people like that lie SO much that they start to believe their own lies (my Father was like that), and even if you DO call them out with the facts, in their mind .. the 'lie' is truth!


This is so true, I agree.
My narcissistic ex-boss (that I mentioned on here before) used to lie all the time about things to make her look good, to inflate her ego, to play a victim etc. and if it wasn't a lie she was telling it would be a _huge_ exaggeration of the truth to get the reaction she wanted from someone. I never confronted her about the lies and exaggerations, but there were many that I found out the truth about while working for her.


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> I wouldn’t take this crushed about the birthday party thing seriously. But I can easily believe Harry is having a hard time being away from the UK right now. I mean, that is all he knows, being part of the royal family and in his best moments, representing and supporting his country, whether in the arm forces or as a royal. And being very well loved for that. To see  that the UK is now going through what is possibly its darkest hour since he was born, and him not be part of it, while his whole family is out there, fulfilling their mission... It is all very well to bring meals around LA, but royals are bred to serve their country... Like are the military, his other education...  It has to be hard for him.


I can see Harry not being happy, after all .. this dog-gone virus spoiled all their plans to become part of the Celebrity hoi-polloi out here, but instead .. having markle'd so many of his UK friends (for her), now what?????  What I also find highly ironic, is how he commented about "handing out prizes" not being glamorous, but what are they doing here in LA .. handing out food???  I'm sure when he agreed to the move, it was all based on going to all these Celebrity events where .. let's face it, he would have gotten attention .. he is a PRINCE after all!!!


----------



## beautymagpie

CeeJay said:


> But, you see .. people like that lie SO much that they start to believe their own lies (my Father was like that), and even if you DO call them out with the facts, in their mind .. the 'lie' is truth!



 Yeah my mum's the same. She believes her own version, constantly rewrites history and will get more and more intense every time you see/talk until you agree and she then simmers down. It's bat*&+t.


----------



## beautymagpie

T


doni said:


> I wouldn’t take this crushed about the birthday party thing seriously. But I can easily believe Harry is having a hard time being away from the UK right now. I mean, that is all he knows, being part of the royal family and in his best moments, representing and supporting his country, whether in the arm forces or as a royal. And being very well loved for that. To see  that the UK is now going through what is possibly its darkest hour since he was born, and him not be part of it, while his whole family is out there, fulfilling their mission... It is all very well to bring meals around LA, but royals are bred to serve their country... Like are the military, his other education...  It has to be hard for him.



Can you imagine have staff, not worrying about the basics of bills and shopping to it being on you to sort? I bet their staff are having a hell of a time. They'll be blamed for it.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> It will be interesting to read how she'll be describing "H" in two years.



Meghan likes to revel in victimhood and I can see her pretending she has overcome great adversity. She might paint Harry as an abuser that she had to get away from for Archie's safety. Or that Harry's mental illness made him too unstable to live with. The sky's the limit with the tall tales she could create.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> I wouldn’t take this crushed about the birthday party thing seriously. But I can easily believe Harry is having a hard time being away from the UK right now. I mean, that is all he knows, being part of the royal family and in his best moments, representing and supporting his country, whether in the arm forces or as a royal. And being very well loved for that. To see  that the UK is now going through what is possibly its darkest hour since he was born, and him not be part of it, while his whole family is out there, fulfilling their mission... It is all very well to bring meals around LA, but royals are bred to serve their country... Like are the military, his other education...  It has to be hard for him.



Apparently he doesn't believe it. He's all about conspiracy theory and thinks it 'depends on who you read'. My DH thinks he's high most of the time.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> She’s “crushed” because she planned on having a MEGA-CELEB birthday bash for Archie!  You know, where she could invite all her (supposed) Celeb “friends”!!! .. I’m sure that’s so much more important than her son’s actual birthday!!!



Exactly. It's all appearance, there is no inside, nothing behind, life as a hologram.


----------



## jennlt

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


I'm so sorry for your loss.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Meghan likes to revel in victimhood and I can see her pretending she has overcome great adversity. She might paint Harry as an abuser that she had to get away from for Archie's safety. Or that Harry's mental illness made him too unstable to live with. The sky's the limit with the tall tales she could create.



100%


----------



## mrsinsyder

bellecate said:


> Gosh, I wonder who he could be referring to?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4716385


Rock bottom is when PAT SAJAK is making fun of you.


----------



## mia55

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


Sorry for your loss


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Rock bottom is when PAT SAJAK is making fun of you.



I'm pretty sure Pat is worth more than Harry and Meghan put together.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> I'm pretty sure Pat is worth more than Harry and Meghan put together.


Oh I'm sure and I love him but it's hilarious that he's throwing shade.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More of her hypocrisy.  She admitted to not communicating with her father for 2 or more years. It’s laughable that she says she _knows_ he was distraught when she personally never speaks to him. No, hearsay is not admissible. 

Knowing how important protocol and manners are to the Royals, wonder why H _never_ made the effort to meet Thomas?  Why wouldn’t Charles insist on that meeting? Meeting the in-laws before the wedding is vital to the success of the marriage, even if it is the bride’s second or third wedding and especially if the bride discourages it.  So many red flags with this story. IMO, this blatant oversight/disrespect makes the marriage look like a scam from the beginning. 





mrsinsyder said:


> I was right, it was in 2016. Hmm...


----------



## 1LV

I wonder if Sunshine Sachs has any regrets.  Or is it a case of the Markles money spends just like anyone else’s?


----------



## mrsinsyder

1LV said:


> I wonder if Sunshine Sachs has any regrets.  Or is it a case of the Markles money spends just like anyone else’s?


They worked for Harvey Weinstein so I doubt it.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I wonder if Sunshine Sachs has any regrets.  *Or is it a case of the Markles money spends just like anyone else’s?*



It's that. And it would be a feather in the company's cap if they can somehow turn them around and make something out of them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Exactly. 
If H misses anything about the UK, it is his party pals and their ‘drugs’. Guessing he knows the location of every underground and private bar, wine cellar, and speakeasy across the UK. 



papertiger said:


> Apparently he doesn't believe it. He's all about conspiracy theory and thinks it 'depends on who you read'. My DH thinks he's high most of the time.


----------



## lulilu

cafecreme15 said:


> For real! I can’t even say I’m “crushed” about my cancelled wedding. There are more important things afoot, and sometimes you have to sacrifice things in your own small life for the greater good. But can’t expect someone like Meg to understand that - it goes against everything she believes.



Sorry to hear it -- a big disappointment, but glad you are not CRUSHED.  (j/k)



cafecreme15 said:


> I mean who really knows what she actually said - I believe this is what a "source" communicated to the tabloids. But from the behavior we've seen I could legitimately see her thinking of a cancelled bday party as a travesty.



Yes, I did say it was from a source, but the reports all used "CRUSHED" in capital letters when reporting about it.  I just think it's funny and shallow.  I never had big first birthday parties for my kids -- they are too young, don't remember it and end up cranky with too much attention.  Small family gatherings are more appropriate, unless as has been said, the party is really a chance for the parents to socialize and get more congratulations..


----------



## CeeJay

.. and their favorite UK 'paper', just put this out .. let the show begin!!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...two-years-despite-claiming-felt-harassed.html

But .. as @mrsinsyder was able to pretty quickly find the Thanksgiving celebration pic, won't his attorneys find this too and so this whole nonsense of not having contact with him for 2 years ... ????


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> More of her hypocrisy.  She admitted to not communicating with her father for 2 or more years. It’s laughable that she says she _knows_ he was distraught when she personally never speaks to him. No, hearsay is not admissible.
> 
> Knowing how important protocol and manners are to the Royals, wonder *why H never made the effort to meet Thomas?  Why wouldn’t Charles insist on that meeting?* Meeting the in-laws before the wedding is vital to the success of the marriage, even if it is the bride’s second or third wedding and especially if the bride discourages it.  So many red flags with this story. IMO, this blatant oversight/disrespect makes the marriage look like a scam from the beginning.



Totally agree, *CarryOn*, regarding the BRF meeting the new in-laws - how did that slip through the cracks or was this a matter of “we already know that MM is totally unacceptable as a bride so we do not need further proof”?

Also, how is it THAT MM’s FATHER DID NOT DEMAND TO MEET HIS FUTURE SON-IN-LAW before the wedding? Especially since their carbon imprint is not large enough already

What type of family is this? What type of parent does not meet a new member of their family before the wedding?

There is a saying, and pls correct me if I’m wrong, it is something like:
 “As so it begins, shall it remain”

This entire wedding - the bride, the groom, the families, the pomp & circumstance, the waste of tax-payer’s money on these two con-artists - it is just too ridiculous to imagine

The only one keeping a clear head is QEII
♥️


----------



## 1LV

mrsinsyder said:


> They worked for Harvey Weinstein so I doubt it.


How did I forget that?  Gross.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> They worked for Harvey Weinstein so I doubt it.


.. and there again, irony .. after her (supposed) comments about Prince Andrew!


----------



## gazoo

This is what happens when children are coddled and not told "NO".

Meghan is widely known to have been spoiled from birth. Add the divorce and her parents likely went even further,  always assuring her of her incredible specialness. Harry too, has always been protected and coddled, and likely even more so after the loss of his mother and all the messiness with Charles/Camila/Diana. You just know Prince Charles has likely always fallen over himself to try to make it all up to Harry.

I suspect Harry has always been a total brat, and the narrative of Britain's Most Loved Prince was helped along by his minders and the Men In Gray. Always behind the scenes, protecting him, guiding him, and likely cleaning up even more messes than we were ever privy to. (Nazi uniforms and naked billiards games in Vegas.) Then along comes a "blind date" and for whatever reason (a pregnancy scare or perhaps it's simply Prince Charles' version of Harry having a bad case of being "c*ntstruck"), Harry decides this is the woman he wanted. And he wanted her NOW. No waiting around to make sure it was a proper fit for all.

And what did those in charge do? They gave in to him, and gave even more by bending THE RULES. Megan was given an invite to Balmoral for the Royal Christmas before their wedding, something that Kate, the future Queen Consort FFS, wasn't even allowed. The Queen took Meghan on a solo trip a minute after the wedding, again elevating Meghan's own sense of importance. They got a fancy CHURCH wedding; something Camila, the other future Queen Consort and the Heir to the fecking throne didn't get. Despite Meghan being a divorcée like them. What other rules could have been bent or broken in favor of the wayward Prince that we aren't even privy too?  

And what do you get when you add all this up? Two utterly spoiled middle-aged brats that feel superior to everyone and entitled to everything they want. Two brats that haven't seemingly cottoned to the fact that they are/were part of a Monarchy. That while that same Monarchy afforded them bottomless privileges and comforts, their roles were always to serve the reigning Monarch.

Meghan has been writing letters her whole life. She continually brings up the one she wrote to the dish soap company. Funny how she omits that it was a class project. It's such an ubiquitous part of her self narrative that it's part of her IMDB profile. (Harry has a page too now!!)

So of course she will continue to write letters. Letters that are now part of a trial case that she started. Letters to newspapers to tell them she will never, ever, ever, speak to them again. Likely even more letters will come with time. Perhaps one day our children's children will all gather around a book of bound letters written by the infamous American Duchess by marriage, and marvel at her penmanship and obvious fortitude to get so much down on paper.

What I can't figure out is if the Queen has given them all these concessions, all this rope per se, to look completely supportive and blameless, or if it's just part of the playbook in this family, to always give in to Harry because he's a wild card and they're afraid of his outbursts (temper tantrums). Either way, the Queen has managed to thwart the whole "they're so toxic, and like, so racist, and ugh, so cold, and OMG it's been so hard and _SOUL CRUSHING_" accusations from Meghan and her dubious "friends" that seem to be on speed dial to the press.

Long live the Queen.


----------



## beautymagpie

Apparently it's the Mail's fault she's estranged from her dad:


----------



## beautymagpie

Do you think the media or public by a petition can write to them to tell them there's a difference between public interest and what the public are interested in, and they don't meet the criteria anymore so please stop with the set up photo oops.


----------



## 1LV

gazoo said:


> This is what happens when children are coddled and not told "NO".
> 
> Meghan is widely known to have been spoiled from birth. Add the divorce and her parents likely went even further,  always assuring her of her incredible specialness. Harry too, has always been protected and coddled, and likely even more so after the loss of his mother and all the messiness with Charles/Camila/Diana. You just know Prince Charles has likely always fallen over himself to try to make it all up to Harry.
> 
> I suspect Harry has always been a total brat, and the narrative of Britain's Most Loved Prince was helped along by his minders and the Men In Gray. Always behind the scenes, protecting him, guiding him, and likely cleaning up even more messes than we were ever privy to. (Nazi uniforms and naked billiards games in Vegas.) Then along comes a "blind date" and for whatever reason (a pregnancy scare or perhaps it's simply Prince Charles' version of Harry having a bad case of being "c*ntstruck"), Harry decides this is the woman he wanted. And he wanted her NOW. No waiting around to make sure it was a proper fit for all.
> 
> And what did those in charge do? They gave in to him, and gave even more by bending THE RULES. Megan was given an invite to Balmoral for the Royal Christmas before their wedding, something that Kate, the future Queen Consort FFS, wasn't even allowed. The Queen took Meghan on a solo trip a minute after the wedding, again elevating Meghan's own sense of importance. They got a fancy CHURCH wedding; something Camila, the other future Queen Consort and the Heir to the fecking throne didn't get. Despite Meghan being a divorcée like them. What other rules could have been bent or broken in favor of the wayward Prince that we aren't even privy too?
> 
> And what do you get when you add all this up? Two utterly spoiled middle-aged brats that feel superior to everyone and entitled to everything they want. Two brats that haven't seemingly cottoned to the fact that they are/were part of a Monarchy. That while that same Monarchy afforded them bottomless privileges and comforts, their roles were always to serve the reigning Monarch.
> 
> Meghan has been writing letters her whole life. She continually brings up the one she wrote to the dish soap company. Funny how she omits that it was a class project. It's such an ubiquitous part of her self narrative that it's part of her IMDB profile. (Harry has a page too now!!)
> 
> So of course she will continue to write letters. Letters that are now part of a trial case that she started. Letters to newspapers to tell them she will never, ever, ever, speak to them again. Likely even more letters will come with time. Perhaps one day our children's children will all gather around a book of bound letters written by the infamous American Duchess by marriage, and marvel at her penmanship and obvious fortitude to get so much down on paper.
> 
> What I can't figure out is if the Queen has given them all these concessions, all this rope per se, to look completely supportive and blameless, or if it's just part of the playbook in this family, to always give in to Harry because he's a wild card and they're afraid of his outbursts (temper tantrums). Either way, the Queen has managed to thwart the whole "they're so toxic, and like, so racist, and ugh, so cold, and OMG it's been so hard and _SOUL CRUSHING_" accusations from Meghan and her dubious "friends" that seem to be on speed dial to the press.
> 
> Long live the Queen.


So well said.  You can’t possibly know how strongly I agree with this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

mrsinsyder said:


> OK I need to do some research and I could be wrong but it was said to the court today that Meghan had no contact with her father for two years before all this... I swore she had posted a picture on IG saying she was at Thanksgiving with him?





Clearblueskies said:


> Yes, and let’s not forget Bogart.  He featured a lot till he got inconvenient/less photogenic.


I felt so sad for Bogart and Guy. I'm sure they were bonded and each other's BFF. I just hope that Bogart ended up in a loving forever home.


----------



## PewPew

papertiger said:


> Apparently he doesn't believe it. *He's all about conspiracy theory and thinks it 'depends on who you read'.* My DH thinks he's high most of the time.



Oh wow this is really true. People were outraged by his careless Zoom comments that things are better Covid-wise in the UK than the evil media portrays. People were like, “how the heck would you know what’s *really*happening in the UK?” He’s not there, nor can he get government-insider info anymore (if they ever trusted him with it before). But the UK media is evil b/c they’re not universally flattering to H&M, so all media are falsely reporting on Covid. Right.

Harry also came off as a baby, complaining about how hard it was for him to be at home with a young child all day. Likely true, but he’s got tons of help that the people he’s Zoom-“inspiring” don’t.... I think papertiger’s husband is right about him being high. He always looks out-of-it & disheveled. I used to think Meghan wouldn’t allow it bc she was all about “clean living”, but she was pictured smoking (after starting her clean living image and blog) and we are regularly seeing that H&M don’t practice what they insta-preach.... He’s probably easier to control when he can get high.


----------



## marietouchet

beautymagpie said:


> Do you think the media or public by a petition can write to them to tell them there's a difference between public interest and what the public are interested in, and they don't meet the criteria anymore so please stop with the set up photo oops.



You folks are amazing , always things in ways I don’t think of , carry on please!
Round of applause for all on the thread
Where is the thumbs up emoji when I need him ?


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> You folks are amazing , always things in ways I don’t think of , carry on please!
> Round of applause for all on the thread
> Where is the thumbs up emoji when I need him ?



He's on the animated group


----------



## bag-mania

These court proceedings must be televised!!!!! I need to watch her lie under oath. 

*Meghan Markle: ‘I’m ready to take the stand’. Duchess’s lawyer says she is prepared for high-stakes courtroom showdown with Thomas*
Meghan Markle is willing to take the stand in a legal battle with the British press, it was revealed today, setting up an extraordinary High Court showdown with her estranged father who she branded a liar.

The Duchess of Sussex, 38, is suing Associated Newspapers, owner of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, over an article which reproduced parts of a handwritten note she sent to Mr Markle, 75, in August 2018, three months after he was unable to walk her down the aisle following a heart attack.

The first stage of her case started at the High Court in London today where the publisher made an application to have parts of her claim thrown out. It was held via video link due to coronavirus.

Her celebrity barrister David Sherborne told the hearing his client had suffered 'great personal anguish and distress' as part of an alleged ‘agenda' against her in the press before making it clear Meghan would give evidence during any future trial.

He said: 'The defendant [Associated Newspapers] wants to cross-examine her [Meghan] as to whether that belief is reasonable or not - and they can do that'.

The Duchess's 'bring it on attitude' emerged near the end of the day’s proceedings, which the Sussexes are believed to have watched online from Los Angeles, where they have settled with their son Archie.

The High Court case has been dubbed 'Markle vs Markle' in which the duchess's estranged father Thomas, 75, is prepared to give evidence against his own daughter in a box office trial where a judge would decide who is telling the truth about their rift and the letter Meghan sent to him in August 2018. 

On Monday court papers lodged by Meghan’s lawyers branded her father a liar and denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of her deteriorating relationship with him - and her handwritten letter to him- with People magazine in America.

Thomas Markle has said he felt pressured to share the letter with the press after its contents were misrepresented and he was 'vilified' in the People article, telling the Mail on Sunday: 'I have to defend myself. I only released parts of the letter because other parts were so painful. The letter didn't seem loving to me. I found it hurtful.'

Meghan would also be asked under oath whether she knowingly' allowed her friends to leak details of the letter to People magazine to attack her father. These five unnamed best friends could also be forced to testify at the High Court in London.

The court heard today that Meghan alleges her estranged father Thomas was 'harassed and exploited' by the press despite not speaking to him for two years or asking if he agrees with her claims.

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...two-years-despite-claiming-felt-harassed.html


----------



## marietouchet

Five of Meghan Markle's best friends could be called to give evidence
https://mol.im/a/8255225
Boy I bet the friends hate this


----------



## Suncatcher

What a train wreck. There is no salvaging here, no ability for a comeback or a reinvention, no matter how much North Americans love a good comeback story. So much of QEII to admire and learn from; this must pain her tremendously to see the BRF drawn through the muck but we don’t hear a peep from her.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> To me, she is realizing he has serious issues that she cannot handle. Diana’s family has known issues with mental health. Guessing that early on she and Doria thought they could handle his issues. Based on his videos and the delivery photos, it looks like he is worse than in his 20s. To my eye, in the delivery photo, she wasn’t holding his hand, she was pulling him by the wrist. For a zillion reasons, she really should have listened to the Palace. They are better equipped to handle this, whatever it is.
> 
> ETA: Did not know that Charles was in therapy for 14 years.
> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-prince-charles-sir-john-batten-a7964551.html



She could always ring up Kimmy Kakes for some pointers.............


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh M & H...the road to financial independence is NOT paved with costly litigation.  Who is paying for this 6 or 7 figure battle?


----------



## kipp

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh M & H...the road to financial independence is NOT paved with costly litigation.  Who is paying for this 6 or 7 figure battle?


I was wondering how they were going to pay for this, especially now that the $$$$$ aren't pouring in as they had expected.  But on the other hand, it will keep Me-gain in the news indefinitely.


----------



## Mrs.Z

“Denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of her deteriorating relationship with him”

Having positioned herself as an absolute nut about privacy does anyone believe she has “close” friends that would just think it was ok to speak to the press....this is a giant load of crap


----------



## bellecate

poopsie said:


> She could always ring up Kimmy Kakes for some pointers.............


At this point I don't think even 'Kimmy Kakes' would take her call.


----------



## rose60610

threadbender said:


> Around here, the fire departments are doing drive bys for birthdays. Maybe they can ask their local FD to do the same? lol



More fitting would be a drive-by line of the L.A. Sanitation Crew


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Mrs.Z said:


> “Denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of her deteriorating relationship with him”
> 
> Having positioned herself as an absolute nut about privacy does anyone believe she has “close” friends that would just think it was ok to speak to the press....this is a giant load of crap



*Mrs Z*, THIS is the most logical post
Her “close” friends and she plotted and planned the story to People

The unspoken signal to other celebs is obvious, yes, if MM will throw her “close” friends under the bus in a legal suit, then she will do the same to anyone else

 Along with her prodigious mis-judgement of influencing a British royal - who up until his marriage seemed quite satisfied with his life, the BRF and the UK - to leave all his Royal-ness behind for an unknown and maybe an unattainable future motivated by only sheer greed

Karma is a biatch but supremely satisfying to watch ♥️


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> “Denied she knew her influential friends planned to reveal details of her deteriorating relationship with him”
> 
> Having positioned herself as an absolute nut about privacy does anyone believe she has “close” friends that would just think it was ok to speak to the press....this is a giant load of crap


.. and how many of us think that there is a very likely chance that said "close" friends will be new additions to the "Markle-dom" Kingdom!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Mrs Z*, THIS is the most logical post
> Her “close” friends and she plotted and planned the story to People
> 
> The unspoken signal to other celebs is obvious, yes, if MM will throw her “close” friends under the bus in a legal suit, then she will do the same to anyone else
> 
> Along with her prodigious mis-judgement of influencing a British royal - who up until his marriage seemed quite satisfied with his life, BRF and the UK - to leave all his Royal-ness behind for an unknown and maybe an unattainable future motivated by only sheer greed
> 
> Karma is a biatch but supremely satisfying to watch ♥️


RIGHT?? .. if I had been a "friend" (_which I don't think I would have ever because I would have seen through her nonsense from the git-go_), I would SOOOOOOOOO distance myself right now (remember what Serena said recently)????  

I guess her Dad will never see his grandson; then again, I wonder how many times Doria has actually "been" with him???


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> At this point I don't think even 'Kimmy Kakes' would take her call.



I can just hear PMK "Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo"
You know you are toxic and lower than a snake belly when even the Ks would pass on your a$$


----------



## Lounorada

beautymagpie said:


> Do you think the media or public by a petition can write to them to tell them there's a difference between public interest and what the public are interested in, and they don't meet the criteria anymore so please stop with the set up photo oops.


This 
Also, not only do they want to control exactly what the press is aloud to publish about them (only positive bullsh*t) they are also trying to tell the public what topics they should consider 'public interest' and 'what the public are interested in'?
Uhmm, NO. People will decide that for themselves, but you did marry into the British Royal Family and that kinda automatically makes you _public interest. _
Harry should already know that, it's all he's ever know since birth.


----------



## chicinthecity777

@bag-mania court proceedings are not allowed to be televised in the UK. I suspect that's why she feels so brazen to testify. I guess secretly she also wishes it could be televised so she can put on her best acting performance yet!


----------



## youngster

The actual trial won't be until the end of 2020 or early 2021 per the DM article. Looks like they were arguing matters related to the scope in today's hearing. 

That's a long time from now, plenty of time to settle or drop it even. I can imagine the 5 friends would not be happy to be called to the UK to testify, subject themselves to cross examination, and incur their own legal expenses.  All their communications from that time frame with each other and MM would have to be handed over, text messages and emails. So, yeah, imagine what might be revealed from that.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This whole thing will only turn UK media more against her! I can't wait!


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> The unspoken signal to other celebs is obvious, yes, if MM will throw her “close” friends under the bus in a legal suit, then she will do the same to anyone else



Are other celebs following this story? Maybe I’ve missed it but I haven’t heard any of this reported in the US media yet. American celebrities may be completely unaware of the shenanigans.


----------



## threadbender

chicinthecity777 said:


> @bag-mania court proceedings are not allowed to be televised in the UK. I suspect that's why she feels so brazen to testify. I guess secretly she also wishes it could be televised so she can put on her best acting performance yet!


Every time I imagine her testifying, I see Jodi Arias when she was on the stand.  Delusional. sociopathic narcissist


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> Are other celebs following this story? *Maybe I’ve missed it but I haven’t heard any of this reported in the US media yet. *American celebrities may be completely unaware of the shenanigans.



*bag-mania*, it’s everywhere in the news online, internationally and national news in the US and UK


----------



## jcnc

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm crushed because I couldn't go to a dear aunts funeral!


So sorry for your loss


----------



## PewPew

Were the 5 friends actually mentioned by name in the original article, or are the sources something People Magazine will be requested to hand over? _People_ had seemed to be in H&M’s pocket with the months of positive coverage.


----------



## Mrs.Z

PewPew said:


> Were the 5 friends actually mentioned by name in the original article, or are the sources something People Magazine will be requested to hand over? (Until recently People had seemed to be in H&M’s pocket with the months of positive coverage.)


No....the friends are anonymous.  One is Jessica .....the rest are Meghan.  Bottom line: friends don’t let friends get subpoenaed !


----------



## mdcx

I suspect the friends are Jessica, Misha, a couple from Suits and Marcus. The ones from Suits probably aren’t as cashed up as the others, so they may crack first imo.
I do wonder if M even answers their calls these days.


----------



## imgg

I am convinced they are following the playbook of the Kardasians- anything to stay in the media.  Good, bad, doesn't matter as long as they are constantly being talked about.  It worked for the Kardashians, made them stupid wealthy.


----------



## Megs

I am so lost on this train wreck I can't even remember what exactly she is looking for in this lawsuit. Head pats?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

marietouchet said:


> Five of Meghan Markle's best friends could be called to give evidence
> https://mol.im/a/8255225





Mrs.Z said:


> No....the friends are anonymous.  One is Jessica .....the rest are Meghan.  Bottom line: friends don’t let friends get subpoenaed !



Ooh, no wonder M’s team doesn’t seem bothered & she’s happy to testify! If the opposition subpoenas the writer(s) for _People_ to get the names, _People_ will cite “journalistic integrity” in not revealing sources. And integrity aside, they risk future sources (PR people) drying up if they spill. There will be little recourse for prosecutors.

Sometimes journalists are held in contempt for big cases, but the U.S. isn’t handing over a reporter for this. The reporter would just have to avoid traveling to the UK and Commonwealth like Anne Sacoolas (who killed Harry Dunn) to avoid prosecution. In the same fashion, Prince Andrew acn ignore any U.S. supoena (as long as he doesn’t travel in the U.S.) since the UK would never extradite him.

But it will make things interesting if they subpoena Jessica!


----------



## PewPew

Megs said:


> I am so lost on this train wreck I can't even remember what exactly she is looking for in this lawsuit. Head pats?



In the UK, if you can prove you were maliciously wronged, you can request a gag order placed on a publication, so they’re not allowed to mention you. And they can’t even write that they’re not allowed to mention you. So if she ever actually does something globally newsworthy, they can’t mention it.

The 1st Amendment (freedom of press) precludes that type of gag order in the U.S.


----------



## poopsie

imgg said:


> I am convinced they are following the playbook of the Kardasians- anything to stay in the media.  Good, bad, doesn't matter as long as they are constantly being talked about.  It worked for the Kardashians, made them stupid wealthy.


They are lacking two things the Ks had
1) a sex tape
2) PMK

of course if she _was_ a yacht girl there is still hope for a sex tape. But they still won't have Kris in their korner


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, definitely, head pats with some photos of their good side and invites to exclusive, private locations.
Most importantly of all, they want money money money. And lots of it. No please’s, no thank you’ s, just give me, give me.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-read-all-about-it-prince-harry-meghan-markle
_The two publishers are, between them, forking out eye-watering sums to avoid any cases going to trial in open court._




Megs said:


> I am so lost on this train wreck I can't even remember what exactly she is looking for in this lawsuit. Head pats?


----------



## Mendocino

marietouchet said:


> Five of Meghan Markle's best friends could be called to give evidence
> https://mol.im/a/8255225
> Boy I bet the friends hate this


I agree. I would think that they have sought legal advice by now and have been told what is going to happen if the matter goes to trial. Oh, and have been  advised what the ramifications are for perjury.


----------



## gracekelly

Megs said:


> I am so lost on this train wreck I can't even remember what exactly she is looking for in this lawsuit. Head pats?


Money Money Money!  They started this before they told the family that they were leaving.  This was supposed to be a windfall for them.  I don't think that they will get a dime.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Money Money Money!  They started this before they told the family that they were leaving.  This was supposed to be a windfall for them.  *I don't think that they will get a dime*.



I'm getting QB VII vibes all the way..................and I hope it ends the same way!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@poopsie 
Leave it to Leon Uris to provide the best ending - ‘give them one half-penny, the smallest coin of the realm, because their past actions were found to have been so bad that the minor inaccuracies in the publications could not have damaged their reputation further. (apologies to Wikipedia).  Perhaps he, too, had to contend with some yacht girls. Hmmmm.


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania*, it’s everywhere in the news online, internationally and national news in the US and UK



That’s good to hear. Because while I’ve seen a lot of coverage on TV about their charity food delivery, I haven’t seen anything about the court case this week. Glad to know I’ve just missed it and that it hasn’t been overlooked here.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> @poopsie
> Leave it to Leon Uris to provide the best ending - ‘give them one half-penny, the smallest coin of the realm, because their past actions were found to have been so bad that the minor inaccuracies in the publications could not have damaged their reputation further. (apologies to Wikipedia).  Perhaps he, too, had to contend with some yacht girls. Hmmmm.



" And I suggest that he should not be rewarded by a British jury for what he did with anything but our contempt and the lowest coin of the realm"
I practically know two Uris books by heart-----this one and Trinity 

watched the miniseries of QB VII when it was on TV in the 70's too. Wish someone would put Trinity on film


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> If my wedding were to be broadcast globally and photographed forever and I had someone creating the dress for me, I would definitely choose a fabric that doesn't stretch out or show any wrinkles. I think the fabric they used for M's dress may have been the issue.


But isn't that the job of the designer? Shouldn't Clare Waight Keller, the artistic director of Givenchy know when to step in and make suggestions?

I put some blame on her.  The dress wasn't from some high street noobie designer, this was from a luxury French fashion house.


----------



## Madrose

Jayne1 said:


> But isn't that the job of the designer? Shouldn't Clare Waight Keller, the artistic director of Givenchy know when to step in and make suggestions?
> 
> I put some blame on her.  The dress wasn't from some high street noobie designer, this was from a luxury French fashion house.



Perhaps that is why she is no longer the artistic director of Givenchy.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

If this has been posted, my apologies!

*Meghan and Harry’s Royal Mansion *
https://www.tmz.com/photos/image_jpg_20200412_d278e42e511e4c4ba4adf5a097c1ff43/

Will keep my opinion to myself and let the voice of the crowd be heard
♥️


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> This is IMO only but I think she planned to wear the Stella McCartney but it obviously would not have been deemed suitable (no sleeves, bare shoulders) so had to get another too. I know there is a fashion to have 2 dresses, one ceremony and another for reception but that second one is just so close to a normal ceremonial one.



Dunno, I feel she tried hard to look, uh, virginal for the church ceremony. What with the over the top cathedral veil.

Also, Kate's 2nd dress would have made a lovely only wedding dress for anyone not marrying a prince, it was just easier to move in than in the huge gown.


----------



## Lodpah

You gotta read this. What a gem. If true, it confirms what a psychopath MM was even before she married JCMH.  The person is alleging that MM is . . . . 
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 4716805


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## Lodpah




----------



## Lodpah

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 4716813


Sorry that's the second part. The first part is after this one.


----------



## Lodpah

3rd Part


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> You gotta read this. What a gem. If true, it confirms what a psychopath MM was even before she married JCMH.  The person is alleging that MM is . . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4716805



WTFFF.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan is like the Fyre Festival, all glamorous upfront advertising, till you get to the site and there's nothing there but chaos.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> You gotta read this. What a gem. If true, it confirms what a psychopath MM was even before she married JCMH.  The person is alleging that MM is . . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4716805


Wow. Rings true to me though, down to the bit about her playing different roles herself, pretending to be her own PR agent. I get the feeling she was very big on "act like it's true and it will be come so!". Pretend you are important enough to have a PR agent, set up the email addresses etc, answer as them.
Imo I think she sits like a hawk over the DM comments section. Quite often new negative comments on her stories get immediate downvotes. Am sure she comments on her own behalf as a "fan" or "acquaintance" or what have you.
I think she probably leans more towards the severe personality disorder end of things. While she needs you or has you where she wants you, she is charming. When you defy her or question her or challenge her power position or prevent her from getting what she wants, that's when she will turn.


----------



## bisousx

Thoroughly entertaining read, Lodpah. I genuinely feel sorry for the members of the RF who had to deal with her insanity firsthand but are barred from speaking a word of it.


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> You gotta read this. What a gem. If true, it confirms what a psychopath MM was even before she married JCMH.  The person is alleging that MM is . . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4716805



This makes sense... to me anyways


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun , 
 I bow to your greatness. What a find! What a house/palace! Very well done.
Looks like, whether knowingly or not, H&M have caused TMZ to unleash the dogs.  
How long before H is back in the UK?


----------



## carmen56

Isn't that David Duchovny and Tea Leoni's old house?  I believe they sold it to Mel Gibson.



VigeeLeBrun said:


> If this has been posted, my apologies!
> 
> *Meghan and Harry’s Royal Mansion *
> https://www.tmz.com/photos/image_jpg_20200412_d278e42e511e4c4ba4adf5a097c1ff43/
> 
> Will keep my opinion to myself and let the voice of the crowd be heard
> ♥️


----------



## mdcx

carmen56 said:


> Isn't that David Duchovny and Tea Leoni's old house?  I believe they sold it to Mel Gibson.


Yes. It's this home:
https://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article230896824.html


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 4716813



OK I could believe everything else but this person lost me when they said their smoking gun was tracing “location stamp” via email headers. Public IP tracing is hardly conclusive and there are many scenarios in which multiple users would show having 1 IP address. Ask the 10k other employees at my company around the company who share the same public IP address as me. And how on earth would they know the IP address in either scenarios was directly traced to Meghan’s HOUSE versus an office, Starbucks, or even a corporate VPN (say Meghan’s pr firm set her up with a media/public email address to deal with work correspondence).


----------



## Aminamina

poopsie said:


> She could always ring up Kimmy Kakes for some pointers.............


Or better yet, Sharon Osbourne


----------



## mdcx

I just realised, M hasn't had a "candid paparazzi" walk in a few days! What on earth is going on????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

Lounorada said:


> This
> Also, not only do they want to control exactly what the press is aloud to publish about them (only positive bullsh*t) they are also trying to tell the public what topics they should consider 'public interest' and 'what the public are interested in'?
> Uhmm, NO. People will decide that for themselves, but you did marry into the British Royal Family and that kinda automatically makes you _public interest. _
> Harry should already know that, it's all he's ever know since birth.



Exactly. It just doesn't wash. We're not s propaganda state. What's their plan, run their own news channel? 

Besides statistics will screw this argument put forward. The publisher can put forward coverage they had no beef with Vs something they'd consider unpalatable and compare audience figures. Or even search trends in Google - who searched for 'what charities does MM support' v 'MM dogs' for example. One she'd argue for, one she'd argue against. It's not up to her to decide and she can't argue they themselves aren't public interest as individuals or a couple. She may try to say that about her dad though, but as the link is her if her friends had the letter (for what purpose other than media) that argument is surely pointless.


----------



## beautymagpie

mdcx said:


> I just realised, M hasn't had a "candid paparazzi" walk in a few days! What on earth is going on????



She'll be trying to pretend she doesn't do it for the court, but she won't be able to keep it up for the duration.


----------



## beautymagpie

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 4716813



Wow.

Major Colleen Rooney vibes at the end of that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

carmen56 said:


> Isn't that David Duchovny and Tea Leoni's old house?  I believe they sold it to Mel Gibson.


Didn't they come forward and said they didn't buy Mel Gibson's house, though?


----------



## Chagall

doni said:


> I wouldn’t take this crushed about the birthday party thing seriously. But I can easily believe Harry is having a hard time being away from the UK right now. I mean, that is all he knows, being part of the royal family and in his best moments, representing and supporting his country, whether in the arm forces or as a royal. And being very well loved for that. To see  that the UK is now going through what is possibly its darkest hour since he was born, and him not be part of it, while his whole family is out there, fulfilling their mission... It is all very well to bring meals around LA, but royals are bred to serve their country... Like are the military, his other education...  It has to be hard for him.


Well Harry should have thought about this when he shafted the BRF! His aging grandparents especially. Selfish son of a gun. It’s called nemesis***just reward!!


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> OK I could believe everything else but this person lost me when they said their smoking gun was tracing “location stamp” via email headers. Public IP tracing is hardly conclusive and there are many scenarios in which multiple users would show having 1 IP address. Ask the 10k other employees at my company around the company who share the same public IP address as me. And how on earth would they know the IP address in either scenarios was directly traced to Meghan’s HOUSE versus an office, Starbucks, or even a corporate VPN (say Meghan’s pr firm set her up with a media/public email address to deal with work correspondence).


I'm not sure how much to believe that it's real but to play devil's advocate if the the IP address location came up as a residential address then I could see how they could be confident in thinking it was the same person. Also it seems like the author used pixel tracking since they mention the email was sent from the same computer, so I think that information combined with IP address makes it much more likely that it was the same person .

If we could see the actual wording of the emails I think we'd be closer to knowing for sure since I think we've seen enough of MM's word salad to recognise her hand. Too bad the author probably can't post the actual emails since MM is so litigious.



bisousx said:


> Thoroughly entertaining read, Lodpah. I genuinely feel sorry for the members of the RF who had to deal with her insanity firsthand but are barred from speaking a word of it.


 That's what always gets me about this because I could never hold my tongue for so long. I guess the BRF have had to deal with more than their fair share of insane family members in the past, my mind goes back to the days of Princess Margaret.


----------



## imgg

mdcx said:


> Wow. Rings true to me though, down to the bit about her playing different roles herself, pretending to be her own PR agent. I get the feeling she was very big on "act like it's true and it will be come so!". Pretend you are important enough to have a PR agent, set up the email addresses etc, answer as them.
> Imo I think she sits like a hawk over the DM comments section. Quite often new negative comments on her stories get immediate downvotes. Am sure she comments on her own behalf as a "fan" or "acquaintance" or what have you.
> I think she probably leans more towards the severe personality disorder end of things. While she needs you or has you where she wants you, she is charming. When you defy her or question her or challenge her power position or prevent her from getting what she wants, that's when she will turn.


Borderline Personality-  Splitting.  Borderlines can be the most charming people until they don't get want they want.


----------



## imgg

PewPew said:


> Ooh, no wonder M’s team doesn’t seem bothered & she’s happy to testify! If the opposition subpoenas the writer(s) for _People_ to get the names, _People_ will cite “journalistic integrity” in not revealing sources. And integrity aside, they risk future sources (PR people) drying up if they spill. There will be little recourse for prosecutors.
> 
> Sometimes journalists are held in contempt for big cases, but the U.S. isn’t handing over a reporter for this. The reporter would just have to avoid traveling to the UK and Commonwealth like Anne Sacoolas (who killed Harry Dunn) to avoid prosecution. In the same fashion, Prince Andrew acn ignore any U.S. supoena (as long as he doesn’t travel in the U.S.) since the UK would never extradite him.
> 
> But it will make things interesting if they subpoena Jessica!


I don't understand this case.  Was the British tabloid not allowed to publish Meghan's letter that was given to them by her father?   And if so, why was it okay that Meghan's friends were allowed to do so.


----------



## LittleStar88

This whole letter thing simplified: Her dad is probably a stubborn ox and maybe a little bit elderly-clueless but she chooses to blame everyone else for the problems she has with her father. Looks like they were preying on his cluelessness by manipulating him in texts.

she should have known mailing him a letter would be a bad idea and that trying to manipulate via text would not work. She needs to accept the fallout for her dumb decisions and poor handling of the situation. The lawsuit will only continue to make her look bad as details come out.

like with everything else, they are reacting and lurching with no plan or thinking of outcomes for actions.


----------



## Coconuts40

lalame said:


> OK I could believe everything else but this person lost me when they said their smoking gun was tracing “location stamp” via email headers. Public IP tracing is hardly conclusive and there are many scenarios in which multiple users would show having 1 IP address. Ask the 10k other employees at my company around the company who share the same public IP address as me. And how on earth would they know the IP address in either scenarios was directly traced to Meghan’s HOUSE versus an office, Starbucks, or even a corporate VPN (say Meghan’s pr firm set her up with a media/public email address to deal with work correspondence).



I have been able to trace an email to the exact address where it was sent.  I didn't personally do it as I know nothing about computers.  However my company had to hire a lawyer and an email was traced to a specific home address.


----------



## Tootsie17

imgg said:


> Borderline Personality-  Splitting.  Borderlines can be the most charming people until they don't get want they want.


No wonder allegedly William and Kate wanted Harry to go slow with Meghan. Better yet, "run Forrest run!" Get the hell away from her while you can.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like, whether knowingly or not, H&M have caused TMZ to unleash the dogs.



Perhaps what prompted it was the story that went around a few days ago, bragging that their new mansion is “paparazzi proof.”

All TMZ had to do was go to the real estate web site and now every room in H&M’s secluded, secret home can be seen by everyone.

I must mention that the huge property is plenty big enough to exercise their dogs in. There was really no need to put them in a car and drive to another part of town to walk them on a sidewalk where they could meet with paparazzi.

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...ince-harry-los-angeles-house-paparazzi-proof/[/user]


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Perhaps what prompted it was the story that went around a few days ago, bragging that their new mansion is “paparazzi proof.”
> 
> All TMZ had to do was go to the real estate web site and now every room in H&M’s secluded, secret home can be seen by everyone.
> 
> I must mention that the huge property is plenty big enough to exercise their dogs in. There was really no need to put them in a car and drive to another part of town to walk them on a sidewalk where they could meet with paparazzi.
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...ince-harry-los-angeles-house-paparazzi-proof/[/user]


Anyone buying in the LA area is liable to have pix shown of their purchased houses, eg see yesterday's photos of Kylie Jenner's new crib - the pix are publicly available prior to sale, the trick is for a journalist to match up a property with buyer, not rocket science, heck there are not that many properties there over say $7M, and realtors are happy to provide some info to help sell the house and sometimes the buyer cooperates
In the UK proper, there is the rota system for BRF - press relations... family does some photo ops (eg Christmas walk to Church) in exchange for being left alone at other times, and having some subjects be no go zones
In the UK sellers of expensive houses are discreet, but in LA, you can expect photos, and the reality TV stars live the tell-all-way of life , and discretion is not valued. Totally different values


----------



## PewPew

imgg said:


> I don't understand this case.  Was the British tabloid not allowed to publish Meghan's letter that was given to them by her father?   And if so, why was it okay that Meghan's friends were allowed to do so.



Here’s my understanding so far—

1) The courts are deciding whether the tabloid deliberately omited parts of the letter to make her look bad. M also says that while the letter is the father’s property (which he IS free to show anyone), the words are copyright protected as her intellectual property. And so, what’s in the “public interest” is also being debated.

2) Meghan’s “friends” didn’t speak to this tabloid. “They” had been telling People magazine that M was upset by her father’s behavior, plus unflattering things about her father not being around for her, etc. People magazine has been very favorable to H&M (in exchange for exclusive info) since they were dating, so that’s the mag PR/Meghan/Friends used to sway public opinion.

3) The problem with the friends talking to People is that it supports Thomas Markle’s position as a defense witness (for the tabloid). Thomas Markle’s reputation was maligned by M’s friends, so he had a right by UK law to defend himself against slander/libel by showing a letter to prove she WAS still in contact with him and said relatively cordial things recently.

4) Meghan claims she had no idea her friends spoke to People and doesn’t know why they would say those things. So she feels she is not responsible for the events leading to Thomas having to defend himself and the letter being published.

5) If she says #4 on the stand & this can be proven false, she will have committed perjury. The problem for prosecutors is they don’t have the anonymous friends names, though one assumes stylist BFF Jessica is one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Anyone buying in the LA area is liable to have pix shown of their purchased houses, eg see yesterday's photos of Kylie Jenner's new crib - the pix are publicly available prior to sale, the trick is for a journalist to match up a property with buyer, not rocket science, heck there are not that many properties there over say $7M, and realtors are happy to provide some info to help sell the house and sometimes the buyer cooperates
> In the UK proper, there is the rota system for BRF - press relations... family does some photo ops (eg Christmas walk to Church) in exchange for being left alone at other times, and having some subjects be no go zones
> In the UK sellers of expensive houses are discreet, but in LA, you can expect photos, and the reality TV stars live the tell-all-way of life , and discretion is not valued. Totally different values



Are you referring to the Royal Rota system that they HAD to get away from?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> I must mention that the huge property is plenty big enough to exercise their dogs in. There was really no need to put them in a car and drive to another part of town to walk them on a sidewalk where they could meet with paparazzi.



Nooo, there was definitely a need— they’re in reputation rehab! PR 101 & Tinder profile tip: photos with animals show you are friendly, likable and approachable!  The problem with M is she’s so extra with these machinations. Bringing the dogs on your Covid photo op is obvious overkill. Maybe she was lured by all the pics of A-listers walking dogs in masks? Remember how she also brought the dogs on her “private” nature pap walk in Canada, but it looked extra fake because she awkwardly had 2 dog leashes in one hand, while grinning & Archie was dangling in a poorly adjusted carrier. This didn’t look like a regular thing she was used to doing, despite her “friends” telling media that she was hiking with Archie 2 hours a day. (he’s not walking, so he’s presumably in the carrier on someone)


----------



## Mendocino

poopsie said:


> I'm getting QB VII vibes all the way..................and I hope it ends the same way!


QB Vll --I read that many years ago and was a massive Leon Uris fan--such a great writer! Thank you for bringing back a happy memory! And to get back to the topic, yes I can totally see this happening.


----------



## Mendocino

Jayne1 said:


> But isn't that the job of the designer? Shouldn't Clare Waight Keller, the artistic director of Givenchy know when to step in and make suggestions?
> 
> I put some blame on her.  The dress wasn't from some high street noobie designer, this was from a luxury French fashion house.


The designer may have done the best that she could under the circumstances, given that what she produced would have to be acceptable to the client. I thought the dress was stunning and she looked absolutely beautiful when she exited the car and climbed the steps to the chapel.  When she exited after the ceremony I noticed the wrinkles around the waistline.  It didn't really bother me- I was so happy and thrilled for them.


----------



## marietouchet

Mendocino said:


> The designer may have done the best that she could under the circumstances, given that what she produced would have to be acceptable to the client. I thought the dress was stunning and she looked absolutely beautiful when she exited the car and climbed the steps to the chapel.  When she exited after the ceremony I noticed the wrinkles around the waistline.  It didn't really bother me- I was so happy and thrilled for them.


The dress style was partially to blame , A line makes wrinkles at waist, Satin fabric makes the wrinkles glow, and no waistline to hide wrinkles or provide a flex point for the fabric
Compare to Kate’s wide skirt with lace to hide wrinkles and a tailored waist
All the ladies that wear satin A lines to the Oscars have to be dropped off in moving vans, they do not sit down before the red carpet


----------



## Mendocino

marietouchet said:


> The dress style was partially to blame , A line makes wrinkles at waist, Satin fabric makes the wrinkles glow, and no waistline to hide wrinkles or provide a flex point for the fabric
> Compare to Kate’s wide skirt with lace to hide wrinkles and a tailored waist
> All the ladies that wear satin A lines to the Oscars have to be dropped off in moving vans, they do not sit down before the red carpet


The sum total of what I don't know about fabric behavior could stop a team of oxen in its tracks.  Thank you for the clarification!


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> I'm not sure how much to believe that it's real but to play devil's advocate if the the IP address location came up as a residential address then I could see how they could be confident in thinking it was the same person. Also it seems like the author used pixel tracking since they mention the email was sent from the same computer, so I think that information combined with IP address makes it much more likely that it was the same person



This is very unlikely (I used to manage email marketing for F50 companies). One, email pixels only come into play if it was a professionally laid out email - that wouldn’t happen with most business correspondence. Two, the IP address doesn’t say “residential” or not - it would just be a guess based on their ISP, but I wouldn’t take a guess like this too seriously.



Coconuts40 said:


> I have been able to trace an email to the exact address where it was sent.  I didn't personally do it as I know nothing about computers.  However my company had to hire a lawyer and an email was traced to a specific home address.



Your lawyers, and their private investigators, DO have ways to triangulate this to an accurate degree - especially if it was related to a business, since businesses carefully control IP traffic on their servers. I highly doubt the average person, like this PR person, would go through these lengths. I say nothing is impossible, but much more likely scenario here is this lady thought she was sleuthier than she was and came to the wrong conclusion based on what she saw.

I can think of a few plausible scenarios where these 2 people would have sent the emails from the same IP address:

Using same VPN, as most companies today do for employees. PR person could've set up a business correspondence email address for Meghan on their servers.
The PR person was working in Meghan's home when she wrote the emails, or the PR person's office, etc - just same space. Not really unusual to be working in the same space as a client
Look, certainly possible Meghan and this PR person are the same (apparently our own president did that). But her IP lookup trick did not convince me. And anyways, these days it's so easy to verify! Look the PR person up on LinkedIn - call her office, verify it's a real person.


----------



## redney

Anyone see the latest blind item?
https://blindgossip.com/like-a-puppy-dog/#more-100508


----------



## lalame

redney said:


> Anyone see the latest blind item?
> https://blindgossip.com/like-a-puppy-dog/#more-100508


I totally believe this is them, but it seems so vague.. could be a ton of people. The only part I'm  about is does this REALLY describe the old H: _Very confident, lots of friends, knew who he was.
_
He seemed troubled for a long time!


----------



## Swe3tGirl

PewPew said:


> Nooo, there was definitely a need— they’re in reputation rehab! PR 101 & Tinder profile tip: photos with animals show you are friendly, likable and approachable!  The problem with M is she’s so extra with these machinations. Bringing the dogs on your Covid photo op is obvious overkill. Maybe she was lured by all the pics of A-listers walking dogs in masks? Remember how she also brought the dogs on her “private” nature pap walk in Canada, but it looked extra fake because she awkwardly had 2 dog leashes in one hand, while grinning & Archie was dangling in a poorly adjusted carrier. This didn’t look like a regular thing she was used to doing, despite her “friends” telling media that she was hiking with Archie 2 hours a day. (he’s not walking, so he’s presumably in the carrier on someone)



You’re absolutely right; if that so called pap dog/Archie walk was so private, why would she be grinning the whole time and awkwardly carrying her child with bodyguards in tow? I’m pretty sure the estate they stayed in was private and gated so no need for all that. 

Before she dated Harry she had pap shots as well but look at the difference; there was no grinning at all-she could care less.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Money Money Money!  They started this before they told the family that they were leaving.  This was supposed to be a windfall for them.  I don't think that they will get a dime.


I'm hoping that they get less, and then hightail it back into obscurity with their double-tails in their backside!  Not surprised with the money-grabbing from Meghan; Harry? .. well, it was surprising at first, but now? .. not so much!


----------



## Jayne1

Mendocino said:


> The designer may have done the best that she could under the circumstances, given that what she produced would have to be acceptable to the client. I thought the dress was stunning and she looked absolutely beautiful when she exited the car and climbed the steps to the chapel.  When she exited after the ceremony I noticed the wrinkles around the waistline.  It didn't really bother me- I was so happy and thrilled for them.


I'm still blaming the designer, to an extent.  

An ultra luxury, haute couture house should warn a client that they should not sit down, bend at the waist, wear for more than a few hours because the fabric will stretch - that sort of thing.

If Meg went ahead anyway, you know what, I think if I was the designer, I would refuse to let her make me look bad.  lol  Givenchy won't suffer losing a client.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I'm hoping that they get less, and then hightail it back into obscurity with their double-tails in their backside!  Not surprised with the money-grabbing from Meghan; Harry? .. well, it was surprising at first, but now? .. not so much!


There are so many stories out there that they were cooking up schemes to get rich even before the wedding.  It was like a business plan.  I think this business is going to die from Covid.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> If this has been posted, my apologies!
> 
> *Meghan and Harry’s Royal Mansion *
> https://www.tmz.com/photos/image_jpg_20200412_d278e42e511e4c4ba4adf5a097c1ff43/
> 
> Will keep my opinion to myself and let the voice of the crowd be heard
> ♥️


HUH? .. are we being trolled here because no way would there be a view of the ocean like that from any Beverly Hills environs!  Regardless, MY GOD .. seriously, this huge a house for 3 people .. EPIC STUPID in my opinion!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still blaming the designer, to an extent.
> 
> An ultra luxury, haute couture house should warn a client that they should not sit down, bend at the waist, wear for more than a few hours because the fabric will stretch - that sort of thing.
> 
> If Meg went ahead anyway, you know what, I think if I was the designer, I would refuse to let her make me look bad.  lol  Givenchy won't suffer losing a client.


I am going to blame the designer for 75% of this.  It is up to the designer to know what works and what doesn't.  The designer should have overseen last minute fittings to make sure the dress looked perfect.  A person would have to be completely obtuse to not realize that this dress would be photographed endlessly and every care needed to make it  and the bride look exactly right.  I am giving the designer the benefit of the doubt that she is not obtuse or she wouldn't have the job with a major design house, so what happened?  Did the bride use a fantasy mirror to see herself and think it all looked perfect?    I think the answer to this is yes based upon subsequent fashion choices.  The emperor has no clothes and someone should really make a point of telling him.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HUH? .. are we being trolled here because no way would there be a view of the ocean like that from any Beverly Hills environs!  Regardless, MY GOD .. seriously, this huge a house for 3 people .. EPIC STUPID in my opinion!


That is definitely the agent getting some  PR for a house that isn't selling.  Take a look and see that it looks abandoned.  How much did TMZ get paid for this ad?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Swe3tGirl said:


> You’re absolutely right; if that so called pap dog/Archie walk was so private, why would she be grinning the whole time and awkwardly carrying her child with bodyguards in tow? I’m pretty sure the estate they stayed in was private and gated so no need for all that.
> 
> Before she dated Harry she had pap shots as well but look at the difference; there was no grinning at all-she could care less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4717267
> View attachment 4717268
> View attachment 4717269
> View attachment 4717270
> View attachment 4717271



How is it possible that the old Meghan looks more celebrity-like off-duty than current Meghan... age? no kids? IDK but she looks more confident and just... normal.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> That is definitely the agent getting some  PR for a house that isn't selling.  Take a look and see that it looks abandoned.  How much did TMZ get paid for this ad?



I think this is the Mel Gibson house that was already confirmed NOT to be on M+H's radar, and was indeed floated just for the realtor's benefit.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VigeeLeBrun said:


> If this has been posted, my apologies!
> 
> *Meghan and Harry’s Royal Mansion *
> https://www.tmz.com/photos/image_jpg_20200412_d278e42e511e4c4ba4adf5a097c1ff43/
> 
> Will keep my opinion to myself and let the voice of the crowd be heard
> ♥️


Gosh, this is beautifully done. I love the style and furnishings 100%. Whether it's theirs or not, someone is super lucky to live in that place!! I wouldn't change a thing about it, except relocate it from California


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> This is very unlikely (I used to manage email marketing for F50 companies). One, email pixels only come into play if it was a professionally laid out email - that wouldn’t happen with most business correspondence. Two, the IP address doesn’t say “residential” or not - it would just be a guess based on their ISP, but I wouldn’t take a guess like this too seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> Your lawyers, and their private investigators, DO have ways to triangulate this to an accurate degree - especially if it was related to a business, since businesses carefully control IP traffic on their servers. I highly doubt the average person, like this PR person, would go through these lengths. I say nothing is impossible, but much more likely scenario here is this lady thought she was sleuthier than she was and came to the wrong conclusion based on what she saw.
> 
> I can think of a few plausible scenarios where these 2 people would have sent the emails from the same IP address:
> 
> Using same VPN, as most companies today do for employees. PR person could've set up a business correspondence email address for Meghan on their servers.
> The PR person was working in Meghan's home when she wrote the emails, or the PR person's office, etc - just same space. Not really unusual to be working in the same space as a client
> Look, certainly possible Meghan and this PR person are the same (apparently our own president did that). But her IP lookup trick did not convince me. And anyways, these days it's so easy to verify! Look the PR person up on LinkedIn - call her office, verify it's a real person.


This whole discussion of the accuracy to which a physical address can be determined from electronic media - texts, phone calls, emails ... Two  important thoughts came to me ...
1. If you have the whole kit and kaboodle ie texts + emails + browser history + phone calls , you can do a more accurate determination of location than with one type of info by itself - they do that all the time on CSI shows, must be true
2. This lawsuit could be determined by forensic experts - my tech data is better than yours or your tech data was collected wrong - just like the OJ Simpson trial , this cone could hinge on technology
That said, how would you like a family squabble to be determined by the geek squad ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

$60K??? Does this sound right? 
_[URL]https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/04/24/duchess-meghans-privacy-case-against-british-newspaper-heard-court/3018894001/_[/URL]
_Stephens says the chances of a settlement before trial in Meghan's case are "close to zero." The paper has little to lose (damages are capped in Britain at about $60,000) and a trial would be a major story for all the media to cover. He said the legal costs for each side in pursuing the case have been estimated at more than $1 million each. 

"The longer it goes on, the more difficult it becomes to bail out and the more expensive it is," Stephens said. "It is a complete mess."
_
Yes, M has been pappin for quite some time. So has H.  Question is - Looks like they have plenty of space to walk their dogs, so why the dog-walk pap? Hmmm, it all reeks of desperation.


----------



## marietouchet

Yes 60k does sound right ... 
If memory serves, William got about that amount when he sued the tabloids for invasion of privacy when Kate was photographed topless (on a private holiday), he did the suit to stress that is a no go zone, it cost him more than he received


CarryOn2020 said:


> $60K??? Does this sound right?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> $60K??? Does this sound right?
> _https://www.usatoday.com/story/ente...nst-british-newspaper-heard-court/3018894001/
> Stephens says the chances of a settlement before trial in Meghan's case are "close to zero." The paper has little to lose (damages are capped in Britain at about $60,000) and a trial would be a major story for all the media to cover. He said the legal costs for each side in pursuing the case have been estimated at more than $1 million each.
> 
> "The longer it goes on, the more difficult it becomes to bail out and the more expensive it is," Stephens said. "It is a complete mess."
> _
> Yes, M has been pappin for quite some time. So has H.  Question is - Looks like they have plenty of space to walk their dogs, so why the dog-walk pap? Hmmm, it all reeks of desperation.


Because TMZ is dead-wrong; that is NOT the property they are renting!!!  If they are truly in Beverly Hills (or environs), they would not have that view of the Pacific, and as such .. could definitely see them taking the pooches out for a "pap-walk".  

On the legal note - all of $60k for this???  That's just stupid, unless her objective is .. "let's get in the news so that we can make more $$$" .. which could also backfire big-time on both of them.  But, given her narcissistic behavior, she is ALWAYS RIGHT!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Because TMZ is dead-wrong; that is NOT the property they are renting!!!  If they are truly in Beverly Hills (or environs), they would not have that view of the Pacific, and as such .. could definitely see them taking the pooches out for a "pap-walk".
> 
> On the legal note - all of $60k for this???  That's just stupid, unless her objective is .. "let's get in the news so that we can make more $$$" .. which could also backfire big-time on both of them.  But, given her narcissistic behavior, she is ALWAYS RIGHT!


Love your analysis of the purported house photos, carry on ! More please


----------



## Coconuts40

lalame said:


> This is very unlikely (I used to manage email marketing for F50 companies). One, email pixels only come into play if it was a professionally laid out email - that wouldn’t happen with most business correspondence. Two, the IP address doesn’t say “residential” or not - it would just be a guess based on their ISP, but I wouldn’t take a guess like this too seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> Your lawyers, and their private investigators, DO have ways to triangulate this to an accurate degree - especially if it was related to a business, since businesses carefully control IP traffic on their servers. I highly doubt the average person, like this PR person, would go through these lengths. I say nothing is impossible, but much more likely scenario here is this lady thought she was sleuthier than she was and came to the wrong conclusion based on what she saw.
> 
> I can think of a few plausible scenarios where these 2 people would have sent the emails from the same IP address:
> 
> Using same VPN, as most companies today do for employees. PR person could've set up a business correspondence email address for Meghan on their servers.
> The PR person was working in Meghan's home when she wrote the emails, or the PR person's office, etc - just same space. Not really unusual to be working in the same space as a client
> Look, certainly possible Meghan and this PR person are the same (apparently our own president did that). But her IP lookup trick did not convince me. And anyways, these days it's so easy to verify! Look the PR person up on LinkedIn - call her office, verify it's a real person.



I do agree with you, and it's important that we don't take stories like these at face value.  Although this story is highly possible, stories like this do need to be scrutinized.  IMO, Meghan has already shown her true colours  well before this apparent photo shoot story


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> This whole discussion of the accuracy to which a physical address can be determined from electronic media - texts, phone calls, emails ... Two  important thoughts came to me ...
> 1. If you have the whole kit and kaboodle ie texts + emails + browser history + phone calls , you can do a more accurate determination of location than with one type of info by itself - they do that all the time on CSI shows, must be true
> 2. This lawsuit could be determined by forensic experts - my tech data is better than yours or your tech data was collected wrong - just like the OJ Simpson trial , this cone could hinge on technology
> That said, how would you like a family squabble to be determined by the geek squad ?



Yes I agree with both these points. PIs, law enforcement, and networking/security experts, etc all have the tools to do this type of analysis... a casual user like this person, in the way she was saying? Highly suspect... seems like she drew a hasty conclusion. Everything else she said, though, I believe it.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Yes I agree with both these points. PIs, law enforcement, and networking/security experts, etc all have the tools to do this type of analysis... a casual user like this person, in the way she was saying? Highly suspect... seems like she drew a hasty conclusion. Everything else she said, though, I believe it.


Her assessment pretty much validates a lot of what I've been saying all along about Meghan, based on my discussions with friends that knew her way back.  I think I said that my friend felt the need (on more than 1 occasion) to chastize Meghan on her behavior when she was at their house rehearsing for her Senior Play.  Unfortunately, she was spoiled rotten by her father .. in addition to (I believe) likely inheriting the narcissistic behavior.  Heck, my mother was similar and trust me, when she was in one of her "moods", it was frightening (as in - get the heck out of Dodge)!!!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Her assessment pretty much validates a lot of what I've been saying all along about Meghan, based on my discussions with friends that knew her way back.  I think I said that my friend felt the need (on more than 1 occasion) to chastize Meghan on her behavior when she was at their house rehearsing for her Senior Play.  Unfortunately, she was spoiled rotten by her father .. in addition to (I believe) likely inheriting the narcissistic behavior.  Heck, my mother was similar and trust me, when she was in one of her "moods", it was frightening (as in - get the heck out of Dodge)!!!



Do you think an outburst will get caught on tape and leaked, a la Christian Bale? If it was that bad, it sounds like it's bound to... I would love to see that. 

Though personally, I love Christian Bale still and bought his remorse so M's stans will likely do the same anyway.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> How is it possible that the old Meghan looks more celebrity-like off-duty than current Meghan... age? no kids? IDK but she looks more confident and just... normal.


It's very possible.   She has a more anxiety now.


----------



## bisousx

I don’t know anything about IT, so just throwing this out there while enjoying the conversation (always have something to learn on tpf!):

is it possible this anonymous PR person could’ve asked a friend who was a lawyer or IT pro? I have a girlfriend whose lawyer friends routinely pull sophisticated background searches on her Tinder dates so I mean, for certain things it’s not like you have to be a professional to have access to this type of stuff.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *On the legal note - all of $60k for this???*  That's just stupid, unless her objective is .. "let's get in the news so that we can make more $$$" .. which could also backfire big-time on both of them.  But, given her narcissistic behavior, she is ALWAYS RIGHT!



My feelings exactly.  why bother?  Oh it's the principle!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> 3rd Part
> 
> View attachment 4716831


Holy Crappoly!


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> I don’t know anything about IT, so just throwing this out there while enjoying the conversation (always have something to learn on tpf!):
> 
> is it possible this anonymous PR person could’ve asked a friend who was a lawyer or IT pro? I have a girlfriend whose lawyer friends routinely pull sophisticated background searches on her Tinder dates so I mean, for certain things it’s not like you have to be a professional to have access to this type of stuff.



Anything's possible, but this particular situation I have doubts on. Real life example: when I worked in marketing it would drive us crazy to identify people's home addresses.... we knew their IP addresses - from website visits, emails, purchased lists - but could not accurately link IP addresses to physical address. That's why sometimes you get marketing snail mail accidentally addressed to someone else. And we put out many multi million dollar RFPs to find vendors who could accurately do this... accuracy was a matter of legal importance for what we did. We never met one vendor, from bigshots like Adobe or Salesforce or others, who could give us a better than 50% rate of accuracy. So for me to believe a casual person could find it SO easy to do this is um unbelievable.

A lawyer or PI could get more info to fill in the picture - for example, subpoenaing that info from your company or ISP provider or, if they suspected you did it at a public area, subpoena that business for their network logs. A hacker could also do their magical things to get that info. But these aren't casually available resources.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Do you think an outburst will get caught on tape and leaked, a la Christian Bale? If it was that bad, it sounds like it's bound to... I would love to see that.
> 
> Though personally, I love Christian Bale still and bought his remorse so M's stans will likely do the same anyway.


IMO .. and this is based on my dealings (my mother) with this type of personality, oh yeah .. eventually, that will happen and (unfortunately) in an EPIC way!  My mother's outbursts used to (mostly) occur in our household, but one time (when she was having a major manic attack), it happened in a public place and it was so bad that an ambulance was called and my mother carted off.  Thank god my older sister (3 years older than me) was there, but .. still, neither of us were that old and so it was rather frightening.  My other older sister (who is 12 years older than me), had to leave her workplace and come to pick us up and then call my father (as he was on a business trip - which was often!), and then he came home.  That started the first of (one) of her stays in a major Mental Health institution in CT.


----------



## kemilia

mdcx said:


> Yes. It's this home:
> https://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article230896824.html


Is that a kitchen table w/chairs in the fancy bathroom? Rich people (shm) ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you for the kind words. As I read through the posts, I feel like we’ve all read the stuff. Some of it, certainly, has been embellished, but it does give a good idea of what she was about. Maybe it was the ‘Gossip Girl’ influence, she seems similar to lots of young girls. Highly groomed, toned, aspirational, and looking to move up socially by marrying ‘up’. Before H, she lived an unabashedly ‘loud’ life - https://www.laweekly.com/mapping-meghan-markles-los-angeles-life-before-the-royal-wedding/. Note the last entry about her long-time membership to SoHo House.

In case you missed this - . 



marietouchet said:


> Love your analysis of the purported house photos, carry on ! More please


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> My feelings exactly.  why bother?  Oh it's the principle!



They’re doing it to save the rest of us from the same type of intrusion. Yes, of course, the principle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In the end, tech data will reveal who did what when and where. Meanwhile, her family and friends will have lots of dirt to clean up. Shameful she and H put people through this nonsense. I agree with Serena — Meghan who?





marietouchet said:


> This whole discussion of the accuracy to which a physical address can be determined from electronic media - texts, phone calls, emails ... Two  important thoughts came to me ...
> 1. If you have the whole kit and kaboodle ie texts + emails + browser history + phone calls , you can do a more accurate determination of location than with one type of info by itself - they do that all the time on CSI shows, must be true
> 2. This lawsuit could be determined by forensic experts - my tech data is better than yours or your tech data was collected wrong - just like the OJ Simpson trial , this cone could hinge on technology
> That said, how would you like a family squabble to be determined by the geek squad ?


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the kind words. As I read through the posts, I feel like we’ve all read the stuff. Some of it, certainly, has been embellished, but it does give a good idea of what she was about. Maybe it was the ‘Gossip Girl’ influence, she seems similar to lots of young girls. Highly groomed, toned, aspirational, and looking to move up socially by marrying ‘up’. Before H, she lived an unabashedly ‘loud’ life - https://www.laweekly.com/mapping-meghan-markles-los-angeles-life-before-the-royal-wedding/. Note the last entry about her long-time membership to SoHo House.
> 
> In case you missed this - .




Haha it definitely seems like having a parent in entertainment influenced her. This was NOT my world growing up in LA. I thought it was interesting she's always gone by "Meghan" if her given name was Rachel. I thought that was just a stage name thing she adopted later on.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the kind words. As I read through the posts, I feel like we’ve all read the stuff. Some of it, certainly, has been embellished, but it does give a good idea of what she was about. Maybe it was the ‘Gossip Girl’ influence, she seems similar to lots of young girls. Highly groomed, toned, aspirational, and looking to move up socially by marrying ‘up’. Before H, she lived an unabashedly ‘loud’ life - https://www.laweekly.com/mapping-meghan-markles-los-angeles-life-before-the-royal-wedding/. Note the last entry about her long-time membership to SoHo House.
> 
> In case you missed this - .



Wow, her voice has changed.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They’re doing it to save the rest of us from the same type of intrusion. Yes, of course, the principle.


I, for one, truly appreciate her selflessness. I just need to dig up my copy of a letter in my extra special calligraphy that I sent to XYZ so I can have a dozen of my nearest and dearest friend spill the contents to a magazine and then sue the person I sent it to for making the letter public because we were having a tiff.


----------



## Madrose

marietouchet said:


> Yes 60k does sound right ...



Can attorney fees be awarded in the UK?


----------



## PewPew

I love that Ricky Gervais will speak his mind about celebs. This quote brought to mind our humble, humanitarian “we have a great love story for the ages” couple—

_“I've got nothing against anyone being a celebrity or being famous," he told the New York Times in an interview published on Thursday. "I think that *people are just a bit * *tired of being lectured to.* Now celebrities think: 'The general public needs to see my face. They can't get to the cinema – I need to do something.' *And it's when you look into their eyes, you know that, even if they're doing something good, they're sort of thinking, 'I could weep at what a good person I am.' Oh dear.*"_
-Ricky Gervais
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/ricky-gervais-celebs-coronavirus


----------



## mdcx

And of course Omid Scobie is front and centre:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257071/Meghan-Harry-biography-bombshell-Royals.html


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> I love that Rickey Gervais will speak his mind about celebs. This quote brought to mind our humble, humanitarian “we have a great love story for the ages” couple—
> 
> _“I've got nothing against anyone being a celebrity or being famous," he told the New York Times in an interview published on Thursday. "I think that people are just a bit *tired of being lectured to.* Now celebrities think: 'The general public needs to see my face. They can't get to the cinema – I need to do something.' *And it's when you look into their eyes, you know that, even if they're doing something good, they're sort of thinking, 'I could weep at what a good person I am.' Oh dear.*"_
> -Rickey Gervais
> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/ricky-gervais-celebs-coronavirus


I like Rickey (maybe) a tad better than Piers Morgan, but maaaaaaan .. the 2 of them do speak the truth about "certain" people (refusing to call either of them 'celebrities')!!!


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> And of course Omid Scobie is front and centre:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257071/Meghan-Harry-biography-bombshell-Royals.html
> View attachment 4717399


WOW .. now this is *STUPID on an EPIC level*!!!!   I guess they just figure that Charles will continue to fund them regardless of what they say about the rest of the BRF!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

mdcx said:


> And of course Omid Scobie is front and centre:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257071/Meghan-Harry-biography-bombshell-Royals.html
> View attachment 4717399


Go for it, no one cares about the five minutes you spent in the Royal Family where everyone treated you so poorly and hurt your feelings.  They are desperate for $ at this point.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Go for it, no one cares about the five minutes you spent in the Royal Family where everyone treated you so poorly and hurt your feelings.  They are desperate for $ at this point.


Will it get them some $$$ right now? .. yeah, maybe.  BUT, how would they do book signings (whenever that comes about); they would have to have all that SECURITY in tow!  I have to say, and maybe this is me (I don't have any children), but if my child did something like this .. to hurt his Grandparents, his Father and his other close family members .. CUT-OFF!!!  Charles does have a reputation of holding a grudge and remember there is a "1-year review" that will occur next year!


----------



## threadbender

CeeJay said:


> Will it get them some $$$ right now? .. yeah, maybe.  BUT, how would they do book signings (whenever that comes about); they would have to have all that SECURITY in tow!  I have to say, and maybe this is me (I don't have any children), but if my child did something like this .. to hurt his Grandparents, his Father and his other close family members .. CUT-OFF!!!  Charles does have a reputation of holding a grudge and remember there is a "1-year review" that will occur next year!


I think I would re-think that year review. Wonder if there are any conditions to receiving that continued support. I am sure the BRF could come up with a reason to cut them off and make it reasonable.


----------



## CeeJay

threadbender said:


> I think I would re-think that year review. Wonder if there are any conditions to receiving that continued support. I am sure the BRF could come up with a reason to cut them off and make it reasonable.


Well, there's an oldie but goodie - "don't bite the hand that feeds you"!!!!


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I'm waiting for a tell-all about Meghan from an ex-bff or ex-husband. I'm surprised no one has published one yet.


----------



## Annawakes

mdcx said:


> And of course Omid Scobie is front and centre:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257071/Meghan-Harry-biography-bombshell-Royals.html
> View attachment 4717399


What a smug smirk she has in that picture with the Queen.


----------



## mia55

lalame said:


> How is it possible that the old Meghan looks more celebrity-like off-duty than current Meghan... age? no kids? IDK but she looks more confident and just... normal.


I was thinking the same, she looks pretty and celebrity like in these pics. I guess this marriage is taking toll on both the parties.


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I'm waiting for a tell-all about Meghan from an ex-bff or ex-husband. I'm surprised no one has published one yet.


Hee-hee-hee .. maybe I'll "ghost-write" one since I do know people who knew Meghan (and I'm sure they know many more given that they are in the Entertainment biz too)!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Annawakes said:


> What a smug smirk she has in that picture with the Queen.


*BOOM* .. so I'm not the only one who thought that???????


----------



## Straight-Laced

Camilla Long with her review of Friday's court proceedings :

*Meghan the narcissist gets her day in court, but she’s too blind to see she’s already lost*
Camilla Long
Sunday April 26 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times

"The trial of the decade kicked off on Friday morning, with much excited fiddling online — a pre-trial hearing conducted, “trickily”, on Microsoft Teams. In one window, the duchess’s little Italian waiter QC appeared, with a plume of glossy turkey hair. In another, there was the silent, clipped, gravedigger QC for the defence, representing The Mail on Sunday and its case for printing Thomas Markle’s letter. Both were in rooms that had been blurred out, while the purring judge — a man not unlike Alan Rickman — sat in a normal Harry Potter panelled courtroom.

Along with 80 or so other journalists, I watched the whole thing from start to finish. It felt vast and important, like Leveson part two. At one point, it looked less like a trial of the matter at hand and more like a trial of the press in general. If Prince Harry has his way, it will be a monstrous, all-consuming, neverending rapture: a terrible reckoning, a Book of Revelation for the people he hates. For Meghan it will involve an end-times level of self-promotion and publicity. Guess what? She will take the stand. It is their dream circus.

Be in no doubt: this is a circus. It seemed astonishing to me that these skilled and pre-eminent men, with 100 years of experience between them, should waste any time discussing a story of such effervescing Marie Antoinettish frippery and thin-skinned triviality. There was talk of “post-Naomi Campbell jurisprudence” and a comic moment when they stopped to consider whether Meghan’s “favourite snack”, avocados, fuelled “human rights abuses, drought and murder”. That was before we got to the 75 pages of articles that had displeased the couple. First impression: neither the duchess nor Harry can take criticism.

Second impression: for someone who doesn’t like to talk about her private life, the duchess sure does want to talk about it. Before this trial, we knew little about her relationship with her grim Honey Bear father; now there’s little we don’t. The hearing made reference to a whole 33 further pages of mostly personal content she made available 10 days ago, including texts to her father from Meghan and Harry before their wedding.

The messages add absolutely nothing. In one, she appears concerned for her father’s “health and safety”. In another, she seems most interested in getting “security” to the hospital where he’s just had heart surgery, presumably to stop him talking to the press. So why release them? Perhaps to provide a mirage of openness, give the impression she’s happy to lay it all out when she isn’t. If anything the couple come across as unhealthily obsessed with the press and image — it’s a strange self-own.

But then, the duchess is someone who thinks she can win at anything; be the centre of all attention; have the moral upper hand in any dispute. Her own ego blinds her; it even blinds the people working for her, like her poor QC struggling to keep up with the vastness of her pompous submissions. I am no fan of the royal family, and in many ways I’d hoped she would expose them as the pale, stale charisma vacuums they are, but at least they have the humility to know when to stop, instead of throwing themselves into this extraordinary trial and its ramifications — the hundreds of pages of overshare, plus the added negative publicity that will never end.

Who wins is irrelevant — in many ways she has already lost. There will be a day’s headlines if she prevails after two, three, even four weeks of lashing stories about her destructive ambition and unedifying obsession with her image. Meanwhile she is reducing the pair of them to supermarket magazine fodder, telling Harry he’s getting better, when he is in fact getting worse. She will brush the whole trial aside as yet another injustice, whatever happens: “See what they made me do,” she will say, by way of explaining the roomfuls of dirty linen about to be laundered. It’s as mad as a box of prancing kippers.

By the end of it, Harry will secretly wish to go back to the relative anonymity of being a royal, living in peace at Frogmore, able to fully disappear once he’s clocked out of the day’s work, just like a normal person would. Royals are the most anonymous celebs in the world — Prince William, for example, lives in obscurity. We don’t know where he buys his clothes, gets his food, even where he goes on holiday. He had a whole job and none of us knew anything about it. As he appeared outside his house on Thursday to clap the NHS, I realised I didn’t even know whether he would like his own front door. All those riches, and all that power and no effort — it is the dream, and Harry is probably already missing it."


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> This is very unlikely (I used to manage email marketing for F50 companies). One, email pixels only come into play if it was a professionally laid out email - that wouldn’t happen with most business correspondence. Two, the IP address doesn’t say “residential” or not - it would just be a guess based on their ISP, but I wouldn’t take a guess like this too seriously.


Sorry to everyone else on this thread because this is a long post and I haven't had time to catch up the rest of the posts yet.

Okay I used to be in Tech and specifically in Fintech, and yes IPs aren't divided into residential or not but I meant that you can look up the ip, find the location information and then use something like google maps street view and determine if it's a residential region or not. I'm not particularly proud of it but I've had to use this method for work before years ago and though it wasn't super precise it definitely gave me info that was actionable.

Though I will agree with your point even back then it was only accurate half the time and it's a not going to be accurate often anymore because of VPNs and other security features people use now. Regardless I really don't think it was the IP address that made this person suspicious.

I think this person did use (or is pretending to have used) pixel tracking or some other form of tracking, how else would they be confident that it was the same computer? I think they didn't specify that it was an IP, you assumed that was all they meant, they specified that it was the same location and computer which definitely sounds like they mean IP + plus some other tracking data most likely from pixel tracking. 

If they had only said  same location or same browser then I would believe them less but they specified computer which makes it more believable.

I personally know one really nosey person who does use pixel tracking even for their regular email correspondence so I think you're underestimating how often it's used especially since it's become so easy to do it. I went to the original forum the post was from and even read all the replies of this person and whether they are lying or not about interacting with MM, they are someone that probably has a business and is capable of using pixel tracking and is a little paranoid enough to use it. I could be totally wrong about them but we shouldn't be surprised that someone is claiming they did this since tracking tech is becoming easier to use.

Pixel tracking is hardly something very difficult to setup or use, anyone here could set it up today even if they don't have any tech experience. How much information they'll get will be the thing that varies based on how they set it up.

Also from the other information in the thread they couldn't verify that the 'PR' person was real because the 'PR' made sure that they could only be reached by email and couldn't be contacted in any other way. That's definitely the most suspicious thing about this 'PR' person so far.


----------



## CeeJay

Jaxion said:


> Okay I used to be in Tech and specifically in Fintech, and yes IPs aren't divided into residential or not but I meant that you can look up the ip, find the location information and then use something like google maps street view and determine if it's a residential region or not. I'm not particularly proud of it but I've had to use this method for work before years ago and though it wasn't super precise it definitely gave me info that was actionable.
> .



Hi there, and same here - Financial Services / Tech!  I was the Dev Manager for our global Trade Application, so you betcha that we had to monitor a LOT in regards to where those trade requests were coming from, even though we also had to make use of 3-tiered login security.  I would say that FinTech is pretty much front-line when it comes to Cybersecurity and ensuring that things don't get hacked (hence my SHOCK when I was asked to do a ZOOM Interview with a major bank out here in LA - and get this, the assignment was for their Risk & Compliance Department) .. huh???


----------



## mdcx

Straight-Laced said:


> Camilla Long with her review of Friday's court proceedings :
> 
> *Meghan the narcissist gets her day in court, but she’s too blind to see she’s already lost*
> Camilla Long
> Sunday April 26 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times
> 
> "The trial of the decade kicked off on Friday morning, with much excited fiddling online — a pre-trial hearing conducted, “trickily”, on Microsoft Teams. In one window, the duchess’s little Italian waiter QC appeared, with a plume of glossy turkey hair. In another, there was the silent, clipped, gravedigger QC for the defence, representing The Mail on Sunday and its case for printing Thomas Markle’s letter. Both were in rooms that had been blurred out, while the purring judge — a man not unlike Alan Rickman — sat in a normal Harry Potter panelled courtroom.
> 
> Along with 80 or so other journalists, I watched the whole thing from start to finish. It felt vast and important, like Leveson part two. At one point, it looked less like a trial of the matter at hand and more like a trial of the press in general. If Prince Harry has his way, it will be a monstrous, all-consuming, neverending rapture: a terrible reckoning, a Book of Revelation for the people he hates. For Meghan it will involve an end-times level of self-promotion and publicity. Guess what? She will take the stand. It is their dream circus.
> 
> Be in no doubt: this is a circus. It seemed astonishing to me that these skilled and pre-eminent men, with 100 years of experience between them, should waste any time discussing a story of such effervescing Marie Antoinettish frippery and thin-skinned triviality. There was talk of “post-Naomi Campbell jurisprudence” and a comic moment when they stopped to consider whether Meghan’s “favourite snack”, avocados, fuelled “human rights abuses, drought and murder”. That was before we got to the 75 pages of articles that had displeased the couple. First impression: neither the duchess nor Harry can take criticism.
> 
> Second impression: for someone who doesn’t like to talk about her private life, the duchess sure does want to talk about it. Before this trial, we knew little about her relationship with her grim Honey Bear father; now there’s little we don’t. The hearing made reference to a whole 33 further pages of mostly personal content she made available 10 days ago, including texts to her father from Meghan and Harry before their wedding.
> 
> The messages add absolutely nothing. In one, she appears concerned for her father’s “health and safety”. In another, she seems most interested in getting “security” to the hospital where he’s just had heart surgery, presumably to stop him talking to the press. So why release them? Perhaps to provide a mirage of openness, give the impression she’s happy to lay it all out when she isn’t. If anything the couple come across as unhealthily obsessed with the press and image — it’s a strange self-own.
> 
> But then, the duchess is someone who thinks she can win at anything; be the centre of all attention; have the moral upper hand in any dispute. Her own ego blinds her; it even blinds the people working for her, like her poor QC struggling to keep up with the vastness of her pompous submissions. I am no fan of the royal family, and in many ways I’d hoped she would expose them as the pale, stale charisma vacuums they are, but at least they have the humility to know when to stop, instead of throwing themselves into this extraordinary trial and its ramifications — the hundreds of pages of overshare, plus the added negative publicity that will never end.
> 
> Who wins is irrelevant — in many ways she has already lost. There will be a day’s headlines if she prevails after two, three, even four weeks of lashing stories about her destructive ambition and unedifying obsession with her image. Meanwhile she is reducing the pair of them to supermarket magazine fodder, telling Harry he’s getting better, when he is in fact getting worse. She will brush the whole trial aside as yet another injustice, whatever happens: “See what they made me do,” she will say, by way of explaining the roomfuls of dirty linen about to be laundered. It’s as mad as a box of prancing kippers.
> 
> By the end of it, Harry will secretly wish to go back to the relative anonymity of being a royal, living in peace at Frogmore, able to fully disappear once he’s clocked out of the day’s work, just like a normal person would. Royals are the most anonymous celebs in the world — Prince William, for example, lives in obscurity. We don’t know where he buys his clothes, gets his food, even where he goes on holiday. He had a whole job and none of us knew anything about it. As he appeared outside his house on Thursday to clap the NHS, I realised I didn’t even know whether he would like his own front door. All those riches, and all that power and no effort — it is the dream, and Harry is probably already missing it."


Wow wow wow. I had no idea this trial was so big and so messy.


----------



## Jaxion

CeeJay said:


> Hi there, and same here - Financial Services / Tech!  I was the Dev Manager for our global Trade Application, so you betcha that we had to monitor a LOT in regards to where those trade requests were coming from, even though we also had to make use of 3-tiered login security.  I would say that FinTech is pretty much front-line when it comes to Cybersecurity and ensuring that things don't get hacked (hence my SHOCK when I was asked to do a ZOOM Interview with a major bank out here in LA - and get this, the assignment was for their Risk & Compliance Department) .. huh???


I remember your original post about Zoom and the bank and I'm still shaking my head over it. It's amazing and it's sad because I've had similar experiences. About two weeks ago a former colleague of mine, who is supposed to be a security expert, was still using Zoom for a video calls!

I was so shocked and weirded out that I almost told him off and I kind of wish I had because he's always been too relaxed, meanwhile I left the industry more than two years ago and I'm still at the level of paranoid where I put masking tape over the front-facing camera of every device I have. I may be too much lol.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan and Harry moved to paparazzi ‘hotspot’*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave jumped from the proverbial frying pan into the paparazzi fire.

The couple, who claimed harsh treatment from the British press and prying paparazzi drove them to leave the royal family earlier this year and flee their secluded estate outside of London, first for Canada and now Los Angeles, have another thing coming to them if they think photographers will lay off them. And some warn the situation could be potentially deadly for the family, mirroring Princess Diana’s deadly crash in Paris.

The dynamic duo have settled into the gated Serra Retreat area of Malibu — a “hotbed of around 300 photographers,” according to one celebrity snapper who regularly camps out there with his compatriots to get a glimpse of stars like Mel Gibson, Britney Spears and Kylie Jenner who have frequented it in the past.

LA photographer Mark Karloff, host of the Paparazzi Podcast, told the Daily Star Meghan and Harry that while they might have privacy a few miles inside the gated community, they’re surrounded by a hot bed of camera lenses.

“This is LA, there are probably 200 to 300 photographers around, they’re really hungry for pictures right now,” he told the paper. “If they were out and about, they could expect to get it constantly if they decide to frequent any place.

“There are different breeds of photographers, there are photographers we would call savages that will pretty much do anything to get a picture,” he continued. “They will stay as many hours as they need to wait for an exit or wait for them to come out.”

“They’re going to have to [negotiate] because then it gets dangerous, the more resistance to the pictures is what gets things dangerous. It’s not necessarily the photographers that are after them. When celebrities or security make it difficult to get photos, a lot of photographers will get more aggressive.”

Malibu is also treacherous as not only are the beaches in California all public, the main road going in and out is Highway 1 — which is packed most days — or two lane winding roads through the steep hills surrounding the coast. A potential paparazzi chase could be deadly.

“It doesn’t need to be that way, obviously if you’re somebody who is more of a private person and who hasn’t chosen a life of being in the public eye, and you don’t want to be photographed that’s a different story,” Karloff told the Star. “But if you’re someone like Meghan who has openly been wanting this celebrity life, you’re going to have to quote unquote give it up a lot of the time.”

This sounds like something Harry — who notoriously loathes the paparazzi and blames them for his mother’s death — will have a hard time swallowing.

https://pagesix.com/2020/04/25/meghan-and-harry-moved-to-paparazzi-hotspot/amp/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> I think this person did use (or is pretending to have used) pixel tracking or some other form of tracking, how else would they be confident that it was the same computer? I think they didn't specify that it was an IP, you assumed that was all they meant, they specified that it was the same location and computer which definitely sounds like they mean IP + plus some other tracking data most likely from pixel tracking.
> 
> If they had only said  same location or same browser then I would believe them less but they specified computer which makes it more believable.
> 
> I personally know one really nosey person who does use pixel tracking even for their regular email correspondence so I think you're underestimating how often it's used especially since it's become so easy to do it. I went to the original forum the post was from and even read all the replies of this person and whether they are lying or not about interacting with MM, they are someone that probably has a business and is capable of using pixel tracking and is a little paranoid enough to use it. I could be totally wrong about them but we shouldn't be surprised that someone is claiming they did this since tracking tech is becoming easier to use.
> 
> Pixel tracking is hardly something very difficult to setup or use, anyone here could set it up today even if they don't have any tech experience. How much information they'll get will be the thing that varies based on how they set it up.
> 
> Also from the other information in the thread they couldn't verify that the 'PR' person was real because the 'PR' made sure that they could only be reached by email and couldn't be contacted in any other way. That's definitely the most suspicious thing about this 'PR' person so far.



Two things here - one, you're right, I find it hard to believe the average person would use pixel tracking on a normal business correspondence email. Who would even think to do that on business correspondence (unless you're sending a marketing email)? It's so out of the norm, I find it unlikely. That's not to say no one would do it... you could find a person out there who has done anything, but how likely is it that a normal person would? If she said she had been stalking M, then I'd believe it... but just on a normal correspondence? Two, pixel tracking is not a smoking gun... it would tell you if that person opened the email, clicked, how long they spent on the email, etc. but it wouldn't tell you the street address that person lived on much less the exact computer. That marketing technology doesn't even exist well today, much less back then. Tell me how many times you've been served ads based on what your spouse or your kids surfed on the internet (or even your neighbor)... it's because the company THINKS they're sending it to that person's computer, but it's yours instead. 

Like I said, I think the person is confident they understand how it works but I don't think they do. People are sometimes mistakenly confident in something that turns out to be wrong.


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> I remember your original post about Zoom and the bank and I'm still shaking my head over it. It's amazing and it's sad because I've had similar experiences. About two weeks ago a former colleague of mine, who is supposed to be a security expert, was still using Zoom for a video calls!
> 
> I was so shocked and weirded out that I almost told him off and I kind of wish I had because he's always been too relaxed, meanwhile I left the industry more than two years ago and I'm still at the level of paranoid where I put masking tape over the front-facing camera of every device I have. I may be too much lol.





CeeJay said:


> Hi there, and same here - Financial Services / Tech!  I was the Dev Manager for our global Trade Application, so you betcha that we had to monitor a LOT in regards to where those trade requests were coming from, even though we also had to make use of 3-tiered login security.  I would say that FinTech is pretty much front-line when it comes to Cybersecurity and ensuring that things don't get hacked (hence my SHOCK when I was asked to do a ZOOM Interview with a major bank out here in LA - and get this, the assignment was for their Risk & Compliance Department) .. huh???



I actually work for a major cybersecurity company and we still use Zoom. The consensus seems to be as long as you require PW for your Zoom meetings, you're protected from Zoom-bombing. I don't join Zoom calls without PW enabled.

Had to update this to qualify... I don't know if Zoom is safe or not. Just sharing our company uses it still, but being a cybersecurity company we may put extra controls on it that aren't standard. A lot of major companies have blocked Zoom to avoid the hassle altogether.


----------



## PewPew

> From Camila Long’s Sunday Times Article— In another [text], she seems most interested in getting “security” to the hospital where he’s just had heart surgery, presumably to stop him talking to the press. So why release them?



It’s astonishing that H&M are trying to pass their increasingly annoyed texts to her father post-heart attack as caring. Their PR even got a Vanity Fair article hilariously claiming that Harry comes off as supportive.

First it’s clear they’re not concerned about his heart attack, or that he’s still in the hospital post-heart surgery. They’re furious that he’s not calling them back (wtf he just had heart surgery?!), so Harry lays out how “only we can help you”, which is a cringey, veiled threat, not “supportive”. They want to know which hospital he’s at, not to visit or see how Thomas Markle is. Nope, they’re going to send a security team to “help him” by preventing him from talking to the media. At that point, cardiac rehab would have been Thomas’ priority, not press conferences & raising his BP talking to 2 self-centered stressors. How arrogant & magnanimous for H&M to keep insistingly they’re not mad he’s missing the wedding, so Thomas needs to do XYZ.

It doesn’t matter how many fawning articles they get written. Reading the texts gave me such secondhand embarrassment that I initially thought the opposition released them. H&M say the texts make them look good/caring, so if we’re too dense to see their generosity, Obie and People will need to write more to “educate” us. No shame.


----------



## lalame

PewPew said:


> It’s astonishing that H&M are trying to pass their increasingly desperate texts to her father post-heart attack as caring. Their PR even got a Vanity Fair article hilariously saying that Harry comes off as supportive.
> 
> First it’s clear they’re not concerned about his heart attack, or that he’s still in the hospital post-heart surgery. They’re furious that he’s not writing or calling them back (wtf he just had heart surgery?!), so Harry lays out how “only we can help you”, which is a cringey, veiled threat. They want to know which hospital he’s at, not to visit or see how he is. Nope, they’re going to send a security team to “help him” by preventing him from talking to the media.
> 
> It doesn’t matter how many fawning articles they have written. Reading the texts gave me such secondhand embarrassment that I initially thought the prosecution released them.  H&M think the texts make them look good/caring & if we’re too dense to see their generosity, Obie and People will need to write more to convince us. No shame.



YES, the "send a security team to help you" was so off to me too... that definitely sounded threatening. I can only imagine them following that poor old man around and hassling everyone he encounters, or standing guard at his hospital bed and interrogating everyone who tries to talk to him. How did they not understand how poorly that would come across to a grown ass adult who has been living on his own in a foreign country for years? I'd ghost them too.


----------



## scarlet555

Boy you guys move fast.  I’m not sure I can catch up.  But, I’m glad media is seeing M for what she is.   There really seems to be something wrong with her.  I still see US catering to her, wonder how long this will last.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan and Harry moved to paparazzi ‘hotspot’*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harryhave jumped from the proverbial frying pan into the paparazzi fire.
> 
> The couple, who claimed harsh treatment from the British press and prying paparazzi drove them to leave the royal family earlier this year and flee their secluded estate outside of London, first for Canada and now Los Angeles, have another thing coming to them if they think photographers will lay off them. And some warn the situation could be potentially deadly for the family, mirroring Princess Diana’s deadly crash in Paris.
> 
> The dynamic duo have settled into the gated Serra Retreat area of Malibu — a “hotbed of around 300 photographers,” according to one celebrity snapper who regularly camps out there with his compatriots to get a glimpse of stars like Mel Gibson, Britney Spears and Kylie Jenner who have frequented it in the past.
> 
> LA photographer Mark Karloff, host of the Paparazzi Podcast, told the Daily Star Meghan and Harry that while they might have privacy a few miles inside the gated community, they’re surrounded by a hot bed of camera lenses.
> 
> “This is LA, there are probably 200 to 300 photographers around, they’re really hungry for pictures right now,” he told the paper. “If they were out and about, they could expect to get it constantly if they decide to frequent any place.
> 
> “There are different breeds of photographers, there are photographers we would call savages that will pretty much do anything to get a picture,” he continued. “They will stay as many hours as they need to wait for an exit or wait for them to come out.”
> 
> “They’re going to have to [negotiate] because then it gets dangerous, the more resistance to the pictures is what gets things dangerous. It’s not necessarily the photographers that are after them. When celebrities or security make it difficult to get photos, a lot of photographers will get more aggressive.”
> 
> Malibu is also treacherous as not only are the beaches in California all public, the main road going in and out is Highway 1 — which is packed most days — or two lane winding roads through the steep hills surrounding the coast. A potential paparazzi chase could be deadly.
> 
> “It doesn’t need to be that way, obviously if you’re somebody who is more of a private person and who hasn’t chosen a life of being in the public eye, and you don’t want to be photographed that’s a different story,” Karloff told the Star. “But if you’re someone like Meghan who has openly been wanting this celebrity life, you’re going to have to quote unquote give it up a lot of the time.”
> 
> This sounds like something Harry — who notoriously loathes the paparazzi and blames them for his mother’s death — will have a hard time swallowing.
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2020/04/25/meghan-and-harry-moved-to-paparazzi-hotspot/amp/



I had to look up this neighborhood... https://www.redfin.com/neighborhood/66071/CA/Malibu/Serra-Retreat

Nice houses, quite a range in prices. I would hate to be boxed in with just HWY1 as the outlet.


----------



## bisousx

scarlet555 said:


> Boy you guys move fast.  I’m not sure I can catch up.  But, I’m glad media is seeing M for what she is.   There really seems to be something wrong with her.  I still see US catering to her, wonder how long this will last.



I predict not long once the trial gains traction. Thomas Markle cannot be controlled and it will be glorious to watch him being cross examined. I wonder if the jury can see Meg's reactions if the trial is mostly from videocall. If the jurors caught a glimpse of Meg's now famous googly-eyed rage fits, she'd be done for.


----------



## Jaxion

lalame said:


> Two things here - one, you're right, I find it hard to believe the average person would use pixel tracking on a normal business correspondence email. Who would even think to do that on business correspondence (unless you're sending a marketing email)? It's so out of the norm, I find it unlikely. That's not to say no one would do it... you could find a person out there who has done anything, but how likely is it that a normal person would? If she said she had been stalking M, then I'd believe it... but just on a normal correspondence? Two, pixel tracking is not a smoking gun... it would tell you if that person opened the email, clicked, how long they spent on the email, etc. but it wouldn't tell you the street address that person lived on much less the exact computer. That marketing technology doesn't even exist well today, much less back then. Tell me how many times you've been served ads based on what your spouse or your kids surfed on the internet (or even your neighbor)... it's because the company THINKS they're sending it to that person's computer, but it's yours instead.
> 
> Like I said, I think the person is confident they understand how it works but I don't think they do. People are sometimes mistakenly confident in something that turns out to be wrong.


The thing that I agree with you most is that It's hard to believe that someone was using detailed pixel tracking back in 2016. The thing is I think this person wasn't stalking MM in particular but was just generally stalking their clients. Especially since their clients are celebrities and other famous people. Also in this person's other posts in that same thread (I don't want to link to it directly but it is on a fairly famous forum) they say that they got the street address from an intern at their company who had to book a car to pick up MM from her home, that admission totally gives me stalker vibes. This also explains why they feel confident it's the same person because they may be able to reference the location they got from the IP against the street address. 

Also you're right the standard pixel tracking tools that people use for email marketing will not give you much information because the companies providing the service only want the service to be used for marketing purposes only. But you're thinking of tracking pixels used for one type of service, while there are other services that use different forms of tracking pixels or other forms of tracking to collect enough data about a device to be able to identify it. 

Regardless I think we've gotten far too into the weeds on this and I'm just going to let it go.


----------



## lalame

Jaxion said:


> The thing that I agree with you most is that It's hard to believe that someone was using detailed pixel tracking back in 2016. The thing is I think this person wasn't stalking MM in particular but was just generally stalking their clients. Especially since their clients are celebrities and other famous people. Also in this person's other posts in that same thread (I don't want to link to it directly but it is on a fairly famous forum) they say that they got the street address from an intern at their company who had to book a car to pick up MM from her home, that admission totally gives me stalker vibes. This also explains why they feel confident it's the same person because they may be able to reference the location they got from the IP against the street address.
> 
> Also you're right the standard pixel tracking tools that people use for email marketing will not give you much information because the companies providing the service only want the service to be used for marketing purposes only. But you're thinking of tracking pixels used for one type of service, while there are other services that use different forms of tracking pixels or other forms of tracking to collect enough data about a device to be able to identify it.
> 
> Regardless I think we've gotten far too into the weeds on this and I'm just going to let it go.



You're making a lot of good pts!! And it totally makes more sense with that info re: the stalking. Sorry, my 9-5 was basically thinking about these issues so I'm just geeking out.  I can totally believe, however she got to the conclusion, that MM could've been playing both roles.


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> I am going to blame the designer for 75% of this.  It is up to the designer to know what works and what doesn't.  The designer should have overseen last minute fittings to make sure the dress looked perfect.  A person would have to be completely obtuse to not realize that this dress would be photographed endlessly and every care needed to make it  and the bride look exactly right.  I am giving the designer the benefit of the doubt that she is not obtuse or she wouldn't have the job with a major design house, so what happened?  Did the bride use a fantasy mirror to see herself and think it all looked perfect?    I think the answer to this is yes based upon subsequent fashion choices.  The emperor has no clothes and someone should really make a point of telling him.


I have always thought Meghan had picked out her wedding dress, the Stella McCartney she wore to the reception. I'm sure someone at the palace saw it and thought no sleeves and no shoulders bared is not the royal way. The Stella dress was a much better look for her. The Givenchy was a last minute disaster.


----------



## lalame

People who lay low and want privacy sanction biographies to be written about them right? Of course Omid is one of the chosen. 

“And so began his cultivation of Meghan, at first through her friends. Struggling to cope under intense media scrutiny after her wedding, the Duchess needed a journalist she could trust, a man whom she could rely on to fight her corner and not write nasty things. 

Scobie was happy to oblige and, perhaps unfairly and possibly through jealousy, was dubbed Meghan's 'mouthpiece'.”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...journalists-writing-flattering-biography.html


----------



## needlv

lalame said:


> People who lay low and want privacy sanction biographies to be written about them right? Of course Omid is one of the chosen.
> 
> “And so began his cultivation of Meghan, at first through her friends. Struggling to cope under intense media scrutiny after her wedding, the Duchess needed a journalist she could trust, a man whom she could rely on to fight her corner and not write nasty things.
> 
> Scobie was happy to oblige and, perhaps unfairly and possibly through jealousy, was dubbed Meghan's 'mouthpiece'.”
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...journalists-writing-flattering-biography.html



Do you think this is a negotiation tactic? The BRF is not “playing ball” so leak a story saying you are co-writing a tell-all and that way you forced their hand (to give you more $$, a house in LA or whatever her latest demands are?). I find it odd that this has leaked when everyone knows they can’t make the $$$ they thought they could (pre covid19)....


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> Do you think this is a negotiation tactic? The BRF is not “playing ball” so leak a story saying you are co-writing a tell-all and that way you forced their hand (to give you more $$, a house in LA or whatever her latest demands are?). I find it odd that this has leaked when everyone knows they can’t make the $$$ they thought they could (pre covid19)....


If it is I doubt it’ll work.  Her credibility is low anyway, and they probably don’t care at this point.  She’s dust if she does a kiss and tell.


----------



## limom

I don’t believe for one minute that they will write anything remotely gossipy about the BRF. No way no how.
I’ll bet you that they are just keeping their profile “hot”.
At the end, the book will just be a fluffy expose of the American actress who would become princess, imo.
They might put a couple of juicy details here and there but nothing that would endanger their relationship with their benefactor aka Prince Charles.
They might be delusional but they still got bills to pay...
So the post is saying Malibu? Could they be so brazen as having two houses paid by dear Papa?


chowlover2 said:


> I have always thought Meghan had picked out her wedding dress, the Stella McCartney she wore to the reception. I'm sure someone at the palace saw it and thought no sleeves and no shoulders bared is not the royal way. The Stella dress was a much better look for her. The Givenchy was a last minute disaster.


You can’t have a last minute couture dress, was the Givenchy off the rack?
Plus, Stella being British and an experienced designer would have known the restriction imposed by the court imo. So hers was always the reception dress.
The Givenchy dress was a miss but at least they were no wayward nipple flashing or other dreadful malfunction.


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> I don’t believe for one minute that they will write anything remotely gossipy about the BRF. No way no how.
> I’ll bet you that they are just keeping their profile “hot”.
> At the end, the book will just be a fluffy expose of the American actress who would become princess, imo.
> They might put a couple of juicy details here and there but nothing that would endanger their relationship with their benefactor aka Prince Charles.
> They might be delusional but they still got bills to pay...
> So the post is saying Malibu? Could they be so brazen as having two houses paid by dear Papa?
> 
> You can’t have a last minute couture dress, was the Givenchy off the rack?
> Plus, Stella being British and an experienced designer would have known the restriction imposed by the court imo. So hers was always the reception dress.
> The Givenchy dress was a miss but at least they were no wayward nipple flashing or other dreadful malfunction.


She's had that same neckline in other dresses she's worn so I think that is a fave look of hers and she wanted it for her wedding gown. The neckline was/is fine, the dress itself was a fail, imo. 

All the points brought up by TPFers here about the fabric stretching, the gown not having a waist so bending wouldn't show wrinkles, etc., make me think that no matter what the designer and others in the dress biz told her, it was "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

chowlover2 said:


> I have always thought Meghan had picked out her wedding dress, the Stella McCartney she wore to the reception. I'm sure someone at the palace saw it and thought no sleeves and no shoulders bared is not the royal way. The Stella dress was a much better look for her. The Givenchy was a last minute disaster.


You got it! She was gonna wear the Stella dress with the Vladimir emerald tiara


----------



## LittleStar88

The dress silhouette was pretty stunning. I personally love this photo (the lighting minimizes the fit flaws - really gorgeous photo):








But here you can see how the fabric began to give and the dress started to wrinkle and droop:











Dress looks heavy and also sagging as it stretches out. She needs those little shoulder suspenders to hold it up. 

Ugh - I was so happy and optimistic for these two... Even still the wedding photos make me smile. Sad to see them turn into a hot mess train wreck.

As for those text messages to her dad... Yeah, they reek of manipulating dad and frantically and desperately trying to trick him into doing their bidding. Zero care or compassion for him or his situation. So she dumps dad because he refuses to be her tool? They think the text messages appear caring and helpful to their case?


----------



## limom

Agreed she looks pretty in the first picture.


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> Camilla Long with her review of Friday's court proceedings :
> 
> *Meghan the narcissist gets her day in court, but she’s too blind to see she’s already lost*
> Camilla Long
> Sunday April 26 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times
> 
> "The trial of the decade kicked off on Friday morning, with much excited fiddling online — a pre-trial hearing conducted, “trickily”, on Microsoft Teams. In one window, the duchess’s little Italian waiter QC appeared, with a plume of glossy turkey hair. In another, there was the silent, clipped, gravedigger QC for the defence, representing The Mail on Sunday and its case for printing Thomas Markle’s letter. Both were in rooms that had been blurred out, while the purring judge — a man not unlike Alan Rickman — sat in a normal Harry Potter panelled courtroom.
> 
> Along with 80 or so other journalists, I watched the whole thing from start to finish. It felt vast and important, like Leveson part two. At one point, it looked less like a trial of the matter at hand and more like a trial of the press in general. If Prince Harry has his way, it will be a monstrous, all-consuming, neverending rapture: a terrible reckoning, a Book of Revelation for the people he hates. For Meghan it will involve an end-times level of self-promotion and publicity. Guess what? She will take the stand. It is their dream circus.
> 
> Be in no doubt: this is a circus. It seemed astonishing to me that these skilled and pre-eminent men, with 100 years of experience between them, should waste any time discussing a story of such effervescing Marie Antoinettish frippery and thin-skinned triviality. There was talk of “post-Naomi Campbell jurisprudence” and a comic moment when they stopped to consider whether Meghan’s “favourite snack”, avocados, fuelled “human rights abuses, drought and murder”. That was before we got to the 75 pages of articles that had displeased the couple. First impression: neither the duchess nor Harry can take criticism.
> 
> Second impression: for someone who doesn’t like to talk about her private life, the duchess sure does want to talk about it. Before this trial, we knew little about her relationship with her grim Honey Bear father; now there’s little we don’t. The hearing made reference to a whole 33 further pages of mostly personal content she made available 10 days ago, including texts to her father from Meghan and Harry before their wedding.
> 
> The messages add absolutely nothing. In one, she appears concerned for her father’s “health and safety”. In another, she seems most interested in getting “security” to the hospital where he’s just had heart surgery, presumably to stop him talking to the press. So why release them? Perhaps to provide a mirage of openness, give the impression she’s happy to lay it all out when she isn’t. If anything the couple come across as unhealthily obsessed with the press and image — it’s a strange self-own.
> 
> But then, the duchess is someone who thinks she can win at anything; be the centre of all attention; have the moral upper hand in any dispute. Her own ego blinds her; it even blinds the people working for her, like her poor QC struggling to keep up with the vastness of her pompous submissions. I am no fan of the royal family, and in many ways I’d hoped she would expose them as the pale, stale charisma vacuums they are, but at least they have the humility to know when to stop, instead of throwing themselves into this extraordinary trial and its ramifications — the hundreds of pages of overshare, plus the added negative publicity that will never end.
> 
> Who wins is irrelevant — in many ways she has already lost. There will be a day’s headlines if she prevails after two, three, even four weeks of lashing stories about her destructive ambition and unedifying obsession with her image. Meanwhile she is reducing the pair of them to supermarket magazine fodder, telling Harry he’s getting better, when he is in fact getting worse. She will brush the whole trial aside as yet another injustice, whatever happens: “See what they made me do,” she will say, by way of explaining the roomfuls of dirty linen about to be laundered. It’s as mad as a box of prancing kippers.
> 
> By the end of it, Harry will secretly wish to go back to the relative anonymity of being a royal, living in peace at Frogmore, able to fully disappear once he’s clocked out of the day’s work, just like a normal person would. Royals are the most anonymous celebs in the world — Prince William, for example, lives in obscurity. We don’t know where he buys his clothes, gets his food, even where he goes on holiday. He had a whole job and none of us knew anything about it. As he appeared outside his house on Thursday to clap the NHS, I realised I didn’t even know whether he would like his own front door. All those riches, and all that power and no effort — it is the dream, and Harry is probably already missing it."


Thanks for posting! Her articles are always so entertaining to read! I mean just look at the headline 
Sounds like this case is going to be even messier than I originally guessed it would... popcorn, snacks, and alcoholic beverage of your choice at the ready!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> T
> Ugh - I was so happy and optimistic for these two... Even still the wedding photos make me smile. Sad to see them turn into a hot mess train wreck.



If you look for it, you can already see the signs even during the wedding ceremony, though. I'm not even talking about several members of the RF looking anything but thrilled, but there's a scene caught on film where Meghan in front of the bishop wants to hold hands (I think it was holding hands? Saw the clip a while ago) and Harry won't and the smily mask slips for a moment to reveal a really ugly face until she catches herself and puts on the mega watts again. DURING THEIR WEDDING CEREMONY. Creepy.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you look for it, you can already see the signs even during the wedding ceremony, though. I'm not even talking about several members of the RF looking anything but thrilled, but there's a scene caught on film where Meghan in front of the bishop wants to hold hands (I think it was holding hands? Saw the clip a while ago) and Harry won't and the smily mask slips for a moment to reveal a really ugly face until she catches herself and puts on the mega watts again. DURING THEIR WEDDING CEREMONY. Creepy.



OMG I missed that! She is a Jeckyll and Hyde.


----------



## ic_locon

It’s like that last family gathering for Commonwealth Day. Everyone had dour, serious faces and Meghan had a wide, toothy grin from ear to ear the whole time! Something was really off there!


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you look for it, you can already see the signs even during the wedding ceremony, though. I'm not even talking about several members of the RF looking anything but thrilled, but there's a scene caught on film where Meghan in front of the bishop wants to hold hands (I think it was holding hands? Saw the clip a while ago) and Harry won't and the smily mask slips for a moment to reveal a really ugly face until she catches herself and puts on the mega watts again. DURING THEIR WEDDING CEREMONY. Creepy.



I didn’t realize til now there’s quite a few articles out there showing footage of Harry rejecting Meghan’s attempts to hold hands.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> I didn’t realize til now there’s quite a few articles out there showing footage of Harry rejecting Meghan’s attempts to hold hands.



Apparently she's upped his dose (of whatever...tranquillizers, poison, voodoo) in the meanwhile.


----------



## SouthTampa

LittleStar88 said:


> The dress silhouette was pretty stunning. I personally love this photo (the lighting minimizes the fit flaws - really gorgeous photo):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But here you can see how the fabric began to give and the dress started to wrinkle and droop:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dress looks heavy and also sagging as it stretches out. She needs those little shoulder suspenders to hold it up.
> 
> Ugh - I was so happy and optimistic for these two... Even still the wedding photos make me smile. Sad to see them turn into a hot mess train wreck.
> 
> As for those text messages to her dad... Yeah, they reek of manipulating dad and frantically and desperately trying to trick him into doing their bidding. Zero care or compassion for him or his situation. So she dumps dad because he refuses to be her tool? They think the text messages appear caring and helpful to their case? [/QUOTE
> 
> Those flowers get me every time.    So Stunning!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I also was so happy for him when they got married. And what beautiful photos. I thought she looked beautiful (loved the reception dress). Sadly, now all I see is:


----------



## 1LV

ic_locon said:


> It’s like that last family gathering for Commonwealth Day. Everyone had dour, serious faces and Meghan had a wide, toothy grin from ear to ear the whole time! Something was really off there!


That grin spoke volumes.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and their favorite UK 'paper', just put this out .. let the show begin!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...two-years-despite-claiming-felt-harassed.html
> 
> But .. as @mrsinsyder was able to pretty quickly find the Thanksgiving celebration pic, won't his attorneys find this too and so this whole nonsense of not having contact with him for 2 years ... ????


I hope her "influential friends" testify.  I can't believe they spoke about her without her knowledge.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I hope her "influential friends" testify.  I can't believe the spoke about her without her knowledge.


At the very least they ran it by her first.  I hope they’re sweating bullets.


----------



## threadbender

1LV said:


> At the very least they ran it by her first.  I hope they’re sweating bullets.


If they are smart, and that may be questionable, they will listen to their attorneys and follow their advice. It could be as simple as letting mm know that they plan on cooperating with the defense and, thus, she may want to reconsider her options. They can offer to do a voluntary deposition explaining exactly how they "happened" to obtain/disclose "private, copyrighted" information to People magazine. Now, do I think they will ? Who knows? But, their paid legal teams will know the best way to protect their clients, not the sussexes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

Swe3tGirl said:


> The dress looked better on the mannequin than on her lol
> 
> View attachment 4715881



Comparing this to the live shots - I have a question for those of you with fabric/sewing/fitting knowledge:
Is the style and construction of the dress technically difficult? No waist, those long vertical seams etc would seem difficult to me (with no sewing knowledge, limited fitting knowledge). 

So it’s a technically complex design but flawed due to fabric constraints, client requests/demands and practical usage issues?  

Eg lace would hide creases but may have looked too old-fashioned for our monarchy-modernizer? And the sleeves/pits had to be baggy so she could raise them up as the fitted non-stretchy fabric itself had no give?


----------



## Genie27

LittleStar88 said:


> The dress silhouette was pretty stunning. I personally love this photo (the lighting minimizes the fit flaws - really gorgeous photo):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But here you can see how the fabric began to give and the dress started to wrinkle and droop:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dress looks heavy and also sagging as it stretches out. She needs those little shoulder suspenders to hold it up.
> 
> Ugh - I was so happy and optimistic for these two... Even still the wedding photos make me smile. Sad to see them turn into a hot mess train wreck.
> 
> As for those text messages to her dad... Yeah, they reek of manipulating dad and frantically and desperately trying to trick him into doing their bidding. Zero care or compassion for him or his situation. So she dumps dad because he refuses to be her tool? They think the text messages appear caring and helpful to their case?


Imagine that first picture if the dress was a softer white....


----------



## sdkitty

Jaxion said:


> The thing that I agree with you most is that It's hard to believe that someone was using detailed pixel tracking back in 2016. The thing is I think this person wasn't stalking MM in particular but was just generally stalking their clients. Especially since their clients are celebrities and other famous people. Also in this person's other posts in that same thread (I don't want to link to it directly but it is on a fairly famous forum) they say that they got the street address from an intern at their company who had to book a car to pick up MM from her home, that admission totally gives me stalker vibes. This also explains why they feel confident it's the same person because they may be able to reference the location they got from the IP against the street address.
> 
> Also you're right the standard pixel tracking tools that people use for email marketing will not give you much information because the companies providing the service only want the service to be used for marketing purposes only. But you're thinking of tracking pixels used for one type of service, while there are other services that use different forms of tracking pixels or other forms of tracking to collect enough data about a device to be able to identify it.
> 
> Regardless I think we've gotten far too into the weeds on this and I'm just going to let it go.


yes, I think most of us can agree this sounds like Meghan but there isn't hard evidence that it was her


----------



## Genie27

I went down a rabbit hole and found this detailed and informative post - 
http://sewingartistry.com/2018/05/the-dress-aka-meghans-wedding-gown/


----------



## marietouchet

Genie27 said:


> Comparing this to the live shots - I have a question for those of you with fabric/sewing/fitting knowledge:
> Is the style and construction of the dress technically difficult? No waist, those long vertical seams etc would seem difficult to me (with no sewing knowledge, limited fitting knowledge).
> 
> So it’s a technically complex design but flawed due to fabric constraints, client requests/demands and practical usage issues?
> 
> Eg lace would hide creases but may have looked too old-fashioned for our monarchy-modernizer? And the sleeves/pits had to be baggy so she could raise them up as the fitted non-stretchy fabric itself had no give?


The minimalist dress style and satin fabric - that hide nothing - is such that it needs to be fitted perfectly and perhaps the customer was not available for detailed fittings esp at the last moment when she might have gained/lost weight
IMHO Bespoke couture takes  a bit of getting used to ... accepting the tailor’s advice, knowing what the tailor can / will do for you, which style will stand the test of time etc, what fabric works better etc, buying and  wearing bespoke is a learned  skill
And a wedding dress is different from a photo shoot dress - you get to have the latter photoshopped. 
The previous article , last post , is great about the perils of photographing a white dress
I thought the recent Emilia Wickstead green cape dress was poorly tailored at the bodice, the cape drew your attention exactly to where the dress was off


----------



## Genie27

marietouchet said:


> IMHO Bespoke couture takes  a bit of getting used to ... accepting the tailor’s advice, knowing what the tailor can / will do for you, which style will stand the test of time etc, what fabric works better etc, buying and  wearing bespoke is a learned  skill


Yes it does take time to learn - even with RTW fittings - when almost everything is beautiful / cut well, it takes some time/experience to select pieces that flatter your shape and personality, as well as lifestyle. The expert seamstress can guide for fit, but wearability is on the client. 

It’s not easy - most of us 30-40-50 somethings are now so accustomed to stretch/casual items that we *dont* know how fitted non-stretch clothing should fit for ease and comfort. 

That green superhero costume (and her other signature cape/shroud looks) suggests that she has an idea of how she looks (tall and slim, with leggy model-like proportions).


----------



## beautymagpie

1LV said:


> That grin spoke volumes.


All for the cameras...


----------



## lalame

needlv said:


> Do you think this is a negotiation tactic? The BRF is not “playing ball” so leak a story saying you are co-writing a tell-all and that way you forced their hand (to give you more $$, a house in LA or whatever her latest demands are?). I find it odd that this has leaked when everyone knows they can’t make the $$$ they thought they could (pre covid19)....



Could be, maybe she’ll give just enough in this one to send the signal that she’s able and willing to spill the beans on the family if they cross her. That would be pretty brilliant actually...


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I hope her "influential friends" testify.  I can't believe they spoke about her without her knowledge.


I DO NOT believe that for ONE MINUTE; I think she asked them .. and they complied!  Now, however, since they may have to testify, the truth will come out.  Even if she didn't ask them outright, if she "suggested" (or something like that), they would still need to be truthful.  Let's face it, when you are on the witness stand, are you going to lie for someone like her?? .. who has historically jettisoned "friends" who did not do her bidding?  This is not a woman who has "real" friends ..


----------



## Sol Ryan

I don’t know. These people have been willing to do her bidding for this long. If it was a US court or they were British citizens I could see them being more concerned. If People or Megs don’t turn over their names, I don’t think they have anything to worry about...

I’ll be surprised if this ends in anything other than another standoff...


----------



## marietouchet

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...journalists-writing-flattering-biography.html 
Be still my beating heart ! A sanctioned Omid bio ! 
Maybe we can bulk buy some copies for an August book party


----------



## Mrs.Z

marietouchet said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...journalists-writing-flattering-biography.html
> Be still my beating heart ! A sanctioned Omid bio !
> Maybe we can bulk buy some copies for an August book party


So basically Meghan is writing the book!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I DO NOT believe that for ONE MINUTE; I think she asked them .. and they complied!  Now, however, since they may have to testify, the truth will come out.  Even if she didn't ask them outright, if she "suggested" (or something like that), they would still need to be truthful.  Let's face it, when you are on the witness stand, are you going to lie for someone like her?? .. who has historically jettisoned "friends" who did not do her bidding?  This is not a woman who has "real" friends ..


I think Jessica might lie
Don't know who else was involved


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Could be, maybe she’ll give just enough in this one to send the signal that she’s able and willing to spill the beans on the family if they cross her. *That would be pretty brilliant actually*...


I totally disagree!!!  I think this could BACKFIRE on her big-time; seriously .. going up against a powerful "organization" like the British Royal family?!?!?!  Just think about it .. they have persevered for how long???  They have resources that many of us likely don't even know about, and she thinks she's going to take them on??? .. and - WHAT IF - Harry finally wakes up and smells the cappuccino and decides "wait, WTF have I gotten myself into .."??? .. and decides to go back?  Personally, I think she's playing with fire, but being the SUPREME NARCISSIST that she is, she obviously thinks she can .. okay, good luck with that!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I think Jessica might lie
> Don't know who else was involved


See, I don't think so .. I would be interested to hear what the Canadians would think because: 
1)  Does she currently style any Brits, especially those that might be close/associated with the BRF? 
2)  What about any Canadians who, like the above - might have close/associated ties with the BRF? 

I think she's going to want to protect her business and her reputation ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> Comparing this to the live shots - I have a question for those of you with fabric/sewing/fitting knowledge:
> Is the style and construction of the dress technically difficult? No waist, those long vertical seams etc would seem difficult to me (with no sewing knowledge, limited fitting knowledge).
> 
> So it’s a technically complex design but flawed due to fabric constraints, client requests/demands and practical usage issues?
> 
> Eg lace would hide creases but may have looked too old-fashioned for our monarchy-modernizer? And the sleeves/pits had to be baggy so she could raise them up as the fitted non-stretchy fabric itself had no give?



They are called 'princess seams' appropriately enough. When the dress is altered the entire panel has to be reworked. 

Doesn't matter if it has a waistline (waist seam) or not, the shoulders nor the waist hold-up that style but it has to be cut close to the body. It also doesn't matter what the fabric was (and I think it was duchesse silk - again, appropriately enough) lots of wedding dresses were made of this fabric in the 1950s and '60s. It has a little give and it's heavy but it holds structure. it should not have wrinkled.

Quoting an article that looks at Waight Keller's dress (useless article otherwise)  "Meghan commission her to design the bateau neckline gown with three-quarter length sleeves and a fitted waist".

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ner-Clare-waight-keller-friendship-royal-news

So the waist was supposed to be fitted. 

_If_ she was measured for the dress in a timely fashion (ie couture, not demi-couture) she could have lost weight in the process but you would still think they would be sewing until the last minute to make it fit correctly. 

My guess is it was a sample or already made (demi-couture) and fitted afterwards making the process harder from the start. MM always goes on about her short-waist, had it been made _for_ her the body would not be so long but would have been made to fit in height as well in every other way. 

This led me to the conclusion that it was a quick buy with just a few fittings. 

I still think the SMcC dress was the intended dress but it got vetoed and at that time she didn't have a tantrum just ordered another dress. There would have been pressure to have a British designer. Clare had not long been in the job, she's British but the House is not. I think MM thought Givenchy = Audrey Hepburn. Unfortunately. it didn't work out. I still like the dress but it didn't fit.


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t know. These people have been willing to do her bidding for this long. If it was a US court or they were British citizens I could see them being more concerned. If People or Megs don’t turn over their names, I don’t think they have anything to worry about...
> 
> I’ll be surprised if this ends in anything other than another standoff...




Surely the tabloids know who they are (or who they think they are).


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> They are called 'princess seams' appropriately enough. When the dress is altered the entire panel has to be reworked.
> 
> Doesn't matter if it has a waistline (waist seam) or not, the shoulders nor the waist hold-up that style but it has to be cut close to the body. It also doesn't matter what the fabric was (and I think it was duchesse silk - again, appropriately enough) lots of wedding dresses were made of this fabric in the 1950s and '60s. It has a little give and it's heavy but it holds structure. it should not have wrinkled.
> 
> Quoting an article that looks at Waight Keller's dress (useless article otherwise)  "Meghan commission her to design the bateau neckline gown with three-quarter length sleeves and a fitted waist".
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ner-Clare-waight-keller-friendship-royal-news
> 
> So the waist was supposed to be fitted.
> 
> _If_ she was measured for the dress in a timely fashion (ie couture, not demi-couture) she could have lost weight in the process but you would still think they would be sewing until the last minute to make it fit correctly.
> 
> My guess is it was a sample or already made (demi-couture) and fitted afterwards making the process harder from the start. MM always goes on about her short-waist, had it been made _for_ her the body would not be so long but would have been made to fit in height as well in every other way.
> 
> This led me to the conclusion that it was a quick buy with just a few fittings.
> 
> I still think the SMcC dress was the intended dress but it got vetoed and at that time she didn't have a tantrum just ordered another dress. There would have been pressure to have a British designer. Clare had not long been in the job, she's British but the House is not. I think MM thought Givenchy = Audrey Hepburn. Unfortunately. it didn't work out. I still like the dress but it didn't fit.


I loved the dress. It’s funny apparently Diana lost a lot of weight in the time leading up to her wedding and she had almost weekly fittings. Why didn’t Meghan do the same if that was the intended dress. I get the feeling like you that it wasn’t and was a fall back choice and she couldn’t be bothered to get it right. Such a shame not to get a proper fitting on such a beautiful dress.


----------



## V0N1B2

I always assumed Meghan was _expecting_ to be pregnant on her wedding day, hence the baggy waist in the dress. Either because she needed the insurance or as a silent f*ck you to the Royal fam.  I think as the day got closer, she realized it wasn't going to happen, and the dress was just slightly taken in. 
::removes tinfoil hat::
As for Harry, I hope he doesn't go back to the UK. As the old saying goes; you made your bed, you lie in it.
H needs to live with his choices, and him running back like a dog with his tail between his legs just speaks to his incredible immaturity - not to mention the lack of backbone by the RF.  Time for him to man-up for once.
jmo, of course.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I always assumed Meghan was _expecting_ to be pregnant on her wedding day, hence the baggy waist in the dress. Either because she needed the insurance or as a silent f*ck you to the Royal fam.  I think as the day got closer, she realized it wasn't going to happen, and the dress was just slightly taken in.
> ::removes tinfoil hat::
> As for Harry, I hope he doesn't go back to the UK. As the old saying goes; you made your bed, you lie in it.
> H needs to live with his choices, and him running back like a dog with his tail between his legs just speaks to his incredible immaturity - not to mention the lack of backbone by the RF.  Time for him to man-up for once.
> jmo, of course.


well, he does strike me as a man-boy


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Could be, maybe she’ll give just enough in this one to send the signal that she’s able and willing to spill the beans on the family if they cross her. That would be pretty brilliant actually...



What “beans” could she possibly have to spill? She wasn’t around the family long enough to learn any of their secrets. From wedding to Megxit was only 18 months. I don’t believe any of the family members ever trusted her (with good reason as it turns out).  

Now, I expect her to make up all kinds of stuff for the book to make herself look good.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> What “beans” could she possibly have to spill? She wasn’t around the family long enough to learn any of their secrets. From wedding to Megxit was only 18 months. I don’t believe any of the family members ever trusted her (with good reason as it turns out).
> 
> Now, I expect her to make up all kinds of stuff for the book to make herself look good.


Very true! I read somewhere where Meghan was taking pics in rooms where she was not allowed and barred from. Meghan is angry because from I what I can read between the lines in the news is that: (1) she was not allowed to wear the tiara she wanted (which most people say the tiara she was given on her wedding day was actually a replica as diamonds don't throw off colors like hers did), (2) barred from taking pictures of the rooms in BP, (3) the very many protocols she had to follow and so much more. 

She does not have dirt unless Harry has told her and whatever dirt it is the BRF will get through it as they did with Fergie, Diana and now Andrew.  The BRF has been mired in "dirt' for centuries and like a little bit Meghan can throw shade? Remember she's a narcissist and probably a sociopath so she lives in her overinflated ego head.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> What “beans” could she possibly have to spill? She wasn’t around the family long enough to learn any of their secrets. From wedding to Megxit was only 18 months. I don’t believe any of the family members ever trusted her (with good reason as it turns out).
> 
> Now, I expect her to make up all kinds of stuff for the book to make herself look good.


Weren't there some rumors some time back that she got 'caught' in various circumstances .. going inside somewhere where she was not supposed to go, looking inside the trunk of Harry's car .. I believe many of these occurred before they were married? (could be wrong about that).  Also, there was a rumor that Charles made her go 'home' (to wherever she was staying at the time) because she was caught doing something she was told not to.  Anyone else remember these "rumors" ... ???


----------



## Genie27

marietouchet said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...journalists-writing-flattering-biography.html
> Be still my beating heart ! A sanctioned Omid bio !
> Maybe we can bulk buy some copies for an August book party



Titled “Is he nice?” - How to Win a Prince in 10 days. And lose the bag in under 18 months.

The opening para will be about her dish-soap activism - it being a life-defining moment and all.

Epilogue will be still pictures of her at the friend’s birthday party, proclaiming herself queen/princess (I forget which) and the wedding.

Header/teaser for each chapter will be taken from the historic Royal Sussex Insta posts (WRITTEN like _this_) and bananagrams.

So much achievement for one so young. It’s going to be a very short book. Expect lots of filler and fluff.



papertiger said:


> They are called 'princess seams' appropriately enough. When the dress is altered the entire panel has to be reworked.
> 
> Doesn't matter if it has a waistline (waist seam) or not, the shoulders nor the waist hold-up that style but it has to be cut close to the body. It also doesn't matter what the fabric was (and I think it was duchesse silk - again, appropriately enough) lots of wedding dresses were made of this fabric in the 1950s and '60s. It has a little give and it's heavy but it holds structure. it should not have wrinkled.
> 
> Quoting an article that looks at Waight Keller's dress (useless article otherwise)  "Meghan commission her to design the bateau neckline gown with three-quarter length sleeves and a fitted waist".
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ner-Clare-waight-keller-friendship-royal-news
> 
> So the waist was supposed to be fitted.
> 
> _If_ she was measured for the dress in a timely fashion (ie couture, not demi-couture) she could have lost weight in the process but you would still think they would be sewing until the last minute to make it fit correctly.
> 
> My guess is it was a sample or already made (demi-couture) and fitted afterwards making the process harder from the start. MM always goes on about her short-waist, had it been made _for_ her the body would not be so long but would have been made to fit in height as well in every other way.
> 
> This led me to the conclusion that it was a quick buy with just a few fittings.
> 
> I still think the SMcC dress was the intended dress but it got vetoed and at that time she didn't have a tantrum just ordered another dress. There would have been pressure to have a British designer. Clare had not long been in the job, she's British but the House is not. I think MM thought Givenchy = Audrey Hepburn. Unfortunately. it didn't work out. I still like the dress but it didn't fit.


I can see - you are right on that it was not made from scratch to her measurements but edited from something built for a taller form. A popsicle stick in a Barbie outfit.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> What “beans” could she possibly have to spill? She wasn’t around the family long enough to learn any of their secrets. From wedding to Megxit was only 18 months. I don’t believe any of the family members ever trusted her (with good reason as it turns out).
> 
> Now, I expect her to make up all kinds of stuff for the book to make herself look good.



"The beans" would be the made up stuff or innuendo that would make them look really bad, eg reference to Will's alleged affairs.


----------



## gazoo

I don't doubt Harry would have told her anything and everything. She doesn't need ins with the BRF. She has the Blood Born Prince (SIXTH IN LINE, for those of you in the back!!), whose mastery of geography may be lacking, (Chunga Changa anyone?), yet he was raised in  the fold and spent 35 years behind Palace walls. 

I'm sure he has plenty of stories. We know he isn't discreet at all, thanks to the faux Greta, so Meghan may just have loads to tell.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Weren't there some rumors some time back that she got 'caught' in various circumstances .. going inside somewhere where she was not supposed to go, looking inside the trunk of Harry's car .. I believe many of these occurred before they were married? (could be wrong about that).  Also, there was a rumor that Charles made her go 'home' (to wherever she was staying at the time) because she was caught doing something she was told not to.  Anyone else remember these "rumors" ... ???



Yes, there were reports that she was caught snooping places where she didn’t belong. At the very least she is a nosy busybody. At worst it shows she was always scheming and looking for an angle to work to her advantage.


----------



## lalame

About her wedding dress.... I love the idea of the dress but yes fit was incomprehensible. You'd think if your BFF owned a big wedding dress/bridal store, there's no way that would happen.... I'm sure she had all the good advice at her disposal and for one reason or another didn't take it.

Her Suits wedding dresses looked better than the real thing! (below is just one of them)







Now when you compare it to the fit of Kate or Pippa - wow. Granted. those ladies truly have insanely good figures. I think Meghan's dress suffered from bad fit and the fabric with that minimalist design was already pretty unforgiving.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> "The beans" would be the made up stuff or innuendo that would make them look really bad, eg reference to Will's alleged affairs.



But it would all be hearsay coming from her. Since she wasn’t there and she didn’t know the people involved, how could anyone take her accusations seriously? She’s got nothing.


----------



## bag-mania

Is Harry such a miserable, spineless sap that he would sit idly by and watch his wife come out with a book that throws his family under the bus?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> But it would all be hearsay coming from her. Since she wasn’t there and she didn’t know the people involved, how could anyone take her accusations seriously? She’s got nothing.



She did know the people involved though... they're her in-laws! Whether it's true or not, for someone like her to throw more kindling to some of those fires would be a major headache for the family. Especially when the rumors have finally started to die down... now imagine if she made even the vaguest comment about the affair, or Prince Andrew, or her relationship with Kate... it would bring it all back into the news cycle and that family does NOT want that! True or not.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Is Harry such a miserable, spineless sap that he would sit idly by and watch his wife come out with a book that throws his family under the bus?



I think the answer is yes! He already left his family when she came along... Of course I think she'd play it just right, basically drop some innuendos and later rationalize it to him like, "That's not what I meant.. the media is twisting my words again." Damage done by that point to the family and he gets another feather in his hat about how the media have victimized them. Oh brother.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> She did know the people involved though... they're her in-laws! Whether it's true or not, for someone like her to throw more kindling to some of those fires would be a major headache for the family. Especially when the rumors have finally started to die down... now imagine if she made even the vaguest comment about the affair, or Prince Andrew, or her relationship with Kate... it would bring it all back into the news cycle and that family does NOT want that! True or not.



Yeah, but does anyone believe that Meghan ever really got to know Will and Kate?  Other than being in the same place for family events and formal events, it’s not like they ever hung around together and became familiar with each other.

I do not see those two couples ever double dating, though it’s hilarious to imagine what that would have been like if it had happened.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> What “beans” could she possibly have to spill? She wasn’t around the family long enough to learn any of their secrets. From wedding to Megxit was only 18 months. I don’t believe any of the family members ever trusted her (with good reason as it turns out).
> 
> Now, I expect her to make up all kinds of stuff for the book to make herself look good.


What about Harry telling her some private information about the firm? Spouses gossip and confide in each other all the time. There was lots of time for that.


----------



## V0N1B2

Genie27 said:


> Titled “Is he nice?” - How to Win a Prince in 10 days. And lose the bag in under 18 months.
> The opening para will be about her dish-soap activism - it being a life-defining moment and all.
> So much achievement for one so young. It’s going to be a very short book. Expect lots of filler and fluff..


You shady bish, you


----------



## Allisonfaye

Personally, I think a book she would write would be mostly about HER and not the BRF. A narcissist isn't going to write a book about OTHER people.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Allisonfaye said:


> Personally, I think a book she would write would be mostly about HER and not the BRF. A narcissist isn't going to write a book about OTHER people.


Bingo!  As someone else said that’s all hearsay.  This is ALL about Meghan and her struggle and how it all went horribly wrong bc the BRF are cold and everyone was mean to her.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> What about Harry telling her some private information about the firm? Spouses gossip and confide in each other all the time. There was lots of time for that.



That thought occurred to me, but what does Harry really know? Most of the worst Royal scandals occurred before he was born. After his mother died he went off to boarding school and he wouldn’t have seen anything going on. As an adult he’s been off doing his own thing for the most part. The BRF is not like a normal family, I don’t get the impression they phone each other and gossip among themselves. Whatever they are up to they aren’t sharing it. I’m sure there are many things that the Queen and Charles know, perhaps they have shared some of it with Will. Or not.

Harry is out of the loop.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> That thought occurred to me, but what does Harry really know? Most of the worst Royal scandals occurred before he was born. After his mother died he went off to boarding school and he wouldn’t have seen anything going on. As an adult he’s been off doing his own thing for the most part. The BRF is not like a normal family, I don’t get the impression they phone each other and gossip among themselves. Whatever they are up to they aren’t sharing it. I’m sure there are many things that the Queen and Charles know, perhaps they have shared some of it with Will.
> 
> Harry is out of the loop.


You may be right however family’s get together and gossip if only occasionally. The BRF are not that different and they are people too, you know human, not gods. And Harry was the Queens favourite grandson and he spent a lot of time with her at one point. And apparently the Queen is a chatterbox privately. Maybe Harry did have things to share with his wife.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> You may be right however family’s get together and gossip if only occasionally. The BRF are not that different and they are people too, you know human, not gods. And Harry was the Queens favourite grandson and he spent a lot of time with her at one point. And apparently the Queen is a chatterbox privately. Maybe Harry did have things to share with his wife.



I guess we’ll find out when the book(s) come out. If he did have some juicy tidbits he shared, he can kiss the rest of his inheritance goodbye. I would hope it was worth it to him.


----------



## Genie27

V0N1B2 said:


> You shady bish, you


Hahaha. I blame the cabin fever. It’s sharpened my tongue.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> You got it! She was gonna wear the Stella dress with the Vladimir emerald tiara


If she thought the reception dress would fly for the church wedding , then she really was delusional.  Way too bare for the church.  It would account for the church dress looking like it was a last minute dress if this was true.  Was she going to wear the same veil with the reception dress?  Did she imagine that it would cover her up enough?


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> I guess we’ll find out when the book(s) come out. If he did have some juicy tidbits he shared, he can kiss the rest of his inheritance goodbye. I would hope it was worth it to him.


I also don’t think Harry is that discreet! When the Russian couple pranked him pretending to have Greta Thumberg on the line he sure did pour his heart out to her!


----------



## Mrs.Z

I think the Vladimir tiara is too over the top for her, I think she wanted the one Eugenie wore.


----------



## mdcx

I would guess H let a few things slip and M ran with them e.g. Kate always suspected that William had a crush on her friend Rose. So M turns this into W had an affair with R, and has her sources get this published.
You know, the kind of things you might hear from your husband about your in-laws, with them of course expecting you to keep it private.
And yes, M was sent home from Camilla snd Charles’ birthday party, the one where she was photographed sticking her tongue out. I think she was drunk maybe?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Mrs.Z said:


> Bingo!  As someone else said that’s all hearsay.  This is ALL about Meghan and her struggle and how it all went horribly wrong bc *the BRF are cold and everyone was mean to her.*



That bolded part is exactly what the BRF would not want to be in the news cycles! True or not... no one wants to see rumors or innuendo about their ugly family dynamics aired out in the press over and over. That could be M's warning shot to them that she's not scared to go there.


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> Bingo!  As someone else said that’s all hearsay.  This is ALL about Meghan and her struggle and how it all went horribly wrong bc the BRF are cold and everyone was mean to her.


.. with the backdrop being an orchestra of the world's smallest violins .. BOO-HOO-HOO!!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

So, I’ll just say it. I don’t think the dress was improperly fitted, I just think the dress didn’t work for her figure and I also think she prefers a less fitted style. I think that dress looked exactly how she wanted it to.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> That bolded part is exactly what the BRF would not want to be in the news cycles! True or not... no one wants to see rumors or innuendo about their ugly family dynamics aired out in the press over and over. That could be M's warning shot to them that she's not scared to go there.


While I agree with what you are saying, if we are to believe what has been printed before (where - supposedly Charles and QEII told Harry to wait before putting the Megexit on IG), then I wonder just how they would react to that.  At this point, I have to believe that Charles and QEII are getting very tired of H&M's antics, and (personally) I think that could backfire on them.  In addition, let's face it .. how many years do they have? .. whereas Will has quite a few years, and I'm not sure he would take very kindly to having his name muddied about and the rest of the family.  While I am, by no means, a meek & "mild" person per se (especially if accused of something that is inaccurate), if I was in their shoes .. I would sit-down and STFU!  But, then again .. her narcissism is going to drive a lot of this - right?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> If she thought the reception dress would fly for the church wedding , then she really was delusional.  Way too bare for the church.  It would account for the church dress looking like it was a last minute dress if this was true.  Was she going to wear the same veil with the reception dress?  Did she imagine that it would cover her up enough?



That veil certainly didn't go with the ceremony dress.

If you look at many of the W dresses now they show a lot more skin than the SMcC. I can see how someone who does no research whatsoever would think it would fly. I can also see her wanting to be in with the Stella crowd.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> I also don’t think Harry is that discreet! When the Russian couple pranked him pretending to have Greta Thumberg on the line he sure did pour his heart out to her!



Yup, and he's been spilling to Jane Goodall. Can't shut that guy up.


----------



## Lodpah

Do you think the Queen gave them Sussex Royal because you know it would be interpreted one day as Sus-EX-ROYAL? lIKE ex-royals?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Lodpah said:


> Do you think the Queen gave them Sussex Royal because you know it would be interpreted one day as Sus-EX-ROYAL? lIKE ex-royals?


Ha, she’s also the Countess of Dumbarton, so obviously the Queen likes to throw shade


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ah, yes, the same mean BRF that is paying her very expensive LA-LA land bills. Because, ya kno, her oh-so-not-talented prince cannot find employment. Neither can she, even with all of her connections. Interesting.

Wonder if QE is paying them to stay _out_ of the UK?  Nobody wants their drama.




CeeJay said:


> .. with the backdrop being an orchestra of the world's smallest violins .. BOO-HOO-HOO!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

MM has jack sh1t about BRF! Anything she thinks she knows were just hearsay and she wouldn't have any proof. And very clever to cut off the hands that feed you! Bye bye, MM!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Possibly this —
_If Markle, who grew up middle class in duke-free Los Angeles, Googled the Sussex title before her wedding ceremony, she likely gleaned some insight into the peculiar constraints of the institution she was marrying into. Prince Harry is only the second Duke of Sussex: the title had been extinct for a hundred and seventy-five years before the Palace polished it up for reuse. The first Duke of Sussex was Prince Augustus Frederick, a son of King George III; and, like his great-great-great-great-great-great-nephew Harry, he had a wandering youth, a fiery desire to live as he wished, and an inclination to balk at the strictures of monarchy.

Augustus was born in 1773, a few years before his father lost control of the American colonies. Portraits reveal a good-looking young man with, like Harry, strawberry-blond hair and a ruddy complexion. Augustus had a sensitive brow, voluptuous lips, and a tendency to gain weight—later ceremonial portraits depict him as plump, dressed in tight white britches and velvet robes._

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-fractured-fairy-tale



Lodpah said:


> Do you think the Queen gave them Sussex Royal because you know it would be interpreted one day as Sus-EX-ROYAL? lIKE ex-royals?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly this —
> _If Markle, who grew up middle class in duke-free Los Angeles, Googled the Sussex title before her wedding ceremony, she likely gleaned some insight into the peculiar constraints of the institution she was marrying into. Prince Harry is only the second Duke of Sussex: the title had been extinct for a hundred and seventy-five years before the Palace polished it up for reuse. The first Duke of Sussex was Prince Augustus Frederick, a son of King George III; and, like his great-great-great-great-great-great-nephew Harry, he had a wandering youth, a fiery desire to live as he wished, and an inclination to balk at the strictures of monarchy.
> 
> Augustus was born in 1773, a few years before his father lost control of the American colonies. Portraits reveal a good-looking young man with, like Harry, strawberry-blond hair and a ruddy complexion. Augustus had a sensitive brow, voluptuous lips, and a tendency to gain weight—later ceremonial portraits depict him as plump, dressed in tight white britches and velvet robes._
> 
> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-fractured-fairy-tale


A-HA .. and what they did not print here is that King George III was known to be a NUTJOB supreme!!!  Hmmm - could Harry be a reincarnation of his great-great-great-great-great-great Uncle Augustus?????


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> While I agree with what you are saying, if we are to believe what has been printed before (where - supposedly Charles and QEII told Harry to wait before putting the Megexit on IG), then I wonder just how they would react to that.  At this point, I have to believe that Charles and QEII are getting very tired of H&M's antics, and (personally) I think that could backfire on them.  In addition, let's face it .. how many years do they have? .. whereas Will has quite a few years, and I'm not sure he would take very kindly to having his name muddied about and the rest of the family.  While I am, by no means, a meek & "mild" person per se (especially if accused of something that is inaccurate), if I was in their shoes .. I would sit-down and STFU!  But, then again .. her narcissism is going to drive a lot of this - right?



IMO, I think that whole family is already tired of the both of them. All that drama already, good grief. IF Meghan were to play that game as a negotiation tactic, it's a dangerous game and IDK if it would work out for her in the end but I'd also bet the family would pay her anything not to even go there. I don't think she cares what kind of relationships she has... as long as she has Harry, she'll have the BRF money as Charles will probably be supporting his kid forever.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> MM has jack sh1t about BRF! Anything she thinks she knows were just hearsay and she wouldn't have any proof. And very clever to cut off the hands that feed you! Bye bye, MM!



Has anything they've done so far been considered smart... those two are clearly not looking before they leap. And remember, it doesn't have to be true to create grief if it plays out in the media. Where's the proof of William's affairs? And yet that story had LEGS for months and months. I didn't envy Kate during that whole thing.


----------



## lalame

I feel bad for the BRF... for such a scandal-averse family, they really know how to pick them. Anyone want to bet Harry will be a future Prince Andrew, with another major scandal in the works due to bad acquaintances?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

lalame said:


> I feel bad for the BRF... for such a scandal-averse family, they really know how to pick them. Anyone want to bet Harry will be a future Prince Andrew, with another major scandal in the works due to bad acquaintances?


I can see that. It’s a little mind boggling how much has happened with these two in a very short amount of time.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> That veil certainly didn't go with the ceremony dress.
> 
> If you look at many of the W dresses now they show a lot more skin than the SMcC. I can see how someone who does no research whatsoever would think it would fly. I can also see her wanting to be in with the Stella crowd.


Yes, the veil certainly did not go with the reception dress.  The reception dress would have been fine for a woman her age and married previously anyplace else, but not where she was getting married.  If she thought it would work, then someone dropped the ball with informing her.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly this —
> _If Markle, who grew up middle class in duke-free Los Angeles, Googled the Sussex title before her wedding ceremony, she likely gleaned some insight into the peculiar constraints of the institution she was marrying into. Prince Harry is only the second Duke of Sussex: the title had been extinct for a hundred and seventy-five years before the Palace polished it up for reuse. The first Duke of Sussex was Prince Augustus Frederick, a son of King George III; and, like his great-great-great-great-great-great-nephew Harry, he had a wandering youth, a fiery desire to live as he wished, and an inclination to balk at the strictures of monarchy.
> 
> Augustus was born in 1773, a few years before his father lost control of the American colonies. Portraits reveal a good-looking young man with, like Harry, strawberry-blond hair and a ruddy complexion. Augustus had a sensitive brow, voluptuous lips, and a tendency to gain weight—later ceremonial portraits depict him as plump, dressed in tight white britches and velvet robes._
> 
> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-fractured-fairy-tale


Thank you for posting this very well written and researched article.
It was a pleasure to read.
So, the queen knew from the get go what she was dealing with....


----------



## CarryOn2020

According to SNL, Prince Harry’s Drag Name is Whipped Strawberry Milk - https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-...ome-edition-banksy-makes-bathroom-art/4157712


----------



## Suncatcher

sdkitty said:


> I think Jessica might lie
> Don't know who else was involved


What makes you think she might lie? I have met her but I don’t know her. We move in similar worlds.  She comes from a well to do family and her father in law was our prime minister. Yes, she loves her plastic surgery, yes, she is a hustler (a trait I respect so I’m not saying it in a derogatory manner) but nothing I have seen in her in the media suggests she would perjure herself in a courtroom. Perjury is a serious offence!


----------



## mdcx

I think when the choice is either to out Meghan as a liar, and admit that Meghan was the one who organised the five friends to talk to People and who provided them with a copy of the letter, 
or 
to state that she herself was "confused" about what happened with the letter and People mag, and that maybe she didn't actually see the letter in question after all, and that she and the other four friends all agreed amongst themselves to jointly talk to People mag....
Not sure how it will play out.
I may also be confused about the lawsuit and what's involved, it's not as simple as I first thought!


----------



## rose60610

I have to wonder if Meghan's motive to "tell all" is to simply destroy any chance for Harry to be accepted back into the fold of the BRF since she burned HER bridges both with the RF and the British public. Perhaps that's her way of preventing him from dumping her. So the more salacious the crap she can invent and spew the more she damages Harry's chance of reuniting with his family. She will have him trapped with her and permanently separated from them. She'd only be following her own playbook.


----------



## PewPew

To avoid legal problems for violating an NDA, the book will likely follow the approach Meghan has relied on when her “friends” talk to the press. They tend to focus on her feelings and soft “facts” (“she was told by unnamed advisors this horrible thing”). These are difficult for the BRF to refute because you can’t dispute some private convo, or how someone is feeling. If she says the BRF were cold and never hugged, you can provide 1,000 hugging pics, but she’ll say it’s all for the cameras. She can say they were horrible and made her feel bad & unvalued, so any smiling pictures were just her “putting on a brave face” bc she’s an ah-mazing actress.

They’ll continue to invent backstories and epiphanies to inflate “their great love story for the ages”. This has already led to conflicting stories about how they met. Early in the relationship, the story her “friends” told (to elevate her status) was that Harry was a huge fan of Suits, and was smitten & arranged a meeting through her people. Then after the engagement, the joint story was that they met through “mutual friends,” but she didn’t know who “H” was (“that’s what I call him H”), or about his mother, “since Americans don’t follow the royal family”.... Yet a British publicist wrote that Meghan had lobbied hard to meet her to strategize about increasing M’s profile in the UK. Ambitious M had been wanting to meet UK elite as early as 2013. (This was independent of M becoming “friends” with UK media personality Piers Morgan later on.) Meghan specifically asked about soccer player Ashley Cole, who she bragged was following one of her social accounts. (Most Americans don’t know who Ashley Cole is. But if you know about Ashley Cole, you sure as heck know about Prince Harry & Diana).

Obie will also re-write her childhood narrative— poor, oppressed girl battled against all odds from a broken home to create an “independent profile”, then Harry came to rescue her when she wanted a family. But she’s a “strong, independent woman”, so they rescued each other (from terrible families) & now they bravely battle the world together as it oppresses them via the evil media.

And if this near-40 yr old, former cable-TV actress doesn’t get prime roles, it’s bc the media and BRF tore her down *sob* She’s already a superhero in her mind, so she doesn’t have to play one in a Marvel film.


----------



## sdkitty

MrsJDS said:


> What makes you think she might lie? I have met her but I don’t know her. We move in similar worlds.  She comes from a well to do family and her father in law was our prime minister. Yes, she loves her plastic surgery, yes, she is a hustler (a trait I respect so I’m not saying it in a derogatory manner) but nothing I have seen in her in the media suggests she would perjure herself in a courtroom. Perjury is a serious offence!


I really don't know anything about her except she is apparently close to "M"


----------



## Mendocino

threadbender said:


> But, their paid legal teams will know the best way to protect their clients, not the sussexes.





mdcx said:


> I think when the choice is either to out Meghan as a liar, and admit that Meghan was the one who organised the five friends to talk to People and who provided them with a copy of the letter,
> or
> to state that she herself was "confused" about what happened with the letter and People mag, and that maybe she didn't actually see the letter in question after all, and that she and the other four friends all agreed amongst themselves to jointly talk to People mag....
> Not sure how it will play out.
> I may also be confused about the lawsuit and what's involved, it's not as simple as I first thought!


The newspaper's attorney has the reputation for being brilliant on cross examination. It would be so foolish to collude amongst themselves and I'm sure their respective legal representatives have informed them that it's their duty to provide the best defense for their individual client, not the whole group of them.
Meghan told the court she was upset when she discovered one of her friend's disclosed the letter, so she has already thrown at least one of the group under the bus.


----------



## sdkitty

from People
now a photo of the baby is such a big deal it has to be announced a week in advance. I know they were criticized for not showing much of him but really?  is this big news?
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/prince-harry-meghan-markle-celebrating-190800319.html


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> from People
> now a photo of the baby is such a big deal it has to be announced a week in advance. I know they were criticized for not showing much of him but really?  is this big news?
> https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/prince-harry-meghan-markle-celebrating-190800319.html



Why of course it’s big news. Read further down where a “source” says what a great mom Meghan is. That’s the actual topic of the article after all. 

Does anyone else wonder if she will have sold photos of Archie to the media this time?  None of those freebies put up on Instagram now that they’re not being held to Royal standards anymore.


----------



## gracekelly

Mendocino said:


> The newspaper's attorney has the reputation for being brilliant on cross examination. It would be so foolish to collude amongst themselves and I'm sure their respective legal representatives have informed them that it's their duty to provide the best defense for their individual client, not the whole group of them.
> Meghan told the court she was upset when she discovered one of her friend's disclosed the letter, so she has already thrown at least one of the group under the bus.


Only one under the bus?  Meghan will call this collateral damage.  If this attorney is so good on cross exam, then I would be shaking in my boots.  These guys can take what you say and turn it right back at you and against you.  That's what they are trained to do.  Her attorneys will attempt to coach her beforehand , but I really doubt that she will listen to them any more than she listens to anyone else.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> from People
> now a photo of the baby is such a big deal it has to be announced a week in advance. I know they were criticized for not showing much of him but really?  is this big news?
> https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/prince-harry-meghan-markle-celebrating-190800319.html


----------



## mdcx

I have been wondering lately why Meghan so desperately wanted to land a wealthy Brit?
I mean, to add a touch of class, sure. But it does seem like she had no intention of ever permanently living in the UK and I’m not sure this would have different with another rich Brit instead of H as her hubby.
Imo when you marry someone from another continent, this generally presents the possibility of living in your spouses home country at some point.
It’s all a bit curious to me. Maybe she needed a dating pool that didn’t know as much about her history?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> I have been wondering lately why Meghan so desperately wanted to land a wealthy Brit?
> I mean, to add a touch of class, sure. But it does seem like she had no intention of ever permanently living in the UK and I’m not sure this would have different with another rich Brit instead of H as her hubby.
> Imo when you marry someone from another continent, this generally presents the possibility of living in your spouses home country at some point.
> It’s all a bit curious to me. *Maybe she needed a dating pool that didn’t know as much about her history?*



Yes to your last sentence.  Perhaps she felt that she wasn't finding a guy to fund her ambitions in the US or Canada so she would try GB.  Who knows that she was thinking regarding where to eventually live.  Did she think she could break into the theater scene in GB?  Boy would that have been unlikely!


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Now when you compare it to the fit of Kate or Pippa - wow. Granted. those ladies truly have insanely good figures. I think Meghan's dress suffered from bad fit and the fabric with that minimalist design was already pretty unforgiving.


Kate has a very athletic build with no curves really.

Sarah Burton (of McQueen) gave an interview where she said she padded the hips of Kate's wedding dress to give her a more shapely figure.  She padded somewhere else but I can't remember what.

I've always said, she probably padded Pippa's behind too, because we all can see she doesn't have a bum. (Which is fine, not everyone does.)  The only time she had a shapely bum was in the dress.


----------



## Jayne1

mdcx said:


> I have been wondering lately why Meghan so desperately wanted to land a wealthy Brit?
> I mean, to add a touch of class, sure. But it does seem like she had no intention of ever permanently living in the UK and I’m not sure this would have different with another rich Brit instead of H as her hubby.
> Imo when you marry someone from another continent, this generally presents the possibility of living in your spouses home country at some point.
> It’s all a bit curious to me. Maybe she needed a dating pool that didn’t know as much about her history?


Did she want a wealthy Brit or just someone with status, money and connections?

The reason I say that, and I said this before, the story in Toronto goes that Meg was attending an event catered by her boyfriend and Harry was there.  That's how she met him.

Harry fit the bill with all the requirements and since he seemed smitten from the get go, the boyfriend was toast.


----------



## Annawakes

I have to be honest, I don’t have any idea what the lawsuit is about either.  It’s too confusing for me.

Can someone explain the point of the lawsuit once more, in just a sentence or two?????   Is it just that M is mad her “private letter” was printed?  That’s it?


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> Only one under the bus?  Meghan will call this collateral damage.  If this attorney is so good on cross exam, then I would be shaking in my boots.  These guys can take what you say and turn it right back at you and against you.  That's what they are trained to do.  Her attorneys will attempt to coach her beforehand , but I really doubt that she will listen to them any more than she listens to anyone else.


Yes, anything she says can and will be used against her (I just had a visual of her being read her Miranda rights, which is probably totally irrelevant in this situation). I have the feeling the defense will somehow discover the identities of the friends and they will be subpoenaed. Since she's also told the courts she had nothing to do with the group talking to People, she is clearly telegraphing to the group that she will not be aiding them in any way in court unless its in her best interests as well.  This is a scary situation to be in, in my opinion.  I hope they listen to their respective lawyers.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> Yes to your last sentence.  Perhaps she felt that she wasn't finding a guy to fund her ambitions in the US or Canada so she would try GB.  Who knows that she was thinking regarding where to eventually live.  Did she think she could break into the theater scene in GB?  Boy would that have been unlikely!



One of the articles mentioned her trying to get on to one of the British reality shows. I think she knew her acting career was pretty much over and was looking for a reality money stream through a British dude, then Harry landed in her lap and she thought she found a path where everyone would fawn over her and do what she wanted... she should have gone the reality show path...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...Chelsea-marrying-Harry-happy-coincidence.html


----------



## Mendocino

Annawakes said:


> I have to be honest, I don’t have any idea what the lawsuit is about either.  It’s too confusing for me.
> 
> Can someone explain the point of the lawsuit once more, in just a sentence or two?????   Is it just that M is mad her “private letter” was printed?  That’s it?


----------



## Mendocino

Annawakes said:


> I have to be honest, I don’t have any idea what the lawsuit is about either.  It’s too confusing for me.
> 
> Can someone explain the point of the lawsuit once more, in just a sentence or two?????   Is it just that M is mad her “private letter” was printed?  That’s it?


She is claiming her copyright right over the letter was violated and that other rights were violated by the defendants 'publication of the letter. She also said the letter published was edited. That's probably not the best explanation, but it's what I've gleaned.

Chris Ship is ITV's Royal reporter. He was in the court hearing a few days ago. the newspapers are asking the court to throw out some of Meghan's suit. The judge said he will make his decision in about a week.

If you go to Ship's Twitter feed on April 24 you can read what happened in court. from that point scroll down to read them chronologically.  He is pretty succinct in his reporting and I found it quite interesting. The relevant tweets are at the top of the link i've included below:


----------



## Mendocino

Sorry, disregard. see my post above this one.


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> Kate has a very athletic build with no curves really.
> 
> Sarah Burton (of McQueen) gave an interview where she said she padded the hips of Kate's wedding dress to give her a more shapely figure.  She padded somewhere else but I can't remember what.
> 
> I've always said, she probably padded Pippa's behind too, because we all can see she doesn't have a bum. (Which is fine, not everyone does.)  The only time she had a shapely bum was in the dress.



I was wondering if that was a "thing"... imo they should've done that for Meghan too because with her undefined waist, adding some more hips would have made her figure look more well-proportioned.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Right, in word-salad speak — numerous _reconfigurations_ of her past will be required to cover the, uh, _misrepresentations  _because most American 15 year olds get their pictures made on the Palace fence. Hmmm.

The rumor is she, a long-time member, met H at a SoHoHouse event. 
Guessing the truth will be stranger than the fiction.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5126431/Meghan-Markle-Buckingham-Palace-aged-15.html


PewPew said:


> Then after the engagement, the joint story was that they met through “mutual friends,” but she didn’t know who “H” was (“that’s what I call him H”), or about his mother, “since Americans don’t follow the royal family”...


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Right, in word-salad speak — numerous _reconfigurations_ of her past will be required to cover the, uh, _misrepresentations  _because most American 15 year olds get their pictures made on the Palace fence. Hmmm.
> 
> The rumor is she, a long-time member, met H at a SoHoHouse event.
> Guessing the truth will be stranger than the fiction.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5126431/Meghan-Markle-Buckingham-Palace-aged-15.html


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Has anything they've done so far been considered smart... those two are clearly not looking before they leap. And remember, it doesn't have to be true to create grief if it plays out in the media. Where's the proof of William's affairs? And yet that story had LEGS for months and months. I didn't envy Kate during that whole thing.


I don't think you get it. People in the UK simply don't care about MM, she's irrelevant here. She was never here long and has done only stupid things so far. She will end up a lot more insignificant compared to even Fergie! When people don't care about you, what you say doesn't matter to us! Maybe she has some followers in the U.S. but U.S. is never BRF territory. Judging from what I read, Australia and Canada (2 biggest commonwealth countries) don't care about them either. People will not give a second thought about what come out of her pipehole!


----------



## chicinthecity777

gracekelly said:


> Her attorneys will attempt to coach her beforehand , but I really doubt that she will listen to them any more than she listens to anyone else.


Witness coaching is not permitted under UK law. It's not done here. They will discuss strategies but she could not be coached in any circumstances. It will be up to herself when she takes that stand.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think you get it. People in the UK simply don't care about MM, she's irrelevant here. She was never here long and has done only stupid things so far. She will end up a lot more insignificant compared to even Fergie! When people don't care about you, what you say doesn't matter to us! Maybe she has some followers in the U.S. but U.S. is never BRF territory. Judging from what I read, Australia and Canada (2 biggest commonwealth countries) don't care about them either. People will not give a second thought about what come out of her pipehole!


Judging from all the articles published about her, I would think that the Brits care about her and the Prince just as much if not more than us in the US.....
There are so many celebs here, plus we have a very, very interesting first family, we don’t really need imported chaos and a failed princess


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> Judging from all the articles published about her, I would think that the Brits care about her and the Prince just as much if not more than us in the US.....
> There are so many celebs here, plus we have a very, very interesting first family, we don’t really need imported chaos and a failed princess


You are mistaken the UK media for UK people. They are very very different.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> You are mistaken the UK media for UK people. They are very very different.


What do you mean?


----------



## mia55

It'll make my day if there comes a news (or even a rumor) that Charles is thinking to halt the funding for "what's his name".


----------



## Clearblueskies

limom said:


> Judging from all the articles published about her, I would think that the Brits care about her and the Prince just as much if not more than us in the US.....
> There are so many celebs here, plus we have a very, very interesting first family, we don’t really need imported chaos and a failed princess


When I say I care about someone I mean I’m vested in their welfare, proud of their achievements, interested in what they think etc.  I don’t care about Meghan Markle.  I’m not sure I ever did that much, since she was barely here long enough to do anything of significance beyond her own self promotion.
Will I stick around and show interest in the wtf moments that it seems are bound to follow?  Yes, absolutely!
I think that’s what we’re talking about here when we say the British no longer care.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> What do you mean?


You read it in the media and on here and it seems that all we ever talk about is BRF. In real life it's very different. We don't talk about them at all! I know they have a group of hardcore followers but in real life, I only ever get to discuss them on this forum. I don't talk about them with my family friends colleagues at all! Nada! We don't care that much about them (maybe with the only exception of the Queen) at all! I started to read and reply to this thread because I was really bored during this lock down.

Let me put it this way, the "real" BRF don't bear much of any significance in our lives and these 2 ex-royals are even less so!


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Judging from all the articles published about her, I would think that the Brits care about her and the Prince just as much if not more than us in the US.....
> There are so many celebs here, plus we have a very, very interesting first family, we don’t really need imported chaos and a failed princess



In GB, in terms of law and society the heir gets it all and the 'spare' gets nothing. Nope, we don't care about any spares. We got _plenty_ of them and wish they'd get a real job (that supports themselves) and PO for good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

New day, new week, new initiative, new excitement, new way to copy existing programs, 3 years in the making.  

=====
HeadFIT
For Life

_Prince Harry, who served in the army for ten years, said: "HeadFIT has been almost three years in the making, and I am extremely grateful for everyone who has been on this journey with us. Everyone who has worked on it, to create what we have today, should be incredibly proud and excited for the impact it will have.

"I've long believed the military community should lead the way for the rest of society. For too long we have been waiting for problems to arise and then reacting to them. HeadFIT is a proactive approach to mental fitness, focusing on our own potential to increase our performance, using proven methods in sport science._
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
=====


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> You read it in the media and on here and it seems that all we ever talk about is BRF. In real life it's very different. We don't talk about them at all! I know they have a group of hardcore followers but in real life, I only ever get to discuss them on this forum. I don't talk about them with my family friends colleagues at all! Nada! We don't care that much about them (maybe with the only exception of the Queen) at all! I started to read and reply to this thread because I was really bored during this lock down.
> 
> Let me put it this way, the "real" BRF don't bear much of any significance in our lives and these 2 ex-royals are even less so!



All any of them are good for are pulling tourists to London and bringing a bit of colour to our grey days. We keep them because of what we'd get as alternative. 

I like the Royal Windsor Horse Show though (which is where I've met QEII twice). Can't imagine what would be the presidential equivalent - plastic medals in a new fake skate park built on where there used to be a Royal Park perhaps, him/her getting down with the kids? No thanks.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> All any of them are good for are pulling tourists to London and bringing a bit of colour to our grey days. We keep them because of what we'd get as alternative.
> 
> I like the Royal Windsor Horse Show though (which is where I've met QEII twice). Can't imagine what would be the presidential equivalent - plastic medals in a new fake skate park built on where there used to be a Royal Park perhaps, him/her getting down with the kids? No thanks.


I know! I mean yes the main stream media report about them on occasions but that's really about it. We don't sit here wooo and ahhh.... about them all day long...


----------



## limom

In short, nobody, anywhere care for them. Good luck with their fantasmagorique brand then!


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> In short, nobody, anywhere care for them. Good luck with their fantasmagorique brand then!


So what's it like in the US? Do people like them? Do you think people will buy what they sell? (Sell what I don't know.)


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> So what's it like in the US? Do people like them? Do you think people will buy what they sell? (Sell what I don't know.)


Nope. What are they selling exactly?
I doubt that vets here are going to care for someone who referred to one of his brothers in arm as Paki and other racist epithets, especially when a large majority of our arm forces are minorities...
As far as her, there are so many style mavens.
In her lane, the chichi people like Goop. I guess if she could really associate with Disney, but even though,  to paraphrase DT who likes a failed princess?
Plus with the Pandemic, there is so much promotion, they can do, imo.
I hope that they will be able to earn a living and if I were her, I would go for QVC. Great money, very little work.
That is her way to easy street, imo.


----------



## marietouchet

mdcx said:


> I think when the choice is either to out Meghan as a liar, and admit that Meghan was the one who organised the five friends to talk to People and who provided them with a copy of the letter,
> or
> to state that she herself was "confused" about what happened with the letter and People mag, and that maybe she didn't actually see the letter in question after all, and that she and the other four friends all agreed amongst themselves to jointly talk to People mag....
> Not sure how it will play out.
> I may also be confused about the lawsuit and what's involved, it's not as simple as I first thought!



To me, the number FIVE is crucial to the affair - and these are intimate / close friends who knew about the letter, not just acquaintances
AND PEOPLE magazine mentioned the number, if I remember ... so, as to give substance to their reporting - LOTS of folks said this, not just one
I can buy that ONE friend broke ranks and blabbed to the press
But FIVE BFFs? no, that was not random , that was organized

And it now dawns on me, this mess involves not just the DAILY MAIL affiliate but also People magazine

Hmmm one might think that the DM spoke to People about the lawsuit/letter - that they compared notes, that would be beneficial to both, since each's story is oddly dependent on the other's


----------



## Annawakes

Mendocino said:


> She is claiming her copyright right over the letter was violated and that other rights were violated by the defendants 'publication of the letter. She also said the letter published was edited. That's probably not the best explanation, but it's what I've gleaned.
> 
> Chris Ship is ITV's Royal reporter. He was in the court hearing a few days ago. the newspapers are asking the court to throw out some of Meghan's suit. The judge said he will make his decision in about a week.
> 
> If you go to Ship's Twitter feed on April 24 you can read what happened in court. from that point scroll down to read them chronologically.  He is pretty succinct in his reporting and I found it quite interesting. The relevant tweets are at the top of the link i've included below:



Thanks for this.  I’ll have to study this in detail lol.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> New day, new week, new initiative, new excitement, new way to copy existing programs, 3 years in the making.
> 
> =====
> HeadFIT
> For Life
> 
> _Prince Harry, who served in the army for ten years, said: "HeadFIT has been almost three years in the making, and I am extremely grateful for everyone who has been on this journey with us. Everyone who has worked on it, to create what we have today, should be incredibly proud and excited for the impact it will have._
> 
> _"I've long believed the military community should lead the way for the rest of society. For too long we have been waiting for problems to arise and then reacting to them. HeadFIT is a *proactive approach to mental fitness, focusing on our own potential to increase our performance, using proven methods in sport science.*_
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
> =====


That second para word salad--wonder who wrote it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> Nope. What are they selling exactly?


You hit the nail in the head! I have said this before. They have zero talent between the pair of them. (No, mental illness is not a talent and it does not qualify you an expert in the subject.) If she was a talented actress should would have done much better by now. Now they are not even "royals"! 
I like the QVC angel! Zero talent required and with her cheesy voice and exaggerated expression, it could work like a charm!


----------



## Clearblueskies

kemilia said:


> That second para word salad--wonder who wrote it.


I can almost hear it now.....”oh H, ffs  give me that pen”


----------



## imgg

chicinthecity777 said:


> Witness coaching is not permitted under UK law. It's not done here. They will discuss strategies but she could not be coached in any circumstances. It will be up to herself when she takes that stand.


Wish the US would take a page or two from British law- you can't print out of context, you can't coach witnesses.  In the US seems like 90% of media stories these days are BS.


----------



## chicinthecity777

imgg said:


> Wish the US would take a page or two from British law- you can't print out of context, you can't coach witnesses.  In the US 90% of media stories these days are BS.


We were absolutely fascinated when we first watched U.S. court room dramas re witness coaching ...


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicinthecity777 said:


> So what's it like in the US? Do people like them? Do you think people will buy what they sell? (Sell what I don't know.)


I dunno, since they've moved really I wouldn't have heard about them if I didn't read this forum or the Daily Mail. Besides the occasional grocery store checkout magazine headline.


----------



## WhyMrBabcock!

mia55 said:


> It'll make my day if there comes a news (or even a rumor) that Charles is thinking to halt the funding for "what's his name".


Interesting- but please correct me if I’m wrong (according to Wikipedia ) in the Queen’s demise - the Duchy if Cornwall is inherited by the Prince of Wales - the heir to the throne - in which case- the Duchy”s income will be inherited by William ...it’s fascinating to see how this plays out- as getting any money from the civil list will be resisted by the British public in my opinion- but it is the source of money for the Sussexes in the event of their charitable endeavors don’t cover their actual living expenses...such silly people ..it takes money to live in this day and age. 
 The significance, I think,  is that William needs funds to support his children in the future ,  as Prince Charles is supporting both William and Harry’s family with the income from the Duchy if Cornwall ...so anything they do with Harry will be the same that they will do for Charlotte and Louis in the future If they decide to leave Royal life ...


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow, this picture is worth a thousand words.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> So what's it like in the US? Do people like them? Do you think people will buy what they sell? (Sell what I don't know.)



Most people in the US do not know the details about Harry and Meghan that we discuss here in this thread. They are not being examined closely by the American media so the average citizen doesn’t hear about any of the negatives. The entertainment media here is reporting regular happy, shallow pieces that you can be certain Sunshine Sachs placed for them. I’m sure it’s been noticed there’s a certain hypocrisy with them, but hey, there’s hypocrisy in almost all celebrities and it is rarely reported.

So I would say the average American is mostly indifferent to them. They are not going to stand out in our sea of celebrities. They have nothing to offer.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dear ... 
reading about Harry s new project headfit - tool for mental health - good
Curious I googled the term 
and never found his site , but Google informed me  that headfit is Northern English slang for a temper tantrum


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> I have been wondering lately why Meghan so desperately wanted to land a wealthy Brit?
> I mean, to add a touch of class, sure. But it does seem like she had no intention of ever permanently living in the UK



To answer your question you need only remember that Meghan is a narcissist. Her choosing a mate was all about how it would reflect on herself. Naturally she wanted someone who would be perceived as more exotic and classier than the men she saw all around her. If he was world-famous too, well then all the better!


----------



## threadbender

CarryOn2020 said:


> New day, new week, new initiative, new excitement, new way to copy existing programs, 3 years in the making.
> 
> =====
> HeadFIT
> For Life
> 
> _Prince Harry, who served in the army for ten years, said: "HeadFIT has been almost three years in the making, and I am extremely grateful for everyone who has been on this journey with us. Everyone who has worked on it, to create what we have today, should be incredibly proud and excited for the impact it will have._
> 
> _"I've long believed the military community should lead the way for the rest of society. For too long we have been waiting for problems to arise and then reacting to them. HeadFIT is a proactive approach to mental fitness, focusing on our own potential to increase our performance, using proven methods in sport science._
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
> =====


HeadFit sounds like a hat app
ETA:
It appears this was actually started awhile back with the Cambridges. The video is from when Harry was still a working royal. But, I still say the name is not a good one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just looked at the twitter. A whopping 60 users and a bunch of retweeted content.  Rme


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, this picture is worth a thousand words.



Ugh. Where was this taken? Did she think the cameras were off so she took a break from the lovey-dovey-gazing-eyes-hold-my-hand BS?  She hadn't yet fully trained Harry when it was mandatory to hold her hand vs to leave her the hell alone. He even looked pretty good in this picture, for a change. She reminds me of when Glenn Close killed and boiled the rabbit.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Kate has a very athletic build with no curves really.
> 
> Sarah Burton (of McQueen) gave an interview where she said she padded the hips of Kate's wedding dress to give her a more shapely figure.  She padded somewhere else but I can't remember what.
> 
> I've always said, she probably padded Pippa's behind too, because we all can see she doesn't have a bum. (Which is fine, not everyone does.)  The only time she had a shapely bum was in the dress.


I wonder how it felt for Pippa to get all that attention to a fake bum


----------



## mrsinsyder

rose60610 said:


> Ugh. Where was this taken? Did she think the cameras were off so she took a break from the lovey-dovey-gazing-eyes-hold-my-hand BS?  She hadn't yet fully trained Harry when it was mandatory to hold her hand vs to leave her the hell alone. He even looked pretty good in this picture, for a change. She reminds me of when Glenn Close killed and boiled the rabbit.


Looks like it was the South Africa tour...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think you get it. People in the UK simply don't care about MM, she's irrelevant here. She was never here long and has done only stupid things so far. She will end up a lot more insignificant compared to even Fergie! When people don't care about you, what you say doesn't matter to us! Maybe she has some followers in the U.S. but U.S. is never BRF territory. Judging from what I read, Australia and Canada (2 biggest commonwealth countries) don't care about them either. People will not give a second thought about what come out of her pipehole!


you mean you aren't waiting with baited breath for those Archie birthday photos?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> you mean you aren't waiting with baited breath for those Archie birthday photos?


It will be lovely to see a photo of him, I'm waiting for the circus surrounding the issue of the photo or photos. [emoji16]


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I wonder how it felt for Pippa to get all that attention to a fake bum


What bum?
She is super skinny and looks good in clothes but bum?(with or without padding)


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> you mean you aren't waiting with baited breath for those Archie birthday photos?


I feel so missed out if I don't see daily updates of their good deeds and baby Archie's photos, NOT!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> To answer your question you need only remember that Meghan is a narcissist. Her choosing a mate was all about how it would reflect on herself. Naturally she wanted someone who would be perceived as more exotic and classier than the men she saw all around her. If he was world-famous too, well then all the better!


and apparently her fantasy only went as far as the wedding.....like a fairy tale


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> What bum?
> She is super skinny and looks good in clothes but bum?(with or without padding)


she had a bum when she was Kate's maid of honor (apparently padded)


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Ugh. Where was this taken? Did she think the cameras were off so she took a break from the lovey-dovey-gazing-eyes-hold-my-hand BS?  She hadn't yet fully trained Harry when it was mandatory to hold her hand vs to leave her the hell alone. He even looked pretty good in this picture, for a change. She reminds me of when Glenn Close killed and boiled the rabbit.



I think it’s just the opposite. Her eyes are locked onto the lens of the camera in that shot. She always has to make sure she looks good by herself before she worries about looking good with Harry.

Harry is reaching for her hand because he has been trained so well.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> she had a bum when she was Kate's maid of honor (apparently padded)


I don’t see said bum.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she had a bum when she was Kate's maid of honor (apparently padded)



Yes, I remember Pippa’s butt was the talk of the wedding. Photos of the back of her appeared everywhere for almost a week.

I didn’t know it was padded!


----------



## Madrose

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow, this picture is worth a thousand words.



Why is this photo making the rounds today?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> I don’t see said bum.
> View attachment 4718314



Well, it is the bum of a slender woman. It was very popular with men at the time.


----------



## bag-mania

Madrose said:


> Why is this photo making the rounds today?




I don’t know but I’m thrilled to see James Woods is trashing them!  It means Hollywood celebrities are paying attention and they aren’t liking what they are see.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know but I’m thrilled to see James Woods is trashing them!  It means Hollywood celebrities are paying attention and they aren’t liking what they are see.


well James Woods isn't typical of Hollywood celebs if you know what I mean


----------



## V0N1B2

HeadFIT?  lawd! 
What is this phuckery? A ripoff of HeadsTogether? The charity that William, Catherine, and Harry started like three years ago? Has it been re-branded or has it been #markled in favour of this new "charity"?


----------



## Annawakes

Madrose said:


> Why is this photo making the rounds today?



Her hair is atrocious


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> well James Woods isn't typical of Hollywood celebs if you know what I mean


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know but I’m thrilled to see James Woods is trashing them!  It means Hollywood celebrities are paying attention and they aren’t liking what they are see.



H and M relationship as we see it is so disheartening, H doesn't even have to be a prince.   I feel like M is trying to compensate for low self esteem as a result makes him look like a pitiful creature.  H will wake up I hope and go home.


----------



## limom

scarlet555 said:


> H and M relationship as we see it is so disheartening, H doesn't even have to be a prince.   I feel like M is trying to compensate for low self esteem as a result makes him look like a pitiful creature.  H will wake up I hope and go home.


Who has low self esteem? Meagan? Harry? Both?


----------



## LittleStar88

James Woods is on fire! Are these recent posts or older ones?


----------



## Madrose

LittleStar88 said:


> James Woods is on fire! Are these recent posts or older ones?



Today.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> James Woods is on fire! Are these recent posts or older ones?


enjoy him if you're so inclined but he's not credible - a 73-year-old conspiracy theorist


----------



## scarlet555

limom said:


> Who has low self esteem? Meagan? Harry? Both?



Both, but with M, she appears to be suffering from delusions de grandeur.  I am not qualified to diagnose her formally, nor am her medical/mental provider, and my opinion carries no weight as to the truth of it all (of course),  this is purely based on what she has portrayed.   OMG, are we going to get sued here on TPF? By M? LOL.


----------



## mrsinsyder

scarlet555 said:


> OMG, are we going to get sued here on TPF? By M? LOL.



I remember when her "people" doxxed a bunch of internet commentators. That was actually when I started to really dislike her. Are you SO fragile that you'd expose people because they hurt your feefees? SMH. I've never seen any celebrity do such a thing.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I remember when her "people" doxxed a bunch of internet commentators. That was actually when I started to really dislike her. Are you SO fragile that you'd expose people because they hurt your feefees? SMH. I've never seen any celebrity do such a thing.


----------



## limom

scarlet555 said:


> Both, but with M, she appears to be suffering from delusions de grandeur.  I am not qualified to diagnose her formally, nor am her medical/mental provider, and my opinion carries no weight as to the truth of it all (of course),  this is purely based on what she has portrayed.   OMG, are we going to get sued here on TPF? By M? LOL.


Sued?


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> I remember when her "people" doxxed a bunch of internet commentators. That was actually when I started to really dislike her. Are you SO fragile that you'd expose people because they hurt your feefees? SMH. I've never seen any celebrity do such a thing.


Wait what? Details, please.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think you get it. People in the UK simply don't care about MM, she's irrelevant here. She was never here long and has done only stupid things so far. She will end up a lot more insignificant compared to even Fergie! When people don't care about you, what you say doesn't matter to us! Maybe she has some followers in the U.S. but U.S. is never BRF territory. Judging from what I read, Australia and Canada (2 biggest commonwealth countries) don't care about them either. People will not give a second thought about what come out of her pipehole!



No one's talking about the UK _people_... We're talking about what the BRF cares about. Whether YOU care or not (and I personally couldn't care less who has affairs with who), you can bet the family cares if their dirty laundry is aired in newspapers, talk shows, radio shows, etc. for months and months. That would be the power M has if she's willing to go there... I don't think she cares about us any more than we her. But I'd bet she cares a lot about how to preserve the royal cash flow.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> Wait what? Details, please.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8341290/meghan-markle-trolls-social-media/

THE vile trolls behind the horrific abuse of Meghan Markle on social media have been unmasked – and include a British author.

The Duchess of Sussex has been the victim of nasty comments online, including those calling her a “hooker” and calling for #Megxit.

Amongst those exposed include a British author, a legal assistant, a care home worker and a married mum.

According to the Mail on Sunday, British author Jessie Tyson – who now lives in Canada – reportedly commented beneath a video of Meghan with the Queen saying the duchess “has had no training to fit into British society, let alone Royal family. Not that she cares, s*he doesnt [sic]even comb her hair! *OFF WITH HER HEAD then she will have no more hair trouble.”

When asked about her posts, she told the paper: “I love the Royal Family. Then she [Meghan] came along. She dresses like a teenager, *she has dirty hair and nails*, filthy shoes, and she breaks Royal protocol.”

Care home worker Mercedes Dawson from Philadelphia has also reportedly taken aim at Meghan Markle online.

Dawson reportedly tweeted – from an account since made private – that “Harry made Meghan famous”.

“*D list actress*, all she knew to do in Suits was to take off her clothes,” she reportedly added.

While Dawson did not reportedly return a request for comment, it’s claimed a woman called from a blocked number and asked: “Why did you single me out? Back off. I have nothing to say.”

Married mum Victoria Iglesias reportedly called Meghan a “hooker” from her now-deleted Twitter account.

“She has zero talent. Never heard of her before she became *Harry’s legal hooker*. Even her X rated films are horrid,” she reportedly said.

In a comment to the paper, she said there are “trolls” on Twitter who would “tear [her] to pieces” if they found her.

McLain Rose, a legal assistant from Carolina, also reportedly tweeted – from her now private account – calling her “trash” and am “b*tch”.

Comparing Meghan and Kate, she reportedly said: “Catherine is so sweet and genuine… Nothing like that other b*tch who shall not be named. #MEGXIT.”

In another post, it’s claimed she called the Duchess of Cambridge, “a true Royal, unlike the trash Harry dragged in.”

Responding to the paper, she reportedly said: “‘I would rather be a troll standing up for something I believe in than a blind follower.”

And Florida woman Deanne Masters also uses her blog to share views on Meghan and Harry, reportedly also including fake claims that Meghan has slept with people for drugs.

In a statement to the paper, Master said Meghan is an unelected public servant and “people do have a right to criticise their representative”.

Veoniss Melissa Houston, a frequent poster on the blog about Meghan, admitted to the paper that while she doesn’t hate Meghan sometimes she goes “a little bit too far”.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> So what's it like in the US? Do people like them? Do you think people will buy what they sell? (Sell what I don't know.)


I'm in the US, and I have not yet met a single person who likes either of them, especially now.  However, we do people who read PEOPLE magazine and watch the various shows that "extol their virtues" .. frankly, I don't get it.  In addition, I didn't know a single person who watched that show Suits.  Especially with what is going on with the virus and in California, and LA .. I really wish they weren't here and would just sit down and STFU!


----------



## lalame

Re: US vs UK. I don't think people in the US care about her any more than people in the UK - and probably a great deal less even - but they're less offended because we're just not brought up in that royal model. Some of the criticism I see on M's appearance for example, like she has dirty hair, nails, unkempt clothes, etc... I think that's in the context of what a royal lifestyle should be. Otherwise, I mean, unkempt seems to be the uniform of celebrities here so I don't think that bothers most people about her here (unless they are royal fans of course). Most aren't royal fans.

I haven't had 1 conversation about MM with any of my friends except expressing surprise awhile ago that people could dislike her so much (that was when I discovered this forum lol) - or feel _anything_ so much about her. That's because I, like most Americans, didn't really care enough to learn more. Then I learned more and here we are dozens of pages later.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

mrsinsyder said:


> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8341290/meghan-markle-trolls-social-media/
> 
> THE vile trolls behind the horrific abuse of Meghan Markle on social media have been unmasked – and include a British author.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has been the victim of nasty comments online, including those calling her a “hooker” and calling for #Megxit.
> 
> Amongst those exposed include a British author, a legal assistant, a care home worker and a married mum.
> 
> According to the Mail on Sunday, British author Jessie Tyson – who now lives in Canada – reportedly commented beneath a video of Meghan with the Queen saying the duchess “has had no training to fit into British society, let alone Royal family. Not that she cares, s*he doesnt [sic]even comb her hair! *OFF WITH HER HEAD then she will have no more hair trouble.”
> 
> When asked about her posts, she told the paper: “I love the Royal Family. Then she [Meghan] came along. She dresses like a teenager, *she has dirty hair and nails*, filthy shoes, and she breaks Royal protocol.”
> 
> Care home worker Mercedes Dawson from Philadelphia has also reportedly taken aim at Meghan Markle online.
> 
> Dawson reportedly tweeted – from an account since made private – that “Harry made Meghan famous”.
> 
> “*D list actress*, all she knew to do in Suits was to take off her clothes,” she reportedly added.
> 
> While Dawson did not reportedly return a request for comment, it’s claimed a woman called from a blocked number and asked: “Why did you single me out? Back off. I have nothing to say.”
> 
> Married mum Victoria Iglesias reportedly called Meghan a “hooker” from her now-deleted Twitter account.
> 
> “She has zero talent. Never heard of her before she became *Harry’s legal hooker*. Even her X rated films are horrid,” she reportedly said.
> 
> In a comment to the paper, she said there are “trolls” on Twitter who would “tear [her] to pieces” if they found her.
> 
> McLain Rose, a legal assistant from Carolina, also reportedly tweeted – from her now private account – calling her “trash” and am “b*tch”.
> 
> Comparing Meghan and Kate, she reportedly said: “Catherine is so sweet and genuine… Nothing like that other b*tch who shall not be named. #MEGXIT.”
> 
> In another post, it’s claimed she called the Duchess of Cambridge, “a true Royal, unlike the trash Harry dragged in.”
> 
> Responding to the paper, she reportedly said: “‘I would rather be a troll standing up for something I believe in than a blind follower.”
> 
> And Florida woman Deanne Masters also uses her blog to share views on Meghan and Harry, reportedly also including fake claims that Meghan has slept with people for drugs.
> 
> In a statement to the paper, Master said Meghan is an unelected public servant and “people do have a right to criticise their representative”.
> 
> Veoniss Melissa Houston, a frequent poster on the blog about Meghan, admitted to the paper that while she doesn’t hate Meghan sometimes she goes “a little bit too far”.


Wow. 
People are nuts.
On the other hand, there are many group/websites dedicated to outing and mocking people.
For example, there were a website dedicated to mock posters on Television without pity and of course the purseforum advisory.
Good times


----------



## marietouchet

Meghan says changes would've been made if Kate Middleton was bashed
https://mol.im/a/8246897
And the friends keep on spilling the beans to the tabloids ... this is from an INSIDER ... and of course, not from H&M since they don’t cooperate with the Daily Mail
PS hmmm I need a clarification ... OK the dynamic duo does not give interviews to the DM , I got that, but does their new policy allow for them to sanction their friends talking to the DM ? Or does the policy of non cooperation mean that they actively discourage friends interaction with the press ?


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> Meghan says changes would've been made if Kate Middleton was bashed
> https://mol.im/a/8246897
> And the friends keep on spilling the beans to the tabloids ... this is from an INSIDER ... and of course, not from H&M since they don’t cooperate with the Daily Mail


Kate was dragged for years though? And still is on occasion. Heck, there's video of the paparazzi swarming her on multiple occasions.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> enjoy him if you're so inclined but he's not credible - a 73-year-old conspiracy theorist



I'm sorry..........which part makes him not credible? His age or that he has a different viewpoint than most of the sheeple? 
FWIW I am 63 and have _never_ believed that Oswald acted alone (even before Oliver Stone got involved).


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Meghan says changes would've been made if Kate Middleton was bashed
> https://mol.im/a/8246897
> And the friends keep on spilling the beans to the tabloids ... this is from an INSIDER ... and of course, not from H&M since they don’t cooperate with the Daily Mail
> PS hmmm I need a clarification ... OK the dynamic duo does not give interviews to the DM , I got that, but does their new policy allow for them to sanction their friends talking to the DM ? Or does the policy of non cooperation mean that they actively discourage friends interaction with the press ?


DailyMail is completely out of bound, this is an online website for American audience, no?
*Bitter* Meaghan?
Really?
This narrative pitting women against one another is old as heck.


----------



## Frivole88

Hmmm....so she’s really jealous of Kate


----------



## limom

Malfunction


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I'm sorry..........which part makes him not credible? His age or that he has a different viewpoint than most of the sheeple?
> FWIW I am 63 and have _never_ believed that Oswald acted alone (even before Oliver Stone got involved).


to each her own
I can't say more here....but it's not just his age


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> to each her own
> I can't say more here....but it's not just his age


What about the way it treats women in general for one?
He is a jerk and an old one. So.


----------



## kipp

kristinlorraine said:


> Hmmm....so she’s really jealous of Kate
> View attachment 4718415


Good grief!


----------



## CeeJay

You know, when you are a "celebrity" .. you have to kind of keep in mind that no matter what, there are always going to be some that criticize .. not everyone likes the same thing.  You have to develop a thick skin; heck .. nowadays, you have to do it in a lot of places (like Corporate America).  If I biatched about half of the things said to me, I would have been in the nuthouse many years ago .. you just put on the filter and 'carry-on' (besides, my Corporate America motto was "better to be a biatch than a Babe"! - HA!  

Now, all that being said, are there going to be some that are outrageous horrible? .. yes, and sadly that is the way of the world today, but you just IGNORE it!  These two with their 'ultra-sensitive' feelings; how the heck do they think they are going to run some organization/foundation .. what, does Hazza think that just because he is a Prince, that people are going to bow to him?  Meghan? .. forget it, she is going to get even dirtier with this case .. and if she starts going against her former "friends", then it would not surprise me if some of them defended themselves .. and then the gloves will be ON!


----------



## beautymagpie

kristinlorraine said:


> Hmmm....so she’s really jealous of Kate
> View attachment 4718415



‘Friends‘ should do their research. 

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-william-issued-stern-message-140300097.html

But the difference is Kate wasn’t courting it then pretending she wasn’t and crying when it wasn’t propaganda like coverage.


----------



## scarlet555

marietouchet said:


> Meghan says changes would've been made if Kate Middleton was bashed
> https://mol.im/a/8246897
> And the friends keep on spilling the beans to the tabloids ... this is from an INSIDER ... and of course, not from H&M since they don’t cooperate with the Daily Mail
> PS hmmm I need a clarification ... OK the dynamic duo does not give interviews to the DM , I got that, but does their new policy allow for them to sanction their friends talking to the DM ? Or does the policy of non cooperation mean that they actively discourage friends interaction with the press ?



In the beginning, Kate was being picked on all the time, from what I remember, and I did not even follow BRF, there were her topless photos and repeated pictures of the wind flushing her skirt up for a full view of her butt, all over the media.  I thought it was pretty humiliating and even surprised that tabloid were allowed to put her pictures up.  It's only now that they are appreciating her more, especially after Megain and her 2 year stint with the royals.

In the end you have to fight your own battles, why are you blaming the whole royal court for not telling the media to stand down.  Didn't you see the whole royal court couldn't stop the topless photos of Kate, nor her bums being flashed all over the world?  Why do you need to blame people that you don't create bridges with to begin with?  How do you expect them to defend you, when you are the least likable and when from the get go, they bet you would do something disgraceful with Harry, and as predicted, you did exactly that.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> No one's talking about the UK _people_... We're talking about what the BRF cares about. Whether YOU care or not ...  But I'd bet she cares a lot about how to preserve the royal cash flow.


I think many people who replied to me were talking about the people! 
The BRF would never acknowledge anything even if they are irritated. But to be frankly, after Prince Andrew, they have seen everything! 
And how is MM going to preserve the royal cash flow if she keeps bad mouth them?


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> What about the way it treats women in general for one?
> He is a jerk and an old one. So.


*BOOM*!!! .. exactly!!!  He has a reputation for being a real a$$hat re: treating women.  What always amazed me, is that he thought he was God's gift to women; I always thought he was ugly as heck (inside and out)!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> No one's talking about the UK _people_... We're talking about what the BRF cares about. Whether YOU care or not (and I personally couldn't care less who has affairs with who), you can bet the family cares if their dirty laundry is aired in newspapers, talk shows, radio shows, etc. for months and months. That would be the power M has if she's willing to go there... I don't think she cares about us any more than we her. But I'd bet she cares a lot about how to preserve the royal cash flow.


Extracted from the post I replied to "Judging from all the articles published about her, I would think that the Brits care about her and the Prince just as much if not more than us in the US....." so clearly we were talking about the people and I was replying to that poster, not you!


----------



## CeeJay

beautymagpie said:


> ‘Friends‘ should do their research.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/prince-william-issued-stern-message-140300097.html
> 
> But the difference is Kate wasn’t courting it then pretending she wasn’t and crying when it wasn’t propaganda like coverage.


YUP .. for someone who is supposed to be "so smart", she is as sharp as a spoon!  Sheesh ..


----------



## bag-mania

There is no such thing as a celebrity that everybody likes. Early on I have no doubt that Meghan was treated badly by some in the tabloid media for the same reason as with every other celebrity, mean gossip gets more readers than nice gossip. That’s the business. After that initial flurry, however, the negative coverage has come from Meghan’s own questionable behavior.

Unfortunately for Meghan she still doesn’t understand she can’t call the shots about what is written about her. She doesn’t have control over anyone except Harry.


----------



## lanasyogamama

“Always complain, always explain” - MM


----------



## queennadine

That last DM story sounds so much like her 

Seeing her wedding dress again a few pages back reminded me of how much I hated it. So plain and that fabric and sleeve length were awful. Coupled with her disheveled hair. NOPE. I said it then and I’ll say it now: she didn’t give AF at that point anymore.


----------



## Lounorada

limom said:


>


 So accurate


----------



## AB Negative

sdkitty said:


> enjoy him if you're so inclined but he's not credible - a 73-year-old conspiracy theorist


He is very smart with a genius IQ and a good actor not sunk in the Hollywood swamp/


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> to each her own
> I can't say more here....but it's not just his age





limom said:


> What about the way it treats women in general for one?
> He is a jerk and an old one. So.



James Woods is awful. Reminds me of the adage... even a broken clock is right twice a day.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> Kate was dragged for years though? And still is on occasion. Heck, there's video of the paparazzi swarming her on multiple occasions.



Agree, Kate got it bad too... maybe a different flavor of bad but certainly she didn't have it easy. And imagine going through that at such a young age... ugh and the topless intrusion photos? Meghan hasn't had it so bad.


----------



## bag-mania

Whether you like him or not, James Woods is one of the very few in the entertainment industry who will speak out about his opinions knowing they aren’t popular there. In an industry where it appears like 99% of the members are in lockstep agreement on their views, having one or two dissenting opinions is refreshing and interesting. I’m sure there are others who are afraid to voice their opinions because they know they will never be hired in Hollywood again if they do.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Whether you like him or not, James Woods is one of the very few in the entertainment industry who will speak out about his opinions knowing they aren’t popular there. In an industry where it appears like 99% of the members are in lockstep agreement on their views, having one or two dissenting opinions is refreshing and interesting. I’m sure there are others who are afraid to voice their opinions because they know they will never be hired in Hollywood again if they do.


there are other conservatives in entertainment....don't know if they tweet but I'm aware of some of them.


----------



## redney

If MM wanted to exit the BRF so badly why does she continue to feed the press with her exasperations over them (rhetorical question)


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Agree, Kate got it bad too... maybe a different flavor of bad but certainly she didn't have it easy. And imagine going through that at such a young age... ugh and the topless intrusion photos? Meghan hasn't had it so bad.


The thing about the topless photos, which no one seems to care about... was that they were supposed to be at some ceremony, something they sponsored and it was the last day, but they said they had a prior commitment... and on the day of the event, they find Kate sunning herself on the French Riviera (or wherever they were.)

Will and Kate had a fair amount of negative press, back in the day, largely due to not doing much.


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> What bum?
> She is super skinny and looks good in clothes but bum?(with or without padding)





limom said:


> I don’t see said bum.
> View attachment 4718314



In this post-augmented-booty-era, Pippa’s padded posterior looks positively puny! In the photos & video footage, the bum was also favorably enhanced when she bent to fix Kate’s train, or to hold the flower girls’ hands in her form-fitting Burton for McQueen dress. At the time, people saying that she was padded were branded as “jealous,” but Burton later said Kate was padded, so I’m sure Pip was too.

Someone mentioned Meghan might have benefited from padding, but I think faux-hips might have emphasized her short waist.


----------



## Sol Ryan

PewPew said:


> In this post-augmented-booty-era, Pippa’s padded posterior looks positively puny! In the photos & video footage, the bum was also enhanced when she bent to fix Kate’s train, or bend to hold the flower girls’ hands in her form-fitting Burton for McQueen dress. At the time, people saying she was padded were branded as “jealous,” but Burton later said Kate was padded, so I’m sure Pip was too.
> 
> Someone mentioned Meghan might have benefited from padding, but I think faux-hips might have emphasized her short waist.
> 
> View attachment 4718513
> 
> 
> View attachment 4718512


I admit, I had the biggest crush on Pippa after that wedding... still sorta do...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> I admit, I had the biggest crush on Pippa after that wedding... still sorta do...



People went crazy for Pippa... TBH, I never really got it. She looks like a regular person to me? And not a particularly beautiful one at that, if we're talking about global fame standards. But maybe she has a lot more to offer and I just don't see it over where I am. IDK.


----------



## muchstuff

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think you get it. People in the UK simply don't care about MM, she's irrelevant here. She was never here long and has done only stupid things so far. She will end up a lot more insignificant compared to even Fergie! When people don't care about you, what you say doesn't matter to us! Maybe she has some followers in the U.S. but U.S. is never BRF territory. Judging from what I read, Australia and Canada (2 biggest commonwealth countries) don't care about them either. People will not give a second thought about what come out of her pipehole!


I'm Canadian and no one I know even mentions them. Period.


----------



## muchstuff

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like it was the South Africa tour...


Does she EVER not look into the camera?


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> Wow.
> People are nuts.
> On the other hand, there are many group/websites dedicated to outing and mocking people.
> For example, there were a website dedicated to mock posters on Television without pity and of course the purseforum advisory.
> Good times


Whatever happened to the latter?


----------



## muchstuff

limom said:


>


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> People went crazy for Pippa... TBH, I never really got it. She looks like a regular person to me? And not a particularly beautiful one at that, if we're talking about global fame standards. But maybe she has a lot more to offer and I just don't see it over where I am. IDK.



I think it was she looked radiant. I don’t know how to describe it. I never go for people who look like models. (I don’t understand what anyone sees in them) But she stood out from the rest. 

I had a friend at the wedding and was trying to find her in the crowd and just remember Pippa in the pictures lol. My friend said she was nice too so liked her even more by proxy.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> People went crazy for Pippa... TBH, I never really got it. She looks like a regular person to me? And not a particularly beautiful one at that, if we're talking about global fame standards. But maybe she has a lot more to offer and I just don't see it over where I am. IDK.



I think it was just a moment in time where Pippa looked great to a lot of people. Maybe it happened because she is a regular person and not a celebrity. Celebrities are always expected to look good. And even if she never looks that good again, she’ll have had her 15 minutes of fame for beauty. That’s got to feel wonderful for her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

No more money, no more snark. For me, it was a sad day when they shut TWOP down. Lots of interesting, behind-the-scenes stuff on that site. The more we know, the more we understand. This is where H&M have stumbled. The more we learn about them, the more we understand how far they have misled us. The ‘do as I say, not as I do’ philosophy was never going to work. If not for this pandemic, I would not have taken the time to comment here because I really didn’t care for much of their behavior (in case ya couldn’t tell).  Thinking about them is not good for my _HeadFit_, but, and this is the important part, reading everyone’s thoughts has been cathartic as well as entertaining.
 Applause, blessings, hugs and kisses for all of us. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_Without_Pity




Jayne1 said:


> Whatever happened to the latter?


----------



## lalame

redney said:


> If MM wanted to exit the BRF so badly why does she continue to feed the press with her exasperations over them (rhetorical question)



Oh boy, you could ask this about so many things they've done. Another one that comes to mind lately... if she's so dismayed by how the press ruined her relationship with her dad, why does she persist in making it worse with a public and intrusive legal battle with all 3?


----------



## LittleStar88

kristinlorraine said:


> Hmmm....so she’s really jealous of Kate
> View attachment 4718415



Kate was put through the wringer for a long time. She stayed her course and paid her dues.

Meghan quit after a short time. No comparison.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Worth a look:
http://www.thefa.com/news/2020/apr/23/st-georges-day-message-this-is-england-hussain-manawer-230420

Tell me again what H&M are complaining about.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> I think it was just a moment in time where Pippa looked great to a lot of people. Maybe it happened because she is a regular person and not a celebrity. Celebrities are always expected to look good. And even if she never looks that good again, she’ll have had her 15 minutes of fame for beauty. That’s got to feel wonderful for her.


I think there's a lot of beauty in a genuine smile. After all the PR about her behind, it's honestly her smile I remember. I completely forgot what her dress looked like and everything. Actually that's not true, Harry looked happy with Pippa as the two siblings. I remember that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Meghan says changes would've been made if Kate Middleton was bashed



1. Kate was harassed and mocked by the press relentlessly for years, IMO way worse than special snowflake M.

2. Kate also is completely inoffensive and does her freaking job while Meghan did whatever she could to piss people off.

3. Quote from article: "Meghan said Harry needed to take a stand for her, their son and his mother, Princess  Diana."

I think it is f*cking gross how she milks his personal tragedy any chance she gets. Really, really gross.


----------



## lalame

Is it just me or does it speak volumes that Kate and Meghan never directly addressed the feuding rumors in a way that actually resonated with people... Like if there were untrue rumors that I didn't get along with someone, I'd coordinate something as simple as a joint Instagram video or something to SHOW people the good rapport and address it plainly. They both have the ability to be funny, personable, relatable, etc. on their own so why not show that together? It always seemed frosty.

Edit to add: In-laws don't always need to be best buds but with a family that tight to begin with, it seems strange. Even Pippa seemed to have a good rapport with the family.


----------



## zinacef

chicinthecity777 said:


> So what's it like in the US? Do people like them? Do you think people will buy what they sell? (Sell what I don't know.)


Personally, I’m like you, i don’t think anybody gives 2 cents, I only comment here otherwise my friends don’t know that I know a lot  about the BRF. It’s harmless fun, time suck, but definitely I can answer jeopardy questions about M and H.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Oh boy, you could ask this about so many things they've done. Another one that comes to mind lately... if she's so dismayed by how the press ruined her relationship with her dad, why does she persist in making it worse with a public and intrusive legal battle with all 3?


I'm really starting to think that it's all about the Kardashian approach .. "make sure to ALWAYS be in the news, regardless".  The difference, obviously, is that they are being held to different standards (being the Duke & Duchess after all ).  Is that right or wrong, not for me to say, but .. look, plenty of times the Kar-Trashians were caught lying, but everyone kind of takes for granted their trashiness.  These two .. "we're going to save / create a new World" .. well, totally different paradigm.  Will they ever realize that people are sick and tired of them?? .. alas, not if Meghan is pulling the strings (IMO).


----------



## imgg

kristinlorraine said:


> Hmmm....so she’s really jealous of Kate
> View attachment 4718415


This will be her downfall.  She is so obsessed and jealous of Kate, she will burn every bridge and destroy her life, just to try to prove a point about Kate.


----------



## mdcx

Regards Pippa, when I watched the wedding it did look like she had very lean but muscular or toned....glutes shall we say. Like a professional gymnast etc. Not so much a big curvy booty.
Pippa did look radiant that day, I think she was just so thrilled for Kate.

As for M, what can one say? The self-pity party continues. 
Her 5 friends have to know they are toast at this point right?


----------



## scrpo83

Jayne1 said:


> The thing about the topless photos, which no one seems to care about... was that they were supposed to be at some ceremony, something they sponsored and it was the last day, but they said they had a prior commitment... and on the day of the event, they find Kate sunning herself on the French Riviera (or wherever they were.)
> 
> Will and Kate had a fair amount of negative press, back in the day, largely due to not doing much.



this is so on point..i think they were supposed to attend a Paralympics event but didn’t with the excuse of prepping for their upcoming tour but topless photos showed otherwise. I frequented forum that discussed royals and the nicknames they have for W&K laziness is hilarious..


----------



## Madrose

scrpo83 said:


> I frequented forum that discussed royals and the nicknames they have for W&K laziness is hilarious..


I remember this.  Didn't Kate get a lot of criticism for her lack of engagements?  Has she finally caught up to what's expected in her position?  I know she wanted to spend more time at home with her children.


----------



## Vintage Leather

I’ll always be fond of “Duchess Do-Little”.

The British press’s favorite hobby is trolling the royals. Even the corgis get an unusually large number of inches of text.  The thing is - the thing that annoys me about Ms No-One-Asks-About-Me  - five minutes in a British airport will reveal that information.

You know you’ll be trolled - and then you’re upset about it? It’s part of the damn job. You can possibly change it - but it’ll take a few decades.


----------



## lalame

Wow I did not witness all of that at all so very interesting to hear. Kind of ironic that W+K got lampooned for not being visible/active enough and now H+M are despised for being TOO visible. They're in the news all the time now... for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Wow I did not witness all of that at all so very interesting to hear. Kind of ironic that W+K got lampooned for not being visible/active enough and now H+M are despised for being TOO visible. They're in the news all the time now... for all the wrong reasons.



Meghan wanted to be visible at events she wanted to attend. She thought that the charity work she would be doing would be high profile and maybe glamorous as well. I think she was stunned when she found out many of the events they were scheduled for were boring and they were not anything she could look like a saint while doing. They went on the Africa trip not long after she came back from maternity leave and that was more to her liking. Of course they managed to screw up all the good will they received from that by giving that disastrous interview.


----------



## Jayne1

scrpo83 said:


> this is so on point..i think they were supposed to attend a Paralympics event but didn’t with the excuse of prepping for their upcoming tour but topless photos showed otherwise. I frequented forum that discussed royals and the nicknames they have for W&K laziness is hilarious..


Yes, that was it. They didn't show up to the final night of the Paralympics because they wanted to vacation in the South of France and lied to everyone saying they had prior commitments.

You'd think people would care that they were shirking their responsibilities, but all anyone talked about were the topless photos that outed them.


----------



## bag-mania

We won’t have long to wait for the book, it is supposedly due out in August (assuming anyone cares).  Don’t expect anything from it that we haven’t already heard, it was already being written before Megxit.


*How Meghan and Harry Will Tell Their Side of the Story*
Only days after lawyers for *Meghan Markle* faced off with the _Mail on Sunday_’s parent company in a remote pre-trial hearing, the tabloid came back with another big scoop on the duchess and her husband, *Prince Harry.* The pair have been collaborating with journalists *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand* on a biographical look at their last few years, provisionally called _Thoroughly Modern Royals: The Real World of Meghan and Harry._

The book’s two authors have had a fruitful relationship with Meghan and Harry, and have already gotten exclusive access to some of their events. Scobie, who writes for _Harper’s Bazaar_ and is a _Good Morning America_ correspondent, has covered Meghan for years, and was one of two journalists granted exclusive access to Meghan’s last private event as a member of the royal family in March. Durand, a contributor to _Elle,_ attended Meghan’s private event at a London school. According to the _Mail on Sunday,_ Meghan and Harry sat for interviews with Durand and Scobie before they announced their exit in January.

The book was reportedly set to come out in June, but its release date has been pushed to August due to the coronavirus crisis. Dey Street Books, the publisher who released *Jessica Simpson*’s _Open Book_ earlier this year, hasn’t confirmed the release yet, but their website does feature a cryptic page advertising a book by the authors “Eibocs” and “Dnarud”—Scobie and Durand backwards—with a release date of August 11.

According to a source with knowledge of the deal, the book will cover the period from Meghan and Harry’s introduction to their royal exit in March, including details about her deteriorating relationship with the Markle family. It will approach those years from the perspective of the couple and cast Meghan in a more flattering light than many tabloid stories have.

Their cooperation tracks with some of their motivations from stepping back from the royal family earlier this year. In January, they released statements complaining about the royal rota system, which didn’t always allow them to choose the journalists they worked with. In a documentary last fall, Meghan said she hadn’t been able to develop a “stiff upper lip” and expressed frustration at her inability to rebut stories that she saw as unfair.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/04/meghan-and-harry-book-their-side-of-the-story/amp


----------



## Jktgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> New day, new week, new initiative, new excitement, new way to copy existing programs, 3 years in the making.
> 
> =====
> HeadFIT
> For Life
> 
> _Prince Harry, who served in the army for ten years, said: "HeadFIT has been almost three years in the making, and I am extremely grateful for everyone who has been on this journey with us. Everyone who has worked on it, to create what we have today, should be incredibly proud and excited for the impact it will have.
> 
> "I've long believed the military community should lead the way for the rest of society. For too long we have been waiting for problems to arise and then reacting to them. HeadFIT is a proactive approach to mental fitness, focusing on our own potential to increase our performance, using proven methods in sport science._
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
> =====



Given Harry is still sobbing over his mom for any audience who will hear him, and the way his wife manhandles him, I don't think his mental illness approach is one to be recommended. For all their resources, BRF hasn't been able to sort him. Another 'Do as I say and not as I do' project.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> We won’t have long to wait for the book, it is supposedly due out in August (assuming anyone cares).  Don’t expect anything from it that we haven’t already heard, it was already being written before Megxit.
> 
> 
> *How Meghan and Harry Will Tell Their Side of the Story*
> Only days after lawyers for *Meghan Markle* faced off with the _Mail on Sunday_’s parent company in a remote pre-trial hearing, the tabloid came back with another big scoop on the duchess and her husband, *Prince Harry.* The pair have been collaborating with journalists *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand* on a biographical look at their last few years, provisionally called _Thoroughly Modern Royals: The Real World of Meghan and Harry._
> 
> The book’s two authors have had a fruitful relationship with Meghan and Harry, and have already gotten exclusive access to some of their events. Scobie, who writes for _Harper’s Bazaar_ and is a _Good Morning America_ correspondent, has covered Meghan for years, and was one of two journalists granted exclusive access to Meghan’s last private event as a member of the royal family in March. Durand, a contributor to _Elle,_ attended Meghan’s private event at a London school. According to the _Mail on Sunday,_ Meghan and Harry sat for interviews with Durand and Scobie before they announced their exit in January.
> 
> The book was reportedly set to come out in June, but its release date has been pushed to August due to the coronavirus crisis. Dey Street Books, the publisher who released *Jessica Simpson*’s _Open Book_ earlier this year, hasn’t confirmed the release yet, but their website does feature a cryptic page advertising a book by the authors “Eibocs” and “Dnarud”—Scobie and Durand backwards—with a release date of August 11.
> 
> According to a source with knowledge of the deal, the book will cover the period from Meghan and Harry’s introduction to their royal exit in March, including details about her deteriorating relationship with the Markle family. It will approach those years from the perspective of the couple and cast Meghan in a more flattering light than many tabloid stories have.
> 
> Their cooperation tracks with some of their motivations from stepping back from the royal family earlier this year. In January, they released statements complaining about the royal rota system, which didn’t always allow them to choose the journalists they worked with. In a documentary last fall, Meghan said she hadn’t been able to develop a “stiff upper lip” and expressed frustration at her inability to rebut stories that she saw as unfair.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/04/meghan-and-harry-book-their-side-of-the-story/amp


Of course it will cast Meghan in a more flattering light....hope it bombs....really what new can they tell anyone?....boo hoo, everyone was mean to me....boo hoo I lost my mom.....


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> We won’t have long to wait for the book, it is supposedly due out in August (assuming anyone cares).  Don’t expect anything from it that we haven’t already heard, it was already being written before Megxit.
> 
> 
> *How Meghan and Harry Will Tell Their Side of the Story*
> Only days after lawyers for *Meghan Markle* faced off with the _Mail on Sunday_’s parent company in a remote pre-trial hearing, the tabloid came back with another big scoop on the duchess and her husband, *Prince Harry.* The pair have been collaborating with journalists *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand* on a biographical look at their last few years, provisionally called _Thoroughly Modern Royals: The Real World of Meghan and Harry._
> 
> The book’s two authors have had a fruitful relationship with Meghan and Harry, and have already gotten exclusive access to some of their events. Scobie, who writes for _Harper’s Bazaar_ and is a _Good Morning America_ correspondent, has covered Meghan for years, and was one of two journalists granted exclusive access to Meghan’s last private event as a member of the royal family in March. Durand, a contributor to _Elle,_ attended Meghan’s private event at a London school. According to the _Mail on Sunday,_ Meghan and Harry sat for interviews with Durand and Scobie before they announced their exit in January.
> 
> The book was reportedly set to come out in June, but its release date has been pushed to August due to the coronavirus crisis. Dey Street Books, the publisher who released *Jessica Simpson*’s _Open Book_ earlier this year, hasn’t confirmed the release yet, but their website does feature a cryptic page advertising a book by the authors “Eibocs” and “Dnarud”—Scobie and Durand backwards—with a release date of August 11.
> 
> According to a source with knowledge of the deal, the book will cover the period from Meghan and Harry’s introduction to their royal exit in March, including details about her deteriorating relationship with the Markle family. It will approach those years from the perspective of the couple and cast Meghan in a more flattering light than many tabloid stories have.
> 
> Their cooperation tracks with some of their motivations from stepping back from the royal family earlier this year. In January, they released statements complaining about the royal rota system, which didn’t always allow them to choose the journalists they worked with. In a documentary last fall, Meghan said she hadn’t been able to develop a “stiff upper lip” and expressed frustration at her inability to rebut stories that she saw as unfair.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/04/meghan-and-harry-book-their-side-of-the-story/amp



That is SOON... what do they even have to write about that we haven't already seen? Her short time in the public eye has been so over-exposed as it is. Especially with that lawsuit trickling info out weekly, I think the only "new" spin she could add to it to make it interesting is some shade or dirt against the BRF. Who's going to buy her book if it's just more of the same ranting against the media that they already do now?


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> New day, new week, new initiative, new excitement, new way to copy existing programs, 3 years in the making.
> 
> =====
> HeadFIT
> For Life
> 
> _Prince Harry, who served in the army for ten years, said: "HeadFIT has been almost three years in the making, and I am extremely grateful for everyone who has been on this journey with us. Everyone who has worked on it, to create what we have today, should be incredibly proud and excited for the impact it will have._
> 
> _"I've long believed the military community should lead the way for the rest of society. For too long we have been waiting for problems to arise and then reacting to them. HeadFIT is a proactive approach to mental fitness, focusing on our own potential to increase our performance, using proven methods in sport science._
> https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...rmP9LAxq936beAo_-YIU2afh_8#Echobox=1587982690
> =====



I am so confused by this. Another passage says:

_"This is about optimisation of self. This is about being the best you can be. This is about gaining an advantage, whether facing an opponent or overcoming a challenging situation. This is about building resilience that will match that of most world class athletes and prepare you for everyday stress. To be HeadFIT, is to be at your peak performance."_

Is this about lifting your mental health or about upping your sportsmanship (as if this is new to the military community)? Can't tell whether this is supposed to send them to the therapist or a UFC match.


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> I am so confused by this. Another passage says:
> 
> _"This is about optimisation of self. This is about being the best you can be. This is about gaining an advantage, whether facing an opponent or overcoming a challenging situation. This is about building resilience that will match that of most world class athletes and prepare you for everyday stress. To be HeadFIT, is to be at your peak performance."_
> 
> Is this about lifting your mental health or about upping your sportsmanship (as if this is new to the military community)? Can't tell whether this is supposed to send them to the therapist or a UFC match.


What's confusing?
Words... toss them around, throw in a little bit of this and a little bit of that, and voilà!
Word Salad.  Mmmmm delicious! Nom nom nom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

"The pair have been collaborating with journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand on a biographical look at their last few years, provisionally called _Thoroughly Modern *Royals*: The Real World of Meghan and Harry."
_
Hmm, I am cornfused as my history prof used to say, thought H&M AGREED that they will not be trading-in on the word "Royals" in connection with themselves bc they were <le sob> going it alone in this big bad world <wink wink, daddy-in-law is on the hook for life wink wink GRIN>

As of January 18th 2020:
"Queen Elizabeth II, Harry's grandmother, summoned her immediate family last week to work out an acceptable agreement, which she disclosed Saturday in a rare personal message. ... The couple will stop using the *royal* title with their Duke and Duchess of Sussex names because they are no longer working members of the family."

How difficult is it to write a simple press release and not shoot yourself in the foot?

Or have I lost the thread of H&M's grifter life-story?


----------



## scrpo83

Madrose said:


> I remember this.  Didn't Kate get a lot of criticism for her lack of engagements?  Has she finally caught up to what's expected in her position?  I know she wanted to spend more time at home with her children.



 Kate stepped up a bit after Louis and DoE's retirement..i think anyone (almost anyone) will look good after Meghan's theatrics


----------



## PewPew

@Ericokore — Since you are a new member & posted duplicate posts with sketchy links (mainstream hosting sites & newspaper vids show up with a preview on TPF), people will be understandably wary of your link. Please consider editing your first post to include a more detailed description of what the video is about & the source for the site or article your link is directing to.



lalame said:


> That is SOON... what do they even have to write about that we haven't already seen? Her short time in the public eye has been so over-exposed as it is



Oh there’s going to be tons of new stuff. Of the fictional variety.

They are SO short-sighted to drop this nonsense now, mid-pandemic. Their 1-year QE2 review is going to be extremely interesting post-trial & this inspired work of fiction. It will be bold if it doesn’t have a different title in the UK (without “Royals”). Remember when H&M threw a tantrum when they were told they couldn’t use “royal” or “HRH”? Their peevish online statement said the the Queen cannot regulate the use of words outside the UK, but they graciously agree (*cough cough* to keep Daddy’s money, indirectly from taxpayers)


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> a biographical look at their last few years, provisionally called _Thoroughly Modern Royals: The Real World of Meghan and Harry._
> 
> ...advertising a book by the authors “Eibocs” and “Dnarud”—Scobie and Durand backwards—with a release date of August 11.



Hahaha! Gimmick “cryptic” marketing & *The Real World of Megan & Harry*?!” These “journalists” are ripping off the title/style of Shane Dawson’s wildly popular YouTube series which [wait for it]... documents the lives of internet personalities (Z-listers?). So classy!


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> Whatever happened to the latter?


Purseforum advisory?
Who knows?
They doxxed plenty of people. It was wild.
Some are still posting here.....DOXXEES and DOXXERS.
Anyways....




CarryOn2020 said:


> No more money, no more snark. For me, it was a sad day when they shut TWOP down. Lots of interesting, behind-the-scenes stuff on that site. The more we know, the more we understand. This is where H&M have stumbled. The more we learn about them, the more we understand how far they have misled us. The ‘do as I say, not as I do’ philosophy was never going to work. If not for this pandemic, I would not have taken the time to comment here because I really didn’t care for much of their behavior (in case ya couldn’t tell).  Thinking about them is not good for my _HeadFit_, but, and this is the important part, reading everyone’s thoughts has been cathartic as well as entertaining.
> Applause, blessings, hugs and kisses for all of us.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_Without_Pity


Love that site. Got spanked. Got banned too many times to count.
Great infos. Great writers.
Tons of behind the scenes participants...


As far as the book, those two are hoping to start the brand and build from there....
Who wants to read a book about nothing?


----------



## LibbyRuth

kristinlorraine said:


> Hmmm....so she’s really jealous of Kate
> View attachment 4718415



She's right ... The palace favors Kate.  It's because Kate is married to a man that will someday be king.  Meghan is not. That's how the palace works.  It was fiction, but it reminds me of the scene in The Crown where Phillip is fed up and complains that people treat his son better than they do him and the Queen says "yes of course, he'll be King some day".  It's the culture of the palace, and there were plenty of ways for Meghan to understand that before she got into all this!


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> As far as the book, those two are hoping to start the brand and build from there....
> Who wants to read a book about nothing?


Bingo! I wouldn't be surprised it's really a vanity publishing project.


----------



## Chagall

LibbyRuth said:


> She's right ... The palace favors Kate.  It's because Kate is married to a man that will someday be king.  Meghan is not. That's how the palace works.  It was fiction, but it reminds me of the scene in The Crown where Phillip is fed up and complains that people treat his son better than they do him and the Queen says "yes of course, he'll be King some day".  It's the culture of the palace, and there were plenty of ways for Meghan to understand that before she got into all this!


Can’t remember the details but it was floated around that in the beginning MM was afforded a lot more privileges than Kate  and apparently Kate was jealous. They bent over backwards for her.


----------



## needlv

LibbyRuth said:


> She's right ... The palace favors Kate.  It's because Kate is married to a man that will someday be king.  Meghan is not. That's how the palace works.  It was fiction, but it reminds me of the scene in The Crown where Phillip is fed up and complains that people treat his son better than they do him and the Queen says "yes of course, he'll be King some day".  It's the culture of the palace, and there were plenty of ways for Meghan to understand that before she got into all this!



I don’t think that’s quite right - Kate was absolutely flamed by the press for years - even had topless photos published when she was on private property!!  She was called all sorts of names (Waity Katie?) etc. but just stuck it out and kept going.  

MM just couldn’t deal with all the criticism.  Initially it wasn’t “fair” criticism from the press but when MM made several missteps after that - she cannot continue to complain about being called out for it!


----------



## PewPew

Continuing the with the celeb go-to-method for reputation rehab (pics & projects involving animals or kids!), Just-call-me-Harry-because-I’m-independent-from-the-BRF will be introducing a special episode of Thomas the Tank featuring animations of... his Royal Dad & Granny. Such independence. Much wow.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/entertainment/prince-harry-thomas-friends-scli-intl/index.html


----------



## LibbyRuth

needlv said:


> I don’t think that’s quite right - Kate was absolutely flamed by the press for years - even had topless photos published when she was on private property!!  She was called all sorts of names (Waity Katie?) etc. but just stuck it out and kept going.
> 
> MM just couldn’t deal with all the criticism.  Initially it wasn’t “fair” criticism from the press but when MM made several missteps after that - she cannot continue to complain about being called out for it!



In terms of the media treatment of both, I would agree with you that Kate was savaged as well. That said, with a large portion of the attacks on Meghan coming from a racist foundation, I'm not sure I'd compare the two as equal. That aside, what I was commenting on was a belief that the _palace _favored Kate over Meghan - not the press.  Meghan did get special treatments that Kate did not get early on - being invited to Christmas when she was just a fiancee, the Queen taking her out for an engagement much earlier than she did for Kate. Then, things normalized and went back to treating them based on rank.  And based on rank, Kate is more important so it would not surprise me in the slightest if she was given favorable treatment and that Meghan being both American and self-centered did not understand that it was about rank and not personal.


----------



## mrsinsyder

When was that Thomas the Tank video filmed? It actually doesn't look like a hostage video like his others.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> When was that Thomas the Tank video filmed? It actually doesn't look like a hostage video like his others.


I think it was January when he was here in the UK and she'd pissed off back to Canada.


----------



## doni

marietouchet said:


> Meghan says changes would've been made if Kate Middleton was bashed
> https://mol.im/a/8246897
> And the friends keep on spilling the beans to the tabloids ... this is from an INSIDER ... and of course, not from H&M since they don’t cooperate with the Daily Mail
> PS hmmm I need a clarification ... OK the dynamic duo does not give interviews to the DM , I got that, but does their new policy allow for them to sanction their friends talking to the DM ? Or does the policy of non cooperation mean that they actively discourage friends interaction with the press ?


If this is true, what I find extraordinary is that, first, she believes the Queen of a ********ic country can shut the free press just like that, with a click of her fingers, and second, that she would or should exercise such power to stop malicious but ultimately harmless (she was not being accused of child abused was she?) gossip about the wife of a second rate royal with no institutional role...

I mean, isn’t she an American? with a degree on international studies to boot?
Puzzling.


----------



## bag-mania

At least we solved the mystery of Omid Scobie's shameless butt-kissing. The book deal was worked out last year before they announced they were leaving. If Harry and Meghan's reputations are shattered beyond repair before it comes out it won't sell and Scobie will get fewer royalties (which is the only "royal" that matters in the story). These past several months of Scobie writing one puff piece after another exaggerating Meghan's importance was his way of protecting his project. Now that I know his intentions are 100% self-serving, Scobie's place as one of Meghan's minions makes total sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

doni said:


> If this is true, what I find extraordinary is that, first, she believes the Queen of a ********ic country can shut the free press just like that, with a click of her fingers, and second, that she would or should exercise such power to stop malicious but ultimately harmless (she was not being accused of child abused was she?) gossip about the wife of a second rate royal with no institutional role...
> 
> I mean, isn’t she an American? with a degree on international studies to boot?
> Puzzling.


It is all driven by her need for attention, imo.
She can’t be that ignorant, can she?


----------



## 1LV

She is the epitome of someone who can’t get out of their own way.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> That is SOON... what do they even have to write about that we haven't already seen? Her short time in the public eye has been so over-exposed as it is. Especially with that lawsuit trickling info out weekly, I think the only "new" spin she could add to it to make it interesting is some shade or dirt against the BRF. Who's going to buy her book if it's just more of the same ranting against the media that they already do now?


I wouldn't even take that book out of the library for free, never mind enrich that grifter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't even take that book out of the library for free, never mind enrich that grifter


Besides that I'd pull my hair out reading how the angelic MM only meant well but was oh so wronged when at this point I feel she's truly disturbed and malicious and everyone but Harry and a handful of dense stans can see it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides that I'd pull my hair out reading how the angelic MM only meant well but was oh so wronged when at this point I feel she's truly disturbed and malicious and everyone but Harry and a handful of dense stans can see it.


the question is how many stans does she have.  because I don't think anyone else is going to buy this book.


----------



## bag-mania

In a year I expect to see the book in the "$5 and less" book bin in obscure places like supermarkets and office supply stores.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> In a year I expect to see the book in the "$5 and less" book bin in obscure places like supermarkets and office supply stores.


how about the 99 cents store?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> In a year I expect to see the book in the "$5 and less" book bin in obscure places like supermarkets and office supply stores.


They'll do like they did the Vogue cover and produce very few then say IT SOLD OUT IMMEDIATELY


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> They'll do like they did the Vogue cover and produce very few then say IT SOLD OUT IMMEDIATELY



Or they will buy them all themselves and give them away to various charities as "inspirational gifts."


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Or they will buy them all themselves and give them away to various charities as "inspirational gifts."


at least when she was a suitcase girl she was working (not saying that was hard work compared to what most people do)


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Or they will buy them all themselves and give them away to various charities as "inspirational gifts."


Aka vanity publishing!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like an ebook - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/51824432-thoroughly-modern-royals
The title is a rip off of the movie Thoroughly Modern Millie.  The arrogance continues. Yuck!
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062362/






chicinthecity777 said:


> Aka vanity publishing!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like an ebook - https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/51824432-thoroughly-modern-royals
> The title is a rip off of the movie Thoroughly Modern Millie.  The arrogance continues. Yuck!
> https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062362/
> 
> View attachment 4719107


oh please


----------



## CarryOn2020

_The MailOnline which calls the book a ‘reputation management operation,’ alleges that it was initially intended for publication around Archie’s birth last spring.
https://www.tatler.com/article/harr...rld-of-harry-and-meghan-royal-family-concerns

_
They planned this nonsense from the beginning. So disrespectful to so many that they fleeced the Brits out of all that money. Now I understand why Chels looked upset at the wedding. It had nothing to do with ‘wanting him back’ — he had told her his plan. SMH, such a farce.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> At least we solved the mystery of Omid Scobie's shameless butt-kissing. The book deal was worked out last year before they announced they were leaving. If Harry and Meghan's reputations are shattered beyond repair before it comes out it won't sell and Scobie will get fewer royalties (which is the only "royal" that matters in the story). These past several months of Scobie writing one puff piece after another exaggerating Meghan's importance was his way of protecting his project. Now that I know his intentions are 100% self-serving, Scobie's place as one of Meghan's minions makes total sense.


It also makes total sense why they disappeared out of the country for months - they wanted to talk freely without royal staff around (who may be more loyal to the Queen than them) and would hear what they were up to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The MailOnline which calls the book a ‘reputation management operation,’ alleges that it was initially intended for publication around Archie’s birth last spring.
> https://www.tatler.com/article/harr...rld-of-harry-and-meghan-royal-family-concerns
> 
> _
> They planned this nonsense from the beginning. So disrespectful to so many that they fleeced the Brits out of all that money. Now I understand why Chels looked upset at the wedding. It had nothing to do with ‘wanting him back’ — he had told her his plan. SMH, such a farce.


so you think H told his ex about his plan?  interesting theory but maybe a bit of a stretch


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> We won’t have long to wait for the book, it is supposedly due out in August (assuming anyone cares).  Don’t expect anything from it that we haven’t already heard, it was already being written before Megxit.
> 
> 
> *How Meghan and Harry Will Tell Their Side of the Story*
> Only days after lawyers for *Meghan Markle* faced off with the _Mail on Sunday_’s parent company in a remote pre-trial hearing, the tabloid came back with another big scoop on the duchess and her husband, *Prince Harry.* The pair have been collaborating with journalists *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand* on a biographical look at their last few years, provisionally called _Thoroughly Modern Royals: The Real World of Meghan and Harry._
> 
> The book’s two authors have had a fruitful relationship with Meghan and Harry, and have already gotten exclusive access to some of their events. Scobie, who writes for _Harper’s Bazaar_ and is a _Good Morning America_ correspondent, has covered Meghan for years, and was one of two journalists granted exclusive access to Meghan’s last private event as a member of the royal family in March. Durand, a contributor to _Elle,_ attended Meghan’s private event at a London school. According to the _Mail on Sunday,_ Meghan and Harry sat for interviews with Durand and Scobie before they announced their exit in January.
> 
> The book was reportedly set to come out in June, but its release date has been pushed to August due to the coronavirus crisis. Dey Street Books, the publisher who released *Jessica Simpson*’s _Open Book_ earlier this year, hasn’t confirmed the release yet, but their website does feature a cryptic page advertising a book by the authors “Eibocs” and “Dnarud”—Scobie and Durand backwards—with a release date of August 11.
> 
> According to a source with knowledge of the deal, the book will cover the period from Meghan and Harry’s introduction to their royal exit in March, including details about her deteriorating relationship with the Markle family. It will approach those years from the perspective of the couple and cast Meghan in a more flattering light than many tabloid stories have.
> 
> Their cooperation tracks with some of their motivations from stepping back from the royal family earlier this year. In January, they released statements complaining about the royal rota system, which didn’t always allow them to choose the journalists they worked with. In a documentary last fall, Meghan said she hadn’t been able to develop a “stiff upper lip” and expressed frustration at her inability to rebut stories that she saw as unfair.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/04/meghan-and-harry-book-their-side-of-the-story/amp


You know how a lot of magazines, right before summer put out a list of "Beach Reads"?? .. well, this one would be in the "*BARF Reads*"  list (IMO)!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Or they will buy them all themselves and give them away to various charities as "inspirational gifts."



Don’t people do that to get on the NYT bestsellers list fairly regularly? She’ll definitely do it.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Sol Ryan said:


> I admit, I had the biggest crush on Pippa after that wedding... still sorta do...


Me too  I think she looked perfect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> so you think H told his ex about his plan?  interesting theory but maybe a bit of a stretch



_But maybe, fans shouldn't have been so surprised. In the past, Prince Harry has publicly voiced thoughts about giving up his "HRH." Back in 2017, Harry spoke to the Mail on Sunday about a time when he "wanted out" of the royal family, to instead pursue an "ordinary life."_
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a30447185/prince-harry-non-royal-life-hint/
He and Chels supposedly are bff, so she’s a logical person for him to confide him, imo. Also, I wonder if this explains why some of his pre-M friends distanced themselves from this ‘oh-so-modern’ and woke couple, in addition to these 2 are just annoying people. If their loyalty is to the crown, they would not approve of H’s desire to bail. They have too much to lose while H apparently knew his free ‘daddy’ ride was a sure thing.  That’s always the question — who knew what when. I feel it’s all been a farce.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the book is for “the greater good of the people”?  Gee, thanks, H.
Why o why did he go thru with a royal wedding show? 
And why hasn’t he given up the HRH? Seems like he ought to ‘man up’.

June 25, 2017.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40396449 
_Last week __Newsweek magazine published an interview with the prince in which he said no one in the Royal Family wanted the throne.
"We are not doing this for ourselves but for the greater good of the people," he said.
"Is there any one of the Royal Family who wants to be king or queen? I don't think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time."
Harry has also said he has thought about the future direction of the Royal Family.
"We want to make sure the monarchy lasts and are passionate about what it stands for.
"But it can't go on as it has done under the Queen. There will be changes and pressure to get them right. 
"Things are moving so fast, especially because of social media, so we are involved in modernising the monarchy."_


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides that I'd pull my hair out reading how the angelic MM only meant well but was oh so wronged when at this point I feel she's truly disturbed and malicious and everyone but Harry and a handful of dense stans can see it.



But do you want to read about the plight of the poor and disenfranchised - not from a journalist, sociologist, economist, or aid worker, but the Duchess of Sussex?


----------



## lalame

You have to give it to Omid... to be that young and now the media favorite of royalty ("royalty") plus soon-to-be NYT best seller I'm sure. He sure hustled his way to get there... not too different than MM, so I can see where the attraction was.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> _But maybe, fans shouldn't have been so surprised. In the past, Prince Harry has publicly voiced thoughts about giving up his "HRH." Back in 2017, Harry spoke to the Mail on Sunday about a time when he "wanted out" of the royal family, to instead pursue an "ordinary life."_
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a30447185/prince-harry-non-royal-life-hint/
> He and Chels supposedly are bff, so she’s a logical person for him to confide him, imo. Also, I wonder if this explains why some of his pre-M friends distanced themselves from this ‘oh-so-modern’ and woke couple, in addition to these 2 are just annoying people. If their loyalty is to the crown, they would not approve of H’s desire to bail. They have too much to lose while H apparently knew his free ‘daddy’ ride was a sure thing.  That’s always the question — who knew what when. I feel it’s all been a farce.


Couldn't agree with you more, and Chelsy not only came from $$$ in Zim, but she went to law school (barrister) and has a successful Jewelry business .. in other words, she's no dummy!  

While I think Charles will continue to support those 2 grifters (given that Harry is his son), I do wonder if he will significantly reduce the $ that he gives them.  If you think about it, with the way those 2 want to live out here in LA-LA land, they will be hurting pretty darn quick.  If their rent is $10k per month, and all the other expenses (security - so ridiculous), they are going to blow through that $$$ very quickly.  I'm not sure that Wills will be as generous, given everything that Harry has done to the BRF to-date.


----------



## LizzieBennett

CeeJay said:


> Couldn't agree with you more, and Chelsy not only came from $$$ in Zim, but she went to law school (barrister) and has a successful Jewelry business .. in other words, she's no dummy!
> 
> While I think Charles will continue to support those 2 grifters (given that Harry is his son), I do wonder if he will significantly reduce the $ that he gives them.  If you think about it, with the way those 2 want to live out here in LA-LA land, they will be hurting pretty darn quick.  If their rent is $10k per month, and all the other expenses (security - so ridiculous), they are going to blow through that $$$ very quickly.  I'm not sure that Wills will be as generous, given everything that Harry has done to the BRF to-date.


I really like her jewelry line!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> But do you want to read about the plight of the poor and disenfranchised - not from a journalist, sociologist, economist, or aid worker, but the Duchess of Sussex?


ARRRGGGGHHHH   .. like she even knows, puhleeze!  This BS that she grew up "so poor" is nonsense!  The area that she grew up in Woodland Hills (near a top-notch golf club) is hardly a sleezy part of LA!  She went to some of the finest schools here, and then went to University .. with her father paying!  So, I really don't think she can say she grew up poor .. go ahead SMeggy .. just try because you will be TOASTED out here!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The MailOnline which calls the book a ‘reputation management operation,’ alleges that it was initially intended for publication around Archie’s birth last spring.
> https://www.tatler.com/article/harr...rld-of-harry-and-meghan-royal-family-concerns
> 
> _
> They planned this nonsense from the beginning. So disrespectful to so many that they fleeced the Brits out of all that money. Now I understand why Chels looked upset at the wedding. It had nothing to do with ‘wanting him back’ — he had told her his plan. SMH, such a farce.


Right? This latest development re timing of the book really leaves a bad taste! They are literally scammers who extracted a very large sum of money from BRF and the taxpayers for their wedding while they were planning abandoning the country! Truly truly disgusting!

*** Edited for grammar.


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> Couldn't agree with you more, and Chelsy not only came from $$$ in Zim, but she went to law school (barrister) and has a successful Jewelry business .. in other words, she's no dummy!
> 
> While I think Charles will continue to support those 2 grifters (given that Harry is his son), I do wonder if he will significantly reduce the $ that he gives them.  If you think about it, with the way those 2 want to live out here in LA-LA land, they will be hurting pretty darn quick.  If their rent is $10k per month, and all the other expenses (security - so ridiculous), they are going to blow through that $$$ very quickly.  I'm not sure that Wills will be as generous, given everything that Harry has done to the BRF to-date.



I don’t think the kinds of houses she’s looking at are $10k/month. More like $25-30k... A one bedroom in the nice neighborhoods in LA is probably >$3k...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

What a great picture.

"Prince Harry is set to introduce a very special Thomas & Friends episode for the 75th Anniversary on Netflix.
The 35-year-old Duke of Sussex recorded a special message for the animated children’s program.
The special episode, called “Thomas & Friends: The Royal Engine,” features animations of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles as a child."


----------



## limom

Fool, he had to ruin Thomas the train engine too!
This people are so arrogant. I don’t need this barely literate man to read to my child.
Netflix is a company run by dimwits. They will give a deal to any celebs for whatever reason...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

ccbaggirl89 said:


> “Thomas & Friends: The Royal Engine,” *features animations of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles* as a child."


Hmmmm .. did he ask QEII and Charles' permission to animate them???


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Fool, he had to ruin Thomas the train engine too!
> This people are so arrogant. I don’t need this barely literate man to read to my child.
> Netflix is a company run by dimwits. They will give a deal to any celebs for whatever reason...





CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. did he ask QEII and Charles' permission to animate them???



There are many things to be upset with Harry about, but fortunately Thomas the Tank Engine isn't one of them. It looks like he was still working for the royal family when he did it.

There is a long history between the series and the royal family, going back to Elizabeth's coronation (that's when she first became a character).
Who knew Thomas had his own Wiki?
https://ttte.fandom.com/wiki/Elizabeth_II


----------



## mdcx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> What a great picture.
> 
> "Prince Harry is set to introduce a very special Thomas & Friends episode for the 75th Anniversary on Netflix.
> The 35-year-old Duke of Sussex recorded a special message for the animated children’s program.
> The special episode, called “Thomas & Friends: The Royal Engine,” features animations of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles as a child."
> 
> 
> View attachment 4719243



Looks a bit like the seedy drunk uncle everyone keeps an eye on.
As for the book, I will flick through it in the bargain bookstore or get a free Kindle sample. I'm sure it will be an embarrassing slop of pity-party, wokeness, look at me, poor victim of racism, sexism, denied my tiara of choice, punished for not following the "dracion" rules of the BRF, and ultimately dissolve into a giant dig at Kate.
I assume she thinks it's going to be her version of Michelle *****'s 'Becoming'. Lol.
(Harry will get 1/4 of a chapter imo! This is all about Meghan, baby!)


----------



## lalame

We won't even have to read the book... I'm sure all the "bombshells" (as they're ALREADY being called) will trickle out in the press over a series of weeks... like she will have planned it...


----------



## Lounorada

limom said:


> Fool, he had to ruin Thomas the train engine too!
> This people are so arrogant.* I don’t need this barely literate man to read to my child.*
> Netflix is a company run by dimwits. They will give a deal to any celebs for whatever reason...


The bold part just made me laugh out loud  so funny


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Looks a bit like the seedy drunk uncle everyone keeps an eye on.
> As for the book, I will flick through it in the bargain bookstore or get a free Kindle sample. I'm sure it will be an embarrassing slop of pity-party, wokeness, look at me, poor victim of racism, sexism, denied my tiara of choice, punished for not following the "dracion" rules of the BRF, and ultimately dissolve into a giant dig at Kate.
> I assume she thinks it's going to be her version of Michelle *****'s 'Becoming'. Lol.
> (Harry will get 1/4 of a chapter imo! This is all about Meghan, baby!)


if she thinks she is anything like Michelle *****, she is really delusional


----------



## Katel

ccbaggirl89 said:


> What a great picture.
> 
> "Prince Harry is set to introduce a very special Thomas & Friends episode for the 75th Anniversary on Netflix.
> The 35-year-old Duke of Sussex recorded a special message for the animated children’s program.
> The special episode, called “Thomas & Friends: The Royal Engine,” features animations of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles as a child."
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4719243




aaand of course there’s her grabby controlling domineering hand at ~1 minute 






bag-mania said:


> There are many things to be upset with Harry about, but fortunately Thomas the Tank Engine isn't one of them. It looks like he was still working for the royal family when he did it.
> 
> There is a long history between the series and the royal family, going back to Elizabeth's coronation (that's when she first became a character).
> Who knew Thomas had his own Wiki?
> https://ttte.fandom.com/wiki/Elizabeth_II



thank God for one good Thomas the Tank Engine in a sea of limpy Harrys.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> if she thinks she is anything like Michelle *****, she is really delusional


I'm not even sure they could have a real conversation beyond " did you enjoy the  tacos that we both ate remotely?"


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I'm not even sure they could have a real conversation beyond " did you enjoy the  tacos that we both ate remotely?"


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> We won't even have to read the book... I'm sure all the "bombshells" (as they're ALREADY being called) will trickle out in the press over a series of weeks... like she will have planned it...


Seriously??? .. BOMBSHELLS???  What idiots ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Seriously??? .. BOMBSHELLS???  What idiots ..


even if they do find some salicious thing to say about Andrew or whatever, it would come out in the media so no need to read the whole stupid book


----------



## lalame

Anyone see this interesting article about Meghan and her ex-husband? Some of the interesting bits:

_Meanwhile, three weeks before the wedding, Trevor took part in a podcast called Schmoes Know in which he discussed his career with two friends. During the show, one of his friends suggested inviting Meghan on, to which Trevor quipped: “I'll talk to her," before adding, "she’s a big deal, f*** off!”

By this point, Suits had already been picked up for a second season and Meghan was back in Toronto filming. She watched the podcast on a livestream and could see Trevor swigging from an engraved hip flask, a gift from her, during the show. Trevor joked that his fiance texted him to “put that flask down, it looks incredibly unprofessional".

Royal biographer Andrew Morton wrote that he was “very different to his bride-to-be who, as her former colleagues on Deal or No Deal observed, was always very self-contained and considered”.

Mr Morton added: “The podcast hinted at their personality differences, Trevor loose-lipped, unconcerned, carefree, a striking counterpart to Meghan, who was archly protective of ‘brand Meghan’, always keen to project an air of sophistication and style.
_


----------



## bellecate

Katel said:


> aaand of course there’s her grabby controlling domineering hand at ~1 minute
> 
> View attachment 4719342
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thank God for one good Thomas the Tank Engine in a sea of limpy Harrys.



It's like she wants to pull him down, he's getting some of the attention which should be all on her.


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> “Always complain, always explain” - MM


Or "Always complain, always Megxplain".


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> even if they do find some salicious thing to say about Andrew or whatever, it would come out in the media so no need to read the whole stupid book



They won’t dare say anything revealing or too negative about the family. As long as they are still dependent on Charles for cash they are going to avoid any criticism that might get them cut off.

The book will be a long, boring love letter congratulating Meghan and Harry on all the amazing plans they had to modernize the monarchy but, sadly, they were not able to implement because everyone was so mean and unfair to Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> They won’t dare say anything revealing or too negative about the family. As long as they are still dependent on Charles for cash they are going to avoid any criticism that might get them cut off.
> 
> The book will be a long, boring love letter congratulating Meghan and Harry on all the amazing plans they had to modernize the monarchy but, sadly, they were not able to implement because everyone was so mean and unfair to Meghan.



... so now they have no choice but to frantically work behind the scenes to save the mental health of the entire world through Archewell, except they don't want to talk about those plans yet so as not to distract from the COVID response (or from their numerous pap walks and announcements about the lack of announcement they'll make to tabloids or the upcoming announcement they'll make about Archie or any other announcement that will keep them in the news on a daily basis, since now they're finally out of the clutches of the nasty royals and can truly maintain their privacy in pap-land).


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder how Meghan feels about this - from Urban Dictionary 
Maybe all attention is good atttention?
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Meghan Markle


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> I wonder how Meghan feels about this - from Urban Dictionary
> Maybe all attention is good atttention?
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Meghan Markle



Oh my - scrolling down and reading the second one from the top was a very interesting read!


----------



## Madrose

sdkitty said:


> I wonder how Meghan feels about this - from Urban Dictionary
> Maybe all attention is good atttention?
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Meghan Markle



  Gasp!  I prefer Markled.


----------



## PewPew

Madrose said:


> Gasp!  I prefer Markled.



Same, but my friend pointed out that the Americans we know wouldn’t know who/what Markle is without saying her full name. Her “independent profile” isn’t as high as she likes to believe, even with Just-call-me-Harry in tow.

But that will change since they’re hustling hard for attention between the Covid insta-fails, covid paps walks, announcing their new company during a pandemic, poaching a Gates fundraiser, the trial, elephant movie press using HRH, Harry’s train cartoon, Omid “biography,” M’s children’s and cookbooks, mental health lecturing, and umpteen press releases on how they are amazing & working hard, but the media is evil, so they’re going to go silent...until tomorrow.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mdcx said:


> Looks a bit like the* seedy drunk uncle *everyone keeps an eye on.
> As for the book, I will flick through it in the bargain bookstore or get a free Kindle sample. I'm sure it will be an embarrassing slop of pity-party, wokeness, look at me, poor victim of racism, sexism, denied my tiara of choice, punished for not following the "dracion" rules of the BRF, and ultimately dissolve into a giant dig at Kate.
> I assume she thinks it's going to be her version of Michelle *****'s 'Becoming'. Lol.
> (Harry will get 1/4 of a chapter imo! This is all about Meghan, baby!)



*mdcx*, completely concur with your post and you took the words out of my mouth before I could fling them out into the universe - kinda what I would like to do to these two grifters ~ toss them both out, ie #DuchessofWindsor2020 and her drunk #UncleHarry, contributions go directly to their GoFundMe page 
♥️


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Having an acute insomnia attack this evening and yes, that is moi doing cardio at 1am

Not to leave any stone unturned, here is one hellava interesting theory:
https://blindgossip.com/the-second-baby/#more-100388

“She said that she will not get pregnant again until she settles into her new home.

That is not true.

In fact, she is already pregnant!

There’s something important you need to know, though.

Her famous husband is not the father!

You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile.

He knew that he wanted to be a father, but he wanted a baby that was part of his bloodline.

He had to seek out a sperm donor within his own family.

The most logical choice was his brother.

However, that presented some quirky issues.

While he initially wanted to keep this private, it was a significant lineage issue that necessitated involving senior members of the family. A family meeting took place, and they unanimously decided that [another family member] would be a better choice.

The chosen family member was handsome, fertile, and had no health issues......

Who was it?

His uncle.....No, the actress did not sleep with the uncle! Don’t be foolish. This was all done in a lab. The actress’ eggs were harvested and fertilized with the uncles’ sperm.

Despite the conspiracy theories, there was no surrogate involved. The actress carried and give birth to the first baby.

Furthermore, despite the turmoil that surrounded the uncle, he will be the biological father of the second baby......The second baby will be announced next month. You’ve already met the first baby.

So, in case you were wondering why the family keeps the uncle so tightly within the family fold… and why the couple chose to move away from the family right after the uncle was exposed… and why the couple still has a home to come back to that is close to the rest of the family… wonder no more!....,.
[Optional] Do you think the couple will go back to live near his family?

*SOLVED!*






Actress: Meghan Markle
Husband: Prince Harry
Uncle: Prince Andrew

Yes, this is all very shocking!.....”


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> It's like she wants to pull him down, he's getting some of the attention which should be all on her.


I think he's waiting for the other guests to come to the seats to sit down before he does, like any person with good manners should.
She is so annoying.


----------



## poopsie

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Having an acute insomnia attack this evening and yes, that is moi doing cardio at 1am
> 
> Not to leave any stone unturned but here is one hellava interesting theory:
> https://blindgossip.com/the-second-baby/#more-100388



It was an April Fool ------- and a heckuva good one 

wasn't it???????????????


----------



## beautymagpie

bellecate said:


> It's like she wants to pull him down, he's getting some of the attention which should be all on her.



Or she’s signalling for a trucker to honk their horn.


----------



## Tootsie17

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Having an acute insomnia attack this evening and yes, that is moi doing cardio at 1am
> 
> Not to leave any stone unturned, here is one hellava interesting theory:
> https://blindgossip.com/the-second-baby/#more-100388
> 
> “She said that she will not get pregnant again until she settles into her new home.
> 
> That is not true.
> 
> In fact, she is already pregnant!
> 
> There’s something important you need to know, though.
> 
> Her famous husband is not the father!
> 
> You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile.
> 
> He knew that he wanted to be a father, but he wanted a baby that was part of his bloodline.
> 
> He had to seek out a sperm donor within his own family.
> 
> The most logical choice was his brother.
> 
> However, that presented some quirky issues.
> 
> While he initially wanted to keep this private, it was a significant lineage issue that necessitated involving senior members of the family. A family meeting took place, and they unanimously decided that [another family member] would be a better choice.
> 
> The chosen family member was handsome, fertile, and had no health issues......
> 
> Who was it?
> 
> His uncle.....No, the actress did not sleep with the uncle! Don’t be foolish. This was all done in a lab. The actress’ eggs were harvested and fertilized with the uncles’ sperm.
> 
> Despite the conspiracy theories, there was no surrogate involved. The actress carried and give birth to the first baby.
> 
> Furthermore, despite the turmoil that surrounded the uncle, he will be the biological father of the second baby......The second baby will be announced next month. You’ve already met the first baby.
> 
> So, in case you were wondering why the family keeps the uncle so tightly within the family fold… and why the couple chose to move away from the family right after the uncle was exposed… and why the couple still has a home to come back to that is close to the rest of the family… wonder no more!....,.
> [Optional] Do you think the couple will go back to live near his family?
> 
> *SOLVED!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actress: Meghan Markle
> Husband: Prince Harry
> Uncle: Prince Andrew
> 
> Yes, this is all very shocking!.....”



All I can say is, "Wow!" 
Ok, that was a good April Fool's joke.


----------



## marietouchet

Deleted garbled post , can’t find referenced post any more


----------



## bag-mania

"You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile."

I think they edited that blind item since it first came out. I could swear that when I first read it weeks ago it went on to describe how Harry was made infertile. Does anyone else remember that?


----------



## Annawakes

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Having an acute insomnia attack this evening and yes, that is moi doing cardio at 1am
> 
> Not to leave any stone unturned, here is one hellava interesting theory:
> https://blindgossip.com/the-second-baby/#more-100388
> 
> “She said that she will not get pregnant again until she settles into her new home.
> 
> That is not true.
> 
> In fact, she is already pregnant!
> 
> There’s something important you need to know, though.
> 
> Her famous husband is not the father!
> 
> You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile.
> 
> He knew that he wanted to be a father, but he wanted a baby that was part of his bloodline.
> 
> He had to seek out a sperm donor within his own family.
> 
> The most logical choice was his brother.
> 
> However, that presented some quirky issues.
> 
> While he initially wanted to keep this private, it was a significant lineage issue that necessitated involving senior members of the family. A family meeting took place, and they unanimously decided that [another family member] would be a better choice.
> 
> The chosen family member was handsome, fertile, and had no health issues......
> 
> Who was it?
> 
> His uncle.....No, the actress did not sleep with the uncle! Don’t be foolish. This was all done in a lab. The actress’ eggs were harvested and fertilized with the uncles’ sperm.
> 
> Despite the conspiracy theories, there was no surrogate involved. The actress carried and give birth to the first baby.
> 
> Furthermore, despite the turmoil that surrounded the uncle, he will be the biological father of the second baby......The second baby will be announced next month. You’ve already met the first baby.
> 
> So, in case you were wondering why the family keeps the uncle so tightly within the family fold… and why the couple chose to move away from the family right after the uncle was exposed… and why the couple still has a home to come back to that is close to the rest of the family… wonder no more!....,.
> [Optional] Do you think the couple will go back to live near his family?
> 
> *SOLVED!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actress: Meghan Markle
> Husband: Prince Harry
> Uncle: Prince Andrew
> 
> Yes, this is all very shocking!.....”


This is so so so gross.  Is it true?!?!?

eta Nvm, I see it’s an April fools joke haha!


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> "You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile."
> 
> I think they edited that blind item since it first came out. I could swear that when I first read it weeks ago it went on to describe how Harry was made infertile. Does anyone else remember that?



Yeah I saw that. Something about hair or a band?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

beautymagpie said:


> Yeah I saw that. Something about hair or a band?



Yes! It was a crude and crazy story about Harry getting stinking drunk and putting one of Meghan's hair bands around his balls and forgetting to take it off until the next day. Blind Gossip made it sound like Meghan was responsible for castrating Harry literally as well as metaphorically. They may have decided they had gone too far and removed that part of the item later.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Yes! It was a crude and crazy story about Harry getting stinking drunk and putting one of Meghan's hair bands around his balls and forgetting to take it off until the next day. Blind Gossip made it sound like Meghan was responsible for castrating Harry literally as well as metaphorically. They may have decided they had gone too far and removed that part of the item later.



The whole thing should be deleted.  There is enough to be said about these two without resorting to outrageously crude fictional blind items.  smdh


----------



## mrsinsyder

I figured she’d try to show up the Cambridge anniversary but wow she is so predictable.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If I hadn’t seen the pics last week, I would be sure she is pregnant from that pic. 

And Meg, your Little House in the Prairie hairdo isn’t fooling anyone.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I figured she’d try to show up the Cambridge anniversary but wow she is so predictable.
> 
> View attachment 4719814


So predictable


----------



## 1LV

For all the glam and glitz, for all the opportunities, for everything she has had laid at her feet it must suck to be her.  Her desperation and insecurity is palpable.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> You have to give it to Omid... to be that young and now the media favorite of royalty ("royalty") plus soon-to-be NYT best seller I'm sure. He sure hustled his way to get there... not too different than MM, so I can see where the attraction was.


He will be Markled one day, he can count on it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

kemilia said:


> He will be Markled one day, he can count on it.


He’ll have made a lot of money in the meantime though


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> He will be Markled one day, he can count on it.



It will happen within five minutes of the book getting bad reviews.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The video:


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mrsinsyder said:


> I figured she’d try to show up the Cambridge anniversary but wow she is so predictable.
> 
> View attachment 4719814


For someone so concerned with her image and social climbing I'm very surprised she cares so little for her overall outward appearance. She doesn't present herself in the best way, ever.


----------



## rose60610

1LV said:


> For all the glam and glitz, for all the opportunities, for everything she has had laid at her feet it must suck to be her.  Her desperation and insecurity is palpable.



I couldn't agree more. Looking back, it seems she was on a "search and destroy" mission. Like you said, for all the glam etc and then to throw it away like it isn't "good enough"?  It reminds me of those stories where a destitute person wins a huge lottery or something. You think "good, the person gets to move out of the dangerous slimy hellhole neighborhood and buy a great house with access to great schools for the family, etc", but can't bring himself to leave because it's the only environment he knows and feels comfortable in the crime infested craphole. 

Obviously M wasn't destitute and the changes aren't that drastic, but I think the analogy is still there. All she had to do was NOT screw up but she couldn't help herself. Now she's dragged Harry to La La Land to show him off to the people she wants to be idolized by. You know, she could have invited them to Frogmore and really rubbed it in their faces but maybe figures they wouldn't come so she's forcing herself on them here. Delivering food under bandanas in an environment that's at least 40 notches beneath what she threw away.  Of course this is the same idiot who whined among destitute people in Africa that she doesn't get enough pity. 

Today marks Will & Kate's 9th anniversary. M & H's marriage is questionable at best before the 2 year mark. Can't say she doesn't work fast. She must idolize the many short-lived, slash-and-burn marriages La La Land is known for too. 

When's she single again her biggest selling point will be "I have a kid who's one huge meal ticket (wink wink)!"


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Having an acute insomnia attack this evening and yes, that is moi doing cardio at 1am
> 
> Not to leave any stone unturned, here is one hellava interesting theory:
> https://blindgossip.com/the-second-baby/#more-100388
> 
> “She said that she will not get pregnant again until she settles into her new home.
> 
> That is not true.
> 
> In fact, she is already pregnant!
> 
> There’s something important you need to know, though.
> 
> Her famous husband is not the father!
> 
> You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile.
> 
> He knew that he wanted to be a father, but he wanted a baby that was part of his bloodline.
> 
> He had to seek out a sperm donor within his own family.
> 
> The most logical choice was his brother.
> 
> However, that presented some quirky issues.
> 
> While he initially wanted to keep this private, it was a significant lineage issue that necessitated involving senior members of the family. A family meeting took place, and they unanimously decided that [another family member] would be a better choice.
> 
> The chosen family member was handsome, fertile, and had no health issues......
> 
> Who was it?
> 
> His uncle.....No, the actress did not sleep with the uncle! Don’t be foolish. This was all done in a lab. The actress’ eggs were harvested and fertilized with the uncles’ sperm.
> 
> Despite the conspiracy theories, there was no surrogate involved. The actress carried and give birth to the first baby.
> 
> Furthermore, despite the turmoil that surrounded the uncle, he will be the biological father of the second baby......The second baby will be announced next month. You’ve already met the first baby.
> 
> So, in case you were wondering why the family keeps the uncle so tightly within the family fold… and why the couple chose to move away from the family right after the uncle was exposed… and why the couple still has a home to come back to that is close to the rest of the family… wonder no more!....,.
> [Optional] Do you think the couple will go back to live near his family?
> 
> *SOLVED!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actress: Meghan Markle
> Husband: Prince Harry
> Uncle: Prince Andrew
> 
> Yes, this is all very shocking!.....”


interesting but how could this blind gossip site know this?


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I figured she’d try to show up the Cambridge anniversary but wow she is so predictable.
> 
> View attachment 4719814


is this pic Meghan or does the girl she is "mentoring" look like her?


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> is this pic Meghan or does the girl she is "mentoring" look like her?


never mind....I just opened the video.....she looks plainer than usual when you look at this as a still pic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> is this pic Meghan or does the girl she is "mentoring" look like her?


That's M.


----------



## scarlet555

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The video:




What qualifies her as a mentor?   Besides marrying a fallen prince, what is her education or perhaps just line of charity works-how many years has she put in and what has she done on her own for charity to be a mentor for any foundation.  Creating your own charity foundation does not mean you've actually done any work, especially in her case.  Maybe call it a "charity cheerleader", is what she should be called, her and many stars who "mentor."


----------



## bisousx

scarlet555 said:


> What qualifies her as a mentor?   Besides marrying a fallen prince, what is her education or perhaps just line of charity works-how many years has she put in and what has she done on her own for charity to be a mentor for any foundation.  Creating your own charity foundation does not mean you've actually done any work, especially in her case.  Maybe call it a "charity cheerleader", is what she should be called, her and many stars who "mentor."



To be fair, I know a lot of girls who would pay for mentorship on how to social climb and marry a Prince!


----------



## scarlet555

bisousx said:


> To be fair, I know a lot of girls who would pay for mentorship on how to social climb and marry a Prince!



That would be her notoriety...  she could do that for charity...  people would go...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> interesting but how could this blind gossip site know this?


*
sdki††y*, this site is a regular gossip portal with the added amusement for the viewer of "blind" items so we can guess the celebs mentioned

Do I believe everything that I see and hear? No, quite rightly but this H&M theory is so crazy that who knows?

My own pragmatic line of thought leads me to believe that H‡M are probably just stinking cray-cray and not as celeb-duplicitous as say, Tom Cruise and his marriages?


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *sdki††y*, this site is a regular gossip portal with the added amusement for the viewer of "blind" items so we can guess the celebs mentioned
> 
> Do I believe everything that I see and hear? No, quite rightly but this H&M theory is so crazy that who knows?
> 
> My own pragmatic line of thought leads me to believe that H‡M are probably just stinking cray-cray and not as celeb-duplicitous as say, Tom Cruise and his marriages?


as I probably said before, if Andrew is the father, it will show.  He daughters with their teeth look just like him


----------



## beautymagpie

kemilia said:


> He will be Markled one day, he can count on it.


Yep. And by then the other royals won’t trust him with anything more than a prepared statement circulated to everyone. Instant gain, long term pain if you value your career and reputation.


----------



## justwatchin

sdkitty said:


> interesting but how could this blind gossip site know this?


I believe it was an April Fools joke.


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> I believe it was an April Fools joke.


yes, I got that further down on the thread
thanks


----------



## justwatchin

sdkitty said:


> yes, I got that further down on the thread
> thanks


Would have been a great story though...skeevy...but right in line with what’s happening with these two


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> as I probably said before, if Andrew is the father, it will show.  He daughters with their teeth look just like him



mans the eyes!  Don’t forget those eyes!!!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

justwatchin said:


> I believe it was an April Fools joke.





sdkitty said:


> yes, I got that further down on the thread
> thanks



An April's Fools joke, rofling? LOVE, better than irl!!!

Apologies for posting the story but fun while it lasted!!!


----------



## V0N1B2

ccbaggirl89 said:


> The video:



The "March 27, 2020" in the bottom right hand corner of the link...
Does this mean the video was recorded just over a month ago now? 
And it was released today because.... anyone... anyone... Bueller... Bueller...


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> I don’t think the kinds of houses she’s looking at are $10k/month. More like $25-30k... A one bedroom in the nice neighborhoods in LA is probably >$3k...


Oh, WAY MORE than $3k .. heck, even in the Valley the rents are over $3k and not for big places!  There is a small (~ 850 sq feet) house nearby and the rent is $3500!  My next-door neighbors are renting, it's a 3-bedroom (_Husband & Wife, 2 young children and her parents_) in that house and it has a tiny pool .. and when they told me that they are paying $6k??? .. HOLY CRAP!  Totally not worth it IMO; been inside and it's not in great shape, super-old Kitchen Appliances, the wood floors really need to be replaced, the walls have some major dents/dings and the worst part is the very small backyard!  The Husband told me that the owner would not pay for a Gardener or Pool maintenance, so the yard is a disaster as is the pool.  Just amazed that they pay that much for a place that is in such disrepair!


----------



## bag-mania

They must have sent that Smart Works story to every single US media outlet. It is appearing everywhere today. They sooooo want to make Meghan look like a saint.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

A perfect lesson in ‘how NOT to film yourself’. The script, the lighting, the background, the camera angle - quelle horreur !  Check the comments. Enough truth to show this tiresome two’s act is over. 

If we have learned anything from this quarantine ordeal, it is cheap and shoddy doesn’t sell. Quality matters.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> A perfect lesson in ‘how NOT to film yourself’. The script, the lighting, the background, the camera angle - quelle horreur !  Check the comments. Enough truth to show this tiresome two’s act is over.
> 
> If we have learned anything from this quarantine ordeal, it is cheap and shoddy doesn’t sell. Quality matters.




It’s so shocking to me because I assume her blog had appealing photography.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s so shocking to me because I assume her blog had appealing photography.



When compared to the videos of QE, Charles, Camilla, W&K, Sophie and Ed, and other A listers, this just looks so very desperate and pitiful.


----------



## muchstuff

bag-mania said:


> "You see, her husband had an unfortunate accident a few years ago that rendered him infertile."
> 
> I think they edited that blind item since it first came out. I could swear that when I first read it weeks ago it went on to describe how Harry was made infertile. Does anyone else remember that?


Wedgie gone horribly wrong .


----------



## beautymagpie

I do hope W&K release something on 6th May or whenever Archie's birthday is. I mean, send a birthday wish too because it's not the kid's fault, but definitely do something else first.


----------



## 1LV

beautymagpie said:


> I do hope W&K release something on 6th May or whenever Archie's birthday is. I mean, send a birthday wish too because it's not the kid's fault, but definitely do something else first.


It would serve her right, but they have something she will never be able to buy no matter how many books she writes or how many speeches Harry gives.  Class.


----------



## beautymagpie

1LV said:


> It would serve her right, but they have something she will never be able to buy no matter how many books she writes or how many speeches Harry gives.  Class.



True. I barely cared or paid any attention to these two or the BRF before this, now they've made me choose teams.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> When compared to the videos of QE, Charles, Camilla, W&K, Sophie and Ed, and other A listers, this just looks so very desperate and pitiful.


I was wondering if she was intentionally looking like a "regular" person.  I actually thought when I first looked at the still from the video that she was the other party (the one Meghan was talking to) and just resembled "M"


----------



## Sharont2305

beautymagpie said:


> I do hope W&K release something on 6th May or whenever Archie's birthday is. I mean, send a birthday wish too because it's not the kid's fault, but definitely do something else first.


Yeah, like announce a pregnancy


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, like announce a pregnancy


If this happens, which is very possible, you get bragging rights.


----------



## PewPew

lanasyogamama said:


> Meg, your Little House in the Prairie hairdo isn’t fooling anyone.





sdkitty said:


> is this pic Meghan or does the girl she is "mentoring" look like her?



I had the same reaction. I didn’t recognize her without her hair “artistically” falling in her face. (In her wedding pics she had wisps of hair falling.)


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> They must have sent that Smart Works story to every single US media outlet. It is appearing everywhere today. They sooooo want to make Meghan look like a saint.


I think this PR is also a fail,  judging by the pathetic number of "likes" or negative comments on that video on Twitter! And that not even taking into account that some of those "likes" were probably  bought! Most of the positive comments were by that organisation's own account!  and wait, I thought they wanted privacy and don't want to be in the media???

W&K's IG post had 1.3+million "likes"!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think this PR is also a fail,  judging by the pathetic number of "likes" or negative comments on that video on Twitter! And that not even taking into account that some of those "likes" were probably  bought! Most of the positive comments were by that organisation's own account!  and wait, I thought they wanted privacy and don't want to be in the media???
> 
> W&K's IG post had 1.3+million "likes"!


oh, if W&K do better than M with social media that will drive her nuts....after all, she had her own blog before she even met H


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I was wondering if she was intentionally looking like a "regular" person.  I actually thought when I first looked at the still from the video that she was the other party (the one Meghan was talking to) and just resembled "M"


No not an ordinary person look , these days ordinary folks have their (hair ) roots showing


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> No not an ordinary person look , these days ordinary folks have their (hair ) roots showing


ok, an ordinary young woman who doesn't dye her hair


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

And threw a ‘sayonara Zara’ party  - “when she became rich” 
https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a25740851/meghan-markle-sayonara-zara-party/
==
ETA:
Videos from a month ago definitely look like they were made in the 90s. This is why they should not be released now. We’ve all improved. H&M just look stuck.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> The "March 27, 2020" in the bottom right hand corner of the link...
> Does this mean the video was recorded just over a month ago now?
> And it was released today because.... anyone... anyone... Bueller... Bueller...







She just can't help herself, such a pathetic woman.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well, I have caught up on over 100 pages, and all I can say is Just Harry and Very Nice Jeans are nothing if not consistent.

Covid-19 grabbed my time with some volunteer stuff, nothing like M&H of course, but I have been pretty busy. I am happy to have some breathing room now and delighted to catch up with all things Meh-ghan and Just Harry.  They are a mess, aren't they!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Interesting.  From Camilla Tominey in The Telegraph UK today/this evening.

Prince Harry misses the Army and tells friends his life has been turned upside down
After Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, the Duke was forced to relinquish his military roles
_By_Camilla Tominey,  ASSOCIATE EDITOR 29 April 2020 • 9:00pm

*"The Duke of Sussex has told friends he “cannot believe” what has happened in recent months and that he misses the Army, The Telegraph has learned.*

Prince Harry has confided in pals that he “misses the camaraderie” of life in the Armed Forces, where he was affectionately known as ‘Captain Wales’, having been stripped of his military appointments following the Sussexes’ split from the Royal Family on March 31.

After Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals in January, the Duke was forced to relinquish his roles as Captain General Royal Marines, Honorary Air Commandant, RAF Honington and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command. 

In a sharply-worded statement reflecting on what had been agreed with the Queen, the couple pointed out that Harry retained “the rank of Major”, insisting he would “continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity.”

They are now living in Los Angeles with their son, Archie, who turns one next Wednesday (May 6).

A well-placed source revealed: “Harry has told friends he is really missing the Army as well his military appointments. He misses the camaraderie of being in the forces. 

“He has been telling friends that he still can't believe this has happened. He can't believe his life has been turned upside down.

“He was in a happy place when he was serving in the Army, then he met Meghan and since then life has been great. But I don’t think he foresaw things turning out quite as they did.”

*Stressing that Harry, 35, does not blame his wife for wanting to return to her native America, the source added: “Of course he doesn’t blame Meghan. There is just a sense that he might have been better protected if he was still in the Army.”*

... A spokesman for the prince declined to comment."


----------



## Tivo

Straight-Laced said:


> Interesting.  From Camilla Tominey in The Telegraph UK today/this evening.
> 
> Prince Harry misses the Army and tells friends his life has been turned upside down
> After Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, the Duke was forced to relinquish his military roles
> _By_Camilla Tominey,  ASSOCIATE EDITOR 29 April 2020 • 9:00pm
> 
> *"The Duke of Sussex has told friends he “cannot believe” what has happened in recent months and that he misses the Army, The Telegraph has learned.*
> 
> Prince Harry has confided in pals that he “misses the camaraderie” of life in the Armed Forces, where he was affectionately known as ‘Captain Wales’, having been stripped of his military appointments following the Sussexes’ split from the Royal Family on March 31.
> 
> After Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals in January, the Duke was forced to relinquish his roles as Captain General Royal Marines, Honorary Air Commandant, RAF Honington and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
> 
> In a sharply-worded statement reflecting on what had been agreed with the Queen, the couple pointed out that Harry retained “the rank of Major”, insisting he would “continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity.”
> 
> They are now living in Los Angeles with their son, Archie, who turns one next Wednesday (May 6).
> 
> A well-placed source revealed: “Harry has told friends he is really missing the Army as well his military appointments. He misses the camaraderie of being in the forces.
> 
> “He has been telling friends that he still can't believe this has happened. He can't believe his life has been turned upside down.
> 
> “He was in a happy place when he was serving in the Army, then he met Meghan and since then life has been great. But I don’t think he foresaw things turning out quite as they did.”
> 
> *Stressing that Harry, 35, does not blame his wife for wanting to return to her native America, the source added: “Of course he doesn’t blame Meghan. There is just a sense that he might have been better protected if he was still in the Army.”*
> 
> ... A spokesman for the prince declined to comment."


Can these types of articles be trusted?
It seems so far fetched that Harry would confide something that personal in someone and they go right to the press.


----------



## Katel

Straight-Laced said:


> *
> ...”
> “Of course he doesn’t blame Meghan. There is just a sense that he might have been better protected if he was still in the Army.”*
> 
> ... A spokesman for the prince declined to comment."



Better protected from whom? His wife?


----------



## BlueCherry

Straight-Laced said:


> Interesting.  From Camilla Tominey in The Telegraph UK today/this evening.
> 
> Prince Harry misses the Army and tells friends his life has been turned upside down
> After Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, the Duke was forced to relinquish his military roles
> _By_Camilla Tominey,  ASSOCIATE EDITOR 29 April 2020 • 9:00pm
> 
> *"The Duke of Sussex has told friends he “cannot believe” what has happened in recent months and that he misses the Army, The Telegraph has learned.*
> 
> Prince Harry has confided in pals that he “misses the camaraderie” of life in the Armed Forces, where he was affectionately known as ‘Captain Wales’, having been stripped of his military appointments following the Sussexes’ split from the Royal Family on March 31.
> 
> After Harry and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals in January, the Duke was forced to relinquish his roles as Captain General Royal Marines, Honorary Air Commandant, RAF Honington and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
> 
> In a sharply-worded statement reflecting on what had been agreed with the Queen, the couple pointed out that Harry retained “the rank of Major”, insisting he would “continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity.”
> 
> They are now living in Los Angeles with their son, Archie, who turns one next Wednesday (May 6).
> 
> A well-placed source revealed: “Harry has told friends he is really missing the Army as well his military appointments. He misses the camaraderie of being in the forces.
> 
> “He has been telling friends that he still can't believe this has happened. He can't believe his life has been turned upside down.
> 
> “He was in a happy place when he was serving in the Army, then he met Meghan and since then life has been great. But I don’t think he foresaw things turning out quite as they did.”
> 
> *Stressing that Harry, 35, does not blame his wife for wanting to return to her native America, the source added: “Of course he doesn’t blame Meghan. There is just a sense that he might have been better protected if he was still in the Army.”*
> 
> ... A spokesman for the prince declined to comment."



Meghan declined to comment ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Golly, poor widdle bee-bay. 
———
Laugh, and the world laughs with you; 
Weep, and you weep alone; 
For the sad old earth must borrow its mirth, 
But has trouble enough of its own. 
Ella Wheeler Wilcox



Straight-Laced said:


> Interesting.  From Camilla Tominey in The Telegraph UK today/this evening.
> *Stressing that Harry, 35, does not blame his wife for wanting to return to her native America, the source added: “Of course he doesn’t blame Meghan. There is just a sense that he might have been better protected if he was still in the Army.”*
> 
> ... A spokesman for the prince declined to comment."


----------



## V0N1B2

CobaltBlu said:


> Well, I have caught up on over 100 pages, and all I can say is Just Harry and Very Nice Jeans are nothing if not consistent.
> 
> Covid-19 grabbed my time with some volunteer stuff, nothing like M&H of course, but I have been pretty busy. I am happy to have some breathing room now and delighted to catch up with all things Meh-ghan and Just Harry.  They are a mess, aren't they!


But do you have photos of yourself - security cam footage or otherwise - showing you helping out, feeding the poors, cuddling with kittens on the ‘gram or Twitter... Snapchat... Zoom...  Did anyone even see you?


----------



## Milosmum0307

I’ve been working 12 - 14 hour days as we attempt to help our small business clients stave off financial ruin, though sadly knowing that our efforts won’t save them all, especially those in devastated industries like travel, retail and hospitality.  Decided to take a break, spend time with my preschooler (who has really grown since I last saw him several weeks ago!  Even though we live in the same house ...) and glance at non-financial, non-pestilence headlines.  When I saw that Grifty and Dim poked their heads out of their Super Exclusive and Luxurious foxhole on W&K’s wedding anniversary (because of course) I decided to brew some tea and pop over here to peruse the scuttlebutt.  Thanks for the much-needed laughs.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan's low cut sweater with nothing underneath would not have been approved by her royal dresser were she still actively part of the BRF.
And her hair is looking a little off - keratin treatments not available bc of Coronavirus or bc she's preggo?
Otherwise, just the usual Meghan word salad aimed at distracting attention from Kate and Wills.

ETA I see now that M wore that sweater to a previous engagement as a royal, and I do remember us commenting on the same thing about the low neckline.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Well, instead of Captain Wales, he can be Major Wails.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Tivo said:


> Can these types of articles be trusted?
> It seems so far fetched that Harry would confide something that personal in someone and they go right to the press.


It's written by a respected Royal Correspondent (and Associate Editor) for a good newspaper.  Camilla Tominey has a lot of contacts and gets well sourced information from insiders close to the BRF.  So she's not going to add her byline to absolute rubbish.

But apart from the writer no one knows who the source is and who knows what's really going on with Harry right now???   Because he seems all over the place, like a teenager acting out, and showing off to his family back home through the media and PR stunts. Does he want to be rescued? 
In his reflective moments memories of life in the military with the lads, taking orders and carrying out duties, are probably a pleasant escape from his current reality.  It's not just adjusting to a new life in LA, there's the high stakes court case in London too.  He has a lot going on and most of it's out of his control. 
I think the crazy making life he's leading means he's either going to 1. settle down to a contented life in LA (yeah, sure ) 2. blow up or breakdown somehow, or 3. he's going to return to the UK.  Even though I'm not a fan of Harry I hope that 3. happens before 2.
Sorry about the lengthy reply! Just thinking it out.  His mother was crazy reckless at the same time in her life after leaving the BRF and getting in with the wrong crowd. Even though for observers like me Harry has turned out to be a right royal PITA I'm sure there are people keeping an eye on him so he doesn't go the way of his mother before this stupid thing plays itself out.  Some of them might even drop some tasty, troublesome gossip to a respected royal correspondent from time to time (which would really cheese Meghan off  ).


----------



## Sophisticatted

Yeah, I saw a news tidbit somewhere today talking about how proud the Queen was of Will and Kate for the way they conduct thems, and I knew that it would tick Meghan off.  It made me wonder if the BRF was planning to beat Meghan at her own game with "confidential new leaks".

Game on!


----------



## Straight-Laced

CarryOn2020 said:


> A perfect lesson in ‘how NOT to film yourself’. The script, the lighting, the background, the camera angle - quelle horreur !  Check the comments. Enough truth to show this tiresome two’s act is over.
> 
> If we have learned anything from this quarantine ordeal, it is cheap and shoddy doesn’t sell. Quality matters.



Arrrgh, there it is again! The Blink.  The fluttery, coy and flirty blinky-blink.  If you watch Meghan with the sound down (which I always do) the Blink is ridiculous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

LOL..................I was kind of hoping that Will and Kate might have an announcement of an addition to their family that they could make on 5/6. That ought to make her head explode. I'd probably feel it being only 100 or so miles away


----------



## CarryOn2020

It hasn’t even been one full month and, now, this - whatever it is.   Charles must be cutting off their funds.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Awwww.....

Meghan Markle's ex-husband Trevor Engelson has announced that he and his wife Tracey Kurland are expecting their first child in September. Engelson, 43, confirmed the happy news that Kurland, 33, is pregnant with a girl in a social media post Wednesday.
'Future mother of the year and girl dad way outta his league! Best thing I've ever produced hands down. Baby girl, So excited to meet you in September,' he wrote.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Engelson-announces-wife-expecting-child.html


----------



## rose60610

CobaltBlu said:


> Well, I have caught up on over 100 pages, and all I can say is Just Harry and Very Nice Jeans are nothing if not consistent.
> 
> Covid-19 grabbed my time with some volunteer stuff, nothing like M&H of course, but I have been pretty busy. I am happy to have some breathing room now and delighted to catch up with all things Meh-ghan and Just Harry.  They are a mess, aren't they!



 APPLAUSE and hats off to you for volunteering. Surely you had TV cameras following you and made sure every media outlet was aware of your participation. When people didn't recognize you I hope you took off your protective gear to put them in danger and shame them for their ignorance in these pandemic times. Meghan is regretting that she didn't stage a person "lying unconscious" on the ground for her to "resuscitate" on camera. Next time she'll be better prepared. A toast to YOUR volunteering .


----------



## bag-mania

In case anyone cares they are looking for a mansion “quietly.” I’m not convinced they understand what that word means.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle quietly shop for mansions in LA*
He’s not the Fresh Prince of Bel Air — yet.

Ex-royals Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, have stepped up their house hunt in Los Angeles, Gimme Shelter can report exclusively.

“They are quietly looking at mansions in the $15 million to $20 million range that are both beautiful and secluded, offering the privacy they need,” our source says.

The couple, parents to almost-1-year-old Archie, are focusing their search on ritzy areas including Beverly Hills and Brentwood, in some cases working alongside “Million Dollar Listing Los Angeles” broker Josh Altman. When reached by Gimme Shelter, though, Altman declined to comment.

One of the homes the ex-royals have expressed interest in is in Beverly Hills. Thought it’s not currently on the market, the modern property has six bedrooms and eight bathrooms on just over one acre, according to an old listing on Realtor.com.

Listing photos show a sleek infinity pool and impressive views of downtown Los Angeles.

A former owner had listed that mansion for $60 million, but it traded hands in February for a more palatable $38 million. The former price is out of the ex-royals’ price range, a source adds, saying that they are still in talks about the house.

Another home they are eyeing is in the Brentwood neighborhood. Also off-market, this California traditional sits on more than a half acre but is tucked behind gates and hedges.

There are six bedrooms and nine bathrooms, per an old Realtor.com listing, as well as light-filled rooms, stained oak floors, a wine cellar and a theater with stadium seating. Outside, there’s a pool, a spa and room for barbecue.

Both Meghan and Harry have Hollywood interests these days — a documentary Meghan narrated, “Elephant,” was released on Disney+ earlier this month — and they really want to find a place they can call home, the source adds.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-quietly-shop-for-mansions-in-la/amp/


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mdcx said:


> Meghan's low cut sweater with nothing underneath would not have been approved by her royal dresser were she still actively part of the BRF.
> *And her hair is looking a little off - keratin treatments not available* bc of Coronavirus or bc she's preggo?
> Otherwise, just the usual Meghan word salad aimed at distracting attention from Kate and Wills.
> 
> ETA I see now that M wore that sweater to a previous engagement as a royal, and I do remember us commenting on the same thing about the low neckline.



*mdcx*, as a novice about all things hair, after looking carefully at #1grifter it is def her hair imo

MM has it styled pulled tightly back and flat against her head but the kinks are popping up everywhere bc well that’s what kinky hair does without a keratin treatment every 4-8 weeks

Funny thing, MM was unrecognizable to me and yes, I thought she was the woman being mentored by our angel MM

Also, Note to Self: H&M cannot move to Brentwood, it is my kingdom and we have #NoGrifter laws here
♥️


----------



## CobaltBlu

Thanks so much!  I have not even been filmed!  But I have raised money and done some good, and didn’t have to wear Very Nice Jeans.  So I’m happy 



rose60610 said:


> APPLAUSE and hats off to you for volunteering. Surely you had TV cameras following you and made sure every media outlet was aware of your participation. When people didn't recognize you I hope you took off your protective gear to put them in danger and shame them for their ignorance in these pandemic times. Meghan is regretting that she didn't stage a person "lying unconscious" on the ground for her to "resuscitate" on camera. Next time she'll be better prepared. A toast to YOUR volunteering .


----------



## Lodpah

Anne Boleyn, oops I meant Meghan what did you do to Harry?  This is an incredibly sad photo .(don'


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess is they'll continue to "shop".  They can't afford the price range Meg wants and I doubt Charles would pay for such a thing.  The "shopping" keeps their names in the media while they literally do nothing.


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> What qualifies her as a mentor?   Besides marrying a fallen prince, what is her education or perhaps just line of charity works-how many years has she put in and what has she done on her own for charity to be a mentor for any foundation.  Creating your own charity foundation does not mean you've actually done any work, especially in her case.  Maybe call it a "charity cheerleader", is what she should be called, her and many stars who "mentor."



So true, and it annoys me that she rails against all the demands of royal life and yet continues to capitalize on what it gave her. Who would she be "mentoring" (except maybe a college acting student) without her short time in the BRF? If you wanted to give it up, give it UP!!


----------



## lalame

Of course now Instagram wants to show me all of the MM intas on earth. I saw this photo and it made me cringe.. what is up with this move all the time? It doesn’t even look natural given how far apart they’re sitting. It looks like a mom comforting child.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> My guess is they'll continue to "shop".  They can't afford the price range Meg wants and I doubt Charles would pay for such a thing.  The "shopping" keeps their names in the media while they literally do nothing.


 That's what I was thinking...will Charles really foot that bill? If so, he's really doing everything wrong with these two.


----------



## doni

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Also, Note to Self: H&M cannot move to Brentwood, it is my kingdom and we have #NoGrifter laws here
> ♥️


Love Brentwood, we stayed there our month in LA in a beautifully restored mid-century modern house and I think it’s the perfect neighborhood, you are lucky.


----------



## chicinthecity777

^^^ highly unlikely Charles will pay a mansion in the price range they are reported to be looking at. No royals in the UK apart from those direct in line with the throne live in extravagant properties like that, unless they married to independently wealthy spouses. They are not even working royals now so very little chance. It would send a very bad message. This is what MM failed to understand. Being royals is never really about extravagant or vulgar lifestyle, it's about serving the country and be relatively conservative and moderate.


----------



## chicinthecity777

V0N1B2 said:


> The "March 27, 2020" in the bottom right hand corner of the link...
> Does this mean the video was recorded just over a month ago now?
> And it was released today because.... anyone... anyone... Bueller... Bueller...


Right? 
I don't mind her appearance in the video but why release it now, a month later than it was recorded? The timings of releases of her "good deeds" are always so cynical!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

I wonder what _Just Call me Harry_ would tell his best pal Greta about the $20m mansion's environmental implications of its suitability for a 3-person family home???


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> In case anyone cares they are looking for a mansion “quietly.” I’m not convinced they understand what that word means.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle quietly shop for mansions in LA*
> He’s not the Fresh Prince of Bel Air — yet.
> 
> Ex-royals Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, have stepped up their house hunt in Los Angeles, Gimme Shelter can report exclusively.
> 
> “They are quietly looking at mansions in the $15 million to $20 million range that are both beautiful and secluded, offering the privacy they need,” our source says.
> 
> The couple, parents to almost-1-year-old Archie, are focusing their search on ritzy areas including Beverly Hills and Brentwood, in some cases working alongside “Million Dollar Listing Los Angeles” broker Josh Altman. When reached by Gimme Shelter, though, Altman declined to comment.
> 
> One of the homes the ex-royals have expressed interest in is in Beverly Hills. Thought it’s not currently on the market, the modern property has six bedrooms and eight bathrooms on just over one acre, according to an old listing on Realtor.com.
> 
> Listing photos show a sleek infinity pool and impressive views of downtown Los Angeles.
> 
> A former owner had listed that mansion for $60 million, but it traded hands in February for a more palatable $38 million. The former price is out of the ex-royals’ price range, a source adds, saying that they are still in talks about the house.
> 
> Another home they are eyeing is in the Brentwood neighborhood. Also off-market, this California traditional sits on more than a half acre but is tucked behind gates and hedges.
> 
> There are six bedrooms and nine bathrooms, per an old Realtor.com listing, as well as light-filled rooms, stained oak floors, a wine cellar and a theater with stadium seating. Outside, there’s a pool, a spa and room for barbecue.
> 
> Both Meghan and Harry have Hollywood interests these days — a documentary Meghan narrated, “Elephant,” was released on Disney+ earlier this month — and they really want to find a place they can call home, the source adds.
> 
> https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-quietly-shop-for-mansions-in-la/amp/


So all they want is a place they can call home?  Aw poor babies, nowhere to lay their little heads away from the awful glare of the bad publicity they worked so hard to achieve?  I have no sympathy.
They spent millions of our £ on a home in Windsor they barely slept in.  Canada was just perfect until only 6 months later they were desperate to leave.  Now LA?  Papville central for the worlds most private couple?  They are just ridiculous.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Right?
> I don't mind her appearance in the video but why release it now, a month later than it was recorded? The timings of releases of her "good deeds" are always so cynical!


Obviously she has a timetable  - and is diligently “working behind the scenes” to steal the limelight at every opportunity.
Her hair and make-up are so patently intended to convey an “I’m just roughing it like the rest of you” impression - it’s laughable


----------



## DoraSilky

Interesting choice of necklace in the mentoring video - reported to be from Edge of Ember a London jeweller.  The site says.... 'the  'Visionary' charm bears a blue topaz to protect its wearer from negative vibes. It's got your back!'


----------



## papertiger

Straight-Laced said:


> It's written by a respected Royal Correspondent (and Associate Editor) for a good newspaper.  Camilla Tominey has a lot of contacts and gets well sourced information from insiders close to the BRF.  So she's not going to add her byline to absolute rubbish.
> 
> But apart from the writer no one knows who the source is and who knows what's really going on with Harry right now???   Because he seems all over the place, like a teenager acting out, and showing off to his family back home through the media and PR stunts. Does he want to be rescued?
> In his reflective moments memories of life in the military with the lads, taking orders and carrying out duties, are probably a pleasant escape from his current reality.  It's not just adjusting to a new life in LA, there's the high stakes court case in London too.  He has a lot going on and most of it's out of his control.
> I think the crazy making life he's leading means he's either going to 1. settle down to a contented life in LA (yeah, sure ) 2. blow up or breakdown somehow, or 3. he's going to return to the UK.  Even though I'm not a fan of Harry I hope that 3. happens before 2.
> Sorry about the lengthy reply! Just thinking it out.  His mother was crazy reckless at the same time in her life after leaving the BRF and getting in with the wrong crowd. Even though for observers like me Harry has turned out to be a right royal PITA I'm sure there are people keeping an eye on him so he doesn't go the way of his mother before this stupid thing plays itself out.  Some of them might even drop some tasty, troublesome gossip to a respected royal correspondent from time to time (which would really cheese Meghan off  ).



Maybe he wants the British army to stage a military coup to save him from having to grow-up, or possibly to invade the US and rescue him so he doesn't have to make the decision to leave for himself? At least send him his batman, he's got no one to switch lights on and off or velcro his slippers, life's just so unfair.

It must be really hard to hit puberty in your mid-30s.


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> I wonder what _Just Call me Harry_ would tell his best pal Greta about the $20m mansion's environmental implications of its suitability for a 3-person family home???



Love this point.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> Of course now Instagram wants to show me all of the MM intas on earth. I saw this photo and it made me cringe.. what is up with this move all the time? It doesn’t even look natural given how far apart they’re sitting. It looks like a mom comforting child.


That happened to me too. I clicked "I don't want to see this" on like 10 of them and they went away


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> “* In their dreams*, they are quietly looking at mansions in the $15 million to $20 million range that are both beautiful and secluded, offering the privacy they need,” our source says.
> 
> https://nypost.com/2020/04/29/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-quietly-shop-for-mansions-in-la/amp/


I added that little important detail that Meghan the journalist seemed to forget to write in that article.
They really think people are that stupid? That the couple who don't like earning and spending their own money and instead expect to coast through life getting a huge allowance from _his_ father/family and getting lots of freebies from 'friends' and acquaintances are in a position to drop anywhere from $15million up to $38million on a house? Oh please! That bulls**t is comical.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lounorada said:


> I added that little important detail that Meghan the journalist seemed to forget to write in that article.
> They really think people are that stupid? That the couple who don't like earning and spending their own money and instead expect to coast through life getting a huge allowance from _his_ father/family and getting lots of freebies from 'friends' and acquaintances are in a position to drop anywhere from $15million up to $38million on a house? Oh please! That bulls**t is comical.


If they buy a $15m house, they're severely overestimating their earning power.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know MM doesn’t care, but I would guess that Charles has been drilling his thoughts on a lean RF to William and Harry for many years, which has to include avoiding ostentatious displays of wealth.  The optics on them moving into a huge mansion are just so bad.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Oh god. They are going to end up on Million Dollar Listing with that horrendous Josh Altman, aren’t they? That’s what this is about?


----------



## Genie27

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh god. They are going to end up on Million Dollar Listing with that horrendous Josh Altman, aren’t they? That’s what this is about?


Could it be that her desire for world-wide attention is measured merely in clicks, views and likes rather than anything substantial? Fawning adoration of fans and stans? That would be hilarious, if that is what makes her feel 'fulfilled' and complete.


----------



## Genie27

Genie27 said:


> Could it be that her desire for world-wide attention is measured merely in clicks, views and likes rather than anything substantial? Fawning adoration of fans and stans? That would be hilarious, if that is what makes her feel 'fulfilled' and complete.


To continue my thought - I recall seeing the ad that Reitmans put out for 'her' collection - that was the premise of the ad - two women were gushing "ooooh, that's MM, what is she wearing?" - even back then, she had grandiose ideas of her own importance and magnificence and she 'graciously' tells them that they too can have her outfit, as it is from Reitmans. That must have been her dream come true in script,

I also remember going "MM, who?" and having to google the cheesiness.


----------



## bag-mania

beautymagpie said:


> I do hope W&K release something on 6th May or whenever Archie's birthday is. I mean, send a birthday wish too because it's not the kid's fault, but definitely do something else first.



I don't think they will do anything to one-up H&M. Why? Because they aren't petty and vindictive people. W&K have the confidence of knowing their place in the world and they don't have anything to prove, especially to H&M.


----------



## Tootsie17

DoraSilky said:


> Interesting choice of necklace in the mentoring video - reported to be from Edge of Ember a London jeweller.  The site says.... 'the  'Visionary' charm bears a blue topaz to protect its wearer from negative vibes. It's got your back!'


With all the negative vibes M naturally has, It's a wonder that charm didn't explode the second she placed the necklace around her neck!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

These two make my head want to implode. Doing absolutely nothing to benefit anyone or anything other than themselves while pretending to care. Living a sweet lifestyle funded by others - just handed to them. Shopping for a $15 - $20 mil giant home? Who do they think they are?

I truly adored Harry, now I just feel sorry for his inability to make good decisions for himself - whether it be because he is feeble-minded or just completely clueless when it comes to adulting. Meghan just looks like a pathetic, desperate woman - long in the tooth by hollywood standards but struggling for that relevance that she should have attained a very long time ago. Grasping at anything and everything. Sad.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I don't think they will do anything to one-up H&M. Why? Because they aren't petty and vindictive people. W&K have the confidence of knowing their place in the world and they don't have anything to prove, especially to H&M.


Exactly this, I totally agree.
However, it would be hilarious if they did.


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> It must be really hard to hit puberty in your mid-30s.






lalame said:


> Of course now Instagram wants to show me all of the MM intas on earth. I saw this photo and it made me cringe.. what is up with this move all the time? It doesn’t even look natural given how far apart they’re sitting. It looks like a mom comforting child.
> 
> View attachment 4720292


Any time I see pictures from that wedding, the more I believe the rumours behind the pictures. The rumour (IIRC) of them being broke up and she rocked up at H's friends wedding even though he was supposed to be attending alone because if it wasn't that, then _something_ happened before those pics were taken because the tension, awkwardness and frostiness between them in the pictures do _not_ scream 'we are a new couple, so in lust/love with each other, can't keep our hands off each other, we have great chemistry'. The pictures scream 'he's just not that into you'. Cringeworthy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Could it be that her desire for world-wide attention is measured merely in clicks, views and likes rather than anything substantial? Fawning adoration of fans and stans? That would be hilarious, if that is what makes her feel 'fulfilled' and complete.


I think you’re right - the online adoration, gushing articles and assorted Instagram fluffy stuff is what she’s here for!  Real people get dumped!


----------



## Chagall

justwatchin said:


> I believe it was an April Fools joke.


You are right! From what I remember it was identified as an April fools joke shortly after it was posted!


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Any time I see pictures from that wedding, the more I believe the rumours behind the pictures. The rumour (IIRC) of them being broke up and she rocked up at H's friends wedding even though he was supposed to be attending alone because if it wasn't that, then _something_ happened before those pics were taken because the tension, awkwardness and frostiness between them in the pictures do _not_ scream 'we are a new couple, so in lust/love with each other, can't keep our hands off each other, we have great chemistry'. The pictures scream 'he's just not that into you'. Cringeworthy.



It makes you wonder what Meghan did to turn the tide, doesn't it? How did it go from casual indifference, almost irritation,  to Harry apparently unable to take a step without her say-so?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania — Since I did not pay attention to these two in the beginning, I took a quick look, definitely not a deep dive, at her history.  
She and Trevor look so much happier than H&M: 
====
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghans-marriage-Trevor-Engelson-implode.html
_Sadly, though, reading this secret diary, one is also struck by her increasing cynicism and egotism as she makes her name in the series. 'I'm part of the horse and pony show this year,' she wrote, after attending a glitzy New York event at which the TV networks unveil the forthcoming season's shows before prospective advertisers. 'They'll roll out the red carpet in a major way because they want me ('the talent', they call us)... this is part of the job and it's f***ing awesome.

'If you are pursuing television then realise that you have already sold out and take your big, fancy pay-check because you can now... flashing those pearly whites (ahem, veneers) and working the carpet with your sexy little body (ahem, Spanx) is part of the job description you jumped on board for when you signed on that dotted line.'_
==== 
https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-prince-harry-relationship-timeline
H claims he was hooked from the 1st blind date....hmmmm.https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-prince-harry-relationship-timeline
July, 2016 - 1st meeting
March, 2017 - the Inskip wedding in Jamaica
Nov, 2017 - Engagement announcement 
May, 2018 - wedding

They knew each other for almost 2 years before the wedding. Not sure why I was under the impression it was only a year or less. 
====


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania — Since I did not pay attention to these two in the beginning, I took a quick look, definitely not a deep dive, at her history.
> She and Trevor look so much happier than H&M:
> ====
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghans-marriage-Trevor-Engelson-implode.html
> _Sadly, though, reading this secret diary, one is also struck by her increasing cynicism and egotism as she makes her name in the series. 'I'm part of the horse and pony show this year,' she wrote, after attending a glitzy New York event at which the TV networks unveil the forthcoming season's shows before prospective advertisers. 'They'll roll out the red carpet in a major way because they want me ('the talent', they call us)... this is part of the job and it's f***ing awesome.
> 
> 'If you are pursuing television then realise that you have already sold out and take your big, fancy pay-check because you can now... flashing those pearly whites (ahem, veneers) and working the carpet with your sexy little body (ahem, Spanx) is part of the job description you jumped on board for when you signed on that dotted line.'_
> ====
> https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-prince-harry-relationship-timeline
> H claims he was hooked from the 1st blind date....hmmmm.
> July, 2016 - 1st meeting
> March, 2017 - the Inskip wedding in Jamaica
> Nov, 2017 - Engagement announcement
> May, 2018 - wedding
> 
> They knew each other for almost 2 years before the wedding. Not sure why I was under the impression it was only a year or less.
> ====



Wow the first article was quite interesting. I didn't know she and Ninaki had a falling out... but makes sense, since I wondered how she could have been giving interviews and sharing old photos.

_According to her friend, Miss Priddy, stardom changed her so drastically that she almost became a different person. 'There is Meghan Before Fame and Meghan After Fame,' she says.

Following the divorce, Miss Priddy sided with Trevor Engelson rather than the girl she had known since they were small children. She declines to reveal what he told her, but she must have thought his story pretty damning, for she says it ended her long friendship with Meghan._


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Wow the first article was quite interesting. I didn't know she and Ninaki had a falling out... but makes sense, since I wondered how she could have been giving interviews and sharing old photos.
> 
> _According to her friend, Miss Priddy, stardom changed her so drastically that she almost became a different person. 'There is Meghan Before Fame and Meghan After Fame,' she says.
> 
> Following the divorce, Miss Priddy sided with Trevor Engelson rather than the girl she had known since they were small children. She declines to reveal what he told her, but she must have thought his story pretty damning, for she says it ended her long friendship with Meghan._


I'm confused about Meghan's "fame" before "H".  Yes, she was on a tv series but it was one that relatively few people watched and she was a supporting character, right?  how would one in that positon have a very successful blog?  how successful was it?  just asking since I don't really participate in social media (unless you count the PF).

How ever it worked, I guess the bottom line was she may not have been a huge success at acting but she was very good at networking - online and in person.  From the little research I did online, she seems like a phony to me.  Saying whatever will sell for the most part on her blog.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I'm confused about Meghan's "fame" before "H".  Yes, she was on a tv series but it was one that relatively few people watched and she was a supporting character, right?  how would one in that positon have a very successful blog?  how successful was it?  just asking since I don't really participate in social media (unless you count the PF).
> 
> How ever it worked, I guess the bottom line was she may not have been a huge success at acting but she was very good at networking - online and in person.  From the little research I did online, she seems like a phony to me.  Saying whatever will sell for the most part on her blog.


I'd consider myself fairly well versed in the entertainment world space and had never heard of her. I'd heard of the show but didn't know much about it.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I'd consider myself fairly well versed in the entertainment world space and had never heard of her. I'd heard of the show but didn't know much about it.


I had seen ads on USA channel for the Suits series but never watched it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love pop culture and I had never heard of her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> I had seen ads on USA channel for the Suits series but never watched it.


Same, during my time watching Law and Order SVU reruns


----------



## chicinthecity777

I must be the only person who watched Suits! But I didn't think she was much of an actress. Other than that I knew nothing else about her.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> It makes you wonder what Meghan did to turn the tide, doesn't it? How did it go from casual indifference, almost irritation,  to Harry apparently unable to take a step without her say-so?


Exactly, that is the question. At this point i'm wondering if it was witchcraft...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Exactly, that is the question. At this point i'm wondering if it was witchcraft...
> 
> View attachment 4720673



Yep, I don't know if it's voodoo, hoodoo, juju, or what. That's some funky powerful love spell action she's got going.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Same, during my time watching Law and Order SVU reruns


same here


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania — Since I did not pay attention to these two in the beginning, I took a quick look, definitely not a deep dive, at her history.
> She and Trevor look so much happier than H&M:
> ====
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghans-marriage-Trevor-Engelson-implode.html
> _Sadly, though, reading this secret diary, one is also struck by her increasing cynicism and egotism as she makes her name in the series. 'I'm part of the horse and pony show this year,' she wrote, after attending a glitzy New York event at which the TV networks unveil the forthcoming season's shows before prospective advertisers. 'They'll roll out the red carpet in a major way because they want me ('the talent', they call us)... this is part of the job and it's f***ing awesome.
> 
> 'If you are pursuing television then realise that you have already sold out and take your big, fancy pay-check because you can now... flashing those pearly whites (ahem, veneers) and working the carpet with your sexy little body (ahem, Spanx) is part of the job description you jumped on board for when you signed on that dotted line.'_
> ====
> https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-prince-harry-relationship-timeline
> H claims he was hooked from the 1st blind date....hmmmm.
> July, 2016 - 1st meeting
> March, 2017 - the Inskip wedding in Jamaica
> Nov, 2017 - Engagement announcement
> May, 2018 - wedding
> 
> They knew each other for almost 2 years before the wedding. Not sure why I was under the impression it was only a year or less.
> ====



After reading that article, it is clear Harry got off easy by having "H" be his pet name from Meghan. Look at what poor Trevor had to endure! 
*
When they were out together Meghan would call him ‘Trevity-Trev-Trev’ in a babyish voice*


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> *When they were out together Meghan would call him ‘Trevity-Trev-Trev’ in a babyish voice*


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


>


oh gawd


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I'm confused about Meghan's "fame" before "H".  Yes, she was on a tv series but it was one that relatively few people watched and she was a supporting character, right?  how would one in that positon have a very successful blog?  how successful was it?  just asking since I don't really participate in social media (unless you count the PF).
> 
> How ever it worked, I guess the bottom line was she may not have been a huge success at acting but she was very good at networking - online and in person.  From the little research I did online, she seems like a phony to me.  Saying whatever will sell for the most part on her blog.



I hadn't heard of her but I think she's talking about "fame" for a normal person, not an A-list star. If I'm a struggling actress and I get on any show as a series regular, that's pretty exciting. Some might consider that fame and let it get to their heads. I've seen "fame" get to people's heads just from being on a widely aired commercial so it's not exactly like logic always prevails.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I hadn't heard of her but I think she's talking about "fame" for a normal person, not an A-list star. If I'm a struggling actress and I get on any show as a series regular, that's pretty exciting. Some might consider that fame and let it get to their heads. I've seen "fame" get to people's heads just from being on a widely aired commercial so it's not exactly like logic always prevails.


yes, I suppose the local news and weather people are famous in a way.  but I am serious with my question.  It doesn't seem there are many "M" fans here these days but I'd like to know how successful her blog was and why (if anyone knows).  If most people didn't know who she was (as opposed to someone like Gwyneth Paltrow who was an Oscar winning actress), how did she get a lot of followers?  or is "a lot" relative?


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> yes, I suppose the local news and weather people are famous in a way.  but I am serious with my question.  It doesn't seem there are many "M" fans here these days but I'd like to know how successful her blog was and why (if anyone knows).  If most people didn't know who she was (as opposed to someone like Gwyneth Paltrow who was an Oscar winning actress), how did she get a lot of followers?  or is "a lot" relative?



I hadn't heard of Tig either but it must have been fairly popular if she was netting $150k in ad revenue per year. I think that's the number that was widely circulated but I could be wrong here. There's a lot of random lifestyle and fashion blogs out there that are successful, run by nobodies with nowhere near Goop level fame. For example, Chiara Ferragni made millions per year from her blog and may be more of a household name now - maybe - but it's because of her blog. There's tons of blogs like that. Some of the super popular ones I followed are Atlantic Pacific, Mary Morton, Extra Petite... likely unfamiliar names to many people but I'd consider their blogs very successful.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Of course now Instagram wants to show me all of the MM intas on earth. I saw this photo and it made me cringe.. what is up with this move all the time? It doesn’t even look natural given how far apart they’re sitting. It looks like a mom comforting child.
> 
> View attachment 4720292


See .. the pictures of the 2 of them at Tom Inskip's wedding *DID* *NOT* look like they were so "_madly in love_", quite the opposite and if we are to believe the verbiage around this, while Harry had invited Meghan as his +1 (but in fact - they had broken up) .. he didn't expect her to show up (_HA - what a fool he was_)!!!!  I know I've asked this a number of times, but *WHAT IN GOD'S NAME* transpired from this non-lovey-dovey event to now??????  Okay, yes .. supposedly the sex (_after all - again, to believe the verbiage - Tom Inskip had insider knowledge of Meghan's 'yacht-girl' days_) .. he told Harry which led to their fallout.  It's almost like she performed some Voodoo schtick on Harry, or just maybe -- she has him on drugs full-time?!?!


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> See .. the pictures of the 2 of them at Tom Inskip's wedding *DID* *NOT* look like they were so "_madly in love_", quite the opposite and if we are to believe the verbiage around this, while Harry had invited Meghan as his +1 (but in fact - they had broken up) .. he didn't expect her to show up (_HA - what a fool he was_)!!!!  I know I've asked this a number of times, but *WHAT IN GOD'S NAME* transpired from this non-lovey-dovey event to now??????  Okay, yes .. supposedly the sex (_after all - again, to believe the verbiage - Tom Inskip had insider knowledge of Meghan's 'yacht-girl' days_) .. he told Harry which led to their fallout.  It's almost like she performed some Voodoo schtick on Harry, or just maybe -- she has him on drugs full-time?!?!


Actually as far as her having ‘H’ on drugs, she encouraged him to come off his antidepressants, which may not have been a wise decision on his part.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> I'm confused about Meghan's "fame" before "H".  Yes, she was on a tv series but it was one that relatively few people watched and she was a supporting character, right?  how would one in that positon have a very successful blog?  how successful was it?  just asking since I don't really participate in social media (unless you count the PF).
> 
> How ever it worked, I guess the bottom line was she may not have been a huge success at acting but she was very good at networking - online and in person.  From the little research I did online, she seems like a phony to me.  Saying whatever will sell for the most part on her blog.



*sdkitty*, interesting question about MM

My adult DDs and I are very close, with similar tastes in most things including entertainment

My DDs and I watched 2/3 seasons of Suits together whiled it aired and even now I cannot recall the channel or any of the actors names that were in the series

When I noticed the headline of H&M’s impending nuptials, my eldest DD had to remind me who MM was in the series Suits bc frankly, even after she told me who it was, I replied, HER? You are kidding me!

So, bottom-line, even people that watched the series Suits probably would not find MM instantly recognizable or even consider her a celeb
♥️


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *sdkitty*, interesting question about MM
> 
> My adult DDs and I are very close, with similar tastes in most things including entertainment
> 
> My DDs and I watched 2/3 seasons of Suits together whiled it aired and even now I cannot recall the channel or any of the actors names that were in the series
> 
> When I noticed the headline of H&M’s impending nuptials, my eldest DD had to remind me who MM was in the series Suits bc frankly, even after she told me who it was, I replied, HER? You are kidding me!
> 
> So, bottom-line, even people that watched the series Suits probably would not find MM instantly recognizable or even consider her a celeb
> ♥️



I only found out about Suits because of the royal wedding buzz, but I suppose I did my part to line MM's pockets because I binge watched it and was a big fan (of the show). I liked her OK on it but she wasn't really a standout... I doubt she got many stans on the basis of the show alone.


----------



## jcnc

papertiger said:


> Maybe he wants the British army to stage a military coup to save him from having to grow-up, or possibly to invade the US and rescue him so he doesn't have to make the decision to leave for himself? At least send him his batman, he's got no one to switch lights on and off or velcro his slippers, life's just so unfair.
> 
> It must be really hard to hit puberty in your mid-30s.


OMG! !  reading army lingo after soooooo long... Batman.. as a kid I always found that word soooooo funny... brings back childhood memories.


----------



## V0N1B2

I told you guys before... it's her magical boobs.
Google it, dolls.  Or if you're too lazy, here's one article:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5428533/Meghan-Markles-secret-diary-soul-baring-blog.html


----------



## Lodpah

Lounorada said:


> Exactly, that is the question. At this point i'm wondering if it was witchcraft...
> 
> View attachment 4720673


Guys I’ve been saying this hundreds of posts back. I believe it is. The one I’m wondering is if she did the chant one or the bracelet voodoo. I know people who do this. It’s wicked and bad but it’s their culture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jcnc

She definitely looks happy in those photos with Trevor and her wedding gown fit her too 


CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania — Since I did not pay attention to these two in the beginning, I took a quick look, definitely not a deep dive, at her history.
> She and Trevor look so much happier than H&M:
> ====
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghans-marriage-Trevor-Engelson-implode.html
> _Sadly, though, reading this secret diary, one is also struck by her increasing cynicism and egotism as she makes her name in the series. 'I'm part of the horse and pony show this year,' she wrote, after attending a glitzy New York event at which the TV networks unveil the forthcoming season's shows before prospective advertisers. 'They'll roll out the red carpet in a major way because they want me ('the talent', they call us)... this is part of the job and it's f***ing awesome.
> 
> 'If you are pursuing television then realise that you have already sold out and take your big, fancy pay-check because you can now... flashing those pearly whites (ahem, veneers) and working the carpet with your sexy little body (ahem, Spanx) is part of the job description you jumped on board for when you signed on that dotted line.'_
> ====
> https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-prince-harry-relationship-timeline
> H claims he was hooked from the 1st blind date....hmmmm.
> July, 2016 - 1st meeting
> March, 2017 - the Inskip wedding in Jamaica
> Nov, 2017 - Engagement announcement
> May, 2018 - wedding
> 
> They knew each other for almost 2 years before the wedding. Not sure why I was under the impression it was only a year or less.
> ====


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> I told you guys before... it's her magical boobs.
> Google it, dolls.  Or if you're too lazy, here's one article:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5428533/Meghan-Markles-secret-diary-soul-baring-blog.html



OMG Thank you! That article has one gem after another. Like this one:

"She remained incognito and wrote her final piquant post, in the summer of 2012, whereupon she signed off from the internet without a word of explanation or farewell."

*She markled her own online diary!! *


----------



## bag-mania

And these, obviously she has always been an entitled prima donna on the verge of becoming an emotional basket case.

When she attended one audition, she found herself being ticked off ‘like a f****** three-year-old’ for failing to bring a headshot photograph and CV with her, as is customary.

‘I find myself in this moment losing every ounce of patience. Not just because [the casting agent] is being ridiculously condescending . . . but because she gets away with talking to an actress that way. It blows my mind.

‘Perhaps she assumes I’m a non-union actress and this is my 4th audition ever . . . it drives me crazy.’

After such days, or when her minor scenes were cut from a film — often after ‘months of work and anticipation’ — ‘The Working Actress’ admitted that she would be plunged into despair.

‘It’s those kind of discoveries that are humbling as they are mind-numbing, and have sent me into a tailspin of sobbing in bed with a bottle of wine and a box of cookies. But it’s part of the game.’


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> See .. the pictures of the 2 of them at Tom Inskip's wedding *DID* *NOT* look like they were so "_madly in love_", quite the opposite and if we are to believe the verbiage around this, while Harry had invited Meghan as his +1 (but in fact - they had broken up) .. he didn't expect her to show up (_HA - what a fool he was_)!!!!  I know I've asked this a number of times, but *WHAT IN GOD'S NAME* transpired from this non-lovey-dovey event to now??????  Okay, yes .. supposedly the sex (_after all - again, to believe the verbiage - Tom Inskip had insider knowledge of Meghan's 'yacht-girl' days_) .. he told Harry which led to their fallout.  It's almost like she performed some Voodoo schtick on Harry, or just maybe -- she has him on drugs full-time?!?!



Well it could be drugs. Loads of people talk about the evil of prescribed drugs and snort tons of coke and vice versa.

I think she drip-feeds him pseudo-psychobabble whisked with liquidised word-salad. He's not the sharpest tool in the box ya know, I can hear him incanting his affirmations in front of a peach-tinted mirror, holding up italicised words in purple ink calligraphy on the back of an envelope  "It cannot be lost until it is found, in hindsight we grieve, out of ashes great love, love is all you need, minds pure and giving, I am the world, the greatest love of all is in me..."


----------



## Sol Ryan

V0N1B2 said:


> I told you guys before... it's her magical boobs.
> Google it, dolls.  Or if you're too lazy, here's one article:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5428533/Meghan-Markles-secret-diary-soul-baring-blog.html


Gods she sounds exhausting as f-....


----------



## mrsinsyder

If her boobs are that great, why did she have those terrible bolt-ons?


----------



## poopsie

LittleStar88 said:


> These two make my head want to implode. Doing absolutely nothing to benefit anyone or anything other than themselves while pretending to care. Living a sweet lifestyle funded by others - just handed to them. Shopping for a $15 - $20 mil giant home? Who do they think they are?



IKR
Usually you do the work and _then_ you get the perqs. This is reverse engineering at it's finest.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Gods she sounds exhausting as f-....


there's something about her writing (here and what little I've seen of Tig) that seems phony or trying to be cool


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> there's something about her writing (here and what little I've seen of Tig) that seems phony or trying to be cool



There’s just something about her that just seems phony. She has actor’s eyes. Like she doesn’t know how to turn the fascade off. Maybe she shows Harry something different at home, but in public, all I see is a fake.

She insults my American work ethic too... works a week and has to take months off because it’s too much.... I haven’t had a day off in months... behind the scenes my rear...


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> There’s just something about her that just seems phony. She has actor’s eyes. Like she doesn’t know how to turn the fascade off. Maybe she shows Harry something different at home, but in public, all I see is a fake.
> 
> She insults my American work ethic too... works a week and has to take months off because it’s too much.... I haven’t had a day off in months... behind the scenes my rear...



I read an article once about why people "hate" Anne Hathaway and Chris Evans. It was something like they are the classic "theater kids," meaning over-eager, over-earnest, with a very self-controlled persona and it comes across as phony to most people. I can totally see that in AH and CE (though I love them) and think Meghan has a little bit of it too... honestly her personality/mannerisms/writing don't bother me at all. It's her actions that are awful.


----------



## mia55

bag-mania said:


> Yep, I don't know if it's voodoo, hoodoo, juju, or what. That's some funky powerful love spell action she's got going.


If she starts selling that love potion, I’m sure she’ll be a billionaire


----------



## lalame

Does Meghan remind anyone else of a reality TV star? The constant hustling, obsession with the media, "for the cameras" persona... I don't see the confidence or "it's just work" type of attitude of a normal actor but a reality star desperately trying to hold onto the 5 mins of fame anyway they can with their own life drama.

Edit: Okay, guess I was wrong - her mannerisms do bother me.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> I read an article once about why people "hate" Anne Hathaway and Chris Evans. It was something like they are the classic "theater kids," meaning over-eager, over-earnest, with a very self-controlled persona and it comes across as phony to most people. I can totally see that in AH and CE (though I love them) and think Meghan has a little bit of it too... honestly her personality/mannerisms/writing don't bother me at all. It's her actions that are awful.



fyi, *lalame*, Anne Hathaway is just plain mean
One of my DDs worked for Rachel Zoe about 5-years ago and she styled all the major celebs for the red carpet award shows including AH, so you have it straight from the horse's mouth here

Back to topic, have been following the antics of these two grifters, H&M for the past many months
Here are a few of my conclusions:
MM controls 75% of the optics that Harry sees: HER friends, HER PR company, HER country, HER town and am sure that he is as confused as all F- about what is going on in HIS world and HIS future, ie H's currency is depreciating rapidly tied in value to his proximity to the BRF
Fast forward, pretty soon he will be starring in his own bio called Bertie 2025 with all negative reviews
<his performance, well, too boozy>

Think Harry actually has a small window to be an actual hero these days
All he would have to do is......wake-up tomorrow, wait until MEGS is on her cell talking manically non-stop,
grab your wallet & phone, put on your sunnies, a baseball cap, grap Archie, his car-seat and yell out,
"Hey MEGS, running to the store for a few things with Arch, brb, babe!!!"
Walk down your long driveway, get into your uber directly to LAX, buy a first-class ticket to London, and right before boarding call your brother and dad and say, "I'm coming home, fix this for me"

And good ole'granny will fix it

And believe me, I would have done this YESTERDAY


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh god. They are going to end up on Million Dollar Listing with that horrendous Josh Altman, aren’t they? That’s what this is about?


HA!! .. you know, when I heard that they had moved to the LA area, that was my first thought .. "I bet they will be on the Million Dollar Listing - LA show"!  But, but, but .. if they were to do that .. they are *really* going to be called out as mega-hypocrites - 1) privacy - what privacy? and 2) Security - not if you show the world your house!!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> fyi, *lalame*, Anne Hathaway is just plain mean
> One of my DDs worked for Rachel Zoe about 5-years ago and she styled all the major celebs for the red carpet award shows including AH, so you have it straight from the horse's mouth here
> 
> Back to topic, have been following the antics of these two grifters, H&M for the past many months
> Here are a few of my conclusions:
> MM controls 75% of the optics that Harry sees: HER friends, HER PR company, HER country, HER town and am sure that he is as confused as all F- about what is going on in HIS world and HIS future, ie H's currency is depreciating rapidly tied in value to his proximity to the BRF
> Fast forward, pretty soon he will be starring in his own bio called Bertie 2025 with all negative reviews
> <his performance, well, too boozy>
> 
> Think Harry actually has a small window to be an actual hero these days
> All he would have to do is......wake-up tomorrow, wait until MEGS is on her cell talking manically non-stop,
> grab your wallet & phone, put on your sunnies, a baseball cap, grap Archie, his car-seat and yell out,
> "Hey MEGS, running to the store for a few things with Arch, brb, babe!!!"
> Walk down your long driveway, get into your uber directly to LAX, buy a first-class ticket to London, and right before boarding call your brother and dad and say, "I'm coming home, fix this for me"
> 
> And good ole'granny will fix it
> 
> And believe me, I would have done this YESTERDAY


I personally find Anne Hathaway annoying....in a try too hard way.  surprised to hear she's nasty though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

VigeeLeBrun said:


> fyi, *lalame*, Anne Hathaway is just plain mean
> One of my DDs worked for Rachel Zoe about 5-years ago and she styled all the major celebs for the red carpet award shows including AH, so you have it straight from the horse's mouth here
> 
> Back to topic, have been following the antics of these two grifters, H&M for the past many months
> Here are a few of my conclusions:
> MM controls 75% of the optics that Harry sees: HER friends, HER PR company, HER country, HER town and am sure that he is as confused as all F- about what is going on in HIS world and HIS future, ie H's currency is depreciating rapidly tied in value to his proximity to the BRF
> Fast forward, pretty soon he will be starring in his own bio called Bertie 2025 with all negative reviews
> <his performance, well, too boozy>
> 
> Think Harry actually has a small window to be an actual hero these days
> All he would have to do is......wake-up tomorrow, wait until MEGS is on her cell talking manically non-stop,
> grab your wallet & phone, put on your sunnies, a baseball cap, grap Archie, his car-seat and yell out,
> "Hey MEGS, running to the store for a few things with Arch, brb, babe!!!"
> Walk down your long driveway, get into your uber directly to LAX, buy a first-class ticket to London, and right before boarding call your brother and dad and say, "I'm coming home, fix this for me"
> 
> And good ole'granny will fix it
> 
> And believe me, I would have done this YESTERDAY


Yes, please save Archie even if his dad deserves a kick in the pants.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> There’s just something about her that just seems phony. She has actor’s eyes. Like she doesn’t know how to turn the fascade off. Maybe she shows Harry something different at home, but in public, all I see is a fake.
> 
> She insults my American work ethic too... works a week and has to take months off because it’s too much.... I haven’t had a day off in months... behind the scenes my rear...


I personally find it annoying that she claims to love Otis Redding....just doesn't seem like the type of person who would appreciate his soul - and the wrong generation for his music


----------



## poopsie

mia55 said:


> If she starts selling that love potion, I’m sure she’ll be a billionaire


I think it is more likely that she went down to the crossroads


----------



## lulilu

CeeJay said:


> See .. the pictures of the 2 of them at Tom Inskip's wedding *DID* *NOT* look like they were so "_madly in love_", quite the opposite and if we are to believe the verbiage around this, *while Harry had invited Meghan as his +1 (but in fact - they had broken up) .. he didn't expect her to show up* (_HA - what a fool he was_)!!!!  I know I've asked this a number of times, but *WHAT IN GOD'S NAME* transpired from this non-lovey-dovey event to now??????  Okay, yes .. supposedly the sex (_after all - again, to believe the verbiage - Tom Inskip had insider knowledge of Meghan's 'yacht-girl' days_) .. he told Harry which led to their fallout.  It's almost like she performed some Voodoo schtick on Harry, or just maybe -- she has him on drugs full-time?!?!



Can you imagine the nerve of M showing up at the wedding like that?  Brass b*lls.



sdkitty said:


> there's something about her writing (here and what little I've seen of Tig) that seems phony or trying to be cool



Everything about her is phony -- always grinning, always knowing where the camera is.....


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> I think it is more likely that she went down to the crossroads



Well now that would explain a few things.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun ”I'm coming home, fix this for me".  Well said! In 7 words, you created the perfect ending 
===
This may sound weird and out there on the fringe — what if they planted this article?
Just to test the public’s reaction? To confirm the ‘M-hate’ is still there?  We know W used to _confide_ false stories in supposed friends, just to test their loyalty.  Diana used to do that, too. H grew up in a high-drama family. M loves lots of drama, too. Something about the article seems off with its seeming contradictions. If, after one month, H really wanted out, he would get out. To me, they both seem fake and manipulative, so it wouldn’t surprise me.

Maybe H&M should call Jerry - looking forward to some good laughs!
https://www.rollingstone.com/tv/tv-news/jerry-seinfeld-23-hours-to-kill-trailer-netflix-992260/
_“All things we do to convince ourselves our lives don’t suck. And I know that because I know everyone’s life sucks. Your life sucks, my life sucks too,” Seinfeld said. “Perhaps not quite as much.”

Seinfeld added, “Never feel bad that your life sucks. The greatest lesson you can learn in life: ‘Sucks and great are pretty close.'”



_


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> Can you imagine the nerve of M showing up at the wedding like that?  *Brass b*lls*.
> Everything about her is phony -- always grinning, always knowing where the camera is.....


100% agree, but she was not going to let him go easy!  Personally, if the other party told me "not interested", I sure as heck would NEVER show up, but she had "her plan" all along.  Really makes you wonder ..


----------



## muchstuff

sdkitty said:


> I personally find it annoying that she claims to love Otis Redding....just doesn't seem like the type of person who would appreciate his soul - and the wrong generation for his music


There's no wrong generation for the Big O, my DDs like his music too!


----------



## sdkitty

muchstuff said:


> There's no wrong generation for the Big O, my DDs like his music too!


yes, I admit I love Otis and I don't like "M" so...I'm biased


----------



## mdcx

Imo, M probably had some bedroom skills that blew Harry's mind. After she got him hooked that way, then she worked on his crumbling mental health and obsession/paranoia about the press. Add in the fact that she could be used as a way to potentially agitate the BRF (American, person of colour, outspoken, troubled family background) and also that it seems all Harry's other exes had run for the hills.....


----------



## lanasyogamama

VigeeLeBrun said:


> fyi, *lalame*, Anne Hathaway is just plain mean
> One of my DDs worked for Rachel Zoe about 5-years ago and she styled all the major celebs for the red carpet award shows including AH, so you have it straight from the horse's mouth here
> 
> Back to topic, have been following the antics of these two grifters, H&M for the past many months
> Here are a few of my conclusions:
> MM controls 75% of the optics that Harry sees: HER friends, HER PR company, HER country, HER town and am sure that he is as confused as all F- about what is going on in HIS world and HIS future, ie H's currency is depreciating rapidly tied in value to his proximity to the BRF
> Fast forward, pretty soon he will be starring in his own bio called Bertie 2025 with all negative reviews
> <his performance, well, too boozy>
> 
> Think Harry actually has a small window to be an actual hero these days
> All he would have to do is......wake-up tomorrow, wait until MEGS is on her cell talking manically non-stop,
> grab your wallet & phone, put on your sunnies, a baseball cap, grap Archie, his car-seat and yell out,
> "Hey MEGS, running to the store for a few things with Arch, brb, babe!!!"
> Walk down your long driveway, get into your uber directly to LAX, buy a first-class ticket to London, and right before boarding call your brother and dad and say, "I'm coming home, fix this for me"
> 
> And good ole'granny will fix it
> 
> And believe me, I would have done this YESTERDAY




Aw man, now I want all the Anne Hathaway and Rachel Zoe dirt!!


----------



## muchstuff

sdkitty said:


> yes, I admit I love Otis and I don't like "M" so...I'm biased


----------



## Mendocino

chicinthecity777 said:


> I must be the only person who watched Suits! But I didn't think she was much of an actress. Other than that I knew nothing else about her.


.
Nope! I watched Suits and loved it! I thought it was well-written and well-acted. Loved the interaction between Mike and Harvey and Wendell Pierce has always been a favorite actor of mine.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mendocino said:


> .
> Nope! I watched Suits and loved it! I thought it was well-written and well-acted. Loved the interaction between Mike and Harvey and Wendell Pierce has always been a favorite actor of mine.



I watched, too. The first 3 seasons focused on interesting cases and character development, after season 3, the story line became repetitive. Harvey and Mike had the snappy repartee, but Jessica Pearson ruled that show and deserves high praise. Her character was very well written, very well acted. The Rachel character was just meh - her plot line was weak, character was somewhat flat, anyone could have played that role. 
https://themuse.jezebel.com/jessica-pearson-is-why-you-should-be-watching-suits-1682318876


----------



## lalame

There were so many good characters on that show... Rachel was very flat in comparison. She was easily outshined by Gina Torres, Rick Hoffman, and Sarah Rafferty at the very least. She was especially bad in the first season, but I suppose it was her first "big" role.

Wow I just realized Amanda Schull (Katrina Bennett) starred in Center Stage, one of my fav movies growing up. There was a lot of talent on Suits... MM was lucky she made it in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *When they were out together Meghan would call him ‘Trevity-Trev-Trev’ in a babyish voice*



Please hold the bucket for me to puke into.


----------



## maryg1

sdkitty said:


> I personally find it annoying that she claims to love Otis Redding....just doesn't seem like the type of person who would appreciate his soul - and the wrong generation for his music


Wait...I’m the same age of MM and I like Otis Redding!
But I agree, she doesn’t seem the person to like soul music


----------



## chicinthecity777

Mendocino said:


> .
> Nope! I watched Suits and loved it! I thought it was well-written and well-acted. Loved the interaction between Mike and Harvey and Wendell Pierce has always been a favorite actor of mine.


My favourite character is Jessica! And Harvey is not bad either!


----------



## Straight-Laced

papertiger said:


> Maybe he wants the British army to stage a military coup to save him from having to grow-up, or possibly to invade the US and rescue him so he doesn't have to make the decision to leave for himself? At least send him his batman, he's got no one to switch lights on and off or velcro his slippers, life's just so unfair.
> 
> It must be really hard to hit puberty in your mid-30s.


You’re quite right, send him his batman at least!  Sounds like a cunning plan


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> And these, obviously she has always been an entitled prima donna on the verge of becoming an emotional basket case.
> 
> When she attended one audition, she found herself being ticked off ‘like a f****** three-year-old’ for failing to bring a headshot photograph and CV with her, as is customary.
> 
> ‘I find myself in this moment losing every ounce of patience. Not just because [the casting agent] is being ridiculously condescending . . . but because she gets away with talking to an actress that way. It blows my mind.
> 
> ‘Perhaps she assumes I’m a non-union actress and this is my 4th audition ever . . . it drives me crazy.’
> 
> After such days, or when her minor scenes were cut from a film — often after ‘months of work and anticipation’ — ‘The Working Actress’ admitted that she would be plunged into despair.
> 
> ‘It’s those kind of discoveries that are humbling as they are mind-numbing, and have sent me into a tailspin of sobbing in bed with a bottle of wine and a box of cookies. But it’s part of the game.’



That’s so revealing, isn’t it?! 

Firstly, ‘I mean, (huff) I’m MM, so I forgot the basics, so what?’ [err if turn up to an interview/audition like that, and that’s what’s expected, the impression is you think you’re above the fold - if you’re Meryl Streep level fair enough - if you’re not you do the basics, you prove yourself].

Secondly, ‘how dare she talk to an actress like that? [if you are outraged at how someone talks to anyone, it should be person to person - not ‘I’m an actress how dare she?’ It just goes to show she’s always felt elevated, with a Duchess title too she must be unbearable]


----------



## needlv

beautymagpie said:


> That’s so revealing, isn’t it?!
> 
> Firstly, ‘I mean, (huff) I’m MM, so I forgot the basics, so what?’ [err if turn up to an interview/audition like that, and that’s what’s expected, the impression is you think you’re above the fold - if you’re Meryl Streep level fair enough - if you’re not you do the basics, you prove yourself].
> 
> Secondly, ‘how dare she talk to an actress like that? [if you are outraged at how someone talks to anyone, it should be person to person - not ‘I’m an actress how dare she?’ It just goes to show she’s always felt elevated, with a Duchess title too she must be unbearable]



I think what is revealing is when she asked for a message to go back to the Queen saying she wouldn’t be wearing a hat!!!  

Honestly, who do you think you are? !?  You are meeting the Queen - so if protocol is wearing a hat - wear one!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


Excellent!  She’d overplayed her hand again and got slapped back.  Let’s hope she dialled in


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


Good! [emoji1]


----------



## Genie27

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


From the article: 
They have never been named, with People magazine referring to them as 'Meghan's inner circle – a longtime friend, a former co-star, a friend from LA, a onetime colleague and a close confidante'.

“Meghan’s inner circle” = Me, myself, I, moi and my mirror.


----------



## chicinthecity777

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


Go to the comment section and sort it by highest rated. It's hilarious!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Genie27 said:


> From the article:
> They have never been named, with People magazine referring to them as 'Meghan's inner circle – a longtime friend, a former co-star, a friend from LA, a onetime colleague and a close confidante'.
> 
> “Meghan’s inner circle” = Me, myself, I, moi and my mirror.


I thought the same thing....Meghan’s five different fake email accounts.


----------



## needlv

Genie27 said:


> From the article:
> They have never been named, with People magazine referring to them as 'Meghan's inner circle – a longtime friend, a former co-star, a friend from LA, a onetime colleague and a close confidante'.
> 
> “Meghan’s inner circle” = Me, myself, I, moi and my mirror.



Surely someone in that circle is her paid PR staff...


----------



## Clearblueskies

The Mail’s going to get some mileage out of this over the next few days


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> The Mail’s going to get some mileage out of this over the next few days



After this ruling,  guessing there will be no birthday photos of Archie — unless they get a hefty fee.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html
_Associated Newspapers will also ask the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to pay their costs of in excess of £50,000 after the couple refused their offer to deal with the issue out of court to save the High Court having to set up an online hearing during the coronavirus crisis.  Meghan's costs are said to have been £60,000-plus._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Mrs.Z said:


> I thought the same thing....Meghan’s five different fake email accounts.


If this goes all the way she’ll have to produce them - what if some of them are Meghan and her fake email IDs??  It could get very interesting.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> The Mail’s going to get some mileage out of this over the next few days


Why not! She brought this on herself!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> If this goes all the way she’ll have to produce them - what if some of them are Meghan and her fake email IDs??  It could get very interesting.


She will be cross examined about this and she will be under oath. We shall see!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> After this ruling,  guessing there will be no birthday photos of Archie.


Well, since they claimed that they wanted privacy, we should see no photos of them AT ALL! But we all know how that turned out...


----------



## beautymagpie

needlv said:


> I think what is revealing is when she asked for a message to go back to the Queen saying she wouldn’t be wearing a hat!!!
> 
> Honestly, who do you think you are? !?  You are meeting the Queen - so if protocol is wearing a hat - wear one!!!



Lol. True. But then, like, she's a duchess AND an actress - doesn't that entitle her to be higher in the chain now than the Queen?


----------



## 1LV

Does MM have the option of dropping this case at any point?  I can see her doing so and saying the deck was stacked against her (unfairly of course), or for her father’s sake, rather than a very public loss that would expose her as a fraud.


----------



## imgg

VigeeLeBrun said:


> fyi, *lalame*, *Anne Hathaway is just plain mean*
> One of my DDs worked for Rachel Zoe about 5-years ago and she styled all the major celebs for the red carpet award shows including AH, so you have it straight from the horse's mouth here
> 
> Back to topic, have been following the antics of these two grifters, H&M for the past many months
> Here are a few of my conclusions:
> MM controls 75% of the optics that Harry sees: HER friends, HER PR company, HER country, HER town and am sure that he is as confused as all F- about what is going on in HIS world and HIS future, ie H's currency is depreciating rapidly tied in value to his proximity to the BRF
> Fast forward, pretty soon he will be starring in his own bio called Bertie 2025 with all negative reviews
> <his performance, well, too boozy>
> 
> Think Harry actually has a small window to be an actual hero these days
> All he would have to do is......wake-up tomorrow, wait until MEGS is on her cell talking manically non-stop,
> grab your wallet & phone, put on your sunnies, a baseball cap, grap Archie, his car-seat and yell out,
> "Hey MEGS, running to the store for a few things with Arch, brb, babe!!!"
> Walk down your long driveway, get into your uber directly to LAX, buy a first-class ticket to London, and right before boarding call your brother and dad and say, "I'm coming home, fix this for me"
> 
> And good ole'granny will fix it
> 
> And believe me, I would have done this YESTERDAY


Anne Hathaway's ex-boyfriend was on American Greed.  They were dating at the time he was embezzling money from people.


----------



## Genie27

needlv said:


> Surely someone in that circle is her paid PR staff...


More likely to be a chargeback to herself. 

I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


I guess the court is biased, too


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Happy birthday! Next year will be better.


----------



## mdcx

_“Meghan initially declined to comment on the newspaper's claim that she had 'knowingly' allowed her friends to leak details of the letter, effectively breaching her own privacy.

But last week she raised the stakes with an emphatic denial. Her lawyer David Sherborne wrote in the document filed to the court: '[She] did not know that her friends were giving an interview to People magazine, let alone that one of them would refer to the letter.' “_

I mean, come on! As if she didn’t arrange it herself!


----------



## 1LV

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Happy Birthday.  I sincerely hope you’re ok and that the sour quickly turns to sweet as your special day progresses!


----------



## Mrs.Z

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Aw, Happy Birthday!  I also spent my bday in captivity as I like to call it!


----------



## beautymagpie

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.



Happy birthday! 

It's my birthday later this month and I'm telling everyone it's cancelled. I've decided I'm going to be like the queen and take a date later in the year when I feel more like celebrating.


----------



## beautymagpie

mdcx said:


> _“Meghan initially declined to comment on the newspaper's claim that she had 'knowingly' allowed her friends to leak details of the letter, effectively breaching her own privacy.
> 
> But last week she raised the stakes with an emphatic denial. Her lawyer David Sherborne wrote in the document filed to the court: '[She] did not know that her friends were giving an interview to People magazine, let alone that one of them would refer to the letter.' “_
> 
> I mean, come on! As if she didn’t arrange it herself!



I saw that and wondered if semantics will come into it - i.e. she will claim she didn't know it was going to People, specifically.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

needlv said:


> Surely someone in that circle is her paid PR staff...



Yep. And another is Omid I'd bet.


----------



## jcnc

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.



Happy Happy Birthday! Here’s hoping you get many many opportunities to make up for the lost fun and gifts due to this lockdown.

Wishing you health and happiness


----------



## beautymagpie

sdkitty said:


> there's something about her writing (here and what little I've seen of Tig) that seems phony or trying to be cool



I listened to Stephen King's book on writing some time ago and it was really good. MM should give it a go.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Happy birthday   Crack open a bottle of something useful when you get home!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.



The merry month of May is indeed a lovely one. 
Let us rejoice and celebrate with you — together afar, the 2020 way. 
That lovely month when everyone goes blissfully astray
http://blogs.wfmt.com/offmic/2015/04/30/6-songs-to-welcome-the-merry-month-of-may/

Happy birthday to you!


----------



## Tootsie17

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Happy birthday fellow thread member. Enjoy your day!


----------



## papertiger

VigeeLeBrun said:


> fyi, *lalame*, Anne Hathaway is just plain mean
> One of my DDs worked for Rachel Zoe about 5-years ago and she styled all the major celebs for the red carpet award shows including AH, so you have it straight from the horse's mouth here
> 
> Back to topic, have been following the antics of these two grifters, H&M for the past many months
> Here are a few of my conclusions:
> MM controls 75% of the optics that Harry sees: HER friends, HER PR company, HER country, HER town and am sure that he is as confused as all F- about what is going on in HIS world and HIS future, ie H's currency is depreciating rapidly tied in value to his proximity to the BRF
> Fast forward, pretty soon he will be starring in his own bio called Bertie 2025 with all negative reviews
> <his performance, well, too boozy>
> 
> Think Harry actually has a small window to be an actual hero these days
> All he would have to do is......wake-up tomorrow, wait until MEGS is on her cell talking manically non-stop,
> grab your wallet & phone, put on your sunnies, a baseball cap, grap Archie, his car-seat and yell out,
> "Hey MEGS, running to the store for a few things with Arch, brb, babe!!!"
> Walk down your long driveway, get into your uber directly to LAX, buy a first-class ticket to London, and right before boarding call your brother and dad and say, "I'm coming home, fix this for me"
> 
> And good ole'granny will fix it
> 
> And believe me, I would have done this YESTERDAY



Maybe this is why she, sorry, they, didn't bring Archie back to the UK. The only thing she has is that kid. If H 'changed his mind' and Archie was in GB she would _never _be able to get him back.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> Can you imagine the nerve of M showing up at the wedding like that?  Brass b*lls.
> 
> 
> 
> Everything about her is phony -- always grinning, always knowing where the camera is.....



She's as stage school as they come (and I should know!)


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html



Look, she's a chancer.

I doubt she's paying the legal fees and I'm sure she thought that if she wins it would be like winning the lottery. Plus, it's kept her in the papers for months and in future the media will be careful what they say about her.  If she loses she'll, sorry, they'll issue some statement of how the world if so unfair but they'll soldier on as only a real sixth-in-line Prince and high-profile, modern, young, feminist, philanthropist Duchesse can. Win/win


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> Look, she's a chancer.
> 
> I doubt she's paying the legal fees and I'm sure she thought that if she wins it would be like winning the lottery. Plus, it's kept her in the papers for months and in future the media will be careful what they say about her.  If she loses she'll, sorry, they'll issue some statement of how the world if so unfair but they'll soldier on as only a real sixth-in-line Prince and high-profile, modern, young, feminist, philanthropist Duchesse can. Win/win


I’m sure you’re right.  (Damnit.)


----------



## Mendocino

CarryOn2020 said:


> I watched, too. The first 3 seasons focused on interesting cases and character development, after season 3, the story line became repetitive. Harvey and Mike had the snappy repartee, but Jessica Pearson ruled that show and deserves high praise. Her character was very well written, very well acted. The Rachel character was just meh - her plot line was weak, character was somewhat flat, anyone could have played that role.
> https://themuse.jezebel.com/jessica-pearson-is-why-you-should-be-watching-suits-1682318876


I liked seeing Rachel and Mike's relationship, and to me I think out of all the characters she had the least angsty backstory and her acting was fine.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html


----------



## Mendocino

lalame said:


> There were so many good characters on that show... Rachel was very flat in comparison. She was easily outshined by Gina Torres, Rick Hoffman, and Sarah Rafferty at the very least. She was especially bad in the first season, but I suppose it was her first "big" role.
> 
> Wow I just realized Amanda Schull (Katrina Bennett) starred in Center Stage, one of my fav movies growing up. There was a lot of talent on Suits... MM was lucky she made it in.


Yes! And the ancillary characters too like Dr. Lipschitz, Sheila, and Buzz. Did you guys know that Gabriel Macht's father played Harvey's law professor with whom he had a tense relationship?


----------



## Mendocino

chicinthecity777 said:


> My favourite character is Jessica! And Harvey is not bad either!


Jessica was great and I'll always have a soft spot for Louis. He can store his raspberry bran bars and prunies in my pantry anytime.


----------



## sdkitty

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


happy birthday....better a less than optimum birthday than the alternative


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

beautymagpie said:


> I saw that and wondered if semantics will come into it - i.e. she will claim she didn't know it was going to People, specifically.


if money buys justice then her opponents have more than her I think.  Wonder if her attorneys will be able to get her to drop it of settle.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> if money buys justice then her opponents have more than her I think.  Wonder if her attorneys will be able to get her to drop it of settle.



They were given the option to settle out of court, they refused. 

They are:
a) stupid 
b) hypersensitive 
d) convinced of their own superiority to everyone in every way


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> They were given the option to settle out of court, they refused.
> 
> They are:
> a) stupid
> b) hypersensitive
> d) convinced of their own superiority to everyone in every way


But when they see it's not going their way, the could change their minds? (assuming the defense attorneys were still willing).  IDK - I've watched a lot of Law & Order


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> But when they see it's not going their way, the could change their minds? (assuming the defense attorneys were still willing).  IDK - I've watched a lot of Law & Order



That's why they're stupid. if Associated Press think they're winning and it's already in the public eye there's no point for AP.

Plus, do M/H ever see something not going their way?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> They were given the option to settle out of court, they refused.
> 
> They are:
> a) stupid
> b) hypersensitive
> d) convinced of their own superiority to everyone in every way



And reckless. Meghan functions solely on impulse and emotion. Harry apparently shares those flaws. Without patience and planning nothing ever gets done. That's why they haven't been able to accomplish anything of note as a couple.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> And reckless. Meghan functions solely on impulse and emotion. Harry apparently shares those flaws. Without patience and planning nothing ever gets done. That's why they haven't been able to accomplish anything of note as a couple.



 

e) reckless


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> But when they see it's not going their way, the could change their minds? (assuming the defense attorneys were still willing).  IDK - I've watched a lot of Law & Order



Not sure about UK but in the US... 99% of the time the settlement offer is "take it or leave it." There's no changing your mind once trial starts... Of course Meghan can drop her suit anytime but doubt that will happen.


----------



## Genie27

Awwwwww! Thank you all so much for the birthday wishes! It really made my day. I tried to multiquote and tag you all but it won’t let me, but I really do appreciate the 

I had a little meltdown this morning due to work stress (never seen such insanely low sales figures in 20 years), and birthday angst, but I’m better now. My brother got me a lovely chocolate cake for later - I’m cutting you all some imaginary pieces - there’s plenty to go around. 




And now back to our regularly scheduled snark.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> They were given the option to settle out of court, they refused.
> 
> They are:
> a) stupid
> b) hypersensitive
> d) convinced of their own superiority to everyone in every way



I think it shows she's not looking for money (guarantee they offered her more than $60k) but she wants it to be public to make a point. Now I could totally understand this strategy in many situations, like nailing a pap for the precedent and sending a signal, but in her particular case it's just stupid and transparent. Of all the ways to blame the media, you choose your DAD as the case in point?? Circular firing squad coming up...


----------



## lalame

Genie27 said:


> Awwwwww! Thank you all so much for the birthday wishes! It really made my day. I tried to multiquote and tag you all but it won’t let me, but I really do appreciate the
> 
> I had a little meltdown this morning due to work stress (never seen such insanely low sales figures in 20 years), and birthday angst, but I’m better now. My brother got me a lovely chocolate cake for later - I’m cutting you all some imaginary pieces - there’s plenty to go around.
> 
> View attachment 4721194
> 
> 
> And now back to our regularly scheduled snark.


Lovely cake! HBD!! I foresee some extra snark today in your honor.


----------



## gracekelly

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.





Mrs.Z said:


> Aw, Happy Birthday!  I also spent my bday in captivity as I like to call it!




Happy Birthday to Genie and belated wishes to Mrs. Z.   As Bill ******* liked to say, I feel your pain. I have a big one coming up in June and like Mrs Z, could still be in captivity.   As long as we are healthy, that’s all that matters. We’ll celebrate later. 

The publicity hound MM will be happy as long as this keeps her name out there. They continue to post several pictures her with every article, so she is assuaged. I don’t think that anyone really cares about this suit and it certainly hasn’t gotten them any jobs.


----------



## limom

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Mayday baby?
Me too...
Happy birthday!


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I think it shows she's not looking for money (guarantee they offered her more than $60k) but she wants it to be public to make a point. Now I could totally understand this strategy in many situations, like nailing a pap for the precedent and sending a signal, but in her particular case it's just stupid and transparent. Of all the ways to blame the media, you choose your DAD as the case in point?? Circular firing squad coming up...



She's totally looking for money. 

I think she thought when she married, that was it, she'd be untouchable.


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh. The DJ on the radio station I'm listening to just said they were posting a recipe for Meghan Markle's banana bread on their web site. She said Meghan brought her banana bread on her tour of Australia and it was a big hit. It has chocolate chips and ginger! I wanted to call the radio station and tell her that Meghan never made an original recipe in her life, but of course I didn't. This is an example of the innocuous information the average American hears about Meghan. Unless someone is actively watching what she is doing (as we are) she seems inoffensive and kind.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> They were given the option to settle out of court, they refused.
> 
> They are:
> a) stupid
> b) hypersensitive
> d) convinced of their own superiority to everyone in every way


Agree , this is self inflicted, SAD


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. The DJ on the radio station I'm listening to just said they were posting a recipe for Meghan Markle's banana bread on their web site. She said Meghan brought her banana bread on her tour of Australia and it was a big hit. It has chocolate chips and ginger! I wanted to call the radio station and tell her that Meghan never made an original recipe in her life, but of course I didn't. This is an example of the innocuous information the average American hears about Meghan. Unless someone is actively watching what she is doing (as we are) she seems inoffensive and kind.


Even during the pandemic, her PR team is spreading it wide. Who is paying for this PR push?


----------



## beautymagpie

This has some interesting contribution from legal experts. One things it could cost her (or others) up to 250k in costs.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/may/01/setback-for-meghan-in-privacy-claim-against-mail-on-sunday-owner


----------



## gazoo

I'm not a lawyer, so please correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is if she drops the case she will then automatically have to pay all the legal fees for the Defendants. This based on twitter chatter and seeing other attys chatter about it on multiple platforms. So either way she is screwed, it seems.

Is Charles paying for her legal team?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I think it shows she's not looking for money (guarantee they offered her more than $60k) but she wants it to be public to make a point. Now I could totally understand this strategy in many situations, like nailing a pap for the precedent and sending a signal, but in her particular case it's just stupid and transparent. Of all the ways to blame the media, you choose your DAD as the case in point?? Circular firing squad coming up...



I think this is part of it. She (they) wanted to set a precedent for how the gossip media handles celebrities. If it had worked she could have taken credit for legally changing an industry. Only now it doesn't look like it's going to work, just like every other plan she has hatched in the past two years.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> I think this is part of it. She (they) wanted to set a precedent for how the gossip media handles celebrities. If it had worked she could have taken credit for legally changing an industry. Only now it doesn't look like it's going to work, like every other plan she has hatched in the past two years.



 They’re going to be trendsetters for sure. But on how not to act.


----------



## V0N1B2

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


OMG doll! A bagel?
Here's a present from the other side of the country for you. Don't wear them out, they've had a long flight.
Also, some high-class wine (drink it out of your Yeti mug, no one will even know) and a banana & packet of crisps.
Now if you don't mind, I have a very important announcement to make on my instagram about like, stuff that happened a few months ago.  I in no way am trying to steal your thunder, it's just coincidence of course


----------



## kemilia

chicinthecity777 said:


> Go to the comment section and sort it by highest rated. It's hilarious!


I like the name "Spenderella"


----------



## kemilia

1LV said:


> Does MM have the option of dropping this case at any point?  I can see her doing so and saying the deck was stacked against her (unfairly of course), or for her father’s sake, rather than a very public loss that would expose her as a fraud.


I could see this definitely happening if this were in the US, but don't know UK rules.


----------



## kemilia

beautymagpie said:


> Happy birthday!
> 
> It's my birthday later this month and I'm telling everyone it's cancelled. I've decided I'm going to be like the queen and take a date later in the year when I feel more like celebrating.


If you can't celebrate your birthday this year, I feel that qualifies as "ok" to knock a year off your age!


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> She's totally looking for money.
> 
> I think she thought when she married, that was it, she'd be untouchable.



I don't think she's looking for money because I bet the settlement offer is more or equal to the amount of money she'd get in a court win minus legal fees. She'd just settle if she was only interested in the money.


----------



## lalame

Just for fun, I looked up a list of other celebs who sued the media and what they got. For your reading pleasure... https://www.ranker.com/list/celebrities-who-sued-for-defamation/jacob-shelton

I think I read somewhere awhile back too that lawsuits in Europe aren't nearly as financially "generous" as lawsuits here are. That jives with the results in that list... the sums were really paltry for European suits compared to the US based one. I didn't know Katie Holmes settled for $50m for that!! Now that's a lot of money.


----------



## beautymagpie

kemilia said:


> If you can't celebrate your birthday this year, I feel that qualifies as "ok" to knock a year off your age!



Deal. I have spent years making myself oblivious to how many grey hairs I have, now, god, I know and am not impressed.


----------



## Sharont2305

gazoo said:


> Is Charles paying for her legal team?



I hope not!!!! It's her choice, her mess!


----------



## Genie27

V0N1B2 said:


> OMG doll! A bagel?
> Here's a present from the other side of the country for you. Don't wear them out, they've had a long flight.
> Also, some high-class wine (drink it out of your Yeti mug, no one will even know) and a banana & packet of crisps.
> Now if you don't mind, I have a very important announcement to make on my instagram about like, stuff that happened a few months ago.  I in no way am trying to steal your thunder, it's just coincidence of course
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4721347
> View attachment 4721348


You give the best gifts! I’m touched.


----------



## Goodfrtune

Genie27 said:


> Awwwwww! Thank you all so much for the birthday wishes! It really made my day. I tried to multiquote and tag you all but it won’t let me, but I really do appreciate the
> 
> I had a little meltdown this morning due to work stress (never seen such insanely low sales figures in 20 years), and birthday angst, but I’m better now. My brother got me a lovely chocolate cake for later - I’m cutting you all some imaginary pieces - there’s plenty to go around.
> 
> View attachment 4721194
> 
> 
> And now back to our regularly scheduled snark.


Happy birthday!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> I hadn't heard of Tig either but it must have been fairly popular if she was netting $150k in ad revenue per year. I think that's the number that was widely circulated but I could be wrong here. There's a lot of random lifestyle and fashion blogs out there that are successful, run by nobodies with nowhere near Goop level fame. For example, *Chiara Ferragni made millions per year from her blog and may be more of a household name now - maybe - but it's because of her blog.* There's tons of blogs like that. Some of the super popular ones I followed are Atlantic Pacific, Mary Morton, Extra Petite... likely unfamiliar names to many people but I'd consider their blogs very successful.



I had never heard of her until she popped up as a replacement judge on Making the Cut


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> I had never heard of her until she popped up as a replacement judge on Making the Cut


There's even an Amazon documentary about her! That's how I learned who she was, but I had heard the name here and there randomly for awhile.


----------



## muchstuff

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Oh! Happy Birthday! Are you OK?


----------



## poopsie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Something to brighten up your day! Was just sent this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sses-multiple-claims-against-Mail-Sunday.html




_Mr Stephens claimed that senior lawyers in London had pored over Ms Markle's claim and concluded 'there was no chance of her winning', adding *she was either 'poorly advised' or disregarded warnings because she wanted her day in court.*
_
Nailed it


----------



## Genie27

muchstuff said:


> Oh! Happy Birthday! Are you OK?


Yes, Von sent me some wine and banane -  and I unwrapped some unmarkled boxes in the office and some strip(per)s jumped out. 

:smoking cig emoji: 

Aaahhhh much better.


----------



## Lodpah

Looks like the court is narrowing the issues. 

1. When did Meghan give the letters to her friend?
2. Those emails between them will be discoverable, I think.

3. What was her intent when she gave them the letter?

Those are my thoughts. Meghan is pretty stupid.


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> I like the name "Spenderella"


Reminds me of an artificial sweetener


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Looks like the court is narrowing the issues.
> 
> 1. When did Meghan give the letters to her friend?
> 2. Those emails between them will be discoverable, I think.
> 
> 3. What was her intent when she gave them the letter?
> 
> Those are my thoughts. Meghan is pretty stupid.


Oh dear she has doubled down, she is pursuing the suit even after today’s ruling


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear she has doubled down, she is pursuing the suit even after today’s ruling



Our girl is stubborn. She won’t back down from a fight since it’s inconceivable to her that she could have made a mistake.


----------



## muchstuff

Genie27 said:


> Yes, Von sent me some wine and banane -  and I unwrapped some unmarkled boxes in the office and some strip(per)s jumped out.
> 
> :smoking cig emoji:
> 
> Aaahhhh much better.


Sounds very V0N .


----------



## Lounorada

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


Happy Birthday!  There will be plenty of better ones ahead


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Our girl is stubborn. She won’t back down from a fight since it’s inconceivable to her that she could have made a mistake.




Agreed!  I also think that she believes that she is somehow controlling the lawsuit.  Wait until she has to testify and she gets cut off for talking about irrelevant things.  Seems to me that most of the ranting and raving that she wanted to do about the unfairness of it all just got pared out of the suit and is now irrelevant.  Meantime, the communications with her 5 friends is fair game, as is her relationship with her father.  Uh oh.....


----------



## mdcx

Oh my, this is a very juicy article on the BRF. M gets a mention:

_'Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff — that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace,' the former servant continues.

'Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers.'_
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ls-dramas-inside-walls-Kensington-Palace.html


----------



## Suncatcher

Classic mistake to think you are smarter than everyone around you, including the experts. It is a sign of arrogance and hubris.  She has blinders on too.  I like to say that the most dangerous person is someone who thinks she is more clever than the rest but who does not realize she is not. Why her lawyers don’t resign from the mandate or fire her as a client surprises me when their own sterling reputations are on the line with this losing lawsuit.  She is her own worse enemy.


----------



## gracekelly

If someone else is funding this for her, then they are going to pull the plug unless they have more money than sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> I'm sure she thought that if she wins it would be like winning the lottery.  _ If she loses she'll, sorry, they'll issue some statement of how the world if so unfair but they'll soldier on as only a real sixth-in-line Prince and high-profile, modern, young, feminist, philanthropist Duchesse can._ *Win/win*



I am quite sure that this is their end game. They can get sooooo much more mileage out of milking the mean/evil/racist/anti-American carp than they ever could if they won in court. How long has JCMH been using his dead mother to further his advantage?



Lodpah said:


> Looks like the court is narrowing the issues.
> 
> 1. When did Meghan give the letters to her friend?
> 2. Those emails between them will be discoverable, I think.
> 
> 3. What was her intent when she gave them the letter?
> 
> Those are my thoughts. Meghan is pretty stupid.



Ha! That isn't the plot Meghan is working from. How dare you go off script and introduce things like.....facts........and reality into this oh-so-wonderful-drama she is starring in


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> _Mr Stephens claimed that senior lawyers in London had pored over Ms Markle's claim and concluded 'there was no chance of her winning', adding *she was either 'poorly advised' or disregarded warnings because she wanted her day in court.*
> _
> Nailed it



Anyone know if the U.K. has a personal injury law model like in the US where the lawyer is paid on contingency, aka only get paid if the lawsuit is successful? I’d be curious if she pays her lawyer on retainer, per hour, or on contingency because I can’t imagine a lawyer would take this type of case on contingency. It seems nuts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could it be H&M knew about this decision earlier in the week?  Is this why _The Telegraph _published the H’s ‘missing-his-friends’ story?


lalame said:


> Anyone know if the U.K. has a personal injury law model like in the US where the lawyer is paid on contingency, aka only get paid if the lawsuit is successful? I’d be curious if she pays her lawyer on retainer, per hour, or on contingency because I can’t imagine a lawyer would take this type of case on contingency. It seems nuts.



No, I don’t know how the UK system works. I did find this article - do all roads lead to Diana? https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32302567/meghan-markle-hires-princess-diana-lawyer/
_Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is taking a page from Princess Diana as she currently undergoes her lawsuit against a British tabloid. 

According to 5RB law firm's official website, the duchess has hired David Sherborne to represent her in her lawsuit against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday. Sherborne has not only previously represented Meghan's late mother-in-law, Princess Diana, but also high-profile British celebrities such as Elton John, David and Victoria Beckham, and Harry Styles. 

"He is also acting for HRH The Duchess of Sussex in her misuse of private information, breach of data protection, and infringement of copyright action against Associated Newspapers," read a statement on Sherborne's official profile._


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could it be H&M knew about this decision earlier in the week?  Is this why _The Telegraph _published the H’s ‘missing-his-friends’ story?
> 
> 
> No, I don’t know how the UK system works. I did find this article - do all roads lead to Diana? https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32302567/meghan-markle-hires-princess-diana-lawyer/
> _Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is taking a page from Princess Diana as she currently undergoes her lawsuit against a British tabloid.
> 
> According to 5RB law firm's official website, the duchess has hired David Sherborne to represent her in her lawsuit against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday. Sherborne has not only previously represented Meghan's late mother-in-law, Princess Diana, but also high-profile British celebrities such as Elton John, David and Victoria Beckham, and Harry Styles.
> 
> "He is also acting for HRH The Duchess of Sussex in her misuse of private information, breach of data protection, and infringement of copyright action against Associated Newspapers," read a statement on Sherborne's official profile._


Oooh, then is he the one that got a super injunction for Elton John, preventing the papers from discussing his husband's variety of extra marital activities? What an interesting choice of lawyer.


----------



## Katel

Mendocino said:


> Jessica was great and I'll always have a soft spot for Louis. *He can store his raspberry bran bars and prunies in my pantry anytime.*


*
*
hahaha! That’s 
 quite a euphemism!


----------



## Katel

Genie27 said:


> ...
> *I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.*


Happy happy happy birthday dear Genie!



Today, you can rest happy in the knowledge that you currently have more style in your pinky nail then the duchass of Me-Gain will ever have in her entire person.


----------



## Mendocino

Katel said:


> hahaha! That’s
> quite a euphemism!


Ha ha! On the other hand sometimes a pantry is just a pantry. I have some friends who are very much foodies and their zeal for having things "just so" reminds me of Louis.


----------



## Katel

gracekelly said:


> Happy Birthday to Genie and belated wishes to Mrs. Z.   As Bill ******* liked to say, I feel your pain. I have a big one coming up in June and like Mrs Z, could still be in captivity.   As long as we are healthy, that’s all that matters. We’ll celebrate later.
> 
> The publicity hound MM will be happy as long as this keeps her name out there. They continue to post several pictures her with every article, so she is assuaged. I don’t think that anyone really cares about this suit and it certainly hasn’t gotten them any jobs.



Yes, happy happy belated Mrs.Z! You guys get to shave off a year plus have several parties and *still* have more style than the duchass ever will - salud and sante!


----------



## Mendocino

Happy belated Birthday, Mrs. Z. and enjoy your Birthday weekend!


----------



## PewPew

For Princess Charlotte’s 5th birthday, the Cambridges delivered homemade pasta to pensioners. This puts tremendous pressure on M. Multiple 1st Birthday parties for Archie + weeks of articles about her disappointment about celebrating in quarantine + a photo spread may not be enough— Perhaps Archie can get nominated for a Nobel Prize in the next 5 days? 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...elivers-homemade-pasta-pensioners-celebrates/


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are they going to join Oprah’s Call to Unite?  Did I miss their names on the schedule?
https://www.unite.us/schedule/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> _Mr Stephens claimed that senior lawyers in London had pored over Ms Markle's claim and concluded 'there was no chance of her winning', adding *she was either 'poorly advised' or disregarded warnings because she wanted her day in court.*_



Well. Which one out of these two could it have been?


----------



## Clearblueskies

MrsJDS said:


> Classic mistake to think you are smarter than everyone around you, including the experts. It is a sign of arrogance and hubris.  She has blinders on too.  I like to say that the most dangerous person is someone who thinks she is more clever than the rest but who does not realize she is not. Why her lawyers don’t resign from the mandate or fire her as a client surprises me when their own sterling reputations are on the line


She’s a narcissist - they always think they’re the best at everything.  I mean she came away from a six week internship in Argentina speaking fluent Spanish didn’t she?  She single handedly modernised a 1000 year old Monarchy in a few months, no?  She even put the Queen right as to where she could and couldn't exercise her right to the use of “Royal” - and posted it on the internet! 
Narcissists HATE to lose, and losing so publicly is   There will be much foot stamping and broken crockery at Pap Villas LA this week 


Lodpah said:


> Looks like the court is narrowing the issues.
> 
> 1. When did Meghan give the letters to her friend?
> 2. Those emails between them will be discoverable, I think.
> 
> 3. What was her intent when she gave them the letter?
> 
> Those are my thoughts. Meghan is pretty stupid.


Cross examination will be forensic


----------



## needlv

PewPew said:


> For Princess Charlotte’s 5th birthday, the Cambridges delivered homemade pasta to pensioners. This puts tremendous pressure on M. Multiple 1st Birthday parties for Archie + weeks of articles about her disappointment about celebrating in quarantine + a photo spread may not be enough— Perhaps Archie can get nominated for a Nobel Prize in the next 5 days?
> 
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...elivers-homemade-pasta-pensioners-celebrates/



By not having a party - MM will be so disappointed she won’t get the same huge amount of loot that was given to her for her baby shower...  I can’t remember exactly how much but I thought it was something like $300000 worth of gifts she got for the baby shower.

No doubt she will delay the star studded event so she can get her hands on all the lavish gifts...

And yes I expect some outlandish stunt on Archie’s birthday.  She desperately needs good PR and you can’t criticise a child!


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Anyone know if the U.K. has a personal injury law model like in the US where the lawyer is paid on contingency, aka only get paid if the lawsuit is successful? I’d be curious if she pays her lawyer on retainer, per hour, or on contingency because I can’t imagine a lawyer would take this type of case on contingency. It seems nuts.



We have this model 'imported' from the US but that's usually just for personal injury, they are particular types of lawyers too, and as you know that's only applicable to cases when they know almost defiantly they will win because _those_ are the only cases they take on.

These are not those kind of lawyers and they are up against Associated Press who have full time lawyers on their payroll.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> Oooh, then is he the one that got a super injunction for Elton John, preventing the papers from discussing his husband's variety of extra marital activities? What an interesting choice of lawyer.



and the reason for that lawsuit was because in _that instance_ EJ _knew _he had a good case. As someone with more skeletons in his closet than the catacombs of Paris it was a battle that had to be won so the press didn't start a war. Excellent protection for the future. The press talk about Elton now as though a national treasure. Job done and a pay out.


----------



## beautymagpie

needlv said:


> By not having a party - MM will be so disappointed she won’t get the same huge amount of loot that was given to her for her baby shower...  I can’t remember exactly how much but I thought it was something like $300000 worth of gifts she got for the baby shower.
> 
> No doubt she will delay the star studded event so she can get her hands on all the lavish gifts...
> 
> And yes I expect some outlandish stunt on Archie’s birthday.  She desperately needs good PR and you can’t criticise a child!



Hers stan are all over KP's tweets with pics of Charlotte for her birthday. 'She's inspired by M&H', 'Where's her gloves?' etc.



I wonder if M will take A's birthday photos? There's a definite skill to taking good photos that capture someone's character.


----------



## chicinthecity777

beautymagpie said:


> Hers stan are all over KP's tweets with pics of Charlotte for her birthday. 'She's inspired by M&H', 'Where's her gloves?' etc.
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if M will take A's birthday photos? There's a definite skill to taking good photos that capture someone's character.



FrancesM sounds like another fake profile MM created! So pathetic! Good job judging by the number of followers they have, they are not much of a player on Twitter! She must be so busy occupied by her stupid law suit now!
She's finally in TV news headline here now due to the defeat yesterday! Well done!


----------



## chicinthecity777

There are some "no win no fee" lawyers in the UK but as @papertiger said they are normally for personal injury cases. For this case, both sides have hired the best QCs in the country and trust me they will need to be paid. In the UK, only QC (barrister) can argue in court. Those QCs' fees will be £20k+ per day. Plus lawyers fees etc. Big pay day for their legal teams! 
UK court also don't hand out astronaumical payouts. Any claims of damages have to be reasonablely quantified, e.g. prove you actually suffered the loss because of it, plus a bit money for emotional distress. 
All of this would have been explained to her but given what she's like, she would just want to do what she wants to do.


----------



## PewPew

chicinthecity777 said:


> FrancesM sounds like another fake profile MM created! So pathetic! Good job judging by the number of followers they have, they are not much of a player on Twitter! She must be so busy occupied by her stupid law suit now!
> She's finally in TV news headline here now due to the defeat yesterday! Well done!



I’m not saying that Charlotte shouldn’t have worn a face covering, but it’s hilarious that the H&M fan account is lecturing about gloves and masks. Are H&M supposed to be the safety model for us? In several photos of their Covid pap walk— H&M shared 1 glove between them, M rubbed Harry’s back with her gloved hand, H couldn’t be bothered to wear his bandana mask properly (nose uncovered) & M lowered her mask when talking to her charity targets so that she’d be recognized.

If anything H&M are a great example of how improper use of gloves and masks can foster a false sense of security. To be effective, safety gear must be donned, worn, and removed correctly.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> There are some "no win no fee" lawyers in the UK but as @papertiger said they are normally for personal injury cases. For this case, both sides have hired the best QCs in the country and trust me they will need to be paid. In the UK, only QC (barrister) can argue in court. Those QCs' fees will be £20k+ per day. Plus lawyers fees etc. Big pay day for their legal teams!
> UK court also don't hand out astronaumical payouts. Any claims of damages have to be reasonablely quantified, e.g. prove you actually suffered the loss because of it, plus a bit money for emotional distress.
> All of this would have been explained to her but given what she's like, she would just want to do what she wants to do.


Obviously the UK courts need Meghan’s magic modernising touch   I’m sure it’s somewhere on her agenda.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> I’m not saying that Charlotte shouldn’t have worn a face covering, but it’s hilarious that the H&M fan account is lecturing about gloves and masks. Are H&M supposed to be the safety model for us? In several photos of their Covid pap walk— H&M shared 1 glove between them, M rubbed Harry’s back with her gloved hand, H couldn’t be bothered to wear his bandana mask properly (nose uncovered) & M lowered her mask when talking to her charity targets so that she’d be recognized.
> 
> If anything H&M are a great example of how improper use of gloves and masks can foster a false sense of security. It’s important that safety gear be donned, worn, and removed correctly.


Yes, we should all take safety lessons from Hapless and Desperate


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> Obviously the UK courts need Meghan’s magic modernising touch   I’m sure it’s somewhere on her agenda.


Of course!



PewPew said:


> I’m not saying that Charlotte shouldn’t have worn a face covering, but it’s hilarious that the H&M fan account is lecturing about gloves and masks. Are H&M supposed to be the safety model for us? In several photos of their Covid pap walk— H&M shared 1 glove between them, M rubbed Harry’s back with her gloved hand, H couldn’t be bothered to wear his bandana mask properly (nose uncovered) & M lowered her mask when talking to her charity targets so that she’d be recognized.
> 
> If anything H&M are a great example of how improper use of gloves and masks can foster a false sense of security. To be effective, safety gear must be donned, worn, and removed correctly.


Exactly!



PewPew said:


> I’m not saying that Charlotte shouldn’t have worn a face covering, but it’s hilarious that the H&M fan account is lecturing about gloves and masks. Are H&M supposed to be the safety model for us? In several photos of their Covid pap walk— H&M shared 1 glove between them, M rubbed Harry’s back with her gloved hand, H couldn’t be bothered to wear his bandana mask properly (nose uncovered) & M lowered her mask when talking to her charity targets so that she’d be recognized.
> 
> If anything H&M are a great example of how improper use of gloves and masks can foster a false sense of security. To be effective, safety gear must be donned, worn, and removed correctly.


And picking on a 5-year old is a new lower even for MM or their stans!


----------



## Genie27

chicinthecity777 said:


> And picking on a 5-year old is a new lower even for MM or their stans!


Archewell’s gonna show up in full Hazmat for his birthday photo feature. Do you think it will be in People mag, since they no longer have an Insta-following?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> Maybe this is why she, sorry, they, didn't bring Archie back to the UK. The only thing she has is that kid. If H 'changed his mind' and Archie was in GB she would _never _be able to get him back.



Exactly, *paper tiger*!
♥️


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Archewell’s gonna show up in full Hazmat for his birthday photo feature.


Perhaps he’ll bear less of a resemblance to his American grandfather if so


----------



## marietouchet

Some one asked about THE TIG - was it popular ? Dont know about popular, I am sure readership sky rocketed when she became linked to Harry, so, there would be two interesting figures - before and after dating
But, portions of THE TIG have been archived online - trivial to google for them - banana bread, interview with Serena etc

Wow, such goopy stuff - think Gwyneth ... GP has her detractors but GOOP has become big business, GP no longer acts, she has a lifestyle brand , nothing wrong with that, but goopiness is perhaps not for everyone... the goopy clothes are arguably too expensive

But it struck me that TT was so not BRF-like.  TT and GP try to share/impose a lifestyle, whereas the BRF NEVER does that, they are/always have been above the fray

For example, a goopy thing is to say dont eat carbs/eat veg
Whereas the BRF thing has Charlotte making pasta for those vulnerable people at home, no comments about the deleterious effects of pasta
So, I can see where the Firm would have had issues immediately with TT


----------



## CeeJay

Genie27 said:


> More likely to be a chargeback to herself.
> 
> I’m extra sour today - it’s my birthday and it’s going to be spent in the office, with a bagel for cake, and previously purchased items as “presents” - and no one’s even asked me yet if I’m OK.


HAPPY, HAPPY BIRTHDAY ..


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Oh my, this is a very juicy article on the BRF. M gets a mention:
> 
> _'Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff — that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace,' the former servant continues.
> 
> 'Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers.'_
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ls-dramas-inside-walls-Kensington-Palace.html


don't know how true this is but I can't stand people who treat staff badly.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> Look, she's a chancer.
> 
> I doubt she's paying the legal fees and I'm sure she thought that if she wins it would be like winning the lottery. Plus, it's kept her in the papers for months and in future the media will be careful what they say about her.  If she loses she'll, sorry, they'll issue some statement of how the world if so unfair but they'll soldier on as only a real sixth-in-line Prince and high-profile, modern, young, feminist, philanthropist Duchesse can. Win/win


Does the UK have punitive damages like here in the US???  That would be a hoot, if the DM came back and slapped her with that!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Does the UK have punitive damages like here in the US???  That would be a hoot, if the DM came back and slapped her with that!!!



They'd have to counter sue


----------



## Lounorada

chicinthecity777 said:


> And picking on a 5-year old is a new lower even for MM or their stans!


This.
Adults passing remarks online, expeciting very young kids being to wear PPE is such a laughable reach and can only be expected from Dumb & Dumbers stans.
As the saying goes, 'pick on someone your own size'.
The best thing kids can be doing throughout this pandemic is having great hand hygiene, by washing and saitizing their hands frequently. Which i'm sure W&K and staff made sure of with the kids helping them organise. After all, they seem like very caring, intelligent and responsible parents.


----------



## Jktgal

.... because kids under 10 are not infectious, say Swiss authorities.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52470838


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> And picking on a 5-year old is a new lower even for MM or their stans!



Well you know the stans intend it as an insult on Kate’s parenting. Because in stanthink if they can bring down Kate a few pegs it means Meghan looks better.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Some one asked about THE TIG - was it popular ? Dont know about popular, I am sure readership sky rocketed when she became linked to Harry, so, there would be two interesting figures - before and after dating
> But, portions of THE TIG have been archived online - trivial to google for them - banana bread, interview with Serena etc
> 
> Wow, such goopy stuff - think Gwyneth ... GP has her detractors but GOOP has become big business, GP no longer acts, she has a lifestyle brand , nothing wrong with that, but goopiness is perhaps not for everyone... the goopy clothes are arguably too expensive
> 
> But it struck me that TT was so not BRF-like.  TT and GP try to share/impose a lifestyle, whereas the BRF NEVER does that, they are/always have been above the fray
> 
> For example, a goopy thing is to say dont eat carbs/eat veg
> Whereas the BRF thing has Charlotte making pasta for those vulnerable people at home, no comments about the deleterious effects of pasta
> So, I can see where the Firm would have had issues immediately with TT



I think it probably just came down to the fact that MM couldn't be making money and the Tig was basically a revenue stream for her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Well you know the stans intend it as an insult on Kate’s parenting. Because in stanthink if they can bring down Kate a few pegs it means Meghan looks better.


anyone who tries to criticize this child (even if the real target is the mother) is not very smart IMO


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Well you know the stans intend it as an insult on Kate’s parenting. Because in stanthink if they can bring down Kate a few pegs it means Meghan looks better.


It might have worked if only H&M (as more infectious adults) had followed the safety precautions themselves!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> It might have worked if only H&M (as more infectious adults) had followed the safety precautions themselves!


and their baby can't compete with Charlotte.  First of all he's too young to really see if he's that cute. also, we just haven't seen him


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> There are some "no win no fee" lawyers in the UK but as @papertiger said they are normally for personal injury cases. For this case, both sides have hired the best QCs in the country and trust me they will need to be paid. In the UK, only QC (barrister) can argue in court. Those QCs' fees will be £20k+ per day. Plus lawyers fees etc. Big pay day for their legal teams!
> UK court also don't hand out astronaumical payouts. Any claims of damages have to be reasonablely quantified, e.g. prove you actually suffered the loss because of it, plus a bit money for emotional distress.
> All of this would have been explained to her but given what she's like, she would just want to do what she wants to do.



Wow, this will be their most expensive PR stunt to date.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> _Mr Stephens claimed that senior lawyers in London had pored over Ms Markle's claim and concluded 'there was no chance of her winning', adding *she was either 'poorly advised' or disregarded warnings because she wanted her day in court.*
> _
> Nailed it


I'll bet on the latter .. 'cos, we all know HOW SMART Meghan is ..


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and their baby can't compete with Charlotte.  First of all he's too young to really see if he's that cute. also, we just haven't seen him



We’ve been told we’ll see him on his birthday. Of course those photos may not show much, like a shot of the back of Archie taken from 50 ft. away. 

Just as long as it isn’t a photo of him hanging limply from a sling on Meghan’s chest I’m sure he will look cute enough.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> I'll bet on the latter .. 'cos, we all know HOW SMART Meghan is ..



*CeeJay*, it’s almost as if I just wanna close my eyes tightly, cannot watch this play out ‘cos we know how this is gonna end - so ugly, so embarrassing!!!

Does MM have to drag everyone through the mud?

Hey, Harry, you may not be Einstein but has no-one told you that if this is the way MM treats family, friends and the media how do you think YOU WILL BE TREATED?

Geez, someone change his meds!
 ♥️


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Oh my, this is a very juicy article on the BRF. M gets a mention:
> 
> _'Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff — that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace,' the former servant continues.
> 
> '*Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness*; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers.'_
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ls-dramas-inside-walls-Kensington-Palace.html


Uh - NOPE, she was like this in her younger (teen) years as well, hence the reason why my friend had to chastize her when she was over their house rehearsing their Senior play.  Bottom line, my friend said that Meghan has always been a spoiled brat ..it was HER WAY OR THE HIGHWAY!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> We’ve been told we’ll see him on his birthday. Of course those photos may not show much, like a shot of the back of Archie taken from 50 ft. away.
> 
> Just as long as it isn’t a photo of him hanging limply from a sling on Meghan’s chest I’m sure he will look cute enough.


cute enough but Charlotte is way more than cute enough


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> cute enough but Charlotte is way more than cute enough


And she's fourth in line, not 7th [emoji16]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hey, Harry, you may not be Einstein but has no-one told you that if this is the way MM treats family, friends and the media how do you think YOU WILL BE TREATED?
> 
> Geez, someone change his meds!
> ♥️



Nobody ever truly believes that they will be Markled. That’s something that only happens to other people, _bad people_. Then suddenly one day you are shut out!  And you are left picking up the pieces of your shattered life, wondering “how could this ever happen to me?”


----------



## rose60610

I'm wondering why they renovated Frogmore to the extent they did, with yoga salon and shipping the employee parking to the hinterlands, only to say "Bye!" shortly thereafter. They had planned their "escape" the whole while. It appears they're counted on their huge safety net to fall back on if their scheme doesn't work, so it was important to pimp Frogmore to the hilt in case they have to tail-between-their-legs return. Any post renovations paid by someone else weren't going to happen if they return. So far their court case looks bad for them. No one gives them the time of day during the virus. Unless Meghan thinks she can convince the British public that she so dearly loves them and wants "the work to continue" and whatever other word salad crap she'd put together, she won't be back. Or if she does return, the Brits will be scolded for not idolizing her. Since playing the victim is something she relishes, she just might go back.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if they will actually pay back the money for Frogmore.  I doubt it.


----------



## poopsie

Genie27 said:


> Could it be that her desire for world-wide attention is measured merely in clicks, views and likes rather than anything substantial? Fawning adoration of fans and stans? That would be hilarious, if that is what makes her feel 'fulfilled' and complete.



She must be thrilled to pieces that _her_  thread here has more than TWICE as many pages as W&K's 

Way to go Megpie


----------



## rcy

https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21

is this legit??


----------



## mrsinsyder

rcy said:


> https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21
> 
> is this legit??


Omg


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> FrancesM sounds like another fake profile MM created! So pathetic! Good job judging by the number of followers they have, they are not much of a player on Twitter! She must be so busy occupied by her stupid law suit now!
> She's finally in TV news headline here now due to the defeat yesterday! Well done!


Frances was Diana's mother's name and her sister Lady Sarah is married to a McCorquodale.  There is an F and N M for you.  Whoever this is, it is definitely a plant.


----------



## gracekelly

_confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world_

Wow what a load of horse pucky.  Right at the moment they don't have a pot to pee in and are unemployed.  The only profound mark on the world at this point is a life lesson in not what to do.


----------



## gracekelly

One would have to be brain dead to think that Kate and/or William would place Charlotte in any danger.  She probably ran up to the step and dropped the bag.  She gets cuter all the time!


----------



## Lounorada

the second slide!


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


>



I love this picture!  You can see that she has a strong personality and self awareness.

Gee whiz Lotttie, to whom are  you referring? LOL!


----------



## Mrs.Z

is this legit?? [/QUOTE]
Ugh, I literally can’t even.  We should come up with alternate titles.  My alternate title is: Meghan & Harry: The World Will Never Understand.  “In giving up everything, they have truly given...nothing”.


----------



## Genie27

gracekelly said:


> _confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world_
> 
> Wow what a load of horse pucky.  Right at the moment they don't have a pot to pee in and are unemployed.  The only profound mark on the world at this point is a life lesson in not what to do.


The promo reads just like the rest of her “writing” - run on sentences with adjectival long jumps. My English teacher would have rapped my knuckles with a metal ruler.


----------



## Genie27

Finding Nemo, in LaLa Land.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Genie27 said:


> Finding Nemo, in LaLa Land.


Ha!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

The Duchess


----------



## Sharont2305

Genie27 said:


> The Duchess


You mean THE Duchess [emoji16]


----------



## A1aGypsy

Nobody Cares is my proposed title. Doubt meaning and all.


----------



## Genie27

Hmmmm.....this is the chain of freedom fighters?
MKGandhi, MLK, Meghan?!?

If Freedom can be “found” as easily as a seashell on a beach, perhaps your “struggle” exists only in your navel-gazing mind.


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if they will actually pay back the money for Frogmore.  I doubt it.



Charles is probably expected to pay.


----------



## lulilu

Finding Freedom, my azz


----------



## Genie27

And the optics of SIXTH IN LINE TO THE THRONE of the empire that “ruled” what is now the commonwealth basking in the glory of Finding Freedom?!?!?!?!?!?


----------



## poopsie

Get back to us when you are free from Daddy's pursestrings

tick......tock...........tick..........tock...........tick..........tock........................tick.............................................tock


----------



## muchstuff




----------



## VigeeLeBrun

My title for the proposed book is unprintable


----------



## Lounorada

rcy said:


> https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21
> 
> is this legit??


'_Finding Freedom'_?   More like, 'How To Burn Bridges- For Dummies'



gracekelly said:


> _*confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world*_
> 
> Wow what a load of horse pucky.  Right at the moment they don't have a pot to pee in and are unemployed.  The only profound mark on the world at this point is a life lesson in not what to do.









ETA: Of course she's in the foreground of the picture on the cover...  staying true to her tradition of always taking the lead and charging ahead of JCMH.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Meghan and H: The World is not Enough 

(James Bond rip off, I know...but it works....and M probably thought of it first.....obviously)


----------



## poopsie




----------



## muchstuff

poopsie said:


>



Great movie!


----------



## marietouchet

poopsie said:


>



Kudos to you for finding this , a fav of mine from Aretha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Finding Freedom?   Ooooh no no nooooo, no, Harry.​Hey BRF, kick them out, kick them out, kick them out.  Aw hell, just kick them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> Oh my, this is a very juicy article on the BRF. M gets a mention:
> 
> _'Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff — that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace,' the former servant continues.
> 
> 'Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers.'_
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ls-dramas-inside-walls-Kensington-Palace.html



It also shows where one's character lacks. Kate didn't grow up with servants either, yet what you heard about her was that it drove staff nuts she made the bed or cleaned the kitchen before they could get to it, not that she treated them inappropriately.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Well you know the stans intend it as an insult on Kate’s parenting. Because in stanthink if they can bring down Kate a few pegs it means Meghan looks better.



I feel the Cambridges execute perfectly their friend Michelle *****'s slogan:

"If they go low, we go high."


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> Kudos to you for finding this , a fav of mine from Aretha




LOL I actually like this version better than the original she did


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel the Cambridges execute perfectly their friend Michelle *****'s slogan:
> 
> "If they go low, we go high."


Love the reference to their friend as opposed to......??? [emoji1787] [emoji1787] [emoji1787]
Yes, exactly, their friend [emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122][emoji122]


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> I'm wondering why they renovated Frogmore to the extent they did, with yoga salon and shipping the employee parking to the hinterlands, only to say "Bye!" shortly thereafter. They had planned their "escape" the whole while. It appears they're counted on their huge safety net to fall back on if their scheme doesn't work, so it was important to pimp Frogmore to the hilt in case they have to tail-between-their-legs return. Any post renovations paid by someone else weren't going to happen if they return. So far their court case looks bad for them. No one gives them the time of day during the virus. Unless Meghan thinks she can convince the British public that she so dearly loves them and wants "the work to continue" and whatever other word salad crap she'd put together, she won't be back. Or if she does return, the Brits will be scolded for not idolizing her. Since playing the victim is something she relishes, she just might go back.



I think one of the reasons for the renovation was Megain loves playing queen of the manor and spending lots and lots of other peoples money as well as telling everyone what to do. Whether she planned to ever live there or not *she* got to be in charge and playact a role.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SNL told us first!


----------



## gracekelly

My alternate title for the book:  Nobody asks if we are OK.  A tale for the ages.


----------



## bellecate

rcy said:


> https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21
> 
> is this legit??



Careful going to read it, I spewed my pop reading the synopsis.


----------



## mdcx

rcy said:


> https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21
> 
> is this legit??


Pretentious cr-p. And they are hardly a “young couple” imo.
All this business about creating a legacy - probably best to talk about that only when you have some solid achievements behind you imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose
And nothin' left was all she left to me_
Kris Kristofferson, Me and Bobby McGee, originally by Janis Joplin


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> My alternate title for the book:  Nobody asks if we are OK.  A tale for the ages.



or, “....A tale for the aged.”
*gracekelly*, I just can’t......
♥️


----------



## mdcx

Fyi:


----------



## mdcx

It's on the Harper Collins site also:
https://www.harpercollins.com/9780063046122/untitled/


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> All this business about creating a legacy - probably best to talk about that only when you have some solid achievements behind you imo.



Wait, you mean talking about all the achievements they meant to have and they hope nobody notices they didn’t get around to actually doing doesn’t count? Because I’m pretty sure that is what the book is about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I never thought I would pay attention to this (meaningless) couple, but they insist in imposing their presence everywhere. 

Is "Finding Freedom" going to be added to Oprah's Book Club List?


----------



## mrsinsyder

How can they be so tone deaf? Look, I don’t think what they went through was a cake walk. But come on. They have oodles of privilege beyond 99.999% of the world. And to come out with this, at a time of worldwide crisis? I just can’t.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> How can they be so tone deaf? Look, I don’t think what they went through was a cake walk. But come on. They have oodles of privilege beyond 99.999% of the world. And to come out with this, at a time of worldwide crisis? I just can’t.



The book was originally supposed to come out in June. The release was pushed back to August in an attempt to show sensitivity during the pandemic. What, that didn’t work for you?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Which one is it?
https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Escaping-Chronic-Syndrome-ebook/dp/B0818DGN2D
https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Writings-Death-Row/dp/188184708X
https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Story-Hope-Restoration-ebook/dp/B07CYNJQQF
https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Personal-Deception-Identity-ebook/dp/B07MTNB3C1
https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Steps-Revealing-Purposed/dp/1682079082
https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Lessons-Advanced-Learners/dp/1618214918


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> The book was originally supposed to come out in June. The release was pushed back to August in an attempt to show sensitivity during the pandemic. What, that didn’t work for you?


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Which one is it?
> https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Escaping-Chronic-Syndrome-ebook/dp/B0818DGN2D
> https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Writings-Death-Row/dp/188184708X
> https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Story-Hope-Restoration-ebook/dp/B07CYNJQQF
> https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Personal-Deception-Identity-ebook/dp/B07MTNB3C1
> https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Steps-Revealing-Purposed/dp/1682079082
> https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Freedom-Lessons-Advanced-Learners/dp/1618214918
> 
> 
> View attachment 4722286




IKR!
I didn't want to click on the link (just in case they would get some kickback or something) so I Googled the title. 
I couldn't believe how many others had had the gall to steal her thunder!
If these two EVER have an original idea I will s#!t plaid rabbits


----------



## Katel

rcy said:


> https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21
> 
> is this legit??



“Finding Out How Little The World Cares - And Why That’s Not OK”

or the shorter version:
“ Finding Out No One Cares“


----------



## Katel

...or

“Finding A Hair Stylist During Lockdown”

and:

“Finding What’s Left of My Package” (for Harry and his fiddling fingers)

(What IS up with his right hand?)

also, every time I see “Omid Scobie,” I think “rabid scabies”


----------



## Madrose

Katel said:


> “Finding Out How Little The World Cares - And Why That’s Not OK”
> 
> or the shorter version:
> “ Finding Out No One Cares“



I would buy this book.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> My title for the proposed book is unprintable


*HA* - same here = *G*[great] *M*[inds] *T*[hink] *A*[like]!!!


----------



## lalame

Katel said:


> ...or
> 
> “Finding A Hair Stylist During Lockdown”
> 
> and:
> 
> “Finding What’s Left of My Package” (for Harry and his fiddling fingers)
> 
> (What IS up with his right hand?)
> 
> also, every time I see “Omid Scobie,” I think “rabid scabies”
> 
> View attachment 4722316



Get. Out. I saw this post first and assumed that was a joke cover one of you guys had doctored. The title, the photo, the weird placement of the authors’ names... all so bizarre. Wow, did the BRF approve this?? Imagine your child moves away from home and calls that “finding freedom”....


----------



## bag-mania

Who are these insipid fangirls writing for Cosmo these days? Helen Gurley Brown must be rolling over in her grave!

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Expected to Grace a Bunch of Red Carpets Once It’s Safe*
If Harry doesn’t wear a harness to the Oscars, I quit!

Today wasn’t filled with the best updates for Meghan Markle, who just lost major ground in her tabloid lawsuit, but there is some good Meghan-related news to get excited about. Apparently, royal fans should expect her to make more red carpet appearances in the future! IDK about you, but the thought of seeing Meghan and Prince Harry walk the Oscars red carpet or sit at the Givenchy Met Gala table might just carry me through at least the next, like, eight hours.

Obviously, nobody is hosting or attending red-carpet events these days, but royal expert Myka Meier thinks that once it’s safe to do so, the Sussex fam will grace them with their presence. Talking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Meier discussed what she thinks Meghan and Harry will do with their newfound freedom, and it sounds like Hollywood is calling their name. 

She said, “I think we’ll see Meghan back in acting in terms of major motion films. I think she’ll be choosy, of course, but I think we’ll see a lot of them.” Fingers crossed that actually happens because as good as Meghan’s previous roles may be, I need to find other Meghan content to watch besides Suits, Deal or No Deal, Disney’s Elephants, and that scene where she’s a FedEx employee in Horrible Bosses.

Meier then added that while she thinks Meghan will be selective about her roles, she and Harry will be a little more lax when it comes to which events they attend. “As soon as there are red carpets again, I genuinely think they will be on every major red carpet,” she said. 

I mean, one can certainly hope that will be the case! During one of their last red carpets, Meghan and Harry met Beyoncé, and I, for one, would like to see more of that. Please and thank you!

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...eghan-markle-attend-red-carpets-acting-again/


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> Who are these insipid fangirls writing for Cosmo these days? Helen Gurley Brown must be rolling over in her grave!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Expected to Grace a Bunch of Red Carpets Once It’s Safe*
> If Harry doesn’t wear a harness to the Oscars, I quit!
> 
> Today wasn’t filled with the best updates for Meghan Markle, who just lost major ground in her tabloid lawsuit, but there is some good Meghan-related news to get excited about. Apparently, royal fans should expect her to make more red carpet appearances in the future! IDK about you, but the thought of seeing Meghan and Prince Harry walk the Oscars red carpet or sit at the Givenchy Met Gala table might just carry me through at least the next, like, eight hours.
> 
> Obviously, nobody is hosting or attending red-carpet events these days, but royal expert Myka Meier thinks that once it’s safe to do so, the Sussex fam will grace them with their presence. Talking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Meier discussed what she thinks Meghan and Harry will do with their newfound freedom, and it sounds like Hollywood is calling their name.
> 
> She said, “I think we’ll see Meghan back in acting in terms of major motion films. I think she’ll be choosy, of course, but I think we’ll see a lot of them.” Fingers crossed that actually happens because as good as Meghan’s previous roles may be, I need to find other Meghan content to watch besides Suits, Deal or No Deal, Disney’s Elephants, and that scene where she’s a FedEx employee in Horrible Bosses.
> 
> Meier then added that while she thinks Meghan will be selective about her roles, she and Harry will be a little more lax when it comes to which events they attend. “As soon as there are red carpets again, I genuinely think they will be on every major red carpet,” she said.
> 
> I mean, one can certainly hope that will be the case! During one of their last red carpets, Meghan and Harry met Beyoncé, and I, for one, would like to see more of that. Please and thank you!
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...eghan-markle-attend-red-carpets-acting-again/


Barf!!!


----------



## rose60610

"Finding Freedom" = throwing away a mountain of privilege and screwing up their lives. So they write a book out of desperation describing how excruciatingly hard it was. And we're supposed to feel sorry for THEM? They're utterly sick.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Who are these insipid fangirls writing for Cosmo these days? Helen Gurley Brown must be rolling over in her grave!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Expected to Grace a Bunch of Red Carpets Once It’s Safe*
> If Harry doesn’t wear a harness to the Oscars, I quit!
> 
> Today wasn’t filled with the best updates for Meghan Markle, who just lost major ground in her tabloid lawsuit, but there is some good Meghan-related news to get excited about. Apparently, royal fans should expect her to make more red carpet appearances in the future! IDK about you, but the thought of seeing Meghan and Prince Harry walk the Oscars red carpet or sit at the Givenchy Met Gala table might just carry me through at least the next, like, eight hours.
> 
> Obviously, nobody is hosting or attending red-carpet events these days, but royal expert Myka Meier thinks that once it’s safe to do so, the Sussex fam will grace them with their presence. Talking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Meier discussed what she thinks Meghan and Harry will do with their newfound freedom, and it sounds like Hollywood is calling their name.
> 
> She said, “I think we’ll see Meghan back in acting in terms of major motion films. I think she’ll be choosy, of course, but I think we’ll see a lot of them.” Fingers crossed that actually happens because as good as Meghan’s previous roles may be, I need to find other Meghan content to watch besides Suits, Deal or No Deal, Disney’s Elephants, and that scene where she’s a FedEx employee in Horrible Bosses.
> 
> Meier then added that while she thinks Meghan will be selective about her roles, she and Harry will be a little more lax when it comes to which events they attend. “As soon as there are red carpets again, I genuinely think they will be on every major red carpet,” she said.
> 
> I mean, one can certainly hope that will be the case! During one of their last red carpets, Meghan and Harry met Beyoncé, and I, for one, would like to see more of that. Please and thank you!
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...eghan-markle-attend-red-carpets-acting-again/


_.  _
Fan_girls_ says it all in a nutshell.  I outgrew Cosmo a long time ago, and it had nothing to do with my age.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

That alone is bad enough.  Add to it that you are paying them millions, supplying security, and letting them keep their ‘royal’ status (HRH, succession, charities, etc.).  

Red carpet? H doesn’t get it yet. He will get booed - loudly, always. 
Is anyone in Cali still taking his calls? 



lalame said:


> Imagine your child moves away from home and calls that “finding freedom”....


----------



## Genie27

Cue a quiet redesign of the cover, removing the word Royal in....3....2....1

New title option:
BECOMING... The _Duchess _


----------



## CarryOn2020

And lest we forget:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...gnores-three-formal-requests-interviewed.html
Ooooh yeah, we’ve got questions for you & the mrs.


----------



## Genie27

“What happened”
Why the dress didn’t fit, where’s Arkie and other unanswered questions of the 21st century.


----------



## lalame

Does anyone else immediately think of how the press loved to bring up Meghan's ancestors who were cotton slaves (and look how far we've come!)..... and now she calls this book "Finding Freedom?" Being in the royal family is her own version of slavery? Her ancestors are probably rolling in their graves.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Does anyone else immediately think of how the press loved to bring up Meghan's ancestors who were cotton slaves (and look how far we've come!)..... and now she calls this book "Finding Freedom?" Being in the royal family is her own version of slavery? Her ancestors are probably rolling in their graves.



Yes, “Finding Freedom” implies they were being oppressed while they lived in luxury and wealth, which is a joke. However, they can probably weasel around any criticism by saying that the authors or the publisher came up with the title, not them.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Yes, “Finding Freedom” implies they were being oppressed while they lived in luxury and wealth, which is a joke. However, they can probably weasel around any criticism by saying that the authors or the publisher came up with the title, not them.



You're right, I keep forgetting it's not technically her book... though very hard to believe Omid is going to publish anything without getting her approval first. He better be ready to get thrown under that bus once the criticism comes in.


----------



## Emeline

rcy said:


> https://www.kobo.com/ca/en/ebook/finding-freedom-21
> 
> is this legit??


I think M&H will pay a price for that very unpleasant title.  The RF has bent over backwards for those two.  I'd doubt they will anymore.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> You're right, I keep forgetting it's not technically her book... though very hard to believe Omid is going to publish anything without getting her approval first. He better be ready to get thrown under that bus once the criticism comes in.



It’s the authorized biography so of course there’s not going to be one line that wasn’t preapproved by Meghan and probably dictated by her. It’s an unauthorized biography that we want to read!



Emeline said:


> I didn't notice it on Amazon. They list lots of books for presale with a later release date.
> 
> I did note many other books there with Finding Freedom as the title or part of the title.
> 
> My guess is that this  self published.
> 
> I think M&H will pay a price for that very unpleasant title.  The RF has bent over backwards for those two.  I'd doubt they will anymore.



It’s on Amazon. Do a search on Omid Scobie and it comes right up.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> It’s on Amazon. Do a search on Omid Scobie and it comes right up.


Thank you! I'll zip back and edit.


----------



## Annawakes

How long is this book?  How long does it take to say H and M are amazing, incredible, brave, amazing, incredible, so inspiring?

I just do not get what they could possibly fill an entire book with, when they haven’t done anything to “change the world”.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please, Charles. Do the right thing and cut the pocket money until the petulant kids learn how to talk to their elders and bring home good grades.


----------



## Clearblueskies

The joke is Meghan and Harry have constantly been preaching “their side of the story” from the first nanosecond they started attracting criticism.  Justifiable criticism for their shocking hypocrisy on climate change and lavish lifestyle.
Getting them to stop talking about themselves is the problem.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I can’t help thinking a lot can happen between now and August.....

* will they still be in the same country?
* will one of them have finally got a real job?
* will they still be on speaking terms with the scrofulous Scobie?
* will they still be on speaking terms with each other?
* will they have finally reimbursed the UK taxpayer the Frogmore refurb millions?
* will Doria have finally shown up?
* will they have actually established a “non profit” that achieved anything - any.small.thing.at.all?

Perhaps they’ll graciously and generously update the book on a monthly basis to keep us all in the loop   They could have a new coronet thingy to royally mark each new edition


----------



## doni

mdcx said:


> Pretentious cr-p. And they are hardly a “young couple” imo.
> .



I am also perplexed about that. No criticism there, I also married late and had my second child at the same age Meghan had her first. But it never occurred to me to consider myself a _young_ bride or mother...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

mrsinsyder said:


> How can they be so tone deaf? Look, I don’t think what they went through was a cake walk. But come on. They have oodles of privilege beyond 99.999% of the world. And to come out with this, at a time of worldwide crisis? I just can’t.



Exactly. It's so tone deaf.

And why are they getting away with the use of royal when they are effectively not a part of it anymore?


----------



## beautymagpie

Emeline said:


> I think M&H will pay a price for that very unpleasant title.  The RF has bent over backwards for those two.  I'd doubt they will anymore.



I'd imagine Royal lawyers are at the ready. But if they veto much I'd be surprised. They're very conscious of the timing of things and Harry's possible road back I think. I hope they act as they would towards anyone.

And I want to know how much they're getting paid for this. Nosey I know, but they owe the British purse money.


----------



## PewPew

doni said:


> I am also perplexed about that. No criticism there, I also married late and had my second child at the same age Meghan had her first. But it never occurred to me to consider myself a _young_ bride or mother...



Even though Meghan is older than Will, Harry & Kate, they have to push the “young, naive” angle for several reasons—

1) they like to draw parallels between Meghan & Harry’s dead mother. Diana  was truly young & naive at 19 when she was engaged to 32 yo Charles. M even patterns outfits after Diana, right down to accessories.

2) to be more sympathetic, Harry must be cast as M’s rescuer & protector— Meghan following her engagement tried to look like a young, innocent waif clinging to her Prince, despite being older & having been married twice before (first marriage was annulled).

3) Youth, naivete, and inexperience is really their only “excuse” (apart from the world conspiring against them) for their litany of tone-deaf actions and statements. If they hyperfocus on their relative youth, you’re supposed to forget that such entitled, peevish behavior is actually coming from world-traveling, college-educated, approaching-middle aged grifters.

And frankly, naive & misled worked to some extent, but they just can’t stay out of the spotlight. When she cried during her Africa documentary that she was just existing & not living b/c people didn’t ask if she was ok. And she claimed she expected the UK tabloids to be nicer bc “we don’t have tabloids in America”. She did convince a lot of people at first, especially outside the UK where we didn’t know their history. Many had compassion about potential post-partum depression & the intense media scrutiny which would be rough for anyone. But compassion waned as people realized this is a nearly-40 yr old actress who grew up on the set of a TV show in LA, who knows about celeb tactics, who had PR-image consultants for 10+ yrs, who cannot stop making press statements, who arranges pap walks & has a long history of leaks to the tabloids via “friends.”

This is a seasoned professional, not a young debutante.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Never forget she is divorced at least once, maybe twice. No blushing bride at all, still she went against the queen and wore a very long veil = tacky. She has been in long-term relationships since her teens. H, too, had 2 long-term relationships, maybe more. Both are very experienced in ‘true love’.  This is why they get so much criticism - they are fake, pretending to be young and naive when they really are “seasoned professionals” in the scamming business.  So, why is Charles funding them?

_
Hard times arouse an instinctive desire for authenticity._
Coco Chanel


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if they will actually pay back the money for Frogmore.  I doubt it.



JCMH said he would but none of us are holding our breath


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Never forget she is divorced at least once, maybe twice. No blushing bride at all, still she went against the queen and wore a very long veil = tacky. She has been in long-term relationships since her teens. H, too, had 2 long-term relationships, maybe more. Both are very experienced in ‘true love’.  This is why they get so much criticism - they are fake, pretending to be young and naive when they really are “seasoned professionals” in the scamming business. * So, why is Charles funding them*?
> 
> _
> Hard times arouse an instinctive desire for authenticity._
> Coco Chanel


What choice does he have?
Let the moron loose to fend for himself?
This is why there is a one year deal in place imo.
They all know that Harry is clueless and will come back to what he knows and will realize love....


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The book was originally supposed to come out in June. The release was pushed back to August in an attempt to show sensitivity during the pandemic. What, that didn’t work for you?



These 2 need to buy a watch between them, not a faux palace in Beverly Hills or wherever.

Their timing is so off, to say they are still living in the last century is kind, they have no nose for zeitgeist and despite their word-spew, no thoughts for anybody or anything beyond themselves.

I haven't  heard or seen them do anything that was beyond a PR stunt yet - not even get married or have a baby.


----------



## marietouchet

The Omid book, FINDING FREEDOM - uggghhh, title sounds like the autobiography of Nelson Mandela, a bit pompous 

What's in it for them ? They dont get the royalties, Omid will ... The BRF must have made H&M sign an NDA.... so, they cannot write a book like Sarah - Duchess of York did

This is like the Andrew Morton book on Diana, she cooperated - behind the scenes, but did not write it, the AM book was to show her side of the story BUT that was in the days when she wanted sympathy for the Charles & Camilla mess, and D could not speak out personally, but M has spoken (no one asked how I was doing...)
All they MIGHT get from this book is sympathy and possible gigs, no money, but golly this is going to burn a lot of bridges ... 

Who knows the agreement with Omid, but , I would want full control of every word - difficult when someone else is sitting at the typewriter 

The down side of this book might be hugely bad


----------



## 1LV

What MM is going to get from the book in lieu of royalties is continued exposure, attention, press - the very thing she seems to crave above all else.  She obviously subscribes to the belief that “any attention is better than no attention”.


----------



## rose60610

When you marry at age 33 after ten years in the military to a twice divorced woman age 37, how in the world can you even try to project an image of  "young, naive, inexperienced, and fresh-faced"?  Shouldn't they be embarrassed by that? 

PewPew nailed it in #28586 

This failed image they try to emulate is the only thing they got going for them. It reeks of desperation. Even Diana at age 19 was more mature than these two now. Diana had a few faux pas but she really WAS young and adopted the "correct" royal behaviors expected of her without going out of her way to rock the boat. MM did try to rub royal noses, then cried about the criticism. M&H are nauseating, and while it's sad to see lives fall apart, it's impossible to feel sorry for these two.


----------



## V0N1B2

rose60610 said:


> ...while it's sad to see lives fall apart, it's impossible to feel sorry for these two.


 Can't argue with that.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> The Omid book, FINDING FREEDOM - uggghhh, title sounds like the autobiography of Nelson Mandela, a bit pompous



I know... I just can’t... I bet it also stokes the anti-monarchist flames too. Why are the people funding this family’s existence when apparently it’s so oppressive? Not to mention when they prove they can make good money on their own. They just want to be free... free them from those shackles of abundant taxpayer-subsidized wealth!


----------



## Mrs.Z

lalame said:


> I know... I just can’t... I bet it also stokes the anti-monarchist flames too. Why are the people funding this family’s existence when apparently it’s so oppressive? Not to mention when they prove they can make good money on their own. They just want to be free... free them from those shackles of abundant taxpayer-subsidized wealth!


I can’t get over Finding Freedom either, they were not free in the UK?  I mean honestly, the implications are offensive.


----------



## sdkitty

now we in the US will see a bunch of positive coverage of the book on shows like ET.
As far as the general public, here is my DH's reaction to hearing something about them on TV:

  Who are they talking about?  Oh, them.  No one cares.  They're just acting like the Kardashians, any attention is good attention.  and it won't be long before he divorces her.  he is the one who is unhappy with their situation.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

This book, written by and of course paid for by H&M - you do know that scoubie-doobie was paid in full upfront for writing it for MM? Yes, that is the way it is done here

Honestly am not sure how much Harry knows about MM’s behind the scene manipulations but the book's title alone is a huge slap in the face to the BRF

Freedom from what, Harry? Your fam, friends, duty, country - you had to find freedom by cutting all of these ties suddenly while in your mid-30's?

In any event, scoubie-doubie's book about H&M? Charles should know that H&M are complicit in it's publication, and he will hopefully slash H&M’s living expenses right here, right now

Maybe H&M in a condo in Century City, lol? Oh the shame of it!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> This book, written by and of course paid for by H&M - you do know that scoubie-doobie was paid in full upfront for writing it for MM? Yes, that is the way it is done here
> 
> Honestly am not sure how much Harry knows about MM’s behind the scene manipulations but the book's title alone is a huge slap in the face to the BRF
> 
> Freedom from what, Harry? Your fam, friends, duty, country - you had to find freedom by cutting all of these ties suddenly while in your mid-30's?
> 
> In any event, scoubie-doubie's book about H&M? Charles should know that H&M are complicit in it's publication, and he will hopefully slash H&M’s living expenses right here, right now
> 
> Maybe H&M in a condo in Century City, lol? Oh the shame of it!!!


and even if in a condo in Century City, they would be so much more fortunate than so many people in this country or the world.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Also, this@Mail Online:
"Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20"

Thought it was stipulated by QEII and agreed with by H&M that the word ROYAL was off -limits by these two grifters?
So why is it it the sub-title of their book?


----------



## queennadine

These two continue to surprise me, SHAME ON ME!

I can't get over the title of this "book." As many of you have said, it's beyond offensive. Freedom from unimaginable wealth, privilege, access, popularity (if you simply act like a normal person and not a spoiled a**)....Charles needs to cut them off ASAP.

I truly hope JCMH is thinking of Archie before making all of these decisions. It's just a matter of time before MM is 'free' of H.


----------



## lalame

The Daily Mail reported on the book just 8 hours ago and it already has 5,000 comments lol. I hadn't really seen it covered anywhere else... where's the popcorn emoji in TPF?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ography-bombshell-called-Finding-Freedom.html

Some funny ones:


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> and even if in a condo in Century City, they would be so much more fortunate than so many people in this country or the world.


Exactly.  That’s what’s so obscene about the game they’re playing - they ask people to feel sorry for them when they’re in a far, far more privileged position than the vast majority.  They have wealth and opportunity beyond most peoples imagining. They could do good works and do it anonymously.  They could do good publicly and still keep their private life private.  They could live a completely private life with their child - it’s entirely their choice to keep publicising their private lives.
I feel worried for the women who adore Meghan and believe in the artful rubbish she puts out, as if it’s making a difference to the world.  The only difference I see is in the lining of her pockets.  If what she’s doing is regarded as making a meaningful global impact, then the bar for philanthropy is being set unbelievably low.


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> The Daily Mail reported on the book just 8 hours ago and it already has 5,000 comments lol. I hadn't really seen it covered anywhere else... where's the popcorn emoji in TPF?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ography-bombshell-called-Finding-Freedom.html
> 
> Some funny ones:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4722736
> View attachment 4722737
> View attachment 4722738


Dayum! Those comments are savage.


----------



## kemilia

I like "Funding Freedom."


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> Finding Freedom, my azz


Yeah, more like "FINDING FRAUDS"!!!  Besides, if H&M can't use their Royal titles, then why is Omid (their pansy) writing about them, they aren't "royal" anymore!


----------



## lalame

Re: using "royal," do you think this is making good on their threat in that exit statement that the queen doesn't have jurisdiction on that word outside the UK? Hard to believe they could get THAT nasty but like the other poster said... why am I even surprised? Shame on me.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Dayum! Those comments are savage.


I hope she's reading them and weeping


----------



## 1LV

MM should have called the book what it really is . . . F YOU


----------



## Suncatcher

Some commentator wrote in the Daily Mail in response to the article that another poster linked above: “Now trees will be felled for this nonsense”. 

Oh my god I am rolling on the floor dying with laughter. 

Perhaps how well the book sells will be a barometer of their popularity. No chance I will read it, even if passed on to me, if only because it will be lost time I will never recoup.


----------



## CeeJay

Can't remember where I saw it (possibly the Daily Mail), that they are now looking at a $13m house (with a Grandma space - for Doria) in the Pacific Palisades area (beautiful $$$ area that can have great views of the Pacific and Santa Monica).  $13m would leave Harry with only $7m left and in that area of LA, whooooo-wheeeee not inexpensive!


----------



## CeeJay

I'm so glad that QEII and Charles have given them 1-year review!  Like QEII's mother, there comes a point where you just have to let them go; they want to make their own $$$ .. fine, but Charles SHOULD NOT fund them anymore!  MM thinks she can get into top-notch movies (Class 'A' - when she is a Class 'Z' actress)?? .. HA!!! .. that will be interesting!


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I saw it (possibly the Daily Mail), that they are now looking at a $13m house (with a Grandma space - for Doria) in the Pacific Palisades area (beautiful $$$ area that can have great views of the Pacific and Santa Monica).  $13m would leave Harry with only $7m left and in that area of LA, whooooo-wheeeee not inexpensive!


Are they really going to settle here?
Seriously?
They will need security for the rest of their lives and nobody is going to curtsy to him nor her.
He will never adapt, imo.
He will forever feel superior to American people and here nobody will give him the time of day in the long run.
He will criticize our horrible table manners and how nobody look up to him, blah, blah, blah.
How vulgar, American people are....
At least on the east coast, he would mangle with the other Euro Trash,.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I saw it (possibly the Daily Mail), that they are now looking at a $13m house (with a Grandma space - for Doria) in the Pacific Palisades area (beautiful $$$ area that can have great views of the Pacific and Santa Monica).  $13m would leave Harry with only $7m left and in that area of LA, whooooo-wheeeee not inexpensive!



that’s to own, right? not renting?

regarding the use of the word “royalty” - wasn’t using that as a title banned, ex., “his Royal Poofter-ness” -  maybe they think they can use it as an adjective for their life...not quite getting that it was their PAST life that they THREW away.



limom said:


> Are they really going to settle here?
> Seriously?
> ...
> *He will criticize our horrible table manners and how nobody look up to him, blah, blah, blah.*
> How vulgar, American people are....
> At least on the east coast, he would mangle with the other Euro Trash,.....



all of this but especially the bolded!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> $13m would leave Harry with only $7m left and in that area of LA, whooooo-wheeeee not inexpensive!



Now you know they won’t pay for a property outright. They will get the longest, cheapest mortgage they possibly can and then put the absolute minimum amount down, just like everyone else who is pretentiously living beyond their means.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I saw it (possibly the Daily Mail), that they are now looking at a $13m house (with a Grandma space - for Doria) in the Pacific Palisades area (beautiful $$$ area that can have great views of the Pacific and Santa Monica).  $13m would leave Harry with only $7m left and in that area of LA, whooooo-wheeeee not inexpensive!



It just hit me too that the $30m net worth figure for him was stated pre-COVID. I'm going to bet all or most of that was tied in investments that sank along with the rest of the market. Wouldn't be surprised if it was more like $20m now... so a $13m house is something.


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> that’s to own, right? not renting?
> 
> regarding the use of the word “royalty” - wasn’t using that as a title banned, ex., “his Royal Poofter-ness” -  maybe they think they can use it as an adjective for their life...not quite getting that it was their PAST life that they THREW away.
> 
> 
> 
> all of this but especially the bolded!


Yes, they were looking at it to BUY.  What kills me re: the "Royal", remember just a little while back when Harry said "just call me Harry" .. yet, his wife just LOVES her "Royal" title!  Like I said before, to me .. QEII and Charles need to cut them off, financially and take away the "Royal" titles!  Basta cosi!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Now you know they won’t pay for a property outright. They will get the longest, cheapest mortgage they possibly can and then put the absolute minimum amount down, just like everyone else who is pretentiously living beyond their means.



I'm sure in the US, like in the the UK, mortgages are dependant on proof of past earnings not projected future fantasies.


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I'm sure in the US, like in the the UK, mortgages are dependant on proof of past earnings not projected future fantasies.


No he could get a loan very easily.
This is America, you can front all you want as long as you can make the monthly payment.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> No he could get a loan very easily.
> This is America, you can front all you way as long as you can make the monthly payment.



Okay...

Good luck America


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> Okay...
> 
> Good luck America


You all forgot 2008?
He has collaterals, at his Financial level he would get a bank from a private banker, easy peasy..


----------



## Mrs.Z

limom said:


> No he could get a loan very easily.
> This is America, you can front all you want as long as you can make the monthly payment.


I disagree, post-2008 banks require far more than “fronting”.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe Charles can be a consigner.


----------



## mdcx

Imo the issue with his finances appears to be that at any moment the BRF financial spigot could be turned off for good, thus seriously reducing his income/assets/status/ability to monetise his title etc. Even his trust may have conditions on it.


----------



## tiktok

Just the property tax in CA will be $150K/year, she’d better hope for a couple more Disney gigs...


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe Charles can be a consigner.


if charles was to cosign or guaranty he'd be on the hook if they don't pay.  He may as well make them a loan or give them the money if that's the case.  I hope he doesn't.  they said they were going to make huge money on their own.  now let them be independent as they wished


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Just the property tax in CA will be $150K/year, she’d better hope for a couple more Disney gigs...


I guess their heads got so big after all the attention they got around the time of the wedding that they just didn't think clearly.  Just acted impulsively.  Now they should live with it.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> The Daily Mail reported on the book just 8 hours ago and it already has 5,000 comments lol. I hadn't really seen it covered anywhere else... where's the popcorn emoji in TPF?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ography-bombshell-called-Finding-Freedom.html
> 
> Some funny ones:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4722736
> View attachment 4722737
> View attachment 4722738


"M" looks unusually smug or arrogant here.  Photog must have caught her at a moment when the mask dropped


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Madrose

mdcx said:


> Imo the issue with his finances appears to be that at any moment the BRF financial spigot could be turned off for good, thus seriously reducing his income/assets/status/ability to monetise his title etc. Even his trust may have conditions on it.



I forgot about that.  You're absolutely right there could be conditions on his trust prohibiting or limiting him from fully utilizing any assets.  There could be a trustee that Harry must defer to.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The IRS will have the last word on their finances. 
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/22/meg...ll-owe-taxes-to-the-irs-wherever-they-go.html


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The IRS will have the last word on their finances.
> https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/22/meg...ll-owe-taxes-to-the-irs-wherever-they-go.html


even if they aren't that smart about finances, they must have accountants who have told them this


----------



## limom

Mrs.Z said:


> I disagree, post-2008 banks require far more than “fronting”.


Really?
 judging from the noise coming from loan servicers freaking about borrowers making their mortgages, it appears underwriting standards are quite loose nowadays. 
Even Fanny Mae is freaking out and those are conforming mortgages
https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/originating-underwriting
Anecdotally, there are many people in my neighborhood buying houses they can’t afford and let’s not forget LI famous taxes...
So yes, people are seriously fronting....


----------



## Mrs.Z

limom said:


> Really?
> judging from the noise coming from loan servicers freaking about borrowers making their mortgages, it appears underwriting standards are quite loose nowadays.
> Even Fanny Mae is freaking out and those are conforming mortgages
> https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/originating-underwriting
> Anecdotally, there are many people in my neighborhood buying houses they can’t afford and let’s not forget LI famous taxes...
> So yes, people are seriously fronting....


Right bc we are in the middle of a pandemic and 30% of the population just lost their jobs...thus the “noise” you speak of.  I can’t comment on your neighbors or how you know they cannot afford their homes.  As for H&M most people buying homes for 13 mil are not applying for mortgages but if they are....good luck!


----------



## lalame

I think realistically these two could get a mortgage for that home if they wanted. If he really does have, let's say $20m in assets from his inheritance and she has $5m (last figure I heard was $7m but that was a few years ago)... they can get the mortgage. They can even buy it in cash. Now I didn't say that was prudent but stranger things have happened to celebs than buy stuff they can't afford.


----------



## CeeJay

Again, what I don't get is .. why do they need that big of a house???  Plus, I'm not sure that Doria would want to live out in the Pacific Palisades; it's somewhat isolated in its position in LA.  Just very ostentatious IMO ..


----------



## Cavalier Girl

It would be much smarter for them to rent for year or so.  But, who am I kidding?  When did these 2 do what was the smart thing to do?  I lost my head for a moment.


----------



## queennadine

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe Charles can be a consigner.



Maybe Doria or her dear dad could


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> "M" looks unusually smug or arrogant here.  Photog must have caught her at a moment when the mask dropped


Smug in this case is sure not pretty.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Again, what I don't get is .. why do they need that big of a house???  Plus, I'm not sure that Doria would want to live out in the Pacific Palisades; it's somewhat isolated in its position in LA.  Just very ostentatious IMO ..


they're royalty doncha know?  she is a Duchess after all.  you don't expect her to live in a "regular" house like you and I?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> "M" looks unusually smug or arrogant here.  Photog must have caught her at a moment when the mask dropped



*sdkitty*, must say Meghan looks positively evil in that pic, for a split nano-sec we see who she really is instead of the facade we are shown daily
♥️


----------



## Genie27

sdkitty said:


> "M" looks unusually smug or arrogant here.  Photog must have caught her at a moment when the mask dropped


“Signature” bateau neckline - check
Favourite strapless bra - check
Left hand over right to showcase ring - check
Extend that neck and elongate - check. 
Now *Smize* like we practiced in the mirror.....
And I’m ready for my closeup, Now to get rid of this frumpy cake topper to my right, who is hogging my spotlight.


----------



## Madrose

CeeJay said:


> Again, what I don't get is .. why do they need that big of a house???



Nobody needs a house that big, lol!


----------



## chowlover2

Why do they need security? I don't think anyone cares about them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I can see Meghan wanting to lock down some joint assets in the case of a divorce.  I doubt the BRF would pay for such a thing.  If Harry has any doubts, he should be reluctant to spend his own money, nut I am sure that Meghan is pushing for it incessantly.


----------



## PewPew

chowlover2 said:


> Why do they need security? * I don't think anyone cares about them*.



That’s why they “need” more security rather than less. H&M see it as a statement of status, which is why their “quiet, secret” charity pap walk needed 6 black SUVs & cars with security and support. (This is not unlike the C-list celeb who is pictured at airports and clubs with a perplexingly large number of bodyguards, it’s a status thing.) How else will you know that ImPoRtAnT humanitarians are around?

Well, the other way you’ll know is via their regular PR leaks, but it’s better if the public notices the caravan and puts in on social media. While a close relative of QE2 will always get security, Eugenie and Beatrice don’t have a state-visit-worthy caravan around them when in NYC. It’s clear that H&M view security as linked to status, which is why they issued their peevish SussexRoyal statement that they require taxpayer-funded security even while living outside the UK, due to Mr-SIXTH-IN-LINE’s birthright & Ms.CableTvActress’s “independent profile.”

Of course, security is more than safety to them— the taxpayer-funded security team was also doing personal assistant tasks, like collecting M’s drycleaning etc in Canada. They are also charged with keeping the press away & putting up tarps.... while M simultaneously arranges “surprise” paparazzi opportunities & her “friends” leak stories for PR. We’ve already had stories about how H&M are supposedly scared the press will kill M “like they killed his mother” & how H is terrified of hearing cameras clicking (unless the cameras are from press & paparazzi they arrange.) Expect them to take it a step further, claiming they need large caravans because their private security has learned that people are always trying to kill them.


----------



## lalame

I can see why they would need security. They seem to have quite a few stans who would pester and intrude on them.. they’d rather keep those people far far away so they don’t see the “behind the scenes.” They only want the public to see what they carefully coordinate themselves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spot on, @PewPew 
It’s all about their own sense of importance. 
They can remove themselves from the succession line, can’t they? 



PewPew said:


> That’s why they “need” more security rather than less. H&M see it as a statement of status, which is why their “quiet, secret” charity pap walk needed 6 black SUVs & cars with security and support. (This is not unlike the C-list celeb who is pictured at airports and clubs with a perplexingly large number of bodyguards, it’s a status thing.) How else will you know that ImPoRtAnT humanitarians are around?
> 
> Well, the other way you’ll know is via their regular PR leaks, but it’s better if the public notices the caravan and puts in on social media. While a close relative of QE2 will always get security, Eugenie and Beatrice don’t have a state-visit-worthy caravan around them when in NYC. It’s clear that H&M view security as linked to status, which is why they issued their peevish SussexRoyal statement that they require taxpayer-funded security even while living outside the UK, due to Mr-SIXTH-IN-LINE’s birthright & Ms.CableTvActress’s “independent profile.”
> 
> Of course, security is more than safety to them— the taxpayer-funded security team was also doing personal assistant tasks, like collecting M’s drycleaning etc in Canada. They are also charged with keeping the press away & putting up tarps.... while M simultaneously arranges “surprise” paparazzi opportunities & her “friends” leak stories for PR. We’ve already had stories about how H&M are supposedly scared the press will kill M “like they killed his mother” & how H is terrified of hearing cameras clicking (unless the cameras are from press & paparazzi they arrange.) Expect them to take it a step further, claiming they need large caravans because their private security has learned that people are always trying to kill them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

More like Harry needs to find freedom sans MM! This women was enraged from her own father, managed to separate her husband from his entire family, cut off their son's access to all his relatives, quite telling about her isn't it?
I think Charles will end up underwriting all their financial commitments. I hope he sees the light and cut them off at some point or impose some serious conditions.
In the good old days, a biography was not written lightly rather reserved written late in someone's life after they have achieved something. How can there be enough material for a book with these 2, especially MM and them as a couple. They were married for a mere 2 years! "I failed 2 marriages, was a D-list actress in a cable TV show, found a prince to marry, then quit the family after 18 months." The END! Seriously nobody cares!


----------



## doni

Finding Freedom. The title is quite something. To come up with this at a time when people are confíned in their homes, not able to go out, not able to travel, many of them in small apartments with no balconies let alone a garden, not to speak of so many loosing their jobs and worrying about the future... At at time like this, to suggest _freedom_ is leaving a newly renovated palace in the UK, to travel back and forth with a security troop in attendance and eventually settling in a mansion in LA to launch a bogus company named after your child, all of which being financed by your dad. Well, all I can say is, their advisors are failing them. Or again, they have stopped listening to advice.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spot on, @PewPew
> It’s all about their own sense of importance.
> *They can remove themselves from the succession line, can’t they?*



And this is of course the BRF's ace up their sleeve.

I personally do not care that H&M retain their title and in fact think Harry should retain his HRH as he was born with that, although without question not use it, if not an active representative member of the BRF. There is no precedent for restoring an "HRH " once removed and so I believe the BRF are trading very carefully around this.

However Harry and his current wife have to all intents and purposes now left the BRF (and are still slashing and burning all links to the UK)

*It is my very strongly held view that in 12 months time at their review date, if they are not returning to Royal duties on behalf of the BRF, Harry should be removed from the line of succession*. Harry had one important job to do - to be available to act as Prince Regent if anything happens to his brother, if King, before his oldest nephew comes of age. If Harry is absent from the BRF how will he be able to fulfill that obligation? He is now not fit to uphold that obligation and I think if an announcement of who is earmarked for this, albeit remote, possibility was made public ( Edward or Anne, I presume) it would be such a rebuke to this pair !

Just noting here also that the Dutch RF managed without any of this crazy carry on when King W-A's brother "stepped down" and also Prince Friso's widow is an amazing woman whose intelligence, work and activism Megan Markle can only dream of emulating.

I do like the latest house they are going to buy though.


----------



## chicinthecity777

RAINDANCE said:


> I do like the latest house *some media wants us to believe that* they are going to buy though.


----------



## limom

chowlover2 said:


> Why do they need security? I don't think anyone cares about them.


All it takes is one unbalanced person or a terrorist, imo.
Even if they reduce their public personas, safety is still an issue, imo.
Plus, they will be pestered non stop by paparazzi and civilians alike, imo.
Who will be picking up the tab after the one year mark?


----------



## CarryOn2020

They can have all the security *their* money can buy, no?



limom said:


> All it takes is one unbalanced person or a terrorist, imo.
> Even if they reduce their public personas, safety is still an issue, imo.
> Plus, they will be pestered non stop by paparazzi and civilians alike, imo.
> Who will be picking up the tab after the one year mark?


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> All it takes is one unbalanced person or a terrorist, imo.
> Even if they reduce their public personas, safety is still an issue, imo.
> Plus, they will be pestered non stop by paparazzi and civilians alike, imo.
> Who will be picking up the tab after the one year mark?


The "unbalanced person or a terrorist" point can apply to anybody so there is nothing specially different towards them. 
The paps issue they brought it on themselves by moving to LA.
As long as no public money goes into their security, I think most people really don't care. 

I do think in their case, especially with MM, having a large security team following them around gives them a sense of self-importance.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Again, what I don't get is .. why do they need that big of a house???  Plus, I'm not sure that Doria would want to live out in the Pacific Palisades; it's somewhat isolated in its position in LA.  Just very ostentatious IMO ..



Champagne taste on a beer budget? You can take the kids out of the Royal but you can’t take the Royal out of the kids?


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> The "unbalanced person or a terrorist" point can apply to anybody so there is nothing specially different towards them.
> The paps issue they brought it on themselves by moving to LA.
> As long as no public money goes into their security, I think most people really don't care.
> 
> I do think in their case, especially with MM, having a large security team following them around gives them a sense of self-importance.


For sure, no one wants to pay for their security.
I think a terrorist killing them as opposed as a civilian would have a bigger impact, he is still the Queen’s grandson.


----------



## Lounorada

Judging by the evidence that 1) they can't seem to stay in one place for long, 2) they don't know what it is they want to do and 3) they don't like to spend their own money (especially when it's large amounts), I would be surprised if they go to the effort of buying a house.
I reckon they'll just carry on living in a place that's been lent to them by connections or just rent somewhere.
Either way, they'll prob jump from one property to another, as they strike me as the type of people (her, more so) who are never fulfilled or happy wherever they go. Always on to the next place.
I'm sure they'll continue to put out false stories of extremely expensive properties that they 'are looking at' and are 'interested in buying'. You know, to fuel that ego.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Again, what I don't get is .. why do they need that big of a house???  Plus, I'm not sure that Doria would want to live out in the Pacific Palisades; it's somewhat isolated in its position in LA.  Just very ostentatious IMO ..


Hmmm Doria... a mystery ... OK obviously a classy lady who stayed out of the fray just before the wedding, she went , said nothing , went home - GOOD

Just looking at the MM page in Wiki, the MM team WAS BUSY recently and polished that up recently ....I wish I had the original page , stark contrast  to the new one... 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex 

Back to D... the page says "Markle has often been described as having a very close friendship with her mother.", odd wording that... 
It mentions parents divorced when she was 6, does not say who got custody ... Does not mention MM went to live with D, then went to live with  Tom in late teenage years 
The bit about MM going to live with dad is CONSPICUOUS by its absence, it used to be there ... IF I remember correctly - I tend to get my pseudo-facts from WIki, not the DM
My point is, if you are living with D and go to live with dad, why? Maybe MM and D were not tight then, or maybe Tom offered a better opportunity 

But, in the end I can find no evidence that the MM-D bond was/is "very close", the living arrangements during high school might tend to suggest the bonds were not ALWAYS so good

Yet, the new Wiki page certainly claims excellent relations

Ahhhh the joys of a good PR team ... they will have us believing all sorts of stuff


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> For sure, no one wants to pay for their security.
> I think a terrorist killing them as opposed as a civilian would have a bigger impact, he is still the Queen’s grandson.


The royalties have been killed before, yes, by the IRA. But to be honest since he's no longer a working royal, the terrorist would not prioritise him (however weird it sounds).


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lounorada said:


> Judging by the evidence that 1) they can't seem to stay in one place for long, 2) they don't know what it is they want to do and 3) they don't like to spend their own money (especially when it's large amounts), I would be surprised if they go to the effort of buying a house.
> I reckon they'll just carry on living in a place that's been lent to them by connections or just rent somewhere.
> Either way, they'll prob jump from one property to another, as they strike me as the type of people (her, more so) who are never fulfilled or happy wherever they go. Always on to the next place.
> *I'm sure they'll continue to put out false stories of extremely expensive properties that they 'are looking at' and are 'interested in buying'. You know, to fuel that ego.*


The bold part nails it! That's exactly how I see it!


----------



## imgg

Lounorada said:


> Judging by the evidence that 1) they can't seem to stay in one place for long, 2) they don't know what it is they want to do and 3) they don't like to spend their own money (especially when it's large amounts), I would be surprised if they go to the effort of buying a house.
> I reckon they'll just carry on living in a place that's been lent to them by connections or just rent somewhere.
> Either way, they'll prob jump from one property to another, as they strike me as the type of people (her, more so) who are never fulfilled or happy wherever they go. Always on to the next place.
> I'm sure they'll continue to put out false stories of extremely expensive properties that they 'are looking at' and are 'interested in buying'. You know, to fuel that ego.


I wonder if the bouncing around is a strategy of Meghan- not let Harry get in a routine or too comfortable or he may have time to reflect on how he royally messed up his life.


----------



## Sharont2305

imgg said:


> I wonder if the bouncing around is a strategy of Meghan- not let Harry get in a routine or too comfortable or he may have time to reflect on how he royally messed up his life.


I think you've hit the nail on the head there.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Any money from Charles will be for the sake of Harry and Archie and MM is just leeching off them. So much for MM being an independent feminist modern woman!


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> I think you've hit the nail on the head there.


Keep him off balance, don't let him get comfortable, maintain control, yeppers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just read that another gossip bio is in the making: "Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir From Queen Mary To Meghan Markle" by Tom Quinn. Interestingly, the article - I only found it in German - touched on how bad things were between Kate and MM, stating that at the end the brothers would only meet between the two of them to avoid fighting or icy silence...but it also said Kate is one of the nicest royals and MM couldn't deal with the fact it wasn't her who was married to a future king. 

This woman is such a jealous witch.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> touched on how bad things were between Kate and MM, stating that at the end the brothers would only meet between the two of them to avoid fighting or icy silence



Unfortunately, William and Harry wouldn't be the first siblings (or best friends) whose relationship became damaged because their spouses couldn't get along. However, the problems with Meghan went so far beyond her dislike of Kate. Meghan couldn't find anything to her liking and I don't think she ever will unless she is universally worshipped.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just read that another gossip bio is in the making: "Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir From Queen Mary To Meghan Markle" by Tom Quinn. Interestingly, the article - I only found it in German - touched on how bad things were between Kate and MM, stating that at the end the brothers would only meet between the two of them to avoid fighting or icy silence...but it also said Kate is one of the nicest royals and MM couldn't deal with the fact it wasn't her who was married to a future king.
> 
> This woman is such a jealous witch.


How can any of those two women develop any real dislike toward one another, they barely know each other?
Of course, Kate is the nicest royals, as she would be queen.
Who need soap operas when one has the royals?


----------



## mdcx

And Kate would have been instructed to mentor Meghan, befriend her, help guide her through all of the BRF protocol. And I’m sure Kate tried her utmost. But seems like M just wanted competition and b!tchiness instead of a perfectly civil but deferential sister in law relationship.


----------



## rose60610

If M&H really wanted to clean up and/or promote a positive image, which they always fail at--since they can't help themselves--they should buy a modest house. I'm not saying a two bedroom bungalow, but one that doesn't scream "We need 5,000 bodyguards".  That way they can say "we really care about being responsible stewards of the environment" bla bla bla, and still have space for some security and a yard and dog for Archie.  

Or wait, is it because they really care about the environment therefore they need a secured compound with multiple SWAT teams so they can safely preach to us plebes about how we should live minimalist lives? Would MM auction off her multi million dollar wardrobes to help the cause? Well, it's not like her clothes would fit anyone since they never did on her.


----------



## bag-mania

Every move H&M make is the opposite of what they publicly say they want. They are hypocrites, pure and simple. 

There are lots of other celebrities who think that because they are famous that means what they say is important. H&M will have to accept like all the others that they don't have any influence over people (except maybe for a few stans).


----------



## Animetc

V0N1B2 said:


> OMG doll! A bagel?
> Here's a present from the other side of the country for you. Don't wear them out, they've had a long flight.
> Also, some high-class wine (drink it out of your Yeti mug, no one will even know) and a banana & packet of crisps.
> Now if you don't mind, I have a very important announcement to make on my instagram about like, stuff that happened a few months ago.  I in no way am trying to steal your thunder, it's just coincidence of course
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4721347
> View attachment 4721348



I died laughing! My birthday is in September [emoji847]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> How can any of those two women develop any real dislike toward one another, they barely know each other?



I don't know, I can just go based off the video footage that shows MM staring at Kate like a lunatic.



> Of course, Kate is the nicest royals, as she would be queen.



Naw, actually most people seem to think Kate genuinely acts decently with other human beings.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, I can just go based off the video footage that shows MM staring at Kate like a lunatic.
> 
> 
> 
> Naw, actually most people seem to think Kate genuinely acts decently with other human beings.


She does appear to be a nice person, but then life has been so kind to her that she even got to wear the good tiara.,,


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm Doria... a mystery ... OK obviously a classy lady who stayed out of the fray just before the wedding, she went , said nothing , went home - GOOD
> 
> Just looking at the MM page in Wiki, the MM team WAS BUSY recently and polished that up recently ....I wish I had the original page , stark contrast  to the new one...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex
> 
> Back to D... the page says "Markle has often been described as having a very close friendship with her mother.", odd wording that...
> It mentions parents divorced when she was 6, does not say who got custody ... Does not mention MM went to live with D, then went to live with  Tom in late teenage years
> The bit about MM going to live with dad is CONSPICUOUS by its absence, it used to be there ... IF I remember correctly - I tend to get my pseudo-facts from WIki, not the DM
> My point is, if you are living with D and go to live with dad, why? Maybe MM and D were not tight then, or maybe Tom offered a better opportunity
> 
> But, in the end I can find no evidence that the MM-D bond was/is "very close", the living arrangements during high school might tend to suggest the bonds were not ALWAYS so good
> 
> Yet, the new Wiki page certainly claims excellent relations
> 
> Ahhhh the joys of a good PR team ... they will have us believing all sorts of stuff


I think the usual reasons a young teen moves from one parent to another are either first parent (Doria) couldn't handle her.   or she preferred to be with dad, maybe so she could be on the set of Married With Children.  In any case, I don't think she's necessarily that close to her mother, which not everyone is.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, I can just go based off the video footage that shows MM staring at Kate like a lunatic.
> 
> Naw, actually most people seem to think Kate genuinely acts decently with other human beings.



Everything I've read about Kate makes her out to be a genuinely nice, if shy person. She's under such media scrutiny I think if it were a front, more stories from her pre-fame days would have come out.

If I'm speculating, I think Kate is probably quite nice and has royal life down to a science by this point. Then Meghan comes in and, to be charitable, like any newcomer asks a lot of questions and points out things that may be different/not ideal than what she's used to. That can cause tension even when everyone involved is a nice person. Add servants and personal staff to the picture and I can easily see a toxic situation.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Her surpassing stupidity and laughably shortsighted definition of success continue to impress.  Why be a duchess of the British royal family when you can be the Exalted Tzarina of Tigtots?


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> I think the usual reasons a young teen moves from one parent to another are either first parent (Doria) couldn't handle her.   or she preferred to be with dad, maybe so she could be on the set of Married With Children.  In any case, I don't think she's necessarily that close to her mother, which not everyone is.


Meg seems well accustomed to getting whatever she wants.
I think, even as a teen,  she made sure she was living in a situation with minimal restrictions. In those early years she had time to practice, see what worked.

She turned eighteen *20 years* ago.  In all those years I don't think she's ever wavered from her "I'm young, I'm a victim, I'm misunderstood" act. Which is followed by her demands. Repeat.

The pandemic (and how both of them have reacted to it) have really made many take a more thorough second look at their grievances.
And that book won't garner them much sympathy either.

It's past time  go for them to get over themselves and go live quiet lives. Quiet. That was what they wanted, right?


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> Meg seems well accustomed to getting whatever she wants.
> I think, even as a teen,  she made sure she was living in a situation with minimal restrictions. In those early years she had time to practice, see what worked.
> 
> She turned eighteen *20 years* ago.  In all those years I don't think she's ever wavered from her "I'm young, I'm a victim, I'm misunderstood" act. Which is followed by her demands. Repeat.
> 
> The pandemic (and how both of them have reacted to it) have really made many take a more thorough second look at their grievances.
> And that book won't garner them much sympathy either.
> 
> It's past time  go for them to get over themselves and go live quiet lives. Quiet. That was what they wanted, right?


they may have said what they wanted was quiet but clearly what she wants is to be worshipped and adored by the masses


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> She turned eighteen *20 years* ago.  In all those years I don't think she's ever wavered from her "I'm young, I'm a victim, I'm misunderstood" act. Which is followed by her demands. Repeat.



It's the pattern that has ALWAYS worked for her. There was never a need to deviate from it. Even now it is working to some degree. The media here in the US won't call her out for phoniness. We expect celebrities to be phony.


----------



## DoggieBags

mdcx said:


> And Kate would have been instructed to mentor Meghan, befriend her, help guide her through all of the BRF protocol. And I’m sure Kate tried her utmost. But seems like M just wanted competition and b!tchiness instead of a perfectly civil but deferential sister in law relationship.


I remember watching on tv when Kate and Meghan attended Wimbledon together. This was the first Wimbledon after Meghan married just call me Harry. When they showed the 2 women in the royal box Meghan was clutching a fedora and I wondered why she had bothered to bring it but not wear it. I found out later that no one is allowed to wear hats in the royal box. Meghan had apparently attended Wimbledon before she was married and had used someone else’s box. She wore that fedora on that occasion and decided to use it again when she went with Kate to sit in the royal box. Anyone with even half a brain would have asked if there were any special attire requirements for attendance at the royal box. Kate goes every year to Wimbledon and would clearly have known the rules. The BRF has a lot of people around them who would also have known the rules on proper attire. But somehow Meghan made it all the way to the royal box with her fedora apparently only to be told at the entrance to the royal box that no hats were allowed. No idea if she was told before she left Kensington palace and refused to listen or if people had already figured out she didn’t like to be told what to do and kept their mouths shut and left it up to the Wimbledon staff to tell her. You can only mentor someone if they are willing to solicit your advise and listen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> She does appear to be a nice person, but then life has been so kind to her that she even got to wear the good tiara.,,



If you're talking about the Lover's Knot, Kate wasn't given access to that one for years after her wedding. Why exactly is it that apparently Meghan is supposed to have everything handed to her on a silver plate?


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> I remember watching on tv when Kate and Meghan attended Wimbledon together. This was the first Wimbledon after Meghan married just call me Harry. When they showed the 2 women in the royal box Meghan was clutching a fedora and I wondered why she had bothered to bring it but not wear it. I found out later that no one is allowed to wear hats in the royal box. Meghan had apparently attended Wimbledon before she was married and had used someone else’s box. She wore that fedora on that occasion and decided to use it again when she went with Kate to sit in the royal box. Anyone with even half a brain would have asked if there were any special attire requirements for attendance at the royal box. Kate goes every year to Wimbledon and would clearly have known the rules. The BRF has a lot of people around them who would also have known the rules on proper attire. But somehow Meghan made it all the way to the royal box with her fedora apparently only to be told at the entrance to the royal box that no hats were allowed. No idea if she was told before she left Kensington palace and refused to listen or if people had already figured out she didn’t like to be told what to do and kept their mouths shut and left it up to the Wimbledon staff to tell her. You can only mentor someone if they are willing to solicit your advise and listen.



It wouldn't matter. Meghan would never ask about special attire rules because she wants everyone to believe she already knows everything. She is so arrogant I wouldn't be surprised if she knew about the hat rule and decided she would be the one to break it and set a new trend. She is a hero in her own mind.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just read that another gossip bio is in the making: "Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir From Queen Mary To Meghan Markle" by Tom Quinn. Interestingly, the article - I only found it in German - touched on how bad things were between Kate and MM, stating that at the end the brothers would only meet between the two of them to avoid fighting or icy silence...but it also said Kate is one of the nicest royals and MM couldn't deal with the fact it wasn't her who was married to a future king.
> 
> This woman is such a jealous witch.


I just read an excerpt and some quotes from that book, too. Is Tom Quinn known to be reliable? It seems from this book that jealousy over Kate is what made MM lose it. And MM did yell at Kate's staff as was widely reported already.


----------



## Lounorada

Just a thought while I have a cup of coffee... I wonder if the supposed jealousy and contempt that M has for Kate is not only that she's married to the future King, but because of the close bond William, Kate and H used to have over the years. For a long time they were always like the 3 musketeers and it was obvious how well that H got on with Kate, he maybe even had a harmless crush on her.
So when M comes along with a firm plan in her mind, wanting to be the star of the show, incapable of being part of a team and sharing the spotlight... it's time to break up the group and burn those bridges.


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I just read an excerpt and some quotes from that book, too. Is Tom Quinn known to be reliable? It seems from this book that jealousy over Kate is what made MM lose it. And MM did yell at Kate's staff as was widely reported already.


I think (and of course it's just my speculation) that she thought she would be much more glamorous than Kate.  Remember on this thread a couple of days ago all the photos of "M"?  Showcasing her boobies and her skinny legs in a sexy way?  She was the movie star.  How could the British Kate overshadow her?  Just Not Acceptable.
But bottom line (IMO again) Kate is beautiful.  Meghan is attractive but maybe not as beautiful as she thought.  And her behavior ruined anything she had going for her.
So Kate is beautiful in her appearance and her behavior.  Meghan not so much.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> It wouldn't matter. Meghan would never ask about special attire rules because she wants everyone to believe she already knows everything. She is so arrogant I wouldn't be surprised if she knew about the hat rule and decided she would be the one to break it and set a new trend. She is a hero in her own mind.



Another Wimbledon situation - https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/07...ns-and-her-paranoia-about-photos-report-says/


----------



## bag-mania

beautymagpie said:


> Another Wimbledon situation - https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/07...ns-and-her-paranoia-about-photos-report-says/



She is so in love with herself.


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> The royalties have been killed before, yes, by the IRA. But to be honest since he's no longer a working royal, the terrorist would not prioritise him (however weird it sounds).



There are certainly people with more money and fame to poach in Los Angeles than H&M. Little fish in a big pond.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I think Meghan, like probably many celebrities, is totally not suited to a traditional role like a royal. Being a Hollywood celebrity is all about trend-setting, doing things that get people talking and keeping your name in the papers. Wearing and using the newest, "in style" things. Respecting centuries-old traditions? Playing an outdated but historic role? Not so much. She didn't hustle her entire life just to be a civil servant - albeit a very well-compensated and famous one.

Too bad she didn't realize all this before taking the leap. Arrogance.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I think (and of course it's just my speculation) that she thought she would be much more glamorous than Kate.  Remember on this thread a couple of days ago all the photos of "M"?  Showcasing her boobies and her skinny legs in a sexy way?  She was the movie star.  How could the British Kate overshadow her?  Just Not Acceptable.
> But bottom line (IMO again) Kate is beautiful.  Meghan is attractive but maybe not as beautiful as she thought.  And her behavior ruined anything she had going for her.
> So Kate is beautiful in her appearance and her behavior.  Meghan not so much.




I think you hit the nail on the head. 

This is embarrassing, but when I was a sophomore in college there was a tryout for a fashion show. My friend and I tried out, and I thought I was a sure thing, I read every fashion magazine my whole life, worshipped Naomi, Kate, etc.

Imagine my surprise when my friend was selected and I wasn’t.  She was a country bumpkin! She didn’t even know the major fashion brands!  Turns out her being 5’11” and underweight gave the edge!

Luckily I grew up and got over myself well before MMs age.


----------



## lalame

DoggieBags said:


> I remember watching on tv when Kate and Meghan attended Wimbledon together. This was the first Wimbledon after Meghan married just call me Harry. When they showed the 2 women in the royal box Meghan was clutching a fedora and I wondered why she had bothered to bring it but not wear it. I found out later that no one is allowed to wear hats in the royal box. Meghan had apparently attended Wimbledon before she was married and had used someone else’s box. She wore that fedora on that occasion and decided to use it again when she went with Kate to sit in the royal box. Anyone with even half a brain would have asked if there were any special attire requirements for attendance at the royal box. Kate goes every year to Wimbledon and would clearly have known the rules. The BRF has a lot of people around them who would also have known the rules on proper attire. But somehow Meghan made it all the way to the royal box with her fedora apparently only to be told at the entrance to the royal box that no hats were allowed. No idea if she was told before she left Kensington palace and refused to listen or if people had already figured out she didn’t like to be told what to do and kept their mouths shut and left it up to the Wimbledon staff to tell her. You can only mentor someone if they are willing to solicit your advise and listen.



If she willfully disregarded the advice, then she's an idiot... doesn't look so chic to be carrying your hat the entire day. If the handlers didn't properly inform her for whatever reason though, that might be why so many of them left. That's something that could get you fired in different contexts. But I can't imagine that NO ONE would've informed her from the time she got dressed to when she left the car.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm Doria... a mystery ... OK obviously a classy lady who stayed out of the fray just before the wedding, she went , said nothing , went home - GOOD
> 
> Just looking at the MM page in Wiki, the MM team WAS BUSY recently and polished that up recently ....I wish I had the original page , stark contrast  to the new one...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex
> 
> Back to D... the page says "Markle has often been described as having a very close friendship with her mother.", odd wording that...
> It mentions parents divorced when she was 6, does not say who got custody ... Does not mention MM went to live with D, then went to live with  Tom in late teenage years
> The bit about MM going to live with dad is CONSPICUOUS by its absence, it used to be there ... IF I remember correctly - I tend to get my pseudo-facts from WIki, not the DM
> My point is, if you are living with D and go to live with dad, why? Maybe MM and D were not tight then, or maybe Tom offered a better opportunity
> 
> But, in the end I can find no evidence that the MM-D bond was/is "very close", the living arrangements during high school might tend to suggest the bonds were not ALWAYS so good
> 
> Yet, the new Wiki page certainly claims excellent relations
> 
> Ahhhh the joys of a good PR team ... they will have us believing all sorts of stuff


I can tell you, based on my friends who knew the Markles (_Meghan & her Dad_) during her High School years, that they said Thomas was *ALWAYS* around, he helped out many times with the lighting for her plays, and in addition - he brought Meghan on-set when he was working on the '_Married With Children_' show.  My friends mentioned that they *NEVER* saw Doria, *EVER*!  They also said that Thomas spoiled Meghan rotten, to the point where her expectation was that she WOULD get everything she asked for .. and became a *BRAT*!  My friend's son was Meghan's counterpart in her Senior play, and they got very 'close' - however, she had an Agenda and that was for my friends to "introduce" her to the various very well-known musicians that they worked with.  Of course, they said NO; heck - I've only met some of them because I was in their office and the musician came in to check on the status of their item!  I would NEVER ask them to introduce me, to me .. that's bad manners .. but you know, "*what Meghan wants, Meghan gets*".  On one particular occasion, when Meghan was over at my friend's house rehearsing with their son, she got pissed off at him (_their son_) and as such, went "in" on him (_trash talk, etc_.).  My friend heard Meghan's rant on her son, and chastised Meghan for her behavior.  In addition, since my friend's were also very close to Thomas, they told him about what had happened.  His reaction was "_well, she has very strong opinions_" .. so, in other words, she got away with a lot!  Once the play was over, even though my friend's son and Meghan "_were very close_" (_according to my friend's son_), she 'markled' him as soon as:  *1) *she no longer needed him because the play was done  *2) *more importantly, she realized that my friends would not relent in regards to introducing her to any of the musicians who utilize their services.  So, the whole family got 'markled'.  Quelle surprise - hell no!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I think (and of course it's just my speculation) that she thought she would be much more glamorous than Kate.  Remember on this thread a couple of days ago all the photos of "M"?  Showcasing her boobies and her skinny legs in a sexy way?  She was the movie star.  How could the British Kate overshadow her?  Just Not Acceptable.
> But bottom line (IMO again) Kate is beautiful.  Meghan is attractive but maybe not as beautiful as she thought.  And her behavior ruined anything she had going for her.
> So Kate is beautiful in her appearance and her behavior.  Meghan not so much.


If we're comparing legs, I would take Kate's over M's any day. Kate's legs show what years of athletics can do (too late for me).


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh lord.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh lord.
> 
> View attachment 4723385


.. and *NOW *the truth starts to come out; not surprised one bit!


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh lord.
> 
> View attachment 4723385



Who would have ever thought..?


----------



## 1LV

She doesn’t have to be too concerned about anyone seeing her feet.  She always has at least one in her mouth.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> I can tell you, based on my friends who knew the Markles (_Meghan & her Dad_) during her High School years, that they said Thomas was *ALWAYS* around, he helped out many times with the lighting for her plays, and in addition - he brought Meghan on-set when he was working on the '_Married With Children_' show.  My friends mentioned that they *NEVER* saw Doria, *EVER*!  They also said that Thomas spoiled Meghan rotten, to the point where her expectation was that she WOULD get everything she asked for .. and became a *BRAT*!  My friend's son was Meghan's counterpart in her Senior play, and they got very 'close' - however, she had an Agenda and that was for my friends to "introduce" her to the various very well-known musicians that they worked with.  Of course, they said NO; heck - I've only met some of them because I was in their office and the musician came in to check on the status of their item!  I would NEVER ask them to introduce me, to me .. that's bad manners .. but you know, "*what Meghan wants, Meghan gets*".  On one particular occasion, when Meghan was over at my friend's house rehearsing with their son, she got pissed off at him (_their son_) and as such, went "in" on him (_trash talk, etc_.).  My friend heard Meghan's rant on her son, and chastised Meghan for her behavior.  In addition, since my friend's were also very close to Thomas, they told him about what had happened.  His reaction was "_well, she has very strong opinions_" .. so, in other words, she got away with a lot!  Once the play was over, even though my friend's son and Meghan "_were very close_" (_according to my friend's son_), she 'markled' him as soon as:  *1) *she no longer needed him because the play was done  *2) *more importantly, she realized that my friends would not relent in regards to introducing her to any of the musicians who utilize their services.  So, the whole family got 'markled'.  Quelle surprise - hell no!


I don’t know if it’s true but I read somewhere that Doria was in prison for 8 years. Could that be the reason there’s a huge gap in history here somewhere?


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know if it’s true but I read somewhere that Doria was in prison for 8 years. Could that be the reason there’s a huge gap in history here somewhere?


Never heard that, I know that she filed bankruptcy at one point, but that's not an offense that would get one into prison!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know if it’s true but I read somewhere that Doria was in prison for 8 years. Could that be the reason there’s a huge gap in history here somewhere?


That’s not true.


----------



## mdcx

I had heard about this incident but could never find a photo before. Claimed that MM deliberately flashed Serena’s husband:


----------



## mdcx

Another from the same account pointing out that the worried looking couple watching M and baby are Charlie and Anneke Gilkes. Charlie schoolfriend of Harry and Wills. Charlie’s brother was married to Misha Nonoo:


----------



## poopsie

mdcx said:


> I had heard about this incident but could never find a photo before. Claimed that MM deliberately flashed Serena’s husband:





Wonder if she tried this out on William?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Another from the same account pointing out that the worried looking couple watching M and baby are Charlie and Anneke Gilkes. Charlie schoolfriend of Harry and Wills. Charlie’s brother was married to Misha Nonoo:
> View attachment 4723442


Hmmmmmm .. @yachtgirlMM .. and supposedly, one of his friends DID hook up with MM when she was a "yacht girl"


----------



## kemilia

mdcx said:


> Another from the same account pointing out that the worried looking couple watching M and baby are Charlie and Anneke Gilkes. Charlie schoolfriend of Harry and Wills. Charlie’s brother was married to Misha Nonoo:
> View attachment 4723442


I never understood why she wore that shapeless green bag of a muumuu. 

Or why that poor child was carried that way. At the time, the stans jumped all over people making similar remarks but I've held lots of babies and never this hanging-off-mom's-body way, though it definitely explains the way he was in the carrier for the pap shots.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I had heard about this incident but could never find a photo before. Claimed that MM deliberately flashed Serena’s husband:



I don't like her either but this could just have been snapped while she was in the process of crossing her legs IMO.


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> She doesn’t have to be too concerned about anyone seeing her feet.  She always has at least one in her mouth.


PERFECTION!!!!  Too funny and true!!!


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh lord.
> 
> View attachment 4723385



Shocker!  lol.  Waging a war with tabloids is never a thing to do, they don't need to dig that deep when you got a lot of dirt.  I almost feel sorry for her.  She doesn't seem like the type of person who will listen to anyone's advise and go on charming people and breaking ties with them, UNLESS she needs them or until then.  We all know someone like that.


----------



## imgg

sdkitty said:


> I don't like her either but this could just have been snapped while she was in the process of crossing her legs IMO.


Definitely not very ladylike imo


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> I had heard about this incident but could never find a photo before. Claimed that MM deliberately flashed Serena’s husband:




This twitter acct is intense. I agree with @sdkitty it looks pretty innocent. She seems to be mid-cross. If photogs take 100 photos of someone per min doing anything you'll find a few funny ones like this.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> This twitter acct is intense. I agree with @sdkitty it looks pretty innocent. She seems to be mid-cross. If photogs take 100 photos of someone per min doing anything you'll find a few funny ones like this.



Yeah, I don’t know, did Serena just dissed her recently?  It may not be because of this picture, per say... but something happened behind the scene.


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Yeah, I don’t know, did Serena just dissed her recently?  It may not be because of this picture, per say... but something happened behind the scene.


wasn't this a very old photo?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

*scarlet,* this is from Daily Mail UK, 28 April 2020, most of the major entertainment sites carried this tidbit:

"On Monday, Naomi <Campbell> took part in an Instagram Live with Serena Williams - *who joked she's never heard of Meghan Markle before, despite attending her wedding to Prince Harry two years ago*. 

The tennis ace got tongue-tied and coy when Naomi asked her if she was happy Meghan had relocated to live with Harry and son Archie in Los Angeles.

Meghan who? On Monday, Naomi took part in an Instagram Live with Serena Williams - who joked she's never heard of Meghan Markle before, despite attending her wedding to Prince Harry two years ago

*'I don't know what you're talking about, don't know nothing about that,'* Serena, 38, responded, trying to shut down the direction of the conversation.

When Naomi, laughing, pressed her on it again, she said: '*Never seen her, never heard of her, don't know her*.'......"


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Yeah, I don’t know, did Serena just dissed her recently?  It may not be because of this picture, per say... but something happened behind the scene.



I took what Serena said as sarcasm, since everybody prob asks her about it. Heck I was at a conference where she was a speaker and the interviewer (a major company CEO) asked her about Meghan Markle!! She was pretty annoyed and said something to the effect of "I'm not going there."


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I took what Serena said as sarcasm, since everybody prob asks her about it. Heck I was at a conference where she was a speaker and the interviewer (a major company CEO) asked her about Meghan Markle!! She was pretty annoyed and said something to the effect of "I'm not going there."



I agree. Serena was joking.  I know a lot has happened but it was only a few months ago that Meghan and Harry stayed with Serena in Miami when they did their JP Morgan speaking gig. She was on good terms with them then so it’s likely she still is.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I agree. Serena was joking.  I know a lot has happened but it was only a few months ago that Meghan and Harry stayed with Serena in Miami when they did their JP Morgan speaking gig. She was on good terms with them then so it’s likely she still is.


Serena was there to talk about herself, not her "friend".....H&M can speak for themselves


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> Serena was there to talk about herself, not her "friend".....H&M can speak for themselves



I agree... it's like when you have hot mess friends and people ask you about them all the damn time. Annoying.


----------



## mdcx

Serena’s hubby is not a fan of M it seems. He tweeted something recently that was viewed as a critique of M

ETA


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

1LV said:


> She doesn’t have to be too concerned about anyone seeing her feet.  She always has at least one in her mouth.


^^ Thanks for this! 

It’s funny, until Meghan made a fuss about her feet nobody noticed them - now we all know


----------



## needlv

The blog may make a comeback...  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8283949/Meghan-Markle-relaunch-Tig.html


----------



## Chagall

lalame said:


> I agree... it's like when you have hot mess friends and people ask you about them all the damn time. Annoying.


Yea you just don’t want to discuss them. You just change the subject.


----------



## Chagall

I haven’t seen anything about how Archie is progressing other than his upcoming birthday. For some reason I feel sorry for the little guy!


----------



## LittleStar88

Chagall said:


> I haven’t seen anything about how Archie is progressing other than his upcoming birthday. For some reason I feel sorry for the little guy!



Maybe they only pull him out for attention or a paycheck...


----------



## CarryOn2020

To my eye and ear, it seemed that Serena was removing herself from that ‘friendship’. The question was a simple one. A simple pivot to “we all should do what makes us happy” would have worked. As the top women’s tennis player of all time, Serena knows how to maneuver tricky questions skillfully and gracefully. Instead she completely distanced herself from MM. Add in that all 3 ladies got a good laugh at M’s expense and I think Serena has had enough. These 2 have repeatedly proven how tiresome they can be. Enough with the upstaging, complaining, lawsuits, etc. So much more important stuff to focus on.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-Meghan-Markle-video-chat-Naomi-Campbell.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-Meghan-Markle-video-chat-Naomi-Campbell.html
The tennis ace got all tongue-tied and coy when British supermodel Naomi, 49, asked her if she was happy Meghan had relocated to live with Harry and son Archie in Los Angeles.
'I don't know what you're talking about, don't know nothing about that,' Serena, 38, responded, trying to shut down the direction of the conversation.
When Naomi, laughing, pressed her on it again, she said: 'Never seen her, never heard of her, don't know her.'


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> I haven’t seen anything about how Archie is progressing other than his upcoming birthday. For some reason I feel sorry for the little guy!


I'm guessing that as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge usually release 4 pictures of their children on their birthdays, Megs will insist on 10 photographs, six of those will include her in them too. [emoji1787]


----------



## Emeline

Chagall said:


> I haven’t seen anything about how Archie is progressing other than his upcoming birthday. For some reason I feel sorry for the little guy!


For Archie's sake, I continue to hope that M&H  are a little better at parenting than they are at PR.
And God bless the nanny.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> I haven’t seen anything about how Archie is progressing other than his upcoming birthday. For some reason I feel sorry for the little guy!



I'm actually happy they haven't been using Archie as a cute prop in their eternal quest for self-promotion. I hope that is due to their wanting to protect him rather than indifference and forgetting how a baby can garner lots of attention.


----------



## PewPew

needlv said:


> The blog may make a comeback...
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8283949/Meghan-Markle-relaunch-Tig.html



Oh thank goodness! I was so worried b/c H&M lack sufficient venues to lecture the masses from (it’s going to be ahmazing...once they figure out what they’re going to educate us about & how to make money off it). Without Tig, they’d only have their Archwell self-charity page, faux fan pages, Omid Scooby-dooby’s socials, the memoir’s publisher website, People magazine/the papers their “friends” leak to, and possibly a new personal instagram. Poor humanitarians, suffering from underexposure.

Actually Tig is a relatively low-risk way to get income via high priced advertisements and paid sponsored content on low controversy, easy reading content (lifestyle, M’a supposed fav recipes borrowed from another source like in the past). It could also be like M’s personal O Magazine where will be tons of flattering pictures of her royal whine-ness


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Serena’s hubby is not a fan of M it seems. He tweeted something recently that was viewed as a critique of M
> 
> ETA



how do we know this is about M?


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> Oh thank goodness! I was so worried b/c H&M lack sufficient venues to lecture the masses from (it’s going to be ahmazing...once they figure out what they’re going to educate us about & how to make money off it). Without Tig, they’d only have their Archwell self-charity page, faux fan pages, Omid Scooby-dooby’s socials, the memoir’s publisher website, People magazine/the papers their “friends” leak to, and possibly a new personal instagram. Poor humanitarians, suffering from underexposure.
> 
> Actually Tig is a relatively low-risk way to get income via high priced advertisements and paid sponsored content on low controversy content (lifestyle, M’a supposed fav recipes borrowed from another source like past endeavors). It could also be like M’s personal O Magazine where will be tons of flattering pictures of her royal whine-ness


don't forget Bazaar


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> how do we know this is about M?


Maybe because he nailed it lol?


----------



## lalame

To be fair, Alexis could’ve been talking about any number of people... he moves in tech and celebrity circles!! Sycophantic behavior is a norm. They’re at the tops of their game, I bet lots of sycophants try to hang off them. Yes even him... just google Silicon Valley cult of the founder.


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> how do we know this is about M?



I think he made it so that it could be anyone, though his twitter feed all pointed to M and H.  But he could be talking about others as well, I'm sure there's more than one bunch of crazies like H and M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

needlv said:


> The blog may make a comeback...
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8283949/Meghan-Markle-relaunch-Tig.html





PewPew said:


> Oh thank goodness! I was so worried b/c H&M lack sufficient venues to lecture the masses from (it’s going to be ahmazing...once they figure out what they’re going to educate us about & how to make money off it). Without Tig, they’d only have their Archwell self-charity page, faux fan pages, Omid Scooby-dooby’s socials, the memoir’s publisher website, People magazine/the papers their “friends” leak to, and possibly a new personal instagram. Poor humanitarians, suffering from underexposure.
> 
> Actually Tig is a relatively low-risk way to get income via high priced advertisements and paid sponsored content on low controversy, easy reading content (lifestyle, M’a supposed fav recipes borrowed from another source like in the past). It could also be like M’s personal O Magazine where will be tons of flattering pictures of her royal whine-ness



*needlv* and *PewPew*, this is great!

The great TIG is coming BACK  
A show of hands here ~ how many of us think that H&M are scratching at the bottom of the barrel $$$-wise?

This quick launch of MM's previous site, could it be that H&M requires an infusion of fast cash? <from stans, of course>

Or will scoubie-doubie launch a go-fund-me page for H&M <they have suffered so much!> this infamous grifter couple needs a home <for US! Not for Achie, silly!>  and must make ends meet in LaLa Land until their novel is released in August

Geez, these two grifters make the Kardashian girls look positively discreet and unassuming

Also, ie Serena Williams, when you have a good friend who is under fire in the media ~ well, any celeb as smart as Serena knows that a kind word and assistance was needed as soon as MM's name was brought up ~ enough said!


----------



## beautymagpie

PewPew said:


> Oh thank goodness! I was so worried b/c H&M lack sufficient venues to lecture the masses from (it’s going to be ahmazing...once they figure out what they’re going to educate us about & how to make money off it). Without Tig, they’d only have their Archwell self-charity page, faux fan pages, Omid Scooby-dooby’s socials, the memoir’s publisher website, People magazine/the papers their “friends” leak to, and possibly a new personal instagram. Poor humanitarians, suffering from underexposure.
> 
> Actually Tig is a relatively low-risk way to get income via high priced advertisements and paid sponsored content on low controversy, easy reading content (lifestyle, M’a supposed fav recipes borrowed from another source like in the past). It could also be like M’s personal O Magazine where will be tons of flattering pictures of her royal whine-ness



You’d have to imagine that they won’t have any traffic at all. No traffic = no page impressions = no ad revenue. 

Like, you know, they won’t be trying to get clicks - which she finds so appalling as a publisher’s tactic.


----------



## sdkitty

beautymagpie said:


> You’d have to imagine that they won’t have any traffic at all. No traffic = no page impressions = no ad revenue.
> 
> Like, you know, they won’t be trying to get clicks - which she finds so appalling as a publisher’s tactic.


we could ask her PF fans but they seem to be gone from this thread


----------



## lalame

Serena's smart and obviously accomplished.... but she's not the most polished interviewee. She has a history of snapping at the press, being rude if she doesn't like the question, shading other people, etc so she's not one to just smile and spread positivity if she's thinking, "Ask me about my game, not my freakin' friend for the 8945375th time." It seems like since Meghan married H, they ask Serena about her every opportunity.


----------



## lalame

I think I would actually like the Tig, if I didn't know as much about Meghan and all that's happened since she married into the BRF. Her actions have killed any interest there is for her actual skills.


----------



## beautymagpie

Just read this. The title of Kate’s itv programme made me lol. I wonder what came first - this or M&H’s book...

https://apple.news/ALOdfogZ3TYi5f3O9YwPhrQ


----------



## beautymagpie

lalame said:


> I think I would actually like the Tig, if I didn't know as much about Meghan and all that's happened since she married into the BRF. Her actions have killed any interest there is for her actual skills.



I didn’t have any interest in her outside of surface stuff, like looking at outfits, until banana-gate happened, then the Wimbledon stuff, the dog’s name stuff and Megxit. Now all the stories I largely ignored, family interviews etc totally make sense, but when they were happening I just ignored them.


----------



## lalame

beautymagpie said:


> I didn’t have any interest in her outside of surface stuff, like looking at outfits, until banana-gate happened, then the Wimbledon stuff, the dog’s name stuff and Megxit. Now all the stories I largely ignored, family interviews etc totally make sense, but when they were happening I just ignored them.



If she had only just kept it at that... no one neeeeeeds to know what you think about everything, Meghan. You had a good thing going for you at the beginning. But like you said, over time the Brits saw first how ridiculous she was and she just couldn't recover their trust. Now she's working her way through the US... one of the other celeb gossip forums I look at is Oh No They Didnt, and for a long time they were pro-Meghan but with this book news she got a lot of hate. I was surprised.


----------



## chicinthecity777

needlv said:


> The blog may make a comeback...
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8283949/Meghan-Markle-relaunch-Tig.html


The comments section of this is GOLD!


----------



## rose60610

Is this what MM meant when she cryptically said about Archewell, "The work continues"?


----------



## bag-mania

The DM is strongly exaggerating the "Bestseller" aspect of the new book. I don't know how Meghan can think they aren't on her side. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s much-anticipated biography Finding Freedom reaches top 10 of Amazon's 24-hour bestseller list as it's made available for pre-order ahead of August release*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's  biography reached number one on Amazon's Top 10 New York bestseller in 24 hours list on the day of its release for pre-order.

Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.

A description of the biography on Amazon promises to offer an 'honest, up-close, and disarming portrait' of the 'confident, influential, forward' Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38.

And last night the book's British co-author Omid Scobie took to Twitter to share his surprise at the much-anticipated book hitting the top spot on the first day of its pre-order release. 

Retweeting the Top 10 Books post from May 3, which read 'Best sellers in the last 24H!! #1: Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan, and the Making of a Modern Royal Family Omid Scobie, Carolyn Durand publisher Dey Street Books', Omid added: 'Well this is a nice surprise!'.

Other books on the top 10 list of the same day include Walt Disney's The Ugly Duckling (Disney Classic) at number two, and Martha Stewart's Cookie Perfection at number five.

While it has now dropped off the 24-hour bestseller list, it has already climbed to number two on Amazon's 'Biographies of Royalty' bestsellers list - just behind current number one 'Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir from Queen Mary to Meghan Markle', by Tom Quinn.

Last month, the Mail on Sunday reported that the Duke and Duchess had co-operated with Omid Scobie and Catherine Durand on a new book about their lives.

Publishing house Harper Collins, which owns Dey Street Books, the publisher of the biography released a brief description of Meghan and Prince Harry's collaboration with the two journalists.

The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'. 

It promises to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple on both sides of the pond'.

It continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.'

The cover features a beaming Prince Harry and Meghan as they visited their namesake county in October 2018 for the first time. 

 The Mail on Sunday were told that before moving to North America, the Sussexes gave an interview to the book's authors, both journalists.

One of them, Omid Scobie, is thought to be close to Meghan and was one of the favoured journalists given details of the couple's video call to the Queen last week in which they wished her a happy 94th birthday. 

Echoing Princess Diana's secret involvement in the blockbuster biography, Diana: Her True Story, when she encouraged her friends to speak to author Andrew Morton, questions are being asked whether members of Meghan's inner circle were being urged to help Scobie and his American co-author, Carolyn Durand. 

The 320-page biography, due to be released in August, is expected to be a global bestseller. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ography-reaches-bestseller-list-24-hours.html


----------



## lalame

Pretty much


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love how people declare themselves bestsellers on the super narrow categories that Amazon organizes their books into.


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## 1LV

320 pages???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


>



LMAO


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


>



Priceless!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I love how people declare themselves bestsellers on the super narrow categories that Amazon organizes their books into.



Hey now, let's show some respect. For nearly an entire 24 hours their book managed to sell more than Disney's The Ugly Duckling (which has been out for over 50 years) and one of Martha Stewart's cookbooks from last year. For almost a WHOLE day they topped that narrow category. It's honestly much more than I expected!


----------



## CeeJay

A description of the biography on Amazon promises to offer an '*honest, up-close*, and disarming portrait' of the '*confident, influential, forward*' Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38.

*Only their stans would believe this sh!t!!!*


----------



## Lounorada

CeeJay said:


> A description of the biography on Amazon promises to offer an '*honest, up-close*, and disarming portrait' of the '*confident, influential, forward*' Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38.
> 
> *Only their stans would believe this sh!t!!!*


When really it will be full of delusions and...


----------



## lanasyogamama

Forward is a adjective?


----------



## mrsinsyder

lanasyogamama said:


> Forward is a adjective?


I mean, it's a nice, subtle way to describe someone who wears Nazi uniforms for fun.


----------



## hedur

1LV said:


> 320 pages???



Perhaps the font is 24 point size.


----------



## marietouchet

Just thought about timing 
The book comes out 10 August, the time of year when Her Majesty is normally at Balmoral
Something tells me H&M will find a reason not to accept HM's invite to Balmoral next summer ...
Heck I would get out of Dodge when that storm hits the fan in August...


----------



## CobaltBlu

er.....  https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/...-markle-clare-waight-keller-friendship-696733


----------



## mrsinsyder

CobaltBlu said:


> er.....  https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/...-markle-clare-waight-keller-friendship-696733


"Fittings were always a special time to chat, just us, it was a time of getting to know each other’s history and there are many memorable moments."

I guess they chatted instead of fitting the gown LOL


----------



## Allisonfaye

mrsinsyder said:


> "Fittings were always a special time to chat, just us, it was a time of getting to know each other’s history and there are many memorable moments."
> 
> I guess they chatted instead of fitting the gown LOL





lalame said:


> It just hit me too that the $30m net worth figure for him was stated pre-COVID. I'm going to bet all or most of that was tied in investments that sank along with the rest of the market. Wouldn't be surprised if it was more like $20m now... so a $13m house is something.



One would be crazy to spend that % of net worth on a house. 



rose60610 said:


> If M&H really wanted to clean up and/or promote a positive image, which they always fail at--since they can't help themselves--they should buy a modest house. I'm not saying a two bedroom bungalow, but one that doesn't scream "We need 5,000 bodyguards".  That way they can say "we really care about being responsible stewards of the environment" bla bla bla, and still have space for some security and a yard and dog for Archie.
> 
> *Or wait, is it because they really care about the environment therefore they need a secured compound with multiple SWAT teams so they can safely preach to us plebes about how we should live minimalist lives?* Would MM auction off her multi million dollar wardrobes to help the cause? Well, it's not like her clothes would fit anyone since they never did on her.



In all fairness, they are far from alone on this one.


----------



## bisousx

Allisonfaye said:


> One would be crazy to spend that % of net worth on a house.



Unless you’re a wife who wants to guarantee her share of California community property, which she otherwise would not be entitled to if the net worth was built/acquired prior to marriage


----------



## Allisonfaye

bisousx said:


> Unless you’re a wife who wants to guarantee her share of California community property, which she otherwise would not be entitled to if the net worth was built/acquired prior to marriage



I don't know. I just don't know if she's that smart.


----------



## bisousx

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't know. I just don't know if she's that smart.



One doesn’t need to be that smart to make outrageous demands on a weaker spouse and take whatever sticks...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

bisousx said:


> One doesn’t need to be that smart to make outrageous demands on a weaker spouse and take whatever sticks...



I meant to figure out the implications of purchasing a home with HIS money.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> 320 pages???



It takes a lot of pages to make the case to readers that Meghan is as wonderful as she thinks she is. 

I noticed that the book isn't considered to be fiction. That must surely be an oversight.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It takes a lot of pages to make the case to readers that Meghan is as wonderful as she thinks she is.
> 
> I noticed that the book isn't considered to be fiction. That must surely be an oversight.


If only we could buy the book for what it’s worth and sell it for what she thinks it’s worth. . .


----------



## CarryOn2020

Leave it to Elon Musk to steal Archie’s birthday limelight.  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...sk-Grimes-parents-new-baby-Mom-baby-good.html


----------



## poopsie

1LV said:


> 320 pages???


300 pages of word salad and 20 pages of meat.


----------



## jennlt

chicinthecity777 said:


> The comments section of this is GOLD!



Bravo to the person in the comments who referred to her as "NutMeg"!


----------



## scarlet555

Allisonfaye said:


> I meant to figure out the implications of purchasing a home with HIS money.



I'm sure she's researched it.  She's quite good at it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I guess they are busy pre-ordering copies with Charles' money!


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't know. I just don't know if she's that smart.


one can be crafty w/o being super intelligent


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Leave it to Elon Musk to steal Archie’s birthday limelight.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...sk-Grimes-parents-new-baby-Mom-baby-good.html



Oh geez, that name. Why do celebrity children always have crappy names? Good thing his father has plenty of money for the hundreds of hours of therapy the kid will inevitably need.


----------



## bisousx

Allisonfaye said:


> I meant to figure out the implications of purchasing a home with HIS money.



Maybe, but it’s not her first rodeo. Meg’s been married twice before Harry so she knows her way around divorce court.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Oh geez, that name. Why do celebrity children always have crappy names? Good thing his father has plenty of money for the hundreds of hours of therapy the kid will inevitably need.


Elon is losing his Sh%$, he’s selling all his possessions ...but maybe NutMeg and H can buy his house....see it all works out.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Just thought about timing
> The book comes out 10 August, the time of year when Her Majesty is normally at Balmoral
> Something tells me H&M will find a reason not to accept HM's invite to Balmoral next summer ...
> Heck I would get out of Dodge when that storm hits the fan in August...


YES!!! .. something like "_well Gran, we are out promoting the book .. we need the $$$_" (_I wouldn't put it pass these two_)!


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Maybe, but it’s not her first rodeo. Meg’s been married twice before Harry so she knows her way around divorce court.


and it's quite possible that she has her own "friends" advising her as an individual


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> and it's quite possible that she has her own "friends" advising her as an individual



Unless Harry is worth way more than what’s reported, there is no way anyone would want to spend half their net worth on a house without serious pressure. Meghan securing her future payout from hapless Harry is the only thing that makes sense to me. From Meghan’s million dollar wardrobe to the private jets to the private security: She’s wildly spending to prove to a judge later she’s grown accustomed to this lifestyle and deserves to have it upkept. I don’t think she has to be smart to figure it out.. just keep her eyes on the prize and pick up pointers from her Soho house yacht friends.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

With plenty of time spent in Hollywood, she knows exactly what to do.  It’s all about the training 



bisousx said:


> *She’s wildly spending to prove to a judge later she’s grown accustomed to this lifestyle and deserves to have it upkept*. I don’t think she has to be smart to figure it out.. just keep her eyes on the prize and pick up pointers from her Soho house yacht friends.


----------



## lalame

For those saying it's crazy to spend half your net worth on a house.... this seems pretty normal to me? At least in high cost areas like LA, SF, NYC, Boston, etc. it's quite normal to spend MORE than your net worth especially among younger people. What matters more is your income, not your net worth.


----------



## sdkitty

I don't know how well off her previous husands were but with H, I'm quite sure she felt she found the goose who laid the golden egg.  Unlike some fans I don't think the fell in love with a man who just happened to be a prince.  and I don't think she has any intention of walking away from this marriage empty handed (if it comes to that)


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> For those saying it's crazy to spend half your net worth on a house.... this seems pretty normal to me? At least in high cost areas like LA, SF, NYC, Boston, etc. it's quite normal to spend MORE than your net worth especially among younger people. What matters more is your income, not your net worth.



What may be common isn’t necessarily prudent. If I was in their position with no current income except from family handouts, I wouldn’t blow half of my inheritance on one property unless the investment was income producing.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> What may be common isn’t necessarily prudent. If I was in their position with no current income except from family handouts, I wouldn’t blow half of my inheritance on a property unless the investment was income producing.



I'm guessing you also wouldn't be 35-40 and still being supported by your dad in the first place though lol. There's no way the BRF would allow them to go bankrupt or default on a mortgage or something like that, so there aren't really any consequences to not being prudent. To be fair too, they probably have income... the interest on $30m, speaking fees, her residuals from the tv show, the blog... I think they could clear a million easily per year.


----------



## lalame

To me this says they plan to launch a ton of stuff asap to bring in money. Whether they'll be successful, idk.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I'm guessing you also wouldn't be 35-40 and still being supported by your dad in the first place though lol. There's no way the BRF would allow them to go bankrupt or default on a mortgage or something like that, so there aren't really any consequences to not being prudent. To be fair too, they probably have income... the interest on $30m, speaking fees, her residuals from the tv show, the blog... I think they could clear a million easily per year.


I think they'll "need" a lot more than 1 million a year to maintain the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I think they'll "need" a lot more than 1 million a year to mainatin the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed



For sure, you're right. $1m alone isn't enough for that kind of lifestyle in totality... I was just saying they probably take in SOME income, not nothing. I think a newspaper said they'd need $3m per year to keep up with their lifestyle... so we're probably going to see a LOT more of them and for a long time...


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> For sure, you're right. $1m alone isn't enough for that kind of lifestyle in totality... I was just saying they probably take in SOME income, not nothing. I think a newspaper said they'd need $3m per year to keep up with their lifestyle... so we're probably going to see a LOT more of them and for a long time...


well as annoying as they are, they do give us something to talk about.  And I don't lose any sleep over them - unlike most of what's in the news these days.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> Oh geez, that name. Why do celebrity children always have crappy names? Good thing his father has plenty of money for the hundreds of hours of therapy the kid will inevitably need.


Maybe he'll attend group therapy with Archie. I really hope not.


----------



## CeeJay

According to Wikipedia, Trevor's net worth is $5m .. kind of surprising given that he has had some very successful movies.  According to various articles I read, Meghan felt that Trevor would "help" her secure a part .. either in one of his productions -OR- someone else's production in the business.  Well, again .. according to the article, Trevor didn't feel comfortable putting Meghan in one of his productions and didn't reach out to others in the business .. so, when she got the part in Suits and started to become more successful on her own, that's when she "markled" him.  I agree with others re: Harry; if it comes down to divorce .. she is going to make darn sure that she gets plenty of $$$!


----------



## marietouchet

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/commen...-royal-privacy-again-at-stake/5104075.article
Enlightening legal opinion on the lawsuit


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> For those saying it's crazy to spend half your net worth on a house.... this seems pretty normal to me? At least in high cost areas like LA, SF, NYC, Boston, etc. it's quite normal to spend MORE than your net worth especially among younger people. What matters more is your income, not your net worth.


Heck - I know more than a few people who spent way more than their net worth and/or income when purchasing a home/condo in exactly those cities you noted.  Unfortunately, however .. when something happened (loss of job, reduction of income, etc.) they ended up either having to sell, declare bankruptcy (which oftentimes, the Bank takes back the ownership of the property), etc. - bottom line, no more property/house/condo.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I think they'll "need" a lot more than 1 million a year to maintain the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed


For sure!!! .. that's chump change - especially the way they WANT to live!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Heck - I know more than a few people who spent way more than their net worth and/or income when purchasing a home/condo in exactly those cities you noted.  Unfortunately, however .. when something happened (loss of job, reduction of income, etc.) they ended up either having to sell, declare bankruptcy (which oftentimes, the Bank takes back the ownership of the property), etc. - bottom line, no more property/house/condo.



There's definitely a risk but it seems to be pretty unavoidable these days (to buy a house more than your net worth). I have to imagine most people who buy houses couldn't pay for them outright. Exceeding income though is another matter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Has everyone checked out MM's last 2 houses pre-Harry (LA and Toronto)? They weren't very exorbitant or luxurious so it's interesting to see how um her tastes have been elevated...

Lots of photos in these 2:

Los Angeles house with Trevor: https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-former-los-angeles-home-for-sale-2019-8

Toronto house: https://www.hgtv.ca/real-estate/photos/meghan-markle-toronto-home-1911320/#currentSlide=1


----------



## Tivo

mdcx said:


> And Kate would have been instructed to mentor Meghan, befriend her, help guide her through all of the BRF protocol. And I’m sure Kate tried her utmost. But seems like M just wanted competition and b!tchiness instead of a perfectly civil but deferential sister in law relationship.


I agree! Meghan was definitely jealous of Kate, but I think Kate was ultimately jealous of Meghan too. Meghan established her own fan base, and grew popular despite her antics,  so I think the competitiveness along with Meghan’s refusal to defer got to Kate.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Has everyone checked out MM's last 2 houses pre-Harry (LA and Toronto)? They weren't very exorbitant or luxurious so it's interesting to see how um her tastes have been elevated...
> 
> Lots of photos in these 2:
> 
> Los Angeles house with Trevor: https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-former-los-angeles-home-for-sale-2019-8
> 
> Toronto house: https://www.hgtv.ca/real-estate/photos/meghan-markle-toronto-home-1911320/#currentSlide=1


She was renting that Toronto house.  Didn't someone say the Los Angeles house was also rented?


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> She was renting that Toronto house.  Didn't someone say the Los Angeles house was also rented?



Yeah the article said that too. I didn't realize Toronto was also a rental!

So this might be their first purchased home? That could explain why they're spending so much, like first -time buyer naivete...


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> According to Wikipedia, Trevor's net worth is $5m .. kind of surprising given that he has had some very successful movies.  According to various articles I read, Meghan felt that Trevor would "help" her secure a part .. either in one of his productions -OR- someone else's production in the business.  Well, again .. according to the article, Trevor didn't feel comfortable putting Meghan in one of his productions and didn't reach out to others in the business .. so, when she got the part in Suits and started to become more successful on her own, that's when she "markled" him.  I agree with others re: Harry; if it comes down to divorce .. she is going to make darn sure that she gets plenty of $$$!



I always assumed that Trevor financially supported Meghan  throughout the seven or so years they dated before they married. He may not have showered her in wealth but I bet he took care of most of her expenses. I have no proof of this of course. But I can see a 20-something Meghan being the type of girlfriend who would expect her man to take care of her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Enlightening, indeed. Thank you for posting this gem.  The photos of the cameras are disconcerting unless the person is accustomed to it. If, big if, M was not prepared for the paps, then shame on H. He well understood what she would face. Many other ‘royals’ have learned how to manage successfully. “Distasteful”? Yes. “Actionable”? No.

Love this comment: _Distasteful intrusion is not actionable. A better question might be "From whom did the letter reach the defendant, and why isn't that person being sued?"_
And
_I can't see why so-called "royals" should have any more privacy than anyone else._



marietouchet said:


> https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/commen...-royal-privacy-again-at-stake/5104075.article
> Enlightening legal opinion on the lawsuit


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> She was renting that Toronto house.  Didn't someone say the Los Angeles house was also rented?


perfectly nice homes but of course now they would need room for live-in staff


----------



## queennadine

I don't know if this got posted already or not: https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...-nickname-princess-acting-videographer-claims


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> I don't know if this got posted already or not: https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...-nickname-princess-acting-videographer-claims



delusions of granduer then too


----------



## mdcx

I think someone else mentioned this, but M buying all those”pre-ordered” copies of the book to make it seem popular makes sense.
I remember reading somewhere that the bar to claim being an “NYT Best Selling Author” was surprisingly low, some people are a best seller for just a moment/day. I’m sure that’s on M’s project plan!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame  Thank you for this excellent info. 
Trevor’s house — looks like a solid, well-styled house. Of course, the framed Hermes scarf easily adds a couple of thousand $$ 
Toronto — perfectly livable basic style.

Amazingly enough, JFK Jr. managed to live in NYC Tribeca loft without all the heavy-duty guards and with a relatively small footprint - 2,700-square-foot co-op. Incidentally, he lived in the same building Letterman lived in. Of course, he had several other residences to escape to. Wonder if H&M are looking for just the 1 residence or a vacation house too?




lalame said:


> Has everyone checked out MM's last 2 houses pre-Harry (LA and Toronto)? They weren't very exorbitant or luxurious so it's interesting to see how um her tastes have been elevated...
> 
> Lots of photos in these 2:
> 
> Los Angeles house with Trevor: https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-former-los-angeles-home-for-sale-2019-8
> 
> Toronto house: https://www.hgtv.ca/real-estate/photos/meghan-markle-toronto-home-1911320/#currentSlide=1


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I always assumed that Trevor financially supported Meghan  throughout the seven or so years they dated before they married. He may not have showered her in wealth but I bet he took care of most of her expenses. I have no proof of this of course. But I can see a 20-something Meghan being the type of girlfriend who would expect her man to take care of her.



I think you're onto something. On Meghan's old blog about working as a striving actress* she wrote this that I found odd: "I don’t wait tables. I don’t have a side job. I am in the club of the fortunate few that sometimes make a living playing dress-up." I suspected she was only staying afloat because of Trevor.

*The article was shared earlier: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5428533/Meghan-Markles-secret-diary-soul-baring-blog.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

Well they’ve got a security deposit now at least.


----------



## Suncatcher

Seaton Village is very middle class but a nice community neighborhood. Houses are small with a lot of row houses.  I don’t buy for a second that they are looking to spend $13MM on real estate. Pun intended.

No knock against the neighborhood at all. Just giving some proper context.


----------



## melissatrv

Gotta love this article.  With her entourage and diva demands .  Quote from the article:

"People told me, 'get ready because she is a lot,'" the cameraman who remained anonymous told the outlet. "They used to call her 'the princess.' When I saw her, right awOay from the moment she arrived, I didn't even know who she was and she was acting like a diva."

And the feet!!! I cannot unsee these



queennadine said:


> I don't know if this got posted already or not: https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...-nickname-princess-acting-videographer-claims


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

MrsJDS said:


> Seaton Village is very middle class but a nice community neighborhood. Houses are small with a lot of row houses.  I don’t buy for a second that they are looking to spend $13MM on real estate. Pun intended.
> 
> No knock against the neighborhood at all. Just giving some proper context.


Agree.  I was surprised she rented in Seaton Village, which is very nice as you said, but not the coolest neighbourhood to live in.  Houses are over a million, but all houses in Toronto are easily over a million.

It was close to one of the BF's restaurants though.


----------



## Jayne1

melissatrv said:


> And the feet!!! I cannot unsee these
> 
> 
> View attachment 4724115


She fixed the bunions years ago.  In some shoes, you can still see the slight scars.


----------



## Sharont2305

How very decent of them [emoji846] All we had from Harry and Megs when it was the Cambridge children's birthdays was a reply the wish them a HB on the original Cambridge post.


----------



## Sharont2305

And one from Clarence House


----------



## jcnc

I had guessed the photos the Cambridges and Prince Charles would use to wish Archie because it looks like they haven’t interacted with Archie other than these photographed events.:/


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Clearblueskies

^^ I found that a little bizarre tbh.  Neither looked comfortable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Emperor Has No Clothes?  Maybe he is carrying some extra Covid weight so he has outgrown his cute clothes   Cute kid.  Still. this video is too casual for a global audience. Fine for a family email, but very strange for the rest of us. It makes Kate’s photos of her children look like the smart, savvy choice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I think you're onto something. On Meghan's old blog about working as a striving actress* she wrote this that I found odd: "I don’t wait tables. I don’t have a side job. I am in the club of the fortunate few that sometimes make a living playing dress-up."



Playing dress-up on a yacht?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

melissatrv said:


> Gotta love this article.  With her entourage and diva demands .  Quote from the article:
> 
> "People told me, 'get ready because she is a lot,'" the cameraman who remained anonymous told the outlet. "They used to call her 'the princess.' When I saw her, right awOay from the moment she arrived, I didn't even know who she was and she was acting like a diva."
> 
> And the feet!!! I cannot unsee these
> 
> 
> View attachment 4724115



She really did have some work done, hu? In this pic she's looking super average. Also, she had the feet fixed.


----------



## Sharont2305

As expected, she is in the video[emoji849]


----------



## lanasyogamama

What happened to those freckles she was so in love with in the VF article?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe she’s the focus.  Ugh, I should have known.


----------



## mdcx

Well it was very ...performative on Meghan's part, look at me being a great mom etc. But I have to say the child looked somewhat comfortable on her lap which is a vast improvement!
I believe there is a filter on the video, but her appearance is surprisingly low key in terms of hair, clothing etc.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...n-Markle-reads-book-Archie-Save-Children.html


----------



## kemilia

He's a cute little guy but I do wish he was wearing something other than a diaper and t-shirt. Wonder what that's about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

kemilia said:


> He's a cute little guy but I do wish he was wearing something other than a diaper and t-shirt. Wonder what that's about.



Perhaps that's how they're living on a budget ...


----------



## Emeline

kemilia said:


> He's a cute little guy but I do wish he was wearing something other than a diaper and t-shirt. Wonder what that's about.


Maybe she's hoping some Hollywood stars will gift her with high end clothing for him?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Seems awfully big for just turning 1. Also asking questions in sentences?


----------



## 1LV

Pretty sure the low key makeup and clothing, and Archie in t-shirt & diaper is to prove just how far away from the Royal Family *The Duchess* - & don’t you forget it! - *of Sussex* has stepped.  (Is this where I curtsy?)


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> Has everyone checked out MM's last 2 houses pre-Harry (LA and Toronto)? They weren't very exorbitant or luxurious so it's interesting to see how um her tastes have been elevated...
> 
> Lots of photos in these 2:
> 
> Los Angeles house with Trevor: https://www.businessinsider.com/meghan-markle-former-los-angeles-home-for-sale-2019-8
> 
> Toronto house: https://www.hgtv.ca/real-estate/photos/meghan-markle-toronto-home-1911320/#currentSlide=1



Yeah, easy to live within your means when it’s your own money you’re spending. She can spend someone else’s money now so sky is the limit!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe she did at one time, but she does not have a looks at this point to pull off that super super natural thing with really plain  clothes. Angelina Jolie could in her day. She literally wore black sacks for years and still looked amazing. To me at least.


----------



## kkfiregirl

hollieplus2 said:


> Seems awfully big for just turning 1. Also asking questions in sentences?



He eats well - good for him! And babies can learn how to mimic an adult asking a question by twelve months old, that's not strange at all


----------



## Blyen

I know it was an April's fool prank, but that baby does look more like Andrew and Eugenie than Harry, to me, especially now that his hair seem to be turning dark... 
And darn, she couldn't even not stare directly into the camera most of the time for her child's birthday video lol


----------



## kkfiregirl

The video would have been better if she read the book to Archie while someone else (maybe his father) held him - she clearly didn't anticipate him being as wiggly as he was, which she would have known if she actually spent time with him.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Blyen said:


> I know it was an April's fool prank, but that baby does look more like Andrew and Eugenie than Harry, to me, especially now that his hair seem to be turning dark...
> And darn, she couldn't even not stare directly into the camera most of the time for her child's birthday video lol



I think Archie looks just like his dada ...


----------



## bisousx

To me, Archie is the spitting image of Grandpa Tom


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, I hate to admit it but I liked the video (hanging head in shame). It was extremely casual but that was the point. Archie is a big healthy butterball of a baby  and in spite of his clear preference for a different story book he seems happy. I could almost hear him thinking “don’t mess with me, mom. That isn’t a duck or a rabbit. Here let’s read this one.”

I assume Harry was taking the video and hearing him chuckle offscreen was nice.

PS, I’m sure I’ll be back to my usual cynical self regarding them soon but for now I have no problem with it.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I think you're onto something. On Meghan's old blog about working as a striving actress* she wrote this that I found odd: "I don’t wait tables. I don’t have a side job. I am in the club of the fortunate few that sometimes make a living playing dress-up." I suspected she was only staying afloat because of Trevor.
> 
> *The article was shared earlier: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5428533/Meghan-Markles-secret-diary-soul-baring-blog.html


Hmmmmmm - “playing dress-up”???  Bottom line, she was spoiled rotten by her father, so I would suspect that she believed that the same would occur with the husband. Everyone talks about her “networking” skills, but .. think about it, that hustle can be done in your armchair and those of you who live in LA, I’m sure you’ve met plenty of Ladies/Men who are waiting tables and doing other jobs just to put $$$ in their pockets .. how pretentious is she to say “I don’t wait tables” .. VERY SPOILED comment!


----------



## scarlet555

Morgan R said:


>




Baby is cute.  But so repulsed by her can't say anything nice about her except she sounds phony, and baby doesn't seem that comfy, as expected.  Everything is so contrived with her, so it's very hard to like her, maybe in 20 years if she actually changes and instead of creating new stuff for charity, actually using her own money to front so many existing charities and built schools and do things that are recognized years after its done, not announce it years before its done.   I understand drawing attention to some charities and causes, but so far I perceive everything she has done thus far purely for self attention and not gracefully either.  

It's hard to believe anything she and H does because they are children who accept allowances from Prince Charles, and therefore are still funded ultimately by Great Britain a place they say treated them so horribly they moved and stopped their associations with them.  The foundation of their departure, their finances, does not support the lifestyle they appear to want, celebrity Hollywood life of peace(oxymoron) nor the type of charity they could fund or create under the pretense or not to do good.  If you can't finance yourself, why should I trust you or trust my money to your charity? It appears at this point, H and M are not creating a charity but a 'gofundme' instead.


----------



## queennadine

Archie seemed annoyed and she sounded condescending.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> How very decent of them [emoji846] All we had from Harry and Megs when it was the Cambridge children's birthdays was a reply the wish them a HB on the original Cambridge post.



But it is such a formal picture isn’t it? But then, it is quite possible there is no single pic of Archie with his uncle and aunt...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Saw the video. Just my 2 cents.. the "baby" looks like a toddler, much much older than 1, he's giant. I don't see any closeness or affection with Archie, he isn't into her and vice-versa. I think a still image would have been much better, at least she could pretend to be an awesome mom, this puts her skills too much on view, and they aren't that great. She should have read the book directly to him and just had someone film her, she was reading the book outward which is how you read for an audience of many and not one, so he was disinterested.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> She fixed the bunions years ago.  In some shoes, you can still see the slight scars.


I think it's also the disproportionate length of the  toes that make her feet look odd


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> But it is such a formal picture isn’t it? But then, it is quite possible there is no single pic of Archie with his uncle and aunt...


I would think this would be M's fave pic.  She is the center of it.


----------



## tiktok

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Saw the video. Just my 2 cents.. the "baby" looks like a toddler, much much older than 1, he's giant. I don't see any closeness or affection with Archie, he isn't into her and vice-versa. I think a still image would have been much better, at least she could pretend to be an awesome mom, this puts her skills too much on view, and they aren't that great. She should have read the book directly to him and just had someone film her, she was reading the book outward which is how you read for an audience of many and not one, so he was disinterested.



Bottom line it was a performance meant to get people to look at them / her rather than actually read the story to other kids. It felt like a bad take when you use a baby actor in a show and they refuse to cooperate. I also didn’t like him not wearing pants - seems disrespectful, not casual. In this case at least the PR stunt might actually get the charity a lot of money because it gets worldwide coverage, so that is something.


----------



## sdkitty

I think the baby is pretty average looking.  Apparently didn't inherit the red hair.  Will be interesting to see how he looks in a year or so.


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> He's a cute little guy but I do wish he was wearing something other than a diaper and t-shirt. Wonder what that's about.


That's likely what they think us "regular" Americans would do?!?! .. pathetic in my opinion, seriously??? .. clothe the child!  

On another front, totally agree that Archie did not look comfortable with Meghan .. at one point, he starts to fuss & cry .. hmmm, maybe because he's more used to his Nanny as opposed to his mother?  I wouldn't be surprised ..


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I think the baby is pretty average looking.  Apparently didn't inherit the red hair.  Will be interesting to see how he looks in a year or so.


I think his hair still looks reddish--maybe my monitor, and he really seems to love his Daddy. H got the big grin at the end. 

Good to see the little guy is eating well too. But even as a non-Royal, his "outfit" is too casual for a special birthday video, maybe there will be another "official" pic.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> That's likely what they think us "regular" Americans would do?!?! .. pathetic in my opinion, seriously??? .. clothe the child!
> 
> On another front, totally agree that Archie did not look comfortable with Meghan .. at one point, he starts to fuss & cry .. hmmm, maybe because he's more used to his Nanny as opposed to his mother?  I wouldn't be surprised ..


I don't get it with the clothing.  She is or was a "regular" American.  Maybe they thought whatever outfit they put on him would be criticized so they went with a non-outift.


----------



## Jayne1

Genes are so odd.  All I see is Harry in the baby.

I would not have posted that video.  I would try again, maybe after he had his bottle and was sleepy, happy and comfy enough to just look at a picture book.

Have to give Meg credit - she kept her composure during the whole awkward thing.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Someone said she didn’t want it to look like she was pushing merch. But seriously, he could have worn SOMETHING!


----------



## youngster

From that Law Society Gazette that was linked a couple pages ago:

_*Associated Newspapers are entitled to claim victory in round one: the publishers are now demanding costs of more than £50,000 from the duchess’s side.* But this was more of a skirmish than a battle — perhaps little more than a sideshow.

*The main issue is whether the duchess’s letter was private and confidential. She says it was; the newspaper says she had no reasonable expectation it was or would remain private. And, in any event, the Mail says its right to freedom of expression outweighs the duchess’s right to respect for her private life and correspondence.
*_
This will be interesting to watch unfold. Is a written letter "private and confidential"?  She had numerous ways to communicate with her father to insure privacy and confidentiality:  a phone call, a private visit, a video chat.  She didn't have to write him a physical letter. That was her choice. Once he received the letter, is it not his property to do with as he wishes?  Especially if her friends have already put the existence of the letter into the public domain by discussing it in People Magazine?  Very interesting stuff!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> That's likely what they think us "regular" Americans would do?!?! .. pathetic in my opinion, seriously??? .. clothe the child!
> 
> On another front, totally agree that Archie did not look comfortable with Meghan .. at one point, he starts to fuss & cry .. hmmm, maybe because he's more used to his Nanny as opposed to his mother?  I wouldn't be surprised ..


He looked happier when interacting with his dada at the end.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it with the clothing.  She is or was a "regular" American.  Maybe they thought whatever outfit they put on him would be criticized so they went with a non-outift.


NOPE .. remember, she was a very spoiled child and the delusions of being a "Princess" seemed to start at a very young age.  For her to act like a diva (_and as the Suits colleague said "Princess"_), her personae wouldn't necessarily "know" the average American and so, wouldn't do her research.  Personally, that outfit screams 'PWT', but how would they know given their style of living?!?!  She SHOULD know better, but likely not (_really_) interested in her child, it's all about *HER *(_and that video is good evidence of that_)!! 

I agree, when Harry would talk, Archie would seem to get happy ..


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Genes are so odd.  All I see is Harry in the baby.
> 
> I would not have posted that video.  I would try again, maybe after he had his bottle and was sleepy, happy and comfy enough to just look at a picture book.
> 
> Have to give Meg credit - she kept her composure during the whole awkward thing.



That's probably the 100th take


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Morgan R said:


>




I'd like to thank M for reading me the story. 

Thanks M. It was very nice that you didn't let your little one put you off, you made sure I didn't miss a single picture even if you're son did, and you really held on tight to him too, both of you in every frame, you're a real pro. 

Feeling a bit sorry that A was prop. But hey, 'I'm' what counts so...Thanks M.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> I'd like to thank M for reading me the story.
> 
> Thanks M. It was very nice that you didn't let your little one put you off, you made sure I didn't miss a single picture even if you're son did, and you really held on tight to him too, both of you in every frame, you're a real pro.
> 
> Feeling a bit sorry that A was prop. But hey, 'I'm' what counts so...Thanks M.


This.  Arkie wasn’t fooled for a minute.


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> I'd like to thank M for reading me the story.
> 
> Thanks M. It was very nice that you didn't let your little one put you off, you made sure I didn't miss a single picture even if you're son did, and you really held on tight to him too, both of you in every frame, you're a real pro.
> 
> Feeling a bit sorry that A was prop. But hey, 'I'm' what counts so...Thanks M.



I had to watch it after your comments.

And that was so awkward to watch... She is so literal about reading every single word written in the book and so uncomfortable with and unresponsive to Archie’s baby antics...


----------



## Lounorada

Clearblueskies said:


> ^^ I found that a little bizarre tbh.  Neither looked comfortable.


I thought the same... the video was awkward to watch.



kkfiregirl said:


> The video would have been better if she read the book to Archie while someone else (maybe his father) held him - she clearly didn't anticipate him being as wiggly as he was, which she would have known if she actually spent time with him.


Agreed. Especially when at that age all kids want to do is touch everything, play and just be active. He kept trying to reach for the book and play with it, but that was interfering with her performace, especially when he picked up the second book and then chucked it on the floor 
She looked quite flustered throughout the video, maybe even a little irritated when Archie appeared to be saying Dada at the end of the video and she quickly says Duck, Rabbit 
Her voice is just painful to listen to IMO.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I think it's also the disproportionate length of the  toes that make her feet look odd



Yeah they look like they're ready to creep right out of the front of those sandals.


----------



## LittleStar88

Baby needs pants on. I don't want to see saggy diapers. Maybe because I have never had kids and my associations with diapers equal poop and heavy soggy pee diaper in my mind and I don't see diapers as being cute?

My two cents - nice try. They could have done dozens of takes - try when the baby is not so fidgety, put a cute outfit on (who doesn't love little baby outfits?!) and try better.

Cute little boy, though. I agree - neither baby nor mom looks comfortable with each other in this video. Looks like they plopped the baby down with a stranger and just went for it.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> That's likely what they think us "regular" Americans would do?!?! .. pathetic in my opinion, seriously??? .. *clothe the child*!
> 
> On another front, totally agree that Archie did not look comfortable with Meghan .. at one point, he starts to fuss & cry .. hmmm, maybe because he's more used to his Nanny as opposed to his mother?  I wouldn't be surprised ..



lol!


----------



## V0N1B2

I, for one am extremely disappointed with this video. I thought FOR SURE she would have "read" the book to Ar-kay using baby sign language.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> She looked quite flustered throughout the video, maybe even a little irritated when Archie appeared to be saying Dada at the end of the video and she quickly says Duck, Rabbit



I saw that too but thought maybe I was imagining things because I dislike her so much. Guess not.


----------



## lalame

I don't have kids so I assumed this was a normal moment for a first time mom and child, with the awkwardness and squirminess and all. But all babies are awkward to me so... 

Archie seems a little too young to be a participant in something like this. Save it for when he's a little older and can sit still.


----------



## cafecreme15

Surprisingly, I really liked this video. I thought it was the first smart move these two have made in a looong time. Yes, Archie was fussy (as most one year olds are) and Meghan looked a bit uncomfortable (maybe knowing people might judge her for having a squirmy baby?), but overall I thought it was endearing and most importantly, appropriate for the times. It seems she purposefully downplayed any fashion element by putting Archie in a plain white onesie and herself in a plain denim shirt.

Archie is adorable, and it was a real hoot when he picked up the second book and threw it on the ground. I'm glad we got this real glimpse of him and not a picture of his foot or lock of hair or whatever.


----------



## marietouchet

Been enjoying all the comments about Archie's outfit ... Tshirt and diaper ... Was wondering if comments were  perhaps a bit hard ...
But, this video will be trotted out when Archie has his own children, when he will cringe at the thought of the outfit. So, everyone's comments, in the end were spot on
Compare to Charlotte's outfit for 5 year birthday - YES an old fashioned style little girl outfit but it is TIMELESS, those snaps can get trotted out later with confidence
And there is a simplicity to snaps versus videos, less to nit pick

PS IMHO getting a 1 year old to sit still is impossible , that is in part why I think snaps would have been better


----------



## justwatchin

Why wasn’t the video posted on their own account or was that shut down when they gave up their titles?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, at this age, a photo makes sense.  Video for the private family email. Photo for the gawking world. 
I, too, dislike criticizing a 1 yr old’s outfit. Maybe it’s a onesie, maybe it’s 2 pieces. Of course, spotless white just adds pounds as does the camera. Still, it isn’t his fault that his parents dressed him this way. Or chose to force him to sit still and pay attention to the %$#  story. Clearly, the lil one is teething and prefers chewing the book’s edges - completely understandable and expected. Also, clearly, he knows how to control these parents. Just start fussing a bit and he gets his way. Haaaaa.  Good on him. 

There was a lot of pressure on the parents to get this birthday thing right because this is a 100% reflection of them, who they are and how they see themselves. They cannot blame the BRF for the criticisms - this one is on them.  IMO, it’s another missed opportunity to get positive press.  Additionally, I’m curious how much money they themselves have donated. Maybe I’m missing it, but that part never gets mentioned. Easy to ask others to give, what about them?  




marietouchet said:


> Been enjoying all the comments about Archie's outfit ... Tshirt and diaper ... Was wondering if comments were  perhaps a bit hard ...
> But, this video will be trotted out when Archie has his own children, when he will cringe at the thought of the outfit. So, everyone's comments, in the end were spot on
> Compare to Charlotte's outfit for 5 year birthday - YES an old fashioned style little girl outfit but it is TIMELESS, those snaps can get trotted out later with confidence
> And there is a simplicity to snaps versus videos, less to nit pick
> 
> PS IMHO getting a 1 year old to sit still is impossible , that is in part why I think snaps would have been better


----------



## gazoo

I'm happy they posted a video of Archie. I think he looks exactly like Harry; he's adorable. I wish she'd have read the book TO him and not the camera, but whatever, this is Meghan and Meghan is consistently always about Meghan.

Her constant need to be _so different,_ down to ensuring her child is not remotely dressed like the Cambridge children is tiresome. A Royal baby in a onesie for his first birthday official video/photo release feels ick. On the one hand, they knew people have been desperate to see the baby, so to not even dress him at all feels I don't know, disrespectful? Meghan looks too casual, and awkward, IMO.

A squirmy baby is pretty normal, based on their temperaments. I have 2 kids, one would have placidly sat there gazing at the book and me. My youngest though, would have been slamming the book from my hand and loudly letting me know she was over the entire exercise.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

gazoo said:


> Her constant need to be _so different,_ down to ensuring her child is not remotely dressed like the Cambridge children is tiresome.


Yes! She seems one of those people who are just contrary for attention.


----------



## Katel

Morgan R said:


>




this is a very contrary, argumentative storybook. It does show the concept of “looks are deceiving” (both so appropriate).

she has a very annoying and fake voice

Archie perks up when he hears his daddy, but doesn’t seem to want much to do with his mommy. And when he says “Dada,” she changes it. Yuk.

- maybe because the whole show feels fake and oppressive and controlling - baby seems to say “no thanks”

what a confusing story for a one-year-old

so very awkward

also funny that there’s an ad for donations at the top lol... I know it’s not for her but it says it all...

(ETA: I didn’t see your note when I posted mdcx - contrary is a good word for her!)


----------



## lulilu

Sharont2305 said:


> As expected, *she is in the video[*emoji849]





lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t believe *she's the focus*.  Ugh, I should have known.





mdcx said:


> Well it was *very ...performative on Meghan's part,* look at me being a great mom etc. But I have to say the child looked somewhat comfortable on her lap which is a vast improvement!
> I believe there is a filter on the video, but her appearance is surprisingly low key in terms of hair, clothing etc.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...n-Markle-reads-book-Archie-Save-Children.html




She is so predictable.  Of course the baby's first birthday photo should be a video where she is front and center, performing. IDK why I thought we'd see a cute photo of the baby.

And as someone mentioned, she has the perpetual need to differentiate herself from the BRF (and actually most of the rest of the world) -- no regular photo, a performance by her, inappropriate/unattractive clothing...she is constantly thumbing her nose at the world.

To me, it also showed she is so inexperienced as a mother -- what mother would expect a one year old to sit still while she performed?  And, IMHO, the book was a stupid one, with virtually the same drawing on every page, making a "cute" distinction that a one year old would not possibly be old enough to make.  No wonder he squirmed around.

The contrast between this video and the nice photos and posts by the rest of the family shows just how out of touch she is with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32388600/baby-archie-oprah-winfrey-book-club/

BAZAAR.com can confirm that the book was one of many gifted from none other than Oprah Winfrey. According to OprahMag.com, Winfrey revealed that she gave Archie a large collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift last year. 

"Honey, I have a standard gift that I do for people that I really care about. I don't know the baby's name or the baby's gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!" she previously told Access Hollywood.


----------



## CarryOn2020

These days we all are judged by our room backgrounds.  
https://twitter.com/ratemyskyperoom?lang=en
https://www.businessinsider.com/twi...rities-home-offices-hilarious-rankings-2020-4
Guessing theirs would be a 2. The book-reading corner is easy and fun to create.  They really need to step it up.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CarryOn2020 said:


> These days we all are judged by our room backgrounds.
> https://twitter.com/ratemyskyperoom?lang=en
> https://www.businessinsider.com/twi...rities-home-offices-hilarious-rankings-2020-4
> Guessing theirs would be a 2. The book-reading corner is easy and fun to create.  They really need to step it up.


Great websites lol. I have loads of fun seeing newscasters/interviewees/celeb-types in their set-ups.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32388600/baby-archie-oprah-winfrey-book-club/
> 
> BAZAAR.com can confirm that the book was one of many gifted from none other than Oprah Winfrey. According to OprahMag.com, Winfrey revealed that she gave Archie a large collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift last year.
> 
> "Honey, I have a standard gift that I do for people that I really care about. I don't know the baby's name or the baby's gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!" she previously told Access Hollywood.




"Standard gift" and "people that I really care about" seems like an at odds concept to me. The people that *I *really care about get customized personal gifts. "Standard gift" sounds like something I would keep on hand as a generic one size fits all party favor


----------



## WillstarveforLV

CarryOn2020 said:


> These days we all are judged by our room backgrounds.
> https://twitter.com/ratemyskyperoom?lang=en
> https://www.businessinsider.com/twi...rities-home-offices-hilarious-rankings-2020-4
> Guessing theirs would be a 2. The book-reading corner is easy and fun to create.  They really need to step it up.


OMG - this is hilarious - thanks for sharing. I just spent a small fortune on fresh flowers in prep for my skype team meeting tomorrow  And yes the Harkles get a 2 at best.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

lulilu said:


> She is so predictable.  Of course the baby's first birthday photo should be a video where she is front and center, performing. IDK why I thought we'd see a cute photo of the baby.
> 
> And as someone mentioned, she has the perpetual need to differentiate herself from the BRF (and actually most of the rest of the world) -- no regular photo, a performance by her, inappropriate/unattractive clothing...she is constantly thumbing her nose at the world.
> 
> To me, it also showed she is so inexperienced as a mother -- what mother would expect a one year old to sit still while she performed?  And, IMHO, the book was a stupid one, with virtually the same drawing on every page, making a "cute" distinction that a one year old would not possibly be old enough to make.  No wonder he squirmed around.
> 
> The contrast between this video and the nice photos and posts by the rest of the family shows just how out of touch she is with them.


Am I the only one thinking it looks like she is eye-*ffing the camera?


----------



## Genie27

WillstarveforLV said:


> Am I the only one thinking it looks like she is eye-*ffing the camera?


She’s planning on adding the clip to her audition reel.

it’s gonna extend her “range” from Hot Girl #3 all the way to MILF-in-park #5.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

kemilia said:


> He's a cute little guy but I do wish he was wearing something other than a diaper and t-shirt. Wonder what that's about.


Her attempt to make super basic into super chic because it's her. was she wearing short cut off jean shorts in the video? if so, OMG .


----------



## Sharont2305

WillstarveforLV said:


> Her attempt to make super basic into super chic because it's her. was she wearing short cut off jean shorts in the video? if so, OMG .


Yes, I noticed the shorts too.


----------



## Happycantwait

What am I missing?  I don’t think either looked uncomfortable. The only weird thing was her insistence on finishing that book when Archie was done with it. Babies squirm. Also don’t almost all babies say “dada” before mama?  BTW, I’m not a fan of hers or the royal family, and I think Harry is going to regret leaving.


----------



## TC1

Archie probably started to squirm because he's done 900 takes of this video and was bored of her passive aggressive tone.


----------



## threadbender

Did she even say anything about his birthday? Or, was it all about the Oprah book? And, her, of course.

Archie could have had a simple t-shirt and shorts on and been far more appropriate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scrpo83

I think the video is fine although it is very clear that the book is not Archie's favourite..and the story is a bit confusing even for an adult like me..why is there a brachiasaurus in a duck rabbit book?no wonder the baby is restless..They should have picked a different title for the read out or better yet just do the reading for the charity without Archie..don't like Meg's insistence that they finished the duck rabbit book first before reading the book that Archie grabbed off camera..


----------



## eunaddict

Morgan R said:


>




She's not even reading or pointing things out to him, she's pointing them out to the camera. The entire exercise was for the camera.

EDIT: I'm not a parent but I have babysat for kids my entire teenage life and even as a teenager, that would not be the book I pick to read to a 1 year old. Something more colourful, with more pictures, with a more coherent storyline and maybe something with fur/felt/cotton that the tot can grab at and interact with would have worked so much better than a book that basically had only one drawing the entire time.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Ah, you all are a tough crowd. I’m sure she purposely chose casual clothing that one couldn’t identify so she wouldn’t get accused of promoting clothing via a charity as a side deal. She also had to finish the book because the whole point was a “read a long for charity. If she has stopped, what about the other kids reading? She clearly struggled with reading to Archie and remembering to show the camera as well. 

And the book choice was likely made by the charity and not her. There would be concerns about content they would have to consider as well as copyright issues to address ahead of time. She can’t just launch into a second book because he grabbed it. (ETA: I just checked - they specifically identify the book so I’m sure there is a charitable donation from sales of it back to them or some sort of agreement in place)

Archie is cute, he’s the spitting image of his Dad at that age. They posted a video instead of some weird photo and they also tried to do some good with it. I’m not a fan of theirs but this was a much better attempt than anything else they have done recently in my book. Also, the chuckle and “oh god, what do I do” moments seem to suggest that this was a happy moment. I hope that is the case.


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> These days we all are judged by our room backgrounds.
> https://twitter.com/ratemyskyperoom?lang=en
> https://www.businessinsider.com/twi...rities-home-offices-hilarious-rankings-2020-4
> Guessing theirs would be a 2. The book-reading corner is easy and fun to create.  They really need to step it up.


Love this! QEII’s is so peaceful and restful for the eye.


----------



## muchstuff

Just my two cents but I thought the video was cute and that their interaction seemed pretty normal. Kids that age can be squirmy and he seemed pretty interested for a good chunk of the book, then wanted to play drop the book, pretty typical for that age. Maybe cutting her a little slack now and then isn't a bad thing...


----------



## poopsie

My effing gawd she is exhausting. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING has to be about _her_. Can you imagine what it must be like to be around her full time? Every waking moment her mind must be ticking and whirring with plots and schemes and vendettas.  There is no 'them' there is only her. She is them. 
Forget "finding freedom" Harry-----you are a prisoner who has merely exchanged one gilded cage for another.
Forget about "finding freedom" Megpie------you too are a prisoner. A prisoner of your insanity/personality disorder.
Run Archie, run


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just looking for authenticity, tired of their posturing and lecturing.  Here’s the SaveWithStories site:
https://www.savethechildren.org/us/...ke-and-duchess-read-to-archie-savewithstories

Knowing that video is going global, I would have set up a cozy kid-friendly reading corner, made the SWS logo into an iron-on patch and placed it front and center on lil one’s t-shirt or worn it myself. A loving grandparent could have made the shirt, too. Alternatively, a framed logo with the website would remind viewers of the purpose. Something like this is all about promotion. Do we know if H&M have donated $$$?





A1aGypsy said:


> Ah, you all are a tough crowd. I’m sure she purposely chose casual clothing that one couldn’t identify so she wouldn’t get accused of promoting clothing via a charity as a side deal. She also had to finish the book because the whole point was a “read a long for charity. If she has stopped, what about the other kids reading? She clearly struggled with reading to Archie and remembering to show the camera as well.
> 
> And the book choice was likely made by the charity and not her. There would be concerns about content they would have to consider as well as copyright issues to address ahead of time. She can’t just launch into a second book because he grabbed it. (ETA: I just checked - they specifically identify the book so I’m sure there is a charitable donation from sales of it back to them or some sort of agreement in place)
> 
> Archie is cute, he’s the spitting image of his Dad at that age. They posted a video instead of some weird photo and they also tried to do some good with it. I’m not a fan of theirs but this was a much better attempt than anything else they have done recently in my book. Also, the chuckle and “oh god, what do I do” moments seem to suggest that this was a happy moment. I hope that is the case.


----------



## marthastoo

I haven't read this thread in weeks and I decided to pop in for ****z and giggle to see what was being said after the video (in which Archie was totally adorable) dropped.  So I click a few pages back to start reading.  ....and I stopped reading after I read that Archie is an average looking baby (yes, babies are cute, so yes, he is cute like all babies) and who would post THAT video.  

And I'm out.

BTW,  I was trying to explain to my husband this thread.   He truly could not wrap his head around what people say on here.  Neither can I.


----------



## sdkitty

muchstuff said:


> Just my two cents but I thought the video was cute and that their interaction seemed pretty normal. Kids that age can be squirmy and he seemed pretty interested for a good chunk of the book, then wanted to play drop the book, pretty typical for that age. Maybe cutting her a little slack now and then isn't a bad thing...


I actually think she looks pretty normal in this video and I don't mind her shorts....she doesn't really look like an evil person


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Anyone familiar with Emily Giffin? I have to say I've read all her novels and she is a really great contemporary author. Her first book is amazing. Anyway, her thoughts....

"Emily Giffin came under fire today for her comments about Meghan Markle.

The “Something Borrowed” author called the Duchess of Sussex a phony and unmaternal in a text message and blasted the former senior royal in a now deleted Instagram comment.

“Holy ‘me first.’ This is the Megan [sic] show. Why didn’t she film and let Harry read? And why didn’t she take the moment at the end to say ‘he said daddy!’ Because that would make it about Harry for a split second, God forbid,” Emily had written. “Also, you want privacy for your child so you put out a video (by your authorized biographer) of him …. wearing no pants?! Ooookay ….”

In another text message, Emily added that Meghan was putting on a show and playing a part “poorly”, as well as calling her unmaternal and phony."

She made a longer statement afterwards, too.


----------



## marietouchet

threadbender said:


> Did she even say anything about his birthday? Or, was it all about the Oprah book? And, her, of course.
> 
> Archie could have had a simple t-shirt and shorts on and been far more appropriate.


Ok I looked into the video details , and now think it was a onesie, not shirt plus diaper 
But the outfit  still wrong given how the video will be scrutinized for decades


----------



## marietouchet

marthastoo said:


> I haven't read this thread in weeks and I decided to pop in for ****z and giggle to see what was being said after the video (in which Archie was totally adorable) dropped.  So I click a few pages back to start reading.  ....and I stopped reading after I read that Archie is an average looking baby (yes, babies are cute, so yes, he is cute like all babies) and who would post THAT video.
> 
> And I'm out.
> 
> BTW,  I was trying to explain to my husband this thread.   He truly could not wrap his head around what people say on here.  Neither can I.


Oh please forgive us our sins as we sit in isolation hyper analyzing the every move of H&M 
It is either that or staring at our own dust bunnies and cleaning them up 
Life is tough these days


----------



## CarryOn2020

So the idea is to promote donating to SWS, right?  Then promote the website -  give the web address and make it easy for the donors. Do we know how much money H&M have donated to this cause?  Other celebs promise matching funds or they announce how much they donated. 

Have they bought that $13 million dollar house yet?


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> Oh please forgive us our sins as we sit in isolation hyper analyzing the every move of H&M
> It is either that or staring at our own dust bunnies and cleaning them up
> Life is tough these days


It was nice, there hadn’t been any insults directed at the members here in quite a while. Alas.


----------



## mrsinsyder

And I might as well be real petty and say I find Archie to be... the opposite of cute. Hopefully he grows into those looks. Though in honesty I don’t find his father to be anything to look at either. Those Windsor genes aren’t my speed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly I was disappointed.   I thought we would see nice pictures of Archie, appropriately dressed, blowing out a candle.  The usual things you see for a first birthday. He is a very cute baby and certainly looks well nourished. A video was fine, but his mother was making it about herself instead of him.   After all this time a little  compilation of images reflecting his growth over the past year would have been nice


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> And I might as well be real petty and say I find Archie to be... the opposite of cute. Hopefully he grows into those looks. Though in honesty I don’t find his father to be anything to look at either. Those Windsor genes aren’t my speed.


LOL
I wouldn't go as far as to say he's ugly.  I just don't find him all that cute.  I call it as I see it.  I think Charlotte is adorable but she's older; I don't recall her as a baby.  I though little george was adorable when he met Pres ***** in the bathrobe too.  But again, he was older.  Maybe Archie will be adorable when he's a bit older.


----------



## lalame

I'm gonna be REALLY controversial and say I don't find any babies attractive. I give Archie 2 years and will prob find him as charming as the other royal kids.

We need to do a focus group... rate Archie on attractiveness based on this photo. Then rate him on same photo, with Meghan standing next to him.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I'm gonna be REALLY controversial and say I don't find any babies attractive. I give Archie 2 years and will prob find him as charming as the other royal kids.


I like babies when they smile and laugh with me.  not sure you can really capture that on a video.


----------



## Genie27

Poor saggy diaper clad Archie!
He’s thinking “Who is this auntie, and why is she reading this stupid book, in a silly voice, while she tries to hold me down and mug for the camera? And me in my undies. Where’s my nanny! Does she have to do everything around here?!?!?”

I think he’s cute - I like chubby babies.


----------



## melissatrv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She really did have some work done, hu? In this pic she's looking super average. Also, she had the feet fixed.


OH yeah, she definitely had those wonky feet fixed...bunions, super long second toe, hammer toes etc. I know people cannot help what their feet look like but...I agree with her for once, I would not want my feet photographed either like that


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> I'm gonna be REALLY controversial and say I don't find any babies attractive. I give Archie 2 years and will prob find him as charming as the other royal kids.
> 
> We need to do a focus group... rate Archie on attractiveness based on this photo. Then rate him on same photo, with Meghan standing next to him.



I’m also in the camp of “not all babies are cute”, although some like Gigi Hadid are born absolutely gorgeous. And that French model Thylane Blondeau who’s been beautiful all her life.


----------



## bisousx

I’m not a parent yet so I don’t get the hubbub.. what’s wrong with a baby hanging out in his diaper?


----------



## mrsinsyder

bisousx said:


> I’m not a parent yet so I don’t get the hubbub.. what’s wrong with a baby hanging out in his diaper?


It’s yucky to me, because a diaper is literally there to catch waste. Idk. It’s something I’d say needs to be covered by clothes for a big public moment. At home chilling is fine, but it’s weird to me to not put shorts on him when millions of people are watching.


----------



## Jktgal

Morgan R said:


>




Oh god, Save the Child from being a perpetual prop for his mother, UK!


----------



## Jktgal

Plus seems that Arkie got the most colorless bland book on the planet.


----------



## lalame

Jktgal said:


> Plus seems that Arkie got the most colorless bland book on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4724895
> View attachment 4724896



Interesting seeing this context... so she didn't even need to have Archie in the video? If I were her, I would've not used him in the first place so it could go smoother but she must feel like people are excited to see him...


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> Honestly I was disappointed.   I thought we would see nice pictures of Archie, appropriately dressed, blowing out a candle.  The usual things you see for a first birthday. He is a very cute baby and certainly looks well nourished. A video was fine, but his mother was making it about herself instead of him.   After all this time a little  compilation of images reflecting his growth over the past year would have been nice


I agree with you.  How sweet are those pictures of kids in their birthday finery blowing out candles, or grinning over a cake? It’s always been about Archie’s mother tho’.  Today was no different.


----------



## 1LV

lalame said:


> Interesting seeing this context... so she didn't even need to have Archie in the video? If I were her, I would've not used him in the first place so it could go smoother but she must feel like people are excited to see him...


He is her claim to fame, long after Harry hits the trail.


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> Plus seems that Arkie got the most colorless bland book on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4724895
> View attachment 4724896



It’s possible the book was assigned to her. 

The author of the book passed away from ovarian cancer awhile back and I saw today that her widower was touched that Meghan read his wife’s book. So that’s a nice aspect to the video anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

I thought the book was kind of charming. 

that’s so sad about the author. I hope her husband found some peace today knowing his wife will live on through her words.


----------



## Lodpah

So are we going to talk about the advertising on the bottom left hand corner of the book? I don’t understand why she has to monetize her son in his birthday. Does she not ever do anything that has nothing’s to do with her self promotion? It’s there you have to look for it in quite obvious.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

1LV said:


> He is her claim to fame, long after Harry hits the trail.


I ruminate over Archie every so often - what country and parent gets Archie when they split in a few years. I think Harry will hit the trail with Archie in tow and she'd be fine with it as long as money flows her way. I don't get mom vibes coming from her at all. Archie was just necessary.


----------



## lalame

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I ruminate over Archie every so often - what country and parent gets Archie when they split in a few years. I think Harry will hit the trail with Archie in tow and she'd be fine with it as long as money flows her way. I don't get mom vibes coming from her at all. Archie was just necessary.



If they divorced I think he'd have very good grounds to ask for primary custody too... assuming he moves back to UK to be with his family he could argue he has the unlimited resources, big family support network, stable and non-traveling "job," etc all of which she would lack as an actress who burned bridges with her entire family.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

So did baby Archie babble “Dada” at the end and she quickly derailed that by saying “rabbit!” ? Like she wanted to distract Archie giving that credit and accolade to Just Harry even though he is Just Dada as well?


----------



## Jktgal

lalame said:


> Interesting seeing this context... so she didn't even need to have Archie in the video? If I were her, I would've not used him in the first place so it could go smoother but she must feel like people are excited to see him...



She neither read it for him nor for viewers. The good thing about this video is it brought attention to the online reading series. The others did it properly. 

Eddie Redmayne was magnificent. Whole different league.  And I quite enjoyed the other guy. Don't know who he is but he makes me want to donate and buy the book. (Maybe because I am partial to cake.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

This video was made last weekend for the SWS UK site — even though in mid-April, H said in a podcast that things are ‘better than we’ve been led to believe’.  Okaaay, H, ok.
https://www.womanandhome.com/life/royal-news/prince-harry-covid-19-comments-356503/


----------



## scrpo83

lalame said:


> Interesting seeing this context... so she didn't even need to have Archie in the video? If I were her, I would've not used him in the first place so it could go smoother but she must feel like people are excited to see him...



Yep..like i said earlier..better to have her alone narrating the story for the charity and put out another video or pic of Archie properly celebrating his birthday with a cake or muffin or something with both parents present on screen..double win for the sussex as they will be in the news longer..but what do i know..


----------



## doni

Jktgal said:


> Plus seems that Arkie got the most colorless bland book on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4724895
> View attachment 4724896


I love the book Meghan read, Duck Rabbit. But it seems everybody else was reading to the audience which seems to be the point. Whereas she attempted to read simultaneously to the audience and to her son, which didn’t really work, so maybe that’s where the awkwardness came from to be fair to her.


----------



## scrpo83

[QUOTE="Jktgal, post: 33776967,And I quite enjoyed the other guy. Don't know who he is but he makes me want to donate and buy the book. (Maybe because I am partial to cake.)

View attachment 4724953
View attachment 4724954

	

		
			
		

		
	
[/QUOTE]
 That's nicholas hoult..he played beast in the new xmen movies..


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> This video was made last weekend for the SWS UK site — even though in mid-April, H said in a podcast that things are ‘better than we’ve been led to believe’.  Okaaay, H, ok.
> https://www.womanandhome.com/life/royal-news/prince-harry-covid-19-comments-356503/



This is so out of touch. People are worried for their health and livelihoods... yeah, tell them things are much better than they think because there’s this “human spirit” thing that’s spreading. Whatever that means. I get he’s trying to be uplifting but all that tells me is he’s so sheltered he has no idea what real people are actually feeling.

_Harry went on to say that the public should be comforted by the “human spirit” being shown within communities. _

_“It’s also proving that I think things are better than we’re led to believe through certain corners of the media,” he told the podcast host. 

“It can be very worrying when you’re sitting there and the only information you are getting is from certain news channels, but then if you are out and about or you are on the right platforms, you can really sense this human spirit coming to the forefront.”_


----------



## eunaddict

Given the new context, wouldn't a better video set-up be to have H holding A (and camera) on the floor while M reads from the chair and so it's natural that she reads to the camera because it's right next to A. And if she MUST include her kid in the video, for a finishing touch, flip the camera around to selfie mode and show that she was reading to her kid and H, and not just the instagram audience.

And viola, she's done her bit for the movement and the world gets a little snippet of A sitting in dad's lap, listening to mom reading him a book.


----------



## Sharont2305

eunaddict said:


> Given the new context, wouldn't a better video set-up be to have H holding A (and camera) on the floor while M reads from the chair and so it's natural that she reads to the camera because it's right next to A. And if she MUST include her kid in the video, for a finishing touch, flip the camera around to selfie mode and show that she was reading to her kid and H, and not just the instagram audience.
> 
> And viola, she's done her bit for the movement and the world gets a little snippet of A sitting in dad's lap, listening to mom reading him a book.


But, you don't understand, it's about Meg, and Meg only, [emoji23]


----------



## 1LV

eunaddict said:


> Given the new context, wouldn't a better video set-up be to have H holding A (and camera) on the floor while M reads from the chair and so it's natural that she reads to the camera because it's right next to A. And if she MUST include her kid in the video, for a finishing touch, flip the camera around to selfie mode and show that she was reading to her kid and H, and not just the instagram audience.
> 
> And viola, she's done her bit for the movement and the world gets a little snippet of A sitting in dad's lap, listening to mom reading him a book.


Sweet!


----------



## kemilia

Jktgal said:


> Plus seems that Arkie got the most colorless bland book on the planet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4724895
> View attachment 4724896


Now I gotta read that Banana book since all my bananas seem to go bad when I'm not looking. 

I do think children like to see color in their books, that grabs their attention. The duck/rabbit book (which took me a while to "get") was pretty bland.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Some author is getting dragged for her spot-on comments about the video:


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> Honestly I was disappointed.   I thought we would see nice pictures of Archie, appropriately dressed, blowing out a candle.  The usual things you see for a first birthday. He is a very cute baby and certainly looks well nourished. A video was fine, but *his mother was making it about herself *instead of him.   After all this time a little  compilation of images reflecting his growth over the past year would have been nice



*gracekelly*, and of course Meghan is unable psychologically to see herself in that light <it's all about me, Me, ME, MEGHAN>

And why the big fat white diaper on Archie in the vid? Like for real?
Even a 1-year-old would have the common sense to put a pair of shorts or a swimsuit on, please
I mean, Meghan, would you just your bra & underwear in video? <never mind, we know the answer>


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't care for babies (more of a puppy person myself) but I thought both looked well in that video. I think the dress code is way too casual and uncomfortable for putting on the world wide web. But I have seen all sorts of things on the internet like really untidy homes, unmade beds etc so I guess that's that! I see Harry in Archie a lot! His hair is definitely showing ginger like his dad. Bless him! He seems to be a healthy and easy baby.


----------



## ic_locon

I’m sorry but why does it always seem that Meghan is awkwardly handling her son in photos and now in this video. If you’re around your child most of the time, you’ll understand his moods and behaviors, like when is the best time to shoot a video and so on. There is a good time to read a story to your child. She should have already figured that out by now. If not, then she needs to spend more time with him.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> Some author is getting dragged for her spot-on comments about the video:



This Emily Giffin needs to become a member here (if she isn't already).


----------



## bag-mania

ic_locon said:


> I’m sorry but why does it always seem that Meghan is awkwardly handling her son in photos and now in this video. If you’re around your child most of the time, you’ll understand his moods and behaviors, like when is the best time to shoot a video and so on. There is a good time to read a story to your child. She should have already figured that out by now. If not, then she needs to spend more time with him.



She probably hands him off to a nanny when he is fussy. Or maybe she gives him to Harry, which would be better.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> *This Emily Giffin needs to become a member here *(if she isn't already).



*bag-mania*, would send Emily Giffin an invite but do not want hate-mail from MM's PR company bots


----------



## Annawakes

It seems to me Archie’s diaper is in need of changing.  Big time.  It’s all puffy with pee...


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania*, would send Emily Giffin an invite but do not want hate-mail from MM's PR company bots



If only it was just bots. I certainly believe there exists a small but vocal group of rabid Meghan fans out there. They must be frustrated and busy these days defending their "queen."


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> Some author is getting dragged for her spot-on comments about the video:



I have followed her for a while. Like many of us, she was so excited about the wedding and Meghan, but then lost faith in both of them over time with all the shenanigans. Of course nobody is paying attention long enough to know that whole backstory, and are just “canceling” her for being a “hater”.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't know. I just don't know if she's that smart.



I wouldn't call her smart by a long shot......cunning?  YES!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lanasyogamama said:


> I have followed her for a while. Like many of us, she was so excited about the wedding and Meghan, but then lost faith in both of them over time with all the shenanigans. Of course nobody is paying attention long enough to know that whole backstory, and are just “canceling” her for being a “hater”.



Totally agree, *lana*!
Why? Why is this author being branded as a racist, per the article in Daily Mail UK. When is it an error to have an opinion about someone or something?

Do not see how racism comes in to play here

The comment section in this Daily Mail article tells the true story imo
♥️


----------



## gracekelly

A new Harry Markle   This picture is from there. Pretty accurate
https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/05/07/archies-1st-birthday-promotional-video/


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> A new Harry Markle   This picture is from there. Pretty accurate
> https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/05/07/archies-1st-birthday-promotional-video/
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4725339



Ha! This paragraph deserves to be featured.

"Meanwhile, some will think the ‘Archie’ video cute and lovely, while others will see him used as a PR prop to further the brand that the Harkles are itching to launch, and an attempt to reignite their ever declining fan base. Is it wrong to criticize a charity video? I would say no because it’s a quid pro quo, and you can choose to overlook that and accept the fact that _*the video promoted MM and her lack of acting skills, her inability to engage with a baby, but did highlight her innate ability to find a camera and to look at it with a disingenuous animated expression. *_You can smell her thirst, for she cannot thrive (or even survive) without posing for a camera. You’d think someone would have given ‘Archie’ an outfit for his birthday, but it looks like funds are tight, and friends and family are thin on the ground. All their funds must have been eaten up with lawyers fees, payments to Sunshine Sachs and other minions, oh but they owe the British public £2.4 million (plus interest) for Frogmore, and we want to see the colour of their money, and we want it now."


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> Some author is getting dragged for her spot-on comments about the video:



re watched the end, and you can tell her eyes changed when Archie said 'dada'(however you spell it lol)  she seemed to almost lose it for half a second there and blurts out 'Duck rabbit' instead of truly recognizing what baby had said, it could have been a tender moment, but it would have acknowledged Harry, so no bueno.  It appears to me, she finds him very uncooperative and who wouldn't be?  Soon, I hope H will be this uncooperative.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> re watched the end, and you can tell her eyes changed when Archie said 'dada'(however you spell it lol)  she seemed to almost lose it for half a second there and blurts out 'Duck rabbit' instead of truly recognizing what baby had said, it could have been a tender moment, but it would have acknowledged Harry, so no bueno.  It appears to me, she finds him very uncooperative and who wouldn't be?  Soon, I hope H will be this uncooperative.



Did she not want to acknowledge Harry because she doesn't want ayone to know she had help taping the story? 

It's hard to believe even Meghan is so petty and insecure that sharing even one second of attention is unbearable. But I guess she slips every once in awhile and shows her true self.


----------



## CeeJay

eunaddict said:


> Given the new context, wouldn't a better video set-up be to have H holding A (and camera) on the floor while M reads from the chair and so it's natural that she reads to the camera because it's right next to A. And if she MUST include her kid in the video, for a finishing touch, flip the camera around to selfie mode and show that she was reading to her kid and H, and not just the instagram audience.
> 
> And viola, she's done her bit for the movement and the world gets a little snippet of A sitting in dad's lap, listening to mom reading him a book.


BOOM .. RIGHT!!!  And, let's not forget, that this could have (likely) easily have been done since .. we all know that they have "extra" help; heck -- they could even ask one of their Security folks to help with filming the video!!!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Harry already had his turn to star in a book reading.  She doesn't want anybody to eclipse her.


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> I’m not a parent yet so I don’t get the hubbub.. what’s wrong with a baby hanging out in his diaper?



I think it's because it looks lazy. It says that he's only going to need changing again, soon so why bother? It's also etiquette for the BRF (but hey ho she's trying to prove she doesn't have to live by formal rules) .

I think for the _World's_ introduction to your child, the big 'reveal', you could put some clothes on your baby. This was his birthday, a special occasion. I wouldn't answer the door to the post in my undies and it's only one woman/man, if I had a kid I wouldn't invite my extended family for Christmas Day and leave my child in whatever they woke up in. It's called having a sense a propriety. Maybe it's really hot in LA ATM. It just _looks _wrong.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I think it's because it looks lazy. It says that he's only going to need changing again, soon so why bother? It's also etiquette for the BRF (but hey ho she's trying to prove she doesn't have to live by formal rules) .
> 
> I think for the _World's_ introduction to your child, the big 'reveal', you could put some clothes on your baby. This was his birthday, a special occasion. I wouldn't answer the door to the post in my undies and it's only one woman/man, if I had a kid I wouldn't invite my extended family for Christmas Day and leave my child in whatever they woke up in. It's called having a sense a propriety. Maybe it's really hot in LA ATM. It just _looks _wrong.


We are having a semi-heatwave (mid to upper 90's), but .. trust me, they live in a air-conditioned house, you really can't afford to not live in one in this climate!


----------



## scarlet555

papertiger said:


> I think it's because it looks lazy. It says that he's only going to need changing again, soon so why bother? It's also etiquette for the BRF (but hey ho she's trying to prove she doesn't have to live by formal rules) .
> 
> I think for the _World's_ introduction to your child, the big 'reveal', you could put some clothes on your baby. This was his birthday, a special occasion. I wouldn't answer the door to the post in my undies and it's only one woman/man, if I had a kid I wouldn't invite my extended family for Christmas Day and leave my child in whatever they woke up in. It's called having a sense a propriety. Maybe it's really hot in LA ATM. It just _looks _wrong.



Yeah, I mean unless it's a diaper or onesie commercial.  Or you were capturing an intimate moment of baby waking up or before dressing. We wear PJ's on lockdown but if we have to be filmed or have a video work appt, we make an effort to look dressed.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> I think it's because it looks lazy. It says that he's only going to need changing again, soon so why bother? It's also etiquette for the BRF (but hey ho she's trying to prove she doesn't have to live by formal rules) .
> 
> I think for the _World's_ introduction to your child, the big 'reveal', *you could put some clothes on your baby*. This was his birthday, a special occasion. I wouldn't answer the door to the post in my undies and it's only one woman/man, if I had a kid I wouldn't invite my extended family for Christmas Day and leave my child in whatever they woke up in. It's called having a sense a propriety. Maybe it's really hot in LA ATM. It just _looks _wrong.



Agreed, *papertiger*!!!
Even in the middle of a heatwave, a pair of swim trunks over the huge diapers and a RL kids polo shirt on top, that would have been NORMAL

This is where I draw the line:
Don't cha'think Harry would have stopped everything and said to Meghan, "Hey, my little guy, Archie, better put more clothes on for his first birthday video!"

I'm just astounded but I guess the wet diaper & undershirt says it all, so sad 

But let's talk about what is really important, at least in Meghan's world 
Here is the exclusive that Meghan and Harry's PR team threw the Daily Mail after running positive articles about them this week:
*"WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry are living in this $18m Beverly Hills mansion of mega-rich Hollywood actor/producer Tyler Perry and arranged by mutual friend Oprah
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Or Tyler Perry’s or Oprah’s bots.   So disappointing to find out how involved they are in this farce. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html



VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania*, would send Emily Giffin an invite but do not want hate-mail from MM's PR company bots


----------



## bisousx

scarlet555 said:


> Yeah, I mean unless it's a diaper or onesie commercial.  Or you were capturing an intimate moment of baby waking up or before dressing. We wear PJ's on lockdown but if we have to be filmed or have a video work appt, we make an effort to look dressed.



That’s probably it. Years of TV brainwashing and Huggies commercials lead me to think babies just crawl around the house in diapers all day and it’s totally normal


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Agreed, *papertiger*!!!
> Even in the middle of a heatwave, a pair of swim trunks over the huge diapers and a RL kids polo shirt on top, that would have been NORMAL
> 
> This is where I draw the line:
> Don't cha'think Harry would have stopped everything and said to Meghan, "Hey, my little guy, Archie, better put more clothes on for his first birthday video!"
> 
> I'm just astounded but I guess the wet diaper & undershirt says it all, so sad
> 
> But let's talk about what is really important, at least in Meghan's world
> Here is the exclusive that Meghan and Harry's PR team threw the Daily Mail after running positive articles about them this week:
> *"WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry are living in this $18m Beverly Hills mansion of mega-rich Hollywood actor/producer Tyler Perry and arranged by mutual friend Oprah
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html*


Whaaaaaat-Whoooooa .. Tyler, be careful, you just may be 'next' (for Meghan); after all .. you have the $$$'s to support her grifter a$$!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or Tyler Perry’s or Oprah’s bots.   So disappointing to find out how involved they are in this farce.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html


SAME HERE .. look, I'm no fan of Oprah after hearing about how she "really" is (knowing people who used to work for her), but Tyler?!?! .. dayum, I just can't be a fan if he thinks this is "okay" and felt sorry for Meghan's boo-hoo "no one is asking ME how I feel"!


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> This Emily Giffin needs to become a member here (if she isn't already).



I met her and we did a What's In Her Bag interview


----------



## Megs

A few thoughts I had on the video. 

1) Our little guy is only a couple months older than Archie, and I can say getting him to sit still for a book is nearly impossible. I have to rush any book I try to read him and he throws the book and jumps off me to run away - always has! With that being said, it would have worked nicely to have H&M sitting with Archie on the ground and M could have read to the camera while H played with Archie or something. 

2) Archie looks big and so much like Harry! Our little guy is big too and Archie's size reminds me of him! 

3) I find changing my kids sometimes to be impossible, because they fight me on it so hard at random moments. So from one mother to another, I give a pass. BUT, her son is the son of Prince Harry, grandson of the Queen. He doesn't need to be perfect, but I do think he should have a cute pair of cozy pants on for this.


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> I met her and we did a What's In Her Bag interview



She likes bags too. Well, she would fit right in here.


----------



## Clearblueskies

^^ prompts another suggestion for the book......”Finding Freebies”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Agreed, *papertiger*!!!
> Even in the middle of a heatwave, a pair of swim trunks over the huge diapers and a RL kids polo shirt on top, that would have been NORMAL
> 
> This is where I draw the line:
> Don't cha'think Harry would have stopped everything and said to Meghan, "Hey, my little guy, Archie, better put more clothes on for his first birthday video!"
> 
> I'm just astounded but I guess the wet diaper & undershirt says it all, so sad
> 
> But let's talk about what is really important, at least in Meghan's world
> Here is the exclusive that Meghan and Harry's PR team threw the Daily Mail after running positive articles about them this week:
> *"WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry are living in this $18m Beverly Hills mansion of mega-rich Hollywood actor/producer Tyler Perry and arranged by mutual friend Oprah
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html*



Fake news unless the grifters moved twice in the midst of a pandemic.  I wouldn't put it past them, however, this is not where they are living.


----------



## doni

I am not so bothered about the onesie but that diaper looking so full is gross. Really? What possible reason could there be not to spare one minute to change the wet diaper of a baby before you take a short film of him for the whole world to see on his first birthday? I mean, it is not like they were in a rush to get anywhere were they...


----------



## ccbaggirl89

doni said:


> I am not so bothered about the onesie but that diaper looking so full is gross. Really? What possible reason could there be not to spare one minute to change the wet diaper of a baby before you take a short film of him for the whole world to see on his first birthday? I mean, it is not like they were in a rush to get anywhere were they...


He'd look cute and adorable and take attention away from her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What would Dr. Fauci say? No way I would want a dirty diaper on my furniture.  I just can’t spare the Lysol.  If they are staying as a guest in someone’s home, shouldn’t they make every effort to protect the furnishings?  Hasn’t Covid taught us to be aware of our ‘viral clouds’?  Gross, indeed.


----------



## gracekelly

Megs said:


> A few thoughts I had on the video.
> 
> 1) Our little guy is only a couple months older than Archie, and I can say getting him to sit still for a book is nearly impossible. I have to rush any book I try to read him and he throws the book and jumps off me to run away - always has! With that being said, it would have worked nicely to have H&M sitting with Archie on the ground and M could have read to the camera while H played with Archie or something.
> 
> 2) Archie looks big and so much like Harry! Our little guy is big too and Archie's size reminds me of him!
> 
> 3) I find changing my kids sometimes to be impossible, because they fight me on it so hard at random moments. So from one mother to another, I give a pass. BUT, her son is the son of Prince Harry, grandson of the Queen. He doesn't need to be perfect, but I do think he should have a cute pair of cozy pants on for this.



Megs, I think you should have asked her if she was OK and did she need for you to send some of your boy's outgrown  clothing

Sorry, I just can't get over this child being immortalized on the internet in a full diaper.  It's pretty consistent with her failure to look at the big picture.  If they did take some proper pictures of him dressed nicely, then it would help their sinking public image to share them.  Hiding behind keeping Archie "private" isn't going to cut it since they released the video.

What did The Queen think when she saw this?  I bet she had the same look on her face that she had in the wedding picture at St. George's  i.e. like she was sucking a sour lemon.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Sorry, I just can't get over this child being immortalized on the internet in a full diaper.  It's pretty consistent with her failure to look at the big picture.  If they did take some proper pictures of him dressed nicely, then it would help their sinking public image to share them.  Hiding behind keeping Archie "private" isn't going to cut it since they released the video.



We live in an era of oversharing. I can't tell you how many stupid, embarrassing photos I see on Facebook and Instagram that parents put out there of their children. They think it's funny but they forget that the internet is forever. Some day 20 or so years down the line a potential employer may Google (or whatever is popular by then) that "kid" and see the moronic stuff. Archie will have his diaper video seen by thousands (millions?) by the time he is in high school. Poor guy!


----------



## Tootsie17

papertiger said:


> I think it's because it looks lazy. It says that he's only going to need changing again, soon so why bother? It's also etiquette for the BRF (but hey ho she's trying to prove she doesn't have to live by formal rules) .
> 
> I think for the _World's_ introduction to your child, the big 'reveal', you could put some clothes on your baby. This was his birthday, a special occasion. I wouldn't answer the door to the post in my undies and it's only one woman/man, if I had a kid I wouldn't invite my extended family for Christmas Day and leave my child in whatever they woke up in. It's called having a sense a propriety. Maybe it's really hot in LA ATM. It just _looks _wrong.


I think she firmly believes that Archie nor Harry can ever one up her. I also assume she wouldn't allow Archie to have a title because she might loose hers one day, but Harry and Archie would keep theirs I'm sure. Too bad Archie doesn't have one. Harry should have firmly (stood up to M) made sure his son had a title.


----------



## Sharont2305

I found it quite amusing in the Catherine interview with Philip and Holly on "This Morning" they asked her how things were with the family, after she replied to that question she said "thank you for asking"


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

OMG I just realized the "Duck Rabbit" book author wrote this Modern Love column, I remember reading it at the time and just sobbing....

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/style/modern-love-you-may-want-to-marry-my-husband.html


----------



## gracekelly

Tootsie17 said:


> I think she firmly believes that Archie nor Harry can ever one up her. I also assume she wouldn't allow Archie to have a title because she might loose hers one day, but Harry and Archie would keep theirs I'm sure. Too bad Archie doesn't have one.


I think the reason he doesn't have a title is because for her, it had to be *Prince* or nothing at all.  She didn't understand that Prince is now reserved for children of the Prince of Wales.  He could have used Harry's lesser title of Earl of Dumbarton, but that didn't work for her.  I bet it is because she didn't like the *Dumb*arton


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> A new Harry Markle   This picture is from there. Pretty accurate
> https://harrymarkle.wordpress.com/2020/05/07/archies-1st-birthday-promotional-video/
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4725339



Interesting the article


Tootsie17 said:


> I think she firmly believes that Archie nor Harry can ever one up her. I also assume she wouldn't allow Archie to have a title because she might loose hers one day, but Harry and Archie would keep theirs I'm sure. Too bad Archie doesn't have one.



I think it's good he doesn't have one. Perhaps he can find the freedom that they seem to longing for and can make something of himself


----------



## Tootsie17

papertiger said:


> Interesting the article
> 
> 
> I think it's good he doesn't have one. Perhaps he can find the freedom that they seem to longing for and can make something of himself


I think everyone will agree that Archie is one big baby for a one-year-old. I was shocked at how huge he is!. The cartoon exaggerates his size, but it is still funny.  No shade intended, just stating a fact.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Tootsie17 said:


> I think everyone will agree that Archie is one big baby for a one-year-old. I was shocked at how huge he is!. The cartoon exaggerates his size, but it is still funny.  No shade intended, just stating a fact.


I agree but I think it's the shape of the head/face. He is very oblong like Harry, not a rounder face like Louis, for example,on his 1st. Never really examined this matter before now but a longer face might give the appearance of being larger? He is probably fairly normal for his age. But really, some clothing would have made him look so much nicer.


----------



## Katel

bisousx said:


> I’m not a parent yet so I don’t get the hubbub.. what’s wrong with a baby hanging out in his diaper?



Cuz diapers are pee and poo holders... that’s not so apparent when they’re dry and empty, but his is obviously full - ick.


----------



## Katel

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I agree but I think it's the shape of the head/face. He is very oblong like Harry, not a rounder face like Louis, for example,on his 1st. Never really examined this matter before now but a longer face might give the appearance of being larger? He is probably fairly normal for his age. But really, some clothing would have made him look so much nicer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4725581
> View attachment 4725583


Archie is a cutie pie.
I think he looks just like his mother.
But then, so often, sons look like their moms and daughters look like their dads.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or Tyler Perry’s or Oprah’s bots.   So disappointing to find out how involved they are in this farce.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...18-million-hilltop-mansion-Beverly-Hills.html


they sure do seem to have a lot of sympthy from celebs.  on the other hand, if the home was sitting empty, guess it's no skin off tyler's back


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Whaaaaaat-Whoooooa .. Tyler, be careful, you just may be 'next' (for Meghan); after all .. you have the $$$'s to support her grifter a$$!


I think he's probably safe.  Believe he is gay, isn't he?


----------



## poopsie

Tootsie17 said:


> I think she firmly believes that Archie nor Harry can ever one up her.* I also assume she wouldn't allow Archie to have a title because she might loose hers one day, but Harry and Archie would keep theirs I'm sure. Too bad Archie doesn't have one. Harry should have firmly (stood up to M) made sure his son had a title.*



Little Lord Archie, Son of Meghan of Markle, FIRST IN LINE to the porcelain throne


----------



## Mrs.Z

sdkitty said:


> I think he's probably safe.  Believe he is gay, isn't he?


He is not, he has a female partner and she is quite stunning.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> He is not, he has a female partner and she is quite stunning.


I stand corrected
just googled and found that out
I thought he had adopted his child


----------



## lalame

Forget Harry, Tyler would be hitting the REAL payload! But Tyler strikes me as someone very down to earth... can't see him putting up with her constant lecturing about such-and-such causes. He's too busy actually making money and donating money to pat himself on the back every second about how he's helping the world's poor.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

ilovehoneybleu said:


> *Fake news unless the grifters moved twice* in the midst of a pandemic.  I wouldn't put it past them, however, *this is not where they are living*.



Please spill, *ilhb*, my day could really use the excitement

Also, the Daily Mail article about M&H's new home is an "EXCLUSIVE" to the Daily Mail ~ do you really think Meghan would plant a false story with a media outlet with whom she is currently litigating?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like all the media has picked up this story - DM, Tatler, TMZ, ad infinitum.

https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/07/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-staying-at-tyler-perrys-mansion/
Just watched the Objectified video - it’s on the site. Beautiful views of the house which is beautifully decorated. The real story is Tyler Perry himself. Wow. Had no idea of his struggles. He has worked for every thing he has. Repeat that and contrast it to H.  

Based on what he says about raising his own child, I have the impression he understands why some of us dislike the sense of entitlement that certain people of privilege have. Maybe he is really trying to help these 2 grifters or maybe he just wants to try to sell the place. Since he knows much more than I do about the situation, I’ll trust him to do what’s right.  Seems his heart in the right place.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like all the media has picked up this story - DM, Tatler, TMZ, ad infinitum.
> 
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/07/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-staying-at-tyler-perrys-mansion/
> Just watched the Objectified video - it’s on the site. Beautiful views of the house which is beautifully decorated. The real story is Tyler Perry himself. Wow. Had no idea of his struggles. He has worked for every thing he has. Repeat that and contrast it to H.
> 
> Based on what he says about raising his own child, I have the impression he understands why some of us dislike the sense of entitlement that certain people of privilege have. Maybe he is really trying  help these 2 grifters or maybe he just wants to try to sell the place. Since he knows much more than I do about the situation, I’ll trust him to do what’s right.  Seems his heart in the right place.


He seems like a good person and very smart.  He's tight with Oprah so maybe her asking was enough for him to say yes.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> What did The Queen think when she saw this?  I bet she had the same look on her face that she had in the wedding picture at St. George's  i.e. like she was sucking a sour lemon.


I thought the same thing... What did the Queen think of that video and how her great-grandchild was dressed (if she saw it). Her reaction was probably something like this...


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I thought the same thing... What did the Queen think of that video and how her great-grandchild was dressed (if she saw it). Her reaction was probably something like this...
> View attachment 4725596


lol


----------



## Mendocino

Tootsie17 said:


> I think she firmly believes that Archie nor Harry can ever one up her. I also assume she wouldn't allow Archie to have a title because she might loose hers one day, but Harry and Archie would keep theirs I'm sure. Too bad Archie doesn't have one. Harry should have firmly (stood up to M) made sure his son had a title.


I believe Archie will gain HRH status when he becomes the grandson (in the male line) of the monarch. The Succession rules were amended in 2014, so I'll have to double check that.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lounorada said:


> I thought the same thing... What did the Queen think of that video and how her great-grandchild was dressed (if she saw it). Her reaction was probably something like this...
> View attachment 4725596


I can only dream of seeing her face look like that.  She is usually so elegant and stoic.


----------



## muchstuff

I came in kind of late to this thread and have been reading it for quite awhile now. At first amused, I'm now finding myself uncomfortable with the level of vitriol I see here from some posters, and I'm not a Meghan fan/stan, whatever. No matter what you all feel about the couple we could all stand to be a little kinder. I'm joining @marthastoo in saying that I'm out. Hoping that some catty comment isn't forthcoming, I'm just calling it the way I see it personally. Which is what we should be able to do without having shade thrown.


----------



## mdcx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Anyone familiar with Emily Giffin? I have to say I've read all her novels and she is a really great contemporary author. Her first book is amazing. Anyway, her thoughts....
> 
> "Emily Giffin came under fire today for her comments about Meghan Markle.
> 
> The “Something Borrowed” author called the Duchess of Sussex a phony and unmaternal in a text message and blasted the former senior royal in a now deleted Instagram comment.
> 
> “Holy ‘me first.’ This is the Megan [sic] show. Why didn’t she film and let Harry read? And why didn’t she take the moment at the end to say ‘he said daddy!’ Because that would make it about Harry for a split second, God forbid,” Emily had written. “Also, you want privacy for your child so you put out a video (by your authorized biographer) of him …. wearing no pants?! Ooookay ….”
> 
> In another text message, Emily added that Meghan was putting on a show and playing a part “poorly”, as well as calling her unmaternal and phony."
> 
> She made a longer statement afterwards, too.


I did wonder if Emily was a commenter here or at another site that begins with G. Lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Lounorada said:


> I thought the same thing... What did the Queen think of that video and how her great-grandchild was dressed (if she saw it). Her reaction was probably something like this...
> View attachment 4725596



you are hysterical!   



muchstuff said:


> ...in saying that I'm out.* Hoping that some catty comment isn't forthcoming, I'm just calling it the way I see it personally. Which is what we should be able to do without having shade thrown.*



It is slightly ironic that we just got shade thrown at us for calling it the way we see it personally.


----------



## mdcx

papertiger said:


> I think it's because it looks lazy. It says that he's only going to need changing again, soon so why bother? It's also etiquette for the BRF (but hey ho she's trying to prove she doesn't have to live by formal rules) .
> 
> I think for the _World's_ introduction to your child, the big 'reveal', you could put some clothes on your baby. This was his birthday, a special occasion. I wouldn't answer the door to the post in my undies and it's only one woman/man, if I had a kid I wouldn't invite my extended family for Christmas Day and leave my child in whatever they woke up in. It's called having a sense a propriety. Maybe it's really hot in LA ATM. It just _looks _wrong.


I wouldn't send a baby in full diaper pic to my in-laws even. I would want baby to look as "nice" as possible for a photo that they may want to show to friends or use as a screen saver etc. It just seems disrespectful imo.


----------



## Mendocino

papertiger said:


> Interesting the article
> 
> 
> I think it's good he doesn't have one. Perhaps he can find the freedom that they seem to longing for and can make something of himself


. .
Per George V's royal decree of 1917 the grandchildren in the direct male line of the monarch are granted HRH status. So when Charles becomes king, Archie will become a prince.


----------



## kkfiregirl

_Vitriol _seems a tad bit *dramatic. *I haven’t seen any _vitriol_, and I don’t see why they deserve “kindness,” look at they way they treated Harry’s elderly grandmother!


----------



## muchstuff

Katel said:


> you are hysterical!
> 
> 
> 
> It is slightly ironic that we just got shade thrown at us for calling it the way we see it personally.


I wasn't throwing shade. There are a lot of comments on here that are pretty hateful. I'm just saying that it bothers me, obviously you're free to say whatever you want. And I knew I couldn't just say my piece without at least one comment back at me. I'm generally a pretty nice person, I felt uncomfortable and felt the need to say so. Please just take it in the manner it was intended and not as a personal attack.


----------



## muchstuff

kkfiregirl said:


> _Vitriol _seems a tad bit *dramatic. *I haven’t seen any _vitriol_, and I don’t see why they deserve “kindness,” look at they way they treated Harry’s elderly grandmother!


Again, my opinion. I'll bow out now.


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> I thought the same thing... What did the Queen think of that video and how her great-grandchild was dressed (if she saw it). Her reaction was probably something like this...
> View attachment 4725596


No kidding!  Probably really glad she didn't make an exception and give him the title of Prince. Prince Poopie Pants.   Poor Archie! To have such unthinking parents, and to make him a sugar free birthday cake!!  Sacre bleu!!


----------



## gracekelly

Mendocino said:


> . .
> Per George V's royal decree of 1917 the grandchildren in the direct male line of the monarch are granted HRH status. So when Charles becomes king, Archie will become a prince.


Since a King has the choice of making or changing edicts like this, I am betting that Charles changes it and there will be no Princely title for Archie.


----------



## mdcx

I too thought Tyler Perry batted for the other team. Knowing that he is into ladies, this blind item sprang to mind. Apparently this other director used to spy on his leading actress via surveillance cam in her trailer etc with her consent, in return for career development etc. I could definitely see M using any means necessary to leverage her way into her next richer marriage. Thinking of Katharine McPhee with David Foster in the wings during her first marriage. M is not about to let her Hollywood dream slip out of her grasp!:



https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2014/12/today-blind-items-cameras.html
(D Fincher, J Lawrence, A Adams)

ETA There has to be some price to pay, right? Their list of rich people they "owe favours to" is growing by the day!


----------



## mrsinsyder

muchstuff said:


> I came in kind of late to this thread and have been reading it for quite awhile now. At first amused, I'm now finding myself uncomfortable with the level of vitriol I see here from some posters, and I'm not a Meghan fan/stan, whatever. No matter what you all feel about the couple we could all stand to be a little kinder. I'm joining @marthastoo in saying that I'm out. Hoping that some catty comment isn't forthcoming, I'm just calling it the way I see it personally. Which is what we should be able to do without having shade thrown.


If you’re concerned about the state of this thread, you’re more than welcome to make your own positive contributions


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> Since a King has the choice of making or changing edicts like this, I am betting that Charles changes it and there will be no Princely title for Archie.


Yes, Charles will have the right to issue his own letters patent, just as the Queen did in 2014 in which she gave George's siblings HRH status as well. In the past the HRH would end with the male heir of the male heir of the mail heir of the monarch. 

In less than a decade--it pains me to write this--(the Queen has been the Queen since before I was born!)-- Charles will in all probability be king. There are still quite a few years before that happens and a lot can happen.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> Whaaaaaat-Whoooooa .. Tyler, be careful, you just may be 'next' (for Meghan); after all .. you have the $$$'s to support her grifter a$$!



 I was just thinking this exact same thing. Victim # 4.


----------



## tiktok

muchstuff said:


> I came in kind of late to this thread and have been reading it for quite awhile now. At first amused, I'm now finding myself uncomfortable with the level of vitriol I see here from some posters, and I'm not a Meghan fan/stan, whatever. No matter what you all feel about the couple we could all stand to be a little kinder. I'm joining @marthastoo in saying that I'm out. Hoping that some catty comment isn't forthcoming, I'm just calling it the way I see it personally. Which is what we should be able to do without having shade thrown.



We've actually repeatedly asked people to explain why they think the negative opinions on this thread are misplaced and why we should look at H&M as anything other than PR-chasing grifters who were planning to profit from the monarchy since long before they left the UK, but so far other than comments about vitriol or nastiness of members no one has been able to explain. Based on their own statements, the lawsuit, the move to Canada and then immediately to LA and the non-stop PR for a couple who "wanted privacy", what positive thing could we possibly say about them? Not to mention that many massive A-listers read for charity without hide or hair of their children, and the couple looking to raise their child out of the public eye just happened to release a video starring said child (in a diaper that needed changing). I don't call that vitriol, I call that saying it like it is. But again totally open to hearing other well-reasoned opinions, I just despaired of them ever actually appearing on this thread.


----------



## Katel

muchstuff said:


> I wasn't throwing shade. There are a lot of comments on here that are pretty hateful. I'm just saying that it bothers me, obviously you're free to say whatever you want. And I knew I couldn't just say my piece without at least one comment back at me. I'm generally a pretty nice person, I felt uncomfortable and felt the need to say so. Please just take it in the manner it was intended and not as a personal attack.



I was responding to your comment:
“No matter what you all feel about the couple we could all stand to be a little kinder.”

of course you can have your own opinion - I may not agree, but I will die for your right to have your own opinion - but it’s yours - and I’m going to have mine - I would not have responded except for the preachy “shade to the masses” comment about how we could all stand to be a little kinder.
Hope you are well and we see you back at some point.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

mdcx said:


> I did wonder if Emily was a commenter here or at another site that begins with G. Lol.


If you read her books she is a (former) lawyer and her protagonists are generally very smart, wealthy and/or high society from large cities. She would fit the general profile for people who like this site. I bet she lurks and posts.  Placing bets her next novel is something akin to this MM-H-BRF family dramedy lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Kinder to Meghan? She who used and abused then roundly dumped the BRF after taking extreme advantage of their financial and other generosity?
"M as victim of X" is a rather tired storyline.
In case you haven't noticed, poor little Meghan seems to be doing rather well out of her whole terrible, difficult struggle-filled time as wife of Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> I think everyone will agree that Archie is one big baby for a one-year-old. I was shocked at how huge he is!. The cartoon exaggerates his size, but it is still funny.  No shade intended, just stating a fact.



I like that Archie is a giant baby! Leave that cute little Gerber look to the baby girls. For baby boys I like the chonky ones with the big baldy heads.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Kinder to Meghan? She who used and abused then roundly dumped the BRF after taking extreme advantage of their financial and other generosity?
> "M as victim of X" is a rather tired storyline.
> In case you haven't noticed, poor little Meghan seems to be doing rather well out of her whole terrible, difficult struggle-filled time as wife of Harry.


it's kind of interesting really.  she has - even from childhood - led a fairly privileged life.  yet she gets to play the victim card.  gets to have it both ways.  I am sure she has experienced some racism, at least from the british tabloids but overall she doesn't really have much to complain about.  Yet she does complain.  That is what I really have a hard time with.


----------



## Megs

muchstuff said:


> I came in kind of late to this thread and have been reading it for quite awhile now. At first amused, I'm now finding myself uncomfortable with the level of vitriol I see here from some posters, and I'm not a Meghan fan/stan, whatever. No matter what you all feel about the couple we could all stand to be a little kinder. I'm joining @marthastoo in saying that I'm out. Hoping that some catty comment isn't forthcoming, I'm just calling it the way I see it personally. Which is what we should be able to do without having shade thrown.



I totally get why you feel that way. I think this thread has a lot of really strong opinions, I’ve had some myself at times! 

It’s hard to come into a thread with mostly negative views toward the people being discussed and feel like you can say anything positive or have the thread have multiple viewpoints together. I know people have asked for other viewpoints, but I imagine it feels weird to come in with something positive to say in here. 

But I’m here to chat about all of it and I always think we all need to be kinder in all ways!


----------



## Jktgal

"She's determined her child won't be paraded around in little shorts like Prince George."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7845621/meghan-markle-child-shorts-kate-middleton-prince-george/

It's the modern look, y'all!


----------



## PewPew

> Archie doesn’t have a title



While it was a great PR move to announce H&M wanted Archie to be a normal kid, they knew he’d be an HRH prince soon enough when Charles becomes King (QE2 is in her mid-nineties) Kind of an interesting footnote to acquired titles— There are rules, often tied to citizenship & residency, that come with non-hereditary titles. I don’t know how it works in the UK, but many who marry into European royalty from other countries have chosen not to have a title because it meant giving up their citizenship (for example, Princess Madeline of Sweden’s husband was established in England & unwillingly to renounce his UK citizenship. He has no title. Their children are styled as HRH prince/cess but have no other titles and are not in the line of succession). Archie will likely have dual US/UK citizenship.

When Meghan married and was given her titles, exceptions were made. She claimed she was working towards UK citizenship.( While she’d not lived in the UK long enough for traditional UK citizenship, it’s common practice for European royal spouses to have their new citizenship fast-tracked, provided they renounce their prior citizenship). Clearly, she never intended to become a UK citizen, and it’s interesting that an American citizen was not only made a UK Duchess, but continues to cling to her titles, despite having only been to Sussex once, being senior “royalty” for only 18 months, and claiming to hate the pomp of royalty.


----------



## scrpo83

PewPew said:


> *While it was a great PR move* to announce H&M wanted Archie to be a normal kid, they knew he’d be an HRH prince soon enough when Charles becomes King (QE2 is in her mid-nineties) Kind of an interesting footnote to acquired titles— .



I'm always surprised at the noise/praise they got about not wanting a title for Archie. I mean Edward declined to use the HRH for his children (they are styled as Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn)  being grandchildren of a monarch in the male line. Archie is only great-grandchild which is further down the line..*shrugged*


----------



## prettyprincess

Megs said:


> I totally get why you feel that way. I think this thread has a lot of really strong opinions, I’ve had some myself at times!
> 
> It’s hard to come into a thread with mostly negative views toward the people being discussed and feel like you can say anything positive or have the thread have multiple viewpoints together. I know people have asked for other viewpoints, but I imagine it feels weird to come in with something positive to say in here.
> 
> But I’m here to chat about all of it and I always think we all need to be kinder in all ways!


Strong opinions?? Umm, there’s literally people in here calling an innocent baby ugly. That’s not a strong opinion, that’s something else entirely.


----------



## papertiger

Mendocino said:


> . .
> Per George V's royal decree of 1917 the grandchildren in the direct male line of the monarch are granted HRH status. So when Charles becomes king, Archie will become a prince.



If we have a Royal family by then


----------



## Clearblueskies

prettyprincess said:


> Strong opinions?? Umm, there’s literally people in here calling an innocent baby ugly. That’s not a strong opinion, that’s something else entirely.


And which posts were they?  I recall one poster that I think said they found all babies unattractive - and I tend to agree.  I don’t recall any specifically aimed at Archie, calling him an ugly baby?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jktgal said:


> "She's determined her child won't be paraded around in little shorts like Prince George."
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7845621/meghan-markle-child-shorts-kate-middleton-prince-george/
> 
> It's the modern look, y'all!
> 
> View attachment 4725748



Well, somehow the Cambridges have managed very well to not parade around #3, 4 and 5. Just  by releasing a tasteful picture now and then - fully clothed, even if in shorts - they got the press to back off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scrpo83 said:


> I'm always surprised at the noise/praise they got about not wanting a title for Archie. I mean Edward declined to use the HRH for his children (they are styled as Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn)  being grandchildren of a monarch in the male line. Archie is only great-grandchild which is further down the line..*shrugged*



Also, luckily "Master" is not a style only used for the privileged ones either, right? Oh the irony.


----------



## Megs

prettyprincess said:


> Strong opinions?? Umm, there’s literally people in here calling an innocent baby ugly. That’s not a strong opinion, that’s something else entirely.



I didn’t see that. To be fair, I missed quite a few pages but I didn’t see where someone called him ugly. I think Archie (and any celeb babies) should be spoken of kindly. It’s not their choice to be in the limelight and they aren’t adults.


----------



## needlv

To be fair Meghan did suffer racism at the start.  There was some horrible incident where a cousin of the Queen wore an inappropriate racist brooch to a gathering which was directed at Meghan.  Awful.

From then on, Meghan and Harry’s own behaviour has led to fair criticisms.  Private planes whilst telling people to be mindful of the environment;  the “woah is me” video in a country full of kids which don’t know where their next meal is coming from etc etc

I do think the video with Archie was well intended - raise money for charity etc.  it’s that the execution of it -  didn’t quite work... Archie in a full diaper  + simple onesie - and no sighting of Harry, Meghan not particularly dressed up or with good makeup.... and clearly Archie got bored of the book half way through (which is normal for babies of his age!! )

I personally wouldn’t have posted that particular take and would have tried again...  
But maybe that was the best take!!  Kids are unpredictable.


----------



## chicinthecity777

MM should have just made the video without Archie and read to the camera audience, just like all others did for that occasion. She can then release a separate video or photos specially for Archie's birthday, either with both Harry and herself, or just Archie. It is Archie's first birthday after all! Surely one of their security guards or helpers can took a video / photo of the family together. Just odd.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

A while back, I also did ask their stans to post positive stuff H&M have done to counter the negative views but my very post was deleted and I was told not to attack others on this thread. I didn't attack anyone, I invited them to join the discussion! SMH!


----------



## Jayne1

Mrs.Z said:


> He is not, he has a female partner and she is quite stunning.


Whether Perry is or not, having a girlfriend doesn’t prove anything.  As we’ve learned from celebs...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of Archie: M and H were very vocal about not wanting a title for Archie...but what if the Queen didn't offer one to begin with? Sons of UK peers only become peers themselves when they inherited the title, in this case the dukedom. Until then, they can use one of the lesser titles, but it's no "real" title, just a courtesy one. 

So maybe the Queen found it was enough with all the indulgence and extras and didn't plan on giving Archie - her greatgrandson and not expected to inherit the throne - a title in her lifetime, seeing he would become a prince anyway once his grandfather succeeds to the throne, and of course that would have ruffled feathers.


----------



## bag-mania

scrpo83 said:


> I'm always surprised at the noise/praise they got about not wanting a title for Archie. I mean Edward declined to use the HRH for his children (they are styled as Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn)  being grandchildren of a monarch in the male line. Archie is only great-grandchild which is further down the line..*shrugged*



We have to put some blame on the media for that. They don't have to make a big deal over every little thing H&M do, but they get lots of hits which equates to $$$. Ironically, those of us who dislike them are pumping up their popularity by reading the articles. Saying they didn't want a title for Archie was at least bigger news than most of the fluff we read about them.

For Harry and Meghan's part, they use the media the way we expect Hollywood celebrities to do. Our perception of royals is that they should have been above all that. They aren't because Meghan is calling the shots and she wants what she wants.


----------



## Emeline

Jktgal said:


> "She's determined her child won't be paraded around in little shorts like Prince George."
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7845621/meghan-markle-child-shorts-kate-middleton-prince-george/
> 
> It's the modern look, y'all!
> 
> View attachment 4725748


Good grief.
So she's fighting class battles with GB while  couch surfing in LA?

Thousands of California moms regularly change their baby's diaper and then put shorts on their little one.

She's going to have to find a new cause.
To the binder!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Emeline said:


> Good grief.
> So she's fighting class battles with GB while  couch surfing in LA?
> 
> Thousands of California moms regularly change their baby's diaper and then put shorts on their little one.
> 
> She's going to have to find a new cause.
> To the binder!


Hmmn I have the impression if Kate had gone down the uber-modern route rather than the traditional one, that we’d have been seeing Archie in sailor suits


----------



## 1LV

Hey, MM.  “Parading” your child for public viewing in a onesie & bloated diaper is not what civilized moms do.  You would do well to take a note from Kate’s book.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> And which posts were they?  I recall one poster that I think said they found all babies unattractive - and I tend to agree.  I don’t recall any specifically aimed at Archie, calling him an ugly baby?


I think I said something to the effect that he was just ordinary-cute, not extraordinary (IMO)......does everyone have to say he is beautiful just because he is the child of a prince and an actress?  as I stated, he may get cuter when he gets older


----------



## bag-mania

Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.


----------



## doni

PewPew said:


> While it was a great PR move to announce H&M wanted Archie to be a normal kid, they knew he’d be an HRH prince soon enough when Charles becomes King (.



He doesn’t have to. The children of Princess Anne are not HRH princes and are not working royals. That would be the logical path for Archie given his parents choices.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.
> 
> View attachment 4726072


we are humbled? really?
so they get to walk away from their roles in the family and still be worshipped - even by celebs?


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.
> 
> View attachment 4726072


What a bunch of malarkey.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> What a bunch of malarkey.


I suspect Meghan's head is so big now it may explode....humbled?  I just can't get over it


----------



## LaidyM

Brand new to the board (lurker for awhile), so hey everyone!
Please forgive as I still learn to navigate the board.

I think many have already commented on the video. Especially the, imo, disrespectful outfit that Archie was wearing.
I agree with what a member said upthread, there was no need for him to appear in the video, not fully. It made the all think clunky.



sdkitty said:


> we are humbled? really?
> so they get to walk away from their roles in the family and still be worshipped - even by celebs?




But I will say: celebrity worshipping is fleeting. In fact most worshipping is fleeting.
But true respect is not. All you have to do is look at the audios the royal family releases today with The Queen and King George VI comments about the end of world war 2.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.
> 
> View attachment 4726072


wowwwwwww 15 849 COMMENTS ON GARNER POST
Lots of us are weighing in during quarantine - a HUGE international pastime ... it is not just us spending too much time on this, we are not alone LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I suspect Meghan's head is so big now it may explode....humbled?  I just can't get over it


No doubt.  So many things ran through my mind, none of which I can post.


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> wowwwwwww 15 849 COMMENTS ON GARNER POST
> Lots of us are weighing in during quarantine - an international pastime ...


I had a quick read on the comments and to be fair a lot of them are negative about the post and some even said they would unfollow Jennifer because of this.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I had a quick read on the comments and to be fair a lot of them are negative about the post and some even said they would unfollow Jennifer because of this.


good idea....why follow someone who is apparently not very smart?


----------



## Megs

sdkitty said:


> I think I said something to the effect that he was just ordinary-cute, not extraordinary (IMO)......does everyone have to say he is beautiful just because he is the child of a prince and an actress?  as I stated, he may get cuter when he gets older



Nah, no one has to call him beautiful! I was just responding to someone saying that they saw a comment calling him ugly. I really always leave kids out of things, this isn't their choice. It baffles me how many parents share everything about their kids for everyone to see now - especially those of influencer status... but I digress! 

I honestly think M & H thought it would be relatable to have him in his onesie squirming around having a story read to him. Like I said, my little guy will not come close to sitting still for a story. And to be fair, I left his Dr appt the other day with only his shirt on and not his pants because he was FLIPPING out over the doctor and crying so hard I was just like let's get out of here and down to the car to settle down. 

BUT, a big BUT, I don't think people want to see 'normal' from M & H. There is no "they're just like us", because they aren't. They are royalty, whether we like it or not, and people expect a certain appearance from them and their little guy. I'm not saying it's right, because I am sure on some level they probably truly do want to be 'normal', but it is what it is. 

I also still feel like a lot of M's actions are acting and doing what she thinks people want to see, and when you are driven by that, it will never come off genuine. That's part of the problem!


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> Kinder to Meghan? She who used and abused then roundly dumped the BRF after taking extreme advantage of their financial and other generosity?
> "M as victim of X" is a rather tired storyline.
> In case you haven't noticed, poor little Meghan seems to be doing rather well out of her whole terrible, difficult struggle-filled time as wife of Harry.


That sums it up.


----------



## sdkitty

Megs said:


> Nah, no one has to call him beautiful! I was just responding to someone saying that they saw a comment calling him ugly. I really always leave kids out of things, this isn't their choice. It baffles me how many parents share everything about their kids for everyone to see now - especially those of influencer status... but I digress!
> 
> I honestly think M & H thought it would be relatable to have him in his onesie squirming around having a story read to him. Like I said, my little guy will not come close to sitting still for a story. And to be fair, I left his Dr appt the other day with only his shirt on and not his pants because he was FLIPPING out over the doctor and crying so hard I was just like let's get out of here and down to the car to settle down.
> 
> BUT, a big BUT, I don't think people want to see 'normal' from M & H. There is no "they're just like us", because they aren't. They are royalty, whether we like it or not, and people expect a certain appearance from them and their little guy. I'm not saying it's right, because I am sure on some level they probably truly do want to be 'normal', but it is what it is.
> 
> I also still feel like a lot of M's actions are acting and doing what she thinks people want to see, and when you are driven by that, it will never come off genuine. That's part of the problem!


I don't recall anyone saying the baby was ugly.  I responded because I was one who said he wasn't all that beautiful.
I agree - while you can't always have your baby looking or acting picture perfect, when you are royalty or whatever they are and doing a public appearance, you want them to look nice.  Kate's pictures of her kids are always adorable.  sorry to compare but in this case it's very applicable IMO.


----------



## lulilu

chicinthecity777 said:


> I had a quick read on the comments and to be fair a lot of them are negative about the post and some even said they would unfollow Jennifer because of this.



So, I had to go glance at it too.  So many knee-jerk, vitriolic (lol) comments to anyone who dared to post a less than fawning compliment for MM.  And I thought there was some arguing here -- some of these women seem to have nothing to do but have keyboard wars on IG with people they don't know, in support of "movie stars" who don't have any idea who they are.  smdh

And I have to say, JGarner was totally OTT to use the term "humbled" in connection with the "birthday" video.  Really?

I still think the book was totally inappropriate for a 12 month old -- few colors and a "message" that is a concept he in no way could comprehend.


----------



## lalame

Someone said Archie was "the opposite of attractive" which may be what she was referring to. Personally, I don't get it... babies are just what they are, not attractive or unattractive any more than a vegetable. So I never really relate when someone says a specific baby is attractive or not.

That being said I think there's enough to criticize about Meghan that I don't get criticism about her physical appearance or her baby's. I see people every day IRL or in the media who look sloppy or out of shape or whatever but that would be the last thing I'd think to criticize them on, whether I liked them or not. Style though is another matter as this is a style-oriented site.


----------



## lalame

Ironically I thought the whole video got more positive/neutral opinions here than most other things she's done recently.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.
> 
> View attachment 4726072



I totally lost respect for Jennifer Garner.after her comment.  I mean has she seen the video where M pushes H out of the way to shake and greet guests?


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> I also still feel like a lot of M's actions are acting and doing what she thinks people want to see, and when you are driven by that, it will never come off genuine. That's part of the problem!



That's my biggest problem with her. There's absolutely nothing genuine there. It's all an act to get what she wants. With some manipulative people you cannot tell, but it's blatantly obvious with her. It's frustrating when someone like her gets away with so much.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> So, I had to go glance at it too.  So many knee-jerk, vitriolic (lol) comments to anyone who dared to post a less than fawning compliment for MM.  And I thought there was some arguing here -- some of these women seem to have nothing to do but have keyboard wars on IG with people they don't know, in support of "movie stars" who don't have any idea who they are.  smdh
> 
> And I have to say, JGarner was totally OTT to use the term "humbled" in connection with the "birthday" video.  Really?
> 
> I still think the book was totally inappropriate for a 12 month old -- few colors and a "message" that is a concept he in no way could comprehend.


Right? Why has JGarner not humbled by these other people who did the reading too for the same charity? So full of sh1t!


----------



## Annawakes

I thought Jennifer Garner was smarter than that too.  Huh.


----------



## lalame

I give Jennifer a break. She's a busy mom of 3, doubt she keeps up with M+H on any deeper level than what we see in the media.  Most people just don't care about them... why would Jennifer be different? It was probably just a throwaway promotional post since she seems to have some connection to STC.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> I give Jennifer a break. She's a busy mom of 3, doubt she keeps up with M+H on any deeper level than what we see in the media.  Most people just don't care about them... why would Jennifer be different? It was probably just a throwaway promotional post since she seems to have some connection to STC.



I don't know...  she lives in Hollyweird and LA, so it would be very hard for her not to know anything about these two.  Now if she was in Ohio or Colorado or Wyoming, Montana, to name a few that'd be a different story.  I mean, yes, it wouldn't be impossible that she is a busy mom and didn't hear about this...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Right? Why has JGarner not humbled by these other people who did the reading too for the same charity? So full of sh1t!





Annawakes said:


> I thought Jennifer Garner was smarter than that too.  Huh.



Let's remember that according to the American news media, Harry and Meghan left the royal family due to the racism they faced from the British media. That's the narrative we were being told in January and that is all many people here have heard on the matter. Looking at it from that perspective it's not surprising that many, particularly celebrities, are still bending over backwards to accommodate them and make them feel welcome.


----------



## scarlet555

chicinthecity777 said:


> I had a quick read on the comments and to be fair a lot of them are negative about the post and some even said they would unfollow Jennifer because of this.



I took a peak at the comment on Jennifer's post, and if you say anything to the contrary or negative about the post, (it's like this Forum LOL), you're a hater or need a life.  Good grief!


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> I don't know...  she lives in Hollyweird and LA, so it would be very hard for her not to know anything about these two.  Now if she was in Ohio or Colorado or Wyoming, Montana, to name a few that'd be a different story.  I mean, yes, it wouldn't be impossible that she was a busy mom and didn't hear about this...



I think most people just don't care enough to go deeper TBH. This type of promotional stuff is just a job to them. I wouldn't be surprised if STC planned this as part of their campaign and ghost write several celeb posts to promote someone else's story and she was assigned Meghan. That's the type of stuff we used to do when I was in marketing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> That's my biggest problem with her. There's absolutely nothing genuine there. It's all an act to get what she wants. With some manipulative people you cannot tell, but it's blatantly obvious with her. It's frustrating when someone like her gets away with so much.


I agree, it’s all acted out - she’s never not “on”.  And for me the hypocrisy keeps coming with these two.  All the fuss about privacy and keeping the kid a private citizen, the nonsense about keeping the birth secret - and yet here he is being paraded in his nappy on his birthday.  Permanently recorded on the internet.  Poor little sod.


----------



## LaidyM

bag-mania said:


> Let's remember that according to the American news media, Harry and Meghan left the royal family due to the racism they faced from the British media. That's the narrative we were being told in January and that is all many people here have heard on the matter. Looking at it from that perspective it's not surprising that many, particularly celebrities, are still bending over backwards to accommodate them and make them feel welcome.




We should also remember most of these celebs probably never been around let alone met Meghan. In a sense she is “one of them”.
I think the best way to judge the entire Meghan is whole heartily accepted by celebs would be to look at her situation five years from now.


FYI, to my knowledge Garner doesn’t live full time in LA but Boston area.- at least she did when she was married to Ben.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.
> 
> View attachment 4726072



"humbled?"


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Let's remember that according to the American news media, Harry and Meghan left the royal family due to the racism they faced from the British media. That's the narrative we were being told in January and that is all many people here have heard on the matter. Looking at it from that perspective it's not surprising that many, particularly celebrities, are still bending over backwards to accommodate them and make them feel welcome.


Well I hope it works out better for these celebs than it did the royal family


----------



## Jktgal

sdkitty said:


> good idea....why follow someone who is apparently not very smart?



Well, her ex-husband did the nanny etc under her nose, so...


----------



## chicinthecity777

scarlet555 said:


> I took a peak at the comment on Jennifer's post, and if you say anything to the contrary or negative about the post, (it's like this Forum LOL), you're a hater or need a life.  Good grief!


Of course! But still doesn't stop those disapproving comments getting a lot of "likes"...


----------



## justwatchin

scarlet555 said:


> I totally lost respect for Jennifer Garner.after her comment.  I mean has she seen the video where M pushes H out of the way to shake and greet guests?


I believe Jennifer Garner also works with Save the Children, so I would expect her to comment.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Well I hope it works out better for these celebs than it did the royal family



We'll see if we ever find out whether they are renting the mansion from Tyler Perry or whether they are long-term houseguests like they were with the Russian billionaire in Canada.


----------



## chicinthecity777

justwatchin said:


> I believe Jennifer Garner also works with Save the Children, so I would expect her to comment.


Sure but how about all the other people who also did the reading? Don't they deserve to be mentioned? Why the need to just single out MM?


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, it’s all acted out - she’s never not “on”.  And for me the hypocrisy keeps coming with these two.  All the fuss about privacy and keeping the kid a private citizen, the nonsense about keeping the birth secret - and yet here he is being paraded in his nappy on his birthday.  Permanently recorded on the internet.  Poor little sod.



Totally agree... didn't Harry say something about how he wants his child to have a normal upbringing and have privacy? This is quite literally the opposite of private.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Of course other celebrities love to jump on the bandwagon. Jennifer Garner put her Harkle love out there on Instagram. Obviously H&M are still popular among celebs who don't actually know them.
> 
> View attachment 4726072


Uggh .. when I saw this, I thought "oh no" .. because I've met Jennifer on a few occasions (flights from LA -> Boston) and she is such a truly nice and down-to-earth person, but she obviously makes mistakes (she married Ben Alfeck being her biggest)!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. when I saw this, I thought "oh no" .. because I've met Jennifer on a few occasions (flights from LA -> Boston) and she is such a truly nice and down-to-earth person, but she obviously makes mistakes (she married Ben Alfeck being her biggest)!



She doesn't know. If we were in the south we'd say "bless her heart."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

I think the video was a desperate attempt to appear down to earth. No matter what walk of life or financial bracket you come from, if you are going to put your baby on the internet for everyone to see, you would want to dress them up at bit. Most people are so proud of their kids they love to dress them nicely, especially on their birthday. In her attempt to appear relatable she has exposed herself for the phoney she is.


----------



## CeeJay

As far as her attempt to say "I refuse to dress my children like the BRF" .. uh, yet again MM .. you didn't do your research!  Putting your boys in shorts when they are youngsters is a VERY European thing; having grown up in a 1/2 Italian family back East, all my male cousins would be in their summer shorts while we girls had to wear our dresses (frankly, I would have preferred the shorts)!!!  As a matter of fact, my Italian Uncle (who was in the retail biz in Italy) always said "yes - shorts are great for young boys, but NOT after the age of 10" (he used to cringe when he saw the non-European boys in shorts when they were in later years)!!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

LaidyM said:


> We should also remember most of these celebs probably never been around let alone met Meghan. In a sense she is “one of them”.
> I think the best way to judge the entire Meghan is whole heartily accepted by celebs would be to look at her situation five years from now.
> 
> *FYI, to my knowledge Garner doesn’t live full time in LA but Boston area.- at least she did when she was married to Ben.*



Not a big deal, *LaidyM*, my eldest DD knew Jen professionally pretty well during the time she was married to Ben. My DD said only the NICEST things about both of them, their home in LA <absolutely gorgeous, decorated in the best taste, fyi> and their children <well-mannered, polite>

Also, as far as H&M paying rent - HA!!!
No way is any money exchanging hands for a variety of reasons - the most important reason being that anyone worth $600M certainly does not need the cash and Tyler Perry is certainly not going to ask a BRF member for $30K monthly - too embarrassing!
♥️


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Save with Stories was started by Garner and Amy Adams. That's why she's been promoting it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Save with Stories was started by Garner and Amy Adams. That's why she's been promoting it.



Aren’t they all ‘managed’ by the same PR firm?   My understanding is that all of these people are connected to each other. Wonder if Perry is hosting other people at his mansion?  His house looks like it has 4 wings that easily accommodate multiple families. According to the Atlanta papers, he himself is at his Atlanta headquarters.  He has had his BH houses on the market for awhile, so housing H&M can be seen as a positive sales and PR strategy.

Stepping back and looking at the big picture (aka, waking from this global slump), how different is H&M’s life now?  Before the move,  they were managed by the BRF. They had some control over how they were used, but not a lot. Now, they are managed by their PR company and Oprah. Sure, they have some control over how they are used, but most of their choices have been made for them. All they’ve really done is trade one institution for another.  Where’s the freedom in that?


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Not a big deal, *LaidyM*, my eldest DD knew Jen professionally pretty well during the time she was married to Ben. My DD said only the NICEST things about both of them, their home in LA <absolutely gorgeous, decorated in the best taste, fyi> and their children <well-mannered, polite>
> 
> Also, as far as H&M paying rent - HA!!!
> No way is any money exchanging hands for a variety of reasons - the most important reason being that anyone worth $600M certainly does not need the cash and Tyler Perry is certainly not going to ask a BRF member for $30K monthly - too embarrassing!
> ♥️



Jennifer Garner strikes me as a super down to earth, earnest, old-fashioned values type of person. In some ways she's an oddball for Hollywood... that may be while she hasn't been in the public eye as a star in awhile (aside from Brad's troubles/shenanigans).


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I give Jennifer a break. She's a busy mom of 3, doubt she keeps up with M+H on any deeper level than what we see in the media.  Most people just don't care about them... why would Jennifer be different? It was probably just a throwaway promotional post since she seems to have some connection to STC.


I'd be fine with her complimenting them but "humbled".....not fine with me


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aren’t they all ‘managed’ by the same PR firm?   My understanding is that all of these people are connected to each other. Wonder if Perry is hosting other people at his mansion?  His house looks like it has 4 wings that easily accommodate multiple families. According to the Atlanta papers, he himself is at his Atlanta headquarters.  He has had his BH houses on the market for awhile, so housing H&M can be seen as a positive sales and PR strategy.
> 
> Stepping back and looking at the big picture (aka, waking from this global slump), how different is H&M’s life now?  Before the move,  they were managed by the BRF. They had some control over how they were used, but not a lot. Now, they are managed by their PR company and Oprah. Sure, they have some control over how they are used, but most of their choices have been made for them. All they’ve really done is trade one institution for another.  Where’s the freedom in that?



They have made too many missteps to believe they are being totally managed. They have Sunshine Sachs, who is being paid to plant stories and promote them, but I don't think Meghan does everything they advise. Harry doesn't know squat about any of it so we know he's not making any decisions.


----------



## PewPew

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Also, as far as H&M paying rent - HA!!!
> No way is any money exchanging hands for a variety of reasons - the most important reason being that anyone worth $600M certainly does not need the cash and Tyler Perry is certainly not going to ask a BRF member for $30K monthly - too embarrassing!
> ♥️



Agreed. PR may say it’s a rental to sound better (& the Harkle’s accountant may even want a bill for tax benefits), but the mega-wealthy & those who aspire to that life often don’t pay their bills at all. Prince Andrew & Fergie were just sued for not paying $8.6 Million USD remaining for their portion of a $16Million USD Swiss Chalet they jointly bought in 2014 for Fergie to live in part-time & holidays for the rest.

Even when the news of the Chalet purchase broke, there was outrage b/c it was thought that useless Andrew & his chronically-broke ex-wife chose Switzerland as a tax haven for their various schemes. I don’t know how UK taxpayers put up with it. I’d be livid if the 3rd child of the QE2 was buying a $16Million chalet for his ex-wife to live in (& this was after she was caught on tape selling access to Andrew, an act that got her disinvited to Will & Kate’s wedding). Plus the tens of millions of all QE2 kids and grandkids’ weddings, $125+Million per anum royal security for 130+ extended BRF members etc, all while the NHS has critical funding shortages.

https://www.the-sun.com/news/798439/prince-andrew-sued-chalet-fergie/


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Let's remember that according to the American news media, Harry and Meghan left the royal family due to the racism they faced from the British media. That's the narrative we were being told in January and that is all many people here have heard on the matter. Looking at it from that perspective it's not surprising that many, particularly celebrities, are still bending over backwards to accommodate them and make them feel welcome.


even if they do think M was a victim of racism, why would she be humbled?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> They have made too many missteps to believe they are being totally managed. They have Sunshine Sachs, who is being paid to plant stories and promote them, but I don't think Meghan does everything they advise. Harry doesn't know squat about any of it so we know he's not making any decisions.



Also, it could be they are playing the role of the negative, rebel couple contrasted to the ‘saintly‘ JG, etc. Then, at some point, the story will change and they will become the ‘saintly’ couple (ick).   For me, none of this can be taken at face value. It’s all manipulative.

ETA:  Perhaps I’ve watched too many movies


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I'd be fine with her complimenting them but "humbled".....not fine with me



Some people just exaggerate. I doubt she gave Meghan a second's thought after she posted that. If she really did start Save with Stories, that's her baby... so sure, why not be a little over the top in gratitude that someone is promoting your baby (no pun intended hehe)? IMO not a big deal. 

I'm "honored" when someone recognizes me at work.. doesn't mean I think they're above me, or they're perfect, or really anything other than I'm glad they bothered to recognize me.


----------



## mdcx

Remember Reese Witherspoon was invited to M&H’s wedding, but didn’t go because she didn’t even know M, had never met her! So, some celebs are willing to be fairly direct about these things.

And Jen Garner is an actress after all, and she wants her cause to get publicity and succeed.

Now that it has come out that M&H flew to LA on Tyler Perry’s private plane, I expect M might be practising writing her new married name in notebooks....


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sked-away-Tyler-Perry-150M-private-plane.html


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> As far as her attempt to say "I refuse to dress my children like the BRF" .. uh, yet again MM .. you didn't do your research!  Putting your boys in shorts when they are youngsters is a VERY European thing; having grown up in a 1/2 Italian family back East, all my male cousins would be in their summer shorts while we girls had to wear our dresses (frankly, I would have preferred the shorts)!!!  As a matter of fact, my Italian Uncle (who was in the retail biz in Italy) always said "yes - shorts are great for young boys, but NOT after the age of 10" (he used to cringe when he saw the non-European boys in shorts when they were in later years)!!


my father's family was Sicilian (he was first generation American).  those older Italians can be very blunt and opinionated.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Some people just exaggerate. I doubt she gave Meghan a second's thought after she posted that. If she really did start Save with Stories, that's her baby... so sure, why not be a little over the top in gratitude that someone is promoting your baby (no pun intended hehe)? IMO not a big deal.
> 
> I'm "honored" when someone recognizes me at work.. doesn't mean I think they're above me, or they're perfect, or really anything other than I'm glad they bothered to recognize me.


I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.  Her being humbled before Meghan and not acknowledging the other readers just rubs me wrong.  Doesn't mean she is a bad person.


----------



## 1LV

MM & H’s pursuit of freedom is looking more and more like free loading and laziness.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

She has acknowledged the other readers, she posts them regularly on her FB page. 

Here is how she describes the initiative...

THIRTY MILLION CHILDREN rely on school for food. Responding to the needs of kids during these school closures, Save the Children US and No Kid Hungry have a new fund #SAVEWITHSTORIES to support food banks, and mobile meal trucks, and community feeding programs with funds to do what they do best—and also—with educational toys, books, and worksheets to make sure brains are full, as well as bellies.

If you can manage a one time gift of $10, please text SAVE to 20222. If another amount would work better for you, please visit our website—http://ow.ly/gxuV30qq1nf. There is no maximum and there is no minimum—together we will rise and together we can help.

Thank you and stay safe. XX​
You can see other celebs reading stories here

and better yet donate here


----------



## chicinthecity777

Look, I don't follow JGarner, if she specifically mentioned other readers names/stories then good for her. But the wording in her post of MM's reading is way way over the top! Humbled? I work with a local charity feeding the homeless people, I am humbled by my experience in direct dealing with the extremely vulnerable! MM living in a multi-million mansion reading a book to her son in a video is humbling? Give me a break!


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> Look, I don't follow JGarner, if she specifically mentioned other readers names/stories then good for her. But the wording in her post of MM's reading is way way over the top! Humbled? I work with a local charity feeding the homeless people, I am humbled by my experience in direct dealing with the extremely vulnerable! MM living in a multi-million mansion reading a book to her son in a video is humbling? Give me a break!



Inflated language - puffed-up, important-sounding words used to give commonplace things and events an elevated, glowing appearance.  Donating a few dollars or time to charity is nothing for that crowd. Sadly, few of the Hwood crowd would do well on the SAT verbal section. Amazing, incredible, wonderful, brilliant, inspirational, humbling, blah blah.  Doubtful they themselves write that stuff.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Look, I don't follow JGarner, if she specifically mentioned other readers names/stories then good for her. But the wording in her post of MM's reading is way way over the top! Humbled? I work with a local charity feeding the homeless people, I am humbled by my experience in direct dealing with the extremely vulnerable! MM living in a multi-million mansion reading a book to her son in a video is humbling? Give me a break!


what comes to my mind is some young woman (not a celeb) I saw on TV.  It was shortly after H&M married.  she had met "M" and just just literally breathless over meeing The Duchess. 
I don't expect this reaction from a famous actress.  Some young perhaps niave woman maybe...


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Inflated language - puffed-up, important-sounding words used to give commonplace things and events an elevated, glowing appearance.  Donating a few dollars or time to charity is nothing for that crowd. Sadly, few of the Hwood crowd would do well on the SAT verbal section. Amazing, incredible, wonderful, brilliant, inspirational, humbling, blah blah.  Doubtful they themselves write that stuff.


Yep, a.k.a fake gushing!


----------



## lalame

Jennifer could also be courting her for a donation.


----------



## 1LV

Don’t you think Jennifer Garner’s kudos to MM had more to do with her feelings about Emily Giffin than her feeling for MM?  Making a point, so to speak.  Btw, just pre-ordered Giffin’s new book, which has more to say about how I feel about JG & MM than an interest in the book.


----------



## lalame

Omg, of course I decide to look up where that term "humbled" even came from anyway and it's actually a thing for it to be over-used in today's society: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/...led-doesnt-sound-as-humble-as-it-used-to.html 

_We are living in humbling times. People are humbled all over the place. Lately it’s pro forma — possibly even mandatory — for politicians, athletes, celebrities and other public figures to be vocally and vigorously humbled by every honor awarded, prize won, job offered, record broken, pound lost, shout-out received, “like” copped and thumb upped._


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yep, a.k.a fake gushing!


well now that she's gotten some criticism I guess she'll just have to live with it (and looking stupid).  she can't very well withdraw the ridiculous compliment


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Jennifer Garner is well known as an ambassador for Save the Children, where she’s been a trustee since 2014. 
https://www.savethechildren.org/us/about-us/leadership-and-trustees

She helped launch the Save with Stories program there. 
https://support.savethechildren.org/site/Donation2?df_id=4067&mfc_pref=T&4067.donation=form1


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't believe anybody here is criticising JGarner's good work with the charity. Just the particular post about MM. 

And can we get back to topic please? JGarner has her own thread!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Omg, of course I decide to look up where that term "humbled" even came from anyway and it's actually a thing for it to be over-used in today's society: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/...led-doesnt-sound-as-humble-as-it-used-to.html
> 
> _We are living in humbling times. People are humbled all over the place. Lately it’s pro forma — possibly even mandatory — for politicians, athletes, celebrities and other public figures to be vocally and vigorously humbled by every honor awarded, prize won, job offered, record broken, pound lost, shout-out received, “like” copped and thumb upped._


interesting....I hadn't noticed that word was so over-used


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Inflated language - puffed-up, important-sounding words used to give commonplace things and events an elevated, glowing appearance.


Word salad! Mmmmm


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> interesting....I hadn't noticed that word was so over-used



I must be desensitized to it. Growing up, everyone "loved" everything, everything was "AMAZING" "ridic," "insane," "intense," "I DIE," etc so I don't really blink when it comes to over the top language haha.

"Humbled" must be the adult version of it.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I must be desensitized to it. Growing up, everyone "loved" everything, everything was "AMAZING" "ridic," "insane," "intense," "I DIE," etc so I don't really blink when it comes to over the top language haha.
> 
> "Humbled" must be the adult version of it.


"amazing" was my pet peeve for awhile.....OT but another word that I feel is way overused these days is "curated"


----------



## bag-mania

I took her use of the word “humbled” as being an American awkwardly trying to show respect towards royalty or in Meghan’s case, a former only-royal-for-18-months. We’ve already put way more thought into the wording than Jennifer did.


----------



## bisousx

In this context, the word "humbled" makes me cringe. You can flatter someone without bowing down to them, but if Jen was seeking more contributions for the charity, then being humbled is the perfect way to stroke a narc's ego. "Honored" may have been more neutral and appropriate.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sked-away-Tyler-Perry-150M-private-plane.html
> 
> View attachment 4726369


I guess the poster here who swore they weren’t there but were in some other secret location had bad intel


----------



## mrsinsyder

Wow! What conservationists. I can’t believe these idiots have the nerve to tell anyone about “green” travel.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> Some people just exaggerate. *I doubt she gave Meghan a second's thought after she posted that*. If she really did start Save with Stories, that's her baby... so sure, why not be a little over the top in gratitude that someone is promoting your baby (no pun intended hehe)? IMO not a big deal.
> 
> I'm "honored" when someone recognizes me at work.. doesn't mean I think they're above me, or they're perfect, or really anything other than I'm glad they bothered to recognize me.



*lalame*, am sure that a staff member <or Meghan> wrote this quote for Jen after a brief sentence or two explanation about it - nothing and no-one was probably researched extensively by Jen or staff

But I agree, the word “humble” in any form is out of place in this quote, bad call
♥️


----------



## Genie27

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow! What conservationists. I can’t believe these idiots have the nerve to tell anyone about “green” travel.
> View attachment 4726436


Now can I unleash some vitriol!?!? Or are we still supposed to be kind and graciously humbled by these two?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Genie27 said:


> Now can I unleash some vitriol!?!? Or are we still supposed to be kind and graciously humbled by these two?


Please do!


----------



## kkfiregirl

Genie27 said:


> Now can I unleash some vitriol!?!? Or are we still supposed to be kind and graciously humbled by these two?



hahahahahaha


----------



## kkfiregirl

Are they paying rent? Or are they homeless? Living with friends because you don't have a home of your own is a definition of homeless too, I think.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow! What conservationists. I can’t believe these idiots have the nerve to tell anyone about “green” travel.
> View attachment 4726436



Thanks, *mrsinsyder*,  for your previous post from the Daily Mail about the carbon imprint left from H&M’s grifting ways <Tyler Perry’s private jet from Canada->Los Angeles>simply shows that a free ride trumps <ha, no hidden meaning!> climate-change for the world’s most famous homeless family <how much do they still owe for the Frogmore reno project?>

Now that we see that Tyler Perry and Oprah are some of the wind behind Meghan’s sails, think these two grifters are paying a TEAM of assorted brand/marketing/PR characters to advise them - they have no long-term reasonable strategic plan apparently, it’s seems that different teams are working on their various issues, ie reputation rehab, non-profit associations, social medial, etc

 Also, since H&M are still living on daddy’s dime <believe me, someone is vetting M&H’s expenditures, hence H&M are living in “free” homes, other people’s private jets, etc> Most NORMAL wealthy people just get on with it and buy a house and a plane already!

Esp when they have a 1-year old child, there is a global pandemic <home & hygiene are everything right now> and real estate prices are great in Los Angeles!
So why wait to get settled in their new home town?
♥️


----------



## mdcx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Thanks, *mrsinsyder*,  for your previous post from the Daily Mail about the carbon imprint left from H&M’s grifting ways <Tyler Perry’s private jet from Canada->Los Angeles>simply shows that a free ride trumps <ha, no hidden meaning!> climate-change for the world’s most famous homeless family <how much do they still owe for the Frogmore reno project?>
> 
> Now that we see that Tyler Perry and Oprah are some of the wind behind Meghan’s sails, think these two grifters are paying a TEAM of assorted brand/marketing/PR characters to advise them - they have no long-term reasonable strategic plan apparently, it’s seems that different teams are working on their various issues, ie reputation rehab, non-profit associations, social medial, etc
> 
> Also, since H&M are still living on daddy’s dime <believe me, someone is vetting M&H’s expenditures, hence H&M are living in “free” homes, other people’s private jets, etc> Most NORMAL wealthy people just get on with it and buy a house and a plane already!
> 
> Esp when they have a 1-year old child, there is a global pandemic <home & hygiene are everything right now> and real estate prices are great in Los Angeles!
> So why wait to get settled in their new home town?
> ♥️


Waiting for a whole home to be generously  gifted to them? This whole “lending M&H a home” thing is just so old news!


----------



## pixiejenna

They probably are waiting for daddy dearest to buy them a new home. Too cheap to buy their own and spend their own money. Probably trying hash out the legal issues in between Harry/Archie citizenships before any cash is dropped. Especially if they are anticipating a divorce down the line, which would probably be even more messy with Harry as a non citizen. Prince Charles probably has an entire team employed fixing the trail of hot mess Harry’s leaving behind wherever he goes.


----------



## needlv

pixiejenna said:


> They probably are waiting for daddy dearest to buy them a new home. Too cheap to buy their own and spend their own money. Probably trying hash out the legal issues in between Harry/Archie citizenships before any cash is dropped. Especially if they are anticipating a divorce down the line, which would probably be even more messy with Harry as a non citizen. Prince Charles probably has an entire team employed fixing the trail of hot mess Harry’s leaving behind wherever he goes.



I would suggest it’s more likely Prince Charles would use a family trust to purchase a house, and then it is “rented” by M&H.  That way they don’t own it.  And if M&H divorce the trust keeps the asset (house).  

But I am sure the BRF  have a whole army of lawyers who can work it out!  No doubt they plan meticulously for divorces since the BRF has seen a lot!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pixiejenna

That must be the plan. I was thinking that they’d find a way to protect themselves from buying a home that Megan will claim as her own when they get divorced.


----------



## LaidyM

mrsinsyder said:


> Wow! What conservationists. I can’t believe these idiots have the nerve to tell anyone about “green” travel.
> View attachment 4726436



Why would the jet need to make a stop at Portland? Assuming it got refueled in Victoria...


----------



## Jktgal

"The plane, with a top speed of 541 mph, is large enough to carry up to 124 people in coach"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sked-away-Tyler-Perry-150M-private-plane.html

Perry was so humbled he sent the equivalent of 6 jets for the Sparkles vacation. Imagine, little Arkee travels and it's the equivalent of 40 people. I am humbled.
Wonder how many bananas that would buy?


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> I would suggest it’s more likely Prince Charles would use a family trust to purchase a house, and then it is “rented” by M&H.  That way they don’t own it. * And if M&H divorce the trust keeps the asset (house).  *
> 
> But I am sure the BRF  have a whole army of lawyers who can work it out!  No doubt they plan meticulously for divorces since the BRF has seen a lot!



my God.........can you imagine how _soul crushing _that would be for her?  To have her grand scheme for world domination and an _independent_ profile thwarted by the Evil Empire  
She will never allow that to happen


----------



## chicinthecity777

I didn't realise being financially independent meant receiving hand-outs and leeching off billionaires for extremely environmental unfriendly lifestyle luxury! 
And how is Archie living a "normal" life? Normal people in their late 30s work jobs and pay bill themselves. Normal people don't fly in $150m private jet and live in $20m mansions! The hypocrisy of these 2!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I’m thinking this is exactly how it works at their level. They themselves never really _own _anything. It’s all “gifts“, rentals, merchandising,  etc. The paperwork may say they have millions, but it’s all tied up in investments and difficult to liquidate. They probably have very little cash. They are the puppets. This could explain why H seems so sheltered — he really is. To her, it probably is the dream life - for now. For her own sanity, let’s hope she is stockpiling ‘walk-away’ money. 




chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't realise being financially independent meant receiving hand-outs and leeching off billionaires for extremely environmental unfriendly lifestyle luxury!
> And how is Archie living a "normal" life? Normal people in their late 30s work jobs and pay bill themselves. Normal people don't fly in $150m private jet and live in $20m mansions! The hypocrisy of these 2!!!


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't realise being financially independent meant receiving hand-outs and leeching off billionaires for extremely environmental unfriendly lifestyle luxury!
> And how is Archie living a "normal" life? Normal people in their late 30s work jobs and pay bill themselves. Normal people don't fly in $150m private jet and live in $20m mansions! The hypocrisy of these 2!!!



You know... normal famous multimillionaire royalty with friends of unlimited means and extremely luxurious tastes. Normal!

I gotta give it up to the Kardashians in moments like these... they know what they are and they own it. You like them or don’t but there’s not much deception going on there. I’d respect Meghan more if she either owned it or just walked away from the fringe benefits.


----------



## doni

lalame said:


> You know... normal famous multimillionaire royalty with friends of unlimited means and extremely luxurious tastes. Normal!
> 
> I gotta give it up to the Kardashians in moments like these... they know what they are and they own it. You like them or don’t but there’s not much deception going on there. I’d respect Meghan more if she either owned it or just walked away from the fringe benefits.


Plus, as far as I know the Kardashians spend their own money whereas these two have a millionaire allowance from daddy and still accept favors worth outrageous amounts of dollars. Obviously to be a successful hustler you need a proverbial lack of shame. I’d be really bad at it. I actually cringe for their sake when I think of asking for a private jet, free mansion in LA etc...


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> You know... normal famous multimillionaire royalty with friends of unlimited means and extremely luxurious tastes. Normal!
> 
> I gotta give it up to the Kardashians in moments like these... they know what they are and they own it. You like them or don’t but there’s not much deception going on there. I’d respect Meghan more if she either owned it or just walked away from the fringe benefits.


That's my problem with these 2! Just own up! Stop being phonies! The biggest hypocrites on earth!


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Plus, as far as I know the Kardashians spend their own money whereas these two have a millionaire allowance from daddy and still accept favors worth outrageous amounts of dollars. Obviously to be a successful hustler you need a proverbial lack of shame. I’d be really bad at it. I actually cringe for their sake when I think of asking for a private jet, free mansion in LA etc...


Me too. I’d feel embarrassed at taking everyone else’s money the way these two do.


----------



## Genie27

chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't realise being financially independent meant receiving hand-outs and leeching off billionaires for extremely environmental unfriendly lifestyle luxury!
> And how is Archie living a "normal" life? Normal people in their late 30s work jobs and pay bill themselves. Normal people don't fly in $150m private jet and live in $20m mansions! The hypocrisy of these 2!!!


I don’t think they meant “pick up your own dry cleaning” normal. Or “send the nanny to Le Cordon Bleu to learn baby food pureeing techniques” normal.
More like “will it be Gstaad or St Barths this weekend, darling” normal. They want to be international jet setters like great aunt Margaret. Can’t someone just *give* them a mansion already? In a socially desirable neighborhood, with the requisite number of bathrooms, pools and fully staffed, of course.

Their life is so full of hardship and challenge.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Genie27 said:


> I don’t think they meant “pick up your own dry cleaning” normal. Or “send the nanny to Le Cordon Bleu to learn baby food pureeing techniques” normal.
> More like “will it be Gstaad or St Barths this weekend, darling” normal. They want to be international jet setters like great aunt Margaret. Can’t someone just *give* them a mansion already? In a socially desirable neighborhood, with the requisite number of bathrooms, pools and fully staffed, of course.
> 
> Their life is so full of hardship and challenge.


I would have no problem with them living in that lifestyle if they had earned it themselves! But no, hell no, "I want freebies and I want it now!" Should be on their T-shirts!


----------



## Genie27

chicinthecity777 said:


> I would have no problem with them living in that lifestyle if they had earned it themselves! But no, hell no, "I want freebies and I want it now!" Should be on their T-shirts!


Agreed. No one would care if she spent her Suits residuals and his inheritance on their lifestyle. This blatant free-loading while simultaneously crying and shining is what bugs me. 
Edit: leaving the auto-correct for whining/shining, since that is her stock phrase.


----------



## LaidyM

Genie27 said:


> *I don’t think they meant “pick up your own dry cleaning” normal*. Or “send the nanny to Le Cordon Bleu to learn baby food pureeing techniques” normal.
> More like “will it be Gstaad or St Barths this weekend, darling” normal. They want to be international jet setters like great aunt Margaret. Can’t someone just *give* them a mansion already? In a socially desirable neighborhood, with the requisite number of bathrooms, pools and fully staffed, of course.
> 
> Their life is so full of hardship and challenge.



To be honest?
I think that’s kind of the kind of life-ish Harry wants.
Sadly he married a woman who wants the exact opposite.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I’m thinking this is exactly how it works at their level. They themselves never really _own _anything. It’s all “gifts“, rentals, merchandising,  etc. The paperwork may say they have millions, but it’s all tied up in investments and difficult to liquidate. They probably have very little cash. They are the puppets. This could explain why H seems so sheltered — he really is. To her, it probably is the dream life - for now. For her own sanity, let’s hope she is stockpiling ‘walk-away’ money.



I hope her dream life gets hit by an earthquake so she can WOKE up


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I’m thinking this is exactly how it works at their level. They themselves never really _own _anything. It’s all “gifts“, rentals, merchandising,  etc. The paperwork may say they have millions, but it’s all tied up in investments and difficult to liquidate. They probably have very little cash. They are the puppets. This could explain why H seems so sheltered — he really is. To her, it probably is the dream life - for now. For her own sanity, let’s hope she is stockpiling ‘walk-away’ money.



It's kinda like (our) royalty operates.

When JCMH's GGGM Queen Mary went visiting, the 'honoured' aristos would hide their best stuff before they rolled out the red carpet, coz if she noticed, commented or admired something, you'd better gift it. His great-aunt Margret was the same, if she admired something, she expected it.

I hope their host has an inventory


----------



## lulilu

Are there any CPAs here who can comment on the taxability of these "gifts" they are receiving -- mansions to borrow, jet rides, etc?  I know for ordinary people, gifts become taxable after a limit set by federal law, i,e,, something like $14K, with a few exemptions.  Grandparents can gift that cash and pay for college tuition but not room and board without tax implications.  $30K a month rentals far exceeds that.

I never watched his movies, but stories I've read about Tyler Perry paying for people's layaways before Christmas or food, rent, etc. always impressed me.  Donations on the ground, directly to people in need.  MM and H are hardly such people.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I would think they pay _something_ for the places they stay in. There must be a contract of some sort through the agencies or lawyers. It's so bizarre that Harry has turned into a drifter from place to place. What about their furniture and personal items - they are just going about with nothing but suitcases? Where is their stuff, I am sure a prince has artwork and personal possessions he'd like to be surrounded by. I can't in my wildest dreams imagine Harry can remain happy in this lifestyle.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I would think they pay _something_ for the places they stay in. There must be a contract of some sort through the agencies or lawyers. It's so bizarre that Harry has turned into a drifter from place to place. What about their furniture and personal items - they are just going about with nothing but suitcases? Where is their stuff, I am sure a prince has artwork and personal possessions he'd like to be surrounded by. I can't in my wildest dreams imagine Harry can remain happy in this lifestyle.



Actually, *ccbaggirl89,* think that there is NOT a rental contract just bc of the field day attorneys for each party would have even drawing one up - let alone if an accident took place during H&M’s stay at Tyler Perry’s home in LA, that rental contract could lead to a nightmare.

Rather, it is probably a very congenial informal, friend-of-a-friend type situation - for example, right before the pandemic hit the US, my eldest DD was on vaca in St Barths, flew back the day the airport was closing and in an emergency has been staying at my younger DD’s friend’s parents‘ estate on the East Coast since March <the parents are in one of their other five homes>  we have never discussed rent. A generous thank-you gift was promptly sent to the parents and my daughter‘s friend.

Anyway, looks like there is a substantial amount of planning being done behind the scenes for H&M’s new life but the optics lead me to believe that there is a distinct lack of coordination in these efforts.


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> That must be the plan. I was thinking that they’d find a way to protect themselves from buying a home that Megan will claim as her own when they get divorced.


but will that be ok with Meghan?  we know what Meghan wants Meghan gets


----------



## 1LV

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Actually, *ccbaggirl89,* think that there is NOT a rental contract just bc of the field day attorneys for each party would have even drawing one up - let alone if an accident took place during H&M’s stay at Tyler Perry’s home in LA, that rental contract could lead to a nightmare.
> 
> Rather, it is probably a very congenial informal, friend-of-a-friend type situation - for example, right before the pandemic hit the US, my eldest DD was on vaca in St Barths, flew back the day the airport was closing and in an emergency has been staying at my younger DD’s friend’s parents‘ estate on the East Coast since March <the parents are in one of their other five homes>  we have never discussed rent. A generous thank-you gift was promptly sent to the parents and my daughter‘s friend.
> 
> Anyway, looks like there is a substantial amount of planning being done behind the scenes for H&M’s new life but the optics lead me to believe that there is a distinct lack of coordination in these efforts.




There may be a lack of coordination in planning efforts, but as this is turning into a way of life it leads me to believe what these two dimwits are lacking is a distinct sense of pride.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Plus, as far as I know the Kardashians spend their own money whereas these two have a millionaire allowance from daddy and still accept favors worth outrageous amounts of dollars. Obviously to be a successful hustler you need a proverbial lack of shame. I’d be really bad at it. I actually cringe for their sake when I think of asking for a private jet, free mansion in LA etc...


I'm sure there is a way to do it without actually asking.  For now it seems people like Oprah are inclined to help without being asked outright.  That may not last forever.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Actually, *ccbaggirl89,* think that there is NOT a rental contract just bc of the field day attorneys for each party would have even drawing one up - let alone if an accident took place during H&M’s stay at Tyler Perry’s home in LA, that rental contract could lead to a nightmare.
> 
> Rather, it is probably a very congenial informal, friend-of-a-friend type situation - for example, right before the pandemic hit the US, my eldest DD was on vaca in St Barths, flew back the day the airport was closing and in an emergency has been staying at my younger DD’s friend’s parents‘ estate on the East Coast since March <the parents are in one of their other five homes>  we have never discussed rent. A generous thank-you gift was promptly sent to the parents and my daughter‘s friend.
> 
> Anyway, looks like there is a substantial amount of planning being done behind the scenes for H&M’s new life but the optics lead me to believe that there is a distinct lack of coordination in these efforts.


But if you let someone stay at your place w/o a rental agreement, then you have no way to evict them and you can have squatters.  Of course, with their high profile, I guess they couldn't afford the bad publicity.  But I would think Tyler would want them to pay for something - utilities, maintenance?
would that just be on the honor system?


----------



## ccbaggirl89

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Actually, *ccbaggirl89,* think that there is NOT a rental contract just bc of the field day attorneys for each party would have even drawing one up - let alone if an accident took place during H&M’s stay at Tyler Perry’s home in LA, that rental contract could lead to a nightmare.
> 
> Rather, it is probably a very congenial informal, friend-of-a-friend type situation - for example, right before the pandemic hit the US, my eldest DD was on vaca in St Barths, flew back the day the airport was closing and in an emergency has been staying at my younger DD’s friend’s parents‘ estate on the East Coast since March <the parents are in one of their other five homes>  we have never discussed rent. A generous thank-you gift was promptly sent to the parents and my daughter‘s friend.
> 
> Anyway, looks like there is a substantial amount of planning being done behind the scenes for H&M’s new life but the optics lead me to believe that there is a distinct lack of coordination in these efforts.


So that means they need to keep being on-the-move I guess. I can't see indefinite generosity coming from any one person. Maybe 6 months max. similar to what happened in Canada. Or maybe they're still looking for a permanent place. I find it so weird - they obviously aren't moving about with their own bed, linens, towels, etc. Such a nomadic way of life . It's comedy, really.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> But if you let someone stay at your place w/o a rental agreement, then you have no way to evict them and you can have squatters.  Of course, with their high profile, I guess they couldn't afford the bad publicity.  But I would think Tyler would want them to pay for something - utilities, maintenance?
> would that just be on the honor system?


Please, his place is empty but for three months.
Plus, the Royal moron has a deal with Oprah, it makes sense that he would lend them his place.
Whatever happened with them renting in Malibu or from a garmento family in BH?
At this point, the Sussex have replaced Waldo!


----------



## limom

ccbaggirl89 said:


> So that means they need to keep being on-the-move I guess. I can't see indefinite generosity coming from any one person. Maybe 6 months max. similar to what happened in Canada. Or maybe they're still looking for a permanent place. I find it so weird - they obviously aren't moving about with their own bed, linens, towels, etc. Such a nomadic way of life . It's comedy, really.


Pathetic, really.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> But if you let someone stay at your place w/o a rental agreement, then you have no way to evict them and you can have squatters.  Of course, with their high profile, I guess they couldn't afford the bad publicity.  But I would think Tyler would want them to pay for something - utilities, maintenance?
> would that just be on the honor system?



If you ask me (and I'm aware no one has) they were prob asked politely to leave their last place (or asked for a date when they were) had outstayed their welcome and M was boo-hoping about the unfairness and desperateness of being homeless, mentally ill partner, baby in tow and eviction. Probably O & T felt compelled to help.


----------



## lulilu

Not that I ever really liked Oprah, the fact that she is their "advisor" in their escapades makes me think even less of her.  It seems very egotistical of her to believe she can help them outwit the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> Not that I ever really liked Oprah, the fact that she is their "advisor" in their escapades makes me think even less of her.  It seems very egotistical of her to believe she can help them outwit the BRF.


whether you like her or not, Oprah worked to get where she is.  same with Tyler.  Now they are handing M major "gifts"
Seems to me she is benefitting from her mother's heritage while enjoying a life of great privilege.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> If you ask me (and I'm aware no one has) they were prob asked politely to leave their last place (or asked for a date when they were) had outstayed their welcome and M was boo-hoping about the unfairness and desperateness of being homeless, mentally ill partner, baby in tow and eviction. Probably O & T felt compelled to help.


maybe part of the question is what is the cost of letting them stay at Tyler's home?  If he had no plans to rent it out, then it would have to be maintained anyway - landscaping, occasional cleaning.  but cost would be more if occupied.  I would think they would have to cover some cost.  but he has a lot of money so I guess it would depend on how generous he wants to be.  they are friends of a friend.  whatever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> If you ask me (and I'm aware no one has) they were prob asked politely to leave their last place (or asked for a date when they were) had outstayed their welcome and M was boo-hoping about the unfairness and *desperateness of being homeless, mentally ill partner, baby in tow and eviction. Probably O & T felt compelled to help*.



THIS. Spot on, *papertiger*
The perfect conversational framework for Meghan to manipulate others, such as the big O and Tyler Perry, in order for MM to pivot, once again and grab a handout

My neck is getting a severe case of whiplash watching this unfold

*sdkitty*, Tyler Perry would not expect a payment of any type, Harry would not know what "utilities" are, and Meghan is not paying for anything ever again!


----------



## jcnc

Not specifically aimed at M&H but it suprises and annoys me that privileged and rich ppl get away without paying a single dime for a lifestyle that many hard working cant even achieve in their Dreams..
When we shifted to a new country for a fresh start, my family stayed at my SIL’s house for 2 weeks and we made sure to leave her a generous gift as she we weren’t paying rent..
This free-loading lifestyle rubs me the wrong way on so many levels


----------



## Rouge H

Oh lord
Meghan and Harry flew on Tyler Perry's $150M plane to move to LA


https://mol.im/a/8301663


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> THIS. Spot on, *papertiger*
> The perfect conversational framework for Meghan to manipulate others, such as the big O and Tyler Perry, in order for MM to pivot, once again and grab a handout
> 
> My neck is getting a severe case of whiplash watching this unfold
> 
> *sdkitty*, Tyler Perry would not expect a payment of any type, Harry would not know what "utilities" are, and Meghan is not paying for anything ever again!


I don't think Oprah is anybody's fool.  My guess is either she sees some gain for herself in helping them or she is sympathetic to the alleged racism suffered by M (or both)


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I hope her dream life gets hit by an earthquake so she can WOKE up


Ummmmm .. I hear 'ya, but if that were to happen, there would be plenty of us 'regular' folk out here in LA-LA land who would also be affected, so please don't wish for that (and no brush fires either) .. something different please!


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Ummmmm .. I hear 'ya, but if that were to happen, there would be plenty of us 'regular' folk out here in LA-LA land who would also be affected, so please don't wish for that (and no brush fires either) .. something different please!



I didn't mean earthquake literally (been in a couple minor tremors myself whilst in Asia, wouldn't wish that on anyone). I meant I hopes she gets hit by REALITY.

Apologies, those living in such zones.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> Jennifer could also be courting her for a donation.


Good luck with that.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> If you ask me (and I'm aware no one has) they were prob asked politely to leave their last place (or asked for a date when they were) had outstayed their welcome and M was boo-hoping about the unfairness and desperateness of being homeless, mentally ill partner, baby in tow and eviction. Probably O & T felt compelled to help.


I think you hit the nail on the head - this would explain why they were reported as saying they “had to leave Canada” which struck me as an odd thing to say at the time.


----------



## bag-mania

Both Tyler and Oprah have great reputations for business. What's in it for them to support H&M, literally it seems? Are they hoping to sign them to a contract and make some money off of them in the future? Surely they know H&M are not paupers who cannot pay their own way. Maybe it's my cynical view of celebrities showing, but I find it hard to believe they actually bought into the "us against the world" narrative H&M put out there.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure there is a way to do it without actually asking.  For now it seems people like Oprah are inclined to help without being asked outright.  That may not last forever.


Hee-hee, you know it .. if these 2 for whatever reason don't come through on their "agreement" to do something with Oprah, then as quick as you can say "see 'ya" .. they will be OUT!  Oprah does not like being double-crossed; heck .. there are a lot of things she doesn't like, but optics plays a huge part of how she wants to be viewed!


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Both Tyler and Oprah have great reputations for business. What's in it for them to support H&M, literally it seems? Are they hoping to sign them to a contract and make some money off of them in the future? Surely they know H&M are not paupers who cannot pay their own way. Maybe it's my cynical view of celebrities showing, but I find it hard to believe they actually bought into the "us against the world" narrative H&M put out there.


Very true -- but don't celebs just like being around other celebs?

Would Oprah or Perry give up one of their estates to any old regular person, a nobody, who is trying to do good in the world?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Both Tyler and Oprah have great reputations for business. What's in it for them to support H&M, literally it seems? Are they hoping to sign them to a contract and make some money off of them in the future? Surely they know H&M are not paupers who cannot pay their own way. Maybe it's my cynical view of celebrities showing, but I find it hard to believe they actually bought into the "us against the world" narrative H&M put out there.


maybe tyler will give her a role in one of his Medea movies 
that would be more her speed than an actual starring role in a drama by an A-list director


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> Very true -- but don't celebs just like being around other celebs?
> 
> Would Oprah or Perry give up one of their estates to any old regular person, a nobody, who is trying to do good in the world?


Oprah gave countless college scholarships. She does plenty for everyone.
Since the whole story about the google meeting came out last year, I am looking at all Celebs present with jaded eyes.
Between that meeting and the need of celebs to post every thing and anything during the pandemic.....they all look like foolish narcissistic fools, imo.


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Oprah gave countless college scholarships. She does plenty for everyone.
> Since the whole story about the google meeting came out last year, I am looking at all Celebs present with jaded eyes.
> Between that meeting and the need of celebs to post every thing and anything during the pandemic.....they all look like foolish narcissistic fools, imo.


Can't remember who said it, but sometime back .. some leading psychologist said that the #1 trait that anyone seeking a career in Hollywood needed was to be a narcissist .. it rings true to me!


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I didn't mean earthquake literally (been in a couple minor tremors myself whilst in Asia, wouldn't wish that on anyone). I meant I hopes she gets hit by REALITY.
> 
> Apologies, those living in such zones.


I did read your reference to earthquake to be metaphorical, not literal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe tyler will give her a role in one of his Medea movies
> that would be more her speed than an actual starring role in a drama by an A-list director



Impossible. Meghan does not have the range for comedy. It is well outside her comfort zone and skill set. 

When you are as rich as Oprah and Tyler you can easily afford to take on a few pet projects, maybe that’s what Harry and Meghan are to them.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Impossible. Meghan does not have the range for comedy. It is well outside her comfort zone and skill set.
> 
> When you are as rich as Oprah and Tyler you can easily afford to take on a few pet projects, maybe that’s what Harry and Meghan are to them.


Oprah and Harry have a mutual project for Netflix.. on mental health no less.
If she can make money out of them, she will ride with them... remember the pics that came out of her, gayle watching the Neverland doc on Geffen yacht.
I can’t stand gayle nor Oprah since then.. especially since she hang out with Weinstein...


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> I did read your reference to earthquake to be metaphorical, not literal.


@papertiger .. and @chicinthecity777 .. no worries, didn't take it as offensive one bit, just poking a bit of fun!  However, we had a "roller" a few months back and given that I'm in the Valley (not that far from Northridge which had a very bad earthquake some years back), the last thing I wanted to hear was all the horror stories about what happened in OUR neighborhood!  I can only thank the architect of my property (who was the architect for the entire village) who built his (now ours) house very sturdily such that there was no damage .. can only hope the same!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> @papertiger .. and @chicinthecity777 .. no worries, didn't take it as offensive one bit, just poking a bit of fun!  However, we had a "roller" a few months back and given that I'm in the Valley (not that far from Northridge which had a very bad earthquake some years back), the last thing I wanted to hear was all the horror stories about what happened in OUR neighborhood!  I can only thank the architect of my property (who was the architect for the entire village) who built his (now ours) house very sturdily such that there was no damage .. can only hope the same!


You take care!


----------



## nautilia

I wonder if H&M are giving these SoCal properties free advertising in exchange for mentions or stats. That’s one great way to couch surf!


----------



## nautilia

Stays not stats


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Oprah and Harry have a mutual project for Netflix.. on mental health no less.
> If she can make money out of them, she will ride with them... remember the pics that came out of her, gayle watching the Neverland doc on Geffen yacht.
> I can’t stand gayle nor Oprah since then.. especially since she hang out with Weinstein...


not sure I understand your outrage....do you equate hanging out with Geffin with hanging with Weinstein?  
I used to listen to Gayle years ago on XM Sirius.  It sometimes annoyed me when she talked about all the privilege she enjoyed tagging along with her BFF.  But I don't think that's what you're talking about.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> @papertiger .. and @chicinthecity777 .. no worries, didn't take it as offensive one bit, just poking a bit of fun!  However, we had a "roller" a few months back and given that I'm in the Valley (not that far from Northridge which had a very bad earthquake some years back), the last thing I wanted to hear was all the horror stories about what happened in OUR neighborhood!  I can only thank the architect of my property (who was the architect for the entire village) who built his (now ours) house very sturdily such that there was no damage .. can only hope the same!


Girl, it is 40degrees. on the  East coast. I’ll take a little shaking...


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> not sure I understand your outrage....do you equate hanging out with Geffin with hanging with Weinstein?
> I used to listen to Gayle years ago on XM Sirius.  It sometimes annoyed me when she talked about all the privilege she enjoyed tagging along with her BFF.  But I don't think that's what you're talking about.


Not a big fan of hypocrites, ymmv.
The fact that they were watching the doc about MJ while being friends with Weinstein and Geffen and they both never said a word about either....
Yes, Geffen turned out many, many young men...
And Weinstein was a known abuser for years...


----------



## bisousx

I don’t think Oprah or Tyler Perry feel compelled to help them personally.. the more successful you are, the more relatives and friends come out with sob stories and palms open so they must be very immune to the storytelling. I do think they believe Harry and Meghan have influence with the younger generation and can bring value to certain causes or business ventures. And with their wealth, helping someone out with a free stay/plane rides doesn’t put a dent in their fortune.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> I don’t think Oprah or Tyler Perry feel compelled to help them personally.. the more successful you are, the more relatives and friends come out with sob stories and palms open so they must be very immune to the storytelling. I do think they believe Harry and Meghan have influence with the younger generation and can bring value to certain causes or business ventures. And with their wealth, helping someone out with a free stay/plane rides doesn’t put a dent in their fortune.


but they are 40ish.....young?
IDK - my DH saw something online this morning saying M is expected to be the biggest influencer.....time will tell.  Her style isn't anything special IMO.  She may be inspirational to a segment of the population.  I think she was at the time of the wedding.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> but they are 40ish.....young?
> IDK - my DH saw something online this morning saying M is expected to be the biggest influencer.....time will tell.  Her style isn't anything special IMO.  She may be inspirational to a segment of the population.  I think she was at the time of the wedding.


If Kim k can be an influencer, so can the Sussex.
As long as they earn it honestly, why not?


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> but they are 40ish.....young?
> IDK - my DH saw something online this morning saying M is expected to be the biggest influencer.....time will tell.  Her style isn't anything special IMO.  She may be inspirational to a segment of the population.  I think she was at the time of the wedding.


I agree.
In a few months M will be a 39 yo ingenue.  I'm not sure who she socially influences beyond her loyal stans, but I guess we'll see what happens next.
Move to a home of their own? Continued couch surfing?  Baby #2?   
New Blog?   Debut of Archwell cookie brand??


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> If Kim k can be an influencer, so can the Sussex.
> As long as they earn it honestly, why not?


whatever
if it wasn't for this thread I probably wouldn't pay much attention to them....and they don't deserve much, esp her


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> If Kim k can be an influencer, so can the Sussex.
> As long as they earn it honestly, why not?


Ex-Sussex!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LaidyM

sdkitty said:


> but they are 40ish.....young?
> IDK - my DH saw something online this morning saying M is expected to be the biggest influencer.....time will tell.  Her style isn't anything special IMO.  She may be inspirational to a segment of the population.  I think she was at the time of the wedding.



Huh?!
She’s nearly 40 years old, prior to meeting Harry, in her early to mid 30’s, she tried very hard to become an influencer/life style blogger with minor success.
Because her brand is.. not very unique.
As a mid 30’s woman I found her blog (the bits that were posted online by various media outlets) for the most part not very interesting - the family stories about her dad were interesting in retrospect- granted I grew out of the vogue/ cosmopolitan mindset she tried to sale somewhere in my very late teens.
(Though I do enjoy watching runway shows and following the fashion scene, but i’m not a full blown fashionista).

But you know, idiots don’t die, they just get replaced. And there is no doubt a vacuous crowd outhere that may just be willing to tune in and listen to silly influencers even after this pandemic is over.


----------



## bisousx

I actually think Meg/Harry can influence, particularly among the age group that’s too young and naive to smell through the BS. They have the royalty edge, charitable image, Meghan dresses more elegant than the average woman her age (love the casual looks in Veronica Beard, L’agence, etc), and most people don’t know what yachting is so negative chatter is easily dismissed by the masses as haterade. Plus, these entrepreneurs (Oprah, Tyler) must enjoy the thrill of quietly betting against the grain. It could either work out gloriously and if it doesn’t, no skin off their nose. Whatever people are trying to sell and the Harkles are willing to merch, it may better to go after that organic marketing than paying an ad or PR agency.


----------



## CeeJay

LaidyM said:


> Huh?!
> She’s nearly 40 years old, prior to meeting Harry, in her early to mid 30’s, she tried very hard to become an influencer/life style blogger with minor success.
> Because her brand is.. not very unique.
> As a mid 30’s woman I found her blog (the bits that were posted online by various media outlets) for the most part not very interesting - the family stories about her dad were interesting in retrospect- granted I grew out of the vogue/ cosmopolitan mindset she tried to sale somewhere in my very late teens.
> (Though I do enjoy watching runway shows and following the fashion scene, but i’m not a full blown fashionista).
> 
> But you know, idiots don’t die, they just get replaced. And there is no doubt a vacuous crowd outhere that may just be willing to tune in and listen to silly influencers even after this pandemic is over.


You bring up a good point .. because I've already seen it; how many "influencers" will we continue to have?  Seems that they were kind of on a down-swing anyhow (at least from what I've seen) .. their content is boring, or they are "trying" to create their own brand (which is very hard nowadays), etc.  Fashion, from what we knew of it, is going to be very different post-pandemic - heck, look at how many stores are filing for bankruptcy!  Now, some may still have brick & mortar stores, but when the 'base' of fashion is that much smaller and then many investors (because sadly - many start-ups are funded by investors) are simply not willing to fund something that they do not believe is going to vest them profit!  So, I think there is going to be a huge "trimming of the sails" re: all these "influencers" IMO.  

The one thing that I keep on thinking about, and we all know that the BRF would never comment on it, is "what they are thinking right now in terms of H&M"???  Especially since they have "left" the BRF, I can just imagine what they might attach their names to .. because let's face it, neither of them seem to vet anything beforehand (well - Meghan always knows more anyhow, right?).  I would just love to see Harry try to start up that stupid Travlyst (or however you spell it), given the hypocrisy of what he and H&M have done in the past year.  Who knows, maybe he is that stupid that he thinks that folks would still take him at 'face value', but I sincerely hope that someone would call him out on his BS!  I'm just waiting for the day here in the US, where someone (who knows - maybe it will be me?!?!) .. will see them at an event (or whatever) and CALL THEM OUT for their shenanigans .. because that is all they seem to know how to do!


----------



## Katel

sdkitty said:


> but they are 40ish.....young?
> IDK - my DH saw something online this morning saying M is expected to be the biggest influencer.....time will tell.  Her style isn't anything special IMO.  She may be inspirational to a segment of the population.  I think she was at the time of the wedding.



I don’t think she will be a mega-influencer. They will divorce and I don’t think she will succeed alone. Because she appears to be wholly self-absorbed and fake. And people increasingly have no time for that.

Like Coco Chanel said, “Hard times arouse an instinctive desire for authenticity.”


----------



## LaidyM

bisousx said:


> I actually think Meg/Harry can influence, particularly among the age group that’s too young and naive to smell through the BS. They have the royalty edge, charitable image, Meghan dresses more elegant than the average woman her age (love the casual looks in Veronica Beard, L’agence, etc), and most people don’t know what yachting is so negative chatter is easily dismissed by the masses as haterade. Plus, these entrepreneurs (Oprah, Tyler) must enjoy the thrill of quietly betting against the grain. It could either work out gloriously and if it doesn’t, no skin off their nose. Whatever people are trying to sell and the Harkles are willing to merch, it may better to go after that organic marketing than paying an ad or PR agency.




People actually believe those “yachting” rumors?
Their just as false as William’s affair rumors and the “porn movies” rumora.
And imo it is disgusting and degrading for both Meghan as a woman- as a human being-, and to the peraon who continues to perpetuate it.
unless one has hard evidence to prove it, this is only hurting those of us who don’t buy her bs, because no rational person is gonna listen if people keep shoving this foolishness.

Apologies for the harshness- especially as a newcomer, but, as much as I dislike Meghan and her fake ass, I can’t be quiet over such claims.. simply for the sake of dragging her.
It makes no sense.


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> I don’t think she will be a mega-influencer. They will divorce and I don’t think she will succeed alone. Because she appears to be wholly self-absorbed and fake. And people increasingly have no time for that.
> 
> Like Coco Chanel said, “*Hard times arouse an instinctive desire for authenticity*.”


LOVE THIS!!! .. and SPOT-ON!!!


----------



## Allisonfaye

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I agree but I think it's the shape of the head/face. He is very oblong like Harry, not a rounder face like Louis, for example,on his 1st. Never really examined this matter before now but a longer face might give the appearance of being larger? He is probably fairly normal for his age. But really, some clothing would have made him look so much nicer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4725581
> View attachment 4725583



That's funny because I see more of HER in him than him.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Clearblueskies said:


> And which posts were they?  I recall one poster that I think said they found all babies unattractive - and I tend to agree.  I don’t recall any specifically aimed at Archie, calling him an ugly baby?



I saw he wasn't as cute as William's kids but I never said he was ugly. I suspect that's what they are referring to.


----------



## Allisonfaye

needlv said:


> To be fair Meghan did suffer racism at the start.  There was some horrible incident where a cousin of the Queen wore an inappropriate racist brooch to a gathering which was directed at Meghan.  Awful.
> 
> From then on, Meghan and Harry’s own behaviour has led to fair criticisms.  Private planes whilst telling people to be mindful of the environment;  the “woah is me” video in a country full of kids which don’t know where their next meal is coming from etc etc
> 
> I do think the video with Archie was well intended - raise money for charity etc.  it’s that the execution of it -  didn’t quite work... Archie in a full diaper  + simple onesie - and no sighting of Harry, Meghan not particularly dressed up or with good makeup.... and clearly Archie got bored of the book half way through (which is normal for babies of his age!! )
> 
> I personally wouldn’t have posted that particular take and would have tried again...
> But maybe that was the best take!!  Kids are unpredictable.



The Queen wore a racist broach? What'd I miss?


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> The Queen wore a racist broach? What'd I miss?


It wasn't the queen, it was Princess Michael of Kent who wore that particular brooch. The brooch depicts a Moorish Venetian prince, and it is a symbol of good fortune. It is not considered racist by many in Europe. I abominate racism, but I sincerely don't think MM was a victim of it.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> It wasn't the queen, it was Princess Michael of Kent who wore that particular brooch. The brooch depicts a Moorish Venetian prince, and it is a symbol of good fortune. It is not considered racist by many in Europe. I abominate racism, but I sincerely don't think MM was a victim of it.



Except this lady is no stranger to racist scandals.. if it looks like a duck...

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20090038/princess-michael-of-kent-racist-past/


----------



## CarryOn2020

How can MM claim she did not know about the BRF’s racist past?  It has been well documented in books, movies, tv, etc. Princess Michael has worn those pins on previous occasions. In fact, most of the BRF’s jewels, art, land are from the spoils of war. Does she know the _provenance_ of all the jewelry she has received?  Supposedly MM is well educated. 




bisousx said:


> Except this lady is no stranger to racist scandals.. if it looks like a duck...
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20090038/princess-michael-of-kent-racist-past/


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> How can MM claim she did not know about the BRF’s racist past?  It has been well documented in books, movies, tv, etc. Princess Michael has worn those pins on previous occasions. In fact, most of the BRF’s jewels, art, land are from the spoils of war. Does she know the _provenance_ of all the jewelry she has received?  Supposedly MM is well educated.


What MM is is selfish and self serving.  If it benefits her that’s all that matters.


----------



## mdcx

LaidyM said:


> Why would the jet need to make a stop at Portland? Assuming it got refueled in Victoria...


So they could clear customs there and not in CA, supposedly to avoid attention.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> How can MM claim she did not know about the BRF’s racist past?  It has been well documented in books, movies, tv, etc. Princess Michael has worn those pins on previous occasions. In fact, most of the BRF’s jewels, art, land are from the spoils of war. Does she know the _provenance_ of all the jewelry she has received?  Supposedly MM is well educated.


She knew however she did not think that it would be directed toward her, imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> She knew however she did not think that it would be directed toward her, imo.



Why wouldn’t it be directed at her?  More so because she is an American (gasp, clutch pearls).
She had her mother, advisors and friends. Surely they said something.

ETA - I believe you are correct, @limom. I believe the answer to that question tells us exactly the kind of person she was and is.


----------



## mdcx

LaidyM said:


> People actually believe those “yachting” rumors?
> Their just as false as William’s affair rumors and the “porn movies” rumora.
> And imo it is disgusting and degrading for both Meghan as a woman- as a human being-, and to the peraon who continues to perpetuate it.
> unless one has hard evidence to prove it, this is only hurting those of us who don’t buy her bs, because no rational person is gonna listen if people keep shoving this foolishness.
> 
> Apologies for the harshness- especially as a newcomer, but, as much as I dislike Meghan and her fake ass, I can’t be quiet over such claims.. simply for the sake of dragging her.
> It makes no sense.


You do know that “yachting” is a very real transactional form of income for actresses/models/wannabes? I have no moral issue with pr-stit—ion myself and think it’s best when legalised to protect all involved, but I think a lot of the participants prefer not to think of it in those terms.
How do you think many of these young women survive financially?
It is thought Hs friend Tom Inskipp had previously met M in such circumstances.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, now knowing who the BRF is and its history, why hang on so desperately to those titles?  If H is so desperate to disconnect from the BRF, why does he hang on to his title?  IMO, this is why they are unlikable and viewed as hypocrites.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Ex-Sussex!



Essex?


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA - I believe you are correct. I believe the answer to that question tells us exactly the kind of person she was and is.


So strange.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It wasn't the queen, it was Princess Michael of Kent who wore that particular brooch. The brooch depicts a Moorish Venetian prince, and it is a symbol of good fortune. It is not considered racist by many in Europe. I abominate racism, but I sincerely don't think MM was a victim of it.



You are absolutely right, but at best it wasn't the time/place to wear it. I think it was meant. NOT nice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@limom 
I do apologize for my strange remarks. Not only is technology not cooperating today, my brain is also having difficulty. Please know no offense was intended. Thank you.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh no. He doesn’t look well at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The bottom teeth look Hwood white, the top still need work.
Filters are a game-changer. Guessing Tyler stepped in to fix H’s videos.
Now the neighbors are upset — https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...everly-Hills-mansion-costs-200-000-month.html






mrsinsyder said:


> Oh no. He doesn’t look well at all.
> View attachment 4727050


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

limom said:


> Oprah and Harry have a mutual project for Netflix.. on mental health no less.
> If she can make money out of them, she will ride with them... remember the pics that came out of her, gayle watching the Neverland doc on Geffen yacht.
> I can’t stand gayle nor Oprah since then.. especially since she hang out with Weinstein...





sdkitty said:


> not sure I understand your outrage....do you equate hanging out with Geffin with hanging with Weinstein?
> I used to listen to Gayle years ago on XM Sirius.  It sometimes annoyed me when she talked about all the privilege she enjoyed tagging along with her BFF.  But I don't think that's what you're talking about.



Off-Topic for one quick sec, mods pls delete if inappropriate

*sdkitty* and *limom*, Guess I'm trying to address this post about O,  I cut her a tremendous amount of slack for so many great reasons. 

Actually, I considered Oprah the Anti-Megan: Oprah has had a undeniably rough life when careers were not only tough to have for any woman, let alone an african-american woman - the humiliation she must have endured and her generosity after her rise to to the Forbes Billionaire Report - and yet still giving her audience cars, literally letting many celebs climb on her shoulders to get to the top - that woman has an enormous heart along with her numerous bank accounts!

A quick word about Gayle, yes, O literally gave Gayle her career but I watched her recently on a political news show and I was pleasantly surprised at her professionalism, intelligence and composure - much like Oprah, herself.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> *Oh no. He doesn’t look well at all.*
> View attachment 4727050



No, HE DOES NOT LOOK LIKE HIMSELF AT ALL!!!
Where is drunky uncle Harry?
Is that even Harry?

MEGHAN MARKLE HAS HARRY DRINKING "HOLLYWOOD" KOOL-AID
OMG THE MIND-BLOWING FILTERS, rofling!!!! 

Are we going to see Archie changed out of his dirty diaper/undershirt outfit and into a little Lord Fauntleroy suit in the near future, too?


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Except this lady is no stranger to racist scandals.. if it looks like a duck...
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a20090038/princess-michael-of-kent-racist-past/


I don't particularly care about Princess Michael of Kent, and I don't question her intentions. However, I feel sorry that the moor brooches are now being  associated with racism. Some of those brooches are exquisite pieces that represent Venetian jewelry since the 17th century.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> You are absolutely right, but at best it wasn't the time/place to wear it. I think it was meant. NOT nice.


I agree with you.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> @limom
> I do apologize for my strange remarks. Not only is technology not cooperating today, my brain is also having difficulty. Please know no offense was intended. Thank you.


No what is strange is the quote quoting yourself. Not you


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Off-Topic for one quick sec, mods pls delete if inappropriate
> 
> *sdkitty* and *limom*, Guess I'm trying to address this post about O,  I cut her a tremendous amount of slack for so many great reasons.
> 
> Actually, I considered Oprah the Anti-Megan: Oprah has had a undeniably rough life when careers were not only tough to have for any woman, let alone an african-american woman - the humiliation she must have endured and her generosity after her rise to to the Forbes Billionaire Report - and yet still giving her audience cars, literally letting many celebs climb on her shoulders to get to the top - that woman has an enormous heart along with her numerous bank accounts!
> 
> A quick word about Gayle, yes, O literally gave Gayle her career but I watched her recently on a political news show and I was pleasantly surprised at her professionalism, intelligence and composure - much like Oprah, herself.


It is the quarantine crankiness. Don’t mind me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Re: the Video of Harry's address about the cancellation of the Invictus Games:, 

What a shock! Supposedly Harry's great enthusiasms were his military experiences and, by extension, his founding of the Invictus Games, his proudest achievement. Yet here he is, not even able to look directly into the camera to address his comrades, let alone generate any sincere enthusiasm. His unkempt appearance is startling in the context of the message,  he would never pass muster. 

I had two take aways from viewing this: (1) I hope the 5 Royals ahead of him in line of succession stay healthy and prosper because this man does not present as anyone capable of leadership, and he obviously has very bad judgement in who he is following;  (2) I'm too old to potentially witness this, but predict in 18 -20 years Archie Mountbatten-Windsor will be in the media bemoaning his mental health issues because of his vacuous parents and isolated  upbringing.

Actually, I had a 3rd reaction also. Hope this was not Intended as an audition tape for video work, he’s a dud.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said, @VigeeLeBrun    My impression is that Oprah and Gayle are all about living an authentic life filled with grace and compassion. I am just learning about Tyler, but he seems to be the same. All 3 worked very hard for their money and their reputations. That said, I do not understand why they have connected themselves to the Harkle train, but, since they have so much riding on this connection, I trust in time we will know.  




VigeeLeBrun said:


> Off-Topic for one quick sec, mods pls delete if inappropriate
> 
> *sdkitty* and *limom*, Guess I'm trying to address this post about O,  I cut her a tremendous amount of slack for so many great reasons.
> 
> Actually, I considered Oprah the Anti-Megan: Oprah has had a undeniably rough life when careers were not only tough to have for any woman, let alone an african-american woman - the humiliation she must have endured and her generosity after her rise to to the Forbes Billionaire Report - and yet still giving her audience cars, literally letting many celebs climb on her shoulders to get to the top - that woman has an enormous heart along with her numerous bank accounts!
> 
> A quick word about Gayle, yes, O literally gave Gayle her career but I watched her recently on a political news show and I was pleasantly surprised at her professionalism, intelligence and composure - much like Oprah, herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> No what is strange is the quote quoting yourself. Not you



thank you


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> @limom
> I do apologize for my strange remarks. Not only is technology not cooperating *today,* my brain is also having difficulty. Please know no offense was intended. Thank you.



*CarryOn*, am right there with you, ie tech & brain not cooperating today
Yesterday was similar but not as bad! Yikes!!! 
And strangely enough my eldest DD on the East Coast is having a reaction too 

Back to topic!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> You are absolutely right, but at best it wasn't the time/place to wear it. I think it was meant. NOT nice.



*papertiger*, Yes, it certainly was not seemingly "nice" of Princess Michael of Kent to wear a blackamoor brooch while visiting at a function with Meghan Markle,

If we are to be blind to race in all aspects of our life - and just not see skin color - what does it matter if Princess Michael wore an acclaimed blackamoor brooch, which may or may not represent Meghan's heritage and Princess Michael may or may not be humbilized simply by being in MM's presence?
Not the case, I guess?


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...sualty-William-Harrys-feud-Dianas-statue.html
_As_ _he seeks his fortune in America, where the memory of Diana is lauded, and where Harry will forever be known as her son, the pressure to speak about her will be huge._

Nope, no, count me out, not interested.  We have the complete story on her. So, this is H’s plan?  Merch his mother? Stomp on his father? Grandmother?  All the while desperately grasping on to that title?  His therapist should have him watch Gone With the Wind. Clark Gable said it best.  

Now, if H wants to tell us that Charles is not his father, hmmm, I’d listen to that story.


----------



## mdcx

The whole Invictus thing is so weird now - he's abandoned the UK but people are still supposed to find him an inspiring advocate for this UK charity? It all rings very hollow.


----------



## Genie27

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh no. He doesn’t look well at all.
> View attachment 4727050


Good lord, she zeroes in on any camera lens within a thousand yards, and he can’t raise his eyes from the cue cards for two seconds. I WONDER if THEY were WRITTEN _like _THIS.

Stay safe and stay tuned y’all.


----------



## floatinglili

Chanbal said:


> I don't particularly care about Princess Michael of Kent, and I don't question her intentions. However, I feel sorry that the moor brooches are now being  associated with racism. Some of those brooches are exquisite pieces that represent Venetian jewelry since the 17th century.


Thank god somebody said it. I’m very concerned about the anti-Art, anti-nuance  ‘cancel culture’. Or rather ‘cancel monoculture ’. 
If the Venetian tradition of brooches is wrong so too surely are all those beautiful representations  of  art-deco nymphs, and I quite like those....


----------



## tiktok

floatinglili said:


> Thank god somebody said it. I’m very concerned about the anti-Art, anti-nuance  ‘cancel culture’. Or rather ‘cancel monoculture ’.
> If the Venetian tradition of brooches is wrong so too surely are all those beautiful representations  of  art-deco nymphs, and I quite like those....



I know nothing about this Princes Michael of Kent (she may be racist, no idea), but the brooch itself apparently depicts a Moorish Venetian prince and so could hardly be considered racist.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chanbal said:


> I don't particularly care about Princess Michael of Kent, and I don't question her intentions. However, I feel sorry that the moor brooches are *now being  associated with racism*. Some of those brooches are exquisite pieces that represent Venetian jewelry since the 17th century.



They were _always_ racist, associated with colonialism. The peoples represented in that art were enslaved or subservient.

And Princess Michael has a well documented history of racism.


----------



## Lodpah

You want to see what evil looks like: here it is. Her name is MM.


----------



## LaidyM

mdcx said:


> You do know that “yachting” is a very real transactional form of income for actresses/models/wannabes? I have no moral issue with pr-stit—ion myself and think it’s best when legalised to protect all involved, but I think a lot of the participants prefer not to think of it in those terms.
> How do you think many of these young women survive financially?
> It is thought Hs friend Tom Inskipp had previously met M in such circumstances.



Yes I know exactly what it is. Which is why I find it disgusting to blame someone of it when there is zero proof of it.
It is as you said Prostitution, and it is illegal in many countries for obvious reasons!!

There is also zero proof (unless you have one, and if so please do share) that either Tom, Andrew or any of Harry circle ever met her in such a manner.

I dislike the woman, she pinges all of my warning bells, but there is enough to criticize both her and Harry without going into the conspiracy theory zone.
Next you’ll tell me you think she was never pregnant? And that Archie is nothing but a doll, or was born via surrogate?


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Off-Topic for one quick sec, mods pls delete if inappropriate
> 
> *sdkitty* and *limom*, Guess I'm trying to address this post about O,  I cut her a tremendous amount of slack for so many great reasons.
> 
> Actually, I considered Oprah the Anti-Megan: Oprah has had a undeniably rough life when careers were not only tough to have for any woman, let alone an african-american woman - the humiliation she must have endured and her generosity after her rise to to the Forbes Billionaire Report - and yet still giving her audience cars, literally letting many celebs climb on her shoulders to get to the top - that woman has an enormous heart along with her numerous bank accounts!
> 
> A quick word about Gayle, yes, O literally gave Gayle her career but I watched her recently on a political news show and I was pleasantly surprised at her professionalism, intelligence and composure - much like Oprah, herself.



ITA, I have a lot of respect for Oprah and think Gayle is often underestimated because of her friendship with O. Gayle had a pretty good career as a broadcast journalist before Oprah gave her a big fame boost. I don’t begrudge her for that... we get our breaks from many things, whether it’s our network, company brand, family, sheer luck, etc. Doesn’t mean the hard work and talent weren’t there to begin with.

Anyway I definitely don’t agree with either of them on everything but they seem legit. As businesswomen I’m sure part of their thing with Meghan is not entirely social. They’re of course going to be nice to current or potential business collaborators.


----------



## Jktgal

We have a visual - he's being held in the underground wine cellar. Send the cavalry NOW and bring the antidote. tanned/bruised nose lends air of authenticity, +1. 1/10


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LaidyM said:


> There is also zero proof (unless you have one, and if so please do share) that either Tom, Andrew or any of Harry circle ever met her in such a manner.



True, and I can also agree to your earlier statement that it is pretty nasty spreading said rumour just out of spite. I'll say though, there's one thing that baffles me. This is one thing I'd take for sure legal action against, especially if I were so sensitive and argumentative as Harry and Meghan. They sue over someone reporting they have a copper tub because that's somehow defamatory, but the one rumour that really is is completely ignored by them? Mh.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, and I can also agree to your earlier statement that it is pretty nasty spreading said rumour just out of spite. I'll say though, there's one thing that baffles me. This is one thing I'd take for sure legal action against, especially if I were so sensitive and argumentative as Harry and Meghan. They sue over someone reporting they have a copper tub because that's somehow defamatory, but the one rumour that really is is completely ignored by them? Mh.



Who would they take legal action against though? I haven’t seen any media outlets publish these allegations (let me know if I’m wrong)... they’re not going to sue individuals on social media.


----------



## floatinglili

FreeSpirit71 said:


> They were _always_ racist, associated with colonialism. The peoples represented in that art were enslaved or subservient.
> 
> And Princess Michael has a well documented history of racism.


If only cancelling all art meant cancelling history! I see a beautiful decorative jewellery tradition with layers and layers of historical and human experience. Some of the wealthiest princes (with the largest slave retinues) in the history of the planet were dark skinned of course as we all know. Venice was known as a melting pot and trading zone. The blackamoot motifs are somewhat similar in my mind to the pierrot clown motifs which are also historical. I see nothing wrong with making my own opinions in regard to beautiful historical and traditional objects and I dislike canceling history and art for the sake of modern one-note sensibilities, even if delivered with the fervour and certainty of a second year university tutorial. At the end of the day I am off topic and I mean well  - peace!


----------



## pukasonqo

floatinglili said:


> If only cancelling all art meant cancelling history! I see a beautiful decorative jewellery tradition with layers and layers of historical and human experience. Some of the wealthiest princes (with the largest slave retinues) in the history of the planet were dark skinned of course as we all know. Venice was known as a melting pot and trading zone. The blackamoot motifs are somewhat similar in my mind to the pierrot clown motifs which are also historical. I see nothing wrong with making my own opinions in regard to beautiful historical and traditional objects and I dislike canceling history and art for the sake of modern one-note sensibilities, even if delivered with the fervour and certainty of a second year university tutorial. At the end of the day I am off topic and I mean well  - peace!


It is not cancelling history but recognising that many artistic expressions were based in what we now know are racist constructs and beliefs, same w many historical events that were based in the misguided concept that one race was better than the other, ie: the Valladolid debate, the selling and buying of African people...


----------



## mdcx

LaidyM said:


> Yes I know exactly what it is. Which is why I find it disgusting to blame someone of it when there is zero proof of it.
> It is as you said Prostitution, and it is illegal in many countries for obvious reasons!!
> 
> There is also zero proof (unless you have one, and if so please do share) that either Tom, Andrew or any of Harry circle ever met her in such a manner.
> 
> I dislike the woman, she pinges all of my warning bells, but there is enough to criticize both her and Harry without going into the conspiracy theory zone.
> Next you’ll tell me you think she was never pregnant? And that Archie is nothing but a doll, or was born via surrogate?


It’s not a conspiracy theory? There are yachting rumours about a number of actresses/models. I personally don’t have an issue with the act itself, rather with the coercion/abuse that can occur when it is illegal and pushed underground. It’s a not unknown way for actresses etc to support themselves. I’m not sure why it’s so controversial? I mean from sugar daddies to the casting couch to Middle Eastern sheiks on yachts in Cannes to seeking out wealthy British men via her Soho House connections, it’s all very much on a continuum.


----------



## doni

floatinglili said:


> If only cancelling all art meant cancelling history! I see a beautiful decorative jewellery tradition with layers and layers of historical and human experience. Some of the wealthiest princes (with the largest slave retinues) in the history of the planet were dark skinned of course as we all know. Venice was known as a melting pot and trading zone. The blackamoot motifs are somewhat similar in my mind to the pierrot clown motifs which are also historical. I see nothing wrong with making my own opinions in regard to beautiful historical and traditional objects and I dislike canceling history and art for the sake of modern one-note sensibilities, even if delivered with the fervour and certainty of a second year university tutorial. At the end of the day I am off topic and I mean well  - peace!



Princess Michael of Kent is not stupid, she wore that brooch on purpose to meet Meghan. She named two black sheep in her state Venus and Serena. Once in a restaurant, when people were talking loudly at a nearby table, she told them to go back to the colonies, etc, etc.
Now, to conclude from her behavior that the Royal family was racist toward Meghan is absurd. No one  in the Royal Family can stand Princess Michael of Kent. She cannot stand the royals either (she is a second rate royal by marriage). She is not at all popular in the UK. She is irrelevant.

I’d say that a prince high up in the line of succession who used to dress up as a nazi (the proponents of the Nuremberg race laws) in parties would have been more worrying in that regard.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

floatinglili said:


> If only cancelling all art meant cancelling history! I see a beautiful decorative jewellery tradition with layers and layers of historical and human experience. Some of the wealthiest princes (with the largest slave retinues) in the history of the planet were dark skinned of course as we all know. Venice was known as a melting pot and trading zone. The blackamoot motifs are somewhat similar in my mind to the pierrot clown motifs which are also historical. I see nothing wrong with making my own opinions in regard to beautiful historical and traditional objects and I dislike canceling history and art for the sake of modern one-note sensibilities, even if delivered with the fervour and certainty of a second year university tutorial. At the end of the day I am off topic and I mean well  - peace!



I agree with your point, BUT I still think these brooches should be cherished in a showcase, not worn out anymore. I would take no issue with someone collecting them for the cultural background, I'd still sideeye anyone who pins one to their chest and parades it around.


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> Princess Michael of Kent is not stupid, she wore that brooch on purpose to meet Meghan. She named two black sheep in her state Venus and Serena. Once in a restaurant, when people were talking loudly at a nearby table, she told them to go back to the colonies, etc, etc.
> Now, to conclude from her behavior that the Royal family was racist toward Meghan is absurd. No one  in the Royal Family can stand Princess Michael of Kent. She cannot stand the royals either (she is a second rate royal by marriage). She is not at all popular in the UK. She is irrelevant.
> 
> I’d say that a prince high up in the line of succession who used to dress up as a nazi (the proponents of the Nuremberg race laws) in parties would have been more worrying in that regard.


Well said! I remember the incident vaguely at the time and I didn't know who wore it and I still don't know who this Princess Michael of Kent is. We never hear about her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well said! I remember the incident vaguely at the time and I didn't know who wore it and I still don't know who this Princess Michael of Kent is. We never hear about her.


She's married to the Queen's cousin (younger brother of the Duke of Kent), and her father was big in Nazi Germany.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's married to the Queen's cousin (younger brother of the Duke of Kent), and her father was big in Nazi Germany.


Thank you but I really don't care about knowing.


----------



## LaidyM

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, and I can also agree to your earlier statement that it is pretty nasty spreading said rumour just out of spite. I'll say though, there's one thing that baffles me. This is one thing I'd take for sure legal action against, especially if I were so sensitive and argumentative as Harry and Meghan. They sue over someone reporting they have a copper tub because that's somehow defamatory, but the one rumour that really is is completely ignored by them? Mh.



Because it is only ever perpetuated by people on social media. I have never seen any credible (or semi credible) media outlet even allude to it.
If this was true the media would have been all over it by now!

ETA: or as Lalame said


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well said! I remember the incident vaguely at the time and I didn't know who wore it and I still don't know who this Princess Michael of Kent is. We never hear about her.


We used to see her a lot, always trying to be front and centre on the balcony on Buckingham Palace for example, hence her nickname Princess Pushy.
Sound familiar? [emoji1787]


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> We used to see her a lot, always trying to be front and centre on the balcony on Buckingham Palace for example, hence her nickname Princess Pushy.
> Sound familiar? [emoji1787]


Yikes! Another wannabe who thinks so highly of herself just because she married a minor royal. Pathetic! Does sound familiar!


----------



## LaidyM

mdcx said:


> *It’s not a conspiracy theory*? There are yachting rumours about a number of actresses/models. I personally don’t have an issue with the act itself, rather with the coercion/abuse that can occur when it is illegal and pushed underground. It’s a not unknown way for actresses etc to support themselves. I’m not sure why it’s so controversial? I mean from sugar daddies to the casting couch to Middle Eastern sheiks on yachts in Cannes to seeking out wealthy British men via her Soho House connections, it’s all very much on a continuum.



Than I will await your evidence of said behavior from her.
There isn’t any because it never happened.

Meghan may be fake, but there has been no evidence she ever sold her body in such a manner.
If there was: the daily mail would have posted it already!


----------



## doni

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yikes! Another wannabe who thinks so highly of herself just because she married a minor royal. Pathetic! Does sound familiar!


This one actually claims that she is more blue-blooded than the lot of them. The Queen said once that Princess Michael of Kent was “too grand for us”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> This one actually claims that she is more blue-blooded than the lot of them. The Queen said once that Princess Michael of Kent was “too grand for us”


Of course! All narcissists think they are better than anybody!


----------



## mdcx

LaidyM said:


> Than I will await your evidence of said behavior from her.
> There isn’t any because it never happened.
> 
> Meghan may be fake, but there has been no evidence she ever sold her body in such a manner.
> If there was: the daily mail would have posted it already!


Bless your heart.


----------



## Blyen

Lodpah said:


> You want to see what evil looks like: here it is. Her name is MM.



OK, this looks scary lol


----------



## Jktgal

Made my day lol


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jktgal said:


> Made my day lol



Very funny! And I then discovered this account. Some very funny tweets too!


----------



## Lodpah

I wonder what MM was thinking looking at Kate.


----------



## limom

LaidyM said:


> Than I will await your evidence of said behavior from her.
> There isn’t any because it never happened.
> 
> Meghan may be fake, but there has been no evidence she ever sold her body in such a manner.
> If there was: the daily mail would have posted it already!


It stinks of sexism.
We, women are our worst enemies.
That being said:
Happy Mother’s Day to all!


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> I wonder what MM was thinking looking at Kate.
> View attachment 4727282


And look who's face is between Will and Kate, Princess Michael of Kent.
Like I said, front and centre.


----------



## LaidyM

mdcx said:


> Bless your heart.



Right back at you.


----------



## 1LV

limom said:


> It stinks of sexism.
> We, women are our worst enemies.
> That being said:
> Happy Mother’s Day to all!


And happy Mother’s Day to you, limom!


----------



## limom

1LV said:


> And happy Mother’s Day to you, limom!


Thank you


----------



## imgg

Happy Mothers Day!


----------



## mrsinsyder

LaidyM said:


> Than I will await your evidence of said behavior from her.
> There isn’t any because it never happened.
> 
> Meghan may be fake, but there has been no evidence she ever sold her body in such a manner.
> If there was: the daily mail would have posted it already!


There was a tweet dated before Harry from a man who invited her back to yacht week. That’s where the rumor started and I tend to believe she probably was involved in the scene.


----------



## Katel

LaidyM said:


> Than I will await your evidence of said behavior from her.
> There isn’t any because it never happened.
> 
> Meghan may be fake, but there has been no evidence she ever sold her body in such a manner.
> If there was: the daily mail would have posted it already!



but it’s not really one or the other, is it?  lots of things happen that aren’t published, does that makes them all untrue / rumor?

if it’s true, it may come out one day (or not).

I think people comment when there’s smoke ... we look for the fire.

is it fair? no. but sadly neither is this present world.


----------



## Katel

doni said:


> This one actually claims that she is more blue-blooded than the lot of them. The Queen said once that Princess Michael of Kent was “too grand for us”



she sounds horridly repulsive, but help me understand, I thought the brooch was of a royal man, no?



Jktgal said:


> Made my day lol




Hahahaha TU soooo much!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

But most importantly


----------



## LaidyM

mrsinsyder said:


> There was a tweet dated before Harry from a man who invited her back to yacht week. That’s where the rumor started and I tend to believe she probably was involved in the scene.
> 
> View attachment 4727360



I think that was a troll, or just a sleazy guy.
She was never a yacht girl.
Let’s just say I know that for a fact via personal sources.



Katel said:


> but it’s not really one or the other, is it?  lots of things happen that aren’t published, does that makes them all untrue / rumor?
> 
> if it’s true, it may come out one day (or not).
> 
> I think people comment when there’s smoke ... we look for the fire.
> 
> is it fair? no. but sadly neither is this present world.



This is not unfair, this is a disgusting lie continue to be perpetuated for no other reason.
Like I said, there has never even been an actual valid! whispers about her being a yacht girl. So there is not even a smoke! About it.

I tell you 100% if she was a yacht girl I would have known, and trust me this would have been publicized a long time ago! If she was, via mutual connections (or ex connections in her case)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jktgal said:


> Made my day lol




Ok, that’s amazing. That girl just gained a follower.


----------



## bisousx

LaidyM said:


> I think that was a troll, or just a sleazy guy.
> *She was never a yacht girl.
> Let’s just say I know that for a fact via personal sources.*
> 
> 
> 
> This is not unfair, this is a disgusting lie continue to be perpetuated for no other reason.
> Like I said, there has never even been an actual valid! whispers about her being a yacht girl. So there is not even a smoke! About it.
> 
> I tell you 100% if she was a yacht girl I would have known, and trust me this would have been publicized a long time ago! If she was, via mutual connections (or ex connections in her case)



Ah! Sorry if we offended you, Meg


----------



## LaidyM

bisousx said:


> Ah! Sorry if we offended you, Meg



Hey! Watch your mouth! It’s not nice to curse someone.
I literally felt nauseous just thinking about it.
It is really that impossible for you to imagine that someone may dislike someone (because they are truly not a nice person) but still defend their honor against untrue claims? Especially of the sexist misogynistic kind?

We can not allow ourselves to be as bad as her fans, who claim anyone who criticizes her is a damn racist or a troll or is Catherine (yep been accused of that too).
Have a black friend whose been accused of being a white woman, for dating to criticize meg.


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> We have a visual - he's being held in the underground wine cellar. Send the cavalry NOW and bring the antidote. tanned/bruised nose lends air of authenticity, +1. 1/10
> 
> View attachment 4727197



Oh Harry, you are little more than a mindless puppet. I hope Meghan remembers to put sunscreen on you before letting you go out to play in the California sun. Maybe she can tell the nanny to do it after she puts some on Archie.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hi *LaidyM*, will you please explain the last sentence of your post?

Trying to give everyone the benefit of a doubt - Princess Michael & racist jewelry collection, Meghan Markle & yacht-girl rumors - and I concur that no-one should be perpetuating false, damaging stories but at this point, is there not enough smoke to justifiably begin to question if this rumor is truly false?

Never seriously thought about this rumor until today after reading this thread. Of course, Meghan could have been a yacht-girl back in the day, that is one way to pay the bills - I do not know and honestly that is not my problem - that’s her problem bc I certainly would not be sleeping much at night waiting for that unpleasant reality of the past to hit the headlines.

Last but not least:
Happy Mother’s Day to all


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I wonder what MM was thinking looking at Kate.
> View attachment 4727282



That look says so much. Anger, jealousy, and malice come to mind. If Meghan could have willed a lightning bolt to strike in a particular spot at that moment there would no longer be a Kate.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Princess Michael of Kent is not stupid, she wore that brooch on purpose to meet Meghan. She named two black sheep in her state Venus and Serena. Once in a restaurant, when people were talking loudly at a nearby table, she told them to go back to the colonies, etc, etc.
> Now, to conclude from her behavior that the Royal family was racist toward Meghan is absurd. No one  in the Royal Family can stand Princess Michael of Kent. She cannot stand the royals either (she is a second rate royal by marriage). She is not at all popular in the UK. She is irrelevant.
> 
> I’d say that a prince high up in the line of succession who used to dress up as a nazi (the proponents of the Nuremberg race laws) in parties would have been more worrying in that regard.


I know nothing about this woman and she may be racist but I'm not sure I understand why it is racist to name goats after people.  I guess in this case it was looked at as disrespectful, therefore racist?  
and telling loud people to go back to the colonies?  in this example were they black people?
funny, there was a similar scenario on Curb Your Enthusiasm the other night.  Larry David was at an event.  The people at the next table, who were black, were having a good time, loudly.  He asked them to please lower their voices as he couldn't hear the waiter.  they accused him of racism.  They told him "we talk" - meaning the black community.  It was funny.  Larry David is a liberal BTW.

I'm not a racist and don't excuse racism but just don't see these particular examples.
Princess Michael probably knew better than to wear that brooch to meet Meghan and may be racist but if the above is the proof, then I think it's weak.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> There was a tweet dated before Harry from a man who invited her back to yacht week. That’s where the rumor started and I tend to believe she probably was involved in the scene.
> 
> View attachment 4727360


to be fair, I don't see a reply from her


----------



## sdkitty

did anyone watch SNL last night?  Tiny Fey was on.  She made a joke about H&M.  Said a few months ago everyone was obsessed with them and their plans to leave the RF.  Now no one remembers what they look like. Funny.


----------



## LaidyM

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *LaidyM*, will you please explain the last sentence of your post?
> 
> Trying to give everyone the benefit of a doubt - Princess Michael & racist jewelry collection, Meghan Markle & yacht-girl rumors - and I concur that no-one should be perpetuating false, damaging stories but at this point, is there not enough smoke to justifiably begin to question if this rumor is truly false?
> 
> Never seriously thought about this rumor until today after reading this thread. Of course, Meghan could have been a yacht-girl back in the day, that is one way to pay the bills - I do not know and honestly that is not my problem - that’s her problem bc I certainly would not be sleeping much at night waiting for that unpleasant reality of the past to hit the headlines.
> 
> Last but not least:
> Happy Mother’s Day to all



Last sentence from which comment?

The thing is, there is no evidence about Meghan being a yacht girl. Besides a sleazy twitter comment from a guy which catapulted the entire rumor and is being kept alive by the more tin foil side of those who dislike her.


Let’s be honest she had no reason to even go that route, her dad to a degree helped her, and her much wealthier boyfriend (later first husband) would have covered any bills and expenses she may have had. (Though briefcase girls on no deal did make decent money).


And that’s before I go into the fact I know for a fact she was not one thanks to my personal connections.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> ITA, I have a lot of respect for Oprah and think Gayle is often underestimated because of her friendship with O. Gayle had a pretty good career as a broadcast journalist before Oprah gave her a big fame boost. I don’t begrudge her for that... we get our breaks from many things, whether it’s our network, company brand, family, sheer luck, etc. Doesn’t mean the hard work and talent weren’t there to begin with.
> 
> Anyway I definitely don’t agree with either of them on everything but they seem legit. As businesswomen I’m sure part of their thing with Meghan is not entirely social. They’re of course going to be nice to current or potential business collaborators.


Oprah and Gayle were friends from when they first started out in broadcasting.  Gayle was nationally known as being Oprah's BFF for many years before getting her big break.  Once she got her CBS job, she performed well.  Became their "crown jewel" after the interview with R. Kelly.  Oprah may have helped her but Oprah didn't have a direct relationship with CBS so maybe Gayle got the job on her own merits.

As far as Oprah, I'm sure she's not a perfect person but she's smart and has done a lot of good things - that school in Africa for one.

Don't know what their motivation is on H&M - probably ratings.  And maybe sympathetic to M as a WOC.


----------



## momtok

sdkitty said:


> I know nothing about this woman and she may be racist but I'm not sure I understand why it is racist to name goats after people.  I guess in this case it was looked at as disrespectful, therefore racist?



(Hey sdkitty.  Waves.)

Wait a minute ... isn't 'goat' supposed to also mean 'greatest of all time' now?   Turns out that urban dictionary can take things in very interesting directions.  Maybe someone should start re-thinking it. 

And yes, we saw that from Tina Fey last night.  We all laughed out loud.  Then you-tubed some vintage Tina Fey before calling the night quits.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

LaidyM said:


> Last sentence from which comment?
> 
> The thing is, there is no evidence about Meghan being a yacht girl. Besides a sleazy twitter comment from a guy which catapulted the entire rumor and is being kept alive by the more tin foil side of those who dislike her.
> 
> 
> Let’s be honest she had no reason to even go that route, her dad to a degree helped her, and her much wealthier boyfriend (later first husband) would have covered any bills and expenses she may have had. (Though briefcase girls on no deal did make decent money).
> 
> 
> And that’s before I go into the fact I know for a fact she was not one thanks to my personal connections.



*LaidyM*, NM about the explanation, all is good!

Look, I get your point
Just bc SOME novice actresses veer off into temporary yacht girl status before the “big break” does not mean ALL novice actresses do this.

IF Meghan Markle were a yacht girl at anytime in her life I strongly doubt that she would write home to family and friends about it.

So my bottom line, not that anyone would or should care is ~ maybe yes, maybe no.

My opinion is that there is very little that Meghan Markle would not to do to get to where she wants to go. That’s it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *LaidyM*, NM about the explanation, all is good!
> 
> Look, I get your point
> Just bc SOME novice actresses veer off into temporary yacht girl status before the “big break” does not mean ALL novice actresses do this.
> 
> IF Meghan Markle were a yacht girl at anytime in her life I strongly doubt that she would write home to family and friends about it.
> 
> So my bottom line, not that anyone would or should care is ~ maybe yes, maybe no.
> 
> My opinion is that there is very little that Meghan Markle would not to do to get to where she wants to go. That’s it.


and she was so successful at her efforts to get where she wanted to go....and then it wasn't good enough.....too bad - esp for Harry


----------



## LaidyM

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *LaidyM*, NM about the explanation, all is good!
> 
> Look, I get your point
> Just bc SOME novice actresses veer off into temporary yacht girl status before the “big break” does not mean ALL novice actresses do this.
> 
> IF Meghan Markle were a yacht girl at anytime in her life I strongly doubt that she would write home to family and friends about it.
> 
> So my bottom line, not that anyone would or should care is ~ maybe yes, maybe no.
> 
> My opinion is that there is very little that Meghan Markle would not to do to get to where she wants to go. That’s it.




Right.
Except I know for a fact that she wasn’t.

Again if she was, the tabloids would have picked up in that and would have published it because it would have been a major deal!


----------



## threadbender

LaidyM said:


> Right.
> Except I know for a fact that she wasn’t.
> 
> Again if she was, the tabloids would have picked up in that and would have published it because it would have been a major deal!


So, I am guessing you know every single yacht girl or, you know Megs. OK. Regardless, there is not proof either way.  If there was, it would have come out.
MM is ambitious and, seemingly, ruthless. Who is to say what she may have done or not done to achieve her goals. Not sure what those goals really are. lol
Wishing all a Happy Mother's Day.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I know nothing about this woman and she may be racist but I'm not sure I understand why it is racist to name goats after people.  I guess in this case it was looked at as disrespectful, therefore racist?





momtok said:


> (Hey sdkitty.  Waves.)
> 
> Wait a minute ... isn't 'goat' supposed to also mean 'greatest of all time' now?   Turns out that urban dictionary can take things in very interesting directions.  Maybe someone should start re-thinking it.
> .


It was reported Princess Michael named two *black sheep *(not goats, thus not a reference to G.O.A.T.) Venus and Serena. Can't say that's not a just an accident free of racial/racist intentions.


----------



## chicinthecity777

LaidyM said:


> Right.
> Except I know for a fact that she wasn’t.
> 
> Again if she was, the tabloids would have picked up in that and would have published it because it would have been a major deal!


But how can you know that she wasn't? Don't get me wrong, I don't think she was because I think she would think that is beneath her. She wrote in her blog (someone quoted here) that she didn't wait tables as a waiting actress. I would think she wouldn't sell her body either. But you cannot be sure whether she is or isn't unless you were her. You couldn't possibly know her every movement in life. I agree with your conclusion but I don't understand the statements you made about knowing it for a fact.


----------



## chicinthecity777

threadbender said:


> So, I am guessing you know every single yacht girl or, you know Megs. OK. Regardless, there is not proof either way.  If there was, it would have come out.
> MM is ambitious and, seemingly, ruthless. Who is to say what she may have done or not done to achieve her goals. Not sure what those goals really are. lol
> Wishing all a Happy Mother's Day.


Our posts just crossed. We posted the same thing!


----------



## bag-mania

LaidyM said:


> Right.
> Except I know for a fact that she wasn’t.



I think many here are wondering why you are so certain? I understand that you don’t want to say anything that could reveal your identity but can you at least give us a reason for your conviction? As someone said earlier, it is not something she would share with her family or even her closest friends if it were true. Unless someone was constantly with her during those years I don’t see how anyone could state it was an absolute fact. I am skeptical of the yacht rumors myself, but I know people are capable of keeping their secrets from everybody around them.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> It was reported Princess Michael named two *black sheep *(not goats, thus not a reference to G.O.A.T.) Venus and Serena. Can't say that's not a just an accident free of racial/racist intentions.


maybe it's viewed as racist because of who did it.  the act alone wouldn't necessarily be racist to me.  what if I adopted to black cats and named one Kobe and the other after some other black athlete?  would this be racist?  are you saying this was negative because of the black sheep analogy?  black sheep being somehow negative or naughty?


----------



## LaidyM

threadbender said:


> So, I am guessing you know every single yacht girl or, you know Megs. OK. Regardless, there is not proof either way.  If there was, it would have come out.
> MM is ambitious and, seemingly, ruthless. Who is to say what she may have done or not done to achieve her goals. Not sure what those goals really are. lol
> Wishing all a Happy Mother's Day.



Have I ever met her? No.
Do we have mutual connections? We used to. She is no longer in contact with them. If anyone would know it be those people.
But I already mentioned this several comments ago.
This is an answer @chicinthecity777 and @bag-mania  too.
I wish I could give more info, but I trust those people 100%.

Like I said, if meg was working as a yacht girl the media would have found out and posted it. I mean it, that’s the kind of info you can’t really keep hidden and no tabloid would have kept something like this under wraps. Especially given the family she married into.


----------



## sdkitty

LaidyM said:


> Have I ever met her? No.
> Do we have mutual connections? We used to. She is no longer in contact with them. If anyone would know it be those people.
> But I already mentioned this several comments ago.
> This is an answer @chicinthecity777 too.
> 
> Like I said, if meg was working as a yacht girl the media would have found out and posted it. I mean it, that’s the kind of info you can’t really keep hidden and no tabloid would have kept something like this under wraps. Especially given the family she married into.


point taken but that's not really saying you know for a fact


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> point taken but that's not really saying you know for a fact


Exactly!


----------



## momtok

redney said:


> It was reported Princess Michael named two *black sheep *(not goats, thus not a reference to G.O.A.T.) Venus and Serena. Can't say that's not a just an accident free of racial/racist intentions.



Yeah, I remember the news, at least the references back when the brooch incident occurred.    My point was just that the urban dictionary, with all its fun, hip new slang terms of modern culture, etc, inadvertently puts an ironic twist back on the story, when goats/sheep so often get mixed up (as was even done just above).  I just find that amusing.  I'm not an overall fan of modern slang in the first place.

editing because I apparently can't spell.


----------



## CeeJay

LaidyM said:


> Have I ever met her? No.
> *Do we have mutual connections? We used to. She is no longer in contact with them*. If anyone would know it be those people.


Ah, so .. I guess they were "markle'd"???  Sorry, couldn't resist ..


----------



## LaidyM

CeeJay said:


> Ah, so .. I guess they were "markle'd"???  Sorry, couldn't resist ..



Yes. Very much so. Like others, it came as a major surprise to them too.
But before that they were close enough (again these are multiple people, not a single person) to the point that if she was one, they’d know.
That’s all i’m saying.


----------



## CeeJay

LaidyM said:


> Yes. Very much so. Like others, it came as a major surprise to them too.
> But before that they were close enough (again these are multiple people, not a single person) to the point that if she was one, they’d know.
> That’s all i’m saying.


Hmmm .. well, she has certainly left a trail of her "markled" friends, as I know some as well ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## momtok

sdkitty said:


> maybe it's viewed as racist because of who did it.  the act alone wouldn't necessarily be racist to me.  what if I adopted to black cats and named one Kobe and the other after some other black athlete?  would this be racist?  are you saying this was negative because of the black sheep analogy?  black sheep being somehow negative or naughty?



No no, not cats.  Get some goats.  That'll really flummox 'em.


----------



## bisousx

The only way I would make an absolute statement about how someone spent their free time is if I was that person myself. Anything else is just speculation, like what we do on the gossip forums.




Lodpah said:


> You want to see what evil looks like: here it is. Her name is MM.




Are we not going to discuss this creepy mask slip?


----------



## momtok

bisousx said:


> Are we not going to discuss this creepy mask slip?



Wow.  I finally stopped to hit play on the video.  Yikes!  I usually keep this laptop muted, so although the sound is currently off, I can easily imagine some horror movie style hiss coming out of her.  Yikes again!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I have no doubt Meghan faced racism when becoming involved with Harry, but that doesn't mitigate her behavior or his.  Frankly, I mostly lost interest in them when they left the royal family the way they did.  It is unbelievable how disrespectful they've been. They both owe their "celebrity" by way of birth and marriage, not through any remarkable good deeds.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Does anyone honestly believe if Meghan was a prostitute (which is what I understand is being alleged) that would not be news beyond a random (unanswered) tweet and comments in this thread?


----------



## sdkitty

LaidyM said:


> Yes. Very much so. Like others, it came as a major surprise to them too.
> But before that they were close enough (again these are multiple people, not a single person) to the point that if she was one, they’d know.
> That’s all i’m saying.


so maybe they were at the sayorana to zara party where she gave away her old clothes?


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Does anyone honestly believe if Meghan was a prostitute (which is what I understand is being alleged) that would not be news beyond a random (unanswered) tweet and comments in this thread?


Quite a few people on here (myself included) already said they didn't think she was.


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Does anyone honestly believe if Meghan was a prostitute (which is what I understand is being alleged) that would not be news beyond a random (unanswered) tweet and comments in this thread?



Yes - Same reason why it takes decades for a story to come out, ie Prince Andrew or Harvey Weinstein. In those circles, discretion is key. No one is taking selfies with the sheik on the yacht. Yacht girls aren’t going to be quick to out themselves for a quick buck from the media either. I find it believable that Meghan could have been one, not only because she was a no name actress for so long but the countless rumors about her ruthless social climbing and most importantly (to me anyways) her Soho house connections. I actually had a close friend in college who told me about the yacht girl sugarbaby world. This same girl kept dragging me to Soho house in hopes she would find a new sponsor or future husband. By observing her and her other gfs, I learned there was an entire subset of young women whose life mission was to either make some coins this way or brush shoulders with the elite so they could eventually marry well. I don’t know if our Meg would be the transactional type but I have read more than a few coincidental tidbits online to form an opinion


----------



## bag-mania

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Does anyone honestly believe if Meghan was a prostitute (which is what I understand is being alleged) that would not be news beyond a random (unanswered) tweet and comments in this thread?



Realistically, probably not.  Hypothetically, it is certainly possible. I don’t know anything about the yacht girl scene but I get the impression they are high-end call girls. As such I would think business is conducted carefully and discreetly. The wealthy, famous, and likely married men on the yachts do not want to be publicly “outed” as being part of that scene either. I doubt most girls use their real names. They would be paid in cash. They may even alter their hair and appearance while they are working to lessen the chance of being recognized later if that is a concern. That’s something an actress would know how to do. It’s not the type of gig that requires much time. A day, maybe a weekend, here and there then back to the real world. She could easily have kept it secret, particularly if she only did it once or twice.


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Yes - Same reason why it takes decades for a story to come out, ie Prince Andrew or Harvey Weinstein. In those circles, discretion is key. No one is taking selfies with the sheik on the yacht. Yacht girls aren’t going to be quick to out themselves for a quick buck from the media either. I find it believable that Meghan could have been one, not only because she was a no name actress for so long but the countless rumors about her ruthless social climbing and most importantly (to me anyways) her Soho house connections. I actually had a close friend in college who told me about the yacht girl sugarbaby world. This same girl kept dragging me to Soho house in hopes she would find a new sponsor or future husband. By observing her and her other gfs, I learned there was an entire subset of young women whose life mission was to either make some coins this way or brush shoulders with the elite so they could eventually marry well. I don’t know if our Meg would be the transactional type but I have read more than a few coincidental tidbits online to form an opinion


.. and this is why I do question if she could have been a Yacht-girl; let's face it .. she made it pretty well-known that she wanted to find a VERY RICH British husband (and talk about getting the jackpot on that)!!  

Her character (if I can even call it that) is one of not caring a rat's a$$ about anyone but herself, and this has been vetted many times by those that she did "markle".  While, yes .. one of the things that she also wanted was to be a "A-List Actress", she even spoke of the many rejections that she got along the way .. and LA is NOT a cheap place to live!  Granted, her Dad subsidized her $$$ a lot (too much according to my friends that knew them), but from what I understand, he (and Doria) both hit some rough times where they both filed for bankruptcy .. so during that time, could he "fund" Meghan?  If her other 'main' objective was in finding a very wealthy husband, well then .. that is (as you noted) another way that some of these gals do find one.  Heck, I've found out things about people that I thought I "knew"; sometimes .. you never truly know the 'real' person.


----------



## bisousx

CeeJay said:


> .. and this is why I do question if she could have been a Yacht-girl; let's face it .. she made it pretty well-known that she wanted to find a VERY RICH British husband (and talk about getting the jackpot on that)!!
> 
> Her character (if I can even call it that) is one of not caring a rat's a$$ about anyone but herself, and this has been vetted many times by those that she did "markle".  While, yes .. one of the things that she also wanted was to be a "A-List Actress", she even spoke of the many rejections that she got along the way .. and LA is NOT a cheap place to live!  Granted, her Dad subsidized her $$$ a lot (too much according to my friends that knew them), but from what I understand, he (and Doria) both hit some rough times where they both filed for bankruptcy .. so during that time, could he "fund" Meghan?  If her other 'main' objective was in finding a very wealthy husband, well then .. that is (as you noted) another way that some of these gals do find one.  Heck, I've found out things about people that I thought I "knew"; sometimes .. you never truly know the 'real' person.




Yep, that’s it. It’s her character that makes the rumors believable, not to mention the Tom Inskip story is awfully specific.  Anyways, I don’t see Meg as the “pay me now” type, maybe more of a hanger-on type of yacht girl who was invited by her other yacht girl friends to get a foot closer to her goals.


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Yep, that’s it. It’s her character that makes the rumors believable, not to mention the Tom Inskip story is awfully specific.  Anyways, I don’t see Meg as the “pay me now” type, maybe more of a hanger-on type of yacht girl who was invited by her other yacht girl friends to get a foot closer to her goals.


Right .. and that is the wedding where Meghan was invited as Harry's +1 even though they had broken-up beforehand, and we see pictures of the two of them that do not under any circumstances make it look like they were a couple "SO IN LOVE"!  Quite to the contrary ..


----------



## LaidyM

sdkitty said:


> so maybe they were at the sayorana to zara party where she gave away her old clothes?



I never asked about that, doubtful but not impossible, though to my knowledge none of them wear Zara. (No offense to Zara great brand)



CeeJay said:


> .. and this is why I do question if she could have been a Yacht-girl; let's face it .. she made it pretty well-known that she wanted to find a VERY RICH British husband (and talk about getting the jackpot on that)!!
> 
> Her character (if I can even call it that) is one of not caring a rat's a$$ about anyone but herself, and this has been vetted many times by those that she did "markle".  While, yes .. one of the things that she also wanted was to be a "A-List Actress", she even spoke of the many rejections that she got along the way .. and LA is NOT a cheap place to live!  Granted, her Dad subsidized her $$$ a lot (too much according to my friends that knew them), but from what I understand, he (and Doria) both hit some rough times where they both filed for bankruptcy .. so during that time, could he "fund" Meghan?  If her other 'main' objective was in finding a very wealthy husband, well then .. that is (as you noted) another way that some of these gals do find one.  Heck, I've found out things about people that I thought I "knew"; sometimes .. you never truly know the 'real' person.



By the time Doria and Tom hit a rough patch she was already with Trevor.


----------



## CeeJay

LaidyM said:


> I never asked about that, doubtful but not impossible, though to my knowledge none of them wear Zara. (No offense to Zara great brand)
> 
> By the time Doria and Tom hit a rough patch she was already with Trevor.


Ah, okay .. didn't know that, but certainly know the "classic" MM story about how she supremely "markled" her ex-husband!  

To be honest, given how many people she has chewed up and then spit out in her quest (which BTW .. I find the worst deplorable behavior ever!) .. that more haven't come forward stating what she did.  Yes, we all know that her step-sister Samantha has been vocal (and not always in the best way), but I have to say .. not everything she has said has been un-true as we've later seen.


----------



## zen1965

doni said:


> This one actually claims that she is more blue-blooded than the lot of them. The Queen said once that Princess Michael of Kent was “too grand for us”


She was born a baroness to a very old family.
Calling her a wannabe aristo as others did in this thread is simply false. She may be a horrible conceited woman and racist with a fascist father but her aristocratic lineage is not minor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

My opinion of H&M, the most insipid global grifters EVER, could never be any lower than it is right now.

Yes, even the news that Meghan Markle’s past, present or future contains yacht girl status, the bar has sunk so low with this grifter couple already that her reputation could not be further diminished imo.


----------



## lalame

I don't believe she was a "yacht girl" just because that's my default position on anyone, until proven otherwise, but I agree that IF she were it would not necessarily be blown up in the press because of what @bisousx says above... lots of shady stuff happens that don't come out until much later if ever. It's clear the casting couch was a thing, and lots of female celebs have had these types of rumors about them... Kate Upton, Megan Fox, JLaw, etc. I believe it happens, but hard to feel confident about any one accusation without proof.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> maybe it's *viewed as racist because of who did it*.  the act alone wouldn't necessarily be racist to me.  what if I adopted to black cats and named one Kobe and the other after some other black athlete?  would this be racist?  are you saying this was negative because of the black sheep analogy?  black sheep being somehow negative or naughty?


Yes, because of who she is and her being known for previous racist activities.

In your example, could someone think you're racist if you, as a younger American living in Southern California, name a cat, who happens to be black, after a famous black athlete who played his entire 20-year professional career for a Southern California team? Likely not as one might presume you're a fan of the team and its one-time superstar.

In Princess Michael's case, it seems more likely to have racist undertones given her reputation. As an older British aristocratic woman who's known in the UK for her racist and otherwise discriminatory actions would name sheep, particularly black-colored ones, after two young American tennis players, who also happen to be black. Is she a fan of Venus and Serena Williams as professional American tennis stars, or is there more derogatory undertone she put forth? Based on her history, I'd bet the latter.

And the Black Sheep analogy, didn't register with that one but certainly that helps fuel it. Citing Urban Dictionary (as has been for these posts) indicates black sheep as outcasts, or people who don't belong typically in a family.

She's suspect is all I'm saying.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Yes, because of who she is and her being known for previous racist activities.
> 
> In your example, could someone think you're racist if you, as a younger American living in Southern California, name a cat, who happens to be black, after a famous black athlete who played his entire 20-year professional career for a Southern California team? Likely not as one might presume you're a fan of the team and its one-time superstar.
> 
> In Princess Michael's case, it seems more likely to have racist undertones given her reputation. As an older British aristocratic woman who's known in the UK for her racist and otherwise discriminatory actions would name sheep, particularly black-colored ones, after two young American tennis players, who also happen to be black. Is she a fan of Venus and Serena Williams as professional American tennis stars, or is there more derogatory undertone she put forth? Based on her history, I'd bet the latter.
> 
> And the Black Sheep analogy, didn't register with that one but certainly that helps fuel it. Citing Urban Dictionary (as has been for these posts) indicates black sheep as outcasts, or people who don't belong typically in a family.
> 
> She's suspect is all I'm saying.


I suppose that makes sense.  thanks


----------



## scarlet555

Outing anyone as a yacht girl would be outing yourself and the privacy of those yacht owners and their friends.  I don’t see that happening, there is a lot of privacy and cheating going on, so yeah...
Yacht girls, sex workers, as long as the person is not forced into it, and the people doing it don’t have an issue with it, then fine.  It’s been discussed here before regarding M.  As long as she did it voluntarily, as I don’t see her not doing it voluntarily, I don’t see a problem with it.  Whether it’s true or not, she’d deny beyond an actual proof, which there won’t be, I don't think anyone with proof is going to show it, and there is a lot of arrangements so there will not be proofs IMO, for the clients or the girls involved.


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Outing anyone as a yacht girl would be outing yourself and the privacy of those yacht owners and their friends.  I don’t see that happening, there is a lot of privacy and cheating going on, so yeah...
> Yacht girls, sex workers, as long as the person is not forced into it, and the people doing it don’t have an issue with it, then fine.  It’s been discussed here before regarding M.  As long as she did it voluntarily, as I don’t see her not doing it voluntarily, I don’t see a problem with it.  Whether it’s true or not, she’d deny beyond an actual proof, which there won’t be, I don't think anyone with proof is going to show it, and there is a lot of arrangements so there will not be proofs IMO, for the clients or the girls involved.


I don't know whether she did this or not.  And I don't know how it would work.  Would these women be expected to have sex with the men whether they were interested or not?  whether they found the men attractive or not?  then that would be prostitution - not rape or white slavery but sex for money?  if money was involved.
If they were just invited to go and have a good time and not expected to necessarily have sex, then that's fine.


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> I don't know whether she did this or not.  And I don't know how it would work.  Would these women be expected to have sex with the men whether they were interested or not?  whether they found the men attractive or not?  then that would be prostitution - not rape or white slavery but sex for money?  if money was involved.
> If they were just invited to go and have a good time and not expected to necessarily have sex, then that's fine.



From what my former friend told me, there is sometimes a mix of both on the yachts - prostitutes and party girls invited for a good time, in which case maybe there’s sex maybe not


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun  Well said.
IMO, their brand has lost considerable value and will continue to until they give up those titles. Absolutely zero respect for them.  Their current pandemic videos are cringeworthy, amateurish nonsense,  lacking style and substance. They want out?  Then, go. 

 I still wonder why O and Tyler would want to help these 2. They must know that these 2 have plenty of people willing to help them (I.e., the whole BRF for one). Also, most importantly, there are many others who need assistance so much more than these 2. Why support grifters?  It is seemingly out of character for them to involve themselves in this way. Who else have they done this much for? The whole thing is just odd.   Elton is understandable. O and Tyler?  Hmmm. 

@bisousx   Well said.
Of course she hung with the YG types and grabbed what she could — free travels, jobs, etc. That is why her video of her driving through BH is cringeworthy. On her blog, she wrote about that audition life. She used people all along the trail. All of this is well documented. Just google it.  MM met Trevor in 2004, parents divorced in ‘87 or ‘88 [interesting those details are vague]. 

@scarlet555  Exactly.  As long it’s all consensual, who cares?  It isn’t an issue until MM begins her lecturing. If she owned up to this behavior and explained this was how she advanced her career, fine. Women like this who claim they did it all on their own are full of %^&. She had connections, sacrificed her scruples, and now wants to tell the rest of us how to live??? No. Just no.  It’s kind of like having a member of the BRF tell us how to live our lives — they never worry about food, paying the bills, clothes, housing, education, travel, etc.   Oh,  wait, we have that with H.  They are way too full of themselves. 

Wishing all a very Happy Mother’s Day. 
Thank you for letting me share my thoughts. Cheers!


----------



## mrsinsyder

LaidyM said:


> And that’s before I go into the fact I know for a fact she was not one thanks to my personal connections.


 Oh okay then, case closed


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> From what my former friend told me, there is sometimes a mix of both on the yachts - prostitutes and party girls invited for a good time, in which case maybe there’s sex maybe not


I don't have a problem with the party girl thing.  prostitution wouldn't reflect well on a now-famous actress IMO


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

My my how I am waiting for this game to play out! 

MM clearly did not want to dance to the song played by the BRF - is she so naive to believe that every single thing that they are given “freely” by their new-ish celeb friends is without cost?

Get ready to face the music eventually, H&M. 
You are simply pawns in someone else’s game now. 

There is a universal rule that every C-level executive knows and remembers, do not take unless you are prepared to give in return. 

Very simple.


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> I don't have a problem with the party girl thing.  prostitution wouldn't reflect well on a now-famous actress IMO



I don’t think people can tell them apart and sometimes....not even themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> My my how I am waiting for this game to play out!
> 
> MM clearly did not want to dance to the song played by the BRF - is she so naive to believe that every single thing that they are given “freely” by their new-ish celeb friends is without cost?
> 
> Get ready to face the music eventually, H&M.
> You are simply pawns in someone else’s game now.
> 
> There is a universal rule that every C-level executive knows and remembers, do not take unless you are prepared to give in return.
> 
> Very simple.


I doubt she is very realistic.  I think she has bought her own legend. We'll see how it plays out.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh okay then, case closed



I am always taken by laughter by people on gossip forums who say they know ‘for a fact.’


----------



## lalame

To be fair to that poster, several people here have said something to the effect of they know someone who knows/knew M and knows XYZ for a fact. Who really knows...  I appreciate that they're willing to share and they may even be right, but you gotta take any anonymous claims with a grain of salt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

scarlet555 said:


> I am always taken by laughter by people on gossip forums who say they know ‘for a fact.’


Right, it’s literally no different than me saying “I know for a fact she was a yacht girl.”


----------



## Frivole88




----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> To be fair to that poster, several people here have said something to the effect of they know someone who knows/knew M and knows XYZ for a fact. Who really knows...  I appreciate that they're willing to share and they may even be right, but you gotta take any anonymous claims with a grain of salt.



Did not now someone on here posted they knew she was for a fact a yacht girl.  I thought it was all speculation the yacht girl lifestyle.


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Did not now someone on here posted they knew she was for a fact a yacht girl.  I thought it was all speculation the yacht girl lifestyle.


someone posted they knew for a fact that she was not a yacht girl


----------



## sdkitty

kristinlorraine said:


> View attachment 4727715


really?
guess they have plenty of dough
If I were Charles and learned of this, I'd cut them off.  But then again H is his beloved son.......uugh


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Did not now someone on here posted they knew she was for a fact a yacht girl.  I thought it was all speculation the yacht girl lifestyle.



I was thinking of other tidbits when I wrote that (not as controversial as the yacht girl thing though).


----------



## lalame

kristinlorraine said:


> View attachment 4727715


Why do they need that? Is this just H being used to having 894753 servants around him at every house? They're a family of 3 living in a rented house (no maintenance on them), and they're probably only living in a small section of it...


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Why do they need that? Is this just H being used to having 894753 servants around him at every house? They're a family of 3 living in a rented house (no maintenance on them), and they're probably only living in a small section of it...


they are The Duke and Duchess...don't you understand?  they are very important people.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> they are The Duke and Duchess...don't you understand?  they are very important people.



My bad, and here I thought VIP had their own houses.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> Why do they need that? Is this just H being used to having 894753 servants around him at every house? They're a family of 3 living in a rented house (no maintenance on them), and they're probably only living in a small section of it...



*lalame*, so ridiculous for H&M to be over the top pretentious ~  planting this story in the Daily Mail or any other news outlet about their expensive staff when half the entire world is right now either strapped for cash, unemployed, over-worked, and/or sick.

Am just hoping that the new expensive hire is granny’s spy in LA, lol.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lalame said:


> To be fair to that poster, several people here have said something to the effect of they know someone who knows/knew M and knows XYZ for a fact. Who really knows...  I appreciate that they're willing to share and they may even be right, but you gotta take any anonymous claims with a grain of salt.


Someone also swore they knew for sure (but couldn’t say how) that they’re not living in Tyler Perry’s house.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone also swore they knew for sure (but couldn’t say how) that they’re not living in Tyler Perry’s house.


yes, I think someone did say that.....but I'd bet they haven't bought a house....they are either being guests or renting


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> maybe it's viewed as racist because of who did it.  the act alone wouldn't necessarily be racist to me.  what if I adopted to black cats and named one Kobe and the other after some other black athlete?  would this be racist?  are you saying this was negative because of the black sheep analogy?  black sheep being somehow negative or naughty?




I think the reason that it is easy to question the motives of Princess Michael is because she repeatedly crosses the line and basically challenges people to call her out on it.  Black sheep have their arguably bad reputation because of their behavior -- like the black sheep in the family.  I am sure that she knew this and yet decided to name her sheep on the basis of their skin color.  It may well have gone past without comment except that she keeps doing it.  I am a Yank and not particularly interested in the BRF, but every time I recall hearing Princess Michael's name it is because she has done something with a racist tint and in bad taste at best.  She sounds to me like a b**&ch.


----------



## bag-mania

Hey, did I miss a sugary Mother’s Day message from them today? Dare I hope they finally understand that it’s fine to keep to themselves and we aren’t all waiting with bated breath to hear from them.


----------



## Lodpah

Hardcore Stans can spin all they want but this picture of Harry cries despair. For the first time really I'm concerned about his mental health I pray that he gets help. You don't need to be a psychologist or psychiatrist to know that something is wrong with his psych.  He looks like he's in deep pain (emotionally).  You don't go on camera for the whole world to see to look like this.  He's probably crying out for help (and people who really know him will understand). I wish his ex-girlfriends or friends or even his father would say something unless Prince Charles is paying to keep him quiet.  If this was my son, I'd be on the first plane to check on him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> to be fair, I don't see a reply from her


I don't think she would reply as it was on public feed.  Heck, she probably cringed. Invitation through private email she might or might not respond.


----------



## Lodpah

Now before anyone says it's the National Inquirer.  Keep in mind that lots of First Amendment attorneys know that tabloids as these do not lose their cases in court easily.  Actually I was told by one attorney they tend to break things first.  

https://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/meghan-markle-prince-harry-fiance-past/


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Luvbolide said:


> I think the reason that it is easy to question the motives of Princess Michael is because she repeatedly crosses the line and basically challenges people to call her out on it.  Black sheep have their arguably bad reputation because of their behavior -- like the black sheep in the family.  I am sure that she knew this and yet decided to name her sheep on the basis of their skin color.  It may well have gone past without comment except that she keeps doing it.  I am a Yank and not particularly interested in the BRF, but every time I recall hearing Princess Michael's name it is because she has done something with a racist tint and in bad taste at best.  She sounds to me like a b**&ch.



Off topic, apologies 
Yes, I concur, over the past 40+ years, living both in the US and internationally, I have heard nothing redeeming about Princess Michael of Kent. Unfortunately.

Maybe a relic from a bygone era?


----------



## mdcx

Regards yacht girls and secrecy - my understanding is that the clients rather prefer to pick "names" and those who appear on popular tv shows or show up in the gossip columns often or have big insta accounts or are well-known models etc may find themselves the most popular girls in the catalogue.
Like I've said, what actual acts transpire is up to the girls themselves and the amount of money on the table, but the bottom line is they are paid to show up and be sexy/hot/pretty and agreeable. If they want to portray it as being "invited to holiday with a wealthy friend from the Middle East", or "working for a super yacht owner," so be it.

H does look bad, and once M has secured her next Mark I'm sure he will be shipped back to the UK.


----------



## mdcx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Off topic, apologies
> Yes, I concur, over the past 40+ years, living both in the US and internationally, I have heard nothing redeeming about Princess Michael of Kent. Unfortunately.
> 
> Maybe a relic from a bygone era?


Princess Michael has been known as a terrible snob/racist forever. The same was also said of Prince Phillip.


----------



## Annawakes

But Why do they need to hire someone to run their lives in LA?????  Like order groceries and dry cleaning stuff? So the security detail doesn’t have to do it?  How much are they paying her???  Who is paying???

So many questions!!!!!


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> Now before anyone says it's the National Inquirer.  Keep in mind that lots of First Amendment attorneys know that tabloids as these do not lose their cases in court easily.  Actually I was told by one attorney they tend to break things first.
> 
> https://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/meghan-markle-prince-harry-fiance-past/



Not surprised


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> Now before anyone says it's the National Inquirer.  Keep in mind that lots of First Amendment attorneys know that tabloids as these do not lose their cases in court easily.  Actually I was told by one attorney they tend to break things first.
> 
> https://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/meghan-markle-prince-harry-fiance-past/



Umm not that I doubt the article but... _where_ is the article? That link just led me to 2 sentences and no further detail. What am I missing?


----------



## LaidyM

mrsinsyder said:


> Oh okay then, case closed



It is in my book.
Meghan was never a yacht girl.


----------



## Clearblueskies




----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> I know nothing about this woman and she may be racist but I'm not sure I understand why it is racist to name goats after people.  I guess in this case it was looked at as disrespectful, therefore racist?
> and telling loud people to go back to the colonies?  in this example were they black people?
> funny, there was a similar scenario on Curb Your Enthusiasm the other night.  Larry David was at an event.  The people at the next table, who were black, were having a good time, loudly.  He asked them to please lower their voices as he couldn't hear the waiter.  they accused him of racism.  They told him "we talk" - meaning the black community.  It was funny.  Larry David is a liberal BTW.
> I'm not a racist and don't excuse racism but just don't see these particular examples.
> Princess Michael probably knew better than to wear that brooch to meet Meghan and may be racist but if the above is the proof, then I think it's weak.



Well, I thought the story made evident that she did not ask a bunch of blond haired Germans to go back to the colonies. In any event, I checked and it was a group of African American lawyers at a New York restaurant. In all fairness, she denied having said that. Instead, she said she told them they should remember the colonies and how then, there were rules that had to be followed (not sure how she thought that made it any better, but there you go).
When Harry was criticized for dressing as a nazi, she said she felt sorry for him and suggested that all the fuss was due to British media being dominated by the Jewish.
Once she commented that Brits are more careful about dogs pedigrees and making sure a Labrador’s blood doesn’t mix than about whom they mixed with in marriage.
But okay, it is true, I do not know her. Still, my strong feeling is that she knew perfectly well what she was doing when she chose that brooch to go meet Meghan.


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> Well, I thought the story made evident that she did not ask a bunch of blond haired Germans to go back to the colonies. In any event, I checked and it was a group of African American lawyers at a New York restaurant. In all fairness, she denied having said that. Instead, she said she told them they should remember the colonies and how then, there were rules that had to be followed (not sure how she thought that made it any better, but there you go).
> When Harry was criticized for dressing as a nazi, she said she felt sorry for him and suggested that all the fuss was due to British media being dominated by the Jewish.
> Once she commented that Brits are more careful about dogs pedigrees and making sure a Labrador’s blood doesn’t mix than about whom they mixed with in marriage.
> But okay, it is true, I do not know her. Still, my strong feeling is that she knew perfectly well what she was doing when she chose that brooch to go meet Meghan.


This woman sounds a racist all right, no doubt about it. If there were people in the restaurant being loud, you would just politely tell them to turn it down without having to mention anything to do with any colony, full stop! The fact that she said it says it all really. And I don't give a rat's ass about what family she was born from, especially that family had strong Nazi ties. Quite frankly I would be hiding that family name if it was me! And she is not our Queen but she wanted to out do our Queen in front of cameras then she is a very sad and pathetic wannabe in my book! She's another irrelevant f*ckwit our country's royal family member choose to marry!


----------



## CarryOn2020

*TOP CHOICES FOR PERMANENT L.A. HOME
‘Cause You Can Only Stay At Tyler's For So Long!!!*
Yippeeee! A win for Tyler’s neighbors! Get rid of the grifters.
Most likely, this is fake news because , if someone wants privacy, Why would they tell us where they’re looking?  
https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/11/prince-harry-meghan-markle-los-angeles-home-real-estate-options/


----------



## CarryOn2020

DP


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> *TOP CHOICES FOR PERMANENT L.A. HOME
> ‘Cause You Can Only Stay At Tyler's For So Long!!!*
> Yippeeee! A win for Tyler’s neighbors! Get rid of the grifters.
> Most likely, this is fake news because , if someone wants privacy, Why would they tell us where they’re looking?
> https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/11/prince-harry-meghan-markle-los-angeles-home-real-estate-options/




Couldn’t help but notice that all of the listings belong to the same company.  Sounds like they may be responsible for giving the info to TMZ.  Or am I just being cynical...again...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

chicinthecity777 said:


> This woman sounds a racist all right, no doubt about it. If there were people in the restaurant being loud, you would just politely tell them to turn it down without having to mention anything to do with any colony, full stop! The fact that she said it says it all really. And I don't give a rat's ass about what family she was born from, especially that family had strong Nazi ties. Quite frankly I would be hiding that family name if it was me! And she is not our Queen but she wanted to out do our Queen in front of cameras then she is a very sad and pathetic wannabe in my book! She's another irrelevant f*ckwit our country's royal family member choose to marry!


She might well be racist but she is certainly classist. White Australian born people are often referred to as coming from ‘the colonies’ in discussion with even very ordinary classes of British people (sometimes in jest but often not) and I could very easily imagine a bunch of rowdy white Aussies being told to ‘go back to the colonies’.


----------



## chicinthecity777

floatinglili said:


> She might well be racist but she is certainly classist. White Australian born people are often referred to as coming from ‘the colonies’ in discussion with even very ordinary classes of British people (sometimes in jest but often not) and I could very easily imagine a bunch of rowdy white Aussies being told to ‘go back to the colonies’.


So do you know this is the case? It just happens that she was referring to a group of white Aussies in a NY restaurant. TBH, even so, I still think her remark was racially intended.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Never mind.


----------



## chicinthecity777

@Sharont2305 sorry I decided to remove my comment. I can't be bothered.


----------



## chicinthecity777

floatinglili said:


> She might well be racist but she is certainly classist. White Australian born people are often referred to as coming from ‘the colonies’ in discussion with even very ordinary classes of British people (sometimes in jest but often not) and I could very easily imagine a bunch of rowdy white Aussies being told to ‘go back to the colonies’.


I just read back doni's post stating the reported incident at the restaurant was directed at African Americans. So I do believe she is a racist.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> But Why do they need to hire someone to run their lives in LA?????  Like order groceries and dry cleaning stuff? So the security detail doesn’t have to do it?  How much are they paying her???  *Who is paying???*
> 
> So many questions!!!!!



Daddy, who else?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

It's amazing how many posts are needed to debate whether someone is racist, despite multiple stories and sources, yet there is almost immediate unanimous agreement about a yacht girl notion with no credible evidence.


----------



## papertiger

'Yacht girls (or boys)' and 'party girls/boys' are more to provide pretty decor, laughter and non-judgemental companionship for taking drugs and putting up with ridiculous behaviour that others (normal) people may be offended by. Sometimes there are call girls too but that's not the deal (unless it is). They also go hopeful that they'll be noticed by someone who can offer them a nice life in a more full-time way. It is usually of mutual benefit to all parties to keep everything off-record and forgotten. 

BTW, if people want to keep real sh*t out of the papers it's not that hard. It's just another deal with their manager/PR company and a different story is given. Journalism is often just business/clicks, doesn't have much to do with the truth. 

This is another reason why I think that M has gone after AP big time now. It's not about the letter. It's a warning shot across the bows.


----------



## marietouchet

I keep thinking that our perceptions - good, bad or indifferent - of the H&M saga are highly affected by current events


----------



## lulilu

Luvbolide said:


> Couldn’t help but notice that all of the listings belong to the same company.  Sounds like they may be responsible for giving the info to TMZ.  Or am I just being cynical...again...



Clearly some kind of connection.  The real estate company involved is owned by the DH of one of the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills and often uses that connection for publicity.  Plus, some of the realtors named are on a show called Million Dollar Listings Los Angeles.

For what it's worth, IMHO, those were some OTT, garish homes.  And while all that glass and doors that slide into the walls to open up the house to the outdoors may provide beautiful views, it also opens the residents to being viewed themselves.  You could see plenty of houses from some of them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Possible the TMZ article is designed to throw people off their trail and to slow the neighbors’ complaints. Who knows what the truth is. They are now the punch line for SNL’s pandemic shows. Can they sink much lower?

https://hollywoodlife.com/2020/05/10/snl-tina-fey-weekend-update-mothers-day-tribute-video/
Tina Fey:  
“_It’s okay to try and find moments of levity and joy. Now when the news is too much and I like to laugh about three months ago when everyone was so worried about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry,” she quipped. “Oh my god, you’re free guys — no one cares who pays for your Vancouver security detail!” she went on, admitting that she couldn’t even “remember what they look like._” Ouch!


----------



## floatinglili

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with your point, BUT I still think these brooches should be cherished in a showcase, not worn out anymore. I would take no issue with someone collecting them for the cultural background, I'd still sideeye anyone who pins one to their chest and parades it around.


I respectfully appreciate your point and I’m not sure I would wear them as a regular jewellery thing either  - all sculptural representation of human figures seems to have gone out of fashion, for a variety of reasons. Just too damn tricky. 
Art is about the generating a range of responses and ideas within a single viewer, and those ideas tend towards the intensely personal. 
What I hate about ‘cancel culture’ is that it totally disregards the intrinsically individualised and very personal enjoyment of art and replaces it with a generalised political response which is received from on high.
By refusing to acknowledge the true and intimate process of art appreciation, and the personal humanity of the viewer, ‘cancel culture’  reduces art to the level of mere political propaganda, and the artist is reduced to political propagandist.
Anyway, thank you for your thoughtful comment.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> Well, I thought the story made evident that she did not ask a bunch of blond haired Germans to go back to the colonies. In any event, I checked and it was a group of African American lawyers at a New York restaurant. In all fairness, she denied having said that. Instead, she said she told them they should remember the colonies and how then, there were rules that had to be followed (not sure how she thought that made it any better, but there you go).
> When Harry was criticized for dressing as a nazi, she said she felt sorry for him and suggested that all the fuss was due to British media being dominated by the Jewish.
> Once she commented that Brits are more careful about dogs pedigrees and making sure a Labrador’s blood doesn’t mix than about whom they mixed with in marriage.
> But okay, it is true, I do not know her. Still, my strong feeling is that she knew perfectly well what she was doing when she chose that brooch to go meet Meghan.


point taken
she is a racist and a right wing wacko/anti semite


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lodpah said:


> Hardcore Stans can spin all they want but this picture of Harry cries despair. For the first time really I'm concerned about his mental health I pray that he gets help. You don't need to be a psychologist or psychiatrist to know that something is wrong with his psych.  He looks like he's in deep pain (emotionally).  You don't go on camera for the whole world to see to look like this.  He's probably crying out for help (and people who really know him will understand). I wish his ex-girlfriends or friends or even his father would say something unless Prince Charles is paying to keep him quiet.  If this was my son, I'd be on the first plane to check on him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4727785


He looks awful here. Far from princely.


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> Clearly some kind of connection.  The real estate company involved is owned by the DH of one of the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills and often uses that connection for publicity.  Plus, some of the realtors named are on a show called Million Dollar Listings Los Angeles.
> 
> For what it's worth, IMHO, those were some OTT, garish homes.  And while all that glass and doors that slide into the walls to open up the house to the outdoors may provide beautiful views, it also opens the residents to being viewed themselves.  You could see plenty of houses from some of them.


For sure .. it's Mauricio Umansky (Kyle - RHoBH's husband) and his firm "The Agency"!  Hmmm .. wonder if they are trying to broker some deal to get H&M on the "Million Dollar Listing LA" series (nothing would surprise me anymore)!  In regards to the "architecture" (or LACK THEREOF) .. welcome to Los Angeles!  One of the reasons why I love Josh Flagg on the Million Dollar Listing - LA show, is because he knows and appreciates the HISTORY of some of the houses that he is selling, and oftentimes really does not want to sell to a developer because he knows full well that they are going to turn out yet another F-UGLY as the ones pictured.  It breaks my heart to see some truly beautiful homes being torn down just to build these non-descript, boxes of concrete .. and excellent point about everyone else getting to 'see your business'!  We went to an estate sale in the Pacific Palisades; the house was amazing with a gorgeous view of Santa Monica and the Pacific Ocean .. IN ADDITION .. to plenty of other houses to look in to!  Uh, no thanks ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> For sure .. it's Mauricio Umansky (Kyle - RHoBH's husband) and his firm "The Agency"!  Hmmm .. wonder if they are trying to broker some deal to get H&M on the "Million Dollar Listing LA" series (nothing would surprise me anymore)!  In regards to the "architecture" (or LACK THEREOF) .. welcome to Los Angeles!  One of the reasons why I love Josh Flagg on the Million Dollar Listing - LA show, is because he knows and appreciates the HISTORY of some of the houses that he is selling, and oftentimes really does not want to sell to a developer because he knows full well that they are going to turn out yet another F-UGLY as the ones pictured.  It breaks my heart to see some truly beautiful homes being torn down just to build these non-descript, boxes of concrete .. and excellent point about everyone else getting to 'see your business'!  We went to an estate sale in the Pacific Palisades; the house was amazing with a gorgeous view of Santa Monica and the Pacific Ocean .. IN ADDITION .. to plenty of other houses to look in to!  Uh, no thanks ...


It’s funny you mention MM/H/Million Dollar Listing because I had the same thought when I read they were moving to LA!  Great minds and all that, right?


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

mrsinsyder said:


> Someone also swore they knew for sure (but couldn’t say how) that they’re not living in Tyler Perry’s house.




That someone was me - lol! They are living in the home of Gerard Guez and Jacqueline Rose.


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> It’s funny you mention MM/H/Million Dollar Listing because I had the same thought when I read they were moving to LA!  Great minds and all that, right?


Well, it could be their "toe in the pond" .. testing out the waters, per se - right?  As much as MM 'thinks' she is deserved of an A-List acting gig (  ), why do I see her being on the RHofBH down the road???  Her pedigree is likely about the same as Luann on RHofNYC, right???


----------



## kipp

ilovehoneybleu said:


> That someone was me - lol! They are living in the home of Gerard Guez and Jacqueline Rose.


Pardon my ignorance, but who are these people?


----------



## chicinthecity777

The TMZ article is just soft advertisement piggyback onto the H & M gravy train. There is no substance to that they were looking at any of those properties.


----------



## chicinthecity777

kipp said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but who are these people?


I had to Google them. The guy is in Fashion and entertainment.


----------



## lalame

ilovehoneybleu said:


> That someone was me - lol! They are living in the home of Gerard Guez and Jacqueline Rose.



Wait, what? Lol you went from mum's the word to listing actual names!  You came around.


----------



## lalame

Wasn't a greedy realtor also behind the whole Mel Gibson house rumor because he was trying to sell it? Wouldn't be surprised if other realtors are behind this... pretty brilliant PR strategy really, especially in these times when fewer people may be on the market!


----------



## mrsinsyder

ilovehoneybleu said:


> That someone was me - lol! They are living in the home of Gerard Guez and Jacqueline Rose.


----------



## zen1965

mdcx said:


> Princess Michael has been known as a terrible snob/racist forever. The same was also said of Prince Phillip.


Truth dat.
And many more in their circles who just happen to  hide it better in public.


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> Wasn't a greedy realtor also behind the whole Mel Gibson house rumor because he was trying to sell it? Wouldn't be surprised if other realtors are behind this... pretty brilliant PR strategy really, especially in these times when fewer people may be on the market!



Yes, and Kyle, Mauricio's wife, has been suspected of leaking to press like TMZ, so a cozy relationship would not surprise me.  His company, The Agency, has been sued and gotten other bad press in the past year or so for shady dealings, so doing some kind of deal with TMZ for free advertising pales in comparison.


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

lalame said:


> Wait, what? Lol you went from mum's the word to listing actual names!  You came around.



Having a bad day and spilling the beans just made it a little better.


----------



## lalame

ilovehoneybleu said:


> Having a bad day and spilling the beans just made it a little better.


----------



## lalame

A few of you guys asked why any celebs would want to host M+H rent-free since they already have a lot of family money. I totally got Downton Abbey deja vu. It's probably a status thing to be able to say "the Duke and Duchess stayed here when they were moving to the US"... even though we don't think much of them, there's some bragging rights to saying 1. you're close to important/infamous people 2. you were a part of this historical moment, 3. you had a front row seat to some major global drama.


----------



## CarryOn2020

zen1965 said:


> Truth dat.
> And many more in their circles who just happen to  hide it better in public.



Yes, many more. Most of it has been exposed. There is a video of the young QE and her sister giving the Nazi salute. Churchill had a difficult time convincing the BRF of Hitler’s dangers.  The thing about H’s shirt incident — while an apology was issued, it didn’t seem very genuine.  Wonder if he has been asked about it in a recent nterview?
The scandal came just two weeks before the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/world/europe/prince-harry-apologizes-for-nazi-costume.html
_In the statement, Harry said he was "very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone."
"It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize," he added.Harry, who plans to enroll this year at a military college, has long been known as the wilder of Charles and Diana's two handsome sons, in contrast to his university-student brother Prince William, 22._
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326
For the Vegas party, he said: "At the end of the day I probably let myself down, I let my family down, I let other people down. But it was probably a classic example of me probably being too much army, and not enough prince. It’s a simple case of that."

The guy is just not that likable, mostly because of his entitled attitude. IMO, of course.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

ilovehoneybleu said:


> That someone was me - lol! They are living in the home of Gerard Guez and Jacqueline Rose.



So basically the Tyler Perry story is another made-up PR story to make them look like they're best buddies with Oprah? And shared with the Daily Mail to mask the fact that they're spreading it, because supposedly they don't talk to the DM?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, many more. Most of it has been exposed. There is a video of the young QE and her sister giving the Nazi salute. Churchill had a difficult time convincing the BRF of Hitler’s dangers.  The thing about H’s shirt incident — while an apology was issued, it didn’t seem very genuine.  Wonder if he has been asked about it in a recent nterview?
> The scandal came just two weeks before the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/world/europe/prince-harry-apologizes-for-nazi-costume.html
> _In the statement, Harry said he was "very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone."
> "It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize," he added.Harry, who plans to enroll this year at a military college, has long been known as the wilder of Charles and Diana's two handsome sons, in contrast to his university-student brother Prince William, 22._
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326
> For the Vegas party, he said: "At the end of the day I probably let myself down, I let my family down, I let other people down. But it was probably a classic example of me probably being too much army, and not enough prince. It’s a simple case of that."
> 
> The guy is just not that likable, mostly because of his entitled attitude. IMO, of course.


and now he wants to be a liberal.....because of M?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and now he wants to be a liberal.....because of M?



He does as he’s told. I don’t believe anything he has done since the marriage has been initiated by him. He seems happy enough to go along with it however.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He does as he’s told. I don’t believe anything he has done since the marriage has been initiated by him. He seems happy enough to go along with it however.


yes....makes him appear weak and not smart.....the one good thing I can say is I'm glad she got him to stop hunting


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's amazing how many posts are needed to debate whether someone is racist, despite multiple stories and sources, yet there is almost immediate unanimous agreement about a yacht girl notion with no credible evidence.



*OriginalBalanciaga*, the optics here tell a different story to me ~
Did not ascertain the unanimous agreement on this thread that Meghan Markle was a yacht girl. Yes, there has been an on-going discussion about it but I read between the lines that all members here were not totally convinced about the veracity of these statements.

Also, the debate about Princess Michael being a racist on this thread recently, which is probably limited to not more than a handful of comments and of which I was a participant, is almost ridiculous speculation.

The press has quoted her many times over the years and anyone with a few minutes can certainly read all about Princess Michael and come to their own conclusions.

Her racist opinions were probably conceived and firmly cemented by her generation’s collective consciousness, have witnessed this in many of my family’s oldest relatives who lived until their 80’s and 90’s.

Not saying it’s right in today’s heated and politically-charged environment. That generation’s views of race are not woke and it is embarrassing if they are family members but people are entitled live, breathe and yes, have their own opinions without being bullied at this late stage in their lives.

Know that I’m going to receive a mountain of push-back. Just to be clear - NOT giving a pass to all 80 - 90-year-old racist white princesses, just sayin’ let’s stick with the two grifters.
Back on topic and let’s move on.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> A few of you guys asked why any celebs would want to host M+H rent-free since they already have a lot of family money. I totally got Downton Abbey deja vu. It's probably a *status* *thing* to be able to say "the Duke and Duchess stayed here when they were moving to the US"... even though we don't think much of them, there's some bragging rights to saying 1. you're close to important/infamous people 2. you were a part of this historical moment, 3. you had a front row seat to some major global drama.



*lalame*, THIS. you nailed it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes....makes him appear weak and not smart.....the one good thing I can say is I'm glad she got him to stop hunting



As an animal lover I agree with you, I’m thrilled he has stopped hunting. However, Harry enjoyed hunting. Did he give it up because he genuinely decided killing for sport was wrong or did he give it up because Meghan told him to? Harry has taken the saying “happy wife, happy life” to the extreme. In his case I don’t believe Meghan is capable of being happy for long. She’s always reaching for more. Nothing he says or does is going to be enough.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> As an animal lover I agree with you, I’m thrilled he has stopped hunting. However, Harry enjoyed hunting. Did he give it up because he genuinely decided killing for sport was wrong or did he give it up because Meghan told him to? Harry has taken the saying “happy wife, happy life” to the extreme. In his case I don’t believe Meghan is capable of being happy for long. She’s always reaching for more. Nothing he says or does is going to be enough.


I agree.  But for this particular thing, I'm happy he stopped watever the reason.  I just don't get hunting.  Unless you are truly dependent on animals for food.  And big game hunting is the worst.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I agree.  But for this particular thing, I'm happy he stopped watever the reason.  I just don't get hunting.  Unless you are truly dependent on animals for food.  And big game hunting is the worst.



TBH I'm surprised a bigger deal wasn't made about this as he's so preachy about environmental and humanitarian causes. I didn't even realize until recently that he did big game hunting, and I saw a photo randomly on a DM article. The incongruity of that.....


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> TBH I'm surprised a bigger deal wasn't made about this as he's so preachy about environmental and humanitarian causes. I didn't even realize until recently that he did big game hunting, and I saw a photo randomly on a DM article. The incongruity of that.....


well, I guess he's been woke since then


----------



## CeeJay

Uggh .. we all knew this was a matter of time, but WHY???  I never watch Lifetime anyhow, but seriously???? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-movie-Megxit.html


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. we all knew this was a matter of time, but WHY???  I never watch Lifetime anyhow, but seriously????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-movie-Megxit.html


cheesy
at least they won't profit from this


----------



## V0N1B2

tiktok said:


> So basically the Tyler Perry story is another made-up PR story to make them look like they're best buddies with Oprah? And shared with the Daily Mail to mask the fact that they're spreading it, because supposedly they don't talk to the DM?


No, I think they probably _were_ at Tyler Perry's place, but they may have already moved on. It seemed like it took (the press?) quite some time to learn that they were staying on Vancouver Island, and when Harry-with-the-nice-jeans was posting his hostage videos from the broom closet, it was discovered that they had already moved to LA. They can be stealthy when they need to be, like when they were in BC and everyone suspected they were in Toronto.  I thought I remembered reading here (or elsewhere?) that the compound on Vancouver Island already had the security fencing and tarps removed when they were doing the MEGHAN&h Farewell Tour 2020 in early March.  I assumed they had already left for California but apparently it was March 24th when they were whisked away, under the cover of darkness, pith helmet between their legs, champagne glass in hand, in a black-ops covert secret mission flight to California.


----------



## Lodpah

Do you guys think that maybe MM has schemed to stay in houses for free until the year is up so that she can leverage a return to GB if things don’t work out? Maybe that’s her plan after all cause I don’t see why finding a house is so difficult with PC financing their lifestyle.


----------



## CeeJay

It could be very well that Tyler wanted his property to get into the news as he is trying to sell it.  I find it hilarious that the neighbors have been putting up a stink about H&M being in "their" environs, but am I surprised?? .. HECK NO!  While H&M may 'think' they are "powerful" and "influential" people, when it comes down to it .. and around here?? .. NOPE!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Do you guys think that maybe MM has schemed to stay in houses for free until the year is up so that she can leverage a return to GB if things don’t work out? Maybe that’s her plan after all cause I don’t see why finding a house is so difficult with PC financing their lifestyle.


I don't see her EVER going back to GB - ever!  Have you been reading the comments on a number of sites, especially from our UK counterparts? .. whooo-wheee - NOT PRETTY!  I think she's made it pretty clear, that her objective all along was to come back to Hollywood and get those 'A-LIST' movie parts - HA HA HA HA (my reaction)!


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> No, I think they probably _were_ at Tyler Perry's place, but they may have already moved on. It seemed like it took (the press?) quite some time to learn that they were staying on Vancouver Island, and when Harry-with-the-nice-jeans was posting his hostage videos from the broom closet, it was discovered that they had already moved to LA. They can be stealthy when they need to be, like when they were in BC and everyone suspected they were in Toronto.  I thought I remembered reading here (or elsewhere?) that the compound on Vancouver Island already had the security fencing and tarps removed when they were doing the MEGHAN&h Farewell Tour 2020 in early March.  I assumed they had already left for California but apparently it was March 24th when they were whisked away, under the cover of darkness, pith helmet between their legs, champagne glass in hand, in a black-ops covert secret mission flight to California.


Too funny!!  

On a serious note tho’ can you imagine raising a child this way?  Who wants to live like this and why?


----------



## Madrose

Lodpah said:


> Do you guys think that maybe MM has schemed to stay in houses for free until the year is up so that she can leverage a return to GB if things don’t work out? Maybe that’s her plan after all cause I don’t see why finding a house is so difficult with PC financing their lifestyle.



Could it be PC does not want to cosign on a loan, hence all the guesting?


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Well, it could be their "toe in the pond" .. testing out the waters, per se - right?  As much as MM 'thinks' she is deserved of an A-List acting gig (  ), why do I see her being on the RHofBH down the road???  Her pedigree is likely about the same as Luann on RHofNYC, right???


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, many more. Most of it has been exposed. There is a video of the young QE and her sister giving the Nazi salute. Churchill had a difficult time convincing the BRF of Hitler’s dangers.  The thing about H’s shirt incident — while an apology was issued, it didn’t seem very genuine.  Wonder if he has been asked about it in a recent nterview?
> The scandal came just two weeks before the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/world/europe/prince-harry-apologizes-for-nazi-costume.html
> _In the statement, Harry said he was "very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone."
> "It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize," he added.Harry, who plans to enroll this year at a military college, has long been known as the wilder of Charles and Diana's two handsome sons, in contrast to his university-student brother Prince William, 22._
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326
> For the Vegas party, he said: "At the end of the day I probably let myself down, I let my family down, I let other people down. But it was probably a classic example of me probably being too much army, and not enough prince. It’s a simple case of that."
> 
> The guy is just not that likable, mostly because of his entitled attitude. IMO, of course.



He was sorry only because he got a ton of ****e for it and people didn’t think it was funny, not because he is sorry that it was hurtful and stupid.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> I don't see her EVER going back to GB - ever!  Have you been reading the comments on a number of sites, especially from our UK counterparts? .. whooo-wheee - NOT PRETTY!  I think she's made it pretty clear, that her objective all along was to come back to Hollywood and get those 'A-LIST' movie parts - HA HA HA HA (my reaction)!


There is no f*cking way she's coming back here! She will not be welcomed! She's in LA now sorry please you guys have to take one for the team.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. we all knew this was a matter of time, but WHY???  I never watch Lifetime anyhow, but seriously????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-movie-Megxit.html



Meghan will play herself in this movie.


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> He was sorry only because he got a ton of ****e for it and people didn’t think it was funny, not because he is sorry that it was hurtful and stupid.


Yep, that's how I read his sorry ass "apology". He was only sorry that people criticized and were offended by it. He wasn't sorry he did it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. we all knew this was a matter of time, but WHY???  I never watch Lifetime anyhow, but seriously????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-movie-Megxit.html


Yikes, a TV movie nonetheless!


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan will play herself in this movie.


The only acting job she could get!


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan will play herself in this movie.


 And it will still be C level acting


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. we all knew this was a matter of time, but WHY???  I never watch Lifetime anyhow, but seriously????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-movie-Megxit.html



The article said Lifetime has already done two other Meghan and Harry movies. So it’s practically a series for them. It’s hard to imagine anything so horrible but I’m sure fictional Meghan and Harry are much more likable than the real thing.

We should have a viewer party when it premieres. We can all meet here and make fun of it together!


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Too funny!!
> 
> On a serious note tho’ can you imagine raising a child this way?  Who wants to live like this and why?



Live?  Nah, they are ‘thriving’   ‘cause they want  “to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work and try and encourage others in the younger generation to be able to see the world in the correct sense rather than perhaps being just having a distorted view.“
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainmen...arkles-engagement-interview/story?id=51415779

What does this mean -  “see the world in the correct sense” ?   When I read the interview rather than listen to it, his awful speaking skills really stuck out.  So many red flags with him.


----------



## Mrs.Z

If they are not living at Tyler Perry’s house, then why are they pulling their signature move and erecting ugly and cheap  privacy screens like two reclusive lunatics. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...creens-Tyler-Perrys-18million-LA-mansion.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Mrs.Z  Ugly, indeed.
Someone should tell Tyler that we can see through these screens, too.  Or does he already know that?
Haha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LaidyM

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, many more. Most of it has been exposed. *There is a video of the young QE and her sister giving the Nazi salute*. Churchill had a difficult time convincing the BRF of Hitler’s dangers.  The thing about H’s shirt incident — *while an apology was issued, it didn’t seem very genuine.*  Wonder if he has been asked about it in a recent nterview?
> The scandal came just two weeks before the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.
> https://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/world/europe/prince-harry-apologizes-for-nazi-costume.html
> _In the statement, Harry said he was "very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone."
> "It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize," he added.Harry, who plans to enroll this year at a military college, has long been known as the wilder of Charles and Diana's two handsome sons, in contrast to his university-student brother Prince William, 22._
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326
> For the Vegas party, he said: "At the end of the day I probably let myself down, I let my family down, I let other people down. But it was probably a classic example of me probably being too much army, and not enough prince. It’s a simple case of that."
> 
> The guy is just not that likable, mostly because of his entitled attitude. IMO, of course.



I’m Jewish, so make no mistake I will never, ever!! Say this if I thought for one second it was more than what it is:
Just a quick note, if not already noted, the video of TQ and princess Margaret was taken in the mid 30’s. At the time Hitler has only just rose to power, most people ignored his anti semantic propaganda as the ranting of a crazy man at best, or they agreed with it at worst. Very few people saw the writing on the wall.
Even fewer thought the world would end up at an all consuming war, not to mention the genocide that occurred. 

It was also the Duke of Windsor who, as one can see, was teaching them the salute. Again, a lot of upper class and aristocrats at that time, early days of the Nazi government, did find him very appealing. As time went on they began to see the dangers of his disgusting message.


And yes, Harry pathetic “apology” and lack of any real work against racism and anti Semitism since than... wel....
I understand his personal pain for losing a parent, but at the same time: I know several people who lost a parent young, no one went on to wear a Nazi outfit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And _that_ is exactly the lesson for today. People ignored the warnings back then. Most ignored the Covid warnings as well as warnings for previous infectious diseases — see Bill Gates article in today’s WSJ. And most of us missed the warning signs with H&M.  H has been waving red flags for years. His behavior was laughed off as being the ‘rowdy prince’, the fun guy, etc. Very similar to Andy’s behavior - remember Randy Andy.  Maybe we will come out of quarantine wiser and less willing to accept nonsense.




LaidyM said:


> I’m Jewish, so make no mistake I will never, ever!! Say this if I thought for one second it was more than what it is:
> Just a quick note, if not already noted, the video of TQ and princess Margaret was taken in the mid 30’s. At the time Hitler has only just rose to power, *most people ignored his anti-Semitic propaganda as the ranting of a crazy man at best*, or they agreed with it at worst. Very few people saw the writing on the wall.
> Even fewer thought the world would end up at an all consuming war, not to mention the genocide that occurred.
> 
> It was also the Duke of Windsor who, as one can see, was teaching them the salute. Again, a lot of upper class and aristocrats at that time, early days of the Nazi government, did find him very appealing. As time went on they began to see the dangers of his disgusting message.
> 
> 
> And yes, Harry pathetic “apology” and lack of any real work against racism and anti Semitism since than... wel....
> I understand his personal pain for losing a parent, but at the same time: I know several people who lost a parent young, no one went on to wear a Nazi outfit.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Live?  Nah, they are ‘thriving’   ‘cause they want  “to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work and try and encourage others in the younger generation to be able to see the world in the correct sense rather than perhaps being just having a distorted view.“
> https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainmen...arkles-engagement-interview/story?id=51415779
> 
> What does this mean -  “*see the world in the correct sense*” ?   When I read the interview rather than listen to it, his awful speaking skills really stuck out.  So many red flags with him.



Sounds like something issued as part of a decree as part of a totalitarian regime for those that are in need of correcting.  Good thing he's no longer part of the BRF or I may have been sent to some Outer Hebrides island with no wifi and only word-salad for company until I saw correct sense.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> And _that_ is exactly the lesson for today. People ignored the warnings back then. Most ignored the Covid warnings as well as warnings for previous infectious diseases — see Bill Gates article in today’s WSJ. And most of us missed the warning signs with H&M.  H has been waving red flags for years. His behavior was laughed off as being the ‘rowdy prince’, the fun guy, etc. Very similar to Andy’s behavior - remember Randy Andy.  Maybe we will come out of quarantine wiser and less willing to accept nonsense.



The problem with Harry (and other privileged men/women like him) is they don't know what is fun and what is hurtful, and when to NOT do it. There's no inside and outside.

One of my (Pakistani) friends said that she thought his choice of MM was racist in itself (although she was his GF then).  Basically,  that he went out with her to prove that he was not and could never have been - a racist. Honestly, I think they've used and deserve each other.


----------



## Tootsie17

chicinthecity777 said:


> There is no f*cking way she's coming back here! She will not be welcomed! She's in LA now sorry please you guys have to take one for the team.


Boo!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The problem with Harry (and other privileged men/women like him) is they don't know what is fun and what is hurtful, and when to NOT do it. There's no inside and outside.
> 
> One of my (Pakistani) friends said that she thought his choice of MM was racist in itself (although she was his GF then).  Basically,  that he went out with her to prove that he was not and could never have been - a racist. Honestly, I think they've used and deserve each other.


interesting POV from a WOC.  But (forgive me if I'm wrong) I don't recall Harry showing any interest in being politically correct before "M"....other than emulating his mother maybe on some things (land mines)


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> interesting POV from a WOC.  But (forgive me if I'm wrong) I don't recall Harry showing any interest in being politically correct before "M"....other than emulating his mother maybe on some things (land mines)



I don't think the full Nazi regalia fiasco ever left him. Not sure he had much time between that and the (British) army.

He was _very_ into Invictus, that was very much his. I'm not saying it was all his idea but he owned when he was involved,  and believed in it. 

Not PC, but he loved his brothers in arms and his mates too, I guess all his army and drinking buddies have been left behind in Blighty. There's nothing else for him to think about but the 'plight of the World' because there's probably not much else he's being fed. His class only talk about each other and who's going where and with whom. He's just as much a baby as his son in many ways. He'd just discovered there a World out there beyond his set and M is his moral compass (LOL - I am actually laughing).


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I don't think the full Nazi regalia fiasco ever left him. Not sure he had much time between that and the (British) army.
> 
> He was _very_ into Invictus, that was very much his. I'm not saying it was all his idea but he owned when he was involved,  and believed in it.
> 
> Not PC, but he loved his brothers in arms and his mates too, I guess all his army and drinking buddies have been left behind in Blighty. There's nothing else for him to think about but the 'plight of the World' because there's probably not much else he's being fed. His class only talk about each other and who's going where and with whom. He's just as much a baby as his son in many ways. He'd just discovered there a World out there beyond his set and M is his moral compass (LOL - I am actually laughing).


yes, as I've said before, he strikes me as a man-boy and she is calling the shots.  I know some here (and elsewhere) think it's unfair to "blame" her.  And he is an adult.  But I just don't think he has much backbone.  And she has plenty but not in a good way.


----------



## Tootsie17

papertiger said:


> I don't think the full Nazi regalia fiasco ever left him. Not sure he had much time between that and the (British) army.
> 
> He was _very_ into Invictus, that was very much his. I'm not saying it was all his idea but he owned when he was involved,  and believed in it.
> 
> Not PC, but he loved his brothers in arms and his mates too, I guess all his army and drinking buddies have been left behind in Blighty. There's nothing else for him to think about but the 'plight of the World' because there's probably not much else he's being fed. His class only talk about each other and who's going where and with whom. He's just as much a baby as his son in many ways. He'd just discovered there a World out there beyond his set and M is his moral compass (LOL - I am actually laughing).


I'm laughing too because she is definitely going to screw him up royally. Morbid fun times ahead!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> I don't see her EVER going back to GB - ever!  Have you been reading the comments on a number of sites, especially from our UK counterparts? .. whooo-wheee - NOT PRETTY!  I think she's made it pretty clear, that her objective all along was to come back to Hollywood and get those 'A-LIST' movie parts - HA HA HA HA (my reaction)!



You're NOT kidding about that! Yeah I think MM has _a shot_ here in the US since the coverage hasn't gone in the toilet yet but I don't see how she could want to return to the UK. That bridge seems to have burned down.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> And _that_ is exactly the lesson for today. People ignored the warnings back then. Most ignored the Covid warnings as well as warnings for previous infectious diseases — see Bill Gates article in today’s WSJ. And most of us missed the warning signs with H&M.  H has been waving red flags for years. His behavior was laughed off as being the ‘rowdy prince’, the fun guy, etc. Very similar to Andy’s behavior - remember Randy Andy.  Maybe we will come out of quarantine wiser and less willing to accept nonsense.



Great analogy!  Again, many of us here were pro-Megain in the beginning... but after a whooping 2 years and a million dollar wardrobe, she decides it's time to go?  They talk about millennials needing immediate gratification... this one too old to be considered one.    And the 'no one asked me how I felt' section; whoever let this play out must really hate M.  WTF poor you arriving on a private jet (was it?) talking about neglect while in a country where food is scarce and water needs tending!  I have now such a newfound respect for Kate.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> One of my (Pakistani) friends said that she thought his choice of MM was racist in itself (although she was his GF then).  Basically,  that he went out with her to prove that he was not and could never have been - a racist. Honestly, I think they've used and deserve each other.



I don’t know about all that. Didn’t she arrange to meet him (through so-called mutual friends)? I can’t see Harry devising a plan to make some sort of statement through his dating choices. He doesn’t strike me as being that invested in his reputation or caring about what the public thinks of him. Royalty don’t  concern themselves with that the way another celebrity would.

Plus that would make Meghan something of a victim. And she definitely isn’t.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> I assumed they had already left for California but apparently it was March 24th when they were whisked away, under the cover of darkness, pith helmet between their legs, champagne glass in hand, in a black-ops covert secret mission flight to California.


 Really tho? I imagined her exiting the UK after their Farewell (to Freedom) tour to look like this...


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Mrs.Z  Ugly, indeed.
> Someone should tell Tyler that we can see through these screens, too.  Or does he already know that?
> Haha
> 
> View attachment 4728316


 Are they trying to make this their 'signature move', to identify where they possibly are/were staying- putting up ugly (pointless) screens to protect the pRiVaCy tHeY sEeK?
They might as well just graffiti _'Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and JustCallMeHarry are/were here'_ right across the screens for everyone to see.
Or even better- don't tell the media outlets where you are/were staying.



papertiger said:


> *He'd just discovered there a World out there beyond his set and M is his moral compass* (LOL - I am actually laughing).


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> For sure .. it's Mauricio Umansky (Kyle - RHoBH's husband) and his firm "The Agency"!  Hmmm .. wonder if they are trying to broker some deal to get H&M on the "Million Dollar Listing LA" series (nothing would surprise me anymore)!  In regards to the "architecture" (or LACK THEREOF) .. welcome to Los Angeles!  One of the reasons why I love Josh Flagg on the Million Dollar Listing - LA show, is because he knows and appreciates the HISTORY of some of the houses that he is selling, and oftentimes really does not want to sell to a developer because he knows full well that they are going to turn out yet another F-UGLY as the ones pictured.  It breaks my heart to see some truly beautiful homes being torn down just to build these non-descript, boxes of concrete .. and excellent point about everyone else getting to 'see your business'!  We went to an estate sale in the Pacific Palisades; the house was amazing with a gorgeous view of Santa Monica and the Pacific Ocean .. IN ADDITION .. to plenty of other houses to look in to!  Uh, no thanks ...


It might be like the media, pre-Oscars.

Many designers or just fashion reporters have articles of what the nominated _could_ wear. How great they would look in these gowns with lots of accompanying pictures.  

Meaningless wasted space.

Maurice (his real name) is advertising what he has listed and available. Calling attention to himself and his company, that's all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> It could be very well that Tyler wanted his property to get into the news as he is trying to sell it.


The equivalent of showing off their homes in Architectural Digest, then putting it on the market?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know about all that. Didn’t she arrange to meet him (through so-called mutual friends)? I can’t see Harry devising a plan to make some sort of statement through his dating choices. He doesn’t strike me as being that invested in his reputation or caring about what the public thinks of him. Royalty don’t  concern themselves with that the way another celebrity would.
> 
> Plus that would make Meghan something of a victim. And she definitely isn’t.



I don't think it was that conscious. But he _loved_ that he could tell the tabloids how horrible they were to his GF and warned them off. At that time, everyone in the UK was like "who?" "Harry's got a GF?",  "Why, what did they say?" Feeds into his whole need to protect 'mummy' from the evil press.


----------



## mrsinsyder

No one:
Literally no one:
Not a single soul: 

The Markles:


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lounorada said:


> Really tho? I imagined her exiting the UK after their Farewell (to Freedom) tour to look like this...
> View attachment 4728385



I don't think Meghan's weave has ever looked that fabulous!


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know about all that. Didn’t she arrange to meet him (through so-called mutual friends)? I can’t see Harry devising a plan to make some sort of statement through his dating choices. He doesn’t strike me as being that invested in his reputation or caring about what the public thinks of him. Royalty don’t  concern themselves with that the way another celebrity would.
> 
> Plus that would make Meghan something of a victim. And she definitely isn’t.



I think he certainly liked the idea of her being 'exotic,' which fits his wild and fun-loving persona.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I don't think it was that conscious. But he _loved_ that he could tell the tabloids how horrible they were to his GF and warned them off. At that time, everyone in the UK was like "who?" "Harry's got a GF?",  "Why, what did they say?" Feeds into his whole need to protect 'mummy' from the evil press.



I think he was getting anxious to find somebody to marry him. It hadn’t worked out with any of his previous girlfriends. I bet it was becoming tiresome always being the third wheel with Will and Kate, watching them have kid after kid while he was still the lonely single guy.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I think he certainly liked the idea of her being 'exotic,' which fits his wild and fun-loving persona.



Perhaps. I don’t think he went out looking for her for that reason though. It’s not like Meghan who told her friends she wanted to be introduced to British guys.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> No one:
> Literally no one:
> Not a single soul:
> 
> The Markles:
> View attachment 4728475


I was thinking the same - in that super rich neighbourhood, anyone hiking is probably loaded themselves and focused on their lovely hike on the trails, not on spying on an ex-royal. Are they even staying there? M plants so many stories probably even she is confused about what the truth is.


----------



## eunaddict

papertiger said:


> I don't think it was that conscious. But he _loved_ that he could tell the tabloids how horrible they were to his GF and warned them off. At that time, everyone in the UK was like "who?" "Harry's got a GF?",  "Why, what did they say?" Feeds into his whole need to protect 'mummy' from the evil press.



I think part of it was conscious. Harry was ALWAYS known as the young rebel prince. And what better way to thumb your nose at grangran than choosing someone who is a woman of colour, an American, a commoner AND an older divorcee - remembering QE's dad, King George VI did not want the Crown, was known as the Reluctant King and only got it because his brother ran away with Simpson... and to some extents the Crown and the stressors of it (along with helping to support the UK through WW2) has long been speculated to be a contributing factor to his ill health and subsequent death.

I mean, when I first heard he'd finally found someone, I was happy for them but then after a while, a tiny part of me wondered if picking MM was his way of reminding QE2 of her uncle and trying to get under the RBF's skin, again.

MM represents a lot of things that H thought the RBF would HATE. But they welcomed her. And by that time he maybe realized it was backfiring, he was royally stuck and/or suckered into the role of H, "Protector and Defender of MM and her honour".


----------



## Clearblueskies

^ there’s something in this I think.  Harry loves to think of himself as the Royal Rebel.  “Just call me Harry” the kicker-over of Royal traces.  The “different” brother. But he’s always been rebel-lite IMO.  A studied scruffiness was about the real extent of the rebellion. Every schoolboy of a certain age goes through that phase - most grow out of it.  And when he talked about normal life - he sure didn’t mean our normal.
Fast forward a couple of years and he chose to marry a mixed race woman who looks white.  He clung to his titles and sulked publicly over his loss of the royal roles he’d intended to keep.  He tried to establish a rival court in competition with his brother.  Private jets, servants and a luxury lifestyle remain his mojo.  There’s no attempt to pursue any gainful means of becoming financially independent other than to exploit his royal connection.
And the thing he keeps on telling us he’s missing most is the rigid rule-driven life he had in the army.


----------



## doni

I have the impression at the time Harry was at a stage in his life where he was thinking of a life of service and finding satisfaction in it. Perhaps toying with the idea of going to Africa, being the Queen’s emissary there, doing that kind of work. I honestly think that what she saw in Meghan was someone who’d be the perfect partner for that, I think she thought of her as a sort of Amal Clooney, committed, engaged, but beautiful and polished at the same time. It is quite possible she caught on those vibes from second one and fed that narrative. Their engagement interview in that regard is quite revealing. Them bonding over global issues and influencing change (she claimed that’s what got them to date number two), him falling in love quickly in the certainty and _relief_ that she would be great at the job part of it, he took her to Africa after the second date... So now he has to blame the press that this whole scenario didn’t work, but I think it is what he had in his head, not deserting the royals and country. I mean, he is an army man more than anything.


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> I have the impression at the time Harry was at a stage in his life where he was thinking of a life of service and finding satisfaction in it. Perhaps toying with the idea of going to Africa, being the Queen’s emissary there, doing that kind of work. I honestly think that what she saw in Meghan was someone who’d be the perfect partner for that, I think she thought of her as a sort of Amal Clooney, committed, engaged, but beautiful and polished at the same time. It is quite probable she caught on those vibes from second one and fed that narrative. Their engagement interview in that regard is quite revealing. Them bonding over global issues and influencing change (she claimed that’s what got them to date number two), him falling in love quickly in the certainty and _relief_ that she would be great at the job part of it, he took her to Africa after the second date... So now he has to blame the press that this whole scenario didn’t work, but I think it is what he had in his head, not deserting the royals and country. I mean, he is an army man more than anything.


Perhaps what we’re seeing is Harry having no clear idea what he wanted to do when he was young, and despite everything, still being no clearer in his thirties.  I agree Meghan did make all the right noises about buying in to the Royal Life - and in a very big way initially.  That didn’t last long at all though, post marriage.  
And I think taking the girlfriends to Africa on the second date was a thing Harry did.  Royal aides organised a lot of these trips for him.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I think he was getting anxious to find somebody to marry him. It hadn’t worked out with any of his previous girlfriends. I bet it was becoming tiresome always being the third wheel with Will and Kate, watching them have kid after kid while he was still the lonely single guy.



I agree


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> I have the impression at the time Harry was at a stage in his life where he was thinking of a life of service and finding satisfaction in it. Perhaps toying with the idea of going to Africa, being the Queen’s emissary there, doing that kind of work. I honestly think that what she saw in Meghan was someone who’d be the perfect partner for that, I think she thought of her as a sort of Amal Clooney, committed, engaged, but beautiful and polished at the same time. It is quite possible she caught on those vibes from second one and fed that narrative. Their engagement interview in that regard is quite revealing. Them bonding over global issues and influencing change (she claimed that’s what got them to date number two), him falling in love quickly in the certainty and _relief_ that she would be great at the job part of it, he took her to Africa after the second date... So now he has to blame the press that this whole scenario didn’t work, but I think it is what he had in his head, not deserting the royals and country. I mean, he is an army man more than anything.



100%


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> ^ there’s something in this I think.  Harry loves to think of himself as the Royal Rebel.  “Just call me Harry” the kicker-over of Royal traces.  The “different” brother. But he’s always been rebel-lite IMO.  A studied scruffiness was about the real extent of the rebellion. Every schoolboy of a certain age goes through that phase - most grow out of it.  And when he talked about normal life - he sure didn’t mean our normal.
> Fast forward a couple of years and he chose to marry a mixed race woman who looks white.  He clung to his titles and sulked publicly over his loss of the royal roles he’d intended to keep.  He tried to establish a rival court in competition with his brother.  Private jets, servants and a luxury lifestyle remain his mojo.  There’s no attempt to pursue any gainful means of becoming financially independent other than to exploit his royal connection.
> And the thing he keeps on telling us he’s missing most is the rigid rule-driven life he had in the army.



This too. 

It sounds as though JCMH had a lot of grand plans and fantasies about himself and freedom. And yet he needs strong guidance, very structured regime, lots of constant reassurance (things that he's always had on tap). He has no self-motivation or self-discipline by himself and even a 24/7 devoted, supportive wife will not be enough . Every picture/vid that I see makes him look like a jelly fish out of water in crumpled clothes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> This too.
> 
> It sounds as though JCMH had a lot of grand plans and fantasies about himself and freedom. And yet he needs strong guidance, very structured regime, lots of constant reassurance (things that he's always had on tap). He has no self-motivation or self-discipline by himself and even a 24/7 devoted, supportive wife will not be enough . Every picture/vid that I see makes him look like a jelly fish out of water in crumpled clothes.


Two fantasists in a relationship together = a recipe for egging each other on.  Not achieving anything


----------



## Grande Latte

mdcx said:


> Regards yacht girls and secrecy - my understanding is that the clients rather prefer to pick "names" and those who appear on popular tv shows or show up in the gossip columns often or have big insta accounts or are well-known models etc may find themselves the most popular girls in the catalogue.
> Like I've said, what actual acts transpire is up to the girls themselves and the amount of money on the table, but the bottom line is they are paid to show up and be sexy/hot/pretty and agreeable. If they want to portray it as being "invited to holiday with a wealthy friend from the Middle East", or "working for a super yacht owner," so be it.
> 
> H does look bad, and once M has secured her next Mark I'm sure he will be shipped back to the UK.



Now everything makes sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And this is how Royals get the message out. Even though it’s at a distance, it is still caring, modern, and touching. 
Good on Prince Charles, etc.  Thank you, Nurses.

https://www.royal.uk/members-royal-family-mark-international-nurses-day


----------



## CarryOn2020

Back to topic — the grifters are still looking for a house. 
_800 gallon aquarium???_ Rrrrright. _Waterfall?_  Unbelievable.

_They’re also checking out a $17,995,000 Hollywood Hills home with five bedrooms, a $12,899,000 mid-century home with a “full-service rooftop deck,” and my personal favorite: a $16,899,000 six-bedroom home with a 800-gallon aquarium. Oh, and it also has a waterfall. Normal!_
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...meghan-markle-prince-harry-18-million-budget/


----------



## lalame

doni said:


> I have the impression at the time Harry was at a stage in his life where he was thinking of a life of service and finding satisfaction in it. Perhaps toying with the idea of going to Africa, being the Queen’s emissary there, doing that kind of work. I honestly think that what she saw in Meghan was someone who’d be the perfect partner for that, I think she thought of her as a sort of Amal Clooney, committed, engaged, but beautiful and polished at the same time. It is quite possible she caught on those vibes from second one and fed that narrative. Their engagement interview in that regard is quite revealing. Them bonding over global issues and influencing change (she claimed that’s what got them to date number two), him falling in love quickly in the certainty and _relief_ that she would be great at the job part of it, he took her to Africa after the second date... So now he has to blame the press that this whole scenario didn’t work, but I think it is what he had in his head, not deserting the royals and country. I mean, he is an army man more than anything.



I think Meghan did have some interest in that stuff and so did he but I'm sure they made it out to be way bigger than it was. It says something that neither of them dated actual aid workers....... just people who love to "champion" aid work.  They basically wanted to date the same attractive, rich, etc cliches that everyone else famous wants but with the unique quality of obsessively preaching about causes. In that way hey maybe it is a perfect match.


----------



## Emeline

Between mansion hunting and erecting tacky fences they must be so busy.
It's sort of interesting that M is always looking.. .because something better is always out there. And she loves the hunt.
She couldn't be happier.

H?  He appears to be exhausted. Likely can't find anything easily in the box/luggage jumble they routinely live in now.  He's probably over looking at property listings with her. And I imagine he might like to sleep on his own pillow for a change.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I think Meghan did have some interest in that stuff and so did he but I'm sure they made it out to be way bigger than it was. It says something that neither of them dated actual aid workers....... just people who love to "champion" aid work.  They basically wanted to date the same attractive, rich, etc cliches that everyone else famous wants but with the unique quality of obsessively preaching about causes. In that way hey maybe it is a perfect match.



That is a big problem with them, they are all talk and little action. They want the credit and publicity for being humanitarians and environmentalists, but they don't make even the tiniest sacrifice from living their entitled lifestyle of the rich and famous. So they will continue to fly in private jets and live in giant mansions which require using large amounts of energy while only being a family of three. The sad thing is some people buy into their hype.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is a big problem with them, they are all talk and little action. They want the credit and publicity for being humanitarians and environmentalists, but they don't make even the tiniest sacrifice from living their entitled lifestyle of the rich and famous. So they will continue to fly in private jets and live in giant mansions which require using large amounts of energy while only being a family of three. The sad thing is some people buy into their hype.


really I think the only thing they have going for themselves is their faces - no real skills or education to back up their ideas


----------



## Clearblueskies

Emeline said:


> Between mansion hunting and erecting tacky fences they must be so busy.
> It's sort of interesting that M is always looking.. .because something better is always out there. And she loves the hunt.
> She couldn't be happier.
> 
> H?  He appears to be exhausted. Likely can't find anything easily in the box/luggage jumble they routinely live in now.  He's probably over looking at property listings with her. And I imagine he might like to sleep on his own pillow for a change.


The paps are always going to know how to find them - theirs is the borrowed house with the unsightly screens tacked up outside it.
Dunroamin’ meets Delusions of Grandeur


----------



## lanasyogamama

Emeline said:


> Between mansion hunting and erecting tacky fences they must be so busy.
> It's sort of interesting that M is always looking.. .because something better is always out there. And she loves the hunt.
> She couldn't be happier.
> 
> H?  He appears to be exhausted. Likely can't find anything easily in the box/luggage jumble they routinely live in now.  He's probably over looking at property listings with her. And I imagine he might like to sleep on his own pillow for a change.



Honestly, does he even own pillows or other household stuff? Serious question.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> really I think the only thing they have going for themselves is their faces - no real skills or education to back up their ideas



The curious thing is she does have an education (and a pretty good one) but she wanted to go into acting, and not even like serious acting... I guess everyone's gotta start from the bottom but I haven't seen any evidence that she tried theater or anything else. Just the really shallow roles.


----------



## Emeline

lanasyogamama said:


> Honestly, does he even own pillows or other household stuff? Serious question.


Good Q. Just my musings-- He wasn't brought up surrounded by modern, minimalist style. And I think all this couch surfing is new to him, too.
Maybe he thought he'd like a change, but too much change can be wearying.  So possibly he misses the familiar.

Anyway, whatever  is going on with him, he looks pretty miserable.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> The curious thing is she does have an education (and a pretty good one) but she wanted to go into acting, and not even like serious acting... I guess everyone's gotta start from the bottom but I haven't seen any evidence that she tried theater or anything else. Just the really shallow roles.


I don't know that much about her education but I'll say she's no Amal Clooney


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I don't know that much about her education but I'll say she's no Amal Clooney



She went to Northwestern, which is a pretty good school. Of course she's no Amal Clooney... Amal is like in the top tier of education and professional success compared to anyone.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> The curious thing is she does have an education (and a pretty good one) but she wanted to go into acting, and not even like serious acting... I guess everyone's gotta start from the bottom but I haven't seen any evidence that she tried theater or anything else. Just the really shallow roles.



I'm sure she was capable of getting through the courses required. She's not vapid. I've read in some places that she majored in international studies and in other places that she majored in theater. Maybe she started in one major and finished in the other. That fits her MO of not being able to stick with any one thing for very long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure she was capable of getting through the courses required. She's not vapid. I've read in some places that she majored in international studies and in other places that she majored in theater. Maybe she started in one major and finished in the other. That fits her MO of not being able to stick with any one thing for very long.


oh, she's not vapid? could have fooled me


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh, she's not vapid? could have fooled me



We have to give credit where it is due. She couldn't have attained what she has if her brain was a box of rocks. She may be manipulative and a raging narcissist. She may be full of grand ideas she is incapable of putting into action. She may destroy nearly every personal relationship she has had. But the girl is not a moron.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Back to topic — the grifters are still looking for a house.
> _800 gallon aquarium???_ Rrrrright. _Waterfall?_  Unbelievable.
> 
> _They’re also checking out a $17,995,000 Hollywood Hills home with five bedrooms, a $12,899,000 mid-century home with a “full-service rooftop deck,” and my personal favorite: a $16,899,000 six-bedroom home with a 800-gallon aquarium. Oh, and it also has a waterfall. Normal!_
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...meghan-markle-prince-harry-18-million-budget/


The Hollywood Hills? .. great views, but .. not a whole heck of a lot of privacy in those parts!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> We have to give credit where it is due. She couldn't have attained what she has if her brain was a box of rocks. She may be manipulative and a raging narcissist. She may be full of grand ideas she is incapable of putting into action. She may destroy nearly every personal relationship she has had. But the girl is not a moron.


OK, I'll agree she's not dumb.  But I don't know that she's qualified to run a large organization.....but they can hire people...again, it's their faces that are their main qualification IMO - and his title


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the dictionary:
vap·id - _adjective_

offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.
=======
With all of her word salads, vapid may be the perfect word for her. Since she knew she wanted to be a star, not an actress, she took the one-dimensional roles that emphasized her body and makeup. Minimal dialogue, very little character development. Essentially, she was playing herself. No need to hone her skills in a theater.


----------



## CeeJay

Northwestern University is most well known for its Theatre program and while she may have done "some" International Studies, I would reckon that she likely went there strictly for it's performing arts studies.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the dictionary:
> vap·id - _adjective_
> 
> offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging.
> =======
> With all of her word salads, vapid may be the perfect word for her. Since she knew she wanted to be a star, not an actress, she took the one-dimensional roles that emphasized her body and makeup. Minimal dialogue, very little character development. Essentially, she was playing herself. No need to hone her skills in a theater.


I would say that they should, indeed, add her picture next to this word because it describes her PERFECTLY!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

"vapid | ˈvapəd | adjective-*offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging*: tuneful but vapid musical comedies."

Sounds about right to me.  Being vapid doesn't translate to low intelligence.


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, my understanding of the word vapid was not accurate. I thought it meant Kardashian level uneducated. Going by the actual definition, pretty much everybody in the entertainment business could be described as being vapid.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Carry on, CarryOn!  I missed your post.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Exactly, not low intelligence at all.  It’s someone who *chooses* not to put forth the effort. 



Cavalier Girl said:


> "vapid | ˈvapəd | adjective-*offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging*: tuneful but vapid musical comedies."
> 
> Sounds about right to me.  Being vapid doesn't translate to low intelligence.


----------



## lalame

Very good points... I've met quite a few people who were vapid/ditzy/came off air-headed but were surprisingly quite intelligent. Examples of people who I think come off vapid but are quite intelligent... Kate Bosworth, Kate Beckinsale, Ashton Kutcher. 

Though personally I feel like Meghan is the opposite... she's not stupid but I think she "behaves" more intelligent than she likely is... it's a part of the image of humanitarianism, verbosity, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I would not have defined vapid in that way either. I connected it to being dim-witted, so I’ve learned something new today. 
Those dear dear Kardashians — they are on an entirely different level and in their own world 
Yes, most of Hollywood fits the vapid category.  Sometimes talk show hosts will ‘talk’ about their worst guest. Almost always it is the person who says nothing. Now, MM’s thing is humble-bragging. 



bag-mania said:


> Okay, my understanding of the word vapid was not accurate. I thought it meant Kardashian level uneducated. Going by the actual definition, pretty much everybody in the entertainment business could be described as being vapid.


----------



## lalame

IMO, if you're intelligent AND confident, you don't need to constantly try to transmit it to everyone else. Same if you're philanthropic. The amount of flexing I see from these two just screams low confidence or self-promotion.


----------



## bag-mania

While I don't have vapid down yet, I do know impatience when I see it. Meghan is eager to put forth her propaganda, er I mean her side of the story. 

*'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*

*Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal*
*The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11*
*A friend said: 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life'*
*DailyMail.com revealed last week Tyler Perry sent his $150M private plane to pick up the couple from Canada to bring them to his $18M Beverly Hills home*
*But despite her high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said*
*They added: 'Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip'*
*The friend also revealed Meghan 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe'*

Meghan Markle wants the biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later because she believes the book will set the record straight on why they chose to leave the royal family and help give them a clean slate, an insider exclusively told DailyMail.com.

The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family by journalists Omid Scobie and Catherine Durand is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.

But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.

'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'

Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.  

Meghan and Harry shocked the world back in January when they announced they would be stepping away from their royal duties and instead work to become financially independent, splitting their time between the United Kingdom and North America.

They were originally living at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island in Canada before making a beeline for California after Canada announced it would be restricting its borders due to COVID-19. 

DailyMail.com revealed last week that Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry had sent his $150 million private plane to pick up the couple and their one-year-old son Archie from Canada in mid-March and brought them to live at his $18 million Beverly Hills pad, where they are now staying.

Despite their mega-rich friends and high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'desperately wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva who was rude to royal staffers and others on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said. 

'She said the book will help give her and Harry a clean slate. Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip.

'Meghan said people need to see her vulnerable side, something the book does in great detail.'

The friend added: 'I think [Meghan] wants people to feel sorry for her, or at least have compassion for her and all she's been through, which has been anything but a fairy tale.'

The insider also revealed the Duchess 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe. 

'The only way Finding Freedom was ever going to be published, was if Meghan had the final say and gave her seal of approval.'

Co-author Omid Scobie recently said the biography gives a real inside account of the royals' story, saying: 'I've been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left un-turned.

'I've seen the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.' 

The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'. 

It promises to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple on both sides of the pond'.

It continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.'

Last week, DailyMail.com exclusively revealed the royals were staying at Tyler Perry's ultra-exclusive mansion in Beverly Hills, and that they were whisked away by the producer and actor on an early morning flight.

The couple have never been seen in public with Perry — best known for his cross-dressing portrayal of feisty Madea in his series of hit films — but are believed to have met him through their mutual close friend Oprah Winfrey. 

Fifty-year-old Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom Tuscan-style villa sits on 22 acres on the top of a hill in the guard-gated community and offers sweeping views of the city from the backyard.

It is not known whether Harry, 35, and Meghan, 38, are renting Perry's property or staying there as guests, but there is no record of the mansion having been sold. 

A source told DailyMail.com: 'Meghan and Harry have been extremely cautious to keep their base in LA under wraps.

'Their team helped them choose the location for their transition to Los Angeles wisely.

'Beverly Ridge has its own guarded gate and Tyler's property has a gate of its own which is watched by their security team.

'Beverly Ridge is an excellent place to keep out of view. The neighbors are mostly old money and mega rich business types rather than show business gossips.

'It goes without saying that the location is stunning — just one of the most beautiful and desirable areas in LA.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eased-believing-book-set-record-straight.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

"Finding Freedom" is a title that should be used for someone that had an actual struggle. Not this drivel.


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> While I don't have vapid down yet, I do know impatience when I see it. Meghan is eager to put forth her propaganda, er I mean her side of the story.
> 
> *'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*
> 
> *Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal*
> *The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11*
> *A friend said: 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life'*
> *DailyMail.com revealed last week Tyler Perry sent his $150M private plane to pick up the couple from Canada to bring them to his $18M Beverly Hills home*
> *But despite her high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said*
> *They added: 'Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip'*
> *The friend also revealed Meghan 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe'*
> 
> Meghan Markle wants the biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later because she believes the book will set the record straight on why they chose to leave the royal family and help give them a clean slate, an insider exclusively told DailyMail.com.
> 
> The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family by journalists Omid Scobie and Catherine Durand is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.
> 
> But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.
> 
> 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'
> 
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.
> 
> Meghan and Harry shocked the world back in January when they announced they would be stepping away from their royal duties and instead work to become financially independent, splitting their time between the United Kingdom and North America.
> 
> They were originally living at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island in Canada before making a beeline for California after Canada announced it would be restricting its borders due to COVID-19.
> 
> DailyMail.com revealed last week that Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry had sent his $150 million private plane to pick up the couple and their one-year-old son Archie from Canada in mid-March and brought them to live at his $18 million Beverly Hills pad, where they are now staying.
> 
> Despite their mega-rich friends and high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'desperately wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva who was rude to royal staffers and others on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said.
> 
> 'She said the book will help give her and Harry a clean slate. Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip.
> 
> 'Meghan said people need to see her vulnerable side, something the book does in great detail.'
> 
> The friend added: 'I think [Meghan] wants people to feel sorry for her, or at least have compassion for her and all she's been through, which has been anything but a fairy tale.'
> 
> The insider also revealed the Duchess 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe.
> 
> 'The only way Finding Freedom was ever going to be published, was if Meghan had the final say and gave her seal of approval.'
> 
> Co-author Omid Scobie recently said the biography gives a real inside account of the royals' story, saying: 'I've been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left un-turned.
> 
> 'I've seen the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.'
> 
> The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'.
> 
> It promises to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple on both sides of the pond'.
> 
> It continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.'
> 
> Last week, DailyMail.com exclusively revealed the royals were staying at Tyler Perry's ultra-exclusive mansion in Beverly Hills, and that they were whisked away by the producer and actor on an early morning flight.
> 
> The couple have never been seen in public with Perry — best known for his cross-dressing portrayal of feisty Madea in his series of hit films — but are believed to have met him through their mutual close friend Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Fifty-year-old Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom Tuscan-style villa sits on 22 acres on the top of a hill in the guard-gated community and offers sweeping views of the city from the backyard.
> 
> It is not known whether Harry, 35, and Meghan, 38, are renting Perry's property or staying there as guests, but there is no record of the mansion having been sold.
> 
> A source told DailyMail.com: 'Meghan and Harry have been extremely cautious to keep their base in LA under wraps.
> 
> 'Their team helped them choose the location for their transition to Los Angeles wisely.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge has its own guarded gate and Tyler's property has a gate of its own which is watched by their security team.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge is an excellent place to keep out of view. The neighbors are mostly old money and mega rich business types rather than show business gossips.
> 
> 'It goes without saying that the location is stunning — just one of the most beautiful and desirable areas in LA.'
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eased-believing-book-set-record-straight.html



Bless her heart.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> While I don't have vapid down yet, I do know impatience when I see it. Meghan is eager to put forth her propaganda, er I mean her side of the story.
> 
> *'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*
> 
> *Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal*
> *The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11*
> *A friend said: 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life'*
> *DailyMail.com revealed last week Tyler Perry sent his $150M private plane to pick up the couple from Canada to bring them to his $18M Beverly Hills home*
> *But despite her high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said*
> *They added: 'Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip'*
> *The friend also revealed Meghan 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe'*
> 
> Meghan Markle wants the biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later because she believes the book will set the record straight on why they chose to leave the royal family and help give them a clean slate, an insider exclusively told DailyMail.com.
> 
> The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family by journalists Omid Scobie and Catherine Durand is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.
> 
> But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.
> 
> 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'
> 
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.
> 
> Meghan and Harry shocked the world back in January when they announced they would be stepping away from their royal duties and instead work to become financially independent, splitting their time between the United Kingdom and North America.
> 
> They were originally living at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island in Canada before making a beeline for California after Canada announced it would be restricting its borders due to COVID-19.
> 
> DailyMail.com revealed last week that Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry had sent his $150 million private plane to pick up the couple and their one-year-old son Archie from Canada in mid-March and brought them to live at his $18 million Beverly Hills pad, where they are now staying.
> 
> Despite their mega-rich friends and high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'desperately wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva who was rude to royal staffers and others on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said.
> 
> 'She said the book will help give her and Harry a clean slate. Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip.
> 
> 'Meghan said people need to see her vulnerable side, something the book does in great detail.'
> 
> The friend added: 'I think [Meghan] wants people to feel sorry for her, or at least have compassion for her and all she's been through, which has been anything but a fairy tale.'
> 
> The insider also revealed the Duchess 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe.
> 
> 'The only way Finding Freedom was ever going to be published, was if Meghan had the final say and gave her seal of approval.'
> 
> Co-author Omid Scobie recently said the biography gives a real inside account of the royals' story, saying: 'I've been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left un-turned.
> 
> 'I've seen the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.'
> 
> The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'.
> 
> It promises to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple on both sides of the pond'.
> 
> It continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.'
> 
> Last week, DailyMail.com exclusively revealed the royals were staying at Tyler Perry's ultra-exclusive mansion in Beverly Hills, and that they were whisked away by the producer and actor on an early morning flight.
> 
> The couple have never been seen in public with Perry — best known for his cross-dressing portrayal of feisty Madea in his series of hit films — but are believed to have met him through their mutual close friend Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Fifty-year-old Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom Tuscan-style villa sits on 22 acres on the top of a hill in the guard-gated community and offers sweeping views of the city from the backyard.
> 
> It is not known whether Harry, 35, and Meghan, 38, are renting Perry's property or staying there as guests, but there is no record of the mansion having been sold.
> 
> A source told DailyMail.com: 'Meghan and Harry have been extremely cautious to keep their base in LA under wraps.
> 
> 'Their team helped them choose the location for their transition to Los Angeles wisely.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge has its own guarded gate and Tyler's property has a gate of its own which is watched by their security team.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge is an excellent place to keep out of view. The neighbors are mostly old money and mega rich business types rather than show business gossips.
> 
> 'It goes without saying that the location is stunning — just one of the most beautiful and desirable areas in LA.'
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eased-believing-book-set-record-straight.html



oh ffs... what drivel. If she truly suffered or wanted some peaceful life why the heck did they move to LA? They are all so full of it.

Was the U.K. sunshine and rainbows? No, but that’s English weather and that’s what gay clubs and vacations are for. And for goodness sakes, they took more vacations than they worked...

What stiff upper lip did she have? Ugh... I can’t...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> While I don't have vapid down yet, I do know impatience when I see it. Meghan is eager to put forth her propaganda, er I mean her side of the story.
> 
> *'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*
> 
> *Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal*
> *The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11*
> *A friend said: 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life'*
> *DailyMail.com revealed last week Tyler Perry sent his $150M private plane to pick up the couple from Canada to bring them to his $18M Beverly Hills home*
> *But despite her high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said*
> *They added: 'Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip'*
> *The friend also revealed Meghan 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe'*
> 
> Meghan Markle wants the biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later because she believes the book will set the record straight on why they chose to leave the royal family and help give them a clean slate, an insider exclusively told DailyMail.com.
> 
> The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family by journalists Omid Scobie and Catherine Durand is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.
> 
> But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.
> 
> 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'
> 
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.
> 
> Meghan and Harry shocked the world back in January when they announced they would be stepping away from their royal duties and instead work to become financially independent, splitting their time between the United Kingdom and North America.
> 
> They were originally living at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island in Canada before making a beeline for California after Canada announced it would be restricting its borders due to COVID-19.
> 
> DailyMail.com revealed last week that Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry had sent his $150 million private plane to pick up the couple and their one-year-old son Archie from Canada in mid-March and brought them to live at his $18 million Beverly Hills pad, where they are now staying.
> 
> Despite their mega-rich friends and high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'desperately wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva who was rude to royal staffers and others on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said.
> 
> 'She said the book will help give her and Harry a clean slate. Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip.
> 
> 'Meghan said people need to see her vulnerable side, something the book does in great detail.'
> 
> The friend added: 'I think [Meghan] wants people to feel sorry for her, or at least have compassion for her and all she's been through, which has been anything but a fairy tale.'
> 
> The insider also revealed the Duchess 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe.
> 
> 'The only way Finding Freedom was ever going to be published, was if Meghan had the final say and gave her seal of approval.'
> 
> Co-author Omid Scobie recently said the biography gives a real inside account of the royals' story, saying: 'I've been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left un-turned.
> 
> 'I've seen the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.'
> 
> The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'.
> 
> It promises to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple on both sides of the pond'.
> 
> It continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.'
> 
> Last week, DailyMail.com exclusively revealed the royals were staying at Tyler Perry's ultra-exclusive mansion in Beverly Hills, and that they were whisked away by the producer and actor on an early morning flight.
> 
> The couple have never been seen in public with Perry — best known for his cross-dressing portrayal of feisty Madea in his series of hit films — but are believed to have met him through their mutual close friend Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Fifty-year-old Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom Tuscan-style villa sits on 22 acres on the top of a hill in the guard-gated community and offers sweeping views of the city from the backyard.
> 
> It is not known whether Harry, 35, and Meghan, 38, are renting Perry's property or staying there as guests, but there is no record of the mansion having been sold.
> 
> A source told DailyMail.com: 'Meghan and Harry have been extremely cautious to keep their base in LA under wraps.
> 
> 'Their team helped them choose the location for their transition to Los Angeles wisely.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge has its own guarded gate and Tyler's property has a gate of its own which is watched by their security team.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge is an excellent place to keep out of view. The neighbors are mostly old money and mega rich business types rather than show business gossips.
> 
> 'It goes without saying that the location is stunning — just one of the most beautiful and desirable areas in LA.'
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eased-believing-book-set-record-straight.html


Monumental anguish and turmoil?  Now I understand.  The suffering of people who are hungry and homeless is nothing compared to what M went through.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I think she’s set to reinforce the impression she’s made rather than dismantle it, judging from this nonsense.  So, not just your average anguish and turmoil then, but the monumental variety.  Good grief


----------



## poopsie

Going form this
_
Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.
_
to this


_
Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,'

_


----------



## CeeJay

I just got the new Vanity Fair magazine with Princess Anne on the cover; haven't read the article yet, but will do so soon!  I used to like Vanity Fair, but *this* article .. seriously????  UGGH!     
https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2020/5/the-comeback-kids


----------



## LaidyM

bag-mania said:


> While I don't have vapid down yet, I do know impatience when I see it. Meghan is eager to put forth her propaganda, er I mean her side of the story.
> 
> *'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*
> 
> *Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal*
> *The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11*
> *A friend said: 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life'*
> *DailyMail.com revealed last week Tyler Perry sent his $150M private plane to pick up the couple from Canada to bring them to his $18M Beverly Hills home*
> *But despite her high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said*
> *They added: 'Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip'*
> *The friend also revealed Meghan 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe'*
> 
> Meghan Markle wants the biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later because she believes the book will set the record straight on why they chose to leave the royal family and help give them a clean slate, an insider exclusively told DailyMail.com.
> 
> The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family by journalists Omid Scobie and Catherine Durand is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.
> 
> But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.
> 
> 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'
> 
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.
> 
> Meghan and Harry shocked the world back in January when they announced they would be stepping away from their royal duties and instead work to become financially independent, splitting their time between the United Kingdom and North America.
> 
> They were originally living at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island in Canada before making a beeline for California after Canada announced it would be restricting its borders due to COVID-19.
> 
> DailyMail.com revealed last week that Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry had sent his $150 million private plane to pick up the couple and their one-year-old son Archie from Canada in mid-March and brought them to live at his $18 million Beverly Hills pad, where they are now staying.
> 
> Despite their mega-rich friends and high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'desperately wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva who was rude to royal staffers and others on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said.
> 
> 'She said the book will help give her and Harry a clean slate. Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip.
> 
> 'Meghan said people need to see her vulnerable side, something the book does in great detail.'
> 
> The friend added: 'I think [Meghan] wants people to feel sorry for her, or at least have compassion for her and all she's been through, which has been anything but a fairy tale.'
> 
> The insider also revealed the Duchess 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe.
> 
> 'The only way Finding Freedom was ever going to be published, was if Meghan had the final say and gave her seal of approval.'
> 
> Co-author Omid Scobie recently said the biography gives a real inside account of the royals' story, saying: 'I've been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left un-turned.
> 
> 'I've seen the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.'
> 
> The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'.
> 
> It promises to go 'beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan's life together, dispelling the many rumours and misconceptions that plague the couple on both sides of the pond'.
> 
> It continues: 'With unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple, Finding Freedom is an honest, up-close, and disarming portrait of a confident, influential, and forward-thinking couple who are unafraid to break with tradition, determined to create a new path away from the spotlight, and dedicated to building a humanitarian legacy that will make a profound difference in the world.'
> 
> Last week, DailyMail.com exclusively revealed the royals were staying at Tyler Perry's ultra-exclusive mansion in Beverly Hills, and that they were whisked away by the producer and actor on an early morning flight.
> 
> The couple have never been seen in public with Perry — best known for his cross-dressing portrayal of feisty Madea in his series of hit films — but are believed to have met him through their mutual close friend Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Fifty-year-old Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom Tuscan-style villa sits on 22 acres on the top of a hill in the guard-gated community and offers sweeping views of the city from the backyard.
> 
> It is not known whether Harry, 35, and Meghan, 38, are renting Perry's property or staying there as guests, but there is no record of the mansion having been sold.
> 
> A source told DailyMail.com: 'Meghan and Harry have been extremely cautious to keep their base in LA under wraps.
> 
> 'Their team helped them choose the location for their transition to Los Angeles wisely.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge has its own guarded gate and Tyler's property has a gate of its own which is watched by their security team.
> 
> 'Beverly Ridge is an excellent place to keep out of view. The neighbors are mostly old money and mega rich business types rather than show business gossips.
> 
> 'It goes without saying that the location is stunning — just one of the most beautiful and desirable areas in LA.'
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eased-believing-book-set-record-straight.html




So she wants the books to be released sooner to set the record straight that she is not a diva and for people to see her vulnerable side and feel sorry for her.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I just got the new Vanity Fair magazine with Princess Anne on the cover; haven't read the article yet, but will do so soon!  I used to like Vanity Fair, but *this* article .. seriously????  UGGH!
> https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2020/5/the-comeback-kids


you said you handn't read it?  oh, is it the title that's bothering you?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I just got the new Vanity Fair magazine with Princess Anne on the cover; haven't read the article yet, but will do so soon!  I used to like Vanity Fair, but *this* article .. seriously????  UGGH!
> https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2020/5/the-comeback-kids



That Erin Vanderhoof is one of several fangirl writers, kind of a wannabe Omid Scobie. You can only hope she is being compensated for all the butt kissing she does.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> you said you handn't read it?  oh, is it the title that's bothering you?


never mind.....


----------



## zen1965

I am sincerely over her „Friends“ blabbering to the press.
Monumental anguish - good grief.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> you said you handn't read it?  oh, is it the title that's bothering you?


Well, the title is a bit offensive IMO, but when you read the blurbs on these two??? .. POPPYCOCK!


----------



## CeeJay

zen1965 said:


> I am sincerely over her „Friends“ blabbering to the press.
> Monumental anguish - good grief.


RIGHT???? .. go ahead Meghan, keep feeding those 'friends' (amazed that she has any) .. so they just might be hauled into the Courtroom in London!  All about YOU Meggie-boo-hoo-hoo!


----------



## Sophisticatted

2 years is not a "life".  Sounds like she needs money from the sale of the book (and appearance fees) ASAP.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Sophisticatted said:


> *2 years is not a "life"*.  Sounds like she needs money from the sale of the book (and appearance fees) ASAP.




It is in soundbyte-land

Despite her inability to THRIVE during those two oh-so-all-important-years she wants us to see how she managed to LIVE despite soul crushing adversity


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just when I thought we were at the bottom. Ooooh no, no no. Why don’t they get it?  Prince Charles and family did such a polished, professional tribute to nurses and _she_ counters with this drivel?!  Mercy.  Because of her, I have learned so many new terms - yacht girl, tongue-poke, vapid, word salad.  I cannot handle much more.
Old but funny article about her tongue-poking. Never knew this was a thang.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/8733679/meghan-markles-tongue-pokes-princess-diana/


----------



## lulilu

Vanity Fair, Town & Country, Elle -- and others -- write endlessly fawning articles, gushing over everything they do.  It's sickening and is in no way fair reporting.  I am not reading those publications any more.


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just when I thought we were at the bottom. Ooooh no, no no. Why don’t they get it?  Prince Charles and family did such a polished, professional tribute to nurses and _she_ counters with this drivel?!  Mercy.  Because of her, I have learned so many new terms - yacht girl, tongue-poke, vapid, word salad.  I cannot handle much more.
> Old but funny article about her tongue-poking. Never knew this was a thang.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/8733679/meghan-markles-tongue-pokes-princess-diana/
> 
> View attachment 4729063



Those tongue pokes make me want to slap her.  So juvenile, unpolished, beneath her (former) position.  Flirty my azz.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> *'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*



I THINK we already know about your vulnerable side, Meg. Geez.


----------



## bisousx

lulilu said:


> Vanity Fair, Town & Country, Elle -- and others -- write endlessly fawning articles, gushing over everything they do.  It's sickening and is in no way fair reporting.  I am not reading those publications any more.



Sunshine Sachs is working overtime for their fees. I have to say, their PR is quite impressive.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> Sunshine Sachs is working overtime for their fees. I have to say, their PR is quite impressive.



They are impressive. It must cost a fortune, but of course all of the money they are saving by not paying their own way for rent and airfare comes in handy for paying those who are creating their brand.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just when I thought we were at the bottom. Ooooh no, no no. Why don’t they get it?  Prince Charles and family did such a polished, professional tribute to nurses and _she_ counters with this drivel?!  Mercy.  Because of her, I have learned so many new terms - yacht girl, tongue-poke, vapid, word salad.  I cannot handle much more.
> Old but funny article about her tongue-poking. Never knew this was a thang.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/8733679/meghan-markles-tongue-pokes-princess-diana/
> 
> View attachment 4729063



Wasn't that 'technique' over-employed by Reese Witherspoon in the Legally Blonde movies?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> OK, I'll agree she's not dumb.  But I don't know that she's qualified to run a large organization.....but they can hire people...again, it's their faces that are their main qualification IMO - and *his* *title*



Hi *sdkitty*, great post! H&M’s qualifications? The sole reason imo anyone is interested in these grifters is his title- take away the ROYAL  and Harry is only a meme.



bag-mania said:


> That Erin Vanderhoof is one of several fangirl writers, kind of a wannabe Omid Scobie. You can only hope she is being *compensated* for all the butt kissing she does.



Yes, am quite sure vast sums of money are being spent by H&M to reinvent their back-story, now being vocalized by their image consultants.

Hard to do when H&M are such a-holes at every twist and turn in their story so far, right?



Sophisticatted said:


> 2 years is not a "life".  *Sounds like she needs money from the sale of the book (and appearance fees) ASAP*.



*Sophisticatted*, yes, your post rings true imo. Am pretty sure that in spite of all the freebies, H&M are running low on funds, not bottom of the barrel and in most people’s opinion they are still fab wealthy but compared to their neighbors?

The lack of funds might explain two events: H&M’s recent media blitz and the fact that after months H&M still have not settled permanently into a new home in LA.

Looks like Meggy forgot to negotiate a $20M home in LA as part of their severance and now no-one in the BRF is going to back them up on this substantial purchase right now.

Can you imagine Harry’s gran-gran or Wills & Kate signing-off on giving Meghan a $20M home of her own? Or Camilla, who surely has daddy’s ear?

That is why H&M’s book must drop ASAP, cash influx needed in a hurry! The book might have have been scribed by scoubie-doubie but the WORDS are all Meghan’s, quite sure.


----------



## mdcx

“Finding Freedom”, the perfect gift for those who you are obliged to exchange gifts with, but not-so-secretly cannot stand. Available at pound and dollar stores everywhere!


----------



## Annawakes

I’ll read this book when it comes to my local library.  It will give me a good laugh!


----------



## threadbender

Probably figures that if they can get it released, then they can get all sorts of paid virtual talk show, fundraiser interviews etc. ASAP. Yeah, no. But, I am betting there would be some more SNL and TMZ "appearances".


----------



## mdcx

Even if M did a full on crying interview with Oprah/Gayle/whoever, would anyone believe it? She comes across as the mean girl, not the victim based on her history. And if she does directly attack or blame Kate/Wills/QEII etc the backlash will be fierce.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Going form this
> _
> Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now.
> _
> to this
> 
> 
> _
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,'
> 
> _


Thanks for the summary, all important topics were addressed!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Before the screens, H caught walking the dog.  
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-and-harry-erect-screens-around-28-million-la-mansion/news-story/929b58dd7ba1e35e8d0daa644b063f53


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Why is he barefoot? They should get a ranch in Wyoming like Kanye - I think they would get the privacy they're so desperately seeking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kkfiregirl said:


> Why is he barefoot? They should get a ranch in Wyoming like Kanye - I think they would get the privacy they're so desperately seeking.



Because they really do love the cameras and the attention. Because they love dominating our _news_ stories. Because they are, ahem, _demanding_ _divas_.  This is why we needed an article to tell us “Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.”  What BS. No one here has referred to them as demanding divas. Who said their life was supposed to be a fairy tale?   The insider is clearly her. 

What is the blue stick he is carrying? A dog training tool?


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, 22 acres. What a surprise. There actually is room to exercise the dogs without getting them in the car during the stay-at-home order and driving out of the community to a place where the paparazzi can “find” them.


----------



## kkfiregirl

But if we don't see them out walking the dogs, how will we know that they're still in love and very happy to have escaped their previous "life?"


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is the blue stick he is carrying? A dog training tool?



I’ll take that question. It’s a device/toy for throwing a ball for your dog. You put a tennis ball in it and you can throw it a lot farther than throwing it by hand. It’s great for dogs who really love to run.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CarryOn2020 said:


> Because they really do love the cameras and the attention. Because they love dominating our _news_ stories. Because they are, ahem, _demanding_ _divas_.  This is why we needed an article to tell us “Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.”  What BS. No one here has referred to them as demanding divas. Who said their life was supposed to be a fairy tale?   The insider is clearly her.
> 
> What is the blue stick he is carrying? A dog training tool?


Kinda looks like a poop shovel. It probably serves a dual purpose for helping them write this book.  

edit to add yeah it does look more like the tennis ball tosser.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Because they really do love the cameras and the attention. Because they love dominating our _news_ stories. Because they are, ahem, _demanding_ _divas_.  This is why we needed an article to tell us “Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added.”  What BS. No one here has referred to them as demanding divas. Who said their life was supposed to be a fairy tale?   The insider is clearly her.
> 
> What is the blue stick he is carrying? A dog training tool?



I think it’s one of the ball flinger things for when simply throwing a ball for a dog isn’t complicated enough for you...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I think it’s one of the ball flinger things for when simply throwing a ball for a dog isn’t complicated enough for you...



So, specially made for the demanding divas?  Got it.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Before the screens, H caught walking the dog.
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...n/news-story/929b58dd7ba1e35e8d0daa644b063f53



So does this confirm they ARE staying at Tyler Perry's?


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m guessing they are still there, looking for the perfect house.


----------



## viciel

Frog in the well.
Her lack of any sophistication is so apparent it's embarrassing. I wonder how many of Sparkle and PC Junior's so called friends in Hollywood are laughing at their child's play behind their backs. Everyone in show bitz (or not) knows how PR works, fake relationships, orchestrated dramas, paid fluff pieces. It's not called the entertainment business for nothing.


----------



## ilovehoneybleu

lalame said:


> So does this confirm they ARE staying at Tyler Perry's?



I was told in February whose home they were to be staying in...obviously this was pre-pandemic. But I was led to believe it was pretty much a done deal and that they were to be arriving very shortly. Now under the circumstances, things could have changed, but I have a strong feeling that just as we were led to believe that they were SURELY in Malibu at first, we are being led to believe through the media that they are at TP’s home.


----------



## LaidyM

BlueCherry said:


> I’m curious and bored ....
> 
> @LaidyM did you specifically join tpf just to vehemently deny Meghan was a yacht girl?



Of course, that’s the only reason why I joined- allow me to roll my eyes.
Let me bust out RDJ again. (Everything is better with RDJ)






It’s actually very simple: I live in a different time zone, not to mention a different country than most (probably all) of you,
Unless it’s something that I feel like I have something to add to (like the foolish yacht rumor) I so not see the point of responding for the sake of responding, especially since by the time I join in everyone already added their amazing commentary.

Also at this point H&M are such a joke that I tend to find myself lost for words.

That’s reason number one, reason number two is personal.

Lastly: I was not aware one must respond to every single post or topic discussed..

But thank you for making me feel so welcomed! I appreciate it!



VigeeLeBrun said:


> Wow, *BlueCherry*, that’s what I call connecting the dots.
> 
> My recent memory recalls only two subjects addressed by posts on this thread by *LaidyM*:
> - *H&M’s true location <NOT Tyler Perry’s home> *
> - MM’s early years yacht girl status <NOT>
> 
> Anyway, appreciate both of your comments here on this thread, *BlueCherry* & *LaidyM* ♥️



???
I don’t recall responding about that topic, I did spoke about Harry and the Nazi outfit, and the queen salute as a child.


And thank you!
I quite enjoy your comments too!


----------



## hedur

kkfiregirl said:


> I would't be surprised if Megs herself was among us ...



Her taste in handbags is far too pedestrian for me to believe she’d be a member here. Wake me when she’s seen with an old school Balenciaga.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> but after a whooping 2 years and a million dollar wardrobe, she decides it's time to go?



I was just thinking about that yesterday as I was cleaning out screenshots and found one of Beatrice's engagement. Her dress was ready made and around 400 bucks. 

Kate's engagement dress was ready made and around the same price point.

So the blood princess and the future queen dressed simply for their engagement pictures, but the divorced TV actress needed a 20000 bucks couture gown for hers? So telling.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

It's such a grand house that the screen looks pitiful. Poor house. Like a budget DIY project. They may be paying for it themselves.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Meg has shot her bolt.  She can keep telling us (and it seems she will) what a wonderful, vulnerable and misunderstood softie she is, but it won’t work.  It’ll backfire, because people have her measure by now.  Further over-exposure will leave the public mightily sick of hearing her name and the fluff pieces will be subject to ridicule.

And seriously, wtf does she think she’s doing?  We “normal” folk are wrestling with the consequences of the pandemic.  THE most significant public health and economic crisis in a lifetime and Meg’s still wittering on about not feeling sufficiently appreciated??  Tells you more about her character than any book can, doesn’t it?  I mean you might as well make a documentary about how s-h-i-tty your life is in the middle of a goodwill tour to a third world country or something


----------



## doni

kkfiregirl said:


> Why is he barefoot? They should get a ranch in Wyoming like Kanye - I think they would get the privacy they're so desperately seeking.


Who desperately seeking privacy moves to LA? To a celebrity’s mansion? And announces with big fanfare the publication of a book about their lives? 
These don’t strike me as ensuring-privacy moves...


----------



## needlv

Clearblueskies said:


> Meg has shot her bolt.  She can keep telling us (and it seems she will) what a wonderful, vulnerable and misunderstood softie she is, but it won’t work.  It’ll backfire, because people have her measure by now.  Further over-exposure will leave the public mightily sick of hearing her name and the fluff pieces will be subject to ridicule.
> 
> And seriously, wtf does she think she’s doing?  We “normal” folk are wrestling with the consequences of the pandemic.  THE most significant public health and economic crisis in a lifetime and Meg’s still wittering on about not feeling sufficiently appreciated??  Tells you more about her character than any book can, doesn’t it?  I mean you might as well make a documentary about how s-h-i-tty your life is in the middle of a goodwill tour to a third world country or something



This is so on point.

Both M & H must be so unaware of how foolish and utterly spoilt they look by continuing this behaviour.


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> This is so on point.
> 
> Both M & H must be so unaware of how foolish and utterly spoilt they look by continuing this behaviour.


Who, in their right mind, having shot themselves in the foot countless times, goes “pass me the gun, I need to try that move again”??


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> I’ll read this book when it comes to my local library.  It will give me a good laugh!



Your time is too precious. Quicker and more fun to catch-up here


----------



## papertiger

threadbender said:


> Probably figures that if they can get it released, then they can get all sorts of paid virtual talk show, fundraiser interviews etc. ASAP. Yeah, no. But, I am betting there would be some more SNL and TMZ "appearances".



That's why it's being released in August. Watching Zoom interviews is even more boring than being in one.

'They' also probably think people won't be so preoccupied by this annoying 'bug' thing going around. Obviously, in a few months, no one will be grieving over the death of loved ones, the ill health of others, frantic with fear over unemployment and rent/mortgage arrears, worried about their jobs or catching-up at school.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> I’ll take that question. It’s a device/toy for throwing a ball for your dog. You put a tennis ball in it and you can throw it a lot farther than throwing it by hand. It’s great for dogs who really love to run.



And you can bypass the ball drool too when they bring it back. I always mean to buy one and forget until that point in a play session.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> This is so on point.
> 
> *Both M & H must be so unaware of how foolish and utterly spoilt they look by continuing this behaviour*.



Unfortunately, it seems not.


----------



## Lodpah

Oh her big heart, she certainly knows where the cameras are, even moving her head to the side a bit to make sure she is staring at the camera.


----------



## Luvbolide

“Monumental anguish” - WTF is she talking about?  This actually makes me livid - while people are dying by the tens of thousands, businesses are going bankrupt and unemployment is at the highest rates ever...and she wants us to feel her monumental anguish at such things as not being to wear the tiara that she wanted to wear at her wedding?!?!  Or having to wear a hat when she would have preferred not to?!?!  This woman is delusional.

I sincerely hope that this book gambit blows up right in her face.  If she wants to impress people with her devotion to her favored causes, why doesn’t she shut up and go about the work.  In the past year or so she has been on an extended vacation, moved to Canada and did nothing of value.  Then moved via private jet to LA where she has done nothing except deliver a few bags of food and have that ridiculous fence put up.  

Wonder when she will actually do something for someone else.  And when she will learn to be gracious and not expect kudos and fanfare every time she thinks she has helped someone.

Ugh....


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eased-believing-book-set-record-straight.html


When I am bored with my day and in-between my Zoom calls, I just go to those DM articles and read the comment section! It's just so funny! I do notice there are a lot of negative comments from the states too.


----------



## BlueCherry

Someone reported my post and it got deleted. I got Markled


----------



## CarryOn2020

BlueCherry said:


> Someone reported my post and it got deleted. I got Markled



probably H&M — DM now says H is _rudderless_.


----------



## LittleStar88

How are these freeloaders not embarrassed by being freeloaders? 
Can still see through those privacy screens. What are they thinking?
I agree as said above. If they truly and honestly wanted privacy they would have the ability to make that possible (big ranch in the middle of Montana or something).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I’ll take that question. It’s a device/toy for throwing a ball for your dog. You put a tennis ball in it and you can throw it a lot farther than throwing it by hand. It’s great for dogs who really love to run.



it’s called a Chuck-It. Ball throw toy for dogs.

http://chuckit-toys.co.uk/our-products/launchers.html


----------



## eunaddict

lulilu said:


> Those tongue pokes make me want to slap her.  So juvenile, unpolished, beneath her (former) position.  Flirty my azz.



It was "cute" when Diana did it because she was just 20 when she married and those photos were taken in her early-mid 20s; and because she was the first to engage the press and public the way she did.

It's a lot less "cute" when you're 37 years old; it's not flirty, it's not relatable, it's just childish. And it's a method usually employed by women who want to appear younger and more relatable and "with it" than they actually are - like when Grandparents try their hand at memes.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> it’s called a Chuck-It. Ball throw toy for dogs.
> 
> http://chuckit-toys.co.uk/our-products/launchers.html



Yes, that's it. The one I had wasn't a Chuck-It, it was some knockoff version I picked up at the supermarket. Fortunately, dogs don't care if they don't get the name brand.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Yes, that's it. The one I had wasn't a Chuck-It, it was some knockoff version I picked up at the supermarket. Fortunately, dogs don't care if they don't get the name brand.



They have a lot of different kinds now. They're great for big/high-energy dogs! Good to see that their dog has room to roam and that Harry is giving the pup some attention and outdoor interaction.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> They have a lot of different kinds now. They're great for big/high-energy dogs! Good to see that their dog has room to roam and that Harry is giving the pup some attention and outdoor interaction.


yay - that makes two positives - this and the hunting ban


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> They have a lot of different kinds now. They're great for big/high-energy dogs! *Good to see that their dog has room to roam and that Harry is giving the pup some attention and outdoor interaction.*



I'm glad Harry is taking care of the dog because in the end that Lab will be his best friend when he feels he has nobody else.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> yay - that makes two positives - this and the hunting ban



Right?! Thank goodness the dog is getting some fun. 

No need for hunting when you can go skeet and target shooting. I am guessing he left all of his firearms in the UK and unlikely that Meghan will let him get one in CA and bring it into the house...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: the tongue poking. MM does a lot of sh*t she thinks is cute and adorable, but is just not for anyone, especially not at nearly 40.


----------



## CobaltBlu

"monumental anguish"  ?  gosh.  I hope she is OK.

But seriously, these two.... they are absurd.


----------



## PewPew

LittleStar88 said:


> *How are these freeloaders not embarrassed by being freeloaders?*
> Can still see through those privacy screens. What are they thinking?
> I agree as said above. If they truly and honestly wanted privacy they would have the ability to make that possible (big ranch in the middle of Montana or something).



They will never see themselves as grifters bc they feel entitled to all these gifts and privileges, as well as exempt from the rules and laws of the commoners bc they are world humanitarians who will educate us (once they decide what will be profitable to harp on).

Remember this is the couple who peevishly wrote on their website that they deserve UK-taxpayer-paid security & associated costs (estimated $20million per annum), while they reside out of the country due to Mr.6TH IN LINE’s birthright & Duchess “independent profile.”


----------



## mrsinsyder

CobaltBlu said:


> "monumental anguish"  ?  gosh.  I hope she is OK.
> 
> But seriously, these two.... they are absurd.


The delusion that they think this book is going to bring everyone back over to their side. Even more so while the entire world is suffering, unemployment is the highest it's been since the depression, etc. They're quickly moving from dense to disgusting.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They just keep digging a bigger hole.


----------



## kemilia

Jktgal said:


> It's such a grand house that the screen looks pitiful. Poor house. Like a budget DIY project. They may be paying for it themselves.
> 
> View attachment 4729418


If this is such a ritzy-titzy neighborhood, why are these screens ok? 

I SO do NOT live in such a neighborhood but I would be cited for something like that in a day's time, if it even took THAT long,


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> If this is such a ritzy-titzy neighborhood, why are these screens ok?
> 
> I SO do NOT live in such a neighborhood but I would be cited for something like that in a day's time, if it even took THAT long,



If they are cited the fine will go to the property owner. You take care of that Tyler Perry. Being a landlord is a PITA.


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> How are these freeloaders not embarrassed by being freeloaders?
> Can still see through those privacy screens. What are they thinking?
> I agree as said above. If they truly and honestly wanted privacy they would have the ability to make that possible (big ranch in the middle of Montana or something).


Or the Frogmore "cottage."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> That is a big problem with them, they are all talk and little action. They want the credit and publicity for being humanitarians and environmentalists, but they don't make even the tiniest sacrifice from living their entitled lifestyle of the rich and famous. So they will continue to fly in private jets and live in giant mansions which require using large amounts of energy while only being a family of three. The sad thing is some people buy into their hype.



how can you be a humanitarian when you are leeching on others and have no dignity ?


BlueCherry said:


> Someone reported my post and it got deleted. I got Markled



I can't even blink with you guys, what did I miss?  Seriously, lol....


----------



## CobaltBlu

How does security for these two add up to 8 million dollars a year? I think that was the number being thrown around.

Lets say they have 10 full time security guards, thats a lot, at $150,000 a year each (average...maybe I am off here) ...   thats 1.5 million.  A couple tricked out bullet proof suburbans, lets say at 400K each (that seems reasonable; 6 times the base price? )  2.3 million.  lets say they pay all their expenses, to the tune of another 150K a year for all 10 of them...3.8 million.  A posh system and monitoring.  1 million, in hardware, so thats not every year. Plus this little crash pad they are in probably has security already.  I am still under 5 million and that is more than 3 guards for each of them and 1.5 way overpriced suburbans also.  You can probably throw in a few walkie talkies, a tiara, and a bullet proof vest or two, maybe even a couple dogs and still be under 5 million. 

Traveling with them should be pretty cheap for the rest of 2020 at least.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I was even thinking the Town might take issue with the screens as they are an eyesore!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm glad Harry is taking care of the dog because in the end that Lab will be his best friend when he feels he has nobody else.


seriously dogs do give unconditional love.   I hope he has this bond and keeps it - that the dog doesn't get Markled


----------



## Emeline

CobaltBlu said:


> "monumental anguish"  ?  gosh.  I hope she is OK.
> 
> But seriously, these two.... they are absurd.


Only the sparkles would have the nerve to whinge on about their personal "monumental anguish" during a pandemic.


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> Or the Frogmore "cottage."


Order how they are doing on paying off the Frogmore expenses , as promised ?


----------



## marietouchet

Mrs.Z said:


> I was even thinking the Town might take issue with the screens as they are an eyesore!


I was thinking they are not at TP’s place, someone else is there, and the poor resident is having to put up with this media circus, I feel for a bystander


----------



## doni

marietouchet said:


> Order how they are doing on paying off the Frogmore expenses , as promised ?


Well they are saving a lot on rent, so there is that.


----------



## scarlet555

Emeline said:


> Only the sparkles would have the nerve to whinge on about their personal "monumental anguish" during a pandemic.



Don't forget 'turmoil' and how they had to 'negotiate their exit', you only need to negotiate if you have no shame and insist on an income despite your exit because you think you have something to blackmail or want to whine about something.  There are no fools except for these two.  This book is about M of course, make no mistake, so people see her 'vulnerable side'-I suppose those that want to learn from an attention seeking rumored yacht girl and d-list actress can do so-I'm thinking this book will be popular after all.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seriously dogs do give unconditional love.   I hope he has this bond and keeps it - that *the dog doesn't get Markled*



When it happens to one of their dogs it's called getting Bogarted. Being given away because it's inconvenient to take him with them. I hope that with Harry that won't happen to these dogs.


----------



## lanasyogamama

scarlet555 said:


> Don't forget 'turmoil' and how they had to 'negotiate their exit', you only need to negotiate if you have no shame and insist on an income despite your exit because you think you have something to blackmail or want to whine about something.  There are no fools except for these two.  This book is about M of course, make no mistake, so people see her 'vulnerable side'-I suppose those that want to learn from an attention seeking rumored yacht girl and d-list actress can do so-I'm thinking this book will be popular after all.



Exactly, people that aren’t aware give them credit for “walking away from it all” when that’s absolutely not the case.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rudderless? Monumental anguish?  torment?  
With this daily onslaught of poor-pitiful-me stories, the super-expensive PR team ought to tell them that they are making themselves objects of ridicule. No A lister or 1%-er respects that stuff. 

Now this:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...chess-Sussex-Duke-biography-book-Royal-Family
Royal expert Roberta Fiorito told the Royally Obsessed podcast that the 2018 photo of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry that has been chosen as the cover of the book is a beautiful picture of the couple. She added that the picture projects that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are still royalty despite being unable to use the word in their branding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The battle continues. Looks like it will get ugly. Passing the popcorn  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ly-photography-superpower-reveals-expert.html
*Royal Family 'see photography as their very own superpower' and being pictured is 'vital to the very survival of the monarchy', reveals chief curator at Historic Royal Palaces*

*Historian Lucy Worsley said the royal family 'see photography as a superpower' *
*Explained how The Firm's snaps are 'vital to the very survival of the monarchy' *
*Suggested if photographs from a tour aren't great, the tour is deemed a failure*
*Lucy Worsley's Royal Photo Album will air on BBC Four tonight at 9pm *


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> How does security for these two add up to 8 million dollars a year? I think that was the number being thrown around.
> 
> Lets say they have 10 full time security guards, thats a lot, at $150,000 a year each (average...maybe I am off here) ...   thats 1.5 million.  A couple tricked out bullet proof suburbans, lets say at 400K each (that seems reasonable; 6 times the base price? )  2.3 million.  lets say they pay all their expenses, to the tune of another 150K a year for all 10 of them...3.8 million.  A posh system and monitoring.  1 million, in hardware, so thats not every year. Plus this little crash pad they are in probably has security already.  I am still under 5 million and that is more than 3 guards for each of them and 1.5 way overpriced suburbans also.  You can probably throw in a few walkie talkies, a tiara, and a bullet proof vest or two, maybe even a couple dogs and still be under 5 million.
> 
> Traveling with them should be pretty cheap for the rest of 2020 at least.



They've added it up themselves. 

They'll take the 8M as cash and won't worry about book-keeping or receipts (that's for plebs)


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Order how they are doing on paying off the Frogmore expenses , as promised ?



All silent. 

It'll be kept quiet too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Jktgal said:


> It's such a grand house that the screen looks pitiful. Poor house. Like a budget DIY project. They may be paying for it themselves.
> 
> View attachment 4729418



Two things about that ugly screen...
1. They should at least consider buying sustainable screens that they can pack up and take with them to re-use at their next 'gifted' glorified Airbnb. The world has enough pointless crap in it. I thought they were supposed to care about the environment?  Never mind the fact that 2 adults and 1 very young child need a house that big to stay in, free or not.
2. Those pictures of JCMH on the grounds of that house look like they were taken from a height, so even if their was a screen or fence there, they still would have gotten the pictures. Plus it's see-through so, it's _pointless_ either way.
It's hilarious that they fled the UK in seek of privacy to set-up a new life in the paparazzi HQ of the world. So dumb.


----------



## bisousx

marietouchet said:


> Order how they are doing on paying off the Frogmore expenses , as promised ?



It won’t be a single penny. Neither Harry nor Meg strike me as the type that’s accustomed to being held accountable. The RF would be happy to turn a blind eye and hope the public forgets.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The battle continues. Looks like it will get ugly. Passing the popcorn
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ly-photography-superpower-reveals-expert.html
> *Royal Family 'see photography as their very own superpower' and being pictured is 'vital to the very survival of the monarchy', reveals chief curator at Historic Royal Palaces*
> 
> *Historian Lucy Worsley said the royal family 'see photography as a superpower' *
> *Explained how The Firm's snaps are 'vital to the very survival of the monarchy' *
> *Suggested if photographs from a tour aren't great, the tour is deemed a failure*
> *Lucy Worsley's Royal Photo Album will air on BBC Four tonight at 9pm *


Lucy Worsley is an accomplished scholar but her presenting style is a bit too cute for me. She likes to try on period outfits, not my thing, but she is engaging to listen to. Not pedantic.
I have to agree that snaps are vital to survival. Yes, there have been news reels , video tapes for a 100 years. But, no one trots out the videos of speeches, it  IS the panoply-filled images that survive. Thousands of horse drawn carriages for weddings and funerals - that kind of thing.
I was just thinking that all the ZOOM chats are the first time I have really heard any of the BRF for donkeys years


----------



## Aimee3

Maybe it’s the angle of the photos, but if it’s a 22 acre property why is the pool is right next to a road without any privacy trees etc?  That so called privacy mesh fence screams “this is where we are! Come take photos!”


----------



## lalame

kemilia said:


> If this is such a ritzy-titzy neighborhood, why are these screens ok?
> 
> I SO do NOT live in such a neighborhood but I would be cited for something like that in a day's time, if it even took THAT long,



Someone correct me here but I think I've seen these types of screens up even at FRONT gates of people's homes in Beverly Hills and WeHo...


----------



## lalame

Aimee3 said:


> Maybe it’s the angle of the photos, but if it’s a 22 acre property why is the pool is right next to a road without any privacy trees etc?  That so called privacy mesh fence screams “this is where we are! Come take photos!”


That looks like the private driveway to the house to me... There's probably two different entrances to the compound.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The photo of the dog in the pool looks like it was taken from an upstairs balcony or window. I’m thinking the photos were staged, even the frowny face photo. They have an agenda - always.  Still, if I were Tyler, I would redesign the pool area, possibly with some more landscaping or another building. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> Meg has shot her bolt.  She can keep telling us (and it seems she will) what a wonderful, vulnerable and misunderstood softie she is, but it won’t work.  It’ll backfire, because people have her measure by now.  Further over-exposure will leave the public mightily sick of hearing her name and the fluff pieces will be subject to ridicule.
> 
> And seriously, wtf does she think she’s doing?  We “normal” folk are wrestling with the consequences of the pandemic.  THE most significant public health and economic crisis in a lifetime and Meg’s still wittering on about not feeling sufficiently appreciated??  Tells you more about her character than any book can, doesn’t it?  I mean you might as well make a documentary about how s-h-i-tty your life is in the middle of a goodwill tour to a third world country or something


*CAN'T EVEN SAY HOW MANY TIMES I LOVE THIS!!!!!!!!!!! * Couldn't agree more; personally, I think this 'book' is going to make them (_especially HER_) look even worse, especially in these times!  *Boo-Hoo-Hoo* .. she had it "so hard", yeah well .. get this Meghan, the number of homeless folks here in LA have now *increased by 70%* .. yup, 70%!!!!!!!  These folks LOST everything because of the pandemic, they don't have an effin' home to put up stupid-a$$ "privacy" screens, they barely have any food, they have to be outside in the elements, and subject themselves (_and families in some cases_) to even more disease .. *HOW DARE SHE* whine about how she was treated .. and we ALL know that that book written by Stupido-Scoobie-Doobie is *total CRAP* that she has essentially written to yet again, make *HER *(_narcissist a$$_) look 'good' - HA!  Joke is on you Meggie-Boo-Hoo-Hoo; I don't think many of your LA neighbors are going to think kindly of you .. and we were just told that we will be continuing the quarantine until the END of August!


----------



## Aminamina

CeeJay said:


> I just got the new Vanity Fair magazine with Princess Anne on the cover; haven't read the article yet, but will do so soon!  I used to like Vanity Fair, but *this* article .. seriously????  UGGH!
> https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2020/5/the-comeback-kids


But this article is pure vomit inducing I mean it's insulting to anyone who is not brain dead....argh


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Someone correct me here but I think I've seen these types of screens up even at FRONT gates of people's homes in Beverly Hills and WeHo...


I've seen them too, but they are usually there only when there is some construction going on ..


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> The photo of the dog in the pool looks like it was taken from an upstairs balcony or window. I’m thinking the photos were staged, even the frowny face photo. They have an agenda - always.  Still, if I were Tyler, I would redesign the pool area, possibly with some more landscaping or another building. Just my 2 cents.



That's what I was wondering too! How is someone taking photos of them across 22 acres?


----------



## LittleStar88

I cannot even wrap my head around expecting this level of entitlement for this long. 

I get the Canada pit stop - there a few months short-term so you take that one freebie and run with it. But to follow it up with another super grand and not very private area freebie while they continue *Duke & Duchess Do Nothings' Couch Surfing Tour 2020*? 

Have they ever not said one thing and then done another? The carbon footprint of that house is probably pretty high. Everything they said they were going to do is not happening. The big venture, the living financially independent (seems everyone else is picking up the tab while they lounge around), living a private life, changing the world, etc... 







Sorry guys, I guess between being on shelter at home orders for sooooo loooong and a quieter than usual workday, I have too much bandwidth to think about this situation and how absolutely insane that rich people feel so compelled to help other rich people with their own bags o' money and insane resources like this. WTF? Same WTF level as rich people getting super expensive free loot at gifting lounges and directly from vendors, etc.

Ok, back to work and being self-supportive and a contributing member of society   [_steps off of soapbox_]


----------



## mrsinsyder

I mean really they could say they paid back the Frogmore stuff whether it's true or not... no one would really know the difference.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> That's what I was wondering too! How is someone taking photos of them across 22 acres?


You know the area right (_the BH "Postal Code"_) .. there are tons of hills and valleys (_the 'community' is actually off Coldwater Canyon_), and as such, those photogs can go to one of the other hills in the area and put on those telephoto lens .. and snap away.  Or, they could be in a Helicopter (_too many out here to begin with_) .. so, in that case, those privacy screens aren't going to do sh!t!  They moved to the worst pap area in the US; *ZERO SYMPATHY* for those grifters! 

On another note .. in regards to "hiking' in the area .. uh, how?  Unless there is a trail, NO ONE would want to hike up those hills with all that scrub brush, thorns, needles, cactus, etc.!!!!  Stupid me, when I first moved out to CA and was in Pasadena, I went out on a walk with a friend up in the hills by the Rose Bowl.  Well, typical me (_I don't have the best balance in the world - thank you swimmer's ear_), I went to look at some of the desert flora and next thing you know, I go tumbling-bumbling down the hill .. until I was able to grab onto something (_and yes - a nice big cactus_)!  Needless to say, I ended up scratched beyond belief and actually ended up having to go to the ER to have some of those needles/thorns taken out because they went in pretty deep .. talk about EMBARRASSING!


----------



## kemilia

scarlet555 said:


> how can you be a humanitarian when you are leeching on others and have no dignity ?
> 
> 
> I can't even blink with you guys, what did I miss?  Seriously, lol....


I missed it too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

mrsinsyder said:


> I mean really they could say they paid back the Frogmore stuff whether it's true or not... no one would really know the difference.


I think the authorities here will know. If they paid, it would be a record of it.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> You know the area right (_the BH "Postal Code"_) .. there are tons of hills and valleys (_the 'community' is actually off Coldwater Canyon_), and as such, those photogs can go to one of the other hills in the area and put on those telephoto lens .. and snap away.  Or, they could be in a Helicopter (_too many out here to begin with_) .. so, in that case, those privacy screens aren't going to do sh!t!  They moved to the worst pap area in the US; *ZERO SYMPATHY* for those grifters!
> 
> On another note .. in regards to "hiking' in the area .. uh, how?  Unless there is a trail, NO ONE would want to hike up those hills with all that scrub brush, thorns, needles, cactus, etc.!!!!  Stupid me, when I first moved out to CA and was in Pasadena, I went out on a walk with a friend up in the hills by the Rose Bowl.  Well, typical me (_I don't have the best balance in the world - thank you swimmer's ear_), I went to look at some of the desert flora and next thing you know, I go tumbling-bumbling down the hill .. until I was able to grab onto something (_and yes - a nice big cactus_)!  Needless to say, I ended up scratched beyond belief and actually ended up having to go to the ER to have some of those needles/thorns taken out because they went in pretty deep .. talk about EMBARRASSING!


Live and learn, that's my motto (about your walking experience, not the Harkles).


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> The battle continues. Looks like it will get ugly. Passing the popcorn
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ly-photography-superpower-reveals-expert.html
> *Royal Family 'see photography as their very own superpower' and being pictured is 'vital to the very survival of the monarchy', reveals chief curator at Historic Royal Palaces*
> 
> *Historian Lucy Worsley said the royal family 'see photography as a superpower' *
> *Explained how The Firm's snaps are 'vital to the very survival of the monarchy' *
> *Suggested if photographs from a tour aren't great, the tour is deemed a failure*
> *Lucy Worsley's Royal Photo Album will air on BBC Four tonight at 9pm *


I love Lucy W docs! She's a hoot and she knows all the royal "stuff."


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> You know the area right (_the BH "Postal Code"_) .. there are tons of hills and valleys (_the 'community' is actually off Coldwater Canyon_), and as such, those photogs can go to one of the other hills in the area and put on those telephoto lens .. and snap away.  Or, they could be in a Helicopter (_too many out here to begin with_) .. so, in that case, those privacy screens aren't going to do sh!t!  They moved to the worst pap area in the US; *ZERO SYMPATHY* for those grifters!
> 
> On another note .. in regards to "hiking' in the area .. uh, how?  Unless there is a trail, NO ONE would want to hike up those hills with all that scrub brush, thorns, needles, cactus, etc.!!!!  Stupid me, when I first moved out to CA and was in Pasadena, I went out on a walk with a friend up in the hills by the Rose Bowl.  Well, typical me (_I don't have the best balance in the world - thank you swimmer's ear_), I went to look at some of the desert flora and next thing you know, I go tumbling-bumbling down the hill .. until I was able to grab onto something (_and yes - a nice big cactus_)!  Needless to say, I ended up scratched beyond belief and actually ended up having to go to the ER to have some of those needles/thorns taken out because they went in pretty deep .. talk about EMBARRASSING!



I don't know that area too intimately... I was imagining it was like rte 23 where you can't really see anything due to all the hills.  Though I know lenses can be super advanced these days. Geez, to go in a helicopter is crazy... even after what happened to Kobe, imagine you risk your life and limb just to sneak a photo of H playing with the dog. I suppose it COULD be big $$$ for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@CeeJay  Thank you for sharing what it’s really like in the Hills. It’s never quite what it looks like. I thought the terrain looked rough, so I was surprised H was barefoot.  Seemed one more strange thing. Plus, isn’t it hot out there?  I’m still thinking the photos were staged.  Agree with zero sympathy.  

@LittleStar88  Add Travelyst to your list of nothings from H&M.  Wasn’t there an article that they had to shutter that effort due to Pandemic or the ‘Tina (as Armie Hammer says)?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Lol I love how they're calling Harry "Hollywood Idle"


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> I've seen them too, but they are usually there only when there is some construction going on ..


Didn't they have these sort of screens while in Canada? Maybe they travel with them--

"did you pack the screens? I packed them last time we moved so it's your turn--I'm not packing these things every time we move!"


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> When it happens to one of their dogs it's called getting Bogarted. Being given away because it's inconvenient to take him with them. I hope that with Harry that won't happen to these dogs.


If Harry isn’t careful he could be Bogarted before the dogs are.  When the dust settles he will be the one with his tail between his legs.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> @CeeJay  Thank you for sharing what it’s really like in the Hills. It’s never quite what it looks like. I thought the terrain looked rough, so I was surprised H was barefoot.  Seemed one more strange thing. Plus, isn’t it hot out there?  I’m still thinking the photos were staged.  Agree with zero sympathy.
> 
> @LittleStar88  Add Travelyst to your list of nothings from H&M.  Wasn’t there an article that they had to shutter that effort due to Pandemic or the ‘Tina (as Armie Hammer says)?


No worries @CarryOn2020 !  Well, remember .. there is a lot of green (_grass_) around the house and that is where Harry would have been.  To be honest, I would absolutely 100% have FENCES around a yard that is up in the hills because 1 little wobble, and you will end up like me (_or even worse - depending on where you are_)!  The weather has been odd out here .. we had high 90's last week, but now we are in the lower 70's, BUT .. that sun is hot and with his lovely white skin ("_only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun_") comes to mind (_can't even say how many times I heard this when we were excavating out in the US Southwest .. as my husband is very pale and freckled like Harry_)!  

Just for yucks - many years ago did a tour of the very famous mid-century modern home in the Hollywood Hills - the "_Stahl_" house.  A quintessential case-study house (_beautifully photographed by Julius Shulman_) in which the house literally sits on a precipice of land.  If you are interested in Architecture and especially mid-century modern, this is a MUST see .. BUT, my god .. do not get too close to the 'end' (literally) of the land which is just a little bit beyond the pool!!!  Not that I got that far, but I asked our tour guide (_who was the wife of the Stahl son_) .. "_uh, how did they have kids here where you can go tumbling down this hill and into all that desert flora & fauna_!"?!?   She laughed and said "_oh, don't you see that little 'fence' down there_"?  Honest-to-god, this supposed fence was about 3 feet tall and made of fabric that was "supposed" to bounce the person back up to the surface!  Yeah, maybe a very lightweight kid, but an adult? .. NFW!!!  I took a bunch of pictures of that just because it was so unbelievable to me!


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> If Harry isn’t careful he could be Bogarted before the dogs are.  When the dust settles he will be the one with his tail between his legs.



Who knows? Neither one seems like they would be able to admit making a mistake in marrying. They may stick together out of sheer stubbornness. They feed each other's neuroses so that may work in their favor.

Meghan may want to throw in the towel, but what would she have? As a celebrity she is NOTHING without him. A wannabe who married a famous guy to become famous herself. She doesn't have any unique talent or ability, she's not particularly likable, and she has nothing to offer that many others aren't already doing much better than her.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...chess-Sussex-Duke-biography-book-Royal-Family
> *She added that the picture projects that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are still royalty despite being unable to use the word in their branding*.





What a load of nonsense. I can't see how the picture on the cover of their book 'projects that they are still royalty'. They look like colleagues leaving work on a Friday, heading to happy-hour. There's absolutely nothing Royal looking about the picture.
You can also tell how bitter they still are about not being able to use 'Royal' in ThEiR BrAnDiNg


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t see her staying in the marriage if she’s unhappy, she has bolted at the least bit of inconvenience since she met him.


----------



## lalame

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t see her staying in the marriage if she’s unhappy, she has bolted at the least bit of inconvenience since she met him.



And she divorced Trevor after just a year of moving to Toronto and being forced to deal with that transition right? Not that I think anyone needs to stay "just because," but she seems like someone who just doesn't put up well with adversity. 1-2 years is her breaking point.

Maybe the book should've been called "Finding Freedom from Commitments".


----------



## Emeline

lalame said:


> And she divorced Trevor after just a year of moving to Toronto and being forced to deal with that transition right? Not that I think anyone needs to stay "just because," but she seems like someone who just doesn't put up well with adversity. 1-2 years is her breaking point.
> 
> Maybe the book should've been called "Finding Freedom from Commitments".


She does have a pattern.
Adding my alternate title into the mix:

Finding  Freedom: The Two Year Plan.


----------



## bag-mania

Wasn't she already scoping out potential prospects in Toronto before she jettisoned Trevor? Seems like she hooked up with the chef relatively quickly and we have no idea how many guys she may have dated once or twice before she decided they had nothing she wanted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

ilovehoneybleu said:


> I was told in February whose home they were to be staying in...obviously this was pre-pandemic. But I was led to believe it was pretty much a done deal and that they were to be arriving very shortly. Now under the circumstances, things could have changed, but I have a strong feeling that just as we were led to believe that they were SURELY in Malibu at first, we are being led to believe through the media that they are at TP’s home.



hi *ilovehoneybleu*, been thinking about your recent post, what do you think happened that caused a change of residence for H&M? I do believe you and it would be just like anyone spoiled rotten to make plans and then pivot at the last minute oblivious to the havoc caused by scheduling changes.



lalame said:


> That's what I was wondering too! How is someone taking photos of them across 22 acres?



*lalame*, THIS! 
A show of hands here that believe a mysterious UFO/drone took those lovely pics of Harry barefoot on "his" estate or were they "leaked" by H&M? <hey, I'm totally slumming it over here, Gran-gran!>


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Emeline said:


> She does have a pattern.
> Adding my alternate title into the mix:
> 
> *Finding  Freedom: The Two Year Plan*.



Cannot resist, *Emeline*:

MEGHAN MARKLE & h a r r y: Finding Freedom FOR MYSELF
or 
MEGHAN MARKLE & h a r r y: Finding Freedom FROM MYSELF
<bc it is all about ME, right?>


----------



## lanasyogamama

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Cannot resist, *Emeline*:
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE & h a r r y: Finding Freedom FOR MYSELF
> or
> MEGHAN MARKLE & h a r r y: Finding Freedom FROM MYSELF
> <bc it is all about ME, right?>


Literally LOL.


----------



## scarlet555

Harry has been reduced to a tiny composite of M's big plans for humanitarian dominance and acting, and of course freeloading off of anyone.  Before H she was not known at all, after the marriage, H will be just another Trevor, until he regains his title.   H without his title sounded good, and perhaps liberating for H, but now, he's been reduced to the role of an extra in M's paparazzi show.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Who knows? Neither one seems like they would be able to admit making a mistake in marrying. They may stick together out of sheer stubbornness. They feed each other's neuroses so that may work in their favor.
> 
> Meghan may want to throw in the towel, but what would she have? As a celebrity she is NOTHING without him. A wannabe who married a famous guy to become famous herself. She doesn't have any unique talent or ability, she's not particularly likable, and she has nothing to offer that many others aren't already doing much better than her.


Narcissistic people don’t let go. It will be Harry that will bolt. Too bad his friends have been alienated. If Harry still had his good friends he would’ve a much stronger person and will be able to have strength. MM knows  exactly what’s she’s doing.


----------



## Bag*Snob

Are we sure the title isn't  FINDING FREEBIES _A Guide to High Level Grubbing From A-Listers!_

(I can't be the only one or first to post this)


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Who knows? Neither one seems like they would be able to admit making a mistake in marrying. They may stick together out of sheer stubbornness. They feed each other's neuroses so that may work in their favor.
> 
> Meghan may want to throw in the towel, but what would she have? As a celebrity she is NOTHING without him. A wannabe who married a famous guy to become famous herself. She doesn't have any unique talent or ability, she's not particularly likable, and she has nothing to offer that many others aren't already doing much better than her.


You’re most likely right.   And you’re absolutely right that she’s not talented or likable, but she thinks she’s all of that and a gorgeous bag of chips.  I think he has pretty much served his purpose.  She has the title.  She has the baby (wouldn’t be surprised if she has her own “spare” by this time next year).  Financially she’s set for life, or on track.  And whether or not they like her everybody now knows her name.   I’m thinking two more years? Five total?


----------



## carleykitten

Clearblueskies said:


> Who, in their right mind, having shot themselves in the foot countless times, goes “pass me the gun, I need to try that move again”??


Lollllllllzzzzz 
So hilarious


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, this is what your cousin and her husband are doing.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> You’re most likely right.   And you’re absolutely right that she’s not talented or likable, but she thinks she’s all of that and a gorgeous bag of chips.  I think he has pretty much served his purpose.  She has the title.  She has the baby (wouldn’t be surprised if she has her own “spare” by this time next year).  Financially she’s set for life, or on track.  And whether or not they like her everybody now knows her name.   I’m thinking two more years? Five total?



She will only let him go if she thinks there is some way she could do better without him. I don't know what hold she has over him, perhaps Harry genuinely loves her and Meghan loves that he loves her.

Could be wrong but I don't believe she'll have another baby. She doesn't need a spare, one child will serve the purpose of financial obligation and forever having a tie to Harry. She doesn't want a 40+ year old's pregnancy wreaking her figure.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Who knows? Neither one seems like they would be able to admit making a mistake in marrying. They may stick together out of sheer stubbornness. They feed each other's neuroses so that may work in their favor.
> 
> Meghan may want to throw in the towel, but what would she have? As a celebrity she is NOTHING without him. A wannabe who married a famous guy to become famous herself. She doesn't have any unique talent or ability, she's not particularly likable, and she has nothing to offer that many others aren't already doing much better than her.


she seems to know how to use being a WOC to her advantage, both with making connections and at the same time painting herself as a victim


----------



## mdcx

M was living with her chef bf Corey at the time she met H is my understanding. So she was already in a committed relationship when she apparently came along to an event Corey catered in Canada that H was attending. Implication being she wanted to meet H and was happy to use her current partner as a means to do so. I believe Corey’s fam were upset with how M treated him.

Regards the cost of security for H&M(not the store), they are guarded by royal protection officers who are imported from the UK, work 8-12 hr shifts I’m guessing, need accomodation, food etc. The officers are flown back to the UK regularly to visit their own homes/families. So the numbers start to add up. There has to be a number of them available to cover shifts 24/7 etc. When the 1 yr review hits though, QEII may deem that they do not need/deserve this level of protection and standard local private security will be fine.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> she seems to know how to use being a WOC to her advantage, both with making connections and at the same time painting herself as a victim



OK  now I know I have been thoroughly TPF-ized.  My first thought at the WOC reference was  she's a Wallet On Chain??????


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> OK  now I know I have been thoroughly TPF-ized.  My first thought at the WOC reference was  she's a Wallet On Chain??????


Lol!!!  Love it!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

poopsie said:


> OK  now I know I have been thoroughly TPF-ized.  My first thought at the *WOC* reference was  she's a Wallet On Chain??????



*poopsie, *rofling!

Literally, went into Chanel over-drive ♥️

What is my excuse? 
It’s been a long ‘tine ala Arnie Hammer


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Paging @CeeJay ! Your thoughts?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...star-says-Meghan-Markle-toyed-heart-teen.html


----------



## mrsinsyder

Interesting. This rumor was circulating on the blind item sites a while ago.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Now that’s a good title, “The Disgruntled Duchess”


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting. This rumor was circulating on the blind item sites a while ago.
> View attachment 4729977


My guess is she was discovered doing this and that's why Wills/Kate disliked her. Her sneaky notes formed the basis of her allegations that W had an affair with Rose Hanbury imo - she overheard something private, like maybe a suggestion that W had a crush on Rose etc and ran with it.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Paging @CeeJay ! Your thoughts?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...star-says-Meghan-Markle-toyed-heart-teen.html
> View attachment 4729965


Well, well, well .. how interesting (he is not the person or family that I’ve mentioned numerous times that knew the Markles way back and their son got markled), but still .. QUELLE SURPRISE.. NOT!!!!!  I’m glad that he spoke up about it, we all know that she has done this to MANY and eventually the truth will come out. The LAST thing MM cares about are “other people” .. she is the classic narcissist who uses you and then spits you out when you have served her purpose. I DESPISE people like this, she better hope that I never run into her in a Grocery around here because I WILL say my peace!  Disgusting person ..


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting. This rumor was circulating on the blind item sites a while ago.
> View attachment 4729977


If she were to threaten the BRF with something like this, then she is truly a very STUPID person as well as being a SICK person.  Think about it, don’t you think MI5 got info on her (yacht-girl rumors, etc) that wouldn’t reflect well in her?  More importantly, don’t you think that the BRF would then just cut them off at the knees, take away titles, money, etc. - and then just maybe hijack Harry and Archie back to the U.K.?!?!  (I know, too many Bond movies right??). But seriously, I cannot see them putting up with something like that!


----------



## mrsinsyder

This was actually posted on another site, about Meghan: _in regards to Harry, He didn’t give up nearly as much as she did.
_
How are her fans SO delusional? She gave up being a D-list cable tv actress in a rented townhouse while he gave up literally being royal. I CANNOT.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> If she were to threaten the BRF with something like this, then she is truly a very STUPID person as well as being a SICK person.  Think about it, don’t you think MI5 got info on her (yacht-girl rumors, etc) that wouldn’t reflect well in her?  More importantly, don’t you think that the BRF would then just cut them off at the knees, take away titles, money, etc. - and then just maybe hijack Harry and Archie back to the U.K.?!?!  (I know, too many Bond movies right??). But seriously, I cannot see them putting up with something like that!


Nah.........it would just provide more fuel for the fire of her getting to play the victim and prove her point  See what happened when I told the truth? Boohoohoosnivelwhine


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> This was actually posted on another site, about Meghan: _in regards to Harry, He didn’t give up nearly as much as she did.
> _
> How are her fans SO delusional? She gave up being a D-list cable tv actress in a rented townhouse while he gave up literally being royal. I CANNOT.



You said it all with delusional. They see her as they want her to be and they won’t hear any criticism. Fandom love is often creepy IMO.


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> You know the area right (_the BH "Postal Code"_) .. there are tons of hills and valleys (_the 'community' is actually off Coldwater Canyon_), and as such, those photogs can go to one of the other hills in the area and put on those telephoto lens .. and snap away.  Or, they could be in a Helicopter (_too many out here to begin with_) .. so, in that case, those privacy screens aren't going to do sh!t!  They moved to the worst pap area in the US; *ZERO SYMPATHY* for those grifters!
> 
> On another note .. in regards to "hiking' in the area .. uh, how?  Unless there is a trail, NO ONE would want to hike up those hills with all that scrub brush, thorns, needles, cactus, etc.!!!!  Stupid me, when I first moved out to CA and was in Pasadena, I went out on a walk with a friend up in the hills by the Rose Bowl.  Well, typical me (_I don't have the best balance in the world - thank you swimmer's ear_), I went to look at some of the desert flora and next thing you know, I go tumbling-bumbling down the hill .. until I was able to grab onto something (_and yes - a nice big cactus_)!  Needless to say, I ended up scratched beyond belief and actually ended up having to go to the ER to have some of those needles/thorns taken out because they went in pretty deep .. talk about EMBARRASSING!


I'm so glad you didn't run into any snakes, there are rattlesnakes in those hills.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> That's why it's being released in August. Watching Zoom interviews is even more boring than being in one.
> 
> 'They' also probably think people won't be so preoccupied by this annoying 'bug' thing going around. Obviously, in a few months, no one will be grieving over the death of loved ones, the ill health of others, frantic with fear over unemployment and rent/mortgage arrears, worried about their jobs or catching-up at school.


paper tiger, it was announced restrictions for Los Angeles have been extended to August. By then people will be desperate to be outside and active and shopping etc and less likely to want to sit in the shade and read a book. Being a calculating beech Diva with a Capital D,  she may have figured that out and, thus, is pushing for early release.

Personally, why waste money on a book when  you already know the ending?


----------



## gracekelly

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting. This rumor was circulating on the blind item sites a while ago.
> View attachment 4729977



Oh NO!  She is going to reveal The Queen's recipe for scones!


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Paging @CeeJay ! Your thoughts?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...star-says-Meghan-Markle-toyed-heart-teen.html
> View attachment 4729965



Here is my take on this.  Usually Meghan tries to ride on the coattails of some other celebrity.  In this case we have some reality "stars" who the world will forget 2 nanoseconds after the show is done for, riding on Meghan's coattails.  I guess that means Meghan has finally reached her level of fame.  Bravo! Oh I made a pun!  Maybe Bravo wants to make a reality series about two not- royal -anymore people and how they are struggling to shine a light, oops I mean turn on a light in LA since they are not working and have to rely on an allowance from Daddio and are struggling with the DWP bill.  We could end every show with Meghan attempting to read a book to Archie.  Archie, as it turns out, will be such a hit with viewers that he will get his own development deal and will end up giving his parents an allowance. The millions will roll in for him, lucky boy!  Just remember there is the  Jackie Coogan law and the parents can't take all the money!


The *Jackie Coogan Law* ensures the financial well-being of child actors by mandating that their employer set aside 15% of the child actor's gross earnings in a *Coogan* Trust Account, where it can be monitored – but not withdrawn – by a legal guardian until the child reaches legal maturity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Child_Actor's_Bill


----------



## rose60610

mrsinsyder said:


> This was actually posted on another site, about Meghan: _in regards to Harry, He didn’t give up nearly as much as she did.
> _
> How are her fans SO delusional? She gave up being a D-list cable tv actress in a rented townhouse while he gave up literally being royal. I CANNOT.



Wha? Harry gave up HIS family (not that Meghan gave up hers), a guaranteed income for life, his lineage, his heritage, people kissing his boots, his status in the community, paid security protection, world travel on somebody else's dime, the royal treatment, AND his influence on British culture. For what? For Meghan's worldly views? Her world renowned celebrity? Her intellectual genius?

Sorry Harry, have you realized you've been royally played yet?


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> Oh NO!  She is going to reveal The Queen's recipe for scones!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 4730070
> View attachment 4730069


lol!  I love this recipe.  Teacups!


----------



## Aimee3

poopsie said:


> OK  now I know I have been thoroughly TPF-ized.  My first thought at the WOC reference was  she's a Wallet On Chain??????


I thought the very same thing a few pages back.  I’m glad I’m not the only one!


----------



## Jayne1

Luvbolide said:


> “Monumental anguish” - WTF is she talking about?  This actually makes me livid - while people are dying by the tens of thousands, businesses are going bankrupt and unemployment is at the highest rates ever...and she wants us to feel her monumental anguish at such things as not being to wear the tiara that she wanted to wear at her wedding?!?!  Or having to wear a hat when she would have preferred not to?!?!  This woman is delusional.
> 
> I sincerely hope that this book gambit blows up right in her face.  If she wants to impress people with her devotion to her favored causes, why doesn’t she shut up and go about the work.  In the past year or so she has been on an extended vacation, moved to Canada and did nothing of value.  Then moved via private jet to LA where she has done nothing except deliver a few bags of food and have that ridiculous fence put up.
> 
> Wonder when she will actually do something for someone else.  And when she will learn to be gracious and not expect kudos and fanfare every time she thinks she has helped someone.
> 
> Ugh....


This reminds me of Diana having the need to explain her side, her feelings, her hurt , to the world and have everyone understand what she was going through and feel sympathy for her. Enough that she tape-recorded her thoughts and complaints for Andrew Morton's book.

Why does Meg feel the need to explain herself, her feelings, her struggles? Both these women have/had everything going for them.

Unless it's H who craves following in his mother's footsteps with a tell-all book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Financially struggling Z lister wanna-be with a tricky (?) past & a rudderless man-child hurl rocks at a well-established, publicly supported  institution well-known for doing good (and bad) throughout the world. Hmmm, my money is on the BRF.  They had MM’s number from day one. They protected themselves from her and let ungrateful, mouthy H do what ungrateful, mouthy H wanted.  Seee, they actually have read and understood those Shakespearean plays.  Yeah, they have seen this play before. Based on the photos of those bioluminescent waves and the Quarantina, it looks like California has enough to deal with. No one cares about these 2 ‘massive, monstrous’ cry-babies. Go ahead, publish that (cough) book, then watch how disinterested we are. These are Pandemic times, show some respect for us — We’ve all had to learn adulting in the last few weeks. Turns out John Lennon was right — ya kno, it ain’t easy.




Even dear AH has lost it 



Jayne1 said:


> This reminds me of Diana having the need to explain her side, her feelings, her hurt , to the world and have everyone understand what she was going through and feel sympathy for her. Enough that she tape-recorded her thoughts and complaints for Andrew Morton's book.
> 
> Why does Meg feel the need to explain herself, her feelings, her struggles? Both these women have/had everything going for them.
> 
> Unless it's H who craves following in his mother's footsteps with a tell-all book.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting. This rumor was circulating on the blind item sites a while ago.
> View attachment 4729977


She kept a diary?   How low.  But then of course she did.
Next thing we know she’ll be turning up as a royal correspondent for one of those American tabloids or TV networks, and elbowing Scobie out of his niche.


----------



## mdcx

Clearblueskies said:


> She kept a diary?   How low.  But then of course she did.
> Next thing we know she’ll be turning up as a royal correspondent for one of those American tabloids or TV networks, and elbowing Scobie out of his niche.


Scobie has to know he's expendable surely? As does anyone who is currently in M's favour for whatever reason. Make the most of it for she is about to ghost you!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> Scobie has to know he's expendable surely? As does anyone who is currently in M's favour for whatever reason. Make the most of it for she is about to ghost you!


Well if The World According To Meghan fails to fly there will be a scapegoat requirement 
I can just see her as the next Paul Burrell actually - dodgy purveyor of royal tittle tattle and self appointed *Diana* expert.  Expect to see a tacky follow-up entitled “In Her Shoes” following shortly.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> Interesting. This rumor was circulating on the blind item sites a while ago.
> View attachment 4729977





CeeJay said:


> If she were to threaten the BRF with something like this, then she is truly a very STUPID person as well as being a SICK person.  Think about it, don’t you think MI5 got info on her (yacht-girl rumors, etc) that wouldn’t reflect well in her?  More importantly, don’t you think that the BRF would then just cut them off at the knees, take away titles, money, etc. - and then just maybe hijack Harry and Archie back to the U.K.?!?!  (I know, too many Bond movies right??). But seriously, I cannot see them putting up with something like that!



*mrsinsyder* & *CeeJay*, After reading this headline, " A book to frighten the life out of the royal family: Meghan Markle kept a DIARY....."

It dawned on me that Meghan Markle is willing to bet the farm that the BRF will fold in her high-stakes game of non-palace intrigue. Her actions, clearly described by screaming headlines during the past week lead me to a few conclusions at this juncture of her crazy delusional self-inflicted drama:

~ First of all, am referring specifically to Meghan's plans, etc bc it's obvious by now who is running this shiz show ~ 100% Meghan, 100% all of the time ~ Harry reminds me of the poor, barefoot, drunken, sloppy village idiot hanging around waiting for Meghan to tell him what to do

~ Looks like Meghan is willing to resort to a little extortion to get whatever her heart desires from the BRF,  ie the news that she kept a private diary chronicalizing her life with her in-laws and that it would "frighten" the BRF, well not exactly a HALLMARK THANK-YOU CARD!
<hey, BRF,  see this here D I A R Y, wouldn't it be easier to just buy me a lil'ole McMansion?>

~Until today, my thoughts were, okay, Meghan Markle shirked her duty after marrying into the BRF, walked away and took her husband and son down with her, and that's bad, even sad  

Never thought the stakes were so astronomically high for those involved in this drama that real harm could occur to the BRF but my perception changed after reading MM's diary story today ~ it appears that Meghan really would not give a rat's azz if she brought down the monarchy, or tarnished it to such an extent that it's considered value by citizens is almost nil.

It's difficult to imagine what Harry's family is going through right now, they must be in disbelief bc they certainly tried v hard to accept Meghan Markle and showed her every kindness from what I have read and heard.


----------



## chicinthecity777

VigeeLeBrun said:


> it appears that Meghan really would not give a rat's azz *if she brought down the monarchy, or tarnished it to such an extent that it's considered value by citizens is almost nil.*


Zero chance of that happening! She's so much hated here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

According to that DM article, QE maintains a diary, too.  My guess is that almost all of MM’s interactions with BRF members were filmed or recorded, so her story can be fact-checked. Those ‘security’ guards were carefully chosen. MM can easily be dismissed as someone with an axe to grind against her in-laws which isn’t an unusual story.  She is a divorced nearly 40 year old woman with few accomplishments.  H is way down the line of succession and has shown so much toxic entitled behavior  that he is most unlikable. Plus, their constant deceptions and expensive lifestyle, especially in pandemic times, have lost them favor. In their short time at the Frogmore, they stayed hidden/private and did almost nothing. 

In contrast, Diana initially had the better story due to Charles’s denials. Once he admitted culpability, Diana’s story became the rantings of a scorned wife. It was very painful to watch. Biggest difference is - Although she, too, had her share of scandals, in her day, she actively supported many v important causes and willingly took risks in order to help her patrons. Sure, she spent money but never seemed frivolous with it because she served Queen and country. She genuinely cared about others. 

In other words, Diana and Charles showed up appropriately dressed and did their jobs. 
H&M rarely showed up, spent wasteful sums of money, and looked disheveled most of the time.  H&M should dial back on these thinly veiled attacks/threats. It really reflects their poor character and makes the BRF look really good.


----------



## Clearblueskies

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *mrsinsyder* & *CeeJay*, After reading this headline, " A book to frighten the life out of the royal family: Meghan Markle kept a DIARY....."
> 
> It dawned on me that Meghan Markle is willing to bet the farm that the BRF will fold in her high-stakes game of non-palace intrigue. Her actions, clearly described by screaming headlines during the past week lead me to a few conclusions at this juncture of her crazy delusional self-inflicted drama:
> 
> ~ First of all, am referring specifically to Meghan's plans, etc bc it's obvious by now who is running this shiz show ~ 100% Meghan, 100% all of the time ~ Harry reminds me of the poor, barefoot, drunken, sloppy village idiot hanging around waiting for Meghan to tell him what to do
> 
> ~ Looks like Meghan is willing to resort to a little extortion to get whatever her heart desires from the BRF,  ie the news that she kept a private diary chronicalizing her life with her in-laws and that it would "frighten" the BRF, well not exactly a HALLMARK THANK-YOU CARD!
> <hey, BRF,  see this here D I A R Y, wouldn't it be easier to just buy me a lil'ole McMansion?>
> 
> ~Until today, my thoughts were, okay, Meghan Markle shirked her duty after marrying into the BRF, walked away and took her husband and son down with her, and that's bad, even sad
> 
> 
> Never thought the stakes were so astronomically high for those involved in this drama that real harm could occur to the BRF but my perception changed after reading MM's diary story today ~ it appears that Meghan really would not give a rat's azz if she brought down the monarchy, or tarnished it to such an extent that it's considered value by citizens is almost nil.
> 
> It's difficult to imagine what Harry's family is going through right now, they must be in disbelief bc they certainly tried v hard to accept Meghan Markle and showed her every kindness from what I have read and heard.


IRL (British here) I don’t know anyone with a good word to say for Harry or Meghan, and that’s if they can be bothered to think about them at all.  I doubt the RF give a toss.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> She kept a diary?   How low.  But then of course she did.
> Next thing we know she’ll be turning up as a royal correspondent for one of those American tabloids or TV networks, and elbowing Scobie out of his niche.



Of course she did


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> If she were to threaten the BRF with something like this, then she is truly a very STUPID person as well as being a SICK person.  Think about it, don’t you think MI5 got info on her (yacht-girl rumors, etc) that wouldn’t reflect well in her?  More importantly, don’t you think that the BRF would then just cut them off at the knees, take away titles, money, etc. - and then just maybe hijack Harry and Archie back to the U.K.?!?!  (I know, too many Bond movies right??). But seriously, I cannot see them putting up with something like that!



That's it then, she won't be welcomed back. Talk about burning bridges. I should think PC (Duchy) and chance of a penny (indirectly) from Grandma (Civil List) is over.


----------



## Clearblueskies

They used to give monarchs nicknames didn’t they?  Alfred the Great, Ethelred the Unready, Edward the Confessor.  Ivan the Terrible   Just wondering what the appropriate soubriquet for dear Harry and Meg might be!


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Financially struggling Z lister wanna-be with a tricky (?) past & a rudderless man-child hurl rocks at a well-established, publicly supported  institution well-known for doing good (and bad) throughout the world. Hmmm, my money is on the BRF.  They had MM’s number from day one. They protected themselves from her and let ungrateful, mouthy H do what ungrateful, mouthy H wanted.  Seee, they actually have read and understood those Shakespearean plays.  Yeah, they have seen this play before. Based on the photos of those bioluminescent waves and the Quarantina, it looks like California has enough to deal with. No one cares about these 2 ‘massive, monstrous’ cry-babies. Go ahead, publish that (cough) book, then watch how disinterested we are. These are Pandemic times, show some respect for us — We’ve all had to learn adulting in the last few weeks. Turns out John Lennon was right — ya kno, it ain’t easy.
> 
> View attachment 4730149
> 
> 
> Even dear AH has lost it


Dang AH came out again?!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Clearblueskies said:


> They used to give monarchs nicknames didn’t they?  Alfred the Great, Ethelred the Unready, Edward the Confessor.  Ivan the Terrible   Just wondering what the appropriate soubriquet for dear Harry and Meg might be!


Harry the lame seems appropriate.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> They used to give monarchs nicknames didn’t they?  Alfred the Great, Ethelred the Unready, Edward the Confessor.  Ivan the Terrible   Just wondering what the appropriate soubriquet for dear Harry and Meg might be!



Just-Call-Me-Harry and U-Can't-Take-ME-Royalty-Away, Neg-MEg


----------



## imgg

Jayne1 said:


> This reminds me of Diana having the need to explain her side, her feelings, her hurt , to the world and have everyone understand what she was going through and feel sympathy for her. Enough that she tape-recorded her thoughts and complaints for Andrew Morton's book.
> 
> Why does Meg feel the need to explain herself, her feelings, her struggles? Both these women have/had everything going for them.
> 
> Unless it's H who craves following in his mother's footsteps with a tell-all book.


Maybe it's me, but I don't find similarities between what Princess Diana went though vs what Meghan went though.


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> Maybe it's me, but I don't find similarities between what Princess Diana went though vs what Meghan when through.


Same for me 100%.
Diana was quite young when she married Charles.
She had her struggles, but she met her challenges with person growth and eventually, wisdom.


----------



## imgg

Emeline said:


> Same for me 100%.
> Diana was quite young when she married Charles.
> She had her struggles, but she met her challenges with person growth and eventually, wisdom.


She was 19 when she married Charles and Meghan married as a divorcee at 36?  That alone is significant.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> You said it all with delusional. They see her as they want her to be and they won’t hear any criticism. Fandom love is often creepy IMO.


but how many people will spend actual money on their book?  will be interesting to see


----------



## bag-mania

imgg said:


> Maybe it's me, but I don't find similarities between what Princess Diana went though vs what Meghan went though.





Emeline said:


> Same for me 100%.
> Diana was quite young when she married Charles.
> She had her struggles, but she met her challenges with person growth and eventually, wisdom.



Yes. The biggest difference is Meghan married a man who actually loves her. Diana married a man who picked her the way he selects his horses: is she healthy, well behaved, attractive, good conformation, able to produce offspring?

We can all agree Harry is Meghan's greatest defender. He was willing to give up everything he is for her. Diana NEVER had that kind of love or support from Charles. If she had maybe things would have turned out better for her. She truly was in a lonely, isolated position that Meghan has not experienced.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes. The biggest difference is Meghan married a man who actually loves her. Diana married a man who picked her the way he selects his horses: is she healthy, well behaved, attractive, good conformation, able to produce offspring?
> 
> We can all agree Harry is Meghan's greatest defender. He was willing to give up everything he is for her. Diana NEVER had that kind of love or support from Charles. If she had maybe things would have turned out better for her. She truly was in a lonely, isolated position that Meghan has not experienced.


speaking of Harry defending M, I saw a clip on TV last night of Oprah saying quite vehemently that H did what he *Had *to do for his family.  So that's the party line pretty much in the media here.  I've seen little criticism of them.
I agree Diana was a whole different story in terms of her age, the nature of the marriage and also the press.  The reason H gives for being so worried about his family - flashing lightbulbs, paps chasing Dians - is not the same as Meghan's problem - bad press/racism


----------



## limom

With the pandemic, celebs are even more asinine and delusional as ever.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but how many people will spend actual money on their book?  will be interesting to see



We know Daily Mail and others will spill any juicy tidbits the day it comes out. There's no reason to waste $25 on a Harry and Meghan lovefest unless you are one of her stans.

I'm sure there will be other books coming out that will examine Harry and Meghan without putting them up on a Scobie-style pedestal.


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> We know Daily Mail and others will spill any juicy tidbits the day it comes out. There's no reason to waste $25 on a Harry and Meghan lovefest unless you are one of her stans.
> 
> I'm sure there will be other books coming out that will examine Harry and Meghan without putting them up on a Scobie-style pedestal.



Yep, you can bet that the whole book will be summarized and the juiciest items quoted in news articles---no need to buy it!  LOL!


----------



## CarryOn2020

In pandemic times, that ‘poor-pitiful me’ stuff won’t sell. Based on how well the BRF is handling this pandemic, they are much better off without the grifters. By whining, flaunting their wealth and disrespecting the Queen, etc, H&M have earned their negative press. Just to have a story out there about the search for a multi-million dollar house is tasteless and gauche in the best of times. With today’s world of job losses and shortages, it is simply rude. Zero sympathy.




sdkitty said:


> speaking of Harry defending M, I saw a clip on TV last night of _Oprah saying quite vehemently that H did what he *Had *to do for his family_.  So that's the party line pretty much in the media here.  I've seen little criticism of them.
> I agree Diana was a whole different story in terms of her age, the nature of the marriage and also the press.  The reason H gives for being so worried about his family - flashing lightbulbs, paps chasing Dians - is not the same as Meghan's problem - bad press/racism


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> speaking of Harry defending M, I saw a clip on TV last night of Oprah saying quite vehemently that H did what he *Had *to do for his family.  So that's the party line pretty much in the media here.  I've seen little criticism of them.
> I agree Diana was a whole different story in terms of her age, the nature of the marriage and also the press.  The reason H gives for being so worried about his family - flashing lightbulbs, paps chasing Dians - is not the same as Meghan's problem - bad press/racism



It doesn't cost Oprah anything to put in a few nice words for them. I bet most of the entertainment industry believes what they were told about why they left. If there wasn't a pandemic going on I'm sure they would have been invited to elite Hollywood parties and events. They may eventually be, but it won't be as nearly as much as it would have been. Projects have been postponed, some have likely been cancelled. In a city full of narcissists, H&M aren't going to hold celebrity attention.


----------



## Jayne1

imgg said:


> Maybe it's me, but I don't find similarities between what Princess Diana went though vs what Meghan went though.


The point was that both women felt an intense need to tell the world how they _feel.  
_
The anthesis of the Queen, who never reveals how she really feels.

Is this all Meg, or does Harry also have that desire to have the last word, in the form of a book...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It doesn't cost Oprah anything to put in a few nice words for them. I bet most of the entertainment industry believes what they were told about why they left. If there wasn't a pandemic going on I'm sure they would have been invited to elite Hollywood parties and events. They may eventually be, but it won't be as nearly as much as it would have been. Projects have been postponed, some have likely been cancelled. In a city full of narcissists, H&M aren't going to hold celebrity attention.


it doesn't cost oprah money but she is more or less staking her reputation on them.  I guess she still thinks they're bankable.  as much as I don't like them (esp M), have to admit, we're still talking about them....but that's not going to make them rich


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

IF Meghan badmouths The Crown in this book of hers, she has given them more than enough ammunition to turn the tables in a vicious way. If there's any truth to yacht girl rumors I think we'd be treated to numerous photos or credible backlash gossip. There's plenty of documented and taped behavior that expose her modus operandi gold-digger me me me shenanigans. If for one second M thinks she can outsmart the BRF, it would take all of five minutes to totally destroy her credibility, her statements, and whatever is left of her reputation. She could permanently say "good-bye" to Archie Meal Ticket as it'd be easy to frame her as an unfit parent. I say bring it on. 
I've never seen anyone so keen to rip apart a spouse's lifestyle and livelihood, and to think M actually feels capable of singlehandedly bringing down the BRF with a book? Because she kept some kind of sham diary? All I can say is that Jim Jones got over 900 people to drink the Kool Aid so it isn't out of the realm to observe Harry being stupid enough to worship and follow Meghan. If he isn't careful who knows how he'll end up if the RF doesn't do an intervention and reverse engineer Meghan's brainwash job.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps Oprah is being a bit melo-dramatic? No middle-aged man *has* to leave his homeland, his family, his lifetime network of friends and advisors, his access to private palaces, his security - just so he can freeload in a stranger’s house.  He was supporting his family over there, only to come here with no job, no friends, no house of his own. No, no, Oprah cannot possibly believe that.  What show was this interview on?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> it doesn't cost oprah money but she is more or less staking her reputation on them.  I guess she still thinks they're bankable.  as much as I don't like them (esp M), have to admit, we're still talking about them....but that's not going to make them rich



I don't believe she's taking any risks. It isn't going to hurt Oprah to repeat what Harry and Meghan themselves have said. I'm looking at it from the perspective of the average person who isn't following their story. Most people here in the US don't know all the little details that make Meghan and Harry so sketchy and insufferably entitled. In truth, many celebrities are probably just like Meghan only we don't know about it.

Maybe that's why Tyler Perry sympathizes with her. I found this quote from him in _Vanity Fair_ about the South Africa interview that we all thought was tone deaf and insensitive, but it sounded just fine to Tyler:

“Remember when Meghan Markle did that interview?” he asked. “She said, ‘Thanks for asking if I’m okay. Because no one ever asks me that.’ I felt her when she said that.... People toss it out. ‘How are you doing?’ But not many people really mean it.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/meghan-and-harry-tyler-perry-mansion-beverly-hills


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't believe she's taking any risks. It isn't going to hurt Oprah to repeat what Harry and Meghan themselves have said. I'm looking at it from the perspective of the average person who isn't following their story. Most people here in the US don't know all the little details that make Meghan and Harry so sketchy and insufferably entitled. In truth, many celebrities are probably just like Meghan only we don't know about it.
> 
> Maybe that's why Tyler Perry sympathizes with her. I found this quote from him in _Vanity Fair_ about the South Africa interview that we all thought was tone deaf and insensitive, but it sounded just fine to Tyler:
> 
> “Remember when Meghan Markle did that interview?” he asked. “She said, ‘Thanks for asking if I’m okay. Because no one ever asks me that.’ I felt her when she said that.... People toss it out. ‘How are you doing?’ But not many people really mean it.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/meghan-and-harry-tyler-perry-mansion-beverly-hills


tyler seems like a kind person - maybe too kind in this instance


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, this is H.  Years ago, he said he wanted out of the BRF, chiefly because he dislikes his place in the succession. So, amazingly enough !!!!, he finds himself an American and she is his  ticket out.  So convenient for him.





Jayne1 said:


> The point was that both women felt an intense need to tell the world how they _feel.
> _
> The anthesis of the Queen, who never reveals how she really feels.
> 
> Is this all Meg, or does Harry also have that desire to have the last word, in the form of a book...


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> tyler seems like a kind person - maybe too kind in this instance



Tyler has houses in BH he wants to sell. Also, he is a BFF of Oprah’s so he wants to help her out. As he learns more about the grifters, he may change his mind about helping them or he may, possibly, try to guide the grifters into becoming responsible citizens of the world.  If anyone can make this a win-win for all, Tyler can.  Of course, IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> tyler seems like a kind person - maybe too kind in this instance



Yes, I am sure he believes Meghan had it rough. I wonder how long he'll continue to believe that.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tyler has houses in BH he wants to sell. Also, he is a BFF of Oprah’s so he wants to help her out. As he learns more about the grifters, he may change his mind about helping them or he may, possibly, try to guide the grifters into becoming responsible citizens of the world.  If anyone can make this a win-win for all, Tyler can.  Of course, IMO.


if he can turn a user into a good person, I wish him well


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> They used to give monarchs nicknames didn’t they?  Alfred the Great, Ethelred the Unready, Edward the Confessor.  Ivan the Terrible   Just wondering what the appropriate soubriquet for dear Harry and Meg might be!


OOOOOOH - this will be fun, let the games begin!!


----------



## bag-mania

I'm not familiar with this program. Is it a British show like The View?

*Loose Women stars SLATE Meghan Markle and Prince Harry for 'abandoning the British people' as they dissect their 'money-spinning' new book Finding Freedom*
The Loose Women panelists tore into Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on their Wednesday show, for releasing a new book.

The four ladies - Ruth Langsford, Linda Robson, Saira Khan and Jane Moore - discussed the biography, titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family, labeling it a 'money-spinner'.

Saira and Jane also declared that the royal pair, who left the UK this year for fresh start in Canada, before relocating instead to California, had 'abandoned the British people'.

Saira - whose parents are from Pakistan - said: 'I was a really big Harry and Meghan fan. When they got married, for me, it was the first mixed marriage in the Royal Family.

'I thought there was loads of hope and excitement - and then it got dark very quickly.

'I feel they really abandoned the British people so I'm not actually going to be really very interested in what they are doing. For many of us who were Harry and Meghan fans, I just feel like they've abandoned us.

'They've left us, they've left the family and they've left this country.'

Jane agreed: 'They've pushed back against the British so much – not everybody, but I think the majority of the British public think, "Well alright then if you don't want us to have anything to do with you that's absolutely fine!"

'But why should they then go out and buy this book?' 

Linda remarked: 'What about the money? You get a lot of money for these biographies don't you? Where's the money going?'

While Ruth added: 'I'm too nosy not to read it. Maybe we'll get what they want to say in more detail.

'So I'm thinking maybe I'll wait until I read it to decide what I think of the way they've left the country and how they felt about things.'

This comes after an insider exclusively told the Mail that Meghan, 38, is eager for the tome to be released promptly.

It's said that the ex-Suits actress hopes that the publication will set the record straight on why she and her husband, 35, chose to leave the royal family and help give them a clean slate.

The upcoming book has been written by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand and is set to be released worldwide online on August 11, with the hard copy on sale from August 20.

'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now,' said the source. 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'

Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale, see 'the genuine person that she is' and wants to 'shatter this image of being a demanding diva,' the insider added. 

Meghan and Harry shocked the world back in January when they announced they would be stepping away from their royal duties and instead work to become financially independent, splitting their time between the United Kingdom and North America.

They were originally living at a waterfront mansion on Vancouver Island in Canada before making a beeline for California after Canada announced it would be restricting its borders due to COVID-19. 

DailyMail.com revealed last week that Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry had sent his $150 million private plane to pick up the couple and their one-year-old son Archie from Canada in mid-March and brought them to live at his $18 million Beverly Hills pad, where they are now staying.

Despite their mega-rich friends and high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'desperately wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva who was rude to royal staffers and others on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said. 

'She said the book will help give her and Harry a clean slate. Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip.

'Meghan said people need to see her vulnerable side, something the book does in great detail.'

The friend added: 'I think [Meghan] wants people to feel sorry for her, or at least have compassion for her and all she's been through, which has been anything but a fairy tale.'

The insider also revealed the Duchess 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe. 

'The only way Finding Freedom was ever going to be published, was if Meghan had the final say and gave her seal of approval.'

Co-author Omid Scobie recently said the biography gives a real inside account of the royals' story, saying: 'I've been on so many engagements and around them as much as possible, and spoken to so many people in their lives, so no stone has been left un-turned.

'I've seen the couple remain faithful in their own beliefs and stand strong in the face of adversities which have been publicly played out in the press, and I would like to think this tells the definitive version of their lives together.' 

The book's description says that 'few know the true story of Harry and Meghan'. 

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...e-Prince-Harry-abandoning-British-people.html


----------



## CeeJay

imgg said:


> Maybe it's me, but I don't find similarities between what Princess Diana went though vs what Meghan went though.





Emeline said:


> Same for me 100%.
> Diana was quite young when she married Charles.
> She had her struggles, but she met her challenges with person growth and eventually, wisdom.


SAME HERE, no comparison between an innocent upperclass young woman and a scheming Z-LIST “actress” !


----------



## Sharont2305

I can write the book

I got a Prince to fall for me
I did a few appearances
Didn't listen to advice
They were all "mean" to me
We left
The End


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I can write the book
> 
> I got a Prince to fall for me
> I did a few appearances
> Didn't listen to advice
> They were all "mean" to me
> We left
> The End


so guess she won't talk about her yacht girl escapades


----------



## Tootsie17

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps Oprah is being a bit melo-dramatic? No middle-aged man *has* to leave his homeland, his family, his lifetime network of friends and advisors, his access to private palaces, his security - just so he can freeload in a stranger’s house.  He was supporting his family over there, only to come here with no job, no friends, no house of his own. No, no, Oprah cannot possibly believe that.  What show was this interview on?


This brief interview that I saw with Oprah was from a while back when Megxit first occurred. The reporter asked her what she thought about Harry and Meghan leaving the BRF. That quote was Oprah's response to that specific question.  The interview appeared on CBS morning news and some of the other entertainment news shows back in March, I believe. The reporter caught Oprah leaving some location and asked her the question. That's all I remember.


----------



## imgg

Jayne1 said:


> The point was that both women felt an intense need to tell the world how they _feel.
> _
> The anthesis of the Queen, who never reveals how she really feels.
> 
> Is this all Meg, or does Harry also have that desire to have the last word, in the form of a book...


Princess Diana seemed more justified, don't you think?  With Meghan we have known her feelings every step of the way and then some.  While I only followed Princess Diana loosely, wasn't she a lot more private and didn't come out with her book later in life?  She had a much more interesting story imo and she was well-liked organically.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if they told Tyler they were interested in buying, but would like to try it out first.


----------



## imgg

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, this is H.  Years ago, he said he wanted out of the BRF, chiefly because he dislikes his place in the succession. So, amazingly enough !!!!, he finds himself an American and she is his  ticket out.  So convenient for him.


Thank goodness Will was first-born.


----------



## Suncatcher

sdkitty said:


> so guess she won't talk about her yacht girl escapades



I am going to write the prologue in one line, adding to @Sharont2305’s book :

Whatever happened before I met him is erased from the records.


----------



## Suncatcher

And the epilogue:

Is anyone listening to me? Does anyone care?


----------



## bellecate

I didn't realize she still had friends or family that she hadn't Markled.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle...is-first-birthday/ar-BB144LMi?ocid=spartanntp
Emily Dixon
5 hrs ago
 




* Meghan Markle Made Archie an Adorable Cake for His First Birthday *
 
 

 






 © @savechildrenuk - Instagram Meghan Markle made baby Archie his own smash cake to celebrate his first birthday, People reports, while Harry decorated the house with balloons.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made baby Archie's first birthday one to remember, even in quarantine.
Meghan made Archie his own smash cake, _People_ reports, while Harry decorated the house with balloons.
The Sussexes also spent time chatting via Zoom with family and friends.
Archie Harrison's first birthday video was exceptionally cute, so it's little surprise that his birthday celebrations were pretty adorable too. One standout feature? A smash cake, made by Meghan Markle herself. For those who don't have babies, or babies in their family or friendship circle, or who haven't inadvertently lost several hours to reading mommy forums despite having absolutely no desire to procreate within the next decade (cough): A smash cake is a personal birthday cake made for a baby to enjoy how they please, which typically involves mashing it up with their tiny baby hands.

"Meghan made the cake—strawberries and cream," an insider told _People. _"And Harry helped with decorations and blew up balloons." Cute!


"Duck! Rabbit!" with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex (and Harry, The Duke of Sussex behind the camera), read to their son Archie for his 1st birthday. Happy Birthday, Archie! . Thank you #DuchessMeghan for helping us to raise urgent funds for our coronavirus appeal by reading "Duck! Rabbit" by @akrfoundation, illustrated by @tlichtenheld (published by @chroniclekidsbooks). . As the world grapples with the coronavirus pandemic, children’s lives are being turned upside down. By donating to Save with Stories, you can support the most vulnerable families in the UK and around the world by helping to provide early learning packs, supermarket vouchers, essential household items and virus protection. . Please donate today by visiting our website. Link in bio. . Or you can text STORIES to 70008 to give a one-off donation of £5. . Together, we can help families get through this. . You can only donate via text from a UK mobile. You’ll be billed £5 plus standard rate text message. We receive 100% of your donation. By texting STORIES you agree to calls about fundraising appeals, campaigns, events and other ways to support. Include NO PHONE to opt out of calls. Queries? 02070126400. Read our Privacy Policy savethechildren.org.uk/privacy The Save the Children Fund is a charity registered in England and Wales (213890) and Scotland (SC039570) . #SaveWithStoriesUK #SaveWithStories #GrowingThroughThis

A post shared by Save The Children UK (@savechildrenuk) on May 6, 2020 at 4:01am PDT

Meghan, Harry, and Archie spoke to family and friends via the magic of Zoom, the insider said, adding that the big day was "really simple but incredibly joyous." Archie also spent a lot of time with his "best friends"—the family's two dogs, beagle Guy and a black Labrador whose name remains a mystery. "They make him laugh and are gentle with him," the source said.

One more thing: Happily, Meghan got to celebrate Mother's Day four days later with both her son _and _her mom, with Doria Ragland joining the celebrations from a safe distance, in accordance with L.A.'s social distancing rules. I'll say it again: cute!


----------



## Emeline

imgg said:


> *Thank goodness Will was first-born.*


Good chance  that sentence has been uttered a few times in private convos among the RF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Exactly, much more justified in her behavior and led a much more interesting life. 
She never stumbled out of a bar in the wee morning hours pre- or post-divorce. She never desperately latched on to men. She was an aristocrat and knew her worth. She took her duties seriously and willingly served Queen and country. She took on AIDS when no one else would - it was a huge deal back then. Yes, she did the one troubling interview with Martin Bashear, but she later regretted it. Never did anything like that again. 



imgg said:


> Princess Diana seemed more justified, don't you think?  With Meghan we have known her feelings every step of the way and then some.  While I only followed Princess Diana loosely, wasn't she a lot more private and didn't come out with her book later in life?  She had a much more interesting story imo and she was well-liked organically.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing Oprah has a different opinion now. She was recovering from pneumonia back then.  It all seems long ago now. We know so much more now. We have seen way too many entitled and selfish actions from H&M. Toss that with their word salads and we have had enough.



Tootsie17 said:


> This brief interview that I saw with Oprah was from a while back when Megxit first occurred. The reporter asked her what she thought about Harry and Meghan leaving the BRF. That quote was Oprah's response to that specific question.  The interview appeared on CBS morning news and some of the other entertainment news shows back in March, I believe. The reporter caught Oprah leaving some location and asked her the question. That's all I remember.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Archie also spent a lot of time with his "best friends"—the family's two dogs, beagle Guy and a black Labrador whose name remains a mystery. "They make him laugh and are gentle with him," the source said.



My favorite part of the article is hearing Archie gets to spend time with the dogs. Who knows if it is true but I hope so. I'll keep thinking of that poor Lab as the dog-with-no-name. They aren't really private about any other aspect of their lives but the dog's name must remain a secret.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting how H is letting M have all the press on this ‘book’.  If it fails, he can say it was all her effort. 
Word of warning - this is not the kind of man to marry. 



bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with this program. Is it a British show like The View?
> *Loose Women stars SLATE Meghan Markle and Prince Harry for 'abandoning the British people' as they dissect their 'money-spinning' new book Finding Freedom*


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> OOOOOOH - this will be fun, let the games begin!!


In the spirit of fun , I am a huge fan of French history - which is DIRECTLY applicable since the Normans came from France to take over the British throne.   And NO I DID NOT INVENT THIS LOL
https://www.medievalists.net/2014/01/the-universal-spider-king-louis-xi/ 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XI_of_France 
I vote for the sobriquet of Universal Spider
King Louis XI of France was called the Universal Spider due to looks and unscrupulous behavior , "spinning webs of plots and conspiracies"
And I quote Wiki - he entered into open rebellion against his father


----------



## CeeJay

.. and my entrance into the "naming" content .. 


Harry the *HYPOCRITICAL* (_kind of obvious, but true - right_)? 
Meghan the *MANIACAL *(_narcissist, demonic, crazed - spot-on_!)


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> .. and my entrance into the "naming" content ..
> 
> 
> Harry the *HYPOCRITICAL* (_kind of obvious, but true - right_)?
> Meghan the *MANIACAL *(_narcissist, demonic, crazed - spot-on_!)


I can’t think of anything for Harry other than Harry the Hapless


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> My favorite part of the article is hearing Archie gets to spend time with the dogs. Who knows if it is true but I hope so. I'll keep thinking of that poor Lab as the dog-with-no-name. They aren't really private about any other aspect of their lives but the dog's name must remain a secret.


The dogs name is Oz.
Must be because they seem to be living in a different place to the rest of us and she's the Wicked Witch of the West to his Scarecrow. [emoji304]


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting how H is letting M have all the press on this ‘book’.  If it fails, he can say it was all her effort.
> Word of warning - this is not the kind of man to marry.



Do you believe Harry had any say in the matter? Has there been any moment in their marriage so far where Meghan looked to Harry to "let" her do anything? She's calling the shots for the book and pretty much everything else.

He doesn't know anything about book promotion and I would be surprised if he has actually read it. Hopefully Meghan has told him the highlights.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> The dogs name is Oz.
> Must be because they seem to be living in a different place to the rest of us and she's the Wicked Witch of the West to his Scarecrow. [emoji304]



Thanks for telling me the dog's name. Maybe they called him Oz because they are toying with the idea of moving to Australia?

I see Meghan as more like the Wizard. All pomp and promises with nothing real going on behind the curtain.


----------



## sdkitty

I don't participate on Instagram or whatever platform they use for social media.  but if I did, I'd post asking if she will talk about her days as a yacht girl


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting how H is letting M have all the press on this ‘book’.  If it fails, he can say it was all her effort.
> Word of warning - this is not the kind of man to marry.


I’ve wondered if he’s really as weak as he appears or if he is stepping back to let her take the fall if this all blows up.  Not much of a man in either case.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> I’ve wondered if he’s really as weak as he appears or if he is stepping back to let her take the fall if this all blows up.  Not much of a man in either case.


I'm betting he is weak.....except for his military duty, he's led a pretty sheltered life


----------



## kkfiregirl

1LV said:


> I’ve wondered if he’s really as weak as he appears or if he is stepping back to let her take the fall if this all blows up.  Not much of a man in either case.



I don't think he's weak, I think he's immature and not comfortable/familiar with making adult decisions.


----------



## Mrs.Z

This is hilarious

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...door-Meghan-Harrys-Beverly-Hills-hideout.html


----------



## Tasha1

sdkitty said:


> she won't talk about her yacht girl escapades



Does she have another child?


----------



## CeeJay

Mrs.Z said:


> This is hilarious
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...door-Meghan-Harrys-Beverly-Hills-hideout.html


WHAT??? .. wait, I thought he just declared bankruptcy (_and of course his sugar-daddy girlfriend/former fiance immediately left the scene when he declared - how surprising? -- NOT_!!!)


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> WHAT??? .. wait, I thought he just declared bankruptcy (_and of course his sugar-daddy girlfriend/former fiance immediately left the scene when he declared - how surprising? -- NOT_!!!)



I HAD to look that one up. Guess bankruptcy was denied. (source: https://www.bravotv.com/the-real-ho...iving/mohamed-hadid-bankruptcy-denied-mansion)

How is that even a house? That's more like a museum he wants to live in until he sells it to a corporation. That would be hilarious if M+H went to LA for "more privacy" and ended up with constant pap coverage due to living next to this clan.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Tasha1 said:


> Does she have another child?


That's another rumor that's been floated


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I don't think he's weak, I think he's immature and not comfortable/familiar with making adult decisions.


for a man in his mid-30's that's pretty close to weak


----------



## viciel

Jktgal said:


> It's such a grand house that the screen looks pitiful. Poor house. Like a budget DIY project. They may be paying for it themselves.


But I mean, aren't there plenty of half naked pics of her floating around on the internet? No one's particularly interested in her bikini shot. Sure, let's drum it up as people are interested in Archie and trying to protect him from getting his pics taken by the pool, so maybe she should install a pool fence first. 

I'm not particularly interested in Archie, and I mean this in the nicest way possible, whatever "amazing" things the kid will be doing as he hits milestones, they've been done a million times in other babies. If it's amenities they want by choosing LA, they can easily get that accomplished elsewhere. Try Jackson, WY, much more private, and will cost just as much as they're likely spending now in LA. Luxury is always at one's finger tips when one is willing to foot the bill, regardless of the location. And it's not like she's all that close to her mom anyway. I doubt D will be in the picture if M didn't need some photo ops to show her devoted daughter side.


----------



## scarlet555

mrsinsyder said:


> That's another rumor that's been floated



What?!!??
I tell ya, I can't blink on this thread...


----------



## A1aGypsy

The discussion is long passed, I’m sure but just on the Diana thing - I think it was another time. The BRF fully intended to wash their hands of both Diana (and Fergie) and raise the children without contact with their mothers. And Diana saw that and played the press game to get her story out and to gain public sympathy in order to maintain contact with the boys. At the time, it was a massive power play and she won. Did she go too far? Maybe. But I don’t think you can compare the two scenarios. I think the way the BRF has handled this situation has been directly as a result of the lessons they learned with Diana.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> WHAT??? .. wait, I thought he just declared bankruptcy (_and of course his sugar-daddy girlfriend/former fiance immediately left the scene when he declared - how surprising? -- NOT_!!!)


That was a different bankrupt house, he has more than one with issues


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

scarlet555 said:


> What?!!??
> I tell ya, I can't blink on this thread...


_note this isn't me saying I do or don't believe this_

I'd read it somewhere long ago that one of the children Samantha is raising was actually Meghan's; that she adopted her because Meghan didn't want to be a parent at that time or something.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mrsinsyder said:


> _note this isn't me saying I do or don't believe this_
> 
> I'd read it somewhere long ago that one of the children Samantha is raising was actually Meghan's; that she adopted her because Meghan didn't want to be a parent at that time or something.


There’s no way Samantha wouldn’t have spilled that when she was talking to DM daily.


----------



## bag-mania

That girl doesn't look like Meghan. She does look like Samantha.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> for a man in his mid-30's that's pretty close to weak



You’re right, I guess we just have different interpretations of weak


----------



## kkfiregirl

viciel said:


> And it's not like she's all that close to her mom anyway. I doubt D will be in the picture if M didn't need some photo ops to show her devoted daughter side.



I honestly think that the only reason she even had her mom in the photos was to show that she was close to SOMEONE in her family, but I truly believe that she’s estranged from all of them.


----------



## bag-mania

Charles always seemed kind of weak and spoiled when he was younger. It stands to reason his son might be as well.


----------



## mdcx

Although it is a comedy, the show ‘The Windsors’ pretty accurately depicts Charles imo. A bit spacy, tree-hugging, clueless, not enough backbone to be monarch. General feeling in the Commonwealth when I was growing up was ‘ can they somehow skip Charles and go straight to William?’.
H definitely seems spoiled and entitled. He does have that in common with M.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> SAME HERE, no comparison between an innocent upperclass young woman and a scheming Z-LIST “actress” !


I wasn't comparing their back stories. I was comparing their responses.

Diana, who had everything in the world except a husband her loved her (but lots of lovers who did) wrote a book through Andrew Morton, telling the world how miserable and unfair things were because her husband, the future king, didn't love her more than Camilla. Oh, and the palace had too many rules and regulations to follow.

Meg has a heck of a lot going for her, including a husband who adores her, writes a book though Omid Scobie describing how miserable she is and how unfair things are because the media is mean to her and oh, the palace has too many rules and regulations to follow.

Same response.  They need to let everyone know their feelings.  How un-royal of them.


----------



## Jayne1

imgg said:


> Princess Diana seemed more justified, don't you think?  With Meghan we have known her feelings every step of the way and then some.  While I only followed Princess Diana loosely, wasn't she a lot more private and didn't come out with her book later in life?  She had a much more interesting story imo and she was well-liked organically.


No, the book came out before her divorce, but it only confirmed all those stories through her friends and her miserable face (on purpose, telling us she was sad) when she was photographed with Charles, if she ever was with Charles.

It was a first, I think.  A princess, a member of the BRF, writing a tell-all book to complain.

So, is Harry not only re-walking a minefield, but also writing a book to tell us how sad they are?

Because if they are sad, then everyone should _know_ they are sad.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> No, the book came out before her divorce, but it only confirmed all those stories through her friends and her miserable face (on purpose, telling us she was sad) when she was photographed with Charles, if she ever was with Charles.
> 
> It was a first, I think.  A princess, a member of the BRF, writing a tell-all book to complain.
> 
> So, is Harry not only re-walking a minefield, but also writing a book to tell us how sad they are?
> 
> Because if they are sad, then everyone should _know_ they are sad.


Diana was not a perfect person but she was very young when she went into the marriage and she had legit reasons to be sad.  She did some real good (AIDS patients, landmines, etc) and she was original.  These two are apparently trying to ride on her coattails.


----------



## caramelize126

Jayne1 said:


> No, the book came out before her divorce, but it only confirmed all those stories through her friends and her miserable face (on purpose, telling us she was sad) when she was photographed with Charles, if she ever was with Charles.
> 
> It was a first, I think.  A princess, a member of the BRF, writing a tell-all book to complain.
> 
> So, is Harry not only re-walking a minefield, but also writing a book to tell us how sad they are?
> 
> Because if they are sad, then everyone should _know_ they are sad.



To be fair, Diana was also humiliated. Her husband had left her for another woman and it appeared that everyone except Diana knew the situation prior to their marriage. She was wronged and maybe she wanted the world to know that she was angry and upset.  But the BRF had much more power in those days than they do now. Who knows how they would have spun it had she not put something out there herself.


----------



## Jayne1

caramelize126 said:


> To be fair, Diana was also humiliated. Her husband had left her for another woman and it appeared that everyone except Diana knew the situation prior to their marriage. She was wronged and maybe she wanted the world to know that she was angry and upset.  But the BRF had much more power in those days than they do now. Who knows how they would have spun it had she not put something out there herself.


Charles never left her.  He couldn't. 

She was supposed to have affairs quietly on the side and put on a united front with Charles, when in public.  That's how it was done for centuries.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I do believe he has a big say in the matter.  Remember _he_ managed the negotiations with Charles and the Queen. MM stayed in Canada. He ‘claims’ he is doing it for his family. In truth, he dislikes his succession number and wants to upset that system. He is in it for himself. His image was the fun-loving, party prince who was expected to pull the practical jokes, make everyone laugh and be the center of attention, but never the leader.  His preferred role is mocking those in the leadership role. He’s _that_ guy.  Andy played that role with Charles in the early days. Problem with the fun-guy role is it gets tired and irritating as the guy ages. He is just no longer funny.  If she were smart, she would distance herself from this book and focus on raising the kid. The book, the lawsuits, the media are no-win situations for her. H knows that.  Whatever MM says, the BRF will dispute, usually by leaking stories through ‘friends’. It will be ugly. 

- a Jack-the-lad, with a penchant for *boorish revelry*.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-fractured-fairy-tale




bag-mania said:


> Do you believe Harry had any say in the matter? Has there been any moment in their marriage so far where Meghan looked to Harry to "let" her do anything? She's calling the shots for the book and pretty much everything else.
> 
> He doesn't know anything about book promotion and I would be surprised if he has actually read it. Hopefully Meghan has told him the highlights.


----------



## csshopper

MrsJDS said:


> And the epilogue:
> 
> Is anyone listening to me? Does anyone care?


And the sequel will be, “Still Nobody’s Asked, But I’ll Tell You Again Anyway”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today’s leaked zoom call:


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...iscussion-Association-Teachers-Lecturers.html

Finally, a word for it - groutfit
https://www.racked.com/2017/1/15/14231490/gray-outfits-groutfits

The craaaaazy continues!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Well, they are at it again. Look at us, aren’t we wonderful and special!!

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Crash a Virtual Staff Meeting -- See the Pic!*
Looks like Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have gotten on board with the most popular quarantine trend... video chatting!

During Crisis Text Line's virtual staff meeting on Wednesday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance to discuss the importance of mental health amid the coronavirus pandemic.

One of the company's Atlanta-based employees, Ricky Neal, shared a pic from the meeting on Twitter, writing, "Still shocked that Meghan and Harry took over our staff meeting yesterday!"

Crisis Text Line works every day to help people in crisis. The text-based service offers free support, 24/7, for anyone who may be feeling sad, lost, isolated, or just needs someone to talk to. Just text 'HOME' to 741741 to connect with a Crisis Counselor, or visit their website here to learn more about becoming a volunteer.

ET reported last May that Meghan and Harry teamed up with Kate Middleton and Prince William to launch Shout, a similar text messaging helpline in England that supports people dealing with a mental health crisis. 

"We are incredibly excited to be launching this service, knowing it has the potential to reach thousands of vulnerable people every day," the four shared in a joint statement at the time. "Over the last few months Shout has started working quietly behind the scenes. We have all been able to see the service working up close and are so excited for its future."

"At the heart of this service will be an incredible national volunteer community, one which needs to grow to allow us to support more people in crisis," the statement continued. "We hope that many more of you will join us and be part of something very special."

Though this appears to be the first time we've seen Meghan and Harry on a Zoom call together since quarantine began, Meghan seems to be using it quite a lot these days. Earlier this month, the former _Suits_ star used the video conferencing app to reconnect with women of London's Hubb Community Kitchen.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.et...-virtual-staff-meeting-see-the-pic-146614?amp


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today’s leaked zoom call:
> View attachment 4730849
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...iscussion-Association-Teachers-Lecturers.html
> 
> Finally, a word for it - groutfit
> https://www.racked.com/2017/1/15/14231490/gray-outfits-groutfits
> 
> The craaaaazy continues!



Oops, we were posting this at the same time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Oops, we were posting this at the same time.



Great minds...


----------



## Frivole88

Harry looks miserable and disheveled on that video chat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Well, they are at it again. Look at us, aren’t we wonderful and special!!



Boom, their lawyers stepped in quickly and made the guy take down the call.  Oh, those Harkles cannot let it go. 
Interesting to note Tyler is letting them use his study. Hmmmm.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> And the sequel will be, “Still Nobody’s Asked, But I’ll Tell You Again Anyway”


lol


----------



## scrpo83

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today’s leaked zoom call:
> View attachment 4730849
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...iscussion-Association-Teachers-Lecturers.html



I intensely disliked Meghan's expression in the call..she always had that look in pictures. It looks so fake like she is trying super hard to look concerned or demure or whatever she thinks is appropriate at that moment..this also goes to those OTT expression that Kate likes to have on public apperances (see I'm an equal opportunity critic)


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Boom, their lawyers stepped in quickly and made the guy take down the call.  Oh, those Harkles cannot let it go.
> Interesting to note Tyler is letting them use his study. Hmmmm.



That is so ridiculous... What did they tell him, "H+M want privacy... but decided to crash your staff meeting to celebrate you... but don't want you to celebrate too long by sharing your experience with others." Why even bother? Are these two just addicted to gracing strangers with their presence for the attention?


----------



## lalame

scrpo83 said:


> I intensely disliked Meghan's expression in the call..she always had that look in pictures. It looks so fake like she is trying super hard to look concerned or demure or whatever she thinks is appropriate at that moment..this also goes to those OTT expression that Kate likes to have on public apperances (see I'm an equal opportunity critic)



I don't know if I've ever thought that about Kate  but Meghan definitely. FWIW I think both are beautiful ladies but yes Meghan's expressions on these things are sometimes cringe... just be normal, dude. You don't need to look at people like their family was wiped out by the plague every time you talk to them. When she's with the royals, she looks like she's been wronged but when she talks to normal people she looks at them like THEY were wronged.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She has a very patronizing way of interacting with people. Maybe trying on her interpretation of Mother Theresa for fit.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has a very patronizing way of interacting with people. Maybe trying on her interpretation of Mother Theresa for fit.


She’s acting.  This is expression #4 in the repertoire *Compassion a la Diana*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> She’s acting.  This is expression #4 in the repertoire *Compassion a la Diana*



Are you sure she has four expressions, though?


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you sure she has four expressions, though?


 Not really


----------



## needlv

Clearblueskies said:


> She’s acting.  This is expression #4 in the repertoire *Compassion a la Diana*



Yes but bad at it!  You can tell she isn’t being genuine!


----------



## scrpo83

lalame said:


> I don't know if I've ever thought that about Kate  but Meghan definitely. FWIW I think both are beautiful ladies but yes Meghan's expressions on these things are sometimes cringe... just be normal, dude. You don't need to look at people like their family was wiped out by the plague every time you talk to them. When she's with the royals, she looks like she's been wronged but when she talks to normal people she looks at them like THEY were wronged.


To be fair I haven't followed Kate closely after Louis' birth so it is possible that she has tone down some of her expression..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Boom, their lawyers stepped in quickly and made the guy take down the call.  Oh, those Harkles cannot let it go.
> Interesting to note Tyler is letting them use his study. Hmmmm.



They have to control everything don't they. That does somewhat lessen the good deed stuff. I know one of the charities MM is a patron of well. I was very surprised they didn't send out a PR to announce it to benefit the charity in awareness etc.The only reason can be MM because they send press releases out for everything they can.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

kristinlorraine said:


> Harry looks miserable and disheveled on that video chat.


Exactly. He looks out of it. Like he did against the white wall. It's actually sad. He's sunk super low and looks awful in every image.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Boom, their lawyers stepped in quickly and made the guy take down the call.  Oh, those Harkles cannot let it go.
> Interesting to note Tyler is letting them use his study. Hmmmm.



Funny how they don't want us to view the actual call, but their PR agency made sure that all of the usual media outlets were given access to the story of their "goodwill." Again, they are trying to control the narrative and it doesn't work that way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Applause to everyone! Because of your wit, this such a fun place to begin the day. Thank you.
====
Seems like these 2 “professionals” would cover disclosures at the beginning of the call.  Or have their ‘staff’ do it. Did somebody goof?  
====
‘H is not unhappy’  — the article is behind a paywall, but I can imagine what it says. Same drivel.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-are-excited-planning-their-future?ref=author


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Boom, their lawyers stepped in quickly and made the guy take down the call.  Oh, those Harkles cannot let it go.
> Interesting to note Tyler is letting them use his study. Hmmmm.


what significance in using his study?  I would assume it doesn't have any of his documents in it?  the home is for sale?  or he want to sell it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Applause to everyone! Because of your wit, this such a fun place to begin the day. Thank you.
> ====
> Seems like these 2 “professionals” would cover disclosures at the beginning of the call.  Or have their ‘staff’ do it. Did somebody goof?
> ====
> ‘H is not unhappy’  — the article is behind a paywall, but I can imagine what it says. Same drivel.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-are-excited-planning-their-future?ref=author


Yeah, probably just looking sick, tired and desperate so we all mere humans don't feel bad we're not living the fairytale with the greatest love story of all times.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> what significance in using his study?  I would assume it doesn't have any of his documents in it?  the home is for sale?  or he want to sell it?



it is a much nicer backdrop than the laundry room where many have speculated H is filming himself. It could be Tyler was concerned that his house was not being represented properly which would be bad for resell.


----------



## LaidyM

I’ll need to find the link, but I saw on a different forum that the Cambridges had a chat with Shout yesterday (Wednesday).. that is the day before the Sussex’s

I’m not saying the Sussex copied , but i’m saying the Sussex copied; cause interesting how their call was “surprise”

Found A link


----------



## kemilia

LaidyM said:


> I’ll need to find the link, but I saw on a different forum that the Cambridges had a chat with Shout yesterday (Wednesday).. that is the day before the Sussex’s
> 
> I’m not saying the Sussex copied , but i’m saying the Sussex copied; cause interesting how their call was “surprise”
> 
> Found A link



At the least they were trying to do a good thing, I guess, but geez--so obvious.


----------



## bag-mania

And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com. 

*Meghan Markle and Her Mom, Doria, Spent Mother's Day Together*
She baked a homemade strawberry and cream cake for Archie, too.

It was a family affair for Duchess Meghan's second Mother’s Day. OprahMag.com has learned that Archie, Markle, and Prince Harry, had a special day celebrating with Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mom, who lives nearby in Los Angeles. Everyone was mindful of proper social distancing guidelines, a source shares.

Ragland, who Prince Harry has described as "amazing," has been an important presence in Archie’s life since the day he was born. She flew to London before Meghann gave birth to be on hand to support her daughter and Prince Harry, and to spend time with her grandson. Ragland, who, sources tell us, is incredibly close to Harry, as well as her daughter, also joined the family during their stay in Vancouver. Prince Harry has a tremendous amount of respect for Ragland, as well.

Given her longtime advocacy on social issues, Ragland was instrumental in encouraging Meghan and Prince Harry to donate their time to deliver food with Project Angel Food. A source tells Oprah Mag.com that last month, Doria, “who is a frontline worker herself," had mentioned that the organization was in great need of support during this unprecedented time. As a little girl, the now Duchess and her mother, would volunteer at the soup kitchens in LA and while in Toronto filming _Suits_, Meghan was a volunteer at the St. Felix Center helping the homeless and those in need.

The Duke and Duchess also flew Doria to London for the launch of Meghan's cookbook, _Together: Our Community Cookbook._ Ragland introduced herself at the Duchess's first solo project by saying, “Hi, I’m Meg’s mom” and when asked if she was proud of her daughter's accomplishment she replied, "head over heels!" She was also on hand in Toronto to join Prince Harry and Meghan for the Invictus Games. A source tells us that it’s vital to Prince Harry that Meghan is able to have her mom on hand for support.

Though we're not sure if Ragland was also there to celebrate Archie's first birthday on May 6, we do know that the new parents pulled out all the stops for their beloved little one. Meghan, an accomplished cook, prepared a homemade strawberry and cream smash cake for Archie, his favorite, sources share with us. The Sussexes also posted a video of Meghan reading _Duck! Rabbit! _to Archie, a book gifted by none other than Oprah. They used this occasion to draw attention to charities that have been aiding vulnerable children impacted by the coronavirus crisis, including Save the Children and No Kid Hungry.

Last year, while speaking to _Access Hollywood_, Oprah revealed that she sent Archie a collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift when he was born. “I don’t know the baby’s name or the baby’s gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!” Oprah said, adding that books are her "standard gift" for people she "really cares about." A small sticker on the cover says "Archie's Book Club," clearly modeled after "Oprah's Book Club's" signature badge.

https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a32465756/meghan-markle-mothers-day-doria-archie/


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Well, they are at it again. Look at us, aren’t we wonderful and special!!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Crash a Virtual Staff Meeting -- See the Pic!*
> Looks like Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have gotten on board with the most popular quarantine trend... video chatting!
> 
> During Crisis Text Line's virtual staff meeting on Wednesday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance to discuss the importance of mental health amid the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> One of the company's Atlanta-based employees, Ricky Neal, shared a pic from the meeting on Twitter, writing, "Still shocked that Meghan and Harry took over our staff meeting yesterday!"
> 
> Crisis Text Line works every day to help people in crisis. The text-based service offers free support, 24/7, for anyone who may be feeling sad, lost, isolated, or just needs someone to talk to. Just text 'HOME' to 741741 to connect with a Crisis Counselor, or visit their website here to learn more about becoming a volunteer.
> 
> ET reported last May that Meghan and Harry teamed up with Kate Middleton and Prince William to launch Shout, a similar text messaging helpline in England that supports people dealing with a mental health crisis.
> 
> "We are incredibly excited to be launching this service, knowing it has the potential to reach thousands of vulnerable people every day," the four shared in a joint statement at the time. "Over the last few months Shout has started working quietly behind the scenes. We have all been able to see the service working up close and are so excited for its future."
> 
> "At the heart of this service will be an incredible national volunteer community, one which needs to grow to allow us to support more people in crisis," the statement continued. "We hope that many more of you will join us and be part of something very special."
> 
> Though this appears to be the first time we've seen Meghan and Harry on a Zoom call together since quarantine began, Meghan seems to be using it quite a lot these days. Earlier this month, the former _Suits_ star used the video conferencing app to reconnect with women of London's Hubb Community Kitchen.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.etonline.com/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-crash-a-virtual-staff-meeting-see-the-pic-146614?amp



They are like a cult with 2 members


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Well, they are at it again. Look at us, aren’t we wonderful and special!!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Crash a Virtual Staff Meeting -- See the Pic!*
> Looks like Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have gotten on board with the most popular quarantine trend... video chatting!
> 
> During Crisis Text Line's virtual staff meeting on Wednesday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance to discuss the importance of mental health amid the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> One of the company's Atlanta-based employees, Ricky Neal, shared a pic from the meeting on Twitter, writing, "Still shocked that Meghan and Harry took over our staff meeting yesterday!"
> 
> Crisis Text Line works every day to help people in crisis. The text-based service offers free support, 24/7, for anyone who may be feeling sad, lost, isolated, or just needs someone to talk to. Just text 'HOME' to 741741 to connect with a Crisis Counselor, or visit their website here to learn more about becoming a volunteer.
> 
> ET reported last May that Meghan and Harry teamed up with Kate Middleton and Prince William to launch Shout, a similar text messaging helpline in England that supports people dealing with a mental health crisis.
> 
> "We are incredibly excited to be launching this service, knowing it has the potential to reach thousands of vulnerable people every day," the four shared in a joint statement at the time. "Over the last few months Shout has started working quietly behind the scenes. We have all been able to see the service working up close and are so excited for its future."
> 
> "At the heart of this service will be an incredible national volunteer community, one which needs to grow to allow us to support more people in crisis," the statement continued. "We hope that many more of you will join us and be part of something very special."
> 
> Though this appears to be the first time we've seen Meghan and Harry on a Zoom call together since quarantine began, Meghan seems to be using it quite a lot these days. Earlier this month, the former _Suits_ star used the video conferencing app to reconnect with women of London's Hubb Community Kitchen.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.etonline.com/meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-crash-a-virtual-staff-meeting-see-the-pic-146614?amp


Been thinking about this--and it may go over like a lead balloon (one of my Dad's fave sayings) but geez, H, are you in or are you out? 

He left the UK to have an independent profile and privacy, moved to the US of A (to LA of all places--pap central) yet still has to do whatever he can to still be a part of his old homeland, he desperately (imo) doesn't want to be missing out on all that's going on over there, It's sad, really, but M is probably behind this all to keep them in the public eye and to test the waters in case of returning, and maybe to keep him from totally becoming unhinged,. He always looks miserable while she looks like a grinning Chuckie doll. IMO


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Exactly. He looks out of it. Like he did against the white wall. It's actually sad. He's sunk super low and looks awful in every image.



Allergies?
Drugged?
Hungover?

All of the above?


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Her Mom, Doria, Spent Mother's Day Together*
> She baked a homemade strawberry and cream cake for Archie, too.
> 
> It was a family affair for Duchess Meghan's second Mother’s Day. OprahMag.com has learned that Archie, Markle, and Prince Harry, had a special day celebrating with Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mom, who lives nearby in Los Angeles. Everyone was mindful of proper social distancing guidelines, a source shares.
> 
> Ragland, who Prince Harry has described as "amazing," has been an important presence in Archie’s life since the day he was born. She flew to London before Meghann gave birth to be on hand to support her daughter and Prince Harry, and to spend time with her grandson. Ragland, who, sources tell us, is incredibly close to Harry, as well as her daughter, also joined the family during their stay in Vancouver. Prince Harry has a tremendous amount of respect for Ragland, as well.
> 
> Given her longtime advocacy on social issues, Ragland was instrumental in encouraging Meghan and Prince Harry to donate their time to deliver food with Project Angel Food. A source tells Oprah Mag.com that last month, Doria, “who is a frontline worker herself," had mentioned that the organization was in great need of support during this unprecedented time. As a little girl, the now Duchess and her mother, would volunteer at the soup kitchens in LA and while in Toronto filming _Suits_, Meghan was a volunteer at the St. Felix Center helping the homeless and those in need.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess also flew Doria to London for the launch of Meghan's cookbook, _Together: Our Community Cookbook._ Ragland introduced herself at the Duchess's first solo project by saying, “Hi, I’m Meg’s mom” and when asked if she was proud of her daughter's accomplishment she replied, "head over heels!" She was also on hand in Toronto to join Prince Harry and Meghan for the Invictus Games. A source tells us that it’s vital to Prince Harry that Meghan is able to have her mom on hand for support.
> 
> Though we're not sure if Ragland was also there to celebrate Archie's first birthday on May 6, we do know that the new parents pulled out all the stops for their beloved little one. Meghan, an accomplished cook, prepared a homemade strawberry and cream smash cake for Archie, his favorite, sources share with us. The Sussexes also posted a video of Meghan reading _Duck! Rabbit! _to Archie, a book gifted by none other than Oprah. They used this occasion to draw attention to charities that have been aiding vulnerable children impacted by the coronavirus crisis, including Save the Children and No Kid Hungry.
> 
> Last year, while speaking to _Access Hollywood_, Oprah revealed that she sent Archie a collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift when he was born. “I don’t know the baby’s name or the baby’s gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!” Oprah said, adding that books are her "standard gift" for people she "really cares about." A small sticker on the cover says "Archie's Book Club," clearly modeled after "Oprah's Book Club's" signature badge.
> 
> https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a32465756/meghan-markle-mothers-day-doria-archie/


The kid's only 1 year old but already has a fave cake? Ok ...


----------



## kkfiregirl

Clearblueskies said:


> She’s acting.  This is expression #4 in the repertoire *Compassion a la Diana*



Honestly, she looks constipated or gassy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

kemilia said:


> The kid's only 1 year old but already has a fave cake? Ok ...



Right? I need to see a picture of this cake, it’s been mentioned so many times now!


----------



## Clearblueskies

kemilia said:


> Been thinking about this--and it may go over like a lead balloon (one of my Dad's fave sayings) but geez, H, are you in or are you out?
> 
> He left the UK to have an independent profile and privacy, moved to the US of A (to LA of all places--pap central) yet still has to do whatever he can to still be a part of his old homeland, he desperately (imo) doesn't want to be missing out on all that's going on over there, It's sad, really, but M is probably behind this all to keep them in the public eye and to test the waters in case of returning, and maybe to keep him from totally becoming unhinged,. He always looks miserable while she looks like a grinning Chuckie doll. IMO


Exactly.  They’re just fiddling around.  They want influence without accountability.


----------



## Clearblueskies

kkfiregirl said:


> Honestly, she looks constipated or gassy.


Ouch!


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Her Mom, Doria, Spent Mother's Day Together*
> She baked a homemade strawberry and cream cake for Archie, too.
> 
> It was a family affair for Duchess Meghan's second Mother’s Day. OprahMag.com has learned that Archie, Markle, and Prince Harry, had a special day celebrating with Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mom, who lives nearby in Los Angeles. Everyone was mindful of proper social distancing guidelines, a source shares.
> 
> Ragland, who Prince Harry has described as "amazing," has been an important presence in Archie’s life since the day he was born. She flew to London before Meghann gave birth to be on hand to support her daughter and Prince Harry, and to spend time with her grandson. Ragland, who, sources tell us, is incredibly close to Harry, as well as her daughter, also joined the family during their stay in Vancouver. Prince Harry has a tremendous amount of respect for Ragland, as well.
> 
> Given her longtime advocacy on social issues, Ragland was instrumental in encouraging Meghan and Prince Harry to donate their time to deliver food with Project Angel Food. A source tells Oprah Mag.com that last month, Doria, “who is a frontline worker herself," had mentioned that the organization was in great need of support during this unprecedented time. As a little girl, the now Duchess and her mother, would volunteer at the soup kitchens in LA and while in Toronto filming _Suits_, Meghan was a volunteer at the St. Felix Center helping the homeless and those in need.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess also flew Doria to London for the launch of Meghan's cookbook, _Together: Our Community Cookbook._ Ragland introduced herself at the Duchess's first solo project by saying, “Hi, I’m Meg’s mom” and when asked if she was proud of her daughter's accomplishment she replied, "head over heels!" She was also on hand in Toronto to join Prince Harry and Meghan for the Invictus Games. A source tells us that it’s vital to Prince Harry that Meghan is able to have her mom on hand for support.
> 
> Though we're not sure if Ragland was also there to celebrate Archie's first birthday on May 6, we do know that the new parents pulled out all the stops for their beloved little one. Meghan, an accomplished cook, prepared a homemade strawberry and cream smash cake for Archie, his favorite, sources share with us. The Sussexes also posted a video of Meghan reading _Duck! Rabbit! _to Archie, a book gifted by none other than Oprah. They used this occasion to draw attention to charities that have been aiding vulnerable children impacted by the coronavirus crisis, including Save the Children and No Kid Hungry.
> 
> Last year, while speaking to _Access Hollywood_, Oprah revealed that she sent Archie a collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift when he was born. “I don’t know the baby’s name or the baby’s gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!” Oprah said, adding that books are her "standard gift" for people she "really cares about." A small sticker on the cover says "Archie's Book Club," clearly modeled after "Oprah's Book Club's" signature badge.
> 
> https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a32465756/meghan-markle-mothers-day-doria-archie/


These puff pieces are hilarious. It's especially funny when Doria has been papped walking her dog on the many occasions she was supposedly in Canada (or elsewhere) supporting her daughter. LOLZ.
Also, I believe I read that Ar-Kay's birthday "cake" was organic, healthy, and sugar-free.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghan-Markles-son-Archie-spend-birthday.html

While I'm at it, why these two tryna make fetch happen with this "we had to leave Canada because of 'rona border closures?" Bish, you know Canada said they weren't going to extend funding for your security past March 31, so c'mon.
Sometimes I feel like these two think everything that is said isn't reported or recorded in some way.


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> Also, I believe I read that Ar-Kay's birthday "cake" was organic, healthy, and sugar-free.


Mmmn yummy!  woke cake


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Been thinking about this--and it may go over like a lead balloon (one of my Dad's fave sayings) but geez, H, are you in or are you out?
> 
> He left the UK to have an independent profile and privacy, moved to the US of A (to LA of all places--pap central) yet still has to do whatever he can to still be a part of his old homeland, he desperately (imo) doesn't want to be missing out on all that's going on over there, It's sad, really, but M is probably behind this all to keep them in the public eye and to test the waters in case of returning, and maybe to keep him from totally becoming unhinged,. He always looks miserable while she looks like a grinning Chuckie doll. IMO



There may be a more mercenary reason for him to keep a hand in his old jobs.  We don't know what factors Charles is going to consider next year when their child support, I mean allowance, is due to be renewed. If Harry and Meghan are being good little do bees by keeping up with charitable work, maybe they'll get more cash from the royal bank accounts.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> There may be a more mercenary reason for him to keep a hand in his old jobs.  We don't know what factors Charles is going to consider next year when their child support, I mean allowance, is due to be renewed. If Harry and Meghan are being good little do bees by keeping up with charitable work, maybe they'll get more cash from the royal bank accounts.


Good point. 

And it is much easier and cheaper to rah rah on phone calls instead of using one's cold hard cash to actually do some good. Really, gotta keep the Porsche SUV detailed and all.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Her Mom, Doria, Spent Mother's Day Together*
> She baked a homemade strawberry and cream cake for Archie, too.
> 
> It was a family affair for Duchess Meghan's second Mother’s Day. OprahMag.com has learned that Archie, Markle, and Prince Harry, had a special day celebrating with Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mom, who lives nearby in Los Angeles. Everyone was mindful of proper social distancing guidelines, a source shares.......
> Given her longtime advocacy on social issues, Ragland was instrumental in encouraging Meghan and Prince Harry to donate their time to deliver food with Project Angel Food. A source tells Oprah Mag.com that last month, Doria, “who is a frontline worker herself," had mentioned that the organization was in great need of support during this unprecedented time. As a little girl, the now Duchess and her mother, would volunteer at the soup kitchens in LA and while in Toronto filming _Suits_, Meghan was a volunteer at the St. Felix Center helping the homeless and those in need.
> 
> Though we're not sure if Ragland was also there to celebrate Archie's first birthday on May 6, we do know that the new parents pulled out all the stops for their beloved little one. Meghan, an accomplished cook, prepared a homemade strawberry and cream smash cake for Archie, his favorite, sources share with us. The Sussexes also posted a video of Meghan reading _Duck! Rabbit! _to Archie, a book gifted by none other than Oprah. They used this occasion to draw attention to charities that have been aiding vulnerable children impacted by the coronavirus crisis, including Save the Children and No Kid Hungry.
> 
> Last year, while speaking to _Access Hollywood_, Oprah revealed that she sent Archie a collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift when he was born. “I don’t know the baby’s name or the baby’s gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!” Oprah said, adding that books are her "standard gift" for people she "really cares about." A small sticker on the cover says "Archie's Book Club," clearly modeled after "Oprah's Book Club's" signature badge......./



*bag-mania*, yes, think you nailed Oprah's pay-off with these grifters, simply another of H&M's business deals.

The problem with H&M as individuals and as a couple is they are so unauthentic ~  the poorly-written article about H&M by Oprah's mag is not convincing, the obvious azz-kizzing by the writer is nauseating.

Oprah, there are a plethora of far more worthier causes that deserve your interest ~
Why these two freeloaders?
Have a few theories of my own....


----------



## pursegirl3

Bag Mania nailed it with the Child Support term. That is exactly what it is !!


----------



## scarlet555

kemilia said:


> The kid's only 1 year old but already has a fave cake? Ok ...



  These two idiots!  The writers are just low key mocking them at this point!  LOL


----------



## Jayne1

So she spent Mother's Day with her mother?  But keeping in mind social distancing?  

I thought the whole point was to shelter in place and not go visiting family. Were they in the kitchen together?  Did her mom touch things? Did Meg?  Were they touching the same things?Aren't we supposed to be careful of germs that way?

Not that I believe they did spend the day together.  lol


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> There may be a more mercenary reason for him to keep a hand in his old jobs.  We don't know what factors Charles is going to consider next year when their child support, I mean allowance, is due to be renewed. If Harry and Meghan are being good little do bees by keeping up with charitable work, maybe they'll get more cash from the royal bank accounts.


BUT .. let us remember that they are also SOOOOOOOO KEEN to release that book noting "their freedom"!!!  I can't see where the BRF are going to be happy about that, and remember .. Charles doesn't forget sh!t like that!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania*, yes, think you nailed Oprah's pay-off with these grifters, simply another of H&M's business deals.
> 
> The problem with H&M as individuals and as a couple is they are so unauthentic ~  the poorly-written article about H&M by Oprah's mag is not convincing, the obvious azz-kizzing by the writer is nauseating.
> 
> Oprah, there are a plethora of far more worthier causes that deserve your interest ~
> Why these two freeloaders?
> Have a few theories of my own....


OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH .. I want to hear those theories; bring them on!!!


----------



## lulilu

I've been wondering what a strawberry and cream cake was too.  I figured it was just strawberries and whipped cream, but now learn it's organic, healthy AND sugar free.  Sounds yummy. 


I'd also be interested in them spending Mothers Day social distancing with Doria.  What bull.  How exactly does one keep a one year old at least 6 feet away from his beloved grandma?


Not that I have ever read Oprah's magazine, I need to add it to the publications I will not read because of the fawning, OTT, false stories outlining the fairy tale duo and their escapades for the good of mankind.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> BUT .. let us remember that they are also SOOOOOOOO KEEN to release that book noting "their freedom"!!!  I can't see where the BRF are going to be happy about that, and remember .. Charles doesn't forget sh!t like that!



That book won't have anything critical of the BRF coming directly from H&M. Quite frankly, they don't have the balls. 

All of their criticism and complaints will be reserved for the media. 

Any possible criticism of the BRF will come from "friends" and "sources" that their buddy Omid spoke with, not from Meghan and Harry themselves. Heavens, no! They are BRAVE and STOIC! But if their well-meaning friends who are so worried about how the poor dears were treated by the family wish to talk to Omid, well, what can they do? It's not their fault. Nothing is their fault!

But I think the book is going to be a whole lot of nothing. They were working on it months before they found out they would have to give up everything. They had to change it some but they aren't going to say anything to cut off daddy's cash. They aren't BRAVE enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Whipped up a cake my azz. 
Smart money would be on her taking kulinary kues from Khloe Kardashian


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Her Mom, Doria, Spent Mother's Day Together*
> She baked a homemade strawberry and cream cake for Archie, too.
> 
> It was a family affair for Duchess Meghan's second Mother’s Day. OprahMag.com has learned that Archie, Markle, and Prince Harry, had a special day celebrating with Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mom, who lives nearby in Los Angeles. Everyone was mindful of proper social distancing guidelines, a source shares.
> 
> Ragland, who Prince Harry has described as "amazing," has been an important presence in Archie’s life since the day he was born. She flew to London before Meghann gave birth to be on hand to support her daughter and Prince Harry, and to spend time with her grandson. Ragland, who, sources tell us, is incredibly close to Harry, as well as her daughter, also joined the family during their stay in Vancouver. Prince Harry has a tremendous amount of respect for Ragland, as well.
> 
> Given her longtime advocacy on social issues, Ragland was instrumental in encouraging Meghan and Prince Harry to donate their time to deliver food with Project Angel Food. A source tells Oprah Mag.com that last month, Doria, “who is a frontline worker herself," had mentioned that the organization was in great need of support during this unprecedented time. As a little girl, the now Duchess and her mother, would volunteer at the soup kitchens in LA and while in Toronto filming _Suits_, Meghan was a volunteer at the St. Felix Center helping the homeless and those in need.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess also flew Doria to London for the launch of Meghan's cookbook, _Together: Our Community Cookbook._ Ragland introduced herself at the Duchess's first solo project by saying, “Hi, I’m Meg’s mom” and when asked if she was proud of her daughter's accomplishment she replied, "head over heels!" She was also on hand in Toronto to join Prince Harry and Meghan for the Invictus Games. A source tells us that it’s vital to Prince Harry that Meghan is able to have her mom on hand for support.
> 
> Though we're not sure if Ragland was also there to celebrate Archie's first birthday on May 6, we do know that the new parents pulled out all the stops for their beloved little one. Meghan, an accomplished cook, prepared a homemade strawberry and cream smash cake for Archie, his favorite, sources share with us. The Sussexes also posted a video of Meghan reading _Duck! Rabbit! _to Archie, a book gifted by none other than Oprah. They used this occasion to draw attention to charities that have been aiding vulnerable children impacted by the coronavirus crisis, including Save the Children and No Kid Hungry.
> 
> Last year, while speaking to _Access Hollywood_, Oprah revealed that she sent Archie a collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift when he was born. “I don’t know the baby’s name or the baby’s gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!” Oprah said, adding that books are her "standard gift" for people she "really cares about." A small sticker on the cover says "Archie's Book Club," clearly modeled after "Oprah's Book Club's" signature badge.
> 
> https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a32465756/meghan-markle-mothers-day-doria-archie/


*BFD* .. why is this even news???  WHO CARES!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> *BFD* .. why is this even news???  WHO CARES!



Because we cannot go even one day without the media (via her publicists) trying to ram down our throats just how friggin' wonderful Meghan is. Today _People_ repeated an old interview with the facialist who did her face before her wedding telling us that Meghan is "kind, generous and inspiring." They are going into the vault for a two-year-old interview to try to pump up her popularity.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Jayne1 said:


> So *she spent Mother's Day with her mother*?  But keeping in mind social distancing?..........
> 
> *Not that I believe they did spend the day together.*  lol



*Jayne*, am with you on this subject.

Is it really feasible for us to believe without optics that Meghan Markle really spent her Mother's Day with Doria?
Meghan or her team <eh-hem> has released barefoot-Harry pics, dog in swimming pool pics,  dog-walking pics, various bloviated tearful charity pics with strangers but not ONE pic is released of Doria visiting the new homestead and her 1-yr old grandson?
As if Meghan would pass-up a photo-op like that?



CeeJay said:


> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH .. *I want to hear those theories*; *bring them on*!!!



*CeeJay*, my dear, you know I can NOT.



bag-mania said:


> That book won't have anything critical of the BRF coming directly from H&M. Quite frankly, they don't have the balls.
> 
> *All of their criticism and complaints will be reserved for the media. *
> 
> Any possible criticism of the BRF will come from "friends" and "sources" that their buddy Omid spoke with, not from Meghan and Harry themselves..... It's not their fault. *Nothing is their fault*!
> 
> But I think the book is going to be *a whole lot of nothing*. They were working on it months before they found out they would have to give up everything. They had to change it some but they aren't going to say anything to cut off daddy's cash. They aren't BRAVE enough.



*bag-mania*, if Meghan thinks her book title, Finding Freedom... is enough of a slap across gran-gran's face from her grand-daughter-in-law, well, MM might stick with criticising just the media but I think not.



[B]bag-mania[/B] said:


> Because we cannot go even one day without the media (via her publicists) *trying to ram down our throats just how friggin' wonderful Meghan is*. Today _People_ repeated an old interview with the facialist who did her face before her wedding telling us that Meghan is "kind, generous and inspiring." *They are going into the vault for a two-year-old interview to try to pump up her popularity*.



Great post, *bag-mania*!
Yes, totally agree that is the main sales point ~ and yes, I do wish just like Meghan ~ that her bio will be released tomorrow, or TODAY if possible so I am not tortured by the anticipation of it until August.
Ha! NOT.


----------



## zinacef

kkfiregirl said:


> Right? I need to see a picture of this cake, it’s been mentioned so many times now!


Pinterest pls!  For clicks and follow for sure!


----------



## poopsie




----------



## chowlover2

papertiger said:


> They are like a cult with 2 members


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> They are like a cult with 2 members


 That is the best way to describe these two!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Allergies?
> Drugged?
> Hungover?
> 
> All of the above?



papertiger, There's a word that describes people who have been pushed to the peripheral, treated as being of no consequence, as being "marginalized". Harry's been "markleized" almost to oblivion,  so he very well could be self medicating.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Her Mom, Doria, Spent Mother's Day Together*
> She baked a homemade strawberry and cream cake for Archie, too.
> 
> It was a family affair for Duchess Meghan's second Mother’s Day. OprahMag.com has learned that Archie, Markle, and Prince Harry, had a special day celebrating with Doria Ragland, Meghan’s mom, who lives nearby in Los Angeles. Everyone was mindful of proper social distancing guidelines, a source shares.
> 
> Ragland, who Prince Harry has described as "amazing," has been an important presence in Archie’s life since the day he was born. She flew to London before Meghann gave birth to be on hand to support her daughter and Prince Harry, and to spend time with her grandson. Ragland, who, sources tell us, is incredibly close to Harry, as well as her daughter, also joined the family during their stay in Vancouver. Prince Harry has a tremendous amount of respect for Ragland, as well.
> 
> Given her longtime advocacy on social issues, Ragland was instrumental in encouraging Meghan and Prince Harry to donate their time to deliver food with Project Angel Food. A source tells Oprah Mag.com that last month, Doria, “who is a frontline worker herself," had mentioned that the organization was in great need of support during this unprecedented time. As a little girl, the now Duchess and her mother, would volunteer at the soup kitchens in LA and while in Toronto filming _Suits_, Meghan was a volunteer at the St. Felix Center helping the homeless and those in need.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess also flew Doria to London for the launch of Meghan's cookbook, _Together: Our Community Cookbook._ Ragland introduced herself at the Duchess's first solo project by saying, “Hi, I’m Meg’s mom” and when asked if she was proud of her daughter's accomplishment she replied, "head over heels!" She was also on hand in Toronto to join Prince Harry and Meghan for the Invictus Games. A source tells us that it’s vital to Prince Harry that Meghan is able to have her mom on hand for support.
> 
> Though we're not sure if Ragland was also there to celebrate Archie's first birthday on May 6, we do know that the new parents pulled out all the stops for their beloved little one. Meghan, an accomplished cook, prepared a homemade strawberry and cream smash cake for Archie, his favorite, sources share with us. The Sussexes also posted a video of Meghan reading _Duck! Rabbit! _to Archie, a book gifted by none other than Oprah. They used this occasion to draw attention to charities that have been aiding vulnerable children impacted by the coronavirus crisis, including Save the Children and No Kid Hungry.
> 
> Last year, while speaking to _Access Hollywood_, Oprah revealed that she sent Archie a collection of books as a "welcome to the world" gift when he was born. “I don’t know the baby’s name or the baby’s gender, but this baby will have enough books to last a lifetime!” Oprah said, adding that books are her "standard gift" for people she "really cares about." A small sticker on the cover says "Archie's Book Club," clearly modeled after "Oprah's Book Club's" signature badge.
> 
> https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a32465756/meghan-markle-mothers-day-doria-archie/


sounds like a lot of BS to me....suddenly both H&M are very close to her mom?

I wonder is Oprah going to help them or are they going to hurt her?  Right now for me it's the latter.  Her gushing support for them is making me like and respect her less.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> And here is what Oprah is getting out of the friendship, exclusive access to such newsflashes as a Mother's Day visit for oprahmag.com.



Telltale sign Sparkles wrote the pressie herlself is when there are multiple incredibleness and amazingness....


----------



## mdcx

M reminds me of people who keep a running list of all their work achievements/projects so they are all prepped for the end of year performance review.
“QEII if you’ll just refer to document 3, look at all that shining a light shiz I did, surely you’ll see that I’m entitled to trillions of dollars and to keeping my title! Kthanksbye.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Okaaaay, so today it’s Saint Doria day?!  What gives, Oprah?  

In Covid times, Mother’s Day feels like  20 yrs ago and the birthday about 50 yrs ago. Why wait so long to publish this pablum? DM was on it the day of.  Are they getting ready for another move?  *Something weird is going on here.* We have almost zero info on Saint Doria other than she is alleged _loving grandmother _and sat completely alone in a church with 600 other people. [those wedding photos of her sitting alone look really awkward]. We see no photos of the alleged _loving grandmother_ and there is no info on the cute clothes/gifts she _may_ have given or made for the baby.  This PR bs just makes the grifters look worse than ever.  I am at a loss to understand any of this — we want privacy but we want to dominate the news cycle and we will send our lawyers with cease&desist orders.  Weird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun 
Will wait for the leaks but would love to know your intel


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M really need to stop popping up all over our screens. They look ever more desperate now, especially when they play the Doria card. She has been off limits from the get-go which was fine. Suddenly, she appears. Even in Oprah’s mag??? H&M reek of desperation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M really need to stop *popping* up all over our screens. They look ever more desperate now, especially when they play the Doria card. She has been off limits from the get-go which was fine. Suddenly, she appears. Even in Oprah’s mag??? H&M reek of desperation.



At first I read ‘pooping’ up all over our screens.  Which would be adequate too.


----------



## Lodpah

As I said previously somewhere it was alleged Doria spent time in prison for fraud relating to her travel business that is why there apparently is nothing online between a certain time. Don't you all think all her info was scrubbed out when H&M were engaged? 

It makes sense now. Doria does seem like a nice person tho.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I think those are just rumors. Some article recently (?) had photos of D at a family gatherings from the 80s/90s. It all looked happy, loving and normal. Nothing staged, nothing fake. My guess is she really does not want to deal with the life her daughter chose. That makes sense. As most parents, maybe she disagrees with some of M’s choices, but loves her anyway. She may not like the narrative the media has tried to impose and just wants to go on with her life.  That’s why I believe Oprah has made a mistake in writing about D.  Oprah now has put the media glare on D.  No idea why Oprah would do that, but it does seem unfair to D.

ETA:  to me, Oprah’s article just confirms how desperate H&M are. Previously, D had been off limits. Now she is front and center.  Seems something is changing in Harkle House.




Lodpah said:


> As I said previously somewhere it was alleged Doria spent time in prison for fraud relating to her travel business that is why there apparently is nothing online between a certain time. Don't you all think all her info was scrubbed out when H&M were engaged?
> 
> It makes sense now. Doria does seem like a nice person tho.


----------



## beautymagpie

I think Doria being pushed is entirely due to the court case. It’s almost like ‘M can’t be a markler, look here’s her mum’. She’s being used as a prop.


----------



## mdcx

You could speculate that her mother was a better visual representation of M’s woke, feminist, minority, shake up the BRF agenda than her dad, and that’s why she was the sole family guest at the wedding. Obviously her dad was the primary parent, but he didn’t suit Ms narrative so was pushed aside imo.


----------



## kemilia

M is smart enough to know she can't Markle her Mom--the optics would be horrendous. But she seems to be having difficulties making D jump through the hoops when M wants her to (good for D!!).


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh. Save us from young women who admire Meghan so much they put her on a pedestal and then write about it. I’m not familiar with “Flare,” I believe it is Canadian. From the way this chick writes about Meghan, she’s got major stan issues. Here is one of her school-girlish essays defending her heroine. 

https://www.flare.com/celebrity/meghan-markle-nema-vand-high-school/amp/


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. Save us from young women who admire Meghan so much they put her on a pedestal and then write about it. I’m not familiar with “Flare,” I believe it is Canadian. From the way this chick writes about Meghan, she’s got major stan issues. Here is one of her school-girlish essays defending her heroine.
> 
> https://www.flare.com/celebrity/meghan-markle-nema-vand-high-school/amp/


She probably still puts smilies on top of her i’s


----------



## Tootsie17

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaaay, so today it’s Saint Doria day?!  What gives, Oprah?
> 
> In Covid times, Mother’s Day feels like  20 yrs ago and the birthday about 50 yrs ago. Why wait so long to publish this pablum? DM was on it the day of.  Are they getting ready for another move?  *Something weird is going on here.* We have almost zero info on Saint Doria other than she is alleged _loving grandmother _and sat completely alone in a church with 600 other people. [those wedding photos of her sitting alone look really awkward]. We see no photos of the alleged _loving grandmother_ and there is no info on the cute clothes/gifts she _may_ have given or made for the baby.  This PR bs just makes the grifters look worse than ever.  I am at a loss to understand any of this — we want privacy but we want to dominate the news cycle and we will send our lawyers with cease&desist orders.  Weird.


My sentiments exactly! If H and M want privacy why hire a PR team in the first place?  Go away and just be quiet.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have nothing against Doria whatsoever - in fact, I have no opinion on her at all, I find her completely inoffensive but not that interesting - but the way the narrative of the mother-daughter-bond was pushed was pretty annoying from the beginning. Have you ever seen the Middletons be in any picture other than official family portraits at the wedding or a christening in nine years of marriage? But Doria had to lovingly gaze at Archie when he met the Queen just so a nice picture could be given to the press? 

At this point I am 100% sure MM is close to exactly one person: herself.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have nothing against Doria whatsoever - in fact, I have no opinion on her at all, I find her completely inoffensive but not that interesting - but the way the narrative of the mother-daughter-bond was pushed was pretty annoying from the beginning. Have you ever seen the Middletons be in any picture other than official family portraits at the wedding or a christening in nine years of marriage? But Doria had to lovingly gaze at Archie when he met the Queen just so a nice picture could be given to the press?
> 
> At this point I am 100% sure MM is close to exactly one person: herself.



I remember when the pregnancy was announced. There were a few people here who were convinced Doria was going to move to be close to Meghan and her grandson. There was never any sign that Doria living in England was ever considered. Good thing too, as it turns out it would have been a huge waste of time and money on her  part.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The  HarkleHouse narratives have overstepped their welcome. Too many false ones, too incredulous, too insulting.  
We deserve better. We’ve earned better.


----------



## Jayne1

I'm not sure the mother wants privacy and to remain in the background, as much as she probably has no choice. 

I doubt Meg has a need for her, except when it's for publicity purposes.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think those are just rumors. Some article recently (?) had photos of D at a family gatherings from the 80s/90s. It all looked happy, loving and normal. Nothing staged, nothing fake. My guess is she really does not want to deal with the life her daughter chose. That makes sense. As most parents, maybe she disagrees with some of M’s choices, but loves her anyway. She may not like the narrative the media has tried to impose and just wants to go on with her life.  That’s why I believe Oprah has made a mistake in writing about D.  Oprah now has put the media glare on D.  No idea why Oprah would do that, but it does seem unfair to D.
> 
> ETA:  to me, Oprah’s article just confirms how desperate H&M are. Previously, D had been off limits. Now she is front and center.  Seems something is changing in Harkle House.


It has been rumored for a long time that Oprah wanted to interview Doria, she’s probably setting up her chess pieces to see if she can still do that.


----------



## CeeJay

I'm pretty sure I mentioned before, that there was quite a bit of time during Meghan's High School years where Doria was very un-involved in her daughter's life.  Now, whether or not that was due to other circumstances (not living in LA at the time, travel, whatever ..), my friends that knew the Markles at that time said that never, ever saw Doria .. and they thought that odd because the parents (even if divorced) did usually attend the plays that their children were in (especially if they were in the lead)!  So, when the news comes out about Meghan and then the craziness with her Father & Sister, and then with Doria being made to look like the "Saint", they were highly perplexed .. and as a matter of fact, my friend said "oh THAT's Meghan's mother, huh .. never saw her"!  So, this whole BS that H&M "are so close" to Doria .. I have a hard time believing this.  Personally, I think Doria is the kind of woman who enjoys her own company and does her own thing .. and you know what? .. I 100% respect that!  I think the problem is that Meghan (as we all know) has left a trail of crumbs (markled people) and so she had a HUGE NEED to show that she was (at least) close to someone in the family.  So, sadly .. right now, I think that the two of them are 'using' Doria to feed their narrative.  We'll see how long this lasts and when/if Doria gets "markled" just like all the rest that Meghan has used up & spit out .. just a matter of time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. Save us from young women who admire Meghan so much they put her on a pedestal and then write about it. I’m not familiar with “Flare,” I believe it is Canadian. From the way this chick writes about Meghan, she’s got major stan issues. Here is one of her school-girlish essays defending her heroine.
> 
> https://www.flare.com/celebrity/meghan-markle-nema-vand-high-school/amp/



Barf (re the 'story")


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I'm pretty sure I mentioned before, that there was quite a bit of time during Meghan's High School years where Doria was very un-involved in her daughter's life.  Now, whether or not that was due to other circumstances (not living in LA at the time, travel, whatever ..), my friends that knew the Markles at that time said that never, ever saw Doria .. and they thought that odd because the parents (even if divorced) did usually attend the plays that their children were in (especially if they were in the lead)!  So, when the news comes out about Meghan and then the craziness with her Father & Sister, and then with Doria being made to look like the "Saint", they were highly perplexed .. and as a matter of fact, my friend said "oh THAT's Meghan's mother, huh .. never saw her"!  So, this whole BS that H&M "are so close" to Doria .. I have a hard time believing this.  Personally, I think Doria is the kind of woman who enjoys her own company and does her own thing .. and you know what? .. I 100% respect that!  I think the problem is that Meghan (as we all know) has left a trail of crumbs (markled people) and so she had a HUGE NEED to show that she was (at least) close to someone in the family.  So, sadly .. right now, I think that the two of them are 'using' Doria to feed their narrative.  We'll see how long this lasts and when/if Doria gets "markled" just like all the rest that Meghan has used up & spit out .. just a matter of time.


fine that doria does her own thing....maybe not so fine that she didn't participate in her daughter's upbringing for years.  but we don't know how that all came about.  maybe the mother and daughter weren't getting along or M wouldn't follow her mom's rules, so she went to live with dad.  and by doing so, got to hang around TV sets (married with children, etc).


----------



## lalame

Was Doria totally not there? I just assumed after divorce Doria may have been living in an apt or something because she didn't make as much money as the dad who kept the house (and M lived there full time).


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> fine that doria does her own thing....maybe not so fine that she didn't participate in her daughter's upbringing for years.  but we don't know how that all came about.  maybe the mother and daughter weren't getting along or M wouldn't follow her mom's rules, so she went to live with dad.  and by doing so, got to hang around TV sets (married with children, etc).





lalame said:


> Was Doria totally not there? I just assumed after divorce Doria may have been living in an apt or something because she didn't make as much money as the dad who kept the house (and M lived there full time).


The only knowledge that I have re: living arrangements and/or "their closeness" is from the Media outlets, just like the rest of us.  I was only saying that, from my friend's perspective and based on what they saw during Meghan's high school years, that their perception was that Doria may not have been around and/or that active in Meghan's life at that time.  I recall that they told me multiple times that Thomas was very present, and that he spoiled Meghan rotten .. hence some of the reasons why there are the "_what Meghan wants, Meghan gets_ .." tidbits.  So, can I answer definitively as to was/was not Doria part of Meghan's life during her teenage years? .. no, I cannot .. but I also didn't say that I knew definitively.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> The only knowledge that I have re: living arrangements and/or "their closeness" is from the Media outlets, just like the rest of us.  I was only saying that, from my friend's perspective and based on what they saw during Meghan's high school years, that their perception was that Doria may not have been around and/or that active in Meghan's life at that time.  I recall that they told me multiple times that Thomas was very present, and that he spoiled Meghan rotten .. hence some of the reasons why there are the "_what Meghan wants, Meghan gets_ .." tidbits.  So, can I answer definitively as to was/was not Doria part of Meghan's life during her teenage years? .. no, I cannot .. but I also didn't say that I knew definitively.



No worries, I wasn't directing that question at anyone in particular.  I was thinking about this recently as it always confused me but lately I've learned some coworkers have similar arrangements - kids live with dad but mom lives close by - so it seemed like a natural explanation.


----------



## melissatrv

The fact that M had zero family members at the wedding other than Doria was a huge red flag to me from the beginning. Imagine having your Mom there with the Royal Family and Hollywood elite and no support from other family members or friends?  The poor woman look terrified


----------



## lalame

melissatrv said:


> The fact that M had zero family members at the wedding other than Doria was a huge red flag to me from the beginning. Imagine having your Mom there with the Royal Family and Hollywood elite and no support from other family members or friends?  The poor woman look terrified



Didn't seem like she was ever close to her extended family except maybe her siblings in law from Dad's side but... well... we all saw what happened there...


----------



## mrsinsyder

It’s literally something every day


----------



## mrsinsyder

And another...

So this says they’re paying back the renovations via paying rent for the place?! Shenanigans.


----------



## lalame

mrsinsyder said:


> And another...
> 
> So this says they’re paying back the renovations via paying rent for the place?! Shenanigans.
> 
> View attachment 4732375
> View attachment 4732376



This tells me they can't afford to hand over 2.4m gbp in one go so this "rental-plus" arrangement lets them save face.


----------



## Sol Ryan

mrsinsyder said:


> It’s literally something every day
> 
> View attachment 4732372


Et tu, Adele? Dang it... I liked her so much... I hope this isn’t true...


----------



## csshopper

scarlet555 said:


> At first I read ‘pooping’ up all over our screens.  Which would be adequate too.


scarlett, I almost spit coffee all over the computer screen when I read this, thanks for the great laugh!


----------



## Jayne1

Did Adele move to LA?


----------



## kkfiregirl

melissatrv said:


> The fact that M had zero family members at the wedding other than Doria was a huge red flag to me from the beginning. Imagine having your Mom there with the Royal Family and Hollywood elite and no support from other family members or friends?  The poor woman look terrified



I agree, but at the time I gave her a pass because I have quite a few toxic relatives myself ...


----------



## kkfiregirl

Jayne1 said:


> Did Adele move to LA?



https://www.lonny.com/Adele's+New+Los+Angeles+Home+Is+Seriously+Impressive


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

kkfiregirl said:


> I agree, but at the time I gave her a pass because I have quite a few toxic relatives myself ...



Me too.  Knowing that, there is no way I would insist on a 600 guest wedding publicized before the whole world. Not certain why M thought those optics would be good for her, especially since it wasn’t her first wedding. It all seems so v tacky now. I’m thinking that is what caused much ill will from the beginning.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Did Adele move to LA?


Like many other Brits (celebrities), they oftentimes purchase a place in LA so that they are nearby when an event and/or their work requires them to be.  It's actually kind of funny because, we (well - used to) go to a favorite Deli up in Beverly Glen (BH is below), and oftentimes felt like we were the strangers because many were foreign - Brits, Aussies, Kiwi's, South African, European .. I've met so many really interesting folks up there and yup .. pretty much ALL in the Entertainment biz.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> This tells me they can't afford to hand over 2.4m gbp in one go so this "rental-plus" arrangement lets them save face.


For sure, and pretty much means that they likely are not paying anything for their 'rental' out here in LA!  $18k (GBP) is no chump change - that will take a big crimp out of Harry's wallet!  Oh wait .. it's likely coming from Daddy's (Charles) wallet .. sheesh, what was I thinking?!?!?!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder why this tidbit is being made public now?
Are they paying Tyler?_ {see @CeeJay’s response above}_
 I’m guessing the stories of them looking for a house in LA are false.
Clearly, they are on the Wallis and Edward path. Freeloading.





mrsinsyder said:


> And another...
> 
> So this says they’re paying back the renovations via paying rent for the place?! Shenanigans.
> 
> View attachment 4732375
> View attachment 4732376


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder why this tidbit is being made public now?
> Are they paying Tyler?_ {see @CeeJay’s response above}_
> I’m guessing the stories of them looking for a house in LA are false.
> Clearly, they are on the Wallis and Edward path. Freeloading.


did the duke and duchess of windsor live off the kindness of friends?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> did the duke and duchess of windsor live off the kindness of friends?



Oh, yes, indeed. It’s the topic of many books and websites.  Here is one:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/09/meghan-harry-wallis-simpson-edward-history
_After abdication, Edward was offered a stipend by his newly enthroned brother with the strict proviso that he agreed never again to set foot on British soil without permission. Edward spent the rest of his life roaming around Europe and the Caribbean bemoaning the hardship he endured and trying to extract more from British taxpayers.

The reality was rather different. The Windsors continued to live in splendor as a result of Edward’s shrewish money management combined with the couple’s bottomless ability to sponge off others; they spent most of their later years living in a 14-room mansion in the Bois du Boulogne rented for next to nothing.

When he abdicated, Edward demanded his brother buy him out of his life interest in the Balmoral and Sandringham estate for a tidy sum. He also secreted away more than £1m from the Duchy of Cornwall that rightfully belonged to the public purse.

By hook or by crook, the former king was left with enough to buy his wife a lavish jewelry collection that sold after her death in 1986 for $50m.
_
And another: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51567105
_A miniature court in exile surrounded by emblems of royalty, Edward and Wallis spent the rest of their lives sponging off wealthy friends. 

Like Harry and Meghan, Edward and Wallis hobnobbed with Hollywood royalty, hosting movie stars such as Richard Burton and Marlene Dietrich at their French country retreat.

Edward had little to do other than play golf. He professed no regrets about his 11-month reign, though his stories too often began with the words: "When I was King..."

He blamed everyone but himself for his abdication, from Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin to the Queen Mother._

"Twenty years I worked for my country and they kicked me out on my ass," the embittered duke told a friend.


----------



## Emeline

M&H wake up every day and proceed to notify the world of their delirious happiness.
The act is getting a little old.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, yes, indeed. It’s the topic of many books and websites.  Here is one:
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/09/meghan-harry-wallis-simpson-edward-history
> _After abdication, Edward was offered a stipend by his newly enthroned brother with the strict proviso that he agreed never again to set foot on British soil without permission. Edward spent the rest of his life roaming around Europe and the Caribbean bemoaning the hardship he endured and trying to extract more from British taxpayers.
> 
> The reality was rather different. The Windsors continued to live in splendor as a result of Edward’s shrewish money management combined with the couple’s bottomless ability to sponge off others; they spent most of their later years living in a 14-room mansion in the Bois du Boulogne rented for next to nothing.
> 
> When he abdicated, Edward demanded his brother buy him out of his life interest in the Balmoral and Sandringham estate for a tidy sum. He also secreted away more than £1m from the Duchy of Cornwall that rightfully belonged to the public purse.
> 
> By hook or by crook, the former king was left with enough to buy his wife a lavish jewelry collection that sold after her death in 1986 for $50m.
> _
> And another: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51567105
> _A miniature court in exile surrounded by emblems of royalty, Edward and Wallis spent the rest of their lives sponging off wealthy friends.
> 
> Like Harry and Meghan, Edward and Wallis hobnobbed with Hollywood royalty, hosting movie stars such as Richard Burton and Marlene Dietrich at their French country retreat.
> 
> Edward had little to do other than play golf. He professed no regrets about his 11-month reign, though his stories too often began with the words: "When I was King..."
> 
> He blamed everyone but himself for his abdication, from Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin to the Queen Mother._
> 
> "Twenty years I worked for my country and they kicked me out on my ass," the embittered duke told a friend.


interesting parallels


----------



## Genie27

Emeline said:


> M&H wake up every day and proceed to notify the world of their delirious happiness.
> The act is getting a little old.


True but then how else would her adoring public know how delirious they are? 

We should set up a go fund me to send them a pivo. Think of the range of new global exposure - Megs doing yoga by the pool, Harry lounging on the deck, Archewells feet as he runs around with his two besties.


----------



## Genie27

Genie27 said:


> True but then how else would her adoring public know how delirious they are?
> We should set up a go fund me to send them a pivo. Think of the range of new global exposure - Megs doing yoga by the pool, Harry lounging on the deck, Archewells feet as he runs around with his two besties.


*halo light thingy not included. Don’t forget she learned Lighting Direction on the set of MWC and can do her own hair, makeup and wardrobe too.


----------



## mdcx

Sol Ryan said:


> Et tu, Adele? Dang it... I liked her so much... I hope this isn’t true...


I feel like M drops these fake stories into the media, hoping they will provoke the named celeb to say something like "I've never met Meghan and Harry unfortunately, but I do wish them all the very best..."
The Meghan can claim that someone else planted the fake story and she also gets the bonus of some (admittedly weak) positive attention from a celeb.

On another note, Adele seems like a fabulously fun and genuine person and I'm not sure that she would tolerate fake M for very long at all.
ETA Adele's home is gorgeous! Very Nancy Meyers movie-esque.


----------



## Emeline

Genie27 said:


> True but then how else would her adoring public know how delirious they are?
> 
> We should set up a go fund me to send them a pivo. Think of the range of new global exposure - Megs doing yoga by the pool, Harry lounging on the deck, Archewells feet as he runs around with his two besties.


Love this!


----------



## mdcx

Genie27 said:


> True but then how else would her adoring public know how delirious they are?
> 
> We should set up a go fund me to send them a pivo. Think of the range of new global exposure - Megs doing yoga by the pool, Harry lounging on the deck, Archewells feet as he runs around with his two besties.


Oh wow, this pivo thing explains a lot to me about how some people make their videos etc:
https://getpivo.com/


----------



## rose60610

NY Post has article "Meghan Markle is trained in martial arts and kickboxing".  It goes on (and on and on) about how brilliant she is. If fluff pieces about her didn't make you gag before, this one assuredly will. Meghan is fluent in Spanish! She does ballet, jazz and tap dancing! Puuuuuuuke.

Get a sick bag ready.

Basically, if I did a finger paint when I was five, that must mean I'm nothing short of a Picasso now. In junior high I made a crappy ashtray for an art class pottery project (that was in the era when public schools provided a smoking area for grades 9-12 and teachers smoked in the teachers' lounge) so I should be known as a renowned sculptor. 

This article makes Meghan sound like she will find the cure for Covid 19 if someone else doesn't beat her to it.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The reality was rather different. The Windsors continued to live in splendor as a result of Edward’s shrewish money management combined with the couple’s bottomless ability to sponge off others; they spent most of their later years living in a 14-room mansion in the Bois du Boulogne rented for next to nothing.
> 
> When he abdicated, Edward demanded his brother buy him out of his life interest in the Balmoral and Sandringham estate for a tidy sum. He also secreted away more than £1m from the Duchy of Cornwall that rightfully belonged to the public purse.
> 
> By hook or by crook, the former king was left with enough to buy his wife a lavish jewelry collection that sold after her death in 1986 for $50m._


Where did his money go when they died, since he had no children.  Anyone know?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> *halo light thingy not included. Don’t forget she learned Lighting Direction on the set of MWC and can do her own hair, makeup and wardrobe too.



Though the hair and wardrobe could use a little help.


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> Where did his money go when they died, since he had no children.  Anyone know?



Wallis Simpson survived Edward  - she ended up with dementia and a lawyer had a power of attorney over Wallis and her estate.  The lawyer apparently sold several jewels at less than market value...

But most of the estate was bought by the Al Fayed family.  And I am not sure who benefitted from that sale...


----------



## Lodpah

I’ve come to believe Prince Charles is a weak man. Maybe that’s why the Queen has not stepped down. There’s a book written years ago called The Prince and a Cup of Tea. Prince Charles in my opinion is not qualified to lead as a King. He admired his abdicated uncle thus  the continued support of the bad behavior of the two  grifters. He was not even able to attend the school that would have made him a real man. Weak and pathetic is  maybe the Queen knows that. Long live the Queen into the ages.


----------



## Lounorada

Sol Ryan said:


> Et tu, Adele? Dang it... I liked her so much... I hope this isn’t true...


At first glance, I thought the same thing, but it sounds like a fake story to me.
I mean why would Adele, someone who is from the UK and has only been living in LA for a relatively short time feel the need to give advice on moving/settling in/suggesting schools there to MM who is from LA and would know all that stuff already seeing as she spent the majority of her life living there. I'm not buying it.
Adele is probably a celebrity M would love to be connected to because she's a superstar and so well liked also M seems desperate to make it look like A-list celebs are rushing out to support them unlike the big mean British media and RF.
So this rather unrealistic story was put out there to desperately to try and connect them as showbiz 'fRiEnDs'.
Adele seems like she enjoys a normal, genuine, quiet life when not working, she doesn't seem like the type of person who has any time for bullsh*t, drama or fake/attention-seeking people.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I’ve come to believe Prince Charles is a weak man. Maybe that’s why the Queen has not stepped down. There’s a book written years ago called The Prince and a Cup of Tea. Prince Charles in my opinion is not qualified to lead as a King. He admired his abdicated uncle thus  the continued support of the bad behavior of the two  grifters. He was not even able to attend the school that would have made him a real man. Weak and pathetic is  maybe the Queen knows that. Long live the Queen into the ages.



Not sure what you mean "has not stepped down". QE II is a monarch not a president. When her father died she became Queen, when she dies Charles will become King (and so on).


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lodpah said:


> I’ve come to believe Prince Charles is a weak man. Maybe that’s why the Queen has not stepped down. There’s a book written years ago called The Prince and a Cup of Tea. Prince Charles in my opinion is not qualified to lead as a King. He admired his abdicated uncle thus  the continued support of the bad behavior of the two  grifters. He was not even able to attend the school that would have made him a real man. Weak and pathetic is  maybe the Queen knows that. Long live the Queen into the ages.


Charles was an early advocate for environmental causes long before it became fashionable with the woke crowd.  He took a lot of flack for it at one time.  
I think he supports Harry because he’s his son.  Simple as.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lounorada said:


> At first glance, I thought the same thing, but it sounds like a fake story to me.
> I mean why would Adele, someone who is from the UK and has only been living in LA for a relatively short time feel the need to give advice on moving/settling in/suggesting schools there to MM who is from LA and would know all that stuff already seeing as she spent the majority of her life living there. I'm not buying it.
> Adele is probably a celebrity M would love to be connected to because she's a superstar and so well liked also M seems desperate to make it look like A-list celebs are rushing out to support them unlike the big mean British media and RF.
> So this rather unrealistic story was put out there to desperately to try and connect them as showbiz 'fRiEnDs'.
> Adele seems like she enjoys a normal, genuine, quiet life when not working, she doesn't seem like the type of person who has any time for bullsh*t, drama or fake/attention-seeking people.


Makes me wonder about the etiquette when some opportunistic grifter does this to you.  Do you publicly deny it? Get your PA to ring them up on the quiet and give them an earful or just ignore it?  Must be very annoying.


----------



## lulilu

The Adele story made me gag -- one Brit helping fellow Brits acclimate to a place they've never lived.  As if MM lived in the UK her entire life and is wholly unfamiliar with LA.  I guess MM isn't familiar with life of the rich and famous in LA, but she certainly had a cushy life there for many years.


----------



## lulilu

IDK if anyone mentioned this, but following the stories about Harry missing his military days, there were statements made by people who served with him, saying he was rude, incompetent and that they spent all of their time protecting him.  Allegedly never passed his pilot's exam even though he took the test at least 3 times so he could only copilot.


----------



## ic_locon

lulilu said:


> IDK if anyone mentioned this, but following the stories about Harry missing his military days, there were statements made by people who served with him, saying he was rude, incompetent and that they spent all of their time protecting him.  Allegedly never passed his pilot's exam even though he took the test at least 3 times so he could only copilot.



Sadly, even now, he is still only the copilot.


----------



## ic_locon

https://www.google.com.ph/amp/s/www...rry-meghan-markle-backed-book-soap-opera/amp/

I sure hope that this is true, that the BRF is not wasting a moment more on these two.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> IDK if anyone mentioned this, but following the stories about Harry missing his military days, there were statements made by people who served with him, saying he was rude, incompetent and that they spent all of their time protecting him.  *Allegedly never passed his pilot's exam even though he took the test at least 3 times so he could only copilot.*



Perhaps another reason there's some jealousy of Will


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> At first glance, I thought the same thing, but it sounds like a fake story to me.
> I mean why would Adele, someone who is from the UK and has only been living in LA for a relatively short time feel the need to give advice on moving/settling in/suggesting schools there to MM who is from LA and would know all that stuff already seeing as she spent the majority of her life living there. I'm not buying it.
> Adele is probably a celebrity M would love to be connected to because she's a superstar and so well liked also M seems desperate to make it look like A-list celebs are rushing out to support them unlike the big mean British media and RF.
> So this rather unrealistic story was put out there to desperately to try and connect them as showbiz 'fRiEnDs'.
> Adele seems like she enjoys a normal, genuine, quiet life when not working, she doesn't seem like the type of person who has any time for bullsh*t, drama or fake/attention-seeking people.



I never know what to think about stories like this. It seems unlikely that Adele would reach out on her own, but maybe it was something worked out between their PR agencies for their mutual benefit. It’s not like Adele is in the news every day anymore and every celebrity can always benefit from a story about being nice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania Exactly, this story has their PR fingerprints all over it.
It could have been Adele and H&M exchanged a few emails or texts. Something simple.  Although if it is true that Adele is ‘coaching’ them and they take her advice (!), then that will show how ineffective Oprah, Tyler, the BRF, Doria and Thomas are. All of them failed where Adele excelled. Certainly possible. Nah, I’m not buying the story at all.    I believe that Adele has so much positive love that they just had to feed off of it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF knows exactly how to handle these amateur threats. They have seen it before. 



ic_locon said:


> https://www.google.com.ph/amp/s/www...rry-meghan-markle-backed-book-soap-opera/amp/
> 
> I sure hope that this is true, that the BRF is not wasting a moment more on these two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> At first glance, I thought the same thing, but it sounds like a fake story to me.
> I mean *why would Adele, someone who is from the UK and has only been living in LA for a relatively short time feel the need to give advice on moving/settling in/suggesting schools there to MM who is from LA and would know all that stuff already *seeing as she spent the majority of her life living there. I'm not buying it.
> Adele is probably a celebrity M would love to be connected to because she's a superstar and so well liked also M seems desperate to make it look like A-list celebs are rushing out to support them unlike the big mean British media and RF.
> So this rather unrealistic story was put out there to desperately to try and connect them as showbiz 'fRiEnDs'.
> Adele seems like she enjoys a normal, genuine, quiet life when not working, she doesn't seem like the type of person who has any time for bullsh*t, drama or fake/attention-seeking people.


*100%++++ .. right????  Utter BS!!! *

While there are many private schools out here in LA, you bet Meghan knows which one is "the best" - after all, that's just another part of her social-climbing .. to make sure that her children attend the 'correct' school (and also a big reason why she would want to be in BH)!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania Exactly, this story has their PR fingerprints all over it.
> It could have been Adele and H&M exchanged a few emails or texts. Something simple.  Although if it is true that Adele is ‘coaching’ them and they take her advice (!), then that will show how ineffective Oprah, Tyler, the BRF, Doria and Thomas are. All of them failed where Adele excelled. Certainly possible. Nah, I’m not buying the story at all.    I believe that Adele has so much positive love that they just had to feed off of it.


that would make them parasitic ....hmm


----------



## zen1965

lulilu said:


> IDK if anyone mentioned this, but following the stories about Harry missing his military days, there were statements made by people who served with him, saying he was rude, incompetent and that they spent all of their time protecting him.  Allegedly never passed his pilot's exam even though he took the test at least 3 times so he could only copilot.



Out of interest: where did you read this?


----------



## beautymagpie

Lodpah said:


> I’ve come to believe Prince Charles is a weak man. Maybe that’s why the Queen has not stepped down. There’s a book written years ago called The Prince and a Cup of Tea. Prince Charles in my opinion is not qualified to lead as a King. He admired his abdicated uncle thus  the continued support of the bad behavior of the two  grifters. He was not even able to attend the school that would have made him a real man. Weak and pathetic is  maybe the Queen knows that. Long live the Queen into the ages.



I’m not sure. To be honest I think the Queen has stayed put because she has a duty, and unlike others, knows it’s a privilege and she takes it seriously.

Charles was a bit political a few years ago. He can be outspoken. That’s a definite no no as King. Royals have had their heads chopped off for it in years gone by  I think he’s toned it down publicly.

And, as our current PM proves, school is not necessarily an indicator of intelligence.

I think Charles sticks by them got two reasons. Harry is his son and the optics of PR. The Diana situation changed how the Royals do PR.


----------



## sdkitty

beautymagpie said:


> I’m not sure. To be honest I think the Queen has stayed put because she has a duty, and unlike others, knows it’s a privilege and she takes it seriously.
> 
> Charles was a bit political a few years ago. He can be outspoken. That’s a definite no no as King. Royals have had their heads chopped off for it in years gone by  I think he’s toned it down publicly.
> 
> And, as our current PM proves, school is not necessarily an indicator of intelligence.
> 
> I think Charles sticks by them got two reasons. Harry is his son and the optics of PR. The Diana situation changed how the Royals do PR.


As I think someone posted already I think the queen's job is for life.  she can't just step down - unless maybe she is unable to perform her duties due to illness


----------



## redney

QE2 could choose to abdicate if she wanted to pass control to her son. The former Queen of the Netherlands did this in the last few years for her son to become King. But based on QE2's history and deep rooted sense of duty to her country, it's unlikely she would unless she became incapacitated and could not physically continue to carry out her duties.

There's been much written that the Duke of Edinburgh has long thought of Charles as "weak." Don't know if QE2 shares his views.


----------



## Clearblueskies

redney said:


> QE2 could choose to abdicate if she wanted to pass control to her son. The former Queen of the Netherlands did this in the last few years for her son to become King. But based on QE2's history and deep rooted sense of duty to her country, it's unlikely she would unless she became incapacitated and could not physically continue to carry out her duties.


It’s not done here - Edward VIII was the first and only monarch to abdicate the British throne, and that’s why it was such a scandal.


----------



## lulilu

papertiger said:


> Perhaps another reason there's some jealousy of Will



Assuming these are true allegations, yes, could be.



zen1965 said:


> Out of interest: where did you read this?



I read it on twitter, which is why I just wrote that I had read these statements/allegations.  I do recall reading some years ago that Harry had to leave Afghanistan because the press got wind he was there and published about it, and it was decided that his presence put the others in potential danger.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> Assuming these are true allegations, yes, could be.
> 
> 
> 
> I read it on twitter, which is why I just wrote that I had read these statements/allegations.  I do recall reading some years ago that Harry had to leave *Afghanistan because the press got wind he was there and published about it, and it was decided that his presence put the others in potential danger*.



That was the official line given at the time.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> That was the official line given at the time.


I'm gonna take this with a grain of salt.  It's one of his few accomplishments so I'd hate to have it taken away


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> Assuming these are true allegations, yes, could be.
> 
> 
> 
> I read it on twitter, which is why I just wrote that I had read these statements/allegations.  I do recall reading some years ago that Harry had to leave Afghanistan because the press got wind he was there and published about it, and it was decided that his presence put the others in potential danger.


All the press were briefed, here in the UK anyway, beforehand and kept it quiet, hence why the press didn't go into why he wasn't at Sandringham for Christmas that year. Under normal circumstances if he was missing from there, there would have been a lot about it in the press questioning why he hadn't turned up.
It was a magazine or newspaper in Australia that published the info a few weeks later.


----------



## DoggieBags

zen1965 said:


> Out of interest: where did you read this?


Not sure if he ever passed his pilot’s exams but in 2009 there were several articles about his failing his pilots theory exam on his first try
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.st...iling-his-pilots-theory-test-6815511.html?amp


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

DoggieBags said:


> Not sure if he ever passed his pilot’s exams but in 2009 there were several articles about his failing his pilots theory exam on his first try
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/prince-harry-flies-high-after-failing-his-pilots-theory-test-6815511.html?amp



Oh my, *DoggieBags*, Harry was def not on my radar during that time. 
In any event, had to quit reading this link after Harry's alleged "racist" comments bc in view of where and whom he is with right now, well  article it me a lil'sick! He seems totally clueless, like dim-witted clueless.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Oh my, *DoggieBags*, Harry was def not on my radar during that time.
> In any event, had to quit reading this link after Harry's alleged "racist" comments bc in view of where and whom he is with right now, well  article it me a lil'sick! He seems totally clueless, like dim-witted clueless.


Yeah .. I wonder what she would think if she knew about those remarks!  BTW .. not the first time it has been reported that he made those types of comments as he apparently did the same when he was at Eton and it was (yet again) a Pakistani classmate of his.


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Not sure if he ever passed his pilot’s exams but in 2009 there were several articles about his failing his pilots theory exam on his first try
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/prince-harry-flies-high-after-failing-his-pilots-theory-test-6815511.html?amp



We got it, he may not be the brightest bulb in the chandelier... Easy prey!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Reading today's delivery of pseudo news about H & M - they have started paying back the Frogmore costs, but at the rate of 18,000 pounds per mo, it will take something like 11 years. 
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...e-cost-pay-back-royal-news-meghan-markle-news
Supposedly they will keep the Cottage for trips home


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> Not sure if he ever passed his pilot’s exams but in 2009 there were several articles about his failing his pilots theory exam on his first try
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/prince-harry-flies-high-after-failing-his-pilots-theory-test-6815511.html?amp



That reminds me of how JFK Jr. failed the bar exam the first couple of times. Being from a famous family doesn’t mean they are smarter or more worthy than anyone else. 

Come to think of it, if anyone shouldn’t have had his pilot’s license it’s JFK Jr.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> That reminds me of how JFK Jr. failed the bar exam the first couple of times. Being from a famous family doesn’t mean they are smarter or more worthy than anyone else.
> 
> Come to think of it, if anyone shouldn’t have had his pilot’s license it’s JFK Jr.


IIRC JFK Jr pilot license was not for flying at night in soupy foggy conditions but he flew the plane anyway.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> That reminds me of how JFK Jr. failed the bar exam the first couple of times. Being from a famous family doesn’t mean they are smarter or more worthy than anyone else.
> 
> Come to think of it, if anyone shouldn’t have had his pilot’s license it’s JFK Jr.


Oh, I soooooooooooooooooo remember that because my husband's cousin was taking the bar at the same time and just about everyone in NYC (where she lives) talked about him.  From what I understood, he failed it 3 times, no? (or was it twice and then finally passed the 3rd time)?  Not that the Law Exam is easy, but .. yes, he was not known as being the brightest bulb; his sister was the bright one!


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> IIRC JFK Jr pilot license was not for flying at night in soupy foggy conditions but he flew the plane anyway.


He did not have the "instrument only" certification; only "visual" (or something like that .. not a pilot, but a good pilot friend told me that).  Bottom line, having spent many a summer holiday on Martha's Vineyard and/or Nantucket, I can tell you that even when taking the boat out, it was oftentimes foggy and overcast.  From what I recall, didn't he also leave at dusk? .. not a smart thing to do (in addition to not checking on the weather beforehand)!  Given his experience on the Cape, he should have known better.  Sad that 3 people lost their lives in that ..


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Reading today's delivery of pseudo news about H & M - they have started paying back the Frogmore costs, but at the rate of 18,000 pounds per mo, it will take something like 11 years.
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...e-cost-pay-back-royal-news-meghan-markle-news
> Supposedly they will keep the Cottage for trips home



The payment of 18,000 pounds/month covers also rent, so it will take a lot more than 11 years to pay for the Frogmore renovation. If one accounts for interests on the £2.4million, their son will eventually finish paying for it.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The payment of 18,000 pounds/month covers also rent, so it will take a lot more than 11 years to pay for the Frogmore renovation. If one accounts for interests on the £2.4million, their son will eventually finish paying for it.


Wonder how long it will before the first payment is missed? But considering how much they’re saving by grifting, really no excuse to default.


----------



## lalame

Why would they even bother with rent... they don't live in the UK anymore, so why not just pay for the renovations and then crash in any number of royal properties for free when they visit the UK? Clearly the "rent" is just a repayment plan for the renovations.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chanbal said:


> The payment of 18,000 pounds/month covers also rent, so it will take a lot more than 11 years to pay for the Frogmore renovation. If one accounts for interests on the £2.4million, their son will eventually finish paying for it.


I said a few pages ago it would be some make believe funny money payments. I knew it.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> Why would they even bother with rent... they don't live in the UK anymore, so why not just pay for the renovations and then crash in any number of royal properties for free when they visit the UK? Clearly the "rent" is just a repayment plan for the renovations.



They know they might have to return to Frogmore if things don’t work out as planned in the US- Megs will say they had to move back for H’s mental health.


----------



## lalame

kkfiregirl said:


> They know they might have to return to Frogmore if things don’t work out as planned in the US- Megs will say they had to move back for H’s mental health.



Even if that were the case though... why would they need to rent it until then? The Queen would just give the couple back the rights to live there and kick out whoever was there before, like they did the first time.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> Even if that were the case though... why would they need to rent it until then? The Queen would just give the couple back the rights to live there and kick out whoever was there before, like they did the first time.



They know that people are waiting for them to announce that they’ve repaid the $$$ for the renovation & this rental payment story is their best attempt at that.


----------



## lalame

kkfiregirl said:


> They know that people are waiting for them to announce that they’ve repaid the $$$ for the renovation & this rental payment story is their best attempt at that.



Totally, I think this is just a funny money (love that phrase from @mrsinsyder) arrangement. They're not going to call it a payment plan bc that's just humiliating to admit that this fancy couple can't cough up 2.4m so they're calling it rent.  So transparent.

2.4m shouldn't be a difficult amount for people of their lifestyle to cough up... and I mean people who live that lifestyle but pay for it legitimately instead of enjoying it for free through the largesse of actually wealthy friends.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> 2.4m shouldn't be a difficult amount for people of their lifestyle to cough up... and I mean people who live that lifestyle but pay for it legitimately instead of enjoying it for free through the largesse of actually wealthy friends.



I was a tiny bit surprised that they didn’t have the money to repay it all at once, especially given their grandiose statement earlier this year about becoming part-time royals while carving out a path to _financial independence. _


----------



## chicinthecity777

Well, we were led to believe they were looking at properties in LA in the price range of $15-20m right? Why not reduce the budget to $12-17m and pay off the money they owe on Frogmore cottage straight away? It will still be big enough for 3 people after all. 

The truth is they don't have the cash! And the house hunting stories are bullcrap!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

M wants a foot in both camps, so she can claim to be "Royal" when it suits and a "Hollywood celeb" when it suits. Thus she needs two residences of course!


----------



## lalame

This is probably the real reason they can't wait to release the book.. they need money ASAP.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I soooooooooooooooooo remember that because my husband's cousin was taking the bar at the same time and just about everyone in NYC (where she lives) talked about him.  From what I understood, he failed it 3 times, no? (or was it twice and then finally passed the 3rd time)?  Not that the Law Exam is easy, but .. yes, he was not known as being the brightest bulb; his sister was the bright one!



I believe he passed it on the third try. It’s a good thing too because it was getting embarrassing for him.  He may not have been brilliant but he was gorgeous which made it easy to overlook his not having a genius IQ.


----------



## Jktgal

Frogmore Cottage was 5 separate apartments. These could have been rented or provided to staff as benefit. So the Markles should be paying rent.
Say the £8k/month is rental and upkeep, so the refurbishment payback portion is £10k/month - at 3% interest it will take 30 years to complete payment. 

Even 3% annual interest on a personal loan is low. No one gets this - this is the kind of interest for sovereign loans. At 5%, then the loan is never paid because 10k/month just covers interest. What an insult.


----------



## lalame

Jktgal said:


> Frogmore Cottage was 5 separate apartments. These could have been rented or provided to staff as benefit. So the Markles should be paying rent.
> Say the £8k/month is rental and upkeep, so the refurbishment payback portion is £10k/month - at 3% interest it will take 30 years to complete payment.
> 
> Even 3% annual interest on a personal loan is low. No one gets this - this is the kind of interest for sovereign loans. At 5%, then the loan is never paid because 10k/month just covers interest. What an insult.



That's why I say this isn't_ really_ rent, it's just a payment plan for the renovations. The term "rent" is public marketing. They have no reason to rent it... the BRF have so many properties that they could stay at when they visit the UK, and I'm sure they don't charge friends when hosting their visits much less their own family. And 8k gbp to rent that huge place? Please, my mortgage costs more and I certainly don't live in a place like that. 

Reminds me of when I graduated during the recession... a lot of my friends moved home but said they "paid rent" to make is sound a little more independent. Their rent? $100, $200 in prime areas. Ok, that's not "rent"... that's money that makes you feel good about what you have to do.


----------



## lalame

I recall this article the Daily Mail put out a few months ago that was kind of fun. They estimated how much the fair rental value would be of the major homes of the BRF. (article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7893899/How-cost-rent-Royal-properties.html)

Their guess for Frogmore Cottage? 30k GBP per month!


----------



## needlv

Jktgal said:


> Frogmore Cottage was 5 separate apartments. These could have been rented or provided to staff as benefit. So the Markles should be paying rent.
> Say the £8k/month is rental and upkeep, so the refurbishment payback portion is £10k/month - at 3% interest it will take 30 years to complete payment.
> 
> Even 3% annual interest on a personal loan is low. No one gets this - this is the kind of interest for sovereign loans. At 5%, then the loan is never paid because 10k/month just covers interest. What an insult.



I don’t think that H&M are actually paying it back.  It’s probably being paid back from Charles “allowance” for all of them - Wills, Kate, H&M.  That’s why it’s being “paid back” in instalments.


----------



## Jktgal

lalame said:


> I recall this article the Daily Mail put out a few months ago that was kind of fun. They estimated how much the fair rental value would be of the major homes of the BRF. (article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7893899/How-cost-rent-Royal-properties.html)
> 
> Their guess for Frogmore Cottage? 30k GBP per month!



Yet their story is that they are paying higher rent than market rent. In that case, they still owe 12k in rent AND the 2.4m loan plus interest. Sparkles is all about fair so this is just saying it as it is. They are about 22k/month short. A layman who doesn't pay back that kind of loan gets jailed.


----------



## beautymagpie

Funny how this payback news is coming out ahead of their anniversary...


----------



## CarryOn2020

beautymagpie said:


> Funny how this payback news is coming out ahead of their anniversary...



It is such an easy thing to say they are ‘paying it back’.  I won’t believe it until I see proof. As others have said, the amount is so small, it is laughable.


kkfiregirl said:


> They know they might have to return to Frogmore if things don’t work out as planned in the US- Megs will say they had to move back for H’s mental health.



My guess - they will move back when his visa (for whatever his immigration status is) runs out.  This rexit was a ploy to gain sympathy. No way he was serious about working in the US.    H is the new Andy, M is the new Fergie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess - they will move back when his visa (for whatever his immigration status is) runs out.  This rexit was a ploy to gain sympathy. No way he was serious about working in the US.    H is the new Andy, M is the new Fergie.



I doubt she's on board with that, though. She obviously hates everything about the UK.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I doubt she's on board with that, though. She obviously hates everything about the UK.


Apart from the titles and privilege this country has given her


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone should tell them the world does not want and will not support  ‘international roving royals’.
They are worse than Wallis and Ed. 

_https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
Royal expert Katie Nicholl called it 'inevitable' that the couple would move overseas but said the speed at which their lives had turned around had 'surprised everybody.'

She told Australian website 9Honey: 'I was told from a very early stage in their courtship, they had told a friend of Harry's that Meghan met quite early on that they wanted to international roving royals and that was going to be their focus.'
...She went on: 'They had an agenda from the outset – to be international royals.'   _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _...She went on: 'They had an agenda from the outset – to be international royals.'   _



How does that work, though...unless you are the King of the World?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How does that work, though...unless you are the King of the World?


Right? It just doesn't! That's why those 2 are so idiotic!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s some background info —  they have forgetten history and are doomed to repeat it.

====
Ultimately the duke got his way, which was to wed the woman who charmed her way into his life in the early 1930s, but the question remains: Was his abdication truly an act of love, as he claimed? Or did he insist on a forbidden marriage because he knew it was the one way out of the kingdom he never wanted?
https://www.biography.com/news/edward-viii-abdicate-throne-wallis-simpson
====
Edward’s behavior in the lead-up to the war was, as historian Caroline Harris explains, problematic. In 1937, Edward and Simpson visited Germany as guests of Adolf Hitler. When their meeting ended, Edward gave Hitler a Nazi salute. After the war, American diplomats discovered a cache of German diplomatic documents detailing connections between Edward and the Nazis, including the outlines of a “a fanciful plan” to reinstall the former royal on the throne. Whether these papers were simply Nazi propaganda tools or genuine chronicles of treasonous activity remains unclear. Prime Minister Winston Churchill, at any rate, was keen to get Edward and Simpson out of Europe, so he sent the couple off to the Bahamas.

Both Edward and Simpson felt the post was beneath them. “It is very hard,” Edward wrote, “once you’ve been King Emperor, to govern the Bahamas.” The state of Government House surely did nothing to stoke the couple’s enthusiasm; it was infested with termites, and after a chunk of ceiling plaster fell into the drawing room where Simpson was sitting, the pair decided to move out. They stayed first at Sigrist House, then at the country home of a British-Canadian mine owner. Simpson did not care for the latter of the accommodations, deeming it a “shack by the sea.”
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...d-prince-edward-and-wallis-simpson-180974416/
====
The Windsors stayed in France. To pass the time, the Duke wrote books and became an avid gardener. Simpson wrote articles and designed patterns. They enjoyed café society in New York and Paris. (Although it’s not certain if everyone enjoyed them in return—Gore Vidal called the Duke “deeply stupid.”)By most accounts, they remained deeply in love. But also by most accounts, the Duke deeply yearned to do something more.
https://www.vogue.com/article/what-happened-when-king-edward-viii-quit-the-royal-family


----------



## lulilu

I am sick unto death of the few photos the media keep posting with every article:  that hideous green thing MM wore on the "farewell" tour, the SAfrica photo of MM and Archie, and their engagement photo where MM, wearing a white coat, makes an obnoxious pose and waves at her fans.  I have come to hate her face and these photos make me sick.

PS -- How about all the nauseating articles about MM's "special, secret, adorable" nickname for Archie -- Arch.  WTF??  How stupid is that as the topic of an article?  Idiotic.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I believe he passed it on the third try. It’s a good thing too because it was getting embarrassing for him.  He may not have been brilliant but he was gorgeous which made it easy to overlook his not having a genius IQ.


He was gorgeous and by all accounts a very nice person - a thoughful person who wanted to make a difference


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I am sick unto death of the few photos the media keep posting with every article:  that hideous green thing MM wore on the "farewell" tour, the SAfrica photo of MM and Archie, and their engagement photo where MM, wearing a white coat, makes an obnoxious pose and waves at her fans.  I have come to hate her face and these photos make me sick.
> 
> PS -- How about all the nauseating articles about MM's "special, secret, adorable" nickname for Archie -- Arch.  WTF??  How stupid is that as the topic of an article?  Idiotic.


right....that photo in the green coat....sick of seeing it


----------



## kkfiregirl

I guess there aren’t many new photos of them or “Arch” so the media keep recycling the same photos. I also hate the white coat engagement photo, she looks so awkward there.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s some background info —  they have forgetten history and are doomed to repeat it.
> 
> ====
> Ultimately the duke got his way, which was to wed the woman who charmed her way into his life in the early 1930s, but the question remains: Was his abdication truly an act of love, as he claimed? Or did he insist on a forbidden marriage because he knew it was the one way out of the kingdom he never wanted?
> https://www.biography.com/news/edward-viii-abdicate-throne-wallis-simpson
> ====
> Edward’s behavior in the lead-up to the war was, as historian Caroline Harris explains, problematic. In 1937, Edward and Simpson visited Germany as guests of Adolf Hitler. When their meeting ended, Edward gave Hitler a Nazi salute. After the war, American diplomats discovered a cache of German diplomatic documents detailing connections between Edward and the Nazis, including the outlines of a “a fanciful plan” to reinstall the former royal on the throne. Whether these papers were simply Nazi propaganda tools or genuine chronicles of treasonous activity remains unclear. Prime Minister Winston Churchill, at any rate, was keen to get Edward and Simpson out of Europe, so he sent the couple off to the Bahamas.
> 
> Both Edward and Simpson felt the post was beneath them. “It is very hard,” Edward wrote, “once you’ve been King Emperor, to govern the Bahamas.” The state of Government House surely did nothing to stoke the couple’s enthusiasm; it was infested with termites, and after a chunk of ceiling plaster fell into the drawing room where Simpson was sitting, the pair decided to move out. They stayed first at Sigrist House, then at the country home of a British-Canadian mine owner. Simpson did not care for the latter of the accommodations, deeming it a “shack by the sea.”
> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...d-prince-edward-and-wallis-simpson-180974416/
> ====
> The Windsors stayed in France. To pass the time, the Duke wrote books and became an avid gardener. Simpson wrote articles and designed patterns. They enjoyed café society in New York and Paris. (Although it’s not certain if everyone enjoyed them in return—Gore Vidal called the Duke “deeply stupid.”)By most accounts, they remained deeply in love. But also by most accounts, the Duke deeply yearned to do something more.
> https://www.vogue.com/article/what-happened-when-king-edward-viii-quit-the-royal-family


Who funded them the whole time - the monarchy?


----------



## lulilu

sdkitty said:


> He was gorgeous and by all accounts a very nice person - a thoughful person who wanted to make a difference



That was the point of the statements I read, saying he was a rude azz and they had to carry him (not doing his job) all the time.


----------



## lalame

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Who funded them the whole time - the monarchy?



I read he had to sell off precious royal jewelry and other belongings that had been passed down to him to partly fund their lifestyles. Such a shame.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> That was the point of the statements I read, saying he was a rude azz and they had to carry him (not doing his job) all the time.


JFK Jr?


----------



## lalame

The Queen is a better person than me... I would've had permanent PTSD from that Wallis disaster and Markled Markle early on.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> That was the point of the statements I read, saying he was a rude azz and they had to carry him (not doing his job) all the time.



You are referring to Harry, right?  Because I can absolutely believe they had to prop him up to make him look good. 

I’ve never read anything bad about JFK Jr’s personality. He had other flaws but by all accounts he was kind and friendly.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> You are referring to Harry, right?  Because I can absolutely believe they had to prop him up to make him look good.
> 
> I’ve never read anything bad about JFK Jr’s personality. He had other flaws but by all accounts he was kind and friendly.


I heard that JFKJr was a nice dude too, besides being totally hot. Not the same for H though.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> I read he had to sell off precious royal jewelry and other belongings that had been passed down to him to partly fund their lifestyles. Such a shame.



If true, that is sad - their “lifestyle” is extremely over the top! They could easily slash their so called expenses in half and still live better than most.


----------



## Vintage Leather

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Who funded them the whole time - the monarchy?


With the exception of sovereign grants, the royal's money comes from their personal property.  When Edward inherited, he inherited personal property like Balmoral and Sandringham, and he sold it back to his brother.

In addition, they sold jewelry and other personal possessions. The Cartier family biography talks about showing them a few notable pieces, and Wallis saying, "We can't afford it."


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> If true, that is sad - their “lifestyle” is extremely over the top! They could easily slash their so called expenses in half and still live better than most.


LOL
try slashing it by ten or by 100


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Why would they even bother with rent... they don't live in the UK anymore, so why not just pay for the renovations and then crash in any number of royal properties for free when they visit the UK? Clearly the "rent" is just a repayment plan for the renovations.


The only thing I can think of, is to provide Harry with a place to retreat .. once he and Meghan are no more.  No way do I *EVER *see her going back, ever!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> The only thing I can think of, is to provide Harry with a place to retreat .. once he and Meghan are no more.  No way do I *EVER *see her going back, ever!


it will be interesting to see how this plays out long term....will they stay together for a few years and then divorce, him go back home and eventually marry someone more low-key?


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> it will be interesting to see how this plays out long term....will they stay together for a few years and then divorce, him go back home and eventually marry CHELSEA ?


----------



## Lodpah

Does anyone know of the tax ramifications of them living gratis in those huge and fancy houses for free? If they do get taxed their accountant bills will be massive, i.e. UK, Canada, US.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone should tell them the world does not want and will not support  ‘international roving royals’.
> They are worse than Wallis and Ed.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
> _https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
> Royal expert Katie Nicholl called it 'inevitable' that the couple would move overseas but said the speed at which their lives had turned around had 'surprised everybody.'
> 
> She told Australian website 9Honey: 'I was told from a very early stage in their courtship, they had told a friend of Harry's that Meghan met quite early on that they wanted to international roving royals and that was going to be their focus.'
> ...She went on: 'They had an agenda from the outset – to be international royals.'   _


I saw this this morning and just wanted to BARF .. seriously, yet again .. they are SO STUPID, just review your history folks (well - Harry is too stupid, but Meghan is supposed to be SO SMART - HA)!!  

The US no longer has a monarchy, Italy no longer has a monarchy, France no longer has a monarchy, Russia no longer has a monarchy, and the list goes on .. so, how in God's name do they think that all these countries .. who in many cases fought and/or deposed the royals, would WANT to have "international royals" .. WHAT A JOKE!!!  The stupidity of these two is just mind-blowing!


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I read he had to sell off precious royal jewelry and other belongings that had been passed down to him to partly fund their lifestyles. Such a shame.


Not quite accurate ... Windsor indeed had loose gems given to him as Emperor of india, and gave them to Wallis, some gems were sold / traded up, Wallis had a valuable collection of modern 1940s - 1950s jewelry. Most of the older historical ladies jewelry - tiaras etc - stayed in the UK since they were in the possession of his mother Queen Mary 
The Windsor expenses were paid from the sale of Sandringham and Balmoral. Those are owned by the the duke, and ,Windsor sold them back to the royal family.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> You are referring to Harry, right?  Because I can absolutely believe they had to prop him up to make him look good.
> 
> I’ve never read anything bad about JFK Jr’s personality. He had other flaws but by all accounts he was kind and friendly.



*Yes, I meant H, not JFKJr.  And I can imagine H was rude -- no sense of self and the fact that his whole school career was held together by others because he's so dim.  He's a prince and they better treat him like one.  Not just plain Harry (that's in his mind).*



Lodpah said:


> Does anyone know of the tax ramifications of them living gratis in those huge and fancy houses for free? If they do get taxed their accountant bills will be massive, i.e. UK, Canada, US.



*If I were an IRS auditor, I'd certainly consider the rental a gift (in kind) and put a valuation on it and treat it as income.  After all, when people win cars and such on those tv game shows, they have to pay income tax on them.  Even one month's rental value would exceed the maximum gift allowance.*


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> *Yes, I meant H, not JFKJr.  And I can imagine H was rude -- no sense of self and the fact that his whole school career was held together by others because he's so dim.  He's a prince and they better treat him like one.  Not just plain Harry (that's in his mind).*
> 
> 
> 
> *If I were an IRS auditor, I'd certainly consider the rental a gift (in kind) and put a valuation on it and treat it as income.  After all, when people win cars and such on those tv game shows, they have to pay income tax on them.  Even one month's rental value would exceed the maximum gift allowance.*


Maybe Harry would have turned out as a better man if his mother had survived to raise him.  He was at a young age when she died.  While she wasn't a perfect person, she was a loving mother.  Not making excuses for him but in addition the trauma of her death, there is the loss of her influence on him and her love.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I saw this this morning and just wanted to BARF .. seriously, yet again .. they are SO STUPID, just review your history folks (well - Harry is too stupid, but Meghan is supposed to be SO SMART - HA)!!
> 
> The US no longer has a monarchy, Italy no longer has a monarchy, France no longer has a monarchy, Russia no longer has a monarchy, and the list goes on .. so, how in God's name do they think that all these countries .. who in many cases fought and/or deposed the royals, would WANT to have "international royals" .. WHAT A JOKE!!!  The stupidity of these two is just mind-blowing!


Maybe M's big ego gets in the way of her being "smart"


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> it will be interesting to see how this plays out long term....will they stay together for a few years and then divorce, him go back home and eventually marry someone more low-key?



I am not convinced there will be a divorce. I get the impression Harry will stay with her for as long as she wants him. If he does end up going back I hope he doesn’t get married again. His mental state is fragile enough to begin with. I can only imagine what he would be like if Meghan is done with him.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I am not convinced there will be a divorce. I get the impression Harry will stay with her for as long as she wants him. If he does end up going back I hope he doesn’t get married again. His mental state is fragile enough to begin with. I can only imagine what he would be like if Meghan is done with him.


we'll see.  maybe she really loves him.  he is the only reason she is so rich and famous.  maybe she realizes that and she'll hang on to him.


----------



## Jktgal

CeeJay said:


> I saw this this morning and just wanted to BARF .. seriously, yet again .. they are SO STUPID, just review your history folks (well - Harry is too stupid, but Meghan is supposed to be SO SMART - HA)!!
> 
> The US no longer has a monarchy, Italy no longer has a monarchy, France no longer has a monarchy, Russia no longer has a monarchy, and the list goes on .. so, how in God's name do they think that all these countries .. who in many cases fought and/or deposed the royals, would WANT to have "international royals" .. WHAT A JOKE!!!  The stupidity of these two is just mind-blowing!



In some non-jurisdiction territories they are simply known as Roving Idiots, and that's being kind.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> Maybe M's big ego gets in the way of her being "smart"


I think her ego is the brainchild of all her irrational ideas.  The sad part is that she will never be able to fully understand how her own illogical behavior has led to such poor decisions for her, H, and Archie. It's disheartening really because she will always see herself as the victim and not the cause of her problems. Therefore, she will only continue to blame others. I couldn't write a better soap opera.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I am not convinced there will be a divorce. I get the impression Harry will stay with her for as long as she wants him. If he does end up going back I hope he doesn’t get married again. His mental state is fragile enough to begin with. I can only imagine what he would be like if Meghan is done with him.


It's going to take a mighty strong and kind woman to put him back together again. Too much work for most.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> we'll see.  maybe she really loves him.  he is the only reason she is so rich and famous.  maybe she realizes that and she'll hang on to him.


I'm afraid she will hold on to H and treat him poorly forever because her prominence is based on being his wife. Unless someone richer with more to pilfer from comes along, she won't ever let H go without a huge fight. I think her narcissist ego feeds on her treating him disrespectfully.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Tootsie17 said:


> I'm afraid she will hold on to H and treat him poorly forever because her prominence is based on being his wife. Unless someone richer with more to pilfer from comes along, she won't ever let H go without a huge fight. I think her narcissist ego feeds on her treating him disrespectfully.


Not just being his wife but also, granddaughter in law to the Queen, daughter in law to a King in waiting, not forgetting Duchess and still technically an HRH.


----------



## Genie27

Sharont2305 said:


> Not just being his wife but also, granddaughter in law to the Queen, daughter in law to a King in waiting, not forgetting Duchess and still technically an HRH.


You forgot SIL to the future King. She’s got six degrees of Separation from the Throne.


----------



## scarlet555

Tootsie17 said:


> I'm afraid she will hold on to H and treat him poorly forever because her prominence is based on being his wife. Unless someone richer with more to pilfer from comes along, she won't ever let H go without a huge fight. I think her narcissist ego feeds on her treating him disrespectfully.



Likely, as she was not known before and her gig on suits was minimal.  Most people didn't even know who she was until she married H.  If he's lucky, he'll get the boot, like Trevor, her ex.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Tootsie17 said:


> It's going to take a mighty strong and kind woman to put him back together again. Too much work for most.



I don't think any woman should take on this task unless she is his psychologist.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> we'll see.  maybe she really loves him.  he is the only reason she is so rich and famous.  maybe she realizes that and she'll hang on to him.



She has proven that she definitely does NOT love him, and they might be famous, but they're not that rich, otherwise, they would have already paid for the Frogmore renovations and own a place in LA.


----------



## CeeJay

kkfiregirl said:


> She has proven that she definitely does NOT love him, and they might be famous, but they're not that rich, otherwise, they would have already paid for the Frogmore renovations and own a place in LA.


Quite honestly, as others have said before me, I truly don't think that she has the ability to love anyone but herself!  She's just a USER, flat-out and simple.  What will be interesting, is what happens coming up .. re: the book (sales - and where does the $$$ go), and of course, the 1-year review (although that's not until next year - darn-it)!  True to form though, I'm sure they will continue to shoot themselves in the a$$ and I'm here for it!


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> She has proven that she definitely does NOT love him, and they might be famous, but they're not that rich, otherwise, they would have already paid for the Frogmore renovations and own a place in LA.





CeeJay said:


> Quite honestly, as others have said before me, I truly don't think that she has the ability to love anyone but herself!  She's just a USER, flat-out and simple.  What will be interesting, is what happens coming up .. re: the book (sales - and where does the $$$ go), and of course, the 1-year review (although that's not until next year - darn-it)!  True to form though, I'm sure they will continue to shoot themselves in the a$$ and I'm here for it!



I agree with you but I have to occasionally remind myself that I'm biased toward her and I don't really know her.  There is no way I think she married him purely for love.  But I suppose she could have fallen in love with him and what he represented - a great opportunity


----------



## LittleStar88

kkfiregirl said:


> I don't think any woman should take on this task unless she is his psychologist.



There are people who take advantage of those who are struggling - manipulate them, create a co-dependency situation, victimizing, etc, for their own personal gain. Purposely choosing that person, knowing they have a weakness, then playing on it.


----------



## Lounorada

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Well, we were led to believe they were looking at properties in LA in the price range of $15-20m right? Why not reduce the budget to $12-17m and pay off the money they owe on Frogmore cottage straight away?* It will still be big enough for 3 people after all.
> 
> The truth is they don't have the cash! And the house hunting stories are bullcrap!


This! My thoughts exactly.

Just realised I quoted your post earlier, but in the W&K thread  Didn't even know that was possible


----------



## mdcx

I could see H returning to the UK after the inevitable split, restoring his friendship with Wills and Kate and, eventually, finding a girlfriend amongst their set. Someone who has their own life and money, probably someone also divorced with kids who just wants to have a companion, not a second husband.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I agree with you but I have to occasionally remind myself that I'm biased toward her and I don't really know her.  There is no way I think she married him purely for love.  But I suppose she could have fallen in love with him and what he represented - a great opportunity



She loves what being with him made her, FAMOUS!!


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> PS -- How about all the nauseating articles about MM's "special, secret, adorable" nickname for Archie -- Arch.  WTF??  How stupid is that as the topic of an article?  Idiotic.



Isn’t Arch the only possible nickname for Archie? There’s not much else you can do with the name. It certainly isn’t special. Heck, characters on All in the Family used to call Archie Bunker Arch and that was 50 years ago.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> She loves what being with him made her, FAMOUS!!



How. Dare. You?! Meghan’s “independent profile” made her famous & deserving of international security. She did not even know who Harry was, or much about his mother since “we don’t follow royals [or have tabloids] in America.” 



bag-mania said:


> Isn’t Arch the only possible nickname for Archie? There’s not much else you can do with the name. It certainly isn’t special.



While Arch is the logical nickname, one never knows with Meghan— remember the mental gymnastics & liberties with language and mythology she took for explaining the names of her blog Tig & their Archwell?

The PR logic for divulging this “secret name” is more straightforward. Babies are good press, mothers using nicknames are good press, and the writer gets a “scoop.”  Meghan did the same thing with Harry in her engagement interviews. She acted extra cutsey & would not only call Harry “H” in interviews, but she’d also stop mid-sentence and giggle “that’s my name for him, H.” There was a bit of surprise for M publicly broadcasting a private term of endearment. (It’s unusual to hear such things in royal engagement interviews, but it’s a common thing for celeb couples to do, especially very young ones & PR-made couples like singers Shawn Mendes & Camilla Cabello being publicly clingy and having pet names for each other when their single was released.)


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> How. Dare. You?! Meghan’s “independent profile” made her famous & deserving of international security. She did not even know who Harry was, or much about his mother since “we don’t follow royals [or have tabloids] in America.”
> 
> 
> 
> While Arch is the logical nickname, one never knows with Meghan— remember the mental gymnastics & liberties with language and mythology she took for explaining the names of her blog Tig & their Archwell?
> 
> The PR logic for divulging this “secret name” is more straightforward. Babies are good press, mothers using nicknames are good press, and the writer gets a “scoop.”  Meghan did the same thing with Harry in her engagement interviews. She acted extra cutsey & would not only call Harry “H” in interviews, but she’d also stop mid-sentence and giggle “that’s my name for him, H.” There was a bit of surprise for M publicly broadcasting a private term of endearment. (It’s unusual to hear such things in royal engagement interviews, but it’s a common thing for celeb couples to do, especially very young ones & PR-made couples like singers Shawn Mendes & Camilla Cabello being publicly clingy and having pet names for each other when their single was released.)


Only Shawn Mendes & Camilla Cabello are in their early 20s and she's pushing 40! I've always thought grown up woman trying to be extra cutesy is quite silly but maybe I am biased.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Doing ads now?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone should tell them the world does not want and will not support  ‘international roving royals’.
> They are worse than Wallis and Ed.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
> _https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
> Royal expert Katie Nicholl called it 'inevitable' that the couple would move overseas but said the speed at which their lives had turned around had 'surprised everybody.'
> 
> She told Australian website 9Honey: 'I was told from a very early stage in their courtship, they had told a friend of Harry's that Meghan met quite early on that they wanted to international roving royals and that was going to be their focus.'
> ...She went on: 'They had an agenda from the outset – to be international royals.'   _



Michael Jackson said a similar thing. 

One country is not enough, people with no boundaries feel entitled to be prince/princesses without borders. 

They love talking about the Commonwealth too, not so much the Empire that was made into the commonwealth.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doing ads now?



They've been resetting stones and remodelling gold for centuries. That's why we have scrap metal prices.


----------



## LaidyM

Tootsie17 said:


> It's going to take a mighty strong and kind woman to put him back together again. Too much work for most.




Why does ANY woman or person needs to put him back together?
At most I can see his family pushing him to get mental help, but they won’t put him back together, no one can do that but he himself- that’s why his in the mess he is in right now: he was looking for a mommy figure to make him and it all better.

I’m in the group that thinks once the divorce is over he’ll be so f-up he’ll seek help himself (Archie may be a huge reason to do it- wanting to make sure he was not screwing up his son), that is assuming he won’t be seeking it during the marriage, and that would be when the light bulb in his head will turn on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And here we have it:  the father H never had!
Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
_Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.

'*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_


----------



## doni

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
> _Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.
> 
> '*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_


That’s such an insulting thing to say vis a vis Prince (and future King) Charles.
I can’t believe they can’t keep their friends under control.
Also, what a bizarre thing to say about your own husband when you are the age of the “son” in this alleged father and son relationship...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.



I do feel for the royals. These two have said - in person or by proxy - a lot of awful, hurtful sh*t for the past months.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
> _Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.
> 
> '*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_


Great! It doesn't take much (a free house stay for a few months in Canada) for Harry to find a father figure! Especially his real father is alive, just went through coronavirus scare, has supported him financially until his late 30s, and now abandoned by him and had his grandson taken far away from him! Way to go Harry! What a great son you are!


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> They've been resetting stones and remodelling gold for centuries. That's why we have scrap metal prices.


Exactly this! Gold and other precious metal has always been melted down and reused, like forever! What else is new here?


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone should tell them the world does not want and will not support  ‘international roving royals’.
> They are worse than Wallis and Ed.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
> _https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Markle-agenda-outset-royal-expert-claims.html
> Royal expert Katie Nicholl called it 'inevitable' that the couple would move overseas but said the speed at which their lives had turned around had 'surprised everybody.'
> 
> She told Australian website 9Honey: 'I was told from a very early stage in their courtship, they had told a friend of Harry's that Meghan met quite early on that they wanted to international roving royals and that was going to be their focus.'
> ...She went on: 'They had an agenda from the outset – to be international royals.'   _


Just when we think those 2 couldn't get more delusional, they came out to surprise us! They quit being royals so that they can be royals? What? Especially in MM's case, she wasn't born to royalty of any kind, she just married one. She was nothing before!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t Arch the only possible nickname for Archie? There’s not much else you can do with the name. It certainly isn’t special. Heck, characters on All in the Family used to call Archie Bunker Arch and that was 50 years ago.


Kinda ironic.


----------



## kkfiregirl

1LV said:


> Kinda ironic.



Someone should explain irony to Megs - this whole situation is filled with ironies.


----------



## beautymagpie

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
> _Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.
> 
> '*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_



What a slap and what a media hungry comment from McPhee.

They can't even blame media twisting things because she just thanked Access Hollywood for having her, didn't dispute or try to clarify anything.


----------



## 1LV

McPhee was never on my radar (or playlist) before she started dating Foster.  MM was never on my radar before she started dating “H”.   Birds of a feather?


----------



## Tootsie17

LaidyM said:


> Why does ANY woman or person needs to put him back together?
> At most I can see his family pushing him to get mental help, but they won’t put him back together, no one can do that but he himself- that’s why his in the mess he is in right now: he was looking for a mommy figure to make him and it all better.
> 
> I’m in the group that thinks once the divorce is over he’ll be so f-up he’ll seek help himself (Archie may be a huge reason to do it- wanting to make sure he was not screwing up his son), that is assuming he won’t be seeking it during the marriage, and that would be when the light bulb in his head will turn on.



I agree with you and I was being facetious.  He definitely does not need another wife until he gets his mental health together which I believe will take quite a while.  I doubt H will leave M anytime soon unfortunately. He can't see her bs yet, but hopefully he will one day for Archie's sake and his own.


----------



## mrsinsyder

1LV said:


> McPhee was never on my radar (or playlist) before she started dating Foster.  MM was never on my radar before she started dating “H”.   Birds of a feather?


She’s as D-list as Meghan. They’re using each other as much as anything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s as D-list as Meghan. They’re using each other as much as anything.


I completely agree.  Probably best friends in the making with so much in common.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
> _Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.
> 
> '*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_








Wow. Another insult to Charles and the family that are funding their quest for fame 'freedom'.
Someone should inform the not-so-bright Katherine that H has a father who is very much alive and well in the UK... a father who also is one of the main reasons H has a lot of money in the bank and doesn't have to actually work.

Well done to all involved on continuing to spit on the hands that feed you, put a roof over your head, fund your designer clothes, fund your security, fund your travels, let you keep your titles etc...


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> _'*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_


Disgusting.  Come on Charles, cut them off! They don’t even appreciate you.


----------



## LaidyM

doni said:


> That’s such an insulting thing to say vis a vis Prince (and future King) Charles.
> I can’t believe they can’t keep their friends under control.
> Also, what a bizarre thing to say about your own husband when you are the age of the “son” in this alleged father and son relationship...



Okay.
Harry seem to love his father very much, but they are two people whe seem to be communicating on very different wave lengths. To be fair Harry has had several other father figures through out his life, most notably is Mark Dyer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LaidyM said:


> Okay.
> Harry seem to love his father very much, but they are two people whe seem to be communicating on very different wave lengths. To be fair Harry has had several other father figures through out his life, most notably is Mark Dyer.



Interestingly enough, none of them taught him how to man up, get a job, take care of his family, pay his bills, and live a stable life. Last week, his word was ‘rudderless’. This week it’s a new dad.  Or...going back to page 1 of this thread, maybe we will find out the rumors are true.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doing ads now?


BS, BS and BS!!!  Scientific breakthrough my a$$!  Recycling Gold has been going on since ancient times!  Are those Diamonds recycled from other pieces?  Are they blood diamonds or are they ethically resourced?  THAT WOULD BE my question!


----------



## Lounorada

LaidyM said:


> Okay.
> Harry seem to love his father very much, but they are two people whe seem to be communicating on very different wave lengths. *To be fair Harry has had several other father figures through out his life, most notably is Mark Dyer*.


That's totally fine, many people have parent-like figures in their lives other than their parents, but to have one of your 'friends' say that out loud, boasting on a celebrity news/gossip outlet of all places, is a slap in the face of Charles (and the RF). Especially after everything that has gone on in recent months, just keep it private.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like there’s trouble ahead....wonder if Foster can cover his regulars and the grifters?
*Royal incomes will be hit hard by coronavirus, Palace staff warned*
*https://www.itv.com/news/2020-05-19/royal-incomes-will-be-hit-hard-by-coronavirus-palace-staff-warned/*


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doing ads now?


Even worse.... those earrings are ugly.... the way they hang off the end of her ear looks stupid....


----------



## scarlet555

Sol Ryan said:


> Even worse.... those earrings are ugly.... the way they hang off the end of her ear looks stupid....


 definitely looks odd like they should go up the ear firmly like to give a multiple pierced ear appearance and not dangle off.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
> _Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.
> 
> '*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_


McPhee - another opportunist


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> BS, BS and BS!!!  Scientific breakthrough my a$$!  Recycling Gold has been going on since ancient times!  Are those Diamonds recycled from other pieces?  Are they blood diamonds or are they ethically resourced?  THAT WOULD BE my question!


and she must be getting paid for this, right?  otherwise she'd be suing them for using her image


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> They've been resetting stones and remodelling gold for centuries. That's why we have scrap metal prices.


YUP .. you beat me to it!!!  All of my pieces are recycled gold and oftentimes gemstones from pieces that the buyer doesn't use/wear anymore .. this is NOT NEW nor "scientific" .. utter crap-oh-la with this advertisement!


----------



## Annawakes

McPhee can sing though.  At least she has a teeny bit of talent.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> McPhee - another opportunist


McPhee secured the bag Meghan should have gone for - rich, mostly under the radar, can buy $90k dresses without anyone harassing you about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here we have it:  the father H never had!
> Seriously, if this doesn’t stop Prince Charles from funding the grifters, nothing will.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rince-Harry-David-Foster-like-father-son.html
> _Actress and singer Katharine McPhee has opened up about her and husband David Foster's great bond with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. McPhee, 38, said that her husband managed to reconnect with the royal couple after setting them up with their Canadian hideaway in British Columbia earlier this year and as a result, he and Harry now have a great relationship which can feel like family.
> 
> '*My husband has a really, really beautiful relationship with Harry. They're so cute. They're like father and son,' McPhee told Access Hollywood.*_


I saw this this morning, and I just HAD to comment on DM .. seriously??????  This is so appalling; it shows how STUPID KMcP is .. seriously, think about it!  *HELLO .. Prince Charles, seriously? .. CUT THEM OFF*!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting this story pops up on the 2nd anniversary.  Seems that most have forgotten it was just 2 years ago that they stole $45million dollars for a show/scam. Mercy, they must have zero integrity, zero conscience, zero morals.

https://www.businessinsider.com/royal-wedding-cost-meghan-markle-prince-harry-2018-4
ETA:  yes, it is absolutely about the money. Pay it back. Cut them off.



CeeJay said:


> I saw this this morning, and I just HAD to comment on DM .. seriously??????  This is so appalling; it shows how STUPID KMcP is .. seriously, think about it!  *HELLO .. Prince Charles, seriously? .. CUT THEM OFF*!


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> She’s as D-list as Meghan. They’re using each other as much as anything.


SHEESH .. I have to keep on correcting everyone on the "D-List" .. no, she's *Z-LIST* (_as in *ZERO*, *ZED*, *ZIP*, *ZILCH*, *ZOT*, etc._)


----------



## 1LV

As a mother I want as many people as possible to love my children.  I want my kids surrounded by love.  But. . .  It would hurt my feelings to read that (David/Harry-father/son) about one of them.  I think Harry is a selfish little $hit.  He and MM deserve each other.  Match made in heaven.


----------



## bag-mania

Rolling my eyes at Vanity Fair. I can't get over all the twisted truths, exaggerations, and downright lies in this article. The author writes some lovely fiction.

*“They’re in a Really Good Place”: Inside Harry and Meghan’s Quiet Anniversary Plans*
Two years after a historic Windsor Castle wedding, and just over a month into their non-royal life, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “only just coming up for air,” says a friend.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be celebrating their second wedding anniversary “quietly together and as a family.”

According to one of their friends, Harry and Meghan will be spending the day “most likely offline, enjoying each other, Archie, and having some time to reflect on the past two years.” No doubt they will find time to thumb through their wedding album and perhaps watch the film they had made of what was arguably the most modern and diverse wedding ceremony Windsor Castle has ever staged.

While their wedding was relatively small by royal standards, the guest list was very VIP, with the likes of George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, and the cast of _Suits_ turning up in their finest alongside the queen, Prince Philip, and the extended royal family. The crowds also played their part, turning up in the thousands to line the sunny streets of Windsor to watch the newlyweds kiss on the West Steps of the chapel and wave them off as they carried out a picture-perfect wedding procession through the historic town.

To say that the two years since then have been eventful is something of an understatement. Harry and Meghan’s fairy-tale wedding—which gave the 1,000-year-old House of Windsor its first biracial, American duchess—seems like a lifetime ago. Since exchanging their vows in front of a global TV audience of millions, the couple have welcomed a son, baby Archie, who recently turned one; they have also made the life-changing decision to leave the royal family at the end of March, just one year, 10 months and 12 days after their wedding day.

The past year in particular has been marred by stories of feuds and family fallouts, with the popular couple rarely out of the tabloid headlines. Last summer they faced especially harsh scrutiny for flying on private jets, even as they promoted environmental causes, and for not visiting the queen at Balmoral. It was that intense experience in the spotlight that prompted them to give up the perks and privileges of royal life for financial freedom and independence. Today they live thousands of miles away from England in California, where they plan to make a fresh start.

“I think today they’ll be quite reflective,” added the friend. “The last year has been pretty epic and all the changes they have lived through and gone through are huge. They’re in a new country, they’re still relatively new parents, Archie is only one. To be honest they’re only just coming up for air; they’re settling in and working on a clearer vision of what they want for the future.”

This time last year the couple were also in a new home—Frogmore Cottage in Windsor— adjusting to being new parents. When Archie was born on May 6, 2019, the Sussexes had broken with tradition, keeping the birth a secret and dispensing with the traditional post-birth photo outside the hospital. Frogmore was busy with visitors keen to meet the new arrival and builders finishing the final renovation work. According to one visitor, the house was immaculate and the couple was blissfully happy, but then the cracks started to show.

Behind the scenes Harry and Meghan were struggling to keep it all together as they came under fierce scrutiny from the media and clashed with other family members. At one point, relations between Harry and his older brother, William, were so strained that the once-close brothers were no longer talking.

Meghan was also under pressure, having taken a brief maternity leave before returning to work on two major projects: editing an issue of British _Vogue_ and creating a capsule clothing collection for the charity Smart Works. According to sources, she soon began to feel isolated in Windsor with no friends nearby and her beloved mother Doria Ragland back in L.A. “It’s something many new parents often feel,” the source said. “It’s often a difficult time, and there was the added pressure of all the stories they had to deal with through the pregnancy and over the birth and the expectations over the birth. That and being away from home weighed on them.”

It was only when the couple were on tour in South Africa last autumn that they revealed to the world the extent of their unhappiness. Harry launched a scathing attack on the media for having been so critical of his wife, and soon after returning to the U.K., they flew to Canada for what aides called “some time out.” While at their holiday home on Vancouver Island, they began mapping out their new lives.

The timing of their bombshell announcement in January that they would quit the royal family came as a surprise to the queen who, after the “Sandringham Summit,” agreed to let the couple stand down as senior royals. It meant losing their titles—the queen insisted they could not be half in and half out the royal family.

As they celebrate their second wedding anniversary in lockdown in Los Angeles, Harry and Meghan are said to be looking forward to the next chapter of their lives.

“They are in a really good place,” said a source. “Speaking up and removing themselves from a toxic situation has enabled them to create a life they’ll be able to flourish in.”

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/harry-and-meghan-second-anniversary


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Rolling my eyes at Vanity Fair. I can't get over all the twisted truths, exaggerations, and downright lies in this article. The author writes some lovely fiction.
> 
> *“They’re in a Really Good Place”: Inside Harry and Meghan’s Quiet Anniversary Plans*
> Two years after a historic Windsor Castle wedding, and just over a month into their non-royal life, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “only just coming up for air,” says a friend.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be celebrating their second wedding anniversary “quietly together and as a family.”
> 
> According to one of their friends, Harry and Meghan will be spending the day “most likely offline, enjoying each other, Archie, and having some time to reflect on the past two years.” No doubt they will find time to thumb through their wedding album and perhaps watch the film they had made of what was arguably the most modern and diverse wedding ceremony Windsor Castle has ever staged.
> 
> While their wedding was relatively small by royal standards, the guest list was very VIP, with the likes of George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, and the cast of _Suits_ turning up in their finest alongside the queen, Prince Philip, and the extended royal family. The crowds also played their part, turning up in the thousands to line the sunny streets of Windsor to watch the newlyweds kiss on the West Steps of the chapel and wave them off as they carried out a picture-perfect wedding procession through the historic town.
> 
> To say that the two years since then have been eventful is something of an understatement. Harry and Meghan’s fairy-tale wedding—which gave the 1,000-year-old House of Windsor its first biracial, American duchess—seems like a lifetime ago. Since exchanging their vows in front of a global TV audience of millions, the couple have welcomed a son, baby Archie, who recently turned one; they have also made the life-changing decision to leave the royal family at the end of March, just one year, 10 months and 12 days after their wedding day.
> 
> The past year in particular has been marred by stories of feuds and family fallouts, with the popular couple rarely out of the tabloid headlines. Last summer they faced especially harsh scrutiny for flying on private jets, even as they promoted environmental causes, and for not visiting the queen at Balmoral. It was that intense experience in the spotlight that prompted them to give up the perks and privileges of royal life for financial freedom and independence. Today they live thousands of miles away from England in California, where they plan to make a fresh start.
> 
> “I think today they’ll be quite reflective,” added the friend. “The last year has been pretty epic and all the changes they have lived through and gone through are huge. They’re in a new country, they’re still relatively new parents, Archie is only one. To be honest they’re only just coming up for air; they’re settling in and working on a clearer vision of what they want for the future.”
> 
> This time last year the couple were also in a new home—Frogmore Cottage in Windsor— adjusting to being new parents. When Archie was born on May 6, 2019, the Sussexes had broken with tradition, keeping the birth a secret and dispensing with the traditional post-birth photo outside the hospital. Frogmore was busy with visitors keen to meet the new arrival and builders finishing the final renovation work. According to one visitor, the house was immaculate and the couple was blissfully happy, but then the cracks started to show.
> 
> Behind the scenes Harry and Meghan were struggling to keep it all together as they came under fierce scrutiny from the media and clashed with other family members. At one point, relations between Harry and his older brother, William, were so strained that the once-close brothers were no longer talking.
> 
> Meghan was also under pressure, having taken a brief maternity leave before returning to work on two major projects: editing an issue of British _Vogue_ and creating a capsule clothing collection for the charity Smart Works. According to sources, she soon began to feel isolated in Windsor with no friends nearby and her beloved mother Doria Ragland back in L.A. “It’s something many new parents often feel,” the source said. “It’s often a difficult time, and there was the added pressure of all the stories they had to deal with through the pregnancy and over the birth and the expectations over the birth. That and being away from home weighed on them.”
> 
> It was only when the couple were on tour in South Africa last autumn that they revealed to the world the extent of their unhappiness. Harry launched a scathing attack on the media for having been so critical of his wife, and soon after returning to the U.K., they flew to Canada for what aides called “some time out.” While at their holiday home on Vancouver Island, they began mapping out their new lives.
> 
> The timing of their bombshell announcement in January that they would quit the royal family came as a surprise to the queen who, after the “Sandringham Summit,” agreed to let the couple stand down as senior royals. It meant losing their titles—the queen insisted they could not be half in and half out the royal family.
> 
> As they celebrate their second wedding anniversary in lockdown in Los Angeles, Harry and Meghan are said to be looking forward to the next chapter of their lives.
> 
> “They are in a really good place,” said a source. “Speaking up and removing themselves from a toxic situation has enabled them to create a life they’ll be able to flourish in.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/harry-and-meghan-second-anniversary


I'm still struggling to understand what this "toxic situation" is. [emoji849][emoji848][emoji23]


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm still struggling to understand what this "toxic situation" is. [emoji849][emoji848][emoji23]


The toxic situation is H&M themselves!


----------



## lanasyogamama

That earring pic looks fake to me anyway.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm still struggling to understand what this "toxic situation" is. [emoji849][emoji848][emoji23]



The toxic situation was they were expected to perform certain tasks and MEGHAN DIDN'T WANNA!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> That earring pic looks fake to me anyway.



I thought it was photoshopped on her ear. Looks weird.


----------



## kemilia

mrsinsyder said:


> McPhee secured the bag Meghan should have gone for - rich, mostly under the radar, can buy $90k dresses without anyone harassing you about it.


The way Foster cycles through the "ladies," she might make it to his list eventually.,


----------



## doni

LaidyM said:


> Okay.
> Harry seem to love his father very much, but they are two people whe seem to be communicating on very different wave lengths. To be fair Harry has had several other father figures through out his life, most notably is Mark Dyer.


That may well be the case, but I would not imagine relatives of Dyer boasting to the press that he is a father figure to Harry, that’s what I find off here.
Not to talk about using the term father figure to refer to someone he’s known for like five minutes...


----------



## doni

chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly this! Gold and other precious metal has always been melted down and reused, like forever! What else is new here?


It is the whole point of a precious metal... Ridiculous.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Rolling my eyes at Vanity Fair. I can't get over all the twisted truths, exaggerations, and downright lies in this article. The author writes some lovely fiction.
> 
> *“They’re in a Really Good Place”: Inside Harry and Meghan’s Quiet Anniversary Plans*
> Two years after a historic Windsor Castle wedding, and just over a month into their non-royal life, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “only just coming up for air,” says a friend.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be celebrating their second wedding anniversary “quietly together and as a family.”
> 
> According to one of their friends, Harry and Meghan will be spending the day “most likely offline, enjoying each other, Archie, and having some time to reflect on the past two years.” No doubt they will find time to thumb through their wedding album and perhaps watch the film they had made of what was arguably the most modern and diverse wedding ceremony Windsor Castle has ever staged.
> 
> While their wedding was relatively small by royal standards, the guest list was very VIP, with the likes of George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, and the cast of _Suits_ turning up in their finest alongside the queen, Prince Philip, and the extended royal family. The crowds also played their part, turning up in the thousands to line the sunny streets of Windsor to watch the newlyweds kiss on the West Steps of the chapel and wave them off as they carried out a picture-perfect wedding procession through the historic town.
> 
> To say that the two years since then have been eventful is something of an understatement. Harry and Meghan’s fairy-tale wedding—which gave the 1,000-year-old House of Windsor its first biracial, American duchess—seems like a lifetime ago. Since exchanging their vows in front of a global TV audience of millions, the couple have welcomed a son, baby Archie, who recently turned one; they have also made the life-changing decision to leave the royal family at the end of March, just one year, 10 months and 12 days after their wedding day.
> 
> The past year in particular has been marred by stories of feuds and family fallouts, with the popular couple rarely out of the tabloid headlines. Last summer they faced especially harsh scrutiny for flying on private jets, even as they promoted environmental causes, and for not visiting the queen at Balmoral. It was that intense experience in the spotlight that prompted them to give up the perks and privileges of royal life for financial freedom and independence. Today they live thousands of miles away from England in California, where they plan to make a fresh start.
> 
> “I think today they’ll be quite reflective,” added the friend. “The last year has been pretty epic and all the changes they have lived through and gone through are huge. They’re in a new country, they’re still relatively new parents, Archie is only one. To be honest they’re only just coming up for air; they’re settling in and working on a clearer vision of what they want for the future.”
> 
> This time last year the couple were also in a new home—Frogmore Cottage in Windsor— adjusting to being new parents. When Archie was born on May 6, 2019, the Sussexes had broken with tradition, keeping the birth a secret and dispensing with the traditional post-birth photo outside the hospital. Frogmore was busy with visitors keen to meet the new arrival and builders finishing the final renovation work. According to one visitor, the house was immaculate and the couple was blissfully happy, but then the cracks started to show.
> 
> Behind the scenes Harry and Meghan were struggling to keep it all together as they came under fierce scrutiny from the media and clashed with other family members. At one point, relations between Harry and his older brother, William, were so strained that the once-close brothers were no longer talking.
> 
> Meghan was also under pressure, having taken a brief maternity leave before returning to work on two major projects: editing an issue of British _Vogue_ and creating a capsule clothing collection for the charity Smart Works. According to sources, she soon began to feel isolated in Windsor with no friends nearby and her beloved mother Doria Ragland back in L.A. “It’s something many new parents often feel,” the source said. “It’s often a difficult time, and there was the added pressure of all the stories they had to deal with through the pregnancy and over the birth and the expectations over the birth. That and being away from home weighed on them.”
> 
> It was only when the couple were on tour in South Africa last autumn that they revealed to the world the extent of their unhappiness. Harry launched a scathing attack on the media for having been so critical of his wife, and soon after returning to the U.K., they flew to Canada for what aides called “some time out.” While at their holiday home on Vancouver Island, they began mapping out their new lives.
> 
> The timing of their bombshell announcement in January that they would quit the royal family came as a surprise to the queen who, after the “Sandringham Summit,” agreed to let the couple stand down as senior royals. It meant losing their titles—the queen insisted they could not be half in and half out the royal family.
> 
> As they celebrate their second wedding anniversary in lockdown in Los Angeles, Harry and Meghan are said to be looking forward to the next chapter of their lives.
> 
> “They are in a really good place,” said a source. “Speaking up and removing themselves from a toxic situation has enabled them to create a life they’ll be able to flourish in.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/harry-and-meghan-second-anniversary


I like VF.  I think they have some good in-depth stories but this is just a piece of propaganda.  Guess their PR people are doing a great job.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> The way Foster cycles through the "ladies," she might make it to his list eventually.,


well I'm quite sure it was true love for McPhee - just like M


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I like VF.  I think they have some good in-depth stories but this is just a piece of propaganda.  Guess their PR people are doing a great job.



It concerns me when I catch publications passing off personal opinions and embellishments as if they are fact. If they embellish stories to pump up a celebrity, you know they will certainly do it in their in-depth stories to prove their point.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I like VF.  I think they have some good in-depth stories but this is just a piece of propaganda.  Guess their PR people are doing a great job.


I used to like VF too, but all it takes is one bogus stinky story to turn me off.


----------



## Emeline

doni said:


> That’s such an insulting thing to say vis a vis Prince (and future King) Charles.
> I can’t believe they can’t keep their friends under control.
> Also, what a bizarre thing to say about your own husband when you are the age of the “son” in this alleged father and son relationship...


Good of McFee to notify the world she's a loyal stan. Ugh.

Next stop for Meg&Kat?  I'm hoping they will join the cast  of Real Housewives of BH.
Bonus:  Kat's  husband could appear and reprise his role  as occasional pianist.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Slightly OT but I have lost respect for media a while back. There is very few real serious journalists left! Most of them just want their own 5 mins of fame, plus 99% of what I read/see are not unbiased fact reporting but rather them telling me what I should think. Just F off!


----------



## Emeline

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm still struggling to understand what this "toxic situation" is.


I don't see it either unless...
They both became  quite ill when they found out the were getting a cottage and not a palace.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Slightly OT but I have lost respect for media a while back. There is very few real serious journalists left! Most of them just want their own 5 mins of fame, plus 99% of what I read/see are not unbiased fact reporting but rather them telling me what I should think. Just F off!



So true. Not only do we have to worry about what the media puts into a story, we also need to be concerned about what they leave out. Even local news coverage tends to not report all aspects of a story, but concentrates only on their chosen narrative.


----------



## 1LV

Annawakes said:


> McPhee can sing though.  At least she has a teeny bit of talent.


Right.  And David Foster’s dad isn’t supporting her and David.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> Rolling my eyes at Vanity Fair. I can't get over all the twisted truths, exaggerations, and downright lies in this article. The author writes some lovely fiction.
> 
> *“They’re in a Really Good Place”: Inside Harry and Meghan’s Quiet Anniversary Plans*
> Two years after a historic Windsor Castle wedding, and just over a month into their non-royal life, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “only just coming up for air,” says a friend.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be celebrating their second wedding anniversary “quietly together and as a family.”
> 
> According to one of their friends, Harry and Meghan will be spending the day “most likely offline, enjoying each other, Archie, and having some time to reflect on the past two years.” No doubt they will find time to thumb through their wedding album and perhaps watch the film they had made of what was arguably the most modern and diverse wedding ceremony Windsor Castle has ever staged.
> 
> While their wedding was relatively small by royal standards, the guest list was very VIP, with the likes of George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey, and the cast of _Suits_ turning up in their finest alongside the queen, Prince Philip, and the extended royal family. The crowds also played their part, turning up in the thousands to line the sunny streets of Windsor to watch the newlyweds kiss on the West Steps of the chapel and wave them off as they carried out a picture-perfect wedding procession through the historic town.
> 
> To say that the two years since then have been eventful is something of an understatement. Harry and Meghan’s fairy-tale wedding—which gave the 1,000-year-old House of Windsor its first biracial, American duchess—seems like a lifetime ago. Since exchanging their vows in front of a global TV audience of millions, the couple have welcomed a son, baby Archie, who recently turned one; they have also made the life-changing decision to leave the royal family at the end of March, just one year, 10 months and 12 days after their wedding day.
> 
> The past year in particular has been marred by stories of feuds and family fallouts, with the popular couple rarely out of the tabloid headlines. Last summer they faced especially harsh scrutiny for flying on private jets, even as they promoted environmental causes, and for not visiting the queen at Balmoral. It was that intense experience in the spotlight that prompted them to give up the perks and privileges of royal life for financial freedom and independence. Today they live thousands of miles away from England in California, where they plan to make a fresh start.
> 
> “I think today they’ll be quite reflective,” added the friend. “The last year has been pretty epic and all the changes they have lived through and gone through are huge. They’re in a new country, they’re still relatively new parents, Archie is only one. To be honest they’re only just coming up for air; they’re settling in and working on a clearer vision of what they want for the future.”
> 
> This time last year the couple were also in a new home—Frogmore Cottage in Windsor— adjusting to being new parents. When Archie was born on May 6, 2019, the Sussexes had broken with tradition, keeping the birth a secret and dispensing with the traditional post-birth photo outside the hospital. Frogmore was busy with visitors keen to meet the new arrival and builders finishing the final renovation work. According to one visitor, the house was immaculate and the couple was blissfully happy, but then the cracks started to show.
> 
> Behind the scenes Harry and Meghan were struggling to keep it all together as they came under fierce scrutiny from the media and clashed with other family members. At one point, relations between Harry and his older brother, William, were so strained that the once-close brothers were no longer talking.
> 
> Meghan was also under pressure, having taken a brief maternity leave before returning to work on two major projects: editing an issue of British _Vogue_ and creating a capsule clothing collection for the charity Smart Works. According to sources, she soon began to feel isolated in Windsor with no friends nearby and her beloved mother Doria Ragland back in L.A. “It’s something many new parents often feel,” the source said. “It’s often a difficult time, and there was the added pressure of all the stories they had to deal with through the pregnancy and over the birth and the expectations over the birth. That and being away from home weighed on them.”
> 
> It was only when the couple were on tour in South Africa last autumn that they revealed to the world the extent of their unhappiness. Harry launched a scathing attack on the media for having been so critical of his wife, and soon after returning to the U.K., they flew to Canada for what aides called “some time out.” While at their holiday home on Vancouver Island, they began mapping out their new lives.
> 
> The timing of their bombshell announcement in January that they would quit the royal family came as a surprise to the queen who, after the “Sandringham Summit,” agreed to let the couple stand down as senior royals. It meant losing their titles—the queen insisted they could not be half in and half out the royal family.
> 
> As they celebrate their second wedding anniversary in lockdown in Los Angeles, Harry and Meghan are said to be looking forward to the next chapter of their lives.
> 
> “They are in a really good place,” said a source. “Speaking up and removing themselves from a toxic situation has enabled them to create a life they’ll be able to flourish in.”
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/harry-and-meghan-second-anniversary


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

All I can state truthfully is that H&M are nauseating, ie the Daily Mail article about Harry & his new dad, David Foster.

Of course, Harry can blame a mis-quote on the media, or McFee ~ it seems like Harry has never had to be responsible for his words or actions. He is one person that we do not have to worry about.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> So true. Not only do we have to worry about what the media puts into a story, we also need to be concerned about what they leave out. Even local news coverage tends to not report all aspects of a story, but concentrates only on their chosen narrative.


Yep! Even articles written in woman or beauty magazines are always disguised ads for something or someone. I gave up on those long time ago. Now I just read Harrods magazine which is exactly what it claims to be - ads for the stuff they sell!


----------



## bellecate

kemilia said:


> The way Foster cycles through the "ladies," she might make it to his list eventually.,


  So true


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> Slightly OT but I have lost respect for media a while back. There is very few real serious journalists left! Most of them just want their own 5 mins of fame, plus 99% of what I read/see are not unbiased fact reporting but rather them telling me what I should think. Just F off!


Yes!  Yes!  Yes!


----------



## scarlet555

1LV said:


> As a mother* I want as many people as possible to love my children*.  I want my kids surrounded by love.  But. . .  It would hurt my feelings to read that (David/Harry-father/son) about one of them.  I think Harry is a selfish little $hit.  He and MM deserve each other.  Match made in heaven.



I can't stress that enough, why are some parents so F-ing selfish, especially these two.  I can understand wanting to spare your kid if the BRF previously showed any signs that they did not like 'Arch', but honestly, being that they love H despite his pathetic moves, I can't imagine that to be the case.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yep! Even articles written in woman or beauty magazines are always disguised ads for something or someone. I gave up on those long time ago. Now I just read Harrods magazine which is exactly what it claims to be - ads for the stuff they sell!


fine if we think some of these entertainment related pices are paid for by PR people but don't please let's not turn against all the media.  supressing free press is how dictators get started.


----------



## kkfiregirl

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yep! Even articles written in woman or beauty magazines are always disguised ads for something or someone. I gave up on those long time ago. Now I just read Harrods magazine which is exactly what it claims to be - ads for the stuff they sell!



I agree! And to add on to that, you can’t even trust product reviews anymore because it seems like _everyone_ was given an item for free to review- so annoying!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> McPhee - another opportunist


*AMEN* to that sistah!!!


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doing ads now?



Ground breaking? Scientific breakthrough? Most of the gold in jewelry is melted down and recycled. She really thinks people are stupid. MM is so narcissistic.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I like VF.  I think they have some good in-depth stories but this is just a piece of propaganda.  Guess their PR people are doing a great job.


In general, I have liked VF .. because they oftentimes have great articles and they have done their research.  For instance, the article on Princess Anne was really great, and WHAT A DIFFERENCE between her and Hazza!  However, the fawning BS with Meghan and Harry .. PUHLEEZE STOP Vanity Fair!  

For those of you in the media industry, does this crap come from their PR company and therefore, what H&M pay for?  What drivel ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> In general, I have liked VF .. because they oftentimes have great articles and they have done their research.  For instance, the article on Princess Anne was really great, and WHAT A DIFFERENCE between her and Hazza!  However, the fawning BS with Meghan and Harry .. PUHLEEZE STOP Vanity Fair!
> 
> For those of you in the media industry, does this crap come from their PR company and therefore, what H&M pay for?  What drivel ..


seems like it ...or are we (the Americans) here on the PF in the minority?  seems everything I see on US media is positive about them


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> fine if we think some of these entertainment related pices are paid for by PR people but don't please let's not turn against all the media.  supressing free press is how dictators get started.


Take it easy. Nobody said anything about suppressing anybody! They can write whatever they want. I just won't take it at their face value, or I don't read some at all.


----------



## PewPew

LaidyM said:


> Okay.
> Harry seem to love his father very much, but they are two people whe seem to be communicating on very different wave lengths. To be fair Harry has had several other father figures through out his life, most notably is Mark Dyer.



This reminds me that Elton John has also spoken about feeling very protective and paternal towards Will & Harry since he was close to Diana & didn’t have kids himself until much later in life. H&M have used his plane for holidays. Elton’s publicly defended Harry's hypocrisy on environmental issues by saying he (Elton) paid money to environmental groups to help “offset” the carbon emissions of Harry using his private jet, etc

H&M will never be without resources, patrons or mansions to stay in. His view of oppression and freedom is always going to be different than the average person. If H&M wanted, they could pay off the Frogmore bill either from his trust, Charles’ personal money, or via any of Harry’s patrons. It’s just better PR to announce they have a longterm payment plan (“look! We’re normal, independent budgeting adults!”)


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> Take it easy. Nobody said anything about suppressing anybody! They can write whatever they want. I just won't take it at their face value, or I don't read some at all.


I have come to take it all with a (healthy?) dose of skepticism, which is a shame when it comes to the “real” news.  Just give me the facts and I’ll form my own opinion based on those.  Or Gary Janetti.  Give me his point of view any time!


----------



## LaidyM

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interestingly enough, none of them taught him how to man up, get a job, take care of his family, pay his bills, and live a stable life. Last week, his word was ‘rudderless’. This week it’s a new dad.  Or...going back to page 1 of this thread, maybe we will find out the rumors are true.




To be fair, you can’t force someone to do something, you can manipulate them but.. it only sticks for so long.
Believe me, I know first hand with my own sister who hates her career but won’t a damn **** about it except complain!


Btw: I managed to get blocked by mrs. Foster.
Like all I did was tell her she should worry about being Markeled for talking to the press not sure how that can upset her *shrugs*


----------



## bellecate

1LV said:


> I have come to take it all with a (healthy?) dose of skepticism, which is a shame when it comes to the “real” news.  Just give me the facts and I’ll form my own opinion based on those.  Or Gary Janetti.  Give me his point of view any time!


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


>


Lol!!  Love it!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> In general, I have liked VF .. because they oftentimes have great articles and they have done their research.  For instance, the article on Princess Anne was really great, and WHAT A DIFFERENCE between her and Hazza!  However, the fawning BS with Meghan and Harry .. PUHLEEZE STOP Vanity Fair!
> 
> For those of you in the media industry, does this crap come from their PR company and therefore, what H&M pay for?  What drivel ..


they have a new editor (past two years); sales are down.  according to what I read, one of her goals is to feature people of color.  that could be part of the reason for fawning over Meghan.  also I think their first H&M issue sold well.


----------



## mrsinsyder

So none of the royals wished them happy anniversary. 

Womp WOMP


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> they have a new editor (past two years); sales are down.  according to what I read, one of her goals is to feature people of color.  that could be part of the reason for fawning over Meghan.  also I think their first H&M issue sold well.


Didn't know that; thanks for the info.  

I don't know, maybe it's me, but I don't think we need any more "celeb news" magazines, we have enough already!  But, I guess from a PR perspective, they want to get H&M's name in every publication regardless.


----------



## lalame

I totally agree about beauty/fashion magazines basically being product shills now. I don't necessarily BLAME them... ads are how they make money... but I take everything with a grain of salt. Brands like VF play all sides so that's why you might see some positive and negative coverage of the same event... it's a play for as many eyeballs as possible to earn their ad revenues.


----------



## bellecate

mrsinsyder said:


> So none of the royals wished them happy anniversary.
> 
> Womp WOMP


I don’t recall the Markles ever publicly congratulating any of their relatives on their anniversaries either. But poor them, they weren’t asked if they’re okay on their anniversary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

News outlets do stealthy ads too but you may just not realize it since they cater to so many different products and people (versus beauty/fashion mags). Like the next time you see an article about how XYZ industry or type of product is trending, one of the companies listed may have just paid to place that article. The article doesn't even need to be a rating or positive coverage... just getting listed is worth $$$ to those brands. 

Wouldn't be surprised if M+H get in on this.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Didn't know that; thanks for the info.
> 
> I don't know, maybe it's me, but I don't think we need any more "celeb news" magazines, we have enough already!  But, I guess from a PR perspective, they want to get H&M's name in every publication regardless.


I think VF is a good mix of celeb stories and stories about some interesting people who may not always be as well known to the general public.  I like that there is really something to read there - not like People, which is fine if you just want pics and a couple of paragraphs of fluff.
I think it was probabably better with Graydon Carter as editor.
I don't lke the fluff piece about H&M but they're  the business of selling magazines and I guess H&M sell.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

LaidyM said:


> To be fair, you can’t force someone to do something, you can manipulate them but..
> 
> *Btw: I managed to get blocked by mrs. Foster.*
> Like all I did was tell her she should worry about being Markeled for talking to the press not sure how that can upset her *shrugs*



Bravo, *LaidyM*, well done!



CeeJay said:


> Didn't know that; thanks for the info.
> 
> I don't know, maybe it's me, but I don't think we need any more "celeb news" magazines, we have enough already!  But, I guess from a PR perspective, they want to get H&M's name in every publication regardless.



*CeeJay*, yes, no more celeb mags! There are enough celeb mags & sites. Most of them repeating the same _news. _


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> Didn't know that; thanks for the info.
> 
> I don't know, maybe it's me, but I don't think we need any more "celeb news" magazines, we have enough already!  But, I guess from a PR perspective, they want to get H&M's name in every publication regardless.


I know... I miss the days of MODELS on the cover of fashion magazines. I don't know why they all started putting actresses and celebs on the cover.  I don't buy Vogue to read about Beyoncé or Dakota Fanning, it's for the FASHUN.


----------



## Lounorada

LaidyM said:


> Btw: I managed to get blocked by mrs. Foster.
> Like all I did was tell her she should worry about being Markeled for talking to the press not sure how that can upset her *shrugs*


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> they have a new editor (past two years); sales are down.  according to what I read, one of her goals is to feature people of color.  that could be part of the reason for fawning over Meghan.  also I think their first H&M issue sold well.



Looking back, that first VF article with M on the cover didn’t resonate with me, I should have trusted my gut and realized she was a phony.


----------



## PewPew

mrsinsyder said:


> So none of the royals wished them happy anniversary.
> 
> Womp WOMP



Oh man the comments from the British public on such a post would be unreal. A happy anniversary post would be like “Happy 2nd Anniversary of the time we spent $50+million on your wedding, only to have you bash us and run away 16months later”


----------



## mdcx

Katharine McPhee is the perfect new BFF for M:

Runner up on American Idol 2006 where she was mentored by.....David Foster (net worth $80 million).
Married actor Nick Cokas almost 20 years her senior and David Foster sang at her wedding.
Had affair with director of show Smash,  Michael Morris who was also married. Was photographed kissing him in public. Somehow Morris' marriage to actress Mary McCormack survived.
Marriage to Cokas ends.
States in an interview that doesn't regret affair.
Dating Foster in 2017 and in 2019 married Foster.
This quote from her is lovely: "You're always available—until you have a ring on your finger, you're always available."
I think H is safe from McPhee, as his net worth doesn't exceed Foster's, but for sure M has her eye out for someone wealthier imo.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Katharine McPhee is the perfect new BFF for M:
> 
> Runner up on American Idol 2006 where she was mentored by.....David Foster (net worth $80 million).
> Married actor Nick Cokas almost 20 years her senior and David Foster sang at her wedding.
> Had affair with director of show Smash,  Michael Morris who was also married. Was photographed kissing him in public. Somehow Morris' marriage to actress Mary McCormack survived.
> Marriage to Cokas ends.
> States in an interview that doesn't regret affair.
> Dating Foster in 2017 and in 2019 married Foster.
> This quote from her is lovely: "You're always available—until you have a ring on your finger, you're always available."
> I think H is safe from McPhee, as his net worth doesn't exceed Foster's, but for sure M has her eye out for someone wealthier imo.


maybe so for next husband but Foster couldn't give her the huge fame she got marrying the prince.  if she's looking for the next one she might need to hurry up.  she's not getting any younger.


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> maybe so for next husband but Foster couldn't give her the huge fame she got marrying the prince.  if she's looking for the next one she might need to hurry up.  she's not getting any younger.


I agree about her needing to get a move on! She may be needing to looking at the 70+ age range at this rate!


----------



## Suncatcher

When you compare what soon to be Sir Tom Moore accomplished, raising £33 million vs what the Markles do for charity, there is no comparison. Tom Moore has fully earned his title.  His impact on charity far outstrips that of the Markles, and he did his work with grace and humility.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I agree about her needing to get a move on! She may be needing to looking at the 70+ age range at this rate!


LOL


----------



## sdkitty

Suncatcher said:


> When you compare what soon to be Sir Tom Moore accomplished, raising £33 million vs what the Markles do for charity, there is no comparison. Tom Moore has fully earned his title.  His impact on charity far outstrips that of the Markles, and he did his work with grace and humility.


did I miss something? 
who is Tom Moore?


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> did I miss something?
> who is Tom Moore?


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/19/beacon-of-light-capt-tom-moore-to-be-knighted


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/19/beacon-of-light-capt-tom-moore-to-be-knighted


thanks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Slightly OT but I have lost respect for media a while back. There is very few real serious journalists left! Most of them just want their own 5 mins of fame, plus 99% of what I read/see are not unbiased fact reporting but rather them telling me what I should think. Just F off!



You gotta watch a series called Flack, this is how PR - media work

H&M are a classic case-study of spin. Adverts dressed up as news or articles.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> In general, I have liked VF .. because they oftentimes have great articles and they have done their research.  For instance, the article on Princess Anne was really great, and WHAT A DIFFERENCE between her and Hazza!  However, the fawning BS with Meghan and Harry .. PUHLEEZE STOP Vanity Fair!
> 
> For those of you in the media industry, does this crap come from their PR company and therefore, what H&M pay for?  What drivel ..



Pay or future favours


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> Oh man the comments from the British public on such a post would be unreal. A happy anniversary post would be like “Happy 2nd Anniversary of the time we spent $50+million on your wedding, only to have you bash us and run away 16months later”


I’m surprised there weren’t any “never previously seen” photos released to mark the great occasion, all the same


----------



## chicinthecity777

Suncatcher said:


> When you compare what soon to be Sir Tom Moore accomplished, raising £33 million vs what the Markles do for charity, there is no comparison. Tom Moore has fully earned his title.  His impact on charity far outstrips that of the Markles, and he did his work with grace and humility.


H&M will never be able to achieve anything like what he did. Because people simply don't buy into H&M's bullsh1t!


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> You gotta watch a series called Flack, this is how PR - media work
> 
> H&M are a classic case-study of spin. Adverts dressed up as news or articles.


I did watch Flack!


----------



## pukasonqo

https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-cut-prince-harry-friends-family-devastating-effect/


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> You gotta watch a series called Flack, this is how PR - media work
> 
> H&M are a classic case-study of spin. Adverts dressed up as news or articles.


 This one is also a good comedy about a PR agency,
https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Absolute_Power_(comedy)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-cut-prince-harry-friends-family-devastating-effect/


Simply Harry and The Duchess of Difficult LMAO

Also, that Aubrey Hansen sure isn't fooled by MM. She should join our conversation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well, in fact Ms. Hansen has written many interesting pieces on our topic: 
https://www.ccn.com/author/aubrey-hansen/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This might be my fave of the five I quickly skimmed:

https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-left-a-trail-of-butcheries-on-her-way-to-prince-harry/

What a highschool friend had to say:

"We were at a party one time, and she sat on my lap. She got nose to nose with me. For a 16-year-old guy, that is an emotional moment. She said to me in Farsi, ‘You are so beautiful.’ I asked her, ‘How do you know Farsi?’ She said, ‘I learned it for you.’ Then she walked away."

WTF. A master manipulator at age 16.


----------



## Mendocino

mdcx said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/19/beacon-of-light-capt-tom-moore-to-be-knighted


That's wonderful news about a wonderful person! I can't think of anyone more deserving!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comment under one of the articles saying Harry will be back to the UK sooner or later:

"I give another three months in LA for Prince Harry, then he will return in the UK for good without Meghan. Unlike many who blame him his own misfortune, I see him as a victim of a malignant narcissist. He was love bombed and duped to marry her, then blackmailed (Archie and I or the highway) to move Vancouver then LA, isolated him from his family and friends and turned into an accessory for her grandiose career she envisioned in Hollywood.

With the help of Corona virus, what they achieved were to squat houses of rich acquaintances, live out of Prince Charles’ handouts and have no purpose. All public appearances post Megxit were gate crashing into some charities and organisations, and Zoom crashing into staff meetings. Financial gains and independence zero, so now they are desperate to publish the book that they expect to reverse the balance. All these grandiose plans to create the biggest charity in the world resulted in Archewell, a name more appropriate for a foot (arch) support than a charity.

The mega million bucks house in Malibu will never be bought, as they don’t have the money. A very acrimonious divorce will follow, very likely with accusations of physical and verbal abuse, molestations, blackmails, you name it.  Prince Harry will return to England; he stands no chance in LA.  Fortunately, the Firm (the Royal Family as it is known in Britain) can afford the best solicitors (lawyers) for Harry. He won’t be spared the divorce ugly circus. Prince Harry will be back in England, rejected and mentally traumatised."


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Comment under one of the articles saying Harry will be back to the UK sooner or later:
> 
> "I give another three months in LA for Prince Harry, then he will return in the UK for good without Meghan. Unlike many who blame him his own misfortune, I see him as a victim of a malignant narcissist. He was love bombed and duped to marry her, then blackmailed (Archie and I or the highway) to move Vancouver then LA, isolated him from his family and friends and turned into an accessory for her grandiose career she envisioned in Hollywood.
> 
> With the help of Corona virus, what they achieved were to squat houses of rich acquaintances, live out of Prince Charles’ handouts and have no purpose. All public appearances post Megxit were gate crashing into some charities and organisations, and Zoom crashing into staff meetings. Financial gains and independence zero, so now they are desperate to publish the book that they expect to reverse the balance. All these grandiose plans to create the biggest charity in the world resulted in Archewell, a name more appropriate for a foot (arch) support than a charity.
> 
> The mega million bucks house in Malibu will never be bought, as they don’t have the money. A very acrimonious divorce will follow, very likely with accusations of physical and verbal abuse, molestations, blackmails, you name it.  Prince Harry will return to England; he stands no chance in LA.  Fortunately, the Firm (the Royal Family as it is known in Britain) can afford the best solicitors (lawyers) for Harry. He won’t be spared the divorce ugly circus. Prince Harry will be back in England, rejected and mentally traumatised."


I totally agree with your assessment.   I also think karma is taking a small bite out of these two each day to even the score of their ungratefulness and haughty attitudes.


----------



## bag-mania

LaidyM said:


> Btw: I managed to get blocked by mrs. Foster.
> Like *all I did was tell her she should worry about being Markeled for talking to the press* not sure how that can upset her *shrugs*



She should be concerned. Meghan does not allow anyone but herself (and maybe Archie) to mean something to Harry. She sure as hell wouldn't tolerate some rich old record producer becoming a father figure to him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Tootsie17 said:


> I totally agree with your assessment.   I also think karma is taking a small bite out of these two each day to even the score of their ungratefulness and haughty attitudes.


I think the more time that passes the shakier it all looks. And the shakier it looks the greater the hyperbole.  I read something or other this morning which if IRC came via a source (Meghan presumably) and quoted by Scobie - that said they were working on _multiple _non-profit charitable organisations


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> I know... I miss the days of MODELS on the cover of fashion magazines. I don't know why they all started putting actresses and celebs on the cover.  I don't buy Vogue to read about Beyoncé or Dakota Fanning, it's for the FASHUN.


I don’t buy the US “Vague” (Vogue) anymore as I find it BORING as heck!  The British version is infinitely better with some great articles (sometimes) and IMO better fashion photography. Vanity Fair was one of the few US publications I purchased.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Katharine McPhee is the perfect new BFF for M:
> 
> Runner up on American Idol 2006 where she was mentored by.....David Foster (net worth $80 million).
> Married actor Nick Cokas almost 20 years her senior and David Foster sang at her wedding.
> Had affair with director of show Smash,  Michael Morris who was also married. Was photographed kissing him in public. Somehow Morris' marriage to actress Mary McCormack survived.
> Marriage to Cokas ends.
> States in an interview that doesn't regret affair.
> Dating Foster in 2017 and in 2019 married Foster.
> This quote from her is lovely: "You're always available—until you have a ring on your finger, you're always available."
> I think H is safe from McPhee, as his net worth doesn't exceed Foster's, but for sure M has her eye out for someone wealthier imo.


While Katherine may think she got the "prize", let me tell you that a very, very good friend of mine (_who knows David Foster very well as her 1st husband was in a very well-known Musician_) told me that he is a 100% POS to women (and especially the many wives that he has had).  He expects 100% subjugation from his partner; it's NEVER about them .. it's ALWAYS about HIM, HIM, HIM!  Look at what happened to Yolanda when she could no longer call him "her King" (or whatever, something like that??!).


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> While Katherine may think she got the "prize", let me tell you that a very, very good friend of mine (_who knows David Foster very well as her 1st husband was in a very well-known Musician_) told me that he is a 100% POS to women (and especially the many wives that he has had).  He expects 100% subjugation from his partner; it's NEVER about them .. it's ALWAYS about HIM, HIM, HIM!  Look at what happened to Yolanda when she could no longer call him "her King" (or whatever, something like that??!).



He is always on the lookout for the next Mrs. Foster, isn't he? The only advantage Katherine might have is he is older now and he might not have the energy to be as much of an @sshole as he used to be.


----------



## Mrs.Z

They are “only just coming up for air”.....after being on vacation since November?  

These articles are so tone deaf in light of what’s going on in the world they border on offensive

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...le-reflective-second-wedding-anniversary.html


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> They are “only just coming up for air”.....*after being on vacation since November?*
> 
> These articles are so tone deaf in light of what’s going on in the world they border on offensive
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...le-reflective-second-wedding-anniversary.html



Longer than that. If you factor in maternity leave she was barely "on duty" for six months last year.


----------



## CeeJay

pukasonqo said:


> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-cut-prince-harry-friends-family-devastating-effect/


.. and *BAM* .. this writer nailed it perfectly, pretty much what we've been saying all along!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Longer than that. If you factor in maternity leave she was barely "on duty" for six months last year.


72 days according to the Daily Telegraph!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Comment under one of the articles saying Harry will be back to the UK sooner or later:
> 
> "I give another three months in LA for Prince Harry, then he will return in the UK for good without Meghan. Unlike many who blame him his own misfortune, I see him as a victim of a malignant narcissist. He was love bombed and duped to marry her, then blackmailed (Archie and I or the highway) to move Vancouver then LA, isolated him from his family and friends and turned into an accessory for her grandiose career she envisioned in Hollywood.
> 
> With the help of Corona virus, what they achieved were to squat houses of rich acquaintances, live out of Prince Charles’ handouts and have no purpose. All public appearances post Megxit were gate crashing into some charities and organisations, and Zoom crashing into staff meetings. Financial gains and independence zero, so now they are desperate to publish the book that they expect to reverse the balance. All these grandiose plans to create the biggest charity in the world resulted in Archewell, a name more appropriate for a foot (arch) support than a charity.
> 
> The mega million bucks house in Malibu will never be bought, as they don’t have the money. A very acrimonious divorce will follow, very likely with accusations of physical and verbal abuse, molestations, blackmails, you name it.  Prince Harry will return to England; he stands no chance in LA.  Fortunately, the Firm (the Royal Family as it is known in Britain) can afford the best solicitors (lawyers) for Harry. He won’t be spared the divorce ugly circus. Prince Harry will be back in England, rejected and mentally traumatised."


EXCELLENT .. and *SPOT-ON*!!!


----------



## beautymagpie

CeeJay said:


> While Katherine may think she got the "prize", let me tell you that a very, very good friend of mine (_who knows David Foster very well as her 1st husband was in a very well-known Musician_) told me that he is a 100% POS to women (and especially the many wives that he has had).  He expects 100% subjugation from his partner; it's NEVER about them .. it's ALWAYS about HIM, HIM, HIM!  Look at what happened to Yolanda when she could no longer call him "her King" (or whatever, something like that??!).



I only know him from RHOBH and he came across like an a#*+hole when Yolanda was ill.


----------



## CeeJay

beautymagpie said:


> I only know him from RHOBH and he came across like an a#*+hole when Yolanda was ill.


Exactly!!! .. when she could no longer "bow" to his wishes, poof .. and that is what my friend told me.  She told me the story about how after the Grammys, she and her ex-husband attended a party, and David was there.  After quite a few drinks, he decides to go up to the piano and play and .. of course, being a party and not a concert, folks were talking.  All of a sudden, in the middle of him playing, he SCREAMS "_SHUT THE F#CK UP, I'M PLAYING MUSIC NOT THAT MOST OF YOU KNOW MUSIC_!".  Well, needless to say, that did shut everyone up, but certainly did not endear him to many there.  He has a reputation in the music biz ..


----------



## CobaltBlu

CeeJay said:


> Exactly!!! .. when she could no longer "bow" to his wishes, poof .. and that is what my friend told me.  She told me the story about how after the Grammys, she and her ex-husband attended a party, and David was there.  After quite a few drinks, he decides to go up to the piano and play and .. of course, being a party and not a concert, folks were talking.  All of a sudden, in the middle of him playing, he SCREAMS "_SHUT THE F#CK UP, I'M PLAYING MUSIC NOT THAT MOST OF YOU KNOW MUSIC_!".  Well, needless to say, that did shut everyone up, but certainly did not endear him to many there.  He has a reputation in the music biz ..



We have a friend who is a soprano, and her voice is amazing but she always does this also; weddings, parties, pretty much anything.  She doesnt tell people to shut up but she just starts singing and wont stop and you just have to stand there and listen, basically.  

Back to topic: So, since no one has asked them, we are just assuming Meghan is OK, then? 
Because I would think that after the ignore-fest of the 2nd anniversary (the reflective one) she would be .... miffed.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Comment under one of the articles saying Harry will be back to the UK sooner or later:
> 
> "I give another three months in LA for Prince Harry, then he will return in the UK for good without Meghan. Unlike many who blame him his own misfortune, I see him as a victim of a malignant narcissist. He was love bombed and duped to marry her, then blackmailed (Archie and I or the highway) to move Vancouver then LA, isolated him from his family and friends and turned into an accessory for her grandiose career she envisioned in Hollywood.
> 
> With the help of Corona virus, what they achieved were to squat houses of rich acquaintances, live out of Prince Charles’ handouts and have no purpose. All public appearances post Megxit were gate crashing into some charities and organisations, and Zoom crashing into staff meetings. Financial gains and independence zero, so now they are desperate to publish the book that they expect to reverse the balance. All these grandiose plans to create the biggest charity in the world resulted in Archewell, a name more appropriate for a foot (arch) support than a charity.
> 
> The mega million bucks house in Malibu will never be bought, as they don’t have the money. A very acrimonious divorce will follow, very likely with accusations of physical and verbal abuse, molestations, blackmails, you name it.  Prince Harry will return to England; he stands no chance in LA.  Fortunately, the Firm (the Royal Family as it is known in Britain) can afford the best solicitors (lawyers) for Harry. He won’t be spared the divorce ugly circus. Prince Harry will be back in England, rejected and mentally traumatised."


I think maybe he'll go back for Christmas-time and family holidays. If he did it would certainly show the beginnings of some social distancing from his wife, which he needs for his own mental health. Going back for holidays to his family would indicate some distance between him/MM is starting to surface. I hope it happens.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Simply Harry and The Duchess of Difficult LMAO
> 
> Also, that Aubrey Hansen sure isn't fooled by MM. She should join our conversation.


she sounds like us....but I don't hear anything like this from any US media....wonder if that will come


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think maybe he'll go back for Christmas-time and family holidays. If he did it would certainly show the beginnings of some social distancing from his wife, which he needs for his own mental health. Going back for holidays to his family would indicate some distance between him/MM is starting to surface. I hope it happens.


I doubt she will allow that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I think maybe he'll go back for Christmas-time and family holidays. If he did it would certainly show the beginnings of some social distancing from his wife, which he needs for his own mental health. Going back for holidays to his family would indicate some distance between him/MM is starting to surface. I hope it happens.



You know...as much as I dislike her, if I felt she was actually good for him and made him thrive I'd probably get over it. But watching what feels like her driving him closer to a completely ruined mental health out of sheer selfishness is just painful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she sounds like us....but I don't hear anything like this from any US media....wonder if that will come


Maybe they are not as invested because they have less reason to be hurt and angry. They are idiots and grifters and full of it, but it's the British people they fooled, took a lot of money from and left out in the rain basically.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> While Katherine may think she got the "prize", let me tell you that a very, very good friend of mine (_who knows David Foster very well as her 1st husband was in a very well-known Musician_) told me that he is a 100% POS to women (and especially the many wives that he has had).  He expects 100% subjugation from his partner; it's NEVER about them .. it's ALWAYS about HIM, HIM, HIM!  Look at what happened to Yolanda when she could no longer call him "her King" (or whatever, something like that??!).


Could you imagine trying to get the ego’s of David and Megain in the same space. You can be sure he won’t be her next hubbie, it must always be about her.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she sounds like us....but I don't hear anything like this from any US media....*wonder if that will come*



No, the majority of the US media will never say anything critical about her.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> No, the majority of the *US media will never say anything critical *about her.



Yeah, I don't get that, everything she does is so transparent...  Or is it just a matter of time?  who is protecting her and why?  She  is a professional self-victimization, and I can't believe Hollywood doesn't see that or do they and they are just trying to exploit her?  Everyone's card runs out, look at Weinstein, he must have really pissed someone off or his narcissism just grew till he it blew him off the top.


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> Yeah, I don't get that, everything she does is so transparent...  Or is it just a matter of time?  who is protecting her and why?  She  is a professional self-victimization, and I can't believe Hollywood doesn't see that or do they and they are just trying to exploit her?  Everyone's card runs out, look at Weinstein, he must have really pissed someone off or his narcissism just grew till he it blew him off the top.



Meghan would have to do something truly horrible for the American media to turn on her. Being a hypocrite, a narcissist, and a manipulator is not a crime, particularly in the Hollywood circles she prefers. The media is not holding her to a standard of conduct. We don't have royalty who are expected to behave a certain way. Only when people stop being interested in her will she go away in the media here.

Weinstein became old and he had lost some of his power in the entertainment industry. The same thing happened with Cosby. That's when it became safe to report them when they were only feared and protected before.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Meghan would have to do something truly horrible for the American media to turn on her. Being a hypocrite, a narcissist, and a manipulator is not a crime, particularly in the Hollywood circles she prefers. The media is not holding her to a standard of conduct. We don't have royalty who are expected to behave a certain way. Only when people stop being interested in her will she go away in the media here.
> 
> Weinstein became old and he had lost some of his power in the entertainment industry. The same thing happened with Cosby. That's when it became safe to report them when they were only feared and protected before.



Yeah, the reasons the UK public hate her just don't translate here for the casual observer... Hypocrite? Narcissist? Manipulator? Sloppy? Progressive phonies? They don't even stand out among the celebrities here.


----------



## chicinthecity777

The U.S. also has the benefits of not having to fund them out of public money. So what if some narcissist is leeching off other rich people! No big deal.


----------



## CeeJay

IMO .. the only thing that would put the nail in Meghan's coffin here in the US, is if they are found out (and there is proof) of their truly hypocritical behavior.  For instance, if they create this "supposed" non-profit and then they are found (and again with proof) with their hands in the cookie Jar, then the US Media may not be as friendly.  There are some media folks here in the US who are very good at those types of stories .. Ronan Farrow for instance.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> IMO .. the only thing that would put the nail in Meghan's coffin here in the US, is if they are found out (and there is proof) of their truly hypocritical behavior.  For instance, if they create this "supposed" non-profit and then they are found (and again with proof) with their hands in the cookie Jar, then the US Media may not be as friendly.  There are some media folks here in the US who are very good at those types of stories .. *Ronan Farrow* for instance.



Boy, watch out who this guy tracks...


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> This one is also a good comedy about a PR agency,
> https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Absolute_Power_(comedy)



Let's not forget Succession, seems appropriate, especially the family feuds, back stabbing, covering up scandals and people shooting themselves in the foot when they're born with a winning hand (and mixing metaphors).


----------



## LaidyM

pukasonqo said:


> This one is also a good comedy about a PR agency,
> https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Absolute_Power_(comedy)



CCN is an extremely bad website to quote. To my recollection it is an extremely right wing thinly veiled pro white supremacy website. They hide it well, but when you know what to look for because you dealt with it your entire life...
Let’s say none of friends (especially the non white ones) would ever read it.
Many of it’s article contributors are just as bigots.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> No, the majority of the US media will never say anything critical about her.



They would be branded as racist bullying haters
god help you if you have a *****GASP*****_* difference of opinion *_


----------



## threadbender

LaidyM said:


> CCN is an extremely bad website to quote. To my recollection it is an extremely right wing thinly veiled pro white supremacy website. They hide it well, but when you know what to look for because you dealt with it your entire life...
> Let’s say none of friends (especially the non white ones) would ever read it.
> Many of it’s article contributors are just as bigots.


? I didn't see a quote from ccn. Did I miss something? I thought the link just went to information regarding a British comedy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent observations, all.  @sdkitty’s question — are H&M popular here in the US?  
Of course, Ricky Gervais has taken Hwood to task on hypocrisy - rightfully so, imo - so the grifters should tread carefully with their business partners.  Rumors about Doria are everywhere, Gayle says Oprah did not arrange the Tyler Perry house for them, and others have notably distanced themselves from H&M (i.e., Clooney?). That could be an indicator or it could be right now we have more important things to focus on than this silly, self-indulgent sideshow. I did find this article quite interesting and entertaining. Looks like H&M have upset a few folks:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/princess-problem/608032/
_I assumed it would be an abdication—and who could blame them?

Instead, it was … Megxit._
_
Megxit is the most complicated, self-involved, grandiose, half-assed, high-minded, shortsighted, greedy-graspy, swing-for-the-fences, letter of partial, fingers-crossed resignation in history. When Edward VIII abdicated in 1936, he announced it to the government on December 9, and was on his way to Austria three days later. But Edward didn’t want to do voice-overs for Disney._

 Cheers


----------



## pukasonqo

LaidyM said:


> CCN is an extremely bad website to quote. To my recollection it is an extremely right wing thinly veiled pro white supremacy website. They hide it well, but when you know what to look for because you dealt with it your entire life...
> Let’s say none of friends (especially the non white ones) would ever read it.
> Many of it’s article contributors are just as bigots.


I didn’t quote CCC, but an article from Wikipedia about an English comedy about a PR company starring Stephen Frye


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

threadbender said:


> ? I didn't see a quote from ccn. Did I miss something? I thought the link just went to information regarding a British comedy.


It did
I am confused


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent observations, all.  @sdkitty’s question — are H&M popular here in the US?
> Of course, Ricky Gervais has taken Hwood to task on hypocrisy - rightfully so, imo - so the grifters should tread carefully with their business partners.  Rumors about Doria are everywhere, Gayle says Oprah did not arrange the Tyler Perry house for them, and others have notably distanced themselves from H&M (i.e., Clooney?). That could be an indicator or it could be right now we have more important things to focus on than this silly, self-indulgent sideshow. I did find this article quite interesting and entertaining. Looks like H&M have upset a few folks:
> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/princess-problem/608032/
> _I assumed it would be an abdication—and who could blame them?
> 
> Instead, it was … Megxit.
> 
> Megxit is the most complicated, self-involved, grandiose, half-assed, high-minded, shortsighted, greedy-graspy, swing-for-the-fences, letter of partial, fingers-crossed resignation in history. When Edward VIII abdicated in 1936, he announced it to the government on December 9, and was on his way to Austria three days later. But Edward didn’t want to do voice-overs for Disney._
> 
> Cheers


WHOOOOO-WHEEEEEE .. gotta love that last line "voice-overs for Disney"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## poopsie

pukasonqo said:


> I didn’t quote CCC, but an article from Wikipedia about an English comedy about a PR company starring Stephen Frye



maybe some people just see what they want to see, have an agenda or an axe to grind. Who knows?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Call My Agent - a hilarious French comedy streaming on Netflix.  It’s subtle but the PR tricks are all there. Enjoy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> WHOOOOO-WHEEEEEE .. gotta love that last line "voice-overs for Disney"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



LOL — greedy-graspy, takes the nonsense to a new level.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> They would be branded as racist bullying haters
> god help you if you have a *****GASP*****_* difference of opinion *_


agree
and she knows how to use that to her advantage IMO


----------



## V0N1B2

I think @LaidyM was referring to these links 



pukasonqo said:


> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-cut-prince-harry-friends-family-devastating-effect/





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, in fact Ms. Hansen has written many interesting pieces on our topic:
> https://www.ccn.com/author/aubrey-hansen/





QueenofWrapDress said:


> This might be my fave of the five I quickly skimmed:
> 
> https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-left-a-trail-of-butcheries-on-her-way-to-prince-harry/
> 
> What a highschool friend had to say:
> 
> "We were at a party one time, and she sat on my lap. She got nose to nose with me. For a 16-year-old guy, that is an emotional moment. She said to me in Farsi, ‘You are so beautiful.’ I asked her, ‘How do you know Farsi?’ She said, ‘I learned it for you.’ Then she walked away."
> 
> WTF. A master manipulator at age 16.


----------



## Awillow

LaidyM said:


> CCN is an extremely bad website to quote. To my recollection it is an extremely right wing thinly veiled pro white supremacy website. They hide it well, but when you know what to look for because you dealt with it your entire life...
> Let’s say none of friends (especially the non white ones) would ever read it.
> Many of it’s article contributors are just as bigots.





threadbender said:


> ? I didn't see a quote from ccn. Did I miss something? I thought the link just went to information regarding a British comedy.





pukasonqo said:


> I didn’t quote CCC, but an article from Wikipedia about an English comedy about a PR company starring Stephen Frye





pukasonqo said:


> It did
> I am confused





poopsie said:


> maybe some people just see what they want to see, have an agenda or an axe to grind. Who knows?



The ccn article was linked by another member in an earlier response to this thread, #30001.

ETA posted at the same time as @V0N1B2


----------



## chicinthecity777

What is ccn? I looked at their website. They seem to be some Danish company. I didn't realise so many on this forum are tapped into the insight of Danish media.


----------



## poopsie

chicinthecity777 said:


> What is ccn? I looked at their website. They seem to be some Danish company. I didn't realise so many on this forum are tapped into the insight of Danish media.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, in fact Ms. Hansen has written many interesting pieces on our topic:
> https://www.ccn.com/author/aubrey-hansen/




GMTA and all that


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> Exactly!!! .. when she could no longer "bow" to his wishes, poof .. and that is what my friend told me.  She told me the story about how after the Grammys, she and her ex-husband attended a party, and David was there.  After quite a few drinks, he decides to go up to the piano and play and .. of course, being a party and not a concert, folks were talking.  All of a sudden, in the middle of him playing, he SCREAMS "_SHUT THE F#CK UP, I'M PLAYING MUSIC NOT THAT MOST OF YOU KNOW MUSIC_!".  Well, needless to say, that did shut everyone up, but certainly did not endear him to many there.  He has a reputation in the music biz ..


Thanks for sharing this, it is not a surprise at all just from the little I have seen of him in the media. As for the 100% subjugation, I get the feeling McPhee would be 100% okay with this as long as the price was right and there were contracts/prenups protecting her exact financial allowance/payout. Would not be surprised if she agreed to stop work after their marriage or to only work on projects that he approved. She's always seemed extremely...ambitiou$.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Thanks for sharing this, it is not a surprise at all just from the little I have seen of him in the media. As for the 100% subjugation, I get the feeling McPhee would be 100% okay with this as long as the price was right and there were contracts/prenups protecting her exact financial allowance/payout. Would not be surprised if she agreed to stop work after their marriage or to only work on projects that he approved. She's always seemed extremely...ambitiou$.


Didn't they already work on something together?  I'm almost positive they did, and it was in the UK if I recall.  Yeah, I guess if the price is right for some people .. that WOULD NEVER BE ME!


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Thanks for sharing this, it is not a surprise at all just from the little I have seen of him in the media. As for the 100% subjugation, I get the feeling McPhee would be 100% okay with this as long as the price was right and there were contracts/prenups protecting her exact financial allowance/payout. Would not be surprised if she agreed to stop work after their marriage or to only work on projects that he approved. She's always seemed extremely...ambitiou$.


It's not like her career was all that big


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> It's not like her career was all that big


True, true .. but I will give her this, she does have a great voice .. at least some talent as opposed to 'meggie-beggie'!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> I don’t buy the US “Vague” (Vogue) anymore as I find it BORING as heck!  The British version is infinitely better with some great articles (sometimes) and IMO better fashion photography. Vanity Fair was one of the few US publications I purchased.



The British version is basically British Elle now at best and Elle is now pants. I get them for free but I wouldn't waste my money on them.


----------



## rose60610

Having never heard of "CCN", I just looked it up and it's interesting. The features on Meghan see her as spoiled brat. 
From their "about us" section:
"Most of our full-time employees and contractors are based in the United States, Europe, and Asia. We consider ourselves as *a global news organization*, not specifically affiliated with Norway."


----------



## young breezy

rose60610 said:


> Having never heard of "CCN", I just looked it up and it's interesting. The features on Meghan see her as spoiled brat.
> From their "about us" section:
> "Most of our full-time employees and contractors are based in the United States, Europe, and Asia. We consider ourselves as *a global news organization*, not specifically affiliated with Norway."



Im from Norway and I have never heard about it. Looks like a bogus site.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah I guess I didn't thoroughly check the sources, I just clicked a link someone else had posted and was delighted to see in writing what we all were thinking. My bad!


----------



## kemilia

There's an item on another site that if true, is pretty sad--he really got played. I know it is a gossip site but generally, where there's smoke, there's fire, especially with these 2. The item is called The Switcheroo on Blind Gossip (don't know if it's ok to post the link).


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

What a weird site, it seems like mostly a series of disconnected op eds? On the front page there are two about MM, one positive and the other negative...

https://www.ccn.com/kate-middleton-borrowed-her-new-social-media-presence-from-meghan-markle/

https://www.ccn.com/meghan-markle-tried-to-bait-the-royal-family-and-boy-did-her-scheme-backfire/


----------



## mrsinsyder

kemilia said:


> There's an item on another site that if true, is pretty sad--he really got played. I know it is a gossip site but generally, where there's smoke, there's fire, especially with these 2. The item is called The Switcheroo on Blind Gossip (don't know if it's ok to post the link).


Not surprised.

What happened?

She told him that she still loved Africa but she had a lot of health and safety concerns about raising their child there. She also told him that his family in England made her very uncomfortable and that she feared their child would also be made to feel unwelcome and uncomfortable in that environment. She cried. He found that very distressing. He felt like she had sacrificed so much to be with him.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> There's an item on another site that if true, is pretty sad--he really got played. I know it is a gossip site but generally, where there's smoke, there's fire, especially with these 2. The item is called The Switcheroo on Blind Gossip (don't know if it's ok to post the link).


interesting but speculation I think - just like all of us here  
This appears to be an American site?  and it's negative about Meghan?  and all of the comments from readers are negative?  but all of the public media in US is positive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> He felt like she had sacrificed so much to be with him.



Like what exactly? A not so great career to live in with wealth and notoriety she couldn't have dreamed of before?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like what exactly? A not so great career to live in with wealth and notoriety she couldn't have dreamed of before?



You know she laid it on thick about how hard it was leaving the US/Canada for him and how far away she was from everything/everybody who was important to her. You know, lies! 

Narcissists are skilled at playing the guilt card to perfection.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I could throw up  There are stories planted today regaling the world at large with the details of the “insanely” and “incredibly” romantic gifts Meghan and Harry gave each other as anniversary pressies.  
Seriously. Shut up. Be private. No one with even the slightest of grips on reality believes this cr*p.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I could throw up  There are stories planted today regaling the world at large with the details of the “insanely” and “incredibly” romantic gifts Meghan and Harry gave each other as anniversary pressies.
> Seriously. Shut up. Be private. No one with even the slightest of grips on reality believes this cr*p.


never mind whether we believe it.  how about not bragging when so many are worried about losing their homes or going hungry?


----------



## mrsinsyder

LOL their gifts summarize their relationship well.

_Meghan opted to do something handmade and very personal, Us's source said: “Meghan designed Harry’s card, and handwrote a beautiful, sentimental message inside expressing her love for him."

Harry, meanwhile, opted for a big, lavish gift: “Harry surprised Meghan with a huge, stunning bouquet of roses and a ring, which she loves.”_


----------



## beautymagpie

Clearblueskies said:


> I could throw up  There are stories planted today regaling the world at large with the details of the “insanely” and “incredibly” romantic gifts Meghan and Harry gave each other as anniversary pressies.
> Seriously. Shut up. Be private. No one with even the slightest of grips on reality believes this cr*p.



This quiet, more private life thing is going well then.

I know more about them now than I did when they were part of the BRF and supposedly not living a quiet, private life.


----------



## bellecate

*Posted in US this morning*

Lucky in love! *Prince Harry* and*Meghan Markle* celebrated their second year of marriage on Tuesday, May 19, and rang in the occasion with a couple of heartfelt gifts.

 Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: A Timeline of Their Relationship 
“Meghan designed Harry’s card, and handwrote a beautiful, sentimental message inside expressing her love for him,” a source exclusively tells _Us Weekly_. “Harry surprised Meghan with a huge, stunning bouquet of roses and a ring, which she loves.”

Two years after exchanging their vows in front of huge crowds at St George’s Chapel in England, the duo wanted to share a more intimate celebration of their love as they settle into their new Los Angeles home. Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, moved to California in March after their temporary stay in Canada in the wake of their royal exit. _Us_ confirmed earlier this month that the pair has been living in *Tyler Perry*‘s multimillion-dollar mansion with their 12-month-old son, Archie.

_How convenient that they have such a wonderful 'close' friend to tell the world about something written in a self designed card that she actually wrote in herself. _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

beautymagpie said:


> This quite, more private life thing us going well then.
> 
> I know more about them now than I did when they were part of the BRF and supposedly not living a quiet, private life.


Good point.  Me too!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> LOL their gifts summarize their relationship well.
> 
> _Meghan opted to do something handmade and very personal, Us's source said: “Meghan designed Harry’s card, and handwrote a beautiful, sentimental message inside expressing her love for him."
> 
> Harry, meanwhile, opted for a big, lavish gift: “Harry surprised Meghan with a huge, stunning bouquet of roses and a ring, which she loves.”_


 Yeah, he just got a card


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, he just got a card



Hey, he has Meghan. According to her that's the best gift he could ever have. He doesn't need anything else.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hey, he has Meghan. According to her that's the best gift he could ever have. He doesn't need anything else.


anything to keep them in the public eye
so much for privacy


----------



## zinacef

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, he just got a card


But ,but. It’s a special handmade designed  written in her special calligraphy talent, written maybe in Farsi or fluent Spanish ! Learn it just for you Harry, my Prince ( or king) whichever Harry prefer.


----------



## sdkitty

zinacef said:


> But ,but. It’s a special handmade designed  written in her special calligraphy talent, written maybe in Farsi or fluent Spanish !


they didn't go into detail about the ring...wonder if that's coming


----------



## zinacef

sdkitty said:


> they didn't go into detail about the ring...wonder if that's coming


They’re having a zoom meeting right now with her friends so the design and word salad meaning is coming soon  preferably when somebody in the BRF is having a birthday or something. Or right before  Finding Freedom comes out. It will be a nice touch!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh, the shade!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-wasnt-going-prepare-royal-expert-claims.html
Meghan Markle's experience as 'a B-list actress wasn't going to prepare her for the global spotlight that comes with being part of the Firm', royal commentator claims


----------



## zinacef

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, the shade!
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-wasnt-going-prepare-royal-expert-claims.html
> Meghan Markle's experience as 'a B-list actress wasn't going to prepare her for the global spotlight that comes with being part of the Firm', royal commentator claims


Just can’t imagine what comeback scoobie omie is writing on his theme essay of the day.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, the shade!
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-wasnt-going-prepare-royal-expert-claims.html
> Meghan Markle's experience as 'a B-list actress wasn't going to prepare her for the global spotlight that comes with being part of the Firm', royal commentator claims


B-list? LMAO sure.


----------



## sdkitty

zinacef said:


> They’re having a zoom meeting right now with her friends so the design and word salad meaning is coming soon  preferably when somebody in the BRF is having a birthday or something. Or right before  Finding Freedom comes out. It will be a nice touch!


it's a shame....Harry has gone from being perceived as the most "normal or regular" prince to being the most fake show-off one


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> B-list? LMAO sure.


If you’re going to be bad, better to be really bad.  I’d rather be a notable D than be scraping the B list.


----------



## bag-mania

LOL. _People_ really is the home of Harkle propaganda.

*Gayle King Denies Oprah Arranged for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to Live in Tyler Perry's Home*
"Oprah didn't hook that up," Gayle King said of the couple's Los Angeles living situation

While Oprah Winfrey has become good friends with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry (she attended their royal wedding and is collaborating with Harry on a mental health docuseries), the media mogul didn't set the couple up with living arrangements when they moved to Los Angeles.

Rumors have been swirling that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are living in Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion with their 1-year-old son, Archie — but Gayle King denied reports that Winfrey, who is close friends with Perry, had anything to do with the arrangement.

"Oprah didn't hook that up," the _CBS This Morning_ host told _Entertainment Tonight_. "Harry and Meghan know people. Tyler knows people. Oprah knows people, but she did not make that connection for Harry and Meghan to live in Tyler's house."

King, who was a guest at Meghan's New York City baby shower in Feb. 2019, is glad that after stepping down from their royal roles in March, the couple is enjoying life as a family of three in Meghan's hometown of Los Angeles.

"They've got a little baby, Archie, they're living in the United States, and I think the fairy tale continues for them and it just makes me happy," she said.

Two years ago, King was reporting live from Windsor at Meghan and Harry's royal wedding at St. George's Chapel.

"I'll never forget it either," the journalist, 65, recalled. "The weather was perfect, she was gorgeous, they drove right by us on that balcony, we could see them, 'Hey, Harry and Meghan!' We had a great shot to see them."

She also recognized the cultural impact of Meghan, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, tying the knot.

"It was interesting that people came from all over the world, certainly the United States for two people that they had never met and probably, let's be honest, will never meet," King said. "But everybody was so excited about the story and for the two of them and for what was to come. It really was, you know, here is Meghan Markle who we know — American number one, biracial number two, and falling in love."

"We all as little girls dream of, one day my prince will come. Well, for her he really did come, he really did come and that was very exciting for all of us," she added.

King previously came to Meghan's defense against the British tabloid media, saying, "I don’t think she’s being treated fairly." She also supported the royal couple's decision to keep the birth of their baby private and championed their decision to step down from the roles as senior members of the royal family.

"I think that they made a decision that they think is best for them, and I know that I'm pulling for them 100 percent," King told _Entertainment Tonight_.

"It's very hard to look at the headlines that said [Queen Elizabeth] was blindsided or they treated the Queen shabbily. That's why I really appreciate that the statement from the Queen herself saying these conversations have been going on for a very long time," she added. "And so it was tough to see her get so battered and beaten because, at the end of the day, these are two people who are in love, who just want to be a family together. And it's no diss on the Queen. It's no diss on the U.K., none of that."

Read more: https://people.com/royals/gayle-kin...an-markle-prince-harry-live-tyler-perry-home/


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> they didn't go into detail about the ring...wonder if that's coming


Meh. She'll redesign it in a year anyway. She's very sentimental that way. ::side-eye::


----------



## papertiger

mrsinsyder said:


> Not surprised.
> 
> What happened?
> 
> She told him that she still loved Africa but she had a lot of health and safety concerns about raising their child there. She also told him that his family in England made her very uncomfortable and that she feared their child would also be made to feel unwelcome and uncomfortable in that environment. She cried. He found that very distressing. He felt like she had sacrificed so much to be with him.



Played like a harp


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> You know she laid it on thick about how hard it was leaving the US/Canada for him and how far away she was from everything/everybody who was important to her. You know, lies!
> 
> Narcissists are skilled at playing the guilt card to perfection.



Could have said that before the wedding. It's not what she said at the 'engagement interview' - quite the opposite.


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> they didn't go into detail about the ring...wonder if that's coming


When they figure out what it will look like! lol
Maybe this?
lol Figure they have to go Diana. And, emerald cuz MM went for green earlier! lol


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, the shade!
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-wasnt-going-prepare-royal-expert-claims.html
> Meghan Markle's experience as 'a B-list actress wasn't going to prepare her for the global spotlight that comes with being part of the Firm', royal commentator claims


It wasn't going to prepare her for being an A list actress either.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> I could throw up  There are stories planted today regaling the world at large with the details of the “insanely” and “incredibly” romantic gifts Meghan and Harry gave each other as anniversary pressies.
> Seriously. Shut up. Be private. No one with even the slightest of grips on reality believes this cr*p.



I feel I just _need_ to mention:

 my DH gave me a stainless-steel water bottle in a leather holder and I gave him a pizza Napoletana

The stainless steel is a reflection of our stainless admiration for each other, the water symbolic of our fluid and pure love, the leather holder in recognition of how much I have to carry daily. I gave him a pizza to symbolise the roundness of our relationship and the circle of life and the rich scattering of things that come our way, especially anchovies. 

Shall I go on?


----------



## papertiger

mrsinsyder said:


> B-list? LMAO sure.



She will B so PO with that tho


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I feel I just _need_ to mention:
> 
> my DH gave me a stainless-steel water bottle in a leather holder and I gave him a pizza Napoletana
> 
> The stainless steel is a reflection of our stainless admiration for each other, the water symbolic of our fluid and pure love, the leather holder in recognition of how much I have to carry daily. I gave him a pizza to symbolise the roundness of our relationship and the circle of life and the rich scattering of things that come our way, especially anchovies.
> 
> Shall I go on?


----------



## kemilia

bellecate said:


> *Posted in US this morning*
> 
> Lucky in love! *Prince Harry* and*Meghan Markle* celebrated their second year of marriage on Tuesday, May 19, and rang in the occasion with a couple of heartfelt gifts.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: A Timeline of Their Relationship
> “Meghan designed Harry’s card, and handwrote a beautiful, sentimental message inside expressing her love for him,” a source exclusively tells _Us Weekly_. “Harry surprised Meghan with a huge, stunning bouquet of roses and a ring, which she loves.”
> 
> Two years after exchanging their vows in front of huge crowds at St George’s Chapel in England, the duo wanted to share a more intimate celebration of their love as they settle into their new Los Angeles home. Meghan, 38, and Harry, 35, moved to California in March after their temporary stay in Canada in the wake of their royal exit. _Us_ confirmed earlier this month that the pair has been living in *Tyler Perry*‘s multimillion-dollar mansion with their 12-month-old son, Archie.
> 
> _How convenient that they have such a wonderful 'close' friend to tell the world about something written in a self designed card that she actually wrote in herself. _


How can it be "their" home if it belongs to someone else and they're just couch surfing?


----------



## kemilia

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, he just got a card


_But_ it had her special loopity loop writing on it, and that's special.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Hey, he has Meghan. According to her that's the best gift he could ever have. He doesn't need anything else.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Could have said that before the wedding. It's not what she said at the 'engagement interview' - quite the opposite.



You cannot expect her to honor any promises she made before marriage. It was all bait-and-switch. Shame on him for trusting her.


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> B-list? LMAO sure.


Same here, and couldn't resist writing in my comment on DM .. "Z-LIST, get it right!"


----------



## Lodpah

Ok please hear me out. From what I understand Doria is good friends with Marianne Williamson (she’s compared to have meanings towards Scientologist in regards ‘it’s mental health and medication). MM takes Harry off his meds, he’s unable to make any decisions and just follows what she says. So between Doria, MM and MW, sounds like a cultic situation for Harry.  I don’t think it’s got to end well for him with those 3 handling him. Wonder what his security detail think.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> _Meghan opted to do something handmade and very personal, Us's source said: “Meghan designed Harry’s card, and handwrote a beautiful, sentimental message inside expressing her love for him."_



No way. She HANDWROTE his card instead of having one of her minions do it? She really went all out.


----------



## rose60610

If they really wanted to impress each other with something extra special, they could each learn some kind of marketable skill. After all, it's one thing neither currently has.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Ok please hear me out. From what I understand Doria is good friends with Marianne Williamson (she’s compared to have meanings towards Scientologist in regards ‘it’s mental health and medication). MM takes Harry off his meds, he’s unable to make any decisions and just follows what she says. So between Doria, MM and MW, sounds like a cultic situation for Harry.  I don’t think it’s got to end well for him with those 3 handling him. Wonder what his security detail think.


that would have to mean that Meghan let her mom and Williamson in on her true motivations.  IDK if she would do that.  And don't know if the other two are evil enough to participate in such a scheme.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No way. She HANDWROTE his card instead of having one of her minions do it? She really went all out.


She studied calligraphy and writes calligraphy every day like grocery list , house listing, etc... it will take a while before she could get things written but only the best handwriting technique! No s%@#$!


----------



## beautymagpie

zinacef said:


> She studied calligraphy and writes calligraphy every day like grocery list , house listing, etc... it will take a while before she could get things written but only the best handwriting technique! No s%@#$!



What happened with the bananas then? The inspiring messages didn't look like 
THE world's foremost handwriting genius had written them.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> How can it be "their" home if it belongs to someone else and they're just couch surfing?



It's because they take over, overshadow, and consume everything and everyone around them.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> that would have to mean that Meghan let her mom and Williamson in on her true motivations.  IDK if she would do that.  And don't know if the other two are evil enough to participate in such a scheme.


But what if they thought it was in his interest to do so like take away his medications if he’s on without any malicious aforethought? People who are passionate about things like this can be pretty persuasive.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> But what if they thought it was in his interest to do so like take away his medications if he’s on without any malicious aforethought? People who are passionate about things like this can be pretty persuasive.


maybe if Doria is a Scientologist.  But Williamson isn't one.  anything's possible.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> LOL. _People_ really is the home of Harkle propaganda.
> 
> *Gayle King Denies Oprah Arranged for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to Live in Tyler Perry's Home*
> "Oprah didn't hook that up," Gayle King said of the couple's Los Angeles living situation
> 
> While Oprah Winfrey has become good friends with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry (she attended their royal wedding and is collaborating with Harry on a mental health docuseries), the media mogul didn't set the couple up with living arrangements when they moved to Los Angeles.
> 
> Rumors have been swirling that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are living in Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion with their 1-year-old son, Archie — but Gayle King denied reports that Winfrey, who is close friends with Perry, had anything to do with the arrangement.
> 
> "Oprah didn't hook that up," the _CBS This Morning_ host told _Entertainment Tonight_. "Harry and Meghan know people. Tyler knows people. Oprah knows people, but she did not make that connection for Harry and Meghan to live in Tyler's house."
> 
> King, who was a guest at Meghan's New York City baby shower in Feb. 2019, is glad that after stepping down from their royal roles in March, the couple is enjoying life as a family of three in Meghan's hometown of Los Angeles.
> 
> "They've got a little baby, Archie, they're living in the United States, and I think the fairy tale continues for them and it just makes me happy," she said.
> 
> Two years ago, King was reporting live from Windsor at Meghan and Harry's royal wedding at St. George's Chapel.
> 
> "I'll never forget it either," the journalist, 65, recalled. "The weather was perfect, she was gorgeous, they drove right by us on that balcony, we could see them, 'Hey, Harry and Meghan!' We had a great shot to see them."
> 
> She also recognized the cultural impact of Meghan, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, tying the knot.
> 
> "It was interesting that people came from all over the world, certainly the United States for two people that they had never met and probably, let's be honest, will never meet," King said. "But everybody was so excited about the story and for the two of them and for what was to come. It really was, you know, here is Meghan Markle who we know — American number one, biracial number two, and falling in love."
> 
> "We all as little girls dream of, one day my prince will come. Well, for her he really did come, he really did come and that was very exciting for all of us," she added.
> 
> King previously came to Meghan's defense against the British tabloid media, saying, "I don’t think she’s being treated fairly." She also supported the royal couple's decision to keep the birth of their baby private and championed their decision to step down from the roles as senior members of the royal family.
> 
> "I think that they made a decision that they think is best for them, and I know that I'm pulling for them 100 percent," King told _Entertainment Tonight_.
> 
> "It's very hard to look at the headlines that said [Queen Elizabeth] was blindsided or they treated the Queen shabbily. That's why I really appreciate that the statement from the Queen herself saying these conversations have been going on for a very long time," she added. "And so it was tough to see her get so battered and beaten because, at the end of the day, these are two people who are in love, who just want to be a family together. And it's no diss on the Queen. It's no diss on the U.K., none of that."
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/gayle-kin...an-markle-prince-harry-live-tyler-perry-home/


Gayle is spouting the party line....two people in love, etc.  OK.  I'm sure Gayle believes this fairy tale


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> that would have to mean that Meghan let her mom and Williamson in on her true motivations.  IDK if she would do that.  And don't know if the other two are evil enough to participate in such a scheme.



They might not be evil or have a devious plan - they may simply believe in what they believe with little regard for others. It happened to a relative of mine. His wife was a part of a very religious (Christian) community that didn’t believe in medication and was convinced to take her husband off his meds after a stroke. He had another stroke and was in a coma for years before he was taken off life support.

Anyways.. as it pertains to Meghan and since she’s of the “feelings first” crowd that’s promoting mental health and therapy, it would be awfully odd of her to want to take Harry off his meds unless she had a motive.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> They might not be evil or have a devious plan - they may simply believe in what they believe with little regard for others. It happened to a relative of mine. His wife was a part of a very religious (Christian) community that didn’t believe in medication and was convinced to take her husband off his meds after a stroke. He had another stroke and was in a coma for years before he was taken off life support.


Oh, tragic
I don't know much about Williamson.  seems to me she's a new-agey feel-good type "religious leader"


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Oh, tragic
> I don't know much about Williamson.  seems to me she's a new-agey feel-good type "religious leader"


She wrote that book A course in miracles back in the dark ages, promoted by Oprah..
I don’t think that she is against meds in general. She was hysterical in the debate and I am guilty to have contributed modestly to her campaign 
Why is there such an urge to make the Prince a victim of evil women?
This is so silly....
A hundred years ago, Princess Grace of Monaco was victim of a cult. Can’t think of the name atm.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> She wrote that book A course in miracles back in the dark ages, promoted by Oprah..
> I don’t think that she is against meds in general. She was hysterical in the debate and I am guilty to have contributed modestly to her campaign
> Why is there such an urge to make the Prince a victim of evil women?
> This is so silly....
> A hundred years ago, Princess Grace of Monaco was victim of a cult. Can’t think of the name atm.


Have you ever watched Snapped? Anyways Harry seems weak so who’s to say MM is not taking advantage of him. You’d be amazed at how many evil women are out there.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> She wrote that book A course in miracles back in the dark ages, promoted by Oprah..
> I don’t think that she is against meds in general. She was hysterical in the debate and I am guilty to have contributed modestly to her campaign
> Why is there such an urge to make the Prince a victim of evil women?
> This is so silly....
> A hundred years ago, Princess Grace of Monaco was victim of a cult. Can’t think of the name atm.


what?  Princess Grace joined a cult?


----------



## V0N1B2

papertiger said:


> I feel I just _need_ to mention:
> 
> my DH gave me a stainless-steel water bottle in a leather holder and I gave him a pizza Napoletana
> 
> The stainless steel is a reflection of our stainless admiration for each other, the water symbolic of our fluid and pure love, the leather holder in recognition of how much I have to carry daily. I gave him a pizza to symbolise the roundness of our relationship and the circle of life and the rich scattering of things that come our way, especially anchovies.
> 
> Shall I go on?


You broads are way classier than I am. I just made my bf some certificates for beejers and stuck ‘em in a card


----------



## V0N1B2

limom said:


> She wrote that book A course in miracles back in the dark ages, promoted by Oprah..
> I don’t think that she is against meds in general. She was hysterical in the debate and I am guilty to have contributed modestly to her campaign
> Why is there such an urge to make the Prince a victim of evil women?
> This is so silly....
> A hundred years ago, Princess Grace of Monaco was victim of a cult. Can’t think of the name atm.


PM me doll


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> what?  Princess Grace joined a cult?


Yep.
It was a huge scandal/rumor and she was hardly alone.
This is the cult in question:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Solar_Temple


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Have you ever watched Snapped? Anyways Harry seems weak so who’s to say MM is not taking advantage of him. You’d be amazed at how many evil women are out there.


I hear you but Megan seems too transparent to be evil....
Plus Harry is not your average dude...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

V0N1B2 said:


> You broads are way classier than I am. I just made my bf some certificates for beejers and stuck ‘em in a card


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> LOL their gifts summarize their relationship well.
> 
> _Meghan opted to do something handmade and very personal, Us's source said: “Meghan designed Harry’s card, and handwrote a beautiful, sentimental message inside expressing her love for him."
> 
> Harry, meanwhile, opted for a big, lavish gift: “Harry surprised Meghan with a huge, stunning bouquet of roses and a ring, which she loves.”_


Calligraphy! Yay! Thanks Megs!


----------



## mdcx

M was unknown except to those who happened to watch Suits. And that was hardly great acting, more being hot and lots of wistful stares and lingering body shots.
As for them buying a home in LA, I wouldn't be surprised if M keeps everything very much on hold until she lines up her next hubby in her sights. Then she will jettison H back to the UK.
If they have an actual purchased home in LA then things like his lack of a green card, his future, taxes etc all become realties, rather than stuff to "work out later" when their endless holiday is over. Just imo.


----------



## PewPew

sdkitty said:


> anything to keep them in the public eye, so much for privacy



Love and gifts are meaningless unless there’s a press announcement, Covid-be-damned. How can they keep whining about not having privacy when they keep talking to the press?? Announce stuff about legitimate work your foundation is doing. Even your Zoom-reputation-revivals & Archie-bday-book reading are understandable. But your private card and gift info? That’s supreme “I’m a celeb and every move I make is glorious even if there’s a pandemic” self-absorption.




papertiger said:


> I feel I just _need_ to mention:
> 
> my DH gave me a stainless-steel water bottle in a leather holder and I gave him a pizza Napoletana
> 
> The stainless steel is a reflection of our stainless admiration for each other, the water symbolic of our fluid and pure love, the leather holder in recognition of how much I have to carry daily. I gave him a pizza to symbolise the roundness of our relationship and the circle of life and the rich scattering of things that come our way, especially anchovies.
> 
> Shall I go on?



I enjoyed this immensely. H&M’s world salads are so laboriously encumbered by filler words to sound more faux-lofty:  I empower you to understand the extraordinary magnitude of what we’re working towards together— a better appreciation of the humanitarian I have been since age 13. I encourage you to embrace the grace of what Harry & I are achieving with our foundation.


----------



## V0N1B2

PewPew said:


> Love and gifts are meaningless unless there’s a press announcement, Covid-be-damned. How can they keep whining about not having privacy when they keep talking to the press?? Announce stuff about legitimate work your foundation is doing. Even your Zoom-reputation-revivals & Archie-bday-book reading are understandable. But your private card and gift info? That’s supreme “I’m a celeb and every move I make is glorious even if there’s a pandemic” self-absorption.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I enjoyed this immensely. H&M’s world salads are so laboriously encumbered by filler words to sound more faux-lofty:  I empower you to understand the extraordinary magnitude of what we’re working towards together— a better appreciation of the humanitarian I have been since age 13. I encourage you to embrace the grace of what Harry & I are achieving with our foundation.


You forgot “shine a light” doll. 
tsk tsk


----------



## Stansy

rose60610 said:


> If they really wanted to impress each other with something extra special, they could each learn some kind of marketable skill. After all, it's one thing neither currently has.


Well, last Christmas Hermès had hired a caligraphist (is this even a word?) to write cards for customers, so there is money to make. But we can agree that this job would not buy them a 15 million dollar mansion that they feel they „deserve“....


----------



## zinacef

Stansy said:


> Well, last Christmas Hermès had hired a caligraphist (is this even a word?) to write cards for customers, so there is money to make. But we can agree that this job would not buy them a 15 million dollar mansion that they feel they „deserve“....


A co- worker’s husband is a calligraphist( don’t know if there is such a word either), she earns the money and he just kinda bum around, he does custom invites like wedding and didn’t know that there are people who actually have their invites written  manually like hundreds of them. And that’s about it so the job is not there all the time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

zinacef said:


> A co- worker’s husband is a calligraphist( don’t know if there is such a word either), she earns the money and he just kinda bum around, he does custom invites like wedding and didn’t know that there are people who actually have their invites written  manually like hundreds of them. And that’s about it so the job is not there all the time.



Calligraphers do all kinds of events, not just weddings. In the political world, calligraphers are used frequently for banquets and parties. People seem to covet the hand-lettered invitations, menus, etc. I’m guessing in the entertainment world it is the same idea. If someone has a talent for it, it can be a good gig. The professionals create simply beautiful and elegant works of art.  Hoping to stay positive, I will avoid commenting on M’s style.  https://www.careerexplorer.com/careers/calligrapher/


----------



## chicinthecity777

Is it me or H&M are really scrapping bottom of the barrel with this sh1t?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, the greedy-grasping grifters are most definitely scraping.  Look what they up against — applause to the BRF for their thoughtful and polished videos. Forget tik-tok — with intelligence and dignity, this family has raised the bar as well as our awareness. Kudos.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

zinacef said:


> A co- worker’s husband is a calligraphist( don’t know if there is such a word either), she earns the money and he just kinda bum around, he does custom invites like wedding and didn’t know that there are people who actually have their invites written  manually like hundreds of them. And that’s about it so the job is not there all the time.



I feel it you are serious about your business there will be work. Of course if you are happy to do one wedding per month you might not exactly make bank LOL


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the greedy-grasping grifters are most definitely scraping.  Look what they up against — applause to the BRF for their thoughtful and polished videos. Forget tik-tok — with intelligence and dignity, this family has raised the bar as well as our awareness. Kudos.




Is that Lady Ogily?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that Lady Ogily?



Yes, indeed it is.
*Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy, *80 yrs old and able to speak with confidence and compassion, to look alert and engaged, and to mesmerize with her strong, powerful voice.


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> I feel I just _need_ to mention:
> 
> my DH gave me a stainless-steel water bottle in a leather holder and I gave him a pizza Napoletana
> 
> The stainless steel is a reflection of our stainless admiration for each other, the water symbolic of our fluid and pure love, the leather holder in recognition of how much I have to carry daily. I gave him a pizza to symbolise the roundness of our relationship and the circle of life and the rich scattering of things that come our way, especially anchovies.
> 
> Shall I go on?


That’s a hard act to follow!  Can’t wait to see how you top it next year!


----------



## Emeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel it you are serious about your business there will be work. Of course if you are happy to do one wedding per month you might not exactly make bank LOL


Agree.
In Meg's case people would be paying for her, not her expert calligraphy.

It's one thing to add pretty flourishes to one's own correspondence. It's entirely different to follow detailed client instructions with a deadline.  

I don't see her starting a home business anytime soon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Emeline said:


> Agree.
> In Meg's case people would be paying for her, not her expert calligraphy.
> 
> It's one thing to add pretty flourishes to one's own correspondence. It's entirely different to follow detailed client instructions with a deadline.
> 
> I don't see her starting a home business anytime soon.


Is it even a thing nowadays? We barely receive real paper invites let alone hand written ones...
if it is, maybe she could teach the Prince as he looks like he could use a healthy hobby....
Imagine the bragging rights... written by her highness just Harry...under the loving guidance from the gracious and never ending guiding light of the Duchess of Sussex....


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> Is it even a thing nowadays? We barely receive real paper invites let alone hand written ones...
> if it is, maybe she could teach the Prince as he looks like he could use a healthy hobby....
> Imagine the bragging rights... written by her highness just Harry...under the loving guidance from the gracious and never ending guiding light of the Duchess of Sussex....



Yes, I believe it still is a thing.
One example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Chief_Calligrapher



Place cards being calligraphed before a state dinner.
_
The *White House chief calligrapher* is responsible for the design and execution of all social and official documents at the White House, the official residence and principal workplace of the president of the United States.

The chief calligrapher works in the East Wing of the White House in the Graphics and Calligraphy Office with two deputy calligraphers. Projects of the chief calligrapher range from official invitations to state dinners, official greetings from the president, proclamations, military commissions, service awards, and place cards.

The current White House chief calligrapher is Patricia "Pat" Blair. In 2018, Blair's salary was $104,200.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?282869-1/tour-white-house-calligraphy-office_


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I believe it still is a thing.
> One example:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Chief_Calligrapher
> 
> 
> 
> Place cards being calligraphed before a state dinner.
> _
> The *White House chief calligrapher* is responsible for the design and execution of all social and official documents at the White House, the official residence and principal workplace of the president of the United States.
> 
> The chief calligrapher works in the East Wing of the White House in the Graphics and Calligraphy Office with two deputy calligraphers. Projects of the chief calligrapher range from official invitations to state dinners, official greetings from the president, proclamations, military commissions, service awards, and place cards.
> 
> The current White House chief calligrapher is Patricia "Pat" Blair. In 2018, Blair's salary was $104,200.
> 
> https://www.c-span.org/video/?282869-1/tour-white-house-calligraphy-office_


While Mr. Blair's salary is very nice, it ain't buying a $20M LA mansion any time soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> While Mr. Blair's salary is very nice, it ain't buying a $20M LA mansion any time soon.



Especially in Covid times - No parties, no invites, no menus, etc.


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> That’s a hard act to follow!  *Can’t wait to see how you top it next year*!



Four cheeses?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what?  Princess Grace joined a cult?





limom said:


> She wrote that book A course in miracles back in the dark ages, promoted by Oprah..
> I don’t think that she is against meds in general. She was hysterical in the debate and I am guilty to have contributed modestly to her campaign
> Why is there such an urge to make the Prince a victim of evil women?
> This is so silly....
> A hundred years ago, Princess Grace of Monaco was victim of a cult. Can’t think of the name atm.



Rumours were she was initiated into the Order of the Solar Temple in the French village of Beaujolais, 1982 (not quite a hundred years or I should be expecting a letter of congratulations on my centenary very soon). 

Even the the name of of the village sounds like a drunken hoax. 

Personally I don't think so.


----------



## 1LV

MM’s calligraphy looks like a high school girl’s idea of calligraphy.  Nothing an adult with a clue would pay for.  Does anyone else feel like she’s 38 going on 15?


----------



## papertiger

PewPew said:


> Love and gifts are meaningless unless there’s a press announcement, Covid-be-damned. How can they keep whining about not having privacy when they keep talking to the press?? Announce stuff about legitimate work your foundation is doing. Even your Zoom-reputation-revivals & Archie-bday-book reading are understandable. But your private card and gift info? That’s supreme “I’m a celeb and every move I make is glorious even if there’s a pandemic” self-absorption.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I enjoyed this immensely. H&M’s world salads are so laboriously encumbered by filler words to sound more faux-lofty:  I empower you to understand the extraordinary magnitude of what we’re working towards together— a better appreciation of the humanitarian I have been since age 13. I encourage you to embrace the grace of what Harry & I are achieving with our foundation.



  OMG, that is scarily accurate.

I will try better next time...I mean, I will use my humbly honed, natural born skills of word divination to champion weak and anxious dough through my handpicked choice of stuffed-crust and pepperoni with a cherry (tomato) on top.


----------



## papertiger

V0N1B2 said:


> You forgot “shine a light” doll.
> tsk tsk



Didn't see 'inspire' or 'young royals' in there either but I'll tell my close friend to drop-off another card tomorrow so DH (and others) can reflect all through the week.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Is it me or H&M are really scrapping bottom of the barrel with this sh1t?



You wish. That would imply they can go no lower or will finish soon


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> Rumours were she was initiated into the Order of the Solar Temple in the French village of Beaujolais, 1982 (not quite a hundred years or I should be expecting a letter of congratulations on my centenary very soon).
> 
> Even the the name of of the village sounds like a drunken hoax.
> 
> Personally I don't think so.


She took frequent trips to Paris alone and was very, very lonely...And never enjoyed her life in the principauté.
It is after all, a small town with many unsavory characters. Her husband was not very clean either.
Anyways, there has been tons of rumors regarding the Princesse. And forget about Charlene.
Regarding Grace, in my knowledge she was very kind irl. And was driving the car that day.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> MM’s calligraphy looks like a high school girl’s idea of calligraphy.  Nothing an adult with a clue would pay for.  Does anyone else feel like she’s 38 going on 15?



She has not grown beyond the teen years emotionally. She is reactive to whatever feelings she has at the moment and firmly believes she is the center of the universe.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> She took frequent trips to Paris alone and was very, very lonely...And never enjoyed her life in the principauté.
> It is after all, a small town with many unsavory characters. Her husband was not very clean either.
> Anyways, there has been tons of rumors regarding the Princesse. And forget about Charlene.
> Regarding Grace, in my knowledge she was very kind irl. And was driving the car that day.



I know that she did a narration for the film 'Children of Theatre Street' and Prince R went berserk. 

What do you mean not very clean? - sorry can't let that pass 

I may expect M to join Scientology if she thought it would help her land the right roles/men but I can't believe that Grace, who often ran away (snuck out) to get away from court life to eat pasta in bistros would then get involved in something to formal, ritualised and theatrical. We digress


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> She has not grown beyond the teen years emotionally. She is reactive to whatever feelings she has at the moment and firmly believes she is the center of the universe.



You are right. She is stuck in her teenage. But then, so is JCMH. 

I mean, the whole father figure stuff too. Bizarre.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> You are right. She is stuck in her teenage. But then, so is JCMH.
> 
> I mean, the whole father figure stuff too. Bizarre.



If their relationship lasts it will be because they provide each other with the adulation they crave. If only everyone thought they were as great as they do. 

I'm skeptical about the father figure nonsense. I don't see Meghan letting anyone else have influence over him. That is her domain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I know that she did a narration for the film 'Children of Theatre Street' and Prince R went berserk.
> 
> What do you mean not very clean? - sorry can't let that pass
> 
> I may expect M to join Scientology if she thought it would help her land the right roles/men but I can't believe that Grace, who often ran away (snuck out) to get away from court life to eat pasta in bistros would then get involved in something to formal, ritualised and theatrical. We digress


 Rainier was involved in unsavory business practices.
The Principauté was on the brinks of bankruptcy at one time and poof it all turned around really quickly and spectacularly. 
To get back to the Princesse, she met the people who founded the cult. Did she actually join? Who knows?
It sounds farfetched but stranger things have happened....


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> She has not grown beyond the teen years emotionally. She is reactive to whatever feelings she has at the moment and firmly believes she is the center of the universe.


100% agree.


----------



## bag-mania

Forget the cult rumors. How many know that Grace Kelly's father had to pay a $2 million dowry for the privilege of allowing the movie star to marry the prince? 

If the BRF had that kind of requirement in place they sure wouldn't have a Meghan problem today. She wouldn't have ponied up her own cash for love.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Forget the cult rumors. How many know that Grace Kelly's father had to pay a $2 million dowry for the privilege of allowing the movie star to marry the prince?
> 
> If the BRF had that kind of requirement in place they sure wouldn't have a Meghan problem today. She wouldn't have ponied up her own cash for love.


two mil would have been most of what she had I think.....if she had more actual cash than that on her d-list tv job, good for her - maybe she's not so dumb


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> Forget the cult rumors. How many know that Grace Kelly's father had to pay a $2 million dowry for the privilege of allowing the movie star to marry the prince?
> 
> If the BRF had that kind of requirement in place they sure wouldn't have a Meghan problem today. She wouldn't have ponied up her own cash for love.


What is also a fact that Grace was pregnant at the time of her wedding? She wasn't showing, but I'm pretty sure I read she was a few weeks along. Maybe that's why dad had to pay $2million, to avoid a scandal.


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> She took frequent trips to Paris alone and was very, very lonely...And never enjoyed her life in the principauté.
> It is after all, a small town with many unsavory characters. Her husband was not very clean either.
> Anyways, there has been tons of rumors regarding the Princesse. And forget about Charlene.
> Regarding Grace, in my knowledge she was very kind irl. And was driving the car that day.



I was shocked to learn that Monaco is UNDER 1 square mile in area (499 acres total). It’s the most densely populated country in the world & the smallest in area after the Vatican. No wonder Charlene looks like a hostage. (She’s said she knows she looks sad b/c she’s homesick & not allowed to take her kids to South Africa). Fortunately her brother’s family has moved to Monaco for her.

Princess Grace looked sad in photos towards the end of her life. (Ranier was always publicly very warm towards her, but was less discrete with his affairs after the children came). The narrative was always movie star being swept away by a smitten Prince, but he was also in dire need of a wealthy bride & her $2million dowry was massive at the time & didn’t count what her father contributed to the wedding (from her inheritance). It’s not even clear who paid for her extravagant 2nd engagement ring. Ranier was great at drawing foreign wealth and business interests to Monaco via a host of schemes including tax shelters & lax requirements for citizenship.


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> I was shocked to learn that Monaco is UNDER 1 square mile in area (499 acres total). It’s the most densely populated country in the world & the smallest in area after the Vatican. No wonder Charlene looks like a hostage. (She’s said she knows she looks sad b/c she’s homesick & not allowed to take her kids to South Africa). Fortunately her brother’s family has moved to Monaco for her.
> 
> Princess Grace looked sad in photos towards the end of her life. (Ranier was always publicly very warm towards her, but was less discrete with his affairs after the children came). The narrative was always movie star being swept away by a smitten Prince, but he was also in dire need of a wealthy bride & her $2million dowry was massive at the time & didn’t count what her father contributed to the wedding (from her inheritance). It’s not even clear who paid for her extravagant 2nd engagement ring. Ranier was great at drawing foreign wealth and business interests to Monaco via a host of schemes including tax shelters & lax requirements for citizenship.


Monaco is built pretty much vertically, especially in recent years. When we were there last May, we parked in a new car park on the -12th floor below ground level. The whole thing was so deep! The idea is you buy a small apartment there then you can qualify as a citizen to have access to various tax avoidance schemes. The you spend most of your time living in a proper big sea view villa somewhere in the rest of Côte d'Azur.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> Monaco is built pretty much vertically, especially in recent years. When we were there last May, we parked in a new car park on the -12th floor below ground level. The whole thing was so deep! The idea is you buy a small apartment there then you can qualify as a citizen to have access to various tax avoidance schemes. The you spend most of your time living in a proper big sea view villa somewhere in the rest of Côte d'Azur.


It really is a scammer paradise. 
Although when Princesse Grace lived there, it still was pretty and the weather is unbeatable.


PewPew said:


> I was shocked to learn that Monaco is UNDER 1 square mile in area (499 acres total). It’s the most densely populated country in the world & the smallest in area after the Vatican. No wonder Charlene looks like a hostage. (She’s said she knows she looks sad b/c she’s homesick & not allowed to take her kids to South Africa). Fortunately her brother’s family has moved to Monaco for her.
> 
> Princess Grace looked sad in photos towards the end of her life. (Ranier was always publicly very warm towards her, but was less discrete with his affairs after the children came). The narrative was always movie star being swept away by a smitten Prince, but he was also in dire need of a wealthy bride & her $2million dowry was massive at the time & didn’t count what her father contributed to the wedding (from her inheritance). It’s not even clear who paid for her extravagant 2nd engagement ring. Ranier was great at drawing foreign wealth and business interests to Monaco via a host of schemes including tax shelters & lax requirements for citizenship.


Why isn’t Charlene allowed to bring her children to SA?
Are they really that fearful that she would make a run for it?


----------



## bellecate

Edited because I forgot the


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> What is also a fact that Grace was pregnant at the time of her wedding? She wasn't showing, but I'm pretty sure I read she was a few weeks along. Maybe that's why dad had to pay $2million, to avoid a scandal.



I think the dowry was part of the rules at the time to marry into the royal family of Monaco. I don't know if that is still the case. Kelly's father hated that it was expected he would pay so his beautiful, famous daughter could marry. I read that Grace paid half of it herself. $2 million in the 50s would be equivalent to about $20 million today.

She gave birth almost exactly nine months from marrying. She may have been a couple weeks pregnant when they married, but they had been engaged for months before that. Another indignity Grace had to suffer in those days was submitting to a fertility test. It had to be proven that she could produce an heir, so her having his children was desired.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I think the dowry was part of the rules at the time to marry into the royal family of Monaco. I don't know if that is still the case. Kelly's father hated that it was expected he would pay so his beautiful, famous daughter could marry. I read that Grace paid half of it herself. $2 million in the 50s would be equivalent to about $20 million today.
> 
> She gave birth almost exactly nine months from marrying. She may have been a couple weeks pregnant when they married, but they had been engaged for months before that. Another indignity Grace had to suffer in those days was submitting to a fertility test. It had to be proven that she could produce an heir, so her having his children was desired.


We come a long way and yet....


----------



## PewPew

limom said:


> Why isn’t Charlene allowed to bring her children to SA?
> Are they really that fearful that she would make a run for it?



In one French interview last year Charlene said that the twins would be able visit her family this year (they turned 5 in December), but then Covid happened & Prince Albert got the corona virus. It seems more an issue of health/safety for the children visiting South Africa than Charlene running away (she won’t leave Albert before they are older).

Albert has several illegitimate children (2 were finally acknowledged & Charlene finding out about #2 is what led her to try to run away before the wedding). But Monaco is a male primogeniture monarchy, so Charlene’s son is the first heir. While Charlene’s daughter is 2nd in line (regardless of who is older), The House of Grimaldi is Europe’s oldest ruling family (in power since 1297) & is an extremely patriarchal monarchy that is deeply involved in government policies & business alliances, in contrast to most European monarchies.

Albert seems genuinely fond of Charlene, but there are persistent rumors that he would consider remarriage and IVF for another male heir. (As long as the son were born in marriage, he would be before any daughter in the line of succession.)


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Is it even a thing nowadays? We barely receive real paper invites let alone hand written ones...
> if it is, maybe she could teach the Prince as he looks like he could use a healthy hobby....
> Imagine the bragging rights... written by her highness just Harry...under the loving guidance from the gracious and never ending guiding light of the Duchess of Sussex....



Definitely still a thing! (Though we’ll see post-COVID19....)

They are quite popular for weddings nowadays but very expensive.


----------



## limom

PewPew said:


> In one French interview last year Charlene said that the twins would be able visit her family this year (they turned 5 in December), but then Covid happened & Prince Albert got the corona virus. It seems more an issue of health/safety for the children visiting South Africa than Charlene running away (she won’t leave Albert before they are older).
> 
> Albert has several illegitimate children (2 were finally acknowledged & Charlene finding out about #2 is what led her to try to run away before the wedding). But Monaco is a male primogeniture monarchy, so Charlene’s son is the first heir. While Charlene’s daughter is 2nd in line (regardless of who is older), The House of Grimaldi is Europe’s oldest ruling family (in power since 1297) & is an extremely patriarchal monarchy that is deeply involved in government policies & business alliances, in contrast to most European monarchies.
> 
> Albert seems genuinely fond of Charlene, but there are persistent rumors that he would consider remarriage and IVF for another male heir. (As long as the son were born in marriage, he would be before any daughter in the line of succession.)


Fond of Charlene?
She is not his type whatsoever. 
His first child was with the flight attendant, right?
He was cute back in the days....
Remarriage? With whom?
Those Grimaldi are super messy. Even Caroline.


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> Monaco is built pretty much vertically, especially in recent years. When we were there last May, we parked in a new car park on the -12th floor below ground level. The whole thing was so deep! The idea is you buy a small apartment there then you can qualify as a citizen to have access to various tax avoidance schemes. The you spend most of your time living in a proper big sea view villa somewhere in the rest of Côte d'Azur.



Wow!! What was the rest of the trip like? Thanks for sharing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> I think the dowry was part of the rules at the time to marry into the royal family of Monaco. I don't know if that is still the case. Kelly's father hated that it was expected he would pay so his beautiful, famous daughter could marry. *I read that Grace paid half of it herself. $2 million in the 50s would be equivalent to about $20 million today.*
> 
> She gave birth almost exactly nine months from marrying. She may have been a couple weeks pregnant when they married, but they had been engaged for months before that. *Another indignity Grace had to suffer in those days was submitting to a fertility test. It had to be proven that she could produce an heir, so her having his children was desired*.





OMG... That would have been a no thanks and a hell-to-the-no thanks from me. Seems like red flags were flying everywhere for Grace, but she just didn't see them.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> Forget the cult rumors. bag-mania, don’t know if this fact was well known but I was raised, educated, owned homes, etc on the Main Line where Princess Grace has long-time family and where she was raised. An interesting family, will leave it at
> .....



*bag-mania,* don’t know if this fact was well known about Grace Kelly but I was raised, educated, owned homes, etc on the Main Line where Princess Grace has long-time family and where she was raised. It’s a small community, interesting family, will leave it at that.
Now back OT 
♥️


----------



## Jayne1

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania,* don’t know if this fact was well known about Grace Kelly but I was raised, educated, owned homes, etc on the Main Line where Princess Grace has long-time family and where she was raised. It’s a small community, interesting family, will leave it at that.
> Now back OT
> ♥️


Way off topic -- but you know that mid-Atlantic accent she developed to be a movie star?  Not close to her own Philadelphia accent, I assume

Do you suppose she dropped the mid-Atlantic thing when she moved to Monaco?


----------



## sdkitty

I'd tried to remember the name of the actress who said on The View that Meghan fell in love with a man who just happened to be a prince.  Today my memory was triggered.  It was Yvette Nicole Brown.  this seems to be a not unintelligent woman who's apparently very romantic (to be generous).
From Yahoo news

If Meghan Markle is looking for a shoulder to cry on, she probably shouldn’t turn to Joy Behar.

Markle and her husband Prince Harry’s recent declaration of independence from the royal family —dubbed “Mexit” by British tabloids — has garnered sympathy from many who saw a couple hounded by the press and criticized at every turn.

“Imagine having to go up against a place like the royal family and Buckingham Palace,” said the View co-host Abby Huntsman.

Behar disagreed and interrupted. “Oh, come on. She did it,” said Behar. “She said, ‘hey, I want to be a princess’ so now she’s a princess,” she added.

“I don’t think she said she wanted to be a princess, I think she just wanted to marry Harry, and he just happened to be a prince,” countered guest co-host, actress Yvette Nicole Brown.

“What a coincidence — he’s a prince!” joked Behar.  UNQUOTE

I haven't heard joy say anything remotely negative about H&M since.  Hope she wasn't reprimanded.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I think the dowry was part of the rules at the time to marry into the royal family of Monaco. I don't know if that is still the case. Kelly's father hated that it was expected he would pay so his beautiful, famous daughter could marry. I read that Grace paid half of it herself. $2 million in the 50s would be equivalent to about $20 million today.
> 
> She gave birth almost exactly nine months from marrying. She may have been a couple weeks pregnant when they married, but they had been engaged for months before that. Another indignity Grace had to suffer in those days was submitting to a fertility test. It had to be proven that she could produce an heir, so her having his children was desired.


Thanks for the information.  I never knew Grace and her father had to pay money for her to marry her prince.


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4737762
> 
> OMG... That would have been a no thanks and a hell-to-the-no thanks from me. Seems like red flags were flying everywhere for Grace, but she just didn't see them.



I feel the same way. But I think it’s important to keep in mind that this happened almost 70 years ago. The world was a different place for women then. They were expected to make sacrifices and endure indignities as a matter of course that we would consider outrageous today. Grace was 26, in love, and the idea of a woman feeling empowered in her relationship was still many years away. 

It may not be perfect for us today but at least it is much better than it once was.


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania,* don’t know if this fact was well known about Grace Kelly but I was raised, educated, owned homes, etc on the Main Line where Princess Grace has long-time family and where she was raised. It’s a small community, interesting family, will leave it at that.
> Now back OT
> ♥️


Were they the Kennedy of the Main line?


----------



## mdcx

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8349283/Have-Harry-Meghan-cost-44million.html


----------



## mdcx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania,* don’t know if this fact was well known about Grace Kelly but I was raised, educated, owned homes, etc on the Main Line where Princess Grace has long-time family and where she was raised. It’s a small community, interesting family, will leave it at that.
> Now back OT
> ♥️


Oh I am dying to hear more! Charlene 100% is scared of Albert and his secrets imo. She definitely wanted to leave. Rumour was her passport was held from her so she couldn’t bolt before the wedding.


----------



## Tootsie17

mdcx said:


> Oh I am dying to hear more! Charlene 100% is scared of Albert and his secrets imo. She definitely wanted to leave. Rumour was her passport was held from her so she couldn’t bolt before the wedding.


I feel so sad for Charlene. I guess for some women things have not changed much. Oh well, thank God I'm not super rich.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think the dowry was part of the rules at the time to marry into the royal family of Monaco. I don't know if that is still the case. Kelly's father hated that it was expected he would pay so his beautiful, famous daughter could marry. I read that Grace paid half of it herself. $2 million in the 50s would be equivalent to about $20 million today.
> 
> She gave birth almost exactly nine months from marrying. She may have been a couple weeks pregnant when they married, but they had been engaged for months before that. Another indignity Grace had to suffer in those days was submitting to a fertility test. It had to be proven that she could produce an heir, so her having his children was desired.


Funny she had to go through all that.  She was very much an A-list star.  Considered one of the most beautiful women in film.  Not like someone else we know of.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

limom said:


> *Were they the Kennedy of the Main line?*



*limom*, not even close
Read all about her brother Jack to get a broader pic of the family
My friends and family, myself included were v active socially <board member, charity galas, etc>
Due to the fact that I have close ties to the community and still have many family & friends etc there - well, it’s a v small town, not my place to call anyone or anything out  ♥️


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mdcx said:


> Oh I am dying to hear more! Charlene 100% is scared of Albert and his secrets imo. She definitely wanted to leave. Rumour was her passport was held from her so she couldn’t bolt before the wedding.



Yes, *mdcx*, heard this from many sources, too. 
Obviously the marriage was arranged and is a business deal.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Funny she had to go through all that.  She was very much an A-list star.  Considered one of the most beautiful women in film.  Not like someone else we know of.



Yes, it’s been said that Rainier pursued Grace because she was a movie star. Apparently Marilyn Monroe was also on his radar, supposedly after being encouraged by Aristotle Onassis of all people. 

Who knows whether that is true. Since they’re all dead nobody can prove it either way.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> Funny she had to go through all that.  She was very much an A-list star.  Considered one of the most beautiful women in film.  Not like someone else we know of.


Not just the most beautiful, she actually could act too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow!! What was the rest of the trip like? Thanks for sharing


Sorry for being OT! We visit Côte d'Azur several times a year for many years now and we pop into Monaco every now and then. We have a love and hate relationship with the place. My SO is a big fan of F1 and his favourite is Monaco Grand Prix. The place is constantly being built and rebuilt so it's always chaotic. The latest grand reopening was about 2 years ago and there are now even more built up than ever! It's really good for luxury goods shopping, people and car watching at Cafe de Paris in the casino square but I can be very crowded and catastrophic! They squeeze so much into such a small place. Driving and parking is a nightmare. It can get really hot and humid in the summer due to the surrounding mountains. Sounds like I really don't like it that much I don't know why we go back there so much!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Last May as Monte Carlo getting ready for the grand prix.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sorry back to topic. Is DM writing more on H&M just to wind them up because H&M said they wouldn't work with DM?


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Yes, it’s been said that Rainier pursued Grace because she was a movie star. Apparently Marilyn Monroe was also on his radar, supposedly after being encouraged by Aristotle Onassis of all people.
> 
> Who knows whether that is true. Since they’re all dead nobody can prove it either way.


Onassis was involved in Monaco businesses in many ways, he attempted to take over business but the Americans took over.


Jayne1 said:


> Not just the most beautiful, she actually could act too!


It is incredible that she walked away from it all as she was only 26.


VigeeLeBrun said:


> *limom*, not even close
> Read all about her brother Jack to get a broader pic of the family
> My friends and family, myself included were v active socially <board member, charity galas, etc>
> Due to the fact that I have close ties to the community and still have many family & friends etc there - well, it’s a v small town, not my place to call anyone or anything out  ♥️


Thanks for the hint. 
Upon reading about his brother, I must say he was ahead of his time.


chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry for being OT! We visit *Côte d'Azur *several times a year for many years now and we pop into Monaco every now and then. We have a love and hate relationship with the place. My SO is a big fan of F1 and his favourite is Monaco Grand Prix. The place is constantly being built and rebuilt so it's always chaotic. The latest grand reopening was about 2 years ago and there are now even more built up than ever! It's really good for luxury goods shopping, people and car watching at Cafe de Paris in the casino square but I can be very crowded and catastrophic! They squeeze so much into such a small place. Driving and parking is a nightmare. It can get really hot and humid in the summer due to the surrounding mountains. Sounds like I really don't like it that much I don't know why we go back there so much!


It is always a pleasure to hear about my birthplace. There is a reason why people retire in Nice and not London
Monaco is magic. The Grand Prix is unlike any race as it occurs on the streets, rain or shine.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry back to topic. Is DM writing more on H&M just to wind them up because H&M said they wouldn't work with DM?


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> It is always a pleasure to hear about my birthplace. There is a reason why people retire in Nice and not London
> Monaco is magic. The Grand Prix is unlike any race as it occurs on the streets, rain or shine.


It's a shame that everything is cancelled this spring! Cannes film festival, Monaco grand prix etc! We were discussing our trips the other day and we think the earliest we want go back to Côte d'Azur (or anywhere for that matter) would be this September.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry back to topic. Is DM writing more on H&M just to wind them up because H&M said they wouldn't work with DM?



Are they writing more? It seems like they have had an article or two almost every day since the pregnancy was announced.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Are they writing more? It seems like they have had an article or two almost every day since the pregnancy was announced.


To be honest I wouldn't know for sure. It's probably because I never really cared about them before Mexit happened. I guess I should have said that DM never stopped reporting on H&M despite the fact that H&M said they wouldn't work with DM. Just to rub it in H&M's faces.


----------



## youngster

The estimated £44 million spent on these two by the British taxpayer over 2 years was a conservative estimate, since the wedding is thought to have cost in the neighborhood of £33.5 million . . . and Meghan and Harry have the unparalleled gall to call the book that is coming out about them, and that they cooperated with, _Finding Freedom_.  As if they were boat people or as if they escaped from a totalitarian regime or refugee camp under cover of darkness, slipping across a border with just the clothes on their backs, risking  torture and imprisonment or even execution if caught.  As opposed to just not getting enough warm hugs, not being able to pick and choose what events to attend, and that if the Queen wants you to wear a hat to an event, you wear a hat.  

On reflection, I guess they did slip across a border under cover of darkness.  In fact, they did it twice!  But, they were toting Meghan's estimated 91 piece jewelry collection, her calligraphy pens, a nanny, laptops, and a full security detail. It'd make a good SNL skit.  Meghan and Harry and the retinue, dressed in camo, fleeing for their lives to catch that last plane out of the UK, with courtiers in hot pursuit shouting not to forget the sterling flatware, Harry's best tux and Meghan's Dior gowns.


----------



## Clearblueskies

They left with everything but their self respect.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Clearblueskies said:


> They left with everything but their self respect.


They never had any of that to begin with....


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> The estimated £44 million spent on these two by the British taxpayer over 2 years was a conservative estimate, since the wedding is thought to have cost in the neighborhood of £33.5 million . . . and Meghan and Harry have the unparalleled gall to call the book that is coming out about them, and that they cooperated with, _Finding Freedom_.  As if they were boat people or as if they escaped from a totalitarian regime or refugee camp under cover of darkness, slipping across a border with just the clothes on their backs, risking  torture and imprisonment or even execution if caught.  As opposed to just not getting enough warm hugs, not being able to pick and choose what events to attend, and that if the Queen wants you to wear a hat to an event, you wear a hat.
> 
> On reflection, I guess they did slip across a border under cover of darkness.  In fact, they did it twice!  But, they were toting Meghan's estimated 91 piece jewelry collection, her calligraphy pens, a nanny, laptops, and a full security detail. It'd make a good SNL skit.  Meghan and Harry and the retinue, dressed in camo, fleeing for their lives to catch that last plane out of the UK, with courtiers in hot pursuit shouting not to forget the sterling flatware, Harry's best tux and Meghan's Dior gowns.


This is DISGUSTING, but you know these two likely feel that "they are worth it"!  Uggh, this is why I SO do not want them to scam people via their (supposed) charities!


----------



## bag-mania

Again with the ancient lovey-dovey stories. Since they have not done anything in awhile, they must regurgitate old phony, I mean, fluffy stories. This is their “official story” about when they fell in love. 

*Meghan Markle Recreated the Place Where She and Prince Harry 'Fell in Love' — in Their Backyard!*
"It's a place that means so much to them — and to Harry in particular — so Meghan wanted to bring that happy place to him on his day," a source tells PEOPLE

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry go the extra mile when it comes to gift-giving!

The couple, who just celebrated two years of marriage, "always give each other incredibly romantic gifts," a source tells PEOPLE. And Meghan made her husband's birthday last September extra special by bringing back memories of the trip they took to Africa when they first started dating in 2016.

"Last year, for Harry's birthday, Meghan recreated their Botswana camping adventures in their backyard," the source says. "It's a place that means so much to them — and to Harry in particular — so Meghan wanted to bring that happy place to him on his day so she set up a tent, got sleeping bags, cooked dinner and recreated Botswana where they fell in love."

Prince Harry revealed in their 2017 engagement interview that they headed to Africa together after just two dates in London after meeting in the summer of 2016.

"And then it was I think about three, maybe four weeks later that I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana," he said. "And we camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for five days out there, which was absolutely fantastic."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people...-recreate-botswana-camping-backyard/?amp=true


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Again with the ancient lovey-dovey stories. Since they have not done anything in awhile, they must regurgitate old phony, I mean, fluffy stories. This is their “official story” about when they fell in love.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Recreated the Place Where She and Prince Harry 'Fell in Love' — in Their Backyard!*
> "It's a place that means so much to them — and to Harry in particular — so Meghan wanted to bring that happy place to him on his day," a source tells PEOPLE
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry go the extra mile when it comes to gift-giving!
> 
> The couple, who just celebrated two years of marriage, "always give each other incredibly romantic gifts," a source tells PEOPLE. And Meghan made her husband's birthday last September extra special by bringing back memories of the trip they took to Africa when they first started dating in 2016.
> 
> "Last year, for Harry's birthday, Meghan recreated their Botswana camping adventures in their backyard," the source says. "It's a place that means so much to them — and to Harry in particular — so Meghan wanted to bring that happy place to him on his day so she set up a tent, got sleeping bags, cooked dinner and recreated Botswana where they fell in love."
> 
> Prince Harry revealed in their 2017 engagement interview that they headed to Africa together after just two dates in London after meeting in the summer of 2016.
> 
> "And then it was I think about three, maybe four weeks later that I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana," he said. "And we camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for five days out there, which was absolutely fantastic."
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/people.com/royals/meghan-markle-prince-harry-romantic-birthday-gift-recreate-botswana-camping-backyard/?amp=true


barf
this would be sweet if it was kept private but sickening that it's put out there as PR


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> barf
> this would be sweet if it was kept private but sickening that it's put out there as PR



And why is what they did last September considered news today?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

I really don’t see her as the camping type.  She was probably hating it the whole time.  Gotta do what you gotta do though.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And why is what they did last September considered news today?


cause they have to keep themselves out there all the time.....uugh


----------



## zen1965

Camping in a luxury safari camp is hardly your average camping experience.


----------



## Chanbal

@CeeJay

Charity is not just about giving away money, and the charity work of MM & H can be seen here.

How many of us come to this thread for relief from the terrible news about COVID-19? The thread could be even included in the "Sheltering in Place" forum.


----------



## Lodpah

https://pagesix.com/2020/05/23/harr...53-million-taxpayer-bill-brit-politician/amp/

I hope the massive outrage begins.


----------



## PewPew

zen1965 said:


> Camping in a luxury safari camp is hardly your average camping experience.





Lodpah said:


> https://pagesix.com/2020/05/23/harr...53-million-taxpayer-bill-brit-politician/amp/
> 
> I hope the massive outrage begins.



Dude. We’re mid-pandemic where people are losing lives and there’s massive unemployment. H&M leaking stories about their romantic dates and expensive gifts does NOT make them more approachable or likable. Harry didn’t pay to whisk Meghan away on a luxury Botswana camping trip for one of their first dates. What’s worse is that it’s never occurred to Harry, Andrew and the lot of them that the taxpayer shouldn’t have to subsidize their lives and recreation.

Yet boo-hoo, poor us, the Queen won’t let us earn a living by cashing in on our hard-earned titles. Boo-hoo how dare the taxpayer be mad at paying $50million USD for our wedding and travel and gifts and security and renovations. Our great love story is EPIC. Boo-hoo— we finally FOUND FREEDOM, but Covid oppressed us and we cannot share our full greatness with the world until August. Boo-hoo.


----------



## mdcx

Aren’t we all gasping at the latest instalment in H&Ms epic love story for the ages - Megxit ordered Mexican food and margs for their 2nd wedding anniversary! Soooo romantic, a love we could all only dream of! 
(I assume that’s what M is hoping for with this tripe, but instead  )
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ed-second-wedding-anniversary-margaritas.html


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Aren’t we all gasping at the latest instalment in H&Ms epic love story for the ages - Megxit ordered Mexican food and margs for their 2nd wedding anniversary! Soooo romantic, a love we could all only dream of!
> (I assume that’s what M is hoping for with this tripe, but instead  )
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ed-second-wedding-anniversary-margaritas.html


they're just like us 
I thought she didn't want Harry drinking?  now they're drinking margueritas together?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they're just like us
> I thought she didn't want Harry drinking?  now they're drinking margueritas together?



Drinking was only bad for Harry when he was doing it with those old friends of his. Now that they are out of the picture, it’s okay for him to drink as long as Meghan is supervising him.

That press release was typical Omid Scobie work. He must be worried that people will cancel their pre-orders of his book. I mean seriously, what kind of people contact the vendors who worked on their wedding two years later on their anniversary?  It’s either people who don’t have any friends or the story is a big, steaming pile of BS:

“Writing in Harper's Bazaar, Omid said the couple chatted with a number of people - including some of the vendors who 'helped bring the ceremony and reception to life' -about exchanging their vows in May 2018 at Windsor Castle”


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Drinking was only bad for Harry when he was doing it with those old friends of his. Now that they are out of the picture, it’s okay for him to drink as long as Meghan is supervising him.
> 
> That press release was typical Omid Scobie work. He must be worried that people will cancel their pre-orders of his book. I mean seriously, what kind of people contact the vendors who worked on their wedding two years later on their anniversary?  It’s either people who don’t have any friends or the story is a big, steaming pile of BS:
> 
> “Writing in Harper's Bazaar, Omid said the couple chatted with a number of people - including some of the vendors who 'helped bring the ceremony and reception to life' -about exchanging their vows in May 2018 at Windsor Castle”


yes, that wonderful exchange of vows that cost the British people so very much money


----------



## mrsinsyder

Omid and M might as well throw Harry under the bus too


----------



## bag-mania

That’s the way a manipulator works. She weeps and complains and acts miserable every day, but “it was his idea to leave.”


----------



## chicinthecity777

Yeah that's how narcissist works. It's always someone else's fault!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> That’s the way a manipulator works. She weeps and complains and acts miserable every day, but “it was his idea to leave.”


Snap!


----------



## mdcx

Next M will be convincing H to “do the decent thing” and return to the UK so that public dislike for him being the one to choose to leave the UK doesn’t taint poor innocent little M. Or something.
(ETA - and M remaining in LA to strategise their divorce settlement obvs.)
_Never be not scheming_ is Ms motto imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Jayne1 said:


> *Not just the most beautiful, she actually could act too!*



Hi *Jayne*, Yes, Grace Kelly could act and much more. 

The Ranier family in prior years had v close ties with the Kelly’s, the Main Line and the city. Obviously, not as much these days.

Will say this, have never ever heard one negative word on the down-low about Grace Kelly. Did she imbibe a little too much socially at times? Yes, later in life, but that was considered pretty normal in our community years ago.

There is so much trash-talk, fake news, people trying desperately to be something they are not, on our world stage today - sometimes I have the impression that people do not know what to believe but Grace Kelly was the real deal. 

Apologies for being OT! 
♥️


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *Jayne*, Yes, Grace Kelly could act and much more.
> 
> The Ranier family in prior years had v close ties with the Kelly’s, the Main Line and the city. Obviously, not as much these days.
> 
> Will say this, have never ever heard one negative word on the down-low about Grace Kelly. Did she imbibe a little too much socially at times? Yes, later in life, but that was considered pretty normal in our community years ago.
> 
> There is so much trash-talk, fake news, people trying desperately to be something they are not, on our world stage today - sometimes I have the impression that people do not know what to believe but Grace Kelly was the real deal.
> 
> Apologies for being OT!
> ♥️


she was before my time but it seems to me she did have her share of "romances" or affairs - other actors - William Holden?  not saying there's anything wrong with that


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Drinking was only bad for Harry when he was doing it with those old friends of his. Now that they are out of the picture, it’s okay for him to drink as long as Meghan is supervising him.
> 
> That press release was typical Omid Scobie work. He must be worried that people will cancel their pre-orders of his book. I mean seriously, what kind of people contact the vendors who worked on their wedding two years later on their anniversary?  It’s either people who don’t have any friends or the story is a big, steaming pile of BS:
> 
> “Writing in Harper's Bazaar, Omid said the couple chatted with a number of people - including some of the vendors who 'helped bring the ceremony and reception to life' -about exchanging their vows in May 2018 at Windsor Castle”


yes she's probably the type that says he doesn't need his old friends; he has her now


----------



## chaneljewel

mrsinsyder said:


> Omid and M might as well throw Harry under the bus too
> 
> View attachment 4738579


Of course she insisted on the departure. I’m so done with the these two!  (And I completely supported M from the start). Learned her self servicing personality.


----------



## Frivole88

I don't believe it was Harry's idea to move to Hollywood. Now, if they move to Africa I would have believe it was all Harry's. He was totally emasculated. Megan has his ball$ kept in a jar.


----------



## Jayne1

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *Jayne*, Yes, Grace Kelly could act and much more.
> 
> The Ranier family in prior years had v close ties with the Kelly’s, the Main Line and the city. Obviously, not as much these days.
> 
> Will say this, have never ever heard one negative word on the down-low about Grace Kelly. Did she imbibe a little too much socially at times? Yes, later in life, but that was considered pretty normal in our community years ago.
> 
> There is so much trash-talk, fake news, people trying desperately to be something they are not, on our world stage today - sometimes I have the impression that people do not know what to believe but Grace Kelly was the real deal.
> 
> Apologies for being OT!
> ♥️


Since you are more aware of Grace Kelly than most, I wonder if you think she looked sad on her wedding day.  I always thought so!  But no one else noticed it, so maybe I read too much into her solemn face.


----------



## zen1965

The press certainly paints a picture of Harry being totally esmaculated. And I am sure he hates it.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> This is DISGUSTING, but you know these two likely feel that "they are worth it"!  *Uggh, this is why I SO do not want them to scam people via their (supposed) charities!*



Actually, *CeeJay*, H&M turn me off to such an extent that anyone or anything that endorses them or that they endorse is totally off-limits as far as my wallet or number of clicks on social media.



Annawakes said:


> I really don’t see her as the *camping* *type*.  She was probably hating it the whole time.  Gotta do what you gotta do though.



*Annawakes*, do I really believe Scoobie-Doobie or MM’s friend du jour via DM that Meghan Markle slept in a sleeping bag outside in the backyard instead of her grifted sumptuous bed covered in Frette linens? What about Arch, the nanny and the security team? What about insects Meghan? They aren’t going to ask you about how you are feeling.

Also, is it normal for a 35-year old prince to leave, or cut-off family and friends to relocate to a different country without having spent any significant time there prior?

Finding Freedom: History Re-Write, Version 1
Harry: Yes, I remember it all so clearly. I had a MOMENT”.
Harry looks into the camera with a sigh, “I just thought at 35-years old I should walk quickly away from gran-gran’s $600M life-style and simply, you know, just keep hooking-up freebie jets and homes as long as I can bc you know I DESERVE my freedom but I’m ROYAL and we don’t WORK. <seriously guys, you know all this already>


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Jayne1 said:


> Since you are more aware of Grace Kelly than most, *I wonder if you think she looked sad on her wedding day*.  I always thought so!  But no one else noticed it, so maybe I read too much into her solemn face.



Hi *Jayne*, hmm, never thought GK looked sad on her wedding day - double-checked the wedding pics bc she was many years older than myself to confirm my initial impression.

What did strike me after looking at those old pics of Grace Kelly is that she honestly looked like almost every other girl on the Main Line, lol. It must be something in the water.


----------



## Lodpah

So I read this today: Meghan is the neurosis building castles in the sky while Harry is the psychosis living in it.

Yep I think that sums it all.

I added the names.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

zen1965 said:


> The press certainly paints a picture of Harry being totally esmaculated. And I am sure he hates it.


Well maybe if he didn't allow for his wife to push and pull him around like a dog on a leash (even the hand signals...I sometimes sign our dog to do something) for everyone to see the evil press wouldn't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun  yes, yes, to all you say. Anyone connected to the greedy graspy  grifters is banished from my world and my dollars.

I don’t buy the glamping Birthday story either — sounds like a jr high girl’s diary entry.  If H went camping on his bday, he did it on his own or with his friends.  Also, I wonder if H is still in LA. It is entirely possible for him to jet over to the UK, soothe the ruffled feathers, pick up some extra cash, perhaps get some PR advice from the KP pros and jet back. How would we know?  It could explain why William is talking about how difficult parenthood was because of his mother’s death.  Of this we can be certain, this drama will continue.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I hadn’t connected these dots but perhaps this is why they’re cozying up to the Fosters...


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> The press certainly paints a picture of Harry being totally esmaculated. And I am sure he hates it.


what press? not the US.  Here is is a hero who had to do the right thing for his family.


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> what press? not the US.  Here is is a hero who had to do the right thing for his family.


Not everybody here has a US perspective. 
The British press does not depict him as a hero or knight in shining armor. Quite to the contrary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Well, well, well .. isn't this interesting .. a "reunion" of Tom Inskip and Hazza?  But, what really struck me is this: 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...rrys-former-wingman-set-fly-LA-heal-rift.html

"_Now I’m delighted to reveal that Skippy, who lives in Washington DC and works at US tech giant Afiniti, is making plans *to take his company’s private jet to Los Angeles* with his newborn son Albert to meet Harry and his toddler Archie_."  

Yet again, the hypocrisy!


----------



## threadbender

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t connected these dots but perhaps this is why they’re cozying up to the Fosters...
> View attachment 4738865


This really does explain so much.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t connected these dots but perhaps this is why they’re cozying up to the Fosters...
> View attachment 4738865


foster always struck me as kinda smarmy


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> Not everybody here has a US perspective.
> The British press does not depict him as a hero or knight in shining armor. Quite to the contrary.


just saying the US media is still fawning over them


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> foster always struck me as kinda smarmy


That was pretty obvious on RHOBH, a total self-centered "make sure all my Grammys fit on the piano" kind of guy. Yes, he's talented but a real jerk. While Yo was irritating also, he dumped her during her Lyme Disease time which was bad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t connected these dots but perhaps this is why they’re cozying up to the Fosters...
> View attachment 4738865


I feel the Hadid kids might not be feeling all that warm towards him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Well, well, well .. isn't this interesting .. a "reunion" of Tom Inskip and Hazza?  But, what really struck me is this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...rrys-former-wingman-set-fly-LA-heal-rift.html
> 
> "_Now I’m delighted to reveal that Skippy, who lives in Washington DC and works at US tech giant Afiniti, is making plans *to take his company’s private jet to Los Angeles* with his newborn son Albert to meet Harry and his toddler Archie_."
> 
> Yet again, the hypocrisy!



Maybe that's part of a plan to rescue Harry. Because if Inskip had concerns about MM they probably have been confirmed and then some.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe that's part of a plan to rescue Harry. Because if Inskip had concerns about MM they probably have been confirmed and then some.


well even if this is true, I think it would take a lot to get H out of M's clutches.  she's not gonna give up her ticket to the A-list without a huge fight (IMO)


----------



## limom

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Hi *Jayne*, hmm, never thought GK looked sad on her wedding day - double-checked the wedding pics bc she was many years older than myself to confirm my initial impression.
> 
> What did strike me after looking at those old pics of Grace Kelly is that she honestly looked like almost every other girl on the Main Line, lol. It must be something in the water.


Are you all of Irish and or German descent?
We are friends with such a family and the kids are all so good looking...
It is no wonder, we keep on talking about Grace as she was a real movie star and a real philanthropist to boot...
I agree with you that she did not sleep outside in the backyard for what?
Their PR is so tone deaf imo. There is so much misery right now in the USA, no one wants to hear all those cheesy and saccharine pr pieces, imo.


----------



## pixiejenna

Ran to Walmart to grab a few things and this gem greeted me at the self checking lol I had to share.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe that's part of a plan to rescue Harry. Because if Inskip had concerns about MM they probably have been confirmed and then some.


Rescue a grown man?! Many of you are so obvious. 

As for Foster, I didn’t feel that bad for Yolanda. It was obvious he had a track record of loving and leaving many before her. He seemed very self centered, I’m sure she saw it but like many before and after her thought he would be different towards her. Or maybe she was just trying to get what she could before the ride was over.


----------



## poopsie

Winter’sJoy said:


> Rescue a grown man?! *Many of you are so obvious*



I must be missing something. Please do elaborate


----------



## Winter’sJoy

poopsie said:


> I must be missing something. Please do elaborate


I’m just reading in between the lines of poor Harry needing rescuing from big bad MM. Just can’t accept that he made his choice and is where he wants to be. That MAN doesn’t need rescuing.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

mrsinsyder said:


> I hadn’t connected these dots but perhaps this is why they’re cozying up to the Fosters...
> View attachment 4738865



Okay, not to veer totally OFF-OFF-Topic, who wants just a lil'dirt on the Hadid girls?
The Main Line is off-limits, but hey, I can tell a factual not too recent Manhattan modeling story while doing 'tine in Brentwood, right?
<told to me a few summers' ago, straight from the mouth of my eldest DD's BFF who is like a son to me>

Then totally back OT, promise!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

kemilia said:


> That was pretty obvious on RHOBH, a total self-centered "make sure all my Grammys fit on the piano" kind of guy. Yes, he's talented but *a real jerk*. While Yo was irritating also, he dumped her during her Lyme Disease time which was bad.



Totally agree,* kemilia*, rofling!!!

Come on, guys, David Foster? "...a real jerk...". Ya'think?

Only five-minutes into watching Mr Foster's debut on RHOBH and there was a-hole written all over him!!!
It was only a matter of time before Yolanda got the boot from that LA marriage, she seems quite happy in her new home in PA ~ I'm glad!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, not to veer totally OFF-OFF-Topic, who wants just a lil'dirt on the Hadid girls?
> The Main Line is off-limits, but hey, I can tell a factual not too recent Manhattan modeling story while doing 'tine in Brentwood, right?
> <told to me a few summers' ago, straight from the mouth of my eldest DD's BFF who is like a son to me>
> 
> Then totally back OT, promise!


Yes!  I’m still in mostly lockdown and Meg hasn’t done much to keep this conversation going, so please tell!


----------



## Lounorada

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, not to veer totally OFF-OFF-Topic, who wants just a lil'dirt on the Hadid girls?
> The Main Line is off-limits, but hey, I can tell a factual not too recent Manhattan modeling story while doing 'tine in Brentwood, right?
> <told to me a few summers' ago, straight from the mouth of my eldest DD's BFF who is like a son to me>
> 
> Then totally back OT, promise!





Jayne1 said:


> Yes!  I’m still in mostly lockdown and Meg hasn’t done much to keep this conversation going, so please tell!


Ditto! Please tell... I'm listening


----------



## CobaltBlu

One of these pictures is not like the others tho....


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Jayne1 said:


> Yes!  I’m still in mostly lockdown and Meg hasn’t done much to keep this conversation going, so please tell!





Lounorada said:


> Ditto! Please tell... I'm listening



Okay, *Jayne* & *Lounorada* must carefully choose my words here. 
Gigi a few years back, had a huge financial boost to her career when Tommy Hilfiger signed her as the face of his brand ~ fyi, models cat-walking the fashion shows are paid zero, the money is in these exclusive deals that go on annually for <hopefully> a lifetime

The Manhattan tattle-tale whom related this to us a few years ago is a long-term family friend who happens to work in PR for Tommy and knows the business well, no reason for anyone to stretch the truth

Anyway, a few years back, Gigi, who is pretty well-liked by everyone in the business, during the course of many major Tommy campaigns, threw tantrums, did not show up on call, delayed schedules repeatedly, etc until a quid quo pro issued by her was met - of course, regarding her younger sister, Bella, who was not yet raking in big modeling dollars like her big sis <and whom did NOT look quite as stunning as she does today, ah-hem>

No Bella, No Gigi ~ it was that simple and Tommy capitulated repeatedly. Gigi was the best big sis ever, putting enormous pressure on Tommy to either accept both sisters or none 

The strategy worked,  Bella had the necessary credentials to further her career and is now enjoying her place in the sun, too  ~ Gigi supposedly earned a paltry annual salary of $19M+ with Bella biting at her heels with a respectable $18M annually 

Gotta hand it to Yolanda and her children ~ they take care of one another  

Back OT


----------



## bisousx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, *Jayne* & *Lounorada* must carefully choose my words here.
> Gigi a few years back, had a huge financial boost to her career when Tommy Hilfiger signed her as the face of his brand ~ fyi, models cat-walking the fashion shows are paid zero, the money is in these exclusive deals that go on annually for <hopefully> a lifetime
> 
> The Manhattan tattle-tale whom related this to us a few years ago is a long-term family friend who happens to work in PR for Tommy and knows the business well, no reason for anyone to stretch the truth
> 
> Anyway, a few years back, Gigi, who is pretty well-liked by everyone in the business, during the course of many major Tommy campaigns, threw tantrums, did not show up on call, delayed schedules repeatedly, etc until a quid quo pro issued by her was met - of course, regarding her younger sister, Bella, who was not yet raking in big modeling dollars like her big sis <and whom did NOT look quite as stunning as she does today, ah-hem>
> 
> No Bella, No Gigi ~ it was that simple and Tommy capitulated repeatedly. Gigi was the best big sis ever, putting enormous pressure on Tommy to either accept both sisters or none
> 
> The strategy worked,  Bella had the necessary credentials to further her career and is now enjoying her place in the sun, too  ~ Gigi supposedly earned a paltry annual salary of $19M+ with Bella biting at her heels with a respectable $18M annually
> 
> Gotta hand it to Yolanda and her children ~ they take care of one another
> 
> Back OT



I probably shouldn’t condone that manipulative behavior but it’s kind of sweet that Gigi looked out for her lil sis like that.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> That was pretty obvious on RHOBH, a total self-centered "make sure all my Grammys fit on the piano" kind of guy. Yes, he's talented but a real jerk. While Yo was irritating also, he dumped her during her Lyme Disease time which was bad.


I didn't even see him on RH....just on music related shows.....it's just his way that put me off....kinda slick or something


----------



## mdcx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, *Jayne* & *Lounorada* must carefully choose my words here.
> Gigi a few years back, had a huge financial boost to her career when Tommy Hilfiger signed her as the face of his brand ~ fyi, models cat-walking the fashion shows are paid zero, the money is in these exclusive deals that go on annually for <hopefully> a lifetime
> 
> The Manhattan tattle-tale whom related this to us a few years ago is a long-term family friend who happens to work in PR for Tommy and knows the business well, no reason for anyone to stretch the truth
> 
> Anyway, a few years back, Gigi, who is pretty well-liked by everyone in the business, during the course of many major Tommy campaigns, threw tantrums, did not show up on call, delayed schedules repeatedly, etc until a quid quo pro issued by her was met - of course, regarding her younger sister, Bella, who was not yet raking in big modeling dollars like her big sis <and whom did NOT look quite as stunning as she does today, ah-hem>
> 
> No Bella, No Gigi ~ it was that simple and Tommy capitulated repeatedly. Gigi was the best big sis ever, putting enormous pressure on Tommy to either accept both sisters or none
> 
> The strategy worked,  Bella had the necessary credentials to further her career and is now enjoying her place in the sun, too  ~ Gigi supposedly earned a paltry annual salary of $19M+ with Bella biting at her heels with a respectable $18M annually
> 
> Gotta hand it to Yolanda and her children ~ they take care of one another
> 
> Back OT


Thanks for this gossip! I have say, Bella has almost got a new face! When I read here that Yolanda was hard on her daughters about their appearances, well it's pretty sad.

On topic, what is little Meghan up to? She is laying out all this PR spin and all her BFFs of the moment commenting but no sightings of late? What gives? Maybe waiting for her surgeries to settle etc?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

*test* So weird, I was reading all the new responses when I was suddenly taken back where  I left off yesterday, and all refreshing in the world won't make the new pages reappear.


----------



## poopsie

Winter’sJoy said:


> I’m just reading in between the lines of poor Harry needing rescuing from big bad MM. *Just can’t accept that he made his choice and is where he wants to be*. That MAN doesn’t need rescuing.



I still don't quite see how that explains the comment that "Many of you are so obvious" Obviously what? It almost sounds like we are being accused of something. 
Personally, I have no problem with accepting that JCMH  made his choice and that being a no balls laughingstock in LALA land  is _exactly _where he wants to be. 
Freedom!


----------



## Nutashha

While the world is "microscoping" hard on all the royal drama, Harry might be feeling just the worst, being away from home! Royal writers predict that he won't be having a nice time in LA.


*Experts Claim Harry Would be a “Lost Soul” in Los Angeles*


----------



## Winter’sJoy

poopsie said:


> I still don't quite see how that explains the comment that "Many of you are so obvious" Obviously what? It almost sounds like we are being accused of something.
> Personally, I have no problem with accepting that JCMH  made his choice and that being a no balls laughingstock in LALA land  is _exactly _where he wants to be.
> Freedom!


Maybe you feel that way because you know where this stems from. And what do you base your assumption on him being a laughing stock? And exactly what has he done to make him seem ball-less in your eyes? And if you really didn’t care you wouldn’t be on here making all these assumptions and hoping for his misery with others that buy into the same assumptions as you just so he can go back to England and marry the woman YOU approve of.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Well, well, well .. isn't this interesting .. a "reunion" of Tom Inskip and Hazza?  But, what really struck me is this:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...rrys-former-wingman-set-fly-LA-heal-rift.html
> 
> "_Now I’m delighted to reveal that Skippy, who lives in Washington DC and works at US tech giant Afiniti, is making plans *to take his company’s private jet to Los Angeles* with his newborn son Albert to meet Harry and his toddler Archie_."
> 
> Yet again, the hypocrisy!



Could be wrong but this story sounds totally fabricated. It implies that no matter what falling out they had, the fact that they both have babies now means all is forgiven. That makes no sense. Nor does it make sense that Tom Inskip would use a company jet to fly his baby out to see Harry’s baby. He might be a CCO at the company but I would be surprised if he has a jet at his personal disposal. These days even prosperous companies are not going to be wasting money for ridiculous reasons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Winter’sJoy said:


> Maybe you feel that way because you know where this stems from.



Well, where does it stem from? Do tell.



> And what do you base your assumption on him being a laughing stock? And exactly what has he done to make him seem ball-less in your eyes?



Do you follow media coverage of these two at all? And I don't mean the fawning Omid fluff pieces.



> And if you really didn’t care you wouldn’t be on here making all these assumptions and hoping for his misery with others that buy into the same assumptions as you just so he can go back to England and marry the woman YOU approve of.



The thing is, the majority here does not want to see him unhappy, sorry to ruin your fun.

Also, just as much as we cannot know he's unhappy you cannot know he's happy and exactly where he wants to be. You're fishing in the dark just as much as we do, so where does the idea come from you somehow know better?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@poopsie @QueenofWrapDress
Completely agree. If anyone reads the posts carefully, he/she will notice that almost all of us have been, are and will continue to be repulsed by H’s ‘poor-pitiful-me’ routine while at the same time lecturing us about global footprints, mental health, foods, etc.  When he did show up at royal events, he was sloppily dressed, made snarky comments and could only stay 5-10 minutes. Then he complains about even that being too much. Additionally, most us are displeased with the way he has treated M. He could have made the transition for her so much easier. It would have required a level of honesty and maturity that he clearly does not have. Whenever a male marries a woman, it is time to stop the man-child routine and actually be a man. The lil boy act is never impressive.

Now why a woman would choose a man-child is another post


----------



## Winter’sJoy

CarryOn2020 said:


> @poopsie @QueenofWrapDress
> Completely agree. If anyone reads the posts carefully, he/she will notice that almost all of us have been, are and will continue to be repulsed by H’s ‘poor-pitiful-me’ routine while at the same time lecturing us about global footprints, mental health, foods, etc.  When he did show up at royal events, he was sloppily dressed, made snarky comments and could only stay 5-10 minutes. Then he complains about even that being too much. Additionally, most us are displeased with the way he has treated M. He could have made the transition for her so much easier. It would have required a level of honesty and maturity that he clearly does not have. Whenever a male marries a woman, it is time to stop the man-child routine and actually be a man. The lil boy act is never impressive.
> 
> Now why a woman would choose a man-child is another post


If that is the case then why does @QueenofWrapDress think Harry needs rescuing? Wouldn’t M need rescuing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Winter’sJoy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, where does it stem from? Do tell.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you follow media coverage of these two at all? And I don't mean the fawning Omid fluff pieces.
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, the majority here does not want to see him unhappy, sorry to ruin your fun.
> 
> Also, just as much as we cannot know he's unhappy you cannot know he's happy and exactly where he wants to be. You're fishing in the dark just as much as we do, so where does the idea come from you somehow know better?


I don’t have to tell you anything I’m sure you already know.

Yes, I’ve read the media coverage from the beginning and know that many were mad at the thought of the two getting married even before they did. There have been many pieces written that paint M in a bad light.

If you don’t want to see him unhappy then why wish unhappiness on him? Has he told you he is unhappy? You have yet to say what concrete evidence you base this on.

What? I would assume anyone that marries a woman he chose out of others he could have chosen would be happy. That is a logical thought. Don’t you assume the bride and groom are happy at weddings you attend? Do people automatically assume newly weds are unhappy? That is illogical and outside the norm. It’s illogical to think a man that asked for a woman to be his wife is unhappy. Do you understand what you are saying?


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Thanks for this gossip! I have say, Bella has almost got a new face! When I read here that Yolanda was hard on her daughters about their appearances, well it's pretty sad.
> 
> On topic, what is little Meghan up to? She is laying out all this PR spin and all her BFFs of the moment commenting but no sightings of late? What gives? Maybe waiting for her surgeries to settle etc?


I wasn't aware Bella got a new face.  I always thought Gigi was more distinctive looking.  You know her when you see her whereas to me Bella is more generically pretty.


----------



## rose60610

Has our worldly spokesperson Meghan said anything about Memorial Day? Any word salad about how she respects fallen soldiers' memories? Or does she only have respect for vapid Hollywood types and dopey, famous rich men that she can sink her gold digger claws into? Perhaps she's loathe to admit that people killed in wars suffered more than she does so it's just best she let this holiday slide.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really enjoyed reading about Gigi taking care of Bella. Yes, Bella’s face now looks very similar to Carla Bruni’s. These days I cannot tell if it’s surgery or makeup. Taking this back to topic, the real connection is with Foster and Mohammed Hadid. Now that H is involved, he may be leveraging those connections too. Who knows.  IMHO, H nor M need rescuing.

Both have considerable resources the rest of us don’t.
Wouldn’t surprise me to find out they are on a private island somewhere.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, *Jayne* & *Lounorada* must carefully choose my words here.
> Gigi a few years back, had a huge financial boost to her career when Tommy Hilfiger signed her as the face of his brand ~ fyi, models cat-walking the fashion shows are paid zero, the money is in these exclusive deals that go on annually for <hopefully> a lifetime
> 
> The Manhattan tattle-tale whom related this to us a few years ago is a long-term family friend who happens to work in PR for Tommy and knows the business well, no reason for anyone to stretch the truth
> 
> Anyway, a few years back, Gigi, who is pretty well-liked by everyone in the business, during the course of many major Tommy campaigns, threw tantrums, did not show up on call, delayed schedules repeatedly, etc until a quid quo pro issued by her was met - of course, regarding her younger sister, Bella, who was not yet raking in big modeling dollars like her big sis <and whom did NOT look quite as stunning as she does today, ah-hem>
> 
> No Bella, No Gigi ~ it was that simple and Tommy capitulated repeatedly. Gigi was the best big sis ever, putting enormous pressure on Tommy to either accept both sisters or none
> 
> The strategy worked,  Bella had the necessary credentials to further her career and is now enjoying her place in the sun, too  ~ Gigi supposedly earned a paltry annual salary of $19M+ with Bella biting at her heels with a respectable $18M annually
> 
> Gotta hand it to Yolanda and her children ~ they take care of one another
> 
> Back OT


Oh, you can tell that Yolanda had EVERY intention of getting ALL her kids into modeling, and frankly .. Anwar??? .. nope!  Let's face it, Gigi got the best genes of them all; Bella had a GOOD DEAL of PS .. and sorry to say (this coming from someone who used to paint portraits a lot) .. Bella had a horrible PS Surgeon who gave her a horrible nose!  While (from the side) it may look good, when you look at her straight on, you can tell that they took out too much cartilage where her nose bump used to be.  Her lips are a little too plumped up as well; she does have a great figure though!


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> I don’t have to tell you anything I’m sure you already know.
> 
> Yes, I’ve read the media coverage from the beginning and know that many were mad at the thought of the two getting married even before they did. There have been many pieces written that paint M in a bad light.
> 
> If you don’t want to see him unhappy then why wish unhappiness on him? Has he told you he is unhappy? You have yet to say what concrete evidence you base this on.
> 
> What? I would assume anyone that marries a woman he chose out of others he could have chosen would be happy. That is a logical thought. Don’t you assume the bride and groom are happy at weddings you attend? Do people automatically assume newly weds are unhappy? That is illogical and outside the norm. It’s illogical to think a man that asked for a woman to be his wife is unhappy. Do you understand what you are saying?


if you assume a man who decides to marry a woman is happy then why do we see so many divorces?  people make mistakes.  I think in addition to whatever personal charm or physical attractiveness she had for H, he thought she would be a good partner for him in his role as a royal.

  Did he always want to leave the family?  I don't know.  But it seems more likely to me that idea came after the marriage.  Is she a manipulator?  I don't know for sure but her history of "Markleing" people doesn't seem to speak well for her.  And the fact that she had no one from her family except for her mother at the wedding probaby raised some red flags for his family.

we all have our opinions here.  I personally don't like Harry as much as I used to but I don't wish him harm or unhappiness.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> I wasn't aware Bella got a new face.  I always thought Gigi was more distinctive looking.  You know her when you see her whereas to me Bella is more generically pretty.


I feel the same as you *sdkitty. *I think Bella has the most beautiful eyes, but both girls are stunning. If anyone has before/after photos of Bella, please post.


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> I feel the same as you *sdkitty. *I think Bella has the most beautiful eyes, but both girls are stunning. If anyone has before/after photos of Bella, please post.


found this:
https://www.who.com.au/bella-hadid-plastic-surgery-before-and-after


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> if you assume a man who decides to marry a woman is happy then why do we see so many divorces?  people make mistakes.  I think in addition to whatever personal charm or physical attractiveness she had for H, he thought she would be a good partner for him in his role as a royal.
> 
> Did he always want to leave the family?  I don't know.  But it seems more likely to me that idea came after the marriage.  Is she a manipulator?  I don't know for sure but her history of "Markleing" people doesn't seem to speak well for her.  And the fact that she had no one from her family except for her mother at the wedding probaby raised some red flags for his family.
> 
> we all have our opinions here.  I personally don't like Harry as much as I used to but I don't wish him harm or unhappiness.


I don’t understand why women are always so hard on other women. Manipulation? Where is this coming from? I don’t understand why that word is being brought up. Could she have wants and desires, Express those to her husband and he try to fulfill them like most men that love their partner would? I don’t know how people jump to manipulation. It has always seemed to me that Harry didn’t want the royal duties long before Meghan came along. It is even evident that he rebelled by who he chose as a wife. He went out of his way to rebel against that way of life. So why is she getting the blame?

Yes, people get married, change their mind and get divorces but it does not change the fact that people do not normally assume newly married couples are unhappy, especially when you do not personally know these people. That is not normal.

I wouldn’t want family members that were selling stories about me for money at my wedding either. Would you be okay with that? Some family members are toxic and they did not seem close even before the marriage so that would not raise a red flag to me. Should she keep these people in her life to appease his family and the onlookers?

Bottom line is he chose her, it’s his life and his decision to make. If it works out great, if it doesn’t that’s okay but many are hoping, wishing and looking for and waiting with bated breath for their union to fail because they don’t approve. I hope everyone approves of who they choose to date or marry.

There have been videos that show the obvious tension between William and Kate and how worn down she has started to look after marrying but no one talks about that.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Winter’sJoy said:


> I don’t have to tell you anything I’m sure you already know.
> 
> Yes, I’ve read the media coverage from the beginning and know that many were mad at the thought of the two getting married even before they did. There have been many pieces written that paint M in a bad light.
> 
> If you don’t want to see him unhappy then why wish unhappiness on him? Has he told you he is unhappy? You have yet to say what concrete evidence you base this on.
> 
> What? I would assume anyone that marries a woman he chose out of others he could have chosen would be happy. That is a logical thought. Don’t you assume the bride and groom are happy at weddings you attend? Do people automatically assume newly weds are unhappy? That is illogical and outside the norm. It’s illogical to think a man that asked for a woman to be his wife is unhappy. Do you understand what you are saying?





Winter’sJoy said:


> I don’t understand why women are always so hard on other women. Manipulation? Where is this coming from? I don’t understand why that word is being brought up. Could she have wants and desires, Express those to her husband and he try to fulfill them like most men that love their partner would? I don’t know how people jump to manipulation. It has always seemed to me that Harry didn’t want the royal duties long before Meghan came along. It is even evident that he rebelled by who he chose as a wife. He went out of his way to rebel against that way of life. So why is she getting the blame?
> 
> Yes, people get married, change their mind and get divorces but it does not change the fact that people do not normally assume newly married couples are unhappy, especially when you do not personally know these people. That is not normal.
> 
> I wouldn’t want family members that were selling stories about me for money at my wedding either. Would you be okay with that? Some family members are toxic and they did not seem close even before the marriage so that would not raise a red flag to me.
> 
> Bottom line is he chose her, it’s his life and his decision to make. If it works out great, if it doesn’t that’s okay but many are hoping, wishing and looking for and waiting with bated breath for their union to fail because they don’t approve. I hope everyone approves of who they choose to date or marry.
> 
> There have been videos that show the obvious tension between William and Kate and how worn down she has started to look after marrying but no one talks about that.


Oh for goodness sake, get off your high horse.  This is a gossip thread.  About two people none of us (including you) knows personally.  “Concrete evidence” really isn’t required to express an opinion here.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh for goodness sake, get off your high horse.  This is a gossip thread.  About two people none of us (including you) knows personally.  “Concrete evidence” really isn’t required to express an opinion here.


I guess you don’t have a rebuttal, huh? And last time I checked, this was a purse discussion forum not a gossip site. I’ll get off mine when you get off yours. After you, my dear!


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> I don’t understand why women are always so hard on other women. Manipulation? Where is this coming from? I don’t understand why that word is being brought up. Could she have wants and desires, Express those to her husband and he try to fulfill them like most men that love their partner would? I don’t know how people jump to manipulation. It has always seemed to me that Harry didn’t want the royal duties long before Meghan came along. It is even evident that he rebelled by who he chose as a wife. He went out of his way to rebel against that way of life. So why is she getting the blame?
> 
> Yes, people get married, change their mind and get divorces but it does not change the fact that people do not normally assume newly married couples are unhappy, especially when you do not personally know these people. That is not normal.
> 
> I wouldn’t want family members that were selling stories about me for money at my wedding either. Would you be okay with that? Some family members are toxic and they did not seem close even before the marriage so that would not raise a red flag to me.
> 
> Bottom line is he chose her, it’s his life and his decision to make. If it works out great, if it doesn’t that’s okay but many are hoping, wishing and looking for and waiting with bated breath for their union to fail because they don’t approve. I hope everyone approves of who they choose to date or marry.
> 
> There have been videos that show the obvious tension between William and Kate and how worn down she has started to look after marrying but no one talks about that.


talking about videos, have you seen the images of Meghan pulling Harry in the direction she wants him to go?  or pushing in front of him?

as far as her family, what about extended family?  she didn't have an aunt, uncle or cousin that she could invite to the wedding? but she could invite people like Oprah who she barely knew?

I think what people resent is that they were happy to take the perks of being a royal (the OT wedding, etc) but then decided the life wasn't for them.  Because the British tabloids werent kind to her?

and for me the most unforgivable was whining on camera in Africa where there are so many truly disadvantaged  people about how no one asked her how she was feeling.  I'm sorry that is just plain wrong

so you have your opinion and I have mine.  we'll see how it plays out


----------



## Clearblueskies

Winter’sJoy said:


> I guess you don’t have a rebuttal, huh? And last time I checked, this was a purse discussion forum not a gossip site. I’ll get off mine when you get off yours. After you, my dear!


I find the best response to tedious and sententious members is the ignore function


----------



## bisousx

Unpopular opinion: I think Bella Hadid is stunning, plastic surgeries and all. Her face and figure has futuristic AI vibes. 

She was normal girl pretty before her nose job and now with whatever she’s had done (plus that cat eye surgery), both her and Gigi are deserving of modern day supermodel status.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Winter’sJoy said:


> I guess you don’t have a rebuttal, huh? And last time I checked, this was a purse discussion forum not a gossip site. I’ll get off mine when you get off yours. After you, my dear!



Er, this is actually a gossip thread, in which everyone is entitled to speculate...and yes, gossip, to their hearts’ content as long as it is respectful to other members. You may disagree with the majority opinion about Meghan but that is all it is, the opinion of other members and that is perfectly fine.  It’s gossip, not journalism, please do not take it so seriously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

Winter’sJoy said:


> I guess you don’t have a rebuttal, huh? And last time I checked, this was a purse discussion forum not a gossip site. I’ll get off mine when you get off yours. After you, my dear!


The subforum you are posting in is actually titled:
Celebrity News And Gossip


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> talking about videos, have you seen the images of Meghan pulling Harry in the direction she wants him to go?  or pushing in front of him?
> 
> as far as her family, what about extended family?  she didn't have an aunt, uncle or cousin that she could invite to the wedding? but she could invite people like Oprah who she barely knew?
> 
> I think what people resent is that they were happy to take the perks of being a royal (the OT wedding, etc) but then decided the life wasn't for them.  Because the British tabloids werent kind to her?
> 
> and for me the most unforgivable was whining on camera in Africa where there are so many truly disadvantaged  people about how no one asked her how she was feeling.  I'm sorry that is just plain wrong
> 
> so you have your opinion and I have mine.  we'll see how it plays out


Yep, and you know I do that to my boyfriend sometimes but I don’t think it makes me a bad person. You still didn’t say anything about what I mentioned about Kate and William. 

Unless you are in her family, why does that bother you? Some people aren’t close to their family. That is hardly shocking or unbelievable. Maybe Oprah has made a great impression on her, maybe they have a close relationship. Is it because it’s Oprah that it upsets you? I’m trying to figure out why that would bother anyone. 

Now didn’t you just say that people can change their mind about marriage? Can they not change their mind about being a part of the royal? The British tabloids were more than unkind to her, lets not downplay that. I wonder how you would fair if in that predicament. I would also hope your new husband would try to protect you and look out for you. I understand why Princess Diana wanted to get out and away from them. Maybe he is thinking of the effects it had on his mother. 

I certainly don’t agree with everything Meghan does nor anyone in my life and maybe that was a little self-centered but I’m not going to take that one thing and discard all of the other good works she has done unless I was adding that to another reason not to like her. 

Yes, we certainly have a right to our opinions and I was just sharing mine in what I hope is a friendly discussion. These people affect me in no way in my everyday life so I really don’t care that much.


----------



## tiktok

New article but I don’t have a subscription so can’t read / post, maybe someone else does:
*The great escape: Prince Harry and Meghan’s new life in LA*

*Their biographer Katie Nicholl reports on the homesickness, the house-hunting and how long their honeymoon period in the US will last*
*https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ce-harry-and-meghans-new-life-in-la-ck7nvnndz*


----------



## Winter’sJoy

CobaltBlu said:


> Er, this is actually a gossip thread, in which everyone is entitled to speculate...and yes, gossip, to their hearts’ content as long as it is respectful to other members. You may disagree with the majority opinion about Meghan but that is all it is, the opinion of other members and that is perfectly fine.  It’s gossip, not journalism, please do not take it so seriously.


I think you should have said that to the poster that came at me about MY SPECULATION AND OPINION but I get it your on their side and agree with their opinion but I wish you guys would take your own advice. I don’t have to get off a high horse for my opinion and the responses seem like you guys are taking this seriously.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

Emeline said:


> The subforum you are posting in is actually titled:
> Celebrity News And Gossip


Well I stand corrected, I have no problem admitting when I’m wrong. You guys are serious about this, huh? Lol Did you guys have a chance with Harry?


----------



## Winter’sJoy

Clearblueskies said:


> I find the best response to tedious and sententious members is the ignore function


You engaged me and I responded but Bye, bye!


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> Yep, and you know I do that to my boyfriend sometimes but I don’t think it makes me a bad person. You still didn’t say anything about what I mentioned about Kate and William.
> 
> Unless you are in her family, why does that bother you? Some people aren’t close to their family. That is hardly shocking or unbelievable. Maybe Oprah has made a great impression on her, maybe they have a close relationship. Is it because it’s Oprah that it upsets you? I’m trying to figure out why that would bother anyone.
> 
> Now didn’t you just say that people can change their mind about marriage? Can they not change their mind about being a part of the royal? The British tabloids were more than unkind to her, lets not downplay that. I wonder how you would fair if in that predicament. I would also hope your new husband would try to protect you and look out for you. I understand why Princess Diana wanted to get out and away from them. Maybe he is thinking of the effects it had on his mother.
> 
> I certainly don’t agree with everything Meghan does nor anyone in my life and maybe that was a little self-centered but I’m not going to take that one thing and discard all of the other good works she has done unless I was adding that to another reason not to like her.
> 
> Yes, we certainly have a right to our opinions and I was just sharing mine in what I hope is a friendly discussion. These people affect me in no way in my everyday life so I really don’t care that much.


I think Will and Kate are lovely and doing a great job.  Their body language is off in some videos?  Don't know.  No one is perfect.
I've said what I have to say about H&M.   Not going to change your mind nor do I want to.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> I think Will and Kate are lovely and doing a great job.  They're body language is off in some videos?  Don't know.  No one is perfect.
> I've said what I have to say about H&M.   Not going to change your mind nor do I want to.


That’s fine. I’m done in here because although I was told it was a gossip thread for opinions, it doesn’t seem like opinions of the opposite are welcomed. Instead I was told to get off my high horse and told I was put on ignore (like it was some kind of punishment for me lol otherwise why announce it, just to it lol) because my opinion differed. This seems like a thread where people that dislike Meghan come to commensurate in their ill feelings toward her and you are condemned if you don’t. Seems sad but have at it.


----------



## CeeJay

Winter’sJoy said:


> Yep, and you know I do that to my boyfriend sometimes but I don’t think it makes me a bad person. *You still didn’t say anything about what I mentioned about Kate and William. *


Uggh .. and here we go again; has the former poster who constantly did the comparisons come back with a different name???  Anyway, time for the IGNORE ..


----------



## elvisfan4life

UK magazine private eye


----------



## Lodpah

Winter’sJoy said:


> I don’t understand why women are always so hard on other women. Manipulation? Where is this coming from? I don’t understand why that word is being brought up. Could she have wants and desires, Express those to her husband and he try to fulfill them like most men that love their partner would? I don’t know how people jump to manipulation. It has always seemed to me that Harry didn’t want the royal duties long before Meghan came along. It is even evident that he rebelled by who he chose as a wife. He went out of his way to rebel against that way of life. So why is she getting the blame?
> 
> Yes, people get married, change their mind and get divorces but it does not change the fact that people do not normally assume newly married couples are unhappy, especially when you do not personally know these people. That is not normal.
> 
> I wouldn’t want family members that were selling stories about me for money at my wedding either. Would you be okay with that? Some family members are toxic and they did not seem close even before the marriage so that would not raise a red flag to me. Should she keep these people in her life to appease his family and the onlookers?
> 
> Bottom line is he chose her, it’s his life and his decision to make. If it works out great, if it doesn’t that’s okay but many are hoping, wishing and looking for and waiting with bated breath for their union to fail because they don’t approve. I hope everyone approves of who they choose to date or marry.
> 
> There have been videos that show the obvious tension between William and Kate and how worn down she has started to look after marrying but no one talks about that.



So you know how a lot of people here feel about  Meghan. Can you enlighten us as to what awesome and redeeming qualities about her you admire? Not just the one about being a feminist and all that but her true redeeming qualities.


----------



## elvisfan4life

My fa v


----------



## kkfiregirl

This thread has taken quite the turn ...


----------



## Winter’sJoy

Lodpah said:


> So you know how a lot of people here feel about  Meghan. Can you enlighten us as to what awesome and redeeming qualities about her you admire? Not just the one about being a feminist and all that but her true redeeming qualities.


.


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> .


that's it?
I'll ask you a question.  Do you think this was a love marriage for her?  Did she fall in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> that's it?
> I'll ask you a question.  Do you think this was a love marriage for her?  Did she fall in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince?


I typed out a long response but then erased it because I’m not spending this much time discussing any person I like or dislike that I don’t know and who has no idea I even exist. They have absolutely no affect on me or my life.  They are living their lives and I’m living mine and I don’t care about how anyone feel about my life and my choice. I hope they feel the same. He chose and married her and there’s nothing banging on your keyboards will do to change that.

Yes, I think she married for love and fell in love with a guy that happened to be a prince. It’s a fairytale with a couple evil step sisters lurking around lol. Do you pose this question to every woman that marries a wealthy or powerful man or the women that marry any men in their family or is this just a question for MM? Now someone else just accused me of being aggressive lol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Winter’sJoy said:


> Do you understand what you are saying?



Actually you are making up things and putting words in my mouth, being way more aggressive than necessary. Also you still haven't answered a simple question several people have asked, so my interaction with you stops at this point.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Actually you are making up things and putting words in my mouth, being way more aggressive than necessary. Also you still haven't answered a simple question several people have asked, so my interaction with you stops at this point.


Good for you!


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> I typed out a long response but then erased it because I’m not spending this much time discussing any person I like or dislike that I don’t know and who has no idea I even exist. They have absolutely no affect on me or my life.  They are living their lives and I’m living mine and I don’t care about how anyone feel about my life and my choice. I hope they feel the same. He chose and married her and there’s nothing banging on your keyboards will do to change that.
> 
> Yes, I think she married for love and fell in love with a guy that happened to be a prince. It’s a fairytale with a couple evil step sisters lurking around lol. Do you pose this question to every woman that marries a wealthy or powerful man? Do you wonder this about Kate that stuck around through William dating other women until she finally won out because she refused to go away or is this a question only for MM? Oops did I ask that? That poster is going to accuse me of being someone else again. Now someone else just accused me of being aggressive lol.


If you're interested in a civil answer, I believe Harry and Will were both princes and that would be part of the package for any woman who was interested in them.  I don't like Kate being brought into the discussion about "M" but I will say she married a future king and she has performed the duties she signed up for and with a great deal of grace.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> If you're interested in a civil answer, I believe Harry and Will were both princes and that would be part of the package for any woman who was interested in them.  I don't like Kate being brought into the discussion about "M" but I will say she married a future king and she has performed the duties she signed up for and with a great deal of grace.


You know what that’s fair and that’s why I went back and erased my comments about Kate and William. You didn’t answer the question though. Did she marry for love? Did Kate happen to fall in love with a guy that will be the future king?

If Harry is okay with her not performing the duties why does it bother you so much? She cannot make this man do what he does not want to no matter the charm, manipulation or whatever else you try to lay at her feet. He would not have married her otherwise but y’all want to live out some fantasy and blame her for what a grown man is doing. Does he get blame for any of it?

I have a problem with people trying to control and condemn the way other people choose to live their lives while they live their lives the way they see fit. You have no idea how it is to be an outsider and live that life so how can you comment on it. I’m curious on your thoughts of Princess Diana.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I cringe at the naivety of people who say Harry and Meghan have the right to do whatever they want, because that’s not the full story by a long country mile.
Frankly,  I wouldn’t give a toss if these two had left the RF and were living an independent life, but they so haven’t.  Far from it.  They’re merching the Royal connection for every penny it’s worth whilst still leeching off the British taxpayer, and simultaneously lobbing sly grenades at the RF and the UK in order to generate headlines and more cash.  Their ghastly search for “privacy” includes giving daily updates to pseudo journalists like Scobie and pliable publications like People magazine.  The tell-all book is on its way and no doubt the tell-all interviews will follow shortly.
Why on Earth are we being told about the “sweet” anniversary present Meghan gave Harry?  Or what they ate and drank ffs? Or Archie’s bl**dy birthday cake??  It’s utterly ridiculous.


----------



## TC1

Clearblueskies said:


> I cringe at the naivety of people who say Harry and Meghan have the right to do whatever they want, because that’s not the full story by a long country mile.
> Frankly,  I wouldn’t give a toss if these two had left the RF and were living an independent life, but they so haven’t.  Far from it.  They’re merching the Royal connection for every penny it’s worth whilst still leeching off the British taxpayer, and simultaneously lobbing sly grenades at the RF and the UK in order to generate headlines and more cash.  Their ghastly search for “privacy” includes giving daily updates to pseudo journalists like Scobie and pliable publications like People magazine.  The tell-all book is on its way and no doubt the tell-all interviews will follow shortly.
> Why on Earth are we being told about the “sweet” anniversary present Meghan gave Harry?  Or what they ate and drank ffs? Or Archie’s bl**dy birthday cake??  It’s utterly ridiculous.


Exactly. A small private life is the last thing they actually want.


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> You know what that’s fair and that’s why I went back and erased my comments about Kate and William. You didn’t answer the question though. Did she marry for love? Did Kate happen to fall in love with a guy that will be the future king?
> 
> If Harry is okay with her not performing the duties why does it bother you so much? She cannot make this man do what he does not want to no matter the charm, manipulation or whatever else you try to lay at her feet. He would not have married her otherwise but y’all want to live out some fantasy and blame her for what a grown man is doing. Does he get blame for any of it?
> 
> I have a problem with people trying to control and condemn the way other people choose to live their lives while they live their lives the way they see fit. You have no idea how it is to be an outsider and live that life so how can you comment on it. I’m curious on your thoughts of Princess Diana.


Diana was very young and I think she got a raw deal marrying man who was in love with someone else.
I think by saying william being a prince was part of the package I did respond to your question.
Did Meghan manipulate Harry or did he want out of the family anyway?  I don't know for sure.  but I don't think 18 months is a very long time to try to fit into a new life.  she went from being a minor league actress in the US to being a world famous woman who had a huge and very expensive wedding paid for by British people (and lots of other financial advantages).  The least she and her husband could have done was to try to do what was expected of them.  Existing not living?  With most people in the world having Much less advantage.  and many starving?
I'm repeating myself so think I'm done.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

@sdkitty you also said people can change their minds about a relationship and get a divorce. Well aren’t they allowed to change their minds and decide they don’t want to carry out the royal duties?

You guys act like this man did not do  embarrassing and classless things to embarrass and rebel against his family before cleaning up his image and joining the army to become a pilot. He has been rebelling but all of a sudden it’s Meghan’s fault and is manipulating him? Please


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> found this:
> https://www.who.com.au/bella-hadid-plastic-surgery-before-and-after


Oh yes, she's had work done.  I wonder why she denies it? Thank you for posting.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> Diana was very young and I think she got a raw deal marrying man who was in love with someone else.
> I think by saying william being a prince was part of the package I did respond to your question.
> Did Meghan manipulate Harry or did he want out of the family anyway?  I don't know for sure.  but I don't think 18 months is a very long time to try to fit into a new life.  she went from being a minor league actress in the US to being a world famous woman who had a huge and very expensive wedding paid for by British people (and lots of other financial advantages).  The least she and her husband could have done was to try to do what was expected of them.  Existing not living?  With most people in the world having Much less advantage.  and many starving?
> I'm repeating myself so think I'm done.


What about the way the royal family treated Diana?

You just admitted you don’t know for sure her intentions so why run with the accusations? The media started in on her before the wedding and ramped it up after the wedding. How can you tell someone how long to deal with something like that? Only 18 months? That would have been 18 months too long for me. What does people starving have to do with this? Are you saying the money would have been taken by the royals to feed them?

My very first post in this thread was about someone saying something about Harry being rescued as if he needed or wanted it and that was my issue. I’m not going to absolve Harry in any of this like he is under the spell of her feminine wiles and can’t think for himself. That is such a cop out and a blatant refusal to hold him accountable.  She is not the sole blame for anything. They both made and are making a choice. But like I said earlier, I’m simply responding to your posts I could really care less about these people. I’m just not that invested but I enjoyed discussing it with you.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> The least she and her husband could have done was to try to do what was expected of them.


I think so.  Who signs up for a job (and it was her choice - Meghan was offered the option of not having to carry out royal duties after the marriage by QEII) and then after a few months says - “Hey, I’m leaving, but I’ll keep 95% of the salary, all of the benefits and the right to use your name and reputation to make my money??”  “Oh and I’ll also tell tales about you to make some money.  That ok??”   Yeah, who could have a problem with that


----------



## poopsie

Winter’sJoy said:


> I have a problem with people trying to control and condemn the way other people choose to live their lives while they live their lives the way they see fit. You have no idea how it is to be an outsider and live that life so how can you comment on it.



But that is exactly what H&M have been doing----------telling people how to behave responsibly  while they private jet all over the world.
This isn't the first time that you have chosen to play the outsider card.
Just as you tell us that we have no idea how it is to live your life you have no idea about the lives of anyone else here so how does that work?


Winter’sJoy said:


> You guys act like this man did not do  embarrassing and classless things to embarrass and rebel against his family before cleaning up his image and jointing the army to become a pilot. He been rebelling but all of a sudden it’s Meghan’s fault and is manipulating him? Please




IDK when you jumped into reading this thread, but I doubt it was very far back. H has been right and properly dragged  by many for his obnoxious behavior. Personally, I didn't start reading this thread until several months ago as I wasn't sufficiently bored enough in my life to read about the antics of the SIXTH IN LINE member of the BRF. Hell I didn't even start following the Ks until Kimmy's threads were double digit Roman numerals.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

poopsie said:


> But that is exactly what H&M have been doing----------telling people how to behave responsibly  while they private jet all over the world.
> This isn't the first time that you have chosen to play the outsider card.
> Just as you tell us that we have no idea how it is to live your life you have no idea about the lives of anyone else here so how does that work?
> 
> 
> IDK when you jumped into reading this thread, but I doubt it was very far back. H has been right and properly dragged  by many for his obnoxious behavior. Personally, I didn't start reading this thread until several months ago as I wasn't sufficiently bored enough in my life to read about the antics of the SIXTH IN LINE member of the BRF. Hell I didn't even start following the Ks until Kimmy's threads were double digit Roman numerals.


I think I made it clear that I would stop commenting in this thread because I just don’t care enough about other people’s lives to do so. I wandered in this thread out of boredom and have regretted it because I honestly don’t care and feel silly gossiping about the lives of people that have no idea I exist nor affect me in any way.

Have I read all through thread? Hell no! I don’t want to. I simply responded to someone saying they were hoping Harry was being rescued and I commented. I didn’t know you guys were that dedicated to this but I’m not so I’m bowing out gracefully so you guys can have at it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Dang the thread is back to bickering again?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Winter’sJoy said:


> @sdkitty you also said people can change their minds about a relationship and get a divorce. Well aren’t they allowed to change their minds and decide they don’t want to carry out the royal duties?
> 
> You guys act like this man did not do  embarrassing and classless things to embarrass and rebel against his family before cleaning up his image and joining the army to become a pilot. He has been rebelling but all of a sudden it’s Meghan’s fault and is manipulating him? Please


But, you see .. he never passed the Pilot's exam, I guess you hadn't read about that.  He was the "assistant" ..


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Winter’sJoy said:


> If that is the case then why does @QueenofWrapDress think Harry needs rescuing? Wouldn’t M need rescuing?



In my opinion, they both need rescuing from themselves.  All the whining they do just isn't healthy, it's toxic.  This is coming from someone who wishes all good things for them from the bottom of my heart.  I just don't see it happening until they get a grip on reality.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

Cavalier Girl said:


> In my opinion, they both need rescuing from themselves.  All the whining they do just isn't healthy, it's toxic.  This is coming from someone who wishes all good things for them from the bottom of my heart.  I just don't see it happening until they get a grip on reality.


I can definitely agree with this.


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> What about the way the royal family treated Diana?
> 
> You just admitted you don’t know for sure her intentions so why run with the accusations? The media started in on her before the wedding and ramped it up after the wedding. How can you tell someone how long to deal with something like that? Only 18 months? That would have been 18 months too long for me. What does people starving have to do with this? Are you saying the money would have been taken by the royals to feed them?
> 
> My very first post in this thread was about someone saying something about Harry being rescued as if he needed or wanted it and that was my issue. I’m not going to absolve Harry in any of this like he is under the spell of her feminine wiles and can’t think for himself. That is such a cop out and a blatant refusal to hold him accountable.  She is not the sole blame for anything. They both made and are making a choice. But like I said earlier, I’m simply responding to your posts I could really care less about these people. I’m just not that invested but I enjoyed discussing it with you.


I'll respond to the people starving part.  I think you missed my point.  She - in marrying him - became extremely privileged.  Famous beyond her wildest dreams.  And I do think (my opinion) that fame and being A-list matters to her.  Then she went on TV whining about how no one asked how she was doing.  she did this while on a tour of Africa where there are many people with Real Problems.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> I'll respond to the people starving part.  I think you missed my point.  She - in marrying him - became extremely privileged.  Famous beyond her wildest dreams.  And I do think (my opinion) that fame and being A-list matters to her.  Then she went on TV whining about how no one asked how she was doing.  she did this while on a tour of Africa where there are many people with Real Problems.


Is that the only thing she said during the tour or the thing you choose to hyper focus on? Okay, okay I’m done for real.


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> Is that the only thing she said during the tour or the thing you choose to hyper focus on? Okay, okay I’m done for real.


yes, that's the thing that bothered me so I'm focused on it.  she got her dream come true and became an object of admiration for many girls (and women I guess) and she didn't appreciate it.  and she chose to air her unhappiness in public.  IMO she isn't deserving of anyone's admiration after that display.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> yes, that's the thing that bothered me so I'm focused on it.  she got her dream come true and became an object of admiration for many girls (and women I guess) and she didn't appreciate it.  and she chose to air her unhappiness in public.  IMO she isn't deserving of anyone's admiration after that display.


I hope you are not this hard on people in your life. To be honest, and I don’t mean any harm but come off as jealous that she has this life and admiration. How do you know she is not appreciative of everything? Because she doesn’t act in a way that meets your approval? Who are you to say who people should admire or what someone is deserving of because she made a comment that didn’t sit right with you. You would think she treated the people in Africa bad or stole money from them.  I hope no one ever makes a complete assessment of you off one comment in one moment in time. I guess you would feel better if she suffered in silence.


----------



## sdkitty

Winter’sJoy said:


> I hope you are not this hard on people in your life. To be honest, and I don’t mean any harm but come off as jealous that she has this life and admiration. How do you know she is not appreciative of everything? Because she doesn’t act in a way that meets your approval? Who are you to say who people should admire because she made a comment that didn’t sit right with you. I hope no one ever makes a complete assessment of you off one comment in one moment in time. I guess you would feel better if she suffered in silence.


this is getting personal
I'm not going to engage with you any further


----------



## youngster

Winter’sJoy said:


> @sdkitty you also said people can change their minds about a relationship and get a divorce. Well aren’t they allowed to change their minds and decide they don’t want to carry out the royal duties?
> 
> You guys act like this man did not do  embarrassing and classless things to embarrass and rebel against his family before cleaning up his image and joining the army to become a pilot. He has been rebelling but all of a sudden it’s Meghan’s fault and is manipulating him? Please



I think Harry has gotten a lot of criticism in this thread.  I don't think anyone is letting him off the hook.  I'm not, that's for sure.  His behavior has been childish and foolish and he (and MM) handled their exit from the family in just about the worst way possible.  It could have been done in a much more calm, discreet way with much more respect for the Queen and Prince Charles. Harry, of all people, should have known better.

I wouldn't have had any issue with either of them stepping back as senior royals, and I think most people posting on this thread feel similarly, if they were the least bit interested in actually living a quiet, private life.  Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice could easily step into many of the public appearances that Harry and Meghan disdained doing.  They could have had that quiet, private life in many beautiful parts of the English countryside or, heck, Wales or Scotland.  Gorgeous country, lots of privacy, still able to make their way easily to London to participate in a few events and see the family.  But, ending up in Paparazzi Central in L.A., scouting for $15 million dollar mansions, re-starting the acting career, and producing some kind of tell-all book is not a couple that's looking for quiet and privacy.  They want all the trappings of being royal, want to monetize the titles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (and Meghan has literally been to Sussex once) while the UK taxpayer picks up the millions in security costs and the tenants and farmers of the Duchy of Cornwall provide their million dollar/year allowance. So, yeah, they are both being raked over the coals and should be.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

sdkitty said:


> this is getting personal
> I'm not going to engage with you any further


Okay.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

youngster said:


> I think Harry has gotten a lot of criticism in this thread.  I don't think anyone is letting him off the hook.  I'm not, that's for sure.  His behavior has been childish and foolish and he (and MM) handled their exit from the family in just about the worst way possible.  It could have been done in a much more calm, discreet way with much more respect for the Queen and Prince Charles. Harry, of all people, should have known better.
> 
> I wouldn't have had any issue with either of them stepping back as senior royals, and I think most people posting on this thread feel similarly, if they were the least bid interested in actually living a quiet, private life.  Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice could easily step into many of the public appearances that Harry and Meghan disdained doing.  They could have had that quiet, private life in many beautiful parts of the English countryside or, heck, Wales or Scotland.  Gorgeous country, lots of privacy, still able to make their way easily to London to participate in a few events and see the family.  But, ending up in Paparazzi Central in L.A., scouting for $15 million dollar mansions, re-starting the acting career, and producing some kind of tell-all book is not a couple that's looking for quiet and privacy.  They want all the trappings of being royal, want to monetize the titles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (and Meghan has literally been to Sussex once) while the UK taxpayer picks up the millions in security costs and the tenants and farmers of the Duchy of Cornwall provide their million dollar/year allowance. So, yeah, they are both being raked over the coals and should be.


I literally made a post about someone saying something about Harry being rescued. And although some are saying they are both responsible many are focusing on Meghan and that is what I was responding to. Could they handle this whole thing better? I’m sure they could. Do they have their own agenda? Of course but that is up to the royal family to cut them off. I don’t think they want a quiet life and that’s okay. But people talking about they are running to the media and planting stories like the royals don’t do the same is crazy and hypocritical.


----------



## bellecate

IMO they are both self-entitled brats, playing grown up on tax payers and daddy's dime. I also IMO feel that Megain is manipulating Harry to get what she wants and doesn't consider his needs. The ones I feel sorry for in this situation are Archie and the rest of Harry's family. 




* Meghan Markle 'was convinced there was a conspiracy against her,' 'felt like an outsider,' pal claims *

Stephanie Nolasco
Meghan Markle was convinced courtiers were working “against her” once she joined the British royal family, one palace insider is claiming.
Vanity Fair correspondent Katie Nicholl told The Times on Monday a pal close to the former American actress revealed Markle “felt like an outsider from the start” during her time with The Firm.
“She was convinced there was a conspiracy against her and so she basically put herself in isolation when they moved to Frogmore [Cottage],” claimed the source, as reported by U.K.’s DailyMail.
“I think she felt like an outsider from the start,” said the source. “This wasn’t the life she was used to and she wanted out.”
According to the outlet, another insider explained how the Duchess of Sussex privately struggled after giving birth to her son Archie, feeling “lonely” and “unfulfilled.”
Nicholl shared how the 38-year-old’s close circle of friends were worried Markle was “burning out” as she immersed herself in numerous projects as a royal.
After Markle and her husband Prince Harry announced on Jan. 8 they were stepping back as senior members of the royal family, they headed to Canada. However, one friend said it “was never going to be their forever home.”

“The big plan, for Meghan at least, was always L.A.,” added the source.
But the big move was “not easy” for Harry 35, who finds himself without “an established life” in America.
The source alleged the Duke of Sussex feels “lonely and directionless” in the U.S., similar to how Markle previously felt in the U.K.
Nicholl previously told Australian website 9Honey that she had no doubt the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “had an agenda from the outset” to become independent. The author believed it was “inevitable” the couple would move overseas.
“I was told from a very early stage in their courtship, they had told a friend of Harry’s that Meghan met quite early on that they wanted to be international roving royals and that was going to be their focus,” she told the outlet.

Nicholl shared that the couple “didn’t want to be stuck in one place” and, instead, yearned to make a difference “on a world stage.”
“They had an agenda from the outset — to be international royals,” she said, adding there were signs early on in their relationship that the couple was determined to do things differently.

Despite the move, a source close to the couple told Nicholl for Vanity Fair that Harry was feeling “a bit rudderless” without a job or friends in Markle’s native Los Angeles.

“This is a very strange time for us all, but I think Harry is missing having a structure in his life right now,” claimed the insider. “He doesn’t have friends in L.A. like Meghan and he doesn’t have a job.”

The source said Harry has been keeping busy during the coronavirus outbreak by keeping in touch with friends and colleagues across the pond. He is also “keeping up regular communication” with the charities he is still involved with.
“At the moment he’s a bit rudderless, but it won’t always be like this, and he knows that,” said the pal.
The couple is currently residing in Markle’s native Los Angeles with their son Archie, 1.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Really incredible. These two are so “independent.”


----------



## chicinthecity777

mrsinsyder said:


> Really incredible. These two are so “independent.”
> 
> View attachment 4739855


Truly disgusting! The pair of them!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Just how long they are going to leech off just about anybody they could get their grubby hands on? How is this financially independent?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Winter’sJoy said:


> Yep, and you know I do that to my boyfriend sometimes but I don’t think it makes me a bad person. You still didn’t say anything about what I mentioned about Kate and William.
> 
> Unless you are in her family, why does that bother you? Some people aren’t close to their family. That is hardly shocking or unbelievable. Maybe Oprah has made a great impression on her, maybe they have a close relationship. Is it because it’s Oprah that it upsets you? I’m trying to figure out why that would bother anyone.
> 
> Now didn’t you just say that people can change their mind about marriage? Can they not change their mind about being a part of the royal? The British tabloids were more than unkind to her, lets not downplay that. I wonder how you would fair if in that predicament. I would also hope your new husband would try to protect you and look out for you. I understand why Princess Diana wanted to get out and away from them. Maybe he is thinking of the effects it had on his mother.
> 
> I certainly don’t agree with everything Meghan does nor anyone in my life and maybe that was a little self-centered but I’m not going to take that one thing and discard all of the other good works she has done unless I was adding that to another reason not to like her.
> 
> Yes, we certainly have a right to our opinions and I was just sharing mine in what I hope is a friendly discussion. These people affect me in no way in my everyday life so I really don’t care that much.


You seem very emotionally invested. I don’t wish either of them harm, but it’s fairly obvious M has done little to fit into the BRF and that has consequences. Imo the marriage will not survive due to fundamental differences and various untreated mental health issues. H will end up back in the UK and M will remain in LA.


----------



## mdcx

Winter’sJoy said:


> Lol Did you guys have a chance with Harry?


No Brit or other aristo wanted to marry Harry due to his known issues. He is not a catch imo.


----------



## mdcx

mrsinsyder said:


> Really incredible. These two are so “independent.”
> 
> View attachment 4739855


So Charles will pay £4 million/year indefinitely in exchange for them paying £2.4 million in total? Lol. Someone cannot do their sums and Charles looks a fool.

It will be entertaining when all this is discussed at H&Ms one year review which I believe is Jan 2021?


----------



## BlueCherry

Who are these posters who randomly appear in this thread, vociferously defend Meghan then disappear ...


----------



## Lodpah

Winter’sJoy said:


> I typed out a long response but then erased it because I’m not spending this much time discussing any person I like or dislike that I don’t know and who has no idea I even exist. They have absolutely no affect on me or my life.  They are living their lives and I’m living mine and I don’t care about how anyone feel about my life and my choice. I hope they feel the same. He chose and married her and there’s nothing banging on your keyboards will do to change that.
> 
> Yes, I think she married for love and fell in love with a guy that happened to be a prince. It’s a fairytale with a couple evil step sisters lurking around lol. Do you pose this question to every woman that marries a wealthy or powerful man or the women that marry any men in their family or is this just a question for MM? Now someone else just accused me of being aggressive lol.



Seriously I’m waiting for an answer  and I’m open minded but you wax on about how you don’t want to to spend time duscussing, etc but you are invested tremendously in supporting her. Please help me understand your point of view and back the attack  (to parlay a famous Medal of Honor receipient’s quote) what is it you find tremendously awesome about her? What accomplishments do you see or read about? 

It’s actually interesting to hear another POV. If you notice no one is personally attacking because she’s just is but based on reports, news articles, etc. that’s the basis for my account. If you really want to want to be triggered I suggest you don’t read Harry Markle Wordpress.


----------



## Jayne1

Winter’sJoy said:


> I guess you would feel better if she suffered in silence.


Yes, now that you mention it.

If she's suffering (hard to believe the perks don't outweigh some of the inconveniences) then that really is too bad, but she should keep her personal problems to herself.  

That's why the palace hated Diana. She too had to tell the world how she wasn't as happy as she thought she should be. Even though she had so much. 

Be like the Queen and now Kate... and keep quiet.


----------



## pinky7129

Apparently they’re moving to NYC now....


----------



## bag-mania

Thanks to the shameless Vanity Fair we now know that everything that happened was a conspiracy against Meghan. There are so many people working to make her appear to be a victim. There is zero evidence provided in the article of course but if they repeat it over and over they hope it will be believed.

*“She Was Convinced There Was a Conspiracy Against Her”: Why Meghan Markle Fled the United Kingdom*

When *Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry* made the move from Canada to Los Angeles in mid-March, a few weeks after their royal farewell tour in the U.K., it came as a surprise to the public. But according to a new report in the _Sunday Times Magazine,_ the couple’s friends had been aware of their desire to make it back to Meghan’s hometown for a long time. Canada was “never the forever home,” a friend said to *Katie Nicholl* (who is also a correspondent for _Vanity Fair_). “The big plan, for Meghan at least, was always L.A.”

One source told Nicholl that Harry and Meghan started looking for a house in California shortly after their wedding, and that she always wanted to spend a significant amount of time in her home country. But it wasn’t until March 14 of this year that they made it official, leaving Vancouver Island in a top secret operation aboard actor *Tyler Perry*’s private jet.

The couple did take advantage of the relative privacy while they had it. Soon after arriving in L.A., Meghan reportedly took Harry for a drive around her old neighborhood, past the house where she was raised and the preschool she once attended. “The streets were empty,” a friend told the _Times._ “It would be two days before the paparazzi found out where they were and what they were doing so they got to see the city in a way they wouldn’t ordinarily be able to. They loved being able to drive themselves around. It was very freeing for them but probably won’t happen again.”

Other than a few video calls and public announcements, the couple has kept mum about their future plans as they stay in Perry’s Beverly Hills mansion. Sources close to the couple told the _Sunday Times Magazine_ the pair say they are hunting for a new house that will enable them to stay “away from the Hollywood fray” and give *Archie Mountbatten-Windsor* a “normal life.” The sources also added Harry and Meghan are also busy working on plans for their new charity foundation Archewell, adding that Meghan has no plans to return to acting, nor is she working on a series of children’s books

While he is enjoying the California sunshine, some friends have said Harry is homesick. “It’s not been easy for Harry,” one of his friends told the _Times._ “He had a much more established life in England and he doesn’t really know anyone in LA. I imagine he might be feeling a bit of what [Meghan] felt over in the UK—lonely and directionless.”

Now, the roles have been reversed. Meghan is happy to be back in L.A. near her mother, *Doria Ragland,* and many of her close friends nearby, while Harry is finding the adjustment a challenge. However, he is reportedly excited about launching Archewell and starting afresh once lockdown has been lifted.

Friends have also spoken about why the couple made the dramatic decision to stand down from the Royal Family and leave England and how Meghan felt cut off and isolated living in Windsor. “She was convinced there was a conspiracy against her and so she basically put herself in self isolation when they moved to Frogmore,” said one. “I think she felt like an outsider from the start. This wasn’t the life she was used to and she wanted out.”

Meghan, a Los Angeles native, once wrote about being a California girl “who lives by the ethos that most things can be cured with either yoga, the beach or a few avocados.” Friends says she missed her mother and her hometown terribly while she was living in the U.K. Though she was committed to making Windsor her home, she continued to feel isolated when the couple moved into Frogmore Cottage, shortly before Archie’s birth. Though Frogmore is close to Windsor Castle, the queen’s weekend home, it is in a very rural area, and Meghan felt cut off with no friends nearby.
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/why-meghan-harry-fled-the-united-kingdom/amp


----------



## Madrose

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, now that you mention it
> If she's suffering (hard to believe the perks don't outweigh some of the inconveniences) then that really is too bad, but she should keep her personal problems to herself.
> 
> That's why the palace hated Diana. She too had to tell the world how she wasn't as happy as she thought she should be. Even though she had so much.
> 
> Be like the Queen and now Kate... and keep quiet.



Diana had so much?  She had a loveless marriage and a cheating husband (yes, she had affairs too but after Charles wouldn't stop seeing Camilla).  Meghan has a husband who loves her and yet she entered the marriage knowing full well what her duties would be and what royal life would entail yet they planned on leaving from the start, all the while wanting to keep the HRH and the luxury lifestyle footed by Charles.  Diana was naive and 19 when she married, Meghan was a divorced adult nearing 40.  There is a vast difference between the two couples.

As for the Queen, she was born into royalty in a different era.  Kate waited for a decade before Will's popped the question, she knew full well what to expect being married to the 2nd in line to the throne.

Which by the way, I came into this thread after Megxit, was Will's alleged infidelities last summer discussed at all?  I only knew of a now deleted Twitter thread from a Nicole Cliffe (sp?) that spelled out a lot of gossip.


----------



## rose60610

I'm not aware of any other royal-to-be that lived with the royal before the wedding. M moved in with H well before the wedding and was fully aware of and performed royal duties. Early coverage was hugely favorable but it was M's own actions and statements that turned public opinion against her. H was basically forced to back her up and saw no other way out.  Now that they clearly wanted to break off from the Firm, they should break off 100% and not accept nor expect any support. 
They employ, demand and exhibit all the negative stereotypes of spoiled, pampered, coddled, immature and entitled millennials who whine about how hard they have it despite being handed everything on a silver platter.  I'm not aware of any cure other than about a thousand swift kicks in the arse to wake up, and even then. They should have thought how they'd support themselves before breaking off, but apparently felt entitled to Crown payouts. They would NOT have broken off without the safety net. So much for being "independent".  
If they can't afford their own security then go without. Or poach some mall cops. But they get to use Archie as security ransom. Maybe that was Archie's purpose all along. Crank out a baby royal, that way the Crown is obligated to provide security even if Mr. 6th in line is a loser, because Baby Royal still has a chance at sanity. If they were 18 year old dupes one could say, "well they're stupid 18 year old dupes", but they're darned near 40. They're as pathetic as pathetic gets.


----------



## bag-mania

Madrose said:


> Which by the way, I came into this thread after Megxit, was Will's alleged infidelities last summer discussed at all?  I only knew of a now deleted Twitter thread from a Nicole Cliffe (sp?) that spelled out a lot of gossip.



Yes, if you go back in the William & Catherine thread it was discussed for awhile. Despite the rumor nobody ever publicly came forward with any proof of an alleged affair. I’m sure the media would have loved to embarrass the royal family, but after reporting the vague rumors for a few weeks the story faded away due to lack of evidence and not having anything new to say about it.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Yes, if you go back in the William & Catherine thread it was discussed for awhile. Despite the rumor nobody ever publicly came forward with any proof of an alleged affair. I’m sure the media would have loved to embarrass the royal family, but after reporting the vague rumors for a few weeks the story faded away due to lack of evidence and not having anything new to say about it.


I sort of concluded that M was the one behind all the stories of this affair, that maybe there was something mild to it, like William had a crush on Rose etc, and M fed this all out through her sources to try and hurt Kate.


----------



## Jayne1

Madrose said:


> Diana had so much?  She had a loveless marriage and a cheating husband (yes, she had affairs too but after Charles wouldn't stop seeing Camilla).  Meghan has a husband who loves her and yet she entered the marriage knowing full well what her duties would be and what royal life would entail yet they planned on leaving from the start, all the while wanting to keep the HRH and the luxury lifestyle footed by Charles.  Diana was naive and 19 when she married, Meghan was a divorced adult nearing 40.  There is a vast difference between the two couples.
> As for the Queen, she was born into royalty in a different era.  Kate waited for a decade before Will's popped the question, she knew full well what to expect being married to the 2nd in line to the throne.


Yes, Diana had the world, just not a husband who loved her.  But everything else -- yes.

My point was that the palace did not like Diana going against protocol and practically writing a book (by tape recorder) and they do not like Meg complaining. Although from what we have learned, they seem to have bent to her will.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> I'm not aware of any other royal-to-be that lived with the royal before the wedding. M moved in with H well before the wedding and was fully aware of and performed royal duties. Early coverage was hugely favorable but it was M's own actions and statements that turned public opinion against her. H was basically forced to back her up and saw no other way out.  Now that they clearly wanted to break off from the Firm, they should break off 100% and not accept nor expect any support.
> They employ, demand and exhibit all the negative stereotypes of spoiled, pampered, coddled, immature and entitled millennials who whine about how hard they have it despite being handed everything on a silver platter.  I'm not aware of any cure other than about a thousand swift kicks in the arse to wake up, and even then. They should have thought how they'd support themselves before breaking off, but apparently felt entitled to Crown payouts. They would NOT have broken off without the safety net. So much for being "independent".
> If they can't afford their own security then go without. Or poach some mall cops. But they get to use Archie as security ransom. Maybe that was Archie's purpose all along. Crank out a baby royal, that way the Crown is obligated to provide security even if Mr. 6th in line is a loser, because Baby Royal still has a chance at sanity. If they were 18 year old dupes one could say, "well they're stupid 18 year old dupes", but they're darned near 40. They're as pathetic as pathetic gets.


I thought Will and Kate lived together for years before the wedding?


----------



## carmen56

Yes, they did.  Edward and Sophie also lived together for several years before they married.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

bag-mania said:


> (...) Meghan, a Los Angeles native, once wrote about being a California girl “who lives by the ethos that most things can be cured with either yoga, the beach or a few avocados.” (...)
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/why-meghan-harry-fled-the-united-kingdom/amp



#barf
Lesson to learnt: with this kind of mindset do not marry a senior European aristocrat.
I personally am appalled that there are people out there who think it is perfectly alright for a member of one of the richest families in the world to whine about her supposedly soul-crushing existence while physically being in one of the poorest places of the world.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Just how long they are going to leech off just about anybody they could get their grubby hands on? How is this financially independent?


Presumably, now they’re living in the US, they’ll have to file a tax return there at some point.  That could be interesting reading.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> this is getting personal
> I'm not going to engage with you any further


I had to say this a page or two back, and even then she had to have the last word. For someone who doesn't care she surely is argumentative.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Meghan Markle was convinced courtiers were working “against her” once she joined the British royal family, one palace insider is claiming.



The one person working against her was she herself, by being entitled, a know-it-all and not willing to take the tiniest bit of advice or compromise on things like wearing a stupid hat when that's it how things were done. Maybe Kate wasn't constantly told what to do because she wasn't so contra to begin with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Really incredible. These two are so “independent.”
> 
> View attachment 4739855



So they are receiving 50 % more than the actual heir to the throne who supports three children? Charles really did everything wrong in dealing with these two.


----------



## Sharont2305

Crikey... I don't come on here for a couple of days... all hell breaks loose! [emoji1]


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had to say this a page or two back, and even then she had to have the last word. For someone who doesn't care she surely is argumentative.


She said she didn't care and didn't want to participant in the thread. Then went on and on and posted more and attacked members here.


----------



## needlv

Both H&M deserve each other.  Both with faults.  And of course it will result in divorce...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, a bit of harmless and endearing gossip, nothing with a hidden message. Chatted with a friend whose husband works for the US government, she said he was part of Harry's security detail several times and has said he and his colleagues truly enjoyed it - which apparently is rare - because H was friendly, would do what was asked of him to keep him safe, wouldn't question what they had to do and just was a good sport about things. That's the Harry I want to remember, not that drama queen on the verge of a nervous breakdown because his wife pulls all his strings.


----------



## Sharont2305

A friend of mine went to the Invictus Games in Florida as a companion. Each competitor could have a certain amount of family with them, my friends niece was the wife of one of them and she (the niece) was heavily pregnant at the time so she was allowed a companion for herself. Anyway my friend met Harry quite a few times on that trip, he, in a nice way was a nightmare for his security as he was always slipping off to be with the competitors and their families during down time (yes, the bar in the evenings too)
During the competitions, he'd be allocated time and a seat to watch what was going on, but he'd not sit where he was supposed to, he'd be sitting with the families. If he knew something exciting was happening elsewhere, he'd disappear to that event.
My friend said he was charming, cheeky, natural, no airs or graces and it literally was "just call me Harry" brilliant with the children and a decent sort and very interested in the life of whoever he spoke to.
I feel very sad at what's going on with him right now.  I really hope he "is okay"


----------



## limom

Winter’sJoy said:


> You know what that’s fair and that’s why I went back and erased my comments about Kate and William. You didn’t answer the question though. Did she marry for love? Did Kate happen to fall in love with a guy that will be the future king?
> 
> If Harry is okay with her not performing the duties why does it bother you so much? She cannot make this man do what he does not want to no matter the charm, manipulation or whatever else you try to lay at her feet. He would not have married her otherwise but y’all want to live out some fantasy and blame her for what a grown man is doing. Does he get blame for any of it?
> 
> I have a problem with people trying to control and condemn the way other people choose to live their lives while they live their lives the way they see fit. You have no idea how it is to be an outsider and live that life so how can you comment on it. I’m curious on your thoughts of Princess Diana.


While I agree with you that they are allowed to live their authentic lives to the fullest. The public at large have the right to critique them, since the public is still supporting them.
Don’t forget, it is the deal she made when she married into that family.
Also, nobody like a bunch of hypocrites. Period.
Now, if they manage to successfully make the transition into living in the USA as private citizens. Great.
I, personally will be very surprised that he will be able to go from a station in life where he is adored for no other reason than being born a Windsor to just Harry....
Aristos and Royals truly believe that they are superior to others which is very much different from the ethos of the USA.
It was probably very hard for the duchesse to adapt to life in England but she did not give it her all, imo.
And nobody likes a quitter especially under those circumstances.
Plus with the pandemic and the very trying circumstances, the public at large has less appetite for them and their bull crap, imo.


----------



## LittleStar88

I take a break from this thread for the holiday weekend and woooooo boy did I miss out on the excitement.


----------



## beautymagpie

youngster said:


> I think Harry has gotten a lot of criticism in this thread.  I don't think anyone is letting him off the hook.  I'm not, that's for sure.  His behavior has been childish and foolish and he (and MM) handled their exit from the family in just about the worst way possible.  It could have been done in a much more calm, discreet way with much more respect for the Queen and Prince Charles. Harry, of all people, should have known better.
> 
> I wouldn't have had any issue with either of them stepping back as senior royals, and I think most people posting on this thread feel similarly, if they were the least bit interested in actually living a quiet, private life.  Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice could easily step into many of the public appearances that Harry and Meghan disdained doing.  They could have had that quiet, private life in many beautiful parts of the English countryside or, heck, Wales or Scotland.  Gorgeous country, lots of privacy, still able to make their way easily to London to participate in a few events and see the family.  But, ending up in Paparazzi Central in L.A., scouting for $15 million dollar mansions, re-starting the acting career, and producing some kind of tell-all book is not a couple that's looking for quiet and privacy.  They want all the trappings of being royal, want to monetize the titles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (and Meghan has literally been to Sussex once) while the UK taxpayer picks up the millions in security costs and the tenants and farmers of the Duchy of Cornwall provide their million dollar/year allowance. So, yeah, they are both being raked over the coals and should be.



This. Frankly they come off as not knowing what they want, except they want the financial cushion of the BRF while pretending they don't. Or they are just duplicitous, greedy and conniving.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

limom said:


> While I agree with you that they are allowed to live their authentic lives to the fullest. The public at large have the right to critique them, since the public is still supporting them.
> Don’t forget, it is the deal she made when she married into that family.
> Also, nobody like a bunch of hypocrites. Period.
> Now, if they manage to successfully make the transition into living in the USA as private citizens. Great.
> I, personally will be very surprised that he will be able to go from a station in life where he is adored for no other reason than being born a Windsor to just Harry....
> Aristos and Royals truly believe that they are superior to others which is very much different from the ethos of the USA.
> It was probably very hard for the duchesse to adapt to life in England but she did not give it her all, imo.
> And nobody likes a quitter especially under those circumstances.
> Plus with the pandemic and the very trying circumstances, the public at large has less appetite for them and their bull crap, imo.


My whole point was they both deserve the blame and that Meghan should not get the brunt of the blame for the actions of a grown man and yet while some claim they blame both many jumped down my throat for saying this and came up with a million reasons to say that she was the blame. If they believed both were fully responsible they wouldn’t have become upset at what I said.

Many women complain how their significant other choose their families over them, and if he has chosen his wife over them then I applaud it. The many that say Meghan didn’t give it enough time to transition aren’t giving them as a couple time to transition. Maybe it will take time for Harry to adjust and for them to get on their feet to be solely independent. Most of us didn’t leave our parents houses’ and become independent overnight. This is very similar.

The complaint about Meghan using PR and running to media is laughable like the royals don’t have their own pr and media they run stories through. No one is innocent in this.


----------



## Sharont2305

Winter’sJoy said:


> Many women complain how their significant other choose their families over them, and if he has chosen his wife over them then I applaud it. The many that say Meghan didn’t give it enough time to transition aren’t giving them as a couple time to transition. Maybe it will take time for Harry to adjust and for them to get on their feet to be solely independent. Most of us didn’t leave our parents houses’ and become independent overnight. This is very similar.




No, she didn't give it time, I agree. And yes, it will take Harry time too, absolutely.
The problem is, OK he's chosen his wife over family,  and yes many people do but, they do go off and live independently with no financial ties at all to their family. These two do. They want it all by the looks of things, financial independence with the help of Pa. Oh, and in January we may or may not rejoin the family.
The way they went about it is a kick in the teeth to his father, grandmother, his brother, his wider family and of course the taxpaying public, of which I am one, who contributed to paying for it all!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

I was financially independent long before I turned 35.  Long before.  I’m sure I would have felt like “just shoot me” if I had been pushing 40 and riding anybody’s coat tails.


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> I was financially independent long before I turned 35.  Long before.  I’m sure I would have felt like “just shoot me” if I had been pushing 40 and riding anybody’s coat tails.


Me too, I took a mortgage out at 22 with my husband and at the age of 41, almost 11 years ago, we became mortgage free.


----------



## chicinthecity777

At this point it's beyond embarrassing for these two (almost) middle aged adults to continue to receive hand-outs after declaring their "financial independence" and new found "freedom".


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> Presumably, now they’re living in the US, they’ll have to file a tax return there at some point.  That could be interesting reading.


I am unfamiliar with U.S. tax law. Are you saying they would need to pay tax on the money they received for their upkeep, including security?


----------



## chicinthecity777

I come to realise that their so-called multi-dimensional "outer space" charity is the charity of themselves!


----------



## chicinthecity777

1LV said:


> I was financially independent long before I turned 35.  Long before.  *I’m sure I would have felt like “just shoot me” if I had been pushing 40 and riding anybody’s coat tails.*


You see that's because you are a decent person and not some thick skinned entitled brats like those two!


----------



## limom

Winter’sJoy said:


> My whole point was they both deserve the blame and that Meghan should not get the brunt of the blame for the actions of a grown man and yet while some claim they blame both many jumped down my throat for saying this and came up with a million reasons to say that she was the blame. If they believed both were fully responsible they wouldn’t have become upset at what I said.
> 
> Many women complain how their significant other choose their families over them, and if he has chosen his wife over them then I applaud it. The many that say Meghan didn’t give it enough time to transition aren’t giving them as a couple time to transition. Maybe it will take time for Harry to adjust and for them to get on their feet to be solely independent. Most of us didn’t leave our parents houses’ and become independent overnight. This is very similar.
> 
> The complaint about Meghan using PR and running to media is laughable like the royals don’t have their own pr and media they run stories through*. No one is innocent in this*.


Agree 100%.
He did not choose his wife over his family. If he truly felt this way, he would have renounced all his titles and any financial help he continues to receive, imo.
My personal opinion is that, he won’t last in the US. He has proven to be a bit challenged scholastically, so it is very doubtful that one of the Euro banks will hire him for window dressing. His reputation is too damaged at this point, imo.
I don’t envy them at all.
The best case scenario for them would be Able to spend time in both countries.

Apparently, a new  unauthorized book by some Lady Caroline came out.
They can always read about themselves and laugh it off.


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> At this point it's beyond embarrassing for these two (almost) middle aged adults to continue to receive hand-outs after declaring their "financial independence" and new found "freedom".[/QUOTE
> 
> It’s called pride, or in this case lack thereof.  You have it, they don’t.  They’re the people sleeping on a friend’s sofa and accepting gas money while they look for a job.



*Not sure what happened here!


----------



## chicinthecity777

1LV said:


> *Not sure what happened here!


I think you accidentally deleted a " ] " in the quote section.


----------



## papertiger

mrsinsyder said:


> Really incredible. These two are so “independent.”
> 
> View attachment 4739855



That report didn't come from the weatherman! 
Inside job.


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think you accidentally deleted a " ] " in the quote section.


Thanks.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Thanks to the shameless Vanity Fair we now know that everything that happened was a conspiracy against Meghan. There are so many people working to make her appear to be a victim. There is zero evidence provided in the article of course but if they repeat it over and over they hope it will be believed.
> 
> *“She Was Convinced There Was a Conspiracy Against Her”: Why Meghan Markle Fled the United Kingdom*
> 
> When *Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry* made the move from Canada to Los Angeles in mid-March, a few weeks after their royal farewell tour in the U.K., it came as a surprise to the public. But according to a new report in the _Sunday Times Magazine,_ the couple’s friends had been aware of their desire to make it back to Meghan’s hometown for a long time. Canada was “never the forever home,” a friend said to *Katie Nicholl* (who is also a correspondent for _Vanity Fair_). “The big plan, for Meghan at least, was always L.A.”
> 
> One source told Nicholl that Harry and Meghan started looking for a house in California shortly after their wedding, and that she always wanted to spend a significant amount of time in her home country. But it wasn’t until March 14 of this year that they made it official, leaving Vancouver Island in a top secret operation aboard actor *Tyler Perry*’s private jet.
> 
> The couple did take advantage of the relative privacy while they had it. Soon after arriving in L.A., Meghan reportedly took Harry for a drive around her old neighborhood, past the house where she was raised and the preschool she once attended. “The streets were empty,” a friend told the _Times._ “It would be two days before the paparazzi found out where they were and what they were doing so they got to see the city in a way they wouldn’t ordinarily be able to. They loved being able to drive themselves around. It was very freeing for them but probably won’t happen again.”
> 
> Other than a few video calls and public announcements, the couple has kept mum about their future plans as they stay in Perry’s Beverly Hills mansion. Sources close to the couple told the _Sunday Times Magazine_ the pair say they are hunting for a new house that will enable them to stay “away from the Hollywood fray” and give *Archie Mountbatten-Windsor* a “normal life.” The sources also added Harry and Meghan are also busy working on plans for their new charity foundation Archewell, adding that Meghan has no plans to return to acting, nor is she working on a series of children’s books
> 
> While he is enjoying the California sunshine, some friends have said Harry is homesick. “It’s not been easy for Harry,” one of his friends told the _Times._ “He had a much more established life in England and he doesn’t really know anyone in LA. I imagine he might be feeling a bit of what [Meghan] felt over in the UK—lonely and directionless.”
> 
> Now, the roles have been reversed. Meghan is happy to be back in L.A. near her mother, *Doria Ragland,* and many of her close friends nearby, while Harry is finding the adjustment a challenge. However, he is reportedly excited about launching Archewell and starting afresh once lockdown has been lifted.
> 
> Friends have also spoken about why the couple made the dramatic decision to stand down from the Royal Family and leave England and how Meghan felt cut off and isolated living in Windsor. “She was convinced there was a conspiracy against her and so she basically put herself in self isolation when they moved to Frogmore,” said one. “I think she felt like an outsider from the start. This wasn’t the life she was used to and she wanted out.”
> 
> Meghan, a Los Angeles native, once wrote about being a California girl “who lives by the ethos that most things can be cured with either yoga, the beach or a few avocados.” Friends says she missed her mother and her hometown terribly while she was living in the U.K. Though she was committed to making Windsor her home, she continued to feel isolated when the couple moved into Frogmore Cottage, shortly before Archie’s birth. Though Frogmore is close to Windsor Castle, the queen’s weekend home, it is in a very rural area, and Meghan felt cut off with no friends nearby.
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/why-meghan-harry-fled-the-united-kingdom/amp



OMG, she really must be trying to convince JCMH she is his mother.


----------



## youngster

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am unfamiliar with U.S. tax law. Are you saying they would need to pay tax on the money they received for their upkeep, including security?



Their tax situation will be complex.  Meghan, because she is a U.S. citizen still, has always had to file and pay in the U.S. on her worldwide income.  For Harry . . . If you have a green card, all of your worldwide income must be reported to the IRS and, I assume, the state of California.  So, both the U.S. Government plus the state of California will want a share of any of their earnings, (though you may exclude up to the first $107,600 from being taxed, a fairly minor amount to someone like Harry).  Also, any other of the 50 states that they work in  . . . like Harry giving a speech down in Florida . . . will want a state tax return filed there too and will want to tax the income earned in that specific state.  (Florida, of course, has no state income tax so he won't have any issues with that fee for the speech he gave a few months ago.)  

Without doing a lot of research, I'm not sure how the IRS would view the income that Charles passes on to Harry.  Gift or pass through of British source income? If the money from Charles is considered a gift, well, gift taxes only apply to the person making the gift and not the person receiving it. Foreign citizens generally don't have liability for U.S. gift tax.  Off the top of my head, at the heart of the matter, it sure seems to be British source income so it may need to be reported and would be subjected to tax but I haven't researched it and it's not my area of expertise.  It will depend on how it is structured by Charles and their advisors.  They've probably taken steps to insure that it is considered a gift to Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am unfamiliar with U.S. tax law. Are you saying they would need to pay tax on the money they received for their upkeep, including security?



I'm not a tax expert by any means but I believe the support payments from Charles would not be taxable. Any money they earn in the US would be taxed. The supposed $1 million payment from JP Morgan for example.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I come to realise that their so-called multi-dimensional "outer space" charity is the charity of themselves!



LOL, you just just twigged


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Winter’sJoy said:


> Many women complain how their significant other choose their families over them, and if he has chosen his wife over them then I applaud it. The many that say Meghan didn’t give it enough time to transition aren’t giving them as a couple time to transition. Maybe it will take time for Harry to adjust and for them to get on their feet to be solely independent. Most of us didn’t leave our parents houses’ and become independent overnight. This is very similar.
> 
> The complaint about Meghan using PR and running to media is laughable like the royals don’t have their own pr and media they run stories through. No one is innocent in this.



What happened to Meghan that was so bad they needed to run away from his family? Running away while expecting to be financially provided for by that family makes them looks like two spoiled cases of arrested development.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> That report didn't come from the weatherman!
> Inside job.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...hausted-trapped-enormous-workload-Megxit.html

This has to be a story straight out of H&M land. They will stop at nothing to trash W&K.  Don’t they realize these trash-talk articles reflect poorly on themselves?  Because H is now connected to these trashy methods, I’m convinced this is who he always was. He was known for throwing stink bombs into celebrations - literally.  Google it. Such jerks. Both of them.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am unfamiliar with U.S. tax law. Are you saying they would need to pay tax on the money they received for their upkeep, including security?


I’m not an expert on taxation in either the UK or US, but I think benefits in kind are usually subject to tax.  And they seem to have racked up an awful lot of those.  Free flights, free accommodation etc etc etc


papertiger said:


> OMG, she really must be trying to convince JCMH she is his mother.


This makes me sick.  It’s too awful for words


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> Their tax situation will be complex.  Meghan, because she is a U.S. citizen still, has always had to file and pay in the U.S. on her worldwide income.  For Harry . . . If you have a green card, all of your worldwide income must be reported to the IRS and, I assume, the state of California.  So, both the U.S. Government plus the state of California will want a share of any of their earnings, (though you may exclude up to the first $107,600 from being taxed, a fairly minor amount to someone like Harry).  Also, any other of the 50 states that they work in  . . . like Harry giving a speech down in Florida . . . will want a state tax return filed there too and will want to tax the income earned in that specific state.  (Florida, of course, has no state income tax so he won't have any issues with that fee for the speech he gave a few months ago.)
> 
> Without doing a lot of research, I'm not sure how the IRS would view the income that Charles passes on to Harry.  Gift or pass through of British source income? If the money from Charles is considered a gift, well, gift taxes only apply to the person making the gift and not the person receiving it. Foreign citizens generally don't have liability for U.S. gift tax.  Off the top of my head, at the heart of the matter, it sure seems to be British source income so it may need to be reported and would be subjected to tax but I haven't researched it and it's not my area of expertise.  It will depend on how it is structured by Charles and their advisors.  They've probably taken steps to insure that it is considered a gift to Harry.





bag-mania said:


> I'm not a tax expert by any means but I believe the support payments from Charles would not be taxable. Any money they earn in the US would be taxed. The supposed $1 million payment from JP Morgan for example.


Thanks for chipping in on this. It's fascinating! In the UK, I believe there is a limit on how much money you can gift someone without being taxed. This is to prevent say parents gifting everything to their children in their late years to avoid inheritance tax etc. I should think it is not unlimited in the U.S. But I am no expert and will be interesting to see what pans out in the end.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe this cover triggered them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m not an expert on taxation in either the UK or US, but I think benefits in kind are usually subject to tax.  And they seem to have racked up an awful lot of those.  Free flights, free accommodation etc etc etc


I shall really hope so! Otherwise it's a major "loophole" for tax avoidance.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

limom said:


> Agree 100%.
> He did not choose his wife over his family. If he truly felt this way, he would have renounced all his titles and any financial help he continues to receive, imo.
> My personal opinion is that, he won’t last in the US. He has proven to be a bit challenged scholastically, so it is very doubtful that one of the Euro banks will hire him for window dressing. His reputation is too damaged at this point, imo.
> I don’t envy them at all.
> The best case scenario for them would be Able to spend time in both countries.
> 
> Apparently, a new  unauthorized book by some Lady Caroline came out.
> They can always read about themselves and laugh it off.


Gosh I really hate to go down the rabbit hole on this because I honestly just do not think of them at all during my days, only when I see this thread pop up in the recent post section

Yes, I do think they need to cut the cord and live independently if they do not want to carryout the duties as a royal. I can’t pretend that my independence as a young adult is different because he stayed under the royals until he got married- so independence is very new to him and e doesn’t seem to have had much going on outside of that. I honestly think time will tell with these two but I’m not sitting on the sidelines hoping and wishing for their demise.

Harry is no catch and I wondered why she wanted him myself. Neither brothers are good looking so I think being a royal is pretty much all they have that’s worth something. He has done very gross things in the past so I will never say that Meghan lucked up with him. I would never consider being a royal and living such a restrictive life an upgrade either.

I wonder if anyone is going to bash Kate Middleton for running to the press about Meghan? Like I said, both of them sling mud and there are no innocent parties.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Thanks for chipping in on this. It's fascinating! In the UK, I believe there is a limit on how much money you can gift someone without being taxed. This is to prevent say parents gifting everything to their children in their late years to avoid inheritance tax etc. I should think it is not unlimited in the U.S. But I am no expert and will be interesting to see what pans out in the end.


And it’ll be interesting - given they've said the as yet amorphous but *globally impactful* Archewell thing won’t be a formalised charitable foundation - exactly how the income will be collected and transparently reported for taxation purposes.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Why do people want to talk about Kate Middleton in here? She has her own thread!


----------



## CarryOn2020

kkfiregirl said:


> Why do people want to talk about Kate Middleton in here? She has her own thread!



Because it’s clear the war between H&M and W&K continues.  W&K just move on, H&M stay stuck in the past. 
Applause to Kate for handling it all with grace and dignity.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

.


----------



## 1LV

I do think MM is pretty in several of the pictures I’ve seen, but if Kate is aging like *spoiled milk I should be so lucky!

*responding to Winter’s Joy “deleted” post


----------



## chicinthecity777

I know it's not Kate's thread but I do think she actually looks better in recent years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> I was financially independent long before I turned 35.  Long before.  I’m sure I would have felt like “just shoot me” if I had been pushing 40 and riding anybody’s coat tails.


Also correct me if I'm wrong, but I bet you were not equipped with 40 million pounds Sterling either.


----------



## Jktgal

Winter’sJoy said:


> Gosh I really hate to go down the rabbit hole on this because I honestly just do not think of them at all during my days, only when I see this thread pop up in the recent post section
> 
> Yes, I do think they need to cut the cord and live independently if they do not want to carryout the duties as a royal. I can’t pretend that my independence as a young adult is different because he stayed under the royals until he got married- so independence is very new to him and e doesn’t seem to have had much going on outside of that. I honestly think time will tell with these two but I’m not sitting on the sidelines hoping and wishing for their demise.
> 
> Harry is no catch and I wondered why she wanted him myself. Neither brothers are good looking so I think being a royal is pretty much all they have that’s worth something. He has done very gross things in the past so I will never say that Meghan lucked up with him. I would never consider being a royal and living such a restrictive life an upgrade either.
> 
> I wonder if anyone is going to bash Kate Middleton for running to the press about Meghan? Like I said, both of them sling mud and there are no innocent parties.



The Kate bashing is in the other thread. No bananas, no word salads, no pap walks, no disheveled amazing incredibleness, no fun. They need you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

I'm sitting on my hands here.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also correct me if I'm wrong, but I bet you were not equipped with 40 million pounds Sterling either.


Not even close.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Thanks for chipping in on this. It's fascinating! In the UK, I believe there is a limit on how much money you can gift someone without being taxed. This is to prevent say parents gifting everything to their children in their late years to avoid inheritance tax etc. I should think it is not unlimited in the U.S. But I am no expert and will be interesting to see what pans out in the end.



If the money is regular and sent to H (or H&M, my guess is through H) then surely it would be income and not a gift. A gift implies not regular and ongoing. But if H uses the 'income' or income as expenses then perhaps he wouldn't need to claim 'gift'. Anyone care to comment? 

However, if the security is not paid to H&M but directly to security, and esp. if they are non-US citizens (security)  and/or a non-US company or agency then they could get around H&M being taxed as they don't actually work for H&M. Anyone care to comment? 

Disclaimer, I am not a tax expert and especially not US tax. No need to comment


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> Why do people want to talk about Kate Middleton in here? She has her own thread!


Because she's running out of the one argument she had going for Meghan, so bashing Kate is the one thing left.


----------



## Tootsie17

Winter’sJoy said:


> Gosh I really hate to go down the rabbit hole on this because I honestly just do not think of them at all during my days, only when I see this thread pop up in the recent post section
> 
> Yes, I do think they need to cut the cord and live independently if they do not want to carryout the duties as a royal. I can’t pretend that my independence as a young adult is different because he stayed under the royals until he got married- so independence is very new to him and e doesn’t seem to have had much going on outside of that. I honestly think time will tell with these two but I’m not sitting on the sidelines hoping and wishing for their demise.
> 
> Harry is no catch and I wondered why she wanted him myself. Neither brothers are good looking so I think being a royal is pretty much all they have that’s worth something. He has done very gross things in the past so I will never say that Meghan lucked up with him. I would never consider being a royal and living such a restrictive life an upgrade either.
> 
> I wonder if anyone is going to bash Kate Middleton for running to the press about Meghan? Like I said, both of them sling mud and there are no innocent parties.


What mud did Kate sling?


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> Oh yes, she's had work done.  I wonder why she denies it? Thank you for posting.


I guess the same reason a lot of women deny it.  I know a couple of women who look exceptionally good for their ages.  Beyond normal expectations.  Both deny any work done.  Maybe they're just genetically blessed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> What mud did Kate sling?


She didn't. Girlfriend is busy wearing Diana's tiara and preparing to become Queen.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't. Girlfriend is busy wearing Diana's tiara and preparing to become Queen.


 True!


----------



## Clearblueskies

mrsinsyder said:


> I'm sitting on my hands here.


Ignore.  Stans are always the same IME.  They run through the full gamut from high-handed to childish in a heartbeat.  Very odd.


----------



## Winter’sJoy

Mods- How do I stop getting notifications for this thread? i keep unwatching it but I still get the notifications. I’m not dedicating time to this any longer. I would never dedicate this much time to someone I dislike and allow them to occupy space in my brain. This is weird, borderline obsessive and I don’t want to partake any longer.


----------



## papertiger

From the Telegraph 

*Celebrity*
*Duchess of Cambridge and Meghan Markle had 'row' over young bridesmaids' tights ahead of royal wedding*
Hannah Furness
The Telegraph5 hours ago






Prince Harry and Meghan Markle wedding
The Duchess of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex had a “row” over whether the young bridesmaids at the royal wedding should wear tights, it has been claimed, as Tatler magazine publishes a profile of “Catherine the Great”.

The society magazine, which claims to have spoken to numerous friends of the Duchess of Cambridge, has described an “incident” ahead of the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, in which the Duchess of Cambridge is said to have been left in tears.

"Then there was an incident at the wedding rehearsal,” a source named only as a ‘friend’ told the magazine.

“It was a hot day and apparently there was a row over whether the bridesmaids should wear tights or not.

“Kate, following protocol, felt that they should. Meghan didn't want them to.”

Photographs from the 2018 Sussex wedding, (below, top) appear to show the bridesmaids with bare legs, while those from the Cambridge wedding in 2011 (below, bottom) show even the youngest members of the party wearing tights.





The bridesmaids at Meghan and Harry's wedding




Bridesmaids at the Cambridge's wedding
Neither Kensington Palace or a spokesman for the Sussexes has yet commented on the veracity of the claims.

The article will fuel the ongoing narrative of Duchess vs Duchess which sources - pointing out that it is possible to praise one without disparaging the other - have previously criticised as sexist.

The Tatler account offers more detail of an incident which has become part of the narrative of the Royal Family’s recent troubles, but has previously been reported without detail.

In November 2018, the Telegraph’s Camilla Tominey wrote that she had “spoken to two separate sources who claim Kate was left in tears following a bridesmaids dress fitting for Princess Charlotte”.

“Kate had only just given birth to Prince Louis and was feeling quite emotional,” said one insider at the time.

The Tatler profile, the cover of its July/August issue, claims to have spoken to numerous unnamed friends of the Cambridges who have given a spirited account of her virtues and recent trials.

One is quoted as saying she feels “exhausted and trapped” by royal duties, now the Sussexes have left the family and the Cambridges are having to be more visible to fill the gap.

"Meghan and Harry have been so selfish,” said one. “William and Catherine really wanted to be hands-on parents and the Sussexes have effectively thrown their three children under a bus.

“There goes their morning school runs as the responsibilities on them now are enormous."

Another source added: “Kate is furious about the larger workload. Of course she's smiling and dressing appropriately but she doesn't want this. She feels exhausted and trapped.

“She's working as hard as a top CEO, who has to be wheeled out all the time, without the benefits of boundaries and plenty of holidays.”

One “royal insider”, speaking of the differences between the Duchesses, said: “In the palace, you hear numerous stories of the staff saying so-and-so is a nightmare and behaves badly but you never hear that about Kate.”

A “courtier” added: “Kate keeps her staff whereas Meghan doesn't. Doesn't that say everything?"


----------



## limom

OMG, arguing about socks now?
This is getting really silly.
Those little girls are all adorable, imo with or without socks.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Winter'sJoy, I think you're being notified when someone quotes you.  You can unfollow those people.  BUT, if you're going to participate in any thread, and someone quotes you, you'll be notified.


----------



## Vlad

Winter’sJoy said:


> Mods- How do I stop getting notifications for this thread? i keep unwatching it but I still get the notifications. I’m not dedicating time to this any longer. I would never dedicate this much time to someone I dislike and allow them to occupy space in my brain. This is weird, borderline obsessive and I don’t want to partake any longer.





Cavalier Girl said:


> Winter'sJoy, I think you're being notified when someone quotes you.  You can unfollow those people.  BUT, if you're going participate in any thread, and someone quotes you, you'll be notified.



Yes, this. You can turn of notification for being quoted only globally, not on a per-thread basis.


----------



## CeeJay

Winter’sJoy said:


> I hope you are not this hard on people in your life. To be honest, and I don’t mean any harm but come off as jealous that she has this life and admiration. How do you know she is not appreciative of everything? Because she doesn’t act in a way that meets your approval? Who are you to say who people should admire or what someone is deserving of because she made a comment that didn’t sit right with you. You would think she treated the people in Africa bad or stole money from them.  I hope no one ever makes a complete assessment of you off one comment in one moment in time. I guess you would feel better if she suffered in silence.


Sorry to say, but there are some folks on this thread who know Meghan a little better than yourself; in other words .. people who know others (_especially here in LA_) who know her (_and her past_) on a very personal level.  Sadly, many have been 'markled' along the way once she had used them for her "advancement" and then on to the next "conquest".  I have to give her one thing .. and that is her "hustle"; she had an objective and she was going to get there at all costs .. BUT while that cost benefited her, the other people who were used felt exactly that .. and is that someone that anyone would truly want as a "friend"???  How would you feel if you married someone and once she was done with you, she sends back her wedding rings in a postal note?  Is that someone who is truly "nice"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

chicinthecity777 said:


> Thanks for chipping in on this. It's fascinating! In the UK, I believe there is a limit on how much money you can gift someone without being taxed. This is to prevent say parents gifting everything to their children in their late years to avoid inheritance tax etc. I should think it is not unlimited in the U.S. But I am no expert and will be interesting to see what pans out in the end.



There is a limit on gifts in the U.S., one U.S. citizen to another U.S. citizen, but the key is that Harry is not a U.S. citizen and Charles certainly is not. (ETA: In the U.S., once you gift over a certain amount, gift tax kicks in.) Charles might be deducting the payments that he makes to Will and Harry on his UK taxes (which I believe he pays) so it would follow that Harry and Will might need to declare the money that they receive on their UK taxes as income.  But, I'm not British and I don't know your tax system.  In the U.S., gift taxes only apply to the person making the gift and not the person receiving it. Foreign citizens generally don't have liability for U.S. gift tax.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> There is a limit on gifts in the U.S., one U.S. citizen to another U.S. citizen, but the key is that Harry is not a U.S. citizen and Charles certainly is not. (ETA: In the U.S., once you gift over a certain amount, gift tax kicks in.) Charles might be deducting the payments that he makes to Will and Harry on his UK taxes (which I believe he pays) so it would follow that Harry and Will might need to declare the money that they receive on their UK taxes as income.  But, I'm not British and I don't know your tax system.  In the U.S., gift taxes only apply to the person making the gift and not the person receiving it. Foreign citizens generally don't have liability for U.S. gift tax.


But MM benefits it too. Not just Harry. So what's her situation? If Charles gives Harry £5m to pay for bills they incurred, she's essentially getting £2.5m.


----------



## 1LV

Tatler, “the society magazine”....  Not to be confused with TV Guide.


----------



## youngster

Now, in the case of the luxury mansion they are borrowing from Tyler Perry . . . you are certainly allowed to let your friends use your home for extended periods.  However, most people's homes aren't massive estates worth millions that would rent for tens of thousands per month.  Tyler Perry (or anyone) is free to gift up to $15,000 per year per person without any tax implications.  He can give MM, Harry and Archie each that $15,000 which would be a $45,000 gift to them without any tax implications whatsoever. I've got no idea what that home would rent for . . . $30,000/month?  $35,000/month?   Depending on what fair market value rent is, they might be able to stay there for a month or two for free without any tax implications.

After that $45,000 in free rent is used up though  . . . then there are tax implications for Tyler Perry.  Hopefully, his CPA has made him aware of those implications and the costs. So, depending on how long they stay, there may be an issue.  If I had to speculate, I think they are paying some amount of reasonable rent in order to avoid causing Mr. Perry any tax implications, or they could be planning on moving again very quickly. to avoid having to start paying rent.


----------



## youngster

chicinthecity777 said:


> But MM benefits it too. Not just Harry. So what's her situation? If Charles gives Harry £5m to pay for bills they incurred, she's essentially getting £2.5m.



It's complicated, that's for sure.  Part of the answer to your question depends on Harry's status in the U.S.  Does he have a green card? Does he truly intend to stay permanently in the U.S. and has started putting that plan into motion?   If so, then U.S. gift tax laws would apply to both of them and they could transfer/gift to each other in an unlimited amount since married couples in any income bracket are allowed to do this in the U.S. between citizens and green card holders.  If his residency/status is in question then it gets more complicated and potentially they could owe taxes on money Harry transfers to MM.  However, if Harry keeps the money separate in his own account and just pays for his "ordinary" living expenses and gifts under $155,000 to MM (which is the limit I believe per year) then they probably don't have too much of an issue. But, it is complex and it's not really my area of tax expertise.


----------



## bag-mania

This may be the book to buy, ladies. This author had members of the Markle family come stay with her. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Meghan and Harry tried to influence the narrative. 
*
Lady Colin Campbell claims Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's friends phoned her to 'try and influence the narrative' of her 'tell-all' book about the couple*

*Lady Colin Campbell has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to 'influence' her upcoming tell-all book Meghan And Harry: The Real Story*
*She is releasing a book she has written with the help of her sons , Dimitri and Michael, who appeared on reality show with Meghan’s nephew Tyler Dooley*
*She claims tells their real story - though it is not known if she has ever met Meghan, 38, or Harry, 35*
* The release of the book is said to coincide with Harry and Meghan's new biography Finding Freedom in August*
Lady Colin Campbell has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to 'influence' her upcoming tell-all book Meghan And Harry: The Real Story.

 The Jamaican-born British writer, 70, is releasing a book she has written with the help of her sons , Dimitri and Michael, who appeared on an MTV reality show with Meghan’s nephew Tyler Dooley, which she claims tells their real story - though it is not known if she has ever met Meghan, 38, or Harry, 35.

The release of the book is said to coincide with Harry and Meghan's new biography Finding Freedom in August, which is co-written by Harper's Bazaar journalist Omid Scobie. 

But in a new interview uploaded to her YouTube account this week, Lady Colin claims the couple's friends 'called her to influence her book', and said she thinks they are keen to get the biography released before her own book.

The socialite, who was married to Lord Colin Campbell for one year in 1974, sniped: 'I had been told that she was desperate to get her book out earlier, or at least coincide with mine, because their book is 'their' version of the truth.'

She ranted: 'The fact is that Meghan and Harry's book, which is basically her book, it's written by Omid Scobie, who has been beating the drum for Meghan all along.'

And when asked whether Harry and Meghan tried to 'influence Lady Colin Campbell' book, she claimed: 'Yes they did. They were getting mutual friends to ring me up to influence the narrative, to feed me stuff, some of I was receptive too, some of it I was not.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...an-Harry-tried-influence-book.html#newcomment


----------



## Flatsy

limom said:


> OMG, arguing about socks now?
> This is getting really silly.
> Those little girls are all adorable, imo with or without socks.


Kate was probably trying to give helpful advice.  The Queen prefers stockings to bare legs.  I doubt Kate would have put her little attendants in tights unless someone told her it was preferred.  Kate has always tried to fit in and follow the rules, whereas Meghan refused to be cooperative about anything from the beginning.  Just like when the Queen sent Meghan polite word that hats would be worn at their joint engagement and Meghan sent back word that she would not wear a hat.  

The nerve of Harry and Meghan coming at the Cambridges for not being welcoming enough.  Who would continue to reach out to someone who was so nasty?  If someone made me cry and I was already a shy person, that would be it for me.


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> This may be the book to buy, ladies. This author had members of the Markle family come stay with her. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Meghan and Harry tried to influence the narrative.
> 
> *Lady Colin Campbell claims Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's friends phoned her to 'try and influence the narrative' of her 'tell-all' book about the couple*
> 
> *Lady Colin Campbell has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to 'influence' her upcoming tell-all book Meghan And Harry: The Real Story*
> *She is releasing a book she has written with the help of her sons , Dimitri and Michael, who appeared on reality show with Meghan’s nephew Tyler Dooley*
> *She claims tells their real story - though it is not known if she has ever met Meghan, 38, or Harry, 35*
> * The release of the book is said to coincide with Harry and Meghan's new biography Finding Freedom in August*
> Lady Colin Campbell has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to 'influence' her upcoming tell-all book Meghan And Harry: The Real Story.
> 
> The Jamaican-born British writer, 70, is releasing a book she has written with the help of her sons , Dimitri and Michael, who appeared on an MTV reality show with Meghan’s nephew Tyler Dooley, which she claims tells their real story - though it is not known if she has ever met Meghan, 38, or Harry, 35.
> 
> The release of the book is said to coincide with Harry and Meghan's new biography Finding Freedom in August, which is co-written by Harper's Bazaar journalist Omid Scobie.
> 
> But in a new interview uploaded to her YouTube account this week, Lady Colin claims the couple's friends 'called her to influence her book', and said she thinks they are keen to get the biography released before her own book.
> 
> The socialite, who was married to Lord Colin Campbell for one year in 1974, sniped: 'I had been told that she was desperate to get her book out earlier, or at least coincide with mine, because their book is 'their' version of the truth.'
> 
> She ranted: 'The fact is that Meghan and Harry's book, which is basically her book, it's written by Omid Scobie, who has been beating the drum for Meghan all along.'
> 
> And when asked whether Harry and Meghan tried to 'influence Lady Colin Campbell' book, she claimed: 'Yes they did. They were getting mutual friends to ring me up to influence the narrative, to feed me stuff, some of I was receptive too, some of it I was not.'
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...an-Harry-tried-influence-book.html#newcomment


Can’t wait!!


----------



## bag-mania

I know I complain about the credibility of the media on a regular basis and today will be no different. 

Headlines about Meghan today:
• The Queen Reportedly Found One Thing About Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress "Questionable"
• Sorry to Break It to You, but Meghan Markle Has “No Plans” to Return to Acting
• Duchess of Cambridge and Meghan Markle had 'row' over young bridesmaids' tights ahead of royal wedding 

Who cares about what happened so long ago? I can't blame Meghan for these "articles." It's the pathetic entertainment media trying so hard to hold on to a cash cow that isn't producing milk for them anymore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania  Well said
I agree that it is the media looking for click-bait.  My question is - why them? There are plenty of real ‘cash cows’ out there. H&M just are not that interesting — they live pampered lives and complain about it. Yawn. Seems the media is hitting bottom, too. 



bag-mania said:


> I know I complain about the credibility of the media on a regular basis and today will be no different.
> 
> Headlines about Meghan today:
> • The Queen Reportedly Found One Thing About Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress "Questionable"
> • Sorry to Break It to You, but Meghan Markle Has “No Plans” to Return to Acting
> • Duchess of Cambridge and Meghan Markle had 'row' over young bridesmaids' tights ahead of royal wedding
> 
> Who cares about what happened so long ago? I can't blame Meghan for these "articles." It's the pathetic entertainment media trying so hard to hold on to a cash cow that isn't producing milk for them anymore.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I know I complain about the credibility of the media on a regular basis and today will be no different.
> 
> Headlines about Meghan today:
> • The Queen Reportedly Found One Thing About Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress "Questionable"
> • Sorry to Break It to You, but Meghan Markle Has “No Plans” to Return to Acting
> • Duchess of Cambridge and Meghan Markle had 'row' over young bridesmaids' tights ahead of royal wedding
> 
> Who cares about what happened so long ago? I can't blame Meghan for these "articles." It's the pathetic entertainment media trying so hard to hold on to a cash cow that isn't producing milk for them anymore.


Agree .. but it almost seems as though they (H&M - likely more M) is taking a page out of the Kardashian book of media coverage; have something in there every (dam#) day!!!  However, unlike the K's, it was equal opportunity .. good or bad news .. we all know Meghan simply CANNOT have any negative news about *HER*!


----------



## Flatsy

Winter’sJoy said:


> I’m not dedicating time to this any longer. I would never dedicate this much time to someone I dislike and allow them to occupy space in my brain. This is weird, borderline obsessive and I don’t want to partake any longer.


Congratulations on your high moral character and priorities.

One thing I haven't seen much of, if any, on this thread is criticizing Meghan's looks or her body.  People have issues with her behavior, and sometimes people question her choices when it comes to what she chooses to wear.  But slinging a remark like "she's aging like curdled milk" at a woman because she's in her late 30s and continues to exist is one of the nastiest things I have ever, ever read on this board.  So congratulations to you again for being the owner of that remark.  

It really shows how sincere you were when you attempted to shame everyone for being judgmental and mean towards Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania  Well said
> I agree that it is the media looking for click-bait.  My question is - why them? There are plenty of real ‘cash cows’ out there. H&M just are not that interesting — they live pampered lives and complain about it. Yawn. Seems the media is hitting bottom, too.



As celebrities Meghan and Harry are polarizing figures. There is a large segment of the population that doesn't follow them at all, but for those who do they are either loved or despised. The media panders to both extremes, with the American media trending pro-H&M and the British media being more anti-H&M. The press knows that both sides will read ALL of the stories so they just keep 'em coming.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Agree .. but it almost seems as though they (H&M - likely more M) is taking a page out of the Kardashian book of media coverage; have something in there every (dam#) day!!!  However, unlike the K's, it was equal opportunity .. good or bad news .. we all know Meghan simply CANNOT have any negative news about *HER*!



I absolutely agree that the happy, wonderful puff pieces we're reading in publications like People, Cosmopolitan, Glamour, and Vanity Fair are being placed by their PR agency. The ones about the fights over kids' stockings is the press desperately reaching for _something_ (anything!) to write about.


----------



## LittleStar88

They're like cilantro - either you love them or you absolutely do not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Lady Colin Campbell is writing a book to be published about the same time as the Scobie book
LCC claims to have interviewed the Markle half siblings


----------



## TC1

marietouchet said:


> Lady Colin Campbell is writing a book to be published about the same time as the Scobie book
> LCC claims to have interviewed the Markle half siblings


Yes! check out post #30389 for a post in detail.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> From the Telegraph
> 
> *Celebrity*
> *Duchess of Cambridge and Meghan Markle had 'row' over young bridesmaids' tights ahead of royal wedding*
> Hannah Furness
> The Telegraph5 hours ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle wedding
> The Duchess of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex had a “row” over whether the young bridesmaids at the royal wedding should wear tights, it has been claimed, as Tatler magazine publishes a profile of “Catherine the Great”.
> 
> The society magazine, which claims to have spoken to numerous friends of the Duchess of Cambridge, has described an “incident” ahead of the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, in which the Duchess of Cambridge is said to have been left in tears.
> 
> "Then there was an incident at the wedding rehearsal,” a source named only as a ‘friend’ told the magazine.
> 
> “It was a hot day and apparently there was a row over whether the bridesmaids should wear tights or not.
> 
> “Kate, following protocol, felt that they should. Meghan didn't want them to.”
> 
> Photographs from the 2018 Sussex wedding, (below, top) appear to show the bridesmaids with bare legs, while those from the Cambridge wedding in 2011 (below, bottom) show even the youngest members of the party wearing tights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The bridesmaids at Meghan and Harry's wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bridesmaids at the Cambridge's wedding
> Neither Kensington Palace or a spokesman for the Sussexes has yet commented on the veracity of the claims.
> 
> The article will fuel the ongoing narrative of Duchess vs Duchess which sources - pointing out that it is possible to praise one without disparaging the other - have previously criticised as sexist.
> 
> The Tatler account offers more detail of an incident which has become part of the narrative of the Royal Family’s recent troubles, but has previously been reported without detail.
> 
> In November 2018, the Telegraph’s Camilla Tominey wrote that she had “spoken to two separate sources who claim Kate was left in tears following a bridesmaids dress fitting for Princess Charlotte”.
> 
> “Kate had only just given birth to Prince Louis and was feeling quite emotional,” said one insider at the time.
> 
> The Tatler profile, the cover of its July/August issue, claims to have spoken to numerous unnamed friends of the Cambridges who have given a spirited account of her virtues and recent trials.
> 
> One is quoted as saying she feels “exhausted and trapped” by royal duties, now the Sussexes have left the family and the Cambridges are having to be more visible to fill the gap.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry have been so selfish,” said one. “William and Catherine really wanted to be hands-on parents and the Sussexes have effectively thrown their three children under a bus.
> 
> “There goes their morning school runs as the responsibilities on them now are enormous."
> 
> Another source added: “Kate is furious about the larger workload. Of course she's smiling and dressing appropriately but she doesn't want this. She feels exhausted and trapped.
> 
> “She's working as hard as a top CEO, who has to be wheeled out all the time, without the benefits of boundaries and plenty of holidays.”
> 
> One “royal insider”, speaking of the differences between the Duchesses, said: “In the palace, you hear numerous stories of the staff saying so-and-so is a nightmare and behaves badly but you never hear that about Kate.”
> 
> A “courtier” added: “Kate keeps her staff whereas Meghan doesn't. Doesn't that say everything?"



If you read the article I don't think it's about tights. It's a rebuttal against how everyone in the BRF was nasty to "so-and-so".


----------



## poopsie

Winter’sJoy said:


> *I don’t understand why women are always so hard on other women.*





1LV said:


> I do think MM is pretty in several of the pictures I’ve seen, but if *Kate is aging like *spoiled milk *I should be so lucky!
> 
> *responding to *Winter’s Joy “deleted” post*



all righty then  



Flatsy said:


> Congratulations on your high moral character and priorities.
> 
> One thing I haven't seen much of, if any, on this thread is criticizing Meghan's looks or her body.  People have issues with her behavior, and sometimes people question her choices when it comes to what she chooses to wear.  But _slinging a remark like "she's aging like curdled milk" at a woman because she's in her late 30s and continues to exist _is one of the nastiest things I have ever, ever read on this board.  So congratulations to you again for being the owner of that remark.
> 
> It really shows how sincere you were when you attempted to shame everyone for being judgmental and mean towards Meghan.



Ya know, I don't even mind the judgemental part so much. I would be willing to wager that we have all been judgemental about something/someone at some time in our lives. It is so easy to read or hear something and broad jump to an ill informed opinion just because it jibes so neatly with what we already believe. But that is for another forum. 
Same with hypocrisy. I've been vegan for years but there are still a few leather bags in my closet. 
And I kinda miss the concept of shame. Yes I am old and there I times I wax nostalgic for hearing phrases like "you should be ashamed of yourself" and "menace to society".   I do my best to keep the spirit---------all my cats have grown up hearing "Shame on you------you know better than that!!!!!!!!" 



That said, BRAVO for your post


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> all righty then
> 
> 
> 
> Ya know, I don't even mind the judgemental part so much. I would be willing to wager that we have all been judgemental about something/someone at some time in our lives. It is so easy to read or hear something and broad jump to an ill informed opinion just because it jibes so neatly with what we already believe. But that is for another forum.
> Same with hypocrisy. I've been vegan for years but there are still a few leather bags in my closet.
> And I kinda miss the concept of shame. Yes I am old and there I times I wax nostalgic for hearing phrases like "you should be ashamed of yourself" and "menace to society".   I do my best to keep the spirit---------all my cats have grown up hearing "Shame on you------you know better than that!!!!!!!!"
> 
> 
> 
> That said, BRAVO for your post


I for one didn't appreciate being attacked personally and I'm surprised that post was allowed to stand.  I've been told it's against the rules to talk about other members and to keep it OT.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I for one didn't appreciate being attacked personally and I'm surprised *that post was allowed to stand. * I've been told it's against the rules to talk about other members and to keep it OT.


Agree with you on that! She attacked you personally but mod did nothing.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Agree with you on that! She attacked you personally but mod did nothing.


yes, and prior to that she had told me she liked debating with me...then the personal attack.  foolish of me to respond to her.


----------



## mrsinsyder

chicinthecity777 said:


> Agree with you on that! She attacked you personally but mod did nothing.


Meanwhile you’ll get in trouble for posting this.


----------



## bisousx

That poster has attacked multiple people in different designer threads then acts like it was a civil discussion lol.


----------



## poopsie

bisousx said:


> That poster has attacked multiple people in different designer threads then acts like it was a civil discussion lol.


Oh it hasn't just been in designer threads


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> That poster has attacked multiple people in different designer threads then acts like it was a civil discussion lol.



maybe she needs to be banned


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> maybe she needs to be banned



MARKLED!


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> maybe she needs to be banned


Pfft, even the poster who asked to be banned wasn’t. Things that make you wonder...


----------



## Annawakes

bisousx said:


> That poster has attacked multiple people in different designer threads then acts like it was a civil discussion lol.


Yes me!  I tried to explain myself with reasoning and no matter what I said it inflamed that poster even more.


----------



## mdcx

Flatsy said:


> Kate was probably trying to give helpful advice.  The Queen prefers stockings to bare legs.  I doubt Kate would have put her little attendants in tights unless someone told her it was preferred.  Kate has always tried to fit in and follow the rules, whereas Meghan refused to be cooperative about anything from the beginning.  Just like when the Queen sent Meghan polite word that hats would be worn at their joint engagement and Meghan sent back word that she would not wear a hat.
> 
> The nerve of Harry and Meghan coming at the Cambridges for not being welcoming enough.  Who would continue to reach out to someone who was so nasty?  If someone made me cry and I was already a shy person, that would be it for me.


I would guess Kate was trying to advocate for the standards/protocols of the BRF as she knew them, and prevent any issues with QEII seeing wedding party sans tights. But Miss M told her where to go, obviously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

I would not be surprised if MM or one of her lackeys is creating accounts to try and rebut certain comments here. It all seems a bit too passionate for someone not personally involved imo. 
Does anyone want to mount a spirited defence of my accusation that MM calls the paps on herself? Or that she is blatantly jealous of KM?


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Does anyone want to mount a spirited defence of my accusation that MM calls the paps on herself? Or that she is blatantly jealous of KM?



I'd say yes to both tbh.


----------



## duna

*


Lodpah said:



			But what if they thought it was in his interest to do so like take away his medications if he’s on without any malicious aforethough
		
Click to expand...

*


Lodpah said:


> t? People who are passionate about things like this can be pretty persuasive.



I don't think anyone who is not a doctor can take away from another person any kind of medication.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since they are dependent on public opinion, I doubt the BRF will let H spiral down too much more, but I could be wrong. Surely they have enough embarrassment with Andrew. Still I do wonder where H is.  Have there been any recent sightings?  It seems like there is a flurry of activity then crickets.


----------



## Clearblueskies

mdcx said:


> I would guess Kate was trying to advocate for the standards/protocols of the BRF as she knew them, and prevent any issues with QEII seeing wedding party sans tights. But Miss M told her where to go, obviously.


The second set of bridesmaids look a lot more polished when you see the pictures together.  My guess is Kate would’ve been trying to help, having experienced the level of scrutiny that goes with a royal wedding herself.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> The second set of bridesmaids look a lot more polished when you see the pictures together.  My guess is Kate would’ve been trying to help, having experienced the level of scrutiny that goes with a royal wedding herself.



Possibly there were also 2 'rules' going head to head here:

The mostly followed Western etiquette that 'bride has the last say'

v

The protocol that for Royal weddings (that take place in somewhere like a CofE like St.Georges Chapel) bridesmaids wear tights (and brides cover their arms). It's a nod to modesty in the High Church, but also marks out why 'this day is different from other days' as a formal occasion.

I can see why looking at the pictures many would be on M's side, and if I believed her stated reason I would too, but she's all about breaking tradition for the sake of doing so and not even trying to understand a different culture. She is difficult for the sake of it, she imposes herself and if people don't like her taking charge, she has her agenda and boo hoo stories at the ready.

It was the middle of May at Windsor, not August in Florida. It was not _that_ hot. It's usually freezing in C of E churches whatever the weather outside and the ceremonies take 'forever'.

I wouldn't care what the bridesmaids wore but Charlotte was a bridesmaid and Kate is her mother. I would worry that my 3 y o daughter would catch a chill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Duchess-Cambridge-claims-feels-exhausted.html

Tatler vs the Palace — did H&M have anything to do with this piece?  I guess everything is suspect now.
I thought the Tatler cover was a beautiful photo of Kate, so I posted it.
If possible,  I’ll remove my post and head for corner. Apologies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now this — blasted drones.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-pay-for-own-security?source=articles&via=rss

ETA: 
this article paired with Tatler’s exhaustion article = H&M are ready to return to the UK


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this — blasted drones.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-pay-for-own-security?source=articles&via=rss


their "friends" sure are talkative.....why don't we hear other celebs complaining about drones?  yes, the cars allegedly following them is reminiscent of diana.....would trigger "H" if true
But she is near her mother in LA


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Duchess-Cambridge-claims-feels-exhausted.html
> 
> Tatler vs the Palace — did H&M have anything to do with this piece?  I guess everything is suspect now.
> I thought the Tatler cover was a beautiful photo of Kate, so I posted it.
> If possible,  I’ll remove my post and head for corner. Apologies.


I skimmed the article and nothing jumped out at me that should put Kate in a bad light.  If she’s pissed because she’s doing her job AND what was supposed to be MM’s, well who wouldn’t be?  Most of us know what it’s like being stuck on the receiving end of a slacker, and it’s not fun.  I think she has shown nothing less than grace under pressure.  And I certainly don’t think you have anything to apologize for.  If I missed the part where Kate kicks puppies and curses kids... oops, my bad.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this — blasted drones.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-pay-for-own-security?source=articles&via=rss


 My eyes cannot roll back far enough, the pathetic attempts of these two. They don’t seem able to fathom how bad these planted stories make them look.


----------



## V0N1B2

From the now infamous "Africa documentary":

“When I first met my now-husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy, but my British friends said to me: ‘I’m sure he’s great but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life’.”

“And I very naively, I’m American, we don’t have that there, what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it. So, it’s been complicated,” she added.

 I don't know which is more laughable - that she has "British friends" or that she needed to remind the interviewer that "I'm American" and "we don't have that there". 
Maybe it's that she really thinks that playing the naive innocent little girl schtick is believable coming from a California-raised almost 40 year old been around the block more than once actress.
"...what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it..." 
I mean, c'mon


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this — blasted drones.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-pay-for-own-security?source=articles&via=rss



Hmm, if they were actually concerned about their privacy and the pesky paparazzi maybe they shouldn't have moved to the WORLD CAPITAL OF PAPARAZZI!! Maybe don't live in the known home of a famous movie star/producer. It is that simple.

They could have moved anywhere. They set up their situation and then they complain when it goes exactly as anyone could have predicted.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Who could possibly have foreseen that drones would find them?  It’s inconceivable.  
Said no one ever.

I think they are paving the way for a return to the UK with this nonsense.


----------



## caramelize126

Clearblueskies said:


> The second set of bridesmaids look a lot more polished when you see the pictures together.  My guess is Kate would’ve been trying to help, having experienced the level of scrutiny that goes with a royal wedding herself.



The second set ( Kate's bridesmaids) also have their dresses ironed. I'm not sure why everyone in Meghans' wedding party ( Megs included) had wrinkly outfits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> From the now infamous "Africa documentary":
> 
> “When I first met my now-husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy, but my British friends said to me: ‘I’m sure he’s great but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life’.”
> 
> “And I very naively, I’m American, we don’t have that there, what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it. So, it’s been complicated,” she added.
> 
> I don't know which is more laughable - that she has "British friends" or that she needed to remind the interviewer that "I'm American" and "we don't have that there".
> Maybe it's* that she really thinks that playing the naive innocent little girl schtick is believable coming from a California-raised almost 40 year old been around the block more than once actress.*
> "...what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it..."
> I mean, c'mon



I love Stanley! 
It boggles the mind that some people actually believe her bunk.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CobaltBlu said:


> Who could possibly have foreseen that drones would find them?  It’s inconceivable.
> Said no one ever.
> 
> I think they are paving the way for a return to the UK with this nonsense.


I hope not


----------



## 1LV

It seems that when we hear from MM she’s whining and complaining.  About everything.  It’s all to garner sympathy and attention.  There’s nothing remotely excusable about anyone in her position playing the victim.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> It seems that when we hear from MM she’s whining and complaining.  About everything.  It’s all to garner sympathy and attention.  There’s nothing remotely excusable about anyone in her position playing the victim.


especially now when so many people are sick physically or out of work and worrying about losing their homes, feeding their families


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this — blasted drones.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-pay-for-own-security?source=articles&via=rss
> ETA:
> this article paired with Tatler’s exhaustion article = H&M are ready to return to the UK


The entire article is PR, designed to make them look like poor victims.  Who is this "friend". Omid?
Poor Meghan and H. Unable to thrive in the California sunshine because they just HAD to let everyone know where they were living.
I especially enjoyed this part:
_Harry and Meghan are also becoming increasingly concerned by the antics of paparazzi in cars pursuing them to take photographs, the friend said.
“They were out driving in the last month in Los Angeles and were noticed by paparazzi,” the friend said. “They were then tailed, followed and chased by two cars, which were being driven very erratically. When they parked up, one of the cars following them, which had been in an outer lane, cut across two lanes of traffic to park themselves. The photographer’s car was five meters away from causing a T-bone crash. It was incredibly dangerous, shocking and scary. They were rattled, but they handled it the best way they could.”
“But the reality is people are following and tailing them every day. They are trying not to let the aggressiveness get to them. Protecting their family is their top concern.”_
This reminds me of someone, who could it be? Hmmmm, maybe.........




*DIANA?*

"_The friend said baby Archie was not with them at the time as they were delivering food for the Project Angel charity._"
Well dolls, maybe it's a good idea to do these selfless charitable acts without pulling your mask down when you ring the doorbell so that the recipient can see who you are, no?

Also?
_However, Meghan and Harry’s friend hit back at such charges and said: “It’s absurd to say they are inviting this because they are in California. When they were in a totally remote location in Canada, they still had swarms of paparazzi photographers descending on them from all over the globe.” 

“No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”_
No, no of course not. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves. Nope. Not one bit. 
They were at that property on Vancouver Island for quite some time, until I guess Meghan felt like they weren't getting enough press so she had to drop little hints about their location. Out of sight out of mind is a terrible predicament for a narc like her to be in. They had scooted off to LA when people thought they were still in Canada but again, she had to make sure she was in the news, photographed out walking the dog, delivering food to the poors.

They are definitely preparing the narrative for a move back to the U.K.  It's been so difficult to live their lives in LA under all this scrutiny.  Like, who knew?  They'll just accept that evil horrible racist British press because, as everyone knows, just like the tabloids and paparazzi, there is no racism in America.  They will slide back into Frogbottom Hollow and she'll fly back and forth to LA when she feels like it, and Harry will be cutting ribbons at elder care homes up in Grimsby. 
At least this way they get a free house and all expenses are paid.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> The entire article is PR, designed to make them look like poor victims.  Who is this "friend". Omid?
> Poor Meghan and H. Unable to thrive in the California sunshine because they just HAD to let everyone know where they were living.
> I especially enjoyed this part:
> _Harry and Meghan are also becoming increasingly concerned by the antics of paparazzi in cars pursuing them to take photographs, the friend said.
> “They were out driving in the last month in Los Angeles and were noticed by paparazzi,” the friend said. “They were then tailed, followed and chased by two cars, which were being driven very erratically. When they parked up, one of the cars following them, which had been in an outer lane, cut across two lanes of traffic to park themselves. The photographer’s car was five meters away from causing a T-bone crash. It was incredibly dangerous, shocking and scary. They were rattled, but they handled it the best way they could.”
> “But the reality is people are following and tailing them every day. They are trying not to let the aggressiveness get to them. Protecting their family is their top concern.”_
> This reminds me of someone, who could it be? Hmmmm, maybe.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *DIANA?*
> 
> "_The friend said baby Archie was not with them at the time as they were delivering food for the Project Angel charity._"
> Well dolls, maybe it's a good idea to do these selfless charitable acts without pulling your mask down when you ring the doorbell so that the recipient can see who you are, no?
> 
> Also?
> _However, Meghan and Harry’s friend hit back at such charges and said: “It’s absurd to say they are inviting this because they are in California. When they were in a totally remote location in Canada, they still had swarms of paparazzi photographers descending on them from all over the globe.”
> 
> “No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”_
> No, no of course not. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves. Nope. Not one bit.
> They were at that property on Vancouver Island for quite some time, until I guess Meghan felt like they weren't getting enough press so she had to drop little hints about their location. Out of sight out of mind is a terrible predicament for a narc like her to be in. They had scooted off to LA when people thought they were still in Canada but again, she had to make sure she was in the news, photographed out walking the dog, delivering food to the poors.
> 
> They are definitely preparing the narrative for a move back to the U.K.  It's been so difficult to live their lives in LA under all this scrutiny.  Like, who knew?  They'll just accept that evil horrible racist British press because, as everyone knows, just like the tabloids and paparazzi, there is no racism in America.  They will slide back into Frogbottom Hollow and she'll fly back and forth to LA when she feels like it, and Harry will be cutting ribbons at elder care homes up in Grimsby.
> At least this way they get a free house and all expenses are paid.


wonder how long it will take for her to figure out whether she can get A-list acting roles


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> The entire article is PR, designed to make them look like poor victims.  Who is this "friend". Omid?
> Poor Meghan and H. Unable to thrive in the California sunshine because they just HAD to let everyone know where they were living.
> I especially enjoyed this part:
> _Harry and Meghan are also becoming increasingly concerned by the antics of paparazzi in cars pursuing them to take photographs, the friend said.
> “They were out driving in the last month in Los Angeles and were noticed by paparazzi,” the friend said. “They were then tailed, followed and chased by two cars, which were being driven very erratically. When they parked up, one of the cars following them, which had been in an outer lane, cut across two lanes of traffic to park themselves. The photographer’s car was five meters away from causing a T-bone crash. It was incredibly dangerous, shocking and scary. They were rattled, but they handled it the best way they could.”
> “But the reality is people are following and tailing them every day. They are trying not to let the aggressiveness get to them. Protecting their family is their top concern.”_
> This reminds me of someone, who could it be? Hmmmm, maybe.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *DIANA?*
> 
> "_The friend said baby Archie was not with them at the time as they were delivering food for the Project Angel charity._"
> Well dolls, maybe it's a good idea to do these selfless charitable acts without pulling your mask down when you ring the doorbell so that the recipient can see who you are, no?
> 
> Also?
> _However, Meghan and Harry’s friend hit back at such charges and said: “It’s absurd to say they are inviting this because they are in California. When they were in a totally remote location in Canada, they still had swarms of paparazzi photographers descending on them from all over the globe.”
> 
> “No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”_
> No, no of course not. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves. Nope. Not one bit.
> They were at that property on Vancouver Island for quite some time, until I guess Meghan felt like they weren't getting enough press so she had to drop little hints about their location. Out of sight out of mind is a terrible predicament for a narc like her to be in. They had scooted off to LA when people thought they were still in Canada but again, she had to make sure she was in the news, photographed out walking the dog, delivering food to the poors.
> 
> They are definitely preparing the narrative for a move back to the U.K.  It's been so difficult to live their lives in LA under all this scrutiny.  Like, who knew?  They'll just accept that evil horrible racist British press because, as everyone knows, just like the tabloids and paparazzi, there is no racism in America.  They will slide back into Frogbottom Hollow and she'll fly back and forth to LA when she feels like it, and Harry will be cutting ribbons at elder care homes up in Grimsby.
> At least this way they get a free house and all expenses are paid.


Starring roles for 40 yr old ingenues must not be rolling in.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Starring roles for 40 yr old ingenues must not be rolling in.


can you imagine a producer or director choosing between "M" and someone like Reese Witherspoon?


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine a producer or director choosing between "M" and someone like Reese Witherspoon?


Never.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Never.


no one told her everyone would be so unfair!


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Pfft, even the poster who asked to be banned wasn’t. Things that make you wonder...


WHAT????  She attacked me multiple times; called me a LIAR .. I reported it, but she was still on here for a bit until Vlad told her to stop .. but she's still on???


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> WHAT????  She attacked me multiple times; called me a LIAR .. I reported it, but she was still on here for a bit until Vlad told her to stop .. but she's still on???


she asked for a thread ban....I don't think there is such a thing.  she's still on.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> she asked for a thread ban....I don't think there is such a thing.  she's still on.


There is... it was done to someone in this thread before: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...n-markle-thread.679793/page-847#post-33389624.


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> There is... it was done to someone in this thread before.


oh, didn't know that
thanks


----------



## mrsinsyder

CeeJay said:


> WHAT????  She attacked me multiple times; called me a LIAR .. I reported it, but she was still on here for a bit until Vlad told her to stop .. but she's still on???


She hasn't been back but she's not been banned.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Megs

I actually don't know if we can do thread bans, that would be @Vlad who knows, not me. 

Banning someone from the boards takes quite a bit. We issue warnings and delete comments, and the warnings allow us to see that poster and their subsequent behavior if it warrants a banning. 

Threads like this one involve a lot of passionate discussion, and many times these are the threads that get most heated. We check all reports and act on them within the lines of our rules. Thank you to everyone for following our rules, and being respectful even when you disagree with someone!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Megs said:


> I actually don't know if we can do thread bans, that would be @Vlad who knows, not me.
> 
> Banning someone from the boards takes quite a bit. We issue warnings and delete comments, and the warnings allow us to see that poster and their subsequent behavior if it warrants a banning.
> 
> Threads like this one involve a lot of passionate discussion, and many times these are the threads that get most heated. We check all reports and act on them within the lines of our rules. Thank you to everyone for following our rules, and being respectful even when you disagree with someone!


I think there's some frustration with the inconsistency of moderation. I've been scolded for not reporting something, when I have reported it. One mod will take something down, and one will leave it up. 

I know moderating isn't fun, but it's a bummer when your posts are deleted for saying that you personally do charity work (as one of mine was, in this very thread), but insults to other members are just left up. I've received lots of PMs related to this thread about the... inconsistency of at least one moderator.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Starring roles for 40 yr old ingenues must not be rolling in.


I mean, 40yo Oscar winning actresses have said Hollywood is harsh after a certain age.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this — blasted drones.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-pay-for-own-security?source=articles&via=rss
> 
> ETA:
> this article paired with Tatler’s exhaustion article = H&M are ready to return to the UK


I have to say that, agree on the Drones .. I absolutely HATE THEM!  We had a neighbor who flew his stinkin' Drone around the neighborhood .. "trying" to look inside people's houses (especially bedrooms).  He also used to fly that dam# thing over our Pool and while I ALWAYS have a bathing suit on, to me .. it's an invasion of my privacy!  Unfortunately, if you attempt to swipe at the drone .. or worse yet, actually damage it .. you have to pay for its repair!  That just frosts my cookies; the drones invade YOUR space but if you damage it??? .. ARRRGGGHHH!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I have to say that, agree on the Drones .. I absolutely HATE THEM!  We had a neighbor who flew his stinkin' Drone around the neighborhood .. "trying" to look inside people's houses (especially bedrooms).  He also used to fly that dam# thing over our Pool and while I ALWAYS have a bathing suit on, to me .. it's an invasion of my privacy!  Unfortunately, if you attempt to swipe at the drone .. or worse yet, actually damage it .. you have to pay for its repair!  That just frosts my cookies; the drones invade YOUR space but if you damage it??? .. ARRRGGGHHH!



You cannot be charged if they never find the drone.


----------



## papertiger

mrsinsyder said:


> I think there's some frustration with the inconsistency of moderation. I've been scolded for not reporting something, when I have reported it. One mod will take something down, and one will leave it up.
> 
> I know moderating isn't fun, but it's a bummer when your posts are deleted for saying that you personally do charity work (as one of mine was, in this very thread), but insults to other members are just left up. I've received lots of PMs related to this thread about the... inconsistency of at least one moderator.



Mods can't read everything all the time. They are just volunteers.
Only mods of each forum can immediately take action.
Mods that have read offending posts and are not designated mods to that particular forum report  them. It will be dealt with the same way as if any member reports it.

So

If you see an offending post(s)
Report
The mod for that forum will then be notified as well as admins
If the post is deemed offensive (or breaking any tPF rule) it will be dealt with so that it complies or is deleted.

You may also use the 'ignore' function for certain members - ignorance can be bliss. There are for sure some wind-up merchants, they thrive on the drama. Pity them but don't react. The mods will get to them soon enough.


----------



## mrsinsyder

papertiger said:


> If the post is deemed offensive (or breaking any tPF rule) it will be dealt with so that it complies or is deleted.


One thing I've found helpful is the 'sticky' posts on some threads that outline the rules in that thread.

For example, in the LV 'what are you stalking' thread, you now can't post anything besides ISO or availability. No idea when that rule was created and even the OP of the thread disagrees with it, but many posters have had posts deleted for not knowing that was a rule in that thread that was apparently made at some point in the thousands of pages of it. 

This isn't directed at you at all, it's just an example of how moderation on the forum can sometimes be confusing. Even in this thread, not "discussing other members" isn't a TPF rule, it's a rule that's been requested in this thread. There are threads all over the forum where members drag each other left and right and it's allowed.


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> From the now infamous "Africa documentary":
> 
> “And I very naively, I’m American, we don’t have that there, what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it. So, it’s been complicated,” she added.
> 
> I don't know which is more laughable - that she has "British friends" or that she needed to remind the interviewer that "I'm American" and "we don't have that there".
> Maybe it's that she really thinks that playing the naive innocent little girl schtick is believable coming from a California-raised almost 40 year old been around the block more than once actress.
> "...what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it..."
> I mean, c'mon


*What utter BULLSH!T to an epic degree*!!!!  I thought she was supposed to be "SO SMART"; after all .. doesn't she have a University degree in International Relations?  More importantly, she sure as heck knows about the Tabloids here in the States, and frankly .. some of them can be just as harsh (_e.g., National Inquirer, NY Post, New York Daily News, etc_.) .. if they have dirt, they sure as heck are going to print it!   She's just making [stupid] excuses ..


----------



## scarlet555

What am I missing?  Does she really think she can get A list actress roles because she married a Prince?  Grace Kelly, was an A list actress, that being one of the reasons the Prince of Monaco even courted and married her.  When Grace Kelly was offered a role in a Hitchcock movie, the royal family didn't allow her to pursue it because... of many reasons; Grace's acting career was over when she got married and became a princess.  M really is a z-list actress, I don't know what her agent told her, but I would not consider her role in "Suits" a breaking role, at all.
Getting a voice over gig by your agent husband for charity, that's different, when you need rent money.


----------



## chicinthecity777

scarlet555 said:


> What am I missing?  Does she really think she can get A list actress roles because she married a Prince?  Grace Kelly, was an A list actress, that being one of the reasons the Prince of Monaco even courted and married her.  When Grace Kelly was offered a role in a Hitchcock movie, the royal family didn't allow her to pursue it because... of many reasons; Grace's acting career was over when she got married and became a princess.  M really is a z-list actress, I don't know what her agent told her, but I would not consider her role in "Suits" a breaking role, at all.
> Getting a voice over gig by your agent husband for charity, that's different, when you need rent money.


That's the first thing I thought when they announced their engagement. I thought she was giving up her "acting career". Seems like she can't let it go.


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> The entire article is PR, designed to make them look like poor victims.  Who is this "friend". Omid?
> Poor Meghan and H. Unable to thrive in the California sunshine because they just HAD to let everyone know where they were living.
> I especially enjoyed this part:
> _Harry and Meghan are also becoming increasingly concerned by the antics of paparazzi in cars pursuing them to take photographs, the friend said.
> “They were out driving in the last month in Los Angeles and were noticed by paparazzi,” the friend said. “They were then tailed, followed and chased by two cars, which were being driven very erratically. When they parked up, one of the cars following them, which had been in an outer lane, cut across two lanes of traffic to park themselves. The photographer’s car was five meters away from causing a T-bone crash. It was incredibly dangerous, shocking and scary. They were rattled, but they handled it the best way they could.”
> “But the reality is people are following and tailing them every day. They are trying not to let the aggressiveness get to them. Protecting their family is their top concern.”_
> This reminds me of someone, who could it be? Hmmmm, maybe.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *DIANA?*
> 
> "_The friend said baby Archie was not with them at the time as they were delivering food for the Project Angel charity._"
> Well dolls, maybe it's a good idea to do these selfless charitable acts without pulling your mask down when you ring the doorbell so that the recipient can see who you are, no?
> 
> Also?
> _However, Meghan and Harry’s friend hit back at such charges and said: “It’s absurd to say they are inviting this because they are in California. When they were in a totally remote location in Canada, they still had swarms of paparazzi photographers descending on them from all over the globe.”
> 
> “No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”_
> No, no of course not. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves. Nope. Not one bit.
> They were at that property on Vancouver Island for quite some time, until I guess Meghan felt like they weren't getting enough press so she had to drop little hints about their location. Out of sight out of mind is a terrible predicament for a narc like her to be in. They had scooted off to LA when people thought they were still in Canada but again, she had to make sure she was in the news, photographed out walking the dog, delivering food to the poors.
> 
> They are definitely preparing the narrative for a move back to the U.K.  It's been so difficult to live their lives in LA under all this scrutiny.  Like, who knew?  They'll just accept that evil horrible racist British press because, as everyone knows, just like the tabloids and paparazzi, there is no racism in America.  They will slide back into Frogbottom Hollow and she'll fly back and forth to LA when she feels like it, and Harry will be cutting ribbons at elder care homes up in Grimsby.
> At least this way they get a free house and all expenses are paid.




*“No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”*
It is most definitely not "rural Canada"


----------



## bag-mania

They had better get their story straight with their various mouthpieces. Omid Scobie was quoted just yesterday as saying Meghan had no intention of taking any acting jobs. It's not like there are any offers coming in. Maybe if she plays her cards just right she could be cast in something on the level of Sharknado 7: Bite Me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Righto!  Roger that.
Hanging out with Oprah and Tyler will never get anyone attention, especially in LA during a pandemic  \sarcasm.

ETA:  just watch the National Enquirer Scandalous show. Their reporters were trained by the Brits.



bellecate said:


> *“No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”*
> It is most definitely not "rural Canada"


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> They had better get their story straight with their various mouthpieces. Omid Scobie was quoted just yesterday as saying Meghan had no intention of taking any acting jobs. It's not like there are any offers coming in. *Maybe if she plays her cards just right she could be cast in something on the level of Sharknado 7: Bite Me. *


Sharknado 7! 
Can't. Stop. Laughing. ​


----------



## CarryOn2020

The 2 books plus a Sharknado!?  Be still my heart.
How will we fit it all in?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Seems everywhere they go and everything they do just doesn't work out for them. They blame everyone else. Sorry, but when the same outcomes keep happening, at what point do you realize the problem is you and not the "everyone else" you keep blaming for your failures?

These two need to go away. Stop struggling for relevance so desperately. They had their chance and totally blew it.


----------



## kemilia

caramelize126 said:


> The second set ( Kate's bridesmaids) also have their dresses ironed. I'm not sure why everyone in Meghans' wedding party ( Megs included) had wrinkly outfits.


Wrinkles are modern?


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> Wrinkles are modern?



Too busy being a modern woman out to change the BRF and the world. No time for looking presentable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cannot possibly give it up now. She’s got the D. Foster connection. Look out, Broadway.  H&M comin for ya.



chicinthecity777 said:


> That's the first thing I thought when they announced their engagement. I thought she was giving up her "acting career". Seems like she can't let it go.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Cannot possibly give it up now. She’s got the D. Foster connection. Look out, Broadway.  H&M comin for ya.


Someone posted a few pages back that the Big Apple was their next move


----------



## Clearblueskies

poopsie said:


> Someone posted a few pages back that the Big Apple was their next move


Next stop, ***** Tower


----------



## Frivole88

poopsie said:


> Someone posted a few pages back that the Big Apple was their next move



ugh, not here please. we have enough problems already.


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> *“No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”*
> It is most definitely not "rural Canada"



IKR
Reminded me of the Danielle Van Dam coverage. All the non-local reports had her found in a "remote area". Well that "remote area" was about three miles from my house, has a golf course, an elementary school, a large Indian casino and the road is traveled by tons of people a day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> Next stop, ***** Tower



This  is hilarious!  You  made my day  Thank you so very much,


----------



## mrsinsyder

PREDICTABLE.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As much as I would like it to be *****’s place, I’ll guess they will land at Gayle’s place. 
Apartment in the city during the week & The Hamptons on the weekend. 




poopsie said:


> Someone posted a few pages back that the Big Apple was their next move


----------



## scarlet555

[


mrsinsyder said:


> PREDICTABLE.
> 
> View attachment 4741684



Show us the receipt... or else it's just BS.


----------



## poopsie

mrsinsyder said:


> PREDICTABLE.
> 
> View attachment 4741684



So, does that mean that they are paying/reimbursing Tyler for the use of his team?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> As much as I would like it to be *****’s place, I’ll guess they will land at Gayle’s place.
> Apartment in the city during the week & The Hamptons on the weekend.


I'm sure Gayle has a nice apartment but probabably not worthy of their magnificence, or roomy enough for all their servants

funny - a couple of years ago more people knew who Gayle was than "M"


----------



## Katel

V0N1B2 said:


> From the now infamous "Africa documentary":
> 
> “When I first met my now-husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy, but my British friends said to me: ‘I’m sure he’s great but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life’.”
> 
> “And I very naively, I’m American, we don’t have that there, what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it. So, it’s been complicated,” she added.
> 
> I don't know which is more laughable - that she has "British friends" or that she needed to remind the interviewer that "I'm American" and "we don't have that there".
> Maybe it's that she really thinks that playing the naive innocent little girl schtick is believable coming from a California-raised almost 40 year old been around the block more than once actress.
> "...what are you talking about, that doesn’t make any sense. I’m not in tabloids, I didn’t get it..."
> I mean, c'mon


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Katel said:


>



Brilliant! Oh poor little Meggie, weeping on top of her piles of couture dresses, jewels and the shattered dreams of her former servants...


----------



## bellecate

poopsie said:


> IKR
> Reminded me of the Danielle Van Dam coverage. All the non-local reports had her found in a "remote area". Well that "remote area" was about three miles from my house, has a golf course, an elementary school, a large Indian casino and the road is traveled by tons of people a day.



_Hey neighbour , it's about 7 K from my place as well. _


----------



## Katel

mdcx said:


> Brilliant! Oh poor little Meggie, weeping on top of her piles of couture dresses, jewels and the shattered dreams of her former servants...



Sorry for the OT - we all need a laugh (at least it’s British?) Meggie Foster is hysterical! Check out her twitter...here’s Boris ft. Theresa


----------



## rose60610

Wha? England isn't acceptable, nor is Canada, now L.A. isn't good enough, so now NY?  Then what? Modeling mops for Home Shopping Network?  Going back to Suitcase Girl?

Hey Harry, you picked yourself a winner! 

They seem "to give" each location "a chance" at promoting their existence. Then, if the location "fails", it's ONWARD! 

Pretty soon they're going to run out of cities to flee to for "privacy and pimping what they got".  Whatever the hell that might be.  If there is a prominent city that thrives on "Poor Me" stories, M&H are waiting breathlessly by the phone. Plus, they got Archie, just waiting to be thrust into cameras in his underwear by Mommy and her plastered on toothy smile with a hard luck story about the hardships of being a parent to a royal offspring. And having to explain that the trappings of Buckingham Palace, Frogmore, private jet travel, servants, unimaginable luxuries, etc were just too much to bear? 

You know, it would NOT surprise me if they went back crawling to Frogmore. They know they're personae non gratae. So The Crown would be pressured into letting forgo most charity obligations for them.  Then they get to lead luxurious lives without all the humdrum of associating with "All Those People".  Archie is earning his nefarious keep yet cannot be described at a ne-er-do-well.

I hpe they're "OK" .


----------



## Annawakes

I wonder if the frequent location changes is them trying to evade having to pay taxes on the free or greatly reduced rent they’ve been enjoying.


----------



## lulilu

OMGosh, it's taken me so long to catch up with this thread after missing it for the holiday weekend, and I've been speed reading, so forgive me.
I do have to mention my reaction to the notion that she is a calligrapher -- the letter to her father was just about the most amateurish "calligraphy" that I have ever seen, so as to be virtually unreadable.  So I am sure her precious card to H for their anniversary was laughable.
In response to the various posts re tax liability -- I'd love to own the accounting firm that will handle their taxes.  Yes, non-taxable gifts are certainly very limited here in the US.  My degree is law and not accounting, but wow do they have issues.  I imagine there will be many requests for extensions of filing of returns.  And yes, CA and other states will want their piece of the action as well.  What a mess that will be.  I hope for their sake the BRF has accountants who can handle things for them.  At hundreds if not 4 figure hourly rates, they will be poverty stricken just to file their tax returns.


----------



## scarlet555

lulilu said:


> OMGosh, it's taken me so long to catch up with this thread after missing it for the holiday weekend, and I've been speed reading, so forgive me.
> I do have to mention my reaction to the notion that she is a calligrapher -- the letter to her father was just about the most amateurish "calligraphy" that I have ever seen, so as to be virtually unreadable.  So I am sure her precious card to H for their anniversary was laughable.
> In response to the various posts re tax liability -- I'd love to own the accounting firm that will handle their taxes.  Yes, non-taxable gifts are certainly very limited here in the US.  My degree is law and not accounting, but wow do they have issues.  I imagine there will be many requests for extensions of filing of returns.  And yes, CA and other states will want their piece of the action as well.  What a mess that will be.  I hope for their sake the BRF has accountants who can handle things for them.  At hundreds if not 4 figure hourly rates, they will be poverty stricken just to file their tax returns.



Well if you’re going shopping for $14million mansions and have $2millilon security, with paps on speed dial, you gotta pay if you want to play. 
Maybe she should have waited tables, you can learn a thing or two as a starving actor, instead of complaining about the hard life of acting on a blog.    She is probably looking into playing herself in a lifetime or hallmark sequel, I don’t see much else unless Oprah has Tyler Perry cast her in a role.  Not sure about public interest though, she doesn’t have that charisma anyone cares about besides the pity card she gives her stans.


----------



## mdcx

scarlet555 said:


> Well if you’re going shopping for $14million mansions and have $2millilon security, with paps on speed dial, you gotta pay if you want to play.
> Maybe she should have waited tables, you can learn a thing or two as a starving actor, instead of complaining about the hard life of acting on a blog.    She is probably looking into playing herself in a lifetime or hallmark sequel, I don’t see much else unless Oprah has Tyler Perry cast her in a role.  Not sure about public interest though, she doesn’t have that charisma anyone cares about besides the pity card she gives her stans.


Waited tables! Hello, this is Meghan Markle we are talking about, not your average triple threat wannabe!!!
Waiting tables is so "surviving not thriving".....


----------



## Sol Ryan

V0N1B2 said:


> The entire article is PR, designed to make them look like poor victims.  Who is this "friend". Omid?
> Poor Meghan and H. Unable to thrive in the California sunshine because they just HAD to let everyone know where they were living.
> I especially enjoyed this part:
> _Harry and Meghan are also becoming increasingly concerned by the antics of paparazzi in cars pursuing them to take photographs, the friend said.
> “They were out driving in the last month in Los Angeles and were noticed by paparazzi,” the friend said. “They were then tailed, followed and chased by two cars, which were being driven very erratically. When they parked up, one of the cars following them, which had been in an outer lane, cut across two lanes of traffic to park themselves. The photographer’s car was five meters away from causing a T-bone crash. It was incredibly dangerous, shocking and scary. They were rattled, but they handled it the best way they could.”
> “But the reality is people are following and tailing them every day. They are trying not to let the aggressiveness get to them. Protecting their family is their top concern.”_
> This reminds me of someone, who could it be? Hmmmm, maybe.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *DIANA?*
> 
> "_The friend said baby Archie was not with them at the time as they were delivering food for the Project Angel charity._"
> Well dolls, maybe it's a good idea to do these selfless charitable acts without pulling your mask down when you ring the doorbell so that the recipient can see who you are, no?
> 
> Also?
> _However, Meghan and Harry’s friend hit back at such charges and said: “It’s absurd to say they are inviting this because they are in California. When they were in a totally remote location in Canada, they still had swarms of paparazzi photographers descending on them from all over the globe.”
> 
> “No one would expect that in rural Canada, but it happened, just as it has now happened in L.A. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves.”_
> No, no of course not. They have absolutely not tried to bring any attention onto themselves. Nope. Not one bit.
> They were at that property on Vancouver Island for quite some time, until I guess Meghan felt like they weren't getting enough press so she had to drop little hints about their location. Out of sight out of mind is a terrible predicament for a narc like her to be in. They had scooted off to LA when people thought they were still in Canada but again, she had to make sure she was in the news, photographed out walking the dog, delivering food to the poors.
> 
> They are definitely preparing the narrative for a move back to the U.K.  It's been so difficult to live their lives in LA under all this scrutiny.  Like, who knew?  They'll just accept that evil horrible racist British press because, as everyone knows, just like the tabloids and paparazzi, there is no racism in America.  They will slide back into Frogbottom Hollow and she'll fly back and forth to LA when she feels like it, and Harry will be cutting ribbons at elder care homes up in Grimsby.
> At least this way they get a free house and all expenses are paid.




Ugh, this one annoys me.  We live in an age of dash cams and cell phones. If the paps were really driving this recklessly and dangerously around them all the time, such that innocent people were in danger, why haven’t they recorded it and contacted the police in the interest of public safety? As much as these two like to play the victim, they would be eating that up...

I’ve been chewing on it a while and I still don’t know what to think.... where is the Omid exclusive? The crocodile tears?  Hmm...


----------



## lalame

Drones and scary aggressive paps are definitely a thing in LA but... how can any celebrity not know that going in? These two always have to play the victim. 

They should’ve just stayed in the U.K. I read that article about how Meghan was feeling isolated and stifled in Windsor... now they feel too exposed everywhere else. Maybe the problem is you and your outlook. Geez.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> Drones and scary aggressive paps are definitely a thing in LA but... how can any celebrity not know that going in? These two always have to play the victim.
> 
> They should’ve just stayed in the U.K. I read that article about how Meghan was feeling isolated and stifled in Windsor... now they feel too exposed everywhere else. Maybe the problem is you and your outlook. Geez.



Maybe she should have opened the windows at Windsor and let some air in...


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh, this one annoys me.  We live in an age of dash cams and cell phones. If the paps were really driving this recklessly and dangerously around them all the time, such that innocent people were in danger, why haven’t they recorded it and contacted the police in the interest of public safety? As much as these two like to play the victim, they would be eating that up...
> 
> I’ve been chewing on it a while and I still don’t know what to think.... where is the Omid exclusive? The crocodile tears?  Hmm...



I’ve seen a few scary incidents on the road myself and I’m sure people do call the cops but nothing really comes out of it. A speeding ticket didn’t stop people from ever speeding again and these guys just figure the payday is worth that kind of risk. Schwarzenegger did pass a law IIRC but those things don’t really help you in the moment. I remember when this happened, it got some attention but I doubt it changed their attitudes: https://www.cnn.com/2012/07/10/showbiz/bieber-paparazzi-chase/index.html


----------



## lalame

All that being said... their choice to settle down in LA and NYC are just nonsensical if they’re so allergic to public scrutiny or attention. Those are not the ideal places to be that way and anyhow this is not rocket science... stop putting out press releases, stop kicking up PR dust, stop Zoom-bombing people and no one is going to have anything to write about or take photos of. You know... be normal, get treated normally?


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I’ve seen a few scary incidents on the road myself and I’m sure people do call the cops but nothing really comes out of it. A speeding ticket didn’t stop people from ever speeding again and these guys just figure the payday is worth that kind of risk. Schwarzenegger did pass a law IIRC but those things don’t really help you in the moment. I remember when this happened, it got some attention but I doubt it changed their attitudes: https://www.cnn.com/2012/07/10/showbiz/bieber-paparazzi-chase/index.html



Oh, I don’t think it would change anything... I mean for the way these two whine and like to sue and act out. You’d think they’d be looking for an opportunity to make a scene...Even just to make an incident report.  It’s like the “private” letter. It was always intended to come out. They need to justify their 2+ million dollar security crew.... why aren’t they showing anything concrete? I’m surprised they aren’t filming everyone trying to film them to prove how intrusive the paparazzi supposedly is. (I mean they might be now that they’ve told everyone where they are so that the paps are looking, which is what they wanted in the first place...)

These two are so contrary with their “I want PRIVACY, but I’m gonna tell you where I am and what I’m DOING even if you didn’t want to know... LOOK AT ME! Are you looking?? Why is everyone looking at me?” schtick.

Also... I just thought of this... what utter BS we don’t have Paparazzi in the US. Harry should know better than that after his Naked Las Vegas Weekend... man get out of here... he thought LA was gonna have fewer Paps than Vegas? Please....


----------



## limom

They would be foolish to settle in either New York or California as those are among the most heavily taxed states of the Union.
May I suggest Florida or Texas?
At the end, I think they will go back to the UK where he is adored and she will be tolerated after a while, imo.
They will have another baby and all will be well with them....
They will look fondly upon what will be known as their excellent adventures abroad...or Royal Rumpspringa.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> They would be foolish to settle in either New York or California as those are among the most heavily taxed states of the Union.
> May I suggest Florida or Texas?
> At the end, I think they will go back to the *UK where he is adored *and she will be tolerated after a while, imo.
> They will have another baby and all will be well with them....
> They will look fondly upon what will be known as their excellent adventures abroad...or Royal Rumpspringa.


If you meant the British public, then nope, he was never really adored and definitely not so now. Obviously the RF will be happy to welcome back I would think.


----------



## lulilu

Growing up in LA, MM had to have read all the various gossip rag stories about the lengths some stars have gone to in order to prevent drone or helicopter photos -- huge tents put up for weddings etc.  And I have to laugh, thinking about the pandemonium at their house when a drone appears -- "H, call the cops!  Call the cops!  There's a drone outside!!!"


----------



## lanasyogamama

scarlet555 said:


> Well if you’re going shopping for $14million mansions and have $2millilon security, with paps on speed dial, you gotta pay if you want to play.
> Maybe she should have waited tables, you can learn a thing or two as a starving actor, instead of complaining about the hard life of acting on a blog.    She is probably looking into playing herself in a lifetime or hallmark sequel, I don’t see much else unless Oprah has Tyler Perry cast her in a role.  Not sure about public interest though, she doesn’t have that charisma anyone cares about besides the pity card she gives her stans.



She actually did wait tables. The comic  Chris Franjola is always talking about his days working with her at some LA hotspot. She would probably deny it if you asked her now though.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If this New York nonsense is true, then I am really starting to feel bad for the baby. I’m not saying you have to stay home all the time, but babies really do thrive on familiarity and routine, and all this constant moving and not having a familiar home is truly not good for him


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whoa, please, please not TX or FL.  With the hurricanes and flooding, we have enough drama. Thanks anyway.
What about Northern Calif? San Francisco area? Carmel? Wine country?  



limom said:


> They would be foolish to settle in either New York or California as those are among the most heavily taxed states of the Union.
> May I suggest Florida or Texas?
> At the end, I think they will go back to the UK where he is adored and she will be tolerated after a while, imo.
> They will have another baby and all will be well with them....
> They will look fondly upon what will be known as their excellent adventures abroad...or Royal Rumpspringa.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> If this New York nonsense is true, then I am really starting to feel bad for the baby. I’m not saying you have to stay home all the time, but babies really do thrive on familiarity and routine, and all this constant moving and not having a familiar home is truly not good for him


But wait, wasn't one of the reasons they _had _to move to LA was to be closer to Doria, the only other family member Archie has access to in the U.S.?


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> She actually did wait tables. The comic  Chris Franjola is always talking about his days working with her at some LA hotspot. She would probably deny it if you asked her now though.


But didn't she say in her "actors" blog something like "at least I didn't have to wait tables"? I could very well be wrong, keeping all her "stories" straight isn't easy.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> May I suggest Florida or Texas?


No ma'am don't you send them here.

I think they should do a Dennis Rodman-style adventure and try to save North Korea.


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t believe there’s a chance in hell of Meghan returning to the UK to live. She doesn’t like it. If Harry goes back he’ll be doing It alone, likely without Archie.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe there’s a chance in hell of Meghan returning to the UK to live. She doesn’t like it. If Harry goes back he’ll be doing It alone, likely without Archie.


I think she would, if she is compensating well enough. Spring and summer in England and winter in Palm Beach with all the other royal grifters.
The Bourbons spent time there...


----------



## marietouchet

GOLLY, GOLLY, GOLLY 
This fairy tale has gotten so goopy, 
Too many competing news stories - they are /are not doing BLAH BLAH 
AND NOW !!!! during all this coronavirus stuff
In the immortal words of Princess Poppy - from Trolls - "seriously (H&M), get some perspective"


----------



## lanasyogamama

kemilia said:


> But didn't she say in her "actors" blog something like "at least I didn't have to wait tables"? I could very well be wrong, keeping all her "stories" straight isn't easy.



Wow, you’re right, she did say that.  I hadn’t thought of that particular lie!!

The restaurant was called Mirabelle, he talked about it on this episode of David Spade’s show.


----------



## chicinthecity777

kemilia said:


> But didn't she say in her "actors" blog something like "at least I didn't have to wait tables"? I could very well be wrong, keeping all her "stories" straight isn't easy.


I remember reading it - part of her blog which was quoted by a poster here.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Mike Fisher/Carrie Underwood started doing a very mini-documentary about their marriage last night (7 min episodes for 4 weeks). The first thing they talked about in the premiere is how Mike is an avid hunter and Carrie is a vegetarian and animal rights activist who also doesn't buy leather. It reminded me immediately of when Harry and Meghan got together and he had to give up his hunting tradition. Apparently Mike and Carrie worked it out and he still hunts. It just reminded me of them and what Harry gave up, unfortunately they invaded my thoughts.
https://www.iamsecond.com/film/mike-and-carrie/


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aaah, yes. The Purdey’s.  Not just any gun, but a collector’s item, the kind passed from father to son to grandson, etc. He sold them for $60K USD.  

Some context:
https://www.thefield.co.uk/shooting/most-expensive-guns-26087
_Purdey, established 1814, acquired the right to make the Woodward over-and-under (patented in 1913) from James Woodward after the Second World War, having offered a more complex, deeper, six-bite design previously. The gun is distinguished by a brilliant hinging system involving stud pins near the knuckle and bifurcated lumps (much copied by dozens of makers) and a unique tongue-and-groove lock mid action. Superlatively strong, this is rarely copied because it is difficult to make. The Woodward-type over-and-under has a low action profile and great elegance of form. The ejection mechanism, improved by Ernest Lawrence, is boxed and powered by leaf springs.

Today, this over-and-under may also be ordered in Damas steel, which looks like traditional Damascus but is a tremendously strong, super-material created by bringing together two powdered steels in a nitrogen vacuum.
I have shot both conventional and Damas guns and found the latter in 30in 12-bore form one of the best I’ve ever used on game.
_
*Price: for Purdey over-and-unders in 12-, 16- or 20-bore start at £108,720. In 28-bore and .410 they rise to £115,320. A Damas version is one of the most expensive guns in the world, and would cost you at least £130,320. *
_
*Delivery:* 18-24 months._




ccbaggirl89 said:


> Mike Fisher/Carrie Underwood started doing a very mini-documentary about their marriage last night (7 min episodes for 4 weeks). The first thing they talked about in the premiere is how Mike is an avid hunter and Carrie is a vegetarian and animal rights activist who also doesn't buy leather. It reminded me immediately of when Harry and Meghan got together and he had to give up his hunting tradition. Apparently Mike and Carrie worked it out and he still hunts. It just reminded me of them and what Harry gave up, unfortunately they invaded my thoughts.
> https://www.iamsecond.com/film/mike-and-carrie/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://money.com/meghan-markle-jobs/
From Andrew Morton’s book:

*Hostess*
_Just before auditioning for her breakout role in Suits, Markle worked as a hostess at a Beverly Hills restaurant. Unfortunately, there are no details on which one — just that she told Vanity Fair in 2017 it was one of the many “odds-and-ends jobs” she took while “trying to make ends meet.”
_


lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, you’re right, she did say that.  I hadn’t thought of that particular lie!!
> 
> The restaurant was called Mirabelle, he talked about it on this episode of David Spade’s show.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://money.com/meghan-markle-jobs/
> From Andrew Morton’s book:
> 
> *Hostess*
> _Just before auditioning for her breakout role in Suits, Markle worked as a hostess at a Beverly Hills restaurant. Unfortunately, there are no details on which one — just that she told Vanity Fair in 2017 it was one of the many “odds-and-ends jobs” she took while “trying to make ends meet.”_



Ah, well then technically she didn't lie if she said she *never had to wait tables*. Hostesses only seat the customers, they don't take their orders. Gotta watch the exact wording with Meghan!


----------



## PewPew

Fear not, New Yorkers! They are likely just looking to have a part time East coast base, so Harry will feel closer to home in terms of time zone and UK visits. Both Eunice & Bea have places in NY & London, and they are well connected to NY society. It’s also a great place to be for high culture, fashion, theater & humanitarian PR (with events for the UN etc).

H&M will not just have one US home. There will likely also be a secluded weekend or “getaway” home. They won’t actually have to pay for them. Many placed would house them to discreetly claim they stayed there. Andrew & Fergie are just now getting a bill from The Swiss Chalet they “bought” years ago, and it likely only came publicly due bc of Andrew’s recent bad



poopsie said:


> So, does that mean that they are paying/reimbursing Tyler for the use of his team?



Not likely. It’s not a huge expense for mega-wealthy Perry, who is known for being generous & championing the underdog (the narrative here is still that the BRF, UK & UK media drove them out via racism & Harry needs to protect his family from the paps who murdered him mum). While he doesn’t need the PR, M may feel his association with the Sussexes are “payment” enough. Seriously, even people who don’t follow pop culture know who his is now due to the ubiquitous PR. My mum knew nothing about Tyler Perry & she asked my aunt who told her he is the lead singer of Aerosmith! (She combined Steven Tyler with their guitarist Joe Perry )


----------



## bag-mania

PewPew said:


> My mum knows nothing about Tyler Perry & she asked my aunt who told her he is the lead singer of Aerosmith!



That is hilarious.


----------



## bellecate

* Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Report Drone Flybys to LAPD: "The Terror Threat Is Very Real for Them" *
Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home



* Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home *



* Drones Illegally Took Photos of Archie Harrison Poolside Memorial Day *

A few headlines from this morning.   I think someone's pants are on fire. If someone was taking photo's of them you can be sure they would be published somewhere by now. It sounds much more like a call out to good ol' pops 'for more money please, see what we're having to put up with'. Yeesh with these two.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bellecate said:


> * Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Report Drone Flybys to LAPD: "The Terror Threat Is Very Real for Them" *
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home
> 
> 
> 
> * Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home *
> 
> 
> 
> * Drones Illegally Took Photos of Archie Harrison Poolside Memorial Day *
> 
> A few headlines from this morning.   I think someone's pants are on fire. If someone was taking photo's of them you can be sure they would be published somewhere by now. It sounds much more like a call out to good ol' pops 'for more money please, see what we're having to put up with'. Yeesh with these two.



Yeah.... I’m surprised there isn’t a Harry-style tersely worded letter to the press or something from Omid with pictures of the drones... like I said... they could provide proof but they haven’t... this just sounds like a money grab for Charles... 

Someone’s probably ordering drones from Sharper Image as we speak to get pictures of lol....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Terror threat. Those freaking drama queens, paps would want pictures of them, not send them a bomb. WTFFFF. Trying to manipulate Charles, who lost his uncle and mentor in an IRA bombing, even more? They need to keep open that purse after all. Honestly my disdain for these people is quickly turning into disgust. 

Also, you never hear about someone wanting to kill the Cambridges, but Z-Lister and her 7th in line offspring are in immediate danger? Give me a break.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe there’s a chance in hell of Meghan returning to the UK to live. She doesn’t like it. If Harry goes back he’ll be doing It alone, likely without Archie.


I keep hoping Harry will return to GB with Archie.  I'd love to see that little boy enrolled in reception in a few years.
Maybe mummy would be happy in LA or NY or Dallas. or Miami...for a nice big regular check.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M are forgetting where they are. LA has far more important people and events to focus on than them.  No, no, please not Dallas - they would definitely not be happy there - please no.
Gladys said it best - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx0j9_AwGWM
_L.A.  Proved too much for the man
(Too much for the man, he couldn't make it)
So he's leavin' the life he's come to know, ooh
(He said he's goin')
He said he's goin' back to find
(Goin' back to find)
Ooh ooh ooh, what's left of his world
The world he left behind
Not so long ago_


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Country music artist Kellie Pickler, retired Chicago Bear middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, actress Dianna Agron, Deanie Dempsey, Gen Martin Dempsey, comedian Rob Riggle, actress Meghan Markle, and Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister sing "White Christmas" during the fifth and final stop of the Chairman's USO Holiday tour in RAF Mildenhall, *England, Dec. 10, 2014.* www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=8XfvJeiUed8&feature=emb_logo_https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=8XfvJeiUed8&feature=emb_logo


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Country music artist Kellie Pickler, retired Chicago Bear middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, actress Dianna Agron, Deanie Dempsey, Gen Martin Dempsey, comedian Rob Riggle, actress Meghan Markle, and Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister sing "White Christmas" during the fifth and final stop of the Chairman's USO Holiday tour in RAF Mildenhall, *England, Dec. 10, 2014.* www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=8XfvJeiUed8&feature=emb_logo_


Looks like nobody there wanted to hug her either.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Looks like nobody there wanted to hug her either.





1LV said:


> Looks like nobody there wanted to hug her either.


wonder if they asked her how she was feeling


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> wonder if they asked her how she was feeling


God help them if they didn’t!


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Country music artist Kellie Pickler, retired Chicago Bear middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, actress Dianna Agron, Deanie Dempsey, Gen Martin Dempsey, comedian Rob Riggle, actress Meghan Markle, and Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister sing "White Christmas" during the fifth and final stop of the Chairman's USO Holiday tour in RAF Mildenhall, *England, Dec. 10, 2014.* www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=8XfvJeiUed8&feature=emb_logo_



Well that was awkward.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> God help them if they didn’t!


well, she wasn't The Duchess back then


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Emeline said:


> I keep hoping Harry will return to GB with Archie.  I'd love to see that little boy enrolled in reception in a few years.
> Maybe mummy would be happy in LA or NY or Dallas. or Miami...for a nice big regular check.



She is not going to let that kid go anywhere without her. He is her Million Dollar Baby and he needs to be kept in the style which she hopes to become accustomed.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Country music artist Kellie Pickler, retired Chicago Bear middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, actress Dianna Agron, Deanie Dempsey, Gen Martin Dempsey, comedian Rob Riggle, actress Meghan Markle, and Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister sing "White Christmas" during the fifth and final stop of the Chairman's USO Holiday tour in RAF Mildenhall, *England, Dec. 10, 2014.* www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=8XfvJeiUed8&feature=emb_logo_



So that's one less string to her bow. 
We know she can't sing, and happily she looks like she knows it too.


----------



## mrsinsyder

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Country music artist Kellie Pickler, retired Chicago Bear middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, actress Dianna Agron, Deanie Dempsey, Gen Martin Dempsey, comedian Rob Riggle, actress Meghan Markle, and Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister sing "White Christmas" during the fifth and final stop of the Chairman's USO Holiday tour in RAF Mildenhall, *England, Dec. 10, 2014.* www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=77&v=8XfvJeiUed8&feature=emb_logo_


Megz we see you trying to secure the Urlacher bag too


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whoa, please, please not TX or FL.  With the hurricanes and flooding, we have enough drama. Thanks anyway.
> What about Northern Calif? San Francisco area? Carmel? *Wine country*?



it would officially be changed to Whine Country


----------



## scarlet555

bellecate said:


> * Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Report Drone Flybys to LAPD: "The Terror Threat Is Very Real for Them" *
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home
> 
> 
> 
> * Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home *
> 
> 
> 
> * Drones Illegally Took Photos of Archie Harrison Poolside Memorial Day *
> 
> A few headlines from this morning.   I think someone's pants are on fire. If someone was taking photo's of them you can be sure they would be published somewhere by now. It sounds much more like a call out to good ol' pops 'for more money please, see what we're having to put up with'. Yeesh with these two.



Yeah whatever, if you have security concerns, you wouldn't live in areas where you can't differentiate between  PAPS vs Bad guy drones and you wouldn't give Paps your outing schedule, I could go on...  This is why M is a big fat liar.  I'm sure Tyler Perry has a home outside of california that they were not interested in.  And when I say they, I mean M


----------



## bag-mania

I'm sure the LAPD don't have anything better to do with their time than go interview Harry and Meghan about their drone sightings.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is the baloney I see in other corners of the internet.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> So that's one less string to her bow.
> We know she can't sing, and happily she looks like she knows it too.



With apologies to Stu Goddard (aka Adam Ant)
♪♫Can't act Can't sing What _can _you do?♪♫


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> This is the baloney I see in other corners of the internet.



Huh? I guess it was too much effort for them to show an example of "all the racism" and what "the sense of entitlement of a white woman over a black woman's body" actually means to them? If they are only looking for one thing, for sure that is all they will ever see.


----------



## Tootsie17

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M are forgetting where they are. LA has far more important people and events to focus on than them.  No, no, please not Dallas - they would definitely not be happy there - please no.
> Gladys said it best - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx0j9_AwGWM
> _L.A.  Proved too much for the man
> (Too much for the man, he couldn't make it)
> So he's leavin' the life he's come to know, ooh
> (He said he's goin')
> He said he's goin' back to find
> (Goin' back to find)
> Ooh ooh ooh, what's left of his world
> The world he left behind
> Not so long ago_



LOVED THIS!!


----------



## bellecate

poopsie said:


> With apologies to Stu Goddard (aka Adam Ant)
> ♪♫Can't act Can't sing What _can _you do?♪♫



Whine, complain, freeload, papwalk, why they can do loads of things. And quite well actually.


----------



## bag-mania

Here we go again. This article says Meghan “secretly” helped an animal charity. Turns out she made a phone call.  I hope the charity is successful but please! And does anyone else remember back when Newsweek used to be a respected publication that reported actual news instead of just being another venue for promoting celebrities?

*Exclusive: Meghan Markle Secretly Helping Out Animal Welfare Charity Facing Funding Crisis*

Meghan Markle has made secret calls to an animal charity fighting through the coronavirus pandemic to keep homeless people with their dogs.

The Duchess of Sussex is patron of Mayhew, which has running costs of $7,400 a day but has seen its income devastated.

The charity gets all its money from donations and relies heavily on public fundraising events which have been cancelled due to social distancing rules.

They have launched an urgent appeal for funds to buy food as well as flea and worming treatments for their animals.

Some are still being looked after in their shelter in North West London, but the charity is also unusual in that it helps homeless and other vulnerable people keep pets in the community.

A source in the Sussex camp told _Newsweek_: "The Duchess is in touch and working with Mayhew at this time.

"One thing many people may not realize is the range of work Mayhew does. It is not your classic animal charity. They are supporting so many other people in the community too."

The Mayhew's work is partly designed to aid the mental health of homeless and other vulnerable people who rely on their pets emotionally.

Helping keep the animals well fed and healthy involves face-to-face contact with clients at high risk from coronavirus.

This hands-on approach has had to be scaled back since the lockdown came into effect in Britain.

However, they have been continuing some face-to-face meetings with their clients in emergencies.

As lockdown restrictions ease in Britain, the charity is beginning to resume adoptions with strict social distancing rules.

They are only placing rescued animals with owners within walking distance and are interviewing over video calls.

They have also found some limited ways to keep fundraising going with supporters doing marathons around their gardens and through a weekly quiz night.

As patron Meghan has helped the charity before, visiting in January 2019, when she met dogs including a German Shepherd call Khan.

Staff will be hoping a new wave of support from the duchess could lift their financial burden as they enter the uncertain autumn and winter months.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-secretly-helping-animal-welfare-charity-funding-crisis-1507157?amp=1


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. This article says Meghan “secretly” helped an animal charity. Turns out she made a phone call.  I hope the charity is successful but please! And does anyone else remember back when Newsweek used to be a respected publication that reported actual news instead of just being another venue for promoting celebrities?
> 
> *Exclusive: Meghan Markle Secretly Helping Out Animal Welfare Charity Facing Funding Crisis*
> 
> Meghan Markle has made secret calls to an animal charity fighting through the coronavirus pandemic to keep homeless people with their dogs.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is patron of Mayhew, which has running costs of $7,400 a day but has seen its income devastated.
> 
> The charity gets all its money from donations and relies heavily on public fundraising events which have been cancelled due to social distancing rules.
> 
> They have launched an urgent appeal for funds to buy food as well as flea and worming treatments for their animals.
> 
> Some are still being looked after in their shelter in North West London, but the charity is also unusual in that it helps homeless and other vulnerable people keep pets in the community.
> 
> A source in the Sussex camp told _Newsweek_: "The Duchess is in touch and working with Mayhew at this time.
> 
> "One thing many people may not realize is the range of work Mayhew does. It is not your classic animal charity. They are supporting so many other people in the community too."
> 
> The Mayhew's work is partly designed to aid the mental health of homeless and other vulnerable people who rely on their pets emotionally.
> 
> Helping keep the animals well fed and healthy involves face-to-face contact with clients at high risk from coronavirus.
> 
> This hands-on approach has had to be scaled back since the lockdown came into effect in Britain.
> 
> However, they have been continuing some face-to-face meetings with their clients in emergencies.
> 
> As lockdown restrictions ease in Britain, the charity is beginning to resume adoptions with strict social distancing rules.
> 
> They are only placing rescued animals with owners within walking distance and are interviewing over video calls.
> 
> They have also found some limited ways to keep fundraising going with supporters doing marathons around their gardens and through a weekly quiz night.
> 
> As patron Meghan has helped the charity before, visiting in January 2019, when she met dogs including a German Shepherd call Khan.
> 
> Staff will be hoping a new wave of support from the duchess could lift their financial burden as they enter the uncertain autumn and winter months.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-secretly-helping-animal-welfare-charity-funding-crisis-1507157?amp=1



Megxit the animal lover and helper
Megxit the pandemic hunger savior 
megxit the career mentor and advisor 
Megxit the charity innovator founder of all

Please!!!


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. This article says Meghan “secretly” helped an animal charity. Turns out she made a phone call.  I hope the charity is successful but please! And does anyone else remember back when Newsweek used to be a respected publication that reported actual news instead of just being another venue for promoting celebrities?
> 
> *Exclusive: Meghan Markle Secretly Helping Out Animal Welfare Charity Facing Funding Crisis*
> 
> Meghan Markle has made secret calls to an animal charity fighting through the coronavirus pandemic to keep homeless people with their dogs.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is patron of Mayhew, which has running costs of $7,400 a day but has seen its income devastated.
> 
> The charity gets all its money from donations and relies heavily on public fundraising events which have been cancelled due to social distancing rules.
> 
> They have launched an urgent appeal for funds to buy food as well as flea and worming treatments for their animals.
> 
> Some are still being looked after in their shelter in North West London, but the charity is also unusual in that it helps homeless and other vulnerable people keep pets in the community.
> 
> A source in the Sussex camp told _Newsweek_: "The Duchess is in touch and working with Mayhew at this time.
> 
> "One thing many people may not realize is the range of work Mayhew does. It is not your classic animal charity. They are supporting so many other people in the community too."
> 
> The Mayhew's work is partly designed to aid the mental health of homeless and other vulnerable people who rely on their pets emotionally.
> 
> Helping keep the animals well fed and healthy involves face-to-face contact with clients at high risk from coronavirus.
> 
> This hands-on approach has had to be scaled back since the lockdown came into effect in Britain.
> 
> However, they have been continuing some face-to-face meetings with their clients in emergencies.
> 
> As lockdown restrictions ease in Britain, the charity is beginning to resume adoptions with strict social distancing rules.
> 
> They are only placing rescued animals with owners within walking distance and are interviewing over video calls.
> 
> They have also found some limited ways to keep fundraising going with supporters doing marathons around their gardens and through a weekly quiz night.
> 
> As patron Meghan has helped the charity before, visiting in January 2019, when she met dogs including a German Shepherd call Khan.
> 
> Staff will be hoping a new wave of support from the duchess could lift their financial burden as they enter the uncertain autumn and winter months.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-secretly-helping-animal-welfare-charity-funding-crisis-1507157?amp=1


My deep apologies and as much as I love animals not a penny will go to support any of her charities. My local animal shelters need the money. Nothing, not a single penny will I ever ever support this greedy grifter.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> My deep apologies and as much as I love animals not a penny will go to support any of her charities. My local animal shelters need the money. Nothing, not a single penny will I ever ever support this greedy grifter.



I can’t tell if it actually is one of her charities or if she is just trying to look involved so she gets credit and publicity for caring. She obviously can’t do much for the charity by making a phone call during a pandemic from thousands of miles away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I can’t tell if it actually is one of her charities or if she is just trying to look involved so she gets credit and publicity for caring. She obviously can’t do much for the charity by making a phone call during a pandemic from thousands of miles away.


I for one don't believe she gives money. She just uses her name. A real charitable person would either silently give with no accolades or combine her gifting money and promotion.


----------



## Lodpah

Tootsie17 said:


> LOVED THIS!!


Here's another one by Hall & Oates: Man-eater

[Verse 1]
She'll only come out at night
The lean and hungry type
Nothing is new
I've seen her here before
Watching and waiting
Ooh, she's sitting with you, but her eyes are on the door
So many have paid to see what you think you're getting for free
The woman is wild, a she-cat tamed by the purr of a Jaguar
Money's the matter
If you're in it for love, you ain't gonna get too far

[Chorus]
(Oh-oh, here she comes)
Watch out, boy, she'll chew you up
(Oh-oh, here she comes)
She's a maneater
(Oh-oh, here she comes)
Watch out, boy, she'll chew you up
(Oh-oh, here she comes)
She's a maneater

[Verse 2]
I wouldn't if I were you
I know what she can do
She's deadly, man
She could really rip your world apart
Mind over matter
Ooh, the beauty is there but a beast is in the heart


----------



## lalame

Ugh I cringe but at the same time I can't bring myself to think anything negative relating to an animal charity. Alright, Meg, you got me this time.

I hope she at least gave $$$$ or they got some from this press. It's kind of a cheap shot to have someone "leak" a story about a charity because it's not like the charity's going to come out and say anything negative or make a comment on whether she gave money or not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> This is the baloney I see in other corners of the internet.



These people are such nutjobs. 

Also, hate to break it to the stans: if Kate's workload hardened I doubt it is because these professional vacationers with their few pet causes took off. It is because Charles caught Corona and the Queen has been in quarantine for weeks.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. This article says Meghan “secretly” helped an animal charity. Turns out she made a phone call.  I hope the charity is successful but please! And does anyone else remember back when Newsweek used to be a respected publication that reported actual news instead of just being another venue for promoting celebrities?
> 
> *Exclusive: Meghan Markle Secretly Helping Out Animal Welfare Charity Facing Funding Crisis*
> 
> Meghan Markle has made secret calls to an animal charity fighting through the coronavirus pandemic to keep homeless people with their dogs.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is patron of Mayhew, which has running costs of $7,400 a day but has seen its income devastated.
> 
> The charity gets all its money from donations and relies heavily on public fundraising events which have been cancelled due to social distancing rules.
> 
> They have launched an urgent appeal for funds to buy food as well as flea and worming treatments for their animals.
> 
> Some are still being looked after in their shelter in North West London, but the charity is also unusual in that it helps homeless and other vulnerable people keep pets in the community.
> 
> A source in the Sussex camp told _Newsweek_: "The Duchess is in touch and working with Mayhew at this time.
> 
> "One thing many people may not realize is the range of work Mayhew does. It is not your classic animal charity. They are supporting so many other people in the community too."
> 
> The Mayhew's work is partly designed to aid the mental health of homeless and other vulnerable people who rely on their pets emotionally.
> 
> Helping keep the animals well fed and healthy involves face-to-face contact with clients at high risk from coronavirus.
> 
> This hands-on approach has had to be scaled back since the lockdown came into effect in Britain.
> 
> However, they have been continuing some face-to-face meetings with their clients in emergencies.
> 
> As lockdown restrictions ease in Britain, the charity is beginning to resume adoptions with strict social distancing rules.
> 
> They are only placing rescued animals with owners within walking distance and are interviewing over video calls.
> 
> They have also found some limited ways to keep fundraising going with supporters doing marathons around their gardens and through a weekly quiz night.
> 
> As patron Meghan has helped the charity before, visiting in January 2019, when she met dogs including a German Shepherd call Khan.
> 
> Staff will be hoping a new wave of support from the duchess could lift their financial burden as they enter the uncertain autumn and winter months.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-secretly-helping-animal-welfare-charity-funding-crisis-1507157?amp=1


Please don't post links to any of these articles. I really hate to see us helping their click count.


----------



## imgg

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. This article says Meghan “secretly” helped an animal charity. Turns out she made a phone call.  I hope the charity is successful but please! And does anyone else remember back when Newsweek used to be a respected publication that reported actual news instead of just being another venue for promoting celebrities?
> 
> *Exclusive: Meghan Markle Secretly Helping Out Animal Welfare Charity Facing Funding Crisis*
> 
> Meghan Markle has made secret calls to an animal charity fighting through the coronavirus pandemic to keep homeless people with their dogs.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is patron of Mayhew, which has running costs of $7,400 a day but has seen its income devastated.
> 
> The charity gets all its money from donations and relies heavily on public fundraising events which have been cancelled due to social distancing rules.
> 
> They have launched an urgent appeal for funds to buy food as well as flea and worming treatments for their animals.
> 
> Some are still being looked after in their shelter in North West London, but the charity is also unusual in that it helps homeless and other vulnerable people keep pets in the community.
> 
> A source in the Sussex camp told _Newsweek_: "The Duchess is in touch and working with Mayhew at this time.
> 
> "One thing many people may not realize is the range of work Mayhew does. It is not your classic animal charity. They are supporting so many other people in the community too."
> 
> The Mayhew's work is partly designed to aid the mental health of homeless and other vulnerable people who rely on their pets emotionally.
> 
> Helping keep the animals well fed and healthy involves face-to-face contact with clients at high risk from coronavirus.
> 
> This hands-on approach has had to be scaled back since the lockdown came into effect in Britain.
> 
> However, they have been continuing some face-to-face meetings with their clients in emergencies.
> 
> As lockdown restrictions ease in Britain, the charity is beginning to resume adoptions with strict social distancing rules.
> 
> They are only placing rescued animals with owners within walking distance and are interviewing over video calls.
> 
> They have also found some limited ways to keep fundraising going with supporters doing marathons around their gardens and through a weekly quiz night.
> 
> As patron Meghan has helped the charity before, visiting in January 2019, when she met dogs including a German Shepherd call Khan.
> 
> Staff will be hoping a new wave of support from the duchess could lift their financial burden as they enter the uncertain autumn and winter months.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-secretly-helping-animal-welfare-charity-funding-crisis-1507157?amp=1


Secretly helping??  That is an oxymoron.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I can’t tell if it actually is one of her charities or if she is just trying to look involved so she gets credit and publicity for caring. She obviously can’t do much for the charity by making a phone call during a pandemic from thousands of miles away.



But she could have a check sent to support them, maybe drum up some help from Oprah, Ellen, the dude’s house she is living in, etc...


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. This article says Meghan “secretly” helped an animal charity. Turns out she made a phone call.  I hope the charity is successful but please! And does anyone else remember back when Newsweek used to be a respected publication that reported actual news instead of just being another venue for promoting celebrities?
> 
> *Exclusive: Meghan Markle Secretly Helping Out Animal Welfare Charity Facing Funding Crisis*
> 
> Meghan Markle has made secret calls to an animal charity fighting through the coronavirus pandemic to keep homeless people with their dogs.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is patron of Mayhew, which has running costs of $7,400 a day but has seen its income devastated.
> 
> The charity gets all its money from donations and relies heavily on public fundraising events which have been cancelled due to social distancing rules.
> 
> They have launched an urgent appeal for funds to buy food as well as flea and worming treatments for their animals.
> 
> Some are still being looked after in their shelter in North West London, but the charity is also unusual in that it helps homeless and other vulnerable people keep pets in the community.
> 
> A source in the Sussex camp told _Newsweek_: "The Duchess is in touch and working with Mayhew at this time.
> 
> "One thing many people may not realize is the range of work Mayhew does. It is not your classic animal charity. They are supporting so many other people in the community too."
> 
> The Mayhew's work is partly designed to aid the mental health of homeless and other vulnerable people who rely on their pets emotionally.
> 
> Helping keep the animals well fed and healthy involves face-to-face contact with clients at high risk from coronavirus.
> 
> This hands-on approach has had to be scaled back since the lockdown came into effect in Britain.
> 
> However, they have been continuing some face-to-face meetings with their clients in emergencies.
> 
> As lockdown restrictions ease in Britain, the charity is beginning to resume adoptions with strict social distancing rules.
> 
> They are only placing rescued animals with owners within walking distance and are interviewing over video calls.
> 
> They have also found some limited ways to keep fundraising going with supporters doing marathons around their gardens and through a weekly quiz night.
> 
> As patron Meghan has helped the charity before, visiting in January 2019, when she met dogs including a German Shepherd call Khan.
> 
> Staff will be hoping a new wave of support from the duchess could lift their financial burden as they enter the uncertain autumn and winter months.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-secretly-helping-animal-welfare-charity-funding-crisis-1507157?amp=1


Maybe if she allowed them to do their own PR they might be more successful.

I know this rescue and I work in the sector. I have never seen a PR from them (and we get their releases regularly) referencing her association from the announcement to now, where M is the main part of the story. It leads me to believe it’s in the terms.


----------



## bag-mania

Here's a follow up on the animal charity story. After the "exclusive" given to _Newsweek_, other publications are picking up the story today. _Daily Mail _reports that Mayhew is one of the four royal patronages that Meghan had. Both SmartWorks and Mayhew had not been patronages before. Since Meghan chose those charities and brought them in, she should still help them. I hope she sends them money.


----------



## chicinthecity777

It's in the news so it's not a secret! Gosh does the media really think people are stupid???


----------



## rose60610

If MM was "secretly helping" anything, then why does the world know about it? I wish she'd "secretly go away", even if she had to publicize it, like: "I'm retiring from public life, except when I can interject some idiotic word salad the world must hear. Like every day. Apart from that, I'm going away." 
Because you know she can't make herself shut up.


----------



## Nutashha

And Gosh, Meghan and Harry are already having a problem with their security! Paps are almost in their hair.

*Meghan and Harry‘s Security Is Already Threatened…by Drones*


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's in the news so it's not a secret! *Gosh does the media really think people are stupid???*



Yes, yes they do. 



rose60610 said:


> If MM was "secretly helping" anything, then why does the world know about it? I wish she'd "secretly go away", even if she had to publicize it, like: "I'm retiring from public life, except when I can interject some idiotic word salad the world must hear. Like every day. Apart from that, I'm going away."
> Because you know she can't make herself shut up.



She "helps" (makes a phone call) then calls her publicist and has them call the media for an exclusive because she desperately needs attention. It's hard to quench her thirst during a pandemic.


----------



## 1LV

Nutashha said:


> And Gosh, Meghan and Harry are already having a problem with their security! Paps are almost in their hair.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry‘s Security Is Already Threatened…by Drones*



.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lodpah said:


> Here's another one by Hall & Oates: Man-eater
> 
> [Verse 1]
> She'll only come out at night
> The lean and hungry type
> Nothing is new
> I've seen her here before
> Watching and waiting
> Ooh, she's sitting with you, but her eyes are on the door
> So many have paid to see what you think you're getting for free
> The woman is wild, a she-cat tamed by the purr of a Jaguar
> Money's the matter
> If you're in it for love, you ain't gonna get too far
> 
> [Chorus]
> (Oh-oh, here she comes)
> Watch out, boy, she'll chew you up
> (Oh-oh, here she comes)
> She's a maneater
> (Oh-oh, here she comes)
> Watch out, boy, she'll chew you up
> (Oh-oh, here she comes)
> She's a maneater
> 
> [Verse 2]
> I wouldn't if I were you
> I know what she can do
> She's deadly, man
> She could really rip your world apart
> Mind over matter
> Ooh, the beauty is there but a beast is in the heart



One of my favorite songs from one of my favorite duos. This song definitely fits M. If she has a sense of humor, I'm sure she would approve.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

imgg said:


> Secretly helping??  That is an oxymoron.



It is for her!


----------



## lulilu

Everything they do is "secret" and immediately revealed by her publicist or close friend.  smdh


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> Everything they do is "secret" and immediately revealed by her publicist or close friend.  smdh


Their desperation is relentless!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Sounds like they are using the media to pave the way for their return.  Poor Kate can’t deal without them, poor H&M being assaulted by paps and drones, Duchess Meg still supporting her UK patronages.  Interesting....


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Sounds like they are using the media to pave the way for their return.  Poor Kate can’t deal without them, poor H&M being assaulted by paps and drones, Duchess Meg still supporting her UK patronages.  Interesting....


imagine being Kate if they did go back - having to try to put on a good face?  but Kate is very capable; I'm sure she could do what she would need to do.  she knows she's on top


----------



## TC1

Perhaps if they don't want the drones to find them they should stop erecting those garish "fences" that scream "we're in here!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

And another H zoom call — because, ya kno,  he just had to get some media coverage, even tho he looks awful.  If they are doing charity calls to the UK, maybe they should actually _be_ in the UK, just a thought.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> And another H zoom call — because, ya kno,  he just had to get some media coverage, even tho he looks awful.  If they are doing charity calls to the UK, maybe they should actually _be_ in the UK, just a thought.



Keeping a foot in the door?  And you’re right, he does look awful.


----------



## V0N1B2

Does he just have the one grey polo shirt? 
Also? Most people doing these zoom call things try to make the background look home-y. Some books, a few plants, something if interest behind them. But Harry? Nope. Still hiding in that laundry room closet. Maybe he has to hide to do these calls so Mememehgan can’t photobomb them.


----------



## marietouchet

V0N1B2 said:


> Does he just have the one grey polo shirt?
> Also? Most people doing these zoom call things try to make the background look home-y. Some books, a few plants, something if interest behind them. But Harry? Nope. Still hiding in that laundry room closet. Maybe he has to hide to do these calls so Mememehgan can’t photobomb them.


i get the reason for the closet ... their location was confirmed by the artwork in the background of their first ZOOM, so, they are trying not to show off TP's incredible (expensive, over the top) art collection anymore - less controversial, no personal details for anyone to nitpick


----------



## gracekelly

They are so thirsty!   I think they received  their 30 day vacate notice. Perhaps SoHo Farmhouse will give them summer jobs for free room and board. Meghan can make roast chicken and he can teach military drills.


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> Does he just have the one grey polo shirt?
> Also? Most people doing these zoom call things try to make the background look home-y. Some books, a few plants, something if interest behind them. But Harry? Nope. Still hiding in that laundry room closet. Maybe he has to hide to do these calls so Mememehgan can’t photobomb them.


Doesn’t he still have those fugly suits with the bright colored lining?


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> And another H zoom call — because, ya kno,  he just had to get some media coverage, even tho he looks awful.  If they are doing charity calls to the UK, maybe they should actually _be_ in the UK, just a thought.




"Thank you so much for being you."  Deep.  Eloquent.  sigh


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> And another H zoom call — because, ya kno,  he just had to get some media coverage, even tho he looks awful.  If they are doing charity calls to the UK, maybe they should actually _be_ in the UK, just a thought.




What's going on with Harry, just because he told everyone he doesn't want to be called 'prince' does not mean he needs to look like he doesn't own a mirror or a comb.  Wow, Megs really wants to outshine him.  I know it's important to look relatable, but who is he trying to relate to?  I just saw  Prince Williams talking about mental illness and he looked sounded so genuine and proper.  This is just not acceptable for Harry to look like this, next time, what?  Just undies like Arch?


----------



## bag-mania

Is that one of Harry's patronages? I'm seeing a trend here. Maybe they have to keep in contact with them to show Charles they are still involved. Who knows? It may be a requirement for them to earn their allowance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe....this is the way Harry has always looked, in his “off time”.  Now that he doesn’t have to answer to the palace anymore, he doesn’t have to groom himself.


----------



## zen1965

CarryOn2020 said:


> And another H zoom call — because, ya kno,  he just had to get some media coverage, even tho he looks awful.  If they are doing charity calls to the UK, maybe they should actually _be_ in the UK, just a thought.




I cannot trash him doing this - his brother and relatives do exactly the same thing. However, he could do a tad more regarding his appearance.


----------



## justwatchin

Lots of opportunities for these layabouts....

Instagram-lots of sponsored posts and free stuff. We know they love anything they don’t pay for.
You Tube-so much content...How to pack in a hurry; Living on a budget, etc.
An Etsy store-Coffee mugs with Just Call Me Harry; posters like Keep Calm I’m Still A Royal, face masks made from M’s ill fitting clothes; so much opportunity


----------



## Lounorada

Again with the over-worn, non-ironed polo shirt...  He's probably trying to look approachable and informal, but he always ends up looking so sloppy and unkept.
All it would take is 1 minute of his time to change into a crisp, clean, ironed dress shirt and it would at least look like he made an effort.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> But wait, wasn't one of the reasons they _had _to move to LA was to be closer to Doria, the only other family member Archie has access to in the U.S.?



_Yes (supposedly) they moved to LA because of Doria .. well, I call a *huge BS* story on that front.  I honestly think that Meghan figured that marrying Harry would provide HER with the exposure/opportunity that she SO craves and, of course, get her foot in the door with various "A-List" Producers, etc._ - *HA   *!!    



kemilia said:


> But didn't she say in her "actors" blog something like "at least I didn't have to wait tables"? I could very well be wrong, keeping all her "stories" straight isn't easy.


'
_I recall that as well; she said that she didn't have to wait tables .. well, goody-two-shoes for her!  Her father funded her, and then her husband (who gets repaid by her sending her wedding rings to him in the mail) - gee, how nice _[*NOT*]!!   _Remember, even Harry seemed to realize very early on that "what Meghan wants, Megha gets" .. SHEESH!  _


----------



## lanasyogamama

Just call him Harry one shirt.


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> And another H zoom call — because, ya kno,  he just had to get some media coverage, even tho he looks awful.  If they are doing charity calls to the UK, maybe they should actually _be_ in the UK, just a thought.



Wow. Without his valet, aides and other servants, he really has no clue how to dress or groom himself it seems.


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh, this one annoys me.  We live in an age of dash cams and cell phones. If the paps were really driving this recklessly and dangerously around them all the time, such that innocent people were in danger, why haven’t they recorded it and contacted the police in the interest of public safety? As much as these two like to play the victim, they would be eating that up...
> 
> I’ve been chewing on it a while and I still don’t know what to think.... where is the Omid exclusive? The crocodile tears?  Hmm...


Again [IMO] .. *UTTER B/S!*!!  Where they are living, is a neighborhood off of Coldwater Canyon.  While Coldwater Canyon is not as 'curvy' as some of the other Canyons, it's not like this is a "wide" road and it's got a LOT of blind spots.  As such, the paps would be, in addition to endangering others, endangering themselves .. and for what? .. a stinkin' picture of these 2 grifters???


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t know if true but read this. Anna Pasternak who wrote the article on Kate is good friends with Mulroney’s sister, Vanessa, who in turn, introduced JM to MM. Sounds like a collusion there. I would not put it past MM.


----------



## Suncatcher

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know if true but read this. Anna Pasternak who wrote the article on Kate is good friends with Mulroney’s sister, Vanessa, who in turn, introduced JM to MM. Sounds like a collusion there. I would not put it past MM.


To clarify, Vanessa and Jessica are sisters in law. Both married into the Mulroney family.


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> * Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Report Drone Flybys to LAPD: "The Terror Threat Is Very Real for Them" *
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home
> 
> 
> 
> * Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worry For Their Family’s Safety After Dealing With Numerous Drone-Related Incidents At Their L.A. Home *
> 
> 
> 
> * Drones Illegally Took Photos of Archie Harrison Poolside Memorial Day *
> 
> A few headlines from this morning.   I think someone's pants are on fire. If someone was taking photo's of them you can be sure they would be *published somewhere by now*. It sounds much more like a call out to good ol' pops 'for more money please, see what we're having to put up with'. Yeesh with these two.


100%+++ AGREE!!!  These paps don't waste their time, unless of course, there is a bidding war going on ..


----------



## bellecate

lanasyogamama said:


> Just call him Harry one shirt.


----------



## Annawakes

And maybe....they don’t have very many clothes with them.  Harry has one shirt.  Archie doesn’t seem to have any pants.  Maybe they’re living like fugitives, ready to flee at a moments notice.  Maybe after a couple more drones fly by they will have to flee.


----------



## chaneljewel

1LV said:


> Keeping a foot in the door?  And you’re right, he does look awful.


Harry does look like a big mess.


----------



## Clearblueskies

chaneljewel said:


> Harry does look like a big mess.


He really does.  Maybe he’s just trying to be different from his brother, because it seems to matter to them that they’re seen as different to the RF (but still Royal of course, 6th and 7th in line and all that).
The comment earlier about a Tyler Perry painting made me wonder about living in an environment where it’s all furnished and tweaked and decorated, where nothing’s their own, without stuff they’ve chosen as a couple.  Short term it’s not a problem but they’ve been married 2 years and it doesn’t look like they’ve made any place “home” yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MaseratiMomma

This just popped into my e-mail...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

MaseratiMomma said:


> This just popped into my e-mail...
> View attachment 4743627


Judging from her other clothes I won't like the fit.


----------



## chicinthecity777

MaseratiMomma said:


> This just popped into my e-mail...
> View attachment 4743627


To be fair, these probably have nothing to do with MM herself. Just some fashion company jumping onto the bandwagon. Next!


----------



## Sol Ryan

I get nervous when this thread goes quiet...


----------



## poopsie

Sol Ryan said:


> I get nervous when this thread goes quiet...


Us or them?


----------



## Frivole88




----------



## Sol Ryan

poopsie said:


> Us or them?


Both.


----------



## poopsie

Sol Ryan said:


> Both.


I've been busy. 
Hung my patio lights and lugged out my fountain, cleaned it up and got it running. Cleaned and de-cobwebbed over 2 dozen planters so I was a filthy mess who couldn't go near a keyboard today. 
Who knows what _they_ did


----------



## Sol Ryan

poopsie said:


> I've been busy.
> Hung my patio lights and lugged out my fountain, cleaned it up and got it running. Cleaned and de-cobwebbed over 2 dozen planters so I was a filthy mess who couldn't go near a keyboard today.
> Who knows what _they_ did



Nice. We’ve had two days of rain... been stuck inside, my garden looks atrocious at the moment and the rabbits have eaten my cantaloupe plants... 

I was nice. I planted them carrots and lettuce... did they eat it?.... well some, but they ate my cantaloupe plants too...


----------



## chicinthecity777

kristinlorraine said:


> View attachment 4744436


Why do they not say who's paying and show us the proof of that? Why are they always talking to the press via "friend"? Are they incarcerated??


----------



## PewPew

chicinthecity777 said:


> Why do they not say who's paying and show us the proof of that? Why are they always talking to the press via "friend"? *Are they incarcerated*??





It’s hypocritical that they talk to press daily via a “friend,” when they also make a platform of demonizing the press— they’ve sued multiple papers, complain about persecution in press conferences, issue letters to papers stating their reps refuse to talk to them publicly... while “friends” continue to talk to them. They were quiet for only 48hrs after proclaiming on instagram that we wouldn’t hear from while they worked on amazing charity things to save the world.

How do people not see the manipulation in them leaking private things like their anniversary card story & H&M’s “secret” charity story leaks? The vid of the “secret” meal delivery was even edited to look like security cam footage. So ridiculous


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> Again with the over-worn, non-ironed polo shirt...  He's probably trying to look approachable and informal, but he always ends up looking so sloppy and unkept.
> All it would take is 1 minute of his time to change into a crisp, clean, ironed dress shirt and it would at least look like he made an effort.



But seriously how do you get a shirt to look that bad? 

Perhaps, it was all screwed-up up in the laundry bag and he took it out again. 

Never mind baby A, I have a feeling it's JCMH's comfort blanket atm.


----------



## papertiger

I am curious as to why M hasn't issued any statements regarding what's going on in the US lately,. As a 'role model', you'd think she'd mention real life.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I’m happy to see them quiet, but I hope it’s not because they’re on the move again and headed back here.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I am curious as to why M hasn't issued any statements regarding what's going on in the US lately,. As a 'role model', you'd think she'd mention real life.


Wait for it! They friends will talk soon ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m happy to see them quiet, but I hope it’s not because they’re on the move again and headed back here.


Having just being reported to have hired a £7000 a day security firm in the U.S., I shall hope not!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I get nervous when this thread goes quiet...



They have run out of things to report for the moment. They aren’t leaving the house and they have already made sure it was known that they called a couple of charities and they’ve seen a drone.

For their part, the media has been taking a walk down memory lane by bringing up a two-year-old alleged disagreement about kids stockings from the wedding. They are all scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of H&M “news.”


----------



## Jayne1

I don't think Harry looks unkempt as much as he just isn't cute anymore.  He was the most adorable kid, but as he ages, he's not that attractive.  (Without those uniforms, especially.)


----------



## sdkitty

kristinlorraine said:


> View attachment 4744436


Bezos has Plenty of his own money to pay and Hanks not as much but still his own earned by him.....Will see what happens with these two but right now to me it looks like they are becoming less and less relevant


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I am curious as to why M hasn't issued any statements regarding what's going on in the US lately,. As a 'role model', you'd think she'd mention real life.


yes, it's a sad day in the US this morning - including a community very close to mine....


----------



## V0N1B2

papertiger said:


> I am curious as to why M hasn't issued any statements regarding what's going on in the US lately,. As a 'role model', you'd think she'd mention real life.


Right?  Especially as a woman of colour who has experienced so much racism. IDK why she hasn't spoken up about the injustices to her fellow African Americans. 
Not all of them could have worn a different coloured shirt to look more "ethnically ambiguous" like her. (Elle, 2015)
Or maybe she's just waiting for the right time to drop her Cooking Through Inequality cookbook.  
But no, all she wants is to make sure gets it leaked to the press that her and Harry _*need*_ to spend $250,000/mo on security due to their ever growing importance in the world. When she does weigh in you can be sure it will somehow be all about her.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> Why do they not say who's paying and show us the proof of that? Why are they always talking to the press via "friend"? Are they incarcerated??


Given Meghan's propensity for "markling" former friends .. and Harry 'markling' his longtime friend Tom Inskip, I find it rather ironic that the drib-drabs of "information" come from their 'supposed' friends .. what BS!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> Given Meghan's propensity for "markling" former friends .. and Harry 'markling' his longtime friend Tom Inskip, I find it rather ironic that the drib-drabs of "information" come from their 'supposed' friends .. what BS!


I think "friend" is just another word for PR agency for them...


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> Right?  Especially as a woman of colour who has experienced so much racism. IDK why she hasn't spoken up about the injustices to her fellow African Americans.
> Not all of them could have worn a different coloured shirt to look more "ethnically ambiguous" like her. (Elle, 2015)
> Or maybe she's just waiting for the right time to drop her Cooking Through Inequality cookbook.
> But no, all she wants is to make sure gets it leaked to the press that her and Harry _*need*_ to spend $250,000/mo on security due to their ever growing importance in the world. When she does weigh in you can be sure it will somehow be all about her.


Hope I don't get sh!t for this but .. it almost seems as though she 'highlights' the WOC when it's convenient for her.  I know I read someone (_do not recall the magazine/article_) where she admitted that in her early auditions, she would categorize herself as Caucasian because she believed that that would help her as opposed to identifying as a WOC.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hope I don't get sh!t for this but .. it almost seems as though she 'highlights' the WOC when it's convenient for her.  I know I read someone (_do not recall the magazine/article_) where she admitted that in her early auditions, she would categorize herself as Caucasian because she believed that that would help her as opposed to identifying as a WOC.


agree.....I think she identifies as a WOC when it's convenient - like when there is a person of color (like Oprah) who can help her.  I notice (if I'm not mistaken) that all of her husbands and boyfriends have been white men.  Hope I'm not offending anyone here and would like to hear from any WOC on this thread if you care to comment.


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think "friend" is just another word for PR agency for them...


Funny and true!


CeeJay said:


> Hope I don't get sh!t for this but .. it almost seems as though she 'highlights' the WOC when it's convenient for her.  I know I read someone (_do not recall the magazine/article_) where she admitted that in her early auditions, she would categorize herself as Caucasian because she believed that that would help her as opposed to identifying as a WOC.


I said something like that a long time ago and got sh!t for it. But I still agree with you.


----------



## mdcx

Markle is technically free as a bird to resume her supposed “social justice warrior” ways in LA but, crickets....
Lemme guess - she doe$n’t want to anger her benefactor$, be they BRF or whoever.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## pixiejenna

I prefer her to keep her word salad mouth shut and stay in hiding then having to hear her comments on what’s going on.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

chicinthecity777 said:


> Having just being reported to have hired a £7000 a day security firm in the U.S., I shall hope not!!!



Has anyone seen pics leaked from the drone that was supposedly intruding on their privacy and therefore justifying their outrageous security demands?  

Pics or it didn’t happen!!!


----------



## rose60610

Wonder if Harry is glad he moved to the U.S. now?  Security details are a tad busy these days.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mdcx said:


> Markle is technically free as a bird to resume her supposed “social justice warrior” ways in LA but, crickets....
> Lemme guess - she doe$n’t want to anger her benefactor$, be they BRF or whoever.


Their silence on what is happening with race issues in the US is deafening.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh no no no. They have no business inserting themselves into it. For once they are using common sense and staying away.

There are some issues that are too important for the typical celebrity attention grab for relevance.


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> Oh no no no. They have no business inserting themselves into it. For once they are using common sense and staying away.
> 
> There are some issues that are too important for the typical celebrity attention grab for relevance.


That is the thing. They are tone deaf so it says a lot that they are not inserting themselves. Not common sense, at all.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 4745150


What's this? I thought this was the man married to her friend Serena? Was this before?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Oh no no no. They have no business inserting themselves into it. *For once they are using common sense and staying away.*
> 
> There are some issues that are too important for the typical celebrity attention grab for relevance.



Well, odds are quite high THAT won't last long. The probable reason MM is currently quiet is because she's busy mixing up a word salad and is wondering where to insert the foot-in-mouth she'll inevitably express, that she knows firsthand EXACTLY what unjust oppression is. I mean, think about it, since she's moved to L.A., how many people have asked her if she's OK?  She DID earn millions of dollars, good for her, married into the BRF and has experienced nothing but oppression with untold royal trappings since. We saw her on a Covid 19 food delivery run, she might go on a protest also. Surely she must set an example for the rest of us and dazzle us with her profound good works. 

There's often an inverse relationship with desperate celebrities. The wiser it is to shut up the more they seek attention.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I must admit that I am surprised at their complete silence over the current affairs in the U.S. But the cynical side of me am not surprised as they can't possibly gain anything financially from this so... I don't believe they genuinely care about anybody else apart from themselves.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I prefer to believe that just for once they’re exercising good judgement.  It would be inappropriate for Harry to comment on the situation.


----------



## bag-mania

The situation is too raw and emotional for celebrities to do their usual schtick of expressing sympathy/support through social media. Some of those who have done it are facing backlash because whatever they said didn't strike the right chord or it was misinterpreted. 

It is a minefield Meghan and Harry don't need to enter. I think they are smart enough to know it.


----------



## melissatrv

Jayne1 said:


> I don't think Harry looks unkempt as much as he just isn't cute anymore.  He was the most adorable kid, but as he ages, he's not that attractive.  (Without those uniforms, especially.)


I think Harry looks miserable and angry all the time now.  It is making him look older.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

melissatrv said:


> I think Harry looks miserable and angry all the time now.  It is making him look older.


I feel he still doesn't blame MM though; he's pissed that his family won't allow him to have his cake and eat it because can't they see how special she is.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Here we go.... hate to give them the clicks, but my iPad is acting up.... if someone wants to screenshot while I try to figure out what’s up with this thing lol...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Middleton-gets-backing-Palace-bad-press.html


----------



## chicinthecity777

From what I can see via main stream and social media, many celebrities have already expressed their opinions. I don't think their silence is because they are smart. They either don't care or they are bond by the "no political views" of the royal family.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sol Ryan said:


> Here we go.... hate to give them the clicks, but my iPad is acting up.... if someone wants to screenshot while I try to figure out what’s up with this thing lol...
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Middleton-gets-backing-Palace-bad-press.html
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Middleton-gets-backing-Palace-bad-press.html


What is the article on about? Or rather what is MM on about? The Tatler article is negative towards Kate???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> What is the article on about? Or rather what is MM on about? The Tatler article is negative towards Kate???


The Tatler article is really quite pro-Kate but said she was tired from all recent work - or words to that effect - not a dig really, but a non-PC thing to say these days when so many people have huge issues - huger than hers 
The article was probably written before the coronavirus or the recent jet-setting around by H&M 
The comments about the Tatler article are IMHO more of a reflection how it is impossible these days to say anything non-controversial about many topics


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the DM article: 

"A source said: 'Meghan said on her last trip to England, Kate barely said two words to her and that it’s absolutely preposterous for her to start playing the blame game."

LMAO I wonder why that was? Team Kate here.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love how the DM article includes the word “Bitter Meghan”!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the DM article:
> 
> "A source said: 'Meghan said on her last trip to England, Kate barely said two words to her and that it’s absolutely preposterous for her to start playing the blame game."
> 
> LMAO I wonder why that was? Team Kate here.


I don't think I'd have had much to say to her either if I were Kate.  I guess Kate was supposed to ask her how she was feeling?


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> The Tatler article is really quite pro-Kate but said she was tired from all recent work - or words to that effect - not a dig really, but a non-PC thing to say these days when so many people have huge issues - huger than hers
> The article was probably written before the coronavirus or the recent jet-setting around by H&M
> The comments about the Tatler article are IMHO more of a reflection how it is impossible these days to say anything non-controversial about many topics


I thought it was pro-Kate too hence I don't understand MM's angle, ooops, I meant MM's friends' angle!
And what makes she think that the RF should support her after what she/they have done to the RF?


----------



## Sol Ryan

I still don’t understand why MM thinks she’s equal in standing to Kate. There’s rules. The BRF isn’t a Meritocracy and they left Kensington Palace to to their own thing, so why didn’t they do it?

It just whine whine whine. They’ve left and they are still whining. Have to keep up interest for Omid’s book I suppose...

I feel like if MM was a Military person she’s be a PFC trying to tell a General what to do... 

(I tried to pick a branch of the Military, but I ugh... she behaves so poorly.... I just can’t offend them that way...)


----------



## Annawakes

She doesn’t understand that Kate doesn’t need to say anything to her.  Two words?  That’s plenty, when Kate didn’t have to say anything at all.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I still don’t understand why MM thinks she’s equal in standing to Kate. There’s rules. The BRF isn’t a Meritocracy and they left Kensington Palace to to their own thing, so why didn’t they do it?
> 
> It just whine whine whine. They’ve left and they are still whining. Have to keep up interest for Omid’s book I suppose...
> 
> I feel like if MM was a Military person she’s be a PFC trying to tell a General what to do...
> 
> (I tried to pick a branch of the Military, but I ugh... she behaves so poorly.... I just can’t offend them that way...)


I guess she joined this family steeped in tradition and thought their ways were wrong and they should change them for her


----------



## Emeline

Meg was very upfront about how miserable she was during her short stint in GB.
She wanted an exit plan and she got it.
So what's the problem?
Meg left of her own accord.
Kate continues to be a hard-working positive force within the RF.

They aren't remotely in the same league  and never will be.  Kate will always  outrank Meg.

The RF will do just fine without Meg's assistance.
It's time for Meg to get busy living her best LA life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just don't understand what they think they'll gain by airing alleged dirty laundry. She will look ridiculous and petty and that's it.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I still don’t understand why MM thinks she’s equal in standing to Kate. There’s rules. The BRF isn’t a Meritocracy and they left Kensington Palace to to their own thing, so why didn’t they do it?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't understand what they think they'll gain by airing alleged dirty laundry. She will look ridiculous and petty and that's it.



If they keep repeating over and over that Meghan was a victim, people will believe it. Some of those people will be influential like Tyler Perry and Oprah. Meghan can be the beneficiary of plenty of offers of help and opportunities by continually bringing up her list of past grievances.


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> If they keep repeating over and over that Meghan was a victim, people will believe it. Some of those people will be influential like Tyler Perry and Oprah. Meghan can be the beneficiary of plenty of offers of help and opportunities by continually bringing up her list of past grievances.



So basically rather than speaking out about racial injustice in general, in her capacity as a self-appointed global royal / charitable patron to the world at large, her way of participating in the #blacklivesmatter movement which is shaking her entire country is to talk about the BRF's racial injustice towards her?


----------



## chicinthecity777

tiktok said:


> So basically rather than speaking out about racial injustice in general, in her capacity as a self-appointed global royal / charitable patron to the world at large, her way of participating in the #blacklivesmatter movement which is shaking her entire country is to talk about the BRF's racial injustice towards her?


Pretty much! In her own little narcissist world, she was so hard done by the BRF, by the British media, the British public (how dare we complain about ££££ spent on their wedding, Frogmore cottage!), even by her own family members! Nobody asked if she was OK flying around the world in private jets and free lodging in $20m mansion!


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> Meghan can be the beneficiary of plenty of offers of help and opportunities by continually bringing up her list of past grievances.


After Harry puts up their Aluminum pole, and Meghan prepares her famous roast chicken for Festivus dinner, she can begin the Airing of Grievances.


----------



## Lodpah

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ex...t-title-Sussex-royal-family-Meghan-Markle/amp


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe there's no money in posting about the racial injustice?


----------



## rose60610

Every oppressed POC I know was given a 50 million dollar wedding, a multi million dollar "cottage" on castle grounds, cars, drivers, travel galore, servants galore, nannies, designer wardrobes, and a several million dollar stipend just for showing up and accepting nosegays.  

So I can understand their suffering. 

Oh wait, they weren't.


----------



## scarlet555

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe there's no money in posting about the racial injustice?



You are actually required to donate and give receipts, so that’s a no go for Megs.  Not only you don’t get any money, you have to give money, you have to put money where your mouth is, so again, no for Megs.


----------



## bisousx

It’s suspect that bona fide activists and humanitarians like Harry and Meghan are silent at this critical time .. not too long ago, they were bursting at the seams for freedom from the BRF’s neutrality, stiff upper lip policy and the ability to openly support causes that could be considered controversial.

Seems like the only reason they’ve stayed silent when the whole world is speaking out is because they’re hanging onto Prince Charles’ purse strings and there’s no way they would risk being cut off.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> It’s suspect that bona fide activists and humanitarians like Harry and Meghan are silent at this critical time .. not too long ago, they were bursting at the seams for freedom from the BRF’s neutrality, stiff upper lip policy and the ability to openly support causes that could be considered controversial.
> 
> Seems like the only reason they’ve stayed silent when the whole world is speaking out is because they’re hanging onto Prince Charles’ purse strings and there’s no way they would risk being cut off.


Not sure I would see that Meghan as a WOC saying something about race in the US would get them cut off....maybe they can't figure out what position they want to take


----------



## rose60610

They're not in a position to risk Charles' generosity. That's why they are STFU. They are only concerned with "whatever" when it doesn't mean any skin off their noses. They learned a TINY little itsy bit after the Africa trip where she whined for pity. Yes. In Africa. A member of the BRF. Whining. In Africa. For pity.  That's our Meghan!  Who ALSO pulls down her bandana mask to make the recipient of the Covid food drop off realize her greatness as the recipient sits sheltered at her home, which is likely a tad below the opulence of Buckingham Palace. Wow Meghan. How wonderful. You force shut-ins to acknowledge your greatness.  That's really big of you.


----------



## mdcx

Megs is so jealous, it seems like she can't just accept all her various good fortunes that have come from marrying into the BRF ($$$$$$$ being the major one I thought she was after). Instead she has become obsessed with all the things she didn't get - not being #1, not being Kate, never going to be Queen Consort, not getting choice in tiaras blah blah. All facts of her new life in the BRF that were extremely obvious to 99% of observers of her engagement/wedding to H. 

She doesn't seem like someone who will ever be content with what she has imo. And no, I do not think she genuinely cares about charity etc, but rather uses it to elevate herself so she can access that next thing she wants.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> They're not in a position to risk Charles' generosity.



You mean like when they go after Kate, whine about the horrible BRF or have their friends announce Harry found a new father? 

Or when MM offended ***** while still a member of the RF (which IMHO opinion she didn't do because he deserves it but to point out how cool and different and unique she is. The Queen doesn't always agree with the politics of her state visitors, but she has manners and is subtle, like driving around the Saudi crown prince when women still weren't allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia).


----------



## Jktgal

sdkitty said:


> I guess she joined this family steeped in tradition and thought their ways were wrong and they should change them for her



"Because in America, we don't have kings and queesn and royal families. I don't know anything about royalty, tiaras, tights. In California we never iron our clothes or comb our hairs.... we just sit around eating avocadoes after yoga and the hair and clothes unwrinkle themselves. It's incredibly magical...."


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You mean like when they go after Kate, whine about the horrible BRF or have their friends announce Harry found a new father?
> 
> Or when MM offended ***** while still a member of the RF (which IMHO opinion she didn't do because he deserves it but to point out how cool and different and unique she is. The Queen doesn't always agree with the politics of her state visitors, but she has manners and is subtle, like driving around the Saudi crown prince when women still weren't allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia).



Good points. We do observe that so far they haven't made any statements about the protests/riots. Or state (non)support for anyone in office (beyond the ***** thing a while back), but it hasn't been the season yet.  One wonders if they eventually will take sides with certain people. M's bickering about Kate is so weird and petty.  Even if there were some legit complaints, anybody else at any other job who isn't the boss has to suck it up. Kate will be Queen Consort, the most M could aspire to is to be an uber wealthy member of the BRF, which, isn't that enough? Or M could have morphed into a super supporter of the BRF and shown appreciation instead of whining about how she wasn't given "enough". Egads, does she really think she was in a position to unseat Kate? Or Camilla? Or QEII? As like a housewarming gift just because she was new?


----------



## 1LV

IMO Meghan will never measure up to - let alone surpass Kate, and it has nothing to do with anything she’s thrown out there.  She’s fighting a losing battle on this one.  All the accusations, all the whining, all the pretense of being something she not ... for the first time I’m starting to feel sorry for Archie.


----------



## Tootsie17

mdcx said:


> Megs is so jealous, it seems like she can't just accept all her various good fortunes that have come from marrying into the BRF ($$$$$$$ being the major one I thought she was after). Instead she has become obsessed with all the things she didn't get - not being #1, not being Kate, never going to be Queen Consort, not getting choice in tiaras blah blah. All facts of her new life in the BRF that were extremely obvious to 99% of observers of her engagement/wedding to H.
> 
> She doesn't seem like someone who will ever be content with what she has imo. And no, I do not think she genuinely cares about charity etc, but rather uses it to elevate herself so she can access that next thing she wants.


I totally agree with you. Being that M is a narcissist, she will NEVER understand how all her calculated plans will lead her to being unsuccessful in the long run. She just doesn't get it.  I find this situation very frustrating because she will never have an epiphany and *come to her senses. * In her eyes everyone is against her and she is the victim.  It would take years of therapy to help her undo her twisted thinking.


----------



## Tootsie17

1LV said:


> IMO Meghan will never measure up to - let alone surpass Kate, and it has nothing to do with anything she’s thrown out there.  She’s fighting a losing battle on this one.  All the accusations, all the whining, all the pretense of being something she not ... for the first time I’m starting to feel sorry for Archie.


I too feel sorry for Archie since he an innocent player in all of his parent's mess. Harry, though not squeaky clean himself, had no idea who he was dealing with when he met Meghan. He may not be the brightest BRF member, but he better wake up soon and start putting the puzzle pieces together. He needs to see where he made his mistakes and then, try to rectify his relationship with his family for Archie's sake and his own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Megs and Vlad are spot on.  
It is time to move away from this dysfunctional H&M drama and focus on bringing healing to a hurting and dis-eased world.
[whisper: H&M sure aren’t going to do it).  Hugs and hearts to all.


----------



## rose60610

Can't we do both?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

https://www.essence.com/articles/meghan-markle-george-floyd-commencement-speech/
*Meghan Markle: "George Floyd's Life Mattered"*
IN HER ADDRESS TO THE 2020 CLASS OF IMMACULATE HEART HIGH SCHOOL, THE DUCHESS OF SUSSEX SHARED SHE'S DEVASTATED AT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THIS COUNTRY.


----------



## mdcx

The text of her address. Seemed very bland to me. "And I" is obviously her sentence starter of choice:

_'Immaculate Heart High School, the graduating class of 2020. For the past couple of weeks I've been planning on saying a few words to you for your graduation.

'And as we've all seen over the last week what is happening in our country and in our state and in our home town of LA has been absolutely devastating.

'And I wasn't sure what I could say to you. I wanted to say the right thing and I was really nervous that I wouldn't or that it would get picked apart.

'And I realised the only wrong thing to say is to say nothing. Because George Floyd's life mattered and Breonna Taylor's life mattered and Philando Castile's life mattered and Tamir Rice's life mattered, and so did so many other people whose names we know and whose names we do not know. Stephon Clark, his life mattered.

'And I was thinking about this moment when I was a sophomore in high school, I was 15, and as you know sophomore year is the year we do volunteer work, which is a prerequisite for graduating.

'And I remember my teacher at the time, one of my teachers, Ms Pollia, said to me as I was leaving for a day of volunteering, 'always remember to put other's needs above your own fears'.

'And that has stuck with me throughout my entire life and I have thought about it more in the last week than ever before.

'So the first thing I want to say to you is that I'm sorry. I'm so sorry that you have to grow up in a world where this is still present.'

'I was 11 or 12 years old when I was just about to start Immaculate Heart Middle School in the fall, and it was the LA Riots, which was also triggered by senseless act of racism.

'And I remember the curfew and I remember rushing back home and on that drive home, seeing ash fall from the sky and smelling the smoke and seeing the smoke billow out of buildings and seeing people run out of buildings carrying bags and looting.

'And I remember seeing men in the back of a van just holding guns and rifles. And I remember pulling up at the house and seeing the tree, that had always been there, completely charred. And those memories don't go away.

'And I can't imagine that at 17 or 18 years old, which is how old you are now, that you would have to have a different version of that same type of experience. That's something that you should have an understanding of, but an understanding of as a history lesson, not as your reality.

'So I am sorry in a way that we have not gotten the world to a place where you deserve it to be.

'The other thing though that I do remember about that time was how people came together, and we are seeing that right now. We are seeing that from the sheriff in Michigan or the police chief in Virginia. 

'We are seeing people stand in solidarity, we are seeing communities come together and to uplift. And you are going to be part of this movement.

'I know that this is not the graduation that you envisioned and this is not the celebration that you imagined. 

'But I also know that there's a way for us to reframe this for you to not see this as the end of something but instead to see this as the beginning of you harnessing all the work, all of the values, all of the skills that you have embodied over the last four years – and now you channel that.

'Now all of that work gets activated. Now you get to be part of rebuilding. And I know that sometimes people say how many times do we need to rebuild? 

'But you know that you're going to rebuild, rebuild and rebuilt until it is rebuilt. Because when the foundation is broken, so are we. You are going to lead with love, you are going to lead with compassion, you are going to use your voice.

You're going to use your voice in a stronger way than you have ever been able to because most of you are 18 – or you're going to turn 18 — so you're going to vote. 

'You are going to have empathy for those who don't see the world through the same lens that you do, because with as diverse, vibrant and opened minded as I know the teachings at Immaculate Heart are, I know you know that black lives matter. So I am already excited for what you're going to do in the world. 

'You are equipped, you are ready, we need you and you are prepared. I am so proud to call each of you a fellow alumni, and I'm so eager to see what you're going to do. 

'Please know that I am cheering you on all along the way, I am exceptionally proud of you, and I'm wishing you a huge congratulations on today, the start of all the impact you're going to make in the world as leaders that we all so deeply crave. Congratulations ladies, and thank you in advance.'_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I woke up to several German news outlets (not the big, serious ones though) wondering if the Sussexes are already preparing their move back to the UK. And not the riots where the turning point but Harry being done with his adventure (then again, those journalists obviously don't get Meghan. If they are returning it's not because Harry is done but because she realizes she won't achieve anything).


----------



## LaidyM

Yay! I’m back- had some technical issues, I see I have 40 odd pages to catch up on. Wow!
I heard about the speech, will comment once I catch up, suffy to say- form a woman who supported the ALM I find it in very umm... bad form.


----------



## pixiejenna

Our wish was not granted she decided to speak out about Floyd in typical Megan fashion a week and a half late and by making it all about her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

_"always remember to put other's needs above your own fears" - _she's definitely followed that one through hasn't she? 
Has she put British people's needs above her own? Has she put BRF's duty above her own? Has she put Archie wellbeing above hers? Has she put her father's above hers? Has she put her husband's needs above hers? HAS she?


----------



## kemilia

pixiejenna said:


> Our wish was not granted she decided to speak out about Floyd in typical Megan fashion a week and a half late and by making it all about her.


Yep, I counted the word "I" and "I'm" 34 times (could be off by a couple). 

I truly think she is totally clueless and very thirsty.


----------



## Sharont2305

This was a good one too...

"And I remember my teacher at the time, one of my teachers, Ms Pollia, said to me as I was leaving for a day of volunteering, 'always remember to put other's needs above your own fears'."


----------



## rose60610

mdcx said:


> And I wasn't sure what I could say to you. I wanted to say the right thing and I was really nervous that I wouldn't or *that it would get picked apart*.



So her big concern is how her words would get picked apart. Well, everyone's words get picked apart, drawn and quartered when detractors work hard to find fault. I'll raise my hand and admit it when it comes to MM's statements. Well, she gives us a lot to work with. MM has a history of saying self-pitying things, and this time is no different. At least she's consistent.


----------



## zinacef

And I _____.  Please fill in the blanks!  Mine will be Ms Whitney Houston’s   And I will always love you!!!!


----------



## seasounds

I checked into this thread after staying away for months.  I had sent a request to Megs and Vlad to rename this thread to reflect the vitriol, but that never happened.

I cannot stay silent.  This thread reeks of racism.  Why else would anonymous posters feel empowered to criticize and mock a woman of color for expressing her own experiences during the LA riots while reflecting on the current racial tensions?

This thread only exists to give a home to these voices.  

"Please reach out to me directly if there is something you feel I could do differently on our forums to be a better ally and make this forum a welcoming community for all."

Been there.  Done that.


----------



## Turquoisebee

seasounds said:


> I checked into this thread after staying away for months.  I had sent a request to Megs and Vlad to rename this thread to reflect the vitriol, but that never happened.
> 
> I cannot stay silent.  This thread reeks of racism.  Why else would anonymous posters feel empowered to criticize and mock a woman of color for expressing her own experiences during the LA riots while reflecting on the current racial tensions?
> 
> This thread only exists to give a home to these voices.
> 
> "Please reach out to me directly if there is something you feel I could do differently on our forums to be a better ally and make this forum a welcoming community for all."
> 
> Been there.  Done that.



I respectfully disagree. 

Been reading this thread for a sometimes. Personally, I interpret most posts here to be directed at her actions rather than her race. 

I'm a woman of colour too.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Turquoisebee said:


> I respectfully disagree.
> 
> Been reading this thread for a sometimes. Personally, I interpret most posts here to be directed at her actions rather than her race.
> 
> I'm a woman of colour too.


Thank you! I have the same view towards Harry, their actions have been shameful! It has nothing to do with skin colour!
Ethnic minority here too!


----------



## 1LV

seasounds said:


> I checked into this thread after staying away for months.  I had sent a request to Megs and Vlad to rename this thread to reflect the vitriol, but that never happened.
> 
> I cannot stay silent.  This thread reeks of racism.  Why else would anonymous posters feel empowered to criticize and mock a woman of color for expressing her own experiences during the LA riots while reflecting on the current racial tensions?
> 
> This thread only exists to give a home to these voices.
> 
> "Please reach out to me directly if there is something you feel I could do differently on our forums to be a better ally and make this forum a welcoming community for all."
> 
> Been there.  Done that.


I can honestly say as an American woman I was rooting for MM 100% in the beginning.   My feelings and opinion changed based on her actions, not her color.


----------



## chicinthecity777

1LV said:


> I can honestly say as an American woman I was rooting for MM 100% in the beginning.   My feelings and opinion changed based on her actions, not her color.


I too wished them well at the beginning! I too gave them the benefit of the doubt when things started to go south. But I had been proven otherwise over and over again!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## seasounds

Turquoisebee said:


> I respectfully disagree.
> 
> Been reading this thread for a sometimes. Personally, I interpret most posts here to be directed at her actions rather than her race.
> 
> I'm a woman of colour too.





chicinthecity777 said:


> Thank you! I have the same view towards Harry, their actions have been shameful! It has nothing to do with skin colour!
> Ethnic minority here too!





1LV said:


> I can honestly say as an American woman I was rooting for MM 100% in the beginning.   My feelings and opinion changed based on her actions, not her color.



Your responses underline the reason I suggested changing the name of this thread to something along the lines of "Venting about M and H" and asked that a more positive thread be started.

Now we only have criticism in a time when we should be actively seeking to understand not undermine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> Yep, I counted the word "I" and "I'm" 34 times (could be off by a couple).
> 
> I truly think she is totally clueless and very thirsty.



Yet Twitter is full of stans aggressively attacking anyone who dared to wonder why Woke Meghan hadn't spoken up, and guess what their line is? "She's been an activist since age 11!" 

LMAO. We all went to elementary school, I guess we're all activists now.


----------



## 1LV

seasounds said:


> Your responses underline the reason I suggested changing the name of this thread to something along the lines of "Venting about M and H" and asked that a more positive thread be started.
> 
> Now we only have criticism in a time when we should be actively seeking to understand not undermine.


I could get behind renaming this thread, but since it’s an established thread maybe someone could start a new thread highlighting the positive aspects of MM & Harry.  I have no doubt it would be well received by many tPF members.


----------



## scarlet555

1LV said:


> I could get behind renaming this thread, but since it’s an established thread maybe someone could start a new thread highlighting the positive aspects of MM & Harry.  I have no doubt it would be well received by many tPF members.



Creating a new thread is what anyone can do I thought.


----------



## mshermes

seasounds said:


> Your responses underline the reason I suggested changing the name of this thread to something along the lines of "Venting about M and H" and asked that a more positive thread be started.
> 
> Now we only have criticism in a time when we should be actively seeking to understand not undermine.


Why not start a new thread more to your liking and ignore this one?


----------



## scarlet555

seasounds said:


> Your responses underline the reason I suggested changing the name of this thread to something along the lines of "Venting about M and H" and asked that a more positive thread be started.
> 
> Now we only have *criticism in a time *when we should be actively seeking to understand not undermine.



Have you been to the Kardashian thread?


----------



## sdkitty

It's a nice enough speech I guess.  I don't know if the written version came from her but I notice the word "realise" is spelled the British way.  Not the way I would expect an American to spell it.
I don't hear anything in the speech that particularly sounds like it's coming from a POC.  She's playing it safe I guess.  Or her experience growing up was not the experience of a POC.


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> It's a nice enough speech I guess.  I don't know if the written version came from her but* I notice the word "realise" is spelled the British way.*  Not the way I would expect an American to spell it.
> I don't hear anything in the speech that particularly sounds like it's coming from a POC.  She's playing it safe I guess.  Or her experience growing up was not the experience of a POC.


Maybe the spell check is set in British English mode?


----------



## TC1

Here in Canada last night on one of the late night TV shows they aired the interview, or speech from MM for the 2012 "Erase the Hate" campaign. She spoke well about her personal experiences and it was genuine. This speech seems less so.


----------



## Emeline

I'm ok with posters sharing a variety of thoughts and opinions. I particularly like that folks worldwide share their what's on their mind here.

It's generally a pretty civil discussion. Any "over the top" stuff doesn't seem to rule the day.

I don't  always agree with every post, and that's ok. Scrolling along is always an option.
What I won't do is bring ugly accusations about personal character into the mix.

That's just my take.


----------



## Kansashalo

Since this was a graduation speech, I thought Meghan did well and I"m glad to see her have the opportunity to be open  by touching on current events relates to BLM..  She recognizes the platform that she has and is using it wisely (of course).


----------



## bag-mania

Was she the only commencement speaker for that high school's graduation? My only criticism is she could have used at least part of the speech to offer the girls some kind of general encouragement that wasn't solely focused on activism. 

These are young people who have experienced a turbulent senior year dealing with a killer virus, self-isolation, and now serious civil unrest. Give those girls something hopeful about their future besides telling them what a mess they are entering.


----------



## Annawakes

I thought the graduation speech was fine.  She spoke some about her childhood experiences, which is relevant.  The speech wasn’t just a big word salad, which was nice.  I thought it was interesting she mentioned not wanting to be critiqued for what she says.  That tells me she realizes everything she says is under scrutiny, which I assumed she already knew.....but it was a bit odd she would specifically point out her concern like that.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Emeline said:


> I don't  always agree with every post, and that's ok. Scrolling along is always an option.
> What I won't do is bring ugly accusations about personal character into the mix.


Exactly. I read a post in here a few weeks ago that I thought was steeped in racism. But since it wasn't overt, it wasn't my place to call it out so I kept it moving. I posted in here a bit less and figured I'd come back when I wanted to.


----------



## seasounds

mrsinsyder said:


> I read a post in here a few weeks ago that I thought was steeped in racism. But since it wasn't overt, it wasn't my place to call it out so I kept it moving.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

?


----------



## bisousx

Kansashalo said:


> Since this was a graduation speech, I thought Meghan did well and I"m glad to see her have the opportunity to be open  by touching on current events relates to BLM..  She recognizes the platform that she has and is using it wisely (of course).



I also think Meg’s speech was fine. Glad she finally spoke up.


----------



## bisousx

mrsinsyder said:


> Exactly. I read a post in here a few weeks ago that I thought was steeped in racism. But since it wasn't overt, it wasn't my place to call it out so I kept it moving. I posted in here a bit less and figured I'd come back when I wanted to.



There’s been quite a bit of subtle racism on TPF that I’ve seen over the years, sadly. Especially when it starts trickling into political discussions. Because TPF is a generally civil board, it’s even harder to detect because of the passive aggressive tones.

Meghan is such a polarizing person that criticism against her can be skewed by some as racist, and actual passive aggressive racist remarks are let to slide because of her numerous questionable actions and behavior.


----------



## mrsinsyder

bisousx said:


> There’s been quite a bit of subtle racism on TPF that I’ve seen over the years, sadly. Especially when it starts trickling into political discussions. Because TPF is a generally civil board, it’s even harder to detect because of the passive aggressive tones.
> 
> Meghan is such a polarizing person that criticism against her can be skewed by some as racist, and actual passive aggressive racist remarks are let to slide because of her numerous questionable actions and behavior.


Agree. Megs and I have PMed recently about the issue...

Anyway, these were comments about her mom who seems largely harmless.


----------



## Katel

1LV said:


> I can honestly say as an American woman I was rooting for MM 100% in the beginning.   My feelings and opinion changed based on her actions, not her color.



Agree!



seasounds said:


> Your responses underline the reason I suggested changing the name of this thread to something along the lines of "Venting about M and H" and asked that a more positive thread be started.
> 
> Now we only have criticism in a time when we should be actively seeking to understand not undermine.



 We reap what we sow, karma is a bit€h. Her actions are the problem - not the way she looks.


----------



## elisa_p

I'm a POC and have lurked on this thread I think the majority of the posts in here are fine with a few that make take a second look.  To be honest, I'm very critical of her and I don't think she should be exempt from that criticism.  I've been really disappointed in the company she keeps for years in Toronto (I am from Toronto) and even more when she married into the BRF which is an institution that's deeply rooted in colonialism and racism over the years.  Her speech was great and she's a lovely speaker but her activism comes off as very performative to me and she's very "hollywood".  She's in a place of a lot of privilege and yet she does absolutely nothing meaningful with it.   Maybe she feels as she has to toe the line as ultimately she's funded by prince Charles and that's fine...but I'm not going to go calling her a social activist for it.  She can do better and I'll be disappointed until she does.


----------



## Brklynjuice10

seasounds said:


> I checked into this thread after staying away for months.  I had sent a request to Megs and Vlad to rename this thread to reflect the vitriol, but that
> 
> I cannot stay silent.  This thread reeks of racism.  Why else would anonymous posters feel empowered to criticize and mock a woman of color for expressing her own experiences during the LA riots while reflecting on the current racial tensions?
> 
> This thread only exists to give a home to these voices.
> 
> "Please reach out to me directly if there is something you feel I could do differently on our forums to be a better ally and make this forum a welcoming community for all."
> 
> Been there.  Done that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Look closely at the name of this thread. H no longer considers himself _Prince. _Neither do I.  Had he handled his relationships with everyone better, M would have been celebrated and treated respectfully. I put 100% blame on the man-child, entitled H.  A worldly 40 yr old man of extreme means free-loading in another man’s mansion...twice. Sheesh. He has serious commitment (doubt he will by a house in the US) and resentment (his brother)  issues. Yes, certainly some media has been disgustingly racist to M. To my knowledge, this thread has not. If so, kindly point me to specific posts that are being considered racist. We can agree to disagree agreeably on why this couple receives so much criticism. For me, it’s the amount of money they have taken from the British when they knowingly had no intentions of doing the job - the clothes, the redecoration, the costly wedding, the trips, etc. He is not even the heir to the throne nor even the second heir. SMH.

  Hugs and hearts to all.


----------



## mdcx




----------



## Brklynjuice10

Meg really get people heated lol


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> _"always remember to put other's needs above your own fears" - _she's definitely followed that one through hasn't she?
> Has she put British people's needs above her own? Has she put BRF's duty above her own? Has she put Archie wellbeing above hers? Has she put her father's above hers? Has she put her husband's needs above hers? HAS she?


I never saw her so-called volunteerism as anything, but self serving.  She even was taking credit for a cook book that was not hers and belonged to the real volunteers.  Go out there and do something and don't tell a soul about it and then maybe I will believe that you want to help people.



kemilia said:


> Yep, I counted the word "I" and "I'm" 34 times (could be off by a couple).
> 
> I truly think she is totally clueless and very thirsty.



Of course you counted multiple "i/I'm" multiple times.  The world revolves around her.  The fact that she could not speak out before now because she thought she would say the wrong thing, tells me that anything she said would be about her.  I don't believe that she is really invested in the words she spouted.  Did she really write all of them?  I thought her eyes were darting around far too much and she had crib notes or Q cards that she was looking at.  Playing to the crowd per usual.  Perhaps an audition tape for a future role.  Sunshine Sachs told her to do this to save her behind.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I never saw her so-called volunteerism as anything, but self serving.  She even was taking credit for a cook book that was not hers and belonged to the real volunteers.  Go out there and do something and don't tell a soul about it and then maybe I will believe that you want to help people.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you counted multiple "i/I'm" multiple times.  The world revolves around her.  The fact that she could not speak out before now because she thought she would say the wrong thing, tells me that anything she said would be about her.  I don't believe that she is really invested in the words she spouted.  Did she really write all of them?  I thought her eyes were darting around far too much and she had crib notes or Q cards that she was looking at.  Playing to the crowd per usual.  Perhaps an audition tape for a future role.  Sunshine Sachs told her to do this to save her behind.


I haven't watched the video.  maybe I'll go look


----------



## tiktok

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...markle-graduation-video-address-george-floyd/
"Both Meghan and Harry have been quietly having meetings *behind the scenes* with people on all levels to make sure that they are educated and connected to the issues of police brutality and the Black Lives Matter movement.

"Harry and Meghan have been having private conversations with community leaders and people at every level, as well as friends and family, about this issue since the start of recent events," a source tells _BAZAAR_ of the Sussexes' recent efforts. "By speaking to as many people and organizations as possible, it has been a way for them to *feel connected to everything that's going on and learn more about the issues surrounding it.*"
=====
Naturally we get the usual "behind the scene" wording, but hey - I thought she knew all about these issues given that she experienced them herself? The lack of any relevant action attached to this is so surprising given their rich history as philanthropists so far...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> "Harry and Meghan have been having private conversations with community leaders and people at every level, as well as friends and family, about this issue since the start of recent events," a source tells _BAZAAR_ of the Sussexes' recent efforts.



What family though?


----------



## duna

Excuse my ignorance but what is a POC??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> Excuse my ignorance but what is a POC??


People/person of colour.


----------



## NY_Mami

rose60610 said:


> Every oppressed POC I know was given a 50 million dollar wedding, a multi million dollar "cottage" on castle grounds, cars, drivers, travel galore, servants galore, nannies, designer wardrobes, and a several million dollar stipend just for showing up and accepting nosegays.
> 
> So I can understand their suffering.
> 
> Oh wait, they weren't.



I have to quote this because as a Black Woman,  the ideal of a POC being given access to wealth and certain privileges automatically gives them some sort of immunity to being subjected to any form of systemic racism or oppression is a myth. Meghan was given access to privileges her entire life yet it didn’t stop tabloids from assuming she was “Straight Out Of Compton”, or saying that her blood will “Taint” the royal Bloodline, it certainly didn’t stop tabloids from comparing her child to a chimpanzee either.
You definitely don’t have to be from the low socioeconomic background to experience racial discrimination or oppression.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> People/person of colour.



Ah ,thanks!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

NY_Mami said:


> it certainly didn’t stop tabloids from comparing her child to a chimpanzee either.



It wasn't "tabloids" though, it was one idiot radio moderator who - rightfully so - got fired for it.

Also, the coverage of Kate's family at the beginning was nasty, with cruel jokes about her mother etc. At least I haven't seen Doria dragged anywhere.

Anyway, I hear what you are saying that even privileged POC can fall victim to racism, I'm not quite on board with the oppression part. If you own the world it's hard to be oppressed I feel...and no, it's not oppression if Meghan Markle, POC or not, is expected to play by the rules.


----------



## chicinthecity777

As a person who have experienced racial prejudice myself in real life and on this forum (the member repeatedly attacked me with passive aggressive subtlely disguised racist posts is still active on the forum dispite repeated  reports), there is no denying racism is well and alive in our society. I don't read about H&M much outside this thread. There had been said that she was subject to racism so I will take their word for it. BUT there is a big difference in saying people who don't like MM are just racist. I have been reading a lot in this thread since our lockdown and I would say 90% of the negative stuff members expressed has nothing to do with her race. Branding any dislikes of a PoC racism doesn't help fighting racism at all! It does the opposite! It says you should like someone just because of their skin colour.


----------



## mia55

elisa_p said:


> I'm a POC and have lurked on this thread I think the majority of the posts in here are fine with a few that make take a second look.  To be honest, I'm very critical of her and I don't think she should be exempt from that criticism.  I've been really disappointed in the company she keeps for years in Toronto (I am from Toronto) and even more when she married into the BRF which is an institution that's deeply rooted in colonialism and racism over the years.  Her speech was great and she's a lovely speaker but her activism comes off as very performative to me and she's very "hollywood".  She's in a place of a lot of privilege and yet she does absolutely nothing meaningful with it.   Maybe she feels as she has to toe the line as ultimately she's funded by prince Charles and that's fine...but I'm not going to go calling her a social activist for it.  She can do better and I'll be disappointed until she does.


I'm a POC as well who has seen racism first hand and I completely agree with you. Well said!


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It wasn't "tabloids" though, it was one idiot radio moderator who - rightfully so - got fired for it.
> 
> Also, the coverage of Kate's family at the beginning was nasty, with cruel jokes about her mother etc. *At least I haven't seen Doria dragged anywhere.*
> 
> Anyway, I hear what you are saying that even privileged POC can fall victim to racism, I'm not quite on board with the oppression part. If you own the world it's hard to be oppressed I feel...and no, it's not oppression if Meghan Markle, POC or not, is expected to play by the rules.


Doria was dragged on this very forum. She was accused of being a criminal. Gee I wonder why?
Also, POC can be oppressed no matter what financial, educational backgrounds they are from.
It starts in school and it continues thru one’s career. It would be very naive to think that because a POC is wealthy that he/she does not suffer oppression and or injustice.
In the case of MM, it is easy to see how she could have experienced less racism and prejudice as she moved in a progressive milieu. (Hollywood)
However,  I do not doubt for a second that she has experienced micro aggressions on the daily, imo.
Being entitled like the duchess is, does not negate her experience.
As far as her commencement speech, it was appropriate for the settings as it is oriented toward teenage girls.
In short, even sucky people can be victim of racism.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Doria was dragged on this very forum. She was accused of being a criminal. Gee I wonder why?



I was referring to the press. I have not read hostile articles about her, what I've read so far was pretty friendly (and why wouldn't it be...she appears to be completely inoffensive and low key).



> Also, POC can be oppressed no matter what financial, educational backgrounds they are from.
> It starts in school and it continues thru one’s career. It would be very naive to think that because a POC is wealthy that he/she does not suffer oppression and or injustice.



Starting to think your (not you personally, you and the other posters who brought it up first) definition of oppression differs from mine, no snark intended.


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...markle-graduation-video-address-george-floyd/
> "Both Meghan and Harry have been quietly having meetings *behind the scenes* with people on all levels to make sure that they are educated and connected to the issues of police brutality and the Black Lives Matter movement.


The term 'behind the scenes' means that they were behind the organization of the peaceful protests, and must be credited for the positive changes that those protests will hopefully bring to the world.  My 2 cents. 

It is a little annoying that people use expressions like "lead with compassion", and show little compassion for their own staff and family (according to what we read in the news).


----------



## Nutashha

I know a lot is going around the world rn but if anyone is interested in some tea then here it is.

*A Detailed Timeline of Kate and Meghan’s Feud*


----------



## sdkitty

my two cents on the commencement speech.  I guess it was fine for the occasion.
I found it somewhat pretentious the way she kept rolling her eyes upward.  Guess that was her way of showing she was remembering or something.

I have to admit that my dislike of her makes it hard for me to give her high praise for anything.  (at least anything she's done so far)

maybe better to let the WOC here judge the speech


----------



## bag-mania

Words are just words. It's easy to say whatever you know will get you positive attention. It's your actions that show who you truly are. Meghan and Harry don't ever actually do anything, but they sure like telling us what we should be doing.


----------



## 1LV

.


----------



## 1LV

mdcx said:


> View attachment 4748247
> View attachment 4748248


Oh. My. God.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H should take note -


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Oh. My. God.


Wow!  It's like spouting words of wisdom that you found on chewing gum wrappers or fortune cookies.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  It's like spouting words of wisdom that you found on chewing gum wrappers or fortune cookies.


in an effort to give her the benefit of the doubt that she may have gotten these words from some other source, I Googled it.  The only other similar quote I found was from Theodore Roosevelt.  So - my guess is that she did get it from Grey's - unless she came up with it herself and it was just a coincidence 
From Brainyquote:
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing. Theodore Roosevelt
Read more at https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/wrong-thing-quotes


----------



## bag-mania

Possible TV show plagiarism aside, the commencement speech is by far Meghan's biggest success since leaving the UK. Today much of the mainstream American media is falling all over themselves singing her praises! In the comments section of the _Washington Post_ anybody who dared say that Meghan was anything less than than the most wonderful woman ever was attacked, called racists, and otherwise insulted and shut down. It's a big win for Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Possible TV show plagiarism aside, the commencement speech is by far Meghan's biggest success since leaving the UK. Today much of the mainstream American media is falling all over themselves singing her praises! In the comments section of the _Washington Post_ anybody who dared say that Meghan was anything less than than the most wonderful woman ever was attacked, called racists, and otherwise insulted and shut down. It's a big win for Meghan.


Yes, it seems that the 'reviews' are positive; let's just hope that she learns something from this and continues in this vein! 

On the other hand, I do wish that the media (especially here in the US) would stop with the "Duchess" already; we do not recognize titles here .. hence the Revolutionary War!  She needs to be "just Meghan" like "just Harry" ..


----------



## zinacef

CeeJay said:


> Yes, it seems that the 'reviews' are positive; let's just hope that she learns something from this and continues in this vein!
> 
> On the other hand, I do wish that the media (especially here in the US) would stop with the "Duchess" already; we do not recognize titles here .. hence the Revolutionary War!  She needs to be "just Meghan" like "just Harry" ..


The Duchess thing is like when Luann was also a Countess Luann in RHONY like 10 years ago and finally people realized that she’s  just so full of it. And we do not actually have Prince, princess  here in the US not unless you work for Disney.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, it seems that the 'reviews' are positive; let's just hope that she learns something from this and continues in this vein!
> 
> On the other hand, I do wish that the media (especially here in the US) would stop with the "Duchess" already; we do not recognize titles here .. hence the Revolutionary War!  She needs to be "just Meghan" like "just Harry" ..


right....she was a duchess for 18 months.....she quit that


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> On the other hand, I do wish that the media (especially here in the US) would stop with the "Duchess" already; we do not recognize titles here .. hence the Revolutionary War!  She needs to be "just Meghan" like "just Harry" ..



You know how most of the US media likes to keep their messages nice and simple. They'll continue to use the title rather than risk criticism or accusations of being disrespectful to her.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> You know how most of the US media likes to keep their messages nice and simple. They'll continue to use the title rather than risk criticism or accusations of being disrespectful to her.


I'll agree with that, but they should understand that calling her the "Duchess" in the US is a slight to our hard-fought victory!  I get that over in the UK, yes .. they would continue with it, but it really shouldn't be supported here state-side.  It could also be that I grew up in New England and on my father's side, he traces his ancestory back to the Revolutionary War.  In addition, a part of our back yard (after me digging around as a kid) was later excavated and it was determined that a household from the Revolutionary War had previously existed there.  Many Bostonians (and surrounding areas) are very knowledgeable of that war, what transpired and where the various battlegrounds were .. so, it could be that as well.


----------



## bag-mania

^Now you know pretty much the last thing US media cares about is American history.


----------



## LaidyM

elisa_p said:


> I'm a POC and have lurked on this thread I think the majority of the posts in here are fine with a few that make take a second look.  To be honest, I'm very critical of her and I don't think she should be exempt from that criticism.  I've been really disappointed in the company she keeps for years in Toronto (I am from Toronto) and even more when she married into the BRF which is an institution that's deeply rooted in colonialism and racism over the years.  Her speech was great and she's a lovely speaker *but her activism comes off as very performative to me and she's very "hollywood"*.  She's in a place of a lot of privilege and yet she does absolutely nothing meaningful with it.   Maybe she feels as she has to toe the line as ultimately she's funded by prince Charles and that's fine...but I'm not going to go calling her a social activist for it.  She can do better and I'll be disappointed until she does.




You know, it just hit me, that nick kids interview must have been an ego rush to her 11 year old self.
She was only 11 years old, and was getting attention for a letter which was only written and send as part of a class project, and let’s be honest was not the catalyst for the ad being changed.
I can’t help wondering if that interview is the root of her faux-Hollywood style activism.
I mean, even an 11 year old must realize the chance of his/her letter being the reason the ad was changed are minuscule?


----------



## sdkitty

LaidyM said:


> You know, it just hit me, that nick kids interview must have been an ego rush to her 11 year old self.
> She was only 11 years old, and was getting attention for a letter which was only written and send as part of a class project, and let’s be honest was not the catalyst for the ad being changed.
> I can’t help wondering if that interview is the root of her faux-Hollywood style activism.
> I mean, even an 11 year old must realize the chance of his/her letter being the reason the ad was changed are minuscule?


judging by the woman she grew up to be and some things we've heard about her childhood, I think she probably did think she was the reason for the ad being changed.  She's very special you know


----------



## Allisonfaye

chicinthecity777 said:


> As a person who have experienced racial prejudice myself in real life and on this forum (the member repeatedly attacked me with passive aggressive subtlely disguised racist posts is still active on the forum dispite repeated  reports), there is no denying racism is well and alive in our society. I don't read about H&M much outside this thread. There had been said that she was subject to racism so I will take their word for it. BUT there is a big difference in saying people who don't like MM are just racist. I have been reading a lot in this thread since our lockdown and I would say 90% of the negative stuff members expressed has nothing to do with her race. Branding any dislikes of a PoC racism doesn't help fighting racism at all! It does the opposite! It says you should like someone just because of their skin colour.



Excellent post.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> As a person who have experienced racial prejudice myself...
> *Branding any dislikes of a PoC racism doesn't help fighting racism at all!*





Allisonfaye said:


> Excellent post.



I couldn't agree more. Skin color (any shade) doesn't make one a saint!

@chicinthecity777 If I may suggest, whenever you feel 'racial prejudice', just think that 'racial prejudice'  is a synonym of ignorance. So you may feel sorry for the ignorant people of this world.


----------



## V0N1B2




----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> View attachment 4749336
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> OMG


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

Well, if true it's sort of good news. I don't think any 10 or 11 year old needs to be upfront and close observing violent riots. 
(Assuming they have access to someplace safe.)


----------



## bag-mania

I am hoping that’s a fraudulent Twitter account but these days anything is possible.


----------



## elisa_p

chicinthecity777 said:


> As a person who have experienced racial prejudice myself in real life and on this forum (the member repeatedly attacked me with passive aggressive subtlely disguised racist posts is still active on the forum dispite repeated  reports), there is no denying racism is well and alive in our society. I don't read about H&M much outside this thread. There had been said that she was subject to racism so I will take their word for it. BUT there is a big difference in saying people who don't like MM are just racist. I have been reading a lot in this thread since our lockdown and I would say 90% of the negative stuff members expressed has nothing to do with her race. Branding any dislikes of a PoC racism doesn't help fighting racism at all! It does the opposite! It says you should like someone just because of their skin colour.



This is a great post!  I think it's ok to think that she did face racism with the British press and they absolutely deserve to be dragged for that.  Some of their remarks was disgusting.  Personally I think they hate any and all woman that enter into the BRF and that's amplified because she's a person of colour.  However that doesn't excuse her actions.  That's not a reason to go to a third world country with starving, underpreviledged children and talk about how your royal life is so difficult that you're merely "surviving not thriving".  Even now, has she donated anything to the cause?  Has she protested?  Has she supported any bailout funds? Has she done anything but give a speech (one where sentences are plagerized no less)?  I can be critical of her for all those things.  Two things can exist mutually; this is such a case.


----------



## lulilu

Personally, I think it's totally offensive that she has plagarised on more than one occasion without attributing the source.  Plus the lies and exaggerations about experiencing riots etc are outrageous (assuming she did lie) but no one in the US press who has reviewed her speeches seems to care.  I don't get it.  Do they not know she can't compose a sentence on her own, or just don't care to follow up on it?


----------



## Brklynjuice10

limom said:


> Doria was dragged on this very forum. She was accused of being a criminal. Gee I wonder why?
> Also, POC can be oppressed no matter what financial, educational backgrounds they are from.
> It starts in school and it continues thru one’s career. It would be very naive to think that because a POC is wealthy that he/she does not suffer oppression and or injustice.
> In the case of MM, it is easy to see how she could have experienced less racism and prejudice as she moved in a progressive milieu. (Hollywood)
> However,  I do not doubt for a second that she has experienced micro aggressions on the daily, imo.
> Being entitled like the duchess is, does not negate her experience.
> As far as her commencement speech, it was appropriate for the settings as it is oriented toward teenage girls.
> In short, even sucky people can be victim of racism.



Right just ask oprah. She is one of the richest people on the earth and was discriminated against in a luxury retail store


----------



## ladysarah

seasounds said:


> Your responses underline the reason I suggested changing the name of this thread to something along the lines of "Venting about M and H" and asked that a more positive thread be started.
> 
> *Now we only have criticism in a time when we should be actively seeking to understand not undermine*.



well put and that is exactly what many of us think. Thank you for speaking out.


----------



## chicinthecity777

elisa_p said:


> This is a great post!  I think it's ok to think that she did face racism with the British press and they absolutely deserve to be dragged for that.  Some of their remarks was disgusting.  Personally I think they hate any and all woman that enter into the BRF and that's amplified because she's a person of colour.  However that doesn't excuse her actions.  That's not a reason to go to a third world country with starving, underpreviledged children and talk about how your royal life is so difficult that you're merely "surviving not thriving".  Even now, has she donated anything to the cause?  Has she protested?  Has she supported any bailout funds? Has she done anything but give a speech (one where sentences are plagerized no less)?  I can be critical of her for all those things.  Two things can exist mutually; this is such a case.





Chanbal said:


> I couldn't agree more. Skin color (any shade) doesn't make one a saint!
> 
> @chicinthecity777 If I may suggest, whenever you feel 'racial prejudice', just think that 'racial prejudice'  is a synonym of ignorance. So you may feel sorry for the ignorant people of this world.





Allisonfaye said:


> Excellent post.



Thank you all for your kind words!
During all the racial prejudice instances IRL and on this forum, I have had by-standers reaching out to me, talking to me on the spot, offering me their help and sending me comforting words! It does make me realise that for every 1 ignorant racist out there, there many more people who are not!


----------



## Jktgal

ladysarah said:


> well put and that is exactly what many of us think. Thank you for speaking out.



Agree, many of us actively trying to understand how to stay at luxury homes for free. I would be happy to have drones spy on me in exchange for a swimming pool of my own. I just have a rain puddle waaaa......


----------



## Chagall

I haven’t been on this thread for a long time. What strikes me now is all the comments related to race. Why is it such an issue. She is a person, period. Her mother is black and her father is white. Why is she considered black and not white. Who cares. Let it go, move on! Her behaviour is insincere, that’s it! That is what 90% of people pick up on.


----------



## maryg1

I rarely post but I always read this thread, and being called racist when I and most posters here criticize the actions, not the color of the skin, is something I really can’t accept.
And before you assume that I don’t understand what racism is, let me tell you that being Italian I have witnessed racism on some levels, mostly by people of northern countries, even though  not comparable to what a POC experiences during his/her life.
In this Covid period it’s even worse since the first detected case was found in Italy, so all people assume we spread the virus all over the world, while there would be plenty of discussion to be made on this subject.
I’m following the racial riots and I’m quite upset, I don’t want to go further into it because the risk of getting political is way too high, but I can assure you your assumption that M is being criticized for her color has no reason to exist. H gets his part of the critics too.



seasounds said:


> I checked into this thread after staying away for months.  I had sent a request to Megs and Vlad to rename this thread to reflect the vitriol, but that never happened.
> 
> I cannot stay silent.  This thread reeks of racism.  Why else would anonymous posters feel empowered to criticize and mock a woman of color for expressing her own experiences during the LA riots while reflecting on the current racial tensions?
> 
> This thread only exists to give a home to these voices.
> 
> "Please reach out to me directly if there is something you feel I could do differently on our forums to be a better ally and make this forum a welcoming community for all."
> 
> Been there.  Done that.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m guessing she leaves it for the security team to pick up

*Meghan Markle Allegedly Refused To Pick Her Dog’s Feces While Walking Her Pet*
*
https://apple.news/A1TZhbD6PT4ylqyeTvsD6TQ*

Meghan Markle allegedly refused to pick up her dog’s feces after walking her pet in her neighborhood in Beverly Hills.

According to Star, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex earned the reputation of being neighbors from hell because they aren’t friendly.

A source told the tabloid that Prince Harry and Markle don’t make eye contact whenever they walk their dogs. And they are also very protective of their 1-year-old son, Archie.

Another insider claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex don’t normally pick up their dog’s feces and called them gross.

The source claimed that life in Beverly Hills has become chaotic since Prince Harry and Markle moved into the neighborhood.

“Parking’s horrible, and you can hear car horns beeping late at night. The hiking trails are so busy now. People have to find somewhere else to go where there’s actual space,” the source said.

The insider also questioned the safety and security of the residents. They said that Prince Harry and Markle are worried about their stalkers even though they have a security team.

However, the other residents in the neighborhood don’t have the same protection.

“They’re concerned about the crazy stalkers showing up looking for Harry and Meghan. It’s OK for them because they have a security team, but not everyone else around here does,” the source said.

Since Prince Harry and Markle have not made a lot of friends in Beverly Hills, the source said that they usually just spend time with Doria Ragland. Markle’s mom allegedly visited their home in Los Angeles while wearing a mask and gloves.

However, the unnamed source said that Ragland hasn’t seen much of her grandson in recent months. As such, the yoga instructor hopes to hang out with Archie more.

Meanwhile, Prince William and Prince Harry have allegedly reconciled. And Middleton and Markle have also been talking to each other.

“They aren’t as close as they once were, but at least they’re heading in the right direction. Being thousands of miles away has made Harry realize how much he misses everyone. He suffers from pangs of guilt about not being in the United Kingdom during the pandemic,” the source said.

Prince Harry and Markle also celebrated their second wedding anniversary last month. And sources claimed that the Duke of Sussex wanted to throw a big celebration complete with fireworks. However, he wasn’t allowed to do anything grand.


----------



## mshermes

ladysarah said:


> well put and that is exactly what many of us think. Thank you for speaking out.


Changing the name will not change the content and accomplishes nothing. Start a new thread. Ignore this thread. Mission accomplished.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chagall said:


> I haven’t been on this thread for a long time. What strikes me now is all the comments related to race. Why is it such an issue. She is a person, period. Her mother is black and her father is white. Why is she considered black and not white. Who cares. Let it go, move on! Her behaviour is insincere, that’s it! That is what 90% of people pick up on.


Biracial people don’t just pick one or the other.


----------



## mrsinsyder

mshermes said:


> Changing the name will not change the content and accomplishes nothing. Start a new thread. Ignore this thread. Mission accomplished.


There’s been so much b*tching about this thread and posters were told months ago that they could create a positivity only version. Yet no one has taken the two seconds to actually do so. 

Makes you wonder why...


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing she leaves it for the security team to pick up
> 
> *Meghan Markle Allegedly Refused To Pick Her Dog’s Feces While Walking Her Pet
> 
> https://apple.news/A1TZhbD6PT4ylqyeTvsD6TQ*
> 
> Meghan Markle allegedly refused to pick up her dog’s feces after walking her pet in her neighborhood in Beverly Hills.
> 
> According to Star, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex earned the reputation of being neighbors from hell because they aren’t friendly.
> 
> A source told the tabloid that Prince Harry and Markle don’t make eye contact whenever they walk their dogs. And they are also very protective of their 1-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> Another insider claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex don’t normally pick up their dog’s feces and called them gross.
> 
> The source claimed that life in Beverly Hills has become chaotic since Prince Harry and Markle moved into the neighborhood.
> 
> “Parking’s horrible, and you can hear car horns beeping late at night. The hiking trails are so busy now. People have to find somewhere else to go where there’s actual space,” the source said.
> 
> The insider also questioned the safety and security of the residents. They said that Prince Harry and Markle are worried about their stalkers even though they have a security team.
> 
> However, the other residents in the neighborhood don’t have the same protection.
> 
> “They’re concerned about the crazy stalkers showing up looking for Harry and Meghan. It’s OK for them because they have a security team, but not everyone else around here does,” the source said.
> 
> Since Prince Harry and Markle have not made a lot of friends in Beverly Hills, the source said that they usually just spend time with Doria Ragland. Markle’s mom allegedly visited their home in Los Angeles while wearing a mask and gloves.
> 
> However, the unnamed source said that Ragland hasn’t seen much of her grandson in recent months. As such, the yoga instructor hopes to hang out with Archie more.
> 
> Meanwhile, Prince William and Prince Harry have allegedly reconciled. And Middleton and Markle have also been talking to each other.
> 
> “They aren’t as close as they once were, but at least they’re heading in the right direction. Being thousands of miles away has made Harry realize how much he misses everyone. He suffers from pangs of guilt about not being in the United Kingdom during the pandemic,” the source said.
> 
> Prince Harry and Markle also celebrated their second wedding anniversary last month. And sources claimed that the Duke of Sussex wanted to throw a big celebration complete with fireworks. However, he wasn’t allowed to do anything grand.


who is the source of this BS?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mrsinsyder said:


> Biracial people don’t just pick one or the other.


historically I think most biracial people have identified as black.....someone please correct me if I'm wrong.  maybe this is changing


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, it seems that the 'reviews' are positive; let's just hope that she learns something from this and continues in this vein!
> 
> On the other hand, I do wish that the media (especially here in the US) would stop with the "Duchess" already; we do not recognize titles here .. hence the Revolutionary War!  She needs to be "just Meghan" like "just Harry" ..


aren't the reviews from media in the US positive on everything they do?


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> who is the source of this BS?


Not MM's "friends" for sure!


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> who is the source of this BS?



The source is in the link. Thought it was funny.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> The source is in the link. Thought it was funny.


my criticism isn't with you.....there's just so much BS from unnamed sources


----------



## Annawakes

It says the neighbors are concerned about the “crazy stalkers”.  So, there are “crazy stalkers”?  Maybe this is a planted story to sneakily convince people their lives really are in danger.  
But, I think the story is probably fake because I really don’t see Kate having a call with M.  I really don’t, what on earth would they talk about??


----------



## LittleStar88

Annawakes said:


> It says the neighbors are concerned about the “crazy stalkers”.  So, there are “crazy stalkers”?  Maybe this is a planted story to sneakily convince people their lives really are in danger.
> But, I think the story is probably fake because I really don’t see Kate having a call with M.  I really don’t, what on earth would they talk about??



Planted story seems possible. I also don’t see them having phone calls.


----------



## Emeline

Annawakes said:


> *It says the neighbors are concerned about the “crazy stalkers”.  So, there are “crazy stalkers”?  *Maybe this is a planted story to sneakily convince people their lives really are in danger.
> But, I think the story is probably fake because I really don’t see Kate having a call with M.  I really don’t, what on earth would they talk about??


About "stalkers"...maybe the problem is more devoted stans and looky loos along with the paps.

M&H seem to struggle with the concept of discretion. They (or their team) drop obvious hints about their current couch surfing location. They  even occasionally go so far as to mark the property with  DIY fencing. They do like a bit of cat and mouse.

It must drive their security folks crazy. And I would think neighbors might find it annoying.

We will know that all the fun and games are over when they enter into a lease, buy a property, or they do neither and
instead move back to the (horrors! ) once unthinkable Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> About "stalkers"...maybe the problem is more devoted stans and looky loos along with the paps.
> 
> M&H seem to struggle with the concept of discretion. They (or their team) drop obvious hints about their current couch surfing location. They  even occasionally go so far as to mark the property with  DIY fencing. They do like a bit of cat and mouse.
> 
> It must drive their security folks crazy. And I would think neighbors might find it annoying.
> 
> We will know that all the fun and games are over when they enter into a lease, buy a property, or they do neither and
> instead move back to the (horrors! ) once unthinkable Frogmore Cottage.


Imagine the neighbors probably didnt like that ugly fencing


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> View attachment 4749336


Whether this is fake or not, honestly .. when I read her comments in regards to the LA Riots of many years ago, I also thought to myself "she saw it?" .. and really questioned that .. because given where she was living at the time, those riots were not even close.  Unless you are WAAAAAAY up in the hills (and if she was with Doria, she would have been in Mid-Wilshire | if she was with her Dad - they would have been in the Valley) .. in either case, it's very unlikely that she saw anything.  Sad to say (and whoever this poster is); gotta say .. it's more accurate IMO!


----------



## LaidyM

Ladies, it’s from Star... it’s like a quarter level up from National Enquirer..
They write fan fiction.

If this was People i’d buy it.
Not even the Kardashian’s leak to Star.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing she leaves it for the security team to pick up
> 
> *Meghan Markle Allegedly Refused To Pick Her Dog’s Feces While Walking Her Pet
> 
> https://apple.news/A1TZhbD6PT4ylqyeTvsD6TQ*
> 
> Meghan Markle allegedly refused to pick up her dog’s feces after walking her pet in her neighborhood in Beverly Hills.
> 
> According to Star, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex earned the reputation of being neighbors from hell because they aren’t friendly.
> 
> A source told the tabloid that Prince Harry and Markle don’t make eye contact whenever they walk their dogs. And they are also very protective of their 1-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> Another insider claimed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex don’t normally pick up their dog’s feces and called them gross.
> 
> The source claimed that life in Beverly Hills has become chaotic since Prince Harry and Markle moved into the neighborhood.
> 
> “Parking’s horrible, and you can hear car horns beeping late at night. The hiking trails are so busy now. People have to find somewhere else to go where there’s actual space,” the source said.
> 
> The insider also questioned the safety and security of the residents. They said that Prince Harry and Markle are worried about their stalkers even though they have a security team.
> 
> However, the other residents in the neighborhood don’t have the same protection.
> 
> “They’re concerned about the crazy stalkers showing up looking for Harry and Meghan. It’s OK for them because they have a security team, but not everyone else around here does,” the source said.
> 
> Since Prince Harry and Markle have not made a lot of friends in Beverly Hills, the source said that they usually just spend time with Doria Ragland. Markle’s mom allegedly visited their home in Los Angeles while wearing a mask and gloves.
> 
> However, the unnamed source said that Ragland hasn’t seen much of her grandson in recent months. As such, the yoga instructor hopes to hang out with Archie more.
> 
> Meanwhile, Prince William and Prince Harry have allegedly reconciled. And Middleton and Markle have also been talking to each other.
> 
> “They aren’t as close as they once were, but at least they’re heading in the right direction. Being thousands of miles away has made Harry realize how much he misses everyone. He suffers from pangs of guilt about not being in the United Kingdom during the pandemic,” the source said.
> 
> Prince Harry and Markle also celebrated their second wedding anniversary last month. And sources claimed that the Duke of Sussex wanted to throw a big celebration complete with fireworks. However, he wasn’t allowed to do anything grand.


Well, something else Harry has got to learn about living in LA -- *NO FIREWORKS, PERIOD*!!!!!  That's what causes fires in these parts and as we are moving into our more hot & dry periods, just a little spark .. can set up a fire that can then rage and jump hills .. here are the fires in the Brentwood hills (right off the 405 - a major freeway here) ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, something else Harry has got to learn about living in LA -- *NO FIREWORKS, PERIOD*!!!!!  That's what causes fires in these parts and as we are moving into our more hot & dry periods, just a little spark .. can set up a fire that can then rage and jump hills .. here are the fires in the Brentwood hills (right off the 405 - a major freeway here) ..
> View attachment 4750125


hopefully that wasn't true about the fireworks.....good point about the fires though.....CA has been horrible the last several years with the fires


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> hopefully that wasn't true about the fireworks.....good point about the fires though.....CA has been horrible the last several years with the fires


Indeed it has; just last year, we had 3 fires around us .. to the West, to the East and the South (which was the fire in the picture above).  It was SO smoky outside that people were wearing face masks (and this is before the virus)!!!  They suggested that folks stay inside, and when I had to go out to the Post Office, you could barely breathe!  I know, in our neighborhoods .. Fireworks are STRICTLY forbidden and if we see someone (even with sparklers) .. we are to report it!


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Well, something else Harry has got to learn about living in LA -- *NO FIREWORKS, PERIOD*!!!!!  That's what causes fires in these parts and as we are moving into our more hot & dry periods, just a little spark .. can set up a fire that can then rage and jump hills .. here are the fires in the Brentwood hills (right off the 405 - a major freeway here) ..
> View attachment 4750125


Geez, @CeeJay, I could not live anywhere near this type of situation! I crab & whine about Midwest living, but sometimes dull is ok. 

As to that "Sammy" tweet/article, I doubt it's for real. M is a lot of things but dumb is not one of them--no way would she say something that could be so easily refuted/fact-checked. A "fib" of this magnitude might make even JCMH wake up and say "whoa, what did I marry?" No way she's gonna chance that, until she's good and ready.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> historically I think most biracial people have identified as black.....someone please correct me if I'm wrong.  maybe this is changing


Yes, from the old “one drop” laws


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Geez, @CeeJay, I could not live anywhere near this type of situation! I crab & whine about Midwest living, but sometimes dull is ok.
> 
> As to that "Sammy" tweet/article, I doubt it's for real. M is a lot of things but dumb is not one of them--no way would she say something that could be so easily refuted/fact-checked. A "fib" of this magnitude might make even JCMH wake up and say "whoa, what did I marry?" No way she's gonna chance that, until she's good and ready.


but do you have tornadoes?  some places have fires, some hurricanes, etc.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> but do you have tornadoes?  some places have fires, some hurricanes, etc.


Having lived in parts of the country that can have tornadoes or hurricanes .. the difference is (oftentimes) you are warned beforehand (however, some have been known to creep up Tornado Alley - Oklahoma .. which is scary)!  With a fire, it just takes one spark and if we have the Santa Ana winds?? .. that sucker spreads so fast in just MINUTES!


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Having lived in parts of the country that can have tornadoes or hurricanes .. the difference is (oftentimes) you are warned beforehand (however, some have been known to creep up Tornado Alley - Oklahoma .. which is scary)!  With a fire, it just takes one spark and if we have the Santa Ana winds?? .. that sucker spreads so fast in just MINUTES!



Yep............been in a few tornados myself as a kid and while they were terrifying the Cedar Fire was worse. Maybe because I was an adult but seeing the towering wall of smoke and the reflection of flames in my dining room window it was the most helpless feeling. We couldn't get any info from the media as they were too busy covering the tonier neighborhoods to pay attention to those of us in the foothills. Two entire communities just over the hill burned to the ground and if you blinked you missed hearing about it.
Fire season used to be Oct/Nov but after the San Luis Rey fire I don't think we can let out guard down at any time.
I can understand Harry not grasping the situation but she grew up in LA/California


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Yep............been in a few tornados myself as a kid and while they were terrifying the Cedar Fire was worse. Maybe because I was an adult but seeing the towering wall of smoke and the reflection of flames in my dining room window it was the most helpless feeling. We couldn't get any info from the media as they were too busy covering the tonier neighborhoods to pay attention to those of us in the foothills. Two entire communities just over the hill burned to the ground and if you blinked you missed hearing about it.
> Fire season used to be Oct/Nov but after the San Luis Rey fire I don't think we can let out guard down at any time.
> I can understand Harry not grasping the situation but she grew up in LA/California


EXACTLY .. I know people who lost their homes in the big Santa Clarita fire last year!  You are SO right though; a fire in Brentwood or Beverly Hills?? .. oh, you know that will be FRONT & CENTER .. not so much in the Valley, but we have way too many of them and those winds just give those flames more ammunition (along with the dry brush, etc.)  Speaking of which, what did I get on my phone just a few minutes ago .. "A Fire Wind Alert" .. UGGH, here we go ..


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY .. I know people who lost their homes in the big Santa Clarita fire last year!  You are SO right though; a fire in Brentwood or Beverly Hills?? .. oh, you know that will be FRONT & CENTER .. not so much in the Valley, but we have way too many of them and those winds just give those flames more ammunition (along with the dry brush, etc.)  Speaking of which, what did I get on my phone just a few minutes ago .. "A Fire Wind Alert" .. UGGH, here we go ..



oh yes...................the ex and I had a condo in Simi Valley mid 80's-90's and the 118 is just a big wind tunnel. 
He was still there during the Northridge quake. 
Wait til Harry gets a ride on one of _those_ babies...........if they are still here of course


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> EXACTLY .. I know people who lost their homes in the big Santa Clarita fire last year!  You are SO right though; a fire in Brentwood or Beverly Hills?? .. oh, you know that will be FRONT & CENTER .. not so much in the Valley, but we have way too many of them and those winds just give those flames more ammunition (along with the dry brush, etc.)  Speaking of which, what did I get on my phone just a few minutes ago .. "A Fire Wind Alert" .. UGGH, here we go ..


when we had the really big fires in 2007 I knew people in affluent neighborhoods and not-so-rich neighborhoods who lost homes.  the three I'm thinking of that we knew all were isolated homes that burned with the neighbors homes still standing.  the fire just swept through and took what it wanted.  very scary.  melted cars and safes.  people had to evacuate in minutes.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I have to admit.... I’m curious if Harry still thinks LA is safer than “rural” Canada....


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Whether this is fake or not, honestly .. when I read her comments in regards to the LA Riots of many years ago, I also thought to myself "she saw it?" .. and really questioned that .. because given where she was living at the time, those riots were not even close.  Unless you are WAAAAAAY up in the hills (and if she was with Doria, she would have been in Mid-Wilshire | if she was with her Dad - they would have been in the Valley) .. in either case, it's very unlikely that she saw anything.  Sad to say (and whoever this poster is); gotta say .. it's more accurate IMO!



Ceejay, during the RK riots, I was actually working on a project in a south central food bank in L.A. So, the day it really got going, my manager calls and says go home early to be safe ... which I did. This was before cell phones too of course so no text messaging, no GPS or apps or watching local news to show you what streets to avoid. While I was feeling tense driving home, I had no trouble whatsoever. Saw nothing. Looked like an ordinary day.  So, I was actually there, on the scene, and didn't see anything! Highly doubtful MM did from much further away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just don't get why she lies so much. Lunching with Michelle *****, witnessing riots as a kid when she wasn't even there...just why. That's easily confirmed or vetoed too, like it happened with Michelle.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get why she lies so much. Lunching with Michelle *****, witnessing riots as a kid when she wasn't even there...just why. That's easily confirmed or vetoed too, like it happened with Michelle.


Yep, that Michelle ***** story was bad. I've learned through my long years on this planet that some people just lie, about anything and everything, doesn't stop even when they're caught.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get why she lies so much. Lunching with Michelle *****, witnessing riots as a kid when she wasn't even there...just why. That's easily confirmed or vetoed too, like it happened with Michelle.


No one is checking on her


----------



## youngster

Fact checking can be tedious and time consuming, especially if a reporter is trying to post or publish a story to beat out another publication.  Also, if you've ever read an article on something that you know a lot about, or it is your area of study or expertise, then you realize how superficial and flat out wrong a lot of reporting actually is.  So, they don't dig, especially if it's the celebrity beat, they just publish their fluffy piece and move on to the next fluffy piece.


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get why she lies so much. Lunching with Michelle *****, witnessing riots as a kid when she wasn't even there...just why. That's easily confirmed or vetoed too, like it happened with Michelle.


I began to have my doubts about M when she said, during her infamous Africa interview, that America did not have any tabloids or I guess, tabloids as vicious as the ones in Britain. I had to scratch my head because I see dozens of crazy tabloid magazines as I stand in line at the grocery store. I've see them since I was a kid, and I am a lot older than M. When she said that I was like, "what planet is she living on?"


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Ceejay, during the RK riots, I was actually working on a project in a south central food bank in L.A. So, the day it really got going, my manager calls and says go home early to be safe ... which I did. This was before cell phones too of course so no text messaging, no GPS or apps or watching local news to show you what streets to avoid. While I was feeling tense driving home, I had no trouble whatsoever. Saw nothing. Looked like an ordinary day.  So, I was actually there, on the scene, and didn't see anything! Highly doubtful MM did from much further away.


You have a similar experience to friends of mine whose business is not far from where the RK riots occurred.  Like you, then sent their employees home early, but when I asked them if they truly "saw anything", they said 'NO'.  That's why when I read her comments about it, I thought "_what???.. NO, that can't be_" .. and this is the reason why I cannot take her seriously!  Don't sensationalize .. especially something like that to make it sound as though you were 'personally' affected.  Looking at the news later, yes .. horrific, but don't say that you "saw" the riots, or the fires or anything of that nature if .. in fact, you didn't!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> I began to have my doubts about M when she said, during her infamous Africa interview, that America did not have any tabloids or I guess, tabloids as vicious as the ones in Britain. I had to scratch my head because I see dozens of crazy tabloid magazines as I stand in line at the grocery store. I've see them since I was a kid, and I am a lot older than M. When she said that I was like, "what planet is she living on?"


RIGHT??? .. same here!!  There are plenty of tabloids that can get downright NASTY; are they 'truthful' .. eh, not so much in my opinion (and they have been sued plenty of times), but it's not like they don't exist here in the states!


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> You have a similar experience to friends of mine whose business is not far from where the RK riots occurred.  Like you, then sent their employees home early, but when I asked them if they truly "saw anything", they said 'NO'.  That's why when I read her comments about it, I thought "_what???.. NO, that can't be_" .. and this is the reason why I cannot take her seriously!  Don't sensationalize .. especially something like that to make it sound as though you were 'personally' affected.  Looking at the news later, yes .. horrific, but don't say that you "saw" the riots, or the fires or anything of that nature if .. in fact, you didn't!



Putting myself in MM's shoes, if she were about 10 years old or so, she might have been watching it on TV and it made a lasting impression, to the point that that is her memory of the time. She "saw" it, though she really just watched it occur miles and miles away on TV.  That's the strange power of TV.  It makes you feel like every event is happening right outside your door, when it isn't.


----------



## MaseratiMomma

youngster said:


> Putting myself in MM's shoes, if she were about 10 years old or so, she might have been watching it on TV and it made a lasting impression, to the point that that is her memory of the time. She "saw" it, though she really just watched it occur miles and miles away on TV.  That's the strange power of TV.  It makes you feel like every event is happening right outside your door, when it isn't.


Yes, the Mandela effect is a very real phenomenon.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Putting myself in MM's shoes, if she were about 10 years old or so, she might have been watching it on TV and it made a lasting impression, to the point that that is her memory of the time. She "saw" it, though she really just watched it occur miles and miles away on TV.  That's the strange power of TV.  It makes you feel like every event is happening right outside your door, when it isn't.


Yes, I can understand that seeing it on TV might arouse a feeling .. and that's perfectly okay, but she did said "she saw it" .. she should have clarified "on TV"!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> I began to have my doubts about M when she said, during her infamous Africa interview, that America did not have any tabloids or I guess, tabloids as vicious as the ones in Britain. I had to scratch my head because I see dozens of crazy tabloid magazines as I stand in line at the grocery store. I've see them since I was a kid, and I am a lot older than M. When she said that I was like, "what planet is she living on?"



My moment was when Harry said during that radio interview "We'll be the family she never had". That's when I knew what she'd been feeding him. And since then she has just cemented that opinion of mine.


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> Ceejay, during the RK riots, I was actually working on a project in a south central food bank in L.A. So, the day it really got going, my manager calls and says go home early to be safe ... which I did. This was before cell phones too of course so no text messaging, no GPS or apps or watching local news to show you what streets to avoid. While I was feeling tense driving home, I had no trouble whatsoever. Saw nothing. Looked like an ordinary day.  So, I was actually there, on the scene, and didn't see anything! Highly doubtful MM did from much further away.



It is my perception, and correct me if I am wrong, but I think the RK riots were not nearly as widespread as the ones going on now. 

I was in town the week before they happened visiting some friends.


----------



## youngster

Allisonfaye said:


> It is my perception, and correct me if I am wrong, but I think the RK riots were not nearly as widespread as the ones going on now.
> 
> I was in town the week before they happened visiting some friends.



It spread to many cities and even, I think, overseas to an extent though this was before cell phones/text messaging allowed people to coordinate and pass info on easily.  The difference is that many, many people were killed in the RK riots.  Motorists were dragged out of their cars and beaten, just horrible stuff.


----------



## CobaltBlu

OK, I removed the photo and associated conversation. Sad. Thanks everyone.


----------



## poopsie

youngster said:


> It spread to many cities and even, I think, overseas to an extent though this was before cell phones/text messaging allowed people to coordinate and pass info on easily.  The difference is that many, many people were killed in the RK riots.  Motorists were dragged out of their cars and beaten, just horrible stuff.



It was!
Our condo in Simi was only 5 or 6 blocks from the courthouse. I was coming home from errands when I noticed all these cops in the neighborhood. Then I heard the news on the car radio. We were in the middle of a labor dispute and locked out of Hollywood Park so we were leaving the next day to go back to the Derby. I don't know how we got to the airport but I do recall looking at all the fires as we took off. We had engaged a cat sitter and I spent the entire time calling her to check on them. Every tv we saw was showing the rioting. We were so sure that our neighborhood would be a target for violence.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Yes, I can understand that seeing it on TV might arouse a feeling .. and that's perfectly okay, but she did said "she saw it" .. she should have clarified "on TV"!



Exactly!
I was 7 when Kennedy was assassinated. We were glued to the tv but it has never occurred to me to say "I saw Kennedy's funeral" like I had been there.


----------



## youngster

poopsie said:


> Exactly!
> I was 7 when Kennedy was assassinated. We were glued to the tv but it has never occurred to me to say "I saw Kennedy's funeral" like I had been there.



So true! One of my earliest memories was watching live the 1969 moon landing on black and white TV. So thrilling, so amazing, it made a lasting memory but, even though I was a very young child, I never ever thought that I actually landed and walked on the moon myself lol.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> So true! One of my earliest memories was watching live the 1969 moon landing on black and white TV. So thrilling, so amazing, it made a lasting memory but, even though I was a very young child, I never ever thought that I actually landed and walked on the moon myself lol.


*SAME HERE*!!! .. except we were living in the Virgin Islands at the time which was kind of like living on the Moon because the stinkin' TV reception was sh!t!!! However, I was GLUED to that program .. and to this day, I have read so much about the before/after of the mission (_especially from an IT/Computer standpoint because everything had to be executed in under 4k of memory .. HOLY CRAP_)!!!  Also, my husband's uncle was a professor at MIT and was heavily involved in the space program from an early standpoint, so he also provided a lot of "inside" information which was just fascinating.  One thing I have to say though is that this happened because many of the folks that worked at NASA at that time were ex-military, so they were used to chain-of-command (_in other words - "yes sir"_).  Given today and the way that executive management seems to work in Corporate America, I'm not convinced that it could get done on-time and certainly on-budget nowadays!  Just MO ..


----------



## bag-mania

Well, you all asked for it. Here's another report of H&M doing something "behind the scenes." . Anyone want to make a bet on whether it's actually true or just more lies, er, I mean free publicity? 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Holding Meetings About Black Lives Matter and How They Can Help*
The royal couple are reportedly speaking with community leaders behind the scenes.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly having conversations about how they can aid the George Floyd protests and the Black Lives Matter movement.

"They are holding calls with community leaders and organizations but are doing that privately as they continue to see how they can play a role. But they also want to learn and talk about it like the rest of us," a source told _People_ last week.

The report came after Meghan first spoke out publicly about the protests. She did so in a virtual commencement speech for seniors at Immaculate Heart, the high school she attended in L.A.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...kle-prince-harry-black-lives-matter-meetings/


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Well, you all asked for it. Here's another report of H&M doing something "behind the scenes." . Anyone want to make a bet on whether it's actually true or just more lies, er, I mean free publicity?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Holding Meetings About Black Lives Matter and How They Can Help*
> The royal couple are reportedly speaking with community leaders behind the scenes.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly having conversations about how they can aid the George Floyd protests and the Black Lives Matter movement.
> 
> "They are holding calls with community leaders and organizations but are doing that privately as they continue to see how they can play a role. But they also want to learn and talk about it like the rest of us," a source told _People_ last week.
> 
> The report came after Meghan first spoke out publicly about the protests. She did so in a virtual commencement speech for seniors at Immaculate Heart, the high school she attended in L.A.
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...kle-prince-harry-black-lives-matter-meetings/


I saw this earlier today; not quite sure what to think of it at this time.  However, we all know that T&C just kowtow to these two.  I think it's legit (the article); not quite sure how they can "help" per se because to do so would likely require "personal" appearances.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I saw this earlier today; not quite sure what to think of it at this time.  However, we all know that T&C just kowtow to these two.  I think it's legit (the article); not quite sure how they can "help" per se because to do so would likely require "personal" appearances.



It's the exact same story as with the animal charity a couple of weeks back. Meghan made a phone call to a group and that was enough effort to get credit from the entertainment media for "helping behind the scenes."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> So true! One of my earliest memories was watching live the 1969 moon landing on black and white TV. So thrilling, so amazing, it made a lasting memory but, even though I was a very young child, *I never ever thought that I actually landed and walked on the moon myself lol*.



Are you sure? Your very cute Avatar looks like a little astronaut.  



bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Holding Meetings About Black Lives Matter and How They Can Help*



Just donate $$$$ to the cause like others are doing...


----------



## lanasyogamama

My first big tv memory was running home as fast as I could to watch the MTV World Premiere of the “Thriller” video.  

I didn’t think I was with MJ.


----------



## V0N1B2

Meghan needs to learn/educate herself about BLM?
LOL okay


----------



## poopsie

LaidyM said:


> *Ladies, it’s from Star... it’s like a quarter level up from National Enquirer..
> They write fan fiction.*
> 
> If this was People i’d buy it.
> Not even the Kardashian’s leak to Star.



Then why aren't The Harkles suing _them_? Could it be because someone would have to eat their salad of words about no tabloids in the US?
Enquiring minds would like to know


----------



## Luvbolide

This is so ridiculous.  Who are these mysterious “community leaders”?  There are protest marches in literally hundreds of cities and towns across the US.  I could claim to be having conversations with the Mayor of DC - who would know the difference (except her!).  They love to make such grandiose claims that never seem to amount to anything.  Try showing up at a march - or better yet, send large checks to organizations working on the issue.  It feels as if they think their “roaming royals” plan requires them to be above those doing the actual work. 

If she starts blathering about how she has suffered from racism, my head will explode!


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Well, you all asked for it. Here's another report of H&M doing something "behind the scenes." . Anyone want to make a bet on whether it's actually true or just more lies, er, I mean free publicity?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Holding Meetings About Black Lives Matter and How They Can Help*
> The royal couple are reportedly speaking with community leaders behind the scenes.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly having conversations about how they can aid the George Floyd protests and the Black Lives Matter movement.
> 
> "They are holding calls with community leaders and organizations but are doing that privately as they continue to see how they can play a role. But they also want to learn and talk about it like the rest of us," a source told _People_ last week.
> 
> The report came after Meghan first spoke out publicly about the protests. She did so in a virtual commencement speech for seniors at Immaculate Heart, the high school she attended in L.A.
> 
> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...kle-prince-harry-black-lives-matter-meetings/



I hope if they support defunding police that they are also good with getting rid of their security? Or is it only THEIR safety that counts?


----------



## CeeJay

Luvbolide said:


> This is so ridiculous.  Who are these mysterious “community leaders”?  There are protest marches in literally hundreds of cities and towns across the US.  I could claim to be having conversations with the Mayor of DC - who would know the difference (except her!).  They love to make such grandiose claims that never seem to amount to anything.  *Try showing up at a march *- or better yet, send large checks to organizations working on the issue.  It feels as if they think their “roaming royals” plan requires them to be above those doing the actual work.
> 
> If she starts blathering about how she has suffered from racism, my head will explode!


I mentioned that prior, but you see .. that would mean that would debunk their whole "privacy" requirements - right???  After all, with all the stalkers, paparazzi, etc. -- how could they possibly show up???


----------



## Luvbolide

CeeJay said:


> I mentioned that prior, but you see .. that would mean that would debunk their whole "privacy" requirements - right???  After all, with all the stalkers, paparazzi, etc. -- how could they possibly show up???



At first I thought that, too - but Mitt Romney showed up at a march in DC yesterday, Steph Curry and his wife showed up at two marches in the Bay Area - wear a mask and don't act like a prima donna!  Or send a large check - and I mean LARGE!  

But I expect that what we will see is her whining about what a victim she has been as if what happened to George Floyd - and so many others - somehow compares with ignorant comments to online articles.


----------



## poopsie

You don't have to be Ladbroke's to make book that these two will never ever contribute anything of meaningful substance


----------



## Luvbolide

poopsie said:


> You don't have to be Ladbroke's to make book that these two will never ever contribute anything of meaningful substance




So true!


----------



## viciel

CeeJay said:


> I saw this earlier today; not quite sure what to think of it at this time.  However, we all know that T&C just kowtow to these two.  I think it's legit (the article); not quite sure how they can "help" per se because to do so would likely require "personal" appearances.


Exactly! They're helping "behind the scenes" because no one is willing to write a check for them to show up "in front of the scenes". She's behind the scenes on this alright, next on her agenda, showing up as a surprise guest for Oprah's town hall on current events and bring Serena Williams as her date. She's going to ride anyone's coattail and use everyone around her to get to the spotlight.


----------



## kemilia

viciel said:


> Exactly! They're helping "behind the scenes" because no one is willing to write a check for them to show up "in front of the scenes". She's behind the scenes on this alright, next on her agenda, showing up as a surprise guest for Oprah's town hall on current events and bring Serena Williams as her date. She's going to ride anyone's coattail and use everyone around her to get to the spotlight.


As the corona virus lets up I feel we will start seeing more of H&M. Whether walking the dogs or showing up at various charitable and/or BLM-related situations--they will be there, time to make their move to financial independence. If Oprah can use them for ratings ...


----------



## CeeJay

Luvbolide said:


> At first I thought that, too - but Mitt Romney showed up at a march in DC yesterday, Steph Curry and his wife showed up at two marches in the Bay Area - wear a mask and don't act like a prima donna!  Or send a large check - and I mean LARGE!
> 
> But I expect that what we will see is her whining about what a victim she has been as if what happened to George Floyd - and so many others - somehow compares with ignorant comments to online articles.


Not surprised with Mitt Romney at all; used to work for him at Bain & Co. ..


----------



## Emeline

A bit more about Oprah's special. It's airing June 9th and 10th. 
https://www.rollingstone.com/tv/tv-news/oprah-winfrey-where-do-we-go-from-here-special-1010455/


----------



## PewPew

Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh turns 99 tomorrow!

As with the Queen’s birthday, the BRF will be instructed not to disclose details of private birthday video chats, so expect a “friend” of H&M to gush to the press about how Archie charmed & impressed his Great-Grandfather with his amazing amazingness inherited from Mr.6thInLine & THE DUCHESS who they assure us are empowering us to do...stuff....while they work on figuring out what they’ll be selling, I mean teaching us for their “charity”.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52986922


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

One wonders if H&M could take a private jet to wish Grand Father a happy birthday from a safe social distance away. 

After our shutdown in Illinois and then the riots, very few people taking Covid 19 precautions outside of businesses that require masks. After thousands of rioters piled on top of each other and were encouraged to destroy everything, people here are sooooooo sick of being locked up inside. 

So. If H&M wanted to return to England, nothing is preventing them. Unless the Queen says "don't bother".


----------



## FreeSpirit71

rose60610 said:


> One wonders if H&M could take a private jet to wish Grand Father a happy birthday from a safe social distance away.
> 
> After our shutdown in Illinois and then the riots, very few people taking Covid 19 precautions outside of businesses that require masks. After thousands of rioters piled on top of each other and were encouraged to destroy everything, people here are sooooooo sick of being locked up inside.
> 
> So. If H&M wanted to return to England, nothing is preventing them. Unless the Queen says "don't bother".



Self-isolation laws of 14 days are still ongoing in the UK.  Travelling with a baby to the UK when so many cases are still active is still a risk.

That people in the US think restrictions should ease while cases in many states are still on the rise is interesting.


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm sure his children, his other grandchildren and great grandchildren will be doing the same [emoji849]


----------



## kemilia

Ah, the "sources" are ready ...


----------



## lalame

Did you guys hear of this ridiculous drama with Jessica Mulroney? See a recap and sources here: https://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/118164316.html

Jessica even mentioned her friendship with Meghan to explain the outlandish and bullying way she overreacted with this poor influencer. This friendship does not reflect well on Meghan at all.


----------



## lalame

Been off the thread for awhile due to work business but just want to address a few recent things...

Commencement speech: I feel nothing but joy for the high school that was lucky enough to land such a high profile speaker. That being said, I didn’t listen to it because there are more eloquent and authentic black American voices out there who didn’t marry nazi uniform-wearing idiots. I give them my attention.

Racism and privilege: I’m a POC and don’t see issue with criticizing M the way we have in this thread. I absolutely do think Meghan received racist press coverage early on but she has made plenty of missteps and it’s fair game to criticize them. Both statements can exist in my brain. Yes, even privileged and wealthy POC are subject to racism and I consider this a form of oppression. That being said, I feel good criticizing anyone with expensive tastes and lifestyles who leave it to others to pay their bills.


----------



## Nutashha

Can we take a break from everything for a sec and see how CUTE their baby is? 

*Meghan and Harry’s Baby Archie Is Speaking a Few Words Now*

*

*


----------



## Megs

Nutashha said:


> Can we take a break from everything for a sec and see how CUTE their baby is?
> 
> *Meghan and Harry’s Baby Archie Is Speaking a Few Words Now*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4753762
> *



He is cute and big! Our little guy is a big baby too, he's 17 months but looks like he's 2 at least but still such a mush. Archie is adorable.


----------



## Megs

lalame said:


> Been off the thread for awhile due to work business but just want to address a few recent things...
> 
> Commencement speech: I feel nothing but joy for the high school that was lucky enough to land such a high profile speaker. That being said, I didn’t listen to it because there are more eloquent and authentic black American voices out there who didn’t marry nazi uniform-wearing idiots. I give them my attention.
> 
> Racism and privilege: I’m a POC and don’t see issue with criticizing M the way we have in this thread. I absolutely do think Meghan received racist press coverage early on but she has made plenty of missteps and it’s fair game to criticize them. Both statements can exist in my brain. Yes, even privileged and wealthy POC are subject to racism and I consider this a form of oppression. That being said, I feel good criticizing anyone with expensive tastes and lifestyles who leave it to others to pay their bills.



Agree with all of this! 

Meghan married Harry who has a very very muddy past. I'm actually surprised how easily he's gotten away with his disgusting past behavior. I do think that in this thread she receives a lot of the discussion (myself included), but for me it's always been that Harry is such a big part of the problem. I mean I don't expect him to really understand how the real world works, he is a Prince who's been cared for and spoiled and lives in a true Royal Bubble. 

What I never really acknowledged was the racism I am sure Meghan faced in the UK and how amplified that was in the simple fact that she married Harry. There is zero excuse for that. And that is something that I have never experienced, so I will never understand. I am sure facing that on the world's stage has changed her as well. It would change anyone. 

But their mooching off the Royal family and any other person to pay for their lives is something that I would criticize for anyone! Plus how they've handled that aspect is very "leave us alone but watch our every move but don't judge us!".


----------



## CeeJay

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Self-isolation laws of 14 days are still ongoing in the UK.  Travelling with a baby to the UK when so many cases are still active is still a risk.
> 
> *That people in the US think restrictions should ease while cases in many states are still on the rise is interesting*.


IMO .. it's divided based on politics, which is so STUPID (again - my opinion)!


----------



## M_Butterfly

Nutashha said:


> Can we take a break from everything for a sec and see how CUTE their baby is?
> 
> *Meghan and Harry’s Baby Archie Is Speaking a Few Words Now*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4753762
> *


 Yes, please and thank you.  Every time I see this photo I smile.  He is so cute.


----------



## 1LV

Archie is his dad made over.


----------



## Emeline

M_Butterfly said:


> Yes, please and thank you.  Every time I see this photo I smile.  He is so cute.


I think all babies are cute, whether the parents are well known or not. It's fun to watch them grow.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> I think all babies are cute, whether the parents are well known or not. It's fun to watch yes grow.


yes, they're all cute and IMO - not to be mean or anything - this baby is no cuter than the babies of the average person.....I'd probably like him more IRL than pics


----------



## jcnc

*Daily Mail*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'openly discussed Megxit before marrying' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', explosive biography to claim



*Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, 'discussed Megxit before marrying'*
*New book will claim the Duke of Sussex was 'deeply unhappy for a long time'*
*Source said biography will 'make clear that Megxit was far from a snap decision' *
*Explosive book will tell 'making of modern royal family' in an 'upclose portrait'*
*Sussexes gave interview to the authors before move to America, MoS reported  *
*Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11 *
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex 'discussed Megxit before they got married' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', a new book is set to claim.

Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, are currently living in Tyler Perry's $18 million mansion having stepped back from royal duty in March.

Sources have now revealed how bombshell biography Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family, which will be released online on August 11, is set to 'explore the couple's journey' to their decision.

An insider told The Sun: 'The seeds of Megxit were sown before they even got married. The truth is that Harry had been deeply unhappy for a long time.'
......


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

jcnc said:


> *Daily Mail*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'openly discussed Megxit before marrying' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', explosive biography to claim
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, 'discussed Megxit before marrying'*
> *New book will claim the Duke of Sussex was 'deeply unhappy for a long time'*
> *Source said biography will 'make clear that Megxit was far from a snap decision' *
> *Explosive book will tell 'making of modern royal family' in an 'upclose portrait'*
> *Sussexes gave interview to the authors before move to America, MoS reported  *
> *Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11 *
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex 'discussed Megxit before they got married' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', a new book is set to claim.
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, are currently living in Tyler Perry's $18 million mansion having stepped back from royal duty in March.
> 
> Sources have now revealed how bombshell biography Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family, which will be released online on August 11, is set to 'explore the couple's journey' to their decision.
> 
> An insider told The Sun: 'The seeds of Megxit were sown before they even got married. The truth is that Harry had been deeply unhappy for a long time.'
> ......


Sorry but what load of bullcrap! If he was that unhappy, he could have left any time. Why wait for after he married and spent a whole load of more tax payers money?


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry but what load of bullcrap! If he was that unhappy, he could have left any time. Why wait for after he married and spent a whole load of more tax payers money?


exactly...if they planned this all along, having that huge wedding at taxpayers expense was obscene....IDK how this narrative can be good for them


----------



## chicinthecity777

I was reading Yahoo news portal yesterday and there was a pro H&M article on it. I didn't read it (can't even remember what it was about) but went straight to the comment section. I kid you not, almost 100% negative comments on them. Several U.S. posters even said "Go back to England!" about them. Although I don't want them back here, I feel for you guys in the U.S.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nutashha said:


> Can we take a break from everything for a sec and see how CUTE their baby is?
> 
> *Meghan and Harry’s Baby Archie Is Speaking a Few Words Now*
> 
> *
> View attachment 4753762
> *



Yeah, didn't he say "Duck rabbit" according to his mother when everyone else heard "Dada"? The need to even overshadow her husband is so offputting.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I just got the new Vanity Fair magazine with Princess Anne on the cover; haven't read the article yet, but will do so soon!  I used to like Vanity Fair, but *this* article .. seriously????  UGGH!
> https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2020/5/the-comeback-kids


I just read that article.  I respect her work ethic but they called her a true style icon.  really??? I don't see it at all


----------



## A1aGypsy

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry but what load of bullcrap! If he was that unhappy, he could have left any time. Why wait for after he married and spent a whole load of more tax payers money?



Didn’t you just answer your own question? Lol.

Their lack of awareness is spectacular. Clearly they are doing this to combat the negative press MM is getting suggesting she was the catalyst for the move. But how on earth can you not foresee how this is going to play out when you tell people that you knew you were out, but you kept it quiet just long enough to let the tax payers fork out for your wedding and a massive reno? Smh


----------



## lalame

jcnc said:


> *Daily Mail*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'openly discussed Megxit before marrying' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', explosive biography to claim
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, 'discussed Megxit before marrying'*
> *New book will claim the Duke of Sussex was 'deeply unhappy for a long time'*
> *Source said biography will 'make clear that Megxit was far from a snap decision' *
> *Explosive book will tell 'making of modern royal family' in an 'upclose portrait'*
> *Sussexes gave interview to the authors before move to America, MoS reported  *
> *Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11 *
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex 'discussed Megxit before they got married' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', a new book is set to claim.
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, are currently living in Tyler Perry's $18 million mansion having stepped back from royal duty in March.
> 
> Sources have now revealed how bombshell biography Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family, which will be released online on August 11, is set to 'explore the couple's journey' to their decision.
> 
> An insider told The Sun: 'The seeds of Megxit were sown before they even got married. The truth is that Harry had been deeply unhappy for a long time.'
> ......



Um agree with everyone that this is even worse!!! So that means they had the intention to leave that entire time and still racked up those bills that would only be a thing if you were an international headline-grabbing royal? Why the need for that "thriving" interview? Why the need for anything... just start off the engagement quietly and leave it quietly. They revved up the machine and then said "all this attention is unfair."


----------



## Emeline

lalame said:


> Um agree with everyone that this is even worse!!! So that means they had the intention to leave that entire time and still racked up those bills that would only be a thing if you were an international headline-grabbing royal? Why the need for that "thriving" interview? Why the need for anything... just start off the engagement quietly and leave it quietly. They revved up the machine and then said "all this attention is unfair."


Exactly.  And after reading about how megxit was actually long planned, I wonder if Lady Colin Campbell was able to get details.  I'll be interested to see what her book has to say. It's out sometime next month I believe.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> yes, they're all cute and IMO - not to be mean or anything - this baby is no cuter than the babies of the average person.....I'd probably like him more IRL than pics


Agree.  All babies are cute.


----------



## Chanbal

My 2 cents:
H strikes me as an emotionally immature and highly influenceable person. He is just trying to take the Megxit blame from MM. Megxit was never planned imo, their attitudes led to it.

Agree, the baby is cute.


----------



## CeeJay

jcnc said:


> *Daily Mail*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'openly discussed Megxit before marrying' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', explosive biography to claim
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, 'discussed Megxit before marrying'*
> *New book will claim the Duke of Sussex was 'deeply unhappy for a long time'*
> *Source said biography will 'make clear that Megxit was far from a snap decision' *
> *Explosive book will tell 'making of modern royal family' in an 'upclose portrait'*
> *Sussexes gave interview to the authors before move to America, MoS reported  *
> *Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11 *
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex 'discussed Megxit before they got married' because the Duke was 'deeply unhappy for a long time', a new book is set to claim.
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, are currently living in Tyler Perry's $18 million mansion having stepped back from royal duty in March.
> 
> Sources have now revealed how bombshell biography Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family, which will be released online on August 11, is set to 'explore the couple's journey' to their decision.
> 
> An insider told The Sun: 'The seeds of Megxit were sown before they even got married. The truth is that Harry had been deeply unhappy for a long time.'
> ......


BS, BS, BS .. if he was SO unhappy beforehand, then heck -- he could have married Chelsy or Cressida - right?  If he had said to them "hey, look .. I'm really unhappy and just want to leave the BRF anyhow .." would they have considered it?  Then, to say this when they had the EXPENSIVE Wedding, the EXPENSIVE Reception, the Frogmore renovations, all her 'new' & expensive clothing & Jewelry .. well, why?? .. if you had ALREADY decided that you were going to leave????  UTTER CRAP!!! 

Then, this BS of "financial independence" .. HA!  The only thing that they (potentially) could be saving the British public on is the 'rental' (and I use that term lightly here because most of us believe that these have been handouts) of these houses.  Aren't they still taking Charles' money .. you know, for all their REQUIRED SECURITY?!?!?!  

I see a SPECTACULAR epic fail from this new blurb; just look at the comments on The Daily Fail ... WHOOO-WHEEE!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I just read that article.  I respect her work ethic but they called her a true style icon.  really??? I don't see it at all


100% AGREE on that; if anything, she (to me) has always looked so matronly!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> 100% AGREE on that; if anything, she (to me) has always looked so matronly!


exactly.  even when young I don't think I ever saw her look as good as that photo on the cover


----------



## jcnc

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry but what load of bullcrap! If he was that unhappy, he could have left any time. Why wait for after he married and spent a whole load of more tax payers money?


I didnt understand the optics of this article either.  So they wanted to leave and that’s ehy they spent soo much on wedding and Frogmore? Also, they attributed their decision to leave on to the paparazzi.. which one is it?

and if this wasplanned all along, what was the need to blindside the BRF? Their current agreement sure doesn’t look like the result of long and deliberate discussions.

the only thing this article does is shift the blame from Meghan to Harry But they both come across as stupid and greedy IMO


----------



## bag-mania

Can we all agree that "Finding Freedom" is going to be fanciful work of fiction? They have had Omid busily rewrite their history to make them appear better/stronger/likable.

These days truth is in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Can we all agree that "Finding Freedom" is going to be fanciful work of fiction? They have had Omid busily rewrite their history to make them appear better/stronger/likable.
> 
> These days truth is in the eye of the beholder.


I hope soon no one will care.....then she can see what she can do.  he can always go back to his family but she will be a 40 year old single mom....doubt she's gonna land another prince


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


> That people in the US think restrictions should ease while cases in many states are still on the rise is interesting.



Patience is not particularly a virtue here. After over two months of staying at home, restlessness has led to some behaving like COVID-19 doesn't exist. I expect it is mainly those who haven't had anyone in their lives affected by it. Unfortunately, they are not only putting their own lives at risk but also the lives of everyone who has the misfortune of coming in contact with them.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I hope soon no one will care.....then she can see what she can do.  he can always go back to his family but she will be a 40 year old single mom....doubt she's gonna land another prince



If it doesn't work out she'll have a generous alimony/child support to live off of, don't worry that. 

I think the book is their big Hail Mary pass. In celebrity terms they only have a limited amount of time to "be somebody" and make all that cash they believe they can earn. Much of their freshness in America has been spent in isolation. There are plenty of other narcissist celebrities out there who have also been denied their public over these past few months. Competition for attention should be fierce when everything starts opening up in the coming weeks/months.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If it doesn't work out she'll have a generous alimony/child support to live off of, don't worry that.
> 
> I think the book is their big Hail Mary pass. In celebrity terms they only have a limited amount of time to "be somebody" and make all that cash they believe they can earn. Much of their freshness in America has been spent in isolation. There are plenty of other narcissist celebrities out there who have also been denied their public over these past few months. Competition for attention should be fierce when everything starts opening up in the coming weeks/months.


right.  she won't be poor but will she be relevant?  famous?  or more like Fergie?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> right.  she won't be poor but will she be relevant?  famous?  or more like Fergie?



How I answer that question depends on the moment you ask it. My opinion fluctuates about whether she will have moderate success or be a total failure.

She has some rabid fangirls out there who luuuurve her. I'll say she could sign on with a company who would agree to put her name on a line of inexpensive clothing/cologne/hair care products. If the product(s) are any good at all that could keep her name relevant for 2–3 years. After that it's Fergie city.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> exactly...if they planned this all along, having that huge wedding at taxpayers expense was obscene....IDK how this narrative can be good for them


For all of their talk (& talk & talk & talk) . . .   Just think what a difference the money would have made to different charities.  You’re right, they really missed the mark on this one.


----------



## Sol Ryan

1LV said:


> For all of their talk (& talk & talk & talk) . . .   Just think what a difference the money would have made to different charities.  You’re right, they really missed the mark on this one.


They’re probably going to spin that they didn’t want the big wedding and that it was forced on them. Meg was also probably some how forced to wear white too Even though it wasn’t her first wedding... lol


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> They’re probably going to spin that they didn’t want the big wedding and that it was forced on them. Meg was also probably some how forced to wear white too Even though it wasn’t her first wedding... lol


and forced to wear a tiara and to have two gowns - one for the ceremony and one for the reception


----------



## poopsie

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Self-isolation laws of 14 days are still ongoing in the UK.  Travelling with a baby to the UK when so many cases are still active is still a risk.
> 
> *That people in the US think restrictions should ease while cases in many states are still on the rise is interesting.*



That is painting with a broad brush, don't you think? Some people do and some people don't. And that is probably true of anywhere, not just the US. Aren't countries all over the world loosening up? What do their people think? Would that be equally interesting?



CeeJay said:


> IMO .. it's divided based on politics, which is so STUPID (again - my opinion)!



That is a bit simplistic and offensive. Substitute the word politics for race, gender, ethnicity, age, religion-- any and all of which factor in more so IMO. Any one of _those_ criteria would be considered stereotyping, but apparently it is okay to denigrate folks based on what they checked on a ballot slip.
Not trying to be mean.........I'm just saying


----------



## Milosmum0307

sdkitty said:


> historically I think most biracial people have identified as black.....someone please correct me if I'm wrong.  maybe this is changing


Legally and culturally, that identification has usually been imposed on biracial people by others.  Her identity as a WOC gives her a unique platform, and I hope she will stop using people of color as props for her photo ops and instead work for meaningful change.  Her husband was a known racist before she married him, and presumably he has changed significantly in that regard; it might be instructive for them to discuss that transformation.  Was he a virulent, violent racist?  No; he was the more pernicious kind, the kind who used racist slurs toward his colleagues while calling them his friends. It’s the kind of insidious racism that many unconsciously racist Americans exhibit, and the Markles can help hold up a mirror to this society by frankly acknowledging Harry’s “soft bigotry.”  It would certainly be timely given current events, and it would avoid the unseemly spectacle of dusting off his mother’s long-dead corpse for their personal enrichment. Obviously, I doubt her sincerity and am dismissive of the invented idea that she had any significant credentials as a humanitarian before their marriage, but nowadays I have little appetite for attacking a black woman who has claimed to have suffered racist treatment by the media and others.  I believe that she has.  Is it frustrating that legitimate criticism of MM is automatically labeled “racism,” regardless of intent?  Yes!  But is it also possible that some criticism, while not factually incorrect, is unconsciously informed by a racial bias?  Also yes. There will be plenty of time and opportunity to criticize Meghan (because I doubt she’ll ever stop doing cringey things like calling the paps on herself or using a title that invokes a history of colonialism and inequality while claiming to be progressive), but for me personally that time isn’t now; so while I haven’t been active on this thread lately (or any other, for that matter ... busy), I’ll be bowing out of this thread for the foreseeable future.  I’m not criticizing others who like to gossip about this gruesome twosome, but I’m going to do some self-reflection and want to be sure that I personally am not letting unconscious bias seep into my opinion of her.  Though I’m of Latin extraction and a child of immigrants (marginalized groups for sure, especially these days), I won’t pretend to know the kind of prejudice black people experience in the United States.  Our racism is ugly and unique, and often it insinuates itself through subtle indignities; so often racist Americans aren’t even conscious of their own racism.  With that said, I’ll make one final observation:  I truly hope someone rethinks the “Finding Freedom” book title.  Right now people are struggling to achieve real freedom in the form of due process and the other civil liberties to which they are entitled, marching for freedom from oppression and terroristic violence that enforces and perpetuates a white supremacist system.  A grown white man born into spellbinding privilege moving away from his family and exercising independence isn’t a rousing tale of personal emancipation.  But I’m biased.  I’ve never liked or taken seriously the UK’s Nazi Prince.


----------



## mdcx

Wow, Jess Mulroney really is something else, isn't she? 








						Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney is FIRED
					

Lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter accused Canadian Mulroney of 'sending a threat' to her in an example of 'textbook white privilege' after she 'took offense' at being asked to speak up about racism.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## PewPew

mdcx said:


> Wow, Jess Mulroney really is something else, isn't she?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney is FIRED
> 
> 
> Lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter accused Canadian Mulroney of 'sending a threat' to her in an example of 'textbook white privilege' after she 'took offense' at being asked to speak up about racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Mulroney (stylist & friend to PM Trudeau’s wife) must be absolutely shocked, given how long she’s been part of Toronto & Canada’s elite in terms of wealth and celebrity. It’s disgusting how Mulroney tried to claim her “special friendship with a public figure” (Meghan) gave her such unique insight into race issues, that own actions couldn’t possibly be misconstrued as offensive, racist or bullying.


----------



## zinacef

mdcx said:


> Wow, Jess Mulroney really is something else, isn't she?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney is FIRED
> 
> 
> Lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter accused Canadian Mulroney of 'sending a threat' to her in an example of 'textbook white privilege' after she 'took offense' at being asked to speak up about racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh oh !  The “Source “ is in trouble. Wonder what’s gonna come out of this, would MM distance  errr—- markle her own BFF, her baby’s godmother ( most likely), personal and trusted baby nanny, etc... the Source that knows everything about her!


----------



## pixiejenna

CeeJay said:


> BS, BS, BS .. if he was SO unhappy beforehand, then heck -- he could have married Chelsy or Cressida - right?  If he had said to them "hey, look .. I'm really unhappy and just want to leave the BRF anyhow .." would they have considered it?  Then, to say this when they had the EXPENSIVE Wedding, the EXPENSIVE Reception, the Frogmore renovations, all her 'new' & expensive clothing & Jewelry .. well, why?? .. if you had ALREADY decided that you were going to leave????  UTTER CRAP!!!
> 
> Then, this BS of "financial independence" .. HA!  The only thing that they (potentially) could be saving the British public on is the 'rental' (and I use that term lightly here because most of us believe that these have been handouts) of these houses.  Aren't they still taking Charles' money .. you know, for all their REQUIRED SECURITY?!?!?!
> 
> I see a SPECTACULAR epic fail from this new blurb; just look at the comments on The Daily Fail ... WHOOO-WHEEE!



Chelsy and Cressida wouldn’t dare marry Harry especially if he wanted out of the firm. They grew up in Britain and understand the social hierarchy the backlash of marrying into the royal family to end up leaving it would have been brutal. Neither of them would want to live the rest of their lives looked down on while still under the same level of scrutiny of a working royal. Part of why Megan is a good fit for him peacing out because she doesn’t care about any of that.


----------



## bag-mania

I wish the book would address why they expected to still be paid when they left the royal family and why they were so shocked when they found out it didn’t work that way. 

Understanding where the sense of entitlement came from would be an interesting read. Of course Harry was born into it but Meghan picked it up in mere months.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Chelsy grew up in Zimbabwe, didn’t she?


----------



## tiktok

zinacef said:


> Oh oh !  The “Source “ is in trouble. Wonder what’s gonna come out of this, would MM distance  errr—- markle her own BFF, her baby’s godmother ( most likely), personal and trusted baby nanny, etc... the Source that knows everything about her!



Meghan can't markle her if she doesn't want Jessica to spill the beans in her trial vs the Daily Mail... The plot thickens...


----------



## Sol Ryan

mdcx said:


> Wow, Jess Mulroney really is something else, isn't she?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney is FIRED
> 
> 
> Lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter accused Canadian Mulroney of 'sending a threat' to her in an example of 'textbook white privilege' after she 'took offense' at being asked to speak up about racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I like that Mulroney had to invoke Megs as her friend... I wonder if we’re going to have sources (Omid) come out and say that Megs and her aren’t that close and the nature of their relationship has been overstated...


----------



## Luvbolide

This whole “modern royal thing” is so ridiculous to me.  These two quit being royals, so how the hell would they know what a modern royal family is.  And if their answer about how to modernize the royal family is to quit, doesn’t seem like something that most mature adults would be interested in.  So they are now two ex-royal global grifters - who is going to want to emulate that?!?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> With that said, I’ll make one final observation:  I truly hope someone rethinks the “Finding Freedom” book title.  Right now people are struggling to achieve real freedom in the form of due process and the other civil liberties to which they are entitled, marching for freedom from oppression and terroristic violence that enforces and perpetuates a white supremacist system.



I'm finishing up my 3rd cookbook (a compilation of recipes I developed for an ongoing video format), and its title had the words "celebration" and "party" in it. The publisher changed it because they said it wasn't fitting for times where people are dying, losing their livelihood and most certainly not throwing big parties, so if their publisher is worth their salt they absolutely should change the title.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pixiejenna said:


> Chelsy and Cressida wouldn’t dare marry Harry especially if he wanted out of the firm. They grew up in Britain and understand the social hierarchy the backlash of marrying into the royal family to end up leaving it would have been brutal. Neither of them would want to live the rest of their lives looked down on while still under the same level of scrutiny of a working royal. Part of why Megan is a good fit for him peacing out because she doesn’t care about any of that.



I still think had they left quietly and in a dignified manner there would not have been much backlash. There wasn't any outrage when Will and Kate spent their first married years quietly on an remote island, him working a normal job and her keeping her own household. They could have gone that route and just faded into the background, but of course the background was never the place MM aspired.


----------



## chicinthecity777

pixiejenna said:


> Part of why Megan is a good fit for him peacing out because she doesn’t care about any of that.


Sure MM didn't care about the royal duties and hierarchy and whatnots, but she sure cared a lot for the titles, the £40m wedding, the clothes, the house, the jewellery, the tiaras, and fame that come with it! Nope, you simply can't have it both ways. If she really didn't care any of those, Harry could have quit the royal first, then they can marry quietly and live a normal life. They said they wanted privacy, right? 
But that's clearly not what they want! They want their cake and eat it! What Meghan wants, Meghan gets after all!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.


I knew this because I watched Suits.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.



Well if you're am idiot then so am I. I had never heard of her until I checked into this thread a few months ago and I never would have guessed she was of mixed parentage until it was mentioned.


----------



## doni

pixiejenna said:


> Chelsy and Cressida wouldn’t dare marry Harry especially if he wanted out of the firm. They grew up in Britain and understand the social hierarchy the backlash of marrying into the royal family to end up leaving it would have been brutal. Neither of them would want to live the rest of their lives looked down on while still under the same level of scrutiny of a working royal. Part of why Megan is a good fit for him peacing out because she doesn’t care about any of that.



Chelsy is from Zimbabwe but did go to boarding school in England. I think actually that relationship may have worked if Harry had been willing to give up his royal role, as reportedly the issue was that she did not see herself in that position. I don’t think there would have been any issue with Harry opting out. Taking a role related to the army. Moving to Africa... There were many plausible options. The trend in Europe is towards smaller ’working’ royal families. The thing here is how it was done, and the appropriateness of choosing a celebrity lifestyle that takes advantage of the royal name.


----------



## doni

Wow, that Jessica Mulroney is a piece of work... “I have spoken to people and companies about how you have treated me”? Unbelievable, and obviously coming from someone who thought was untouchable.
And then to say “as I told you privately” I suffered the racism against my closest friend and learnt from it... It is not private if you tell the world. Plus she doesn’t seem to have learnt much but is simply throwing it around to get legitimacy. So low.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

poopsie said:


> That is painting with a broad brush, don't you think? Some people do and some people don't. And that is probably true of anywhere, not just the US. Aren't countries all over the world loosening up? What do their people think? Would that be equally interesting?
> 
> That is a bit simplistic and offensive. Substitute the word politics for race, gender, ethnicity, age, religion-- any and all of which factor in more so IMO. Any one of _those_ criteria would be considered stereotyping, but apparently it is okay to denigrate folks based on what they checked on a ballot slip.
> Not trying to be mean.........I'm just saying



We’re not allowed to discuss here but I don’t think anyone was trying to be offensive.... 

Also in terms of stereotyping there is a difference between all those categories you mentioned...checking a ballot slip is an action, a choice, the others you listed are inherited or biological traits (although I guess an argument could be made that religion becomes a choice after a certain age, but again not the place for that discussion either)!


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.


Because she's lived her life as a white woman and enjoyed the privileges of such.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Mulroney is losing a lot of TV gigs over her behavior. Good riddance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Mulroney is losing a lot of TV gigs over her behavior. Good riddance.


I try not to be gleeful, but I'm also so done with people - the Meghans, Harries, Jessicas, Weinsteins (not saying they all play in the same league of evil obviously) of the world - getting away with completely inappropriate behaviour, so I'm totally down with them feeling the consequences of their poor conduct.


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> That is painting with a broad brush, don't you think? Some people do and some people don't. And that is probably true of anywhere, not just the US. Aren't countries all over the world loosening up? What do their people think? Would that be equally interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> That is a bit simplistic and offensive. Substitute the word politics for race, gender, ethnicity, age, religion-- any and all of which factor in more so IMO. Any one of _those_ criteria would be considered stereotyping, but apparently it is okay to denigrate folks based on what they checked on a ballot slip.
> Not trying to be mean.........I'm just saying


I “liked” CeeJays post because I interpreted it to mean politicians rather than voters, and that was based on what I’m seeing in politicians in _my _small part of the world - elected officials (some, not all) who will say or do anything for a vote and/or a dollar.  Sad, but true.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.


Her appearance changed a lot over the years. I saw some photos of her in her younger years and she had a lot of African American features then.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Her appearance changed a lot over the years. I saw some photos of her in her younger years and she had a lot of African American features then.


not sure if you're suggesting she had some PS but she did have big curly hair as a child.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.


You are not alone, I only realized that she was mixed race when I saw her mother on the wedding pictures.


----------



## Chanbal

mrsinsyder said:


> Because she's lived her life as a white woman and enjoyed the privileges of such.


You might be right mrsinsyder, I didn't think about this possibility. Though, I had no idea how she lived her life before the wedding.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You might be right mrsinsyder, I didn't think about this possibility. Though, I had no idea how she lived her life before the wedding.


we have heard (partly from Ceejay) that she went to a private school (Catholic?) and lived past a certain age (12 or so?) with her dad who was a white guy and worked on the set of Married With Children.  So it's possible that she suffered from some bullying or something like that at school but she certainly didn't grown up surrounded by many other children of color.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> not sure if you're suggesting she had some PS but she did have big curly hair as a child.


No idea about whether she had PS or not whatsoever but one's appearance can be changed by wearing hair differently, different make-up etc.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> we have heard (partly from Ceejay) that she went to a private school (Catholic?) and lived past a certain age (12 or so?) with her dad who was a white guy and worked on the set of Married With Children.  So it's possible that she suffered from some bullying or something like that at school but she certainly didn't grown up surrounded by many other children of color.


What about her family on Doria’s side?  Grandparents, aunts & uncles, cousins?


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> What about her family on Doria’s side?  Grandparents, aunts & uncles, cousins?


don't know.....no one came to the wedding and it seems she lived with her dad much of her growing up years


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> don't know.....no one came to the wedding and it seems she lived with her dad much of her growing up years


Just read that Doria has 1/2 siblings.  My parents divorced when I was younger than MM was when her parents divorced, but one entire side of my family didn’t cease to exist.  I just find it somewhat odd that there’s no mention of family (other than her mom) in her life.  Not even a hint.

ETA No mention of family from her mom’s side


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Just read that Doria has 1/2 siblings.  My parents divorced when I was younger than MM was when her parents divorced, but one entire side of my family didn’t cease to exist.  I just find it somewhat odd that there’s no mention of family (other than her mom) in her life.  Not even a hint.


I seem to recall there was an uncle on her fathers side who helped her in some way but wasn't at the wedding


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> What about her family on Doria’s side?  Grandparents, aunts & uncles, cousins?





1LV said:


> Just read that Doria has 1/2 siblings.  My parents divorced when I was younger than MM was when her parents divorced, but one entire side of my family didn’t cease to exist.  I just find it somewhat odd that there’s no mention of family (other than her mom) in her life.  Not even a hint.
> 
> ETA No mention of family from her mom’s side



Very little has been said about other relatives. Meghan is Doria's only child. You're right Doria has a couple of half-siblings but maybe she was never that close to them. I found an article that said she has distant cousins on the Ragland side who live in Georgia, but it doesn't look like Meghan or even Doria has ever met them.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Very little has been said about other relatives. Meghan is Doria's only child. You're right Doria has a couple of half-siblings but maybe she was never that close to them. I found an article that said she has distant cousins on the Ragland side who live in Georgia, but it doesn't look like Meghan or even Doria has ever met them.


It’s kinda sad that you live 38+years and only have three family members in your life, for whatever reason.  Doria, Harry and Archie.  Does the same await Archie?  Seems to be shaping up that way.


----------



## TC1

Interesting that Jessica was the first to post on her IG about how Meghan was treated by the media was flat out racist...now here she is, speaking our both sides of her mouth. Clearly just another "celeb" who is friends with people and defends them when it's convenient.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> we have heard (partly from Ceejay) that she went to a private school (Catholic?) and lived past a certain age (12 or so?) with her dad who was a white guy and worked on the set of Married With Children.  So it's possible that she suffered from some bullying or something like that at school but she certainly didn't grown up surrounded by many other children of color.


Unfortunately, many kids suffer from bullying in schools, and it is possible that she also did.

Though, any bullying that she might have suffered in school may have nothing to do with the way she was perceived in Europe. What made her unpopular there was her personality imo. Rude attitudes with staff are not very popular in Europe. Apart of her mother, she had no family members or childhood friends attending her wedding.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Unfortunately, many kids suffer from bullying in schools, and it is possible that she also did.
> 
> Though, any bullying that she might have suffered in school may have nothing to do with the way she was perceived in Europe. What made her unpopular there was her difficult personality imo. Rude attitudes with staff are not very popular in Europe. Apart of her mother, she had no family members or childhood friends attending her wedding.


as far as I know she had just her mother from the family and some (mostly new) show biz friends


----------



## 1LV

TC1 said:


> Interesting that Jessica was the first to post on her IG about how Meghan was treated by the media was flat out racist...now here she is, speaking our both sides of her mouth. Clearly just another "celeb" who is friends with people and defends them when it's convenient.


Both remind me of the saying “big talkers, little do-ers”.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> as far as I know she had just her mother from the family and some (mostly new) show biz friends


If that had been my wedding I would have had lots of my cousins begging for a seat in the church and I would have said "heck yeah!" To have my family experience that extravagance and history would have been the best gift I could ever give them. When I saw only her mom there (sitting all by herself) I thought hmmm, sad.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> Unfortunately, many kids suffer from bullying in schools, and it is possible that she also did.
> 
> Though, any bullying that she might have suffered in school may have nothing to do with the way she was perceived in Europe. What made her unpopular there was her personality imo. Rude attitudes with staff are not very popular in Europe. Apart of her mother, she had no family members or childhood friends attending her wedding.


Seeing her in that birthday video as a child, claiming to be the queen of them all, she didn't seem like anyone was pushing her around any. Honestly, she looked like a little pain that the other kids would run from.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.



I never knew until the wedding when I saw her mother too.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> Mulroney is losing a lot of TV gigs over her behavior. Good riddance.



This isn't the first questionable behavior by Jessica Mulroney either.  I recall a year or two ago she took to social media to shame someone on one of her airplane flights, something about her being bullied by another passenger who called her names and no one stepped forward to defend her.  She deleted the post pretty quick but, if I recall, the passenger defended himself and accused her of being the bully, demanding and demeaning others.  My sense is she's pretty arrogant to everyone, no matter their gender or race.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> If that had been my wedding I would have had lots of my cousins begging for a seat in the church and I would have said "heck yeah!" To have my family experience that extravagance and history would have been the best gift I could ever give them. When I saw only her mom there (sitting all by herself) I thought hmmm, sad.


right.  as I've said before, even if I wasn't close with my family I'm pretty sure I could find a few who would like to attend a historic event like that.....seems maybe she didn't feel her family was presentable


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> right.  as I've said before, even if I wasn't close with my family I'm pretty sure I could find a few who would like to attend a historic event like that.....seems maybe she didn't feel her family was presentable


In childhood pictures, both father and sister look like they really loved her.


----------



## bag-mania

If Meghan had been bullied in school we would have heard about it long ago. The way she milks every event in her life for maximum media attention, she surely wouldn't have missed an opportunity to be promoted as a brave, strong young woman who overcame a bullied past.


----------



## CeeJay

According to the DM, Jessica has been sacked by ABC - GMA as well!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Mulroney-threatened-sue-black-influencer.html


----------



## CeeJay

In regards to Meghan's "childhood" (her mid to teen years), my friends that knew her and her Dad very well (they are also in the entertainment business), Meghan was flat out SPOILED ROTTEN and as such, she was very much a ME-ME-ME type of person (things HAD to be HER way or she markled you)!  When Meghan was over their house rehearsing her senior play with their son, my friend told me that at one point she behaved horribly such that my friend took her aside and told her "you DO NOT do that, especially in MY house".  Of course, after the play was over .. her son was markled!


----------



## mshermes

Found this pic when Meghan was young. Family was visible...


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This will make me look like an idiot, but for the first weeks at least, possibly months because I just wasn't invested at all, I didn't even know Meghan was mixed race. I only saw the occasional pic of them, never really read the articles, and hadn't seen a picture of Doria. I thought Meghan was Southern European or Latin or something until I finally caught on.


I didn't either.


----------



## justwatchin

mshermes said:


> Found this pic when Meghan was young. Family was visible...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4755350


With the exception of her mother, everyone else looks pretty happy. Wonder what happened to these family members?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> With the exception of her mother, everyone else looks pretty happy. Wonder what happened to these family members?



Pretty sure Doria's parents are deceased and Meghan's half-brother is markled. Since we never hear about Meghan's Aunt Saundra and her family, maybe they have been markled as well.


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> In regards to Meghan's "childhood" (her mid to teen years), my friends that knew her and her Dad very well (they are also in the entertainment business), Meghan was flat out SPOILED ROTTEN and as such, she was very much a ME-ME-ME type of person (things HAD to be HER way or she markled you)!  When Meghan was over their house rehearsing her senior play with their son, my friend told me that at one point she behaved horribly such that my friend took her aside and told her "you DO NOT do that, especially in MY house".  Of course, after the play was over .. her son was markled!


I can believe it.  We’ve pretty much been seeing this all along.


----------



## 1LV

mshermes said:


> Found this pic when Meghan was young. Family was visible...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4755350


What a handsome family & sweet picture!  MM looked adorable.  I wonder more and more what Doria’s story is.


----------



## youngster

justwatchin said:


> With the exception of her mother, everyone else looks pretty happy. Wonder what happened to these family members?



They are a very good looking family for sure!


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> According to the DM, Jessica has been sacked by ABC - GMA as well!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Mulroney-threatened-sue-black-influencer.html



There was little doubt of that, I think.  It will be interesting to see if Meghan stands by her or fades her out.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> There was little doubt of that, I think.  It will be interesting to see if Meghan stands by her or fades her out.


I bet anything, Jessica will be markled ..


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> I bet anything, Jessica will be markled ..


Cue the music.  Boomp, boomp, boomp.  Another one bites the dust.


----------



## Emeline

And the markling begins.....








						Meghan Markle is 'absolutely mortified' over BFF Jessica Mulroney
					

Meghan Markle is telling close friends she is 'absolutely mortified' over best friend Jessica Mulroney's 'tone-deaf' and 'heatbreaking' actions, close friends tell DailyMail.com.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## justwatchin

Emeline said:


> And the markling begins.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'absolutely mortified' over BFF Jessica Mulroney
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is telling close friends she is 'absolutely mortified' over best friend Jessica Mulroney's 'tone-deaf' and 'heatbreaking' actions, close friends tell DailyMail.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well that didn’t take long


----------



## V0N1B2

CeeJay said:


> I bet anything, Jessica will be markled ..


I don’t know... Jessica knows where the bodies are buried so to speak. Meghan will throw some balls in the air to distance herself for a little while. They'll probably crash some penguin rescue organization zoom meeting in Chunga Changa to deflect and distract.


----------



## V0N1B2

Emeline said:


> And the markling begins.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'absolutely mortified' over BFF Jessica Mulroney
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is telling close friends she is 'absolutely mortified' over best friend Jessica Mulroney's 'tone-deaf' and 'heatbreaking' actions, close friends tell DailyMail.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Jess will ruin Meghan if this is true.
You hate to see it but...


----------



## LaidyM

bag-mania said:


> Pretty sure Doria's parents are deceased and Meghan's half-brother is markled. Since we never hear about Meghan's Aunt Saundra and her family, maybe they have been markled as well.



They got Markeled very early on, even before the white family was!

Her uncle said they haven’t had any contact with her since she went to college.
They wished her luck about the wedding. I can’t remember if they said they were sad st not being invited or not.
He also said the family grew apart after the grandmother died.
I mean sure, it happens, but with your entire family?!
Even if so, you still invite them to your wedding, unless they’re super toxic.. which does not seem to be the case with her maternal side.


I’m not judging- necessarily, I have little contact with my cousins, nothing personal, truth is we were never very close when young long story, but I still love them!

And I would absolutely attend their weddings if invited! (Except one which got married while I was away and was unable to attend) And would invite them to mine.
Why? Because we are a small family and they’re family!


----------



## mdcx

But....who will release all those “close friend” PR spin stories to the media if this is true? Time for a new BFF Megs.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> But....who will release all those “close friend” PR spin stories to the media if this is true? Time for a new BFF Megs.
> View attachment 4755598


.. "*at being dragged into Jessica Mulroney's mess*" .. WHAT???   WTF? .. how is Meghan being dragged into this???  Give me a break ..


----------



## Jayne1

I'd love to hear the whole Jessica M story - both sides.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

This thread moves so fast. Did anyone see this article about how Nima from Shahs of sunset knew Meghan in high school and how she ghosted him and their other friend after she landed Suits?: https://www.eonline.com/news/115162...-meghan-markle-toyed-with-his-heart-as-a-teen

And then how he regretted telling the story bc meg fans went after him:








						'Shahs' Star Nema Vand 'Learned His Lesson' After Meghan Markle Joke
					

'Shahs of Sunset' star Nema Vand apologized for bringing up an old story about Meghan Markle in May — get the details




					www.usmagazine.com
				




I dont understand why people continue to associate with her knowing that she has a long history of "Markle"ing people...


----------



## bellecate

. commented on the wrong person.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Girlfriend has some cleanup to do on her insta bio.


----------



## bellecate

Emeline said:


> And the markling begins.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'absolutely mortified' over BFF Jessica Mulroney
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is telling close friends she is 'absolutely mortified' over best friend Jessica Mulroney's 'tone-deaf' and 'heatbreaking' actions, close friends tell DailyMail.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



     She called someone else tone-deaf! The Duchess of tone-deaf.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am helpful


----------



## mrsinsyder

Spill the tea Jess!


----------



## PewPew

Meghan is in a complicated, precarious position with respect to Jessica’s actions & career turn.

1) Meghan just gave a graduation speech where she quoted Grey’s Anatomy (without attribution, of course), stating that saying nothing is worse than saying the wrong or unpopular thing. So far Meghan hasn’t said anything, but “friends” tell the DailyMail she’s disappointed in Jessica. Interestingly the DailyMail is a tabloid H&M publicly said they’ll not be talking to. Is the story to be believed as a plant, or...?

2) In her public “apologies,” Jessica states that her friendship with a prominent person (Meghan) gave her insight into racism, so she couldn’t be racist. (Jessica was actually among the most vocal, early supporters of MM & publicly said the UK press was racist towards MM.)

3) In Meghan’s ongoing trial against a UK tabloid, critical testimony will involve what MM told 5 friends about Thomas & how that info got into the press. The names have not been disclosed by the press, but many believe Jessica was one of the friends who will be subpoenaed to testify.

If MM turns her back on Jessica now, Jess could certainly tell volumes. But is it in Jessica’s best interest to lash out at M, if she wants to continue to work in this business? Probably not. She’s still well-connected enough, that laying low & emerging with a heartfelt statement and proof of “sensitivity training” may be all she needs to rehab her career, given how many other celebrities are in similar positions. Time will tell.


----------



## Jayne1

PewPew said:


> Meghan is in a complicated, precarious position with respect to Jessica’s actions & career turn.
> 
> 1) Meghan just gave a graduation speech where she quoted Grey’s Anatomy (without attribution, of course), stating that saying nothing is worse than saying the wrong or unpopular thing. So far Meghan hasn’t said anything, but “friends” tell the DailyMail she’s disappointed in Jessica. Interestingly the DailyMail is a tabloid H&M publicly said they’ll not be talking to. Is the story to be believed as a plant, or...?
> 
> 2) In her public “apologies,” Jessica states that her friendship with a prominent person (Meghan) gave her insight into racism, so she couldn’t be racist. (Jessica was actually among the most vocal, early supporters of MM & publicly said the UK press was racist towards MM.)
> 
> 3) In Meghan’s ongoing trial against a UK tabloid, critical testimony will involve what MM told 5 friends about Thomas & how that info got into the press. The names have not been disclosed by the press, but many believe Jessica was one of the friends who will be subpoenaed to testify.
> 
> If MM turns her back on Jessica now, Jess could certainly tell volumes. But is it in Jessica’s best interest to lash out at M, if she wants to continue to work in this business? Probably not. She’s still well-connected enough, that laying low & emerging with a heartfelt statement and proof of “sensitivity training” may be all she needs to rehab her career, given how many other celebrities are in similar positions. Time will tell.


I think so.  They'll give her a time out and she'll be back, maybe not on US TV, but certainly on Canadian TV.


----------



## lulilu

I agree that it's in Jessica's best interest to keep her mouth shut.  But question is, will all five friends tell the same story/lie/whatever in the lawsuit.  I wonder if it will settle now.


----------



## 1LV

Am I the only one who finds it questionable that as long as MM and Jessica have known each other, as close as they were (Archie’s godmother, right?) that MM never saw or heard anything up until now when this “side” of Jessica was made public?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

caramelize126 said:


> This thread moves so fast. Did anyone see this article about how Nima from Shahs of sunset knew Meghan in high school and how she ghosted him and their other friend after she landed Suits?: https://www.eonline.com/news/115162...-meghan-markle-toyed-with-his-heart-as-a-teen
> 
> And then how he regretted telling the story bc meg fans went after him:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Shahs' Star Nema Vand 'Learned His Lesson' After Meghan Markle Joke
> 
> 
> 'Shahs of Sunset' star Nema Vand apologized for bringing up an old story about Meghan Markle in May — get the details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I dont understand why people continue to associate with her knowing that she has a long history of "Markle"ing people...



Far more interesting I found the bit how 16yo Megs sat down on his lap, put her face next to his and told him in Farsi how beautiful he was, and when he was like "You speak Farsi?" she said "I learned it for you" and took off. Manipulative to the core at age 16, and it gives you an idea how she landed Harry.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Far more interesting I found the bit how 16yo Megs sat down on his lap, put her face next to his and told him in Farsi how beautiful he was, and when he was like "You speak Farsi?" she said "I learned it for you" and took off. Manipulative to the core at age 16, and it gives you an idea how she landed Harry.


and very self-confident


----------



## PewPew

1LV said:


> Am I the only one who finds it questionable that as long as MM and Jessica have known each other, as close as they were (Archie’s godmother, right?) that MM never saw or heard anything up until now when this “side” of Jessica was made public?



MM is likely very familiar with this entitled, threatening side of Jess, whose behavior isn’t uncommon among celebrity movers & shakers. M has learned & benefited from Jessica’s hustle & way of doing business, long before Harry. There was an article several pages back from a magazine where Meghan’s “publicist” early in her career (believed to be M herself) sent entitled and demanding emails on her “client’s” behalf, before canceling a photoshoot. Per several reports, type of erratic, entitled behavior continued via late night emails to royal staffers, & may be reflected in the peevish, tone-deaf Sussex Royal website statements of early Megxit.

I don’t think MM finds Jessica’s behavior surprising, just the fact that she publicly drew M into the situation by saying she was “deeply educated” on race issues by her friendship with M. Now it’s every person for themselves.

I’ve a friend who worked as a makeup artist and personal stylist in Toronto, and the general rumblings seem to be that while certainly tone-deaf on race issues, Jessica is similar to actress Lea Michele, who’s known for being universally rude and entitled to *everyone* perceived as beneath her.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> MM is likely very familiar with this entitled, threatening side of Jess, whose behavior isn’t uncommon among celebrity movers & shakers. M has learned & benefited from Jessica’s hustle & way of doing business, long before Harry. There was an article several pages back from a magazine where Meghan’s “publicist” early in her career (believed to be M herself) sent entitled and demanding emails on her “client’s” behalf, before canceling a photoshoot. Per several reports, type of erratic, entitled behavior continued via late night emails to royal staffers, & may be reflected in the peevish, tone-deaf Sussex Royal website statements of early Megxit.
> 
> I don’t think MM finds Jessica’s behavior surprising, just the fact that she publicly drew M into the situation by saying she was “deeply educated” on race issues by her friendship with M. Now it’s every person for themselves.
> 
> I’ve a friend who worked as a makeup artist and personal stylist in Toronto, and the general rumblings seem to be that while certainly tone-deaf on race issues, Jessica is similar to actress Lea Michele, who’s known for being universally rude and entitled to *everyone* perceived as beneath her.


Meghan will do what benefits Meghan.  of course it's true Jess has dirt on her but the last thing M can afford to be is tone deaf on race at this time


----------



## mrsinsyder

This is the party many of us have watched video of them leaving in a hurry. The truths are finally starting to come out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> This is the party many of us have watched video of them leaving in a hurry. The truths are finally starting to come out.
> View attachment 4756338


Oooooooooooooh - like what???  Is this the party where she (supposedly) went where she wasn't supposed to in addition to taking photos???  Meghan has been very calculating (and manipulative) from a very early age, and my friend certainly said that she did the same to her son when they were in high school.  He thought that they were "best friends" and (at one time) considered asking her out until his mother said "no - sorry son, don't want you to get hurt".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Oooooooooooooh - like what???  Is this the party where she (supposedly) went where she wasn't supposed to in addition to taking photos???  Meghan has been very calculating (and manipulative) from a very early age, and my friend certainly said that she did the same to her son when they were in high school.  He thought that they were "best friends" and (at one time) considered asking her out until his mother said "no - sorry son, don't want you to get hurt".



If the pictures are correct that was Charles' party right after the wedding. Pictures came out where H&M where driving off while the party was still going strong and M's face was not too happy.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If the pictures are correct that was Charles' party right after the wedding. Pictures came out where H&M where driving off while the party was still going strong and M's face was not too happy.


Ah - right, I remember that!  What the hell was she thinking????


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Ah - right, I remember that!  What the hell was she thinking????


Meghan didn't get what Meghan wanted?


----------



## csshopper

Whatever it turns out to be, it started before this. 

Remember she had already thrown a hissy fit over trying to treat the Crown Jewels like the prop shop at a movie studio, and was called up short by the Queen who basically said: "no",  my Tiaras, my decision, and you may not wear that one, but this one is equally lovely and you may wear it. Pout, pout because Harry could not deliver on his declaration "Whatever Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets".


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If the pictures are correct that was Charles' party right after the wedding. Pictures came out where H&M where driving off while the party was still going strong and M's face was not too happy.



I saw a video of that party -- Charles came up to Harry and took him aside to say something.  Immediately thereafter, Harry was guiding an unwilling M out of the party.

I am dying to hear what she did.  I think I saw a photo of her sticking her tongue out at that party as well.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Ah - right, I remember that!  What the hell was she thinking????


They were reportedly ushered out Of the garden party at the request of Charles


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> They were reportedly ushered out Of the garden party at the request of Charles


now I'm getting curious


----------



## poopsie

I thought I read somewhere on this thread or the other one that it was something to do with Camilla, if it is the same party


----------



## mrsinsyder

lulilu said:


> I saw a video of that party -- Charles came up to Harry and took him aside to say something.  Immediately thereafter, Harry was guiding an unwilling M out of the party.
> 
> I am dying to hear what she did.  I think I saw a photo of her sticking her tongue out at that party as well.



She did.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Welp.


----------



## Chanbal

lulilu said:


> I saw a video of that party -- Charles came up to Harry and took him aside to say something.  Immediately thereafter, Harry was guiding an unwilling M out of the party.
> 
> *I am dying to hear what she did.*  I think I saw a photo of her sticking her tongue out at that party as well.





sdkitty said:


> *now I'm getting curious*


I' guess we will have to wait until August when the tell-all book 'Meghan And Harry: The Real Story' is going to be released.

"And when asked whether Harry and Meghan tried to 'influence Lady Colin Campbell' book, she claimed: 'Yes they did. They were getting mutual friends to ring me up to influence the narrative, to feed me stuff, some of I was receptive too, some of it I was not.''










						Colin Campbell claims Meghan and Harry tried to influence her book
					

Lady Colin Campbell has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to 'influence' her upcoming tell-all book Meghan And Harry: The Real Story.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

Hmmmm - maybe she jettisoned Jessica M and needs a new child care provider.  Hopefully it will be a good thing for little Archie.  I feel so sorry for that kid...


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> I thought I read somewhere on this thread or the other one that it was something to do with Camilla, if it is the same party



I wonder if she had a bit too much to drink and said something rude.


----------



## bag-mania

I’ll believe the “Doria moves in to be the nanny” story when I see multiple sources reporting it. There has been nothing in the past year to give any indication Doria wants to be such a hands-on grandma. I think the Daily Mail is just tweaking MM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Frivole88




----------



## bag-mania

Here’s your future as a celebrity in America, Meghan. You get second billing to Kim Kardashian in a mediocre Us magazine article.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if she had a bit too much to drink and said something rude.


hard to believe that at her age and knowing the group she was with (and being the champion networker) she would mis-step


----------



## Sol Ryan

kristinlorraine said:


> View attachment 4756744



ok.... I don’t ever care if this is true or not... it’s hilarious...


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Here’s your future as a celebrity in America, Meghan. You get second billing to Kim Kardashian in a mediocre Us magazine article.
> 
> View attachment 4756771



Can’t compare the two, Kim actually makes her own money (with her momager,) doesn’t leech or depend on anyone for money, but between the two of them, I actually like Kim K!


----------



## scarlet555

Sol Ryan said:


> ok.... I don’t ever care if this is true or not... it’s hilarious...



I secretly kind of hope its true!  Lol


----------



## mdcx

I believe M was drunk at that party. They were definitely asked to leave and their car was suddenly right there, ready for them.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> hard to believe that at her age and knowing the group she was with (and being the champion networker) she would mis-step



Overconfidence perhaps? She was riding high at that point and thought she could do no wrong. After having several successes maybe she got sloppy (or sloppy drunk).


----------



## Emeline

mdcx said:


> I believe M was drunk at that party. They were definitely asked to leave and their car was suddenly right there, ready for them.


I've only seen the video below. I've not see what happens when they head for the car. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGO4mTQnseU


----------



## mdcx

I’m sure M struggled with all the polite chitchat expected of her at this party. May have been the moment she started to realise she was expected to actually make conversation and put others at ease in her royal role, not just talk about herself. Am sure she had minder/s keeping an eye on her and they prob reported she was out of her depth to Charles.


----------



## ic_locon

Chanbal said:


> I' guess we will have to wait until August when the tell-all book 'Meghan And Harry: The Real Story' is going to be released.
> 
> "And when asked whether Harry and Meghan tried to 'influence Lady Colin Campbell' book, she claimed: 'Yes they did. They were getting mutual friends to ring me up to influence the narrative, to feed me stuff, some of I was receptive too, some of it I was not.''
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Colin Campbell claims Meghan and Harry tried to influence her book
> 
> 
> Lady Colin Campbell has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to 'influence' her upcoming tell-all book Meghan And Harry: The Real Story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Actually, we only have to wait until next month for Lady Campbell’s book. It’s Scobie’s book that comes out in August.


----------



## ic_locon

I’m sure that, as we speak, H&M are looking for something juicy from their book to leak to the press, to counter Lady Campbell.


----------



## lalame

Wow I hadn’t heard all that drama about the garden party and M being shown the door. Now I’m curious too what it could’ve been! Surprised it hasn’t leaked already if it was that offensive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> I saw a video of that party -- Charles came up to Harry and took him aside to say something.  Immediately thereafter, Harry was guiding an unwilling M out of the party.
> 
> I am dying to hear what she did.  I think I saw a photo of her sticking her tongue out at that party as well.



I tried to give the benefit of the doubt...that so shortly after the wedding they were told they could leave early to spend time together, but it didn't add up with the salty face she made while being driven off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kristinlorraine said:


> View attachment 4756744



As if. Also I can't see why a whining MM would make a big reveal necessary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## byzina

PewPew said:


> Meghan is in a complicated, precarious position with respect to Jessica’s actions & career turn.
> 
> 1) Meghan just gave a graduation speech where she quoted Grey’s Anatomy (without attribution, of course), stating that saying nothing is worse than saying the wrong or unpopular thing. So far Meghan hasn’t said anything, but “friends” tell the DailyMail she’s disappointed in Jessica. Interestingly the DailyMail is a tabloid H&M publicly said they’ll not be talking to. Is the story to be believed as a plant, or...?
> 
> *2) In her public “apologies,” Jessica states that her friendship with a prominent person (Meghan) gave her insight into racism, so she couldn’t be racist. (Jessica was actually among the most vocal, early supporters of MM & publicly said the UK press was racist towards MM.)*
> 
> 3) In Meghan’s ongoing trial against a UK tabloid, critical testimony will involve what MM told 5 friends about Thomas & how that info got into the press. The names have not been disclosed by the press, but many believe Jessica was one of the friends who will be subpoenaed to testify.
> 
> If MM turns her back on Jessica now, Jess could certainly tell volumes. But is it in Jessica’s best interest to lash out at M, if she wants to continue to work in this business? Probably not. She’s still well-connected enough, that laying low & emerging with a heartfelt statement and proof of “sensitivity training” may be all she needs to rehab her career, given how many other celebrities are in similar positions. Time will tell.



I didn't quite get it. Jessica's threatened another person's career using her influence and power. In her apologies she says she is not racist because Meghan's her friend (in my opinion, this doesn't state anything but anyway). Does it really make a difference? We would have done perfectly the same to any person irrespective of her/his gender, race, nationality, age. This was a wrong move in itself. She might always settle the matters this way in her job routine. I bet Meghan knew it when she lived in Toronto and played this game according to the rules.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> I’m sure M struggled with all the polite chitchat expected of her at this party. May have been the moment she started to realise she was expected to actually make conversation and put others at ease in her royal role, not just talk about herself. Am sure she had minder/s keeping an eye on her and they prob reported she was out of her depth to Charles.



I’ll be surprised if it was something so minor. She’s an actress, she is certainly capable of feigning interest in the conversation going on around her. Even if she looked outright bored she wouldn’t be asked to leave. No, the rules are the same no matter what kind of party you are attending. When you say or do something inappropriate, that’s when you get kicked out. I’d love to know what happened.


----------



## LittleStar88

scarlet555 said:


> Can’t compare the two, Kim actually makes her own money (with her momager,) doesn’t leech or depend on anyone for money, but between the two of them, I actually like Kim K!



I agree!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I remember reading somewhere that alleged that there had been some discussions about her behaviour at the public event (they weren’t happy about her sticking her tongue out) and then Meghan stuck her tongue out at Camilla when Camilla was giving a speech at the private event.

No way of knowing if there is any credibility behind it or not.


----------



## LittleStar88

I suppose regardless of the reason, a grown woman being asked to leave an event isn't a good look. Had to be something embarrassing.


----------



## Tootsie17

A1aGypsy said:


> I remember reading somewhere that alleged that there had been some discussions about her behaviour at the public event (they weren’t happy about her sticking her tongue out) and then Meghan stuck her tongue out at Camilla when Camilla was giving a speech at the private event.
> 
> No way of knowing if there is any credibility behind it or not.



Even though this supposed story may not be credible, thanks for sharing.  I always wondered what could she have done to be kicked  out of an event because that's pretty embarrassing.  She just got married and she's already rocking the boat.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> I remember reading somewhere that alleged that there had been some discussions about her behaviour at the public event (they weren’t happy about her sticking her tongue out) and then Meghan stuck her tongue out at Camilla when Camilla was giving a speech at the private event.
> 
> No way of knowing if there is any credibility behind it or not.


that tongue business is just ridiculous


----------



## lanasyogamama

a a


scarlet555 said:


> Can’t compare the two, Kim actually makes her own money (with her momager,) doesn’t leech or depend on anyone for money, but between the two of them, I actually like Kim K!



that’s been the craziest thing for me out of all this, it’s made me like Kim K!



Emeline said:


> I've only seen the video below. I've not see what happens when they head for the car.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGO4mTQnseU



Must have been torture not to hold hands with “H”.


----------



## Chanbal

*I can't wait to see what is their monetary contribution!*

*Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Postpone the Launch of Archewell Nonprofit*
According to sources, the couple is currently focusing on supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, and coronavirus relief efforts.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-postpone-140800433.html


----------



## caramelize126

I believe the "other forum" had either speculated or provided some sort of evidence that Megs was accepting gifts and "crossing the line" when it came to networking. She may have been directly asking folks for stuff? Does anyone remember this?

This is much more believable to me than her getting too drunk or getting kicked out for sticking her tongue out.


----------



## Emeline

caramelize126 said:


> I believe the "other forum" had either speculated or provided some sort of evidence that Megs was accepting gifts and "crossing the line" when it came to networking. She may have been directly asking folks for stuff? Does anyone remember this?
> 
> This is much more believable to me than her getting too drunk or getting kicked out for sticking her tongue out.


I think M does accept a gift in the video I posted. It appears to be about the size of a deck of cards in a small white fabric gift bag. She hands it off to someone before leaving the party.

That said, I have no idea if this was what caused the early departure, or if it was something else.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> *I can't wait to see what is their monetary contribution!*
> 
> *Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Postpone the Launch of Archewell Nonprofit*
> According to sources, the couple is currently focusing on supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, and coronavirus relief efforts.
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-postpone-140800433.html


Let’s hope the poor dear isn’t too tired to give it a proper launch when the time rolls around.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

caramelize126 said:


> I believe the "other forum" had either speculated or provided some sort of evidence that Megs was accepting gifts and "crossing the line" when it came to networking. She may have been directly asking folks for stuff? Does anyone remember this?
> 
> This is much more believable to me than her getting too drunk or getting kicked out for sticking her tongue out.



Not even MM is crazy enough to walk around her father-in-laws garden party and beg for things. Also, why would she...Charles funded a wardrobe for 1 million pounds in less than a year! He paid for their wedding reception, their furniture for Frogmore, and the Queen let them pick pieces from her art collection. At that point, she didn't even need anything.


----------



## caramelize126

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not even MM is crazy enough to walk around her father-in-laws garden party and beg for things. Also, why would she...Charles funded a wardrobe for 1 million pounds in less than a year! He paid for their wedding reception, their furniture for Frogmore, and the Queen let them pick pieces from her art collection. At that point, she didn't even need anything.



She went to a disney movie premiere and had her husband beg for a job for her. This girl is constantly "on" and if the rumors of H&M planning megxit before they even married are true...who knows what she was looking for. I wouldnt put it past her.


----------



## lalame

Emeline said:


> I've only seen the video below. I've not see what happens when they head for the car.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGO4mTQnseU


Yeah, hard to tell what’s going on here... I doubt she had said something offensive to Camilla as she kissed her and said “we’ll see you soon” before they left. Maybe they were just late to another engagement?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> Yeah, hard to tell what’s going on here... I doubt she had said something offensive to Camilla as she kissed her and said “we’ll see you soon” before they left. Maybe they were just late to another engagement?



It seemed like a weird departure.  I thought you were not allowed to leave before the senior royals  unless told to do so, I may have dreamed this thought too but maybe someone with more knowledge can chime in, been reading a lot of royal gossip b/c of crazy M with her ‘me before Harry antics’.   I would think since your brother cannot attend your dad’s garden birthday party, then maybe you’d stay till the end, unless you were asked to leave.  It seemed awkward.  Can we get a body reading expert to translate for us, they usually have one in those gossip TV channels, .


----------



## Chanbal

byzina said:


> I didn't quite get it. Jessica's threatened another person's career using her influence and power. In her apologies she says she is not racist because Meghan's her friend (in my opinion, this doesn't state anything but anyway). Does it really make a difference? We would have done perfectly the same to any person irrespective of her/his gender, race, nationality, age. This was a wrong move in itself. She might always settle the matters this way in her job routine. I bet Meghan knew it when she lived in Toronto and played this game according to the rules.



When JM states that she is not racist might be because she may threaten any person whom she dislikes and dares to cross her path irrespective of her/his race. JM and MM probably have common beliefs.


----------



## scarlet555

lanasyogamama said:


> a a
> 
> 
> that’s been the craziest thing for me out of all this, it’s *made me like Kim K*!
> 
> 
> 
> Must have been torture not to hold hands with “H”.



Sadly, I never cared for Kim K before, but found some respect for the girl after what it seems M leeching off of everyone and anyone.  Without a job, you should continue charity work but not as the actual pity charity pitch.  Many people without millions still volunteer with charities and donate their time and efforts to make the world a better place.  It’s that entitlement of stepping out of royal titles for being treated badly and accepting money and seemingly wanting everything to be paid for by someone from Harry’s family.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> *I can't wait to see what is their monetary contribution!*
> 
> *Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Postpone the Launch of Archewell Nonprofit*
> According to sources, the couple is currently focusing on supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, and coronavirus relief efforts.
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-postpone-140800433.html


The comments aren't pretty.


----------



## kemilia

Emeline said:


> I think M does accept a gift in the video I posted. It appears to be about the size of a deck of cards in a small white fabric gift bag. She hands it off to someone before leaving the party.
> 
> That said, I have no idea if this was what caused the early departure, or if it was something else.


I noticed that but I thought it was like the flowers the royals get from people, no big deal. But who knows.


----------



## Emeline

kemilia said:


> I noticed that but I thought it was like the flowers the royals get from people, no big deal. But who knows.


I've heard flowers are fine, anything else is a no-no. 
I am really curious to find out what is in Lady C's book. 
Was it something M did? Or was it something M said?


----------



## CeeJay

mrsinsyder said:


> Welp.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4756728


1)  Nope - not buying it; Doria has her own place and her Dog(s) and her own life
2)  RENTED Mansion???  Rented???? .. how much and who's paying???


----------



## Emeline

CeeJay said:


> 1)  Nope - not buying it; Doria has her own place and her Dog(s) and her own life
> 2)  RENTED Mansion???  Rented???? .. *how much and who's paying???*


H&M would save everyone a lot of time if they'd kindly put how much and who's paying in the first line of any of their posts.


----------



## scarlet555

kemilia said:


> The comments aren't pretty.



I think a lot people have a good idea of what M is up to...


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> 1)  Nope - not buying it; Doria has her own place and her Dog(s) and her own life
> 2)  RENTED Mansion???  Rented???? .. how much and *who's paying*???



Seriously...  inquiring minds want to know...  we want to hear how embarrassing and banal the answer is.  These two are like kids playing house.    

With COVID 19 and BLM taking taking over the headlines, of course ARCHEWELL isn’t going to get the attention it has planned, get ready instead for M secretly being pregnant with baby #2 and with a second book already in the works called “(fill in the blank)”


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> With COVID 19 and BLM taking taking over the headlines, of course ARCHEWELL isn’t going to get the attention it has planned, get ready instead for M secretly being pregnant with baby #2 and with a second book already in the works called “(fill in the blank)”



Yeah, they know they only have one shot at a launch. Right now there are so many more important issues and concerns than H&M’s very bland, not completely planned-out charity. I doubt there will be another baby however.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> *I can't wait to see what is their monetary contribution!*
> 
> *Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Postpone the Launch of Archewell Nonprofit*
> According to sources, the couple is currently focusing on supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, and coronavirus relief efforts.
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-postpone-140800433.html


Spare me the talks, just tell me how much $£ H&M have donate and how are they actually helping the relief of covid-19!!! Tell exactly what they are doing!!!


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> Spare me the talks, just tell me how much $£ H&M have donate and how are they actually helping the relief of covid-19!!! Tell exactly what they are doing!!!


Look, she gave a speech to some students at a private school, and delivered a couple of meals after she and Harry moved to L.A.  She’s really, really busy doing... you know... stuff.


----------



## Jayne1

What exactly did Jessica do (or write) - does anyone know?

I can't understand what was so horrible that she got fired from all her jobs.  No one is saying exactly what she did.

It seems like two women got into a fight as only women can do, but did Jessica actually go the racist route?


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> What exactly did Jessica do (or write) - does anyone know?
> 
> I can't understand what was so horrible that she got fired from all her jobs.  No one is saying exactly what she did.
> 
> It seems like two women got into a fight as only women can do, but did Jessica actually go the racist route?


This is what I understood, she criticized an influencer, publicly apologized for it, and then privately sent an email or message intimidating the influencer with a possible lawsuit...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

I don’t know why, but the whole Archewell Foundation makes me think of...


----------



## bellecate

I wonder if someone's head is exploding over not being mentioned?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> This is what I understood, she criticized an influencer, publicly apologized for it, and then privately sent an email or message intimidating the influencer with a possible lawsuit...


All she wrote was “that’s libel” and told her to be nice.

Still don’t understand, but I guess we have more important things to worry about.


----------



## lulilu

Jayne1 said:


> All she wrote was “that’s libel” and told her to be nice.
> 
> Still don’t understand, but I guess we have more important things to worry about.



JM threatened the influencer with talking to the companies who provided her with work.  It was way more than saying it's libel (which she spelled as liable).  It's all over twitter and easy to find.


----------



## PewPew

Jayne1 said:


> What exactly did Jessica do (or write) - does anyone know?
> 
> I can't understand what was so horrible that she got fired from all her jobs.  No one is saying exactly what she did.
> 
> It seems like two women got into a fight as only women can do, but did Jessica actually go the racist route?





Chanbal said:


> This is what I understood, she criticized an influencer, publicly apologized for it, and then privately sent an email or message intimidating the influencer with a possible lawsuit...



@Chanbal’s summary is my understanding as well. It’s a series of events that only started with a BLM discussion, so articles aren’t covering the whole story— It’s getting misrepresented for soundbites as just a casual lawsuit comment, or a racist slur or a women’s spat.

I don’t follow either woman, but have a good friend who was a stylist in Toronto who feels Jess’s career could have recovered more easily if she was just caught making a racist slur (there’s a celeb protocol now for how to apologize and get absolved when this happens).

** The issue that set off the industry is that she abused her position to “cancel” a small influencer’s career for merely saying that people should speak up on BLM. When caught out, Jess publicly apologized, while privately continuing to harass the blogger & threaten a lawsuit.
NOTE—
1) Saying “that’s libel” is a threat in this context, (not merely an attempt to educate someone about libel) when you’ve already acknowledged publicly that your target spoke the truth.
2) When your irate neighbor threatens a lawsuit, that’s easy to dismiss. You *must* take it seriously when it’s coming from someone who’s already told your sponsors to drop you, AND is an heiress, who’s at the top of her industry, is friends with country’s first lady, and is married to the former PM’s son. Even when she’s wrong, Jess can and will bankrupt you in legal fees before your case starts. She’s known for having an ace legal and PR team.

**For more background, since not everyone is familiar with them— Sasha Exeter is a black Canadian lifestyle blogger & former athlete, who had an instagram following around 30k. Jessica has been at the top of Canadian style & fashion as a stylist and commentator for 10+ yrs.

When Sasha made a post about Black Lives Matter, she remarked that she wished people with larger followings would speak up. Jess was NOT mentioned. Inexplicably, Jessica took this as a personal insult (perhaps bc she does view herself at the #1 NorthAmerican stylist) & started harassing Sasha privately via DM and texts, stating that she’d contacted brands who worked with Sasha in the past & they won’t work with her in the future. (Sasha is a single mom & blogging is her full time job, so these were concrete steps against her livelihood).

**When Sasha went public with screenshots of the threats, Jessica publicly apologized, and did not deny she’d sent the messages. She claimed she apologized privately. But in reality, she doubled down on the private harassment of Sasha, who has never called Jess a racist (her commentary focused in the fact that she was being unfairly threatened by someone in a very privileged position).

Shows are distancing themselves from her bc 1) people don’t  trust her public apologies & 2) being “likeable” and “relatable” are critical for a style & lifestyle guru


----------



## FreeSpirit71

poopsie said:


> That is painting with a broad brush, don't you think? Some people do and some people don't. And that is probably true of anywhere, not just the US. *Aren't countries all over the world loosening up? What do their people think?* Would that be equally interesting?


No, I don't think it's a broad brush or else I would have said that.

The common-sense approach in some countries where the Covid curve is actually flattening ie New Zealand and here (Australia) - yes we are loosening up restrictions. 

But countries where despite what the leaders say, cases are on the rise or the curve hasn't been flattened sufficiently? I wouldn't travel with my young child to those.


----------



## bisousx

PewPew said:


> @Chanbal’s summary is my understanding as well. It’s a series of events that only started with a BLM discussion, so articles aren’t covering the whole story— It’s getting misrepresented for soundbites as just a casual lawsuit comment, or a racist slur or a women’s spat.
> 
> I don’t follow either woman, but have a good friend who was a stylist in Toronto who feels Jess’s career could have recovered more easily if she was just caught making a racist slur (there’s a celeb protocol now for how to apologize and get absolved when this happens).
> 
> ** The issue that set off the industry is that she abused her position to “cancel” a small influencer’s career for merely saying that people should speak up on BLM. When caught out, Jess publicly apologized, while privately continuing to harass the blogger & threaten a lawsuit.
> NOTE—
> 1) Saying “that’s libel” is a threat in this context, (not merely an attempt to educate someone about libel) when you’ve already acknowledged publicly that your target spoke the truth.
> 2) When your irate neighbor threatens a lawsuit, that’s easy to dismiss. You *must* take it seriously when it’s coming from someone who’s already told your sponsors to drop you, AND is an heiress, who’s at the top of her industry, is friends with country’s first lady, and is married to the former PM’s son. Even when she’s wrong, Jess can and will bankrupt you in legal fees before your case starts. She’s known for having an ace legal and PR team.
> 
> **For more background, since not everyone is familiar with them— Sasha Exeter is a black Canadian lifestyle blogger & former athlete, who had an instagram following around 30k. Jessica has been at the top of Canadian style & fashion as a stylist and commentator for 10+ yrs.
> 
> When Sasha made a post about Black Lives Matter, she remarked that she wished people with larger followings would speak up. Jess was NOT mentioned. Inexplicably, Jessica took this as a personal insult (perhaps bc she does view herself at the #1 NorthAmerican stylist) & started harassing Sasha privately via DM and texts, stating that she’d contacted brands who worked with Sasha in the past & they won’t work with her in the future. (Sasha is a single mom & blogging is her full time job, so these were concrete steps against her livelihood).
> 
> **When Sasha went public with screenshots of the threats, Jessica publicly apologized, and did not deny she’d sent the messages. She claimed she apologized privately. But in reality, she doubled down on the private harassment of Sasha, who has never called Jess a racist (her commentary focused in the fact that she was being unfairly threatened by someone in a very privileged position).
> 
> Shows are distancing themselves from her bc 1) people don’t  trust her public apologies & 2) being “likeable” and “relatable” are critical for a style & lifestyle guru



Thanks for putting it in perspective. I’m not a big fan of today’s cancel culture but it sounds like Jessica was bullying Sasha with her power and privilege. Jessica seems downright nasty as a human being.

I didn’t understand the fuss at first either - it read to me like Jessica posted generic support for BLM on her IG and Sasha criticized Jessica on her page, and an argument ensued.

But for someone being on TV and relatively famous, you’d think Jessica would realize that people are watching and either agree, agree to disagree, not engage or seek advice from her PR team on how to reply.


----------



## lalame

Not sure if you saw this after Jessica's public "apology". This is from Sasha's instagram live. Jessica's a piece of work. Truly the self-entitlement speaks volumes. This is definitely egregious no matter what race the person is but it rings especially tone deaf at this time when companies and people have been trying to put more attention on black businesses... and this chick is trying to take one down for a random ass reason.



I don't know if it's racism exactly but it's definitely nasty. The response was so swift, I have to imagine she made a lot of enemies along the way and this event gave them an out to nix her. I'm sure her contracts have a "don't reflect badly on our brand" type of clause.


----------



## Twelve

How Sasha Exeter Unmasked Jessica Mulroney
					

Unpacking the shocking situation that led to Mulroney's downfall



					thekit.ca
				




Sasha spoke up on her IG and JM world started to fall apart. Have to listen  to her words to understand the whole event is NOT two people have a disagreement.


----------



## bag-mania

Once again Meghan is a little unclear about what the word “quietly” means. She has to make sure she gets publicity and credit in the media for each and every good deed.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Once again Meghan is a little unclear about what the word “quietly” means. She has to make sure she gets publicity and credit in the media for each and every good deed.
> 
> View attachment 4758165


she's desperately trying to stay relevant


----------



## Flatsy

It's important to note that what power Jessica Mulroney has is all because she was born into privilege (shoe empire heiress) and then married privilege (former Prime Minister's son with a famous last name).  And she was trying to end the career of a black woman who worked to get where she is and needs the income to support herself.  It was very much a demonstration of inherited white privilege being used intentionally to disenfranchise a black woman who had done absolutely nothing wrong.

I'm sure she's done it before to other women, but this was the wrong woman at the wrong time.  I don't think Meghan minded Jessica throwing her influence around and acting as gatekeeper to their little Toronto scene back when she decided Meghan was worthy of being made part of the club.  Because it doesn't sound like any of Jessica's behavior was out of character for her.


----------



## youngster

bisousx said:


> I didn’t understand the fuss at first either - it read to me like Jessica posted generic support for BLM on her IG and Sasha criticized Jessica on her page, and an argument ensued.
> 
> *But for someone being on TV and relatively famous, you’d think Jessica would realize that people are watching and either agree, agree to disagree, not engage or seek advice from her PR team on how to reply.*



Agree, it's amazing that people who make their living being in the public eye and who need to be _likeable_ make these kinds of mistakes over and over.  It's the risk of 24/7 social media. Sometimes you tweet or post before you think.  Once it's out there, it's out there and the public gets insight into someone's character in a way they never would have otherwise.  This isn't Jess Mulroney's first mis-step though and you'd think she would have learned a lesson from previous incidents.  Apparently not though.  She's a wolf who tries to dress herself up as a lamb but the wolf keeps breaking free.  OK, I really need some coffee as I don't know if that made any sense at all lol.


----------



## Jayne1

Flatsy said:


> It's important to note that what power Jessica Mulroney has is all because she was born into privilege (shoe empire heiress) and then married privilege (former Prime Minister's son with a famous last name).  And she was trying to end the career of a black woman who worked to get where she is and needs the income to support herself.  It was very much a demonstration of inherited white privilege being used intentionally to disenfranchise a black woman who had done absolutely nothing wrong.
> 
> I'm sure she's done it before to other women, but this was the wrong woman at the wrong time.  I don't think Meghan minded Jessica throwing her influence around and acting as gatekeeper to their little Toronto scene back when she decided Meghan was worthy of being made part of the club.  Because it doesn't sound like any of Jessica's behavior was out of character for her.


I don't know why it keeps getting reported in mainstream media that she's a shoe empire heiress (Browns Shoes) because she isn't. 

She's a niece of the Brownstein part of the family that owns Browns Shoes and worked there apparently, but since she's such a go-getter and married very well, she made a huge career for herself.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I don't know why it keeps getting reported in mainstream media that she's a shoe empire heiress (Browns Shoes) because she isn't.
> 
> She's a niece of the Brownstein part of the family that owns Browns Shoes and worked there apparently, but since she's such a go-getter and married very well, she made a huge career for herself.



It's because many of the people who pass themselves off as being journalists these days are lazy as hell. Why spend days or weeks doing research when you can just do a Google search and cobble a story together based on what you think you know?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> Agree, it's amazing that people who make their living being in the public eye and who need to be _likeable_ make these kinds of mistakes over and over.  It's the risk of 24/7 social media. Sometimes you tweet or post before you think.  Once it's out there, it's out there and the public gets insight into someone's character in a way they never would have otherwise.  This isn't Jess Mulroney's first mis-step though and you'd think she would have learned a lesson from previous incidents.  Apparently not though.  She's a wolf who tries to dress herself up as a lamb but the wolf keeps breaking free.  OK, I really need some coffee as I don't know if that made any sense at all lol.



The struggle is real when you're a nasty person who has to keep the nastiness behind closed doors lol.


----------



## Chagall

I’m not so sure Jessica married that well when she became the wife of Ben Mulroney. Bens father, the former PM Brian Mulroney left office in a cloud of controversy.


----------



## elle woods

Just saw this on a celebrity gossip site...


----------



## LaidyM

Flatsy said:


> It's important to note that what power Jessica Mulroney has is all because she was born into privilege (shoe empire heiress) and then married privilege (former Prime Minister's son with a famous last name).  And she was trying to end the career of a black woman who worked to get where she is and needs the income to support herself.  It was very much a demonstration of inherited white privilege being used intentionally to disenfranchise a black woman who had done absolutely nothing wrong.
> 
> I'm sure she's done it before to other women, but this was the wrong woman at the wrong time.  I don't think Meghan minded Jessica throwing her influence around and acting as gatekeeper to their little Toronto scene back when she decided Meghan was worthy of being made part of the club.  Because it doesn't sound like any of Jessica's behavior was out of character for her.



This. All of this plus more.
This is not the first time Jessica has used her privilege to attack and try to destroy other people.
Meghan was all too Happy and okay to be part of that club because that’s who she is too!


Lainey has posted her article about the topic, and it is not Jessica friendly. And also touches a bit on Meghan.

I’m lazy to copy the article and parts of it, but I recommend reading it. I never knew Lainey can be a thoughtful writer.
Miracles never cease to exist.









						How Jessica Mulroney used white privilege and white fragility against Sasha Exeter
					

How Jessica Mulroney used white privilege and white fragility against Sasha Exeter and how so many around her are paying the price for her actions




					www.laineygossip.com


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Agree, it's amazing that people who make their living being in the public eye and who need to be _likeable_ make these kinds of mistakes over and over.  It's the risk of 24/7 social media. Sometimes you tweet or post before you think.  Once it's out there, it's out there and the public gets insight into someone's character in a way they never would have otherwise.  This isn't Jess Mulroney's first mis-step though and you'd think she would have learned a lesson from previous incidents.  Apparently not though.  She's a wolf who tries to dress herself up as a lamb but the wolf keeps breaking free.  OK, I really need some coffee as I don't know if that made any sense at all lol.


*THIS!!!! * I'll admit, I'm not a huge fan of Twitter and other Social media, but one thing learned many years ago, is when you have to write (or speak) at/on a public level, you choose your words/verbiage VERY carefully!   Every time I see a celebrity (or others) write crap on these mediums, I just shake my head as in 'HOW STUPID CAN YOU BE'??? 

IMO .. Jessica looks like your typical entitled "mean-girl" and quite honestly, I could totally see her and Meghan bonding in that regards.  Even though Meghan wants to portray herself as the "poor - hardship" girl, she was by all means an entitled "princess" growing up .. and so, she probably saw how Jessica operated (re: business) and realized that she could "learn" from that (just like Meghan has used so many others).  Of course, now that everything has transpired, I'm sure Jessica will be "markled"!


----------



## scarlet555

elle woods said:


> Just saw this on a celebrity gossip site...
> View attachment 4758317



This is pretty sad, what is wrong with M and her camp to make such dumb claim! Liza probably doesn't want to cut her ties with the BRF.  It's so pathetic, Liza never even met them!  OMG.


----------



## bisousx

Meghan and Jessica sure do share the same habit of tearing down anyone critical of their actions. Two apples falling from the same narc tree.


----------



## 1LV

Doria and TRF must be mortified on a regular basis.


----------



## PewPew

“Quietly” is their PR’s teams post-Megxit buzzword to spread positive news about H&M to rehab their reputation without seeming self-serving. This is something it took them months to learn after tone-deaf posts during early Covid events.

Now they wait a few days to a week to leak info about any “public yet secret” act of humanitarianism. (They’ll rightly be called out as self-serving if they leaked on the day of the staged events, during all that’s occurring in the world.) It worked for the general public in the US, but even here where most people don’t follow them, people are getting fed up & it sometimes backfires like their “secret” quiet faux-pap walk of a few meal deliveries which required Megan to reveal herself sans mask, and quietly needed a Caravan of 4 SUVs, a luxury car and 2 dogs to walk 2 blocks. (PR leaked footage edited to look like security cameras images), but they often overdo it (like living on a large property, but having to walk their dogs while delivering a few meals...secretly, but with an entourage and press team)

It’s hard for the public to buy quiet, “anonymous” endeavors that are explicitly done in their son’s name (non-anonymously) or Diana’s honor. It’s great to do things for your son, but own what your doing. And good PR for Archie also helps the Archwell brand.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> “Quietly” is their PR’s teams post-Megxit buzzword to spread positive news about H&M to rehab their reputation without seeming self-serving. This is something it took them months to learn after tone-deaf posts during early Covid events.
> 
> Now they wait a few days to a week to leak info about any “public yet secret” act of humanitarianism. (They’ll rightly be called out as self-serving if they leaked on the day of the staged events, during all that’s occurring in the world.) It worked for the general public in the US, but even here where most people don’t follow them, people are getting fed up & it sometimes backfires like their “secret” quiet coupel of meal deliveries which required a Caravan of 4 SUVs, a luxury car and dogs to walk 2 blocks. (PR leaked footage edited to look like security cameras images), but they often overdo it (like living on a large property, but having to walk their dogs while delivering a few meals...secretly, but with an entourage and press team)
> 
> It’s hard for the public to buy quiet, “anonymous” endeavors that are often explicitly done in their son’s name (non-anonymously) or Diana’s honor.


and as has been pointed out here before, they aren't kids....she's going on 40 years old.  pretty stupid situation they have put themselves in IMO.  She went from being a low level basic cable supporting actress to being one of the most famous and admired women in the world.  but it was too much bother to try to fit into the situation she inserted herself into. 

 and him - born a prince, pretty much handed everything.  and he just throws it all away because why? some of the British tabloids were "mean" to his bride?  no one asked her how she was feeling?  how are they feeling now?  desperate I think.

have no idea how this will play out.  seems the two likeliest scenarios would be they return to the royals.  or he returns to the family and she is a rich American divorcee.  I just don't see them succeeding with this pandemic and everything else that's going on.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> have no idea how this will play out.  seems the two likeliest scenarios would be they return to the royals.  or he returns to the family and she is a rich American divorcee.  I just don't see them succeeding with this pandemic and everything else that's going on.



Sometimes I feel as you do, that their marriage is a timebomb ready to explode. Other times I think they might stick together for the long haul. They feed each other's egos. They were both spoiled as children and they both grew up believing they were important and special. I'm not sure what would turn them against each other, especially since they don't have anybody else in their lives but Archie.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> I’m not so sure Jessica married that well when she became the wife of Ben Mulroney. Bens father, the former PM Brian Mulroney left office in a cloud of controversy.


That's true. But to those who don't know the politics, and most non-Canadians, Ben is the son of a former prime minister and that's all they know or care about. Plus Brian made a fortune, so they're a wealthy family.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Sometimes I feel as you do, that their marriage is a timebomb ready to explode. Other times I think they might stick together for the long haul. They feed each other's egos. They were both spoiled as children and they both grew up believing they were important and special. I'm not sure what would turn them against each other, especially since they don't have anybody else in their lives but Archie.


God, that has to be tiring though .. think about it.  While I love my HB dearly, there are times when he drives me NUTS and as such, I thank god that I have a good amount of friends that I can talk to (and prior to COVID - meet up with)!  The only person she "has" is her mother, and Doria has a life of her own (I still don't believe for 1 word that she's living with them .. why would she want to be a full-on "nanny")!?!  

Yes, for the time being, I think they do feed each other's egos .. but sometimes the tables turn; at what point will either one of their "entitlements" foster a feeling of resent for the other one?  Just a matter of time IMO ..


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> Sometimes I feel as you do, that their marriage is a timebomb ready to explode. Other times I think they might stick together for the long haul. They feed each other's egos. They were both spoiled as children and they both grew up believing they were important and special. I'm not sure what would turn them against each other, especially since they don't have anybody else in their lives but Archie.


I think money will be the big issue. 

 If PC doesn't keep those checks rolling in (with an acceptable dollar amount) all bets are off.
I don't think M would hesitate  to divorce  in exchange for a sizeable settlement.
It's all about control with her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Sometimes I feel as you do, that their marriage is a timebomb ready to explode. Other times I think they might stick together for the long haul. They feed each other's egos. They were both spoiled as children and they both grew up believing they were important and special. I'm not sure what would turn them against each other, especially since they don't have anybody else in their lives but Archie.


but if their plans don't work to become independently wealthy, then what?  will Charles keep sending them money if they want to stay in the US?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Yes, for the time being, I think they do feed each other's egos .. but sometimes the tables turn; at what point will either one of their "entitlements" foster a feeling of resent for the other one?  Just a matter of time IMO ..



It could conceivably go on indefinitely. Look at Kim and Kanye. They are poster children for being celebrity narcissists and yet they have been married for six years now. Granted their relationship is anything but normal but they have somehow managed to make it work in a way that makes sense to them. I don't think any of us here thought they'd last even two years.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> but if their plans don't work to become independently wealthy, then what?  will Charles keep sending them money if they want to stay in the US?


Another question might be will Charles continue sending money to keep them in the US?  Some adult children are easier to love from afar.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> I think money will be the big issue.
> 
> If PC doesn't keep those checks rolling in (with an acceptable dollar amount) all bets are off.
> I don't think M would hesitate  to divorce  in exchange for a sizeable settlement.
> It's all about control with her.


yes, she didn't marry him because he's so cute or so intelligent for that matter.....don't care if some people want to believe it was a love match but there is no way him being a prince wasn't a huge part of the attraction for her.....they wouldn't last long as a poor working couple


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> I think money will be the big issue.
> 
> If PC doesn't keep those checks rolling in (with an acceptable dollar amount) all bets are off.
> I don't think M would hesitate  to divorce  in exchange for a sizeable settlement.
> It's all about control with her.





sdkitty said:


> but if their plans don't work to become independently wealthy, then what?  will Charles keep sending them money if they want to stay in the US?



It comes down to the money, doesn't it? Frankly, I don't see Harry initiating a divorce under any circumstances. I think Meghan will continue to keep her viselike grip on him. The only thing that would make her let go would be if she thought she could do better with someone else. But at her age and with her reputation, I don't see any billionaires signing on for the headache.


----------



## sdkitty

I'd love to see the two of them living in a US median income of $63K


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> God, that has to be tiring though .. think about it.  While I love my HB dearly, there are times when he drives me NUTS and as such, I thank god that I have a good amount of friends that I can talk to (and prior to COVID - meet up with)!  The only person she "has" is her mother, and Doria has a life of her own (I still don't believe for 1 word that she's living with them .. why would she want to be a full-on "nanny")!?!
> 
> Yes, for the time being, I think they do feed each other's egos .. but sometimes the tables turn; at what point will either one of their "entitlements" foster a feeling of resent for the other one?  Just a matter of time IMO ..



*"at what point will either one of their "entitlements" foster a feeling of resent for the other one?  Just a matter of time IMO .." *
I could see JHarry at some point feeling resentment and turn around and blame Megain for all he's lost.


----------



## gracekelly

From Lady CC's book:

At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.  

Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.  

So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.


----------



## bag-mania

^So it was basically what we thought many months ago. Meghan kept saying she wanted to do all the work involved with having the title, but she never really intended to do it. Again she proves she was and is all talk with zero follow through.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> From Lady CC's book:
> 
> At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.
> 
> Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.
> 
> So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.


Again!  she is 40 years old.....acting like a spoiled brat


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> ^So it was basically what we thought many months ago. Meghan kept saying she wanted to do all the work involved with having the title, but she never really intended to do it. Again she proves she was and is all talk with zero follow through.


Part of this doesn't make sense to me, not that I am disputing it.  The part I don't get is that she likes to be fawned over and I would bet there was plenty of attention shown to her since the wedding was only a few days prior.  You would think that she would want to stick around if only for that.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> From Lady CC's book:
> 
> At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.
> 
> Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.
> 
> So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.


I just might read that book!


----------



## gracekelly

The person who tattled to Lady C was probably one of those old timers who was brought up to do your duty whether you enjoyed it or not.  I attended many a meeting with the DH when I had to smile my way through and make small talk because he was a featured speaker or on the committee etc.   It won't kill you.  In this case, this was a job that paid you a salary for lack of a better description.  Did she think the travel, house and the pretty clothes and the attention came for free?


----------



## PewPew

sdkitty said:


> I'd love to see the two of them living in a US median income of $63K



Haha they’d need 2+ yrs salary after taxes to pay for her dresses like her pregnancy kaftan, worn for 2 hrs to an event


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> That's true. But to those who don't know the politics, and most non-Canadians, Ben is the son of a former prime minister and that's all they know or care about. Plus Brian made a fortune, so they're a wealthy family.


Yes, Brian Mulroney did end up very wealthy. I guess what most of us have a problem with is how he ended up that way.


----------



## opensesame

I’m not into the Royal Affairs, but I was appalled when this couple said that they want to become financially independent through a charity organization. They plan to earn millions by managing a charity organizations? Whoa, what a plan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## slang

Chagall said:


> Yes, Brian Mulroney did end up very wealthy. I guess what most of us have a problem with is how he ended up that way.



YES! and let’s not forget Jessica wasn’t some go-getter who was taking the world by storm before she met MM. She worked for the Bay in their marketing dept hired when they put a Kleinfelds to market their bridal department. She occasionally did spots on local Toronto morning shows to promote them.
It was only after her husband Ben “announced“ on his gossip entertainment show that Jessica helped style Sophie Trudeau did people start to call her a celebrity stylist....then of course MM came along and Jessica‘s star started to rise.....


----------



## gracekelly

opensesame said:


> I’m not into the Royal Affairs, but I was appalled when this couple said that they want to become financially independent through a charity organization. They plan to earn millions by managing a charity organizations? Whoa, what a plan.


Back when I was a teenager, my mother was roped into working for a cancer research charity by a woman who was in her bridge group.  A man who lived in our community, was the comptroller.  My father always thought that the guy was somewhat shady and took a dim view of him.  To shorten the story, it turned out that the charity was a sham.  The friend of my mother who roped her into it was having an affair with the scientific guy who was working on the cure and he was in cahoots with the comptroller and they took off with the money. The woman's husband sued for divorce when it all came out.   So bottom line and my simplistic take , a charity will only be a source of income for you if you intend to scam people.  Good luck with that Harkles.

BTW, that episode totally soured my mom on ever doing any charity work.  She was happy to give to national and well known charities, but that was it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spoiled brats indeed. 
She has already been through 2 (?) husbands/relationships and has adopted each man’s religion. H himself has had numerous relationships, so what’s one more? When she did not get to wear her preferred tiara, it sank in exactly what kind of hierarchy she married. There are rules that she was required to follow which apparently were not to her liking, especially knowing she would never be queen.

My guess is once Arche is school age, he is shipped off to boarding school and eventually H&M split. H goes to Africa, supports his charities, reconnects with Diana’s brother, few to none royal duties.  Due to Andrew’s issues, this 6th in line is kept far away from the real Royal functions and businesses. The Queen has learned some tough lessons with her own family and will not want Charles to relive those.   M stays in LA, gets a nominal settlement (like Fergie), writes books, starts websites, and becomes even more irrelevant. She may do a soul-searching tour like Fergie did with Oprah. Several duchesses have flown off, done their own thing, and have claimed to be quite happy. This stuff is nothing new for the royals. Anyone unwilling to follow is happily let go. The people individually are not that important. It is the big picture that counts. 




gracekelly said:


> Part of this doesn't make sense to me, not that I am disputing it.  The part I don't get is that she likes to be fawned over and I would bet there was plenty of attention shown to her since the wedding was only a few days prior.  You would think that she would want to stick around if only for that.


----------



## gracekelly

PewPew said:


> Haha they’d need 2+ yrs salary after taxes to pay for her dresses like her pregnancy kaftan, worn for 2 hrs to an event


To this day, I am stupefied by the amounts reported for some of her dresses.  I just can't believe......


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> Yes, Brian Mulroney did end up very wealthy. I guess what most of us have a problem with is how he ended up that way.


Agree.


slang said:


> YES! and let’s not forget Jessica wasn’t some go-getter who was taking the world by storm before she met MM. She worked for the Bay in their marketing dept hired when they put a Kleinfelds to market their bridal department. She occasionally did spots on local Toronto morning shows to promote them.
> It was only after her husband Ben “announced“ on his gossip entertainment show that Jessica helped style Sophie Trudeau did people start to call her a celebrity stylist....then of course MM came along and Jessica‘s star started to rise.....


Yes... I think when I said she was a go-getter, I meant she was always slogging through until she hit the big time.


----------



## lalame

PewPew said:


> Haha they’d need 2+ yrs salary after taxes to pay for her dresses like her pregnancy kaftan, worn for 2 hrs to an event



Fyi, the designer (Lisa Marie Fernandez) has a current collection at Target right now. 

I wasn't super floored by how much her outfits cost... designer clothes are just expensive. I think that about nearly everything sold on Net-a-Porter! I'm more amazed when "normal" non-public people wear clothing that expensive.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Part of this doesn't make sense to me, not that I am disputing it.  The part I don't get is that she likes to be fawned over and I would bet there was plenty of attention shown to her since the wedding was only a few days prior.  You would think that she would want to stick around if only for that.



My guess is she was not being fawned over by the attendees at the party. They were there for Charles, not her. It’s possible most of them were too old to be interesting to her and therefore not worth her time or effort.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> Haha they’d need 2+ yrs salary after taxes to pay for her dresses like her pregnancy kaftan, worn for 2 hrs to an event


how about she goes and finds cute clothes at Nordsroms Rack or TJ Maxx and posts them on her blog?  or goes shopping for food on a budget - lots of rice and beans....now that would be entertainment


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Part of this doesn't make sense to me, not that I am disputing it.  The part I don't get is that she likes to be fawned over and I would bet there was plenty of attention shown to her since the wedding was only a few days prior.  You would think that she would want to stick around if only for that.


.. and see, I can TOTALLY see this .. given the information that my friends have told me about Meghan.  Regardless of her age (coming close to now 40), she still seems to act (using that term lightly here) like she was before .. in her "princess" entitlement stage of teens/early 20's.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> My guess is she was not being fawned over by the attendees at the party. They were there for Charles, not her. It’s possible most of them were too old to be interesting to her and therefore not worth her time or effort.


In the GP video, it looked like many people were thrilled to speak with her and one gave her a gift.  It wasn't enough....


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> In the GP video, it looked like many people were thrilled to speak with her and one gave her a gift.  It wasn't enough....



I’ve got nothing then. Maybe she’s got to be in just the right mood to be fussed over. High maintenance.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I’ve got nothing then. Maybe she’s got to be in just the right mood to be fussed over. High maintenance.


head case?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, very high maintenance. 
At the GP, she was not the center of attention. She was off to the side. Her ego/neurosis/whatever cannot take being in the background. She m.u.s.t. be center stage. Always.  This is why she tugs on H when he tries to take the center.  At the GP, she stuck out her tongue to gain the attention. Just re-watch a few videos, even her teenage ones — notice how she makes certain to be the center. Yes, it is obnoxious, ridiculous, annoying, etc. Still, it is who she is.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, very high maintenance.
> At the GP, she was not the center of attention. She was off to the side. Her ego/neurosis/whatever cannot take being in the background. She m.u.s.t. be center stage. Always.  This is why she tugs on H when he tries to take the center.  At the GP, she stuck out her tongue to gain the attention. Just re-watch a few videos, even her teenage ones — notice how she makes certain to be the center. Yes, it is obnoxious, ridiculous, annoying, etc. Still, it is who she is.


if that is the case, then sadly it seems Harry made a big mistake by marrying her (and I think he did)


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> if that is the case, then sadly it seems Harry made a big mistake by marrying her (and I think he did)



Lots of celebrities are that way which probably explains why they love the spotlight. H himself is like that. Being the youngest, rumor is that H was able to get away with stuff that William couldn’t. With her, it could be she really did not understand the royal protocol. Since she knew H didn’t intend to stay royal, she wasn’t really interested in adapting. I just wish they would pay back the huge sums they took. As others have said, for many reasons, these two deserve each other.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lots of celebrities are that way which probably explains why they love the spotlight. H himself is like that. Being the youngest, rumor is that H was able to get away with stuff that William couldn’t. With her, it could be she really did not understand the royal protocol. Since she knew H didn’t intend to stay royal, she wasn’t really interested in adapting. I just wish they would pay back the huge sums they took. As others have said, for many reasons, these two deserve each other.


we don't really know H didn't intend to stay royal, do we?  that's one version.....what a mess.  and yet they still have a lot of fans and the american media won't say anything negative about them.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry and Meghan's British Columbia stay cost Canadian taxpayers more than $40,000 USD after the couple fled to Canada in wake of Megxit, according to RCMP documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. 

The cost of protecting the couple during their two month stay came to $56,384.52 Canadian dollars, or more than $40,000 US dollars. 

Harry and Meghan's security and who will pay for it has been a subject of much debate. In March it was reported that the couple had left Canada to set up home in California and they are now living at tycoon Tyler Perry's mansion in Los Angeles.

The figures, obtained by Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a taxpayer advocacy group, show the cost between November 18, 2019 and January 19 this year; it does not include fees after that. 

And the bill does not include the salaries paid to the Mounties; it shows extra costs including overtime, travel and meals. 

Policing for the couple is understood to have continued until March 14. In a statement a spokesman for the RCMP said: 'For security reasons and to protect our operations, we are not releasing salary costs. Security costs for protection are covered through the existing operational budget. 

But National Division commanding officer Bernadine Chapman wrote in emails on January 10: 'We are having a greater conversation next week on the go forward on this. This has a potential to cost us huge!' 

Harry and Meghan's decision to move to California came following the news the Canadian authorities would not contribute to the cost of protecting them with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police after March 31.   

It is unclear who is paying for their security bill in the US, though friends of the Sussexes say the couple would be paying for protecting out of their own pocket.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> we don't really know H didn't intend to stay royal, do we?  that's one version.....what a mess.  and yet they still have a lot of fans and the american media won't say anything negative about them.



Not sure if these can be ‘trusted’. They all say the same thing. In an interview with Angela Levin, June 2017, H said he wanted out because the press revealed his military location, etc.
https://www.thecut.com/2020/01/how-long-has-prince-harry-wanted-out-of-royal-life.html

https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...hat-people-think-faked-their-own-deaths.html/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4636038/I-wanted-confesses-Harry-reluctant-prince.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing it’s Prince Charles paying. Maybe this article will put pressure on them to own it. 




bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4758846
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's British Columbia stay cost Canadian taxpayers more than $40,000 USD after the couple fled to Canada in wake of Megxit, according to RCMP documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
> 
> The cost of protecting the couple during their two month stay came to $56,384.52 Canadian dollars, or more than $40,000 US dollars.
> 
> Harry and Meghan's security and who will pay for it has been a subject of much debate. In March it was reported that the couple had left Canada to set up home in California and they are now living at tycoon Tyler Perry's mansion in Los Angeles.
> 
> The figures, obtained by Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a taxpayer advocacy group, show the cost between November 18, 2019 and January 19 this year; it does not include fees after that.
> 
> And the bill does not include the salaries paid to the Mounties; it shows extra costs including overtime, travel and meals.
> 
> Policing for the couple is understood to have continued until March 14. In a statement a spokesman for the RCMP said: 'For security reasons and to protect our operations, we are not releasing salary costs. Security costs for protection are covered through the existing operational budget.
> 
> But National Division commanding officer Bernadine Chapman wrote in emails on January 10: 'We are having a greater conversation next week on the go forward on this. This has a potential to cost us huge!'
> 
> Harry and Meghan's decision to move to California came following the news the Canadian authorities would not contribute to the cost of protecting them with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police after March 31.
> 
> It is unclear who is paying for their security bill in the US, though friends of the Sussexes say the couple would be paying for protecting out of their own pocket.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing it’s Prince Charles paying. Maybe this article will put pressure on them to own it.


Doubt it................you can't shame the shameless


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> From Lady CC's book:
> 
> At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.
> 
> Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.
> 
> So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.



While I was hoping for something more outrageous, was this woman raised by wolves? She still acts like the spoiled little girl. My neighbours' 10yo while he was chatting with us from the street grabbed his hand and said "Dad, I want to leave NOW" and I thought she was too old for that sh*t!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Part of this doesn't make sense to me, not that I am disputing it.  The part I don't get is that she likes to be fawned over and I would bet there was plenty of attention shown to her since the wedding was only a few days prior.  You would think that she would want to stick around if only for that.



True, but maybe they didn't fawn enough, after all she was not the main person and there were other important people in attendance.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The person who tattled to Lady C was probably one of those old timers who was brought up to do your duty whether you enjoyed it or not.  I attended many a meeting with the DH when I had to smile my way through and make small talk because he was a featured speaker or on the committee etc.   It won't kill you.  In this case, this was a job that paid you a salary for lack of a better description.  Did she think the travel, house and the pretty clothes and the attention came for free?



Girl, you are just not as special as MM. She deserves the luxuries just because.


----------



## ic_locon

QueenofWrapDress said:


> While I was hoping for something more outrageous, was this woman raised by wolves? She still acts like the spoiled little girl. My neighbours' 10yo while he was chatting with us from the street grabbed his hand and said "Dad, I want to leave NOW" and I thought she was too old for that sh*t!



I LOL that MM is compared to a 10 year old!


----------



## ic_locon

gracekelly said:


> From Lady CC's book:
> 
> At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.
> 
> Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.
> 
> So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.



As a new in-law, you should be on your best behavior and try to win your  husband’s family over, even if it takes years. 
And this was the 70th Birthday Party of the man who generously offered to walk you down the aisle as his daughter! I really cannot fathom the gall of MM!


----------



## ic_locon

bag-mania said:


> ^So it was basically what we thought many months ago. Meghan kept saying she wanted to do all the work involved with having the title, but she never really intended to do it. Again she proves she was and is all talk with zero follow through.



I’m beginning to think that MM is actually the lazy one, compared to KM. I mean what has she actually done since they left the UK for Canada last year?! And to think they said she wakes up at 4AM?! Doing what exactly?!


----------



## csshopper

1. she probably scoped the crowd, realized she wasn’t the main attraction, there wasn’t anyone there she could “use”  and

2. nobody asked “how are you?”

So it was a waste of HER time.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I'd imagine MM is one of those people if they are not the centre of the attention at a party then it's a boring party. Narssicist at its core.


----------



## LibbyRuth

ic_locon said:


> I’m beginning to think that MM is actually the lazy one, compared to KM. I mean what has she actually done since they left the UK for Canada last year?! And to think they said she wakes up at 4AM?! Doing what exactly?!



My money is on 90 minutes of yoga, then reading her press to figure out who is against her. Then some play time with Archie followed by calling friends to determine who is still loyal and ask them to contact press outlets and refute any stories she doesn't like.  Then more yoga.  It's a busy day!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Honestly, the garden party does look boring, but it was her job to go and smile and say hello to people that were excited to meet her, so she should have done so gracefully.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

LibbyRuth said:


> My money is on 90 minutes of yoga, then reading her press to figure out who is against her. Then some play time with Archie followed by calling friends to determine who is still loyal and ask them to contact press outlets and refute any stories she doesn't like.  Then more yoga.  It's a busy day!



And toiling over making avocado toast perfection


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lots of celebrities are that way which probably explains why they love the spotlight. H himself is like that. Being the youngest, rumor is that H was able to get away with stuff that William couldn’t. With her, it could be she really did not understand the royal protocol. Since she knew H didn’t intend to stay royal, she wasn’t really interested in adapting. I just wish they would pay back the huge sums they took. As others have said, for many reasons, these two deserve each other.


I would say that is more true (the attention seeking) for celebs who don't have real talent.  People who are famous for being famous.  I guess these two would fit that description.  He is famous due to the family he happened to be born into.  She is a minor league actress/former suitcase girl.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Honestly, the garden party does look boring, but it was her job to go and smile and say hello to people that were excited to meet her, so she should have done so gracefully.



She consistently showed during her brief stint as duchess that she only liked doing the fun events. Visiting the residents at a nursing home or being at a ribbon-cutting for a new school weren’t the kind of things that were worth her time. She didn’t personally benefit from events like those. Now if the guest list for the garden party had been celebrity A-listers you can bet she would have been out there working the room like a politician.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Girl, you are just not as special as MM. She deserves the luxuries just because.






ic_locon said:


> As a new in-law, you should be on your best behavior and try to win your  husband’s family over, even if it takes years.
> And this was the 70th Birthday Party of the man who generously offered to walk you down the aisle as his daughter! I really cannot fathom the gall of MM!



Entitled ungrateful. and not smart since he will be paying your bills. 


csshopper said:


> 1. she probably scoped the crowd, realized she wasn’t the main attraction, there wasn’t anyone there she could “use”  and
> 
> 2. nobody asked “how are you?”
> 
> So it was a waste of HER time.



Spot on!  Nobody there to ask for voiceover work.


----------



## gracekelly

Time for someone to mention that others in the family, work harder at putting up with the “boredom” of attending a GP.   The York girls do this and this is part of the allowance their father gives them the same as the allowance that Prince Charles gives to the Sussex.   I don’t hear them complaining, or the Wessex or any of the other assorted relatives in The Firm who show up.   They are representatives of the family and it is their job.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> From Lady CC's book:
> 
> At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.
> 
> Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.
> 
> So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.


and by harry responding the way he did shows he did understand his role - but she wasn't buying it...and apparently she rules


----------



## limom

If this story is indeed true, it reflects poorly on her upbringing, Imho.
Especially as someone who went thru a catholic education, where is her manners?


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> If this story is indeed true, it reflects poorly on her upbringing, Imho.
> Especially as someone who went thru a catholic education, where is her manners?


apparently she is a spoiled brat and possibly a narcissist....guess the nuns could only do so much

It would be interesting to know more about her parenting.  why did Doria seemingly give over responsibility to the dad?  was it because she couldn't handle M?  because M wanted to be with her dad and go onto the set of Married with Children?  
In any case (and I admit I'm not a parent) it would seem Thomas was maybe enamoured with her cuteness and also busy working.  so when you're busy (or unequipped) it's easier to give in to a child rather than teach and discipline them.  so he seemingly has reaped what he sowed (along with his ex)


----------



## Sharont2305

Seeing as Prince Charles and Camilla, and William have done a public engagement today, I wonder how long it'll be before a "source" will disclose something to upstage them.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and by harry responding the way he did shows he did understand his role - but she wasn't buying it...and apparently she rules


That day she did not.  On the whole, they were told to leave.  Harry understood that they had to stay and told her that twice according to the report.  I think the minders were afraid of a scene with her insistence that they leave, so they suggested to Prince Charles that it would be wisest to let them go.  I always thought she looked upset in the car after they left.  I suppose that even though she wanted to leave. being told by PC to do so took her by surprise.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Seeing as Prince Charles and Camilla, and William have done a public engagement today, I wonder how long it'll be before a "source" will disclose something to upstage them.


Well there was an internet story from a dodgy source that states that if the marriage busts up, Archie may have to remain in the US because this is where he was being raised.  Sounds like a threat to me.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Time for someone to mention that others in the family, work harder at putting up with the “boredom” of attending a GP.   The York girls do this and this is part of the allowance their father gives them the same as the allowance that Prince Charles gives to the Sussex.   I don’t hear them complaining, or the Wessex or any of the other assorted relatives in The Firm who show up.   They are representatives of the family and it is their job.


HERE, HERE .. 100% SPOT ON!!!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> That day she did not.  On the whole, they were told to leave.  Harry understood that they had to stay and told her that twice according to the report.  I think the minders were afraid of a scene with her insistence that they leave, so they suggested to Prince Charles that it would be wisest to let them go.  I always thought she looked upset in the car after they left.  I suppose that even though she wanted to leave. being told by PC to do so took her by surprise.


that day she didn't get her way but it wasn't due to Harry asserting himself....it was charles


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> If this story is indeed true, it reflects poorly on her upbringing, Imho.
> Especially as someone who went thru a catholic education, whe_re is her manners?
> _



Sorry, but I had to laugh at this .. I was 13 years-old when I informed my parents that I NEVER intended on going to Church again, no less go to the Catholic High School!!  Some of the [ahem] _"most dutiful_" patrons were the *WORST* people I have ever met, and what they did to others (_e.g., cheat/steal, have affairs, very "unchristian" behavior_) was outrageous!  I had plenty of friends in the Catholic High School, and the stories that they used to tell about various folks and goings-on??? .. well, it was like a High School Soap Opera (_and sometimes I wish I had gone there to hear all the drama .. not that I ever wanted to participate in that though_)!!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that day she didn't get her way but it wasn't due to Harry asserting himself....it was charles


Yes, Prince Charles told Harry that they had to leave, but when she first indicated to Harry that she was bored and wanted to leave, Harry  told her that they had to stay and told her why X 2.  That may have been the first and last time in their marriage when he was able to put his foot down.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Well there was an internet story from a dodgy source that states that if the marriage busts up, Archie may have to remain in the US because this is where he was being raised.  Sounds like a threat to me.


Really? .. I've never heard that one!  Gosh .. this reminds me of my brother-in-law's family and his 2 daughters with the ex-wife.  They were both SO INDULDGED as children that they turned out as major-league brats.  Needless to say, most of the family really didn't want to bother with them.  Come a few summers ago, when the eldest gets married .. guess what was going on??  Well, the mother (BIL's ex) had so smothered them as kids that they got so sick of it that they (in essence) 'divorced' her .. and simply would not do/agree with anything that she wanted.  The BIL's current wife ran "the show"!  Others that didn't know the family (and the dynamics) that well were .. well, rather "surprised" .. not my HB nor I, we figured it was just a matter of time before those 2 girls said "enough"!  This could potentially happen with Archie; some kids do not like an overbearing mother and then, as they grow up, it's "see 'ya Mom"!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> if that is the case, then sadly it seems Harry made a big mistake by marrying her (and I think he did)


I wonder if he already realized his mistake.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Sorry, but I had to laugh at this .. I was 13 years-old when I informed my parents that I NEVER intended on going to Church again, no less go to the Catholic High School!!  Some of the [ahem] _"most dutiful_" patrons were the *WORST* people I have ever met, and what they did to others (_e.g., cheat/steal, have affairs, very "unchristian" behavior_) was outrageous!  I had plenty of friends in the Catholic High School, and the stories that they used to tell about various folks and goings-on??? .. well, it was like a High School Soap Opera (_and sometimes I wish I had gone there to hear all the drama .. not that I ever wanted to participate in that though_)!!


my BIL was sent to Catholic school (HS I think).  He was so embittered he now wants Nothing to do with the church.  would not even baptize his babies, which made my Irish mother sad.


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> Sorry, but I had to laugh at this .. I was 13 years-old when I informed my parents that I NEVER intended on going to Church again, no less go to the Catholic High School!!  Some of the [ahem] _"most dutiful_" patrons were the *WORST* people I have ever met, and what they did to others (_e.g., cheat/steal, have affairs, very "unchristian" behavior_) was outrageous!  I had plenty of friends in the Catholic High School, and the stories that they used to tell about various folks and goings-on??? .. well, it was like a High School Soap Opera (_and sometimes I wish I had gone there to hear all the drama .. not that I ever wanted to participate in that though_)!!


Really?
I was taught how to behave in public.
So was my son.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Yes, Prince Charles told Harry that they had to leave, but when she first indicated to Harry that she was bored and wanted to leave, Harry  told her that they had to stay and told her why X 2.  That may have been the first and last time in their marriage when he was able to put his foot down.


And this after he stepped in and gave her an ultimate starring role on a world stage, the dapper future King Of England as her down the aisle escort. At the VERY least gratitude should have caused her to suck it up at his Birthday Party even if she was bored to tears. 

This seems to support the theory they were already planning at this point to Mexit, so why “waste” time.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> That day she did not.  On the whole, they were told to leave.  Harry understood that they had to stay and told her that twice according to the report.  I think the minders were afraid of a scene with her insistence that they leave, so they suggested to Prince Charles that it would be wisest to let them go.  I always thought she looked upset in the car after they left.  I suppose that even though she wanted to leave. being told by PC to do so took her by surprise.


And this, only 4 or 5 days after they married


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Really?
> I was taught how to behave in public.
> So was my son.


lilmom excuse me for asking but what does your avatar represent?  a masked woman, holding - what?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> And this after he stepped in and gave her an ultimate starring role on a world stage, the dapper future King Of England as her down the aisle escort. At the VERY least gratitude should have caused her to suck it up at his Birthday Party even if she was bored to tears.
> 
> This seems to support the theory they were already planning at this point to Mexit, so why “waste” time.


I think the reason she was 'bored' was because she was not the center of attention at the GP. Attitudes like the one at the GP were what forced the Mexit imo. I don't think they planned anything apart of enjoying the perks of being 'royals' living between LA and London. 

The Queen surprised them by not accepting their conditions, and they are now trying desperately to stay relevant. They are probably paying $$$$ to their publicist to keep pushing them into the limelight.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> lilmom excuse me for asking but what does your avatar represent?  a masked woman, holding - what?


I've been asking myself the same question.


----------



## A1aGypsy

sdkitty said:


> lilmom excuse me for asking but what does your avatar represent?  a masked woman, holding - what?



It’s Princess Leia (from Star Wars) holding a blaster, I believe.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I think the reason she was 'bored' was because she was not the center of attention at the GP. Attitudes like the one at the GP were what forced the Mexit imo. I don't think they planned anything apart of enjoying the perks of being 'royals' living between LA and London.
> 
> The Queen surprised them by not accepting their conditions, and they are now trying desperately to stay relevant. They are probably paying $$$$ to their publicist to keep pushing them into the limelight.



My comment was based on what I had read last week about their plans. And it made me angry, because if it's true, the duped the world with the wedding and being part of the Royal Family, at least in tradition terms. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'discussed Megxit before ...*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rince-Harry-discussed-Megxit-got-married.html - 292k - Cached - Similar pages 
5 days ago *...* Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, 'discussed *Megxit before* ... Sussex ' discussed *Megxit before* they got *married*' because the Duke was 'deeply ... The Duke and Duchess announced *plans* to step back from life in the ...


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> lilmom excuse me for asking but what does your avatar represent?  a masked woman, holding - what?



already answered above...


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> My comment was based on what I had read last week about their plans. And it made me angry, because if it's true, the duped the world with the wedding and being part of the Royal Family, at least in tradition terms.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'discussed Megxit before ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rince-Harry-discussed-Megxit-got-married.html - 292k - Cached - Similar pages
> 5 days ago *...* Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, 'discussed *Megxit before* ... Sussex ' discussed *Megxit before* they got *married*' because the Duke was 'deeply ... The Duke and Duchess announced *plans* to step back from life in the ...


You comments make total sense based on the article. Though, I think that is what they want us to believe, boosts their egos.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> It’s Princess Leia (from Star Wars) holding a blaster, I believe.


oh, ok, not a star wars fan
thanks


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh, ok, not a star wars fan
> thanks



Princess Leia doesn't usually wear a mask, but these are strange times.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Really?
> I was taught how to behave in public.
> So was my son.


I was taught to behave in public .. by MY PARENTS!!!  Personally, and this is my opinion, I don't think it's the responsibility of the Teachers (_regardless of denomination or type of school_) to have to teach manners.  To me, the parents should always be responsible to teach their children what is right and wrong, and that includes what "can" be done in public.  Alas (_and unfortunately_) .. again IMO .. I don't see that as much nowadays and then .. heaven forbid you say something to the child (_or parent_), and you get a mouthful (which oftentimes includes F-BOMBS - this was my neighbor big-time)!  There is *NO WAY* that I would ever have done that; I certainly never used foul language with all my nephews/niece and when I would babysit for them, and you bet I would let them know immediately if something that they did was inappropriate or wrong to do in public!


----------



## bisousx

CeeJay said:


> Sorry, but I had to laugh at this .. I was 13 years-old when I informed my parents that I NEVER intended on going to Church again, no less go to the Catholic High School!!  Some of the [ahem] _"most dutiful_" patrons were the *WORST* people I have ever met, and what they did to others (_e.g., cheat/steal, have affairs, very "unchristian" behavior_) was outrageous!  I had plenty of friends in the Catholic High School, and the stories that they used to tell about various folks and goings-on??? .. well, it was like a High School Soap Opera (_and sometimes I wish I had gone there to hear all the drama .. not that I ever wanted to participate in that though_)!!



Most of the girls I went to Catholic school with behaved like Blair Waldorf (well mannered and well spoken) but did all of the above that you mentioned behind closed doors or away from adults’ view. Like someone else said, there’s only so much the nuns can do if you’re dealing with a narc


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Most of the girls I went to Catholic school with behaved like Blair Waldorf (well mannered and well spoken) but did all of the above that you mentioned behind closed doors or away from adults’ view. Like someone else said, there’s only so much the nuns can do if you’re dealing with a narc


YUP .. honestly, my friends who attended the Catholic High School (a few were neighbors on my street) were into some things that I was simply not into at that time (drugs, sex, etc.).  I had very strict parents, who espoused Education first, so I had to have a very good reason as to why I wasn't going to be home studying .. and that was either that I was in a sporting event (I was very athletic at that time) -or- attending a sporting event .. that was it!

Well, I should also mention that my oldest sister (thanks a pant-load) .. was the hellion in high school (she is quite a bit older than me), such that when it came to my other sister and I, my parents clamped down big-time!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> YUP .. honestly, my friends who attended the Catholic High School (a few were neighbors on my street) were into some things that I was simply not into at that time (drugs, sex, etc.).  I had very strict parents, who espoused Education first, so I had to have a very good reason as to why I wasn't going to be home studying .. and that was either that I was in a sporting event (I was very athletic at that time) -or- attending a sporting event .. that was it!
> 
> Well, I should also mention that my oldest sister (thanks a pant-load) .. was the hellion in high school (she is quite a bit older than me), such that when it came to my other sister and I, my parents clamped down big-time!


usually it's the other way around....with me my parents were stricter; when it came to my younger sister she got away with more.....she would call home (HS age) and say she was at the beach (ferry ride away) and wasn't coming home that night....and get away with it


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> lilmom excuse me for asking but what does your avatar represent?  a masked woman, holding - what?


It is Princess Leia from Star Wars. The Covid 19 version


----------



## ic_locon

gracekelly said:


> Yes, Prince Charles told Harry that they had to leave, but when she first indicated to Harry that she was bored and wanted to leave, Harry  told her that they had to stay and told her why X 2.  That may have been the first and last time in their marriage when he was able to put his foot down.



I think H will continually give in for a long time before he eventually realizes he’s had enough, if he ever does. This is sad and will not end well.


----------



## ic_locon

I also think H&M or the Sussex Squad are actively looking for something about Lady Campbell to discredit her or call her a racist, when race was never the problem with M. The real problem is her attitude. She just hides behind the veil of racism so she doesn’t need to change anything.


----------



## gracekelly

Fellow tPFers.  Please be careful with unknown links.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Fellow tPFers.  Please be careful with unknown links.



I reported it. Someone joining a board for the sole purpose of posting a link is almost always bad news.


----------



## mdcx

gracekelly said:


> From Lady CC's book:
> 
> At the garden party, after about 15 min into their being at  the garden party, Meghan turned to Harry and said "let's leave, this is boring."  He said they could not and gave her multiple reasons. She pushed and he pushed back and said they had to stay.   This exchange was overheard by a person of high position in royal circles  (a man) who was floored by this.  As the British like to say "this wasn't cricket."  You sign up and you are expected to do your job.  Apparently, after the dressing up, being admired and making a little small talk, that was enough for Meghan and she had had enough and wanted to leave.
> 
> Since they had an equerry shadowing her, it must have been reported back to Charles as well.  I suppose Charles thought it better to have them leave rather than stick around.  Harry  took it rather well in the video and didn't put up a fight over it at all.
> 
> So anyone can see how this made for juicy gossip over dinner and the conclusion that she wasn't going to fulfill the duties befitting her rank and position in the The Firm.


Oh my, she really is a silly thing isn't she? She had to know she was being watched and that her minders would be on her and steering her behaviour if she went off course.
My feeling is that her view of things was that once she got married, the gloves were off and she could do what she liked because who was going to stop her? As if she was untouchable. She never really intended to do what the job entailed, just to collect the perks and exploit her position wherever possible.
I do think she was drunk - she had that manner of being "naughty", like she had been forced to come and dress nicely but she wasn't going to be a sweet obedient girl because she's too cool for that, so had a few drinks first. M thinks her life is a rom com imo.


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting the difference two years of bad behaviour makes

At the time of the party, the only thing reported was that they left early - H&M got the kid glove treatment from the press
The videos have been around for 2 years, but no one publicly showed them and did the full analysis with lip readers
The gloves are off now

And all this hoo-haa over the party, it is common sense that flouncing out of a party is a bad thing (rude) for ANYONE, at any social level, esp when the cameras are rolling, which they ALWAYS are anymore, we all have phones and we all take selfies and movies - you dont do it to your family or the host, even if it is a weenie roast in the backyard

And finally, the grumpy side of me says wow , how much did that blush Givenchy frock cost, when worn for an hour ? Not cost effective

To me, the H&M story is not about discrimination for not being born-royal, it is about a lack of general purpose good behavior that is useful at any stratum of society


----------



## gracekelly

I reported that weird link last night as soon as I saw it and didn’t know how fast the Mods would act on it, and so I also wrote the post to be careful.
@threadbender I would suggest that you ask to have your post removed because it still shows the link.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Oh my, she really is a silly thing isn't she? She had to know she was being watched and that her minders would be on her and steering her behaviour if she went off course.
> My feeling is that her view of things was that once she got married, the gloves were off and she could do what she liked because who was going to stop her? As if she was untouchable. She never really intended to do what the job entailed, just to collect the perks and exploit her position wherever possible.
> I do think she was drunk - she had that manner of being "naughty", like she had been forced to come and dress nicely but she wasn't going to be a sweet obedient girl because she's too cool for that, so had a few drinks first. M thinks her life is a rom com imo.



Yes, she felt safe because the ring was on her finger. The only person in the family who ever got away with questionable, though oftentimes funny quips, is Prince Philip.  I always thought that he knew exactly what he was saying and knew he wasn’t going to get”fired.” Lol!


----------



## gracekelly

Lady C dropping more bombs. Calling Meghan an opportunist and grifter in so many words and Harry as dim and manipulated by her. No kid gloves!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Lady C dropping more bombs. Calling Meghan an opportunist and grifter in so many words and Harry as dim and manipulated by her. No kid gloves!


In other words, speaking the TRUTH!! .. LOVE it!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yes, she felt safe because the ring was on her finger. The only person in the family who ever got away with questionable, though oftentimes funny quips, is Prince Philip.  I always thought that he knew exactly what he was saying and knew he wasn’t going to get”fired.” Lol!



Philip has a foul mouth and a temper but he always knew his place and his duty. When he got married he signed up to be the Queen's most fierce vassal and he's never failed this role.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Lady C dropping more bombs. Calling Meghan an opportunist and grifter in so many words and Harry as dim and manipulated by her. No kid gloves!


I really didn't want to get the book as Lady C is a questionable character herself, but I feel it could be entertaining.


----------



## bag-mania

I fully expect a smear campaign against Lady C to commence at any time now. They will retaliate if they can. If Jessica wasn't so busy currently that would probably have been her job.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I fully expect a smear campaign against Lady C to commence at any time now. They will retaliate if they can. If Jessica wasn't so busy currently that would probably have been her job.


wouldn't it be funny if this book outsells theirs


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be funny if this book outsells theirs



I'll be shocked if either one sells very well. The stans might buy their book. Those who don't like them might buy the other one. But the majority of people in the world are indifferent to H&M. They just aren't interesting enough to read a book about them.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Philip has a foul mouth and a temper but he always knew his place and his duty. When he got married he signed up to be the Queen's most fierce vassal and he's never failed this role.



Also, consider the time frames with P & others in the BRF
Ex: all 4 of Philip's sisters married Germans before WWII - that was a decided liability after the end of WWII when he courted Elizabeth and German connections were unfashionable  -  very, very bad press 70 years ago - scandal, scandal, scandal 
And, yes over the decades there have been faux pas - but give the guy credit - we are talking a 70 year period of time

Sophie Wessex was interviewed last week in the London Times where she alluded to the differences between her integration into the BRF and Meghan's. Sophie dated Edward for 5 years, and she gradually was seen more often during that time. Compare to Meghan - 1.5 year courtship, mostly out of the public eye, she was not seen in the UK until 6 mos before wedding ...
Yes, SW has had some gaffes, but she has been around for almost 25 years

H&M seem to be in the gaffe of the week club, while P & SW are not


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'll be shocked if either one sells very well. The stans might buy their book. Those who don't like them might buy the other one. But the majority of people in the world are indifferent to H&M. They just aren't interesting enough to read a book about them.


yes, I'll probably get all I want from this thread   definitely wouldn't spend hours of my time reading about those two grifters

I'm gonna amend that - this grifter and her lap dog


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, I'll probably get all I want from this thread   definitely wouldn't spend hours of my time reading about those two grifters



Yep, any juicy tidbits from the books will be spilled by the press on the day of release. No need to waste your money.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Interesting the difference two years of bad behaviour makes
> 
> At the time of the party, the only thing reported was that they left early - H&M got the kid glove treatment from the press
> The videos have been around for 2 years, but no one publicly showed them and did the full analysis with lip readers


Which garden party?  The one where she's wearing a cream dress and a cream coloured ufo style hat?

I searched and that's the one I found and she didn't look grumpy or anything. I want to look at the video again with fresh eyes.

It did look really hot, sunny and humid though, but think of how it was for those standing in a row for hours to meet them.


----------



## bag-mania

Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.


*Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*







Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.

The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.

But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.

The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.

Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.

And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.

“I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”

As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.

Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.

Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.

She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.

Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”

She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”

Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.









						Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
					

The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.




					pagesix.com


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> I reported that weird link last night as soon as I saw it and didn’t know how fast the Mods would act on it, and so I also wrote the post to be careful.
> @threadbender I would suggest that you ask to have your post removed because it still shows the link.


Thank you. I did not even think of it but it was removed. I hope I didn't get a slap!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.
> 
> The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.
> 
> But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.
> 
> The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.
> 
> Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.
> 
> And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.
> 
> “I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”
> 
> As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.
> 
> Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.
> 
> Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.
> 
> She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.
> 
> Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”
> 
> She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
> 
> 
> The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


wonder if Harry is taking note of how loyal his wife is to those close to her


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder if Harry is taking note of how loyal his wife is to those close to her



Nope. If there is one thing we've learned about people who get Markled it's that they never see it coming. Ever. She must seem like the nicest person in the world until she decides you are of no further use to her.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.
> 
> The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.
> 
> But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.
> 
> The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.
> 
> Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.
> 
> And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.
> 
> “I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”
> 
> As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.
> 
> Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.
> 
> Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.
> 
> She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.
> 
> Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”
> 
> She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
> 
> 
> The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



It was so on the rocks that they left their son with her? What?


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> It was so on the rocks that they left their son with her? What?



Did they really though? I always wondered if that was true or if they said it because it sounded better to leave their baby with a friend than admit that royal nannies were taking care of Archie all along.

*"*_*And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?*”_

Gotta love the irony of this quote! Isn't this exactly what Meghan has done with her marriage to Harry?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nope. If there is one thing we've learned about people who get Markled it's that they never see it coming. Ever. She must seem like the nicest person in the world until she decides you are of no further use to her.


yes, sorry to those who want to give H equal responsibility but I think while he is technically a grown man, he is under her control


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Did they really though? I always wondered if that was true or if they said it because it sounded better to leave their baby with a friend than admit that royal nannies were taking care of Archie all along.
> 
> *"*_*And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?*”_
> 
> Gotta love the irony of this quote! Isn't this exactly what Meghan has done with her marriage to Harry?



I’d be kinda surprised if they had “royal” nannies in Canada...if you hired me to work in the UK and secret squirrel moved my job to to Canada without telling me there would be some terrible HR issues... wouldnt the nannies be government employees? I don’t know how that works there... Let me see if my Ex knows... she lives in the UK....

(edited to clarify location lol)


----------



## TC1

Funny how Jessica seemed to be "benefiting" from the friendship..yet Meghan fled to Canada to the support and care of her best friend, who possibly helped make the connection of her freebie mansion and left Canadian taxpayers with over 50K in security costs.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.
> 
> The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.
> 
> But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.
> 
> The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.
> 
> Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.
> 
> And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.
> 
> “I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”
> 
> As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.
> 
> Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.
> 
> Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.
> 
> She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.
> 
> Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”
> 
> She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
> 
> 
> The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Let me see if I understand this. In the past, MM used Jessica to introduce her "to a swanky Toronto social set" and to "helping Markle pick her clothes". However, MM is now feeling shocked "that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF", and discards Jessica as stylist", since "she has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney". This is really entertaining when one wants to forget COVID-19.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.
> 
> The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.
> 
> But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.
> 
> The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.
> 
> Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.
> 
> And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.
> 
> “I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”
> 
> As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.
> 
> Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.
> 
> Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.
> 
> She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.
> 
> Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”
> 
> She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
> 
> 
> The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Hilarious!

Meghan has literally no friends left in the world.


----------



## TC1

bisousx said:


> Hilarious!
> 
> Meghan has literally no friends left in the world.


She'll just keep making them up. Lunch with Michelle *****, H's new relationship with Liza Minnelli. All fabricated.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bisousx said:


> Hilarious!
> 
> Meghan has literally no friends left in the world.


Well, she’s living in Tyler Perry’s house... I think she thinks she’s moved on. She’s got Oprah and Tyler now...


----------



## youngster

Wow, that didn't take long.  Seriously though, if Meghan felt she was being "used" by Jessica, why did she not call her up months ago, weeks ago, and discuss it like two mature adults?  Give her another chance maybe.  Hear her side at a minimum.  Jessica still clearly felt that Meghan was her "closest friend" as she stated in those posts with the Canadian influencer just a few days ago.  Instead . . . _markled_.  Maybe Meghan will have Jessica and children photoshopped out of the wedding photos.


----------



## 1LV

Meghan and Jessica.  Pot, meet kettle.


----------



## opensesame

gracekelly said:


> Back when I was a teenager, my mother was roped into working for a cancer research charity by a woman who was in her bridge group.  A man who lived in our community, was the comptroller.  My father always thought that the guy was somewhat shady and took a dim view of him.  To shorten the story, it turned out that the charity was a sham.  The friend of my mother who roped her into it was having an affair with the scientific guy who was working on the cure and he was in cahoots with the comptroller and they took off with the money. The woman's husband sued for divorce when it all came out.   So bottom line and my simplistic take , a charity will only be a source of income for you if you intend to scam people.  Good luck with that Harkles.
> 
> BTW, that episode totally soured my mom on ever doing any charity work.  She was happy to give to national and well known charities, but that was it.



That is utterly disgusting...I can see how gigantic charity organization needs to hire managers and other officers to oversee the funds; they might be paid very well but certainly shouldn’t be millions. H&M must be confused because famous charities are usually formed by people who are already “financially independent,” and not the other way around.


----------



## csshopper

bisousx said:


> Hilarious!
> 
> Meghan has literally no friends left in the world.


But I bet she has mirrors all over the place so she can always look at herself,  which for someone like her, is all she needs.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Let me see if I understand this. In the past, MM used Jessica to introduce her "to a swanky Toronto social set" and to "helping Markle pick her clothes". However, MM is now feeling shocked "that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF", and discards Jessica as stylist", since "she has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney". This is really entertaining when one wants to forget COVID-19.


Right? I can't get my head around this either. Just how exactly Jessica benefited from MM's "friendship"? Anybody care to enlighten me?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sol Ryan said:


> Well, she’s living in Tyler Perry’s house... I think she thinks she’s moved on. She’s got Oprah and Tyler now...


Yep, her old pals are all beneath her now since she's graduated from the next level of social climbing!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Wow, that didn't take long.  Seriously though, if Meghan felt she was being "used" by Jessica, why did she not call her up months ago, weeks ago, and discuss it like two mature adults?  Give her another chance maybe.  Hear her side at a minimum.  Jessica still clearly felt that Meghan was her "closest friend" as she stated in those posts with the Canadian influencer just a few days ago.  Instead . . . _markled_.  Maybe Meghan will have Jessica and children photoshopped out of the wedding photos.



Meghan is currently snipping away at her wedding pictures.  I wonder if anyone will be left in the album lol!


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> Right? I can't get my head around this either. Just how exactly Jessica benefited from MM's "friendship"? Anybody care to enlighten me?


It got her the job at GMA.  It gave her a higher profile in general as a stylist as she was styling a member of the Royal Family.  Before that she was just another self appointed fashion influencer from Toronto.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> wonder if Harry is taking note of how loyal his wife is to those close to her


  No kidding!  He may be the first markled Harkle!


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> But I bet she has mirrors all over the place so she can always look at herself,  which for someone like her, is all she needs.


Does she have four other friends?  (all the other people with the same hotmail account)  Let's not forget all the bots!  Bots can be very dear friends if you keep paying for them.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Right? I can't get my head around this either. Just how exactly Jessica benefited from MM's "friendship"? Anybody care to enlighten me?



It doesn’t matter if it’s true. As long as the accusation is repeated many times by multiple sources, people will believe it and it becomes as good as fact.

Welcome to the duplicitous world of the modern media, circa 2020!


----------



## chicinthecity777

gracekelly said:


> It got her the job at GMA.  It gave her a higher profile in general as a stylist as *she was styling a member of the Royal Family.*  Before that she was just another self appointed fashion influencer from Toronto.


First, like who cares? Last time I checked, there is no queue of BRF members waiting to be styled by Jessica. 

Secondly, like MM quit the royal family so she's no longer a royal! Or wait, is that royal title too precious for her as a modern independent feminist role model? But of course, everybody MM knows have benefited her, never the other way around! Everything she touches turns to gold while she hasn't benefited from anyone, like AT ALL!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> It doesn’t matter if it’s true. As long as the accusation is repeated many times by multiple sources, people will believe it and it becomes as good as fact.
> 
> Welcome to the duplicitous world of the modern media, circa 2020!


I sure hope there are still people who can see through this sh1t!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> I sure hope there are still people who can see through this ****!



There are lots of people who see her for who she is, but don’t expect anything but glowing stories about her in the US media. Nobody is going to throw their career away by criticizing her and risk being accused of racism.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It doesn’t matter if it’s true. As long as the accusation is repeated many times by multiple sources, people will believe it and it becomes as good as fact.
> 
> Welcome to the duplicitous world of the modern media, circa 2020!


You are so right and it’s scary as hell.


----------



## zinacef

bag-mania said:


> There are lots of people who see her for who she is, but don’t expect anything but glowing stories about her in the US media. Nobody is going to throw their career away by criticizing her and risk being accused of racism.


This! She will always be glowing and be perceived as underdog so nobody will really mess with her on the mainstream media. It’s just not acceptable and will never be.   I don’t think MM would actually markle Jessica, I believe they are truly friends in true friends terms and they both know where the bodies are buried. They would go under the radar for sure.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Nope. If there is one thing we've learned about people who get Markled it's that they never see it coming. Ever. She must seem like the nicest person in the world until she decides you are of no further use to her.



Exactly!
We had a person like this at work. OMG I had never seen anything like it. She moved down from NoCal and seemed okay. She was attractive, outgoing, the center of attention. She always had one BFF and they would be inseparable. Then for some reason there would be a falling out----the BFF would be shunned (if they were lucky) or downright viciously attacked (if they weren't) which was what happened to me. This went on at every facility---she literally burned every bridge----until she finally ran out of places to go where she hadn't made enemies. No one in the industry wants to work with her as she is as toxic as they come. But while it was going on we would all be warned by a previous BFF and in turn go on to warn the next person. It was always , "but she seems so nice she would NEVER do that to ME" People just have to learn for themselves I guess.


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.
> 
> The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.
> 
> But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.
> 
> The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.
> 
> Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.
> 
> And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.
> 
> “I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”
> 
> As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.
> 
> Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.
> 
> Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.
> 
> She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.
> 
> Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”
> 
> She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
> 
> 
> The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Shocking! Meghan discarding someone when they have stopped being an exploitable asset and started to become someone with actual needs or problems! She probably has a generic "rejection statement" ready for her PR to issue about anyone who she needs rid of. I'm sure there's one with Harry's name already slotted in, lol.


----------



## PewPew

Even though Jessica Mulroney “knows where the bodies are buried,” Meghan & Harry must feel pretty confident in publicly distancing themselves, as Jess has lost all credibility & she would face penalties for any revelations due to a Non-Disclosure Agreement that was required to work with Meghan during/after the wedding.


----------



## Emeline

.

......


PewPew said:


> Even though Jessica Mulroney “knows where the bodies are buried,” Meghan & Harry must feel pretty confident in publicly distancing themselves, as Jess has lost all credibility & she would face penalties for any revelations due to a Non-Disclosure Agreement that was required to work with Meghan during/after the wedding.


I see MM and JM as two peas of a pod. Hard to tell how this plays out. MM always has to be smarter than everyone. If she pushes too hard on JM,  JM may decide she's had enough. She might drop some very unflattering gossip via "friends."


----------



## scarlet555

I am sure there will be repercussions from shunning JM.  Just wait and see.


----------



## caramelize126

Would JM be required to testify in M&H's lawsuit in England? They might be keeping quiet so that she cooperates.


----------



## mshermes

Uh-oh....









						New blow for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's application to trademark their new charitable organisation Archewell has been rejected because they did not sign the document or  pay all the required fees.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ic_locon

mshermes said:


> Uh-oh....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New blow for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's application to trademark their new charitable organisation Archewell has been rejected because they did not sign the document or  pay all the required fees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is so funny to me! I mean, come on! I thought they were so committed and focused on the Archewell organization?! How could you not sign the documents?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.



Meghan is loyal to exactly one person: herself. Which is why I secretly hope she'll find a reason to loosen her death grip on Harry.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan is loyal to exactly one person: herself.


You got that right!


----------



## Luvbolide

mshermes said:


> Uh-oh....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New blow for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's application to trademark their new charitable organisation Archewell has been rejected because they did not sign the document or  pay all the required fees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Hilarious!  First class legal talent on this one.  Excess verbiage that makes no sense in English - and they even submit unsigned docs.  Wonder what that effort is costing Prince Charles!

Can’t wait to see how their case against the DM goes!


----------



## zinacef

Luvbolide said:


> Hilarious!  First class legal talent on this one.  Excess verbiage that makes no sense in English - and they even submit unsigned docs.  Wonder what that effort is costing Prince Charles!
> 
> Can’t wait to see how their case against the DM goes!


It states they haven’t included the required fees either, what kind of management these two has ?


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> Uh-oh....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New blow for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's application to trademark their new charitable organisation Archewell has been rejected because they did not sign the document or  pay all the required fees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



 Each of their failures gives me a warm, happy feeling.

“*The notice reads: 'The wording 'providing a website featuring content relating to philanthropy, monetary giving, volunteer and career opportunities' in International Class 35 is also indefinite and over-broad, and must be clarified to specify the nature of the content provided.'”*

What a surprise! Creating a charity that appears to have no actual purpose beyond supporting themselves and funding their extravagant lifestyle is frowned upon by the patent office. Who knew?


----------



## kemilia

bisousx said:


> Hilarious!
> 
> Meghan has literally no friends left in the world.


But who needs friends when you have "sources".


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Each of their failures gives me a warm, happy feeling.
> 
> “*The notice reads: 'The wording 'providing a website featuring content relating to philanthropy, monetary giving, volunteer and career opportunities' in International Class 35 is also indefinite and over-broad, and must be clarified to specify the nature of the content provided.'”*
> 
> What a surprise! Creating a charity that appears to have no actual purpose beyond supporting themselves and funding their extravagant lifestyle is frowned upon by the patent office. Who knew?


Apparently their "word salad" doesn't work with the patent office (and US Government agencies have word salad down to a science).


----------



## Jktgal

mshermes said:


> Uh-oh....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New blow for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's application to trademark their new charitable organisation Archewell has been rejected because they did not sign the document or  pay all the required fees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Did they hire her law firm from Suits??


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jktgal said:


> Did they hire her law firm from Suits??


You mean the one with a fake lawyer?


----------



## Bastetan

kemilia said:


> But who needs friends when you have "sources".


Sometimes best friends are the best sources.


----------



## marietouchet

BTW interesting how the press works  ... 

London Times, Country Life and Tatler are available via subscription  only while the tabloids - Daily Mail - have free apps.  People may have different opinions on those three magazine articles that are subscription only 

So, the recent article LT last week on Sophie Wessex, Tatler on Kate and an upcoming issue of CL - guest edited by Pss Anne are not/will not be widely available 
So, there is/will be a major article on the 3 remaining female members of the BRF - obviously at a time to counter all the exhausting stories from H&M land
Also, FYI, the LT publishes a calendar of events enumerating BRF events, there are a lot of events not widely covered by the DM - even minor members eg Gloucester and Kent events get a mention

I thought the Tatler article was generally favorable to Kate, but I can see where some statement (she is tired) struck a raw nerve in these days of H&M, COVID and Andrew scandals, I am sure she wants to be seen as a fully contributing member of the BRF - stiff upper lip and no whining 
The Sophie article was very positive - emphasizing 20-25 years of service
CL is an upper class country gent magazine - horsy crowd - and I have no doubt the edition will focus on horses and Anne's innumerable engagements for the BRF

The FREE press that you can access without a subscription is the tabloidy stuff while the other side of the coin - more moderate article - you have to pay to read

I both all types of stuff, the subscription stuff is not better but I do find it less exhausting to read - less inflammatory


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> You mean the one with a fake lawyer?



She figures she played a lawyer on TV, so can't be too hard to do in real life, too.


----------



## bag-mania

To think that earlier in the week they were claiming that they were postponing Archewell because they wanted to focus on BLM and COVID-19. They are such pathetic liars. 

I don’t understand how anyone with a functioning brain can respect these two.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Wow, it didn't take long for Meghan to throw her bestie Jessica under the bus. We all knew Jessica would be Markled quickly once she was embroiled in a scandal, but I don't think any of us could have predicted Meghan would have the gall to outright lie and say she wasn't friends with her anymore before it happened.
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was already on the outs before the stylist was criticized last week for her tone-deaf “white privilege” remarks, a source told Page Six.
> 
> The pair had been long-term pals since meeting in Canada, with Mulroney, 40, introducing the former “Suits” star, 38, to a swanky Toronto social set.
> 
> But despite giving Mulroney’s three kids a starring role in her 2018 Windsor Castle wedding to Britain’s Prince Harry, Markle has increasingly felt that her friend was “benefiting” from her position as royal BFF and stylist, sources say.
> 
> The white privilege “row has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off for good,” one source said.
> 
> Since the royal wedding, Mulroney has won TV gigs on “Good Morning America” and her own reality show, “I Do, Redo.” She was canned from both shows last week following her racially charged clash with lifestyle blogger Sasha Exeter, with sources saying she wound up in a “flood of tears” after losing her morning show spot, a TV source said.
> 
> And while she started off helping Markle pick her clothes, Markle has now forged her own relationships with top design houses such as Givenchy and Stella McCartney.
> 
> “I don’t know what the tipping point was, but Jess has been on the outs for some time,” said another source. “Their friendship is definitely not what it was. And really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship?”
> 
> As reported, Mulroney is one of baby Archie’s godparents, which will make matters more difficult.
> 
> Mulroney has yet to appear publicly since her war of words with Exeter was made public.
> 
> Exeter revealed that Mulroney “took offense” to a “generic call to action” she made, asking white influencers to use their platforms to address racial inequality.
> 
> She said the exchange resulted in Mulroney privately messaging her — and then threatening to sue her.
> 
> Referring to Markle, Mulroney posted a message on Instagram saying: “I have lived a very public and personal experience with my closest friend where race was front and center.”
> 
> She then apologized again and said she would be stepping back from social media, adding: “I plan to use this time to reflect, learn and listen.”
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes declined to comment. Reps for Mulroney have been contacted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friendship with Jessica Mulroney was on the rocks before ‘white privilege’ controversy
> 
> 
> The controversy “has really given Meghan the excuse she was waiting for to cut Jess off,” one source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


*EXCUSE ME??? .. *
“_*and really, how can you have such a close friendship when one person is basically making a career out of the friendship*_?”

Oh, yes ..  let us not forget that Meghan has *NEVER *done that, right???   MM is a piece of work; she should be a lot more careful because those Hollywood types look at crap like this and and distance themselves .. tout suite!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

zinacef said:


> It states they haven’t included the required fees either, what *kind of management these two *has ?



Megan Megxit Management, the solo manager and agent and ex duchess, who else?  No one else would have forgotten to* pay *the 'fee'.  I recall a magazine writer who says she traced Megan's agent's email to Megan's IP address in Canada?


----------



## 1LV

If JM had not introduced MM to the “swanky Toronto social set” . . .  Doubt we would be talking about her today.  She wasn’t even a blip on the radar for most of us.


----------



## V0N1B2

1LV said:


> If JM had not introduced MM to the “swanky Toronto social set” . . .  Doubt we would be talking about her today.  She wasn’t even a blip on the radar for most of us.


Yep. I suspect if JM rolls on Meghan, we're gonna find out exactly how Harry met Sally Meghan.
Probably lots of dirt on Soho House as well.
Wasn't Jessica with Meghan on their tour of Australia?  Maybe we'll find out more about Meghan's behaviour on that tour - wasn't it reported that she yelled & screamed and threw things at her aides?  Or was it the trip she and Harry were reportedly fighting nonstop?
A lot of things are starting to come out about her and she has no one to blame but herself.


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Which garden party?  The one where she's wearing a cream dress and a cream coloured ufo style hat?
> 
> I searched and that's the one I found and she didn't look grumpy or anything. I want to look at the video again with fresh eyes.
> 
> It did look really hot, sunny and humid though, but think of how it was for those standing in a row for hours to meet them.


See youtube channels eg from Murky Meg or Celt  News
They have gone over the videos with a fine tooth comb


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> Yep. I suspect if JM rolls on Meghan, we're gonna find out exactly how Harry met Sally Meghan.
> Probably lots of dirt on Soho House as well.
> Wasn't Jessica with Meghan on their tour of Australia?  Maybe we'll find out more about Meghan's behaviour on that tour - wasn't it reported that she yelled & screamed and threw things at her aides?  Or was it the trip she and Harry were reportedly fighting nonstop?
> A lot of things are starting to come out about her and she has no one to blame but herself.


YUP .. if Meghan was smart (_which we know not to be the case_), she would have just said something to the effect "_oh - I'm saddened to hear about what occurred, but I'm sure Jessica will learn from this and correct the behavior _.."  something along those lines.  But - *NO* - she now has to have her "sources" say that the 2 of them weren't that friendly anymore and then .. worse, that she (_Meghan_) felt that Jessica was '*using*' her!  This woman (_Meghan_) really has the female version of *cohones* .. she was a *NOBODY* who used Jessica to insert herself into the higher echelons of Toronto "society" .. and then from there, used those folks to meet a "_wealthy British guy_" (_one of Meghan's 'markled' friends indicated that she indeed told folks that she wanted that_).  This could get messy; I don't see Jessica as the type of person who will put up with Meghan's BS if she wants to get 'dirty'.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> YUP .. if Meghan was smart (_which we know not to be the case_), she would have just said something to the effect "_oh - I'm saddened to hear about what occurred, but I'm sure Jessica will learn from this and correct the behavior _.."  something along those lines.  But - *NO* - she now has to have her "sources" say that the 2 of them weren't that friendly anymore and then .. worse, that she (_Meghan_) felt that Jessica was '*using*' her!  This woman (_Meghan_) really has the female version of *cohones* .. she was a *NOBODY* who used Jessica to insert herself into the higher echelons of Toronto "society" .. and then from there, used those folks to meet a "_wealthy British guy_" (_one of Meghan's 'markled' friends indicated that she indeed told folks that she wanted that_).  This could get messy; I don't see Jessica as the type of person who will put up with Meghan's BS if she wants to get 'dirty'.



Honestly, these two! JM and M were both using each other.  Pot/Kettle...  JM is not going down alone, not like this.


----------



## kemilia

V0N1B2 said:


> Yep. I suspect if JM rolls on Meghan, we're gonna find out exactly how Harry met Sally Meghan.
> Probably lots of dirt on Soho House as well.
> Wasn't Jessica with Meghan on their tour of Australia?  Maybe we'll find out more about Meghan's behaviour on that tour - wasn't it reported that she yelled & screamed and threw things at her aides?  Or was it the trip she and Harry were reportedly fighting nonstop?
> A lot of things are starting to come out about her and she has no one to blame but herself.


Maybe yacht girl stuff too!


----------



## pukasonqo

CeeJay said:


> YUP .. if Meghan was smart (_which we know not to be the case_), she would have just said something to the effect "_oh - I'm saddened to hear about what occurred, but I'm sure Jessica will learn from this and correct the behavior _.."  something along those lines.  But - *NO* - she now has to have her "sources" say that the 2 of them weren't that friendly anymore and then .. worse, that she (_Meghan_) felt that Jessica was '*using*' her!  This woman (_Meghan_) really has the female version of *cohones* .. she was a *NOBODY* who used Jessica to insert herself into the higher echelons of Toronto "society" .. and then from there, used those folks to meet a "_wealthy British guy_" (_one of Meghan's 'markled' friends indicated that she indeed told folks that she wanted that_).  This could get messy; I don't see Jessica as the type of person who will put up with Meghan's BS if she wants to get 'dirty'.


 You meant cojones?
(Spanish is my first language and I have a bit of an issue when it’s misspelled)
Back to this culebrón


----------



## Suncatcher

If I were in Jessica’s high heel shoes and I saw my “friend” trash me in the media the way Meghan did, after all I did to support her (including introducing to Toronto society that led her down the path to meeting Harry) I would be planning how I would get back at Meghan right now. I’m sure she has a lot of dirt of Meghan that she could share through “sources”.


----------



## sdkitty

Suncatcher said:


> If I were in Jessica’s high heel shoes and I saw my “friend” trash me in the media the way Meghan did, after all I did to support her (including introducing to Toronto society that led her down the path to meeting Harry) I would be planning how I would get back at Meghan right now. I’m sure she has a lot of dirt of Meghan that she could share through “sources”.


But can she risk Meghan playing the woc card


----------



## threadbender

Emeline said:


> .
> 
> ......
> 
> I see MM and JM as two peas of a pod. Hard to tell how this plays out. MM always has to be smarter than everyone. If she pushes too hard on JM,  JM may decide she's had enough. She might drop some very unflattering gossip via "friends."


That is what I was thinking. NDA or no, word can get out. And, when would mm have had JM sign one? Seems like an awkward convo to have with a bestie.


----------



## Suncatcher

sdkitty said:


> But can she risk Meghan playing the woc card


Less of a risk if we read in the paper that “sources tell us that ...”.  I don’t think she would do a face to face tell all interview. But yes, she would still have to be careful.


----------



## threadbender

Suncatcher said:


> If I were in Jessica’s high heel shoes and I saw my “friend” trash me in the media the way Meghan did, after all I did to support her (including introducing to Toronto society that led her down the path to meeting Harry) I would be planning how I would get back at Meghan right now. I’m sure she has a lot of dirt of Meghan that she could share through “sources”.


With any luck, JM has more patience that her former "friend" and the dirt is provable. If it were me, I would play it smart and do it low and slow.


----------



## Sol Ryan

threadbender said:


> With any luck, JM has more patience that her former "friend" and the dirt is provable. If it were me, I would play it smart and do it low and slow.



I’m hoping she hasn’t learned anything from the events of the past couple weeks, gets totally offended and let’s off some spectacular truth-bombs... I’ve gone out and bought a fresh box of popcorn...

I also hope this means she breaks ranks and tells the truth in the court case...
Neither will probably happen, but a girl can dream...


----------



## CeeJay

pukasonqo said:


> You meant cojones?
> (Spanish is my first language and I have a bit of an issue when it’s misspelled)
> Back to this culebrón


HA HA HA .. you are right, I was thinking phonetically (since the 'J' is pronounced as an 'H')!!!!  Sorry 'bout that!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> It got her the job at GMA.  It gave her a higher profile in general as a stylist as she was styling a member of the Royal Family.  Before that she was just another self appointed fashion influencer from Toronto.


I agree with this... I had never even heard of Jessica before she came into orbit as Meghan's friend. Social climbing can go both ways... I think Meghan benefitted when she was coming up and Jessica had the higher profile in Canada but now the only one who could benefit is Jessica. Great time to ditch a friend who probably always annoyed you but you put up with it for social climbing.


----------



## lulilu

I think there also has to be some jealousy on MM's part re JM's success in getting TV shows etc.


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> I think there also has to be some jealousy on MM's part re JM's success in getting TV shows etc.


Oh yeah .. 100% agree with this!!!  While I haven't watched GMA for some years now, it is a well-known morning program here in the States .. they don't hire the schlubs .. and, let's face it .. wouldn't (especially) Meghan and Harry love to be on their telling "their story"!!!


----------



## ic_locon

Suncatcher said:


> If I were in Jessica’s high heel shoes and I saw my “friend” trash me in the media the way Meghan did, after all I did to support her (including introducing to Toronto society that led her down the path to meeting Harry) I would be planning how I would get back at Meghan right now. I’m sure she has a lot of dirt of Meghan that she could share through “sources”.




I’ve read that JM is the type of person who watches which of her “friends” likes Exeter’s posts and then sends threatening emails to get them in line. So, I’m pretty sure she may be scheming her next move for MM.


----------



## A1aGypsy

You know, I’ve always wanted to see someone who, I don’t know, may be fairly well off, plunk down the money for the DND penalty and then turn to the press with her cell phone and say, “so folks, would you rather start with the text messages or the photos?”

That would be spunk.


----------



## PewPew

lulilu said:


> I think there also has to be some jealousy on MM's part re JM's success in getting TV shows etc.



I agree. Jealousy over not just the high profile attention, but the enjoyment of parties, instafancy trips and celeb friends, without scrutiny or public responsibility.  (They used to take extravagant holidays together and post pics to Instagram of the high life.) MM can’t do that and be the world humanitarian she has cast herself.

MM likely believed some of her own PR hype that she was essentially Hollywood Royalty Grace Kelly 2.0, instead of a mid-30’s cable TV actress who most Americans and high profile celebs only came to know through her engagement. The star power of her “independent profile” is limited.

Interestingly, Jess’ kids + Doria were the only people from her past life in the wedding. Jess helped plan Megxit via the great Canadian escape. Remember Megan expressed sadness for her “good friend” Sophie Trudeau getting Covid? She first knew Sophie thru Jess, as Sophie’s friend and stylist. Jess also got MM involved in the Toronto elite “scene” via which she met the chef BF she left for Harry. It must burn Jess to see “sources” reporting that MM felt used by her.


----------



## MaseratiMomma

A1aGypsy said:


> You know, I’ve always wanted to see someone who, I don’t know, may be fairly well off, plunk down the money for the DND penalty and then turn to the press with her cell phone and say, “so folks, would you rather start with the text messages or the photos?”
> 
> That would be spunk.


It really would be spunk! & I have my popcorn ready, just... waiting... for... it!!!
But having signed many non disclosure agreements myself.... I can’t imagine how the rest of the industry would react to finding out about someone who broke theirs. It would be a foot in the grave for sure, especially for the careers of people I care about.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan needs Jess on side for this lawsuit doesn't she? To portray that Jess magically got together with 4 other close friends of Meghans and decided to spontaneously talk to People mag, rather than them being directed to do so by Meg?


----------



## PewPew

mdcx said:


> Meghan needs Jess on side for this lawsuit doesn't she? To portray that Jess magically got together with 4 other close friends of Meghans and decided to spontaneously talk to People mag, rather than them being directed to do so by Meg?



M’s legal team may be setting this up to look like a “well-meaning friend behaving badly” situation where Jess or another friend went rogue. It will hinge on whether proof exists via text or email.


----------



## tiktok

LOL! 








						Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
					

Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


----------



## Emeline

tiktok said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


MM, No one thinks you are destined to preach about anything.

It wasn't destiny that made you  leave the UK, it was hubris.


----------



## lulilu

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


US doesn't deserve one more burden. We have already the highest number of covid cases, we need a break. *Queen Elizabeth, please take her back *(with my deepest apologies to our UK members).


----------



## scarlet555

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*



We know this is fake news bc M has no friends... OMG, a career in politics...?  She has done nothing to qualify... I mean NOTHING.  Mentoring, giving a speech, going to Africa to whine about how insensitive the world has treated her...


----------



## Annawakes

Who are the friends she has left??  The suits cast???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Mmm hmm


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


One word - *NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO*!!!!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Ugh... she would be a vote against candidate.... pretty much don’t care about the opposition....


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


you've gotta be kidding me.....it seems to me (and please WOC here please tell me if you disagree) that "M" is a WOC when it's convenient/profitable for her

also seems that (I thought this a long time ago and now even more) her role model is Angelina Jolie


----------



## sdkitty

is anyone gonna buy into this crap?


----------



## 1LV

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


Give me a freakin’ break.


----------



## 1LV

MM is always working the room, trying to see where she might have more to gain.  Such a hypocrite.


----------



## CeeJay

Emeline said:


> MM, No one thinks you are destined to preach about anything.
> 
> It wasn't destiny that made you  leave the UK, it was hubris.


You know, she needs to get her [sh!t] *FAKE NEWS* together!!  Remember, before .. there was the 'news' that Megxit was planned even before they married, now .. she's saying it's '*FATE*' that they left????  C'mon .. who the heck is going to believe her, and as a friend of mine in DC (_who was a top Political Advisor years ago_) said to me "_you better make sure to have your 'tales' straightened out_" (_things have changed - obv_).  Has MM ever been specific as to the racism she has experienced .. a particular story?  I'm not saying that it didn't happen, but I don't recall her ever mentioning the specifics and IMO .. if you were to compare her life versus Oprah and Tyler .. well, I bet they went through a heck of a lot worse than she did.  To me, she seemed like she led a pretty 'comfortable' life in the Valley.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> You know, she needs to get her [sh!t] *FAKE NEWS* together!!  Remember, before .. there was the 'news' that Megxit was planned even before they married, now .. she's saying it's '*FATE*' that they left????  C'mon .. who the heck is going to believe her, and as a friend of mine in DC (_who was a top Political Advisor years ago_) said to me "_you better make sure to have your 'tales' straightened out_" (_things have changed - obv_).  Has MM ever been specific as to the racism she has experienced .. a particular story?  I'm not saying that it didn't happen, but I don't recall her ever mentioning the specifics and IMO .. if you were to compare her life versus Oprah and Tyler .. well, I bet they went through a heck of a lot worse than she did.  To me, she seemed like she led a pretty 'comfortable' life in the Valley.


right....as you said there may be things we haven't heard about but as far as we know the only thing she's complained about in terms of racism is the British tabloids


----------



## chicinthecity777

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


I must say I am impressed, as an actress, I didn't realise she has such a range. I see she's doing comedy now! Wow! LOL!


----------



## threadbender

1LV said:


> MM is always working the room, trying to see where she might have more to gain.  Such a hypocrite.


Maybe always working the room but, she sure cannot read it.


----------



## Suncatcher

She is so scattered and so full of herself. First an actress. Then she gives it up to become royal. Then she gives it up because she wants to go back into acting, in a role that will allow her to win the EGOT. Now she thinks she wants a career in politics. Like a particular world leader who was only interested in winning and not actually governing she will also find out that if she wins an election she would have to govern and governing is a slog. If she found a garden party to be a bore I can’t imagine her pouring over policy material for a term of office. I would rather vote for some random person I come across in telephone book than her. She is not even suited to run for municipal politics, let alone something grander. Next we will hear how she wants to be sainted. The comedy never ends with this woman.


----------



## sdkitty

Suncatcher said:


> She is so scattered and so full of herself. First an actress. Then she gives it up to become royal. Then she gives it up because she wants to go back into acting, in a role that will allow her to win the EGOT. Now she thinks she wants a career in politics. Like a particular world leader who was only interested in winning and not actually governing she will also find out that if she wins an election she would have to govern and governing is a slog. If she found a garden party to be a bore I can’t imagine her pouring over policy material for a term of office. I would rather vote for some random person I come across in telephone book than her. She is not even suited to run for municipal politics, let alone something grander. Next we will hear how she wants to be sainted. The comedy never ends with this woman.


I guess the reality is she wants to be rich and famous.  for what and how is less important.


----------



## Luvbolide

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*




Oh, FFS - now she has stooped to the patently absurd.  Incredible!


----------



## gracekelly

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*


I believe they are shining up a Nobel Prize for her as I write this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Suncatcher said:


> She is so scattered and so full of herself. First an actress. Then she gives it up to become royal. Then she gives it up because she wants to go back into acting, in a role that will allow her to win the EGOT. Now she thinks she wants a career in politics. Like a particular world leader who was only interested in winning and not actually governing she will also find out that if she wins an election she would have to govern and governing is a slog. If she found a garden party to be a bore I can’t imagine her pouring over policy material for a term of office. I would rather vote for some random person I come across in telephone book than her. She is not even suited to run for municipal politics, let alone something grander. Next we will hear how she wants to be sainted. The comedy never ends with this woman.



That’s my issue. It doesn’t seem like she wants to put the work in. She wants to ride other people’s coattails and steal their credit. She didn’t have a Number 1 Selling Book, the ladies of the Hubb Community Kitchen did. She had to steal the credit of the hard work they did and do and make it all about her because she wrote the forward. At no point does she acknowledge anyone in the work they do except in a way that makes it look like the serve her, from her speeches where she “empowers” people or is so “proud of them” to the random Zoom-bombing in dirty clothes with Harry. It’s so fake. I just wish they’d both go away for a few years and do some real work, raise their son in the anonymity they claim they want and prove they are actually out to do good instead of being a set of clout chasers.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> That’s my issue. It doesn’t seem like she wants to put the work in. She wants to ride other people’s coattails and steal their credit. She didn’t have a Number 1 Selling Book, the ladies of the Hubb Community Kitchen did. She had to steal the credit of the hard work they did and do and make it all about her because she wrote the forward. At no point does she acknowledge anyone in the work they do except in a way that makes it look like the serve her, from her speeches where she “empowers” people or is so “proud of them” to the random Zoom-bombing in dirty clothes with Harry. It’s so fake. I just wish they’d both go away for a few years and do some real work, raise their son in the anonymity they claim they want and prove they are actually out to do good instead of being a set of clout chasers.


I wonder if people like oprah are thinking about whether she has anything legit to offer. or just still looking at her as that wonderful woman who was so opressed by the Brits.
as someone here pointed out, people like Oprah and Tyler Perry came up the hard way.  Meghan seems to have led a pretty privileged life from the time she was a child.


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


>


lulilu - I had exactly the same reaction, I burst out loud laughing and startled the dog!

Wow, we've all been waiting for MM to arrive back in the US and save us, oh, the poor people of Britain, where she claimed racism drove her out, will never be able to benefit from her superior knowledge  because she is here is the USA to spread her fairy dust.  But, perhaps she will dispatch Harry back to Britain so he can cover that part of the world???? In the meantime instead of calling Oprah she could start by connecting with the black part of her heritage to find out about real life.

I really am at a loss to find the words to full describe the woman's ego.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> right....as you said there may be things we haven't heard about but as far as we know the only thing she's complained about in terms of racism is the British tabloids



Disclosure: this is just my opinion. 

Her skin color had nothing to do with the way she was treated in the UK. British tabloids would be all over any Harry's wife. The problem is that she keeps attracting their attention with controversial attitudes. It looks like she believes the saying, “there's no such thing as bad publicity,” and does whatever it takes to be always in the limelight. 

Using racism for self-promotion will do no good to a very serious problem. It is worrisome.


----------



## bag-mania

You know it’s to be expected that their charity patent application was deliberately written in a vague way, without any specific details. Meghan is only interested in whatever can get her the most attention. Focusing her charity on only one social issue is too limiting for her. She wants the freedom to be able to change focus from issue to issue, so she can  insert herself into whatever is currently in the news. That way she can always pretend to have her finger on the pulse of humanity.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Disclosure: this is just my opinion.
> 
> Her skin color had nothing to do with the way she was treated in the UK. British tabloids would be all over any Harry's wife. The problem is that she keeps attracting their attention with controversial attitudes. It looks like she believes the saying, “there's no such thing as bad publicity,” and does whatever it takes to be always in the limelight.
> 
> Using racism for self-promotion will do no good to a very serious problem. It is worrisome.


I can't say for 100% sure that she has never been subject to racial prejudice by the U.K. press but the British press hated Kate at the beginning. Called her all sorts of names etc. So I don't think MM was necessarily singled out because of her race.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I believe they are shining up a Nobel Prize for her as I write this.


Are you talking about the Nobel Prize for Peace? It could also be a Nobel prize in literature.


----------



## Emeline

Chanbal said:


> *Are you talking about the Nobel Prize for Peace? It could also be a Nobel prize in literature.*


Bet she is currently working on her acceptance speech.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Are you talking about the Nobel Prize for Peace? It could also be a Nobel prize in literature.


 I think they may have a new category for most woke person


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> I think they may have a new category for* most woke person*



Or the most narcissistic, and in THAT CROWD, well, that says SOMETHING, *gracekelly*, right?

These two....grifters, fakers, sniveling, mean, greedy, manipulative LIARS ~ as you can see, dear reader, this writer is truly at a loss for words where my dear friends H&M are concerned and that is the ONLY reason why I have not posted in recent weeks


----------



## chicinthecity777

She will never succeed in politics. Because being a politician means you actually do need to do work; you do need to interact with people from all walks of life. Some of those you encounter will hate your guts. If she can't even work a high class garden party where people at least pretend to be nice to each other, she would not survive in politics for a day! Besides, being a politician means you need to raise money for your campaign, a lot of it. She can't even raise sh1t for her "outer space" charity! It's beyond a joke!


----------



## PewPew

MM flips out when someone criticizes her dress, she’s not going to enter politics where you’re a lightning rod for public criticism and have to go to boring meetings without photographers.


----------



## CeeJay

.. and WHERE would she start said “political” career?!?! .. here in LA???  She would need to leave that Ivory Tower of hers in BH (gated community) and actually see the “real world” here .. like the massive homeless situation, the fire threats, what about Earthquake preparedness??? .. and those are just a few!  She grew up in a sheltered part of LA; it’s a massive county - heck, I’ve only been here for 7 years and there’s a lot I don’t know about. Is she really willing to go downtown to see the Tent cities, has she gone to any of the Soup Kitchens here, has she seen all the buildings no longer occupied.. yet, down the street a new “luxury” Condo/Apartment structure is being built???  I can just imagine her trying to get up in front of a group of irate Angelenos .. can you imagine what would happen if someone were to take her to task??? .. will they be called racists???  The two of them need to go back into their stupid cave and STAY THERE with their required security and STFU!!


----------



## Sol Ryan

CeeJay said:


> .. and WHERE would she start said “political” career?!?! .. here in LA???  She would need to leave that Ivory Tower of hers in BH (gated community) and actually see the “real world” here .. like the massive homeless situation, the fire threats, what about Earthquake preparedness??? .. and those are just a few!  She grew up in a sheltered part of LA; it’s a massive county - heck, I’ve only been here for 7 years and there’s a lot I don’t know about. Is she really willing to go downtown to see the Tent cities, has she gone to any of the Soup Kitchens here, has she seen all the buildings no longer occupied.. yet, down the street a new “luxury” Condo/Apartment structure is being built???  I can just imagine her trying to get up in front of a group of irate Angelenos .. can you imagine what would happen if someone were to take her to task??? .. will they be called racists???  The two of them need to go back into their stupid cave and STAY THERE with their required security and STFU!!



as if she was interested in LA politics.... that’s small potatoes... I bet she wants to be the next AOC...


----------



## poopsie

Sol Ryan said:


> as if she was interested in LA politics.... that’s small potatoes... I bet she wants to be the next AOC...


Pfffffffttttttttt
1600 Pennsylvania Ave or bust


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ic_locon

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*




Looks like Lady C’s predictions are coming true.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Pfffffffttttttttt
> 1600 Pennsylvania Ave or bust





ic_locon said:


> Looks like Lady C’s predictions are coming true.



Boldly, Lady Campbell reportedly wrote that "England doesn't do it" for Meghan and that she would like to run for president of the United States one day because she is "an operator" and "a fame addict." https://news.amomama.com/213794-lady-colin-campbell-calls-meghan-markle.html 

Thinking about relocating, is Australia far enough?


----------



## Sol Ryan

poopsie said:


> Pfffffffttttttttt
> 1600 Pennsylvania Ave or bust



Every political campaign I’ve ever worked the candidate lost... I’ll gladly volunteer for hers...


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> Boldly, Lady Campbell reportedly wrote that "England doesn't do it" for Meghan and that she would like to run for president of the United States one day because she is "an operator" and "a fame addict." https://news.amomama.com/213794-lady-colin-campbell-calls-meghan-markle.html
> 
> Thinking about relocating, is Australia far enough?


Thanks but no thanks, the UK can keep her
We have major issues w real discrimination against Australian Aborigines (racism is big in Australia as much as most Aussies would prefer to claim the country is not racist) and other minorities so nobody is going to bother to ask her if she is OK, we have real issues to deal with
(Aboriginal deaths in custody is a big concern here)


----------



## chicinthecity777

pukasonqo said:


> Thanks but no thanks, the UK can keep her
> We have major issues w real discrimination against Australian Aborigines (racism is big in Australia as much as most Aussies would prefer to claim the country is not racist) and other minorities so nobody is going to bother to ask her if she is OK, we have real issues to deal with
> (Aboriginal deaths in custody is a big concern here)


Well last time I checked, she wasn't born British and she left the UK for the U.S. so no, we are not lucky to "keep" her. And thank God for that! Even if it was temporary. Sorry U.S. guys!


----------



## Lodpah

This is one of the reasons I think Meghan is so hateful to the BRF. Watch at starting .20 seconds in. Watch her expression as her and Harry are led away and watch how Harry gestures to PC as it is necessary. So sad.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> This is one of the reasons I think Meghan is so hateful to the BRF. Watch at starting .20 seconds in. Watch her expression as her and Harry are led away and watch how Harry gestures to PC as it is necessary. So sad.



Oh that was awkward! So they weren’t even supposed to enter the room it looked like! And then the staff seemed to usher then quickly out once they realised M & H were in there.
100% they knew what they were supposed to do but broke the rules anyway.


----------



## mdcx

chicinthecity777 said:


> She will never succeed in politics. Because being a politician means you actually do need to do work; you do need to interact with people from all walks of life. Some of those you encounter will hate your guts. If she can't even work a high class garden party where people at least pretend to be nice to each other, she would not survive in politics for a day! Besides, being a politician means you need to raise money for your campaign, a lot of it. She can't even raise sh1t for her "outer space" charity! It's beyond a joke!


“Making conversation”, as in neutral, comfortable conversation that makes the other party feel at ease, is one of those essential skills for a working royal. M does not strike me as someone who can be bothered with it. The BRF are often recorded when interacting with the public, so it becomes even more important that they can manage it well.
Kate has this down pat.


----------



## Lodpah

This girl says the truth. This is probably the best description of Meghan and how she lured H formerly known as Harry (her words).


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> This girl says the truth. This is probably the best description of Meghan and how she lured H formerly known as Harry (her words).



Wow, interesting stuff!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Come to think of it, if her going into politics means she and JCH (if they are still married) will have give up their titles properly then I am all for it! But i sense with her it's just all talks! She will stick to her grand statements and word salad with no action to back them up, like she's always done. 

Still waiting to hear how "they wanted privacy" has turned out for them.


----------



## beautymagpie

Lodpah said:


> This is one of the reasons I think Meghan is so hateful to the BRF. Watch at starting .20 seconds in. Watch her expression as her and Harry are led away and watch how Harry gestures to PC as it is necessary. So sad.



I’m amazed tbh there’s no training or brief beforehand to avoid awkwardness. Or maybe there is and MM ignored it on the basis she’d do what she wanted and if it ‘upset’ her it was added ammo to get Harry on side the poor M train.


----------



## zen1965

Harry, of course, would have known how to behave at that event. He should have acted accordingly.
The 2nd video is cray-cray to me. Doria killed her brother to get her house?! Alright then.


----------



## byzina

Lodpah said:


> This is one of the reasons I think Meghan is so hateful to the BRF. Watch at starting .20 seconds in. Watch her expression as her and Harry are led away and watch how Harry gestures to PC as it is necessary. So sad.




Meghan was expecting something like the Kardashian family - lot's of relatives getting attention together. BRF is all about traditions otherwise they wouldn't exist any more.
It was obvious from the very beginning she had to work hard to gain the respect of the family. Most ordinary families are not extremely excited about their children's wives. And this family are aware of their wealth and power and of a huge financial/social gap between H and M. H is one of the best matches for Meghan ever, but there are lots of women like Meghan who would be happy and proud to marry the prince.

UPD: The last sentence is from the point of view of his relatives, of course, who love him. I'm personally is not really impressed.


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> This is one of the reasons I think Meghan is so hateful to the BRF. Watch at starting .20 seconds in. Watch her expression as her and Harry are led away and watch how Harry gestures to PC as it is necessary. So sad.




So thirsty all the time and asked to leave i don’t know how many times.  So pathetic and pitiful that a person would be this bold and stupid,  she really no shame. I really am wondering if she wasn’t asked to leave England as well.  Think about it, it makes perfect sense.  She gets asked and paid to leave England.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> This girl says the truth. This is probably the best description of Meghan and how she lured H formerly known as Harry (her words).



ha....interesting...not sure I can comfortably call her a psychopath....never heard that stuff about Doria before.  Oprah's black illuminati?  never heard of that


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> I really am wondering if she wasn’t asked to leave England as well.  Think about it, it makes perfect sense.  She gets asked and paid to leave England.



I don’t think it was like that. If the royal family had asked her to leave she would have made sure it was publicized all over the world. She never would’ve missed an opportunity to ride the pity train all the way to LA. She would still be wallowing in the sympathy and attention.

Plus the family never wanted Harry to leave and they would take him back in a second if he wanted it.


----------



## kemilia

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well last time I checked, she wasn't born British and she left the UK for the U.S. so no, we are not lucky to "keep" her. And thank God for that! Even if it was temporary. Sorry U.S. guys!


----------



## chicinthecity777

kemilia said:


>


----------



## kemilia

zen1965 said:


> Harry, of course, would have known how to behave at that event. He should have acted accordingly.
> The 2nd video is cray-cray to me. Doria killed her brother to get her house?! Alright then.


Never heard the bit about Doria and her brother, however, other things in this vid make sense. 

I do think M is impulsive and jumps from thing to thing. And why in the world did she not research the heck out of royal protocol, traditions, etc. if she was hell-bent on snagging H? That makes no sense to me unless she just figured everyone would fall for her and then fall in line with whatever she wanted, just like dumb old H did. 

But it proved to be a very bad (and lazy) thing--she just does not see the value in making a genuine effort except for snagging and keeping H where she needs him. Looking at the many ways she mimicked Diana, even perfume--H being basically a dimwit and depressed, of course he went for it. Finally someone who "gets" him. Sad that it was her. And again I feel for the baby.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Never heard the bit about Doria and her brother, however, other things in this vid make sense.
> 
> I do think M is impulsive and jumps from thing to thing. And why in the world did she not research the heck out of royal protocol, traditions, etc. if she was hell-bent on snagging H? That makes no sense to me unless she just figured everyone would fall for her and then fall in line with whatever she wanted, just like dumb old H did.
> 
> But it proved to be a very bad (and lazy) thing--she just does not see the value in making a genuine effort except for snagging and keeping H where she needs him. Looking at the many ways she mimicked Diana, even perfume--H being basically a dimwit and depressed, of course he went for it. Finally someone who "gets" him. Sad that it was her. And again I feel for the baby.


yes, I think she's manipulative.  psychopath? don't know.  that video is interesting speculation IMO


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> ha....interesting...not sure I can comfortably call her a psychopath....never heard that stuff about Doria before.  Oprah's black illuminati?  never heard of that


Yes, and (supposedly) Jay-Z and Beyoncé .. this notion drives me nuts because it’s obvious that those that say this do not know the meaning of Illuminati!!!!


----------



## Lounorada

tiktok said:


> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle feels that her 'gnawing urgency to uproot from England' was fate so that she could be at the 'forefront' of the fight against systemic racism, the insider explained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle tells friends her instinct to leave the UK 'all makes sense' now because she was 'destined' to help fight systemic racism in US - and she hasn't ruled out a career in politics*








Sure Meg. *If this story is true* That would mean you'd have to get off your a$$, leave the multi-million dollar mansion in BH that you're squatting in, put in some seriously hard work and actually use your privilege to make a change. Although, we all know she won't be doing any of that.  It's more her style to hijack the years of hard work of other people and take credit for it herself. She comes across as so utterly insufferable.



sdkitty said:


> I guess the reality is *she wants to be rich and famous.*  for what and how is less important.


 And don't forget _adored_. She seems to want plenty of adoration... we've all seen how they act when they don't get that


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> Sure Meg. *If this story is true* That would mean you'd have to get off your a$$, leave the multi-million dollar mansion in BH that you're squatting in, put in some seriously hard work and actually use your privilege to make a change. Although, we all know she won't be doing any of that.  It's more her style to hijack the years of hard work of other people and take credit for it herself. She comes across as so utterly insufferable.
> 
> And don't forget _adored_. She seems to want plenty of adoration... we've all seen how they act when they don't get that


yes, and I think she got plenty of adoration (and I'm sure still does).  I think there were many women and girls who identified with her.  some may be disappointed and I'm sure some don't want to see the negative side of her.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> US doesn't deserve one more burden. We have already the highest number of covid cases, we need a break. *Queen Elizabeth, please take her back *(with my deepest apologies to our UK members).


No way she is all yours !!!


----------



## Chagall

Her wanting to be a politician is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. She’s a run away train that someone needs to stop. Is there nobody anywhere that wants to smarten her up and burst that huge over inflated ego of hers. Does everyone around her just sit back and let her believe   all this nonsense about herself?


----------



## Frivole88

Looks like she has no plans of returning to UK



This week, Harry and Meghan filed official documents confirming the split. ‘It would appear to demonstrate that they have no intention of coming back,’ a courtier tells me. ‘The choice of lawyers is of great importance to the Royal Household and Gerrard was a useful neutral link man between the Sussexes and the Palace.’

Harbottle & Lewis was representing the couple’s planned not-for-profit organisation, Archewell, but it has been replaced by a rival firm, Fieldfisher. A source close to Harry and Meghan tells me: ‘They wanted to instruct their own lawyers, not those also used by the Royal Family. They are on an independent path.’


----------



## chicinthecity777

kristinlorraine said:


> Looks like she has no plans of returning to UK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4763984
> 
> This week, Harry and Meghan filed official documents confirming the split. ‘It would appear to demonstrate that they have no intention of coming back,’ a courtier tells me. ‘The choice of lawyers is of great importance to the Royal Household and Gerrard was a useful neutral link man between the Sussexes and the Palace.’
> 
> Harbottle & Lewis was representing the couple’s planned not-for-profit organisation, Archewell, but it has been replaced by a rival firm, Fieldfisher. A source close to Harry and Meghan tells me: ‘They wanted to instruct their own lawyers, not those also used by the Royal Family. They are on an independent path.’


Well good! I hope they are paying for their own lawyers too!


----------



## kemilia

elvisfan4life said:


> No way she is all yours !!!


How long can H stay in the US (legally)? I realize he has a US citizen wife, but I don't know what that all means visa-wise, green card-wise, etc. And I doubt he's thought that through--his whole life has been a series of babysitters taking care of his every whim.


----------



## zinacef

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well good! I hope they are paying for their own lawyers too!


So these are the new lawyers that filed the paperwork for the Arche foundation without enclosing the fees and using the exact language?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

zinacef said:


> So these are the new lawyers that filed the paperwork for the Arche foundation *without enclosing the fees* and using the exact language?


LOL!  

I thought maybe they were using lawyers from Oprah’s Illuminati, but now I think not.


----------



## csshopper

scarlet555 said:


> LOL!
> 
> I thought maybe they were using lawyers from Oprah’s Illuminati, but now I think not.


As evidenced by many prior decisions these two have fumbled, they seem to favor "dim" witted, not "illumined"


----------



## poopsie

Maybe she can do the "baby bar" thing like Kim did and handle it all herself
Insert huge eyeroll


----------



## PewPew

kemilia said:


> How long can H stay in the US (legally)? I realize he has a US citizen wife, but I don't know what that all means visa-wise, green card-wise, etc. And I doubt he's thought that through--his whole life has been a series of babysitters taking care of his every whim.



Harry can stay as long as he wants. He’s not going to get deported, given who he is. He’ll eventually get a “permanent visa” aka green card status, as most rich people   buy their way in (article below has details & amounts). But he doesn’t even have to do much, between his household staff & his foundation, some congressman will write a letter saying he  “created jobs & helps the U.S. economy.” He’ll keep his UK citizenship, but just get legal resident (green card) status.









						Yes, you can buy your way into U.S. citizenship
					

It’s known as the ‘million dollar green card,’ a visa program that offers permanent U.S. residency and eventually citizenship when you invest money and create jobs




					www.theglobeandmail.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

byzina said:


> It was obvious from the very beginning she had to work hard to gain the respect of the family. Most ordinary families are not extremely excited about their children's wives.



Not sure I agree. From what we saw they bent over backwards to be welcoming towards here, gave her privileges very early on Kate had to earn over years, were very inclusive towards her mother (have you ever seen the Middletons anywhere in the BRF's business aside from official family portraits for the wedding or the christenings of the kids? But Doria was there to introduce Archie to the Queen) and let her get away with attitude (that shared thing with the Queen where she refused to wear a hat even though she had been told to? The Queen could have just cancelled on her - not over the hat but over the impertinence - yet she didn't).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well good! I hope they are paying for their own lawyers too!



Aw you good soul. Hope dies last I guess.


----------



## ic_locon

Royal aides fear Prince Harry and Meghan new book will blame William
					

The book 'Finding Freedom', which Harry and Meghan are believed to have co-operated with, is soon to be released and charts the couple's journey into their departure from the Royal Family.



					www.google.com.ph
				




Of course, they’ll blame Prince William, Duchess Kate, the entire BRF, the media, the British people and whoever else they can! They will never accept that they had a problem. They were victims in all of this, were pushed into Megxit and had no other choice.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw you good soul. Hope dies last I guess.


I know! My hope is way too high! ***Sigh***


----------



## chicinthecity777

ic_locon said:


> Royal aides fear Prince Harry and Meghan new book will blame William
> 
> 
> The book 'Finding Freedom', which Harry and Meghan are believed to have co-operated with, is soon to be released and charts the couple's journey into their departure from the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, they’ll blame Prince William, Duchess Kate, the entire BRF, the media, the British people and whoever else they can! They will never accept that they had a problem. They were victims in all of this, were pushed into Megxit and had no other choice.


Of course it's always someone else's fault! These 2 are saints can do no wrong, only according to themselves!


----------



## kemilia

Well, here it is Father's Day in the US, waiting for an artsy pic of A & H. 

The photos Kate took of her 3 children and William were great, M isn't gonna let those override her family's wokeness, imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> Well, here it is Father's Day in the US, waiting for an artsy pic of A & H.
> 
> The photos Kate took of her 3 children and William were great, M isn't gonna let those override her family's wokeness, imo.



She also took a really cute pic of William and Prince Charles.


----------



## Roxanna

Interesting video I came across. Lady  Colin Campbell talks abt how Harry's and Megan decision to get involved in politics is strictly against BRF policy of non involvement  in political issues and might as well be intentionaly coincided with Prince William Birthday.


----------



## scarlet555

Roxanna said:


> Interesting video I came across. Lady  Colin Campbell talks abt how Harry's and Megan decision to get involved in politics is strictly against BRF policy of non involvement  in political issues and might as well be intentionaly coincided with Prince William Birthday.




No shock again.  M is shameless.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan must be eaten up inside with envy and disillusionment. She assumed she would be a big star in demand by everyone by summer. Instead she’s hunkered down in a borrowed mansion, scheming how to get her name in the media every day when she has not done anything useful in many months.


----------



## Lodpah

So  now these 2 grifters don’t think ahead and release this book attacking the BRF then I don’t believe their 12 month review will be good and PC will probably cut them off if he has not at least reduced. 

BTW I read that they are not senior royals. There’s a hierarchy in that order.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

In today’s news, Meghan and Harry getting involved with BLM. She gave a high school graduation speech for crying out loud and she didn’t offer any ideas. She only said a few nice, but ultimately meaningless words.

Notice how quickly they threw aside their intense desire to help the mentally ill when it’s been replaced in the news.





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## Annawakes

I think she probably dreams of being President because it’s the only status that is sort of equivalent to, or even higher than, Kate’s position as Queen consort (I hope I got that title right) once William becomes King.  She would be sort of equal footing with William then, whereas Kate is only the spouse.  In her most wildest fantasies lol.


----------



## bag-mania

I want her to run for President. It would be amusing to watch her overestimate her abilities yet again. She couldn’t even last 18 months as a pampered duchess in the BRF where literally all she had to do was attend to a few charitable duties. It was all too overwhelming and she had to run away because she was sad. Boo hoo!

Can you imagine her in a debate against other candidates? She and her pretty word salad would be torn to shreds. I say bring it on!


----------



## 1LV

She is probably thinking more along the lines of political adviser, maybe a show on CNN.  Her beauty AND brains would be displayed across America!  I can see her practicing in front of her bathroom mirror now.


----------



## bellecate




----------



## Chagall

bellecate said:


> View attachment 4764967


That is so sad. I feel very sorry for that man. I’m sure he wasn’t perfect and made mistakes like everyone else, but her treatment of him says so much about her.


----------



## CeeJay

ic_locon said:


> Royal aides fear Prince Harry and Meghan new book will blame William
> 
> 
> The book 'Finding Freedom', which Harry and Meghan are believed to have co-operated with, is soon to be released and charts the couple's journey into their departure from the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, they’ll blame Prince William, Duchess Kate, the entire BRF, the media, the British people and whoever else they can! They will never accept that they had a problem. They were victims in all of this, were pushed into Megxit and had no other choice.


How stupid is this?? .. her *ENORMOUS *ego has made her as dim-witted as her husband!  Obviously, hasn't heard the idiom "_don't bite the hand that feeds you_"!!!  I mean, really .. what did these 2 really expect? .. to be co-King & co-Queen???  When will the 12-month review be? .. I truly hope that QEII and PC just CUT THEM OFF!


----------



## 1LV

Chagall said:


> That is so sad. I feel very sorry for that man. I’m sure he wasn’t perfect and made mistakes like everyone else, but her treatment of him says so much about her.


I completely agree.  Thought the same thing when I saw the photo.  MM really turned out to be a cold fish, didn’t she?  I do wonder how much Doria plays into this.  She doesn’t strike me as particularly warm.


----------



## scarlet555

1LV said:


> I completely agree.  Thought the same thing when I saw the photo.  MM really turned out to be a cold fish, didn’t she?  I do wonder how much Doria plays into this.  She doesn’t strike me as particularly warm.


LOL, i thought you were talking about H... But might as well be.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I want her to run for President.* It would be amusing to watch her overestimate her abilities yet again. She couldn’t even last 18 months as a pampered duchess in the BRF where literally all she had to do was attend to a few charitable duties. It was all too overwhelming and she had to run away because she was sad. Boo hoo!
> 
> Can you imagine her in a debate against other candidates? She and her pretty word salad would be torn to shreds. I say bring it on!


With all due respect, *we do not want that. *We have already enough problems, and the last thing we want is to fund parasites. Oprah and Bill Gates (and other potential targets) will do us all a disservice if they sponsor MM & H.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The BRF is not bad at throwing shade. I was looking at their official Instagram and a few entries back it had a post about the horses they use for ceremonies (two particular breeds), and it said "Swipe if you want to see them used in the recent royal weddings". Well...the recent weddings were Will's and Kate's LOL At least they didn't go as far as showing Eugenie's wedding while skipping Harry's, but then again, it's Kate MM hates with all her soul.


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> I completely agree.  Thought the same thing when I saw the photo.  MM really turned out to be a cold fish, didn’t she?  I do wonder how much Doria plays into this.  She doesn’t strike me as particularly warm.


I would say more like a cold-hearted biatch!  Her father did everything for her in her younger years, and this is how she "pays him back"?  He got the all-time MEGA-MARKLE!


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> I would say more like a cold-hearted biatch!  Her father did everything for her in her younger years, and this is how she "pays him back"?  He got the all-time MEGA-MARKLE!


True


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> With all due respect, *we do not want that. *We have already enough problems, and the last thing we want is to fund parasites. Oprah and Bill Gates (and other potential targets) will do us all a disservice if they sponsor MM & H.



There's absolutely nothing to worry about. There's not a chance in hell of Meghan running. Oprah and Bill Gates would fund their own campaigns for the presidency before they put support behind Meghan's. They didn't get where they are by being stupid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, they are posting nothing, nada, zilch for Father’s Day????  After the adorable photos that W&K posted of their kiddies with Will and Will with Prince Charles?? Nothing?   _That_, dear ones, is very telling. Perhaps they have already been cut off. Hmmm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Read at Harry Markle blog that Harry went to England last night. Hope all is well with Prince Phillip.


----------



## LaidyM

Lodpah said:


> Read at Harry Markle blog that Harry went to England last night. Hope all is well with Prince Phillip.



It may be as simple as visa issue (which further proof they are winging it- shame this was one issue I had wished they planned ahead), if he entered on a tourist visa from Canada, as a British subject he only has 3 months he can legally stay in the US on that visa, in normal times you can theoretically extend it for an extra 3, but ***** is being an ******* about visas (as I hear from friends who are in the US on student and work visas).


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if Harry wished his brother a happy birthday.


----------



## LaidyM

LaidyM said:


> It may be as simple as visa issue (which further proof they are winging it- shame this was one issue I had wished they planned ahead), if he entered on a tourist visa from Canada, as a British subject he only has 3 months he can legally stay in the US on that visa, in normal times you can theoretically extend it for an extra 3, but ***** is being an ******* about visas (as I hear from friends who are in the US on student and work visas).



I stand corrected by a British friend: Harry likely has an ESTA which means he had to leave within 90 days of entering the US, no extensions, to reset it he has to return to the UK.


----------



## chicinthecity777

LaidyM said:


> I stand corrected by a British friend: Harry likely has an ESTA which means he had to leave within 90 days of entering the US, no extensions, to reset it he has to return to the UK.


And with ESTA, he cannot work in the U.S. e.g. not generate an income.


----------



## Chagall

chicinthecity777 said:


> And with ESTA, he cannot work in the U.S. e.g. not generate an income.


If Harry cannot work or generate an income in the US how did he hope to be independent financially from the BRF as he and MM stated?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chagall said:


> If Harry cannot work or generate an income in the US how did he hope to be independent financially from the BRF as he and MM stated?


I am only guessing, presumably that their "new independent" lawyers are working on getting him a spouse green card which will allow him to work in the U.S.


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> And with ESTA, he cannot work in the U.S. e.g. not generate an income.



That doesn’t seem to be an issue!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> That doesn’t seem to be an issue!


 indeed!


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> And with ESTA, he cannot work in the U.S. e.g. not generate an income.


And he presumably was paid for the Goldman Sachs speech


----------



## 1LV

Exceptions are always going to be made for certain people, and MM & Harry are two of them.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> And with ESTA, he cannot work in the U.S. e.g. not generate an income.





lanasyogamama said:


> That doesn’t seem to be an issue!



Not to work doesn't seem to be an issue and income from the nonprofit Archpoorly (or from any foundation) goes to M. You may have nailed it!


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> And he presumably was paid for the Goldman Sachs speech


You mean his speech at JP Morgan summit in Miami? I suspect the money was not paid to him directly, e.g. via some loophole...


----------



## PewPew

Another book about Harry will be coming out in the Fall. This one is by biographer Rober Lacey, who’s also a historical consultant on the Netflix show *The Crown.* The book will focus on Harry’s relationship with William & will be called *Battle of Brothers: William and Harry - the Friendship and the Feuds

*_The book explores conflicts that emerge as a result of the heir and the spare dynamic that permeates British aristocracy, and claims that the 'seeds of damage were sown' when William and Harry's parents' marriage unravelled._









						New book will explore 'untold reality' of William and Harry's rift
					

Biographer Robert Lacey, author of Majesty, a 1977 study of Queen Elizabeth, has penned Battle of Brothers: William and Harry - the Friendship and the Feuds, set to be released in October.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> And he presumably was paid for the Goldman Sachs speech


wonder if they will get more engagements like that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> And he presumably was paid for the Goldman Sachs speech



They were still living in Canada at that time.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> They were still living in Canada at that time.


I wouldn't think it would make any difference. He was not entitled to work in the U.S. without a proper work visa/permit etc. Maybe he was paid by the JPM's UK subsidiary to his UK account. Who knows what they did.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> wonder if they will get more engagements like that


Not likely for a long time. Don't think many people have interest in a privileged white male's struggle with his mother's untimely death these days and into the future.


----------



## CeeJay

I don't know, maybe it's me but .. while Diana's death was horrible, it has been quite some time since it happened .. AND (_supposedly_) Harry had many discussions with Mental Health folks (to help him deal with it) .. YET, here we are .. and he is STILL bemoaning it!  From my perspective, he is USING her Death for what .. making money???  That's pathetic IMO!  

Meanwhile, yet again .. MM's "friends" (_HA - does she even have any_???) .. are saying that MM was 'concerned' *for some time* about Jessica "using" her and "profiting" from their relationship .. *SERIOUSLY*????  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Jessica-Mulroney-profiting-relationship.html


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I don't know, maybe it's me but .. while Diana's death was horrible, it has been quite some time since it happened .. AND (_supposedly_) Harry had many discussions with Mental Health folks (to help him deal with it) .. YET, here we are .. and he is STILL bemoaning it!  From my perspective, he is USING her Death for what .. making money???  That's pathetic IMO!
> 
> Meanwhile, yet again .. MM's "friends" (_HA - does she even have any_???) .. are saying that MM was 'concerned' *for some time* about Jessica "using" her and "profiting" from their relationship .. *SERIOUSLY*????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Jessica-Mulroney-profiting-relationship.html


right....but she wasn't "using" Jessica before she found her golden goose?


----------



## 1LV

A couple of leeches with overinflated egos and sense of entitlement that knows no bounds.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> right....but she wasn't "using" Jessica before she found her golden goose?


Oh, I know .. that's what I find rather ironic about this .. like MM didn't "USE" Jessica to get into that elite Toronto circle and then from that, extend that into folks in the UK who had connections!!!  I think .. slowly, the "truth" is going to start coming out about MM!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I know .. that's what I find rather ironic about this .. like MM didn't "USE" Jessica to get into that elite Toronto circle and then from that, extend that into folks in the UK who had connections!!!  I think .. slowly, the "truth" is going to start coming out about MM!


I know lots of people - actors and otherwise - use things like networking to get ahead.  but Meghan seems extra-calculating to me. 
Just the idea that she decided she wanted an English man?  why?  because she was d-list in the US and couldn't attract an A-list guy?
she did succeed - probably beyond her wildest dreams


----------



## Tootsie17

1LV said:


> A couple of leeches with overinflated egos and sense of entitlement that knows no bounds.


So true! That's why they make the perfect couple.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> I know lots of people - actors and otherwise - use things like networking to get ahead.  but Meghan seems extra-calculating to me.
> Just the idea that she decided she wanted an English man?  why?  because she was d-list in the US and couldn't attract an A-list guy?
> she did succeed - probably beyond her wildest dreams


I agree. From the outside looking in, she did succeed. However, when you marry for money or fame, I believe you have to earn every penny. I bet quite a few times she's been miserable due to her own scheming.


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> I agree. From the outside looking in, she did succeed. However, when you marry for money or fame, I believe you have to earn every penny. I bet quite a few times she's been miserable due to her own scheming.


not sure how miserable but she certainly doesn't seem very appreciative after getting what she wanted....must be sad for "H"


----------



## jcnc

1LV said:


> Exceptions are always going to be made for certain people, and MM & Harry are two of them.


Not trying to bring politics but even Melania ***** got paid when she was on a tourist visa.. the government definitely picks and chooses rules when convenient.
I don’t think legality of his stay/remuneration are on their mind


----------



## PewPew

I wanted to follow up on the discussion of whether Jessica Mulroney would “spill the beans” on Meghan after being Markled (After Jess lost her jobs for bullying & insensitivity, Jess said her special friendship with M gave her insight into racism, but M’s “friends” said M has distanced herself from Jess, who she felt used M’s status for professional gain).

There’s been so much professional fallout, that I can’t see Jess & her husband ever speaking against H&M, unless possibly under subpoena.

Ben Mulroney has stepped down from his long-time (18 yrs) job as host of a Canadian entertainment program. He’ll still be doing red carpet events and other jobs for them. (It’s believed he and the program were getting hate mail/comments). I didn’t realize he was an entertainment reporter/host. Reporting on H&M for years, while knowing the inside scoop from his wife (M’s ex-BFF) must have been interesting & certainly a way to shape the narrative to help M as an insider before recent events.









						Ben Mulroney steps down as host of Canadian  celebrity news show
					

Ben, 44, announced the 'immediate' change on Your Morning. He is stepping down as anchor on CTV's 'etalk' but will still host Your Morning and do red carpet coverage.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I don't know, maybe it's me but .. while Diana's death was horrible, it has been quite some time since it happened .. AND (_supposedly_) Harry had many discussions with Mental Health folks (to help him deal with it) .. YET, here we are .. and he is STILL bemoaning it!  From my perspective, he is USING her Death for what .. making money???  That's pathetic IMO!
> 
> Meanwhile, yet again .. MM's "friends" (_HA - does she even have any_???) .. are saying that MM was 'concerned' *for some time* about Jessica "using" her and "profiting" from their relationship .. *SERIOUSLY*????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Jessica-Mulroney-profiting-relationship.html



Diana's death was likely very traumatizing for a boy that spent all his life under the spotlight. 
He is very immature, and the idea of profiting from talking about his mother likely came from MM. He changed a lot after marrying her. According to Duncan Larcombe (New York Post) "All of Harry's staff have always thought he was fantastic, but the two of them [together] are high maintenance." 

I am also rather curious about who are "Meghan's closest pals" and "Meghan't friends", they must all have been at her weeding.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Diana's death was likely very traumatizing for a boy that spent all his life under the spotlight.
> He is very immature, and the idea of profiting from talking about his mother likely came from MM. He changed a lot after marrying her. According to Duncan Larcombe (New York Post) "All of Harry's staff have always thought he was fantastic, but the two of them [together] are high maintenance."
> 
> I am also rather curious about who are "Meghan's closest pals" and "Meghan't friends", they must all have been at her weeding.


some think Meghan's "friends" who leak stories are actually Meghan or her staff


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> some think Meghan's "friends" who leak stories are actually Meghan or her staff


She must be paying those "friends". Whatever she saves on rent, invests in story leaks.


----------



## Sol Ryan

She must spend all her time yelling at her “friends” since this move was about wanting privacy. Shame they keep running to the media... 

Please note the sarcasm lol


----------



## chowlover2

_How come no one has mentioned Harry was spotted in the UK? Allegedly Meghan and Archie are with him, I just cannot see her setting her foot there again. Anyway he supposedly flew in to see Phillip._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chowlover2 said:


> _How come no one has mentioned Harry was spotted in the UK? Allegedly Meghan and Archie are with him, I just cannot see her setting her foot there again. Anyway he supposedly flew in to see Phillip._



Maybe their relationship is at a point where she fears if she loosens her grip to much he'll slip through her fingers, so she came to keep her thumb down on him. 

Has it been reported Phillip is unwell?


----------



## chicinthecity777

chowlover2 said:


> _How come no one has mentioned Harry was spotted in the UK? Allegedly Meghan and Archie are with him, I just cannot see her setting her foot there again. Anyway he supposedly flew in to see Phillip._


It's because it hasn't been reported here. Really they (H&M) is not that high in our priority here. As I said before, this thread is my main source of H&M news.


----------



## kemilia

chowlover2 said:


> _How come no one has mentioned Harry was spotted in the UK? Allegedly Meghan and Archie are with him, I just cannot see her setting her foot there again. Anyway he supposedly flew in to see Phillip._


Someone mentioned it on this thread yesterday, worried that maybe his father was ill. Then it was thought maybe he has to leave the US, return to the UK, and then come back to the US for visa reasons, just theories. But I'm surprised there isn't any news about it. 

I doubt M or A is with him, anchor baby stays put with M and she's not going back any time soon.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I am also rather curious about who are "Meghan's closest pals" and "Meghan't friends", *they must all have been at her weeding*.



I know it was a typo but it is so appropriate. The way Meghan cuts people out of her life, she treats them like they are no more than weeds.


----------



## opensesame

PewPew said:


> Harry can stay as long as he wants. He’s not going to get deported, given who he is. He’ll eventually get a “permanent visa” aka green card status, as most rich people   buy their way in (article below has details & amounts). But he doesn’t even have to do much, between his household staff & his foundation, some congressman will write a letter saying he  “created jobs & helps the U.S. economy.” He’ll keep his UK citizenship, but just get legal resident (green card) status.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you can buy your way into U.S. citizenship
> 
> 
> It’s known as the ‘million dollar green card,’ a visa program that offers permanent U.S. residency and eventually citizenship when you invest money and create jobs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theglobeandmail.com



This is the part that really gross me out. I am pretty sure he doesn’t even have to “buy,” green card. I think he is going to get it due to his “exceptional ability.” I‘ve seen some defunct royalties get this status despite them having no “exceptional ability,” other than their last names. It infuriates me because it goes against everything America is supposed to stand for.


----------



## chicinthecity777

opensesame said:


> This is the part that really gross me out. I am pretty sure he doesn’t even have to “buy,” green card. I think he is going to get it due to his “exceptional ability.” I‘ve seen some defunct royalties get this status despite them having no “exceptional ability,” other than their last names. It infuriates me because it goes against everything America is supposed to stand for.


He's married to a U.S. citizen so he can get a green card that way. He doesn't need to "buy" anything or have exceptional abilities.


----------



## TC1

PewPew said:


> I wanted to follow up on the discussion of whether Jessica Mulroney would “spill the beans” on Meghan after being Markled (After Jess lost her jobs for bullying & insensitivity, Jess said her special friendship with M gave her insight into racism, but M’s “friends” said M has distanced herself from Jess, who she felt used M’s status for professional gain).
> 
> There’s been so much professional fallout, that I can’t see Jess & her husband ever speaking against H&M, unless possibly under subpoena.
> 
> Ben Mulroney has stepped down from his long-time (18 yrs) job as host of a Canadian entertainment program. He’ll still be doing red carpet events and other jobs for them. (It’s believed he and the program were getting hate mail/comments). I didn’t realize he was an entertainment reporter/host. Reporting on H&M for years, while knowing the inside scoop from his wife (M’s ex-BFF) must have been interesting & certainly a way to shape the narrative to help M as an insider before recent events.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ben Mulroney steps down as host of Canadian  celebrity news show
> 
> 
> Ben, 44, announced the 'immediate' change on Your Morning. He is stepping down as anchor on CTV's 'etalk' but will still host Your Morning and do red carpet coverage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Apparently Lainey wrote an article about how Jess was "keeping score" of who supported her and who didn't..and that she's a nightmare. I think it seemed that Ben (her co-worker) was picking and choosing as well. So he decided to step down. Word is because of Lainey "calling them out"


----------



## bisousx

chicinthecity777 said:


> He's married to a U.S. citizen so he can get a green card that way. He doesn't need to "buy" anything or have exceptional abilities.



This. They’ve probably applied already for what’s called adjustment of status and he applied for/was granted a travel waiver for the meantime. He’ll probably get the greencard within 1 year like most other legitimate marriages applying.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Apparently Lainey wrote an article about how Jess was "keeping score" of who supported her and who didn't..and that she's a nightmare. I think it seemed that Ben (her co-worker) was picking and choosing as well. So he decided to step down. Word is because of Lainey "calling them out"


almost sounds like junior high stuff
but of course stakes are much higher


----------



## CeeJay

opensesame said:


> This is the part that really gross me out. I am pretty sure he doesn’t even have to “buy,” green card. I think he is going to get it due to his “exceptional ability.” I‘ve seen some defunct royalties get this status despite them having no “exceptional ability,” other than their last names. It infuriates me because it goes against everything America is supposed to stand for.


If I recall correctly, a former Italian Royal (house of Savoy - Northern Italy) .. now owns/operates a Pasta Food Truck out here in CA .. and supposedly, the pasta is pretty darn good .. so, at least he has some 'ability'!!!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> almost *sounds like junior high stuff*
> but of course stakes are much higher


.. well then, quelle surprise that Jess and MM were so close!  IMO .. Meghan still acts like she is in Junior High or High School, after all .. that's when she was so spoiled by her Father!


----------



## CeeJay

Are you kidding me????  Boy, MM must be "pounding the pavement" (not literally - obviously) .. getting all these 'WONDERFUL' books out about her!  Seriously .. "the most charismatic member of the Royal Family"???????  

*'Pioneering' new Meghan Markle book vows to 'set record straight' on 'most talked about woman in the world' as royal biographer explores why 'the most charismatic member of the Royal Family was so upset' before Megxit*

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...y-set-record-straight-talked-woman-world.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me????  Boy, MM must be "pounding the pavement" (not literally - obviously) .. getting all these 'WONDERFUL' books out about her!  Seriously .. "the most charismatic member of the Royal Family"???????
> 
> *'Pioneering' new Meghan Markle book vows to 'set record straight' on 'most talked about woman in the world' as royal biographer explores why 'the most charismatic member of the Royal Family was so upset' before Megxit*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...y-set-record-straight-talked-woman-world.html


she's charasmatic all right - to her stans


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> she's charasmatic all right - to her stans


RIGHT?!?! .. one of the comments on the DM was "she is SO charismatic that SHE should be Queen" .. wow, DELUSIONAL!!!


----------



## MaseratiMomma

CeeJay said:


> "the most charismatic member of the Royal Family"


Someone mixed up their synonyms, the fill in the blank here is abundant...
”the most________”
narcissistic
rude
unappreciative
stubborn
calculating


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?!?! .. one of the comments on the DM was "she is SO charismatic that SHE should be Queen" .. wow, DELUSIONAL!!!


I would like to think that they were being sarcastic.

Sort the comments by Best rated then you get the full picture.


----------



## Lodpah

I honestly think the papers are being sarcastic and gaslighting MM just do the comments can be out there.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> I honestly think the papers are being sarcastic and gaslighting MM just do the comments can be out there.


It does feel like very over the top to me.


----------



## bellecate

Saw this waiting in line at the supermarket.


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> Saw this waiting in line at the supermarket.


How about she forgives and start at home to make a better, kinder world. Like her family maybe?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me????  Boy, MM must be "pounding the pavement" (not literally - obviously) .. getting all these 'WONDERFUL' books out about her!  Seriously .. "the most charismatic member of the Royal Family"???????
> 
> *'Pioneering' new Meghan Markle book vows to 'set record straight' on 'most talked about woman in the world' as royal biographer explores why 'the most charismatic member of the Royal Family was so upset' before Megxit*
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...y-set-record-straight-talked-woman-world.html



Meh. The writer is a professional "celebrity author." All he does is choose a famous person and write a book. Judging from his other subjects, he picks whoever is trendy at the moment. His past books were about Kim Kardashian, Ed Sheeran, Adele, Justin Timberlake, and even Kate, among others. It's one of those titles that's going to come and go without anything new to offer.





__





						the books | My Blog
					






					seansmithceleb.com


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Meh. The writer is a professional "celebrity author." All he does is choose a famous person and write a book. Judging from his other subjects, he picks whoever is trendy at the moment. His past books were about Kim Kardashian, Ed Sheeran, Adele, Justin Timberlake, and even Kate, among others. It's one of those titles that's going to come and go without anything new to offer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the books | My Blog
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seansmithceleb.com


Ah okay, but there are also some comments (obviously the 'stans') where "she should be Queen" .. my god, are people that stupid???


----------



## Jayne1

PewPew said:


> Ben Mulroney has stepped down from his long-time (18 yrs) job as host of a Canadian entertainment program. He’ll still be doing red carpet events and other jobs for them. (It’s believed he and the program were getting hate mail/comments). I didn’t realize he was an entertainment reporter/host. Reporting on H&M for years, while knowing the inside scoop from his wife (M’s ex-BFF) must have been interesting & certainly a way to shape the narrative to help M as an insider before recent events.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ben Mulroney steps down as host of Canadian  celebrity news show
> 
> 
> Ben, 44, announced the 'immediate' change on Your Morning. He is stepping down as anchor on CTV's 'etalk' but will still host Your Morning and do red carpet coverage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ben never did any segments when it was about H&M. Someone else always did. You never heard him speak of them. Very professional.  He didn't even dish any details about the wedding he attended.

He still has his morning show, he's good on the red carpet and of course his French is excellent for that, so if he walks away from reading a teleprompter on a mindless entertainment programme, he's still working full time.

Why does one person have so many gigs. It's nice to give someone else a job and he said he wants the entertainment programme position to go to a minority.


----------



## chowlover2

There are rumors that Prince Phillip has dementia. He can no longer have any female caretakers either. PH may have jetted in for one last visit.


----------



## bag-mania

chowlover2 said:


> There are rumors that Prince Phillip has dementia. He can no longer have any female caretakers either. PH may have jetted in for one last visit.



I hadn’t heard that rumor. At his age it wouldn’t surprise anyone but I remember reading about his birthday in the last week or so and it sounded like he was in good health. Due to the COVID crisis  they are undoubtedly being cautious with him.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I know it was a typo but it is so appropriate. The way Meghan cuts people out of her life, she treats them like they are no more than weeds.


Meghan has her own person weedwacker.  It's called the markler.


----------



## chowlover2

bag-mania said:


> I hadn’t heard that rumor. At his age it wouldn’t surprise anyone but I remember reading about his birthday in the last week or so and it sounded like he was in good health. Due to the COVID crisis  they are undoubtedly being cautious with him.


There was a pic of him & HM, but it looked badly photoshopped, like from 2 different events.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

chowlover2 said:


> There was a pic of him & HM, but it looked badly photoshopped, like from 2 different events.











						Prince Philip, 99, Appears for Birthday Snap With the Queen—and No, It Has Not Been Digitally Altered
					

Online Prince Philip-truthers hit speculation overdrive Wednesday morning as a new 99th birthday picture of the Duke of Edinburgh and his wife at Windsor Castle raised eyebrows.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




they claim the photo was _not_ photoshopped — not sure who or what to believe anymore.


_However a senior courtier told The Daily Beast that the picture was “not altered” and insisted that “there was nothing done to the picture.” 

The source said the slightly unusual aspect that some Philip-truthers have detected was due to the location where the picture was taken, one of Windsor Castle’s famous quadrangles, which are large lawns surrounded on four sides by the walls of the ancient buildings. The pop-out appearance of the queen and her husband is due to “the contrast to the sun in the quadrangle and the shadow they are standing in.

Philip is said to have wanted a “no fuss” celebration of his birthday, with celebrations limited to a “simple lunch” with the queen at Windsor Castle, where they have been isolating together for the past three months. 

It is thought to be the longest they have spent together under one roof in their 73 years of married life._


----------



## jcnc

chowlover2 said:


> There was a pic of him & HM, but it looked badly photoshopped, like from 2 different events.


Haven’t seen the pics but I would be surprised if Harry travels from US and see’s the Queen or Philip.. too much risk of infection


----------



## PewPew

> _[QE2 and Prince Philip] have been isolating together for the past three months.
> 
> It is thought to be the longest they have spent together under one roof in their 73 years of married life._



Wow that’s harsh. They certainly lived together for the first couple of years of marriage in a royal residence in Malta, where Philip was stationed in the Navy, though they likely weren’t fully blissful years as she was in training to be Queen & he was known for partying & womanizing in the early years. (The lack of modern paparazzi & political clout helped keep things from the public eye at the time.)


----------



## LaidyM

PewPew said:


> Wow that’s harsh. They certainly lived together for the first couple of years of marriage in a royal residence in Malta, where Philip was stationed in the Navy, though they likely weren’t fully blissful years as she was in training to be Queen & he was known for partying & womanizing in the early years. (The lack of modern paparazzi & political clout helped keep things from the public eye at the time.)



Actually, I believe the queen is on record as saying their time in Malta was their happiest.
I can see why, while she was in training she was allowed the same courtesy W&C has had: to be nothing more than a mother and wife.

Things began to go sideways when she became queen and Philip was literally hanging about, with out a direction, and not much to do, with a royal household staff that looked down upon him and at times even openly detested him.


----------



## Blyen

CeeJay said:


> If I recall correctly, a former Italian Royal (house of Savoy - Northern Italy) .. now owns/operates a Pasta Food Truck out here in CA .. and supposedly, the pasta is pretty darn good .. so, at least he has some 'ability'!!!


Yes, Emanuele Filiberto, the Prince of Venice (which is also the name of the truck ahahah)! He is the grandson of our last King and Queen. 
I like him because he never takes himself and his family too seriously (Netflix had him film the commercial for the Crown 3, and it was hilarious) and tried to find some kind of business for himself and his family, while his parents just sat there, living with the family's money.


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Philip, 99, Appears for Birthday Snap With the Queen—and No, It Has Not Been Digitally Altered
> 
> 
> Online Prince Philip-truthers hit speculation overdrive Wednesday morning as a new 99th birthday picture of the Duke of Edinburgh and his wife at Windsor Castle raised eyebrows.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they claim the photo was _not_ photoshopped — not sure who or what to believe anymore.
> 
> 
> _However a senior courtier told The Daily Beast that the picture was “not altered” and insisted that “there was nothing done to the picture.”
> 
> The source said the slightly unusual aspect that some Philip-truthers have detected was due to the location where the picture was taken, one of Windsor Castle’s famous quadrangles, which are large lawns surrounded on four sides by the walls of the ancient buildings. The pop-out appearance of the queen and her husband is due to “the contrast to the sun in the quadrangle and the shadow they are standing in.
> 
> Philip is said to have wanted a “no fuss” celebration of his birthday, with celebrations limited to a “simple lunch” with the queen at Windsor Castle, where they have been isolating together for the past three months.
> 
> It is thought to be the longest they have spent together under one roof in their 73 years of married life._


If that picture of Prince Philip was not photoshopped then he looks amazing for his age. Erect with a direct gaze and beautifully dressed. Good for him. H and M should make the effort to visit him with proper distancing of course.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> If that picture of Prince Philip was not photoshopped then he looks amazing for his age. Erect with a direct gaze and beautifully dressed. Good for him. H and M should make the effort to visit him with proper distancing of course.


IDK if I'd travel on a plane these days....of course H could take a private jet


----------



## bag-mania

Has it been verified that Harry went to England or is it only a rumor? 

In the meantime, hope springs eternal with these two! Can't imagine who would want to pay to listen to them, but that's their agency's problem.


*Harry and Meghan’s next move: Signing with speaking agency that reps Obamas, *******s*
Look who’s talking!

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are settling into life in Los Angeles, have signed on with the New York-based Harry Walker Agency for speaking engagements, according to a person familiar with their plans.

The couple, whose professional interests and every move have been scrutinized, will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums, said the person, who declined to be identified.

They will focus on social issues such as racial justice (which the former Meghan Markle recently addressed with students from her L.A. alma mater), gender equity and environmental concerns. They will also speak on mental health; Prince Harry has shared his own struggles with grief and has championed emotional health initiatives and organizations in recent years.

The appointment of Harry Walker, tasked with fielding and sourcing speaking opportunities, heralds the couple’s return to public platforms as they seek to promote their philanthropic foundation Archewell. Fans and critics alike have been waiting to see how the couple will deploy their significant cultural capital and which causes they will support since stepping back from front-line royal duties in the U.K.

Since leaving the U.K, their appearances have largely been in private. Prince Harry spoke at a private JP Morgan event in Miami — where he reportedly discussed mental health — and the couple have both participated in video calls with charities they support. As the coronavirus health crisis moves into a new phase, with the reopening of many aspects of public life, the couple could now return to speaking on stages.

But don’t expect them to be spilling the beans on the inner workings of Harry’s family; there are no plans to accept any speaking engagements about the royal life they have left behind.

By choosing the Harry Walker Agency to represent them, they join an A list of Hollywood entertainers as well as some of the world’s most sought-after ********ic politicos: Michelle and Barack *****, Hillary and Bill ******* and rising party star Stacey Abrams.

It’s a high-profile signing for Harry Walker, which was acquired by last year by Endeavor, the parent company of WME.

The speaking agency also represents other close connections of the couple, including Oprah Winfrey and Jane Goodall.

Speaking can be extremely lucrative and the proceeds from Harry and Meghan’s bookings will be part of their move to become financially independent from the British royal family. President ***** reportedly earned $400,000 for one 2017 speech, while the *******s averaged $250,000 per appearance in 2014. It is unclear what speaking fees will be for the Duke and Duchess, who will speak both together or individually.

Harry and Meghan took their first steps into Los Angeles life in April, when they were spied volunteering — delivering meals to vulnerable West Hollywood residents confined to home by the coronavirus shutdown. Their roles as senior royals in the U.K. ended in March, and they’ve made their California home in a 22-acre Beverly Hills property owned by filmmaker Tyler Perry, according to reports.









						Harry and Meghan's next move: Signing with speaking agency that reps Obamas, Clintons
					

Now settled in L.A., the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signed with the Harry Walker Agency to book speaking engagements on health and social issues.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Has it been verified that Harry went to England or is it only a rumor?
> 
> In the meantime, hope springs eternal with these two! Can't imagine who would want to pay to listen to them, but that's their agency's problem.
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan’s next move: Signing with speaking agency that reps Obamas, *******s*
> Look who’s talking!
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are settling into life in Los Angeles, have signed on with the New York-based Harry Walker Agency for speaking engagements, according to a person familiar with their plans.
> 
> The couple, whose professional interests and every move have been scrutinized, will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums, said the person, who declined to be identified.
> 
> They will focus on social issues such as racial justice (which the former Meghan Markle recently addressed with students from her L.A. alma mater), gender equity and environmental concerns. They will also speak on mental health; Prince Harry has shared his own struggles with grief and has championed emotional health initiatives and organizations in recent years.
> 
> The appointment of Harry Walker, tasked with fielding and sourcing speaking opportunities, heralds the couple’s return to public platforms as they seek to promote their philanthropic foundation Archewell. Fans and critics alike have been waiting to see how the couple will deploy their significant cultural capital and which causes they will support since stepping back from front-line royal duties in the U.K.
> 
> Since leaving the U.K, their appearances have largely been in private. Prince Harry spoke at a private JP Morgan event in Miami — where he reportedly discussed mental health — and the couple have both participated in video calls with charities they support. As the coronavirus health crisis moves into a new phase, with the reopening of many aspects of public life, the couple could now return to speaking on stages.
> 
> But don’t expect them to be spilling the beans on the inner workings of Harry’s family; there are no plans to accept any speaking engagements about the royal life they have left behind.
> 
> By choosing the Harry Walker Agency to represent them, they join an A list of Hollywood entertainers as well as some of the world’s most sought-after ********ic politicos: Michelle and Barack *****, Hillary and Bill ******* and rising party star Stacey Abrams.
> 
> It’s a high-profile signing for Harry Walker, which was acquired by last year by Endeavor, the parent company of WME.
> 
> The speaking agency also represents other close connections of the couple, including Oprah Winfrey and Jane Goodall.
> 
> Speaking can be extremely lucrative and the proceeds from Harry and Meghan’s bookings will be part of their move to become financially independent from the British royal family. President ***** reportedly earned $400,000 for one 2017 speech, while the *******s averaged $250,000 per appearance in 2014. It is unclear what speaking fees will be for the Duke and Duchess, who will speak both together or individually.
> 
> Harry and Meghan took their first steps into Los Angeles life in April, when they were spied volunteering — delivering meals to vulnerable West Hollywood residents confined to home by the coronavirus shutdown. Their roles as senior royals in the U.K. ended in March, and they’ve made their California home in a 22-acre Beverly Hills property owned by filmmaker Tyler Perry, according to reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's next move: Signing with speaking agency that reps Obamas, Clintons
> 
> 
> Now settled in L.A., the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signed with the Harry Walker Agency to book speaking engagements on health and social issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com


they are a curiousity at best IMO....wonder who will pay to hear them


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they are a curiousity at best IMO....wonder who will pay to hear them



The agency represents celebrities of all levels from A-list on down. They need to have some options available for the budget-conscience.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Meghan has her own person weedwacker.  It's called the markler.


HA HA HA .. this is THE BEST!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The agency represents celebrities of all levels from A-list on down. They need to have some options available for the budget-conscience.


I'm sure they (esp M) feel very good about being repped by the agency who reps the Obamas, *******s, etc.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> they are a curiousity at best IMO....wonder who will pay to hear them



Companies are always looking for ways to make virtual meetings a little more exciting. Good novelty name to excite employees.


----------



## Sharont2305

Here they are, helping at Homeboy Industries in LA yesterday


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure they (esp M) feel very good about being repped by the agency who reps the Obamas, *******s, etc.



As well as Oprah and Jane Goodall, who they are personally familiar with. Many companies have been hurt by the COVID situation. There may be a few willing to buy the ex-royals for a day but I can’t imagine they will be in great demand.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

Hell, can we all just make our millions doing this speach crap written for us?? Sign me the heck in...there's nothing left to DO, damn


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Here they are, helping at Homeboy Industries in LA yesterday


Using Homeboy Industries for self-promotion, it is ridiculous. It looks like they missed a photo opp with father Greg.


----------



## Suncatcher

A key note speech at a trade association is not what I would call glamorous.


----------



## CeeJay

More importantly, because so many companies have been hurt financially because of the virus, I doubt that they will be paying the top dollar ($250k -> $400k) that they would have been before.  So, if they so hated doing the work in the UK, they think this is better? .. oh wait, it's $$$!


----------



## CeeJay

Suncatcher said:


> A key note speech at a trade association is not what I would call glamorous.


Not to mention, truly .. what can either party bring to the Table???  Is Hazza going to continue talking about the death of his Mother and its impact on him; what is Meghan going to talk about .. all the horrible UK papers, etc.?  Truly, neither of them have anything to offer other than 'a name'.


----------



## zen1965

Chanbal said:


> Using Homeboy Industries for self-promotion, it is ridiculous. It looks like they missed a photo opp with father Greg.


Why are they supposedly using Homeboy Industries for self-promotion?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Not to mention, truly .. what can either party bring to the Table???  Is Hazza going to continue talking about the death of his Mother and its impact on him; what is Meghan going to talk about .. all the horrible UK papers, etc.?  Truly, neither of them have anything to offer other than 'a name'.



They will do what they always do, WORD SALAD! Whatever the circumstance they will provide a ready supply of nice, politically correct, inspirational words to say to the members of Company XYZ who are paying for their presence. Not anything too specific or controversial, but they will offer plenty of vague, feel-good comments.


----------



## gracekelly

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were just ‘Harry and Meghan’ to the homies,” Boyle says. “They rolled up their sleeves and deeply engaged with our workers in the Bakery and Café. It was *immediate kinship and heartening in its mutuality.”*

Huh?  They were making salad too?  Who speaks or writes like this.  Duh!


----------



## bag-mania

_"E! News can confirm that the former Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signed with Harry Walker Agency for speaking engagements. The couple will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums, _*speaking on racial justice, gender equity, environmental concerns and mental health."*

We've seen examples of it many times now. H&M are flighty and have short attention spans. Here are all of the issues they believe they are qualified to be paid to speak about. They are apparently incapable of choosing just one issue and working hard to actually make a difference. Instead they choose many social issues and pretend that they know the subjects as well as those people who have devoted many years of their lives to them. 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Make a Major Professional Move After Royal Exit - E! Online
					

E! News can confirm that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have signed on with Harry Walker Agency for speaking engagements. Get all of the details on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's big move here.




					www.eonline.com


----------



## rose60610

Will they be taking private jets to their speech engagements about environmental concerns? And they're not the first people I'd think of to address the other topics. They would, however, be great at demonstrating how to whine, act entitled, and screw up your life. So their audiences would be, what, junior high school students? Only the whiny entitled screwed up kids would pay, of course they'd have to get the money from their parents and/or grandparents.


----------



## kemilia

I have a friend that spends his whole life flying all over the country daily overseeing the setting up A/V stuff for conferences, meetings, you name it. And that business is done for the year (unless some miracle happens), and it's a big biz. 

My neighbor works for some chi-chi catering business, same for him--no ballet, symphony, opera, Lollapalooza, celeb parties, etc. 

So I really don't see what kind of "talks" these 2 are going to do, at least for the foreseeable future. It's good that they helped out a charitable group but really, that was just for a photo op, most likely to compete with the family "back home." This is what they could have done back in the UK.

If they show up at this Homeboys place* every day* to WORK, that's when I'll give them credit.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> Here they are, helping at Homeboy Industries in LA yesterday


Wow, H is the tallest one there!


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> They will do what they always do, WORD SALAD! Whatever the circumstance they will provide a ready supply of nice, politically correct, inspirational words to say to the members of Company XYZ who are paying for their presence. Not anything too specific or controversial, but they will offer plenty of vague, feel-good comments.



Super easy, she already wrote her template:
[Most newsworthy issue] is so important to me and my husband. As far back as 9th grade I remember already [making a speech / volunteering / educating others] about solving this problem and I'm so excited that the world has caught on. H and I are setting up... we are announcing this now even though we know now is not the right time to announce it but we have to, because the tabloids would announce it otherwise... anyway we're announcing that Archewell is working on a massive worldwide platform that will save the world from [most newsworthy issue]. We are already working behind the scenes to have the greatest impact on [most newsworthy issue]. We know so many people are struggling with [most newsworthy issue], and as a result their mental health is suffering. I myself was struggling with mental health issues because of the horrific British tabloids, which I didn't know existed before I married my H. We don't have those in the States, you know.
I'll now introduce my husband to speak about how the death of his dear mother touched upon [most newsworthy issue] and mental health issues at large.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> They will do what they always do, WORD SALAD! Whatever the circumstance they will provide a ready supply of nice, politically correct, inspirational words to say to the members of Company XYZ who are paying for their presence. Not anything too specific or controversial, but they will offer plenty of vague, feel-good comments.



Her speaches have gotten better since she’s starting to paraphrase monologues from shows like Grey’s Anatomy (for her recent HS grad speech), instead of relying on her own word salad of empowering us to enable us to understand the magnitude of her hope for us, etc. If she can either plagerize from more obscure sources (or just cite references), she’ll do better with speaking engagements.


----------



## bag-mania

Reviews offering hints of what the Lady Campbell book will be like are starting to surface.

*Lady Colin Campbell calls Prince Harry ‘pathetic’ in new tell-all*
Out in London today, Lady Colin Campbell’s book “Meghan and Harry: The Real Story.” Note who gets top billing. It calls her “an operator.” It also calls her lots more. It calls him “pathetic.” It also calls him lots more. And don’t anyone get their knickers in a twist because Pegasus releases this 400-page scorcher in the US next month. The cover is them together.

Chapter 1: Campbell claims MM immediately “jettisoned British traditions that didn’t suit her” … she showed such rock-solid self-importance that Prince Philip nicknamed her Tungsten … although a divorcee, she defied palace dictum of cream color for anyone previously married and insisted on a virginal white wedding gown.

Andrew’s kid Princess Eugenie was to be a bride wearing — per Queen Elizabeth’s promise — an emerald and diamond tiara. The book alleges Me-Me-Meghan demanded exactly that tiara, demanded her own ceremony precede Eugenie’s, demanded Eugenie’s nuptials be postponed, even demanded Her Majesty break the promise that Eugenie might wear that headpiece. Eugenie did later wear an emerald tiara at her wedding.

The book has encyclopedic chapters on baby Prince Archie. Also examples that Miss Me-Me knew what she wanted long before grabbing the role of Mrs. Harry.

I know author Campbell. Georgie, friends call her, is no shrunken violet. She knows from courts and lawsuits. However, she’s acquainted with every royal going back to Catherine the Great. She also knows from best sellers like her Princess Diana bios. And she said: “I go into everything surrounding her pregnancy and all’s been minutely vetted by lawyers. I have spoken to courtiers, Romeos, princes, princesses, relations, friends in detail. Knowing she intended to marry him from word Go, they were desperate to talk. Still, I bent over backwards to be positive.”

Campbell claims: “She’s a total opportunist. She knew in advance she’d embark on commercial ventures, which royalty strictly forbids. She now has what she wanted — a millionaire’s life in Hollywood. She’s caused Harry to lose most of his friends. He’s weaker than she. He’s run ragged. Despite the sex, she will make his life miserable. He has no strength of character to leave her.”
It’s not a bad read.









						Lady Colin Campbell calls Prince Harry ‘pathetic’ in new tell-all
					

“I bent over backwards to be positive.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Oooo.  I’m tempted to treat myself and buy this book.


----------



## Chanbal

zen1965 said:


> Why are they supposedly using Homeboy Industries for self-promotion?


For the same reason they use whatever they can to attract attention. A substantial cash contribution to Homeboy Industries would likely be more helpful than making a couple of sandwiches for a photo opp.


----------



## lalame

Suncatcher said:


> A key note speech at a trade association is not what I would call glamorous.



This is the dirty secret of celebrities... speaking/performing at conferences, parties, birthdays, bat mitzvahs, etc... it’s good money.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> Lady Colin Campbell calls Prince Harry ‘pathetic’ in new tell-all
> 
> 
> “I bent over backwards to be positive.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



The book sounds like what would materialise if people in this thread banded together to write one.


----------



## Lodpah

Channeling Angelina Jolie starts at 22



Starts at 7:25


----------



## zen1965

Chanbal said:


> For the same reason they use whatever they can to attract attention. A substantial cash contribution to Homeboy Industries would likely be more helpful than making a couple of sandwiches for a photo opp.



That's what royals do. They bring attention to noteworthy causes.
So in this context the only problem I have with them is that they stepped down as senior royals because they wanted to have their cake and eat it. They should have kept their status and done these kind of appearances in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Channeling Angelina Jolie starts at 22
> 
> 
> 
> Starts at 7:25



Wait...at one point she was able to stand next to him without grabbing his body parts?


----------



## Chagall

tiktok said:


> Super easy, she already wrote her template:
> [Most newsworthy issue] is so important to me and my husband. As far back as 9th grade I remember already [making a speech / volunteering / educating others] about solving this problem and I'm so excited that the world has caught on. H and I are setting up... we are announcing this now even though we know now is not the right time to announce it but we have to, because the tabloids would announce it otherwise... anyway we're announcing that Archewell is working on a massive worldwide platform that will save the world from [most newsworthy issue]. We are already working behind the scenes to have the greatest impact on [most newsworthy issue]. We know so many people are struggling with [most newsworthy issue], and as a result their mental health is suffering. I myself was struggling with mental health issues because of the horrific British tabloids, which I didn't know existed before I married my H. We don't have those in the States, you know.
> I'll now introduce my husband to speak about how the death of his dear mother touched upon [most newsworthy issue] and mental health issues at large.


Oh my goodness, how can people stand this. She says back in the ninth grade she was trying to solve the worlds problems and she is so glad the world has caught up. Fly free narcissist!!


----------



## marietouchet

book report time , lady C book released today ...
i cannot believe there are 4 books coming out soon , that is too little news for four writers or (more likely) lotsa fake news


----------



## Chanbal

zen1965 said:


> That's what royals do. They bring attention to noteworthy causes.
> So in this context the only problem I have with them is that they stepped down as senior royals because they wanted to have their cake and eat it. They should have kept their status and done these kind of appearances in the UK.



US does not have a Royal Family. Homeboy Industries is certainly a noteworthy cause. Father Greg, its founder is relatively famous and well-connected in certain influential circles (with major donors). 

MM seems to have a long history of not caring for her own family (both sides) and friends, and it is not convincing that she has a genuine interest in the well-being of others. So it is rather annoying to be bombarded with news about this couple associating themselves with a variety of serious causes or charities without any sound contribution to them.


----------



## bag-mania

zen1965 said:


> That's what royals do. They bring attention to noteworthy causes.
> So in this context the only problem I have with them is that they stepped down as senior royals because they wanted to have their cake and eat it. They should have kept their status and done these kind of appearances in the UK.



If I were to guess it's purely a control issue. Meghan cannot tolerate anyone else giving her assignments or telling her what she needs to do. She could never survive in an office environment. No, she likes to pick and choose which causes are worth her time and only select the ones that will make her look like a humanitarian and get her more press coverage. Using a charity to boost her own ego is the result.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If I were to guess it's purely a control issue. Meghan cannot tolerate anyone else giving her assignments or telling her what she needs to do. She could never survive in an office environment. No, she likes to pick and choose which causes are worth her time and only select the ones that will make her look like a humanitarian and get her more press coverage. Using a charity to boost her own ego is the result.


you couldn't make this stuff up....this marriage IMO is in the category of truth is stranger than fiction


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> If I were to guess it's purely a control issue. Meghan cannot tolerate anyone else giving her assignments or telling her what she needs to do. She could never survive in an office environment. No, she likes to pick and choose which causes are worth her time and only select the ones that will make her look like a humanitarian and get her more press coverage. Using a charity to boost her own ego is the result.


100%


----------



## CeeJay

"_*Knowing she intended to marry him from word Go, they were desperate to talk. Still, I bent over backwards to be positive*_.” 

Exactly the same thing that a British (_markled_) friend said as well and *the minute* the friend said to Meghan "_you might want to think about it a little longer_", she was markled!  Quelle surprise .. *NOT*!


----------



## V0N1B2

I'm guessing it's so quiet in here today 'cause everyone is reading Lady C's book that dropped today?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm guessing it's so quiet in here today 'cause everyone is reading Lady C's book that dropped today?


And I hope some people here have press credentials - to get advance copies  of the other 3 books. The JOHN BOLTON book was sent to the press prior to the recent legal kerfuffle, that way the JB book would stay out in the public regardless of any court decision.


----------



## marietouchet

Been thinking of how much hot water H&M have gotten themselves in ... they have burnt too many bridges ... cannot go back to the UK for public appearances for years
Ex the Jessica issue - I did not follow that - and not M's fault - but a PR mess nonetheless for the BFFs JM & M. I did not see the friends fallout coming 
And thinking of H&M in light of stories on Prince Charles -  much less income due to COVID - hmmm might not be able to fund H&M any more in the style to which they are accustomed. 
But, also C has been absent from the media - he did a tiny appearance swaying he still lacks senses of smell & taste after COVID, so, I am thinking H's dad is doing poorly on balance, plus granny & grandfather are not well 
Boy, if I were a fiction writer, I could not have imagined a bigger much up for the BRF


----------



## bag-mania

That photo for the book cover though. Her eyes locked on the camera, Meghan looks like the cat who ate the canary.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> That photo for the book cover though. Her eyes locked on the camera, Meghan looks like the cat who ate the canary.
> 
> View attachment 4770018


Yikes! That is straight up creepy!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Been thinking of how much hot water H&M have gotten themselves in ... they have burnt too many bridges ... cannot go back to the UK for public appearances for years
> Ex the Jessica issue - I did not follow that - and not M's fault - but a PR mess nonetheless for the BFFs JM & M. I did not see the friends fallout coming
> And thinking of H&M in light of stories on Prince Charles -  much less income due to COVID - hmmm might not be able to fund H&M any more in the style to which they are accustomed.
> But, also C has been absent from the media - he did a tiny appearance swaying he still lacks senses of smell & taste after COVID, so, I am thinking H's dad is doing poorly on balance, plus granny & grandfather are not well
> Boy, if I were a fiction writer, I could not have imagined a bigger much up for the BRF



JM's actions towards Exeter were cruel imo. While I hope this was a single case, I wouldn't be very surprised if other women (independent of race) would be able to join a 'me too' type movement... In any event, it was rather revealing on how fast MM turned her back to her best friend; tempted to say "With friends like that, who needs enemies?" 

It seems that JM has hired a Crises PR team, and if it is a really good one, chances are that she will resume her power position and friendship with MM.  or ?


----------



## Blyen

I've started to read Lady C's book and, so far, she has being extremely fair to Meghan (and Doria) ;I'm only at the beginning though, can't wait to see what's in store lol


----------



## sdkitty

Blyen said:


> I've started to read Lady C's book and, so far, she has being extremely fair to Meghan (and Doria) ;I'm only at the beginning though, can't wait to see what's in store lol


wonder if there will be anything we don't already know about doria


----------



## bag-mania

Blyen said:


> I've started to read Lady C's book and, so far, she has being extremely fair to Meghan (and Doria) ;I'm only at the beginning though, can't wait to see what's in store lol



Lady C said she bent over backwards to be fair and I think she had the manuscript vetted by lawyers. It was a wise decision since writing about Meghan is like walking on thin ice, considering how lawsuit-happy and prone to self-pity she is. I hope she found many of the Markled people from Meghan's past to interview.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Lady C said she bent over backwards to be fair and I think she had the manuscript vetted by lawyers. It was a wise decision since writing about Meghan is like walking on thin ice, considering how lawsuit-happy and prone to self-pity she is. I hope she found many of the Markled people from her past to interview.


in respect to what you say, I think H may be as sensitive as she is - or more so.  All that whining about what was done to his mother and now to his wife.....sorry but I don't think it was the same


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder if there will be anything we don't already know about doria



I'm thinking she won't touch Doria with a 10-foot pole. If she found out something unpleasant about her there is no benefit in revealing it. Doria is a private citizen who never aspired to be famous, unlike her daughter. I'm sure Lady C found enough material about Meghan and Harry to more than fill 400+ pages.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> in respect to what you say, I think H may be as sensitive as she is - or more so.  *All that whining about what was done to his mother and now to his wife.....sorry but I don't think it was the same*



He's only repeating what Meghan told him, just like a good puppet husband should!


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm guessing it's so quiet in here today 'cause everyone is reading Lady C's book that dropped today?


And the book is so engaging that nobody has time to come here and share the news.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> And the book is so engaging that nobody has time to come here and share the news.
> View attachment 4770443


----------



## V0N1B2

Oh ladies, the tea is HOT!
Most of it confirms what a lot of us already know tho


----------



## Lodpah

So these 2 cons . . . allege they work for charity while good people in Harry’s country give them money to live. Ok then.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

V0N1B2 said:


> Oh ladies, the tea is HOT!
> Most of it confirms what a lot of us already know tho


Time to spill... lol


----------



## Lodpah

So if you mosey on over to the Harry Markle blog, Archie is suing the mag for invasion of his privacy. You know, the one where Meg is dangling poor baby Archie and holding onto the dogs and the two nice security guys are chatting and Meg looks like she's reached nirvana by the way she smiles into the camera? Yeah, that photo and yeah that's why she's suing the paper on behalf of Archie. 

So between paying lawyers, security staff, nannies, buying food for everyone, Frogmore payments, etc. Charles has an endless supply of money so that's not a problem. Sometimes I think she knows lawsuits are lucrative so that's an angle for income.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> So if you mosey on over to the Harry Markle blog, Archie is suing the mag for invasion of his privacy. You know, the one where Meg is dangling poor baby Archie and holding onto the dogs and the two nice security guys are chatting and Meg looks like she's reached nirvana by the way she smiles into the camera? Yeah, that photo and yeah that's why she's suing the paper on behalf of Archie.
> 
> So between paying lawyers, security staff, nannies, buying food for everyone, Frogmore payments, etc. Charles has an endless supply of money so that's not a problem. Sometimes I think she knows lawsuits are lucrative so that's an angle for income.


If the photos were taken in a public space surely she/he hasn't got a leg to stand on? You see if they were in the UK, the photos wouldn't have been published due to the agreement. Now they chose to move to the U.S. So who's fault is that?

I never could buy into their narrative of "wanting privacy" and "protecting Archie". How did they protect Archie when they used his name to register for a rather public "non-profit" company??

Just when you think those 2 couldn't sink any lower, they just keep surprise you!


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> View attachment 4770518


No need to wait, ebay is selling the ebook for only 2 dollars. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Meghan-and...740006?hash=item445d93bf66:g:AI0AAOSw3V1e9cZ4

Disclosure: I do not know the seller.


----------



## 1LV

From the Daily Mail. 

MEGHAN AND HARRY MAKE A MAJOR CAREER MOVE: California couple Meghan and Harry, signed with a high-profile speaking agency this week — a huge step towards achieving financial independence (and paying back the rent they owe British taxpayers for their UK estate). The elite agency, which also represents the Obamas and the *******s, will allow the Royal couple to make up to $1.2M per speaking engagement.

‘I’m surprised they haven’t done this sooner,’ PR expert Mark Borkowski told The Sun. ‘It will be one of the great income generators for them. *The speaker's circuit is a natural safe space for them to plunder*'.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Lady C said she bent over backwards to be fair and I think she had the manuscript vetted by lawyers. It was a wise decision since writing about Meghan is like walking on thin ice, considering how lawsuit-happy and prone to self-pity she is. I hope she found many of the Markled people from Meghan's past to interview.


I think all books anymore are vetted by lawyers 
but this one I am sure had a bigger team than usual ...

did anyone see the (probably fake) news story that Archie is suing Splash about the photo of him in harness walking two dogs in Canada?
M is listed as the defendant‘s ”litigation friend “ not mother 

got a chuckle reading that , who invents this stuff ?


----------



## lulilu

marietouchet said:


> I think all books anymore are vetted by lawyers
> but this one I am sure had a bigger team than usual ...
> 
> did anyone see the (probably fake) news story that Archie is suing Splash about the photo of him in harness walking two dogs in Canada?
> M is listed as the defendant‘s ”litigation friend “ not mother
> 
> got a chuckle reading that , who invents this stuff ?



Litigation friend is a legal term/person required when a minor sues, since they cannot sue on their own behalf.  The parent usually sues on their behalf.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle desperate to fix Prince Harry’s coronavirus ‘cabin fever’*

When Prince Harry picked up the phone in late March and heard the strain in his father’s voice, he immediately knew something was wrong.

It was bad news indeed: Harry was shocked to learn that 71-year-old Prince Charles had tested positive for the potentially deadly coronavirus.

Worse, having just moved to Los Angeles, Harry was 5,000 miles away from his family.

“It hit home for him that Charles and the Queen aren’t going to be around forever,” says a source in the new book “Royals At War: The Inside Story of Harry and Meghan’s Shocking Split With the House of Windsor” by Andy Tillett and Dylan Howard (Skyhorse Publishing), out Tuesday.

“Harry’s biggest fear is not being there if his grandmother were to die,” adds a source in the book.

The worrying update that his beloved dad was sick with COVID-19 was one of many stark reminders that the 35-year-old was stranded a long way from home after quitting Britain with his wife, Meghan Markle, and their 1-year-old son, Archie.

Such struggles in Harry’s new life — first on Vancouver Island, Canada, and now in LA — are laid bare in the new book, along with Meghan’s determination to get what she wants.

“Meghan has always been fascinated with the creation of a ‘brand,'” a former friend tells the authors. “I do not believe she married Harry with that solely in mind, but it was a determining factor.”

Then the question is, how does someone who, as the book says, was born into fame and came to loathe it and someone who aspired to fame and came to weaponize it, live happily ever after in La La Land?

“She’s assuring [Harry] that once things go back to normal, he’ll love their new life in LA,” says an insider. “Meghan wants to take him hiking and talks about the local polo club and how much he’ll love surfing.”

But right now, life is a bit of a glossy facade. The authors paint a depressing picture of the once-adored second son of the late Princess Diana being “overwhelmed with guilt over not being closer to home while this [the pandemic] is going on.”

It seems a heavy price to pay for what many believe was an ill-conceived, somewhat headstrong decision by Harry and Meghan to turn their backs on royal duty, citing their desire to live like a normal family with Archie, far from the media spotlight and stuffy palace protocol.

The duo announced their determination to break from the blue-blooded household in January, just 20 months after their fairytale wedding at Windsor Castle in May 2018. According to sources, the departure — which became widely known as “Megxit” — deeply “saddened” the 94-year-old Queen Elizabeth II.

It also widened the rift between Harry and his once-close brother, Prince William, as well as William’s wife, Kate Middleton. According to a royal insider quoted in the book, the second-in-line to the British throne and his spouse “feel screwed over,” because they will likely have double the workload now that Harry and Meghan won’t be attending many official engagements.

“They think it’s unfair that Harry and Meghan still get to reap the rewards of being part of the royal family without having to put in any effort,” explains the royal insider. (While Harry remains a prince by birthright, he will no longer use that title, or His Royal Highness.)

The royal insider says that Kate in particular is “panicking” over how she’ll “juggle the extra responsibilities with family life” during the pandemic. It’s a time when older royals — like her mother-in-law Camilla Parker Bowles, and father-in-law Charles, who has since recovered from COVID-19 — need to take a break from the front line for their own health and safety.

Another person familiar with the situation claims Will and Kate, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, sense that Meghan, 38, is a master manipulator of her husband — who is known in inner circles as not being the smartest of men who frequently acts first and thinks later.

“They think it’s pathetic how Meghan works Harry like her own personal puppet,” says a source. “They’ve resigned themselves to losing the Harry they once knew for the foreseeable future.”

According to Ninaki Priddy, who grew up with Meghan, the actress has long known how to shape people and situations to her satisfaction. Priddy reveals in the book how Meghan changed once she landed “Suits,” the USA Network series that brought the first real taste of the stardom she craved.

“There’s Meghan Before Fame and Meghan After Fame … The tone of her voice, her mannerisms, the way she laughed — didn’t seem real to me anymore,” Priddy says. “By Season Two of ‘Suits’ she was turning down lunch with [old friends] because she said she’d be recognized.”

Initially, it looked as if Canada was going to a permanent home for Harry, Meghan and baby Archie, with the family holing up at secluded Mille Fleurs, a French country-inspired five-bedroom house borrowed from an unnamed billionaire on Vancouver Island.

But itchy feet soon struck again. According to the authors, the duchess soon “unleashed her long-desired plan” to move back to Los Angeles, the city where she grew up. It’s also home to her mother, yoga instructor Doria Ragland.

Southern California was calling the ex-actress’s name. After looking at mansions in gated communities around Bel Air, the family moved into an $18 million eight-bedroom Tuscan-style villa on 23 acres of land in Beverly Hills. It is owned by actor and producer Tyler Perry, whom Meghan is believed to have met through their mutual friend Oprah Winfrey.

In Beverly Hills, Meghan is pandering to Harry’s whims, aware his homesickness is likely exacerbated because of the lockdown. She is anxious for the city to reopen so they can start getting out and about again.

Harry — who has taken up yoga to relieve his anxiety — is trying to play down the extent of the discontent he is feeling. At least to his wife.

Comments another of the book’s sources: “Like any household, right now, there are up and downs. To Harry’s credit, he has tried to shield Meghan from his stress. So he’ll confide to friends in London over the phone.”

Los Angeles’ pandemic lockdown did nothing to help matters.

“On top of it all, he’s got cabin fever,” adds that source. “It was far from an ideal situation. Harry’s gone from feeling excited about the move to feeling secretly tortured.”

But the couple is already busy networking in the Golden State and exploring career opportunities for when the pandemic is over.

“They are in touch with a number of LA power players and are looking forward to hosting dinner parties with the likes of George and Amal Clooney and big-time movie producer Jeffrey Katzenberg,” says another insider.

Meghan, who recently did a highly-publicized voice-over for the Disney documentary film “Elephants,” loves the idea of being the breadwinner with Harry as a stay-at-home dad.

“Image has always been everything to Meghan Markle,” a friend of hers is quoted in the book as saying. “It’s now more important for her than ever before because with the Queen’s money no longer pouring in, she needs income.”

But she has no plans to do another TV show like “Suits.” Instead, according to another insider, her husband has been encouraging her to do more voice-over work as well as “writing, producing, and directing in her free time.”

Harry, too, has Hollywood ambitions, focused on documentaries about the charities he supports.

“We’ll see him on camera, mostly as a spokesperson,” a source tells the authors. “He’s not trying to be the next Brad Pitt or anything. He understands it’s a risky venture. Harry knows Hollywood is fickle.

“He wants to get everything right from the beginning and if it all goes well, he’ll use the exposure to shine a light on worthy causes. With Harry and Meghan, it’s not just about making a fast buck — there has to be purpose behind their work.”

Meanwhile, Meghan is enjoying the little things that her renewed life in America can deliver. That includes having the freedom to wear what she wants rather than following strict guidelines from purists at her former office at Kensington Palace.

The book quotes someone on her fashion team as saying that “Meghan was told she needed to start dressing less like a Hollywood star and more like a royal” — like not wearing so much black, and wearing a hat only when the queen approved.

She can also go back to other old Hollywood habits.

The book mentions how Meghan’s “particular brand of up and at ’em West Coast energy” — meaning, she would get up at 5 a.m. and bombard aides with texts — riled her former staff in London and earned her the nickname “Hurricane Meghan.” It also, a source says in the book, led to Kate telling Meghan to not speak to her staff that way.

No matter how Los Angeles changes Meghan — or lets her revert to familiar behaviors, only now with a whole other level of fame — one thing seems to be sure. The authors are convinced Harry will be in Meghan’s thrall for years to come.

As the book puts it: “She is his one survival strategy for his greatest dream — a life forever free of being a royal.” 









						Meghan Markle desperate to fix Prince Harry’s coronavirus ‘cabin fever’
					

When Prince Harry picked up the phone in late March and heard the strain in his father’s voice, he immediately knew something was wrong. It was bad news indeed: Harry was shocked to learn that 71-y…




					nypost.com


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> No need to wait, ebay is selling the ebook for only 2 dollars. https://www.ebay.com/itm/Meghan-and...740006?hash=item445d93bf66:g:AI0AAOSw3V1e9cZ4
> 
> Disclosure: I do not know the seller.


10 sold already!


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> “We’ll see him on camera, mostly as a spokesperson,” a source tells the authors. “He’s not trying to be the next Brad Pitt or anything. He understands it’s a risky venture. Harry knows Hollywood is fickle.


I give him three months before he's schilling reverse home mortgages with Tom Selleck


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I give him three months before he's schilling reverse home mortgages with Tom Selleck


tom sellek doing that annoys the f out of me....he has a successful tv series and selling a possibly dangerous product to old people who look up to him......disgusting IMO


----------



## chicinthecity777

Well colour me confused! Just how many books are out there about these two? I lost count...


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well colour me confused! Just how many books are out there about these two? I lost count...



There are at least four coming out this year.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> There are at least four coming out this year.


 I am sure MM will say these people are "using" them for profit!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am sure MM will say these people are "using" them for profit!



Since one of them was written by her fanboy Omid, it will be almost like she wrote it herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Since one of them was written by her fanboy Omid, it will be almost like she wrote it herself.


Yep and she would still say he used her, not the other way around!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> “We’ll see him on camera, mostly as a spokesperson,” a source tells the authors. “*He’s not trying to be the next Brad Pitt or anything.* He understands it’s a risky venture. Harry knows Hollywood is fickle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle desperate to fix Prince Harry’s coronavirus ‘cabin fever’
> 
> 
> When Prince Harry picked up the phone in late March and heard the strain in his father’s voice, he immediately knew something was wrong. It was bad news indeed: Harry was shocked to learn that 71-y…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I would be worried if H was trying to be the next Brad Pitt, that would indicate an advanced stage of delusion.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would be worried if H was trying to be the next Brad Pitt, that would indicate an advanced stage of delusion.


I don't think he expects to be Brad but I do think M wants to be Angie


----------



## lulilu

If H's appearance is any indication, he looks terrible in recent photos -- ill-kempt and sour faced.


----------



## PewPew

The books seem to confirm stories that have been circulating for a while:
*Meghan Markle 'embarrassed' Prince Harry by announcing her pregnancy on Princess Eugenie's wedding day in a 'huge social gaffe' that left the bride and her* *mother Sarah Ferguson 'furious', new book claims*








						Meghan Markle revealed she was pregnant on Princess Eugenie's big day
					

In the upcoming book  Royals At War, journalists Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett claim that Meghan Markle 'put her foot in it' at Princess Eugenie's wedding.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> If H's appearance is any indication, he looks terrible in recent photos -- ill-kempt and sour faced.


Well, the fabulous new life his honey probably promised hasn't exactly materialized. 

Add COVID, LA heat, nothing to do except make sandwiches (or whatever) with non-upper crust, non-polo playing people, well I would be downright cranky too. And add Her to the mix, yikes. That multi-million dollar borrowed mansion is pretty much just a gilded cage. Wonder how long he will last.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Wonder how long he will last.



He’ll last as long as Meghan has use of him. He could go back home but that would be admitting he made a huge mistake and he’s too proud and stubborn to do that.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He’ll last as long as Meghan has use of him. He could go back home but that would be admitting he made a huge mistake and he’s too proud and stubborn to do that.


I expect she will have use for him until she becomes an A-list star - which isn't gonna happen.  The Only reason she is a household name is Harry


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> The books seem to confirm stories that have been circulating for a while:
> *Meghan Markle 'embarrassed' Prince Harry by announcing her pregnancy on Princess Eugenie's wedding day in a 'huge social gaffe' that left the bride and her* *mother Sarah Ferguson 'furious', new book claims*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revealed she was pregnant on Princess Eugenie's big day
> 
> 
> In the upcoming book  Royals At War, journalists Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett claim that Meghan Markle 'put her foot in it' at Princess Eugenie's wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm sure everyone was very concerned that Sarah was "furious"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PewPew said:


> The books seem to confirm stories that have been circulating for a while:
> *Meghan Markle 'embarrassed' Prince Harry by announcing her pregnancy on Princess Eugenie's wedding day in a 'huge social gaffe' that left the bride and her* *mother Sarah Ferguson 'furious', new book claims*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revealed she was pregnant on Princess Eugenie's big day
> 
> 
> In the upcoming book  Royals At War, journalists Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett claim that Meghan Markle 'put her foot in it' at Princess Eugenie's wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I mean, we all saw that carefully crafted outfit that made everyone go "Is she pregnant?" I was 100% sure she did that on purpose to get people talking, nice to see we're not all a bunch of crazy conspiration theorists.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I expect she will have use for him until she becomes an A-list star - which isn't gonna happen.  The Only reason she is a household name is Harry



They deserve each other. Two deluded souls who desperately want to be respected and adored. Their future disappointment is likely going to be jarring for them.


----------



## opensesame

chicinthecity777 said:


> He's married to a U.S. citizen so he can get a green card that way. He doesn't need to "buy" anything or have exceptional abilities.



Ahhh I forgot that part. I’m sure he will be on express lane for that too. I know 1 defunct royalty (not even direct line) who is past The age of 65 who came to the US based on her nonexistent poetry skills. She wrote some poetry as a hobby and no one recognizes her works. The US considered her person of extraordinary skills, in the same application category as Einstein. It was appalling.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m not going to post the link but there is a rumour circulating that Meghan and her mom are Scientologists? Nothing wrong wit what one chooses but that might explain the distancing from family members or friends who don’t agree with you.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I’m not going to post the link but there is a rumour circulating that Meghan and her mom are Scientologists? Nothing wrong wit what one chooses but that might explain the distancing from family members or friends who don’t agree with you.


I haven't heard that.....but actually IMO there is something wrong with scientology


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I haven't heard that.....but actually IMO there is something wrong with scientology


Me too but I believe anyone can choose their own path to whatever they want.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

Lodpah said:


> I’m not going to post the link but there is a rumour circulating that Meghan and her mom are Scientologists? Nothing wrong wit what one chooses but that might explain the distancing from family members or friends who don’t agree with you.



While I can see her going to one of their celeb info sessions to network, she wouldn’t join. This is a woman who can’t even handle being told to wear a hat, or not to touch during Covid. No way she’d follow all the Scientology rules. Also, if she were seriously into it, you’d have seen all the Scientology A-team at the wedding (like Tom Cruise & John Travolta, who once shared a famous dance with Diana, etc)


----------



## Lodpah

PewPew said:


> While I can see her going to one of their celeb info sessions to network, she wouldn’t join. This is a woman who can’t even handle being told to wear a hat, or not to touch during Covid. No way she’d follow all the Scientology rules. Also, if she were seriously into it, you’d have seen all the Scientology A-team at the wedding (like Tom Cruise & John Travolta, who once shared a famous dance with Diana, etc)


I read she did invite Tom Cruise but not sure the source is accurate.


----------



## marietouchet

PewPew said:


> While I can see her going to one of their celeb info sessions to network, she wouldn’t join. This is a woman who can’t even handle being told to wear a hat, or not to touch during Covid. No way she’d follow all the Scientology rules. Also, if she were seriously into it, you’d have seen all the Scientology A-team at the wedding (like Tom Cruise & John Travolta, who once shared a famous dance with Diana, etc)


Yes, and she converted, then had a Church of England wedding and baptism for Archie - replete with the Archbishop of Canterbury - for the  baptism - to me, it was over the top for the head of the COE to cover the PRIVATE baptism


----------



## bag-mania

PewPew said:


> While I can see her going to one of their celeb info sessions to network, she wouldn’t join. This is a woman who can’t even handle being told to wear a hat, or not to touch during Covid. No way she’d follow all the Scientology rules. Also, if she were seriously into it, you’d have seen all the Scientology A-team at the wedding (like Tom Cruise & John Travolta, who once shared a famous dance with Diana, etc)



Oh this for sure. I could see her finding Scientology appealing because I'm sure she observed so many in the entertainment industry getting career boosts from it. But this is Meghan we're talking about and Scientology requires a lot of effort and study to get anywhere within its hierarchy. Meghan would find it extremely frustrating that she couldn't start out right at the top. No, it's faster and easier to become famous by marrying a dullard prince.


----------



## sdkitty

I'm sorry but this seems like a moment where it's to her advantage to be biracial IMO.  From Huffpost:









						Meghan Markle Speaks With Wisconsin Victim Of Alleged Hate Crime
					

Althea Bernstein, who is biracial, was attacked by white men who poured lighter fluid on her and set her on fire earlier this month.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## melissatrv

For some reason I find this photo so creepy.  Maybe it's because I can imagine the smug look that is etched on to her face


----------



## bellecate

melissatrv said:


> For some reason I find this photo so creepy.  Maybe it's because I can imagine the smug look that is etched on to her face
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4773213



To me, I see an actress playing a role, not being the person.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, we all saw that carefully crafted outfit that made everyone go "Is she pregnant?" I was 100% sure she did that on purpose to get people talking, nice to see we're not all a bunch of crazy conspiration theorists.



That outfit was so obviously meant to show she was pregnant.  Buttons not done up, sticking out her stomach -- and she was barely pregnant.  What a truly vile thing to do to Eugenie, who already had to postpone her wedding so MM could have hers first.  She tried to take Eugenie's tiara too.  She is pathological in her need to be the center of attention.  H should have been embarrassed by her behavior.


----------



## lulilu

melissatrv said:


> For some reason I find this photo so creepy.  Maybe it's because I can imagine the smug look that is etched on to her face
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4773213



Agree.  Especially with her swishing her azz back and forth while she sashayed away.


----------



## Lodpah

lulilu said:


> Agree.  Especially with her swishing her azz back and forth while she sashayed away.


Shades of Angelina Jolie’s walk in The Tourist.


----------



## Lodpah

So why didn’t she invite her niece to the wedding? Meghan is a piece of work. She must have a heart of stone. Don’t know about you guys but if I have nieces and nephews I care about regardless of feelings between siblings, I don’t hold it against them.


----------



## jehaga

melissatrv said:


> For some reason I find this photo so creepy.  Maybe it's because I can imagine the smug look that is etched on to her face
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4773213


I’m sure that dress was a bazillion dollars but she makes it look like a TJ Maxx clearance-rack lucky find.


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> Agree.  Especially with her swishing her azz back and forth while she sashayed away.


I know it sounds silly but that's another thing that bothers me, she walks like an actress on a red carpet, not a Royal.


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> So why didn’t she invite her niece to the wedding? Meghan is a piece of work. She must have a heart of stone. Don’t know about you guys but if I have nieces and nephews I care about regardless of feelings between siblings, I don’t hold it against them.
> 
> View attachment 4773419


My wonderful niece would have been in my wedding! 

Oh, and her hashtag "family first", what an absolute liar! Didn't Harry see this stuff or his staff see it and tell him about her already having a family--that she apparently Markled? You can't make this stuff up!


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> Agree.  Especially with her swishing her azz back and forth while she sashayed away.


Yep, that butt is always sashaying,.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I keep thinking back to the garden party, 4 days after wedding, yes it was C's bday but I was surprised that they delayed the honeymoon - at the time, I thought this was a very nice gesture as Kate was still nominally on  maternity leave, so, THEN I had such a positive view of their participation in the event 

Naive me, H&M must have been asked/told to attend, setting the stage for the whole silly garden party kerfuffle

Not that I am a paragon of protocol and manners, but I think to my own life and wonder what I would do, asked to attend a party I did not want to attend, answer: having decided to go, I would suck it up for 2 hrs, common sense to avoid irritating the family, then go have a cocktail. Heck, we have all attended some function that was distasteful, and we deal with it 

This garden party is more complicated than my hypothetical, due to the army of press at garden party - ready to lip read and video tape ... 

But, I keep coming back to a leitmotif ... if they had acted with NORMAL attention to social conventions, they would have been fine Being a less controversial  member of the BRF is not rocket science, common sense is invaluable


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Shades of Angelina Jolie’s walk in The Tourist.


the more I think about it, I think Angie was probably a role model for "M".  But I'll bet M now thinks she has surpassed Angie.  Too bad she didn't realize by throwing away the royal duties she's given up a lot of the fame and adulation she so wanted (at least I hope so).


----------



## lanasyogamama

They do both have very skinny ankles, that’s all I got.


----------



## rose60610

hashtag "family first" and not inviting any family (except Doria) to her gazillion dollar wedding that the groom's family that would have paid all expenses to attend without batting an eye? Don't tell me that Doria shelled out a single dime for her lovely tailored outfit and the Rolls Royce ride to St George's Chapel. Or does Meghan mean "family first when throwing people under the bus"?  What a piece of work.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> hashtag "family first" and not inviting any family (except Doria) to her gazillion dollar wedding that the groom's family that would have paid all expenses to attend without batting an eye? Don't tell me that Doria shelled out a single dime for her lovely tailored outfit and the Rolls Royce ride to St George's Chapel. Or does Meghan mean "family first when throwing people under the bus"?  What a piece of work.


yes, it's odd that she couldn't find a single relative other than her mother to invite
As far as Doria's outfit, I think Meghan could have afforded that from her own money (if Doria could not)


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Yep, that butt is always sashaying,.



That walk is the exaggerated confidence of a woman who believes she has scored BIG!!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the more I think about it, I think Angie was probably a role model for "M".  But I'll bet M now thinks she has surpassed Angie.  Too bad she didn't realize by throwing away the royal duties she's given up a lot of the fame and adulation she so wanted (at least I hope so).



Meghan still has a long way to go before she reaches that high level of calculated scheming that Angie has exhibited. She certainly is showing potential though. Dare to dream, Meghan!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Meghan still has a long way to go before she reaches that high level of calculated scheming that Angie has exhibited. She certainly is showing potential though. Dare to dream, Meghan!


well she got a prince to give up his "throne" (assuming you believe it was her idea).....and if one believes they had broken up when she showed up at the wedding as his plus-one uninvited, then it was quite an accomplishment to manage to marry him after that.  have to give credit where credit is due


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well she got a prince to give up his "throne" (assuming you believe it was her idea).....and if one believes they had broken up when she showed up at the wedding as his plus-one uninvited, then it was quite an accomplishment to manage to marry him after that.  have to give credit where credit is due



So true. I wish we knew the story of how she managed that amazing turnaround. I'm guessing it involved either spectacular sex or witchcraft, maybe both!


----------



## melissatrv

Are we talking about Pippa's wedding?  The one where the Middleton's did not want her there and Harry insisted she attend the reception by leaving the event and driving 50 miles each way to pick her up?  

What a colossal sap.


----------



## melissatrv

kemilia said:


> My wonderful niece would have been in my wedding!
> 
> Oh, and her hashtag "family first", what an absolute liar! Didn't Harry see this stuff or his staff see it and tell him about her already having a family--that she apparently Markled? You can't make this stuff up!



They probably did and that is why he kept butting heads with everyone.  He did not want to hear it and tried to force her on everyone.  I am just surprised that the RF agreed to this wedding and the huge expense.  They probably did not want to lose Harry over it.  Well they did anyway.


----------



## marietouchet

melissatrv said:


> Are we talking about Pippa's wedding?  The one where the Middleton's did not want her there and Harry insisted she attend the reception by leaving the event and driving 50 miles each way to pick her up?
> 
> What a colossal sap.


Yup, in the UK, in society, it is not done to bring a mere girlfriend to a wedding - just a plus one - the mantra is NO RING NO BRING - ie if you are not engaged, then she is NOT invited
May seem silly in other countries, but, it is totally the norm in the UK where protocol rules


----------



## kemilia

melissatrv said:


> Are we talking about Pippa's wedding?  The one where the Middleton's did not want her there and Harry insisted she attend the reception by leaving the event and driving 50 miles each way to pick her up?
> 
> What a colossal sap.


Did not hear this story before. Who knows what kind of cr*p she would have pulled there. Thankfully the Middletons don't have to see her creepy grin in the wedding photos.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yup, in the UK, in society, it is not done to bring a mere girlfriend to a wedding - just a plus one - the mantra is NO RING NO BRING - ie if you are not engaged, then she is NOT invited
> May seem silly in other countries, but, it is totally the norm in the UK where protocol rules



Yeah, but the wedding that was talked about was the wedding of one of his friends somewhere in the Caribean, not Pippa's. There's plenty of pictures of a very icy mood between the two of them and M pulling seriously scary faces.

Come to think of it, if everything else fails, she could always sell the concept of how she turned that around for her. I bet desperate women all over the world would pay good money for that stunt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yup, in the UK, in society, it is not done to bring a mere girlfriend to a wedding - just a plus one - the mantra is NO RING NO BRING - ie if you are not engaged, then she is NOT invited
> May seem silly in other countries, but, it is totally the norm in the UK where protocol rules



Kate attended weddings pre-engagement, though. But I always thought it was utterly ridiculous to expect Pippa to invite a newish, random girlfriend she had barely met or not met at all to her wedding and to use it as proof how poorly poor Megs was treated.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> So true. I wish we knew the story of how she managed that amazing turnaround. I'm guessing it involved either spectacular sex or witchcraft, maybe both!


Don't forget voodoo!


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but the wedding that was talked about was the wedding of one of his friends somewhere in the Caribean, not Pippa's. There's plenty of pictures of a very icy mood between the two of them and M pulling seriously scary faces.



This is the wedding I recall being shocked about.  She has nerves of steel to show up, in the Caribbean no less, uninvited to a wedding of H's best friend.  The photos did not show a pretty picture of their relationship.

I didn't know about Pippa's wedding, but it makes sense.  I always thought that sashaying away at Charles' birthday garden party was reminiscent of Pippa walking into the church at W&K's wedding.  Pippa's posterior was quite famous after that.  I am sure M was jealous.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> So true. I wish we knew the story of how she managed that amazing turnaround. I'm guessing it involved either spectacular sex or witchcraft, maybe both!



..................a visit to the crossroads..................a Faustian bargain


----------



## PewPew

I can believe there was encouragement to curb public extravagance, as there has been increasing public outrage since around 2016 over how much public funding is spent on “protection” for the BRF (lose wording since security isn’t publicly itemized & has covered jets & personal errands in the past— The outrage was fanned in part by the public learning that even distant relatives of the Queen took lavish international holidays with security, etc).

But I cannot see how M felt deprived after a $50 million public wedding, $500,000 wardrobe budget, on top of loaned or “discounted” items for Royalty. (Royals aren’t supposed to accept gifts and swag, but you know Meghan didn’t pay the full $100,000 price for the designer pregnancy kaftan she wore for 2 hrs in Morocco).

———
*Kate Middleton warned Prince Harry not to rush into marrying 'completely different' Meghan Markle according to explosive new book - which claims the Duke's lavish spending sparked his rift from Prince William*









						Prince Harry's 'increased spending sparked rift with Prince William'
					

Authors of new book Royals At War Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett, released today on Kindle, said that Prince Harry's increased spending with Meghan Markle sparked a rift with Prince William.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PewPew said:


> I can believe there was encouragement to curb public extravagance, as there has been increasing public outrage since around 2016 over how much public funding is spent on “protection” for the BRF (lose wording since security isn’t publicly itemized & has covered jets & personal errands in the past— The outrage was fanned in part by the public learning that even distant relatives of the Queen took lavish international holidays with security, etc).
> 
> But I cannot see how M felt deprived after a $50 million public wedding, $500,000 wardrobe budget, on top of loaned or “discounted” items for Royalty. (Royals aren’t supposed to accept gifts and swag, but you know Meghan didn’t pay the full $100,000 price for the designer pregnancy kaftan she wore for 2 hrs in Morocco).
> 
> ———
> *Kate Middleton warned Prince Harry not to rush into marrying 'completely different' Meghan Markle according to explosive new book - which claims the Duke's lavish spending sparked his rift from Prince William*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's 'increased spending sparked rift with Prince William'
> 
> 
> Authors of new book Royals At War Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett, released today on Kindle, said that Prince Harry's increased spending with Meghan Markle sparked a rift with Prince William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The thing is, they did it so publicly and unapologetic. I am sure Kate's wardrobe is expensive too, but you see her wear Zara to engagements, recycle designer wardrobe, and just in general none of them throws that money they spend into the public's face like MM did.


----------



## Lodpah

Think about this: millions and millions of dollars for those two and yet go help pack sandwiches? A true humanitarian would donate to feed and clothe. Sure have a nice wedding but over 400,000 on maternity clothes? Hypocrites the two of them.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, they did it so publicly and unapologetic. I am sure Kate's wardrobe is expensive too, but you see her wear Zara to engagements, recycle designer wardrobe, and just in general none of them throws that money they spend into the public's face like MM did.


That’s the thing about MM that gets to me.  It feels like everything she did/does has been with an  “in your face” attitude.


----------



## lanasyogamama

MM doesn’t say “God bless you” to someone after a sneeze without making sure it gets leaked to the press.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> That’s the thing about MM that gets to me.  It feels like everything she did/does has been with an  “in your face” attitude.


Exactly!


----------



## Blyen

I'm sorry, did anyone mention the sex tapes already? Lady C. plainly said she saw them :O


----------



## LittleStar88

Blyen said:


> I'm sorry, did anyone mention the sex tapes already? Lady C. plainly said she saw them :O



Kim K part two?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate attended weddings pre-engagement, though. But I always thought it was utterly ridiculous to expect Pippa to invite a newish, random girlfriend she had barely met or not met at all to her wedding and to use it as proof how poorly poor Megs was treated.


Exactly, also unless you were friends, why would you invite your sisters husbands brother to your wedding, cos that's exactly what Harry is to Pippa.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, also unless you were friends, why would you invite your sisters husbands brother to your wedding, cos that's exactly what Harry is to Pippa.


Yeah, but he is a Prince in the British Royal Family so I would make an exception for him, but then that means he would drag Her with so I guess I wouldn't on second thought.


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> Yeah, but he is a Prince in the British Royal Family so I would make an exception for him, but then that means he would drag Her with so I guess I wouldn't on second thought.



Probably a result of Harry living in a gimme gimme bubble where he is spoiled and given whatever he wants...


----------



## kemilia

Blyen said:


> I'm sorry, did anyone mention the sex tapes already? Lady C. plainly said she saw them :O


Wouldn't those have surfaced already if they existed? And if they do exist, I would think the RF would have somehow had them disappear from everywhere. Would these be pre-H or with H?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> Yeah, but he is a Prince in the British Royal Family so I would make an exception for him, but then that means he would drag Her with so I guess I wouldn't on second thought.


But she has the big ticket of having William as her brother in law.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh. German press reports that Lady CC says the reason MM got rid of her father so quickly and mercilessly is because she had painted herself in a light that was pretty far from the truth and she couldn't risk Harry getting close enough to him that he could have endagered her story telling by actually revealing the truth. Can't say I'm surprised.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## lanasyogamama

Did he shave off his eyebrows?


----------



## imgg

Meghan Markle names the five friends behind People article
					

Meghan Markle is suing MailOnline's owner over an article in The Mail On Sunday which reproduced parts of a handwritten note she had sent to her father Thomas Markle in August 2018.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




What are the odds that all of the 5 friends she revealed the contents of her letter to all went to People magazine and Meghan had no idea.  Is anyone buying this?


----------



## sdkitty

imgg said:


> Meghan Markle names the five friends behind People article
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is suing MailOnline's owner over an article in The Mail On Sunday which reproduced parts of a handwritten note she had sent to her father Thomas Markle in August 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are the odds that all of the 5 friends she revealed the contents her letter to all went to People magazine and Meghan had no idea.  Is anyone buying this?


whole thing is ugly......can't believe they will actually to go trial
the royals didn't adequately protect her?  please


----------



## PewPew

“*The Duchess has claimed that her royal wedding to Prince Harry at Windsor Castle in May 2018 raised more than £1billion in tourism revenue, which 'far outweighed' the contribution of taxpayers' money towards crowd security.”*

Hahaha the quote above is from the article summarizing Meghan’s court filings. She believes she generated over a BILLION pounds for the UK by getting married. No wonder Meghan felt no shame about planning Megxit _before_ a $50million wedding + entitled to $20million annually for security etc from the British taxpayers afterwards.


imgg said:


> Meghan Markle names the five friends behind People article
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is suing MailOnline's owner over an article in The Mail On Sunday which reproduced parts of a handwritten note she had sent to her father Thomas Markle in August 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sol Ryan

PewPew said:


> “*The Duchess has claimed that her royal wedding to Prince Harry at Windsor Castle in May 2018 raised more than £1billion in tourism revenue, which 'far outweighed' the contribution of taxpayers' money towards crowd security.”*
> 
> Hahaha the quote above is from the article summarizing Meghan’s court filings. She believes she generated a BILLION pounds for the UK by getting married. No wonder Meghan feels no shame about planning Megxit before a $50million wedding + entitled to $20million annually for security etc from the British taxpayers.



Ugh, the entitlement of these two annoys me... even if that number was real, none of that money went to the average U.K. citizen. It all went to corporations and property owners, which there aren’t a lot of in London.

They learn nothing from history...
(edited because wow... that made no sense... lol)


----------



## youngster

From the DM article:
_*But insiders said to Howard and Tillett that Meghan found the constraints of royalty frustrating - especially the expectation that she would remain diplomatically impartial and not voice opinions. *_

I don't understand how she was not aware of the constraints that would be placed on her before they married.  Even if not a single person told her this prior to the marriage, with just the smallest amount of research, it would be obvious that royal families are politically neutral and must remain that way.  She was either supremely foolish to ignore what she was being told or totally blinded by her ambition.  Harry, too, was a fool not to be completely sure she understood what constraints would be placed on her before they married. ETA:  But, I think she absolutely was aware but just didn't care or figured she'd change those bothersome rules to suit herself.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> From the DM article:
> _*But insiders said to Howard and Tillett that Meghan found the constraints of royalty frustrating - especially the expectation that she would remain diplomatically impartial and not voice opinions. *_
> 
> I don't understand how she was not aware of the constraints that would be placed on her before they married.  Even if not a single person told her this prior to the marriage, with just the smallest amount of research, it would be obvious that royal families are politically neutral and must remain that way.  She was either supremely foolish to ignore what she was being told or totally blinded by her ambition.  Harry, too, was a fool not to be completely sure she understood what constraints would be placed on her before they married. ETA:  But, I think she absolutely was aware but just didn't care or figured she'd change those bothersome rules to suit herself.



Rules are for other people. She thinks so highly of herself that of course it didn't occur to her that she would have to conform and behave the way everyone else did. She believes she is exceptional! I'm sure she lets everyone around her know that.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> I’m not going to post the link but there is a rumour circulating that Meghan and her mom are Scientologists? Nothing wrong wit what one chooses but that might explain the distancing from family members or friends who don’t agree with you.


My understanding is that Doria is VERY CLOSE to Marianne Williamson (_who is the owner of Project Angel Food - that sound familiar?? .. it's the charity for which Meghan & Harry delivered food in LA_).  What I also find interesting, is that Marianne was once the "spiritual advisor" to Oprah Winfrey .. hmmmmm.  I have no idea if she is, in fact, a Scientologist .. don't know exactly which "religion" she espouses.  She also, unsuccessfully, tried to insert herself into the 2020 Presidential Campaign as a ******** (maybe Meghan thinks that is how she could someday be President    ????).


----------



## Tootsie17

youngster said:


> From the DM article:
> _*But insiders said to Howard and Tillett that Meghan found the constraints of royalty frustrating - especially the expectation that she would remain diplomatically impartial and not voice opinions. *_
> 
> I don't understand how she was not aware of the constraints that would be placed on her before they married.  Even if not a single person told her this prior to the marriage, with just the smallest amount of research, it would be obvious that royal families are politically neutral and must remain that way.  She was either supremely foolish to ignore what she was being told or totally blinded by her ambition.  Harry, too, was a fool not to be completely sure she understood what constraints would be placed on her before they married. ETA:  But, I think she absolutely was aware but just didn't care or figured she'd change those bothersome rules to suit herself.


Meghan has got to be the supreme narcissist if there ever is one. I cannot believe the *audacity* of she and Harry. The nickname Nutmeg does suit her well.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> My understanding is that Doria is VERY CLOSE to Marianne Williamson (_who is the owner of Project Angel Food - that sound familiar?? .. it's the charity for which Meghan & Harry delivered food in LA_).  What I also find interesting, is that Marianne was once the "spiritual advisor" to Oprah Winfrey .. hmmmmm.  I have no idea if she is, in fact, a Scientologist .. don't know exactly which "religion" she espouses.  She also, unsuccessfully, tried to insert herself into the 2020 Presidential Campaign as a ******** (maybe Meghan thinks that is how she could someday be President    ????).


marrianne is more into spiratuality, metaphysics, not scientology...wonder if doria is actually personally acquainted with her or maybe just a follower


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> So why didn’t she invite her niece to the wedding? Meghan is a piece of work. She must have a heart of stone. Don’t know about you guys but if I have nieces and nephews I care about regardless of feelings between siblings, I don’t hold it against them.
> 
> View attachment 4773419


The IRONY here is really epic!! .. "#familyfirst"??? .. HA!!!!  So, who does she invite to the wedding?? .. all these celebrities (Oprah, Gayle King, etc.) .. who she really didn't freakin' know at the time and THE ONLY "family" that attends is Doria!  The hypocrisy is what really gets me .. how can MM's stans explain this sh!t???  UFB ..


----------



## CeeJay

Blyen said:


> I'm sorry, did anyone mention the sex tapes already? Lady C. plainly said she saw them :O


WHAT????? .. spill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> “*The Duchess has claimed that her royal wedding to Prince Harry at Windsor Castle in May 2018 raised more than £1billion in tourism revenue, which 'far outweighed' the contribution of taxpayers' money towards crowd security.”*
> 
> Hahaha the quote above is from the article summarizing Meghan’s court filings. She believes she generated over a BILLION pounds for the UK by getting married. No wonder Meghan felt no shame about planning Megxit _before_ a $50million wedding + entitled to $20million annually for security etc from the British taxpayers afterwards.


I would like to see the evidence in support of that claim. How did she quantify it?


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> WHAT????? .. spill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Like... NOW lol


----------



## scarlet555

Blyen said:


> I'm sorry, did anyone mention the sex tapes already? Lady C. plainly said she saw them :O



Don't insert this without elaborating... whose, when, where, ?  lol


----------



## Lodpah

Over on Quora she’s being called Yacht Girl  Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh. German press reports that Lady CC says the reason MM got rid of her father so quickly and mercilessly is because she had painted herself in a light that was pretty far from the truth and she couldn't risk Harry getting close enough to him that he could have endagered her story telling by actually revealing the truth. Can't say I'm surprised.


Hmmmm .. as in, just maybe .. those rumors about MM being a 'yacht-girl' are not false and that Thomas knew about it (if she was, he would likely know since he was also in the entertainment business and that type of stuff gets around) ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oprah, Marianne & Project Angel Food volunteers - way back when (1992). 








						Marianne Williamson has almost everything
					

Marianne Williamson has almost everything -- The best-selling guide to the stars is missing the peace that understanding brings




					ew.com
				



_Oprah went all out to get every one of her 14 million viewers to buy Williamson’s new book, her first, the snappy mystical tome A Return to Love. ”I bought a thousand copies!” exclaimed the talk-show titan, who experienced ”157 miracles” in her life as a direct result of reading it._


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Over on Quora she’s being called Yacht Girl  Meghan.


You know, I gotta say .. in reference to those pictures we saw of Meghan & Harry's attendance at Tom Inskip's wedding (_in Jamaica_), where Harry was giving the Meghan the big-time "cold shoulder" .. it kind of makes sense that .. IF (_indeed_) Tom (_nickname "Skippy"_) did have "experience" (_ahem_) with Meghan onboard a Yacht (_supposedly in the Mediterranean_), and that prior to his wedding told Harry, then: 
1.  Harry likely felt that Meghan would by no means be a show-up for the wedding (_he was WRONG about that_) 
2.  The pictures clearly showed that Harry was not so "_in love_" with Meghan at the time 

Now, how she was able to turn him around after said wedding .. that has always been a mystery to me, but then again .. given Harry's (_lack of_) intelligence, she likely came up with some "story" (complete with tears & the "woe is me" behavior that we saw exhibited in South Africa) that he believed her nonsense.  Honestly, nothing would surprise me about her at this point ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


>




is he wearing a toupee?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe she used her *Hollywood gung-ho attitude'.*








						Meghan Markle's 'gung-ho attitude put her at odds with staff'
					

In the new book Royals At War, journalists Dylan Howard and Andy Tillett claim Meghan Markle, who is currently living in LA, alienated herself from palace staff with her 'high energy approach'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






CeeJay said:


> You know, I gotta say .. in reference to those pictures we saw of Meghan & Harry's attendance at Tom Inskip's wedding (_in Jamaica_), where Harry was giving the Meghan the big-time "cold shoulder" .. it kind of makes sense that .. IF (_indeed_) Tom (_nickname "Skippy"_) did have "experience" (_ahem_) with Meghan onboard a Yacht (_supposedly in the Mediterranean_), and that prior to his wedding told Harry, then:
> 1.  Harry likely felt that Meghan would by no means be a show-up for the wedding (_he was WRONG about that_)
> 2.  The pictures clearly showed that Harry was not so "_in love_" with Meghan at the time
> 
> Now, how she was able to turn him around after said wedding .. that has always been a mystery to me, but then again .. given Harry's (_lack of_) intelligence, she likely came up with some "story" (complete with tears & the "woe is me" behavior that we saw exhibited in South Africa) that he believed her nonsense.  Honestly, nothing would surprise me about her at this point ..


----------



## Blyen

scarlet555 said:


> Don't insert this without elaborating... whose, when, where, ?  lol


I'm about halfway through the book, and Lady Campbell said that basically the press AND the Royal family knew things about Meghan that were pretty damaging but kept silent out of love/respect of Harry;this included this tape/tapes, that she says she watched, and while she never said outright that it's definitely Meghan in them, she said that it is someone that looks exactly like Meghan, with the body you can imagine her having, but with bigger boobs (she also noted that her early 20s pictures shows bigger and rounder boobs than some years later, and that she probably had implants removed at some point, like we thought). It's a quite... descriptive passage in the book, lol
It wasn't clear if only the Royals and their circle knew about the tapes, or if also the press did and kept silent because their silence on this was in some way "bought", or if it was out of respect for Harry /the Queen. 
So far the only thing that sounded wrong to me in the book was the bit about Meghan not curtsying to the Queen at the wedding, as I remember seeing a video of her curtsying. Everything else sounds fair and quite possible.


----------



## Lodpah

Blyen said:


> I'm about halfway through the book, and Lady Campbell said that basically the press AND the Royal family knew things about Meghan that were pretty damaging but kept silent out of love/respect of Harry;this included this tape/tapes, that she says she watched, and while she never said outright that it's definitely Meghan in them, she said that it is someone that looks exactly like Meghan, with the body you can imagine her having, but with bigger boobs (she also noted that her early 20s pictures shows bigger and rounder boobs than some years later, and that she probably had implants removed at some point, like we thought). It's a quite... descriptive passage in the book, lol
> It wasn't clear if only the Royals and their circle knew about the tapes, or if also the press did and kept silent because their silence on this was in some way "bought", or if it was out of respect for Harry /the Queen.
> So far the only thing that sounded wrong to me in the book was the bit about Meghan not curtsying to the Queen at the wedding, as I remember seeing a video of her curtsying. Everything else sounds fair and quite possible.


True. And we know that Meghan was most likely checked out by MI6 (MI5 and MI6 have different functions) and Doria was scrubbed from the net. Doria is actually a private person regardless of whatever she may have done so she should not be dragged into anything.


----------



## Blyen

Here it is, because the description is quite funny and deserves to be read


----------



## Sol Ryan

Blyen said:


> Here it is, because the description is quite funny and deserves to be read
> 
> View attachment 4775253
> 
> 
> View attachment 4775255


I love the way the Brits write gossip... it just has a certain... oomph that ya don’t get in the US...


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh. German press reports that Lady CC says the reason MM got rid of her father so quickly and mercilessly is because she had painted herself in a light that was pretty far from the truth and she couldn't risk Harry getting close enough to him that he could have endagered her story telling by actually revealing the truth. Can't say I'm surprised.



That absolutely rings true. There’s no telling what tall tales she told Harry about her youth, probably presenting herself in the most wonderful light whatever she thought would appeal to him. She hasn’t changed her MO come to think of it.


----------



## CeeJay

Blyen said:


> Here it is, because the description is quite funny and deserves to be read
> 
> View attachment 4775253
> 
> 
> View attachment 4775255


Well, well, well .. interesting!  

So .. (my thoughts) .. given her behavior with her father about the publication of her letter, it makes you kind of wonder about these purported tapes.  Wouldn't you think that if she HADN'T made these tapes, that she would be ALL OVER this????  As in "how dare they say this is me?" .. blah, blah, blah.  On the other hand, let's say that indeed, these are her???  Well, then .. I find it totally possible that she would not say a PEEP about them .. as in "no way do I want to have any publicity about these"!!  Even Kim Kardashian originally stayed mum about her tapes; it wasn't until her Momager said "hey - we should take these to the Bank" that it all came out about her Sex tape.  Wasn't it the same with Paris Hilton? .. silence until later on??? 

As Lady C indicates, the timeline would support Meghan during that time that she wasn't finding any work .. and what about her infamous line on her Blog, that she "NEVER had to wait tables"!  Well, yeah .. you wouldn't have to if you were being paid to sit at one on a luxury yacht! 

Maybe Thomas knew about this .. and that the whole "issue" with the letter is really Meghan telling him to "keep his mouth shut"!  However, given how many "friends" (obviously using this speciously) Meghan has made over the years, does she think that marrying Harry would provide her with the ability to "shut up" all those that might know the 'real truth' about her?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Bleh. I’m not going to drag her about some supposed sex tape that this lady saw but wasn’t even sure is her. Idk it just feels gross to me.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I will say that I have no doubt her separation from her dad was to hide some of the stuff she told Harry about her life, though. It was clear she had a relationship with her dad up until meeting Harry... she wanted the royals to be the “family she never had.”


----------



## Sol Ryan

mrsinsyder said:


> Bleh. I’m not going to drag her about some supposed sex tape that this lady saw but wasn’t even sure is her. Idk it just feels gross to me.



I sort of assume most actresses have one or two out there, especially actresses pre-this new enlightened HR friendly Hollywood (which I assume just hides it better).  Weinstein's don’t happen in a bubble and the culture isn’t going to magically change.

I honestly don’t care either way. I don’t really even care if she was a Yacht girl, so long as she wasn’t breaking laws. To each their own.

My issue is with her and Harry’s behavior.


----------



## Sharont2305

mrsinsyder said:


> ... she wanted the royals to be the “family she never had.”


It was Harry who said that, makes you wonder what exactly she told him about her family.


----------



## maryg1

I don’t believe in the tape thing, it would be out in the newspaper by now since H&M are at war with some of them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I don't understand how she was not aware of the constraints that would be placed on her before they married.



Oh she was. She just thought somehow it wouldn't apply to her special self...rules are for bores like Kate. As with Harry, I wouldn't put it past her that she pretended to be completely on board up to the moment where he signed that marriage certificate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. as in, just maybe .. those rumors about MM being a 'yacht-girl' are not false and that Thomas knew about it (if she was, he would likely know since he was also in the entertainment business and that type of stuff gets around) ..



Articles where more along the lines of how she painted herself as having overcome incredible hardships when in fact she grew up comfortably middle class and was spoilt rotten, and about her activism which wasn't quite as inflated as she wanted him to believe..

Even if true, would a father reveal this to anyone? I feel he would be heartbroken over this.


----------



## Blyen

maryg1 said:


> I don’t believe in the tape thing, it would be out in the newspaper by now since H&M are at war with some of them


I do believe there are tapes, otherwise Lady C would just be asking to get sued, given how lawsuit happy Meghan is. 
I don't guilt her for it though ;I too assume most actresses have at least one and, as stated in the book, she was probably much younger, so I don't really blame her for having fallen for the pressure. 
As for why those alleged tapes aren't out, well, it sounds like the Royal family bought silence somehow... Also, can you imagine what Meghan and Harry would unleash should it emerge?
 I am actually happy it didn't come out, just because a public figure makes this kind of mistake it doesn't mean it has to be plastered all over the internet, imho. Besides, apparently you can find stills from it, and probably even the videos itself, if you really look for it, at least according to a reddit search. It's been pretty much obliterated from the conventional web, but not from everywhere.


----------



## Lodpah

PewPew said:


> “*The Duchess has claimed that her royal wedding to Prince Harry at Windsor Castle in May 2018 raised more than £1billion in tourism revenue, which 'far outweighed' the contribution of taxpayers' money towards crowd security.”*
> 
> Hahaha the quote above is from the article summarizing Meghan’s court filings. She believes she generated over a BILLION pounds for the UK by getting married. No wonder Meghan felt no shame about planning Megxit _before_ a $50million wedding + entitled to $20million annually for security etc from the British taxpayers afterwards.



How did she know who the anonymous friends were? I think she colluded with them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

In his video speech for Diana awards, he actually said "my wife said ... " omg, Harry please grow a pair! You are a true laughing stock!


----------



## 1LV

maryg1 said:


> I don’t believe in the tape thing, it would be out in the newspaper by now since H&M are at war with some of them


Seems it would have come to light in the early days when she and Harry first started dating.


----------



## mrsinsyder

1LV said:


> Seems it would have come to light in the early days when she and Harry first started dating.


She even walks back her claim in the book by saying it might just be someone who looks like her.

I saw one of the stills a while ago from another tape that was supposed to be her and it definitely wasn’t.


----------



## LittleStar88

Blyen said:


> I do believe there are tapes, otherwise Lady C would just be asking to get sued, given how lawsuit happy Meghan is.
> I don't guilt her for it though ;I too assume most actresses have at least one and, as stated in the book, she was probably much younger, so I don't really blame her for having fallen for the pressure.
> As for why those alleged tapes aren't out, well, it sounds like the Royal family bought silence somehow... Also, can you imagine what Meghan and Harry would unleash should it emerge?
> I am actually happy it didn't come out, just because a public figure makes this kind of mistake it doesn't mean it has to be plastered all over the internet, imho. Besides, apparently you can find stills from it, and probably even the videos itself, if you really look for it, at least according to a reddit search. It's been pretty much obliterated from the conventional web, but not from everywhere.



About how old was she when she was allegedly yachting/doing the love boat stuff? she was already long in the tooth when marrying Harry And I thought the yacht stuff wasn’t too far back?


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> is he wearing a toupee?


Wouldn't be surprised. 

There have been mentions about "hair rejuvenation" on this thread. I so remember H making fun of W losing his hair and then, boy, karma smacked him upside his now balding head. Once the dynamic duo start appearing around town, we will know.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah, Marianne & Project Angel Food volunteers - way back when (1992).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Marianne Williamson has almost everything
> 
> 
> Marianne Williamson has almost everything -- The best-selling guide to the stars is missing the peace that understanding brings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Oprah went all out to get every one of her 14 million viewers to buy Williamson’s new book, her first, the snappy mystical tome A Return to Love. ”I bought a thousand copies!” exclaimed the talk-show titan, who experienced ”157 miracles” in her life as a direct result of reading it._


Wow, that woman is a doozy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, they did it so publicly and unapologetic. I am sure Kate's wardrobe is expensive too, but you see her wear Zara to engagements, recycle designer wardrobe, and just in general none of them throws that money they spend into the public's face like MM did.



Exactly. I mean they live in or have access to palaces with gold furniture and a tonne of history and tiaras etc. We know they don't shop at the £1 store. But image is everything and it seems the younger Royals are more conscious of how things are perceived and mix and match high street with high end, especially since there's been austerity in the UK over the last 10 years at least. Meghan obviously didn't feel the need, and that's fine, but she can't complain about backlash over spending.


----------



## beautymagpie

PewPew said:


> “*The Duchess has claimed that her royal wedding to Prince Harry at Windsor Castle in May 2018 raised more than £1billion in tourism revenue, which 'far outweighed' the contribution of taxpayers' money towards crowd security.”*
> 
> Hahaha the quote above is from the article summarizing Meghan’s court filings. She believes she generated over a BILLION pounds for the UK by getting married. No wonder Meghan felt no shame about planning Megxit _before_ a $50million wedding + entitled to $20million annually for security etc from the British taxpayers afterwards.



Where on earth did she get £1bn from? 

Even being generous, in 2018 London's tourism - for the whole year - was £2,006m direct spend and £536m gross value added. Breaking it down further, there's another chart that says those staying for leisure = £135.3 direct spend and/or £60.3 gross value added.

source: https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/thi...gies-trends/Documents/tourism-impact-2018.pdf


----------



## 1LV

beautymagpie said:


> *Where on earth did she get £1bn from?*
> 
> Even being generous, in 2018 London's tourism - for the whole year - was £2,006m direct spend and £536m gross value added. Breaking it down further, there's another chart that says those staying for leisure = £135.3 direct spend and/or £60.3 gross value added.
> 
> source: https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/thi...gies-trends/Documents/tourism-impact-2018.pdf


Pretty sure I know where she pulled it from.


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> Wow, that woman is a doozy.


Which one?


----------



## mshermes

Ever notice that she is always the victim.....or the hero.


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> Which one?


Multiple choice this time.


----------



## kemilia

They called him Cali-dude!









						Prince Harry Was Spotted Biking Alone at a Malibu Beach
					

Not a bodyguard in sight!




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> They called him Cali-dude!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Was Spotted Biking Alone at a Malibu Beach
> 
> 
> Not a bodyguard in sight!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


All fine and good, but no way would he have biked FROM the place in BH to Mailbu as that would be quite the schlep and would have to be done through one of the Canyons (and none of them provide 'easy' biking with the winds & turns - no less the horrible drivers)!!!  However, good for him for getting out of the house .. hope he was WEARING A MASK!


----------



## Sol Ryan

I thought they were being constantly harassed by the paparazzi and needed constant security?


----------



## Sol Ryan

At this point I am just here for the popcorn. I don’t know if what she is saying is true or not, but man Lady CC is going all in... it’s entertaining at least...








						Lady C compares Meghan Markle to Hitler and calls Phillip Schofield a 'liar'
					

The I'm A Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here! star took an extremely savage dig at Meghan Markle before branding Phillip Schofield a "liar" for not coming out as gay sooner




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## tiktok

Sol Ryan said:


> At this point I am just here for the popcorn. I don’t know if what she is saying is true or not, but man Lady CC is going all in... it’s entertaining at least...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady C compares Meghan Markle to Hitler and calls Phillip Schofield a 'liar'
> 
> 
> The I'm A Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here! star took an extremely savage dig at Meghan Markle before branding Phillip Schofield a "liar" for not coming out as gay sooner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4776171



She didn't actually compare Meghan to Hitler, but even bringing that up in the conversation was really unnecessary and a low blow.
That said, I couldn't agree more with her point about their "privacy".


----------



## Sol Ryan

tiktok said:


> She didn't actually compare Meghan to Hitler, but even bringing that up in the conversation was really unnecessary and a low blow.
> That said, I couldn't agree more with her point about their "privacy".



yeah, that was more what I was pointing out. The commentary about Harry and his nappy was what had me rolling...


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sol Ryan said:


> I thought they were being constantly harassed by the paparazzi and needed constant security?


I guess MM forgot to call the paparazzis for once!


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> I guess MM forgot to call the paparazzis for once!


Harry’s such a dolt he probably rode his bike the wrong way.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan's latest made up story, she felt unprotected while pregnant and it's all the Royal Family's fault. Boo hoo hoo! 

*Meghan Markle Felt 'Unprotected' by the Royal Family While Pregnant, Court Documents Claim*

Court documents released as part of Meghan and Prince Harry's lawsuit against a British media company claimed she was "prohibited from defending herself" against media intrusion
Meghan Markle felt "unprotected" by the British royal family during her pregnancy with son Archie, she says in new court documents.

The documents surfaced Wednesday as part of Meghan and Prince Harry's lawsuit against a British media company claimed that the Duchess of Sussex, 38, was "prohibited from defending herself" by the monarchy against media intrusion.

"The Claimant had become the subject of a large number of false and damaging articles by the U.K. tabloid media, specifically by the Defendant, which caused tremendous emotional distress and damage to her mental health," according to the new documents filed by Meghan's legal team.

"As her friends had never seen her in this state before, they were rightly concerned for her welfare, specifically as she was pregnant, unprotected by the Institution, and prohibited from defending herself," the documents continue.

Meghan, 38, is suing publishers Associated Newspapers and the _Mail on Sunday_ for publishing extracts of what she describes as a "private and confidential" letter sent to her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018 — three months after her wedding to Prince Harry, 35.

"This case centers on a private and hand-written letter from a daughter to her father that was published by_ The Mail on Sunday_," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE. "This gross violation of any person's right to privacy is obvious and unlawful."

The existence of the letter was first publicly disclosed in a PEOPLE story in which five of Meghan's friends spoke out against the "global bullying" they said was aimed at the Duchess of Sussex. In the new court documents, Meghan says she did not authorize her friends to speak to PEOPLE, nor was she aware of the story in advance.

After the PEOPLE story was published, _The Mail on Sunday_ published the letter Meghan had written to her father.

"The Duchess’ rights were violated; the legal boundaries around privacy were crossed," the source adds. "Throughout this process, the extremes to which_ The Mail on Sunday_ used distortive, manipulative and dishonest tactics to target The Duchess of Sussex have been put on full display."

Following a pre-trial hearing in April, to which Meghan and Harry listened in from their home in Los Angeles, the legal case will focus on whether the_ Mail on Sunday _infringed on Meghan's privacy and U.K. laws surrounding copyright and data protection by printing excerpts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father in August 2018.

The lawsuit is expected to go to a full trial in late 2020 or early 2021.









						Meghan Markle Felt 'Unprotected' by the Royal Family While Pregnant, Court Documents Claim
					

Meghan Markle felt "unprotected" by the royal family and was "prohibited from defending herself" against media scrutiny during her pregnancy, new court documents in her lawsuit claim




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

I'm just shaking my head here; what does MM think (or maybe she doesn't care) .. about what the BRF is going to think about this???  Is she forgetting that there will be a 12-month 'review' of the Megxit?  Honestly, if I were QEII or Prince Charles, I would be ready to 'cast off'!  First of all, take away that Duchess title because she just LOVES to use that .. and let them have their "financial freedom" .. by THEMSELVES .. no $$$ for security or for their living expenses.  It's about time that these two see what it's like in the "real" world!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German press is warming up all the stories about how Meghan was a bridezilla and constantly baffled staff with her rude behaviour. Dunno, I feel affronting everyone was maybe not the best idea.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> I'm just shaking my head here; what does MM think (or maybe she doesn't care) .. about what the BRF is going to think about this???  Is she forgetting that there will be a 12-month 'review' of the Megxit?  Honestly, if I were QEII or Prince Charles, I would be ready to 'cast off'!  First of all, take away that Duchess title because she just LOVES to use that .. and let them have their "financial freedom" .. by THEMSELVES .. no $$$ for security or for their living expenses.  It's about time that these two see what it's like in the "real" world!


I don't see that happening. It would only give MM more opportunity to play the victim card. 
Probably better to just let her keep yammering on. She's only embarrassing herself. Give her enough rope and she will undoubtedly make a grievous mistake. Then the RF can truthfully say they did all they could to appease an unappeasable person


----------



## Madrose

CeeJay said:


> I'm just shaking my head here; what does MM think (or maybe she doesn't care) .. about what the BRF is going to think about this???  Is she forgetting that there will be a 12-month 'review' of the Megxit?



I'm guessing Meghan is banking the BRF will never cut the purse strings given that Harry is the son of the future king.


----------



## zinacef

CeeJay said:


> All fine and good, but no way would he have biked FROM the place in BH to Mailbu as that would be quite the schlep and would have to be done through one of the Canyons (and none of them provide 'easy' biking with the winds & turns - no less the horrible drivers)!!!  However, good for him for getting out of the house .. hope he was WEARING A MASK!


 Agree!
Looks like a PR bike ride, from his shoes to his outfit and the bike itself with the Invictus sign on the box, meh, I don’t think you can ride a mile on that bike and shoes, etc.... so predictable.


----------



## mrsinsyder

zinacef said:


> Agree!
> Looks like a PR bike ride, from his shoes to his outfit and the bike itself with the Invictus sign on the box, meh, I don’t think you can ride a mile on that bike and shoes, etc.... so predictable.


That’s a picture from an old story/event.


----------



## zinacef

mrsinsyder said:


> That’s a picture from an old story/event.


Thank you for your correction!


----------



## CarryOn2020

"He was alone, had a white biking outfit on with red and black and was, of course, wearing a helmet," an eyewitness told the site.
Of course he was wearing a helmet. He needed to make sure his toupee stayed on. 
The desperate need for attention is just gross. Enough already.


----------



## PewPew

To follow up on the article @bag-mania posted, it makes sense that the Palace won’t refute true allegations— Unlike PR people, the Palace can’t really comment in situations where there is evidence to the contrary, right?

*”Meghan Markle felt 'unprotected by the royal institution' because palace press officers couldn't defend her AGAINST TRUE STORIES that angered her”*








						Meghan Markle felt 'unprotected by the royal institution'
					

The Duchess's lawyers said she felt 'unprotected' by the 'institution' of the Royal Family and 'prohibited from defending herself' against claims levelled against her.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

I'm still a bit perplexed by what her vision of the BRF "protecting her" should look like.  They aren't going to release daily statements saying that the tabloid rags are being mean to MM and that she really isn't all that bad.  Don't see any connection between this and the claim at issue in her lawsuit - loss of privacy.  In Calif. she would be taking a  huge risk by putting her mental state at the heart of the case.  If you want damages for your emotional distress, it has to be above and beyond the difficulties we all experience from time to time.  She also places her emotional issues at issue which means that the other side can see her psych records and question her about these issues in deposition and at trial.  Hope it is the same in the UK!

She is completely out of control.  Ever since Harry unearthed her it has been drama after drama and a non-stop show of inappropriate behavior.  Go away already...


----------



## lalame

Luvbolide said:


> I'm still a bit perplexed by what her vision of the BRF "protecting her" should look like.  They aren't going to release daily statements saying that the tabloid rags are being mean to MM and that she really isn't all that bad.  Don't see any connection between this and the claim at issue in her lawsuit - loss of privacy.  In Calif. she would be taking a  huge risk by putting her mental state at the heart of the case.  If you want damages for your emotional distress, it has to be above and beyond the difficulties we all experience from time to time.  She also places her emotional issues at issue which means that the other side can see her psych records and question her about these issues in deposition and at trial.  Hope it is the same in the UK!
> 
> She is completely out of control.  Ever since Harry unearthed her it has been drama after drama and a non-stop show of inappropriate behavior.  Go away already...



Seems like she expected them to be her personal PR machine (the free kind) instead of the institution’s. I can only imagine the soul crushing disappointment when she found out all the glitz, glamor, and power one sees on TV belongs to the institution and is not a personal benefit.


----------



## lalame

All these articles that have come out about their battle with the press just make them seem so petty and self-involved... I have second hand embarrassment for them. Can’t imagine this dirty laundry is helping her friendships with friends A, B, C, D, and E or relationships with family either.

Yeah, go figure why the BRF with their hundreds of years of scandals and learned press experience would rather not have a public shouting match with the press on her behalf. But of course she takes it as a personal affront.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> I don't see that happening. It would only give MM more opportunity to play the victim card.
> Probably better to just let her keep yammering on. She's only embarrassing herself. Give her enough rope and she will undoubtedly make a grievous mistake. Then the RF can truthfully say they did all they could to appease an unappeasable person



Why should they (or we) continue to bankroll that behaviour though? In some ways, as she embarrassing herself she is also embarrassing them. Slagging off the hand that feeds is begging for that hand to be withdrawn IMO


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> All these articles that have come out about their battle with the press just make them seem so petty and self-involved... I have second hand embarrassment for them. Can’t imagine this dirty laundry is helping her friendships with friends A, B, C, D, and E or relationships with family either.
> 
> Yeah, go figure why the BRF with their hundreds of years of scandals and learned press experience would rather not have a public shouting match with the press on her behalf. But of course she takes it as a personal affront.



No one with any sort of social standing or self-respect would want to be a close friend of either. They expect loyalty (if obedience can be deemed loyalty) but they would both throw whoever/whatever to the wolves for any reason/whim. Both toxic. 

As for JCMH apologising on behalf of I'm not sure who for past injustice in a ramble of virtue signalling. If he'd apologised for things he'd done (thinking wearing a Nazi uniform to a party was a jolly jape 2005 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/apology-for-harry-s-nazi-outfit-falls-on-deaf-ears-1.406189) said (racist remarks 2009 - https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/12/prince-harry-video-pakistani). If he had made the apology personal, it would have meant a lot more OMO. 

He has always thought himself above the law, morality and decency. That's because he comes from a family/class that often was and he is used to getting away with murder (quite literally on occasion (2007)  https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/nov/07/monarchy.wildlife ). 

Opportunity after opportunity, they insist on acting holier than thou rather than setting an example. Whilst both of them have this constant need to tell us how good they are, how brilliant, skilful, sensitive, charitable etc, when evidence points in another direction, they will always look like what they are stupid hypocrites that can't get/hold-down a job/staff/friends/family/home. 

To (ab)use your influence and power most of your adult life because of an accident of birth (or marrying one) then to set yourself up as an authority on social justice is beyond hypocrisy.

I'll call these 2 entitled liggers 'woke' when they a) give up (all) their titles voluntarily b) don't make a public speech - ever again c) do some charitable work without it being documented d) give some personal money away to the causes they say they believe in e) live in a dwelling that is appropriate for a family of 3 _and_ they've paid for personally e) go to work and earn their own money f) take pride in _not_ accepting money from daddy/grandma g) not slag-off the country/institution that you represented 5 mins ago to the rest of the world.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> No one with any sort of social standing or self-respect would want to be a close friend of either. They expect loyalty (if obedience can be deemed loyalty) but they would both throw whoever/whatever to the wolves for any reason/whim. Both toxic.
> 
> As for JCMH apologising on behalf of I'm not sure who for past injustice in a ramble of virtue signalling. If he'd apologised for things he'd done (thinking wearing a Nazi uniform to a party was a jolly jape 2005 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/apology-for-harry-s-nazi-outfit-falls-on-deaf-ears-1.406189) said (racist remarks 2009 - https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/12/prince-harry-video-pakistani). If he had made the apology personal, it would have meant a lot more OMO.
> 
> He has always thought himself above the law, morality and decency. That's because he comes from a family/class that often was and he is used to getting away with murder (quite literally on occasion (2007)  https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/nov/07/monarchy.wildlife ).
> 
> Opportunity after opportunity, they insist on acting holier than thou rather than setting an example. Whilst both of them have this constant need to tell us how good they are, how brilliant, skilful, sensitive, charitable etc, when evidence points in another direction, they will always look like what they are stupid hypocrites that can't get/hold-down a job/staff/friends/family/home.
> 
> To (ab)use your influence and power most of your adult life because of an accident of birth (or marrying one) then to set yourself up as an authority on social justice is beyond hypocrisy.
> 
> I'll call these 2 entitled liggers 'woke' when they a) give up (all) their titles voluntarily b) don't make a public speech - ever again c) do some charitable work without it being documented d) give some personal money away to the causes they say they believe in e) live in a dwelling that is appropriate for a family of 3 _and_ they've paid for personally e) go to work and earn their own money f) take pride in _not_ accepting money from daddy/grandma g) not slag-off the country/institution that you represented 5 mins ago to the rest of the world.


Well said!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> No one with any sort of social standing or self-respect would want to be a close friend of either. They expect loyalty (if obedience can be deemed loyalty) but they would both throw whoever/whatever to the wolves for any reason/whim. Both toxic.
> 
> As for JCMH apologising on behalf of I'm not sure who for past injustice in a ramble of virtue signalling. If he'd apologised for things he'd done (thinking wearing a Nazi uniform to a party was a jolly jape 2005 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/apology-for-harry-s-nazi-outfit-falls-on-deaf-ears-1.406189) said (racist remarks 2009 - https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/12/prince-harry-video-pakistani). If he had made the apology personal, it would have meant a lot more OMO.
> 
> He has always thought himself above the law, morality and decency. That's because he comes from a family/class that often was and he is used to getting away with murder (quite literally on occasion (2007)  https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/nov/07/monarchy.wildlife ).
> 
> Opportunity after opportunity, they insist on acting holier than thou rather than setting an example. Whilst both of them have this constant need to tell us how good they are, how brilliant, skilful, sensitive, charitable etc, when evidence points in another direction, they will always look like what they are stupid hypocrites that can't get/hold-down a job/staff/friends/family/home.
> 
> To (ab)use your influence and power most of your adult life because of an accident of birth (or marrying one) then to set yourself up as an authority on social justice is beyond hypocrisy.
> 
> I'll call these 2 entitled liggers 'woke' when they a) give up (all) their titles voluntarily b) don't make a public speech - ever again c) do some charitable work without it being documented d) give some personal money away to the causes they say they believe in e) live in a dwelling that is appropriate for a family of 3 _and_ they've paid for personally e) go to work and earn their own money f) take pride in _not_ accepting money from daddy/grandma g) not slag-off the country/institution that you represented 5 mins ago to the rest of the world.


Well said!  I’m so sick of hearing the tripe they put out I can hardly be bothered to take the pi** anymore.  It’s a sorry saga of ego-driven self-destructive pseudo-drama from beginning to end.  That latest video from Harry was just pitiful, the coaching and rehearsal so evident in the stilted *heartfelt* body language I didn’t know whether to weep for him or laugh out loud.
But thankfully with all thats happening in the world at the moment there are more business opportunities - oops I mean good causes, than they can get their attention span around.  Scared of picking the wrong one upon which to drape their royal beneficence and make their fortune, they’re reduced to trying to convince us all they’re the most deep thinking leaders the worlds ever seen on absolutely everything.  Like Arkiewell, that’s never going to work, is it.


----------



## limom

Prince Harry Talks About Racism and Change in a Speech for the Diana Awards
					

On what would have been Princess Diana’s 59th birthday, Harry opened up about conversations about the history of race he’s had with Meghan Markle.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



shut up already!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Please take away their royal titles ASAP since they are so keen on talking about politics!


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Prince Harry Talks About Racism and Change in a Speech for the Diana Awards
> 
> 
> On what would have been Princess Diana’s 59th birthday, Harry opened up about conversations about the history of race he’s had with Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shut up already!



Oh, these two, such keyboard warriors! Always eager to tell everyone else what they must do to make the world a better place while never actually stepping up and accomplishing anything on their own. I imagine Harry is sitting there on their borrowed couch, eating ice cream, and two-finger keying all of their amazing ideas on Instagram. Then Meghan messages the media that they have a new post up. What a team!


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Please take away their royal titles ASAP since they are so keen on talking about politics!


Am convinced that title removal will have to wait ...
all the news about Ghislaine Maxwell is so not good for Andrew,
and the BRF is not known for hasty actions
they would have to chop off all their heads (Just joking ... ) if they acted fairly to all the badly behaved BRF members


----------



## Frivole88

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle officially SHUT DOWN their Sussex Royal charity as they shift focus to eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst'*

*Meghan and Harry said to have filed paperwork to dissolve the royal foundation *
*The couple are shifting their focus to Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst' *
*'Travalyst' hopes to help the tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis*
*Follows Queen's decision that couple can no longer use word 'royal' in branding'*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have officially shut down their Sussex Royal charity.

The couple have filed official paperwork with Companies House to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.

The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.

The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> No one with any sort of social standing or self-respect would want to be a close friend of either. They expect loyalty (if obedience can be deemed loyalty) but they would both throw whoever/whatever to the wolves for any reason/whim. Both toxic.
> 
> As for JCMH apologising on behalf of I'm not sure who for past injustice in a ramble of virtue signalling. If he'd apologised for things he'd done (thinking wearing a Nazi uniform to a party was a jolly jape 2005 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/apology-for-harry-s-nazi-outfit-falls-on-deaf-ears-1.406189) said (racist remarks 2009 - https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jan/12/prince-harry-video-pakistani). If he had made the apology personal, it would have meant a lot more OMO.
> 
> He has always thought himself above the law, morality and decency. That's because he comes from a family/class that often was and he is used to getting away with murder (quite literally on occasion (2007)  https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/nov/07/monarchy.wildlife ).
> 
> Opportunity after opportunity, they insist on acting holier than thou rather than setting an example. Whilst both of them have this constant need to tell us how good they are, how brilliant, skilful, sensitive, charitable etc, when evidence points in another direction, they will always look like what they are stupid hypocrites that can't get/hold-down a job/staff/friends/family/home.
> 
> To (ab)use your influence and power most of your adult life because of an accident of birth (or marrying one) then to set yourself up as an authority on social justice is beyond hypocrisy.
> 
> I'll call these 2 entitled liggers 'woke' when they a) give up (all) their titles voluntarily b) don't make a public speech - ever again c) do some charitable work without it being documented d) give some personal money away to the causes they say they believe in e) live in a dwelling that is appropriate for a family of 3 _and_ they've paid for personally e) go to work and earn their own money f) take pride in _not_ accepting money from daddy/grandma g) not slag-off the country/institution that you represented 5 mins ago to the rest of the world.


Can't even say HOW MUCH I love this .. it's EXACTLY what THEY SHOULD do, alas .. 

I'm wondering though, given their need to continue to make fools of themselves, at what point in time will various "supporters" start to see the truth - e.g., Oprah, Tyler, etc.??  They are NOT stupid people, so you have to figure that at some point in time they are going to realize that 'association' with these 2 is toxic.  HOWEVER, and this is the sad part .. the fact that he is Prince Harry and that because of that it means 'media' coverage, will then continue supporting them because it means $$$ to their pockets?  (Well - don't know about Tyler unless he is somehow using that to take off money from his taxes)!!


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> Please take away their royal titles ASAP since they are so keen on talking about politics!


I'm wondering if that will be the coup-de-grace on the 12-month review; that the Queen will take away the Duke & Duchess titles since they are SO keen on getting into issues which the BRF has purposely stayed away from. That would just KILL Meghan ..


----------



## joyeaux

This article from Forbes.com is long, but it quotes the suit directly and has some good insights, IMO!

eta: one interesting thing this article Seems to point to, that if read carefully the verbiage of suit actually seems to place the blame on palace staff for not “protecting” her, not necessarily the senior royals. Although considering staff gets their orders from the Queen and Charles... I mean it’s all intertwined.

Another thing I don’t get about the suit is how she brings up Eugenie and Bea as examples of royals who are permitted to have jobs, and therefore she should have been able to have one too. But they aren't senior Royals And that’s WHY they can have jobs. But at the same time, she later brings up the 1 billion pound revenue her Very Important Senior Royal status wedding brought to the UK (how can that even be quantified?!?). Seems to be wanting to have it both ways to me  




> *Meghan Markle’s Lawsuit Against A London Tabloid Takes A Turn: Her Lawyers Claim PR Mismanagement By Kensington Palace*
> Dave Johnson09:10am EDT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Singin' In The Rain: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend The Endeavour Fund Awards at Mansion ... [+]
> Samir Hussein/WireImage
> Meghan Markle's privacy-invasion and data-protection lawsuit against Associated Newspapers and its publications the _Mail On Sunday_ and the Mail Online lurches on, pandemic be damned. The pre-trial legal jousting has brought to light much more of the backstory of the years 2018 and 2019, when Ms. Markle and Prince Harry married, produced young Master Archie, and in the process swiftly distanced themselves from both the Markle and the Windsor families. That is, the pre-trial jousting has brought to light what Meghan Markle and Prince Harry _interpret _as the backstory. Still, that has value as their version of the narrative.
> In its ongoing pre-trial efforts to defend the scope of Meghan Markle's invasion-of-privacy, data-protection and copyright complaint, her British legal team has just filed papers in London that add significantly to that turbulent 2018-19 narrative. Told from the plaintiff's perspective of course, the story in the documents is nevertheless a rich one and along the way yields tendrils of the parallel narrative of Prince Harry's and Meghan Markle's inexplicably rushed and heedlessly messy departure from the House of Windsor earlier this year.
> It remains a court filing from the plaintiff in answer to some queries by the defense, thus not everything is fully explained by Meghan Markle's lawyers. But a lot is told along the way in attempting to maintain the knife blade of the plaintiff's case. This, in turn, has had the predictable result since the filing was disclosed of loosing the coursing hounds of the British press on the royals beat to bay in full cry after the fox of the "Markle" side of the grand Meghan-and-Harry narrative.
> Made by the Sussex legal team led by David Sherbourne, the filing refers to Meghan Markle, their client, as "the Claimant." It sets up the narrative in this way:
> _“The Claimant had become the subject of a large number of false and damaging articles by the UK tabloid media, specifically by the Defendant, which caused tremendous emotional distress and damage to her mental health. As her friends had never seen her in this state before, they were rightly concerned for her welfare, specifically as she was pregnant, unprotected by the Institution, and prohibited from defending herself.” _
> The upper-cased "Institution" referred to in these two sentences is the British monarchy, and specifically, the public-relations courtiers of Kensington Palace, where Meghan Markle and Prince Harry lived and worked at the time. The "friends" referred to are the infamous "five" who spoke anonymously to _People_magazine in early 2019, on behalf of Meghan Markle, to explain how "misunderstood" she was by the British press. The five friends are reportedly named by Ms. Markle in a confidential portion of the document but are referred to in the public portions by the letters "A" through "E."
> Well-meaning as they might have been, those friends' effort to right the record backfired spectacularly after it was published in February 2019. Although the People article was rather benign, one "friend" did insinuate that Thomas Markle could very well get in touch with his daughter if he so desired. That casual, and possibly incorrect observation incensed the risible former lighting director to the point that he gave his daughter's letter to an Los Angeles-based reporter from the _Mail on Sunday_, kicking off the whole circumstance of the current lawsuit.
> The current filing waxes quite boldly on the subject of Ms. Markle being "constrained" by Kensington Palace courtiers, as follows:
> _“The stance of “no comment” was taken by the KP Communications Team without any discussion with or approval by the Claimant, as is standard practice for Royal communications. Had the Claimant been asked or been given the opportunity to participate, she would have asked the KP Communications Team to say on the record that she had not been involved with the People magazine article, as she had not been.” _
> As usual in England with anything remotely Markle, the larger significance of the instant hue and cry at the document drop is that the British are still, after three years and counting, more than a little flummoxed by the, in the largely critical royal-beat press view, superslick California-temptress-lady-TV-thespian-style person, and especially by her mysterious, lightning-fast absconding with their once-beloved prince. How did she do that, and why so ungratefully after having been gloriously anointed a "royal," and a 'duchess' to boot, is the question that lingers in Britain in Meghan Markle's still quite choppy wake.
> Although Ms. Markle does seem to want to exculpate herself in the current filing from having organized or instructed her five friends to speak to _People_, it isn't entirely clear why she has her lawyers repeatedly emphasize Kensington Palace's role in the aftermath of the _People _publication so heartily. Having not reached court yet, the trudging lawsuit is doing little to restore Meghan Markle's pre-wedding positive image from its recent downturn. What is clear is that she is not prosecuting the case to accomplish that.
> Herewith, from the current filing, a further odd repetition of the points already made on the subject of Kensington Palace, its constraints, and the five friends who spoke with _People_:
> _“It was mandated by the KP Communications Team that all friends and family of the Claimant should say ‘no comment’ when approached by any media outlet, despite misinformation being provided to UK tabloids about the Claimant. This shared frustration amongst the Claimant’s friends left everyone feeling silenced, as it appeared that other so-called sources were able to disseminate false statements about the Claimant, while the people who knew her best were told that they needed to remain silent. The Claimant believes that it is probably because of this reason, as well as concerns about the press intrusion by the UK tabloids, that a few friends chose to participate and they did so anonymously.”_
> Suffice it to say, it remains a mystery what legal advantage in a British court any description of Meghan Markle's friends' alleged "shared frustration" among her friends will bring.
> The presiding High Court judge, Justice David Warby, has proven his distaste for what he views as extraneous blather by shaving Ms. Markle's case down following a pre-trial "leave-out" hearing on April 30 — held remotely, via video conference, in the teeth of London's SARS-CoV-2 lockdown.
> But, if the case proceeds to court as now seems likely, the specter of Ms. Markle's perennially irascible father, Thomas Markle, testifying for the defense against his own daughter, looms large. In great anticipation of that, among legal wags in Britain, the lawsuit is known colloquially as "Markle vs. Markle."
> In the granular arcana of what has been made public in the latest filing trove, it's important to remember the shape of the greater narrative, namely, that in the runup to the time frame encompassed by the data- and privacy-violation lawsuit, the white-hot media scrum around Meghan Markle's wedding to Prince Harry, including various miscues, leaks, and miscommunications around that fray, resulted in the estrangement of Meghan Markle from her father. At this point, with Mr. Markle's new grandson residing in Beverly Hills, within a two-hour drive of the Baja California retirement community in which he lives, Meghan Markle and her father have reportedly not spoken in some two years.
> The fact remains: By having Mr. Sherbourne address the _People_ article as well as devote so much wordage to the Kensington Palace courtiers allegedly controlling her own public response to that rather mild 2019 story, it seems that Ms. Markle, and by extension Prince Harry, are attempting to justify and/or rectify every jot and iota of their behavior. That they would like the trial to proceed seems clear. Unclear, still, despite the many expensive jousts thus far, is why they want that.
> Given this form of attenuated legal combat over whether sufficient distress or emotional damage was inflicted by the defendant, thus far the lone possible advantage of the trial going forward seems to be that the High Court could function as a sort of massive, extremely expensive, restrained form of family counseling — a way for Meghan Markle and her estranged father to resume their larger battle with each other about who said or did what, with which publication, and when.
> Certainly, this is at least part of the reason that the contest is so passionately awaited in London. The British love nothing more than a good family outing.


----------



## bag-mania

More about Meghan‘s lawsuit. Petulant is exactly the right word for her. 









						Meghan's court documents show a royally petulant sense of grievance
					

RICHARD KAY: Among the headline-grabbing assertions Meghan makes in new papers filed in her High Court privacy battle, lies an extraordinary degree of resentment towards the Royal Family



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

kristinlorraine said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle officially SHUT DOWN their Sussex Royal charity as they shift focus to eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry said to have filed paperwork to dissolve the royal foundation *
> *The couple are shifting their focus to Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst' *
> *'Travalyst' hopes to help the tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis*
> *Follows Queen's decision that couple can no longer use word 'royal' in branding'*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have officially shut down their Sussex Royal charity.
> 
> The couple have filed official paperwork with Companies House to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.
> 
> The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.
> 
> The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.



Is this Archewell or a totally different entity? I can't keep up!


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> More about Meghan‘s lawsuit. Petulant is exactly the right word for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's court documents show a royally petulant sense of grievance
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Among the headline-grabbing assertions Meghan makes in new papers filed in her High Court privacy battle, lies an extraordinary degree of resentment towards the Royal Family
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I hope the lawsuit is a complete embarrassment for Meghan - sounds like it well might be.  Time those titles were gone.
ETA - I wonder how long it’ll be before she sues the actual Royal Family for damaging her reputation, her Hollywood career and etc etc etc.  That’s what she’d REALLY like to be at IMO


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> Is this Archewell or a totally different entity? I can't keep up!


No this is SussexRoyal, their original foundation which they set up when they decided to split with the Cambridges (and which, like Archewell also never got off the ground).


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> I hope the lawsuit is a complete embarrassment for Meghan - sounds like it well might be.  Time those titles were gone.
> ETA - I wonder how long it’ll be before she sues the actual Royal Family for damaging her reputation, her Hollywood career and etc etc etc.  That’s what she’d REALLY like to be at IMO


She would never sue BRF as long as they are paying for her. She gets her priority right! Money comes first!


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> She would never sue BRF as long as they are paying for her. She gets her priority right! Money comes first!


Any rational person would think like that.  But Meghan’s a narcissist and they self-sabotage in pursuit of their grudges.  Her actions have already significantly damaged her prospects and she’s still doubling down.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Am convinced that title removal will have to wait ...
> all the news about Ghislaine Maxwell is so not good for Andrew,
> and the BRF is not known for hasty actions
> they would have to chop off all their heads (Just joking ... ) if they acted fairly to all the badly behaved BRF members



Jup. I already saw the stans going on on Twitter excusing Meghan's behaviour with Andrew's shenanigans. Only because he's a disrespectful, morally rotten individual I don't see how her behaviour is less apalling TBH. There will always be something worse. I feel so bad for the Queen, he was her favourite and for her to realize not only is he a sexual predator but also disrespecting her like this with these people sitting on her throne must be hard. 

Also, while I was reading up on this someone mentioned how mysteriously most of Kevin Spacey's accuser died with the last one dropping their case. This is such a deep, ugly swamp.


----------



## beautymagpie

joyeaux said:


> This article from Forbes.com is long, but it quotes the suit directly and has some good insights, IMO!
> 
> eta: one interesting thing this article Seems to point to, that if read carefully the verbiage of suit actually seems to place the blame on palace staff for not “protecting” her, not necessarily the senior royals. Although considering staff gets their orders from the Queen and Charles... I mean it’s all intertwined.
> 
> Another thing I don’t get about the suit is how she brings up Eugenie and Bea as examples of royals who are permitted to have jobs, and therefore she should have been able to have one too. But they aren't senior Royals And that’s WHY they can have jobs. But at the same time, she later brings up the 1 billion pound revenue her Very Important Senior Royal status wedding brought to the UK (how can that even be quantified?!?). Seems to be wanting to have it both ways to me


This just makes me think she definitely (I was in no doubt anyway) guided the five friends to speak. She was pissed at KP, she wanted a say, she got it another way.

I don’t think this document does what she thinks it does or will in the court of public opinion.

And I’m no huge royal fan but god, what is her deal with B&E??? Smells of jealousy and tantrums of the highest order. I’d take them over her anyway.

I guess what Countess LuAnn says is true. Money can’t buy you class.


----------



## beautymagpie

kristinlorraine said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle officially SHUT DOWN their Sussex Royal charity as they shift focus to eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry said to have filed paperwork to dissolve the royal foundation *
> *The couple are shifting their focus to Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst' *
> *'Travalyst' hopes to help the tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis*
> *Follows Queen's decision that couple can no longer use word 'royal' in branding'*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have officially shut down their Sussex Royal charity.
> 
> The couple have filed official paperwork with Companies House to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.
> 
> The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.
> 
> The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.



Took them long enough. They want free holidays, don’t they.


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, while I was reading up on this someone mentioned how *mysteriously most of Kevin Spacey's accuser died *with the last one dropping their case. This is such a deep, ugly swamp.




Spacey is *a monster *no doubt, but "most"of his accusers are still alive and well, including Anthony Rapp who was the first to lobby the accusations loudly enough for the media to finaaaally pick up on it. As far as I know, only one of his accusers has died - Ari Behn from a post-divorce suicide. 

To say most of his accusers died is a huge leap.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> Spacey is *a monster *no doubt, but "most"of his accusers are still alive and well, including Anthony Rapp who was the first to lobby the accusations loudly enough for the media to finaaaally pick up on it. As far as I know, only one of his accusers has died - Ari Behn from a post-divorce suicide.
> 
> To say most of his accusers died is a huge leap.


I haven't following his case at all, but the Twitter person I quoted named three or four. I'm not insisting though, as I said, I have no clue about this at all.


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't following his case at all, but the Twitter person I quoted named three or four. I'm not insisting though, as I said, I have no clue about this at all.



Interesting, I'd be curious to know who else. I haven't been following either his or Weinstein's cases, it's just maddening and depressing.


----------



## Chagall

chicinthecity777 said:


> I can't say for 100% sure that she has never been subject to racial prejudice by the U.K. press but the British press hated Kate at the beginning. Called her all sorts of names etc. So I don't think MM was necessarily singled out because of her race.


MM did Kate a real service by joining the BRF. Kate’s normal behaviour has been highlighted by MM’s crazy antics! Still, at this point looking back on same, the speed with which all this happened points to the very real possibility that there was a plan in place to exit the royal family right from the onset!


----------



## papertiger

kristinlorraine said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle officially SHUT DOWN their Sussex Royal charity as they shift focus to eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry said to have filed paperwork to dissolve the royal foundation *
> *The couple are shifting their focus to Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst' *
> *'Travalyst' hopes to help the tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis*
> *Follows Queen's decision that couple can no longer use word 'royal' in branding'*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have officially shut down their Sussex Royal charity.
> 
> The couple have filed official paperwork with Companies House to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.
> 
> The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.
> 
> The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.



Perhaps they can get together and find a way to fuel private jets by celery juice?


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Perhaps they can get together and find a way to fuel private jets by celery juice?


Or gas out of their own *ss? They have so much of it!


----------



## doni

Of course, there is no such thing as eco tourism.  Unless it involves visiting your own backyard which I don’t believe is what we are talking about here...


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> Of course, there is no such thing as eco tourism.  Unless it involves visiting your own backyard which I don’t believe is what we are talking about here...


I think they meant "how to avoid single use plastic on your private jet" kind of sh1te!


----------



## beautymagpie

Right-o... markling begins...









						Meghan Markle apparently ‘embarrassed’ Harry by announcing her pregnancy on Eugenie’s wedding day — Marie Claire UK
					

Sure, being a royal has its advantages – the fashion, the princes, the tiaras, the castles – but it definitely also has its drawbacks, from the end of privacy to the dreaded rumour mill. No one knows this more than Meghan Markle, who has endured an endless stream of online bullying since joining...




					apple.news


----------



## sdkitty

beautymagpie said:


> This just makes me think she definitely (I was in no doubt anyway) guided the five friends to speak. She was pissed at KP, she wanted a say, she got it another way.
> 
> I don’t think this document does what she thinks it does or will in the court of public opinion.
> 
> And I’m no huge royal fan but god, what is her deal with B&E??? Smells of jealousy and tantrums of the highest order. I’d take them over her anyway.
> 
> I guess what Countess LuAnn says is true. Money can’t buy you class.


money can't buy class nor can it buy happiness (though it certainly is a nice convenience)


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think they meant "how to avoid single use plastic on your private jet" kind of sh1te!


I don't see how that makes them saintly (which seems to be what they want to be perceived as)


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> Of course, there is no such thing as eco tourism.  Unless it involves visiting your own backyard which I don’t believe is what we are talking about here...



They know that if they put “eco” in front of any word it automatically means they are caring and involved (at least to simple-minded people who don’t actually stop to think about it).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

The tide might be turning finally. Just read some of the comments on this Courier Mail article about her lawsuit and there's a ton of criticism from people around the world - UK, USA, Canada, Australia etc.


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> The tide might be turning finally. Just read some of the comments on this Courier Mail article about her lawsuit and there's a ton of criticism from people around the world - UK, USA, Canada, Australia etc.



funny, she was such a great networker that she was able to land a prince but she couldn't get along with the family?  guess that was because - as this article says - she couldn't accept second place......she thought she would outshine Kate


----------



## CeeJay

.. and meanwhile, the 'REAL' reason behind the Archewell "foundation" .. this is noted in quite a few publications (People, Marie Claire, etc.):
https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...-meghan-markle-trademark-archewell-tv-movies/

So much for 'charity', they just wanted to make movies and TV shows!  UFB and how transparent ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh my, the drama — these 2 love the drama and the chaos it brings. Their pity parties just aren’t that interesting.
These lawsuits spell out in no uncertain terms that H&M are indeed delusional about their importance to the world. Since there have been so many articles about them recently, most of us have reached our saturation point and have more important things to do.

Happy 4th!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and meanwhile, the 'REAL' reason behind the Archewell "foundation" .. this is noted in quite a few publications (People, Marie Claire, etc.):
> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...-meghan-markle-trademark-archewell-tv-movies/
> 
> So much for 'charity', they just wanted to make movies and TV shows!  UFB and how transparent ..


OMG
her worst nightmare must be to be unknown - not famous


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I don't see how that makes the saintly (which seems to be what they want)


I was being sarcastic. There is no such a thing as being environmental friendly on a private jet.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> funny, she was such a great networker that she was able to land a prince but she couldn't get along with the family?  guess that was because - as this article says - she couldn't accept second place......she thought she would outshine Kate


.. and that, to me, just shows how STUPID and what a true NARCISSIST she is


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and meanwhile, the 'REAL' reason behind the Archewell "foundation" .. this is noted in quite a few publications (People, Marie Claire, etc.):
> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...-meghan-markle-trademark-archewell-tv-movies/
> 
> So much for 'charity', they just wanted to make movies and TV shows!  UFB and how transparent ..




Oh, that Meghan! She has so much ambition and almost no grasp on reality. Does she honestly think she’s the first to try to launch a studio by plugging it from a charitable angle? Unless she has completely bamboozled Oprah and Tyler Perry into funding it for them, this idea is going to go where all of her other plans go, nowhere.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I was being sarcastic. There is no such a thing as being environmental friendly on a private jet.


I get it


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh, that Meghan! She has so much ambition and almost no grasp on reality. Does she honestly think she’s the first to try to launch a studio by plugging it from a charitable angle? Unless she has completely bamboozled Oprah and Tyler Perry into funding it for them, this idea is going to go where all of her other plans go, nowhere.


she has delusions of grandeur


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Perhaps they can get together and find a way to fuel private jets by celery juice?



I'm in such a hurry all the time. I _meant_ to say... Perhaps they can get together with Elon Musk and find a way to feul prvate jets by celery juice 

Maybe I need a feul injection of vitamin B12!?!


----------



## Lodpah

chicinthecity777 said:


> I was being sarcastic. There is no such a thing as being environmental friendly on a private jet.


They are so . . . anyway I took an eco friendly flight to Hilo for the 4th. Enjoy these pictures. What I mean is that a regular flight and it felt like a private flight as it was not full flight.


----------



## lalame

beautymagpie said:


> And I’m no huge royal fan but god, what is her deal with B&E??? Smells of jealousy and tantrums of the highest order. I’d take them over her anyway.



Has anyone else had that coworker who joins and right away expects everyone to give them the same respect, trust and admiration as the employees who have been there for years? Like just can't seem to understand that it takes time or simply not appropriate to earn certain privileges...


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Has anyone else had that coworker who joins and right away expects everyone to give them the same respect, trust and admiration as the employees who have been there for years? Like just can't seem to understand that it takes time or simply not appropriate to earn certain privileges...


OH YES .. and TOO many times!!!  Oftentimes, they don't 'make' it ..


----------



## mshermes

Among the plethora of genius ideas she has, she must be psychic as well. How the heck do you know that a one year old loves Los Angeles?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> Among the plethora of genius ideas she has, she must be psychic as well. How the heck do you know that a one year old loves Los Angeles?


didn't catch that....a one year old doesn't even understand getting birthday presents (although in the case of Archie, it was a big disappointment to him not having a big party)


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> didn't catch that....a one year old doesn't even understand getting birthday presents (although in the case of Archie, it was a big disappointment to him not having a big party)


Yes .. a HUGE disappointment for Meghan since she couldn't have all her "celebrity" friends attend and adorn them with expensive presents like her baby shower .. BOO-HOO-HOO!  I just don't understand how anyone can't see through this woman anymore, her motives are pretty clear.


----------



## papertiger

mshermes said:


> Among the plethora of genius ideas she has, she must be psychic as well. How the heck do you know that a one year old loves Los Angeles?



Especially when that one year old hasn't been outside the house/garden


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> didn't catch that....a one year old doesn't even understand getting birthday presents (although in the case of Archie, it was a big disappointment to him not having a big party)





CeeJay said:


> Yes .. a HUGE disappointment for Meghan since she couldn't have all her "celebrity" friends attend and adorn them with expensive presents like her baby shower .. BOO-HOO-HOO!  I just don't understand how anyone can't see through this woman anymore, her motives are pretty clear.



More importantly, they missed the chance to shake down those celebrity infant party attendees with “networking opportunities”  like when they cornered poor Bob Iger at a movie premiere and practically begged him for a voiceover spot for Meghan. Shameless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

With all the important stuff happening now, I think everyone is just having some well-earned fun mocking these two. The more we learn about them, the less likable they are.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> With all the important stuff happening now, I think everyone is just having some well-earned fun mocking these two. The more we learn about them, the less likable they are.


actually it would be a bit more fun if we have someone here who liked them


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes .. a HUGE disappointment for Meghan since she couldn't have all her "celebrity" friends attend and adorn them with expensive presents like her baby shower .. BOO-HOO-HOO!  I just don't understand how anyone can't see through this woman anymore, her motives are pretty clear.


wonder if she would have as good a turnout these days.....


----------



## csshopper

I think the whole movie-TV production thing is funny and really pretty telling. If she is the one in charge it masks the embarrassment when Hollywood casting directors aren't calling, and she can produce her own screen time and proclaim her supposed stardom.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Welp... that’s a movie I won’t be seeing... 









						Meghan Markle 'signs up to produce film adaptation of political novel'
					

Meghan Markle, 38, will take on the US presidency in producing a film with a politically-motivated 'renegade' character. She is believed to have struck a deal with Election Year author Lloyd Scott.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## tiktok

Sol Ryan said:


> Welp... that’s a movie I won’t be seeing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'signs up to produce film adaptation of political novel'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 38, will take on the US presidency in producing a film with a politically-motivated 'renegade' character. She is believed to have struck a deal with Election Year author Lloyd Scott.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Signing a deal with the author (though they say she only signed an NDA so even that is a question mark) is very far from raising the money to actually make the film...


----------



## Sol Ryan

tiktok said:


> Signing a deal with the author (though they say she only signed an NDA so even that is a question mark) is very far from raising the money to actually make the film...



Their inability to actually start anything has me thinking that it wont ever come to fruition, but if it did, I won’t see it lol... I mean it takes years to make a movie...


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> actually it would be a bit more fun if we have someone here who liked them



Lol believe it or not, when I glance at headlines about their charity activities I have a moment of “aww well that’s very nice, maybe they’re not so bad.” As soon as I read the article, or I see another story about their lawsuit, I sour on them again. I WANT to like them.


----------



## Luvbolide

limom said:


> Prince Harry Talks About Racism and Change in a Speech for the Diana Awards
> 
> 
> On what would have been Princess Diana’s 59th birthday, Harry opened up about conversations about the history of race he’s had with Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shut up already!



Oh FFS, who the hell cares?  Now they alert the media when they talk to each other?  There are plenty more intelligent and accomplished people talking about racial issues these days than MM.


----------



## Luvbolide

kristinlorraine said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle officially SHUT DOWN their Sussex Royal charity as they shift focus to eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry said to have filed paperwork to dissolve the royal foundation *
> *The couple are shifting their focus to Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst' *
> *'Travalyst' hopes to help the tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis*
> *Follows Queen's decision that couple can no longer use word 'royal' in branding'*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have officially shut down their Sussex Royal charity.
> 
> The couple have filed official paperwork with Companies House to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.
> 
> The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.
> 
> The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.




More empty words from these two.  What the hell do either of them know about how to help the travel business survive the pandemic?  They seem to be grabbing onto random issues or problems, announcing that they have come to the rescue and then not doing anything of substance.

Have they done a single thing of substance yet?  For anyone other than themselves?  

Wonder when they will learn that one of the problems with incessant word salad is that it is darned difficult to have any specific ideas or thoughts because your word salad is so vague that it becomes meaningless.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Welp... that’s a movie I won’t be seeing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'signs up to produce film adaptation of political novel'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 38, will take on the US presidency in producing a film with a politically-motivated 'renegade' character. She is believed to have struck a deal with Election Year author Lloyd Scott.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4778727





tiktok said:


> Signing a deal with the author (though they say she only signed an NDA so even that is a question mark) is very far from raising the money to actually make the film...



I’m calling BS. I just looked on Amazon and this book is such a non-entity that it doesn’t even have any reviews. It looks like it was self-published only a few weeks ago.  This is someone’s little joke. Either the Daily Mail having some fun or Meghan Markle getting free publicity by pretending like she’s politically involved when in truth it’s a nonstarter. One thing is certain, this book becoming a movie will never happen. Popular bestsellers get optioned by real studios all the time and often nothing comes of it. 

I have a third possibility, maybe the author himself put out the story. How better to boost sales for an obscure book by an unknown writer?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I’m calling BS. I just looked on Amazon and this book is such a non-entity that it doesn’t even have any reviews. It looks like it was self-published only a few weeks ago.  This is someone’s little joke. Either the Daily Mail having some fun or Meghan Markle getting free publicity by pretending like she’s politically involved when in truth it’s a nonstarter. One thing is certain, this book becoming a movie will never happen. Popular bestsellers get optioned by real studios all the time and often nothing comes of it.
> 
> I have a third possibility, maybe the author himself put out the story. How better to boost sales for an obscure book by an unknown writer?



Ooh.. I wonder if we’ll get another lawsuit to enjoy then... Lol...


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> Signing a deal with the author (though they say she only signed an NDA so even that is a question mark) is very far from raising the money to actually make the film...


Soooooooo true!! .. and nowadays, THAT (raising the $$$) is the hardest thing to do!  Now, given this .. a (potential) “political” movie, how can they really retain their titles (Duke / Duchess) .. isn’t this against the BRF protocol???


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> I think the whole movie-TV production thing is funny and really pretty telling. If she is the one in charge it masks the embarrassment when Hollywood casting directors aren't calling, and she can produce her own screen time and proclaim her supposed stardom.


does she have the money and the knowledge to do it?  let's face it - she isn't an experienced A-list actress like reese witherspoon or nicole kidman.  what she has it her husband's name.  unless someone like oprah or tyler helps her.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> does she have the money and the knowledge to do it?  let's face it - she isn't an experienced A-list actress like reese witherspoon or nicole kidman.  what she has it her husband's name.  *unless someone like oprah or tyler helps her*.


Uggh .. perish the thought!


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think some poster said it could take years to develop a movie project from signing an option for a book, if it actually completes at all. Many many projects don't. Good luck to her!
How about we don't need to hear how you started something and come and tell us when you actually finish something, MM?


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Prince Harry Talks About Racism and Change in a Speech for the Diana Awards
> 
> 
> On what would have been Princess Diana’s 59th birthday, Harry opened up about conversations about the history of race he’s had with Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shut up already!



Oh, the absurd irony of this one talking about institutionalized racism. Your only claim to fame stems from the fact that your family institutionalized their superiority over other citizens. I’ll take lessons on racism from people who didn’t party in nazi uniforms.


----------



## Aimee3

Every time I hear Archwell I think of Archcare which is something to do with the archdiocese of ny nursing care (or something in the health arena).  That’s what the name Archwell sounds like to me..health care...certainly nothing remotely Hollywood or movie stuff.


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> Every time I hear Archwell I think of Archcare which is something to do with the archdiocese of ny nursing care (or something in the health arena).  That’s what the name Archwell sounds like to me..health care...certainly nothing remotely Hollywood or movie stuff.


To many of us in the US, we think of "Archway" .. which made some mean (GOOD) cookies!  Not sure if it's in all parts of the US, but boy-oh-boy, it was a favorite in my household in my youth (as a matter of fact, my mother used to "try" to hide a new-bought box .. much to her dismay, she sucked at trying to hide things from me - HA)!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meanwhile, W&K look tan, fit, and happy at their event today. No angst with them. 
The petulant H&M continue to throw their pity parties.

Who would we rather chat with?  The happy couple or the Bickersons?


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> To many of us in the US, we think of "Archway" .. which made some mean (GOOD) cookies!  Not sure if it's in all parts of the US, but boy-oh-boy, it was a favorite in my household in my youth (as a matter of fact, my mother used to "try" to hide a new-bought box .. much to her dismay, she sucked at trying to hide things from me - HA)!!


Yes, Archway cookies always comes to mind. I love them (the cookies, not the grifters)!


----------



## PewPew

Even putting aside his Nazi uniform costume, Harry is uniquely unqualified to lecture us on racism in America, as he was born/raised/lived in the UK with an unrivaled degree of privilege.

H & M are also unqualified to lecture us on the environment, despite his new eco-tourist venture. He’s flown in private jets his whole life, including to an environmental conference where he told everyone else to cut down on their carbon footprint and not travel so much. (Charles has done the same, so it’s tradition to “do as I say & not as i do”)

H&M are also unqualified to lecture us about Covid precautions, as they have done on instagram, all the while not following the rules themselves— flouting travel ban, exposing staff to excess travel, not wearing their masks properly in public (for photo ops) etc

Their hypocrisy and entitlement are endless, but I guess we feed into it as a society, when Harry can make $1million to discuss his dead mother to JP Morgan, etc


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> Even putting aside his Nazi uniform costume, Harry is uniquely unqualified to lecture us on racism in America, as he was born/raised/lived in the UK with an unrivaled degree of privilege.
> 
> H & M are also unqualified to lecture us on the environment, despite his new eco-tourist venture. He’s flown in private jets his whole life, including to an environmental conference where he told everyone else to cut down on their carbon footprint and not travel so much. (Charles has done the same, so it’s tradition to “do as I say & not as i do”)
> 
> H&M are also unqualified to lecture us about Covid precautions, as they have done on instagram, all the while not following the rules themselves— flouting travel ban, exposing staff to excess travel, not wearing their masks properly in public (for photo ops) etc
> 
> Their hypocrisy and entitlement are endless, but I guess we feed into it as a society, when Harry can make $1million to discuss his dead mother to JP Morgan, etc


don't forget M pulling down her mask so the recipient of her kindness could recognize her


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> To many of us in the US, we think of "Archway" .. which made some mean (GOOD) cookies!  Not sure if it's in all parts of the US, but boy-oh-boy, it was a favorite in my household in my youth (as a matter of fact, my mother used to "try" to hide a new-bought box .. much to her dismay, she sucked at trying to hide things from me - HA)!!


Sounds like an orthopedic shoe company for people with flat feet.


----------



## bag-mania

PewPew said:


> Even putting aside his Nazi uniform costume, Harry is uniquely unqualified to lecture us on racism in America, as he was born/raised/lived in the UK with an unrivaled degree of privilege.
> 
> H & M are also unqualified to lecture us on the environment, despite his new eco-tourist venture. He’s flown in private jets his whole life, including to an environmental conference where he told everyone else to cut down on their carbon footprint and not travel so much. (Charles has done the same, so it’s tradition to “do as I say & not as i do”)
> 
> H&M are also unqualified to lecture us about Covid precautions, as they have done on instagram, all the while not following the rules themselves— flouting travel ban, exposing staff to excess travel, not wearing their masks properly in public (for photo ops) etc
> 
> Their hypocrisy and entitlement are endless, but I guess we feed into it as a society, when Harry can make $1million to discuss his dead mother to JP Morgan, etc



They are total phonies. They can’t even be bothered to pretend to be environmentally-conscious themselves. Weren’t they driving around LA in a Porsche SUV? It’s not like they rented a Prius to help the environment that they want everybody to believe care about.


----------



## Jktgal

We're in for a treat with these Messiahs of future travel!

Rule 1  Social distance on planes like we did when escaped Canada! A whole 144 seater plane to carry the 3 of us. Arki was in the co-pilot seat! It's really important for babies to thrive early on in their lives! Our live's goal is to bring this incredibly profound experience to everyone!

Rule 2 It's really important to support small businesses in the places you visit! Like we support Mr Perry and Ms Winfrey and Disney.

Rule 3 Virtual travel is the future! We are #1 supporters of virtuality - our friends, our activism, our support for the environment, our family.... we can go on and on!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> They are total phonies. They can’t even be bothered to pretend to be environmentally-conscious themselves. Weren’t they driving around LA in a Porsche SUV? It’s not like they rented a Prius to help the environment that they want everybody to believe care about.


Phonies says it all. 

I can kinda give H some slack on this (and that's trying hard). He was raised in such a rarified world, one that I cannot even imagine. As for flying--I doubt very much that he's ever gone on Expedia (or whatever discount booking site) and looked for the best price along with arrivals, seat choice, etc.--he knows the same as my dogs about air travel (which is nothing). As for her--I can't even.

The only solace I have is that they will probably fail with this (along with movie making) as they have with everything else. While I would think the Queen & Charles are being nice about all their "we are going to save the world and this is how" baloney,  hope W&K are having a good chuckle over their glasses of white wine each evening after their 3 children are in bed.


----------



## rose60610

This was reported in various sites in defense of the BRF against Meghan's criticism of not being protected enough: 

"Kensington Palace could not defend her because some of the stories were true.

According to the papers, the duchess was left unhappy by stories about her deteriorating relationship with palace staff, as well as the comments made about her by her half-sister Samantha Grant.

Referring to reports that one palace employee had been left in tears by Meghan’s demand, a source told The Times: “The stories were a drop in the ocean compared to what was going on.”

The source also told the paper the “institution” Meghan felt unprotected by refers to the media team rather than members of the Royal Family.

Meghan, 38, is also reported to have wanted something done about the interviews her half-sister was carrying out, but the palace would be unlikely to get involved with those."

etc.

When the Palace basically says "Well, Honey, you WERE a b*tch, that's why", you'd think she'd learn to back off. A dope like Meghan taking on the BRF?  With her track record? She'll keep the tabloids busy for ages. So.....is this her new way of making money? Spewing crap like this so she can sell it to the tabloids? Makes me think Harry enjoys having his gonads fused in a vice. He's as big a dope as she is, so maybe it's a marriage made in heaven after all. I used to think "Run, Harry run!", but since he isn't, he's complicit in her BS. Stay tuned for more forced tear jerker stories about Dead Diana, the suffering environment that isn't affected by private jets, and our planet that's on fire because not enough people ask Meghan if she's OK.


----------



## lalame

PewPew said:


> Even putting aside his Nazi uniform costume, Harry is uniquely unqualified to lecture us on racism in America, as he was born/raised/lived in the UK with an unrivaled degree of privilege.
> 
> H & M are also unqualified to lecture us on the environment, despite his new eco-tourist venture. He’s flown in private jets his whole life, including to an environmental conference where he told everyone else to cut down on their carbon footprint and not travel so much. (Charles has done the same, so it’s tradition to “do as I say & not as i do”)
> 
> H&M are also unqualified to lecture us about Covid precautions, as they have done on instagram, all the while not following the rules themselves— flouting travel ban, exposing staff to excess travel, not wearing their masks properly in public (for photo ops) etc
> 
> Their hypocrisy and entitlement are endless, but I guess we feed into it as a society, when Harry can make $1million to discuss his dead mother to JP Morgan, etc



I think they would get so much respect if they said something like, “I recognize the unfair inequity my family and the royal establishment stands for. I will no longer continue to benefit from it by taking advantage of the spotlight it’s given me, even as a non-working royal.” and then go away into the good night. Working royal is one thing but to continue benefitting from the system even when you’re not working... smh.


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> To many of us in the US, we think of "Archway" .. which made some mean (GOOD) cookies!  Not sure if it's in all parts of the US, but boy-oh-boy, it was a favorite in my household in my youth (as a matter of fact, my mother used to "try" to hide a new-bought box .. much to her dismay, she sucked at trying to hide things from me - HA)!!


They still make them! I bought their oatmeal raisin before Covid and they were still delicious!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Meghan, 38, is also reported to have wanted something done about the interviews her half-sister was carrying out, but the palace would be unlikely to get involved with those."



Oh, this is priceless. It’s as though once she became a duchess she completely forgot that the BRF has no control over what other people do, especially in the US. Though I’m sure she would’ve liked Samantha silenced. She was giving out too much truth.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> I think they would get so much respect if they said something like, “I recognize the unfair inequity my family and the royal establishment stands for. I will no longer continue to benefit from it by taking advantage of the spotlight it’s given me, even as a non-working royal.” and then go away into the good night. Working royal is one thing but to continue benefitting from the system even when you’re not working... smh.


 Logical thoughts and speech are not for these two charlatans.  Always doing something so shameful every time I drop in this thread.


----------



## rose60610

Can't believe the Archway Cookie references here. Though I haven't had one in years, I do recall their oatmeal cookies were soft and delicious. Glad I'm not the only one by far to be reminded of those cookies. So,........thanks wackadoodle Meghan for naming your Royal Child/Foundation whatevers after a brand of sweets many reminisce as a good chomper. But you're still a loser. Just tellin' it like it is. Sorry that your grandmother-in-law, QEII, in her 90's, is forced to defend her family against a stupid whiney talentless "I'm, a victim!" amateur opportunist such as yourself. Surely QEII has better things to do, such as care for her elderly husband (your husband's grandfather) that Harry cannot visit nearly as much as he'd like. Why? You really have to go THERE? Oh, Sweetheart Meghan, by the time Harry finally realizes he screwed up his life by marrying a pretty psycho such as yourself, he'll realize he's a persona non grata on every continent on the globe. But since you don't care, how much do you think you can squeeze out of the Royal Till for yourself and Anchor Baby Archie? That is, if Harry doesn't get custody of your premeditated lifelong meal ticket? Oh, he'll get custody, unless he hires a loser attorney. Think the BRF will let THAT happen? Umm, NO. Whine some more, Honey, the more whining the more the sympathy the public and potential judges lose for you. Not that you have gift for reading people. By the way, are you OK?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Oh, this is priceless. It’s as though once she became a duchess she completely forgot that the BRF has no control over what other people do, especially in the US. Though I’m sure she would’ve liked Samantha silenced. She was giving out too much truth.


I mean, the least they could have done was incarcerate Samantha in the Tower, that's what that thing is for after all, no?


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, the least they could have done was incarcerate Samantha in the Tower, that's what that thing is for after all, no?



Haha! Meghan was likely expecting the BRF to scare off her detractors with a combination of legal threats, payoffs with non-disclosure agreements, and digging up dirt to blackmail with. 

To be fair, that’s probably how they squashed unfavorable news decades ago like Prince Philip’s affairs & Prince Charles’ dalliances with as many as 20-30 women in the few years before proposing to Diana (history was rewritten that he was pining for Camilla since his youth, which wasn’t the case). 

But in the age of social media & so many news outlets, you can’t easily threaten and pay off people to quash rumors. And if they bought or scared off Samantha, they’d have to buy off the whole family. And someone would still blab bc their motivation for speaking out doesn’t just seem like only self-promo or money. They are genuinely mad and hurt at being Markled & being portrayed as neglectful by MM (ie Harry gave her “the family she never had”)


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> Haha! Meghan was likely expecting the BRF to scare off her detractors with a combination of legal threats, payoffs with non-disclosure agreements, and digging up dirt to blackmail with.
> 
> To be fair, that’s probably how they squashed unfavorable news decades ago like Prince Philip’s affairs & Prince Charles’ dalliances with as many as 20-30 women in the few years before proposing to Diana (history was rewritten that he was pining for Camilla since his youth, which wasn’t the case).
> 
> But in the age of social media & so many news outlets, you can’t easily threaten and pay off people to quash rumors. And if they bought or scared off Samantha, they’d have to buy off the whole family. And someone would still blab bc their motivation for speaking out doesn’t just seem like only self-promo or money. They are genuinely mad and hurt at being Markled & being portrayed as neglectful by MM (ie Harry gave her “the family she never had”)


What MM couldn't gasp is that Prince Philip, Prince Charles and the latest scandal of Prince Andrew, these people are royals by blood. The BRF will do everything to protect them. She's not a royal by birth. She just happened to marry one. The BRF is not going to get involved in her family feud. Why should they? They have enough additional embarrassment to deal with caused by the likes of Fergie. The way she's heading, she will end up a lot worse than Fergie!


----------



## Frivole88

oh, oh they've gone too far this time. time to cut off the titles, money and inheritance.

*Prince Harry risks angering Queen by saying Commonwealth 'must acknowledge past wrongs' even if it's 'uncomfortable' in apparent criticism of British Empire during call with Meghan to young leaders*


*Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, joined young leaders in video call  *
*The Duke said the Commonwealth needs to 'acknowledge its past'  *
*Apparent slight against his own ancestors who ruled over the British Empire *
*Duke said 'there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head'*
Prince Harry risked upsetting the royal family by insisting the Commonwealth 'must acknowledge the past', even if it's 'uncomfortable'.

The Duke of Sussex, 35, made the comment as he joined wife Meghan Markle, 38, for a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust last week but released today.

As part of the discussion on 'justice and equal rights', Harry said the Commonwealth needed to follow others who have 'acknowledged the past' and are 'trying to right their wrongs', and also admitted to having his own 'unconscious bias'.

*It's time to look at the past: Harry's words on the Commonwealth*
'When you look across the Commonwealth, there is no way that we can move forward unless we acknowledge the past.
'So many people have done such an incredible job of acknowledging the past and trying to right those wrongs, but I think we all acknowledge there is so much more still to do.
'It’s not going to be easy and in some cases it’s not going to be comfortable, but it needs to be done, because, guess what, everybody benefits.'
He continued: 'We can’t deny or ignore the fact that all of us have been educated to see the world differently,” he said.
'However, once you start to realise that there is that bias there, then you need to acknowledge it, you need to do the work to become more aware ... so that you can help stand up for something that is so wrong and should not be acceptable in our society today.'
He added: 'The optimism and the hope that we get is from listening and speaking to people like you, because there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head.
'Solutions exist and change is happening far quicker than it ever has done before.'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kristinlorraine said:


> *Prince Harry risks angering Queen by saying Commonwealth 'must acknowledge past wrongs' even if it's 'uncomfortable' in apparent criticism of British Empire during call with Meghan to young leaders*



I mean...he really should not be profitting off such a horrible institution. I would respect what he's saying if he actually followed through and refused the blood money, but the wokeness doesn't go that far, eh?


----------



## chicinthecity777

JCMH and MM, stop accepting the "blood" money then!!!


----------



## kemilia

kristinlorraine said:


> oh, oh they've gone too far this time. time to cut off the titles, money and inheritance.
> 
> *Prince Harry risks angering Queen by saying Commonwealth 'must acknowledge past wrongs' even if it's 'uncomfortable' in apparent criticism of British Empire during call with Meghan to young leaders*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, joined young leaders in video call  *
> *The Duke said the Commonwealth needs to 'acknowledge its past'  *
> *Apparent slight against his own ancestors who ruled over the British Empire *
> *Duke said 'there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head'*
> Prince Harry risked upsetting the royal family by insisting the Commonwealth 'must acknowledge the past', even if it's 'uncomfortable'.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 35, made the comment as he joined wife Meghan Markle, 38, for a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust last week but released today.
> 
> As part of the discussion on 'justice and equal rights', Harry said the Commonwealth needed to follow others who have 'acknowledged the past' and are 'trying to right their wrongs', and also admitted to having his own 'unconscious bias'.
> 
> *It's time to look at the past: Harry's words on the Commonwealth*
> 'When you look across the Commonwealth, there is no way that we can move forward unless we acknowledge the past.
> 'So many people have done such an incredible job of acknowledging the past and trying to right those wrongs, but I think we all acknowledge there is so much more still to do.
> 'It’s not going to be easy and in some cases it’s not going to be comfortable, but it needs to be done, because, guess what, everybody benefits.'
> He continued: 'We can’t deny or ignore the fact that all of us have been educated to see the world differently,” he said.
> 'However, once you start to realise that there is that bias there, then you need to acknowledge it, you need to do the work to become more aware ... so that you can help stand up for something that is so wrong and should not be acceptable in our society today.'
> He added: 'The optimism and the hope that we get is from listening and speaking to people like you, because there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head.
> 'Solutions exist and change is happening far quicker than it ever has done before.'


This word salad from a Nazi-uniform-wearing dope. Arggh.


----------



## Clearblueskies

kristinlorraine said:


> oh, oh they've gone too far this time. time to cut off the titles, money and inheritance.
> 
> *Prince Harry risks angering Queen by saying Commonwealth 'must acknowledge past wrongs' even if it's 'uncomfortable' in apparent criticism of British Empire during call with Meghan to young leaders*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, joined young leaders in video call  *
> *The Duke said the Commonwealth needs to 'acknowledge its past'  *
> *Apparent slight against his own ancestors who ruled over the British Empire *
> *Duke said 'there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head'*
> Prince Harry risked upsetting the royal family by insisting the Commonwealth 'must acknowledge the past', even if it's 'uncomfortable'.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 35, made the comment as he joined wife Meghan Markle, 38, for a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust last week but released today.
> 
> As part of the discussion on 'justice and equal rights', Harry said the Commonwealth needed to follow others who have 'acknowledged the past' and are 'trying to right their wrongs', and also admitted to having his own 'unconscious bias'.
> 
> *It's time to look at the past: Harry's words on the Commonwealth*
> 'When you look across the Commonwealth, there is no way that we can move forward unless we acknowledge the past.
> 'So many people have done such an incredible job of acknowledging the past and trying to right those wrongs, but I think we all acknowledge there is so much more still to do.
> 'It’s not going to be easy and in some cases it’s not going to be comfortable, but it needs to be done, because, guess what, everybody benefits.'
> He continued: 'We can’t deny or ignore the fact that all of us have been educated to see the world differently,” he said.
> 'However, once you start to realise that there is that bias there, then you need to acknowledge it, you need to do the work to become more aware ... so that you can help stand up for something that is so wrong and should not be acceptable in our society today.'
> He added: 'The optimism and the hope that we get is from listening and speaking to people like you, because there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head.
> 'Solutions exist and change is happening far quicker than it ever has done before.'


Oh god, poor head in the clouds stupid Harry.  He’s got a long list of world leaders to call then, on his self appointed mission to put the world to rights.  Have H&M made a donation anywhere yet? No? thought not - the moneys only flowing one way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Have they given up all of the titles? Have they handed over whatever lands/housing Charles gave them? Have they given back the cars? Still living in a mansion, are they? Still have the full-time security? Still flying on the private jet?  

Talk is cheap, H&M, very cheap.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I wonder if Harry’s ever read a history book.  Somehow I doubt it.

And we’ve just celebrated VE Day.  The British did have a teensy bit to do with defeating the forces of fascism in the two world wars of the last century.  There are still people alive in this country who took part and for whom those memories and the sacrifices made are vivid.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> I wonder if Harry’s ever read a history book.  Somehow I doubt it.
> 
> And we’ve just celebrated VE Day.  The British did have a teensy bit to do with *defeating the forces of fascism *in the two world wars of the last century.  There are still people alive in this country who took part and for whom those memories and the sacrifices made are vivid.


Yep, a force he chose to leave behind when he agreed to leave the UK and his royal duties and live in LA!


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> This word salad from a Nazi-uniform-wearing dope. Arggh.


he isn't a dope anymore....M has woken him


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Have they given up all of the titles? Have they handed over whatever lands/housing Charles gave them? Have they given back the cars? Still living in a mansion, are they? Still have the full-time security? Still flying on the private jet?
> 
> Talk is cheap, H&M, very cheap.


I'd like to hear what you're saying from the US media - who fawns over those two dolts


----------



## bag-mania

OMG has anyone watched the actual video? Meghan has herself mostly centered in the frame and Harry is off to the side. She does most of the talking and she looks to him when it's his turn to talk. He is her puppet. I seriously doubt he wrote the words he said and whether he believes them or is just going along with her, who knows? He is so pathetic.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> OMG has anyone watched the actual video? Meghan has herself mostly centered in the frame and Harry is off to the side. She does most of the talking and she looks to him when it's his turn to talk. He is her puppet. I seriously doubt he wrote the words he said and whether he believes them or is just going along with her, who knows? He is so pathetic.


the one I saw was just him on camera


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> OMG has anyone watched the actual video? Meghan has herself mostly centered in the frame and Harry is off to the side. She does most of the talking and she looks to him when it's his turn to talk. He is her puppet. I seriously doubt he wrote the words he said and whether he believes them or is just going along with her, who knows? He is so pathetic.



 I have not because I can only do MM from afar, but...are we surprised? I honestly wonder how she turned him into her personal zombie.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have not because I can only do MM from afar, but...are we surprised? I honestly wonder how she turned him into her personal zombie.


voodoo? sex? he's not very smart?
I wonder if his family is embarassed for him


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> OMG has anyone watched the actual video? Meghan has herself mostly centered in the frame and Harry is off to the side. She does most of the talking and she looks to him when it's his turn to talk. He is her puppet. I seriously doubt he wrote the words he said and whether he believes them or is just going along with her, who knows? He is so pathetic.


I watched 20 seconds of it.  Nauseating stuff - he sounds like a teenager that thinks he’s found the answer to everything, and guess what, it’s everyone else’s fault and everyone else’s responsibility to put right.  And no, he will NOT be getting out of bed till lunchtime, and WHERE is his clean shirt!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> OMG has anyone watched the actual video? *Meghan has herself mostly centered in the frame and Harry is off to the side*. She does most of the talking and she looks to him when it's his turn to talk. He is her puppet. I seriously doubt he wrote the words he said and whether he believes them or is just going along with her, who knows? He is so pathetic.


What a surprise .. *NOT*!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> voodoo? sex? he's not very smart?
> I wonder if his family is embarassed for him


Ordinary people who's not related to him are embarrassed for him! It's just beyond pathetic!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the one I saw was just him on camera



Scroll down in this article for the longer version of the video chat, almost 5 minutes I think. It’s obvious she’s running the show and set up the entire thing. She’s an expert on how to solve racism now, in addition to her expertise on environmentalism and mental health issues. Is there anything Meghan isn’t an expert on? 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle join video call to discuss equal rights
					

The Duke of Sussex, 35, made the comment as he joined wife Meghan Markle, 38, for a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust last week.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## mshermes

She certainly has that faux adoring focused gaze down to a science. And hubby is biting his nails down to the quick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mshermes said:


> She certainly has that faux adoring focused gaze down to a science. And hubby is biting his nails down to the quick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4779825



Anyone heard the tearm "Duggar stare"? That evangelical TLC family with 19 kids who can't date but "court"? All the girls stare at their fiancés and husbands with a totally overdone adoring gaze while they speak, nearly squinting because it seems to be exhausting. When I first saw them together when she first moved to the UK that's what I nicknamed her creepy stare. I feel this pic is even harmless in comparison. Maybe her patience for faking adoration is wearing off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

I wish I could remember WHERE I read the article, but it was a comparison of King George III (who was King during the time of the American Revolution) .. where it was said that there were a LOT of similarities between Harry and the King.  It was very interesting; I'm going to try to find it again ..


----------



## kemilia

kristinlorraine said:


> oh, oh they've gone too far this time. time to cut off the titles, money and inheritance.
> 
> *Prince Harry risks angering Queen by saying Commonwealth 'must acknowledge past wrongs' even if it's 'uncomfortable' in apparent criticism of British Empire during call with Meghan to young leaders*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, joined young leaders in video call  *
> *The Duke said the Commonwealth needs to 'acknowledge its past'  *
> *Apparent slight against his own ancestors who ruled over the British Empire *
> *Duke said 'there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head'*
> Prince Harry risked upsetting the royal family by insisting the Commonwealth 'must acknowledge the past', even if it's 'uncomfortable'.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 35, made the comment as he joined wife Meghan Markle, 38, for a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust last week but released today.
> 
> As part of the discussion on 'justice and equal rights', Harry said the Commonwealth needed to follow others who have 'acknowledged the past' and are 'trying to right their wrongs', and also admitted to having his own 'unconscious bias'.
> 
> *It's time to look at the past: Harry's words on the Commonwealth*
> 'When you look across the Commonwealth, there is no way that we can move forward unless we acknowledge the past.
> 'So many people have done such an incredible job of acknowledging the past and trying to right those wrongs, but I think we all acknowledge there is so much more still to do.
> 'It’s not going to be easy and in some cases it’s not going to be comfortable, but it needs to be done, because, guess what, everybody benefits.'
> He continued: 'We can’t deny or ignore the fact that all of us have been educated to see the world differently,” he said.
> 'However, once you start to realise that there is that bias there, then you need to acknowledge it, you need to do the work to become more aware ... so that you can help stand up for something that is so wrong and should not be acceptable in our society today.'
> He added: 'The optimism and the hope that we get is from listening and speaking to people like you, because there is no turning back now, everything is coming to a head.
> 'Solutions exist and change is happening far quicker than it ever has done before.'


How's about starting at home, Harry? 

Your entire "allowance" from Daddy that has been your only income (as far as anyone can tell because you have never worked for a paycheck a *DAY IN YOUR LIFE*) comes from an ancient charter that takes rents from the people of Cornwall dating back to the 1300's. If he and his puppet master want to make a "quicker" change, write a check for the whole amount and divvy it up to the residents there. He is more than pathetic, he is now repulsive.


----------



## lalame

kemilia said:


> How's about starting at home, Harry?
> 
> Your entire "allowance" from Daddy that has been your only income (as far as anyone can tell because you have never worked for a paycheck a *DAY IN YOUR LIFE*) comes from an ancient charter that takes rents from the people of Cornwall dating back to the 1300's. If he and his puppet master want to make a "quicker" change, write a check for the whole amount and divvy it up to the residents there. He is more than pathetic, he is now repulsive.



Yes!!! It is just so absurd to hear these things from someone who continues to benefit from the system for personal profit. I don't even disagree with the things he says, but he needs to just sit down and STFU. How are you going to lecture on colonialism and yet fight tooth and nail for the rights to continue calling yourself "royal."


----------



## scarlet555

Who is drinking Meg's kool aid?  Seriously??  MOST of the comments I have seen on youtube or on articles are negative calling M manipulative, evil, same stuff we're doing here.  Who is helping her propelling this crap?  They are both disillusioned!


----------



## lalame

Gotta love the Daily Mail for putting this out on the heels of their lecture on privilege and colonialism. The lesson is treat everyone equally, guys!! Except the hired help of course... or your non-classy family members... or your less popular (in her head) in-laws... or anyone that gets in the way of your shining star.












						Meghan Markle left Kate Middleton 'upset' with 'rant' at staff
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 38, is 'very sensitive' about being 'number two' to Kate Middleton, 38, after joining 'alien environment' of The Firm, royal author Tom Quinn told the Daily Star Online.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Gotta love the Daily Mail for putting this out on the heels of their lecture on privilege and colonialism. The lesson is treat everyone equally, guys!! Except the hired help of course... or your non-classy family members... or your less popular (in her head) in-laws... or anyone that gets in the way of your shining star.
> 
> View attachment 4779917
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle left Kate Middleton 'upset' with 'rant' at staff
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 38, is 'very sensitive' about being 'number two' to Kate Middleton, 38, after joining 'alien environment' of The Firm, royal author Tom Quinn told the Daily Star Online.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


.. and I 100% believe this!!!  I just wonder, how long will the US Media continue to portray these two DOLTS as "so wonderful"?!?!  If you have any intelligence at all, you just have to be shaking your head at this time because they are just beyond repulsive in every aspect!


----------



## Frivole88

did she do something to her face? it looks a bit different like it's longer, thinner and her chin seems pointier.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and I 100% believe this!!!  I just wonder,* how long will the US Media continue to portray these two DOLTS as "so wonderful"?!?! * If you have any intelligence at all, you just have to be shaking your head at this time because they are just beyond repulsive in every aspect!



I think the lovefest will go on indefinitely. There is no benefit to the US media in criticizing them. So what if they are self-important hypocrites? That term could be used to describe half of the celebs in Hollywood. The media here doesn't expect any more out of H&M than they would an actor, musician, or athlete. All H&M needs to do is try to look reasonably attractive and sound earnest when they make their weekly "save the world" pitches for media attention.

Only when nobody is interested in them anymore will they finally go away. And while that can't happen soon enough I will miss this thread when the inevitable eventually happens. 

ETA: Actually it occurs to me that many in the US media like H&M so much because they are saying all the things that the press themselves love to say. Heaven forbid, maybe they will get a job on the "news."


----------



## Annawakes

She’s just about edged Harry off camera.  In the 5-minute clip, she talked for like 4:30, Harry talked for 25 and only one of the other participants talked for like 5 seconds.  Was this clip edited to string together H and M’s word salads??  I wanted to hear what the others had to say.  Harry even said he jumped in when it was someone else’s turn to speak.  And then M wrapped it up.  Did they even let anyone else say anything?!!!


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I'd like to hear what you're saying from the US media - who fawns over those two dolts



It continues to surprise me ...


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I think the lovefest will go on indefinitely. There is no benefit to the US media in criticizing them. So what if they are self-important hypocrites? That term could be used to describe half of the celebs in Hollywood. The media here doesn't expect any more out of H&M than they would an actor, musician, or athlete. All H&M needs to do is try to look reasonably attractive and sound earnest when they make their weekly "save the world" pitches for media attention.
> 
> *Only when nobody is interested in them anymore will they finally go away. And while that can't happen soon enough I will miss this thread when the inevitable eventually happens.*
> 
> ETA: Actually it occurs to me that many in the US media like H&M so much because they are saying all the things that the press themselves love to say. Heaven forbid, maybe they will get a job on the "news."



Nature abhors a vacuum. How many KK multi-thousand page threads are archived here? I know it is in the double digit realm. The K/Js have gradually drifted off the first page for the most part. Some of the "lesser" members have actually faded to page THREE at times. So we now have these two to fill in. But inevitably they too will fade. Modern attention spans usually have the longevity of a fruit fly. It takes a lot of work (and $$$) to stay in the spotlight. It will be interesting to see if MM can come close to PMK's record


----------



## lanasyogamama

The BRF couldn’t control her, how would they possibly control Samantha??


----------



## csshopper

kristinlorraine said:


> did she do something to her face? it looks a bit different like it's longer, thinner and her chin seems pointier.
> 
> Picture # 1 -  Take my lead Harry, set your expression, and let me read these notes correctly, this is serious stuff we are discussing.
> Picture # 2 - If we get it "right" we can use it on our new lecture tour, should be worth a million or two. Laughing like loonies on the    way to the bank
> View attachment 4779981
> 
> 
> View attachment 4779983


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> I wish I could remember WHERE I read the article, but it was a comparison of King George III (who was King during the time of the American Revolution) .. where it was said that there were a LOT of similarities between Harry and the King.  It was very interesting; I'm going to try to find it again ..



Here's one, there were several versions. Interesting.....
*A tale of two abdications: The uncanny parallels between ...*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ions-uncanny-parallels-Harry-Edward-VIII.html - 359k - Cached - Similar pages 
Jan 18, 2020 *...* At first glance, *Prince Harry* might bear little *comparison* with his ... *King* Edward and Wallis Simpson attract the crowds during a holiday to the ... his top hat habitually tilted at a rakish angle –prompted his father *George* V to


----------



## csshopper

oops, meant to attach this one also:

*Prince Harry news: George V's chilling prediction about royal ...*
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...dication-edward-viii-warning-royal-family-spt - 297k - Cached - Similar pages 
Jan 13, 2020 *...* *Prince Harry* warning: *King George* V's chilling prediction about royal future ... Many have drawn *comparisons* between the couples' so-called ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Here's one, there were several versions. Interesting.....
> *A tale of two abdications: The uncanny parallels between ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ions-uncanny-parallels-Harry-Edward-VIII.html - 359k - Cached - Similar pages
> Jan 18, 2020 *...* At first glance, *Prince Harry* might bear little *comparison* with his ... *King* Edward and Wallis Simpson attract the crowds during a holiday to the ... his top hat habitually tilted at a rakish angle –prompted his father *George* V to





csshopper said:


> oops, meant to attach this one also:
> 
> *Prince Harry news: George V's chilling prediction about royal ...*
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...dication-edward-viii-warning-royal-family-spt - 297k - Cached - Similar pages
> Jan 13, 2020 *...* *Prince Harry* warning: *King George* V's chilling prediction about royal future ... Many have drawn *comparisons* between the couples' so-called ...


Yes, I remember seeing these two .. but if I recall, the one comparing Harry and George III talked about the fact that George III was also a redhead, and the mental health issues (although in George III's case, it was more than mental health).  I'll keep looking ..


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> I wish I could remember WHERE I read the article, but it was a comparison of King George III (who was King during the time of the American Revolution) .. where it was said that there were a LOT of similarities between Harry and the King.  It was very interesting; I'm going to try to find it again ..



I remember reading that somewhere also. Fairly long and quite a few comparisons between the two.


----------



## ic_locon

kristinlorraine said:


> did she do something to her face? it looks a bit different like it's longer, thinner and her chin seems pointier.
> 
> View attachment 4779981
> 
> 
> View attachment 4779983



I think she has more makeup on than previous videos. Probably practicing KK’s contouring on herself, if she didn’t already hire a makeup artist. 
She should have included JH in the deal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could this be the article? It compares the 2 Dukes of Sussex — seems both disliked their royal lives.








						Royal Expert Says Prince Harry Has 'A Fiery Desire' to Live On His Own Terms, Just Like the First Duke of Sussex, Prince Augustus
					

Prince Harry has a surprising number of things in common with the first Duke of Sussex, from his red hair to his unique and controversial personality.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				






CeeJay said:


> Yes, I remember seeing these two .. but if I recall, the one comparing Harry and George III talked about the fact that George III was also a redhead, and the mental health issues (although in George III's case, it was more than mental health).  I'll keep looking ..


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could this be the article? It compares the 2 Dukes of Sussex — seems both disliked their royal lives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Expert Says Prince Harry Has 'A Fiery Desire' to Live On His Own Terms, Just Like the First Duke of Sussex, Prince Augustus
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has a surprising number of things in common with the first Duke of Sussex, from his red hair to his unique and controversial personality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com


Yes, I think that was it .. don't know how I got the George III mix-up (probably because I had just had a discussion with someone who had no idea about the Revolutionary War in regards to the July-4th celebration -- UFB, right?!?!)!!! 

BUT .. what a bunch of malarky really; he's not really "living on his own" .. he's being supported by his Daddy!  Again, maybe it's just me and my upbringing, but there is no way that I could respect being with a man who is that age and being supported by his Daddy .. it's just SO PATHETIC IMO!


----------



## Annawakes

***Definitely*** more makeup on than before.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just saw a cardboard on Twitter how the UK is more angry at MM for being mixed race than at Andrew for being a pedophile. Who buys that sh*t? The difference is that while Andrew is a gross POS MM broke up a tightknit family.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just saw a cardboard on Twitter how the UK is more angry at MM for being mixed race than at Andrew for being a pedophile. Who buys that sh*t? The difference is that while Andrew is a gross POS MM broke up a tightknit family.


That's just bullcrap so no need to justify that. She's hated because of her actions, not because of her skin colour.


----------



## PewPew

I can definitely understand the hurt of being jettisoned after a long friendship, can Jessica be that shocked that she was Markled? For years, she’s not only been witness to, but also helped Meghan cast off other friends, family & causes when they cease to serve. 

It reminds me a bit of when someone cheats on their partner & then OMG IS SO SHOCKED to find out their new partner has cheated on them. Like c’mon, you knew who you were dealing with. You’re not so special that a leopard’s spots will change just for you.

________________
*Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke' and has left the Canadian TV star 'terrified she will never work again' after racism controversy*









						Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke'
					

Canadian stylist Jessica Mulroney, 40, is said to be 'distraught and devastated' at having been 'ditched' by close friend Meghan Markle, 38, following a racism controversy last month.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

mshermes said:


> She certainly has that faux adoring focused gaze down to a science. And hubby is biting his nails down to the quick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4779825



The science of ham acting.

Shame for her the silent movie era is over (with apologies to the devine GS)


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> It continues to surprise me ...
> 
> View attachment 4780006



Being lectured on equality by a Duchess is like being lectured on veganism by a tiger (apology for this analogy to tigers everywhere)


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just saw a cardboard on Twitter how the UK is more angry at MM for being mixed race than at Andrew for being a pedophile. Who buys that sh*t? The difference is that while Andrew is a gross POS MM broke up a tightknit family.



There’s just so much hypocrisy surrounding H&M. So Harry is now lecturing the UK remotely on the need to acknowledge the harms of racism/colonialism. *So many of us worldwide agree with that statement!* But it rings to many as another attempt to seek attention, given Meghan&Harry’s current sources of income & their hypocritical rhetoric & his past — 

-Harry declined to comment Andrew’s situation in the “Greta” interview as an uncomfortable situation, but now lectures that the UK needs be uncomfortable and discuss the past in order to move forward. Again, I agree that discomfort is ok & we should discuss these issues! But we recoil at H&M’s hypocrisy in historically having so little sensitivity or tolerance for discomfort (“no one asks if we’re ok” boohoo we’re visiting one of the poorest countries in the world but we are the oppressed ones)— their PR people are also rewriting history to make Megxit less of an entrepreneurial issue & one of “we had to leave on high moral grounds”

-This would have been a great time for them to acknowledge his past transgressions like the Nazi uniform & apologize from his new woke persona & the past excuses of a party boy who just got carried away. 

-Is Harry going to give back any personal funds or jewels (from his share of Diana’s wealth) that came from colonial exploitation? (The Queen of Spain stopped wearing her engagement ring years ago when it was found that it was purchased with funds from unethical practices by the King’s BIL & that was the right thing to do...)

-Is the Duchess going to stop using her title and apologize for trying to capitalize on the institution she finds abhorrent via monetizing her “royal” status?  It would be one thing if H&M had actually done things to help the people of Sussex vs. their Duchess visiting once, but Megxit was in the planning stages before the $50million wedding


----------



## doni

That party Harry attended dressed as a nazi, wasn’t it a colonial themed party I seem to recall?  
Fine that he’s changed. Good for him.
But please don’t lecture me...


----------



## Clearblueskies

All this talk of *righting the wrongs* got me looking at which developed countries give most generously in foreign aid.  Only a handful of countries meet or exceed the UN target of .70% of GNI (Gross National Income) - the UK being one of them. Worth a google and food for thought Harry.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> The science of ham acting.
> 
> Shame for her the silent movie era is over (with apologies to the devine GS)
> 
> View attachment 4780509



With the greatest emphasis on the SILENT part, pleeeeeeeze


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Sol Ryan said:


> Welp... that’s a movie I won’t be seeing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'signs up to produce film adaptation of political novel'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 38, will take on the US presidency in producing a film with a politically-motivated 'renegade' character. She is believed to have struck a deal with Election Year author Lloyd Scott.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4778727


Well MM has certainly come a tremendously long way since her small acting career. I think we can definitely say she married well.


----------



## Luvbolide

I can’t believe that they were babbling like this when they were addressing a group and acting on behalf of QE.  Their comments are so poorly worded that half of the time they make little sense.  QE is far less petty than I am - if I were her, I would take away this and any other charities that they are still working with.  Staying out of politics means staying out of politics.  

I hope no one tells Prince Phillip about all of this crap that they are doing, poor man’s head would probably explode and he is too old for that.


----------



## eunaddict

I know we shouldn't read too much into a photo but I just came across this one and just look at the former "Fab Fours'" faces at the Commonwealth Service. 2 look despondent, 1 looks sullen and the last looks strangely quite pleased and proud.


----------



## ic_locon

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 4780612
> 
> 
> I know we shouldn't read too much into a photo but I just came across this one and just look at the former "Fab Fours'" faces at the Commonwealth Service. 2 look despondent, 1 looks sullen and the last looks strangely quite pleased and proud.



I have always wondered why she smiled like that?! The occasion, situation and circumstances did not call for it.


----------



## Aimee3

Maybe because she’s in her own delusional world?


----------



## LibbyRuth

My problem with Harry and Meghan's comments in that forum were that they did not come across to me as being from the heart. They came across to me as dropping the buzzwords needed to be embraced as caring and concerned.  There was even one part where Meghan was repeating a phrase about complacency and seemed to pause for everyone to marvel at the wisdom of her unoriginal point. 
I admire people in the spotlight who feel passion for a cause and use their position to fight for that cause. But I cringe at people in the spotlight who jump on the bandwagon of every cause when it's hot in order to ensure they are in that spotlight. Over and over again Harry and Meghan come across as caring about the spotlight - not the cause.


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> I can definitely understand the hurt of being jettisoned after a long friendship, can Jessica be that shocked that she was Markled? For years, she’s not only been witness to, but also helped Meghan cast off other friends, family & causes when they cease to serve.
> 
> It reminds me a bit of when someone cheats on their partner & then OMG IS SO SHOCKED to find out their new partner has cheated on them. Like c’mon, you knew who you were dealing with. You’re not so special that a leopard’s spots will change just for you.
> 
> ________________
> *Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke' and has left the Canadian TV star 'terrified she will never work again' after racism controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke'
> 
> 
> Canadian stylist Jessica Mulroney, 40, is said to be 'distraught and devastated' at having been 'ditched' by close friend Meghan Markle, 38, following a racism controversy last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


wonder if Harry is paying attention and when he may become "not useful"


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 4780612
> 
> 
> I know we shouldn't read too much into a photo but I just came across this one and just look at the former "Fab Fours'" faces at the Commonwealth Service. 2 look despondent, 1 looks sullen and the last looks strangely quite pleased and proud.


H looks angry (of course this is just a moment but anyway)


----------



## limom

LibbyRuth said:


> My problem with Harry and Meghan's comments in that forum were that they did not come across to me as being from the heart. They came across to me as dropping the buzzwords needed to be embraced as caring and concerned.  There was even one part where Meghan was repeating a phrase about complacency and seemed to pause for everyone to marvel at the wisdom of her unoriginal point.
> I admire people in the spotlight who feel passion for a cause and use their position to fight for that cause. But I cringe at people in the spotlight who jump on the bandwagon of every cause when it's hot in order to ensure they are in that spotlight. Over and over again Harry and Meghan come across as caring about the spotlight - not the cause.


They are both followers but at the end of the day, they are looking for an opportunity to make a buck.
So as a biracial family, they are positioning  themselves as  “specialist” in racism and to market well paid speech, imo.
The Poor Diana narrative can only be heard for so many times....
This is l’air du temps, so they jumped on the BLM train.


----------



## Lounorada

mshermes said:


> She certainly has that faux adoring focused gaze down to a science. And hubby is biting his nails down to the quick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4779825





kristinlorraine said:


> did she do something to her face? it looks a bit different like it's longer, thinner and her chin seems pointier.
> 
> View attachment 4779981
> 
> 
> View attachment 4779983


I though the same thing about her looking different when I saw these screenshots posted on here. 
She's reminding me of Kim K and the way after all the work she's had done her face seems to be shaped into a point, very angular features, harsh looking. I never noticed her lips to be so plump/pouty before (very noticeable in the screenshot of her looking at JCMH). Could just be kontouring and tonnes of makeup or she could be going to the 'dentist'.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> I though the same thing about her looking different when I saw these screenshots posted on here.
> She's reminding me of Kim K and the way after all the work she's had done her face seems to be shaped into a point, very angular features, harsh looking. I never noticed her lips to be so plump/pouty before (very noticeable in the screenshot of her looking at JCMH). Could just be kontouring and tonnes of makeup or she could be going to the 'dentist'.


She's been to the dentist before and most likely will continue. 

Whereas Harry--nothing can be done for his balding head and sorry face, though he should try that nail polish that tastes bitter (just saw an Amazon ad for it). His appearance has really plummeted.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> She's been to the dentist before and most likely will continue.
> 
> Whereas Harry--nothing can be done for his balding head and sorry face, though he should try that nail polish that tastes bitter (just saw an Amazon ad for it). His appearance has really plummeted.


LOL
I guess he could get a weave or something....but I kinda like men to be more natural
Nail biting - not attractive.....makes his seem even more like a man-boy


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder if Harry is paying attention and when he may become "not useful"



Nope, he is as dumb as a stump and he doesn't show any sign of noticing anything. He is 100% in Meghan's thrall.


----------



## rose60610

I wouldn't take much stock on what appears on Twitter or most other social media from a lot of people. Anybody, even no-name ax-grinding wackjobs with a phone can spew anything they want. It's the major Media players--the CBS, ABC, NBC, NYT, Economist, FT, WaPo's, etc that leave me smh. As someone stated before, are H&M (and others like them) giving up/donating ALL the wealth and privilege that came from their backgrounds? If not, they can STFU. And since they and others want to go back to days of colonization, that's not nearly good enough. Why not prior to that? Let's go WAY back. If actions from 400 years ago are relevant today, then why not 500 years ago, or 800 years ago, biblical times, etc? Let's judge everyone, from every era, and then let's hear the magnitudes of wisdom that will surely come from the idiots who still expect millions of dollars to automatically flow into their laps due to Harry's "birthright". That they are now criticizing. Sort of. Kind of. Bloviating about but not giving up. Pieces of work, these two.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Whereas Harry--nothing can be done for his balding head and sorry face, though he should try that nail polish that tastes bitter (just saw an Amazon ad for it). His appearance has really plummeted.



A lot can be done superficially for his appearance. William is more bald than Harry and yet he manages to look dignified and put together. Maybe part of it is the confidence that comes with being the future king, but Harry obviously isn't making any effort. He has a substantial wardrobe budget unless Meghan has coopted it all. As for his sullen expression, he's living in the perfect location to take acting lessons so that one day he can look as fake as his wife when giving a speech.

Looks matter in LA more than in any other place in the world. Get with it, Harry!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

PewPew said:


> I can definitely understand the hurt of being jettisoned after a long friendship, can Jessica be that shocked that she was Markled? For years, she’s not only been witness to, but also helped Meghan cast off other friends, family & causes when they cease to serve.
> 
> It reminds me a bit of when someone cheats on their partner & then OMG IS SO SHOCKED to find out their new partner has cheated on them. Like c’mon, you knew who you were dealing with. You’re not so special that a leopard’s spots will change just for you.
> 
> ________________
> *Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke' and has left the Canadian TV star 'terrified she will never work again' after racism controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke'
> 
> 
> Canadian stylist Jessica Mulroney, 40, is said to be 'distraught and devastated' at having been 'ditched' by close friend Meghan Markle, 38, following a racism controversy last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I can't bring myself to feel sorry about Jessica being markled. From what little I know about her she seems to be the same kind of person as Meghan. When you are a superficial person with superficial friends, this is what happens. The expression _birds of a feather_ comes to mind.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I can't bring myself to feel sorry about Jessica being markled. From what little I know about her she seems to be the same kind of person as Meghan. When you are a superficial person with superficial friends, this is what happens. The expression _birds of a feather_ comes to mind.


superficial friend is almost an oxymoron


----------



## bisousx

Well I’m team Jessica, but only because I want them secrets spilled!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> A lot can be done superficially for his appearance. William is more bald than Harry and yet he manages to look dignified and put together. Maybe part of it is the confidence that comes with being the future king, but Harry obviously isn't making any effort. He has a substantial wardrobe budget unless Meghan has coopted it all. As for his sullen expression, he's living in the perfect location to take acting lessons so that one day he can look as fake as his wife when giving a speech.
> 
> Looks matter in LA more than in any other place in the world. Get with it, Harry!



Agreed. William does look dignified and well groomed. But in the U.S., IMO, I think that a lot of younger guys purposely want to look like crap, like it's a thing. Weird hair, scraggly facial hair--please either grow a real beard or quit trying, crappy clothes that I don't think are meant to be athletic attire but look it, and hands stuck in hoodie pockets all the time. Ugh. And these are 20-30+year somethings and they imitate looks from when they were ten. MM did wear some pretty clothes at one time (ill fitting, but pretty) while H is content to look like he just rolled out of bed. Of all the women he could have chosen to marry he ended up with a ball busting doozy. Maybe M likes him to look like crap so he looks unattractive to other women and she looks all the better?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems to me that this selfish, bitter, vengeful duo wants to disparage the monarchy in every possible way.
Hasn’t the world had enough of this venom?

Looks like Piers has —
_What was even less palatable than her linguistic plagiarism was Meghan's next claim: 'Equality does not put anyone on the back foot, it puts us all on the same footing - which is a fundamental human right.' The essence of this assertion is entirely correct. But there's something quite breathtakingly unedifying about a very rich deeply privileged Duchess banging on about equality from her $20 million borrowed mansion in Hollywood._









						PIERS MORGAN: Watching Harry lecture about inequality is uncomfortable
					

There's something quite breathtakingly unedifying about the very rich deeply privileged Duke and Duchess banging on about equality from their $20 million borrowed mansion in Hollywood.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> I can definitely understand the hurt of being jettisoned after a long friendship, can Jessica be that shocked that she was Markled? For years, she’s not only been witness to, but also helped Meghan cast off other friends, family & causes when they cease to serve.
> 
> It reminds me a bit of when someone cheats on their partner & then OMG IS SO SHOCKED to find out their new partner has cheated on them. Like c’mon, you knew who you were dealing with. You’re not so special that a leopard’s spots will change just for you.
> 
> ________________
> *Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke' and has left the Canadian TV star 'terrified she will never work again' after racism controversy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'ditched her best friend Jessica Mulroney to look woke'
> 
> 
> Canadian stylist Jessica Mulroney, 40, is said to be 'distraught and devastated' at having been 'ditched' by close friend Meghan Markle, 38, following a racism controversy last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's because they NEVER think it will happen to '*THEM*'!!!!


----------



## kemilia

Geez, can't she even credit her stolen words with a "as JFK once said …" ? Is she that stupid that she doesn't know these things can be easily checked nowadays? Everything they do is disingenuous. I so feel for the Queen.


----------



## Annawakes

Perhaps she thinks it’s her fundamental human right to be on the same footing as Kate.  And Camilla, and the Queen.  She must **really** have disliked walking behind them.  Maybe that statement was a veiled jab at those times.


----------



## bag-mania

Well, Meghan has her next gig. She'll be a keynote speaker at a virtual summit on feminism, because of course that is yet another of her many passions. The American news media adores her for sure. Does anyone else remember back when _Newsweek_ used to be a respected publication that didn't need to promote celebrities? I'm showing my age I know, but still...

*Meghan Markle and Michelle ***** Reuniting for Special Summit This Month*

Meghan Markle is set to join friend Michelle ***** as a keynote speaker at a virtual summit to empower girls.

The Duchess of Sussex will share her passion for feminism at the Girl Up conference, which runs from July 13-15 next week.

Actress Priyanka Chopra, another of Meghan's friends, will also be answering a Q&A for the campaign, which was launched by the United Nations Foundation.

Girl Up said on Twitter: "The present is female! But don't take our word for it. ⁠

"Hear from our keynote speaker Meghan Markle, The Duchess of Sussex, as she takes the stage at our 2020 Leadership Summit, happening virtually July 13-15!"

The booking comes after Meghan and Prince Harry both made a series of comments on racism.

Yesterday, they said the Commonwealth, made up almost entirely of countries that were part of Britain's Empire, would have to acknowledge the past in order to move on.

Meghan and Prince Harry recently signed to the Harry Walker Agency, also used by Michelle *****, as they launched their new careers as guest speakers.

A source told _Newsweek_ this event was not related to Meghan's work with Harry Walker.

Marketing says the event is for: "The movers and changemakers from around the globe committed to gender equality."

The Eventbrite tickets page read: "No matter their background, girls have the power to transform themselves, their communities, and the world around them.

"Girl Up is a global movement of empowered young women leaders who defend gender equality.

"Through leadership development training, Girl Up gives girls the resources and platform to start a movement for social change wherever they are.

"For those who stand with us in this movement, there is no rest until we achieve equal rights for every girl.

"Because when girls rise, we all rise."

When Michelle *****'s speech was announced last month, Girl Up executive director Melissa Kilby said: "We're honored to have Mrs. ***** with us at our Summit this year.



"The impact she has made in this country, and around the world, is deeply inspiring and motivating to our girl leaders—she's a role model for using your voice."

When Harry and Meghan signed to Harry Walker Agency, a spokesperson told _Newsweek_: "They will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums.

"The conversations will relate to topics that are important in their lives—and in the world.

"Topics will largely relate to the social issues the world is facing now including racial justice and gender equity, mental health, issues impacting women and girls and the environment — as well as the intersectional nature of these issues.

"Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-michelle-*****-reuniting-special-summit-this-month-1516037


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Meghan Markle is set to join friend Michelle ***** as a keynote speaker at a virtual summit *to empower girls.*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will share her passion for feminism at the Girl Up conference, which runs from July 13-15 next week.



No way. Is this a joke? "Empower" girls?  Meghan's idea of feminism is to marry rich and scream "Victim!" How is anyone supposed to be empowered by a woman who whines about not being worshipped or given enough by one of the world's richest and most famous families? Is it too late for these virtual attendees to get their money refunded? They won't get empowered, they'll get hammered for not feeling sorry enough for Meghan. If they lacked self esteem before, they'll never find any after listening to her.


----------



## Chagall

Lounorada said:


> I though the same thing about her looking different when I saw these screenshots posted on here.
> She's reminding me of Kim K and the way after all the work she's had done her face seems to be shaped into a point, very angular features, harsh looking. I never noticed her lips to be so plump/pouty before (very noticeable in the screenshot of her looking at JCMH). Could just be kontouring and tonnes of makeup or she could be going to the 'dentist'.


Oh I think she has been having dental work poor thing. Nobody likes going to the dentist.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> No way. Is this a joke? "Empower" girls?  Meghan's idea of feminism is to marry rich and scream "Victim!" How is anyone supposed to be empowered by a woman who whines about not being worshipped or given enough by one of the world's richest and most famous families? Is it too late for these virtual attendees to get their money refunded? They won't get empowered, they'll get hammered for not feeling sorry enough for Meghan. If they lacked self esteem before, they'll never find any after listening to her.



We are living in the age of hypocrisy. As long as her speeches adhere to whatever rhetoric is currently popular and uplifting, she will get a pass on not actually living by those words.


----------



## Sol Ryan

rose60610 said:


> No way. Is this a joke? "Empower" girls?  Meghan's idea of feminism is to marry rich and scream "Victim!" How is anyone supposed to be empowered by a woman who whines about not being worshipped or given enough by one of the world's richest and most famous families? Is it too late for these virtual attendees to get their money refunded? They won't get empowered, they'll get hammered for not feeling sorry enough for Meghan. If they lacked self esteem before, they'll never find any after listening to her.



We’re probably going to hear about how she’s empowering them too... like WTH makes her so special?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, Newsweek et al sold out years ago.

Empower girls? Please don’t shoot the messenger, no offence is intended.  We have been ‘empowering girls’ for decades.
Will yet another talk, virtual or real, change anything?
Maybe it is time to update our schtick. Once again, MM seems stuck in the 90s.




bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan has her next gig. She'll be a keynote speaker at a virtual summit on feminism, because of course that is yet another of her many passions. The American news media adores her for sure. Does anyone else remember back when _Newsweek_ used to be a respected publication that didn't need to promote celebrities? I'm showing my age I know, but still...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ic_locon said:


> I have always wondered why she smiled like that?! The occasion, situation and circumstances did not call for it.


Because she thought she had gotten the upper hand.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, Newsweek et al sold out years ago.
> 
> Empower girls? Please don’t shoot the messenger, no offence is intended.  We have been ‘empowering girls’ for decades.
> Will yet another talk, virtual or real, change anything?
> Maybe it is time to update our schtick. Once again, MM seems stuck in the 90s.


Honestly do people have the money to pay to listen to her? I think not a lot people. This is just more of their agenda trying to create publicity. They most likely needed Michele ***** to prop Meghan cause after all they are signed to the sane company. They are desperate so tag Meghan to a high profile speaker cause there’s no way in . . . that Meghan can pull this off in her own recognizance.


----------



## kipp

With regard to MM's Girl Up summit appearance, this is what really stood out to me: 

"Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> With regard to MM's Girl Up summit appearance, this is what really stood out to me:
> 
> "Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."



Since she wants _Archewell_ to cover a wide range of missions, that doesn't surprise me. Promotion of her future money-making endeavors has got to be at the top of her agenda these days.


----------



## purseinsanity

LOL I just discovered this thread.  I actually try to avoid any articles or threads about these two as much as I can.  I was partly expecting these two to be glorified and was pleasantly surprised to see a LOT of comments that make it seem that there are a lot of others here that can't stand them either!   I've said I can't stand her and of course got accused of being "racist".   I don't care what color she is (frankly, I'm darker than her!), but I dislike her because she seems manipulative, a con artist, and absolutely desperate to become as famous as she can be.  I think Harry is an absolute idiot and was so desperate to find someone to step into a motherly role that he unfortunately landed on her.  She uses people to get to whatever stepping stone she wants, then dumps them faster than yesterday's worn underwear.  I LOL'ed that "Markled" is a verb.  So true and accurate though.


----------



## purseinsanity

ic_locon said:


> I have always wondered why she smiled like that?! The occasion, situation and circumstances did not call for it.


She looks like the cat that swallowed the canary.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> LOL I just discovered this thread.  I actually try to avoid any articles or threads about these two as much as I can.  I was partly expecting these two to be glorified and was pleasantly surprised to see a LOT of comments that make it seem that there are a lot of others here that can't stand them either!   I've said I can't stand her and of course got accused of being "racist".   I don't care what color she is (frankly, I'm darker than her!), but I dislike her because she seems manipulative, a con artist, and absolutely desperate to become as famous as she can be.  I think Harry is an absolute idiot and was so desperate to find someone to step into a motherly role that he unfortunately landed on her.  She uses people to get to whatever stepping stone she wants, then dumps them faster than yesterday's worn underwear.  I LOL'ed that "Markled" is a verb.  So true and accurate though.



Welcome, purseinsanity! I think you'll like it here.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Honestly* do people have the money to pay to listen to her?* I think not a lot people. This is just more of their agenda trying to create publicity. They most likely needed Michele ***** to prop Meghan cause after all they are signed to the sane company. They are desperate so tag Meghan to a high profile speaker cause there’s no way in . . . that Meghan can pull this off in her own recognizance.



The little secret _Newsweek_ neglected to mention in their Meghan promotion article is that the three day summit is FREE to anyone who wants to register for it. The Girl Up charity is funded by the United Nations Foundation, which in turn was started with a $1 billion gift from Ted Turner back in the '90s. It looks like a couple of large companies are funding the summit as well. So nobody has to pay to watch it but you can bet Meghan's getting paid, either outright or in free promotion like this article.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...he really should not be profiting off such a horrible institution. I would respect what he's saying if he actually followed through and refused the blood money, but the wokeness doesn't go that far, eh?


There is a limit to him being woke.     Typical politican, "do as I say, not as I do" mentality.  Hypocrites!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Welcome, purseinsanity! I think you'll like it here.


Thank you!    I'm already having a ball reading the comments.  2115 pages should keep me busy for awhile.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> To many of us in the US, we think of "Archway" .. which made some mean (GOOD) cookies!  Not sure if it's in all parts of the US, but boy-oh-boy, it was a favorite in my household in my youth (as a matter of fact, my mother used to "try" to hide a new-bought box .. much to her dismay, she sucked at trying to hide things from me - HA)!!


I remember those!  Delicious!  It was my first thought too.  Shows how unoriginal M&H are.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOL I just discovered this thread.  I actually try to avoid any articles or threads about these two as much as I can.  I was partly expecting these two to be glorified and was pleasantly surprised to see a LOT of comments that make it seem that there are a lot of others here that can't stand them either!   I've said I can't stand her and of course got accused of being "racist".   I don't care what color she is (frankly, I'm darker than her!), but I dislike her because she seems manipulative, a con artist, and absolutely desperate to become as famous as she can be.  I think Harry is an absolute idiot and was so desperate to find someone to step into a motherly role that he unfortunately landed on her.  She uses people to get to whatever stepping stone she wants, then dumps them faster than yesterday's worn underwear.  I LOL'ed that "Markled" is a verb.  So true and accurate though.


Haha welcome to the club! I also joined late. I was tired of being bombarded by ridiculous news released by MM&H and their 'friends'. This thread also acts as a stress reliever.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Haha welcome to the club! I also joined late. I was tired of being bombarded by ridiculous news released by MM&H and their 'friends'. This thread also acts as a stress reliever.


Thank you!


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan has her next gig. She'll be a keynote speaker at a virtual summit on feminism, because of course that is yet another of her many passions. The American news media adores her for sure. Does anyone else remember back when _Newsweek_ used to be a respected publication that didn't need to promote celebrities? I'm showing my age I know, but still...
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Michelle ***** Reuniting for Special Summit This Month*
> 
> Meghan Markle is set to join friend Michelle ***** as a keynote speaker at a virtual summit to empower girls.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will share her passion for feminism at the Girl Up conference, which runs from July 13-15 next week.
> 
> Actress Priyanka Chopra, another of Meghan's friends, will also be answering a Q&A for the campaign, which was launched by the United Nations Foundation.
> 
> Girl Up said on Twitter: "The present is female! But don't take our word for it. ⁠
> 
> "Hear from our keynote speaker Meghan Markle, The Duchess of Sussex, as she takes the stage at our 2020 Leadership Summit, happening virtually July 13-15!"
> 
> The booking comes after Meghan and Prince Harry both made a series of comments on racism.
> 
> Yesterday, they said the Commonwealth, made up almost entirely of countries that were part of Britain's Empire, would have to acknowledge the past in order to move on.
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry recently signed to the Harry Walker Agency, also used by Michelle *****, as they launched their new careers as guest speakers.
> 
> A source told _Newsweek_ this event was not related to Meghan's work with Harry Walker.
> 
> Marketing says the event is for: "The movers and changemakers from around the globe committed to gender equality."
> 
> The Eventbrite tickets page read: "No matter their background, girls have the power to transform themselves, their communities, and the world around them.
> 
> "Girl Up is a global movement of empowered young women leaders who defend gender equality.
> 
> "Through leadership development training, Girl Up gives girls the resources and platform to start a movement for social change wherever they are.
> 
> "For those who stand with us in this movement, there is no rest until we achieve equal rights for every girl.
> 
> "Because when girls rise, we all rise."
> 
> When Michelle *****'s speech was announced last month, Girl Up executive director Melissa Kilby said: "We're honored to have Mrs. ***** with us at our Summit this year.
> View attachment 4780896
> 
> 
> "The impact she has made in this country, and around the world, is deeply inspiring and motivating to our girl leaders—she's a role model for using your voice."
> 
> When Harry and Meghan signed to Harry Walker Agency, a spokesperson told _Newsweek_: "They will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums.
> 
> "The conversations will relate to topics that are important in their lives—and in the world.
> 
> "Topics will largely relate to the social issues the world is facing now including racial justice and gender equity, mental health, issues impacting women and girls and the environment — as well as the intersectional nature of these issues.
> 
> "Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-michelle-*****-reuniting-special-summit-this-month-1516037


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> No way. Is this a joke? "Empower" girls?  Meghan's idea of feminism is to marry rich and scream "Victim!" How is anyone supposed to be empowered by a woman who whines about not being worshipped or given enough by one of the world's richest and most famous families? Is it too late for these virtual attendees to get their money refunded? They won't get empowered, they'll get hammered for not feeling sorry enough for Meghan. If they lacked self esteem before, they'll never find any after listening to her.



Seriously, what kind of empowerment are the girls getting here? "Just marry rich or powerful"??? This whole thing seems so phony, when you choose keynote speakers just because they're popular in the media with no real accomplishment to speak of. What exactly did she lead that she's speaking on leadership? A household of hired help?? UGH.

Imagine looking across a field of female CEOs, world leaders, charity founders, top athletes and thinking "nah, I want the woman who married into royalty to motivate the girls." SMGDH


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of the corporate sponsors is Disney. As another member said, this is all her PR company. Of course, she will say she got the gig on her own so we should all show her respect.  Hilarious!




lalame said:


> Seriously, what kind of empowerment are the girls getting here? "Just marry rich or powerful"??? This whole thing seems so phony, when you choose keynote speakers just because they're popular in the media with no real accomplishment to speak of. What exactly did she lead that she's speaking on leadership? A household of hired help?? UGH.
> 
> Imagine looking across a field of female CEOs, world leaders, charity founders, top athletes and thinking "nah, I want the woman who married into royalty to motivate the girls." SMGDH


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

Headlines like this one from Vanity Fair must be such a rush for Meghan. MM still benefits from milking the victim role (“I was used by Jess!”), so Jess has to know there will be no “public shopping trips”. Jess will be fine though— she has massive wealth and will always have private clients, even if she’s not back on TV as a style guru.
—————-
*Jessica Mulroney’s Attempted Comeback Might Not Be Possible Without Meghan’s Support*









						Jessica Mulroney’s Attempted Comeback Might Not Be Possible Without Meghan’s Support
					

Her agents are reportedly taking meetings on her behalf, but the duchess is still keeping her distance.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

Will "how to leech off billionaires and accept hand outs" also be part of her empowerment package too???


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan has her next gig. She'll be a keynote speaker at a virtual summit on feminism, because of course that is yet another of her many passions. The American news media adores her for sure. Does anyone else remember back when _Newsweek_ used to be a respected publication that didn't need to promote celebrities? I'm showing my age I know, but still...
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Michelle ***** Reuniting for Special Summit This Month*
> 
> Meghan Markle is set to join friend Michelle ***** as a keynote speaker at a virtual summit to empower girls.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will share her passion for feminism at the Girl Up conference, which runs from July 13-15 next week.
> 
> Actress Priyanka Chopra, another of Meghan's friends, will also be answering a Q&A for the campaign, which was launched by the United Nations Foundation.
> 
> Girl Up said on Twitter: "The present is female! But don't take our word for it. ⁠
> 
> "Hear from our keynote speaker Meghan Markle, The Duchess of Sussex, as she takes the stage at our 2020 Leadership Summit, happening virtually July 13-15!"
> 
> The booking comes after Meghan and Prince Harry both made a series of comments on racism.
> 
> Yesterday, they said the Commonwealth, made up almost entirely of countries that were part of Britain's Empire, would have to acknowledge the past in order to move on.
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry recently signed to the Harry Walker Agency, also used by Michelle *****, as they launched their new careers as guest speakers.
> 
> A source told _Newsweek_ this event was not related to Meghan's work with Harry Walker.
> 
> Marketing says the event is for: "The movers and changemakers from around the globe committed to gender equality."
> 
> The Eventbrite tickets page read: "No matter their background, girls have the power to transform themselves, their communities, and the world around them.
> 
> "Girl Up is a global movement of empowered young women leaders who defend gender equality.
> 
> "Through leadership development training, Girl Up gives girls the resources and platform to start a movement for social change wherever they are.
> 
> "For those who stand with us in this movement, there is no rest until we achieve equal rights for every girl.
> 
> "Because when girls rise, we all rise."
> 
> When Michelle *****'s speech was announced last month, Girl Up executive director Melissa Kilby said: "We're honored to have Mrs. ***** with us at our Summit this year.
> View attachment 4780896
> 
> 
> "The impact she has made in this country, and around the world, is deeply inspiring and motivating to our girl leaders—she's a role model for using your voice."
> 
> When Harry and Meghan signed to Harry Walker Agency, a spokesperson told _Newsweek_: "They will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums.
> 
> "The conversations will relate to topics that are important in their lives—and in the world.
> 
> "Topics will largely relate to the social issues the world is facing now including racial justice and gender equity, mental health, issues impacting women and girls and the environment — as well as the intersectional nature of these issues.
> 
> "Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-michelle-*****-reuniting-special-summit-this-month-1516037




MM is going to sound like a lightweight giving a speech when compared to someone as talented and practiced as Michelle *****.  Good luck , honey.  And don’t plagiarize something from Pres. *****!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> MM is going to sound like a lightweight giving a speech when compared to someone as talented and practiced as Michelle *****.  Good luck , honey.  And don’t plagiarize something from Pres. *****!


Most people don't listen all that thoroughly, though, especially not teenage girls.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan has her next gig. She'll be a keynote speaker at a virtual summit on feminism, because of course that is yet another of her many passions. The American news media adores her for sure. Does anyone else remember back when _Newsweek_ used to be a respected publication that didn't need to promote celebrities? I'm showing my age I know, but still...
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Michelle ***** Reuniting for Special Summit This Month*
> 
> Meghan Markle is set to join friend Michelle ***** as a keynote speaker at a virtual summit to empower girls.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will share her passion for feminism at the Girl Up conference, which runs from July 13-15 next week.
> 
> Actress Priyanka Chopra, another of Meghan's friends, will also be answering a Q&A for the campaign, which was launched by the United Nations Foundation.
> 
> Girl Up said on Twitter: "The present is female! But don't take our word for it. ⁠
> 
> "Hear from our keynote speaker Meghan Markle, The Duchess of Sussex, as she takes the stage at our 2020 Leadership Summit, happening virtually July 13-15!"
> 
> The booking comes after Meghan and Prince Harry both made a series of comments on racism.
> 
> Yesterday, they said the Commonwealth, made up almost entirely of countries that were part of Britain's Empire, would have to acknowledge the past in order to move on.
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry recently signed to the Harry Walker Agency, also used by Michelle *****, as they launched their new careers as guest speakers.
> 
> A source told _Newsweek_ this event was not related to Meghan's work with Harry Walker.
> 
> Marketing says the event is for: "The movers and changemakers from around the globe committed to gender equality."
> 
> The Eventbrite tickets page read: "No matter their background, girls have the power to transform themselves, their communities, and the world around them.
> 
> "Girl Up is a global movement of empowered young women leaders who defend gender equality.
> 
> "Through leadership development training, Girl Up gives girls the resources and platform to start a movement for social change wherever they are.
> 
> "For those who stand with us in this movement, there is no rest until we achieve equal rights for every girl.
> 
> "Because when girls rise, we all rise."
> 
> When Michelle *****'s speech was announced last month, Girl Up executive director Melissa Kilby said: "We're honored to have Mrs. ***** with us at our Summit this year.
> View attachment 4780896
> 
> 
> "The impact she has made in this country, and around the world, is deeply inspiring and motivating to our girl leaders—she's a role model for using your voice."
> 
> When Harry and Meghan signed to Harry Walker Agency, a spokesperson told _Newsweek_: "They will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums.
> 
> "The conversations will relate to topics that are important in their lives—and in the world.
> 
> "Topics will largely relate to the social issues the world is facing now including racial justice and gender equity, mental health, issues impacting women and girls and the environment — as well as the intersectional nature of these issues.
> 
> "Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-michelle-*****-reuniting-special-summit-this-month-1516037





bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan has her next gig. She'll be a keynote speaker at a virtual summit on feminism, because of course that is yet another of her many passions. The American news media adores her for sure. Does anyone else remember back when _Newsweek_ used to be a respected publication that didn't need to promote celebrities? I'm showing my age I know, but still...
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Michelle ***** Reuniting for Special Summit This Month*
> 
> Meghan Markle is set to join friend Michelle ***** as a keynote speaker at a virtual summit to empower girls.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will share her passion for feminism at the Girl Up conference, which runs from July 13-15 next week.
> 
> Actress Priyanka Chopra, another of Meghan's friends, will also be answering a Q&A for the campaign, which was launched by the United Nations Foundation.
> 
> Girl Up said on Twitter: "The present is female! But don't take our word for it. ⁠
> 
> "Hear from our keynote speaker Meghan Markle, The Duchess of Sussex, as she takes the stage at our 2020 Leadership Summit, happening virtually July 13-15!"
> 
> The booking comes after Meghan and Prince Harry both made a series of comments on racism.
> 
> Yesterday, they said the Commonwealth, made up almost entirely of countries that were part of Britain's Empire, would have to acknowledge the past in order to move on.
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry recently signed to the Harry Walker Agency, also used by Michelle *****, as they launched their new careers as guest speakers.
> 
> A source told _Newsweek_ this event was not related to Meghan's work with Harry Walker.
> 
> Marketing says the event is for: "The movers and changemakers from around the globe committed to gender equality."
> 
> The Eventbrite tickets page read: "No matter their background, girls have the power to transform themselves, their communities, and the world around them.
> 
> "Girl Up is a global movement of empowered young women leaders who defend gender equality.
> 
> "Through leadership development training, Girl Up gives girls the resources and platform to start a movement for social change wherever they are.
> 
> "For those who stand with us in this movement, there is no rest until we achieve equal rights for every girl.
> 
> "Because when girls rise, we all rise."
> 
> When Michelle *****'s speech was announced last month, Girl Up executive director Melissa Kilby said: "We're honored to have Mrs. ***** with us at our Summit this year.
> View attachment 4780896
> 
> 
> "The impact she has made in this country, and around the world, is deeply inspiring and motivating to our girl leaders—she's a role model for using your voice."
> 
> When Harry and Meghan signed to Harry Walker Agency, a spokesperson told _Newsweek_: "They will be engaging in moderated discussions and keynote speeches with trade associations, corporations and community forums.
> 
> "The conversations will relate to topics that are important in their lives—and in the world.
> 
> "Topics will largely relate to the social issues the world is facing now including racial justice and gender equity, mental health, issues impacting women and girls and the environment — as well as the intersectional nature of these issues.
> 
> "Many of the areas and topics covered in these conversations will be related to the foundation and mission of Archewell, their new organization housing their philanthropic endeavors."
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-michelle-*****-reuniting-special-summit-this-month-1516037


to have her name used next to Michelle *****, a highly accomplished, highly educated WOC who came from a working family - is sickening to me.  Her friend?  really?  I don't think so


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Most people don't listen all that thoroughly, though, especially not teenage girls.



Exactly. I assume they signed her on because they believe she is popular with pre-teen and teenage girls. Is she? I don’t know any girls in that age range. 

Anyway, there’s no danger of Meghan talking over their heads with concepts that might be a little too advanced for them. She married a prince! For young girls only a few years out of wearing Disney princess clothing that’s got to be impressive.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Exactly. I assume they signed her on because they believe she is popular with pre-teen and teenage girls. Is she? I don’t know any girls in that age range.
> 
> Anyway, there’s no danger of Meghan talking over their heads with concepts that might be a little too advanced for them. She married a prince! For young girls only a few years out of wearing Disney princess clothing that’s got to be impressive.


maybe she's still inspirational to some girls of color who think they too can become a "princess" like her.....not much to aspire to compared to someone like Michelle ***** IMO.  would like to hear from WOC on this thread.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I wonder if this gig will be the beginning of Meghan going her own way and leaving H behind.  It‘s everything she‘s been striving for since she landed him and manoeuvred her way back to LA - and a golden opportunity to align herself with her next pull-me-up-the-ladder bff target.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe she's still inspirational to some girls of color who think they too can become a "princess" like her.....not much to aspire to compared to someone like Michelle ***** IMO.  would like to hear from WOC on this thread.



I wonder how many girls will actually sign up to watch a  three-day long video summit. Let’s face it, it’s the middle of summer vacation from school (which started early for many because of COVID) and most girls aren’t going to be sitting around dwelling on the social issues of being a girl. I imagine the audience will be mainly activists, teachers, and of course members of the media who will be eager to report to us exactly what was said by Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how many girls will actually sign up to watch a  three-day long video summit. Let’s face it, it’s the middle of summer vacation from school (which started early for many because of COVID) and most girls aren’t going to be sitting around dwelling on the social issues of being a girl. I imagine the audience will be mainly activists, teachers, and of course members of the media who will be eager to report to us exactly what was said by Meghan.


she can tell everyone how she overcame her difficult childhood, going to private school, spending time on the set of a TV series, to became a famous D-list cable TV actress and then landed a prince.  So inspirational.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she can tell everyone how she overcame her difficult childhood, going to private school, spending time on the set of a TV series, to became a famous D-list cable TV actress and then landed a prince.  So inspirational.



And don't forget her stint being a briefcase girl on the _Deal or No Deal_ game show. She had to smile while wearing uncomfortable high-heel shoes! It was soul-crushing to her because she didn't stand out as being special from all of those other models. Well, she showed them! She married herself a prince. Let that be a lesson to all you young girls out there, dreams can come true.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> she can tell everyone how she overcame her difficult childhood, going to private school, spending time on the set of a TV series, to became a famous D-list cable TV actress and then landed a prince.  So inspirational.


And was sent to a top-notch University (Northwestern) by her father--that she no longer has the time of day for.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Seriously, what kind of empowerment are the girls getting here? "Just marry rich or powerful"??? This whole thing seems so phony, when you choose keynote speakers just because they're popular in the media with no real accomplishment to speak of. What exactly did she lead that she's speaking on leadership? A household of hired help?? UGH.
> 
> Imagine looking across a field of female CEOs, world leaders, charity founders, top athletes and thinking "nah, I want the woman who married into royalty to motivate the girls." SMGDH


SOOOOOOOOOOO agree!! .. there are so many other women who would be so much more appropriate than this major-league grifter, it really peeves me!  She has *ZERO* to add; oh wait .. let's see: 

I used and climbed over anyone who I felt could "help" *ME ME ME* in my quest 
Once I got what I needed from them, I "markled" them .. who needs *THEM *anymore, they served *MY *purpose 
I schemed and schmoozed to insert myself into the "highest" society .. you know, so that I could use *THEM* in my quest 
Now that I had that "high society" connection, I set upon my quest to *SNAG* a super-RICH husband, but more importantly, one that *I COULD CONTROL* 
'Lo and behold, I worked behind the scenes to gain access to the most eligible bachelor in the UK - Prince Harry! 
.. and *I GOT HIM*; he *MARRIED ME ME ME* .. and now I *100% CONTROL HIM* (_his Meds, his actions, EVERYTHING_) 
I then made sure to pump out that *ANCHOR BABY*, to ensure that I will be *PAID-FOR-LIFE* 
*See .. how 'empowering' I am???*


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> SOOOOOOOOOOO agree!! .. there are so many other women who would be so much more appropriate than this major-league grifter, it really peeves me!  She has *ZERO* to add; oh wait .. let's see:
> 
> I used and climbed over anyone who I felt could "help" *ME ME ME* in my quest
> Once I got what I needed from them, I "markled" them .. who needs *THEM *anymore, they served *MY *purpose
> I schemed and schmoozed to insert myself into the "highest" society .. you know, so that I could use *THEM* in my quest
> Now that I had that "high society" connection, I set upon my quest to *SNAG* a super-RICH husband, but more importantly, one that *I COULD CONTROL*
> 'Lo and behold, I worked behind the scenes to gain access to the most eligible bachelor in the UK - Prince Harry!
> .. and *I GOT HIM*; he *MARRIED ME ME ME* .. and now I *100% CONTROL HIM* (_his Meds, his actions, EVERYTHING_)
> I then made sure to pump out that *ANCHOR BABY*, to ensure that I will be *PAID-FOR-LIFE*
> *See .. how 'empowering' I am???*



Nailed it!


----------



## PewPew

sdkitty said:


> to have her name used next to Michelle *****, a highly accomplished, highly educated WOC who came from a working family - is sickening to me.  Her friend?  really?



How DARE you forget they had a fish taco lunch together, per what she wrote in a magazine! Oh, you don’t recall? Well, neither did Michelle ***** who said it never happened and they only met briefly backstage while Michelle was on booktour. Then Meghan back tracked & said she was eating fish tacos for her lunch while talking to Michelle on the phone. Really? She was eating tacos while talking to the former First Lady for the first time?



sdkitty said:


> she can tell everyone how she overcame her difficult childhood, going to private school, spending time on the set of a TV series, to became a famous D-list cable TV actress and then landed a prince.  So inspirational.



Meg proudly wrote on her blog that _she_ never had to wait tables when starting out as an actress. But after she got engaged, she started describing her past in increasingly deprived terms, so she may have a colorful Horatio Alger “made it by myself” story crafted by now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

PewPew said:


> How DARE you forget they had a fish taco lunch together, per what she wrote in a magazine! Oh, you don’t recall? Well, neither did Michelle ***** who said it never happened and they only met briefly backstage while Michelle was on booktour. Then Meghan back tracked & said she was eating fish tacos for her lunch while talking to Michelle on the phone. Really? She was eating tacos while talking to the former First Lady for the first time?
> 
> 
> 
> Meg proudly wrote on her blog that _she_ never had to wait tables when starting out as an actress. But after she got engaged, she started describing her past in increasingly deprived terms, so she may have a colorful Horatio Alger “made it by myself” story crafted by now.



Why lie?  Especially when people can and will and have blatantly denied any association with her.  Liza Minnelli, Michelle *****, two good examples of ladies who are respected, well known and have come out and said 'I don't know her'.  LOL.  (Oh Mariah!)  Isn't she embarrassed?  I am mortified for her, and yet she keeps going on with these lies.  Don't want to be mean, but enough already, truly now believe she suffers from some mental illness, not just personality disorder, nor just a chronic liar.


----------



## CeeJay

scarlet555 said:


> Why lie?  Especially when people can and will and have blatantly denied any association with her.  Liza Minnelli, Michelle *****, two good examples of ladies who are respected, well known and have come out and said 'I don't know her'.  LOL.  (Oh Mariah!)  Isn't she embarrassed?  I am mortified for her, and yet she keeps going on with these lies.  Don't want to be mean, but enough already, truly now believe she suffers from some mental illness, not just personality disorder, nor just a chronic liar.


She is the type of person who yes - lies, but then they start to believe their lies!  I've seen this first-hand with other people; it amazes me but not surprising given her narcissism!


----------



## CarryOn2020

So glad to see Royal Reporters commenting on the latest video. Hoping this will put pressure on Charles to stop funding this nonsense.


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> Why lie?  Especially when people can and will and have blatantly denied any association with her.  Liza Minnelli, Michelle *****, two good examples of ladies who are respected, well known and have come out and said 'I don't know her'.  LOL.  (Oh Mariah!)  Isn't she embarrassed?  I am mortified for her, and yet she keeps going on with these lies.  Don't want to be mean, but enough already, truly now believe she suffers from some mental illness, not just personality disorder, nor just a chronic liar.



My guess is she has gotten away with lying throughout her life and doing it is second nature to her. Most of the time she will never be called out for it. It isn't worth it to other celebrities to publicly announce to the press "no, I am not friends with Meghan" (Liza, notwithstanding). That could make THEM look mean or rude. Likely there are several other celebrities who have only met her once and then were surprised to find out via the media that they are actually very good friends with Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> My guess is she has gotten away with lying throughout her life and doing it is second nature to her. Most of the time she will never be called out for it. It isn't worth it to other celebrities to publicly announce to the press "no, I am not friends with Meghan" (Liza, notwithstanding). That could make THEM look mean or rude. Likely there are several other celebrities who have only met her once and then were surprised to find out via the media that they are actually very good friends with Meghan.


100% agree .. heck, wasn't Oprah and some of the other celeb "friends" shocked that they got invited to the wedding given that they really didn't know Meghan that well???


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree .. heck, wasn't Oprah and some of the other celeb "friends" shocked that they got invited to the wedding given that they really didn't know Meghan that well???



Yep. Remember back when the media was buzzing about how H&M were going to hanging out with the Clooneys a lot since they have a home not far from Frogmore? Because living near somebody automatically means you're going to be besties.

Meghan's relatives weren't good enough to be invited to the wedding but room had to be made for the most important people in her life, the Clooneys and the Beckhams.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Edited for clarity:
Not judging here or bashing men, as long as MM gives credit to these men for getting her to where she is, it’s not an issue. Oprah really did get her success on her own merit. Kudos to her - she succeeded when many said she wouldn‘t. Now, that’s inspirational. 

The simple fact is MM was/is empowered by the men in her life. Although supposedly she is a millionaire, what has she paid for and what has she accomplished? Rhetorical question - I already know the answer.

father - paid for private school, lessons, expensive private college
Trevor, the husband - bought a nice house, nice ring, nice cars, got her acting jobs, etc.
Canadian chef/bf - introduced her to Canadian society and, possibly, H ?
H’s dad - paid for her Royal wardrobe, continues to give H&M money

Now, what does H pay for?  Wonder if he is giving the boys a chat on how to use women and his dad?


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Why lie?  Especially when people can and will and have blatantly denied any association with her.  Liza Minnelli, Michelle *****, two good examples of ladies who are respected, well known and have come out and said 'I don't know her'.  LOL.  (Oh Mariah!)  Isn't she embarrassed?  I am mortified for her, and yet she keeps going on with these lies.  Don't want to be mean, but enough already, truly now believe she suffers from some mental illness, not just personality disorder, nor just a chronic liar.



I'll be fair to her and say the article called them friends, not Meghan herself. That being said, there's a low risk of penalty here... in no world is Michelle ***** going to put out a statement specifically saying "We're not real friends, that's a lie." That's beneath her. And people probably know this and try to paint a rosy picture without much consequence.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle is bizarrely listed as a DOCTOR on Companies House website after she and Prince Harry file applications to close down their Sussex Royal foundation*
Meghan Markle was listed as a Doctor on Companies House website after she and Prince Harry filed applications to close down their Sussex Royal foundation.

The 38-year-old was given the title Dr The Duchess of Sussex, in a mistake thought to have been made by staff from the executive agency.

It follows the royal couple being requested to drop their HRH styles, before their move to Canada and Los Angeles thereafter.

Meghan was previously named HRH The Duchess of Sussex on the government's site, before her title was changed to Dr The Duchess of Sussex.

Both titles have since been removed from the website, according to The Sun.

A source told the newspaper: 'I must admit doing a double-take when I saw Meghan had been made a doctor.

'She has been called a lot of things but I had never heard Doctor Meghan.'

Another added: 'The Duchess is definitely not a doctor.'

Meghan graduated from the Illinois-based college's school of communication in 2003 with a bachelor's degree and a double major in theatre and international studies.

Companies House is said to be 'looking into' the matter.

The couple filed official paperwork with the agency to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.

The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.

The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.

An insider told Newsweek: 'Following previous announcements that The Duke and Duchess will not be using the name 'Sussex Royal' and will not continue with a foundation in its name, paperwork has been filed with Companies House and the Charity Commission to formally close the charity down.

'This will appear on the online public record in the coming days. The charity formally enters a period of "solvent liquidation".'

It is claimed the couple, who quit the royal family earlier this year, want to concentrate on new ventures going forward.

This includes Travalyst, led by The Duke of Sussex, which brought together some of the biggest operators in the travel industry - including Visa, Booking.com and Skyscanner - to help travellers pick low carbon options more easily and chose destinations that will have more benefit to local communities.









						Meghan Markle is listed as a DOCTOR on Companies House website
					

Meghan Markle, 38, who graduated from Northwestern University in Illinois with a bachelors degree, was given the title Dr The Duchess of Sussex in what is thought to have been a mistake.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle is bizarrely listed as a DOCTOR on Companies House website after she and Prince Harry file applications to close down their Sussex Royal foundation*


MM is now the recipient of an honorary doctorate.   Did Harry get one too? This is such an accomplished couple. We must share them with the rest of the world.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> MM is now the recipient of an honorary doctorate.



Well, I'd agree if the honorary doctorate were awarded for "Attempting to Cast Yourself as a Victim as Member of the British Royal Family WHILE ON TOUR IN AFRICA" because that would take such high levels of self delusion that mere mortals could not possibly achieve. She'd might as well cast herself as world's foremost medical expert in Neurosurgery. In fact, she could use a good neurosurgeon...

I hope Doctor Meghan is OK.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> to have her name used next to Michelle *****, a highly accomplished, highly educated WOC who came from a working family - is sickening to me. Her friend? really? I don't think so



Stay tuned for future statements from MM how she and Michelle ***** are such close friends that they call each other regularly for advice and tips on how to handle throngs of adoring crowds, fire sub-par hired help, and decide on whose yacht to travel next. MM will explain to us plebes that only a select certain few can relate to the horrors of life that she must endure. I hope MM will use simple words so we can understand her profound genius and be impressed with her elite circle of close-to-the-heart friends.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> MM is now the recipient of an honorary doctorate.   Did Harry get one too? This is such an accomplished couple. We must *share* them with the rest of the world.



share and ship- internationally if possible!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle is bizarrely listed as a DOCTOR on Companies House website after she and Prince Harry file applications to close down their Sussex Royal foundation*
> Meghan Markle was listed as a Doctor on Companies House website after she and Prince Harry filed applications to close down their Sussex Royal foundation.
> 
> The 38-year-old was given the title Dr The Duchess of Sussex, in a mistake thought to have been made by staff from the executive agency.
> 
> It follows the royal couple being requested to drop their HRH styles, before their move to Canada and Los Angeles thereafter.
> 
> Meghan was previously named HRH The Duchess of Sussex on the government's site, before her title was changed to Dr The Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Both titles have since been removed from the website, according to The Sun.
> 
> A source told the newspaper: 'I must admit doing a double-take when I saw Meghan had been made a doctor.
> 
> 'She has been called a lot of things but I had never heard Doctor Meghan.'
> 
> Another added: 'The Duchess is definitely not a doctor.'
> 
> Meghan graduated from the Illinois-based college's school of communication in 2003 with a bachelor's degree and a double major in theatre and international studies.
> 
> Companies House is said to be 'looking into' the matter.
> 
> The couple filed official paperwork with the agency to dissolve the royal foundation as they shift their focus to the Prince's eco-tourism scheme 'Travalyst', reports suggest.
> 
> The company - which has been set up independently - hopes to help the hard-hit tourism industry survive the coronavirus crisis.
> 
> The couple's move to disband their charitable organisation follows the Queen's decision that Harry and Meghan can no longer use the word 'royal' in their 'branding'.
> 
> An insider told Newsweek: 'Following previous announcements that The Duke and Duchess will not be using the name 'Sussex Royal' and will not continue with a foundation in its name, paperwork has been filed with Companies House and the Charity Commission to formally close the charity down.
> 
> 'This will appear on the online public record in the coming days. The charity formally enters a period of "solvent liquidation".'
> 
> It is claimed the couple, who quit the royal family earlier this year, want to concentrate on new ventures going forward.
> 
> This includes Travalyst, led by The Duke of Sussex, which brought together some of the biggest operators in the travel industry - including Visa, Booking.com and Skyscanner - to help travellers pick low carbon options more easily and chose destinations that will have more benefit to local communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is listed as a DOCTOR on Companies House website
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 38, who graduated from Northwestern University in Illinois with a bachelors degree, was given the title Dr The Duchess of Sussex in what is thought to have been a mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well, shoot.  You mean to tell me that instead of going to med school, I could've just snagged a whipped prince to become a doctor?


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> Yep. Remember back when the media was buzzing about how H&M were going to hanging out with the Clooneys a lot since they have a home not far from Frogmore? Because living near somebody automatically means you're going to be besties.
> 
> Meghan's relatives weren't good enough to be invited to the wedding but room had to be made for the most important people in her life, the Clooneys and the Beckhams.


That is all true, only I don’t believe the Beckhams was her contribution at all. They were also in William and Kate’s wedding. Victoria may be the more popular across the pond, but David Beckham has semi-god status in Britain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> MM is now the recipient of an honorary doctorate.   Did Harry get one too? This is such an accomplished couple. We must share them with the rest of the world.



An honorary title would still not entitle her to use it on official documentation (in the UK anyway)


----------



## LittleStar88

Dr. Do Nothing. Perfect!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> An honorary title would still not entitle her to use it on official documentation (in the UK anyway)


You guys are too picky, let her use the well deserved title...  We are very generous here, we will give her also the Distinguished Professor title and are ready to share Her Excellency with the rest of the world. Are there any candidate countries? Who wants to go first?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Edited for clarity:
> Not judging here or bashing men, as long as MM gives credit to these men for getting her to where she is, it’s not an issue. Oprah really did get her success on her own merit. Kudos to her - she succeeded when many said she wouldn‘t. Now, that’s inspirational.
> 
> The simple fact is MM was/is empowered by the men in her life. Although supposedly she is a millionaire, what has she paid for and what has she accomplished? Rhetorical question - I already know the answer.
> 
> father - paid for private school, lessons, expensive private college
> Trevor, the husband - bought a nice house, nice ring, nice cars, got her acting jobs, etc.
> Canadian chef/bf - introduced her to Canadian society and, possibly, H ?
> H’s dad - paid for her Royal wardrobe, continues to give H&M money
> 
> Now, what does H pay for?  Wonder if he is giving the boys a chat on how to use women and his dad?


You forgot a kind of important item that her father also paid for .. a fair amount of Plastic Surgery (nose, teeth, hair straightening, etc.)  She looks the way she does today thanks to her father paying for all those 'procedures'!


----------



## sdkitty

this is rich
she can't just let the lawyers handle it....has to talk
from Huffpost








						Meghan Markle Slams Tabloids' Attempt To Identify Friends Who Defended Her
					

"These five women are not on trial, and nor am I,” the Duchess of Sussex said.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> this is rich
> she can't just let the lawyers handle it....has to talk
> from Huffpost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Slams Tabloids' Attempt To Identify Friends Who Defended Her
> 
> 
> "These five women are not on trial, and nor am I,” the Duchess of Sussex said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


When I read this my first reaction was to wonder if the 5 friends she named in the court paperwork are aware they’ve been named, and if that’s why she’s so anxious to keep it secret?


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> When I read this my first reaction was to wonder if the 5 friends she named in the court paperwork are aware they’ve been named, and if that’s why she’s so anxious to keep it secret?


maybe she's telegraphing them via this statement that they better keep quiet


----------



## scarlet555

Clearblueskies said:


> When I read this my first reaction was to wonder if the 5 friends she named in the court paperwork are aware they’ve been named, and if that’s why she’s so anxious to keep it secret?



It's most likely similar to the Michelle ***** and Liza Minnelli lies, the friends don't even know they're being named and so it ought to be known so they can come forward and do a little Mariah Carey quote.   It's probably something psychotic and twisted that Dr Meghan thought up and picked a friend's name to be the source.  It wouldn't be a stretch or anything, this woman is capable.


----------



## TC1

Clearblueskies said:


> When I read this my first reaction was to wonder if the 5 friends she named in the court paperwork are aware they’ve been named, and if that’s why she’s so anxious to keep it secret?


She has 5 friends??? LOL doubtful


----------



## Clearblueskies

scarlet555 said:


> It's most likely similar to the Michelle ***** and Liza Minnelli lies, the friends don't even know they're being named and so it ought to be known so they can come forward and do a little Mariah Carey quote.   It's probably something psychotic and twisted that Dr Meghan thought up and picked a friend's name to be the source.  It wouldn't be a stretch or anything, this woman is capable.


And one or two of the 5 would be Jessica, no?


----------



## youngster

I think there are plenty of legitimate reasons that someone might sue the tabloids (and win) but this case is not one of them.   MM and JCMH sue the tabloids over printing excerpts from a letter to her father that said father gave to the tabloids to defend himself . . .  _because of what the 5 friends told People magazine_.  But, MM is shocked that the tabloids want to identify the 5 friends? Really, how did she and JCMH think this was all going to play out?  That the court case was going to be so narrowly defined that the 5 friends would be left out entirely and remain anonymous? 

The 5 friends talking to People kicked off this tempest in a tea pot after all, though it would all have been old, old news by now, if MM and JCMH had just ignored it.  Of course, the 5 friends were going to be identified and questioned about what they said and why and whether MM knew or encouraged them to talk to People in the first place because it is highly relevant to the court case and, yes, of course the tabloids are going to do their best to unearth this info even before the court case goes forward. Should be interesting to see if the 5 friends version of events under oath lines up with MM's version.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think there are plenty of legitimate reasons that someone might sue the tabloids (and win) but this case is not one of them.   MM and JCMH sue the tabloids over printing excerpts from a letter to her father that said father gave to the tabloids to defend himself . . .  _because of what the 5 friends told People magazine_.  But, MM is shocked that the tabloids want to identify the 5 friends? Really, how did she and JCMH think this was all going to play out?  That the court case was going to be so narrowly defined that the 5 friends would be left out entirely and remain anonymous?
> 
> The 5 friends talking to People kicked off this tempest in a tea pot after all, though it would all have been old, old news by now, if MM and JCMH had just ignored it.  Of course, the 5 friends were going to be identified and questioned about what they said and why and whether MM knew or encouraged them to talk to People in the first place because it is highly relevant to the court case and, yes, of course the tabloids are going to do their best to unearth this info even before the court case goes forward. Should be interesting to see if the 5 friends version of events under oath lines up with MM's version.


but it's the newspaper who is on trial....yes, because you sued them....very arrogant IMO

I'd say she has hubris!  someone taught her she is Very Special


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> but it's the newspaper who is on trial....yes, because you sued them....very arrogant IMO



I know, right?  Uh, Meghan and Just Harry, you do know that you actually have to prove the charges that you brought against the tabloids, right?   Kind of tough to sue the tabloids for breach of privacy, among other things, if you encouraged your 5 friends to talk to People in the first place.  So, yeah, you wacky Sussex duo, the 5 friends are relevant.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I know, right?  Uh, Meghan and Just Harry, you do know that you actually have to prove the charges that you brought against the tabloids, right?   Kind of tough to sue the tabloids for breach of privacy, among other things, if you encouraged your 5 friends to talk to People in the first place.  So, yeah, you wacky Sussex duo, the 5 friends are relevant.


don't you understand?  she had no idea her "friends" were talking to People


----------



## CeeJay

.. now wait a minute .. didn't she previously say that she didn't know "which friends" talked to People, and now she is trying to ensure that their names are kept secret???  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...entities-5-female-friends-briefed-People.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> don't you understand?  she had no idea her "friends" were talking to People


EXACT-A-MUNDO!! .. that's how I remember it as well, so now trying to ensure that their names are kept secret, pretty much says that she knew (and likely encouraged) them to speak to People!!  I would suspect that Jessica is very likely the #1 source, which should prove interesting given that latest series of events between these two!  I really hope that MM gets nailed on this ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> EXACT-A-MUNDO!! .. that's how I remember it as well, so now trying to ensure that their names are kept secret, pretty much says that she knew (and likely encouraged) them to speak to People!!  I would suspect that Jessica is very likely the #1 source, which should prove interesting given that latest series of events between these two!  I really hope that MM gets nailed on this ..


me too


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> EXACT-A-MUNDO!! .. that's how I remember it as well, so now trying to ensure that their names are kept secret, pretty much says that she knew (and likely encouraged) them to speak to People!!  I would suspect that Jessica is very likely the #1 source, which should prove interesting given that latest series of events between these two!  I really hope that MM gets nailed on this ..



I remember it this way too.  To be fair, _if_ MM did not know about the 5 friends speaking to People originally, she might have been told later by those 5 friends if they confessed to her, or it may have become known during the discovery process by her attorneys.  But, that's a really big "if" and trying to keep their names secret now makes no sense.  The names are going to come out at some point.  I think it's much more likely that MM did give at least one of them the greenlight to go ahead and talk to People and that person perhaps gathered the other 4.  I could see JM doing that.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I remember it this way too.  To be fair, _if_ MM did not know about the 5 friends speaking to People originally, she might have been told later by those 5 friends if they confessed to her, or it may have become known during the discovery process by her attorneys.  But, that's a really big "if" and trying to keep their names secret now makes no sense.  The names are going to come out at some point.  I think it's much more likely that MM did give at least one of them the greenlight to go ahead and talk to People and that person perhaps gathered the other 4.  I could see JM doing that.


oh, she didn't know who they were but now she knows they are young mothers....such BS


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> this is rich
> she can't just let the lawyers handle it....has to talk
> from Huffpost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Slams Tabloids' Attempt To Identify Friends Who Defended Her
> 
> 
> "These five women are not on trial, and nor am I,” the Duchess of Sussex said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com





Clearblueskies said:


> When I read this my first reaction was to wonder if the 5 friends she named in the court paperwork are aware they’ve been named, and if that’s why she’s so anxious to keep it secret?



If the five friends are outed then they will be hounded by the press for interviews. That's why Meghan is sweating bullets. If even one of them blabs to the media then the jig is up. The "friends" may have been willing to help her out when they could remain safely anonymous. All that will change if they suddenly become targets of media attention and inconvenienced or harassed.


----------



## Jktgal

errr, 'young mothers'?? Does she not realise she and her friends are middle-aged?!


----------



## Sharont2305

doni said:


> That is all true, only I don’t believe the Beckhams was her contribution at all. They were also in William and Kate’s wedding. Victoria may be the more popular across the pond, but David Beckham has semi-god status in Britain.


Yes, the Beckhams are actual friends of William and Harry, particularly David.


----------



## doni

I don’t get it. She is so upset about her dad talking about the letter she is suing a big newspaper, but these friends who arguably talked to the press without her permission or knowledge are still her friends? And why is she not suing People too then?


----------



## Gimmethebag

I wonder if it was a “mistake” to help out feelers out there if people would notice or just accept it?


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> I don’t get it. She is so upset about her dad talking about the letter she is suing a big newspaper, but these friends who arguably talked to the press without her permission or knowledge are still her friends? And why is she not suing People too then?


I don't get it from the very beginning! I don't think the case will go her way. We shall see...


----------



## 1LV

I wonder if she ever wishes she had left well enough alone, and just enjoyed the free ride.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I wonder if she ever wishes she had left well enough alone, and just enjoyed the free ride.



I don't think she does. It's never been solely about the wealth. Having worldwide fame and royal status was a higher priority to her. I believe she was genuinely shocked that the Queen took away their right to use the royal titles to market themselves. After all, in the self-delusional world of Meghanland nobody else has any say in her life. I'd be willing to bet she's still very bitter about it and wouldn't be surprised if she throws that up at Harry sometimes.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I don't think she does. It's never been solely about the wealth. Having worldwide fame and royal status was a higher priority to her. I believe she was genuinely shocked that the Queen took away their right to use the royal titles to market themselves. After all, in the self-delusional world of Meghanland nobody else has any say in her life. I'd be willing to bet she's still very bitter about it and wouldn't be surprised if she throws that up at Harry sometimes.


I think you’re absolutely right.  Notoriety and power, or her idea of power.  Surely JCMH looks at her at times and wonders what the heck was he thinking.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I think you’re absolutely right.  Notoriety and power, or her idea of power.  Surely JCMH looks at her at times and wonders what the heck was he thinking.



Ha! I have no clue what Harry is thinking (or IF Harry is thinking). He should be wondering how he ended up living halfway around the world in a borrowed mansion, isolated away from all of his friends, family, and everyone else he ever knew. But he doesn't seem like a deep thinker so maybe he's just going with it. Perhaps Meghan told him that she and Archie are all he needs and there's no need to worry his little head over it.


----------



## PewPew

Jktgal said:


> errr, 'young mothers'?? Does she not realise she and her friends are middle-aged?!



It’s long been H&M’s PR rhetoric to cast H&M as a young, naive couple abused by the world. Visually she’s to be the innocent waif clinging to Harry for protection. Even her mouthpiece Omid’s book blurb focused on it. She’s a young naive girl, saved from her family by her Prince. 

Together the brave young couple left the BRF to forge a safe life for themselves and protect their young son, as they longed to become independent humanitarians...blahblah.  People are more likely to overlook their tone-deaf behavior if they forget these are middle-aged people who felt entitled to his dad’s funds, a $50million wedding & a lifetime of UK taxpayer funded security and other perks, all while plotting an escape to Hollywood.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> It’s long been H&M’s PR rhetoric to cast H&M as a young, naive couple abused by the world. Visually she’s to be the innocent waif clinging to Harry for protection. Even her mouthpiece Omid’s book blurb focused on it. She’s a young naive girl, saved from her family by her Prince.
> 
> Together the brave young couple left the BRF to forge a safe life for themselves and protect their young son, as they longed to become independent humanitarians...blahblah.  People are more likely to overlook their tone-deaf behavior if they forget these are middle-aged people who felt entitled to his dad’s funds, a $50million wedding & a lifetime of UK taxpayer funded security and other perks, all while plotting an escape to Hollywood.


right
those doe eyes in the interview where she said no one asked how she was feeling didn't do a thing for me


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan is a lawyer's nightmare. Commenting on a ongoing case. Lawyers should be doing the talking. That’s why you hire them. This must be a nightmare for them. I would not be surprised if they withdraw.


----------



## 1LV

PewPew said:


> It’s long been H&M’s PR rhetoric to cast H&M as a young, naive couple abused by the world. Visually she’s to be the innocent waif clinging to Harry for protection. Even her mouthpiece Omid’s book blurb focused on it. She’s a young naive girl, saved from her family by her Prince.
> 
> Together the brave young couple left the BRF to forge a safe life for themselves and protect their young son, as they longed to become independent humanitarians...blahblah.  People are more likely to overlook their tone-deaf behavior if they forget these are middle-aged people who felt entitled to his dad’s funds, a $50million wedding & a lifetime of UK taxpayer funded security and other perks, all while plotting an escape to Hollywood.


Amen.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone believe she will testify in the court case? She said she would but I assume that was a lie and when the time comes there will suddenly be some important reason why she can’t do it.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone believe she will testify in the court case? She said she would but I assume that was a lie and when the time comes there will suddenly be some important reason why she can’t do it.


I hope she has to.


----------



## Lodpah

1LV said:


> I hope she has to.


She will perjure herself.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Lodpah said:


> She will perjure herself.



But she is an actress! Surely, she must be so good we won’t be able to tell... lol (I really hope y’all are getting the sarcasm I’m throwing...   I just can’t with H and MM anymore...it’s too stupid)


----------



## CarryOn2020

I thought they wanted privacy.


----------



## gracekelly

The MoS is not going to give this up.  I'm sure they have a treasure trove of good dirt on her and can't wait to see it.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The MoS is not going to give this up.  I'm sure they have a treasure trove of good dirt on her and can't wait to see it.


MoS?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> MoS?


Mail on Sunday.  That's what the DM calls the Sunday paper and who is listed in the suit.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone believe she will testify in the court case? She said she would but I assume that was a lie and when the time comes there will suddenly be some important reason why she can’t do it.


I can't believe Meghan would not want to testify to give an Oscar worthy performance of self pity, I've been wronged, no one in LA is asking, "if I'm OK!"


----------



## Luvbolide

Just for a little perspective, the quotes of MM about the 5 witnesses are part of court filings from yesterday or the day before.  MM is trying to stop the DM from publishing the names of the 5 friends.  The names have already been turned over, but they are under seal so the Daily Mail knows who they are and she is trying to keep them from publishing the names.  I have no idea why her speculation and opinion is part of a court filing - they would not be in the US where a statement like that would be made under penalty of perjury and subject to various evidentiary rules.  For obvious reasons, she doesn't want anyone talking to those 5 friends ever!!  I don't see how she can keep them from giving testimony, but will be interesting to see what her lawyers cook up.

Though she whines about wanting privacy, she also wants to be able to talk about her side of the case and have that be published.  She is unreal.

I think her lawyer is also the lawyer for Johnny Depp, so he is a tad busy right now - LOL!!


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan makes me appreciate Kim Kardashian a whole lot.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> I can't believe Meghan would not want to testify to give an Oscar worthy performance of self pity, I've been wronged, no one in LA is asking, "if I'm OK!"



True enough, she would revel in performance aspect of it. But the stakes are high and she won’t get any rehearsals. Her lawyers will do their best to prep her but she’s not going to be ready for everything that will come up. Meghan doesn’t handle stress well. Imagine her sitting there trying to look composed while her father is on the stand speaking his mind. I suppose Harry will be there for her to lock on to his arm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> errr, 'young mothers'?? Does she not realise she and her friends are middle-aged?!



and why exactly does it matter (or not) that they're "young" and/or "mothers"? What's that got to do with them giving evidence? They're not in line to go to jail.

Perhaps, the five friends don't actually know who they are - yet. Maybe this is why MM is stalling.


----------



## mdcx

Gosh, with corona virus going on here I haven't really given Miss M much thought lately! She must really be p!ssed at the timing of this whole pandemic thing! So, the 5 friends have still not been publicly named? That will be a juicy story when it does come out.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Perhaps, the five friends don't actually know who they are - yet. Maybe this is why MM is stalling.


I wondered about this too - why else would she make such a big deal out of it??  Seems v odd.


----------



## chicinthecity777

PewPew said:


> It’s long been H&M’s PR rhetoric to cast H&M as a young, naive couple abused by the world. Visually she’s to be the innocent waif clinging to Harry for protection. Even her mouthpiece Omid’s book blurb focused on it. She’s a young naive girl, saved from her family by her Prince.
> 
> Together the brave young couple left the BRF to forge a safe life for themselves and protect their young son, as they longed to become independent humanitarians...blahblah.  People are more likely to overlook their tone-deaf behavior if they forget these are middle-aged people who felt entitled to his dad’s funds, a $50million wedding & a lifetime of UK taxpayer funded security and other perks, all while plotting an escape to Hollywood.


Just how does this "young innocent girl who needs protection by her man" narrative fit into her "empowerment to girls" narrative? Gosh, she can't keep her lies straight!


----------



## PewPew

Meghan feels she’s too famous to find friends for her son. Meanwhile, actual A-listers and famous international figures with only children manage to find playmates for their children, do PTA and school events etc. 

The irony is that she would hate being treated like “just another mom.” And wouldn’t she cause drama in a mommy-me class (she knows everything already!)? She called the paps and took 4 security SUVs & 2 dogs for a “quiet, secret” Covid meal drop photo-op... and still had to pull off her mask bc a good deeds are meaningless unless you are recognized.
——————
*EXCLUSIVE: Archie needs a friend! Meghan bemoans one-year-old will lack social skills because he doesn't interact with other toddlers, complaining she's too famous to join 'Mommy and Me' class









						Meghan bemoans Archie lacks interaction with other toddlers
					

The Sussexes and their one-year-old son Archie have been holed up at Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry's mega-mansion in LA since March.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## LibbyRuth

PewPew said:


> Meghan feels she’s too famous to find friends for her son. Meanwhile, actual A-listers and famous international figures with only children manage to find playmates for their children, do PTA and school events etc.
> 
> The irony is that she would hate being treated like “just another mom.” And wouldn’t she cause drama in a mommy-me class (she knows everything already!)? She called the paps and took 4 security SUVs & 2 dogs for a “quiet, secret” Covid meal drop photo-op... and still had to pull off her mask bc a good deeds are meaningless unless you are recognized.
> ——————
> *EXCLUSIVE: Archie needs a friend! Meghan bemoans one-year-old will lack social skills because he doesn't interact with other toddlers, complaining she's too famous to join 'Mommy and Me' class
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan bemoans Archie lacks interaction with other toddlers
> 
> 
> The Sussexes and their one-year-old son Archie have been holed up at Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry's mega-mansion in LA since March.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Hmm ... George, Charlotte and Louis all had social interaction as toddlers.  Perhaps London is just better for that than LA!

Lets be honest Megs ... the reason Louis doesn't have chances to make friends with other toddlers is that you cut their moms out of your life too quickly.


----------



## Clearblueskies

PewPew said:


> Meghan feels she’s too famous to find friends for her son. Meanwhile, actual A-listers and famous international figures with only children manage to find playmates for their children, do PTA and school events etc.
> 
> The irony is that she would hate being treated like “just another mom.” And wouldn’t she cause drama in a mommy-me class (she knows everything already!)? She called the paps and took 4 security SUVs & 2 dogs for a “quiet, secret” Covid meal drop photo-op... and still had to pull off her mask bc a good deeds are meaningless unless you are recognized.
> ——————
> *EXCLUSIVE: Archie needs a friend! Meghan bemoans one-year-old will lack social skills because he doesn't interact with other toddlers, complaining she's too famous to join 'Mommy and Me' class
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan bemoans Archie lacks interaction with other toddlers
> 
> 
> The Sussexes and their one-year-old son Archie have been holed up at Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry's mega-mansion in LA since March.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Grandiose? Moi?  Easy to roll eyes at foolish, silly Meghan. and I bet many of her wealthy neighbours are. But poor Archie


----------



## KellyObsessed

I'm hoping they will return to the UK and Archie will be able to have relationships with his family.   Why deprive him of growing up amongst family members who will love him.  He has cousins and I'm sure there are many other children in the BRF circle where play dates could be arranged out of the range of paparazzi.
Archie's future well being could give them a graceful excuse to exit the US and go back to try and repair their BRF relationships.     Archie is adorable, and I'm sure hearts will melt.  Given time who knows?   With some good works they may be able to win back some love.
They will never find it in the US.


----------



## 1LV

Does Archie even stand a chance?  This poor little kid.  Seriously.  MM, pushing 40, needs to grow the hell up.  And Harry needs to grow a backbone.


----------



## Clearblueskies

KellyObsessed said:


> I'm hoping they will return to the UK and Archie will be able to have relationships with his family.   Why deprive him of growing up amongst family members who will love him.  He has cousins and I'm sure there are many other children in the BRF circle where play dates could be arranged out of the range of paparazzi.
> Archie's future well being could give them a graceful excuse to exit the US and go back to try and repair their BRF relationships.     Archie is adorable, and I'm sure hearts will melt.  Given time who knows?   With some good works they may be able to win back some love.
> They will never find it in the US.


There’s no appetite to have them back in the UK that I can see


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> I don't think she does. It's never been solely about the wealth. Having worldwide fame and royal status was a higher priority to her. I believe she was genuinely shocked that the Queen took away their right to use the royal titles to market themselves. After all, in the self-delusional world of Meghanland nobody else has any say in her life. I'd be willing to bet she's still very bitter about it and wouldn't be surprised if she throws that up at Harry sometimes.



I was thinking about it last night, she's cunning because of how we've seen her operate, but she's clearly not clever. 

The new book by Tom about her and others that highlights her row with Kate's staff because she assumed 'I'm a Princess, do as I say' applied to every staff member in the palace, makes me think she really would have been pissed at having to share a Palace with others and the word Princess meaning not everyone had to dance to her tune. 

'Like, who wants an apartment in a palace? Give me the whole damn thing.'

She really must have only watched Disney films before getting married.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> There’s no appetite to have them back in the UK that I can see


Right! None whatsoever! And Archie will not "save" her because there are many other royal babies/children to go around here.


----------



## 1LV

Archie won’t save MM, but he’ll sure pay the mortgage.


----------



## Emeline

KellyObsessed said:


> I'm hoping they will return to the UK and Archie will be able to have relationships with his family.   Why deprive him of growing up amongst family members who will love him.  He has cousins and I'm sure there are many other children in the BRF circle where play dates could be arranged out of the range of paparazzi.
> Archie's future well being could give them a graceful excuse to exit the US and go back to try and repair their BRF relationships.     Archie is adorable, and I'm sure hearts will melt.  Given time who knows?   With some good works they may be able to win back some love.
> They will never find it in the US.


Well, maybe if H heads home with A and leaves M in her beloved LA.
With M? I can't see the RF wanting her anywhere. She appears to be litigious, untrustworthy and dishonest.


----------



## youngster

*'Plus the consistency of biweekly 'Mommy and Me' classes would be good for Archie and a place where she could just be a mom and make new lifelong friends.'* 

Please, somebody, name another "lifelong friend" of MM.  I don't think she has any.  These "lifelong friends" from a Mommy and Me class in L.A. would maybe last a few months. When another toddler makes Archie cry or shoves him in a play pit, that other kid and his mom will be markled.

And . . . where would they go to do this Mommy and Me class? Brentwood?  Bel Air?  Malibu?  Beverly Hills?  Those parts of L.A. are filled with famous and semi-famous people or formerly famous people and some of them will try to cultivate a relationship with her and Archie in order to advance their own careers, so not many "lifelong friends" are likely to be found.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

If she so badly wants Ar-kay to have little friends, why doesn't she just give him a sibling? 
Instant playmate.

_Or maybe th IVF clinics are closed due to Covid? Are her eggs held up at the border in Toronto?_


----------



## beautymagpie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Right! None whatsoever! And Archie will not "save" her because there are many other royal babies/children to go around here.


Exactly. Look at Fergie.


----------



## Sol Ryan

youngster said:


> *'Plus the consistency of biweekly 'Mommy and Me' classes would be good for Archie and a place where she could just be a mom and make new lifelong friends.'*
> 
> Please, somebody, name another "lifelong friend" of MM.  I don't think she has any.  These "lifelong friends" from a Mommy and Me class in L.A. would maybe last a few months. When another toddler makes Archie cry or shoves him in a play pit, that other kid and his mom will be markled.
> 
> And . . . where would they go to do this Mommy and Me class? Brentwood?  Bel Air?  Malibu?  Beverly Hills?  Those parts of L.A. are filled with famous and semi-famous people or formerly famous people and some of them will try to cultivate a relationship with her and Archie in order to advance their own careers, so not many "lifelong friends" are likely to be found.



I’m guessing this is just a play for sympathy since the A-list isn’t knocking down their borrowed door. People are seeing through them. What happened to Adele who was supposed to be helping them out “With settling in LA“ or James Corden, who was at the wedding? They both have young children LA and could help them out... Something is BS....


----------



## Chanbal

*Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle *The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.

The dislike of MM has nothing to do with racism for the vast majority of people. It seems that she just takes advantage of being mixed race to promote her own agenda. It is rather sad to see the name of MLK dragged into her drama, he sacrificed his life for his ideals and to make the world better. 









						Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle
					

The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## sdkitty

just another excuse for her to whine/brag about how famous she is.  A one year old doesn't really need that much socialization.
If she's worried about being so well known, then step back and live a normal life.  How about getting a job and living in a two or three bedroom house?  
would love to see her fade away like Octomom


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> *Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle *The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.
> 
> The dislike of MM has nothing to do with racism for the vast majority of people. It seems that she just takes advantage of being mixed race to promote her own agenda. It is rather sad to see the name of MLK dragged into her drama, he sacrificed his life for his ideals and to make the world better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


With all due respect to MLK III, but does he live in the UK? Does he interact with MM's staff? Does he know everybody who she interacted in the UK and concluded they are all racist? Sorry the more stories like this, the more I dislike her! It's a typical under-achieving nobody who thinks it's always someone else's fault!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Before she married JCMH, we never heard her complaining about racism! I read it somewhere that her actress resumes identified herself as caucasian. I don't know whether it was true or not but she's lived a white woman's life so what changed now?


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> Before she married JCMH, we never heard her complaining about racism! I read it somewhere that her actress resumes identified herself as caucasian. I don't know whether it was true or not but she's lived a white woman's life so what changed now?


The headlines.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Before she married JCMH, we never heard her complaining about racism! I read it somewhere that her actress resumes identified herself as caucasian. I don't know whether it was true or not but she's lived a white woman's life so what changed now?


I recall reading somewhere that as an actress she would identify as white, biracial, whatever to get roles.  I do think she has mostly led the life of a white woman.  maybe the first racism she experienced was the criticism by the British tabloids.
Other than that, I would think most of her knowledge of racism would be indirect - from her mother talking to her about her own experiences maybe.
I'd like to hear from WOC on this but to me, she takes advantage of her mixed race when it's convenient while enjoying all the privileges (and more) of a white woman.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle *The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.



Hardly much of a news story, very brief, and not at all researched in any depth. More like a statement or two from MLKIII who has likely not spent a lot of time thinking about MM and looking into this in any depth.   "_The reports that I saw were very, very, very difficult reports of how she was treated."_ 

I'd say he hasn't read enough reports.  I saw friendly, cheering crowds. She was welcomed by the family warmly, Charles walked her down the aisle, she was included at events that Kate was not included at at similar stages of her relationship with Will, UK taxpayers funded multi-million dollar renovations to the Frogmore cottage, she was given a $50 million dollar public wedding, was sent out on prestigious overseas trips representing the Queen, was appointed to prestigious patronages, and you could go on and on.  

The press coverage at first was consistently positive.  It turned negative because Meghan and Harry gave the news media so much to report on and the two of them decided the media was the enemy.  Look at all the fodder the two of them gave the press:  Meghan's crazy family, cutting off her relationship with her father, the staff turnover, the demands about the tiara, the kerfuffle with little Charlotte and Kate at the rehearsal, the private jet trips, the taxpayer funded cottage renovations, the cost of her wardrobe, the insane secrecy over the birth and photos of Archie and keeping the Godparents secret, and on and on and on.  

They were a constant source of stories due to their own choices and behavior.  I think they intentionally made certain choices to alienate the press for the attention (like the secrecy over the birth and the Godparents), so they could begin building a case for leaving which appears to have been the plan since basically day 1.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maybe she really should let Harry wear the dresses  he might take the tags off


----------



## Tootsie17

chicinthecity777 said:


> With all due respect to MLK III, but does he live in the UK? Does he interact with MM's staff? Does he know everybody who she interacted in the UK and concluded they are all racist? Sorry the more stories like this, the more I dislike her! It's a typical under-achieving nobody who thinks it's always someone else's fault!


Most people of color and people with at least an ounce of dignity, I believe, would not play the race card unless their allegations were absolutely true.  However, Meghan being a narcissist, will use anything and anybody to promote her false ideas and accusations.  She has no clue how messed up she is.


----------



## Tootsie17

chicinthecity777 said:


> Before she married JCMH, we never heard her complaining about racism! I read it somewhere that her actress resumes identified herself as caucasian. I don't know whether it was true or not but she's lived a white woman's life so what changed now?


I don't think she ever acknowledged Black History Month on the now defunct Sussex Royal Instagram account. At least for this year, I am fairly certain this is an accurate statement.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> *'Plus the consistency of biweekly 'Mommy and Me' classes would be good for Archie and a place where she could just be a mom and make new lifelong friends.'*
> 
> Please, somebody, name another "lifelong friend" of MM.  I don't think she has any.  These "lifelong friends" from a Mommy and Me class in L.A. would maybe last a few months. When another toddler makes Archie cry or shoves him in a play pit, that other kid and his mom will be markled.
> 
> And . . . where would they go to do this Mommy and Me class? Brentwood?  Bel Air?  Malibu?  Beverly Hills?  Those parts of L.A. are filled with famous and semi-famous people or formerly famous people and some of them will try to cultivate a relationship with her and Archie in order to advance their own careers, so not many "lifelong friends" are likely to be found.


RIGHT??? .. yeah, I would like to see ANY of her "life-long" friends because I don't think she has any.  When I saw this article yesterday, I was blown away by the "*I'm too famous*" BS .. this is *EXACTLY *what she has schemed, used, and then markled her entire life!!! .. but now SHE IS TOO FAMOUS?!?!  You dumb-a@@ .. you could have stayed in the UK and Archie would have made friends & socialized with his damn cousins .. but NO .. you had to come back to Hollywood so that you could promote you own sorry a@@.  I really wish, somehow, they could get that poor child away from her .. he is likely to not grow up well (mentally).


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT??? .. yeah, I would like to see ANY of her "life-long" friends because I don't think she has any.  When I saw this article yesterday, I was blown away by the "*I'm too famous*" BS .. this is *EXACTLY *what she has schemed, used, and then markled her entire life!!! .. but now SHE IS TOO FAMOUS?!?!  You dumb-a@@ .. you could have stayed in the UK and Archie would have made friends & socialized with his damn cousins .. but NO .. you had to come back to Hollywood so that you could promote you own sorry a@@.  I really wish, somehow, they could get that poor child away from her .. he is likely to not grow up well (mentally).


Lol, You go girl!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Even if she wasn’t “famous/infamous” nobody is doing mommy and me classes now, unless it’s on Zoom which really only works for the mommy part.  The kids can’t really play on Zoom.


----------



## chicinthecity777

1LV said:


> The headlines.


Right?


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> Lol, You go girl!


Are they going to have a Question/Answer session during her "keynote" address?  Hee-hee-hee .. would love to "chime" in!!


----------



## CeeJay

Oooooooooooooh .. well, well, well .. this would be interesting; Jessica's going to 'spill-the-beans' on Meggie-POO?!?!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...roney-reaching-best-friend-Meghan-Markle.html


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Oooooooooooooh .. well, well, well .. this would be interesting; Jessica's going to 'spill-the-beans' on Meggie-POO?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...roney-reaching-best-friend-Meghan-Markle.html


she's been markled


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Oooooooooooooh .. well, well, well .. this would be interesting; Jessica's going to 'spill-the-beans' on Meggie-POO?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...roney-reaching-best-friend-Meghan-Markle.html



Not to deviate too much from the topic of the article, but did we know that Meghan was godmother to Jessica's daughter? I don't remember reading that before. 

Why do celebs and wannabe celebs choose each other to be godparents? Surely they know better than anyone how unreliable they are.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> Oooooooooooooh .. well, well, well .. this would be interesting; Jessica's going to 'spill-the-beans' on Meggie-POO?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...roney-reaching-best-friend-Meghan-Markle.html


These people are all dog eat dog aren’t they?  I wonder why Meghan the “young mom” didn’t stop to think about how her little goddaughter might feel at being bridesmaid one minute and dumped the next?


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Not to deviate too much from the topic of the article, but did we know that Meghan was godmother to Jessica's daughter? I don't remember reading that before.
> 
> Why do celebs and wannabe celebs choose each other to be godparents? Surely they know better than anyone how unreliable they are.


Well, to Jessica’s credit... no one had ever heard of Meghan Narcle back in 2013 when her daughter was born. 
However, I’m not sure I believe the story anyway. Like, you’ve only known Meghan for two years and you make her your daughter’s godmother? **cough**bullsh!t**cough**


----------



## youngster

I'm not sure why anyone would bother forming a friendship with Meghan Markle.  The minute you are not useful to her or are damaged in some way in the public eye, you will be dumped and never hear from her again.  She'll walk away without a backward glance.  She could have helped Jessica Mulroney, come to her defense in some way by speaking about her general character, all of the lovely and generous things she's done over the years (of which I assume there are some), in the name of their 10 years of friendship, the prominent place she gave her and her children at the wedding, and that she herself is godmother to one of Jessica's children.  But, nope, the best friend has been markled. It was the easy road to take.   

Can't imagine though that the people who MM wants so desperately to befriend in the Hollywood power structure and the elite haven't taken note of this.  Any "friendship" Meghan manages to form will be with other users, people who want to use her for their own purposes. Eventually, she'll find out what it feels like to be markled herself.


----------



## Chagall

They should get both children away from her for their mental health. Archie and Harry.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I'm not sure why anyone would bother forming a friendship with Meghan Markle.  The minute you are not useful to her or are damaged in some way in the public eye, you will be dumped and never hear from her again.  She'll walk away without a backward glance.  She could have helped Jessica Mulroney, come to her defense in some way by speaking about her general character, all of the lovely and generous things she's done over the years (of which I assume there are some), in the name of their 10 years of friendship, the prominent place she gave her and her children at the wedding, and that she herself is godmother to one of Jessica's children.  But, nope, the best friend has been markled. It was the easy road to take.
> 
> Can't imagine though that the people who MM wants so desperately to befriend in the Hollywood power structure and the elite haven't taken note of this.  Any "friendship" Meghan manages to form will be with other users, people who want to use her for their own purposes. Eventually, she'll find out what it feels like to be markled herself.


exactly...her "friendships" are more like business relationships


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Oooooooooooooh .. well, well, well .. this would be interesting; Jessica's going to 'spill-the-beans' on Meggie-POO?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...roney-reaching-best-friend-Meghan-Markle.html


JM looks dumb. What she did to Exeter was pure stupidity and now trying to patch up her friendship with MM implies total lack of judgment. Using her must have been like a piece of cake for MM.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> JM looks dumb. What she did to Exeter was pure stupidity and now trying to patch up her friendship with MM implies total lack of judgment. Using her must have been like a piece of cake for MM.


well using people does seem to be something M has had a lot of practice at


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> Well, to Jessica’s credit... no one had ever heard of Meghan Narcle back in 2013 when her daughter was born.
> However, I’m not sure I believe the story anyway. *Like, you’ve only known Meghan for two years and you make her your daughter’s godmother?* **cough**bullsh!t**cough**


It didn't take long for MM to be engaged to H. MM knows how to choose her targets. JM and H don't look like the sharpest tools in the box.


----------



## Luvbolide

Poor Archie.  Every day a new story about MM.  I am getting exhausted from the daily angst and drama.  How is this wanting a private life?  She is awful!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> When I read this my first reaction was to wonder if the 5 friends she named in the court paperwork are aware they’ve been named, and if that’s why she’s so anxious to keep it secret?


I love how she says they're young mothers.  Hint hint.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Meghan makes me appreciate Kim Kardashian a whole lot.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> *'Plus the consistency of biweekly 'Mommy and Me' classes would be good for Archie and a place where she could just be a mom and make new lifelong friends.'*
> 
> Please, somebody, name another "lifelong friend" of MM.  I don't think she has any.  These "lifelong friends" from a Mommy and Me class in L.A. would maybe last a few months. When another toddler makes Archie cry or shoves him in a play pit, that other kid and his mom will be markled.
> 
> And . . . where would they go to do this Mommy and Me class? Brentwood?  Bel Air?  Malibu?  Beverly Hills?  Those parts of L.A. are filled with famous and semi-famous people or formerly famous people and some of them will try to cultivate a relationship with her and Archie in order to advance their own careers, so not many "lifelong friends" are likely to be found.


Who in their right minds would want to be friends with her other than the kind of people who write to serial killers in jail?  She'll chew you up and spit you out when she's done with the taste of you.  She has no concept of being a true friend or even a family member from what I gather!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle *The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.
> 
> The dislike of MM has nothing to do with racism for the vast majority of people. It seems that she just takes advantage of being mixed race to promote her own agenda. It is rather sad to see the name of MLK dragged into her drama, he sacrificed his life for his ideals and to make the world better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Luther King III Was "Greatly Disappointed" with the U.K.'s Treatment of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The son of the acclaimed civil rights activist was also "not surprised" to see the racist reception toward the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Amen.  If you're a nice person, I couldn't care less what color you are, I'll probably like you.  If you're nasty, I couldn't care less what color you are, I won't like you.  MM seems like a nasty individual.  She uses being biracial, being a woman, being a wife, mother, "victim", etc., as an excuse whenever it suits her.


----------



## Jktgal

PewPew said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: Archie needs a friend! Meghan bemoans one-year-old will lack social skills because he doesn't interact with other toddlers, complaining she's too famous to join 'Mommy and Me' class
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan bemoans Archie lacks interaction with other toddlers
> 
> 
> The Sussexes and their one-year-old son Archie have been holed up at Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry's mega-mansion in LA since March.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



He will learn PLENTY of social climbing skills from mommy and how to bite the hand that feeds you skills from daddy. Plus plenty of social distancing skills from the 35+ hired help at the mansion. Other babies can only wish for such a prep for a future of virtuality.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> Ha! I have no clue what Harry is thinking (or IF Harry is thinking). He should be wondering how he ended up living halfway around the world in a borrowed mansion, isolated away from all of his friends, family, and everyone else he ever knew. But he doesn't seem like a deep thinker so maybe he's just going with it. Perhaps Meghan told him that she and Archie are all he needs and there's no need to worry his little head over it.



Let's kick it up a notch, *bag-mania*, Stockholm-Syndrome = Harry, maybe?

Ladies & gents, have not posted here recently bc you all are speaking my mind more eloquently these days, a huge thank-you for many lol moments!

Personally, not a fan of sudden power-grabs, but our global delusional grifters seem to be ready to pivot and make their next move, regardless of the pandemic, LA riots, etc. those of us here on this thread that are lifelong students of the BRF, UK history, laws of power, and social change have the opportunity now to have a ring-side seat during history in the making all bc of this surprising and ridiculous saga brought about by a terribly stupid and spoiled child, and an equally spoilt, ambitious and convincing con-woman whom he chose and sold <to his family and the UK public> as his mate. 

The one most important lesson that I have learned recently from that formidable battleship of a woman, QEII, is the value of waiting and not-blinking during a fight <at least until she sees the whites of MM's eyes, lol>. 
QEII's self-control is truly spectacular.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I recall reading somewhere that as an actress she would identify as white, biracial, whatever to get roles.  I do think she has mostly led the life of a white woman.  maybe the first racism she experienced was the criticism by the British tabloids.
> Other than that, I would think most of her knowledge of racism would be indirect - from her mother talking to her about her own experiences maybe.
> I'd like to hear from WOC on this but to me, she takes advantage of her mixed race when it's convenient while enjoying all the privileges (and more) of a white woman.



There’s a few issues here. I think biracial people often find themselves “too much X” for one group and ”not enough X” for the other. A few biracial actors have spoken out about how they have to go for both ethnicities for roles because otherwise they’d never get anything.. there’s always that “not white enough to play a white character” but “not Latina enough to play a Latina character” thing going on for example. That could be what Meghan meant. I’d understand that.

In the black community I think there’s acknowledgment that lighter skinned or biracial AA escape the worst discrimination... I think this plus her upbringing may have shielded her from the worst of it. I think it’s proper that she gives attention/publicly supports the black community but I personally just don’t care to hear it from her.


----------



## lalame

I don’t get the big deal with revealing the 5 friends’ names... presumably they are all somewhat public figures like actors or something like that if the magazine was even interested in them. Does she even have “normal” friends anymore? These people can surely hold their own in the public eye.


----------



## Sharont2305

V0N1B2 said:


> Well, to Jessica’s credit... no one had ever heard of Meghan Narcle back in 2013 when her daughter was born.
> However, I’m not sure I believe the story anyway. Like, you’ve only known Meghan for two years and you make her your daughter’s godmother? **cough**bullsh!t**cough**


LOL, it's like not really knowing someone, or a few people, and inviting them to your wedding and seating them in the most important seats when all the genuine friends of your husband to be were relegated to the "cheap seats" where they couldn't even see the ceremony only via monitors.


----------



## justwatchin

PewPew said:


> Meghan feels she’s too famous to find friends for her son. Meanwhile, actual A-listers and famous international figures with only children manage to find playmates for their children, do PTA and school events etc.
> 
> The irony is that she would hate being treated like “just another mom.” And wouldn’t she cause drama in a mommy-me class (she knows everything already!)? She called the paps and took 4 security SUVs & 2 dogs for a “quiet, secret” Covid meal drop photo-op... and still had to pull off her mask bc a good deeds are meaningless unless you are recognized.
> ——————
> *EXCLUSIVE: Archie needs a friend! Meghan bemoans one-year-old will lack social skills because he doesn't interact with other toddlers, complaining she's too famous to join 'Mommy and Me' class
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan bemoans Archie lacks interaction with other toddlers
> 
> 
> The Sussexes and their one-year-old son Archie have been holed up at Hollywood tycoon Tyler Perry's mega-mansion in LA since March.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


More b.s. I don’t believe for a minute that she is concerned with Archie and his potential lack of social skills. He has plenty of cousins in the UK but his self serving parents decided to leave. Ugh...for people that want their privacy they just won’t shut up!


----------



## justwatchin

Tootsie17 said:


> Most people of color and people with at least an ounce of dignity, I believe, would not play the race card unless their allegations were absolutely true.  However, Meghan being a narcissist, will use anything and anybody to promote her false ideas and accusations.  She has no clue how messed up she is.


And more than likely MLK III has no clue how messed up she is.


----------



## mshermes

All of this drama simply to call constant attention to ME....ME...ME...reminded me of someone who is a legend in her own mind.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> Before she married JCMH, we never heard her complaining about racism! I read it somewhere that her actress resumes identified herself as caucasian. I don't know whether it was true or not but she's lived a white woman's life so what changed now?



To be fair, before she married him .. we didn’t really hear her talk much about anything because she wasn’t famous lol. People are only paying attention now. I think what’s changed is more people are talking about racism openly period these days... even 5 years ago it felt like a very different climate. Most celebrities probably haven’t addressed racism until now when everyone is talking about it.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan jumps on issues that are fashionable at the time to discuss. Every time something big pops in the news, M can't help herself from making a word salad about it. When the issue subsides, she forgets about it. Discarded, like all the people in her life. Remember the women's shelter in Canada she went to when Harry was in London? Photo op then poof! Taking food to people during the pandemic lasted a whole 20 minutes. Just enough time to pull down her homemade mask and beguile us with her sacrifice. She isn't walking the dog, dangling Archie like a windsock and psycho gazing into the camera on hikes so she can prove to us how down to earth she is anymore either. Now she's "empowering" girls on some virtual forum with Michelle ***** and others. My guess, when it's her turn to speak, that's when listener participants will take their restroom and snack breaks. Those who actually listen to her written-by-someone-else speech won't remember a word of it. I'm not exactly waiting with bated breath for M's earth-shattering utterances about the next huge news piece that hits the airwaves . But you can bet it won't make sense.


----------



## beautymagpie

sdkitty said:


> exactly...her "friendships" are more like business relationships



They’re rungs on a ladder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> Meghan jumps on issues that are fashionable at the time to discuss. Every time something big pops in the news, M can't help herself from making a word salad about it. When the issue subsides, she forgets about it. Discarded, like all the people in her life. Remember the women's shelter in Canada she went to when Harry was in London? Photo op then poof! Taking food to people during the pandemic lasted a whole 20 minutes. Just enough time to pull down her homemade mask and beguile us with her sacrifice. She isn't walking the dog, dangling Archie like a windsock and psycho gazing into the camera on hikes so she can prove to us how down to earth she is anymore either. Now she's "empowering" girls on some virtual forum with Michelle ***** and others. My guess, when it's her turn to speak, that's when listener participants will take their restroom and snack breaks. Those who actually listen to her written-by-someone-else speech won't remember a word of it. I'm not exactly waiting with bated breath for M's earth-shattering utterances about the next huge news piece that hits the airwaves . But you can bet it won't make sense.


Exactly this!


----------



## bag-mania

*Why Meghan Markle should be afraid of Johnny Depp’s disastrous libel trial*

If privacy is truly what Meghan Markle craves, she should take one look at what happened to Johnny Depp last week and drop her libel lawsuit against a British tabloid immediately.

At issue for Markle: In her initial filing against the Mail on Sunday and its owner, Associated Newspapers, in October 2019, she claimed the paper violated her privacy by publishing a letter she wrote to her father — a letter she mailed to him, and which he gave, or sold, to the Mail. Markle also maintains that the paper edited her letter to make her seem like a villain.

“Please allow us to live our lives in peace,” it read in part. “Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband … if you take a moment to pause I think you’ll see that being able to live with a clear conscience is more valuable than any payment in the world.”

Not a terribly toothy letter, that. In fact, in some ways — in my opinion only, don’t sue, Meghan — it reads like a document that the writer suspects will be leaked to the media. Take this part, which seems almost alibi-like in its exposition:

“So the week of the wedding to hear about you having a heart attack through a tabloid was horrifying. I called and texted … I begged you to accept help — we sent someone to your home … and instead of speaking to me to accept this or any help, you stopped answering your phone and chose to only speak to tabloids.”

There was also a helpful refutation of her father’s claims that his daughter had changed her phone number, and he didn’t have her new one — a piece of minutiae surely known only to the most die-hard royal watchers.

“My phone number has remained the same,” she wrote.

These details are salient: Libel lawsuits in the UK, as Depp is learning, are far more brutal than those in the US. Depp filed suit over just one adjective, “wife-beater.”

But instead of a trial narrowly focused on that word, the world has been made privy to the most grisly, humiliating details of his ill-fated marriage to ex-wife Amber Heard — evidence submitted in everything from Depp’s drug binges at breakfast to Heard, or one of her friends, pooping in the marital bed.

And just like that, the Coolest Guy in the World has become, perhaps irrevocably, a sad caricature of an aged-out, irrelevant movie star.

Yet here’s Markle doubling down last week, filing an application to prevent the Mail on Sunday — as part of their defense — from naming five friends who spoke to People magazine for a glowing 2019 cover story about Markle.

“Meghan Markle’s Best Friends Break Their Silence: We Want to Speak the Truth,” went the coverline.

The notion that these friends spoke without direct authorization from the Duchess of Sussex is laughable. People magazine itself made the slant of this write-around profile clear.

“After maintaining their silence for nearly two years, five women who form an essential part of Meghan’s inner circle have spoken with People to ‘stand up against the global bullying we are seeing and speak the truth about our friend,’” says a longtime friend and former co-star.

“Selfless” and “the best listener” is how her friends depicted Markle here.

“If I’m thrown some kind of curveball, I always think, ‘I gotta talk to Meg,’” another colleague told People. “We talk daily. And the first thing out of her mouth is, ‘How are the kids? How are you?’ I’m not even allowed to ask about her until she finds out about me.’”

And the issue here for Markle is … ?

Ever since she wed Prince Harry in 2018 — a wedding watched by 1.9 billion people, attended by largely glowing media coverage about the new, divorced, biracial American who was a breath of fresh air — we have been unrelentingly subjected to Markle’s victim narrative.

She has complained about the British tabloids, about the Royal Family, about no one asking her “if I’m okay” during a trip to Africa where she met with poor and starving children living under the threat of violence.

Poor Harry and Meghan. The Queen wouldn’t let them brand SussexRoyal, so now they can’t peddle various and sundry tchotchkes. The pandemic has prevented them from giving paid speeches, as Harry did in February to JP Morgan Chase on life without his mother.

Princess Diana’s premature, tragic and preventable death, by the way, was Harry and Meghan’s stated reason for stepping down as senior royals and staying out of the spotlight.

Yet here they are, monetizing Harry’s most painful and once-private loss. And in August comes another Sussex-approved gambit, the forthcoming book “Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family.”

Such a great title. Two famous, privileged, wealthy global celebrities fleeing a castle in the night, just the clothes on their backs, looking for independence while taking refuge in a $14 million mansion in Canada — since upgraded to Tyler Perry’s $18 million LA mansion, where they reportedly pay rent — still bankrolled by Harry’s father Prince Charles.

Does Markle think this book won’t come up at trial? Does she think there will be no mention of the book’s co-author, Omid Scobie, who told the press in May that he’d been working on it, with both Harry and Meghan, since 2018, the year they married?

We keep hearing how media-savvy Meghan is, that her time in Hollywood made her a master at manipulating the press. But this decision to sue for libel makes no sense. Perhaps she’s confused her time on a basic-cable legal drama with actual legal expertise.

Meghan can’t have it both ways. She can’t sue for intrusion of privacy while doing everything she can to stay in the spotlight. And if she really wanted to retreat, no better time — we’re all under lockdown, preoccupied with our own pressing real-world issues.

Yet Markle is willing to do battle in court over such libelous claims that she didn’t invite her mother, Doria, to her star-studded baby shower in New York.

Johnny Depp, who has lived his entire adult life in the spotlight, has seen the smallest aperture widen out into a forensic examination of his alleged addictions, demons, and failings — accompanied by photos of him allegedly passed out, bloody and burned, insults scrawled in his own blood. His public image, carefully cultivated over decades, has been blown to bits in just four days of testimony.

Meghan Markle, ostensible spin doctor extraordinaire, should take heed.









						Why Meghan Markle should be afraid of Johnny Depp’s disastrous libel trial
					

If privacy is truly what Meghan Markle craves, she should take one look at what happened to Johnny Depp last week and drop her libel lawsuit against a British tabloid immediately. At issue for Mark…




					nypost.com


----------



## Lodpah

Her bank account . . . I mean husband and her long term CD have made her wealthy beyond her wildest dream and she keeps going on and on . . . she’s despicable.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> *Why Meghan Markle should be afraid of Johnny Depp’s disastrous libel trial*
> 
> If privacy is truly what Meghan Markle craves, she should take one look at what happened to Johnny Depp last week and drop her libel lawsuit against a British tabloid immediately.
> 
> At issue for Markle: In her initial filing against the Mail on Sunday and its owner, Associated Newspapers, in October 2019, she claimed the paper violated her privacy by publishing a letter she wrote to her father — a letter she mailed to him, and which he gave, or sold, to the Mail. Markle also maintains that the paper edited her letter to make her seem like a villain.
> 
> “Please allow us to live our lives in peace,” it read in part. “Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband … if you take a moment to pause I think you’ll see that being able to live with a clear conscience is more valuable than any payment in the world.”
> 
> Not a terribly toothy letter, that. In fact, in some ways — in my opinion only, don’t sue, Meghan — it reads like a document that the writer suspects will be leaked to the media. Take this part, which seems almost alibi-like in its exposition:
> 
> “So the week of the wedding to hear about you having a heart attack through a tabloid was horrifying. I called and texted … I begged you to accept help — we sent someone to your home … and instead of speaking to me to accept this or any help, you stopped answering your phone and chose to only speak to tabloids.”
> 
> There was also a helpful refutation of her father’s claims that his daughter had changed her phone number, and he didn’t have her new one — a piece of minutiae surely known only to the most die-hard royal watchers.
> 
> “My phone number has remained the same,” she wrote.
> 
> These details are salient: Libel lawsuits in the UK, as Depp is learning, are far more brutal than those in the US. Depp filed suit over just one adjective, “wife-beater.”
> 
> But instead of a trial narrowly focused on that word, the world has been made privy to the most grisly, humiliating details of his ill-fated marriage to ex-wife Amber Heard — evidence submitted in everything from Depp’s drug binges at breakfast to Heard, or one of her friends, pooping in the marital bed.
> 
> And just like that, the Coolest Guy in the World has become, perhaps irrevocably, a sad caricature of an aged-out, irrelevant movie star.
> 
> Yet here’s Markle doubling down last week, filing an application to prevent the Mail on Sunday — as part of their defense — from naming five friends who spoke to People magazine for a glowing 2019 cover story about Markle.
> 
> “Meghan Markle’s Best Friends Break Their Silence: We Want to Speak the Truth,” went the coverline.
> 
> The notion that these friends spoke without direct authorization from the Duchess of Sussex is laughable. People magazine itself made the slant of this write-around profile clear.
> 
> “After maintaining their silence for nearly two years, five women who form an essential part of Meghan’s inner circle have spoken with People to ‘stand up against the global bullying we are seeing and speak the truth about our friend,’” says a longtime friend and former co-star.
> 
> “Selfless” and “the best listener” is how her friends depicted Markle here.
> 
> “If I’m thrown some kind of curveball, I always think, ‘I gotta talk to Meg,’” another colleague told People. “We talk daily. And the first thing out of her mouth is, ‘How are the kids? How are you?’ I’m not even allowed to ask about her until she finds out about me.’”
> 
> And the issue here for Markle is … ?
> 
> Ever since she wed Prince Harry in 2018 — a wedding watched by 1.9 billion people, attended by largely glowing media coverage about the new, divorced, biracial American who was a breath of fresh air — we have been unrelentingly subjected to Markle’s victim narrative.
> 
> She has complained about the British tabloids, about the Royal Family, about no one asking her “if I’m okay” during a trip to Africa where she met with poor and starving children living under the threat of violence.
> 
> Poor Harry and Meghan. The Queen wouldn’t let them brand SussexRoyal, so now they can’t peddle various and sundry tchotchkes. The pandemic has prevented them from giving paid speeches, as Harry did in February to JP Morgan Chase on life without his mother.
> 
> Princess Diana’s premature, tragic and preventable death, by the way, was Harry and Meghan’s stated reason for stepping down as senior royals and staying out of the spotlight.
> 
> Yet here they are, monetizing Harry’s most painful and once-private loss. And in August comes another Sussex-approved gambit, the forthcoming book “Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family.”
> 
> Such a great title. Two famous, privileged, wealthy global celebrities fleeing a castle in the night, just the clothes on their backs, looking for independence while taking refuge in a $14 million mansion in Canada — since upgraded to Tyler Perry’s $18 million LA mansion, where they reportedly pay rent — still bankrolled by Harry’s father Prince Charles.
> 
> Does Markle think this book won’t come up at trial? Does she think there will be no mention of the book’s co-author, Omid Scobie, who told the press in May that he’d been working on it, with both Harry and Meghan, since 2018, the year they married?
> 
> We keep hearing how media-savvy Meghan is, that her time in Hollywood made her a master at manipulating the press. But this decision to sue for libel makes no sense. Perhaps she’s confused her time on a basic-cable legal drama with actual legal expertise.
> 
> Meghan can’t have it both ways. She can’t sue for intrusion of privacy while doing everything she can to stay in the spotlight. And if she really wanted to retreat, no better time — we’re all under lockdown, preoccupied with our own pressing real-world issues.
> 
> Yet Markle is willing to do battle in court over such libelous claims that she didn’t invite her mother, Doria, to her star-studded baby shower in New York.
> 
> Johnny Depp, who has lived his entire adult life in the spotlight, has seen the smallest aperture widen out into a forensic examination of his alleged addictions, demons, and failings — accompanied by photos of him allegedly passed out, bloody and burned, insults scrawled in his own blood. His public image, carefully cultivated over decades, has been blown to bits in just four days of testimony.
> 
> Meghan Markle, ostensible spin doctor extraordinaire, should take heed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle should be afraid of Johnny Depp’s disastrous libel trial
> 
> 
> If privacy is truly what Meghan Markle craves, she should take one look at what happened to Johnny Depp last week and drop her libel lawsuit against a British tabloid immediately. At issue for Mark…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Love it.


----------



## VickyB

V0N1B2 said:


> If she so badly wants Ar-kay to have little friends, why doesn't she just give him a sibling?
> Instant playmate.
> 
> _Or maybe th IVF clinics are closed due to Covid? Are her eggs held up at the border in Toronto?_


Or go back to England where he has plenty of cousins with whom he can play.


----------



## VickyB

purseinsanity said:


>



OMG - YES


----------



## VickyB

mshermes said:


> All of this drama simply to call constant attention to ME....ME...ME...reminded me of someone who is a legend in her own mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4784841


WOW...didn't realize how badly Harry's doing in the hair department!


----------



## Luvbolide

" Perhaps she’s confused her time on a basic-cable legal drama with actual legal expertise."

I thought this was the best line in the article above.  She still lives in the world of "what Megan wants, Megan gets", and she thinks that she can control the proceedings in her lawsuit somehow.   The judge already tossed out the majority of her case, but on she goes.  I figured she would at least be somewhat aware of Johnny Depp's situation as I believe that they have the same lawyer.  Even if Depp wins his case and gets some $, the damage is done and the info/pix are out on the internet for all to see.  Even litigators will tell you that sometimes a lawsuit is not the way to go.

But hey, Megan, carry on!!


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> " Perhaps she’s confused her time on a basic-cable legal drama with actual legal expertise."
> 
> I thought this was the best line in the article above.  She still lives in the world of "what Megan wants, Megan gets", and she thinks that she can control the proceedings in her lawsuit somehow.   The judge already tossed out the majority of her case, but on she goes.  I figured she would at least be somewhat aware of Johnny Depp's situation as I believe that they have the same lawyer.  Even if Depp wins his case and gets some $, the damage is done and the info/pix are out on the internet for all to see.  Even litigators will tell you that sometimes a lawsuit is not the way to go.
> 
> But hey, Megan, carry on!!



She expects to win. I wonder how much she’s thinking about the case since she’s got other things to focus on, like her virtual seminar with her “good friend” Michelle *****.


----------



## bag-mania

*EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry don hats and face masks in scorching Beverly Hills as they are seen in a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV 'as far from environmentally-friendly as you can get'*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry appeared to put their ongoing privacy court case and feud with ex-best friend Jessica Mulroney behind them as they stepped out for an appointment in Beverly Hills Friday. 

Pictures obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show the former Royals protecting themselves from both the sun and coronavirus as they donned face masks and hats while collecting their car from a valet in their new neighborhood Friday afternoon. 

The couple were spotted exiting a building and getting into a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV that has been dubbed in online reviews 'as far from environmentally-friendly as you can get', marking an unusual choice for the staunchly eco-conscious duo. 

Meghan, 38, who led the way to their waiting car, dressed for the scorching California weather, with temperatures reaching 84 Fahrenheit and humidity topping 67 percent yesterday.  

She wore a loose cream linen dress with matching cream and black Sam Edelman ballet flats, and accessorized her outfit with a large straw hat and dark sunglasses.

A dark cross-body bag hung across her petite frame while she clutched a clear purse in her hands. 

An expensive-looking gold watch, which she hasn't been spotted in before, decorated her wrist. 

Harry, 35, opted for a more casual look of dark blue jeans, a grey polo shirt, navy trainers and a cap.

The couple exited the building flanked by their security team, who also wore face masks, before one of them opened the car door for Meghan. 

Harry walked behind his wife and made his way to the other side of the black SUV before getting in.  

The couple, who appeared to have left one-year-old son Archie at home, seem to be taking no chances with coronavirus, as cases and deaths from the virus soar across California.  

Face masks are now mandatory for all Californian residents in public places and Meghan and Harry were clearly sticking to the rules.  

However, their choice of car during the outing may raise some questions, as the luxury Cadillac Escalade normally comes with a gas-guzzling six-liter engine. 

Online reviews describe the five-door motor as being 'as far from environmentally friendly as you can get'.  

This suggests yet another sustainability gaffe for the couple, who have previously been slammed for preaching about saving the planet, and then flying around the world by private jet. 

Harry last year infamously said ‘we are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,’ before they took four trips in 11 days on private jets that summer. 

The rare outing comes amid a turbulent few weeks for the Sussexes who have been laying low and have only been spotted out a handful of times since their move to LA. 

Meghan's privacy and copyright case against the Mail on Sunday rumbled on this week and, on Thursday, Meghan issued an application for a High Court injunction to stop anyone from naming her five female friends who briefed People magazine about her and a letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas.

The five women were named as the sources of a People Magazine article in 2019 in legal papers submitted by Meghan to the court last week, although their identities were not made public.

The article lies at the heart of the case because it was the first time the existence of a letter the Duchess had written to her father Thomas was revealed.

The Mail On Sunday claims that revelation and the misleading impression it gave of the letter gave Thomas the right to publish more of the handwritten note in the Mail on Sunday to defend himself after their relationship became hopelessly estranged in the wake of Meghan’s marriage to Harry in May 2018.

But Meghan insists that she had no idea any of her friends had spoken to People magazine until after the fact.

All five of the women now face the prospect of being hauled to the High Court in London next year to testify in the explosive privacy trial. 

They will be asked to confirm on oath that the Duchess had no prior knowledge that they were going to speak to People. 

The legal battle comes at the same time Meghan has reportedly cut ties with best friend Jessica Mulroney, after Mulroney became embroiled in a social media row with Black influencer Sasha Exeter last month.  









						EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry step out for appointment in Beverly Hills
					

EXCLUSIVE: Pictures obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show the former Royals out in Beverly Hills Friday afternoon.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

The Daily Mail isn’t pulling any punches when it comes to highlighting Meghan and Harry’s hypocrisy.


----------



## kemilia

Though they are bad fuzzy pics, her ring looks flashier than before.


----------



## Sol Ryan

It must be because I’m car shopping... but I can’t figure out what the two Hollywood Eco Wannabes are thinking with this move? why didn’t they get a Tesla or a Prius? Even Land Rover makes a plug-in hybrid. (Not that I’m completely sold on battery Manufacturing and its affect on the Earth, but with these two... I don’t get it... Harry wants to tell me I can’t go on vacation because of my impact, but he picks an Escalade?)




bag-mania said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry don hats and face masks in scorching Beverly Hills as they are seen in a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV 'as far from environmentally-friendly as you can get'*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry appeared to put their ongoing privacy court case and feud with ex-best friend Jessica Mulroney behind them as they stepped out for an appointment in Beverly Hills Friday.
> 
> Pictures obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show the former Royals protecting themselves from both the sun and coronavirus as they donned face masks and hats while collecting their car from a valet in their new neighborhood Friday afternoon.
> 
> The couple were spotted exiting a building and getting into a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV that has been dubbed in online reviews 'as far from environmentally-friendly as you can get', marking an unusual choice for the staunchly eco-conscious duo.
> 
> Meghan, 38, who led the way to their waiting car, dressed for the scorching California weather, with temperatures reaching 84 Fahrenheit and humidity topping 67 percent yesterday.
> 
> She wore a loose cream linen dress with matching cream and black Sam Edelman ballet flats, and accessorized her outfit with a large straw hat and dark sunglasses.
> 
> A dark cross-body bag hung across her petite frame while she clutched a clear purse in her hands.
> 
> An expensive-looking gold watch, which she hasn't been spotted in before, decorated her wrist.
> 
> Harry, 35, opted for a more casual look of dark blue jeans, a grey polo shirt, navy trainers and a cap.
> 
> The couple exited the building flanked by their security team, who also wore face masks, before one of them opened the car door for Meghan.
> 
> Harry walked behind his wife and made his way to the other side of the black SUV before getting in.
> 
> The couple, who appeared to have left one-year-old son Archie at home, seem to be taking no chances with coronavirus, as cases and deaths from the virus soar across California.
> 
> Face masks are now mandatory for all Californian residents in public places and Meghan and Harry were clearly sticking to the rules.
> 
> However, their choice of car during the outing may raise some questions, as the luxury Cadillac Escalade normally comes with a gas-guzzling six-liter engine.
> 
> Online reviews describe the five-door motor as being 'as far from environmentally friendly as you can get'.
> 
> This suggests yet another sustainability gaffe for the couple, who have previously been slammed for preaching about saving the planet, and then flying around the world by private jet.
> 
> Harry last year infamously said ‘we are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,’ before they took four trips in 11 days on private jets that summer.
> 
> The rare outing comes amid a turbulent few weeks for the Sussexes who have been laying low and have only been spotted out a handful of times since their move to LA.
> 
> Meghan's privacy and copyright case against the Mail on Sunday rumbled on this week and, on Thursday, Meghan issued an application for a High Court injunction to stop anyone from naming her five female friends who briefed People magazine about her and a letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas.
> 
> The five women were named as the sources of a People Magazine article in 2019 in legal papers submitted by Meghan to the court last week, although their identities were not made public.
> 
> The article lies at the heart of the case because it was the first time the existence of a letter the Duchess had written to her father Thomas was revealed.
> 
> The Mail On Sunday claims that revelation and the misleading impression it gave of the letter gave Thomas the right to publish more of the handwritten note in the Mail on Sunday to defend himself after their relationship became hopelessly estranged in the wake of Meghan’s marriage to Harry in May 2018.
> 
> But Meghan insists that she had no idea any of her friends had spoken to People magazine until after the fact.
> 
> All five of the women now face the prospect of being hauled to the High Court in London next year to testify in the explosive privacy trial.
> 
> They will be asked to confirm on oath that the Duchess had no prior knowledge that they were going to speak to People.
> 
> The legal battle comes at the same time Meghan has reportedly cut ties with best friend Jessica Mulroney, after Mulroney became embroiled in a social media row with Black influencer Sasha Exeter last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry step out for appointment in Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Pictures obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show the former Royals out in Beverly Hills Friday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

84 F is scorching?  That’s ridiculous!

Oh, so is everything else about them in that article haha.  Gas guzzling Escalade!


----------



## HiromiT

kemilia said:


> Though they are bad fuzzy pics, her ring looks flashier than before.


Yes, I noticed that too! It looks bigger. Wonder if it’s another upgrade or just the fuzziness making it look bigger. Also hope someone will ID her gold watch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Annawakes said:


> 84 F is scorching?  That’s ridiculous!
> 
> Oh, so is everything else about them in that article haha.  Gas guzzling Escalade!


If this was Friday, then (well - at least in the Valley), it was a scorcher .. at about 100 degrees here and BH is usually anywhere from 5 to 10 degrees cooler .. so, yes .. still hot!


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> It must be because I’m car shopping... but I can’t figure out what the two Hollywood Eco Wannabes are thinking with this move? why didn’t they get a Tesla or a Prius? Even Land Rover makes a plug-in hybrid. (Not that I’m completely sold on battery Manufacturing and its affect on the Earth, but with these two... I don’t get it... Harry wants to tell me I can’t go on vacation because of my impact, but he picks an Escalade?)



Yep. They are showing who they really are, spoiled, delusional brats who feel entitled to status and luxury. It would never occur to them to do without the best of everything for themselves because they want to continue to feel special and important. No, it is up to the millions of unknown non-celebrity folks to make sacrifices in their lives to save the environment and make the world a better place. But, hey, they will be here to tell all of us unwashed masses exactly how we need to do better and cheer us on.


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> It must be because I’m car shopping... but I can’t figure out what the two Hollywood Eco Wannabes are thinking with this move? why didn’t they get a Tesla or a Prius? Even Land Rover makes a plug-in hybrid. (Not that I’m completely sold on battery Manufacturing and its affect on the Earth, but with these two... I don’t get it... Harry wants to tell me I can’t go on vacation because of my impact, but he picks an Escalade?)


No no no, you are not getting it. 

It is most likely a super duper Escalade with bullet proof windows, nuclear bomb-proof body, machine guns in the wheel wells, rocket launcher under the hood and hidden helicopter rotors to whisk them from any threatening event. Why oh why can we not see the importance of these 2 clueless incredible people? Why oh why, I ask you?


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> No no no, you are not getting it.
> 
> It is most likely a super duper Escalade with bullet proof windows, nuclear bomb-proof body, machine guns in the wheel wells, rocket launcher under the hood and hidden helicopter rotors to whisk them from any threatening event. Why oh why can we not see the importance of these 2 clueless incredible people? Why oh why, I ask you?


Did I detect a bullet proof vest under that white sheet dress?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PewPew said:


> Meghan feels she’s too famous to find friends for her son. Meanwhile, actual A-listers and famous international figures with only children manage to find playmates for their children, do PTA and school events etc.



I read that earlier...this woman's ego is unreal. Kate, the future Queen of Great Britain, has attended parent meetings at a local pub, but this nobody without her prestigious marriage is too famous for normal activities, in a city full of actual celebrities no less? Give me a break.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read that earlier...this woman's ego is unreal. Kate, the future Queen of Great Britain, has attended parent meetings at a local pub, but this nobody without her prestigious marriage is too famous for normal activities, in a city full of actual celebrities no less? Give me a break.


I'm sure that Meggie-POO feels that the ONLY people that she can be "friends" with are the tippy-top of the heap - such as Michele ***** and Oprah, you know .. those folk!  Meanwhile, yes .. there a are tons of A-list celebs out here whose children attend the various schools and have after-school activities (a dear friend of mine just retired from one of the schools and told me plenty of times about this celeb's children, etc.).  I can't even imagine what she is going to be like when Archie does start attending school because (you know) she is going to be the EXPERT on everything!  Who knows, maybe they will just home-school him .. you know, with Meghan as the 'SUPREME' teacher!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mshermes said:


> All of this drama simply to call constant attention to ME....ME...ME...reminded me of someone who is a legend in her own mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4784841


Oh god. This is by far my most hated picture of her (not THIS picture, but the series of the mosque visit)...naked arms, unkempt hair, sloppily draped rag of a scarf and of course not willing to lay off the PDA for just a moment. So freaking disrespectful.


----------



## V0N1B2

I found this one quite touching. 
Saint Meghan from Our Lady of Hypocrisy zooming her celeb commencement speech with that high school last month.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh god. This is by far my most hated picture of her (not THIS picture, but the series of the mosque visit)...naked arms, unkempt hair, sloppily draped rag of a scarf and of course not willing to lay off the PDA for just a moment. So freaking disrespectful.


*RIGHT?* .. *RIGHT??* .. and this is someone who is supposed to be SO FREAKIN' Smart .. and her Bachelors was in Theatre -AND- International Relations??????  Hey Meghan, how about doing some research on what to do/wear/say/act when visiting another country, *ESPECIALLY* when visiting Churches/Mosques/Temples, etc.???  This is why Italy has imposed "rules" around what one should be wearing when visiting a Cathedral (don't even try to wear shorts or short-sleeved shirts when visiting St. Peter's)!!!  Personally, this is a major pet-peeve of mine as I used to work in International Finance and I ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS did my research on the cultural aspects of the country that I would be visiting/working in and would behave in the manner that they were accustomed to, not as a dumb American!


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> 84 F is scorching?  That’s ridiculous!


That's what I thought!  Anything under 30ºC is fine by me.

I'm getting Duchess of Windsor vibes from Meg.  Might be just that photo.


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> I found this one quite touching.
> Saint Meghan from Our Lady of Hypocrisy zooming her celeb commencement speech with that high school last month.
> View attachment 4786120


HA!!! .. yes, i remember seeing this and thinking .. my god, she has got to be the worst actress evah .. she wouldn't have even been good for the silent movies!  Too bad they couldn't give her the top RAZZIE for this "performance"!!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I thought!  Anything under 30ºC is fine by me.
> 
> I'm getting Duchess of Windsor vibes from Meg.  Must be just that photo.


Yes, and remember .. it is DRY HEAT out here, so yeah .. it's hot, but it's not like it's HOT & HUMID (and that I cannot take, hence my departure of Boston to out here)!!!


----------



## PewPew

kemilia said:


> No no no, you are not getting it.
> 
> *It is most likely a super duper Escalade with bullet proof windows, nuclear bomb-proof body, machine guns in the wheel wells, rocket launcher under the hood and hidden helicopter rotors to whisk them from any threatening event*. Why oh why can we not see the importance of these 2 clueless incredible people? Why oh why, I ask you?



Ha! This cracked me up, but you’re actually not far off what H&M will say when called out— Remember how entitled they were in their RoyalSussex Megxit statements? So, their logic would be:

_We are very environmentally conscious, but Harry’s 6th in Line status & Megan’s independent profile means we need a special vehicle for SAFETY reasons. It’s not as eco-friendly as we’d like, so we’ve already been working with big important companies to make sure high profile people can travel in a way that’s safe for them & Mother Nature. 

Right now we need TO SURVIVE. But we have been reading up on the environment for our ecoTourism business & look forward to EMPOWERING & EDUCATING *YOU*
on how help the environment.” -Duchess & JCMH_


----------



## Sol Ryan

Which is STILL bs because how long has Land Rover and Jag been providing vehicles to the royals? And they make electrics and hybrids....

How stupid do they think we are?


They have to be a PR nightmare... I’m expecting to hear they felt it was important to buy American..... which doesn’t explain why it wasn’t a Tesla....




PewPew said:


> Ha! This cracked me up, but you’re actually not far off what H&M will say when called out— Remember how entitled they were in their RoyalSussex Megxit statements? So, their logic would be:
> 
> _We are very environmentally conscious, but Harry’s 6th in Line status & Megan’s independent profile means we need a special vehicle for SAFETY reasons. It’s not as eco-friendly as we’d like, so we’ve already been working with big important companies to make sure high profile people can travel in a way that’s safe for them & Mother Nature.
> 
> Right now we need TO SURVIVE. But we have been reading up on the environment for our ecoTourism business & look forward to EMPOWERING & EDUCATING *YOU*
> on how help the environment.” -Duchess & JCMH_


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> I found this one quite touching.
> Saint Meghan from Our Lady of Hypocrisy zooming her celeb commencement speech with that high school last month.
> View attachment 4786120


Oh. My. God.  You are good!  Lol!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry don hats and face masks in scorching Beverly Hills as they are seen in a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV 'as far from environmentally-friendly as you can get'*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry appeared to put their ongoing privacy court case and feud with ex-best friend Jessica Mulroney behind them as they stepped out for an appointment in Beverly Hills Friday.
> 
> Pictures obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show the former Royals protecting themselves from both the sun and coronavirus as they donned face masks and hats while collecting their car from a valet in their new neighborhood Friday afternoon.
> 
> The couple were spotted exiting a building and getting into a gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV that has been dubbed in online reviews 'as far from environmentally-friendly as you can get', marking an unusual choice for the staunchly eco-conscious duo.
> 
> Meghan, 38, who led the way to their waiting car, dressed for the scorching California weather, with temperatures reaching 84 Fahrenheit and humidity topping 67 percent yesterday.
> 
> She wore a loose cream linen dress with matching cream and black Sam Edelman ballet flats, and accessorized her outfit with a large straw hat and dark sunglasses.
> 
> A dark cross-body bag hung across her petite frame while she clutched a clear purse in her hands.
> 
> An expensive-looking gold watch, which she hasn't been spotted in before, decorated her wrist.
> 
> Harry, 35, opted for a more casual look of dark blue jeans, a grey polo shirt, navy trainers and a cap.
> 
> The couple exited the building flanked by their security team, who also wore face masks, before one of them opened the car door for Meghan.
> 
> Harry walked behind his wife and made his way to the other side of the black SUV before getting in.
> 
> The couple, who appeared to have left one-year-old son Archie at home, seem to be taking no chances with coronavirus, as cases and deaths from the virus soar across California.
> 
> Face masks are now mandatory for all Californian residents in public places and Meghan and Harry were clearly sticking to the rules.
> 
> However, their choice of car during the outing may raise some questions, as the luxury Cadillac Escalade normally comes with a gas-guzzling six-liter engine.
> 
> Online reviews describe the five-door motor as being 'as far from environmentally friendly as you can get'.
> 
> This suggests yet another sustainability gaffe for the couple, who have previously been slammed for preaching about saving the planet, and then flying around the world by private jet.
> 
> Harry last year infamously said ‘we are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,’ before they took four trips in 11 days on private jets that summer.
> 
> The rare outing comes amid a turbulent few weeks for the Sussexes who have been laying low and have only been spotted out a handful of times since their move to LA.
> 
> Meghan's privacy and copyright case against the Mail on Sunday rumbled on this week and, on Thursday, Meghan issued an application for a High Court injunction to stop anyone from naming her five female friends who briefed People magazine about her and a letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas.
> 
> The five women were named as the sources of a People Magazine article in 2019 in legal papers submitted by Meghan to the court last week, although their identities were not made public.
> 
> The article lies at the heart of the case because it was the first time the existence of a letter the Duchess had written to her father Thomas was revealed.
> 
> The Mail On Sunday claims that revelation and the misleading impression it gave of the letter gave Thomas the right to publish more of the handwritten note in the Mail on Sunday to defend himself after their relationship became hopelessly estranged in the wake of Meghan’s marriage to Harry in May 2018.
> 
> But Meghan insists that she had no idea any of her friends had spoken to People magazine until after the fact.
> 
> All five of the women now face the prospect of being hauled to the High Court in London next year to testify in the explosive privacy trial.
> 
> They will be asked to confirm on oath that the Duchess had no prior knowledge that they were going to speak to People.
> 
> The legal battle comes at the same time Meghan has reportedly cut ties with best friend Jessica Mulroney, after Mulroney became embroiled in a social media row with Black influencer Sasha Exeter last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Meghan and Harry step out for appointment in Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Pictures obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com show the former Royals out in Beverly Hills Friday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


There goes JCMH wearing that faded, scruffy, wrinkly t-shirt again. Surely this man has more than one t-shirt?


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> I'm sure that Meggie-POO feels that the ONLY people that she can be "friends" with are the tippy-top of the heap - such as Michele ***** and Oprah, you know .. those folk!  Meanwhile, yes .. there a are tons of A-list celebs out here whose children attend the various schools and have after-school activities (a dear friend of mine just retired from one of the schools and told me plenty of times about this celeb's children, etc.).  I can't even imagine what she is going to be like when Archie does start attending school because (you know) she is going to be the EXPERT on everything!  Who knows, maybe they will just home-school him .. you know, with Meghan as the 'SUPREME' teacher!



Home skooling in the finest KarJenner tradition!
PMK really should be getting a kickback from these grifters


----------



## V0N1B2

Sol Ryan said:


> I’m expecting to hear they felt it was important to buy American..... which doesn’t explain why it wasn’t a Tesla....


BUY American?  I think it's more likely this is the vehicle that came with their rented mansion. I guess it doesn't have a car seat, otherwise they surely would have taken their son out with them for a walk, no?


1LV said:


> Oh. My. God.  You are good!  Lol!!!


I can't take credit for it, I saw it on another forum and thought it was amaze.


Lounorada said:


> There goes JCMH wearing that faded, scruffy, wrinkly t-shirt again. Surely this man has more than one t-shirt?


I know, right? JCMH or OPSH? (one-polo-shirt-Harry)


----------



## ccbaggirl89

It hurts my eyes to see how Meghan dresses; I just want to send her and Harry an iron in the mail.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> I know, right? JCMH or *OPSH? (one-polo-shirt-Harry)*


----------



## rose60610

ccbaggirl89 said:


> It hurts my eyes to see how Meghan dresses; I just want to send her and Harry an iron in the mail.



If you sent them an iron and charged them for it, you'd be getting a check from Charles.


----------



## Lodpah

I’ve been saying Meghan is a shape shifter.


----------



## viciel

MM was never at the top echelon level in Hollywood, at best, AT BEST, she was not even a B-list TV (not movie, just TV) actress who wasn't even a headliner on Suits until word got out she's dating that idiot Harry. When did we ever see her anywhere? 

She sits WAYYYYY in the back at any award shows if she's even there. Try looking for any interest/photos/articles of her before Harry, there's really nothing. Kathy Griffin self-proclaims D-lister, and she's more recognizable than MM before Harry. I don't think MM was ever privy to how the game works in Hollywood at the top tier. She's too transparent to everyone else in the industry, if people seem to be on her team, that's because they are trying to sell magazines/papers/boost their light/etc. She's made her bed now, let's see how she's going to lie in it.


----------



## VickyB

HiromiT said:


> Yes, I noticed that too! It looks bigger. Wonder if it’s another upgrade or just the fuzziness making it look bigger. Also hope someone will ID her gold watch.



I too noticed the gold watch. I wonder if it is Diana's gold Cartier watch?
Also noted the Chanel flats. Don't recall those being worn before.


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> It hurts my eyes to see how Meghan dresses; I just want to send her and Harry an iron in the mail.



They'd think it was a door-stop


----------



## lalame

VickyB said:


> I too noticed the gold watch. I wonder if it is Diana's gold Cartier watch?
> Also noted the Chanel flats. Don't recall those being worn before.



she’s worn Chanel flats before but those are apparently Sam Edelman. I like her dress but you really have to plan your day around wearing that kind of linen... not a good look. Im very curious about the watch... it looks quite big? Can’t tell if it’s just the pixelation making it so, but it definitely doesn’t look like the tank francaise.


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> Which is STILL bs because how long has Land Rover and Jag been providing vehicles to the royals? And they make electrics and hybrids....
> 
> How stupid do they think we are?
> 
> 
> They have to be a PR nightmare... I’m expecting to hear they felt it was important to buy American..... which doesn’t explain why it wasn’t a Tesla....


"buy American?" I doubt they purchased this vehicle or pretty much anything since moving to the USA, spending their money isn't their way of doing things--handouts are the way these two roll.


----------



## Jayne1

VickyB said:


> I too noticed the gold watch. I wonder if it is Diana's gold Cartier watch?
> Also noted the Chanel flats. Don't recall those being worn before.


Diana didn’t wear oversized gold, day-type jewellery - the trend for huge watches had barely started.

I always checked out her day jewellery, not the royal stuff, and she wore classic pieces, not overly large.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Diana’s Cartier had a black leather strap as well.


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> It didn't take long for MM to be engaged to H. MM knows how to choose her targets. JM and H don't look like the sharpest tools in the box.


I don’t think you have to be stupid to be taken in by a narcissist. They often target very smart accomplished people, often because of jealousy. They want to hurt anyone who they feel inferior to. Not saying that’s the case with our Harry, but although I don’t personally like JM, she is far from stupid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Staci_W

Luvbolide said:


> MM is going to sound like a lightweight giving a speech when compared to someone as talented and practiced as Michelle *****.  Good luck , honey.  And don’t plagiarize something from Pres. *****!


I have tremendous respect for Michelle. She was an accomplished woman all on her own. Her and Barack seem like teammates. Wonderful couple. 

I was disappointed in her being paired with Megan for an event.


----------



## Chanbal

Too bad, this would have been entertaining!

*Jessica Mulroney's Husband Broke His Silence Over That Meghan Markle Tell-All Book Rumor *Jessica's husband, Ben Mulroney, thankfully denied claims that she's writing an exposé.








						Jessica Mulroney’s Husband Broke His Silence Over That Meghan Markle Tell-All Book Rumor
					

Truly cannot think of a worse idea.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> I don’t think you have to be stupid to be taken in by a narcissist. They often target very smart accomplished people, often because of jealousy. They want to hurt anyone who they feel inferior to. Not saying that’s the case with our Harry, but although I don’t personally like JM, she is far from stupid.


Thanks, I see your point. I don't know JM, but her actions have been rather stupid. I agree with you, narcissists know how to choose their targets.


----------



## Luvbolide

Staci_W said:


> I have tremendous respect for Michelle. She was an accomplished woman all on her own. Her and Barack seem like teammates. Wonderful couple.
> 
> I was disappointed in her being paired with Megan for an event.




I agree a million percent!


----------



## Chagall

mshermes said:


> All of this drama simply to call constant attention to ME....ME...ME...reminded me of someone who is a legend in her own mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4784841


That is a terribly unflattering shot. She has an enormous butt and he is much more bald than I realized. Not that there is anything wrong with either of those two things.


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> Meghan jumps on issues that are fashionable at the time to discuss. Every time something big pops in the news, M can't help herself from making a word salad about it. When the issue subsides, she forgets about it. Discarded, like all the people in her life. Remember the women's shelter in Canada she went to when Harry was in London? Photo op then poof! Taking food to people during the pandemic lasted a whole 20 minutes. Just enough time to pull down her homemade mask and beguile us with her sacrifice. She isn't walking the dog, dangling Archie like a windsock and psycho gazing into the camera on hikes so she can prove to us how down to earth she is anymore either. Now she's "empowering" girls on some virtual forum with Michelle ***** and others. My guess, when it's her turn to speak, that's when listener participants will take their restroom and snack breaks. Those who actually listen to her written-by-someone-else speech won't remember a word of it. I'm not exactly waiting with bated breath for M's earth-shattering utterances about the next huge news piece that hits the airwaves . But you can bet it won't make sense.


She definitely is a flavour of the month girl. Whatever cause is fashionable she jumps on it. Nothing with her is genuine. And good old Harry is just along for the ride.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> Yes, and remember .. it is DRY HEAT out here, so yeah .. it's hot, but it's not like it's HOT & HUMID (and that I cannot take, hence my departure of Boston to out here)!!!


OMG I know what you mean we have been getting 37C with high humidity. When I lived in Africa it was hot but a dry heat and low humidity. We nearly died when we arrived in Canada in the middle of the summer and experienced the humidity.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> OMG I know what you mean we have been getting 37C with high humidity. When I lived in Africa it was hot but a dry heat and low humidity. We nearly died when we arrived in Canada in the middle of the summer and experienced the humidity.


RIGHT?? .. my sister lives in Houston and while they often don't get the temps that we do here in LA, the humidity is just a killer!  Same when I lived in Washington DC; the humidity was so bad that in August .. the vegetation would rot and stink up everything .. and then in the winter, with that Humidity .. OMG, was never so cold in my entire life (and I grew up in New England so it's not like I didn't experience Winter)!!  HATE, HATE, HATE HUMIDITY!


----------



## Nutashha

*Meghan Markle is Eagerly Waiting for Her Biography Launch*
*

*

She's hoping it'll salvage her image and put all dirty rumors to rest.


----------



## lalame

I saw this watch pop up on the Cartier instagram... maybe this is the one Meghan was wearing? Seems to be new model. More details: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/cartier-maillon-de-cartier-introducing


----------



## LaidyM

VickyB said:


> I too noticed the gold watch. I wonder if it is Diana's gold Cartier watch?
> Also noted the Chanel flats. Don't recall those being worn before.



Well she did buy the same model to herself. Had it engraved, dedicated to herself.. yep!


----------



## kemilia

A1aGypsy said:


> Diana’s Cartier had a black leather strap as well.


There are multiple pics of Diana wearing different watches, some all gold.

I remember reading that after her death, Harry got the sapphire ring and Will got the watch she taught him to tell time with. When William was going to ask Kate to marry him, he asked H if he could have the sapphire ring for Kate & Harry was ok with it so maybe they switched and M now has D's watch, maybe?


----------



## rose60610

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Markle is Eagerly Waiting for Her Biography Launch*
> *
> View attachment 4787865
> *
> 
> She's hoping it'll salvage her image and put all dirty rumors to rest.



I'll admit it's a nice picture. It is recent?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I'll admit it's a nice picture. It is recent?



I doubt it. They have been cloistered away since they sneaked in before the border closed (with the exception of their heroic afternoon delivering a few bags of food of course).

Can't wait to hear HER SIDE of the story. Silly me, I thought we were getting that all along via People magazine. Now I expect we'll get some tragic Cinderella tale of Meghan conquering all. So much adversity!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> I don’t think you have to be stupid to be taken in by a narcissist. They often target very smart accomplished people, often because of jealousy. They want to hurt anyone who they feel inferior to. Not saying that’s the case with our Harry, but although I don’t personally like JM, she is far from stupid.


What does JM stand for?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> What does JM stand for?



Jessica Mulroney


----------



## purseinsanity

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Markle is Eagerly Waiting for Her Biography Launch*
> *
> View attachment 4787865
> *
> 
> She's hoping it'll salvage her image and put all dirty rumors to rest.


She wants privacy but then wants to put it all out there??  Or her victimized version of actual events that is?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney


Thank you!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney


I was guessing "Jesus Meghan" since she likes to believe she's Godly.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I was guessing "Jesus Meghan" since she likes to believe she's Godly.



Naw, just the latest on the long, battered list of "markled" friends and family.


----------



## Chagall

purseinsanity said:


> What does JM stand for?


Jessica Mulroney


----------



## Tootsie17

purseinsanity said:


> I was guessing "Jesus Meghan" since she likes to believe she's Godly.


Thank you for the best laugh I've had all day.


----------



## Lodpah

I read the funniest comment today. It said: Meghan the Remarkable is the only person who can take a prince and turn him into a frog.


----------



## Lodpah

You all should check out Quora sometimes the questions and comments are hilarious.


----------



## bellecate




----------



## Lounorada

I scrolled past this post yesterday on Instagram (I scrolled past quickly at first and thought it was Kim or Kourtney K, then did a double check) and had a peep at the comments.... they gave me a laugh 

Also, 'unscripted'? She's clearly reading from a script


----------



## 1LV

Speech 101.


----------



## ic_locon

Lounorada said:


> I scrolled past this post yesterday on Instagram (I scrolled past quickly at first and thought it was Kim or Kourtney K, then did a double check) and had a peep at the comments.... they gave me a laugh
> 
> Also, 'unscripted'? She's clearly reading from a script






	

		
			
		

		
	
Gwyneth Paltrow commented, #meghanforpresident

OMG!


----------



## 1LV

I would expect nothing less from Paltrow (#meghanforpresident).  She’s a whack job in a league of her own.  #norespect


----------



## Chanbal

ic_locon said:


> Gwyneth Paltrow commented, #meghanforpresident
> OMG!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

I haven't read or watched the speech but her face is looking rather Kardashian in that photo...


----------



## Alena21

What a mess!


----------



## Chagall

Lounorada said:


> I scrolled past this post yesterday on Instagram (I scrolled past quickly at first and thought it was Kim or Kourtney K, then did a double check) and had a peep at the comments.... they gave me a laugh
> 
> Also, 'unscripted'? She's clearly reading from a script



She looks more like a Kardashian by the moment.


----------



## kemilia

1LV said:


> I would expect nothing less from Paltrow (#meghanforpresident).  She’s a whack job in a league of her own.  #norespect


Maybe things aren't going so well for Gwynnie since her vagina-scented candle embarrassment. 

Wrong wagon to hitch on to, Paltrow.


----------



## melissatrv

RE: the Meghan's Kardashian looks.  Lots of stars seem to be taking advantage of the quarantine to squeeze in some plastic surgery...just sayin


----------



## melissatrv

Meghan for president and Gwyneth as VP?  Hey stranger things have happened. I'd be moving to Australia to get as far away as possible from that train wreck. 



kemilia said:


> Maybe things aren't going so well for Gwynnie since her vagina-scented candle embarrassment.
> 
> Wrong wagon to hitch on to, Paltrow.


----------



## Chagall

kemilia said:


> Maybe things aren't going so well for Gwynnie since her vagina-scented candle embarrassment.
> 
> Wrong wagon to hitch on to, Paltrow.


There have been a lot of fans consciously uncoupling from Gwynnie.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She looks so different to me, much more generic.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> You all should check out Quora sometimes the questions and comments are hilarious.


Oh yes, for sure!!  I have a friend who works there, so he turned me on to that some time back .. they ARE NOT MM "friendly"!!


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> I scrolled past this post yesterday on Instagram (I scrolled past quickly at first and thought it was Kim or Kourtney K, then did a double check) and had a peep at the comments.... they gave me a laugh
> 
> Also, 'unscripted'? She's clearly reading from a script



Okay .. got one thing for her "unscripted talk" .. she wins the GOLD Medal for the biggest WORD-SALAD ever!


----------



## CeeJay

melissatrv said:


> Meghan for president and Gwyneth as VP?  Hey stranger things have happened. I'd be moving to Australia to get as far away as possible from that train wreck.


I've already started the process of getting my Italian citizenship (mother was from Italy), just in case .. our elections this year!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I've already started the process of getting my Italian citizenship (mother was from Italy), just in case .. our elections this year!


I guess I could do this with Ireland as my mother was born there.....things would probably have to get pretty bad here though.....but I hear you


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I guess I could do this with Ireland as my mother was born there.....things would probably have to get pretty bad here though.....but I hear you



I had finally just finished all the paperwork to send in, and then I found out the Irish Embassy offices here in the US are closed because of Covid.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I had finally just finished all the paperwork to send in, and then I found out the Irish Embassy offices here in the US are closed because of Covid.


oh....everything is f-d up


----------



## arnott

kemilia said:


> Maybe things aren't going so well for Gwynnie since her vagina-scented candle embarrassment.
> 
> Wrong wagon to hitch on to, Paltrow.



What?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

ic_locon said:


> View attachment 4788887
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gwyneth Paltrow commented, #meghanforpresident
> 
> OMG!





1LV said:


> I would expect nothing less from Paltrow (#meghanforpresident).  She’s a whack job in a league of her own.  #norespect



And this is why I can’t take most celebrities seriously. They live in their own odd, insulated fantasy world where a speech that doesn’t have any actual ideas in it impresses them only because of who said it.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. got one thing for her "unscripted talk" .. she wins the GOLD Medal for the biggest WORD-SALAD ever!



I can't even listen...


----------



## scarlet555

ic_locon said:


> View attachment 4788887
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gwyneth Paltrow commented, #meghanforpresident
> 
> OMG!


Gwyneth, Gwyneth- I tried to ignore you even made candles, with your last wit of ideas...  you have lost any last shred of respect and credibility now with this.   WT@#$%


----------



## bag-mania

This isn't exactly news to anyone, but Thomas is still markled. I don't think anyone ever gets off of that list.

*Meghan Markle’s Dad, Thomas Markle, Has Been Trying to Get in Contact With Her After L.A. Move*
Hoping to make amends. *Meghan Markle*‘s estranged father, *Thomas Markle*, is “continuing to try and get in contact” with his daughter since she and *Prince Harry* moved to Los Angeles, a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly_.

The retired lighting director, 75, who in Mexico, has been “sending letters to the house” with hopes of reaching the former _Suits_ star, 38, who relocated to California with her husband, 35, and their 14-month-old son, Archie, in March. Despite his best efforts, the source says his “letters remain unopened.”

Meghan and her father have had a strained relationship since he was caught staging paparazzi photos ahead of her May 2018 wedding. Thomas was set to walk his daughter down the aisle at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle in England, but announced days before the ceremony that he could no longer attend after suffering a heart attack. An insider told _Us_ at the time that while the retired actress’ relationship with her father “has always been strained,” she was “upset and disturbed by the entire ordeal.” Their relationship was further strained after Thomas gave several interviews in which he slammed the royal family, Harry and even Meghan.

The duchess confirmed in January that she and Harry would be stepping down from their roles as senior members of the royal family and splitting their time between the U.K. and North America. Days after the couple made their shocking announcement, Thomas confessed that he was ashamed of his daughter’s behavior.

“What they have decided to do is, to me, embarrassing,” he said during an interview with ITV’s _Good Morning Britain_ at the time. “I think they have hurt the queen. I think they have hurt the royals and it just doesn’t work to be going to another country to be serving England. It’s never going to work.”

Three months later, new details of Meghan and Harry’s dramatic conversations with Thomas ahead of the royal wedding were revealed in legal documents obtained by TMZ.

“I’ve been reaching out to you all weekend but you’re not taking any of our calls or replying to any texts,” the California native texted her father at the time. “Very concerned about your health and safety and have taken every measure to protect you but not sure what more we can do if you don’t respond…Do you need help? Can we send the security team down again?”

According to the documents, Thomas refused his daughter’s offer and the help of a security team.









						Meghan Markle's Dad Has Been Trying to Get Back in Contact With Her in L.A.
					

Meghan Markle's estranged father, Thomas Markle, has been 'sending letters' to her new Los Angeles home — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> oh....everything is f-d up





bag-mania said:


> This isn't exactly news to anyone, but Thomas is still markled. I don't think anyone ever gets off of that list.
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s Dad, Thomas Markle, Has Been Trying to Get in Contact With Her After L.A. Move*
> Hoping to make amends. *Meghan Markle*‘s estranged father, *Thomas Markle*, is “continuing to try and get in contact” with his daughter since she and *Prince Harry* moved to Los Angeles, a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly_.
> 
> The retired lighting director, 75, who in Mexico, has been “sending letters to the house” with hopes of reaching the former _Suits_ star, 38, who relocated to California with her husband, 35, and their 14-month-old son, Archie, in March. Despite his best efforts, the source says his “letters remain unopened.”
> 
> Meghan and her father have had a strained relationship since he was caught staging paparazzi photos ahead of her May 2018 wedding. Thomas was set to walk his daughter down the aisle at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle in England, but announced days before the ceremony that he could no longer attend after suffering a heart attack. An insider told _Us_ at the time that while the retired actress’ relationship with her father “has always been strained,” she was “upset and disturbed by the entire ordeal.” Their relationship was further strained after Thomas gave several interviews in which he slammed the royal family, Harry and even Meghan.
> 
> The duchess confirmed in January that she and Harry would be stepping down from their roles as senior members of the royal family and splitting their time between the U.K. and North America. Days after the couple made their shocking announcement, Thomas confessed that he was ashamed of his daughter’s behavior.
> 
> “What they have decided to do is, to me, embarrassing,” he said during an interview with ITV’s _Good Morning Britain_ at the time. “I think they have hurt the queen. I think they have hurt the royals and it just doesn’t work to be going to another country to be serving England. It’s never going to work.”
> 
> Three months later, new details of Meghan and Harry’s dramatic conversations with Thomas ahead of the royal wedding were revealed in legal documents obtained by TMZ.
> 
> “I’ve been reaching out to you all weekend but you’re not taking any of our calls or replying to any texts,” the California native texted her father at the time. “Very concerned about your health and safety and have taken every measure to protect you but not sure what more we can do if you don’t respond…Do you need help? Can we send the security team down again?”
> 
> According to the documents, Thomas refused his daughter’s offer and the help of a security team.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Dad Has Been Trying to Get Back in Contact With Her in L.A.
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's estranged father, Thomas Markle, has been 'sending letters' to her new Los Angeles home — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


dont know if this is credible but if it is, the had better start acting like someone with a heart......her father may not live much longer and he did raise/spoil her.....this doesn't look good for her IMO


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder who the source was who claimed her relationship with her father “has always been strained.” Because that doesn't appear to have been based in fact since he was largely responsible for raising her and paying for her education. In the photos of them together at her wedding to Trevor they looked to be very close.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I wonder who the source was who claimed her relationship with her father “has always been strained.” Because that doesn't appear to have been based in fact since he was largely responsible for raising her and paying for her education. In the photos of them together at her wedding to Trevor they looked to be very close.


right
BS


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> I would expect nothing less from Paltrow (#meghanforpresident).  She’s a whack job in a league of her own.  #norespect


You mean you don't like the candles that smell like her vagina???!!!  Say it's not true!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> She looks more like a Kardashian by the moment.


I'm waiting for the butt implants!


----------



## Chagall

purseinsanity said:


> I'm waiting for the butt implants!


Just a matter of time. Lol.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I wonder who the source was who claimed her relationship with her father “has always been strained.” Because that doesn't appear to have been based in fact since he was largely responsible for raising her and paying for her education. In the photos of them together at her wedding to Trevor they looked to be very close.


Sadly, I think both of them are narcissists .. but the fact that Thomas spoiled her so bad also means that it's her way or the highway (markled in her world).  My friends certainly never mentioned anything about a 'strained' relationship and as a matter of fact, when Meghan was doing those High School plays, her father was the one behind the scenes (lighting, etc.) .. and this was when he was on a hugely successful TV show to boot!  Honestly, I think this whole BS with her is that SHE believes that she is in a different stratosphere than her family and that SHE felt that he would embarrass her.  However, she is just proving how UNCARING she really is ..


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> You mean you don't like the candles that smell like her vagina???!!!  Say it's not true!


Right?  Who thinks like that?? (And who the heck buys it?)


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> I'm waiting for the butt implants!


Her legs they could never support those.


----------



## kemilia

arnott said:


> What?!


Ok, maybe not her va-jay-jay but close:








						goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle | goop
					

Shop the goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle at goop.com. Discover product details, pricing, sizing, styling suggestions and more.




					shop.goop.com


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> Ok, maybe not her va-jay-jay but close:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle | goop
> 
> 
> Shop the goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle at goop.com. Discover product details, pricing, sizing, styling suggestions and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shop.goop.com


Good GOD!  What's next?  "Smells like my penis"???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> Ok, maybe not her va-jay-jay but close:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle | goop
> 
> 
> Shop the goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle at goop.com. Discover product details, pricing, sizing, styling suggestions and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shop.goop.com


LOLOL.  I didn't know orgasms smelled like "tart grapefruit, neroli, and ripe cassis berries blended with gunpowder tea and Turkish rose"


----------



## pukasonqo

melissatrv said:


> Meghan for president and Gwyneth as VP?  Hey stranger things have happened. I'd be moving to Australia to get as far away as possible from that train wreck.



We have our own train wrecks but not in the same category as yours!


----------



## CeeJay

pukasonqo said:


> We have our own train wrecks but not in the same category as yours!


She may "think" she could run, but let's face it .. the News Media in the States?!?! .. they will look up & get the dirt BIG-TIME and she would (as we all know) not respond well to anything that isn't "perfect" about her!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> She may "think" she could run, but let's face it .. the News Media in the States?!?! .. they will look up & get the dirt BIG-TIME and she would (as we all know) not respond well to anything that isn't "perfect" about her!


Which party would support her and who would give her the money for a campaign.  Nobody.  This is the kind of  ridiculous talk that really illustrates how stupid some of her supporters are.  None of this is realistic.  She doesn't even own a home in the state unless sofa surfing counts as an abode.


----------



## Awillow

kemilia said:


> Ok, maybe not her va-jay-jay but close:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle | goop
> 
> 
> Shop the goop x Heretic This Smells Like My Orgasm Candle at goop.com. Discover product details, pricing, sizing, styling suggestions and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shop.goop.com


That was a follow up.  This was the original.


----------



## Jktgal

Awillow said:


> That was a follow up.  This was the original.
> View attachment 4789659



It sold out?! I have to say, what's wrong with Americans now, honestly?!


----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> I've already started the process of getting my Italian citizenship (mother was from Italy), just in case .. our elections this year!



Not than things are any better here in Italy, lol!!


----------



## Chagall

Jktgal said:


> It sold out?! I have to say, what's wrong with Americans now, honestly?!


The virus must be destroying their brain cells.


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> It sold out?! I have to say, what's wrong with Americans now, honestly?!



Let’s hope everyone who bought it meant to use it as a joke gift or as a humorous item for their guests to discover when they are using the powder room.


----------



## zinacef

Just out of curiosity —- has anybody actually smelled that Gwyneth candle here?  And how does it smell? Like a jo Malone kind or that candle place in the mall ( forgot the name). Not trying to hijack the thread from our duchess!


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> The virus must be destroying their brain cells.


Nope .. this is the case of "*stupid is as stupid does*" (Forrest Gump movie, and one of my favorite lines)!


----------



## Lounorada

zinacef said:


> Just out of curiosity —- has anybody actually smelled that Gwyneth candle here?  And how does it smell? Like a jo Malone kind or that candle place in the mall ( forgot the name). Not trying to hijack the thread from our duchess!


Judging by how Goopy thinks she's gods gift to the world and the enormity of her ego, the _candle _probably smells heavenly of roses, chamomile, honeysuckle and lavender...


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> This isn't exactly news to anyone, but Thomas is still markled. I don't think anyone ever gets off of that list.
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s Dad, Thomas Markle, Has Been Trying to Get in Contact With Her After L.A. Move*
> Hoping to make amends. *Meghan Markle*‘s estranged father, *Thomas Markle*, is “continuing to try and get in contact” with his daughter since she and *Prince Harry* moved to Los Angeles, a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly_.
> 
> The retired lighting director, 75, who in Mexico, has been “sending letters to the house” with hopes of reaching the former _Suits_ star, 38, who relocated to California with her husband, 35, and their 14-month-old son, Archie, in March. Despite his best efforts, the source says his “letters remain unopened.”
> 
> Meghan and her father have had a strained relationship since he was caught staging paparazzi photos ahead of her May 2018 wedding. Thomas was set to walk his daughter down the aisle at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle in England, but announced days before the ceremony that he could no longer attend after suffering a heart attack. An insider told _Us_ at the time that while the retired actress’ relationship with her father “has always been strained,” she was “upset and disturbed by the entire ordeal.” Their relationship was further strained after Thomas gave several interviews in which he slammed the royal family, Harry and even Meghan.
> 
> The duchess confirmed in January that she and Harry would be stepping down from their roles as senior members of the royal family and splitting their time between the U.K. and North America. Days after the couple made their shocking announcement, Thomas confessed that he was ashamed of his daughter’s behavior.
> 
> “What they have decided to do is, to me, embarrassing,” he said during an interview with ITV’s _Good Morning Britain_ at the time. “I think they have hurt the queen. I think they have hurt the royals and it just doesn’t work to be going to another country to be serving England. It’s never going to work.”
> 
> Three months later, new details of Meghan and Harry’s dramatic conversations with Thomas ahead of the royal wedding were revealed in legal documents obtained by TMZ.
> 
> “I’ve been reaching out to you all weekend but you’re not taking any of our calls or replying to any texts,” the California native texted her father at the time. “Very concerned about your health and safety and have taken every measure to protect you but not sure what more we can do if you don’t respond…Do you need help? Can we send the security team down again?”
> 
> According to the documents, Thomas refused his daughter’s offer and the help of a security team.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Dad Has Been Trying to Get Back in Contact With Her in L.A.
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's estranged father, Thomas Markle, has been 'sending letters' to her new Los Angeles home — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



This father daughter duo are like a family Romeo & Juliet... ships passing in the night... timing and circumstances always off. If only he had the wherewithal to do this while she was trying to contact him this may all have never happened.


----------



## bellecate

lalame said:


> This father daughter duo are like a family Romeo & Juliet... ships passing in the night... timing and circumstances always off. If only he had the wherewithal to do this while she was trying to contact him this may all have never happened.



I personally don’t believe she was really trying to reach her father at that time. Writing things to later say what a caring daughter she was/is. Not trying to reconnect.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> This father daughter duo are like a family Romeo & Juliet... ships passing in the night... timing and circumstances always off. *If only he had the wherewithal to do this while she was trying to contact him* this may all have never happened.



I figured she was trying to contact him so badly in those days leading up to the wedding because she was terrified of what he might say to the press. She wanted to have total control over the media narrative about herself and daddy Thomas couldn't be trusted to keep to the script. Didn't she sic Harry on him too?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I don't know what her intentions were, but I think if they both had just kept the communication line open without either side ghosting the other at different times... they probably wouldn't be here today! She might even have said everything in that letter to him personally instead of snail mail.


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Judging by how Goopy thinks she's gods gift to the world and the enormity of her ego, the _candle _probably smells heavenly of roses, chamomile, honeysuckle and lavender...
> View attachment 4790234


I seriously wonder what this woman is sniffing.  This is not normal putting out a product with this description. It's as if she has weirdo groupies who fantasize about this lol!


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> I seriously wonder what this woman is sniffing.  This is not normal putting out a product with this description. It's as if she has weirdo groupies who fantasize about this lol!


I think its a case of-


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Which party would support her and who would give her the money for a campaign.  Nobody.  This is the kind of  ridiculous talk that really illustrates how stupid some of her supporters are.  None of this is realistic.  She doesn't even own a home in the state unless sofa surfing counts as an abode.


I have to think this was gwyneth joking....did anyone else say this?


----------



## Awillow

sdkitty said:


> I have to think this was gwyneth joking....did anyone else say this?


It was such a bizarre thing that it stuck in my brain (although I wish it hadn't - some things can't be forgotten unfortunately).  I remember she told Seth Myers it started out as a joke on late night. 









						Gwyneth Paltrow says her vagina-scented candle originally started out as a joke: 'I was kidding, obviously'
					

The actress said the product was meant to be "subversive" since a lot of women "have grown up feeling certain degrees of shame around our body."




					www.google.com


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I have to think this was gwyneth joking....did anyone else say this?


Her sugars say this all the time that she should run for office.  They are so delusional that they think she would be HRH The Duchess of Sussex, US Senator lol!


----------



## beautymagpie

Lol. It isn’t working.









						The tricks Meghan Markle uses to make everyone like her, expert reveals — The Sun
					

THE SUN MOBILE APP




					apple.news


----------



## poopsie

beautymagpie said:


> Lol. It isn’t working.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tricks Meghan Markle uses to make everyone like her, expert reveals — The Sun
> 
> 
> THE SUN MOBILE APP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Whatever she's doing, I hope she brought enough for everybody


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> And this is why I can’t take most celebrities seriously. They live in their own odd, insulated fantasy world where a speech that doesn’t have any actual ideas in it impresses them only because of who said it.



Only posting this comment bc the "white gloves" must come off after working up-close and personal in both the movie and fashion *BUSINESSES:* Celebs, at least 99.9% of the time, are just PAID_FOR_HIRE walking advertisements - they are WALKING and TALKING for the money, honey 

Altruism is not a word most celebs can define let alone spell
A harsh reality to face


----------



## sdkitty

Awillow said:


> It was such a bizarre thing that it stuck in my brain (although I wish it hadn't - some things can't be forgotten unfortunately).  I remember she told Seth Myers it started out as a joke on late night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gwyneth Paltrow says her vagina-scented candle originally started out as a joke: 'I was kidding, obviously'
> 
> 
> The actress said the product was meant to be "subversive" since a lot of women "have grown up feeling certain degrees of shame around our body."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I was referring to her saying Meghan should run for political office (or whatever she said on that subject)


----------



## sdkitty

seems she still has plenty of stans
from Yahoo
someone tweeting her melanin is just right....she is glowing, etc.









						'Meghan is glowing!' Fans praise Duchess of Sussex's look as she makes highest-profile speech since leaving royal duties
					

Meghan Markle is 'back', declared fans of the duchess after she addressed girls and young women about activism.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> seems she still has plenty of stans
> from Yahoo
> someone tweeting her melanin is just right....she is glowing, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Meghan is glowing!' Fans praise Duchess of Sussex's look as she makes highest-profile speech since leaving royal duties
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'back', declared fans of the duchess after she addressed girls and young women about activism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



Her melanin is just right? What does that even mean? I think _everyone's_ melanin is "just right"!


----------



## needlv

Did anyone see the Thomas Markle interview?  I got the distinct impression he had been asking MM for money as he expected after funding  her. - she would repay him.  So when she landed a prince he thought he would be looked after.

But if she had been spinning stories about her family to H - the letter she wrote to her father was more about protecting her own position / story she had told H than any real concern for her Dad.
Either way - it’s sad she has a strained relationship with her Dad and she should contact her dad  before it is too late.


----------



## limom

Wow Beatrice got married secretly.









						Princess Beatrice marries fiancé Edoardo in secret wedding attended by Queen
					

PRINCESS Beatrice married Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi at a secret Royal Wedding in Windsor, The Sun can exclusively reveal. The Queen, 94, and Duke of Edinburgh, 99,  joined Prince Andrew, 60, at th…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Wow Beatrice got married secretly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice marries fiancé Edoardo in secret wedding attended by Queen
> 
> 
> PRINCESS Beatrice married Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi at a secret Royal Wedding in Windsor, The Sun can exclusively reveal. The Queen, 94, and Duke of Edinburgh, 99,  joined Prince Andrew, 60, at th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Fantastic, lovely news.
I love the fact that a photo will not be released until tomorrow so as not to overshadow Captain Tom Moore getting knighted by the Queen this afternoon.
Others should take note... 
Actually, the floaty linen dress the other day, the blue loose top on Wednesday, might we have a pregnancy announcement in the next few hours? Two sisters weddings, two pregnancy announcements..... She wouldn't dare? Would she?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I saw a photo of Beatrice the other day with her new blonde hair and she looked much thinner and quite pretty.  I can’t wait to see the wedding photos. I wonder if she wore a wedding gown.  Lol at the big shipment of BEER allegedly for the wedding....not champagne?!?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Wow Beatrice got married secretly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice marries fiancé Edoardo in secret wedding attended by Queen
> 
> 
> PRINCESS Beatrice married Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi at a secret Royal Wedding in Windsor, The Sun can exclusively reveal. The Queen, 94, and Duke of Edinburgh, 99,  joined Prince Andrew, 60, at th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Oh wow good for her. She had to go through so much unwanted drama ahead of her big day, and then Corona showed her the middle finger as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I love the fact that a photo will not be released until tomorrow so as not to overshadow Captain Tom Moore getting knighted by the Queen this afternoon.



Some people have class and confidence and know their place in the world, and others have to scream on top of their lungs "But I am IMPORTANT!"


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some people have class and confidence and know their place in the world, and others have to scream on top of their lungs "But I am IMPORTANT!"


 Does this mean JH and MM will release photos tomorrow too or some word salad nonsense?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Aimee3 said:


> Does this mean JH and MM will release photos tomorrow too or some word salad nonsense?


Probably!


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, it’s a second marriage for Bea’s husband and it was a second marriage for Meghan. Bea’s simplified and dignified wedding just makes H&M‘s wedding show look so much more extravagant and very tacky.
Glad QE and the Duke of E were able to attend.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, it’s a second marriage for Bea’s husband and it was a second marriage for Meghan. Bea’s simplified and dignified wedding just makes H&M‘s wedding show look so much more extravagant and very tacky.
> Glad QE and the Duke of E were able to attend.


I agree but did they have a choice?  was this done this way mostly due to Covid?


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Did anyone see the Thomas Markle interview?  I got the distinct impression he had been asking MM for money as he expected after funding  her. - she would repay him.  So when she landed a prince he thought he would be looked after.
> 
> But if she had been spinning stories about her family to H - the letter she wrote to her father was more about protecting her own position / story she had told H than any real concern for her Dad.


You know, after financially supporting her the way he did, now that's he's poorly, she should be trying to take care of him.  

I doubt he's wanting to buy a fancy car or a mansion, just maybe to retire and not worry about the bills.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I agree but did they have a choice?  was this done this way mostly due to Covid?



Covid, QE and Duke of E‘S age, Andrew‘s mess, falling economy and public opinion — it all adds up to a small and private wedding. At least, these two know what _private_ means.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> Fantastic, lovely news.
> I love the fact that a photo will not be released until tomorrow so as not to overshadow Captain Tom Moore getting knighted by the Queen this afternoon.
> Others should take note...
> Actually, the floaty linen dress the other day, the blue loose top on Wednesday, might we have a pregnancy announcement in the next few hours? Two sisters weddings, two pregnancy announcements..... She wouldn't dare? Would she?


Kinda funny that QE & the Prince attended the wedding yet not the christening of A. The Q knows how to send a message (and throw excellent shade).


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Kinda funny that QE & the Prince attended the wedding yet not the christening of A. The Q knows how to send a message (and throw excellent shade).



To be fair the Queen already had another commitment for that day. She has always attended the weddings but there are other christenings for great-grandchildren that she has missed. She wasn't there for Louie's.


----------



## eunaddict

Meghan 'won't take back dog Bogart' because he 'doesn't like Harry'
					

Meghan was said to have been left devastated when when she was forced to leave Bogart in Toronto when she moved to the UK to live with Harry  in 2017. She has two other dogs with her husband.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




People really shouldn't adopt pets just to abandon them again (yes, leaving your pooch with your friends permanently counts as abandonment), those poor rescue animals have already been through it once before...to do it again is cruel. And look, maybe I'm biased but my SO and I agreed, back when we were friends, that if our pets hated someone that person was a no-go romantically. Also, MM, if your dog doesn't like H, maaaaaybe it's because y'all really rushed into things and Bogart never got time to come around to H - I'm guessing they were rarely at hers.

I guess even pups can't escape being Markled.


----------



## beautymagpie

eunaddict said:


> Meghan 'won't take back dog Bogart' because he 'doesn't like Harry'
> 
> 
> Meghan was said to have been left devastated when when she was forced to leave Bogart in Toronto when she moved to the UK to live with Harry  in 2017. She has two other dogs with her husband.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People really shouldn't adopt pets just to abandon them again (yes, leaving your pooch with your friends permanently counts as abandonment), those poor rescue animals have already been through it once before...to do it again is cruel. And look, maybe I'm biased but my SO and I agreed, back when we were friends, that if our pets hated someone that person was a no-go romantically. Also, MM, if your dog doesn't like H, maaaaaybe it's because y'all really rushed into things and Bogart never got time to come around to H - I'm guessing they were rarely at hers.
> 
> I guess even pups can't escape being Markled.



Yep. And to blame Harry for it, is just a sign of things to come.


----------



## elvisfan4life

melissatrv said:


> Meghan for president and Gwyneth as VP?  Hey stranger things have happened. I'd be moving to Australia to get as far away as possible from that train wreck.


 the moon for me please


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, it’s a second marriage for Bea’s husband and it was a second marriage for Meghan. Bea’s simplified and dignified wedding just makes H&M‘s wedding show look so much more extravagant and very tacky.
> Glad QE and the Duke of E were able to attend.



He wasn't married before, just engaged.

Also, petty me actually enjoyed how it was leaked they said they wouldn't want to burden the British tax payers with high security costs for a lavish wedding. Seems like some other couple really aggravated even close family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> To be fair the Queen already had another commitment for that day. She has always attended the weddings but there are other christenings for great-grandchildren that she has missed. She wasn't there for Louie's.


True, I'd forgotten about Louie. 
Having a small, quiet wedding (last minute compared to the extravaganza of H&Ms) lets the 2 of them off the hook as to why they would not/could not attend; I thought I read H & B were close. 

And congrats to the newlyweds!


----------



## sdkitty

nts


eunaddict said:


> Meghan 'won't take back dog Bogart' because he 'doesn't like Harry'
> 
> 
> Meghan was said to have been left devastated when when she was forced to leave Bogart in Toronto when she moved to the UK to live with Harry  in 2017. She has two other dogs with her husband.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People really shouldn't adopt pets just to abandon them again (yes, leaving your pooch with your friends permanently counts as abandonment), those poor rescue animals have already been through it once before...to do it again is cruel. And look, maybe I'm biased but my SO and I agreed, back when we were friends, that if our pets hated someone that person was a no-go romantically. Also, MM, if your dog doesn't like H, maaaaaybe it's because y'all really rushed into things and Bogart never got time to come around to H - I'm guessing they were rarely at hers.
> 
> I guess even pups can't escape being Markled.


if Harry is a good guy then he would be able to tolerate having a dog around who doesn't love him, esp if Meghan (who gets what Meghan wants) loves the dog

I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on saying this.  but bottom line, it seems the dog is no longer convenient.  she used the dog to become friends with Ellen?  and promote herself as an animal rescuer?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He wasn't married before, just engaged.
> 
> Also, petty me actually enjoyed how it was leaked they said they wouldn't want to burden the British tax payers with high security costs for a lavish wedding. Seems like some other couple really aggravated even close family.



Thank you for this correction. I knew he had a child from the previous relationship but did not know he had *not*  married her.  This proves how selfish and arrogant MM really is. She and Trevor had the big wedding spread over several days. Since the lavish ‘royal’ wedding goes against all the rules of etiquette, Doria should have stopped MM from participating in such a gross display of deceit — MM was no blushing bride. Thomas tried to stop it. H&M should pay back that wedding money. Yes, he has lands that he could sell. Just my opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Westminster Abbey will not ring for Meghan Markle's
					

EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: I hear that Westminster Abbey will not ring its bells for Meghan Markle's birthday next month. To add insult to injury, it did ring them for the birthday of Prince Andrew.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





and H&M should pay back all of the money.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Westminster Abbey will not ring for Meghan Markle's
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: I hear that Westminster Abbey will not ring its bells for Meghan Markle's birthday next month. To add insult to injury, it did ring them for the birthday of Prince Andrew.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and H&M should pay back all of the money.


Even if they were gazillionaires they wouldn't pay back a penny.  It was DUE them don't ya know!


----------



## rose60610

I started out liking MM, then things went south, then into black hole territory.....but I'll cut her some slack on the dog. I don't believe she would have turned the dog loose if she had no other choice. If a friend/acquaintance/stranger took in her dog and provides a good home for it I don't see the harm. At least the dog probably doesn't have to listen to its current owner whining for sympathy in Africa as a member of the BRF. It probably enjoys its life more (wouldn't you?).

for a 180 degree turn:

When my sister's brother-in-law got cancer, his biggest concern was what was going to happen to his dog. My sister loves animals and spoils her rabbits, cats, horses, etc. But she wasn't a "dog person" but always was kind to people's dogs too.  Her bil was such a kind man and knew she had a way with animals, which she does, and animals respond to her. She visited every day and fussed over his dog. When he got sicker she walked it for him. Out of all his friends and family members he wanted her to take his dog after he died. So she did. Her husband enjoys the dog. She's getting used to having a dog in the house. Years ago, she took in a rabbit from some people who moved and couldn't take it along. She took care of it, and a number of years later it had a stroke and went blind. Regardless, she hand fed it cauliflower (it's favorite) Every Single Day for a long time. The day it had another debilitating stroke she took it to the vet to euthanize it. Her inherited dog has a very good and spoiled life too. 

Point is, if an animal gets "dumped" into a good home, IMO, it's not a bad thing.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Bogart's owner didn't die, she just "markled" him.  He became an inconvenience.

I rescued an abused dog many years ago that was terrified of my husband.  It took him a full year to warm up to him.  Fortunately, DH didn't ask me to choose which of them to re-home.


----------



## sdkitty

Cavalier Girl said:


> Bogart's owner didn't die, she just "markled" him.  He became an inconvenience.
> 
> I rescued an abused dog many years ago that was terrified of my husband.  It took him a full year to warm up to him.  Fortunately, DH didn't ask me to choose which of them to re-home.


and I doubt H asked her to rehome the dog either


----------



## eunaddict

rose60610 said:


> Point is, if an animal gets "dumped" into a good home, IMO, it's not a bad thing.



You can't help "dumping" an animal if you're dying, and at that point...better a good home than no home. MM didn't die, *she chose a man over her (supposedly) beloved rescue dog*...there isn't a single woman (or man) on the planet who gets a pass on that choice from me.

My SO has always known if it came to rehoming him or a pet (bar actual full on anaphylactic level allergies), it won't be the pet that's leaving. And I know the same about him.


----------



## bag-mania

It gets lost that it was never Meghan‘s idea to adopt Bogart in the first place. She was at an animal charity adoption event and Ellen DeGeneres was also there and prodded her into adopting the dog.  Adopting Bogart was merely a kissing-up-to-a-celebrity-who-might-be-useful opportunity for Meghan. 

Come to think of it I haven’t heard anything more about Ellen when it comes to MM lately. Was she Markled and we never noticed?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It gets lost that it was never Meghan‘s idea to adopt Bogart in the first place. She was at an animal charity adoption event and Ellen DeGeneres was also there and prodded her into adopting the dog.  Adopting Bogart was merely a kissing-up-to-a-celebrity-who-might-be-useful opportunity for Meghan.
> 
> Come to think of it I haven’t heard anything more about Ellen when it comes to MM lately. Was she Markled and we never noticed?


maybe it was the other way around....ellen markled meghan


----------



## lalame

So many good points about the dog and happy to see other animal lovers here. I agree that it's sooooooo sad she left Bogart behind.  Pets get attached to us too and it can be traumatic for them to get shuttled around - then again maybe it is better for him this way given their lifestyle. Either way, I hope he's in a good home now and yes it's certainly better than back at the shelter! He's probably living in the lap of luxury - better than us!


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> she’s worn Chanel flats before but those are apparently Sam Edelman. I like her dress but you really have to plan your day around wearing that kind of linen... not a good look. Im very curious about the watch... it looks quite big? Can’t tell if it’s just the pixelation making it so, but it definitely doesn’t look like the tank francaise.


I think it's the Cartier Gold Baignoire watch. Meghan wears a $100,000 maternity caftan so it would be a $50K watch she would wear.


----------



## beautymagpie

rose60610 said:


> I started out liking MM, then things went south, then into black hole territory.....but I'll cut her some slack on the dog. I don't believe she would have turned the dog loose if she had no other choice. If a friend/acquaintance/stranger took in her dog and provides a good home for it I don't see the harm. At least the dog probably doesn't have to listen to its current owner whining for sympathy in Africa as a member of the BRF. It probably enjoys its life more (wouldn't you?).
> 
> for a 180 degree turn:
> 
> When my sister's brother-in-law got cancer, his biggest concern was what was going to happen to his dog. My sister loves animals and spoils her rabbits, cats, horses, etc. But she wasn't a "dog person" but always was kind to people's dogs too.  Her bil was such a kind man and knew she had a way with animals, which she does, and animals respond to her. She visited every day and fussed over his dog. When he got sicker she walked it for him. Out of all his friends and family members he wanted her to take his dog after he died. So she did. Her husband enjoys the dog. She's getting used to having a dog in the house. Years ago, she took in a rabbit from some people who moved and couldn't take it along. She took care of it, and a number of years later it had a stroke and went blind. Regardless, she hand fed it cauliflower (it's favorite) Every Single Day for a long time. The day it had another debilitating stroke she took it to the vet to euthanize it. Her inherited dog has a very good and spoiled life too.
> 
> Point is, if an animal gets "dumped" into a good home, IMO, it's not a bad thing.



That’s lovely. It must have been such a weight off for him.

Onto MM, I work in the pet sector and around animal adoption in part. I’ve seen so many stories and agree some dogs can thrive in other environments and some people just shouldn’t be dog owners. The issue with M for me in this story is it was leaked to make her as much the victim as the dog, Harry the villain. It’s insincere, in my view, when you look at how she acts with people she discards, she has a pattern. Things - people, animals, objects - have to fulfil a role, including PR fodder.


----------



## beautymagpie

eunaddict said:


> You can't help "dumping" an animal if you're dying, and at that point...better a good home than no home. MM didn't die, *she chose a man over her (supposedly) beloved rescue dog*...there isn't a single woman (or man) on the planet who gets a pass on that choice from me.
> 
> My SO has always known if it came to rehoming him or a pet (bar actual full on anaphylactic level allergies), it won't be the pet that's leaving. And I know the same about him.



Exactly. You can always put time and effort in, if you’re so inclined. If you’re not, blame someone else and send out a PR.

8 years ago a cat moved into our house. She was pregnant and around 9 months old, the vet estimated. I had two dogs then, a Rottweiler and a Labrador. We had to do a lot of work to get them used to get - and used to kitten sounds before we could rehomed them - and we did. She’s still here. My Lab ignored her. My Rotty got over her fascination. And when we adopted another dog 5 years ago, we re-did that work. Because when you can and want to, you at least try. 

It’s a pretty desperate attempt by her PR and shows they know they’re not doing well at controlling our view of her. 

Dogs are usually good for some good PR for people ‘he/she can’t be that bad, he/she likes dogs’ - hurting dogs is a tactic used in films or tv shows to change views on a character we might give a pass to or make excuses for, I read (Irvine Welsh I think).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

beautymagpie said:


> 8 years ago a cat moved into our house.



6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.


----------



## beautymagpie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.



Ah, so sorry to hear that. My oldest dog is 14 now and she keeps dipping then bouncing back. It’s a rollercoaster and I don’t quite know what I’ll do when she doesn’t bounce back. 

Our cat - Catface because we’re unimaginative and she wouldn’t respond to her name anyway - had four kittens. Born to Elton John playing live in London (on the tv). They were all rehomed to the same person who we knew and always had four cats, so we were lucky.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.


I'm so sorry for your loss. They do create a huge hole when they leave us. Hang in there.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.


so sorry for your loss
you and your family are true animal lovers.  I have allergies including cat dander and still have cats but my allergies aren't severe


----------



## sdkitty

so now it's the tabloids who caused the rift with her father









						Meghan Markle's loving and caring relationship with her father was poisoned by the UK tabloids, say her lawyers
					

The Duchess of Sussex is said to have suffered "tremendous emotional distress" over the publication of her handwritten letter to her father in 2019.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Aimee3

MM REALLY needs to get her stories straight.  Every day it seems there’s another one, completely different from the others before it.


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> so now it's the tabloids who caused the rift with her father
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's loving and caring relationship with her father was poisoned by the UK tabloids, say her lawyers
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is said to have suffered "tremendous emotional distress" over the publication of her handwritten letter to her father in 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


How much you want to bet the anti-bullying charity the proceeds are going to is Archwell or whatever they’re calling it?


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> How much you want to bet the anti-bullying charity the proceeds are going to is Archwell or whatever they’re calling it?


if it was and that came out it would be very bad for them


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> maybe it was the other way around....ellen markled meghan


Could be. There have always been a lot of rumours about Ellen. I see some coming to light in the media recently.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> if it was and that came out it would be very bad for them



Nah ,........... They would just spin it and/or throw someone else under the bus


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> if it was and that came out it would be very bad for them



I don’t think it would be obvious... I think it would be funneled to it or split with it. But at the same time, we aren’t even allowed to question their actions... no vacations for us unless Harry approves while he can fly on private jets everywhere (and now drive an Escalade) right?


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t think it would be obvious... I think it would be funneled to it or split with it. But at the same time, we aren’t even allowed to question their actions... no vacations for us unless Harry approves while he can fly on private jets everywhere (and now drive an Escalade) right?


they are very superficial people posing as deep, thoughtful, smart....hope it catches up with them


----------



## VickyB

Lounorada said:


> Judging by how Goopy thinks she's gods gift to the world and the enormity of her ego, the _candle _probably smells heavenly of roses, chamomile, honeysuckle and lavender...
> View attachment 4790234


I read some place that Goopy said herself that it has rose scent.


----------



## Lodpah

What makes Meghan a hypocrite saying the media is the reason for the break down of her relationship with her father is that she’s a liar. She just needs to pick up the phone and communicate and live by what she says. She’s always a victim.


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> 6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.


so sorry.  Giant hugs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I unapologetically stan Gwyneth lol she's been a fave ever since I saw her in Emma in my teens. I'll always love her, even though she's gotten very wacky in her later years. She's loud and proud about it which I have to appreciate!! haha


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Royal Family account over on Instagram posted two wedding pics of Beatrice. She wore one of the Queen's vintage evening gowns, loving it! 

I bet M is angry with herself right now she didn't have this brilliant idea to fake closeness.


----------



## Blyen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Royal Family account over on Instagram posted two wedding pics of Beatrice. She wore one of the Queen's vintage evening gowns, loving it!
> 
> I bet M is angry with herself right now she didn't have this brilliant idea to fake closeness.


She also wore the Fringe tiara the Queen herself wore on her wedding day... Somewhere in California, Meghan must be seething


----------



## Emeline

Blyen said:


> She also wore the Fringe tiara the Queen herself wore on her wedding day... Somewhere in California, Meghan must be seething


The gown, the tiara, Princess Beatrice is absolutely beautiful.


----------



## kemilia

Emeline said:


> The gown, the tiara, Princess Beatrice is absolutely beautiful.


OMG, she looks fabulous. The gown, the flowers and of course the TIARA! The Queen and Phillip look wonderful too. Yes, agreeing with @Blyen--M must be seething about, well, just about everything. 

Take that, baggy ill-fitting Givenchy dress, and the droopy hair too. B knocked it out of the park.


----------



## Chanbal

I would prefer not to be reminded about MM every time I am on yahoo. I don't like to be reminded about fake people, particularly in a difficult time like this. She certainly makes sure that we don't forget her existence, for a person that wants to live a private life...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would prefer not to be reminded about MM every time I am on yahoo. I don't like to be reminded about fake people, particularly in a difficult time like this. She certainly makes sure that we don't forget her existence, for a person that wants to live a private life...
> 
> View attachment 4792605


yahoo always has the sensational stuff


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> yahoo always has the sensational stuff


Agree, it is a great vehicle to be in the limelight. Though, some people use it extensively...


----------



## Emeline

This brought me to tears. What a beautiful tradition.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, H&M should take note:
— it _is_ possible to have a beautiful, sincere and meaningful private ceremony (kinda like JFKjr and CBK)
— no need for designer dresses when grandmother‘s closet is filled with beautifully preserved, gorgeous gowns - here’s hoping we see more BRF re-use QE’s gowns 
— Queen Mary’s tiara wins - Bea wore it like a boss , um, princess 
— no need for an uncomfortable carriage ride in front of screaming masses - just bring up the rolls
— originality and creativity count for far more than copying Hollywood‘s idea of a wedding — those flowers are beyond beautiful
— the long game truly matters - 10 years from now Bea’s photos will stand the test of time

Whoever put this wedding together has style and taste in abundance! Kudos!


----------



## gracekelly

This wedding was actually rather refreshing.  All the hoopla just did not seem necessary.  They wanted to get married and they did it.  They wanted her grandparents there and so they were.  Grandmothers like this do not grow on trees.  You know that she personally selected the dress for Bea and it was her idea to allow her to wear a tiara steeped in so much meaning.  It is obviously a tiara meant for a senior daughter as Princess Anne wore it to her wedding.  So happy to see Prince Philip looking so fit!


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> OMG, she looks fabulous. The gown, the flowers and of course the TIARA! The Queen and Phillip look wonderful too. Yes, agreeing with @Blyen--M must be seething about, well, just about everything.
> 
> Take that, baggy ill-fitting Givenchy dress, and the droopy hair too. B knocked it out of the park.


I don't know if M is seething but why should she be?  she isn't the queen's granddaughter.  she was almost a stranger to the queen when she married H


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I don't know if M is seething but why should she be?  she isn't the queen't granddaughter.  she was almost a stranger to the queen when she married H


Oh she is totally seething. MM expected everything she wanted, particularly since she married The Sixth In Line. Beatrice is Ninth in Line. (and yes I know a blood princess and QEII's granddaughter) but we know how MM thinks.


----------



## LaidyM

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, H&M should take note:
> — it _is_ possible to have a beautiful, sincere and meaningful private ceremony (kinda like JFKjr and CBK)
> — no need for designer dresses when grandmother‘s closet is filled with beautifully preserved, gorgeous gowns - here’s hoping we see more BRF re-use QE’s gowns
> — Queen Mary’s tiara wins - Bea wore it like a boss , um, princess
> — no need for an uncomfortable carriage ride in front of screaming masses - just bring up the rolls
> — originality and creativity count for far more than copying Hollywood‘s idea of a wedding — those flowers are beyond beautiful
> — the long game truly matters - 10 years from now Bea’s photos will stand the test of time
> 
> Whoever put this wedding together has style and taste in abundance! Kudos!



— being truly eco/ sustainability friendly by wearing an already existing gown.


----------



## gracekelly

LaidyM said:


> — being truly eco/ sustainability friendly by wearing an already existing gown.


Bea and her sister are into cleaning up the oceans of plastic waste.  She is doing something unlike other people we know.  Truthfully, if she had the wedding she planned originally, she most likely would have worn a new dress.  I think she already had one according to reports.  I am guessing The Queen suggested this and Bea was happy to comply.  When she was offered this tiara, she must have fainted!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Hahahahaha - such supreme shade


----------



## CarryOn2020

She’s seething. 
1. No one told MM about Bea’s wedding so she could not upstage it.
2. Bea just proved weddings do not need to be costly.
3. Bea showed the world that there is indeed privacy, so what exactly were H&M fussing   about?
4. Bea has the strength of her convictions — family, loyalty, history — all matter. Who wouldn’t want QE and Duke of E smiling happily at them on their special day?  Swoon. 
5. Bea just showed the world how fake and superficial Hollywood is — it‘s about fake vs. real.
The list is endless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QE is the real deal with real people-skills. She has seen plenty of ungrateful in-laws in her day. 




Katel said:


> Hahahahaha - such supreme shade
> View attachment 4792708
> 
> View attachment 4792717


----------



## Chanbal

Emeline said:


> This brought me to tears. What a beautiful tradition.



The flowers are so beautiful. It was a very elegant wedding indeed...


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s seething.
> 1. No one told MM about Bea’s wedding so she could not upstage it.
> 2. Bea just proved weddings do not need to be costly.
> 3. Bea showed the world that there is indeed privacy, so what exactly were H&M fussing   about?
> 4. Bea has the strength of her convictions — family, loyalty, history — all matter. Who wouldn’t want QE and Duke of E smiling happily at them on their special day?  Swoon.
> 5. Bea just showed the world how fake and superficial Hollywood is — it‘s about fake vs. real.
> The list is endless.


There was an embargo on the pictures and it was announced and the reasons.  SS/Meghan took that opportunity to plant the stories about the wedding guest who felt traumatized at the thought of wearing a fascinator hat to the wedding.  There was no earthly reason to print that story 2 years later unless you were trying to upstage the new married couple. There was no reason to talk about the court filings on a Sat as well.  Same reason.  Meghan is what I call a "spoiler."  If she isn't the center of attention she wants to spoil it for the person who is.


----------



## LaidyM

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s seething.
> 1. *No one told MM about Bea’s wedding so she could not upstage it.*
> 2. Bea just proved weddings do not need to be costly.
> 3. Bea showed the world that there is indeed privacy, so what exactly were H&M fussing   about?
> 4. Bea has the strength of her convictions — family, loyalty, history — all matter. Who wouldn’t want QE and Duke of E smiling happily at them on their special day?  Swoon.
> 5. Bea just showed the world how fake and superficial Hollywood is — it‘s about fake vs. real.
> The list is endless.



She certainly tried, Scobie doo aka her mouthpiece was posting on this IG about some more court papers from the lawsuit, papers which were filed on the 8th! (nearly two weeks ago!) No matter how you twist it looks bad, to talk of this on Friday, the day of the wedding of all days. (I highly at least some close family had no idea of the wedding, they might have even zoomed it for them.)


----------



## purseinsanity

eunaddict said:


> You can't help "dumping" an animal if you're dying, and at that point...better a good home than no home. MM didn't die, *she chose a man over her (supposedly) beloved rescue dog*...there isn't a single woman (or man) on the planet who gets a pass on that choice from me.
> 
> My SO has always known if it came to rehoming him or a pet (bar actual full on anaphylactic level allergies), it won't be the pet that's leaving. And I know the same about him.


ITA.  I did not grow up with any pets while my husband had had all kinds of animals.  When I met him, he already had an Alaskan Malamute “puppy“ who was 90 lbs by the time I met him at 9 mos old.  I was utterly terrified of him (even though I finally realized he actually WAS the most gentle giant ever), but I already knew my then boyfriend was madly in love with the dog.  I wasn’t about to give him an ultimatum because I knew I’d likely lose.  It took me a full 6 months not to cringe in the corner of the sofa before he wore me down.  14.5 years later, I cried like a baby as he closed his eyes for the last time in my lap.  I’ve come to love dogs often more than many people I meet.  MM is a horrible human being.  I’m just waiting to see how long it is before Harry is Markley.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 6 years for our pregnant stray, and we have several humans with severe allergies. Also, one of the kittens was severely handicapped and needed 24/7 care, so I didn't even try to rehome him. He wasn't thought to make it through his first night, he lived to be nearly 6. He had to be put down last Friday because of a sudden liver failure and I am an absolute mess. I had to make a lot of sacrifices because of his care, but the hole he left is huge. Ugh, sorry for hijacking.


I’m so sorry for your loss!  ❤️


----------



## Clearblueskies

Amazon has knocked a third off the price of Scobie and Meghan‘s book.  It’s not due out till mid-August, so I suppose pre-sales aren‘t great.


----------



## kipp

Harry's popularity plummets and many Brits see him as liability for monarchy
					

PRINCE Harry’s popularity has plummeted — and many people now see him as a liability for the monarchy. The number who think he is an asset to the nation has more than halved in the past eight years…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Harry's popularity plummets and many Brits see him as liability for monarchy
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry’s popularity has plummeted — and many people now see him as a liability for the monarchy. The number who think he is an asset to the nation has more than halved in the past eight years…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


sad really.  the yanks here on the PF are pretty much in agreement with the Brits (according to what this report says about the Brits).  But I guess American media is still cheering for them and most Americans just aren't really interested.


----------



## bag-mania

Is it safe to say Harry is no longer one of the Queen’s favorite grandchildren? 

I don’t understand the Sun’s thinking in bringing up Bogart again. It is ridiculous to suggest that Meghan could somehow reclaim the dog. How could she? Imagine if every deadbeat pet owner who ever got rid of an animal could change their mind and expect to get it back after three or four years. We don’t even know if the people she gave him to still have him. Maybe they gave him away too for all we know. Hopefully he went to people who are kind and love him, in which case it is cruel to suggest taking him away and returning him to MEhgan.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> sad really.  the yanks here on the PF are pretty much in agreement with the Brits (according to what this report says about the Brits).  But I guess American media is still cheering for them and most Americans just aren't really interested.


I think the reason why the "press" is more favorable to them here in the US, is because SHE is using their PR machine to promote the "we're wonderful" crap .. that's the only thing I can think of.  Even some folks who were stans before, have now come to the realization that these 2 are frauds.  I've also been reading some press that Harry is not really happy here in LA, but of course - what Meghan wants, Meghan gets.  Boy did he ever 'F' up big-time!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I think the reason why the "press" is more favorable to them here in the US, is because SHE is using their PR machine to promote the "we're wonderful" crap .. that's the only thing I can think of.  Even some folks who were stans before, have now come to the realization that these 2 are frauds.  I've also been reading some press that Harry is not really happy here in LA, but of course - what Meghan wants, Meghan gets.  Boy did he ever 'F' up big-time!


also she could possibly be benefitting from the black lives matter movement.....even though IMO she has led a privileged life.....as I've said before, she didn't work herself up from the bottom as Oprah did


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I think the reason why the "press" is more favorable to them here in the US, is because *SHE is using their PR machine to promote the "we're wonderful" crap .. *that's the only thing I can think of.  Even some folks who were stans before, have now come to the realization that these 2 are frauds.  I've also been reading some press that Harry is not really happy here in LA, but of course - what Meghan wants, Meghan gets.  Boy did he ever 'F' up big-time!


This is terribly annoying, I could be spared of news about this couple every single day. There are people that work hard and invest in their careers to make a difference. MM seems to invest on the constant spread of news about her persona to make a glorious life without work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Maybe because I haven't been physically inside a supermarket to see the tabloids on the stands since March (do grocery curbside pick up these days), I don't see anything in the US press about them. Maybe the NYT, WaPo and regular media outlets have their hands full covering more important urgent news priorities than MM's "woe is me" word salad.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> also she could possibly be benefitting from the black lives matter movement.....even though IMO she has led a privileged life.....as I've said before, she didn't work herself up from the bottom as Oprah did


I would be OK with her having a privileged life and be interested in the black lives matter movement, one doesn't need to work from the bottom to care about what is right imo. The problem is that she seems to only want to benefit from all possible causes...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would be OK with her having a privileged life and be interested in the black lives matter movement, one doesn't need to work from the bottom to care about what is right imo. The problem is that she seems to only want to benefit from all possible causes...


she can be interested in BLM and also in the environment, etc.
I just don't know if she can really claim to be a victim of racism.  I guess if you count the british tabloids treatment of her......

and as people have said here before, let's see them put their money where their mouths are


----------



## CarryOn2020

They said they wanted out of royal life, then give up those titles. They said they wanted privacy, then stop calling the paps. They said they wouldn’t use the royal connection, then stop merching off it. They said they wanted financial independence, then stop mooching off Tyler Perry and Prince Charles. They said they wanted a BevHills mansion, then buy one. They said they wanted to save the environment, then give up the gas guzzlers. Ad nauseam.

That is why they are so unpopular and uninteresting. Preach one thing then do another.
In pandemic times, we want authenticity. We know they aren’t _it. _


----------



## Lodpah

Interesting comment on the https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Amazo...pher-Jones-18?ch=99&share=9fca798e&srid=uR0gt


----------



## Tootsie17

CarryOn2020 said:


> They said they wanted out of royal life, then give up those titles. They said they wanted privacy, then stop calling the paps. They said they wouldn’t use the royal connection, then stop merching off it. They said they wanted financial independence, then stop mooching off Tyler Perry and Prince Charles. They said they wanted a BevHills mansion, then buy one. They said they wanted to save the environment, then give up the gas guzzlers. Ad nauseam.
> 
> That is why they are so unpopular and uninteresting. Preach one thing then do another.
> In pandemic times, we want authenticity. We know they aren’t _it. _


I couldn't have said it better.


----------



## Chagall

lalame said:


> So many good points about the dog and happy to see other animal lovers here. I agree that it's sooooooo sad she left Bogart behind.  Pets get attached to us too and it can be traumatic for them to get shuttled around - then again maybe it is better for him this way given their lifestyle. Either way, I hope he's in a good home now and yes it's certainly better than back at the shelter! He's probably living in the lap of luxury - better than us!


Does anyone know where Bogart is now and how he is doing. As far as Ellen is concerned, it’s never a good idea to pressure anyone to take on a pet. They deserve to be much wanted and loved. Not adopted to make the adopter look good. That is sad.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> she can be interested in BLM and also in the environment, etc.
> I just don't know if she can really claim to be a victim of racism.  I guess if you count the british tabloids treatment of her......
> 
> and as people have said here before, let's see them put their money where their mouths are


Absolutely, and they don't seem to be really interested in a particularly cause. It is more like what can serve them better. It will be an endless wait for them to put their money where their mouths are...


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> sad really.  the yanks here on the PF are pretty much in agreement with the Brits (according to what this report says about the Brits).  But I guess American media is still cheering for them and most Americans just aren't really interested.



Media and brands still romanticize Wallis to this day so I think we can all see how historically aware they care to be. It’s all about what sells the dream... which pays the bills for these companies!


----------



## VickyB

Blyen said:


> She also wore the Fringe tiara the Queen herself wore on her wedding day... Somewhere in California, Meghan must be seething


Yup! Bea won the tiara lottery!


----------



## Chagall

Blyen said:


> She also wore the Fringe tiara the Queen herself wore on her wedding day... Somewhere in California, Meghan must be seething


Beatrice is the queens granddaughter. Meghan is not. Who does she think she is, and where does she get off seething.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Beatrice is the queens granddaughter. Meghan is not. Who does she think she is, and where does she get off seething.



I mean, technically Bea has to curtsy to her when Harry is with her because he is after all SIXTH IN LINE (never mind Meghan herself is a zero), so that's got to be worth something.

I honestly wonder if that choice of tiara is a not so subtle message, because not only is it the Queen's wedding tiara, she has also worn it regularly since her wedding and she doesn't usually loan out the things she actually wears. That said, she also loaned Kate her wedding gift from Phillip (a super stunning diamond bracelet made from a dismanteled tiara his mother gave him) she had been wearing for 70+ years.

All this while someone else got banned from having access to the big guns.


----------



## Lodpah

So did these two congratulate the newlyweds? If not, green is their color.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, technically Bea has to curtsy to her when Harry is with her because he is after all SIXTH IN LINE (never mind Meghan herself is a zero), so that's got to be worth something.
> 
> I honestly wonder if that choice of tiara is a not so subtle message, because not only is it the Queen's wedding tiara, she has also worn it regularly since her wedding and she doesn't usually loan out the things she actually wears. That said, she also loaned Kate her wedding gift from Phillip (a super stunning diamond bracelet made from a dismanteled tiara his mother gave him) she had been wearing for 70+ years.
> 
> All this while someone else got banned from having access to the big guns.


I doubt the queen is passive-aggressive.  she probably did what she wanted to do for her granddaughter w/o thinking about "M"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps, back in their youth, when the lil princesses visited Granny QE, they were allowed in her closets and played dress-up with their favorite pieces. I can just imagine the giggles, the delight, and the cuteness from the girls as well as Granny. Undoubtedly, QE paid attention to their likes/dislikes. Looking forward to hearing more about preserving QE’s clothes and jewels.









						Conservation and collections
					

How we conserve, display and interpret the magnificent buildings, interiors and collections in our care at Historic Royal Palaces.




					www.hrp.org.uk
				



Hampton Court Palace has the Conservation Room for clothes, tapestries, artifacts. Clearly, those curators and conservators deserve a huge round of applause for their efforts. Enjoy the video.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I guess H&M were not at B's wedding? Is it even remotely possible they were there? - they have done clandestine meets and travels before. If not, were W&K there? Will we ever know? I want to know


----------



## sdkitty

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I guess H&M were not at B's wedding? Is it even remotely possible they were there? - they have done clandestine meets and travels before. If not, were W&K there? Will we ever know? I want to know


I'd guess William and Kate were there but not H&M....you will probably find out in time


----------



## Emeline

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I guess H&M were not at B's wedding? Is it even remotely possible they were there? - they have done clandestine meets and travels before. If not, were W&K there? Will we ever know? I want to know


I can't imagine H/M would have been able to travel, quarantine and attend. It would have taken many weeks. 
Still, maybe they won't be forgotten. They  may receive some photos of the happy couple in the post.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'd guess William and Kate were there but not H&M....you will probably find out in time



I bet they don’t even send a card.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I bet they don’t even send a card.


well I think that would be up to M
H doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would even think to send a card.  so while I don't excuse him (it's his family) I would think it would be up to M.  She would be making a decision to send or not.
Even though I don't really like them (esp her) I can't believe they wouldn't acknowledge the marriage.


----------



## pixiejenna

If MM & JCMH attended they would have posted a picture of themselves to upstage them per usual. ITA with @Lodpah they’re jelly. I think that they were intentionally left out of the loop so they couldn’t upstage it like they did with princess Eugene. Add in the praise that Princess Bea is receiving for her low key “cheap” wedding along with rewearing one of the Queens old dresses you know MM is foaming at the mouth. Which is probably considered a triple slap in MM’s mind, the Queen gave her a heavily used tiara, gave her a personal dress of hers, and kept it quite until after the fact.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m certain in the next day or two we will be reading a People magazine article about how heartbroken Meghan and Harry are that they were not included in the wedding or why they couldn’t attend. It’s all about their feelings after all. That’s what’s really important.


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s seething.
> 1. *No one told MM about Bea’s wedding so she could not upstage it.*
> 2. Bea just proved weddings do not need to be costly.
> 3. Bea showed the world that there is indeed privacy, so what exactly were H&M fussing   about?
> 4. Bea has the strength of her convictions — family, loyalty, history — all matter. Who wouldn’t want QE and Duke of E smiling happily at them on their special day?  Swoon.
> 5. Bea just showed the world how fake and superficial Hollywood is — it‘s about fake vs. real.
> The list is endless.



I didn't even think of that being the reason to keep it secret until it was over.  I just thought it was private.  Smart girl.  You just know MM would have tried to ruin the day.


----------



## Sophisticatted

It has already been announced (by the Queen’s people) that PH and MM will not be going to Balmoral to visit the Queen this summer due to Covid restrictions.  Other members of the family may visit, but must follow Covid protocols.


----------



## LaidyM

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, technically Bea has to curtsy to her when Harry is with her because he is after all SIXTH IN LINE (never mind Meghan herself is a zero), so that's got to be worth something.
> 
> I honestly wonder if that choice of tiara is a not so subtle message, because not only is it the Queen's wedding tiara, she has also worn it regularly since her wedding and she doesn't usually loan out the things she actually wears. That said, she also loaned Kate her wedding gift from Phillip (a super stunning diamond bracelet made from a dismanteled tiara his mother gave him) she had been wearing for 70+ years.
> 
> All this while someone else got banned from having access to the big guns.



Princes/ess do not courtesy to one another, as they are of equal. Location in the line of succession is of no meaning in that regards.
So Beatrice would never courtesy to Meghan even if she was with Harry for that reason alone.

But if Meghan and Beatrice were alone that is of a different meaning as you have a blood princess vs a married in. Same deal with Catherine until she becomes queen.




ccbaggirl89 said:


> I guess H&M were not at B's wedding? Is it even remotely possible they were there? - they have done clandestine meets and travels before. If not, were W&K there? Will we ever know? I want to know





sdkitty said:


> I'd guess William and Kate were there but not H&M....you will probably find out in time




W&K as well as Beatrice other cousins were not there.
The only people were the couple parents and any step parents, siblings and spouses, the groom son, the bride grandparents.
There may have been a friend or two we were not told of.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LaidyM said:


> Princes/ess do not courtesy to one another, as they are of equal. Location in the line of succession is of no meaning in that regards.
> So Beatrice would never courtesy to Meghan even if she was with Harry for that reason alone.



That's not correct. There's nothing like "equal" within the BRF, it's all about rank, and Harry outranks Beatrice. It just seems they have an agreement in place they only curtsy so the elders when they all meet.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not correct. There's nothing like "equal" within the BRF, it's all about rank, and Harry outranks Beatrice. It just seems they have an agreement in place they only curtsy so the elders when they all meet.


Serious question.  What are the consequences if Beatrice (or anyone else) didn’t curtsy to MM?  I, for one, would just have to suffer the consequence.


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> Serious question.  What are the consequences if Beatrice (or anyone else) didn’t curtsy to MM?  I, for one, would just have to suffer the consequence.


Meghan would have a hissy fit and claim it as racism


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan would have a hissy fit and claim it as racism


Lol!  I’m sure you’re right!


----------



## Bastetan

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan would have a hissy fit and claim it as racism


I liked that a lot.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> I bet they don’t even send a card.



If they'd done anything, I think her PR would have released a 'we put ourselves out because we're oh so brilliant to congratulate Bea by zoom' story.


----------



## eunaddict

LaidyM said:


> Princes/ess do not courtesy to one another, as they are of equal. Location in the line of succession is of no meaning in that regards.
> So Beatrice would never courtesy to Meghan even if she was with Harry for that reason alone.
> 
> But if Meghan and Beatrice were alone that is of a different meaning as you have a blood princess vs a married in. Same deal with Catherine until she becomes queen.



Not true. If you're there with your husband, you take on your husband's rank and then the blood Princesses will have to curtsey MM because none of them rank higher than H. But technically, that also means MM has to curtsey to Kate. If you're there by yourself as someone who married into the family than all the blood princesses "outrank" you and they don't have to curtsey to you regardless of who you're married to - eg. If Camilla attends an event on her own then even though she's married to the heir apparent, the blood princesses still don't have to curtsey.

QE2 changed the rules in 2005ish after Camilla married in, to save Princess Anne etc. from having to curtsey to Camilla.


----------



## BlueCherry

Oh dear ... 

Campaigners report Harry and Meghan Markle's Sussex Royal charity


https://mol.im/a/8541853


----------



## BlueCherry




----------



## PewPew

Had H&M known about the wedding ahead of time, there would have already been an article soon after the wedding about “the Duchess & JCMH QUIETLY doing X charitable act & QUIETLY sending this amazing and thoughtful and unique gift to Bea”

As it is, we suddenly have M’s friend talking about how hard it was to hide her (the friend’s) pregnancy & find the right hat for M’s wedding 2 yrs ago. It’s so calculated. This random friend (wife of an actor on the Suits show) was 5 months pregnant & was so terrified people would figure out she was pregnant that she’s quaking 2 yrs later— is this supposed to combat the expected reminders that Meghan dressed and behaved (craddling her nonexistent bump) in a way that announced her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding?


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is this why H&M won’t give up their titles? Then, they would have to curtsy&bow to people who have been curtsying/bowing to them? Oh, such fragile egos. The press should emphasize this, especially now.




eunaddict said:


> Not true. If you're there with your husband, you take on your husband's rank and then the blood Princesses will have to curtsey MM because none of them rank higher than H. But technically, that also means MM has to curtsey to Kate. If you're there by yourself as someone who married into the family than all the blood princesses "outrank" you and they don't have to curtsey to you regardless of who you're married to - eg. If Camilla attends an event on her own then even though she's married to the heir apparent, the blood princesses still don't have to curtsey.
> 
> QE2 changed the rules in 2005ish after Camilla married in, to save Princess Anne etc. from having to curtsey to Camilla.


----------



## CarryOn2020

William&Kate must hate this stuff. Will they blame it on a rogue staff Member? 



BlueCherry said:


> Oh dear ...
> 
> Campaigners report Harry and Meghan Markle's Sussex Royal charity
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/8541853


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think H and M will send a wedding gift?


----------



## Jayne1

I read they only had about 20 guests at the wedding and when you add his parents, her parents, grandparents, his son and their siblings, that means no Will and Kate, etc.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think H and M will send a wedding gift?


They will generously offer to mach a donation from the newlywed couple to the Arch** foundation.


----------



## Clearblueskies

BlueCherry said:


> View attachment 4794702


Republic obviously have an agenda in doing this - but they have a good point.  Funds were transferred from the Royal Foundation because Harry and Meghan wanted to do their own thing.  It WAS about the personal relationships.  
When I read that money had been transferred to Travelyst I thought uh oh, because the people and organisations that donated to the Royal Foundation originally did so before Travelyst existed, and didn’t donate money for that purpose - there are rules about that sort of thing to protect the integrity of donations.  And now it seems money‘s to be transferred on from Sussexroyal to Archewell - which isn’t even a charity and is entirely controlled by H and M.  It’s not OK.  It’s not their money, but they’re treating it as if it is.



Jayne1 said:


> I read they only had about 20 guests at the wedding and when you add his parents, her parents, grandparents, his son and their siblings, that means no Will and Kate, etc.


You are only allowed a maximum of 30 guests at weddings at present.


----------



## Mendocino

PewPew said:


> Had H&M known about the wedding ahead of time, there would have already been an article soon after the wedding about “the Duchess & JCMH QUIETLY doing X charitable act & QUIETLY sending this amazing and thoughtful and unique gift to Bea”
> 
> As it is, we suddenly have M’s friend talking about how hard it was to hide her (the friend’s) pregnancy & find the right hat for M’s wedding 2 yrs ago. It’s so calculated. This random friend (wife of an actor on the Suits show) was 5 months pregnant & was so terrified people would figure out she was pregnant that she’s quaking 2 yrs later— is this supposed to combat the expected reminders that Meghan dressed and behaved (craddling her nonexistent bump) in a way that announced her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding?


Troian Bellisario, the daughter of Don Bellisario, a major TV producer, is married to Patrick J. Adams who played Mike in Suits. I think her attendance at the wedding was more of a "going to the wedding of one's spouse's work colleague" situation rather than going to the wedding of a friend. 

Meghan didn't attend the Adams' wedding which took place when M & H were dating.

Troian's wedding outfit did a great job of hiding her pregnancy. I didn't have a clue she was expecting.


----------



## bag-mania

From today's Cindy Adams' column:

*From royal to disloyal*
Kiddies, today class discusses Meghan’s husband, who signed with the Harry Walker lecture bureau, which reps Tan France of “Queer Eye,” ex-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, whose Chicago kills more people than Al Capone, and former performance-enhancing slugger A. Rodriguez.

The routine then could be ex-HRH Harry, booked inside some local pig-naming contest in Scratch-Your-Crotch, Ariz., and hired to thrill a styful of middle-aged ladies about prince-ing. Such a classy royalship for Her Majesty the Queen of England’s grandson after telling Brittania to go screw itself.

Heavy as hell wears the crown.









						From royal to disloyal
					

The Sussexes recently signed with a prestigious speech agency.




					pagesix.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> From today's Cindy Adams' column:
> 
> *From royal to disloyal*
> Kiddies, today class discusses Meghan’s husband, who signed with the Harry Walker lecture bureau, which reps Tan France of “Queer Eye,” ex-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, whose Chicago kills more people than Al Capone, and former performance-enhancing slugger A. Rodriguez.
> 
> The routine then could be ex-HRH Harry, booked inside some local pig-naming contest in Scratch-Your-Crotch, Ariz., and hired to thrill a styful of middle-aged ladies about prince-ing. Such a classy royalship for Her Majesty the Queen of England’s grandson after telling Brittania to go screw itself.
> 
> Heavy as hell wears the crown.i
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From royal to disloyal
> 
> 
> The Sussexes recently signed with a prestigious speech agency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


is she still writing this column?
very inflammatory.  I don't like it


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> is she still writing this column?
> very inflammatory.  I don't like it



Apparently. I thought she was long retired but clearly she's still at it. I wonder what she has against middle-aged women in Arizona.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Apparently. I thought she was long retired but clearly she's still at it. I wonder what she has against middle-aged women in Arizona.


she is 90....maybe someone else is writing under her name


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> From today's Cindy Adams' column:
> 
> *From royal to disloyal*
> Kiddies, today class discusses Meghan’s husband, who signed with the Harry Walker lecture bureau, which reps Tan France of “Queer Eye,” ex-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, whose Chicago kills more people than Al Capone, and former performance-enhancing slugger A. Rodriguez.
> 
> The routine then could be ex-HRH Harry, booked inside some local pig-naming contest in Scratch-Your-Crotch, Ariz., and hired to thrill a styful of middle-aged ladies about prince-ing. Such a classy royalship for Her Majesty the Queen of England’s grandson after telling Brittania to go screw itself.
> 
> Heavy as hell wears the crown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From royal to disloyal
> 
> 
> The Sussexes recently signed with a prestigious speech agency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


No she didn’t! For real?


----------



## poopsie

Never heard of Cindy Adams, but she sounds like a pistol


----------



## mdcx

Just my periodic comment that this pandemic must really grind Meghan's gears seeing as how it is taking all the attention away from her great plan to dominate America in some capacity - influencer, charity queen, "royal"....


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> is she still writing this column?
> very inflammatory.  I don't like it


There was a saying way back that if you were mentioned in her column then you have made it but in this instance Blue Blood Harry has now been relegated to the bottom of the heap. She’s legit in the gossip mags.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaaa????  Some cutie across the pond is turning 7 tomorrow.  Nothing from H&M?  Could there be trouble in those Beverly Hills?









						Prince George Looks Adorable in New Photos Taken by Kate Middleton, Released for His 7th Birthday
					

He's growing up so fast!




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Emeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa????  Some cutie across the pond is turning 7 tomorrow.  Nothing from H&M?  Could there be trouble in those Beverly Hills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince George Looks Adorable in New Photos Taken by Kate Middleton, Released for His 7th Birthday
> 
> 
> He's growing up so fast!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Love, love the photos!


----------



## Lodpah

Would you wear this to an official event?


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Apparently. I thought she was long retired but clearly she's still at it. I wonder what she has against middle-aged women in Arizona.



Would be interested to know that, particularly considering that she herself is well into the "old woman" category.  I find her utterly distasteful.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa????  Some cutie across the pond is turning 7 tomorrow.  Nothing from H&M?  Could there be trouble in those Beverly Hills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince George Looks Adorable in New Photos Taken by Kate Middleton, Released for His 7th Birthday
> 
> 
> He's growing up so fast!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com




Nothing from H&M re: Bea's wedding either, right?  I'd expect that from her but I read somewhere that Bea and Harry were very close. Would expect some sort of congratulatory message would be in order.  If he keeps this up, he's going to find that, in addition to having no friends in LA, he has lost the ones he has in the UK.  Harry - wake the hell up.


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> Would you wear this to an official event?
> 
> View attachment 4795791



Not in the daylight!  At least if it was dark one may not be able to see through it...


----------



## Sharont2305

Luvbolide said:


> Nothing from H&M re: Bea's wedding either, right?  I'd expect that from her but I read somewhere that Bea and Harry were very close. Would expect some sort of congratulatory message would be in order.  If he keeps this up, he's going to find that, in addition to having no friends in LA, he has lost the ones he has in the UK.  Harry - wake the hell up.


Maybe they have sent a congratulatory message the novel way for them, privately and decided to keep it private. You never know.


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe they have sent a congratulatory message the novel way for them, privately and decided to keep it private. You never know.



You are right - that thought did cross my mind, but it sounds like the mature approach so I ruled it out based on H&M’s usual behavior.  My bad!


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMG, now they are re-defining ‘privacy’.  








						Meghan and Harry do not want 'totally private life', royal expert says
					

Speaking to Town and Country, royal author Victoria Murphy said Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, are not seeking a wholly private existence away from the limelight.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

Am I the only one who felt sorry for Archie while looking at the sweet, fun photos of George?

Let me rephrase that.  I’m sure I’m NOT the only one who felt sorry for Archie while looking at the sweet, fun photos of George.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

1LV said:


> Am I the only one who felt sorry for Archie while looking at the sweet, fun photos of George?




No, I was thinking the same.  And with the coronaviris situation, who knows how long it will be until he sees his cousins again, much less has some to hang with them and get to know them.


----------



## 1LV

Luvbolide said:


> No, I was thinking the same.  And with the coronaviris situation, who knows how long it will be until he sees his cousins again, much less has some to hang with them and get to know them.


Right.  He’s missing out on so much.


----------



## kemilia

1LV said:


> Right.  He’s missing out on so much.


Visiting with my cousins while the adults were in the kitchen smoking cigs, drinking coffee and chatting are some of my best memories, especially since my very fave cuz is now gone. We all had loads of fun and got in fun trouble too, it's a special family bond but then M doesn't have any family it seems (per Harry) so A won't either.


----------



## 1LV

kemilia said:


> Visiting with my cousins while the adults were in the kitchen smoking cigs, drinking coffee and chatting are some of my best memories, especially since my very fave cuz is now gone. We all had loads of fun and got in fun trouble too, it's a special family bond but then M doesn't have any family it seems (per Harry) so A won't either.


Exactly!  The bonds that were formed in early childhood with my cousins have endured for decades, and reminiscing over our antics has provided so much fun and laughter, and more than a little gratefulness that we remain a part of each other’s life.  But at least MM was able to score a small corner on the cover of People magazine an issue or two ago.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, now they are re-defining ‘privacy’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry do not want 'totally private life', royal expert says
> 
> 
> Speaking to Town and Country, royal author Victoria Murphy said Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, are not seeking a wholly private existence away from the limelight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It’s like I always thought. They  only want to do the fun events, the ones with celebrities and a lot of high profile attention.  They don’t want to do anything boring or for charities she didn’t personally hand pick. Meghan’s time is just too valuable for that.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe they have sent a congratulatory message the novel way for them, privately and decided to keep it private. You never know.


If they sent a 'behind the scenes' congratulatory message, their PR team will make sure we will learn about it over and over...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, now they are re-defining ‘privacy’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry do not want 'totally private life', royal expert says
> 
> 
> Speaking to Town and Country, royal author Victoria Murphy said Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, are not seeking a wholly private existence away from the limelight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If they are looking for a "different kind of public life", they must drop the duke & duchess titles that belong to the previous 'royal' life.


----------



## mshermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, now they are re-defining ‘privacy’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry do not want 'totally private life', royal expert says
> 
> 
> Speaking to Town and Country, royal author Victoria Murphy said Meghan Markle, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, are not seeking a wholly private existence away from the limelight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Laying the groundwork for her upcoming birthday gala. She is feeling so cooped that she absolutely must celebrate her birthday (not her son’s birthday) in a very public way with guests being screened for COVID-19.

*EXCLUSIVE: 'Cooped up' Meghan wants to leave her $18M sprawling mega-mansion to celebrate her August birthday - and will make guests get tested for Covid-19 beforehand*


----------



## Sol Ryan

mshermes said:


> Laying the groundwork for her upcoming birthday gala. She is feeling so cooped that she absolutely must celebrate her birthday (not her son’s birthday) in a very public way with guests being screened for COVID-19.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'Cooped up' Meghan wants to leave her $18M sprawling mega-mansion to celebrate her August birthday - and will make guests get tested for Covid-19 beforehand*



Gods she’s tone deaf.... I haven’t gone out with my friends in months... oh wait... I care about them...


----------



## melissatrv

*How has C-list actress and A-list money-grabber Meghan Markle become the world’s most in-demand speaker?*

Excellent article: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/495382-meghan-markle-duchess-sussex/


The Duchess of Sussex is reported to be the world’s most sought after public speaker, but why? She knows how to make everything about herself and rake in cash, but what pearls of wisdom can she possibly offer?
Meghan Markle is a disturbing new breed of leader. Not someone who has achieved anything of note, nor broken down any barriers. Neither does she have a prodigious talent.

What she does possess is a steely willingness to do anything that makes money.

PR experts have revealed that Markle is about to become the most sought after public speaker on the planet.

Her fee per event is estimated to be around $1 million.

A lot was made of Markle’s recent speech at the Girl Up Leadership Summit, as her YouTube figures were far higher than those of Michelle ***** and Hillary *******, who also spoke.

Whatever you think of the former first ladies, it would take the devotion of a zealous fan to equate them to the Duchess of Sussex – let alone prefer her over them.

One reason people could be tuning in was the hope that she might wash some dirty laundry. Does she hate William and Kate? Is it true she made their daughter cry by manically shouting at her during a wedding rehearsal?

Why has Harry or her son never met her father, who regularly appears in the media asking to be part of their lives?

Why did she invite Oprah Winfrey, David Beckham and George Clooney to her wedding but not a single member of her family, apart from her mother?

On a trip to Africa with Harry in 2019, she told a British documentary crew that life had been “a struggle” since becoming a royal.

It was a ridiculous comment, but the lightning rod was that it was uttered while meeting people who barely have any possessions and worry about where their next meal is coming from. Quite rightly, she was pilloried for it.

Since then, things have changed as Markle has realized she can’t work the royal angle to her benefit.

They can’t make any serious money, as the Queen keeps a firm grip on the family’s commercial enterprises.

While they live in grand palaces and never do any sort of conventional work, they don’t have tens of millions to splash about on indulgent whims.

Meghan thought she had joined the global club of which Winfrey, Beckham and Clooney are all members. One with global fame, but also the wealth to live on their terms.

The royal family don’t have that; the men wear boring suits, the women have to shun lavish dresses for clothes that aren’t too expensive and they all drive ‘sensible’ cars.

There’s no decadence as quite simply, the money comes with rules. Tom Cruise, for example, is wealthier than the Queen.

So Markle – and Harry – walked out of the world’s most prestigious club to go it alone.

They cited their desire to have a normal life and privacy, and raise their son Archie away from all the ceremony.

How does that equate with standing up in front of an audience in exchange for a cheque featuring a string of zeros?

What could Meghan possibly share apart from anecdotes about life on the set of her mediocre TV show ‘Suits’?

Pompous British society magazine Tatler wrote: “The Duchess is well versed on topics such as racial justice…” but it’s hard to see how that claim can be validated.

On the other side of the coin are those paying her. Her speaking agency Harry Walker is a business, which exists to turn a profit. But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.

Most of them – who are men – will be bereft of any glamor. They have money, but they don’t have the X-Factor, as that can’t be bought.

Bruce Springsteen, Colin Kaepernick, Beyonce and Barack *****, for example, all have it and don’t adjust their compass for money.

But Markle is exploiting a worrying trend in society, which used to be the domain of low-rent celebrities. She’s trying to use the formula far higher up the food chain.

She’s neither rich nor exceptional, but is leveraging her undeniably high profile to portray herself as something she isn’t, someone worth listening to.

The disappointment is that many younger and easily influenced people are falling for it, believing this to be someone who can offer guidance and wisdom.

Charlatans like her are being enabled to masquerade as individuals of distinction. It feels like we’re in a race to the bottom, where any sort of integrity or dedication is deemed worthless compared with the great god that is ‘celebrity.’

Markle is cheap, tacky and full of sparkles. However, all that glitters isn’t gold.


----------



## Emeline

'Cooped up' Meghan wants to celebrate her birthday outside of LA
					

Meghan Markle wants to celebrate her birthday outside of Los Angeles, as she and Prince Harry are feeling 'cooped up', a friend told DailyMail.com.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



[/QUOTE]
I  do hope Meg gets plenty of cake.

It's nice she's concerned for her guests health.
In that spirit, Pre and post party covid tests for herself might be a good idea.


----------



## bag-mania

On what planet is she in demand for speaking engagements? Despite her thirsty attempts to insert herself into the issues of the day, she’s not getting much attention beyond the PR articles her agency is placing for her.


----------



## ic_locon

mshermes said:


> Laying the groundwork for her upcoming birthday gala. She is feeling so cooped that she absolutely must celebrate her birthday (not her son’s birthday) in a very public way with guests being screened for COVID-19.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'Cooped up' Meghan wants to leave her $18M sprawling mega-mansion to celebrate her August birthday - and will make guests get tested for Covid-19 beforehand*



It says in the article that MM feels claustrophobic in her mansion! The gall!


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> Laying the groundwork for her upcoming birthday gala. She is feeling so cooped that she absolutely must celebrate her birthday (not her son’s birthday) in a very public way with guests being screened for COVID-19.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'Cooped up' Meghan wants to leave her $18M sprawling mega-mansion to celebrate her August birthday - and will make guests get tested for Covid-19 beforehand*


.. and did anyone else notice that she would like to have her Birthday-bash up towards Oprah's place in Montecito/Santa Barbara???  She's already planning her Celebrity mash-up .. how PATHETIC!


----------



## bag-mania

When is her birthday?  Los Angeles is still under lots of COVID restrictions isn’t it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> When is her birthday?  Los Angeles is still under lots of COVID restrictions isn’t it?


Aug 4 1981


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> Aug 4 1981



Thanks. Ah, so the pandemic situation needs to turn around in two weeks so ‘lil Meghan isn’t disappointed on her birthday. Good luck with that.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe they have sent a congratulatory message the novel way for them, privately and decided to keep it private. You never know.


I was just going to say that! Maybe it was a private message.  Like in the old days, when conversations were one-on-one.


----------



## gracekelly

They received their eviction notice. Time to find a new squat. Of course this big story came out on George’s birthday. I would love to see the guest list for her bash. The 5 friends? No only four now. Are the Clooneys available?  Serena?  Maybe Alex Ohanian will hire them to give empowerment speeches to the new female soccer team.  Ummm.....no


----------



## Annawakes

I want to know who is going to actually go to this party.  I can see her feverishly party planning right now.  Well, something to look forward to!


----------



## melissatrv

bag-mania said:


> On what planet is she in demand for speaking engagements? Despite her thirsty attempts to insert herself into the issues of the day, she’s not getting much attention beyond the PR articles her agency is placing for her.



I know, seriously!   My company has hired people like Bill ******* to speak at our company events.  But I couldn't imagine that any of my colleagues would want to hear Megan and Harry.  Unless she teams up with someone more interesting like Michelle *****


----------



## Lounorada

ic_locon said:


> *It says in the article that MM feels claustrophobic in her mansion*! The gall!


----------



## 1LV

I’m curious to know how many speaking engagements she had, let alone headlined, prior to latching onto Harry.  If she does team up with Michelle ***** (or anyone else) it certainly won’t be the first time she’s ridden somebody’s coattails into the spotlight.


----------



## Chanbal

melissatrv said:


> I know, seriously!   My company has hired people like Bill ******* to speak at our company events.  But I couldn't imagine that any of my colleagues would want to hear Megan and Harry.  Unless she teams up with someone more interesting like Michelle *****


People like Michelle ***** or any other woman (or man) that worked hard to get where they are may not want to team up with MM.


----------



## youngster

_*But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.*_

Let's wait and see how many of these "corporate bosses" actually pay her (or Harry) $1 million per speech in a post-covid world.  Doubt there will be very many.  Honestly, for the foreseeable future, I see companies looking at their balance sheet, cash flow, state of their industry, state of their business and making very conservative decisions about their discretionary spending.


----------



## kemilia

mshermes said:


> Laying the groundwork for her upcoming birthday gala. She is feeling so cooped that she absolutely must celebrate her birthday (not her son’s birthday) in a very public way with guests being screened for COVID-19.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'Cooped up' Meghan wants to leave her $18M sprawling mega-mansion to celebrate her August birthday - and will make guests get tested for Covid-19 beforehand*


It's not her friggin' mansion!! Gawd.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Thanks. Ah, so the pandemic situation needs to turn around in two weeks so ‘lil Meghan isn’t disappointed on her birthday. Good luck with that.


Cali has more cases than NY as of today. That doesn't say "party on!" to me. 

I swear her "PR" firm plants anything in the hopes that something grows.


----------



## 1LV

kemilia said:


> Cali has more cases than NY as of today. That doesn't say "party on!" to me.
> 
> I swear her "PR" firm plants anything in the hopes that something grows.


With all the BS surrounding her they aren’t lacking in fertilize!


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> _*But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.*_
> 
> Let's wait and see how many of these "corporate bosses" actually pay her (or Harry) $1 million per speech in a post-covid world.  Doubt there will be very many.  Honestly, for the foreseeable future, I see companies looking at their balance sheet, cash flow, state of their industry, state of their business and making very conservative decisions about their discretionary spending.


Hope you are right youngster. There are so many people unemployed due to COVID, I would like to see companies using that speech money to generate more job opportunities. Instead of spending $1 million/speech, companies can help many families.


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> _*But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.*_
> 
> Let's wait and see how many of these "corporate bosses" actually pay her (or Harry) $1 million per speech in a post-covid world.  Doubt there will be very many.  Honestly, for the foreseeable future, I see companies looking at their balance sheet, cash flow, state of their industry, state of their business and making very conservative decisions about their discretionary spending.


I read an article yesterday that said the airlines are coming to grips with the idea that business travel is going to be dead for a long while since companies have seen how well zoom mtgs can go. The last minute big dollar flights are not happening. 

I know that my town's board mtgs, that used to go on for nearly 2 hours, have gotten lots shorter now that they zoom, less socializing and more business, and they love it that way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right youngster. There are so many people unemployed due to COVID, I would like to see companies using that speech money to generate more job opportunities. Instead of spending $1 million/speech, companies can help many families.



Oh, I agree with you, I'd hope they'd take that speech money and use it for the benefit of employees, to hire new employees, or to invest further in the business in some way.  I just can't see companies throwing away $1 million on a 30 minute speech at some conference or gathering, which I also think will be cut back dramatically for the foreseeable future. Like @kemilia said, it's going to be awhile before business travel picks up again and might not return to pre-covid levels ever.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right youngster. There are so many people unemployed due to COVID, I would like to see companies using that speech money to generate more job opportunities. Instead of spending $1 million/speech, companies can help many families.


With the "fiscal cliff" that's coming up at the end of the month, so many people will not be able to pay for their morts, rent, car payments, food, etc. things are going to get so much worse--and these 2 just want to get handed more free money. I really can't see any of these big dollar "speeches" happening.


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> Oh, I agree with you, I'd hope they'd take that speech money and use it for the benefit of employees, to hire new employees, or to invest further in the business in some way.  I just can't see companies throwing away $1 million on a 30 minute speech at some conference or gathering, which I also think will be cut back dramatically for the foreseeable future. Like @kemilia said, it's going to be awhile before business travel picks up again and might not return to pre-covid levels ever.


All of my neighbors that have been wfh during covid have been told that they will continue to work from home for the foreseeable future, the offices are not going to reopen for biz as usual. Some pf their employers even pay for their wifi--wfh is proving to be lots cheaper.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> _*But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.*_
> 
> Let's wait and see how many of these "corporate bosses" actually pay her (or Harry) $1 million per speech in a post-covid world.  Doubt there will be very many.  Honestly, for the foreseeable future, I see companies looking at their balance sheet, cash flow, state of their industry, state of their business and making very conservative decisions about their discretionary spending.


100% AGREE with this!!!  I think this 'notion' that M+H are going to be pulling in $1m per 'speech' (aka = drivel) is their PR company trying to *MAKE IT LOOK* like that will happen!  You know, as in .. "better book your speech now, before H+M get too busy to be on your Calendar"!  These companies have so much more to think about now that I really don't think booking a $1m "speech" from these two is going to be high on their Agenda!


----------



## Luvbolide

Let me see, MM...I can understand that people are feeling cooped up and antsy these days.  Can’t say that it feels the same when one is in someone else’s mansion, but I digress. 

 Pretty much the entire world is enacting some kind of stay-at-home order to cope with this situation.  In face, we in California still have such an order in place.  My bday was last week, but no party here...however I count myself as lucky - my friend had to have her husband’s funeral on Zoom FFS.

Whining about your petty problems at a time like this is freaking unbelievable, childish and completely tone deaf.  But hey, you do you...


----------



## CeeJay

mshermes said:


> Laying the groundwork for her upcoming birthday gala. She is feeling so cooped that she absolutely must celebrate her birthday (not her son’s birthday) in a very public way with guests being screened for COVID-19.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'Cooped up' Meghan wants to leave her $18M sprawling mega-mansion to celebrate her August birthday - and will make guests get tested for Covid-19 beforehand*


If this is coming from her PR team, then they are even more stupid than Harry!!!!  As though ANYONE is going to feel bad for "cooped up" Meghan and the possibility that she can't throw herself a big Celeb-filled bash.  Even IF she truly felt that way, you DO NOT publicize something like this during this time .. TONE-DEAF to the NTH degree!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> _*But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.*_
> 
> Let's wait and see how many of these "corporate bosses" actually pay her (or Harry) $1 million per speech in a post-covid world.  Doubt there will be very many.  Honestly, for the foreseeable future, I see companies looking at their balance sheet, cash flow, state of their industry, state of their business and making very conservative decisions about their discretionary spending.



Waaaaaaay out of budget.


----------



## Lodpah

melissatrv said:


> *How has C-list actress and A-list money-grabber Meghan Markle become the world’s most in-demand speaker?*
> 
> Excellent article: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/495382-meghan-markle-duchess-sussex/
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is reported to be the world’s most sought after public speaker, but why? She knows how to make everything about herself and rake in cash, but what pearls of wisdom can she possibly offer?
> Meghan Markle is a disturbing new breed of leader. Not someone who has achieved anything of note, nor broken down any barriers. Neither does she have a prodigious talent.
> 
> What she does possess is a steely willingness to do anything that makes money.
> 
> PR experts have revealed that Markle is about to become the most sought after public speaker on the planet.
> 
> Her fee per event is estimated to be around $1 million.
> 
> A lot was made of Markle’s recent speech at the Girl Up Leadership Summit, as her YouTube figures were far higher than those of Michelle ***** and Hillary *******, who also spoke.
> 
> Whatever you think of the former first ladies, it would take the devotion of a zealous fan to equate them to the Duchess of Sussex – let alone prefer her over them.
> 
> One reason people could be tuning in was the hope that she might wash some dirty laundry. Does she hate William and Kate? Is it true she made their daughter cry by manically shouting at her during a wedding rehearsal?
> 
> Why has Harry or her son never met her father, who regularly appears in the media asking to be part of their lives?
> 
> Why did she invite Oprah Winfrey, David Beckham and George Clooney to her wedding but not a single member of her family, apart from her mother?
> 
> On a trip to Africa with Harry in 2019, she told a British documentary crew that life had been “a struggle” since becoming a royal.
> 
> It was a ridiculous comment, but the lightning rod was that it was uttered while meeting people who barely have any possessions and worry about where their next meal is coming from. Quite rightly, she was pilloried for it.
> 
> Since then, things have changed as Markle has realized she can’t work the royal angle to her benefit.
> 
> They can’t make any serious money, as the Queen keeps a firm grip on the family’s commercial enterprises.
> 
> While they live in grand palaces and never do any sort of conventional work, they don’t have tens of millions to splash about on indulgent whims.
> 
> Meghan thought she had joined the global club of which Winfrey, Beckham and Clooney are all members. One with global fame, but also the wealth to live on their terms.
> 
> The royal family don’t have that; the men wear boring suits, the women have to shun lavish dresses for clothes that aren’t too expensive and they all drive ‘sensible’ cars.
> 
> There’s no decadence as quite simply, the money comes with rules. Tom Cruise, for example, is wealthier than the Queen.
> 
> So Markle – and Harry – walked out of the world’s most prestigious club to go it alone.
> 
> They cited their desire to have a normal life and privacy, and raise their son Archie away from all the ceremony.
> 
> How does that equate with standing up in front of an audience in exchange for a cheque featuring a string of zeros?
> 
> What could Meghan possibly share apart from anecdotes about life on the set of her mediocre TV show ‘Suits’?
> 
> Pompous British society magazine Tatler wrote: “The Duchess is well versed on topics such as racial justice…” but it’s hard to see how that claim can be validated.
> 
> On the other side of the coin are those paying her. Her speaking agency Harry Walker is a business, which exists to turn a profit. But it’s the corporate bosses paying the $1 million fee who should be embarrassed.
> 
> Most of them – who are men – will be bereft of any glamor. They have money, but they don’t have the X-Factor, as that can’t be bought.
> 
> Bruce Springsteen, Colin Kaepernick, Beyonce and Barack *****, for example, all have it and don’t adjust their compass for money.
> 
> But Markle is exploiting a worrying trend in society, which used to be the domain of low-rent celebrities. She’s trying to use the formula far higher up the food chain.
> 
> She’s neither rich nor exceptional, but is leveraging her undeniably high profile to portray herself as something she isn’t, someone worth listening to.
> 
> The disappointment is that many younger and easily influenced people are falling for it, believing this to be someone who can offer guidance and wisdom.
> 
> Charlatans like her are being enabled to masquerade as individuals of distinction. It feels like we’re in a race to the bottom, where any sort of integrity or dedication is deemed worthless compared with the great god that is ‘celebrity.’
> 
> Markle is cheap, tacky and full of sparkles. However, all that glitters isn’t gold.


Propaganda from her PR. I read a report that people are tuning out to celebrities and their crass postings of their opuloand greed.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and did anyone else notice that she would like to have her Birthday-bash up towards Oprah's place in Montecito/Santa Barbara???  She's already planning her Celebrity mash-up .. how PATHETIC!


I hope all the celebs see this as a bad idea and decline to attend


----------



## scarlet555

The thirst is r e a l  with crazy M!


----------



## caramelize126

.


----------



## mdcx

Surely she can't have a party in this climate? No-one I know has had any kind of birthday party other than at home with the people you live with, since around March. 
I am also curious when she is going to move to her next freebie mansion. It must make the owner nervous that they have been there so long surely? I guess not paying any rent since late November 2019 is pretty great though....


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> *They received their eviction notice.* Time to find a new squat. Of course this big story came out on George’s birthday. I would love to see the guest list for her bash. The 5 friends? No only four now. Are the Clooneys available?  Serena?  Maybe Alex Ohanian will hire them to give empowerment speeches to the new female soccer team.  Ummm.....no



Wait....................what??? Really?


----------



## beautymagpie

Meghan and Kate congratulated Beatrice on wedding in very different ways
					

Princess Beatrice tied the knot with Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi in an intimate ceremony at the Royal Lodge, Windsor, with less than 20 guests, including the Queen - but Meghan and Kate did not attend



					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Grande Latte

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

The sister of my husband's best friend insisted on coming over to their father's house for a surprise 94th birthday gathering for him. He was dead ten days later and his wife followed last night. There is no end to people's stupidity. Birthday parties are literally the least important thing on earth right now.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Surely she can't have a party in this climate? No-one I know has had any kind of birthday party other than at home with the people you live with, since around March.
> I am also curious when she is going to move to her next freebie mansion. It must make the owner nervous that they have been there so long surely? I guess not paying any rent since late November 2019 is pretty great though....


we (in So Cal) had neighbors down the street who were having pool parties.  there is really no enforcement so they got away with it.  but with H&M there would be publicity and it wouldn't be good....boo hoo - she can't have a birthday party.  my heart is broken for her


----------



## csshopper

*Prince Harry 'much less intelligent than' Meghan Markle*
Prince Harry 'is a much less intelligent character' than Meghan Markle and 'goes along with whatever she says' because he's 'desperate to please his wife', according to Lady Colin Campbell.

Sums it up. She goes on to say Harry is "besotted."  Interesting in light of articles on Meghan being bored and wanting to party on her birthday. Sounds like Harry is already coming up short in the satisfaction category.


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> *Prince Harry 'much less intelligent than' Meghan Markle*
> Prince Harry 'is a much less intelligent character' than Meghan Markle and 'goes along with whatever she says' because he's 'desperate to please his wife', according to Lady Colin Campbell.
> 
> Sums it up. She goes on to say Harry is "besotted."  Interesting in light of articles on Meghan being bored and wanting to party on her birthday. Sounds like Harry is already coming up short in the satisfaction category.


So _she’s_ the smart one?  Scary.


----------



## bag-mania

I have seen numerous sources claiming Doria has been living with them for awhile and has been helping take care of Archie. I'm skeptical that this is true. On one hand I can see Meghan wanting it to appear like she's looking out for her mother during the pandemic, but Doria is extremely independent. On the other hand, free child care!


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> So _she’s_ the smart one?  Scary.


I think she's the dominant one....much smarter?  don't know.  more manipulative and calculating? I think so


----------



## lanasyogamama

This thread has had an impact on my attitude. A supplier just said they were working something “behind the scenes” and I was thinking “ohhh suuuuuuure!”


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I have seen numerous sources claiming Doria has been living with them for awhile and has been helping take care of Archie. I'm skeptical that this is true. On one hand I can see Meghan wanting it to appear like she's looking out for her mother during the pandemic, but Doria is extremely independent. On the other hand, free child care!


They already have free child care--because they don't pay for anything.

The way she cradled her belly for the entire pregnancy--you would think she wouldn't want anyone near her precious baby, even her mom. I doubt her mother is with them, btw. Just more "look how wonderful we are" bs put out by her clueless PR team.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I think she's the dominant one....much smarter?  don't know.  more manipulative and calculating? I think so


You’re right.  MM being “more intelligent than Harry” doesn’t automatically mean she’s smart.  My bad!


----------



## poopsie

Two grown azz idjits with nothing to do and nowhere to go needing childcare. I.just.can't.


----------



## Chanbal

kemilia said:


> They already have free child care--*because they don't pay for anything*.
> 
> The way she cradled her belly for the entire pregnancy--you would think she wouldn't want anyone near her precious anchor baby, even her mom. I doubt her mother is with them, btw. Just more "look how wonderful we are" bs put out by her clueless PR team.


This is not totally fair @kemilia, would you think that their PR Team works for free? We are talking about a very hard working team! I bet MM&H are paying $$$$ for their superb service...


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I have seen numerous sources claiming Doria has been living with them for awhile and has been helping take care of Archie. I'm skeptical that this is true. On one hand I can see Meghan wanting it to appear like she's looking out for her mother during the pandemic, but Doria is extremely independent. On the other hand, free child care!


Don’t forget Marcus Anderson. I read that he lives with them too.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> This is not totally fair @kemilia, would you think that their PR Team works for free? We are talking about a very hard working team! I bet MM&H are paying $$$$ for their superb service...


Correction, I, as a British Tax payer are paying for it, lol


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This is not totally fair @kemilia, would you think that their PR Team works for free? We are talking about a very hard working team! I bet MM&H are paying $$$$ for their superb service...





Sharont2305 said:


> Correction, I, as a British Tax payer are paying for it, lol



They are probably using the missing money from the end of "SussexRoyal" to pay for their publicity machine.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Correction, I, as a British Tax payer are paying for it, lol


Pardon my ignorance. You must be paying a lot, that PR team is working overtime.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> The way she cradled her belly for the entire pregnancy--you would think she wouldn't want anyone near her precious anchor baby, even her mom. I doubt her mother is with them, btw. Just more "look how wonderful we are" bs put out by her clueless PR team.



Anyone remember that was exactly the narrative that was put out when Archie was a newborn? That she basically didn't allow anyone to touch him, including his father, and insisted on getting up herself even though they had a night nurse?

Of course that only lasted until she flew to the US to watch a tennis match LOL


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of course that only lasted until she flew to the US to watch a tennis match LOL


yeah, a whole two months. Or I guess I should say two months and three days to be factually accurate for when I’m accused of being a racist and they come for me.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> The sister of my husband's best friend insisted on coming over to their father's house for a surprise 94th birthday gathering for him. He was dead ten days later and his wife followed last night. There is no end to people's stupidity. Birthday parties are literally the least important thing on earth right now.


This is really sad.  People have this idea that if it is "family" then it is OK and they don't have to wear masks.   It is not OK.  Any of these people could have been with a person who was ill and not even known it at the time.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I have seen numerous sources claiming Doria has been living with them for awhile and has been helping take care of Archie. I'm skeptical that this is true. On one hand I can see Meghan wanting it to appear like she's looking out for her mother during the pandemic, but Doria is extremely independent. On the other hand, free child care!


I think the English nanny did her tour of duty and went home or the check from the Bank of Dad was enough to cover her.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Don’t forget Marcus Anderson. I read that he lives with them too.


I forgot that he was there.  I have to ask why.  Is he acting as referee?  Helps to keep the narrative straight?  I think there is a pun in that last sentence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lanasyogamama
And that is the blessing of TpF. We share solid, behind-the-scenes info that alerts people to the shenanigans businesses/celebrities use. I really like that part of this forum. Thanks, all!


----------



## caramelize126

I can’t imagine any reputable PR firm would be putting out all this nonsense every single day. There’s no strategy or anything. Me thinks megs is doing her own PR via her hotmail account again


----------



## CeeJay

Some of the comments are epic, but seriously .. do they really want to bite the hand(s) that feed them?  That is pretty darn stupid .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lations-Royal-Family-new-low-sources-say.html


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> I forgot that he was there.  I have to ask why.  Is he acting as referee?  Helps to keep the narrative straight?  I think there is a pun in that last sentence.


I know this is a crazy theory but I read he’s Meghan’s true love.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> Some of the comments are epic, but seriously .. do they really want to bite the hand(s) that feed them?  That is pretty darn stupid ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...lations-Royal-Family-new-low-sources-say.html


You wanna know how stupid these two are? If an investigation commences about the charity fund then it means these 2 idiots have basically approved the fact stating that they planned their exit 9 months and looks like they funneled money thru Royal Sussex and then to Travylst. If this is the case I would like to see these two grifters explain that. Also how quick Harry jumped on explaining or rather trying to explain that charity funds.

In my opinion they scammed the donators and Prince William and the BRF.


----------



## Lodpah

caramelize126 said:


> I can’t imagine any reputable PR firm would be putting out all this nonsense every single day. There’s no strategy or anything. Me thinks megs is doing her own PR via her hotmail account again



Money talks and MM is known to do her own PR surreptitiously.


----------



## sdkitty

another lawsuit?  really are pics of a one-year-old that interesting?









						Duke and Duchess of Sussex sue Los Angeles paparazzi over alleged drone pictures of Archie
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are suing paparazzi for invasion of privacy after drones were allegedly used to take pictures of their son Archie at the house where they are staying in Los Angeles. In a 10-page legal complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California the couple said...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> another lawsuit?  really are pics of a one-year-old that interesting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex sue Los Angeles paparazzi over alleged drone pictures of Archie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are suing paparazzi for invasion of privacy after drones were allegedly used to take pictures of their son Archie at the house where they are staying in Los Angeles. In a 10-page legal complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California the couple said...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Two parts of this article gave me an eye roll...
1)

”The couple said they had a "right to be left alone in the privacy of their own home" and would "not allow the tabloids to break the law" by taking such photographs.”

LOL... its not their own home... they don’t have one. I am actually curious about this. I thought laws in LA were fairly lax about the paps... 

2)
”In the complaint it was detailed how the couple had moved to North America part-time to "escape the incessant UK tabloid fabrications" and for the first six weeks lived "unmolested" in North Saanich, Canada before paparazzi descended.”

Wut? You moved from a country that has rules about the paparazzi and a home that had privacy to LA.... a) what is wrong with you? And b) what did you think would happen?

I really am done with Harry.. he can’t be this stupid...


----------



## Katel

Has this been posted? Wonder how legit...
















						New photo of Doria and Archie - jerseydeanne and friends
					

A German magazine called Bunte published photos of them: Come on, I know you’re all thinking this, WTH are they feeding that kid? Sides of beef? Def going to look like her dad, Thomas. JD    Spread the love




					jerseydeanne.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the new lawsuit — so much negativity encircles this couple
RE: Doria’s photo — some have said the kid is not A. Who knows? Who cares?

Comments are hilarious - 


Completely agree with @Sol Ryan — I am finished with the Dumbarton’s dumber than dumb antics. Best to take a page from QE and the Duke of E’s playbook. Smile and walk away. Cheers, all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I randomly discovered the youtuber Lorry Hill and came across her video of MM... thought I'd share in case you haven't seen. Pretty interesting! I'm amazed at people who notice all this.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Sol Ryan said:


> Two parts of this article gave me an eye roll...
> 1)
> 
> ”The couple said they had a "right to be left alone in the privacy of their own home" and would "not allow the tabloids to break the law" by taking such photographs.”
> 
> LOL... its not their own home... they don’t have one. I am actually curious about this. I thought laws in LA were fairly lax about the paps...
> 
> 2)
> ”In the complaint it was detailed how the couple had moved to North America part-time to "escape the incessant UK tabloid fabrications" and for the first six weeks lived "unmolested" in North Saanich, Canada before paparazzi descended.”
> 
> Wut? You moved from a country that has rules about the paparazzi and a home that had privacy to LA.... a) what is wrong with you? And b) what did you think would happen?
> 
> I really am done with Harry.. he can’t be this stupid...



I think Harry can absolutely be this stupid.  He's lived a life of virtually no consequences, so it's no surprise that he can reach the age he is and not be able to make a connection between decisions he made and bad things he's facing. He thought he was insulated because he's awesome. He's discovering he was insulated because he lived in a country where his grandmother got people to play along believing she was chosen by God to be in charge.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> I randomly discovered the youtuber Lorry Hill and came across her video of MM... thought I'd share in case you haven't seen. Pretty interesting! I'm amazed at people who notice all this.



Thanks for this! I always enjoy seeing how famous people change with PS. Her father probably paid for the early procedures so that his darling would be happy. What a sad "thank you" she gave him.


----------



## mshermes

Perhaps litigation is her back-up income plan to failed speaking engagements, voiceovers, acting gigs, ad nauseam attempts at charities and companies, etc., etc.
Her distorted self importance is astounding.


----------



## mshermes

Katel said:


> Has this been posted? Wonder how legit...
> 
> View attachment 4797932
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4797933
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New photo of Doria and Archie - jerseydeanne and friends
> 
> 
> A German magazine called Bunte published photos of them: Come on, I know you’re all thinking this, WTH are they feeding that kid? Sides of beef? Def going to look like her dad, Thomas. JD    Spread the love
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jerseydeanne.com


Can’t be real. The vehicle isn’t high end. Too eco friendly.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Two parts of this article gave me an eye roll...
> 1)
> 
> ”The couple said they had a "right to be left alone in the privacy of their own home" and would "not allow the tabloids to break the law" by taking such photographs.”
> 
> LOL... its not their own home... they don’t have one. I am actually curious about this. I thought laws in LA were fairly lax about the paps...
> 
> 2)
> ”In the complaint it was detailed how the couple had moved to North America part-time to "escape the incessant UK tabloid fabrications" and for the first six weeks lived "unmolested" in North Saanich, Canada before paparazzi descended.”
> 
> Wut? You moved from a country that has rules about the paparazzi and a home that had privacy to LA.... a) what is wrong with you? And b) what did you think would happen?
> 
> I really am done with Harry.. he can’t be this stupid...


I will grant that drones would be very annoying but I don't see anyone else suing....are pics of them more desirable than any other celebs?  are they the only victims of the paps?  are they seeking attention by filing lawsuits?  why live in LA if you want privacy?  the whole thing is ridiculous


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> are pics of them more desirable than any other celebs?



She wants us to think so. Thanks to COVID they won’t be the new, shiny couple by the time everything opens back up. She’s hoping to  pump up their demand for those speaking engagements while still eliciting sympathy by making it look like they are always so much more persecuted than any other celeb. Poor them! Who would ever have thought you’d have a paparazzi problem in the one place in the world that by far has the most paparazzi? 

I have no doubt some are sending drones over their house. Paps must be desperate to make some cash and they’ve got to eat too.


----------



## Sol Ryan

LibbyRuth said:


> I think Harry can absolutely be this stupid.  He's lived a life of virtually no consequences, so it's no surprise that he can reach the age he is and not be able to make a connection between decisions he made and bad things he's facing. He thought he was insulated because he's awesome. He's discovering he was insulated because he lived in a country where his grandmother got people to play along believing she was chosen by God to be in charge.



I don‘t buy it though. Harry has already experienced the US press with his naked Billiards weekend in Las Vegas. So for him to say that the press in the US is in anyway less intrusive than in the U.K. where they literally have embargoes on what can be published is absurd.


----------



## csshopper

MM is getting EXACTLY what she wants, publicity, but what has her ticked off is that SHE is not controlling it. These two have to be the world’s biggest hypocrites.

As to the timing: stay tuned,  the whining book is about to released and what better lead in than a “poor us, we’re being picked on by the paps”  lawsuit to reinforce their victimized view of themselves.


----------



## Nutashha

Another British writer trying to sell their book by being obnoxious! 


*Lady Colin Campbell Thinks Prince Harry Is ‘Much Less Intelligent' than Meghan Markle*


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> You wanna know how stupid these two are? If an investigation commences about the charity fund then it means these 2 idiots have basically approved the fact stating that they planned their exit 9 months and looks like they funneled money thru Royal Sussex and then to Travylst. If this is the case I would like to see these two grifters explain that. Also how quick Harry jumped on explaining or rather trying to explain that charity funds.
> 
> In my opinion they scammed the donators and Prince William and the BRF.


Well, personally.. I think Harry is too stupid to have engineered that .. but we all know that the supreme scammer MM sure as heck had her “plans” in place. I really think that QEII and Prince Charles have to take those titles away and funding - PERIOD!


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> Thanks for this! I always enjoy seeing how famous people change with PS. Her father probably paid for the early procedures so that his darling would be happy. What a sad "thank you" she gave him.


I had mentioned this some time back about the fact that Meghan had had work done on her nose (my friend’s son was her counterpart in her Senior play - and he said that she had the work done at that time). I remember getting crap for saying that, but they knew her and Thomas quite well and as a Sculptor, the son could see the changes (and yes, Thomas paid for it) - quelle surprise!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Well, personally.. I think Harry is to stupid to have engineered that .. but we all know that the supreme scammer MM sure as heck had her “plans” in place. *I really think that QEII and Prince Charles have to take those titles away and funding* - PERIOD!



They are smart to play the waiting game and let H&M have enough rope to hang themselves. The Queen got criticism from some in the US media for what she did take away from them. Let them try to "make it on their own" and see what happens. If (when) they fail after moving to the US and doing everything their own way, they will have nobody to point the finger at except themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Well, personally.. I think Harry is to stupid to have engineered that .. but we all know that the supreme scammer MM sure as heck had her “plans” in place. I really think that QEII and Prince Charles have to take those titles away and funding - PERIOD!


Doesn't she believe herself to be a great businesswoman since she merched on The Tig?  Didn't take much to convince him because he has never handled money except to buy some buns at school.   If they did anything untoward, there will be hell to pay unless they can put on a convincing act of "I didn't know it was wrong to do that."  That doesn't hold up in the US, don't know about UK.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> She wants us to think so. Thanks to COVID they won’t be the new, shiny couple by the time everything opens back up. She’s hoping to  pump up their demand for those speaking engagements while still eliciting sympathy by making it look like they are always so much more persecuted than any other celeb. Poor them! Who would ever have thought you’d have a paparazzi problem in the one place in the world that by far has the most paparazzi?
> 
> I have no doubt some are sending drones over their house. Paps must be desperate to make some cash and they’ve got to eat too.


BS, DOUBLE-BS and TRIPLE-BS .. on the 'drone' story .. NOT buying it and let me tell you why! 

Look at the map below .. Beverly Ridge Estates is just that .. *ON TOP OF A FREAKIN' RIDGE* and you have various Canyons around, the very well-known Mullholland Drive (_where Jimmy Dean died because of all the twists and turns_) .. not to mention that Coldwater Canyon is NOT necessarily easy drive .. BOTTOM line, one would have to be a superb drone "pilot" to be able to go up, down, all-around .. up hills, summits, over trees, etc. -- UNLESS .. said Drone-driver is up on top of that ridge too?!?! .. *HMMM*?????  Same with Helicopters; we all remember what happened to Kobe Bryant .. these parts of LA are just filled with ups/downs .. we have the Santa Monica Mountains on one side and then the San Fernando Mountains on the other side .. so you kind of want to keep that flying vehicle higher up in order to avoid a crash!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They are smart to play the waiting game and let H&M have enough rope to hang themselves. The Queen got criticism from some in the US media for what she did take away from them. Let them try to "make it on their own" and see what happens. If (when) they fail after moving to the US and doing everything their own way, they will have nobody to point the finger at except themselves.


There is something today in one of the Brit tabloids to the effect that TQ is not happy about their making any political statements in regards to what is happening in the US.  That could be a warm up to title removal.  Royals aren't supposed to make political statements in general and in another country, that is certainly a no no.  I think that the US qualifies as "another country" as long as they are going to use the titles.  Meghan can get away with it to a certain extent, but he can not and the title is attached to him and she is just along for the title ride.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> BS, DOUBLE-BS and TRIPLE-BS .. on the 'drone' story .. NOT buying it and let me tell you why!
> 
> Look at the map below .. Beverly Ridge Estates is just that .. *ON TOP OF A FREAKIN' RIDGE* and you have various Canyons around, the very well-known Mullholland Drive (_where Jimmy Dean died because of all the twists and turns_) .. not to mention that Coldwater Canyon is NOT necessarily easy drive .. BOTTOM line, one would have to be a superb drone "pilot" to be able to go up, down, all-around .. up hills, summits, over trees, etc. -- UNLESS .. said Drone-driver is up on top of that ridge too?!?! .. *HMMM*?????  Same with Helicopters; we all remember what happened to Kobe Bryant .. these parts of LA are just filled with ups/downs .. we have the Santa Monica Mountains on one side and then the San Fernando Mountains on the other side .. so you kind of want to keep that flying vehicle higher up in order to avoid a crash!
> 
> View attachment 4798460


I wonder if someone was in the house like a workman, and surreptitiously took a picture.  We'll never know unless the picture makes it to the light of day.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if someone was in the house like a workman, and surreptitiously took a picture.  We'll never know unless the picture makes it to the light of day.


Yeah, who knows .. "supposedly" some of Tyler Perry's Security Team are up there with H&M, so why would "they" have stopped it?!?!  IMO .. Meghan is trying to play that 'sympathy' card yet again .. it's getting tiring and we all know it's BOGUS!


----------



## bag-mania

It is all so bizarre. H&M apparently found out a photographer has been shopping some photos of Archie around to various tabloids. They don't know who the pap was but they know the photos must have been shot on the Perry property. So they hire a celebrity lawyer to sue some "John Does" since they don't have an actual defendant. 

All I got out of it is media interest in buying photos of Archie wasn't high enough for the pap to sell them. NOBODY CARES, MEGHAN!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is all so bizarre. H&M apparently found out a photographer has been shopping some photos of Archie around to various tabloids. They don't know who the pap was but they know the photos must have been shot on the Perry property. So they hire a celebrity lawyer to sue some "John Does" since they don't have an actual defendant.
> 
> All I got out of it is media interest in buying photos of Archie wasn't high enough for the pap to sell them. NOBODY CARES, MEGHAN!


right...he's a baby....cute but nothing unusual IMO.....looks like a little white one-year-old


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> right...he's a baby....cute but nothing unusual IMO.....looks like a little white one-year-old



Filing a lawsuit is their knee jerk reaction to anybody doing something they don't like. Their legal fees must be insane.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, who knows .. "supposedly" some of Tyler Perry's Security Team are up there with H&M, so why would "they" have stopped it?!?!  IMO .. Meghan is trying to play that 'sympathy' card yet again .. it's getting tiring and we all know it's BOGUS!


Maybe it was someone she yelled at or threw tea on lol!  Revenge!


----------



## haute okole

She is so affected L.A.  Anyone who lives in L.A. and is surrounded by the industry types knows exactly what I mean and is grossed out by it.  It has everything to do with her self importance, the inauthentic "I just want a normal life and I am such a do gooder" when everything she does is LOOK AT ME, HONOR ME, I AM THE SH!T!  She is a dime a dozen here, but a lot less talented.  She just got lucky, a lucky LA grifter.  Who is paying for her house, not her, their attorneys, their security, their designer clothes, not her.


----------



## Lodpah

Let’s call them vexatious litigants. Royals, that is.


----------



## Lounorada

_Another _lawsuit?!




At this point, these two seem so desperate for attention and pity that I wouldn't be surprised if they set up the whole thing themselves, took the photos with their own drone and had them sent to whatever media outlet that published the pic, just so they could go ahead and sue. Probably sounds mad, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true.
I hope they're paying their own legal fees with all these lawsuits and that Charles isn't stuck with the bills. I'm sure the fees must be through the roof.


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> _Another _lawsuit?!
> *I hope they're paying their own legal fees with all these lawsuits and that Charles isn't stuck with the bills. I'm sure the fees must be through the roof.*



I agree with you, but don't let @ Sharont2305 read this. She will rightfully remind us that she pays for it as a British Tax payer.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> right...he's a baby....cute but nothing unusual IMO.....looks like a little white one-year-old


A well-fed one-year-old (not fat shaming). He's kinda jammed in that little push car (if that's him).


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Filing a lawsuit is their knee jerk reaction to anybody doing something they don't like. Their legal fees must be insane.


Once again--money is no obstacle 'cause they don't pay for ANYTHING.


----------



## gracekelly

haute okole said:


> She is so affected L.A.  Anyone who lives in L.A. and is surrounded by the industry types knows exactly what I mean and is grossed out by it.  It has everything to do with her self importance, the inauthentic "I just want a normal life and I am such a do gooder" when everything she does is LOOK AT ME, HONOR ME, I AM THE SH!T!  She is a dime a dozen here, but a lot less talented.  She just got lucky, a lucky LA grifter.  Who is paying for her house, not her, their attorneys, their security, their designer clothes, not her.


TBH, over the years I have met some high profile industry types and they weren't like that at all.  I will agree that if there are 3 people and if an actor is one of them, they will act.  They can't help it, but that doesn't mean they will act self important or expect special treatment.  I think she behaves  this way exactly because she was/is a nobody.  This is her idea of how  an important person should act and she has it all wrong.  My last interaction with a high profile person was a professional baseball player who was signed by the Dodgers for a gazillion dollars.  He was the the nicest and most polite guy and not affected at all. He called and made his own appointments, showed up on time and paid his bill himself.   I was the person with the problem lol! Every time he came to our office I stared at him because he was built like a Greek god


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> BS, DOUBLE-BS and TRIPLE-BS .. on the 'drone' story .. NOT buying it and let me tell you why!
> 
> Look at the map below .. Beverly Ridge Estates is just that .. *ON TOP OF A FREAKIN' RIDGE* and you have various Canyons around, the very well-known Mullholland Drive (_where Jimmy Dean died because of all the twists and turns_) .. not to mention that Coldwater Canyon is NOT necessarily easy drive .. BOTTOM line, one would have to be a superb drone "pilot" to be able to go up, down, all-around .. up hills, summits, over trees, etc. -- UNLESS .. said Drone-driver is up on top of that ridge too?!?! .. *HMMM*?????  Same with Helicopters; we all remember what happened to Kobe Bryant .. these parts of LA are just filled with ups/downs .. we have the Santa Monica Mountains on one side and then the San Fernando Mountains on the other side .. so you kind of want to keep that flying vehicle higher up in order to avoid a crash!
> 
> View attachment 4798460


A close relative has a drone biz--does work for HBO, Netflix, movie studios, etc. and he could probably fly in these hills/canyons if necessary for some gig--not sure but drone work is pretty good now.

But who bought these pics and who cares? Maybe this will spur on their next move since the excuse of no privacy is so obvious, and it IS time to move on to another couch, um, free mansion. They gotta be wearing out their welcome by now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

kemilia said:


> A well-fed one-year-old (not fat shaming). He's kinda jammed in that little push car (if that's him).


The baby in the photo looks like many babies do as they go from crawling to learning to walk. 
 I really wish she'd share photos of baby A now and then. 
All the secret secret stuff combined with frequent lawsuits is so distasteful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> A close relative has a drone biz--does work for HBO, Netflix, movie studios, etc. and he could probably fly in these hills/canyons if necessary for some gig--not sure but drone work is pretty good now.



But that's the thing...it's difficult and and probably wouldn't be cheap. It's one thing to do this for the next blockbuster or a high profile docu or a super high profile wedding (think Brad Pitt and Jen back in the day), but who would put in that much effort and money to stalk MM doing nothing in her mooched mansion?


----------



## zinacef

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, who knows .. "supposedly" some of Tyler Perry's Security Team are up there with H&M, so why would "they" have stopped it?!?!  IMO .. Meghan is trying to play that 'sympathy' card yet again .. it's getting tiring and we all know it's BOGUS!


Meghan Markle is used to playing a lot of cards depending on what is the flavor of the week or day or whatever will give her money and everything she wants.  she seemed to be successful at it as she’s getting a lot of mainstream sympathies like Oprah, Ellen, Tyler Perry, the Clooneys, to name a few. I give it to her, she is tireless in promoting herself. I’m sure, COViD and the BRF for not being caring people ,will be blamed for all her failures.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tyler is in a difficult position. His reputation is one of a nice guy, so he can’t be viewed as someone who kicks out a royal and a child. He is probably hoping someone gives them a job so they will need to move.

What a tangled web they have woven for themselves. Oh my,    How will they thrive?



kemilia said:


> It IS time to move on to another couch, um, free mansion. They gotta be wearing out their welcome by now.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tyler is in a difficult position. His reputation is one of a nice guy, so he can’t be viewed as someone who kicks out a royal and a child. He is probably hoping someone gives them a job so they will need to move.
> 
> What a tangled web they have woven for themselves. Oh my,    How will they thrive?



What is fair is fair and it isn't fair to overstay your welcome.  If they are staying there for free. TP has gone above and beyond with kindness and if he wants to sell the house, he needs them out to make repairs etc.


----------



## haute okole

gracekelly said:


> TBH, over the years I have met some high profile industry types and they weren't like that at all.  I will agree that if there are 3 people and if an actor is one of them, they will act.  They can't help it, but that doesn't mean they will act self important or expect special treatment.  I think she behaves  this way exactly because she was/is a nobody.  This is her idea of how  an important person should act and she has it all wrong.  My last interaction with a high profile person was a professional baseball player who was signed by the Dodgers for a gazillion dollars.  He was the the nicest and most polite guy and not affected at all. He called and made his own appointments, showed up on time and paid his bill himself.   I was the person with the problem lol! Every time he came to our office I stared at him because he was built like a Greek god



I completely agree with you.  It is the high profile A list people who are the most gracious and humble.  She is the epitome of a D list actress.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> TBH, over the years I have met some high profile industry types and they weren't like that at all.  I will agree that if there are 3 people and if an actor is one of them, they will act.  They can't help it, but that doesn't mean they will act self important or expect special treatment.  I think she behaves  this way exactly because she was/is a nobody.  This is her idea of how  an important person should act and she has it all wrong.  My last interaction with a high profile person was a professional baseball player who was signed by the Dodgers for a gazillion dollars.  He was the the nicest and most polite guy and not affected at all. He called and made his own appointments, showed up on time and paid his bill himself.   I was the person with the problem lol! Every time he came to our office I stared at him because he was built like a Greek god


Same here, I've met some top names that were very down-to-earth .. it's always the Z-class or "wanna-be's" that act like their sh!t doesn't stink!  Although, I must say that I've also met some well-known names that have been truly horrible .. it's like anything else, some nice/great and others - ugh!  I definitely put her in the UGGH category and I know that I would 100% tune-out when she would start with her word-salad.


----------



## Lodpah

IMHO the reason they are not buying a place is because they want to wait for the one year review. It’s as simple as that. That way they are not out of a lot of money. Meghan is a shrew.


----------



## CeeJay

haute okole said:


> I completely agree with you.  It is the high profile A list people who are the most gracious and humble.  She is the epitome of a *Z list actress*.


Fixed that for you ..


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> I know this is a crazy theory but I read he’s Meghan’s true love.
> 
> View attachment 4797755
> 
> 
> View attachment 4797756


He's been out forever. You mean like soulmates?


lalame said:


> I randomly discovered the youtuber Lorry Hill and came across her video of MM... thought I'd share in case you haven't seen. Pretty interesting! I'm amazed at people who notice all this.



So interesting! She did so much, but not in an exaggerated way (except for the Hollywood teeth) and that really explains the facial changes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If only there were a system in place that would tightly control when and how they are photographed.  Oh wait, there is. It’s called the Royal Rota and they HAD to get away from it. When’s the last time you saw a candid of W or K?


----------



## PewPew

Lodpah said:


> IMHO the reason they are not buying a place is because they want to wait for the one year review. It’s as simple as that. That way they are not out of a lot of money.



Yep, I can’t see them paying out of pocket at this point. They can wait for the launch of Archway & to see what income they generate as media producers. 

The house will be purchased by one of their eventual companies or a third-party, which is how the very rich operate to limit liability (remember how no one could find proof of the owner for the Canadian mansion?). They may also try to change the name of the sussexroyal instagram (after the year’s review) to one of the new companies for the ad potential & instant 11+million followers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> What is fair is fair and it isn't fair to overstay your welcome.  If they are staying there for free. TP has gone above and beyond with kindness and if he wants to sell the house, he needs them out to make repairs etc.



Absolutely agree. TP is a gentleman and should not be criticized if/when he asks them to move on. I should have been clearer — I believe he will only be criticized by the toxic stans for ”making them leave”. The rest of us know these two have been grifting from day 1. TP deserves praises for his kindness.  Let’s hope the arrangement was clearly spelled out from the beginning.


----------



## V0N1B2

lanasyogamama said:


> If only there were a system in place that would tightly control when and how they are photographed.  Oh wait, there is. It’s called the Royal Rota and they HAD to get away from it.


THANK YOU!!!!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

haute okole said:


> She is so affected L.A.  Anyone who lives in L.A. and is surrounded by the industry types knows exactly what I mean and is grossed out by it.  It has everything to do with her self importance, the inauthentic "I just want a normal life and I am such a do gooder" when everything she does is LOOK AT ME, HONOR ME, I AM THE SH!T!  She is a dime a dozen here, but a lot less talented.  She just got lucky, a lucky LA grifter.  Who is paying for her house, not her, their attorneys, their security, their designer clothes, not her.



THIS. 
*haute okole*, such a great post, can concur, and will add a point - 

They are truly laughable at this point, or as my DH said,
 "Which companies, in this day and age, are going to hire them on the speaking circuit when they have proven to be so litigious in such a short period of time? Are they crazy or asleep at the wheel?

You guys decide


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

and just like that they ruin Jane Goodall’s reputation.

_








						Jane Goodall Sets the Record Straight on Her Friendship with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

The beloved conservationist opens up about her relationship with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in this week's issue of PEOPLE




					people.com
				




Don’t believe everything you read about Dr. Jane Goodall's relationship with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the famed conservationist tells PEOPLE.
"There's all this stuff in the press about being best friends, which is absolutely stupid," Goodall, 86, tells PEOPLE.
"We're not best friends," she says. "I've only met them three times. It's so silly."

...

Despite feeling that her relationship with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has been overhyped, the British-born ethologist thinks  highly of the couple. "Prince Harry is great. Really great," she says. "And Meghan too."_


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> TBH, over the years I have met some high profile industry types and they weren't like that at all.  I will agree that if there are 3 people and if an actor is one of them, they will act.  They can't help it, but that doesn't mean they will act self-important or expect special treatment.  I think she behaves  this way exactly because she was/is a nobody.  This is her idea of how an important person should act and she has it all wrong.  My last interaction with a high profile person was a professional baseball player who was signed by the Dodgers for a gazillion dollars.  He was the nicest and most polite guy and not affected at all. He called and made his own appointments, showed up on time and paid his bill himself.   I was the person with the problem lol! Every time he came to our office I stared at him because he was built like a Greek god



*gracekelly*, interestingly enough, my experience over the years <many. lol. I'm old!> and around the world <residence in
Sverige, Schweiz, USA: both coasts> with various celebs, CEOs, etc. does differ from your experience - have found that most of the almost-celebs that were trying-hard-but-had-not-made-the-A-list, similar to MM, were absolutely obnoxious, and horrifically needy, but the real-deal A-list celebs? 

Per your post, *gracekelly*, they were gracious to the extreme.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> and just like that they ruin Jane Goodall’s reputation.
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jane Goodall Sets the Record Straight on Her Friendship with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The beloved conservationist opens up about her relationship with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in this week's issue of PEOPLE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don’t believe everything you read about Dr. Jane Goodall's relationship with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the famed conservationist tells PEOPLE.
> "There's all this stuff in the press about being best friends, which is absolutely stupid," Goodall, 86, tells PEOPLE.
> "We're not best friends," she says. "I've only met them three times. It's so silly."
> 
> ...
> 
> Despite feeling that her relationship with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has been overhyped, the British-born ethologist thinks  highly of the couple. "Prince Harry is great. Really great," she says. "And Meghan too."_



who Markled who?!


----------



## Rouge H

GK and VLB,  I concur- as I’ve had the same experiences and I compare it to old money vs. new money.


----------



## Milosmum0307

I was bored and perusing the Daily Beast when I saw a headline about these grifters, something about how MM “gave up her entire life for the Royal Family,” stamped with an “unprotected” graphic for good measure, and I truly thought, “Huh?”  Honestly, four million people in the US infected during a pandemic, coming upon 150K dead, many suffering economic ruin, and the most consequential US general election in our lifetime, and someone - anyone- with an actual audience is debasing themselves to talk about these morons?  Really???  How embarrassing.  I’m all for escapism, but who can tolerate these privileged idiots yodeling about their photogenic victimhood in these circumstances?  I haven’t thought about them in weeks, and I actually follow the BRF as a hobby!  Their irrelevance is self-inflicted and richly deserved.  Anyway, yeah, I just can’t believe they still exist, honestly. (As public figures, I mean.  I’m not wishing them any sort of destruction.  Hopefully that could have gone without saying.)


----------



## Grande Latte

Lounorada said:


> _Another _lawsuit?!
> 
> View attachment 4798610
> 
> 
> At this point, these two seem so desperate for attention and pity that I wouldn't be surprised if they set up the whole thing themselves, took the photos with their own drone and had them sent to whatever media outlet that published the pic, just so they could go ahead and sue. Probably sounds mad, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true.
> I hope they're paying their own legal fees with all these lawsuits and that Charles isn't stuck with the bills. I'm sure the fees must be through the roof.



Or they hire a contingency fee lawyer. 

They get rewarded, the lawyers get paid. If not, the lawyers gets fame for having royals as their clients. 

Otherwise I can't think of who will front these legal costs.....


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but don't let @ Sharont2305 read this. She will rightfully remind us that she pays for it as a British Tax payer.


Too flipping right, lol!!!


----------



## Lodpah

Ok this is craziest thing. I read some suppositions for filing the lawsuit was to take focus away from Travylst and that maybe Doria is selling the pictures. Who knows?


----------



## maryg1

I know they’ve moved to LA which is arguably a place where someone looking for privacy should live, but using drones to get pics when they’re inside home is a no no for me.


----------



## kemilia

Grande Latte said:


> Or they hire a contingency fee lawyer.
> 
> They get rewarded, the lawyers get paid. If not, the lawyers gets fame for having royals as their clients.
> 
> Otherwise I can't think of who will front these legal costs.....


These "we're gonna sue you" statements seem to be the only thing keeping them in the news, I have no doubt MM is behind all this drone/pics stuff. And loving it.


----------



## Jayne1

From the NY Post:

If “Megxit” had its own dishy biography — this would be it.

The Times of London has released the first excerpt from a new tell-all book by a pair of veteran UK journalists, and they offer an inside look at the bitterness and palace intrigue behind Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s split from the royal family.

“Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family,” is being serialized beginning Saturday.

It promises inside scoop direct from the royal family’s close confidantes — and while not officially sanctioned by Harry and Markle, it is shaping up to be particularly sympathetic to their side of Megxit.

The first installment includes these revelations by authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand:


Harry was disparaged within the palace walls for being “too sensitive and outspoken” — and he felt unprotected by his own family.
Harry, in turn, strived to protect his new bride from the palace “old guard,” some of whom “simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make her life difficult.”
Harry and Markle had immediately become international sensations, eclipsing even Prince William and Kate Middleton and the rest of the royals above their rank — and so “needed to be reined in,” many in the old guard felt.
William and Kate, meanwhile, were deeply hurt that private family matters were being aired in public while the royal family was kept in the dark.
Markle told pals that suffering the criticism of the vicious UK tabloids was like “death by a thousand cuts.”
Here is some of the first excerpt, as reprinted by the Times of London:

——

Since getting married, Harry and Meghan had enjoyed calling their own shots. “Harry and Meghan liked being in control of their narrative,” a source said, which is why originally agreeing to fold their household into Buckingham Palace, instead of creating their own independent court, had proved a big disappointment to them.

Harry and Meghan had wanted to create their own individual household in Windsor, meaning their own office staffed with their own team, who would be separate from all others. But senior officials quickly ruled out that option.

The senior courtiers whom Diana used to refer to as “men in grey suits” were concerned that the global interest in and popularity of the Sussexes needed to be reined in.

In the short time since their fairytale wedding, Harry and Meghan were already propelling the monarchy to new heights around the world.

As their popularity had grown, so did Harry and Meghan’s difficulty in understanding why so few inside the palace were looking out for their interests.

They were a major draw for the royal family. According to a press report that compared the online popularity of the Sussexes with the Cambridges from November 2017 to January 2020, “Harry-and-Meghan-related searches accounted for 83 percent of the world’s curiosity in the two couples.”

The Sussexes had made the monarchy more relatable to those who had never before felt a connection. However, there were concerns that the couple should be brought into the fold; otherwise, the establishment feared their popularity might eclipse that of the royal family.

Increasingly Harry had grown frustrated that he and Meghan often took a back seat to other family members.

While they both respected the hierarchy of the institution, it was difficult when they wanted to focus on a project and were told that a more senior ranking family member, be it Prince William or Prince Charles, had an initiative or tour being announced at the same time — so they would just have to wait.

For months the couple tried to air these frustrations, but the conversations didn’t lead anywhere.

Worse, there were just a handful of people working at the palace they could trust. Outside this core team, no information was safe.

A friend of the couple referred to the old guard as “the vipers”. Meanwhile, an equally frustrated palace staffer described the Sussexes’ team as “the squeaky third wheel” of the palace.

Highly emotional and fiercely protective of his wife and son, Harry was drained by the unique circumstances of his family, which, as a source described, “doesn’t have the opportunity to operate as an actual family.”

While politics are part of every family dynamic, they are at a whole other level for William, Harry, and the rest of the royals.

“Every conversation, every issue, every personal disagreement, whatever it may be, involves staff,” the source said of the aides who invariably send and receive messages between the royal households.

“It creates a really weird environment that actually doesn’t allow people to sort things out themselves.”

No one could deny the fact that the couple was emotionally exhausted, whether they had brought it on themselves or were victims of a merciless machine.

“They felt under pressure,” a source said. “They felt that they were alone.”

For Harry especially, it was all getting to be too much. “Doesn’t the Queen deserve better?” screamed one newspaper headline, which the prince read online.

“These people are just paid trolls,” he later told a friend. “Nothing but trolls . . . and it’s disgusting.”

Scrolling on his iPhone, he sometimes couldn’t stop himself from reading the comments on the articles.

“H&M disgust me.”

“They are a disgrace to the royal family.”

“The world would be a better place without Harry and Meghan in it.”

The last comment had over 3,500 upvotes. Harry regretted opening the link.

His stomach tied into the same knot every time he saw these sorts of comments.

“It’s a sick part of the society we live in today, and no one is doing anything about it,” he continued.

“Where’s the positivity? Why is everyone so miserable and angry?”









						Read it: The first excerpt released from ‘Megxit’ tell-all book
					

If “Megxit” had its own dishy biography — this would be it. The Times of London has released the first excerpt from a new tell-all book by a pair of veteran UK journalists, and th…




					pagesix.com


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I'm done with these two imposters.  Their sense of entitlement appears to have no bounds.  The very idea that Meghan gave up everything for the BRF is laughable in the extreme.


----------



## sdkitty

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm done with these two imposters.  Their sense of entitlement appears to have no bounds.  The very idea that Meghan gave up everything for the BRF is laughable in the extreme.


right
what exacty did she give up?
wasn't her Suits gig over?
Not sure where this came from or whether she actually said it but if she did, she is really tone deaf.  I guess she thinks the world is filled with her stans who will believe any crap she dishes out


----------



## carmen56

If anyone gave up everything, it’s Harry.  He’s lost his family, friends and country, all to please her.   I can't see any rapprochement between William and Harry happening any time soon, at least not all the while Meghan is on the scene.  Frankly, after the way they have behaved, and continue to behave, HMQ and Prince Charles should cut them loose, cut the purse strings and let H and M get on with it.  



Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm done with these two imposters.  Their sense of entitlement appears to have no bounds.  The very idea that Meghan gave up everything for the BRF is laughable in the extreme.


----------



## sdkitty

he says at the end of the article he didn't speak to them.....so where did he get this "Meghan feels she gave up everything"?
what a bunch of crap








						Meghan Markle: ‘I Gave Up My Entire Life for the Royal Family. It’s Very Sad.’
					

An explosive book detailing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s departure from the royal family reveals their pain and anguish, including Harry's sense of rejection from the family.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe.....Meghan feels like she gave up “everything” because she was now told what to wear, what she could or couldn’t say, and when she could say it.  It’s like she could no longer be herself, the star.  Marrying into the RF is a tough transition for anyone, but for someone who believes so much that the world needs to hear what she has to say....I can see that that would feel “soul crushing”.


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> he says at the end of the article he didn't speak to them.....so where did he get this "Meghan feels she gave up everything"?
> what a bunch of crap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: ‘I Gave Up My Entire Life for the Royal Family. It’s Very Sad.’
> 
> 
> An explosive book detailing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s departure from the royal family reveals their pain and anguish, including Harry's sense of rejection from the family.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Gave up everything, huh?
She's moved back to her beloved LA, hubby and baby in tow.
She lives rent free and occasionally lifts a finger only to grab those overly generous checks from PC.

I wonder if she is remotely aware many jobless in the  US are slated for eviction in the coming weeks.
Those struggling families are truly going to give up everything.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> If anyone gave up everything, it’s Harry.  He’s lost his family, friends and country, all to please her.   I can't see any rapprochement between William and Harry happening any time soon, at least not all the while Meghan is on the scene.  Frankly, after the way they have behaved, and continue to behave, HMQ and Prince Charles should cut them loose, cut the purse strings and let H and M get on with it.



Sorry, but if JCMH approved this book, it's his fault. He has a screw loose if he thinks this book will provoke sympathy. He knows the system, he should understand it better than anyone. In aristocratic families the first-born takes it all, usually, end of story. He was born into the BRF, reaped the rewards all his life, much more than his position demands actually, he was and still is leading the life of _immense_ privilege. I think he's having a prolonged toddler temper-tantrum. 

ITA though, the entire BRF should cut them loose.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Sorry, but if JCMH approved this book, it's his fault. He has a screw loose if he thinks this book will provoke sympathy. He knows the system, he should understand it better than anyone. In aristocratic families the first-born takes it all, usually, end of story. He was born into the BRF, reaped the rewards all his life, much more than his position demands actually, he was and still is leading the life of _immense_ privilege. I think he's having a prolonged toddler temper-tantrum.
> 
> ITA though, the entire BRF should cut them loose.


can I double-like this post?


----------



## bag-mania

As expected all of the juicy bits will be given away in the reviews. There’s no reason to actually pay for the book. Omid and his cohort wrote a pro-Meghan and Harry “us against the world” tale and every supposed quote will be from unnamed sources (Meghan). Who out there still believes this tripe?


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *gracekelly*, interestingly enough, my experience over the years <many. lol. I'm old!> and around the world <residence in
> Sverige, Schweiz, USA: both coasts> with various celebs, CEOs, etc. does differ from your experience - have found that most of the almost-celebs that were trying-hard-but-had-not-made-the-A-list, similar to MM, were absolutely obnoxious, and horrifically needy, but the real-deal A-list celebs?
> 
> Per your post, *gracekelly*, they were gracious to the extreme.


YUP, my experience has been the same on both Coasts .. the Z-list or "wanna-be's" are the OBNOXIOUS ones and I would definitely categorize Meghan in that group.  Based on what my friend said, even at her high-school age, she was "high maintenance" and very much "me me me" such that my friend had to admonish her for her behavior when she was over their house rehearsing with their son.  Of course, the minute the play was over, her son was "markled"!


----------



## maryg1

papertiger said:


> He has a screw loose if he thinks this book will provoke sympathy.


I can’t agree more with this statement.
The part where he feels bad when reading the online comments and asks: “where is positivity? Why is everybody so angry?”
Harry, you should have learnt by now that you have to gain respect and positivity from the people of your country by making good things, working hard and be at their side when they need the most.
It’s not that you’re granted good feelings just because you were born into the most relevant family in UK.
People in charge will always be subject to critics and it’s not good to point people’s opinion out as just “negative” or “angry”, think why your own actions have turned almost an entire country from being happy on your wedding day to sour just at hearing your name.


----------



## CeeJay

Very interesting as Graydon Carter 'used' to be a fan of these two .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ace-Harry-suggests-ex-Vanity-Fair-editor.html


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Very interesting as Graydon Carter 'used' to be a fan of these two ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ace-Harry-suggests-ex-Vanity-Fair-editor.html


I miss him at VF


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Very interesting as Graydon Carter 'used' to be a fan of these two ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ace-Harry-suggests-ex-Vanity-Fair-editor.html



Wow! First Jane Goodall and now GC??  The tide may be turning.


----------



## CeeJay

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm done with these two imposters.  Their sense of entitlement appears to have no bounds.  *The very idea that Meghan gave up everything for the BRF is laughable in the extreme*.


When I saw this STUPIDITY this morning, I had a good HOWL .. that's the only positive!  In addition .. heck, how would Meghan even know about "family" (_referring to the BRF_) .. 'cos she's pretty much 'markled' all of them except Doria!  Again with the woe-is-me "_oh, they didn't like me_ .."  *BOO-HOO-HOO* (_very, very, very small violins playing in the background_).


----------



## CeeJay

Annawakes said:


> Maybe.....Meghan feels like she gave up “everything” because she was now told what to wear, what she could or couldn’t say, and when she could say it.  It’s like she could no longer be herself, the star.  Marrying into the RF is a tough transition for anyone, but for someone who believes so much that the world needs to hear what she has to say....I can see that that would feel “soul crushing”.


I don't disagree with that, but in my opinion .. I think Meghan felt that her "modernization" of the BRF would indeed allow her to do whatever she wanted .. and that, IMO .. is beyond STUPID and this is someone who is "supposed" to be SO SMART?!?!?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I miss him at VF


SAME HERE .. big-time!!!


----------



## Sol Ryan

I don’t believe for a second that they weren’t involved with this book... the articles about how they wanted the release pushed up because it was their side of the story and now they didn’t talk to Omid about it? Huh?

Again, how stupid are we supposed to be?


----------



## Lodpah

Dear Mr. Harry and Meghan Markle. You’re nothing more than sentence sprinkles with a side of word salad. No one cares what you two self entitled grifters, cons think. The world is in a crises and pretty soon the media will lose interest in you. Once you two do something earth breaking and shattering and changes the world let us know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> From the NY Post:
> 
> If “Megxit” had its own dishy biography — this would be it.
> 
> The Times of London has released the first excerpt from a new tell-all book by a pair of veteran UK journalists, and they offer an inside look at the bitterness and palace intrigue behind Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s split from the royal family.
> 
> “Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family,” is being serialized beginning Saturday.
> 
> It promises inside scoop direct from the royal family’s close confidantes — and while not officially sanctioned by Harry and Markle, it is shaping up to be particularly sympathetic to their side of Megxit.
> 
> The first installment includes these revelations by authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand:
> 
> 
> Harry was disparaged within the palace walls for being “too sensitive and outspoken” — and he felt unprotected by his own family.
> Harry, in turn, strived to protect his new bride from the palace “old guard,” some of whom “simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make her life difficult.”
> Harry and Markle had immediately become international sensations, eclipsing even Prince William and Kate Middleton and the rest of the royals above their rank — and so “needed to be reined in,” many in the old guard felt.
> William and Kate, meanwhile, were deeply hurt that private family matters were being aired in public while the royal family was kept in the dark.
> Markle told pals that suffering the criticism of the vicious UK tabloids was like “death by a thousand cuts.”
> Here is some of the first excerpt, as reprinted by the Times of London:
> 
> ——
> 
> Since getting married, Harry and Meghan had enjoyed calling their own shots. “Harry and Meghan liked being in control of their narrative,” a source said, which is why originally agreeing to fold their household into Buckingham Palace, instead of creating their own independent court, had proved a big disappointment to them.
> 
> Harry and Meghan had wanted to create their own individual household in Windsor, meaning their own office staffed with their own team, who would be separate from all others. But senior officials quickly ruled out that option.
> 
> The senior courtiers whom Diana used to refer to as “men in grey suits” were concerned that the global interest in and popularity of the Sussexes needed to be reined in.
> 
> In the short time since their fairytale wedding, Harry and Meghan were already propelling the monarchy to new heights around the world.
> 
> As their popularity had grown, so did Harry and Meghan’s difficulty in understanding why so few inside the palace were looking out for their interests.
> 
> They were a major draw for the royal family. According to a press report that compared the online popularity of the Sussexes with the Cambridges from November 2017 to January 2020, “Harry-and-Meghan-related searches accounted for 83 percent of the world’s curiosity in the two couples.”
> 
> The Sussexes had made the monarchy more relatable to those who had never before felt a connection. However, there were concerns that the couple should be brought into the fold; otherwise, the establishment feared their popularity might eclipse that of the royal family.
> 
> Increasingly Harry had grown frustrated that he and Meghan often took a back seat to other family members.
> 
> While they both respected the hierarchy of the institution, it was difficult when they wanted to focus on a project and were told that a more senior ranking family member, be it Prince William or Prince Charles, had an initiative or tour being announced at the same time — so they would just have to wait.
> 
> For months the couple tried to air these frustrations, but the conversations didn’t lead anywhere.
> 
> Worse, there were just a handful of people working at the palace they could trust. Outside this core team, no information was safe.
> 
> A friend of the couple referred to the old guard as “the vipers”. Meanwhile, an equally frustrated palace staffer described the Sussexes’ team as “the squeaky third wheel” of the palace.
> 
> Highly emotional and fiercely protective of his wife and son, Harry was drained by the unique circumstances of his family, which, as a source described, “doesn’t have the opportunity to operate as an actual family.”
> 
> While politics are part of every family dynamic, they are at a whole other level for William, Harry, and the rest of the royals.
> 
> “Every conversation, every issue, every personal disagreement, whatever it may be, involves staff,” the source said of the aides who invariably send and receive messages between the royal households.
> 
> “It creates a really weird environment that actually doesn’t allow people to sort things out themselves.”
> 
> No one could deny the fact that the couple was emotionally exhausted, whether they had brought it on themselves or were victims of a merciless machine.
> 
> “They felt under pressure,” a source said. “They felt that they were alone.”
> 
> For Harry especially, it was all getting to be too much. “Doesn’t the Queen deserve better?” screamed one newspaper headline, which the prince read online.
> 
> “These people are just paid trolls,” he later told a friend. “Nothing but trolls . . . and it’s disgusting.”
> 
> Scrolling on his iPhone, he sometimes couldn’t stop himself from reading the comments on the articles.
> 
> “H&M disgust me.”
> 
> “They are a disgrace to the royal family.”
> 
> “The world would be a better place without Harry and Meghan in it.”
> 
> The last comment had over 3,500 upvotes. Harry regretted opening the link.
> 
> His stomach tied into the same knot every time he saw these sorts of comments.
> 
> “It’s a sick part of the society we live in today, and no one is doing anything about it,” he continued.
> 
> “Where’s the positivity? Why is everyone so miserable and angry?”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read it: The first excerpt released from ‘Megxit’ tell-all book
> 
> 
> If “Megxit” had its own dishy biography — this would be it. The Times of London has released the first excerpt from a new tell-all book by a pair of veteran UK journalists, and th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



OMG they couldn't play the first fiddle at all times and Meghan couldn't get everything even though she wanted it...serious human rights violations right there!


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t believe for a second that they weren’t involved with this book... the articles about how they wanted the release pushed up because it was their side of the story and now they didn’t talk to Omid about it? Huh?
> 
> Again, how stupid are we supposed to be?



They are counting on the fact that most people aren’t following them closely and won’t catch the contradictions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the Daily Beast article:
H asks:_  Where’s the positivity? Why is everyone so miserable and angry?_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> Maybe.....Meghan feels like she gave up “everything” because she was now told what to wear, what she could or couldn’t say, and when she could say it.  It’s like she could no longer be herself, the star.  Marrying into the RF is a tough transition for anyone, but for someone who believes so much that the world needs to hear what she has to say....I can see that that would feel “soul crushing”.



At this point, I can’t feel any sympathy for MM.
If, after all the cautions and warnings she didn’t know what and who she was marrying — well, it’s on her.

Perhaps if they had spent more time together _before_ marrying, she would have known what to expect.
Alternatively, she could have read Diana and Fergie’s books. They spelled it out quite candidly and very clearly. Additionally, she could have watched the interviews Fergie did with Oprah. Even the books about Wallis explain the issues. Now, why would MM think she would be treated differently than those ladies?


----------



## Lodpah

Kate and William hit back as book said they shunned Meghan and Harry
					

Close friends of the Cambridges insisted they had 'rolled out the red carpet' for US actress Meghan and 'done all they possible could' to welcome her into the Firm.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> At this point, I can’t feel any sympathy for MM.
> If, after all the cautions and warnings she didn’t know what and who she was marrying — well, it’s on her.
> 
> Perhaps if they had spent more time together _before_ marrying, she would have known what to expect.
> Alternatively, she could have read Diana and Fergie’s books. They spelled it out quite candidly and very clearly. Additionally, she could have watched the interviews Fergie did with Oprah. Even the books about Wallis explain the issues. Now, why would MM think she would be treated differently than those ladies?



It comes down to one word, arrogance. Of course she went into it believing she could wheedle her way into everyone’s good graces and she would be able to do as she pleased. She thinks she’s smarter than all of those women who preceded her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: apologies all, I am way too wound up over these two. Time to meditate. 



bag-mania said:


> It comes down to one word, arrogance. Of course she went into it believing she could wheedle her way into everyone’s good graces and she would be able to do as she pleased. She thinks she’s smarter than all of those women who preceded her.



Pride goeth before the fall. Each of those women learned the hard way that Royal life is not glamorous. Heck, Grace Kelly said the same. It isn’t just Royal life. Many women who married for money (Babe Paley, Jackie O?) regretted it. This idea that she (and he) are smarter than the rest of us and we schlubs are eagerly awaiting their pearls of wisdom (aka, word salad) — nah, not ok.

Take a look at Post #716 by @sdkitty — kudos for making the call way back then.


----------



## sdkitty

I admit I'm biased - partly from participation in this thread.  But the more I hear about her the more I think there is nothing real there.  She is just a selfish woman obsessed with her image.  I know H is a grown man and responsible for his actions but if she's the empty shell I think she is I have to pity him and that poor child


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> As expected all of the juicy bits will be given away in the reviews. There’s no reason to actually pay for the book. Omid and his cohort wrote a pro-Meghan and Harry *“us against the world”* tale and every supposed quote will be from unnamed sources (Meghan). Who out there still believes this tripe?


This is a rather arrogant comment imo, it looks like they see themselves as the center of attention. Their greed made them blind to the huge privilege that is to be the sixth in line...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> At this point, I can’t feel any sympathy for MM.
> If, after all the cautions and warnings she didn’t know what and who she was marrying — well, it’s on her.
> 
> Perhaps if they had spent more time together _before_ marrying, she would have known what to expect.
> Alternatively, she could have read Diana and Fergie’s books. They spelled it out quite candidly and very clearly. Additionally, she could have watched the interviews Fergie did with Oprah. Even the books about Wallis explain the issues. Now, why would MM think she would be treated differently than those ladies?



Because she is special.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It comes down to one word, arrogance. Of course she went into it believing she could wheedle her way into everyone’s good graces and she would be able to do as she pleased. She thinks she’s smarter than all of those women who preceded her.



Also, she strikes me as the type of woman who thinks on top of being better than other women she can wrap the men around her finger with her cuteness. That's her thing anyway, acting "cute" when she's pushing 40.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This is a rather arrogant comment imo, it looks like they see themselves as the center of attention. Their greed made them blind to the huge privilege that is to be the sixth in line...



It’s the same arrogance that made Harry think he could stand barefoot on the beach at a junket for billionaires and lecture the rest of the world about what they should be doing to save the environment, after flying in on a private jet no less. Clueless fool that he is.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, she strikes me as the type of woman who thinks on top of being better than other women she can wrap the men around her finger with her cuteness. That's her thing anyway, acting "cute" when she's pushing 40.


oh yes - those big doe eyes when she told the reporter no one asked how she was feeling


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Kate and William hit back as book said they shunned Meghan and Harry
> 
> 
> Close friends of the Cambridges insisted they had 'rolled out the red carpet' for US actress Meghan and 'done all they possible could' to welcome her into the Firm.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


And I believe it. MM never got over the fact she and Kate were not equals, and that's where the problems started, not with them being unfriendly to her.

ETA: also, all these quotes about people not trusting MM and questioning her motives from the beginning...I don't know, if that's supposed to be a book in their favour I wouldn't maybe push that narrative as in hindsight we know these people where right. But I'm dying to know who called her Harry's showgirl LOL


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And I believe it. MM never got over the fact she and Kate were not equals, and that's where the problems started, not with them being unfriendly to her.
> 
> ETA: also, all these quotes about people not trusting MM and questioning her motives from the beginning...very telling.


equals?  I think she believed she was better, more glamourous, more intelligent, etc.
So to have to play second fiddle to Kate?  not acceptable


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> It comes down to one word, arrogance. Of course she went into it believing she could wheedle her way into everyone’s good graces and she would be able to do as she pleased. She thinks she’s smarter than all of those women who preceded her.


*NOPE* .. in my opinion, it was all about *SNAGGING the $$$* and that *"high" profile*.. PERIOD!  There was an article sometime back (_don't remember where published_) about the 'former' (_aka: markled_) British friend who also suggested that Meghan take the challenges of marrying into the BRF more seriously and to take more time in the relationship.  It was at this point, that the 'former friend' was told flat-out (_by Meghan_) that she (_Meghan_) wanted to get that ring on her finger tout-suite .. and was Meghan was "_so upset_" with the 'former friend' that she was subsequently markled (_and not invited to the wedding - even though they were supposedly "close friends" - hmmm, sound familiar?!?!_)  

I figure that Meghan just simply believed that she was just SO SMART and that her 'experience' in *manipulating *people and putting on all that '*charm*' (_probably her best acting - ever_) .. would just win the entire BRF over such that she would be able to do whatever she wanted (_remember _"_What Meghan wants, Meghan gets_")!  If you look at her "success" at climbing up that ladder, why wouldn't she think that they would all bow down to her wishes?!?!?


----------



## justwatchin

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t believe for a second that they weren’t involved with this book... the articles about how they wanted the release pushed up because it was their side of the story and now they didn’t talk to Omid about it? Huh?
> 
> Again, how stupid are we supposed to be?


Exactly. And considering how litigious they’ve become then they should have been filing a lawsuit months ago.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And I believe it. MM never got over the fact she and Kate were not equals, and that's where the problems started, not with them being unfriendly to her.
> 
> ETA: also, all these quotes about people not trusting MM and questioning her motives from the beginning...I don't know, if that's supposed to be a book in their favour I wouldn't maybe push that narrative as in hindsight we know these people where right. But I'm dying to know who called her Harry's showgirl LOL


Wasn't that Prince Phillip who said that "you date an actress, you don't marry one"?  I wouldn't put it past him ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Wasn't that Prince Phillip who said that "you date an actress, you don't marry one"?  I wouldn't put it past him ..


Harry should have listened to that advice.
I can't imagine H is happy right now.  But he is either too stubborn to admit he made a mistake or too much under her control.  And of course he has a son to think about.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because she is special.



LOL! Laughter is good for the soul. Thank you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Wasn't that Prince Phillip who said that "you date an actress, you don't marry one"?  I wouldn't put it past him ..




“People think there’s a rigid class system here, but dukes have been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.”
— Prince Philip


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> “People think there’s a rigid class system here, but dukes have been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.”
> — Prince Philip


HA!!! .. he's classic for saying some really horrible things but there are times when they are pretty darn funny!!!


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> From the NY Post:
> 
> If “Megxit” had its own dishy biography — this would be it.
> 
> The Times of London has released the first excerpt from a new tell-all book by a pair of veteran UK journalists, and they offer an inside look at the bitterness and palace intrigue behind Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s split from the royal family.
> 
> “Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family,” is being serialized beginning Saturday.
> 
> It promises inside scoop direct from the royal family’s close confidantes — and while not officially sanctioned by Harry and Markle, it is shaping up to be particularly sympathetic to their side of Megxit.
> 
> The first installment includes these revelations by authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand:
> 
> 
> Harry was disparaged within the palace walls for being “too sensitive and outspoken” — and he felt unprotected by his own family.
> Harry, in turn, strived to protect his new bride from the palace “old guard,” some of whom “simply didn’t like Meghan and would stop at nothing to make her life difficult.”
> Harry and Markle had immediately become international sensations, eclipsing even Prince William and Kate Middleton and the rest of the royals above their rank — and so “needed to be reined in,” many in the old guard felt.
> William and Kate, meanwhile, were deeply hurt that private family matters were being aired in public while the royal family was kept in the dark.
> Markle told pals that suffering the criticism of the vicious UK tabloids was like “death by a thousand cuts.”
> Here is some of the first excerpt, as reprinted by the Times of London:
> 
> ——
> 
> Since getting married, Harry and Meghan had enjoyed calling their own shots. “Harry and Meghan liked being in control of their narrative,” a source said, which is why originally agreeing to fold their household into Buckingham Palace, instead of creating their own independent court, had proved a big disappointment to them.
> 
> Harry and Meghan had wanted to create their own individual household in Windsor, meaning their own office staffed with their own team, who would be separate from all others. But senior officials quickly ruled out that option.
> 
> The senior courtiers whom Diana used to refer to as “men in grey suits” were concerned that the global interest in and popularity of the Sussexes needed to be reined in.
> 
> In the short time since their fairytale wedding, Harry and Meghan were already propelling the monarchy to new heights around the world.
> 
> As their popularity had grown, so did Harry and Meghan’s difficulty in understanding why so few inside the palace were looking out for their interests.
> 
> They were a major draw for the royal family. According to a press report that compared the online popularity of the Sussexes with the Cambridges from November 2017 to January 2020, “Harry-and-Meghan-related searches accounted for 83 percent of the world’s curiosity in the two couples.”
> 
> The Sussexes had made the monarchy more relatable to those who had never before felt a connection. However, there were concerns that the couple should be brought into the fold; otherwise, the establishment feared their popularity might eclipse that of the royal family.
> 
> Increasingly Harry had grown frustrated that he and Meghan often took a back seat to other family members.
> 
> While they both respected the hierarchy of the institution, it was difficult when they wanted to focus on a project and were told that a more senior ranking family member, be it Prince William or Prince Charles, had an initiative or tour being announced at the same time — so they would just have to wait.
> 
> For months the couple tried to air these frustrations, but the conversations didn’t lead anywhere.
> 
> Worse, there were just a handful of people working at the palace they could trust. Outside this core team, no information was safe.
> 
> A friend of the couple referred to the old guard as “the vipers”. Meanwhile, an equally frustrated palace staffer described the Sussexes’ team as “the squeaky third wheel” of the palace.
> 
> Highly emotional and fiercely protective of his wife and son, Harry was drained by the unique circumstances of his family, which, as a source described, “doesn’t have the opportunity to operate as an actual family.”
> 
> While politics are part of every family dynamic, they are at a whole other level for William, Harry, and the rest of the royals.
> 
> “Every conversation, every issue, every personal disagreement, whatever it may be, involves staff,” the source said of the aides who invariably send and receive messages between the royal households.
> 
> “It creates a really weird environment that actually doesn’t allow people to sort things out themselves.”
> 
> No one could deny the fact that the couple was emotionally exhausted, whether they had brought it on themselves or were victims of a merciless machine.
> 
> *“They felt under pressure,” a source said. “They felt that they were alone.”*
> 
> For Harry especially, it was all getting to be too much. “Doesn’t the Queen deserve better?” screamed one newspaper headline, which the prince read online.
> 
> *“These people are just paid trolls,” he later told a friend. “Nothing but trolls . . . and it’s disgusting.”*
> 
> Scrolling on his iPhone, he sometimes couldn’t stop himself from reading the comments on the articles.
> 
> “H&M disgust me.”
> 
> “They are a disgrace to the royal family.”
> 
> “The world would be a better place without Harry and Meghan in it.”
> 
> *The last comment had over 3,500 upvotes. Harry regretted opening the link.
> 
> His stomach tied into the same knot every time he saw these sorts of comments.
> 
> “It’s a sick part of the society we live in today, and no one is doing anything about it,” he continued.
> 
> “Where’s the positivity? Why is everyone so miserable and angry?”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read it: The first excerpt released from ‘Megxit’ tell-all book
> 
> 
> If “Megxit” had its own dishy biography — this would be it. The Times of London has released the first excerpt from a new tell-all book by a pair of veteran UK journalists, and th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



What in the entitled, preachy, woe-is-me, pity-party-for-2, attention-seeking, arrogant bullsh*t, did I just read?



This 'bOoK' is going to destroy them.

All of this could have been avoided IF:
1. Harry would have listened to the (supposed) caring advice of his brother and took his time with his relationship with MM. Slowly introduce her to the RF way of life and traditions, see if she liked it and felt comfortable living that way. Give everyone (including himself) a chance to actually get to know her, instead of being forced to know her.

2. As he proceeded at 100mph with this relationship, getting engaged after not really being together for that long (each living in different countries and not having lived _together _full-time), they could have actually done the job they said they would do in that shambles of an engagement interview. They could have listened to the advice from experienced professionals there to guide them and got on with doing great things in the world, while representing the Queen and the RF they were part of and working for.

Also...
3. Harry would have married anyone else but MM. Yeah. I said what I said. Marrying the type of person she is, only highlights how gullible, immature, sheltered of a person JCMH actually is/was all along... and it seems she knew exactly this when she set her sights on him. Gaslighting is one hell of an evil thing.
This whole thing is a trainwreck I can't take my eyes off of.


----------



## mdcx

Had to come here when I saw the "throw Omid Scobie under the bus" strategy had begun. So, she used him to publicise her dislike for the BRF and continue to portray herself as a victim. When the backlash began though, Omid who? We never authorised this book etc.

ETA https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8560293/Royal-book-authors-DID-information-come-from.html


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> What in the entitled, preachy, woe-is-me, pity-party-for-2, attention-seeking, arrogant bullsh*t, did I just read?
> 
> View attachment 4799799
> 
> *This 'bOoK' is going to destroy them.*


.. but you know their 'stans' are going to believe every freakin' word of this drivel; however - I have to really wonder what QEII and Prince Charles are going to do about it.  While Prince Harry would retain his Princely title, didn't QEII remove the 'HRH' from Diana after the divorce, as well as taking away the Duchess title from Fergie after their divorce?  

I have to wonder if this book is their (_well - actually Meghan's_) way of shooting across the bow; in other words .. almost daring QEII to take away those titles .. because IMO, if QEII were to take those titles away (_which I would 100% support_), Meghan would have a field-day in playing that victim card even more so to garner all that "sympathy" that she seems to feed on .. and who knows, they might end up living on an even more expensive property (Oprah's?) .. without paying a dime!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, Dumbarton knew nothing about tourism, so let’s book him as our spokesperson 








						Royal book authors: So where DID all their information come from?
					

Omid Scobie described how he 'hugged' Meghan during a farewell in March just hours before she quit Britain and has boasted of enjoying a 'one-on-one' discussion with Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



Omid detailed how he ‘joined the Duke of Sussex in Edinburgh’ on February 26 for a summit on sustainable and ethical tourism.
_Chatting with him one-on-one recently I was struck by how knowledgeable he has become in this field,’ Mr Scobie said. ‘As one of the attendees at the Edinburgh work summit whispered to me after his speech, “He’s about to change the game for good.”’_


@CeeJay  If not now, when?  They can play the victim card so many times before they sound like HennyPenney. This book is one long ‘the sky is falling’ drivel, so it seems like the best time to take away the titles, lands, houses and all the money. H&M‘s book has earned them the _QE touch_. They throw shade at her and the family, they lose the titles. Seems fair to me.


----------



## BrandSnob

Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.


----------



## mshermes

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.


What kind of women might that be? Normal, intelligent women perhaps? This has absolutely nothing to do with jealousy. Who would be jealous of her? I think it has more to do with the fact that her narcissistic behavior is simply shocking. I have yet to see one redeeming quality in her.


----------



## mdcx

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.


Goodness, what is there to be jealous of? Yes she is pretty, no one is disputing that. Her life is far from enviable to me - plenty of other people live lives of quiet luxury in happy marriages with loving extended families and privacy. Meghan was advised of the rules and restrictions of marrying into the BRF before the event. It's a hugely constrained and demanding role, not a Lady Godiva type situation. She turned her nose up at the protocol and at the dreary day to day work involved imo. It may surprise you but race has little to do with many people's judgements of Meghan's behaviour.


----------



## BrandSnob

mdcx said:


> Goodness, what is there to be jealous of? Yes she is pretty, no one is disputing that. Her life is far from enviable to me - plenty of other people live lives of quiet luxury in happy marriages with loving extended families and privacy. Meghan was advised of the rules and restrictions of marrying into the BRF before the event. It's a hugely constrained and demanding role, not a Lady Godiva type situation. She turned her nose up at the protocol and at the dreary day to day work involved imo. It may surprise you but race has little to do with many people's judgements of Meghan's behaviour.



Harry hasn’t wanted to be a royal tho. She accepted that about him and it why he loved her and married her as opposed to the women before him who just wanted to have a Royal title.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

BrandSnob said:


> Harry hasn’t wanted to be a royal tho. She accepted that about him and it why he loved her and married her as opposed to the women before him who just wanted to have a Royal title.


I would suggest that the appeal of a Royal title as compared to the cost of obtaining one by marrying H was deemed not worth it by all of H's previous girlfriends. There are plenty of other options for marrying well amongst the Brit aristo set.


----------



## BrandSnob

mdcx said:


> I would suggest that the appeal of a Royal title as compared to the cost of obtaining one by marrying H was deemed not worth it by all of H's previous girlfriends. There are plenty of other options for marrying well amongst the Brit aristo set.



lol yea right. There’s tons of girls what would’ve dated anyone half decent looking to get a title. His past gfs that HE left were All too much into the titles and everything which was a turnoff for him and why they didn’t succeed. You say they have other options well I don’t see each of them with a wife title from someone Well off now so I guess you’re wrong


----------



## mdcx

BrandSnob said:


> lol yea right. There’s tons of girls what would’ve dated anyone half decent looking to get a title. His past gfs that HE left were All too much into the titles and everything which was a turnoff for him and why they didn’t succeed. You say they have other options well I don’t see each of them with a wife title from someone Well off now so I guess you’re wrong


Well, that's one way to look at it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BrandSnob said:


> lol yea right. There’s tons of girls what would’ve dated anyone half decent looking to get a title. His past gfs that HE left were All too much into the titles and everything which was a turnoff for him and why they didn’t succeed. You say they have other options well I don’t see each of them with a wife title from someone Well off now so I guess you’re wrong



The wonderful thing about this thread is that most of us post links that support our comments. Do you have support for your comment that he left the gfs? This article may help you to understand that he was never really considered a top catch. Ya kno, the excessive drinking & drugging & lad-ish & petulant & daft behavior are kind of a turn-off for most of us.








						A Look Back At Prince Harry's Dating History
					

Before there was Meghan Markle, these were the ladies (both rumored and confirmed) who captured the Prince's eye.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




If, as you say there tons of girls who want a guy with a title, then they get what they deserve — a shallow relationship. Once someone makes the Faustian bargain, they really shouldn’t complain.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if *certain kinds of women* are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.




Well, *BrandSnob*, your racist phrase about myself, presumably, bc yes, you seem to be calling out "certain kinds of woman are jealous a black woman snagged a prince" <if that isn't a blanket racist prase about the PEOPLE on this thread, then get your head out of the sand> 
Almost burst out laughing reading that post, thanks for the entertainment 

Moving along, Grayden Carter will always be missed@VF! 
He offered his comments about the un-royal, not loyal grifters to Daily Mail:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...uggests-ex-Vanity-Fair-editor.html#newcomment

LA is 'not a place' for Harry, suggests ex-Vanity Fair editor who says Prince's military past and the couple's taste for 'lecturing' people while enjoying a luxury lifestyle count against them

Graydon Carter, 71, says the Prince's move to LA has saddened the British people
He says it is hard for them to lecture people when they live in a 14-bed mansion
In comparison he says that Kate and William do things 'almost to perfection'​
BUT, dear reader, the best-rated comments are truly worth the price of the popcorn:

_Wat Tyler, Mercia, United Kingdom, 17 hours ago_
"No Meghan. It was the Queen who gave up her entire life for "this family".

_DarkStraightUp, Blackpool, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago_
*The only things she gave up were bee j.s, pay for play and turning tricks in Soh0 H0.us. e, Room 69.*

So, in closing, *BrandSnob*, tPF is not THE ONLY FORUM on the globe that discerns this couple's combined ginormous appetite for displays of hypocrisy, greed, lying, jealousy, and spite.
Go figure.


----------



## Lodpah

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.


Nah, it's not about color. It's about greed, nastiness, disrespectful to the charities she left standing in the rain, the maliciousness, greed again, perpetual victimhood, markling everyone she has no use for, the preaching of love one another while she leads her lapdog . . . I mean JCHM around a chain, the frivolous litigation, the do as I say not as I do, etc.  You might have to go to the beginning of the tread to see how loved she was and as time went by, well . . . the train wreck is moving faster and faster . . . but she's gonna derail it soon herself by her own actions.

It’s all about the content of character not the dress.


----------



## pixiejenna

This book sounds awful I wonder how the BRF will respond. Hopefully they will cut the strings for good and take away their titles. Poor JCMH and MM having to actually accept their place in line even though they believe that they’re better than the higher ranking family members. This is not a popularity contest and if it was they’re not doing well in that department either LMAO.

Also no one is being racist here because we don’t like MM. The reason why we don’t like her has nothing to do with the color of her skin but the content of her character and the lack there of. It‘s based on her past and current behavior that she has repeatedly displayed. JCMH’s previous long term relationships ended because the women he was with didn’t want to marry into the royal family, unlike MM they have a true understanding of the monarchy and the role that they would be subjected to if they joined.


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> equals?  I think she believed she was better, more glamourous, more intelligent, etc.
> So to have to play second fiddle to Kate?  not acceptable



I totally agree!  MM clearly thinks that she is superior to Kate, and believes that she is much more popular than Kate.  It seems as if she feels that she and H were super novas, more interesting and more popular than the entire rest of the BRF and that William and Kate should just stand aside and let MM and H ascend to the top of the heap.

Right, Meg, that is exactly how this all works.

Personally, my only interest (small and waning as it is) in Harry is that I feel badly for him for what he had to go through as a small boy. I would have liked to see him happily married.  No need to see or hear much more from or about him than that.  As for MM, to the only even slightly interesting thing about her is that she married him.  Neither has the intelligence or achievements to really talk about or to cause me to be interested in hearing more from them.  But this daily non-stop drama, arrogance and insulting of the BRF and its traditions and the Cambridges in particular is most definitely a bridge too far.


----------



## needlv

Harry can’t blame anyone but himself.  He seems to seeth resentment, anger and jealousy in the past few years.  I don’t think he was a catch.  He just found MM who also feels like the world should bow down to her.  They both deserve each other.  Prince Charles should cut them off, and the Queen should remove titles.  They aren’t relevant to the UK anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> .. but you know their 'stans' are going to believe every freakin' word of this drivel; however - I have to really wonder what QEII and Prince Charles are going to do about it.  While Prince Harry would retain his Princely title, didn't QEII remove the 'HRH' from Diana after the divorce, as well as taking away the Duchess title from Fergie after their divorce?



Sarah is still Duchess of York as well as HRH, she only lost the "The" in front of Duchess (don't ask me what that means though). Diana lost her HRH, but it's been reported it was in fact Charles, not The Queen, who insisted, which I feel regarding how this marriage ended is, uh, bold. I guess the one time he felt even a little bit guilty was after her death.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.



If I have to read one more newbie with "I don't get why y'all don't like her"...read the thread, people. All spelled out for you. I'm happy to revisit my opinion if you give me good arguments why we all are wrong, but alas, so far no stan has had more than thinly veiled insults for those who do not stan.

P.S. Could you kindly explain how being interested in Development Assistance equals "being into black women"? My father has been spending his vacations in Cameroon for years working pro bono at a local clinic, I would be surprised to learn it was all due to "being into black women" to be honest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BrandSnob said:


> Harry hasn’t wanted to be a royal tho. She accepted that about him and it why he loved her and married her as opposed to the women before him who just wanted to have a Royal title.



You're not up to date with your info game, are you? Both Cressida and Chelsey didn't want to be part of the firm, which is why they ultimately broke up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> I would suggest that the appeal of a Royal title as compared to the cost of obtaining one by marrying H was deemed not worth it by all of H's previous girlfriends. There are plenty of other options for marrying well amongst the Brit aristo set.


Too bad the Duke of Westminster is too young for me LOL


----------



## Mariambagaholic

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Diana lost her HRH



She will always be the queen in my heart


----------



## Aqua01

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## djuna1

https://camfed.org/InspiredByMeghan/


----------



## Handbag1234

djuna1 said:


> https://camfed.org/InspiredByMeghan/



 I applaud the cause, but the video looks like a MM PR film. The girls and JCMH are simply props. MM looks so smug when she talks. It’s all about her. Everyone listen up, I’m talking, and I’m going to save the world one cause at a time. The only thing missing is a halo above her head! JCMH looks really uncomfortable.


----------



## beautymagpie

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t believe for a second that they weren’t involved with this book... the articles about how they wanted the release pushed up because it was their side of the story and now they didn’t talk to Omid about it? Huh?
> 
> Again, how stupid are we supposed to be?



I thought that too. Given how trigger happy their PR and legal teams are, they could have taken action against so many reports that they/she was holed up giving interviews for the book in Canada while they were on holiday before or around Christmas before they blew things up.


----------



## beautymagpie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And I believe it. MM never got over the fact she and Kate were not equals, and that's where the problems started, not with them being unfriendly to her.
> 
> ETA: also, all these quotes about people not trusting MM and questioning her motives from the beginning...I don't know, if that's supposed to be a book in their favour I wouldn't maybe push that narrative as in hindsight we know these people where right. But I'm dying to know who called her Harry's showgirl LOL



You know, with certain people (personalities) the more they see someone try, the more they take advantage. Making someone’s favourite meals might be see as kind and welcoming to a normal person, but to someone with the personality of ‘me, me, me’ it will be taken as ‘ok, that’s the base now, what else can I get? I deserve more’. 

And all the reports that say someone was leaking I believe are true, but I think it’s a smokescreen for who the leak was. Meghan clearly loves PR and being in the press. She had an issue with not being allowed openly to speak out, that’s where the letter legal drama stems from, she’s the leak, directly or via friends. Her.


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> I totally agree!  MM clearly thinks that she is superior to Kate, and believes that she is much more popular than Kate.  It seems as if she feels that she and H were super novas, more interesting and more popular than the entire rest of the BRF and that William and Kate should just stand aside and let MM and H ascend to the top of the heap.
> 
> Right, Meg, that is exactly how this all works.
> 
> Personally, my only interest (small and waning as it is) in Harry is that I feel badly for him for what he had to go through as a small boy. I would have liked to see him happily married.  No need to see or hear much more from or about him than that.  As for MM, to the only even slightly interesting thing about her is that she married him.  Neither has the intelligence or achievements to really talk about or to cause me to be interested in hearing more from them.  But this daily non-stop drama, arrogance and insulting of the BRF and its traditions and the Cambridges in particular is most definitely a bridge too far.



I think 'we' (not the Royal 'We' but 'we', most people of GB/UK) _were_ really happy when he did get married - to Meghan. That engagement interview seemed to point the way for a very strong union. She wasn't too young and no wall-flower and he'd made a decision for himself. We wished them well and gave them a wedding fit for a Prince and Princess.

They in turn thanked the people of the United Kingdom, saying we _and_ the BRF had warmly welcomed Meghan and they were looking forward to working with the BRF as full time members of Royals.

Where it turned sour is after the wedding, investiture and another grace and favour home (because Kensington Palace was not good enough).

Their 'gimme, gimme attitude', where _nothing_ was ever grand enough, acute paranoia and collective narcism has earned the the disdain of the people they promised to serve (at that interview). This was made worse by the Duke and Duchess' hypocrisy which provoked ridicule, not to mention some pretty grandiose and petty vindictive statements are pretty worrying for a couple that seek to be future leaders.


----------



## carmen56

It’s amazing how petty and pathetic some of their grievances are.  It must be like dealing with kindergarten age children!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> “People think there’s a rigid class system here, but dukes have been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans.”
> — Prince Philip





CeeJay said:


> HA!!! .. he's classic for saying some really horrible things but there are times when they are pretty darn funny!!!



Darn funny but rather too snobbish for my taste. There is nothing wrong with a chorus girl (or actress) marrying a duke or a king. The character of a person is what it counts.  

My major problem with MM&H is their controversial characters. They give the impression of wanting a life of luxury without working for it, be always in the limelight while preaching about the need of privacy, and all this under the umbrella of being called philanthropists without donating $$$$.


----------



## LittleStar88

djuna1 said:


> https://camfed.org/InspiredByMeghan/




Is this from the trip to Africa where she whined On camera about how hard her life is?


----------



## sdkitty

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.


if she had "snagged a prince" and then been graceful and performed the role she signed up for, no one here would be criticizing her.  as far as her being a black woman who "snagged" a prince and us being jealous - do you see any of us criticizing other black women?  Beyonce?  Hallie Berry?  Michelle ***** (epitome of grace IMO)
  I don't and I doubt anyone else here does.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> if she had "snagged a prince" and then been graceful and performed the role she signed up for, no one here would be criticizing her.  as far as her being a black woman who "snagged" a prince and us being jealous - do you see any of us criticizing other black women?  Beyonce?  Hallie Berry?  Michelle ***** (epitome of grace and IMO)
> I don't and I doubt anyone else here does.



If Michelle had snagged a prince you'd be hating on her, too. Just kidding.

By the way, I hate to shatter yet one more stan illusion, but the first black woman to marry into European royalty wasn't our precious Meghan, but Angela of Liechtenstein (daughter-in-law to the reigning monarch...her husband is the spare too).


----------



## 1LV

^^^^
A lot of people would say Michelle did snag a prince!


----------



## sdkitty

I recall reading this VF article about British (and biracial) Emma Thynn, Vicscountess of Bath.  Brits are probably well aware of her but I wasn't.  Seems lovely. 









						Meet the Viscountess Transforming the Idea of British Aristocracy
					

Emma Thynn, an extraordinary cook and mother who is positioned to become Britain’s first black marchioness, has recast the mold of aristocracy with her stylish, entrepreneurial spirit—despite a strained relationship with her in-laws.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Luvbolide said:


> Nothing from H&M re: Bea's wedding either, right?  I'd expect that from her but I read somewhere that Bea and Harry were very close. Would expect some sort of congratulatory message would be in order.  If he keeps this up, he's going to find that, in addition to having no friends in LA, he has lost the ones he has in the UK.  Harry - wake the hell up.


I think that's part of the plan, isn't it?  Isolate him from friends and family so he is utterly "dependent" on Meghan?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I recall reading this VF article about British (and biracial) Emma Thynn, Vicscountess of Bath.  Brits are probably well aware of her but I wasn't.  Seems lovely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Viscountess Transforming the Idea of British Aristocracy
> 
> 
> Emma Thynn, an extraordinary cook and mother who is positioned to become Britain’s first black marchioness, has recast the mold of aristocracy with her stylish, entrepreneurial spirit—despite a strained relationship with her in-laws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


She now is the Marchioness of Bath, her father in law sadly passed away in April due to coronavirus.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> She now is the Marchioness of Bath, her father in law sadly passed away in April due to coronavirus.


FIL was quite the character


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> So _she’s_ the smart one?  Scary.


"Smart"?  More like conniving.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I recall reading this VF article about British (and biracial) Emma Thynn, Vicscountess of Bath.  Brits are probably well aware of her but I wasn't.  Seems lovely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Viscountess Transforming the Idea of British Aristocracy
> 
> 
> Emma Thynn, an extraordinary cook and mother who is positioned to become Britain’s first black marchioness, has recast the mold of aristocracy with her stylish, entrepreneurial spirit—despite a strained relationship with her in-laws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


She is very accomplished and respected.  Here she is with her parents.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> FIL was quite the character


Yup, he was pretty eccentric to put it politely.  He had "wifelets" scattered on his estate.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> She is very accomplished and respected.  Here she is with her parents.
> 
> View attachment 4800508


She was also a contestant on strictly come dancing


----------



## Cavalier Girl

1LV said:


> ^^^^
> A lot of people would say Michelle did snag a prince!



This could also be said the other way around.    They're a wonderful match.


----------



## Sol Ryan

So what was the point of the BBC interview? Apparently everything they said in it was a lie....

Harry and Megan Secretly engaged 2 Months before they told the world

Why lie?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yup, he was pretty eccentric to put it politely.  He had "wifelets" scattered on his estate.


according to the VF article he had as many as 70 wifelets


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> according to the VF article he had as many as 70 wifelets


Busy guy!  He puts some of the Mormon outliers to shame hahaha!


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> So what was the point of the BBC interview? Apparently everything they said in it was a lie....
> 
> Harry and Megan Secretly engaged 2 Months before they told the world
> 
> Why lie?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4800553


Everything has to be a secret with these two.  So childish.  

EDit:  I have to go back and look at that interview again.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> Everything has to be a secret with these two.  So childish.
> 
> EDit:  I have to go back and look at that interview again.


Ina Garten is gonna be so disappointed... remember when she was bragging that it was her chicken recipe that they used?









						Ina Garten Explains Why Meghan and Harry's Royal Wedding "Would’ve Never Happened" Without Her Recipe | Bravo TV Official Site
					

When Prince Harry wed Meghan Markle back in May, foodies were obsessing over the lemon-elderberry cake that was reportedly served at the reception.




					www.bravotv.com
				




Disrespecting The Barefoot Contessa is a bridge too far...


----------



## lulu212121

Sol Ryan said:


> So what was the point of the BBC interview? Apparently everything they said in it was a lie....
> 
> Harry and Megan Secretly engaged 2 Months before they told the world
> 
> Why lie?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4800553


Megan really does seem obsessed with Kate! I hope Kate has some sort of "protection/restraining order" from Megan. My goodness!


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> Ina Garten is gonna be so disappointed... remember when she was bragging that it was her chicken recipe that they used?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ina Garten Explains Why Meghan and Harry's Royal Wedding "Would’ve Never Happened" Without Her Recipe | Bravo TV Official Site
> 
> 
> When Prince Harry wed Meghan Markle back in May, foodies were obsessing over the lemon-elderberry cake that was reportedly served at the reception.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bravotv.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disrespecting The Barefoot Contessa is a bridge too far...



It sure is.  If Jeffrey get mad, who knows what will happen!


----------



## gracekelly

lulu212121 said:


> Megan really does seem obsessed with Kate! I hope Kate has some sort of "protection/restraining order" from Megan. My goodness!


The good news is that nanny Maria Borrallo has been trained in the defensive arts.  She may have to use them!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulu212121 said:


> Megan really does seem obsessed with Kate! I hope Kate has some sort of "protection/restraining order" from Megan. My goodness!



Have you seen all that footage where Meghan was staring at Kate from behind her like a lunatic ready to put a knife through her? That was seriously scary, from several different occasions no less.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

At first I didn't think much of the engagement dates not matching up...who cares if they kept to themselves for a few weeks. Now that I was bored and actually read the article...why fabricate a completely different story though (from a trip to Botswana to a roasted chicken in Kensington palace)? At least one of them - looking at the person who's made up sh*t before - is a compulsive liar.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toulouse

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Well, *BrandSnob*, your racist phrase about myself, presumably, bc yes, you seem to be calling out "certain kinds of woman are jealous a black woman snagged a prince" <if that isn't a blanket racist prase about the PEOPLE on this thread, then get your head out of the sand>
> Almost burst out laughing reading that post, thanks for the entertainment
> 
> Moving along, Grayden Carter will always be missed@VF!
> He offered his comments about the un-royal, not loyal grifters to Daily Mail:
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...uggests-ex-Vanity-Fair-editor.html#newcomment
> 
> LA is 'not a place' for Harry, suggests ex-Vanity Fair editor who says Prince's military past and the couple's taste for 'lecturing' people while enjoying a luxury lifestyle count against them
> 
> Graydon Carter, 71, says the Prince's move to LA has saddened the British people
> He says it is hard for them to lecture people when they live in a 14-bed mansion
> In comparison he says that Kate and William do things 'almost to perfection'​
> BUT, dear reader, the best-rated comments are truly worth the price of the popcorn:
> 
> _Wat Tyler, Mercia, United Kingdom, 17 hours ago_
> "No Meghan. It was the Queen who gave up her entire life for "this family".
> 
> _DarkStraightUp, Blackpool, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago_
> *The only things she gave up were bee j.s, pay for play and turning tricks in Soh0 H0.us. e, Room 69.*
> 
> So, in closing, *BrandSnob*, tPF is not THE ONLY FORUM on the globe that discerns this couple's combined ginormous appetite for displays of hypocrisy, greed, lying, jealousy, and spite.
> Go figure.


While I am no great fan of Meghan, I am disappointed that you would paste such a blatantly sexist comment in this thread (yes, I know it was a cut and paste job, but why even go there?). And you’re by no means alone in this. I’ve seen other references in this thread to her being “a yacht girl” and “having an anchor baby.” If you want to criticize her, and there certainly is room to do so, please don’t use these sexist tropes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I recall reading this VF article about British (and biracial) Emma Thynn, Vicscountess of Bath.  Brits are probably well aware of her but I wasn't.  Seems lovely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Viscountess Transforming the Idea of British Aristocracy
> 
> 
> Emma Thynn, an extraordinary cook and mother who is positioned to become Britain’s first black marchioness, has recast the mold of aristocracy with her stylish, entrepreneurial spirit—despite a strained relationship with her in-laws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



What an interesting read. Also the nerve of the dowager marchioness.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At first I didn't think much of the engagement dates not matching up...who cares if they kept to themselves for a few weeks. Now that I was bored and actually read the article...why fabricate a completely different story though (from a trip to Botswana to a roasted chicken in Kensington palace)? At least one of them - looking at the person who's made up sh*t before - is a compulsive liar.



That’s what I don’t understand? What’s the point in lying and creating this whole chicken dinner story and bringing Ina into it? Honestly, the engagement while camping in Botswana would be a better story with the history of the diamonds in the ring (if that’s even true).

I don’t understand what how this book is supposed to make them look better? So far we’ve had that Kate, a mother of three, didn’t drop everything to take her shopping, a fake engagement story, and Wills suggesting a longer relationship, which if they got engaged two months earlier than the public were told, seems reasonable when you’re talking about that much money... shoot, I don’t have any where near that much money and me and my previous partner were together 5 years before we committed to a mortgage (before marriage was legal...)...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, he is known for his controversial comments. In this case he was referring to Edward’s abdication which caused his wife, QE, to become Queen. Some of the upheaval the abdication caused for him was shown in ’The Crown‘. Due to his dignified silence and sense of duty, we will never know exactly how much he has suffered because of Edward’s actions. His healthy appearance at the Palace last week must rattle Harry’s nerves. Philip is old school and does not allow the kiddies or grandkiddies to sully his wife’s reputation. He is healthy and showed himself to be most definitely in charge.


			https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/slideshows/9-of-prince-philips-most-royally-awkward-moments?slide=8
		





Chanbal said:


> Darn funny but rather too snobbish for my taste. There is nothing wrong with a chorus girl (or actress) marrying a duke or a king. The character of a person is what it counts.
> 
> My major problem with MM&H is their controversial characters. They give the impression of wanting a life of luxury without working for it, be always in the limelight while preaching about the need of privacy, and all this under the umbrella of being called philanthropists without donating $$$$.


----------



## Mimmy

djuna1 said:


> https://camfed.org/InspiredByMeghan/



An organization that supports marginalized girls to learn, thrive and lead change sounds like a good cause to support.

If MM is able to bring positive attention to CAMFED I support this also.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, he is known for his controversial comments. In this case he was referring to Edward’s abdication which caused his wife, QE, to become Queen. Some of the upheaval the abdication caused for him was shown in ’The Crown‘. Due to his dignified silence and sense of duty, we will never know exactly how much he has suffered because of Edward’s actions. His healthy appearance at the Palace last week must rattle Harry’s nerves. Philip is old school and does not allow the kiddies or grandkiddies to sully his wife’s reputation. He is healthy and showed himself to be most definitely in charge.
> 
> 
> https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/slideshows/9-of-prince-philips-most-royally-awkward-moments?slide=8



I was a little surprised when Philip didn't stick around for the Sandringham summit meeting.  The reports were that she handled the country and he handled the family, but he left as Harry was arriving.  Maybe they were afraid he would really lose his temper and at his age that could be dangerous.  He looked very well and perhaps he will make more appearances despite Covid.  He may be willing to take a stronger stance now  with Harry.

Yes, he is know for his controversial comments, but I have to admit, that he is pretty funny even when being politically incorrect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Found this while looking into the titles and style issue: 
The difference in the title and style is as follows:
— HRH The Duchess of York (married TITLE)
— Sarah, Duchess of York (divorced STYLE)










						Sarah, Duchess of York - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_By her divorce on 30 May 1996, she retained the style Her Royal Highness with the style of other divorced peeresses, eliminating the preface "The" before "Duchess of York". However, in accordance with letters patent issued in August 1996 regulating post-divorce royal titles, *Sarah ceased being a Royal Highness*, as she was no longer married to the Duke of York.[36] *Her current name, thus, is Sarah, Duchess of York*.[25] Should she marry again, Sarah would lose the use of the style of "Duchess of York" (unless of course she would remarry Prince Andrew).









						Diana, Princess of Wales - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



Days before, letters patent were issued with general rules to regulate royal titles after divorce. Diana lost the style "Her Royal Highness" and instead *was styled **Diana, Princess of Wales*._

Not sure how H&M are titled or styled now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I get why they would have to give up a title they only had because of their husband to begin with. I just think in Diana's case it was a bit unfortunate - and if the reports are true super petty of Charles - because she was after all the mother of a future king.


----------



## Luvbolide

1LV said:


> ^^^^
> A lot of people would say Michelle did snag a prince!




Hear, hear!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> ^^^^
> A lot of people would say Michelle did snag a prince!



Well, after reading Becoming I got the impression living with Barack was trying at times, but of course Michelle handeled it like the queen she is.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, after reading Becoming I got the impression living with Barack was trying at times, but of course Michelle handeled it like the queen she is.


I confess I didn't read the book but isn't living with any man trying at times?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I get why they would have to give up a title they only had because of their husband to begin with. I just think in Diana's case it was a bit unfortunate - and if the reports are true super petty of Charles - because she was after all the mother of a future king.



I always thought that was the Queen’s decision. Charles and Diana really despised each other at the end. There was little in the way of generous behavior between them. Had Diana lived, after a few years they likely would have found a way to deal with each other better for the boys’ sakes once they had both moved on with their lives.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors were he was ill or recovering from a hospital stay back then. Whatever it was,  he is receiving praises for last week’s appearance. At 99, still fit with ramrod straight posture and still conversing with the troops. It is worth noting that he asks them about their years of service. He put in 67 years of continuous service.  Duty to Queen and country — that is what he represents.

Never wavered, never explained, always confident and in charge. Watch out, H&M.




gracekelly said:


> I was a little surprised when Philip didn't stick around for the Sandringham summit meeting.  The reports were that she handled the country and he handled the family, but he left as Harry was arriving.  Maybe they were afraid he would really lose his temper and at his age that could be dangerous.  He looked very well and perhaps he will make more appearances despite Covid.  He may be willing to take a stronger stance now  with Harry.
> 
> Yes, he is know for his controversial comments, but I have to admit, that he is pretty funny even when being politically incorrect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I confess I didn't read the book but isn't living with any man trying at times?



I bet! She does not say a bad word about him, just describes how he'd work 24/7 and be always so immersed in his projects, plus she is super structured and he is...not LOL She described how her patience slowly started moving downhill or something (paraphrasing because I read it when it first came out) "until it finally slid off a cliff". I loved that she told it how it was, very relatable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I always thought that was the Queen’s decision. Charles and Diana really despised each other at the end. There was little in the way of generous behavior between them. Had Diana lived, after a few years they likely would have found a way to deal with each other better for the boys’ sakes once they had both moved on with their lives.



I thought I had read the Queen was erring on the side of being generous but it was Charles who insisted Di should lose the HRH. But I could be wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

1LV said:


> ^^^^
> A lot of people would say Michelle did snag a prince!


He bought her an ice cream cone on their first date, if I remember correctly. And that makes him a prince, imo!


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> She is very accomplished and respected.  Here she is with her parents.
> 
> View attachment 4800508


Gotta comment--that's one heck of a fireplace, are those dudes nekkid?


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors were he was ill or recovering from a hospital stay back then. Whatever it was,  he is receiving praises for last week’s appearance. At 99, still fit with ramrod straight posture and still conversing with the troops. It is worth noting that he asks them about their years of service. He put in 67 years of continuous service.  Duty to Queen and country — that is what he represents.
> 
> Never wavered, never explained, always confident and in charge. Watch out, H&M.





I continue to be astounded at how healthy both of them look at their advanced ages. Not only physically, but also mentally.  Incredible!


----------



## kemilia

Luvbolide said:


> I continue to be astounded at how healthy both of them look at their advanced ages. Not only physically, but also mentally.  Incredible!


Hopefully Charles has a long wait ahead of him.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought I had read the Queen was erring on the side of being generous but it was Charles who insisted Di should lose the HRH. But I could be wrong.



I am going by memory but it has been a long time. I could be mistaken. Charles is a petty man so I wouldn’t be surprised if he made his feelings known to his mother, but back then as now, her wishes always prevailed.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors were he was ill or recovering from a hospital stay back then. Whatever it was,  he is receiving praises for last week’s appearance. At 99, still fit with ramrod straight posture and still conversing with the troops. It is worth noting that he asks them about their years of service. He put in 67 years of continuous service.  Duty to Queen and country — that is what he represents.
> 
> Never wavered, never explained, always confident and in charge. Watch out, H&M.



He looked fabulous, good for him. 

And no, I would not go up against him. I can see why she stays far far away from the UK.


----------



## Lounorada

Sol Ryan said:


> So what was the point of the BBC interview? Apparently everything they said in it was a lie....
> 
> Harry and Megan Secretly engaged 2 Months before they told the world
> 
> Why lie?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4800553


Why lie about how your proposal/engagement happened? This sounds like them originally going for the roast chicken story to make them seem relatable and down-to-earth. To go with the whole 'just call me Harry', we're modern royals, 'we're not stuck-up like the rest of them' image they seemed desperate to have.

And this quote in relation to their last joint appearence at the Commonwealth ceremony in London in March:

_Mr Scobie told the Times: "To purposefully snub your sister-in-law... I don't think it left a great taste in the couple's mouths."_


First of all, it's pretty easy to leave a bad taste in this couples mouths, they're insulted by everything.
Secondly, Kate had every right to 'snub' the two of them. After all the stunts they had pulled up to that point and the disrespect they have shown the Queen and RF, she clearly had enough of the bullsh*t and drama and I don't blame her one bit. I can only imagine the stuff she knows from behind the scenes about the Sussex duo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sol Ryan said:


> That’s what I don’t understand? What’s the point in lying and creating this whole chicken dinner story and bringing Ina into it? Honestly, the engagement while camping in Botswana would be a better story with the history of the diamonds in the ring (if that’s even true).
> 
> I don’t understand what how this book is supposed to make them look better? So far we’ve had that Kate, a mother of three, didn’t drop everything to take her shopping, a fake engagement story, and Wills suggesting a longer relationship, which if they got engaged two months earlier than the public were told, seems reasonable when you’re talking about that much money... shoot, I don’t have any where near that much money and me and my previous partner were together 5 years before we committed to a mortgage (before marriage was legal...)...



I bet they took a secret sponsorship from the chicken industry. 




Lounorada said:


> Why lie about how your proposal/engagement happened? This sounds like them originally going for the roast chicken story to make them seem relatable and down-to-earth. To go with the whole 'just call me Harry', we're modern royals, 'we're not stuck-up like the rest of them' image they seemed desperate to have.
> 
> And this quote in relation to their last joint appearence at the Commonwealth ceremony in London in March:
> 
> _Mr Scobie told the Times: "To purposefully snub your sister-in-law... I don't think it left a great taste in the couple's mouths."_
> 
> 
> First of all, it's pretty easy to leave a bad taste in this couples mouths, they're insulted by everything.
> Secondly, Kate had every right to 'snub' the two of them. After all the stunts they had pulled up to that point and the disrespect they have shown the Queen and RF, she clearly had enough of the bullsh*t and drama and I don't blame her one bit. I can only imagine the stuff she knows from behind the scenes about the Sussex duo.



SLOW CLAP.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Philip is old school and does not allow the kiddies or grandkiddies to sully his wife’s reputation. [/URL]


QE dedicated her life to her role as queen and deserves admiration and respect, so it is good that he protects his wife's reputation.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I get why they would have to give up a title they only had because of their husband to begin with. I just think in Diana's case it was a bit unfortunate - and if the reports are true super petty of Charles - because she was after all the mother of a future king.


I agree with the above. Diana was very young and didn't know how to deal with certain situations during and after her marriage. I always admired her empathy for others, she had a genuine compassion for the less fortunate. She would have been sad with Harry's choice of wife imo.


----------



## CeeJay

Well, as we predicted.. the proverbial sh!t has started hitting the pan .. 

“Harry and Meghan 'will NEVER resume official roles with Royal Family”
https://mol.im/a/8562521


----------



## Emeline

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we predicted.. the proverbial sh!t has started hitting the pan ..
> 
> “Harry and Meghan 'will NEVER resume official roles with Royal Family”
> https://mol.im/a/8562521


What a pair. Only H&M would not realize their incredible disrespect and rudeness would have permanent  consequences. 
Maybe  they will occasionally be invited to Christmas lunch in the coming years.


----------



## CeeJay

Emeline said:


> What a pair. Only H&M would not realize their incredible disrespect and rudeness would have permanent  consequences.
> Maybe  they will occasionally be invited to Christmas lunch in the coming years.


Right?!?  At this point, I have to say that I really don’t get their “agenda” with this book .. it certainly appears that the consensus (based on the DM Comments) are NOT positive for H&M with many feeling that the Queen and Prince Charles should cast them off sans titles and £££!


----------



## gracekelly

Emeline said:


> What a pair. Only H&M would not realize their incredible disrespect and rudeness would have permanent  consequences.
> Maybe  they will occasionally be invited to Christmas lunch in the coming years.



They won't go.  So much easier to wallow in their hurt feelings.  Really pathetic at this point.

Even if Harry finds his way back, it can and will never be the same.  He is not trustworthy.  I think that is one of the reason's his military patronages were taken from him.  He couldn't even be bothered to do his duty to for the memorial concert and went to the Disney opening instead just to flack his wife to Bob Iger.  We see where that got her.  A pathetic narration that was promptly shoved to the back of the closet.

i have come around to thinking that Harry hates his family.  He has a laundry list of all the wrongs he believes they did to him.  The biggest wrong they did was creating this fictional prince who was wonderful and hale fellow well met.  I'd say that image has been torn apart and he has himself to thank.  All it took was the right woman and right set of circumstances and *BOOM!  That guy is gone!*


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?  At this point, I have to say that I really don’t get their “agenda” with this book .. it certainly appears that the consensus (based on the DM Comments) are NOT positive for H&M with many feeling that the Queen and Prince Charles should cast them off sans titles and £££!


CeeJay, totally agree. No sympathy and lots of incredulity about the whining since he is 6th in line and was never going to be William’s equal. Most seem to think William was being a loving protective older brother in his cautionary statement to Harry about taking more time.

The authors’ claims of never interviewing them are disingenuous. Scooby Do could have had the friends ask questions and then had the friends relay the info to him. Or, considering the manipulative cunning of MM, selected friends may have been directed to tell him specific stories, as in, “When Scubs interviews you, be sure to tell him about...” either way they are coming off as a petulant, nasty, vindictive pair.  

Could this turn out to be analogous to Andrew’s train wreck  interview with the BBC?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?  At this point, I have to say that I really don’t get their “agenda” with this book .. it certainly appears that the consensus (based on the DM Comments) are NOT positive for H&M with many feeling that the Queen and Prince Charles should cast them off sans titles and £££!


The agenda is pretty straightforward.  They are whining children who need to get their side of the story out no matter what.  They have not thought ahead to the consequences because that is not what they do for anything i.e. think ahead.  They will just take all the negative comments as proof that they were right about the whole world being against them.  If their titles were taken away, that would just be further proof that the family was against them.  They have set themselves up to the be ultimate victims.   In essence, they markled themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> CeeJay, totally agree. No sympathy and lots of incredulity about the whining since he is 6th in line and was never going to be William’s equal. Most seem to think William was being a loving protective older brother in his cautionary statement to Harry about taking more time.
> 
> The authors’ claims of never interviewing them are disingenuous. Scooby Do could have had the friends ask questions and then had the friends relay the info to him. Or, considering the manipulative cunning of MM, selected friends may have been directed to tell him specific stories, as in, “When Scubs interviews you, be sure to tell him about...” either way they are coming off as a petulant, nasty, vindictive pair.
> 
> Could this turn out to be analogous to Andrew’s train wreck  interview with the BBC?



She found herself a copying machine and sent him the pages of her diary.  He didn't have to speak to her IRL.  She gave him everything.  

Yes, this is similar to Andrew's train wreck.  Just goes to prove that silence can be your best friend.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we predicted.. the proverbial sh!t has started hitting the pan ..
> 
> “Harry and Meghan 'will NEVER resume official roles with Royal Family”
> https://mol.im/a/8562521



They deserve this outcome. Man, I want to go to that one year review.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> The authors’ claims of never interviewing them are disingenuous. Scooby Do could have had the friends ask questions and then had the friends relay the info to him. Or, considering the manipulative cunning of MM, selected friends may have been directed to tell him specific stories, as in, “When Scubs interviews you, be sure to tell him about...” either way they are coming off as a petulant, nasty, vindictive pair.
> 
> Could this turn out to be analogous to Andrew’s train wreck  interview with the BBC?



It is nonsense. Scobie had to have interviewed Meghan many times for all those butt-kissing articles he wrote for Harpers Bazaar over the past 2+ years. He considers her a friend. She considers him someone useful (for the moment). Maybe it is true they didn’t have an actual book interview, Meghan probably sent him all of her notes and an outline of exactly how she wanted the book written.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So many lies, deceptions, falsehoods put this couple truly in the undesirable category.  Oprah and Gayle need to interview them ASAP in order to salvage some morsel of dignity. Not sure crying on tv will help restore their reputation. If I remember correctly, Diana regretted her Bashear interview as well as the Morton book. Didn’t those interviews accelerate QE approving of the divorce which Diana didn’t actually want? Certainly, we see here another cautionary tale — words have consequences. Going public, posting private matters on social media never ever works out well. Silence is golden.

Now we know they lied about the engagement and the wedding. Mercy, no wonder Thomas didn’t want to be part of the deception. All that money, 33million, spent on a sham.  What’s next? Lies about their kid?  No wonder they wanted this book to be published quickly. Probably hoped Covid would lessen its impact.


----------



## Grande Latte

She might have snagged a prince but in Los Angeles, Harry is pretty much useless, even as an accessory. Over time I get the feeling Megan will be so tired of him. Because without the titles, he's just another man on the street, or less than that. 

Who is Marcus Andersen? Is he still in Megan's life? What a way to mess with Harry's mental state. It's like that Dora Huang character in Princess Beatrice's life. This is one tactic narcissists use to manipulate/ play their spouses- create a triangle.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> It is nonsense. Scobie had to have interviewed Meghan many times for all those butt-kissing articles he wrote for Harpers Bazaar over the past 2+ years. He considers her a friend. She considers him someone useful (for the moment). Maybe it is true they didn’t have an actual book interview, Meghan probably sent him all of her notes and an outline of exactly how she wanted the book written.


He will be markled if sales are not good.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> It is nonsense. Scobie had to have interviewed Meghan many times for all those butt-kissing articles he wrote for Harpers Bazaar over the past 2+ years. He considers her a friend. She considers him someone useful (for the moment). Maybe it is true they didn’t have an actual book interview, Meghan probably sent him all of her notes and an outline of exactly how she wanted the book written.



The co-authors insist there are “at least 2 sources” for everything in the book... which supposedly recounts their private dates & even their meals in detail etc. (In her own words she’s said in interviews that they have the greatest love story ever. But Scooby & Megs went overboard bc in the previews the romance is coming across as contrived and desperate.)

The sources are H&M and her supposed diary. They can easily claim not having been “interviewed” by all sorts of creative reasoning, ranging from not considering their informal chats interviews, to simply being interviewed by an assistant or additional ghostwriter. And M has shown she studies & imitates Diana style. Di would speak into a tape recorder to answer biographer Andrew Morton’s written questions.

H&M have consistently shown that they think they are very clever, while the public are viewed as morons. Remember the peevish, public written lecture they gave about how the Queen can’t regulate their use of the word “royal” outside of the UK, but H&M have graciously decided not to use the word after March 31.... and then signed their letter with their HRHs in a great big “neener neener!” 

We’ve had a glimpse into their creative logic & delusions of grandeur in their court filings. They believe their $50million wedding cost was not only justified, but THEY feel used bc they feel their wedding generated over a BILLION pounds in tourism for the UK, which isn’t supported by any facts.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we predicted.. the proverbial sh!t has started hitting the pan ..
> 
> “Harry and Meghan 'will NEVER resume official roles with Royal Family”
> https://mol.im/a/8562521



This article is shocking to say the least. 

The couple were dismayed when no photograph of them and their son Archie was displayed during the Queen’s Christmas speech last year

The queen didn't display photos of her other several grandkids, why would she display photos of MM & H? 

Harry returning to Kensington Palace alone, though he admitted to friends afterwards that Meghan was 'ticking every box'

He must be very naive. 

The duchess was surrounded by an ‘A-team’ of high-achieving women all wanting to promote their boss’ world vision. But one by one, they all departed.
Archie’s first nurse did not survive her second night... 

For an aspiring philanthropist and leader, MM doesn't seem to treat well her workers.


----------



## Luvbolide

I read that MM wanted this book to be published early (think the release date was moved up a week or two) because  she was so upset at having been labelled as difficult,demanding,etc. and she thought that the book would "set the record straight".  Oh dear, Meg - unfortunately the book makes you sound petty, vindictive, rude and very, very immature. Nice call.  And, add to that the repeated attacks on Kate and William.  Why would K&W want to see you at all after that?  One of my fave examples of how "bad" Kate is - MM was upset because Kate sent her flowers on her birthday, when Megan would have preferred something else.  Seriously?!?!  I think there is a better than even chance that Kate was rather reserved around MM because she simply didn't like her. Don't know where MM got the idea that Kate had to bend over backwards to start some kind of "besties" friendship with her. Unbelievable...


----------



## beautymagpie

Meghan 'rejected Kate's peace-offering flowers saying they weren't enough' — The Mirror
					

The gesture came amid mounting speculation that the women had become the “duelling duchesses” as relations between them were so frosty




					apple.news


----------



## Sol Ryan

Unrelated to current events, but this gave me a giggle...

So I watch British Panel shows when I work out and with Covid interrupting production, it means I’ve been having to watch old ones... there was a bit in this episode of 8 Out of 10 Cats that was making fun of when Harry wanted to go to space in 2011... lol Hopefully I’m allowed to share it here... the Harry bit ends at the 13:57 mark.

8 Out of 10 Cats August 2011
(warning for coarse language And humor... )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> And this quote in relation to their last joint appearence at the Commonwealth ceremony in London in March:
> 
> _Mr Scobie told the Times: "To purposefully snub your sister-in-law... I don't think it left a great taste in the couple's mouths."_
> 
> 
> First of all, it's pretty easy to leave a bad taste in this couples mouths, they're insulted by everything.
> Secondly, Kate had every right to 'snub' the two of them. After all the stunts they had pulled up to that point and the disrespect they have shown the Queen and RF, she clearly had enough of the bullsh*t and drama and I don't blame her one bit. I can only imagine the stuff she knows from behind the scenes about the Sussex duo.



Let's not forget the Rose Hanbury rumours. No proof ever found by anybody, but as the story went on other rumours came up it was one of Meghan's mouthpieces who gave currency to them. Back then I thought that was a stretch, with what I have seen from her character plus the sheer hatred she seems to have for Kate for no good reason other than being green with envy and jealousy I believe it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we predicted.. the proverbial sh!t has started hitting the pan ..
> 
> “Harry and Meghan 'will NEVER resume official roles with Royal Family”
> https://mol.im/a/8562521



Is it really their choice at that point? I feel they didn't get the memo this family doesn't need them. ETA: oops, article says so. I thought that was another PR stunt of these petulant kids who let the world know what they don't want to do.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think there’s a chance that we haven’t seen her on another hike because she is pregnant and waiting for a big reveal of the bump?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think there’s a chance that we haven’t seen her on another hike because she is pregnant and waiting for a big reveal of the bump?


I think if that were the case she would have found a way to hint/announce it right after Beatrice got married.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think there’s a chance that we haven’t seen her on another hike because she is pregnant and waiting for a big reveal of the bump?



Anything is possible but I doubt it. She doesn’t strike me as being a kid person and I think one child will be enough for her. Her focus is solely on promoting themselves and coming up with money-making opportunities these days. Harry might want more kids but nobody has ever said “what Harry wants, Harry gets” and no one ever will.

She was so hoping to have a triumphant welcome back to LA and COVID-19 went and ruined all her plans. She won’t want to be 7 months pregnant next year when she finally gets an invitation to one of those glamorous Hollywood events she’s spent her life envying.


----------



## bag-mania

Grande Latte said:


> Who is Marcus Andersen? Is he still in Megan's life? What a way to mess with Harry's mental state. It's like that Dora Huang character in Princess Beatrice's life. This is one tactic narcissists use to manipulate/ play their spouses- create a triangle.
> 
> View attachment 4801020
> 
> 
> View attachment 4801021
> 
> 
> View attachment 4801022



I can’t find anything indicating he’s ever been romantically involved with her. He most likely knows her dirt though so I would love to hear his story should he ever become Markled.


----------



## csshopper

I wonder when the betting will start, or maybe it already has?, on how long it will take for them to turn on Scobie and friend claiming they really didn't say all those things and have been unfairly portrayed? 

With what appears to be wide spread disdain for JCMH and MM, will corporations think twice about using them as spokespersons or speakers. Their hypocrisy and malevolence is so transparent and they are being so thoroughly ridiculed and called out on their behaviors, it seems they are more of a liability than an asset. 

Kate once sent Meagain flowers for her birthday and they were roundly dissed by MM, don't think she'll have to worry about receiving any this year, unless someone creative does stinkweed and thistles?


----------



## bag-mania

She dissed the flowers Kate sent her? I hadn’t heard that. What did she expect, a friggin’ rose garden named after her?


----------



## scarlet555

Always despicable... never seems to amaze me anymore...


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She dissed the flowers Kate sent her? I hadn’t heard that. What did she expect, a friggin’ rose garden named after her?


But now Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl has revealed how Kate did send flowers 'at one point' to 'rectify the situation', but the Duchess of Sussex was nonplussed, with the royal author writing: 'Meghan told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.'


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> But now Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl has revealed how Kate did send flowers 'at one point' to 'rectify the situation', but the Duchess of Sussex was nonplussed, with the royal author writing: 'Meghan told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.'



What was the situation Kate was supposed to rectify? I must have missed this story completely.


----------



## justwatchin

csshopper said:


> I wonder when the betting will start, or maybe it already has?, on how long it will take for them to turn on Scobie and friend claiming they really didn't say all those things and have been unfairly portrayed?


I don’t think they will turn on him because I would be willing to bet they are going to get a cut of the profits. This book was being hyped before and not a peep from these grifters running to their lawyer(s) trying to stop publication.


----------



## csshopper

From the London Daily Mail:

Kate Middleton sent flowers to Meghan Markle as a 'peace offering' but the Duchess of Sussex told her 'in no uncertain terms that it was not enough', Vanity Fair has reported.

Authors of a new explosive new biography claimed over the weekend that the Duchess of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex, both 38, never became friends - with Meghan 'disappointed' Kate never reached out to her or visited.

According to the Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durant, who penned Finding Freedom, the Duchesses 'struggled to move past distance politeness' and had 'nothing in common other than the fact that they lived at Kensington Palace'.

But now Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl has revealed how Kate did send flowers 'at one point' to 'rectify the situation', but the Duchess of Sussex was nonplussed, with the royal author writing: 'Meghan told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.'

New biography Finding Freedom details how Harry and Meghan invited the Cambridges to their Cotswold country home, near Soho Farmhouse, but they never went, and while how Kate sent Meghan flowers for her birthday, but Meghan was upset that she didn't 'check in on her'.


----------



## scarlet555

csshopper said:


> From the London Daily Mail:
> 
> Kate Middleton sent flowers to Meghan Markle as a 'peace offering' but the Duchess of Sussex told her 'in no uncertain terms that it was not enough', Vanity Fair has reported.
> 
> Authors of a new explosive new biography claimed over the weekend that the Duchess of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex, both 38, never became friends - with Meghan 'disappointed' Kate never reached out to her or visited.
> 
> According to the Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durant, who penned Finding Freedom, the Duchesses 'struggled to move past distance politeness' and had 'nothing in common other than the fact that they lived at Kensington Palace'.
> 
> But now Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl has revealed how Kate did send flowers 'at one point' to 'rectify the situation', but the Duchess of Sussex was nonplussed, with the royal author writing: 'Meghan told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.'
> 
> New biography Finding Freedom details how Harry and Meghan invited the Cambridges to their Cotswold country home, near Soho Farmhouse, but they never went, and while how Kate sent Meghan flowers for her birthday, but Meghan was upset that she didn't 'check in on her'.



What did Meghan expect?  A tiara?  WTF?  What is wrong with her?


----------



## lanasyogamama

She’s a classic narcissist.


----------



## Luvbolide

I wonder if they have a “Book of Slights” and every night before bed they spend some time cataloging the sins against them that day.  Makes it easier to remember them all and also to keep them all straight.  Incredible!


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s a classic narcissist.
> View attachment 4801336


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama, 

Perfect, thanks for posting this!

I laughed out loud after reading it as I flashed on a comment attributed to Harry in describing his immediate attraction to M: "She ticks every box."  Yes, H, she certainly does, but this isn't the list you were thinking of!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

justwatchin said:


> I don’t think they will turn on him because I would be willing to bet they are going to get a cut of the profits. This book was being hyped before and not a peep from these grifters running to their lawyer(s) trying to stop publication.


I think you are spot on correct!


----------



## HiromiT

Luvbolide said:


> I read that MM wanted this book to be published early (think the release date was moved up a week or two) because  she was so upset at having been labelled as difficult,demanding,etc. and she thought that the book would "set the record straight".  Oh dear, Meg - unfortunately the book makes you sound petty, vindictive, rude and very, very immature. Nice call.  And, add to that the repeated attacks on Kate and William.  Why would K&W want to see you at all after that?  One of my fave examples of how "bad" Kate is - MM was upset because Kate sent her flowers on her birthday, when Megan would have preferred something else.  Seriously?!?!  I think there is a better than even chance that Kate was rather reserved around MM because she simply didn't like her. Don't know where MM got the idea that Kate had to bend over backwards to start some kind of "besties" friendship with her. Unbelievable...



MM is probably accustomed to Hollywood-type friendships in which you hit it off with someone at an event, a photo is snapped of both parties mid-hug, and instantly you proclaim to be each other’s bestie without really knowing each other. The “friendship” looks good on social media, aligns with your brand, garners positive PR, and has the possibility of expanding your network.

By dating and then marrying Harry, MM automatically expected she would be swept into the inner sanctum of W&C’s social circle. Well, it doesn’t work like that in real life. Especially when W&C seem quite reserved and careful with their relationships. They had every reason to proceed cautiously with MM even if Harry was quick to fall for her. Wasn’t it reported that William purposely fed false stories to acquaintances and if those stories were leaked, he knew which “friend” betrayed him?

MM and Kate come from vastly different worlds and would have so little in common to begin with. Not saying they couldn’t become friends eventually, but true friendships take time to build and nurture.

I mean, in reality, how many women become instant best friends with their sister-in-law? I know it can happen but it’s not guaranteed that you’ll instantly bond with another woman who just happens to marry into the same family.

And now, MM has burned that bridge forever!


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> From the London Daily Mail:
> 
> Kate Middleton sent flowers to Meghan Markle as a 'peace offering' but the Duchess of Sussex told her 'in no uncertain terms that it was not enough', Vanity Fair has reported.
> 
> Authors of a new explosive new biography claimed over the weekend that the Duchess of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex, both 38, never became friends - with Meghan 'disappointed' Kate never reached out to her or visited.
> 
> According to the Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durant, who penned Finding Freedom, the Duchesses 'struggled to move past distance politeness' and had 'nothing in common other than the fact that they lived at Kensington Palace'.
> 
> But now Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl has revealed how Kate did send flowers 'at one point' to 'rectify the situation', but the Duchess of Sussex was nonplussed, with the royal author writing: 'Meghan told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.'
> 
> New biography Finding Freedom details how Harry and Meghan invited the Cambridges to their Cotswold country home, near Soho Farmhouse, but they never went, and while how Kate sent Meghan flowers for her birthday, but Meghan was upset that she didn't 'check in on her'.



Oh, the vanity! So it’s because Kate never asked Meghan how she was feeling. That is a horrible sin. Bad Kate! You shall never be forgiven. I’m sure all of us expect our in-laws to drop everything they are doing to come check on us. Not that anything was wrong but she didn’t even think to ask! What if something had been wrong? Think of Meghan’s feelings, Kate! It’s like you don’t understand that everything revolves around her. Get with the program!


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> Oh, the vanity! So it’s because Kate never asked Meghan how she was feeling. That is a horrible sin. Bad Kate! You shall never be forgiven. I’m sure all of us expect our in-laws to drop everything they are doing to come check on us. Not that anything is wrong but she didn’t even think to ask! What if something had been wrong? Think of Meghan’s feelings, Kate! It’s like you don’t understand that everything revolves around her. Get with the program!



Also means that comment on the ITV Africa show about not being asked if she’s ok is a complete jibe at Kate.


----------



## bag-mania

beautymagpie said:


> Also means that comment on the ITV Africa show about not being asked if she’s ok is a complete jibe at Kate.



This book is going to backfire on Meghan so bad. She is even more whiny and vindictive than we thought and that’s saying something.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s a classic narcissist.
> View attachment 4801336





csshopper said:


> lanasyogamama,
> 
> Perfect, thanks for posting this!
> 
> I laughed out loud after reading it as I flashed on a comment attributed to Harry in describing his immediate attraction to M: "She ticks every box."  Yes, H, she certainly does, but this isn't the list you were thinking of!


 I can see it now. Harry was right, "She ticks every box."


----------



## CeeJay

HiromiT said:


> MM is probably accustomed to Hollywood-type friendships in which you hit it off with someone at an event, a photo is snapped of both parties mid-hug, and instantly you proclaim to be each other’s bestie without really knowing each other. The “friendship” looks good on social media, aligns with your brand, garners positive PR, and has the possibility of expanding your network.
> 
> By dating and then marrying Harry, MM automatically expected she would be swept into the inner sanctum of W&C’s social circle. Well, it doesn’t work like that in real life. Especially when W&C seem quite reserved and careful with their relationships. They had every reason to proceed cautiously with MM even if Harry was quick to fall for her. Wasn’t it reported that William purposely fed false stories to acquaintances and if those stories were leaked, he knew which “friend” betrayed him?


100% agree with this!!!  Truly, what .. she has 1 "friend" (I use that term lightly when talking about MM) that she has known since High School?!?! .. that's kind of odd and very telling about MM.  It's all ABOUT HER .. she truly is a huge narcissist.  

I just wonder what is going to happen now?  Will QEII and Prince Charles take away those titles (I hope they do, although I don't think they will take away the "Prince" from Harry) .. and why should they be supported by the Brits?!?!  I think it will be telling to see what happens with their "celebrity friends" too .. I think some of them (Amal Clooney & maybe even Serena?) .. will walk away - not sure about Oprah or Gayle King since both could 'use' them for a "news" story.  Time will tell .. but personally, I think this is going to backfire on them big-time (well - kinda hoping)!!


----------



## Katel

I was wondering when the “annual review” would be, and found this interesting op-ed article by a British journalist (via NBC, no less):








						Opinion | What Prince Harry and Meghan's quest for "financial independence" really means
					

The Sussexes are lying to themselves — or us — by acting as if they are above the lucrative cycle of influence, access and branding that is modern celebrity culture.




					www.nbcnews.com
				




It doesn’t discuss the review - when do y’all think that will be happening?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> I was wondering when the “annual review” would be, and found this interesting op-ed article by a British journalist (via NBC, no less):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | What Prince Harry and Meghan's quest for "financial independence" really means
> 
> 
> The Sussexes are lying to themselves — or us — by acting as if they are above the lucrative cycle of influence, access and branding that is modern celebrity culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn’t discuss the review - when do y’all think that will be happening?



Supposedly one year from when they left which was Jan, 2020 - so Jan 2021 is the review?  I think Charles and QE need to go ahead and reschedule it. These two have not conducted themselves in any kind of dignified manner, much less royal. This book just seals the doom.  Very bad move on their part to air grievances publicly.  Silence is golden.


----------



## pinkrose398

Just read this: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/e...jESJ_V1RugYNqzzZsHIaLmO3Gdbon9_3mLP8ybRzD6e1o

It makes them sound incredibly whiny. I don't understand how anyone will be on their side after this is published.



> The book claims they wanted to see the Queen on their return to the UK on January 6, but were told she wasn’t available until January 29.



Grow the f up. She's the Queen. Sometimes I want to see my parents but they happen be busy and can't see me until X date, and they're just normal people and not a Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent video - thank you! 
The Panel clearly knew Harry’s ‘game’ even in 2011.  The media really did build him up into being something he is not.
Now that the gloves are off, we may find out a lot more salacious news. MM really did get duped.




Sol Ryan said:


> Unrelated to current events, but this gave me a giggle...
> 
> So I watch British Panel shows when I work out and with Covid interrupting production, it means I’ve been having to watch old ones... there was a bit in this episode of 8 Out of 10 Cats that was making fun of when Harry wanted to go to space in 2011... lol Hopefully I’m allowed to share it here... the Harry bit ends at the 13:57 mark.
> 
> 8 Out of 10 Cats August 2011
> (warning for coarse language And humor... )


----------



## Jayne1

BrandSnob said:


> Wow, so much hate towards Meg in this thread. It’s almost as if certain kinds of women are jealous a black woman snagged a prince Bc I’m not understanding why she would warrant this much attention, focus and hate other than jealousy. Anyways she’s gorg. Harry has been into black women for years, focused on helping those in Africa and has wanted to get away from The Royal life that killed his mom for years.



I agree she's gorgeous, I find I can't take my eyes off her when she's in a group with others, but the video *lalame* linked to just explained why she's so gorgeous.  lol

By the way, "The Royal life that killed his mom for years" didn't kill his mother.  A drunk driver speeding to avoid photographers that Diana herself called and not wearing a seat belt killed her. 



lalame said:


>


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I am going by memory but it has been a long time. I could be mistaken. Charles is a petty man so I wouldn’t be surprised if he made his feelings known to his mother, but back then as now, her wishes always prevailed.


After the way she used the press to destroy his reputation, I don't blame him for being petty.

I agree with what a poster wrote above though.  Diana had so many men at her feet to choose from, she would have moved on. Charles had Camilla and I think both C and D would have mellowed with time.


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> This book is going to backfire on Meghan so bad. She is even more whiny and vindictive than we thought and that’s saying something.



It does take an extraordinary level of talent to come out looking worse than you already did from the book you sanctioned and was going to finally reveal the truth of the horrible abuse you suffered...


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> *It does take an extraordinary level of talent to come out looking worse than you already did* from the book you sanctioned and was going to finally reveal the truth of the horrible abuse you suffered...




She has a rare gift.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Grande Latte said:


> Who is Marcus Andersen? Is he still in Megan's life? What a way to mess with Harry's mental state. It's like that Dora Huang character in Princess Beatrice's life. This is one tactic narcissists use to manipulate/ play their spouses- create a triangle.
> 
> View attachment 4801020
> 
> 
> View attachment 4801021
> 
> 
> View attachment 4801022


Markus Anderson is a Canadian who moved to the UK for a bit. He worked as a Soho House waiter in London. He must have some fascinating qualities because he worked his way up to their global membership director. I think he’s back in Toronto now, but he travels to different cities where Soho opens, to identify potential members.

He became an extremely close friend to Meg and introduced her to everyone who is anyone.

He’s been out since forever, so I doubt there was anything else going on, other than Meg really benefiting from his friendship and connections.

The media often writes that he introduced H to M, but it’s thought, here in Toronto, that she met H when she attended an event her boyfriend Cory was catering.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Extraordinary, indeed. 
All the papers, tweets, and comments I have read are highly negative. Not sure how anyone can defend the petty, bratty and infantile behaviors now. Same thing happened to Diana and Sarah. Their public complaining backfired.  Sure, sure, I understand Andrew has serious issues, even Charles - none of that justifies the nonsense in this book. Their scandalous behavior is, in fact, all the more reason for these two to stay above the fray. No need for this pity party. Pretty sure Shakespeare covers this stuff. Guessing H never studied the bard?




tiktok said:


> It does take an extraordinary level of talent to come out looking worse than you already did from the book you sanctioned and was going to finally reveal the truth of the horrible abuse you suffered...


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Markus Anderson is a Canadian who moved to the UK for a bit. He worked as a Soho House waiter in London. He must have some fascinating qualities because he worked his way up to their global membership director. I think he’s back in Toronto now, but he travels to different cities where Soho opens, to identify potential members.
> 
> He became an extremely close friend to Meg and introduced her to everyone who is anyone.
> 
> He’s been out since forever, so I doubt there was anything else going on, other than Meg really benefiting from his friendship and connections.
> 
> The media often writes that he introduced H to M, but it’s thought, here in Toronto, that she met H when she attended an event her boyfriend Cory was catering.


My working theory for a long time is that he is the brains behind Meghan and many of her actions.  I think he was instrumental in Meghan meeting Cory and Harry.  The problem is that Meghan is strong willed and probably didn't follow the game plan as laid out. MA is supposedly with them now in BH which tells me that he is working strategy. He is a "connector" of people., a facilitator.  Now they want him to be a fixer.  Ray Donovan is busy unfortunately.   Their charity food delivery months ago was connected to Soho House and I bet he arranged it.  I suspect he thought the book was a bad idea, but it was too late to do anything about it.  The only thing that could be done is the the Harkles to say that they did not give interviews for it or sanction it 100%.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> This book is going to backfire on Meghan so bad. She is even more whiny and vindictive than we thought and that’s saying something.


I agree with you BIG TIME bag-mania.  I think MM thought she was going to return to LA and be a BOSS. She thought everyone would cater to her, being that she's a Duchess you see.  H would buy her a grand house, after all the acting jobs rolled in. In fact, she probably assumed some roles would have to be turned down because she just had too many offers. Oh poo! What's a narcissist to do when they are so adored by Hollywood? M thought she could settle a few scores with the book, but the jokes on her now. Covid struck, no "real" acting offers coming in, no big money deals, and bumming a house from TP.  Maybe her profits from the book will help to buy them a decent house, by LA standards.  I doubt that Charles will buy them a house after the book because he surmises a divorce may be forthcoming and why let Megs get the house.  H and M are the most entertaining and saddest trainwreck I've paid attention to. As much as they frustrate me, I just have to follow along to see how it will turn out. I don't comment often because some days, it's just too frustrating.  I mean, I just cant with these two nutcases.


----------



## Tootsie17

gracekelly said:


> My working theory for a long time is that he is the brains behind Meghan and many of her actions.  I think he was instrumental in Meghan meeting Cory and Harry.  The problem is that Meghan is strong willed and probably didn't follow the game plan as laid out. MA is supposedly with them now in BH which tells me that he is working strategy. He is a "connector" of people., a facilitator.  Now they want him to be a fixer.  Ray Donovan is busy unfortunately.   Their charity food delivery months ago was connected to Soho House and I bet he arranged it.  I suspect he thought the book was a bad idea, but it was too late to do anything about it.  The only thing that could be done is the the Harkles to say that they did not give interviews for it or sanction it 100%.


Nice nod to Ray Donovan. I love that show.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone needs to investigate this SoHo House. It seems to be a major player in the H&M story.
Maybe Perry Mason is available?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Are there enough sugars to make this book successful?


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> This book is going to backfire on Meghan so bad. She is even more whiny and vindictive than we thought and that’s saying something.





tiktok said:


> It does take an extraordinary level of talent to come out looking worse than you already did from the book you sanctioned and was going to finally reveal the truth of the horrible abuse you suffered...



Ironically their own peevish complaints may play in their favor when the book is released. They’re already denying being sources, but if there is significant backlash, they can double down & say they wouldn’t have authorized something to make them look bad.... 

Yet, that’s exactly what they did with their petulant post-Megxit sussexroyal website statements, which seemed like tantrums that had to be removed/edited/reposted. Similarly Harry stood by his “Greta” interview statements which showed him to be churlish, entitled & uninformed, as they also were in their Africa documentary. So they have an established history of not presenting themselves well (without significant handler intervention & script-writing).

The book itself will likely be a “best seller” as the publisher or a third party just needs to buy enough books to get on one of the bestselling lists for a week & then they can market it as a “bestseller!”


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone needs to investigate this SoHo House. It seems to be a major player in the H&M story.
> Maybe Perry Mason is available?


Perry is drinking at the bar with Lupe Gibbs.


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s a classic narcissist.
> View attachment 4801336








csshopper said:


> lanasyogamama,
> 
> Perfect, thanks for posting this!
> 
> I laughed out loud after reading it as I flashed on a comment attributed to Harry in describing his immediate attraction to M: "She ticks every box."  Yes, H, she certainly does, but this isn't the list you were thinking of!


----------



## kemilia

PewPew said:


> Ironically their own peevish complaints may play in their favor when the book is released. They’re already denying being sources, but if there is significant backlash, they can double down & say they wouldn’t have authorized something to make them look bad....
> 
> Yet, that’s exactly what they did with their petulant post-Megxit sussexroyal website statements, which seemed like tantrums that had to be removed/edited/reposted. Similarly Harry stood by his “Greta” interview statements which showed him to be churlish, entitled & uninformed, as they also were in their Africa documentary. So they have an established history of not presenting themselves well (without significant handler intervention & script-writing).
> 
> The book itself will likely be a “best seller” as the publisher or a third party just needs to buy enough books to get on one of the bestselling lists for a week & then they can market it as a “bestseller!”


Is this the book that Amazon slashed the price on before it was released? I wonder how M structured the "who gets what" from the advance money, if there was any.

And calling H "uninformed" is being WAY too kind, he is totally *STUPID*. (chunga changa)


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4801694


You have the best gifs, been meaning to tell you for a while. So "this says it all".


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone needs to investigate this SoHo House. It seems to be a major player in the H&M story.
> Maybe Perry Mason is available?





gracekelly said:


> Perry is drinking at the bar with Lupe Gibbs.


I left a voice mail for Della Street, I can't wait to hear back.


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> You have the best gifs, been meaning to tell you for a while. So "this says it all".


Thank you, @kemilia!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I left a voice mail for Della Street, I can't wait to hear back.



Perry:  Della I could kiss you!
Della:   Please don't.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we predicted.. the proverbial sh!t has started hitting the pan ..
> 
> “Harry and Meghan 'will NEVER resume official roles with Royal Family”
> https://mol.im/a/8562521


yeah, I'll bet she was "all in" after a couple of dates.....all in for the fame, money, title


----------



## csshopper

Books will sell. Unfortunately with these narcissistic twits, it will be a sign to them they are successfully selling their side of the story, not comprehending that buying the book doesn't necessarily mean buying the story within it.

Meantime from the Daily Mail: 
"Thomas Markle has told his daughter Meghan and her husband Prince Harry that it is the 'worst time in the world to be whining', following the publication of an explosive biography into their relationship with the royal family. 

Speaking from his home in Rosario, Mexico, he criticised the Sussexes and said he doesn't 'really appreciate what Meghan has become'."

Can you imagine the transAtlantic conversation that could result from this??? "Charles, this is Thomas, read today where you have been thoroughly dissed in the world wide press. I can relate. Maybe if I have to come across the Pond for the pesky Trial we could get together for a Pint and share stories about these two? And, I'm sure you're as worried about the little guy as I am living with those two nasties, but at least you have seen and maybe even held him once?"


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> yeah, I'll bet she was "all in" after a couple of dates.....all in for the fame, money, title


A couple of dates?!? .. nah, remember .. she is supposed to be “so smart” .. and this was the coup de gras as in “a rich British man” that could provide her with the best exposure, best network opportunities .. and (of course) .. £$£$!  After the first date (given what a dolt Hazza is), she was likely dancing around the room and plotting her plan.


----------



## Lounorada

csshopper said:


> Meantime from the Daily Mail:
> "Thomas Markle has told his daughter Meghan and her husband Prince Harry that it is the 'worst time in the world to be whining', following the publication of an explosive biography into their relationship with the royal family.
> 
> *Speaking from his home in Rosario, Mexico, he criticised the Sussexes and said he doesn't 'really appreciate what Meghan has become'."*


For most people that would really hurt to hear your dad (or even your mother) say something like about you and would probably even make you stop and re-think the type of person you've become and try and change your ways, but with M this will only make her frantically try to figure out how she can be the victim and demean her father and his feelings.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From what we've heard she's always been a spoiled brat, so where did it spiral so completely out of control that even her father is shocked?


----------



## beautymagpie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From what we've heard she's always been a spoiled brat, so where did it spiral so completely out of control that even her father is shocked?



I reckon he was probably less aware of it when he was closer to her. Now he's at a distance, he can probably see it better. He might have let her off with a lot when she was younger too.


----------



## bag-mania

Could the reason they are making such a point of claiming they didn't work with Omid be because they spilled secrets about other members of the royal family? Depending on what the secrets are, it would be like burning their bridges with a blow torch.

Are they stupid enough to think the family can't hold them responsible because they say they didn't have anything to do with it?


----------



## Chanbal

Wow

“Yet the more they complain, as the rest of the world struggles with the very real hell of the worst pandemic for 100 years, the more they expose themselves as a pair of appallingly bitter, staggeringly self-obsessed, utterly deluded, and woefully tone-deaf laughing stocks.”

Morgan finished his column saying: “I think what most of us would like now is to find freedom from this ridiculous pair’s incessantly negative, miserably, angry whining.”









						Piers Morgan brands Harry and Meghan 'deluded, whiny brats' in new rant
					

The 'GMB' presenter has launched yet another rant against the couple ahead of the release of unofficial biography 'Finding Freedom'.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

Ha! The book describes Harry as being "in a trance" on their first date and they were "in their own little world."

Whatever she did to enthrall him so much she must still be at it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ha! The book describes Harry as being "in a trance" on their first date and they were "in their own little world."
> 
> Whatever she did to enthrall him so much she must still be at it.


really
makes him sound like an idiot
Unless you're a stan and you think this is so romantic


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> really
> makes him sound like an idiot
> Unless you're a stan and you think this is so romantic



Harry isn't a deep thinker. Whatever is available on the surface is what he's going to think. If Meghan told him "I am ABC" then Harry believes "Meghan is ABC." Even though he could have observed over time that Meghan was actually "XYZ." He wouldn't bother looking any deeper because he's, I don't want to call him simple, but let's just say he's a very uncomplicated man.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Harry isn't a deep thinker. Whatever is available on the surface is what he's going to think. If Meghan told him "I am ABC" then Harry believes "Meghan is ABC." Even though he could have observed over time that Meghan was actually "XYZ." He wouldn't bother looking any deeper because he's, I don't want to call him simple, but let's just say he's a very uncomplicated man.


still think he sounds like a pushover


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> still think he sounds like a pushover



I think he is perfectly happy to have somebody else do his thinking for him. All of his life he has been told what to do and where to be. Being married to Meghan is merely a continuation of that.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think he is perfectly happy to have somebody else do his thinking for him. All of his life he has been told what to do and where to be. Being married to Meghan is merely a continuation of that.


I guess


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I think he is perfectly happy to have somebody else do his thinking for him. All of his life he has been told what to do and where to be. Being married to Meghan is merely a continuation of that.



With benefits...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> For most people that would really hurt to hear your dad (or even your mother) say something like about you and would probably even make you stop and re-think the type of person you've become and try and change your ways, but with M this will only make her frantically try to figure out how she can be the victim and demean her father and his feelings.



If I was him, I'd be soooo upset I'd never even seen/held my grandson. The only way for him to communicate with them seems to be through the media. 

This couple live more in their odd, distorted, virtual world than the real one.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From what we've heard she's always been a spoiled brat, so where did it spiral so completely out of control that even her father is shocked?


Yes, according to my friends that knew Meghan / Thomas from way back in the day (_and yes - they said she was way too spoiled_), IMO ..  the difference is that before .. she simply 'markled' the person and moved on but she didn't really have the means -or- the need to speak negatively about them.  Now, however, is a different story as I'm assuming that SHE figures that this all translates into $$$$ (in other words - "attempting" to bribe the BRF into paying her off to keep mum).  What a sticky-whicket ..


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> “Yet the more they complain, as the rest of the world struggles with the very real hell of the worst pandemic for 100 years, the more they expose themselves as a pair of appallingly bitter, staggeringly self-obsessed, utterly deluded, and woefully tone-deaf laughing stocks.”
> 
> Morgan finished his column saying: “I think what most of us would like now is to find freedom from this ridiculous pair’s incessantly negative, miserably, angry whining.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan brands Harry and Meghan 'deluded, whiny brats' in new rant
> 
> 
> The 'GMB' presenter has launched yet another rant against the couple ahead of the release of unofficial biography 'Finding Freedom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com






Thunder will be erupting in the Tyler Perry Mansion today after hearing this!



bag-mania said:


> Ha! The book describes Harry as being "in a trance" on their first date and they were "in their own little world."
> 
> *Whatever she did to enthrall him so much she must still be at it.*








 I couldn't help myself


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4802476
> 
> 
> Thunder will be erupting in the Tyler Perry Mansion today after hearing this!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4802491
> 
> View attachment 4802492
> 
> 
> I couldn't help myself



TP better call his contractor because there will be a lot of damage!  Hopefully he collected some type of rent, even if it was only token, because then he can write off the repair bill lol!

Omid is toast IMO.  No one will ever take him seriously in any of his future reports on any celeb or royal.  He should get more plastic surgery and change his face and change his name and reinvent himself and come back as a completely different person. hahahahaha!

Don't think it was a love potion.  More like some yoga poses


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> TP better call his contractor because there will be a lot of damage!  Hopefully he collected some type of rent, even if it was only token, because then he can write off the repair bill lol!
> 
> Omid is toast IMO.  No one will ever take him seriously in any of his future reports on any celeb or royal.  He should get more plastic surgery and change his face and change his name and reinvent himself and come back as a completely different person. hahahahaha!
> 
> Don't think it was a love potion.  More like some yoga poses



gracekelly, out of curiosity last night I clicked on the Sun's web page to see what they were saying and found a commentator, who in the course of bashing the book, shared that Omid lied in an Interview, said he was 33, but someone checked and he's almost 40. 

Helps make the case for putting "Finding Freedom" under Fiction.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Harry isn't a deep thinker. Whatever is available on the surface is what he's going to think. If Meghan told him "I am ABC" then Harry believes "Meghan is ABC." Even though he could have observed over time that Meghan was actually "XYZ." He wouldn't bother looking any deeper because he's, *I don't want to call him simple*, but let's just say he's a very uncomplicated man.
> 
> OK. If you don't want to call him simple, then *I'll* call him simple!  Just call him Harry!
> 
> I think that many people who've led very pampered lives where everything has been done for them (including kids of uber-helicopter parents) have a yearning to add some complication and drama to their lives and then set about looking for it. Because they want to KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE. Most of us grow up having to figure things out and we learn from our failures and setbacks. And then hopefully realize that complication and drama for the sake of complication and drama shouldn't be some kind of warped objective.


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> Thunder will be erupting in the Tyler Perry Mansion today after hearing this!





gracekelly said:


> TP better call his contractor because there will be a lot of damage!  Hopefully he collected some type of rent, even if it was only token, because then he can write off the repair bill lol!
> 
> Omid is toast IMO.  No one will ever take him seriously in any of his future reports on any celeb or royal.  He should get more plastic surgery and change his face and change his name and reinvent himself and come back as a completely different person. hahahahaha!
> 
> Don't think it was a love potion.  More like some yoga poses



Omid will foot the bill for all damages in the Tyler Perry Mansion, but plastic surgery will have to be postponed. Does anybody know when the philanthropic power couple moves out?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Omid will foot the bill for all damages in the Tyler Perry Mansion, but plastic surgery will have to be postponed. Does anybody know when the philanthropic power couple moves out?


It will be in the dead of night and nobody will know until they surface having lived in the other place for a month.


----------



## papertiger

and some of us had all the drama we could take growing-up and do everything and anything for a peaceful quiet life now we are adults 

I know this has been said before but I still think there's some Diana role play in their relationship. I know that sounds icky, especially considering M's already older than when Diana sadly died. There is something about these 2's dysfunctional relationship which takes JCMH back to childhood instead of helping him mature. I also thinks M worships Diana's impact on the world and considers herself as her successor. I think they also think they are criticising the BRF as though in Diana's memory. 

It's hard for me to remember exactly everything that went on between Charles and Di, it's a long time ago and I wasn't that interested tbh. But the animosity recanted by 'insiders' towards the BRF, feeling trapped, hating protocol, and the venom towards the men in grey suits sounds not only horribly familiar but also somehow, hopelessly out of date. 

They are obviously both stuck in some psychodrama based on media reports and newspaper cuttings from 25 years ago, whipping each other up into a frenzy of paranoia and magnifying every perceived past slight or pause for breath as sign of personal hatred. 

Diana provoked a great deal of sympathy because she could empathise with others in need (much of it to do with her loneliness felt as an abandoned child as well as an abandoned wife). Whereas these two have very little empathy or genuine sympathy. It feels like they borrow others' injustice and causes because they want what Diana had, not the empathy, but the public's adulation. 

Nothing wrong with a good, strongly cathartic psychodrama, but at some point you have to deal with the here (sofa surfing in LA) and now (responsible for their own child and no longer even close to children's ages).


----------



## bag-mania

Here is my vote for most ridiculous H&M story of the day. 











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are top of list for Beckham wedding'
					

The groom's parents David, 45, and Victoria, 46, are good friends with the royal couple, even attending their nuptials at Windsor Castle in May 2018.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Here is my vote for most ridiculous H&M story of the day.
> View attachment 4802772
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are top of list for Beckham wedding'
> 
> 
> The groom's parents David, 45, and Victoria, 46, are good friends with the royal couple, even attending their nuptials at Windsor Castle in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Lol, smacks of desperation from the Grifters’ PR. It’s becoming cartoonish. It’s all about Meghan and not the bride and groom to be.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Lol, smacks of desperation from the Grifters’ PR. It’s becoming cartoonish. It’s all about Meghan and not the bride and groom to be.



It’s hilarious for the article to say they are going to choose their wedding date based on Meghan and Harry’s availability. I bet that is news to the young engaged couple.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> It’s hilarious for the article to say they are going to choose their wedding date based on Meghan and Harry’s availability. I bet that is news to the young engaged couple.



I guess Becks really has given up on that Knighthood... lol


----------



## Aimee3

as if Meghan’s and Harry’s schedule is so full! What is on their agenda besides suing the tabloids?


----------



## Sol Ryan

Aimee3 said:


> as if Meghan’s and Harry’s schedule is so full! What is on their agenda besides suing the tabloids?



Need to book between court dates for all their lawsuits...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> and some of us had all the drama we could take growing-up and do everything and anything for a peaceful quiet life now we are adults
> 
> I know this has been said before but I still think there's some Diana role play in their relationship. I know that sounds icky, especially considering M's already older than when Diana sadly died. There is something about these 2's dysfunctional relationship which takes JCMH back to childhood instead of helping him mature. I also thinks M worships Diana's impact on the world and considers herself as her successor. I think they also think they are criticising the BRF as though in Diana's memory.
> 
> It's hard for me to remember exactly everything that went on between Charles and Di, it's a long time ago and I wasn't that interested tbh. But the animosity recanted by 'insiders' towards the BRF, feeling trapped, hating protocol, and the venom towards the men in grey suits sounds not only horribly familiar but also somehow, hopelessly out of date.
> 
> They are obviously both stuck in some psychodrama based on media reports and newspaper cuttings from 25 years ago, whipping each other up into a frenzy of paranoia and magnifying every perceived past slight or pause for breath as sign of personal hatred.
> 
> Diana provoked a great deal of sympathy because she could empathise with others in need (much of it to do with her loneliness felt as an abandoned child as well as an abandoned wife). Whereas these two have very little empathy or genuine sympathy. It feels like they borrow others' injustice and causes because they want what Diana had, not the empathy, but the public's adulation.
> 
> Nothing wrong with a good, strongly cathartic psychodrama, but at some point you have to deal with the here (sofa surfing in LA) and now (responsible for their own child and no longer even close to children's ages).


paper tiger,

Yes, I think from the get go Meghan had his neediness figured out and the whole Mommy overlay is creepy.

One thing I never understood about the adulation of Diana as a great Mom was her lack of empathy for the impact of her actions on her sons. I remember reading more than one news item at the time of her bombshell TV appearance that Headmasters at the boys' schools had had to call them in to explain why they might expect an uptick in teasing or unpleasantness from their classmates in reaction to their mother's appearance on TV and her talking about their father and their parents marriage. Diana had never said a word of prep or warning to either of them. And the overly coy, poor me affect during that performance has absolutely, IMO, been replicated by MM.

Their covert attacks on his Grandmother are unexcuseable. At the time of Diana's death the Queen endured more criticism than I can remember at any other time from the British people for not returning to Buckingham Palace to mourn her. As it later was made clear the Queen had chosen to put her grandsons first and to be Granny in the immediate aftermath. Then we had the cluelessly cruel Nazi Uniform incident and Naked Billiards and Pool Romps in Las Vegas that not only bared his azz, but showed what a total one he could be. His Granny might have rebuked in private, but she never added  to his public embarassment. Pictures of the Queen with Meaghan early on certainly looked like she was being welcomed, even as MM disparaged protocol.


----------



## Emeline

Lodpah said:


> Lol, smacks of desperation from the Grifters’ PR. It’s becoming cartoonish. *It’s all about Meghan and not the bride and groom to be*.


If Meg's presence is all that then  invite her to a shower.
The wedding day really should be about the engaged couple.


----------



## bag-mania

Has anyone posted this one yet?  I can’t believe their book talks about Harry one upping his dad. 











						Biography claims Charles 'crushed' by Harry's girlfriend announcement
					

Prince Charles was left 'crushed' when Harry confirmed Meghan Markle was his girlfriend - as it overshadowed an official tour of the Middle East.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bisousx

I haven’t read one teaser from their upcoming book that’s flattering for them - or is it just me?


----------



## Lodpah

Creepy as all get out:


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Here is my vote for most ridiculous H&M story of the day.
> View attachment 4802772
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are top of list for Beckham wedding'
> 
> 
> The groom's parents David, 45, and Victoria, 46, are good friends with the royal couple, even attending their nuptials at Windsor Castle in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So good friends that were seated in the "cheap seats" at the wedding and not where Oprah, Serena and the Clooney were seated opposite the Royal Family. The Beckhams could only see the actual ceremony on TV monitors.
Yeah, good friends.
ETA, and Elton John for that matter, not even he got the posh seats


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> One thing I never understood about the adulation of Diana as a great Mom was her lack of empathy for the impact of her actions on her sons. I remember reading more than one news item at the time of her bombshell TV appearance that Headmasters at the boys' schools had had to call them in to explain why they might expect an uptick in teasing or unpleasantness from their classmates in reaction to their mother's appearance on TV and her talking about their father and their parents marriage. Diana had never said a word of prep or warning to either of them.



Not only that, I still remember being shocked of later reports how she had locked herself in the bathroom hysterically crying while 4yo Wills shoved paper towels under the door. WTF? Reminds me of my own mother who would make herself throw up after every meal during her first divorce to garner sympathy and paint herself as the victim. You don't do that to your small children.


----------



## beautymagpie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not only that, I still remember being shocked of later reports how she had locked herself in the bathroom hysterically crying while 4yo Wills shoved paper towels under the door. WTF? Reminds me of my own mother who would make herself throw up after every meal during her first divorce to garner sympathy and paint herself as the victim. You don't do that to your small children.



Sorry you had to go through that. My parents split when I was 11 and they couldn't see past themselves either. 27 years on, they're still playing games, even up until last week. Mum's a narcissist, Dad's short sighted, short tempered and thinks before he speaks. I realise now I was just coping with the situations thrown around, now I think back, I realise more and more, unfortunately. And because I'm not mental, I know what I did wrong back then in individual situations and would do differently too.

Our town knew the whole saga. It was incredibly uncomfortable, even for me as a kid having to play an adult. I can't imagine what H&W had to go through knowing the world knew what was happening, and now perhaps reading more about it as adults and having an adult perspective on it all individually and as parents.

I didn't really care for Diana, I have to be honest, but I can see she was sincere about the causes she cared for.

Sincerity is not what I'd consider a trait being mimicked by the two in LA now, however hard they might try it to be so.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> It’s hilarious for the article to say they are going to choose their wedding date based on Meghan and Harry’s availability. I bet that is news to the young engaged couple.



This has to be from H&M’s PR since Brooklyn & his family don’t need H&M or their PR for what’s already likely to be 2 big celebrity packed events on both sides of the pond (the bride has family in the US). 

Remember when H&M were for months reported to be on the outs with David & Victoria? Supposedly Harry told David that Meghan was upset & believed they’d spoken to the press about her. (This was around the time people suspected Meghan’s team for leaking stories about William’s alleged affair).

That rift is why it was a big deal that Meghan wore a VB dress (the tight aqua one) on her last UK visit. Presumably, she was burying the hachet, since they could really use powerful, wealthy friends like VB and David post-Megxit.


----------



## Grande Latte

bag-mania said:


> Harry isn't a deep thinker. Whatever is available on the surface is what he's going to think. If Meghan told him "I am ABC" then Harry believes "Meghan is ABC." Even though he could have observed over time that Meghan was actually "XYZ." He wouldn't bother looking any deeper because he's, I don't want to call him simple, but let's just say he's a very uncomplicated man.



Harry doesn't have the breadth and depth of thinking you might expect out of someone of his title. He's been sheltered and living in a bubble all his life. This is the first time he's in touch with reality, he's unprotected, and he'll learn the hard way, or crash and burn. I already feel sorry for this guy because he's met an extreme narcissist. I don't see how he can come out unscathed. He cannot protect/ think for himself.


----------



## LittleStar88

Grande Latte said:


> Harry doesn't have the breadth and depth of thinking you might expect out of someone of his title. He's been sheltered and living in a bubble all his life. This is the first time he's in touch with reality, he's unprotected, and he'll learn the hard way, or crash and burn. I already feel sorry for this guy because he's met an extreme narcissist. I don't see how he can come out unscathed. He cannot protect/ think for himself.



I guess it’s never too late to learn how to put on your big boy pants and learn some real adulting. Or he likes it this way: continuing to allow someone else to think for him and dictate his life. A very ideal situation for MM.


----------



## lulilu

How long do you thing the fervor about these two will last?  It's everywhere I look.  I'd like to see other news come across my e.g. twitter feed.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> How long do you thing the fervor about these two will last?  It's everywhere I look.  I'd like to see other news come across my e.g. twitter feed.


You might have to move country! There is hardly anything about them here in the UK Twitter. Not trenching, not in the news...


----------



## Nutashha

In case anybody is missing the drama from Meghan's daddy, here's something for you...

*Meghan’s Dad Wants Her to Stop ‘Whining’ in Her New Book*


----------



## Emeline

Nutashha said:


> In case anybody is missing the drama from Meghan's daddy, here's something for you...
> 
> *Meghan’s Dad Wants Her to Stop ‘Whining’ in Her New Book*
> 
> View attachment 4803282


He's giving her pretty good advice. And there is about 0% chance scoobie-do came up with the book contents without cooperation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Here is my vote for most ridiculous H&M story of the day.
> View attachment 4802772
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are top of list for Beckham wedding'
> 
> 
> The groom's parents David, 45, and Victoria, 46, are good friends with the royal couple, even attending their nuptials at Windsor Castle in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


that's ridiculous
I refuse to believe they would plan their wedding around these two


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Scobie... He is now a new member of the Discarded by Duchess club! 

*May 12:* But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now. 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.' 
Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale... 









						Meghan wants biography out now, saying it will set the record straight
					

Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*July 25:* LONDON — Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, have distanced themselves from a new book about their time in Britain’s royal family.
However, a spokesman for the couple said in a statement late Friday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “were not interviewed and did not contribute to ‘Finding Freedom.’”









						Prince Harry and Meghan 'did not contribute' to new book about their time in royal family
					

Due to be published in August, “Finding Freedom” describes a culture of increasing tension between the couple and other members of the royal family.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> Creepy as all get out:
> View attachment 4802990
> View attachment 4802991


Oh noooo, so unfortunate... someone should have done a quick google search before choosing that quote for the cover of VF.









bag-mania said:


> Here is my vote for most ridiculous H&M story of the day.
> View attachment 4802772
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are top of list for Beckham wedding'
> 
> 
> The groom's parents David, 45, and Victoria, 46, are good friends with the royal couple, even attending their nuptials at Windsor Castle in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk








They are so:


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Poor Scobie... He is now a new member of the Discarded by Duchess club!
> 
> *May 12:* But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now. 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan wants biography out now, saying it will set the record straight
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *July 25:* LONDON — Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, have distanced themselves from a new book about their time in Britain’s royal family.
> However, a spokesman for the couple said in a statement late Friday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “were not interviewed and did not contribute to ‘Finding Freedom.’”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'did not contribute' to new book about their time in royal family
> 
> 
> Due to be published in August, “Finding Freedom” describes a culture of increasing tension between the couple and other members of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com


oh....her life isn't a fairy tale?  isn't that what was sold to all the little girls of color?  you too can be a princess?  too bad she couldn't set a better example for those little girls


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Ha! *The book describes Harry as being "in a trance" on their first date* and they were "in their own little world."
> 
> Whatever she did to enthrall him so much she must still be at it.


BUT, BUT, BUT .. remember his friend (Inskip's) wedding in Jamaica .. where Meghan "showed up" as the +1 .. even though (supposedly), they had 'broken up'?!?!  Those pictures DO NOT show Harry as being sooooooooooo enamored of Meghan, so I don't know what she did after that, but (obviously) .. she somehow turned that around!!!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> oh....her life isn't a fairy tale?  isn't that what was sold to all the little girls of color?  you too can be a princess?  too bad she couldn't set a better example for those little girls


They have distanced themselves very fast from their much desired book. As soon as the book started being criticized, they wasted no time... It looks like Scobie may have joined a large number of members of the Discarded by Duchess club.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Here is my vote for most ridiculous H&M story of the day.
> View attachment 4802772
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are top of list for Beckham wedding'
> 
> 
> The groom's parents David, 45, and Victoria, 46, are good friends with the royal couple, even attending their nuptials at Windsor Castle in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


When I saw this, my first thought was "no way - they HAVE to be kidding" .. so, yeah .. another PR 'stunt' from MM?!?!  Didn't H&M have a falling-out with the Beckham's because Meghan thought that Victoria was spreading "rumors" behind her back????  

On another note .. their son is 21 .. WOW, is it just me or does anyone else think that that is way too young for a man to get married?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> When I saw this, my first thought was "no way - they HAVE to be kidding" .. so, yeah .. another PR 'stunt' from MM?!?!  Didn't H&M have a falling-out with the Beckham's because Meghan thought that Victoria was spreading "rumors" behind her back????
> 
> On another note .. their son is 21 .. WOW, is it just me or does anyone else think that that is way too young for a man to get married?


I agree....21 is very young esp for a man.....thinking back I was pretty immature even at 26 and guys generally mature slower than women


----------



## zinacef

Scobie should know better though, disposable people ! not unless she can get something from you like Oprah, Gayle and Tyler Perry.


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe there will be a lawsuit against the publication of “Finding Freedom”.  Let’s see.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Maybe there will be a lawsuit against the publication of “Finding Freedom”.  Let’s see.


that would be funny....they basically ask someone to write a book for them and then sue?


----------



## Annawakes

sdkitty said:


> that would be funny....they basically ask someone to write a book for them and then sue?


Yes.


----------



## Annawakes

They’re already saying they had nothing to do with the book....


----------



## CeeJay

zinacef said:


> Scobie should know better though, disposable people ! not unless she can get something from you like Oprah, Gayle and Tyler Perry.


I wonder about Oprah and Gayle, and whether or not they will continue to 'support' Meghan?  Both women are no dummies!  Sadly, I think Tyler Perry has a big heart and would likely let them continue to stay .. unless, of course, H&M find another place (as reported more towards Santa Barbara) for the same "price" (zero)!  

In regards to Scooby-dumb .. hmmm, would he spill the beans if Meghan markles him?  I know that one thing that I absolute HATE (major pet-peeve) is when someone accuses me of something that - in fact, I did not do.  Just like her father defending himself against Meghan's lies, I would too .. and the truth would spill!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> BUT, BUT, BUT .. remember his friend (Inskip's) wedding in Jamaica .. where Meghan "showed up" as the +1 .. even though (supposedly), they had 'broken up'?!?!  Those pictures DO NOT show Harry as being sooooooooooo enamored of Meghan, so I don't know what she did after that, but (obviously) .. she somehow turned that around!!!



You can bet _that_ particular story will not be recounted anywhere in _Finding Freedom_. It must never be known that Harry was ever anything but completely enamored with Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> BUT, BUT, BUT .. remember his friend (Inskip's) wedding in Jamaica .. where Meghan "showed up" as the +1 .. even though (supposedly), they had 'broken up'?!?!  Those pictures DO NOT show Harry as being sooooooooooo enamored of Meghan, so I don't know what she did after that, but (obviously) .. she somehow turned that around!!!


voodoo?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I wonder about Oprah and Gayle, and whether or not they will continue to 'support' Meghan?  Both women are no dummies!  Sadly, I think Tyler Perry has a big heart and would likely let them continue to stay .. unless, of course, H&M find another place (as reported more towards Santa Barbara) for the same "price" (zero)!
> 
> In regards to Scooby-dumb .. hmmm, would he spill the beans if Meghan markles him?  I know that one thing that I absolute HATE (major pet-peeve) is when someone accuses me of something that - in fact, I did not do.  Just like her father defending himself against Meghan's lies, I would too .. and the truth would spill!


re Oprah and Gayle, I guess it's gonna depend on whether they continue to see her as a sincere, powerful WOC...or a fraud as some think


----------



## CeeJay

Quora is becoming an interesting read in regards to H&M .. 


*Why is Meghan Markle claiming in court documents that she was not protected by the royal family during her pregnancy?*
Meghan is a deeply unpopular woman and she knows it.





The only way for her to save her failing popularity and make money now is to play the victim card.
She can lie and pretend the villain in this situation is The Queen, Prince William and Kate Middleton but it won’t work.
The entire world knows the Queen, Will and Kate to be kind, compassionate and caring individuals. The world knows they are not the cold hearted, mean villains Meghan has painted them as.
Meghan lost before she even begun. And it’s all her own fault. No one will believe her ridiculous claims. After all, Who would YOU believe was the villain in this story?Do YOU really think The Queen, Prince William, Kate, the entire Royal Family and the entire UK are ALL evil, mean, bigoted racists? No of course not. No one does.
Does the Queen sound evil to you? The Queen who has given her entire life to deeply loving her family, her people and her country? Who served in WW2 and welcomed Meghan with open arms? Who in the world has EVER known William and Kate to be mean, cold hearted, Un welcoming and a horrible person? No one. Not a single person believes this.
But Meghan is well known to treat people terribly. She abused her staff, abandoned her sick Dad then emotionally abused him by never letting him see his grandchild. She refused to help her own homeless family members, abandoned friends and family when she became famous, was cruel to her first husband, was reportedly a bully in school, was so rude to a waiter she made them cry, threw objects at staff and abandoned her dog because ““it was too old”. When her own nephew was reportedly about to die of an overdose, Meghan diddnt even bother lifting a finger to save her own nephews life. Meghan has openly bullied the Royal Family and openly insulted the Queen of England.
Who do YOU believe is the villain? We all know who the world will choose. And it’s not Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> When I saw this, my first thought was "no way - they HAVE to be kidding" .. so, yeah .. another PR 'stunt' from MM?!?!  Didn't H&M have a falling-out with the Beckham's because Meghan thought that Victoria was spreading "rumors" behind her back????
> 
> On another note .. their son is 21 .. WOW, is it just me or does anyone else think that that is way too young for a man to get married?



I'll throw out the possibility that DM completely manufactured this tale. They are already being sued by H&M and writing stuff like this shows just how little they care about it. They aren't going to back down and stop writing gossip about them. If anything I believe the lawsuit inspired them to be even more creative in how they do it.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> They have distanced themselves very fast from their much desired book. As soon as the book started being criticized, they wasted no time... It looks like Scobie may have joined a large number of members of the Discarded by Duchess club.


Can't say I'm surprised that they are now .. trying to distance themselves from the book & Author(s) .. *BUT*, the damage has already been done.  If you look at the comments on DM and other places, the comments are predominantly against the 2 grifters with many saying "take away the titles and take away the $$$" (which I wholeheartedly agree with).  Honestly, IMO .. it just goes to show you how STUPID they both are .. that they thought that this book would make it look like they are "victims" of the BRF?!?!


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> I'll throw out the possibility that DM completely manufactured this tale. They are already being sued by H&M and writing stuff like this shows just how little they care about it. They aren't going to back down and stop writing gossip about them. If anything I believe the lawsuit inspired them to be even more creative in how they do it.



That’s the unfortunate thing about our media. It strikes me as made up too, but it means similar stories that aren’t and are planted by M&H will be denied along the lines of ‘you know what the media’s like, they always make stuff up’ getting them off the hook.


----------



## bag-mania

beautymagpie said:


> That’s the unfortunate thing about our media. It strikes me as made up too, but it means similar stories that aren’t and are planted by M&H will be denied along the lines of ‘you know what the media’s like, they always make stuff up’ getting them off the hook.



Sadly, yes. We live in an era where the news media is agenda-oriented and promote their own biases. What chance do we have of identifying when the gossip media is manufacturing stories?

I really believe 90% of people (probably more) have no interest in H&M at all. They won't know about their gross hypocrisy or their spoiled brat behavior because they don't care enough to follow them.


----------



## csshopper

Ohhh Scoobie, you didn't make the Markle sparkle and were too dumb to realize you were writing your own "distant" future, time to take your place in the l-o-n g line of the Hollow Duchess's discards? 

On the other hand, being very cynical about MM and JCMH, this could be part of the pre publication hype : buy it so you will know why we are so upset?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Can't say I'm surprised that they are now .. trying to distance themselves from the book & Author(s) .. *BUT*, the damage has already been done.  If you look at the comments on DM and other places, the comments are predominantly against the 2 grifters with many saying "take away the titles and take away the $$$" (which I wholeheartedly agree with).  Honestly, IMO .. it just goes to show you how STUPID they both are .. that they thought that this book would make it look like they are "victims" of the BRF?!?!


I still haven't heard a peep of negativity from US media though


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Poor Scobie... He is now a new member of the Discarded by Duchess club!
> 
> *May 12:* But Meghan, 38, wants the publication date bumped up, with a friend explaining: 'If Meghan had it her way, the book would be released tomorrow instead of three months from now. 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life.'
> Meghan wants readers to understand her life hasn't been a fairy tale...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan wants biography out now, saying it will set the record straight
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *July 25:* LONDON — Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, have distanced themselves from a new book about their time in Britain’s royal family.
> However, a spokesman for the couple said in a statement late Friday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “were not interviewed and did not contribute to ‘Finding Freedom.’”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'did not contribute' to new book about their time in royal family
> 
> 
> Due to be published in August, “Finding Freedom” describes a culture of increasing tension between the couple and other members of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com


It's like they think we can't read.  Or we don't remember what we read. I distinctly remember reading this story about how they wanted to put a rush on releasing Omid's book so "their" side could be heard... in their own words.  Now they're trying to spin this narrative of them having nothing to do with it.  It always amazes me that there are people who are quoted as saying something - even on tape or camera, and turn around a month later and say "I never said that"


----------



## csshopper

Posted on line today from the Express in the UK: 
*Ramblings of the woke royals, no thanks!’ Britons savage book on Meghan and Harry - POLL*
*MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's unofficial biography has been savaged by Express.co.uk readers who say they will not read 'Finding Freedom'.*

An overwhelming 96 percent (6,957) of readers said they would not read the explosive book, which has lifted the lid on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s life in the Royal Family before they made the bombshell decision to quit the Firm and live a life away from the spotlight.


----------



## Sol Ryan

V0N1B2 said:


> It's like they think we can't read.  Or we don't remember what we read. I distinctly remember reading this story about how they wanted to put a rush on releasing Omid's book so "their" side could be heard... in their own words.  Now they're trying to spin this narrative of them having nothing to do with it.  It always amazes me that there are people who are quoted as saying something - even on tape or camera, and turn around a month later and say "I never said that"



I think they’ve learned it works in politics so they want to go for it too... also, most people apparently are dumb enough to buy it. I never thought I would literally have an argument about them in real life, but I have...


----------



## CarryOn2020

How dare they — picking on Angela Kelley is too much. Best to leave ‘the help’ alone. To me, this shows exactly what kind of character H&M have — zilch. Shame and side eye to anyone who supports this nonsense. Yes, this means Oprah, TP, etc. What exactly are their motives?









						Queen DID slap down Meghan over choice of wedding tiara, book reveals
					

Meghan Markle has blamed the Queen's favourite dresser for a row over which tiara she could wear at her wedding to Prince Harry in 2018, a new book on the Sussexes claims.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_However the authors of Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claim Harry felt the Queen's dresser Angela Kelly had deliberately dragged her feet while trying to help decide on what tiara to wear, The Sun reports._


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> It's like they think we can't read.  Or we don't remember what we read. I distinctly remember reading this story about how they wanted to put a rush on releasing Omid's book so "their" side could be heard... in their own words.  Now they're trying to spin this narrative of them having nothing to do with it.  It always amazes me that there are people who are quoted as saying something - even on tape or camera, and turn around a month later and say "I never said that"


and people wonder why we on this thread don't like them


----------



## scarlet555

Erase if this was posted:

Ridiculous Meghan is upset because she is told what she can and cannot wear...  probably the poor thing didn't know there would be rules and dress codes marrying into the royal family.  Honestly she isn't old by any standards but this 'naive' narrative shes played   is just dumb.   She works as an actress, the currency a lot of time is sex and image, so no naivety from her. 

link is cut and paste below from:   http://www.justjared.com/2020/07/29...l-staff-resulted-in-a-frustrating-phone-call/
*This Meghan Markle Necklace Annoyed Royal Staff & Resulted in a Frustrating Phone Call*




Before *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* were engaged, the future member of the royal family was seen out and about in a necklace that showed her initial, “M,” alongside his initial, “H.”
*Meghan *was seen wearing the necklace in December of 2016, before we really got much confirmation or details about their relationship. They announced their engagement in November of 2017.
“She was advised that wearing such a necklace only served to encourage the photographers to keep pursuing such images — and new headlines,” a source said in Finding Freedom, the tell-all book about the former royal couple. You can see a pic of the necklace here.
Meghan received a phone call and apparently “said very little…choosing instead to simply listen to the counsel”.
But apparently, “after hanging up, she felt frustrated and emotional. While she knew the aide had good intentions, the surreal experience of having someone from her boyfriend’s office tell her what kind of jewelry to wear or not to smile at a photographer was too much.”
The tell-all book is being published soon and apparently, this person in their lives is going to be most upset about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I still haven't heard a peep of negativity from US media though



And you won't hear anything negative. From how the story was presented here in January, the US media seemed to have collectively decided that H&M left the royal family due to overt racism and unfair treatment from the British media and the royals themselves. 

That is the story they told and they will stick with it. Nobody is going to risk losing their career over these two useless creatures.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> as if Meghan’s and Harry’s schedule is so full! What is on their agenda besides suing the tabloids?



Another hard day by the pool


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> “She was advised that wearing such a necklace only served to encourage the photographers to keep pursuing such images — and new headlines,” a source said in Finding Freedom, the tell-all book about the former royal couple. You can see a pic of the necklace here.
> Meghan received a phone call and apparently “said very little…choosing instead to simply listen to the counsel”.
> But apparently, “after hanging up, she felt frustrated and emotional. While she knew the aide had good intentions, the surreal experience of having someone from her boyfriend’s office tell her what kind of jewelry to wear or not to smile at a photographer was too much.”
> The tell-all book is being published soon and apparently, this person in their lives is going to be most upset about it.



It wouldn't surprise me to find out that she purchased the H&M necklace herself with the intention of wearing it to encourage the media to gossip about her being Harry's girlfriend. No wonder she was steamed at being called out for her blatant fame whoring.

It was an indication of what she was going to face if she got engaged to him. So much for her crocodile tears when she pretended she didn't understand she would have restrictions on what she did. Is every word out of her mouth a lie?


----------



## CarryOn2020

H M = her majesty or Harry & Meghan ?
She pushed the ‘Queen Meghan‘ narrative which, again, shows how divisive they truly are. While others wonder why some of us dislike this couple, some of us wonder why anyone does like and support them. How does anyone justify defending these two fakers/grifters/liars?


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It wouldn't surprise me to find out that she purchased the H&M necklace herself with the intention of wearing it to encourage the media to gossip about her being Harry's girlfriend. No wonder she was steamed at being called out for her blatant fame whoring.
> 
> It was an indication of what she was going to face if she got engaged to him. So much for her crocodile tears when she pretended she didn't understand she would have restrictions on what she did. *Is every word out of her mouth a lie?*



Pretty much.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> It wouldn't surprise me to find out that she purchased the H&M necklace herself with the intention of wearing it to encourage the media to gossip about her being Harry's girlfriend. No wonder she was steamed at being called out for her blatant fame whoring.
> 
> It was an indication of what she was going to face if she got engaged to him. So much for her crocodile tears when she pretended she didn't understand she would have restrictions on what she did. Is every word out of her mouth a lie?


It is ridiculous.  Her reaction is what you might expect from a teen who is receiving unwanted advice.
She was a grown woman in her mid 30's.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> H M = her majesty or Harry & Meghan ?
> She pushed the ‘Queen Meghan‘ narrative which, again, shows how divisive they truly are. While others wonder why some of us dislike this couple, some of us wonder why anyone does like and support them. *How does anyone justify defending these two fakers/grifters/liars?*



Her stans fell in love with the semifictional romantic story we were told by the media (as many of us did at the time). Their relationship was presented to us like the saccharine plot of a friggin' Hallmark movie. Remember how Meghan was supposed to be a breath of fresh air for the stodgy royal family? Never has oxygen soured so quickly!

Over time those of us here looked beneath the surface, past what Meghan was saying and saw what Meghan was actually doing. The stans take her at her word. (I'm sure she still has plenty of stans but I bet she doesn't have as many as before.)


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle trying to keep friends’ identities secret in lawsuit*
Meghan Markle was happy with the “flattering” interview that five of her closest friends gave to People magazine, a London court heard on Wednesday.

The Duchess of Sussex is making a legal bid to protect the identity of the women who spoke out to complain that she was being bullied.

She’s currently suing the Mail on Sunday newspaper for breach of privacy after it published a private letter she had sent to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.

The High Court heard that one of Markle’s best friends arranged the interviews as she was close to People’s editor.

The Mail on Sunday argued that their interviews are central to the case because one of them — known only in the public documents as “Friend B” — referred to the existence of Markle’s letter during her interview.

It maintained that following the People magazine interviews that were published last year ”neither the existence nor the contents of the Letter were confidential.”

Mail on Sunday publisher Associated Newspapers said the names should be made public and argued that Markle cannot fight for their privacy since she “freely” named them in court documents.

Lawyers for the newspaper said, “They gave flattering material to People about [Markle].

“[She] does not complain about what they did — in fact she appears to commend it.

“The information they disclosed to People was information about the claimant, but is not said by her to be private or information that she seeks to protect.”

However, Markle ‘s legal team argued that her friends “have not waived their right to anonymity — quite the contrary”.

She also insisted that she had no knowledge of the interviews in advance and would not have condoned them if she had been aware.

The names of the five friends are in the private section of the court documents.

Markle’s legal team argued, “The fact that the Claimant has named the friends in a Confidential Schedule … does not entitle the media to treat their names as publicly reportable.”

Earlier this month, the Mail on Sunday’s legal team told the Duchess’ lawyers that they regarded the names of the friends as being “properly reportable by the media.”

No date has been set for this trial but if it does reach that stage it is possible that Meghan’s father will have to give evidence against his daughter.

The newspaper maintains it was acting in the public interest as Markle was — at that time — a senior working member of the royal family who was publicly funded.









						Meghan Markle trying to keep friends’ identities secret in lawsuit
					

Meghan Markle was happy with the “flattering” interview that five of her closest friends gave to People magazine, a London court heard on Wednesday.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> How dare they — picking on Angela Kelley is too much. Best to leave ‘the help’ alone. To me, this shows exactly what kind of character H&M have — zilch. Shame and side eye to anyone who supports this nonsense. Yes, this means Oprah, TP, etc. What exactly are their motives?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen DID slap down Meghan over choice of wedding tiara, book reveals
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has blamed the Queen's favourite dresser for a row over which tiara she could wear at her wedding to Prince Harry in 2018, a new book on the Sussexes claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _However the authors of Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claim Harry felt the Queen's dresser Angela Kelly had deliberately dragged her feet while trying to help decide on what tiara to wear, The Sun reports._


They are unbelievable  Angela is employed by the Queen and is there to do her job (and does it so well), why on earth would she be taking demands from MM? She answers to the Queen, not to some new woman marrying into the royal family. It costs nothing to be polite.

So apparently:
_At the time of the row, The Queen is said to have told Prince Harry, according to a Royal insider: 'Meghan cannot have whatever she wants. She gets what tiara she's given by me.'_

Yet liar, liar MM said:
_Speaking for an exhibition where the tiara was being displayed at the time, she (MM) said: 'When it came to the tiara on the day, I was very fortunate to be able to choose this gorgeous art deco style bandeau tiara. Harry and I had gone to Buckingham Palace to meet with Her Majesty The Queen to select one of the options that were there, which was an incredibly surreal day as you can imagine.
And that was the one that, I think, as we tried them on, stood out.'_

 you chose nothing! That's the tiara the Queen decided you would wear and that was it. 
Always inflating her own ego to make herself seem more important and special than she is/was. It must be exhausting to be like that.

Also this:
*'The Queen also questioned why Meghan needed a veil for the wedding, given it was to be her second marriage',* the source alleged, adding that: 'Meghan can be difficult'.
I didn't expect her to be wearing a veil either, let alone one as long and detailed as the one she wore.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> They are unbelievable  Angela is employed by the Queen and is there to do her job (and does it so well), why on earth would she be taking demands from MM? She answers to the Queen, not to some new woman marrying into the royal family. It costs nothing to be polite.
> 
> So apparently:
> _At the time of the row, The Queen is said to have told Prince Harry, according to a Royal insider: 'Meghan cannot have whatever she wants. She gets what tiara she's given by me.'_
> 
> Yet liar, liar MM said:
> _Speaking for an exhibition where the tiara was being displayed at the time, she (MM) said: 'When it came to the tiara on the day, I was very fortunate to be able to choose this gorgeous art deco style bandeau tiara. Harry and I had gone to Buckingham Palace to meet with Her Majesty The Queen to select one of the options that were there, which was an incredibly surreal day as you can imagine.
> And that was the one that, I think, as we tried them on, stood out.'_
> 
> you chose nothing! That's the tiara the Queen decided you would wear and that was it.
> Always inflating her own ego to make herself seem more important and special than she is/was. It must be exhausting to be like that.
> 
> Also this:
> *'The Queen also questioned why Meghan needed a veil for the wedding, given it was to be her second marriage',* the source alleged, adding that: 'Meghan can be difficult'.
> I didn't expect her to be wearing a veil either, let alone one as long and detailed as the one she wore.


I agree about the veil but all those traditions seem to have gone away.  I wouldn't be surprised if J Lo wore a veil when she gets married for the fourth time


----------



## CarryOn2020

£67,000 loss!  Next case, please.









						Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
					

A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> £67,000 loss!  Next case, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
> 
> 
> A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Harry had better get daddy on the phone pronto. He needs cash!


----------



## marietouchet

I refuse to pay for the Omid book 
but the DM reports that the book does acknowledge a dust up over choice of tiara for wedding, putting blame on Angela  Kelly, which is silly
I had wanted not to believe the hissy fit over the tiara, I figured someone had exaggerated something somewhere 
but the new version - AK is to blame - is ludicrous, AK would have referred the spat to the Queen immediately rather than personally intervening, she has too much experience to extemporize on a tiara matter
well, I was wrong, I wanted to believe that no one could be so silly as to fuss over which priceless tiara would be on loan, am gobsmacked the story is true

silly old naive me.... lol


----------



## bag-mania

*Everything she tries blows up in her face in such a spectacular way!



*


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> I refuse to pay for the Omid book
> but the DM reports that the book does acknowledge a dust up over choice of tiara for wedding, putting blame on Angela  Kelly, which is silly
> I had wanted not to believe the hissy fit over the tiara, I figured someone had exaggerated something somewhere
> but the new version - AK is to blame - is ludicrous, AK would have referred the spat to the Queen immediately rather than personally intervening, she has too much experience to extemporize on a tiara matter
> well, I was wrong, I wanted to believe that no one could be so silly as to fuss over which priceless tiara would be on loan, am gobsmacked the story is true
> 
> silly old naive me.... lol



Don’t feel bad, I have given MM the benefit of the doubt so many times, only to have the item proven true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

*The Sussexes were said to be furious after Meghan was told she could not wear the emerald tiara she'd chosen, as nobody was sure where it came from. *

I remember this, no one was sure of the provenance of the emerald tiara and were concerned that the jewels might be from a tainted source, so no way was anyone going to be allowed to wear it.  

Still . . . furious?  Over which priceless tiara you're being loaned?


----------



## bag-mania

Strangely the Queen doesn't live by the motto "whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets."

The whole thing only makes Harry look like more of a dumb@ss.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> *The Sussexes were said to be furious after Meghan was told she could not wear the emerald tiara she'd chosen, as nobody was sure where it came from. *
> 
> I remember this, no one was sure of the provenance of the emerald tiara and were concerned that the jewels might be from a tainted source, so no way was anyone going to be allowed to wear it.
> 
> Still . . . furious?  Over which priceless tiara you're being loaned?


OK, flood gates are open now that I know the tiara story is true ... having been obsessed with the BRF jewels forever...

There are 2 emerald tiaras - the Vladimir one - only worn by QEII - it is well known 
The second is the Greville tiara - worn by Eugenie at her wedding, NO ONE knew the BRF had this one until E got married. There is also a TDF Greville emerald necklace that surfaced this year worn by QEII. NO ONE knew the BRF had the Greville emerald pieces

Well, MM would not have known about he Greville tiara, I doubt Angela Kelly showed it to MM , nor was MM allowed to rummage through the vault where they are stored in cloth covered baskets - made for Queen Mary

So, I find it impossible that MM could have known about the Greville, but she may have known about the Vladimir one. I conclude MM was hankering for the Vladimir tiara - that only the Queen wears. MM wanted the serious BLING

How tacky to dispute the Queen's personal tiaras...


----------



## bisousx

I thought their gripe was about Meghan being half black and the British press had it out for her, put out multiple false stories to make her look difficult. And her own book is literally confirming that all the rumors are in fact true. What on earth is going on 

I actually thought that they would write a sympathetic version of their story, but H&M seem to be bragging about throwing tantrums and people under the bus.

The thing is, most people could understand that an old institution could be snobby and intimidating for anyone. I was expecting a way different version of their story.

They really should scramble and rewrite this book if it’s meant to sway public opinion back to team Meghan.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> *Is every word out of her mouth a lie?*


.. and, after lying time & time again, people like her start to BELIEVE their lies!


----------



## Madrose

youngster said:


> I remember this, no one was sure of the provenance of the emerald tiara and were concerned that the jewels might be from a tainted source, so no way was anyone going to be allowed to wear it.



I'm confused.  How would Meghan have known about the emerald tiara if there was no chance it could be worn?  Is there a display room where all the crown jewels are kept?  It sounds like she saw a selection of tiaras.


----------



## sdkitty

Madrose said:


> I'm confused.  How would Meghan have known about the emerald tiara if there was no chance it could be worn?  Is there a display room where all the crown jewels are kept?  It sounds like she saw a selection of tiaras.


or she said she did?
who knows what to believe?


----------



## bisousx

Madrose said:


> I'm confused.  How would Meghan have known about the emerald tiara if there was no chance it could be worn?  Is there a display room where all the crown jewels are kept?  It sounds like she saw a selection of tiaras.



There’s numerous articles about the Vladimir tiara online, it would be easy for any BRF enthusiast to learn about it. Thanks to @marietouchet for the interesting info!


----------



## youngster

Madrose said:


> I'm confused.  How would Meghan have known about the emerald tiara if there was no chance it could be worn?  Is there a display room where all the crown jewels are kept?  It sounds like she saw a selection of tiaras.



I've got no idea what the truth is about the tiara that MM wore at her wedding. I just remember there were several news reports that she wanted a particular one with emeralds but that was no go from the start since the background of the emeralds was not fully known.  Even if the Queen made the final selection, maybe MM was given a chance to try some on and make her preference known?  

I think I read that the Queen's personal jewelry collection is split between items owned by her as monarch and items owned by her personally.  This is separate from the Crown Jewels (like St. Edward's Crown and the Imperial State Crown) that are kept in the Tower of London and brought out for state occasions.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> There are 2 emerald tiaras - the Vladimir one - only worn by QEII - it is well known
> The second is the Greville tiara - worn by Eugenie at her wedding, NO ONE knew the BRF had this one until E got married. There is also a TDF Greville emerald necklace that surfaced this year worn by QEII. NO ONE knew the BRF had the Greville emerald pieces



I've read that the Queen's personal jewelry collection numbers up to 300 pieces.  Could it be that there is another emerald tiara, other than the Vladimir and the Greville?  One that also hasn't been seen before and with a shady provenance (which is why it hasn't been seen before)?


----------



## Annawakes

I’m a bit confused too.  If the only emerald tiara that MM could have known about and wanted was the Vladimir that only QE wears, why was the reason they gave her “because the provenance of the stones were unknown”?  Why didn’t they just say, “No.  Only the Queen wears that”.  So, it is okay for the Queen to wear tiaras where the stones’ provenance is unknown?


----------



## Frivole88

double post


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> £67,000 loss!  Next case, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
> 
> 
> A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk








marietouchet said:


> OK, flood gates are open now that I know the tiara story is true ... having been obsessed with the BRF jewels forever...
> 
> There are 2 emerald tiaras - the Vladimir one - only worn by QEII - it is well known
> The second is the Greville tiara - worn by Eugenie at her wedding, NO ONE knew the BRF had this one until E got married. There is also a TDF Greville emerald necklace that surfaced this year worn by QEII. NO ONE knew the BRF had the Greville emerald pieces
> 
> Well, MM would not have known about he Greville tiara, I doubt Angela Kelly showed it to MM , nor was MM allowed to rummage through the vault where they are stored in cloth covered baskets - made for Queen Mary
> 
> So, I find it impossible that MM could have known about the Greville, but she may have known about the Vladimir one. I conclude MM was hankering for the Vladimir tiara - that only the Queen wears. MM wanted the serious BLING
> 
> How tacky to dispute the Queen's personal tiaras...


Thanks for the info! I had to Google pics of the Vladimir tiara and wow, that is one _serious _tiara  
The Greville tiara that Eugenie wore is so beautiful. It's good that her and Beatrice both got to wear pretty exclusive tiaras which is how it should be being Princesses and granddaughters of the Queen.


----------



## Annawakes

youngster said:


> I've read that the Queen's personal jewelry collection numbers up to 300 pieces.  Could it be that there is another emerald tiara, other than the Vladimir and the Greville?  One that also hasn't been seen before and with a shady provenance (which is why it hasn't been seen before)?


Okay, this answers my question.  She must have somehow seen another emerald tiara that isn’t the Vladimir.


----------



## Emeline

Madrose said:


> I'm confused.  How would Meghan have known about the emerald tiara if there was no chance it could be worn?  Is there a display room where all the crown jewels are kept?  It sounds like she saw a selection of tiaras.


That emerald tiera is famous.
The Queen has worn it numerous times. Just my opinion, it was absurd if Meg thought she'd be lent that particular tiera.





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Lounorada said:


> Oh noooo, so unfortunate... someone should have done a quick google search before choosing that quote for the cover of VF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are so:
> View attachment 4803340



Your pictures are always fantastic


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> There’s numerous articles about the Vladimir tiara online, it would be easy for any BRF enthusiast to learn about it. Thanks to @marietouchet for the interesting info!


but remember Meghan claimed to know very little about the RF before she got involved with H?


----------



## Madrose

sdkitty said:


> or she said she did?
> who knows what to believe?



Ha ha, true!  I also just realized it's possible Meghan mentioned to Harry she wanted an emerald tiara and he told her about it.  She could've been shown other tiaras the Queen approved of but she wanted the emerald one and made it known and the Queen said no!


----------



## Emeline

Annawakes said:


> Okay, this answers my question.  She must have somehow seen another emerald tiara that isn’t the Vladimir.


Maybe?
I did have fun looking at this list of 40 British royal tieras. Only noted 2 emerald ones (Vladimir can have emeralds, pearls or diamonds), but who knows?


			https://www.harpersbazaar.com.au/culture/british-royal-tiaras-18106


----------



## Lodpah

I read something hilarious that Harry’s Army buddies should set up an extraction team to get him out. I think that’s a great idea


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> £67,000 loss!  Next case, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
> 
> 
> A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


*$87,060.80 .. in USD*!  HA!!!!


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> Okay, this answers my question.  She must have somehow seen another emerald tiara that isn’t the Vladimir.





Annawakes said:


> I’m a bit confused too.  If the only emerald tiara that MM could have known about and wanted was the Vladimir that only QE wears, why was the reason they gave her “because the provenance of the stones were unknown”?  Why didn’t they just say, “No.  Only the Queen wears that”.  So, it is okay for the Queen to wear tiaras where the stones’ provenance is unknown?


i think the whole story of provenance is a red herring lie used by MM to diffuse Tiaragate by making MM seem very woke , an I did not really want to wear THAT ONE type of explanation 
heck the tiaras all come from the time when no one noticed exploitation of Africa, they are all tainted by modern standards


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Her stans fell in love with the semifictional romantic story we were told by the media (as many of us did at the time). Their relationship was presented to us like the saccharine plot of a friggin' Hallmark movie. Remember how Meghan was supposed to be a breath of fresh air for the stodgy royal family? Never has oxygen soured so quickly!
> 
> Over time those of us here looked beneath the surface, past what Meghan was saying and saw what Meghan was actually doing. The stans take her at her word. (I'm sure she still has plenty of stans but I bet she doesn't have as many as before.)



If they'd stuck to doing what they'd they would like to i.e. 1) get married 2) have family 3) live at Frogmore 4) go to work occasionally - 

no one would have have looked further, their romantic tale would be in tact, darlings 4ever

It's coz they keep changing:
Their story
Their plans
Their friends
Their 'home'
Their focus
Their cause 
Their allegiance(s)

+ JCMH looks like he hasn't slept since arriving in the US 

that people start to not take a singe word that comes out of their mouths seriously. 

This is not the picture of a romantically content and heathy couple. These PR puff pieces are the drip drip feed of two disparate wannabes - whilst we're thinking to ourselves (me anyway) - but had they had it ALL. Yes, it's all relative, everyone has problems etc, but in this case, forget Diana's death, forget Princess Pushy B**ch, forget the paparazzi. They had it all and could have argued for respect and privacy - but no, nothing will ever be good enough, not even their own romantic history.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> £67,000 loss!  Next case, please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
> 
> 
> A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The Duchess of Sussex has applied for an order to keep secret the identities of the women, all 'young mothers', at a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

I guess we can eliminate Kate from the list of 'young mothers'.


----------



## Lounorada

rose60610 said:


> Your pictures are always fantastic


Thanks @rose60610! You can't beat a good gif  I hope people enjoy them!


----------



## Tootsie17

V0N1B2 said:


> It's like they think we can't read.  Or we don't remember what we read. I distinctly remember reading this story about how they wanted to put a rush on releasing Omid's book so "their" side could be heard... in their own words.  Now they're trying to spin this narrative of them having nothing to do with it.  It always amazes me that there are people who are quoted as saying something - even on tape or camera, and turn around a month later and say "I never said that"


M and her PR team can't keep up with all the lies they tell. She truly believes her own BS. I guess M and her team also feel that most people won't remember the lies they've told. Ha! I can recall quite a few of her falsehoods and I assume most astute people can smell their BS coming from miles away. I wonder how much input Harry has in her schemes?


----------



## marietouchet

Emeline said:


> Maybe?
> I did have fun looking at this list of 40 British royal tieras. Only noted 2 emerald ones (Vladimir can have emeralds, pearls or diamonds), but who knows?
> 
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com.au/culture/british-royal-tiaras-18106


The BRF bling is pretty well documented with the exception of the Greville collection 
Queen Mary and later QEII had all the good stuff, so, the Queen Mum had no serious bling until Lady Grenville, who was childless, bequeathed her bling to the Queen Mum
a bit of murky provenance, in these days when major gifts are taxable 
so The BRF has been quiet about the G bling, except for pieces that the Queen Mum chose to wear 
so the G emeralds were not known, while the rest seems to have been photographed ad infinitum
you can go back to photos of lady GreVille to figure out what she bequeathed


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> OK, flood gates are open now that I know the tiara story is true ... having been obsessed with the BRF jewels forever...
> 
> There are 2 emerald tiaras - the Vladimir one - only worn by QEII - it is well known
> The second is the Greville tiara - worn by Eugenie at her wedding, NO ONE knew the BRF had this one until E got married. There is also a TDF Greville emerald necklace that surfaced this year worn by QEII. NO ONE knew the BRF had the Greville emerald pieces
> 
> Well, MM would not have known about he Greville tiara, I doubt Angela Kelly showed it to MM , nor was MM allowed to rummage through the vault where they are stored in cloth covered baskets - made for Queen Mary
> 
> So, I find it impossible that MM could have known about the Greville, but she may have known about the Vladimir one. I conclude MM was hankering for the Vladimir tiara - that only the Queen wears. MM wanted the serious BLING
> 
> How tacky to dispute the Queen's personal tiaras...



Yes, pretty sure it was the Vladimir

Maybe wearing head-to-toe emerald including hat and cape was a subtle hint?


----------



## Tootsie17

Lounorada said:


> Thanks @rose60610! You can't beat a good gif  I hope people enjoy them!


Your gifs are absolutely the best! I always get a much needed laugh from them and they are one of my favorite parts of reading this thread. Please don't stop posting.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Yes, pretty sure it was the Kokoshnik


Technically the Vladimir and Greville tiaras are both kokoshnik style, ie Russian style


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> The Duchess of Sussex has applied for an order to keep secret the identities of the women, all 'young mothers', at a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
> 
> I guess we can eliminate Kate from the list of 'young mothers'.


Sounds more like she's trying to keep the names of her fRiEnDs from coming out as it will make her look bad rather than trying to protect them because I don't see why them being mothers should make a difference to anything. They are grown women who made the decision to let MM use them as scapegoats, go to People magazine and have them publish a 'private' letter you sent to your father for publicity and self-serving reasons. I couldn't care less about their names, but I hope her application for an order to keep their names private is denied becasue they made their choices, now it's time to deal with the consequences.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Technically the Vladimir and Greville tiaras are both kokoshnik style, ie Russian style



They are, true. 

I'd have been happy with any tbh . 

_I_ think M thinks she looks good in emerald(s) and she does (not sure about the top-to-toe outfit though). These things go down in history. Not that diamond tiaras are a dime a dozen but lots of brides wear replicas od simulated clear stones so it's not as memorable. I think the emeralds would have been written about. She was denied her place in fashion history, and QEII has never been forgiven


----------



## Lounorada

Tootsie17 said:


> Your gifs are absolutely the best! I always get a much needed laugh from them and they are one of my favorite parts of reading this thread. Please don't stop posting.


I have quite the selection of gifs saved in a folder, I save them as I see them  Half of them I never get to use, until you need the perfect reaction for certain stories! I shall definitely keep posting them and more often


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> OK, flood gates are open now that I know the tiara story is true ... having been obsessed with the BRF jewels forever...
> 
> There are 2 emerald tiaras - the Vladimir one - only worn by QEII - it is well known
> The second is the Greville tiara - worn by Eugenie at her wedding, NO ONE knew the BRF had this one until E got married. There is also a TDF Greville emerald necklace that surfaced this year worn by QEII. NO ONE knew the BRF had the Greville emerald pieces
> 
> Well, MM would not have known about he Greville tiara, I doubt Angela Kelly showed it to MM , nor was MM allowed to rummage through the vault where they are stored in cloth covered baskets - made for Queen Mary
> 
> So, I find it impossible that MM could have known about the Greville, but she may have known about the Vladimir one. I conclude MM was hankering for the Vladimir tiara - that only the Queen wears. MM wanted the serious BLING
> 
> How tacky to dispute the Queen's personal tiaras...



Thanks for the history lesson, @marietouchet !

I have to say the Vladimir seems too ostentatious and old-fashioned for a younger, modern woman to wear - she seems to have a pretty simple style overall and the wedding dress was very clean and modern, so the tiara she ended up wearing was a much better fit IMO than the other one would have been. As I see it the only reason to want to wear the Vladimir would be for the prestige of it.


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> Sounds more like she's trying to keep the names of her fRiEnDs from coming out as it will make her look bad rather than trying to protect them because I don't see why them being mothers should make a difference to anything. They are grown women who made the decision to let MM use them as scapegoats, go to People magazine and have them publish a 'private' letter you sent to your father for publicity and self-serving reasons. I couldn't care less about their names, but I hope her application for an order to keep their names private is denied becasue they made their choices, now it's time to deal with the consequences.


You know what? .. I'm beginning to think that there are no such "friends" that told People Magazine anything and that, in fact, it was MM herself "disguised" as 'friends'!  After all, how many friends has MM had (notice PAST tense here)!!!


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> If they'd stuck to doing what they'd they would like to i.e. 1) get married 2) have family 3) live at Frogmore 4) go to work occasionally -
> 
> no one would have have looked further, their romantic tale would be in tact, darlings 4ever
> 
> It's coz they keep changing:
> Their story
> Their plans
> Their friends
> Their 'home'
> Their focus
> Their cause
> Their allegiance(s)
> 
> + JCMH looks like he hasn't slept since arriving in the US
> 
> that people start to not take a singe word that comes out of their mouths seriously.
> 
> This is not the picture of a romantically content and heathy couple. These PR puff pieces are the drip drip feed of two disparate wannabes - whilst we're thinking to ourselves (me anyway) - but had they had it ALL. Yes, it's all relative, everyone has problems etc, but in this case, forget Diana's death, forget Princess Pushy B**ch, forget the paparazzi. They had it all and could have argued for respect and privacy - but no, nothing will ever be good enough, not even their own romantic history.


Don't forget 'Their staff'!


----------



## marietouchet

Ps loaning out any BRF bling is a new thing, Margaret and Anne were loaned a few minor things, but they are/were princesses of the blood, MM is not- she married into the family

females in the BRF were gifted bling at their marriage , but that is difficult anymore due to tax 

consequences, so, tiaras are routinely loaned to the grandchildren and spouses while, their parents were not loaned anything, eg the Queen did / does not loan to Diana, Fergie or Sophie
Anne was gifted three tiaras at marriage, they were smaller ones that were not usually worn and were collecting dust, not the good stuff, Anne has never worn her mother’s good stuff

and tiara selection is difficult, they do not fit every head, and many are not adjustable
also they weigh a ton , and if you are not used to the weight, you get a headache
and hair style is important, fluffy hair helps to support the weight, added chignons or braids are also a plus For anchoring and weight distribution and for hiding the elastic at the back and or the sometimes ugly bottom of the tiara frame

Camilla and QEII wear the same hair day and night, but they Have tiaras that work without added braids , Kate always has added pieces and height added at the top to her tiara-hair

so, hair  style, size and weight are major issues not just gemstones

ps sorry for weird use of capital letters, my ipad did it despite me


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Ps loaning out any BRF bling is a new thing
> females in the BRF were gifted bling at their marriage , but that is difficult anymore due to tax consequences, so, tiaras are routinely loaned to the grandchildren and spouses while, their parents were not loaned anything, eg the Queen did / does not loan to Diana, Fergie or Sophie
> Anne was gifted three tiaras at marriage, they were smaller ones that were not usually worn and were collecting dust, not the good stuff, Anne has never worn her mother’s good stuff



Personally, I'd be _very_ happy with the Meander - whichever side of the family it came from 

I thought one of Anne's tiaras come from a Hong Kong shipping company (or something like that) just happened to gifted same year she married (the first time). Maybe that was another.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Personally, I'd be _very_ happy with the Meander - whichever side of the family it came from
> 
> I thought one of Anne's tiaras come from a Hong Kong shipping company (or something like that) just happened to gifted same year she married (the first time). Maybe that was another.


Anne has the meander, smaller but classic, and came from Philip’s mother which is cool
She has a festoon tiara, very baroque , worked better in the 80s than today
her last is a 1950s style aquamarine one, called the pine cone tiara, It is blue and very 50s not at all in style today, had been a gift to her mother from Brazil maybe 
don’t remember an HK tiara , there were Burmese rubies given to QEII, but she kept the tiara made from those


----------



## Lounorada

marietouchet said:


> The BRF bling is pretty well documented with the exception of the Greville collection
> Queen Mary and later QEII had all the good stuff, so, the Queen Mum had no serious bling until Lady Grenville, who was childless, bequeathed her bling to the Queen Mum
> a bit of murky provenance, in these days when major gifts are taxable
> so The BRF has been quiet about the G bling, except for pieces that the Queen Mum chose to wear
> so the G emeralds were not known, while the rest seems to have been photographed ad infinitum
> you can go back to photos of lady GreVille to figure out what she bequeathed


I just got lost on Google images searching pics of BRF tiaras and I agree Queen Mary had the best stuff plus, Queen Victoria had an absolutely stunning emerald & diamond tiara. Even though it isn't part of QE2's collection from what I gathered, which is a shame seeing as she's her great-great-grandmother. It would be great to see QV's emerald tiara worn! I mean look at it 





RoyalWatcher


----------



## gelbergirl

Could some post the pics of the 2 tiaras and mark which is which? TYIA


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> M and her PR team can't keep up with all the lies they tell. She truly believes her own BS. I guess M and her team also feel that most people won't remember the lies they've told. Ha! I can recall quite a few of her falsehoods and I assume most astute people can smell their BS coming from miles away. I wonder how much input Harry has in her schemes?


I think she's the alpha and he just follows


----------



## marietouchet

Lounorada said:


> I just got lost on Google images searching pics of BRF tiaras and I agree Queen Mary had the best stuff plus, Queen Victoria had an absolutely stunning emerald tiara. Even though it isn't part of QE2's collection from what I gathered, which is a shame seeing as she's her great-great-grandmother. It would be great to see QV's emerald tiara worn! I mean look at it
> 
> View attachment 4803744





Lounorada said:


> I just got lost on Google images searching pics of BRF tiaras and I agree Queen Mary had the best stuff plus, Queen Victoria had an absolutely stunning emerald & diamond tiara. Even though it isn't part of QE2's collection from what I gathered, which is a shame seeing as she's her great-great-grandmother. It would be great to see QV's emerald tiara worn! I mean look at it
> 
> View attachment 4803744
> 
> View attachment 4803754


That Emerald one was gifted to the duchess of Fife, a grand daughter of Victoria, so it is not in the hands of QEII
There was a similar one in sapphires, which Queen Mary gifted to her daughter Pss Mary, so, it too left the BRF per se
various museums have purchased some of those that left the family, so, they remain in the UK but not in the QEII jewelry box


----------



## marietouchet

The two emerald tiaras still owned by QEII


----------



## Lounorada

gelbergirl said:


> Could some post the pics of the 2 tiaras and mark which is which? TYIA


The Vladimir Tiara:






The Greville Emerald Kokoshnik tiara:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> *$87,060.80 .. in USD*!  HA!!!!


That’s a lot of money to feed her ego. Should have spent it on charity.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I put my money on it being the Grenville and she knew her Granddaughter wanted to wear it.


----------



## marietouchet

Eugenie may have had earlier dibs on the Greville, there were stories that she pushed back her wedding to the fall so Harry could marry in the spring, maybe E had already selected a tiara ... and maybe she told MM her selection , letting MM know of the tiara existence 
MM knowingly asking for it was way rude, given that E agreed  to delay her wedding... 
either way, MM was Asking to use Eugenie’s tiara or the queen’s tiara, and pitched a hissy fit, badly done either way


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> I think I read that the Queen's personal jewelry collection is split between items owned by her as monarch and items owned by her personally.  This is separate from the Crown Jewels (like St. Edward's Crown and the Imperial State Crown) that are kept in the Tower of London and brought out for state occasions.


So there are 3 collections?  Items owned by the Queen as a monarch, items owned by her, personally and the Crown Jewels? 

That's a lot of jewellery.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lou! I was just on the google jewelry searching as well!!  Look at how much bling this lady wearing the Vladimir has!


----------



## Jayne1

I think Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, wears the best tiaras.  They're huge and look good on her too.

I also think Meg got a gorgeous tiara that suited her face.

Did Sophie, Countess of Wessex, have a say in the tiara she wore?  Because that one isn't as nice looking. It was given to her for her wedding.  Meg should count her blessings.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> That’s a lot of money to feed her ego. Should have spent it on charity.



I believe Meghan follows that  old adage “charity begins at home.”


----------



## scarlet555

Hmmm
Wonder if the queen would lend me the Vladimir crown for my wedding pictures...or my cardio hip hop dance class....that tiara will make anyhting look good, even just moping around the house without purpose.


----------



## chowlover2

A tiara makes everything better! If I were QEII I would wear a different tiara everyday!


----------



## PewPew

lulilu said:


> How long do you thing the fervor about these two will last?



Years at least, especially with so many current events to try to latch on to & lecture us about. There will be press generated by “friends” to keep them in the public eye for a long time. 



Lounorada said:


> Oh noooo, so unfortunate... someone should have done a quick google search before choosing that quote for the cover VF



Oh it was definitely a deliberate copy of the headline by VF. There was commentary in the UK at the time about how her PR were trying hard to cast her the new Diana in photography and styling as well.



Annawakes said:


> Maybe there will be a lawsuit against the publication of “Finding Freedom”.  Let’s see.



This will be the true litmus test. The won’t sue Omid bc he knows too much & will have proof of their cooperation. Unlike Lady C, Omid is writing about their personal feelings and dates to such an extent they wouldn’t have come third and fourth hand. He’s either made them up (& you’d expect a lawsuit) or he got it from H&M and her journal.

Omid has been their champion online for so long that it doesn’t make sense that he’d suddenly turn on the hand that feeds him. He likely genuinely felt he’s portrayed them well and the world is too jealous to appreciate the love story. Ultimately, he may try to hedge his bets and say the co-author or editors drastically altered the content.


----------



## rose60610

I didn't know much about the various tiaras QEII has. So I looked up the history on the Vladimir tiara and others.  ARE YOU KIDDING ME????  That MM wanted THAT tiara?  I hope it's a media or tabloid lie. While I'm not a MM stan, I can't believe anyone marrying into the BRF would request it. Not even a blood relation. It would be pretty ballsy to even verbalize your wish to wear it, even for your wedding. QEII has how many tiaras from which to choose?

Call me confused. Papertiger earlier on posted my sentiments, so forgive the repeat here. Meghan is very beautiful. She landed Harry. Good for her. He was/is gaga over her. Goody for them.  They had it *ALL. *That's great! And she complains? She has a right to complain about whatever, don't get me wrong.  When so many criticize others about purchasing luxury goods, like "Ms/Mr Smith spent $1500 on a bla bla bla when they could have given that money to the homeless/charity/animal shelter bla bla bla"  then we're treated to MM's hissy fit about not being granted the Vladimir tiara? No wonder the Brits are miffed at MM and JCMH. The U.S. Media are highly selective and spineless when it comes to a lot of things. The vapid U.S. Media would gladly criticize certain people for spending "big" money on a Coach bag, but so far MM gets a pass here. I can't believe it'll last much longer. The Media here already look like neutered sycophants, let's hope they recognize a self pitying person when they see one. Actually, their editors/employers have to give the OK first. Then they'll be allowed to have a spine.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I didn't know much about the various tiaras QEII has. So I looked up the history on the Vladimir tiara and others.  ARE YOU KIDDING ME????  That MM wanted THAT tiara?  I hope it's a media or tabloid lie. While I'm not a MM stan, I can't believe anyone marrying into the BRF would request it. Not even a blood relation. It would be pretty ballsy to even verbalize your wish to wear it, even for your wedding. QEII has how many tiaras from which to choose?
> 
> Call me confused. Papertiger earlier on posted my sentiments, so forgive the repeat here. Meghan is very beautiful. She landed Harry. Good for her. He was/is gaga over her. Goody for them.  They had it *ALL. *That's great! And she complains? She has a right to complain about whatever, don't get me wrong.  When so many criticize others about purchasing luxury goods, like "Ms/Mr Smith spent $1500 on a bla bla bla when they could have given that money to the homeless/charity/animal shelter bla bla bla"  then we're treated to MM's hissy fit about not being granted the Vladimir tiara? No wonder the Brits are miffed at MM and JCMH. The U.S. Media are highly selective and spineless when it comes to a lot of things. The vapid U.S. Media would gladly criticize certain people for spending "big" money on a Coach bag, but so far MM gets a pass here. I can't believe it'll last much longer. The Media here already look like neutered sycophants, let's hope they recognize a self pitying person when they see one. Actually, their editors/employers have to give the OK first. Then they'll be allowed to have a spine.


for the first time tonight I heard something on US television (ET or similar show) that was almost a teeny bit critical of them......really they were just reapeating things from British news I think but it wasn't really fawning over them....maybe the tide will turn.  they really don't deserve adulation IMO


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF jewel list —








						Jewels of Elizabeth II - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



More info here:








						Jewel Central
					

From spotlights on individual pieces to glittering events chock full of tiaras, find all the major royal jewels covered on this blog right ...




					orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
				






Madrose said:


> I'm confused.  How would Meghan have known about the emerald tiara if there was no chance it could be worn?  Is there a display room where all the crown jewels are kept?  It sounds like she saw a selection of tiaras.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, thank you for saying it.  It’s the hair that makes the tiara look elegant, appropriate, regal. The Swedish royals understand that very well as do QE and Camiila. A flat, middle part does not do justice to the tiara. The hair matters — poufy & fluffy are best..

More on Queen Mary’s tiara: 
	

	




						The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor
					






					orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
				












						Kate Middleton's Stunning Lover's Knot Tiara Has a Fascinating Royal History
					

The sparkling pearl heirloom was a favorite of Princess Diana.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				






marietouchet said:


> Ps loaning out any BRF bling is a new thing, Margaret and Anne were loaned a few minor things, but they are/were princesses of the blood, MM is not- she married into the family
> 
> females in the BRF were gifted bling at their marriage , but that is difficult anymore due to tax
> 
> consequences, so, tiaras are routinely loaned to the grandchildren and spouses while, their parents were not loaned anything, eg the Queen did / does not loan to Diana, Fergie or Sophie
> Anne was gifted three tiaras at marriage, they were smaller ones that were not usually worn and were collecting dust, not the good stuff, Anne has never worn her mother’s good stuff
> 
> and tiara selection is difficult, they do not fit every head, and many are not adjustable
> also they weigh a ton , and if you are not used to the weight, you get a headache
> and hair style is important, fluffy hair helps to support the weight, added chignons or braids are also a plus For anchoring and weight distribution and for hiding the elastic at the back and or the sometimes ugly bottom of the tiara frame
> 
> Camilla and QEII wear the same hair day and night, but they Have tiaras that work without added braids , Kate always has added pieces and height added at the top to her tiara-hair
> 
> so, hair  style, size and weight are major issues not just gemstones
> 
> ps sorry for weird use of capital letters, my ipad did it despite me


----------



## Katel

lanasyogamama said:


> Lou! I was just on the google jewelry searching as well!!  Look at how much bling this lady wearing the Vladimir has!
> View attachment 4803815








Mary of Teck, Queen Consort of George V of the United Kingdom, c. 1936, wearing the tiara...
What a resemblance to granddaughter QE2!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

Katel said:


> Mary of Teck, Queen Consort of George V of the United Kingdom, c. 1936, wearing the tiara...
> Is she directly related to Queen Elizabeth 2? What a resemblance!



Yes, Mary of Teck is the paternal grandmother of QE2. She was the mother of QE2’s father (King George VI) & QE2’s uncle Edward aka David (Duke of Windsor, who abdicated & married Wallis Simpson).

She outlived her son (QE2’s father King George VI) by more than a year, though she died a couple of months before QE2’s coronation ceremony.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She looks very much like a Queen of the World here — In charge, blinged up, IDGA*
With her icy stare, straight posture and perfect grooming, I would definitely lower my gaze, if not my whole head.



Katel said:


> Mary of Teck, Queen Consort of George V of the United Kingdom, c. 1936, wearing the tiara...
> What a resemblance to granddaughter QE2!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> On another note .. their son is 21 .. WOW, is it just me or does anyone else think that that is way too young for a man to get married?



I did a double take too. Also, they have been dating like 6 months.


----------



## doni

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, thank you for saying it.  It’s the hair that makes the tiara look elegant, appropriate, regal. The Swedish royals understand that very well as do QE and Camiila. A flat, middle part does not do justice to the tiara. The hair matters — poufy & fluffy are best..



I disagree. That is just the fashion of the times. Tiaras were beautifully worn with middle partings and natural hair in the 20s, often so close to the forehead no hair would show in front all. And of course, flat and parted in the middle, no puffiness, was Queen Victoria’s signature style.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Personally, I'd be _very_ happy with the Meander - whichever side of the family it came from



Prince Philip's mother! It was her wedding gift to the Queen.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prince Philip's mother! It was her wedding gift to the Queen.



That's right - she was a character and a half, really someone to be admired and yet no one talked/talks about her much. Interestingly born at Windsor Castle.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> I disagree. That is just the fashion of the times. Tiaras were beautifully worn with middle partings and natural hair in the 20s, often so close to the forehead no hair would show in front all. And of course, flat and parted in the middle, no puffiness, was Queen Victoria’s signature style.
> 
> View attachment 4804082
> View attachment 4804084
> View attachment 4804088



I think tiaras can work for every era. 

If I had one, I'd wear it (actually I may have a French tortoiseshell/paste one somewhere but not sure where) I certainly have a 1920s gold lace one.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Anne has the meander, smaller but classic, and came from Philip’s mother which is cool
> She has a festoon tiara, very baroque , worked better in the 80s than today
> her last is a 1950s style aquamarine one, called the pine cone tiara, It is blue and very 50s not at all in style today, had been a gift to her mother from Brazil maybe
> don’t remember an HK tiara , there were Burmese rubies given to QEII, but she kept the tiara made from those



Yes, the Festoon. I think_ that_ was the one gifted by a company from Hong Kong(?) 

The aquamarine Pine Flower is beautiful IMO. Probably more 1940s no? I actually think it stands the test of time and looks quite modern with the step cuts.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Yes, the Festoon. I think_ that_ was the one gifted by a company from Hong Kong(?)
> 
> The aquamarine Pine Flower is beautiful IMO. Probably more 1940s no? I actually think it stands the test of time and looks quite modern with the step cuts.
> 
> We should have a tiara thread in the jewellery thread - so fascinating in terms of heirloom history and showcasing styles of the day.


----------



## Grande Latte

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, thank you for saying it.  It’s the hair that makes the tiara look elegant, appropriate, regal. The Swedish royals understand that very well as do QE and Camiila. A flat, middle part does not do justice to the tiara. The hair matters — poufy & fluffy are best..



Yes. It's all about the hair. My hair is too fine and flat, can't properly wear a crown at all, or any type of heavy accessory. Maybe it's nature's way of telling me I don't belong in the royal family.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The BRF jewel list —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewels of Elizabeth II - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More info here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jewel Central
> 
> 
> From spotlights on individual pieces to glittering events chock full of tiaras, find all the major royal jewels covered on this blog right ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com



No. She would have to have seen it in a picture IMO. You can go to the Tower (of London) and see some of the Crown Jewels and some are obviously in different palaces.

Her Majesty has planned outfits and jewellery brought to and laid-out in her dressing room, she doesn't potter around a walk-in wardrobe and nor would anyone else be allowed to.

M would have had the tiara brought to her and that's it.


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I did a double take too. Also, they have been dating like 6 months.



His most ex (31 yo dancer/instagrammer Lexy Pantera) told TMZ that he’s too immature to marry. But it may be a comfort to David & VB that Brooklyn’s fiancee is not interested in his wealth & arguably has more to lose (her father is a billionaire). How handy during these difficult times that each of them can independently buy an island.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow! I have never seen this Meander tiara. It is gorgeous! Zara wore it for her wedding. My new favorite. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. These bandeau tiaras do look lovely and classic as wedding tiaras. Meghan made a smart and beautiful choice.
All the fuss seems like much ado about nothing.








						The Top Ten: Princess Anne's Jewels
					

CHRIS J RATCLIFFE/AFP/Getty Images Today, the Princess Royal celebrates her birthday, and to mark the occasion, I've compiled a list of ten of her very best pieces of jewelry. Anne's collection is much bigger than




					www.thecourtjeweller.com
				







The last photo of Queen Mary is quite something  https://www.tatler.com/gallery/royal-wedding-tiaras-in-history


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PewPew said:


> His most ex (31 yo dancer/instagrammer Lexy Pantera) told TMZ that he’s too immature to marry. But it may be a comfort to David & VB that Brooklyn’s fiancee is not interested in his wealth & arguably has more to lose (her father is a billionaire). How handy during these difficult times that each of them can independently buy an island.



Can he though? I read somewhere David and Victoria made him take a summer job at a restaurant kitchen, they seem to not throw money at their kids. Did his modelling gigs make him rich already?

Also, that his ex said that to the press makes me take it with a grain of salt, sounds bitter even if true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> All the fuss seems like much ado about nothing.



They are masters at making an elephant out of a moscito.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can he though? I read somewhere David and Victoria made him take a summer job at a restaurant kitchen, they seem to not throw money at their kids. Did his modelling gigs make him rich already?



He’s estimated to be worth $10million USD from a combination of endorsements, modeling, photography/a photography book & investments. He’s popular in Asian markets, where he earns as much as $200,000 for ads for clothing, watches and tech brands. Sometimes they are styled after David’s old ads in the same markets, but Brooklyn has his own fans & a large, lucrative social media following.

His parents do seem more less permissive than many celebrity or uber wealthy parents. He did work some weekends at a London cafe when he was 15, which is around the time he was considering soccer and trained at Arsenal’s youth camp. His photography has gotten mixed reviews, but he takes it seriously and has studied it in NY....

Sorry to go on about the family! (I just appreciate David & VB’s work ethic. They support each other & don’t coast on their past achievements, which is great for kids to see.)

Ok, back to H&M who um..aren’t necessarily known for their work ethic...


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I believe Meghan follows that  old adage “charity begins at home.”



perfect!


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> *The Sussexes were said to be furious after Meghan was told she could not wear the emerald tiara she'd chosen, as nobody was sure where it came from. *
> 
> I remember this, no one was sure of the provenance of the emerald tiara and were concerned that the jewels might be from a tainted source, so no way was anyone going to be allowed to wear it.
> 
> Still . . . furious?  Over which priceless tiara you're being loaned?


So, the grifter knew pretty much nothing about the RF and marrying into it BUT was well-versed with the tiara collection. 
Does she even know how to be truthful? 
I really do fear for that baby.


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> Lou! I was just on the google jewelry searching as well!!  Look at how much bling this lady wearing the Vladimir has!
> View attachment 4803815



Last night I got lost down a google rabbit hole of RF jewels and tiaras, it was entertaining to say the least  As a jewellery lover and collector (I get it from my Mom) I would LOVE to be invisible for the day and just go to all the places they have these jewels stored and have a good nosey through them and maybe try some on 




CarryOn2020 said:


> The last photo of Queen Mary is quite something  https://www.tatler.com/gallery/royal-wedding-tiaras-in-history


That last photo is WOW! Such extravagance in one picture  QEII father was so handsome when he was young.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Reading a bit through Quora and stumbled upon a thread about what MM did at Eugenie's wedding. Not only does it say H & M were not invited to the evening reception (couldn't confirm, but considering the wedding was in 2018 things went quickly downhill, didn't they? The thread states M couldn't deal with Harry and Eugenie being close, so she quickly drove a wedge between them, and I do believe every word of this), it also says Meghan was overheard bragging about how the crowds were much bigger at her wedding (confirmed by Fergie apparently). How pathetic can you get.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, thank you for saying it.  It’s the hair that makes the tiara look elegant, appropriate, regal. The Swedish royals understand that very well as do QE and Camiila. A flat, middle part does not do justice to the tiara. The hair matters — poufy & fluffy are best..
> 
> More on Queen Mary’s tiara:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Order of Sartorial Splendor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's Stunning Lover's Knot Tiara Has a Fascinating Royal History
> 
> 
> The sparkling pearl heirloom was a favorite of Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


It also doesn't hurt to be pretty like Diana and Kate


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Reading a bit through Quora and stumbled upon a thread about what MM did at Eugenie's wedding. Not only does it say H & M were not invited to the evening reception (couldn't confirm, but considering the wedding was in 2018 things went quickly downhill, didn't they? The thread states M couldn't deal with Harry and Eugenie being close, so she quickly drove a wedge between them, and I do believe every word of this), it also says Meghan was overheard bragging about how the crowds were much bigger at her wedding (confirmed by Fergie apparently). How pathetic can you get.


well if she is who we think she is, then I guess she can't afford to have Harry be close to anyone else....might threaten her stranglenold on him......this is really starting to seem tragic to me


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> So there are 3 collections?  Items owned by the Queen as a monarch, items owned by her, personally and the Crown Jewels?
> 
> That's a lot of jewellery.


The crown jewels are in the Tower of London, not in the Queen's jewel box. That includes piles of stuff lots of CROWNS not tiaras - for the whole family. These are used rarely, one crown gets trotted out for the opening of Parliament, usually.

Then there is everything in the personal jewel box. Some was inherited eg from Queen Victoria - people would say those belong the the crown not QEII personally. Then there are the gifts given on state visits. The monarch can use all the booty but cannot dispose of it. 

The monarch is the only one who can inherit the jewel box without paying a boat load of inheritance tax.  Family members, eg Camilla either surrender their state visit gifts to QEII then they are loaned back, or, C pay tax in order so that a necklace is hers , which would allow her to sell it. 

That is the general rule, but the inheritance from the Queen Mum was special. Camilla uses the pieces previously worn by the the Queen Mum. Technically, they were loaned to the Queen Mum by QEII after the death of George VI - husband and father. The lot went from monarch to monarch, but QEII allowed her mother to keep some of the better pieces with the understanding that they would revert to QEII after the death of the Queen Mum, the latter was not free to dispose of them. QEII did not need them after her mother's death so, they are loaned to Camilla.

In the end, QEII cannot dispose of the contents of her jewel box at all, they will go to the next monarch to avoid a huge tax bill. It is like Buckingham Palace, not exactly hers.  

It is complicated. That is why the Sovereign Grant is so controversial - money government gives to  members of the BRF. The govt maintains Buck House but the Queen lives there and does not exactly own it... but if she fusses about the SG then then all her privileges are up for discussion eg exemption from inheritance tax.



papertiger said:


> Yes, the Festoon. I think_ that_ was the one gifted by a company from Hong Kong(?)
> 
> The aquamarine Pine Flower is beautiful IMO. Probably more 1940s no? I actually think it stands the test of time and looks quite modern with the step cuts.


Maybe I was a bit harsh on the pine cone tiara, the style reminds me of the bling worn by the great Hollywood actresses - Marlena Dietrich, Joan Crawford so 40s is a possibility
Yes, the step cut stones are different


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I've got no idea what the truth is about the tiara that MM wore at her wedding. I just remember there were several news reports that she wanted a particular one with emeralds but that was no go from the start since the background of the emeralds was not fully known.  Even if the Queen made the final selection, maybe MM was given a chance to try some on and make her preference known?
> 
> I think I read that the Queen's personal jewelry collection is split between items owned by her as monarch and items owned by her personally.  This is separate from the Crown Jewels (like St. Edward's Crown and the Imperial State Crown) that are kept in the Tower of London and brought out for state occasions.


As to display of the jewels... 

Some are routinely loaned to museums eg the Cartier tiara worn by Kate at her wedding had made the round of exhibitions. It was last in Australia. 

Queen Mary had a set of cloth lined baskets hand crafted. Many pieces still live in the baskets under the cloth, so, not usually on display. 
And the leather presentation cases - made by the jewelers 150 years ago are likely stored too.

Is there a display room? Maybe... but it could be a temporary thing eg the Cartier tiara was on display at Kensington Palce for a while, but not on permanent exhibit. 

There are buckets of jewels, eg QEII has like 300 diamond brooches ! She religiously wear one every day on the right shoulder of her coat.  So, some must travel with her eg to Scotland in the summer.

But, QEII must have one or more closets/vaults for the bling, think Kardashian-sized. The baskand presentation cases mostly live in the vault.

Ex the Vladimir tiara has some two dozen emerald pendants, and about two dozen pearl pendants that can replace the emeralds. So, about four dozen pendants total. Each pendant is stored in its own pouch ! So, 48 pouches. That is a lot of stuff to keep track of , plus basket and / or presentation case for the tiara itself.  It has its own closet, I imagine ...


----------



## Aimee3

My favorite, from the 40 shown in the article previously posted, is the Strathmore Rose Tiara.  Looks very 1920 flapper era to me.  That’s the one I want!!!


----------



## KellyObsessed

The QEII wears her brooches on her left side, as is considered the correct side.    Remembrance Day Poppies are also worn on the left side.


----------



## Lounorada

PewPew said:


> Oh it was definitely a deliberate copy of the headline by VF. There was commentary in the UK at the time about how her PR were trying hard to cast her the new Diana in photography and styling as well.









Eww. That is beyond creepy.


----------



## Lounorada

Aimee3 said:


> My favorite, from the 40 shown in the article previously posted, is the Strathmore Rose Tiara.  Looks very 1920 flapper era to me.  That’s the one I want!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4804326


Agreed! That's my absolute favourite too! It's so stunning.



Pinterest


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> My favorite, from the 40 shown in the article previously posted, is the Strathmore Rose Tiara.  Looks very 1920 flapper era to me.  That’s the one I want!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4804326


 It looks like we will be competing for this one!


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> Agreed! That's my absolute favourite too! It's so stunning.
> 
> View attachment 4804348
> 
> Pinterest



Big competition here...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I don’t know how to multi quote but regarding the Strathmore Rose Tiara, I googled a little after posting and apparently there are 2 ways to wear it:  low on the head flapper style and higher up, more crown like on top of the head.  So you get 2 Tiaras for the price of one!  It says no one’s really worn it since the Queen Mother as it’s considered too “young girl” but maybe that’s part of the reason I love it.  The girly flowers flow so organically.  It’s just more interesting and stylish to me than all the others.


----------



## Sharont2305

Aimee3 said:


> My favorite, from the 40 shown in the article previously posted, is the Strathmore Rose Tiara.  Looks very 1920 flapper era to me.  That’s the one I want!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4804326


I'll fight you for that one, lol, it's beautiful.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> I just got lost on Google images searching pics of BRF tiaras and I agree Queen Mary had the best stuff plus, Queen Victoria had an absolutely stunning emerald & diamond tiara. Even though it isn't part of QE2's collection from what I gathered, which is a shame seeing as she's her great-great-grandmother. It would be great to see QV's emerald tiara worn! I mean look at it
> 
> View attachment 4803744
> 
> View attachment 4803754
> 
> RoyalWatcher


Thank you for the gorgeous tiara pic! Drool-worthy!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I think she's the alpha and he just follows


He does what mommy, er M, tells him to do.


----------



## ThisVNchick

Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
					

A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Came across this article this morning while scanning my Facebook newsfeed.

I guess frivolous litigations won’t be her cash cow anytime soon...


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Big competition here...


Snap! We must have posted that within moments of each other


----------



## bisousx

ThisVNchick said:


> Meghan Markle to pay £67,000 legal costs for legal battle first round
> 
> 
> A written submission to the High Court in Lodnon from July 22 shows that the Duchess has agreed to pay in full the publisher's costs for the strike-out hearing of £67,888.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Came across this article this morning while scanning my Facebook newsfeed.
> 
> I guess frivolous litigations won’t be her cash cow anytime soon...





_The Duchess of Sussex has applied for an order to keep secret the identities of the women, all 'young mothers', at a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

Today a skeleton argument presented to the court by Meghan's legal team said: 'To disclose their identities to the public at this stage is an unacceptable price to pay for the right to pursue her claim for invasion of privacy'._

Not the young mothers angle again! Let me guess... all five friends’ initials are MM?


----------



## joyeaux

papertiger said:


> Yes, pretty sure it was the Vladimir
> 
> Maybe wearing head-to-toe emerald including hat and cape was a subtle hint?



Ohhh, Good thought! And don’t forget Haz’s emerald green coat liner too!

You know, there was a time I would have thought there was no correlation between the two, because who holds grudges and sends messages through whatever means is convenient...?  Hmmmm... 

And on the note of the tiara, I kinda think it was the Vladimir one too. Knowing now what we know about Meghan’s self-grandiosity and inability to see herself as anything other than a gift she so selflessly is giving the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if she expected the Queen’s favorite/biggest tiara. Then again I can also see her wanting the one Eugenie wore, because it’s so similar to the one she ended up with. Interesting though that the tiara hissy fit “malicious gossip” story seems to have been confirmed.


----------



## csshopper

Harry is back to "work" and touting Travalyst in a video conference. I know the pandemic has hit the travel industry very very hard and many many employees in the various sectors are in the same dire straits as others, but having one of the most out of touch with the common folk people in the world, even if his name is only "Harry" be their choice to try and jump start things seems counterproductive.  The timing is off, the pandemic numbers are in the true frightening realm and in the US, the latest data shows the _US economy shrunk _by _one third_  between April and June. Someone couch surfing in a multi million dollar squat, who's preferred mode of travel has been shown time and again to be private jet, and who probably never booked a ticket in his life, is not the person to cause me to think about a vacation.

Reaction from a US poster in the Comments section to the article in the DM: 

"Dearest Harry: We spent any travel savings fund on food and rent/mortgage. We spent savings on bills. We haven't worked since March (six months) and those of us who were higher paid don't get the unemployment $600 bonus each month. Nor do we qualify for the $1200 check. The masses, even the suburban McMansion masses, have no travel money. Do you understand that?? You and the missus (a shame there) have zero insight re: 98% of the western worlds financial situation. THERES NO MONEY FOR TRAVEL. You're an idiot."


----------



## joyeaux

Going down the rabbit hole and hopefully didn’t miss this if already posted, but could it maybe have been this one? Actually a choker but so iconic Diana, the sentiment and look would both be there  :















						Princess Diana's Emerald Choker/Headband
					

One of your neighbors posted in Health & Fitness. Click through to read what they have to say. (The views expressed in this post are the author’s own.)




					patch.com


----------



## beautymagpie

joyeaux said:


> Ohhh, Good thought! And don’t forget Haz’s emerald green coat liner too!
> 
> You know, there was a time I would have thought there was no correlation between the two, because who holds grudges and sends messages through whatever means is convenient...?  Hmmmm...
> 
> And on the note of the tiara, I kinda think it was the Vladimir one too. Knowing now what we know about Meghan’s self-grandiosity and inability to see herself as anything other than a gift she so selflessly is giving the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if she expected the Queen’s favorite/biggest tiara. Then again I can also see her wanting the one Eugenie wore, because it’s so similar to the one she ended up with. Interesting though that the tiara hissy fit “malicious gossip” story seems to have been confirmed.



On the tiara my theory is this:

She wanted emerald and she wanted her Prince to make her wish come true.

He tried. Was told no, one is the Queen’s and one’s for E.

He then said the infamous what Megan wants etc. 

Was told tough. She can have this one (or choose from a selection, if her story about choosing one is true, which let’s face it after the engagement nonsense it probably isn’t).

Harry looked like a mug, not respected in the family if he couldn’t get Meghan what she wanted. They then started discussing leaving because they weren’t respected etc.


----------



## papertiger

joyeaux said:


> Ohhh, Good thought! And don’t forget Haz’s emerald green coat liner too!
> 
> You know, there was a time I would have thought there was no correlation between the two, because who holds grudges and sends messages through whatever means is convenient...?  Hmmmm...
> 
> And on the note of the tiara, I kinda think it was the Vladimir one too. Knowing now what we know about Meghan’s self-grandiosity and inability to see herself as anything other than a gift she so selflessly is giving the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if she expected the Queen’s favorite/biggest tiara. Then again I can also see her wanting the one Eugenie wore, because it’s so similar to the one she ended up with. Interesting though that the tiara hissy fit “malicious gossip” story seems to have been confirmed.



I just don't think she would have seen the Grenville. If it was already going to be loaned there's very little chance she would have been shown it either. Even in a vault they're in their custom cases. 

Unlike in Meghan's tales, there's no tiara 'shop'.  You're brought 'your' tiara, say TY,, politely decline tea and leave. 

I think the 'romantic' Russian story of how the V tiara was smuggled out seems more in keeping with 'our MM'. 

BTW, the Vladimir's natural pearl drops (can you imagine the price of just those alone?!?) were the originals. The Emeralds came later.


----------



## joyeaux

Such good points. The syrupy-sweet description she gave of “choosing” that one harkens back to the *just enough truth to not be a lie* story of the “lunch” with Michele *****. I get of course that she couldn’t say anything other than the positive for the documentary, but she expounds so much to spin it as her #1 choice rather than just say, “when this was offered, I loved it because xyz.”


----------



## papertiger

joyeaux said:


> Going down the rabbit hole and hopefully didn’t miss this if already posted, but could it maybe have been this one? Actually a choker but so iconic Diana, the sentiment and look would both be there  :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's Emerald Choker/Headband
> 
> 
> One of your neighbors posted in Health & Fitness. Click through to read what they have to say. (The views expressed in this post are the author’s own.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> patch.com



Not my favourite look but she was fun. 

I have seen the Spencer Tiara close-up and in person. I wonder if it was sold by Diana's step-mother coz otherwise I would think the Earl (of Spencer) would have it?


----------



## papertiger

beautymagpie said:


> On the tiara my theory is this:
> 
> She wanted emerald and she wanted her Prince to make her wish come true.
> 
> He tried. Was told no, one is the Queen’s and one’s for E.
> 
> He then said the infamous what Megan wants etc.
> 
> Was told tough. She can have this one (or choose from a selection, if her story about choosing one is true, which let’s face it after the engagement nonsense it probably isn’t).
> 
> Harry looked like a mug, not respected in the family if he couldn’t get Meghan what she wanted. They then started discussing leaving because they weren’t respected etc.



More plausible. Slightly random though. H would have only known one emerald tiara, and common sense should have told him that one wasn't going to be up for grabs. 

Hold on, did I just use Harry and 'common sense' in the same sentence? Forget it, you may be right


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Lounorada said:


> Snap! We must have posted that within moments of each other


I’m willing to share!!!


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> _*Today a skeleton argument presented to the court by Meghan's legal team said: 'To disclose their identities to the public at this stage is an unacceptable price to pay for the right to pursue her claim for invasion of privacy'.*_
> Not the young mothers angle again! Let me guess... all five friends’ initials are MM?


The excuse for not wanting to disclose the names of MM, MM, MM, MM, and MM is perfect for the plaintiff to drop her lawsuit (lost cause).


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Not my favourite look but she was fun.
> 
> I have seen the Spencer Tiara close-up and in person. I wonder if it was sold by Diana's step-mother coz otherwise I would think the Earl (of Spencer) would have it?


Earl Spencer has it, it's only worn by *Spencer women, one of his sisters daughters wore it at her wedding a couple of years ago. Harry and Meghan went to that wedding. 
*The only exception I've known was when Victoria Lockwood wore it when she married the now Earl Spencer, as Viscount he was obviously the heir, so she became a Viscountess and later (if there was no divorce) Countess to his Earl so I think it was correct "protocol" that she was allowed to wear it on her wedding day


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry 'felt like a third wheel' and complained he was a 'gooseberry' at events with Kate Middleton and Prince William - but Meghan Markle 'gave him his own identity': FOOL*









						Prince Harry 'felt like a third wheel' with William and Kate
					

Speaking to ET Canada, about bombshell new biography Finding Freedom, royal expert Katie Nicholl said Harry feeling like a third wheel is a 'recurring theme' of the book.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## scarlet555

HAHA!  Her Wikipedia page has been changed, so funny and hilarious she erased fashion model and spokes model and changed to activist and humanitarian, F-ing piece of work.









						Meghan Markle’s Wikipedia Page Was Edited Just Before Prince Harry Romance Went Public – Here’s What Was Removed
					

Check it out...




					www.justjared.com
				




*Meghan Markle's Wikipedia Page Was Edited Just Before Prince Harry Romance Went Public - Here's What Was Removed*





Just before *Meghan Markle*‘s romance with *Prince Harry* made headlines in late 2016, her Wikipedia page went through some edits that have now been made public.
Someone took out the line about the future Duchess’ modeling work, taking out a line that read, “the model who held case #24 on the US version of the television game show ‘Deal or No Deal.’”
Ten minutes after that change was made, someone took out the mentions of *“fashion model, spokesmodel” and changed her description to read “Activist, Humanitarian,”* according to Wikipedia‘s record of changes (via Page Six).
Another change read, “*Markle* is actively involved in the socio-political arena. She has also worked with The United Nations Women, where, as an Advocate, she presented at UN Headquarters for the HeforShe Gender Equality Campaign in September 2014…Meghan has also been a panelist on the esteemed list of speakers for One Young World (Dublin, 2014), and has traveled to Afghanistan with the Joint Chief of Staff on a USO tour December 2014.”
Apparently, the edits were made from an IP address linked to a Los Angeles PR firm with no ties to the Palace.
If you missed it, we recently found out info about *Meghan Markle*‘s relationship with *Kate Middleton*.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Not my favourite look but she was fun.
> 
> I have seen the Spencer Tiara close-up and in person. I wonder if it was sold by Diana's step-mother coz otherwise I would think the Earl (of Spencer) would have it?


We will find out about the Spencer tiara ... the Earl of Spencer has two engaged daughters


----------



## beautymagpie

papertiger said:


> More plausible. Slightly random though. H would have only known one emerald tiara, and common sense should have told him that one wasn't going to be up for grabs.
> 
> Hold on, did I just use Harry and 'common sense' in the same sentence? Forget it, you may be right



Ha. 

My thinking is she would have wanted to keep her image up in front of others (only on the basis it’s what my mum did and she's similar to M), letting the other one do her bidding. Keeping her hands clean in the drama, she lights the match and someone else does the work. The only thing is she didn’t know when to stop and assumed no one would know it was her orchestrating it all.


----------



## V0N1B2

papertiger said:


> Unlike in Meghan's tales, there's no tiara 'shop'.  You're brought 'your' tiara, say TY,, politely decline tea and leave.


Right?  Like, yeah..... no. 
Why is Meghan acting like she was taken down to the vault to select from hundreds of jewels to wear on her wedding day?  The Queen says "here is the tiara you may wear". The End.


----------



## Lounorada

Aimee3 said:


> I’m willing to share!!!


Me too


----------



## CeeJay

scarlet555 said:


> HAHA!  Her Wikipedia page has been changed, so funny and hilarious she erased fashion model and spokes model and changed to activist and humanitarian, F-ing piece of work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Wikipedia Page Was Edited Just Before Prince Harry Romance Went Public – Here’s What Was Removed
> 
> 
> Check it out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justjared.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wikipedia Page Was Edited Just Before Prince Harry Romance Went Public - Here's What Was Removed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just before *Meghan Markle*‘s romance with *Prince Harry* made headlines in late 2016, her Wikipedia page went through some edits that have now been made public.
> Someone took out the line about the future Duchess’ modeling work, taking out a line that read, “the model who held case #24 on the US version of the television game show ‘Deal or No Deal.’”
> Ten minutes after that change was made, someone took out the mentions of *“fashion model, spokesmodel” and changed her description to read “Activist, Humanitarian,”* according to Wikipedia‘s record of changes (via Page Six).
> Another change read, “*Markle* is actively involved in the socio-political arena. She has also worked with The United Nations Women, where, as an Advocate, she presented at UN Headquarters for the HeforShe Gender Equality Campaign in September 2014…Meghan has also been a panelist on the esteemed list of speakers for One Young World (Dublin, 2014), and has traveled to Afghanistan with the Joint Chief of Staff on a USO tour December 2014.”
> Apparently, the edits were made from an IP address linked to a Los Angeles PR firm with no ties to the Palace.
> If you missed it, we recently found out info about *Meghan Markle*‘s relationship with *Kate Middleton*.


*What a TOOL she is; this is just SO pathetic .. *


----------



## bag-mania

Love these photos. Keep the tiara pics coming, ladies!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> We will find out about the Spencer tiara ... the Earl of Spencer has two engaged daughters



I know where it's kept when no head's under it


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I know where it's kept when no head's under it


Cool mystery ...
 I find it easier to gossip about tiaras than people ...
yes there are people in this BRF maelstrom that are not nice people, but, I cringe when I say even that vague bit , and you all know I mean ...


----------



## PewPew

> young mothers



This reminded me how the initial press blurb about the Finding Freedom book was all about how these YOUNG ROYALS found love & had a quest to make the monarchy modern. Supposedly the whole world was excited for how these young and hip royals would change the world. And then they bailed in less than 2 years. So then it was these two YOUNG people want to find their own way in life and be independent, if we’d all just give them a chance they could teach us stuff..

Diana was 36 when she died. Everything she accomplished  as a humanitarian and mother happened by the age Harry will be in 6 weeks. Meghan will be 39 in a few days.

When will they grow up and stop hiding their misteps and quest behind the excuse of youth/inexperience/naivete? They’re not old by any means, but they’re far too old to whine about someone not hugging them as 35 yr olds, or not letting them wear the “right” multi-million dollar headpiece, or throw a tantrum when the Queen enforces reasonable boundaries. (It’s human to get hurt, but shameful to publicly complain about it & expect sympathy from the 99.9% of the world who have less than you...during a pandemic no less.)


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is almost as bad as Meghan. He does these damn speaking gigs and all he can come up with to say is to chide everyone else to do better. The man has never had to do anything for himself yet he thinks he's qualified to lecture others? What a joke!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I have seen the Spencer Tiara close-up and in person. I wonder if it was sold by Diana's step-mother coz otherwise I would think the Earl (of Spencer) would have it?



He does have it. His first wife wore it for her wedding and I think it was exhibited at Altorp. Also his niece (daughter of their sister) wore it to her 2018 wedding.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Love these photos. Keep the tiara pics coming, ladies!
> 
> View attachment 4804553


A silly self affirmation blurb that I love , for everyone here


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> A silly self affirmation blurb that I love , for everyone here
> 
> View attachment 4804628


Let us just HOPE that Meghan does not see this because .. you know, she was such a "*victim*" of the BRF .. but on the other hand, she deserves to be Queen  (_in her mind of course_) ..


----------



## gelbergirl

Drama over a tiara


----------



## Lounorada

One other tiara I fell in love with while down the google rabbit hole of tiara images, was the 'Snowdon Floral Tiara' that Lady Sarah Chatto (Princess Margaret's daughter & QEII niece) wore for her wedding. Found this info on it:
__________
_'Margaret was lucky enough to be given a fabulous and expensive wedding gift from her husband Antony on their wedding day. She was given a set of beautiful brooches._
_The diamond-encrusted pieces were a wedding gift for Margaret from her husband.
The flowers are set on a branch with pointy petals.
Margaret did something very specific with her wedding gifts from Antony after they split.
In a romantic gesture, she had the brooches made into a wedding tiara for her daughter Sarah Chatto’s wedding in 1994, now known as the Snowdon Floral Tiara.
The diamond flowers were set on a tiara frame, and Sarah wore an additional green wreath.
As is often the case with royal jewellery, the tiara can be taken apart and worn as brooches again.
Sarah wore them in this style for the anniversary of Elizabeth II and Prince Philip in 1997, five years before Margaret died.
In a sweet touch, Sarah also wore one of the brooches for her mother’s funeral.'_








						How Princess Margaret redesigned wedding gift jewels from ex husband
					

PRINCESS MARGARET and Antony Armstrong-Jones married in 1960 in a glamorous royal wedding. The couple divorced, an event dramatised in the most recent season of The Crown. Margaret did something interesting with her wedding gift from her husband.




					www.express.co.uk
				



__________

It's so romantic, whimsical and beautiful IMO. It's also so special because of how personal it is to her and the history around the brooches that made it.





Pinterest / Express


----------



## Lounorada

gelbergirl said:


> Drama over a tiara


This! The Queen could have handed me the ugliest tiara she could find or even could have handed me some wire wrapped in tinsel and told me that's the tiara I will be wearing on my wedding day and I still would have been polite, accepted it and be excited to wear something QEII allowed me to wear from her collection... or craft supplies box


----------



## csshopper

PewPew said:


> This reminded me how the initial press blurb about the Finding Freedom book was all about how these YOUNG ROYALS found love & had a quest to make the monarchy modern. Supposedly the whole world was excited for how these young and hip royals would change the world. And then they bailed in less than 2 years. So then it was these two YOUNG people want to find their own way in life and be independent, if we’d all just give them a chance they could teach us stuff..
> 
> Diana was 36 when she died. Everything she accomplished  as a humanitarian and mother happened by the age Harry will be in 6 weeks. Meghan will be 39 in a few days.
> 
> When will they grow up and stop hiding their misteps and quest behind the excuse of youth/inexperience/naivete? They’re not old by any means, but they’re far too old to whine about someone not hugging them as 35 yr olds, or not letting them wear the “right” multi-million dollar headpiece, or throw a tantrum when the Queen enforces reasonable boundaries. (It’s human to get hurt, but shameful to publicly complain about it & expect sympathy from the 99.9% of the world who have less than you...during a pandemic no less.)


wow, PewPew,  thanks for posting this. The age comparison is startling, reallllly makes them look moronic for their grievances. I was not a Diana fan, but, like others, applauded her humanitarianism etc. and had lost track of the fact she was only 36 when she died. JCMH and MM have accomplished nothing in comparison.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is yet another reason why some of us strongly dislike these grifters. IMHO, if she & H were already married, all the more reason to not wear a gleaming white dress and veil. Sure, JLo, the singer and dancer, can ignore proper decorum for divorced brides, that’s her choice. She’s paying for her wedding — big difference. H&M had a royal wedding, paid for by the taxpayers, and so should follow proper etiquette. QE must have known word would leak out that they were married in Africa. This deception damages QE as well as all who participated in the farce. Kudos to Thomas for not participating, not the others. 








						Meghan Markle's 'hint' she and Harry got engaged two months earlier
					

Finding Freedom, a new bombshell biography written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claims Harry and Meghan were 'secretly engaged' at the Invictus Games in September 2017.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





====
Lady Sarah and Princess Charlotte look so much alike. Beautiful tiara, beautiful story, and most beautiful bride.


----------



## Mendocino

V0N1B2 said:


> Right?  Like, yeah..... no.
> Why is Meghan acting like she was taken down to the vault to select from hundreds of jewels to wear on her wedding day?  The Queen says "here is the tiara you may wear". The End.


This is probably my all-time favorite skit from The Carol Burnett Show! Thank you!


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> As to display of the jewels...
> 
> Some are routinely loaned to museums eg the Cartier tiara worn by Kate at her wedding had made the round of exhibitions. It was last in Australia.
> 
> Queen Mary had a set of cloth lined baskets hand crafted. Many pieces still live in the baskets under the cloth, so, not usually on display.
> And the leather presentation cases - made by the jewelers 150 years ago are likely stored too.
> 
> Is there a display room? Maybe... but it could be a temporary thing eg the Cartier tiara was on display at Kensington Palce for a while, but not on permanent exhibit.
> 
> There are buckets of jewels, eg QEII has like 300 diamond brooches ! She religiously wear one every day on the right shoulder of her coat.  So, some must travel with her eg to Scotland in the summer.
> 
> But, QEII must have one or more closets/vaults for the bling, think Kardashian-sized. The baskand presentation cases mostly live in the vault.
> 
> Ex the Vladimir tiara has some two dozen emerald pendants, and about two dozen pearl pendants that can replace the emeralds. So, about four dozen pendants total. Each pendant is stored in its own pouch ! So, 48 pouches. That is a lot of stuff to keep track of , plus basket and / or presentation case for the tiara itself.  It has its own closet, I imagine ...
> [/QU
> deleted


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry 'felt like a third wheel' and complained he was a 'gooseberry' at events with Kate Middleton and Prince William - but Meghan Markle 'gave him his own identity': FOOL*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'felt like a third wheel' with William and Kate
> 
> 
> Speaking to ET Canada, about bombshell new biography Finding Freedom, royal expert Katie Nicholl said Harry feeling like a third wheel is a 'recurring theme' of the book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


he sounds pathetic
and what is a gooseberry? Ha


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> he sounds pathetic
> and what is a gooseberry? Ha



gooseberry: "a round edible yellowish-green or reddish berry with a thin translucent hairy skin."
Would banana be better?
banana: "insane or extremely silly" (informal)


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> gooseberry: "a round edible yellowish-green or reddish berry with a thin translucent hairy skin."
> Would banana be better?
> banana: "insane or extremely silly" (informal)


So he felt like a gooseberry or looks like one?


----------



## mshermes

I think Diana looks so pretty.....


But who doesn’t look pretty in a tiara?


----------



## kemilia

V0N1B2 said:


> Right?  Like, yeah..... no.
> Why is Meghan acting like she was taken down to the vault to select from hundreds of jewels to wear on her wedding day?  The Queen says "here is the tiara you may wear". The End.


My favorite Carol Burnett Show skit ever!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry 'felt like a third wheel' and complained he was a 'gooseberry' at events with Kate Middleton and Prince William - but Meghan Markle 'gave him his own identity': FOOL*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'felt like a third wheel' with William and Kate
> 
> 
> Speaking to ET Canada, about bombshell new biography Finding Freedom, royal expert Katie Nicholl said Harry feeling like a third wheel is a 'recurring theme' of the book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well that tells us right there the low level of self-esteem he had/has, when he claims that being with/marrying someone 'gave him his identity'  No JCMH, it seemed you were doing just fine on your own (in fact much better) but you should already be pretty sure of your identity, feeling confident within yourself and comfortable being on your own, not relying on someone else to give you your identity. Your other half can certainly make your life better in so many ways, but you should be doing pretty damn good on your own first and not putting that much power in the other persons hands. He probably thinks that sounds romantic, but to me it sounds sad, quite frankly.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> So he felt like a gooseberry or looks like one?


That is a pertinent question. Let's hope MM clarifies what he meant, she may be the only one that understands him.


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> Well that tells us right there the low level of self-esteem he had/has, when he claims that being with/marrying someone 'gave him his identity'  No JCMH, it seemed you were doing just fine on your own (in fact much better) but you should feel confident within yourself, comfortable being on your own, not relying on someone else to give you your identity. Your other half can certainly make your life better in so many ways, but you should be doing pretty damn good on your own first and not putting that much power in the other persons hands. He probably thinks that sounds romantic, but to me it sounds sad, quite frankly.


I couldn't agree more with the above. It is sad indeed.


----------



## Lodpah

bisousx said:


> _The Duchess of Sussex has applied for an order to keep secret the identities of the women, all 'young mothers', at a hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
> 
> Today a skeleton argument presented to the court by Meghan's legal team said: 'To disclose their identities to the public at this stage is an unacceptable price to pay for the right to pursue her claim for invasion of privacy'._
> 
> Not the young mothers angle again! Let me guess... all five friends’ initials are MM?


She’s setting up to drop the case gracefully and by the way I don’t think she agreed. She was ordered. Courts order. Her PR  team think us natural psychologists are stupid.

As an aside I wonder if she will markle Ellen De Generes due to the allegations coming out like racism, etc. Meghan the remarkable is . . . remarkable.


----------



## Tootsie17

V0N1B2 said:


> Right?  Like, yeah..... no.
> Why is Meghan acting like she was taken down to the vault to select from hundreds of jewels to wear on her wedding day?  The Queen says "here is the tiara you may wear". The End.





Lounorada said:


> Well that tells us right there the low level of self-esteem he had/has, when he claims that being with/marrying someone 'gave him his identity'  No JCMH, it seemed you were doing just fine on your own (in fact much better) but you should already be pretty sure of your identity, feeling confident within yourself and comfortable being on your own, not relying on someone else to give you your identity. Your other half can certainly make your life better in so many ways, but you should be doing pretty damn good on your own first and not putting that much power in the other persons hands. He probably thinks that sounds romantic, but to me it sounds sad, quite frankly.


You speak the truth!


----------



## kipp

What a mess these two are!  Others have said it before, but it probably bears repeating----they deserve each other.


----------



## Brownbarbie27

kipp said:


> What a mess these two are!  Others have said it before, but it probably bears repeating----they deserve each other.


I agree!


----------



## Lodpah

scarlet555 said:


> HAHA!  Her Wikipedia page has been changed, so funny and hilarious she erased fashion model and spokes model and changed to activist and humanitarian, F-ing piece of work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Wikipedia Page Was Edited Just Before Prince Harry Romance Went Public – Here’s What Was Removed
> 
> 
> Check it out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justjared.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wikipedia Page Was Edited Just Before Prince Harry Romance Went Public - Here's What Was Removed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just before *Meghan Markle*‘s romance with *Prince Harry* made headlines in late 2016, her Wikipedia page went through some edits that have now been made public.
> Someone took out the line about the future Duchess’ modeling work, taking out a line that read, “the model who held case #24 on the US version of the television game show ‘Deal or No Deal.’”
> Ten minutes after that change was made, someone took out the mentions of *“fashion model, spokesmodel” and changed her description to read “Activist, Humanitarian,”* according to Wikipedia‘s record of changes (via Page Six).
> Another change read, “*Markle* is actively involved in the socio-political arena. She has also worked with The United Nations Women, where, as an Advocate, she presented at UN Headquarters for the HeforShe Gender Equality Campaign in September 2014…Meghan has also been a panelist on the esteemed list of speakers for One Young World (Dublin, 2014), and has traveled to Afghanistan with the Joint Chief of Staff on a USO tour December 2014.”
> Apparently, the edits were made from an IP address linked to a Los Angeles PR firm with no ties to the Palace.
> If you missed it, we recently found out info about *Meghan Markle*‘s relationship with *Kate Middleton*.


You should see the video on that Afghan tour. Kinda sad. She was totally ignored and stood on the stage like no one is paying attention to me. It’s sad.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> She’s setting up to drop the case gracefully and by the way I don’t think she agreed. She was ordered. Courts order.



She can’t do anything gracefully. She could do it embarrassingly, awkwardly, or cluelessly, but never gracefully.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> She can’t do anything gracefully. She could do it embarrassingly, awkwardly, or cluelessly, but never gracefully.


I was really trying hard to be “gracious.”


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> You should see the video on that Afghan tour. Kinda sad. She was totally ignored and stood on the stage like no one is paying attention to me. It’s sad.


I saw that. Maybe they already had a glimpse of what we came to see.


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> You should see the video on that Afghan tour. Kinda sad. She was totally ignored and stood on the stage like no one is paying attention to me. It’s sad.


Was that the one where she was "singing"?


----------



## Lodpah

mshermes said:


> I think Diana looks so pretty.....
> View attachment 4804819
> 
> But who doesn’t look pretty in a tiara?
> 
> View attachment 4804820


Meghan tried to copy Princess Diana’s shyness with those doleful looks. Diana was 19 and was actually shy.


----------



## Lodpah

There’s this story I heard in a movie.

A bunch of guys in the marines all got along great till this one person came on the scene and then all of a sudden these guys that got along great started fighting each other, chaos ensued until someone realized it that that new person all long who played so innocent was the cause of chaos.

That’s Megan, the devil in disguise. Where she goes, chaos, problems and discord arises.


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> There’s this story I heard in a movie.
> 
> A bunch of guys in the marines all got along great till this one person came on the scene and then all of a sudden these guys that got along great started fighting each other, chaos ensued until someone realized it that that new person all long who played so innocent was the cause of chaos.
> 
> That’s Megan, the devil in disguise. Where she goes, chaos, problems and discord arises.


And she just sits back and watches it all with that smug smirk on her face


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

rose60610 said:


> I didn't know much about the various tiaras QEII has. So I looked up the history on the Vladimir tiara and others.  ARE YOU KIDDING ME????  That MM wanted THAT tiara?  I hope it's a media or tabloid lie. While I'm not a MM stan, I can't believe anyone marrying into the BRF would request it. Not even a blood relation. It would be pretty ballsy to even verbalize your wish to wear it, even for your wedding. QEII has how many tiaras from which to choose?
> 
> Call me confused. Papertiger earlier on posted my sentiments, so forgive the repeat here. Meghan is very beautiful. She landed Harry. Good for her. He was/is gaga over her. Goody for them.  They had it *ALL. *That's great! And she complains? She has a right to complain about whatever, don't get me wrong.  When so many criticize others about purchasing luxury goods, like "Ms/Mr Smith spent $1500 on a bla bla bla when they could have given that money to the homeless/charity/animal shelter bla bla bla"  then we're treated to MM's hissy fit about not being granted the Vladimir tiara? No wonder the Brits are miffed at MM and JCMH. The U.S. Media are highly selective and spineless when it comes to a lot of things. The vapid U.S. Media would gladly criticize certain people for spending "big" money on a Coach bag, but so far MM gets a pass here. I can't believe it'll last much longer. The Media here already look like neutered sycophants, let's hope they recognize a self pitying person when they see one. Actually, their editors/employers have to give the OK first. Then they'll be allowed to have a spine.


The Queen has more than 40 tiaras.


----------



## papertiger

mshermes said:


> I think Diana looks so pretty.....
> View attachment 4804819
> 
> But who doesn’t look pretty in a tiara?
> 
> View attachment 4804820



This thread is becoming unexpectedly enabling


----------



## chowlover2

If you like tiaras there is a great website " From Her Majesty's Vault " where you can check out QEII's tiaras.


----------



## papertiger

chowlover2 said:


> If you like tiaras there is a great website " From Her Majesty's Vault " where you can check out QEII's tiaras.



Oh there's lots of online info.

I think we should have some threads in the Jewelery Box, one on tiaras and another on well-known jewellery


----------



## papertiger

Sometimes I think all media comment on the couple follows _this_ tPF thread









						Former minister likens Harry to 'Carnivore advocating VEGETARIANISM':
					

The Duke of Sussex was savaged last night after his speech urging the travel industry to rebuild greener was likened to 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'. He was criticised by a former transport minister




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I read something here and then I see huge similarities cropping-up in the news.

In this case, even their headlines copy our words

However, since I am not a narcissist (and the 6th-in-line) I'll let this one slide as coincidence


----------



## PewPew

Their lawyers & PR people stay busy on both sides of the pond! QE2 would not be happy to see her family name (Windsor) used for commercial gain. Harry’s surname is actually Mountbatten-Windsor, with Mountbatten coming from Prince Phillip’s side & Windsor coming from QE2.

—————————-
*The Markle Windsor Foundation? Mystery surrounds name of Meghan and Harry's new **charity as couple change Sussex Royal title to 'MWX' - but WITHDRAW application just nine minutes later









						Mystery of Meghan and Harry's charity name after nine-minute U-turn
					

Harry and Meghan submitted papers to change the Sussex Royal Foundation name - but then withdrew them after nine minutes. An earlier document revealing the change is still published.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## Genie27

PewPew said:


> Their lawyers & PR people stay busy on both sides of the pond! QE2 would not be happy to see her family name (Windsor) used for commercial gain. Harry’s surname is actually Mountbatten-Windsor, with Mountbatten coming from Prince Phillip’s side & Windsor coming from QE2.
> 
> —————————-
> *The Markle Windsor Foundation? Mystery surrounds name of Meghan and Harry's new **charity as couple change Sussex Royal title to 'MWX' - but WITHDRAW application just nine minutes later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mystery of Meghan and Harry's charity name after nine-minute U-turn
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan submitted papers to change the Sussex Royal Foundation name - but then withdrew them after nine minutes. An earlier document revealing the change is still published.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Seems like they are being blocked from every angle. Still playing tiddlywinks, while the BRF are playing Grandmaster level chess.


----------



## gelbergirl

I wonder about a tiara on loan.  Do they get returned immediately to the Queen and do they have a security person/jeweler around the tiara, or for instance would Camillia bring it home with her?  Or does the tiara travel with the hairdresser because that person will ultimately assemble the hair around the tiara.  And lastly, major eye roll at Meghan thinking she could wear any tiara she wanted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I feel the hint with the Husband shirt (just a white dress shirt) is a stretch, but ugh, this woman rubs me sooo the wrong way:

"In the interview given to the BBC's Mishal Husain at Kensington Palace, Harry added: 'She didn't even let me finish, she said, "Can I say yes, can I say yes" and then there was hugs and I had the ring in my finger and I was like, "Can I, can I give you the ring?" She goes, "Oh yes the ring"."

A woman in her mid 30s, previously married, even talks over him during his freaking proposal, and also "Can I say yes?" No stupid cow, he expects you to say no, that's why people ask. WTFFF. THIS IS NOT CUTE.


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> Seems like they are being blocked from every angle. Still playing tiddlywinks, while the BRF are playing Grandmaster level chess.



Sounds like they need some proper advisors who know the law or have business experience...wait a minute...oh yer, never mind, forget  the suggestion.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel the hint with the Husband shirt (just a white dress shirt) is a stretch, but ugh, this woman rubs me sooo the wrong way:
> 
> "In the interview given to the BBC's Mishal Husain at Kensington Palace, Harry added: 'She didn't even let me finish, she said, "Can I say yes, can I say yes" and then there was hugs and I had the ring in my finger and I was like, "Can I, can I give you the ring?" She goes, "Oh yes the ring"."
> 
> A woman in her mid 30s, previously married, even talks over him during his freaking proposal, and also "Can I say yes?" No stupid cow, he expects you to say no, that's why people ask. WTFFF. THIS IS NOT CUTE.



Total stretch 

I know, but at least the "Can I say yes?' was probably true. As for the rest of it, I think H&M have read too many of H's step-grandmother's romance novels.


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> Sometimes I think all media comment on the couple follows _this_ tPF thread
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former minister likens Harry to 'Carnivore advocating VEGETARIANISM':
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was savaged last night after his speech urging the travel industry to rebuild greener was likened to 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'. He was criticised by a former transport minister
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read something here and then I see huge similarities cropping-up in the news.
> 
> In this case, even their headlines copy our words
> 
> However, since I am not a narcissist (and the 6th-in-line) I'll let this one slide as coincidence


What, was his faded & worn-out polo shirt in the laundry (finally)?


----------



## rose60610

chowlover2 said:


> The Queen has more than 40 tiaras.



More than 40 tiaras? Can't they make a miniseries documentary about those tiaras and other bling-bling? There are shows discussing the Crown Jewels but not one exclusively to tiaras. They could discuss the history, who and when worn, and scandals behind each one. I'd watch it.


----------



## Lounorada

chowlover2 said:


> The Queen has more than 40 tiaras.








rose60610 said:


> More than 40 tiaras? Can't they make a miniseries documentary about those tiaras and other bling-bling? There are shows discussing the Crown Jewels but not one exclusively to tiaras. They could discuss the history, who and when worn, and scandals behind each one. *I'd watch it.*


Ditto, i'd love that! It would be so interesting.


----------



## Lounorada

kemilia said:


> What, was his faded & worn-out polo shirt in the laundry (finally)?


Would be even better if it has been destroyed.


----------



## justwatchin

PewPew said:


> Their lawyers & PR people stay busy on both sides of the pond! QE2 would not be happy to see her family name (Windsor) used for commercial gain. Harry’s surname is actually Mountbatten-Windsor, with Mountbatten coming from Prince Phillip’s side & Windsor coming from QE2.
> 
> —————————-
> *The Markle Windsor Foundation? Mystery surrounds name of Meghan and Harry's new **charity as couple change Sussex Royal title to 'MWX' - but WITHDRAW application just nine minutes later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mystery of Meghan and Harry's charity name after nine-minute U-turn
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan submitted papers to change the Sussex Royal Foundation name - but then withdrew them after nine minutes. An earlier document revealing the change is still published.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


How many “foundations “ do these 2 have and what exactly are they for? What is the one named after Archie supposed to be? Honestly, they just need to stay in hiding for at least a year until they can hire someone that knows what to do. Both seem utterly clueless.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## HermesHope

By the way, we have a special meaning for ”being a gooseberry” or “playing the gooseberry” in the UK. Yes, it is a fruit, but we also say this:

“UK informal (also feel like a *gooseberry*) *to be* an unwanted third person who is present when two other people, especially two people *having* a romantic relationship, want *to be* alone. Too much and unnecessary.

*PLAY GOOSEBERRY | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary”*


----------



## papertiger

HermesHope said:


> By the way, we have a special meaning for ”being a gooseberry” or “playing the gooseberry” in the UK. Yes, it is a fruit, but we also say this:
> 
> “UK informal (also feel like a *gooseberry*) *to be* an unwanted third person who is present when two other people, especially two people *having* a romantic relationship, want *to be* alone. Too much and unnecessary.
> *PLAY GOOSEBERRY | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary”*




*We really have everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language* Oscar Wilde

*To many, no doubt, he will seem blatant and bumptious, but we prefer to regard him as being simply British*
Oscar Wilde


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Oh there's lots of online info.
> 
> I think we should have some threads in the Jewelery Box, one on tiaras and another on well-known jewellery


The royalty fashion thread touches on tiaras as they are worn, one at a time , for many royal houses not just the BRF
however, since COVID the tiaras have not Been trotted out of the closets, they are now dust collection systems in this age of the modern modest scaled-back royal families


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> The royalty fashion thread touches on tiaras as they are worn, one at a time , for many royal houses not just the BRF
> however, since COVID the tiaras have not Been trotted out of the closets, they are now dust collection systems in this age of the modern modest scaled-back royal families



Not using stuff is not good practice. Such a shame.


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> What, was his faded & worn-out polo shirt in the laundry (finally)?



kemilla,
New shirt, same old word salad message dressed with some plagiarism. Joe *****, US Presidential candidate has already used "Build Back Better."

Then JCMH went on to say:
'_Before the pandemic unfolded we witnessed more and more young people expressing an interest in authentic travel experiences and an ability to partake in trips that are greener, that allow them to support local communities, uphold heritage and protect destinations and cultures.                _

Not being part of the youth culture JCMH is referencing in this, I need help, what is "authentic travel?" I always felt when we boarded a commercial jet in the US and deplaned in France, Great Britain, Greece, Turkey, Spain, Portugal etc that it was pretty authentic. 

And the horrible irony in the message of increased travel to "uphold heritage and protect destinations" may not be helped by masses of people descending on some of our most beautiful destinations. The canals in Venice, for example, glistened with clear water in which sea life was visible for the first time in decades when the Virus shut down travel and that glorious city was not under daily siege. 

I'm not suggesting travel should cease, but before spouting platitudes, think through what they mean and be able to explain how you will achieve what you claim you are going to do.

Especially when espoused by someone who does not "uphold heritage"...and "cultures" but instead disparages his own heritage and culture to become a commercial huckster with zero credibility.


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> What, was his faded & worn-out polo shirt in the laundry (finally)?


Yes, in general, Harry and William lack their father and mothers fashion sense of great color, perfect tailoring, detailing
say what you will about Charles, but his bespoke suits are TDF while the gray polos are dreadful
i don’t suppose anyone noticed a while back, when H and M were Delivering food, there was a snap of H bending over the boot of the car, with his shirt rising up, so all could admire his undergarment , think plumber bending over, seen from behind lol


----------



## Annawakes

Markle Windsor foundation?  Gee, she has to come first in everything. Shouldn’t it be the other way around.


----------



## V0N1B2

csshopper said:


> I'm not suggesting travel should cease, but before spouting platitudes, think through what they mean and be able to explain how you will achieve what you claim you are going to do.








Whaaaaa?
You know you are just talking crazy now.


----------



## Emeline

Annawakes said:


> Markle Windsor foundation?  Gee, she has to come first in everything. Shouldn’t it be the other way around.


Would Warkle or Mindsor be options?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Not using stuff is not good practice. Such a shame.


QEII is wonderful about trotting out the stuff on a regular rotating business


gelbergirl said:


> I wonder about a tiara on loan.  Do they get returned immediately to the Queen and do they have a security person/jeweler around the tiara, or for instance would Camillia bring it home with her?  Or does the tiara travel with the hairdresser because that person will ultimately assemble the hair around the tiara.  And lastly, major eye roll at Meghan thinking she could wear any tiara she wanted.


Camilla seems to have tiaras on permanent loan, she too has a vault full of bling
And she has a permanent security detail
The recent wedding my tiaras seem to have been loaned for A short time  , well long enough to practice wearing the uncomfortable thing


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> What, was his faded & worn-out polo shirt in the laundry (finally)?



He was getting paid! Meghan told him he needed to put on his nice clothes for the speech.


----------



## Katel

HermesHope said:


> By the way, we have a special meaning for ”being a gooseberry” or “playing the gooseberry” in the UK. Yes, it is a fruit, but we also say this:
> 
> “UK informal (also feel like a *gooseberry*) *to be* an unwanted third person who is present when two other people, especially two people *having* a romantic relationship, want *to be* alone. Too much and unnecessary.
> *PLAY GOOSEBERRY | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary”*



Ahh - a third wheel!



Annawakes said:


> Markle Windsor foundation?  Gee, she has to come first in everything. Shouldn’t it be the other way around.



This may be utterly appropriate, because she’s about to markle the Windsors.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> gooseberry: "a round edible yellowish-green or reddish berry with a thin translucent hairy skin."
> Would banana be better?
> banana: "insane or extremely silly" (informal)


I remember having Gooseberry Pie when I was an Exchange student in London.  In addition to the undercooked (and cream added) Eggs and the most limpy Bacon ever, I hardly ate .. and lost a LOT of weight!  However, the minute I hit Paris?!! .. with the Croissant, Baguette, the Cheese(s) and Butter .. every pound went back on.  Oh yeah, forgot my Pain au Chocolat .. NUMMY!!!


----------



## Graw

*Prince Harry and Meghan Sue Over Photos of Their Son, Archie*
The couple contend that the photos were most likely taken with a drone or telephoto lens while they were in their backyard in the Los Angeles area, which violates California’s so-called paparazzi law.










A lawyer for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is seeking to subpoena people who may have knowledge about the unauthorized photos of their son.Credit...Frank Augstein/Associated Press

By Neil Vigdor

July 23, 2020


They stepped away from their royal duties and left Britain.
But Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, contend in an invasion of privacy lawsuit filed on Thursday in California that they haven’t been able to escape the paparazzi, who the couple accuse of using drones and telephoto lenses to take unauthorized photos of their son, Archie.
The photos show the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with their 14-month-old son in the backyard of a secluded estate in the Los Angeles area where the family has been staying since earlier this year, the lawsuit said.
The defendants were not named in the lawsuit because the couple do not know who took the photos, according to the complaint, which listed the defendants as John Does. The couple’s lawyer is seeking to subpoena people who may have knowledge about the intrusions.
Prince Harry and Meghan are suing under a so-called paparazzi law in California, under which a person can be held liable civilly for airspace intrusions to take photographs of a person on private property. The lawsuit is the latest clash between the British royal family and the media over privacy issues.



“The plaintiffs have done everything in their power to stay out of the limelight — except in connection with their work, which they freely admit is newsworthy,” the lawsuit said. “But the photos at issue are not news. They are not in the public interest. They are harassment.”
The couple have retained the lawyer Michael J. Kump, whose other clients have included Kim Kardashian West.



“Every individual and family member in California is guaranteed by law the right to privacy in their home,” Mr. Kump said in a statement on Thursday. “No drones, helicopters or telephoto lenses can take away that right.”
Prince Harry and Meghan discovered that someone was shopping photos of their son and had claimed they had been taken on a recent public outing in Malibu, according to the lawsuit, which said that Archie had not been out in public since the family arrived in Southern California.
“It is one thing for parents to share photos of their children, on occasion, with supporters — particularly when doing so has the salutary effect of reducing the bounty on their children’s heads,” the lawsuit said. “It is something else entirely to cede all control to photographers driven by commercial incentive alone. Simply put, it is the plaintiffs’ choice when and how to share photos of their son.”


In the lawsuit, the couple complained that a British tabloid, The Daily Mail, publicized the location of the Los Angeles-area estate where they were staying, as well as the location of the Vancouver, British Columbia, suburb where they rented a home in Canada. Dozens of paparazzi staked out both properties, the lawsuit said.
A spokesman for The Daily Mail did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday night.
In Southern California, the couple installed a large mesh fence to prevent the paparazzi from photographing them at the estate from a ridgeline, the lawsuit said. But the couple’s efforts to shield their son from the glare haven’t been successful because of the ingenuity and “insatiable” appetite of the tabloids, according to the lawsuit.
“Some paparazzi and media outlets have flown drones a mere 20 feet above the house, as often as three times a day, to obtain photographs of the couple and their young son in their private residence (some of which have been sold and published),” the lawsuit said. “Others have flown helicopters above the backyard of the residence, as early as 5:30 a.m. and as late as 7:00 p.m., waking neighbors and — their son, day after day. And still others have even cut holes in the security fence itself to peer through it.”
Earlier this year, lawyers representing the couple sent a letter to some British news outlets threatening legal action over the purchase and publication of photos of Meghan walking with Archie in a public park near the house they were renting outside Vancouver. Other photographers had tried to take pictures of the couple through windows when they were inside the house, the letter said.
Last year, Prince Harry chastised the press for its unrelenting coverage of his wife and said he was fearful that history would repeat itself, a reference to his mother, Princess Diana, who was constantly trailed by paparazzi. She died in Paris in 1997 after her car crashed while trying to avoid photographers. Her death prompted lawmakers in California to adopt the anti-paparazzi legislation.


----------



## Graw

Can you imagine drones flying over your home to take pictures of a child?  Complete invasion to Duke and Duchess of Sussex.  Poor Meghan and Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

PewPew said:


> Their lawyers & PR people stay busy on both sides of the pond! QE2 would not be happy to see her family name (Windsor) used for commercial gain. Harry’s surname is actually Mountbatten-Windsor, with Mountbatten coming from Prince Phillip’s side & Windsor coming from QE2.
> 
> —————————-
> *The Markle Windsor Foundation? Mystery surrounds name of Meghan and Harry's new **charity as couple change Sussex Royal title to 'MWX' - but WITHDRAW application just nine minutes later
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mystery of Meghan and Harry's charity name after nine-minute U-turn
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan submitted papers to change the Sussex Royal Foundation name - but then withdrew them after nine minutes. An earlier document revealing the change is still published.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Well, this certainly shows who wears the PANTS .. Markle before Windsor??? .. is that supposed to be a jibe against the BRF?  Meghan, take a seat ..


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> He was getting paid! Meghan told him he needed to put on his nice clothes for the speech.



Gotta keep-up those e(xtra)penses for the char-i-tee

New shirt - £1M


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> I remember having Gooseberry Pie when I was an Exchange student in London.  In addition to the undercooked (and cream added) Eggs and the most limpy Bacon ever, I hardly ate .. and lost a LOT of weight!  However, the minute I hit Paris?!! .. with the Croissant, Baguette, the Cheese(s) and Butter .. every pound went back on.  Oh yeah, forgot my Pain au Chocolat .. NUMMY!!!



I _love_ gooseberries (the kind you can eat). I have 4 gooseberry bushes, 2 green and 2 red. 

Come to Britain - and lose weight LOL


----------



## CeeJay

Katel said:


> Ahh - a third wheel!


Okay .. yes, I can (kind of) understand being the 3rd wheel, BUT .. if you look at some of the pictures of when Harry (before Meghan) was with William and Kate, they were all smiling and looking like they were joking around and having fun.  I really think that when Meghan came into the picture, everything changed .. and given HER jealousy of Kate, that started to translate over to Harry .. really pathetic in my opinion!


----------



## papertiger

Graw said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Sue Over Photos of Their Son, Archie*
> The couple contend that the photos were most likely taken with a drone or telephoto lens while they were in their backyard in the Los Angeles area, which violates California’s so-called paparazzi law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lawyer for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is seeking to subpoena people who may have knowledge about the unauthorized photos of their son.Credit...Frank Augstein/Associated Press
> 
> By Neil Vigdor
> 
> July 23, 2020
> 
> They stepped away from their royal duties and left Britain.
> But Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, contend in an invasion of privacy lawsuit filed on Thursday in California that they haven’t been able to escape the paparazzi, who the couple accuse of using drones and telephoto lenses to take unauthorized photos of their son, Archie.
> The photos show the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with their 14-month-old son in the backyard of a secluded estate in the Los Angeles area where the family has been staying since earlier this year, the lawsuit said.
> The defendants were not named in the lawsuit because the couple do not know who took the photos, according to the complaint, which listed the defendants as John Does. The couple’s lawyer is seeking to subpoena people who may have knowledge about the intrusions.
> Prince Harry and Meghan are suing under a so-called paparazzi law in California, under which a person can be held liable civilly for airspace intrusions to take photographs of a person on private property. The lawsuit is the latest clash between the British royal family and the media over privacy issues.
> 
> 
> 
> “The plaintiffs have done everything in their power to stay out of the limelight — except in connection with their work, which they freely admit is newsworthy,” the lawsuit said. “But the photos at issue are not news. They are not in the public interest. They are harassment.”
> The couple have retained the lawyer Michael J. Kump, whose other clients have included Kim Kardashian West.
> 
> 
> 
> “Every individual and family member in California is guaranteed by law the right to privacy in their home,” Mr. Kump said in a statement on Thursday. “No drones, helicopters or telephoto lenses can take away that right.”
> Prince Harry and Meghan discovered that someone was shopping photos of their son and had claimed they had been taken on a recent public outing in Malibu, according to the lawsuit, which said that Archie had not been out in public since the family arrived in Southern California.
> “It is one thing for parents to share photos of their children, on occasion, with supporters — particularly when doing so has the salutary effect of reducing the bounty on their children’s heads,” the lawsuit said. “It is something else entirely to cede all control to photographers driven by commercial incentive alone. Simply put, it is the plaintiffs’ choice when and how to share photos of their son.”
> In the lawsuit, the couple complained that a British tabloid, The Daily Mail, publicized the location of the Los Angeles-area estate where they were staying, as well as the location of the Vancouver, British Columbia, suburb where they rented a home in Canada. Dozens of paparazzi staked out both properties, the lawsuit said.
> A spokesman for The Daily Mail did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday night.
> In Southern California, the couple installed a large mesh fence to prevent the paparazzi from photographing them at the estate from a ridgeline, the lawsuit said. But the couple’s efforts to shield their son from the glare haven’t been successful because of the ingenuity and “insatiable” appetite of the tabloids, according to the lawsuit.
> “Some paparazzi and media outlets have flown drones a mere 20 feet above the house, as often as three times a day, to obtain photographs of the couple and their young son in their private residence (some of which have been sold and published),” the lawsuit said. “Others have flown helicopters above the backyard of the residence, as early as 5:30 a.m. and as late as 7:00 p.m., waking neighbors and — their son, day after day. And still others have even cut holes in the security fence itself to peer through it.”
> Earlier this year, lawyers representing the couple sent a letter to some British news outlets threatening legal action over the purchase and publication of photos of Meghan walking with Archie in a public park near the house they were renting outside Vancouver. Other photographers had tried to take pictures of the couple through windows when they were inside the house, the letter said.
> Last year, Prince Harry chastised the press for its unrelenting coverage of his wife and said he was fearful that history would repeat itself, a reference to his mother, Princess Diana, who was constantly trailed by paparazzi. She died in Paris in 1997 after her car crashed while trying to avoid photographers. Her death prompted lawmakers in California to adopt the anti-paparazzi legislation.



So that's their financial plan: sue everything and everyone they can. What a way to make a living. 

Back to the pool

To whoever it may concern: 
You may print the above.


----------



## CeeJay

Graw said:


> “*The plaintiffs have done everything in their power to stay out of the limelight* — _except in connection with their work, *which they freely admit is newsworthy*_,” the lawsuit said. “But the photos at issue are not news. They are not in the public interest. They are harassment.”
> 
> The couple have retained the lawyer Michael J. Kump, whose other clients have included Kim Kardashian West.


.. and to this, I say BULL-F#CKING-ISH!!!  She wants to be "newsworthy" every doggone day; IMO .. she has superseded Kim Kardashian re: every day photos & "news" (_using that term VERY lightly here_)


----------



## bag-mania

Geez, she is so lawsuit happy. What's next for her, slipping on a grape in the supermarket and then suing the chain?


----------



## Lodpah

Darn I wish I had saved a screenshot of someone’s take on those allegations. Basically the guy said that due to California law the fact that it was outside and something to the effect that the area leads to a hill/cliff/edge etc. she has no case. She might as well sue Goggle Earth and all the government entities that have satellites in space. Also she has to prove what damages will lead to those pictures. Major fail MM you don’t get what you want all the time.


----------



## Graw

CeeJay said:


> .. and to this, I say BULL-F#CKING-ISH!!!  She wants to be "newsworthy" every doggone day; IMO .. she has superseded Kim Kardashian re: every day photos & "news" (_using that term VERY lightly here_)


I think when paps take your picture, its annoying, but acceptable because thats life.  But when they go after your children... thats too much.  There has to be a boundary even if you are a celebrity.


----------



## PewPew

bag-mania said:


> Geez, she is so lawsuit happy. What's next for her, slipping on a grape in the supermarket and then suing the chain?



Of course she’d have to sue them— they will grateful to pay out since they’ll be earning an extra $1 Billion in business when the world learns that the DuCHesS shopped there once. -Markle Logic
#EndGrapeMistreatmentofHumanitarians


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> More than 40 tiaras? Can't they make a miniseries documentary about those tiaras and other bling-bling? There are shows discussing the Crown Jewels but not one exclusively to tiaras. They could discuss the history, who and when worn, and scandals behind each one. I'd watch it.


Send a note to Lucy Worsley the Brit historian who does the TV shows about various Kings and Queens.  This is right up her alley.  Truthfully I can't stand watching her because of the way she literally inserts herself into the program by wearing costumes and pretending to be part of the vignettes.


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder about a tiara on loan.  Do they get returned immediately to the Queen and do they have a security person/jeweler around the tiara, or for instance would Camillia bring it home with her?  Or does the tiara travel with the hairdresser because that person will ultimately assemble the hair around the tiara.  And lastly, major eye roll at Meghan thinking she could wear any tiara she wanted.


The loaned jewelry probably has a protection guy along for the ride.  Even Harry Winston does this when loaning out for the Oscars.


----------



## bag-mania

Who is she even suing? They don't know who the alleged drones belong to, they don't have any names of paparazzi trying to sell photos.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> he sounds pathetic
> and what is a gooseberry? Ha



He meant he was a dingleberry.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Send a note to Lucy Worsley the Brit historian who does the TV shows about various Kings and Queens.  This is right up her alley.  Truthfully I can't stand watching her because of the way she literally inserts herself into the program by wearing costumes and pretending to be part of the vignettes.



Please don't. Can't stand her. She trashed our 1700s library by using valuable books as props, stacking them in huge piles for visual display purposes, piles one on top of another (books should be placed vertically only). Even placing lit candles (in holders thank goodness) on books she shouldn't have even had keys for.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don’t know who took the photos,  Don‘t know if it was a drone or helicopter,  but, @$€&, we are suing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Please don't. Can't stand her. She trashed our 1700s library by using valuable books as props, staking them in huge piles for visual display purposes, piles one on top of another (books should be placed vertically only). Even placing lit candles (in holders thank goodness) on books she shouldn't have even had keys for.



OMGF. I am annoyed when our housekeeper touches my very modern cookbook collection because she puts sh*t on top (I once found a pair of shoes on a book...why???) or drops them and then the corners are bent and I like my books pristine. I'd have lost it with antique books.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t know who took the photos,  Don‘t know if it was a drone or helicopter,  but, @$€&, we are suing.



Only a team of highly-paid lawyers can properly express Meghan's self-righteous indignation.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Anything is possible but I doubt it. She doesn’t strike me as being a kid person and I think one child will be enough for her. Her focus is solely on promoting themselves and coming up with money-making opportunities these days. Harry might want more kids but nobody has ever said “what Harry wants, Harry gets” and no one ever will.
> 
> She was so hoping to have a triumphant welcome back to LA and COVID-19 went and ruined all her plans. She won’t want to be 7 months pregnant next year when she finally gets an invitation to one of those glamorous Hollywood events she’s spent her life envying.


I guess that is only good thing that came from COVID.


----------



## pmburk

I just wanted to say that this thread and all the discussion of these two - especially now, with _Finding Freebies_ on the way - has kept me highly entertained during this time of stay-at-home. So, thank you all. (And keep that snark coming!)


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Please don't. Can't stand her. She trashed our 1700s library by using valuable books as props, stacking them in huge piles for visual display purposes, piles one on top of another (books should be placed vertically only). Even placing lit candles (in holders thank goodness) on books she shouldn't have even had keys for.


OMG!  She should certainly know better!  She is rather full of herself and I really don't like her.  I just sat through the program about the French Revolution.  Lucy says we (the US) caused the French Revolution because the French lent us so much money and put them into such deep debt so we could fight you guys lol!  OKaaaay!


----------



## gracekelly

There is one surefire way for the Harkles to get some decent press.  Put out some decent pictures of Archie.  I know I shouldn't be giving them any advice, not that they will take it.  Or they might, depending on their level of desperation.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> OMG!  She should certainly know better!  She is rather full of herself and I really don't like her.  I just sat through the program about the French Revolution.  Lucy says we (the US) caused the French Revolution because the French lent us so much money and put them into such deep debt so we could fight you guys lol!  OKaaaay!


Such nonsense... the revolution was due to the bill to pay for the cake ordered by Marie Antoinette


----------



## CarryOn2020

According to Wikipedia: 
_The causes of the French Revolution are complex and are still debated among historians. The American Revolution helped set the stage for the events of the French Revolution, having shown France that a rebellion based on Enlightenment principles, including natural rights and equality for all citizens, against an authoritarian regime could succeed.








						French Revolution - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_
As is today’s trend, it’s just another oversimplification. Full disclosure, I blame the College Board AP system for teaching people to oversimplify history. They did this in all areas of knowledge. [I say this as a teacher].


----------



## sdkitty

pmburk said:


> I just wanted to say that this thread and all the discussion of these two - especially now, with _Finding Freebies_ on the way - has kept me highly entertained during this time of stay-at-home. So, thank you all. (And keep that snark coming!)


I know
much better than thinking about the news


----------



## rose60610

So when is MM going to create the "I'm a Victim Foundation"? Why all the foundations? To my knowledge, even Bill and Melinda Gates have only one foundation. Foundations are allowed to donate to other foundations. Hmmm. So I wonder if you have more than one foundation...can you just wile away the day taking money out of one of your foundations to donate to another one of your own foundations? You'd think there'd be tax laws making this non-beneficial or illegal otherwise why wouldn't wealthy people just automatically slap up multiple foundations? Don't tell me M&H thought of something unique. So why all the foundations?


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Geez, she is so lawsuit happy. What's next for her, slipping on a grape in the supermarket and then suing the chain?


Because she is so lawsuit happy and loves to play victim, I wouldn't be surprised if they file one of those 'Have you had an accident at work that wasn't your fault?' lawsuits in the future.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

I knew these two would still live rent free in the UK’s media mind long after they left.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I can see it now. Harry was right, "She ticks every box."


of course she ticked all the boxes - it was all very calculated.  I wonder if she is capable of genuine feelings for another person


----------



## Lounorada

Graw said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Sue Over Photos of Their Son, Archie*
> The couple contend that the photos were most likely taken with a drone or telephoto lens while they were in their backyard in the Los Angeles area, which violates California’s so-called paparazzi law.
> 
> A lawyer for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is seeking to subpoena people who may have knowledge about the unauthorized photos of their son.Credit...Frank Augstein/Associated Press
> 
> By Neil Vigdor
> 
> July 23, 2020
> 
> They stepped away from their royal duties and left Britain.
> But Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, contend in an invasion of privacy lawsuit filed on Thursday in California that they haven’t been able to escape the paparazzi, who the couple accuse of using drones and telephoto lenses to take unauthorized photos of their son, Archie.
> The photos show the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with their 14-month-old son in the backyard of a secluded estate in the Los Angeles area where the family has been staying since earlier this year, the lawsuit said.
> The defendants were not named in the lawsuit because the couple do not know who took the photos, according to the complaint, which listed the defendants as John Does. The couple’s lawyer is seeking to subpoena people who may have knowledge about the intrusions.
> Prince Harry and Meghan are suing under a so-called paparazzi law in California, under which a person can be held liable civilly for airspace intrusions to take photographs of a person on private property. The lawsuit is the latest clash between the British royal family and the media over privacy issues.
> 
> 
> 
> “The plaintiffs have done everything in their power to stay out of the limelight — except in connection with their work, which they freely admit is newsworthy,” the lawsuit said. “But the photos at issue are not news. They are not in the public interest. They are harassment.”
> The couple have retained the lawyer Michael J. Kump, whose other clients have included Kim Kardashian West.
> 
> 
> 
> “Every individual and family member in California is guaranteed by law the right to privacy in their home,” Mr. Kump said in a statement on Thursday. “No drones, helicopters or telephoto lenses can take away that right.”
> Prince Harry and Meghan discovered that someone was shopping photos of their son and had claimed they had been taken on a recent public outing in Malibu, according to the lawsuit, which said that Archie had not been out in public since the family arrived in Southern California.
> “It is one thing for parents to share photos of their children, on occasion, with supporters — particularly when doing so has the salutary effect of reducing the bounty on their children’s heads,” the lawsuit said. “It is something else entirely to cede all control to photographers driven by commercial incentive alone. Simply put, it is the plaintiffs’ choice when and how to share photos of their son.”
> In the lawsuit, the couple complained that a British tabloid, The Daily Mail, publicized the location of the Los Angeles-area estate where they were staying, as well as the location of the Vancouver, British Columbia, suburb where they rented a home in Canada. Dozens of paparazzi staked out both properties, the lawsuit said.
> A spokesman for The Daily Mail did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Thursday night.
> In Southern California, the couple installed a large mesh fence to prevent the paparazzi from photographing them at the estate from a ridgeline, the lawsuit said. But the couple’s efforts to shield their son from the glare haven’t been successful because of the ingenuity and “insatiable” appetite of the tabloids, according to the lawsuit.
> “Some paparazzi and media outlets have flown drones a mere 20 feet above the house, as often as three times a day, to obtain photographs of the couple and their young son in their private residence (some of which have been sold and published),” the lawsuit said. “Others have flown helicopters above the backyard of the residence, as early as 5:30 a.m. and as late as 7:00 p.m., waking neighbors and — their son, day after day. And still others have even cut holes in the security fence itself to peer through it.”
> Earlier this year, lawyers representing the couple sent a letter to some British news outlets threatening legal action over the purchase and publication of photos of Meghan walking with Archie in a public park near the house they were renting outside Vancouver. Other photographers had tried to take pictures of the couple through windows when they were inside the house, the letter said.
> Last year, Prince Harry chastised the press for its unrelenting coverage of his wife and said he was fearful that history would repeat itself, a reference to his mother, Princess Diana, who was constantly trailed by paparazzi. She died in Paris in 1997 after her car crashed while trying to avoid photographers. Her death prompted lawmakers in California to adopt the anti-paparazzi legislation.


Suing 'John Doe's'?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

BagOuttaHell said:


> I knew these two would still live rent free in the UK’s media mind long after they left.


Please don't mistaken the daily mail for the entire UK media. Main stream media here don't report on them that much at all!


----------



## Lodpah

Lounorada said:


> Suing 'John Doe's'?
> 
> View attachment 4805860


Yes people can sue John Does until they identify them. She should have investigated first and then sue cause it’s not like the SOL was going to expire. That’s my opinion. I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho.


----------



## Madrose

Lounorada said:


> Suing 'John Doe's'?



The pictures had to have been sold by an agency, so eventually a name will surface.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Yes people can sue John Does until they identify them. She should have investigated first and then sue cause it’s not like the SOL was going to expire. That’s my opinion. I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho.


I'm starting to hope what someone said about Charles being a petty man is true....if so, how long will he put up with this crap


----------



## Madrose

chicinthecity777 said:


> Please don't mistaken the daily mail for the entire UK media. Main stream media here don't report on them that much at all!



What makes up the mainstream media in the UK?  I know there are lots of papers there.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> QEII is wonderful about trotting out the stuff on a regular rotating business
> 
> Camilla seems to have tiaras on permanent loan, she too has a vault full of bling
> And she has a permanent security detail
> The recent wedding my tiaras seem to have been loaned for A short time  , well long enough to practice wearing the uncomfortable thing


I read the Queen, and by the looks of it, Camilla, wear wigs to help with the weight of some of the heavier tiaras.  The crowns look incredibly heavy.


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> Yes people can sue John Does until they identify them. She should have investigated first and then sue cause it’s not like the SOL was going to expire. That’s my opinion. I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho.





Madrose said:


> What makes up the mainstream media in the UK?  I know there are lots of papers there.


I know! I was just being sarcastic and flippant  Seeing as they are so lawsuit (trigger) happy, they're now suing John Doe's! It seems crazy.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Yes people can sue John Does until they identify them. She should have investigated first and then sue cause it’s not like the SOL was going to expire. That’s my opinion.* I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho*.



You might be onto something. "Since Meghan married Harry in 2019, she's worn £947,132.49 (~$1,239,345.59 dollars) worth of clothes" and of course "covered by Prince Charles through the budget he gives the couple from the Duchy of Cornwall". https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kles-wardrobe-cost-massive-944-146-royal.html

How many people can you feed with 1 million dollars? Many more than the ones that they fed with the couple of sandwiches  distributed for the "FEEDING THE NEEDY In L.A." photo opp...


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I remember having Gooseberry Pie when I was an Exchange student in London.  In addition to the undercooked (and cream added) Eggs and the most limpy Bacon ever, I hardly ate .. and lost a LOT of weight!  However, the minute I hit Paris?!! .. with the Croissant, Baguette, the Cheese(s) and Butter .. every pound went back on.  Oh yeah, forgot my Pain au Chocolat .. NUMMY!!!


I have been having too much cheese, bread and chocolate. I need to go on a gooseberry diet.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You might be onto something. "Since Meghan married Harry in 2019, she's worn £947,132.49 (~$1,239,345.59 dollars) worth of clothes" and of course "covered by Prince Charles through the budget he gives the couple from the Duchy of Cornwall". https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kles-wardrobe-cost-massive-944-146-royal.html
> 
> How many people can you feed with 1 million dollars? Many more than the ones that they fed with the couple of sandwiches  distributed for the "FEEDING THE NEEDY In L.A." photo opp...


what a concept
the wonderful "woke" H&M giving money away instead of spending it on themselves


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> what a concept
> the wonderful "woke" H&M giving money away instead of spending it on themselves


I agree, the concept sounds weird, the 2-3 sandwiches will do.


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> Yes people can sue John Does until they identify them. She should have investigated first and then sue cause it’s not like the SOL was going to expire. That’s my opinion. I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho.



Now that they filed, they have 2 years to serve the case. That they effectively filed against no one.  California no longer permits cases to be "parked" in the court system.  Another winning litigation strategy...


----------



## chowlover2

marietouchet said:


> QEII is wonderful about trotting out the stuff on a regular rotating business
> 
> Camilla seems to have tiaras on permanent loan, she too has a vault full of bling
> And she has a permanent security detail
> The recent wedding my tiaras seem to have been loaned for A short time  , well long enough to practice wearing the uncomfortable thing


I think Camilla is wearing the Queen Mums jewelry. EII loaned to her after her death.


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> I remember having Gooseberry Pie when I was an Exchange student in London.  In addition to the undercooked (and cream added) Eggs and the most limpy Bacon ever, I hardly ate .. and lost a LOT of weight!  However, the minute I hit Paris?!! .. with the Croissant, Baguette, the Cheese(s) and Butter .. every pound went back on.  Oh yeah, forgot my Pain au Chocolat .. NUMMY!!!


Unfortunately nowadays I never lose weight when I visit London, the food is way too good...


----------



## V0N1B2

Lodpah said:


> I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho.


And so she should! That'll teach him for offering to walk her down the aisle, providing her a home, security detail, and paying for all of her living expenses for the last two years. 
Like, seriously. He sounds like a real d!ck.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PewPew

V0N1B2 said:


> And so she should! That'll teach him for offering to walk her down the aisle, providing her a home, security detail, and paying for all of her living expenses for the last two years. Like, seriously.



Lady C made a great point that her book shows the couple in a better light than the biography that they sanctioned because their version is like a couple of entitled rich people  whining about being persecuted. 

H&M were overeager to air every perceived slight & elevate their romance to teen rom-com levels (seriously— she was “intrigued” by his excessive use of the ghost emoji  & he supposedly told everyone she was the most beautiful woman he’d ever seen & that he’d marry her after the second date.)  

They really missed opportunities to cast themselves as mentally-balanced, gracious individuals. It would have given more weight to their complaints if they could have acknowledged Charles was kind in walking her down the aisle short notice & she did have her introductions and some privileges fastracked, like being allowed to move into royal quarters earlier than Kate, Sophie or other royal girlfriend or fiancee. Instead, they claim everyone is abusive & jealous of them, including Charles.


----------



## pukasonqo

SNL wedding reception


----------



## bag-mania

pukasonqo said:


> SNL wedding reception




This is funny but it shows what a free pass Meghan was given that even SNL was afraid to use her as a character in a skit about her own wedding because they didn’t want to be accused of being mean to her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

At least they got his name right — Prince Harry Markle!
Interesting people understood their dynamic back then.




bag-mania said:


> This is funny but it shows what a free pass Meghan was given that even SNL was afraid to use her as a character in a skit about her own wedding because they didn’t want to be accused of being mean to her.


----------



## Luvbolide

V0N1B2 said:


> And so she should! That'll teach him for offering to walk her down the aisle, providing her a home, security detail, and paying for all of her living expenses for the last two years.
> Like, seriously. He sounds like a real d!ck.




I have to chuckle at the NBA's biggest flopper over-reacting again!  (Though this acting job is at least funny!)


----------



## pixiejenna

Lounorada said:


> Because she is so lawsuit happy and loves to play victim, I wouldn't be surprised if they file one of those 'Have you had an accident at work that wasn't your fault?' lawsuits in the future.



Na that won’t ever happen neither of them work.




Lodpah said:


> Yes people can sue John Does until they identify them. She should have investigated first and then sue cause it’s not like the SOL was going to expire. That’s my opinion. I’m now convinced MM wants to bankrupt Prince Charles tho.



I don’t know who’s paying for these BS lawsuits but if it’s Prince Charles I don’t understand why he hasn’t cut them off already? is he wait for the 1 year “review“ to cut them off? She will bankrupt the family if they’re footing the bill for this. If Prince Charles wants to cut the fat so bad with the royal family why is he permitting this behavior? Or is he perhaps waiting until the queen retires to cut them off because Harry can’t run to nan-nan to fix it?


----------



## PewPew

pixiejenna said:


> I don’t know who’s paying for these BS lawsuits but if it’s Prince Charles I don’t understand why he hasn’t cut them off already?



They likely have top tier solicitors clamoring for their business on both sides of the pond and would be willing to work on contingency (a fee only if they win). It’s tremendous advertising for any firm or attorney to have a high-profile, royal client. H&M moved to a prestigious firm in the UK after splitting with the firm that does much work for the BRF. It was a huge endorsement for the new law firm. 

Even if they make lots of frivolous cases, it’s still a good business move for a large law firm in the long run, as H&M could make them millions via legal work for their foundation(s), various new companies, their contracts & their properties over the coming years.


----------



## Lodpah

PewPew said:


> They likely have top tier solicitors clamoring for their business on both sides of the pond, who would be willing to work on contingency (a fee only if they win). It’s tremendous advertising for any firm or attorney to have a high-profile, royal client. H&M moved to a prestigious firm in the UK after splitting with the firm that does much work for the BRF. It was a huge endorsement for the new law firm.
> 
> Even if they make lots of frivolous cases, it’s still a good business move for a large law firm in the long run, as H&M could make them millions via legal work for their foundation(s), various new companies, their contracts & their properties over the coming years.


I don't know about that. I've worked with a few firms and even though they had some high profile clients, the most they would do is reduce the fees. High powered law firms don't need to advertise, they are already in high demand, but those on billboards do cater to pedestrian clients (not meant to be a dig by that but rather mostly accidents, etc.). Top rated law firms and high powered law firms, it's all about the billable hours AND they have already established themselves and their clients are way more financially wealthier than Meghan Harry could ever deign to be.


----------



## lalame

They probably have some family firms on retainer... that's what really wealthy people do I believe. I doubt these are contingency fee lawyers... they would know the amount of work, scrutiny, and length of time it takes to go through a suit that has low chance of success like this wouldn't be worth it. Contingency fee lawyers only take on cases they think they can win. Not to mention... isn't she not even suing for monetary damages?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Madrose said:


> What makes up the mainstream media in the UK?  I know there are lots of papers there.


Anything which is NOT a tabloid, such as BBC, BBC online. Other major national TV stations, broadsheet and compact newspapers. Daily Mail is a tabloid newspaper.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> They probably have some family firms on retainer... that's what really wealthy people do I believe. I doubt these are contingency fee lawyers... they would know the amount of work, scrutiny, and length of time it takes to go through a suit that has low chance of success like this wouldn't be worth it. Contingency fee lawyers only take on cases they think they can win. Not to mention... isn't she not even suing for monetary damages?


Yep. Those won't be "no win no fee" lawyers.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Did anyone other than myself catch the Anderson Cooper - Tyler Perry interview on CNN@Wednesday night?

Asking bc of relevancy M&H->Tyler Perry's home->BLM issue

Tyler Perry's authenticity blind-sided me, neither did it appear to be scripted as Anderson Cooper looked quite astonished when Tyler Perry stated not once but twice, "We do not need to defund the police, we need MORE police".

In any event, it is well worth watching this 3-minute interview bc going forward it appears that Miss Markle will have to tread very lightly <not exactly her style> if she intends to continue being Queen of  Beverly Ridge, CA.


----------



## Sharont2305

chowlover2 said:


> I think Camilla is wearing the Queen Mums jewelry. EII loaned to her after her death.


Her engagement ring belonged to the Queen Mum


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PewPew said:


> he supposedly told everyone she was the most beautiful woman he’d ever seen & that he’d marry her after the second date.



He hasn't been around much, hu? She is pretty (but let's be real...her new face is way better than her original one too) but a prince who has been around models and such thinks Meghan is the reincarnation of Aphrodite? Please.


----------



## marietouchet

Amusing video on YouTube , murky meg channel, Sussex royal liquidation blunder
the details are juicy, H&M have/had a pile of shell corporations eg Sussex royal which has been liquidated , it is one of parent corps of travelyst, which h promoted this week, the pile of spaghetti makes no buisiness sense
not Clear these are set up as charities at all


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Madrose said:


> What makes up the mainstream media in the UK?  I know there are lots of papers there.


The Times of London certainly is Right up there, been very Quiet/fair to H&M lately
most of the tabloids have free internet versions, the Times does not, to my knowledge
i would say that Country Life and Tatler magazines are upper crust aristo type of topics, like the US Town and Country, eg fox hunting and gallery going, but Pss Anne is on the cover of CL this month, and Kate graced Tatler recently, the Times did Sophie Wessex last month 
the magazines are circumspect in what they write , tho K did not like the Tatler article , issued at the height of COVID, it said she was exhausted from the extra work due to H&M departure, true but unflattering in the days of covid


----------



## marietouchet

Also the term mainstream media is not entirely applicable re the BRF
the media and the BRF have a system, name escapes me now, Rota ? 
the BRF agrees To cooperate  a bit and the press agrees to pool it’s coverage, eg there is one reporter at state dinners not 105, and photo ops are arranged, and some subjects are off limits or you get kicked out of the system
the paparazzi are outside the rota system and always have been 
h&m used to be covered by the system, but not now, which is why all sorts of unflattering stuff is coming out now about things that happened 2 years ago
the flood of bad press is due to leaving the rota system


----------



## sdkitty

Gayle King from People.  Couldn't get much more fawning than this.  "the fairy tale continues"....."two people in love"....from May.....she wasn't giving up the kool aid









						Gayle King Denies Oprah Arranged for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to Live in Tyler Perry's Home
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have reportedly been staying in Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, but Gayle King says Oprah Winfrey didn't set up the connection between her close friends




					people.com


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Did anyone other than myself catch the Anderson Cooper - Tyler Perry interview on CNN@Wednesday night?
> 
> Asking bc of relevancy M&H->Tyler Perry's home->BLM issue
> 
> Tyler Perry's authenticity blind-sided me, neither did it appear to be scripted as Anderson Cooper looked quite astonished when Tyler Perry stated not once but twice, "We do not need to defund the police, we need MORE police".
> 
> In any event, it is well worth watching this 3-minute interview bc going forward it appears that Miss Markle will have to tread very lightly <not exactly her style> if she intends to continue being Queen of  Beverly Ridge, CA.


not sure what you mean about M treading lightly?
Tyler is smart enough to figure her out?


----------



## bag-mania

Aren’t they paying Tyler rent? I know that has been reported several times. I’d be surprised if the rent is anywhere close to what it costs to maintain a house of that size however.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Aren’t they paying Tyler rent? I know that has been reported several times. I’d be surprised if the rent is anywhere close to what it costs to maintain a house of that size however.


he's a nice guy and has plenty of money....but I like it better when he helps people who are truly in need


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Gayle King from People.  Couldn't get much more fawning than this.  "the fairy tale continues"....."two people in love"....from May.....she wasn't giving up the kool aid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King Denies Oprah Arranged for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to Live in Tyler Perry's Home
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have reportedly been staying in Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, but Gayle King says Oprah Winfrey didn't set up the connection between her close friends
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



“What Meghan said is she wanted to show Harry Los Angeles through the eyes of philanthropy. It’s just beautiful,”  This ties so well with news of MM spending over 1 million dollars on her clothing in <1 year... 

Let's raise money for charity (a couple of sandwiches will do) while drinking Champagne and eating caviar!


----------



## V0N1B2

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Did anyone other than myself catch the Anderson Cooper - Tyler Perry interview on CNN@Wednesday night?
> 
> Asking bc of relevancy M&H->Tyler Perry's home->BLM issue
> 
> Tyler Perry's authenticity blind-sided me, neither did it appear to be scripted as Anderson Cooper looked quite astonished when Tyler Perry stated not once but twice, "We do not need to defund the police, we need MORE police".
> 
> In any event, it is well worth watching this 3-minute interview bc going forward it appears that Miss Markle will have to tread very lightly <not exactly her style> if she intends to continue being Queen of  Beverly Ridge, CA.


I saw it. I was amazed by how they seemed like polar opposites. All I could think while listening was that Meghan would do well to follow Tyler Perry's lead. It's just another thing that makes you realize all of the missed opportunities for doing true good in the world. Plus the fact that she's just not authentic. In any way. At all.  I don't care what anyone says, she just doesn't have "it".
It also made me think that they have never met because if they had, he would have realized they have absolutely nothing in common.  (Not that you need that to lend/rent your house out to someone).


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I saw it. I was amazed by how they seemed like polar opposites. All I could think while listening was that Meghan would do well to follow Tyler Perry's lead. It's just another thing that makes you realize all of the missed opportunities for doing true good in the world. Plus the fact that she's just not authentic. In any way. At all.  I don't care what anyone says, she just doesn't have "it".
> It also made me think that they have never met because if they had, he would have realized they have absolutely nothing in common.  (Not that you need that to lend/rent your house out to someone).


there's another video online where gayle asks him about H&M living at his house and he pretends to lose connection with her....guess he's protecting their privacy and his own


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> Please don't. Can't stand her. She trashed our 1700s library by using valuable books as props, stacking them in huge piles for visual display purposes, piles one on top of another (books should be placed vertically only). Even placing lit candles (in holders thank goodness) on books she shouldn't have even had keys for.


That's awful! I usually watch her shows because I learn things about the olden days in Britain, now it will be with a different eye.


----------



## CeeJay

Graw said:


> I think when paps take your picture, its annoying, but acceptable because thats life.  But when they go after your children... thats too much.  There has to be a boundary even if you are a celebrity.


I wasn't referring to the paps taking pictures of Archie; I was referring to the story of their much desired "need" for privacy for themselves .. I agree with you, taking pictures of the children is a different story!


----------



## V0N1B2

What was Ar-Kay doing in the "pictures" taken by these "drones" in "their" backyard?
Was Harry in the pics? Were they frolicking in the pool? What was Meghan wearing? Was Doria there? Markus? Was it sunny that day?
Which company published the photos? Splash? Backgrid? Daily Mail?


----------



## marietouchet

V0N1B2 said:


> What was Ar-Kay doing in the "pictures" taken by these "drones" in "their" backyard?
> Was Harry in the pics? Were they frolicking in the pool? What was Meghan wearing? Was Doria there? Markus? Was it sunny that day?
> Which company published the photos? Splash? Backgrid? Daily Mail?


i saw one pic of Doria pulling Archie in a plastic kiddie car, nothing special but kids are off limits to me - the photo was taken from above , drone maybe but not sure
In Europe, one has to blur out the face of a child of a celebrity, but not in the USA
I dont know the nuances of country laws relative to every day candid snaps eg photo taken in public (selfie) versus sneaky shot taken using a long lens from a distance or drone

The "drone" photo goes to the usefulness of the BRF rota system 

Ex: Kate takes a snap or two of her children every 6 mos or so, and the photos are widely disseminated, in exchange the children are off limits otherwise 

H&M have been stingy with snaps of Archie, and that makes a market for the inocuous snap snap of Archie & gma


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, this Doria and A in the lil car is the only photo I have seen. It could have been taken from a hilltop, helicopter, drone, etc. Some have suggested that the lil kid is not A, perhaps the child is not ”the private one” but belongs to Doria’s brother. Most comments were criticising Doria for walking outside on the driveway/street barefoot.  All that said, Doria looked very fit and slim. She and Carole should write a book on ageing well.




marietouchet said:


> i saw one pic of Doria pulling Archie in a plastic kiddie car, nothing special but kids are off limits to me - the photo was taken from above , drone maybe but not sure
> In Europe, one has to blur out the face of a child of a celebrity, but not in the USA
> I dont know the nuances of country laws relative to every day candid snaps eg photo taken in public (selfie) versus sneaky shot taken using a long lens from a distance or drone
> 
> The "drone" photo goes to the usefulness of the BRF rota system
> 
> Ex: Kate takes a snap or two of her children every 6 mos or so, and the photos are widely disseminated, in exchange the children are off limits otherwise
> 
> H&M have been stingy with snaps of Archie, and that makes a market for the inocuous snap snap of Archie & gma


----------



## Katel

Oh, it wasn’t which tiara she got, but how she got access to it, poor dear 








						Queen scolded Prince Harry for using bad language about closest aide
					

The Queen gave Prince Harry a dressing down for using offensive language about her closest aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

Posted today on Page Six..








						Meghan Markle: a ‘diva’ from her early days
					

Even before joining the royal family, Markle reportedly frustrated coworkers on the Toronto set of “Suits.”




					pagesix.com
				




Before Meghan Markle drove the royal family to distraction, she frustrated coworkers on the Toronto set of “Suits.”​​Years before she was the Duchess of Sussex, Markle gained a difficult reputation for holding up filming and photoshoots if everything wasn’t perfect or if she wasn’t getting enough of the spotlight.​​“She was always having to be coaxed out of her dressing room during promotional shoots because she didn’t think she looked pretty enough, or her outfit wasn’t right or she felt she wasn’t getting prominent enough placement (in the promotional pictures),” a source on set told the Post while sighing. “There were always tears. Every time.”​​Our source’s information jibes with an earlier report from the Daily Mail in which a videographer was warned, “People told me, ‘get ready because she is a lot.’ They used to call her ‘the princess.’”​​“When I saw her, right away from the moment she arrived, I didn’t even know who she was and she was acting like a diva – It was the attitude, how she talked to people, the rules,” the videographer continued.​​“She came in wearing a (baseball) cap, hiding her face and she had her head down and just walked back toward the make-up room. It was like it was the big diva coming in, and she doesn’t want people to see her, like you would do if you’re walking in the street and you don’t want the paparazzi to take your picture.”​​The videographer wasn’t impressed, telling the Daily Mail, “Everyone thought, ‘she is acting like an A-lister when she is not even a D-lister.’”​​Representatives for Markle did not respond to requests for comment.​


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> Posted today on Page Six..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: a ‘diva’ from her early days
> 
> 
> Even before joining the royal family, Markle reportedly frustrated coworkers on the Toronto set of “Suits.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before Meghan Markle drove the royal family to distraction, she frustrated coworkers on the Toronto set of “Suits.”​​Years before she was the Duchess of Sussex, Markle gained a difficult reputation for holding up filming and photoshoots if everything wasn’t perfect or if she wasn’t getting enough of the spotlight.​​“She was always having to be coaxed out of her dressing room during promotional shoots because she didn’t think she looked pretty enough, or her outfit wasn’t right or she felt she wasn’t getting prominent enough placement (in the promotional pictures),” a source on set told the Post while sighing. “There were always tears. Every time.”​​Our source’s information jibes with an earlier report from the Daily Mail in which a videographer was warned, “People told me, ‘get ready because she is a lot.’ They used to call her ‘the princess.’”​​“When I saw her, right away from the moment she arrived, I didn’t even know who she was and she was acting like a diva – It was the attitude, how she talked to people, the rules,” the videographer continued.​​“She came in wearing a (baseball) cap, hiding her face and she had her head down and just walked back toward the make-up room. It was like it was the big diva coming in, and she doesn’t want people to see her, like you would do if you’re walking in the street and you don’t want the paparazzi to take your picture.”​​The videographer wasn’t impressed, telling the Daily Mail, “Everyone thought, ‘she is acting like an A-lister when she is not even a D-lister.’”​​Representatives for Markle did not respond to requests for comment.​


gawd


----------



## bag-mania

Katel said:


> Oh, it wasn’t which tiara she got, but how she got access to it, poor dear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen scolded Prince Harry for using bad language about closest aide
> 
> 
> The Queen gave Prince Harry a dressing down for using offensive language about her closest aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I didn’t follow him but I don’t remember Harry being such a tantrum-throwing little ninny pre-Meghan. She really brought out the worst in his personality. Yet another of her “gifts.”


----------



## poopsie

Katel said:


> Oh, it wasn’t which tiara she got, but how she got access to it, poor dear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen scolded Prince Harry for using bad language about closest aide
> 
> 
> The Queen gave Prince Harry a dressing down for using offensive language about her closest aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


One of her jobs is to break in the Queen's shoes? 
It's good to be Queen


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> there's another video online where gayle asks him about H&M living at his house and he pretends to lose connection with her....guess he's protecting their privacy and his own



Outstanding videos! Thank you, @VigeeLeBrun and @sdkitty, for the recommendationS. I would have missed these.
Ya know, if H&M took TP’s approach, ‘right the wrongs’, I would gladly cheer them on. Instead they lecture, criticise, point fingers and do not follow their own advice. TP has shown with Camp Quarantine what businesses can do to get us through the Covid. Applause and kudos to him.

Anderson & TP — very thoughtful answers from TP


Gayle & TP — he needs to be running our country!


----------



## zen1965

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t follow him but I don’t remember Harry being such a tantrum-throwing little ninny pre-Meghan. She really brought out the worst in his personality. Yet another of her “gifts.”



I think he was known per-Meghan to sulk and throw tantrums when he did not get his way. The entitlement has always been there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> Oh, it wasn’t which tiara she got, but how she got access to it, poor dear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen scolded Prince Harry for using bad language about closest aide
> 
> 
> The Queen gave Prince Harry a dressing down for using offensive language about her closest aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



_The scolding came after Harry, 35, flew into a rage when the Queen's dresser and confidante Angela Kelly was unable to meet Meghan's sudden demand to visit Buckingham Palace with her hairdresser to try on a tiara that the couple had chosen for their wedding._

Please, BRF, please remove them from the line-up and the money. Enough is enough.
Wonder how long the reporters have been sitting on this stuff. Unreal how these two behave. Just unreal.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t follow him but I don’t remember Harry being such a tantrum-throwing little ninny pre-Meghan. She really brought out the worst in his personality. Yet another of her “gifts.”


the myth about red heads is they have a temper


----------



## bag-mania

zen1965 said:


> I think he was known per-Meghan to sulk and throw tantrums when he did not get his way. The entitlement has always been there.



Thanks. Now that you mention it I do recall seeing several older photographs of him looking sullen and disgruntled. I didn’t realize he acted out on his bad attitude as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> the myth about red heads is they have a temper



He learned it all from his mother. From QE and Philip, Charles learned to restrain himself. Diana was allowed to say whatever she wanted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Ex: Kate takes a snap or two of her children every 6 mos or so, and the photos are widely disseminated, in exchange the children are off limits otherwise



BUT if #2 and 3 in line happen to go to a soccer match together - without clearing out a whole section, mind you - and snapshots of that event do show up in the press nobody makes a fuss either.


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> gawd



ouch. Acting like an À-lister when she wasn‘t even a D-lister.
Dumb Harry could not have chosen much worse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

caramelize126 said:


> Before Meghan Markle drove the royal family to distraction, she frustrated coworkers on the Toronto set of “Suits.”​​Years before she was the Duchess of Sussex, Markle gained a difficult reputation for holding up filming and photoshoots if everything wasn’t perfect or if she wasn’t getting enough of the spotlight. [...]​​“When I saw her, right away from the moment she arrived, I didn’t even know who she was and she was acting like a diva – It was the attitude, how she talked to people, the rules,” the videographer continued.​​



Quelle surprise. Not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The scolding came after Harry, 35, flew into a rage when the Queen's dresser and confidante Angela Kelly was unable to meet Meghan's sudden demand to visit Buckingham Palace with her hairdresser to try on a tiara that the couple had chosen for their wedding._



LOL. I knew it couldn't possibly have been AK dragging her feet to make Meghan late for her hair appointment. Maybe it could have gone smoother if The Princess and the Pea would have made an appointment instead of just forcing herself on people once again?


----------



## CarryOn2020

“There were always tears. Every time.”






sdkitty said:


> gawd


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, those two idiots really opened Pandora's box when they declared the press their enemy. Can't say I have much sympathy, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"But last night a Royal source pointedly said: 'The book's version of what happened would not be everyone else's recollection of events and certainly not those who were close to it.' "

I'm so in love with these courtiers using nothing but polite language but letting it show through every letter how they really feel.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> gawd





sdkitty said:


> gawd



They are such bullies


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> Oh, it wasn’t which tiara she got, but how she got access to it, poor dear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen scolded Prince Harry for using bad language about closest aide
> 
> 
> The Queen gave Prince Harry a dressing down for using offensive language about her closest aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Meg had flown her hairdresser over from Paris for a hair practice and they needed the tiara." 
It looks like their much anticipated biography is confirming many of the rumors about MM diva attitude.  Poor dear so much pain and suffering...


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> “There were always tears. Every time.”



Harry isn’t the only one who can throw a tantrum. They deserve each other. I wonder what their day-to-day life is like. I bet it revolves around Harry struggling to please Meghan and Meghan being incapable of being pleased.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> "Meg had flown her hairdresser over from Paris for a hair practice and they needed the tiara."
> It looks like their much anticipated biography is confirming many of the rumors about MM diva attitude.  Poor dear so much pain and suffering...



Gods they are so spoiled, who can afford to have their hairstylists fly over from Paris? They are so out of touch. I don’t know how they thought this was a good Idea....


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> Gods they are so spoiled, who can afford to have their hairstylists fly over from Paris? They are so out of touch. I don’t know how they thought this was a good Idea....


Yep, and they did it only for "a hair practice". A lifestyle that requires many 'philanthropy events' and 'paid speeches' if Charles stops funding them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It does indeed point out two very spoiled, very immature brats being told “No, there are rules of decorum,  and we follow those rules in this palace.”


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> *"Meg had flown her hairdresser over from Paris for a hair practice and they needed the tiara."*
> It looks like their much anticipated biography is confirming many of the rumors about MM diva attitude.  Poor dear so much pain and suffering...


She flew a hairdresser to the UK from Paris for a 'hair practice' for that beyond basic hair-do she wore on the wedding day? The hair-do that looked like she just left a gym after a workout or yoga class? The hair-do that looked like she could have saved some money and done it herself because it was so basic? She NEEDED the tiara to practise _that _hair-do?!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Her argument will be that if she had been able to have a hair practice, she would have looked much better. So, to show the BRF how mean they are, she chose to wear a sloppy hair do. Yes, indeed, she showed us all, didn’t she?

@sdkitty said it best — gawd.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lounorada said:


> She flew a hairdresser to the UK from Paris for a 'hair practice' for that beyond basic hair-do she wore on the wedding day? The hair-do that looked like she just left a gym after a workout or yoga class? The hair-do that looked like she could have saved some money and done it herself because it was so basic? She NEEDED the tiara to practise _that _hair-do?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4807217


You nailed it!


----------



## csshopper

She flew a hairdresser from Paris to London.
 Wow, now I know what "authentic travel" is, it's what makes MM happy. 
If he had swum the Channel towing a small inflatable with his gear in it, that might have qualified as "authentic."


----------



## Luvbolide

Well, MM, looks like you were spot on in thinking that the new book would give the world a more accurate impression of you.  Just too bad that it is confirming and expanding every awful thing written about you.  Time to just go away, it is all getting very tiresome.


----------



## Sol Ryan

csshopper said:


> She flew a hairdresser from Paris to London.
> Wow, now I know what "authentic travel" is, it's what makes MM happy.
> If he had swum the Channel towing a small inflatable with his gear in it, that might have qualified as "authentic."



Jeez what was the Carbon Footprint of their wedding? There weren’t any hairdressers in London who are familiar with tiaras? What happened to the hairstylist that Amal introduced Meghan to?

Eta:








						Meet the hairdresser Meghan Markle has been using for all her London appearances
					

Meghan Markle has certainly sparked a conversation with her hairstyles as she counts down to the royal wedding - meet the hairdresser behind her modern choices




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> What happened to the hairstylist that Amal introduced Meghan to?[/URL]



The one from Paris must have been more famous/prestigious/expensive. Meghan would only want whoever was universally known to be the best. She deserves only the best!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

zen1965 said:


> ouch. Acting like an À-lister when she wasn‘t even a D-lister.
> Dumb Harry could not have chosen much worse.


A D-List would be a "promotion" for her IMO, she is Z-List!!!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Harry isn’t the only one who can throw a tantrum. They deserve each other. I wonder what their day-to-day life is like. I bet it revolves around Harry struggling to please Meghan and Meghan being incapable of being pleased.


Well, it's a good thing that they will have money because that poor child is likely going to need a LOT of psychiatric help later on.  God, I feel so bad for that poor child ..


----------



## CeeJay

Well .. I wonder if this will get a response from his way over-spoiled daughter??? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ding-Finding-Freedom-says-son-Thomas-Jnr.html


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> The one from Paris must have been more famous/prestigious/expensive. Meghan would only want whoever was universally known to be the best. She deserves only the best!


Serge Normant!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> A D-List would be a "promotion" for her IMO, *she is Z-List*!!!


This is because after 1835 the English Alphabet lost the 27th letter.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Well .. I wonder if this will get a response from his way over-spoiled daughter???
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ding-Finding-Freedom-says-son-Thomas-Jnr.html



"He just had his 76th birthday – needless to say, he didn't hear from Meghan."
Discarded by Duchess!


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> Well, MM, looks like you were spot on in thinking that the new book would give the world a more accurate impression of you.  Just too bad that it is confirming and expanding every awful thing written about you.  Time to just go away, it is all getting very tiresome.



*"Meghan Markle heartbreak: Duchess felt 'muted' while a senior member of the Royal Family*
Finding Freedom may be seen by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as a way to set the record straight on issues they were not able to speak for themselves...The level of details included in Finding Freedom has led many commentators to think Meghan and Harry may be two of the sources Mr Scobie and Ms Durand spoke to. "https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...latest-meghan-harry-book-finding-freedom-news

*"Lady Colin Campbell insists her rather scathing book on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle is more flattering than Finding Freedom ..."*








						Lady Colin Campbell says book on Harry and Meghan is not a takedown
					

Lady Colin Campbell told Vanity Fair her book, Harry and Meghan: The Real Story, paints the couple in a better light than Finding Freedom because she is more 'impartial'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




We will be entertained for a long time.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Camilla Long in The Sunday Times (London) today commenting on hypocrisy, "Meghanese", Sussex victimology and so on ... 

*All aboard the Freedom bus, cries Meghan as her friends are crushed under the wheels*
Camilla Long

Sunday August 02 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times

"You will by now have hopefully recovered from Prince Harry and Meghan’s latest round of tiara-twanking and courtier-yanking. In Finding Freedom we were treated to a devastating string of teeny tiny regal microaggressions including the humiliating non-moment the Duchess of Cambridge didn’t give the Duchess of Sussex a lift to the shops in her Range Rover. We also learnt that Prince William had not always been one hundred per cent complimentary about La Sussex. He’d once referred to her as “this girl” in a private (he thought) conversation with the dedicated privacy crusader Prince Harry, who promptly leaked it. It was astonishingly petty stuff.

In return for this perceived disloyalty and “snobbishness”, Harry and Meghan now appear to have unloaded ten tons of emotional violence on William and his circle. It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against? And if you thought it was bad being the couple’s relatives, you should see what it’s like being their friends.

Meghan seems to expect such blind loyalty that friends routinely feel obliged to telephone newspapers and give anonymous quotes about her “calm” and “penmanship”. In some cases, the duchess knows they’re calling. In others, she claims she doesn’t. In February 2019, for example, five friends secretly telephoned People magazine to gush about “how much Meghan loves her animals”. Meghan says she didn’t know about the interviews but I can’t help wondering who else would have come up with the phrases “she makes everywhere she goes feel like a holiday” and “she personifies elegance, grace, philanthropy”? It’s pure Meghanese.

One of the friends even cleverly thought to mention that Meghan had selflessly written a letter to her father to mend their broken relationship. This letter is now the subject of a court case the duchess is waging against The Mail on Sunday. The duchess says the paper shouldn’t have printed a private note. The paper says the letter wasn’t really private because it had already popped up in People magazine. If the Mail can prove Meghan sanctioned the letter stuff by cross-examining the five friends in open court, her privacy case collapses. A lot’s riding on these friends.

At this point, as one of Meghan’s matcha-licking buddies, I might be vaguely asking whether friendship with Meghan has been all it’s cracked up to be. Having spent the past five years secretly, or otherwise, conducting a PR campaign for her by feeding stories about her bomb-ass roast chicken, I now risk being further thrown under the bus and unveiled just so that she can have her triumphal post-court, tear-choking, street-style moment à la Amber Heard. On Wednesday, in a fresh submission to the court, the duchess said unmasking these friends would be an “unacceptable price to pay” as they were private citizens and “young mothers”. But Kate’s a young mother, and Meghan hasn’t ever defended her. Far from it: she has apparently allowed a whole book to be published tearing her down. Why wouldn’t she screw over her mother friends if it suited?

She’s already thrown away far more than mere friends: her own family, his family, even their home over here. It’s devastating to think how far this humourless couple have fallen in their pursuit of what they call “happiness”. They’ve gone from hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyoncé to trying to persuade a judge that Meghan has some kind of psychic hold over her mates (who leaks positive stories without telling the subject first?). There are the sad video messages with the usual authoritarian language: just a few days ago a comatose Prince Harry issued one from some rapper’s brocaded toilet, reminding us of “what is right”. Whoever’s words he was reading, they didn’t feel like his. The script’s now all wrong.

Harry isn’t an eco-travel crusader any more than Meghan’s an anti-bullying campaigner or a feminist. Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.

Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims."


----------



## Luvbolide

Straight-Laced said:


> Camilla Long in The Sunday Times (London) today commenting on hypocrisy, "Meghanese", Sussex victimology and so on ...
> 
> *All aboard the Freedom bus, cries Meghan as her friends are crushed under the wheels*
> Camilla Long
> 
> Sunday August 02 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times
> 
> "You will by now have hopefully recovered from Prince Harry and Meghan’s latest round of tiara-twanking and courtier-yanking. In Finding Freedom we were treated to a devastating string of teeny tiny regal microaggressions including the humiliating non-moment the Duchess of Cambridge didn’t give the Duchess of Sussex a lift to the shops in her Range Rover. We also learnt that Prince William had not always been one hundred per cent complimentary about La Sussex. He’d once referred to her as “this girl” in a private (he thought) conversation with the dedicated privacy crusader Prince Harry, who promptly leaked it. It was astonishingly petty stuff.
> 
> In return for this perceived disloyalty and “snobbishness”, Harry and Meghan now appear to have unloaded ten tons of emotional violence on William and his circle. It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against? And if you thought it was bad being the couple’s relatives, you should see what it’s like being their friends.
> 
> Meghan seems to expect such blind loyalty that friends routinely feel obliged to telephone newspapers and give anonymous quotes about her “calm” and “penmanship”. In some cases, the duchess knows they’re calling. In others, she claims she doesn’t. In February 2019, for example, five friends secretly telephoned People magazine to gush about “how much Meghan loves her animals”. Meghan says she didn’t know about the interviews but I can’t help wondering who else would have come up with the phrases “she makes everywhere she goes feel like a holiday” and “she personifies elegance, grace, philanthropy”? It’s pure Meghanese.
> 
> One of the friends even cleverly thought to mention that Meghan had selflessly written a letter to her father to mend their broken relationship. This letter is now the subject of a court case the duchess is waging against The Mail on Sunday. The duchess says the paper shouldn’t have printed a private note. The paper says the letter wasn’t really private because it had already popped up in People magazine. If the Mail can prove Meghan sanctioned the letter stuff by cross-examining the five friends in open court, her privacy case collapses. A lot’s riding on these friends.
> 
> At this point, as one of Meghan’s matcha-licking buddies, I might be vaguely asking whether friendship with Meghan has been all it’s cracked up to be. Having spent the past five years secretly, or otherwise, conducting a PR campaign for her by feeding stories about her bomb-ass roast chicken, I now risk being further thrown under the bus and unveiled just so that she can have her triumphal post-court, tear-choking, street-style moment à la Amber Heard. On Wednesday, in a fresh submission to the court, the duchess said unmasking these friends would be an “unacceptable price to pay” as they were private citizens and “young mothers”. But Kate’s a young mother, and Meghan hasn’t ever defended her. Far from it: she has apparently allowed a whole book to be published tearing her down. Why wouldn’t she screw over her mother friends if it suited?
> 
> She’s already thrown away far more than mere friends: her own family, his family, even their home over here. It’s devastating to think how far this humourless couple have fallen in their pursuit of what they call “happiness”. They’ve gone from hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyoncé to trying to persuade a judge that Meghan has some kind of psychic hold over her mates (who leaks positive stories without telling the subject first?). There are the sad video messages with the usual authoritarian language: just a few days ago a comatose Prince Harry issued one from some rapper’s brocaded toilet, reminding us of “what is right”. Whoever’s words he was reading, they didn’t feel like his. The script’s now all wrong.
> 
> Harry isn’t an eco-travel crusader any more than Meghan’s an anti-bullying campaigner or a feminist. Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.
> 
> Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims."


Ouch, someone has their number.  Thanks for posting this.


----------



## Grande Latte

This is an interesting read.
https://qr.ae/pNsx5R


----------



## beautymagpie

Chanbal said:


> "Meg had flown her hairdresser over from Paris for a hair practice and they needed the tiara."
> It looks like their much anticipated biography is confirming many of the rumors about MM diva attitude.  Poor dear so much pain and suffering...



If they had time to make plans to book a flight, they had time to book an appointment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> Well, MM, looks like you were spot on in thinking that the new book would give the world a more accurate impression of you.  Just too bad that it is confirming and expanding every awful thing written about you.  Time to just go away, it is all getting very tiresome.



I just do not understand how the Sussexes AND the authors could have possibly sat back and said to themselves "This will set the record straight", because it just confirms they are awful.


----------



## Lodpah

I’ll just leave at this. When Prince William sued the tabloids way back he used his name Mount-Batten Windsor and these two clowns used this in their complaint. I am astonished . . . usually people use their names lol.


----------



## papertiger

beautymagpie said:


> If they had time to make plans to book a flight, they had time to book an appointment.



Not to mention, MM putting an employee in an impossible position that could have cost her, her job. 

And never mind Harry's vile behaviour's,  berating someone as though a skivvy* admonishing and demonising someone for doing their job diligently. (*Skivvy in the historical sense, not sure what underclass servant is called now by the aristocracy - probably "girl!") 

These 2 are more autocratic than even I thought. No wonder no staff will stay with them.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just do not understand how the Sussexes AND the authors could have possibly sat back and said to themselves "This will set the record straight", because it just confirms they are awful.



I don't know what the collective term is for a group of people that (individually and en masse) have absolutely no sense of self-awareness, propriety or common sense. Maybe like buffalo, an obstinacy of buffalo, or perhaps like a cloud, as in a cloud of bats.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> I don't know what the collective term is for a group of people that (individually and en masse) have absolutely no sense of self-awareness, propriety or common sense. Maybe like buffalo, an obstinacy of buffalo, or perhaps like a cloud, as in a cloud of bats.




Or perhaps so wrapped up in their own fabulousity that they have lost their minds!  And far too much time spent obsessing on the slightest of imagined slights.  Ugh...


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> I’ll just leave at this. When Prince William sued the tabloids way back he used his name Mount-Batten Windsor and these two clowns used this in their complaint. I am astonished . . . usually people use their names lol.
> 
> View attachment 4807427




Too ridiculous to use their titles instead of their legal names.  Especially here in the US where we don’t give a damn about titles.  

I thought that they were filing on Archie’s behalf.  Guess I am getting the Sussex litigation mixed up!  Thanks for posting this.


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> Lou! I was just on the google jewelry searching as well!!  Look at how much bling this lady wearing the Vladimir has!
> View attachment 4803815



Queen Mary.


----------



## Katel

poopsie said:


> One of her jobs is to break in the Queen's shoes?
> It's good to be Queen



do not mess with “AK47” 



Lounorada said:


> She flew a hairdresser to the UK from Paris for a 'hair practice' for that beyond basic hair-do she wore on the wedding day? The hair-do that looked like she just left a gym after a workout or yoga class? The hair-do that looked like she could have saved some money and done it herself because it was so basic? She NEEDED the tiara to practise _that _hair-do?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4807217



Hysterically true!


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her argument will be that if she had been able to have a hair practice, she would have looked much better. So, to show the BRF how mean they are, she chose to wear a sloppy hair do. Yes, indeed, she showed us all, didn’t she?
> 
> @sdkitty said it best — gawd.


I agree with her sloppy hair--fiddling with that clump of hair that kept falling down--no pro hairdresser would come up with that non-styled mess. I wonder if having the Paris-based hairdresser is just another lie, like she did her own makeup for the big day (that proved to be not true). 

But that's what she always does--touch, push, pat--her hair is her soother. She probably thought (and still does) it makes her look alluring (to dumbo H) and oh so young and enchanting. Now with the extensions it looks really bad and straggly.


----------



## kemilia

Luvbolide said:


> Too ridiculous to use their titles instead of their legal names.  Especially here in the US where we don’t give a damn about titles.
> 
> I thought that they were filing on Archie’s behalf.  Guess I am getting the Sussex litigation mixed up!  Thanks for posting this.


I thought he told people to just call him Harry. Now he's back to being Prince Harry? Gimme a break.


----------



## kemilia

beautymagpie said:


> If they had time to make plans to book a flight, they had time to book an appointment.


They don't book flights, H just sends a private jet for whoever. 

Carbon footprint/Travelyst be damned--Meggie-poo needs to see how her droopy hair will look with a tiara. (I know the wedding stuff was pre-"do what we say, not what we do Sussex-world" but do you just wake up one day and say--hey, all this flying around ain't so good for the environment?)


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well .. I wonder if this will get a response from his way over-spoiled daughter???
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ding-Finding-Freedom-says-son-Thomas-Jnr.html


the only response I would expect would be a denial via media from her "sources"
I'm sure you didn't think she would actually respond to her dad @CeeJay


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I’ll just leave at this. When Prince William sued the tabloids way back he used his name Mount-Batten Windsor and these two clowns used this in their complaint. I am astonished . . . usually people use their names lol.
> 
> View attachment 4807427


eww......she really loves that title - but not the "work" and behavior that goes with it


----------



## Chanbal

Grande Latte said:


> This is an interesting read.
> https://qr.ae/pNsx5R


The situation is starting to sound very creepy. Is H being brainwashed? Hope QE will be able to fix this mess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm sick in bed and bored, so I watched William's and Kate's engagement interview. What a stark difference. It's very obvious Kate is nervous and a bit scared, not an experienced speaker and her personality doesn't really shine, and she humbly ends the interview with "I hope I can make a difference in the smallest way". 

Well, not even ten years later she has massively succeeded while the one with the overinflated ego who was fooling around on camera thinking she was being oh so charming and cute and who confidently talked a little too big has achieved nothing (at least nothing desirable...breaking up a family is not exactly what most people are aiming for) and is a hot mess.


----------



## Chanbal

Straight-Laced said:


> Camilla Long in The Sunday Times (London) today commenting on hypocrisy, "Meghanese", Sussex victimology and so on ...
> 
> *All aboard the Freedom bus, cries Meghan as her friends are crushed under the wheels*
> Camilla Long
> 
> Sunday August 02 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times
> 
> "You will by now have hopefully recovered from Prince Harry and Meghan’s latest round of tiara-twanking and courtier-yanking. In Finding Freedom we were treated to a devastating string of teeny tiny regal microaggressions including the humiliating non-moment the Duchess of Cambridge didn’t give the Duchess of Sussex a lift to the shops in her Range Rover. We also learnt that Prince William had not always been one hundred per cent complimentary about La Sussex. He’d once referred to her as “this girl” in a private (he thought) conversation with the dedicated privacy crusader Prince Harry, who promptly leaked it. It was astonishingly petty stuff.
> 
> In return for this perceived disloyalty and “snobbishness”, Harry and Meghan now appear to have unloaded ten tons of emotional violence on William and his circle. It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against? And if you thought it was bad being the couple’s relatives, you should see what it’s like being their friends.
> 
> Meghan seems to expect such blind loyalty that friends routinely feel obliged to telephone newspapers and give anonymous quotes about her “calm” and “penmanship”. In some cases, the duchess knows they’re calling. In others, she claims she doesn’t. In February 2019, for example, five friends secretly telephoned People magazine to gush about “how much Meghan loves her animals”. Meghan says she didn’t know about the interviews but I can’t help wondering who else would have come up with the phrases “she makes everywhere she goes feel like a holiday” and “she personifies elegance, grace, philanthropy”? It’s pure Meghanese.
> 
> One of the friends even cleverly thought to mention that Meghan had selflessly written a letter to her father to mend their broken relationship. This letter is now the subject of a court case the duchess is waging against The Mail on Sunday. The duchess says the paper shouldn’t have printed a private note. The paper says the letter wasn’t really private because it had already popped up in People magazine. If the Mail can prove Meghan sanctioned the letter stuff by cross-examining the five friends in open court, her privacy case collapses. A lot’s riding on these friends.
> 
> At this point, as one of Meghan’s matcha-licking buddies, I might be vaguely asking whether friendship with Meghan has been all it’s cracked up to be. Having spent the past five years secretly, or otherwise, conducting a PR campaign for her by feeding stories about her bomb-ass roast chicken, I now risk being further thrown under the bus and unveiled just so that she can have her triumphal post-court, tear-choking, street-style moment à la Amber Heard. On Wednesday, in a fresh submission to the court, the duchess said unmasking these friends would be an “unacceptable price to pay” as they were private citizens and “young mothers”. But Kate’s a young mother, and Meghan hasn’t ever defended her. Far from it: she has apparently allowed a whole book to be published tearing her down. Why wouldn’t she screw over her mother friends if it suited?
> 
> She’s already thrown away far more than mere friends: her own family, his family, even their home over here. It’s devastating to think how far this humourless couple have fallen in their pursuit of what they call “happiness”. They’ve gone from hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyoncé to trying to persuade a judge that Meghan has some kind of psychic hold over her mates (who leaks positive stories without telling the subject first?). There are the sad video messages with the usual authoritarian language: just a few days ago a comatose Prince Harry issued one from some rapper’s brocaded toilet, reminding us of “what is right”. Whoever’s words he was reading, they didn’t feel like his. The script’s now all wrong.
> 
> Harry isn’t an eco-travel crusader any more than Meghan’s an anti-bullying campaigner or a feminist. Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.
> 
> Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims."





Grande Latte said:


> This is an interesting read.
> https://qr.ae/pNsx5R


These are 2 pieces of 'literature' that should be read together imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The situation is starting to sound very creepy. Is H being brainwashed? Hope QE will be able to fix this mess.


sure doesn't make Meghan seem wholesome IMO
Actually from the story and the pics she seems somewhat degenerate....not the "woke" philanthropist she sold H


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

*papertiger*, I don't know what the collective term is for a group of people that (individually and en masse) have absolutely no sense of self-awareness, propriety or common sense. Maybe like buffalo, an obstinacy of buffalo, or perhaps like a cloud, as in a cloud of bats.


*papert*, think I know the term to which you refer, as my dear departed father, a WWII air force vet, Wharton-educated adventurer-gentleman always told his children, "The biggest a-holes in the WORLD are the people that NEVER THINK THEY ARE".

Pretty much sums up H&M from my point of view, and the evidence just keeps mounting.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> There is one surefire way for the Harkles to get some decent press.  Put out some decent pictures of Archie.  I know I shouldn't be giving them any advice, not that they will take it.  Or they might, depending on their level of desperation.


Absolutely. A simple photo of the 3 of them celebrating her birthday would be nice. One of Archie laughing, playing, wearing clothes (this time) would do wonders. 
But, I don't think it will happen. 
Who knows where they are? Still at TP's? Another couch somewhere? Oprah's? A Winnebago?
Harry detests paps or any sort of casual photos.
Meghan cannot share the spotlight with an adorable toddler. Especially on her birthday! I mean, it is her day, her week, her month!
And, most of all, no one would pay what H&M believe they are worth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

For me, that ship has sailed.  
I’m just not interested in them. Too many lies, too much complaining, too much grifting. 




threadbender said:


> Absolutely. A simple photo of the 3 of them celebrating her birthday would be nice. One of Archie laughing, playing, wearing clothes (this time) would do wonders.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> For me, that ship has sailed.
> I’m just not interested in them. Too many lies, too much complaining, too much grifting.


I know but they do provide a distraction from the horrible news


----------



## CeeJay

Grande Latte said:


> This is an interesting read.
> https://qr.ae/pNsx5R


WOW .. interesting for sure!!!  Hmmmm .. seems like the 'truth' is starting to come out about Meghan, good!!!


----------



## csshopper

Re: Me-again’s “friend”  Markus Anderson

Looking at the body language, smouldering expressions in MM/Markus photos, Diana’s famous proclamation “Well, there were 3 of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded” popped into my head.

And his connection to Omid Scobie is fascinating. 

Harry, Marcus, and Omid.....  Seems like JCMH might still be a gooseberry after all.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *papert*, think I know the term to which you refer, as my dear departed father, a WWII air force vet, Wharton-educated adventurer-gentleman always told his children, "The biggest a-holes in the WORLD are the people that NEVER THINK THEY ARE".


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  100% spot-on!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> the only response I would expect would be a denial via media from her "sources"
> I'm sure you didn't think she would actually respond to her dad @CeeJay


Oh heck no, but I find it interesting that he has spoken up after a fairly long absence and it's NOT favorable to her!


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Re: Me-again’s “friend”  Markus Anderson
> 
> Looking at the body language, smouldering expressions in MM/Markus photos, Diana’s famous proclamation “Well, there were 3 of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded” popped into my head.
> 
> And his connection to Omid Scobie is fascinating.
> 
> Harry, Marcus, and Omid.....  Seems like JCMH might still be a gooseberry after all.


yeah, smoldering.....very posed....trying to look sexy


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. interesting for sure!!!  Hmmmm .. seems like the 'truth' is starting to come out about Meghan, good!!!


Thanks to all of you for the links to info, I am much amused
amusement is priceless in lockdown


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Re: Me-again’s “friend”  Markus Anderson
> 
> Looking at the body language, smouldering expressions in MM/Markus photos, Diana’s famous proclamation “Well, there were 3 of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded” popped into my head.
> 
> And his connection to Omid Scobie is fascinating.
> 
> Harry, Marcus, and Omid.....  Seems like JCMH might still be a gooseberry after all.


Hmmmm .. very interesting indeed!  So, while Omid may not have talked to H&M directly, it could be that Markus was the "messenger"  -- and -- it sounds like Markus was also an "operator", as in moving up very quickly .. could it be that he and Meghan had a *Symbiotic Relationship*?  After all, one part of that is "parasitism" .. hmmmmmm


----------



## Emeline

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. very interesting indeed!  So, while Omid may not have talked to H&M directly, it could be that Markus was the "messenger"  -- and -- it sounds like Markus was also an "operator", as in moving up very quickly .. could it be that he and Meghan had a *Symbiotic Relationship*?  After all, one part of that is "parasitism" .. hmmmmmm


I think you are spot on.  Because she is always intent on trying to control the narrative. She would think this arrangement was oh so clever. 
Markus: Hey Meg, Omid wants to know....
Meg: Tell Omid......


----------



## Annawakes

This just gets more and more amusing.  Now this Markus character.  I agree, the pics of him and MM look very smoldering.  I look forward to the shenanigans on her birthday.  It is all so entertaining in these bleak Covid times.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Re: Me-again’s “friend”  Markus Anderson
> 
> Looking at the body language, smouldering expressions in MM/Markus photos, Diana’s famous proclamation “Well, there were 3 of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded” popped into my head.
> 
> And his connection to Omid Scobie is fascinating.
> 
> Harry, Marcus, and Omid.....  Seems like JCMH might still be a gooseberry after all.


Well there are rumors about: *Prince Harry’s jealousy over Meghan Markle’s best friend, Markus Anderson*


			https://www.nowtolove.com.au/royals/british-royal-family/prince-harry-meghan-markle-markus-anderson-54783
		


I wonder when Bezos (the richest person in modern history) will become the next bff of MM or MA...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> Well there are rumors about: *Prince Harry’s jealousy over Meghan Markle’s best friend, Markus Anderson*
> 
> 
> https://www.nowtolove.com.au/royals/british-royal-family/prince-harry-meghan-markle-markus-anderson-54783
> 
> 
> 
> *I wonder when Bezos (the richest person in modern history) will become the next bff of MM or MA...*



Hmm, *Chanbal*, the very little that I know about Jeff Bezos has me surmise that he is truly orbiting in his own exclusive universe right now and his sights are set very much further afield than H&M <little fish in a big $$$ pond, who have repeatedly shown poor judgment in every aspect of their lives>.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm .. very interesting indeed!  So, while Omid may not have talked to H&M directly, it could be that Markus was the "messenger"  -- and -- it sounds like Markus was also an "operator", as in moving up very quickly .. could it be that he and Meghan had a *Symbiotic Relationship*?  After all, one part of that is "parasitism" .. hmmmmmm


Remember how the Morton book about Diana came about - they never met but she made tapes for him , passed on via intermediary 
There are lots of modern tech  ways to do that without cassettes , digital info can be passed on adinfinitum


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Well there are rumors about: *Prince Harry’s jealousy over Meghan Markle’s best friend, Markus Anderson*
> 
> 
> https://www.nowtolove.com.au/royals/british-royal-family/prince-harry-meghan-markle-markus-anderson-54783
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder when Bezos (the richest person in modern history) will become the next bff of MM or MA...


is the from the American magazine Woman's Day?  If so, the most negative thing I've seen in US media.  This is starting to really smell.  I'll bet Charles would like to offer H the opportunity to come back to the fold w/o her. But stubborn H would just dig his heels in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> The one from Paris must have been more famous/prestigious/expensive. Meghan would only want whoever was universally known to be the best. She deserves only the best!


I had to google who was the hairdresser for the wedding and I've never heard of him before.
He isn't very good at hairdressing if he needed to practice that wedding hair-do, but what's even worse is he probably got paid a tonne of money to create that basic look. Must have been paid for with someone elses money...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> is the from the American magazine Woman's Day?  If so, the most negative thing I've seen in US media.  This is starting to really smell.  I'll bet Charles would like to offer H the opportunity to come back to the fold w/o her. But stubborn H would just dig his heels in.


That's from spring 2019 though, not exactly hot news.


----------



## V0N1B2

Engagement fakery:




The part that got cut:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Girl does indeed have a history to rival H’s. It’s really creepy how similar all 3 men look. Also, creepy how she befriended Cory’s family, especially his mother.  Would be interesting to see this prom dress that knocks off Liz’s dress — haaaaa.









						The hunky chef Meghan Markle nearly married
					

Around three months before Meghan Markle and Prince Harry met, she was dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello. David Jones unveils how their relationship gave her an entrée into high society.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

H is so visibly out of his element.  Clearly, the guy was looking to be led. 



V0N1B2 said:


> Engagement fakery:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The part that got cut:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"According to one well-placed source, it was Vitiello who initiated the break-up because he grew tired of Meghan's increasingly 'prima donna-like' behaviour.

When they went out to dinner or travelled together, says the insider, she would drive her unpretentious boyfriend to distraction by using her name to win better service. Matters are rumoured to have come to a head, somewhat farcically, when she and Cory had friends to dinner, and she passed off the recipe for the much-admired main dish of pasta with courgette spirals – one of her boyfriend's creations – as hers."

All the complaints about her go in one direction, don't they? Self-inflated drama queen with a thing for plagiarizing. I just don't get how apparently she made Cory's family adore her so much, I feel it would be hard work to hold up the image of "warm and caring and into children" for someone who is obviously not.


----------



## youngster

Someone, a few pages back linked that DM article on Sir Alan (Tommy) Lascelles and his private journals that are being re-published now. He worked for Edward VIII at two different times for several years.  Amazing stuff, he had enormous contempt for Edward and Wallis Simpson and a front row seat for so much of it: 








						Sir Alan 'Tommy' Lascelles' hatred of King Edward VIII
					

SIR ALAN LASCELLES:  For some years after I joined his staff in 1920, I had a great affection and admiration for the Prince of Wales.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




It's hard not to compare JCMH and MM to Edward and Wallis. Some of the parallels are extraordinary.  The UK was fortunate that Edward abdicated, what a horrible war time leader he would have been, and is fortunate now that William is the heir.


----------



## scarlet555

V0N1B2 said:


> Engagement fakery:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The part that got cut:




I never watched their interview, but all the fake stuff they embellished is pretty sad and her always in acting mode is nails on chalk cringe.  Such a charlatan that Meghan, she doesn’t know when to stop, that will be her downfall and hoping their finding freedom book completely backfires on them as it’s been doing so far.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "According to one well-placed source, it *was Vitiello who initiated the break-u*p because he grew tired of Meghan's increasingly 'prima donna-like' behaviour.
> 
> When they went out to dinner or travelled together, says the insider, she would drive her unpretentious boyfriend to distraction by using her name to win better service. Matters are rumoured to have come to a head, somewhat farcically, when she and Cory had friends to dinner, and she passed off the recipe for the much-admired main dish of pasta with courgette spirals – one of her boyfriend's creations – as hers."
> 
> All the complaints about her go in one direction, don't they? Self-inflated drama queen with a thing for plagiarizing. I just don't get how apparently she made Cory's family adore her so much, I feel it would be hard work to hold up the image of "warm and caring and into children" for someone who is obviously not.



Smart guy then...


----------



## purseproblm

This book is such an epic self own. I wonder if scooby-doo just picked up the phone and Megan talked. No interviewing done then.


----------



## Lodpah

Someone did a comparison of the engagement interviews of PW and JCMH and their respective then brides to be. One was humble and did so much and the other spoke great and elaborate and things. Pride goes before the fall MM.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get how apparently she made Cory's family adore her so much, I feel it would be hard work to hold up the image of "warm and caring and into children" for someone who is obviously not.


----------



## 1LV

marietouchet said:


> Remember how the Morton book about Diana came about - they never met but she made tapes for him , passed on via intermediary
> There are lots of modern tech  ways to do that without cassettes , digital info can be passed on adinfinitum


Or MM could be lying about not collaborating one on one with him.  It’s not like integrity is her strong suit.


----------



## youngster

Lodpah said:


> Someone did a comparison of the engagement interviews of PW and JCMH and their respective then brides to be. One was humble and did so much and the other spoke great and elaborate and things. Pride goes before the fall MM.




This was really interesting, I probably saw this years ago but forgot. William is obviously very comfortable being interviewed, Kate less so, it's all new to her. At about the 13:35 mark, William speaks about how they dated so long because he wanted to give both Kate and her family the time to see what it was really like, being part of his family, and what that would involve. He comes right out and says he learned lessons from the past and didn't want to repeat mistakes others have made.


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> Camilla Long in The Sunday Times (London) today commenting on hypocrisy, "Meghanese", Sussex victimology and so on ...
> 
> *All aboard the Freedom bus, cries Meghan as her friends are crushed under the wheels*
> Camilla Long
> 
> Sunday August 02 2020, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times
> 
> "You will by now have hopefully recovered from Prince Harry and Meghan’s latest round of tiara-twanking and courtier-yanking. In Finding Freedom we were treated to a devastating string of teeny tiny regal microaggressions including the humiliating non-moment the Duchess of Cambridge didn’t give the Duchess of Sussex a lift to the shops in her Range Rover. We also learnt that Prince William had not always been one hundred per cent complimentary about La Sussex. He’d once referred to her as “this girl” in a private (he thought) conversation with the dedicated privacy crusader Prince Harry, who promptly leaked it. It was astonishingly petty stuff.
> 
> In return for this perceived disloyalty and “snobbishness”, Harry and Meghan now appear to have unloaded ten tons of emotional violence on William and his circle. It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against? And if you thought it was bad being the couple’s relatives, you should see what it’s like being their friends.
> 
> Meghan seems to expect such blind loyalty that friends routinely feel obliged to telephone newspapers and give anonymous quotes about her “calm” and “penmanship”. In some cases, the duchess knows they’re calling. In others, she claims she doesn’t. In February 2019, for example, five friends secretly telephoned People magazine to gush about “how much Meghan loves her animals”. Meghan says she didn’t know about the interviews but I can’t help wondering who else would have come up with the phrases “she makes everywhere she goes feel like a holiday” and “she personifies elegance, grace, philanthropy”? It’s pure Meghanese.
> 
> One of the friends even cleverly thought to mention that Meghan had selflessly written a letter to her father to mend their broken relationship. This letter is now the subject of a court case the duchess is waging against The Mail on Sunday. The duchess says the paper shouldn’t have printed a private note. The paper says the letter wasn’t really private because it had already popped up in People magazine. If the Mail can prove Meghan sanctioned the letter stuff by cross-examining the five friends in open court, her privacy case collapses. A lot’s riding on these friends.
> 
> At this point, as one of Meghan’s matcha-licking buddies, I might be vaguely asking whether friendship with Meghan has been all it’s cracked up to be. Having spent the past five years secretly, or otherwise, conducting a PR campaign for her by feeding stories about her bomb-ass roast chicken, I now risk being further thrown under the bus and unveiled just so that she can have her triumphal post-court, tear-choking, street-style moment à la Amber Heard. On Wednesday, in a fresh submission to the court, the duchess said unmasking these friends would be an “unacceptable price to pay” as they were private citizens and “young mothers”. But Kate’s a young mother, and Meghan hasn’t ever defended her. Far from it: she has apparently allowed a whole book to be published tearing her down. Why wouldn’t she screw over her mother friends if it suited?
> 
> She’s already thrown away far more than mere friends: her own family, his family, even their home over here. It’s devastating to think how far this humourless couple have fallen in their pursuit of what they call “happiness”. They’ve gone from hanging out with Jay-Z and Beyoncé to trying to persuade a judge that Meghan has some kind of psychic hold over her mates (who leaks positive stories without telling the subject first?). There are the sad video messages with the usual authoritarian language: just a few days ago a comatose Prince Harry issued one from some rapper’s brocaded toilet, reminding us of “what is right”. Whoever’s words he was reading, they didn’t feel like his. The script’s now all wrong.
> 
> Harry isn’t an eco-travel crusader any more than Meghan’s an anti-bullying campaigner or a feminist. Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.
> 
> Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims."







That was all so spot on!
Two things that echoed my thoughts:

_'It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against?'_
Exactly this. They haven't a clue just how hypocritical they are by whinging (and sometimes suing) every time anyone criticizes or talks negatively about them, but it's perfectly fine for this book to be released that basically talks sh*t and blames everyone they've ever come in contact with for any inconvenience that has ever happened to them even when they are to blame for pretty much all of it.

_'Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. *It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.*
Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims.'_
Well... all of this, especially the bolded.

Meanwhile M is thinking more like...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

csshopper said:


> Re: Me-again’s “friend”  Markus Anderson
> 
> Looking at the body language, smouldering expressions in MM/Markus photos, Diana’s famous proclamation “Well, there were 3 of us in this marriage so it was a bit crowded” popped into my head.
> 
> And his connection to Omid Scobie is fascinating.
> 
> Harry, Marcus, and Omid.....  Seems like JCMH might still be a gooseberry after all.



Read somewhere too that during Los Angeles lockdown, Markus is staying with H&M. Weirder and weirder. How does Harry even deal with all this?


----------



## csshopper

Grande Latte said:


> Read somewhere too that during Los Angeles lockdown, Markus is staying with H&M. Weirder and weirder. How does Harry even deal with all this?



Maybe he has no choice if he wants Meaghan? Harry is such a simple minded twit he may have been suckered into a "if you want me, Markus stays" after she'd gotten him to the altar. Sounds extreme but I wouldn't put anything past her.

MM has known Markus since 2011. One of the articles referenced earlier included a MM post on her Instagram to Markus:

"What would I do without you, my loving, supportive, and endlessly fun friend??" she once shared on Instagram.
"I know what... I would be bored, and life would be infinitely less interesting. I love you SO much. Happiest of days for you now and always. Love you."

There are different kinds of love, but I agree with CeeJay's comment earlier, Meaghan and Markus have a symbiotic relationship at the very least, he sounds a lot like her. And thinking about it, she disposes of people like used Kleenex, but she's kept him close, very close it seems for 9 years. That's significant.


----------



## Grande Latte

csshopper said:


> Maybe he has no choice if he wants Meaghan? Harry is such a simple minded twit he may have been suckered into a "if you want me, Markus stays" after she'd gotten him to the altar. Sounds extreme but I wouldn't put anything past her.
> 
> MM has known Markus since 2011. One of the articles referenced earlier included a MM post on her Instagram to Markus:
> 
> "What would I do without you, my loving, supportive, and endlessly fun friend??" she once shared on Instagram.
> "I know what... I would be bored, and life would be infinitely less interesting. I love you SO much. Happiest of days for you now and always. Love you."
> 
> There are different kinds of love, but I agree with CeeJay's comment earlier, Meaghan and Markus have a symbiotic relationship at the very least, he sounds a lot like her. And thinking about it, she disposes of people like used Kleenex, but she's kept him close, very close it seems for 9 years. That's significant.



Even just based on the posed photographs, Markus and Meghan have an insane amount of chemistry. That's just something H&M never had. Sources say he's bisexual, but one thing is for sure, they've been incredibly attracted to each other since 2011. 

Harry can cry in his own bedroom. He reminds me of Diana in a three-people marriage. I have so little respect for this royal now.


----------



## chowlover2

Lounorada said:


> I had to google who was the hairdresser for the wedding and I've never heard of him before.
> He isn't very good at hairdressing if he needed to practice that wedding hair-do, but what's even worse is he probably got paid a tonne of money to create that basic look. Must have been paid for with someone elses money...


Serge Normant was a big name hairdresser back in the '90's I believe. Remember when Julia Roberts won the Oscar for Rain Brockavich? About the time as he was the man responsible for her hair then and in her films afterwards. Then I honestly have ever hard about him again.


----------



## chowlover2

Did some digging, Serge Normant does Amal Clooney's hair in Los Angeles. He is based there. I remember when Meghan moved to London Amal contacted her and gave her info on hairstylists. That's how Amal & George were invited to the wedding.


----------



## Sol Ryan

chowlover2 said:


> Did some digging, Serge Normant does Amal Clooney's hair in Los Angeles. He is based there. I remember when Meghan moved to London Amal contacted her and gave her info on hairstylists. That's how Amal & George were invited to the wedding.


LOL Amal’s London Hairstylist is apparently only good enough for everyday looks? I really don’t ever want to hear JCMH say anything Eco related again...

We poor people need to change our once in a lifetime chances to go somewhere cool on vacation so JCMH and MM can fly their hairstylist around, drive their Escalade and fly on Private Planes, which we’ll never get the opportunity to do in our lives. Seriously, sometimes he goes beyond amusing me to legit disgusting me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4808086


Yeah, but his mother sounds like a nutjob the way she's raving about her. Over the top even for a person everyone else would find great, even more so if you realize it's MM she's talking about.


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> That was all so spot on!
> Two things that echoed my thoughts:
> 
> _'It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against?'_
> Exactly this. They haven't a clue just how hypocritical they are by whinging (and sometimes suing) every time anyone criticizes or talks negatively about them, but it's perfectly fine for this book to be released that basically talks sh*t and blames everyone they've ever come in contact with for any inconvenience that has ever happened to them even when they are to blame for pretty much all of it.
> 
> _'Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. *It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.*
> Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims.'_
> Well... all of this, especially the bolded.
> 
> Meanwhile M is thinking more like...
> View attachment 4808120



I agree about the feeding the gossipy woman v woman angle, and don't you think it's also weird to use 'young mothers' in that way?

IMO, it's kind of _anti_-feminist to single out a) women b) young women (or women with young children - she didn't specify) and C. mothers, as some kind of unique group of imbecilic creatures that couldn't take care of themselves (let alone kids) when asked questions or be trusted to speak the truth under oath.

Utter nonsense.

Kind of the 21C equivalent of 19C men talking about protecting genteel young ladies that shouldn't be educated in maths and the sciences past a certain level because their heads would explode with too much knowledge.


----------



## beautymagpie

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4808086



I know people who have been able to fool others for a big chunk of time. Eventually they work it out, or they get Markled and find out with burnt fingers. My mum has a MM personality. She fooled my dad's parents and my ex-step dad's parents for a long time. When the latter worked her out, she'd already set a fire around his relationship with them and an almighty fallout happened. I don't know how, she paints herself in a particular light (woe is me) for a long time, they buy the act and when they start to see glimmers of the real person, the fire's already started. I expect the same with MM. It's often easier to see from the outside, or if you're used to a pattern of behaviour you spot the cycle. 

In my experience, generally, people buy what someone tells them - they don't expect someone to lie their ass off. Unless you're the BRF, in which case you're more on red alert for grifters.


----------



## beautymagpie

Grande Latte said:


> Even just based on the posed photographs, Markus and Meghan have an insane amount of chemistry. That's just something H&M never had. Sources say he's bisexual, but one thing is for sure, they've been incredibly attracted to each other since 2011.
> 
> Harry can cry in his own bedroom. He reminds me of Diana in a three-people marriage. I have so little respect for this royal now.



Markus has undoubtedly been useful for M and he's probably of more use to her in the circle than out of it, but her ego is so out of control I wonder if she'll blame him for the Omid book not doing what she wanted (painting her in a particular way and paraphrasing Omid's words 'putting the spotlight back on their causes') and Markle him?


----------



## papertiger

beautymagpie said:


> I know people who have been able to fool others for a big chunk of time. Eventually they work it out, or they get Markled and find out with burnt fingers. My mum has a MM personality. She fooled my dad's parents and my ex-step dad's parents for a long time. When the latter worked her out, she'd already set a fire around his relationship with them and an almighty fallout happened. I don't know how, she paints herself in a particular light (woe is me) for a long time, they buy the act and when they start to see glimmers of the real person, the fire's already started. I expect the same with MM. It's often easier to see from the outside, or if you're used to a pattern of behaviour you spot the cycle.
> 
> *In my experience, generally, people buy what someone tells them - they don't expect someone to lie their ass off.* Unless you're the BRF, in which case you're more on red alert for grifters.



I read somewhere that this because adults expect people who look like adults (i.e. adults) to act like adults.

So, for example, when an adult sees a young child in distress, it _maybe_ because something awful has happed _or_ it may be because he/she has not been allowed peanut and jelly sandwiches for dinner - for the third evening running. The adult knows to enquire further for greater clarity as to the actual situation.

However, when an adult sees another adult in distress, most will assume it's_ not_ just because he/she has not been allowed peanut and jelly sandwiches for dinner every night. 

That's based on a presumption that during the process of growing-up adults would have figured out the difference between a traumatic event and not being able to always have what one wants all the time.

This is the challenge when meeting narcissists later in life. If you've been brought up with/by them you may realise the warning signs at an earlier stage of the relationship. Everything _some_ people say is better met in an ultra-measured and objective way so as to not become a victim to manipulative behaviour.

That is why in some ways, MM's and JCMH's parents/relatives are all so responsible. Those 30-40 year old adults have never _had_ to learn the difference between, say the fight for freedom of Nelson Mandela, imprisoned in a small concrete cell for 27 years for fighting against racial tyranny and injustice, and a millionaire Prince and his Princess, living a life of splendid grandeur all at others' expense, with the slightly less life-threatening inconvenience of not being able to access diamond tiaras whenever one's hairdresser pops into town.


----------



## bagshopr

youngster said:


> Someone, a few pages back linked that DM article on Sir Alan (Tommy) Lascelles and his private journals that are being re-published now. He worked for Edward VIII at two different times for several years.  Amazing stuff, he had enormous contempt for Edward and Wallis Simpson and a front row seat for so much of it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sir Alan 'Tommy' Lascelles' hatred of King Edward VIII
> 
> 
> SIR ALAN LASCELLES:  For some years after I joined his staff in 1920, I had a great affection and admiration for the Prince of Wales.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's hard not to compare JCMH and MM to Edward and Wallis. Some of the parallels are extraordinary.  The UK was fortunate that Edward abdicated, what a horrible war time leader he would have been, and is fortunate now that William is the heir.


Thank you for this link, the article is incredibly interesting.


----------



## csshopper

HURRAY!  Markle got markled!

According to an article in the DM today, The Official BRF web site was edited and updated with chunks of her bio deleted and info about leaving as a Senior Royal and moving to LA inserted:

The Royal Family's official website have deleted large chunks of The Duchess of Sussex's biography, The Sun reports.

The page's bio, which details senior members of the royal family's background and duties, no longer contains large parts of Meghan Markle's history - including references to women's empowerment and her work  in a soup kitchen from the age of 13-17.

Meghan, 38, has no biography, and the second line of the 'About The Duchess of Sussex' section now references her move to America with Prince Harry, 35, stating: 'As announced in January, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior members of The Royal Family'.

The rest of the royal family, including the Duke of Sussex, still have a biography in place. The previously described details of Meghan's philanthropic activities have been moved to the 'Charitable Work' section of the royal's page.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but his mother sounds like a nutjob the way she's raving about her. Over the top even for a person everyone else would find great, even more so if you realize it's MM she's talking about.



Cory didn’t date Meghan very long, did he? It’s likely his mother only met her a few times at most. Meghan probably went into overdrive trying to present herself as sweet and wonderful to the family.

Either the mother is just a poor judge of character or she’s so relieved Meghan is out of her son’s life that she’s over generous with her praise.

ETA: Thinking from a mother’s perspective, maybe Cory has another ex or two in his past who were much worse than Meghan. She might look fantastic by comparison! If that’s the case I feel sorry for Cory.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> That was all so spot on!
> Two things that echoed my thoughts:
> 
> _'It’s funny, I thought, as I read the extracts from the 368-page blow-out: aren’t vicious public slaggings and “global bullying” something Meghan and Harry are supposed to be against?'_
> Exactly this. They haven't a clue just how hypocritical they are by whinging (and sometimes suing) every time anyone criticizes or talks negatively about them, but it's perfectly fine for this book to be released that basically talks sh*t and blames everyone they've ever come in contact with for any inconvenience that has ever happened to them even when they are to blame for pretty much all of it.
> 
> _'Using “young mothers” as bargaining chips in court is about as feminist as marrying your husband for status or being a princess. *It is about as feminist as allowing gossipy anecdotes that spark a public catfight with your sister-in-law to go unchecked because you v Kate is the *****y story that will generate the best headlines.*
> Lots of women use feminism merely for self-promotion: Meghan isn’t a feminist, never was. And yet nothing will stop this couple trying to prove they are victims.'_
> Well... all of this, especially the bolded.
> 
> Meanwhile M is thinking more like...
> View attachment 4808120


I think the characterization of them as humorless fits


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elle woods

csshopper said:


> HURRAY!  Markle got marked!
> 
> According to an article in the DM today, The Official BRF web site was edited and updated with chunks of her bio deleted and info about leaving as a Senior Royal and moving to LA inserted.


Ooh. Would you have the link? 

I would love to be a fly on the wall for the BRF PR team. I would imagine that normally the more senior royals would not be involved in minor updates and changes but who knows these days... Given that all the excerpts being spilled from the Scobie book are direct attacks at specific senior royals in most cases.


----------



## beautymagpie

Meghan Markle's 'pomp' comment about Kate years before joining royal family
					

Meghan Markle commented about Kate Middleton's royal wedding to Prince William years before she even dreamt of becoming a member of the royal family




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

elle woods said:


> Ooh. Would you have the link?
> 
> I would love to be a fly on the wall for the BRF PR team. I would imagine that normally the more senior royals would not be involved in minor updates and changes but who knows these days... Given that all the excerpts being spilled from the Scobie book are direct attacks at specific senior royals in most cases.



Ooh. Would you have the link?

I would love to be a fly on the wall for the BRF PR team. I would imagine that normally the more senior royals would not be involved in minor updates and changes but who knows these days... Given that all the excerpts being spilled from the Scobie book are direct attacks at specific senior royals in most cases.
[/QUOTE]
*Meghan Markle's 'proud to be feminist' biography statement is ...*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...oud-feminist-biography-statement-deleted.html - 269k - Cached - Similar pages 
6 hours ago *...* The *Royal* Family's official *website* have deleted large chunks of The Duchess of ... *Meghan Markle's* 'proud to be feminist' *biography* statement and ... a child are DELETED from the *Royal* Family's *website* - and *replaced* with ...


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Ooh. Would you have the link?
> 
> I would love to be a fly on the wall for the BRF PR team. I would imagine that normally the more senior royals would not be involved in minor updates and changes but who knows these days... Given that all the excerpts being spilled from the Scobie book are direct attacks at specific senior royals in most cases.


*Meghan Markle's 'proud to be feminist' biography statement is ...*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...oud-feminist-biography-statement-deleted.html - 269k - Cached - Similar pages
6 hours ago *...* The *Royal* Family's official *website* have deleted large chunks of The Duchess of ... *Meghan Markle's* 'proud to be feminist' *biography* statement and ... a child are DELETED from the *Royal* Family's *website* - and *replaced* with ...
[/QUOTE]
love it
If I see the pics of her in that awful green outfit one more time I may vomit


----------



## Chanbal

I still need to catch up with this thread, but here is an article that may have some interest. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will struggle to launch careers in LA because powerful studio bosses see them as 'red-carpet fodder, not as a bankable item,' royal biographer claims. *'It's taken a long time for the penny to drop, but Harry has discovered he is no king of the high seas but a castaway stranded on a desert island.' 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are seen as 'red-carpet fodder'
					

Speaking to The Express, royal biographer Christopher Wilson claimed that studio bosses see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as 'red-carpet fodder, not as a bankable item.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

more syrup from People magazine








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Black Lab's Name Is Finally Revealed — and It Has Special Meaning
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's black Labrador rescue dog's name is revealed to be Pula




					people.com


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> If I see the pics of her in that awful green outfit one more time I may vomit


Amen.
I still can't get over the cost  of that swathed in green fabric dress. 
£11,000, hat was extra.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I still need to catch up with this thread, but here is an article that may have some interest.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will struggle to launch careers in LA because powerful studio bosses see them as 'red-carpet fodder, not as a bankable item,' royal biographer claims. *'It's taken a long time for the penny to drop, but Harry has discovered he is no king of the high seas but a castaway stranded on a desert island.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are seen as 'red-carpet fodder'
> 
> 
> Speaking to The Express, royal biographer Christopher Wilson claimed that studio bosses see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as 'red-carpet fodder, not as a bankable item.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Anybody who has a brain and even a tiny understanding of business knows that. The only thing these two morons had going for them was the glamor and mystery of having a royal title in an era where there isn't much of that left in the world. AND THEY THREW IT AWAY!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Anybody who has a brain and even a tiny understanding of business knows that. The only thing these two morons had going for them was the glamor and mystery of having a royal title in an era where there isn't much of that left in the world. AND THEY THREW IT AWAY!


oh no....she's still a duchess


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh no....she's still a duchess



If she expects all of Hollywood's royalty to awkwardly curtsy to her at awards ceremonies, I hope she's waiting a long, LONG time. The only reason they might indulge her is so many people in the entertainment business are superficial and they bought into the "victimhood of Meghan" story they were told.


----------



## duna

bagshopr said:


> Thank you for this link, the article is incredibly interesting.



Yes, incredibly interesting..... and thank goodness he wasn't King of England for long!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sick in bed and bored, so I watched William's and Kate's engagement interview. What a stark difference. It's very obvious Kate is nervous and a bit scared, not an experienced speaker and her personality doesn't really shine, and she humbly ends the interview with "I hope I can make a difference in the smallest way".
> 
> Well, not even ten years later she has massively succeeded while the one with the overinflated ego who was fooling around on camera thinking she was being oh so charming and cute and who confidently talked a little too big has achieved nothing (at least nothing desirable...breaking up a family is not exactly what most people are aiming for) and is a hot mess.



Hope you’re feeling better!!



sdkitty said:


> oh no....she's still a duchess



Just ask her!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If she expects all of Hollywood's royalty to awkwardly curtsy to her at awards ceremonies, I hope she's waiting a long, LONG time. The only reason they might indulge her is so many people in the entertainment business are superficial and they bought into the "victimhood of Meghan" story they were told.


so far she's been able to use being biracial effectively.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. Not only was the infamous feminist letter a school project, one of the comments on the changed bio says that volunteering in a soup kitchen was mandatory for all students of Catholic high schools in LA:

"The soup kitchen work was a requirement for all students attending Catholic high schools in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. I did the same thing at my Catholic high school in the late eighties and early nineties."

Is there anything this woman won't twist and spin to somehow look way better than she is?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is there anything this woman won't twist and spin to somehow look way better than she is?



Just imagine how much more phoniness there must be about her that we'll never know about. Most of the people she's known in her life have not been interviewed by the media.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> Just imagine how much more phoniness there must be about her that we'll never know about. Most of the people she's known in her life have not been interviewed by the media.


There might be more former friends who wish to add to the record post Finding Freedom.
This caught my eye today. 









						Meghan Markle ‘strategically shut down marriage’
					

MEGHAN MARKLE's estranged best friend, Ninaki Priddy, shed light on the now-Duchess of Sussex's divorce to ex-husband Trevor Engelson, claiming she was "cold" and "calculated" in the "way she handles relationships".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Girl does indeed have a history to rival H’s. It’s really creepy how similar all 3 men look. Also, creepy how she befriended Cory’s family, especially his mother.  Would be interesting to see this prom dress that knocks off Liz’s dress — haaaaa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The hunky chef Meghan Markle nearly married
> 
> 
> Around three months before Meghan Markle and Prince Harry met, she was dating celebrity chef Cory Vitiello. David Jones unveils how their relationship gave her an entrée into high society.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Cory and his mother must be _thankin' the Lord_ right now that he (Cory) did not end up with MM!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> There might be more former friends who wish to add to the record post Finding Freedom.
> This caught my eye today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘strategically shut down marriage’
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's estranged best friend, Ninaki Priddy, shed light on the now-Duchess of Sussex's divorce to ex-husband Trevor Engelson, claiming she was "cold" and "calculated" in the "way she handles relationships".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



That former childhood friend has the most accurate description for Meghan: calculated.


----------



## CeeJay

beautymagpie said:


> Markus has undoubtedly been useful for M and he's probably of more use to her in the circle than out of it, but her ego is so out of control I wonder if she'll blame him for the Omid book not doing what she wanted (painting her in a particular way and paraphrasing Omid's words 'putting the spotlight back on their causes') and Markle him?


Mmmmmm .. if, in fact, Markus is similar to MM (let's face it .. he likely did a lot of the same things to people on his 'way up') then he would likely NOT take being "markled" very kindly and could just be the Monte Vesuvius that would spill all the Lava about the 'real' MM (after all - he probably knows all the dets)!!  Also, if he is living with H&M, he would also be able to spill all the details about the "marriage", about Archie, etc. - that could be catastrophic .. so, I'm not seeing MM doing that .. if anything, she would probably keep him over Harry!


----------



## bag-mania

Where did the rumor about Markus living with them come from? That is so completely absurd I cannot believe it but I wouldn't mind being proven wrong.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> If she expects all of Hollywood's royalty to awkwardly curtsy to her at awards ceremonies, I hope she's waiting a long, LONG time. The only reason they might indulge her is so many people in the entertainment business are superficial and they bought into the "victimhood of Meghan" story they were told.


I don't think that will happen a bit (_unless it's a 'wanna-be' actress on the Z-list_)!  Think about it, many of the A-listers didn't exactly have the easiest time breaking into Hollywood themselves; some of them are pretty tough cookies (_Angelina Jolie, Reese Witherspoon, Julia Roberts_) .. they are all known for being 'difficult', so in that respect .. they are similar to Meghan.  As such, given that Meghan (_currently_) has a title and (currently) all that money, what would *they EXPECT* from her???  Personally, I think the only players that would want to interact with these two are going to be those *desperately TRYING* to climb up that ladder .. and Meghan has already put it out there that she will ONLY accept A-list offers!  HA - good luck with that you two grifters-supreme!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope I don’t offend anyone with this question, but since the subject of her wedding day hair came up I am curious. 

Elizabeth Holmes had also criticized her hair that day, but then walked back from those comments and made huge apologies for them after reflecting and listening to feedback she concluded that the wispiness of the front was intentional and to criticize it was racist. 

Can any WoC on here chime in on that?


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope I don’t offend anyone with this question, but since the subject of her wedding day hair came up I am curious.
> 
> Elizabeth Holmes had also criticized her hair that day, but then walked back from those comments and made huge apologies for them after reflecting and listening to feedback she concluded that the wispiness of the front was intentional and to criticize it was racist.
> 
> Can any WoC on here chime in on that?


So this EH more recently thinks that the sloppy, droopy wedding hair was deliberate and to say something bad about it is racist? If so, this is a MAJOR bit of reaching here. And for the record, I am not a WOC.


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope I don’t offend anyone with this question, but since the subject of her wedding day hair came up I am curious.
> 
> Elizabeth Holmes had also criticized her hair that day, but then walked back from those comments and made huge apologies for them after reflecting and listening to feedback she concluded that the wispiness of the front was intentional and to criticize it was racist.
> 
> Can any WoC on here chime in on that?


How is an opinion on someone's hair racist? I've heard it all now!


----------



## papertiger

Emeline said:


> Amen.
> I still can't get over the cost  of that swathed in green fabric dress.
> £11,000, hat was extra.



I thought _I_ had expensive taste


----------



## marietouchet

Compare and contrast ...
MM guest edited vogue and singled out salma Hayek, Jane Fonda and strident greta thunberg et al as forces for change, and designed a capsule collection of pieces that seemed a bit expensive .. issue theme was forces for change
Pss Anne guest edited Country Life this month, I attached one page, sorry you will have to pay for the rest ... The photo accurately shows the flavor of the issue , country, horsy, organic farming
CL is not about fashion or society, but is kind of an Architectural Digest does farms magazine
she patronizes some 30 farm, horse related charities , see photo and of course raises horses
very casual attire , her portrait at the front was in a wide lapel tweed suit, must have come from the 1970s to have such wide lapels , but fashion recycling is her thing
just such an interesting juxtaposition to the issue curated by MM


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> more syrup from People magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Black Lab's Name Is Finally Revealed — and It Has Special Meaning
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's black Labrador rescue dog's name is revealed to be Pula
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Compare and contrast ...
> MM guest edited vogue and singled out salma Hayek, Jane Fonda and strident greta thunberg et al as forces for change, and designed a capsule collection of pieces that seemed a bit expensive .. issue theme was forces for change
> Pss Anne guest edited Country Life this month, I attached one page, sorry you will have to pay for the rest ... The photo accurately shows the flavor of the issue , country, horsy, organic farming
> CL is not about fashion or society, but is kind of an Architectural Digest does farms magazine
> she patronizes some 30 farm, horse related charities , see photo and of course raises horses
> very casual attire , her portrait at the front was in a wide lapel tweed suit, must have come from the 1970s to have such wide lapels , but fashion recycling is her thing
> just such an interesting juxtaposition to the issue curated by MM
> 
> View attachment 4808675


I have respect for Anne (what little I know of her)
But I can't agree with you about Greta....love that little girl


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> oh no....she's still a duchess



Credit where credit's due, JCMH is just as much to blame. 

He has as much spine as a goldfish - and unfortunately he is delusional too, he thinks he can live outside his royal goldfish bowl of water. All I see is a goldfish flapping hoping someone or something's going to rescue him.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Credit where credit's due, JCMH is just as much to blame.
> 
> He has as much spine as a goldfish - and unfortunately he is delusional too, he thinks he can live outside his royal goldfish bowl of water. All I see is a goldfish flapping hoping someone or something's going to rescue him.


right....I've lost most of my love for H.  But he was a born a prince.  That grifter he married loves her royal title which she neither inherited by birth nor earned nor deserves IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Emeline said:


> Amen.
> I still can't get over the cost  of that swathed in green fabric dress.
> £11,000, hat was extra.


Did that include the matching lining for Harry's jacket?


----------



## papertiger

threadbender said:


> Did that include the matching lining for Harry's jacket?



Not if they could help it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> more syrup from People magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Black Lab's Name Is Finally Revealed — and It Has Special Meaning
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's black Labrador rescue dog's name is revealed to be Pula
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Oh for crying out loud. She managed to turn the naming of a pet into a pretentious bit of schlock. Everything she does lowers the bar a little more.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh for crying out loud. She managed to turn the naming of a pet into a pretentious bit of schlock. Everything she does lowers the bar a little more.


and they're talking about her other beloved dogs - one of which I think she rehomed?


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> Credit where credit's due, JCMH is just as much to blame.
> 
> He has as much spine as a goldfish - and unfortunately he is delusional too, he thinks he can live outside his royal goldfish bowl of water. All I see is a goldfish flapping hoping someone or something's going to rescue him.



I honestly think he’s worse. I really don’t care about MM. She gets her titles through him. Without Harry, she’d be on the recently cancelled Suits, looking for a new gig. Probably trying to hook up with Ashley Cole still. He’s the cause of this mess and it’s on him to deal with it. Everything they do, is really just a reflection of him. Even if it was MM’s idea, he allows it and he should know better.

It’s like the filing of the suit against the John Doe in Cali. They used their Royal titles? Here? GTFO.... This is a the US... I’m pretty certain we fought a war to get away from the Royals...









						Ashley Cole’s brother dismisses claims ex-England ace chased Meghan
					

MEGHAN, Duchess of Sussex had been reported to have been chased by former England footballer Ashley Cole before she met her husband Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## PewPew

Emeline said:


> Amen.
> I still can't get over the cost  of that swathed in green fabric dress.
> £11,000, hat was extra.





papertiger said:


> I thought _I_ had expensive taste





threadbender said:


> Did that include the matching lining for Harry's jacket?



You’re forgetting the most prominent accessory for that ensemble— Meghan’s creepy, perma-smug smile throughout the day, including during a somber event. She was glowing like the cat who got the cream with Megxit


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: apologies, didn’t know there are 2 - it’s the one from HBazaar — https://www.byelizabethholmes.com/blog/2019/5/17/klz87e08kjsc2pirko7wre0lodvlgm

=====
Is this _the_ Elizabeth Holmes of Bad Blood, deep voice, and Steve Jobs turtleneck fame?
Did not know she voiced an MM opinion. Interesting.  TPF offers an excellent education 





lanasyogamama said:


> I hope I don’t offend anyone with this question, but since the subject of her wedding day hair came up I am curious.
> 
> Elizabeth Holmes had also criticized her hair that day, but then walked back from those comments and made huge apologies for them after reflecting and listening to feedback she concluded that the wispiness of the front was intentional and to criticize it was racist.
> 
> Can any WoC on here chime in on that?


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> I honestly think he’s worse. I really don’t care about MM. She gets her titles through him. Without Harry, she’d be on the recently cancelled Suits, looking for a new gig. Probably trying to hook up with Ashley Cole still. He’s the cause of this mess and it’s on him to deal with it. Everything they do, is really just a reflection of him. Even if it was MM’s idea, he allows it and he should know better.
> 
> It’s like the filing of the suit against the John Doe in Cali. They used their Royal titles? Here? GTFO.... This is a the US... I’m pretty certain we fought a war to get away from the Royals...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ashley Cole’s brother dismisses claims ex-England ace chased Meghan
> 
> 
> MEGHAN, Duchess of Sussex had been reported to have been chased by former England footballer Ashley Cole before she met her husband Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Without wishing to be exiled myself, ITA  

She's the average wannabe that struck lucky and is now just pushing her luck, _he should_ know better.


----------



## papertiger

PewPew said:


> You’re forgetting the most prominent accessory for that ensemble— Meghan’s creepy, perma-smug smile throughout the day, including during a somber event. She was glowing like the cat who got the cream with Megxit



I think she was acting her socks off actually. I have to commend on her projecting qualities. At the end of the day she has to live with dim bloke that is unemployable except as a letter head.


----------



## gracekelly

Emeline said:


> Amen.
> I still can't get over the cost  of that swathed in green fabric dress.
> £11,000, hat was extra.


I detested that dress and am sick of looking at it.  I hate all these styles with capes and flounces and load of fabric floating around.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> HURRAY!  Markle got markled!
> 
> According to an article in the DM today, The Official BRF web site was edited and updated with chunks of her bio deleted and info about leaving as a Senior Royal and moving to LA inserted:
> 
> The Royal Family's official website have deleted large chunks of The Duchess of Sussex's biography, The Sun reports.
> 
> The page's bio, which details senior members of the royal family's background and duties, no longer contains large parts of Meghan Markle's history - including references to women's empowerment and her work  in a soup kitchen from the age of 13-17.
> 
> Meghan, 38, has no biography, and the second line of the 'About The Duchess of Sussex' section now references her move to America with Prince Harry, 35, stating: 'As announced in January, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior members of The Royal Family'.
> 
> The rest of the royal family, including the Duke of Sussex, still have a biography in place. The previously described details of Meghan's philanthropic activities have been moved to the 'Charitable Work' section of the royal's page.


lol!  The Royals markled her!


----------



## csshopper

QUOTE="sdkitty, post: 33965242, member: 1486"]
and they're talking about her other beloved dogs - one of which I think she rehomed?
[/QUOTE]
Archie "is best friends with his dogs," a source previously told PEOPLE.

Read this and thought at least he has one friend since he's been banished by his narcissistic parents from any association with George,  Charlotte, Louis and Zara's two little fireballs, plus the Phillips' kids, and probably some day additional cousins from Beatrice and Eugenie .


----------



## gracekelly

Emeline said:


> There might be more former friends who wish to add to the record post Finding Freedom.
> This caught my eye today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘strategically shut down marriage’
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's estranged best friend, Ninaki Priddy, shed light on the now-Duchess of Sussex's divorce to ex-husband Trevor Engelson, claiming she was "cold" and "calculated" in the "way she handles relationships".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


All shade is going to come out because these people feel empowered.  They no longer are afraid of her.


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> I honestly think he’s worse. I really don’t care about MM. She gets her titles through him. Without Harry, she’d be on the recently cancelled Suits, looking for a new gig. Probably trying to hook up with Ashley Cole still. He’s the cause of this mess and it’s on him to deal with it. Everything they do, is really just a reflection of him. Even if it was MM’s idea, he allows it and he should know better.
> 
> It’s like the filing of the suit against the John Doe in Cali. They used their Royal titles? Here? GTFO.... This is a the US... *I’m pretty certain we fought a war to get away from the Royals...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ashley Cole’s brother dismisses claims ex-England ace chased Meghan
> 
> 
> MEGHAN, Duchess of Sussex had been reported to have been chased by former England footballer Ashley Cole before she met her husband Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


*THIS .. 100 TIMES!!!*  Look, I love my friends in the entire UK, but at that time, a revolution was needed.  It BUGS ME TO NO-END that she continues to use that title as well as Harry; in the US .. calling Harry "Prince Harry" is polite, but is NOT required!  I swear, if I see another article in either Town & Country or one of the other mags calling her "Duchess", I am going to write in an CALL THEM OUT (they likely won't print it .. and I would probably be shut down as a 'racist').  That's why, to me .. QEII and Prince Charles need to take those titles away, and need to stop funding them.  Sadly, I know that Harry is going to play the 'guilt' card on Prince Charles, but at some point, PC needs to grow a set too .. and say "hey - you guys wanted financial independence, here you go"!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I think she was acting her socks off actually. I have to commend on her projecting qualities. At the end of the day she has to live with dim bloke that is unemployable except as a letter head.


"letter head"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I detested that dress and am sick of looking at it.  I hate all these styles with capes and flounces and load of fabric floating around.


*100% agree* .. and what really does it for me, is that ill-fitting bra that she has worn too many times and .. even if the outfit is nice, that doggone bra just totally wrecks it!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *100% agree* .. and what really does it for me, is that ill-fitting bra that she has worn too many times and .. even if the outfit is nice, that doggone bra just totally wrecks it!


I think the rumor was that she was wearing a bullet proof vest under that.  What an act to beg Charles for protection.


----------



## Lodpah

Sounds like reality check is due for these two.








						'Penny's finally dropped for Prince Harry, can he and Meghan go on'
					

It's been the grimmest week of their lives together - and things only look like they're getting worse. But however baffled and hurt we may feel by Harry and Meghan Markle's defection to America, the couple still needs our sympathy.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Will this be the next lawsuit?  



gracekelly said:


> lol!  The Royals markled her!


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> If she expects all of Hollywood's royalty to awkwardly curtsy to her at awards ceremonies, I hope she's waiting a long, LONG time. The only reason they might indulge her is so many people in the entertainment business are superficial and they bought into the "victimhood of Meghan" story they were told.



She'll wait a _very_ long time as Americans do not curtsy to any royalty.  We fought a revolution to separate ourselves from them after all.  So, when the President and First Lady of either political party meets the Queen or Prince Charles or any other King or Queen, either here or abroad, they do not bow or curtsy ever.  Of course, individual people can do as they choose should they happen to run into JCMH or MM at Gelson's or Trader Joe's, but it's likely going to be few and far between.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and they're talking about her other beloved dogs - one of which I think she rehomed?



I hate it when bad pet owners act like they were being virtuous and pretend they did it for the pet's sake rather than their own convenience. Meghan was marrying a damn prince of England! She could easily have had Bogart safely transported to the UK along with Guy. She didn't want him, end of story.


----------



## Lounorada

csshopper said:


> HURRAY!  Markle got markled!
> 
> According to an article in the DM today, The Official BRF web site was edited and updated with chunks of her bio deleted and info about leaving as a Senior Royal and moving to LA inserted:
> 
> The Royal Family's official website have deleted large chunks of The Duchess of Sussex's biography, The Sun reports.
> 
> The page's bio, which details senior members of the royal family's background and duties, no longer contains large parts of Meghan Markle's history - including references to women's empowerment and her work  in a soup kitchen from the age of 13-17.
> 
> Meghan, 38, has no biography, and the second line of the 'About The Duchess of Sussex' section now references her move to America with Prince Harry, 35, stating: 'As announced in January, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior members of The Royal Family'.
> 
> The rest of the royal family, including the Duke of Sussex, still have a biography in place. The previously described details of Meghan's philanthropic activities have been moved to the 'Charitable Work' section of the royal's page.











Chanbal said:


> I still need to catch up with this thread, but here is an article that may have some interest.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will struggle to launch careers in LA because powerful studio bosses see them as 'red-carpet fodder, not as a bankable item,' royal biographer claims. *'It's taken a long time for the penny to drop, but Harry has discovered he is no king of the high seas but a castaway stranded on a desert island.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are seen as 'red-carpet fodder'
> 
> 
> Speaking to The Express, royal biographer Christopher Wilson claimed that studio bosses see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as 'red-carpet fodder, not as a bankable item.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk











Emeline said:


> Amen.
> *I still can't get over the cost  of that swathed in green fabric dress.
> £11,000,* hat was extra.







Say what now?! That pea pod dress/cape outfit cost £11,000?!!


----------



## Sol Ryan

CeeJay said:


> *THIS .. 100 TIMES!!!*  Look, I love my friends in the entire UK, but at that time, a revolution was needed.  It BUGS ME TO NO-END that she continues to use that title as well as Harry; in the US .. calling Harry "Prince Harry" is polite, but is NOT required!  I swear, if I see another article in either Town & Country or one of the other mags calling her "Duchess", I am going to write in an CALL THEM OUT (they likely won't print it .. and I would probably be shut down as a 'racist').  That's why, to me .. QEII and Prince Charles need to take those titles away, and need to stop funding them.  Sadly, I know that Harry is going to play the 'guilt' card on Prince Charles, but at some point, PC needs to grow a set too .. and say "hey - you guys wanted financial independence, here you go"!



I mean honestly, at the end of the day, I don’t care if magazines and the press do it. They’re in a business to sell clicks and paper and if that’s what does it fine. I'm not going to buy it. I have a real prob with that name\title showing up on legal documents in the US. I’m hoping it’s grounds for them to have the filing thrown out sinceI don’t think they are legal names here... I have to double check though... but to tell me you’re leaving the Royal Family and still be using the titles in such a manner is deeply off-putting. Are you JCMH or Prince Harry our apparent lord and savior to reign over us in the land that kicked your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather out?

I like the Royals, but in the Commonwealth. Here they need to be just Harry and Meghan and stop this nonsense.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I detested that dress and am sick of looking at it.  I hate all these styles with capes and flounces and load of fabric floating around.



Usually I would be soooo into that OTT glam look, plus I love capes. 

Don't know why it didn't work for me either, I think the shoes are probably a bit too 'straight'(?). Perhaps she didn't 'own it', I can imagine someone like Ditta v T or Bey shutting their stuff and 'owning it', I need to deconstruct and get back to you .


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> Say what now?! That pea pod dress/cape outfit cost £11,000?!!



You always crack me up!


----------



## marietouchet

PS Ps


marietouchet said:


> Compare and contrast ...
> MM guest edited vogue and singled out salma Hayek, Jane Fonda and strident greta thunberg et al as forces for change, and designed a capsule collection of pieces that seemed a bit expensive .. issue theme was forces for change
> Pss Anne guest edited Country Life this month, I attached one page, sorry you will have to pay for the rest ... The photo accurately shows the flavor of the issue , country, horsy, organic farming
> CL is not about fashion or society, but is kind of an Architectural Digest does farms magazine
> she patronizes some 30 farm, horse related charities , see photo and of course raises horses
> very casual attire , her portrait at the front was in a wide lapel tweed suit, must have come from the 1970s to have such wide lapels , but fashion recycling is her thing
> just such an interesting juxtaposition to the issue curated by MM
> 
> View attachment 4808675


Pss Anne also singled out some for recognition, all in the farming/horse business. No young people, they all had grey hair, so, an emphasis on experience.
Anne selected all from the UK


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I have respect for Anne (what little I know of her)
> But I can't agree with you about Greta....love that little girl


I said it awkwardly, did not intend to address her message , just her presentation (if you are used to the mellifluous diction of QEII, GT speech comes off as cacophony ...)
And interestingly, the 3 that I cited that were praised by MM - Greta, Salma & Jane - none of the 3 that I remembered is from the UK


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Usually I would be soooo into that OTT glam look, plus I love capes.
> 
> Don't know why it didn't work for me either, I think the shoes are probably a bit too 'straight'(?). Perhaps she didn't 'own it', I can imagine someone like Ditta v T or Bey shutting their stuff and 'owning it', I need to deconstruct and get back to you .


I think the problem is that the dress is wearing her and not the other way around.  She seems to like this  idea of extra fabric floating around her and has done it on several dresses and they all suffer from this problem.  She has a smallish frame and very thin legs so it doesn't work for her and she looks like she is carrying around a bolt of fabric.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I detested that dress and am sick of looking at it.  I hate all these styles with capes and flounces and load of fabric floating around.


The dress turned her green with envy.


----------



## justwatchin

gracekelly said:


> I think the rumor was that she was wearing a bullet proof vest under that.  What an act to beg Charles for protection.


What the heck? There is no end to their drama


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> She'll wait a _very_ long time as Americans do not curtsy to any royalty.  We fought a revolution to separate ourselves from them after all.  So, when the President and First Lady of either political party meets the Queen or Prince Charles or any other King or Queen, either here or abroad, they do not bow or curtsy ever.  Of course, individual people can do as they choose should they happen to run into JCMH or MM at Gelson's or Trader Joe's, but it's likely going to be few and far between.


I want to run into her at Gelson's and see if she will try to cut in front of me at the fish counter by claiming her rank lololololol!  The good news is that at the take-out counter they use number tickets


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> What the heck? There is no end to their drama


It was all part of the "they hate me and want to harm me act."  Plus the dress was clingy and it was so obvious.  She knew this too and did it on purpose.


----------



## bag-mania

Everything about them is unnecessarily confusing. They sue unknown paparazzi a week after the photos have been bought and used by a German publication. Was that because they didn't want photos released that show it's Doria caring for Archie and not one of his parents?

Even something as unimportant as their dog's name was kept secret for some stupid reason only Meghan knows. For over a year most publications have described their Lab as a male named Oz. Now suddenly it is a female named Pula? Is it the same dog or did some ill-fate befall Oz (Markled!) and another black lab was quickly brought in to take his place? Nothing surprises me anymore.


----------



## poopsie

youngster said:


> She'll wait a _very_ long time as Americans do not curtsy to any royalty.  We fought a revolution to separate ourselves from them after all.  So, when the President and First Lady of either political party meets the Queen or Prince Charles or any other King or Queen, either here or abroad, they do not bow or curtsy ever.  Of course, individual people can do as they choose should they happen to run into JCMH or MM at Gelson's or Trader Joe's, but it's likely going to be few and far between.


I'd be more likely to present them with a three fingered salute and fell them to read between the lines


----------



## Emeline

Wow.








						CAUGHT RED HANDED— MEGHAN MARKLE LEAKED STORY TO MEDIA
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been caught red-handed providing information to the media about them.




					okmagazine.com


----------



## marietouchet

Emeline said:


> Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CAUGHT RED HANDED— MEGHAN MARKLE LEAKED STORY TO MEDIA
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been caught red-handed providing information to the media about them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com


and I quote  MEGHAN MARKLE SET UP HER OWN PAPARAZZI SHOTS PRIOR TO ROMANCE WITH PRINCE HARRY AND ROYAL FAME

We bought a drone for grins, maybe H bought her one for Xmas ? and she just figured out how to fly it


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan made a bad move on suing the tabloids. She should have chosen her battles carefully as she is a public figure. These mags take their business seriously and MM is not the only “celebrity.” They will fight tooth and nail, dig up everything and anything, as whatever ruling the court makes might affect future reporting.

She really is not too bright or she’s going insaneon lockdown and had so much time to seethe that she’s going off the rails. Manipulative is too kind a word for her.


----------



## Chanbal

Emeline said:


> Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CAUGHT RED HANDED— MEGHAN MARKLE LEAKED STORY TO MEDIA
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been caught red-handed providing information to the media about them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com




"Fearful Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Report Multiple Drone Flybys to LAPD, Will Now Pay for Own Security." I thought they were already paying for it.

“Every time someone is quoted as a ‘friend’ of Harry or Meghan, post Royal life, make no mistake, that is their publicist.” They are a mess!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Everything about them is unnecessarily confusing. They sue unknown paparazzi a week after the photos have been bought and used by a German publication. Was that because they didn't want photos released that show it's Doria caring for Archie and not one of his parents?
> 
> Even something as unimportant as their dog's name was kept secret for some stupid reason only Meghan knows. For over a year most publications have described their Lab as a male named Oz. Now suddenly it is a female named Pula? Is it the same dog or did some ill-fate befall Oz (Markled!) and another black lab was quickly brought in to take his place? Nothing surprises me anymore.


I think the dog should sue over that name.  It's awful.  Can you imagine being out for a walk and calling the dog back to you Pula, oh Pula!  It sounds like an expletive in a foreign language.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> "Fearful Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Report Multiple Drone Flybys to LAPD, Will Now Pay for Own Security." I thought they were already paying for it.
> 
> “Every time someone is quoted as a ‘friend’ of Harry or Meghan, post Royal life, make no mistake, that is their publicist.” They are a mess!


The only thing these two clowns are fearful of is not being noticed.  They probably paid for the drone fly overs so they could call the cops.


----------



## Tootsie17

Emeline said:


> Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CAUGHT RED HANDED— MEGHAN MARKLE LEAKED STORY TO MEDIA
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been caught red-handed providing information to the media about them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com


  We all knew she was behind it the whole time!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I think the dog should sue over that name.  It's awful.  Can you imagine being out for a walk and calling the dog back to you Pula, oh Pula!  It sounds like an expletive in a foreign language.


Reminds me of Puka shell necklaces from the 1970s


----------



## CarryOn2020

We don’t bow to royalty over here, but we do bow to 2020.  She did not come to play.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the jolly green dress with off-center cape (why o why?) and matching suit lining

when will she wear that ensemble again?  They bought that stuff knowing they were leaving and would not need fancy dress.
Another waste of so much money.
It is definitely time for payback...on all sides!

No MM or A on Succession page — https://www.royal.uk/succession


----------



## PewPew

papertiger said:


> Usually I would be soooo into that OTT glam look, plus I love capes.
> 
> Don't know why it didn't work for me either, I think the shoes are probably a bit too 'straight'(?). Perhaps she didn't 'own it', I can imagine someone like Ditta v T or Bey shutting their stuff and 'owning it', I need to deconstruct and get back to you .





gracekelly said:


> I think the problem is that the dress is wearing her and not the other way around.  She seems to like this  idea of extra fabric floating around her and has done it on several dresses and they all suffer from this problem.  She has a smallish frame and very thin legs so it doesn't work for her and she looks like she is carrying around a bolt of fabric.



I agree about the proportions. I showed the dress to my cape-loving aunt (who doesn’t know who MM is) & she asked why someone would deliberately try to look like a frog?!  The hat didn’t do her any favors by contributing to this effect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

gracekelly said:


> The only thing these two clowns are fearful of is not being noticed.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the jolly green dress with off-center cape (why o why?) and matching suit lining
> 
> when will she wear that ensemble again?  They bought that stuff knowing they were leaving and would not need fancy dress.
> Another waste of so much money.
> It is definitely time for payback...on all sides!
> 
> No MM or A on Succession page — https://www.royal.uk/succession


They keep calling themselves philanthropists and humanitarians, and the only thing they do is wasting money on themselves... The transport minister was spot-on, 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'. 

Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is #7 on the succession page.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies about missing the A on the Succession. For some reason, my eyes glossed over the Master ... 

Has something happened? No HRH for MM? 








						Meghan Markle's royal biography STRIPS her of her HRH title
					

The page's bio, which details senior members of the royal family's background and duties, now refers to Meghan Markle, 38, as 'she' or the 'Duchess', instead of 'Her Royal Highness'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

If you go to the website and look at all the bios, I don't see HRH for any of them.









						The Royal Family
					






					www.royal.uk


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> oh no....she's still a duchess


Yes, and Luann is still a Countess.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> If you go to the website and look at all the bios, I don't see HRH for any of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk



Harry’s is still there. From Harry’s:

”In 2016, His Royal Highness underwent a public HIV test at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital to raise awareness and promote how easy it is to get tested, as part of his on-going efforts to eradicate stigmas associated with HIV/AIDS.”









						The Duke of Sussex
					

The Duke of Sussex is fifth in line to the throne and the younger son of The Prince of Wales and Diana, Princess of Wales. He spent ten years working in the Armed Forces, ending operational duties in 2015. During his service, he conducted two tours of duty to Afghanistan with the British Army...




					www.royal.uk


----------



## Annawakes

I feel like it must be exhausting to be MM.  On one hand she thirsts for and thrives on adulation.  On the other hand she is constantly looking for that slight, that “threat”, that criticism that she can latch onto and triumphantly show Harry, “See, they’re terrorizing me!  I’m a victim!  It’s so unfair!”

It seems to me that she needs equal amounts of both sides of the coin, to keep herself going. If she didn’t have any of the “bad”, her whole narrative falls apart.

ETA I think what I’m trying to say is, if and when the US media turns on her/them, it might even give her more ammunition to show Harry that she’s so victimized. I think, the best way to shut her down is just not to print anything about her, bad or good. Then she will likely just shrivel up and fade away, which is her worst nightmare.


----------



## purseinsanity

Grande Latte said:


> Read somewhere too that during Los Angeles lockdown, Markus is staying with H&M. Weirder and weirder. How does Harry even deal with all this?


Because Meghan tells him he must.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. Not only was the infamous feminist letter a school project, one of the comments on the changed bio says that volunteering in a soup kitchen was mandatory for all students of Catholic high schools in LA:
> 
> "The soup kitchen work was a requirement for all students attending Catholic high schools in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. I did the same thing at my Catholic high school in the late eighties and early nineties."
> 
> Is there anything this woman won't twist and spin to somehow look way better than she is?


LOL.  Community service is often a requirement of many Catholic schools, not just for students but for parents as well.  Both of my children have done many hours of service (as have I).  My son didn't even think to put it on his college applications, since it was not something he did on his own!


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> So this EH more recently thinks that the sloppy, droopy wedding hair was deliberate and to say something bad about it is racist? If so, this is a MAJOR bit of reaching here. And for the record, I am not a WOC.


I am a WoC and "wispy" is not usually a term I think of as racist.  I can think of a lot worse!  MM likes to play the racism card whenever convenient, just like she played white women whenever convenient.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I want to run into her at Gelson's and see if she will try to cut in front of me at the fish counter by claiming her rank lololololol!  The good news is that at the take-out counter they use number tickets


HA, HA, HA .. you and me both!!!!!  You know I would have some “commentary” on that event!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I feel like it must be exhausting to be MM.
> 
> ETA I think what I’m trying to say is, if and when the US media turns on her/them, it might even give her more ammunition to show Harry that she’s so victimized. I think, the best way to shut her down is just not to print anything about her, bad or good. Then she will likely just shrivel up and fade away, which is her worst nightmare.



It would be much more exhausting to be around Meghan. It must be incredibly stressful being with someone who is never satisfied and complains constantly.

The US media will never turn on her. She hasn’t done anything worse than the average Hollywood celebrity, certainly nothing worth slamming her. What they may eventually do will hurt her a lot more though and that is ignore her. If she hasn’t done anything of interest, even her PR firm will be hard-pressed to keep her in the news.


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> Harry’s is still there. From Harry’s:
> 
> ”In 2016, His Royal Highness underwent a public HIV test at Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital to raise awareness and promote how easy it is to get tested, as part of his on-going efforts to eradicate stigmas associated with HIV/AIDS.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is fifth in line to the throne and the younger son of The Prince of Wales and Diana, Princess of Wales. He spent ten years working in the Armed Forces, ending operational duties in 2015. During his service, he conducted two tours of duty to Afghanistan with the British Army...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk



That is so far down the page, I think they missed it.  I bet it gets removed.  Everyplace else he is referred to as The Duke.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We were told in February that they would keep the HRH titles, but not use them. Recall that Sarah and Diana lost theirs upon their divorce.  It seems that something has changed with MM, maybe, perhaps. Her bio is different and the title is omitted. Who knows? It all moves so fast that I can’t keep up.









						Harry and Meghan Will Keep Their Titles, But Not Actively Use Them
					

But they won't actively use their "Royal Highnesses" titles, "as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020."




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				





_What will Harry and Meghan be known as without their HRH titles?

The Queen's statement revealed that the couple will lose their HRH titles, meaning they can no longer be referred to as his or her royal highness because they are not working members of the royal family. However, the couple will maintain their Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, from the spring._








						Everything we know about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's future so far
					

From where the couple will live to how they will fund their new lifestyle




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

More clarification...from 2018.  I am confused. Is this a significant change or no?









						Meghan Markle’s Biography Undergoes Major Update On Royal Family’s Official Website
					

The depth of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's royal biographies are noticeably different




					www.elle.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today’s Sun:
_Meanwhile, Meghan Markle's biography on the Royal Family's official website has been shortened.
The Duchess was given several paragraphs on the site following her marriage to Prince Harry including about her time in Canada and USA.
The bio also saw lines on her being described as a 'proud feminist' removed, along with her volunteer work at soup kitchens in Los Angeles in her youth.









						Meghan and Harry: Duchess found Prince's text chat 'adorable' when they dated
					

KATE Middleton has been left “devastated” by the explosive new biography about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to royal experts.  The Duchess of Cambridge, 38, is said to…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_

My final word on this topic — the green dress is featured on all of these sites.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the jolly green dress with off-center cape (why o why?) and matching suit lining
> 
> when will she wear that ensemble again?  They bought that stuff knowing they were leaving and would not need fancy dress.
> Another waste of so much money.
> It is definitely time for payback...on all sides!
> 
> No MM or A on Succession page — https://www.royal.uk/succession



Master A is 7

I didn't even know B and Eu were in the running. Slightly strange they are in front of their uncle Edward. Someone explain that to me?

Andrew has gone though, skipped out the queue LOL (shut the door on your way out!)

It's a bloodline though, wives and husbands would _never_ be on it.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> If you go to the website and look at all the bios, I don't see HRH for any of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk



MM and JCMH shouldn't even be on that page at all, they no longer work for the Firm.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> They keep calling themselves philanthropists and humanitarians, and the only thing they do is wasting money on themselves... The transport minister was spot-on, '*A carnivore advocating vegetarianism*'.
> 
> Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is #7 on the succession page.



and he got that from me 

actually, I'm thinking of suing 

especially since he misquoted. I said V E G A N - outrageous,

actually, calling my lawyer (and publicist) now!!!!


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> MM and JCMH shouldn't even be on that page at all, they no longer work for the Firm.



Yeah... the two examples of royals that JCMH and MM like to use as examples of how they should be treated, aka Beatrice and Eugenie, aren’t there so they shouldn’t be either...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> No MM or A on Succession page — https://www.royal.uk/succession



Why would MM be on their anyway...she is 0th in line.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I didn't even know B and Eu were in the running. Slightly strange they are in front of their uncle Edward. Someone explain that to me?



The same reason Will's kids are in front of Harry. In Saudi Arabia, succession would move through all brothers before jumping to the next generation which is why they used to have a 70+ yo crown prince. In the UK if the higher ranking successor has kids they will follow in his footsteps before the next sibling of the heir gets their shot.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ah, remember the trying times when the stans suggested we were making up lies out of pure jealousy? And now the press and these two morons themselves keep confirming things that had been brought up here months ago.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The same reason Will's kids are in front of Harry. In Saudi Arabia, succession would move through all brothers before jumping to the next generation which is why they used to have a 70+ yo crown prince. In the UK if the higher ranking successor has kids they will follow in his footsteps before the next sibling of the heir gets their shot.



Of course - Andrew's kids are still there even though he isn't


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would MM be on their anyway...she is 0th in line.



Aaah, now I am beginning to understand my confusion, along with that of MM & her stans.  Succession follows only the blood line, not the married-ins. Kate will only be queen as long as W is alive, correct? I think but could be wrong, for most US marriages, succession (and inheritance?) passes from husband to wife to kids, unless otherwise specified. So, since H owns really nothing, upon his demise, MM doesn't receive anything that is not in her name, correct?   Surprising that she even agreed to the marriage.


----------



## doni

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aaah, now I am beginning to understand my confusion, along with that of MM & her stans.  Succession follows only the blood line, not the married-ins. Kate will only be queen as long as W is alive, correct? I think but could be wrong, for most US marriages, succession (and inheritance?) passes from husband to wife to kids, unless otherwise specified. So, since H owns really nothing, upon his demise, MM doesn't receive anything that is not in her name, correct?   Surprising that she even agreed to the marriage.


Succession in line has not to do with the laws of marriage. The crown, like titles, can only be inherited by blood line. If you are titled and don’t have direct descendants your title would go to siblings, cousins in the 4th grade or whatever, but never to those related by marriage. It is the whole point of an aristocratic system that you can trace blue blood through generations. But any money Harry has (he inherited for example from his mother, or what he earned at that Goldman‘s talk - I don’t know of any other income he’s had) would follow inheritance laws and could go to Meghan.

Kate will be Queen consort, and would stay Queen if William passes away after coronation. But then she would be Queen mother, i.e., her Queen title is only by reference to her relationship with the reigning King, be it her husband or her son. She would not be a Queen like Queen Elizabeth is a Queen.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aaah, now I am beginning to understand my confusion, along with that of MM & her stans.  Succession follows only the blood line, not the married-ins. Kate will only be queen as long as W is alive, correct? I think but could be wrong, for most US marriages, succession (and inheritance?) passes from husband to wife to kids, unless otherwise specified. So, since H owns really nothing, upon his demise, MM doesn't receive anything that is not in her name, correct?   Surprising that she even agreed to the marriage.


This is the succession of the throne, not just any inheritance order. Only blood line. Married spouse don't count.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aaah, now I am beginning to understand my confusion, along with that of MM & her stans.  Succession follows only the blood line, not the married-ins. Kate will only be queen as long as W is alive, correct? I think but could be wrong, for most US marriages, succession (and inheritance?) passes from husband to wife to kids, unless otherwise specified. So, since H owns really nothing, upon his demise, MM doesn't receive anything that is not in her name, correct?   Surprising that she even agreed to the marriage.



That's right, but upon her husband's death I think she would be Dowager Duchess of Sussex or Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Archie will inherit everything of Harry's held in trust and any land he may own, his wife will become the Duchess of S-ex, and his mother will live on his good will. -

This is of course assuming H&M don't lose their titles before (highly unlikely).

Not sure she'd keep any title if they divorced and H married again.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> Succession in line has not to do with the laws of marriage. The crown, like titles, can only be inherited by blood line. If you are titled and don’t have direct descendants your title would go to siblings, cousins in the 4th grade or whatever, but never to those related by marriage. It is the whole point of an aristocratic system that you can trace blue blood through generations. But any money Harry has (he inherited for example from his mother, or what he earned at that Goldman‘s talk - I don’t know of any other income he’s had) would follow inheritance laws and could go to Meghan.
> 
> Kate will be Queen consort, and would stay Queen if William passes away after coronation. But then she would be Queen mother, i.e., her Queen title is only by reference to her relationship with the reigning King, be it her husband or her son. She would not be a Queen like Queen Elizabeth is a Queen.



She'd be the Dowager Queen/Queen Dowager or the King's Mother - unless you know something we don't - rock on Queen Charlotte!

You know this conversation is considered treason BTW. If I disappear, it's because I've put put in the Tower with no WiFi


----------



## CarryOn2020

Once again, TPF experts have raised my level of awareness and knowledge.  Now, it makes sense that Philip wasnt given the King Consort (?) title — he would need to give it up when QE died.  The real power is only in the bloodline. 

Just some random thoughts: Is it correct that in terms of succession the titles are not as important as the birth order?  Someone could lose the HRH title and still remain in the line-up, correct?  In H’s situation, rather than call for a removal of title, there should be a call for him to remove himself from the line-up. Can QE or the govt remove him?  Apologies for all the questions, I will now go to google.  I am gaining a new perspective here. Thanks much.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

From the awful father and brother in law. 
Coincidentally, her great grandmother in law Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was born today 120 years ago.


----------



## doni

doni said:


> Succession in line has not to do with the laws of marriage. The crown like titles can only be inherited by blood line. If you are titled and don’t have direct descendants your title would go to siblings, cousins in the 4th grade or whatever, but never to those related by marriage. It is the whole point of an aristocratic system that you can trace blue blood through generations. But any money Harry has (he inherited for example from his mother, or what he earned at that Goldman‘s talk - I don’t know of any other income he’s had) would follow inheritance laws and could go to Meghan.





papertiger said:


> She'd be the Dowager Queen/Queen Dowager or the King's Mother - unless you know something we don't - rock on Queen Charlotte!
> 
> You know this conversation is considered treason BTW. If I disappear, it's because I've put put in the Tower with no WiFi


Really? I thought Queen Mother is the mother of the sovereign, whether that is a Queen or a King?
So the last Queen Mother was called like that because mother of a Queen?


----------



## doni

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once again, TPF experts have raised my level of awareness and knowledge.  Now, it makes sense that Philip wasnt given the King Consort (?) title — he would need to give it up when QE died.  The real power is only in the bloodline.
> 
> Just some random thoughts: Is it correct that in terms of succession the titles are not as important as the birth order?  Someone could lose the HRH title and still remain in the line-up, correct?  In H’s situation, rather than call for a removal of title, there should be a call for him to remove himself from the line-up. Can QE or the govt remove him?  Apologies for all the questions, I will now go to google.  I am gaining a new perspective here. Thanks much.


HRH is not a title, it is a treatment associated with position.

I don’t know in England, but I understand in Spain no one can remove a legitimate heir from the line of succession. It is well known that Felipe VI would like her sister to renounce her succession rights but she refuses.

I any event, I don’t see why Harry should be removed from the succession line. He is not involved in any scandal such as his uncle‘s to warrant that.


----------



## carmen56

I understood that the Queen Mother invented that title for herself when the current Queen ascended the throne.  



doni said:


> Really? I thought Queen Mother is the mother of the sovereign, whether that is a Queen or a King?
> So the last Queen Mother was called like that because mother of a Queen?


----------



## doni

doni said:


> Really? I thought Queen Mother would be the mother of the sovereign, whether that is a Queen or a King?
> So the last Queen Mother was called like that because mother of a Queen?





papertiger said:


> She'd be the Dowager Queen/Queen Dowager or the King's Mother - unless you know something we don't - rock on Queen Charlotte!
> 
> You know this conversation is considered treason BTW. If I disappear, it's because I've put put in the Tower with no WiFi





carmen56 said:


> I understood that the Queen Mother invented that title for herself when the current Queen ascended the throne.



I just read that Queen Mary was also called Queen Mother and she was the mother of Kings?
No pressure to reply @papertiger, we don’t want you arrested


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Of course - Andrew's kids are still there even though he isn't


He is on there, he's 8th in line


----------



## Sharont2305

Sorry to double post. 
Just noticed... 
Two brothers, two threads started within 3 days of one another, one has over 15k posts and the other has over 33k. 
Someone's kept us busy, lol


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> Usually I would be soooo into that OTT glam look, plus I love capes.
> 
> Don't know why it didn't work for me either, I think the shoes are probably a bit too 'straight'(?). Perhaps she didn't 'own it', I can imagine someone like Ditta v T or Bey shutting their stuff and 'owning it', I need to deconstruct and get back to you .


The peapod outfit made her neck disappear, like her head (with peapod hat) was just plopped down on her shoulders. 

There were very few outfits she wore that were ok for her body type. The peapod dress, while dreadful imo, would have rocked on a Naomi Campbell body type--tall and lean with legs that go on forever.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> It was all part of the "they hate me and want to harm me act."  Plus the dress was clingy and it was so obvious.  She knew this too and did it on purpose.


Her underwear was frequently showing through the outfits she wore though I think that was because the dress fitted really poorly. I do remember the vest story though, especially with that awful green number. For a second I thought "maybe that's why her outfits fit so badly".


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> If you go to the website and look at all the bios, I don't see HRH for any of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk


Agree no HRH on the bio graphics but in the text for the women who married into the family ie Duchess of Gloucester, Anne, Kate, Sophie & Camilla have an HRH in the text. Alexandra did not get a HRH, but she was born royal as is the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester - different case... 

I noticed the absence of the Duchess of Kent, but I think I can explain that.  As I remember she gave up her royal status to convert to Roman Catholicism but is still married to the Duke of Kent.

The term fill-time working member of the BRF is sued for Sophie and the Duchess of Gloucester, Alexandra is merely a working member of the BRF. I think I can explain that too - she mostly retired from public duties a few years ago due to ill health, so A is a part time member of the firm, not full time

WOW - Anne is listed after Edwards BUT before Andrew ! but he is stated to have stepped down... but A is still on the site Andrew and Edward normally rank above Anne.

Over all, I would say someone made a SERIOUS attempt to edit the site text for correctness. Someone worked hard at the bios of Andrew, H and M - to pick just the right words

BUT the BRF is complicated in a word everyone is a special case, as born out by my endless notes above.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> I am a WoC and "wispy" is not usually a term I think of as racist.  I can think of a lot worse!  MM likes to play the racism card whenever convenient, just like she played white women whenever convenient.


Very cool that you do not take offense .. it is so hard to find the correct words any more Thumbs up !


----------



## marietouchet

carmen56 said:


> I understood that the Queen Mother invented that title for herself when the current Queen ascended the throne.


Yes the Q Mum invented the term 
Queen Mother is a not a GENUINE title, but rather a nickname the Q Mum used since her daughter has the same first name and tghe correct bu dowdy term - Queen Dowager - was  already in use

Queen Mary grandmother of QEII was still alive when QEII came to the throne, and she had been the Queen Dowager during the reign of her sons - Edward VIII an George VI - father of QEII.

There are always these special cases in royalty requiring new nomenclature and procedures and the upper class in the UK is very sensitive to all the nuances that probably escape everyone else.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> That's right, but *upon her husband's death I think she would be Dowager Duchess of Sussex* or Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Archie will inherit everything of Harry's held in trust and any land he may own, his wife will become the Duchess of S-ex, and his mother will live on his good will. -
> 
> This is of course assuming H&M don't lose their titles before (highly unlikely).
> 
> Not sure she'd keep any title if they divorced and H married again.



Not that I wish any ill on Harry, but it's hilarious to imagine Meghan going ballistic the first time she was called a Dowager Duchess. She is still a young mother at almost 40 you know!


----------



## bag-mania

From happier times...


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I am a WoC and "wispy" is not usually a term I think of as racist.  I can think of a lot worse!  MM likes to play the racism card whenever convenient, just like she played white women whenever convenient.


not understanding where the wispy reference is coming from?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today’s Sun:
> _Meanwhile, Meghan Markle's biography on the Royal Family's official website has been shortened.
> The Duchess was given several paragraphs on the site following her marriage to Prince Harry including about her time in Canada and USA.
> The bio also saw lines on her being described as a 'proud feminist' removed, along with her volunteer work at soup kitchens in Los Angeles in her youth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Duchess found Prince's text chat 'adorable' when they dated
> 
> 
> KATE Middleton has been left “devastated” by the explosive new biography about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to royal experts.  The Duchess of Cambridge, 38, is said to…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> My final word on this topic — the green dress is featured on all of these sites.


so that awful green outfit is going to be the picture that represents her maybe for the rest of her life?  Ha
Wonder how she likes that?  Actually maybe she does if they used it on the book cover


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> From the awful father and brother in law.
> Coincidentally, her great grandmother in law Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was born today 120 years ago.



in-laws showing some class


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> in-laws showing some class


Yes they are, and it seems the BRF took pains to find flattering pictures of her. No scrunchy green outfit!
Taken in whole it makes MM look even more petty and vengeful in comparison, since these gracious people are the ones she has attacked.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Yes they are, and it seems the BRF took pains to find flattering pictures of her. No scrunchy green outfit!
> Taken in whole it makes MM look even more petty and vengeful in comparison, since these gracious people are the ones she has attacked.


ha
I'm going to assume their intentions were good.  but in a way, by being kind, they're making her look worse


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ha
> I'm going to assume their intentions were good.  but in a way, by being kind, they're making her look worse



They don't want to give Meghan's frail little feelings any reason to be hurt. It will be tomorrow's headline in _People_ if she feels the least bit slighted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And yet the stans go for Wills and Kate saying they don't have to pretend they care (they don't, they are just being polite) and that they should just have left her alone (can you imagine the cries over the new "snub", though?).

One extra delusional fan said the only royal in that whole family was Meghan because she was a descendant from 12 important tribes, what's that about?


----------



## bisousx

Meghan will tell them, in no uncertain terms, that a birthday wish is not enough.


----------



## Chanbal

The in laws were very generous with the pictures they chose to wish MM Happy Birthday, these are some of her best shots. She looks great. I wonder if they were tempted to choose the infamous green attire or some other pictures that are circulating in the net... Despite the less favorable comments about them in Finding Freedom, they showed class @sdkitty



Sharont2305 said:


> From the awful father and brother in law.
> Coincidentally, her great grandmother in law Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother was born today 120 years ago.






bag-mania said:


> From happier times...
> 
> View attachment 4809400


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> Meghan will tell them, in no uncertain terms, that a birthday wish is not enough.


But where there flowers involved?


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I am a WoC and "wispy" is not usually a term I think of as racist.  I can think of a lot worse!  MM likes to play the racism card whenever convenient, just like she played white women whenever convenient.


I'm glad we have at least a few WOC on this thread.  There is a thread about racism and this thread on Meghan & Harry was talked about there.  I guess they think we're a bunch of mean girls.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm glad we have at least a few WOC on this thread.  There is a thread about racism and this thread on Meghan & Harry was talked about there.  I guess they think we're a bunch of mean girls.



Are they saying there's no reason for anyone to dislike Meghan so it must be because of her race? I'm guessing it is members who don't actually follow her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Are they saying there's no reason for anyone to dislike Meghan so it must be because of her race? I'm guessing it is members who don't actually follow her.


it's under the Sheltering in Place forum.....I don't recall exactly but they thought we were unfair and mean.  One person said she used to post here but couldn't stand it anymore


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> it's under the Sheltering in Place forum.....I don't recall exactly but they thought we were unfair and mean.  One person said she used to post here but couldn't stand it anymore



Did she say she gets as upset when a white celebrity is being bashed? We have many of those threads. Only when we judge everyone by their actions instead of their skin color will things truly be equal. Doesn't that include only liking someone because of race as well as disliking?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The in laws were very generous with the pictures they chose to wish MM Happy Birthday, these are some of her best shots. She looks great. I wonder if they were tempted to choose the infamous green attire or some other pictures that are circulating in the net... Despite the less favorable comments about them in Finding Freedom, they showed class @sdkitty



Can you imagine if they had used a pic from the same outfit as the book cover?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So it was after all the Vladimir tiara? Oh my.

Vladimir tiara: Why was Meghan Markle denied tiara she had her 'heart set' on?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> The peapod outfit made her neck disappear, like her head (with peapod hat) was just plopped down on her shoulders.
> 
> There were very few outfits she wore that were ok for her body type. The peapod dress, while dreadful imo, would have rocked on a Naomi Campbell body type--tall and lean with legs that go on forever.



Although let's face it, La Campbell would look not only look good in a paper bag - she'd rock it!


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So it was after all the Vladimir tiara? Oh my.
> 
> Vladimir tiara: Why was Meghan Markle denied tiara she had her 'heart set' on?



Honestly, I really, really deserve it more than her, no JOKES.  I mean who does she think she is.


----------



## lanasyogamama

For anyone in Instagram, this lady kills me.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So it was after all the Vladimir tiara? Oh my.
> 
> Vladimir tiara: Why was Meghan Markle denied tiara she had her 'heart set' on?


Well then the Queen would have adored me.  I still stand by my first choice of Tiara that no one in the Royal family seems to want, the Strathmore Rose one!


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> For anyone in Instagram, this lady kills me.



That engagement video (real one) is so cringeworthy knowing what I do now about the grifters. Though I did cringe when it was first posted, it's even more icky now.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Can you imagine if they had used a pic from the same outfit as the book cover?!


Are you referring to the picture chosen by MM for the book cover? That would have sounded more like Ciao Bambina!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Did she say she gets as upset when a white celebrity is being bashed? We have many of those threads. Only when we judge everyone by their actions instead of their skin color will things truly be equal. Doesn't that include only liking someone because of race as well as disliking?


here's part of the conversation:





__





						The Atlantic: Fashion’s Racism and Classism Are Finally Out of Style
					

This has been a very interesting insight into the inner workings of TpF.  Some comments have enlightened me, some clearly reflect an agenda, some are just downright confusing — such is life, no?    Just to clarify where we are here:  Is it ok for a member to express a dislike of a celebrity’s...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> here's part of the conversation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Atlantic: Fashion’s Racism and Classism Are Finally Out of Style
> 
> 
> This has been a very interesting insight into the inner workings of TpF.  Some comments have enlightened me, some clearly reflect an agenda, some are just downright confusing — such is life, no?    Just to clarify where we are here:  Is it ok for a member to express a dislike of a celebrity’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com



Ah well, let's hope she never sees the horrible things I've said about Angelina Jolie. It would blow that argument out of the water.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> I just read that Queen Mary was also called Queen Mother and she was the mother of Kings?
> No pressure to reply @papertiger, we don’t want you arrested



Even though the title 'Queen Mother' existed before _this_ Queen's mother (the Queen Mother) none were actually referred to as Queen Mother until Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother used it. 

Queen Mary used Her Majesty Queen Mary. 

Queen Dowager was more common.


----------



## Christina48576

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope I don’t offend anyone with this question, but since the subject of her wedding day hair came up I am curious.
> 
> Elizabeth Holmes had also criticized her hair that day, but then walked back from those comments and made huge apologies for them after reflecting and listening to feedback she concluded that the wispiness of the front was intentional and to criticize it was racist.
> 
> Can any WoC on here chime in on that?



Microaggressions against women of color for their hair are well-documented and fairly prevalent.  I recommend the documentary "Good Hair."  Also some articles from Business Insider, NYT, The Guardian, Washington Post, and BBC.



sdkitty said:


> here's part of the conversation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Atlantic: Fashion’s Racism and Classism Are Finally Out of Style
> 
> 
> This has been a very interesting insight into the inner workings of TpF.  Some comments have enlightened me, some clearly reflect an agenda, some are just downright confusing — such is life, no?    Just to clarify where we are here:  Is it ok for a member to express a dislike of a celebrity’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com



I think it's a bit disingenuous to respond to those comments here when you've been posting in that thread too without saying anything. The framing of a black woman as manipulative, underhanded, overly demanding, blinding poor innocent white boy is racially coded language and part of a larger stereotype black women get boxed into. I don't think you have to like someone but just think more about the language you use and how these narratives get formed. Because this narrative is pretty toxic.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> From happier times...
> 
> View attachment 4809400


I believe this was the event where MM thought it appropriate to walk herself in front/before the Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I believe this was the event where MM thought it appropriate to walk herself in front/before the Queen.



She was doing the Queen a favor by distracting all of those photographers who were making a nuisance of themselves.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And yet the stans go for Wills and Kate saying they don't have to pretend they care (they don't, they are just being polite) and that they should just have left her alone (can you imagine the cries over the new "snub", though?).
> 
> One extra delusional fan said the only royal in that whole family was Meghan because she was a descendant from 12 important tribes, what's that about?



The 12 tribes of Israel 

One of the tribes were the descendants of the King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, the Falashas, Ethiopian Jews were said to be descended from their 'union'. 

They were/are a tiny part of the population of Ethiopia and heavily persecuted, now at only 1% exists.  

Bit of a long stretch claim to me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Christina48576 said:


> Microaggressions against women of color for their hair are well-documented and fairly prevalent.  I recommend the documentary "Good Hair."  Also some articles from Business Insider, NYT, The Guardian, Washington Post, and BBC.



But her hair was sloppy, not "too black" (e.g. Michelle O. - I think his name gets xxxed out if I try to type it out - having the what is considered "professional" sleek hair while Barack was in office, but sporting her natural curls now that they are retired). It looked like neither she nor her hairdresser put in any effort, and I would have found it rather thoughtless on Kate too (and just saying...I was not fond of Kate's signature eye liner she loved during her early days and didn't hold back ).

Just as I cannot fathom how someone who spent 1 million pounds on clothes in nine months couldn't spend a few more bucks to make her clothes actually fit and for underwear that wasn't too small and showing through her outfits.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The 12 tribes of Israel
> 
> One of the tribes were the descendants of the King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, the Falashas, Ethiopian Jews were said to be descended from their 'union'.
> 
> They were/are a tiny part of the population of Ethiopia and heavily persecuted, now at only 1% exists.
> 
> Bit of a long stretch claim to me



Doria is Ethiopian and Jewish? I am so confused right now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doria is Ethiopian and Jewish? I am so confused right now.



Pure fantasy


----------



## Christina48576

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But her hair was sloppy, not "too black" (e.g. Michelle O. - I think his name gets xxxed out if I try to type it out - having the what is considered "professional" sleek hair while Barack was in office, but sporting her natural curls now that they are retired). It looked like neither she nor her hairdresser put in any effort, and I would have found it rather thoughtless on Kate too (and just saying...I was not fond of Kate's signature eye liner she loved during her early days and didn't hold back ).
> 
> Just as I cannot fathom how someone who spent 1 million pounds on clothes in nine months couldn't spend a few more bucks to make her clothes actually fit and for underwear that wasn't too small and showing through her outfits.



Like I said, I don’t think you have to like her or think everything she does is great (because I don’t) but there it is a common racist trope that black women have to deal with that their hair is too messy or unprofessional.  I think its fine to say I didn’t like the tendrils falling around her face but describing it as sloppy or lazy or stating “sleek”=professional uses whiteness as the beauty standard to be upheld. Commenting on the texture of a black woman’s hair is specifically problematic


----------



## lanasyogamama

Christina48576 said:


> Like I said, I don’t think you have to like her or think everything she does is great (because I don’t) but there it is a common racist trope that black women have to deal with that their hair is too messy or unprofessional.  I think its fine to say I didn’t like the tendrils falling around her face but describing it as sloppy or lazy or stating “sleek”=professional uses whiteness as the beauty standard to be upheld. Commenting on the texture of a black woman’s hair is specifically problematic


Thanks, that helped me understand.


----------



## sdkitty

Christina48576 said:


> Microaggressions against women of color for their hair are well-documented and fairly prevalent.  I recommend the documentary "Good Hair."  Also some articles from Business Insider, NYT, The Guardian, Washington Post, and BBC.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's a bit disingenuous to respond to those comments here when you've been posting in that thread too without saying anything. The framing of a black woman as manipulative, underhanded, overly demanding, blinding poor innocent white boy is racially coded language and part of a larger stereotype black women get boxed into. I don't think you have to like someone but just think more about the language you use and how these narratives get formed. Because this narrative is pretty toxic.


what am I supposed to say.  I don't like her and it's not because of her race


----------



## Christina48576

sdkitty said:


> what am I supposed to say.  I don't like her and it's not because of her race



And like I said, that's fine but posting the comments from the race thread in here but not bringing up your concerns there is just a bit sly. There were very real concerns about the tone of this thread. I didn't say anyone didn't like her because of her race (although I'm sure plenty have that viewpoint) but the framing of her as essentially a siren, plays into a lot of racist stereotypes.


----------



## KellyObsessed

Meghan would have looked stunning in the Vladamir tiara.    She has the perfect skin tones for emeralds, and she looks amazing in greens, imo.


----------



## opensesame

I‘m starting to understand why she gets so much hate, and I suppose it doesn’t have much to o do with her race. We probably would have found the royal family trashy and unaccomplished if Meghan was Malia or Sasha and had parents like Barack and Michelle. In addition, I think anyone who married Diana’s son is going to get some bashing, especially in first few years of marriage.


----------



## sdkitty

Christina48576 said:


> And like I said, that's fine but posting the comments from the race thread in here but not bringing up your concerns there is just a bit sly. There were very real concerns about the tone of this thread. I didn't say anyone didn't like her because of her race (although I'm sure plenty have that viewpoint) but the framing of her as essentially a siren, plays into a lot of racist stereotypes.


ok
I don't recall whether I said anything about M in that thread or not
People on that thread were talking about this thread so why not vise versa?


----------



## papertiger

KellyObsessed said:


> Meghan would have looked stunning in the Vladamir tiara.    She has the perfect skin tones for emeralds, and she looks amazing in greens, imo.



She would have (I've said so before). 

It would suit me too. 

It just wasn't on the table for either of us.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Christina48576 said:


> Like I said, I don’t think you have to like her or think everything she does is great (because I don’t) but there it is a common racist trope that black women have to deal with that their hair is too messy or unprofessional.  I think its fine to say I didn’t like the tendrils falling around her face but describing it as sloppy or lazy or stating “sleek”=professional uses whiteness as the beauty standard to be upheld. Commenting on the texture of a black woman’s hair is specifically problematic



I thought all my " " made it clear I do not agree with the notion Michelle's natural hair somehow didn't fit her role. English is also not my first language, so please advise on which term would be better than sleek when decribing her straightened hair? 

I'll still stand by saying Meghan's do was sloppy because it wasn't tendrils around her face - that was her hair do for the evening reception -, but the pinned back hair falling out of place which should not have happened with wedding hair that reportedly cost thousands of bucks. Maybe not as much her fault as her stylist's.


----------



## chicinthecity777

opensesame said:


> I‘m starting to understand why she gets so much hate, and I suppose it doesn’t have much to o do with her race. We probably would have found the royal family trashy and unaccomplished if Meghan was Malia or Sasha and had parents like Barack and Michelle. In addition, I think anyone who married Diana’s son is going to get some bashing, especially in first few years of marriage.


Yes, Kate got bashed for years.


----------



## Lodpah

Those pics of MM and the Queen is so condescending of MM it clearly indicates the Queen was focused on something and MM with her acting skills was making it look like she was making her smile. The body language of the QE says it all.


----------



## Annawakes

Yes, and she’s looking directly into the camera again.


----------



## Christina48576

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought all my " " made it clear I do not agree with the notion Michelle's natural hair somehow didn't fit her role. English is also not my first language, so please advise on which term would be better than sleek when decribing her straightened hair?
> 
> I'll still stand by saying Meghan's do was sloppy because it wasn't tendrils around her face - that was her hair do for the evening reception -, but the pinned back hair falling out of place which should not have happened with wedding hair that reportedly cost thousands of bucks. Maybe not as much her fault as her stylist's.



Ok I think that's where there might be some differences because a lot of words that are considered inappropriate when referring to a woman of color's hair might not translate. I would generally say avoiding judgment on texture and being aware that hair is often used (especially in Western cultures) to police black women's bodies. (btw I didn't like the wedding look either because it caused her to have to push it back a lot)


----------



## Christina48576

sdkitty said:


> ok
> I don't recall whether I said anything about M in that thread or not
> People on that thread were talking about this thread so why not vise versa?



It comes across as defensive, rather than being productive. That thread was talking about problems on the forum and categorizing it as "unfair and mean" misrepresents, oversimplifies, and dismisses the problems women of color have raised when it comes to this thread. I would hope everyone could take a moment to reflect rather than immediately want to make sure everyone knows they aren't racist. I don't think it's about whether people don't like Meghan because she's black but maybe the overwhelming media narrative about her could be tinged by racism and misogyny in ways we haven't learned how to spot. I know I'm still learning how to do this on a daily basis!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Christina48576 said:


> Ok I think that's where there might be some differences because a lot of words that are considered inappropriate when referring to a woman of color's hair might not translate. I would generally say avoiding judgment on texture and being aware that hair is often used (especially in Western cultures) to police black women's bodies. (btw I didn't like the wedding look either because it caused her to have to push it back a lot)


I certainly can agree on that and appreciate you made me think outside of the box!


----------



## BlueCherry




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Christina48576 said:


> I don't think it's about whether people don't like Meghan because she's black but maybe the overwhelming media narrative about her could be tinged by racism and misogyny in ways we haven't learned how to spot. I know I'm still learning how to do this on a daily basis!



I feel people - myself included - are quick to go with a possibly unfair narrative because she's just such an unlikeable person. Like you don't even have to read the gossip rags, just listen to the nonsense she says - especially in combination with what she actually does - or read what she puts out through her own outlets, throw in some uncut footage of her cutting in front of Harry, pushing him out of the way, ellbowing his ribs (!!!) to reach an important person first, pulling his sleeve or the back of his jacket to get his attention or to order him to sit and you'll have material for days.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once again, TPF experts have raised my level of awareness and knowledge.  Now, it makes sense that Philip wasnt given the King Consort (?) title — he would need to give it up when QE died.  The real power is only in the bloodline.



Off topic, but Denmark's Queen Margrethe was married for about 50 years to her husband, Henrik, until his death in 2018.  Throughout his marriage to Margrethe, Prince Henrik made it very clear that he was outraged that he was only "Prince Consort" and not "King Consort", and that there was no way to differentiate between him and his two sons with Margrethe (the oldest of whom is crown prince and Margrethe's successor).  He found this insulting and intolerable and spoke of it publicly.  (Such a first world problem for Prince Henrik!)  Didn't matter how many times it was likely explained to him that the Danish were not going to name him King Consort, not ever, and to get over it.  Margrethe always seemed to handle it in stride though, they stayed married, though seemed to live rather separate lives towards the end.  He also announced that he didn't want to be buried next to Margrethe over the whole "King Consort" issue, which had to have been very hurtful for her. He seems though to have been suffering from dementia towards the end of his life.


----------



## papertiger

Christina48576 said:


> It comes across as defensive, rather than being productive. That thread was talking about problems on the forum and categorizing it as "unfair and mean" misrepresents, oversimplifies, and dismisses the problems women of color have raised when it comes to this thread. I would hope everyone could take a moment to reflect rather than immediately want to make sure everyone knows they aren't racist. I don't think it's about whether people don't like Meghan because she's black but maybe the overwhelming media narrative about her could be tinged by racism and misogyny in ways we haven't learned how to spot. I know I'm still learning how to do this on a daily basis!



Absolutely.

On the other hand _that_ thread was initially about class (in Fashion) too. In the UK, it's very hard to criticise the Royal Family, even about Dukes and Duchesses (unless you're into commenting on the Daily Fail) so this thread_ is_ like 'Finding Freedom' for some of us.

Britain doesn't have a constitution, we are subjects of Her Majesty. We don't have a national anthem either really, rather it's an ode to our monarch. We all sing Her praises and say how much we love Her to reign _over _us.

Whilst the Queen has earned our respect and admiration over 60 years on the 'job', it's actually quite galling that her upstart of grandson thinks the World owes him and a woman we've only 'just met', not only a living, but for all of us to be in perpetual sense of awe of their glorified awsomeness. They are self-crowned, delusional, deified, holler-than-thou (I can do word-salad too) plastic idols.

I'm sorry that Harry lost his mother at a young age but it's time for him to get professional help and grow-up. I'm sorry that Meghan kissed a Prince and he turned into a frog, but that's what you get for flirting with every guy you meet as a meal ticket and not doing your homework.

Is it sexist to suppose that M wanted to marry a Prince for status? Had I not cheered her for her optimism at the announcement of their engagement maybe. It's only after the wedding that I felt I'd been duped by the both of them.

It's nice to have a place to call them out on their sh*t. It's liberating  to be able to point out the utter hypocrisy and incompetence of 2 people that were privileged beyond most of our wildest dreams,_ both_ gave themselves airs and graces above all others, even their own families. If we have to stand up and sing the Gd save the Queen, then they should be made to too - or suffer a thread on tPF.


----------



## Christina48576

papertiger said:


> It's nice to have a place to call them out on their sh*t. It's liberating  to be able to point out the utter hypocrisy and incompetence of 2 people, that were privileged beyond most of our wildest dreams,_ both_ gave themselves airs and graces above all others, even their own families. If we have to stand up and sing the Gd save the Queen, then they should be made to too - or suffer a thread on tPF.



That's really interesting to hear! Especially because I, personally as an American, often have a hard time wrapping my mind around the concept of a monarchy. Living it must be very strange!


----------



## youngster

KellyObsessed said:


> Meghan would have looked stunning in the Vladamir tiara.    She has the perfect skin tones for emeralds, and she looks amazing in greens, imo.



The Vladimir tiara is amazing, but I think the one MM wore was a much better choice for her simple, streamlined wedding gown.  I think the Vladimir would have looked odd with that particular gown, especially with her hair coming loose and falling around her face.  It's a breathtaking piece of course and one of QEII's favorites so no surprise that she doesn't lend it out.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> The 12 tribes of Israel
> 
> One of the tribes were the descendants of the King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, the Falashas, Ethiopian Jews were said to be descended from their 'union'.
> 
> They were/are a tiny part of the population of Ethiopia and heavily persecuted, now at only 1% exists.
> 
> Bit of a long stretch claim to me


MM has Jewish blood??


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Off topic, but Denmark's Queen Margrethe was married for about 50 years to her husband, Henrik, until his death in 2018.  Throughout his marriage to Margrethe, Prince Henrik made it very clear that he was outraged that he was only "Prince Consort" and not "King Consort", and that there was no way to differentiate between him and his two sons with Margrethe (the oldest of whom is crown prince and Margrethe's successor).  He found this insulting and intolerable and spoke of it publicly.  (Such a first world problem for Prince Henrik!)  Didn't matter how many times it was likely explained to him that the Danish were not going to name him King Consort, not ever, and to get over it.  Margrethe always seemed to handle it in stride though, they stayed married, though seemed to live rather separate lives towards the end.  He also announced that he didn't want to be buried next to Margrethe over the whole "King Consort" issue, which had to have been very hurtful for her. He seems though to have been suffering from dementia towards the end of his life.


Hopefully it was dementia, because otherwise he sounded like an a$$.


----------



## sdkitty

Christina48576 said:


> It comes across as defensive, rather than being productive. That thread was talking about problems on the forum and categorizing it as "unfair and mean" misrepresents, oversimplifies, and dismisses the problems women of color have raised when it comes to this thread. I would hope everyone could take a moment to reflect rather than immediately want to make sure everyone knows they aren't racist. I don't think it's about whether people don't like Meghan because she's black but maybe the overwhelming media narrative about her could be tinged by racism and misogyny in ways we haven't learned how to spot. I know I'm still learning how to do this on a daily basis!


I don't want to get into an argument with you but I was not characterizing the conversation in that thread as unfair or mean.  I was saying that people in that thread thought the posts in the H&M thread were mean.

On the subject of black women and their hair is it wrong for me to say I love to see black women with their natural hair?  I have curly hair myself and get tired of seeing everyone (of every color) straightening their hair.


----------



## doni

Christina48576 said:


> The framing of a black woman as manipulative, underhanded, overly demanding, blinding poor innocent white boy is racially coded language and part of a larger stereotype black women get boxed into.


I see your point, and I am convinced that Meghan has been victim of racism in some of the criticism directed to her. But if you take ‘black‘ and ‘white‘ from this sentence (as below) I believe it would still to work...

_The framing of a woman as manipulative, underhanded, overly demanding, blinding poor innocent boy is part of a larger stereotype  women get boxed into. _


----------



## KellyObsessed

I agree, the Vladimir tiara would have been overpowering with her wedding dress.    I feel the hairdresser should have been more aware of securing her hair.  As a bride it was likely a fail that was magnified in her eyes 1000%
I was once a bridesmaid and my hair was falling as I walked down the aisle.   I burned with embarrassment and felt I was ruining the brides wedding.   Little flaws and fails seem so massive where weddings are concerned.    Can you imagine how Meghan feels having people keep commenting on her wedding day hair?    These things happen and I think focusing on it is mean spirited.


----------



## melissatrv

Aimee3 said:


> Well then the Queen would have adored me.  I still stand by my first choice of Tiara that no one in the Royal family seems to want, the Strathmore Rose one!


That is so my favorite tiara...though not in the Queen's collection, the Spencer tiara is another favorite!  Think I read that the Strathmore Rose it too delicate to wear very often?


----------



## rose60610

Allure Magazine just announced the color of MM's nail polish she wore on her wedding day: on fingers: a combo of "Unmasked" and "Negligee" ; on toes: "Cashmere Wrap".  Rumor has it that it they were gel mani/pedi.   What dogged singleminded determined person moved Heaven and Earth to get us the answer two years after the fact? Or did MM throw out another factoid for coverage?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

@Christina48576
I suggest you to read some of the comments and articles/links provided on this thread, you will see that they have nothing to do with racism. People don't particularly like MM because her attitudes don't seem genuine.

I don't have a problem with the way her hair looks (it looks good to me), but I don't like the news that she flew a hairdresser to the UK from Paris just for a 'hair practice'... I also don't like the news about the way she treated the staff that was working with her.

I didn't care about MM until I got annoyed with the constant news released by her PR team...

We will not end racism if we keep finding it in every single word. Praises or critiques should always be independent of a person's race.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully it was dementia, because otherwise he sounded like an a$$.



He complained about not being King Consort periodically over the years, going back decades, so seems more like the later than the former. Apparently, he never got the message that he should be grateful for his rather royal lot in life.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> MM has Jewish blood??



No.

Just some stupid stan's fantasy. 

Rastafarianism is built around the idea of Zionism. Cut from their ancestral roots, forced into slavery and knowing the bible they identified with the Jews in terms of the Diaspora, when 12 tribes of Israel were exiled by the Romans. Going back to the promised land of Ethiopia, Haile Selassie I was the Emperor of Ethiopia (so-said ancestor of the Queen of Sheba) was thought to be the Messiah. Many Rasta men even call their 'women' queens. 

Not saying the stan was a Rastafarian, but there's been a kind of spread of these ideas to a wider community who appropriate Rastafarianism, linking things that were never never linked and breaking many of the Rastafarian laws (e.g. dietary) and spouting all sorts fantastic stuff. Rastas were marginalised and oppressed by mainstream Jamaican society for many years, now they stereotypically 'represent' it to outsiders.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully it was dementia, because otherwise he sounded like an a$$.


hahahahahaha!  I think he was both.


----------



## melissatrv

youngster said:


> He complained about not being King Consort periodically over the years, going back decades, so seems more like the later than the former. Apparently, he never got the message that he should be grateful for his rather royal lot in life.



Prince Henrik of Denmark complained about this for years also.  In fact, he refused to be buried next to his wife Queen Margrethe because of it.  Not to spite her, but the lack of what he saw as an appropriate title.  In these modern times, if the wife of sovereign is Queen Consort, the husband of the sovereign should be King Consort.  But changes within royal families tend to move at a snail's pace.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrik,_Prince_Consort_of_Denmark#Death


----------



## Christina48576

sdkitty said:


> I don't want to get into an argument with you but I was not characterizing the conversation in that thread as unfair or mean.  I was saying that people in that thread thought the posts in the H&M thread were mean.
> 
> On the subject of black women and their hair is it wrong for me to say I love to see black women with their natural hair?  I have curly hair myself and get tired of seeing everyone (of every color) straightening their hair.



I'm really trying not to be argumentative and I understood what you were saying but summarizing the concerns about this thread as complaints of it being "unfair" and "mean" misrepresents, oversimplifies, and dismisses the problems women of color have raised when it comes to this thread.

It is generally inappropriate to ask to touch or exoticize a woman of color's hair, how people engage on an individual level depends on the people and the relationship, I think.



doni said:


> I see your point, and I am convinced that Meghan has been victim of racism in some of the criticism directed to her. But if you take ‘black‘ and ‘white‘ from this sentence (as below) I believe it would still to work...
> 
> _The framing of a woman as manipulative, underhanded, overly demanding, blinding poor innocent boy is part of a larger stereotype  women get boxed into. _



That is true and women of color face it twofold because they are othered for their gender _and_ their race.


Chanbal said:


> @Christina48576
> I suggest you to read some of the comments and articles/links provided on this thread, you will see that they have nothing to do with racism. People don't particularly like MM because her attitudes don't seem genuine.
> 
> I didn't care about MM until I got annoyed with the constant news released by her PR team...
> 
> We will not end racism if we keep finding it in every single word. Praises or critiques should always be independent of a person's race.



I've looked through the thread which is why I've seen the stereotypes.  but racism isn't just the n-word. There are microaggressions like being branded aggressive or arrogant. She could very well be an a-hole (and I don't think their PR tactics are effective at all) but I will always question when women of color are called these things because they are very racially loaded characterizations. There are lots of ways to criticize without falling into these.


----------



## doni

youngster said:


> He complained about not being King Consort periodically over the years, going back decades, so seems more like the later than the former. Apparently, he never got the message that he should be grateful for his rather royal lot in life.



Poor Henrik. He had a point, why are the consorts of Kings called Queens but no the other way round? 
He did his job, even if he was outspoken about his likes and dislikes. I think him and the Queen married very much in love and never stopped caring for each other. Not bad all in all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Um, as with most things involving H&M, nothing is as it seems.  Trevor is Jewish, they did have a Jewish wedding. She was raised Protestant, attended Catholic schools, etc.









						Why is Meghan Markle Getting Baptized Before Wedding?
					

The American actress wasn't raised in the Anglican Church like her fiancé.




					www.newsweek.com
				




===
MM gets criticised for her wedding day hair (the single tendril); Kate for her wedding day makeup (self applied). Diana, too, was criticized for wedding day hair (it was flat).  For giggles, google ‘loose tendrils’. Notice how many Hwood actresses use that hairstyle (the list is endless). IMHO, the single tendril, like the _Karen_ and other styles, is dated. Perhaps it is time for all to update their style (when the shops open) or we let the fussing and fuming go - allow each person to choose her own look. MM has a beautiful face and could wear any hairstyle. 

===
the Shelter in Place thread - v helpful insight into how TPF works as well as what the mods have to deal with. While I hope and pray racism and elitism in the fashion world are indeed diminishing, I have lived long enough to know they are not. Seems like elitism has gained strength and will outlive us all. Maybe together we can end the racism. We gotta try each and every day.

===
Did some reading on Prince Joachim from Denmark. He is 6th in line, divorced, receives an annual stipend(?) without doing too much. Perhaps H thought the BRF would treat him that way. Who knows?  If, big if, H does not want to be a royal, then, yes, he should remove himself from the succession. That would show he has the strength of his convictions. Staying in the line-up shows he really doesn’t mean what he says. Taking Charles’ money which, however indirectly, is really from the taxpayers = needs to stop.
===
Just my humble opinion.




papertiger said:


> No.
> 
> Just some stupid stan's fantasy.
> 
> Rastafarianism is built around the idea of Zionism. Cut from their ancestral roots, forced into slavery and knowing the bible they identified with the Jews in terms of the Diaspora, when 12 tribes of Israel were exiled by the Romans. Going back to the promised land of Ethiopia, Haile Selassie I was the Emperor of Ethiopia (so-said ancestor of the Queen of Sheba) was thought to be the Messiah. Many Rasta men even call their 'women' queens.
> 
> Not saying the stan was a Rastafarian, but there's been a kind of spread of these ideas to a wider community who appropriate Rastafarianism, linking things that were never never linked and breaking many of the Rastafarian laws (e.g. dietary) and spouting all sorts fantastic stuff. Rastas were marginalised and oppressed by mainstream Jamaican society for many years, now they stereotypically 'represent' it to outsiders.


----------



## youngster

Christina48576 said:


> I've looked through the thread which is why I've seen the stereotypes.  but racism isn't just the n-word. There are microaggressions like being branded aggressive or arrogant. She could very well be an a-hole (and I don't think their PR tactics are effective at all) but I will always question when women of color are called these things because they are very racially loaded characterizations. There are lots of ways to criticize without falling into these.



So, when someone has behaved in an aggressive and/or arrogant manner, what words should be used?  

I know a number of people I would describe as "aggressive", as they pursue personal goals forcefully and with purpose.  Any and all successful actors and actresses are likely aggressive to an extent.  At least, the ones that I've met, not that I've met that many, but you don't get anywhere in Hollywood otherwise.  Arrogant? Well, some of her and Harry's actions and statements have been arrogant. (Things like sending out a press release that they are leaving as senior royals and the terms of their half-in/half-out model, which they blindsided the Queen and Prince Charles with.)  There are other synonyms for arrogant of course so which ones do you consider acceptable?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Reminding people of the multi-million dollar waste is probably not a good idea. Surely H&M aren’t that out-of-touch.



rose60610 said:


> Allure Magazine just announced the color of MM's nail polish she wore on her wedding day: on fingers: a combo of "Unmasked" and "Negligee" ; on toes: "Cashmere Wrap".  Rumor has it that it they were gel mani/pedi.   What dogged singleminded determined person moved Heaven and Earth to get us the answer two years after the fact? Or did MM throw out another factoid for coverage?


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reminding people of the multi-million dollar waste is probably not a good idea. Surely H&M aren’t that out-of-touch.



Yes they are. Remember, that wedding supposedly generated a billion dollars in tourism and the British should be thankful for them getting married....


----------



## CarryOn2020

In a man, aggressive = assertive, arrogant = confident. 
When a woman is called these things, it means she got somewhere and somebody is threatened by her. Good for her! Of course, it is racist. We should not let the name-calling stop us. Harriet Tubman kept going, we should, too.


*“Well behaved women rarely make history.”*  Louise Thatcher Ulrich





youngster said:


> So, when someone has behaved in an aggressive and/or arrogant manner, what words should be used?
> 
> I know a number of people I would describe as "aggressive", as they pursue personal goals forcefully and with purpose.  Any and all successful actors and actresses are likely aggressive to an extent.  At least, the ones that I've met, not that I've met that many, but you don't get anywhere in Hollywood otherwise.  Arrogant? Well, some of her and Harry's actions and statements have been arrogant. (Things like sending out a press release that they are leaving as senior royals and the terms of their half-in/half-out model, which they blindsided the Queen and Prince Charles with.)  There are other synonyms for arrogant of course so which ones do you consider acceptable?


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> On the other hand _that_ thread was initially about class (in Fashion) too. In the UK, it's very hard to criticise the Royal Family, even about Dukes and Duchesses (unless you're into commenting on the Daily Fail) so this thread_ is_ like 'Finding Freedom' for some of us.
> 
> Britain doesn't have a constitution, we are subjects of Her Majesty. We don't actually have a national anthem either really, or rather it's an ode to our monarch. We all sing Her praises and say how much we love Her to reign _over _us.
> 
> Whilst the Queen has earned our respect and admiration over 60 years on the 'job', it's actually quite galling that her upstart of grandson thinks the World owes him and a woman we've only 'just met', not only a living, but for all of us to be in perpetual sense of awe of their glorified awsomeness. They are self-crowned delusional, deified holler-than-thou-ness (I can do word-salad too) plastic idols.
> 
> I'm sorry that Harry lost his mother at a young age but it's time for him to get professional help and grow-up. I'm sorry that Meghan kissed a Prince and he turned into a frog, but that's what you get for flirting with every guy you meet as a meal ticket and not doing your homework.
> 
> Is it sexist to suppose that M wanted to marry a Prince for status? Had I not cheered her for her optimism at the announcement of their engagement maybe. It's only after the wedding that I felt I'd been duped by the both of them.
> 
> It's nice to have a place to call them out on their sh*t. It's liberating  to be able to point out the utter hypocrisy and incompetence of 2 people that were privileged beyond most of our wildest dreams,_ both_ gave themselves airs and graces above all others, even their own families. If we have to stand up and sing the Gd save the Queen, then they should be made to too - or suffer a thread on tPF.


Well said!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> In a man, aggressive = assertive, arrogant = confident.
> When a woman is called these things, it means she got somewhere and somebody is threatened by her. Good for her! Of course, it is racist. We should not let the name-calling stop us. Harriet Tubman kept going, we should, too.
> 
> *“Well behaved women rarely make history.”*  Louise Thatcher Ulrich


Sure, but this applies to most women, not just Meghan, and not just to women of color.  ANY woman in a position of power is often called all kinds of awful names, and not just by men, but by other women as well.  
Meghan IMO put on the greatest act of her life when she snagged the prince.  She'd never heard of him?  Really?  Does anyone believe that idiotic statement?  Her actions are what have irritated me as I find her absolutely insufferable and a social piranha.  And please please please don't put the name "Harriet Tubman" in the same paragraph as MM.  Next thing we know, she'll claim she's actually descended from someone that important.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Sure, but this applies to most women, not just Meghan, and not just to women of color.  ANY woman in a position of power is often called all kinds of awful names, and not just by men, but by other women as well.
> Meghan IMO put on the greatest act of her life when she snagged the prince.  She'd never heard of him?  Really?  Does anyone believe that idiotic statement?  Her actions are what have irritated me as I find her absolutely insufferable and a social piranha.  And please please please don't put the name "Harriet Tubman" in the same paragraph as MM.  Next thing we know, she'll claim she's actually descended from someone that important.



Please allow me to clarify. That paragraph was not about MM. It was about all women who have suffered sexism, racism, elitism, and every other -ism from others. Not sure how we are defining feminist these days, but MM seems to be far from it. On the other hand, if she got what she wanted and is happy with her situation, then, good on her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please allow me to clarify. That paragraph was not about MM. It was about all women who have suffered sexism, racism, elitism, and every other -ism from others. Not sure how we are defining feminist these days, but MM seems to be far from it. On the other hand, if she got what she wanted and is happy with her situation, then, good on her.


she got a huge wedding watched by the world...tons of fans watching her.....a beautiful place to love...a million dollar wardrobe...but no one was asking he she was feeling
I highly doubt she is happy....Covid has messed up her plans big time


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Sure, but this applies to most women, not just Meghan, and not just to women of color.  ANY woman in a position of power is often called all kinds of awful names, and not just by men, but by other women as well.
> Meghan IMO put on the greatest act of her life when she snagged the prince.  She'd never heard of him?  Really?  Does anyone believe that idiotic statement?  Her actions are what have irritated me as I find her absolutely insufferable and a social piranha.  And please please please don't put the name "Harriet Tubman" in the same paragraph as MM.  Next thing we know, she'll claim she's actually descended from someone that important.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All people are important, yes? Hasn’t she claimed to be descended from royalty? As well as from slaves -








						Meghan Markle Actually Has Royal Ancestors
					

She and Prince Harry are technically 17th cousins.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



_She even opened up about her great-great-great grandfather choosing a surname after slavery was abolished in 1865. Markle wrote in an essay about her mixed-race heritage in 2015:

"Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own box."_



purseinsanity said:


> Sure, but this applies to most women, not just Meghan, and not just to women of color.  ANY woman in a position of power is often called all kinds of awful names, and not just by men, but by other women as well.
> Meghan IMO put on the greatest act of her life when she snagged the prince.  She'd never heard of him?  Really?  Does anyone believe that idiotic statement?  Her actions are what have irritated me as I find her absolutely insufferable and a social piranha.  And please please please don't put the name "Harriet Tubman" in the same paragraph as MM.  Next thing we know, she'll claim she's actually descended from someone that important.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sol Ryan said:


> Yes they are. Remember, that wedding supposedly generated a billion dollars in tourism and the British should be thankful for them getting married....


Maybe they’ll sell a billion dollars worth of that nail polish  now that the color is known!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allure or Harper’s — who got it right?  ETA: her nails did indeed look great!









						Meghan Markle Wore This $9 Nail Polish For The Royal Wedding
					

Everything you need to know about Meghan Markle's royal wedding day manicure.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



_If you're not going to wear your nails bare and buffed, nude nail polish is allowed, as is one particular shade of pink: Essie Ballet Slippers (so it's no surprise that it's the shade Markle picked)._




lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe they’ll sell a billion dollars worth of that nail polish  now that the color is known!


----------



## Jktgal

Happy birthday, young mother! You are officially middle-aged!

Seriously, Camilla Long also referred to Kate Middleton as a young mother. Do people in the West really think people in late 30s as young?? I just googled average age of women becoming a mother for the first time and in USA it's 26, for God's sake. Now that's young.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> All people are important, yes? Hasn’t she claimed to be descended from royalty? As well as from slaves -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Actually Has Royal Ancestors
> 
> 
> She and Prince Harry are technically 17th cousins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _She even opened up about her great-great-great grandfather choosing a surname after slavery was abolished in 1865. Markle wrote in an essay about her mixed-race heritage in 2015:
> 
> "Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own box."_


Sure everyone is important in their own way, but some think they're more important than others.  MM to me falls into the "Look at me, I'm so, so, SO important" category.


----------



## sdkitty

Jktgal said:


> Happy birthday, young mother! You are officially middle-aged!
> 
> Seriously, Camilla Long also referred to Kate Middleton as a young mother. Do people in the West really think people in late 30s as young?? I just googled average age of women becoming a mother for the first time and in USA it's 26, for God's sake. Now that's young.


yes, for having kids 38 isn't young....but in general "young" is a relative term.  If you're in your 60's 38 is young.  If you're in your twenties, not so much.


----------



## Chanbal

Jktgal said:


> Happy birthday, young mother! You are officially middle-aged!
> 
> Seriously, Camilla Long also referred to Kate Middleton as a young mother. *Do people in the West really think people in late 30s as young?*? I just googled average age of women becoming a mother for the first time and in USA it's 26, for God's sake. Now that's young.



Yes, we are all officially young in our 20s, 30s, 40s, 60s, 70s, and 80s.
Though, young mothers is a term that applies mostly to mothers in their 20s.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Sorry to double post.
> Just noticed...
> Two brothers, two threads started within 3 days of one another, one has over 15k posts and the other has over 33k.
> Someone's kept us busy, lol


Most of this thread has gone off topic and been about the brf and even other European royals not H&M so the number.of posts is no indication of.popularity - it started off as a we love MM thread and I was never a fan  -look how.it has turned out now !!! At the end of the day Will will be our King and Kate will be Queen consort they and their adorable kids are.our future -thank the good lord!!!


----------



## Jktgal

We know from the Meghanese that the planted stories are by her, so she considers herself not middle-aged even tho life expectancy at birth for someone born in 1981 in USA is 74 years. I was wondering whether in general people have this perception. Do people in general consider middle-aged as older than late 30s? If 50 is considered middle then 100 is the lifespan and that is not the case in reality.


----------



## doni

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did some reading on Prince Joachim from Denmark. He is 6th in line, divorced, receives an annual stipend(?) without doing too much. Perhaps H thought the BRF would treat him that way. Who knows?  If, big if, H does not want to be a royal, then, yes, he should remove himself from the succession. That would show he has the strength of his convictions. Staying in the line-up shows he really doesn’t mean what he says. Taking Charles’ money which, however indirectly, is really from the taxpayers = needs to stop.



Prince Joachim is a working royal. He can even act as regent. The Scandinavian royal families are probably among the busiest and most active of royals, although naturally their activities don’t get much coverage in the anglosaxon press.


----------



## doni

CarryOn2020 said:


> In a man, aggressive = assertive, arrogant = confident.
> When a woman is called these things, it means she got somewhere and somebody is threatened by her. Good for her! Of course, it is racist. We should not let the name-calling stop us.


But isn’t this male chauvinist? I don’t understand how is this racist?

Nevertheless, personally, after years spent in the corporate jungle (and a management position were we are only 8% females), I long for the day when women will not need to mimic destructive behaviours to prosper. I do not want arrogant women to be labeled confident. I want agressive men to be labeled “agressive” and arrogant men to be labeled “arrogant”...


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> But isn’t this male chauvinist? I don’t understand how this is racist?
> 
> Nevertheless, personally, after years spent in the corporate jungle (and a management position were we are only 8% females), I long for the day when women will not need to mimic destructive behaviours to prosper. I do not want arrogant women to be labeled confident. I want agressive men to be labeled “agressive” and arrogant men to be labeled “arrogant”...


I thought it was sexist. I personally have not come across black women specifically being associated with being manipulative, mean or overtly aggressive. I see these type of personality traits in women and men in all races. 

We have had unconscious bias training at my work and it talked a lot about this, e.g. men are assertive v.s. women are "aggressive"; men are confident v.s. women are "arrogant" etc.


----------



## kemilia

Christina48576 said:


> Ok I think that's where there might be some differences because a lot of words that are considered inappropriate when referring to a woman of color's hair might not translate. I would generally say avoiding judgment on texture and being aware that hair is often used (especially in Western cultures) to police black women's bodies. (btw I didn't like the wedding look either because it caused her to have *to push it back a lot*)


And this was my gripe about her wedding hair--all that money spent (we recently found out she used a Paris-based hairdresser) and he/she flew in and that was the result--a clump/lock of hair that kept on falling down and she would push it back. At the time I asked "does GB have no hairpins or barrettes?" It wasn't like an artful tendril meant to happen.

She touches her hair frequently and I think it is a "soother". It drives me crazy when I see girls (all races) constantly smoothing, stroking, moving their hair from one side--now the other side--now back to the other side, while they are having a conversation with others. My mother would say (and she did, RIP) "stop touching your hair, keep your hands in your lap!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> she got a huge wedding watched by the world...tons of fans watching her.....a beautiful place to love...a million dollar wardrobe...but no one was asking he she was feeling
> I highly doubt she is happy....Covid has messed up her plans big time


Compare and contrast - Pss Beatrice

B is the poster girl for bad luck. Lots of stuff NOT of HER making. 

She might have wanted to be included in the ranks of the SENIOR royals but the H&M stuff has caused too much scrutiny of the (finances of the) BRF. Arguably she would never have gotten or wanted that but the decision has been made for her now. A huge loss of stature in class conscious UK, to put things in perspective.
Her YOUNGER sister got married first - horrors ! In the UK primogeniture is a big deal, B should have got a more  costly wedding, it is a UK thing
Her father's kerfuffle - see Jeffrey Epstein - caused B's initial plans - probably for a big wedding like Eugenie and Harry - to be scuttled in favor of a private one at St James palace, if I remember , ie behind closed doors 
Then came COVID to cancel the second St James wedding, and the Epstein mess keeps getting bigger, not dying out 
So, B had a tiny wedding focused on her elderly grandparents, she wore a borrowed gown and obviously did her own hair 

She has not given an interview or done public speaking about anything, nor fostered someone's book


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> And this was my gripe about her wedding hair--all that money spent (we recently found out she used a Paris-based hairdresser) and he/she flew in and that was the result--a clump/lock of hair that kept on falling down and she would push it back. At the time I asked "does GB have no hairpins or barrettes?" It wasn't like an artful tendril meant to happen.
> 
> She touches her hair frequently and I think it is a "soother". It drives me crazy when I see girls (all races) constantly smoothing, stroking, moving their hair from one side--now the other side--now back to the other side, while they are having a conversation with others. My mother would say (and she did, RIP) "stop touching your hair, keep your hands in your lap!"


Hair moving and touching ... I am still guilty of that ..  my Granny - from Liverpool - was always on me about that

And yes, I have receive/received lots of negative comments about the habit even though my hair is bottle blonde and my waves are keratin straightened. 

We all get criticised for stuff


----------



## kemilia

marietouchet said:


> Hair moving and touching ... I am still guilty of that ..  my Granny - from Liverpool - was always on me about that
> 
> And yes, I have receive/received lots of negative comments about the habit even though my hair is bottle blonde and my waves are keratin straightened.
> 
> We all get criticised for stuff


Yep we do. My mother, who was difficult (and I'm being nice here) would always rag on my ankles--"I don't know where you got those ankles, mine are so SLENDER." Um, thanks Mom?


----------



## Emeline

I often thought she was featuring her hair, much like she regularly featured the bump.
It's kind of more spokesmodel than royal, but if it works for her it's fine.


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> And this was my gripe about her wedding hair--all that money spent (we recently found out she used a Paris-based hairdresser) and he/she flew in and that was the result--a clump/lock of hair that kept on falling down and she would push it back. At the time I asked "does GB have no hairpins or barrettes?" It wasn't like an artful tendril meant to happen.
> 
> She touches her hair frequently and I think it is a "soother". It drives me crazy when I see girls (all races) constantly smoothing, stroking, moving their hair from one side--now the other side--now back to the other side, while they are having a conversation with others. My mother would say (and she did, RIP) "stop touching your hair, keep your hands in your lap!"



It is often a sign of anxiety, children do it to comfort themselves, and away from a similar play (to attract a mate) men and women do it at time of stress. 

This conflicts with her _apparent_ confidence because she has trained herself well through acting techniques, but aligns to her feeling like a victim no matter what is factual, behind that facade she may be feeling vulnerable. It's quite a common combo in actors.


----------



## marietouchet

Someone posted we are off topic , agree 
We are all waiting for the Omid which might have something good to say


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> On the other hand _that_ thread was initially about class (in Fashion) too. In the UK, it's very hard to criticise the Royal Family, even about Dukes and Duchesses (unless you're into commenting on the Daily Fail) so this thread_ is_ like 'Finding Freedom' for some of us.
> 
> Britain doesn't have a constitution, we are subjects of Her Majesty. We don't have a national anthem either really, rather it's an ode to our monarch. We all sing Her praises and say how much we love Her to reign _over _us.
> 
> Whilst the Queen has earned our respect and admiration over 60 years on the 'job', it's actually quite galling that her upstart of grandson thinks the World owes him and a woman we've only 'just met', not only a living, but for all of us to be in perpetual sense of awe of their glorified awsomeness. They are self-crowned, delusional, deified, holler-than-thou (I can do word-salad too) plastic idols.
> 
> I'm sorry that Harry lost his mother at a young age but it's time for him to get professional help and grow-up. I'm sorry that Meghan kissed a Prince and he turned into a frog, but that's what you get for flirting with every guy you meet as a meal ticket and not doing your homework.
> 
> Is it sexist to suppose that M wanted to marry a Prince for status? Had I not cheered her for her optimism at the announcement of their engagement maybe. It's only after the wedding that I felt I'd been duped by the both of them.
> 
> It's nice to have a place to call them out on their sh*t. It's liberating  to be able to point out the utter hypocrisy and incompetence of 2 people that were privileged beyond most of our wildest dreams,_ both_ gave themselves airs and graces above all others, even their own families. If we have to stand up and sing the Gd save the Queen, then they should be made to too - or suffer a thread on tPF.



All of this 100%! 

To those who think that people on this thread are somehow racist/intollerant towards M, maybe they haven't seen the infamous documentary H&M made in Africa and the stupid things they said.  M complaining and feeling sorry for herself in a continent where thousands of children still die of starvation and illness in 2020 is despicable! THIS changed my feelings towards her!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope I don’t offend anyone with this question, but since the subject of her wedding day hair came up I am curious.
> 
> Elizabeth Holmes had also criticized her hair that day, but then walked back from those comments and made huge apologies for them after reflecting and listening to feedback she concluded that the wispiness of the front was intentional and to criticize it was racist.
> 
> Can any WoC on here chime in on that?





kemilia said:


> So this EH more recently thinks that the sloppy, droopy wedding hair was deliberate and to say something bad about it is racist? If so, this is a MAJOR bit of reaching here. And for the record, I am not a WOC.



I didn't know who Elizabeth Holmes was until I looked her up. Now that I know, she's way more interesting than Meghan. We should have a thread on her especially since her trial is coming up.

I think anybody famous who publicly comments on other famous people has to be oh so cautious these days. There are fans who get deeply offended by criticism of their favorites. They are looking for insults. And for the record if you search in Google images for "wispy hair" or "messy hair," almost all of the photos are of white women.


----------



## LittleStar88

duna said:


> All of this 100%!
> 
> To those who think that people on this thread are somehow racist/intollerant towards M, maybe they haven't seen the infamous documentary H&M made in Africa and the stupid things they said.  M complaining and feeling sorry for herself in a continent where thousands of children still die of starvation and illness in 2020 is despicable! THIS changed my feelings towards her!



Yep - this was my turning point with her, too. She has entangled herself with saying and doing too many things that completely lack thought for anyone other than herself and has dragged Harry along for the ride. Calling her out for doing/saying dumb stuff is not racism.


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> All of this 100%!
> 
> To those who think that people on this thread are somehow racist/intollerant towards M, maybe they haven't seen the infamous documentary H&M made in Africa and the stupid things they said.  M complaining and feeling sorry for herself in a continent where thousands of children still die of starvation and illness in 2020 is despicable! THIS changed my feelings towards her!


that did it for me too....Really despicable performance


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> I didn't know who Elizabeth Holmes was until I looked her up. Now that I know, she's way more interesting than Meghan. We should have a thread on her especially since her trial is coming up.
> 
> I think anybody famous who publicly comments on other famous people has to be oh so cautious these days. There are fans who get deeply offended by criticism of their favorites. They are looking for insults. And for the record if you search in Google images for "wispy hair" or "messy hair," almost all of the photos are of white women.



It’s actually two different women with the same name.  The Elizabeth Holmes commenting on MM is a former WSJ fashion journalist who has a book coming out on Royal Fashion.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s actually two different women with the same name.  The Elizabeth Holmes commenting on MM is a former WSJ fashion journalist who has a book coming out on Royal Fashion.


oh....I thought it was the other one


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s actually two different women with the same name.  The Elizabeth Holmes commenting on MM is a former WSJ fashion journalist who has a book coming out on Royal Fashion.



 Thank you! I was wondering why in the world the other Elizabeth was taking time out of her f*cked up life to comment on Meghan's wedding hair of all things.

(I stand by my statement that the other Elizabeth is much more interesting than Meghan and Harry.)


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> And this was my gripe about her wedding hair--all that money spent (we recently found out she used a Paris-based hairdresser) and he/she flew in and that was the result--a clump/lock of hair that kept on falling down and she would push it back. At the time I asked "does GB have no hairpins or barrettes?" It wasn't like an artful tendril meant to happen.
> 
> She touches her hair frequently and I think it is a "soother". It drives me crazy when I see girls (all races) constantly smoothing, stroking, moving their hair from one side--now the other side--now back to the other side, while they are having a conversation with others. My mother would say (and she did, RIP) "stop touching your hair, keep your hands in your lap!"


knowing her, I would think it was an intentional tendril....and even though tendrils may be intentional, they can still be a bit bothersome and cause one to want to push them back


----------



## CobaltBlu

marietouchet said:


> Compare and contrast - Pss Beatrice
> 
> B is the poster girl for bad luck. Lots of stuff NOT of HER making.
> 
> She might have wanted to be included in the ranks of the SENIOR royals but the H&M stuff has caused too much scrutiny of the (finances of the) BRF. Arguably she would never have gotten or wanted that but the decision has been made for her now. A huge loss of stature in class conscious UK, to put things in perspective.
> Her YOUNGER sister got married first - horrors ! In the UK primogeniture is a big deal, B should have got a more  costly wedding, it is a UK thing
> Her father's kerfuffle - see Jeffrey Epstein - caused B's initial plans - probably for a big wedding like Eugenie and Harry - to be scuttled in favor of a private one at St James palace, if I remember , ie behind closed doors
> Then came COVID to cancel the second St James wedding, and the Epstein mess keeps getting bigger, not dying out
> So, B had a tiny wedding focused on her elderly grandparents, she wore a borrowed gown and obviously did her own hair
> 
> She has not given an interview or done public speaking about anything, nor fostered someone's book



At the end of the day, Beatrice won the wedding game, in my opinion . The dress and the Fringe tiara lent to her by the queen .... not the same quantitively as the huge wedding but certainly a huge statement on the part of QEII.  No one can criticize Beatrice's wedding (though time will tell about the husband one), and M&H will get dragged forever for theirs now, with good reason after their behavior.

On another note...how tiny is Elizabeths waist here, wow! (another shot of the dress Beatrice wore on her wedding day)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> knowing her, I would think it was an intentional tendril....and even though tendrils may be intentional, they can still be a bit bothersome and cause one to want to push them back



She was going for the sweet/sassy little girl look because she was a young bride.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She was going for the sweet/sassy little girl look because she was a young bride.


yes a young bride marrying for the third time


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

All this "young mom" and "young bride" talk makes me remember when ex Tennis star Boris Becker sent public congratulations to his ex-fiancé after she gave birth (not his kid, new relationship). He had broken up with her in a pretty sh*tty way, and the woman he went on to marry played a role in it (they're getting divorced now). Anyway, the ex-fiancé was 27 at the time, while his wife had just given birth to her first and his 3rd son (plus a daughter who grew up in London) at age 34. So the ex-fiancé who had married a German comedian (are y'all still following? LOL) answered with a very sarcastic sketch featuring her comedian husband, and OMG you should have seen my face when she said "From a new mom to an old mom". I guess someone was still very bitter years after the break-up.


----------



## Chanbal

Today's news:
*Prince Harry 'resents the perception that Prince William is the sensible one while he's the loose cannon' and has often been the one advising his older brother...*








						Prince Harry hates that William is the sensible one
					

Royal commentator and journalist Duncan Larcombe told OK! how he met Harry, now 35, for a drink in 2008 after the results of the inquest into the death of his mother, were published.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Harry has been advising his older brother-William listens to him-very sensible
William recommends Harry to take time to know MM before getting married-Harry is furious and does the opposite-loose cannon  Clear as crystal!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Today's news:
> *Prince Harry 'resents the perception that Prince William is the sensible one while he's the loose cannon' and has often been the one advising his older brother...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hates that William is the sensible one
> 
> 
> Royal commentator and journalist Duncan Larcombe told OK! how he met Harry, now 35, for a drink in 2008 after the results of the inquest into the death of his mother, were published.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I wonder why that is.

Also, maybe he should give himself sound advice as he apparently doesn't listen to anyone else.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder why that is.
> 
> Also, maybe he should give himself sound advice as he apparently doesn't listen to anyone else.


I read that dreadful article , shameless manipulation of facts 
Harry said things in 2008 to a journalist, ok, but that was 12 years ago ! I assume he did say that ... 
The date is in the article for all to see but the article is written AS IF H said those things YESTERDAY
I give anybody the benefit of the doubt that 12 years, marriage, child may have made a difference 

I always read these things looking at dates, journalists are notorious for mixing up things that happeneded decades apart, then coming to an ill-found if not bogus conclusion


----------



## csshopper

What a contrast, no surprise:

Last week whiny JCMH preached to the world about Travalyst his program to boost "authentic travel", it involved no action on his part other than reading a script.  

Meanwhile back across the Pond, his brother and sister-in-law are out and about actually visiting places "to show their support for the U.K. travel industry". Last week it was a short family vacation including all the children to Tresco, which included bike rides and boat rides and casual dolphin spotting. 

Today:
 K*ate and William have fun at Gavin & Stacey amusement arcade: Royal couple visit Barry Island attraction from BBC comedy as they try to provide boost to Britain's Covid-hit tourism industry*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe at this point Harry can't afford a vacation.


----------



## bag-mania

The media is desperate for Harry and Meghan material. Here's a "new" story about Harry's wild fun partying days from the POV of an athlete who met him once at a club. 

*AFL great reveals his wild night of partying with Prince Harry in Las Vegas - and how he got thrown out after trying to 'manhandle' the royal*
Former AFL star Campbell Brown has recalled his crazy night partying with Prince Harry while dancing to Pitbull and drinking cranberry vodkas in a Las Vegas nightclub.

The 2008 premiership star has fond memories of his encounter with the royal, opening up about the hilarious tale for Thirsty Camel's Thirsty for a Good Story campaign.

Brown was in Sin City for one night during a Gold Coast Suns pre-season training camp in late 2011 when he and a few teammates decided to breach midnight curfew to kick on at the iconic XS Nightclub.

'I was just looking around and I see a Prince Harry lookalike, a guy with red hair, I said to Matty Warnock "Ha, Prince Harry!" We keep walking and then I stop and I look and I go "I actually reckon that is Prince Harry"!' the former Hawthorn and Suns star recalled.

'I walk up, there were two skinny sort of guys, they were sort of overlooking the booth he was in, he was sitting in there with three other guys. I said 'Harry!' He looks across at me and I said 'I knew it was Prince Harry!'

Spotting Prince Harry sitting in a private booth, Brown decided to join him and struck up a conversation under the very watchful eye of the royal's security entourage.

'They didn't look like your usual big burly security guards,' Brown recalled. 

The royal told him he was in town for fighter pilot drills with the British Air Force, while Brown told him about AFL.

'I thought I better keep him engaged here because Scotland Yard standing over there, they were pretty keen to move me along,' Brown said.

'I'm out of my drink now so I lean in I grab the drink - I pour myself a Vodka cranberry!'

With a few drinks under his belt, it was what Brown did next that brought his partying antics with the royal to an abrupt end.

'I've got this habit that every hour on the hour I undo a button after midnight,' he said.

'I've looked down at my watch and it was about two o'clock so I've undone my buttons and on comes my favourite ever song, Pitbull's Give Me Everything.  

'I start dancing to this song and I undo my button and I turn to Harry and I start to try undo his buttons and I get a tap on the shoulder saying "time to move on mate". 

'I looked at Harry pleadingly, he'd waved them away the first couple of times and he sort of just said nice to meet you and off I went. You can't manhandle the prince!' 

The next morning, Brown initially believed he'd got away with breaching club curfew scot-free.

'One of the coaches came up to me and said "Did you break curfew last night?" I said "Nah nah", he goes "So you weren't at Excess last night?" I said "Nah nah",' Brown recalled. 

'He goes "That's funny because as I was walking through the crowd to go to the bathroom with the chief executive and a couple of the coaches, I looked up and I saw you. Then as we get a bit closer we see you in a booth with Prince Harry, how do they know each other?"

'So he took them the long way to the toilet and they never saw me until now I suppose!'

Brown was happy to be part of Prince Harry's weekend. 

'He's probably smart to offload me when he did otherwise there might've been a lot more trouble!' Brown quipped.

The father-of-one played 159 games for Hawthorn and 46 for the Suns after they joined the AFL in 2011.

His career ended when he was sacked by the Suns in late 2013 after he broke a teammate's jaw in a fight during a US pre-season training camp.









						AFL great Campbell Brown recalls partying with Prince Harry in Vegas
					

Former AFL Campbell Brown has looked back on partying with Prince Harry while in Las Vegas for one night during a Gold Coast Suns pre-season training camp in late 2011.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## melissatrv

Well William was the wild one who got naked at a Las Vegas party and dressed up in a Nazi costume.  

Oh wait, that was Harry.




Chanbal said:


> Today's news:
> *Prince Harry 'resents the perception that Prince William is the sensible one while he's the loose cannon' and has often been the one advising his older brother...*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hates that William is the sensible one
> 
> 
> Royal commentator and journalist Duncan Larcombe told OK! how he met Harry, now 35, for a drink in 2008 after the results of the inquest into the death of his mother, were published.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry has been advising his older brother-William listens to him-very sensible
> William recommends Harry to take time to know MM before getting married-Harry is furious and does the opposite-loose cannon  Clear as crystal!


----------



## Annawakes

Ya’ll.  No news about them is good news.  Whew.  Our entertainment fodder might be drying up but at least they are keeping to themselves.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get how apparently she made Cory's family adore her so much, I feel it would be hard work to hold up the image of "warm and caring and into children" for someone who is obviously not.


They didn't live in Toronto, they live about an hour and a half away, and people don't get in the car and travel for a quick visit because traffic on the different highways is so annoying.

My guess is, they saw her on the occasional holiday. I mean, Cory owns a few restaurants, I can't see him taking off on a whim.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just found it odd how passionate his mother was about defending her. I like my brothers' girlfriends usually well enough, if you asked me about them I'd say "Nice girl" and be done, not paint them as a crossbred of Mother Teresa, Michelle O. and the ray of sunshine that could light a black hole.


----------



## Jayne1

From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil. 

The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Jayne1 said:


> From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil.
> 
> The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.
> 
> View attachment 4810702
> View attachment 4810703



I just don’t know why someone had to fly in from France for a hairstyle....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil.
> 
> The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.
> 
> View attachment 4810702
> View attachment 4810703


Come on y all, you are being fair to either D or M
The worst royal wedding hair was .... drum roll please ... Pss Margaret
That tiara is super tall and look how her hair poofs out on top - her hair was like 5 in tall!
it was the swinging sixties LOL
She wore an entire birds nest



I had trouble finding a good photo. The candid above has not been touched but the snap with the Queen had the birds nest airbrushed out - tall order in the days before Photoshop


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil.
> 
> The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.
> 
> View attachment 4810702
> View attachment 4810703


Diana’s hair was very fashionable at the time and suited her very well.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Thank you! I was wondering why in the world the other Elizabeth was taking time out of her f*cked up life to comment on Meghan's wedding hair of all things.
> 
> (I stand by my statement that the other Elizabeth is much more interesting than Meghan and Harry.)



Absolutely, the Theranos book and documentary series were both amazing. 



Jayne1 said:


> From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil.
> 
> The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.
> 
> View attachment 4810702
> View attachment 4810703



I just assumed it made sense at the time? You’re right tho, it’s not pretty. 



Sol Ryan said:


> I just don’t know why someone had to fly in from France for a hairstyle....



Because of the environment! Oh, wait...


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Diana’s hair was very fashionable at the time and suited her very well.



Exactly. It was the '80s and she had '80s hair. It would have been weird if she didn't. What we are doing today will look odd in another 40 years.


----------



## bisousx

marietouchet said:


> Come on y all, you are being fair to either D or M
> The worst royal wedding hair was .... drum roll please ... Pss Margaret
> That tiara is super tall and look how her hair poofs out on top - her hair was like 5 in tall!
> it was the swinging sixties LOL
> She wore an entire birds nest
> 
> View attachment 4810747
> 
> I had trouble finding a good photo. The candid above has not been touched but the snap with the Queen had the birds nest airbrushed out - tall order in the days before Photoshop
> 
> View attachment 4810751



Those photos are so classic and elegant, even with the beehive. Margaret was a stunning woman. I always have to look a little longer whenever I see photos of her.


----------



## Lounorada

Chagall said:


> Diana’s hair was very fashionable at the time and suited her very well.


I thought the same thing. Plus, her hair was pretty short so she was limited as to what she could do with it.

IMO, the worst Royal wedding hair was Princess Anne (her first marriage). That hair-do was a big NO... she looked like Princess Leia with a fancy tiara


----------



## bag-mania

This is a pity. For the moment it appears the identities of the "young mothers" are protected. We really wanted to see that list.

*Meghan Markle Wins Legal Bid to Protect Friends' Identities in Court Case*
Meghan Markle has won a legal bid to protect the anonymity of five friends who spoke to PEOPLE in February 2019 as her court case against publishers Associated Newspapers and the _Mail on Sunday_ continues.

A British judge ruled Wednesday that the _Mail on Sunday_ cannot name the friends who came to Meghan's defense anonymously in last year's cover story.

“I have concluded that, for the time being at least, the court should grant the claimant the order that she seeks,” High Court judge Mark Warby said.

A source from the team representing the Duchess of Sussex tells PEOPLE, "The Duchess felt it was necessary to take this step to try and protect her friends—as any of us would—and we’re glad this was clear. We are happy that the Judge has agreed to protect these five individuals."

Meghan, 39, is suing publishers Associated Newspapers and the _Mail on Sunday_ for printing extracts of a “private and confidential” letter sent to her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018 — three months after her wedding to Prince Harry.

During a pre-trial hearing last week, Associated Newspapers argued that as the letter was first referenced in the PEOPLE cover story, her friends could be called as witnesses and therefore named.

In response, Meghan's lawyers applied to protect the identities of her friends on the grounds that they have a "right" to privacy.

On Wednesday, Justice Warby agreed with Meghan, "for the time being" — going on to stress that his ruling was an "interim decision" and could change if one or more of the friends, whose identities have not been publicly disclosed, gives evidence at a future trial.

"The weight to be given to the relevant factors may well change as the case progresses," he added.
Wednesday's ruling is the latest stage in Markle's lawsuit, which is expected to go to a full trial in late 2020 or early 2021.

Meghan and Harry were not present at the proceedings, which have taken place under strict coronavirus measures restricting access to the courtroom.

On May 1, Meghan lost the first stage of her battle against the Mail, when Justice Warby agreed to"strike out" parts of Meghan’s claim in a pre-trial hearing.

It means that if or when the case goes to trial, the court will not be asked to rule on whether the _Mail on Sunday_ acted dishonestly, pursued a negative agenda against Meghan or deliberately stirred up trouble between the Duchess of Sussex and her father, Thomas Markle, 75.

In response, Meghan said she would “continue to move forward” with her case - a fact evidenced by today's ruling.

"Normally, when such an issue arises it is the claimant who seeks disclosure of the sources," Justice Warby added in reference to Associated Newspapers' desire to upend the key journalistic principle of anonymity for sources.

"The media invariably maintain that the protection of confidential sources is of high importance, and that names should not be disclosed or publicised," he added.

"In this unusual case, the roles are reversed."









						Meghan Markle Wins Legal Bid to Protect Friends' Identities in Court Case
					

Meghan Markle has won a legal bid to protect the anonymity of five friends who spoke to PEOPLE in February 2019 as her court case continues




					people.com


----------



## justwatchin

So these 5 mystery friends didn’t get “ markled “ for talking to People? Interesting


----------



## Lodpah

The key word is for the time being.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> So these 5 mystery friends didn’t get “ markled “ for talking to People? Interesting



Not only were they not Markled, she went out of her way to try to legally protect them. You don't get Markled for doing what Meghan asked you to do.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil.
> 
> The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.
> 
> View attachment 4810702
> View attachment 4810703


I think maybe the problem with Diana is the hair and the gown look dated.  Fashions change and some wedding gowns may be timeless but not this one.  I didn't love Kate's gown but it is more timeless IMO


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Not only were they not Markled, she went out of her way to try to legally protect them. You don't get Markled for doing what Meghan asked you to do.


She wants to keep those 5 happy so there is no extra tea spilled, imo.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just found it odd how passionate his mother was about defending her. I like my brothers' girlfriends usually well enough, if you asked me about them I'd say "Nice girl" and be done, not paint them as a crossbred of Mother Teresa, Michelle O. and the ray of sunshine that could light a black hole.


She was probably making sure that Harry wouldn't change his mind, smart lady!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe the problem with Diana is the hair and the gown look dated.  Fashions change and some wedding gowns may be timeless but not this one.  I didn't love Kate's gown but it is more timeless IMO


Ten years from now people will be saying "why were all the wedding gowns strapless?" Like with names (at least in the US) wedding gowns can be dated pretty easily.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe the problem with Diana is the hair and the gown look dated.  Fashions change and some wedding gowns may be timeless but not this one.  I didn't love Kate's gown but it is more timeless IMO


Diana was very young and poorly advised when she got married. It took her some time to find her timeless style. Despite her problems, she was a beautiful person inside and outside.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Diana was very young and poorly advised when she got married. It took her some time to find her timeless style. Despite her problems, she was a beautiful person inside and outside.


she was much more sophisticated later in her life but at the time she got married she was young and styles were different then...poorly advised? maybe but I don't recall anyone saying she didn't look good at the time.  and the flower girls were adorable


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> she was much more sophisticated later in her life but at the time she got married she was young and styles were different then...poorly advised? maybe but I don't recall anyone saying she didn't look good at the time.  and the flower girls were adorable


The flower girls looked adorable, but I sincerely didn't like her dress. I also remember to have read some less enthusiastic comments about it. In any event, she became one of the best dressed women. Her photos captured by Mario Testino were just stunning.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The flower girls looked adorable, but I sincerely didn't like her dress. I also remember to have read some less enthusiastic comments about it. In any event, she became one of the best dressed women. Her photos captured by Mario Testino were just stunning.


I had the VF magazine with her on the cover after she died. some random girl at work borrowed it and didn't return it to me.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> This is a pity. For the moment it appears the identities of the "young mothers" are protected. We really wanted to see that list.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Wins Legal Bid to Protect Friends' Identities in Court Case*
> Meghan Markle has won a legal bid to protect the anonymity of five friends who spoke to PEOPLE in February 2019 as her court case against publishers Associated Newspapers and the _Mail on Sunday_ continues.
> 
> A British judge ruled Wednesday that the _Mail on Sunday_ cannot name the friends who came to Meghan's defense anonymously in last year's cover story.
> 
> “I have concluded that, for the time being at least, the court should grant the claimant the order that she seeks,” High Court judge Mark Warby said.
> 
> A source from the team representing the Duchess of Sussex tells PEOPLE, "The Duchess felt it was necessary to take this step to try and protect her friends—as any of us would—and we’re glad this was clear. We are happy that the Judge has agreed to protect these five individuals."
> 
> Meghan, 39, is suing publishers Associated Newspapers and the _Mail on Sunday_ for printing extracts of a “private and confidential” letter sent to her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018 — three months after her wedding to Prince Harry.
> 
> During a pre-trial hearing last week, Associated Newspapers argued that as the letter was first referenced in the PEOPLE cover story, her friends could be called as witnesses and therefore named.
> 
> In response, Meghan's lawyers applied to protect the identities of her friends on the grounds that they have a "right" to privacy.
> 
> On Wednesday, Justice Warby agreed with Meghan, "for the time being" — going on to stress that his ruling was an "interim decision" and could change if one or more of the friends, whose identities have not been publicly disclosed, gives evidence at a future trial.
> 
> "The weight to be given to the relevant factors may well change as the case progresses," he added.
> Wednesday's ruling is the latest stage in Markle's lawsuit, which is expected to go to a full trial in late 2020 or early 2021.
> 
> Meghan and Harry were not present at the proceedings, which have taken place under strict coronavirus measures restricting access to the courtroom.
> 
> On May 1, Meghan lost the first stage of her battle against the Mail, when Justice Warby agreed to"strike out" parts of Meghan’s claim in a pre-trial hearing.
> 
> It means that if or when the case goes to trial, the court will not be asked to rule on whether the _Mail on Sunday_ acted dishonestly, pursued a negative agenda against Meghan or deliberately stirred up trouble between the Duchess of Sussex and her father, Thomas Markle, 75.
> 
> In response, Meghan said she would “continue to move forward” with her case - a fact evidenced by today's ruling.
> 
> "Normally, when such an issue arises it is the claimant who seeks disclosure of the sources," Justice Warby added in reference to Associated Newspapers' desire to upend the key journalistic principle of anonymity for sources.
> 
> "The media invariably maintain that the protection of confidential sources is of high importance, and that names should not be disclosed or publicised," he added.
> 
> "In this unusual case, the roles are reversed."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wins Legal Bid to Protect Friends' Identities in Court Case
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has won a legal bid to protect the anonymity of five friends who spoke to PEOPLE in February 2019 as her court case continues
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


This whole secrecy around the 5 friends sounds so suspicious IMO and because of that it's surprising that the judge made the decision to keep their names private for now. Although it's interesting she phrased it as 'for the time being at least', so their names could come out at some point and they could be called as witnesses, as they should.
They are grown women who decided to go forward to the media and talk about a friends 'private' matter which would be broadcast to the world. Which makes it laughable that MM is so keen to protect their privacy yet they didn't respect her desperate need for privacy when they went to People Magazine to tell them details about a private letter she wrote to her father...


Makes no sense!
I don't think it's her friends privacy she's trying to protect, it's her possible involvement in getting that letter into the public domain and all the lies that could be surrounding this lawsuit.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> This whole secrecy around the 5 friends sounds so suspicious IMO and because of that it's surprising that the judge made the decision to keep their names private for now. Although it's interesting she phrased it as 'for the time being at least', so their names could come out at some point and they could be called as witnesses, as they should.
> They are grown women who decided to go forward to the media and talk about a friends 'private' matter which would be broadcast to the world. Which makes it laughable that MM is so keen to protect their privacy yet they didn't respect her desperate need for privacy when they went to People Magazine to tell them details about a private letter she wrote to her father...
> View attachment 4810913
> 
> Makes no sense!
> I don't think it's her friends privacy she's trying to protect, it's her possible involvement in getting that letter into the public domain and all the lies that could be surrounding this lawsuit.


of course....it's all about her


----------



## CarryOn2020

Earlier, I said Diana‘s wedding hair was criticized because it was flat.  Looking at these photos, it appears the flatness was because  the cut was not very suitable for a tiara style. The cut has choppy layers. As time passed, she and hairdresser learned how to style tiara hair.








						55 of Princess Diana's Best Hairstyles
					

A look back at the late royal's greatest hairstyles.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




Interesting rules for styling tiara hair:








						Princess Diana's Personal Hairdresser Shares His Memories of the Late Royal
					

Richard Dalton met Diana when she was 17, spent every day with her for 12 years, and gave William and Harry their first hair cuts.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




_“What people don’t realize,” he continued, “is the magnitude of that monarch length veil and the significance of the tiara. It’s a crown jewel, and must be respected and protected. You have to be extremely careful and gentle with it, and absolutely no hairspray or styling product can touch the stones.”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

While MM did defy tradition and wear a bright white gown, even though it was not a perfect fit, the gown has all the elements of a classic.








						Meghan Markle's wedding dress to go on display in Windsor and Edinburgh – dates and details revealed
					

Meghan Markle's stunning Givenchy wedding dress will go on display at Windsor Castle and the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh – all the details




					www.hellomagazine.com
				







https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedding_dress_of_Lady_Diana_Spencer

Diana‘s gown:
_The twenty-five-foot train posed problems. According to writer Andrew Morton, in Diana: Her True Story, the gown's designers realized too late that they had forgotten to allow for the train's length in relation to the size of the glass coach Diana and her father rode in to the ceremony. They found it difficult to fit inside the glass coach, and the train was badly crushed despite Diana's efforts. This accounted for the visible wrinkles in the wedding gown when she arrived at the cathedral._

Looks much better pressed:_ https://voice-tribune.com/_/news/princess-dianas-wedding-gown-now-at-the-frazier/ 

_
ETA: Scobie’s book has squelched any interest I have in the 5. His book confirmed what reporters and many of us have said from the beginning. For me, that’s good enough.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Exactly. It was the '80s and she had '80s hair. It would have been weird if she didn't. What we are doing today will look odd in another 40 years.


Oh I strongly disagree.  I remember getting up to watch the wedding and so surprised that she wore the same hairstyle she wore to be a nursery school assistant. Maybe she needed a little hairspray to control the frizz and major droop? She was to be the future Queen after all.

And this is coming form someone who got married in the '70s when women were au naturel and very laid back. So I'm fine with nothing elaborate.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I actually found Diana’s hair more timeless than most 80s ‘dos.  I love the fact that she didn’t overdo it. I also recognize that Jayne and I will never see eye to eye on Diana. Lol

I think MM’s hair was the way she wanted it. She often has that tendril. Maybe that was her stand and I don’t begrudge her for it. Who doesn’t want to look like themselves on their wedding day? I think people saying it was disrespectful is a little silly. She’s done a LOT of disrespectful things since that day but I’ll give her a pass on the hair.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Oh I strongly disagree.  I remember getting up to watch the wedding and so surprised that she wore the same hairstyle she wore to be a nursery school assistant. Maybe she needed a little hairspray to control the frizz and major droop? She was to be the future Queen after all.
> 
> And this is coming form someone who got married in the '70s when women were au naturel and very laid back. So I'm fine with nothing elaborate.



Diana was only 20 when she got married and it was a different time. It would never have occurred to her to fly a famous hairdresser in to do her hair, for example. Yet the vast majority of people still thought she looked great the way she was. 

She upped her glamour game as she grew older. I don’t think most people expected the new princess to look perfectly polished when she was barely out of her teens.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lounorada said:


> This whole secrecy around the 5 friends sounds so suspicious IMO and because of that it's surprising that the judge made the decision to keep their names private for now. Although it's interesting she phrased it as 'for the time being at least', so their names could come out at some point and they could be called as witnesses, as they should.
> They are grown women who decided to go forward to the media and talk about a friends 'private' matter which would be broadcast to the world. Which makes it laughable that MM is so keen to protect their privacy yet they didn't respect her desperate need for privacy when they went to People Magazine to tell them details about a private letter she wrote to her father...
> View attachment 4810913
> 
> Makes no sense!
> I don't think it's her friends privacy she's trying to protect, it's her possible involvement in getting that letter into the public domain and all the lies that could be surrounding this lawsuit.


Love the cat! Titus isn't bad either.


----------



## Lodpah

Ma


CarryOn2020 said:


> Earlier, I said Diana‘s wedding hair was criticized because it was flat.  Looking at these photos, it appears the flatness was because  the cut was not very suitable for a tiara style. The cut has choppy layers. As time passed, she and hairdresser learned how to style tiara hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 55 of Princess Diana's Best Hairstyles
> 
> 
> A look back at the late royal's greatest hairstyles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting rules for styling tiara hair:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's Personal Hairdresser Shares His Memories of the Late Royal
> 
> 
> Richard Dalton met Diana when she was 17, spent every day with her for 12 years, and gave William and Harry their first hair cuts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“What people don’t realize,” he continued, “is the magnitude of that monarch length veil and the significance of the tiara. It’s a crown jewel, and must be respected and protected. You have to be extremely careful and gentle with it, and absolutely no hairspray or styling product can touch the stones.”_


Maybe you should open a Diana thread. That would be interesting. I’m having to scroll past thru many non Meghan posts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

There are lots of posters who continue to mention Diana.
Perhaps one of them could open the thread, too?  Surely your post is not directed at just me, right?



Lodpah said:


> Ma
> 
> Maybe you should open a Diana thread. That would be interesting. I’m having to scroll past thru many non Meghan posts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I guess I need to read several pages again. I missed the disrespect part of MM’s hair.
Yes, brides can style themselves however they wish. Royal brides are different level. And BRF brides, another level entirely.
The bright white dress, the veil, the tiara fuss — those are what I consider disrespectful to QE (and AK). 



A1aGypsy said:


> I actually found Diana’s hair more timeless than most 80s ‘dos.  I love the fact that she didn’t overdo it. I also recognize that Jayne and I will never see eye to eye on Diana. Lol
> 
> I think MM’s hair was the way she wanted it. She often has that tendril. Maybe that was her stand and I don’t begrudge her for it. Who doesn’t want to look like themselves on their wedding day? I think people saying it was disrespectful is a little silly. She’s done a LOT of disrespectful things since that day but I’ll give her a pass on the hair.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I wasn’t referring to specific people here but in the comments section of one of the articles posted.

The tiara situation was deeply disrespectful to QEII.

The colour of a bride’s dress being relative to her virginity is also deeply disrespectful. To the bride. In my humble opinion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you for saving me time  
I do try to read each post, but, as many are pointing out, there are a lot of posts. Some are way off topic, some are tangentially related to H&M. IMHO, all are informative and helpful to understanding how these 2 grifters went so far off BRF message. For instance, just recently I learned that H and MasterA will stay in the succession line-up, albeit far down. That being the case, it is baffling to me that he would want to live in the US and maintain his place in line. As 2020 has taught me, anything can happen. We just never know the future. Baffling that he would do this.




A1aGypsy said:


> I wasn’t referring to specific people here but in the comments section of one of the articles posted.
> 
> The tiara situation was deeply disrespectful to QEII.
> 
> The colour of a bride’s dress being relative to her virginity is also deeply disrespectful. To the bride. In my humble opinion.


----------



## Emeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for saving me time
> I do try to read each post, but, as many are pointing out, there are a lot of posts. Some are way off topic, some are tangentially related to H&M. IMHO, all are informative and helpful to understanding how these 2 grifters went so far off BRF message. For instance, just recently I learned that H and MasterA will stay in the succession line-up, albeit far down. That being the case, it is baffling to me that he would want to live in the US and maintain his place in line. As 2020 has taught me, anything can happen. We just never know the future. Baffling that he would do this.


It's totally baffling. That may be one of the reasons he might decide to head home in the next year.  In addition, perpetual couch surfing during a pandemic may be getting old. 

I wonder what he thinks when he sees photos of all of his family doing well, cheerily lending a hand and getting on with life.

Meanwhile his main job these days seems to be occasionally  sending out hostage type videos.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> she was much more sophisticated later in her life but at the time she got married she was young and styles were different then...poorly advised? maybe but I don't recall anyone saying she didn't look good at the time.  and the flower girls were adorable


I remember the criticism. They said her dress looked like crumpled Kleenex with hair that got caught in the rain.

I always liked her original Sloane Ranger style of dressing before she changed it up.

People are saying Diana was a teenager and it was a different time... but not for the BRF.  They have always done things a certain regal way, whether we like the look or not. And she wasn't just some shopgirl, she was born an aristocrat from a noble family that had centuries old English history.  More royal than the Windsors, it has been said.


----------



## gracekelly

I am a little late to this wedding hair party, but there was something off about the story of the Paris based hairdresser.  Serge Normont did her hair on the day of the wedding.  He is not based in Paris.  He got his start in Paris at the Jacques Dessange Salon.   He subsequently went to NYC where he is now based.  He does the hair of many Hollywood bona fide stars and super models for big events.  This entire story about flying him in from Paris is  off, unless he was there for commitments.  I don't believe it and think they said that to force the issue and impress Angela Kelly, who wasn't impressed and  she could not change the protocol for releasing a tiara prior to the wedding anyway.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> I guess I need to read several pages again. I missed the disrespect part of MM’s hair.
> Yes, brides can style themselves however they wish. Royal brides are different level. And BRF brides, another level entirely.
> The bright white dress, the veil, the tiara fuss — those are what I consider disrespectful to QE (and AK).



It's interesting, I'm completely untraditional and personally would not subscribe to traditions like the wedding dress color myself. That being said, if I had all the money at my disposal and teams of people and designers who could style me to look fabulous in _any_ style, I wouldn't fight it. Why not just go along... she certainly wouldn't be the first bride or groom who made some compromises for their spouse's religion/culture/preferences on their wedding day. To me it says she must have it her way no matter what. I don't necessarily fault her... I have some bridezilla friends myself. But quite interesting considering the low-maintenance/easy going image she tries to project.


----------



## csshopper

Maybe I missed the headline the past few years, but I don’t think she followed through and became a British citizen?


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I am a little late to this wedding hair party, but there was something off about the story of the Paris based hairdresser.  Serge Normont did her hair on the day of the wedding.  He is not based in Paris.  He got his start in Paris at the Jacques Dessange Salon.   He subsequently went to NYC where he is now based.  He does the hair of many Hollywood bona fide stars and super models for big events.  This entire story about flying him in from Paris is  off, unless he was there for commitments.  I don't believe it and think they said that to force the issue and impress Angela Kelly, who wasn't impressed and  she could not change the protocol for releasing a tiara prior to the wedding anyway.


Good points.  Maybe she is still trying to make Angela Kelly look bad by showing how unhelpful she was. Poor Meg and all.  Everyone was against her.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Good points.  Maybe she is still trying to make Angela Kelly look bad by showing how unhelpful she was. Poor Meg and all.  Everyone was against her.


I don't think the real purpose  was to make AK look bad.  They wanted something that she could not deliver to them even it she had the power to do it.  Even Kate was not allowed to have a hairstyle try out with her chosen tiara.  She made do with a dime store version.  MM obviously wanted to do something else besides a hairstyle try out.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Emeline said:


> It's totally baffling. That may be one of the reasons he might decide to head home in the next year.  In addition, perpetual couch surfing during a pandemic may be getting old.
> 
> I wonder what he thinks when he sees photos of all of his family doing well, cheerily lending a hand and getting on with life.
> 
> Meanwhile his main job these days seems to be occasionally  sending out hostage type videos.



I’d be surprised if they go home. That would be the same as admitting they were wrong... and that’s not gonna happen... 



gracekelly said:


> I am a little late to this wedding hair party, but there was something off about the story of the Paris based hairdresser.  Serge Normont did her hair on the day of the wedding.  He is not based in Paris.  He got his start in Paris at the Jacques Dessange Salon.   He subsequently went to NYC where he is now based.  He does the hair of many Hollywood bona fide stars and super models for big events.  This entire story about flying him in from Paris is  off, unless he was there for commitments.  I don't believe it and think they said that to force the issue and impress Angela Kelly, who wasn't impressed and  she could not change the protocol for releasing a tiara prior to the wedding anyway.



I don’t disagree. It’s just another part of Finding Freedom that seems to be off. Like I said,if it’s true, I don’t know how the story makes them look better? Now we have it was either a tiff about the wrong tiara or Harry being hateful to the Queen’s staff demanding a tiara for a hairdresser who flew from Paris and Harry and Meghan didn’t discuss it with any to find out the protocols... before they looked petulant, now they look petulant, out of touch, condescending and even more like they don’t give a crap about the environment. And this story was OLD... no one was talking about it, they dug it back up again to make themselves somehow look worse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for saving me time
> I do try to read each post, but, as many are pointing out, there are a lot of posts. Some are way off topic, some are tangentially related to H&M. IMHO, all are informative and helpful to understanding how these 2 grifters went so far off BRF message. For instance, just recently I learned that H and MasterA will stay in the succession line-up, albeit far down. That being the case, it is baffling to me that he would want to live in the US and maintain his place in line. As 2020 has taught me, anything can happen. We just never know the future. Baffling that he would do this.



Years ago I read a memoir "Living with the Laird", written by an American journalist who - as a not so young bride and mother, about Meghan's age - met and married a super distant cousin who was a Scottish nobleman and lived with him in his nearly ruined estate for a while. I vividly remember how disturbing I found it that the woman took the young heir to the estate and title, his only son, back to the US after the divorce, and it's much worse with a child that is actually in line to the British THRONE IMO.

Also, that journalist went on to give very unflattering interviews about her ex-husband (who while educated lacked basic life skills and was a hoarder from how she painted it) and even had the freaking child chime in. Very distasteful.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> While MM did defy tradition and wear a bright white gown, even though it was not a perfect fit, the gown has all the elements of a classic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's wedding dress to go on display in Windsor and Edinburgh – dates and details revealed
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's stunning Givenchy wedding dress will go on display at Windsor Castle and the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh – all the details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4810947
> 
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedding_dress_of_Lady_Diana_Spencer
> 
> Diana‘s gown:
> _The twenty-five-foot train posed problems. According to writer Andrew Morton, in Diana: Her True Story, the gown's designers realized too late that they had forgotten to allow for the train's length in relation to the size of the glass coach Diana and her father rode in to the ceremony. They found it difficult to fit inside the glass coach, and the train was badly crushed despite Diana's efforts. This accounted for the visible wrinkles in the wedding gown when she arrived at the cathedral._
> 
> Looks much better pressed:_ https://voice-tribune.com/_/news/princess-dianas-wedding-gown-now-at-the-frazier/
> View attachment 4810941
> _
> ETA: Scobie’s book has squelched any interest I have in the 5. His book confirmed what reporters and many of us have said from the beginning. For me, that’s good enough.



Not so classic for a woman marrying marrying _again_, nor was the veil. In fact is was against protocol and advice. She just couldn't resist going for the 'full picture' of a 'young' bride. Not just self-delusion. All for the photo op IMO. 

I know that's sounds beachy, but actually, if she wants to think of herself as young in her late '30s, I have no problem with that. Who knows, she may live forever. But, she has this propensity for reimagining/reinventing herself as a character, She sees herself from the outside constantly, I would like to see her happy with just being herself.


----------



## doni

I love Diana’s wedding look, hair included, because it was so extra and iconic.
I also didn’t get Meghan’s veil (I did like the dress). I mean, if you are in your late 30s, even if you had not been married before, why would you _want to_ wear a veil?


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> It's interesting, I'm completely untraditional and personally would not subscribe to traditions like the wedding dress color myself. That being said, if I had all the money at my disposal and teams of people and designers who could style me to look fabulous in _any_ style, I wouldn't fight it. Why not just go along... she certainly wouldn't be the first bride or groom who made some compromises for their spouse's religion/culture/preferences on their wedding day. To me it says she must have it her way no matter what. I don't necessarily fault her... I have some bridezilla friends myself. But quite interesting considering the low-maintenance/easy going image she tries to project.



It wasn't as though she was paying for any of it or doing all the planning alone. 

She wouldn't even go along with protocol regarding bridesmaids. 

Let's not go into demanding air-freshener for our historical chapels 

I always wonder that people have so many contrary and definite opinions on things. Most people just want to celebrate the wedding and wish the couple the best. 

Why start your relationship with your in-laws acting like a bridezilla?


----------



## maryg1

CarryOn2020 said:


> In a man, aggressive = assertive, arrogant = confident.
> When a woman is called these things, it means she got somewhere and somebody is threatened by her. Good for her! Of course, it is racist.


Not for me, or at least not in Italian.
Arrogant means arrogant, aggressive means aggressive, both words are used do describe bad behaviors, be it woman/man/white/PoC.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe the problem with Diana is the hair and the gown look dated.  Fashions change and some wedding gowns may be timeless but not this one.  I didn't love Kate's gown but it is more timeless IMO



I remember loving Diana's wedding dress at the time, being more or less the same age it all seemed very romantique and she looked like a farytale princess!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> I love Diana’s wedding look, hair included, because it was so extra and iconic.
> I also didn’t get Meghan’s veil (I did like the dress). I mean, if you are in your late 30s, even if you had not been married before, *why would you want to wear a veil?*



She wanted the whole royal wedding experience, including the veil to give the illusion of being a blushing bride. If there is one thing nobody can dispute, it's that Meghan wants what she wants and Harry is there to make sure she gets it if he can.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> I remember loving Diana's wedding dress at the time, being more or less the same age it all seemed very romantique and she looked like a farytale princess!



That is how I remember it too. That dress was extremely popular and it inspired the look of wedding dresses for many brides around the world for years.

To get this back on topic: Interestingly, according to Wikipedia Diana's wedding dress belongs to Harry. I wonder if Meghan has ever asked to try it on.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe at this point Harry can't afford a vacation.



Ha!  The guy has been on a vacation his entire "adult" life.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is how I remember it too. That dress was extremely popular and it inspired the look of wedding dresses for many brides around the world for years.
> 
> To get this back on topic: Interestingly, according to Wikipedia Diana's wedding dress belongs to Harry. I wonder if Meghan has ever asked to try it on.


can't imagine that dress on M
and even if he owns it, who knows where it's stored....now if they are the humanitarians they say they are they could sell it and donate the proceeds to people (or animals) in need


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> can't imagine that dress on M
> and even if he owns it, who knows where it's stored....now if they are the humanitarians they say they are they could sell it and donate the proceeds to people (or animals) in need


You are giving her a brilliant idea. She can't sell it and keep the money (it will not look good for her image). Without hurting Harry's feelings, she can get rid of it and come out as a philanthropist. You may get a Thank You note.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You are giving her a brilliant idea. She can't sell it and keep the money (it will not look good for her image). Without hurting Harry's feelings, she can get rid of it and come out as a philanthropist. You may get a Thank You note.


I wish
Would love to see that money go to a good cause (and I think it would bring a pretty penny)


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> That is how I remember it too. That dress was extremely popular and it inspired the look of wedding dresses for many brides around the world for years.
> 
> To get this back on topic: *Interestingly, according to Wikipedia Diana's wedding dress belongs to Harry.* I wonder if Meghan has ever asked to try it on.



It could well be, but I distinctly remember that at some point, several years ago, it was sent to Japan for an exhibition, organized by Charles Spencer, who else? Trying in every way to make money with his sister's memory.....Hmmm, maybe I'm being nasty and it was lent for free or the proceeds were given to charity...I hope so anyway. Maybe it belongs to Harry but it's kept at Althorp? I have no idea....

Correction: I've just googled the dress and Wikipedia says it did tour several exhibitons, and was kept at Althorp, then in 2014 it passed from her brother to her sons, the ring to William and the dress to Harry. She had requested that all her belongings would go to her sons when they turned 30.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan found another virtual summit to volunteer to speak in. This week's subject of interest: Gender and politics.

*Meghan Markle will interview the co-founder of nonprofit newsroom The 19th about gender and diversity in the media at a virtual summit - after 'reaching out' and asking to be involved*

*Duchess of Sussex, 38, will take part in a virtual summit next week*
*Meghan Markle will interview The 19th* co-founder and CEO, Emily Ramshaw*
*The 19th* is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom focused on gender and politics*
The Duchess of Sussex will take part in a virtual summit next week, it has been announced. 

Meghan Markle, 38, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, civic engagement, journalism and the arts.

The Duchess, who lives in Los Angeles with Prince Harry and their 15-month-old son Archie, will interview Emily Ramshaw, the co-founder and CEO of The 19th*, a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom focused on gender and politics.

The discussion next Friday will close the summit. It will take place three days after the publication of the Duke and Duchess of Susssex's biography, Finding Freedom.

In a statement to Glamour, Meghan said: 'The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important.

'I’m looking forward to asking the co-founder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity, and community at its core.'

Ramshaw said the Duchess 'reached out' to the organisation after learning of its work. 'She [Meghan] told us that our vision for The 19th*—building a truly diverse and representative newsroom that covers women with nuance—spoke to her immediately.'

The 19th*, which launched last week, describes itself as 'a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy'. 

Its website description reads: 'We aim to empower women — particularly those underserved by and underrepresented in American media — with the information, community and tools they need to be equal participants in our democracy.'

The 19th* summit features an impressive line-up including US Senator ****** Harries, Melinda Gates, Hillary ******* and Meryl Streep. 

Each day is themed around a topic like 'On Race and Gender', 'Electability*' and 'The Future is Female'. 

Many of the sessions will take the form of conversations or panel discussions. Streep will be joined by Zoe Saldaña for a performance titled Voices of Suffrage.  

It will mark Meghan's second appearance at a virtual summit in recent weeks, following her address to young women around the world last month for the UN initiative Girl Up.

On this occasion the Duchess will be flexing her interviewer muscles. Meghan previously conducted a high profile interview with First Lady Michelle ***** for her Forces For Change issue of British Vogue.

Ramshaw admitted the idea of being interviewed by Meghan is 'surreal'.  

In the months since moving to Los Angeles at the start of lockdown, the Duchess of Sussex has made only a handful of virtual appearances. 

In the immediate wake of the death of the Black Lives Matter protests sparked by the death of George Floyd, Meghan delivered a speech to the graduating class of her former high school about racial equality and justice. 

She also joined Prince Harry for a virtual roundtable discussion with young leaders from around the Commonwealth.  









						Meghan Markle will interview co-founder of virtual summit
					

Meghan Markle, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, journalism and the arts.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Meghan found another virtual summit to volunteer to speak in. This week's subject of interest: Gender and politics.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will interview the co-founder of nonprofit newsroom The 19th about gender and diversity in the media at a virtual summit - after 'reaching out' and asking to be involved*
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex, 38, will take part in a virtual summit next week*
> *Meghan Markle will interview The 19th* co-founder and CEO, Emily Ramshaw*
> *The 19th* is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom focused on gender and politics*
> The Duchess of Sussex will take part in a virtual summit next week, it has been announced.
> 
> Meghan Markle, 38, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, civic engagement, journalism and the arts.
> 
> The Duchess, who lives in Los Angeles with Prince Harry and their 15-month-old son Archie, will interview Emily Ramshaw, the co-founder and CEO of The 19th*, a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom focused on gender and politics.
> 
> The discussion next Friday will close the summit. It will take place three days after the publication of the Duke and Duchess of Susssex's biography, Finding Freedom.
> 
> In a statement to Glamour, Meghan said: 'The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important.
> 
> 'I’m looking forward to asking the co-founder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity, and community at its core.'
> 
> Ramshaw said the Duchess 'reached out' to the organisation after learning of its work. 'She [Meghan] told us that our vision for The 19th*—building a truly diverse and representative newsroom that covers women with nuance—spoke to her immediately.'
> 
> The 19th*, which launched last week, describes itself as 'a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy'.
> 
> Its website description reads: 'We aim to empower women — particularly those underserved by and underrepresented in American media — with the information, community and tools they need to be equal participants in our democracy.'
> 
> The 19th* summit features an impressive line-up including US Senator ****** Harries, Melinda Gates, Hillary ******* and Meryl Streep.
> 
> Each day is themed around a topic like 'On Race and Gender', 'Electability*' and 'The Future is Female'.
> 
> Many of the sessions will take the form of conversations or panel discussions. Streep will be joined by Zoe Saldaña for a performance titled Voices of Suffrage.
> 
> It will mark Meghan's second appearance at a virtual summit in recent weeks, following her address to young women around the world last month for the UN initiative Girl Up.
> 
> On this occasion the Duchess will be flexing her interviewer muscles. Meghan previously conducted a high profile interview with First Lady Michelle ***** for her Forces For Change issue of British Vogue.
> 
> Ramshaw admitted the idea of being interviewed by Meghan is 'surreal'.
> 
> In the months since moving to Los Angeles at the start of lockdown, the Duchess of Sussex has made only a handful of virtual appearances.
> 
> In the immediate wake of the death of the Black Lives Matter protests sparked by the death of George Floyd, Meghan delivered a speech to the graduating class of her former high school about racial equality and justice.
> 
> She also joined Prince Harry for a virtual roundtable discussion with young leaders from around the Commonwealth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will interview co-founder of virtual summit
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, journalism and the arts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Will someone watch and count how many times she says “I” in the course of the speech?


----------



## Shopgirl1996

Jayne1 said:


> *I remember the criticism. They said her dress looked like crumpled Kleenex with hair that got caught in the rain.*
> 
> I always liked her original Sloane Ranger style of dressing before she changed it up.
> 
> People are saying Diana was a teenager and it was a different time... but not for the BRF.  They have always done things a certain regal way, whether we like the look or not. And she wasn't just some shopgirl, she was born an aristocrat from a noble family that had centuries old English history.  More royal than the Windsors, it has been said.



OMG! (to the bolded part) That is so funny! I hadn't heard that before.


----------



## lalame

Why is this making news? Why do people care to hear about her opinion on serious topics when she's just now a normal person? I don't get it... I can't imagine the ego behind pursuing these opportunities or even agreeing to them when you haven't had any direct experience at all. I think racism is awful... maybe the NAACP should ask me to be their next keynote speaker.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Ramshaw said the Duchess 'reached out' to the organisation after learning of its work. 'She [Meghan] told us that our vision for The 19th*—building a truly diverse and representative newsroom that covers women with nuance—spoke to her immediately.'*
> Ramshaw admitted the idea of being interviewed by Meghan is 'surreal'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will interview co-founder of virtual summit
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, journalism and the arts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Participation in this type of activities should be earned not imposed! It is outrageous to have parasites taking advantage (for self-promotion) of work done by so many women over generations.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Participation in this type of activities should be earned not imposed! It is outrageous to have parasites taking advantage (for self-promotion) of work done by so many women over generations.



I KNOW! If you're actually doing the hard work, why would you want someone who married into fame basically to be representing you or the struggle of your profession or whatever. And have to sit and hear her talk to YOU about it as an expert.  This could be said for all celebrity speakers honestly but it's a lot more palatable if they actually bring their accomplishments and experiences there to the table, but she doesn't really do that. She lectures.

I remember hearing a good keynote by Serena Williams at a conference and she spoke about the importance of teamwork in elite sports. It wasn't directly about the serious topic of the conference but it was still a good takeaway and she was an authority on that topic. WTF does MM know about diversity in newsrooms?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Will someone watch and count how many times she says “I” in the course of the speech?


A-HA .. now, if we were still in our University days, this would become the new drinking game .. "each time she says I, you have to take a drink"!


----------



## bag-mania

It is all about gaining publicity for herself and getting her name associated with the likes *************, Melinda Gates, Hillary C. and Meryl Streep. That way maybe next time she won't have to "reach out" and she'll get an offer for a paid speaking engagement.

I feel sorry for the organizers of the event. They had to scramble to figure out what to do with her because God forbid they turn her down. She'll close the summit by reading pre-written questions to the group's CEO. It's like any acting job, she needs to learn her lines and she'll be fine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I KNOW! If you're actually doing the hard work, why would you want someone who married into fame basically to be representing you or the struggle of your profession or whatever. And have to sit and hear her talk to YOU about it as an expert.  This could be said for all celebrity speakers honestly but it's a lot more palatable if they actually bring their accomplishments and experiences there to the table, but she doesn't really do that. She lectures.
> 
> I remember hearing a good keynote by Serena Williams at a conference and she spoke about the importance of teamwork in elite sports. It wasn't directly about the serious topic of the conference but it was still a good takeaway and she was an authority on that topic. WTF does MM know about diversity in newsrooms?


100% agree!  As per usual, she's talking out of her a$$ .. we'll likely get a whole lot of word-salad and I can't even imagine her being able to "share" the stage with any of the other folks .. since SHE always needs to be the center of attention.  No way I'm going to watch; will be interesting to hear what the pundits think about it after the fact ..


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> It is all about gaining publicity for herself and getting her name associated with the likes *************, Melinda Gates, Hillary C. and Meryl Streep. That way maybe next time she won't have to "reach out" and she'll get an offer for a paid speaking engagement.
> 
> I feel sorry for the organizers of the event. They had to scramble to figure out what to do with her because God forbid they turn her down. *She'll close the summit by reading pre-written questions to the group's CEO*. It's like any acting job, she needs to learn her lines and she'll be fine.


GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR .. I can't even say HOW MUCH I HATE, HATE, HATE that BS!!!!  We used to have to do the same when we had our Divisional or Company "town-hall" meetings - seriously?!?!  If you are the gosh-darn CEO or Divisional head, you should be able to speak extemporaneously and tackle the TOUGH questions .. but no, everything has to be "reviewed" and "tamed-down" before they get their questions .. to me, that reeks of a poorly run organization!!!


----------



## Aimee3

How long is she going to be 38?  Isn’t she 39 now like, am I the only one old enough to remember, Jack Benny?


----------



## V0N1B2

Hmmmm  
How would Meghan know to "reach out" to this organization?  I admit I've never heard of them, but then again, I don't have the flair or panache for hustling and getting my name out there. 
Is this the same Emily Ramshaw that _also_ went to Northwestern and _also_ graduated in 2003? 
I wonder, were they _also_ sorority sisters?


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are lots of posters who continue to mention Diana.
> Perhaps one of them could open the thread, too?  Surely your post is not directed at just me, right?


Actually what I should have said Princess Diana should have her own thread and no not directed at you personally.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Hmmmm
> How would Meghan know to "reach out" to this organization?  I admit I've never heard of them, but then again, I don't have the flair or panache for hustling and getting my name out there.
> Is this the same Emily Ramshaw that _also_ went to Northwestern and _also_ graduated in 2003?
> I wonder, were they _also_ sorority sisters?
> 
> View attachment 4811671
> View attachment 4811672



Anything is possible. The reason you've never heard of them is the group has only existed since January of this year. They have received some very generous donations from wealthy people and groups to start them off.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Why is this making news? Why do people care to hear about her opinion on serious topics when she's just now a normal person? I don't get it... I can't imagine the ego behind pursuing these opportunities or even agreeing to them when you haven't had any direct experience at all. I think racism is awful... maybe the NAACP should ask me to be their next keynote speaker.


apparently she has respect from some prominent people still
I was just watching an interview with the (black) editor in chief of British Vogue.  He was asked about H&M and their exit from the RF.  He went on about how wonderful she was and what a great experience he had working with her on the Vogue issue.  He said something to the effect that she really knows herself and he's sure she will be fine with the decision she made.  (but will H be fine? this guy apparently doesn't know H)
I still don't like her and don't think she's any great activist or intellectual but I guess lots of people don't agree with me.


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> Hmmmm
> How would Meghan know to "reach out" to this organization?  I admit I've never heard of them, but then again, I don't have the flair or panache for hustling and getting my name out there.
> Is this the same Emily Ramshaw that _also_ went to Northwestern and _also_ graduated in 2003?
> I wonder, were they _also_ sorority sisters?
> 
> View attachment 4811671
> View attachment 4811672



Great detective work!


----------



## lalame

V0N1B2 said:


> Hmmmm
> How would Meghan know to "reach out" to this organization?  I admit I've never heard of them, but then again, I don't have the flair or panache for hustling and getting my name out there.
> Is this the same Emily Ramshaw that _also_ went to Northwestern and _also_ graduated in 2003?
> I wonder, were they _also_ sorority sisters?
> 
> View attachment 4811671
> View attachment 4811672



I bet her PR team approaches it like a sales situation and reaches out to dozens or hundreds of event planners/speech brokers to solicit opportunities. Then they have her reach out and flatter the head of the company or association or whatever. Classic sales.


----------



## rose60610

I think women's organizations/movements started out with positive intentions, but have largely morphed or been hijacked to represent monolithic views. The "19th" website is a slick site that claims to be bla bla bla but it's really just another echo chamber.  

I'm so sick of women led panels that try to convince me that I'm nothing but a helpless little victim in this big bad world of men monsters--therefore I'm obligated to think only a certain way and donate my money to their organization that purports to "help all women" which is a total line of BS. You're telling me that a panel of Markle, Gates, Harris, C****** and Streep is nonpartisan? I think Streep's success is self-made, but the other four would be total no-names without their husbands or previous lovers. MM fits right in. She gets another platform to tell us how she overcame all the hardship in her life and finally found purpose when she delivered food to people's homes for half an hour. I can't wait for her magnitudes of awe inspiring wisdom. Oh well, maybe she'll get clothes that fit for this presentation. For her, that would be an accomplishment. And what's up with MM's work with British Vogue? Did she Markle that too?


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> I think women's organizations/movements started out with positive intentions, but have largely morphed or been hijacked to represent monolithic views. The "19th" website is a slick site that claims to be bla bla bla but it's really just another echo chamber.
> 
> I'm so sick of women led panels that try to convince me that I'm nothing but a helpless little victim in this big bad world of men monsters--therefore I'm obligated to think only a certain way and donate my money to their organization that purports to "help all women" which is a total line of BS. You're telling me that a panel of Markle, Gates, Harris, C****** and Streep is nonpartisan? I think Streep's success is self-made, but the other four would be total no-names without their husbands or previous lovers. MM fits right in. She gets another platform to tell us how she overcame all the hardship in her life and finally found purpose when she delivered food to people's homes for half an hour. I can't wait for her magnitudes of awe inspiring wisdom. Oh well, maybe she'll get clothes that fit for this presentation. For her, that would be an accomplishment. And what's up with MM's work with British Vogue? Did she Markle that too?



There's no comparison between MM and any of those women. It's true they may not be household names without their husbands (is this true of ****** though? Don't know the history there) but they were all well-educated and were successful in serious careers.


----------



## bag-mania

Here's an insipid fluffy article because we were all waiting with bated breath to find out how Meghan spent her birthday...

*Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘Small and Intimate’ 39th Birthday Celebration With Prince Harry*
Home sweet house party! *Prince Harry* planned a low-key celebration for his wife *Meghan Markle*’s 39th birthday at their Los Angeles residence, a source exclusively tells _Us Weekly_. Meghan’s mother, *Doria Ragland*, and the couple’s 14-month-old son, Archie, were both in attendance.

“They spent the day as a family and in the evening Doria looked after Archie so that Meghan and Harry could enjoy some couple time,” the insider said of the Tuesday, August 4, festivities. “Harry cooked Meghan a three-course dinner, but Doria helped him with the preparation.”

The source adds: “While Harry has become a better cook since marrying Meghan, he still has a long way to go!”

The former military pilot, 35, “organized a huge chocolate birthday cake, covered in icing sugar and balloons” to make sure Meghan’s big day was one to remember.

When it came to her present, Harry went for something both unique and sentimental.

“He wanted the gift to be personal, so he surprised Meghan with a necklace that he designed,” the insider tells _Us_. “And a framed photograph of the two of them, which he took himself.”

For her part, the California native “wanted to keep it small and intimate” this year, but the source says Meghan plans to throw a “big, glamourous birthday party with all her friends for her 40th next year.”

While the family honored Meghan in L.A., some of her royal relatives sent well wishes from England to commemorate the milestone.

“Wishing The Duchess of Sussex a very happy birthday!” the royal family’s official Instagram account wrote alongside a photo of the queen and _Suits_ alum in 2018.

Luminary Bakery in London also celebrated the occasion by auctioning off a cake in her name. The treat was very similar to the cake the bakery created for Meghan’s birthday in August 2019, but instead of carrot cake it was “lemon celebration cake.”

The confections décor of fresh fruit and frosting closely resembled the sweet treat the actress enjoyed at Frogmore Cottage last year.

The best part was that the money from those who entered for a chance to win the dessert went to the business’ mission to empower women. By donating £10 (about $13 USD) women who are homeless, coming out of prison, were victims of domestic violence or sexual abuse, are given the tools to learn to bake and find employment.









						How Meghan Markle Celebrated Her 39th Birthday With Prince Harry in L.A.
					

A look at what Prince Harry did to honor his wife Meghan Markle’s 39th birthday in Los Angeles — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Here's an insipid fluffy article because we were all waiting with bated breath to find out how Meghan spent her birthday...
> 
> *Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘Small and Intimate’ 39th Birthday Celebration With Prince Harry*
> Home sweet house party! *Prince Harry* planned a low-key celebration for his wife *Meghan Markle*’s 39th birthday at their Los Angeles residence, a source exclusively tells _Us Weekly_. Meghan’s mother, *Doria Ragland*, and the couple’s 14-month-old son, Archie, were both in attendance.
> 
> “They spent the day as a family and in the evening Doria looked after Archie so that Meghan and Harry could enjoy some couple time,” the insider said of the Tuesday, August 4, festivities. “Harry cooked Meghan a three-course dinner, but Doria helped him with the preparation.”
> 
> The source adds: “While Harry has become a better cook since marrying Meghan, he still has a long way to go!”
> 
> The former military pilot, 35, “organized a huge chocolate birthday cake, covered in icing sugar and balloons” to make sure Meghan’s big day was one to remember.
> 
> When it came to her present, Harry went for something both unique and sentimental.
> 
> “He wanted the gift to be personal, so he surprised Meghan with a necklace that he designed,” the insider tells _Us_. “And a framed photograph of the two of them, which he took himself.”
> 
> For her part, the California native “wanted to keep it small and intimate” this year, but the source says Meghan plans to throw a “big, glamourous birthday party with all her friends for her 40th next year.”
> 
> While the family honored Meghan in L.A., some of her royal relatives sent well wishes from England to commemorate the milestone.
> 
> “Wishing The Duchess of Sussex a very happy birthday!” the royal family’s official Instagram account wrote alongside a photo of the queen and _Suits_ alum in 2018.
> 
> Luminary Bakery in London also celebrated the occasion by auctioning off a cake in her name. The treat was very similar to the cake the bakery created for Meghan’s birthday in August 2019, but instead of carrot cake it was “lemon celebration cake.”
> 
> The confections décor of fresh fruit and frosting closely resembled the sweet treat the actress enjoyed at Frogmore Cottage last year.
> 
> The best part was that the money from those who entered for a chance to win the dessert went to the business’ mission to empower women. By donating £10 (about $13 USD) women who are homeless, coming out of prison, were victims of domestic violence or sexual abuse, are given the tools to learn to bake and find employment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle Celebrated Her 39th Birthday With Prince Harry in L.A.
> 
> 
> A look at what Prince Harry did to honor his wife Meghan Markle’s 39th birthday in Los Angeles — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


On the like option we should have a few more emojis:  I need them for some of the released news.

"“He wanted the gift to be personal, so he surprised Meghan with a necklace that he designed,” *the insider tells Us*." Who is the insider, MM, H, Doria or Archie? They were the only ones on the party...


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Anything is possible. The reason you've never heard of them is the group has only existed since January of this year. They have received some very generous donations from wealthy people and groups to start them off.


Yes. Goldman Sachs, I hear. 


sdkitty said:


> apparently she has respect from some prominent people still
> I was just watching an interview with the (black) editor in chief of British Vogue.  He was asked about H&M and their exit from the RF.  He went on about how wonderful she was and what a great experience he had working with her on the Vogue issue.  He said something to the effect that she really knows herself and he's sure she will be fine with the decision she made.  (but will H be fine? this guy apparently doesn't know H)
> I still don't like her and don't think she's any great activist or intellectual but I guess lots of people don't agree with me.


Edward Enninful. Per the article snippet below from Women's Wear Daily, it is understood Meghan reached out directly to him.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> On the like option we should have a few more emojis:  I need them for some of the released news.
> 
> "“He wanted the gift to be personal, *so he surprised Meghan with a necklace that he designed*,” *the insider tells Us*." Who is the insider, MM, H, Doria or Archie? They were the only ones on the party...



Here's the important question, did he design the necklace with Meghan looking over his shoulder? If she didn't get to put her input in then it's going to have to go back to the shop and be reworked, just like the engagement ring he designed for her that she didn't like.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> You're telling me that a panel of Markle, Gates, Harris, C****** and Streep is nonpartisan? I think Streep's success is self-made, but the other four would be total no-names without their husbands or previous lovers.



I disagree on Hillary. She was an accomplished lawyer and many have said she's way smarter and brighter than Bill, it's just he's a man and she is not. About ******, who's her important husband? I don't know anything about her.

P.S. Vogue UK, same thing, they reached out but in that case made it sound like Vogue begged her. Someone let it slip way after the fact MM approached them. You bet when Kate worked with magazines she did not have to harrass them LOL


----------



## sdkitty

Streep is pretty much considered the greatest actress of our time.  Hillary is very smart and accomplished.  Her husband is very smart too - and accomplished.  ****** is a US Senator and former CA Attorney General.  Gates was in senior management at Microsoft before they married.
Meghan is a D-list actress who had a somewhat successful blog.  A superior networker who landed a prince.  Not just any prince but one from the most famous and prestigious royal family in the world.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Here's the important question, did he design the necklace with Meghan looking over his shoulder? If she didn't get to put her input in then it's going to have to go back to the shop and be reworked, just like the engagement ring he designed for her that she didn't like.


She needs to be assured that the necklace is indeed very 'precious'...


----------



## scarlet555

V0N1B2 said:


> Yes. Goldman Sachs, I hear.
> 
> Edward Enninful. Per the article snippet below from Women's Wear Daily, it is understood Meghan reached out directly to him.
> View attachment 4811734



Meghan had to contact them directly, acted like an editor, pretended to be humble...   rubbish and shady character that Meghan, her thirst for self promotion is so embarrassing.  Somehow I just don't see her acting anytime soon either, I'm sure she'll say she's busy rescuing the world.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> Hmmmm
> How would Meghan know to "reach out" to this organization?  I admit I've never heard of them, but then again, I don't have the flair or panache for hustling and getting my name out there.
> Is this the same Emily Ramshaw that _also_ went to Northwestern and _also_ graduated in 2003?
> I wonder, were they _also_ sorority sisters?
> 
> View attachment 4811671
> View attachment 4811672








V0N1B2 said:


> *Yes. Goldman Sachs, I hear.*
> 
> Edward Enninful. Per the article snippet below from Women's Wear Daily, it is understood Meghan reached out directly to him.
> View attachment 4811734






It seems to be a bit of a theme that she isn't asked to be involved/appear/speak at some of these events (including co-editing the Vogue UK issue) but more like has to ask or beg to be included. That's not a good look for anyone.

After your detective work @V0N1B2, it seems that this reeks of another case of nepotism. No surprise there.


----------



## rose60610

Right, Hillary, Gates, Markle would be successful in their own rights, but not reached the fame and become the household names they are due to their husbands. As for Harris, it's highly unlikely she'd have gotten elected to anything without Willie Brown. "Business Insider" January 2019, among many other publications, has a summary of the background.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree on Hillary. She was an accomplished lawyer and many have said she's way smarter and brighter than Bill, it's just he's a man and she is not. About ******, who's her important husband? I don't know anything about her.



Okay did a little more research... ******'s husband is definitely no big wig haha. He's just a partner at a law firm. Certainly prestigious but he did not put her on the map. She was already Attorney General of CA when they started dating.

Edit: I see that poster meant Willie Brown (prev bf), not spouse. Now that I don't know anything about.


----------



## lulu212121

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree on Hillary. She was an accomplished lawyer and many have said she's way smarter and brighter than Bill, it's just he's a man and she is not. *About ******, who's her important husband? I don't know anything about her*.
> 
> P.S. Vogue UK, same thing, they reached out but in that case made it sound like Vogue begged her. Someone let it slip way after the fact MM approached them. You bet when Kate worked with magazines she did not have to harrass them LOL





rose60610 said:


> Right, Hillary, Gates, Markle would be successful in their own rights, but not reached the fame and become the household names they are due to their husbands. As for* Harris, it's highly unlikely she'd have gotten elected to anything without Willie Brown. "Business Insider" January 2019, among many other publications, has a summary of the background.*


Thank you. I was trying to find a way to answer without politics.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Right, Hillary, Gates, Markle would be successful in their own rights, but not reached the fame and become the household names they are due to their husbands. As for Harris, it's highly unlikely she'd have gotten elected to anything without Willie Brown. "Business Insider" January 2019, among many other publications, has a summary of the background.



To be honest, why do they need to be famous? This type of organization should just find accomplished and successful people - famous or not! I could see Melinda on this panel since her org does a lot of women's rights/education type of projects but the others IMO are only there 75% for fame. What's wrong with just picking well-respected female media or business or reporting leaders. Business' obsession with fame is stupid.


----------



## melissatrv

Diana's stunning tiara makes up for the hair  




Jayne1 said:


> From a few pages back and the discussion of M's wedding hair - I think it was probably very pretty in the back, with some add-on to make it fuller, but we couldn't see it at all. She wanted that veil.
> 
> The worst Royal wedding hair was Diana's but since people like her, no one talks about it.


----------



## melissatrv

I love Princess Margaret's tiara.   It looks more like a crown to me, as a girl what I would imagine a princess to wear.   Dress was rather plain though.  




marietouchet said:


> Come on y all, you are being fair to either D or M
> The worst royal wedding hair was .... drum roll please ... Pss Margaret
> That tiara is super tall and look how her hair poofs out on top - her hair was like 5 in tall!
> it was the swinging sixties LOL
> She wore an entire birds nest
> 
> 
> I had trouble finding a good photo. The candid above has not been touched but the snap with the Queen had the birds nest airbrushed out - tall order in the days before Photoshop


----------



## rose60610

I think it's all about eyeballs being attracted to familiarity. Give me a Serena/Venus Williams (well OK they're famous--but tremendously hard working and self made), Sara Blakely (Spanx creator), Judy Faulkner (Epic Systems), or a woman emergency room surgeon any day over those listed on the panel that includes "Ask ME if I'M OK".


----------



## melissatrv

bag-mania said:


> Here's the important question, did he design the necklace with Meghan looking over his shoulder? If she didn't get to put her input in then it's going to have to go back to the shop and be reworked, just like the engagement ring he designed for her that she didn't like.



That is probably the one thing I can agree with Meghan on...did not like the engagement ring.  Not a fan of the yellow gold


----------



## Jayne1

melissatrv said:


> I love Princess Margaret's tiara.   It looks more like a crown to me, as a girl what I would imagine a princess to wear.   Dress was rather plain though.


The Poltimore tiara. Here's a nicer angle than the one posted above with the bun.

This tiara didn't come out of the monarch's vault, apparently her sister or mother bought it for her, so it was all her's.

Does the BRF still spend an exorbitant amount of money on jewellery?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

melissatrv said:


> That is probably the one thing I can agree with Meghan on...did not like the engagement ring.  Not a fan of the yellow gold



It was widely reported he picked yellow gold because that's what Meghan prefers, though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I like yellow gold. If I married into the friggin' BRF one of my first moves would not have been to redesign the ring. What a harbinger  that turned out to be.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Streep is pretty much considered the greatest actress of our time.  Hillary is very smart and accomplished.  Her husband is very smart too - and accomplished.  ****** is a US Senator and former CA Attorney General.  Gates was in senior management at Microsoft before they married.
> Meghan is a D-list *Z-LIST* actress who had a somewhat successful blog.  A superior networker who landed a prince.  Not just any prince but one from the most famous and prestigious royal family in the world.


Fixed that for you ..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> I like yellow gold. If I married into the friggin' BRF one of my first moves would not have been to redesign the ring. What a harbinger  that turned out to be.



OT I follow Victor Barbone on Instagram. Young (female!) jeweler who sells exclusively antique diamond engagement rings (not always antique rings, but never new stones), and she has a fascinating variety of beautiful warm yellow gold engament rings. Now I'm forever alone, plus big diamond engagement rings are sadly not a thing in my home country, but I've already identified a few firm favourites.

P.S. I also don't think her redesign added anything to the ring. I don't like that thin diamond band at all. BUT I must admit it wasn't one of my faves before, I always thought the balance was off. The side stones are too big for mere accents but too small for a proper three stone ring.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Melinda Gates earned an MBA from Duke, had a very successful career in Microsoft and then instead of sitting around spending a fortune on herself she chose to start a foundation to which she and her husband have donated billions of dollars

************* is a Senator, former Attorney General and California's first African American district attorney

Hillary *******, no matter what you think about her husband (and I believe an argument could be made that he hurt more than helped her career) was one of 27 women in her graduating class at Yale Law School

Really disappointing and puzzling that their accomplishments are being denigrated on this thread


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I like yellow gold. If I married into the friggin' BRF one of my first moves would not have been to redesign the ring. What a harbinger  that turned out to be.



She needs to control everything within her world. That ring was something that was easy to change to what suited her. Harry is completely under her thumb and if it bothered him that she didn’t like what he designed for her, it certainly doesn’t show. 

She couldn’t control how the BRF or the British media dealt with her and it frustrated her. That’s why they had to leave. She can control how the American media treats her with her PR agency and with the regular stories fed to the press.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She needs to control everything within her world. That ring was something that was easy to change to what suited her. Harry is completely under her thumb and if it bothered him that she didn’t like what he designed for her, it certainly doesn’t show.
> 
> She couldn’t control how the BRF or the British media dealt with her and it frustrated her. That’s why they had to leave. She can control how the American media treats her with her PR agency and with the regular stories fed to the press.


she just seems to arrogant to me


----------



## scarlet555

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Melinda Gates earned an MBA from Duke, had a very successful career in Microsoft and then instead of sitting around spending a fortune on herself she chose to start a foundation to which she and her husband have donated billions of dollars
> 
> ************* is a Senator, former Attorney General and California's first African American district attorney
> 
> Hillary *******, no matter what you think about her husband (and I believe an argument could be made that he hurt more than helped her career) was one of 27 women in her graduating class at Yale Law School
> 
> R*eally disappointing* and puzzling that their accomplishments are being denigrated on this thread



I'm more disappointed that Meghan is in queue to speak along with them


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> I'm more disappointed that Meghan is in queue to speak along with them


maybe Melinda can get her to give away some money


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> She needs to control everything within her world. That ring was something that was easy to change to what suited her. Harry is completely under her thumb and if it bothered him that she didn’t like what he designed for her, it certainly doesn’t show.
> 
> She couldn’t control how the BRF or the British media dealt with her and it frustrated her. That’s why they had to leave. She can control how the American media treats her with her PR agency and with the regular stories fed to the press.


I agree with you 100%. I also think she wanted to get Harry away from his family to sadly gaslight him over and over. No one is here to watch over him or what she does to him.


----------



## gelbergirl

I'm not really sure what else could have been done with Diana's wedding tiara hair.  It was a short cut swept to the side.  Nothing was overdone with it, looked very natural. Perhaps they didn't want the hair to compete with the dress! (which I loved by the way).
I read once the dress was designed to resemble the St. Paul's Cathedral where they were married


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> maybe Melinda can get her to give away some money



Umm you mean maybe Meghan can get Melinda to give HER money?


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Umm you mean maybe Meghan can get Melinda to give HER money?


I kinda doubt it....they like to use their money for things like clean water


----------



## Jayne1

Anyone have a side by side comparison of Meg's 2 rings?  The original and the new?


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Anyone have a side by side comparison of Meg's 2 rings?  The original and the new?



Here you go.


----------



## threadbender

gracekelly said:


> I am a little late to this wedding hair party, but there was something off about the story of the Paris based hairdresser.  Serge Normont did her hair on the day of the wedding.  He is not based in Paris.  He got his start in Paris at the Jacques Dessange Salon.   He subsequently went to NYC where he is now based.  He does the hair of many Hollywood bona fide stars and super models for big events.  This entire story about flying him in from Paris is  off, unless he was there for commitments.  I don't believe it and think they said that to force the issue and impress Angela Kelly, who wasn't impressed and  she could not change the protocol for releasing a tiara prior to the wedding anyway.


I thought I had read somewhere that he had not met up with MM til the wedding for the hair. So, this story may not have been about Serge but maybe someone else? 
Now, I am not sure. This article states they did not do "several bridal trials" so maybe he did go there once? I am confused.








						Meghan Markle's Hairstylist Spills All the Details on Her Royal Wedding 'Messy Bun'
					

He was inspired by Audrey Hepburn in the 1960s.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Melinda Gates earned an MBA from Duke, had a very successful career in Microsoft and then instead of sitting around spending a fortune on herself she chose to start a foundation to which she and her husband have donated billions of dollars
> 
> ************* is a Senator, former Attorney General and California's first African American district attorney
> 
> Hillary *******, no matter what you think about her husband (and I believe an argument could be made that he hurt more than helped her career) was one of 27 women in her graduating class at Yale Law School
> 
> Really disappointing and puzzling that their accomplishments are being denigrated on this thread



Not denigrating MGates in any way, rest assured she is definitely well taken care of with plenty of the highest end jewelry anyone has seen as well as beautiful properties.








						Peek Inside Bill and Melinda Gates' New $43 Million Southern California Mansion
					

The home is the most expensive sale ever in San Diego County.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




What is insulting is that MM would be included in a conservation with these very accomplished women. I’m guessing but could be wrong  Ramshaw is a sorority sister.  She started The Texas Tribune website which supposedly is nonpartisan, nonprofit.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Here you go.
> 
> View attachment 4811881


The original version was more elegant imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The original version was more elegant imo.



IMO, both rings are too clunky for her small hands. Most of her jewelry is v delicate.


Just for comparison — from the Trevor wedding  https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/me...ty-rings/9a4e400a-35c2-4693-b332-19c7d2f4f0ed









						Meghan Markle’s redesigned engagement ring from Prince Harry now looks A LOT like the one her ex Trevor Engelson gave her
					

IT WAS revealed last month that Meghan Markle had her engagement ring from Prince Harry redesigned, replacing the gold pave band with diamonds. And eagle-eyed fans claim that it now looks very simi…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## lalame

She really seems to like that delicate jewelry. The new band is a bit too thin for me but to each their own. Do you really think Harry made the original ring a complete surprise? I'm surprised he didn't ask her for input from the get-go.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Here you go.
> 
> View attachment 4811881


Thanks! I like all her rings. Maybe her first marriage, non Harry, rings the best.


----------



## tiktok

Guess who's been working behind the scenes to save us from social media? 

I can't even keep track of how many global issues these two are working on (eco-travel, BLM and this in the past month alone). The entire Gates Foundation with all its staff and money is working on fewer topics than these two. Melinda, take note so you don't embarrass yourself when meeting Meghan! They must open the NY Times each morning thinking, "hmm... what cause shall we work on today?"









						Prince Harry says social media stoking 'crisis of hate'
					

Prince Harry on Thursday said social media was stoking a 'crisis of hate,' and he appealed to companies to rethink their roles in advertising on digital platforms.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_"In an opinion piece for U.S. business magazine Fast Company headlined 'Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it,' Harry said that social media, as it stands, is 'unwell'.

The former senior royal said he and his wife, Meghan, have spent the past few weeks working with business leaders and marketing executives on the issue to try and enact positive change."_


----------



## csshopper

He’s been re-programmed, “Whatever Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets.” 

I bet he did the original on his own, thinking a large stone of his Mother’s would be enough of a statement, but ........


----------



## csshopper

tiktok said:


> Guess who's been working behind the scenes to save us from social media?
> 
> I can't even keep track of how many global issues these two are working on (eco-travel, BLM and this in the past month alone). The entire Gates Foundation with all its staff and money is working on fewer topics than these two. Melinda, take note so you don't embarrass yourself when meeting Meghan! They must open the NY Times each morning thinking, "hmm... what cause shall we work on today?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says social media stoking 'crisis of hate'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Thursday said social media was stoking a 'crisis of hate,' and he appealed to companies to rethink their roles in advertising on digital platforms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"In an opinion piece for U.S. business magazine Fast Company headlined 'Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it,' Harry said that social media, as it stands, is 'unwell'.
> 
> The former senior royal said he and his wife, Meghan, have spent the past few weeks working with business leaders and marketing executives on the issue to try and enact positive change."_


Can hardly believe the duplicity. Go look in the mirror Sussexes.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Guess who's been working behind the scenes to save us from social media?
> 
> I can't even keep track of how many global issues these two are working on (eco-travel, BLM and this in the past month alone). The entire Gates Foundation with all its staff and money is working on fewer topics than these two. Melinda, take note so you don't embarrass yourself when meeting Meghan! They must open the NY Times each morning thinking, "hmm... what cause shall we work on today?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says social media stoking 'crisis of hate'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Thursday said social media was stoking a 'crisis of hate,' and he appealed to companies to rethink their roles in advertising on digital platforms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"In an opinion piece for U.S. business magazine Fast Company headlined 'Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it,' Harry said that social media, as it stands, is 'unwell'.
> 
> The former senior royal said he and his wife, Meghan, have spent the past few weeks working with business leaders and marketing executives on the issue to try and enact positive change."_


again, arrogant....sorry H is turning into an AH


----------



## CarryOn2020

Can’t they spew this mindless, meaningless drivel elsewhere?
Absolutely offensive that he comes over here and treads on our freedom of speech, our freedom of thought, freedom to make money, our freedom.  These grifters are just Ewwww.

Hey dumbar, tell us about life on Chunga-Changa. Did those penguins stuck at Belarus customs ever get freed? 








						Prince Harry offers to help penguins stuck in customs after being duped by Greta Thunberg phone hoaxsters
					

A hoax call that led Prince Harry into sharing his thoughts on politics, family and the plight of some imaginary penguins exposes "huge flaws" in security in his new life outside palace walls, it is feared.




					www.independent.ie
				







tiktok said:


> Guess who's been working behind the scenes to save us from social media?
> 
> I can't even keep track of how many global issues these two are working on (eco-travel, BLM and this in the past month alone). The entire Gates Foundation with all its staff and money is working on fewer topics than these two. Melinda, take note so you don't embarrass yourself when meeting Meghan! They must open the NY Times each morning thinking, "hmm... what cause shall we work on today?"


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not denigrating MGates in any way, rest assured she is definitely well taken care of with plenty of the highest end jewelry anyone has seen as well as beautiful properties.
> unfurl="true"]https://www.townandcountrymag.com/l...gates-melinda-california-del-mar-home-photos/[
> [/URL]




what???? She is not “well taken care of” with jewellery and properties. She was accomplished. She met her intellectual match. The two of them TOGETHER have been successful and have used their wealth to benefit humanity. 

I too am boggled at how highly capable and successful women have been relegated as collateral to their husband’s success in this thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gotta be fair to the gents — Bill Gates was in the billionaire club prior to his wedding. I am *not* criticising Melinda or slighting her in any way. She was indeed an accomplished woman on her own merits. In no way did she use him as MM has done with H. My point is even with all the wonderful philanthropy (which is impressive on its own) they still buy a $45 million dollar house in a pandemic. Total respect for this couple. 









						Bill Gates | Biography, Microsoft, & Facts
					

Bill Gates, in full William Henry Gates III,  (born October 28, 1955, Seattle, Washington, U.S.), American computer programmer and entrepreneur who cofounded Microsoft Corporation, the world’s largest personal-computer software company. Gates wrote his first software program at the age of 13. In...



					www.britannica.com
				




Not sure Melinda should be listed with ****** and Hillary. Melinda has done so much than they have.

Not sure I should post this on TPF - saw this meme of Bill and Bezos. The caption said something like the 2 richest men on the planet and neither one is wearing a logo. Not a logo shirt, belt, watch or shoe. Notice Melinda is the same way. Kudos and high praise to them.




A1aGypsy said:


> what???? She is not “well taken care of” with jewellery and properties. She was accomplished. She met her intellectual match. The two of them TOGETHER have been successful and have used their wealth to benefit humanity. [/url]
> 
> I too am boggled at how highly capable and successful women have been relegated as collateral to their husband’s success in this thread


[/QUOTE]


----------



## purseinsanity

Emeline said:


> It's totally baffling. That may be one of the reasons he might decide to head home in the next year.  In addition, perpetual couch surfing during a pandemic may be getting old.
> 
> I wonder what he thinks when he sees photos of all of his family doing well, cheerily lending a hand and getting on with life.
> *
> Meanwhile his main job these days seems to be occasionally  sending out hostage type videos.*


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Meghan found another virtual summit to volunteer to speak in. This week's subject of interest: Gender and politics.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will interview the co-founder of nonprofit newsroom The 19th about gender and diversity in the media at a virtual summit - after 'reaching out' and asking to be involved*
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex, 38, will take part in a virtual summit next week*
> *Meghan Markle will interview The 19th* co-founder and CEO, Emily Ramshaw*
> *The 19th* is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom focused on gender and politics*
> The Duchess of Sussex will take part in a virtual summit next week, it has been announced.
> 
> Meghan Markle, 38, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, civic engagement, journalism and the arts.
> 
> The Duchess, who lives in Los Angeles with Prince Harry and their 15-month-old son Archie, will interview Emily Ramshaw, the co-founder and CEO of The 19th*, a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom focused on gender and politics.
> 
> The discussion next Friday will close the summit. It will take place three days after the publication of the Duke and Duchess of Susssex's biography, Finding Freedom.
> 
> In a statement to Glamour, Meghan said: 'The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important.
> 
> 'I’m looking forward to asking the co-founder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity, and community at its core.'
> 
> Ramshaw said the Duchess 'reached out' to the organisation after learning of its work. 'She [Meghan] told us that our vision for The 19th*—building a truly diverse and representative newsroom that covers women with nuance—spoke to her immediately.'
> 
> The 19th*, which launched last week, describes itself as 'a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy'.
> 
> Its website description reads: 'We aim to empower women — particularly those underserved by and underrepresented in American media — with the information, community and tools they need to be equal participants in our democracy.'
> 
> The 19th* summit features an impressive line-up including US Senator ****** Harries, Melinda Gates, Hillary ******* and Meryl Streep.
> 
> Each day is themed around a topic like 'On Race and Gender', 'Electability*' and 'The Future is Female'.
> 
> Many of the sessions will take the form of conversations or panel discussions. Streep will be joined by Zoe Saldaña for a performance titled Voices of Suffrage.
> 
> It will mark Meghan's second appearance at a virtual summit in recent weeks, following her address to young women around the world last month for the UN initiative Girl Up.
> 
> On this occasion the Duchess will be flexing her interviewer muscles. Meghan previously conducted a high profile interview with First Lady Michelle ***** for her Forces For Change issue of British Vogue.
> 
> Ramshaw admitted the idea of being interviewed by Meghan is 'surreal'.
> 
> In the months since moving to Los Angeles at the start of lockdown, the Duchess of Sussex has made only a handful of virtual appearances.
> 
> In the immediate wake of the death of the Black Lives Matter protests sparked by the death of George Floyd, Meghan delivered a speech to the graduating class of her former high school about racial equality and justice.
> 
> She also joined Prince Harry for a virtual roundtable discussion with young leaders from around the Commonwealth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will interview co-founder of virtual summit
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, will appear at The 19th* Represents 2020 Virtual Summit, which features a series of conversations with prominent women in US politics, journalism and the arts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Just reading that whole description of what's she's doing bored me to tears.  Can't imagine listening to her BS.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Yes. Goldman Sachs, I hear.
> 
> Edward Enninful. Per the article snippet below from Women's Wear Daily, it is understood Meghan reached out directly to him.
> View attachment 4811734


 Even when she isn't on the cover, she has to be mentioned how she's not on the cover.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Streep is pretty much considered the greatest actress of our time.  Hillary is very smart and accomplished.  Her husband is very smart too - and accomplished.  ****** is a US Senator and former CA Attorney General.  Gates was in senior management at Microsoft before they married.
> Meghan is a D-list actress who had a somewhat successful blog.  A superior networker who landed a prince.  Not just any prince but one from the most famous and prestigious royal family in the world.


While I may not agree with everything that comes out of Streep's mouth, I respect what she's accomplished, and she's a damn good actress.  Hillary I completely believe is smarter than Bill, but I lose respect for women who stay with philandering husbands that are less smart than themselves.  One indiscretion is one thing, repeatedly being cheated on is another.  Just my opinion.  Gates I don't know much about, but I haven't read much negative press in regards to her.  ****** may be a senator and a former AG, but it's well known she slept her way to the top.  I have as much respect for women who do that as I do for powerful men who force their subordinates to sleep with them.   
As for MM, I really do not need to be preached about climate change, women's rights, equality in the work force,  problems with the monarchy, BLM, the plight of Africa and its animals, racism, child rearing, lessons on privacy, how to use your parents to the absolute max, how to use and then dispose of friends, etc, etc, etc, from a woman who opened suitcases, was best known for being a D list actress, and managed to act her way into an idiot prince's heart.


----------



## rose60610

So Harry says social media is "stoking hate"? So then what? Anybody read any corporate print or TV media lately? Any talk shows? They're not known for being fuzzy and chirpy cheerful. Corporate media are threatened by social media where everybody gets a platform. No wonder all of a sudden there is "such concern" over "hate". 

"Hate" has become to mean anything one disagrees with. REAL hate speech is still protected. These days, even minor different viewpoints are often described as "hate" just to get you to shut up. 

On SM, narratives get challenged, neglected issues come to light, and fans/detractors can either be followed, ignored or get called out. Social media can often degrade to "Lord of the Flies" syndrome, and everyone should recognize that, just as you shouldn't listen to telemarketer phone calls. 

If Harry wants to use his position to rout out something, he could target drug and human trafficking on the dark web--truly dangerous stuff, and leave social media to bored trolls. Just as social media can "stoke hate", it can also be of benefit. I hope H isn't in favor of curtailing free speech. You don't rip out your mail box just because you get annoyed at junk mail, you can ignore stuff on social media if it bothers you too. Not everything one disagrees with is " HATE ".


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> So Harry says social media is "stoking hate"? So then what? Anybody read any corporate print or TV media lately? Any talk shows? They're not known for being fuzzy and chirpy cheerful. Corporate media are threatened by social media where everybody gets a platform. No wonder all of a sudden there is "such concern" over "hate".
> 
> "Hate" has become to mean anything one disagrees with. REAL hate speech is still protected. These days, even minor different viewpoints are often described as "hate" just to get you to shut up.
> 
> On SM, narratives get challenged, neglected issues come to light, and fans/detractors can either be followed, ignored or get called out. Social media can often degrade to "Lord of the Flies" syndrome, and everyone should recognize that, just as you shouldn't listen to telemarketer phone calls.
> 
> If Harry wants to use his position to rout out something, he could target drug and human trafficking on the dark web--truly dangerous stuff, and leave social media to bored trolls. Just as social media can "stoke hate", it can also be of benefit. I hope H isn't in favor of curtailing free speech. You don't rip out your mail box just because you get annoyed at junk mail, you can ignore stuff on social media if it bothers you too. Not everything one disagrees with is " HATE ".


Well said!


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Not everything one disagrees with is " HATE ".



 Thank you for saying this, especially in this thread. Thank you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> I'm more disappointed that Meghan is in queue to speak along with them



But she has a bachelor's degree! LOL (not dissing bachelor's degrees, but the others are highly educated women whose professional experience goes beyond an internship their markled uncle organized for them)


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> So Harry says social media is "stoking hate"? So then what? Anybody read any corporate print or TV media lately? Any talk shows? They're not known for being fuzzy and chirpy cheerful. Corporate media are threatened by social media where everybody gets a platform. No wonder all of a sudden there is "such concern" over "hate".
> 
> "Hate" has become to mean anything one disagrees with. REAL hate speech is still protected. These days, even minor different viewpoints are often described as "hate" just to get you to shut up.
> 
> On SM, narratives get challenged, neglected issues come to light, and fans/detractors can either be followed, ignored or get called out. Social media can often degrade to "Lord of the Flies" syndrome, and everyone should recognize that, just as you shouldn't listen to telemarketer phone calls.
> 
> If Harry wants to use his position to rout out something, he could target drug and human trafficking on the dark web--truly dangerous stuff, and leave social media to bored trolls. Just as social media can "stoke hate", it can also be of benefit. I hope H isn't in favor of curtailing free speech. You don't rip out your mail box just because you get annoyed at junk mail, you can ignore stuff on social media if it bothers you too. Not everything one disagrees with is " HATE ".


What has JCMH done to qualify in educating anybody on anything? He knows nothing about real life! Just p1ss off already! 

"Hate" on social media? Have you seen how much "hate" on main stream media? To use a quote from a comedian, "just because you are offended, doesn't mean you are right!" 

To use another quote from a comedian, "being stupid is only painful for others!" And JCMH is just a PITA!


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Here you go.
> 
> View attachment 4811881


I much prefer the original, the thickness of the gold makes it a classic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Such a small world — all these people are connected [markle - Oprah - Jake - Emily] — proving once again how deceitful these 2 grifters are 
_Jake talks about how he started and grew his brand, what the word “brand” means to him, and the highly-photographed moment when he walked into Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s wedding with Oprah_
By: Emily Ramshaw
Photography: Jake Rosenberg








						Why Bobbi Brown is Giving Back This Mother’s Day
					

And how you can too (by bidding for Bobbi’s chic AF stuff).




					coveteur.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

The misogyny in this thread


----------



## kemilia

V0N1B2 said:


> Hmmmm
> How would Meghan know to "reach out" to this organization?  I admit I've never heard of them, but then again, I don't have the flair or panache for hustling and getting my name out there.
> Is this the same Emily Ramshaw that _also_ went to Northwestern and _also_ graduated in 2003?
> I wonder, were they _also_ sorority sisters?
> 
> View attachment 4811671
> View attachment 4811672


Whatever school she went to, she took the same word-salad courses. Storytelling? Finally something M is good at!

And also corporate-speak courses ("you too can sound smart if if you use a bunch of hi-falutin' words"). I used to work with someone that kept a thesaurus open on his desk--he never used a 10 cent word if he could find a 25 dollar word to do the same thing. His emails were epic.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> apparently she has respect from some prominent people still
> I was just watching an interview with the (black) editor in chief of British Vogue.  He was asked about H&M and their exit from the RF.  He went on about how wonderful she was and what a great experience he had working with her on the Vogue issue.  He said something to the effect that she really knows herself and he's sure she will be fine with the decision she made.  (but will H be fine? this guy apparently doesn't know H)
> I still don't like her and don't think she's any great activist or intellectual but I guess *lots of people* don't agree with me.


This guy knows how to keep his job and that's about it--never say negative things about the flavor of the month.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> I bet her PR team approaches it like a sales situation and reaches out to dozens or hundreds of event planners/speech brokers to solicit opportunities. Then they have her reach out and flatter the head of the company or association or whatever. Classic sales.


I agree re: PR team, and it's pretty slim pickings nowadays with the CORONA so they take whatever bites.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I much prefer the original, the thickness of the gold makes it a classic.



I prefer the one on the right too, but she may have very slim fingers in which case I guess it's what suits her physique best.


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> This guy knows how to keep his job and that's about it--never say negative things about the flavor of the month.



I think it's good he doesn't say negative things.

He's just about keeping his job. At the end of the day magazines need to sell.

Edited to say, he didn't mind throwing shade at Kate x Shulman, really uncalled for (I'm not on anyone's team)


----------



## bag-mania

I am tired of famous people being brought in as speakers to tell us what to do. Is the average attention span so short nobody would watch a speech on a subject they presumably care about unless somebody they've heard of is giving it? It's fine when it is a public service, like when a few celebrities did commercials encouraging the wearing of masks at the beginning of the pandemic. But seriously, what kind of person is going to be influenced on a subject because they heard Meryl Streep speak her views? 

Obviously in this case it is a new group no one has ever heard of trying to make a name for themselves in a competitive time for attaining donations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Milosmum0307

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If Michelle had snagged a prince you'd be hating on her, too. Just kidding.
> 
> By the way, I hate to shatter yet one more stan illusion, but the first black woman to marry into European royalty wasn't our precious Meghan, but Angela of Liechtenstein (daughter-in-law to the reigning monarch...her husband is the spare too).


Yes, thanks for pointing that out.  Meghan’s dress was very similar to Angela’s as well.


----------



## sdkitty

[/QUOTE]


purseinsanity said:


> While I may not agree with everything that comes out of Streep's mouth, I respect what she's accomplished, and she's a damn good actress.  Hillary I completely believe is smarter than Bill, but I lose respect for women who stay with philandering husbands that are less smart than themselves.  One indiscretion is one thing, repeatedly being cheated on is another.  Just my opinion.  Gates I don't know much about, but I haven't read much negative press in regards to her.  ****** may be a senator and a former AG, but it's well known she slept her way to the top.  I have as much respect for women who do that as I do for powerful men who force their subordinates to sleep with them.
> As for MM, I really do not need to be preached about climate change, women's rights, equality in the work force,  problems with the monarchy, BLM, the plight of Africa and its animals, racism, child rearing, lessons on privacy, how to use your parents to the absolute max, how to use and then dispose of friends, etc, etc, etc, from a woman who opened suitcases, was best known for being a D list actress, and managed to act her way into an idiot prince's heart.


your political views are showing big time here......I won't respond as it's not allowed


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> The Poltimore tiara. Here's a nicer angle than the one posted above with the bun.
> 
> This tiara didn't come out of the monarch's vault, apparently her sister or mother bought it for her, so it was all her's.
> 
> *Does the BRF still spend an exorbitant amount of money on jewellery?*



You are right that Princess Margaret did actually buy her own wedding tiara at an auction before she was married but most of the truly amazing items are very old and inherited. The Queen supposedly has a collection of about 300 pieces and she loans some of it out.  Part of her personal collection includes The Greville Bequest which was left to QEII's mother by her friend, Mrs. Greville, who had no children and was quite the social climber.  It includes the Greville Tiara.  Mrs. Greville probably got a kick out of knowing a lot of her beautiful, extraordinary collection would be worn by QEII and future royals. Btw, Princess Margaret's tiara cost about £5,500 at the time.  (Really, if she had waited 60 years, she would have had enough to buy a Chanel flap.  )


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> You are right that Princess Margaret did actually buy her own wedding tiara at an auction before she was married but most of the truly amazing items are very old and inherited. The Queen supposedly has a collection of about 300 pieces and she loans some of it out.  Part of her personal collection includes The Greville Bequest which was left to QEII's mother by her friend, Mrs. Greville, who had no children and was quite the social climber.  It includes the Greville Tiara.  Mrs. Greville probably got a kick out of knowing a lot of her beautiful, extraordinary collection would be worn by QEII and future royals. Btw, Princess Margaret's tiara cost about £5,500 at the time.  (Really, if she had waited 60 years, she would have had enough to buy a Chanel flap.  )


So, rounding things up, Margaret's tiara would cost approximately $69,000 in 2020?

Is that a lot of not for a diamond tiara of that size.  lol


----------



## Vintage Leather

Margaret's tiara also converted to a necklace, which looked surprisingly different.

As for "Does the royal family still spend crazy money?" Sorta but not really. They seldom buy obvious known pieces - the exception being Camilla's Alhambra pieces, and Kate's Trinity pieces. Jewelry randomly appears, and you get to guess if it was 1) a wedding present, 2) a loan, 3) an inheritance, or 4) a new purchase. 

They haven't bought new tiaras since the Queen Mother died (before her death, the majority of tiaras were either designated to only be worn by the queen or QE's personal possessions, in the possession of QEQM, or Anne's.) But as for the rest of it...  Camilla has a very impressive VCA collection as well as pieces owned by Alice Keppel. We can assume but it's hard to tell if "gold with blue stones" is a paltry thing, or part of an amazing sapphire parue.



Jayne1 said:


> The Poltimore tiara. Here's a nicer angle than the one posted above with the bun.
> 
> This tiara didn't come out of the monarch's vault, apparently her sister or mother bought it for her, so it was all her's.
> 
> Does the BRF still spend an exorbitant amount of money on jewellery?
> 
> View attachment 4811793


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> So, rounding things up, Margaret's tiara would cost approximately $69,000 in 2020?
> 
> Is that a lot of not for a diamond tiara of that size.  lol



If you had to build a new tiara from scratch today, it would likely cost way more than $69,000 if you used high quality diamonds and gems, so Princess Margaret did very well with her purchase!  Of course, just her owning that tiara and wearing it to her wedding would cause it to go up in value dramatically since anything worn by QEII, her mother, Princess Margaret, etc., has historic significance.  ETA:  Btw, the Queen has commissioned over the years a few new tiaras, or re-styled a few, to go with suites of gems either in her collection or given to her, such as the Brazilian Aquamarine tiara which she had made to go with aquamarines that were gifted to her by the Brazilian people.


----------



## gracekelly

Am I to understand that Prince Harry doesn't consider Finding Freedom to be full of hateful digs at his family?  What about using the internet in a calculated fashion by dropping some story nugget just when Prince Charles, Camilla, Kate or Prince William  are making an appearance for one of their patronages that make a social statement?  As far as I can ascertain, using embargoes on media drops is a favorite Harkle ploy to upstage other people.  These are aggressive things to do to steal light off the work of others.  If what they want to tell the world is so important, at the very least, don't do it in conflict with another family member.  

Time to get off the word salad hypocritical perch and out of the private airplane and put your words into actions, Harreeeeeeee.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Am I to understand that Prince Harry doesn't consider Finding Freedom to be full of hateful digs at his family?  What about using the internet in a calculated fashion by dropping some story nugget just when Prince Charles, Camilla, Kate or Prince William  are making an appearance for one of their patronages that make a social statement?  As far as I can ascertain, using embargoes on media drops is a favorite Harkle ploy to upstage other people.  These are aggressive things to do to steal light off the work of others.  If what they want to tell the world is so important, at the very least, don't do it in conflict with another family member.
> 
> Time to get off the word salad hypocritical perch and out of the private airplane and put your words into actions, Harreeeeeeee.



Harry and Meghan are hypocritical and self-absorbed to the bone. I'm sure they justify anything they do to someone else as being deserved. If social media is used against them, however, suddenly they go into victim mode. Shame on those mean-spirited bullies!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Am I to understand that Prince Harry doesn't consider Finding Freedom to be full of hateful digs at his family?  What about using the internet in a calculated fashion by dropping some story nugget just when Prince Charles, Camilla, Kate or Prince William  are making an appearance for one of their patronages that make a social statement?  As far as I can ascertain, using embargoes on media drops is a favorite Harkle ploy to upstage other people.  These are aggressive things to do to steal light off the work of others.  If what they want to tell the world is so important, at the very least, don't do it in conflict with another family member.
> 
> *Time to get off the word salad hypocritical perch and out of the private airplane and put your words into actions, Harreeeeeeee*.


I can't even begin to say how much I love this!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

_We are now plugged into a vast nervous system that, yes, reflects our good, but too often also magnifies and fuels our bad._








						Prince Harry: Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it
					

Amid a crisis of health, hate, and truth online, companies need to take a stand for a more compassionate digital world, writes Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.




					www.fastcompany.com
				




Welcome to the 21st century, H&M. While you were sleeping or zoned out on who-knows-what for the last 20 years, all employees have attended tech sessions that cover internet security, bullying, etc. Your opinion piece shows someone who is far more out of touch than we knew. What is much more worrisome is your idea of being ‘plugged into a vast nervous system...’.  Time to give up the zombie movies and join the rest of us.  You are a first-time parent. The rest of us have already traveled this path. Learn from us.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We are now plugged into a vast nervous system that, yes, reflects our good, but too often also magnifies and fuels our bad._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it
> 
> 
> Amid a crisis of health, hate, and truth online, companies need to take a stand for a more compassionate digital world, writes Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fastcompany.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the 21st century, H&M. While you were sleeping or zoned out on who-knows-what for the last 20 years, all employees have attended tech sessions that cover internet security, bullying, etc. Your opinion piece shows someone who is far more out of touch than we knew. What is much more worrisome is your idea of being ‘plugged into a vast nervous system...’.  Time to give up the zombie movies and join the rest of us.  You are a first-time parent. The rest of us have already traveled this path. Learn from us.



Someone should send him a VHS tape of The Matrix so he can catch-up


----------



## bag-mania

That virtual summit isn't exactly popular. There are still between 7,000 and 8,000 spots left for the days Meryl, Hillary, and Melinda are speaking. For the final day when Meghan "interviews" the CEO, there are less than 5,000 spots left. Does that means an extra 2,000 people signed up to see what she'll do?


----------



## Lodpah

Henrietta, that’s the name JCMH is being referred to in some social media.


----------



## rose60610

In reading the article in "Fast Company", we learn that H&M supposedly called many CEOs, industry leaders and chief marketing officers to discuss, among other things, "hate and division" and "providing safe spaces" online. 

In other words, to sum it up the way I see it: no real free speech lest somebody get their feelings hurt. H&M call for "accurate information" instead of "misinformation" and basically the right for companies to censor "hate" that could promote extremism bla bla bla. Harry feels that some of the hate online can incite various forms of radicalism. He compares the dangers of social media to the physical harmful effects of lead paint. Uh huh. To paraphrase: since society cleaned up applications of lead paint, we can also clean up and basically sanitize social media. 

Apparently social media affects the brains of users the way lead paint affected the brains of toddlers that chewed on lead lacquered windowsills when their parents' backs were turned for hours at a time. Oh, and we need digital reform now, we don't have "the luxury of time". 

That's nice Harry. What tells me that Harry's idea of hate speech includes anything that is unflattering about him and MM? 

And if social media is indeed soooo harmful, then why is/was Hollywood so outraged and defensive when people suggest a connection between violent movies/video games and violent behavior? And since anyone, including very young kids, can access any and all the violent, misogynistic and sexually explicit rap music out there, why is anybody in the least bit upset about whatever gets posted on social media? 

In the end, people are responsible for their own actions. As much as social media can be vicious, gross, cruel or misleading, free speech is free speech. At the very least, don't use it as an excuse when somebody screws up.


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> Guess who's been working behind the scenes to save us from social media?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says social media stoking 'crisis of hate'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Thursday said social media was stoking a 'crisis of hate,' and he appealed to companies to rethink their roles in advertising on digital platforms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"In an opinion piece for U.S. business magazine Fast Company headlined 'Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it,' Harry said that social media, as it stands, is 'unwell'.
> 
> The former senior royal said he and his wife, Meghan, have spent the past few weeks working with business leaders and marketing executives on the issue to try and enact positive change."_


Of course, social media should only be used for their very productive PR team release news about how important and special MM & H are and for us to drool about those news and profusely thank them...

Is there anything that MM&H don't get involved? They are the superheroes of the 21 century.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Golly, if only he had read Shakespeare — Macbeth foresaw H’s manifesto opinion piece:

_It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing._

For the last 20 years, all of this social media stuff has been covered in numerous discussions, sessions and conferences. Is he just behind or is it the whole BRF? IMO, the UK has never seemed lagging in its educational practices. Sure, for her, sheltered in private schools, SoHo, and the Hwood bubble, she is lagging in knowledge, but him? Never would have thought that.

Sanitize social media - perfect!


----------



## Jktgal

Social media definitely divide us - the Meggies and the Meghans. 

You're welcome.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Am I to understand that Prince Harry doesn't consider Finding Freedom to be full of hateful digs at his family?  What about using the internet in a calculated fashion by dropping some story nugget just when Prince Charles, Camilla, Kate or Prince William  are making an appearance for one of their patronages that make a social statement?  As far as I can ascertain, using embargoes on media drops is a favorite Harkle ploy to upstage other people.  These are aggressive things to do to steal light off the work of others.  If what they want to tell the world is so important, at the very least, don't do it in conflict with another family member.
> 
> Time to get off the word salad hypocritical perch and out of the private airplane and put your words into actions, Harreeeeeeee.


We also need aemoji on the 'Like'... Well said!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We are now plugged into a vast nervous system that, yes, reflects our good, but too often also magnifies and fuels our bad._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it
> 
> 
> Amid a crisis of health, hate, and truth online, companies need to take a stand for a more compassionate digital world, writes Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fastcompany.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the 21st century, H&M. While you were sleeping or zoned out on who-knows-what for the last 20 years, all employees have attended tech sessions that cover internet security, bullying, etc. Your opinion piece shows someone who is far more out of touch than we knew. What is much more worrisome is your idea of being ‘plugged into a vast nervous system...’.  Time to give up the zombie movies and join the rest of us.  You are a first-time parent. The rest of us have already traveled this path. Learn from us.


Plugged into a vast etc. 

Borg anyone ? lol


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> In reading the article in "Fast Company", we learn that H&M supposedly called many CEOs, industry leaders and chief marketing officers to discuss, among other things, "hate and division" and "providing safe spaces" online.
> 
> In other words, to sum it up the way I see it: no real free speech lest somebody get their feelings hurt. H&M call for "accurate information" instead of "misinformation" and basically the right for companies to censor "hate" that could promote extremism bla bla bla. Harry feels that some of the hate online can incite various forms of radicalism. He compares the dangers of social media to the physical harmful effects of lead paint. Uh huh. To paraphrase: since society cleaned up applications of lead paint, we can also clean up and basically sanitize social media.
> 
> Apparently social media affects the brains of users the way lead paint affected the brains of toddlers that chewed on lead lacquered windowsills when their parents' backs were turned for hours at a time. Oh, and we need digital reform now, we don't have "the luxury of time".
> 
> That's nice Harry. What tells me that Harry's idea of hate speech includes anything that is unflattering about him and MM?
> 
> And if social media is indeed soooo harmful, then why is/was Hollywood so outraged and defensive when people suggest a connection between violent movies/video games and violent behavior? And since anyone, including very young kids, can access any and all the violent, misogynistic and sexually explicit rap music out there, why is anybody in the least bit upset about whatever gets posted on social media?
> 
> In the end, people are responsible for their own actions. As much as social media can be vicious, gross, cruel or misleading, free speech is free speech. At the very least, don't use it as an excuse when somebody screws up.




So are they fighting for verifiable sources? Passport to post? 

Ironic considering both H&M hide behind 'friends' they refuse to name when they spin stories on mainstream media


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Plugged into a vast etc.
> 
> Borg anyone ? lol


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> *Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘Small and Intimate’ 39th Birthday Celebration With Prince Harry*
> Home sweet house party! *Prince Harry* planned a low-key celebration for his wife *Meghan Markle*’s 39th birthday at their Los Angeles residence, a source exclusively tells _Us Weekly_. Meghan’s mother, *Doria Ragland*, and the couple’s 14-month-old son, Archie, were both in attendance.
> 
> “They spent the day as a family and in the evening Doria looked after Archie so that Meghan and Harry could enjoy some couple time,” the insider said of the Tuesday, August 4, festivities. “Harry cooked Meghan a three-course dinner, but Doria helped him with the preparation.”
> 
> The source adds: “While Harry has become a better cook since marrying Meghan, he still has a long way to go!”
> 
> The former military pilot, 35, “organized a huge chocolate birthday cake, covered in icing sugar and balloons” to make sure Meghan’s big day was one to remember.
> 
> When it came to her present, Harry went for something both unique and sentimental.
> 
> “He wanted the gift to be personal, so he surprised Meghan with a necklace that he designed,” the insider tells _Us_. “And a framed photograph of the two of them, which he took himself.”
> 
> For her part, the California native “wanted to keep it small and intimate” this year, but the source says Meghan plans to throw a “big, glamourous birthday party with all her friends for her 40th next year.”
> 
> While the family honored Meghan in L.A., some of her royal relatives sent well wishes from England to commemorate the milestone.
> 
> “Wishing The Duchess of Sussex a very happy birthday!” the royal family’s official Instagram account wrote alongside a photo of the queen and _Suits_ alum in 2018.
> 
> Luminary Bakery in London also celebrated the occasion by auctioning off a cake in her name. The treat was very similar to the cake the bakery created for Meghan’s birthday in August 2019, but instead of carrot cake it was “lemon celebration cake.”
> 
> The confections décor of fresh fruit and frosting closely resembled the sweet treat the actress enjoyed at Frogmore Cottage last year.
> 
> The best part was that the money from those who entered for a chance to win the dessert went to the business’ mission to empower women. By donating £10 (about $13 USD) women who are homeless, coming out of prison, were victims of domestic violence or sexual abuse, are given the tools to learn to bake and find employment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle Celebrated Her 39th Birthday With Prince Harry in L.A.
> 
> 
> A look at what Prince Harry did to honor his wife Meghan Markle’s 39th birthday in Los Angeles — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com





Too. Much. Information. 
Someone needs to tell these two just how hypocritical they are. They beg and whine for privacy and sue the media for invading their privacy, but then they feel the need to get this utter drivel released to the press. No one cares about her birthday, but herself. You never hear the birthday plans and details of celebs who genuinely want to be and ARE private, in fact you never see them at all unless when they are working or promoting their work.


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4812719
> 
> Too. Much. Information.
> Someone needs to tell these two just how hypocritical they are. They beg and whine for privacy and sue the media for invading their privacy, but then they feel the need to get this utter drivel released to the press. No one cares about her birthday, but herself. You never hear the birthday plans and details of celebs who genuinely want to be and ARE private, in fact you never see them at all unless when they are working or promoting their work.



But, but, the whole world must know that Harry adores her so much that he spends all his time designing jewelry just to accentuate her beauty and trying to prepare her an oh so special birthday meal!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be the man and pull the plug, H, just pull the @&^% plug.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Golly, if only he had read Shakespeare — Macbeth foresaw H’s manifesto opinion piece:
> 
> _It is a tale
> Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
> Signifying nothing._
> 
> For the last 20 years, all of this social media stuff has been covered in numerous discussions, sessions and conferences. Is he just behind or is it the whole BRF? IMO, the UK has never seemed lagging in its educational practices. Sure, for her, sheltered in private schools, SoHo, and the Hwood bubble, she is lagging in knowledge, but him? Never would have thought that.
> 
> Sanitize social media - perfect!



He went to Eton. 
Doesn't mean he learnt anything except how to write Eton on his CV. 
Hold on a minute, why would he need a CV? 

Our public schools are a bit like US private schools except more elitist, one step away from being home educated (like the Queen). Unlike the Harry, she probably did some work.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> But, but, the whole world must know that Harry adores her so much that he spends all his time designing jewelry just to accentuate her beauty and trying to prepare her an oh so special birthday meal!


And I guess they expect us to swoon? 
That article reads like it's straight out of The Onion.


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> And I guess they expect us to swoon?
> That article reads like it's straight out of The Onion.



Hey now, theirs is a fairytale romance that will last forever. We know this because they are always having the media tell us how wonderful their love story is.


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4812719
> 
> Too. Much. Information.
> Someone needs to tell these two just how hypocritical they are. They beg and whine for privacy and sue the media for invading their privacy, but then they feel the need to get this utter drivel released to the press. No one cares about her birthday, but herself. You never hear the birthday plans and details of celebs who genuinely want to be and ARE private, in fact you never see them at all unless when they are working or promoting their work.



She sent out lots of invites. but everyone was busy washing their hair.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> But, but, the whole world must know that Harry adores her so much that he spends all his time designing jewelry just to accentuate her beauty and trying to prepare her an oh so special birthday meal!



She loved the engagement ring he designed so much that she had it redone within a year.  I am in awe of such sentiment!


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> Someone should send him a VHS tape of The Matrix so he can catch-up


Lol!!  This was great!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We are now plugged into a vast nervous system that, yes, reflects our good, but too often also magnifies and fuels our bad._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: Social media is dividing us. Together, we can redesign it
> 
> 
> Amid a crisis of health, hate, and truth online, companies need to take a stand for a more compassionate digital world, writes Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fastcompany.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the 21st century, H&M. While you were sleeping or zoned out on who-knows-what for the last 20 years, all employees have attended tech sessions that cover internet security, bullying, etc. Your opinion piece shows someone who is far more out of touch than we knew. What is much more worrisome is your idea of being ‘plugged into a vast nervous system...’.  Time to give up the zombie movies and join the rest of us.  You are a first-time parent. The rest of us have already traveled this path. Learn from us.





JCMH, if you find social media such a stressful thing to use, well maybe you simply should not use it, stay away from it and stop reading comments that you disagree with. If you haven't got a maturity level high enough to ignore the opinions you don't like, then maybe you should delete the apps and live the private life you so desperately want. I can only imagine the amount of time they must spend endlessly scrolling online at articles and comments about them, how else would they know everything that is said? Such an unhealthy thing to do with your life.



bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4812722



Words can not describe how f**king creepy I find this man.



bag-mania said:


> But, but, the whole world must know that Harry adores her so much that he spends all his time designing jewelry just to accentuate her beauty and trying to prepare her an oh so special birthday meal!


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> *JCMH, if you find social media such a stressful thing to use, well maybe you simply should not use it, stay away from it and stop reading comments that you disagree with. *If you haven't got a maturity level high enough to ignore the opinions you don't like, then maybe you should delete the apps and live the private life you so desperately want. I can only imagine the amount of time they must spend endlessly scrolling online at articles and comments about them, how else would they know everything that is said? Such an unhealthy thing to do with your life.



I think he can do much better. He can ask his wife and PR team to stop releasing news about them. One cannot read the news these days without being inundated by zillions of idiotic headlines about the duke and duchess, we are the victims here!


----------



## lanasyogamama

That article was soooo booooooring.


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> Harry cooked Meghan a three-course dinner, but Doria helped him with the preparation.”
> 
> The source adds: “While Harry has become a better cook since marrying Meghan, he still has a long way to go!”
> 
> The former military pilot, 35, “organized a huge chocolate birthday cake, covered in icing sugar and balloons” to make su


Even when they (her PR) praise him, they still get a dig in about his competence. Of course he’s nowhere near “gourmet chef” enough to please la duchesse.

and the grammar fiend in me wants to know if the balloons were on the cake. And was it vegan? Bad Harry.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan Markle left off Vogue UK’s list of influential women, but Queen is on there
					

She might have guest-edited the fastest-selling Vogue issue in history – but this year she was left off the magazine’s Top 25 list of influential women.




					www.google.com


----------



## bag-mania

Genie27 said:


> Even when they (her PR) praise him, they still get a dig in about his competence. Of course he’s nowhere near “gourmet chef” enough to please la duchesse.
> 
> and the grammar fiend in me wants to know if the balloons were on the cake. And was it vegan? Bad Harry.



It is all very calculated to pander to her core fans. “Look, my husband the prince is just as helpless in the kitchen as your husband! Isn’t he cute and silly? We are ordinary, everyday folks just like you.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

She had Corey, _voted best new chef in Toronto in 2009. _
 H must be nervous.





__





						Cory Vitiello - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Not only did he not read Shakespeare, but it seems he has never watched Mary Berry or Ina either.  Kinda sad an almost 40 yr old cannot cook a birthday dinner for his wife by himself. No wonder the British ladies gave him a pass. 




Genie27 said:


> Even when they (her PR) praise him, they still get a dig in about his competence. Of course he’s nowhere near “gourmet chef” enough to please la duchesse.
> 
> and the grammar fiend in me wants to know if the balloons were on the cake. And was it vegan? Bad Harry.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> She had Corey, _voted best new chef in Toronto in 2009. _
> H must be nervous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cory Vitiello - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not only did he not read Shakespeare, but it seems he has never watched Mary Berry or Ina either.  Kinda sad an almost 40 yr old cannot cook a birthday dinner for his wife by himself. No wonder the British ladies gave him a pass.



Now wait a minute! He supposedly used Ina’s Chicken recipe for the faux engagement dinner lol...


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> She had Corey, _voted best new chef in Toronto in 2009. _
> H must be nervous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cory Vitiello - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Somebody has been tinkering with Wikipedia. It has since been corrected.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> I can only imagine the amount of time they must spend endlessly scrolling online at articles and comments about them, how else would they know everything that is said? Such an unhealthy thing to do with your life.



Yeah, I always wondered how "I am having nervous break-downs about the mean press" and Oprah announcing "She really does not read anything about herself in the press" went together. If the latter was true, she'd be happily oblivious to anything written, no?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> Even when they (her PR) praise him, they still get a dig in about his competence. Of course he’s nowhere near “gourmet chef” enough to please la duchesse.



Now that point it out, it's true and pretty sad now that I think of it. Of course, her famous zucchini pasta sauce (basically cook zucchini and not much else until they are mush) is on an completely other level.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> Now wait a minute! He supposedly used Ina’s Chicken recipe for the faux engagement dinner lol...



No no, that was her, the great cook.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No no, that was her, the great cook.



LOL, you’re right. I stand corrected. Of cource, Harry can’t be expected to do anything useful or normal... like cook...

ugh, too many of their lies to keep track of lately. I’m getting them all confused....


----------



## poopsie

Lounorada said:


> I can only imagine the amount of time they must spend endlessly scrolling online at articles and comments about them, how else would they know everything that is said? Such an unhealthy thing to do with your life.



They must love this thread!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It is all very calculated to pander to her core fans. “Look, my husband the prince is just as helpless in the kitchen as your husband! Isn’t he cute and silly? We are ordinary, everyday folks just like you.”



Absolutely!  I’ve got a message for Malarkey Markle.  Everyone’s husband isn’t helpless in the kitchen, nor do they need help tying their shoes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> Henrietta, that’s the name JCMH is being referred to in some social media.


Ooooh, that's mean! I now understand what he's word-salading about.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Meghan Markle left off Vogue UK’s list of influential women, but Queen is on there
> 
> 
> She might have guest-edited the fastest-selling Vogue issue in history – but this year she was left off the magazine’s Top 25 list of influential women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


she must be fuming


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that point it out, it's true and pretty sad now that I think of it. Of course, her famous zucchini pasta sauce (basically cook zucchini and not much else until they are mush) is on an completely other level.


hey I do that (my own recipe)


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4812772
> 
> JCMH, if you find social media such a stressful thing to use, well maybe you simply should not use it, stay away from it and stop reading comments that you disagree with. If you haven't got a maturity level high enough to ignore the opinions you don't like, then maybe you should delete the apps and live the private life you so desperately want. I can only imagine the amount of time they must spend endlessly scrolling online at articles and comments about them, how else would they know everything that is said? Such an unhealthy thing to do with your life.
> 
> 
> 
> Words can not describe how f**king creepy I find this man.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4812801


LOL sometimes I laugh at your posts before even reading them because the gifs are hysterical!  Thank you for always making me crack up!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Meghan Markle left off Vogue UK’s list of influential women, but Queen is on there
> 
> 
> She might have guest-edited the fastest-selling Vogue issue in history – but this year she was left off the magazine’s Top 25 list of influential women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Why should she be included on that list?  She left the UK!

IMO, she shouldn't be on ANY "influential women" list.


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> Even when they (her PR) praise him, they still get a dig in about his competence. Of course he’s nowhere near “gourmet chef” enough to please la duchesse.
> 
> and the grammar fiend in me wants to know if the balloons were on the cake. And was it vegan? Bad Harry.


LOL he may be a "prince", but I'm starting to think he probably can't even button up his own sports jacket without help.  I like my "prince" to help out around the house, catch bugs if necessary, and be a real partner rather than a pawn to get to the next level in life.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> LOL he may be a "prince", but I'm starting to think he probably can't even button up his own sports jacket without help.  I like my "prince" to help out around the house, catch bugs if necessary, and be a real partner rather than a pawn to get to the next level in life.


oh yes....I don't like killing bugs - esp spiders.  cats eat them, which is gross but gets rid of them


----------



## bisousx

purseinsanity said:


> LOL he may be a "prince", but I'm starting to think he probably can't even button up his own sports jacket without help.  I like my "prince" to help out around the house, catch bugs if necessary, and be a real partner rather than a pawn to get to the next level in life.



If you took away the title and money, I probably wouldn’t date him for these reasons even if he’s known to be kind and friendly. Harry was very attractive when he was young, who didn’t have a crush on him? But the party’s over now and real life has set in. I just appreciated my husband so much more after reading this.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Why should she be included on that list?  She left the UK!
> 
> IMO, she shouldn't be on ANY "influential women" list.



I think you're missing that is her beloved Vogue's list, she probably expected to head the list for several lifetimes considering she contributed sooooo much

I bet she's outraged 

I'm amazed the magazine has actually gaged the nation's mood correctly - for once.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> hey I do that (my own recipe)



and I thought it was mine


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> oh yes....I don't like killing bugs - esp spiders.  cats eat them, which is gross but gets rid of them


It's cucarachas here. They don't stand a chance against a herd of cats. Every morning the patio is scattered with corpses. The kitties are much more dependable than the BF


----------



## Chanbal

"Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton says Meghan Markle might have been 'frustrated' that she wasn't able to answer back to false claims about her - and adds he '*feels for the poor girl*'" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghan-frustrated-not-able-answer-claims.html

"Prince Charles has been in 'regular contact with Prince Harry to *provide emotional and financial support' *despite being hurt by book revelations" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ct-Prince-Harry-despite-book-revelations.html

Poor girl indeed!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> "Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton says Meghan Markle might have been 'frustrated' that she wasn't able to answer back to false claims about her - and adds he '*feels for the poor girl*'" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghan-frustrated-not-able-answer-claims.html
> 
> "Prince Charles has been in 'regular contact with Prince Harry to *provide emotional and financial support' *despite being hurt by book revelations" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ct-Prince-Harry-despite-book-revelations.html
> 
> Poor girl indeed!


Oh my bleeding heart .. NOT!  However, I really wish Prince Charles would 'grow a set' and SIGNIFICANTLY reduce the $$$ being sent to Harry - after all, they wanted PRIVACY and were going to be financially INDEPENDENT!!  Arrgghh ..


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> It's cucarachas here. They don't stand a chance against a herd of cats. Every morning the patio is scattered with corpses. The kitties are much more dependable than the BF


YUP .. same here, YUCK!  My boy Kitty nails them but leaves remnants .. UGGH!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> I think you're missing that is her beloved Vogue's list, she probably expected to head the list for several lifetimes considering she contributed sooooo much
> 
> I bet she's outraged
> 
> I'm amazed the magazine has actually gaged the nation's mood correctly - for once.



*papert*, let's get ready for H&M's next lawsuit, lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> It's cucarachas here. They don't stand a chance against a herd of cats. Every morning the patio is scattered with corpses. The kitties are much more dependable than the BF


are cats are indoors so fortunately none of those... they chase flies and sometimes I'll see them chewing on something unknown (assume it's maybe a spider)


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Oh my bleeding heart .. NOT!  However, I really wish Prince Charles would 'grow a set' and SIGNIFICANTLY reduce the $$$ being sent to Harry - after all, they wanted PRIVACY and were going to be financially INDEPENDENT!!  Arrgghh ..


IKR
Almost makes me wonder if JCMH doesn't have something on him


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> IKR
> Almost makes me wonder if JCMH doesn't have something on him


It's his father....I would hope not


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> It's his father....I would hope not


Well, yes I would hope that too. But JCMH's behavior as of late really gives me pause. While I'm sure that all the Royals have carefully cultivated public personas did they  have to work overtime on his? Has there been resentment and churlish, petulant behavior all along?
All I know is that I would never let a newcomer in my life disrespect my parents/family as I truly loved and respected them


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> LOL sometimes I laugh at your posts before even reading them because the gifs are hysterical!  Thank you for always making me crack up!


You're welcome! I'm glad the gifs give you and others a laugh or two


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> "Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton says Meghan Markle might have been 'frustrated' that she wasn't able to answer back to false claims about her - and adds he '*feels for the poor girl*'" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Meghan-frustrated-not-able-answer-claims.html
> 
> "Prince Charles has been in 'regular contact with Prince Harry to *provide emotional and financial support' *despite being hurt by book revelations" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ct-Prince-Harry-despite-book-revelations.html
> 
> Poor girl indeed!


Ahhh come on now Charles, it's time to shut the doors to the Bank of Dad. I sense a strong case of emotional blackmail keeping JCMH with plenty of money in the bank, courtesy of Charles, while pretending to be FiNaNcIaLlY iNdEpEnDeNt.


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> Ahhh come on now Charles, it's time to shut the doors to the Bank of Dad. I sense *a strong case of emotional blackmail* keeping JCMH with plenty of money in the bank, courtesy of Charles, while pretending to be FiNaNcIaLlY iNdEpEnDeNt.


.. and BOOM, you nailed it!!!!  Can't remember where I read it, but (supposedly) yup .. Harry has always felt that Charles' behavior (re: Camilla) and after Diana's death were not to his liking, so in essence .. yes, I think Harry has been playing his father big-time with that "guilt"!


----------



## bag-mania

The parent/child relationship can be complicated in any family and we don’t know much about them privately, even though it may feel like we know a lot. Resentment and/or guilt could be completely deserved.


----------



## A1aGypsy

If Chuck was my dad, he’d have been on the receiving end of some SERIOUS side eye over the years.


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> If Chuck was my dad, he’d have been on the receiving end of some SERIOUS side eye over the years.



Charles always gave the impression of being detached and kind of a cold fish when he was a younger man. He seems much more human these days. I guess he’s mellowed with age. Maybe he’s had time to reflect and that is why he is handling the Harry situation with immense patience.


----------



## Chanbal

More revelations from the famous book by MM & Scobie-doo:

*"Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan and warned the prince to slow things down with her, new book claims *

As a result, Mr Inskip and his wife Lara were reportedly 'punished' by being excluded from Prince Harry and Meghan’s wedding party at Frogmore House.

Instead, they had to watch as the Royal couple’s new friends such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney made their way to the event.

Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had been a close friend of the Duke after they met at Eton College, and were for a time inseparable."









						Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan, new book claims
					

According to the upcoming biography, Finding Freedom, Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had a falling out with Prince Harry after he shared his 'doubts' about the Duchess before they became engaged.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

So true. 
With Charles and Diana, home life was utter chaos, according to Morton. Diana in tears, Charles “busy“, constant arguing. All of that takes a huge toll on the children. Supposedly, H&M are self-described homebodies now, even before Covid. Pre-marriage, H was well known for his partying ways. Nobody ever thought of him as a homebody. At least, that was the narrative from the BRF. Although I am not a psychiatrist, it seems to me it would be much better for H’s mental health if he was financially independent from Bank of Dad. From what we know, it seems MM has been somewhat financially independent since she began her role in Suits. Maybe she is helping him? 




bag-mania said:


> The parent/child relationship can be complicated in any family and we don’t know much about them privately, even though it may feel like we know a lot. Resentment and/or guilt could be completely deserved.


----------



## PewPew

For several reasons, it may be relatively easy for Charles to provide financial support indefinitely. It’s never going to affect his lifestyle, even to partially support the extravagances of H&M. Charles has $100million personal fortune, ever growing interest, as well as annual income from the Duchy, his mother, and the discretionary fund that is authorized by Parliament. The only issue is the accounting, as his accountants will make sure it’s not directly coming from taxpayers (remember this is the meager 2.5% decrease in funding H&M expected to lose with Mexgit.)

I think it’s a matter of both pride & BRF interest not to cut Harry off ever, partially so that H&M cannot whine to the press about it, but mostly bc people desperate for validation and financial gain make poor decisions. We’ve seen this in how reckless H was in the “Greta” interview. They could easily align themselves with foreign interests seeking to exploit Harry’s *perceived* knowledge of the BRF & govt. (It need not be actual knowledge to do harm. They’re such lose cannons)


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> More revelations from the famous book by MM & Scobie-doo:
> 
> *"Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan and warned the prince to slow things down with her, new book claims *
> 
> As a result, Mr Inskip and his wife Lara were reportedly 'punished' by being excluded from Prince Harry and Meghan’s wedding party at Frogmore House.
> 
> Instead, they had to watch as the Royal couple’s new friends such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney made their way to the event.
> 
> Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had been a close friend of the Duke after they met at Eton College, and were for a time inseparable."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan, new book claims
> 
> 
> According to the upcoming biography, Finding Freedom, Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had a falling out with Prince Harry after he shared his 'doubts' about the Duchess before they became engaged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Glass is less breakable than this couple's egos. How can anyone maintain a relationship with them when they have the emotional capacity of a 4-year-old? Seems like no topic is safe except the weather in Chunga Chunga...


----------



## scarlet555

Charles cutting the financial cord would not hurt his bank account, he should donate the entirety of one year allowance in Prince Harry’s names to WHO for COVID 19 funds or to some cause Harry was involved in before la Megs got in.   Whatever guilt trip Harry is pulling on him has been played far too long, grow a pair both of them and be independent, that‘s usually the best lesson any parent can teach their child.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Charles always gave the impression of being detached and kind of a cold fish when he was a younger man. He seems much more human these days. I guess he’s mellowed with age. Maybe he’s had time to reflect and that is why he is handling the Harry situation with immense patience.



ITA, but in the long run it won't do JCMH any favours - or Charlie boy either


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> LOL he may be a "prince", but I'm starting to think he probably can't even button up his own sports jacket without help.  I like my "prince" to help out around the house, catch bugs if necessary, and be a real partner rather than a pawn to get to the next level in life.



Thing is, she makes him sound like a special needs child. He might not be the brightest bulb, but honestly, he can't be that unable to do mundane tasks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> From what we know, it seems MM has been somewhat financially independent since she began her role in Suits. Maybe she is helping him?



Her alleged fortune of 3 to 5 millions doesn't fund their lavish lifestyle at all. We're talking the woman who spent a freaking million on 9 months of clothes.


----------



## gelbergirl

what does this mean: JCMH


----------



## chicinthecity777

gelbergirl said:


> what does this mean: JCMH


Just Call me Harry


----------



## sdkitty

PewPew said:


> For several reasons, it may be relatively easy for Charles to provide financial support indefinitely. It’s never going to affect his lifestyle, even to partially support the extravagances of H&M. Charles has $100million personal fortune, ever growing interest, as well as annual income from the Duchy, his mother, and the discretionary fund that is authorized by Parliament. The only issue is the accounting, as his accountants will make sure it’s not directly coming from taxpayers (remember this is the meager 2.5% decrease in funding H&M expected to lose with Mexgit.)
> 
> I think it’s a matter of both pride & BRF interest not to cut Harry off ever, partially so that H&M cannot whine to the press about it, but mostly bc people desperate for validation and financial gain make poor decisions. We’ve seen this in how reckless H was in the “Greta” interview. They could easily align themselves with foreign interests seeking to exploit Harry’s *perceived* knowledge of the BRF & govt. (It need not be actual knowledge to do harm. They’re such lose cannons)


also (and admittedly I'm basing this on the movie The Queen) maybe there is concern about public backlash as the queen had when Diana died and she didn't respond appropriately.  I understand a lot of Brits may not be big H fans these days but there are also those who would accuse the royals of racism if they didn't support H&M.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her alleged fortune of 3 to 5 millions doesn't fund their lavish lifestyle at all. We're talking the woman who spent a freaking million on 9 months of clothes.



given half the chance this is something I could have in common with MM


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> also (and admittedly I'm basing this on the movie The Queen) maybe there is concern about public backlash as the queen had when Diana died and she didn't respond appropriately.  I understand a lot of Brits may not be big H fans these days but there are also those who would accuse the royals of racism if they didn't support H&M.



They'd just say they fully and whole-heatedly respect and support H&M's wish to achieve full independence (from the BRF).


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> They'd just say they fully and whole-heatedly respect and suppose H&M's wish to achieve full independence (from the BRF).


yes, but can they survive (never mind thrive) on their own (financially)?


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> They'd just say they fully and whole-heatedly respect and suppose H&M's wish to achieve full independence (from the BRF).


Exactly, isn't this actually what they (H&M) want? The RF could word it as such.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, isn't this actually what they (H&M) want? The RF could word it as such.



Exactly. 

Had to edit to change the typo, apologies - autocorrect doesn't work for me, I wish it would underline in red if I make a typo, then I could change it myself.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, but can they survive (never mind thrive) on their own (financially)?



Why not? I have to. Most of us do.

Don't forget they have more money than most people can dream about.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Why not? I have to. Most of us do.
> 
> Don't forget they have more money than most people can dream about.


absolutely.....even with her meager $3 mil or whatever it is, they'd be richer than most people.  but they wouldn't be able to live in the style to which they've become accustomed.
They asked for it though and I'd love to see it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, but can they survive (never mind thrive) on their own (financially)?



Not to the level of luxury and excess they want (and believe they deserve) to live. They’ve already played the “poor, poor us, everybody is so mean” card with the media. They’ve milked that for a while but they could probably squeeze a few more drops out of it. 

Whether it’s the British or the American media, they will get their their story told because discord in the BRF is a popular subject.


----------



## sdkitty

maybe some day she'll say to herself "no one is knocking down my door with offers for A-list movie roles.  I can go back to England and stir things up, live the royal life and gets lots of attention".....you never know.  The royals (esp Kate & Will) seem to be doing fine w/o them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe some day she'll say to herself "no one is knocking down my door with offers for A-list movie roles.  I can go back to England and stir things up, live the royal life and gets lots of attention".....you never know.  The royals (esp Kate & Will) seem to be doing fine w/o them.



I don’t see that ever happening. She bolted because she didn’t want the responsibilities assigned to her, she couldn’t control the media narrative, and her ego couldn’t stand playing second fiddle to William and Kate. None of that would change if they went back. Harry could go back alone but there’s no way Meghan is returning.


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> Charles cutting the financial cord would not hurt his bank account, he should donate the entirety of one year allowance in Prince Harry’s names to WHO for COVID 19 funds or to some cause Harry was involved in before la Megs got in.   Whatever guilt trip Harry is pulling on him has been played far too long, grow a pair both of them and be independent, that‘s usually the best lesson any parent can teach their child.


It would be great to see Charles donating their annual allowance to fight COVID or any other important cause, but I don't think he will do.

Charles is in a very tough situation, he loves his son and he is trying to minimize scandals surrounding the BRF. Despite the immature way he may have handled his marriage to Diana, he seems to be an overall decent man. 

H was tremendously selfish when he abandoned and exposed his family at a time they were already dealing with the 'Randy Andy' problem. If that was not enough, he also supported a book about how his dear wife was unfairly treated by the family. A family that gave her a clothing allowance of >$1,000,000 dollars, a renovated palace, and so many other perks. An overly ambitious wife with a reputation of not caring about her own family and of using and discarding people to get what she wants. As H has said, 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets'.  

QE, Charles, William and many other members of the RF are working for their country and deserve our respect. I hope they will be able to distance themselves from this toxic couple.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> yes, but can they survive (never mind thrive) on their own (financially)?


In my opinion, I really think that Meghan thought that once they came to LA, she would get the big-time Movie Parts (_A-List only of course_) and that Harry could use his "royalty" to get various highly-paid engagements.  Given their current housing situation, you know that Meghan *would not be happy* living in Woodland Hills again (_or the Valley for that matter_) .. she wants to be in Beverly Hills or Malibu, etc. - in other words, *NO CHEAP SPOTS*!  Obviously, COVID has put a huge damper on their plans!

What really slays me, is that she seems to think that she grew up in such hardship - HA, not quite kiddo!  The house that she lived in with her Dad (_Woodland Hills_) was by no means in a bad area (_right next to the fancy Golf Club_?!?!), and the private schools were not el-cheapo.  Living in the LA area can be VERY expensive, but *IF* (_bit IF here_) they truly wanted to trim their financial spending, they could .. but I sure don't see that happening.  Harry is very used to luxury, and Meghan wants to live the life of luxury .. so "Chuckie-Cheese" is going to have to fund that, unfortunately. 

At this point in time, given that book and how they have both whined about the BRF, I would be the happiest if QEII took those titles away such that we don't have to continue to see "_the Duchess_"!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> More revelations from the famous book by MM & Scobie-doo:
> 
> *"Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan and warned the prince to slow things down with her, new book claims *
> 
> As a result, Mr Inskip and his wife Lara were reportedly 'punished' by being excluded from Prince Harry and Meghan’s wedding party at Frogmore House.
> 
> Instead, they had to watch as the Royal couple’s new friends such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney made their way to the event.
> 
> Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had been a close friend of the Duke after they met at Eton College, and were for a time inseparable."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan, new book claims
> 
> 
> According to the upcoming biography, Finding Freedom, Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had a falling out with Prince Harry after he shared his 'doubts' about the Duchess before they became engaged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


.. and it was Inskip's wedding in Jamaica where Meghan was the +1 and (supposedly) Harry had broken it off with her, but she still showed up (_quelle surprise_).  When you see photos of the 2 of them together, they certainly DO NOT look like lovebirds .. at all!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> In my opinion, I really think that Meghan thought that once they came to LA, she would get the big-time Movie Parts (A-List only of course) and that Harry could use his "royalty" to get various highly-paid engagements.  Given their current housing situation, you know that Meghan would not be happy living in Woodland Hills again (or the Valley for that matter) .. she wants to be in Beverly Hills or Malibu, etc. - in other words, NO CHEAP SPOTS!  Obviously, COVID has put a huge damper on their plans!
> 
> What really slays me, is that she seems to think that she grew up in such hardship - HA, not quite kiddo!  The house that she lived in with her Dad (_Woodland Hills_) was by no means in a bad area (_right next to the fancy Gold Club_?!?!), and the private schools were not el-cheapo.  Living in the LA area can be VERY expensive, but *IF* (_bit IF here_) they truly wanted to trim their financial spending, they could .. but I sure don't see that happening.  Harry is very used to luxury, and Meghan wants to live the life of luxury .. so "Chuckie-Cheese" is going to have to fund that, unfortunately.
> 
> At this point in time, given that book and how they have both whined about the BRF, I would be the happiest if QEII took those titles away such that we don't have to continue to see "_the Duchess_"!



I wouldn't care if they wanted to live a life of luxury with their own money, good for them!

What annoys me more about this couple is that they constantly impose themselves to us (via PR-released news) and use others to achieve what they want without caring about the ones they use. They preach one thing and do another... 
I can't stand the daily news released by the PR-team (which includes MM). Those news make me run to this thread to compensate for so much hypocrisy.


----------



## lulu212121

Maybe Charles is indulging them for now, because maybe he knows William is going to cut the purse strings as soon as he can.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> .. and it was Inskip's wedding in Jamaica where Meghan was the +1 and (supposedly) Harry had broken it off with her, but she still showed up (_quelle surprise_).  When you see photos of the 2 of them together, they certainly DO NOT look like lovebirds .. at all!


She wouldn't risk any chance of losing her golden goose...


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and it was Inskip's wedding in Jamaica where Meghan was the +1 and (supposedly) Harry had broken it off with her, but she still showed up (_quelle surprise_).  When you see photos of the 2 of them together, they certainly DO NOT look like lovebirds .. at all!



This story always bothered me. How did she gain access to the ceremony and reception? Maybe they sent her her own invitation. She would have needed a room at the hotel too.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> This story always bothered me. How did she gain access to the ceremony and reception? Maybe they sent her her own invitation. She would have needed a room at the hotel too.


she may not be genius but she's crafty


----------



## Chanbal

lulu212121 said:


> Maybe Charles is indulging them for now, because maybe he knows William is going to cut the purse strings as soon as he can.


QE is still doing well, Charles will likely follow his mother's footsteps... By the time William will be king, MM&H will be senior citizens.


----------



## maryg1

Wasn’t Finding Freedom supposed to be the great gestures of M&H? And to describe accurately how the outer world has been so mean to them, while they only had love and hugs for everyone?
Every time a new paragraph of the book comes out I feel like they were behaving like spoiled pre-teens.
This book isn’t doing them any good service IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> QE is still doing well, Charles will likely follow his mother's footsteps... By the time William will be king, MM&H will be senior citizens.


good chance of that....you never know - Charles may not live as long and his mother but he's likely to love another ten years


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, Wills might still have a soft spot for his brother even though he feels about Meghan the way we all do. Dunno, I would probably put up with feeding a greedy grifter as a side effect of keeping my brother afloat, even though I'd wholeheartedly hope she'd choke on one of my coins LOL


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, Wills might still have a soft spot for his brother even though he feels about Meghan the way we all do. Dunno, I would probably put up with feeding a greedy grifter as a side effect of keeping my brother afloat, even though I'd wholeheartedly hope she'd choke on one of my coins LOL



It depends on how bad the rift between them is. We don’t know what Harry said and what bridges he may have burned. Given what Harry fed to the media, I doubt Will or any of the other royals will ever fully trust Harry again


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't care if they wanted to live a life of luxury with their own money, good for them!
> 
> What annoys me more about this couple is that they constantly impose themselves to us (via PR-released news) and use others to achieve what they want without caring about the ones they use. They preach one thing and do another...
> I can't stand the daily news released by the PR-team (which includes MM). Those news make me run to this thread to compensate for so much hypocrisy.






maryg1 said:


> Wasn’t Finding Freedom supposed to be the great gestures of M&H? And to describe accurately how the outer world has been so mean to them, while they only had love and hugs for everyone?
> Every time a new paragraph of the book comes out I feel like they were behaving like spoiled pre-teens.
> This book isn’t doing them any good service IMO.



This. And they knew releasing their claims would go unanswered by the BRF... I’d absolutely love if Charles cut them off and before he did it put out a press release with an itemized list of all the things they’ve done and just ended it with and  “They’re almost 40 years old and have decided to leave the family business, so why does the family business need to keep supporting them?” I know Charles/The BRF are too classy and wouldn’t lower themselves to JCMH/MM’s level, but it would be funny and for goodness sake it would cut them off before the whining...

I don’t know how anyone sees these two as anything but petulant overgrown children, but then I see my own Facebook and I’m reminded that apparently people who have 35 million dollars are poor...

I just can’t feel any pity for them when businesses are closing and people are facing losing their homes and these two are freeloading with millions... they chose to move to LA, the home to the paps... They’re both liars when they says they didn’t know about them in the US. Harry especially after his Vegas weekend.

35 million is enough to live comfortably and never have to work again. Ugh... Damn... if I could have 500k, it would change my life.. shoot... Their poor me BS, they make their own problems...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> Wasn’t Finding Freedom supposed to be the great gestures of M&H? And to describe accurately how the outer world has been so mean to them, while they only had love and hugs for everyone?
> Every time a new paragraph of the book comes out I feel like they were behaving like spoiled pre-teens.
> This book isn’t doing them any good service IMO.



I bet the majority of the book is “hooray for Meghan and Harry” sentiment. Unfortunately for them, when a book is being reviewed by the media, only the interesting information is worth writing articles about. Their shameless self-promotion doesn’t count as interesting since we’ve been subjected to it all along.


----------



## Staci_W

While I acknowledge that racism is a real problem, I think it detracts from actual racism when you overuse the word. Disliking a POC does not make you racist. I know this conversation was a few pages back. You guys move too fast in this thread.

I referred to Megan as Wallis Simpson on Facebook. That turned into multiple people accusing me of racism. How does that even make sense? I’m automatically not allowed to dislike any colored people because that makes me racist? I don’t like Candace Owens either. It has nothing to do with her appearance.


----------



## sdkitty

Staci_W said:


> While I acknowledge that racism is a real problem, I think it detracts from actual racism when you overuse the word. Disliking a colored person does not make you racist. I know this conversation was a few pages back. You guys move too fast in this thread.
> 
> I referred to Megan as Wallis Simpson on Facebook. That turned into multiple people accusing me of racism. How does that even make sense? I’m automatically not allowed to dislike any colored people because that makes me racist? I don’t like Candace Owens either. It has nothing to do with her appearance.



"colored people"....isn't that a term from the 50's?
as far as the Wallis Simpson thing - agree that doesn't make sense.  guess whoever said that thinks any negative thing about Meghan is racist


----------



## gracekelly

William will be cordial with his brother, but trust him...don't think so.  Kate showed she was pretty upset at the last event and she had good reason.  She will probably cool off and be able to go through the motions  in the future, but I doubt there will be too many opportunities for her to be tested in that regard. and perhaps with Harry, but not with Meghan, who I don't think will ever set foot in England again.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> "colored people"....isn't that a term from the 50's?
> as far as the Wallis Simpson thing - agree that doesn't make sense.  guess whoever said that thinks any negative thing about Meghan is racist


I actually heart that phrase 20 years ago from someone who was the sweetest person with no prejudice in her mind. Is that a bad phrase now? To be honest I lost track.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> William will be cordial with his brother, but trust him...don't think so.  Kate showed she was pretty upset at the last event and she had good reason.  She will probably cool off and be able to go through the motions  in the future, but I doubt there will be too many opportunities for her to be tested in that regard. and perhaps with Harry, but not with Meghan, who I don't think will ever set foot in England again.



Was it ever revealed why she was so obsessed with rich British men (as opposed to rich Canadians or US citizens)?


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I actually heart that phrase 20 years ago from someone who was the sweetest person with no prejudice in her mind. Is that a bad phrase now? To be honest I lost track.


I'll leave it to the WOC to answer that but I thought it wasn't acceptable these days


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was it ever revealed why she was so obsessed with rich British men (as opposed to rich Canadians or US citizens)?


I don't know but my guess is she knew she wasn't A-list here and she had a brainstorm that she could network her way into landing a weathy Brit


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> William will be cordial with his brother, but trust him...don't think so.  Kate showed she was pretty upset at the last event and she had good reason.  She will probably cool off and be able to go through the motions  in the future, but I doubt there will be too many opportunities for her to be tested in that regard. and perhaps with Harry, but not with Meghan, who I don't think will ever set foot in England again.



Can you imagine having to be cordial with family members that blame you (and your wife/family) for everything, can't stop moaning, and sharing every perceived slight and paranoid fantasy >>>> straight to mainstream/social media?

It's not even gossiping to neighbours and beaching to their friends, but to everyone who'll listen and many that don't want to.  Every minute of their time plotting against you, plotting and plotting.

And I'm not even a royalist!

Life's too short. Who's got the time, energy and inclination to be on the receiving end of such high drama constantly? Gets tired, gets tiring. I don't think a brother that has his own family to protect, feels he has the same obligations as a parent might.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't know but my guess is she knew she wasn't A-list here and she had a brainstorm that she could network her way into landing a weathy Brit



The saying is "Better to be a large fish in a small pond" Basically, she was getting desperate and needed somewhere 'else'  to reinvent herself without having to learn another language.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The saying is "Better to be a large fish in a small pond" Basically, she was getting desperate and needed somewhere 'else'  to reinvent herself without having to learn another language.


she was successful beyond her wildest dreams....but she didn't appreciate it


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Can you imagine having to be cordial with family members that blame you (and your wife/family) for everything, can't stop moaning, and sharing every perceived slight and paranoid fantasy >>>> straight to mainstream/social media?
> 
> It's not even gossiping to neighbours and beaching to their friends, but to everyone who'll listen and many that don't want to.  Every minute of their time plotting against you, plotting and plotting.
> 
> And I'm not even a royalist!
> 
> Life's too short. Who's got the time, energy and inclination to be on the receiving end of such high drama constantly? Gets tired, gets tiring. I don't think a brother that has his own family to protect, feels he has the same obligations as a parent might.



I will be totally honest in my answer.  I would cut her dead.  The air temp in the vicinity would be so frigid that permafrost would fee warmer. Even the penguins would feel cold. Deader than dead!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she was successful beyond her wildest dreams....but she didn't appreciate it


Many people have trouble recognizing when "they have it good."  They could be feeling that they should have left earlier, in which case, they would have been with the family and performing royal duties for all of a nanosecond, or that they should have remained longer been able to ride out the Covid wave and plot their dazzling arrival in LA.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she was successful beyond her wildest dreams....but she didn't appreciate it



Both of them will _never_ be satisfied, there is a German (and Russian) story called _Von dem Fischer un syner Fru / The fisherman and his Wife_

I copied and pasted this from wikki coz I need to go to bed sharpish, but here's the synopsis: 

"There is a poor fisherman who lives with his wife in a hovel by the sea. One day the fisherman catches a fish, which claims to be an enchanted prince, and begs to be set free. The fisherman kindly releases it. When his wife hears the story, she says he ought to have had the fish grant him a wish. She insists that he go back and ask the flounder to grant her wish for a nice house.

The fisherman returns to the shore but is uneasy when he finds that the sea seems to becoming turbid, as it was so clear before. He makes up a rhyme to summon the flounder, and it grants the wife's wish. The fisherman is pleased with his new wealth, but the wife is not and demands more, and demands that her husband go back and wish that he be made a king. Reluctantly, he does, and gets his wish. But again and again, his wife sends him back to ask for more and more. The fisherman knows this is wrong but there is no reasoning with his wife. He says they should not annoy the flounder, and be content with what they have been given, but his wife is not content. Each time, the flounder grants the wishes with the words: "just go home again, she has it already" or similar, but each time the sea grows more and more fierce.

Eventually, the wife wishes to command the sun, moon and heavens, and she sends her husband to the flounder with the wish "I want to become equal to God". When that final wish is made, the flounder says: "just go home again, she is already sitting in the old hovel again". And with that, the sea becomes calm once more."

From the Brother's Grimm collected fairytales 1812, a tale for 2020


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she was successful beyond her wildest dreams....but she didn't appreciate it



In her dreams she outshines the Queen - and all future queens


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> In her dreams she outshines the Queen - and all future queens


of course
She really is full of herself.....wonder if she was popular in school.  maybe @CeeJay knows.  sounds like she had a lot of confidence even back then.  and if that's the case, then it reinforces my opinion (or guess) that she hasn't experienced much racism other than the British tabloids.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was it ever revealed why she was so obsessed with rich British men (as opposed to rich Canadians or US citizens)?



Fresh meat. They didn't know anything about her and she would be new on the scene.


----------



## Lounorada

A1aGypsy said:


> If Chuck was my dad, he’d have been on the receiving end of some SERIOUS side eye over the years.


 @ 'Chuck' 


Chanbal said:


> More revelations from the famous book by MM & Scobie-doo:
> 
> *"Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan and warned the prince to slow things down with her, new book claims *
> 
> As a result, Mr Inskip and his wife Lara were reportedly 'punished' by being excluded from Prince Harry and Meghan’s wedding party at Frogmore House.
> 
> Instead, they had to watch as the Royal couple’s new friends such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney made their way to the event.
> 
> Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had been a close friend of the Duke after they met at Eton College, and were for a time inseparable."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's childhood friend 'had doubts' about Meghan, new book claims
> 
> 
> According to the upcoming biography, Finding Freedom, Tom 'Skippy' Inskip had a falling out with Prince Harry after he shared his 'doubts' about the Duchess before they became engaged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What a mess. The atmosphere amongst the guests at their (H&M) wedding must have been an uncomfortable sh*tshow.


----------



## Lodpah

So I’ve been binging on movies. The great actresses really are good at their craft. I watched Gia with Angelina Jolie, then The Tourust, and no way is MM ever ever growing to the level of professional actresses. Her range is more soft porn and am not being nasty. She just does not project on film.


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> What a mess. The atmosphere amongst the guests at their (H&M) wedding must have been an uncomfortable sh*tshow.



I bet they were all just hoping for the best. We’ve all experienced that friend or relative who falls in love, won’t listen to anybody else, and rushes into marriage. Every once in a while it works out but usually it ends the way everyone at the wedding could’ve predicted.


----------



## Jayne1

I thought is was pretty well known that Cory, who had numerous upscale and very trendy chicken restaurants, was responsible for Meg knowing how to cook a chicken.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was it ever revealed why she was so obsessed with rich British men (as opposed to rich Canadians or US citizens)?


I can also see her thinking it would seem “posh” like Madonna and Gwynneth.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I can also see her thinking it would seem “posh” like Madonna and Gwynneth.



Yes, I could see her thinking a British man would be a bit more exotic compared to the men she was used to, but not so much where she would have to adapt to any cultural differences. Getting a shot at Harry was likely more than she expected or dared to dream.


----------



## csshopper

Meagain especially and JCMH, her tag along, have nothing but time to sit and mope and imagine they are being ignored, judged, cheated out of every little minuscule thing they think they are entitled to because they have collectively, distanced themselves from generations of family and decades long friendships, let alone the recent acquisitions who have been jettisoned.

Basically it seems they have Doria and Marcus to spend time with, the dogs, Archie (who probably still takes naps) and at least 5 "young mother friends." Other than that, and mixing up word salad pronouncements to bedazzle the peons with, it seems they have little else to fill their days, and days, and days. And being utterly narcissistic even this void laden life is someone else's fault, since those horrid people who have been Markled did MM and JCMH wrong, so it's their own fault MM and JCMH simply can't associate with them any longer, and on and on it goes.


----------



## purseinsanity

I think the only subject MM is an expert at, and could possibly write a book on, is "How to Social Climb Effortlessly".


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yes, I could see her thinking a British man would be a bit more exotic compared to the men she was used to, but not so much where she would have to adapt to any cultural differences. Getting a shot at Harry was likely more than she expected or dared to dream.


She was looking for an athlete initially.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I think the only subject MM is an expert at, and could possibly write a book on, is "How to Social Climb Effortlessly".


Mmmmmmmmm............. I don't know about the _Effortlessly_ part. IMO it must be like marrying money..........a full time job.
little nod to the Stones there


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Mmmmmmmmm............. I don't know about the _Effortlessly_ part. IMO it must be like marrying money..........a full time job.
> little nod to the Stones there



She worked hard and applied herself. It paid off, glad for her.

Let's hope she carries on with the same purpose in the future i.e. a full time job


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> She worked had and applied herself. It paid off, glad for her.
> 
> Let's hope she carries on with the same purpose in the future i.e. a full time job


At this point, both of them need to get real jobs! They are middle aged adults for crying out loud!


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> She was looking for an athlete initially.


I’m not sure anyone has ever been as happy as Khloe Kardashian strutting onto the floor for Lakers games.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

MM is reminding me of others, take Lindsay Lohan as an example, who at one time became very successful then destroyed their lives because they couldn't handle the success or became so immersed and caught up with the celebrity fame, popularity and the parties etc. They feel the world revolves around them and when they realize it doesn't they react with self pity instead of self reflection.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> MM is reminding me of others, take Lindsay Lohan as an example, who at one time became very successful then destroyed their lives because they couldn't handle the success or became so immersed and caught up with the celebrity fame, popularity and the parties etc. *They feel the world revolves around them and when they realize it doesn't they react with self pity instead of self reflection*.


 Couldn’t agree more.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Both of them will _never_ be satisfied, there is a German (and Russian) story called _Von dem Fischer un syner Fru / The fisherman and his Wife_
> 
> I copied and pasted this from wikki coz I need to go to bed sharpish, but here's the synopsis:
> 
> "There is a poor fisherman who lives with his wife in a hovel by the sea. One day the fisherman catches a fish, which claims to be an enchanted prince, and begs to be set free. The fisherman kindly releases it. When his wife hears the story, she says he ought to have had the fish grant him a wish. She insists that he go back and ask the flounder to grant her wish for a nice house.
> 
> The fisherman returns to the shore but is uneasy when he finds that the sea seems to becoming turbid, as it was so clear before. He makes up a rhyme to summon the flounder, and it grants the wife's wish. The fisherman is pleased with his new wealth, but the wife is not and demands more, and demands that her husband go back and wish that he be made a king. Reluctantly, he does, and gets his wish. But again and again, his wife sends him back to ask for more and more. The fisherman knows this is wrong but there is no reasoning with his wife. He says they should not annoy the flounder, and be content with what they have been given, but his wife is not content. Each time, the flounder grants the wishes with the words: "just go home again, she has it already" or similar, but each time the sea grows more and more fierce.
> 
> Eventually, the wife wishes to command the sun, moon and heavens, and she sends her husband to the flounder with the wish "I want to become equal to God". When that final wish is made, the flounder says: "just go home again, she is already sitting in the old hovel again". And with that, the sea becomes calm once more."
> 
> From the Brother's Grimm collected fairytales 1812, a tale for 2020


good one
funny how things don't really change that much


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, I could see her thinking a British man would be a bit more exotic compared to the men she was used to, but not so much where she would have to adapt to any cultural differences. Getting a shot at Harry was likely more than she expected or dared to dream.


now that she has him and he's out of his element, I wouldn't be surprised if she's bored with him
Oh, I forgot, who was it - Gayle King - who said they are a couple in love.  never mind


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I think the only subject MM is an expert at, and could possibly write a book on, is "How to Social Climb Effortlessly".



She should teach a class. Imagine all the pretty young girls who desperately want to find a lifelong meal ticket. Meghan is who they aspire to be, they are her people! She would finally get the adulation she craves.


----------



## sdkitty

H apparently campaigning for racial equality on TV w/o the boss








						Prince Harry Says Combating Racism Will Take 'Every Single Person On The Planet'
					

The Duke of Sussex spoke with Rashad Robinson, activist and president of Color of Change, about the issue.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I will be totally honest in my answer.  I would cut her dead.  The air temp in the vicinity would be so frigid that permafrost would fee warmer. Even the penguins would feel cold. Deader than dead!


Same here; I think we have similar personalities in that respect .. once you 'cross' me, you NEVER get a second chance and while (if at the same event) I would be cordial and say HI, no way would I even engage in a conversation with you because, frankly .. you aren't worth my time and I don't want to share the air with you!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> H apparently campaigning for racial equality on TV w/o the boss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Combating Racism Will Take 'Every Single Person On The Planet'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex spoke with Rashad Robinson, activist and president of Color of Change, about the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Of course he is, he is applying what he has learned with his master:

*Meghan Markle guided Prince Harry on his public 'journey to wokeness', authors of the couple's biography Finding Freedom claim








						Meghan Markle guided Prince Harry on his public 'journey to wokeness'
					

Meghan Markle played a pivotal role in helping Prince Harry become more attuned to racism, according to the authors  of Finding Freedom Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Many people have trouble recognizing when "they have it good."  They could be feeling that they should have left earlier, in which case, they would have been with the family and performing royal duties for all of a nanosecond, or that they should have remained longer been able to ride out the Covid wave and plot their dazzling arrival in LA.


.. and she would be in that category, after all .. she was "spoiled" rotten early in life, and as such .. she's not ever going to think things are "good enough"!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> of course
> She really is full of herself.....wonder if she was popular in school.  maybe @CeeJay knows.  sounds like she had a lot of confidence even back then.  and if that's the case, then it reinforces my opinion (or guess) that she hasn't experienced much racism other than the British tabloids.


From what my friends told me, yes .. you could consider herself somewhat "popular" in High School, but they could also be because she was PUSHY beyond belief; she wasn't used to being told NO .. and as such, she felt she was better than all the others.  In addition, how many HS "friends" have come out to talk about her? .. what?!? - 1?  Oh wait, wasn't that one markled???  Same thing with her college years, but since Mom & Dad weren't around, she didn't get as much during those days ..


----------



## scarlet555

LOL at these two, Karma man









						Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Social Media Account Was Taken Off British Royal Family Website
					

Read more here...




					www.justjared.com
				



*Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Social Media Account Was Taken Off British Royal Family Website*





It seems like *Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry*, as well as *Prince Andrew*‘s social accounts have been removed from the British royal family’s website.
If you click the Instagram icon on the website, neither the *Duke and Duchess of Sussex *or *Prince Andrew, the Duke of York*‘s social media accounts pop up.
Instead, you will only find options for *Queen Elizabeth* (@TheRoyalFamily), *Prince Charles* and *Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall* (@ClarenceHouse) and the *Duke* and *Duchess of Cambridge* (@KensingtonRoyal).
*Harry* and *Meghan *left their senior royal roles in March, and just before that *Prince Andrew *was named as a person of interest in the *Jeffrey Epstein* case going on.
*Harry *also removed his Royal Highness title from the website, just after he and *Meghan *left off their titles on these documents.
At this time, their profiles remain on the Royal Family’s website.


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> LOL at these two, Karma man
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Social Media Account Was Taken Off British Royal Family Website
> 
> 
> Read more here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justjared.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Social Media Account Was Taken Off British Royal Family Website*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems like *Meghan Markle* and *Prince Harry*, as well as *Prince Andrew*‘s social accounts have been removed from the British royal family’s website.
> If you click the Instagram icon on the website, neither the *Duke and Duchess of Sussex *or *Prince Andrew, the Duke of York*‘s social media accounts pop up.
> Instead, you will only find options for *Queen Elizabeth* (@TheRoyalFamily), *Prince Charles* and *Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall* (@ClarenceHouse) and the *Duke* and *Duchess of Cambridge* (@KensingtonRoyal).
> *Harry* and *Meghan *left their senior royal roles in March, and just before that *Prince Andrew *was named as a person of interest in the *Jeffrey Epstein* case going on.
> *Harry *also removed his Royal Highness title from the website, just after he and *Meghan *left off their titles on these documents.
> At this time, their profiles remain on the Royal Family’s website.



LOL love how they're being treated the same way as the other pariah in the BRF!


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> She should teach a class. Imagine all the pretty young girls who desperately want to find a lifelong meal ticket. Meghan is who they aspire to be, they are her people! She would finally get the adulation she craves.


Don't forget the money aspect. Teaching social climbing 101 will be her true moneymaker and $millions will fall from the heavens. LOL!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Of course he is, he is applying what he has learned with his master:
> 
> *Meghan Markle guided Prince Harry on his public 'journey to wokeness', authors of the couple's biography Finding Freedom claim
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle guided Prince Harry on his public 'journey to wokeness'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle played a pivotal role in helping Prince Harry become more attuned to racism, according to the authors  of Finding Freedom Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


If he thinks every person is going to be on board, he is sadly mistaken.  Take it from one who lives an area of shall we say "conservatives"
The strides that have been made in the past has been from activism and also from politicans like Lyndon Johnson.....even though young people are more "color blind" than old people, there are still young bigots.  So no, not gonna get everyone on board for change Harry


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> From what my friends told me, yes .. you could consider herself somewhat "popular" in High School, but they could also be because she was PUSHY beyond belief; she wasn't used to being told NO .. and as such, she felt she was better than all the others.  In addition, how many HS "friends" have come out to talk about her? .. what?!? - 1?  Oh wait, wasn't that one markled???  Same thing with her college years, but since Mom & Dad weren't around, she didn't get as much during those days ..


so she was no "victim" back then or ever (except for the tabloids).  and their complaints that the royals didn't do enough to protect her?  uugh....how about being grateful that you were welcomed with open arms and given a huge wedding etc.  I imagine that down deep she was not the wife the queen would have chosen for H.  never mind Phillip.  I can imagine what he thought/said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Talk is cheap. What has he really done? Afaik, they just zoom from TP’s mansion. 




sdkitty said:


> If he thinks every person is going to be on board, he is sadly mistaken.  Take it from one who lives an area of shall we say "conservatives"
> The strides that have been made in the past has been from activism and also from politicans like Lyndon Johnson.....even though young people are more "color blind" than old people, there are still young bigots.  So no, not gonna get everyone on board for change Harry


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Talk is cheap. What has he really done? Afaik, they just zoom from TP’s mansion.


wonder why he was sent out for a TV appearance by himself


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder why he was sent out for a TV appearance by himself



She's too busy preparing for the big interview she's giving this week. Look out, Gayle King, Meghan is gunning for your job!


----------



## CarryOn2020

My gut feeling is that the BRF doesn’t worry too much about those who are direct in line. H never had special sessions with Qe like Will did/does and now George is. Why the BRF pushed the fun-guy H narrative is a mystery to me. I guess it was similar to Andy’s randy story. In neither case did it work out too well.



sdkitty said:


> so she was no "victim" back then or ever (except for the tabloids).  and their complaints that the royals didn't do enough to protect her?  uugh....how about being grateful that you were welcomed with open arms and given a huge wedding etc.  I imagine that down deep she was not the wife the queen would have chosen for H.  never mind Phillip.  I can imagine what he thought/said.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Other than the lectures on racism, is there any other evidence of H’s wokeness? 
What has she really done?

ETA -he has not been back to Africa since the disaster tour.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She's too busy preparing for the big interview she's giving this week. Look out, Gayle King, Meghan is gunning for your job!


does she actually have an interview coming up?
I've never seen her actually "act" ....only live footage I've seen is the wedding the the "no one has asked how I feel" interview


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My gut feeling is that the BRF doesn’t worry too much about those who are direct in line. H never had special sessions with Qe like Will did/does and now George is. *Why the BRF pushed the fun-guy H narrative is a mystery to me. I guess it was similar to Andy’s randy story*. In neither case did it work out too well.



It wasn't the BRF pushing that narrative, it was the press. What do you do when you have to write about a royal who will never have any authority, you show him being a nonstop party animal!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> does she actually have an interview coming up?
> I've never seen her actually "act" ....only live footage I've seen is the wedding the the "no one has asked how I feel" interview



It's that one we were talking about last week. She'll interview the CEO of the feminist org that nobody has ever heard of at the end of their online summit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very interesting observation. That seems to be the thinking for the men. Anne is always shown to be working.



bag-mania said:


> It wasn't the BRF pushing that narrative, it was the press. What do you do when you have to write about a royal who will never have any authority, you show him being a nonstop party animal!


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Talk is cheap. What has he really done? Afaik, they just zoom from TP’s mansion.



Has any interviewer spoken about his Nazi costume?  Since he is talking about systemic racism...  That'd be an interview I'd like to watch and has anyone asked la Meghan how she feels about marrying someone who once wore a Nazi costume, being that she had problems in England about lack of support from the BRF and the racism she encountered and since they want to talk about racism, let's start at home.  I mean I'm curious.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> so she was no "victim" back then or ever (except for the tabloids).  and their complaints that the royals didn't do enough to protect her?  uugh....how about being grateful that you were welcomed with open arms and given a huge wedding etc.  I imagine that down deep she was not the wife the queen would have chosen for H.  never mind Phillip.  I can imagine what he thought/said.


Oh, Phillip .. true to form, did say something along the lines of "you date an actress, you don't marry one"!!!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Other than the lectures on racism, is there any other evidence of H’s wokeness?
> What has she really done?
> 
> ETA -he has not been back to Africa since the disaster tour.


.. what really cracks me up, is even when he "toured" Africa, he would always stay at the NICEST places, c'mon .. would he have stayed in a shack in one of the shanty towns???  He has lived in a massive BUBBLE for most of his life, and NOW???? .. he is 'WOKE'?!?!?  Puhleeze .. JCMH, STOP!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said.
Even when ’camping’, he is actually glamping. No sympathy for the hypocrites.

_The camp is filled with curios from the golden age of exploration. Pinned insect samples, antique maps, rickety globes, teak furniture, and burnished leather chairs accent the tents. A ceiling over the main dining table is made from little more than draped parachute silk. There’s an outdoor kitchen where yeasty bread is freshly-baked all day long. Daybeds, oriental rugs, and chintz pillows lend themselves to long and lazy naps._








						Inside the Romantic Safari Camp Where Prince Harry Took Meghan Markle
					

Get to know the Botswana safari camp that played a pivotal part in the world’s most talked-about love story of the moment.




					www.vogue.com
				









CeeJay said:


> .. what really cracks me up, is even when he "toured" Africa, he would always stay at the NICEST places, c'mon .. would he have stayed in a shack in one of the shanty towns???  He has lived in a massive BUBBLE for most of his life, and NOW???? .. he is 'WOKE'?!?!?  Puhleeze .. JCMH, STOP!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Who is Harry to preach to others when he has been accused of using racist slurs in the past? Enjoy this old list of Harry's most cringeworthy moments.









						9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
					

From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

All things considered, a move to Africa would be his (and hers) best option. Otherwise, they will continue to be criticized .

_He told me about his first trip to Africa: “I first came in 1997, straight after my mum died. My dad told my brother and me to pack our bags—we were going to Africa to get away from it all. My brother and I were brought up outdoors—we appreciate the countryside, we appreciate nature and everything about it. But it became more…."








						After Spending a Week in Malawi with Prince Harry, I’m Not Surprised He Wants to Move to Africa
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning an international move following the birth of their first child.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMHO, we get a new perspective and insight looking back at his previous statements.




bag-mania said:


> Who is Harry to preach to others when he has been accused of using racist slurs in the past? Enjoy this old list of Harry's most cringeworthy moments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
> 
> 
> From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMHO, we get a new perspective and insight looking back at his previous statements.



I can acknowledge that he has grown up and realized that what he said/did in his youth was wrong and insensitive. But just live a better life and keep your trap shut, Harry! Nobody needs you of all people telling them what to do ABOUT ANYTHING.


----------



## bag-mania

Scobie was out plugging his book on GMA this morning. He's still drinking that Markle Kool-aid!

*Finding Freedom's Omid Scobie Speaks Out on Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's Rumored Feud*
*Omid Scobie* is spilling the royal tea on *Meghan Markle* and *Kate Middleton*'s relationship.

The royal reporter sat down with *Deborah Roberts* for Monday's episode of _Good Morning America_ to discuss the duchesses' level of camaraderie as reported in his new book _Finding_ _Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_.

"These are two women that really have very little in common," he said when asked if Meghan and Kate get along. "I think being a newcomer and knowing that Kate was once a newcomer, I think there were times where she, from speaking to sources, knew that Meghan felt that she could of or needed a little bit more support from Kate and didn't get it in some of those important moments."

When Meghan and Harry announced their engagement back in 2017, Kate said she and *Prince William* were "absolutely thrilled" about the news. In fact, during their first interview as an engaged couple, Meghan told the BBC Kate has "been wonderful" and Harry said she's "been absolutely amazing, as is William as well," noting the "fantastic support."

However, things seemed to take a turn. Soon, reports started to spread that there was a rift between the brothers and tension between Meghan and Kate. At one point, Kensington Palace even shut down a report by _The Sun_ that claimed Kate told Meghan not to berate her staff, with the Palace noting, "This never happened." The publication also reported Kate broke down in tears at a fitting for *Princess Charlotte*'s bridesmaid's dress ahead of Meghan and Harry's wedding. But when asked if the report about Kate breaking down at the wedding was true, Scobie said it "couldn't be further from the truth."

He explained, "When I spoke to the people who were actually there and involved, the first thing they all said was, 'There were no tears.'"

While Harry has spoken out about his relationship with William before, Scobie also wanted to cover it in his book.

"I felt it was important to really dive into this in the book because we had seen Meghan and Kate really blamed for almost driving a wedge between them," he said. "You know, they're both men in their 30s and Harry not wanting to play that role of sort of the younger, more subservient brother anymore."

In addition to addressing any allegations of family feuds, Scobie spoke about Meghan's portrayal in the media and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to step back as senior members of the royal family, claiming the couple "had no choice other than to leave." At one point in the interview, Scobie was also asked if he boiled "this down to a racial issue" or it was "really more complicated than that."

As he explained to Roberts, "In terms of ticking those boxes that may ruffle feathers within an ancient institution such as that of the monarchy, she had really ticked all of them. But race did play a role."

He was also asked how history will remember Harry and Meghan.

"History will remember them as a couple that were perhaps failed by the institution of the monarchy, where there was this chance to have a woman of color, an American woman of color, in the House of Windsor representing the monarchy just as much as her husband," Scobie said. "That was a chance for the royal family to have diversity, inclusivity and representation in a way that no other moment in their lives could have brought. And for them to not have harnessed that is something I'm sure historians will be looking at for years to come."

Scobie wrote _Finding Freedom_ with *Carolyn Durand*. He told Roberts the book is based on 100 interviews with "those who know Harry and Meghan best, close friends and even Buckingham Palace aides." He also denied claims Harry and Meghan were involved with the book.

"I know there's a lot of speculation about the couple having sort of given secret interviews for the book and having weighed in," he said, "but it really couldn't be further from the truth."

A spokesperson for Harry and Meghan also told E! News, "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to _Finding Freedom_."

"This book is based on the authors' own experiences as members of the royal press corps and their own independent reporting," the spokesperson added.

Buckingham Palace did not respond to _GMA_'s request for comment.

Watch the interview via the video above.

Scobie is set to appear on _Daily Pop_ this Friday.









						Finding Freedom's Omid Scobie Speaks Out on Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's Rumored Feud - E! Online
					

Omid Scobie, author of Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family appeared on GMA and spoke about Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's rumored feud.




					www.eonline.com


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Oh, Phillip .. true to form, did say something along the lines of "you date an actress, you don't marry one"!!!


right...I remember you saying that he said that - not directly about Meghan I don't think but I'm sure his ideas didn't change; he just had to swallow hard and shut up


----------



## CeeJay

Oh geez .. Obie-one-con-boobie .. you just wait, you'll be markled at some point when you no longer are needed!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said.
> Even when ’camping’, he is actually glamping. No sympathy for the hypocrites.
> 
> _The camp is filled with curios from the golden age of exploration. Pinned insect samples, antique maps, rickety globes, teak furniture, and burnished leather chairs accent the tents. A ceiling over the main dining table is made from little more than draped parachute silk. There’s an outdoor kitchen where yeasty bread is freshly-baked all day long. Daybeds, oriental rugs, and chintz pillows lend themselves to long and lazy naps._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the Romantic Safari Camp Where Prince Harry Took Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Get to know the Botswana safari camp that played a pivotal part in the world’s most talked-about love story of the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


.. and let us not forget, that these places represent the "old time" version of the colonization of Africa and while the Brits may think that was such a 'romantic' period of time, I wouldn't say that the native Africans would think so given that it was their land that was taken from them!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Who is Harry to preach to others when he has been accused of using racist slurs in the past? Enjoy this old list of Harry's most cringeworthy moments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
> 
> 
> From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


The statement from the former transport minister Norman Baker couldn't define better this couple, *‘The message is fine, but the messenger is wrong – it’s like a carnivore advocating vegetarianism.’*


----------



## Aimee3

Re: Harry’s wearing the Nazi uniform, his response  "[I am] very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize.” doesn’t really sound like a true apology to me.  To me I translate that as I’m sorry YOU feel offended or embarrassed, but I’m not sorry for what I did.  Poor “choice” of “costume”? What about saying he realizes what that uniform signifies to a lot of people and how wrong it was to put it on for whatever reason?   I have zero respect for him.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Scobie was out plugging his book on GMA this morning. He's still drinking that Markle Kool-aid!
> 
> *Finding Freedom's Omid Scobie Speaks Out on Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's Rumored Feud*
> *Omid Scobie* is spilling the royal tea on *Meghan Markle* and *Kate Middleton*'s relationship.
> 
> The royal reporter sat down with *Deborah Roberts* for Monday's episode of _Good Morning America_ to discuss the duchesses' level of camaraderie as reported in his new book _Finding_ _Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_.
> 
> "These are two women that really have very little in common," he said when asked if Meghan and Kate get along. "I think being a newcomer and knowing that Kate was once a newcomer, I think there were times where she, from speaking to sources, knew that Meghan felt that she could of or needed a little bit more support from Kate and didn't get it in some of those important moments."
> 
> When Meghan and Harry announced their engagement back in 2017, Kate said she and *Prince William* were "absolutely thrilled" about the news. In fact, during their first interview as an engaged couple, Meghan told the BBC Kate has "been wonderful" and Harry said she's "been absolutely amazing, as is William as well," noting the "fantastic support."
> 
> However, things seemed to take a turn. Soon, reports started to spread that there was a rift between the brothers and tension between Meghan and Kate. At one point, Kensington Palace even shut down a report by _The Sun_ that claimed Kate told Meghan not to berate her staff, with the Palace noting, "This never happened." The publication also reported Kate broke down in tears at a fitting for *Princess Charlotte*'s bridesmaid's dress ahead of Meghan and Harry's wedding. But when asked if the report about Kate breaking down at the wedding was true, Scobie said it "couldn't be further from the truth."
> 
> He explained, "When I spoke to the people who were actually there and involved, the first thing they all said was, 'There were no tears.'"
> 
> While Harry has spoken out about his relationship with William before, Scobie also wanted to cover it in his book.
> 
> "I felt it was important to really dive into this in the book because we had seen Meghan and Kate really blamed for almost driving a wedge between them," he said. "You know, they're both men in their 30s and Harry not wanting to play that role of sort of the younger, more subservient brother anymore."
> 
> In addition to addressing any allegations of family feuds, Scobie spoke about Meghan's portrayal in the media and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to step back as senior members of the royal family, claiming the couple "had no choice other than to leave." At one point in the interview, Scobie was also asked if he boiled "this down to a racial issue" or it was "really more complicated than that."
> 
> As he explained to Roberts, "In terms of ticking those boxes that may ruffle feathers within an ancient institution such as that of the monarchy, she had really ticked all of them. But race did play a role."
> 
> He was also asked how history will remember Harry and Meghan.
> 
> "History will remember them as a couple that were perhaps failed by the institution of the monarchy, where there was this chance to have a woman of color, an American woman of color, in the House of Windsor representing the monarchy just as much as her husband," Scobie said. "That was a chance for the royal family to have diversity, inclusivity and representation in a way that no other moment in their lives could have brought. And for them to not have harnessed that is something I'm sure historians will be looking at for years to come."
> 
> Scobie wrote _Finding Freedom_ with *Carolyn Durand*. He told Roberts the book is based on 100 interviews with "those who know Harry and Meghan best, close friends and even Buckingham Palace aides." He also denied claims Harry and Meghan were involved with the book.
> 
> "I know there's a lot of speculation about the couple having sort of given secret interviews for the book and having weighed in," he said, "but it really couldn't be further from the truth."
> 
> A spokesperson for Harry and Meghan also told E! News, "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to _Finding Freedom_."
> 
> "This book is based on the authors' own experiences as members of the royal press corps and their own independent reporting," the spokesperson added.
> 
> Buckingham Palace did not respond to _GMA_'s request for comment.
> 
> Watch the interview via the video above.
> 
> Scobie is set to appear on _Daily Pop_ this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom's Omid Scobie Speaks Out on Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's Rumored Feud - E! Online
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie, author of Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family appeared on GMA and spoke about Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's rumored feud.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com



It looks like Scobie-doo is still being useful to MM & MA.


----------



## 1LV

I have a question.  Cancel culture.  Why does Harry get a pass?  His idea of dressing up in a Nazi uniform as a “joke” was, and is inexcusable.  The fact that it’s obviously ok, more than anything else, shows just how shallow his wife and her so called friends are.  I wouldn’t listen to their advice on choosing a toilet paper brand, let alone on how to change the world.


----------



## csshopper

From an article regarding JCMH hooking up with the "Color of Change" group, including a quote from him: 

_'“Inequality is not unfortunate like a car accident, it has been manufactured”.  _

Harry,  if someone dies as the result of a car accident it is waaaaaaay beyond "unfortunate." How could you even have uttered this tripe? All the more astounding since it was a car accident that killed your mother, the life defining moment that seems to have influenced your life since that time. "Unfortunate" hardly begins to describe it.

Actually the whole analogy of racial inequality to the automotive manufacturing process is mind boggling.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Same here; I think we have similar personalities in that respect .. once you 'cross' me, you NEVER get a second chance and while (if at the same event) I would be cordial and say HI, no way would I even engage in a conversation with you because, frankly .. you aren't worth my time and I don't want to share the air with you!



The biggest thumbs up for this post!  Exactly sis!  I will qualify and say that there have been times when I cut some people some slack because I knew or subsequently learned the extenuating circumstances that provoked the behavior.  In this case NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!  She gets the ice cube effect.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and let us not forget, that these places represent the "old time" version of the colonization of Africa and while the Brits may think that was such a 'romantic' period of time, I wouldn't say that the native Africans would think so given that it was their land that was taken from them!!!!


and probably big game hunting went on....still does I guess but not as acceptable today


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I have a question.  Cancel culture.  Why does Harry get a pass?  His idea of dressing up in a Nazi uniform as a “joke” was, and is inexcusable.  The fact that it’s obviously ok, more than anything else, shows just how shallow his wife and her so called friends are.  I wouldn’t listen to their advice on choosing a toilet paper brand, let alone on how to change the world.



I get what you are saying but does that mean that anyone who ever did something stupid when he/she was 20 should forever be branded by that mistake for the rest of their lives? Should they never be allowed to have a good job, a normal life? I don't think it's that Harry got a pass as much as he had the opportunity to learn from his mistakes and hopefully gain the understanding that what he did was insensitive.

There are drunk drivers who kill somebody and barely get punished, sometimes no punishment at all. They go about their lives with no repercussions. Those are the types of people I get mad when I hear they got off easy.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> My gut feeling is that the BRF doesn’t worry too much about those who are direct in line. H never had special sessions with Qe like Will did/does and now George is. Why the BRF pushed the fun-guy H narrative is a mystery to me. I guess it was similar to Andy’s randy story. In neither case did it work out too well.


I doubt most people in that age group would be excited about their gandson marrying for the first time choosing a twice divorced actress.....even if he wasn't in line for the throne


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

scarlet555 said:


> Has any interviewer spoken about his Nazi costume?  Since he is talking about systemic racism...  That'd be an interview I'd like to watch and has anyone asked la Meghan how she feels about marrying someone who once wore a Nazi costume, being that she had problems in England about lack of support from the BRF and the racism she encountered and since they want to talk about racism, let's start at home.  I mean I'm curious.


Glad you brought this up because I have often wondered the same thing.  I guess M overlooked this incident since Harry has so many other positive characteristics going for him...money, royalty, status, father-in-law with big bucks, clothing allowance, future husband that is not too smart. Oh, the list could go on and on.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yes, I could see her thinking a British man would be a bit more exotic compared to the men she was used to, but not so much where she would have to adapt to any cultural differences. Getting a shot at Harry was likely more than she expected or dared to dream.



I don't know about the men being  exotic.  I think she was told that they would be easier to dazzle, think she was exotic and weren't as discerning as the men in Canada or the  US.  I would guess the source of this advice was Markus Anderson.  She just got very lucky because Harry was far more sheltered than your average British celebrity and she was able to give her big sell and it was successful.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I get what you are saying but does that mean that anyone who ever did something stupid when he/she was 20 should forever be branded by that mistake for the rest of their lives? Should they never be allowed to have a good job, a normal life? I don't think it's that Harry got a pass as much as he had the opportunity to learn from his mistakes and hopefully gain the understanding that what he did was insensitive.
> 
> There are drunk drivers who kill somebody and barely get punished, sometimes no punishment at all. They go about their lives with no repercussions. Those are the types of people I get mad when I hear they got off easy.


It would have been smart and cognizant of him to address the incident and how he is now sorry for making that mistake when he was younger. Maybe I would give him more credit for being intelligent and "woke."

Update:  Oops! Posted before I read more posts that he did make an effort to apologize.


----------



## Tootsie17

CeeJay said:


> Oh geez .. Obie-one-con-boobie .. you just wait, you'll be markled at some point when you no longer are needed!


Obie-one-con-boobie!  LMAO!!! Good one


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> From an article regarding JCMH hooking up with the "Color of Change" group, including a quote from him:
> 
> _*'“Inequality is not unfortunate like a car accident, it has been manufactured”.  *_
> 
> Actually the whole analogy of racial inequality to the automotive manufacturing process is mind boggling.



This quote is too profound.  We need to wait for his wife's explanation via Scobie-doo.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Oh geez .. Obie-one-con-boobie .. you just wait, you'll be markled at some point when you no longer are needed!


That's for sure, but it will take some time. MM & MA can't waste such devoted advocate until they catch bigger fish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sheesh!  Need to fix this:
_My gut feeling is that the BRF doesn’t worry too much about those who are *not* direct in line. H never had special sessions with Qe like Will did/does and now George is. Why the BRF pushed the fun-guy H narrative is a mystery to me. I guess it was similar to Andy’s randy story. In neither case did it work out too well.

@sdkitty _they may dislike his choice, but QE learned from her sister’s romances that intervening is much worse than just letting life go on. She also learned from Andy’s Koo Stark situation — resistance is futile. Nobody wants a Romeo&Juliet kind of situation. As @bag-mania said, it was all media-hype anyway and proved to be a lie.
======
His youthful indiscretions tell us all we need to know. Was he sorry he wore that shirt or sorry someone took a photo? The apology sounds like the Palace wrote it. That particular shirt worn by a member of that particular family at that particular time is/was inexcusable. He thought he wouldn’t be photographed. Same thing about Vegas — no photos were supposed to be taken. Same idea about the mansion photos, etc. From early on, he felt he was untouchable because he could control the press. Haaa- didn’t work out, did it?  It is the pattern of arrogant behavior that he continues to show us. That is who he is.









						Top 10 Royal-Family Gaffes - TIME
					

In 2005, just two weeks before Holocaust Memorial Day, Prince Harry figured it was a good idea to turn up at a "colonials and natives" costume party dressed as a Nazi. British tabloid the Sun...




					content.time.com
				



A colonials and natives party? What kind of people do that? Or were doing that in 2005?


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Has any interviewer spoken about his Nazi costume?  Since he is talking about systemic racism...  That'd be an interview I'd like to watch and has anyone asked la Meghan how she feels about marrying someone who once wore a Nazi costume, being that she had problems in England about lack of support from the BRF and the racism she encountered and since they want to talk about racism, let's start at home.  I mean I'm curious.



They probably had some "agreement" with the royal family not to mention it again after some point... But I'll be curious to see how that plays in the US press since people are probably more willing to burn some bridges to get a money moment. No royal rota system here. Very transactional.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _Inequality is not unfortunate like a car accident, it has been manufactured_



What exactly “has been manufactured” — the inequality or the car accident?  Such poor grammar, tsk tsk.
There we have another word salad that completely loses the point.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sheesh!  Need to fix this:
> _My gut feeling is that the BRF doesn’t worry too much about those who are *not* direct in line. H never had special sessions with Qe like Will did/does and now George is. Why the BRF pushed the fun-guy H narrative is a mystery to me. I guess it was similar to Andy’s randy story. In neither case did it work out too well.
> 
> @sdkitty _they may dislike his choice, but QE learned from her sister’s romances that intervening is much worse than just letting life go on. She also learned from Andy’s Koo Stark sitUstinov — resistance is futile. Nobody wants a Romeo&Juliet kind of situation. As @bag-mania said, it was all media-hype anyway and proved to be a lie.
> ======
> His youthful indiscretions tell us all we need to know. Was he sorry he wore that shirt or sorry someone took a photo? The apology sounds like the Palace wrote it. That particular shirt worn by a member of that particular family at that particular time is/was inexcusable. He thought he wouldn’t be photographed. Same thing about Vegas — no photos were supposed to be taken. Same idea about the mansion photos, etc. From early on, he felt he was untouchable because he could control the press. Haaa- didn’t work out, did it?  It is the pattern of arrogant behavior that he continues to show us. That is who he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Top 10 Royal-Family Gaffes - TIME
> 
> 
> In 2005, just two weeks before Holocaust Memorial Day, Prince Harry figured it was a good idea to turn up at a "colonials and natives" costume party dressed as a Nazi. British tabloid the Sun...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> content.time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A colonials and natives party? What kind of people do that? Or were doing that in 2005?


agree - they did what they had to do in accepting Meghan but I just don't think deep down in their hearts they were likely happy about it


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I get what you are saying but does that mean that anyone who ever did something stupid when he/she was 20 should forever be branded by that mistake for the rest of their lives? Should they never be allowed to have a good job, a normal life? I don't think it's that Harry got a pass as much as he had the opportunity to learn from his mistakes and hopefully gain the understanding that what he did was insensitive.
> 
> There are drunk drivers who kill somebody and barely get punished. Those are the types of people I get mad when I hear they got off easy.


I completely agree with you that we shouldn’t be defined by the mistakes we made in our youth.  Maybe it’s just the overall hypocrisy that surrounds him and MM.  Lots of people have been “cancelled” because of old “jokes”, and have been branded as a result.  Why not Harry? (I’m looking at you JP Morgan)  That’s my point.  I do have to say tho’ if he didn’t have enough sense and sense of decency not to dress as a nazi at 20 I sure as hell don’t want to hear what he (or his blushing bride) has to say now.  Not only did I know better at 20, it never would have occurred to me.  Who thinks like that?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Who is Harry to preach to others when he has been accused of using racist slurs in the past? Enjoy this old list of Harry's most cringeworthy moments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
> 
> 
> From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Among the stuff I knew about, that poor horse! Barbaric!


----------



## papertiger

Tootsie17 said:


> It would have been smart and cognizant of him to address the incident and how he is now sorry for making that mistake when he was younger. Maybe I would give him more credit for being intelligent and "woke."
> 
> Update:  Oops! Posted before I read more posts that he did make an effort to apologize.



No, you were right, he should have started this recent talk with that 'car crash'(?) 15 years ago. He thinks we don't remember. We do. The fact that he doesn't talk about it means he's still as half-witted as the idiot who thought wearing a symbol of white supremacy and signifier for so-called racial purity was just a joke.

If anyone wore the full Party uniform to a party it would be bad enough. That the third in line to the throne of a country that lost and suffered so much during the war and after shows he's either really, really, stupid or holds similar views.

That apology was written for him in the aftermath in 2005 and totally insincere (IMHO)


----------



## tiktok

Blind gossip item: https://blindgossip.com/three-moves/
"She has tossed her hat in the ring to replace [that TV talk show host who is going through some turmoil]...
She expressed interest in speaking at the ********ic National Committee Convention...
She knows that if they “take a knee” during _The Star Spangled Banner_, that would be the cover photo of every single newspaper, magazine, and website in the world."

Who knows whether any of these has any basis in reality, but can't say I'd be shocked if they do...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What exactly “has been manufactured” — the inequality or the car accident?  Such poor grammar, tsk tsk.
> There we have another word salad that completely loses the point.


Trying to understand such profound statement was giving me a headache, so I gave up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> All things considered, a move to Africa would be his (and hers) best option. Otherwise, they will continue to be criticized .
> 
> _He told me about his first trip to Africa: “I first came in 1997, straight after my mum died. My dad told my brother and me to pack our bags—we were going to Africa to get away from it all. My brother and I were brought up outdoors—we appreciate the countryside, we appreciate nature and everything about it. But it became more…."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Spending a Week in Malawi with Prince Harry, I’m Not Surprised He Wants to Move to Africa
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning an international move following the birth of their first child.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I don’t ever see this happening. Not enough press or photographers and how could they possibly stay relevant (in their own minds)?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Who is Harry to preach to others when he has been accused of using racist slurs in the past? Enjoy this old list of Harry's most cringeworthy moments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
> 
> 
> From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


How lovely  I know Philip said many inappropriate things (at least according to The Crown) but I suppose those could be kind of overlooked given the times back then?  Harry should know better.  He's using derogatory and offensive terms and uniforms as well as being accused of animal cruelty, rehab as a teen, etc etc etc., and suddenly now he's a spokesman for anti all that?  Puh-leeze.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> .. and let us not forget, that these places represent the "old time" version of the colonization of Africa and while the Brits may think that was such a 'romantic' period of time, I wouldn't say that the native Africans would think so given that it was their land that was taken from them!!!!


Not just Africa...many countries!  The sun never set on the British Empire...you don't conquer all that just by asking nicely.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Re: Harry’s wearing the Nazi uniform, his response  "[I am] very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize.” doesn’t really sound like a true apology to me.  *To me I translate that as I’m sorry YOU feel offended or embarrassed, but I’m not sorry for what I did.  *Poor “choice” of “costume”? What about saying he realizes what that uniform signifies to a lot of people and how wrong it was to put it on for whatever reason?   I have zero respect for him.


Exactly!!


----------



## zinacef

csshopper said:


> From an article regarding JCMH hooking up with the "Color of Change" group, including a quote from him:
> 
> _'“Inequality is not unfortunate like a car accident, it has been manufactured”.  _
> 
> Harry,  if someone dies as the result of a car accident it is waaaaaaay beyond "unfortunate." How could you even have uttered this tripe? All the more astounding since it was a car accident that killed your mother, the life defining moment that seems to have influenced your life since that time. "Unfortunate" hardly begins to describe it.
> 
> Actually the whole analogy of racial inequality to the automotive manufacturing process is mind boggling.


I’m sure somebody spent a night in the couch this week and had to attend an extra tutorial hours on appropriate whatever is the flavor of the week topic!


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Scobie was out plugging his book on GMA this morning. He's still drinking that Markle Kool-aid!
> 
> *Finding Freedom's Omid Scobie Speaks Out on Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's Rumored Feud*
> *Omid Scobie* is spilling the royal tea on *Meghan Markle* and *Kate Middleton*'s relationship.
> 
> The royal reporter sat down with *Deborah Roberts* for Monday's episode of _Good Morning America_ to discuss the duchesses' level of camaraderie as reported in his new book _Finding_ _Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_.
> 
> "These are two women that really have very little in common," he said when asked if Meghan and Kate get along. "I think being a newcomer and knowing that Kate was once a newcomer, I think there were times where she, from speaking to sources, knew that Meghan felt that she could of or needed a little bit more support from Kate and didn't get it in some of those important moments."
> 
> When Meghan and Harry announced their engagement back in 2017, Kate said she and *Prince William* were "absolutely thrilled" about the news. In fact, during their first interview as an engaged couple, Meghan told the BBC Kate has "been wonderful" and Harry said she's "been absolutely amazing, as is William as well," noting the "fantastic support."
> 
> However, things seemed to take a turn. Soon, reports started to spread that there was a rift between the brothers and tension between Meghan and Kate. At one point, Kensington Palace even shut down a report by _The Sun_ that claimed Kate told Meghan not to berate her staff, with the Palace noting, "This never happened." The publication also reported Kate broke down in tears at a fitting for *Princess Charlotte*'s bridesmaid's dress ahead of Meghan and Harry's wedding. But when asked if the report about Kate breaking down at the wedding was true, Scobie said it "couldn't be further from the truth."
> 
> He explained, "When I spoke to the people who were actually there and involved, the first thing they all said was, 'There were no tears.'"
> 
> While Harry has spoken out about his relationship with William before, Scobie also wanted to cover it in his book.
> 
> "I felt it was important to really dive into this in the book because we had seen Meghan and Kate really blamed for almost driving a wedge between them," he said. "You know, they're both men in their 30s and Harry not wanting to play that role of sort of the younger, more subservient brother anymore."
> 
> In addition to addressing any allegations of family feuds, Scobie spoke about Meghan's portrayal in the media and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to step back as senior members of the royal family, claiming the couple "had no choice other than to leave." At one point in the interview, Scobie was also asked if he boiled "this down to a racial issue" or it was "really more complicated than that."
> 
> As he explained to Roberts, "In terms of ticking those boxes that may ruffle feathers within an ancient institution such as that of the monarchy, she had really ticked all of them. But race did play a role."
> 
> He was also asked how history will remember Harry and Meghan.
> 
> "History will remember them as a couple that were perhaps failed by the institution of the monarchy, where there was this chance to have a woman of color, an American woman of color, in the House of Windsor representing the monarchy just as much as her husband," Scobie said. "That was a chance for the royal family to have diversity, inclusivity and representation in a way that no other moment in their lives could have brought. And for them to not have harnessed that is something I'm sure historians will be looking at for years to come."
> 
> Scobie wrote _Finding Freedom_ with *Carolyn Durand*. He told Roberts the book is based on 100 interviews with "those who know Harry and Meghan best, close friends and even Buckingham Palace aides." He also denied claims Harry and Meghan were involved with the book.
> 
> "I know there's a lot of speculation about the couple having sort of given secret interviews for the book and having weighed in," he said, "but it really couldn't be further from the truth."
> 
> A spokesperson for Harry and Meghan also told E! News, "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to _Finding Freedom_."
> 
> "This book is based on the authors' own experiences as members of the royal press corps and their own independent reporting," the spokesperson added.
> 
> Buckingham Palace did not respond to _GMA_'s request for comment.
> 
> Watch the interview via the video above.
> 
> Scobie is set to appear on _Daily Pop_ this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom's Omid Scobie Speaks Out on Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's Rumored Feud - E! Online
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie, author of Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family appeared on GMA and spoke about Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's rumored feud.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com





Said no one, ever. Stop talking and go away Scooby Doo. He always sounds like a gossipy, b*tchy teenager.


----------



## scarlet555

Harry talking about racism is the biggest hypocrisy of all, he needs to talk about what he did to offend the world before he can volunteer his thoughts to be part of the solution.  It’s just horrible no one calls him on it, it feels fake otherwise, well probably it all is anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate: 

"Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"









						Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
					

The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He is forevermore going to be the brunt of jokes.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



TMI...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Among the stuff I knew about, that poor horse! Barbaric!



Ugh. First the elephant, now the horse. As a huge animal lover this is the kind of sh*t that makes my soft sport for Harry harden quickly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> Blind gossip item: https://blindgossip.com/three-moves/
> "She has tossed her hat in the ring to replace [that TV talk show host who is going through some turmoil]...
> She expressed interest in speaking at the ********ic National Committee Convention...
> She knows that if they “take a knee” during _The Star Spangled Banner_, that would be the cover photo of every single newspaper, magazine, and website in the world."
> 
> Who knows whether any of these has any basis in reality, but can't say I'd be shocked if they do...


 LOL. Ellen might not be the finest human, but she is good at what she does. MM...her only really talent is social climbing, so don't know about that.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



And this is what happens when you leave the Royal Rota system...


----------



## creme fraiche

I find it ironic that Harry would minimise a car accident as simply "unfortunate" as such an unfortunate occurrence directly impacted his life.


----------



## papertiger

creme fraiche said:


> I find it ironic that Harry would minimise a car accident as simply "unfortunate" as such an unfortunate occurrence directly impacted his life.



 100% +


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

csshopper said:


> From an article regarding JCMH hooking up with the "Color of Change" group, including a quote from him:
> 
> _'“Inequality is not unfortunate like a car accident, it has been manufactured”.  _
> 
> Harry,  if someone dies as the result of a car accident it is waaaaaaay beyond "unfortunate." How could you even have uttered this tripe? All the more astounding since it was a car accident that killed your mother, the life defining moment that seems to have influenced your life since that time. "Unfortunate" hardly begins to describe it.


what I find surprising is to have _a Prince_, of all people, complaining about how inequality is manufactured and not an accidental... I mean, he should know...


----------



## uhpharm01

wow really! this is shocking even if it's true








						The Queen Told Prince Harry That He And Meghan Markle Can Return To Royal Life If They Want To
					

"It’s been made very clear they can come back whenever they want, when they’re ready."




					www.delish.com


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So when the globe is shut down due to Covid, these are the kinds of stories M&H conjure up to stay relevant? TMI stuff? Harry must have had one heck of a checklist for dates. "Hmm...pretty/check, slim/check, nice smile/check, pee in woods/check...." And isn't Harry surrounded at all times by security? Did his security detail make sure M could pee safely in the woods? Did they hand her some Royal Handiwipes afterward? Wow Harry, you impress rather easily. Did you ask her if she was OK afterward? So they were dating, and their first trip abroad he takes her somewhere where she's forced to pee outside? Okaaaaaay......


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

uhpharm01 said:


> wow really! this is shocking even if it's true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen Told Prince Harry That He And Meghan Markle Can Return To Royal Life If They Want To
> 
> 
> "It’s been made very clear they can come back whenever they want, when they’re ready."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com


Well, that is what she told him when they first left. That was before they had gone on a crusade against the whole family and I bet the BRF had still hope Harry would have enough of the new adventure after a few weeks. By now, they must have understand that a) Meghan is a snake b) she carries Harry's privates around in her purse c) these people are as immature as sulky teenagers d) they can't be trusted, especially not around important info e) the British people's opinion of these two is quite unfavourable.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, that is what she told him when they first left. That was before they had gone on a crusade against the whole family and I bet the BRF had still hope Harry would have enough of the new adventure after a few weeks. By now, they must have understand that a) Meghan is a snake b) she carries Harry's privates around in her purse c) these people are as immature as sulky teenagers d) they can't be trusted, especially not around important info e) the British people's opinion of these two is quite unfavourable.



Not sure about a) since I like snakes and b) he never had any


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ok, so this happened during the glamping in Africa.  Methinks this story is yet another truth-stretcher.









						Meno A Kwena
					

OVERVIEW Meno A Kwena Tented Camp is an authentic, unique, tented safari camp ideally situated for safaris to the Makgadikgadi and Nxai Pans National Parks as well as the Central Kalahari Game...



					www.botswana-safaris.com
				



*FACILITIES*
Meno A Kwena offers eight serviced canvas tents, each with a semi en-suite shower, flush toilet and authentic outdoor safari shower. The showers are all within an enclosure of thorny branches for safety from wandering wildlife, and tea and coffee facilities are also provided. The tents are hidden amongst the natural vegetation for privacy, but in full view of the Boteti River where wildlife comes to drink. The camp has solar power for charging camera batteries and energy saving lights. All meals are served in the dining tent, that also doubles as the bar, kitchen, lounge area and library tent while a natural rock plunge pool provides welcome relief in summer.


----------



## Annawakes

I think the Queen is really smart to say they can come back whenever they want.  That way M can’t say she’s been victimized, if she/they are completely cut off.  Also, the Queen knows M will never want to return and be subject to the same rules that “stifled” her previously.  So it is a win win to say that I think.

Edited to put “stifled” in quotes.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> How lovely  I know Philip said many inappropriate things (at least according to The Crown) but I suppose those could be kind of overlooked given the times back then?  Harry should know better.  He's using derogatory and offensive terms and uniforms as well as being accused of animal cruelty, rehab as a teen, etc etc etc., and suddenly now he's a spokesman for anti all that?  Puh-leeze.


he's been woke don't you know?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. First the elephant, now the horse. As a huge animal lover this is the kind of sh*t that makes my soft sport for Harry harden quickly.


and I believe he and his brother have hunted in the past.  I think Meghan got him to quit - the one thing I like that she's done


----------



## bag-mania

Another nugget from the book, they fired their first night nurse. It doesn't say what the woman did. I'm guessing she probably dared to disagree with Meghan's orders. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were 'forced' to dismiss Archie's night nurse' during her SECOND shift at Frogmore Cottage because she was 'unprofessional ', biography claims*

*Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, hired a night nurse after Archie's birth*
*New book details how they were 'forced to let her go' in 'middle of second night'*
*Authors of Finding Freedom write that the couple's nanny was 'unprofessional' *
*Couple went on to hire a second night nurse but couldn't 'sleep comfortably' *
*After a few weeks, the Duke and Duchess 'decided to take on nights themselves'*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were 'forced to let go' of Archie's night nurse during her second shift with the couple 'for being unprofessional', their bombshell new biography Finding Freedom claims.

The book, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claims the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 38, wanted to hire a night nurse to establish a sleep schedule and be an extra pair of helping hands' after the birth of their son Archie, one.

However, the nanny's time with the family was 'brief', with the authors writing: 'Meghan and Harry felt they were forced to let the nurse go in the middle of her second night of work for being unprofessional.' 

Finding Freedom provides an intimately detailed and personalised version of the events leading up to the Sussexes' dramatic departure from royal life, with co-authors Scobie and Durand insisting 'all information in this book has at least two sources'. 

And, after their experience with the first nanny, the couple were wary, with the authors writing: 'The new parents went on to hire a second night nurse, who did a fine job, but because of the incident with the first nurse, neither found themselves comfortable sleeping through the night without going to check on Archie regularly.

'After a few weeks, they decided to take on nights themselves and went without a night nurse entirely.'

Instead the couple 'hired a nanny to work weekdays', joining other members of staff in the household. 

The book also details how the couple had decided not to have any live-in staff, with the authors writing: 'Harry and Meghan had agreed they didn't want heir home filled with staff.'

They go on to write that 'Harry had seen that situation at Prince William's home (the Cambridge's had a live-in housekeeper and a full-time, live-in nanny) and didn't want the same for his own family.'

He and Meghan liked the idea that when they went to bed at night, it was just the three of them in the house. Cosy and private.' 

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge employ a Norland nanny called Maria who is often seen in a traditional uniform looking after Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two.

The third nanny hired by Prince Harry and Meghan to look after baby Archie was seen for the first time hiring a private jet to accompany hem on their holiday to Sir Elton John's mansion in the south of France in August 2019. 

At the time, it was widely reported that the couple had two earlier nannies, however details have never been made public before.   

The same month, a source told The Sun that their third recruit has 'fitted into the family really well', adding: 'Meghan is a very hands-on mum but the new nanny is a godsend.

'She's great with little Archie and just adores him. Harry and Meghan are very happy with her.'

At the time, Katie Nicholl, who has written a series of biographies on the royal family, claimed that hands-on parents Prince Harry and Meghan asked the royal childminder to sign an 'extensive' non-disclosure agreement. 

Katie told Entertainment Online: 'I've heard from very reliable sources that the new nanny who has been appointed by the Sussexes has had to sign quite an extensive non-disclosure agreement.  

'Meghan's been up in the night nursing, feeding on demand every few hours. Apparently he's a hungry little baby.' 

Throughout their time as working members of the royal family, the couple saw a series of changes to their staff.  

In November 2018, Melissa Toubati, Meghan's PA, quit after six months, with reports that she had been left in tears.

A few weeks later, the couple's private secretary, Samantha Cohen, left her role after 17 years with the Royal family. 

And in January last year, Meghan's female bodyguard departed after just six months. 

As well as these departures, assistant private secretaries Amy Pickerall and Heather Wong also left the couple's royal household. 

The biography also details how Meghan 'fell hard' for Prince Harry after watching him win over former best pal Jessica Mulroney's children gave her a glimpse of how he'd be as a father.

The book claims the Duke 'never turned up empty-handed' when they visited the Mulroneys' twins Brian and John and daughter Ivy. 

As well as his generosity, the trio of youngsters were charmed by Harry's willingness to get on the floor to play with them - something which also appealed to his future wife Meghan. 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'let go' Archie 'unprofessional' nanny
					

The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, were 'forced to let go' of Archie's night nurse during her second shift 'for being unprofessional', according to the authors of Finding Freedom.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## doni

uhpharm01 said:


> wow really! this is shocking even if it's true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen Told Prince Harry That He And Meghan Markle Can Return To Royal Life If They Want To
> 
> 
> "It’s been made very clear they can come back whenever they want, when they’re ready."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com


Really? I find it to be expected. We are talking royalty here, a world where your position and rights depend on who you are, not on merit or on what you do (which is why it is hilarious to hear Harry pontificate about equality). He is a Prince of the realm, and if he wants a job as a Prince, he would have to mess up BIG time (hello Andrew?) for the Queen not to accept him back into the firm.


----------



## Annawakes

“They go on to write that 'Harry had seen that situation at Prince William's home (the Cambridge's had a live-in housekeeper and a full-time, live-in nanny) and didn't want the same for his own family.'”

this was a completely unnecessary dig at Kate.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> “They go on to write that 'Harry had seen that situation at Prince William's home (the Cambridge's had a live-in housekeeper and a full-time, live-in nanny) and didn't want the same for his own family.'”
> 
> this was a completely unnecessary dig at Kate.


I guess they wanted to sound like a "regular" couple - who wanted a nanny at night so they didn't have to be woken by their new baby


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> The book also details how the couple had decided not to have any live-in staff, with the authors writing: 'Harry and Meghan had agreed they didn't want heir home filled with staff.'
> 
> They go on to write that 'Harry had seen that situation at Prince William's home (the Cambridge's had a live-in housekeeper and a full-time, live-in nanny) and didn't want the same for his own family.'



In a 20-bedroom-apartment two people are barely "a home filled with staff". Oh well.



> The same month, a source told The Sun that their third recruit has 'fitted into the family really well', adding: 'Meghan is a very hands-on mum but the new nanny is a godsend.



Oh come on now. I have never seen someone as uncomfortable with their baby as Meghan, and that didn't change from his infant days until the last time she showed us the half-naked little chap. You can clearly tell she doesn't spend a lot of time with him, and whenever they are together as a family it seems he's more into Harry.



> 'Meghan's been up in the night nursing, feeding on demand every few hours. Apparently he's a hungry little baby.'



Sure, minus the time she spent flying out to the US to watch tennis I guess.


----------



## lanasyogamama

uhpharm01 said:


> wow really! this is shocking even if it's true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen Told Prince Harry That He And Meghan Markle Can Return To Royal Life If They Want To
> 
> 
> "It’s been made very clear they can come back whenever they want, when they’re ready."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com



So this whole thing may be an elaborate rumspringa?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

More and more false & misleading stories just fall out of this book.
Hope they realize sooner rather than later that none of this Omid nonsense is helping their reputations. 
Using their superior communication skills (haaaa), they look much worse now than ever.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> So this whole thing may be an elaborate rumspringa?


ok, you got me.  rumspringa?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Where else was she going to go if they were out for a hike?


sdkitty said:


> I guess they wanted to sound like a "regular" couple - who wanted a nanny at night so they didn't have to be woken by their new baby


If she was feeding on demand, then what can a night nurse do exactly?  Wake her up if the baby is crying to be fed?  

I remember waking up at the sound of a whimper, does that mean Meg is such a sound sleeper that even her newborn cannot wake her?  Or maybe she wasn't really breastfeeding on demand.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> Where else was she going to go if they were out for a hike?
> 
> If she was feeding on demand, then what can a night nurse do exactly?  Wake her up if the baby is crying to be fed?
> 
> I remember waking up at the sound of a whimper, does that mean Meg is such a sound sleeper that even her newborn cannot wake her?  Or maybe she wasn't really breastfeeding on demand.


My babies never woke me up.
But it doesn’t make sense. It says they felt the need to check on the baby every couple of hours because of the experience with the nurse, but if she was feeding on demand every couple of hours a very hungry baby, as also claimed, she would wake up anyway or?

Nothing seems to make much sense in this book? Like this story of Meghan going into the woods in Africa. Thereafter we are told they were in a $1500 a night camp room with en suite bathroom, so what was that about? Or the cleaning the face with the wipes, which seemingly is a sign of simplicity and austerity compared to what? A cloth and water? I know Americans are fond of their everything cleaning wipes, but also not exactly the most ecological choice particularly to bring to a natural reserve in Africa...
I don’t really get what the message of the whole thing is.
Bizarre.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh, Harry and Meghan and their cute little secrets! The book makes of point of not telling us how they met because the couple wants the beginning of their love story to be a mystery.

Translation: Their first date was set up in a sterile, unromantic way, much like a business transaction. Most likely the person who introduced them was a publicist.


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> ok, you got me.  rumspringa?







__





						Rumspringa – Amish Studies
					





					groups.etown.edu
				



And I will add, these young people are around age 16-21.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Another nugget from the book, they fired their first night nurse. It doesn't say what the woman did. I'm guessing she probably dared to disagree with Meghan's orders.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were 'forced' to dismiss Archie's night nurse' during her SECOND shift at Frogmore Cottage because she was 'unprofessional ', biography claims*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, hired a night nurse after Archie's birth*
> *New book details how they were 'forced to let her go' in 'middle of second night'*
> *Authors of Finding Freedom write that the couple's nanny was 'unprofessional' *
> *Couple went on to hire a second night nurse but couldn't 'sleep comfortably' *
> *After a few weeks, the Duke and Duchess 'decided to take on nights themselves'*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were 'forced to let go' of Archie's night nurse during her second shift with the couple 'for being unprofessional', their bombshell new biography Finding Freedom claims.
> 
> The book, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claims the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 38, wanted to hire a night nurse to establish a sleep schedule and be an extra pair of helping hands' after the birth of their son Archie, one.
> 
> However, the nanny's time with the family was 'brief', with the authors writing: 'Meghan and Harry felt they were forced to let the nurse go in the middle of her second night of work for being unprofessional.'
> 
> Finding Freedom provides an intimately detailed and personalised version of the events leading up to the Sussexes' dramatic departure from royal life, with co-authors Scobie and Durand insisting 'all information in this book has at least two sources'.
> 
> And, after their experience with the first nanny, the couple were wary, with the authors writing: 'The new parents went on to hire a second night nurse, who did a fine job, but because of the incident with the first nurse, neither found themselves comfortable sleeping through the night without going to check on Archie regularly.
> 
> 'After a few weeks, they decided to take on nights themselves and went without a night nurse entirely.'
> 
> Instead the couple 'hired a nanny to work weekdays', joining other members of staff in the household.
> 
> The book also details how the couple had decided not to have any live-in staff, with the authors writing: 'Harry and Meghan had agreed they didn't want heir home filled with staff.'
> 
> They go on to write that 'Harry had seen that situation at Prince William's home (the Cambridge's had a live-in housekeeper and a full-time, live-in nanny) and didn't want the same for his own family.'
> 
> He and Meghan liked the idea that when they went to bed at night, it was just the three of them in the house. Cosy and private.'
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge employ a Norland nanny called Maria who is often seen in a traditional uniform looking after Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two.
> 
> The third nanny hired by Prince Harry and Meghan to look after baby Archie was seen for the first time hiring a private jet to accompany hem on their holiday to Sir Elton John's mansion in the south of France in August 2019.
> 
> At the time, it was widely reported that the couple had two earlier nannies, however details have never been made public before.
> 
> The same month, a source told The Sun that their third recruit has 'fitted into the family really well', adding: 'Meghan is a very hands-on mum but the new nanny is a godsend.
> 
> 'She's great with little Archie and just adores him. Harry and Meghan are very happy with her.'
> 
> At the time, Katie Nicholl, who has written a series of biographies on the royal family, claimed that hands-on parents Prince Harry and Meghan asked the royal childminder to sign an 'extensive' non-disclosure agreement.
> 
> Katie told Entertainment Online: 'I've heard from very reliable sources that the new nanny who has been appointed by the Sussexes has had to sign quite an extensive non-disclosure agreement.
> 
> 'Meghan's been up in the night nursing, feeding on demand every few hours. Apparently he's a hungry little baby.'
> 
> Throughout their time as working members of the royal family, the couple saw a series of changes to their staff.
> 
> In November 2018, Melissa Toubati, Meghan's PA, quit after six months, with reports that she had been left in tears.
> 
> A few weeks later, the couple's private secretary, Samantha Cohen, left her role after 17 years with the Royal family.
> 
> And in January last year, Meghan's female bodyguard departed after just six months.
> 
> As well as these departures, assistant private secretaries Amy Pickerall and Heather Wong also left the couple's royal household.
> 
> The biography also details how Meghan 'fell hard' for Prince Harry after watching him win over former best pal Jessica Mulroney's children gave her a glimpse of how he'd be as a father.
> 
> The book claims the Duke 'never turned up empty-handed' when they visited the Mulroneys' twins Brian and John and daughter Ivy.
> 
> As well as his generosity, the trio of youngsters were charmed by Harry's willingness to get on the floor to play with them - something which also appealed to his future wife Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'let go' Archie 'unprofessional' nanny
> 
> 
> The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, were 'forced to let go' of Archie's night nurse during her second shift 'for being unprofessional', according to the authors of Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


MM & H looked very professional when "they were forced to let the nurse go in the middle of her second night of work". Just for that, they should receive an award for the best employers in the UK. Why did Samantha Cohen leave her role after 17 years with the Royal family? The way MM&H treat family, friends, employees, and ... supports well their charitable and humanitarian image. Why is Samantha Markle so quiet these days?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Why is Samantha Markle so quiet these days?



Samantha doesn't have anything more to say. She dished on her sister at the time of the wedding and was roundly insulted and shot down. Then she resurfaced at the beginning of the year for a brief "I told you so." There is nothing left.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Emeline said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rumspringa – Amish Studies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> groups.etown.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I will add, these young people are around age 16-21.


Also, it’s a fun word to say.


----------



## Chanbal

*Among the fresh revelations in the book are: 

Meghan Markle formed such a close bond with Prince Charles that she considers him her 'second father';*
If I were Charles, I would be cautious. She was not very kind to her first father.

*Meghan was often 'seen carrying binders full of research on Royal protocol' so she didn't put a foot wrong;*
She may have put both feet wrong.

*The Queen gave Meghan a royal masterclass in protocol and described Meghan as 'very clever and good';*
QE is very perceptive.

*Harry felt he was 'thrown under the bus' by aides working for his brother Prince William;*
Feel sorry for William, he looks like a major target.

*Royal courtiers feared the brother's falling out 'could spell the end of the monarchy';*
They likely had their reasons for the fears.

*Meghan left the UK 'emotionally bruised and exhausted' after her last frosty event with William and Kate;*
This sounds more like jealousy towards William and Kate.

*Russian hackers stole hundreds of their personal photos in 2018 after gaining access to an online account.*
Was this done because of her supposed intent to run for president?









						Meghan's friends say she and Harry were 'thrown under the bus'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex say they were not interviewed for the new book Finding Freedom which provides a dramatic account of the events leading up to their dramatic departure from royal life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Megs

Speaking on night nurses and nursing which I've seen a bunch the past few pages of this thread... I know a lot about both. We did not have a night nurse or any help after we had Millie, but we had a night nurse for a little after we had Vaughn (incredibly lucky to have her, he had a lot of colic/reflux and had a really really hard time sleeping!). I nursed both my kids (still nursing Vaughn) so I know the schedule of this intimately.

A night nurse would help a nursing mom by bringing the baby when he's ready to feed and then taking the baby after the feed and changing, swaddling, and settling him back down to sleep. Depending on the baby, that can be a big help because some babies (like our 2nd little guy) have really bad colic, reflux, etc and need to be held upright and soothed for quite a while before they can fall back asleep. But the night nurse will still need to come and wake you with the baby. The best way to really get the benefits of a night nurse is if you formula feed. Otherwise you are still waking to nurse and/or pump many times.

But, if you are a nursing mom of a newborn, you can't skip night feeds and sleep thru the night even with a night nurse there. You will have to get up to nurse or at the very least pump on the same or similar schedule a baby is feeding. Especially the first few months, without doing so, your supply will completely dwindle and you'll wind up with clogged ducts and possible mastitis.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


LOLOLOL I'm glad to see how high his standards were!  Seriously, is that supposed to make her more endearing to the reader?  Why in the world would you put that in a book??


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> From an article regarding JCMH hooking up with the "Color of Change" group, including a quote from him:
> 
> _'“Inequality is not unfortunate like a car accident, it has been manufactured”.  _
> 
> Harry,  if someone dies as the result of a car accident it is waaaaaaay beyond "unfortunate." How could you even have uttered this tripe? All the more astounding since it was a car accident that killed your mother, the life defining moment that seems to have influenced your life since that time. "Unfortunate" hardly begins to describe it.
> 
> Actually the whole analogy of racial inequality to the automotive manufacturing process is mind boggling.


He obviously doesn't have his royal babysitters writing his lines anymore. 

You're just twirling in the wind, Harry-boy.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Another nugget from the book, they fired their first night nurse. It doesn't say what the woman did. I'm guessing she probably dared to disagree with Meghan's orders.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were 'forced' to dismiss Archie's night nurse' during her SECOND shift at Frogmore Cottage because she was 'unprofessional ', biography claims*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 38, hired a night nurse after Archie's birth*
> *New book details how they were 'forced to let her go' in 'middle of second night'*
> *Authors of Finding Freedom write that the couple's nanny was 'unprofessional' *
> *Couple went on to hire a second night nurse but couldn't 'sleep comfortably' *
> *After a few weeks, the Duke and Duchess 'decided to take on nights themselves'*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were 'forced to let go' of Archie's night nurse during her second shift with the couple 'for being unprofessional', their bombshell new biography Finding Freedom claims.
> 
> The book, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, claims the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 38, wanted to hire a night nurse to establish a sleep schedule and be an extra pair of helping hands' after the birth of their son Archie, one.
> 
> However, the nanny's time with the family was 'brief', with the authors writing: 'Meghan and Harry felt they were forced to let the nurse go in the middle of her second night of work for being unprofessional.'
> 
> Finding Freedom provides an intimately detailed and personalised version of the events leading up to the Sussexes' dramatic departure from royal life, with co-authors Scobie and Durand insisting 'all information in this book has at least two sources'.
> 
> And, after their experience with the first nanny, the couple were wary, with the authors writing: 'The new parents went on to hire a second night nurse, who did a fine job, but because of the incident with the first nurse, neither found themselves comfortable sleeping through the night without going to check on Archie regularly.
> 
> 'After a few weeks, they decided to take on nights themselves and went without a night nurse entirely.'
> 
> Instead the couple 'hired a nanny to work weekdays', joining other members of staff in the household.
> 
> The book also details how the couple had decided not to have any live-in staff, with the authors writing: 'Harry and Meghan had agreed they didn't want heir home filled with staff.'
> 
> They go on to write that 'Harry had seen that situation at Prince William's home (the Cambridge's had a live-in housekeeper and a full-time, live-in nanny) and didn't want the same for his own family.'
> 
> He and Meghan liked the idea that when they went to bed at night, it was just the three of them in the house. Cosy and private.'
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge employ a Norland nanny called Maria who is often seen in a traditional uniform looking after Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two.
> 
> The third nanny hired by Prince Harry and Meghan to look after baby Archie was seen for the first time hiring a private jet to accompany hem on their holiday to Sir Elton John's mansion in the south of France in August 2019.
> 
> At the time, it was widely reported that the couple had two earlier nannies, however details have never been made public before.
> 
> The same month, a source told The Sun that their third recruit has 'fitted into the family really well', adding: 'Meghan is a very hands-on mum but the new nanny is a godsend.
> 
> 'She's great with little Archie and just adores him. Harry and Meghan are very happy with her.'
> 
> At the time, Katie Nicholl, who has written a series of biographies on the royal family, claimed that hands-on parents Prince Harry and Meghan asked the royal childminder to sign an 'extensive' non-disclosure agreement.
> 
> Katie told Entertainment Online: 'I've heard from very reliable sources that the new nanny who has been appointed by the Sussexes has had to sign quite an extensive non-disclosure agreement.
> 
> 'Meghan's been up in the night nursing, feeding on demand every few hours. Apparently he's a hungry little baby.'
> 
> Throughout their time as working members of the royal family, the couple saw a series of changes to their staff.
> 
> In November 2018, Melissa Toubati, Meghan's PA, quit after six months, with reports that she had been left in tears.
> 
> A few weeks later, the couple's private secretary, Samantha Cohen, left her role after 17 years with the Royal family.
> 
> And in January last year, Meghan's female bodyguard departed after just six months.
> 
> As well as these departures, assistant private secretaries Amy Pickerall and Heather Wong also left the couple's royal household.
> 
> The biography also details how Meghan 'fell hard' for Prince Harry after watching him win over former best pal Jessica Mulroney's children gave her a glimpse of how he'd be as a father.
> 
> The book claims the Duke 'never turned up empty-handed' when they visited the Mulroneys' twins Brian and John and daughter Ivy.
> 
> As well as his generosity, the trio of youngsters were charmed by Harry's willingness to get on the floor to play with them - something which also appealed to his future wife Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'let go' Archie 'unprofessional' nanny
> 
> 
> The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, were 'forced to let go' of Archie's night nurse during her second shift 'for being unprofessional', according to the authors of Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I love how every possible chance, there's a dig at William and/or Kate.  Harry didn't like the full time nanny.  Harry said having more than 2 kids is environmentally irresponsible, Harry was insulted William dared tell him to slow down.  Harry sounds like a jealous a hole.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I get what you are saying but does that mean that anyone who ever did something stupid when he/she was 20 should forever be branded by that mistake for the rest of their lives? Should they never be allowed to have a good job, a normal life? I don't think it's that Harry got a pass as much as he had the opportunity to learn from his mistakes and hopefully gain the understanding that what he did was insensitive.
> 
> There are drunk drivers who kill somebody and barely get punished, sometimes no punishment at all. They go about their lives with no repercussions. Those are the types of people I get mad when I hear they got off easy.


Anyone wearing a Nazi uniform will never get a pass from me. He knew what he was doing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Anyone wearing a Nazi uniform will never get a pass from me. He knew what he was doing.



I don’t believe he had a clue that he would offend people.  It was an act of pure stupidity, but not malice.

I know it was a costume party. I have no idea whether it was something as informal as a Halloween party among friends  or if it was some fancy, formal affair where he was representing the BRF. Maybe somebody else here knows.


----------



## Chanbal

kemilia said:


> Anyone wearing a Nazi uniform will never get a pass from me. He knew what he was doing.





bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe he had a clue that he would offend people.  It was an act of pure stupidity, but not malice.
> 
> I know it was a costume party. I have no idea whether it was something as informal as a Halloween party among friends  or if it was some fancy, formal affair where he was representing the BRF. Maybe somebody else here knows.


I also think that it was more like "an act of pure stupidity". Keep in mind how he found his soulmate.


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe he had a clue that he would offend people.  It was an act of pure stupidity, but not malice.



He was an extremely well educated Prince set to attend an elite military academy that year and the grandson of a Queen who lived through WWII in what it was a defining moment for the country that monarchy serves. He knew perfectly well what he was doing (either that or there is something seriously wrong with him). What he didn’t know was that it would make front page news.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Not just Africa...many countries!  The sun never set on the British Empire...you don't conquer all that just by asking nicely.


Oh, I remember that phrase all too well .. heard it from my British colleagues, especially when Britain still had Hong Kong in their "realm"!


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> He was an extremely well educated Prince set to attend an elite military academy that year and the grandson of a Queen who lived through WWII in what it was a defining moment for the country that monarchy serves. He knew perfectly well what he was doing (either that or there is something seriously wrong with him). What he didn’t know was that it would make front page news.



I can guarantee we have already put much more thought into his costume choice than Harry did. He is highly impulsive and doesn't have an analytical bone in his body. All of his recent decisions prove that.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> "Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


HA!!! .. when I saw this, I thought .. *what utter BS*!  So, mind you .. the LUXURIOUS cabins are in the woods .. SOOOOOOO, *BFD .. she takes a piss in their bungalow loo*?!?!  C'mon .. maybe he was more "impressed" when he saw her parts .. who knows?!?!?!  Sheesh ...


----------



## scarlet555

Harry apologizing and capitalizing as being the depressed son of the departed Diana is getting old, and wearing a nazi costume, irregardless of intentions, is such poor taste for any 20 year old boy:  He is in line to becoming King, even if it's almost imaginary.  People don't give him enough credit.   He can claim anything as his intentions.  But when you portray an aggressor in a genocide history, you have to ask the surviving victims if they are offended.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> LOL. Ellen might not be the finest human, but she is good at what she does. MM...her only really talent is social climbing, so don't know about that.


MM would be the WORST at this type of venue .. simply because SHE ALWAYS HAS TO BE THE CENTER OF ATTENTION and no one would be able to talk over her epic word-salad diatribes!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nah, not done out of stupidity. He did it deliberately. He knew he could get away with it, which he did. <<< same as Andy 
He was 3rd in line at that time. The party was celebrating the birthday of a former Olympian’s son, another 22 yr old.





__





						Prince Harry faces outcry at Nazi outfit
					






					www.telegraph.co.uk
				



Some more facts -
_But the most offensive part of the amateurish ensemble was the red, white and black swastika armband.
The costume was apparently meant to represent the Afrika Korps - a rather odd interpretation of the birthday party's "colonial" theme._

Shall we discuss the party’s theme: colonials and natives?   I ask again, who does that? Why in 2005 would this theme be appropriate? What other themes have these people used?  My guess is these theme parties for adults are still going on and are well-attended by certain ‘elites’.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, so this happened during the glamping in Africa.  Methinks this story is yet another truth-stretcher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meno A Kwena
> 
> 
> OVERVIEW Meno A Kwena Tented Camp is an authentic, unique, tented safari camp ideally situated for safaris to the Makgadikgadi and Nxai Pans National Parks as well as the Central Kalahari Game...
> 
> 
> 
> www.botswana-safaris.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *FACILITIES*
> Meno A Kwena offers eight serviced canvas tents, each with a semi en-suite shower, flush toilet and authentic outdoor safari shower. The showers are all within an enclosure of thorny branches for safety from wandering wildlife, and tea and coffee facilities are also provided. The tents are hidden amongst the natural vegetation for privacy, but in full view of the Boteti River where wildlife comes to drink. The camp has solar power for charging camera batteries and energy saving lights. All meals are served in the dining tent, that also doubles as the bar, kitchen, lounge area and library tent while a natural rock plunge pool provides welcome relief in summer.


I worked with a fellow at Bain, whose family was in this Business in Africa (can't remember the exact location).  When I looked up their site on the Internet, let me tell you .. WOW!!!  This would be the type of camping I would do (because yeah - I kinda need a working loo and having a shower is fantastic).  These places are BY NO MEANS a true "camp" .. this is LUXURY beyond .. just situated in certain places which allows them to bring these spoiled people to the veld's to see the various animals.  Puhleeze .. GLAMPING 100%+++!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Unfortunately, I’m seeing lots of positive buzz about the book on some FB groups I’m in.  They’ll believe the spin.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Unfortunately, I’m seeing lots of positive buzz about the book on some FB groups I’m in.  They’ll believe the spin.



The book was released today and it has 11 reviews on Amazon but only six of them are from verified purchasers. All but one of them absolutely loves Meghan and Harry. That's as you would expect since stans are their target audience.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The book was released today and it has 11 reviews on Amazon but only six of them are from verified purchasers. All but one of them absolutely loves Meghan and Harry. That's as you would expect since stans are their target audience.


The bots are at work.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> The bots are at work.



I expect we'll see dozens of bot reviews appearing in the coming days. The few that are there so far seem to be all fan girls plus one who could easily be a member here.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I expect we'll see dozens of bot reviews appearing in the coming days. The few that are there so far seem to be all fan girls plus one who could easily be a member here.


Yes, and a 'former' member of this thread, likely those that accused us of being racist or lying ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The book was released today and it has 11 reviews on Amazon but only six of them are from verified purchasers. All but one of them absolutely loves Meghan and Harry. That's as you would expect since stans are their target audience.


Scobie-doo, MM, MA, H, PR-team... all working overtime in the coming days


----------



## Lodpah

Does anyone know how much it costs to keep publicists on retainer? I mean she supposedly has 3.


----------



## bag-mania

My favorite Amazon review so far is the one that says "Finally, an unbiased book!"


----------



## elvisfan4life

British press reporting Eugenie and Harry fell out over the pregnancy announcement at her wedding another family bond markle severed ruthlessly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I must abstain of the review section...these days, my nerves are not strong enough to deal with the bullsh*tting of the stans.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Samantha doesn't have anything more to say. She dished on her sister at the time of the wedding and was roundly insulted and shot down. Then she resurfaced at the beginning of the year for a brief "I told you so." There is nothing left.


She once seemed so obnoxious and I almost feel I owe her an apology for simply thinking she was a jealous step sister to be dismissed.....wrong, she was a truth sayer.


CeeJay said:


> HA!!! .. when I saw this, I thought .. *what utter BS*!  So, mind you .. the LUXURIOUS cabins are in the woods .. SOOOOOOO, *BFD .. she takes a piss in their bungalow loo*?!?!  C'mon .. maybe he was more "impressed" when he saw her parts .. who knows?!?!?!  Sheesh ...


My first thought on reading this drivel was, so that's when the pissing and moaning started, right from the beginning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> British press reporting Eugenie and Harry fell out over the pregnancy announcement at her wedding another family bond markle severed ruthlessly



I read somewhere that M didn't like how close Harry and Eugenie were and immediately set out to drive a wegde between them, way before her sh*tty move at the wedding - if rumours are to be believed things were already bad when the invitations went out as apparently our double trouble wasn't invited to the evening reception.


----------



## lalame

Ignore me if this was already shared but BuzzFeed created this list of interesting new learnings from the book. This one caught me eye, since we had been speculating why Harry was in such a foul mood at Tom Inskip's wedding. Aside from the apparent falling out Tom and Harry had, maybe this had something to do with it too:




Link to full article: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...arned-from-finding-freedom-the-new-book-about


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> I worked with a fellow at Bain, whose family was in this Business in Africa (can't remember the exact location).  When I looked up their site on the Internet, let me tell you .. WOW!!!  This would be the type of camping I would do (because yeah - I kinda need a working loo and having a shower is fantastic).  These places are BY NO MEANS a true "camp" .. this is LUXURY beyond .. just situated in certain places which allows them to bring these spoiled people to the veld's to see the various animals.  Puhleeze .. GLAMPING 100%+++!


Sign me up for glamping !


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Ignore me if this was already shared but BuzzFeed created this list of interesting new learnings from the book. This one caught me eye, since we had been speculating why Harry was in such a foul mood at Tom Inskip's wedding. Aside from the apparent falling out Tom and Harry had, maybe this had something to do with it too:
> 
> View attachment 4816132
> 
> 
> Link to full article: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...arned-from-finding-freedom-the-new-book-about



I'm sure that could have dampened Harry's mood, but Meghan's? That's the woman who would have that creepy grin plastered on her face if she witnessed a murder. I'm kind of surprised she couldn't fake it for that wedding.


----------



## marietouchet

BOOK REPORT kinda sorta

I read all the excerpts on the Daily Mail .. One of the articles was titled the 24 (or whatever number, I dont remember) takeaways from the book. Excellent Cliff notes study. It was written in the format of giving a quote for the take-away, then a brief summary. 

My takeaways from the Cliff notes
- H&M are PERFECT, I just cannot find a more accurate word, no flaws at all 
- Lot of people under the bus eesp Angela Kelly, night nurses (hard to imagine that..) and William, Kate, the guy who sent the death threats deserves to be in quarantine under another bus - totally different can of worms that - I guess that episode started the fixation on security
- Meghan was given training by the security team
- Great praise was heaped on the two that control the purse strings - Charles and the Queen - they too were PERFECT in every way 

The whole thing reminds me of a UNICORN drink at Starbucks - layered creams and foams in multiple pastels shades - soooo CUTE !!! and sugary sweet, instant food  coma


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOLOL I'm glad to see how high his standards were!  Seriously, is that supposed to make her more endearing to the reader?  Why in the world would you put that in a book??


well, you know they had nothing to do with the book


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe he had a clue that he would offend people.  It was an act of pure stupidity, but not malice.
> 
> I know it was a costume party. I have no idea whether it was something as informal as a Halloween party among friends  or if it was some fancy, formal affair where he was representing the BRF. Maybe somebody else here knows.


I equate wearing a Nazi uniform to black face in terms of offensiveness.  If it's done amongst friends, then I think it shows the person's true character even more.  If someone does that and has "no clue" it could be offensive, I think they're an idiot.  And quite possibly worse.


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read somewhere that M didn't like how close Harry and Eugenie were and immediately set out to drive a wegde between them, way before her sh*tty move at the wedding - if rumours are to be believed things were already bad when the invitations went out as apparently our double trouble wasn't invited to the evening reception.


Yes I have read that too - and Eugenie went out of her way to be nice to her double dating and showing her around shopping etc only.to get markled!!! I can't feel.sorry for Harry he has thrown his family and.friends aside for her without a care he deserves her!!!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I equate wearing a Nazi uniform to black face in terms of offensiveness.  If it's done amongst friends, then I think it shows the person's true character even more.  If someone does that and has "no clue" it could be offensive, I think they're an idiot.  And quite possibly worse.


Totally agree with you, but what can one expect from somebody that finds his soulmate when she goes 'for a pee in the woods'?  

Apparently when they were spending time in a luxurious resort.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

*Royal expert Penny Junor questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with the Finding Freedom authors and says they would be 'kicking up a fuss' about the book if they had not*








						Royal expert questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with writer
					

EXCLUSIVE: The controversial biography written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was released today and raised eyebrows for its intimate knowledge of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *Royal expert Penny Junor questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with the Finding Freedom authors and says they would be 'kicking up a fuss' about the book if they had not*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with writer
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The controversial biography written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was released today and raised eyebrows for its intimate knowledge of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I tried but couldn't bear to finish reading this drivel


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In a 20-bedroom-apartment two people are barely "a home filled with staff". Oh well.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh come on now. I have never seen someone as uncomfortable with their baby as Meghan, and that didn't change from his infant days until the last time she showed us the half-naked little chap. You can clearly tell she doesn't spend a lot of time with him, and whenever they are together as a family it seems he's more into Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, minus the time she spent flying out to the US to watch tennis I guess.



The nanny probably tried to show M how to hold the baby.

The UK has excellent nannies, full-time, highly skilled and qualified and they would have attracted the creme de la creme. This would not have been some young girl straight out of school, stuck for cash, giving it a go.

Can you imagine perhaps being excited on your second day (night) one day hoping to add the D&D of Sx to your CV. Then, not only being dismissed but embarrassingly immortalised by being labeled 'unprofessional' with no explanation. I mean, the mind boggles. Did she dance on the table naked? Wear a gas mask? Ask why the baby was so big? Very likely, it was she tried to show M how to hold a baby or wanted to put him to bed a reasonable hour or something - so completely 'unprofessional' it can't be mentioned.

And, who are these 2 to mark someone out as unprofessional?

Is this what JCMH means by equality, sack staff on the second night, no warnings, no notice, and tell the whole world about it so they'd be lucky ever get another job.

Edited to say: of course she was expected to sign a non-disclosure, but she would not have been allowed to set foot in Frogmore without signing one first. That's how business works. Security and paperwork checks, non-disclosure and contracts signed _first._


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Royal expert Penny Junor questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with the Finding Freedom authors and says they would be 'kicking up a fuss' about the book if they had not*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with writer
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The controversial biography written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was released today and raised eyebrows for its intimate knowledge of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That's what someone said on this thread. 

Plus (as someone else also pointed out) they were talking about it waaaaay back with much authority and 'setting the record straight' blah blah.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> That's what someone said on this thread.
> 
> Plus (as someone else also pointed out) they were talking about it waaaaay back with much authority and 'setting the record straight' blah blah.


of course....I think we've all been saying this is their book
what a couple of phonies


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> MM & H looked very professional when "they were forced to let the nurse go in the middle of her second night of work". Just for that, they should receive an award for the best employers in the UK. Why did Samantha Cohen leave her role after 17 years with the Royal family? The way MM&H treat family, friends, employees, and ... supports well their charitable and humanitarian image. Why is Samantha Markle so quiet these days?



So too, depriving Archie of ever seeing his grandparents, save one, or his aunts, uncles and cousins.


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> of course....I think we've all been saying this is their book
> what a couple of phonies


Indeed.
But I am glad to see Penny Junor express some opinions.  She knows the score.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I expect we'll see dozens of bot reviews appearing in the coming days. The few that are there so far seem to be all fan girls plus one who could easily be a member here.


Is it a very sunny review?


----------



## Aimee3

I would love to know why they sacked the nurse and what they considered unprofessional.  We also fired our baby nurse who actually came highly recommended.  I had asked her to file the baby’s nails because they were sharp and raggedy.  I walked in and the baby was shrieking with bloody fingers!  We probably should’ve reported her but we just wanted her to get the he!! out of our house.


----------



## Aimee3

I just read on page six (NY Post) that M and H  bought a house in Santa Barbara and moved in 6 weeks ago!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like the bots are losing - 16% negative reviews with only 77% positive.  Sure, 77 looks high, but not in the Amazon book world. Reviewers are asking the proper questions and pointing out the flaws.  As we know, they can fool some of the people some of the time.

— Ash
1.0 out of 5 stars       Skip it
Reviewed in the United States on August 11, 2020
Verified Purchase
This book is so terribly written. It sounds like one of them wrote it themselves.... the narrative has them perfectly crafted into these flawless human beings, going so far as to imply that they didn’t hook up on the first date. I think the public is beyond that at this point. If it was so “real” why not show some of the grittier stuff as well? Either they wrote it themselves or they paid the two that did very handsomely. Everything about it rings insincere and hollow and will most likely polarize and vilify them even further. Most highly disappointing because I’m sure they actually are very kind, genuine, sincere people, but this book did nothing for their cause in my opinion. Shame.
39 people found this helpful

—Miss Mini 1 hour ago
How would the authors know if they hooked up? You would only get that type of information from an autobiography or an authorized biography. Not sure if they would share their personal grittier life with friends and that who was interviewed. A friend is probably not going to say negative things. If you read the whole book instead of excerpt or skimming you will find that they cleared up some of the rumors regarding their relationship with the royal family. And it didn’t paint them in a bad light. William was a caring brother who felt Harry took his comment out of context. The reader can assume what they want. Also Meg chose not to go to Pipa’s wedding because of an article That ran in the Sun and not that she couldn’t attend as reported in the tabloids. It is a well written biography. The authors take some license with the imagery but it reads like a biography. It is not a tabloid article. I have only read the first 10 chapters. So my comments pertain to those chapters.

— Amazon Customer
1.0 out of 5 stars Nothing new
Reviewed in the United States on August 11, 2020
Verified Purchase
If you followed news stories on the couple,, you have no need to read this book. Basically repeated news stories.


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
					

The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.




					pagesix.com
				




Another thing done in secrecy.  They must have bought it in May or June.  Where did the money come from?  The Bank of Dad?  Hmmm....all this happened before the book came out.  They weren't taking any chances.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Royal expert Penny Junor questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with the Finding Freedom authors and says they would be 'kicking up a fuss' about the book if they had not*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert questions whether Harry and Meghan 'colluded' with writer
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The controversial biography written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was released today and raised eyebrows for its intimate knowledge of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I would say there's no need to question!  They've said they didn't contribute so many times that it makes me certain they did!  Plus, how many people would be privy to the fact that he fell in love with her when she peed in the bush?


----------



## lalame

The BuzzFeed article pointed out there are so many details in the book that only M+H would know that there's no way the two didn't collaborate with the authors. For example it even talked about the exact yoga pose Meghan used one morning on their trip to Africa that only the two of them witnessed. (My immediate thought was... and M is probably the only person in the world who would find that factoid remotely interesting.)


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> The BuzzFeed article pointed out there are so many details in the book that only M+H would know that there's no way the two didn't collaborate with the authors. For example it even talked about the exact yoga pose Meghan used one morning on their trip to Africa that only the two of them witnessed. (My immediate thought was... and M is probably the only person in the world who would find that factoid remotely interesting.)



Of course.  No way to believe that they didn't help.  Diana sent audio tapes to Morton for her book and they could have done similar.  Emails, tapes, texting.  Perhaps all done with no in person meetings.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Supposedly early in the book, there is a detailed description of the Cambridge’s house. Things like number of steps to the door and the order of rooms she passed through.  So H is only concerned with his own security and not that of the heirs.  Shakespeare couldn’t make this kind of stuff up.

What jerks and hypocrites they are.



lalame said:


> The BuzzFeed article pointed out there are so many details in the book that only M+H would know that there's no way the two didn't collaborate with the authors. For example it even talked about the exact yoga pose Meghan used one morning on their trip to Africa that only the two of them witnessed. (My immediate thought was... and M is probably the only person in the world who would find that factoid remotely interesting.)


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> This is how Harry knew he had found his soulmate:
> 
> *"Prince Harry knew Meghan Markle was his soulmate when she went for a pee in the woods on their first trip abroad"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk









bag-mania said:


> Oh, Harry and Meghan and their cute little secrets! The book makes of point of not telling us how they met because the couple wants the beginning of their love story to be a mystery.
> 
> Translation: Their first date was set up in a sterile, unromantic way, much like a business transaction. Most likely the person who introduced them was a publicist.








purseinsanity said:


> I love how every possible chance, there's a dig at William and/or Kate.  Harry didn't like the full time nanny.  Harry said having more than 2 kids is environmentally irresponsible, Harry was insulted William dared tell him to slow down.  Harry sounds like a jealous a hole.


Agreed. The comment he made about having more than two kids being somewhat damaging to the environment always stood out to me the most. Such an insensitive comment to make considering his brother has 3 kids, just _one more_ kid than Harry's recommended number of kids to have. Seemed like a cold hearted thing to say IMO. If you only want to have a maximum 2 kids, then that's perfectly fine, just keep it at that. Don't go and basically say that people who have more than 2 kids are only thinking of themselves and don't care about the planet... like WTF?! There's a million things he could be bringing awareness to that could help to make positive changes to the environment and global warming, not making passive aggressive comments obviously aimed at your brother & sister-in-laws choice to have 3 kids- who are your nephews and niece BTW... which makes me think he hasn't got much of a relationship with them. Serious case of...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very wise for TP to get rid of them — 








						Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Chose Malibu For Their Life After Megxit According to Royal Expert
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have chosen to settle in Malibu following their exit from the royal family and there is a very good reason why.




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly early in the book, there is a detailed description of the Cambridge’s house. Things like number of steps to the door and the order of rooms she passed through.  So H is only concerned with his own security and not that of the heirs.  Shakespeare couldn’t make this kind of stuff up.
> 
> What jerks and hypocrites they are.



And which one of their friends gave them this detailed description?  The answer is none.  This is all Harkle.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> Agreed. The comment he made about having more than two kids being somewhat damaging to the environment always stood out to me the most. Such an insensitive comment to make considering his brother has 3 kids, just _one more_ kid than Harry's recommended number of kids to have. Seemed like a cold hearted thing to say IMO. If you only want to have a maximum 2 kids, then that's perfectly fine, just keep it at that. Don't go and basically say that people who have more than 2 kids are only thinking of themselves and don't care about the planet... like WTF?! There's a million things he could be bringing awareness to that could help to make positive changes to the environment and global warming, not making passive aggressive comments obviously aimed at your brother & sister-in-laws choice to have 3 kids- who are your nephews and niece BTW... which makes me think he hasn't got much of a relationship with them. Serious case of...
> 
> View attachment 4816267


Yep.  Absolutely.  Maybe he should take less private jets to "protect his family" and not drive gas guzzling cars before he starts criticizing the number of children his brother has.  Jerk.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> And which one of their friends gave them this detailed description?  The answer is none.  This is all Harkle.


Probably a "young mother"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why start in on Trevor now?  Two very jealous haters attacking a nice guy. Would definitely buy his book.









						Why Meghan Markle's first marriage failed
					

Finding Freedom, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, says Meghan Markle's first husband Trevor Engelson liked his actress wife to be 'dependent on him'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aimee3

Harry’s probably annoyed by the fact that by William and Kate having 3 children the line of succession moves him down to 6th instead of just 5th.


----------



## Genie27

Let’s not forget that she’s a  “grab a backpack and tent to sleep under the stars” type of gal - neglects to mention that it’s a luxury glam-camp setup, and you have to fly halfway around the world for this little getaway.
So relatable. So sustainable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comedy gold:


----------



## CarryOn2020

More lies — she and Trevor had a house.  Based on the claims that Oprah was not involved, I’m guessing she was involved. Based on the claims they did this themselves, I’m guessing the BRF took care of the details, perhaps it is a house the BRF already had in its stable. Never trust what the grifters say.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
					

The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.




					pagesix.com
				



“_They are not houseguests of Oprah or anyone else, they bought this home themselves. This is where they want to continue their lives after leaving the UK.

“This is the first home either of them has ever owned. It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family — to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in._

Now they throw shade at TP:
“_While it was a nice favor to them at a very difficult time, Tyler Perry’s house with 18 bedrooms isn’t Harry’s style. Yes, he grew up in royalty and the halls of Buckingham Palace, but he prefers more intimate homes with character.”_

 Next book title: Under the H&M bus


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies — she and Trevor had a house.  Based on the claims that Oprah was not involved, I’m guessing she was involved. Based on the claims they did this themselves, I’m guessing the BRF took care of the details, perhaps it is a house the BRF already had in its stable. Never trust what the grifters say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “_They are not houseguests of Oprah or anyone else, they bought this home themselves. This is where they want to continue their lives after leaving the UK.
> 
> “This is the first home either of them has ever owned. It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family — to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in._
> 
> Now they throw shade at TP:
> “_While it was a nice favor to them at a very difficult time, Tyler Perry’s house with 18 bedrooms isn’t Harry’s style. Yes, he grew up in royalty and the halls of Buckingham Palace, but he prefers more intimate homes with character.”_


intimate....does that mean their home a the size a "regular" family of three would occupy?  I kinda doubt it.  She didn't marry him to live a middle class life


----------



## csshopper

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4816247
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4816260
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. The comment he made about having more than two kids being somewhat damaging to the environment always stood out to me the most. Such an insensitive comment to make considering his brother has 3 kids, just _one more_ kid than Harry's recommended number of kids to have. Seemed like a cold hearted thing to say IMO. If you only want to have a maximum 2 kids, then that's perfectly fine, just keep it at that. Don't go and basically say that people who have more than 2 kids are only thinking of themselves and don't care about the planet... like WTF?! There's a million things he could be bringing awareness to that could help to make positive changes to the environment and global warming, not making passive aggressive comments obviously aimed at your brother & sister-in-laws choice to have 3 kids- who are your nephews and niece BTW... which makes me think he hasn't got much of a relationship with them. Serious case of...
> 
> View attachment 4816267


Lounorada-
   THANKS, beyond an emoji one, for the great pictures you post. You make me laugh with each one!


----------



## Genie27

sdkitty said:


> intimate....does that mean their home a the size a "regular" family of three would occupy?  I kinda doubt it.  She didn't marry him to live a middle class life


Maybe they will shock us all and move into a quiet little cul-de-sac and JCMH will take Little Master Archie around, teaching him to ride his little tricycle. And JCMD will bake cookies and...wait....no...she’ll be away at her high-powered international person of importance type gig...or on set of the newest Marvel superhero...no...BLM documentary...no wait...don’t tell me.


----------



## Lodpah

The girl is so thirsty she can find the drone in the sky.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies — she and Trevor had a house.  Based on the claims that Oprah was not involved, I’m guessing she was involved. Based on the claims they did this themselves, I’m guessing the BRF took care of the details, perhaps it is a house the BRF already had in its stable. Never trust what the grifters say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “_They are not houseguests of Oprah or anyone else, they bought this home themselves. This is where they want to continue their lives after leaving the UK.
> 
> “This is the first home either of them has ever owned. It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family — to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in._
> 
> Now they throw shade at TP:
> “_While it was a nice favor to them at a very difficult time, Tyler Perry’s house with 18 bedrooms isn’t Harry’s style. Yes, he grew up in royalty and the halls of Buckingham Palace, but he prefers more intimate homes with character.”_
> 
> Next book title: Under the H&M bus


wonder if this story is true....don't see anything on TMZ and they usually have all the scoops


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I just read on page six (NY Post) that M and H  bought a house in Santa Barbara and moved in 6 weeks ago!



They moved six weeks ago yet they filed a lawsuit just two weeks ago about the alleged paparazzi drone that was flying over Tyler Perry’s house. What is the point of that lawsuit?  These two are nuts.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies — she and Trevor had a house.  Based on the claims that Oprah was not involved, I’m guessing she was involved. Based on the claims they did this themselves, I’m guessing the BRF took care of the details, perhaps it is a house the BRF already had in its stable. Never trust what the grifters say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “_They are not houseguests of Oprah or anyone else, they bought this home themselves. This is where they want to continue their lives after leaving the UK.
> 
> “This is the first home either of them has ever owned. It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family — to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in._
> 
> Now they throw shade at TP:
> “_While it was a nice favor to them at a very difficult time, Tyler Perry’s house with 18 bedrooms isn’t Harry’s style. Yes, he grew up in royalty and the halls of Buckingham Palace, but he prefers more intimate homes with character.”_
> 
> Next book title: Under the H&M bus


She had a house she owned in LA and one in Toronto.  To be a good liar, one must have a good memory.  These two seem to be developing early dementia.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why start in on Trevor now?  Two very jealous haters attacking a nice guy. Would definitely buy his book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle's first marriage failed
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, says Meghan Markle's first husband Trevor Engelson liked his actress wife to be 'dependent on him'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Trevor was threatened because she "found fame" on Suits?  Let's be honest, how many of us had ever heard of her before she got involved with Harry?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s see how this looks:
Nottinham Cottage on KP grounds
Married in 2018
Moved to Frogmore
Moved to Canada, January, 2020
Moved to TP’s mansion 2020
Moved to somewhere in some other place special to his Mum, summer 2020

Papa was a rolling stone


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle was 'furious' at 'absurd claims' against her from her own family including 'problem' sister Samantha, Finding Freedom biography claims*








						Meghan Markle was 'furious' at 'absurd claims' made by relatives
					

Prince Harry also couldn't believe how 'badly' his new partner's relatives had behaved after giving a series of interviews, the book claims.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Problem sister Samantha was probably the first sibling to see through MM


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, the woman who wrote the review for the New York Times sure loves Meghan. What I wouldn’t give to go back to the time when professionals at least pretended to have impartiality in their writing. 









						Happily Ever After? Harry and Meghan Will Settle for Normal (Published 2020)
					

In “Finding Freedom,” the veteran reporters Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand show how the British royal family’s fairy tale turned into a cautionary one.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy Santa Barbara home
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been living in the home since early July, after staying in Tyler Perry's Beverly Hill's mansion for the last few months.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy Santa Barbara home
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been living in the home since early July, after staying in Tyler Perry's Beverly Hill's mansion for the last few months.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Seems like the usual disconnect with JCMH and MM between what they claim and what is actual.

They have filed lawsuits about violation of their privacy by the paparazzi. Yet now we are being told they actually purchased a home and moved north to Santa Barbara last month and no one knew.

And no paps knew?
Hardly seems they are being followed like they’ve claimed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why start in on Trevor now?  Two very jealous haters attacking a nice guy. Would definitely buy his book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle's first marriage failed
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, says Meghan Markle's first husband Trevor Engelson liked his actress wife to be 'dependent on him'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She had no problem milking his connections, and now he's the bad and controlling guy? LOL


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _“This is the first home either of them has ever owned. It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family — to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in._



Meghan must have suffered from a lack of attention during those 6 weeks.

That said, who funded that thing? Charles didn't really reward those two jerks by forking over millions to buy them a house? He is the worst enabler.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nah, not done out of stupidity. He did it deliberately. He knew he could get away with it, which he did. <<< same as Andy
> He was 3rd in line at that time. The party was celebrating the birthday of a former Olympian’s son, another 22 yr old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry faces outcry at Nazi outfit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some more facts -
> _But the most offensive part of the amateurish ensemble was the red, white and black swastika armband.
> The costume was apparently meant to represent the Afrika Korps - a rather odd interpretation of the birthday party's "colonial" theme._
> 
> Shall we discuss the party’s theme: colonials and natives?   I ask again, who does that? Why in 2005 would this theme be appropriate? What other themes have these people used?  My guess is these theme parties for adults are still going on and are well-attended by certain ‘elites’.





What kind of idiot thought up a “colonial” theme for a party?!?!  Pretty much any way you go is going to be offensive.  And I totally agree - these morons were trying to upstage each other and see how much they could get away with.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> The BuzzFeed article pointed out there are so many details in the book that only M+H would know that there's no way the two didn't collaborate with the authors. For example it even talked about the exact yoga pose Meghan used one morning on their trip to Africa that only the two of them witnessed. (My immediate thought was... and M is probably the only person in the world who would find that factoid remotely interesting.)



Although I don't know which pose, it was probably considered 'interesting' because it showed how accomplished and advanced she is in the practice


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly early in the book, there is a detailed description of the Cambridge’s house. Things like number of steps to the door and the order of rooms she passed through.  So H is only concerned with his own security and not that of the heirs.  Shakespeare couldn’t make this kind of stuff up.
> 
> What jerks and hypocrites they are.



Good point


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Over on Quora it was asked why Meghan gets more bad press than Andrew, and an accomplished member answered "Because she deserves it."

And he does indeed have a point: he said that while Andrew is the gross predator which is obviously worse than a ruthless social climber (paraphrasing here), he got the point, shut up and is flying low, while there doesn't go a week by (being generous here) where Meghan's PR machine doesn't put out some sh*t. She's feeding into it while he is not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  Absolutely.  Maybe he should take less private jets to "protect his family" and not drive gas guzzling cars before he starts criticizing the number of children his brother has.  Jerk.



Even as someone who believes that overpopulation contributes to climate change more than almost any other factor, I also think that was just a personal jibe. He could have easily kept it general and future-tense to not try to make people feel guilty for the children they have already. This was a direct jibe at W & K, no doubt about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Even as someone who believes that overpopulation contributes to climate change more than almost any other factor, I also think that was just a personal jibe. He could have easily kept it general and future-tense to not try to make people feel guilty for the children they have already. This was a direct jibe at W & K, no doubt about it.



But was he always so envious and resentful of Wills and Kate? A few days ago I stumbled upon old pics from a handful of occasions that show him with Kate. They look happy, relaxed and super close. What happened there?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But was he always so envious and resentful of Wills and Kate? A few days ago I stumbled upon old pics from a handful of occasions that show him with Kate. They look happy, relaxed and super close. *What happened there?*


Meghan happened


----------



## Sharont2305

Quite the honour, considering how vocal (negatively) Arthur's been regarding H&M. I've always enjoyed seeing him interviewed on TV, lovely man and I think well respected within the RF.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very wise for TP to get rid of them —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Chose Malibu For Their Life After Megxit According to Royal Expert
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have chosen to settle in Malibu following their exit from the royal family and there is a very good reason why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



Most people who buy a house and have no other, move into it. Probably doing $M renovations with their 'independent' income


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s probably annoyed by the fact that by William and Kate having 3 children the line of succession moves him down to 6th instead of just 5th.



You nailed it!


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Quite the honour, considering how vocal (negatively) Arthur's been regarding H&M. I've always enjoyed seeing him interviewed on TV, lovely man and I think well respected within the RF.




Such shade


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies — she and Trevor had a house.  Based on the claims that Oprah was not involved, I’m guessing she was involved. Based on the claims they did this themselves, I’m guessing the BRF took care of the details, perhaps it is a house the BRF already had in its stable. Never trust what the grifters say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “_They are not houseguests of Oprah or anyone else, they bought this home themselves. This is where they want to continue their lives after leaving the UK.
> 
> “This is the first home either of them has ever owned. It has been a very special time for them as a couple and as a family — to have complete privacy for six weeks since they moved in._
> 
> Now they throw shade at TP:
> “_While it was a nice favor to them at a very difficult time, Tyler Perry’s house with 18 bedrooms isn’t Harry’s style. Yes, he grew up in royalty and the halls of Buckingham Palace, but he prefers more intimate homes with character.”_
> 
> Next book title: Under the H&M bus



OMG, that is so rude! 

Thank him, move, keep mouth shut.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle was 'furious' at 'absurd claims' against her from her own family including 'problem' sister Samantha, Finding Freedom biography claims*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'furious' at 'absurd claims' made by relatives
> 
> 
> Prince Harry also couldn't believe how 'badly' his new partner's relatives had behaved after giving a series of interviews, the book claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Problem sister Samantha was probably the first sibling to see through MM



That maybe true, but I'd hate to read what my sister would write about me _should_ I ever be silly enough to be famous.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But was he always so envious and resentful of Wills and Kate? A few days ago I stumbled upon old pics from a handful of occasions that show him with Kate. They look happy, relaxed and super close. What happened there?



He's obviously had some alter-ego well-hidden or been wound-up by something (or someone)

Maybe it suddenly is just him. He's basically the 'spare' and getting sparer with every child K&W have.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The paps will find the house at some point. And then won’t there be public record of who paid for it?


----------



## LibbyRuth

Annawakes said:


> I think the Queen is really smart to say they can come back whenever they want.  That way M can’t say she’s been victimized, if she/they are completely cut off.  Also, the Queen knows M will never want to return and be subject to the same rules that “stifled” her previously.  So it is a win win to say that I think.
> 
> Edited to put “stifled” in quotes.



I agree with this. I also think the Queen is likely genuine in saying they can come back.  For all they've done, it would be hard for her to totally forget her relationship with Harry as a whole and all the reasons she adored him before all of this.  Not to mention - she can take them back into the fold but ensure they get all the crappy assignments and have to do all the openings and appearances no one else wants to do.


----------



## PewPew

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Why start in on Trevor now?*  Two very jealous haters attacking a nice guy. Would definitely buy his book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle's first marriage failed
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom, out today and co-authored by journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, says Meghan Markle's first husband Trevor Engelson liked his actress wife to be 'dependent on him'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Remember, Meghan’s entire self-narrative since the engagement has been to portray herself as an innocent waif who struggled against oppression all her life. (This image is in contrast to her deleted lifestyle blog where she painted a more privileged life and talked about never having had to waitress as an actress.) Harry rescued her from her family etc. 

Painting Meghan as an emotionally abused spouse gives her another platform to co-opt for her lecture tour. (There was another brief marriage believed to have been annulled. Of course they also skip over the celeb chef she was still dating when she met Harry.) So many “one true loves,” but this time it’s the greatest love of all time bc he used excessive ghost emojis & that connection has nothing to do with his being a Prince says Don’tJustCallMeghanIAMmTheDuchess.)


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan must have suffered from a lack of attention during those 6 weeks.
> 
> That said, who funded that thing? Charles didn't really reward those two jerks by forking over millions to buy them a house? He is the worst enabler.





papertiger said:


> Most people who buy a house and have no other, move into it. Probably doing $M renovations with their 'independent' income





lanasyogamama said:


> The paps will find the house at some point. And then won’t there be public record of who paid for it?


*Prince Harry draws on 'bank of Dad' for £8m Santa Barbara mansion: Royal insiders say Prince Charles 'provided funding' for new 'family home' among Hollywood's 'wokerati' - as couple are still paying off £2.4m taxpayer-funded Frogmore Cottage revamp*








						Why are Harry and Meghan blowing £8m when they owe taxpayer £2.4m
					

Prince Harry and Meghan had help from Prince Charles to buy their £8million family home in Santa Barbara, after ditching Tyler Perry's 12-bedroom Beverly Hills mansion for more privacy




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry draws on 'bank of Dad' for £8m Santa Barbara mansion: Royal insiders say Prince Charles 'provided funding' for new 'family home' among Hollywood's 'wokerati' - as couple are still paying off £2.4m taxpayer-funded Frogmore Cottage revamp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are Harry and Meghan blowing £8m when they owe taxpayer £2.4m
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan had help from Prince Charles to buy their £8million family home in Santa Barbara, after ditching Tyler Perry's 12-bedroom Beverly Hills mansion for more privacy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Are US citizens allowed to have gifts as big as that without declaring as income, or would it be in Charles' name?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> That maybe true, but I'd hate to read what my sister would write about me _should_ I ever be silly enough to be famous.


I wonder if it was 'famous' or 'phony' that motivated the sister...


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Over on Quora it was asked why Meghan gets more bad press than Andrew, and an accomplished member answered "Because she deserves it."
> 
> *while there doesn't go a week by (being generous here) where Meghan's PR machine doesn't put out some sh*t.* She's feeding into it while he is not.


Weekly? You are being very generous!


----------



## Tootsie17

Sharont2305 said:


> Meghan happened


You are so right! When M walked in the gaslighting began and Harry fell for it. I can't believe he is that daft.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle was 'furious' at 'absurd claims' against her from her own family including 'problem' sister Samantha, Finding Freedom biography claims*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was 'furious' at 'absurd claims' made by relatives
> 
> 
> Prince Harry also couldn't believe how 'badly' his new partner's relatives had behaved after giving a series of interviews, the book claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Problem sister Samantha was probably the first sibling to see through MM



Notice the choice of words. If my siblings went to the press and said horrible things about me, I'd be hurt and sad, not furious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Are US citizens allowed to have gifts as big as that without declaring as income, or would it be in Charles' name?


If he's only a tiny bit smart it's his house he allows them to use. I mean, not even William owns a house, his are borrowed from his grandma.


----------



## Emeline

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry draws on 'bank of Dad' for £8m Santa Barbara mansion: Royal insiders say Prince Charles 'provided funding' for new 'family home' among Hollywood's 'wokerati' - as couple are still paying off £2.4m taxpayer-funded Frogmore Cottage revamp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are Harry and Meghan blowing £8m when they owe taxpayer £2.4m
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan had help from Prince Charles to buy their £8million family home in Santa Barbara, after ditching Tyler Perry's 12-bedroom Beverly Hills mansion for more privacy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don't see this marriage lasting many more years. Maybe PC was actually  ticking the residence for Meg box.
Chore completed ahead of time.


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If he's only a tiny bit smart it's his house he allows them to use. I mean, not even William owns a house, his are borrowed from his grandma.


Charles would have been wise to give them a loaner house. However, its hard to believe that Meghan would agree to not having her own house.  She'll need her own place when she decides to dump Harry, if ever. Besides, I thought they wanted to get away from the constraints of the BRF and live their own lives and pay their own way.  They are such idiots!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> MM & H looked very professional when "they were forced to let the nurse go in the middle of her second night of work". Just for that, they should receive an award for the best employers in the UK. Why did Samantha Cohen leave her role after 17 years with the Royal family? The way MM&H treat family, friends, employees, and ... supports well their charitable and humanitarian image. Why is Samantha Markle so quiet these days?


I think the Markles are quiet due to the lawsuit in the UK, where Meghan is suing a tabloid about the chats that her 5 friends had with People, the topic being the MM letter to dad
I could see the Markles being sued ... 
There are so many lawsuits, ughhh, I would be exhausted talking to the armies of lawyers in two countries...


----------



## marietouchet

Tootsie17 said:


> Charles would have been wise to give them a loaner house. However, its hard to believe that Meghan would agree to not having her own house.  She'll need her own place when she decides to dump Harry, if ever. Besides, I thought they wanted to get away from the constraints of the BRF and live their own lives and pay their own way.  They are such idiots!


It is not well known but Charles has a lovely estate in Eastern Europe, Rumania? He could park the kids there for a while ... LOL 

The issue of housing is tied up in the security issue - more security means bigger house but also one that is secluded (ie not where crime is) but not too out of the way (that you feel abandoned) . Difficult to find such a house. The cottage at Kensington was too small.  Omid suggests that MM&H felt that Frogmore cottage was TOO secluded. 

The Omid book alludes the death threats on MM, but heck the BRF is subject to those - comes with the territory - someone did try to kidnap Anne some years ago so, I am not sure if the threats on out of the norm or not. Not that he was a royal exactly, but Earl Mountbatten - uncle of Philip - died in a terrorist explosion

But, I see now that Charles would not want to cut them off and deal with the collateral damage of bad publicity due to abandoning MM&H (to terrorists)

I bet Charles is hoping some how they manage to pay their own bills somehow - getting them off the payroll without seeming like an ogre


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I think the Markles are quiet due to the lawsuit in the UK, where Meghan is suing a tabloid about the chats that her 5 friends had with People, the topic being the MM letter to dad
> *I could see the Markles being sued ...
> There are so many lawsuits, ughhh,* I would be exhausted talking to the armies of lawyers in two countries...


I wouldn't be surprised if they were approached by lawyers at some point.


----------



## LittleStar88

papertiger said:


> Are US citizens allowed to have gifts as big as that without declaring as income, or would it be in Charles' name?



Their tax situation makes my head spin. It is possible they had to cut short the stay at TP's house because after a certain point it becomes a taxable stay (I think).

Everything portrays them as young kids venturing off to adulthood for the first time and naively navigating life. They are pushing 40. Hard to buy into the _Innocence of Youth_ they keep trying to sell.

Honestly I am hoping to hear less and less about their struggle for relevancy as we continue through this global pandemic. They have nothing to offer here or anywhere. 

I have slowly stopped coming to this thread because their self-importance totally blows my mind. They need to sit down and be quiet. Indefinitely.


----------



## Chanbal

Tootsie17 said:


> Charles would have been wise to give them a loaner house. However, its hard to believe that Meghan would agree to not having her own house.  *She'll need her own place when she decides to dump Harry*, if ever. Besides, I thought they wanted to get away from the constraints of the BRF and live their own lives and pay their own way.  They are such idiots!


Why would she dump Harry? She is on her ~40s without a prominent movie star career... She would be immediately forgotten. 

By the way where is Markus Anderson these days?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, the woman who wrote the review for the New York Times sure loves Meghan. What I wouldn’t give to go back to the time when professionals at least pretended to have impartiality in their writing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happily Ever After? Harry and Meghan Will Settle for Normal (Published 2020)
> 
> 
> In “Finding Freedom,” the veteran reporters Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand show how the British royal family’s fairy tale turned into a cautionary one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


more like an editorial than a book review....very disappointing


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Their tax situation makes my head spin. It is possible they had to cut short the stay at TP's house because after a certain point it becomes a taxable stay (I think).
> 
> Everything portrays them as young kids venturing off to adulthood for the first time and naively navigating life. They are pushing 40. Hard to buy into the _Innocence of Youth_ they keep trying to sell.
> 
> Honestly I am hoping to hear less and less about their struggle for relevancy as we continue through this global pandemic. They have nothing to offer here or anywhere.
> 
> I have slowly stopped coming to this thread because their self-importance totally blows my mind. They need to sit down and be quiet. Indefinitely.



Very wise. I was actually thinking that (applied to my own contributions). On the other hand, it makes me laugh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> Charles would have been wise to give them a loaner house. However, its hard to believe that Meghan would agree to not having her own house.  She'll need her own place when she decides to dump Harry, if ever. Besides, I thought they wanted to get away from the constraints of the BRF and live their own lives and pay their own way.  They are such idiots!


What's there to agree, though? She can go ahead and buy a house from her own money, or take what's offered to her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

I think both were pretty clear in explaining their obsession with Kate and dissing her or one-upping her constantly.

H:
He has mentioned (repeatedly IIRC) that he always felt like a 3rd wheel around Will and Kate. I think to some extents, he felt like she was an interloper - it was always just Will and Harry since their childhood and they must have leaned on each other a lot given the lives they've lived; and then in comes Kate. It must have been tough for him; living next to your brother and his soulmate (and their ever growing brood), working with them every day and meanwhile, all your girlfriends seem to leave you because they can't handle the stress of being in your family.

M:
I mean, she's said leaked to the Press (and Scooby) repeatedly that she expected Kate would welcome her and show her the ropes (as a fellow outsider), but she's too self-centered to understand that when they got engaged, Kate was pregnant and she has really tough pregnancies (hyperemesis gravidarum) and so was unavailable. I think M just bears a massive grudge over that (particularly if she has a victim complex and sees it as another example being shunted aside by W&K). Kate has also told her off for being rude to staff and that must have been another sting, especially for someone who has never been told off in her life. There are people who keep score of "insults" and bear massive grudges over itty bitty things.

It's great fun reading their little jabs though, especially since the other party has zero interest in raising to the bait. Ever tried arguing with a wall...? It's immensely frustrating.


----------



## youngster

Santa Barbara is quite beautiful and the weather is fantastic year round.  They would have more privacy than in L.A. while not having to deal with the masses of people. You know, the ones they want to instruct on how to live their lives and travel. Santa Barbara has less than 100,000 people, but is still incredibly expensive because of the beauty and weather. Waterfront costs around $6 or $7 million easily, just saw that they spent about $8 million on their new digs, but it isn't the $20+ million they'd need for an equivalent place in L.A. It's about 100 miles though from L.A. so they'll have a world of hassle getting in and out of the city and will burn up a lot of gas or private plane fuel jetting into LAX to go anywhere.

@papertiger, yes, someone can make a gift of basically any size in the U.S. but there are rules and tax implications depending on what was done.  I absolutely think that they needed to move on from TP's mansion for tax reasons, among others.  (I also don't doubt they were tired of couch surfing and wanted their own place.) Letting someone stay for free in a home that the owner is not occupying for a short time is not a problem, but they were getting to the point (and were probably past the point) that it could trigger tax issues for Tyler Perry. He was likely pleased to see them go and get his house back.  

Overall, their tax situation is complex to say the least, given that only MM is a citizen. It all depends on how the purchase was structured.  Is Charles' name on the property? Is Harry's?  Did Charles gift money to Harry directly who then used it to buy the house?  Did Harry use his own money which Charles then replenished in the UK so that Charles' name isn't on any document in the U.S.?  The public records should provide more info.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry draws on 'bank of Dad' for £8m Santa Barbara mansion: Royal insiders say Prince Charles 'provided funding' for new 'family home' among Hollywood's 'wokerati' - as couple are still paying off £2.4m taxpayer-funded Frogmore Cottage revamp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are Harry and Meghan blowing £8m when they owe taxpayer £2.4m
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan had help from Prince Charles to buy their £8million family home in Santa Barbara, after ditching Tyler Perry's 12-bedroom Beverly Hills mansion for more privacy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



_'At their peak Harry and Meghan's combined wealth had been estimated to be worth around £33 million.'_

So where did all that money go if they can't even afford to buy an £8m house with their own money out of their estimated £33m wealth? That would still leave them with £25m, which is _a lot_ of money and plenty to buy a nice house. Or even if you can't afford £8m for a house, maybe do something absolutely crazy like look for something cheaper, that you CAN afford without funding from someone elses bank account 

These two, financially independent...


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's there to agree, though? She can go ahead and buy a house from her own money, or take what's offered to her.


I wouldn't be surprised if they have a way to blackmail Charles into paying their way - not saying because he


Lounorada said:


> _'At their peak Harry and Meghan's combined wealth had been estimated to be worth around £33 million.'_
> 
> So where did all that money go if they can't even afford to buy an £8m house with their own money out of their estimated £33m wealth? That would still leave them with £25m, which is _a lot_ of money and plenty to buy a nice house. Or even if you can't afford £8m for a house, maybe do something absolutely crazy like look for something cheaper, that you CAN afford without funding from someone elses bank account
> 
> These two, financially independent...
> 
> View attachment 4816857


with her million dollar wardrobe and their security costs, etc., 25 mil isn't so much


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle secretly buy family home in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The two have been living in Santa Barbara with son Archie since July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another thing done in secrecy.  They must have bought it in May or June.  Where did the money come from?  The Bank of Dad?  Hmmm....all this happened before the book came out.  They weren't taking any chances.


Of course they did, after all .. Oprah is up there in Montecito, right?!?!?  Their BH neighbors didn't like them being in the neighborhood, so ...


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> .....
> 
> Overall, their tax situation is complex to say the least, given that only MM is a citizen. It all depends on how the purchase was structured.  Is Charles' name on the property? Is Harry's?  Did Charles gift money to Harry directly who then used it to buy the house?  Did Harry use his own money which Charles then replenished in the UK so that Charles' name isn't on any document in the U.S.?  *The public records should provide more info.*



If the sale is true... How have the documents not popped up yet? Surely TMZ is on it. Any chance that it has been kept private? 

Can't be too many homes recently sold in the 8 million range in that area - possible to make a good guess?


----------



## Lounorada

I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't bought that house in SB and this is just another story to keep them in the news for another day.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Trevor was threatened because she "found fame" on Suits?  Let's be honest, how many of us had ever heard of her before she got involved with Harry?


Again .. what UTTER BS!!!  From earlier reports, Meghan pestered Trevor to put HER into various projects he was working on, and he didn't feel comfortable with doing that (citing 'nepotism' .. but probably more like "she's a horrible actress")!  He was/is a successful Film Producer and Literary Agent; why would he be jealous of her dinky role on a Cable show (barely watched - heck, I never knew about it until her name came out associated with Harry)!!!  PUHLEEZE ...


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Again .. what UTTER BS!!!  From earlier reports, Meghan pestered Trevor to put HER into various projects he was working on, and he didn't feel comfortable with doing that (citing 'nepotism' .. but probably more like "she's a horrible actress")!  He was/is a successful Film Producer and Literary Agent; why would he be jealous of her dinky role on a Cable show (barely watched - heck, I never knew about it until her name came out associated with Harry)!!!  PUHLEEZE ...


right....not that many people watched the show (I never saw it) and she was a supporting character, wasn't she?


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> _'At their peak Harry and Meghan's combined wealth had been estimated to be worth around £33 million.'_
> 
> So where did all that money go if they can't even afford to buy an £8m house with their own money out of their estimated £33m wealth? That would still leave them with £25m, which is _a lot_ of money and plenty to buy a nice house. Or even if you can't afford £8m for a house, maybe do something absolutely crazy like look for something cheaper, that you CAN afford without funding from someone elses bank account
> 
> These two, financially independent...



You can't expect them to use their own money to buy a house! That's crazy. They need that money for more important matters, like paying three PR firms to try to sell the improbable idea that these two people who have nothing to offer are worth paying $1 million for speaking jobs. Their allowance from Charles can't possibly cover it all.


----------



## sdkitty

TMZ has it now








						TMZ
					

Breaking the biggest stories in celebrity and entertainment news. Get exclusive access to the latest stories, photos, and video as only TMZ can.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't bought that house in SB and this is just another story to keep them in the news for another day.



Gee for people that want privacy and to keep their location secret, why announce on Page Six?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Gee for people that want privacy and to keep their location secret, why announce on Page Six?


oh, I must have been someone else who "leaked" it


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> TMZ has it now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TMZ
> 
> 
> Breaking the biggest stories in celebrity and entertainment news. Get exclusive access to the latest stories, photos, and video as only TMZ can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



That was my first guess when I heard Santa Barbara! Lovely place. I love SB. Not really less expensive than LA though so I'm surprised to see that but maybe it's more about homes of a certain size not being as available in LA.


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> The girl is so thirsty she can find the drone in the sky.
> View attachment 4816311


Oh.  My.  God.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

LittleStar88 said:


> If the sale is true... How have the documents not popped up yet? Surely TMZ is on it. Any chance that it has been kept private?
> 
> Can't be too many homes recently sold in the 8 million range in that area - possible to make a good guess?



Looks like there were 8 houses sold in the last 3 months between $7m-9m in Montecito. I'm sure the exact house will be leaked at some point. It's just a matter of time.


----------



## lalame

If I had to make a guess, it's one of these two (listing linked in photos):



 $7.1m, unknown sq ft

or



 $7.9m, 7500 sq ft


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> oh, I must have been someone else who "leaked" it


Spokesperson. According to page six.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> Santa Barbara is quite beautiful and the weather is fantastic year round.  They would have more privacy than in L.A. while not having to deal with the masses of people. You know, the ones they want to instruct on how to live their lives and travel. Santa Barbara has less than 100,000 people, but is still incredibly expensive because of the beauty and weather. Waterfront costs around $6 or $7 million easily, just saw that they spent about $8 million on their new digs, but it isn't the $20+ million they'd need for an equivalent place in L.A. It's about 100 miles though from L.A. so they'll have a world of hassle getting in and out of the city and will burn up a lot of gas or private plane fuel jetting into LAX to go anywhere.
> 
> @papertiger, yes, someone can make a gift of basically any size in the U.S. but there are rules and tax implications depending on what was done.  I absolutely think that they needed to move on from TP's mansion for tax reasons, among others.  (I also don't doubt they were tired of couch surfing and wanted their own place.) Letting someone stay for free in a home that the owner is not occupying for a short time is not a problem, but they were getting to the point (and were probably past the point) that it could trigger tax issues for Tyler Perry. He was likely pleased to see them go and get his house back.
> 
> Overall, their tax situation is complex to say the least, given that only MM is a citizen. It all depends on how the purchase was structured.  Is Charles' name on the property? Is Harry's?  Did Charles gift money to Harry directly who then used it to buy the house?  Did Harry use his own money which Charles then replenished in the UK so that Charles' name isn't on any document in the U.S.?  The public records should provide more info.


in the USA, one can receive a gift of about $20k without paying income tax, if the gift is a straight gift
but who knows how H&M got the money from Charles .. maybe he loaned them the money ? money to H&M or just to H ? H and M each have different tax situations 
I doubt the full $8M was paid by C, I doubt the UK public would stand for that these days... further he used to pay only $2-3 M a year so this is a lot, but maybe a one time settlement ?...
there is a lot of talk in the UK about imminent reduction in payments to the BRF


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> By the way where is Markus Anderson these days?


Right? When did the story come out that Markus was living with them? Was it in July when they were supposedly living in their new Santa Barbara home?
What about that pap shot of Doria outside with Ar-Kay? Maybe they needed her there to babysit while they packed up the furniture her yoga mat.  


Lounorada said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't bought that house in SB and this is just another story to keep them in the news for another day.


Mmm hmmm. They disappear quite easily when they want to (the North Saanich hideaway), but Meghan just can't stand to be out of the press/paps/spotlight so 'someone' has to leak her location.

I also think her so-called worth was greatly exaggerated pre-wedding. Yes, she made about $450K annually on Suits for seven seasons. The sugars out there acting like she banked $450K. I assume she paid taxes? Rent/mortgage, food, insurance, fees to agent and publicist, flights/hotels on the vacations she took with Jessica Mulroney?  She'd be lucky to keep 50% of that.


----------



## bag-mania

We shouldn't assume that they outright bought the $8 million house. Even rich people get mortgages.


----------



## 1LV

PewPew said:


> Remember, Meghan’s entire self-narrative since the engagement has been to portray herself as an innocent waif who struggled against oppression all her life. (This image is in contrast to her deleted lifestyle blog where she painted a more privileged life and talked about never having had to waitress as an actress.) Harry rescued her from her family etc.
> 
> Painting Meghan as an emotionally abused spouse gives her another platform to co-opt for her lecture tour. (There was another brief marriage believed to have been annulled. Of course they also skip over the celeb chef she was still dating when she met Harry.) So many “one true loves,” but this time it’s the greatest love of all time bc he used excessive ghost emojis & that connection has nothing to do with his being a Prince says *Don’tJustCallMeghanIAMmTheDuchess*.)



Love it!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like every time they move, it always “the plan was NEVER to stay in *insert previous location*. Now that they’re in *insert new location*, they can really settle down and live their private lives.”


----------



## lalame

V0N1B2 said:


> Right? When did the story come out that Markus was living with them? Was it in July when they were supposedly living in their new Santa Barbara home?
> What about that pap shot of Doria outside with Ar-Kay? Maybe they needed her there to babysit while they packed up the furniture her yoga mat.
> 
> Mmm hmmm. They disappear quite easily when they want to (the North Saanich hideaway), but Meghan just can't stand to be out of the press/paps/spotlight so 'someone' has to leak her location.
> 
> I also think her so-called worth was greatly exaggerated pre-wedding. Yes, she made about $450K annually on Suits for seven seasons. The sugars out there acting like she banked $450K. I assume she paid taxes? Rent/mortgage, food, insurance, fees to agent and publicist, flights/hotels on the vacations she took with Jessica Mulroney?  She'd be lucky to keep 50% of that.



I don't think she made just $450k annually... she was also in adverts and probably got paid for appearances and etc. A figure that's also been thrown around is $80k annually just in blog revenue.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry draws on 'bank of Dad' for £8m Santa Barbara mansion: Royal insiders say Prince Charles 'provided funding' for new 'family home' among Hollywood's 'wokerati' - as couple are still paying off £2.4m taxpayer-funded Frogmore Cottage revamp*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why are Harry and Meghan blowing £8m when they owe taxpayer £2.4m
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan had help from Prince Charles to buy their £8million family home in Santa Barbara, after ditching Tyler Perry's 12-bedroom Beverly Hills mansion for more privacy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Think about it.  If you were Charles and could spend money to keep those two embarrassing morons on the other side of the pond, wouldn’t you?  That’s a drop in the bucket.  (Charles’ bucket, not mine)


----------



## redney

Even if the SB/Montecito house is identified most wealthy/famous people use trusts or their business entities for the transaction. It's not like their names will be on the county assessor's records as the owners.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> in the USA, one can receive a gift of about $20k without paying income tax, if the gift is a straight gift
> but who knows how H&M got the money from Charles .. maybe he loaned them the money ? money to H&M or just to H ? H and M each have different tax situations
> I doubt the full $8M was paid by C, I doubt the UK public would stand for that these days... further he used to pay only $2-3 M a year so this is a lot, but maybe a one time settlement ?...
> there is a lot of talk in the UK about imminent reduction in payments to the BRF



I don't have any familiarity with UK tax law but I'm sure Prince Charles had to conform to whatever UK law currently is on gifts.  He could have "loaned" the money to Harry and transferred the cash to Harry's UK accounts, which Harry then transferred to a U.S. escrow company to buy the house, and then this loan will be "forgiven" upon Charles' death perhaps. There are lots of creative options.

In the U.S., you can make a gift or receive a gift of up to $15,000 per person per year in cash without paying any gift tax.  You can still make large gifts of _any amount_ if you are willing to eat into your lifetime gift exemption.  Without getting into too much boring detail, the lifetime gift tax exemption ties directly to the federal estate tax. So, if you make gifts over the $15,000 annual amount, you can choose to apply the excess to your lifetime gift exemption and your federal estate tax exemption. Or, you can pay the gift tax which ranges from about 18 - 40% and is paid by the giver. Certain gifts are exempt though. For example, gift to charities approved by the IRS, payments for education paid directly to the institution, payments of medical expenses if paid directly to the medical provider/facility etc.)  But, this wouldn't apply to Charles since he obviously is not a U.S. citizen or resident.


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> Even if the SB/Montecito house is identified most wealthy/famous people use trusts or their business entities for the transaction. It's not like their names will be on the county assessor's records as the owners.


And the identity of the trustees will not be known, Charles might be a trustee, H and M will be trustees, but Voting rights ? Do you need approval of just one trustee, or all of them ? Etc


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I don't have any familiarity with UK tax law but I'm sure Prince Charles had to conform to whatever UK law currently is on gifts.  He could have "loaned" the money to Harry and transferred the cash to Harry's UK accounts, which Harry then transferred to a U.S. escrow company to buy the house, and then this loan will be "forgiven" upon Charles' death perhaps. There are lots of creative options.
> 
> In the U.S., you can make a gift or receive a gift of up to $15,000 per person per year in cash without paying any gift tax.  You can still make large gifts of _any amount_ if you are willing to eat into your lifetime gift exemption.  Without getting into too much boring detail, the lifetime gift tax exemption ties directly to the federal estate tax. So, if you make gifts over the $15,000 annual amount, you can choose to apply the excess to your lifetime gift exemption and your federal estate tax exemption. Or, you can pay the gift tax which ranges from about 18 - 40% and is paid by the giver. Certain gifts are exempt though. For example, gift to charities approved by the IRS, payments for education paid directly to the institution, payments of medical expenses if paid directly to the medical provider/facility etc.)  But, this wouldn't apply to Charles since he obviously is not a U.S. citizen or resident.


And in all fairness ... each royal child of QEII has received a estate In the country from HM, which is intended to flow to the grandchildren
plus each child  has digs in London, eg rooms at palace
so, the children all have at least two residences, one in London, one in country
the grandchildren will get the piles in the country eventually, and have also received grace and favor apartments in London, not free, but great location and low price
H was to have Frogmore, but this housing money is kinda sorta instead of a country place and/or London digs


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> She had a house she owned in LA and one in Toronto.  To be a good liar, one must have a good memory.  These two seem to be developing early dementia.


I remember seeing pics of her LA home, it had bars on some of the windows.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> And in all fairness ... each royal child of QEII has received a estate In the country from HM, which is intended to flow to the grandchildren
> plus each child  has digs in London, eg rooms at palace
> so, the children all have at least two residences, one in London, one in country
> the grandchildren will get the piles in the country eventually, and have also received grace and favor apartments in London, not free, but great location and low price
> H was to have Frogmore, but this housing money is kinda sorta instead of a country place and/or London digs



Harry is not a royal child, though, just a grandchild. He was provided a home and decided he wanted to move countries, making everything multiple times as expensive (housing, security). Nobody buys anyone homes, they get the opportunity to live in a house already in the family, so there is no housing budget poor Harry never used. Also, while I think Anne actually owns her home (as opposed to say Wills whose country estate is a loan that will fall back to the crown eventually, not be inherited by his children) the Wessexes and I think Andrew as well are renting.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> If the sale is true... How have the documents not popped up yet? Surely TMZ is on it. Any chance that it has been kept private?
> 
> Can't be too many homes recently sold in the 8 million range in that area - possible to make a good guess?


Could be that the 'paperwork' notes a Trust, as opposed to Harry, Meghan's or Charles name(s) ..


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> in the USA, one can receive a gift of about $20k without paying income tax, if the gift is a straight gift
> but who knows how H&M got the money from Charles .. maybe he loaned them the money ? money to H&M or just to H ? H and M each have different tax situations
> I doubt the full $8M was paid by C, I doubt the UK public would stand for that these days... further he used to pay only $2-3 M a year so this is a lot, but maybe a one time settlement ?...
> there is a lot of talk in the UK about imminent reduction in payments to the BRF


taxes and maintenance will cost plenty on a home like this.  can you imagine the water, power, landscaping, pool maintenance and CA property tax?  Not to mention the servants (not that they would have as many as Will and Kate of course)


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> If I had to make a guess, it's one of these two (listing linked in photos):
> 
> 
> View attachment 4816929
> $7.1m, unknown sq ft
> 
> or
> 
> 
> View attachment 4816930
> $7.9m, 7500 sq ft


I'd almost be a bit envious but really if I had that kind of money I'd prefer a smaller home - maybe on the ocean.  So this is what Harry calls cozy or whatever the word was?  so out of touch.  Please just don't tell other people how to live when you're in a mansion


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> TMZ has it now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TMZ
> 
> 
> Breaking the biggest stories in celebrity and entertainment news. Get exclusive access to the latest stories, photos, and video as only TMZ can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


SURE ENOUGH .. in Montecito, same as Oprah!  Call me surprised .. NOT!!!


----------



## redney

CeeJay said:


> SURE ENOUGH .. in Montecito, same as Oprah!  Call me surprised .. NOT!!!


Tons of celebs in Montecito, in addition to Oprah.


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> I remember seeing pics of her LA home, it had bars on some of the windows.


Those were decorative bars, not the type of bars that you see in the rougher neighborhoods!!!


----------



## CeeJay

redney said:


> Tons of celebs in Montecito, in addition to Oprah.


Yes, indeed .. it's beautiful up in those parts!  I almost worked for a company based in Santa Barbara, but there was no way I could afford a nice house given the "paltry" salary they were offering .. certainly not $8m - HA!


----------



## redney

CeeJay said:


> Yes, indeed .. it's beautiful up in those parts!  I almost worked for a company based in Santa Barbara, but there was no way I could afford a nice house given the "paltry" salary they were offering .. certainly not $8m - HA!


I lived and worked in SB years ago. Homes were pricey, but nothing like recent years, but doable. It was an amazing place to live. If it weren't for CA taxes I fled over 15 years ago, I'd move back there in a heartbeat!


----------



## lalame

No doubt they bought the property in a trust, but I think the house will be revealed soon enough. If people can even identify homes they are crashing, they won't keep this secret for long. If they even want it to be a secret.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> Tons of celebs in Montecito, in addition to Oprah.



If I lived there I’d go up the street and visit Patrick Stewart. That’s the kind of celebrity I’m impressed by.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> No doubt they bought the property in a trust, but I think the house will be revealed soon enough. If people can even identify homes they are crashing, *they won't keep this secret for long.* If they even want it to be a secret.



the wife can't keep a secret, we all know this.  she can find a drone in the sky and smile at it, come on... they want people to talk and be interested

any reputation-good or bad is better than none, but can you make money from it?  with a tiny bit of dignity? that ship has long sailed for the wife


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> No doubt they bought the property in a trust, but I think the house will be revealed soon enough. If people can even identify homes they are crashing, they won't keep this secret for long. If they even want it to be a secret.



I don’t think they do. It doesn’t keep up the victim narrative if they aren’t constantly being harassed.


----------



## marietouchet

Another bit from the Scoobie book ...

MM was indeed offended by Pss Michael's blackamoor brooch.
OK, but Pss Michael did apologize publicly and that was a while ago ... a petty thing to bring up in the book ... I woulda accepted the apology and moved on ... forgiveness is not MM's strong suit


----------



## redney

marietouchet said:


> Another bit from the Scoobie book ...
> 
> MM was indeed offended by Pss Michael's blackamoor brooch.
> OK, but Pss Michael did apologize publicly and that was a while ago ... a petty thing to bring up in the book ... I woulda accepted the apology and moved on ... forgiveness is not MM's strong suit


Including it in the book is additional fuel for MM's victim storyline. Although in Princess Michael's case, she has been proven to be racist so it is a legit (IMO) complaint.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Another bit from the Scoobie book ...
> 
> MM was indeed offended by Pss Michael's blackamoor brooch.
> OK, but Pss Michael did apologize publicly and that was a while ago ... a petty thing to bring up in the book ... I woulda accepted the apology and moved on ... forgiveness is not MM's strong suit



I'd be shocked if she noticed the brooch or knew what it was at the time it was worn. She was retroactively offended when she found out from the media that she should be offended. Most people don't seem to like Michael so she's an easy target to bash.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The brooch is one of the only valid complaints she has! Of course it’s in the book


----------



## csshopper

I'm guessing at least part of Charles' generosity is out of love for his grandson. They claim to want this to be their "forever" home, perhaps it was put in Trust for Archie, even when (not if) they do move on it will have been a good investment. Montecito is a lovely area, unfortunately not immune to some of the staggering wild fires we are increasingly experiencing in this state, but they will have factored that in and may plan to live elsewhere during the worst months of the year. Having been a home occupied by them it will have a certain cachet so resale would likely never be a problem. They owe Charles big time IMO, and not only in financial terms. He should be wary, Meagan considers him a "second father" and we know how she's treated the first one!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Another bit from the Scoobie book ...
> 
> MM was indeed offended by Pss Michael's blackamoor brooch.
> OK, but Pss Michael did apologize publicly and that was a while ago ... a petty thing to bring up in the book ... I woulda accepted the apology and moved on ... forgiveness is not MM's strong suit



Marie Christine von Reibnitz is a controversial figure and her intentions can be questionable. However, it looks like MM is trying to find whatever she can to play the victim card.

The Blackamoor brooches depict a Venetian Prince, comparable to the designs carved onto Cameo brooches, which are portraits of important dignitaries (ex: Roman emperor Augustus). These are pieces of jewelry that shouldn't be linked to racism.


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> the wife can't keep a secret, we all know this.  she can find a drone in the sky and smile at it, come on... they want people to talk and be interested
> 
> any reputation-good or bad is better than none, but can you make money from it?  with a tiny bit of dignity? that ship has long sailed for the wife



At this point why even single her out... he's proven to be just as shameless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *I'd be shocked if she noticed the brooch or knew what it was at the time it was worn.* *She was retroactively offended when she found out from the media that she should be offended.* Most people don't seem to like Michael so she's an easy target to bash.



While I don't believe for a minute Princess Michael didn't know exactly what she was doing I agree with the boldened part.

Also, I had to look up the apology, never knew PM was married before! I can't even find one decent husband, and those divorced ladies snag princes.


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> Including it in the book is additional fuel for MM's victim storyline. Although in Princess Michael's case, she has been proven to be racist so it is a legit (IMO) complaint.


Agree - story needed for victim storyline


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Blackamoor brooches depict a Venetian Prince, comparable to the designs carved onto Cameo brooches, which are portraits of important dignitaries (ex: Roman emperor Augustus). These are pieces of jewelry that shouldn't be linked racism.



While I can appreciate the workmanship as well at the cultural background, I still feel if something is controversial and offends people it's best to abstain. Collect them, let them spark joy in a showcase, but don't wear them out, not even to meet MM.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Marie Christine von Reibnitz is a controversial figure and her intentions can be questionable. However, it looks like MM is trying to find whatever she can to play the victim card.
> 
> The Blackamoor brooches depict a Venetian Prince, comparable to the designs carved onto Cameo brooches, which are portraits of important dignitaries (ex: Roman emperor Augustus). These are pieces of jewelry that shouldn't be linked racism.



Yes, good point the dark facial color can be due to the stone.  It is a carved depiction, so has to be a soft stone, shell - for cameos, onyx - was used in Rome, and volcanic rock - used for lava cameos

I have a lava cameo bracelet and the figures all look Grecian, they are in various shades of reds, browns, yellows. The figures all look like Greco-Roman white marble status goddesses but in dark colors of lava stone


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> The brooch is one of the only valid complaints she has! Of course it’s in the book


I would say M. Christine von Reibnitz's intention was probably the only valid reason.


----------



## gracekelly

According to a Brit writer, Kate really did cry.  A poster on another site says that the entire birthday in Montecito was nothing more than a tease and a hint that they were already there.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh, the Daily Mail is having a field day at their expense. They must fight over who gets to write about the Sussexes.

*Welcome to Wokeville: Right-on A-list neighbours, top notch vegan restaurants, and yoga classes in a pink salt cave. Harry and Meghan have bought new home in exclusive California enclave round the corner from Oprah...  and Windsor it ain't!*
A slice of paradise for the wealthy and woke; where you can ‘absorb micro minerals’ by doing yoga in a pink salt cave, buy a silk kaftan from Gwynnie then pop out for a camomile brûlée.

Welcome to Santa Barbara, the new home of Harry and Meghan and celebrity pals Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Gwyneth Paltrow.

Surely we should have suspected this might be the ultimate destination for our disgruntled prince and his ‘California girl’ bride.

Known as the ‘America Riviera’, Santa Barbara has its own airport, a Polo club where Prince William has played and hums with deep pocketed humanitarians, right-on and rich. So what lies in store for Harry and Meghan? Alison Boshoff reports...

CELEBRITY PADS

A source says of the royal move to Montecito, Santa Barbara: ‘They intend to put down roots in this house and the quiet community, which has considerable privacy.’

They will be among friends who share those priorities. The sense of privacy was also a massive draw for Meghan’s friend and confidante Oprah Winfrey, who until yesterday was its most famous resident.

She has expanded her ocean-side Promised Land estate in Montecito from 42 acres to 70 and recently bought a house from actor Jeff Bridges because it neighboured hers.

Her 23,000-square-foot mansion has a library, 14 bathrooms, rose gardens and fountains in her landscaped grounds. There is also an outdoor theatre and man-made fishing lake.

Another local friend is Ellen DeGeneres, the chat show host who is going through a scandal over her alleged ‘mean’ behaviour on her daytime chat show.

She revealed recently that she had visited the Sussexes soon after Archie’s birth, had fed him and described Harry and Meghan as the ‘cutest couple.’ She and Meghan text each other.

Her main home with actress Portia de Rossi is in Beverly Hills, but she has four houses in Santa Barbara. The most intriguing, bought in January for £2.7million, are a pair of 18th-century half-timbered houses which used to sit in Surrey.

They were dismantled and shipped at huge expense by a previous owner and are now in a wooded 1.3 acre plot in Montecito, connected by a glass orangerie.

PLAYMATES

There will be plenty of little friends for baby Archie, now 15 months.

Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher have daughter Wyatt, five, and son Dimitri, three. Natalie Portman’s children, Aleph and Amalia, are nine and three.

An hour down the coast in Malibu is Leo Hess. He is the son of Meghan’s best pal, the designer Misha Nonoo, and was born in March, so is less than a year younger than Archie.

HOBBIES FOR HIM AND HER

What could be more indicative of the solid silver character of the area than the fact it has a polo club?

Harry will be able to take part in the sport, which he has long loved, at the Santa Barbara Polo & Racquet Club. Prince William played at a charity event here in 2011 while on a tour of California.

Yoga and wellness are huge in the area. Meghan and Harry may enjoy the gong baths at Salt, a spa situated in a man-made underground salt-lined cave, with crystals flown in from the Himalayas.

Gwyneth Paltrow’s website Goop calls it: ‘A total new age freak-out in the best possible way.’

FEASTS FOR FOODIES

Santa Barbara has a reputation as a food lover’s paradise. Celebs flock to Lucky’s Steakhouse. More modish food is offered at the vegan Mesa Verde, where a Wheatberry brunch bowl, of black lentils, harisa, radishes and za’atar, will cost you $15 (£11).

Actor Sir Patrick Stewart is a fan of La Super Rica Taqueria – a Mexican restaurant – saying: ‘I will not queue – ever. Except here.’ The area is very popular for wine touring and Meghan, who named her blog the Tig after an Italian wine Tignanello, is sure to be in heaven.

SUPER SCHOOLS

Top schools in Montecito include Laguna Blanca, a private co-ed day school that says it ‘celebrates the worth of the individual’. The pupil teacher ratio is 6:1. Another option for Archie would be the exclusive Crane County School which was founded in 1928. Both cost about £20,000 a year.










						ALISON BOSHOFF: Harry and Meghan make Santa Barbara their new home
					

ALISON BOSHOFF: Welcome to Santa Barbara, the new home of Harry and Meghan and celebrity pals Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Gwyneth Paltrow.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh, the Daily Mail is having a field day at their expense. They must fight over who gets to write about the Sussexes.
> 
> *Welcome to Wokeville: Right-on A-list neighbours, top notch vegan restaurants, and yoga classes in a pink salt cave. Harry and Meghan have bought new home in exclusive California enclave round the corner from Oprah...  and Windsor it ain't!*
> A slice of paradise for the wealthy and woke; where you can ‘absorb micro minerals’ by doing yoga in a pink salt cave, buy a silk kaftan from Gwynnie then pop out for a camomile brûlée.
> 
> Welcome to Santa Barbara, the new home of Harry and Meghan and celebrity pals Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Gwyneth Paltrow.
> 
> Surely we should have suspected this might be the ultimate destination for our disgruntled prince and his ‘California girl’ bride.
> 
> Known as the ‘America Riviera’, Santa Barbara has its own airport, a Polo club where Prince William has played and hums with deep pocketed humanitarians, right-on and rich. So what lies in store for Harry and Meghan? Alison Boshoff reports...
> 
> CELEBRITY PADS
> 
> A source says of the royal move to Montecito, Santa Barbara: ‘They intend to put down roots in this house and the quiet community, which has considerable privacy.’
> 
> They will be among friends who share those priorities. The sense of privacy was also a massive draw for Meghan’s friend and confidante Oprah Winfrey, who until yesterday was its most famous resident.
> 
> She has expanded her ocean-side Promised Land estate in Montecito from 42 acres to 70 and recently bought a house from actor Jeff Bridges because it neighboured hers.
> 
> Her 23,000-square-foot mansion has a library, 14 bathrooms, rose gardens and fountains in her landscaped grounds. There is also an outdoor theatre and man-made fishing lake.
> 
> Another local friend is Ellen DeGeneres, the chat show host who is going through a scandal over her alleged ‘mean’ behaviour on her daytime chat show.
> 
> She revealed recently that she had visited the Sussexes soon after Archie’s birth, had fed him and described Harry and Meghan as the ‘cutest couple.’ She and Meghan text each other.
> 
> Her main home with actress Portia de Rossi is in Beverly Hills, but she has four houses in Santa Barbara. The most intriguing, bought in January for £2.7million, are a pair of 18th-century half-timbered houses which used to sit in Surrey.
> 
> They were dismantled and shipped at huge expense by a previous owner and are now in a wooded 1.3 acre plot in Montecito, connected by a glass orangerie.
> 
> PLAYMATES
> 
> There will be plenty of little friends for baby Archie, now 15 months.
> 
> Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher have daughter Wyatt, five, and son Dimitri, three. Natalie Portman’s children, Aleph and Amalia, are nine and three.
> 
> An hour down the coast in Malibu is Leo Hess. He is the son of Meghan’s best pal, the designer Misha Nonoo, and was born in March, so is less than a year younger than Archie.
> 
> HOBBIES FOR HIM AND HER
> 
> What could be more indicative of the solid silver character of the area than the fact it has a polo club?
> 
> Harry will be able to take part in the sport, which he has long loved, at the Santa Barbara Polo & Racquet Club. Prince William played at a charity event here in 2011 while on a tour of California.
> 
> Yoga and wellness are huge in the area. Meghan and Harry may enjoy the gong baths at Salt, a spa situated in a man-made underground salt-lined cave, with crystals flown in from the Himalayas.
> 
> Gwyneth Paltrow’s website Goop calls it: ‘A total new age freak-out in the best possible way.’
> 
> FEASTS FOR FOODIES
> 
> Santa Barbara has a reputation as a food lover’s paradise. Celebs flock to Lucky’s Steakhouse. More modish food is offered at the vegan Mesa Verde, where a Wheatberry brunch bowl, of black lentils, harisa, radishes and za’atar, will cost you $15 (£11).
> 
> Actor Sir Patrick Stewart is a fan of La Super Rica Taqueria – a Mexican restaurant – saying: ‘I will not queue – ever. Except here.’ The area is very popular for wine touring and Meghan, who named her blog the Tig after an Italian wine Tignanello, is sure to be in heaven.
> 
> SUPER SCHOOLS
> 
> Top schools in Montecito include Laguna Blanca, a private co-ed day school that says it ‘celebrates the worth of the individual’. The pupil teacher ratio is 6:1. Another option for Archie would be the exclusive Crane County School which was founded in 1928. Both cost about £20,000 a year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ALISON BOSHOFF: Harry and Meghan make Santa Barbara their new home
> 
> 
> ALISON BOSHOFF: Welcome to Santa Barbara, the new home of Harry and Meghan and celebrity pals Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Gwyneth Paltrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


now will they be happy?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> now will they be happy?



For about five minutes.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> For about five minutes.


they're gonna need to find someone else to sue....their occupation/entertainment


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> now will they be happy?


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> At this point why even single her out... he's proven to be just as shameless.



Both are shameless, true.  Of the two, Harry doesn't seem to need as much attention, he already has it, he is the fallen one, the ex royal, again both are shameless.   Harry's publicity was consistent:  he's the idiot prince.  Since he has been with her, there is to me, always a narrative of Meghan (Not even Harry so much) against the world, jealous Kate, jealous haters, bad ex-friends, bad-ex nanny, bad gossip publishers (Seriously now...), bad parents(hers), bad royals(no one defended her enough)  She makes me appreciate Kim Kardashian, it's that bad.   He goes along with her in her narrative (to me) so there is no sparing him, he seems more of a puppet.


----------



## Lodpah

People are dying, losing jobs, economy going down and these two flaunt their wealth. People will get more disgusted and this wii backfire on them. Sure people can buy whatever they want but I would think a little sensitivity and discretion is in order, especially nowadays.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> People are dying, losing jobs, economy going down and these two flaunt their wealth. People will get more disgusted and this wii backfire on them. Sure people can buy whatever they want but I would think a little sensitivity and discretion is in order, especially nowadays.


strongly agree with this
There will always be the stans who love them no matter what but yes, they should show some sensitivity and discretion for sure


----------



## Lounorada

csshopper said:


> Lounorada-
> THANKS, beyond an emoji one, for the great pictures you post. You make me laugh with each one!


My pleasure @csshopper! Glad the gifs make you laugh


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> I'm guessing at least part of Charles' generosity is out of love for his grandson. They claim to want this to be their "forever" home, perhaps it was put in Trust for Archie, even when (not if) they do move on it will have been a good investment. Montecito is a lovely area, unfortunately not immune to some of the staggering wild fires we are increasingly experiencing in this state, but they will have factored that in and may plan to live elsewhere during the worst months of the year. Having been a home occupied by them it will have a certain cachet so resale would likely never be a problem. They owe Charles big time IMO, and not only in financial terms. He should be wary, Meagan considers him a "second father" and we know how she's treated the first one!


.. and mudslides, post the fires .. NO BUENO!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I'd be shocked if she noticed the brooch or knew what it was at the time it was worn. She was retroactively offended when she found out from the media that she should be offended. Most people don't seem to like Michael so she's an easy target to bash.


You beat me to it!!!  While she studied "the Arts" (Theatre) and "International Relations", I doubt someone like her would even know about a Blackamoor brooch .. I suppose I could be wrong, but it appeared that the "offense" was post (after she saw others commenting on it).  Agreed on Michael though; uggh ..


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Yes, good point the dark facial color can be due to the stone.  It is a carved depiction, so has to be a soft stone, shell - for cameos, onyx - was used in Rome, and volcanic rock - used for lava cameos
> 
> I have a lava cameo bracelet and the figures all look Grecian, they are in various shades of reds, browns, yellows. The figures all look like Greco-Roman white marble status goddesses but in dark colors of lava stone


Same here (_re: Lava Cameo Bracelet_); it was actually my Grandmother's (_she was Italian_), so it does have a special meaning to me. As a Jewelry aficionado (I also design & make jewelry) in addition to being an armchair Ancient Roman studies enthusiast, I also collect ancient Coins and other artifacts that I can use.  I am SO lucky that my husband, who is a former Egyptologist, has connections to many of the European museums, such that when they deaccession some pieces, he gets the call and I get first 'dibs'!  I have some amazing beads from the ancient Roman times (Carnelian, Lapis, Amber, including Beads made from Marble!) .. that I just treasure!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> now will they be happy?


.. yes, and then SHUT-THE-F#CK-UP and quite "lecturing" us???  Seriously, how can they *NOT* see how hypocritical they are living in a huge house, a location like that, JCMH playing Polo at the club, etc.?????  Sometimes, I wish they would have a public speaking event (_obviously after COVID_) and I would be the audience member that would *CALL THEM OUT*!  Such BS these two ..


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> taxes and maintenance will cost plenty on a home like this.  can you imagine the water, power, landscaping, pool maintenance and CA property tax?  Not to mention the servants (not that they would have as many as Will and Kate of course)


I know she can afford it, but Oprah has 14 bathrooms, according to the article posted above. That's very excessive, IMO.  lol


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Both are shameless, true.  Of the two, Harry doesn't seem to need as much attention, he already has it, he is the fallen one, the ex royal, again both are shameless.   Harry's publicity was consistent:  he's the idiot prince.  Since he has been with her, there is to me, always a narrative of Meghan (Not even Harry so much) against the world, jealous Kate, jealous haters, bad ex-friends, bad-ex nanny, bad gossip publishers (Seriously now...), bad parents(hers), bad royals(no one defended her enough)  She makes me appreciate Kim Kardashian, it's that bad.   He goes along with her in her narrative (to me) so there is no sparing him, he seems more of a puppet.



I wonder if Harry's sensibilities have just changed over time... I can't reconcile all the decisions they've made, even his decision to give paid speeches about his darn mother, with the person who was so allergic to attention in the past.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> taxes and maintenance will cost plenty on a home like this.  can you imagine the water, power, landscaping, pool maintenance and CA property tax?  Not to mention the servants (not that they would have as many as Will and Kate of course)



To do all that while you know your family owns like 20 castles in the UK just sitting there... geez. Can't wait until they start talking about the importance of water conservation and waste.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I wonder if Harry's sensibilities have just changed over time... I can't reconcile all the decisions they've made, even his decision to give paid speeches about his darn mother, with the person who was so allergic to attention in the past.



He is married to the biggest change in his life. She is the dominant spouse and he is going along for the ride. Meghan knows best!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> While I can appreciate the workmanship as well at the cultural background, I still feel if something is controversial and offends people it's best to abstain. Collect them, let them spark joy in a showcase, but don't wear them out, not even to meet MM.


ITA.  The Swastika was originally an ancient religious symbol in Hinduism and Buddhism and Eurasia in general until Hitler slanted it, rotated it slightly, and basically made it a symbol of evil.  Most Hindus and Buddhists I know don't dare use it, especially in public, because of the association with the Nazis.  Why offend people on purpose?


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> I know she can afford it, but Oprah has 14 bathrooms, according to the article posted above. That's very excessive, IMO.  lol


LOL she has enough to not use the same bathroom for two weeks each.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is getting better and better, from their loyal Scobie-doo:

Finding Freedom author hits back at claims he spoke to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and insists *they only 'exchanged a few words at engagements' *despite book note saying they had 'spoken'*. 

The acknowledgement reads:* '*We have spoken with* close friends of Harry and Meghan, royal aides and palace staff (past and present), the charities and organizations they have built long-lasting relationships with and, *when appropriate, the couple themselves.' *









						Finding Freedom author hits back at claims he spoke to the Sussexes
					

Omid Scobie, who co-wrote Finding Freedom with Carolyn Durand, took to Twitter to clarify he had only exchanged a 'few words at engagements' rather than conduct a 'full interview'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Scoobie did speak to H&M , in an acknowledgement hidden at the back of the book , it states
Merci to Daily Mail for pointing this out

*‘We have spoken with close friends of Harry and Meghan, royal aides and palace staff (past and present), the charities and organisations they have built long-lasting relationships with and, when appropriate, the couple themselves' *

Sorry I was writing when the last post was made ...  duplicate info


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Jayne1 — 14 bathrooms??? now, I understand the toilet paper shortage 

@lalame, wonder if the BRF owns homes in the US.

So, now the area will be flooded with paps, we should see some photos within a week or two. Guessing in a few months this area will be too sedate and slow for the golden couple. They really do not wish to be ignored, lack of attention and drama will crush them.

Found this while google-ing:








						Montecito Neighborhood Guide — Susan J. Pate
					

WELCOME TO MONTECITO   Just east of Santa Barbara, Montecito’s eight square miles are flush with lavish estates, luxe compounds, and secluded manors. Affluent families and individuals—including a smattering of mega-celebrities like long-time resident Oprah Winfrey—call this seaside sanctum home. Bui




					www.montecitolifestyle.com
				



*WELCOME TO MONTECITO*
Just east of Santa Barbara, Montecito’s eight square miles are flush with lavish estates, luxe compounds, and secluded manors. Affluent families and individuals—including a smattering of mega-celebrities like long-time resident Oprah Winfrey—call this seaside sanctum home. Built into the oak- and eucalyptus-laden foothills of the Santa Ynez mountains (Montecito means “little mountain” in Spanish), the peaceful town boasts several world-class resorts, top-of-the-line schools, country clubs, and a selection of high-end shops and restaurants.
*THE NEIGHBORS*
An older, well-heeled crowd of CEOs, entrepreneurs, and Hollywood stars, drawn to the neighborhood’s privacy and beauty.
*WHAT TO EXPECT*
An elite locale of understated elegance sans attitude, filled with quiet streets and gated estates.
*THE LIFESTYLE*
The town folk mix along beaches and two main streets, and it’s an unspoken rule that no one makes a fuss if a famous face is spotted.
*UNEXPECTED APPEAL*
There’s plenty of places to see and be seen, from the Biltmore’s Bella Vista restaurant to celeb-studded Butterfly beach.
*THE MARKET*
Considered the crème de la crème of Santa Barbara County real estate, even teardowns go for millions.
*YOU'LL FALL IN LOVE WITH*
Sunny days, ocean breezes, beautiful scenery, and the pleasant daily pursuit of the high life.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I know she can afford it, but Oprah has 14 bathrooms, according to the article posted above. That's very excessive, IMO.  lol



Well, they dared to upstage Oprah. TMZ has the scoop on H&M’s new house and it has 16 bathrooms and is actually worth $14.6 million.  Apparently they’ve already moved Doria into the guest house like she was the hired help or something.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Drop $14 Mil on Spectacular Montecito Estate
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have moved to Montecito, home of Oprah and many other celebs, and now we know which home they bought ... and it's insanely lavish.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> LOL she has enough to not use the same bathroom for two weeks each.


Maybe she has Crohn's?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Huh, wasn’t the story yesterday that TPs home was too big and not JCMH’s style?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Huh, wasn’t the story yesterday that TPs home was too big and not JCMH’s style?



The press must throw guesses out there and hope they will be right once in awhile.


----------



## Gimmethebag

It’s a lovely home but... how can they afford a $14M house when they need a payment plan to pay the £2M back for FrogCot?


----------



## Chanbal

I agree with William:

“*William thinks the book is their calculated way of controlling the narrative and that they took advantage of their entertainment contacts so they’d be painted in a favorable light,” the source says.*









						What Prince William Thinks of New 'Finding Freedom' Book About Royal Family
					

Prince William believes 'Finding Freedom' is an attempt to paint Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in a 'favorable light' — exclusive




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, today the $4mil house has turned into a $14mil.  Nah, nope, not believing this questionable reporting. Just more of the game-playing that we should expect from the grifters.  Guessing tomorrow’s story will be they are couch-surfing at O’s or Ellen’s. 

On the other hand, maybe they need the big spread so W&K and the kids can visit


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> *WELCOME TO MONTECITO*
> Just east of Santa Barbara, Montecito’s eight square miles are flush with lavish estates, luxe compounds, and secluded manors. Affluent families and individuals—including a smattering of mega-celebrities like long-time resident Oprah Winfrey—call this seaside sanctum home. Built into the oak- and eucalyptus-laden foothills of the Santa Ynez mountains (Montecito means “little mountain” in Spanish), the peaceful town boasts several world-class resorts, top-of-the-line schools, country clubs, and a selection of high-end shops and restaurants.
> *THE NEIGHBORS*
> An older, well-heeled crowd of CEOs, entrepreneurs, and Hollywood stars, drawn to the neighborhood’s privacy and beauty.
> *WHAT TO EXPECT*
> An elite locale of understated elegance sans attitude, filled with quiet streets and gated estates.
> *THE LIFESTYLE*
> The town folk mix along beaches and two main streets, and it’s an unspoken rule that no one makes a fuss if a famous face is spotted.
> *UNEXPECTED APPEAL*
> There’s plenty of places to see and be seen, from the Biltmore’s Bella Vista restaurant to celeb-studded Butterfly beach.
> *THE MARKET*
> Considered the crème de la crème of Santa Barbara County real estate, even teardowns go for millions.
> *YOU'LL FALL IN LOVE WITH*
> Sunny days, ocean breezes, beautiful scenery, and the pleasant daily pursuit of the high life.



Now I know why they moved there!  Sounds like there are all sorts of really rich neighbors and other people they can sue for whatever reason!  Little do the Montecito residents know--they all have targets on their backs. Next time they answer the doorbell, it'll be a guy serving papers courtesy of H&M. Watch out Deep Pockets Oprah!


----------



## CarryOn2020

But, but, it backfired spectacularly.  
The staged multi-million dollar wedding showed us how they took advantage of those contacts. Doubtful those people will get duped again.  Wonder if Beyoncé has called recently? The Clooneys? Disney?  



Chanbal said:


> I agree with William:
> 
> “*William thinks the book is their calculated way of controlling the narrative and that they took advantage of their entertainment contacts so they’d be painted in a favorable light,” the source says.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Prince William Thinks of New 'Finding Freedom' Book About Royal Family
> 
> 
> Prince William believes 'Finding Freedom' is an attempt to paint Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in a 'favorable light' — exclusive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> But, but, it backfired spectacularly.
> The staged multi-million dollar wedding showed us how they took advantage of those contacts. Doubtful those people will get duped again.  Wonder if Beyoncé has called recently? The Clooneys? Disney?


They will keep looking for other targets. I read somewhere that Adele was MM new bff.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Well, they dared to upstage Oprah. TMZ has the scoop on H&M’s new house and it has 16 bathrooms and is actually worth $14.6 million.


Once again, the potential environmental impact of such an unnecessarily large home doesn't apply to Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Once again, the *potential environmental impact of such an unnecessarily large home doesn't apply to Harry.*



Very good point. Think of the AC costs, travel back and forth to LA. This will be a short term deal. Guessing they are just renters.
This house looks like a monstrosity, for 3 people and maybe Doria. She had her own place at one point. Did she sell it?
How long before the fences go up? DM managed to get a very nice photo.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
					

The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*The Sussexes bought the 18,000-square-foot home for $14,650,000 on June 18*
*The property in upscale Montecito features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms*
*The estate also includes a game room, gym, tennis courts, tea house and more*
* The mansion was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25M in 2009*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very good point. Think of the AC costs, travel back and forth to LA. This will be a short term deal. Guessing they are just renters.
> This house looks like a monstrosity, for 3 people and maybe Doria. She had her own place at one point. Did she sell it?
> How long before the fences go up? DM managed to get a very nice photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Sussexes bought the 18,000-square-foot home for $14,650,000 on June 18*
> *The property in upscale Montecito features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms*
> *The estate also includes a game room, gym, tennis courts, tea house and more*
> * The mansion was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25M in 2009*



Wow previous sellers took a real haircut on that sale. LOST more than half its value over a 10 year period? Sheesh. It seems beautiful but yeah pretty wasteful. I don't begrudge them for having an extravagant mansion but really, shut up about the green lecturing.


----------



## Jktgal

16 bathrooms?? And JCMH thought she just needed bushes...

If they split, half whatever property is hers so it would make sense to go big...


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> Another bit from the Scoobie book ...
> 
> MM was indeed offended by Pss Michael's blackamoor brooch.
> OK, but Pss Michael did apologize publicly and that was a while ago ... a petty thing to bring up in the book ... I woulda accepted the apology and moved on ... forgiveness is not MM's strong suit


If you read Princess Michael's apology, you will know that it wasn't a real apology. She was sorry for the offence caused but she wasn't sorry that she wore the pin. Same (non-)apology Harry gave for wearing the Nazi uniform. 



redney said:


> Including it in the book is additional fuel for MM's victim storyline. Although in Princess Michael's case, *she has been proven to be racist so it is a legit (IMO) complaint.*


Yep!


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> While I can appreciate the workmanship as well at the cultural background, I still feel if something is controversial and offends people it's best to abstain. Collect them, let them spark joy in a showcase, but don't wear them out, not even to meet MM.


Exactly! The object itself isn't racist but wearing it on that occasion the intention was a racist one.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very good point. Think of the AC costs, travel back and forth to LA. This will be a short term deal. Guessing they are just renters.
> This house looks like a monstrosity, for 3 people and maybe Doria. She had her own place at one point. Did she sell it?
> How long before the fences go up? DM managed to get a very nice photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Sussexes bought the 18,000-square-foot home for $14,650,000 on June 18*
> *The property in upscale Montecito features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms*
> *The estate also includes a game room, gym, tennis courts, tea house and more*
> * The mansion was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25M in 2009*



what's a tea house?


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very good point. Think of the AC costs, travel back and forth to LA. This will be a short term deal. Guessing they are just renters.
> This house looks like a monstrosity, for 3 people and maybe Doria. She had her own place at one point. Did she sell it?
> How long before the fences go up? DM managed to get a very nice photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Sussexes bought the 18,000-square-foot home for $14,650,000 on June 18*
> *The property in upscale Montecito features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms*
> *The estate also includes a game room, gym, tennis courts, tea house and more*
> * The mansion was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25M in 2009*



Yet the cost to taxpayers to renovate the Frogmore Cottage is still NOT repaid! SMH! This is quite frankly disgusting!


----------



## Chagall

Well if they were into one-upping they beat Will and Kate’s townhouse. Sheer greed and execessive opulance. What did they do to earn this property. They don’t belong there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Well, they dared to upstage Oprah. TMZ has the scoop on H&M’s new house and it has 16 bathrooms and is actually worth $14.6 million.  Apparently they’ve already moved Doria into the guest house like she was the hired help or something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Drop $14 Mil on Spectacular Montecito Estate
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have moved to Montecito, home of Oprah and many other celebs, and now we know which home they bought ... and it's insanely lavish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



If this is true, I really wonder WTH is wrong with Charles. Not only a multi-million dollar home, but a multi-million dollar home in the 8 digits, WTF.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If this is true, I really wonder WTH is wrong with Charles. Not only a multi-million dollar home, but a multi-million dollar home in the 8 digits, WTF.



I think PC thinks it will placate them 

but those 2 will never stop moaning. 

Like I said before it's The Fisherman and the Fish story. Never, ever, ever satisfied.


----------



## maryg1

To our UK members: how has been this news treated by media over there?
I bet many people will be livid hearing that PC contributed buying this mansion, while they still have to repay for Frogmore, and when other member of the RF settle in the palaces that are available, without buying new. Oh, and let’s not forget there is still a pandemic going on and recession knocking at the door.


----------



## maryg1

Forgot to add: she has finally reached what she wanted, being among the rich and famous.


----------



## Grande Latte

Hahaha. Fun read. Check out the photos.
https://qr.ae/pN2Gph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Man he was so drunk in those pics.


----------



## Jktgal

maryg1 said:


> To our UK members: how has been this news treated by media over there?
> I bet many people will be livid hearing that PC contributed buying this mansion, while they still have to repay for Frogmore, and when other member of the RF settle in the palaces that are available, without buying new. Oh, and let’s not forget there is still a pandemic going on and recession knocking at the door.



Recession is there already, with the UK experiencing the largest economic contraction in Europe, GDP down by 20%. This might be an investment move if they have got excess cash. If the monarchy doesn't survive Covid, it's a way to park some asset overseas.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very good point. Think of the AC costs, travel back and forth to LA. This will be a short term deal. Guessing they are just renters.
> This house looks like a monstrosity, for 3 people and maybe Doria. She had her own place at one point. Did she sell it?
> How long before the fences go up? DM managed to get a very nice photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Sussexes bought the 18,000-square-foot home for $14,650,000 on June 18*
> *The property in upscale Montecito features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms*
> *The estate also includes a game room, gym, tennis courts, tea house and more*
> * The mansion was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25M in 2009*


do we know if this is all true?  this can't be good for their rep IMO.
Doria is acting as nanny?  I doubt that.
Again, I couldn't finish reading it.  makes me sick


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

maryg1 said:


> To our UK members: how has been this news treated by media over there?
> I bet many people will be livid hearing that PC contributed buying this mansion, while they still have to repay for Frogmore, and when other member of the RF settle in the palaces that are available, without buying new. Oh, and let’s not forget there is still a pandemic going on and recession knocking at the door.


This mornings London Times had a 2 line blurb about the house purchase, no cost stated - all it said was they bought house in Santa Barbara. Source of funds not stated. Typical Times stuff, just the facts
The Times has had vague stuff about a possibility in reduced income for the BRF from the government, vague, usually in the political news, not the royal news section
The Daily Mail had a new article today  - beyond what we knew yesterday - about the cost, mortgage - that is the eye opener article 

And DUHHHH - takes me a while , just dawned on me, the disclosure of the house purchase was timed to coincide with the well spring of good publicity brought on by the Omid book, yup they have good PR folks


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> This mornings London Times had a 2 line blurb about the house purchase, no cost stated - all it said was they bought house in Santa Barbara. Source of funds not stated. Typical Times stuff, just the facts


Sorry to be off topic but what is London Times? There are The Times and Sunday Times. I have never heard of London Times.


----------



## chicinthecity777

The main stream media I frequent, e.g. BBC, I have not read anything about it. My info on them comes from this thread and the links to dailymail...


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> I agree with William:
> 
> “*William thinks the book is their calculated way of controlling the narrative and that they took advantage of their entertainment contacts so they’d be painted in a favorable light,” the source says.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Prince William Thinks of New 'Finding Freedom' Book About Royal Family
> 
> 
> Prince William believes 'Finding Freedom' is an attempt to paint Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in a 'favorable light' — exclusive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


Hmm.  I’m surprised William even acknowledged the book.  I wish he hadn’t, or maybe this is just someone saying that he said something.

in any case I think the best response from the RF about this book is no response.


----------



## Annawakes

gelbergirl said:


> what's a tea house?


I think it is a Japanese tea house, where traditional tea ceremonies can be conducted.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry to be off topic but what is London Times? There are The Times and Sunday Times. I have never heard of London Times.


IMHO, the London Time is the POSH upper crust respected newspaper while the DM is a tabloid / gossipy stuff
London Times is comparable to the NY Times or Wall Street Journal


----------



## elvisfan4life

maryg1 said:


> To our UK members: how has been this news treated by media over there?
> I bet many people will be livid hearing that PC contributed buying this mansion, while they still have to repay for Frogmore, and when other member of the RF settle in the palaces that are available, without buying new. Oh, and let’s not forget there is still a pandemic going on and recession knocking at the door.


No one remotely gives a damn -we haven't missed her.and there is little media coverage at all except in sleazy rags no one buys anymore- we are struggling to.cope with the worst death rate in the world.from the pandemic and just hope she keeps away


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> Recession is there already, with the UK experiencing the largest economic contraction in Europe, GDP down by 20%. This might be an investment move if they have got excess cash. If the monarchy doesn't survive Covid, it's a way to park some asset overseas.



Doesn't sound much of an asset if it went > millions for the last owners. 

But I take your point, except the BRF have millions already abroad


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> IMHO, the London Time is the POSH upper crust respected newspaper while the DM is a tabloid / gossipy stuff
> London Times is comparable to the NY Times or Wall Street Journal


It is just called the Times not the London times it is a national paper


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> IMHO, the London Time is the POSH upper crust respected newspaper while the DM is a tabloid / gossipy stuff
> London Times is comparable to the NY Times or Wall Street Journal


There is no such a thing as London Times. It's called The Times, or The Sunday Times.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone know if they bought the mansion from the same Russian billionaire who lent them the mansion in Canada last year? If it is indeed the same guy he gave them a great deal and they must have quite a cozy relationship with him. Intriguing...


_"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle *bought their new California mansion from a Russian businessman *with a $9.5million mortgage after the price was knocked down by more than $10million, DailyMail.com can reveal.

The couple bought the sprawling nine-bedroom and 16-bathroom mansion in upscale Montecito for $14.65million on June 18, making them neighbors with celebs Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres.  

The 14,563-square-foot home, known as 'The Chateau', sits on 5.4 acres of land and immaculately clipped hedges border the estate's stone-pillared entry gates."_


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, I found the answer. It was a different Russian billionaire.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I found the answer. It was a different Russian billionaire.


Still, interesting.  Wonder why those two seem to be drawn to business dealings with Russian billionaires.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Now I know why they moved there!  Sounds like there are all sorts of really rich neighbors and other people they can sue for whatever reason!  Little do the Montecito residents know--they all have targets on their backs. Next time they answer the doorbell, it'll be a guy serving papers courtesy of H&M. Watch out Deep Pockets Oprah!



You are forgetting all those neighbors as donors to their Arch**** Foundation!



CarryOn2020 said:


> Very good point. Think of the AC costs, travel back and forth to LA. This will be a short term deal. Guessing they are just renters.
> This house looks like a monstrosity, for 3 people and maybe Doria. She had her own place at one point. Did she sell it?
> How long before the fences go up? DM managed to get a very nice photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The Sussexes bought the 18,000-square-foot home for $14,650,000 on June 18*
> *The property in upscale Montecito features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms*
> *The estate also includes a game room, gym, tennis courts, tea house and more*
> * The mansion was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25M in 2009*


"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle bought their new California mansion from a Russian businessman with *a $9.5million mortgage* after the price was knocked down by more than $10million, DailyMail.com can reveal."

Only the best for the very woke couple! Who is paying the mortgage?


----------



## marietouchet

elvisfan4life said:


> It is just called the Times not the London times it is a national paper


I like to use the older nickname London times to distinguish it from The NY Times and the LA Times. The NY Times certainly purports to do national news, not just regional
yes LT is a bit of an anachronism
and it is published daily not just on Sunday as in Sunday Times
Just as the Wall St Journal has a Saturday magazine - separate volume, the Times has a large number of ancillary volumes / editions all of which have their own names
but the key thing is that no one would call the Times a National Enquirer style tabloid, as one would for the Daily Mail, the Time is respected journalism
ps today’s edition has two extended articles about the sb house, but no details price, lot of stuff on the general location, mostly describing sb for the UK audiense, how it differs from LA, lots of words today, not much substance


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Jktgal said:


> Recession is there already, with the UK experiencing the largest economic contraction in Europe, GDP down by 20%. This might be an investment move if they have got excess cash. *If the monarchy doesn't survive Covid, it's a way to park some asset overseas.*


Park assets in the pockets of MM?? I would like to give more credit to the BRF, QE doesn't looks senile.


----------



## bag-mania

Emeline said:


> Still, interesting.  Wonder why those two seem to be drawn to business dealings with Russian billionaires.



It could be a coincidence, if you believe in coincidences. Both men have money and invest in property. They met Yuri Milner at that swanky Google billionaires beach meeting where all the rich folks got together to discuss what was best for the rest of the world. That shameless event was where Harry told us how we should be doing more for the environment. I don't know if H&M were acquainted with Sergey Grishin before buying the house.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

if the house was owned by a Russian investor and was sold at a greatly discounted price, wouldn't the IRS have some interest in the deal because it would largely decrease the cap gains tax?


----------



## youngster

I think Harry is going to be shocked at how expensive owning and maintaining a house actually is, let alone a sprawling 14,000 square foot mansion on substantial acreage in an area where they likely pay a premium for every service.  The maintenance, repairs, fire/hazard/earthquake insurance, utilities, and property taxes on that place is going to be crushingly expensive.  I think the DM doesn't realize that the property value will be reassessed to around the sales price of $14.7 million, now that ownership has changed hands, which is how it works in California.  $68,000 for property taxes on that place? Maybe the Russian got it down to that amount based on appeal, but it should be _a lot_ more than that. Minimum of around 1% so closer to $140,000 at least, once the property is reassessed. Could be a lot more too given that Montecito sustained so much fire and mudslide damage and needs to fix a host of infrastructure issues.

So, maintenance, repairs, fire insurance, earthquake insurance, groundskeeping/landscaping/pool, utilities, cleaning, housekeeping with probably a full time housekeeper, gardening crew, who all need to be paid, etc.  Add in property taxes of $140K plus $500K mortgage payments.  Harry is going to blow through that allowance from Charles'.  They'll need a million just to furnish that place too.  Doesn't even count security, the lawyers for all the lawsuits, and their accountant who has to be on speed dial at this point.

ETA:  The DM sidebar in their article estimated $1.1 million for maintenance, property taxes, staff, utilities.  They didn't appear to include insurance or earthquake insurance which will be hefty amounts.  Add in an estimate of $3.3 million for their private security.  So, $4.4 million per year total and that doesn't include food, clothing, travel, etc.  It seems a huge amount to ask Charles to fund each year and seems really unsustainable.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I would like to know who "guaranteed" that $9.5million mortgage!


marietouchet said:


> I like to use the older nickname London times to distinguish it from The NY Times and the LA Times. The NY Times certainly purports to do national news, not just regional
> yes LT is a bit of an anachronism
> and it is published daily not just on Sunday as in Sunday Times
> Just as the Wall St Journal has a Saturday magazine - separate volume, the Times has a large number of ancillary volumes / editions all of which have their own names
> but the key thing is that no one would call the Times a National Enquirer style tabloid, as one would for the Daily Mail, the Time is respected journalism
> ps today’s edition has two extended articles about the sb house, but no details price, lot of stuff on the general location, mostly describing sb for the UK audiense, how it differs from LA, lots of words today, not much substance


Nobody is disputing that The Times is a serious paper, e.g. not tabloid. But the point is The Time is not a regional newspaper therefore calling it London Time throw us Brits off.


----------



## youngster

Cavalier Girl said:


> if the house was owned by a Russian investor and was sold at a greatly discounted price, wouldn't the IRS have some interest in the deal because it would largely decrease the cap gains tax?



The house has lingered on the market off and on, it was listed in 2009 at $34.5 million but didn't sell, It was listed at $16.9 million this past January.  In that price range, it's not that much of a discount, nothing that would really raise eyebrows.  In that price range, houses can linger for years as there really is a limited pool of multi-millionaires or billionaires that can afford it.  

One real estate sale is unlikely to trigger any particular interest by the IRS unless they have this particular Russian or Harry on a watch list to pay extra attention to their tax returns when they come in.  If the Russian made substantial capital improvements to the place, he might have a substantial capital loss on the property, not a gain at all.


----------



## Chanbal

Grande Latte said:


> Hahaha. Fun read. Check out the photos.
> https://qr.ae/pN2Gph


This article made me feel sorry for H, he has become a puppet in the hands of MM.


----------



## rose60610

Do they get to pay their mortgage in rubles? Playing the foreign currency spreads?


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I think Harry is going to be shocked at how expensive owning and maintaining a house actually is, let alone a sprawling 14,000 square foot mansion on substantial acreage in an area where they likely pay a premium for every service.  The maintenance, repairs, fire/hazard/earthquake insurance, utilities, and property taxes on that place is going to be crushingly expensive.  I think the DM doesn't realize that the property value will be reassessed to around the sales price of $14.7 million, now that ownership has changed hands, which is how it works in California.  $68,000 for property taxes on that place? Maybe the Russian got it down to that amount based on appeal, but it should be _a lot_ more than that. Minimum of around 1% so closer to $140,000 at least, once the property is reassessed. Could be a lot more too given that Montecito sustained so much fire and mudslide damage and needs to fix a host of infrastructure issues.
> 
> So, maintenance, repairs, fire insurance, earthquake insurance, groundskeeping/landscaping/pool, utilities, cleaning, housekeeping with probably a full time housekeeper, gardening crew, who all need to be paid, etc.  Add in property taxes of $140K plus $500K mortgage payments.  Harry is going to blow through that allowance from Charles'.  They'll need a million just to furnish that place too.  Doesn't even count security, the lawyers for all the lawsuits, and their accountant who has to be on speed dial at this point.
> 
> ETA:  The DM sidebar in their article estimated $1.1 million for maintenance, property taxes, staff, utilities.  They didn't appear to include insurance or earthquake insurance which will be hefty amounts.  Add in an estimate of $3.3 million for their private security.  So, $4.4 million per year total and that doesn't include food, clothing, travel, etc.  It seems a huge amount to ask Charles to fund each year and seems really unsustainable.


But they will put offices in some of the 9 bedrooms and 16 bathrooms, so the house will become a giant business deduction lol
but they will still need to generate enough income to offset the deductions


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> But they will put offices in some of the 9 bedrooms and 16 bathrooms, so the house will become a giant business deduction lol
> but they will still need to generate enough income to offset the deductions


16 bathrooms....can you imagine cleaning that?  of course they will have staff but it will cost them big time.  again - will they be happy now?  or will they still find plenty to complain/sue about?   as the old saying goes - money does not buy happiness


----------



## Emeline

Chanbal said:


> This article made me feel sorry for H, he has become a puppet in the hands of MM.


I feel the same. 
And at some point I hope he figures something out. 

Her firm hand placed on his back is solely to manipulate him.  Anyplace, anywhere, anytime.

And once he realizes that, maybe he can begin to see unpleasant truth of what's really going on.  Because it's pretty obvious he's not the captain of Titanic ll.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> But they will put offices in some of the 9 bedrooms and 16 bathrooms, so the house will become a giant business deduction lol
> but they will still need to generate enough income to offset the deductions



For sure!  This is one deduction though that the IRS does look really carefully at!  The home office deduction!  They better have their documentation of use, hours spent, and everything done perfectly.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  The Swastika was originally an ancient religious symbol in Hinduism and Buddhism and Eurasia in general until Hitler slanted it, rotated it slightly, and basically made it a symbol of evil.  Most Hindus and Buddhists I know don't dare use it, especially in public, because of the association with the Nazis.  Why offend people on purpose?


In addition, it was used by man Southwestern Native American tribes .. most notably the Navajo!  To the Hopi, it represented the wandering Hopi clans and to the Navajo, it represented a Whirling Log which was used in their healing rituals.  So sad that they can no longer use the logo as well!


----------



## Chagall

Wow a huge mansion with all those bedrooms. I see she is housing Doria, who wasn’t around when she was growing up. Wonder how her dad is doing down in Mexico.


----------



## Annawakes

Is it weird that Doria is housed in the guest house though?  Surely they could give her a corner of the house with her own bedroom, sitting room, and 3-4 bathrooms?

seems a bit cold to stick her in the guest house?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Just for fun, as I sit here sipping coffee, I looked up the Santa Barbara County Tax Assessors Office to see what is included in a typical Annual Property Tax Bill. 

THIS IS NOT JCMH AND MM's BILL. It is a hypothetical annual Tax Bill to show all of the items included in owning a home in this County. 

Obviously they, or Charles, can afford it, but makes the point JCMH is probably totally clueless about how the "real" world functions. He probably will never see something like this, it will be handled by others. But, Harry, here you really are JCMH and will get no breaks. This, of course, is in addition to your Mortgage and your Utility Bills and OMG your insurance rates must be in the stratisphere, home, contents, location in a high risk area due to fires and mudslides, earthquake insurance, probably don't need flood insurance as you are too far above the tideline.... And then there is the personal Income Taxes to be paid as you venture forth to enlighten the rest of us on how to live sustainable, ecologically friendly lives.

Our schools, funded by these taxes, are in dire straits with huge losses due to the effects of COVID 19, so we really can use the $ you may generate. Beyond that contribution I think you are a dimless twit, more comatose than "woke," with a soul sucking narcissist in tow. Welcome to California.





__





						County of Santa Barbara Online - Taxes
					





					taxes.co.santa-barbara.ca.us


----------



## Emeline

Annawakes said:


> Is it weird that Doria is housed in the guest house though?  Surely they could give her a corner of the house with her own bedroom, sitting room, and 3-4 bathrooms?
> 
> seems a bit cold to stick her in the guest house?


A beloved grandmother would be given a nice suite in the home. 

She's working as a nanny.  Maybe guest house quarters give her a break away from her responsibilities.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> Just for fun, as I sit here sipping coffee, I looked up the Santa Barbara County Tax Assessors Office to see what is included in a typical Annual Property Tax Bill.
> 
> THIS IS NOT JCMH AND MM's BILL. It is a hypothetical annual Tax Bill to show all of the items included in owning a home in this County.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> County of Santa Barbara Online - Taxes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> taxes.co.santa-barbara.ca.us



Thanks for looking this up!  So, basically their property taxes should be around what I estimated, about 1% of assessed value so about $140,000 - $150,000 per year on their $14.75 million dollar "cozy home".  That's pretty hefty.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Our schools, funded by these taxes, are in dire straits with huge losses due to the effects of COVID 19, so we really can use the $ you may generate. Beyond that contribution I think you are a dimless twit, more comatose than "woke," with a soul sucking narcissist in tow. Welcome to California.





youngster said:


> Thanks for looking this up!  So, basically their property taxes should be around what I estimated, about 1% of assessed value so about $140,000 - $150,000 per year on their $14.75 million dollar "cozy home".  That's pretty hefty.



Property tax is about 1.25% purchase price in CA. Actually I think we are taking a big cut in property tax revenue with this purchase since the previous owner would've been paying the 1.25% on their purchase price of $25M and now we will just be getting 1.25% of $14M.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> do we know if this is all true?  this can't be good for their rep IMO.
> Doria is acting as nanny?  I doubt that.
> Again, I couldn't finish reading it.  makes me sick


These 2 seem so delusional, that *they *aren't going to view this as being bad for their "rep", know what I mean???  

Agreed about Doria though .. doesn't make any sense to me; she has a life and a house (supposedly a $6m house that MM bought for her - that was another rumor sometime back), but more importantly .. wasn't she teaching Yoga in LA?  Look, yes .. living in a house like that might be pretty nice, but Doria has always seemed to move to her own beat.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> These 2 seem so delusional, that *they *aren't going to view this as being bad for their "rep", know what I mean???
> 
> Agreed about Doria though .. doesn't make any sense to me; she has a life and a house (supposedly a $6m house that MM bought for her - that was another rumor sometime back), but more importantly .. wasn't she teaching Yoga in LA?  Look, yes .. living in a house like that might be pretty nice, but Doria has always seemed to move to her own beat.


yes, she seems to have a life
I do think that if she was going to say with them there's nothing wrong with a granny flat - a nice space of her own (even tho the main house is huge)


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Wow previous sellers took a real haircut on that sale. LOST more than half its value over a 10 year period? Sheesh. It seems beautiful but yeah pretty wasteful. I don't begrudge them for having an extravagant mansion but really, shut up about the green lecturing.


Speaking of green - according to the post above, "The estate has sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, tall Italian cypress trees, blooming lavender, century old olive trees, a tennis court, tea house, children's cottage and a pool" and if they keep everything beautifully green (as in watering) I'm hoping someone will call them out.

(Unless Santa Barbara doesn't have the drought problem that the rest of California has.)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...aid-14-7M-sprawling-Santa-Barbara-estate.html


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Property tax is about 1.25% purchase price in CA. Actually I think we are taking a big cut in property tax revenue with this purchase since the previous owner would've been paying the 1.25% on their purchase price of $25M and now we will just be getting 1.25% of $14M.



Where I live, when re-assessing after a sale, the local assessor keeps the value just under what the last sales price was, to avoid people appealing and saying "I paid XXX amount so you can't re-assess my property for more than XXX".  Still, at 1% - 1.25%, it's going to be around $150k - $175K.  It's a lot, no matter how it shakes out and they can only deduct up to $10,000 of it for federal purposes.  

Though as @marietouchet pointed out, they'll likely try to deduct a lot of expenses related to the house as business expenses.  But, it's not like they're using the 14,500 square feet to run a manufacturing facility. They are selling themselves as . . . whatever . . . I don't know . . . public speakers, writers, producers of movies/TV content, product endorsers, a lifestyle blog, a charity that has yet to get off the ground?  At most, they need his and her offices and some office space for a small number of employees and security.  Maybe they can justify 10 - 15% of their square footage as being used to operate a business, that's still about 1,500 - 2,000 square feet, so maybe 10 - 15% of certain house expenses would be deductible against any earned income from that business.  They aren't going to be able to deduct pool maintenance or tennis court maintenance though.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> Where I live, when re-assessing after a sale, the local assessor keeps the value just under what the last sales price was, to avoid people appealing and saying "I paid XXX amount so you can't re-assess my property for more than XXX".  Still, at 1% - 1.25%, it's going to be around $150k - $175K.  It's a lot, no matter how it shakes out and they can only deduct up to $10,000 of it for federal purposes.
> 
> Though as @marietouchet pointed out, they'll likely try to deduct a lot of expenses related to the house as business expenses.  But, it's not like they're using the 14,500 square feet to run a manufacturing facility. They are selling themselves as . . . whatever . . . I don't know . . . public speakers, writers, producers of movies/TV content, product endorsers, a lifestyle blog, a charity that has yet to get off the ground?  At most, they need his and her offices and some office space for a small number of employees and security.  Maybe they can justify 10 - 15% of their square footage as being used to operate a business, that's still about 1,500 - 2,000 square feet, so maybe 10 - 15% of certain house expenses would be deductible against any earned income from that business.  They aren't going to be able to deduct pool maintenance or tennis court maintenance though.


But if they invite Oprah over for a swim ? Lol


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of green - according to the post above, "The estate has sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, tall Italian cypress trees, blooming lavender, century old olive trees, a tennis court, tea house, children's cottage and a pool" and if they keep everything beautifully green (as in watering) I'm hoping someone will call them out.
> 
> (Unless Santa Barbara doesn't have the drought problem that the rest of California has.)
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...aid-14-7M-sprawling-Santa-Barbara-estate.html


I supposed they could have a well....the only people in our neighborhood who have green lawns are ones with wells.  If they don't have one, then they should have drought resistant plants....which it doesn't sound like they do.  maybe they can change it.  Uugh....I don't need to know


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> These 2 seem so delusional, that *they *aren't going to view this as being bad for their "rep", know what I mean???
> 
> Agreed about Doria though .. doesn't make any sense to me; she has a life and a house (supposedly a $6m house that MM bought for her - that was another rumor sometime back), but more importantly .. wasn't she teaching Yoga in LA?  Look, yes .. living in a house like that might be pretty nice, but Doria has always seemed to move to her own beat.


They must be counting with the Arch*** Foundation or speech engagements to afford such living arrangements. Unless, they are counting with the BRF to continue sponsoring their financial independence. The mother as a yoga teacher may not be able to finance their very woke lifestyle in the mansion of the 16 toilets.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Well, they dared to upstage Oprah. TMZ has the scoop on H&M’s new house and it has 16 bathrooms and is actually worth $14.6 million.  Apparently they’ve already moved Doria into the guest house like she was the hired help or something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Drop $14 Mil on Spectacular Montecito Estate
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have moved to Montecito, home of Oprah and many other celebs, and now we know which home they bought ... and it's insanely lavish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Maybe she'll Markle her own mother once she's no longer needed for childcare services?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she'll Markle her own mother once she's no longer needed for childcare services?


That would be very sad, but possible looking at her history...


----------



## Lodpah

500K mortgage? Is that a month? Wow!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she'll Markle her own mother once she's no longer needed for childcare services?



Wonder if they made her sign an NDA?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> 500K mortgage? Is that a month? Wow!


That s all ?


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> *Where I live, when re-assessing after a sale, the local assessor keeps the value just under what the last sales price was, to avoid people appealing and saying "I paid XXX amount so you can't re-assess my property for more than XXX". * Still, at 1% - 1.25%, it's going to be around $150k - $175K.  It's a lot, no matter how it shakes out and they can only deduct up to $10,000 of it for federal purposes.
> 
> Though as @marietouchet pointed out, they'll likely try to deduct a lot of expenses related to the house as business expenses.  But, it's not like they're using the 14,500 square feet to run a manufacturing facility. They are selling themselves as . . . whatever . . . I don't know . . . public speakers, writers, producers of movies/TV content, product endorsers, a lifestyle blog, a charity that has yet to get off the ground?  At most, they need his and her offices and some office space for a small number of employees and security.  Maybe they can justify 10 - 15% of their square footage as being used to operate a business, that's still about 1,500 - 2,000 square feet, so maybe 10 - 15% of certain house expenses would be deductible against any earned income from that business.  They aren't going to be able to deduct pool maintenance or tennis court maintenance though.



Not following this... in CA the sale price is the re-assessed price for property tax purposes, unless you ask for a re-assessment if your value drops after the sale. Are you saying that where you live, they use the PRIOR sale price? In this case it would be $25m?


----------



## youngster

Lodpah said:


> 500K mortgage? Is that a month? Wow!



No, that's per year.  They are likely paying about $40,000/month on their mortgage.  Still, its a lot of course.


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> Just for fun, as I sit here sipping coffee, I looked up the Santa Barbara County Tax Assessors Office to see what is included in a typical Annual Property Tax Bill.
> 
> THIS IS NOT JCMH AND MM's BILL. It is a hypothetical annual Tax Bill to show all of the items included in owning a home in this County.
> 
> Obviously they, or Charles, can afford it, but makes the point JCMH is probably totally clueless about how the "real" world functions. He probably will never see something like this, it will be handled by others. But, Harry, here you really are JCMH and will get no breaks. This, of course, is in addition to your Mortgage and your Utility Bills and OMG your insurance rates must be in the stratisphere, home, contents, location in a high risk area due to fires and mudslides, earthquake insurance, probably don't need flood insurance as you are too far above the tideline.... And then there is the personal Income Taxes to be paid as you venture forth to enlighten the rest of us on how to live sustainable, ecologically friendly lives.
> 
> Our schools, funded by these taxes, are in dire straits with huge losses due to the effects of COVID 19, so we really can use the $ you may generate. *Beyond that contribution I think you are a dimless twit, more comatose than "woke," with a soul sucking narcissist in tow. Welcome to California.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> County of Santa Barbara Online - Taxes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> taxes.co.santa-barbara.ca.us


Spot on.  Perfect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Y’all are amazing! You provide us with much more info than the ‘journalists’ give us. Hats off and kudos to you.  

If I were Doria, there is no way I would want H&M to have 24/7 access to me. A separate building would be a requirement, grandkids or no. 

Oprah is a billionaire, so they are not on her level. These expenses will eat up most of H’s money — perhaps that is what MM wants [makes him less attractive to gold diggers].  Although the house did come with a stripper pole, so maybe that is a new income stream for them.

Finally, if I paid that kind of money to live in a secluded area, I would not want a neighbor running a home business with constant in/out traffic traipsing through the neighborhood. The more people means the less privacy. They may not be too welcome after a few months.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Y’all are amazing! You provide us with much more info than the ‘journalists’ give us. Hats off and kudos to you.
> 
> If I were Doria, there is no way I would want H&M to have 24/7 access to me. A separate building would be a requirement, grandkids or no.
> 
> Oprah is a billionaire, so they are not on her level. These expenses will eat up most of H’s money — perhaps that is what MM wants [makes him less attractive to gold diggers].  Although the house did come with a stripper pole, so maybe that is a new income stream for them.
> 
> Finally, if I paid that kind of money to live in a secluded area, I would not want a neighbor running a home business with constant in/out traffic traipsing through the neighborhood. The more people means the less privacy. They may not be too welcome after a few months.


The whole thing about running a business in your home .. well?!?! .. that just raises that good 'ole Red Flag to the IRS, because there are very strict rules around that and then "trying" to take expenses (based on said business) off of your taxes .. I should know, been there done that.  The IRS just loves to pick on those who run a business from their home, and when they review your taxes .. it's with a nitpick!  I would NOT want to be an Accountant responsible for either of these 2 accounts .. what a nightmare!!!


----------



## Sol Ryan

CeeJay said:


> The whole thing about running a business in your home .. well?!?! .. that just raises that good 'ole Red Flag to the IRS, because there are very strict rules around that and then "trying" to take expenses (based on said business) off of your taxes .. I should know, been there done that.  The IRS just loves to pick on those who run a business from their home, and when they review your taxes .. it's with a nitpick!  I would NOT want to be an Accountant responsible for either of these 2 accounts .. what a nightmare!!!



On the other hand, probably would be fun to be the Auditor.... lol

I sort of feel bad making the joke.... but then I don’t... poor civil servants... I really do feel for them. :/


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> The whole thing about running a business in your home .. well?!?! .. that just raises that good 'ole Red Flag to the IRS, because there are very strict rules around that and then "trying" to take expenses (based on said business) off of your taxes .. I should know, been there done that.  The IRS just loves to pick on those who run a business from their home, and when they review your taxes .. it's with a nitpick!  I would NOT want to be an Accountant responsible for either of these 2 accounts .. what a nightmare!!!



Lol trust these two pay their legal and financial advisors handsomely, so most accountants can only aspire to land clients like this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe with Covid and most of us WFH, the friendly (haaaa) IRS has relaxed some of its enforcement. 
Stiil, if the billionaires complain, this obnoxious couple may find themselves in more troubling situations. Guessing more privacy lawsuits are on the horizon, along with more books that they absolutely never ever helped write, along with more calls to the paps to record their “spontaneous“ outings, ad infinitum. What a tiresome couple. 




CeeJay said:


> The whole thing about running a business in your home .. well?!?! .. that just raises that good 'ole Red Flag to the IRS, because there are very strict rules around that and then "trying" to take expenses (based on said business) off of your taxes .. I should know, been there done that.  The IRS just loves to pick on those who run a business from their home, and when they review your taxes .. it's with a nitpick!  I would NOT want to be an Accountant responsible for either of these 2 accounts .. what a nightmare!!!


----------



## bag-mania

I bet they are home right now waiting impatiently for "welcome to the neighborhood" invitations to come pouring in from the celebrities living around them. They can't wait to start schmoozing.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I bet they are home right now waiting impatiently for "welcome to the neighborhood" invitations to come pouring in from the celebrities living around them. They can't wait to start schmoozing.


I'm already baking welcome cookies.


----------



## bag-mania

Since it is a slow day I will share an Amazon review of their book. This one is from Amazon customer, Gail:

_1.0 out of 5 stars_ Such Nonsense.
Reviewed in the United States on August 11, 2020
Verified Purchase
This is the worst book ever. Obviously, Harry and Meghan wrote this book. I bought it out of curiosity. Sorry I wasted my money, but it made me aware of two middle aged people who have no understanding of struggling people today. They are eager for attention , but have nothing to offer. Feel bad for Prince Charles and Prince William that they will have these two parasites on their backs for life.


----------



## lulilu

sdkitty said:


> 16 bathrooms....can you imagine cleaning that?  of course they will have staff but it will cost them big time.  again - will they be happy now?  or will they still find plenty to complain/sue about?   as the old saying goes - money does not buy happiness



I sit here thinking where are all the bathrooms?  One en suite for each bedroom, one in pool house, one in gym, where do they put them all and when are they used?  Seems crazy.


----------



## lulilu

Has anyone seen the tabloid photos of MM's baby bump falling down?  IDK what to believe about that but it would certainly explain why she always had her hands under and above it, to keep it in place.  But why would she (really) have a fake belly?  To look more pregnant because she was thin?  I know the conspiracy theories re surrogacy, but it's very weird.


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> For sure!  This is one deduction though that the IRS does look really carefully at!  The home office deduction!  They better have their documentation of use, hours spent, and everything done perfectly.



My accountant said it’s not worth it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Doria’s jobs may have been affected by the pandemic.  Perhaps the home is a bargaining chip in the “exit package”.  Ex. If she agrees to certain terms, she can keep the house; if not, the house must be sold.  She’s never going to be successful enough to buy a house like that, or live amongst A-list celebs like that on her own.


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> I sit here thinking where are all the bathrooms?  One en suite for each bedroom, one in pool house, one in gym, where do they put them all and when are they used?  Seems crazy.


.. right? .. and heck, she could just pee on the lawn so that Harry can swoon all over her again!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> You are forgetting all those neighbors as donors to their Arch**** Foundation!
> 
> 
> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle bought their new California mansion from a Russian businessman with *a $9.5million mortgage* after the price was knocked down by more than $10million, DailyMail.com can reveal."
> 
> Only the best for the very woke couple! Who is paying the mortgage?


Daddy


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This article made me feel sorry for H, he has become a puppet in the hands of MM.


I don't.  How do you convince someone to marry you that easily?  I would hope most men would think she was acting like a stalker!  It was what, less than a year after meeting?  He's an idiot.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Is it weird that Doria is housed in the guest house though?  Surely they could give her a corner of the house with her own bedroom, sitting room, and 3-4 bathrooms?
> 
> seems a bit cold to stick her in the guest house?


Meghan doesn't seem the kind to be warm and fuzzy unless it suits her needs.


----------



## Jayne1

lulilu said:


> Has anyone seen the tabloid photos of MM's baby bump falling down?  IDK what to believe about that but it would certainly explain why she always had her hands under and above it, to keep it in place.  But why would she (really) have a fake belly?  To look more pregnant because she was thin?  I know the conspiracy theories re surrogacy, but it's very weird.


I've seen the photos. Her whole pregnancy was odd to me, but I'm in the minority.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> Wow a huge mansion with all those bedrooms. I see she is housing Doria, who wasn’t around when she was growing up. Wonder how her dad is doing down in Mexico.



Where was Doria when she was growing up?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I bet they are home right now waiting impatiently for "welcome to the neighborhood" invitations to come pouring in from the celebrities living around them. They can't wait to start schmoozing.


Meghan will be insulted if they just bring flowers or cookies.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Doria’s jobs may have been affected by the pandemic.  Perhaps the home is a bargaining chip in the “exit package”.  Ex. If she agrees to certain terms, she can keep the house; if not, the house must be sold.  She’s never going to be successful enough to buy a house like that, or live amongst A-list celebs like that on her own.


nor would she be successful enough to maintain a house like that.  they would have to give her big alimony, which in CA I don't think she'd normally be entitled to unless she was married for a long time.  but then again, she gave up her huge career


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I sit here thinking where are all the bathrooms?  One en suite for each bedroom, one in pool house, one in gym, where do they put them all and when are they used?  Seems crazy.


I think lots of bathrooms is pretty common with the wealthy these days.  when would they be used?  maybe when they have a party?


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Where was Doria when she was growing up?


That’s something I’ve wondered about more than once.  Something about Doria has seemed off from Day 1.  Controlled and aloof to the point of ... cold?  Or not.  Who knows?


----------



## scarlet555

lulilu said:


> Has anyone seen the tabloid photos of MM's baby bump falling down?  IDK what to believe about that but it would certainly explain why she always had her hands under and above it, to keep it in place.  But why would she (really) have a fake belly?  To look more pregnant because she was thin?  I know the conspiracy theories re surrogacy, but it's very weird.



Can you post the link?


----------



## Chagall

purseinsanity said:


> Where was Doria when she was growing up?


It was her dad who was around and did everything for her. Not sure where Doria was. Apparently nobody saw much of her. So why is it Doria that reaps the benefit of her daughters ‘success’.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> .. right? .. and heck, she could just pee on the lawn so that Harry can swoon all over her again!



Harry: "will you pee mine?" 

Truly a Hallmark worthy moment if there ever was one


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I sit here thinking where are all the bathrooms?  One en suite for each bedroom, one in pool house, one in gym, where do they put them all and when are they used?  Seems crazy.



The main house itself is around 14,550 sq. ft. Those bathrooms are spread out over an enormous area. Harry and Meghan won't have to walk 500 ft. every time they need to take a dump.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Here's an aerial shot of their new home (from the LA Times). Cozy little place, isn't it?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Since it is a slow day I will share an Amazon review of their book. This one is from Amazon customer, Gail:
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ Such Nonsense.
> Reviewed in the United States on August 11, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> This is the worst book ever. Obviously, Harry and Meghan wrote this book. I bought it out of curiosity. Sorry I wasted my money, but it made me aware of two middle aged people who have no understanding of struggling people today. They are eager for attention , but have nothing to offer. Feel bad for Prince Charles and Prince William that they will have these two parasites on their backs for life.



I wonder if she/he is a member of TPF 



lulilu said:


> I sit here thinking where are all the bathrooms?  One en suite for each bedroom, one in pool house, one in gym, where do they put them all and when are they used?  Seems crazy.



The Buckingham Palace has 78 bathrooms, MM may not be satisfied. 



Sophisticatted said:


> Doria’s jobs may have been affected by the pandemic.  *Perhaps the home is a bargaining chip in the “exit package”.  Ex. If she agrees to certain terms, she can keep the house; if not, the house must be sold.*  She’s never going to be successful enough to buy a house like that, or live amongst A-list celebs like that on her own.



I hope you are right and the BRF made them sign an 'exit package' contract.  



CeeJay said:


> .. right? .. and heck, she could just pee on the lawn so that Harry can swoon all over her again!


MM doesn't need to 'pee in the woods' anymore, H seems to be already in her pocket. 



purseinsanity said:


> I don't.  How do you convince someone to marry you that easily?  I would hope most men would think she was acting like a stalker!  It was what, less than a year after meeting?  He's an idiot.



He found his soulmate when MM peed in woods, would this answer any questions?


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> It was her dad who was around and did everything for her. Not sure where Doria was. Apparently nobody saw much of her. *So why is it Doria that reaps the benefit of her daughters ‘success’.*


She needs to display a family member at least (for her image). Doria has several advantages, she is alone while the father has other kids and grandkids. Just one family member to deal with. Doria seems to be a reserved woman, which is always a plus. The presence of Doria will remind the world that MM is mixed race. Keep in mind that many of us didn't know that she was mixed race until we saw the mother.


----------



## marietouchet

Chagall said:


> It was her dad who was around and did everything for her. Not sure where Doria was. Apparently nobody saw much of her. So why is it Doria that reaps the benefit of her daughters ‘success’.


If memory serves ... Parents divorced around age 6 or so. MM lived with D until teenage years when she moved to live with dad.
I concluded that MM, when she was a teenager and able to sort of decide for herself, MM made a request to live with dad.
I got that out of Wiki, cant swear my memories are exact, and the page may have been edited since then


----------



## marietouchet

1LV said:


> That’s something I’ve wondered about more than once.  Something about Doria has seemed off from Day 1.  Controlled and aloof to the point of ... cold?  Or not.  Who knows?


I give Doria a pass on this ... 
A quiet aloof relationship might be the best thing with difficult relatives, agree that we dont know


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Here's an aerial shot of their new home (from the LA Times). Cozy little place, isn't it?
> 
> View attachment 4817998


I’ve got to hand it to her.  The old girl - ahem, young mother/blushing bride - did good.  Not that it changes a thing.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> If memory serves ... Parents divorced around age 6 or so. MM lived with D until teenage years when she moved to live with dad.
> I concluded that MM, when she was a teenager and able to sort of decide for herself, made a request to live with dad.
> I got that out of Wiki, cant swear my memories are exact, and the p[age may have been edited since then


I would guess - and of course I don't know - that maybe she wanted to live with dad to be near the TV business....or maybe mom couldn't handle her


----------



## bag-mania

They are on good terms with only a very few friends and relatives, just Doria and the "protected from the lawsuit 5." I wonder why their fans never stop to consider the reason for that. Do they believe the whole world is persecuting poor Meghan and Harry?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are on good terms with only a very few friends and relatives, just Doria and the "protected from the lawsuit 5." I wonder why their fans never stop to consider the reason for that. Do they believe the whole world is persecuting poor Meghan and Harry?


well Yes


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well Yes



Morons


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Morons


good thing her fan has left this thread....she wouldn't have appreciated your characterization


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> good thing her fan has left this thread....she wouldn't have appreciated your characterization



I don't want to hurt feelings. I retract my "morons" statement and replace it with the kinder "bless their hearts."


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> good thing her fan has left this thread....she wouldn't have appreciated your characterization


From other posts around the forum, pretty sure this thread is still being read


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> From other posts around the forum, pretty sure this thread is still being read


I'm well aware


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> The main house itself is around 14,550 sq. ft. Those bathrooms are spread out over an enormous area. Harry and Meghan won't have to walk 500 ft. every time they need to take a dump.


You're killing me.  This is gold!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

TBH, the number of bathrooms isn't that wild for the amount of space... 14 bathrooms is basically one bathroom per bedroom (and remember the guest house is 2 bedrooms) plus the usual bathrooms you see in homes like living room, kitchen, basement, pool. Of course normally people don't have all of those bathrooms in 1 house but haha if you have a lot of house you can.


----------



## lalame

Doria gets a pass from me. I don't think anyone really knows anything about her and I'd give her the benefit of the doubt in absence of any other info that comes out. It's not that unusual to me that she'd choose to live with her dad (or her mom) at different parts of her upbringing. Sometimes it's as simple as one parent living closer to the preferred school.

Also dang @ the comment about Doria reaping the benefits.. that's cold! My DH's parents were divorced when he was young and he only saw his dad during the summers... as long as they had a good relationship, why wouldn't he reap the benefits from a child that is financially comfortable? I think it would be ridiculous for her to let Doria continue to live in an apartment while she lives in a 14 sq ft house with more rooms than she can count.


----------



## 1LV

marietouchet said:


> I give Doria a pass on this ...
> A quiet aloof relationship might be the best thing with difficult relatives, agree that we dont know


True.  MM would have done well to take notes.


----------



## papertiger

Emeline said:


> Still, interesting.  Wonder why those two seem to be drawn to business dealings with Russian billionaires.



Russian + billionaires 

It's not because they're Russian


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> Russian + billionaires
> 
> It's not because they're Russian


Reminds me of someone else.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Thanks for looking this up!  So, basically their property taxes should be around what I estimated, about 1% of assessed value so about $140,000 - $150,000 per year on their $14.75 million dollar "cozy home".  That's pretty hefty.



That's (only) equivalent to a couple of couture Givenchy dresses


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> That's (only) equivalent to a couple of couture Givenchy dresses



True true!   But, they are racking up expenses with that palatial estate with no obvious source of income other than the money/allowance from Charles' and, perhaps some income off their own assets.  There may not be quite as much left for couture going forward, unless they expect to receive dresses and gowns gratis.

It will be interesting to see whether Charles can continue to support them to the extent that he has. Hard to imagine that the Duchy is going to be as profitable this year or next year. There is also something really distasteful about the image of hundreds of farmers and tenants of the Duchy, some of whom are likely struggling, paying their monthly rents to Charles who turns around and sends it to his son living in luxury in sunny Southern California.  When Harry was a working royal, living at his apartment in Kensington Palace, pulling his weight, and received an allowance to pay his expenses and pay his staff. . . well, that has a whole different feel to me than the current situation.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Doria gets a pass from me. I don't think anyone really knows anything about her and I'd give her the benefit of the doubt in absence of any other info that comes out. It's not that unusual to me that she'd choose to live with her dad (or her mom) at different parts of her upbringing. Sometimes it's as simple as one parent living closer to the preferred school.



Doria gets a pass from me too.  She seems like a reserved, dignified lady who probably is hoping to not be made into a tabloid target.  She looked great at the wedding too.


----------



## Lounorada

Grande Latte said:


> Hahaha. Fun read. Check out the photos.
> https://qr.ae/pN2Gph


His body language in those pictures always screams 'I'm just not that into you!'. So awkward.



Emeline said:


> I feel the same.
> And at some point I hope he figures something out.
> 
> *Her firm hand placed on his back is solely to manipulate him.  Anyplace, anywhere, anytime.*
> 
> And once he realizes that, maybe he can begin to see unpleasant truth of what's really going on.  Because it's pretty obvious he's not the captain of Titanic ll.


It reminds me of that episode of Sex and The City, where Charlotte learns how to manipulate Trey into getting her way, by placing her hand on his arm, like his mother does.



youngster said:


> I think Harry is going to be shocked at how expensive owning and maintaining a house actually is, let alone a sprawling 14,000 square foot mansion on substantial acreage in an area where they likely pay a premium for every service.  The maintenance, repairs, fire/hazard/earthquake insurance, utilities, and property taxes on that place is going to be crushingly expensive.  I think the DM doesn't realize that the property value will be reassessed to around the sales price of $14.7 million, now that ownership has changed hands, which is how it works in California.  $68,000 for property taxes on that place? Maybe the Russian got it down to that amount based on appeal, but it should be _a lot_ more than that. Minimum of around 1% so closer to $140,000 at least, once the property is reassessed. Could be a lot more too given that Montecito sustained so much fire and mudslide damage and needs to fix a host of infrastructure issues.
> So, maintenance, repairs, fire insurance, earthquake insurance, groundskeeping/landscaping/pool, utilities, cleaning, housekeeping with probably a full time housekeeper, gardening crew, who all need to be paid, etc.  Add in property taxes of $140K plus $500K mortgage payments.  Harry is going to blow through that allowance from Charles'.  They'll need a million just to furnish that place too.  Doesn't even count security, the lawyers for all the lawsuits, and their accountant who has to be on speed dial at this point.
> 
> ETA:  The DM sidebar in their article estimated $1.1 million for maintenance, property taxes, staff, utilities.  They didn't appear to include insurance or earthquake insurance which will be hefty amounts.  Add in an estimate of $3.3 million for their private security.  So, $4.4 million per year total and that doesn't include food, clothing, travel, etc.  It seems a huge amount to ask Charles to fund each year and seems really unsustainable.







Buckle up Charles! You're gonna be saying bye bye to a lot more money from here on out, if this house purchase is true.


----------



## gelbergirl

bag-mania said:


> Here's an aerial shot of their new home (from the LA Times). Cozy little place, isn't it?
> 
> View attachment 4817998



I wonder if we'll ever see pics of the inside, even if it is with the previous owner's stuff.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> True true!   But, they are racking up expenses with that palatial estate with no obvious source of income other than the money/allowance from Charles' and, perhaps some income off their own assets.  There may not be quite as much left for couture going forward, unless they expect to receive dresses and gowns gratis.
> 
> It will be interesting to see whether Charles can continue to support them to the extent that he has. Hard to imagine that the Duchy is going to be as profitable this year or next year. There is also something really distasteful about the image of hundreds of farmers and tenants of the Duchy, some of whom are likely struggling, paying their monthly rents to Charles who turns around and sends it to his son living in luxury in sunny Southern California.  When Harry was a working royal, living at his apartment in Kensington Palace, pulling his weight, and received an allowance to pay his expenses and pay his staff. . . well, that has a whole different feel to me than the current situation.


when you put it like that (about the farmers and tenants) it's sickening


----------



## Chagall

I think Charles is riddled with guilt over Diana. He is spoiling Harry way beyond what is normal, or what is good for him.


----------



## papertiger

If people think MM is manipulating JCMH, it's just as bad what H's doing to PC

Why is money from the Duchy going abroad at all, esp at this time?


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> I think Charles is riddled with guilt over Diana. He is spoiling Harry way beyond what is normal, or what is good for him.



I don’t believe Charles has ever felt one iota of guilt over Diana. I think he’s being cautious because the “new” Harry is unpredictable and disloyal. Charles doesn’t want Harry having any excuse to go telling tales to the media and slamming the BRF.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> True true!   But, they are racking up expenses with that palatial estate with no obvious source of income other than the money/allowance from Charles' and, perhaps some income off their own assets.  There may not be quite as much left for couture going forward, unless they expect to receive dresses and gowns gratis.
> 
> It will be interesting to see whether Charles can continue to support them to the extent that he has. Hard to imagine that the Duchy is going to be as profitable this year or next year. There is also something really distasteful about the image of hundreds of farmers and tenants of the Duchy, some of whom are likely struggling, paying their monthly rents to Charles who turns around and sends it to his son living in luxury in sunny Southern California.  When Harry was a working royal, living at his apartment in Kensington Palace, pulling his weight, and received an allowance to pay his expenses and pay his staff. . . well, that has a whole different feel to me than the current situation.





sdkitty said:


> when you put it like that (about the farmers and tenants) it's sickening



The idea of a duchy seems distasteful in modern times in general to be honest... I feel like they must have always been aware of the disparity between the immense wealth of their landlords and themselves. At least I would be! What is the perception of that arrangement in the UK?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if we'll ever see pics of the inside, even if it is with the previous owner's stuff.


Not likely. I found the street name via a Google image search, and viewed homes on that street on Zillow. The home + layout + lot that looks a lot like the MM/JCMH photos has all Zillow data removed and you can't click on the property for more details. Looks like MM's privacy police were already on it before their PR team went to work announcing it.

Interestingly, aside from an empty lot for $636K the homes on that street are valued from $2.81M to $9.68M, so theirs is the spendiest on the block.


----------



## Tootsie17

poopsie said:


> Harry: "will you pee mine?"
> 
> Truly a Hallmark worthy moment if there ever was one


Thank for the best laugh I've had all day. I think I will get more from these two ninnies.


----------



## csshopper

redney said:


> Not likely. I found the street name via a Google image search, and viewed homes on that street on Zillow. The home + layout + lot that looks a lot like the MM/JCMH photos has all Zillow data removed and you can't click on the property for more details. Looks like MM's privacy police were already on it before their PR team went to work announcing it.
> 
> Interestingly, aside from an empty lot for $636K the homes on that street are valued from $2.81M to $9.68M, so theirs is the spendiest on the block.


2 clicks and the original information from when the Russian had it on the market is the featured home in an LA Times article on line and it includes the street name and all the details, verbatim, of what the DM published.


----------



## Chanbal

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if we'll ever see pics of the inside, even if it is with the previous owner's stuff.


If it is the house shown in the link, the photos were removed.

https://www.coldwellbanker.com/property/765-ROCKBRIDGE-RD-MONTECITO-CA-93108/86696580/detail

By the way, the name of the house: *The Chateau of Montecito *(for the king and queen)


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe Charles has ever felt one iota of guilt over Diana. I think he’s being cautious because the “new” Harry is unpredictable and disloyal. Charles doesn’t want Harry having any excuse to go telling tales to the media and slamming the BRF.


you'd think Harry's credibility would be shot....so what if he does talk to the media?  then again, the US media still hasn't said a negative word about them


----------



## Tootsie17

papertiger said:


> If people think MM is manipulating JCMH, it's just as bad what H's doing to PC
> 
> Why is money from the Duchy going abroad at all, esp at this time?
> [/QUOTE
> The one year review for H and M will be interesting, I'm sure. I hope the media will spill the details.


My apologies @papertiger for posting this incorrectly in your post.  I don't know how to fix it.


----------



## lalame

Is it just me or is there something slightly weird about a royal having a normal street address lol


----------



## CobaltBlu

wayback machine? there are a bunch of photos on pinterest but I am on the way out and cant screencap them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe Charles has ever felt one iota of guilt over Diana. I think he’s being cautious because the “new” Harry is unpredictable and disloyal. Charles doesn’t want Harry having any excuse to go telling tales to the media and slamming the BRF.


Harry has become pretty unlikeable - for me anyway - and I used to like him quite a bit


----------



## papertiger

Tootsie17 said:


> My apologies @papertiger for posting this incorrectly in your post.  I don't know how to fix it.



No worries


----------



## melissatrv

Aimee3 said:


> Re: Harry’s wearing the Nazi uniform, his response  "[I am] very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize.” doesn’t really sound like a true apology to me.  To me I translate that as I’m sorry YOU feel offended or embarrassed, but I’m not sorry for what I did.  Poor “choice” of “costume”? What about saying he realizes what that uniform signifies to a lot of people and how wrong it was to put it on for whatever reason?   I have zero respect for him.



If any famous person did that today, they would never be able to live it down.  Yet, this rarely even gets brought up and gets shrugged off as "he was young and stupid"  "he apologized".   The public sentiment that people still have for Diana helped people overlook some of these things.


----------



## Lounorada

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if we'll ever see pics of the inside, even if it is with the previous owner's stuff.


There was a link shared on _another forum_ of the house listing which had all pictures featured, but all of a sudden the link come up blank  Although I chuckled at the members on there joking to save all pics before they were deleted and cleared... so I thought i'd save the pics myself!  I can post them real quick on here, if it's safe to do so?


----------



## redney

csshopper said:
			
		

> 2 clicks and the original information from when the Russian had it on the market is the featured home in an LA Times article on line and it includes the street name and all the details, verbatim, of what the DM published.


yep 



Chanbal said:


> If it is the house shown in the link, the photos were removed.
> 
> https://www.coldwellbanker.com/property/765-ROCKBRIDGE-RD-MONTECITO-CA-93108/86696580/detail
> 
> By the way, the name of the house: *The Chateau of Montecito *(for the king and queen)
> View attachment 4818203


That's it.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

1LV said:


> *That’s something I’ve wondered about more than once.  Something about Doria has seemed off from Day 1.  Controlled and aloof to the point of ... cold?  Or not.  Who knows*?





Chagall said:


> It was her dad who was around and did everything for her. Not sure where Doria was. Apparently nobody saw much of her. *So why is it Doria that reaps the benefit of her daughters ‘success’.*



Both of your posts, *1LV* & *Chagall,* echo similar thoughts that I have had witnessing MM & Doria's mother-daughter relationship ala the press - personally, do not buy into this "closeness" between these two women at all.

Have not read one quote, or seen a pic of the two together that looks authentic and loving. 

Doria is a prop, imo.

If in fact, MM lived with her dad during all of her teenage years, then off to the uni, and then her acting career - how well does Doria know her daughter?

Probably NOT WELL AT ALL, and that is why Doria is reaping all of the success of MM's marriage. 
She just fits MM's narrative, that's all.


----------



## melissatrv

I think the Queen also knows this marriage is not going to last so she does not want to permanently cut him off. Think she is hoping he will come back once the dust clears. 



Annawakes said:


> I think the Queen is really smart to say they can come back whenever they want.  That way M can’t say she’s been victimized, if she/they are completely cut off.  Also, the Queen knows M will never want to return and be subject to the same rules that “stifled” her previously.  So it is a win win to say that I think.
> 
> Edited to put “stifled” in quotes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> She needs to display a family member at least (for her image). Doria has several advantages, she is alone while the father has other kids and grandkids. Just one family member to deal with. Doria seems to be a reserved woman, which is always a plus. The presence of Doria will remind the world that MM is mixed race. Keep in mind that many of us didn't know that she was mixed race until we saw the mother.


Excellent points.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> Doria gets a pass from me. I don't think anyone really knows anything about her and I'd give her the benefit of the doubt in absence of any other info that comes out. It's not that unusual to me that she'd choose to live with her dad (or her mom) at different parts of her upbringing. Sometimes it's as simple as one parent living closer to the preferred school.
> 
> Also dang @ the comment about Doria reaping the benefits.. that's cold! My DH's parents were divorced when he was young and he only saw his dad during the summers... as long as they had a good relationship, why wouldn't he reap the benefits from a child that is financially comfortable? I think it would be ridiculous for her to let Doria continue to live in an apartment while she lives in a 14 sq ft house with more rooms than she can count.


I have no problem with Doria "reaping the benefits" as the mother.  Unless we are missing something, from all accounts, her father doted on her and spoiled her.  I have heard no accusations of any kind of abuse by him, so to be so cold to him now when he basically educated her with his lottery winnings and loved her, but can no longer provide any service for her (such as childcare), seems downright disgusting to me.


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> If in fact, MM lived with her dad during all of her teenage years, then off to the uni, and then her acting career - how well does Doria know her daughter?
> 
> Probably NOT WELL AT ALL, and that is why Doria is reaping all of the success of MM's marriage.
> She just fits MM's narrative, that's all.



Is it really that surprising that parents can be close to their kids even if they don't live together? OR that you'd even have to be close to a parent to still support them? I don't know about these two, but in general the statements about parent/child relationship don't add up to me. Lots of kids of divorced parents would probably still support their parents once they get big. I believe Jamie Foxx even invited his father to live with him though the father walked out on their family when he was a child. I invited my mother to live with me and DH even though I was never close to her at all. Sometimes it's not about closeness but... it's your parent and you still want to be there for them.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I have no problem with Doria "reaping the benefits" as the mother.  Unless we are missing something, from all accounts, her father doted on her and spoiled her.  I have heard no accusations of any kind of abuse by him, so to be so cold to him now when he basically educated her with his lottery winnings and loved her, but can no longer provide any service for her (such as childcare), seems downright disgusting to me.



Well, I think had they not had a big public blowout where they both demonstrated bad judgment she would probably still be supporting him. I agree with you he did a lot for her as a child and she should be supporting him (seems like she did before their blow out). It's just a matter of Doria hasn't done anything to downright alienate her and that's why she's still in her good graces... the Dad not so much. I'm not justifying the way she treated her dad, actually I think they were both asses, but I'm just saying it's not really a mystery why Doria was invited in.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> The idea of a duchy seems distasteful in modern times in general to be honest... I feel like they must have always been aware of the disparity between the immense wealth of their landlords and themselves. At least I would be! What is the perception of that arrangement in the UK?


*COULD NOT agree with this more!!! * While it may not be the same as Feudalism (_since the "serfs" are not slaves_), to me .. it still reeks of indentured servitude where these folks work the lands "of the Lord" (_in this case - Prince Charles_), yet they are still taxed and are considered socially inferior.  I would be pretty pissed off at this time (_and especially with COVID_) if I had to "pay" for that spoiled Brat JCMH and his Meghan-Money-Monger!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> *COULD NOT agree with this more!!! * While it may not be the same as Feudalism (_since the "serfs" are not slaves_), to me .. it still reeks of indentured servitude where these folks work the lands "of the Lord" (_in this case - Prince Charles_), yet they are still taxed and are considered socially inferior.  I would be pretty pissed off at this time (_and especially with COVID_) if I had to "pay" for that spoiled Brat JCMH and his Meghan-Money-Monger!



I know, I was trying not to be culturally insensitive in case it was some treasured national value  but I do not get this one at all.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

melissatrv said:


> I think the Queen also knows this marriage is not going to last so she does not want to permanently cut him off. Think she is hoping he will come back once the dust clears.



*melissatrv*, hope that granny permanently cuts H&M off sooner rather than later- they are an embarrassment and that new home, $14M home sends a horrible message with obscene optics, esp for MM: become (or marry) an actress (btw who had tons of PS SO NO-ONE CAN GUESS HER HERITAGE), marry up, have a baby, shirk your duty, rat out friends & family, throw your new-found fame around with unnecessary litigation, staged fake photo-ops, stupid news stories and your reward is $14M McMansion when 5M people in the US are unemployed? These fame-whores are disgusting.


----------



## csshopper

Very interesting. Since we started posting what is readily available on line about The Chateau, the real estate sites that previously had pictures have gone blank and even the arial shots are gone is some, didn't check them all. Guess their team didn't realize these things are public record.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> Is it really that surprising that parents can be close to their kids even if they don't live together? OR that you'd even have to be close to a parent to still support them? I don't know about these two, but in general the statements about parent/child relationship don't add up to me. Lots of kids of divorced parents would probably still support their parents once they get big. I believe Jamie Foxx even invited his father to live with him though the father walked out on their family when he was a child. I invited my mother to live with me and DH even though I was never close to her at all. Sometimes it's not about closeness but... it's your parent and you still want to be there for them.



Quite agree with you, *lalame* - and our posts are not mutually exclusive, imo.

PROXIMITY will never be a barometer of a relationship but the time spent together is meaningful, whether it is FT/zoom, ie virtual or face-to-face TIME, which is necessary for any relationship to survive years.

My opinion stands that I have never seen/read/heard anything that would make me believe that Doria & MM have or have had a close relationship.

And if they did, don't you think MM would work that angle? 
We are all adults in the room and know the way the world works.

Sticking Doria in a cottage on my estate does not quite cut it - personally, I would have asked for a $10M home for my family of three and a $4M home for my mommy to be near-by, which would honor her need for independence too.

Just sayin' and this is all fun to me, not to be taken too seriously!


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Very interesting. Since we started posting what is readily available on line about The Chateau, the real estate sites that previously had pictures have gone blank and even the arial shots are gone is some, didn't check them all. Guess their team didn't realize these things are public record.



It’s a good example of how quickly information can be scrubbed from the internet when someone has enough money to get it done. Keep this in mind the next time you think you remember something that happened years ago but you can’t find any trace of it online anymore.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that thought that 16 bathrooms were too many, it is on Zillow as Sold: $14,650,000 (9 beds, 19 baths, 18,671 Square Feet). 








						765 Rockbridge Rd, Santa Barbara, CA 93108 | Zillow
					

765 Rockbridge Rd, Santa Barbara CA, is a Single Family home that contains 18671 sq ft and was built in 2003.It contains 9 bedrooms and 19 bathrooms.This home last sold for $14,650,000 in June 2020.   The Zestimate for this Single Family is $17,122,700, which has decreased by $650,539 in the...




					www.zillow.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that thought that 16 bathrooms were too many, it is on Zillow as Sold: $14,650,000 (9 beds, 19 baths, 18,671 Square Feet).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 765 Rockbridge Rd, Santa Barbara, CA 93108 | Zillow
> 
> 
> 765 Rockbridge Rd, Santa Barbara CA, is a Single Family home that contains 18671 sq ft and was built in 2003.It contains 9 bedrooms and 19 bathrooms.This home last sold for $14,650,000 in June 2020.   The Zestimate for this Single Family is $17,122,700, which has decreased by $650,539 in the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zillow.com



Oooo, there is their street address. Who wants to write them a fan letter?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not believing much of the _Doria_ narrative.

This entire H&M story has been one long tale, full of deceit, lawsuits, sound and fury.
Yes, to us Americans, much of the BRF aristocratic world is indeed elitist, racist and stuck in a previous century. We do not glorify that family as much as other nations do. We see through their facade, their pretence, their condescension. To our delight, we mock those people — who here hasn’t done a queenly wave?  Either this  or this ? 

Recall the words of Slim Aarons, photographer to the wealthy, who saw that world up close — “remember, it’s all BS”.

And here it is — notice how OSco sets up this story “Doria has plenty of friends, but none like Oprah”.  Ha ha, yeah right, gawd, what pandering. Oprah set this up from the beginning.









						How Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Found an "Unlikely Ally" in Oprah
					

"Meghan will always be so grateful to Oprah for being someone her mother can turn to," according to Finding Freedom, a new biography on the Sussexes.




					www.oprahmag.com
				



_"Doria was able to spend time with Oprah when she needed to get away from her house without worrying that she would use their friendship to get an interview," the reporters wrote. "A senior palace aide had an honest conversation with Oprah before the wedding, where she assured them that 'that's not what any of this is about.'"

"Meghan will always be so grateful to Oprah for being someone her mother can turn to," a source told Scobie and Durand. "Doria has plenty of friends, but there's a comfort you can take in knowing that someone like Oprah is close by and supportive.'" _


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe Charles has ever felt one iota of guilt over Diana. I think he’s being cautious because the “new” Harry is unpredictable and disloyal. Charles doesn’t want Harry having any excuse to go telling tales to the media and slamming the BRF.


Hard to say but I can’t think of any reason why PC appears to be held hostage by these two. What’s this, hush money.


----------



## lanasyogamama

FiNaNcIaL IndEpEndEnCE


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Hard to say but I can’t think of any reason why PC appears to be held hostage by these two. What’s this, hush money.



Maybe it’s as simple as Charles loves his son. He probably still has hopes that Harry will one day return to the fold, sans Meghan. 

The more time that goes by the less likely that will ever happen.


----------



## bisousx

If that is their address, they have a $9.52m mortgage. Also, the guesthouse is a 2 br 2 ba


----------



## V0N1B2

Has it been confirmed that Chuckles loaned them the down payment?
Their most recent narrative claims they put the money down themselves, with no help from pops.

There has been so much information about the seller of the property (and just the way the articles have been worded) that it makes me wonder if he financed it for them as well.
I mean, who really cares how many times he's been married or that he asked for US citizenship? Why is he relevant and how many times in the past has the previous owner's history been so newsworthy?
Much bigger celebrities have bought homes and the seller's identities or dating history weren't brought up. Hmmmmm...


----------



## scarlet555

If this is not PC, please Mod, remove, but lol

it‘s from the fatJewish instagram


----------



## threadbender

V0N1B2 said:


> Has it been confirmed that Chuckles loaned them the down payment?
> Their most recent narrative claims they put the money down themselves, with no help from pops.
> 
> There has been so much information about the seller of the property (and just the way the articles have been worded) that it makes me wonder if he financed it for them as well.
> I mean, who really cares how many times he's been married or that he asked for US citizenship? Why is he relevant and how many times in the past has the previous owner's history been so newsworthy?
> Much bigger celebrities have bought homes and the seller's identities or dating history weren't brought up. Hmmmmm...


n/m I am not positive my information was correct


----------



## Chanbal

@V0N1B2 No idea who helped with downpayment, but it seems they bought a historic home, the so-called 'Scarface mansion'.









						'Scarface oligarch' who sold Meghan and Harry their cut-price mansion
					

Sergey Grishin (pictured with ex-wife Anna Fedoseeva), 54, is nicknamed the 'Scarface oligarch' due to his earlier purchase of the California estate which appeared in the 1983 Al Pacino movie.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						How Harry and Meghan snapped up $14.7m dream home from Russian tycoon
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle purchased their dream seven-acre California home from the Russian oligarch Sergey Grishin, 54, nicknamed the 'Scarface Oligarch'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

um, okaay.









						Sergey Grishin (businessman) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_He recorded some videos where he confessed about robbing banks in Russia and Estonia._


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> @V0N1B2 No idea who helped with downpayment, but it seems they bought a historic home, the so called 'Scarface Mansion.'


No, the "Scarface Mansion" is a different home, also located in Santa Barbara and also once owned by the same Russian guy. It's not the same home MM and JCMH just bought. 








						Your Next Move Starts Here
					

Keeping you informed on how to handle buying, selling, renting — or just nesting at home — as we adapt to life during COVID-19.




					www.zillow.com


----------



## closeted

More Russian connection, roll eyes, I guess they are sure selling sob stories through zoom is gonna pay enough for their annual upkeep for such property.


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> I sit here thinking where are all the bathrooms?  One en suite for each bedroom, one in pool house, one in gym, where do they put them all and when are they used?  Seems crazy.


Little wonder Cali has water shortage problems with all these awful mega mansions' bathrooms. 

Oh, this is so not an eco couple.


----------



## marietouchet

Got to thinking ...  about the unhappy Charles and Diana marriage. And given the new Scoobie info - H&M were engaged quicker than previously reported.

How did that impact the behavior of C H and W regarding H&M courtship?

I put some things together:
1. The H and W feud - W offended H by saying "take as long as you need" to decide about marriage ie dont rush
2. The bilateral unhappy Charles and Diana marriage - they had dated only 12 times prior to engagement, she got cold feet & wanted to call off wedding the day before marriage but her sister said"too late, your face is on all the (souvenir) tea towels"

In light of 2, I think 1 is a natural/normal response for Will - actually I give him kudos for the caution to his brother.

Then a few more  pieces of the puzzle:
3. Meghan ALONE was accorded extraordinary privileges and access to the BRF prior to marriage, got to meet the family at Xmas at Sandringham , she went on joint events with Harry eg Invictus. Good ideas but UNUSUAL for the BRF, it was so unusual at the time, it struck me. But obviously QEII had approved the invite the Sandringham.
4. None of the spouses of H's cousins had/has those privileges - Kate - no, Edo Mapelli did not .. nor Brooksbanks.  But surely the subject had come up before, and been discarded. Why the CHANGE now ?

I think that 3 was the result of people wanting to avoid the C & D mismarriage. See item 2.

Charles and Will must have gone to QEII to push the idea of integrating Meghan prior to the wedding, to avoid the last minute issues faced by D - see item 2. They are the only ones that have the  weight to get the Queen to change protocol.

I give Will and Charles a pass for their conduct. But, some would say this was obstruction of the marriage.


----------



## doni

I just don’t get it. And this is not a criticism exclusively of H&M.
In Old Hollywood, stars lived a grand lifestyle. But houses were much much smaller, tended to be modern too (and stylish).
In Old Europe, the aristocracy and the rich, yes they had palaces and big houses full of rooms. But they were flowing with people. From family, to servants, to permanent guests. The square meter per person was probably rather tight.
There was no awareness of climate change then.
Now you have all this California elite, non stop talking about the environment, lecturing, forever attending climate change events and fund risings, and they live in these monumental air-conditioned atrocities, with hundreds of useless bathrooms, manicured lawns and big pools needing lots of water, far away from any place that could possibly be reached by foot, and not employing any live in service (and thus preferring people taking the car in an out of there every day) because it is _cozier_ that way...
But when they go to Africa they take pride in using the woods because, you know, they are so down to earth.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Agree with Doni.  The carbon footprint of a house like that is enormous.  Maybe Chump..umm, I mean Charles, will fund an eco friendly makeover of the house.  The hypocrisy is now at the level of the absurd.


----------



## bag-mania

With great wealth/fame comes even greater entitlement.  Harry and Meghan fit right in with other celebrities who live just as opulently and talk just as hypocritically. They make excuses to themselves about why they deserve to have everything they desire while the little people need to make the sacrifices to save the planet. Shame on all of us for putting such people on pedestals and making them believe they are better than everyone else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent analysis @marietouchet — thank you for putting it altogether.
Agree about 1& 2. Now about 3 & 4, with all that has been revealed about the Botswana trip, I wonder if they were already married. That would explain the invitation to MM.  Still, all of this has been very unusual. 

Here‘s H discussing what a wonderful time they had — I do notice that H looks awful in these photos. His glow is definitely gone. 
"It was fantastic. She really enjoyed it," Harry, 33, said of Markle, 36. "The family loved having her there.”








						Prince Harry describes 'fantastic' Christmas with Meghan Markle
					






					abcnews.go.com
				








marietouchet said:


> Got to thinking ...  about the unhappy Charles and Diana marriage. And given the new Scoobie info - H&M were engaged quicker than previously reported.
> 
> How did that impact the behavior of C H and W regarding H&M courtship?
> 
> I put some things together:
> 1. The H and W feud - W offended H by saying "take as long as you need" to decide about marriage ie dont rush
> 2. The bilateral unhappy Charles and Diana marriage - they had dated only 12 times prior to engagement, she got cold feet & wanted to call off wedding the day before marriage but her sister said"too late, your face is on all the (souvenir) tea towels"
> 
> In light of 2, I think 1 is a natural/normal response for Will - actually I give him kudos for the caution to his brother.
> 
> Then a few more  pieces of the puzzle:
> 3. Meghan ALONE was accorded extraordinary privileges and access to the BRF prior to marriage, got to meet the family at Xmas at Sandringham , she went on joint events with Harry eg Invictus. Good ideas but UNUSUAL for the BRF, it was so unusual at the time, it struck me. But obviously QEII had approved the invite the Sandringham.
> 4. None of the spouses of H's cousins had/has those privileges - Kate - no, Edo Mapelli did not .. nor Brooksbanks.  But surely the subject had come up before, and been discarded. Why the CHANGE now ?
> 
> I think that 3 was the result of people wanting to avoid the C & D mismarriage. See item 2.
> 
> Charles and Will must have gone to QEII to push the idea of integrating Meghan prior to the wedding, to avoid the last minute issues faced by D - see item 2. They are the only ones that have the  weight to get the Queen to change protocol.
> 
> I give Will and Charles a pass for their conduct. But, some would say this obstruction of the marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love this explanation!  The tinny lectures from the billionaires and the wanna-be billionaires need to stop. 

It is one thing for the BRF to live in thousand year old, draft-y, crumbling palaces or farms and, quite another matter,  for one of them to live in a relatively new McMansion (with a stripper pole). BRF is old money and behaves as such which is appropriate, legal and expected.  H&M are behaving as crass nouveau-riche.  It is one thing to spend Duchy pounds to help the UK’s economy, but, it is another matter entirely to spend those same pounds on USA property.  Not sure that this sort of sale is legal. Surely, approvals had to be given?




doni said:


> I just don’t get it. And this is not a criticism exclusively of H&M.
> In Old Hollywood, stars lived a grand lifestyle. But houses were much much smaller, tended to be modern too (and stylish).
> In Old Europe, the aristocracy and the rich, yes they had palaces and big houses full of rooms. But they were flowing with people. From family, to servants, to permanent guests. The square meter per person was probably rather tight.
> There was no awareness of climate change then.
> Now you have all this California elite, non stop talking about the environment, lecturing, forever attending climate change events and fund risings, and they live in these monumental air-conditioned atrocities, with hundreds of useless bathrooms, manicured lawns and big pools needing lots of water, far away from any place that could possibly be reached by foot, and not employing any live in service (and thus preferring people taking the car in an out of there every day) because it is _cozier_ that way...
> But when they go to Africa they take pride in using the woods because, you know, they are so down to earth.


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> I just don’t get it. And this is not a criticism exclusively of H&M.
> In Old Hollywood, stars lived a grand lifestyle. But houses were much much smaller, tended to be modern too (and stylish).
> In Old Europe, the aristocracy and the rich, yes they had palaces and big houses full of rooms. But they were flowing with people. From family, to servants, to permanent guests. The square meter per person was probably rather tight.
> There was no awareness of climate change then.
> Now you have all this California elite, non stop talking about the environment, lecturing, forever attending climate change events and fund risings, and they live in these monumental air-conditioned atrocities, with hundreds of useless bathrooms, manicured lawns and big pools needing lots of water, far away from any place that could possibly be reached by foot, and not employing any live in service (and thus preferring people taking the car in an out of there every day) because it is _cozier_ that way...
> But when they go to Africa they take pride in using the woods because, you know, they are so down to earth.


Agree less square footage in Old Europe... 
was looking at real estate listings in Country Life, for London , it’s suburbs and country houses 
6000 Sq ft is a palace in London, last house I noticed had about that on 7 floors ! So, each floor is tiny
and country houses are not that much bigger, depending on price, but, the number of lavatories is no where like 16 , and 15000 sq ft would be a ducal pile


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love this explanation!  The tinny lectures from the billionaires and the wanna-be billionaires need to stop.
> 
> It is one thing for the BRF to live in thousand year old, draft-y, crumbling palaces or farms and, quite another matter,  for one of them to live in a relatively new McMansion (with a stripper pole). BRF is old money and behaves as such which is appropriate, legal and expected.  H&M are behaving as crass nouveau-riche.  It is one thing to spend Duchy pounds to help the UK’s economy, but, it is another matter entirely to spend those same pounds on USA property.  Not sure that this sort of sale is legal. Surely, approvals had to be given?


And all the landscaping! How does it stay green ? California has severe restrictions on sprinklers, and rain is rare
there have been drone photis of some Beverly Hills piles , all brown lawns , ugly


----------



## bag-mania

That house just keeps getting bigger every time you hear about it. Now it is 18,671-sq. ft. with 19 bathrooms. And Scobie, who claims he didn't talk with Meghan and Harry when doing the book, feels perfectly comfortable saying that this is their "forever home." What a dope!









						Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito Mansion Is Their 'Forever Home'
					

'Finding Freedom' co-author Omid Scobie dishes on the couple's latest move, whom their celebrity neighbors are and more.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## maryg1

Regarding the water used to take care of the house, there are systems now that “recycle” the rain and use it for watering the garden.
I give them the benefit of the doubt, since this is a fairly new home it could have this system installed.
But on the other side I don’t see any solar panel on the roof to provide electricity or hot water. I don’t know if they are widely used in the US and the laws that regulate their use on roofs, so I give the benefit of the doubt in this case too.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> That house just keeps getting bigger every time you hear about it. Now it is 18,671-sq. ft. with 19 bathrooms. And Scobie, who claims he didn't talk with Meghan and Harry when doing the book, feels perfectly comfortable saying that this is their "forever home." What a dope!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito Mansion Is Their 'Forever Home'
> 
> 
> 'Finding Freedom' co-author Omid Scobie dishes on the couple's latest move, whom their celebrity neighbors are and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Does the latest square footage number count the guest house ? lol 
And how many cars fit in the garages ? 12 ? I bet those will all be EVs


----------



## Annawakes

_what does Scobie know about their “extremely liquid” finances if they aren’t feeding him all this info?  It is so crystal clear he is their mouth piece.

It’s also so annoying they keep trying to put themselves on the same plane as the former President and First Lady.  They must think if the comparison is repeated often enough people will start to believe it.

I have no idea why this post is in italics lol_


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> No, the "Scarface Mansion" is a different home, also located in Santa Barbara and also once owned by the same Russian guy. It's not the same home MM and JCMH just bought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Next Move Starts Here
> 
> 
> Keeping you informed on how to handle buying, selling, renting — or just nesting at home — as we adapt to life during COVID-19.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zillow.com


Thanks for clarifying, I was probably too tired when I read the DM.

In any event, they bought their mansion from the famous 'Scarface oligarch', it should still qualify as a historical site, don't you think so? 

I remember visiting Chicago and the places linked to Al Capone were included in the Chicago's Historic Gangster Sites. I found it very interesting.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Their house gets thrown some shade last year...LOL....from an article in 2019 about a different house in the area: https://www.sitelinesb.com/under-the-tuscan-spell/



> If size is all that matters to you, you might be happier at nearby 765 Rockbridge (18,671 square feet on 5.38 acres for $16.975 million). But this is far more tasteful.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Quite agree with you, *lalame* - and our posts are not mutually exclusive, imo.
> 
> PROXIMITY will never be a barometer of a relationship but the time spent together is meaningful, whether it is FT/zoom, ie virtual or face-to-face TIME, which is necessary for any relationship to survive years.
> 
> My opinion stands that I have never seen/read/heard anything that would make me believe that Doria & MM have or have had a close relationship.
> 
> And if they did, don't you think MM would work that angle?
> We are all adults in the room and know the way the world works.
> 
> Sticking Doria in a cottage on my estate does not quite cut it - personally, I would have asked for a $10M home for my family of three and a $4M home for my mommy to be near-by, which would honor her need for independence too.
> 
> Just sayin' and this is all fun to me, not to be taken too seriously!


Is a wealthy child obligated to buy a home for her mother (or father)?  Doria works and has a home I assume.  She isn't elderly.  Maybe the guest house/granny flat is not for her to live in FT but for when she visits.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not believing much of the _Doria_ narrative.
> 
> This entire H&M story has been one long tale, full of deceit, lawsuits, sound and fury.
> Yes, to us Americans, much of the BRF aristocratic world is indeed elitist, racist and stuck in a previous century. We do not glorify that family as much as other nations do. We see through their facade, their pretence, their condescension. To our delight, we mock those people — who here hasn’t done a queenly wave?  Either this  or this ?
> 
> Recall the words of Slim Aarons, photographer to the wealthy, who saw that world up close — “remember, it’s all BS”.
> 
> And here it is — notice how OSco sets up this story “Doria has plenty of friends, but none like Oprah”.  Ha ha, yeah right, gawd, what pandering. Oprah set this up from the beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Found an "Unlikely Ally" in Oprah
> 
> 
> "Meghan will always be so grateful to Oprah for being someone her mother can turn to," according to Finding Freedom, a new biography on the Sussexes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"Doria was able to spend time with Oprah when she needed to get away from her house without worrying that she would use their friendship to get an interview," the reporters wrote. "A senior palace aide had an honest conversation with Oprah before the wedding, where she assured them that 'that's not what any of this is about.'"
> 
> "Meghan will always be so grateful to Oprah for being someone her mother can turn to," a source told Scobie and Durand. "Doria has plenty of friends, but there's a comfort you can take in knowing that someone like Oprah is close by and supportive.'" _


we don't glorify the royals? then why is it then when one of them (H) has a huge wedding it's talked about endlessly and televised here?


----------



## sdkitty

maryg1 said:


> Regarding the water used to take care of the house, there are systems now that “recycle” the rain and use it for watering the garden.
> I give them the benefit of the doubt, since this is a fairly new home it could have this system installed.
> But on the other side I don’t see any solar panel on the roof to provide electricity or hot water. I don’t know if they are widely used in the US and the laws that regulate their use on roofs, so I give the benefit of the doubt in this case too.


it's possible they have solar panels elsewhere on the property - don't have to be on roof


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Their house gets thrown some shade last year...LOL....from an article in 2019 about a different house in the area: https://www.sitelinesb.com/under-the-tuscan-spell/


I followed the trail of breadcrumbs to zillow where it stated the H&M house was PENDING SALE on 19 Nov 2019 ! Maybe they were looking to buy while they were exiled in Vancouver ?? Who knows , could be previous buyer  that fell through 

Also, it says the Property Taxes (2020) were $25,136 on an assessed value of $2,450, 501.  Sounds like totally out of date numbers , the house price was about 6X the assessed value, so one can expect about 6X in property taxes after sale, it does not take that long for the municipal government to discover sale prices. 

It also says the median house price for the neighborhood was about $3M, which would make the H&M house the most expensive around, priced ridiculously for the neighborhood , unless I am missing something 

Finally refi cost (mortgage with minimum down ?) is about $65k per month, so, about $700k per annum 

So, all in all, a cool million in mortgage and taxes per year for house.


----------



## CobaltBlu

The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million – eXtravaganzi
					

The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million




					www.extravaganzi.com
				




This is from five years ago...including some interior shots. Hard to find, it has pretty much been scrubbed. 
Good thing I'm on the case....  The little casita by the water is very cool.  Gardens are nice.


----------



## CobaltBlu

more....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

last ones.  this must be the "stripper pole" but its hardly that....


----------



## purseinsanity

doni said:


> I just don’t get it. And this is not a criticism exclusively of H&M.
> In Old Hollywood, stars lived a grand lifestyle. But houses were much much smaller, tended to be modern too (and stylish).
> In Old Europe, the aristocracy and the rich, yes they had palaces and big houses full of rooms. But they were flowing with people. From family, to servants, to permanent guests. The square meter per person was probably rather tight.
> There was no awareness of climate change then.
> Now you have all this California elite, non stop talking about the environment, lecturing, forever attending climate change events and fund risings, and they live in these monumental air-conditioned atrocities, with hundreds of useless bathrooms, manicured lawns and big pools needing lots of water, far away from any place that could possibly be reached by foot, and not employing any live in service (and thus preferring people taking the car in an out of there every day) because it is _cozier_ that way...
> But when they go to Africa they take pride in using the woods because, you know, they are so down to earth.



ie hypocrites


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> And all the landscaping! How does it stay green ? California has severe restrictions on sprinklers, and rain is rare
> there have been drone photis of some Beverly Hills piles , all brown lawns , ugly


Rules only apply to us little peons.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> more....
> 
> View attachment 4818762
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818763
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818764
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818765
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818766
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818767
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818768
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818769
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818770
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818771


Wonder how long before MM decides she needs to renovate the entire thing?  I don't see a yoga studio LOL.


----------



## sdkitty

beautiful but ridiculously opulent...and neither of them has earned the money.....at least other celebs who live in mansions have worked for their money (even if they are overpaid compared to others)

and the landscaping would be a lot more appropriate in England than in dry CA....I do want to hear them explain how they are going to be energy efficient in this place


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That house just keeps getting bigger every time you hear about it. Now it is 18,671-sq. ft. with 19 bathrooms. And Scobie, who claims he didn't talk with Meghan and Harry when doing the book, feels perfectly comfortable saying that this is their "forever home." What a dope!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito Mansion Is Their 'Forever Home'
> 
> 
> 'Finding Freedom' co-author Omid Scobie dishes on the couple's latest move, whom their celebrity neighbors are and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


@bag-mania Great article! Scobie-doo is showing how the very woke MM&H have everything figured out:

When "living in Tyler Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom" mansion, they realized the need for more toilets, so they upgraded to a 19-bathroom home.

"Harry brings a lot to the table himself and Meghan lives off residuals...".  H (or his family) funded the downpayment. Is the house furnished? MM may buy some pieces of furniture.

Their "focus very much on their philanthropic work" and "smart speaking engagements as a couple and separately" will pay for mortgage, taxes, utilities, and other living expenses.  

And the icing on the cake, they will be "following a path not that dissimilar to the Obamas". I'm already visualizing Harry's powerful speeches. Wasn't MM a lawyer in suits?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania Great article! Scobie-doo is showing how the very woke MM&H have everything figured out:
> 
> When "living in Tyler Perry's eight-bedroom, 12-bathroom" mansion, they realized the need for more toilets, so they upgraded to a 19-bathroom home.
> 
> "Harry brings a lot to the table himself and Meghan lives off residuals...".  H (or his family) funded the downpayment. Is the house furnished? MM may buy some pieces of furniture.
> 
> Their "focus very much on their philanthropic work" and "smart speaking engagements as a couple and separately" will pay for mortgage, taxes, utilities ($$$$), and other living expenses.
> 
> And the icing on the cake, they will be "following a path not that dissimilar to the Obamas". I'm already visualizing Harry's powerful speeches. Wasn't MM a lawyer in suits?


the Obamas?  these two aren't fit to be maid and butler to the Obamas


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania And the icing on the cake, they will be "following a path not that dissimilar to the Obamas". I'm already visualizing Harry's powerful speeches. *Wasn't MM a lawyer in suits*?


LOLOLOL.  "I'm not a lawyer, but I played one on TV!"
Ugh.  Bi**h, sit down!  You're lucky to be mentioned in the same sentence as Michelle O.


----------



## CobaltBlu

residuals from Suits are not gonna pay for much.....  but I love that they have scoob to keep creating fantastic narratives for them.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> residuals from Suits are not gonna pay for much.....  but I love that they have scoob to keep creating fantastic narratives for them.


right....it's not like she was one of the "Friends" cast LOL


----------



## limom

Cavalier Girl said:


> if the house was owned by a Russian investor and was sold at a greatly discounted price, wouldn't the IRS have some interest in the deal because it would largely decrease the cap gains tax?


According to Zillow, the house was sold for 16 million and change.
There was no 10 million discount


----------



## bag-mania

Today is the day Meghan gives the closing interview with the CEO of that new womens political group. I'm sure we'll be treated to footage of that later.

As it turns out ************* was the keynote speaker today as well. We'll see who gets the most press coverage.


----------



## TC1

Yeeesh, that home is garish


----------



## rose60610

TC1 said:


> Yeeesh, that home is garish



The structure of the house in and of itself is OK, the decor looks like it came from J.C. Penney and Dollar General.


----------



## Lodpah

Chagall said:


> It was her dad who was around and did everything for her. Not sure where Doria was. Apparently nobody saw much of her. So why is it Doria that reaps the benefit of her daughters ‘success’.
> [/QUOT
> 
> 
> closeted said:
> 
> 
> 
> More Russian connection, roll eyes, I guess they are sure selling sob stories through zoom is gonna pay enough for their annual upkeep for such property.
> 
> 
> 
> Could it is be Meghan  showing some flex to the Queen after all she was not allowed to use the questionable “Russian” tiara? So we know MM is very conniving and hateful so she throws shade at the Queen by purchasing from a Russian knowing that the BRF its all about optics and not wanting any any controversy? We got you MM.
Click to expand...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> This is from five years ago...including some interior shots. Hard to find, it has pretty much been scrubbed.
> Good thing I'm on the case....  The little casita by the water is very cool.  Gardens are nice.
> 
> View attachment 4818749
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818750
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818751
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818752
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818753
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818754
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818755
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818756
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818757
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818758
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818759
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818760



Congratulations, Cobaltblu! You have done what TMZ and the Daily Mail and all the others couldn't do. That view is gorgeous!


----------



## Lodpah

doni said:


> I just don’t get it. And this is not a criticism exclusively of H&M.
> In Old Hollywood, stars lived a grand lifestyle. But houses were much much smaller, tended to be modern too (and stylish).
> In Old Europe, the aristocracy and the rich, yes they had palaces and big houses full of rooms. But they were flowing with people. From family, to servants, to permanent guests. The square meter per person was probably rather tight.
> There was no awareness of climate change then.
> Now you have all this California elite, non stop talking about the environment, lecturing, forever attending climate change events and fund risings, and they live in these monumental air-conditioned atrocities, with hundreds of useless bathrooms, manicured lawns and big pools needing lots of water, far away from any place that could possibly be reached by foot, and not employing any live in service (and thus preferring people taking the car in an out of there every day) because it is _cozier_ that way...
> But when they go to Africa they take pride in using the woods because, you know, they are so down to earth.


The difference I think between them and MM is that the BRF employ a lot of people thus contributing to the economy. So people do benefit.


----------



## Chagall

I am not a monacist and have no idea how it works.  If any of my tax payer money was going to supporting the royals I would be beyond annoyed if Charles was spending even a penny of it on those lackies.


----------



## V0N1B2

Lovely deck.  It'll be a great place to sit and watch the fog roll in during the summer months.


----------



## maryg1

"Like many couples, they have a mortgage,"
They really are treating anybody else as fools, this is really insulting to anybody else (me included) that has to get mortgage for a small and simple house. I think my whole apartment is as big as one of their bathrooms.
Btw, the outside is lovely, the inside is not really my taste for a newly built house.


----------



## Tootsie17

CobaltBlu said:


> last ones.  this must be the "stripper pole" but its hardly that....
> 
> View attachment 4818773
> 
> 
> View attachment 4818780


Thanks for posting the pics. It is a beautiful home that I hope Archie will love the most.


----------



## kemilia

maryg1 said:


> Regarding the water used to take care of the house, there are systems now that “recycle” the rain and use it for watering the garden.
> I give them the benefit of the doubt, since this is a fairly new home it could have this system installed.
> But on the other side I don’t see any solar panel on the roof to provide electricity or hot water. I don’t know if they are widely used in the US and the laws that regulate their use on roofs, so I give the benefit of the doubt in this case too.


In my little town solar panels are all the rage. The ordinances were being revised for each request and finally the Board just said whatever--if you want (and can afford) solar panels--fine with us. 

I'm outside Chicago, not in a sunny state though this summer has had a crazy amount of sun, heat & humidity (thanks climate change--at least my tomato plants love you!). While I would think solar panels would be the way to go in sunny states, they are not the greatest looking things so maybe the McMansion crowd find them unattractive and tacky.

And really--do we think H&M are paying their own light bills?


----------



## sdkitty

maryg1 said:


> "Like many couples, they have a mortgage,"
> They really are treating anybody else as fools, this is really insulting to anybody else (me included) that has to get mortgage for a small and simple house. I think my whole apartment is as big as one of their bathrooms.
> Btw, the outside is lovely, the inside is not really my taste for a newly built house.


I do like all the fireplaces


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> Thanks for posting the pics. It is a beautiful home that I hope Archie will love the most.


I don't think a baby cares about how many bathrooms he has or what the decor is....he may like the playground
Maybe H will play with him out there or his expert networker mom will find him some playdates


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> the Obamas?  these two aren't fit to be maid and butler to the Obamas


*HA HA HA .. god, I can't EVEN say how much I LOVE THIS .. 100% TRUE!!!! *


----------



## 1LV

MM was probably planning renovations before the ink dried.  Doing her part to make it more eco friendly, you know.  (Eye roll)


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> According to Zillow, the house was sold for 16 million and change.
> There was no 10 million discount



The house was last sold for $25M, and M+H just bought it for $14M. That's where the $10 million discount comes from. You can see the sale history here: https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/765-Rockbridge-Rd_Montecito_CA_93108_M15914-62636


----------



## CeeJay

.. think Meghan will be "HAPPY" and "THRIVING" now????  Oh wait, what was I thinking - her happy?!!? .. NEVAH!


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> I followed the trail of breadcrumbs to zillow where it stated the H&M house was PENDING SALE on 19 Nov 2019 ! Maybe they were looking to buy while they were exiled in Vancouver ?? Who knows , could be previous buyer  that fell through
> 
> Also, it says the Property Taxes (2020) were $25,136 on an assessed value of $2,450, 501.  Sounds like totally out of date numbers , the house price was about 6X the assessed value, so one can expect about 6X in property taxes after sale, it does not take that long for the municipal government to discover sale prices.
> 
> It also says the median house price for the neighborhood was about $3M, which would make the H&M house the most expensive around, priced ridiculously for the neighborhood , unless I am missing something
> 
> Finally refi cost (mortgage with minimum down ?) is about $65k per month, so, about $700k per annum
> 
> So, all in all, a cool million in mortgage and taxes per year for house.



I'd really like to know how the previous sellers got away with $25k property taxes. In CA the property tax is assessed at cost of sale (unless some radical value loss or renovations happen). Sounds shady. I'd bet H+M will pay a more acceptable amount otherwise they're gonna get hell from locals.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> The house was last sold for $25M, and M+H just bought it for $14M. That's where the $10 million discount comes from. You can see the sale history here: https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/765-Rockbridge-Rd_Montecito_CA_93108_M15914-62636


Yes, they lost quite a bit of money (while laundering said money) but the property sold close to the asking price.
Am I right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Roxanna

It seems like that this is the Riven Rock estate.
As in same name novel by American author T. Coraghessan Boyle. It concerns the life of Stanley McCormick . How  interesting.


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> Congratulations, Cobaltblu! You have done what TMZ and the Daily Mail and all the others couldn't do. That view is gorgeous!



Thanks doll!  You know I was determined to find pictures for you all, and they are safe on my hard drive so....*hair toss.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Yes, they lost quite a bit of money (while laundering said money) but the property sold close to the asking price.
> Am I right?



Looks like it was listed for the latest time at $16.9M and sold for $14.9M.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Looks like it was listed for the latest time at $16.9M and sold for $14.9M.


Dang. I guess good for Prince Charles..


----------



## limom

Roxanna said:


> It seems like that this is the Riven Rock estate.
> As in same name novel by American author T. Coraghessan Boyle. It concerns the life of Stanley McCormick . How  interesting.


Is said estate on Rockbridge road?


----------



## lalame

My wallet is just burning at the thought of losing $10M on a home.... that's like you could gift a home to 20 different families!!!


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I'd really like to know how the previous sellers got away with $25k property taxes. In CA the property tax is assessed at cost of sale (unless some radical value loss or renovations happen). Sounds shady. I'd bet H+M will pay a more acceptable amount otherwise they're gonna get hell from locals.


Agree $25k is nonsense, Zillow must have it wrong , its taxes would be based on the last sale price which was $25M
The last sale was long enough ago that the tax office would have it in its records - sometimes they take a year or so to get the most recent data, tax assessments are only done once a year


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Is said estate on Rockbridge road?


765 Rockbridge looks about right


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> 765 Rockbridge looks about right


 So much for privacy...


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> My wallet is just burning at the thought of losing $10M on a home.... that's like you could gift a home to 20 different families!!!


That money is not going to be laundered by magic. This is going on everywhere.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't think a baby cares about how many bathrooms he has or what the decor is....he may like the playground
> Maybe H will play with him out there or his expert networker mom will find him some playdates


Frankly, I doubt that there are any children in this neighborhood.  She have to slum and go to Mommy and Me in Santa Barbara.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Agree $25k is nonsense, Zillow must have it wrong , its taxes would be based on the last sale price which was $25M
> The last sale was long enough ago that the tax office would have it in its records - sometimes they take a year or so to get the most recent data, tax assessments are only done once a year



Oddly one of the real estate sites linked to the actual county assessor record for this property and it does show $25k. Maybe it was a data entry error and they linked to data from the wrong property? Though it does look to be the same place since it shows transfer on 6/18 which sounds right.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Oddly one of the real estate sites linked to the actual county assessor record for this property and it does show $25k. Maybe it was a data entry error and they linked to data from the wrong property? Though it does look to be the same place since it shows transfer on 6/18 which sounds right.


Is it somehow classified as an agricultural property?


----------



## gracekelly

Prop 13:  taxes are 1% of the sale price plus whatever the bonded indebtedness of the locality happens to be.  2% increase per year.

I don't think Harry or Charles put in a penny on this house.


----------



## Emeline

Interesting read.








						Montecito: the super-wealthy enclave Harry and Meghan now call home
					

Duke and Duchess of Sussex should feel right at home in this part of California, where the rich and famous can live a quiet life




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> Is it somehow classified as an agricultural property?


Doubtful.  Most of the acreage is probably hilly brush and unusable.   I also think the entire area is zoned in such a way to prevent some wiseguy from  coming in and thinking  that he can buy a home with 6 acres and subdivide it and build more homes.


----------



## gracekelly

This is some article!









						Why we’re sympathetic to Princess Diana — but not Harry and Meghan
					

Much as his mother, the late Princess Diana, denied having anything to do with a sympathetic book packed with insider details called “Diana: Her True Story,” Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markl…




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> the Obamas?  these two aren't fit to be maid and butler to the Obamas


Arrogance is a personality trait that MM & H seem to have in abundance.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOLOL.  "I'm not a lawyer, but I played one on TV!"
> Ugh.  Bi**h, sit down!  You're lucky to be mentioned in the same sentence as Michelle O.


I wonder if the duchess doesn't think the other way around.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Doubtful.  Most of the acreage is probably hilly brush and unusable.   I also think the entire area is zoned in such a way to prevent some wiseguy from  coming in and thinking  that he can buy a home with 6 acres and subdivide it and build more homes.


The lot is only 6-7 acres and not even big enough to graze Harry's polo ponies
For reference, Pss Anne has like 60,000 acres at Gatcombe Park (and she does indeed farm it ...) but then she is a child of the monarch not the grandchild


----------



## CarryOn2020

Because we love to gossip, especially about Hollywood and royals.
We have a special dislike for hypocrisy from anyone, but especially those who lecture us to do what they say and not what they do. 





sdkitty said:


> we don't glorify the royals? then why is it then when one of them (H) has a huge wedding it's talked about endlessly and televised here?


----------



## purseinsanity

Harry and Meghan Moved to Montecito Because He ‘Absolutely Hated’ L.A.
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle tried to make things work in Los Angeles before their move to Montecito — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Uh huh.  Sure Meghan.  _*Harry*_ wanted the giant house.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Congratulations, Cobaltblu! You have done what TMZ and the Daily Mail and all the others couldn't do. That view is gorgeous!


I agree, @CobaltBlu is now our elected detective!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Because we love to gossip, especially about Hollywood and royals.
> We have a special dislike for hypocrisy from anyone, but especially those who lecture us to do what they say and not what they do.


Interesting comparison - Harry and Diana ... 
Diana was before social media and extensive videos of everything, she was never seen lecturing people


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> 765 Rockbridge looks about right





limom said:


> So much for privacy...



Who wants to send them a party invitation and pretend it's from Oprah?


----------



## bag-mania

Anyone up for another reader review? Today's entry comes from Amazon customer, Michelle.   

_1.0 out of 5 stars_ Bad Teenage Fanfic
Reviewed in the United States on August 12, 2020
Verified Purchase
I am shocked that these people get paid to write. I wrote better when I was 13 and filling my diary with hopes and dreams. The sentence structure veers wildly between convoluted and messy to simplistic depending on whether the authors wish to obfuscate the facts or praise the Sussexes.

The amount of personal detail makes it feel more like autobiography than biography. For example, it includes tons of detail of how Meghan arranged her home for a Vanity Fair interview, down to laying out afghans for her dogs so they wouldn't mess the white couch and how she arranged the throw pillows. The only way the authors would know that is if they had spoken directly to Meghan, read Meghan's diaries, had a direct wiretap into Meghan's brain or if Meghan revealed every thought she ever had about decorating to a friend who managed to retain all of those (useless) details and passed them on to the authors.

This book is a silly, poorly written mess and quite frankly, Meghan and Harry should sue the authors.


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> Yeeesh, that home is garish



I'll take the cellar and the gardens


----------



## Sol Ryan

limom said:


> So much for privacy...



These two never wanted privacy... I’m pretty certain they want someone to try showing up. It keeps up the narrative. They could have said they bought a house and left it at that, but no, they had to tell us where the house was. They know exactly what they are doing. There’s no way they didn’t know the listing was still up.

When I bought my house, I had to do it quietly due to family issues. It can be done if you want to...


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that thought that 16 bathrooms were too many, it is on Zillow as Sold: $14,650,000 (9 beds, 19 baths, 18,671 Square Feet).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 765 Rockbridge Rd, Santa Barbara, CA 93108 | Zillow
> 
> 
> 765 Rockbridge Rd, Santa Barbara CA, is a Single Family home that contains 18671 sq ft and was built in 2003.It contains 9 bedrooms and 19 bathrooms.This home last sold for $14,650,000 in June 2020.   The Zestimate for this Single Family is $17,122,700, which has decreased by $650,539 in the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zillow.com



These bathrooms might not exist or be permitted. The tax records (at least per one software) show it has 13.5 baths.




marietouchet said:


> Agree $25k is nonsense, Zillow must have it wrong , its taxes would be based on the last sale price which was $25M
> The last sale was long enough ago that the tax office would have it in its records - sometimes they take a year or so to get the most recent data, tax assessments are only done once a year



As an investor, I use a software that compiles public records in a one stop snapshot to see a property’s transactions. The buyer purchased this through a trust in June 2020 and it was purchased as a short sale. Previous owner bought for around $25m but took out two large cashout loans, one at $9.9m and another loan at $11.2.

The taxes were/are estimated about $282k per year.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This is some article!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why we’re sympathetic to Princess Diana — but not Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Much as his mother, the late Princess Diana, denied having anything to do with a sympathetic book packed with insider details called “Diana: Her True Story,” Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markl…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Thanks for the article. Diana was genuine and empathic and MM is the opposite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> I am not a monacist and have no idea how it works.  If any of my tax payer money was going to supporting the royals I would be beyond annoyed if Charles was spending even a penny of it on those lackies.



Duchy is his private income but his position as the PoW provides the Duchy


----------



## youngster

bisousx said:


> As an investor, I use a software that compiles public records in a one stop snapshot to see a property’s transactions. The buyer purchased this through a trust in June 2020 and it *was purchased as a short sale*. Previous owner bought for around $25m but took out two large cashout loans, one at $9.9m and another loan at $11.2.
> 
> The taxes were/are estimated *about $282k per year.*



Interesting!  So, it was a short sale! I guess the Russian owner had to come up with the excess cash to repay the mortgages to the bank. I assume the bank wouldn't have allowed the sale to go through otherwise.

And, yes, property taxes at $282K sounds a lot more reasonable on a $25 million property.  It'll likely come down to closer to $150K - $175K with the reduced sales price.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry is the opposite, too. Rightly or wrongly, I had higher expectations for him. It’s the “noblesse oblige” idea. MM’s story is completely predictable and common. He and the BRF are held to a much higher standard. 




Chanbal said:


> Thanks for the article. Diana was genuine and empathic and MM is the opposite.


----------



## Chanbal

Surrounded by all these potential donors to the Arch*** Foundation  $$$$$$$$$$$.










						Meet Meghan and Harry's new Montecito neighbors
					

Meghan and  Harry  bought the nine-bedroom and 16-bathroom mansion in the secluded area of Riven Rock in upscale Montecito in June for $14.65M.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Anyone up for another reader review? Today's entry comes from Amazon customer, Michelle.
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ Bad Teenage Fanfic
> Reviewed in the United States on August 12, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> 
> 
> This book is a silly, poorly written mess and quite frankly, Meghan and Harry should sue the authors.




Pretty sure that's already in the works


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> The lot is only 6-7 acres and not even big enough to graze Harry's polo ponies
> For reference, Pss Anne has like 60,000 acres at Gatcombe Park (and she does indeed farm it ...) but then she is a child of the monarch not the grandchild


I don't think so that would be like the size of Scotland!!!!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Who wants to send them a party invitation and pretend it's from Oprah?



Considering how easily JCMH got duped by the fake Greta, they'd be on pins and needles to get an invite from Oprah. How about under the pretense of a costume party? A potluck costume party! They'd show up at Oprah's gate and she'd probably allow them in. Surprise! (Not that I'd ever think of such a thing )


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Surrounded by all these potential donors to the Arch*** Foundation  $$$$$$$$$$$.
> 
> View attachment 4819050
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet Meghan and Harry's new Montecito neighbors
> 
> 
> Meghan and  Harry  bought the nine-bedroom and 16-bathroom mansion in the secluded area of Riven Rock in upscale Montecito in June for $14.65M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Most of these are likely self-made people who are too smart to be duped out of their money by the likes of H&M. There are thousands of charities out there competing for cash. They need to have a valid plan for theirs before rich people are going to line up to fund it.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Considering how easily JCMH got duped by the fake Greta, they'd be on pins and needles to get an invite from Oprah. How about under the pretense of a costume party? A potluck costume party! They'd show up at Oprah's gate and she'd probably allow them in. Surprise! (Not that I'd ever think of such a thing )


How about a "welcome to the neighborhood" party? You just know that MM will be expecting an all-star bash in her...........errrrrrr......_their_ honor


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Pretty sure that's already in the works


It is understandable, they may need the $$$. DM already made the calculations- a TOTAL: $4.4MILLION PER YEAR are needed to run the mansion. But no worries, the loyal Scobie-doo will continue praising them. Do you think they have a spare room for MA? 









						Running Harry and Meghan's $14.7m mansion could cost $4.4m a year
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new California mansion comes with eye-watering bills that could stretch as high as $4.4million per year... so what makes their new property so expensive?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, Meghan couldn't wait to tell her publicist, who told _People_, who told us all about Meghan's speech. Yay!

As one would expect, it sounds like she spent more time talking about herself and her views than the accomplishments of the person she was interviewing. Oh, and for some reason at a summit on gender equality she decided to talk about racism.

WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS TRIPE IF SUGARY COMMENTS MAKE YOU GAG!

*Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'*
Meghan Markle says "it's good to be home" after her return to the U.S.

The Duchess of Sussex, 39, joined a virtual summit on Friday for a conversation with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*, a "nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy" — with Meghan serving as moderator and asking the questions.

Meghan also spoke about returning to her home state of California amid the killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and others.

"To come back and to just see this state of affairs, I think at the onset, if I'm being honest, it was just devastating. It was so sad to see where our country was in that moment," she said. "If there's any silver lining in that, I would say that in the weeks after the murder of George Floyd, in the peaceful protests that you were seeing, in the voices that were coming out, in the way that people were actually owning their role…it shifted from sadness to a feeling of absolute inspiration, because I can see that the tide is turning."

She added that the peaceful protests and call for change have been energizing.

"From my standpoint, it’s not new to see this undercurrent of racism and certainly unconscious bias, but I think to see the changes that are being made right now is really — it's something I look forward to being a part of,” Meghan said. "And being part of using my voice in a way that I haven’t been able to of late. So, yeah, it’s good to be home.”

After stepping down from their royal roles earlier this year, Meghan and Prince Harry moved to California with their 1-year-old son, Archie. They recently relocated from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara.

"They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family," a rep for the couple tells PEOPLE.

For the virtual appearance, Meghan wore an orange ensemble with her hair in loose waves. She and fellow Northwestern alumna Ramshaw discussed the 19th*'s beginnings, with the Duchess of Sussex congratulating her on the journalistic endeavor.

"You're capturing this moment in such an extraordinary way...You did it," she said.

Meghan, who recently revealed that she plans to vote in the U.S. presidential election this year in an article for _Marie Claire, _also spoke with Ramshaw about the importance of voting. (The organization — named for the amendment that granted (some) women the right to vote in the United States and includes an asterisk in its title to represent the work still to be done — held their "The 19th Represents" virtual summit 100 years after the amendment was ratified in August 1920.)

"When I have these conversations about encouraging people to go out and vote, I think it's often challenging for men and women alike and certainly for people to remember just how hard it was to get the right to vote. And to be really aware and not taking that for granted," she said. "My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."

She added, "I really do hope what you're able to encourage and what we're able to see happen through The 19th* over the course of the next few months is that women understand that their voices are needed now more than ever — and the best way to exercise that is through voting."

Meghan also praised Ramshaw as a fellow mother making a difference in the world.

"I know what it's like with a toddler," the Duchess of Sussex said, referring to son Archie. "There's not a lot of time."

Meghan said in a statement to _Glamour_ after the engagement was announced earlier this month, "The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important. I'm looking forward to asking the cofounder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core."

Ramshaw shared on Twitter, "In the department of the surreal: The Duchess reached out to us; she said [the 19th's] vision of building a diverse and representative newsroom that covers women and other underserved people with nuance + empathy spoke to her immediately."

Ramshaw continued, "She asked if she could interview me on 'storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media,' and 'what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core.' "









						Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'
					

Meghan Markle joined a virtual summit for a conversation on race and gender with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*




					people.com


----------



## zinacef

rose60610 said:


> The structure of the house in and of itself is OK, the decor looks like it came from J.C. Penney and Dollar General.


How does one actually furnish a huge home like this?  This would be like a full time job for me. When we bought our house they said the rule is furnish your house with about 10% of the cost of the house, whatever would that be. You just about have to hire an agency to get things together. I’m sure she has the “staff” if they made it to their second day or night or next 5am because I know I would have to quit.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Most of these are likely self-made people *who are too smart to be duped out of their money by the likes of H&M.* There are thousands of charities out there competing for cash. They need to have a valid plan for theirs before rich people are going to line up to fund it.


Love your optimism. Oprah seems to be already a big supporter of the couple, according to Scobie-doo. QE is also a very smart lady, and we know the rest of the story.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> I don't think a baby cares about how many bathrooms he has or what the decor is....he may like the playground
> Maybe H will play with him out there or his expert networker mom will find him some playdates


You're right, he won't care about the décor or how many baths the house has.  I just want him to be happy and to enjoy the playground and pool.  I hope Archie is a jovial child who will have good memories of growing up in the house.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> It is understandable, they may need the $$$. DM already made the calculations- a TOTAL: $4.4MILLION PER YEAR are needed to run the mansion. But no worries, the loyal Scobie-doo will continue praising them. Do you think they have a spare room for MA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Running Harry and Meghan's $14.7m mansion could cost $4.4m a year
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new California mansion comes with eye-watering bills that could stretch as high as $4.4million per year... so what makes their new property so expensive?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I would hope someone who buys $14M homes are making well over $10M a year haha.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, Meghan couldn't wait to tell her publicist, who told _People_, who told us all about Meghan's speech. Yay!
> 
> As one would expect, it sounds like she spent more time talking about herself and her views than the accomplishments of the person she was interviewing. Oh, and for some reason at a summit on gender equality she decided to talk about racism.
> 
> WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS TRIPE IF SUGARY COMMENTS MAKE YOU GAG!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'*
> Meghan Markle says "it's good to be home" after her return to the U.S.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, joined a virtual summit on Friday for a conversation with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*, a "nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy" — with Meghan serving as moderator and asking the questions.
> 
> Meghan also spoke about returning to her home state of California amid the killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and others.
> 
> "To come back and to just see this state of affairs, I think at the onset, if I'm being honest, it was just devastating. It was so sad to see where our country was in that moment," she said. "If there's any silver lining in that, I would say that in the weeks after the murder of George Floyd, in the peaceful protests that you were seeing, in the voices that were coming out, in the way that people were actually owning their role…it shifted from sadness to a feeling of absolute inspiration, because I can see that the tide is turning."
> 
> She added that the peaceful protests and call for change have been energizing.
> 
> "From my standpoint, it’s not new to see this undercurrent of racism and certainly unconscious bias, but I think to see the changes that are being made right now is really — it's something I look forward to being a part of,” Meghan said. "And being part of using my voice in a way that I haven’t been able to of late. So, yeah, it’s good to be home.”
> 
> After stepping down from their royal roles earlier this year, Meghan and Prince Harry moved to California with their 1-year-old son, Archie. They recently relocated from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara.
> 
> "They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family," a rep for the couple tells PEOPLE.
> 
> For the virtual appearance, Meghan wore an orange ensemble with her hair in loose waves. She and fellow Northwestern alumna Ramshaw discussed the 19th*'s beginnings, with the Duchess of Sussex congratulating her on the journalistic endeavor.
> 
> "You're capturing this moment in such an extraordinary way...You did it," she said.
> 
> Meghan, who recently revealed that she plans to vote in the U.S. presidential election this year in an article for _Marie Claire, _also spoke with Ramshaw about the importance of voting. (The organization — named for the amendment that granted (some) women the right to vote in the United States and includes an asterisk in its title to represent the work still to be done — held their "The 19th Represents" virtual summit 100 years after the amendment was ratified in August 1920.)
> 
> "When I have these conversations about encouraging people to go out and vote, I think it's often challenging for men and women alike and certainly for people to remember just how hard it was to get the right to vote. And to be really aware and not taking that for granted," she said. "My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."
> 
> She added, "I really do hope what you're able to encourage and what we're able to see happen through The 19th* over the course of the next few months is that women understand that their voices are needed now more than ever — and the best way to exercise that is through voting."
> 
> Meghan also praised Ramshaw as a fellow mother making a difference in the world.
> 
> "I know what it's like with a toddler," the Duchess of Sussex said, referring to son Archie. "There's not a lot of time."
> 
> Meghan said in a statement to _Glamour_ after the engagement was announced earlier this month, "The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important. I'm looking forward to asking the cofounder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core."
> 
> Ramshaw shared on Twitter, "In the department of the surreal: The Duchess reached out to us; she said [the 19th's] vision of building a diverse and representative newsroom that covers women and other underserved people with nuance + empathy spoke to her immediately."
> 
> Ramshaw continued, "She asked if she could interview me on 'storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media,' and 'what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core.' "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle joined a virtual summit for a conversation on race and gender with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


It is for this type of articles that I would like to have more emojis  in the 'Like' option.


----------



## Lounorada

doni said:


> I just don’t get it. And this is not a criticism exclusively of H&M.
> In Old Hollywood, stars lived a grand lifestyle. But houses were much much smaller, tended to be modern too (and stylish).
> In Old Europe, the aristocracy and the rich, yes they had palaces and big houses full of rooms. But they were flowing with people. From family, to servants, to permanent guests. The square meter per person was probably rather tight.
> There was no awareness of climate change then.
> Now you have all this California elite, non stop talking about the environment, lecturing, forever attending climate change events and fund risings, and they live in these monumental air-conditioned atrocities, with hundreds of useless bathrooms, manicured lawns and big pools needing lots of water, far away from any place that could possibly be reached by foot, and not employing any live in service (and thus preferring people taking the car in an out of there every day) because it is _cozier_ that way...
> But when they go to Africa they take pride in using the woods because, you know, they are so down to earth.


Well said @doni









bag-mania said:


> That house just keeps getting bigger every time you hear about it. Now it is 18,671-sq. ft. with 19 bathrooms. And Scobie, who claims he didn't talk with Meghan and Harry when doing the book, feels perfectly comfortable saying that this is their "forever home." What a dope!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito Mansion Is Their 'Forever Home'
> 
> 
> 'Finding Freedom' co-author Omid Scobie dishes on the couple's latest move, whom their celebrity neighbors are and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com








Nothing is forever with these two.



CobaltBlu said:


> The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million – eXtravaganzi
> 
> 
> The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.extravaganzi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is from five years ago...including some interior shots. Hard to find, it has pretty much been scrubbed.
> Good thing I'm on the case....  The little casita by the water is very cool.  Gardens are nice.
> View attachment 4818749
> 
> View attachment 4818750
> 
> View attachment 4818751
> 
> View attachment 4818752
> 
> View attachment 4818753
> 
> View attachment 4818754
> 
> View attachment 4818755
> 
> View attachment 4818756
> 
> View attachment 4818757
> 
> View attachment 4818758
> 
> View attachment 4818759
> 
> View attachment 4818760





CobaltBlu said:


> more....
> View attachment 4818762
> 
> View attachment 4818763
> 
> View attachment 4818764
> 
> View attachment 4818765
> 
> View attachment 4818766
> 
> View attachment 4818767
> 
> View attachment 4818768
> 
> View attachment 4818769
> 
> View attachment 4818770
> 
> View attachment 4818771





CobaltBlu said:


> last ones.  this must be the "stripper pole" but its hardly that....
> View attachment 4818773
> 
> View attachment 4818780



This house to me is just... 





(apart from the gardens which are nice)

I just realised I said on here that I had saved the pictures of the house interior and meant to post them last night, but completely forgot and fell asleep! Oops.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> It is understandable, they may need the $$$. DM already made the calculations- a TOTAL: $4.4MILLION PER YEAR are needed to run the mansion. But no worries, the loyal Scobie-doo will continue praising them. Do you think they have a spare room for MA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Running Harry and Meghan's $14.7m mansion could cost $4.4m a year
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new California mansion comes with eye-watering bills that could stretch as high as $4.4million per year... so what makes their new property so expensive?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They're radically undercounting the property taxes too! It would be something like $183k per year, not $68k


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Love your optimism. Oprah seems to be already a big supporter of the couple, according to Scobie-doo. QE is also a very smart lady, and we know the rest of the story.



I haven't heard of Oprah writing any big checks for them. She may have introduced them to Tyler Perry and they got the use of the mansion, but that wasn't directly from her. 

If they want to impress all the other rich celebrities they have to show they can accomplish something on their own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

"My husband for example — he's never been able to vote." 

[never trust a grifter]









						Does the Queen vote in general elections? Rules on the royal family voting
					

MILLIONS of people across the country will today cast their votes – but many may be wondering if the Queen can vote in the general election. Here are the rules on whether or not the Queen can…




					www.the-sun.com
				



*Can the Royal Family vote in General Elections?*
It may surprise you that all royals are able to vote but chooses not to.
The Royal Family are expected to be above politics and as such voluntarily refrain from casting votes.
Everyone in the line of succession needs to remain politically neutral.



bag-mania said:


> "When I have these conversations about encouraging people to go out and vote, I think it's often challenging for men and women alike and certainly for people to remember just how hard it was to get the right to vote. And to be really aware and not taking that for granted," she said. *"My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."*


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> They're radically undercounting the property taxes too! It would be something like $183k per year, not $68k


If they would stop pretending to be woke, philanthropists, humanitarians, ..., saints, and fire their PR-team, I would be fine with them buying a 100-toilet mansion.
People like them are making me rethink my future donations. This is not good, because there are a lot of people in need of help. This is really upsetting.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> "My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."
> 
> [never trust a grifter]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does the Queen vote in general elections? Rules on the royal family voting
> 
> 
> MILLIONS of people across the country will today cast their votes – but many may be wondering if the Queen can vote in the general election. Here are the rules on whether or not the Queen can…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Can the Royal Family vote in General Elections?*
> It may surprise you that all royals are able to vote but chooses not to.
> The Royal Family are expected to be above politics and as such voluntarily refrain from casting votes.
> Everyone in the line of succession needs to remain politically neutral.



He's a f*cking prince! He's never needed to vote because his place at the top was ensured by the chance of his birth. And here Meghan is lecturing all these feminists who are much more intelligent than she is about how they ought to feel sorry for Harry. The sad thing is I think they liked her. What a load of nonsense.


----------



## rose60610

zinacef said:


> How does one actually furnish a huge home like this?  This would be like a full time job for me. When we bought our house they said the rule is furnish your house with about 10% of the cost of the house, whatever would that be. You just about have to hire an agency to get things together. I’m sure she has the “staff” if they made it to their second day or night or next 5am because I know I would have to quit.



I think furnishing a house like this would be very easy for MM. She'd fill it full of pictures of herself. 

I wonder if they could send for furnishings from Frogmore. Or maybe they'll have to wait for a scratch-and-dent sale.


----------



## lalame

zinacef said:


> How does one actually furnish a huge home like this?  This would be like a full time job for me. When we bought our house they said the rule is furnish your house with about 10% of the cost of the house, whatever would that be. You just about have to hire an agency to get things together. I’m sure she has the “staff” if they made it to their second day or night or next 5am because I know I would have to quit.


You'd pay a really, really, really expensive interior design company to do it for you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Too bad Emily didn’t question MM about that comment — thought Em was a better journalist than that.  
*He has the right and the ability to vote.  He chooses not to. *

Why aren’t more people outraged at the lies?  The silence is deafening! 




bag-mania said:


> He's a f*cking prince! He's never needed to vote because his place at the top was ensured by the chance of his birth. And here Meghan is lecturing all these feminists who are much more intelligent than she is about how they ought to feel sorry for Harry. The sad thing is I think they liked her. What a load of nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> "My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."


I feel her pain, poor H deprived from his rights. 

Can you imagine if Harry had been the first born instead of William?


----------



## rose60610

It would be odd for any member of monarchy to vote. They hold their positions via ovarian lotteries, they're "above" "all those people" who have a political bent of some kind. They're expected to refrain from politics. If they don't I could understand critics of their political choices demanding to abolish the respective monarchy. Newsweek had an interesting article covering this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

"My husband for example — he's never been able to vote." 

[never trust a grifter]


*Does the Queen vote in general elections? Rules on the royal family voting*
MILLIONS of people across the country will today cast their votes – but many may be wondering if the Queen can vote in the general election. Here are the rules on whether or not the Queen can…



www.the-sun.com
Can the Royal Family vote in General Elections?
It may surprise you that all royals are able to vote but chooses not to.
The Royal Family are expected to be above politics and as such voluntarily refrain from casting votes.
Everyone in the line of succession needs to remain politically neutral.



Chanbal said:


> I feel her pain, poor H deprived from his rights.
> 
> Can you imagine if Harry had been the first born instead of William?


----------



## CarryOn2020

MM said “he's never been able to vote”.

That is a lie. He is *able* to vote. He *chooses* not to.

She is trying to generate sympathy for him by equating his life to those who have truly been oppressed.
We cannot allow her BS to go unchallenged.

If she meant he is not able to vote in the USA, that is because he does not meet the criteria:








						Who Can and Can’t Vote in U.S. Elections | USAGov
					

To vote in U.S. elections, you must be a U.S. citizen, turn 18 on or before Election Day, and meet your state’s residency and registration requirements.




					www.usa.gov
				




*Who CAN’T Vote?*

Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents
Again, he could vote here if he became a citizen. We all know why he will never become a US citizen.
They are knee-deep in bs.






rose60610 said:


> It would be odd for any member of monarchy to vote. They hold their positions via ovarian lotteries, they're "above" "all those people" who have a political bent of some kind. They're expected to refrain from politics. If they don't I could understand critics of their political choices demanding to abolish the respective monarchy. Newsweek had an interesting article covering this.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry or any other member of the BRF voted, they'd be taken to the woodshed, even though it's technically legal for them to do so. If they voted and their choice became known, the firestorm of backlash wouldn't be worth it. It's strategic just to stay out of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

He is *able *to vote.
It is horribly misleading and deceitful to say that “he has never been able to vote”.

Words matter. Time to challenge their BS narratives.
It is morally wrong for her to equate his situation to those here in the USA who truly are not able to vote.


----------



## rose60610

MM is such a dope. I'd love for somebody to grow a pair and call her on it. She'd have to explain it's an expectation not a legality. Like it was expected H would stay in England, not bail. Like it was expected MM would respect and grow in her role, not wither and wallow in self pity after being given untold riches.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone else is fed up with their deceit.  Although it is exhausting, time-consuming and, at times, comical, they must be challenged on their BS. Lies such as theirs are dangerous to our freedoms. 









						Uncle disputes claim Meghan's first husband couldn't cope with fame
					

Meghan Markle and Trevor Engelson were inseparable boyfriend and girlfriend before just 23 months of marriage and a sudden split but the reasons why have always remained undisclosed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> *"My husband for example — he's never been able to vote." *
> 
> [never trust a grifter]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does the Queen vote in general elections? Rules on the royal family voting
> 
> 
> MILLIONS of people across the country will today cast their votes – but many may be wondering if the Queen can vote in the general election. Here are the rules on whether or not the Queen can…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Can the Royal Family vote in General Elections?*
> It may surprise you that all royals are able to vote but chooses not to.
> The Royal Family are expected to be above politics and as such voluntarily refrain from casting votes.
> Everyone in the line of succession needs to remain politically neutral.





CarryOn2020 said:


> MM said *“he's never been able to vote”.*
> 
> That is a lie. He is *able* to vote. He *chooses* not to.
> 
> She is trying to generate sympathy for him by equating his life to those who have truly been oppressed.
> We cannot allow her BS to go unchallenged.
> 
> If she meant he is not able to vote in the USA, that is because he does not meet the criteria:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who Can and Can’t Vote in U.S. Elections | USAGov
> 
> 
> To vote in U.S. elections, you must be a U.S. citizen, turn 18 on or before Election Day, and meet your state’s residency and registration requirements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usa.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who CAN’T Vote?*
> 
> Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents
> Again, he could vote here if he became a citizen. We all know why he will never become a US citizen.
> They are knee-deep in bs.






OMG, so glad you brought that up, you took the words straight out of my mouth! Reading that part of her 'iNtErViEw', it jumped straight out at me. She is insufferable... the lengths she will go to play the eternal victim (and make H out to be victim) is shocking. She has no shame.



Chanbal said:


> I feel her pain, poor H deprived from his rights.
> 
> *Can you imagine if Harry had been the first born instead of William?*


I imagine it would be something like this...











Chaos.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is *able *to vote.
> It is horribly misleading and deceitful to say that “he has never been able to vote”.
> 
> Words matter. *Time to challenge their BS narratives*.
> It is morally wrong for her to equate his situation to those here in the USA who truly are not able to vote.


----------



## marietouchet

elvisfan4life said:


> I don't think so that would be like the size of Scotland!!!!
> 
> View attachment 4819061


i stand corrected, thank you
Must have got messed up by all the zeroes in the Sq footage, acres and price , my bad


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Most of these are likely self-made people who are too smart to be duped out of their money by the likes of H&M. There are thousands of charities out there competing for cash. They need to have a valid plan for theirs before rich people are going to line up to fund it.


and I'm sure you never see your neighbors there....unless someone they know (Oprah?) throws them a welcome party


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, Meghan couldn't wait to tell her publicist, who told _People_, who told us all about Meghan's speech. Yay!
> 
> As one would expect, it sounds like she spent more time talking about herself and her views than the accomplishments of the person she was interviewing. Oh, and for some reason at a summit on gender equality she decided to talk about racism.
> 
> WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS TRIPE IF SUGARY COMMENTS MAKE YOU GAG!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'*
> Meghan Markle says "it's good to be home" after her return to the U.S.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, joined a virtual summit on Friday for a conversation with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*, a "nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy" — with Meghan serving as moderator and asking the questions.
> 
> Meghan also spoke about returning to her home state of California amid the killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and others.
> 
> "To come back and to just see this state of affairs, I think at the onset, if I'm being honest, it was just devastating. It was so sad to see where our country was in that moment," she said. "If there's any silver lining in that, I would say that in the weeks after the murder of George Floyd, in the peaceful protests that you were seeing, in the voices that were coming out, in the way that people were actually owning their role…it shifted from sadness to a feeling of absolute inspiration, because I can see that the tide is turning."
> 
> She added that the peaceful protests and call for change have been energizing.
> 
> "From my standpoint, it’s not new to see this undercurrent of racism and certainly unconscious bias, but I think to see the changes that are being made right now is really — it's something I look forward to being a part of,” Meghan said. "And being part of using my voice in a way that I haven’t been able to of late. So, yeah, it’s good to be home.”
> 
> After stepping down from their royal roles earlier this year, Meghan and Prince Harry moved to California with their 1-year-old son, Archie. They recently relocated from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara.
> 
> "They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family," a rep for the couple tells PEOPLE.
> 
> For the virtual appearance, Meghan wore an orange ensemble with her hair in loose waves. She and fellow Northwestern alumna Ramshaw discussed the 19th*'s beginnings, with the Duchess of Sussex congratulating her on the journalistic endeavor.
> 
> "You're capturing this moment in such an extraordinary way...You did it," she said.
> 
> Meghan, who recently revealed that she plans to vote in the U.S. presidential election this year in an article for _Marie Claire, _also spoke with Ramshaw about the importance of voting. (The organization — named for the amendment that granted (some) women the right to vote in the United States and includes an asterisk in its title to represent the work still to be done — held their "The 19th Represents" virtual summit 100 years after the amendment was ratified in August 1920.)
> 
> "When I have these conversations about encouraging people to go out and vote, I think it's often challenging for men and women alike and certainly for people to remember just how hard it was to get the right to vote. And to be really aware and not taking that for granted," she said. "My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."
> 
> She added, "I really do hope what you're able to encourage and what we're able to see happen through The 19th* over the course of the next few months is that women understand that their voices are needed now more than ever — and the best way to exercise that is through voting."
> 
> Meghan also praised Ramshaw as a fellow mother making a difference in the world.
> 
> "I know what it's like with a toddler," the Duchess of Sussex said, referring to son Archie. "There's not a lot of time."
> 
> Meghan said in a statement to _Glamour_ after the engagement was announced earlier this month, "The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important. I'm looking forward to asking the cofounder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core."
> 
> Ramshaw shared on Twitter, "In the department of the surreal: The Duchess reached out to us; she said [the 19th's] vision of building a diverse and representative newsroom that covers women and other underserved people with nuance + empathy spoke to her immediately."
> 
> Ramshaw continued, "She asked if she could interview me on 'storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media,' and 'what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core.' "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle joined a virtual summit for a conversation on race and gender with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


gee, why doesn't Terry Gross talk more about hersef, her feelings and thoughts, when she intereviews people?


----------



## V0N1B2

bisousx said:


> These bathrooms might not exist or be permitted. The tax records (at least per one software) show it has 13.5 baths.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As an investor, I use a software that compiles public records in a one stop snapshot to see a property’s transactions. The buyer purchased this through a trust in June 2020 and it was purchased as a short sale. Previous owner bought for around $25m but took out two large cashout loans, one at $9.9m and another loan at $11.2.
> 
> The taxes were/are estimated about $282k per year.


Yeah it was bought through an LLC. Apparently it was registered to the same company address that Meghan used for all her other business dealings. 
* apologies if someone already posted this, I’m three pages behind*


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Surrounded by all these potential donors to the Arch*** Foundation  $$$$$$$$$$$.
> 
> View attachment 4819050
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet Meghan and Harry's new Montecito neighbors
> 
> 
> Meghan and  Harry  bought the nine-bedroom and 16-bathroom mansion in the secluded area of Riven Rock in upscale Montecito in June for $14.65M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





bag-mania said:


> Most of these are likely self-made people who are too smart to be duped out of their money by the likes of H&M. There are thousands of charities out there competing for cash. They need to have a valid plan for theirs before rich people are going to line up to fund it.


You know that these people must be thrilled to bits to have a pair of high maintenance, overly litigious, fame whoring drama queens move in. They must be over the moon


----------



## chicinthecity777

CobaltBlu said:


> The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million – eXtravaganzi
> 
> 
> The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.extravaganzi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is from five years ago...including some interior shots. Hard to find, it has pretty much been scrubbed.
> Good thing I'm on the case....  The little casita by the water is very cool.  Gardens are nice.


Not offence to anybody who like it but personally I find the whole thing overly done, overly decorated and over the top. Really tacky! Completely the opposite of elegant and chic. Each to their own indeed!


TC1 said:


> Yeeesh, that home is garish


Yep.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, yes, oh yes, absolutely, the world needs more super-duper McMansions for the classy people on the planet.
SMH at the hypocrites.


----------



## V0N1B2

Tootsie17 said:


> You're right, he won't care about the décor or how many baths the house has.  I just want him to be happy and to enjoy the playground and pool.  I hope Archie is a jovial child who will have good memories of growing up in the house.


You think Ar-Kay is gonna grow up in this house? 
My prediction is they’ll be there 4 years tops. 
All my opinion of course.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, yes, oh yes, absolutely, the world needs more super-duper McMansions for the classy people on the planet.
> SMH at the hypocrites.



Just still trying to wrap my brain around the fact these two grifters have their hearts' desires.

Shame on you BRF, shame on you.

My bet is that this is not going down very well with Wills & Kate~ they exemplify the worker-bees of the fam imo.

Hmmm, do nothing, sling mud & constantly complain? Get rewarded.
Welcome to the new world. Will add that to my play book, lol.
Thanks, H&M.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone else is fed up with their deceit.  Although it is exhausting, time-consuming and, at times, comical, they must be challenged on their BS. Lies such as theirs are dangerous to our freedoms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncle disputes claim Meghan's first husband couldn't cope with fame
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Trevor Engelson were inseparable boyfriend and girlfriend before just 23 months of marriage and a sudden split but the reasons why have always remained undisclosed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Trevor, who had been her mentor and *soulmate* and to whom she had clung as his fortunes rose ..." *Soulmate* the same word used by the brainwashed H. I wonder if MM makes them believe they are soulmates...

"According to Finding Freedom, Meghan was puzzled as to why Trevor *didn’t do more to support her career*." The BRF didn't do more to protect her... professional victim. 

"According to uncle Mickey-Miles, Engelson... devoted a decade to Meghan, steering her career, only to find himself dumped when she attained it." As for this latest evaluation of his nephew’s first marriage, uncle Mickey-Miles says: ‘It sounds like this book — ... — is *rubbish*.’ The Engelson's family is likely celebrating, but the BRF...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

The royals have voting right but they don't excise that right because they are supposed to be political neutral. If they want to vote then they really need to be completely removed of their royal titles, ties and whole works and we all know how they think about the titles!


----------



## youngster

Interesting that this is perhaps the first time that one of Trevor Engelson's family has broken their silence about that marriage.  For the most part, they've all been quiet and he (Trevor) has been extremely discreet when you know he's been offered a lot of money to talk.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Considering how easily JCMH got duped by the fake Greta, they'd be on pins and needles to get an invite from Oprah. How about under the pretense of a costume party? A potluck costume party! They'd show up at Oprah's gate and she'd probably allow them in. Surprise! (Not that I'd ever think of such a thing )


Rich!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another challenge to their BS — it is near the bottom of the article 









						Princess stuns in three new portraits to mark turning 70
					

The Princess Royal's 70th birthday has been marked with the release of three official photographs taken at her Gatcombe Park home in Gloucestershire. to celebrate the milestone.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Harry and Meghan are a different kettle of fish. They are the *journalists’ gift that simply keeps on giving *— though for very different reasons. Scarcely a week goes by without journalists throughout the land offering up their thanks for yet another story about them that will have the nation *gobbling up every word with a mixture of horror and hilarity*.

This past week has been a vintage one. Only yesterday, we had the news that they have bought a house in California. By ‘house’ I mean, obviously, a vast mansion that’s more akin to a luxury country club than to, say, Frogmore Cottage, which had been intended to be their home in this country. You’ll remember it. *They still owe the taxpayer a couple of million for renovating it to their taste.*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> The royals have voting right but they don't excise that right because they are supposed to be political neutral. If they want to vote then they really need to be completely removed of their royal titles, ties and whole works and we all know how they think about the titles!



The point is MM lied when she said that “he has never been able to vote.”
He has always been *able*, he has *chosen* not to. Another example of MM’s manipulative BS.
Don‘t tread on us. Don’t even try to revise our history of voting. Power to us.


----------



## gracekelly

Hair and lips?  She needs to stop doing this.  Please stop waving your hands, it's making me dizzy.


----------



## purseinsanity

I don't understand why all the people she's Markled (besides her own family) keep quiet?  Do they have to sign NDAs to even speak to her royalness?  If she threw me under the bus like she seems to with everyone, I'd tell everyone what a witch she is LOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Hair and lips?  She needs to stop doing this.  Please stop waving your hands, it's making me dizzy.



No disrespect to your post.  I tried to watch but every time she spoke, I felt like slapping her.  I could only watch less than a minute LOL.  She's a better actress than she's been given credit for.  She also looks like she's turning into a Kardashian.  Extensions?  Lip fillers?  Conturing?


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Not offence to anybody who like it but personally I find the whole thing overly done, overly decorated and over the top. Really tacky! Completely the opposite of elegant and chic. Each to their own indeed!
> 
> Yep.



Nothing political, but I saw pictures of Donald T's house before and there was so much gold everything, it was anything but elegant.  Tacky is the same word I'd use.  Too much!  And in my culture gold is good!  This house is also tacky to me in a more Golden Girls kind of way.  Looks dated.


----------



## bisousx

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand why all the people she's Markled (besides her own family) keep quiet?  Do they have to sign NDAs to even speak to her royalness?  If she threw me under the bus like she seems to with everyone, I'd tell everyone what a witch she is LOL.



I personally wouldn’t blab to the press about a former friend or flame even if they did me wrong. I can understand why Trevor didn’t speak to the press either.. no one wants to look like sour grapes.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Interesting that this is perhaps the first time that one of Trevor Engelson's family has broken their silence about that marriage.  For the most part, they've all been quiet and he (Trevor) has been extremely discreet when you know he's been offered a lot of money to talk.



Trevor took the high road and look where it got him. He was with her for many years and he probably watched other people get Markled and I bet he never thought it would happen to him.  He’s probably still perplexed by it  but fortunately he has moved on and has a wife and a child. He’s happier now than he was with Meghan, he’d have to be.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Surrounded by all these potential donors to the Arch*** Foundation  $$$$$$$$$$$.
> 
> View attachment 4819050
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet Meghan and Harry's new Montecito neighbors
> 
> 
> Meghan and  Harry  bought the nine-bedroom and 16-bathroom mansion in the secluded area of Riven Rock in upscale Montecito in June for $14.65M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Uh oh, JCMH .. Meghan is going try like heck to meet that "*On Forbes' Richest List*" gentleman .. after all, that way she'll have even more $$$ to spend, while still getting funded for Archie of course, and then won't have to deal with the BRF and her "inability" to be able to speak freely on politics, etc.!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Trevor is not speaking directly, it is his uncle. To me, it shows how supportive his family is. They have read MM’s lies and have had enough of it. The world has changed. Unquestioned obedience or deference to elites is o.v.e.r.   The world has moved on.

No offence to Montecito residents, your McMansions just are not impressive. In fact, they all have a similar look and style. Pools, sauna, gyms, stripper pole, similar cabinetry, look-alike landscaping, multiple bathrooms, gated — we can find the same thing in every city in the USA. Yawn.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Hair and lips?  She needs to stop doing this.  Please stop waving your hands, it's making me dizzy.



nice hair er extensions er wig?  sorry she is just so smug....so she is going to vote?  so what?  so am I


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Uh oh, JCMH .. Meghan is going try like heck to meet that "*On Forbes' Richest List*" gentleman .. after all, that way she'll have even more $$$ to spend, while still getting funded for Archie of course, and then won't have to deal with the BRF and her "inability" to be able to speak freely on politics, etc.!!


oh yes, now she can speak....I'm so excited


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Hair and lips?  She needs to stop doing this.  Please stop waving your hands, it's making me dizzy.



Watching part of this video made me feel sick, she is very dangerous.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> No disrespect to your post.  I tried to watch but every time she spoke, I felt like slapping her.  I could only watch less than a minute LOL.  She's a better actress than she's been given credit for.  She also looks like she's turning into a Kardashian.  Extensions?  Lip fillers?  Conturing?


 I felt the same way!  Those waving hands were killing me.  I'm not sure which is worse the hair or the lips, however you can remove those awful extension, but the lips are going to stay a while.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Interesting that this is perhaps the first time that one of Trevor Engelson's family has broken their silence about that marriage.  For the most part, they've all been quiet and he (Trevor) has been extremely discreet when you know he's been offered a lot of money to talk.


I don't think his uncle would have spoken unless Trevor said it was OK.


----------



## Emeline

I wonder how long it will take H  to realize he's living in a  poor imitation of the beautiful stately homes he's always known.

And MM can renovate to her heart's content, it won't change the basic fact.


----------



## gracekelly

Emeline said:


> I wonder how long it will take H  to realize he's living in a  poor imitation of the beautiful stately homes he's always known.



This place is not even an imitation.  I would guess that for him it is new and different.  He'll get over it.


----------



## pixiejenna

sdkitty said:


> beautiful but ridiculously opulent...and neither of them has earned the money.....at least other celebs who live in mansions have worked for their money (even if they are overpaid compared to others)
> 
> and the landscaping would be a lot more appropriate in England than in dry CA....I do want to hear them explain how they are going to be energy efficient in this place



My first thought was as lovely as the garden is god the water bill must be insane.




bag-mania said:


> Today is the day Meghan gives the closing interview with the CEO of that new womens political group. I'm sure we'll be treated to footage of that later.
> 
> As it turns out ************* was the keynote speaker today as well. We'll see who gets the most press coverage.



I hope ****** over shines word salad Megan.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I don't think his uncle would have spoken unless Trevor said it was OK.



I think you are likely right. I also think it's a warning to MM, if he did give the OK to his uncle to speak. Trevor has stayed silent so far. He's been a gentleman and moved on with his life and his career and likely didn't want to get dragged into the tabloids. But, he doesn't have to stay silent forever, especially if he is maligned or belittled to try to make her look good.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand why all the people she's Markled (besides her own family) keep quiet?  Do they have to sign NDAs to even speak to her royalness?  If she threw me under the bus like she seems to with everyone, I'd tell everyone what a witch she is LOL.



Ahhh, *grace*, for a second here I read, "her selfishness" and not your "*her royalness*", ie our delightful ship-to-shore gal, MM, and do concur, why the silence from everyone?

Is our* CeeJay*, here on tPF, the only person who-knows-someone-who-knows-someone that knew MM way back when she was young and/or starting out as an actress?

Everyone has friends here that knows someone - LA is a small town and of course, Soho House is v social on both coasts, so what gives? 

Yes, *gracekelly*, totally agree, why the silence from almost everyone?


----------



## poopsie

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Just still trying to wrap my brain around the fact these two grifters have their hearts' desires.
> 
> Shame on you BRF, shame on you.
> 
> My bet is that this is not going down very well with Wills & Kate~ they exemplify the worker-bees of the fam imo.
> 
> Hmmm, do nothing, sling mud & constantly complain? Get rewarded.
> Welcome to the new world. Will add that to my play book, lol.
> Thanks, H&M.


That sort of crap has been going on for years now.  IMO it all harkens back to the everyone gets a trophy mentality where hard work and dedication are ignored so as not to make others feel bad. Instead of raising the bar and encouraging achievement we have been dragged downward by progressive thinkers. So now everyone feels entitled to everything whether they have earned it or not.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> I personally wouldn’t blab to the press about a former friend or flame even if they did me wrong. I can understand why Trevor didn’t speak to the press either.. no one wants to look like sour grapes.


You're more mature than I


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Uh oh, JCMH .. Meghan is going try like heck to meet that "*On Forbes' Richest List*" gentleman .. after all, that way she'll have even more $$$ to spend, while still getting funded for Archie of course, and then won't have to deal with the BRF and her "inability" to be able to speak freely on politics, etc.!!


Are you talking about her next 'soulmate'? I wonder what she will have to do this time. She may need to be more creative than 'peeing in the woods'.


----------



## youngster

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Yes, *gracekelly*, totally agree, why the silence from almost everyone?



Probably because they know her and know if they speak, it will be non-stop drama, and they'll be dragged into the tabloids and suffer at the hands of various people in the twitterverse. Not worth it for someone you probably don't care about any longer. Now, if they were maligned directly or indirectly, like what happened to Trevor E., in that book, well, that's different and people might come forward to defend themselves.


----------



## purseinsanity

pixiejenna said:


> I hope ****** over shines word salad Megan.


I think ****** could rip MM a new one.  I wish she would!  Someone needs to put her in her place.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Are you talking about her next 'soulmate'? I wonder what she will have to do this time. She may need to be more creative than 'peeing in the woods'.


Maybe she'll up her game and go number 2?  Wipe with some leaves?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think ****** could rip MM a new one.  I wish she would!  *Someone needs to put her in her place.*


before it's too late (completed your sentence)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

The hair, makeup, clothes, etc. all scream Kardashian look-at-me vibes — she won’t win that competition. Since she is nearly 40, it’s highly unlikely she will ever grow beyond her immature tastes. Such a shame that Emily Ramshaw gave her airtime.

The house, though, screams nouveau-riche. Its impracticality lacks the gravitas and dignity of old money that is found in the UK and Europe. Perhaps this will be exactly what they want. Now if only they could stay out of the media for a few years, we could return some semblance of peace and balance.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think ****** could rip MM a new one.  I wish she would!  *Someone needs to put her in her place.*





Chanbal said:


> *before it's too late* (completed your sentence)


*Could Meghan Markle Run For Office One Day?*








						Could Meghan Markle Run For Office One Day?
					

Meghan "has the capacity to really inspire people and I think that’s what we need in our country right now," author Carolyn Durand said.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, Meghan couldn't wait to tell her publicist, who told _People_, who told us all about Meghan's speech. Yay!
> 
> As one would expect, it sounds like she spent more time talking about herself and her views than the accomplishments of the person she was interviewing. Oh, and for some reason at a summit on gender equality she decided to talk about racism.
> 
> WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS TRIPE IF SUGARY COMMENTS MAKE YOU GAG!
> 
> *Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'*
> Meghan Markle says "it's good to be home" after her return to the U.S.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, joined a virtual summit on Friday for a conversation with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*, a "nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom reporting at the intersection of gender, politics and policy" — with Meghan serving as moderator and asking the questions.
> 
> Meghan also spoke about returning to her home state of California amid the killings of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and others.
> 
> "To come back and to just see this state of affairs, I think at the onset, if I'm being honest, it was just devastating. It was so sad to see where our country was in that moment," she said. "If there's any silver lining in that, I would say that in the weeks after the murder of George Floyd, in the peaceful protests that you were seeing, in the voices that were coming out, in the way that people were actually owning their role…it shifted from sadness to a feeling of absolute inspiration, because I can see that the tide is turning."
> 
> She added that the peaceful protests and call for change have been energizing.
> 
> "From my standpoint, it’s not new to see this undercurrent of racism and certainly unconscious bias, but I think to see the changes that are being made right now is really — it's something I look forward to being a part of,” Meghan said. "And being part of using my voice in a way that I haven’t been able to of late. So, yeah, it’s good to be home.”
> 
> After stepping down from their royal roles earlier this year, Meghan and Prince Harry moved to California with their 1-year-old son, Archie. They recently relocated from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara.
> 
> "They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family," a rep for the couple tells PEOPLE.
> 
> For the virtual appearance, Meghan wore an orange ensemble with her hair in loose waves. She and fellow Northwestern alumna Ramshaw discussed the 19th*'s beginnings, with the Duchess of Sussex congratulating her on the journalistic endeavor.
> 
> "You're capturing this moment in such an extraordinary way...You did it," she said.
> 
> Meghan, who recently revealed that she plans to vote in the U.S. presidential election this year in an article for _Marie Claire, _also spoke with Ramshaw about the importance of voting. (The organization — named for the amendment that granted (some) women the right to vote in the United States and includes an asterisk in its title to represent the work still to be done — held their "The 19th Represents" virtual summit 100 years after the amendment was ratified in August 1920.)
> 
> "When I have these conversations about encouraging people to go out and vote, I think it's often challenging for men and women alike and certainly for people to remember just how hard it was to get the right to vote. And to be really aware and not taking that for granted," she said. "My husband for example — he's never been able to vote."
> 
> She added, "I really do hope what you're able to encourage and what we're able to see happen through The 19th* over the course of the next few months is that women understand that their voices are needed now more than ever — and the best way to exercise that is through voting."
> 
> Meghan also praised Ramshaw as a fellow mother making a difference in the world.
> 
> "I know what it's like with a toddler," the Duchess of Sussex said, referring to son Archie. "There's not a lot of time."
> 
> Meghan said in a statement to _Glamour_ after the engagement was announced earlier this month, "The 19th*'s commitment to reporting and storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media has never been more important. I'm looking forward to asking the cofounder what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core."
> 
> Ramshaw shared on Twitter, "In the department of the surreal: The Duchess reached out to us; she said [the 19th's] vision of building a diverse and representative newsroom that covers women and other underserved people with nuance + empathy spoke to her immediately."
> 
> Ramshaw continued, "She asked if she could interview me on 'storytelling that lifts up those who are too often underrepresented in the media,' and 'what it means to build a media outlet with gender equity, diversity and community at its core.' "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Talks About Moving Back to U.S. Amid Racial Upheaval: 'Just Devastating'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle joined a virtual summit for a conversation on race and gender with Emily Ramshaw, the cofounder and CEO of The 19th*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I need to puke . . . she said a whole lot of nothing.


----------



## Tootsie17

V0N1B2 said:


> You think Ar-Kay is gonna grow up in this house?
> My prediction is they’ll be there 4 years tops.
> All my opinion of course.


Well, didn't Omid aka Scoobie Doo say, in a recent tv interview, the house was H and M's "forever home?" He is their secret spokesperson.  It will be comically interesting to wait and see.


----------



## csshopper

She sure doesn't present as "Royal", maybe the stripper pole has had an influence these past few weeks.


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> I don't think a baby cares about how many bathrooms he has or what the decor is....he may like the playground
> Maybe H will play with him out there or his expert networker mom will find him some playdates




I think little Archie will probably lose his mind over that play structure.  From the bits that we can see, it looks pretty fab to me.  

More missteps for these two eco-warriors - fireplaces are huge polluters.  But worst of all, to me (a city dweller), is the fact that the homes there are on such enormous plots of land.  The only way for anyone to get around is by car.  Little guy will probably need his own driver once he finds some friends.   Wonder if he will get his own security...


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Today is the day Meghan gives the closing interview with the CEO of that new womens political group. I'm sure we'll be treated to footage of that later.
> 
> As it turns out ************* was the keynote speaker today as well. We'll see who gets the most press coverage.




Oh good grief - how long until MM becomes ******’s BFF.  Right alongside Michele and Oprah!  MM is such a fraud!


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> Frankly, I doubt that there are any children in this neighborhood.  She have to slum and go to Mommy and Me in Santa Barbara.



no, she can’t, she’s far too famous! Just ask her!



purseinsanity said:


> No disrespect to your post.  I tried to watch but every time she spoke, I felt like slapping her.  I could only watch less than a minute LOL.  She's a better actress than she's been given credit for.  She also looks like she's turning into a Kardashian.  Extensions?  Lip fillers?  Conturing?



I was wondering if I was the only one seeing changes in her face!



Tootsie17 said:


> Well, didn't Omid aka Scoobie Doo say, in a recent tv interview, the house was H and M's "forever home?" He is their secret spokesperson.  It will be comically interesting to wait and see.



The dogs probably were told they were in a forever home too.


----------



## rose60610

****** won't dare utter a negative word about MM. She's in campaign pander mode and won't dare speak ill of a WOC who supports her. MM has a way of pathetically glomming onto anyone who has any kind of spotlight.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Anyone up for another reader review? Today's entry comes from Amazon customer, Michelle.
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ Bad Teenage Fanfic
> Reviewed in the United States on August 12, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> I am shocked that these people get paid to write. I wrote better when I was 13 and filling my diary with hopes and dreams. The sentence structure veers wildly between convoluted and messy to simplistic depending on whether the authors wish to obfuscate the facts or praise the Sussexes.
> 
> The amount of personal detail makes it feel more like autobiography than biography. For example, it includes tons of detail of how Meghan arranged her home for a Vanity Fair interview, down to laying out afghans for her dogs so they wouldn't mess the white couch and how she arranged the throw pillows. The only way the authors would know that is if they had spoken directly to Meghan, read Meghan's diaries, had a direct wiretap into Meghan's brain or if Meghan revealed every thought she ever had about decorating to a friend who managed to retain all of those (useless) details and passed them on to the authors.
> 
> This book is a silly, poorly written mess and quite frankly, Meghan and Harry should sue the authors.




Another lawsuit opportunity!!  Yes!!


----------



## Emeline

rose60610 said:


> ****** won't dare utter a negative word about MM. She's in campaign pander mode and won't dare speak ill of a WOC who supports her. MM has a way of pathetically glomming onto anyone who has any kind of spotlight.


Just my take- MM won't be mentioned because she is irrelevant.  

I don't think we have heard a word yet from MM's high school when they were "gifted" the MM spotlight.  
People with actual work to do don't care about being selected for her cause of the week club.


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> Oh good grief - how long until MM becomes ******’s BFF.  Right alongside Michele and Oprah!  MM is such a fraud!





rose60610 said:


> ****** won't dare utter a negative word about MM. She's in campaign pander mode and won't dare speak ill of a WOC who supports her. MM has a way of pathetically glomming onto anyone who has any kind of spotlight.



Fortunately it was an online event and Meghan didn’t get to personally meet the others involved. I’m hoping she moves on to her next great publicity scheme. With her hypersensitivity and persecution complex she would be a basket case in politics.


----------



## chowlover2

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  The Swastika was originally an ancient religious symbol in Hinduism and Buddhism and Eurasia in general until Hitler slanted it, rotated it slightly, and basically made it a symbol of evil.  Most Hindus and Buddhists I know don't dare use it, especially in public, because of the association with the Nazis.  Why offend people on purpose?


The swastika is also forbidden in Germany. Guess what white supremacists use as a symbol? The confederate flag.


----------



## Jktgal

"My husband for example — he's never been able to vote." 

JCMH should never take that for granted. One day, hopefully soon, he will be able to vote AND not be able to have a title and live in palaces.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh, surely they have generators —


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> No disrespect to your post.  I tried to watch but every time she spoke, I felt like slapping her.  I could only watch less than a minute LOL.  She's a better actress than she's been given credit for.  She also looks like she's turning into a Kardashian.  *Extensions? Lip fillers? Conturing? *



You forgot _filter_


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> That sort of crap has been going on for years now.  IMO it all harkens back to the everyone gets a trophy mentality where hard work and dedication are ignored so as not to make others feel bad. Instead of raising the bar and encouraging achievement we have been dragged downward by *progressive* thinkers. So now everyone feels entitled to everything whether they have earned it or not.



I take issue with the word *progressive* here

I am totally for all forms of ideology and established patterns of behaviour being questioned and discussed. What you seem to be describing seems to be these people's sense of entitlement to live 'the dream' even though there were never expectations that they could achieve through accomplishment.

It doesn't really matter to any system who is living the dream so long as someone is.

What gets_ me_, is that MM and JCMH actually think they are _more_ accomplished and _better_ in_ every_ way than _everyone_ they preach to (i.e. everyone) and entitled to live the fantasy (looking very Disney-book, cookie-cutter standard re choice of house) on the back's of others' contributions.

And anyone who disagrees with them getting their cake and eating it is obviously prejudiced/hateful/jealous/X.

IMO (and I'm not a mental health professional) their behaviour, including the constant PR feeds, the having to have the last word on everything we'd forgotten about (book) and holier-than-thou weekly sermons  seem far more the manifestations of classic behaviour of vulnerable + grandiose narcissists.

It is sad to see such vomit-inducing behaviour being rewarded.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> Hair and lips?  She needs to stop doing this.  Please stop waving your hands, it's making me dizzy.



#hairbyLupo


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Nothing political, but I saw pictures of Donald T's house before and there was so much gold everything, it was anything but elegant.  Tacky is the same word I'd use.  Too much!  And in my culture gold is good!  This house is also tacky to me in a more Golden Girls kind of way.  Looks dated.


I think they have more in common than either one of them cares to admit.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Fortunately it was an online event and Meghan didn’t get to personally meet the others involved. I’m hoping she moves on to her next great publicity scheme. With her hypersensitivity and persecution complex she would be a basket case in politics.


Love!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> I take issue with the word progressive here.......
> And anyone who disagrees with them getting their cake and eating it is obviously prejudiced/hateful/jealous/X.
> 
> IMO (and I'm not a mental health professional) their behaviour, including the constant PR feeds, the having to have the last word on everything we'd forgotten about (book) and holier-than-thou weekly sermons  seem far more the manifestations of classic behaviour of vulnerable + grandiose narcissists.
> *It is sad to see such vomit-inducing behaviour being rewarded.*



*paperet*, you are a mind-reader.

The rewarding of H&M with a $14M McMansion by pops & granny <after doing not one thing H&M stated they would after running freeeee, yipeee> and esp during COVID-19 here in the US, well, maybe is it time to abolish the monarchy?

If the BRF cannot steer its way through this crisis, I mean, these two bozos just made a complete mockery of the "royal" institution while ripping off the public mucho $$$,$$$,$$$ with an over-the-top-wedding, designer glam wardrobe stuffed in suitcases to travel fast and Frogmore Cottage renos that are left unpaid of course.

So, yes, maybe the British monarchy should now be de-institutionalized if the BRF cannot stabilize these petulant and delusional idiots, imo. Rewarding very bad behavior is clearly dad's way of handling problems.

But during these troubling times with so many people suffering?

An unfortunate turn of events and IF I was a Brit, I would be fuming and yes, this might be the beginning of the end for the monarchy <unfortunately>.


----------



## bag-mania

Do we know for sure that Charles is funding the new property? I mean I know they get a generous allowance from him, but we don’t know that he specifically gave them a significant payment for their dream house. 

An evil thought occurred to me. What if instead of pushing their book release (that they were not involved with!) back a couple of months because of COVID-19, they did it because they needed to get through settlement on the house? The original release date was in early June, right around the time they bought the house. If daddy was fronting the cash they wouldn’t want to mess up that arrangement with their literary tantrum.

ETA: After a bit of thought that speculation won’t work. The publisher determines release dates and they couldn’t influence that. And Charles already knew the book was coming earlier in the year. It would surprise me if he gave them mansion money knowing it was on the horizon.


----------



## marietouchet

we all need distractions from COVID and I woke to headlines of worsened California fires - sad. I have not opened the Euro newspapers yet to see the travails in France & UK

Streaming fun, see Youtube , murky meg  and celt news channels, if you cant keep up and need video-style Cliff notes, look for their most recent vlogs
Murky had a great 15 min recap on the house, lots of substantial documents, I failed to notice the stripper pole in the @CobaltBlu photos (merci) til murky called it out on the video , property financial details, she chased the leads on the LLC that bought the property, well done murky
Also a shorter one on the secrets of Meghan's birthday party , lots of conjecture there but so many details it had to be true, catered by Nobu no less, they went to Montecito from LA (90 miles one way = like 4 hours in traffic LOL), so she could have nibbles

I take all of that with a grain of as alt but  am gobsmacked by the H&M lifestyle given
1. They lecture us improve ourselves and be more eco, for ex
2. they dont exactly have jobs, OK, Meghan did some work on Friday for a video conference, she rattled on about racism which was not the topic of the seminar, hmmm, wonder how she was rated by the conference attendees

Regarding point 2, Jon Bon Jovi and JLO/AROD just bought equally ostentatious piles in Miami, actually much more expensive places, but they have had daytime jobs for like 25 years... they earned it the hard way .. So the Bon Jovi and JLO news sat a lot better with me - I keep asking myself - why am I not positively disposed to H&M? I keep trying to like them , I want to forgive them and see them flourish , naive me


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet  The Tatler article mentioned this LLC, so I will check the video for more info. Thanks so much 
Tatler printed the same info as Page Six, but has not confirmed ChuckDaddy‘s contribution - https://www.tatler.com/article/harry-and-meghan-secretly-buy-house-in-santa-barbara
_Royal insiders suggested yesterday that Harry and Meghan had purchased the home with the help of Prince Charles, a report that has not been confirmed by Clarence House._

@VigeeLeBrun   Agree about the funding problem.  This H&M drama has dragged on far too long.  It is time for the palace to clarify the funding questions as well as citizenship/visa questions. If there is no clear answer from QE or Charles and money is tight, then, yes, it is time for the monarchy to step aside. It has happened in France and Greece, may well happen in Spain, so the BRF may be next. The unresolved issues surrounding Andrew may be the monarchy’s undoing.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> property financial details, she chased the leads on the LLC that bought the property, well done murky
> *Also a shorter one on the secrets of Meghan's birthday party , lots of conjecture there but so many details it had to be true, catered by Nobu no less, they went to Montecito from LA (90 miles one way = like 4 hours in traffic LOL), so she could have nibbles*
> 
> I take all of that with a grain of as alt but  am gobsmacked by the H&M lifestyle given
> 1. They lecture us improve ourselves and be more eco, for ex
> 2. they dont exactly have jobs, OK, Meghan did some work on Friday for a video conference, she rattled on about racism which was not the topic of the seminar, hmmm, wonder how she was rated by the conference attendees
> 
> Regarding point 2, Jon Bon Jovi and JLO/AROD just bought equally ostentatious piles in Miami, actually much more expensive places, but they have had daytime jobs for like 25 years... they earned it the hard way .. So the Bon Jovi and JLO news sat a lot better with me - I keep asking myself - why am I not positively disposed to H&M? I keep trying to like them , I want to forgive them and see them flourish , naive me



So much for the tale of Harry gallantly (but incompetently) cooking Meghan‘s birthday dinner with the help of Doria.


----------



## LittleStar88

maryg1 said:


> Regarding the water used to take care of the house, there are systems now that “recycle” the rain and use it for watering the garden.
> I give them the benefit of the doubt, since this is a fairly new home it could have this system installed.
> But on the other side I don’t see any solar panel on the roof to provide electricity or hot water. I don’t know if they are widely used in the US and the laws that regulate their use on roofs, so I give the benefit of the doubt in this case too.



We don’t get enough rain in SoCal for that to make a difference outside of winter.


----------



## sdkitty

I find it striking that lifestyle reporter Carly Ledbetter repeatedly refers to Meghan as "the duchess" https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-emily-ramshaw_n_5f3590acc5b6fc009a635e74


----------



## Genie27

“The Duchess” is looking more like Patti from Millionaire Matchmaker every day. It’s been a striking resemblance since the blue-dress-video a couple of months back.


----------



## sdkitty

Genie27 said:


> “The Duchess” is looking more like Patti from Millionaire Matchmaker every day. It’s been a striking resemblance since the blue-dress-video a couple of months back.


I guess everyone getting the same PS makes them look generic....seems funny to me that a WOC would need to have her lips plumped


----------



## Pessie

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *paperet*, you are a mind-reader.
> 
> The rewarding of H&M with a $14M McMansion by pops & granny <after doing not one thing H&M stated they would after running freeeee, yipeee> and esp during COVID-19 here in the US, well, maybe is it time to abolish the monarchy?
> 
> If the BRF cannot steer its way through this crisis, I mean, these two bozos just made a complete mockery of the "royal" institution while ripping off the public mucho $$$,$$$,$$$ with an over-the-top-wedding, designer glam wardrobe stuffed in suitcases to travel fast and Frogmore Cottage renos that are left unpaid of course.
> 
> So, yes, maybe the British monarchy should now be de-institutionalized if the BRF cannot stabilize these petulant and delusional idiots, imo. Rewarding very bad behavior is clearly dad's way of handling problems.
> 
> But during these troubling times with so many people suffering?
> 
> An unfortunate turn of events and IF I was a Brit, I would be fuming and yes, this might be the beginning of the end for the monarchy <unfortunately>.


Thing is Harry stopped being of any importance to the crown the minute William and Kate started having kids.  And that was long before Meghan turned up.  And now they‘re gone and done with as far as the public is concerned.  An annoyance certainly, but in no way a crisis.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m kind of surprised that they could get a big mortgage like that, nobody is sure of their earning potential. Maybe there is a co-signer.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m kind of surprised that they could get a big mortgage like that, nobody is sure of their earning potential. Maybe there is a co-signer.



Maybe normal rules don’t apply to celebrities.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Maybe normal rules don’t apply to celebrities.


I don't think financial institutions care who you are...Russian could be carrying paper but more likely daddy is taking care of it IMO


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't think financial institutions care who you are...Russian could be carrying paper but more likely daddy is taking care of it IMO



I guess it doesn’t really matter. There are tens of thousands of offspring of wealthy parents having their lives funded all over the world. We just don’t know who they all are.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> So much for the tale of Harry gallantly (but incompetently) cooking Meghan‘s birthday dinner with the help of Doria.


As I stated, there was not a lot of proof for the Nobu dinner - I did not see the caterer receipt - so take it with a grain of salt 
- could be fake news
BUT the yarn is SO AMUSING ... justbew open minded


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> @marietouchet  The Tatler article mentioned this LLC, so I will check the video for more info. Thanks so much
> Tatler printed the same info as Page Six, but has not confirmed ChuckDaddy‘s contribution - https://www.tatler.com/article/harry-and-meghan-secretly-buy-house-in-santa-barbara
> _Royal insiders suggested yesterday that Harry and Meghan had purchased the home with the help of Prince Charles, a report that has not been confirmed by Clarence House._
> 
> @VigeeLeBrun   Agree about the funding problem.  This H&M drama has dragged on far too long.  It is time for the palace to clarify the funding questions as well as citizenship/visa questions. If there is no clear answer from QE or Charles and money is tight, then, yes, it is time for the monarchy to step aside. It has happened in France and Greece, may well happen in Spain, so the BRF may be next. The unresolved issues surrounding Andrew may be the monarchy’s undoing.


There are also house articles in Vanity Fair & another major magazine - cannot remember name - everyone has a hold of this story 
Again compare and contrast to Jon Bon Jovi & JLO house purchases, that mostly have gone under the radar - I find that point fascinating


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I find it striking that lifestyle reporter Carly Ledbetter repeatedly refers to Meghan as "the duchess" https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-emily-ramshaw_n_5f3590acc5b6fc009a635e74


I get that ...  Duchess seems to be a good solid term ... that has lasted a full two years now. It is so tricky on referencing the BRF in general ... there are so many appellations and they have changed day by day, as the  Sussex titles evaporate along with their status as senior royals. 

She is still Meghan Markle to many folks...  What is their last name du jour ? Windsor ? Mountbatten-Windsor ? Wales?  Technically , Harry has a different last name to his son ... and he was Capt Harry Wales in the military. The royal last name ambiguity is long standing

And of course saying Meghan Sussex - similar to Sophie Wessex - is not entirely incorrect, but I see that only in the UK press, never in the foreign press eg POINT DE VUE - which is French, aristo & Euro


I did find MM's use of the term "our country" to refer to the USA telling in that interview.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m kind of surprised that they could get a big mortgage like that, nobody is sure of their earning potential. Maybe there is a co-signer.


That came also to my mind. I would bet on Oprah (or one of her rich friends), or on Scarface himself as co-signers or lenders??? 

Scarface, from whom the duchess and duke purchased the 19-toilet mansion, is "a person who has endless resources, endless amounts of money..."

There is only a tiny little problem, he may not be kind if someone fails to pay him back. Per one of his borrowers, he “sent numerous death threats, violent images, and pornographic images...”.

In any event, what we know for sure is that the Duchess and Duke have the same taste for opulent houses as Scarface.  Did they acquire also the furniture from him?









						Harry & Meg 'should have been more careful buying home from Scarface Oligarch'
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan “should not be lining the pockets” of the Russian “Scarface Oligarch” they bought their $14 million mansion from after he allegedly launched a three-…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Jktgal

VigeeLeBrun said:


> ...
> 
> An unfortunate turn of events and IF I was a Brit, I would be fuming and yes, this might be the beginning of the end for the monarchy <unfortunately>.



A couple of rogue has-beens, COVID, very bad economic downturn that may last years, AND an aging monarch with a weak successor might just do it. And from the way the BRF have been working working working, they know it, too.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> I get that ...  Duchess seems to be a good solid term ... that has lasted a full two years now. It is so tricky on referencing the BRF in general ... there are so many appellations and they have changed day by day, as the  Sussex titles evaporate along with their status as senior royals.
> 
> She is still Meghan Markle to many folks...  What is their last name du jour ? Windsor ? Mountbatten-Windsor ? Wales?  Technically , Harry has a different last name to his son ... and he was Capt Harry Wales in the military. The royal last name ambiguity is long standing
> 
> And of course saying Meghan Sussex - similar to Sophie Wessex - is not entirely incorrect, but I see that only in the UK press, never in the foreign press eg POINT DE VUE - which is French, aristo & Euro
> 
> 
> I did find MM's use of the term "our country" to refer to the USA telling in that interview.


it just annoys me that she didn't want the responsibilities of the royal life but she likes and uses that title


----------



## rose60610

So here's a couple of jet setters, literally, private jet-setters, going around preaching about climate change and the destruction of the Earth, aaaaaaaaand where do they buy an expensive energy-sucking mega-home?  On the tippy coast that's supposed to either fall into the ocean due to an earthquake or be covered in water due to global warming. Hmmm. So do they and all the other wealthy hypocrites doing the same thing REALLY feel in danger over climate change? Who plops 10, 25, 50, 80+ million $'s on a house only to lecture us about climate change and watch it fall into or be covered up by the sea? If they really feel the danger, they at least feel it's not before they can flip the sucker to another wealthy alarmist who'll buy it. No wonder JCMH and Duchess of Doom have a mile long slate of topics they supposedly care about. In other words, they can farm themselves out to anybody to babble about anything.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> MM is such a dope. I'd love for somebody to grow a pair and call her on it. She'd have to explain it's an expectation not a legality. Like it was expected H would stay in England, not bail. Like it was expected MM would respect and grow in her role, not wither and wallow in self pity after being given untold riches.


Oh trust me, there are some of us who have said "SET" (even though I'm female) .. to call BOTH of them out!  Just show me where to do it, and I will be on it.  I am SO SICK and TIRED of these two, their hypocrisy, their grifting .. I just want them to GO AWAY and BE PRIVATE like they said they (sooooooooooooooooo supposedly) wanted!


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> it just annoys me that she didn't want the responsibilities of the royal life but she likes and uses that title


She loves:
That title
Money
Delivering word salad lectures

I don't think personal responsibility fits into her life plan.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> it just annoys me that she didn't want the responsibilities of the royal life but she likes and uses that title


It annoys me too, and using a title in non monarchical USA is tres gauche
ps tried to write an innocuous term to describe the US political system, and it was edited out , I get it discussing politics is not good


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Maybe normal rules don’t apply to celebrities.



Seems to be true in many areas. 



Chanbal said:


> That came also to my mind. I would bet on Oprah (or one of her rich friends), or on Scarface himself as co-signers or lenders???
> 
> Scarface, from whom the duchess and duke purchased the 19-toilet mansion, is "a person who has endless resources, endless amounts of money..."
> 
> There is only a tiny little problem, he may not be kind if someone fails to pay him back. Per one of his borrowers, he “sent numerous death threats, violent images, and pornographic images...”.
> 
> In any event, what we know for sure is that the Duchess and Duke have the same taste for opulent houses as Scarface.  Did they acquire also the furniture from him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg 'should have been more careful buying home from Scarface Oligarch'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan “should not be lining the pockets” of the Russian “Scarface Oligarch” they bought their $14 million mansion from after he allegedly launched a three-…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



Wearing a tiara with Russian associations was too controversial, but this is cool. Got it!



rose60610 said:


> So here's a couple of jet setters, literally, private jet-setters, going around preaching about climate change and the destruction of the Earth, aaaaaaaaand where do they buy an expensive energy-sucking mega-home?  On the tippy coast that's supposed to either fall into the ocean due to an earthquake or be covered in water due to global warming. Hmmm. So do they and all the other wealthy hypocrites doing the same thing REALLY feel in danger over climate change? Who plops 10, 25, 50, 80+ million $'s on a house only to lecture us about climate change and watch it fall into or be covered up by the sea? If they really feel the danger, they at least feel it's not before they can flip the sucker to another wealthy alarmist who'll buy it. No wonder JCMH and Duchess of Doom have a mile long slate of topics they supposedly care about. In other words, they can farm themselves out to anybody to babble about anything.



I can’t wait until they tell us where to donate money.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> “The Duchess” is looking more like Patti from Millionaire Matchmaker every day. It’s been a striking resemblance since the blue-dress-video a couple of months back.


Well, she certainly knows how to match herself up with millionaires, so I'd say she's an expert in finding rich men to marry!


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I get that ...  Duchess seems to be a good solid term ... that has lasted a full two years now. It is so tricky on referencing the BRF in general ... there are so many appellations and they have changed day by day, as the  Sussex titles evaporate along with their status as senior royals.
> 
> She is still Meghan Markle to many folks...  What is their last name du jour ? Windsor ? Mountbatten-Windsor ? Wales?  Technically , Harry has a different last name to his son ... and he was Capt Harry Wales in the military. The royal last name ambiguity is long standing
> 
> And of course saying Meghan Sussex - similar to Sophie Wessex - is not entirely incorrect, but I see that only in the UK press, never in the foreign press eg POINT DE VUE - which is French, aristo & Euro
> 
> 
> I did find MM's use of the term "our country" to refer to the USA telling in that interview.


She shades the BRF every chance she gets.  Talking about how she's going to vote because she "knows what it's like to not have a voice".  Sigh.  I wish Charles would wake up and cut them off.


----------



## purseinsanity

Wow there are a lot of stans for her.  I was on IG last night and a video of her popped up so I read some comments.  One lady in particular was defending her to the death, how "she has worked hard to get where she is" and on and on and on, like she knows her.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Ahhh, *grace*, for a second here I read, "her selfishness" and not your "*her royalness*", ie our delightful ship-to-shore gal, MM, and do concur, why the silence from everyone?
> 
> Is our* CeeJay*, here on tPF, the only person who-knows-someone-who-knows-someone that knew MM way back when she was young and/or starting out as an actress?
> 
> Everyone has friends here that knows someone - LA is a small town and of course, Soho House is v social on both coasts, so what gives?
> 
> Yes, *gracekelly*, totally agree, why the silence from almost everyone?


Well, from what my friends (_who knew the Markles back then_) have told me, Meghan could get rather "scary" if she [FELT] she had been crossed.  Obviously, her latest schtick is litigation, so maybe these folks feel that she would sue them .. and let's face it, she has a lot more disposable income than they likely do.  

All that being said, at some point (just like Ellen DeGeneres), the truth will come out ..


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Wow there are a lot of stans for her.  I was on IG last night and a video of her popped up so I read some comments.  One lady in particular was defending her to the death, how "she has worked hard to get where she is" and on and on and on, like she knows her.


Probably WAS her,............


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Probably WAS her,............


The thought did cross my mind...


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Oh trust me, there are some of us who have said "SET" (even though I'm female) .. to call BOTH of them out!  Just show me where to do it, and I will be on it.  I am SO SICK and TIRED of these two, their hypocrisy, their grifting .. I just want them to GO AWAY and BE PRIVATE like they said they (sooooooooooooooooo supposedly) wanted!


Yes, please go private. We are tired of so much hypocrisy. 



purseinsanity said:


> She shades the BRF every chance she gets.  Talking about how she's going to vote because she "*knows what it's like to not have a voice*".  Sigh.  I wish Charles would wake up and cut them off.


How can decent people in their right mind support MM?


----------



## sdkitty

Duchess indeed.  and she wants to brag about being back home, being an American, voting


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> So here's a couple of jet setters, literally, private jet-setters, going around preaching about climate change and the destruction of the Earth, aaaaaaaaand where do they buy an expensive energy-sucking mega-home?  On the tippy coast that's supposed to either fall into the ocean due to an earthquake or be covered in water due to global warming. Hmmm. So do they and all the other wealthy hypocrites doing the same thing REALLY feel in danger over climate change? Who plops 10, 25, 50, 80+ million $'s on a house only to lecture us about climate change and watch it fall into or be covered up by the sea? If they really feel the danger, they at least feel it's not before they can flip the sucker to another wealthy alarmist who'll buy it. No wonder JCMH and Duchess of Doom have a mile long slate of topics they supposedly care about. In other words, they can farm themselves out to anybody to babble about anything.



I was trying to figure out why it bothers me so much that they do it versus everyone else (and it seems nearly every celebrity does it). The thing is with other celebrities, I feel partly responsible for their wealth because I'm watching the movies, shows, etc. I'm a willing participant and I see it happen gradually. With H+M, it's impossible to ignore that their wealth for the most part comes from the public and it's like all of a sudden they went from basically public housing lol to extravagant mansion all the while lecturing on being green. Ew.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m just curious, how big is the Cambridge’s house?  Is HM’s new mansion like multiples in terms of size?


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Not offence to anybody who like it but personally *I find the whole thing overly done, overly decorated and over the top. Really tacky! Completely the opposite of elegant and chic.* Each to their own indeed!
> 
> Yep.





gracekelly said:


> Hair and lips?  She needs to stop doing this.  Please stop waving your hands, it's making me dizzy.




The house suits the owners.


----------



## Chanbal

The parrot Scobie-doo is unstoppable, I wonder if MA is in charge of changing the batteries. In any event, good news for the BRF and for our British TPF members: 

*“I can’t imagine them ever stepping back into their roles as working members of the royal family,” he tells Yahoo. “*








						Author of new Prince Harry and Meghan Markle book says duchess's differences 'made her an outcast'
					

Omid Scobie, who co-authored "Finding Freedom" with fellow royal correspondent Carolyn Durand, wants the book to "rehumanize" Harry and Megan.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm sorry, is this Omid guy stupid? Did he read the book he wrote? How is this going to rehumanize them and make them look likeable at all?


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Do we know for sure that Charles is funding the new property? I mean I know they get a generous allowance from him, but we don’t know that he specifically gave them a significant payment for their dream house.
> 
> An evil thought occurred to me. What if instead of pushing their book release (that they were not involved with!) back a couple of months because of COVID-19, they did it because they needed to get through settlement on the house? The original release date was in early June, right around the time they bought the house. If daddy was fronting the cash they wouldn’t want to mess up that arrangement with their literary tantrum.
> 
> ETA: After a bit of thought that speculation won’t work. The publisher determines release dates and they couldn’t influence that. And Charles already knew the book was coming earlier in the year. It would surprise me if he gave them mansion money knowing it was on the horizon.


IIRC, Meghan and Harry wanted to get the release date of the book pushed up because they felt it would be sympathetic towards them; showing them in a more favourable light; so the world would see how difficult it had been for them. You know, the book they had no hand in writing 
Post#29,450 on page 1964 posted by you @bag-mania contains a link from the DM about how Meghan had the final say on what went into the book. Again, the book she now knows relatively little about


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Seems to be true in many areas.
> 
> 
> 
> Wearing a tiara with Russian associations was too controversial, but this is cool. Got it!
> 
> 
> 
> I can’t wait until they tell us where to donate money.


Re" "I can't wait until they tell us where to donate money" 

If you get an email soliciting funds for a nameless charity headquartered at 765 Rockbridge Rd, Montecito CA, don't open it, send it to your JUNK file, it's a phishing scam. Grifters are everywhere these days!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Annawakes said:


> I’m just curious, how big is the Cambridge’s house?  Is HM’s new mansion like multiples in terms of size?



Kensington Palace Apt 1A? I believe it's bigger, it has something like 20 rooms. I'm sure all of the royals' castles are bigger but it's kind of hard to compare a centuries-old building literally built for royalty to a new build mansion. I think if the Cambridges were to go and buy a $20m mansion today, there would be a little bit of scandal.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I get that ...  Duchess seems to be a good solid term ... that has lasted a full two years now. It is so tricky on referencing the BRF in general ... there are so many appellations and they have changed day by day, as the  Sussex titles evaporate along with their status as senior royals.
> 
> She is still Meghan Markle to many folks...  What is their last name du jour ? Windsor ? Mountbatten-Windsor ? Wales?  Technically , Harry has a different last name to his son ... and he was Capt Harry Wales in the military. The royal last name ambiguity is long standing
> 
> And of course saying *Meghan Sussex* - similar to Sophie Wessex - is not entirely incorrect, but I see that only in the UK press, never in the foreign press eg POINT DE VUE - which is French, aristo & Euro
> 
> 
> I did find MM's use of the term "our country" to refer to the USA telling in that interview.



Sounds like she could joint host a talk show with Joey Essex (you prob. won't know who that is - lucky you)


----------



## Lodpah

Their PR bringing up old times as they can’t find anything positive. This is embarrassing the desperation those two scumbags go to length to insert themselves into the public’s psych.
Prince Charles is looking more of a pansy and not fit to be a King if he’s this easily manipulated by a grown as$ son and wicked daughter-in-law  from the West.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> IIRC, Meghan and Harry wanted to get the release date of the book pushed up because they felt it would be sympathetic towards them; showing them in a more favourable light; so the world would see how difficult it had been for them. You know, the book they had no hand in writing
> Post#29,450 on page 1964 posted by you @bag-mania contains a link from the DM about how Meghan had the final say on what went into the book. Again, the book she now knows relatively little about



    Now you can’t expect me to remember articles I posted 300 pages ago. I can barely keep track of what I’m doing this week.

Buuuut, now that you mention it, it was a big deal that the title of the book was changed to Finding Freedom. Meghan was milking the narrative of escaping from the jaws of wealth and privilege for the “freedom” of wealth and privilege without responsibility.  Shame the US media won’t call them out on their lies.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry, is this Omid guy stupid? *Did he read the book he wrote?* How is this going to rehumanize them and make them look likeable at all?


He is very busy with speaking engagements about his masters and he probably only had a chance to browse the book. Though, we should not hold that against him, MM and MA are probably giving him plenty of material to talk about.


----------



## lalame

Meghan talks about this "awful economy of attention" in the interview.... such an eyeroll. It's only an issue if you're trying to profit off that economy. Weird how we don't really see some A-list stars like Jennifer Lawrence or Keanu Reeves between press engagements for their work._ Somehow_ those people, despite all their fame and wealth, keep off the grid.... could it be that when you need to speak about everything at every opportunity you draw attention to yourself? What a revelation!

UGH and then she goes on to talk about how it's a shame people take for granted their right to vote and how hard it was to get that. And one of her examples was... her husband??? No one is feeling sorry that ROYALTY don't have the right to vote. They have access and privilege no one else can come close to, at the literal expense of taxpayers. STFU.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> She shades the BRF every chance she gets.  Talking about how she's going to vote because she "knows what it's like to not have a voice".  Sigh.  I wish Charles would wake up and cut them off.



I mean...really, that struck even me in the throat.

Everybody knows when you're Royal you shut-up.

MM was of course the only person in the entire World over the age of 4 who didn't know that_ before_ she married into it...

...and even after Finding Freedom she's _still_ moaning about her 'incarceration'.

Anyone who has a real job (and not just spend all day contriving CV-inflating, word salad vanity pieces) knows they can't speak as freely as they'd like at times. That includes whilst being at work and off-duty. Whether it's called diplomacy, team-working, following policy or trying not to lose one's job, it's how it is for everyone. 

The reason H is such a good enabler is because he absolutely hasn't a clue about the real world, she could could tell him anything, makes it up as she goes along. Literally, in many cases. But he is also passive aggressive towards his own family and his country. He's let her say that he and she were voteless and voiceless. Good thing she's a US citizen or they'd be seeking asylum from UK's oppressive regime.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Meghan talks about this "awful economy of attention" in the interview.... such an eyeroll. It's only an issue if you're trying to profit off that economy. Weird how we don't really see some A-list stars like Jennifer Lawrence or Keanu Reeves between press engagements for their work._ Somehow_ those people, despite all their fame and wealth, keep off the grid.... could it be that when you need to speak about everything at every opportunity you draw attention to yourself? What a revelation!
> 
> UGH and then she goes on to talk about how it's a shame people take for granted their right to vote and how hard it was to get that. And one of her examples was... her husband??? No one is feeling sorry that ROYALTY don't have the right to vote. They have access and privilege no one else can come close to, at the literal expense of taxpayers. STFU.


Not to mention their national anthem is God Save the Queen and their money is a picture of the Queen. I adore Queen Elizabeth tho. So yeah JCMH or Henrietta or whatever bugger off.


----------



## marietouchet

Itic


Annawakes said:


> I’m just curious, how big is the Cambridge’s house?  Is HM’s new mansion like multiples in terms of size?


wiki has large article on Anmer Hall,  no specifics about house size
google says it is thought to have 10 bedrooms , not known for certain
grade II historic house at one time, so surely has no where near 18 baths 
1.5 M pounds to renovate for the Cambridge’s, paid for with private royal funds


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Buuuut, now that you mention it, it was a big deal that the title of the book was changed to Finding Freedom. Meghan was milking the narrative of escaping from the jaws of wealth and privilege for the “freedom” of wealth and privilege without responsibility.  *Shame the US media won’t call them out on their lies.*



It's because they are treating them like entertainment celebrities who get the puff-ball treatment, not like serious public figures since what they say or do doesn't really impact anyone's life here.   So, news outlets basically re-print the press release, don't do much (if any) digging, move on to the next bit of celebrity "news" since they constantly need to replenish and refresh their content.  They treat all celebs this same way. Seems like there has to be a build up over a period of years and multiple reports of bad behavior before criticism is generally published of a big entertainment figure, like Ellen or scumbag Harvey Weinstein.


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> Sounds like she could joint host a talk show with Joey Essex (you prob. won't know who that is - lucky you)



Don’t do that to Joey! He’s hilarious....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Meghan talks about this "awful economy of attention" in the interview.... such an eyeroll. It's only an issue if you're trying to profit off that economy. Weird how we don't really see some A-list stars like Jennifer Lawrence or Keanu Reeves between press engagements for their work._ Somehow_ those people, despite all their fame and wealth, keep off the grid.... could it be that when you need to speak about everything at every opportunity you draw attention to yourself? What a revelation!


Kylie Jenner - a Kardashian after all (I know she's not really, but you know what I mean) - managed to keep her pregnancy a secret. There were rumours, but not only did NOBODY blab to the press, she also wasn't photographed once. Of course it could be that the press is just so much more interested in world famous grifter Meghan *eyeroll*


----------



## 1LV

Annawakes said:


> *I’m just curious, how big is the Cambridge’s house*?  Is HM’s new mansion like multiples in terms of size?


Bet MM could tell you.


----------



## rose60610

Now that MM is in California, overturning the sofa cushions for spare change, will she stalk Bob Iger again to beg a job? Why doesn't she just demand to run the Disneyland? In her defense, she did become a princess after marrying JCMH and has a hard time distinguishing reality from fantasy anyway. You know, since Disneyland is closed now, why didn't they just move in and take IT over? Or are they forbidden from owning anything bigger than Buckingham Palace? Not that protocol means anything to them.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Now that MM is in California, overturning the sofa cushions for spare change, will she stalk Bob Iger again to beg a job? Why doesn't she just demand to run the Disneyland? In her defense, she did become a princess after marrying JCMH and has a hard time distinguishing reality from fantasy anyway. You know, since Disneyland is closed now, why didn't they just move in and take IT over? Or are they forbidden from owning anything bigger than Buckingham Palace? Not that protocol means anything to them.



Good point, and the security is like Fort Knox, I had my passport screened and the van searched including under the chassis (presumably) for bombs.

I tell you, HCMH and MM missed a trick there!

But, running the place, would take effort and being nice to the staff (I hope).

Doesn't Disney owe her a debt of gratitude?

After all, she must have make a trillion $$$$$$$$ for them and the elephants by now, not to mention she's a real life princess and duchess and humanitarian and young mother and role model...did I mention she's a princess?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe Charles has ever felt one iota of guilt over Diana. I think he’s being cautious because the “new” Harry is unpredictable and disloyal. Charles doesn’t want Harry having any excuse to go telling tales to the media and slamming the BRF.





Chagall said:


> Hard to say but I can’t think of any reason why PC appears to be held hostage by these two. What’s this, hush money.


Agree ...
doubt it’s love or guilt ...there’s probably (a lot) more to hide about the BRF than currently meets the public eye.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> It's because they are treating them like entertainment celebrities who get the puff-ball treatment, not like serious public figures since what they say or do doesn't really impact anyone's life here.   So, news outlets basically re-print the press release, don't do much (if any) digging, move on to the next bit of celebrity "news" since they constantly need to replenish and refresh their content.  They treat all celebs this same way. Seems like there has to be a build up over a period of years and multiple reports of bad behavior before criticism is generally published of a big entertainment figure, like Ellen or scumbag Harvey Weinstein.



True, nothing Meghan and Harry have done is any worse than other celebrities. In fact I’m sure there are lots of celebs who have done many more tacky, hypocritical things than they have. The difference is we don’t know about those because they don’t have multiple PR agencies spinning conflicting narratives several times a week.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Now that MM is in California, overturning the sofa cushions for spare change, will she stalk Bob Iger again to beg a job? Why doesn't she just demand to run the Disneyland? In her defense, she did become a princess after marrying JCMH and has a hard time distinguishing reality from fantasy anyway. You know, since Disneyland is closed now, why didn't they just move in and take IT over? Or are they forbidden from owning anything bigger than Buckingham Palace? Not that protocol means anything to them.



She will have to find someone else to pester for work at Disney. Bob Iger stepped down as CEO earlier in the year. He is still on the board for another year but he won’t have the influence he had when Harry was begging him for a voiceover job for her.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Good point, and the security is like Fort Knox, I had my passport screened and the van searched including under the chassis (presumably) for bombs.
> 
> I tell you, HCMH and MM missed a trick there!
> 
> But, running the place, would take effort and being nice to the staff (I hope).
> 
> Doesn't Disney owe her a debt of gratitude?
> 
> After all, she must have make a trillion $$$$$$$$ for them and the elephants by now, not to mention she's a real life princess and duchess and humanitarian and young mother and role model...did I mention she's a princess?



I'm afraid that you may have forgotten woke, philanthropist, ... entitled, victim...

The BRF has excellent lawyers & councilors working with them, they should be able to clean this mess. I suspect H never bought anything in is life before buying this very expensive house from a very questionable source, and in a new country ... Somebody else with his or her own agenda must be behind all this. H is hopeless and I don't think MM could do all this alone.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I'm afraid that you may have forgotten woke, philanthropist, ... entitled, victim...
> 
> The BRF has excellent lawyers & councilors working with them, they should be able to clean this mess. I suspect H never bought anything in is life before buying this very expensive house from a very questionable source, and in a new country ... Somebody else with his or her own agenda must be behind all this. H is hopeless and I don't think MM could do all this alone.


Well, she certainly couldn't with her "measly" cash!!!  

You know, just thinking about this house .. the size, the number of rooms, etc. .. well, heck .. she could have the whole lot of "markled" family .. Thomas, Samantha and the other siblings - right?!?!  HA .. yeah, I know.  

But seriously, I kind of feel bad for Thomas in some respects.  Based on what my friends told me, he pretty much paid for everything for her, including a fair amount of plastic surgery that she had in High School.  They said that they NEVER met Doria, and that Doria was never present at Meghan's High School plays .. I find that odd given that (now) it appears that they are just "so close"!  That's why I keep on saying that the whole notion of Doria living there?? .. gotta kind of call BS on that, but then again .. who knows because these 2 are constantly putting out spin (oftentimes lies).


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I'm afraid that you may have forgotten woke, philanthropist, ... entitled, victim...
> 
> The BRF has excellent lawyers & councilors working with them, they should be able to clean this mess. I suspect H never bought anything in is life before buying this very expensive house from a very questionable source, and in a new country ... *Somebody else with his or her own agenda must be behind all this. H is hopeless and I don't think MM could do all this alone.*



Yes, I missed a few ha ha 

Oh really? Do you have someone in mind?


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Harry Shares Reminder to Check in on Friends amid 'Stressful' Coronavirus Pandemic
					

"If you haven't heard from someone for a while you know that the first thing you need to do is check in with them," Prince Harry said




					people.com
				




Hmmm...did MM allow Harry to have any of his original friends?    Or is Harry crying out for help?   Hey JCMH, while you're at it, maybe check in on your family. Granny might like to hear from you.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Shares Reminder to Check in on Friends amid 'Stressful' Coronavirus Pandemic
> 
> 
> "If you haven't heard from someone for a while you know that the first thing you need to do is check in with them," Prince Harry said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm...did MM allow Harry to have any of his original friends?    Or is Harry crying out for help?   Hey JCMH, while you're at it, maybe check in on your family. Granny might like to hear from you.



Speechless


----------



## youngster

Today is Princess Anne's 70th birthday.  She's the patron of more than 200 charities and organizations and was president of Save The Children from 1970 - 2016, and is now their patron.  She was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for this work by the President of Zambia. She was on the British equestrian team for several years, won medals in various European eventing competitions, and was a 1976 Olympian.  She is president of the British Olympic Association and was actively involved in bringing the games to London in 2012. She survived a kidnapping attempt in the 1970's. She routinely carries out about 500+ engagements per year on behalf of the Queen. Her estate, Gatcombe Park, hosts equestrian events and a biannual craft fair for artists.  She requested that her two children not be given royal titles and they, and their children, appear well adjusted and close to her.  She frequently recycles and rewears her gowns and clothes and boots.  I think she would likely wear whatever tiara someone handed her to put on her head. She's had a busy, useful, interesting life and managed to live it fairly privately without complaining or filing multiple lawsuits against the tabloids.

Not sure why Harry thinks he'll have a more meaningful life in Santa Barbara/L.A. than doing what Princess Anne has managed to do so successfully for 50+ years.  She, also being second born, is really the example that he should have tried to emulate.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Well, she certainly couldn't with her "measly" cash!!!
> 
> You know, just thinking about this house .. the size, the number of rooms, etc. .. well, heck .. she could have the whole lot of "markled" family .. Thomas, Samantha and the other siblings - right?!?!  HA .. yeah, I know.
> 
> But seriously, I kind of feel bad for Thomas in some respects.  Based on what my friends told me, he pretty much paid for everything for her, including a fair amount of plastic surgery that she had in High School.  They said that they NEVER met Doria, and that Doria was never present at Meghan's High School plays .. I find that odd given that (now) it appears that they are just "so close"!  That's why I keep on saying that the whole notion of Doria living there?? .. gotta kind of call BS on that, but then again .. who knows because these 2 are constantly putting out spin (oftentimes lies).


I'm sure she has in mind to entertain the entire family in the mansion of the 19 toilets.

It was likely more convenient to identify with Thomas when in high school, and with Doria in her new phase ...  We are talking about a practical woman.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Yes, I missed a few ha ha
> 
> Oh really? Do you have someone in mind?


I couple of names come to mind, but I'm counting with our TPF detectives


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Shares Reminder to Check in on Friends amid 'Stressful' Coronavirus Pandemic
> 
> 
> "If you haven't heard from someone for a while you know that the first thing you need to do is check in with them," Prince Harry said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm...did MM allow Harry to have any of his original friends?    Or is Harry crying out for help?   Hey JCMH, while you're at it, maybe check in on your family. Granny might like to hear from you.



It’s his hypocrisy rearing its ugly head again. 

There are none so blind as those who will not see.


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Shares Reminder to Check in on Friends amid 'Stressful' Coronavirus Pandemic
> 
> 
> "If you haven't heard from someone for a while you know that the first thing you need to do is check in with them," Prince Harry said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm...did MM allow Harry to have any of his original friends?    Or is Harry crying out for help?  Hey JCMH, while you're at it, maybe check in on your family. Granny might like to hear from you.


Is that the awful over-worn, faded, un-ironed polo shirt he's wearing again? For a professional video call?










Plus, he always chooses to do these Zoom calls in a room with the worst looking background. It looks like he's sitting in an empty room that's never used with random paint testings on the wall, which is quite the difference in comparison to the set-up M was sitting in for her video interview the other day, which had her looking like she was sitting upon the thrown in her own palace 

Meanwhile all his old friends back in the UK are listening to that sh*t like....


----------



## Aimee3

I may get banned for writing this but it dawned on me why they NEED a house with 19 toilets...they are both so full of Sh!t that 19 toilets are really a necessity for M&H!


----------



## 1LV

Aimee3 said:


> I may get banned for writing this but it dawned on me why they NEED a house with 19 toilets...they are both so full of Sh!t that 19 toilets are really a necessity for M&H!


Too funny!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has this been posted?  House initially designed by a Canadian, then sold to a Russian oligarch, now to H&M.  They seem to have a Canada-Russian pattern developing. Interesting.  

_However, Mr Cunningham sounded one note of caution. In 2018, devastating mudslides – triggered by heavy rain saturating the hills which had been ravaged by wildfires – came within 200ft of the property.

He said: 'We sure as hell didn't think about it [the mudslides] when we were building but certainly it's something I would be thinking about now.'

Mr Cunningham sold the house in 2009 because the couple wanted to downsize but they still live close to their dream home.








						Mudslides warning from designer of Harry and Meghan's mansion
					

Multi-millionaire businessman Terry Cunningham, 61, told how he and his wife Randi bought 5.4 acres of 'spectacular' land in exclusive Montecito in 1999




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?  House initially designed by a Canadian, then sold to a Russian oligarch, now to H&M.  They seem to have a Canada-Russian pattern developing. Interesting.
> 
> _However, Mr Cunningham sounded one note of caution. In 2018, devastating mudslides – triggered by heavy rain saturating the hills which had been ravaged by wildfires – came within 200ft of the property.
> 
> He said: 'We sure as hell didn't think about it [the mudslides] when we were building but certainly it's something I would be thinking about now.'
> 
> Mr Cunningham sold the house in 2009 because the couple wanted to downsize but they still live close to their dream home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudslides warning from designer of Harry and Meghan's mansion
> 
> 
> Multi-millionaire businessman Terry Cunningham, 61, told how he and his wife Randi bought 5.4 acres of 'spectacular' land in exclusive Montecito in 1999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I‘m sure if anything happens to it, they’ll throw a pity party and expect FEMA to pay for it...

 Man, they make me catty.....


----------



## bag-mania

This falls under the category of “you can’t make this s*** up.” Somebody has created an online comic book to tell Harry and Meghan’s side of the story. 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Royal Exit Featured in Comic Book
					

Illustrator Josh Adams brings Prince Harry and Meghan’s Markle’s royal exit to life in a digital comic book —read more to get the details!




					www.google.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, he got the hair correct 
_Nonetheless, drawing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex offered its challenges for illustrator Josh Adams. “The toughest factor to do is to attract even featured good wanting individuals, and Harry and Meghan are literally actually simply stunning individuals,” he notes._


Somewhat serious questions:
— did she meet these rich and powerful, mostly Canadian, men while on the yacht? Or did her disowned daddy set up these connections? Or is it coming from Doria? Oprah? Gayle?
— why this avalanche of videos now? Are they still competing with W&K? Seems every media outlet is reporting on these bratty grifters.
— is this 2020 still f-ing with us???? Can’t we just put up the holiday decorations and call it a year? I’m ready.

It is creepy and odd No one, not one other person (not even the politicians), none are taking up this much space. In the famous Vanity Fair article on Diana, someone commented that Diana not only had a natural glow (MM should take note), but she brought oxygen into the room. That‘s the stuff that money cannot buy, people either have *it* or they don’t. Diana had *it. * I’ve always thought that was such a kind way to characterise someone — bringing in oxygen.

Now, fast forward to her son,  for the love of all things holy, H&M just drain the energy, oxygen and water out of the world. Can’t these drainers just sit down and be quiet? Enough already. 







bag-mania said:


> This falls under the category of “you can’t make this s*** up.” Somebody has created an online comic book to tell Harry and Meghan’s side of the story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Royal Exit Featured in Comic Book
> 
> 
> Illustrator Josh Adams brings Prince Harry and Meghan’s Markle’s royal exit to life in a digital comic book —read more to get the details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Shares Reminder to Check in on Friends amid 'Stressful' Coronavirus Pandemic
> 
> 
> "If you haven't heard from someone for a while you know that the first thing you need to do is check in with them," Prince Harry said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm...did MM allow Harry to have any of his original friends?    Or is Harry crying out for help?  Hey JCMH, while you're at it, maybe check in on your family. Granny might like to hear from you.


His message about checking in on friends & family goes well with this:

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle phoned fan linked to Twitter TROLL that posts foul-mouthed attacks on Kate Middleton and the Queen to thank her for her fundraising *








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle phoned fan linked to Twitter TROLL
					

The woman, who Prince Harry and Meghan Markle told they were 'so moved and happy' after she raised £45,000, runs another Twitter account which has branded the Duchess of Cambridge a 'b****'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is creepy and odd No one, not one other person (not even the politicians), none are taking up this much space. In the famous Vanity Fair article on Diana, someone commented that Diana not only had a natural glow (MM should take note), but she brought oxygen into the room. That‘s the stuff that money cannot buy, people either have *it* or they don’t. Diana had *it. * I’ve always thought that was such a kind way to characterise someone — bringing in oxygen.
> 
> Now, fast forward to her son,  for the love of all things holy, H&M just drain the energy, oxygen and water out of the world. Can’t these drainers just sit down and be quiet? Enough already.



Call it poetic justice that their desperate bid for popularity and relevance occurred in 2020. Here they had been building up for two years and when they were finally ready to make their big break, what happens? The whole world shut down. Nobody welcomed to them to LA. Nobody offered them high-profile jobs (or any jobs). They had to call their own paparazzi to show them delivering meals. Their publicists routinely resort to going back to the archives and fishing out stories about the wedding to fulfill their obligation to get them media placement each week. The book that was supposed to portray them as saints appeals only to their small fringe fandom. It has been a delightful disaster!

Watching these two try so hard and falter so badly has been the one bright spot of the year.


----------



## PewPew

Chanbal said:


> His message about checking in on friends & family goes well with this:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle phoned fan linked to Twitter TROLL that posts foul-mouthed attacks on Kate Middleton and the Queen to thank her for her fundraising *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle phoned fan linked to Twitter TROLL
> 
> 
> The woman, who Prince Harry and Meghan Markle told they were 'so moved and happy' after she raised £45,000, runs another Twitter account which has branded the Duchess of Cambridge a 'b****'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Obviously they are hypocrites on so many issues, so this cannot surprise anyone. It was ironic but not surprising to hear them target social media, given their persecution complex.... Hiring PR to manipulate social media and employ bots has been standard fare for Hollywood (films and A-lister buzz) and politics for many years. I’m surprised that people don’t realize this when even entry level influencers can buy tens of thousands of bot followers and social media “engagement”. The level of sophistication for bot content and comments is incredible for those with wealth.

Meghan’s lifestyle blog was reliant on social media. (Her PR firm Sunshine Sachs was caught years ago for editing clients Wikipedia pages & other overt manipulation of public content.) She knows how it works & used it to her advantage in controlling the narrative since prior to getting engaged. Meghan did not give up having PR & management when she married, and she also moved to the big leagues in terms of PR. 

H&M benefited greatly from social media & traditional media manipulation even before Megxit. You can’t blame H&M for paying to manipulate content, since that’s what everyone with wealth & looking for publicity does. 

The absurdity comes in acting like you have the moral high ground with “social media is mean” as your platform, while engaging in bullying behavior. (They’ve been releasing negative information about Will & Kate and the BRF since before Megxit. Harry was whining about the BRF holding him back & handing prizes being meaningless in his “Greta” interview recorded in Jan.) *What gets people angry is the hypocrisy of lecturing others about independence, the media, bullying, the environment, all while having unashamedly enjoyed so much from the taxpayers as their “right”.*


----------



## csshopper

They really have become the two most tiresome people on the planet. I'm on the verge of no longer reading any of the articles about them and will check out the ones about Covid etc..instead. At least those are about real people, dealing with a real issue. 

The ultimate gagging communication is the sanctimonious, hypocritical JCMH preaching to us about contacting people. Before pontificating to the masses he needs to deal with his vacuous, narcissistic wife. How's her Dad? How's her Mom's family? 
How about his family and friends he's thrown under the bus? Although, on second thought maybe some of them no longer want
to hear from him. 

In amazes me these two continue to feel compelled to tell us how to live our lives as if they have all the answers and we should fall to our knees in gratitude for their wisdom. 

Their book is # 13 on the Amazon Best Seller "Non Fiction" (that's dubious) List.  A Picture Book, "Pete the Cat and the Missing Cupcakes" is #7 well ahead of them. They are not in the top 15 of the New York Times and are #19 at Barnes and Noble (chain book store in the US) in the "Top 100 Books" but  five children books outrank them in the # 6, 7, 8, 15, and 16 slots. Not the blockbuster they were surely hoping for. 

 Harry, please just go to your room, there are many to choose from, close the door, sit down and be quiet. So so many people don't give a rip for what you have to say and you're disturbing those of us focused on Pete and his friends searching for the missing cupcakes. The outtake from the book is "it's cool to be kind." Maybe you and MeMeMe should read it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Dear H&M, if you are so concerned about cyber bullying, why don't you do something about your fans?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@chicinthecity777
Guessing this is why H’s friends distanced themselves from these drama lovers.
Now, when is the next zoom call about oppression and caring for others? Looking forward to their special insight.


ETA:  why would Murk post under her real name and take such a risk?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  why would Murk post under her real name and take such a risk?



I don't think she did, the stans found out and made it public.


----------



## donutsprinkles

I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.

I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.

Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.

I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).

*Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?

Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Someone remind me where the ignore button is!!!!


----------



## marietouchet

re post from @donutsprinkles 

No matter your point of view thank you for sharing it, so respectfully. I like hearing lots of points of view, makes me think

To be honest this thread moves so fast, I cannot keep up with all of it ... honestly I miss half the posts
Yours was the first to come up today, it is well written - thank you for taking the time - honestly - easy to read and think about

I am old school - I can agree to disagree but also find that people that lead me to new/different ideas are important


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> They really have become the two most tiresome people on the planet. I'm on the verge of no longer reading any of the articles about them and will check out the ones about Covid etc..instead. At least those are about real people, dealing with a real issue.
> 
> The ultimate gagging communication is the sanctimonious, hypocritical JCMH preaching to us about contacting people. Before pontificating to the masses he needs to deal with his vacuous, narcissistic wife. How's her Dad? How's her Mom's family?
> How about his family and friends he's thrown under the bus? Although, on second thought maybe some of them no longer want
> to hear from him.
> 
> In amazes me these two continue to feel compelled to tell us how to live our lives as if they have all the answers and we should fall to our knees in gratitude for their wisdom.
> 
> Their book is # 13 on the Amazon Best Seller "Non Fiction" (that's dubious) List.  A Picture Book, "Pete the Cat and the Missing Cupcakes" is #7 well ahead of them. They are not in the top 15 of the New York Times and are #19 at Barnes and Noble (chain book store in the US) in the "Top 100 Books" but  five children books outrank them in the # 6, 7, 8, 15, and 16 slots. Not the blockbuster they were surely hoping for.
> 
> Harry, please just go to your room, there are many to choose from, close the door, sit down and be quiet. So so many people don't give a rip for what you have to say and you're disturbing those of us focused on Pete and his friends searching for the missing cupcakes. The outtake from the book is "it's cool to be kind." Maybe you and MeMeMe should read it.



I’m glad to hear they are not going to get the New York Times number one spot. I have heard that is basically available to purchase with the right PR.




donutsprinkles said:


> I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.
> 
> I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.
> 
> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).
> 
> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.



Thank you for respectfully posting a differing opinion, and asking questions without accusing people of being racist.

For me, the reason MM drives me crazy is because she has never acknowledged the very warm welcome she got from the vast majority of the royal family and has done nothing but talk about how poorly she was treated, as well as the constant leaking of information that either makes her look amazing or William and Kate look not so amazing through “friends”. 

Andrew is obviously way worse than Meghan, he’s an actual pedophile monster! But luckily he seems to be willing to go away quietly for the most part and not try to blame others for his troubles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, he got the hair correct
> _Nonetheless, drawing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex offered its challenges for illustrator Josh Adams. “The toughest factor to do is to attract even featured good wanting individuals, and Harry and Meghan are literally actually simply stunning individuals,” he notes._
> 
> 
> Somewhat serious questions:
> — did she meet these rich and powerful, mostly Canadian, men while on the yacht? Or did her disowned daddy set up these connections? Or is it coming from Doria? Oprah? Gayle?
> — why this avalanche of videos now? Are they still competing with W&K? Seems every media outlet is reporting on these bratty grifters.
> — is this 2020 still f-ing with us???? Can’t we just put up the holiday decorations and call it a year? I’m ready.
> 
> It is creepy and odd No one, not one other person (not even the politicians), none are taking up this much space. In the famous Vanity Fair article on Diana, someone commented that Diana not only had a natural glow (MM should take note), but she brought oxygen into the room. That‘s the stuff that money cannot buy, people either have *it* or they don’t. Diana had *it. * I’ve always thought that was such a kind way to characterise someone — bringing in oxygen.
> 
> Now, fast forward to her son,  for the love of all things holy, H&M just drain the energy, oxygen and water out of the world. Can’t these drainers just sit down and be quiet? Enough already.


MM sucks the oxygen out of the room.  At least out of me, even just by reading about her!


----------



## bag-mania

donutsprinkles said:


> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.



Welcome to the thread, donutsprinkles. The reasons Meghan and Harry are so disliked cannot be conveyed in only a few sentences. There is a reason why this thread is well over 2,000 pages. If you are truly interested, go back and read the thread from a few months after the wedding on. The vitriol you describe began as Meghan slowly revealed that she was not the person she portrayed herself to be. Nobody likes a phony. And while no one expects total honesty from a celebrity, the blatant hypocrisy these two consistently display annoys the hell out of most of us.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

donutsprinkles said:


> If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.



Whereas I appreciate your point of view, there's a huge gap between talking the talk and walking the walk with not only Harry and Meghan, but many others of large net worth.  Leonardo DiCaprio comes immediately to mind. No one is asking them to be perfect environmentalist, but as a middle aged couple, they don't have that much time left to make progress, nor do they appear to be being anything personally to reduce their carbon footprint. I don't hate either of them, but I do find them terribly disappointing.


----------



## Jktgal

donutsprinkles said:


> I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.
> 
> I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.
> 
> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).
> 
> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


The authors were journalists assigned to cover the royal family during their official functions. Some befriend their subjects then write a tell all. Some ... not. Some may pass on gossips they hear, but the gossip column writers (those who write for People magazine, etc) are not part of the posse covering the BRF.

On the vitriol - there aren't daily messages from Andrew on how young women should be supported in their endeavours and we should all be their ally. And he hasn't lately appeared on online conferences urging the business sector to stand together, and lives matter, chop chop. So not really anything to comment except this is an ogre and another reason royalty and their privileges are antiquated. And repeat. Which is boring. Sparkles, however, is a comic delight that keeps on giving for discerning online spectators.


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> I may get banned for writing this but it dawned on me why they NEED a house with 19 toilets...they are both so full of Sh!t that 19 toilets are really a necessity for M&H!


HA HA HA .. this is the best!!!  Thank you for a GOOD laugh!!


----------



## Chanbal

@*donutsprinkles *
1) Congratulations on your new book, enjoy it! You may want also to read some of the articles (links) provided in this thread. 
2) I didn't read the book by Omid S, only some parts. What I read was clearly written to please MM. However, it also supported some comments in this thread, but we may have a different interpretation of the facts. For example,  when the book described some of her demands (ex. tiara, staff, etc) in a favorable light, we found them rather unreasonable.  
3) Above everything, we are tired of so much hypocrisy. Quoting the former transport minister Norman Baker 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'.  
4) If MM & H would stop their daily spamming news, people would forget them. 
5) FYI, there is a thread on Andrew. He has been very quiet and not cluttering the news.


----------



## Emeline

donutsprinkles said:


> I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.
> 
> I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.
> 
> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).
> 
> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on *Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates,* but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


It sounds like you are looking for more content on Epstein et all.  I highly recommend following Julie K Brown.  I am in awe of her continued courage and tenaciousness.


----------



## doni

donutsprinkles said:


> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.



I don’t know about vitriol, or people zooming on Meghan, but I think the reason people talk more about H&M than Prince Andrew is because in the end it is more entertaining. There is all this stuff... With Prince Andrew, you can say he is a disgusting and despicable person (at least I think so). And then you can say he is a disgusting person again. There is just not much more to say. And the whole mess, it is no so much entertainment.  


On the environment and so on, I very much agree with you. If we have to be perfect environmentalists to do something about climate change, there wouldn’t be anything done, and that includes raising awareness.
But there is a difference between not being the perfect environment, and then there is buying into a lifestyle that is 100 times more harmful than that of the standard human. Like, one does not speak in favor of veganism and then go hunting for diner... I think it is only fair that people get upset if they are told to stop flying to touristic places by someone who then the day after catches a private jet to Ibiza... It has to be genuine to some extent at least...


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Well, she certainly couldn't with her "measly" cash!!!
> 
> You know, just thinking about this house .. the size, the number of rooms, etc. .. well, heck .. she could have the whole lot of "markled" family .. Thomas, Samantha and the other siblings - right?!?!  HA .. yeah, I know.
> 
> But seriously, I kind of feel bad for Thomas in some respects.  Based on what my friends told me, he pretty much paid for everything for her, including a fair amount of plastic surgery that she had in High School.  They said that they NEVER met Doria, and that Doria was never present at Meghan's High School plays .. I find that odd given that (now) it appears that they are just "so close"!  That's why I keep on saying that the whole notion of Doria living there?? .. gotta kind of call BS on that, but then again .. who knows because these 2 are constantly putting out spin (oftentimes lies).


Now that is weird.  Why wouldn't her mom be at the plays?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> Now that is weird.  Why wouldn't her mom be at the plays?



yes, *gracefully*, remember reading about the school plays and found it v strange, too.
Many people work, male & female, but all parents are usually in attendance for at least ONE (1) night of a school play. Interesting? Maybe.


----------



## donutsprinkles

Chanbal said:


> @*donutsprinkles *
> 1) Congratulations on your new book, enjoy it! You may want also to read some of the articles (links) provided in this thread.
> 2) I didn't read the book by Omid S, only some parts. What I read was clearly written to please MM. However, it also supported some comments in this thread, but we may have a different interpretation of the facts. For example,  when the book described some of her demands (ex. tiara, staff, etc) in a favorable light, we found them rather unreasonable.
> 3) Above everything, we are tired of so much hypocrisy. Quoting the former transport minister Norman Baker 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'.
> 4) If MM & H would stop their daily spamming news, people would forget them.
> 5) FYI, there is a thread on Andrew. He has been very quiet and not cluttering the news.


1) I skimmed this thread (as others said, it moves so quickly!!), but I admit I haven't read everything about them yet.
2) OK, I need to get to the chapters on after the marriage. I admit, the writing style is very hard to swallow. It's what I imagine Gossip Girl was like (haven't watched the show, so don't come for me, please...!).
5) Fair enough. I check the status on the legal proceedings surrounding Epstein, Maxwell, et al every couple of weeks using newspapers. I fear it will not come to much, unfortunately. I do hope it opens up a conversation about how to be better guardians of young adults (aged 14-17) and oversexualization in the West--but that's a topic for another thread!


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> yes, *gracefully*, remember reading about the school plays and found it v strange, too.
> Many people work, male & female, but all parents are usually in attendance for at least ONE (1) night of a school play. Interesting? Maybe.


My entire family used to show up including my married brother and SIL.  My parents were there opening and closing nights.  I don't get it.  I am always impressed by the parents and grandparents of my acquaintance who show up for everything the children are involved in.  It really doesn't make sense unless they had a horrible relationship when she was a teen and she told her mother not to show up.

@Lounorada  Of course that was a throne!  She is a Princess of The United Kingdom.  I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tiara.


----------



## chicinthecity777

donutsprinkles said:


> I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.
> 
> I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.
> 
> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).
> 
> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


First of all, thank you for your polite post and not jumping on anybody's throat with name calling. 

I assume you are U.S. based so if I may lend some thoughts from a Brit. I am not a royalist and I don't generally care or follow the royal family. My problem with them started when they decided to abandon the country after spending £30m tax payers' money on their state wedding then a few more £m tax payers' money for a house they no longer live. Then the news broke that they planned the Megxit before they got married. To me they are no better than scammers! Only in such big scale while at it! 

Another main reason is their hypocrisy! Travelling by private jets but tell others to go eco. Crying for privacy but make public appearances almost daily! Buying a $14m mansion while not repaying tax payers' money. Declared financial independence but still taking hand-outs. The list goes on! 

Honestly I can go on for ages but you get the picture. And re Andrew, there isn't much to say apart from he is disgusting and he's keeping a low profile not in your face every second of the day. There is a thread about those involved with Epstein scandal, many have been discussed there including Andrew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> @Lounorada  Of course that was a throne!  She is a Princess of The United Kingdom.  I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tiara.



Might not have had access to one, like the time she wanted to take one to her first overseas trip and Charles was like "Nope, dear" (not because they were stingy with the jewels, but totally inappropriate / over the top to wear one to the occasion).


----------



## Chanbal

donutsprinkles said:


> 1) I skimmed this thread (as others said, it moves so quickly!!), but I admit I haven't read everything about them yet.
> 2) OK, I need to get to the chapters on after the marriage. I admit, the writing style is very hard to swallow. It's what I imagine Gossip Girl was like (haven't watched the show, so don't come for me, please...!).
> 5) Fair enough. I check the status on the legal proceedings surrounding Epstein, Maxwell, et al every couple of weeks using newspapers. I fear it will not come to much, unfortunately. I do hope it opens up a conversation about how to be better guardians of young adults (aged 14-17) and oversexualization in the West--but that's a topic for another thread!


Read some of the comments on this thread, and you may join some of us here that became annoyed with so much selfishness and hypocrisy related to this couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Might not have had access to one, like the time she wanted to take one to her first overseas trip and Charles was like "Nope, dear" (not because they were stingy with the jewels, but totally inappropriate / over the top to wear one to the occasion).


Okay, so can we can add overdressed, pretentious and try hard to her resume? Has she never heard of effortless chic? Even if you weren't born with it you can still aspire to it.
There isn't a 'cool' bone in her body
Sorry/not sorry to sound so catty but she annoys the schnitz out of me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Okay, so can we can add overdressed, pretentious and try hard to her resume? Has she never heard of effortless chic? Even if you weren't born with it you can still aspire to it.
> There isn't a 'cool' bone in her body
> Sorry/not sorry to sound so catty but she annoys the schnitz out of me



Yeah, especially when she put out numerous times through her mouthpieces how she just didn't care for the blitz and glitz. Of course she did, did you ever hear of Kate asking for a tiara (and if we count the wedding debacle, more than once)? Or wearing a couture 80000 bucks pregnancy caftan for two hours?


----------



## Lodpah

donutsprinkles said:


> I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.
> 
> I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.
> 
> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).
> 
> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


Nice to hear from a different view point but I speak for myself MM is like a picture book, her actions speak for themselves. One: how on earth does one alienate their entire family’s and then turn around and alienate her husband’s family. Too many things out there point to MM as a vacuous, manipulative and thinks common people are too stupid, I’m afraid if you knew her personally you’d also be persona non grata  to her if you don’t have a few . . .

Anyway she had no substance in in her character. She’s a tall hat no cattle human being.


----------



## marietouchet

Found a wonderful amusing and useful short video on YouTube , anglophenia channel, title is “confusing things about British homes “

yanks and brits have totally different expectations for bathrooms

British homes tend to be older and very different  

this all goes directly to the shock and awe of 18 FULL baths in a home lol


----------



## Lodpah

doni said:


> I don’t know about vitriol, or people zooming on Meghan, but I think the reason people talk more about H&M than Prince Andrew is because in the end it is more entertaining. There is all this stuff... With Prince Andrew, you can say he is a disgusting and despicable person (at least I think so). And then you can say he is a disgusting person again. There is just not much more to say. And the whole mess, it is no so much entertainment.
> 
> 
> On the environment and so on, I very much agree with you. If we have to be perfect environmentalists to do something about climate change, there wouldn’t be anything done, and that includes raising awareness.
> But there is a difference between not being the perfect environment, and then there is buying into a lifestyle that is 100 times more harmful than that of the standard human. Like, one does not speak in favor of veganism and then go hunting for diner... I think it is only fair that people get upset if they are told to stop flying to touristic places by someone who then the day after catches a private jet to Ibiza... It has to be genuine to some extent at least...


And the green leather skirt and roast chicken dinner. Sorry I couldn’t help myself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@donutsprinkles  I agree with all here who say, “Welcome, we appreciate and respect you.” One reason I like TPF is its philosophy that all are welcome to express themselves as long as they are not attacking other members. There is no correct opinion, it’s a safe space. Another reason TPF succeeds is the posters here are well-informed and fair-minded. Reading through the posts, it should be clear that we provide documentation to support our thoughts, are highly analytical thinkers and willing to change our minds when presented with cogent discussions. We aren’t here with an agenda, but are here to listen and learn [and gossip]. H&M are two privileged adults who are public figures, a legal term used in the US which pertains to defamation and our freedom of speech. They have teams of lawyers and PR staff at their ready disposal. They deceive us when they routinely present themselves as victims. They deceive us when they lecture us to do one thing while they do the opposite.  Being a public figure carries a tremendous responsibility. If they are not willing to accept that responsibility [which means demonstrate their convictions], then they must accept the criticisms. They cannot have it both ways. They have lost the public trust.

In regards to H&M in this gossip thread, I don’t find this ‘vitriol towards MM’.  Vitriol means bitter criticism. We aren’t bitterly criticizing her or her behaviors. Remember, she and he are public figures. We point out their deceptions. We strongly dislike and disagree with H&M’s behavior and their lectures. In a gossip thread, that is what posters do. I cannot speak for other “threads and YT channels“. Andrew has his own TPF thread.

Yes, the past matters. Indeed, it does — it‘s why we have the ‘me-too’ movement. It matters even more when the public figure has not fully owned his/her behavior. A half-hearted apology is meaningless. Plenty of books and websites explain how public figures can successfully manage their indiscretions. In the public arena, simply saying ‘sorry’ (like we did in junior hi) just doesn’t work. That is how H&M have lost credibility. Rightfully, they will be criticised each time they brazenly attempt to make money off of us. No, we do not wish to fund their extravagant lifestyle, especially during a pandemic. Businesses and charities are learning that, today more than ever, authenticity matters, quality matters, purpose matters. We see through the fake, the false, etc. Odd that their PR people don’t advise them on this stuff. 

Hope this post has increased awareness. As others have said, to gain a better understanding of this thread, read previous pages. We will happily answer any questions. Take care, all.




donutsprinkles said:


> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> My entire family used to show up including my married brother and SIL.  My parents were there opening and closing nights.  I don't get it.  I am always impressed by the parents and grandparents of my acquaintance who show up for everything the children are involved in.  It really doesn't make sense unless they had a horrible relationship when she was a teen and she told her mother not to show up.
> 
> @Lounorada  Of course that was a throne!  She is a Princess of The United Kingdom.  *I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tiara.*



Claire's accessories as some really pretty ones lately:





__





						Search Page | Claire's
					






					www.claires.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@donutsprinkles welcome, you just entered the room entirely differently from the other "fans", which is why I doubt anyone will be unkind towards you.

I want to say, most of us didn't start out disliking MM...many had a soft spot for Harry before we couldn't longer deny what a spoiled brat he really is, and wanted things to work out for him. When I saw the engagement interview I thought something was off about her, but didn't give it much thought because after all, it wasn't me getting married to her.

But then she started to say and do all kinds of questionable things. My "moment" was actually way before that unbelievable Africa interview...it was when Harry said in a radio interview "We'll be the family she never had", and having grown up with a narcissist who's the eternal victim that was the moment I just KNEW what she'd been feeding him and how she manipulates him, especially when she herself had always spoken fondly of her father and her childhood before meeting Harry. And it's just gone downhill since. Have you seen the (uncut) footage of her cutting in front of him, pushing him out of the way, even ellbowing his ribs (!!!) to get to an important person first? How she guides him like a dog on a leash with her hand on his back, arm or hanging onto the back of his jacket? It is seriously unsettling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Claire's accessories as some really pretty ones lately:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Search Page | Claire's
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.claires.com



Maybe we can all pitch in and send her one to her new address.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> My entire family used to show up including my married brother and SIL.  My parents were there opening and closing nights.  I don't get it.  I am always impressed by the parents and grandparents of my acquaintance who show up for everything the children are involved in.  It really doesn't make sense unless they had a horrible relationship when she was a teen and she told her mother not to show up.
> 
> @Lounorada  Of course that was a throne!  She is a Princess of The United Kingdom.  I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tiara.


She was and never will be a princess of the UK!!!!

 Princesses are born 

Harry and Margaret and Andrew before him have all spent their lives disgracing the Queen by their actions borne of jealousy of not being number and one heir to the throne... All could learn from our best Princess -Anne -our Princess Royal ... It is no.secret the Queen favoured her male children above Anne but looking at them now and seeing how Anne has devoted her life to charitable works and her duties I bet the Queen wishes she could save a wand and have Anne replace her ..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> She was and never will be a princess of the UK!!!!
> 
> Princesses are born



Princess of the United Kingdom is actually the occupation that's listed in Archie's birth certificate.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Princess of the United Kingdom is actually the occupation that's listed in Archie's birth certificate.



She obviously didn't read the job description before applying for the post


----------



## Chanbal

*'Scarface' Russian oligarch's estranged wife slams Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for having 'double standards'* ... Nothing new here, but for the ones that are stuck at home due to COVID, here is the link:








						Oligarch's ex-wife slams Harry and Meghan for 'double standards'
					

Anna Fedoseeva, who is involved in a bitter court battle with the billionaire Russian ex-bank boss Sergey Grishin (pictured together) , claims he is a 'dangerous man' who destroyed her life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Jennifer Hudson is a woman of substance, character, strength and most of all not word salad sprouting, fake and manipulative. MM should take a lesson from her. 









						Jennifer Hudson and Her Sister Deliver 2,000 Backpacks Filled with School Supplies to Chicago Kids
					

"Now more than ever, young people need to know that there are people standing up for them and rooting for them as they learn and grow," Julia and Jennifer Hudson said




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh no....it can’t be. H&M are victims yet again. How awful for them to not know anyone, no one, who could check out this stuff for them. If only they had known, they could have arranged a zoom call to ... whoever so they could pout about the injustice of it all. It’s just they are new to the US [she’s been gone 10 years] and they don’t know anyone in the area.

Ummmm, wait, where does Oprah live? Ellen? Doria? Marianne? Any of the BRF staff couldn’t research the place? Bueller? Anyone?

My spidey senses tell me that H&M knew exactly what they were doing.



Chanbal said:


> *'Scarface' Russian oligarch's estranged wife slams Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for having 'double standards'* ... Nothing new here, but for the ones that are stuck at home due to COVID, here is the link:



ETA:  Just do a simple google of the wife’s name — lots of articles to read through.  My point is: the info is readily available


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like Cressida has a healthy sense of humor 









						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Cressida Bonas's pop at Harry's £11million palace?
					

While Prince Harry and Meghan have spent £11 million on a mansion with nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms (right), his ex, Cressida Bonas, is keen to make the point that she's happy with a simpler life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> Jennifer Hudson is a woman of substance, character, strength and most of all not word salad sprouting, fake and manipulative. MM should take a lesson from her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Hudson and Her Sister Deliver 2,000 Backpacks Filled with School Supplies to Chicago Kids
> 
> 
> "Now more than ever, young people need to know that there are people standing up for them and rooting for them as they learn and grow," Julia and Jennifer Hudson said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com





What a lovely way to honor the memory of her young nephew.  And I totally agree with your description of JH.  I don’t understand why MM and H can’t think of a way to give back like this.  The mission here was clear and easy to define - giving school supplies and Christmas gifts to children in need.  There are so many in need - surely they can think of something meaningful to them and to others.

But one big flaw - no opportunity to preach at others or to dream up convoluted word salads.  They need to be more like birthday girl Princess Anne - who supports so many good causes and works hard at it...and mostly in silence.  And therein lies the rub...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @donutsprinkles welcome, you just entered the room entirely differently from the other "fans", which is why I doubt anyone will be unkind towards you.
> 
> I want to say, most of us didn't start out disliking MM...........a narcissist who's the eternal victim that was the moment I just KNEW what she'd been feeding him and how she manipulates him,......*her cutting in front of him, pushing him out of the way, even ellbowing his ribs (!!!) to get to an important person first? How she guides him like a dog on a leash with her hand on his back, arm or hanging onto the back of his jacket? It is seriously unsettling.*



Unsettling!!!
Ya'think???  You are too kind, *QoWD. *Prefer to call it what it really is, ie when Meghan acts unpredictable, uncontrollable and inappropriate, just plain psycho-crazy, that's all.

Brings to mind a phrase someone told me a long time ago, describing the attraction to his old girlfriend who was visibly up to no-no-good.
"SEX WITH A CRAZY PERSON IS ALWAYS EXCITING!".
Can't make this stuff up.


----------



## purseinsanity

Those who give without expecting anything in return, especially publicity, I respect deeply.  MM and JCMH don't actually do anything, but want publicity for word salads.  They're gross.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Now that is weird.  Why wouldn't her mom be at the plays?





VigeeLeBrun said:


> yes, *gracefully*, remember reading about the school plays and found it v strange, too.
> Many people work, male & female, but all parents are usually in attendance for at least ONE (1) night of a school play. Interesting? Maybe.





gracekelly said:


> My entire family used to show up including my married brother and SIL.  My parents were there opening and closing nights.  I don't get it.  I am always impressed by the parents and grandparents of my acquaintance who show up for everything the children are involved in.  It really doesn't make sense unless they had a horrible relationship when she was a teen and she told her mother not to show up.
> 
> @Lounorada  Of course that was a throne!  She is a Princess of The United Kingdom.  I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tiara.



My parents never did that stuff, and I mean _never_ - PTA meetings, plays, championships, awards, even graduations. It wasn't that big of a deal, to be honest. We didn't have a horrible relationship either. I moved across the country to live with my mom when my dad died, in my 20's, which astounded my friends at the time. Some families just have different dynamics.


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> What a lovely way to honor the memory of her young nephew.  And I totally agree with your description of JH.  *I don’t understand why MM and H can’t think of a way to give back like this.*  The mission here was clear and easy to define - giving school supplies and Christmas gifts to children in need.  There are so many in need - surely they can think of something meaningful to them and to others.
> 
> But one big flaw - no opportunity to preach at others or to dream up convoluted word salads.  They need to be more like birthday girl Princess Anne - who supports so many good causes and works hard at it...and mostly in silence.  And therein lies the rub...



MM & H aren't here to give, they are looking at ways to receive...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

purseinsanity said:


> *Those who give without expecting anything in return, especially publicity, I respect deeply.  MM and JCMH don't actually do anything, but want publicity for word salads.  They're gross.*



Bravo, *purseinsanity*.
M&H are GROSS esp now during these turbulent times <no explanation needed, we all feel it>.

Even if we, personally, are lucky enough not to be suffering right now, am sure that we know of people who are - and this is not the time that the collective global consciousness is in the mood for attention-seeking vacuous wanna-bees seeking to capitalize off of the public by exploiting critical issues.

Supporting evidence: Look through the Daily Mail these days, the A-listers are ABSENT. GONE.
Only needy Z-listers are present, like the gift that keeps on giving us streaming comedic content like our grifter couple, H&M.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> MM & H aren't here to give, they are looking at ways to receive...




Sad, but true.  What was I thinking?!?!


----------



## scrpo83

Harry and Meghan insist on privacy. Apart from when they’re the ones doing the dishing | Catherine Bennett
					

A new book will invite derision and give yet more ammunition to their detractors




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Jktgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like Cressida has a healthy sense of humor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Cressida Bonas's pop at Harry's £11million palace?
> 
> 
> While Prince Harry and Meghan have spent £11 million on a mansion with nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms (right), his ex, Cressida Bonas, is keen to make the point that she's happy with a simpler life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I love it, the piece is something like a Wodehouse who's who. Now there is the one who does what she says - she wants and does privacies.


----------



## bag-mania

*The British Monarchy Is a Game. Harry and Meghan Didn’t Want to Play.*
Prince Harry confused sacrifice with service. Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, confused it with fame.

By Tanya Gold
Ms. Gold is a British journalist.






What is required of the British monarchy?

The answer is obvious, though it is both painful and embarrassing to admit: It is a willingness to be consumed. Sometimes, as when I watched the 12-year-old Prince Harry walk behind the coffin of his mother, Princess Diana, I think monarchy is less a national enchantment, or hoax, than a national sickness. I have done a jigsaw puzzle of the queen’s face. I bought it at the gift shop at Sandringham, the queen’s country home. What is that but an act of control by the subject of the object?

It is hard for outsiders to know what British people want from the royal family. Sometimes even members of the family, for reasons of self-preservation, do not allow themselves to know. And if Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, know what it is, then they are disenchanted.

The couple retired from royal life earlier this year and have retreated to California, from where they have sent a list of instances in which they have been harmed by the British media and the royal household. The list is called “Finding Freedom,” the new biography of the couple by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, published this week. It is a book Harry and Meghan obviously endorse — and, I suspect, may have written passages of. It _feels_like autobiography.

It is a plaintive document with fascinating detail. For instance, that Meghan was accused by the British media — less a nemesis than a mean girl, an ever-watchful frenemy — of wearing the wrong color of nail polish (too dark) to the British Fashion Awards. But, Ms. Durand and Mr. Scobie write, “There was no nail polish protocol.” Meghan asked Queen Elizabeth II’s dresser Angela Kelly, the queen’s working-class friend, for a hair with tiara rehearsal before her wedding. The dresser ignored the request until the queen intervened. We learn that Meghan “has always taken pride in being a great packer” of clothes and that Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, still colloquially known as Kate Middleton, sent Meghan flowers on her birthday but that “Meghan would far rather have had Kate check in on her during the most difficult times with the press.”

No royals are explicitly abused in the book. Prince William and Catherine emerge as cold (when they are merely English) but nothing worse. Prince William called Meghan “this girl.” Catherine went shopping without offering Meghan a lift in her Range Rover, although both were going to the same street.


Throughout the book, Prince Harry’s disgust with Britons’ treatment of royalty is visible. He said as much when he filed a lawsuit against a newspaper for publishing a letter Meghan wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, which he then leaked: “Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one,” Harry said in a statement. “Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditized to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”

But it’s clear that the main purpose of this book is to serve as Meghan’s testimony. She is a perfectionist, and her failure to succeed at royalty clearly grates. This book says: I did my best. I could not have done more. But the truth is, she did too much. The best insight in “Finding Freedom” is from a former senior courtier, who compares Meghan with the silent — and therefore now adored — Catherine. Meghan “talks about life and how we should live,” the courtier told the authors. “That’s the way in America. In Britain, people look at that and go, ‘Who do you think you are?’” 

The royal family is a sacrifice at the center of Britain’s national life, fuel for the creation of a national soul because we can’t think of anything better. Sometimes it works. Often — and increasingly — it doesn’t. We dress them up in coronets. We play with them like toys. It has nothing to do with admiration or love. They submit to us, not we to them.

And if they are to survive this monstrous game? They do what is required. The women put weights on their hemlines, so that they do not swing in a breeze. The men are discreet and they are pliant. They allow the nation to project what it wants on them.

The Sussexes did not understand this. Harry confused sacrifice with service. Meghan confused it with fame.

I always thought Harry chose a woman, however subconsciously, who would free him, and “Finding Freedom” seems to confirm it here: “‘Fundamentally, Harry wanted out,’ a source close to the couple said. ‘Deep down, he was always struggling within that world. She’s opened the door for him on that.’”

“He was also sick,” the authors write, “of the hypocrisy of the media outlets that glorified Meghan one day and tore her down the next.” It is not hypocrisy; it is cynicism. The newspapers do not love Meghan, and they do not hate her. One day she is an inspiration. The next she is a torment.

It would eventually have settled, if they had. I think it is admirable that they didn’t.









						Opinion | The British Monarchy Is a Game. Harry and Meghan Didn’t Want to Play. (Published 2020)
					

Prince Harry confused sacrifice with service. Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, confused it with fame.




					www.google.com


----------



## redney

Has this been posted yet?








						Why we’re sympathetic to Princess Diana — but not Harry and Meghan
					

Much as his mother, the late Princess Diana, denied having anything to do with a sympathetic book packed with insider details called “Diana: Her True Story,” Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markl…




					nypost.com


----------



## Lodpah

Please disregard.


----------



## Lodpah

__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com
				




About time.


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Has this been posted yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why we’re sympathetic to Princess Diana — but not Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Much as his mother, the late Princess Diana, denied having anything to do with a sympathetic book packed with insider details called “Diana: Her True Story,” Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markl…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



The article is really clever, Diana and M _are _total opposites, their books reveal more about their subjects than what they tell as story:

"Harry and Meghan, on the other hand, have reached peak entitlement. They may be the whiniest millennials on the planet, their delusional book depicting them as two perfect beings who can’t understand why everyone else a) won’t worship them and b) leave them alone.

If not so poorly written, “Finding Freedom” would be high comedy."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About time.



Would you mind copying an pasting the article? Unfortunately,  I can't get it.


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About time.



No. Charles, well actually the hard working tax payers, will foot the bill. Harry will never be on the hook for _anything.........._EVER


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Would you mind copying an pasting the article? Unfortunately,  I can't get it.





Lodpah said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About time.



It's OK, no worries, I found it somewhere else. It's as we suspected, i.e. they are constantly playing catch-up with their ill thought-through plans


----------



## chicinthecity777

poopsie said:


> No. Charles, well *actually the hard working tax payers, will foot the bill.* Harry will never be on the hook for _anything.........._EVER


I shall hope not since they are no longer working royals. No public money would be used to fund them. It would be from Charles' personal estate. At least that's the rule.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> It's OK, no worries, I found it somewhere else. It's as we suspected, i.e. they are constantly playing catch-up with their ill thought-through plans
> 
> View attachment 4821057


If being a hypocrite can be counted as an extraordinary ability he would have no problem getting that visa!


----------



## CarryOn2020

“A spokesman for Prince Harry declined to comment but insisted they would ‘follow the same legal requirements as everyone else.’”

Really???? Let’s hope the media keeps the pressure on H&M to explain his status. Is he trying to worm out of paying US taxes? Supposedly, this is his forever home.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> If being a hypocrite can be counted as an extraordinary ability he would have no problem getting that visa!



His extraordinary ability is that he has no ability whatsoever!


----------



## bag-mania

They want to make it known that they are buying the house all on their own. Although the last paragraph shows that Charles is stilling funding them in other ways. 

“Later that month, _Harper’s Bazaar_ royal correspondent *Omid Scobie* reported that Charles, 71, would continue to fund Harry and Meghan’s operating costs with the Duchy of Cornwall private estate, which he owns. The Prince of Wales paid 95 percent of their costs at the time.”









						Why Harry and Meghan Didn’t Ask Royal Family to Pay for Montecito House
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want to make their own way in Montecito without interference from the royal family — exclusive details




					www.google.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> They want to make it known that they are buying the house all on their own. Although the last paragraph shows that Charles is stilling funding them in other ways.
> 
> “Later that month, _Harper’s Bazaar_ royal correspondent *Omid Scobie* reported that Charles, 71, would continue to fund Harry and Meghan’s operating costs with the Duchy of Cornwall private estate, which he owns. The Prince of Wales paid 95 percent of their costs at the time.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Harry and Meghan Didn’t Ask Royal Family to Pay for Montecito House
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want to make their own way in Montecito without interference from the royal family — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Here we go! If they paid so much for that house themselves, where is our tax payers' money repayment of £3m???


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> They want to make it known that they are buying the house all on their own. Although the last paragraph shows that Charles is stilling funding them in other ways.
> 
> “Later that month, _Harper’s Bazaar_ royal correspondent *Omid Scobie* reported that Charles, 71, would continue to fund Harry and Meghan’s operating costs with the Duchy of Cornwall private estate, which he owns. *The Prince of Wales paid 95 percent of their costs at the time.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Harry and Meghan Didn’t Ask Royal Family to Pay for Montecito House
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want to make their own way in Montecito without interference from the royal family — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



"Putting their money where their mouth is. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want to make their own way without *interference* from the royal family, which meant excluding his relatives from the purchase of their new house in Montecito."


"interference" ?

I wish Prince Charles would stop 'interfering' too.


----------



## Pessie

So Charles is paying the running costs then.  They’re too financially needy and dependant to be so ill mannered to him IMO.


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> Here we go! If they paid so much for that house themselves, where is our tax payers' money repayment of £3m???


Right, the three million is being paid over years and years, but they claim to have loads of money for this house right now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember, this is their  ‘forever‘ house, so they are locked in to it. Guessing they will play the victim card when it becomes oh so overwhelming. Doubt that H will handle the fires and mudslides well.

_interference  - _more rudeness and arrogance. Seriously, Charles, cut these two loose. With Andrew’s mess and these two grifters, your reign will not begin well.

@bag-mania  the green dress lives on! Not sure what it is, she and Omid look a lot alike.

RE: Angela Kelly - I bought her book & enjoyed reading it.  She is a wealth of information.
I have not and will not buy the Finding book. 

So glad the DM has made this a headline story!  More people need to know how rudely H&M treat the help. Just disgusting that QE tolerates this behaviour. 








						Prince Harry 'exchanged strong words with Queen about key aide'
					

Author Omid Scobie has claimed Harry made the exasperated call following a tussle with a key aide to the Queen, Angela Kelly, about which tiara Meghan would wear when the couple wed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## mia55

Lodpah said:


> Jennifer Hudson is a woman of substance, character, strength and most of all not word salad sprouting, fake and manipulative. MM should take a lesson from her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Hudson and Her Sister Deliver 2,000 Backpacks Filled with School Supplies to Chicago Kids
> 
> 
> "Now more than ever, young people need to know that there are people standing up for them and rooting for them as they learn and grow," Julia and Jennifer Hudson said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Beautiful woman and what she went through her life, she can teach world how to keep calm and move on!!!
I’d pay to listen to her ❤️❤️❤️


----------



## rose60610

Since "whatever Meghan wants Meghan gets", and she was intending on moving to CA the whole while, why did they even accept the Frogmore cottage, and then put millions of renovations into it? It's as though when they agreed to marry they started setting up the dominoes. They had the 50 million dollar wedding, Frogmore rehab, M was setting up LLC's while pregnant with Archie, formed foundations, went on some Crown sponsored trips, vagabonded to Canada and LA, now Montecito. All the while claiming victimhood. I'm wondering if the straw that broke the camel's back was her Africa debacle where she self destructed into an international poor-me pity party that became a hole she couldn't dig out of. Were they thinking of jetting between CA and Frogmore with crowns on their heads between lucrative word salad engagements and online tchotchke crap merch? These two don't make sense but show us just how shallow and self pitying you can be if you have enough millions behind you that you never worked for. Yea, I know M was worth around 5 million or so on her own, but that wouldn't have paid even ten minutes worth of her wedding. When they can't even deliver food in CA without revealing their identities to make the recipients oh-so-grateful, it's vomit inducing, but still in keeping with the poor-me mentality of "I don't understand why I get picked when I act so stupid". They're almost 40 years old now. They're a slow motion train wreck.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> "Putting their money where their mouth is. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want to make their own way without *interference* from the royal family, which meant excluding his relatives from the purchase of their new house in Montecito."
> 
> 
> "interference" ?
> 
> I wish Prince Charles would stop 'interfering' too.


Interesting choice of words . The WOULD indicates C might change his mind and of course the payments were known a while back AT THE TIME. So, the payments are subject to change, even per Omid

"Later that month, _Harper’s Bazaar_ royal correspondent *Omid Scobie* reported that Charles, 71, WOULD continue to fund Harry and Meghan’s operating costs with the Duchy of Cornwall private estate, which he owns. The Prince of Wales paid 95 percent of their costs AT THE TIME."

Putting their money in the house , not the expenses, is smart. They take that with them if they get divorced from Charles but expenses are just down the tube every month. C might have a good lawyer, and be able to deduct the expenses in some way shape or form... 

I will take credit for predicting that they would fail to go to Balmoral this summer , despite the Queen's having announced it 8 months ago. They are too busy decorating - shame, we will never see Archie in a kilt


----------



## Pessie

If Meghan isn’t the sponsor of FF why isn’t she taking legal action against the authors?  It’s a bigger invasion of her privacy than anything else that’s been published.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, this is their  ‘forever‘ house, so they are locked in to it. Guessing they will play the victim card when it becomes oh so overwhelming. *Doubt that H will handle the fires and mudslides well.*
> 
> _interference  - _more rudeness and arrogance. Seriously, Charles, cut these two loose. With Andrew’s mess and these two grifters, your reign will not begin well.
> 
> @bag-mania  the green dress lives on! Not sure what it is, she and Omid look a lot alike.
> 
> RE: Angela Kelly - I bought her book & enjoyed reading it.  She is a wealth of information.
> I have not and will not buy the Finding book.



Here's how they "handle the fires".  Right before the house goes into foreclosure, they'll SET it afire for the insurance. And they'll cry another pity party.


----------



## bag-mania

*Harry and Meghan insist on privacy. Apart from when they’re the ones doing the dishing*

“As Meghan continued her morning yoga practice by the green riverbanks of the Zambezi River, it was difficult not to lose focus. She had never imagined she would be laying out her mat as wild Cape buffalo grazed across the water…”

“As she walked the lonely sands, Diana realised that any hopes she may have harboured over a reconciliation with her husband were over… Now was the moment to start believing in herself.”

Despite being exhaustively scraped, pre-publication, for the not already obvious, Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family can still spring one surprise. As above, it turns out to be a sublime revival of the free indirect style in the royal manner most memorably deployed by Andrew Morton in 1992, when he needed to pretend Diana: Her True Story hadn’t been dictated by the princess. “A sense of injustice burned deeply inside her. Every time she was spotted with an unattached man, however innocently, it made banner headlines, while her husband’s friendship with Camilla barely raised an eyebrow.”

Once Prince Charles decided, in 1994, to describe his burning injustices directly, there was a risk that Private Eye’s Sylvie Krin would become a stylistic outlier. The Sussexes’ coyness has, however, extracted an ambitious revival from authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, who are currently maintaining that their book, with its undeviating pro-Sussex perspective and telltale phrasing, isn’t essentially the work of a couple whose passion for privacy has clearly diminished. “Meghan was protective of herself. She preferred to play it cool and get to know a guy before committing.” And Harry? “He wanted to protect Meghan, to wrap her up and shield her from all the negativity, but he knew that was impossible. He worried about her turning to him one day to say, ‘I love you, but I can’t live like this.’”

Accompanying the couple’s US relaunch, Finding Freedom dwells, again following the template for royal confessions, on how let down Meghan and Harry were by their own side, how exceptional they are and what inspiring things they are impelled to do in a way that is “modern and relevant” but also, if you know anything at all about his parents, painfully familiar. A belief that they have healing powers, which afflicted both Diana and Charles, seems, judging from this regrettable publication, to be only a matter of time. As it is, these are not the first royals to fantasise that instead of visiting things for money it is their special destiny to bring light where there is darkness.
Diana had a vision for the royal family, Charles had a vision for Britain; now the Sussexes reveal, via a chief of staff formerly of the Gates Foundation, that they too have a vision, albeit still on the vague side, “as they embark on this journey of learning, listening and inspiring all of us to act”.

But first they want understandably to detail their achievements, second, set the record straight and, third, get one over on their persecutors. Had they left it at that, with a catalogue of the racist and malicious attacks to which Meghan has been subjected, and an account of what it feels like to be repeatedly insulted, including by the family that still protects Prince Andrew, their admirers would have sympathised while their media persecutors could hardly have disputed events preceding the escape to Santa Barbara. What is the excuse for relentlessly denouncing a pregnant woman, with assistance from her own father? The Mail on Sunday’s extracts from Meghan’s private letter remain the subject of legal action.

It’s also useful to have on record, when the couple’s disenchantment is represented as petulant, that Princess Michael of Kent chose an eye-catching “blackamoor” brooch” for her first meeting with Meghan. Only marginally more subtle, a Mailwriter speculated on infusing the Windsor line with “some rich and exotic DNA”.

As for the rest of the book, the kindest explanation is that the authors hoped, with their unintentionally hilarious Zambezi-style digressions, to dispel any impression of never-ending grievance.
Like most people, I try to ration any mention of Walter Bagehot to around once a decade, max, but Finding Freedom is a provocation too far. Above all, its low-grade revelations are a reminder that the biggest danger to the royals is the royals. It’s their repeated urge to “let in daylight upon magic”, not organised **********ism, which has most threatened royal job security, whether demystification comes in the shape of Charles’s political interference, Prince Andrew’s interview, It’s a Royal Knockout or, in the Sussexes’ case, tone-deaf details about celebrity baby showers. “There were also Ladurée macaron towers, key lime and cherry tarts, red velvet and carrot cakes, cotton candy pompoms and a jar of multicoloured gluten-free doughnut holes.”

Admittedly, like the trooping of the colour and the state opening of parliament, the invasion of the privacy has, over years of repetition, become hallowed ritual. Out of respect for Harry’s predecessors, the Sussexes may have felt a duty likewise to fuel public derision with, for instance, this revelation about infant care: “After a few weeks, they decided to take on the nights themselves and went without a night nurse entirely.”

But not long ago this couple dismissed the notion that baptism details were a reasonable expectation from the paying public. “‘The same people who have been abusing me want me to serve my child on a silver platter,’ she told a friend.” In the next paragraph, we learn, maybe from a different friend, that the child’s nicknames are “Bubba” and “Arch”.

Over to the Sussex team of skilled advisers and publicists to explain their clients’ involvement with a book that, at a stroke, exposes the embryonic visionaries to ridicule, dismays their supporters and, as demonstrated last week, delights their enemies. Of all the royal traditions to hang on to, why this one?









						Harry and Meghan insist on privacy. Apart from when they’re the ones doing the dishing | Catherine Bennett
					

A new book will invite derision and give yet more ammunition to their detractors




					www.google.com


----------



## marietouchet

Latest on tiara-gate - Harry called grandmum to complain of Angela. Omid QUOTES the convo between H & QEII.  WOW ... Only 2 people would have been able to quote THAT phone call, Harry and QEII. 









						Prince Harry 'exchanged strong words with Queen about key aide'
					

Author Omid Scobie has claimed Harry made the exasperated call following a tussle with a key aide to the Queen, Angela Kelly, about which tiara Meghan would wear when the couple wed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Omid Scobie claims that the Duke of Sussex, 35, called his grandmother, 94, and said: 'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman (Angela) needs to make this work for my future wife.' 

Clearly Omid has H&M on speed dial, they take his calls, and they even blabber on about chats with grandmum.  WOW!

Speaking about a family member behind their backs... not good .. I think I learned that at age 6 ... Common sense and courtesy lacking ... you dont need to be an expert on the BRF. I know, I know, everyone here has been saying that, I am merely behind the curve ... mea culpa 

BUT it really helps me when I see a FACT (in this gossipy story) that I can hang my hat on 

It pains me to see the UK institution of monarchy besmirched so much at a time when there are BIGGER fish to fry eg COVID and BREXIT, Boris Johnson needs to focus on the latter.


----------



## marietouchet

Pessie said:


> If Meghan isn’t the sponsor of FF why isn’t she taking legal action against the authors?  It’s a bigger invasion of her privacy than anything else that’s been published.


She is pre-occupied trying to find the 60,000 pounds she owes to the defendants in her other suit, about her letter to her dad


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> If not so poorly written, “Finding Freedom” would be high comedy."


It could be a great comic movie, I love the British humor.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> No. Charles, well actually the hard working tax payers, will foot the bill. Harry will never be on the hook for _anything.........._EVER


@poopsie 
Please be a little more optimist, it is Monday...


----------



## Chagall

Apparently MM said they needed such a big house because it was hard to go out because of their ‘fame’. Is this the fame she so desperately and endlessly courts? How do all the other legitimately famous people who have talent and have worked hard, manage to get out and about and have lives then? (Covid aside).


----------



## CarryOn2020

@rose60610  they wanted to maintain their funding, buy a Cali house, live part of the year at Frogmore and the other part of the year in Cali, do a few royal tours to help out the family, maintain a working wardrobe, etc.  It seems MM with H’s support decided early on to make Charles pay for whatever perceived slights and hurts he caused H. As we have seen, vengeance is never attractive — just look at the green outfit and her other ill-fitting clothes. Mercy.

So, now what? They have had their pity party, albeit poorly attended. They‘ve got their Cali house. They zoomed charities. They‘ve sued many many many people.  They’ve criticized her father, Charles, W&K,  and the BRF.  Are they finished? Interestingly enough, they haven’t really criticized Camilla. And never ever Doria. Hmmm.









						11 warning signs that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were ready to leave the royal family
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were dropping hints about their unhappiness with royal life for some time.




					www.insider.com


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Omid Scobie claims that the Duke of Sussex, 35, called his grandmother, 94, and said: 'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman (Angela) needs to make this work for my future wife.'



I don’t believe for a second that Harry gets away with speaking to his grandmother the queen like that. Maybe in his fantasies he is that disrespectful.


----------



## eunaddict

donutsprinkles said:


> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?


It is absolutely okay to be fan. It is the blind worship of stans that many of us find....cringey?..

There is a Prince Andrew thread on here and on many other forums. *MANY, MANY* people, including myself, believe him and all his little pedophile friends from those Lolita Express Jet trips ought to rot in prison. However, Andrew is doing the "smart" thing (especially after he tried it his way with that horrendous BBC interview) and listening to his minders, staying under the radar, trying to draw as little attention as he can; I mean, the dude even stayed out of his daughter's released wedding photos. And it's hard to write gossipy pieces for the public about a man who hasn't been seen in public in months. 

Meanwhile, a couple who are professing at every turn to want privacy and normality for their child is busy parading themselves in front of media whenever possible, and when not possible, they're releasing deets about their lives through "unnamed sources". It is the hypocrisy that drives the interest. And of course, them pissing of the tabloids with lawsuits...who are now just gleefully poking constant fun at them.

As for Harry and his Nazi outfit. Look, teenagers and young adults are often dumb and they make dumb decisions. BUT, I loathe the whole "boys will be boys, kids will be kids" excuse. Everyone has been a kid, how many of us have thought it would be okay to wear a swastika to a party? Besides, adults should absolutely own up for making mistakes in the past, and if that adult is going to make it his life's goal to appear "woke", then even MORE he should be addressing that elephant in the room. No, that apology via his minders doesn't count, it was less of an apology and more of a presser from his minders in an attempt to quell the outrage.

IF Harry actually brings it up and apologizes for it in one of his "woke" zoom lectures, then sure. We can stop harping on it.
-----------

For the record, I think people like Leo should also be called out more often for their environmental hypocrisy. If you wanna save the planet, stop yachting and private jetting around the world.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Interesting choice of words . The WOULD indicates C might change his mind and of course the payments were known a while back AT THE TIME. So, the payments are subject to change, even per Omid
> 
> "Later that month, _Harper’s Bazaar_ royal correspondent *Omid Scobie* reported that Charles, 71, WOULD continue to fund Harry and Meghan’s operating costs with the Duchy of Cornwall private estate, which he owns. The Prince of Wales paid 95 percent of their costs AT THE TIME."
> 
> Putting their money in the house , not the expenses, is smart. They take that with them if they get divorced from Charles but expenses are just down the tube every month. C might have a good lawyer, and be able to deduct the expenses in some way shape or form...
> 
> I will take credit for predicting that they would fail to go to Balmoral this summer , despite the Queen's having announced it 8 months ago. They are too busy decorating - shame, we will never see Archie in a kilt



Yes, sounds like code for the payments for "operating costs" have conditions attached.

Fancy saying this house is their first home together too.

So basically, a rent-free, grace and favour home given by the Queen in perpetuity doesn't count! OMG, the entitlement goes on. And on. Infinitum...


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> My entire family used to show up including my married brother and SIL.  My parents were there opening and closing nights.  I don't get it.  I am always impressed by the parents and grandparents of my acquaintance who show up for everything the children are involved in.  It really doesn't make sense unless they had a horrible relationship when she was a teen and she told her mother not to show up.
> 
> @Lounorada  Of course that was a throne!  She is a Princess of The United Kingdom.  I'm surprised she wasn't wearing a tiara.


I can only tell you what my friends told me, and that was she was never there. Now, that being said .. I suppose it could have nothing to do with Meghan, maybe Doria and Thomas were not getting along such that Doria didn’t want to be there because of him?  After all, he was very involved in the “behind the scenes” work on Meghan’s plays.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_As for Harry and his Nazi outfit. Look, teenagers and young adults are often dumb and they make dumb decisions. BUT, I loathe the whole "boys will be boys, kids will be kids" excuse._

It isn’t only the Nazi shirt incident, although for some of us that is enough, that reflects H’s rude, boorish behavior.
Here’s 30 more from his past — the real issue is that he and now his wife continue to be offensive with their holier-than thou BS:








						30 Times Prince Harry Was a Royal Bad-Boy
					

Remember when he got fully naked in Vegas? WE DO.




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				












						Royal Bad Boy to Prince Charming: A Look Back at Prince Harry's Wild Days
					

From wild, naked nights in Vegas to attending costume parties dressed as a Nazi, here’s a look back at Prince Harry’s “bad boy” days, before he met Meghan Markle.




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe for a second that Harry gets away with speaking to his grandmother the queen like that. Maybe in his fantasies he is that disrespectful.


I see your point  ... hmmm ... the lawsuit not filed topic - brought up by others 
you all make good points


----------



## youngster

donutsprinkles said:


> . . . . Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?



I think it's an interesting point, when do we forgive people for past mistakes and blunders?  If you are a public figure, I think it will always be tempting for the press or detractors to bring up the past.  Sometimes people can mitigate that with a sincere apology and some effort on their part. I think Harry would not be pummeled about over that incident from his past if he had taken time to tour the Holocaust Museum, among other places, and made a more sincere apology.  But, it goes both ways. Meghan had the opportunity recently to forgive her former best friend, Jessica Mulroney, over her social media intimidation of a Canadian influencer.  MM apparently has cut her off completely. They had a 10 year close friendship, JM's children were in the wedding party, Meghan is godmother to one of JM's children, they vacationed together, attended numerous events together, and more.  MM didn't come to her defense.  She could have done a lot to help Jess Mulroney by simply saying that she's known her for years, that she doesn't have a racist bone in her body, that she made a mistake in the heat of the moment, that she's been a good friend always, etc.  She didn't.  If you want forgiveness, you gotta demonstrate it too.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> Today is Princess Anne's 70th birthday.  She's the patron of more than 200 charities and organizations and was president of Save The Children from 1970 - 2016, and is now their patron.  She was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for this work by the President of Zambia. She was on the British equestrian team for several years, won medals in various European eventing competitions, and was a 1976 Olympian.  She is president of the British Olympic Association and was actively involved in bringing the games to London in 2012. She survived a kidnapping attempt in the 1970's. She routinely carries out about 500+ engagements per year on behalf of the Queen. Her estate, Gatcombe Park, hosts equestrian events and a biannual craft fair for artists.  She requested that her two children not be given royal titles and they, and their children, appear well adjusted and close to her.  She frequently recycles and rewears her gowns and clothes and boots.  I think she would likely wear whatever tiara someone handed her to put on her head. She's had a busy, useful, interesting life and managed to live it fairly privately without complaining or filing multiple lawsuits against the tabloids.
> 
> Not sure why Harry thinks he'll have a more meaningful life in Santa Barbara/L.A. than doing what Princess Anne has managed to do so successfully for 50+ years.  She, also being second born, is really the example that he should have tried to emulate.


Anne was quite surly in her younger days and not much liked. I remember all the negative press, well into her first marriage. It didn't help that she never smiled, but I think that's just her natural way. 

Around the time of her divorce, she seemed to buckle down and get on with things and her reputation grew admirably to what it is now.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Latest on tiara-gate - Harry called grandmum to complain of Angela. Omid QUOTES the convo between H & QEII.  WOW ... *Only 2 people would have been able to quote THAT phone call, Harry and QEII.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'exchanged strong words with Queen about key aide'
> 
> 
> Author Omid Scobie has claimed Harry made the exasperated call following a tussle with a key aide to the Queen, Angela Kelly, about which tiara Meghan would wear when the couple wed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie claims that the Duke of Sussex, 35, called his grandmother, 94, and said: 'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman (Angela) needs to make this work for my future wife.'
> 
> Clearly Omid has H&M on speed dial, they take his calls, and they even blabber on about chats with grandmum.  WOW!
> 
> Speaking about a family member behind their backs... not good .. I think I learned that at age 6 ... Common sense and courtesy lacking ... you dont need to be an expert on the BRF. I know, I know, everyone here has been saying that, I am merely behind the curve ... mea culpa
> 
> BUT it really helps me when I see a FACT (in this gossipy story) that I can hang my hat on
> 
> It pains me to see the UK institution of monarchy besmirched so much at a time when there are BIGGER fish to fry eg COVID and BREXIT, Boris Johnson needs to focus on the latter.


You are forgetting his future wife.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Latest on tiara-gate - Harry called grandmum to complain of Angela. Omid QUOTES the convo between H & QEII.  WOW ... *Only 2 people would have been able to quote THAT phone call, Harry and QEII.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'exchanged strong words with Queen about key aide'
> 
> 
> Author Omid Scobie has claimed Harry made the exasperated call following a tussle with a key aide to the Queen, Angela Kelly, about which tiara Meghan would wear when the couple wed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie claims that the Duke of Sussex, 35, called his grandmother, 94, and said: 'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman (Angela) needs to make this work for my future wife.'
> 
> Clearly Omid has H&M on speed dial, they take his calls, and they even blabber on about chats with grandmum.  WOW!
> 
> Speaking about a family member behind their backs... not good .. I think I learned that at age 6 ... Common sense and courtesy lacking ... you dont need to be an expert on the BRF. I know, I know, everyone here has been saying that, I am merely behind the curve ... mea culpa
> 
> BUT it really helps me when I see a FACT (in this gossipy story) that I can hang my hat on
> 
> It pains me to see the UK institution of monarchy besmirched so much at a time when there are BIGGER fish to fry eg COVID and BREXIT, Boris Johnson needs to focus on the latter.


That is the essential problem with this book (the bolded) vis a vis their claim that they did not participate in the writing of it.  Too many one on one conversations and personal thoughts  are related and many conversations are with people that would never deign to speak with him on any subject.  A decent book editor surely would have pointed out these inconsistencies to the authors.  I think this book was rushed into print without any type of editing other than its being vetted by the subjects of the book.  That's not how it is properly done.  This was written like a piece of tabloid pulp fiction.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> _However, Mr Cunningham sounded one note of caution. In 2018, devastating mudslides – triggered by heavy rain saturating the hills which had been ravaged by wildfires – came within 200ft of the property.
> 
> He said: 'We sure as hell didn't think about it [the mudslides] when we were building but certainly it's something I would be thinking about now.'
> 
> Mr Cunningham sold the house in 2009 because the couple wanted to downsize but they still live close to their dream home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mudslides warning from designer of Harry and Meghan's mansion
> 
> 
> Multi-millionaire businessman Terry Cunningham, 61, told how he and his wife Randi bought 5.4 acres of 'spectacular' land in exclusive Montecito in 1999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So about this guote — “We sure as hell didn't think about it [the mudslides] when we were building but certainly it's something I would be thinking about now.”

Everyone knows about fires and mudslides in California. I’m in Canada and list that as one reason I wouldn’t want to move there. How is he allowed to build without knowing about it.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Would you mind copying an pasting the article? Unfortunately,  I can't get it.


It’s a paid article and I didn’t want to pay to read the entire content. Sorry.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> So about this guote — “We sure as hell didn't think about it [the mudslides] when we were building but certainly it's something I would be thinking about now.”
> 
> Everyone knows about fires and mudslides in California. I’m in Canada and list that as one reason I wouldn’t want to move there. How is he allowed to build without knowing about it.



The mudslide that happened a couple years ago in that area was historic.  It only occurred because wildfires stripped the land of vegetation and destabilized the soil in the summer of 2017, so when it rained in winter 2018, you had historic mudslides.  The catch basins too had been built in the early 1960's and needed to be expanded and modernized but it wasn't really on anyone's radar in a meaningful way.  So, when this house was built, it wasn't likely a consideration.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> You are forgetting his future wife.


YES YES YES MY BIG BAD ... 
and I cannot find the ROTFL emoiji      ... my life is falling apart


----------



## lalame

donutsprinkles said:


> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.



I think we should have different ideas in here so at least for me you are very welcome here. I give negative feedback on H+M, I also give some positive feedback, it's all good. They're people just like anyone else so the good and bad should be appreciated. Over time I've had more bad feedback than good but I try not to be unfair with my criticism. I won't criticize her looks (I think she's gorgeous anyway so not much to criticize) or her mom, since I don't know much else about her.

There ARE whole threads about Prince Andrew though... it's called "Prince Andrew and the Epstein scandal" (enough said!) and most people in here are also in there unequivocally bashing him. I don't think anyone would disagree with you that that whole thing is much more disturbing.

About the Nazi uniform thing, I mean H hasn't exactly been canceled because of it. I think it's pretty fair to rib on someone for making such stupid decisions. He's known for making an ass out of himself throughout his youth, cheated his way through school, and yet today people pay $1m to have him come speak for 30 mins. so I'm not exactly feeling sorry for how the public treats him. He's doing ok.

I totally agree no one has to be perfect or be an expert to have an opinion about the right way to do something. But the orders of magnitude of the hypocrisy is just frankly annoying to witness. If you saw someone lecturing you about environmentalism while they were littering, you'd be annoyed and write them off. Now these people craft their entire image around it and profit off it while taking private jets and buying up huge properties. It's just lame. I'm glad if it actually spurs fans out there to change their ways but I'm guessing those fans just wanna model the same behavior - eg pass on the same message while not making any actual changes in their lives.


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> If Meghan isn’t the sponsor of FF why isn’t she taking legal action against the authors?  It’s a bigger invasion of her privacy than anything else that’s been published.


They may file a lawsuit if that helps their agenda. I wouldn't be surprised if such lawsuit would have the blessings of MA and Scobie-doo himself. There is so much hypocrisy...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> There ARE whole threads about Prince Andrew though... it's called "Prince Andrew and the Epstein scandal" (enough said!) and most people in here are also in there unequivocally bashing him. I don't think anyone would disagree with you that that whole thing is much more disturbing.



That's the thing: there's just no differing opinions on Andrew to be had. What's there to discuss when everyone agrees his behaviour is disgusting and criminal, and most people also don't care why he would choose to have sex with underage girls because no reason in the world would make it ok.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's the thing: there's just no differing opinions on Andrew to be had. What's there to discuss when everyone agrees his behaviour is disgusting and criminal.



I keep hearing this same thing being said to defend MM on social media over and over.... where does that come from! Everyone agrees he's a big creep! And how does that reflect on MM in any way, positive or negative? I don't get it.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> YES YES YES MY BIG BAD ...
> and I cannot find the ROTFL emoiji      ... my life is falling apart


Don't be so hard on yourself, we know that Mondays can be tough...  This could have been avoided if Scobie-doo' had listed his biggest source of information as a co-author of the book.


----------



## maryg1

@donutsprinkles 
Welcome! Thank you for your post
I’ve never been a fan of the couple H&M, somehow I’ve always felt she wasn’t 100% sincere (don’t ask me why, it’s like a 6th sense I have). I’ve always thought she would have caused trouble but boy, that was faster than I imagined.
What I dislike about the couple (and I want to underline couple, because the both of them caused all the mess) is that they have this “I know better, so I’m better than you” attitude, both towards family and towards common people. They want to appear down to earth, simple and caring, but their actions only show that they care for spending money (earned by other), they don’t care at all for privacy and any critics they receive is labelled as racism, which is in most cases untrue.
They were granted a big wedding, although she was divorced (even Charles and Camilla had a private ceremony), a total renovation of their liking of a given home, not to mention other benefits, and they only had to do the job they were expected to do, i.e. going to charity events, family gatherings at Christmas and Summer, and let the press take some public pictures of them and their baby, so they would have had total privacy. But no, they knew better and all these duties were wrong.
I knew they were going for the glam life when they didn’t show at a ceremony to attend the Lion King’s premiere instead: if you look carefully at their engagements, you will also see that they only liked the ones that could serve to portrait them as civil rights warriors.
Moaning about being treated badly while on a royal tour in Africa was also a bad note for me.
If I were a Uk citizen I would be livid at knowing that these couple call themself indipendent but still receive 95% of their income from Dad, and do nothing for their Country.
More recently, I find disgusting that MM LIED telling that her husband was never allowed to vote, and that she knows what it means not being able to express her opinion: this is so irresponsible to say, when there are countries where people are not allowed to vote or risk their life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She seems to lie an awful lot, I know I've pointed out blatant lies in the past (but can't remember the details, I tend to empty my brain regularly LOL).


----------



## Annawakes

papertiger said:


> It's OK, no worries, I found it somewhere else. It's as we suspected, i.e. they are constantly playing catch-up with their ill thought-through plans
> 
> View attachment 4821057


“....worried about the tax implications of any association with P Harry.”

soooo.  Is the house kinda sorta registered/purchased in her name/business name/trust then?  All hers?

I must give her some props for masterminding this.  She has set herself up very very nicely.


----------



## Jayne1

donutsprinkles said:


> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.


The BRF has all the privacy they want, but not when out working. Which might be a lot of time for them, but it’s hardly an eight-hour workday, like regular working folks*. *

In other words*, *royal correspondents follow them when they cut a ribbon in Scotland, but do not follow them from their homes or back. The BRF have mostly private lives which we never see.

Also, about being works in progress until we die — Meg seems to be going in in the opposite direction since her marriage. Now her actions are anti-environmentalist.  And Harry has always had a life of privilege and his actions show he doesn’t even realize it.


----------



## bag-mania

now the Sussexes reveal, via a chief of staff formerly of the Gates Foundation, that they too have a vision, albeit still on the vague side, *“as they embark on this journey of learning, listening and inspiring all of us to act”.*


This is irritating. They are so incredibly egotistical they actually believe they are inspirational to the rest of us. No wonder Meghan is so damned frustrated, the public isn’t getting with the program! We aren’t appreciating all they are telling us to do. Why won’t we adore her? What is wrong with us?!


----------



## papertiger

maryg1 said:


> @donutsprinkles
> Welcome! Thank you for your post
> I’ve never been a fan of the couple H&M, somehow I’ve always felt she wasn’t 100% sincere (don’t ask me why, it’s like a 6th sense I have). I’ve always thought she would have caused trouble but boy, that was faster than I imagined.
> What I dislike about the couple (and I want to underline couple, because the both of them caused all the mess) is that they have this “I know better, so I’m better than you” attitude, both towards family and towards common people. They want to appear down to earth, simple and caring, but their actions only show that they care for spending money (earned by other), they don’t care at all for privacy and any critics they receive is labelled as racism, which is in most cases untrue.
> They were granted a big wedding, although she was divorced (even Charles and Camilla had a private ceremony), a total renovation of their liking of a given home, not to mention other benefits, and they only had to do the job they were expected to do, i.e. going to charity events, family gatherings at Christmas and Summer, and let the press take some public pictures of them and their baby, so they would have had total privacy. But no, they knew better and all these duties were wrong.
> I knew they were going for the glam life when they didn’t show at a ceremony to attend the Lion King’s premiere instead: if you look carefully at their engagements, you will also see that they only liked the ones that could serve to portrait them as civil rights warriors.
> Moaning about being treated badly while on a royal tour in Africa was also a bad note for me.
> If I were a Uk citizen I would be livid at knowing that these couple call themself indipendent but still receive 95% of their income from Dad, and do nothing for their Country.
> More recently, I find disgusting that MM LIED telling that her husband was never allowed to vote, and that she knows what it means not being able to express her opinion: this is so irresponsible to say, when there are countries where people are not allowed to vote or risk their life.



Well said *maryg *


----------



## maryg1

papertiger said:


> Well said *maryg *


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> That is the essential problem with this book (the bolded) vis a vis their claim that they did not participate in the writing of it.  Too many one on one conversations and personal thoughts  are related and many conversations are with people that would never deign to speak with him on any subject.  A decent book editor surely would have pointed out these inconsistencies to the authors.  I think this book was rushed into print without any type of editing other than its being vetted by the subjects of the book.  That's not how it is properly done.  This was written like a piece of tabloid pulp fiction.



Well exactly, can't have it both ways, don't play silly bugs*rs.

Either it was a work of fiction and therefore a lawsuit should ensue prove the point, OR it was a biography, in which case he/she/they wrote it with Scooby-doo-doo.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> It’s a paid article and I didn’t want to pay to read the entire content. Sorry.



It's OK I found it somewhere in full. 

Thank you for noting it, in the UK, it's less likely that we understand US tax laws and the implications for foreigners, so it's good to have it explained in very simple terms, even if just possible options.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> It's OK, no worries, I found it somewhere else. It's as we suspected, i.e. they are constantly playing catch-up with their ill thought-through plans
> 
> View attachment 4821057



Why would they buy it through a shell company? Do you think this is a way for them to write it off as a business asset/expense?


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like Cressida has a healthy sense of humor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Cressida Bonas's pop at Harry's £11million palace?
> 
> 
> While Prince Harry and Meghan have spent £11 million on a mansion with nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms (right), his ex, Cressida Bonas, is keen to make the point that she's happy with a simpler life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Also, looks like Cressida made a much better choice in who she married.


----------



## justwatchin

Pessie said:


> If Meghan isn’t the sponsor of FF why isn’t she taking legal action against the authors?  It’s a bigger invasion of her privacy than anything else that’s been published.


Because despite the mild claim they weren’t involved with book, I think they’re getting some money from any sales. Otherwise, there would already be a threat of legal action. If these are the same people who want to sue for pics of M walking a dog and carrying A like a crossbody bag, don’t you think they would be all over this book being published?


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> Why would they buy it through a shell company? Do you think this is a way for them to write it off as a business asset/expense?





papertiger said:


> It's OK I found it somewhere in full.
> 
> Thank you for noting it, in the UK, it's less likely that we understand US tax laws and the implications for foreigners, so it's good to have it explained in very simple terms, even if just possible options.


the snippet from the article misused  the terms shell corporation and trust. They are not synonymous. Different things. 
a Shell Corp is synonymous with the term Limited liability Corp. A business is incorporated in that fashion to reduce the liability of the owner, less financial risk that way
a trust is primarily a way of reducing inheritance taxes used by people with larger estates 
 I am sure the lawyers among us might have issues with those simple definitions but suffice it to say the article misused the legal terms
so, I give the article a D for correctness.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Why would they buy it through a shell company? Do you think this is a way for them to write it off as a business asset/expense?



Yup.  It's probably a company just set-up to own the house (could be a property company and this will be one of many). Perhaps they're renting from that company (themselves) and PC pays the rent. 

Also, not sure how you personally pay a mortgage on a company owned asset. 

But then my property is in my name so not sure how it works. 

Someone else will be far more astute with the workings than me. My properties are in my name and this is not my specialist filed of business. My father tried explaining this kind of thing to me again and again, but my eyes glazed over and...


----------



## marietouchet

FYI on trusts

the French singer Johnny Halliday was a tax exile in the USA for the last 10 years of his life. He put his assets in trusts in the USA, in part to reduce inheritance taxes but also for two more reasons ...

JH was hiding assets/income from the fisc, the French equivalent of the IRS AKA Chancellor of the Exchequer/ inland revenue and 3 years after death , it became known he owed 35 Million euros to the fisc ...
he set up the trusts to be managed by his widow, basically to cut off his two adult children BUT they cannot be disinherited under French law ...

massive French lawsuits for 3 years about the JH estate until it became known the estate was not much more than a liability due to the tax bill

so, trusts are useful to hide assets from foreigners

a Trust could be useful way for H&M to prevent anyone in the UK from monitoring their finances either Charles, the Queen or Boris Johnson


----------



## lalame

A trust would make much more sense and frankly knowing H, it's probably a trust owned by Prince Charles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> Because despite the mild claim they weren’t involved with book, I think they’re getting some money from any sales. Otherwise, there would already be a threat of legal action. If these are the same people who want to sue for pics of M walking a dog and carrying A like a crossbody bag, don’t you think they would be all over this book being published?



Yup. Like I said can;'t have it both ways.

if anyone ever sniffed out a breadcrumb trail of money it could blow their cover. 

They'd never be that stupid as to even think of getting paid... Never mind


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> FYI on trusts
> 
> the French singer Johnny Halliday was a tax exile in the USA for the last 10 years of his life. He put his assets in trusts in the USA, in part to reduce inheritance taxes but also for two more reasons ...
> 
> JH was hiding assets/income from the fisc, the French equivalent of the IRS AKA Chancellor of th Exchequer, and 3 years after death , it became known he owed 35 Million euros to the fisc ...
> he set up the trusts to be managed by his widow, basically to cut off his two adult children BUT they cannot be disinherited under French law ...
> 
> massive French lawsuits for 3 years about the JH estate until it became known the estate was not much more than a liability due to the tax bill
> 
> so, trusts are useful to hide assets from foreigners
> 
> a Trust could be useful way for H&M to prevent anyone in the UK from monitoring their fI an ex, either Charles, the Queen or Boris Johnson



The Queen would only have to ask.


----------



## marietouchet

FYI on LLCs and shell corps , the reason for wanting limited liability 

I actually read the tax returns of Hillary ******* four years ago ... 

she and Bill ******* each own a number of LLCs, there is one that manages speaking engagements for her, another manages revenues from any books she writes, Bill ******* has two more similar LLCs.
they have more LLCs, but those are the only ones that come to mind

anyway, the LLCs are useful as follows. Let’s say hypothetically she writes a book, and is sued for libel. technically, her book writing LLC is sued, not her or Bill. So, Bill is insulated from any Lawsuits, the person suing cannot go after his assets eg his house, or his money 

so, having a pile of LLCs is not underhanded, it is just good business practice, and LLCs are like potato chips, you Can’t  have just one


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The Queen would only have to ask.


Yes, she is the most powerful piece on the board ....


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> the snippet from the article misused  the terms shell corporation and trust. They are not synonymous. Different things.
> a Shell Corp is synonymous with the term Limited liability Corp. A business is incorporated in that fashion to reduce the liability of the owner, less financial risk that way
> a trust is primarily a way of reducing inheritance taxes used by people with larger estates
> I am sure the lawyers among us might have issues with those simple definitions but suffice it to say the article misused the legal terms
> so, I give the article a D for correctness.



But Harry already has a trust fund. 

London is full of trust lawyers at posh addresses. They can make money appear and disappear like magic. 

This house purchase is using her contacts and her contact's address


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> A trust would make much more sense and frankly knowing H, it's probably a trust owned by Prince Charles.



Then why that address? 

And the BIG 'our first real home paid by us' / 'no interference'  speech?


----------



## bisousx

The Montecito address was purchased with a trust, not an LLC. The company listed on the trust is in LA.


----------



## Tootsie17

Annawakes said:


> “....worried about the tax implications of any association with P Harry.”
> 
> soooo.  Is the house kinda sorta registered/purchased in her name/business name/trust then?  All hers?
> 
> I must give her some props for masterminding this.  She has set herself up very very nicely.


I wonder sometimes how much time did it take M to calculate this whole charade that so far, seems to be working for her, unfortunately. To paraphrase what someone on this thread once said, narcissists often never get their comeuppance and NEVER realize all the wrong they have done. Too bad if that's true in M's case because I want her to get what's coming to her so BAD!


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> now the Sussexes reveal, via a chief of staff formerly of the Gates Foundation, that they too have a vision, albeit still on the vague side, *“as they embark on this journey of learning, listening and inspiring all of us to act”.*
> 
> 
> This is irritating. They are so incredibly egotistical they actually believe they are inspirational to the rest of us. No wonder Meghan is so damned frustrated, the public isn’t getting with the program! We aren’t appreciating all they are telling us to do. Why won’t we adore her? What is wrong with us?!


We have common sense and decent morals.


----------



## Tootsie17

justwatchin said:


> Because despite the mild claim they weren’t involved with book, I think they’re getting some money from any sales. Otherwise, there would already be a threat of legal action. If these are the same people who want to sue for pics of M walking a dog and carrying A like a crossbody bag, don’t you think they would be all over this book being published?


I wonder what the BRF thinks about them not suing or receiving money from the book, especially PC.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> But Harry already has a trust fund.
> 
> London is full of trust lawyers at posh addresses. They can make money appear and disappear like magic.
> 
> This house purchase is using her contacts and her contact's address


Harry has a trust, set up for him by his late mother. I think it is fair to say a UK Trust is diff from a USA Trust. One wonders if H can get at his capital? or just the income ? Is it entailed ? The only specific I remember is that John Major - a previous PM - is a trustee, so H would probably have to get JM's nod of approval for major things. The trust could be in vested in illiquid investments eg real estate, that are valuable but cannot be instantly converted to cash

Trusts are a when in Rome kind of thing ...  I would get a solicitor to set up my UK Trust, and American lawyer(s) to set up USA Trusts - one for every state you operate in
If memory serves, MM is/was incorporated in Delaware ... because the state is known for its privacy laws, I could not vouch for California privacy laws, so she has Delaware lawyers in the mix
Yes the whole subject of trusts, lawyer, solicitors, is enough to give anyone headaches in 15 minutes.

Agree, MM picked the US legal team , if I were H I would select at least one US counselor directly employed only by him, not her, to look out for his interests alone.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Harry has a trust, set up for him by his late mother. I think it is fair to say a UK Trust is diff from a USA Trust. One wonders if H can get at his capital? or just the income ? Is it entailed ? The only specific I remember is that John Major - a previous PM - is a trustee, so H would probably have to get JM's nod of approval for major things. THe trust could get in vested in illiquid investments, that are valuable but cannot be instantly converted to cash
> 
> Trusts are a when in Rome kind of thing ...  I would get a solicitor to set up my UK Trust, and American lawyer(s) to set up USA Trusts - one for every state you operate in
> If memory serves, MM is/was incorporated in Delaware ... because the state is known for its privacy laws, I could not vouch for California privacy laws
> Yes the whole subject of trusts, lawyer, solicitors, is enough to give anyone headaches in 15 minutes.
> 
> Agree, MM picked the US legal team , if I were H I would select at least one US counselor directly employed only by him, not her, to look out for his interests alone.



UK trusts are nearly always set-up with prudence in mind. 1. they provide a regular income - it's very doubtful he can get at the capital and 2. they are nearly always locked against future spouses, are non-transferable to another/others even if the trust fund 'kid' wishes, and only inheritable, sometimes even then only by descendants or a designated charity.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Harry has a trust, set up for him by his late mother. I think it is fair to say a UK Trust is diff from a USA Trust. One wonders if H can get at his capital? or just the income ? Is it entailed ? The only specific I remember is that John Major - a previous PM - is a trustee, so H would probably have to get JM's nod of approval for major things. The trust could be in vested in illiquid investments eg real estate, that are valuable but cannot be instantly converted to cash
> 
> Trusts are a when in Rome kind of thing ...  I would get a solicitor to set up my UK Trust, and American lawyer(s) to set up USA Trusts - one for every state you operate in
> If memory serves, MM is/was incorporated in Delaware ... because the state is known for its privacy laws, I could not vouch for California privacy laws, so she has Delaware lawyers in the mix
> Yes the whole subject of trusts, lawyer, solicitors, is enough to give anyone headaches in 15 minutes.
> 
> Agree, MM picked the US legal team , if I were H I would select at least one US counselor directly employed only by him, not her, to look out for his interests alone.



California is a community property state, so spouses get half of your assets, come heck or high water

But the UK has no such default that the spouse gets half. After all,ducal estates routinely go to the eldest son, bypassing the widow and daughters


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> UK trusts are nearly always set-up with prudence in mind. 1. they provide a regular income - it's very doubtful he can get at the capital and 2. they are nearly always locked against future spouses, are non-transferable to another/others even if the trust fund 'kid' wishes, and only inheritable, sometimes even then only by descendants or a designated charity.


Agree, thank you for adding to my thoughts


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> California is a community property state, so spouses get half of your assets, come heck or high water
> 
> But the UK has no such default that the spouse gets half. After all,ducal estates routinely go to the eldest son, bypassing the widow and daughters



Even in a community property state, assets brought to a marriage and held separately in accounts in just one person's name (like from an inheritance or held in a trust) are not community property.  So, assets held in trust in Harry's name would be separate property and not subject to California's community property laws.  Now, if he took those assets out of his trust and put them in joint accounts with MM then those assets could be considered part of their joint assets.  But, it's likely that his UK trust was set up by Diana to protect him long term and does not allow him to invade the principle and make withdrawals at will.  He might just get the income from it for his lifetime with the principle going to any children on his death and, even then, the trust might also specify that those children only get the income as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> *California is a community property state, so spouses get half of your assets, come heck or high water*
> 
> But the UK has no such default that the spouse gets half. After all,ducal estates routinely go to the eldest son, bypassing the widow and daughters



Only for assets acquired after marriage though so at this point I'll bet they have a new joint trust set up and that's probably what they're using for this house if not a trust H alone owns (since he's probably going in with substantially higher assets).


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree, MM picked the US legal team , if I were H I would select at least one US counselor directly employed only by him, not her, to look out for his interests alone.



He is too much of a dullard to look out for his interests. He has never had to, someone has always done it for him. I bet the only accounts Meghan doesn’t know about are ones Harry doesn’t know about himself (if any).


----------



## bag-mania

This is the biggest nonstory of the year. Was anyone naive enough to believe that Meghan was _not _writing their SussexRoyal Instagram? It had her word salad style all over it.



Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was behind many of the captions on the Sussex Royal Instagram account during the beginning of her tenure as a working member of the royal family, according to the new Sussex-centered biography, Finding Freedom. 

Per Town & Country, the duchess was reportedly happy to help curate the voice and tone of the now-defunct Sussex Royal feed, especially since becoming a member of the royal family meant that Meghan had to deactivate her personal Instagram account and take down her lifestyle blog, The Tig. 

"Launching the account was a somewhat liberating experience for Meghan. Not having a platform of her own to talk directly to the public was one of the toughest changes for her, especially after building so much of her own brand on Instagram and her blog. @SussexRoyal meant that she finally had a place to curate," revealed an anonymous aide in Finding Freedom. 


"Meghan drafted a lot of the posts herself in the early days," wrote authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand. "It was one of the things that kept her occupied during her final days of pregnancy."

Following the Sussexes' decision to step down as senior members of the royal family and the queen's blocking of the word royal for use by the couple in any of their independent ventures going forward, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan officially closed the Instagram account earlier this spring. 

Meghan's secret caption creating for the Sussex Royal account wasn't the duchess's last go at writing and utilizing her voice, however.  During a livestream interview with the female-focused media platform The 19th, Meghan revealed that she's excited to speak out more on the issues of womanhood, gender discrepancies, and racial injustice now that she's settled in her new home in Santa Barbara with Harry and their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.









						Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
					

It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, tell us something we don’t know.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Coincident or not?
Meghan & Omid Scoobie Doobie's book is released and :snap: goes the down payment on their $14M forever house...wait for it without daddy's assistance.

YES, bought WITHOUT daddy's help and planned for quite some time, and if I remember correctly there was an urgency about the release of THEIR, I mean Scoobie's book <bc neither H, nor M are worth squat in the big scheme of things, at least not of that magnitude or with the liquidity required to buy and then re-decorate and maintain an estate of that magnitude> 
And we claim Ms Meghan has not WORKED thus far?  What fools are we?

My gosh, I bet Meghan was burning the midnight oil writing the preliminary drafts of her book F-ch-ng Freedom herself, before and after her sultry yoga poses while in Africa.

And let's say that one day some time ago, MM offers Scoobie, a bonafide journalist, who in all probability may be a decent writer of original content himself but there is only so much he could do IF Ms Bossy Pants handed him a bunch of her life-with-Harry notes without asking anyone's opinion and simply said USE THIS for our book, Omid, it's all right here!

This is the only logical explanation bc after reading the reviews at Amazon, and as a customer for over 16-years, I have never read such scathing reviews of a celeb book. Ever.

We know how it has played out, we are the audience and connectingt the dots is easy with these imbeciles.

It's getting


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> This is the biggest nonstory of the year. Was anyone naive enough to believe that Meghan was _not _writing their SussexRoyal Instagram? It had her word salad style all over it.
> 
> View attachment 4821511
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was behind many of the captions on the Sussex Royal Instagram account during the beginning of her tenure as a working member of the royal family, according to the new Sussex-centered biography, Finding Freedom.
> 
> Per Town & Country, the duchess was reportedly happy to help curate the voice and tone of the now-defunct Sussex Royal feed, especially since becoming a member of the royal family meant that Meghan had to deactivate her personal Instagram account and take down her lifestyle blog, The Tig.
> 
> "Launching the account was a somewhat liberating experience for Meghan. Not having a platform of her own to talk directly to the public was one of the toughest changes for her, especially after building so much of her own brand on Instagram and her blog. @SussexRoyal meant that she finally had a place to curate," revealed an anonymous aide in Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> "Meghan drafted a lot of the posts herself in the early days," wrote authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand. "It was one of the things that kept her occupied during her final days of pregnancy."
> 
> Following the Sussexes' decision to step down as senior members of the royal family and the queen's blocking of the word royal for use by the couple in any of their independent ventures going forward, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan officially closed the Instagram account earlier this spring.
> 
> Meghan's secret caption creating for the Sussex Royal account wasn't the duchess's last go at writing and utilizing her voice, however.  During a livestream interview with the female-focused media platform The 19th, Meghan revealed that she's excited to speak out more on the issues of womanhood, gender discrepancies, and racial injustice now that she's settled in her new home in Santa Barbara with Harry and their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
> 
> 
> It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



What has happened to you, Harper's Bazaar...


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> Harry has a trust, set up for him by his late mother. I think it is fair to say a UK Trust is diff from a USA Trust. One wonders if H can get at his capital? or just the income ? Is it entailed ? The only specific I remember is that John Major - a previous PM - is a trustee, so H would probably have to get JM's nod of approval for major things. The trust could be in vested in illiquid investments eg real estate, that are valuable but cannot be instantly converted to cash
> 
> Trusts are a when in Rome kind of thing ...  I would get a solicitor to set up my UK Trust, and American lawyer(s) to set up USA Trusts - one for every state you operate in
> If memory serves, MM is/was incorporated in Delaware ... because the state is known for its privacy laws, I could not vouch for California privacy laws, so she has Delaware lawyers in the mix
> Yes the whole subject of trusts, lawyer, solicitors, is enough to give anyone headaches in 15 minutes.
> 
> Agree, MM picked the US legal team , if I were H I would select at least one US counselor directly employed only by him, not her, to look out for his interests alone.


He can’t. His brain is too far up in her . . . you know.


----------



## marietouchet

Prince Harry 'did NOT shout' at the Queen, sources insist
https://mol.im/a/8636967
Omid was on tv today about the tiara kerfuffle
Now Omid has been Markled ie a source close to H has denied the story told by Omid in the book and on tv


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Prince Harry 'did NOT shout' at the Queen, sources insist
> https://mol.im/a/8636967
> Omid was on tv today about the tiara kerfuffle
> Now Omid has been Markled



_*'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman needs to make this work for my future wife.' *_

Gotta laugh.  Harry apparently referred to Angela Kelly as "this woman" but took great offense when William called MM "this girl".


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> _*'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman needs to make this work for my future wife.' *_
> 
> Gotta laugh.  Harry apparently referred to Angela Kelly as "this woman" but took great offense when William called MM "this girl".


Typical hypocrite!


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> "Putting their money where their mouth is. *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want to make their own way without interference from the royal family, which meant excluding his relatives from the purchase of their new house in Montecito*."
> "interference" ?
> I wish Prince Charles would stop 'interfering' too.








Usually the truth is the opposite of what M&H say, so I would take from this that the Royal family _did _have an involvement with the payment of this house.




CarryOn2020 said:


> So glad the DM has made this a headline story!  More people need to know how rudely H&M treat the help. Just disgusting that QE tolerates this behaviour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'exchanged strong words with Queen about key aide'
> 
> 
> Author Omid Scobie has claimed Harry made the exasperated call following a tussle with a key aide to the Queen, Angela Kelly, about which tiara Meghan would wear when the couple wed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





While I don't believe for a second that he would dare speak to the Queen like this, it's just as disrespectful to allow for this false narrative to be published in a book for the world to see. It makes you sound and look like a spoiled brat who has zero respect for his grandmother by thinking it's acceptable to speak to her like that... all because your egotistical soon-to-be-wife wanted to try on a tiara so her hairstylist could create a bland hairstyle? If he was any good at hairstyling then he wouldn't have needed the actual tiara to practice on and would have instead improvised and used a similar sized hairband or cheap costume tiara. Such a load of petty, childish bullsh*t. Instead of 'Just call me Harry' it should be 'Just call me dumba$$'.




rose60610 said:


> Since "whatever Meghan wants Meghan gets", and she was intending on moving to CA the whole while, why did they even accept the Frogmore cottage, and then put millions of renovations into it? It's as though when they agreed to marry they started setting up the dominoes. They had the 50 million dollar wedding, Frogmore rehab, M was setting up LLC's while pregnant with Archie, formed foundations, went on some Crown sponsored trips, vagabonded to Canada and LA, now Montecito. All the while claiming victimhood. I'm wondering if the straw that broke the camel's back was her Africa debacle where she self destructed into an international poor-me pity party that became a hole she couldn't dig out of. Were they thinking of jetting between CA and Frogmore with crowns on their heads between lucrative word salad engagements and online tchotchke crap merch? These two don't make sense but show us just how shallow and self pitying you can be if you have enough millions behind you that you never worked for. Yea, I know M was worth around 5 million or so on her own, but that wouldn't have paid even ten minutes worth of her wedding. When they can't even deliver food in CA without revealing their identities to make the recipients oh-so-grateful, it's vomit inducing, but still in keeping with the poor-me mentality of "I don't understand why I get picked when I act so stupid". They're almost 40 years old now. They're a slow motion train wreck.


When you see all the main details written out in front of you...








maryg1 said:


> @donutsprinkles
> Welcome! Thank you for your post
> I’ve never been a fan of the couple H&M, somehow I’ve always felt she wasn’t 100% sincere (don’t ask me why, it’s like a 6th sense I have). I’ve always thought she would have caused trouble but boy, that was faster than I imagined.
> What I dislike about the couple (and I want to underline couple, because the both of them caused all the mess) is that they have this “I know better, so I’m better than you” attitude, both towards family and towards common people. They want to appear down to earth, simple and caring, but their actions only show that they care for spending money (earned by other), they don’t care at all for privacy and any critics they receive is labelled as racism, which is in most cases untrue.
> They were granted a big wedding, although she was divorced (even Charles and Camilla had a private ceremony), a total renovation of their liking of a given home, not to mention other benefits, and they only had to do the job they were expected to do, i.e. going to charity events, family gatherings at Christmas and Summer, and let the press take some public pictures of them and their baby, so they would have had total privacy. But no, they knew better and all these duties were wrong.
> I knew they were going for the glam life when they didn’t show at a ceremony to attend the Lion King’s premiere instead: if you look carefully at their engagements, you will also see that they only liked the ones that could serve to portrait them as civil rights warriors.
> Moaning about being treated badly while on a royal tour in Africa was also a bad note for me.
> If I were a Uk citizen I would be livid at knowing that these couple call themself indipendent but still receive 95% of their income from Dad, and do nothing for their Country.
> More recently, I find disgusting that MM LIED telling that her husband was never allowed to vote, and that she knows what it means not being able to express her opinion: this is so irresponsible to say, when there are countries where people are not allowed to vote or risk their life.


Well said @maryg1! I completely agree with everything you said.









bag-mania said:


> now the Sussexes reveal, via a chief of staff formerly of the Gates Foundation, that they too have a vision, albeit still on the vague side, *“as they embark on this journey of learning, listening and inspiring all of us to act”.*


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> The mudslide that happened a couple years ago in that area was historic.  It only occurred because wildfires stripped the land of vegetation and destabilized the soil in the summer of 2017, so when it rained in winter 2018, you had historic mudslides.  The catch basins too had been built in the early 1960's and needed to be expanded and modernized but it wasn't really on anyone's radar in a meaningful way.  So, when this house was built, it wasn't likely a consideration.


I remember seeing videos of mudslides swallowing homes and have been seeing and reading about CA mudslides for decades. 

Are you saying mudslides were not common in Santa Barbara at the time?


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Prince Harry 'did NOT shout' at the Queen, sources insist
> https://mol.im/a/8636967
> Omid was on tv today about the tiara kerfuffle
> Now Omid has been Markled


In addition to providing information, MM likely reviewed the book prior to its publication. So I don't think Omid has been markled yet, this is just part of their little show. They will have their friends correct some inaccuracies when convenient to them.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> In addition to providing information, MM likely reviewed the book prior to its publication. So I don't think Omid has been markled yet, this is just part of their little show. They will have their friends correct some inaccuracies when convenient to them.


Thank you yes I used the wrong word 
Omid has not been Markled yet , he has merely been thrown under the bus - it is crowded under the bus


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Thank you yes I used the wrong word
> Omid has not been Markled yet , he has merely been thrown under the bus - it is crowded under the bus


Poor Omid, he is just following instructions. 

“*The fact is that Meghan and Harry’s book, which is essentially her book, is written by the ex-boyfriend of her good friend Marcus Anderson, Omid Scobie, who has always beaten the drum for Meghan*."








						Lady Colin Campbell Says Meghan And Harry Tried To Influence His Book | FR24 News English
					






					www.fr24news.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Harry has a trust, set up for him by his late mother. I think it is fair to say a UK Trust is diff from a USA Trust. One wonders if H can get at his capital? or just the income ? Is it entailed ? The only specific I remember is that John Major - a previous PM - is a trustee, so H would probably have to get JM's nod of approval for major things. The trust could be in vested in illiquid investments eg real estate, that are valuable but cannot be instantly converted to cash
> 
> Trusts are a when in Rome kind of thing ...  I would get a solicitor to set up my UK Trust, and American lawyer(s) to set up USA Trusts - one for every state you operate in
> If memory serves, MM is/was incorporated in Delaware ... because the state is known for its privacy laws, I could not vouch for California privacy laws, so she has Delaware lawyers in the mix
> Yes the whole subject of trusts, lawyer, solicitors, is enough to give anyone headaches in 15 minutes.
> 
> Agree, MM picked the US legal team , if I were H I would select at least one US counselor directly employed only by him, not her, to look out for his interests alone.


Many LLC's and Trusts are set up in Delaware also because of the cost; a LOT cheaper than other states!  My LLC was set up in Delaware.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> I remember seeing videos of mudslides swallowing homes and have been seeing and reading about CA mudslides for decades.
> 
> Are you saying mudslides were not common in Santa Barbara at the time?



Well, the original owner and builder of the house they bought said that mudslides weren't on his radar at all when he built the place.  

For sure, Southern California is huge and lots of areas have hills and canyons so, yes, there have been lots of mudslides through the decades just depending on where the wildfires have struck followed by a huge amount of rain.  Sometimes it's just a huge amount of rain that destabilizes hillsides or just shifting due to the passage of time.  The one that happened in 2018 in Montecito though was historic in the amount of damage and number of deaths in that area.  I believe it was revealed after that the Army Corps of Engineers had been telling Santa Barbara to upgrade their infrastructure and clear out their catch basins since about the 1990's but, you know how it is, it was put on a back burner since they hadn't had a big problem before.


----------



## Lodpah

Freaking newspapers keep talking about them buying their house! We are not their family and they’re not the first people to ever buy a house. MM needs to stop feeding the media. We don’t care and won’t care. They are taking up so much air! There’s a crises going on and they are pushing 40 so congrats to them and move the hell on.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Freaking newspapers keep talking about them buying their house! We are not their family and they’re not the first people to ever buy a house. *MM needs to stop feeding the media. We don’t care and won’t care. They are taking up so much air! *There’s a crises going on and they are pushing 40 so congrats to them and move the hell on.



Screenshot from Yahoo, I can't stand this entitled and pretentious couple!


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> _*'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman needs to make this work for my future wife.' *_
> 
> Gotta laugh.  Harry apparently referred to Angela Kelly as "this woman" but took great offense when William called MM "this girl".


It’s all about the tone!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Poor Omid, he is just following instructions.
> 
> “*The fact is that Meghan and Harry’s book, which is essentially her book, is written by the ex-boyfriend of her good friend Marcus Anderson, Omid Scobie, who has always beaten the drum for Meghan*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Colin Campbell Says Meghan And Harry Tried To Influence His Book | FR24 News English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fr24news.com



I’ve never heard of a Markus/Omid romantic connection before. Seems like that information would have surfaced before now if it was true but nothing surprises me this year.


----------



## Katel

papertiger said:


> It's OK, no worries, I found it somewhere else. It's as we suspected, i.e. they are constantly playing catch-up with their ill thought-through plans
> 
> View attachment 4821057


She has/had a company called “frim fram?!?” Like “flim flam” - does she know what that slang means? 
So appropriate - it’s real life satire right in front of us!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I do believe he spoke and still does speak to QE and staff in that way. It is part of his entitlement. It is the same tone used in his zoom videos and everywhere else.  He acts like the devil’s *itch.

Here’s another reminder of how H really feels and behaves. He is on publicly funded tour, representing QE, being *given* access to high ranking officials [as well as reporters] that most people never get. This is from the South Africa tour where H&M were criticized for their lil 5 min stop-and-go visits. When this is how he manages himself on a tour, it is no wonder he thinks royalty is useless. And it is no wonder that the only woman who would marry him is a _woods’ pee-er._

In the video, notice his dismissive tone, his and the ’help’ fumbling with the door handle and his stern ‘don’t behave like this’ to an adult female. He has told us through his actions and behavior exactly who he is and what is important to him. That is why his past behavior is important and relevant.  Who said ‘what’s past is prologue‘?  Our dear friend Shakespeare in The Tempest.

No, we will not stop reminding people of H’s condescending attitude, his hypocrisy and his arrogance. Never.
Yes, we will hold public figures accountable for their behavior, especially when they lecture us on our behavior.










						Moment angry Prince Harry lectures journalist on her behaviour on royal trip
					

FOOTAGE has emerged of Prince Harry scolding a television reporter for asking a question hours before he released an extraordinary rant about the media. The Duke of Sussex released the unprecedente…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



Sky News reporter Rhiannon Mills asked: "That short conversation, what do you hope to achieve through it?"
Harry let out a laugh before responding: "What? Ask them" and pointing back towards the hospital.
The reporter followed up: "Is that why it's important for you to come and talk to them?"
Harry gestured for the journalist to move away from him, saying: "Rhiannon, don't behave like this."
It is understood palace officials later told reporters similar conduct would not be tolerated again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since this Mr. Cunningham is from Canada, it is possible that he would not know about the wildfires and the mudslides and other dangers that lurk in a seemingly peaceful and beautiful setting. The Pacific Ocean is a misnomer — below those calm waters are strong currents that can and do kill people.

What is interesting is that the architect would not advise his clients of the potential hazards. Wonder why he and his team have not spoken up.  As always, _caveat emptor._ 




youngster said:


> Well, the original owner and builder of the house they bought said that mudslides weren't on his radar at all when he built the place.
> 
> For sure, Southern California is huge and lots of areas have hills and canyons so, yes, there have been lots of mudslides through the decades just depending on where the wildfires have struck followed by a huge amount of rain.  Sometimes it's just a huge amount of rain that destabilizes hillsides or just shifting due to the passage of time.  The one that happened in 2018 in Montecito though was historic in the amount of damage and number of deaths in that area.  I believe it was revealed after that the Army Corps of Engineers had been telling Santa Barbara to upgrade their infrastructure and clear out their catch basins since about the 1990's but, you know how it is, it was put on a back burner since they hadn't had a big problem before.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H should have quit while he was ahead 
_*'I don't know what the hell is going on.’*_

What Charles wants to say:
_'*I don't know what the hell is going on, but this man-child needs to stop this nonsense for our future lives.'*_

What Andrew wants to say:
_*'I know exactly what the hell is going on.'*_

What Prince Philip said:
*'One steps out with actresses, one doesn't marry them'*


----------



## Lodpah

Can someone send this to those two grifters and tell them we don’t care about their whining and platitudes: 



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/08/15/eviction-coronavirus-houston/?arc404=true


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Even in a community property state, assets brought to a marriage and held separately in accounts in just one person's name (like from an inheritance or held in a trust) are not community property.  So, assets held in trust in Harry's name would be separate property and not subject to California's community property laws.  Now, if he took those assets out of his trust and put them in joint accounts with MM then those assets could be considered part of their joint assets.  But, it's likely that his UK trust was set up by Diana to protect him long term and does not allow him to invade the principle and make withdrawals at will.  He might just get the income from it for his lifetime with the *principle going to any children on his death and, even then, the trust might also specify that those children only get the income as well.*


Well with his child's mother being MM, that would be a brilliant thing.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> This is the biggest nonstory of the year. Was anyone naive enough to believe that Meghan was _not _writing their SussexRoyal Instagram? It had her word salad style all over it.
> 
> View attachment 4821511
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was behind many of the captions on the Sussex Royal Instagram account during the beginning of her tenure as a working member of the royal family, according to the new Sussex-centered biography, Finding Freedom.
> 
> Per Town & Country, the duchess was reportedly happy to help curate the voice and tone of the now-defunct Sussex Royal feed, especially since becoming a member of the royal family meant that Meghan had to deactivate her personal Instagram account and take down her lifestyle blog, The Tig.
> 
> "Launching the account was a somewhat liberating experience for Meghan. Not having a platform of her own to talk directly to the public was one of the toughest changes for her, especially after building so much of her own brand on Instagram and her blog. @SussexRoyal meant that she finally had a place to curate," revealed an anonymous aide in Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> "Meghan drafted a lot of the posts herself in the early days," wrote authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand. "It was one of the things that kept her occupied during her final days of pregnancy."
> 
> Following the Sussexes' decision to step down as senior members of the royal family and the queen's blocking of the word royal for use by the couple in any of their independent ventures going forward, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan officially closed the Instagram account earlier this spring.
> 
> Meghan's secret caption creating for the Sussex Royal account wasn't the duchess's last go at writing and utilizing her voice, however.  During a livestream interview with the female-focused media platform The 19th, Meghan revealed that she's excited to speak out more on the issues of womanhood, gender discrepancies, and racial injustice now that she's settled in her new home in Santa Barbara with Harry and their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
> 
> 
> It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



I'm as "shocked" about this as I will be when it comes out that MM "ghostwrote" Finding Freedom


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> What has happened to you, Harper's Bazaar...


Same thing as most journalism these days.  Their biases are clear.  I long for the days of pure reporting without being able to instantly realize where the writer stands.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> _*'I don't know what the hell is going on, but this woman needs to make this work for my future wife.' *_
> 
> Gotta laugh.  Harry apparently referred to Angela Kelly as "this woman" but took great offense when William called MM "this girl".


"This girl" would go along with their "young mother" narrative, whereas "this woman" sounds more matronly.  Harry should have been flattered that William referred to a woman in her mid 30s as a "girl".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> While I don't believe for a second that he would dare speak to the Queen like this, it's just as disrespectful to allow for this false narrative to be published in a book for the world to see. It makes you sound and look like a spoiled brat who has zero respect for his grandmother by thinking it's acceptable to speak to her like that... all because your egotistical soon-to-be-wife wanted to try on a tiara so her hairstylist could create a bland hairstyle? If he was any good at hairstyling then he wouldn't have needed the actual tiara to practice on and would have instead improvised and used a similar sized hairband or cheap costume tiara. Such a load of petty, childish bullsh*t. Instead of 'Just call me Harry' it should be '*Just call me dumba$$*'.



 JCMH is here forth going to be JCMD


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never heard of a Markus/Omid romantic connection before. Seems like that information would have surfaced before now if it was true but nothing surprises me this year.



I recall to have read about it before on this thread. The possibility of a relationship between MA and MM has also been brought up. This link is not very good but entertaining. 









						What is Meghan Markle’s relationship to Marcus Anderson and SoHo House?
					

Answer (1 of 6): It’s Markus Anderson.  He’s someone that she’s been a close friend of for some years.  He’s also close friends with others in her circle, including Misha Nonoo.  Misha is also a close friend of Beatrice, Eugenie Harry and William.  It’s Soho House.  Meghan has no more association...




					www.quora.com


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> I remember seeing videos of mudslides swallowing homes and have been seeing and reading about CA mudslides for decades.
> 
> Are you saying mudslides were not common in Santa Barbara at the time?



Mudslides are only really common in certain scenarios along the coast, like homes on the edge or the base of a steep cliff/hill/mountainside. But even then "common" is still kind of over-stating it, a very small percentage of homes actually experience this. What happened in 2018 in Montecito was a pretty unique (at the time) combination of events due to drought, fires, and then unprecedented heavy rainfall. All those things have been at historic highs over the last few years. Santa Barbara and Montecito had to update their flood maps after that.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> This is the biggest nonstory of the year. Was anyone naive enough to believe that Meghan was _not _writing their SussexRoyal Instagram? It had her word salad style all over it.



Word salad and font salad unmistakably Meghanese. Poor UK taxpayers, all that money spent on hours of making font salad.


----------



## papertiger

As you may all know (but I did not) is the Royal Editor at Large at Harpers Bazaar. At Large - is that code for title but no tenure, bit like his Duchess - and therefore paid by (puff) piece?

Anyway, Omid Scobie is bit of a social climber himself. He is using MM as much as she has used him. He is her in many ways





__





						Omid Scobie Royal Editor At Large
					






					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




Earliest piece at Harpers Bazaar April 10 2018 and almost _every_ single piece is about MM and Harry. No other royals, only British, apart from Angelina Jolie (when did she join the BRF?).

Every entry is sweeter than saccharine and so gushing they're more forceful than sticking a fingers down one's throat. No objectivity, no clarity, seriously back to Devine Right - well with MM as Queen.

And so when did a US publication get so royal??? I thought it was a fashion mag, looks like _Hello_ now.

And MM can't help outing herself. She's now boasting of what we knew along. She maps the PR road map and writes the  headlines for SM and did so all along. I can't believe she doesn't keep her mouth shut rather than just have to show us how 'clever' she is.









						Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
					

It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




Credit where credit's due. She is her own worst enemy.


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> Word salad and font salad unmistakably Meghanese. Poor UK taxpayers, all that money spent on hours of making font salad.
> 
> View attachment 4821756



If I need a ransom note I'll know who to contact LOL

_"please_ QUOTE _me"_


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> This is the biggest nonstory of the year. Was anyone naive enough to believe that Meghan was _not _writing their SussexRoyal Instagram? It had her word salad style all over it.
> 
> View attachment 4821511
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was behind many of the captions on the Sussex Royal Instagram account during the beginning of her tenure as a working member of the royal family, according to the new Sussex-centered biography, Finding Freedom.
> 
> Per Town & Country, the duchess was reportedly happy to help curate the voice and tone of the now-defunct Sussex Royal feed, especially since becoming a member of the royal family meant that Meghan had to deactivate her personal Instagram account and take down her lifestyle blog, The Tig.
> 
> "Launching the account was a somewhat liberating experience for Meghan. Not having a platform of her own to talk directly to the public was one of the toughest changes for her, especially after building so much of her own brand on Instagram and her blog. @SussexRoyal meant that she finally had a place to curate," revealed an anonymous aide in Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> "Meghan drafted a lot of the posts herself in the early days," wrote authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand. "It was one of the things that kept her occupied during her final days of pregnancy."
> 
> Following the Sussexes' decision to step down as senior members of the royal family and the queen's blocking of the word royal for use by the couple in any of their independent ventures going forward, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan officially closed the Instagram account earlier this spring.
> 
> Meghan's secret caption creating for the Sussex Royal account wasn't the duchess's last go at writing and utilizing her voice, however.  During a livestream interview with the female-focused media platform The 19th, Meghan revealed that she's excited to speak out more on the issues of womanhood, gender discrepancies, and racial injustice now that she's settled in her new home in Santa Barbara with Harry and their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
> 
> 
> It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



She was probably told to stop using the BRF as a self-promotion tool - could be the whole catalyst for leaving, they felt silenced and had to find 'freedom'.


----------



## Chagall

The wearing of the Nazi uniform was an act hard to forgive. Preteens and teenagers know better than that and Harry was in his twenties. Especially being a member of the BRF. Never an excuse for that. To me it shows a serious character defect.


----------



## chicinthecity777

If Greta is taken seriously in her teenage years then Harry should be held accountable for his actions in his twenties. Do we have double standard when it suits?


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
> 
> 
> It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Credit where credit's due. She is her own worst enemy.



What do we do without Harpers Bazaar to tell us those inside scoops???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: Harry not daring to speak to the Queen like this, at the comment section one poster painted a very plausible scenario. He said it probably went down like this, livid Meghan complained to Harry, who then probably did call the Queen, but greatly exaggerated what was said to polish up his knight in shiny armor image when he reported back to her. Meghan, too stupid / culturally insensitive to understand the dynamics and that hell would freeze over before Harry missed the mark like this took it at face value and tattletaled to Scobie.

I just don't understand why not even Scobie proceeded with caution, this (the whole book, not this single incident) might very well be his career grave too.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I am a little bored today and went on to Amazon to look at the reviews of Finding Freedom. They sure are entertaining! Looks like a lot of them have been complaining about their negative review (with very high usefulness scores) have been deleted. Looks like H&M's internet scrub service is hard at work!  and still the 1-star reviews are getting the most votes!


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am a little bored today and went on to Amazon to look at the reviews of Finding Freedom. They sure are entertaining! Looks like a lot of them have been complaining about *their negative review (with very high usefulness scores) have been deleted*. Looks like H&M's internet scrub service is hard at work!  and still the 1-star reviews are getting the most votes!



Didn't even know someone could do that


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Same thing as most journalism these days.  Their biases are clear.  I long for the days of pure reporting without being able to instantly realize where the writer stands.



Yes. It’s bad enough that their own biases are obvious, but then they try to shove their point of view down your throat. Newspapers, magazines, and websites are  merely collections of opinion pieces.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Didn't even know someone could do that


It would have been deleted by Amazon but requested by the data scrub company hired by H&M. Yes you can hire companies to remove unfavourable data of you from the Internet, e.g. from search results etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Didn't even know someone could do that


Any public forum that allows comments requires moderator(s) to expunge the nasty stuff, buyer reviews are no exception


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Any public forum that allows comments requires moderator(s) to expunge the nasty stuff, buyer reviews are no exception



Didn't mean how can it happen.

Well, if they were offensive, then good. But if they bought the book and gave their honest opinion it's something else.


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> The mudslide that happened a couple years ago in that area was historic.  It only occurred because wildfires stripped the land of vegetation and destabilized the soil in the summer of 2017, so when it rained in winter 2018, you had historic mudslides.  The catch basins too had been built in the early 1960's and needed to be expanded and modernized but it wasn't really on anyone's radar in a meaningful way.  So, when this house was built, it wasn't likely a consideration.


I remember seeing a video of Oprah walking around in her yard, all muddy and icky and talking about it. With climate change things are only gonna get worse.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Yes. It’s bad enough that their own biases are obvious, but then they try to shove their point of view down your throat. Newspapers, magazines, and websites are  merely collections of opinion pieces.





purseinsanity said:


> Same thing as most journalism these days.  Their biases are clear.  I long for the days of pure reporting without being able to instantly realize where the writer stands.



Just been watching Shadows of Liberty doc.  

It's from 8 years ago, and things can only have become worse. 'News' is just a collection of PR-written-and-pushed articles.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> It would have been deleted by Amazon but requested by the data scrub company hired by H&M. Yes you can hire companies to remove unfavourable data of you from the Internet, e.g. from search results etc.



I can understand removing the ones that aren’t from verified purchasers or if there are obscenities in them, but why allow reviews at all if they are going to cull the bad ones? Of course the answer is Amazon wants to sell the books. They are a business and selling comes first.

Even when reviews are provided it is always Buyer Beware.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Didn't even know someone could do that


It's happened to me before, I reviewed a cookbook I still think years later was the worst I've ever bought, and my review vanished. It wasn't even by a famous author. No clue if you just need to somehow contact amazon about it or downvote it or anything?

ETA: I was not being nasty, just pointed out the long list of flaws (one being that the woman loved to open cans and convenience products instead of actually cooking).


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am a little bored today and went on to Amazon to look at the reviews of Finding Freedom. They sure are entertaining! Looks like a lot of them have been complaining about their negative review (with very high usefulness scores) have been deleted. Looks like H&M's internet scrub service is hard at work!  and still the 1-star reviews are getting the most votes!


I was not able to sleep last night and (to take my mind off this terrible COVID period) I did a brief unsuccessful search to find where is the mysterious MA these days, Montecito? 
However, I found that apart of MM, it seems there is a connection between him and Andrew; they were apparently photographed together on a yacht (search words on google: prince andrew markus anderson yacht).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> However, I found that apart of MM, it seems there is a connection between him and Andrew; they were apparently photographed together on a yacht (search words on google: prince andrew markus anderson yacht).





That is...creepy.


----------



## youngster

kemilia said:


> I remember seeing a video of Oprah walking around in her yard, all muddy and icky and talking about it. With climate change things are only gonna get worse.



The area is likely still at risk for at least another 3 or so years unless the city and county have taken extraordinary measures to replant those hillsides.  I don't live in So Cal any longer so I don't really follow what's been done.  But, the original cause of the 2017 fire was a small brush fire fanned by Santa Ana winds that took hold in the dense brush/overgrowth. Residents say a transformer blew which started the fire but that is still in dispute as the transformer could have blown when the small fire reached it. Residents would like to hold the utility responsible of course. But, houses built in the area are difficult to access, had decades of brush and overgrowth, and catch basins that hadn't been cleaned out and upgraded.  The original catch basins were built after a huge, devastating mudslide back in the 1930's that killed many, many people and destroyed homes, more than in 2018, and was one of the worst mudslides in US history. It was part of my California history class in either middle or high school. It was caused by the same conditions, a wildfire followed by heavy rain.  The catch basins were upgraded in the 1960's but needed further work a couple of decades later. So, a lot of the damage could maybe have been prevented.  The problem, of course, is that these are expensive and difficult infrastructure issues that can take years to address. Still, they should have been addressed but people get complacent.


----------



## rose60610

kemilia said:


> I remember seeing a video of Oprah walking around in her yard, all muddy and icky and talking about it. With climate change things are only gonna get worse.



Exactly. When H&M go flying around on private jets preaching about the dangers of climate change, why do they and others spend many millions on houses smack in the middle of troublesome areas???? On one hand it's: "We're all gonna die of climate change within bla bla bla!!" then a second later: "Looky my brand new 14 million dollar house right in the path of wildfires and mudslides! and the oceans are rising so we're gonna drown too!!  Check out these 18 bathrooms!"


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I was not able to sleep last night and (to take my mind off this terrible COVID period) I did a brief unsuccessful search to find where is the mysterious MA these days, Montecito?
> However, I found that apart of MM, it seems there is a connection between him and Andrew; they were apparently photographed together on a yacht (search words on google: prince andrew markus anderson yacht).





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That is...creepy.



There is a Quora page full of theories that Markus is Andy’s secret love child. A souvenir from his wild college days at Lakefield College in Ontario in the late ‘70s.


----------



## csshopper

There's a picture from the closing ceremonies of, I think, the 2117 Invictus Games, Marcus stands  one side, arm around Doria who is pulled close to his body--------widely apart, on the other side Meaghan stands next to Harry. If you look carefully at the picture, Marcus, Doria, Meaghan are all looking out towards the crowd, Harry, however, has Marcus in his sights and an apparent scowl on his face. Nothing wrong with having male friends, but I suspect she uses the Marcus relationship as another control on Harry, especially since some of the steamy pictures of her with Marcus have sex all over them, she's not a good enough actress to fake it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice the former BFF is there, too




csshopper said:


> There's a picture from the closing ceremonies of, I think, the 2117 Invictus Games, Marcus stands  one side, arm around Doria who is pulled close to his body--------widely apart, on the other side Meaghan stands next to Harry. If you look carefully at the picture, Marcus, Doria, Meaghan are all looking out towards the crowd, Harry, however, has Marcus in his sights and an apparent scowl on his face. Nothing wrong with having male friends, but I suspect she uses the Marcus relationship as another control on Harry, especially since some of the steamy pictures of her with Marcus have sex all over them, she's not a good enough actress to fake it.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

chicinthecity777 said:


> If Greta is taken seriously in her teenage years then Harry should be held accountable for his actions in his twenties. Do we have double standard when it suits?



Greta is taken seriously because she not only talks the talk, but seriously walks the walk.....unlike many others.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That is...creepy.





bag-mania said:


> There is a Quora page full of theories that Markus is Andy’s secret love child. A souvenir from his wild college days at Lakefield College in Ontario in the late ‘70s.


There is an apparent creepier connection to the late E.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> There is an apparent creepier connection to the late E.



Markus too? Yikes. Epstein’s list of associates must be a mile long. No wonder he was eliminated before he could talk.


----------



## rose60610

As slimy as Epstein was, I think he was astute enough to insert quite a few "clean people" who remained innocent in his circle, using them to bolster his image.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> As slimy as Epstein was, I think he was astute enough to insert quite a few "clean people" who remained innocent in his circle, using them to bolster his image.



He knew many, many people, lots of them famous. I’m pretty sure he had other business dealings unrelated to the scandal.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice the former BFF is there, too





CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice the former BFF is there, too



CarryOn2020,

Thanks for attaching this...really interesting because the version I saw on line earlier and neglected to post, did not include her BBF in it! 

I guess there are degrees of being Markled, maybe influence was exerted in some journalistic circles, and Whoosh,  air brushed, gone.


----------



## bag-mania

From the same event. Very blurry. Harry looks like he's wishing he was elsewhere.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Exactly. When H&M go flying around on private jets preaching about the dangers of climate change, why do they and others spend many millions on houses smack in the middle of troublesome areas???? On one hand it's: "We're all gonna die of climate change within bla bla bla!!" then a second later: "Looky my brand new 14 million dollar house right in the path of wildfires and mudslides! and the oceans are rising so we're gonna drown too!!  Check out these 18 bathrooms!"



Not sure why those two are contradictory... They probably care about climate change BECAUSE they're living in areas that are at risk. IMO, if you want to pay 8 figures for a home, you should be able to live wherever you want (you can also complain about climate change at the same time).


----------



## Cavalier Girl

It's contradictory by definition.  Or to put it another way, it's hypocritical.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And it’s Invictus which is ‘his’ thing, right?  



bag-mania said:


> From the same event. Very blurry. Harry looks like he's wishing he was elsewhere.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> There is a Quora page full of theories that Markus is Andy’s secret love child. A souvenir from his wild college days at Lakefield College in Ontario in the late ‘70s.


I read that too.  This whole thing is becoming...incestuous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, they can certainly live where wherever they wish and pay whatever they wish. I have no issue with that...until they use taxpayers’ dollars, even if it’s by circuitous means.  Once they cross that line, they have gone too far. Then, you add in the lectures for us common folks, no, no no, not going to support that.

In some ways, Charles is a good example. Way back in the 70s or 80s, he started lecturing about organic foods & gardens as well as the importance of building architectural pleasing facilities.  Media mocked him.  He stuck with it and showed how it can indeed work.  Now, people think he‘s a genius. Well, maybe not genius, but a forward thinker.

They need to stop the hypocrisy along with the giant carbon footprint.  Walk their talk, own their behavior and their words, speak with a good purpose, wear a mask, etc.  Really just all the stuff we learned in kindergarten 





lalame said:


> Not sure why those two are contradictory... They probably care about climate change BECAUSE they're living in areas that are at risk. IMO, if you want to pay 8 figures for a home, you should be able to live wherever you want (you can also complain about climate change at the same time).


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I read that too.  This whole thing is becoming...incestuous.



That's royalty for you.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, they can certainly live where wherever they wish and pay whatever they wish. I have no issue with that...until they use taxpayers’ dollars, even if it’s by circuitous means.  Once they cross that line, they have gone too far. Then, you add in the lectures for us common folks, no, no no, not going to support that.
> 
> In some ways, Charles is a good example. Way back in the 70s or 80s, he started lecturing about organic foods & gardens as well as the importance of building architectural pleasing facilities.  Media mocked him.  He stuck with it and showed how it can indeed work.  Now, people think he‘s a genius. Well, maybe not genius, but a forward thinker.
> 
> They need to stop the hypocrisy along with the giant carbon footprint.



Now this I totally agree with. I was just responding to the "hypocrisy" of living in a place with mudslides and wildfires and still caring about climate change... that in itself isn't hypocritical. Most of us in California fall under that description!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> That's royalty for you.


Haha.  Touche!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Now this I totally agree with. I was just responding to the "hypocrisy" of living in a place with mudslides and wildfires and still caring about climate change... that in itself isn't hypocritical. Most of us in California fall under that description!


To me, it has nothing to do with mudslides and wildfires, it's all to do with buying an excessive large home for 3-people household while still owing tax-payers money which they promised they would repay. Abandoning the Frogmore cottage straight after it being redecorated to their taste (completely wasted the work, materials etc went into it), knowing full well that they wanted to move to the U.S. If that's not hypocrisy then what is it? Thieving?


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> If that's not hypocrisy then what is it?



Douchebaggery


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

chicinthecity777 said:


> To me, it has nothing to do with mudslides and wildfires, it's all to do with buying an excessive large home for 3-people household while still owing tax-payers money which they promised they would repay. Abandoning the Frogmore cottage straight after it being redecorated to their taste (completely wasted the work, materials etc went into it), knowing full well that they wanted to move to the U.S. If that's not hypocrisy then what is it? Thieving?


Gluttony, selfish, disdainful, abhorrent are others that come to mind.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Douchebaggery





csshopper said:


> Gluttony, selfish, disdainful, abhorrent are others that come to mind.


I have many more... but environmental-friendly they ain't!

Greta on the other hand, as unconventional as she is, she donated her $1m prize money to charity! That's $1m more than H&M have ever done!


----------



## bag-mania

There's no business like show business! Nice to know they have completely given up the pretense of having any dignity as they plead to become somebody in Hollywood.

*Now they want to be Hollywood royalty! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are pitching a top secret project to network execs and intend to serve as joint producers'*

*Sources say Meghan and Harry have been shopping their idea around since June*
*The former royal couple were said to have met with 'numerous' media companies, including NBC Universal  *
*The concept and intended format of the project have yet to be revealed   *
*Harry and Meghan reportedly intend to serve as joint producers on the venture*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are quietly shopping a top secret project to network executives as they settle into their new life in Hollywood, a new report claims. 

Sources tell Variety that the former royal couple began pitching their idea to 'numerous' media companies back in June, around the time that they purchased a sprawling estate in Santa Barbara.  

Very few details are known about the project, including the concept behind it and whether it would be a TV series or some other format.

However, one source with knowledge of the idea said Harry and Meghan intend to serve as joint producers on the venture should it get picked up.

The insiders said that NBCUniversal was among the networks that heard the pitch. 

They said that the couple held a meeting with the media giant's top executives, including NBCUniversal Content Studios Chairman Bonnie Hammer, who has known Meghan since her days on Suits.   

A friend of Meghan's told Variety that she has no intention of acting in her project with Harry or in any other ventures.  

Rumors of Harry and Meghan seeking to gain a foothold in Hollywood have run rampant ever since the couple announced their plans to quit as senior royals, seek financial independence and move to North America in January. 

Meghan's first post-Megxit job in showbiz was as a narrator of the Disney Plus docuseries Elephants, which came out in April. 

The 39-year-old Los Angeles native nabbed the job after Harry bragged about her voice-over skills to Disney chairman Bob Iger at the London premiere of The Lion King live-action remake last summer. 

Her fee for the project went entirely to the Elephants Without Borders charity - an organization dedicated to conserving wildlife and helps protect the animals from poaching. 

Harry followed in her footsteps by appearing in a new Netflix documentary about about the Paralympic Games called Rising Phoenix. That film is set to air on August 26. 

Last year Harry announced that he was partnering with Oprah Winfrey on on an Apple TV+ docuseries about mental health. 

It's unclear whether the couple pitched their secret project to Disney, Netflix or Apple TV+.  

Shortly after the Duke and Duchess announced their intention to step back from royal duty, a senior Netflix executive said the streaming giant would like to work with them. 

Netflix's chief content officer Ted Sarandos said at the Screen Actors Guild Awards in January that the streaming giant would like to work with Harry and Meghan, adding: 'Who wouldn't be interested? Yes, sure.' 

The decision to work with Netflix is also a move reminiscent of former President Barack ***** and his lawyer wife Michelle. 

In January, sources confirmed the couple had discussed their plans with the Obamas and wanted to mimic the way they had managed to build a successful, but dignified, life for themselves after the White House.

Since leaving the White House, the Obamas have earned a small fortune by selling rights to their autobiographies and setting up their own production company, which has bagged a lucrative deal with Netflix. 

A source said: 'They have found huge commercial success without actually looking like they are getting their hands dirty, to put it bluntly, and retaining their popularity.

'In fact it is fair to say that their star has soared since leaving the White House, particularly Michelle's, and this is something Meghan admires very, very much.' 

After stepping down as senior royals, Meghan and Harry signed with New York-based Harry Walker Agency in June, which represents the Obamas and the *******s. 

Meghan has made several appearances as a speaker at various online summits, however it is understood that she did not receive payment for these engagements. 

Experts estimate that the Sussexes stand to earn an impressive sum from public speaking however, with one agency estimating that the couple could rake in up to $500,000 each from a single appearance. 

In February, a PR expert told DailyMail.com that the couple may have earned 'up to $1 million' between them to speak at a star-studded JP Morgan summit in Miami, insisting that the couple will be the 'highest-paid speakers that exist on the corporate market'.

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...g-secret-Hollywood-project-network-execs.html


----------



## chicinthecity777

So they want to be the new Obamas! That part is clear! OMG just how delusional can they be???


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> To me, it has nothing to do with mudslides and wildfires, it's all to do with buying an excessive large home for 3-people household while still owing tax-payers money which they promised they would repay. Abandoning the Frogmore cottage straight after it being redecorated to their taste (completely wasted the work, materials etc went into it), knowing full well that they wanted to move to the U.S. If that's not hypocrisy then what is it? Thieving?



Bravo!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice the former BFF is there, too




Happier times!



bag-mania said:


> There's no business like show business! Nice to know they have completely given up the pretense of having any dignity as they plead to become somebody in Hollywood.
> 
> *Now they want to be Hollywood royalty! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are pitching a top secret project to network execs and intend to serve as joint producers'*
> 
> *Sources say Meghan and Harry have been shopping their idea around since June*
> *The former royal couple were said to have met with 'numerous' media companies, including NBC Universal  *
> *The concept and intended format of the project have yet to be revealed   *
> *Harry and Meghan reportedly intend to serve as joint producers on the venture*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are quietly shopping a top secret project to network executives as they settle into their new life in Hollywood, a new report claims.
> 
> Sources tell Variety that the former royal couple began pitching their idea to 'numerous' media companies back in June, around the time that they purchased a sprawling estate in Santa Barbara.
> 
> Very few details are known about the project, including the concept behind it and whether it would be a TV series or some other format.
> 
> However, one source with knowledge of the idea said Harry and Meghan intend to serve as joint producers on the venture should it get picked up.
> 
> The insiders said that NBCUniversal was among the networks that heard the pitch.
> 
> They said that the couple held a meeting with the media giant's top executives, including NBCUniversal Content Studios Chairman Bonnie Hammer, who has known Meghan since her days on Suits.
> 
> A friend of Meghan's told Variety that she has no intention of acting in her project with Harry or in any other ventures.
> 
> Rumors of Harry and Meghan seeking to gain a foothold in Hollywood have run rampant ever since the couple announced their plans to quit as senior royals, seek financial independence and move to North America in January.
> 
> Meghan's first post-Megxit job in showbiz was as a narrator of the Disney Plus docuseries Elephants, which came out in April.
> 
> The 39-year-old Los Angeles native nabbed the job after Harry bragged about her voice-over skills to Disney chairman Bob Iger at the London premiere of The Lion King live-action remake last summer.
> 
> Her fee for the project went entirely to the Elephants Without Borders charity - an organization dedicated to conserving wildlife and helps protect the animals from poaching.
> 
> Harry followed in her footsteps by appearing in a new Netflix documentary about about the Paralympic Games called Rising Phoenix. That film is set to air on August 26.
> 
> Last year Harry announced that he was partnering with Oprah Winfrey on on an Apple TV+ docuseries about mental health.
> 
> It's unclear whether the couple pitched their secret project to Disney, Netflix or Apple TV+.
> 
> Shortly after the Duke and Duchess announced their intention to step back from royal duty, a senior Netflix executive said the streaming giant would like to work with them.
> 
> Netflix's chief content officer Ted Sarandos said at the Screen Actors Guild Awards in January that the streaming giant would like to work with Harry and Meghan, adding: 'Who wouldn't be interested? Yes, sure.'
> 
> The decision to work with Netflix is also a move reminiscent of former President Barack ***** and his lawyer wife Michelle.
> 
> In January, sources confirmed the couple had discussed their plans with the Obamas and wanted to mimic the way they had managed to build a successful, but dignified, life for themselves after the White House.
> 
> Since leaving the White House, the Obamas have earned a small fortune by selling rights to their autobiographies and setting up their own production company, which has bagged a lucrative deal with Netflix.
> 
> A source said: 'They have found huge commercial success without actually looking like they are getting their hands dirty, to put it bluntly, and retaining their popularity.
> 
> 'In fact it is fair to say that their star has soared since leaving the White House, particularly Michelle's, and this is something Meghan admires very, very much.'
> 
> After stepping down as senior royals, Meghan and Harry signed with New York-based Harry Walker Agency in June, which represents the Obamas and the *******s.
> 
> Meghan has made several appearances as a speaker at various online summits, however it is understood that she did not receive payment for these engagements.
> 
> Experts estimate that the Sussexes stand to earn an impressive sum from public speaking however, with one agency estimating that the couple could rake in up to $500,000 each from a single appearance.
> 
> In February, a PR expert told DailyMail.com that the couple may have earned 'up to $1 million' between them to speak at a star-studded JP Morgan summit in Miami, insisting that the couple will be the 'highest-paid speakers that exist on the corporate market'.
> 
> Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...g-secret-Hollywood-project-network-execs.html



Secret, my A$$!!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> He knew many, many people, lots of them famous. I’m pretty sure he had other business dealings unrelated to the scandal.


Not sure whether you are describing MA or the late E, both very well connected. Here is a well-written article on MA:

"Anderson is also said to be responsible for connecting Meghan and Harry to Sara Latham, their new press chief who has previously worked with the likes of Bill and Hillary *******. A source described Anderson as “great fun, very witty and amusing”, continuing that, “He knows everyone. He’s utterly discreet.”

 “He and Sara [Latham] are amazing people for Meghan to have on her team. Between them they know everyone in the world of politics and show business on both sides of the Atlantic. If Meghan and Harry are looking to become a global brand with their philanthropy, they could not have chosen two better people to guide them.”

"Markle once wrote of Anderson on her Instagram account, “What would I do without you, my loving, supportive, and endlessly fun friend?? I know what...I would be bored, and life would be infinitely less interesting. I love you SO much. Happiest of days for you now and always. Love you xx.”









						Who exactly is Meghan Markle's best friend Markus Anderson?
					

'What would I do without you, my loving, supportive, and endlessly fun friend?'




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Not sure whether you are describing MA or the late E, both very well connected. Here is a well-written article on MA:
> 
> "Anderson is also said to be responsible for connecting Meghan and Harry to Sara Latham, their new press chief who has previously worked with the likes of Bill and Hillary *******. A source described Anderson as “great fun, very witty and amusing”, continuing that, “He knows everyone. He’s utterly discreet.”
> 
> “He and Sara [Latham] are amazing people for Meghan to have on her team. Between them they know everyone in the world of politics and show business on both sides of the Atlantic. If Meghan and Harry are looking to become a global brand with their philanthropy, they could not have chosen two better people to guide them.”
> 
> "Markle once wrote of Anderson on her Instagram account, “What would I do without you, my loving, supportive, and endlessly fun friend?? I know what...I would be bored, and life would be infinitely less interesting. I love you SO much. Happiest of days for you now and always. Love you xx.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who exactly is Meghan Markle's best friend Markus Anderson?
> 
> 
> 'What would I do without you, my loving, supportive, and endlessly fun friend?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk



I had been referring to Epstein.  But Markus Anderson certainly seems like he has a similar personality, oh not as a perv, but as a collector of famous, influential, and useful people.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> And MM can't help outing herself. She's now boasting of what we knew along. She maps the PR road map and writes the  headlines for SM and did so all along. I can't believe she doesn't keep her mouth shut rather than just have to show us how 'clever' she is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Ghostwrote Sussex Royal's Instagram Account Captions
> 
> 
> It's no secret that the duchess has quite a way with words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Credit where credit's due. She is her own worst enemy.*


It looks like her new book may hurt her as well. 

*How ‘Finding Freedom’ Could Sink Meghan Markle’s Court Case Against British Tabloid*









						How ‘Finding Freedom’ Could Sink Meghan Markle’s Court Case Against British Tabloid
					

Harry and Meghan say they didn’t assist the authors of blockbuster bio “Finding Freedom.” Mail on Sunday lawyers are reportedly reading it to decipher who did do the talking.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> It looks like her new book may hurt her as well.
> 
> *How ‘Finding Freedom’ Could Sink Meghan Markle’s Court Case Against British Tabloid*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How ‘Finding Freedom’ Could Sink Meghan Markle’s Court Case Against British Tabloid
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they didn’t assist the authors of blockbuster bio “Finding Freedom.” Mail on Sunday lawyers are reportedly reading it to decipher who did do the talking.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


The lady doeth protest too much about her privacy so she keeps on leaking information. She’s as fake as a . . . well she’s allegedly a habitual liar.


----------



## Gimmethebag

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they want to be the new Obamas! That part is clear! OMG just how delusional can they be???



With a dash of Kardashian thrown in.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

csshopper said:


> Gluttony, selfish, disdainful, abhorrent are others that come to mind.



*csshopper,* reading your post, realized that therein lies the reason why these grifters, H&M so get under my skin ~ I was brought up with the mindset that everyone has faults, even awful faults & everyone makes mistakes, but people can change, forgive & forget, blah blah blah and had to learn the hard way that some people HAVE TOO MANY FAULTS, SOME PEOPLE DO NOT CHANGE AND SOME PEOPLE ARE SIMPLY HORRID.

They are true candidates for the latter category, and it's a shortlist.

And not sure if Harry's misdeeds during the past 35-years <approx> add up to the fricken mess that he has created while linked with Meghan Markle, who has a colorful history of turning on friends & family leaving them in the dust <wave to Doria> and Meghan seemingly, I have come to believe, influenced her new husband via various strategies to do the same.

Rule #1 to my daughters growing-up: People become what they surround themselves with in life, so be careful.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Did H&M board the Titanic? Loose lips sink ships.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-f...court-case-against-british-tabloid?ref=scroll


----------



## Lodpah

MM's resumes . . . before and after. Superwoman, Oprah, Michelle ***** have nothing on MM. Check out how "professional" the updated resume is. She did good. To boot, her resume has the Buckingham Palace address. I found these online so I don't know how accurate they are. Wow, I did not realize how successful an actress she was, I mean like she was in some heavyweights.  You all need to apologize to MM and bow down to her greatness as Meghan the Remarkable. Don't forget to curtsy less your heads be cut off and you are put in the dungeon to await your fate.  The first resume you have to cut and paste. 



			https://s3.amazonaws.com/resume.cdn/articles/posts/Meghan-Markle_CV.pdf


----------



## CarryOn2020

So bizarre TopCV did this updated resume prior to her wedding. I liked the special skills section listed on the old one. Wondering if I should add that section to mine. 









						Meghan Markle CV: A makeover before her big day
					

When Meghan Markle married Prince Harry, the humanitarian, feminist and former actress needed a fresh CV makeover to become part of the British Royal Family.




					www.topcv.com
				



_In honour of Ms. Markle's upcoming marriage to His Royal Highness Prince Henry of Wales, we asked TopCV senior staff writer TC Paulson to write a CV for Ms. Markle that showcases her role as a Humanitarian Advocate, as she previously stated that she intends to leave acting to focus on philanthropy once she's married._






Lodpah said:


> MM's resumes . . . before and after. Superwoman, Oprah, Michelle ***** have nothing on MM. Check out how "professional" the updated resume is. She did good. To boot, her resume has the Buckingham Palace address. I found these online so I don't know how accurate they are. Wow, I did not realize how successful an actress she was, I mean like she was in some heavyweights.  You all need to apologize to MM and bow down to her greatness as Meghan the Remarkable. Don't forget to curtsy less your heads be cut off and you are put in the dungeon to await your fate.  The first resume you have to cut and paste.
> 
> 
> 
> https://s3.amazonaws.com/resume.cdn/articles/posts/Meghan-Markle_CV.pdf


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I read the funniest thing today:

Q: Why does MM need so many bathrooms?

A: Because she speaks so much s;$) she can’t walk too far without needing one.


----------



## papertiger

Gimmethebag said:


> With a dash of Kardashian thrown in.



and a _soupçon_ of Jolie


----------



## chicinthecity777

Gimmethebag said:


> With a dash of Kardashian thrown in.


When I read the piece that they were pitching their project in Hollywood, actually the first thing came to my mind was a reality TV show. So...


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> There's no business like show business! Nice to know they have completely given up the pretense of having any dignity as they plead to become somebody in Hollywood.
> 
> *Now they want to be Hollywood royalty! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are pitching a top secret project to network execs and intend to serve as joint producers'*
> 
> *Sources say Meghan and Harry have been shopping their idea around since June*
> *The former royal couple were said to have met with 'numerous' media companies, including NBC Universal  *
> *The concept and intended format of the project have yet to be revealed   *
> *Harry and Meghan reportedly intend to serve as joint producers on the venture*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are quietly shopping a top secret project to network executives as they settle into their new life in Hollywood, a new report claims.
> 
> Sources tell Variety that the former royal couple began pitching their idea to 'numerous' media companies back in June, around the time that they purchased a sprawling estate in Santa Barbara.
> 
> Very few details are known about the project, including the concept behind it and whether it would be a TV series or some other format.
> 
> However, one source with knowledge of the idea said Harry and Meghan intend to serve as joint producers on the venture should it get picked up.
> 
> The insiders said that NBCUniversal was among the networks that heard the pitch.
> 
> They said that the couple held a meeting with the media giant's top executives, including NBCUniversal Content Studios Chairman Bonnie Hammer, who has known Meghan since her days on Suits.
> 
> A friend of Meghan's told Variety that she has no intention of acting in her project with Harry or in any other ventures.
> 
> Rumors of Harry and Meghan seeking to gain a foothold in Hollywood have run rampant ever since the couple announced their plans to quit as senior royals, seek financial independence and move to North America in January.
> 
> Meghan's first post-Megxit job in showbiz was as a narrator of the Disney Plus docuseries Elephants, which came out in April.
> 
> The 39-year-old Los Angeles native nabbed the job after Harry bragged about her voice-over skills to Disney chairman Bob Iger at the London premiere of The Lion King live-action remake last summer.
> 
> Her fee for the project went entirely to the Elephants Without Borders charity - an organization dedicated to conserving wildlife and helps protect the animals from poaching.
> 
> Harry followed in her footsteps by appearing in a new Netflix documentary about about the Paralympic Games called Rising Phoenix. That film is set to air on August 26.
> 
> Last year Harry announced that he was partnering with Oprah Winfrey on on an Apple TV+ docuseries about mental health.
> 
> It's unclear whether the couple pitched their secret project to Disney, Netflix or Apple TV+.
> 
> Shortly after the Duke and Duchess announced their intention to step back from royal duty, a senior Netflix executive said the streaming giant would like to work with them.
> 
> Netflix's chief content officer Ted Sarandos said at the Screen Actors Guild Awards in January that the streaming giant would like to work with Harry and Meghan, adding: 'Who wouldn't be interested? Yes, sure.'
> 
> The decision to work with Netflix is also a move reminiscent of former President Barack ***** and his lawyer wife Michelle.
> 
> In January, sources confirmed the couple had discussed their plans with the Obamas and wanted to mimic the way they had managed to build a successful, but dignified, life for themselves after the White House.
> 
> Since leaving the White House, the Obamas have earned a small fortune by selling rights to their autobiographies and setting up their own production company, which has bagged a lucrative deal with Netflix.
> 
> A source said: 'They have found huge commercial success without actually looking like they are getting their hands dirty, to put it bluntly, and retaining their popularity.
> 
> 'In fact it is fair to say that their star has soared since leaving the White House, particularly Michelle's, and this is something Meghan admires very, very much.'
> 
> After stepping down as senior royals, Meghan and Harry signed with New York-based Harry Walker Agency in June, which represents the Obamas and the *******s.
> 
> Meghan has made several appearances as a speaker at various online summits, however it is understood that she did not receive payment for these engagements.
> 
> Experts estimate that the Sussexes stand to earn an impressive sum from public speaking however, with one agency estimating that the couple could rake in up to $500,000 each from a single appearance.
> 
> In February, a PR expert told DailyMail.com that the couple may have earned 'up to $1 million' between them to speak at a star-studded JP Morgan summit in Miami, insisting that the couple will be the 'highest-paid speakers that exist on the corporate market'.
> 
> Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...g-secret-Hollywood-project-network-execs.html


“Finding Freedom - the Movie” - can’t wait


----------



## Chagall

Lakefield College School in Ontario Canada is an excellent school. However it still lists Prince Andrew the Duke of York as a volunteer supporter. In view of what has happened with him recently, they should take that down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaa?










						Meghan and Harry will return to UK for charity work, says royal author
					

Speaking to Royal Central, British author Omid Scobie said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will undertake trips to the UK in both a private and professional capacity when travel is possible.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Emeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaa?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry will return to UK for charity work, says royal author
> 
> 
> Speaking to Royal Central, British author Omid Scobie said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will undertake trips to the UK in both a private and professional capacity when travel is possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Sounds like somebody is worried she may lose her patronages. 
And doing a quick drive by charity stop isn't that hard, just filling the square.


----------



## rose60610

Waaaait, wha? They're returning to the UK for "charity work"? As in, they realized they screwed up and are going back to the UK with tails between their legs to reinsert themselves in the BRF? And think they can just keep the CA house like backyard gazebo? Can't wait to see how they're received by the British public.


----------



## marietouchet

Emeline said:


> Sounds like somebody is worried she may lose her patronages.
> And doing a quick drive by charity stop isn't that hard, just filling the square.


Yeah but story came from Omid was TOTALLY DISCREDITED yesterday when it emerged that Harry did not have cross words with Granny about tiaragate, while throwing Angela under bus 
And as to their future, plans, the Queen's people announced two years running that H&M will make a royal summer progress to Balmoral and they have yet to visit Scotland 
So, all in all, the H&M future plans are totally up in the air, pending their earning money for the fare to Scotland LOL


----------



## CarryOn2020

In a way, this article is quite clever. Perhaps OS or the DM is pushing for a resolution??

—If they deny it, they have removed themselves from their patronages , yes?  So, it will be easy for QE to remove them entirely from the line-up. H will need to file for US citizenship and the IRS can knock on their door.  MM & Doria have had IRS issues in the past, right?

—If they agree with it, then they are signaling they will follow their half-in, half-out plan. And the UK & the US will roar. Their carbon footprint will be huge.  Hypocrites! Cue the band. 2020 is still on the crazy train 

Of course, this is happening during QE’s summer vacation.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> And as to their future, plans, the Queen's people announced two years running that H&M will make a royal summer progress to Balmoral and they have yet to visit Scotland
> So, all in all, the H&M future plans are totally up in the air, pending their earning money for the fare to Scotland LOL



Covid-19 provided a valid reason for not visiting this summer. Mind you, I don't believe they would have visited anyway if there hadn't been a pandemic. I doubt Meghan will ever go back and I think Harry will only go for brief visits or for important occasions, funerals, etc.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Covid-19 provided a valid reason for not visiting this summer. Mind you, I don't believe they would have visited anyway if there hadn't been a pandemic. I doubt Meghan will ever go back and I think Harry will only go for brief visits or for important occasions, funerals, etc.


Oh, she'll go back for funerals.  She'll want to be photographed "mourning" with the grin on her face, eagerly waiting to see what she can get.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, she'll go back for funerals.  She'll want to be photographed "mourning" with the grin on her face, eagerly waiting to see what she can get.



She will make up a feeble excuse to get out of it. She knows she is mostly disliked in the UK now and she can't bear handling uncomfortable situations. Remember how fast she ran back to Canada and left Harry holding the bag and having to face the Queen and his father alone to explain himself when they announced Megxit. She has not shown herself to be a supportive spouse unless she is personally benefitting from it.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Covid-19 provided a valid reason for not visiting this summer. Mind you, I don't believe they would have visited anyway if there hadn't been a pandemic. I doubt Meghan will ever go back and I think Harry will only go for brief visits or for important occasions, funerals, etc.


Agree ... COVID is a major obstacle but they could do a zoom cameo somewhere in Scotland
Harry does have a Scottish title in addition to the English Sussex title


----------



## CarryOn2020

We need to take bets on when/if she goes back. I doubt she will, unless it is merching opp for her.
When H was not involved in the V-J Day events, I’m guessing that smarted a bit. Perhaps reality began to sink in. The UK has several activities in the fall that the US does not. With high heat and the fires happening now in Cali, it will be tough for him to miss the events and the changing seasons. He will get bored  of Cali quickly.

Guessing no one is bowing down to him now or even standing when he enters a room. The Duke of Windsor found those lil changes difficult to deal with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> We need to take bets on when/if she goes back. I doubt she will, unless it is merching opp for her.
> When H was not involved in the V-J Day events, I’m guessing that smarted a bit. Perhaps reality began to sink in. The UK has several activities in the fall that the US does not. With high heat and the fires happening now in Cali, it will be tough for him to miss the events and the changing seasons. He will get bored  of Cali quickly.
> 
> Guessing no one is bowing down to him now or even standing when he enters a room. The Duke of Windsor found those lil changes difficult to deal with.



Wasn't she supposed to come back to testify in her lawsuit against the British tabloids? Knowing how she operates, she'll either do it through a Zoom call or more likely have her lawyers do the work for her. She's all talk and no follow through.


----------



## bag-mania

OMG, why don't they stop announcing nothing every five minutes and actually get off their @sses and DO SOMETHING worthy of reporting? Their PR firm has been scraping the bottom of the barrel, there is not one tiny bit of new information in this article but they have an arrangement with _People_ so here it is.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Consider This Move a 'Pivotal Moment' after 'Turbulent' Time: Source*

*"For the first time in a long time, they have a clear focus," a source tells PEOPLE about Meghan and Prince Harry*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are home.

After stepping down from their senior royal roles, the couple have relocated to the U.S. After spending months in Meghan's hometown of Los Angeles, they purchased their first home about 95 miles north in Santa Barbara.

A source tells PEOPLE in this week's issue that the move marks a "pivotal moment" for Meghan, Prince Harry and their 1-year-old son, Archie.

"This is their permanent home," the insider says. "Ever since Archie arrived, everything has been so turbulent, and many things have been up in the air. It has not been easy, necessarily. For the first time in a long time, they have a clear focus."

Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 35, bunked in Tyler Perry's L.A. estate while they house hunted, settling on a 9-bedroom mansion for a reported $14 million.

"They both love California, and Santa Barbara has a magic to it — the mountains, oceans, vineyards, flowers, gardens," says a source close to the couple. "It’s so beautiful."









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Consider This Move a 'Pivotal Moment' after 'Turbulent' Time: Source
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's purchase of a home in Santa Barbara, California marks a "pivotal moment" for the couple




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, the young adults have a focus now. Don't most people decide in their early 20s what to do with their lives?


----------



## piperdog

Let's be honest, their focus is the same as it's always been - themselves!


----------



## bag-mania

What is hilarious is it took three contributors from _People_ magazine to write that little bit of fluff.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, she'll go back for funerals.  She'll want to be photographed "mourning" with the grin on her face, eagerly waiting to see what she can get.


yes.  Our only hope is that the royal ladies would have to wear a veil with their hats. Knowing her, she won't or it will be really transparent.  After all, if she couldn't comply with the dress code for the  christening of Prince Louis, why she she comply with the dress code for a funeral.  She'll probably wear red.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, she'll go back for funerals.  She'll want to be photographed "mourning" with the grin on her face, eagerly waiting to see what she can get.



And she'll be staring straight into the cameras. And like @gracekelly said, she'll probably wear red. Without a veil so she won't be obscured zeroing in on the cameras.  Maybe the red dress she wore for the Mountbatten Music Festival if she can't get Charles to pay for a new one. And whoever dies, will she sue the estate if she doesn't inherit a satisfactory amount?


----------



## A1aGypsy

What was the dress code for the christening?


----------



## maryg1

“For the first time in a long time, they have a clear focus”.
How can they think it’s a positive thing to say? A married couple approaching their 40 with a baby doesn’t have a clear focus? People in their early 20s are justified if they don’t have a clear focus, not people who are responsible for a baby.


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> “For the first time in a long time, they have a clear focus”.
> How can they think it’s a positive thing to say? A married couple approaching their 40 with a baby doesn’t have a clear focus? People in their early 20s are justified if they don’t have a clear focus, not people who are responsible for a baby.



Well of course it’s not their fault if they didn’t have a clear focus. They were facing so much adversity! What with living in a luxurious mansion that wasn’t even their own and probably only had a dozen bathrooms!


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Agree ... COVID is a major obstacle but they could do a zoom cameo somewhere in Scotland
> Harry does have a Scottish title in addition to the English Sussex title



Yes, and his Scottish title is very appropriate, the Queen chose well, he is the Earl of DUMBarton when in Scotland, 

JCMD(Dumb)H  everywhere else in the world.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Yes, and his Scottish title is very appropriate, the Queen chose well, he is the Earl of DUMBarton when in Scotland,
> 
> JCMD(Dumb)H  everywhere else in the world.



It's very beautiful actually - too good for him


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> yes.  Our only hope is that the royal ladies would have to wear a veil with their hats. Knowing her, she won't or it will be really transparent.  After all, if she couldn't comply with the dress code for the  christening of Prince Louis, why she she comply with the dress code for a funeral.  She'll probably wear red.



My money's on green - the woman seems obsessed


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> My money's on green - the woman seems obsessed


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> My money's on green - the woman seems obsessed


Well green is the color of money, at least in the USA!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Didn't we all say she'd never show her face again in the UK after they hightailed it to their first rented mansion in Canada?
Then, she gave her "farewell tour" in what, March?
Remember? The green dress....


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> yes.  Our only hope is that the royal ladies would have to wear a veil with their hats. Knowing her, she won't or it will be really transparent.  After all, if she couldn't comply with the dress code for the  christening of Prince Louis, why she she comply with the dress code for a funeral.  She'll probably wear red.


This will be the time she *DOESN'T *want to wear a veil, after insisting on one for her wedding, LOL.


----------



## 1LV

Is 


V0N1B2 said:


> Didn't we all say she'd never show her face again in the UK after they hightailed it to their first rented mansion in Canada?
> Then, she gave her "farewell tour" in what, March?
> Remember? The green dress....


Is it just me, or does this walk remind you of an old lady (with no neck)?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> This will be the time she *DOESN'T *want to wear a veil, after insisting on one for her wedding, LOL.


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Is
> 
> Is it just me, or does this walk remind you of an old lady (with no neck)?



Is this supposed to be the Green Caped Crusader?  I know some of you ladies love  your capes, but for me, when it is attached to a dress like this, I can't stand it.


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Is
> 
> Is it just me, or does this walk remind you of an old lady (with no neck)?


Very poor posture.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Very poor posture.


Maybe she didn't have time for her yoga routine with all the scheming and planning their escape.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe she didn't have time for her yoga routine with all the scheming and planning their escape.



Maybe all of her misdeeds are sitting on her back and bending her over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Maybe all of her misdeeds are sitting on her back and bending her over.


Doubt it, she doesn't strike me as the self-reflecting type who ever feels sorry for anyone but herself.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaa?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry will return to UK for charity work, says royal author
> 
> 
> Speaking to Royal Central, British author Omid Scobie said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will undertake trips to the UK in both a private and professional capacity when travel is possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





This fool insists he doesn't talk directly to the Freedom Finders, but sure does know a lot of intimate details (details that are true or not- who knows) about their life and what they plan to do. So is he now their publicist or what? He sure loves to talk on behalf of them to the media.




bag-mania said:


> OMG, why don't they stop announcing nothing every five minutes and actually get off their @sses and DO SOMETHING worthy of reporting? Their PR firm has been scraping the bottom of the barrel, there is not one tiny bit of new information in this article but they have an arrangement with _People_ so here it is.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Consider This Move a 'Pivotal Moment' after 'Turbulent' Time: Source*
> 
> *"For the first time in a long time, they have a clear focus," a source tells PEOPLE about Meghan and Prince Harry*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are home.
> 
> After stepping down from their senior royal roles, the couple have relocated to the U.S. After spending months in Meghan's hometown of Los Angeles, they purchased their first home about 95 miles north in Santa Barbara.
> 
> A source tells PEOPLE in this week's issue that the move marks a "pivotal moment" for Meghan, Prince Harry and their 1-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> "This is their permanent home," the insider says. "Ever since Archie arrived, everything has been so turbulent, and many things have been up in the air. It has not been easy, necessarily. For the first time in a long time, they have a clear focus."
> 
> Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 35, bunked in Tyler Perry's L.A. estate while they house hunted, settling on a 9-bedroom mansion for a reported $14 million.
> 
> "They both love California, and Santa Barbara has a magic to it — the mountains, oceans, vineyards, flowers, gardens," says a source close to the couple. "It’s so beautiful."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Consider This Move a 'Pivotal Moment' after 'Turbulent' Time: Source
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's purchase of a home in Santa Barbara, California marks a "pivotal moment" for the couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Again with the TMI...


So they had no clear focus until now? Probably would have been a good idea to either work on gaining some clear focus and stability in their life before bringing a child into the world. Turbulent since their child was born? And i'm guessing that's no fault of their own


----------



## purseinsanity

I swear, they have People on speed dial.


----------



## gracekelly

It is obvious that Scobie is now their spokesman for all things.  Announcing that they will return to the UK at some point is not something in the book.

People Magazine is a willing participant as they have to keep churning out the crap every week.  Every time things got slow, they use to put Diana on the cover.  I think BG calls them _Kneepads_


----------



## bag-mania

Oh yeah, we’re expected to believe Meghan didn’t dictate this word for word. Somebody make it stop! 

*We Finally Know Meghan Markle's Reaction to That Jay-Z and Beyoncé Tribute*
"She wrote me back, like, the big-eye emoji." 

Sometimes the only way to appropriately convey your emotions over text is via emoji. That's certainly how the Duchess of Sussex felt after receiving news that one of the most powerful couples in the world released a very public tribute to Meghan. 

In February 2019, then-pregnant Meghan traveled to New York for her star-studded baby shower. The celebration was hosted by Serena Williams in the Mark Hotel's luxurious penthouse, and featured a floral arrangement class and dessert tasting by celebrated chef Jean-Georges Vongerichten. The small guest list included notable names like Amal Clooney, Misha Nonoo, and Priyanka Chopra.

According to Finding Freedom, a new biography about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Meghan left New York "on a high." The Duchess returned to London, via the Clooney's private jet, with close pal Amal and her twins, Ella and Alexander. It was en route to England that Meghan received news of a special tribute in her honor. 

Daniel Martin, Meghan's makeup artist and close friend, sent her a text referring to Jay-Z and Beyoncé's homage to the Duchess at the 2019 Brit Awards. "I think all I wrote was 'Girl,'" said Martin, who also attached the relevant video. "She wrote me back, like, the big-eye emoji."

The video of note shows Beyoncé and Jay-Z accepting their Brit Award for Best International Group in front of illustrator Tim O'Brien's portrait of Meghan. The Duchess appears dressed in royal regalia, complete with extensive jewelry and a lavish tiara. The couple's video acceptance references their music video for the song, Apes**t, in which they stood in front of the Mona Lisa at Paris's Louvre museum.

Beyoncé later posted a still from that video on her Instagram account. In her caption, she compliments Meghan further, and congratulates her on her pregnancy. 

"In honor of Black History Month, we bow down to one of our Melanated Monas," Beyoncé wrote. "Congrats on your pregnancy! We wish you so much joy."









						We Finally Know Meghan Markle's Reaction to That Jay-Z and Beyoncé Tribute
					

"She wrote me back, like, the big-eye emoji."




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## purseinsanity

I thought Priyanka Chopra was not at the baby shower and there was question of whether she'd been Markled?


----------



## threadbender

Lodpah said:


> MM's resumes . . . before and after. Superwoman, Oprah, Michelle ***** have nothing on MM. Check out how "professional" the updated resume is. She did good. To boot, her resume has the Buckingham Palace address. I found these online so I don't know how accurate they are. Wow, I did not realize how successful an actress she was, I mean like she was in some heavyweights.  You all need to apologize to MM and bow down to her greatness as Meghan the Remarkable. Don't forget to curtsy less your heads be cut off and you are put in the dungeon to await your fate.  The first resume you have to cut and paste.
> 
> 
> 
> https://s3.amazonaws.com/resume.cdn/articles/posts/Meghan-Markle_CV.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4822535


OMG! I am laughing at her playing Sylvia in The Women. Wonder which version they did.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I thought Priyanka Chopra was not at the baby shower and there was question of whether she'd been Markled?



Thank goodness absolute truth isn’t required for Meghan stories or else there would be nothing to read about her.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Oh yeah, we’re expected to believe Meghan didn’t dictate this word for word. Somebody make it stop!
> 
> *We Finally Know Meghan Markle's Reaction to That Jay-Z and Beyoncé Tribute*
> "She wrote me back, like, the big-eye emoji."
> 
> Sometimes the only way to appropriately convey your emotions over text is via emoji. That's certainly how the Duchess of Sussex felt after receiving news that one of the most powerful couples in the world released a very public tribute to Meghan.
> 
> In February 2019, then-pregnant Meghan traveled to New York for her star-studded baby shower. The celebration was hosted by Serena Williams in the Mark Hotel's luxurious penthouse, and featured a floral arrangement class and dessert tasting by celebrated chef Jean-Georges Vongerichten. The small guest list included notable names like Amal Clooney, Misha Nonoo, and Priyanka Chopra.
> 
> According to Finding Freedom, a new biography about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Meghan left New York "on a high." The Duchess returned to London, via the Clooney's private jet, with close pal Amal and her twins, Ella and Alexander. It was en route to England that Meghan received news of a special tribute in her honor.
> 
> Daniel Martin, Meghan's makeup artist and close friend, sent her a text referring to Jay-Z and Beyoncé's homage to the Duchess at the 2019 Brit Awards. "I think all I wrote was 'Girl,'" said Martin, who also attached the relevant video. "She wrote me back, like, the big-eye emoji."
> 
> The video of note shows Beyoncé and Jay-Z accepting their Brit Award for Best International Group in front of illustrator Tim O'Brien's portrait of Meghan. The Duchess appears dressed in royal regalia, complete with extensive jewelry and a lavish tiara. The couple's video acceptance references their music video for the song, Apes**t, in which they stood in front of the Mona Lisa at Paris's Louvre museum.
> 
> Beyoncé later posted a still from that video on her Instagram account. In her caption, she compliments Meghan further, and congratulates her on her pregnancy.
> 
> "In honor of Black History Month, we bow down to one of our Melanated Monas," Beyoncé wrote. "Congrats on your pregnancy! We wish you so much joy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We Finally Know Meghan Markle's Reaction to That Jay-Z and Beyoncé Tribute
> 
> 
> "She wrote me back, like, the big-eye emoji."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


That portrait with her wearing the tiara, royal regalia and jewelry is as close as she will ever get to wearing Her Majesty's jewels!


----------



## lulilu

V0N1B2 said:


> Didn't we all say she'd never show her face again in the UK after they hightailed it to their first rented mansion in Canada?
> Then, she gave her "farewell tour" in what, March?
> Remember? The green dress....



I loathe this look.  She looks absolutely stupid.  And am sick unto death of the photos everywhere.


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


> I loathe this look.  She looks absolutely stupid.  And am sick unto death of the photos everywhere.



I suspect MM and JCMH are beginning to realize their book was not something much of the world was waiting for with baited breath, it is not a top seller, and there is a negative backlash as their true characters are glaringly apparent. Therefore, not ever really wanting privacy, and having no sense of the mood of much of world battling much more staggering problems, they are revving up the PR machine and pumping out a new river of drivel to keep their names afloat.

Further motivation is the supposed deal they are trying to generate in Hollywood so they can jointly produce something...besides Archie of course.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That portrait with her wearing the tiara, royal regalia and jewelry is as close as she will ever get to wearing Her Majesty's jewels!


Too bad the tiara pictured belongs to the Bourbons and is only ever worn by the Queen of Spain. The devil is in the detail.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the Wickstead green dresss 

Thinking of a Halloween costume, I googled “Meghan Markle green dress replica”.  Someone on Etsy [who I do not know and am not recommending, so I am not posting the photo] has one that is styled with the hat angled to the right, cape off the left shoulder with a pink & white rose pinned near the center right, matching green gloves, soft pink handbag, soft pink shoes. The look is stunning and elegant and so different than the way MM styled it.  Clearly, it shows what an excellent tailor and stylist can do.  For more reasons than one, H&M should have made Ms. Kelly their best friend.

Scroll down to the _mimic_ section — it‘s the first one listed








						Emilia Wickstead Green Cape-Effect Dress - Meghan Markle Dresses
					

Shop the Emilia Wickstead Green Cape-Effect Dress as seen on Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex



					www.meghansfashion.com
				




Is this MM’s? $10K??
https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Custom...254541719913?_trksid=p2385738.m4383.l4275.c10


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was it ever revealed why she was so obsessed with *rich British men* (as opposed to rich Canadians or US citizens)?



I don't know the answer, but lets not forget that she was after Ashley Cole  before she met Harry!


----------



## Chanbal

The very accomplished and philanthropic young mother and leader is desperately "working":

*Meghan Markle is unveiled as surprise guest at virtual summit to encourage voting participation*
When We All Vote was launched in 2018 by several co-chairs, including Michelle *****, and is described online as on 'a mission to increase participation in every election and close the race and age voting gap by changing the culture around voting, harnessing grassroots energy, and through strategic partnerships to reach every American.'









						Meghan Markle set to join virtual summit When We All Vote
					

Meghan Markle, 39, has been announced as a special guest for the When All Women Vote Couch Party, weeks after the Duchess announced her plans to vote in the upcoming US election.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*It's an honour to continue your grandmother's legacy': Meghan Markle admits she 'didn't know' about the Commonwealth until she joined 'The Family' as she and Prince Harry speak to young leaders*

Duke and Duchess of Sussex joined video call with QCT leaders from US mansion
Couple spoke of their pride in remaining part of organisation set up by Queen 
Meghan, 39, said called it an 'honour' to continue the Queen's legacy via QCT
Prince Harry, 35, spoke adoringly of royal and referred to her as 'grandmother'
Comes weeks after their rift with Royal Family was laid bare in an explosive book









						Meghan and Harry join video call with young leaders from QCT
					

Meghan, 39, spoke of her 'incredible pride' at being able to work with the Queen's charity, which is a growing network of young changemakers across the Commonwealth.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




For the ones that question MM humanitarian curriculum, the link below leads to other links and to details that the BRF probably overlooked when retrieving (cleaning) her information from the net:





__





						Google Image Result for https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKWLV4FW4AUrfNQ?format=jpg&name=900x900
					





					www.google.com


----------



## Annawakes

Again with the name dropping of the O’s!


----------



## bag-mania

They obviously still need to perform certain duties to earn their allowance. There is backpedaling galore here.

_Meghan Markle admitted she 'didn't know' about the Commonwealth until she joined the Royal Family and gushed that it is an 'honour' to be continuing Her Majesty's legacy during a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust._
_
The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39,  joined the discussion from their new $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara, California, on Monday, with a video of the call shared on the QCT YouTube channel today.     

Both Meghan and Prince Harry spoke adoringly of the Queen, 94, whom they referred to as 'grandmother' during the video call, weeks after their rift with the Royal Family was laid bare in their explosive biography Finding Freedom.

Meanwhile the couple also gushed over the Commonwealth with Meghan saying she felt 'incredible pride' at being able to work with the QCT, revealing: '[Young people from across the Commonwealth] come with a question, they always offered a solution, and that’s what I think is so inspiring and why I’m incredibly proud to be able to work with the QCT, but why it’s the continuation of the legacy of your grandmother.' 
_
_Their loving comments for the organisation and the Queen come after the couple faced criticism for their last conversation with the group, in which they appeared to take a swipe at the British Empire by saying the history of the Commonwealth 'must be acknowledged', even if it's 'uncomfortable'._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Meghan Markle continues the Queen's legacy. Now I've heard it all.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> They obviously still need to perform certain duties to earn their allowance. There is backpedaling galore here.
> 
> _Meghan Markle admitted she 'didn't know' about the Commonwealth until she joined the Royal Family and gushed that it is an 'honour' to be continuing Her Majesty's legacy during a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust._
> 
> _The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39,  joined the discussion from their new $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara, California, on Monday, with a video of the call shared on the QCT YouTube channel today.
> 
> Both Meghan and Prince Harry spoke adoringly of the Queen, 94, whom they referred to as 'grandmother' during the video call, weeks after their rift with the Royal Family was laid bare in their explosive biography Finding Freedom.
> 
> Meanwhile the couple also gushed over the Commonwealth with Meghan saying she felt 'incredible pride' at being able to work with the QCT, revealing: '[Young people from across the Commonwealth] come with a question, they always offered a solution, and that’s what I think is so inspiring and why I’m incredibly proud to be able to work with the QCT, but why it’s the continuation of the legacy of your grandmother.' _
> 
> _Their loving comments for the organisation and the Queen come after the couple faced criticism for their last conversation with the group, in which they appeared to take a swipe at the British Empire by saying the history of the Commonwealth 'must be acknowledged', even if it's 'uncomfortable'._


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> They obviously still need to perform certain duties to earn their allowance. There is backpedaling galore here.
> 
> _Meghan Markle admitted she 'didn't know' about the Commonwealth until she joined the Royal Family and gushed that it is an 'honour' to be continuing Her Majesty's legacy during a video call with young leaders from the Queen's Commonwealth Trust._
> 
> _The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39,  joined the discussion from their new $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara, California, on Monday, with a video of the call shared on the QCT YouTube channel today.
> 
> Both Meghan and Prince Harry spoke adoringly of the Queen, 94, whom they referred to as 'grandmother' during the video call, weeks after their rift with the Royal Family was laid bare in their explosive biography Finding Freedom.
> 
> Meanwhile the couple also gushed over the Commonwealth with Meghan saying she felt 'incredible pride' at being able to work with the QCT, revealing: '[Young people from across the Commonwealth] come with a question, they always offered a solution, and that’s what I think is so inspiring and why I’m incredibly proud to be able to work with the QCT, but why it’s the continuation of the legacy of your grandmother.' _
> 
> _Their loving comments for the organisation and the Queen come after the couple faced criticism for their last conversation with the group, in which they appeared to take a swipe at the British Empire by saying the history of the Commonwealth 'must be acknowledged', even if it's 'uncomfortable'._


----------



## duna

lulilu said:


>



LOL, I hadn't seen your "answer" when I posted mine, great minds think alike


----------



## lanasyogamama

The audacity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh, the lil jerks have been ‘talked to’, haven’t they?  Hahaa



What‘s next — Charles is the father of the year? Will for brother of the year?  



duna said:


>


----------



## rose60610

So Meghan lived in Canada, marries Harry who took her on trips to Australia and various countries in Africa, and claims she didn't know about the Commonwealth? (choking cough) Then how could she claim to be offended by its "uncomfortable history" if she didn't know about it? Isn't it lovely that she now feels "incredibly proud" of it now? How long is Harry going to put up this psycho?


----------



## maryg1

We study Commonwealth at school. In Italy. 
She lived in Canada and didn’t know about it. 
Great basis to start a political engagement.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Man, I hope people don’t look at her as a reflection of Americans... we do know what the Commonwealth is... ffs...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really a horrible reflection on Northwestern

This recent zoom call ooks like they really really want back in the Royal world.  Just unreal at the hypocrisy and lack of authenticity. 



Sol Ryan said:


> Man, I hope people don’t look at her as a reflection of Americans... we do know what the Commonwealth is... ffs...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> So Meghan lived in Canada, marries Harry who took her on trips to Australia and various countries in Africa, and claims she didn't know about the Commonwealth? (choking cough) Then how could she claim to be offended by its "uncomfortable history" if she didn't know about it? Isn't it lovely that she now feels "incredibly proud" of it now? How long is Harry going to put up this psycho?



I mean, she obviously knew enough to wish for the Commonwealth countries to be close to her on her wedding day, which is why she and only she alone came up with the genius idea of having her veil embroidered with Commonwealth flowers. Of course I can't write such artful word salads as Her Royal Highness, despite being a journalist, so she might have said it better.

P.S. Who's going to tell her it's not cute to play up on your educational gaps all the freaking time? It just makes you look stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> Man, I hope people don’t look at her as a reflection of Americans... we do know what the Commonwealth is... ffs...



No worries, we know she likes to play extra dumb because that suits her "I'm young and cute and innocent" narrative.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DP. Apologies.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really a horrible reflection on Northwestern
> 
> This recent zoom call ooks like they really really want back in the Royal world.  Just unreal at the hypocrisy and lack of authenticity.


 I was just going to add that, thanks! Meghan majored in International Studies as well. I forgot about the Commonwealth flowers on the wedding dress, thanks Q of WD.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, could she not be trained?
> Will they offer classes in this training? Ya kno, for us common folk?  Do the lawsuits count as cruel or kind?
> 
> _Commenting on the reach of global platforms and the impact of the social media ripple effect, she aid: 'When you look at what these platforms are capable of with that reach, and what that propels in terms of trolling… *You can either train people to be cruel, or you can train people to be kind. It's really that simple.'*_


----------



## chicinthecity777

I should think not knowing what commonwealth is NOT something one would advertise if one is even slightly educated. Are they/is she and their PR team really that stupid to think this is something even remotely entertaining? The "poor naive me" narrative is epic fail! You both are middle-aged, H&M! Grow up!


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if they are talking about posts about themselves.

*Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'









						Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> The very accomplished and philanthropic young mother and leader is desperately "working":
> 
> *Meghan Markle is unveiled as surprise guest at virtual summit to encourage voting participation*
> When We All Vote was launched in 2018 by several co-chairs, including Michelle *****, and is described online as on 'a mission to increase participation in every election and close the race and age voting gap by changing the culture around voting, harnessing grassroots energy, and through strategic partnerships to reach every American.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle set to join virtual summit When We All Vote
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, has been announced as a special guest for the When All Women Vote Couch Party, weeks after the Duchess announced her plans to vote in the upcoming US election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *It's an honour to continue your grandmother's legacy': Meghan Markle admits she 'didn't know' about the Commonwealth until she joined 'The Family' as she and Prince Harry speak to young leaders*
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex joined video call with QCT leaders from US mansion
> Couple spoke of their pride in remaining part of organisation set up by Queen
> Meghan, 39, said called it an 'honour' to continue the Queen's legacy via QCT
> Prince Harry, 35, spoke adoringly of royal and referred to her as 'grandmother'
> Comes weeks after their rift with Royal Family was laid bare in an explosive book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry join video call with young leaders from QCT
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, spoke of her 'incredible pride' at being able to work with the Queen's charity, which is a growing network of young changemakers across the Commonwealth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the ones that question MM humanitarian curriculum, the link below leads to other links and to details that the BRF probably overlooked when retrieving (cleaning) her information from the net:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google Image Result for https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKWLV4FW4AUrfNQ?format=jpg&name=900x900
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Pretty shrewd of them to release this, and mention the O's names at this time, knowing they would be getting a lot of press and this week due to the DNC events.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Pretty shrewd of them to release this, and mention the O's names at this time, knowing they would be getting a lot of press and this week due to the DNC events.



They get press but I don’t know that many are reading it. We look for their daily missives but does anyone still care? Everyone has other concerns.


----------



## Emeline

maryg1 said:


> We study Commonwealth at school. In Italy.
> She lived in Canada and didn’t know about it.
> Great basis to start a political engagement.


Exactly. 
Didn't she living in Canada for years while filming suits?  The Queen is on currency there. 
Nice try Rachel. Ha!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Pretty shrewd of them to release this, and mention the O's names at this time, knowing they would be getting a lot of press and this week due to the DNC events.





bag-mania said:


> They get press but I don’t know that many are reading it. We look for their daily missives but does anyone still care? Everyone has other concerns.



Her PR machine is doing whatever possible (and impossible) to give her a new image, very different from what it shows on last link. I wonder how those images escaped the BRF when they were building the duchess's profile.


----------



## Shopgirl1996

sorry wrong thread


----------



## rose60610

Emeline said:


> Exactly.
> Didn't she living in Canada for years while filming suits?  *The Queen is on currency there.*
> Nice try Rachel. Ha!



NAILED IT!  But I'll take a stab at defending M here. She's talented at getting others to pay everything for her, so maybe she never had a reason to use currency.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if they are talking about posts about themselves.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


OK I am in a b1tching mood today so here it is. They are so full of ground-breaking original ideas, aren't they? Who would have thought of this! I mean who?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Emeline said:


> Exactly.
> Didn't she living in Canada for years while filming suits?  *The Queen is on currency there.*
> Nice try Rachel. Ha!


Bingo!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if they are talking about posts about themselves.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk





chicinthecity777 said:


> OK I am in a b1tching mood today so here it is. They are so full of ground-breaking original ideas, aren't they? Who would have thought of this! I mean who?


Of course, they don't share horrible posts about themselves. H & MM pay their PR-team to feed and overload the media with posts and news about their brilliant accomplishments.


----------



## csshopper

I think I'll start to refer to MM and JCMH as the "Hoovers,"  like the vacuum, because they are trying sooo hard to "suck up" to the RF.   

    Maybe the backlash against them and the major "yawn" for their version of history is starting to register a little with them.

    Maybe Charles finally laid down some hard truths about "biting the hands that feed you," and being ginormous consumers of all things luxury, they came to the conclusion they had some make up work to do.

     It would be lovely if one could view this and feel good about it, but based on past experiences my reaction is: acting again, how long will it be before you're dissing someone, and for how insufferably long are your PR people and Scobie Doo going to play this one out?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal   yes, we should bow down, let their brilliance shine on us, and praise their greatness. LOL, not going to happen here. 

So, are these heavily-filtered zoom calls approved by QE, Charles, Will?  I just do not understand the game they’re playing.  The lies are piling up.

To my eye, it looks like they are competing with W&K and hoping to rehabilitate their image, perhaps for their return. Someone should remind them that the USA does not have royalty, so they will be mocked for the lies.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder how much they are paying Scobie. He is doing interviews where he again portrays Meghan as the victim, still promoting his book I suppose. I am not familiar with "The Cut." It appears to be some sort of fashion web site. This particular author has written a number of pro-Meghan articles so her mind was made up long before talking with H&M's mouthpiece. What I got out of it is everyone who doesn't like Meghan must be jealous of her. 

*Meghan Markle Was Set Up to Fail*

Last week, after months of teasing, the definitive book about Meghan and Harry was released. _Finding Freedom, _which is written by two longtime royals reporters, Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, chronicles the escalating tensions between Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and the rest of the royal family leading up to their unprecedented decision to step back as senior members of the royal family in January. While the couple was not interviewed for _Finding Freedom_, it contains a number of revelations and corrections, such as the true nature of Meghan and Kate’s relationship, and the snobbish way Meghan was received by some members of the royal family.

But what _Finding Freedom_ ultimately reveals is how much Meghan Markle was set up to fail, a victim of an institution that was wholly incapable of embracing her. What’s more, it turns the spotlight on Prince Harry and his desire to be his own person in an establishment that is not only designed around conformity, but that punishes other ways of living. In spite of her husband’s efforts to protect her, Meghan — throughout her engagement, marriage, and pregnancy — was a casualty of the British media, which built a racist and sexist mythology around her, one that was, ultimately, enabled by the crown.

Scobie, who has been covering the royal family since William and Kate’s wedding in 2011, says that from the beginning, the tabloid stories about Meghan were very different from what he and Durand witnessed as reporters whose sources reached the highest ranks within Buckingham Palace. He spoke to the Cut about how the couple dealt with the widespread denigration before and after their marriage, and how, ultimately, their decision to step down made the most sense.

*In the book you write about how some of the British press “did little to hide racial undertones in snarky commentary and headlines.” Did you anticipate that Meghan would receive this kind of treatment? *

I’m a mixed-race royals correspondent — there aren’t really many of us, or any of us. I was excited about this new chapter, and there were many people at the time, certainly around the wedding, that spoke about how Meghan would modernize the monarchy and usher in a new chapter for the House of Windsor.

But, ultimately, it was her differences that were weaponized against her. All the things that made her exciting at the beginning were suddenly the things that made her annoying or problematic for the institution. Many within the royal press core are the gatekeepers to information about members of the royal family. And that’s why, often, we find that the narrative set by certain British tabloids sets the tone for the rest of a royal’s working career.

But I think what was more worrying was that I noticed that a lot of the stories that painted her in such a light were often coming from within the palace itself.

*What do you mean “from within the palace itself?” Do you mean from other royals, or staff? *

We have an interesting system within the palace as a whole. There are different households: Clarence House, Kensington Palace, and Buckingham Palace. Each one has the responsibility to look after the royal family members that they work for. These are the private aides, the communication staffers, the courtiers. They’re the characters that work behind the scenes.

Often, it’s a popularity contest: Members of the royal family are almost competing over coverage in the papers. For example, Charles is often frustrated that his children always get more press than him given he’s often the more hardworking member of the royal family, and there are people within his household working to make sure that he gets as much of a prolific feature for his work as possible. Often that leads to jealousy within the different households as well.

*What did that mean for Meghan and Harry? *

Harry and Meghan are really not considered the most senior members of the royal family, and suddenly they became the most talked about couple on the planet. People who didn’t care about the monarchy before felt that, with Meghan, there was a woman in the House of Windsor that represented someone that they hadn’t seen there before: It changed what it meant to be “royal and regal” — those connotations were no longer only associated with being white. This made Meghan a huge draw for the royals — but being a draw, you will also attract jealousy.

We noticed that some of the narratives being leaked out by courtiers or aides working within the households were things to make Meghan look bad. It was something that Meghan and Harry were aware of early on, but the royal family has a unique culture where they never comment on anything. Stories will go out in the press and that’s it. They take on a life of their own and you have to deal with it. You don’t get to comment.

As a newcomer, I think Meghan suffered. That “Duchess Difficult” label we saw attached to her by some of the British tabloids, it fed off of so many ugly, racist, and sexist tropes that we often see attached to successful women and successful women of color. She was “too loud, too difficult, too demanding, too obnoxious, couldn’t keep the staff on hand.” As someone that literally had a front-row seat to a lot of their work, I couldn’t match up the two characters.

Time and time again, Harry and Meghan wanted to speak up. They wanted to say what was true and what wasn’t true and defend themselves. And whilst the people immediately working for them were keen to do that, the powers that be much higher up would never agree to something like that — it didn’t fit the “never complain, never explain” mantra of the institution.

*Did you see Meghan and Harry take steps to resolve the problems they were having? *

In the summer of 2019, Harry actually had a conversation amongst his team and his senior aides within Buckingham Palace about restructuring that press system and making him and Meghan more accessible to a wider, more diverse media landscape. And the answer was well, _If you want to do that, you can pay for your own engagements_. And so that was the first seed of, well, _Maybe we will break away, maybe we will do our own thing_.

There was that very memorable moment when Meghan did the TV interview in southern Africa where she spoke about some of the difficulties that she’d been through throughout her pregnancy. At that point, Harry and Meghan were so beaten down through the various challenges they had faced — they’d already also launched those three legal actions against British tabloids — and they were desperately trying to figure out how to make the situation work.

It’s a shame, because the signs were there internally for a very long time.  They really made it known what their grievances were, but it often fell on deaf ears.

*What was the most difficult period for them that you witnessed?*

It was around the time that there was this obsession with Meghan’s father. There were stories about her parents appearing in some of the tabloids almost every day. They had followed Meghan’s father to a Home Depot and taken a photograph of him buying a toilet, and made a joke that it was his throne. There were photos of Meghan’s mom, Doria, going to a laundromat, and there was a very sort of ugly narrative around that. Meghan had already been called “straight outta Compton” at that point. We saw editorials talking about Meghan’s “exotic DNA” and talking about how she would “water down the blue blood” of the royal family. There was a commentary piece talking about how strange it would be for Meghan’s dreadlocked and nose-ringed mom to sit down and have tea with the queen.

And at the same time, the people that were responsible for writing and saying a lot of these things were somehow being enabled to do so. There was almost a thirst for more of it. As a mixed-race Brit on the royals beat I was ashamed to even be connected to it.

*Do you think it’s possible for the royal family to embrace anyone who is different? And by different, I mean: not white, not British, not royal by blood — or do you think these prejudices run too deep? *

When we look at the immediate royal family, I think they clearly did support Harry and Meghan to some extent. Unfortunately the institution itself is not built to handle someone coming in who is different, or is as dramatically different as Meghan was.

And it’s a shame because I think the royal family had this incredible chance to be seen as inclusive and diverse and progressive. And that’s gone now, ending a very short chapter for the monarchy.









						How Meghan Markle Was Set Up to Fail
					

The author of Finding Freedom, the new book on Meghan and Harry, explains how “her differences were weaponized against her.”




					www.thecut.com


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> *I wonder if they are talking about posts about themselves.*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan: Don't feed the social media trolls by sharing 'horrible' posts
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex warn social media 'shouting match' is benefitting 'all the wrong people'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


I'd guess, yes.


Of course they are, all they care about is themselves. I'd be shocked if they showed genuine concern for the well-being of other people.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> As a newcomer, I think Meghan suffered. That “Duchess Difficult” label we saw attached to her by some of the British tabloids, it fed off of so many ugly, racist, and sexist tropes that we often see attached to successful women and successful women of color. She was “too loud, too difficult, too demanding, too obnoxious, couldn’t keep the staff on hand.” *As someone that literally had a front-row seat to a lot of their work, I couldn’t match up the two characters*.



Apparently, Scobie doesn't realize that while he had "a front row seat", he wasn't an actual witness to what was going on behind the scenes in reality. He didn't work for MM so he doesn't actually know what she would be like to work for and whether she was actually too difficult or too demanding or too obnoxious or too whatever.  He only saw her and Harry's public faces from his front row seat.  The people who did work for her can't talk because of NDA's but there is some evidence with the large amount of staff turnover that those things were likely, at least partly, true. They had a lot of turnover, a lot of people left after short periods.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, she obviously knew enough to wish for the Commonwealth countries to be close to her on her wedding day, which is why she and only she alone came up with the genius idea of having her veil embroidered with Commonwealth flowers. Of course I can't write such artful word salads as Her Royal Highness, despite being a journalist, so she might have said it better.
> *
> P.S. Who's going to tell her it's not cute to play up on your educational gaps all the freaking time? It just makes you look stupid.*


Maybe she's aiming to be the next Jessica Simpson


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> Pretty shrewd of them to release this, and mention the O's names at this time, knowing they would be getting a lot of press and this week due to the DNC events.



Thanks for pointing this out, *lalame*.

Am dumbstruck seeing this press piece, thought as part of their separation agreement to remain “royals” was to remain apolitical?

This makes me sick, quite frankly.

It is the exact OPPOSITE message that should be echoed during a very divisive time in the US.

Where is the BRF? Why are they standing down?
Think I get it, any guesses?


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Apparently, Scobie doesn't realize that while he had "a front row seat", he wasn't an actual witness to what was going on behind the scenes in reality. He didn't work for MM so he doesn't actually know what she would be like to work for and whether she was actually too difficult or too demanding or too obnoxious or too whatever.  He only saw her and Harry's public faces from his front row seat.  The people who did work for her can't talk because of NDA's but there is some evidence with the large amount of staff turnover that those things were likely, at least partly, true. They had a lot of turnover, a lot of people left after short periods.


Whether he knows or not about her personality is irrelevant, he only does what he is asked to do.


----------



## threadbender

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the Wickstead green dresss
> 
> Thinking of a Halloween costume, I googled “Meghan Markle green dress replica”.  Someone on Etsy [who I do not know and am not recommending, so I am not posting the photo] has one that is styled with the hat angled to the right, cape off the left shoulder with a pink & white rose pinned near the center right, matching green gloves, soft pink handbag, soft pink shoes. The look is stunning and elegant and so different than the way MM styled it.  Clearly, it shows what an excellent tailor and stylist can do.  For more reasons than one, H&M should have made Ms. Kelly their best friend.
> 
> Scroll down to the _mimic_ section — it‘s the first one listed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emilia Wickstead Green Cape-Effect Dress - Meghan Markle Dresses
> 
> 
> Shop the Emilia Wickstead Green Cape-Effect Dress as seen on Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this MM’s? $10K??
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Custom...254541719913?_trksid=p2385738.m4383.l4275.c10


Surprised she isn't suing for using her image.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Thanks for pointing this out, *lalame*.
> 
> Am dumbstruck seeing this press piece, thought as part of their separation agreement to remain “royals” was to remain apolitical?
> 
> This makes me sick, quite frankly.
> 
> It is the exact OPPOSITE message that should be echoed during a very divisive time in the US.
> 
> Where is the BRF? Why are they standing down?
> Think I get it, any guesses?



Are they waiting for the one year review to lower the boom?  I don't think the BRF will be too harsh IMO.  However, I'm really hoping they prove me wrong.


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Where is the BRF? Why are they standing down?
> Think I get it, any guesses?



Think of the BRF as being a candle with an endless, slow-burning wick. Now think of H&M as being a little firecracker. They are loud, annoying, and right in your face. They also burn out quickly. They have no lasting power.

The BRF is a timeless institution. H&M are a flash in the pan. The Queen can afford to be patient.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

bag-mania said:


> and the snobbish way Meghan was received by some members of the royal family.



Which is likely referring to not being fawned over 24/7.  Apparently, if she doesn't get all the attention, others are being snobbish.  Sheesh, get an effing life, and actually do something worthwhile for pity sake.


----------



## marietouchet

threadbender said:


> Surprised she isn't suing for using her image.


Probably not hers since the seller is in Houston, TX not CA


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they want to be the new Obamas! That part is clear! OMG just how delusional can they be???


there is Absolutely No Basis for that


----------



## Annawakes

She wants to command respect like Michelle O, swan around like an A-Lister like Angelina J, look like the Kardashians, and have everyone defer to her royal status like the Queen.

that’s pretty delusional!


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is getting embarrassing for MM. Like I said, she was completely wrong about Harry *not being able to vote*. Their PR team should be fired! Unless that team is herself ...


----------



## gracekelly

She should not  be using a title when urging US citizens to vote and should stick to her own name.  Wrong Wrong Wrong.  The organizers never should have put her name on the ID like that.




Her title is by marriage only and I don't think it amounts to a row of pins as far as losing citizenship in the US.  It has become quite common recently for British actors to have dual citizen ship.  I think the rules must have eased up.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> What is hilarious is it took three contributors from _People_ magazine to write that little bit of fluff.


I'm convinced the US media is looking for someone to idolize - a glamour couple.  I was reading an article in Vanity Fair - not about them per se but some Hollywood insider was saying how he expects H&M will want to join some club (I don't recall name) and that they would probably be welcomed there........celebs like royals or something to that effect.  
I've been known to buy into admiration of certain celebs like Diana and JFK Jr and his wife Carolyn.  But these two grifters aren't all that attractive and whatever glamour they had they have ruined it with their bad behavior and attention seeking.  IMO
Anyway I like VF but not sure I'm liking it as much under the new editor in chief.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is getting embarrassing for MM. Like I said, she was completely wrong about Harry *not being able to vote*. Their PR team should be fired! Unless that team is herself ...



If I see pictures of her in that green outfit one more time I may puke


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> If I see pictures of her in that green outfit one more time I may puke



Truth!  That cape thing does me in,


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Truth!  That cape thing does me in,


the cape effect, the shade of green, her face....


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm convinced the US media is looking for someone to idolize - a glamour couple.  I was reading an article in Vanity Fair - not about them per se but some Hollywood insider was saying how he expects H&M will want to join some club (I don't recall name) and that they would probably be welcomed there........celebs like royals or something to that effect.
> I've been known to buy into admiration of certain celebs like Diana and JFK Jr and his wife Carolyn.  But these two grifters aren't all that attractive and whatever glamour they had they have ruined it with their bad behavior and attention seeking.  IMO
> Anyway I like VF but not sure I'm liking it as much under the new editor in chief.



The US media is as shallow as a mud puddle and about as transparent. Reporting the facts isn’t enough, you must have a message, a very special message ideally. That means spinning the narrative to fit the story they want to tell. They adored the premise that an American woman helped “free” her royal husband from the oppression of his family and title. Harry and Meghan are so brave and strong and wonderful! Look at all the good they want to do! They walked away from all that racism! Love conquers all!

Oddly, the American media is not particularly patriotic in other matters, but they really love that Meghan took Harry away from the British royal family.

Sadly I think the media in the rest of the world is getting to be just as bad as here.


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> She wants to command respect like Michelle O, swan around like an A-Lister like Angelina J, look like the Kardashians, and have everyone defer to her royal status like the Queen.
> 
> that’s pretty delusional!


You got that right!


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> She should not  be using a title when urging US citizens to vote and should stick to her own name.  Wrong Wrong Wrong.  The organizers never should have put her name on the ID like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her title is by marriage only and I don't think it amounts to a row of pins as far as losing citizenship in the US.  It has become quite common recently for British actors to have dual citizen ship.  I think the rules must have eased up.




I agree.. she must specifically ask them to use that title since I'm sure they ask her how she would like to be addressed. "Just Call Me Harry" and "The Duchess of Sussex," quite a couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

For people who want desperately to have private lives, you'd think this is the perfect time for them. With masks on, who would even spot them out and about... they could completely hide under the radar like other celebrities. Instead they go out of their way to speak at events that have nothing to do with them. "I want privacy... so I'll keynote a symposium" said no one ever!!


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> The US media is as shallow as a mud puddle and about as transparent. Reporting the facts isn’t enough, you must have a message, a very special message ideally. That means spinning the narrative to fit the story they want to tell. They adored the premise that an American woman helped “free” her royal husband from the oppression of his family and title. Harry and Meghan are so brave and strong and wonderful! Look at all the good they want to do! They walked away from all that racism! Love conquers all!
> 
> Oddly, the American media is not particularly patriotic in other matters, but they really love that Meghan took Harry away from the British royal family.
> 
> Sadly I think the media in the rest of the world is getting to be just as bad as here.



The new JFK and Jackie, Camelot 2.2?


----------



## bag-mania

pukasonqo said:


> The new JFK and Jackie, Camelot 2.2?



Fortunately, no. We can be grateful that Meghan and Harry don’t have any charisma. All they do is parrot popular opinions. They haven’t offered an original idea yet and I doubt they are capable of coming up with one.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> For people who want desperately to have private lives, you'd think this is the perfect time for them. With masks on, who would even spot them out and about... they could completely hide under the radar like other celebrities. Instead they go out of their way to speak at events that have nothing to do with them. "I want privacy... so I'll keynote a symposium" said no one ever!!



This is the elephant in the room that no one wants to say.  They don't want to be private at all.  This is the last place to be.  On top of that, don't notify all the outlets when you have to take a leak.


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> The new JFK and Jackie, Camelot 2.2?


they wish


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> She wants to command respect like Michelle O, swan around like an A-Lister like Angelina J, look like the Kardashians, and have everyone defer to her royal status like the Queen.
> 
> that’s pretty delusional!


mentioning them in the same breath as the Obamas is an insult to the Obamas.  A couple who are highly educated, highly successful professionally and as parents compared to what? a z-list actress and her spoiled prince?  so what do they have in common with the Obamas?  that she is a WOC?


----------



## mshermes

marietouchet said:


> Probably not hers since the seller is in Houston, TX not CA


I wrote to the seller to find out:

Q: So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic? I am confused. Is this a replica of the item worn by Meghan Markle?

No it’s not a replica because all my items are authentic. This is a custom made original Emilia wickstead dress that was also seen on Meghan markle.

Q:  So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic?

I didn’t say that Meghan physically wore the dress I’m selling. I said this is a custom original Emilia wickstead dress which is the same as the one she wore.


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle makes a political stand as she slams 'voter suppression' while urging women to vote for 'the change we deserve' - telling virtual summit: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'*

*The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****   *
"I'm really thrilled that you asked me to be a part of this,' the mother-of-one began, adding: 'I think this is such an exceptional time [and I am] happy to be here for my friend Michelle *****'s When We All Vote, and to kick off the When All Women Vote Couch Party."









						Meghan Markle tells voters: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'
					

The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I wish the above would make me laugh... Who is inviting MM to this type events? I have little respect for people that promote parasites, they are equally dangerous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Please clue me in. I do not understand why BRF permits the private-not-at-all-private couple to be front and center. There are too many unanswered questions with all of this. I agree @Chanbal — no respect for their promoters.  Guessing they want to deflect the HarveyW and JeffE and PrinceAndrew scandals & connections. We shouldn’t be _complacent or complicit_ about any of it.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle makes a political stand as she slams 'voter suppression' while urging women to vote for 'the change we deserve' - telling virtual summit: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'*
> 
> *The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****   *
> "I'm really thrilled that you asked me to be a part of this,' the mother-of-one began, adding: 'I think this is such an exceptional time [and I am] happy to be here for my friend Michelle *****'s When We All Vote, and to kick off the When All Women Vote Couch Party."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tells voters: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'
> 
> 
> The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish the above would make me laugh... Who is inviting MM to this type events? I have little respect for people that promote parasites, they are equally dangerous.



What a load of codswallop... do they just jump on every single bandwagon? Every week it’s a new cause... remember when we were supposed to use our free time during COVID to train to be counselors? If next week it’s suddenly fashionable to burn tires are they going to make hostage videos to tell us to do that too?

I‘ve said it before, I’d have a lot more respect for them if they picked a cause (don’t care what at this point) actually went away and worked on it out of the limelight and raised their son. If they lived on their own Money, I don’t begrudge them living a life of luxury. But they are still living off of Prince Charles’s money, while talking smack about the Institution that gives Harry’s dad his money and they still owe the taxpayer for the renovations on the house that they apparently never planned to live in. This running around chasing fame, stealing credit for others work and doing their weird zoom bombs is so cringeworthy.  

It’s also really awkward for members of British Monarchy to be so openly involved in US politics. They need to be stripped of their titles. No matter the political leanings, it seems wrong for a Prince and Duchess of the BRF to get involved In another countries politics. I’m surprised the BRF hasn’t stripped their titles just because of that... Meghan wants to get involved in politics? Fine, that’s her right as a US citizen, but drop the titles.  With the title your representing the BRF. I don’t understand how she thinks it’s okay to use the DoS title in this manner... she’s in America, we don’t have titles here. I know Meghan saw Hamilton.

I also don’t think someone who claims they didn’t know what the Commonwealth is should be giving me a civics lesson. Don’t play dumb and act like we won’t remember... ffs...

Man, I hope my late night ramblings make sense....


----------



## CarryOn2020

In fact, you make so much sense it is worth repeating with some bold for emphasis  Your points are spot on.



Sol Ryan said:


> What a load of codswallop... do they just jump on every single bandwagon? Every week it’s a new cause... remember when we were supposed to use our free time during COVID to train to be counselors? If next week it’s suddenly fashionable to burn tires are they going to make hostage videos to tell us to do that too?
> 
> I‘ve said it before, *I’d have a lot more respect for them if they picked a cause *(don’t care what at this point) actually went away and worked on it out of the limelight and raised their son. *If they lived on their own Money*, I don’t begrudge them living a life of luxury. But they are still living off of Prince Charles’s money, while talking smack about the Institution that gives Harry’s dad his money and they still owe the taxpayer for the renovations on the house that they apparently never planned to live in. This running around chasing fame, stealing credit for others work and doing their *weird zoom bombs* is so cringeworthy.
> 
> It’s also *really awkward for members of British Monarchy to be so openly involved in US politics*. They need to be stripped of their titles. No matter the political leanings, it seems wrong for a Prince and Duchess of the BRF to get involved In another countries politics. I’m surprised the BRF hasn’t stripped their titles just because of that... Meghan wants to get involved in politics? Fine, that’s her right as a US citizen, but drop the titles.  With the title your representing the BRF. I don’t understand how she thinks it’s okay to use the DoS title in this manner... she’s in America, we don’t have titles here. I know Meghan saw Hamilton.
> 
> I also don’t think someone who claims they didn’t know what the Commonwealth is should be giving me a civics lesson. Don’t play dumb and act like we won’t remember... ffs...
> 
> Man, I hope my late night ramblings make sense....


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please clue me in. I do not understand why BRF permits the private-not-at-all-private couple to be front and center. There are too many unanswered questions with all of this. I agree @Chanbal — no respect for their promoters.  Guessing they want to deflect the HarveyW and JeffE and PrinceAndrew scandals & connections. We shouldn’t be _complacent or complicit_ about any of it.



They're not allowed to comment directly. You'll just see photos of them working and a bit about the charity/party/event. If they're not working there's not much material. 

HarveyW? I think I missed something?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle makes a political stand as she slams 'voter suppression' while urging women to vote for 'the change we deserve' - telling virtual summit: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'*
> 
> *The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****   *
> "I'm really thrilled that you asked me to be a part of this,' the mother-of-one began, adding: 'I think this is such an exceptional time [and I am] happy to be here for my friend Michelle *****'s When We All Vote, and to kick off the When All Women Vote Couch Party."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tells voters: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'
> 
> 
> The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish the above would make me laugh... Who is inviting MM to this type events? I have little respect for people that promote parasites, they are equally dangerous.



If an article can't get something factual and basic like her age right, how can we trust a word of the rest?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Photo shows Jeffrey Epstein, Harvey Weinstein at Prince Andrew’s party
					

No costume could ever disguise these three. New photos show accused rapist Harvey Weinstein posing with late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged madam Ghislaine Maxwell at a royal party throw…




					nypost.com
				







papertiger said:


> They're not allowed to comment directly. You'll just see photos of them working and a bit about the charity/party/event. If they're not working there's not much material.
> 
> HarveyW? I think I missed something?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photo shows Jeffrey Epstein, Harvey Weinstein at Prince Andrew’s party
> 
> 
> No costume could ever disguise these three. New photos show accused rapist Harvey Weinstein posing with late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his alleged madam Ghislaine Maxwell at a royal party throw…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Me was at every Met ball and Oscars too (but no apologies, PA certainly thinks he is above every law - as does Harry actually.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

I've been away for a few days so I admit not having read ALL the more recent posts,  maybe this has already been mentioned  (this thread moves soooo quickly)..... but it was in the papers here in Italy a couple of days ago that H&M have actually bought a house in LA , can't remember where exactly, at the cost of $14 million Surely it can't be true, I can't believe Charles would fork out such a sum for them......


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> They're not allowed to comment directly. You'll just see photos of them working and a bit about the charity/party/event. If they're not working there's not much material.



Which is not exclusive to the British Royal Family. I would think this is the case for ALL Royal Families in Europe. Because it makes sense and it is actually essential for their survival as higher representatives of the countries they serve. Imagine the Royals commenting on every bit of gossip... They are not celebrities. I get that Meghan, not having experience as a subdit, may not have grasped this. But Harry and this Scobie person should know better. Harry in particular should have been able to understand and explain this. He really comes across as a total airhead, Prince Charles cannot be said to have succeed in educating him for his role.


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> *Which is not exclusive to the British Royal Family. I would think this is the case for ALL Royal Families in Europe.* Because it makes sense and it is actually essential for their survival as higher representatives of the countries they serve. Imagine the Royals commenting on every bit of gossip... *They are not celebrities.* I get that Meghan, not having experience as a subdit, may not have grasped this. But Harry and this Scobie person should know better. Harry in particular should have been able to understand and explain this. He really comes across as a total airhead, Prince Charles cannot be said to have succeed in educating him for his role.


Yes and YES! This is what H&M (more M) failed to or chose not to understand. Being a royalty is NOT being a celebrity! It's much more toned down and neutral and detached from it all. Very conservative. The operating parameters and boundaries are set for royalties, not set by themselves. It's like they thought the job was for a reality TV show while the job is really just reading the news! They don't want privacy at all, they just want to be big big crass celebrities!


----------



## Alexiawaldrop

Annawakes said:


> _what does Scobie know about their “extremely liquid” finances if they aren’t feeding him all this info?  It is so crystal clear he is their mouth piece.
> 
> It’s also so annoying they keep trying to put themselves on the same plane as the former President and First Lady.  They must think if the comparison is repeated often enough people will start to believe it.
> 
> I have no idea why this post is in italics lol_


Meghan was invited to speak at the "When we all vote" couch party and she said she was pleased to support, and I quote "my friend, Michelle *****"...
Ummm... No Meghan no


----------



## lanasyogamama

mshermes said:


> I wrote to the seller to find out:
> 
> Q: So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic? I am confused. Is this a replica of the item worn by Meghan Markle?
> 
> No it’s not a replica because all my items are authentic. This is a custom made original Emilia wickstead dress that was also seen on Meghan markle.
> 
> Q:  So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic?
> 
> I didn’t say that Meghan physically wore the dress I’m selling. I said this is a custom original Emilia wickstead dress which is the same as the one she wore.


Wow, she sure didn’t say it’s NOT the dress either.


----------



## Grande Latte

MM and Wallis Simpson.


----------



## Grande Latte

They both have ambiguous sexy gay friend to create a triangle.


----------



## Genie27

Grande Latte said:


> MM and Wallis Simpson.
> 
> View attachment 4824540
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824541


That dress looks like it was ordered two sizes too small and zipped up while she sucked in her ribcage.  Unfortunate because it’s quite pretty and a classic silhouette. At least Wallis looks like she can move/talk without splitting a seam.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> She should not  be using a title when urging US citizens to vote and should stick to her own name.  Wrong Wrong Wrong.  The organizers never should have put her name on the ID like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her title is by marriage only and I don't think it amounts to a row of pins as far as losing citizenship in the US.  It has become quite common recently for British actors to have dual citizen ship.  I think the rules must have eased up.



Looks like they found their new Zoom recording space, better background.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I'm convinced the US media is looking for someone to idolize - a glamour couple.  I was reading an article in Vanity Fair - not about them per se but some Hollywood insider was saying how he expects H&M will want to join some club (I don't recall name) and that they would probably be welcomed there........celebs like royals or something to that effect.
> I've been known to buy into admiration of certain celebs like Diana and JFK Jr and his wife Carolyn.  But these two grifters aren't all that attractive and whatever glamour they had they have ruined it with their bad behavior and attention seeking.  IMO
> Anyway I like VF but not sure I'm liking it as much under the new editor in chief.


I used to like VF but not anymore, dumped the subscription.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> That dress looks like it was ordered two sizes too small and zipped up while she sucked in her ribcage.  Unfortunate because it’s quite pretty and a classic silhouette. At least Wallis looks like she can move/talk without splitting a seam.



I don't know why MM dislikes well fitted clothes so much. Squeezing yourself in the next smaller size never makes one look good.


----------



## Nutashha

Drop everything! Harry's now decided to be a big gun in Hollywood! 

*Prince Harry Is All Set to ‘Make It Big’ in Hollywood*


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> I wrote to the seller to find out:
> 
> Q: So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic? I am confused. Is this a replica of the item worn by Meghan Markle?
> 
> No it’s not a replica because all my items are authentic. This is a custom made original Emilia wickstead dress that was also seen on Meghan markle.
> 
> Q:  So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic?
> 
> I didn’t say that Meghan physically wore the dress I’m selling. I said this is a custom original Emilia wickstead dress which is the same as the one she wore.


so what is the price?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle makes a political stand as she slams 'voter suppression' while urging women to vote for 'the change we deserve' - telling virtual summit: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'*
> 
> *The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****   *
> "I'm really thrilled that you asked me to be a part of this,' the mother-of-one began, adding: 'I think this is such an exceptional time [and I am] happy to be here for my friend Michelle *****'s When We All Vote, and to kick off the When All Women Vote Couch Party."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tells voters: 'If you are complacent, you're complicit'
> 
> 
> The 38-year-old Duchess of Sussex took part in an online summit organized by When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle *****.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish the above would make me laugh... Who is inviting MM to this type evsheents? I have little respect for people that promote parasites, they are equally dangerous.


she is claiming to be a "friend" of Michelle?  I guess there are friends and there are friends....uugh


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> In fact, you make so much sense it is worth repeating with some bold for emphasis  Your points are spot on.


right - she wants to use that title to be glamorous while preaching to Americans to vote and saying how happy she to be here and be free to speak  .....disgusting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

duna said:


> I've been away for a few days so I admit not having read ALL the more recent posts,  maybe this has already been mentioned  (this thread moves soooo quickly)..... but it was in the papers here in Italy a couple of days ago that H&M have actually bought a house in LA , can't remember where exactly, at the cost of $14 million Surely it can't be true, I can't believe Charles would fork out such a sum for them......


Yep, true.


----------



## Annawakes

Grande Latte said:


> MM and Wallis Simpson.
> 
> View attachment 4824540
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824541


Wallis Simpson has always looked odd to me.  Maybe she was really charismatic in real life, but she doesn’t seem very attractive in the photos.  I always found it strange that guy (can’t remember his name) gave up the throne for her.  Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Wallis Simpson has always looked odd to me.  Maybe she was really charismatic in real life, but she doesn’t seem very attractive in the photos.  I always found it strange that guy (can’t remember his name) gave up the throne for her.  Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.


agree - she wasn't what I'd call pretty.  she was thin and therere probably looked decent in clothes.  but I think her appeal for him was more as some sort of dominatrix....hmm - remind us of anyone?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> If an article can't get something factual and basic like her age right, how can we trust a word of the rest?


There is a video and DM just printed what MM said about being invited to " When We All Vote, a non-profit founded by 'her friend' Michelle O..."

I've had the privilege of having met women that dedicated their lives to the advancement of important fields and causes, and I sincerely have no respect or patience for phonies or for people that support them.

In general, people that use PR-machines and other questionable means to transform their images into something they are not (ex. humanitarian, activists, philanthropists,...) are more dangerous than what they appear.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like she’s getting her way, speaking on politics and living amongst celebs, calling herself the Duchess, while having it all funded by the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please clue me in. I do not understand why BRF permits the private-not-at-all-private couple to be front and center. There are too many unanswered questions with all of this. I agree @Chanbal — no respect for their promoters.  Guessing they want to deflect the HarveyW and JeffE and PrinceAndrew scandals & connections. We shouldn’t be _complacent or complicit_ about any of it.



How could the BRF stop them? H&M are a loose cannon which can go off in any direction at any time. Sure, they could threaten to take away their  allowance, but you know how belligerent children can be. They would escalate the situation and become even more overdramatic and cringeworthy than they already are. Drama Queen is the one royal title that Meghan truly deserves.


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> The new JFK and Jackie, Camelot 2.2?


she doesn't even wear clothese that fit properly for one thing.....I wonder if/when the US media is going to guage whether the public is buying this crap and possibly dial down the praise


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> I wrote to the seller to find out:
> 
> Q: So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic? I am confused. Is this a replica of the item worn by Meghan Markle?
> 
> No it’s not a replica because all my items are authentic. This is a custom made original Emilia wickstead dress that was also seen on Meghan markle.
> 
> Q:  So this is the exact dress she wore as shown in the pic?
> 
> I didn’t say that Meghan physically wore the dress I’m selling. I said this is a custom original Emilia wickstead dress which is the same as the one she wore.


kudos - GREAT REPORTING ! THANKS


----------



## marietouchet

THE GREEN DRESS
Too funny - was trying to explain to a GF that she should never overpay for a green item in a resale shop, many people - like all of you LOL - feel that green is an unflattering color to most skin tones
If you buy green, then you should be getting an absolute bargain


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Wallis Simpson has always looked odd to me.  Maybe she was really charismatic in real life, but she doesn’t seem very attractive in the photos.  I always found it strange that guy (can’t remember his name) gave up the throne for her.  Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.





sdkitty said:


> agree - she wasn't what I'd call pretty.  she was thin and therere probably looked decent in clothes.  but I think her appeal for him was more as some sort of dominatrix....hmm - remind us of anyone?



There are so many similarities between them. Both were/are self-absorbed, laser-focused on getting their way, and determined to have wealth. In Wallis' day marrying for money was not uncommon. Job opportunities for women were almost nonexistent at the time, unless you wanted to be teacher, nurse, or housekeeper. Husbands were expected to take care of everything. They were about the same age, I think Wallis was at least 40.

Wallis would have loved to have access to all the beauty tools we take for granted today. There is so much more available now in terms of skin care, plastic surgery, and makeup. Poor Wallis probably only had some rouge, kohl for her eyes, and a jar of cold cream to catch her king. You can't say she didn't make the most of what she had.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> THE GREEN DRESS
> Too funny - was trying to explain to a GF that she should never overpay for a green item in a resale shop, many people - like all of you LOL - feel that green is an unflattering color to most skin tones
> If you buy green, then you should be getting an absolute bargain


depends on the shade of green and your skin tone...I just don't care for that shade of green personally


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *It's an honour to continue your grandmother's legacy': Meghan Markle admits she 'didn't know' about the Commonwealth until she joined 'The Family' as she and Prince Harry speak to young leaders*


UTTER BS!!! .. and this is someone who double-majored in Theatre and INTERNATIONAL STUDIES?!?!?!?!  Then NW must have a REALLY BAD International Studies program if she didn't know about the Commonwealth!  Sheesh ..


----------



## CeeJay

Oh, so they schlepped all the way down from Montecito to Los Angeles (in the midst of the City) to do a 'CHARITY' event?!?!?!  I wonder if CMDM ("Call-Me-Duchess Meghan") and JCMH pulled down their masks to make sure those "common" people recognized them?!?!?!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Markle-volunteered-school-charity-event.html


----------



## Lounorada

lalame said:


> For people who want desperately to have private lives, you'd think this is the perfect time for them. With masks on, who would even spot them out and about... they could completely hide under the radar like other celebrities. Instead they go out of their way to speak at events that have nothing to do with them. "I want privacy... so I'll keynote a symposium" said no one ever!!





Exactly. With the pandemic having brought the world to a standstill for the last few months (several months at this stage), you would think they would have kept to their word and used this time so enjoy the privacy in which they supposedly seek and the reason they stepped down from their royal duties. It just goes to show that privacy is the last thing that they actually want, but they do love to weaponize 'privacy' as a way to sue people when they say something about them that they don't like and use it as a protection for themselves, _when it suits them_. 
They are insufferable to the core.




Sol Ryan said:


> What a load of codswallop... do they just jump on every single bandwagon? Every week it’s a new cause... remember when we were supposed to use our free time during COVID to train to be counselors? If next week it’s suddenly fashionable to burn tires are they going to make hostage videos to tell us to do that too?
> 
> *I‘ve said it before, I’d have a lot more respect for them if they picked a cause (don’t care what at this point) actually went away and worked on it out of the limelight and raised their son.* If they lived on their own Money, I don’t begrudge them living a life of luxury. But they are still living off of Prince Charles’s money, while talking smack about the Institution that gives Harry’s dad his money and they still owe the taxpayer for the renovations on the house that they apparently never planned to live in. *This running around chasing fame, stealing credit for others work and doing their weird zoom bombs is so cringeworthy.
> 
> It’s also really awkward for members of British Monarchy to be so openly involved in US politics. They need to be stripped of their titles. No matter the political leanings, it seems wrong for a Prince and Duchess of the BRF to get involved In another countries politics. I’m surprised the BRF hasn’t stripped their titles just because of that... Meghan wants to get involved in politics? Fine, that’s her right as a US citizen, but drop the titles.  With the title your representing the BRF. I don’t understand how she thinks it’s okay to use the DoS title in this manner... she’s in America, we don’t have titles here. I know Meghan saw Hamilton.*
> 
> I also don’t think someone who claims they didn’t know what the Commonwealth is should be giving me a civics lesson. Don’t play dumb and act like we won’t remember... ffs...
> 
> Man, I hope my late night ramblings make sense....








Well said @Sol Ryan! I completely agree with you, especially with the bolded parts




Nutashha said:


> Drop everything! Harry's now decided to be a big gun in Hollywood!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is All Set to ‘Make It Big’ in Hollywood*
> 
> View attachment 4824590


----------



## bag-mania

These two are just saints aren't they? Here they are helping people in need again. There are close up photos of everything they did. Why it's almost as though they brought their own photographers with them to get the best shots for _People_ mag. 
ETA: It seems that the charity took the photos and gave them to People. It's not exactly impromptu or accurate to have a photo from inside of a vehicle show the view from the supposed receiver of goods.





*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!*

Although the couple relocated to Santa Barbara, they headed back to L.A. to distribute school supplies to those in need
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are continuing their charity work in California.

Although the couple relocated to Santa Barbara last month, they headed back to Los Angeles on Wednesday to take part in a drive-through event with Baby2Baby, an L.A.-based national nonprofit organization. They helped distribute school supplies, books, backpacks, clothing, food, hygiene items and more to those in need as children prepare for the new school year.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported masks — a blue and white striped covering for Meghan and an olive green mask for Harry — and gloves as they surprised recipients in their cars. At one point, Meghan knelt down to help fit a backpack for a young boy as Prince Harry squatted down to take a look.

For the outing, Meghan wore a white blouse with olive green shorts while Harry sported a white polo, shorts and a casual baseball cap.

This isn't the first time Meghan and Prince Harry have supported the L.A.-based organization. In April 2019, just before they welcomed son Archie, they thanked fans via their Instagram page for the virtual "baby shower" encouraging charitable donations to celebrate Baby Sussex. They also gave four suggestions on charities if people were still looking to participate, including Baby2Baby.

Founders and co-presidents Norah Weinstein and Kelly Sawyer Patricof had no idea that they were on the royals’ radar — they found out like the rest of the world when the Instagram post was shared.

"We were thrilled and overwhelmed at the support," Weinstein told PEOPLE. "We believe that the fact that the Duchess is from Los Angeles was what prompted her to highlight L.A., where Baby2Baby is based. We felt particularly grateful that she was highlighting an American organization."








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a surprise appearance at a charity event with Baby2Baby, where they helped distribute school supplies in Los Angeles




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4824681
> 
> Exactly. With the pandemic having brought the world to a standstill for the last few months (several months at this stage), you would think they would have kept to their word and used this time so enjoy the privacy in which they supposedly seek and the reason they stepped down from their royal duties. It just goes to show that privacy is the last thing that they actually want, but they do love to weaponize 'privacy' as a way to sue people when they say something about them that they don't like and use it as a protection for themselves, _when it suits them_.
> They are insufferable to the core.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well said @Sol Ryan! I completely agree with you, especially with the bolded parts
> insufferable is right
> I just don't get why the American media (and Americans?) are worshipping these two hypocrites
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824692


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> These two are just saints aren't they? Here they are helping people in need again. There are close up photos of everything they did. Why it's almost as though they brought their own photographers with them to get the best shots for _People_ mag.
> ETA: It seems that the charity took the photos and gave them to People. It's not exactly impromptu or accurate to have a photo from inside of a vehicle show the view from the supposed receiver of goods.
> 
> View attachment 4824699
> View attachment 4824700
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!*
> 
> Although the couple relocated to Santa Barbara, they headed back to L.A. to distribute school supplies to those in need
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are continuing their charity work in California.
> 
> Although the couple relocated to Santa Barbara last month, they headed back to Los Angeles on Wednesday to take part in a drive-through event with Baby2Baby, an L.A.-based national nonprofit organization. They helped distribute school supplies, books, backpacks, clothing, food, hygiene items and more to those in need as children prepare for the new school year.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported masks — a blue and white striped covering for Meghan and an olive green mask for Harry — and gloves as they surprised recipients in their cars. At one point, Meghan knelt down to help fit a backpack for a young boy as Prince Harry squatted down to take a look.
> 
> For the outing, Meghan wore a white blouse with olive green shorts while Harry sported a white polo, shorts and a casual baseball cap.
> 
> This isn't the first time Meghan and Prince Harry have supported the L.A.-based organization. In April 2019, just before they welcomed son Archie, they thanked fans via their Instagram page for the virtual "baby shower" encouraging charitable donations to celebrate Baby Sussex. They also gave four suggestions on charities if people were still looking to participate, including Baby2Baby.
> 
> Founders and co-presidents Norah Weinstein and Kelly Sawyer Patricof had no idea that they were on the royals’ radar — they found out like the rest of the world when the Instagram post was shared.
> 
> "We were thrilled and overwhelmed at the support," Weinstein told PEOPLE. "We believe that the fact that the Duchess is from Los Angeles was what prompted her to highlight L.A., where Baby2Baby is based. We felt particularly grateful that she was highlighting an American organization."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a surprise appearance at a charity event with Baby2Baby, where they helped distribute school supplies in Los Angeles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



The 2nd photo looks like it was taken through one window with view out the other. But agree with you on everything else. Do they ever show up at events without photogs?


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> THE GREEN DRESS
> Too funny - was trying to explain to a GF that she should never overpay for a green item in a resale shop, many people - like all of you LOL - feel that green is an unflattering color to most skin tones
> If you buy green, then you should be getting an absolute bargain



I love green. An emerald green looks incredible on most people with warm skin-tones (and I think it looks good on Meghan as well) but like all colors the tone of the color and your own skintone matters a lot.


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> It’s also really awkward for members of British Monarchy to be so openly involved in US politics. They need to be stripped of their titles. No matter the political leanings, it seems wrong for a Prince and Duchess of the BRF to get involved In another countries politics. I’m surprised the BRF hasn’t stripped their titles just because of that... Meghan wants to get involved in politics? Fine, that’s her right as a US citizen, but drop the titles.  With the title your representing the BRF. I don’t understand how she thinks it’s okay to use the DoS title in this manner... she’s in America, we don’t have titles here. *I know Meghan saw Hamilton.*



LOL! You are so very right about everything here.


----------



## KellyObsessed

Wow, I wouldn't have imagined that "people in need" have cars and can do a drive-through pick up.


----------



## lalame

I think Wallis has that "sexy ugly" vibe, like Jay Z, Anjelica Huston, Benicio del Toro, etc. They aren't UGLY but I think you get the premise... like not conventionally attractive but they have a certain confidence and mystique that makes it sexy. I'm sure she was a very charming and manipulative person.



Annawakes said:


> Wallis Simpson has always looked odd to me.  Maybe she was really charismatic in real life, but she doesn’t seem very attractive in the photos.  I always found it strange that guy (can’t remember his name) gave up the throne for her.  Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.





sdkitty said:


> agree - she wasn't what I'd call pretty.  she was thin and therere probably looked decent in clothes.  but I think her appeal for him was more as some sort of dominatrix....hmm - remind us of anyone?


----------



## lalame

KellyObsessed said:


> Wow, I wouldn't have imagined that "people in need" have cars and can do a drive-through pick up.



It's LA... unless you're homeless, you probably have a car. It's also probably an old beater.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4824681
> 
> Exactly. With the pandemic having brought the world to a standstill for the last few months (several months at this stage), you would think they would have kept to their word and used this time so enjoy the privacy in which they supposedly seek and the reason they stepped down from their royal duties. It just goes to show that privacy is the last thing that they actually want, but they do love to weaponize 'privacy' as a way to sue people when they say something about them that they don't like and use it as a protection for themselves, _when it suits them_.
> They are insufferable to the core.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well said @Sol Ryan! I completely agree with you, especially with the bolded parts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824692



Thanks, although I just noticed my spelling and grammar at 2 a.m. isn’t so good. LOL




lalame said:


> The 2nd photo looks like it was taken through one window with view out the other. But agree with you on everything else. Do they ever show up at events without photogs?



No. They just save the photos for when the BRF is doing something.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> The 2nd photo looks like it was taken through one window with view out the other. But agree with you on everything else. Do they ever show up at events without photogs?



What would be the point in doing good if they didn't have the photos to prove it to the world. They want credit dammit!


----------



## chicinthecity777

*Meghan Markle and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer for charity work*









						Meghan and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry were photographed providing families in needs with key supplies while volunteering with an LA-based non-profit organisation.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

*'Inappropriate!' Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US*








						Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US
					

MEGHAN MARKLE's use of her Duchess of Sussex title while discussing politics in the US, which first existed as a British colony, has been criticised.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sorry a slow Friday afternoon for me, I took a little read after being prompted some articles on twitter.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I love green. An emerald green looks incredible on most people with warm skin-tones (and I think it looks good on Meghan as well) but like all colors the tone of the color and your own skintone matters a lot.


Green is MY thing, i just have learned to profit from its unpopularity in the resale market


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Oh, so they schlepped all the way down from Montecito to Los Angeles (in the midst of the City) to do a 'CHARITY' event?!?!?!  I wonder if CMDM ("Call-Me-Duchess Meghan") and JCMH pulled down their masks to make sure those "common" people recognized them?!?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Markle-volunteered-school-charity-event.html


CeeJay get it right !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol 
They schllepped to SOUTH LA, for which they should receive an even bigger gold star for putting up with so much LA traffic


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> kudos - GREAT REPORTING ! THANKS


We should sponsor some journalism awards, right up there with EGOTs- Emmy, Oscar etc


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> There are so many similarities between them. Both were/are self-absorbed, laser-focused on getting their way, and determined to have wealth. In Wallis' day marrying for money was not uncommon. Job opportunities for women were almost nonexistent at the time, unless you wanted to be teacher, nurse, or housekeeper. Husbands were expected to take care of everything. They were about the same age, I think Wallis was at least 40.
> 
> Wallis would have loved to have access to all the beauty tools we take for granted today. There is so much more available now in terms of skin care, plastic surgery, and makeup. Poor Wallis probably only had some rouge, kohl for her eyes, and a jar of cold cream to catch her king. You can't say she didn't make the most of what she had.


Well, Wallis did have to resort to a facelift rather than fillers, dermabrasion, tooth whitening and laser hair removal


----------



## marietouchet

Sol Ryan said:


> What a load of codswallop... do they just jump on every single bandwagon? Every week it’s a new cause... remember when we were supposed to use our free time during COVID to train to be counselors? If next week it’s suddenly fashionable to burn tires are they going to make hostage videos to tell us to do that too?
> 
> I‘ve said it before, I’d have a lot more respect for them if they picked a cause (don’t care what at this point) actually went away and worked on it out of the limelight and raised their son. If they lived on their own Money, I don’t begrudge them living a life of luxury. But they are still living off of Prince Charles’s money, while talking smack about the Institution that gives Harry’s dad his money and they still owe the taxpayer for the renovations on the house that they apparently never planned to live in. This running around chasing fame, stealing credit for others work and doing their weird zoom bombs is so cringeworthy.
> 
> It’s also really awkward for members of British Monarchy to be so openly involved in US politics. They need to be stripped of their titles. No matter the political leanings, it seems wrong for a Prince and Duchess of the BRF to get involved In another countries politics. I’m surprised the BRF hasn’t stripped their titles just because of that... Meghan wants to get involved in politics? Fine, that’s her right as a US citizen, but drop the titles.  With the title your representing the BRF. I don’t understand how she thinks it’s okay to use the DoS title in this manner... she’s in America, we don’t have titles here. I know Meghan saw Hamilton.
> 
> I also don’t think someone who claims they didn’t know what the Commonwealth is should be giving me a civics lesson. Don’t play dumb and act like we won’t remember... ffs...
> 
> Man, I hope my late night ramblings make sense....


Yes codswallop ... priceless term 

British and US politics differences - there are huge differences ... and if we let it slide that Meghan did not know of the Commonwealth, then we have to assume Harry does not know the difference between a republic, a democracy and the US system with 3 branches of government while he tells the Americans to vote


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> *'Inappropriate!' Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's use of her Duchess of Sussex title while discussing politics in the US, which first existed as a British colony, has been criticised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


all the criticism is from Britain....the US media seems intent on making us idolize them


----------



## V0N1B2

Of course they brought their own photographer. How else could they provide the most staged flattering candids? 
Freelance photographer Christian Monterrosa "hired" by Meg's PR firm Rachelwiththehotmail LLC
And then there Omid, fan-girling and merching for Meghan.
Fun Fact: Omid's bedroom walls are covered in posters of Meghan Markle and Harry Styles from Tiger Beat magazine, like every other 13 year old girl.


----------



## bag-mania

She’s a duchess for the British royal family when it’s advantageous to her and she is an American citizen when it is advantageous for her. If she can get double the admiration and attention, she’s going to go for it. Whatever it takes!


----------



## kemilia

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Meghan Markle and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer for charity work*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry were photographed providing families in needs with key supplies while volunteering with an LA-based non-profit organisation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Ooof!  

On a serious note--why can't they or their PR chums see this as pretty classless?


----------



## bag-mania

I hope that all of those people who haven’t been following them closely and have been giving them the benefit of the doubt begin to notice that even though they were crying for privacy they seem to be everywhere, all the time. Some of them must be noticing the disconnect.


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> so what is the price?


$9999 + $49 expedited shipping or Make Offer


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Of course they brought their own photographer. How else could they provide the most staged flattering candids?
> Freelance photographer Christian Monterrosa "hired" by Meg's PR firm Rachelwiththehotmail LLC
> And then there Omid, fan-girling and merching for Meghan.
> *Fun Fact: Omid's bedroom walls are covered in posters of Meghan Markle and Harry Styles from Tiger Beat magazine, like every other 13 year old girl.*
> View attachment 4824734


Lmbo!


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Me was at every Met ball and Oscars too (but no apologies, PA certainly thinks he is above every law - as does Harry actually.


He had something on everybody and that’s the big difference. Harry has nothing. MM may think she has something on some people, but it’s doubtful that she can use it because it will make her look tawdry.


----------



## gracekelly

KellyObsessed said:


> Wow, I wouldn't have imagined that "people in need" have cars and can do a drive-through pick up.


Almost everyone has a car here, but I have to say that the DH and I have noticed that when they show news footage of the drive through food giveaways, 95% of the cars look new, and/or big SUV gas guzzlers and it makes you wonder if the people who are showing up really don’t need the supplies and just things for free.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> all the criticism is from Britain....the US media seems intent on making us idolize them


If you read the actual article, you will see the criticism quoted in the article are mostly from people in the U.S. they don't want UK royal family to interfere with U.S. politics. These people may not be part of major media outlets in the U.S. but at least they are not part of the H&M PR machine.


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> the cape effect, the shade of green, her face....


She looks like the Jolly Green Giant in that get up!


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Meghan Markle and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer for charity work*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry were photographed providing families in needs with key supplies while volunteering with an LA-based non-profit organisation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


This is DISGRACEFUL!!!  When is someone going to call them out??? .. oh wait, that will be me when I meet them!!! - HA!


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> *'Inappropriate!' Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's use of her Duchess of Sussex title while discussing politics in the US, which first existed as a British colony, has been criticised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


*YES, YES, YES!!!* This just ticks me off big-time!!!  Maybe it's because growing up in New England and more importantly, being from a family who can trace its roots back to those that fought in the Revolutionary War (_father's side_), it just rankles my chains that she touts that *constantly*!  However, I also fault the publications here (especially Town & Country and the 'rags') and refuse to buy any of them if I see her or Harry on the cover.  I keep on hoping that (at least) QEII and Chuckie-Cheese will take those titles away .. to prove a point.  Okay, we'll continue to fund you two, but those titles are gone ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> CeeJay get it right !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol
> They schllepped to SOUTH LA, for which they should receive an even bigger gold star for putting up with so much LA traffic


RIGHT?? .. but, the level of traffic is not yet back to pre-COVID times, so it likely took them .. hmmmm, say .. 30 minutes less??!?!!?  But seriously, they likely took their gas guzzler big-a$$ car, had to have all their "security" and then the photog's cars, etc. - how environmentally 'wonderful' (SIC) they are?!?!  I honestly detest these 2 grifters ..


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Almost everyone has a car here, but I have to say that the DH and I have noticed that when they show news footage of the drive through food giveaways, 95% of the cars look new, and/or big SUV gas guzzlers and it makes you wonder if the people who are showing up really don’t need the supplies and just things for free.


*BINGO!!! .. same here!  *


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> What would be the point in doing good if they didn't have the photos to prove it to the world. They want credit dammit!


I guess they think the photos from volunteering will give them something to slap on their resume as they wait for all those speaking engagements to roll in.  Remember they do want to be financially independent and private ha ha!


----------



## CeeJay

What I don't get is this .. the 2 whined about having to "perform" various functions for the BRF, for instance, go to an old folks home (Veterans) bearing gifts, and yet .. they would rather give out food/items to the needy?  Oh wait, I answered my own question .. the difference MUST be that they 'control' the paps in this situation and prior, they could not .. WOW, how low is that???


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> I guess they think the photos from volunteering will give them something to slap on their resume as they wait for all those speaking engagements to roll in.  Remember they do want to be financially independent and private ha ha!



They want to scam the world and have the public image of being righteous do-gooder activists. Meghan does not want anyone to see the reality behind the facade she has so carefully crafted, that they live like any other wealthy, egocentric celebrity couple.

All they have to do is every month or so spend an hour doing something nice and they get tons of mileage in self-promotion value out of it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice that with this photo-charity event, they are wearing shorts and tennis shoes. Other volunteers are in jeans.
They seem to be going for the bookend effect


----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on recent events and articles, it seems they are desperate to be the US version of W&K.  That will never happen b/c W&K are the real deal, they have the authenticity that H&M will always lack.  The way H squats down at these events looks extremely 
un-gentlemanly, definitely inappropriate with children around.


----------



## Lounorada

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Meghan Markle and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer for charity work*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry branded ‘tacky’ as they bring along photographer
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry were photographed providing families in needs with key supplies while volunteering with an LA-based non-profit organisation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Proving yet again they are more like the Kardashians every day, more than they would care to think as they clearly live by the phrase 'Pictures or it didn't happen'. 
That extra posed picture of Harry giving the thumbs up, taken perfectly through a car window from the opposite side of the car has me like...






chicinthecity777 said:


> *'Inappropriate!' Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle criticised for using royal title in 'former colony' US
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's use of her Duchess of Sussex title while discussing politics in the US, which first existed as a British colony, has been criticised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk












V0N1B2 said:


> Of course they brought their own photographer. How else could they provide the most staged flattering candids?
> Freelance photographer Christian Monterrosa "hired" by Meg's PR firm Rachelwiththehotmail LLC
> And then there Omid, fan-girling and merching for Meghan.
> Fun Fact: Omid's bedroom walls are covered in posters of Meghan Markle and Harry Styles from Tiger Beat magazine, like every other 13 year old girl.
> View attachment 4824734


This guy is so cringeworthy and sounds so unprofessional. There is nothing 'fun' about the fact that you are merching for your beloved MM on Twitter. It sounds like an arrangement of some sort


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Oh, so they schlepped all the way down from Montecito to Los Angeles (in the midst of the City) to do a 'CHARITY' event?!?!?!  I wonder if CMDM ("Call-Me-Duchess Meghan") and JCMH pulled down their masks to make sure those "common" people recognized them?!?!?!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-Markle-volunteered-school-charity-event.html


This couple is so fake and whatever they do is beyond ridiculous. So they came to LA because they couldn't get a "humanitarian" photo-op in Montecito. I guess, they couldn't find a place there to distribute a couple of sandwiches or pencils.

They must be at home making lists of potential victims for photo-ops or to join their zoom meetings...


----------



## marietouchet

I am not totally naive , other celebrities get these perks but pl -ezzzz this comes from the book that M ghostwrote , how stoooopid can you be ? 
Finding Freedom reveals largesse royal couple have received
https://mol.im/a/8652443
hypocrite is the word that comes to mind
ok I know I am the last to notice these things  Lol


----------



## Chanbal

Wrong post.


----------



## sdkitty

mshermes said:


> $9999 + $49 expedited shipping or Make Offer


on etsy?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They want to scam the world and have the public image of being righteous do-gooder activists. Meghan does not want anyone to see the reality behind the facade she has so carefully crafted, that they live like any other wealthy, egocentric celebrity couple.
> 
> All they have to do is every month or so spend an hour doing something nice and they get tons of mileage in self-promotion value out of it.


If they post a picture of her scrubbing the 15 bathrooms then I will believe that they are just real folks.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Almost everyone has a car here, but I have to say that the DH and I have noticed that when they show news footage of the drive through food giveaways, 95% of the cars look new, and/or big SUV gas guzzlers and it makes you wonder if the people who are showing up really don’t need the supplies and just things for free.


my husband has commented on this too....I guess they could be people who had good jobs and got laid off....or just greedy people


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I am not totally naive , other celebrities get these perks but pl -ezzzz this comes from the book that M ghostwrote , how stoooopid can you be ?
> Finding Freedom reveals largesse royal couple have received
> https://mol.im/a/8652443
> hypocrite is the word that comes to mind
> ok I know I am the last to notice these things  Lol



This boggles the mind.  They are even bigger moochers than I thought they were.  I have been to Tromso, Norway and it is a pretty place, but I am sure she was bored silly.  

After reading all of this I am more convinced that he didn't buy the house.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> my husband has commented on this too....I guess they could be people who had good jobs and got laid off....or just greedy people


A bit of both.  They are probably keeping up the lease payments and use the food money for it.  It is pretty difficult being in CA without a car.  This just goes to something that I have thought for a long time that most people just live off their credit cards and have nothing saved.  Many times they are spending money that should be saved on things that are very expensive.  I get that the kids want to go to Hawaii or Disneyland, but that should not be the first priority.  Many feel that the Bank of Dad will bail them out.  Right Harry?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Wowza, *gracekelly*, was just reading this too, so H&M wanted to play hard-ball? 
This simply adds to the negative optics for H&M.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> A bit of both.  They are probably keeping up the lease payments and use the food money for it.  It is pretty difficult being in CA without a car.  This just goes to something that I have thought for a long time that most people just live off their credit cards and have nothing saved.  Many times they are spending money that should be saved on things that are very expensive.  I get that the kids want to go to Hawaii or Disneyland, but that should not be the first priority.  Many feel that the Bank of Dad will bail them out.  Right Harry?


you know when you go to buy a new car and they try to sell you the car based on the monthly payment (ignoring the actual price).  Lots of people probably live that way....paycheck to paycheck with the CCs and monthly payments driving vehicles they can't really afford.....guess their parents didn't teach them anything


----------



## Katel

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like she’s getting her way, speaking on politics and living amongst celebs, calling herself the Duchess, while having it all funded by the BRF.



this won’t last for long... either Megain will dump him or Harry will wake up - he will do a 180 and it will not be pretty.


----------



## 1LV

^^^  I think Harry’s days as Mr. Markle are numbered.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This couple is so fake and whatever they do is beyond ridiculous. So they came to LA because they couldn't get a "humanitarian" photo-op in Montecito. I guess, they couldn't find a place there to distribute a couple of sandwiches or pencils.
> 
> They must be at home making lists of potential victims for photo-ops or to join their zoom meetings...


That part of the world is *VERY wealthy*, so the 2 "humanitarians" (  ) would likely not have the opportunity to meet with people who are less fortunate (nor would they likely want to).


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> you know when you go to buy a new car and they try to sell you the car based on the monthly payment (ignoring the actual price).  Lots of people probably live that way....paycheck to paycheck with the CCs and monthly payments driving vehicles they can't really afford.....guess their parents didn't teach them anything


Not to derail the thread too much, but they just don't have the mindset of saving or controlling money and finances.  Perhaps this is germane to the thread because we are talking about a man who has never had to do any of this on a personal level.  I doubt that he ever had a checking account back in the day.  He may not even have a CC.  Others picked up the tab and/or he used cash.  MM did run her own life in the real world, pay bills, go to the grocery store etc  and hopefully her knowledge of that will rub off on him.    I did see a picture of Harry sitting on a counter in a little kitchen in his dorm at school, and he was making toast, so I know he won't starve as long as he knows how to buy the bread.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This couple is so fake and whatever they do is beyond ridiculous. So they came to LA because they couldn't get a "humanitarian" photo-op in Montecito. I guess, they couldn't find a place there to distribute a couple of sandwiches or pencils.
> 
> They must be at home making lists of potential victims for photo-ops or to join their zoom meetings...



Exactly!  First of all they will be hard pressed to find a child on the streets where they live in Montecito  and one that is in need? Forget it.  They could have easily gone into Santa Barbara where there will be people who are just as needy and will be just as grateful for the supplies as the folks in LA  and they didn't have to leave the carbon footprint of a private plane to get there.  12 minute car ride.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Exactly!  First of all they will be hard pressed to find a child on the streets where they live in Montecito  and one that is in need? Forget it.  They could have easily gone into Santa Barbara where there will be people who are just as needy and will be just as grateful for the supplies as the folks in LA  and they didn't have to leave the carbon footprint of a private plane to get there.  12 minute car ride.


I'm just getting more and more annoyed that they seem to be succeeding in getting the attention they seek in such blatently phony ways.  who else does this crap?


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> This is DISGRACEFUL!!!  When is someone going to call them out??? .. oh wait, that will be me when I meet them!!! - HA!



I want you to have a video cam with good sound when you do because *I KNOW *you will give the business!  I will save a copy of it on my computer!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Based on recent events and articles, *it seems they are desperate to be the US version of W&K.*  That will never happen b/c W&K are the real deal, they have the authenticity that H&M will always lack.  The way H squats down at these events looks extremely
> un-gentlemanly, definitely inappropriate with children around.


A pair of fake and envious opportunists...


----------



## Lounorada

marietouchet said:


> I am not totally naive , other celebrities get these perks but pl -ezzzz this comes from the book that M ghostwrote , how stoooopid can you be ?
> Finding Freedom reveals largesse royal couple have received
> https://mol.im/a/8652443
> hypocrite is the word that comes to mind
> ok I know I am the last to notice these things  Lol








I get that celebs get a lot of freebies and large discounts on many things, but oh my god, these two are out to get anything they can for nothing. At least Charles isn't the only one out of pocket for these two. Is there _anything _they actually use their own money to pay for?


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> If they post a picture of her scrubbing the 15 bathrooms then I will believe that they are just real folks.



With all that landscape for Harry to get juiced up watching her pee  sans plumbing? Those bathrooms shouldn't need scrubbing for a while.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Based on recent events and articles, it seems they are desperate to be the US version of W&K.  That will never happen b/c W&K are the real deal, they have the authenticity that H&M will always lack.  The way H squats down at these events looks extremely
> un-gentlemanly, definitely inappropriate with children around.


is that what they are trying to do? play the role of royals after making a huge fuss about how unhappy they were actually being royals?
I can't think of an American celeb who acts this way - as some sort of professional do-gooder (bringing photogs everywhere they go).  Yes, there are celebs who contribute to charity or participate in politics, etc.  But they also Work at their profession.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> This boggles the mind.  They are even bigger moochers than I thought they were.  I have been to Tromso, Norway and it is a pretty place, but I am sure she was bored silly.
> 
> *After reading all of this I am more convinced that he didn't buy the house.*


Me too. It seems they won't even spend a few thousand on a hotel stay, I can't imagine them spending $14m on a house, with mortgage or not. Is there actual proof that they bought the house, like official public records or something because I still think they're renting it.
Or by 'he didn't buy the house' do you mean Charles?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> is that what they are trying to do? play the role of royals after making a huge fuss about how unhappy they were actually being royals?
> I can't think of an American celeb who acts this way - as some sort of professional do-gooder (bringing photogs everywhere they go).  Yes, there are celebs who contribute to charity or participate in politics, etc.  But they also Work at their profession.



But this is the only thing Harry knows how to do... it’s not like he’s ever worked at anything before... he has no profession.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> But this is the only thing Harry knows how to do... it’s not like he’s ever worked at anything before... he has no profession.


and she is a mediocre actress who is by Hollywood standards already past her prime.....should have kept the gig in England
Oh no she wasn't thriving


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> This boggles the mind.  They are even bigger moochers than I thought they were.  I have been to Tromso, Norway and it is a pretty place, but I am sure she was bored silly.
> 
> After reading all of this I am more convinced that he didn't buy the house.


Agree, his money did not go to the house, he cannot likely access his capital
but his English income is paying for Frogmore


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Me too. It seems they won't even spend a few thousand on a hotel stay, I can't imagine them spending $14m on a house, with mortgage or not. Is there actual proof that they bought the house, like official public records or something because I still think they're renting it.
> Or by 'he didn't buy the house' do you mean Charles?



You understood me correctly, I meant Harry.  So true that if they are loathe to spend on a hotel, spending that on a house doesn't compute.  If they did, it was a cut rate money laundering deal of some sort and they will get to stay in the house and perhaps even a payment when it sells again. That estate will be a money pit.  They don't have a clue.


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> Agree, his money did not go to the house, he cannot likely access his capital
> but his English income is paying for Frogmore



I‘d like to see the receipts for that too, because I don’t believe it. I wouldn’t be surprised if Charles is paying it...


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and she is a mediocre actress who is by Hollywood standards already past her prime.....should have kept the gig in England
> Oh no she wasn't thriving



Hmmm age 40.  No hot girl roles.  Mommy roles.   Appearance on cop shows playing the judge, DA, public defender.  All 10 min total roles.  Base scale.   Commercials:  taking the kids to Taco Bell, out for pizza, baking Pillsbury cookies.  Give it a couple more years and it will be laxatives, mouthwash,  and feminine hygiene products.  A few more years after that...BP and diabetes medications and stronger laxatives.


The gig in England would have consisted of opening beer bottle factories in Northern England, giving out ribbons for prize pigs in Yorkshire and for the salmon fishing contest in Scotland.  @papertiger and @Sharont2305 you can come up with better ones than I can.


----------



## marietouchet

Lounorada said:


> I get that celebs get a lot of freebies and large discounts on many things, but oh my god, these two are out to get anything they can for nothing. At least Charles isn't the only one out of pocket for these two. Is there _anything _they actually use their own money to pay for?


But most celebs get their perks quietly instead of having their hagiographers trumpet them


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> You understood me correctly, I meant Harry.  So true that if they are loathe to spend on a hotel, spending that on a house doesn't compute.  If they did, it was a cut rate money laundering deal of some sort and they will get to stay in the house and perhaps even a payment when it sells again. That estate will be a money pit.  They don't have a clue.









marietouchet said:


> But most celebs get their perks quietly instead of having their hagiographers trumpet them


Yep. This is so true.


----------



## lalame

Rich people can also be the stingiest people, especially the entitled. So I can totally believe they wouldn't pay for a hotel room (only non-famous people actually pay for hotel rooms obviously) but still splurge on a house.


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> on etsy?


No. eBay and it must not be that hot of an item. The seller just emailed me to offer it to me for $8k.


----------



## Emeline

On a serious note, the air quality in the Santa Barbara area is being affected by smoke.  Hope it clears for the area residents soon.


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?? .. but, the level of traffic is not yet back to pre-COVID times, so it likely took them .. hmmmm, say .. 30 minutes less??!?!!?  But seriously, they likely took their gas guzzler big-a$$ car, had to have all their "security" and then the photog's cars, etc. - how environmentally 'wonderful' (SIC) they are?!?!  I honestly detest these 2 grifters ..



There is a blind item claiming she asked the charity to pay for a private jet 25-min flight but the charity refused and she convinced Harry to cover it. No idea if it’s true but knowing everything we know about her it’s not a stretch to believe it...


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> There is a blind item claiming she asked the charity to pay for a private jet 25-min flight but the charity refused and she convinced Harry to cover it. No idea if it’s true but knowing everything we know about her it’s not a stretch to believe it...


They could have stayed at home and used the costs of the private jet to feed the homeless in Los Angeles.


----------



## Sol Ryan

tiktok said:


> There is a blind item claiming she asked the charity to pay for a private jet 25-min flight but the charity refused and she convinced Harry to cover it. No idea if it’s true but knowing everything we know about her it’s not a stretch to believe it...



I really hope that isn’t true because that is legit gross... why would you hit up a charity for private plane rides?


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> I really hope that isn’t true because that is legit gross... why would you hit up a charity for private plane rides?


How can you tell the Queen of England which of the Crown Jewels you want to wear at your wedding?  

Calling the book a hagiography is hilarious. Whose idea was that?  That term is usually reserved for the life story of a saint.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I am not totally naive , other celebrities get these perks but pl -ezzzz this comes from the book that M ghostwrote , how stoooopid can you be ?
> Finding Freedom reveals largesse royal couple have received
> https://mol.im/a/8652443
> hypocrite is the word that comes to mind
> ok I know I am the last to notice these things  Lol



So for some reason the most eligible bachelor of the world could indeed spend several weekends with his z-list actress, erm, celebrity and influencer, without being caught? How come seeing the press basically stalked him? Maybe because the hint dropping and calling up the paps didn't begin until later?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> How can you tell the Queen of England which of the Crown Jewels you want to wear at your wedding?
> 
> *Calling the book a hagiography is hilarious. Whose idea was that?  That term is usually reserved for the life story of a saint.*


Here is an interesting article on the hagiography of MM. 

*What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family*

Taking up just over 36 months and a bit on the calendar, the book offers a markedly skinny time period for a biography. In fact, new dad and newly self-unmade royal Prince Harry is all of 35, his wife, Meghan Markle is 39, so that it's a bit of a stretch for HarperCollins, the publisher on both sides of the Atlantic, to be calling the thing a "biography." Hagiography, perhaps, would be a more accurate term. But in the book-flogging trade, Finding Freedom is an insta-book.









						What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
					

The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."




					www.forbes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal   hands down, one of the best articles written about these grifters — made my day  Thank you.


“But in the book-flogging trade, Finding Freedom is an insta-book.“

Insta-book = Love that characterization.  They are living the insta-life with the insta-house, insta-fashion, insta-photo op, insta-zoom call, insta-lectures.  Insta!









						What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
					

The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."




					www.forbes.com
				




_But their topicality means that their success depends upon the durability of the star wattage of the subject or subject matter, meaning, that subject's currency in national or international debate, and the conditions on the ground in the instant that the insta-book drops.

The conditions for the August 11 drop of Finding Freedom are just barely middling.

====_

Now I understand the flood of media for them. Book sales must be abysmal for this insta-couple.


----------



## periogirl28

gracekelly said:


> If they post a picture of her scrubbing the 15 bathrooms then I will believe that they are just real folks.


I would demand a video. Of all 15 bathrooms. Every week.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mshermes said:


> No. eBay and it must not be that hot of an item. The seller just emailed me to offer it to me for $8k.



Can we get it and have a party where each try it on and giggle? Bring your strapless bra!!



Chanbal said:


> They could have stayed at home and used the costs of the private jet to feed the homeless in Los Angeles.



Yeah, but no pictures??!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

LOL

Wonder if she had it made in multiple sizes due to weight fluctuations (ahem)? 




lanasyogamama said:


> Can we get it and have a party where each try it on and giggle? Bring your strapless bra!!
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, but no pictures??!!


----------



## Lounorada

lalame said:


> Rich people can also be the stingiest people, especially the entitled. So I can totally believe they wouldn't pay for a hotel room (only non-famous people actually pay for hotel rooms obviously) but still splurge on a house.


So true and I completely agree, but JCMH & MM specifically have form for being completely OK with other people footing the bill for huge costs like their wedding and the renovations on Frogmore Cottage.
If they had plans in motion to walk away from Royal life from back at the beginning of their relationship, then they should have opted for a smaller, more private wedding (like Charles and Camilla had or even more private like Beatrice had) and the same goes for Frogmore Cottage, they should have declined that place and stayed somewhere else for the short amount of time they lived together in the UK, a place that would have needed little or _no_ work done to it to suit their tastes.
Yet they felt it perfectly acceptable for multi millions of £ to be spent on them and I know they are apparently repaying the FC renovation costs, but IMO that's only because there was crticism from the public and media about those millions wasted. If there is any way possible that someone elses money paid for the SB mansion (if it was bought), then you could bet that they happily let someone else pay for it.


----------



## Chanbal

periogirl28 said:


> I would demand a video. Of all 15 bathrooms. Every week.


19 bathrooms, according to Zillow. If you drop the 'every week' request, they may do it. H found his soulmate when MM "went for a pee in the woods." Scrubbing toilets...all these romantic photo-ops.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> I want you to have a video cam with good sound when you do because *I KNOW *you will give the business!  I will save a copy of it on my computer!


And then send the vid straight to TMZ please!


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I get that celebs get a lot of freebies and large discounts on many things, but oh my god, these two are out to get anything they can for nothing. At least Charles isn't the only one out of pocket for these two. Is there _anything _they actually use their own money to pay for?


sickening
I suspect these people thought they'd get something out of being generous to these two...but what?  publicity?  and why would the book talk about this?  it doesn't reflect well on H&M


----------



## Chanbal

@*CarryOn2020 *I don't think the article below is good, but it is intriguing. It exposes and denies accusations...   

*Meghan Markle demands $90M, threats royals with tell-all rumor: Debunk









						Meghan Markle demands $90M, threats royals with tell-all rumor: Debunk
					

Meghan Markle allegedly demanded $90 million and threatened the royal family with a tell-all, according to an outlet. Meghan Markle and Prince Harry already le




					micky.com.au
				



*


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is an interesting article on the hagiography of MM.
> 
> *What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family*
> 
> Taking up just over 36 months and a bit on the calendar, the book offers a markedly skinny time period for a biography. In fact, new dad and newly self-unmade royal Prince Harry is all of 35, his wife, Meghan Markle is 39, so that it's a bit of a stretch for HarperCollins, the publisher on both sides of the Atlantic, to be calling the thing a "biography." Hagiography, perhaps, would be a more accurate term. But in the book-flogging trade, Finding Freedom is an insta-book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
> 
> 
> The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


this from an American magazine?  Finally.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is an interesting article on the hagiography of MM.
> 
> *What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family*
> 
> Taking up just over 36 months and a bit on the calendar, the book offers a markedly skinny time period for a biography. In fact, new dad and newly self-unmade royal Prince Harry is all of 35, his wife, Meghan Markle is 39, so that it's a bit of a stretch for HarperCollins, the publisher on both sides of the Atlantic, to be calling the thing a "biography." Hagiography, perhaps, would be a more accurate term. But in the book-flogging trade, Finding Freedom is an insta-book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
> 
> 
> The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


I googled revenge dressing and found this Vanity Fair article.  This "writer" must be a stan.  Makes me want to cancel my VF subscription.








						Meghan Markle’s U.K. Farewell Tour Is a Master Class in Revenge-Dressing
					

Not since Princess Diana herself has a royal sent such an exquisitely powerful message with her clothes.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> These two are just saints aren't they? Here they are helping people in need again. There are close up photos of everything they did. Why it's almost as though they brought their own photographers with them to get the best shots for _People_ mag.
> ETA: It seems that the charity took the photos and gave them to People. It's not exactly impromptu or accurate to have a photo from inside of a vehicle show the view from the supposed receiver of goods.
> 
> View attachment 4824699
> View attachment 4824700
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!*
> 
> Although the couple relocated to Santa Barbara, they headed back to L.A. to distribute school supplies to those in need
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are continuing their charity work in California.
> 
> Although the couple relocated to Santa Barbara last month, they headed back to Los Angeles on Wednesday to take part in a drive-through event with Baby2Baby, an L.A.-based national nonprofit organization. They helped distribute school supplies, books, backpacks, clothing, food, hygiene items and more to those in need as children prepare for the new school year.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported masks — a blue and white striped covering for Meghan and an olive green mask for Harry — and gloves as they surprised recipients in their cars. At one point, Meghan knelt down to help fit a backpack for a young boy as Prince Harry squatted down to take a look.
> 
> For the outing, Meghan wore a white blouse with olive green shorts while Harry sported a white polo, shorts and a casual baseball cap.
> 
> This isn't the first time Meghan and Prince Harry have supported the L.A.-based organization. In April 2019, just before they welcomed son Archie, they thanked fans via their Instagram page for the virtual "baby shower" encouraging charitable donations to celebrate Baby Sussex. They also gave four suggestions on charities if people were still looking to participate, including Baby2Baby.
> 
> Founders and co-presidents Norah Weinstein and Kelly Sawyer Patricof had no idea that they were on the royals’ radar — they found out like the rest of the world when the Instagram post was shared.
> 
> "We were thrilled and overwhelmed at the support," Weinstein told PEOPLE. "We believe that the fact that the Duchess is from Los Angeles was what prompted her to highlight L.A., where Baby2Baby is based. We felt particularly grateful that she was highlighting an American organization."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a surprise appearance at a charity event with Baby2Baby, where they helped distribute school supplies in Los Angeles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I am not caught up reading the thread, so forgive me if this is old news
on the DM site the photos are watermarked with the photographers name “Joe (or whatever..) for the Duke and duchess of Sussex /AP wire “ ie their photog took them and provided to the us news outlet Associated Press , yes the brought the photographer


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?? .. but, the level of traffic is not yet back to pre-COVID times, so it likely took them .. hmmmm, say .. 30 minutes less??!?!!?  But seriously, they likely took their gas guzzler big-a$$ car, had to have all their "security" and then the photog's cars, etc. - how environmentally 'wonderful' (SIC) they are?!?!  I honestly detest these 2 grifters ..


But it is like a 200 mile round trip in how many Escalades ( giant USA luxury bulletproof SUVs)?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> 19 bathrooms, according to Zillow. If you drop the 'every week' request, they may do it. H found is soulmate when MM "went for a pee in the woods." Scrubbing toilets...all these romantic photo-ops.


And let’s us define the term correctly for those not well acquainted with the us real estate market ... lol 
in the us that would a FULL bathroom with toilet, shower/bath and sinks
the loo is not separate here, it is the full enchilada, you don’t have go down the hall from the tub to get to the loo


----------



## Jayne1

Diana called her favourite paps to document her ‘do-good’ visits. JCMH learned from the best. 

Now add Meg and we’re going to be seeing these two media manipulators for a long time.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> And let’s us define the term correctly for those not well acquainted with the us real estate market ... lol
> in the us that would a FULL bathroom with toilet, shower/bath and sinks
> the loo is not separate here, it is the full enchilada, you don’t have go down the hall from the tub to get to the loo


well there are "powder rooms" that have just a sink and toilet....and pool house bathrooms which probably do have a shower


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Diana called her favourite paps to document her ‘do-good’ visits. JCMH learned from the best.
> 
> Now add Meg and we’re going to be seeing these two media manipulators for a long time.


don't say that


----------



## scarlet555

Saw the volunteer Photos, if these two are royal anything, it is nothing more than royal buffoons.  Soon the world will catch on... nutMeg needs to stfu, don’t want to hear anything from her about voting, desperately seeking attention While saying something banal.


----------



## periogirl28

sdkitty said:


> I googled revenge dressing and found this Vanity Fair article.  This "writer" must be a stan.  Makes me want to cancel my VF subscription.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s U.K. Farewell Tour Is a Master Class in Revenge-Dressing
> 
> 
> Not since Princess Diana herself has a royal sent such an exquisitely powerful message with her clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



VF thinks dressing like a Teletubby is jealousy inducing? I'm glad I never had a subscription to begin with. High-5 sdkitty!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I googled revenge dressing and found this Vanity Fair article.  This "writer" must be a stan.  Makes me want to cancel my VF subscription.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s U.K. Farewell Tour Is a Master Class in Revenge-Dressing
> 
> 
> Not since Princess Diana herself has a royal sent such an exquisitely powerful message with her clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


I stopped my  subscription to VF...


----------



## Blyen

I haven't been able to read the thread often lately, has this been posted already?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...Vaw27I-w6iYI2RIeVrmftTHOQ&cshid=1598107896965


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> Wallis Simpson has always looked odd to me.  Maybe she was really charismatic in real life, but she doesn’t seem very attractive in the photos.  I always found it strange that guy (can’t remember his name) gave up the throne for her.  Beauty is definitely in the eye of the beholder.


Wallis Simpson was not an attractive woman.

She was the one who said you can never be too rich or too thin, but her thinness just added to her harsh features.  Even her hair made her look severe.

Anyway, as mentioned, she treated him like sh*t and he got off on it - a very dominatrix-and-submissive relationship.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Now add Meg and we’re going to be seeing these two media manipulators for a long time.



Don't summon the demon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal 
Similar article here — really hilarious ’photos’ of the golden couple — no green dress https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...dal-meghan-markle-prince-harry-prince-charles

I cancelled my VF, T&C last year. Way too many ads and not enough substance. Plus, most is free online.
Congrats on cancelling. My guess is these mags will only get worse. Didn’t Oprah stop hers?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal
> Similar article here — really hilarious ’photos’ of the golden couple — no green dress https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...dal-meghan-markle-prince-harry-prince-charles
> 
> I cancelled my VF, T&C last year. Way too many ads and not enough substance. Plus, most is free online.
> Congrats on cancelling. My guess is these mags will only get worse. Didn’t Oprah stop hers?


there is still quite a lot of reading in VF but this pandering to H&M is making me sick.  and I miss Graydon Carter as editor - liked his editorials for one thing


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet   Great catch on the photographer.  Makes sense they would play the Diana game. Seems like they would realize it kinda backfired on her.  The BRF are masters at this sort of thing and know how outmaneuver these pitiful attempts at PR by H&M.  They learned with Wallis.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I stopped my  subscription to VF...


I did too.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> well there are "powder rooms" that have just a sink and toilet....and pool house bathrooms which probably do have a shower


It's been eons since I have looked at real estate but I recall them being referred to as half baths.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

That Forbes article is really interesting.  If you read this thread, you should read that whole article.   








						What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
					

The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."




					www.forbes.com
				




_*On the one hand, the couple is reportedly ensconced now in the privacy of their own recently-purchased home in Santa Barbara after landing first in glitzier self-imposed lockdown in Tyler Perry's hilltop mansion in Beverly Hills, whence they fled in a "top-secret" pre-lockdown maneuver from their borrowed island mansion in Vancouver, whence they had originally fled from Windsor's lovingly renovated Frogmore House, whence they had fled from Kensington Palace as they stopped getting along with the Cambridges. The readers of Finding Freedom won't be finding much real analysis of these telling peregrinations in the book, incidentally, but the habit of more or less instant flight-upon-dissatisfaction remains key to this couple's modus operandi.

It's important to remember that bestowing permission, whether performed tacitly or overtly, is a willed act. Whatever happens to the book in the marketplace does not matter one whit to Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, the Queen, Charles, Will, or any serious courtier, although there will be those at court who will wish it to tank and die whimpering at the bottom of the publisher's profit and loss statements. Rather, what matters to Buckingham Palace is that Harry has left the strong impression that he has, overtly or not, supplied sources for the book's many subjective arguments against the institution of the monarchy. 

As the London Times' first book excerpt about, among other things, the rift between William and Harry over his exit from duty, was published on the weekend of July 25 and the headlines exploded on every front page in Great Britain, Harry and Ms. Markle could, and did, instantly scramble to issue a swift denial of participation. No matter the content or specifics of the denial, its velocity meant that the ability to deny connection to the book mattered very much to the couple.

The Queen and Charles are especially practiced at soldiering rather elegantly on without complaint, and both of them have been through tougher fires than this. They will work to connect with Harry and Meghan Markle rather than to disconnect. However: Gauging from the headlines surrounding the Times' first excerpt in late July and the headlines of the last few days as the book launched, Harry's relationship with his brother, the future king, seems at an admittedly delicate point. 

On lockdown in Mr. Perry's capacious Beverly Hills mansion and subsequently burrowed in up in Santa Barbara with not quite enough to do, it seems that they have found everything but freedom. Seven thousand miles west of their dread Court of St. James, it can well be that the couple has just swapped one gilt birdcage for another.*_


----------



## rose60610

The VF article on Meghan's "masterful" revenge dressing includes:

 "Meghan’s farewell tour fashion was rife with sweet revenge messaging...But in recent days, the colors turned unapologetically bold—like her critics never wanted her to be. It can’t be a coincidence that Meghan opted for not one but two capes, whether for superheroine vibes (some credit her with rescuing Harry, after all) or to symbolize the couple’s flight."

Ugh. Isn't that about as insulting to Harry as it gets? That a mid 30's man from the BRF who spent ten years in the military "needed rescuing"? From Meghan? I wonder if they have the decency to be embarrassed by that.


----------



## sdkitty

periogirl28 said:


> VF thinks dressing like a Teletubby is jealousy inducing? I'm glad I never had a subscription to begin with. High-5 sdkitty!


I know  - that awful green outfit....and the capes make her H's superhero or some Sh-t like that?  Please


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> The VF article on Meghan's "masterful" revenge dressing includes:
> 
> "Meghan’s farewell tour fashion was rife with sweet revenge messaging...But in recent days, the colors turned unapologetically bold—like her critics never wanted her to be. It can’t be a coincidence that Meghan opted for not one but two capes, whether for superheroine vibes (some credit her with rescuing Harry, after all) or to symbolize the couple’s flight."



Where does that colour nonsense even come from. I remember reading how some other stan journalist knew the BRF had broken MM when she wore BEIGE a few days after the wedding. Now, I for one always thought that outfit (for Charles' garden party) was blush pink, and also...we have all seen the pics of the Queen and the other royal ladies being dressed in all the colours of the rainbow while MM insisted on the black widow look in black, deepest navy or drab olive. Now I don't wear much colour and happen to love black and olive, but when everyone else is dressed brightly, it does look like the ugly duckling of outfits. Are these people insisting poor Meghan was the only one being banned from colour or what?

P.S. Hate to always be the bearer of bad news, but if you want to revenge dress the right way you make sure your clothes fit flawlessly and your bra lines don't show, but eh, what do I know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Ugh. Isn't that about as insulting to Harry as it gets? That a mid 30's man from the BRF who spent ten years in the military "needed rescuing"? From Meghan? I wonder if they have the decency to be embarrassed by that.



He most definitely needs to be rescued from Meghan, he just didn't need to be rescued by her


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> That Forbes article is really interesting.  If you read this thread, you should read that whole article.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
> 
> 
> The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*On the one hand, the couple is reportedly ensconced now in the privacy of their own recently-purchased home in Santa Barbara after landing first in glitzier self-imposed lockdown in Tyler Perry's hilltop mansion in Beverly Hills, whence they fled in a "top-secret" pre-lockdown maneuver from their borrowed island mansion in Vancouver, whence they had originally fled from Windsor's lovingly renovated Frogmore House, whence they had fled from Kensington Palace as they stopped getting along with the Cambridges. The readers of Finding Freedom won't be finding much real analysis of these telling peregrinations in the book, incidentally, but the habit of more or less instant flight-upon-dissatisfaction remains key to this couple's modus operandi.
> 
> It's important to remember that bestowing permission, whether performed tacitly or overtly, is a willed act. Whatever happens to the book in the marketplace does not matter one whit to Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, the Queen, Charles, Will, or any serious courtier, although there will be those at court who will wish it to tank and die whimpering at the bottom of the publisher's profit and loss statements. Rather, what matters to Buckingham Palace is that Harry has left the strong impression that he has, overtly or not, supplied sources for the book's many subjective arguments against the institution of the monarchy.
> 
> As the London Times' first book excerpt about, among other things, the rift between William and Harry over his exit from duty, was published on the weekend of July 25 and the headlines exploded on every front page in Great Britain, Harry and Ms. Markle could, and did, instantly scramble to issue a swift denial of participation. No matter the content or specifics of the denial, its velocity meant that the ability to deny connection to the book mattered very much to the couple.
> 
> The Queen and Charles are especially practiced at soldiering rather elegantly on without complaint, and both of them have been through tougher fires than this. They will work to connect with Harry and Meghan Markle rather than to disconnect. However: Gauging from the headlines surrounding the Times' first excerpt in late July and the headlines of the last few days as the book launched, Harry's relationship with his brother, the future king, seems at an admittedly delicate point.
> 
> On lockdown in Mr. Perry's capacious Beverly Hills mansion and subsequently burrowed in up in Santa Barbara with not quite enough to do, it seems that they have found everything but freedom. Seven thousand miles west of their dread Court of St. James, it can well be that the couple has just swapped one gilt birdcage for another.*_


Spot on.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does that colour nonsense even come from. I remember reading how some other stan journalist knew the BRF had broken MM when she wore BEIGE a few days after the wedding. Now, I for one always thought that outfit (for Charles' garden party) was blush pink, and also...we have all seen the pics of the Queen and the other royal ladies being dressed in all the colours of the rainbow while MM insisted on the black widow look in black, deepest navy or drab olive. Now I don't wear much colour and happen to love black and olive, but when everyone else is dressed brightly, it does look like the ugly duckling of outfits. Are these people insisting poor Meghan was the only one being banned from colour or what?
> 
> P.S. Hate to always be the bearer of bad news, but if you want to revenge dress the right way you make sure your clothes fit flawlessly and your bra lines don't show, but eh, what do I know.



What do you know? You’re the queen of the wrap dress!!


----------



## kemilia

mshermes said:


> No. eBay and it must not be that hot of an item. The seller just emailed me to offer it to me for $8k.


That's a lotta money for a Halloween costume, not that there will be any trick or treating this year.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I am not caught up reading the thread, so forgive me if this is old news
> on the DM site the photos are watermarked with the photographers name “Joe (or whatever..) for the Duke and duchess of Sussex /AP wire “ ie their photog took them and provided to the us news outlet Associated Press , yes the brought the photographer



That is what I originally thought but I changed my post when I noticed in the article that each photo caption was specifically credited to the “Baby2Baby” charity. It’s wrong that People deliberately gave false photo credits,  assuming they knew.  

I suppose it is possible that the photographer hired by H&M gave special permission for that because he was being compensated so well.


----------



## csshopper

Seven days ago I posted the sales ranking for Finding Freedom at Barnes and Nobel, a US book chain.  They were #19.

A few minutes ago I checked again: 

Publisher:	HarperCollins Publishers
Publication date:	08/11/2020
Pages:	368
                                                              Sales rank:	175


----------



## Genie27

csshopper said:


> Seven days ago I posted the sales ranking for Finding Freedom at Barnes and Nobel, a US book chain.  They were #19.
> 
> A few minutes ago I checked again:
> 
> Publisher:    HarperCollins Publishers
> Publication date:    08/11/2020
> Pages:    368
> Sales rank:    175


So, $1 bin at indigo by fall?

well done Scobie. With any luck we can all learn some secrets about Finding Freebies.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Seven days ago I posted the sales ranking for Finding Freedom at Barnes and Nobel, a US book chain.  They were #19.
> 
> A few minutes ago I checked again:
> 
> Publisher:    HarperCollins Publishers
> Publication date:    08/11/2020
> Pages:    368
> Sales rank:    175


she has to be pissed


----------



## bag-mania

_Forbes _offered a very well-written analysis of the book. It is refreshing to read something about Meghan and Harry which was written for readers above the 6th grade level that most celebrity magazines seem to be targeting.











						What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
					

The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."




					www.forbes.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> _Forbes _offered a very well-written analysis of the book. It is refreshing to read something about Meghan and Harry which was written for readers above the 6th grade level that most celebrity magazines seem to be targeting.
> 
> View attachment 4825776


and from a US publication (sorry to repeat myself but I'm so happy to see the first negative news about them here)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and from a US publication (sorry to repeat myself but I'm so happy to see the first negative news about them here)



It makes a difference that it is coming from a financial magazine as opposed to an entertainment or news magazine. _Forbes_ isn’t on the payroll of H&M’s publicity agency and it isn’t concerned at all about emotional responses or cries of being unfair by the fans of these two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> and from a US publication (sorry to repeat myself but I'm so happy to see the first negative news about them here)



And from FORBES no less, *sdkitty*, which is read by relatively ALL of the US corporate decision-makers who sign the checks for H&M's speaking engagements. 

No spin there, thankfully.


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> And from FORBES no less, *sdkitty*, which is read by relatively ALL of the US corporate decision-makers who sign the checks for H&M's speaking engagements.
> 
> No spin there, thankfully.


what's the matter with Forbes?  Don't they have a stan to write about M&H?


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> The VF article on Meghan's "masterful" revenge dressing includes:
> 
> "Meghan’s farewell tour fashion was rife with sweet revenge messaging...But in recent days, the colors turned unapologetically bold—like her critics never wanted her to be. It can’t be a coincidence that Meghan opted for not one but two capes, whether for superheroine vibes (some credit her with rescuing Harry, after all) or to symbolize the couple’s flight."
> 
> Ugh. Isn't that about as insulting to Harry as it gets? That a mid 30's man from the BRF who spent ten years in the military "needed rescuing"? From Meghan? I wonder if they have the decency to be embarrassed by that.


I had forgotten about the earlier press on her dress. Actually I tried to blank it out..... but:

           Meghan Markle's latest outfit is drawing major Princess Diana ...
https://www.today.com/style/meghan-markle-s-green-dress-reminds-people-princess-diana-s-t175752 - 147k - Cached - Similar pages
Mar 11, 2020 ... Meghan Markle's Commonwealth Day outfit resembled an emerald green outfit Princess Diana wore in the '80s.


----------



## CobaltBlu

csshopper said:


> I had forgotten about the earlier press on her dress. Actually I tried to blank it out..... but:
> 
> Meghan Markle's latest outfit is drawing major Princess Diana ...
> https://www.today.com/style/meghan-markle-s-green-dress-reminds-people-princess-diana-s-t175752 - 147k - Cached - Similar pages
> Mar 11, 2020 ... Meghan Markle's Commonwealth Day outfit resembled an emerald green outfit Princess Diana wore in the '80s.



Yes, the two outfits are nearly identical.  Like a banana and a taxicab.


----------



## gracekelly

Genie27 said:


> So, $1 bin at indigo by fall?
> 
> well done Scobie. With any luck we can all learn some secrets about Finding Freebies.


I saw a tea tin, with their wedding picture on it, at the  Home Goods after Christmas sale.  They can make room and put the two of them together.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> I saw a tea tin, with their wedding picture on it, at the  Home Goods after Christmas sale.  They can make room and put the two of them together.


I'd never be able to drink the tea!


----------



## Genie27

gracekelly said:


> I saw a tea tin, with their wedding picture on it, at the  Home Goods after Christmas sale.  They can make room and put the two of them together.





csshopper said:


> I'd never be able to drink the tea!


I think I saw the same at my local Winners (TJMaxx) a couple of weeks ago. Stale tea.


----------



## sdkitty

periogirl28 said:


> VF thinks dressing like a Teletubby is jealousy inducing? I'm glad I never had a subscription to begin with. High-5 sdkitty!


that article was written by michelle ruiz....I clicked on her name and got several fawning articles about H&M. to be fair, she's apparently also a fan of Kate M.....real high level stuff VF


----------



## Sol Ryan

Genie27 said:


> I think I saw the same at my local Winners (TJMaxx) a couple of weeks ago. Stale tea.



Lol, those must have sold really badly because I saw them at 2 Homegoods, Marshall’s and a TJ Maxx here. The Kate and Will ones sold though. I remember seeing them sitting beside them on the shelf... I spend a lot of time in the tea section...


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that article was written by michelle ruiz....I clicked on her name and got several fawning articles about H&M. to be fair, she's apparently also a fan of Kate M.....real high level stuff VF


I dumped a subscription to VF years ago.  I was sick of their formula year after year and too much fawning on everyone.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I'd never be able to drink the tea!



I bet the tea is unbearably sweet and cloying while still being pretentious.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I dumped a subscription to VF years ago.  I was sick of their formula year after year and too much fawning on everyone.


I read it on car trips....they do have some pretty indepth articles - a lot of the time about people I don't know much about....at least historically they did.....I'm feeling kinda negative toward the new editor.....not supposed to be People magazine lady


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I bet the tea is unbearably sweet and cloying while still being pretentious.


It will give you a big build up on the label and then taste like nothing lol!


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Here is an interesting article on the hagiography of MM.
> 
> *What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family*
> 
> Taking up just over 36 months and a bit on the calendar, the book offers a markedly skinny time period for a biography. In fact, new dad and newly self-unmade royal Prince Harry is all of 35, his wife, Meghan Markle is 39, so that it's a bit of a stretch for HarperCollins, the publisher on both sides of the Atlantic, to be calling the thing a "biography." Hagiography, perhaps, would be a more accurate term. But in the book-flogging trade, Finding Freedom is an insta-book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
> 
> 
> The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


Brilliant article @Chanbal! Thanks for posting the link  I particularly liked these parts:



> Mr. Scobie makes no secret of the fact that, over time reporting on the couple, he somehow stood out. By this is meant that he stood out in the view of the prince and Ms. Markle as belonging to a different, more nuanced, sympathetic hominid species than the average rabid, bloodthirsty coursing canines on Fleet Street's royal-beat, virtually all of whom routinely (in the Windsor/Markle/Scobie/Durand world view) "unfairly" report on the prince and his bride. And, in fact, according to Scobie, Durand, and HarperCollins, _Finding Freedom_ is intended to be the antidote to that allegedly vindictive reportage.











___________________________________________________



> In the real world as defined by London's newspapers on the royal beat, the tetchy prince and Ms. Markle have infamously issued another, separate boycott edict/post — an open letter, let's call it — in which they explain that they will no longer be dealing with a handful of what they view as the most offensive London newspapers. The shortlist includes the _Sun_, which in a fine twist of fate is owned by Rupert Murdoch' News Corp., which is also the proprietor of HarperCollins, publisher of _Finding Freedom._





___________________________________________________



> It's important to remember that bestowing permission, whether performed tacitly or overtly, is a willed act. *Whatever happens to the book in the marketplace does not matter one whit to Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, the Queen, Charles, Will, or any serious courtier, although there will be those at court who will wish it to tank and die whimpering at the bottom of the publisher's profit and loss statements*. Rather, what matters to Buckingham Palace is that Harry has left the strong impression that he has, overtly or not, supplied sources for the book's many subjective arguments against the institution of the monarchy.







___________________________________________________

This passage from the book that is quoted:
_



			Back at Buckingham Palace, the ACU students now en route to Westminster Abbey and Harry quietly slipping through the door to say hello, the reality—and the emotions—finally set in as I give Meghan a goodbye hug. She’s flying back to Canada on the last commercial flight of the day, eager to be back in Vancouver Island by the morning before Archie wakes up. For a couple who only ever wanted to focus on their work and bring good to the world, it seems like an unnecessarily cruel ending to their royal lives. Forced to give up roles they’re incredibly proud of after sacrificing so much to get there.
At this point, the 1844 Room
		
Click to expand...

_


> (of Buckingham Palace)_ is almost empty and tears that the duchess had been bravely holding back are free to flow among familiar faces. As she embraces some of the loyal staff she will most likely not see again, I can’t help but feel sad for the dedicated team members whose tireless efforts—to promote the couple’s work, launch landmark projects, and deal with the near-daily crises brought on by tabloid lies—have come to an abrupt end._





___________________________________________________



> In fact, exiting royal duty was Harry and Meghan Markle's choice, and it was they who authored the slap-dash architecture of their exit by springing their Instagram vision of it on the Palace, on Harry's father, and on the Queen in early January. It wasn't tactical, or even very smartly executed, and it smacked of absolute desperation. The whole point of the subsequent scramble by the Queen, Charles and their senior courtiers was to tidy the legal and financial wreckage wrought by the couple's firing off the announcement of their liberation from royal duty as a fait accompli.







___________________________________________________



> Ironically, the most pointed question that _Finding Freedom_ poses is one for the prince-in-exile and for Meghan Markle. On lockdown in Mr. Perry's capacious Beverly Hills mansion and subsequently burrowed in up in Santa Barbara with not quite enough to do, it seems that they have found everything but freedom. Seven thousand miles west of their dread Court of St. James, it can well be that the couple has just swapped one gilt birdcage for another.


----------



## marietouchet

I can’t take credit for noticing but Omid’s co-author has been MIA


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I can’t take credit for noticing but Omid’s co-author has been MIA



Her contribution to the book may have been relatively minor, like editing Omid’s fawning narrative to make it sound slightly less obsequious than the raving love letters about them he wrote for Harper’s Bazaar.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does that colour nonsense even come from. I remember reading how some other stan journalist knew the BRF had broken MM when she wore BEIGE a few days after the wedding. Now, I for one always thought that outfit (for Charles' garden party) was blush pink, and also...we have all seen the pics of the Queen and the other royal ladies being dressed in all the colours of the rainbow while MM insisted on the black widow look in black, deepest navy or drab olive. Now I don't wear much colour and happen to love black and olive, but when everyone else is dressed brightly, it does look like the ugly duckling of outfits. Are these people insisting poor Meghan was the only one being banned from colour or what?
> 
> P.S. Hate to always be the bearer of bad news, but if you want to revenge dress the right way you make sure your clothes fit flawlessly and your bra lines don't show, but eh, what do I know.



I quite liked some of her earlier outfits. I think she looks good in neutrals and even emerald green. The Queen wears bright colours to so she can be seen by people in the crowds. I think MM tried to do that too with this green number but for the photographers.

Actually, I think the* green* outfit looked like something she thought royals _should_ wear, but it came off as terribly dated, fussy and OTT, stuffy and 'done-up' does not say revenge.  If it had fitted, and she'd lost the cape and hat it would have looked fine. I feel like she was trying to channel Jackie Kennedy and ended-up looking like a Franklin Mint doll.  It was just a bit too costume (and I love me a bit of costume) certainly no revenge.

This is what revenge dressing looks like:


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, I don't know how much more of this horse manure I can take.  They all should be locked up.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I quite liked some of her earlier outfits. I think she looks good in neutrals and even emerald green. The Queen wears bright colours to so she can be seen by people in the crowds. I think MM tried to do that too with this green number but for the photographers.
> 
> Actually, I think the* green* outfit looks like something she thought royals _should_ wear, but it came off as terribly dated, fussy and OTT, stuffy and 'done-up' does not say revenge.  If it had fitted, and she'd lost the cape and hat it would have looked fine. I feel like she was trying to channel Jackie Kennedy and ended-up looking like a Franklin Mint doll.  It was just a bit too costume (and I love me a bit of costume) certainly no revenge.
> 
> This is what revenge dressing looks like:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4825974


Why they called any of that revenge dressing is beyond me. If anything it was the opposite.  Leaving  and looking as terrible as possible.


----------



## Lounorada

rose60610 said:


> The VF article on Meghan's "masterful" revenge dressing includes:
> 
> "Meghan’s farewell tour fashion was rife with sweet revenge messaging...But in recent days, the colors turned unapologetically bold—like her critics never wanted her to be. It can’t be a coincidence that Meghan opted for not one but two capes, whether for superheroine vibes (some credit her with rescuing Harry, after all) or to symbolize the couple’s flight."
> 
> Ugh. Isn't that about as insulting to Harry as it gets? That a mid 30's man from the BRF who spent ten years in the military "needed rescuing"? From Meghan? I wonder if they have the decency to be embarrassed by that.


VF should be hanging their heads in shame for publishing that article. 'Revenge dressing' is something you'd say when referring to a break-up, to show an ex what he/she is missing out on, it IS NOT a phrase I would use to describe a woman dressing a certain way to make herself appear superior after she and her husband basically threw a wrecking ball among his family (her in-laws) and the royal family staff causing nothing but stress, upset and drama all to suit themselves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

#175??? !!!   Now we know why they are blitzing the media.
Insta-book requires immediate relevance which requires high visible presence. Odd they don’t realize it’s too little, too late.

Even odder they compare MM and Diana’s dressing. I don’t understand the aversion to or the criticism of neutrals, those are her best colors, best looks. MM wore neutrals long before Harry — are there photos of her in bright colors pre-H? The royal Ladies themselves are known to wear bright colors when on duty. That’s because they _want_ to be seen by the public, the photographers, and their family. Typically, they only wear black to funerals.  I thought this was common knowledge.  Is she claiming they, whoever _they_ is, demanded she wear neutrals so that she would blend in, not stand out?  Such absurdity. 



csshopper said:


> Seven days ago I posted the sales ranking for Finding Freedom at Barnes and Nobel, a US book chain.  They were #19.
> 
> A few minutes ago I checked again:
> 
> Publisher:    HarperCollins Publishers
> Publication date:    08/11/2020
> Pages:    368
> Sales rank:    175


----------



## Chanbal

Fun news and Stupid news:

*Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election









						Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
					

Piers Morgan has called for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to be stripped of their royal titles after Meghan weighed in on the upcoming US election.On Thursday, the duchess appeared as a special guest at the online “When All Women Vote” event to encourage more people to vote.




					www.yahoo.com
				



*
*Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive***








						Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive
					

Harry and Meghan met with members of the Commonwealth Trust, a remaining link to the UK, to talk about making the world better through social media.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Queen and Government
					

As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters. By convention, The Queen does not vote or stand for election, however Her Majesty does have important ceremonial and formal roles in relation to the government of the UK.




					www.royal.uk
				



_As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.

By convention, The Queen does not vote or stand for election, however Her Majesty does have important ceremonial and formal roles in relation to the government of the UK._
====
H&M stirring up trouble as usual. She is emphasizing that she never intends to be a UK citizen, ever. It was all a farce. Since that is the case, why give her a title? As for H, he can vote here any time he wants to become a US citizen. He won’t because that would mean giving up his 6th place in the line up. He will never do that, possibly because he knows she isn’t worth it? 




Chanbal said:


> Fun news and Stupid news:
> 
> *Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan has called for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to be stripped of their royal titles after Meghan weighed in on the upcoming US election.On Thursday, the duchess appeared as a special guest at the online “When All Women Vote” event to encourage more people to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> *Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met with members of the Commonwealth Trust, a remaining link to the UK, to talk about making the world better through social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


----------



## chowlover2

papertiger said:


> I quite liked some of her earlier outfits. I think she looks good in neutrals and even emerald green. The Queen wears bright colours to so she can be seen by people in the crowds. I think MM tried to do that too with this green number but for the photographers.
> 
> Actually, I think the* green* outfit looked like something she thought royals _should_ wear, but it came off as terribly dated, fussy and OTT, stuffy and 'done-up' does not say revenge.  If it had fitted, and she'd lost the cape and hat it would have looked fine. I feel like she was trying to channel Jackie Kennedy and ended-up looking like a Franklin Mint doll.  It was just a bit too costume (and I love me a bit of costume) certainly no revenge.
> 
> This is what revenge dressing looks like:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4825974


" dead " at Franklin Mint doll. And that is my fav pic of Diana ever!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Queen and Government
> 
> 
> As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters. By convention, The Queen does not vote or stand for election, however Her Majesty does have important ceremonial and formal roles in relation to the government of the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.*
> 
> By convention, The Queen does not vote or stand for election, however Her Majesty does have important ceremonial and formal roles in relation to the government of the UK._
> ====
> H&M stirring up trouble as usual. She is emphasizing that she never intends to be a UK citizen, ever. It was all a farce. Since that is the case, why give her a title? As for H, he can vote here any time he wants to become a US citizen. He won’t because that would mean giving up his 6th place in the line up. He will never do that, possibly because he knows she isn’t worth it?



QE follows the protocol and works well with everybody.

MM should stop using the duchess title (ridiculous) before getting involved in the US election, I'm with Piers on that one. Why is H getting involved in political matters in the US ? He just arrived here.


----------



## bag-mania

Has this been posted? This article inadvertently shows how sensitive Meghan is about her age. Apparently on a few recent occasions Harry has referred to himself as being old. Each time Meghan chimes in saying “we’re not old.”  There’s a certain insecurity from both of them, whatever Harry is going through and Meghan needing to put in her two cents.









						See Meghan Markle's Response When Prince Harry Says He's 'Way Too Old'
					

Prince Harry joked he was "way too old" at 35, but wife Meghan Markle quickly disagreed during a recent video call




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted? This article inadvertently shows how sensitive Meghan is about her age. Apparently on a few recent occasions Harry has referred to himself as being old. Each time Meghan chimes in saying “we’re not old.”  There’s a certain insecurity from both of them, whatever Harry is going through and Meghan needing to put in her two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle's Response When Prince Harry Says He's 'Way Too Old'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry joked he was "way too old" at 35, but wife Meghan Markle quickly disagreed during a recent video call
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Haha poor Harry, he probably got in trouble for saying that.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Fun news and Stupid news:
> 
> *Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan has called for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to be stripped of their royal titles after Meghan weighed in on the upcoming US election.On Thursday, the duchess appeared as a special guest at the online “When All Women Vote” event to encourage more people to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> *Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met with members of the Commonwealth Trust, a remaining link to the UK, to talk about making the world better through social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



It‘s such weird times when I agree with Piers.... but he’s right... I fully respect Meghan Markle’s right to participate as a citizen... but the Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry are members of the BRF and it’s not okay for them to play with our political system.

If being a member of the BRF is so awful, why would you want to keep the titles anyway? I’d want to be rid of all of it. Shoot, I’d give up Prince Charles’s money given Harry’s feelings on the history of the Commonwealth...









						Harry and Meghan say Commonwealth ‘must acknowledge the past’
					

Couple say process will be uncomfortable but ‘needs to be done because everyone benefits’




					www.theguardian.com
				




Just found this and I can’t think of a TV show that I would want to watch less... if it was with anyone else, I might have been interested, but those two? Nah. People who cling to titles given through birth and marriage, don’t need to lecture me.









						Meghan Harry planning TV show that takes a 'political stance'
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are planning to produce a new TV show that takes a 'political stance' on feminism and racial inequality and focuses on 'normal' people.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing he truly believes he can reign over here.  

Just think about it for a minute — He knows he will never be King in the UK.   He has bought into the idea that “we Americans love royalty“, so he will be our ‘king’.  With her ‘queen of hearts’ stuff, his mother thought the same thing. Sadly, she fell for the media hype which convinced her that living in the US was the answer to her issues, that Americans would bow down to her.  It was then and is now utter bs, codswallop, nonsense, grandiose delusional thinking. While we may watch all the pomp on tv, we are celebrate because we do not have to pay for it.  H&M consistently show their lack of respect for us, for our ideals, for our Freedom from tyranny.  Oprah, Michelle, Ellen, Disney, etc. have done a disservice to these 2 by contributing to these delusions.  Wallis and Edward tried it. Didn’t work then, won’t work now.

Yes, they should tread carefully because we Americans really want to hear from Uncle Andy.  Surely H&M realize they are being played for info and access, no?  “ ‘Will you step into my parlor,’ said the spider to the fly.”  




Chanbal said:


> QE follows the protocol and works well with everybody.
> 
> MM should stop using the duchess title (ridiculous) before getting involved in the US election, I'm with Piers on that one. Why is H getting involved in political matters in the US ? He just arrived here.


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020
Who is behind MM? It doesn't make any sense to have her name included on the
*100 Influential Women on Why They’re Voting in the 2020 Election*








						100 Influential Women on Why They’re Voting in the 2020 Election
					

“I am voting because I want change. I want radical, life-altering, culture-shifting change.”




					www.marieclaire.com
				




Let's see if the BRF has courage to do what should be done.
*Piers Morgan, Others Call For Meghan Markle To Lose Title After Speaking Out Urging People To Vote*









						Piers Morgan, Others Call For Meghan Markle To Lose Title After Speaking Out Urging People To Vote
					

The Duchess for Sussex didn’t share her political beliefs, but urged people to vote to gain the “change that we all need and deserve.”




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps she is being used to get to H who is being used to get to Andy. [perhaps I’ve watched too much of The Bureau]
Clearly, MM is telling the world that the UK citizenship classes were meaningless to her.  She never planned to stay over there. Her child will remain here. H got duped.

Not to be political — I, too, believe strongly in the right to vote, so I applaud anyone who emphasizes it.

[ Your link goes to a Twitter page, not the MarieClaire site. ]



Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020
> Who is behind MM? It doesn't make any sense to have her name included on the
> *100 Influential Women on Why They’re Voting in the 2020 Election*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 100 Influential Women on Why They’re Voting in the 2020 Election
> 
> 
> “I am voting because I want change. I want radical, life-altering, culture-shifting change.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if the BRF has courage to do what should be done.
> *Piers Morgan, Others Call For Meghan Markle To Lose Title After Speaking Out Urging People To Vote*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan, Others Call For Meghan Markle To Lose Title After Speaking Out Urging People To Vote
> 
> 
> The Duchess for Sussex didn’t share her political beliefs, but urged people to vote to gain the “change that we all need and deserve.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Actually, I think the* green* outfit looked like something she thought royals _should_ wear, but it came off as terribly dated, fussy and OTT, stuffy and 'done-up' does not say revenge.  If it had fitted, and she'd lost the cape and hat it would have looked fine. I feel like she was trying to channel Jackie Kennedy and ended-up looking like a Franklin Mint doll.  It was just a bit too costume (and I love me a bit of costume) certainly no revenge.



That's what I thought with a lot of her outfits: she dressed up as her idea of a royal, and it didn't look genuine. Just as the way she treated her, uh, subjects, this fake sententious behaviour with the Mother Teresa smile and attitude.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, I don't know how much more of this horse manure I can take.  *They all should be locked up.*



Give them time 









Chanbal said:


> QE follows the protocol and works well with everybody.
> 
> MM should stop using the duchess title (ridiculous) before getting involved in the US election, I'm with Piers on that one. Why is H getting involved in political matters in the US ? He just arrived here.



They are so ignorant, it's quite scary:

M, using (a British) Duchess title whilst speaking to the US public on political matters 

H, who knows the US/the world from the inside of a 1%-er living room giving advice on lowering_ our_ carbon footprint and moaning about his life - as a Prince  

(foreign) Royalty getting directly involved in politics. Never mind protocol, the law (GB) has forbidden it since 1649, when we cut Charles I head off   

I am also pro-voting, but if I heard either one of these two charlatan, selfie-doo-gooders tell me to vote or I'd be "complicit"  I'd be fuming


----------



## mdcx

M got her la-di-da royal title and obviously plans to keep using it in the US whilst not acting in any way befitting the BRF. Just exploiting it for cash and favours, there's our girl. I don't really see how her reputation can be rehabilitated at this point.


----------



## Pessie

The arch social climber isn’t going to give up using the badge of her achievement.  But the Americans booking her are billing her using the title and making much of it - they should be the subject of criticism surely.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I honestly don't have any objection to her sending a message but she simply shouldn't use her title when she does. Why hang on to the title so much since you have left the BRF? Why not just go back to your maiden name or use Meghan Windsor or something, anything but that title. That will show that you truly have left, and don't care about the title given to you by a family you clearly detest so much. Just another shining example of her hypocrisy.


----------



## rose60610

Does anybody believe that if this wasn't an election year in the U.S. that Meghan would even care in the slightest about voting? Next year is the Summer Olympics, surely she'll become an Olympics enthusiast. As for their show about taking a political stance on feminism and racism, who do they think they're kidding? All they're going to do is blather into the echo chamber of how everybody is a victim and complain how they're victims too. And if you don't think you're a victim, well, shut up because you're ruining the narrative. You'll always be a victim, and M & H will always be victims, that horrible BRF was a nightmare from which they barely escaped with their lives. Luckily they were able to seek asylum in Montecito, spend Crown money that was given to them, filthy lucre, to buy a mansion with 500 bathrooms to lecture us how discriminated M is in this big bad horrific nation. What this world needs is more multi million dollar celebrities whining and moaning about being victims by slamming the very country that enables them to earn millions. And how much are M&H donating to the cause? Oh wait! They are seeking to Get Paid from hawking a show that promotes victimhood.


----------



## bag-mania

She jumps on whatever bandwagon is popular at the moment and abandons them just as quickly. No matter what cause she’s plugging her real message is always “look at me!”


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted? This article inadvertently shows how sensitive Meghan is about her age. Apparently on a few recent occasions Harry has referred to himself as being old. Each time Meghan chimes in saying “we’re not old.”  There’s a certain insecurity from both of them, whatever Harry is going through and Meghan needing to put in her two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle's Response When Prince Harry Says He's 'Way Too Old'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry joked he was "way too old" at 35, but wife Meghan Markle quickly disagreed during a recent video call
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I would love to have been a fly on the wall for the debriefing of that conversation!! “H, you’re affecting my image as a young mother!”


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She jumps on whatever bandwagon is popular at the moment and abandons them just as quickly. No matter what cause she’s plugging her real message is always “look at me!”



The right to vote is fundamental, and MM has the right to do whatever she wants as long as she follows the law. 

Having said that, we are talking about a previously unknown person that received from the BRF a curriculum makeover, a couple of pompous titles, and a clothing allowance that could feed numerous families. However, she had a few obligations and had to compete with QE, and William&Kate for the spotlight in the UK. 

So she took H, the money, and the titles and came to the US in search of privacy (celebrity status and photo-ops). She is getting involved on ever possible topic of the moment without providing any real contribution ($$$$) or work... Eventually some of these activities and contacts will continue sponsoring her very costly lifestyle, and the real problems will continue getting worse and worse... My question is as always, who is behind MM? Whoever is supporting this entitled attitude is doing a disservice to this country. My 2 cents. Have a wonderful Sunday!


----------



## youngster

So, now they are Hollywood producers? Going to produce a show about inequality and racism and "normal people"?  Of course, they need someone to come up with the substantial amount of money (not their own of course) so they can hire writers, assistants, crew, someone to actually find those "normal people" to participate and . . . then what?   

What do they actually know about producing content that us ordinary people would want to watch on a weekly or daily basis?  MM was married to a producer, guess she thinks its easy.  I think her first husband, Trevor, will likely enjoy watching them pitch their idea and see how far they get.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> QE follows the protocol and works well with everybody.
> 
> MM should stop using the duchess title (ridiculous) before getting involved in the US election, I'm with Piers on that one. Why is H getting involved in political matters in the US ? He just arrived here.


his wife told him to?


----------



## doni

I remember reading about the daughter of Diane von Furstenberg, a Princess by birth, saying how she doesn’t use her title in LA because it doesn’t make any sense. Her mother didn’t use her title when she went to NY to start a designer career. Even Mary Chantal Miller, who is a consort Crown Princess doesn’t use her title to market her posh children gear in London... That an American born and bred, who has chosen to live and make her living in the US, uses a British Duchess title _to talk about American politics_ and elections, is one of the most bizarre things these two have done so far.
And that is saying something. They do keep us entertained, I give them that.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I remember reading about the daughter of Diane von Furstenberg, a Princess by birth, saying how she doesn’t use her title in LA because it doesn’t make any sense. Her mother didn’t use her title when she went to NY to start a designer career. Even Mary Chantal Miller, who is a consort Crown Princess doesn’t use her title to market her posh children gear in London... That an American born and bred, who has chosen to live and make her living in the US, uses a British Duchess title to talk about American politics and elections, is one of the most bizarre things I have seen these two do.
> And that is to say something. They do keep us entertained, I give them that.


yes, her problem I think is she is an attention whore.....she snagged a prince and now just can't get enough attention


----------



## purseinsanity

Grande Latte said:


> They both have ambiguous sexy gay friend to create a triangle.
> 
> View attachment 4824542
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824543
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824544
> 
> 
> View attachment 4824545


I never liked Wallis Simpson either, but at least she made no bones about what she was after.  MM is even more of a snake IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> These two are just saints aren't they? Here they are helping people in need again. There are close up photos of everything they did. Why it's almost as though they brought their own photographers with them to get the best shots for _People_ mag.
> ETA: It seems that the charity took the photos and gave them to People. It's not exactly impromptu or accurate to have a photo from inside of a vehicle show the view from the supposed receiver of goods.
> 
> View attachment 4824699
> 
> View attachment 4824700
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Make Rare Public Outing at Drive-Through Charity Event — in Masks!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a surprise appearance at a charity event with Baby2Baby, where they helped distribute school supplies in Los Angeles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Haha, it looks like MM is inside the car with JCMH giving a thumbs up!  Oh, and JCMH, the proper way to wear a mask is to also cover your nose.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I think Wallis has that "sexy ugly" vibe, like Jay Z, Anjelica Huston, Benicio del Toro, etc. They aren't UGLY but I think you get the premise... like not conventionally attractive but they have a certain confidence and mystique that makes it sexy. I'm sure she was a very charming and manipulative person.


Supposedly she had great skills in the bedroom as well.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> If they post a picture of her scrubbing the 15 bathrooms then I will believe that they are just real folks.


I would need to see a short film of her actually doing it.  She would dress up in shorts, hair net, rubber gloves and hold a sponge for a second during the picture, then scream at her assistant for getting her the wrong rubber gloves.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Supposedly she had great skills in the bedroom as well.


And like MM, she married a Royal Wimp.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Not to derail the thread too much, but they just don't have the mindset of saving or controlling money and finances.  Perhaps this is germane to the thread because we are talking about a man who has never had to do any of this on a personal level.  I doubt that he ever had a checking account back in the day.  He may not even have a CC.  Others picked up the tab and/or he used cash.  MM did run her own life in the real world, pay bills, go to the grocery store etc  and hopefully her knowledge of that will rub off on him.    I did see a picture of Harry sitting on a counter in a little kitchen in his dorm at school, and he was making toast, so I know he won't starve as long as he knows how to buy the bread.


For beans on toast?!?!?! .. never got that dish!


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Wallis Simpson was not an attractive woman.
> 
> She was the one who said you can never be too rich or too thin, but her thinness just added to her harsh features.  Even her hair made her look severe.
> 
> Anyway, as mentioned, she treated him like sh*t and he got off on it - a very dominatrix-and-submissive relationship.


I think some of these royals, even with all the fame, money, travel, luxury, and privilege, have very low self esteem.  Diana certainly did, and I think JCMH did as well as Edward.  Both men allowed controlling women to take over their lives.  Let's see if Harry can wrangle himself away.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> @marietouchet   Great catch on the photographer.  Makes sense they would play the Diana game. Seems like they would realize it kinda backfired on her.  The BRF are masters at this sort of thing and know how outmaneuver these pitiful attempts at PR by H&M.  They learned with Wallis.


Harry blames the media (that Diana likely notified) for her death, and claimed he didn't want something like that repeated with his wife, yet he's allowing them to be called now?  Boggles the mind.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> That Forbes article is really interesting.  If you read this thread, you should read that whole article.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Price Exile: How Prince Harry’s And Meghan Markle’s Anonymously Sourced ‘Biography’ Will Distance Harry From His Family
> 
> 
> The book about Harry's and Meghan Markle's exit from the British Royal Family has just been published.  The couple have strenuously denied participating in it, but their inner circle is liberally, and anonymously, sourced. Here's the takeaway on the book that's touted as the couple's "true story."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*On the one hand, the couple is reportedly ensconced now in the privacy of their own recently-purchased home in Santa Barbara after landing first in glitzier self-imposed lockdown in Tyler Perry's hilltop mansion in Beverly Hills, whence they fled in a "top-secret" pre-lockdown maneuver from their borrowed island mansion in Vancouver, whence they had originally fled from Windsor's lovingly renovated Frogmore House, whence they had fled from Kensington Palace as they stopped getting along with the Cambridges. The readers of Finding Freedom won't be finding much real analysis of these telling peregrinations in the book, incidentally, but the habit of more or less instant flight-upon-dissatisfaction remains key to this couple's modus operandi.
> 
> It's important to remember that bestowing permission, whether performed tacitly or overtly, is a willed act. Whatever happens to the book in the marketplace does not matter one whit to Buckingham Palace, Clarence House, the Queen, Charles, Will, or any serious courtier, although there will be those at court who will wish it to tank and die whimpering at the bottom of the publisher's profit and loss statements. Rather, what matters to Buckingham Palace is that Harry has left the strong impression that he has, overtly or not, supplied sources for the book's many subjective arguments against the institution of the monarchy.
> 
> As the London Times' first book excerpt about, among other things, the rift between William and Harry over his exit from duty, was published on the weekend of July 25 and the headlines exploded on every front page in Great Britain, Harry and Ms. Markle could, and did, instantly scramble to issue a swift denial of participation. No matter the content or specifics of the denial, its velocity meant that the ability to deny connection to the book mattered very much to the couple.
> 
> The Queen and Charles are especially practiced at soldiering rather elegantly on without complaint, and both of them have been through tougher fires than this. They will work to connect with Harry and Meghan Markle rather than to disconnect. However: Gauging from the headlines surrounding the Times' first excerpt in late July and the headlines of the last few days as the book launched, Harry's relationship with his brother, the future king, seems at an admittedly delicate point.
> 
> On lockdown in Mr. Perry's capacious Beverly Hills mansion and subsequently burrowed in up in Santa Barbara with not quite enough to do, it seems that they have found everything but freedom. Seven thousand miles west of their dread Court of St. James, it can well be that the couple has just swapped one gilt birdcage for another.*_


A grandmother and especially a father would have a softer spot for a petulant child.  A sibling, on the other hand, has less tolerance.  Harry needs to watch himself.  Even if the BRF survives into the future, I can't believe William will tolerate this type of nonsense.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I want you to have a video cam with good sound when you do because *I KNOW *you will give the business!  I will save a copy of it on my computer!


FOR SURE I will; the HB is a great photog and videographer .. and he won't stop me when I "engage" with these 2 master-grifters!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Rich people can also be the stingiest people, especially the entitled. So I can totally believe they wouldn't pay for a hotel room (only non-famous people actually pay for hotel rooms obviously) but still splurge on a house.


THIS .. 100%+++!!!  I have horror stories from my friends that worked high-end retail, where some celeb's (_who - funny enough have people totally fooled that they are so "down-to-earth"_ .. *BS*) who actually expected to pay "wholesale" or less for very high-end Jewelry and clothing!  On top of that, demanding that the Sales Associate *NOT charge them the Sales Tax* (_and in Boston at that time, it was a measly 4.5% on $250 and up_)!!!!  Most of these people were the upper echelon of Hollywood, but I've heard that the worst are people like Meghan, the *Class-Z level*!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> A grandmother and especially a father would have a softer spot for a petulant child.  A sibling, on the other hand, has less tolerance.  Harry needs to watch himself.  Even if the BRF survives into the future, I can't believe William will tolerate this type of nonsense.


I'd like to see them get just enough allowance to live like "regular" people.....less than $100K a year (which is still rich to most people)


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> and from a US publication (sorry to repeat myself but I'm so happy to see the first negative news about them here)


Not really negative but HONEST. Truth hurts.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Harry blames the media (that Diana likely notified) for her death, and claimed he didn't want something like that repeated with his wife, yet he's allowing them to be called now?  Boggles the mind.



If he works in TV/film he'll be part of the media and open himself (and his wife) to all kinds of criticism.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Not really negative but HONEST. Truth hurts.


yes, not fawning over them and calling them heroes


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So for some reason the most eligible bachelor of the world could indeed spend several weekends with his z-list actress, erm, celebrity and influencer, without being caught? How come seeing the press basically stalked him? Maybe because the hint dropping and calling up the paps didn't begin until later?


.. think about the IRONY of this whole scene; remember when JCMH told the photogs and reporters on their Africa trip .. 

_"Prince Harry is getting real about his royal pressures. In a heartbreaking interview conducted during the filming of ITV's new documentary "Harry & Meghan: An African Journey," the Duke of Sussex gets candid about the death of his mother. "I see a 
camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back," he said. "In that respect, it’s the worst reminder of her life as oppose to the best." _

Yet, *NOW *.. they are calling up the paps to take pictures of them, to make sure the WORLD knows how  *WONDERFUL* they are doing these unbelievable humanitarian "tasks".  It just goes to show you that the 2 of them are that *stupid*, that they simply don't seem to understand the hypocrisy that they exhibit time & time again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

purseinsanity said:


> I think some of these royals, even with all the fame, money, travel, luxury, and privilege, have very low self esteem.  Diana certainly did, and I think JCMH did as well as Edward.  Both men allowed controlling women to take over their lives.  Let's see if Harry can wrangle himself away.





purseinsanity said:


> Harry blames the media (that Diana likely notified) for her death, and claimed he didn't want something like that repeated with his wife, yet he's allowing them to be called now?  Boggles the mind.





CeeJay said:


> .. think about the IRONY of this whole scene; remember when JCMH told the photogs and reporters on their Africa trip ..
> 
> _"Prince Harry is getting real about his royal pressures. In a heartbreaking interview conducted during the filming of ITV's new documentary "Harry & Meghan: An African Journey," the Duke of Sussex gets candid about the death of his mother. "I see a
> camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back," he said. "In that respect, it’s the worst reminder of her life as oppose to the best." _
> 
> Yet, *NOW *.. they are calling up the paps to take pictures of them, to make sure the WORLD knows how  *WONDERFUL* they are doing these unbelievable humanitarian "tasks".  It just goes to show you that the 2 of them are that *stupid*, that they simply don't seem to understand the hypocrisy that they exhibit time & time again.



I would say it’s because, like Meghan, Harry lies for sympathy... there isn’t a doubt in my mind that he’s worse than her...


----------



## lulilu

sdkitty said:


> I googled revenge dressing and found this Vanity Fair article.  This "writer" must be a stan.  Makes me want to cancel my VF subscription.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s U.K. Farewell Tour Is a Master Class in Revenge-Dressing
> 
> 
> Not since Princess Diana herself has a royal sent such an exquisitely powerful message with her clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com





rose60610 said:


> The VF article on Meghan's "masterful" revenge dressing includes:
> 
> "Meghan’s farewell tour fashion was rife with sweet revenge messaging...But in recent days, the colors turned unapologetically bold—like her critics never wanted her to be. It can’t be a coincidence that Meghan opted for not one but two capes, whether for superheroine vibes (some credit her with rescuing Harry, after all) or to symbolize the couple’s flight."
> 
> Ugh. Isn't that about as insulting to Harry as it gets? That a mid 30's man from the BRF who spent ten years in the military "needed rescuing"? From Meghan? I wonder if they have the decency to be embarrassed by that.





gracekelly said:


> Why they called any of that revenge dressing is beyond me. If anything it was the opposite.  Leaving  and looking as terrible as possible.



I never understood this theory.  Are we to believe she plotted with designers to make these outfits to send some kind of message?  Other than she likes ill-fitting clothing?  That green one is criminal it is so ugly and badly fitting.  It makes me laugh to imagine the discussions she had about her ideas for revenge dressing.




bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted? This article inadvertently shows how sensitive Meghan is about her age. Apparently on a few recent occasions Harry has referred to himself as being old. Each time Meghan chimes in saying “we’re not old.”  There’s a certain insecurity from both of them, whatever Harry is going through and Meghan needing to put in her two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle's Response When Prince Harry Says He's 'Way Too Old'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry joked he was "way too old" at 35, but wife Meghan Markle quickly disagreed during a recent video call
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I just love that she is sensitive about her age.  What vanity and insecurity.  I hope newspapers keep adding it when reporting on her:  "MM, 39......"  (If she is truly that young)


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> There is a blind item claiming she asked the charity to pay for a private jet 25-min flight but the charity refused and she convinced Harry to cover it. No idea if it’s true but knowing everything we know about her it’s not a stretch to believe it...


Wouldn't surprise me in the least; the question is .. what airport would they have flown into?  @gracekelly / @lalame ???


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> So, now they are Hollywood producers? Going to produce a show about inequality and racism and "normal people"?  Of course, they need someone to come up with the substantial amount of money (not their own of course) so they can hire writers, assistants, crew, someone to actually find those "normal people" to participate and . . . then what?
> 
> What do they actually know about producing content that us ordinary people would want to watch on a weekly or daily basis?  MM was married to a producer, guess she thinks its easy.  I think her first husband, Trevor, will likely enjoy watching them pitch their idea and see how far they get.



Wow, this show they want to make sounds like a real barrel of laughs. It’s not like people may want entertainment to take a break from the cruelty of the world.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan and Harry accused of leaking Queen's jewels security secrets
					

HARRY and Meghan are at the centre of a Buckingham Palace security lapse after a book about their split from the House of Windsor told where and how the Queen stored her priceless jewellery collection.




					www.google.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> FOR SURE I will; the HB is a great photog and videographer .. and he won't stop me when I "engage" with these 2 master-grifters!



This would make my year.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Meghan and Harry accused of leaking Queen's jewels security secrets
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan are at the centre of a Buckingham Palace security lapse after a book about their split from the House of Windsor told where and how the Queen stored her priceless jewellery collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I mean, they basically revealed the layout of William's and Kate's country estate as well. I am surprised Harry would be that malicious actually.


----------



## bag-mania

Anyone familiar with the Rick and Morty cartoon? Meghan  showing up at any charity event reminds me of this character.  He pops in, announces his name and shouts “look at me.” He proceeds to perform one task (and ONLY one task) and then he completely disappears from existence.  

I am thinking of all of the charities that Meghan visits once and never returns to help again.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Wouldn't surprise me in the least; the question is .. what airport would they have flown into?  @gracekelly / @lalame ???


I would guess Santa  Monica first and  Van Nuys second.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they basically revealed the layout of William's and Kate's country estate as well. I am surprised Harry would be that malicious actually.


It is malicious!  I think it is a form of name dropping. Showing the world that they know all the particulars about the Cambridge home and the layout of the Queen’s jewelry vault. Extremely irresponsible for all of the above. For people who are always yapping about privacy, they have no problem spilling regarding other people


----------



## gracekelly

In the time it took to drive to and from the various airports, they could have driven directly from Montecito   to the event in less time.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> It is malicious!  I think it is a form of name dropping. Showing the world that they know all the particulars about the Cambridge home and the layout of the Queen’s jewelry vault. Extremely irresponsible for all of the above. For people who are always yapping about privacy, they have no problem spilling regarding other people


And seriously, how would the writers of FF get information like that if not from these two fools who now claim they had nothing to do with contributing to the book??


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Anyone familiar with the Rick and Morty cartoon? Meghan  showing up at any charity event reminds me of this character.  He pops in, announces his name and shouts “look at me.” He proceeds to perform one task (and ONLY one task) and then he completely disappears from existence.
> 
> I am thinking of all of the charities that Meghan visits once and never returns to help again.
> 
> View attachment 4826751


Love it. It would be duchess MEESEEKS, perfect!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> In the time it took to drive to and from the various airports, they could have driven directly from Montecito   to the event in less time.


Yes, but driving would require a lot less apparatus... too common


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> And seriously, how would the writers of FF get information like that if not from these two fools who now claim they had nothing to do with contributing to the book??



You know, if I was Wills this would be the straw that broke the camel's back. Their kid is too precious to even let the world see a picture now and then, but they don't have a care in the world revealing info that could actually be a significant security risk for his children, one of whom is a future king. Now Meghan has shown in the past she just doesn't get lots of things, but Harry...he knew.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they basically revealed the layout of William's and Kate's country estate as well. I am surprised Harry would be that malicious actually.


Can you imagine what MM would say if Kate announced the layout of MM’s place?  We would never hear the end of the accusations.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Wouldn't surprise me in the least; the question is .. what airport would they have flown into?  @gracekelly / @lalame ???



I have no idea... that rumor doesn't seem plausible to me since it's so close to LA. Unless it was a helicopter lol. Who wants to fly for just 95 miles???


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Yes, but driving would require a lot less apparatus... too common


They could have  arrived with car and driver. Rent a Bentley.   A Rolls would be too flashy. Showing up in the Porsche woukd have been good. Ferrari or Lamborghini would be a tad too much.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I have no idea... that rumor doesn't seem plausible to me since it's so close to LA. Unless it was a helicopter lol. Who wants to fly for just 95 miles???


Helicopter is easy and more cost effective than a plane. Perhaps it was too foggy for that


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Can you imagine what MM would say if Kate announced the layout of MM’s place?  We would never hear the end of the accusations.


The entire world has already seen the inside of that mansion and the layout of the grounds.  The thieves and kidnappers know right where to go after landing their  helicopter on the tennis court.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> The entire world has already seen the inside of that mansion and the layout of the grounds.  The thieves and kidnappers know right where to go after landing their  helicopter on the tennis court.


No doubt (and yikes!).


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> It is malicious!  I think it is a form of name dropping. Showing the world that they know all the particulars about the Cambridge home and the layout of the Queen’s jewelry vault. Extremely irresponsible for all of the above. *For people who are always yapping about privacy, they have no problem spilling regarding other people*


Exactly! Shameful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, this would be the last straw for me. Tacky and boorish,  indeed.  Harry knew better than to do this. MM did, too. Why would anyone want to be around these grifters?  They really are the lowest of the lows. Hooray for W&K for dropping them and staying positive.

QE and Charles should cut them off ASAP.  Now is the time. The momentum has shifted against the jerks. Surely no one is defending this breach of security and etiquette. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, if I was Wills this would be the straw that broke the camel's back. Their kid is too precious to even let the world see a picture now and then, but they don't have a care in the world revealing info that could actually be a significant security risk for his children, one of whom is a future king. Now Meghan has shown in the past she just doesn't get lots of things, but Harry...he knew.


----------



## bisousx

gracekelly said:


> The entire world has already seen the inside of that mansion and the layout of the grounds.  The thieves and kidnappers know right where to go after landing their  helicopter on the tennis court.



This is downright evil of them to invite thieves.


----------



## 1LV

Looking for something to listen to I found an interview on SiriusXM’s Michelle Collins Show where she interviewed Omid (8/17).  Michelle said she thinks Harry is dumb, and that while she’s not a Meghan fan she thinks Meghan was Harry’s ticket out.  It was somewhat interesting, and funny at times.  I think it’s safe to say she isn’t impressed with either of them.  Oh, and Omid continues to swear they didn't speak to him about the book, which Michelle had a hard time believing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe he's trying to be literal. "They never spoke to me...but nobody asked if they sent their personal assistant with a huge binder full of details".


----------



## CarryOn2020

They did not need to ‘speak’ to OS.
MM gave him her detailed diary/notes/files along with her photos. The palace suspected her of planning a book from day 1. This is why she was never allowed into the palace unless H was with her.  Well, that’s the rumor anyway. 



1LV said:


> Looking for something to listen to I found an interview on SiriusXM’s Michelle Collins Show where she interviewed Omid (8/17).  Michelle said she thinks Harry is dumb, and that while she’s not a Meghan fan she thinks Meghan was Harry’s ticket out.  It was somewhat interesting, and funny at times.  I think it’s safe to say she isn’t impressed with either of them.  Oh, and Omid continues to swear they didn't speak to him about the book, which Michelle had a hard time believing.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> They did not need to ‘speak’ to OS.
> MM gave him her detailed diary/notes/files along with her photos. The palace suspected her of planning a book from day 1. This is why she was never allowed into the palace unless H was with her.  Well, that’s the rumor anyway.


Short of Jesus telling me they didn’t speak directly to OS about the book I’ll continue to believe they did.


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> Meghan and Harry accused of leaking Queen's jewels security secrets
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan are at the centre of a Buckingham Palace security lapse after a book about their split from the House of Windsor told where and how the Queen stored her priceless jewellery collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com





I hope there is some sort of law they broke by revealing that kind of info because if not, there should be.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they basically revealed the layout of William's and Kate's country estate as well. I am surprised Harry would be that malicious actually.


Whaaaaat?! I never heard this until now. OMG  What a disgraceful thing to do, there's three young kids living in that house, does their privacy and safety mean nothing? What the h*ll does the layout of W&K's house have anything to do with M&H and their stupid highschool diaries bIoGrApHy? The audacity of these two chancers.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like none of the dirt MM has slung at Kate has stuck at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4826939
> 
> I hope there is some sort of law they broke by revealing that kind of info because if not, there should be.
> 
> 
> Whaaaaat?! I never heard this until now. OMG  What a disgraceful thing to do, there's three young kids living in that house, does their privacy and safety mean nothing? What the h*ll does the layout of W&K's house have anything to do with M&H and their stupid highschool diaries bIoGrApHy? The audacity of these two chancers.



The Brits are bit on the Official Secrets Act and it covers a multitude of things.  In theory, by revealing the information about the home of heirs to the throne and the crown jewels, this Act could be considered breached.  If they made Harry sign it when he was in the military, I wonder if it still holds. 

This goes beyond audacity, this is really sick.


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> The Brits are bit on the Official Secrets Act and it covers a multitude of things.  In theory, by revealing the information about the home of heirs to the throne and the crown jewels, this Act could be considered breached.  If they made Harry sign it when he was in the military, I wonder if it still holds.
> 
> This goes beyond audacity, this is really sick.


Unforgivable, IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

Who has to *sign* it? Employees and ex-employees of the security services, civil servants, *cops*, judges, members of the armed forces and government contractors are among those subject to the *Official Secrets Acts*. 

I think Harry had to sign it when he went into the Army.

Hot da*m*n Harry, you could be up the creek if they can prove you told Omid.


----------



## gracekelly

What is the Official Secrets Act and what happens if you break it?
					

THE Official Secrets Act is used to protect Great Britain’s state secrets and breaching it can have severe consequences. But what is the legislation that protects state secrets, who has to si…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				





Oh boy oh boy I hope they get slammed for this!


----------



## mdcx

My feeling is, the BRF will have to step in to contain the damage being done by H&M in terms of political commentary etc. Something similar to what was done with Prince Andrew - he does not speak/act in any official role, has no duties, important information is not shared with him, he has no diplomatic ties etc. And making all of that public to all governmental/industry networks that M will inevitably try to utilise. I just see M&H on a dangerous path in terms of their effect on the BRF unless they basically "divorce" them. This means she shouldn't be using the Duchess title obvs.


----------



## DebbieAnn

*Who is JCMH? mts mts mts*


----------



## gracekelly

DebbieAnn said:


> *Who is JCMH? mts mts mts*


Just Call Me Harry


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> For beans on toast?!?!?! .. never got that dish!


You want the Heinz English recipe baked beans(not as sweet). Heat them up, then pour over a slice of buttered nice (ETA toasted!) wholewheat bread. Eat with a knife and fork. A very simple supper kind of dish, similar to scrambled eggs on toast.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> My feeling is, the BRF will have to step in to contain the damage being done by H&M in terms of political commentary etc. Something similar to what was done with Prince Andrew - he does not speak/act in any official role, has no duties, important information is not shared with him, he has no diplomatic ties etc. And making all of that public to all governmental/industry networks that M will inevitably try to utilise. I just see M&H on a dangerous path in terms of their effect on the BRF unless they basically "divorce" them. This means she shouldn't be using the Duchess title obvs.



But the Harkles have already stepped down from doing any official.  No duties etc.  This is a bigger problem IMO.  He needs to be stopped from giving out sensitive information.  I doubt that the Queen's jewels are in any danger, but there is principle involved there.


----------



## DebbieAnn

gracekelly said:


> Just Call Me Harry


So simple!  Thank you!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> What is the Official Secrets Act and what happens if you break it?
> 
> 
> THE Official Secrets Act is used to protect Great Britain’s state secrets and breaching it can have severe consequences. But what is the legislation that protects state secrets, who has to si…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy oh boy I hope they get slammed for this!



The Tower of London is vacant, probably has room for 2.


----------



## mdcx

gracekelly said:


> But the Harkles have already stepped down from doing any official.  No duties etc.  This is a bigger problem IMO.  He needs to be stopped from giving out sensitive information.  I doubt that the Queen's jewels are in any danger, but there is principle involved there.


Yes, but they have been qiven quite a bit of grace in terms of not being outright stopped from dealing as if they are still royal. I think that bit will need to be made explicit because M is taking them on a path towards being compromised and potentially compromising the BRF. What deals/trades/promises has she made to all these people who have done them favours? If I was the BRF, I would be locking down everything 100%, no chance for H to ever come back as he can't be trusted again.


----------



## purseinsanity

A new day, a new useless story to keep them in the news:









						Harry and Meghan's Son Archie Will Become a Prince When Charles Is King
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's son, Archie, will automatically become a prince when his grandfather Prince Charles is king of England — read more




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> A new day, a new useless story to keep them in the news:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Son Archie Will Become a Prince When Charles Is King
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's son, Archie, will automatically become a prince when his grandfather Prince Charles is king of England — read more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


Oh please


----------



## Sol Ryan

purseinsanity said:


> A new day, a new useless story to keep them in the news:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Son Archie Will Become a Prince When Charles Is King
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's son, Archie, will automatically become a prince when his grandfather Prince Charles is king of England — read more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



You’d think with the big stink they made about him not having a title when he was born they’d ask for him not to get one then too... oh wait...that’s because all that initial blathering was for show... he was always going to have a title...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

But............but...........It says it will happen _automatically_...........as in out of their control.
As in they will be victims yet again


----------



## zinacef

What about Prince Archie’s mama though ? I’m sure her feelings are gonna get hurt, the BRF are forgetting about her! Another day, another story, another chapter to a book!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> You’d think with the big stink they made about him not having a title when he was born they’d ask for him not to get one then too... oh wait...that’s because all that initial blathering was for show... he was always going to have a title...



Makes me wonder if they refused the courtesy title because they found it inferior compared to George's, Charlotte's and Louis' titles. At this point we've gotten more than one taste of their inflated egos.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I have no idea... that rumor doesn't seem plausible to me since it's so close to LA. Unless it was a helicopter lol. Who wants to fly for just 95 miles???



Harry. That's what he's used to.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> The Brits are bit on the Official Secrets Act and it covers a multitude of things.  In theory, by revealing the information about the home of heirs to the throne and the crown jewels, this Act could be considered breached.  If they made Harry sign it when he was in the military, I wonder if it still holds.
> 
> This goes beyond audacity, this is really sick.



If H signed it, then yes it does.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> The Tower of London is vacant, probably has room for 2.



it has plenty of rooms. Not enough toilets though


----------



## Chanbal

Overtime work for Scobie-doo and his master: 

*Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive biography Finding Freedom after 'noticing unusual activity' amid a fan campaign to boost its rating*

But it has now emerged that fan accounts for the couple urged the 'Sussex Squad' supporters to write their own positive reviews and vote on existing posts about the book in an effort to boost its rating. 

*








						Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biography
					

Amazon placed restrictions on Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's, 39, biography about their departure from life in the British royal family after 'noticing unusual reviewing activity'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Overtime work for Scobie-doo and his master:
> 
> *Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive biography Finding Freedom after 'noticing unusual activity' amid a fan campaign to boost its rating*
> 
> But it has now emerged that fan accounts for the couple urged the 'Sussex Squad' supporters to write their own positive reviews and vote on existing posts about the book in an effort to boost its rating.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biography
> 
> 
> Amazon placed restrictions on Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's, 39, biography about their departure from life in the British royal family after 'noticing unusual reviewing activity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


"I told you so!"


----------



## lanasyogamama

Will the Sugars put their money where their mouth is and buy the book?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Some interesting entries in DM article's comment section. So much for their recent preach on "Social Media in society ... ". Clearly they have never tried to do anything about their own fans actions on social media.


----------



## bag-mania

It is to be expected. Anyone who is still a fan of these two after all that is known about them must admire traits like lying and phoniness. It’s no surprise such fans would write fake reviews on Amazon as a tribute to their heroes.


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Some interesting entries in DM article's comment section. So much for their recent preach on "Social Media in society ... ". Clearly they have never tried to do anything about their own fans actions on social media.
> 
> View attachment 4827463
> View attachment 4827464


Meghan Markle should condemn the behaviour of these “Sussex Squad“ crazies, instead she’s rewarded it.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Overtime work for Scobie-doo and his master:
> 
> *Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive biography Finding Freedom after 'noticing unusual activity' amid a fan campaign to boost its rating*
> 
> But it has now emerged that fan accounts for the couple urged the 'Sussex Squad' supporters to write their own positive reviews and vote on existing posts about the book in an effort to boost its rating.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biography
> 
> 
> Amazon placed restrictions on Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's, 39, biography about their departure from life in the British royal family after 'noticing unusual reviewing activity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


sussex squad?  what a bunch of crap......you'd think if these two were adults....oh wait, they are middle aged people


----------



## rose60610

The "Sussex Squad" has several hundred people? That's a lot of bot work. I wonder how many are dedicated to foreign language outlets so even speakers of Xhosa and Tagalog are included on the "Ask Me If I'm OK" victimhood bandwagon.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> The "Sussex Squad" has several hundred people? That's a lot of bot work. I wonder how many are dedicated to foreign language outlets so even speakers of Xhosa and Tagalog are included on the "Ask Me If I'm OK" victimhood bandwagon.


are they copying AOC's squad?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Cheerleader Squad. Complete with pom poms and matching uniforms. And they don't fit either.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> sussex squad?  what a bunch of crap......you'd think if these two were adults....oh wait, they are middle aged people


I have personally experienced their fans on twitter (not necessarily the Sussex Squad members) and let me tell you they are a different spices all together! I pre-emptively blocked a lot of accounts based on their tweets and avatar. I have read it that accounts tweeting negative stuff towards them receiving death threads etc.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I have personally experienced their fans on twitter (not necessarily the Sussex Squad members) and let me tell you they are a different spices all together! I pre-emptively blocked a lot of accounts based on their tweets and avatar. I have read it that accounts tweeting negative stuff towards them receiving death threads etc.


I can imagine....they do seem to inspire great passion in certain people


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> I have personally experienced their fans on twitter (not necessarily the Sussex Squad members) and let me tell you they are a different spices all together! I pre-emptively blocked a lot of accounts based on their tweets and avatar. *I have read it that accounts tweeting negative stuff towards them receiving death threads etc.*



So do we need bodyguards?  And Meghan wants to produce a show about feminism and racism from her perspective? So if you don't agree with her word salad views her sugars are coming for you ? Because they're all about tolerance?


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Cheerleader Squad. Complete with pom poms and matching uniforms. And they don't fit either.


Green is probably the "team" color, maybe they got left over material from the green "revenge dress" she wore so poorly for her last official outing. The cape alone would probably make at least one uniform skirt.


----------



## chicinthecity777

To be fair, those are not directly from H&M, and of course they will say their fans' actions have nothing to do with them. They are all about influencing others and change the world for the better after all! We shall see!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> To be fair, those are not directly from H&M, and of course they will say their fans' actions have nothing to do with them. They are all about influencing others and change the world for the better after all! We shall see!


well, it seems they could tell their stans to behave...or have someone leak it for them.....not very Michelle-like to let this go on


----------



## 1LV

Probably Jennifer Garner leading the march.  Remember how she said we were humbled by MM’s presence or some BS along those lines.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> To be fair, those are not directly from H&M, and of course they will say their fans' actions have nothing to do with them. They are all about influencing others and change the world for the better after all! We shall see!


Agree but this is a mechanism whereby social media/internet have gone nuts recently, pardoxically the kind of stuff that H&M has deplored of late 
Boy am I getting confused ...


----------



## scarlet555

chicinthecity777 said:


> To be fair, those are not directly from H&M, and of course they will say their fans' actions have nothing to do with them. They are all about influencing others and change the world for the better after all! We shall see!



To be fair, they could be directly from NutMeg and Harry...  

To be fair, is Meghan American citizen, Canadian citizen,  or did she have to acquire some other citizenship to marry Harry, because she is talking about voting she should divulge which country of citizenship she is CURRENTLY, if not STFU.  

To be fair, Harry, if you have a problem, start with lecturing your own country first, oh, wait, you rescinded those rights, so WTF are you preaching in America for, you weren't elected or asked (I don't think)?  Nobody wants to hear from a British guy who insist on not being called a prince and doesn't want to do his royal duties.  Sit down! is all I got to say to Harry.  You are so pretentious and fake is how you sound when you don't want to take part in duties that you were born into and instead, come lecture Americans...


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Some interesting entries in DM article's comment section. So much for their recent preach on "Social Media in society ... ". Clearly they have never tried to do anything about their own fans actions on social media.
> 
> View attachment 4827463
> View attachment 4827464


This just shows what kind of person MM is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Confusion and drama are exactly what the stans and H&M want.  H&M have not condemned the attacks on normal people, have they?  They could turn off the comments. Just remember how H&M twist the facts, then it all becomes clear. 

Focus on QE, Charle, W&K with their kids enjoying a lovely holiday. They know how to maintain their dignity and stay above the fray.  Kudos to them. 





marietouchet said:


> Agree but this is a mechanism whereby social media/internet have gone nuts recently, pardoxically the kind of stuff that H&M has deplored of late
> Boy am I getting confused ...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Confusion and drama are exactly what the stans and H&M want.  H&M have not condemned the attacks on normal people, have they?  They could turn off the comments. Just remember how H&M twist the facts, then it all becomes clear.
> 
> Focus on QE, Charle, W&K with their kids enjoying a lovely holiday. They know how to maintain their dignity and stay above the fray.  Kudos to them.


I am not good at saying things so clearly.. thank you for doing so ...


----------



## lanasyogamama

How long until they launch a new insta?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aww, thank you. We all need kind words these days. Rest assured, your posts are always thought and well-thought out.
Much appreciation 



marietouchet said:


> I am not good at saying things so clearly.. thank you for doing so ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

How long until they fly outta LA? H just is not ready to deal with fires.  Like TP’s mansion, it is not _his style. _

My guess is very soon to both   They gotta sell sell sell those books.



lanasyogamama said:


> How long until they launch a new insta?


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> How long until they fly outta LA? H just is not ready to deal with fires.  Like TP’s mansion, it is not _his style. _
> 
> My guess is very soon to both   They gotta sell sell sell those books.


I am not familiar with California. How close to the fires is their house?


----------



## CarryOn2020

I do not live in Cali, so not sure about this year, but IIRC the last one almost reached Oprah’s house.  My guess is if it isn’t the actual fire, the poor air quality affects everyone as does the increased traffic from those leaving. In a pandemic, everything will just feel worse. Surely, if necessary, H&M will evacuate safely.



			https://twitter.com/montecitofire?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
		









						Prince Harry heartbreak as Santa Barbara’s devastating past unveiled
					

PRINCE HARRY, a keen environmentalist, may have been deeply affected when he learned his new home city of Santa Barbara has been left devastated after two climate disasters in the past.




					www.express.co.uk
				











						Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Cut A Great $14.7 Million Deal On Sergey Grishin’s Montecito Estate
					

After three years on the run and a new baby boy, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have finally settled on a bolthole in Montecito.  It's a fine house, with plenty of room for more kids.  Whether this means they will stay is the question. They have left four houses behind them in the last months.




					www.forbes.com
				






Chagall said:


> I am not familiar with California. How close to the fires is their house?


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> VF should be hanging their heads in shame for publishing that article. 'Revenge dressing' is something you'd say when referring to a break-up, to show an ex what he/she is missing out on, it IS NOT a phrase I would use to describe a woman dressing a certain way to make herself appear superior after she and her husband basically threw a wrecking ball among his family (her in-laws) and the royal family staff causing nothing but stress, upset and drama all to suit themselves.


Totally agree, and quite honestly .. seriously?? .. "revenge dressing" .. something one would do in their early teenage years, not when you are about ready to hit the 40-YO milestone!  These two act like they are 13, seriously? .. GROW THE F UP!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Fun news and Stupid news:
> 
> *Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan calls for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be stripped of titles after plea for ‘change’ in US election
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan has called for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to be stripped of their royal titles after Meghan weighed in on the upcoming US election.On Thursday, the duchess appeared as a special guest at the online “When All Women Vote” event to encourage more people to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> *Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive***
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan talk social media in video call from new house; Meghan joins voter registration drive
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met with members of the Commonwealth Trust, a remaining link to the UK, to talk about making the world better through social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Not a fan of Piers Morgan, but gotta agree with him on this !!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, and quite honestly .. seriously?? .. "revenge dressing" .. something one would do in their early teenage years, not when you are about ready to hit the 40-YO milestone!  These two act like they are 13, seriously? .. GROW THE F UP!


Right, was this a riff off Khloe’s revenge body?  Eye roll.


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> Just found this and I can’t think of a TV show that I would want to watch less... if it was with anyone else, I might have been interested, but those two? Nah. People who cling to titles given through birth and marriage, don’t need to lecture me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Harry planning TV show that takes a 'political stance'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are planning to produce a new TV show that takes a 'political stance' on feminism and racial inequality and focuses on 'normal' people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This is preposterous, seriously? .. "normal" people?????  Like JCMH is a "normal" person? .. and heck, we know Meghan is by no means "normal" and I'm not talking about growing up here!


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Overtime work for Scobie-doo and his master:
> 
> *Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive biography Finding Freedom after 'noticing unusual activity' amid a fan campaign to boost its rating*
> 
> But it has now emerged that fan accounts for the couple urged the 'Sussex Squad' supporters to write their own positive reviews and vote on existing posts about the book in an effort to boost its rating.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon restricts reviews on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biography
> 
> 
> Amazon placed restrictions on Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's, 39, biography about their departure from life in the British royal family after 'noticing unusual reviewing activity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *












chicinthecity777 said:


> Some interesting entries in DM article's comment section. So much for their recent preach on "Social Media in society ... ". Clearly they have never tried to do anything about their own fans actions on social media.
> 
> View attachment 4827463
> View attachment 4827464





Promoting bullies, when those bullies were openly starting dreadful rumours online about your in-laws? Disgusting and twisted. Well done MM, you've reached a new low. Although, not surprising at all.


With all the things coming out since the book was released, confirming (not dismissing!!!) a lot of the rumours about MM & JCMH that were in the newspapers throughout the last couple of years like the bad attitude / rumour spreading / entitlement / jealousy / tantrums etc. it is more understandable than ever why W&K (especially Kate) looked so livid while attending their last joint appearence at the Commonwealth Ceremony in March.

I can only imagine the truth they knew back then and the disgust and anger that they were holding inside while having to sit in the same space as them and then the drama over the procession of senior royals in to Westminster Abbey and W&K dropping out of the procession to suit the two spoilt brats who weren't included. Then having the two chancers strolling out with, one looking smug as a green cheshire cat the other like all his toys had been thrown away.
W&K may have looked p*ssed offffff, but my god they had every right to and it showed that they are human at the end of the day, not just royals.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *How long until they fly outta LA? *H just is not ready to deal with fires.  Like TP’s mansion, it is not _his style. _
> 
> My guess is very soon to both   They gotta sell sell sell those books.



Well, they are trying to leave a door open at the Buckingham palace.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are 'trying to build bridges with the Queen' by gushing about the Commonwealth ...









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'trying to build bridges with Queen'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are trying to make amends with the Queen after Prince Harry appeared to take a swipe at the British Empire last month, a source told The Sunday People.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## tiktok

Chagall said:


> I am not familiar with California. How close to the fires is their house?



The current massive fires are closer to the San Francisco area - wine country, Santa Cruz mountains etc. Air quality is impacted throughout the state and beyond but H&M are pretty far from the most heavily affected areas. However CA fire season in general (which peaked in recent years in Sep-Nov) definitely affects the LA area quite heavily.
I’m sure they can easily go somewhere else if there are fires affecting their areas (maybe not with quite as many bathrooms per person but they’ll manage). I don’t think it’s a reason for the rich and famous not to live in sunny, beautiful CA the rest of the year.


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> The current massive fires are closer to the San Francisco area - wine country, Santa Cruz mountains etc. Air quality is impacted throughout the state and beyond but H&M are pretty far from the most heavily affected areas. However CA fire season in general (which peaked in recent years in Sep-Nov) definitely affects the LA area quite heavily.
> I’m sure they can easily go somewhere else if there are fires affecting their areas (maybe not with quite as many bathrooms per person but they’ll manage). I don’t think it’s a reason for the rich and famous not to live in sunny, beautiful CA the rest of the year.



As long as they're paying their taxes, they are very welcome to this California resident. I'd prefer if they kept their mouths shut more but hey I'll take some of that tax revenue.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4827779
> 
> Promoting bullies, when those bullies were openly starting dreadful rumours online about your in-laws? Disgusting and twisted. Well done MM, you've reached a new low. Although, not surprising at all.
> 
> 
> With all the things coming out since the book was released, confirming (not dismissing!!!) a lot of the rumours about MM & JCMH that were in the newspapers throughout the last couple of years like the bad attitude / rumour spreading / entitlement / jealousy / tantrums etc. it is more understandable than ever why W&K (especially Kate) looked so livid while attending their last joint appearence at the Commonwealth Ceremony in March.
> 
> I can only imagine the truth they knew back then and the disgust and anger that they were holding inside while having to sit in the same space as them and then the drama over the procession of senior royals in to Westminster Abbey and W&K dropping out of the procession to suit the two spoilt brats who weren't included. Then having the two chancers strolling out with, one looking smug as a green cheshire cat the other like all his toys had been thrown away.
> W&K may have looked p*ssed offffff, but my god they had every right to and it showed that they are human at the end of the day, not just royals.



I really feel badly for Kate that day, you could see how hard she was trying to keep her emotions in check, but she had to be ready to either cry or scream. They could not have acted more bratty


----------



## gracekelly

There are fires all over the place and the air quality is terrible.  They are blaming lightening strikes for most of them as opposed to arson, though in one case they seem pretty sure that one man with a jail record started one of them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Here you go. I wonder who is their Social media manager?


----------



## mdcx

Do tactics like Meghan’s actually work on the American audience? I mean to the Brit/Commonwealth audience, she is very transparent and false. Style over substance is not a respected sort of approach there imo. The BRF is generally very solid and hardworking and humble about their wealth etc. She could hardly have taken a more opposite path.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, no, H&M’s tactics make them look ridiculous. She was a Zzzz lister. She wasn’t even one of the top actresses on the Suits show. Jessica Pearson, Gina Torres, and Donna, Sarah Rafferty, were the best female actresses on Suits. Gina Torres won the awards. MM wasnt even nominated for an award, she is glitzy which does not represent US. Old money values are what counts here. Flashing the cash is too nouveau and frowned upon. They’ll never gain respect with their current approach. 










						Suits (American TV series) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				







mdcx said:


> Do tactics like Meghan’s actually work on the American audience? I mean to the Brit/Commonwealth audience, she is very transparent and false. Style over substance is not a respected sort of approach there imo. The BRF is generally very solid and hardworking and humble about their wealth etc. She could hardly have taken a more opposite path.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, no, H&M’s tactics make them look ridiculous. She was a Zzzz lister. She wasn’t even one of the top actresses on the Suits show. Jessica Pearson, Gina Torres, and Donna, Sarah Rafferty, were the best female actresses on Suits. Gina Torres won the awards. MM wasnt even nominated for an award, she is glitzy which does not represent US. *Old money values are what counts here. Flashing the cash is too nouveau and frowned upon. They’ll never gain respect with their current approach.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suits (American TV series) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


I'm not sure that's true any more.  I mean, the US did give the rise to the Kardashians and reality TV.


----------



## purseinsanity

So strip him of his title!









						Meghan Markle can't be stripped of royal title unless Harry is too
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has ruffled feathers by dipping her toe into politics and urging Americans to vote in the upcoming US election. But despite calls for the Duchess to lose her royal title she can't unless Harry does too, a constitutional expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

A lot of women in their 20s and early 30s think she’s great, a “badass”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, that is all due to Andy at Bravo and his friends lowering the bar as a joke and an effort to rake in mega-$$$ for themselves. It worked.  No one I know respects that shallow, meaningless lifestyle. 

RE: Vote!   Who are the US citizens advocating for people *not* to vote? This _vote_ movement has been with us for decades. It is a non-partisan program. So, yes, I support the right to vote.   For MM, it is a clear slap at the UK. She was supposed to become a UK citizen, right?  All lies.

RE: bada$$.  IMO, that is Oprah pushing her on us. Rumor is H&M have jobs with Harpo.




purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure that's true any more.  I mean, the US did give the rise to the Kardashians and reality TV.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Do tactics like Meghan’s actually work on the American audience? I mean to the Brit/Commonwealth audience, she is very transparent and false. Style over substance is not a respected sort of approach there imo. The BRF is generally very solid and hardworking and humble about their wealth etc. She could hardly have taken a more opposite path.



It is a different perspective. Most Americans don’t care enough about them to follow what they are doing so they won't see through the façade. They are a novelty. Megxit was presented to us as a nice story about them giving up everything because they didn't want the discrimination and hassle of being in the royal family. That is all. The details were never supplied by the media here.

A far as style over substance, they live and act like Hollywood celebrities. That is the level they are on and it is what Meghan had planned for awhile. She is counting on their PR machine to generate enough interest to support her delusions of grandeur.


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> A lot of women in their 20s and early 30s think she’s great, a “badass”.


Everybody else just thinks she’s an ass.


----------



## duna

mdcx said:


> You want the Heinz English recipe baked beans(not as sweet). Heat them up, then pour over a slice of buttered nice (ETA toasted!) wholewheat bread. Eat with a knife and fork. A very simple supper kind of dish, similar to scrambled eggs on toast.



Delicious too!


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> Some interesting entries in DM article's comment section. So much for their recent preach on "Social Media in society ... ". Clearly they have never tried to do anything about their own fans actions on social media.
> 
> View attachment 4827463
> View attachment 4827464



Birds of a feather......


----------



## bag-mania

Omid must be thrilled. His book hit the top of the _New York Times_ best sellers list for at least a week. Strangely, it is not among the Amazon top 100 sellers.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Omid must be thrilled. His book hit the top of the _New York Times_ best sellers list for at least a week. Strangely, it is not among the Amazon top 100 sellers.


yes, I see it's number 4....how much you want to bet that somehow H&M get money out of this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Meghan Markle's ‘selfish’ claim to have given up her life for royals debunked by expert

"Meghan lamented she had "given up her entire life" for the Royal Family, according to the authors of the newly-released biography Finding Freedom. However, this claim has been slapped down by US royal historian Marlene Koenig, who argued Meghan had a lot to gain by becoming the Duchess of Sussex."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Even better: apparently others have noticed too she's staring at Harry like a lunatic, entertaining read:

Meghan Markle’s ‘weird habit’ with Prince Harry mocked: ‘It trips me out!’

Though I'll say that's by far not her worst habit with him.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, I see it's number 4....how much you want to bet that somehow H&M get money out of this?



If anything H&M should be paying him. That man has spent the last few years of his life worshipping at the alter of Meghan. Sure, he's making cash on his book but that kind of blind devotion is not easy to find. 

He posted this on Twitter. Now I don't feel bad calling her fans "morons" since it is a term open for use. I suspect Omid visits here as well as other sites from time to time to get a feel for what he is up against in his role as Meghan's biggest cheerleader.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan Markle's ‘selfish’ claim to have given up her life for royals debunked by expert
> 
> "Meghan lamented she had "given up her entire life" for the Royal Family, according to the authors of the newly-released biography Finding Freedom. However, this claim has been slapped down by US royal historian Marlene Koenig, who argued Meghan had a lot to gain by becoming the Duchess of Sussex."



I think it's pretty clear that she gained more than she gave up. She was a supporting player on that show which was coming to an end, her relationship with her celebrity chef boyfriend was ending, etc. She was mid 30's with no real prospects for future employment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think it's pretty clear that she gained more than she gave up. She was a supporting player on that show which was coming to an end, her relationship with her celebrity chef boyfriend was ending, etc. She was mid 30's with no real prospects for future employment.


right...she is now a household name and loves it.....no one can convince me otherwise.  now is she happy? is she satisfied? probably not.  this is a very ambitious woman


----------



## CarryOn2020

Asking for a moron — isn’t Prince Andrew a ‘non-working royal’?

OS does know MM lies, right?  Don‘t H&M’s lies count as a ‘horrendous mess’?  Perhaps OS could tell us why any ‘woman with a voice‘ would marry a guy like Harry who is from a family known to be racist.  Since when does a ‘woman with a voice’  fuss and complain and cry about perceived slights?  Shouldn’t she be a champion for the downtrodden, not someone begging for sympathy?


[aw, darn it, I’m all wound up now ]




bag-mania said:


> If anything H&M should be paying him. That man has spent the last few years of his life worshipping at the alter of Meghan. Sure, he's making cash on his book but that kind of blind devotion is not easy to find.
> 
> He posted this on Twitter. Now I don't feel bad calling her fans "morons" since it is a term open for use. I suspect Omid visits here as well as other sites from time to time to get a feel for what he is up against in his role as Meghan's biggest cheerleader.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4828469


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Asking for a moron — isn’t Prince Andrew a ‘non-working royal’?



Now why would you expect a _royal reporter_ to know that? 

Since Scobie has no rational explanation for some of Meghan and Harry's antics, he is forced to deflect and try to distract the argument away from them. "Look, at least Meghan is not a perv so anything she does is fine" appears to be his defense of choice.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> But the Harkles have already stepped down from doing any official.  No duties etc.  This is a bigger problem IMO.  He needs to be stopped from giving out sensitive information.  I doubt that the Queen's jewels are in any danger, but there is principle involved there.


What I find amazing, is that Harry seems to have a huge dislike of his brother now .. what happened? (oh wait - Meghan)!  To jeopardize William, Katherine and their children?!?!? .. heartless, disgusting and reeks of jealousy.  QEII and Prince Charles really need to deal with these 2 in a harsh way, strip the titles and no more funding!  They wanted individual Finances, well .. there you go!!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Now why would you expect a _royal reporter_ to know that?
> 
> Since Scobie has no rational explanation for some of Meghan and Harry's antics, he is forced to deflect and try to distract the argument away from them. "Look, at least Meghan is not a perv so anything she does is fine" appears to be his defense of choice.


there is another Brit (woc) reporter/author I've seen on Amanpour and Co.  She seems to be a legit writer - Afua Hirsch -  who firmly believes H&M are victims of racism.  Not sure why a woc would really align with this grifter, who basically grew up pretty privileged and fashioned herself as white or racially ambiguous for her acting career.  But what do I know.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> If anything H&M should be paying him. That man has spent the last few years of his life worshipping at the alter of Meghan. Sure, he's making cash on his book but that kind of blind devotion is not easy to find.
> 
> He posted this on Twitter. Now I don't feel bad calling her fans "morons" since it is a term open for use. I suspect Omid visits here as well as other sites from time to time to get a feel for what he is up against in his role as Meghan's biggest cheerleader.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4828469



Oh boy, someone needs to point out to him the only one spending energy on a non-working royal is him... and he's the one adding fuel to the fire by keeping her name in the papers every day.


----------



## Chagall

mdcx said:


> You want the Heinz English recipe baked beans(not as sweet). Heat them up, then pour over a slice of buttered nice (ETA toasted!) wholewheat bread. Eat with a knife and fork. A very simple supper kind of dish, similar to scrambled eggs on toast.


That’s really going to help with the Covid pounds.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> there is another Brit (woc) reporter/author I've seen on Amanpour and Co.  She seems to be a legit writer - Afua Hirsch -  who firmly believes H&M are victims of racism.  Not sure why a woc would really align with this grifter, who basically grew up pretty privileged and fashioned herself as white or racially ambiguous for her acting career.  But what do I know.



That is because you know more about Meghan than the supposed reporter.

Let's face it, Meghan has benefitted greatly from an overabundance of good will that was automatically bestowed upon her by the media and the public alike from the moment the engagement was announced. She was viewed as being a symbol (WOC in the BRF, breath of fresh air, great humanitarian, blah, blah, blah). That image of her was built up and promoted so much and there is a great deal of emotional investment among those who wanted it to be true. That's why they won't let go, they desperately want/need for her to succeed and be what they want her to be.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> If anything H&M should be paying him. That man has spent the last few years of his life worshipping at the alter of Meghan. Sure, he's making cash on his book but that kind of blind devotion is not easy to find.
> 
> He posted this on Twitter. Now I don't feel bad calling her fans "morons" since it is a term open for use. I suspect Omid visits here as well as other sites from time to time to get a feel for what he is up against in his role as Meghan's biggest cheerleader.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4828469


Oh Lord, here we go again.  Those of us who don't like her, it MUST be because she's a WOC.  STFU Scobie.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Oh Lord, here we go again.  Those of us who don't like her, it MUST be because she's a WOC.  STFU Scobie.



This woman could be purple with pink polka dots.  Can't people see it is just the personality that is so objectionable?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Undoubtedly, some of H&M’s critics are ugly racists and have reserved a special place in h3ll for themselves. IMO, by far the majority of H&M’s critics are repulsed by their behavior, grifting, disrespect to QE, Charles et al., and their lies. Most of us do not see them as helpless victims, but as manipulators of the truth.  Interesting that OS passes over all of that and focuses on the critics who are racists [without asking H to explain his own behavior and comments].

If they weren’t tacky grifters:
They could use their ‘voice’ to educate people about the positives that focus on both countries. For instance, I learned yesterday about the garden at Dumbarton Oaks in DC. The woman who designed it was Edith Wharton’s niece. How cool is that! https://www.doaks.org/visit

They could shine their special light on people who have overcome racism and let these stories inspire others. Instead as they sit in their multi-million dollar house,  we hear all about their difficult life. Spare me. This lack of authenticity is why most of us strongly dislike these 2 grifters.




gracekelly said:


> This woman could be purple with pink polka dots.  Can't people see it is just the personality that is so objectionable?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Omid must be thrilled. His book hit the top of the _New York Times_ best sellers list for at least a week. Strangely, it is not among the Amazon top 100 sellers.


Ugh I’ve heard that the NYT spot is basically for sale.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh I’ve heard that the NYT spot is basically for sale.



I am not one bit surprised by that. It's been years since the "gray lady" has had the integrity it based it's reputation on.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan Markle's ‘selfish’ claim to have given up her life for royals debunked by expert
> 
> *"Meghan lamented she had "given up her entire life" for the Royal Family,* according to the authors of the newly-released biography Finding Freedom. However, this claim has been slapped down by US royal historian Marlene Koenig, who argued Meghan had a lot to gain by becoming the Duchess of Sussex."



Lamented? What did she give up? Was being a D List actress with zero prospects the ultimate prize of humankind? She lived with Harry before the wedding. She knew exactly what she was getting into. She can't plead "young and naive". Even I was a fan at the beginning. I spent a good part of her wedding day glued to the TV, happy for her.  She was given effing everything. Riches galore. Private jet travel galore. Designer clothes galore. Servants galore. Fawning media attention galore. The BRF still doles out millions to M&H annually. Now? Everyone make a few missteps along the way, but M just kept sinking herself deeper and deeper, crying for pity louder and louder. She recently claimed she didn't know about the Commonwealth while at the same time "was uncomfortable" about its history, like that is even remotely possible or believable coming from a Northwestern grad who majored in International Studies. Did she think she could throw Kate and Will under the bus and be in line to be Queen herself? Every time she turns around she frames herself as a victim of something new. She must be exhausted searching for excuses to call herself a victim. If QEII decided to give up the throne and everything that comes with it and said "Here Meghan, take over", M would still find ways to be a victim and beg for sympathy.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan Markle's ‘selfish’ claim to have given up her life for royals debunked by expert
> 
> "Meghan lamented she had "given up her entire life" for the Royal Family, according to the authors of the newly-released biography Finding Freedom. However, this claim has been slapped down by US royal historian Marlene Koenig, who argued Meghan had a lot to gain by becoming the Duchess of Sussex."


Marlene Koenig is just stating the obvious. Many of us never heard of MM before she started chasing Harry, how lucky we were! Regrettably, the entire world is now inundated with news about the duchess living in her historic mansion of the 19 toilets acquired from the equally famous Scarface.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is because you know more about Meghan than the supposed reporter.
> 
> Let's face it, Meghan has benefitted greatly from an overabundance of good will that was automatically bestowed upon her by the media and the public alike from the moment the engagement was announced. She was viewed as being a symbol (WOC in the BRF, breath of fresh air, great humanitarian, blah, blah, blah). That image of her was built up and promoted so much and there is a great deal of emotional investment among those who wanted it to be true. That's why they won't let go, they desperately want/need for her to succeed and be what they want her to be.


this is a smart woman I think.  but biracial and identifying with Meghan.  doesn't want to see the negative in her.


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> That’s really going to help with the Covid pounds.


When one adds Covid pounds to the burden of Scobie-doo and his masters MA & MM...


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> So strip him of his title!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle can't be stripped of royal title unless Harry is too
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has ruffled feathers by dipping her toe into politics and urging Americans to vote in the upcoming US election. But despite calls for the Duchess to lose her royal title she can't unless Harry does too, a constitutional expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


IMO .. they should take the Duke & Duchess titles away from them .. PERIOD, basta cosi!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> IMO .. they should take the Duke & Duchess titles away from them .. PERIOD, basta cosi!


uugh
so annoying that she wants to be "the duchess" and at the same time talk about how much more free she is here in the US.  That pic of her with H, Will and Kate.  They all look stressed - Harry frowning - and she has a smug smile.


----------



## Tootsie17

rose60610 said:


> Lamented? What did she give up? Was being a D List actress with zero prospects the ultimate prize of humankind? She lived with Harry before the wedding. She knew exactly what she was getting into. She can't plead "young and naive". Even I was a fan at the beginning. I spent a good part of her wedding day glued to the TV, happy for her.  She was given effing everything. Riches galore. Private jet travel galore. Designer clothes galore. Servants galore. Fawning media attention galore. The BRF still doles out millions to M&H annually. Now? Everyone make a few missteps along the way, but M just kept sinking herself deeper and deeper, crying for pity louder and louder. She recently claimed she didn't know about the Commonwealth while at the same time "was uncomfortable" about its history, like that is even remotely possible or believable coming from a Northwestern grad who majored in International Studies. Did she think she could throw Kate and Will under the bus and be in line to be Queen herself? Every time she turns around she frames herself as a victim of something new. She must be exhausted searching for excuses to call herself a victim. If QEII decided to give up the throne and everything that comes with it and said "Here Meghan, take over", M would still find ways to be a victim and beg for sympathy.


You nailed it!  M will never realize how blessed she was that Harry actually fell in love with her, and the BRF welcomed her.


----------



## 1LV




----------



## bag-mania

Oprah Winfrey Seems to Be Introducing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to All of Her Friends
					

The royal couple said that they “absolutely adore” self-help author and longtime Oprah Winfrey Network contributor, Brené Brown.




					www.google.com


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4828963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey Seems to Be Introducing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to All of Her Friends
> 
> 
> The royal couple said that they “absolutely adore” self-help author and longtime Oprah Winfrey Network contributor, Brené Brown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I always thought Oprah was intelligent (even with the massive ego), but apparently she is dumber than I thought.


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4828963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey Seems to Be Introducing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to All of Her Friends
> 
> 
> The royal couple said that they “absolutely adore” self-help author and longtime Oprah Winfrey Network contributor, Brené Brown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



If this story is true, they likely have something she wants...I wonder what it is...


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I always thought Oprah was intelligent (even with the massive ego), but apparently she is dumber than I thought.



Could be Oprah bought into the victimhood of Meghan and believes she can help turn those two into something. She somehow became invested in their success but probably not to the extent of actively funding them.


----------



## purseinsanity

I swear, I can't link on any website without seeing MM drivel:









						Meghan Markle Teams Up with Gloria Steinem for a 'Backyard Chat' — with an Appearance from Her Dogs!
					

Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem got together for a "backyard chat" about representation and voting — and Meghan's two dogs made a surprise appearance




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4828963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey Seems to Be Introducing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to All of Her Friends
> 
> 
> The royal couple said that they “absolutely adore” self-help author and longtime Oprah Winfrey Network contributor, Brené Brown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


@*purseinsanity *I believe Oprah knows very well what she is doing. I suspect that both Oprah and MA are behind the zoom meetings,  videos, mansion, etc. Scobie spreads the convenient news... We are looking at the speedy production of an entitlement ***. This is the world we live in.


----------



## Chanbal

Please hide the article below from MM and her loyal supporters. Otherwise, Scobie and company will be working all night on behalf of their duchess.  

*Palace aides are 'cleverly' bringing Kate Middleton to the forefront as a 'Queen-in-waiting' because they 'realise the power the Cambridges have as a young, glamorous, dynamic duo', royal expert claims








						Palace is bringing Kate 'into the forefront' as a 'Queen-in-waiting'
					

Kate Middleton, who is currently staying with her family at Anmer Hall in Norfolk, is taking on more duties, royal expert Katie Nicholl told True Royalty's Kate: The Making of a Modern Queen.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, I can't link on any website without seeing MM drivel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Teams Up with Gloria Steinem for a 'Backyard Chat' — with an Appearance from Her Dogs!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem got together for a "backyard chat" about representation and voting — and Meghan's two dogs made a surprise appearance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



This little meet up took place earlier this month.  Another story under embargo so they could drop it when they wanted to.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, I can't link on any website without seeing MM drivel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Teams Up with Gloria Steinem for a 'Backyard Chat' — with an Appearance from Her Dogs!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem got together for a "backyard chat" about representation and voting — and Meghan's two dogs made a surprise appearance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Gloria Steinem is a very smart woman.  Surely she will see that Meg speaks word salad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## creme fraiche

bag-mania said:


> That is because you know more about Meghan than the supposed reporter.
> 
> Let's face it, Meghan has benefitted greatly from an overabundance of good will that was automatically bestowed upon her by the media and the public alike from the moment the engagement was announced. She was viewed as being a symbol (WOC in the BRF, breath of fresh air, great humanitarian, blah, blah, blah). That image of her was built up and promoted so much and there is a great deal of emotional investment among those who wanted it to be true. That's why they won't let go, they desperately want/need for her to succeed and be what they want her to be.



Afua Hirsh, although she is an accomplished writer with a clear message, has a particular political slant which makes TaNahesi Coates look positively moderate.  Any woman of colour will have been a victim of racism in her eyes, no matter what the individual character of the person is.  Even if there was definitive proof of MMs vindictive selfishness and self aggrandisement offered to Afua, she would still say that MM is innocent of any wrongdoing and the victim of racism.  As  WOC myself, I have all sympathies with the fight against systemic racism, but I find outlooks like Afua Hirsch' one to be unhelpful and more divisive than healing.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I always thought Oprah was intelligent (even with the massive ego), but apparently she is dumber than I thought.





Jayne1 said:


> Gloria Steinem is a very smart woman.  Surely she will see that Meg speaks word salad.



Both smart women but they’re business women ultimately which means their livelihood depends on networking and self-promotion. They might even think MM is an idiot but she is the trend of the day (for now) so they’re riding the wave. For their parts it’s probably no different than promoting an herbal supplement.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Gloria Steinem is a very smart woman.  Surely she will see that Meg speaks word salad.


It looks like there is a big interest in transforming MM into a big star. Why MM? There are so many brilliant women that have dedicated their lives to fight against gender inequality, racial discrimination, and other important causes. MM&H are perceived as an entitled couple (big mansions, private jets...) that preaches one thing and does another.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> For beans on toast?!?!?! .. never got that dish!


Its delicious, lol


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4828963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey Seems to Be Introducing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to All of Her Friends
> 
> 
> The royal couple said that they “absolutely adore” self-help author and longtime Oprah Winfrey Network contributor, Brené Brown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Whatever

Next non-story please


----------



## Chanbal

creme fraiche said:


> Afua Hirsh, although she is an accomplished writer with a clear message, has a particular political slant which makes TaNahesi Coates look positively moderate.  Any woman of colour will have been a victim of racism in her eyes, no matter what the individual character of the person is.  Even if there was definitive proof of MMs vindictive selfishness and self aggrandisement offered to Afua, she would still say that MM is innocent of any wrongdoing and the victim of racism.  As  WOC myself, *I have all sympathies with the fight against systemic racism, but I find outlooks like Afua Hirsch' one to be unhelpful and more divisive than healing.*


Thank you and I couldn't agree more with the above.


----------



## lalame

I’m irritated people keep bringing up how Meghan critics aren’t condemning Prince Andrew instead. One, I can walk and chew gum at same time. Two, neither M or H have spoken up about Prince Andrew either so why are people who have no direct relation to any of them on the hook to condemn this person instead of people they actually know? 

Meghan needs to reflect on that “complacency is complicity” ethos she is championing.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Both smart women but they’re business women ultimately which means their livelihood depends on networking and self-promotion. They might even think MM is an idiot but she is the trend of the day (for now) so they’re riding the wave. *For their parts it’s probably no different than promoting an herbal supplement.*


I agree with you. The problem is that some herbal supplements are harmful, and promoting them is dangerous.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan Markle's ‘selfish’ claim to have given up her life for royals debunked by expert
> 
> "Meghan lamented she had "given up her entire life" for the Royal Family, according to the authors of the newly-released biography Finding Freedom. However, this claim has been slapped down by US royal historian Marlene Koenig, who argued Meghan had a lot to gain by becoming the Duchess of Sussex."


But this is what you do when you marry into the BRF, any Royal Family really. The following ladies did, Catherine, CP Mary of Denmark, Queen Letizia, Queen Maxima. The only difference is these ladies gave up everything to be or eventually be a Queen (Consort) which is a stark contrast to the supposed inferior supporting role Meghan has as "only" a Duchess. Somehow, if she'd snagged William first, all would be well and she'd love the BRF as she'd eventually get her end goal of being a Queen.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you. The problem is that some herbal supplements are harmful, and promoting them is dangerous.



Meh I don’t think Meghan is dangerous. She’s just another celebrity who is famous for no other reason than being famous. Don’t think she has that power.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Meh I don’t think Meghan is dangerous. She’s just another celebrity who is famous for no other reason than being famous. Don’t think she has that power.



Not sure about that. She has a certain ruthlessness and recklessness that makes me proceed with caution. She already destroyed a tight knit family for no good reason, too.


----------



## duna

gracekelly said:


> This little meet up took place earlier this month.  Another story under embargo so they could drop it when they wanted to.



What about wearing masks and social distancing?? I'm not sure about the anti-covid rules in the US but in my neck of the woods this would not be allowed!


----------



## CarryOn2020

All solid points, especially the _end:

"But why try talking about being equal when HRH Megs insists on using a title of hierarchy on every occasion while pretending she’s one of us.
"She doesn’t want to be equal with ANYONE".
And social media user using the nickname Boudica added: "In that case why is Meghan using her rank? Seems hypocritical.
"Also, pure coincidence that Meghan & Gloria are signed to the same speaking agency I'm sure." _

Another article mentioned that if QE was unhappy with H&M, she would remove the titles and money.  So, they do this stuff, however quietly, with palace approval. Too bad QE‘s reign will end on a downbeat - H&M nonsense, Andrew scandal, who knows what else. Spanish King Juan Carlos left under shameful circumstance, too.  At least, Queen Beatrix left on a upbeat note.









						'You've got to laugh!' Royal fans MOCK Meghan Markle after slogan
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been criticised on Twitter for continuing to use her royal title while demanding women be "linked and not ranked".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure about that. She has a certain ruthlessness and recklessness that makes me proceed with caution. She already destroyed a tight knit family for no good reason, too.


Except that many of the stories coming out about William and Harry indicate there was tension between them long before Meghan came along.  So were they a tight family founded in duty or love?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, H wanted out long before MM came along. He has used her to get what he wanted — the spotlight.
IMO, that makes her seem as un-woke as anyone can be. The only reason she is accepted anywhere is because of her husband. Whatever damage she has done, she did with H’s approval and QE‘s.

Frolicking around her backyard during a pandemic and devastating fires — it reminds us of a certain Roman emperor. She should have had H playing the fiddle while she chatted.  Not a great image for us ‘morons’.  




LibbyRuth said:


> Except that many of the stories coming out about William and Harry indicate there was tension between them long before Meghan came along.  So were they a tight family founded in duty or love?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another article mentioned that if QE was unhappy with H&M, she would remove the titles and money.  So, they do this stuff, however quietly, with palace approval.



I'm not sure. She didn't take away Andrew's titles and I have a REALLY hard time believing she would approve of his shenanigans at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> Except that many of the stories coming out about William and Harry indicate there was tension between them long before Meghan came along.  So were they a tight family founded in duty or love?



I don't think it's abnormal to have tension between family members, but from tension to not speaking at all, stripping your child of any family relationships with his cousins and standing by while your wife drives a smearing campaign against your SIL you used to love is quite a stretch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I think this is just one issue with Andrew that disturbs many of us. Since his guilt has not been proven in a court of law, it’s the court of public opinion that counts now, especially in this time of ‘women’s rights.  This is exactly what makes MM seem so disingenuous. By using the title, she is complicit in showing her support for Andrew.  As she is fond is saying, silence is complicity.

She needs to distance herself in a very public way from Andrew. Denounce the title, then she may gain some respect and authenticity.

QE’s inaction makes her look weaker and weaker. Add in H&M’s tacky book with her lack of consequences to them, she is not projecting strength.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure. She didn't take away Andrew's titles and I have a REALLY hard time believing she would approve of his shenanigans at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I agree it seems surprising and abnormal that H would participate so actively and publicly in criticizing his family who is paying for his extravagant lifestyle. Of course, he is someone who is well known to enjoy making trouble for others. He does it because he can get away with it. Once a jerk, always a jerk. Interesting that MM who preaches peace and love would involve herself with such a person.  To me, it just says who they really are. So glad TP got away from them. Definitely a bad news couple with so many negative vibes. Ick.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think it's abnormal to have tension between family members, but from tension to not speaking at all, stripping your child of any family relationships with his cousins and standing by while your wife drives a smearing campaign against your SIL you used to love is quite a stretch.


----------



## Annawakes

I think the Queen is biding her time until the one year review to possibly (please, potentially!) strip their title. If she made any big announcement now it would come across as petty, in response to their book.  She isn’t going to lower herself to even acknowledge the book.  

Add to that M will whine about being victimized for telling the truth, if her title is stripped now.  I still think the Queen is smart, not weak, in waiting until the review


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> Gloria Steinem is a very smart woman.  Surely she will see that Meg speaks word salad.


Well, I would have thought so too, but I saw a video of them talking on instagram and Gloria was gushing over MM like a fan-girl saying how she's so glad that M is back home and M said 'so am I'. I rolled my eyes into another dimension and kept scrolling 




lalame said:


> I’m irritated people keep bringing up how Meghan critics aren’t condemning Prince Andrew instead. One, I can walk and chew gum at same time. Two, neither M or H have spoken up about Prince Andrew either so why are people who have no direct relation to any of them on the hook to condemn this person instead of people they actually know?
> 
> Meghan needs to reflect on that “complacency is complicity” ethos she is championing.


This.
They have no problem leaking stories to the press criticising the royal family and making snide remarks, but have yet to leak a story through sOuRcEs to express their opinions on Andrew and his despicable actions. I wonder why.


----------



## Tootsie17

Lounorada said:


> Well, I would have thought so too, but I saw a video of them talking on instagram and Gloria was gushing over MM like a fan-girl saying how she's so glad that M is back home and M said 'so am I'. I rolled my eyes into another dimension and kept scrolling
> 
> 
> 
> This.
> They have no problem leaking stories to the press criticising the royal family and making snide remarks, but have yet to leak a story through sOuRcEs to express their opinions on Andrew and his despicable actions. I wonder why.


"I rolled my eyes into another dimension"  LMAO!


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> Well, I would have thought so too, but I saw a video of them talking on instagram and Gloria was gushing over MM like a fan-girl saying how *she's so glad that M is back home and M said 'so am I*'. I rolled my eyes into another dimension and kept scrolling
> 
> 
> 
> This.
> They have no problem leaking stories to the press criticising the royal family and making snide remarks, but have yet to leak a story through sOuRcEs to express their opinions on Andrew and his despicable actions. I wonder why.



So it'll be interesting re review date.

Kinda silly to either deliberately burn bridges or risk looking really stupid if they ever need to return to the UK.

I guess she's actually not so smart.


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Well, I would have thought so too, but I saw a video of them talking on instagram and Gloria was gushing over MM like a fan-girl saying how she's so glad that M is back home and M said 'so am I'. I rolled my eyes into another dimension and kept scrolling



Oh ick. It makes me wonder how many famous people who we are told are worthy of great respect would be disappointments if we knew them on a personal level. Once somebody becomes a symbol for a cause he/she becomes publicly revered and above criticism, even though we have absolutely no idea what that person is actually like as an individual. 

I can't fathom Meghan ever becoming that respected but it's 2020 so who knows?


----------



## CarryOn2020

If MM is a status symbol for anything other than social climbing through her husband, then we are all in big trouble.  She sends the exact wrong message to the youth. Relying solely on a man for your _success _is backward. Most men of accomplishment do not want a clingy woman who uses them. They want self-reliant, confident, self-accomplished women. Harry is not a man of his own accomplishment. He has freeloaded off his dad, QE, and the British public his entire life. He and M, the perpetual, helpless victims, whine and complain and blame others. This is not a path to success. Doesn’t Oprah know that?


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Could be Oprah bought into the victimhood of Meghan and believes she can help turn those two into something. She somehow became invested in their success but probably not to the extent of actively funding them.





Tootsie17 said:


> "I rolled my eyes into another dimension"  LMAO!


hmm guehing is a polite conversation technique, when you have exhausted the topic of the weather


----------



## CarryOn2020

When someone treats the ‘help’ as poorly as H&M did [and puts it in a book!], QE needs to act immediately. There should be a zero tolerance policy on behaviours like that. Does anyone believe this is the first time he has been rude to staff? Her?  No, this is exactly who they are. After a lifetime of devoted service, Ms. Kelly and all workers deserve much better.  How dare QE continue to allow these poseurs to stay in the succession. It is disgusting that this happens in the 21st century. If Oprah didn't like her treatment by Hermes, why is she supporting people who behave this way? She needs to stand by her beliefs.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If MM is a status symbol for anything other than social climbing through her husband, then we are all in big trouble.  *She sends the exact wrong message to the youth. *Relying solely on a man for your _success _is backward. Most men of accomplishment do not want a clingy woman who uses them. They want self-reliant, confident, self-accomplished women. Harry is not a man of his own accomplishment. He has freeloaded off his dad, QE, and the British public his entire life. He and M, the perpetual, helpless victims, whine and complain and blame others.* This is not a path to success. Doesn’t Oprah know that?*



Times are changing but it isn't all for the better. That old saying "actions speak louder than words" isn't being followed anymore. There are too many people who talk a good game but they can't or won't do s**t. Yet they are popular and have others clapping for them like trained seals because their words sounded good and meaningful. Phonies and pretenders are being put up on pedestals because they say what they know the crowds want to hear. I could see that being Meghan's path to success.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Oh ick. It makes me wonder how many famous people who we are told are worthy of great respect would be disappointments if we knew them on a personal level. Once somebody becomes a symbol for a cause he/she becomes publicly revered and above criticism, even though we have absolutely no idea what that person is actually like as an individual.
> 
> I can't fathom Meghan ever becoming that respected but it's 2020 so who knows?



I believe that’s where the standard “Don’t meet your heroes comes from”. From my experience it’s very true...


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> hmm guehing is a polite conversation technique, when you have exhausted the topic of the weather


Cannot type ... should have been gushing not guehing , sorry, too late to edit


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> If this story is true, they likely have something she wants...I wonder what it is...


guess she thinks they're marketable


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, I can't link on any website without seeing MM drivel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Teams Up with Gloria Steinem for a 'Backyard Chat' — with an Appearance from Her Dogs!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem got together for a "backyard chat" about representation and voting — and Meghan's two dogs made a surprise appearance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


really?  I can't bring myself to read that one


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> guess she thinks they're marketable


Markleable?


----------



## bag-mania

So Meghan invited Gloria to visit her new (very private, unless you are famous) mansion. It's hard to tell who is using who in this scenario since it is obvious Gloria is pandering as well. Somebody brought the photographer. 

The only good thing about it as far as I'm concerned is we get to see that the dogs are happy.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Cannot type ... should have been gushing not guehing , sorry, too late to edit


No worries, it was understandable.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So Meghan invited Gloria to visit her new (very private, unless you are famous) mansion. It's hard to tell who is using who in this scenario since it is obvious Gloria is pandering as well. Somebody brought the photographer.
> 
> The only good thing about it as far as I'm concerned is we get to see that the dogs are happy.
> 
> View attachment 4829448
> View attachment 4829449


oh gawd, gloria with her rep and at her age doing this?  maybe it's us that aren't seeing M clearly (but I don't think so)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh gawd, gloria with her rep and at her age doing this?  maybe it's us that aren't seeing M clearly (but I don't think so)



I am taking the jaded view that everybody uses everybody. It has likely always been that way, but there is no reason to hide it anymore and pretend to be above all that the way they would have in the past.


----------



## piperdog

bag-mania said:


> Times are changing but it isn't all for the better. That old saying "actions speak louder than words" isn't being followed anymore. There are too many people who talk a good game but they can't or won't do s**t. Yet they are popular and have others clapping for them like trained seals because their words sounded good and meaningful. Phonies and pretenders are being put up on pedestals because they say what they know the crowds want to hear. I could see that being Meghan's path to success.


I agree with all of this. The thing they've been most successful at shining a light on is how phony and transactional the celebrity/activist/philanthropic world is, and how much of the benefit only accrues to those who need it least. It's something I vaguely assumed, but it looks much worse now that it's laid out for all to see. They really have the reverse Midas touch, as I now think less of just about everyone who chooses to/doesn't refuse to act like either of them have accomplished anything to deserve recognition or praise. I never expected sincerity from celebrity, but it's still disappointing to see how that world's tentacles have spread into fields that I had hoped were still honest and honorable.


----------



## scarlet555

Oh Gloria... Julianne Moore is playing you and loving her I was going to watch it... but this...  OMG, I lose respect...  I mean, are we all fame whores at any cost?  Maybe...  I suppose it's hard not to sell out for money...


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Oh Gloria... Julianne Moore is playing you and loving her I was going to watch it... but this...  OMG, I lose respect...  I mean, are we all fame whores at any cost?  Maybe...  I suppose it's hard not to sell out for money...


so I guess you're saying gloria is doing this for exposure which could equal money?  very disappointing to me


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So Meghan invited Gloria to visit her new (very private, unless you are famous) mansion. It's hard to tell who is using who in this scenario since it is obvious Gloria is pandering as well. Somebody brought the photographer.
> 
> The only good thing about it as far as I'm concerned is we get to see that the dogs are happy.
> 
> View attachment 4829448
> View attachment 4829449


basking in the glow that Harry made for her.  she was pretty much a nobody before she snagged him
I wonder if there will every come a day when H will say that to her


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> So Meghan invited Gloria to visit her new (very private, unless you are famous) mansion. It's hard to tell who is using who in this scenario since it is obvious Gloria is pandering as well. Somebody brought the photographer.
> 
> The only good thing about it as far as I'm concerned is we get to see that the dogs are happy.
> 
> View attachment 4829448
> View attachment 4829449


Artful back and white, and soft focus too, all very great Gatsby  but did they cut the part where the beagle ignored her? Seriously puddles have more depth


----------



## marietouchet

Oh to be a trademark lawyer in California .. they are so busy ...

Today's name for the foundation is the Markle Windsor Foundation per DM
I guess they are not counting on getting to keep Sussex

Interesting use of maiden name which does come alphabetically before Windsor ..


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> Oh Gloria... Julianne Moore is playing you and loving her I was going to watch it... but this...  OMG, I lose respect...  I mean, are we all fame whores at any cost?  Maybe...  I suppose it's hard not to sell out for money...





sdkitty said:


> so I guess you're saying gloria is doing this for exposure which could equal money?  very disappointing to me



Even if Gloria always had the best of intentions, living 50+ years with thousands of women constantly telling her how inspirational she is and how admired she is, it is going to inflate the ego and change a person. There’s no way to  maintain much humbleness under those circumstances.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Oh to be a trademark lawyer in California .. they are so busy ...
> 
> Today's name for the foundation is the Markle Windsor Foundation per DM
> I guess they are not counting on getting to keep Sussex
> 
> Interesting use of maiden name which does come alphabetically before Windsor ..



Is she allowed to use the name Windsor without permission?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

:lol:"Pessie said:


> Artful back and white, and soft focus too, all very great Gatsby  but did they cut the part where the beagle ignored her? Seriously puddles have more depth



Guy is thinking “I know her better than any of you all, and that includes you, Harry.”


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Is she allowed to use the name Windsor without permission?


I assume, perhaps incorrectly , Markle is for her, Windsor is for him


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I assume, perhaps incorrectly , Markle is for her, Windsor is for him



I’m sure you’re right but what I don’t know is whether he has permission to use that name from his grandmother and father. Or rather Meghan using it for him, since everyone knows she is the one driving that train.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I only trust people I know, never trust these Hwood or ‘inspirational’ people or royals or many other professions 
They are all fake, only there to put on a show and collect the dollars.




bag-mania said:


> Even if Gloria always had the best of intentions, living 50+ years with thousands of women constantly telling her how inspirational she is and how admired she is, it is going to inflate the ego and change a person. There’s no way to  maintain much humbleness under those circumstances.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I only trust people I know, never trust these Hwood or ‘inspirational’ people or royals or many other professions
> They are all fake, only there to put on a show and collect the dollars.


I don't even trust all of the people I do know, LOL, certainly not celebrities or athletes.  That's why I don't care what their personal opinions are on politics, religion, or what toilet brush to use.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaa? Vote for MM?  
Oh my, I need to have a lie-down now






CeeJay said:


> Alas, at the RNC convention last night, there was a woman who said that she would have her husband vote FOR HER!  That's all I'm going to say about that ..


----------



## Lounorada




----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Alas, at the RNC convention last night, there was a woman who said that she would have her husband vote FOR HER!  That's all I'm going to say about that ..


stupid people


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


>



I just cant look at the video


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> so I guess you're saying gloria is doing this for exposure which could equal money?  very disappointing to me



Sadly, I am only speculating, but what would possess such a woman of character to allow herself to freely be in the same photoframe as Nutmeg.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure about that. She has a certain ruthlessness and recklessness that makes me proceed with caution. She already destroyed a tight knit family for no good reason, too.



Ha fair enough, I should clarify I don't think they are dangerous to the public. To people who actually know them, all bets are off. Though in her defense I put it on Harry really. He's the one who started this entire thing and continues to go with it.


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Sadly, I am only speculating, but what would possess such a woman of character to allow herself to freely be in the same photoframe as Nutmeg.


Money... fame... :/


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Even if Gloria always had the best of intentions, living 50+ years with thousands of women constantly telling her how inspirational she is and how admired she is, it is going to inflate the ego and change a person. There’s no way to  maintain much humbleness under those circumstances.



Unfortunately, it takes a lot of restraint to stay humble, especially in Hollywood.


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Unfortunately, it takes a lot of restraint to stay humble, especially in Hollywood.


hope gloria gets backlash on this


----------



## youngster

Doesn't Gloria have a bio-pic coming out? Or, maybe it's out, I have no clue.  This was convenient for the both of them, MM and GS. GS has a bio-pic, MM is on the celebrity train now and needs to keep her profile high if there is any chance of raking in the dollars for public speeches down the road or raise any serious money for that new foundation.  So, they meet, pics taken and released, publicity for each of them, move on to the next photo op,  Doubtful you'll ever see them together again unless they happen to run into each other at some event.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


>





sdkitty said:


> I just cant look at the video



If those are the highlights I can't imagine how dull the rest of the video will be. They are a mutual admiration society repeating "young women should vote." They aren't encouraging them to learn about the issues and the candidates so they can make their best decisions, just vote! Talk about phoning it in.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure you’re right but what I don’t know is whether he has permission to use that name from his grandmother and father. Or rather Meghan using it for him, since everyone knows she is the one driving that train.


It's Archie's last name too though right?, so maybe she can use it as such.


----------



## 1LV

scarlet555 said:


> Sadly, I am only speculating, but what would possess such a woman of character to allow herself to freely be in the same photoframe as Nutmeg.


When is the last time you (or most of us) gave any thought to Gloria Steinem before this?


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> When is the last time you (or most of us) gave any thought to Gloria Steinem before this?


well, someone here said there's a movie with julianne moore?  so that would bring her attention.  she's an icon


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> well, someone here said there's a movie with julianne moore?  so that would bring her attention.  she's an icon


I just haven’t thought of her in ages.  It’s probably a case of “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours”.  They both have something to sell.


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> Oh to be a trademark lawyer in California .. they are so busy ...
> 
> Today's name for the foundation is the Markle Windsor Foundation per DM
> I guess they are not counting on getting to keep Sussex
> 
> Interesting use of maiden name which does come alphabetically before Windsor ..



So how does this relate to Archewell? How many foundations are these two going to have?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gloria once _was_ an icon. Long time ago, thinking in the 70s and 80s.  I don’t know anything about a biopic.

IIRC, she fell out of favor, got into some kind of fuss with other founders of ‘the movement’, they sort of shut her out. After years of saying she would not, she got married, became a step-mom, etc. Somewhere in there she may have had a battle with cancer. So, her struggle has been a real one and now she looks great, seems healthy and well.  Please correct me as needed.

This silly chat is beneath her imo. Most likely, it happen b/c they have the same PR agency. Guessing we can always count on H&M to dumb it down.

ETA:  I am curious about that tree and whatever is in the windows. Anyone know?



sdkitty said:


> well, someone here said there's a movie with julianne moore?  so that would bring her attention.  she's an icon


----------



## CarryOn2020

They have more than 5, I think.  Almost like they have an issue with focus, paying attention. 



Sol Ryan said:


> So how does this relate to Archewell? How many foundations are these two going to have?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I am taking the jaded view that everybody uses everybody. It has likely always been that way, but there is no reason to hide it anymore and pretend to be above all that the way they would have in the past.



Integrity may not be valued enough (by marketing, HR and PR mostly) but people who have it are mentally and probably physically healthier. They don't have to attach themselves to every cause célèbre or esteemed celebrity to validate their own self-worth. Or own 19 bathrooms.

IMO, it's those who are authentically themselves, living by their own rules, and make clear and valued judgments that are held in high esteem by the people around them and the public, Nelson Mandela for his sense of justice, QEII for her duty, Bowie's endless search for expression, Diana's fearlessness for someone in her position, and many others too. It's these that will be revered long after they're all gone - for their life's work - not just their outfit (as fine and memorable as some of those outfits undoubtedly were).

Integrity and _substance _are what MM and JCMH don't have. They know full well they've never had either, and they both tirelessly scheme and endlessly manipulate, latching on to anyone's coat-tails they think does. They are weightless, hollow and meaningless. Everything's for show. Integrity is not transferable by association. In H's case, not inherited either.


----------



## sdkitty

I'm becoming convinced that the American media (and celebs I guess) are hungry for an icon (a new Camelot couple).  They decided that this biracial woman and her red-headed prince  fit the bill and they're sticking to it.  Don't know what most "regular" people think about H&M.  Probably most people are busy with their own lives and problems.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Lamented? What did she give up? Was being a *D List* *Z-LIST* actress with zero prospects


Fixed that for you!!!


----------



## poopsie

This is just my VHO of course but Gloria and our duchess are birds of a feather
When you put Gloria up against real women of ACTION like Eleanor, Betty, Bella and Shirley she just doesn't carry the same weight. Like someone else we know, Gloria was a purveyor of words. Lots and lots of words. BUT Gloria was _attractive_. All you heard about the other women was how physically unattractive they were. Never mind that they were in the trenches doing the grunt work (like, who wants to see _that_).  The only thing I seem to recall Gloria doing was putting on a Bunny suit to get the lowdown on Playboy Clubs. Again..........totally related to her looks. Was there ever any follow up or actual effort to implement change?
No, Gloria did just enough to make a name for herself. Talk show circuits have that going for them. Just like someone else *cough cough* it enabled her to attach her name to some real movers and shakers.
Ms Magazine, the ERA, yes you will see Gloria's name attached to their formation. After that?
Good for Gloria for what she contributed. And she was there when a lot of things were going down but I just don't worship at her altar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Sussex Royal charity enters liquidation
					

Couple are closing down the foundation to focus on Archewell




					www.independent.co.uk
				



_The declaration of solvency and other documents were filed at the start of July, but listed as being processed by Companies House for the first time on 28 July.

Earlier this month, a source who works closely with the royal couple told The Independent that paperwork had been filed with Companies House and the Charity Commission to officially shut down Sussex Royal.

“This will appear on the online public record in the coming days,” they said._


----------



## CarryOn2020

“_Well,” Steinem said, “you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy.”
“Like my husband! I love that when he just came in he said, ‘You know that I’m a feminist, too, right Gloria? It’s really important to me that you know that,’” Markle said. “I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification. That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which, of course, includes women.”
“And also that he is a nurturing father,” Steinem replied. “Because then your son will grow up knowing it’s okay to be loving and nurturing.”
Harry being open about his feminism isn’t new, per se. In 2013, for example, at the Nepal Girl Summit in Kathmandu, the prince gave a speech about women’s empowerment. 
“While the unique challenges faced by girls is not a topic I have spoken much about in the past, I think it’s important to acknowledge something that has become obvious to me and is already known to everyone in this room: There are way too many obstacles between girls and the opportunities they deserve,” he said. “It cannot just be women who speak up for girls.









						Meghan Markle Says Prince Harry Is A ‘Beautiful’ Feminist Father To Archie
					

In an interview with feminist icon Gloria Steinam, Markle discussed Harry owning his feminism.




					www.huffingtonpost.ca
				



_


----------



## marietouchet

Sol Ryan said:


> So how does this relate to Archewell? How many foundations are these two going to have?


Thus one replaces Sussex Royal
BTW this one is abbreviated MWX, where did they got the X? 
No clue about Archewell, I assume foundations are like LLCs and potato chips, you cant stop at just one


BTW just go to thinking ...
OK I get it MWX puts the last names in alphabetical order, kinda logical in an American kind of way
Reminds me of how Meghan always wanted to precede Harry in English ceremonies, which is justified by the US way where ladies go first ...

BUT BUT BUT ...
This is so NOT British and actually will not likely go down well in the UK - it goes against he British class system. Not here to defend that but it is there - the elephant in the room
From the UK perspective, H will always outrank his wife. PERIOD. He should always go first in royal processions, and his name should have gone first according to British logic

I dont care who goes first, up they have chosen a solution that will rankle in the UK, not a compromise or a path of least resistance


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> “_Well,” Steinem said, “you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy.”_
> *Harry being open about his feminism isn’t new, per se. In 2013, for example, at the Nepal Girl Summit in Kathmandu, the prince gave a speech about women’s empowerment. *
> _“While the unique challenges faced by girls is not a topic I have spoken much about in the past, I think it’s important to acknowledge something that has become obvious to me and is already known to everyone in this room: There are way too many obstacles between girls and the opportunities they deserve,” he said. *“It cannot just be women who speak up for girls.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Prince Harry Is A ‘Beautiful’ Feminist Father To Archie
> 
> 
> In an interview with feminist icon Gloria Steinam, Markle discussed Harry owning his feminism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffingtonpost.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



FINALLY!!!!!!!  Someone who talks the talk and walks the walk! Way to go Harry. 
I just think you went a teensy bit too far. It's one thing to hand the reins over to your wife. It's quite another to let her walk all over you (literally) in public until you are a laughingstock. True equality is based on respect. It doesn't look like your grand gesture is being respected. And while I don't advocate traditional gender roles at all it is time to take at least one of your balls back. 
Women cannot afford to let anyone other than women SPEAK UP for their gender. If men want to be _supportive, _fine but women will NEVER be respected unless we ourselves EARN it. Otherwise it just looks like the old weak woman/strong man to the rescue scenario


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Integrity may not be valued enough (by marketing, HR and PR mostly) but people who have it are mentally and probably physically healthier. They don't have to attach themselves to every cause célèbre or esteemed celebrity to validate their own self-worth. Or own 19 bathrooms.
> 
> IMO, it's those who are authentically themselves, living by their own rules, and make clear and valued judgments that are held in high esteem by the people around them and the public, Nelson Mandela for his sense of justice, QEII for her duty, Bowie's endless search for expression, Diana's fearlessness for someone in her position, and many others too. It's these that will be revered long after they're all gone - for their life's work - not just their outfit (as fine and memorable as some of those outfits undoubtedly were).
> 
> Integrity and _substance _are what MM and JCMH don't have. They know full well they've never had either, and they both tirelessly scheme and endlessly manipulate, latching on to anyone's coat-tails they think does. They are weightless, hollow and meaningless. Everything's for show. Integrity is not transferable by association. In H's case, not inherited either.



I agree with everything you said right up until the part about H&M knowing that they don't have any integrity and substance. Those two believe their hype and they are so full of themselves it is obnoxious. In fact they personify the stereotype of the millennial generation as being somewhat lazy while demanding instant gratification without putting in the years of work and earning it.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I agree with everything you said right up until the part about H&M knowing that they don't have any integrity and substance. Those two believe their hype and they are so full of themselves it is obnoxious. In fact they personify the stereotype of the millennial generation as being somewhat lazy while demanding instant gratification without putting in the years of work and earning it.



Well, you may be right. But I think they are way overcompensating. This flurry of activity is last chance saloon for the both of them. 

I don't think they'd work so 'hard' to flag down everyone who is is 'someone' unless they knew deep down they are a couple of unemployed wannabes that are soon to hit middle age, regretting staring out of the window dreaming at and/or passing notes at school when they could/should have been paying attention and learning something useful. Even fools like these know word salad and good intentions to do 'let's think of later' won't pay their staff for long. 

Time is ticking and they know it.


----------



## KellyObsessed

I think the movie featuring Ms Steinem is the Mrs.America series starring Cate Blanchett?

I'm appalled that Meghan placed her hat on the table.  Even though there was no food on the table at the time, it simply isn't done.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Is she allowed to use the name Windsor without permission?


I don't think so.  Or even Mountbatten-Windsor which would be his actual family last name.  Does it make a difference if the Foundation is in the US vs UK?


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Doesn't Gloria have a bio-pic coming out? Or, maybe it's out, I have no clue.  This was convenient for the both of them, MM and GS. GS has a bio-pic, MM is on the celebrity train now and needs to keep her profile high if there is any chance of raking in the dollars for public speeches down the road or raise any serious money for that new foundation.  So, they meet, pics taken and released, publicity for each of them, move on to the next photo op,  Doubtful you'll ever see them together again unless they happen to run into each other at some event.


GS is signed with the same speaker bureau as the Harkles.  They are  all kissing butts.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Well, you may be right. But I think they are way overcompensating. This flurry of activity is last chance saloon for the both of them.
> 
> I don't think they'd work so 'hard' to flag down everyone who is is 'someone' unless they knew deep down they are a couple of unemployed wannabes that are soon to hit middle age, regretting staring out of the window dreaming at and/or passing notes at school when they could/should have been paying attention and learning something useful. Even fools like these know word salad and good intentions to do 'let's think of later' won't pay their staff for long.
> 
> Time is ticking and they know it.



They are overcompensating because they still don't know what they want to be when they grow up. Meghan is throwing everything she can think of at the wall and hoping something sticks. Is she an activist? Maybe she is this week. Do they want to run a charitable foundation? They cannot decide on one cause they believe in and stay with it for more than five minutes. Is encouraging women to vote important to her? Only as long as she is getting press coverage about it. I doubt it will hold her interest until November. Do they want to be Hollywood producers? Sure they do, except for the unfortunate fact that they don't know what they are doing. You see where I am going.


----------



## scarlet555

KellyObsessed said:


> I think the movie featuring Ms Steinem is the Mrs.America series starring Cate Blanchett?
> 
> I'm appalled that Meghan placed her hat on the table.  Even though there was no food on the table at the time, it simply isn't done.



I thought it was Julianne Moore?


----------



## bag-mania

KellyObsessed said:


> I think the movie featuring Ms Steinem is the Mrs.America series starring Cate Blanchett?
> 
> I'm appalled that Meghan placed her hat on the table.  Even though there was no food on the table at the time, it simply isn't done.





scarlet555 said:


> I thought it was Julianne Moore?



The movie called The Glorias comes out at the end of September and stars Julianne Moore. Mrs. America was a mini-series earlier in the year. Rose Byrne played Gloria in that show. 

Am I the only one old enough to remember the first Gloria Steinem movie? It was called "A Bunny's Tale" and it starred Kirstie Alley as Steinem. That was back in the '80s.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh, yes, I remember that.
I even bought this edition of MS. magazine, March 1979. 




I was just 2 at the time and a most brilliant child 




bag-mania said:


> The movie called The Glorias comes out at the end of September and stars Julianne Moore. Mrs. America was a mini-series earlier in the year. Rose Byrne played Gloria in that show.
> 
> Am I the only one old enough to remember the first Gloria Steinem movie? It was called "A Bunny's Tale" and it starred Kirstie Alley as Steinem. That was back in the '80s.


----------



## KellyObsessed

Ah, I hadn't heard of The Gloria's movie.    I did watch the Mrs. America series.     I'm not sure I'm up for another Gloria Steinem movie.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost like they have an issue with focus, paying attention.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> *“Well,” Steinem said, “you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy.”
> “Like my husband! I love that when he just came in he said, ‘You know that I’m a feminist, too, right Gloria? It’s really important to me that you know that,’” Markle said. “I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification. That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which, of course, includes women.”*
> _*“And also that he is a nurturing father,” Steinem replied. “Because then your son will grow up knowing it’s okay to be loving and nurturing.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Prince Harry Is A ‘Beautiful’ Feminist Father To Archie
> 
> 
> In an interview with feminist icon Gloria Steinam, Markle discussed Harry owning his feminism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffingtonpost.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _






Most things M&H say reads/sounds like a snide remark aimed at someone they know. So this comment about men being comfortably loving and nurturing fathers is, I'm guessing, aimed at her own father & Charles for being the complete opposite.


----------



## Katel

marietouchet said:


> Oh to be a trademark lawyer in California .. they are so busy ...
> 
> Today's name for the foundation is the Markle Windsor Foundation per DM
> I guess they are not counting on getting to keep Sussex
> 
> Interesting use of maiden name which does come alphabetically before Windsor ..



If they are branded as “Windsor” instead of “Sussex,” this will still work for her after the divorce.



CarryOn2020 said:


> I only trust people I know, never trust these Hwood or ‘inspirational’ people or royals or many other professions
> They are all fake, only there to put on a show and collect the dollars.






purseinsanity said:


> I don't even trust all of the people I do know, LOL, certainly not celebrities or athletes.  That's why I don't care what their personal opinions are on politics, religion, or what toilet brush to use.



Yaaaas to both 



Lounorada said:


>




truly revolting


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, yes, I remember that.
> I even bought this edition of MS. magazine, March 1979.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4829787
> 
> I was just 2 at the time and a most brilliant child


Too funny!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

marietouchet said:


> Thus one replaces Sussex Royal
> BTW this one is abbreviated MWX, where did they got the X?
> No clue about Archewell, I assume foundations are like LLCs and potato chips, you cant stop at just one
> 
> 
> BTW just go to thinking ...
> OK I get it MWX puts the last names in alphabetical order, kinda logical in an American kind of way
> Reminds me of how Meghan always wanted to precede Harry in English ceremonies, which is justified by the US way where ladies go first ...
> 
> BUT BUT BUT ...
> This is so NOT British and actually will not likely go down well in the UK - it goes against he British class system. Not here to defend that but it is there - the elephant in the room
> From the UK perspective, H will always outrank his wife. PERIOD. He should always go first in royal processions, and his name should have gone first according to British logic
> 
> I dont care who goes first, up they have chosen a solution that will rankle in the UK, not a compromise or a path of least resistance


Imo there is some connection to the name Elon Musk gave his son - X AE A-12, which he says is pronounced X Ash A-12, where the A-12 refers to the Archangel-12 aircraft. So, contained within is a version of Archies name, or a version of Archewell foundation.
We know that M loves to create "connections" to wealthy/famous people that can be monetised later, so I would be unsurprised.


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> What about wearing masks and social distancing?? I'm not sure about the anti-covid rules in the US but in my neck of the woods this would not be allowed!


.. LA is still a hotspot for the virus but I guess MM feels that now that she's in the Santa Barbara area, that the "rules" don't apply to them! .. yet another "entitlement"????


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> The movie called The Glorias comes out at the end of September and stars Julianne Moore. Mrs. America was a mini-series earlier in the year. Rose Byrne played Gloria in that show.
> 
> Am I the only one old enough to remember the first Gloria Steinem movie? It was called "A Bunny's Tale" and it starred Kirstie Alley as Steinem. That was back in the '80s.




Didn't watch it but I remember it. 
Of course they chose to play up the Playboy/sex angle . In a movie  about an "iconic feminist"
What I don't remember is any push back from her camp. Which is why I have NEVER liked or respected her, and this is going back to when I was very young (60's/70's). Even then I sensed the disconnect between the media and the message. I recall the lightweight interviews she gave. Innocuous fluff she charmed herself through. Playing the stereotypical non offensive female. Totally different than how the REAL (less attractive) feminists were handled. 
I just can't with her. 
I do find it amusing that she and MM are using each other. If I were an "iconic feminist" I can 't think of anyone I'd rather gussy up to than a woman who wouldn't be where she was if it weren't for the men in her life. First her father (schooling, plastic surgery) to her ex(career) to finally achieving every enlightened female's dream of marrying a real live PRINCE!!!


----------



## lulilu

I wish the like button had a barf face option.  It would get so much use in this thread.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I wish the like button had a barf face option.  It would get so much use in this thread.


I thought we used to have a vomiting emoji a long time ago.  Wish it would come back.


----------



## gracekelly

There is so much dancing around with facts and obfuscation about the financials.  I can't figure out what they intend, but I don't think that they can either.  They just want to make loads of money.  That's great, but don't start taking money to live off of from whatever these entities of MWX and Archewell are going to turn out to be.  That's not supposed to be the way it works and they will have to do something because I don't think that the Bank of Dad is going to be open forever.


----------



## marietouchet

i looked it up finally, the Queen chose Mountbatten - Windsor as last name in 1960 , see wiki for details ... It had been Windsor previous to 1960
I thought the choice has been made much later eg after Harry was born so I mistakenly thought H is a Windsor, no, he is a Mountbatten-Windsor

hmmm Harry ditched the Mountbatten in the foundation name

Windsor comes from the queen’s side of the family, Mountbatten was the name that Philip used when married Elizabeth and became a U.K. citizen , discarding his status as a Greek Prince.


----------



## limom

It is a good thing Archie is not old enough to realize the type of craziness his parents are involved in....
What is the child’s last name at this point?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I thought we used to have a vomiting emoji a long time ago.  Wish it would come back.



We have this little guy. He’s about to vomit.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> It is a good thing Archie is not old enough to realize the type of craziness his parents are involved in....
> What is the child’s last name at this point?



I wonder what kind of personality Archie will have when he’s older. Will he inherit the worst traits from his parents?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what kind of personality Archie will have when he’s older. Will he inherit the worst traits from his parents?


He looks like a happy baby and judging by the book reading video he ignores his mother.  I predict a good outcome for him.


----------



## Emeline

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what kind of personality Archie will have when he’s older. Will he inherit the worst traits from his parents?


I continue to hope he has (or will soon have) a wonderful nanny.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> FINALLY!!!!!!!  Someone who talks the talk and walks the walk! Way to go Harry.
> I just think you went a teensy bit too far. It's one thing to hand the reins over to your wife. It's quite another to let her walk all over you (literally) in public until you are a laughingstock. True equality is based on respect. It doesn't look like your grand gesture is being respected. And while I don't advocate traditional gender roles at all *it is time to take at least one of your balls back*.
> Women cannot afford to let anyone other than women SPEAK UP for their gender. If men want to be _supportive, _fine but women will NEVER be respected unless we ourselves EARN it. Otherwise it just looks like the old weak woman/strong man to the rescue scenario


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Thus one replaces Sussex Royal
> BTW this one is abbreviated MWX, where did they got the X?
> OK I get it MWX puts the last names in alphabetical order, kinda logical in an American kind of way


I'm sorry but my mind automatically converts "MWX" to "BMX" LOL.  Don't know why.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> They are overcompensating because they still don't know what they want to be when they grow up. Meghan is throwing everything she can think of at the wall and hoping something sticks. Is she an activist? Maybe she is this week. Do they want to run a charitable foundation? They cannot decide on one cause they believe in and stay with it for more than five minutes. Is encouraging women to vote important to her? Only as long as she is getting press coverage about it. I doubt it will hold her interest until November. Do they want to be Hollywood producers? Sure they do, except for the unfortunate fact that they don't know what they are doing. You see where I am going.


You know, I expect uncertainty from my freshman 18 year old son I just dropped off at college.  I fully expect him to change majors a couple times, because I don't expect an 18 year old to completely be certain about what he'd like to do in his lifetime.  These "young parents" pushing 40?  Yeah, I'd expect them to know better.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I wish the like button had a barf face option.  It would get so much use in this thread.


Yes yes yes yes YES


----------



## csshopper

I wonder if JCMH is sitting inside thinking what happened? , I gave up everything for her to have privacy and there she is outside chasing publicity at every turn, even the dogs are part of her script.


----------



## Sol Ryan

csshopper said:


> I wonder if JCMH is sitting inside thinking what happened? , I gave up everything for her to have privacy and there she is outside chasing publicity at every turn, even the dogs are part of her script.



nah, because he’s doing it too.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> i looked it up finally, the Queen chose Mountbatten - Windsor as last name in 1960 , see wiki for details ... It had been Windsor previous to 1960
> I thought the choice has been made much later eg after Harry was born so I mistakenly thought H is a Windsor, no, he is a Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> hmmm Harry ditched the Mountbatten in the foundation name
> 
> Windsor comes from the queen’s side of the family, Mountbatten was the name that Philip used when married Elizabeth and became a U.K. citizen , discarding his status as a Greek Prince.


They darent use the Mountbatten name, lol, Philip will have put a stop to that I'm sure!!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I don't think so.  Or even Mountbatten-Windsor which would be his actual family last name.  Does it make a difference if the Foundation is in the US vs UK?


I think the location of the foundation does matter for at least 3 reasons

1. I bet US and UK non-charitable foundations are subject to different tax laws especially regarding deducting expenses for officers. The US is very lenient about that as evidenced by Hillary-Bill getting lots of expenses paid by their CGI foundation. So, I will guess the H&M expenses will be better covered by a US foundation. 
The UK expenses deduction thing is probably linked to whether Charles can also deduct anything paid to them. That used to be the case, but Boris Johnson is probably having a look-see at that previous agreement with Charles

2. A US foundation is perhaps more desirable from the point of view of the Queen cannot touch it, less interference possible from the UK government/Granny

3. A UK foundation, IMHO, would be subject more to the same British -type of scrutiny (public opinion) as their previous work for the BRF. There are expectations of the value of a British patronage. H&M dont want that at all costs - they want to make their own rules


----------



## Chanbal

"Royal author Katie said the pair are now figuring out how to make money from some of their projects, following the lack of public speaking engagements due to the coronavirus pandemic.

Meghan and Harry are working on ... a programme, which will focus on 'normal people',

...the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear in the show, the project will not be about them."









						Meghan and Prince Harry 'focusing on production', royal source says
					

The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, are 'exploring other avenues' for work in LA while their public speaking is 'on hold', an insider told Katie Nicholl for Vanity Fair.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Let's see if I understood correctly:
MM&H want more money (a lot of money) to support their pompous lifestyle. Since nobody is paying them to talk about their difficulties (modest wardrobe allowance, lack of emeralds on tiaras, Frogmore Cottage's long renovation, 19 toilets to clean in the former Scarface's mansion... ) they will produce a program that is not about them, but about 'normal people'.  Though, the 'Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear'... All these photo-ops and $$$$.


----------



## Annawakes

“Normal people”????????????

They’re so clueless there are no words.  I don’t know whether to laugh or barf.


----------



## Emeline

Chanbal said:


> "Royal author Katie said the pair are now figuring out how to make money from some of their projects, following the lack of public speaking engagements due to the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are working on ... a programme, which will focus on 'normal people',
> 
> ...the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear in the show, the project will not be about them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry 'focusing on production', royal source says
> 
> 
> The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, are 'exploring other avenues' for work in LA while their public speaking is 'on hold', an insider told Katie Nicholl for Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understood correctly:
> MM&H want more money (a lot of money) to support their pompous lifestyle. Since nobody is paying them to talk about their difficulties (modest wardrobe allowance, lack of emeralds on tiaras, Frogmore Cottage's long renovation, 19 toilets to clean in the former Scarface's mansion... ) they will produce a program that is not about them, but about 'normal people'.  Though, the 'Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear'... All these photo-ops and $$$$.


OK, not about them (titled royals), but they will appear. It will be about "normal people."
It would be fabulous if the duo is planning to star in a remake of Green Acres.


----------



## bag-mania

Why does hearing that H&M want to do a show focusing on "normal people" sound like they will be analyzing some unusual species of insect they discovered?


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> They darent use the Mountbatten name, lol, Philip will have put a stop to that I'm sure!!


I think they would be afraid to tell PP for fear he would have a stroke or get on a plane so he could personally slap  them!


----------



## 1LV

They probably see themselves as smarter than “normal people”, thereby seeing normal people as an easy mark (as evidenced by their stans).


----------



## rose60610

First of all, what do self-absorbed M&H even know about "normal" people?  They probably wanted to do a show about other self-absorbed people, but then got angry when those subjects...only...wanted...to...talk...about...themselves, THE NERVE!
Maybe they got into never ending fights about who were the biggest victims. "I'm the victim!" ; "NO YOU'RE NOT! I'M a bigger victim! My private jet only seats ten!" and three days later they'd still be arguing.
So finally: "H! Let's do a show about normal people! Normal people will be impressed by how special we are! That way the show will still be about US! Tricky!" 
What will M&H do when they realize that even "normal" people are unimpressed and disgusted with them? M would feel sorry for herself and get to be a victim  all over again. So maybe that's the goal.


----------



## gracekelly

Normal is insulting the Queen of England?  I learn something everyday!


----------



## bag-mania

Hahahahaha! What kind of wacky, bizarro world are we living in? Gloria Steinem gave Meghan a bracelet which denounces rank. But Gloria giving it to her was basically an ad for her website so it was self-serving. And if Meghan didn't have her rank and status she would be nothing at all. Rank means everything to Meghan! You couldn't make this s**t up.

Everyone get their gag emoji ready for this little treasure. 

*Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message*
When Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem sat down for a "backyard chat" to discuss voting, representation at the polls and what it means to be a feminist, the Duchess of Sussex accessorized with a meaningful gift from the feminist icon.

Meghan wore a beaded bracelet given to her by Steinem featuring the motto "linked not ranked," emphasizing the idea that women should support one another rather than compete with each other.

"I love this," Meghan said, referring to the saying.

Steinem replied, "Well, you know actually, '*we are linked not ranked'* is the shortest way I’ve ever found to say what our goal is."

"It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked," Meghan added.

"And I thank you for understanding that rank is less important than being linked," Steinem said. "That’s a big thing."

The $48 bracelet designed by Steinem comes in black and red, with sales supporting feminist.com, a website founded in 1995 to offer people around the world access to information and support. However, they are currently sold out.

The bracelet completed Meghan's chic ensemble, which took inspiration from her recent return to California (she and Prince Harry moved to Santa Barbara last month after spending time in Los Angeles). After months of virtual appearances that gave fans just a small glimpse of her ensembles, the video shows Meghan in a pair of striped Anine Bing trousers, $250, paired with a simple white top and black sandals by Stella McCartney (which she kicked off to go barefoot for part of the conversation).

She topped her outfit off with a $356 straw hat featuring a black ribbon detail by Janessa Leone. The accessories brand announced on Instagram that "in honor of this important conversation" they would donate 10% of proceeds made through online orders through Sunday to I Am a Voter, a "nonpartisan movement dedicated to creating a cultural shift around voting and civic engagement."

Meghan, 39, also spoke about realizing "it's not mutually exclusive to be a feminist and be feminine."

Steinem, 86, then replied, "Well, you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy."
"Like my husband!" Meghan said. "I love that when he just came in he said, 'You know that I’m a feminist too, right Gloria?! It's really important to me that you know that.' "

Meghan also spoke about how Prince Harry, 35, will be a positive influence on their 1-year-old son, Archie.

"I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification," she said. "That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which of course includes women."









						Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message
					

During their backyard chat, Meghan Markle wore bracelets gifted to her from Gloria Steinem with a special message about women supporting each other




					people.com


----------



## 1LV

^^^^^^  Where is ceejay and her tiny, tiny, tiny violins??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

On topic of financial independence. Bad news, no one wants H&M as speakers, so they are looking to produce instead. 

Speaking fees are gravy. If you are smart, your terms will be that the host pay for expenses (hotel rooms, airfare for you and your posse) in the first place. The you get paid A BIG FEE (A LOT), you do have to pay your staff salaries but the rest is pure gravy. You are out nothing to begin with even if no one attends the conference. 

Producing is another matter entirely. Producers put up the money to finance a film. They may lose their investment if film does bad box office, it is a gamble and a good return is not assured by having a well-known producer. Ex Mick Jagger has never made money on the films he produced, he lost his investments.

The Obamas are (supposedly) producers but I have failed to notice that they have actually produced anything yet.  They were smart, Michelle wrote the bestseller (cannot remember if he has written anything in the last 4 years) was paid a fortune that feathered the nest so they have the capital to do producing. 

But who needs an H &M autobiography now that Omid has told it all? The autobiography option has gone away.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I think they would be afraid to tell PP for fear he would have a stroke or get on a plane so he could personally slap  them!


Funny that ... PP, for years, lobbied to get the Queen to add his Mountbatten to the family name. It took him like 15 years to get his wish ... Prior to that his kids had their mother's last name only. 

PP might be chuffed if they had asked his blessing for use of the name

A little bit of courtesy can melt opposition.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

poopsie said:


> Good for Gloria for what she contributed. And she was there when a lot of things were going down but *I just don't worship at her altar*.



Nor do I.  Gloria was smart enough to take advantage of what was happening around her, but she didn't do what I think of as the "heavy lifting."


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure about that. She has a certain ruthlessness and recklessness that makes me proceed with caution. She already destroyed a tight knit family for no good reason, too.


I guess it depends on the definition of "dangerous".  Totally agree with @QueenofWrapDress in regards to her ruthless behavior; there is a reason why we now have a new word ("markled") that describes being used and then tossed away when your usefulness is no longer needed!  

IMO .. she represents the worst type of person that one would want in their life - as in:  manipulative, cunning, uses people, extremely self-centered, egotistical, narcissist, jealousy (_of others that SHE perceives have it 'better' than her_) <-- which leads into her boo-hoo-hoo "victim" complex .. but then a major case of "entitle-itis"!  I could go on, but I would likely use about every adjective one could 

What really slew me in the past, is her stans in this thread who would call the rest of us (if not racist because we called MM out for her behavior), but "jealous" .. OF WHAT exactly?????


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure about that. She has a certain ruthlessness and recklessness that makes me proceed with caution. She already destroyed a tight knit family for no good reason, too.


I guess it depends on the definition of "dangerous".  Totally agree with @QueenofWrapDress in regards to her ruthless behavior; there is a reason why we now have a new word ("markled") that describes being used and then tossed away when your usefulness is no longer needed!  

IMO .. she represents the worst type of person that one would want in their life - as in:  manipulative, cunning, uses people, extremely self-centered, egotistical, narcissist, jealousy (_of others that SHE perceives have it 'better' than her_) <-- which leads into her boo-hoo-hoo "victim" complex .. but then a major case of "entitle-itis"!  I could go on, but I would likely use about every adjective one could 

What really slew me in the past, is her stans in this thread who would call the rest of us (if not racist because we called MM out for her behavior), but "jealous" .. OF WHAT exactly?????


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Funny that ... PP, for years, lobbied to get the Queen to add his Mountbatten to the family name. It took him like 15 years to get his wish ... Prior to that his kids had their mother's last name only.
> 
> PP might be chuffed if they had asked his blessing for use of the name
> 
> A little bit of courtesy can melt opposition.


No don’t think he would be happy to have his name linked to commercial ventures.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I guess it depends on the definition of "dangerous".  Totally agree with @QueenofWrapDress in regards to her ruthless behavior; there is a reason why we now have a new word ("markled") that describes being used and then tossed away when your usefulness is no longer needed!
> 
> IMO .. she represents the worst type of person that one would want in their life - as in:  manipulative, cunning, uses people, extremely self-centered, egotistical, narcissist, jealousy (_of others that SHE perceives have it 'better' than her_) <-- which leads into her boo-hoo-hoo "victim" complex .. but then a major case of "entitle-itis"!  I could go on, but I would likely use about every adjective one could
> 
> What really slew me in the past, is her stans in this thread who would call the rest of us (if not racist because we called MM out for her behavior), but "jealous" .. OF WHAT exactly?????



Not to mention that the only time nasty and racist articles appeared on this thread was because a sugar brought them here to post them.  There is not one regular poster on this thread, and there are many of long standing, who has ever done this.


----------



## lalame

"Linked not ranked"  Then why do you insist on using special titles M+H. Self-awareness is apparently not a woke trait.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> "Linked not ranked"  Then why do you insist on using special titles M+H. Self-awareness is apparently not a woke trait.



She said what Gloria wanted to hear. Besides, all of these quaint little rules are for other people, not Meghan.


----------



## poopsie

That $356 for a straw hat is what most 'normal' people make in a week of unemployment​




​
  

​
 



​
​​


​
 



​
   


​


----------



## csshopper

Emeline said:


> OK, not about them (titled royals), but they will appear. It will be about "normal people."
> It would be fabulous if the duo is planning to star in a remake of Green Acres.


Emeline, Had to do more than just hit the emoji button, this made me laugh out loud when I read it and was still giggling while I scrolled through more posts. Oh, the image it evokes!  Thank You, needed a good laugh!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> That $356 for a straw hat is what most 'normal' people make in a week of unemployment​



That is why normal people are so worthy of study. What makes them tick? How do they exist in a world where they might only have one or two bathrooms? Surely everyone would want to watch a show celebrating such people!


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> *I guess it depends on the definition of "dangerous".*  Totally agree with @QueenofWrapDress in regards to her ruthless behavior; there is a reason why we now have a new word ("markled") that describes being used and then tossed away when your usefulness is no longer needed!
> 
> IMO .. she represents the worst type of person that one would want in their life - as in:  manipulative, cunning, uses people, extremely self-centered, egotistical, narcissist, jealousy (_of others that SHE perceives have it 'better' than her_) <-- which leads into her boo-hoo-hoo "victim" complex .. but then a major case of "entitle-itis"!  I could go on, but I would likely use about every adjective one could
> 
> What really slew me in the past, is her stans in this thread who would call the rest of us (if not racist because we called MM out for her behavior), but "jealous" .. OF WHAT exactly?????



She was involved in/approved of the publication of information that could compromise the security of #s 2-5 in line for the throne. That was enough for me.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She said what Gloria wanted to hear. Besides, all of these quaint little rules are for other people, not Meghan.


I believe that is called sucking up.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> She was involved in/approved of the publication of information that could compromise the security of #s 2-5 in line for the throne. That was enough for me.


There was already one crazy that we know of who went to George’s school a few years ago.  It was so irresponsible and dangerous to allow that in the book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

So Gloria gave her a bracelet that is also available for sale on her website? For $48.00? OK.  
How meaningful.  Also, my jewelry box from when my daughter was in preschool must be worth a fortune. 

Gloria must not have heard the tiara story. Because unless those are real rubies I dont see MM getting a lot of use out of this.


----------



## LittleStar88

poopsie said:


> She was involved in/approved of the publication of information that could compromise the security of #s 2-5 in line for the throne. That was enough for me.



I fell grossly behind in this thread and skipped a lot. Can anyone summarize what was said?


----------



## maryg1

LittleStar88 said:


> I fell grossly behind in this thread and skipped a lot. Can anyone summarize what was said?


The book describes W&K’s house in details
And it also reveals where the Queen’s jewelry is kept, if you ever want to wear a tiara!


----------



## LittleStar88

maryg1 said:


> The book describes W&K’s house in details
> And it also reveals where the Queen’s jewelry is kept, if you ever want to wear a tiara!



Oh my!

That was either deliberate or the whole lot of them are clueless. Either way...


----------



## pukasonqo

poopsie said:


> That $356 for a straw hat is what most 'normal' people make in a week of unemployment​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​​
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> ​


She is tone deaf to other’s situations, mind you nobody expects her to wear trackies but none of her clothes are cheap and they are beyond the price range of “normal” people
She wore a VB shirt to her photo opp of handling baby supplies
Her theme song:


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> "Royal author Katie said the pair are now figuring out how to make money from some of their projects, following the lack of public speaking engagements due to the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are working on ... a programme, which will focus on 'normal people',
> 
> ...the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear in the show, the project will not be about them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry 'focusing on production', royal source says
> 
> 
> The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, are 'exploring other avenues' for work in LA while their public speaking is 'on hold', an insider told Katie Nicholl for Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understood correctly:
> MM&H want more money (a lot of money) to support their pompous lifestyle. Since nobody is paying them to talk about their difficulties (modest wardrobe allowance, lack of emeralds on tiaras, Frogmore Cottage's long renovation, 19 toilets to clean in the former Scarface's mansion... ) they will produce a program that is not about them, but about 'normal people'.  Though, the 'Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear'... All these photo-ops and $$$$.


There are pages and pages of Comments to this article in the DM, o v e r w h e l m I n g l y negative. Their true selves have become transparent and I think they run the risk of being publicly booed. Unfortunately, they will blame Covid and never recognize they are increasingly viewed as loathsome and irrelevant.


----------



## Tootsie17

Do you think M still receives a clothing allowance from PC?  If I were him, I would have cut that before they left Canada.


----------



## poopsie

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh my!
> 
> That was either deliberate or the whole lot of them are clueless. Either way...



As hypersensitive as they are regarding their _own _security my $$$$ is on deliberate.
She fully intends to get her grubby mitts on those jewels one way or another
IMO


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Steinem replied, "Well, you know actually, '*we are linked not ranked'* is the shortest way I’ve ever found to say what our goal is."
> 
> "It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked," Meghan added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message
> 
> 
> During their backyard chat, Meghan Markle wore bracelets gifted to her from Gloria Steinem with a special message about women supporting each other
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



One of the levels has to do with the fact that Kate&William have a higher rank in the BRF. I came across an article with an interesting title: *Meghan Markle accused of hypocrisy over ‘linked not ranked’ quote*









						Meghan Markle accused of hypocrisy over ‘linked not ranked’ quote
					

Meghan Markle has been criticized on social media over her decision to continue using her royal title after insisting



					trendswide.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: normal people:  Are these us ‘morons‘ that OS referred to?

RE: GS bracelet:  Stating the obvious, but surely GS knows that women rank men as much as men rank women. Didn’t MM rank H?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hahahahaha! What kind of wacky, bizarro world are we living in? Gloria Steinem gave Meghan a bracelet which denounces rank. But Gloria giving it to her was basically an ad for her website so it was self-serving. And if Meghan didn't have her rank and status she would be nothing at all. Rank means everything to Meghan! You couldn't make this s**t up.
> 
> Everyone get their gag emoji ready for this little treasure.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message*
> When Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem sat down for a "backyard chat" to discuss voting, representation at the polls and what it means to be a feminist, the Duchess of Sussex accessorized with a meaningful gift from the feminist icon.
> 
> Meghan wore a beaded bracelet given to her by Steinem featuring the motto "linked not ranked," emphasizing the idea that women should support one another rather than compete with each other.
> 
> "I love this," Meghan said, referring to the saying.
> 
> Steinem replied, "Well, you know actually, '*we are linked not ranked'* is the shortest way I’ve ever found to say what our goal is."
> 
> "It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked," Meghan added.
> 
> "And I thank you for understanding that rank is less important than being linked," Steinem said. "That’s a big thing."
> 
> The $48 bracelet designed by Steinem comes in black and red, with sales supporting feminist.com, a website founded in 1995 to offer people around the world access to information and support. However, they are currently sold out.
> 
> The bracelet completed Meghan's chic ensemble, which took inspiration from her recent return to California (she and Prince Harry moved to Santa Barbara last month after spending time in Los Angeles). After months of virtual appearances that gave fans just a small glimpse of her ensembles, the video shows Meghan in a pair of striped Anine Bing trousers, $250, paired with a simple white top and black sandals by Stella McCartney (which she kicked off to go barefoot for part of the conversation).
> 
> She topped her outfit off with a $356 straw hat featuring a black ribbon detail by Janessa Leone. The accessories brand announced on Instagram that "in honor of this important conversation" they would donate 10% of proceeds made through online orders through Sunday to I Am a Voter, a "nonpartisan movement dedicated to creating a cultural shift around voting and civic engagement."
> 
> Meghan, 39, also spoke about realizing "it's not mutually exclusive to be a feminist and be feminine."
> 
> Steinem, 86, then replied, "Well, you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy."
> "Like my husband!" Meghan said. "I love that when he just came in he said, 'You know that I’m a feminist too, right Gloria?! It's really important to me that you know that.' "
> 
> Meghan also spoke about how Prince Harry, 35, will be a positive influence on their 1-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> "I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification," she said. "That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which of course includes women."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message
> 
> 
> During their backyard chat, Meghan Markle wore bracelets gifted to her from Gloria Steinem with a special message about women supporting each other
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


where to begin?
if she isn't into rank why is she calling herself duchess?
H saying that to gloria sounds like a child....


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is why normal people are so worthy of study. What makes them tick? How do they exist in a world where they might only have one or two bathrooms? Surely everyone would want to watch a show celebrating such people!


yes, normal people are merely exisisting, not really living


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> "Royal author Katie said the pair are now figuring out how to make money from some of their projects, following the lack of public speaking engagements due to the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are working on ... a programme, which will focus on 'normal people',
> 
> ...the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear in the show, the project will not be about them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry 'focusing on production', royal source says
> 
> 
> The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, are 'exploring other avenues' for work in LA while their public speaking is 'on hold', an insider told Katie Nicholl for Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understood correctly:
> MM&H want more money (a lot of money) to support their pompous lifestyle. Since nobody is paying them to talk about their difficulties (modest wardrobe allowance, lack of emeralds on tiaras, Frogmore Cottage's long renovation, 19 toilets to clean in the former Scarface's mansion... ) they will produce a program that is not about them, but about 'normal people'.  Though, the 'Duke and Duchess of Sussex will both appear'... All these photo-ops and $$$$.


they must be in almost panic mode trying to cash in before everyone loses interest in them


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Gloria must not have heard the tiara story. Because unless those are real rubies *I dont see MM getting a lot of use out of this.*
> 
> View attachment 4830560



Perish the thought. I fully expect Meghan to steal this idea. She will come up with a cheesy message or two and sell her bracelets for $100! The stans will be lining up to wear Meghan's wisdom on their arms.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Perish the thought. I fully expect Meghan to steal this idea. She will come up with a cheesy message or two and sell her bracelets for $100! The stans will be lining up to wear Meghan's wisdom on their arms.



THRIVE


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> There are pages and pages of Comments to this article in the DM, o v e r w h e l m I n g l y negative. Their true selves have become transparent and I think they run the risk of being publicly booed. Unfortunately, they will blame Covid and never recognize they are *increasingly viewed as loathsome and irrelevant.*



“...*they are* *increasingly viewed as loathsome and irrelevant.“
   *
Thank you! 
I come here for the writers / graphic artists and their wit as much as anything.


----------



## poopsie

............... or
MARRY UP

I would suggest SOMEDAY MY PRINCE WILL COME but it is probably too long and she _might _need to work for Disney again


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> I wonder if JCMH is sitting inside thinking what happened? , I gave up everything for her to have privacy and there she is outside chasing publicity at every turn, even the dogs are part of her script.


I *USED* to think that, but given what we have seen/heard as of late, I think JCMH truly *WANTS* to be in the spotlight .. to take away from William!  Sheesh, how long has this been festering in Harry???  Although Diana apparently said that she wasn't worried about William as he was more like Charles, it was Harry that she was so concerned about.  I know all too well, being 2nd or even 3rd fiddle, but it's not like he's a youngster anymore, and a 'smart' individual would figure out how to beat their own drum .. but as Harry was always given what he wanted, he's just exhibiting his spoiled 'child' personality.


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> they must be in almost panic mode trying to cash in before everyone loses interest in them


Since they have an alleged mortgage, they must find a way to keep a roof over Archie's head. Heaven forbid they have to ask PC to pitch in again and again.


----------



## poopsie

Tootsie17 said:


> Since they have an alleged mortgage, they must find a way to keep a roof over Archie's head. *Heaven forbid they have to ask PC to pitch in again and again.*



Well, they have no shame or moral compass so....................why not? 
He OWES them that much. Everyone OWES them everything


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Everyone get their gag emoji ready for this little treasure.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message*
> When Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem sat down for a "backyard chat" to discuss voting, representation at the polls and what it means to be a feminist, the Duchess of Sussex accessorized with a meaningful gift from the feminist icon.
> 
> Meghan wore a beaded bracelet given to her by Steinem featuring the motto "linked not ranked," emphasizing the idea that women should support one another rather than compete with each other.
> 
> "I love this," Meghan said, referring to the saying.
> 
> Steinem replied, "Well, you know actually, '*we are linked not ranked'* is the shortest way I’ve ever found to say what our goal is."
> 
> "It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked," Meghan added.
> 
> "And I thank you for understanding that rank is less important than being linked," Steinem said. "That’s a big thing."
> 
> The $48 bracelet designed by Steinem comes in black and red, with sales supporting feminist.com, a website founded in 1995 to offer people around the world access to information and support. However, they are currently sold out.
> 
> The bracelet completed Meghan's chic ensemble, which took inspiration from her recent return to California (she and Prince Harry moved to Santa Barbara last month after spending time in Los Angeles). After months of virtual appearances that gave fans just a small glimpse of her ensembles, the video shows Meghan in a pair of striped Anine Bing trousers, $250, paired with a simple white top and black sandals by Stella McCartney (which she kicked off to go barefoot for part of the conversation).
> 
> She topped her outfit off with a $356 straw hat featuring a black ribbon detail by Janessa Leone. The accessories brand announced on Instagram that "in honor of this important conversation" they would donate 10% of proceeds made through online orders through Sunday to I Am a Voter, a "nonpartisan movement dedicated to creating a cultural shift around voting and civic engagement."
> 
> Meghan, 39, also spoke about realizing "it's not mutually exclusive to be a feminist and be feminine."
> 
> Steinem, 86, then replied, "Well, you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy."
> "Like my husband!" Meghan said. "I love that when he just came in he said, 'You know that I’m a feminist too, right Gloria?! It's really important to me that you know that.' "
> 
> Meghan also spoke about how Prince Harry, 35, will be a positive influence on their 1-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> "I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification," she said. "That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which of course includes women."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message
> 
> 
> During their backyard chat, Meghan Markle wore bracelets gifted to her from Gloria Steinem with a special message about women supporting each other
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: normal people:  Are these us ‘morons‘ that OS referred to?


Their need to produce a show about 'normal people' is comparable to their philanthropic, and now also linked (not ranked) attitude. Let's make a couple of sandwiches for the needy while we enjoy champagne toasts and caviar hors d'oeuvres. Is there a Nobel Prize for Hypocrisy?


----------



## Chagall

Tootsie17 said:


> Do you think M still receives a clothing allowance from PC?  If I were him, I would have cut that before they left Canada.


If that is true then I have completely lost every modicum of respect for PC. I would even go so far as to say that he needs his head read.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> i looked it up finally, the Queen chose Mountbatten - Windsor as last name in 1960 , see wiki for details ... It had been Windsor previous to 1960
> I thought the choice has been made much later eg after Harry was born so I mistakenly thought H is a Windsor, no, he is a Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> hmmm Harry ditched the Mountbatten in the foundation name
> 
> Windsor comes from the queen’s side of the family, Mountbatten was the name that Philip used when married Elizabeth and became a U.K. citizen , discarding his status as a Greek Prince.


They just pick the surnames they like.  First it was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but Windsor was better for them since it sounded more British and Mountbatten was Battenberg.

Was Gloria sending a not-so-subtle message to Meg with the "linked not ranked" bracelet?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> They just pick the surnames they like.  First it was Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, but Windsor was better for them since it sounded more British and Mountbatten was Battenberg.
> 
> Was Gloria sending a not-so-subtle message to Meg with the "linked not ranked" bracelet?


we can only hope that's what gloria was doing


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Was Gloria sending a not-so-subtle message to Meg with the "linked not ranked" bracelet?



I wish that was the case but I don’t think so. They promoted themselves in that “interview.” And who was interviewing who? They each got something out of it while both were looking concerned about others.


----------



## CarryOn2020

When an Hwood Zzzzz lister has to frolick in the backyard with GS during a pandemic,
it’s over.

Until I read a reputable report that says BankofCharles has closed, he is still funding them. Undoubtedly, he is well familiar with Harry‘s issues [academic as well as partying], may feel guilty about the Diana situation, and knows how easy it will be for Harry to become Andrew 2.o. Plus, it is 2020, he himself had covid, and who knows what else will happen. That said, I don’t respect or admire any of these people. I have learned too much about their negative habits.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> “...*they are* *increasingly viewed as loathsome and irrelevant.“
> *
> Thank you!
> I come here for the writers / graphic artists and their wit as much as anything.


if more and more people are disliking them, then how long will it take for the media (and the celebs who support them) to figure it out and stop promoting them?


----------



## lalame

I think everyone probably sees what they want to see in the meaning of that bracelet... M's probably thinking about rank in royalty (super literal) and that's why it speaks to her. I think about rank in class.... as in "duchess" is a bogus class rank that isn't respected in the US so why are you trying to hold onto it. Gloria... who knows what she's thinking of.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> When an Hwood Zzzzz lister has to frolick in the backyard with GS during a pandemic,
> it’s over.
> 
> Until I read a reputable report that says BankofCharles has closed, he is still funding them. Undoubtedly, he is well familiar with Harry‘s issues [academic as well as partying], may feel guilty about the Diana situation, and knows how easy it will be for Harry to become Andrew 2.o. Plus, it is 2020, he himself had covid, and who knows what else will happen. That said, I don’t respect or admire any of these people. I have learned too much about their negative habits.



I agree, I bet H gets an income from the BRF or PC. It's probably in the form of a trust fund or something like that. They're wealthy, that's what wealthy people do for their unemployed children.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

I thought GS meant ranking in the way some people label others a 10 or a 1, etc.  
Do we really think that practice will stop?  It isn‘t just men who do it to women. Plenty of women rank men. Didn‘t MM rank H?




lalame said:


> I think everyone probably sees what they want to see in the meaning of that bracelet... M's probably thinking about rank in royalty (super literal) and that's why it speaks to her. I think about rank in class.... as in "duchess" is a bogus class rank that isn't respected in the US so why are you trying to hold onto it. Gloria... who knows what she's thinking of.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh you guys, we have a family wedding this weekend and I think an attention seeking family member is going to announce/leak a pregnancy to make sure the focus is on her. Just like you know who.  I’m already sad for the bride.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> I fell grossly behind in this thread and skipped a lot. Can anyone summarize what was said?


The latest - Gloria Steinem is promoting a new movie about herself , went to chat with Meghan to grab a bit of publicity for the nearly forgotten 60s - 70s icon
No one wants to hire jcmh and m as speakers
Further back - ginormous house purchased with more bathrooms than the total number of rooms in my house
Omid lost credibility - he reported Harry had cross words with qe2 about tiara , next day Harry’s people walked that one back
Omid calls non Meghan lovers morons and thinks people should obsess about andrew not our glimmer twins
Did I miss much ?
Ps yes forgot new foundation name is mwx, not unlike the name of Elon musk’s new son


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> The latest - Gloria Steinem is promoting a new movie about herself , went to chat with Meghan to grab a bit of publicity for the nearly forgotten 60s - 70s icon
> No one wants to hire jcmh and m as speakers
> Further back - ginormous house purchased with more bathrooms than the total number of rooms in my house
> Omid lost credibility - he reported Harry had cross words with qe2 about tiara , next day Harry’s people walked that one back
> Omid calls non Meghan lovers morons and thinks people should obsess about andrew not our glimmer twins
> Did I miss much ?
> Ps yes forgot new foundation name is mwx, not unlike the name of Elon musk’s new son


that about summarizes it


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Perish the thought. I fully expect Meghan to steal this idea. She will come up with a cheesy message or two and sell her bracelets for $100! The stans will be lining up to wear Meghan's wisdom on their arms.



MM is all over the news with the powerful statement "If you are complacent, you are complicit." "Complacent is complicit" could be a good message for her bracelets. However, there is an article from 2016 (published prior to the rise of the duchess) with that same title/message, but then again originality is not MM forte.

www.vickilicious.com/?p=1279


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> “...*they are* *increasingly viewed as loathsome and irrelevant.“
> *
> Thank you!
> I come here for the writers / graphic artists and their wit as much as anything.


You are right, the comments on her video/speech "Meghan Markle Delivers Impassioned Speech About Voting: 'If You're Complacent, You're Complicit" on youtube are . Here are a couple of screenshots:


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You are right, the comments on her video/speech "Meghan Markle Delivers Impassioned Speech About Voting: 'If You're Complacent, You're Complicit" on youtube are . Here are a couple of screenshots:
> 
> View attachment 4830776
> 
> View attachment 4830773
> 
> View attachment 4830768


have to laugh at that last comment


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Hahahahaha! What kind of wacky, bizarro world are we living in? Gloria Steinem gave Meghan a bracelet which denounces rank. But Gloria giving it to her was basically an ad for her website so it was self-serving. And if Meghan didn't have her rank and status she would be nothing at all. Rank means everything to Meghan! You couldn't make this s**t up.
> 
> Everyone get their gag emoji ready for this little treasure.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message*
> When Meghan Markle and Gloria Steinem sat down for a "backyard chat" to discuss voting, representation at the polls and what it means to be a feminist, the Duchess of Sussex accessorized with a meaningful gift from the feminist icon.
> 
> Meghan wore a beaded bracelet given to her by Steinem featuring the motto "linked not ranked," emphasizing the idea that women should support one another rather than compete with each other.
> 
> "I love this," Meghan said, referring to the saying.
> 
> Steinem replied, "Well, you know actually, '*we are linked not ranked'* is the shortest way I’ve ever found to say what our goal is."
> 
> "It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked," Meghan added.
> 
> "And I thank you for understanding that rank is less important than being linked," Steinem said. "That’s a big thing."
> 
> The $48 bracelet designed by Steinem comes in black and red, with sales supporting feminist.com, a website founded in 1995 to offer people around the world access to information and support. However, they are currently sold out.
> 
> The bracelet completed Meghan's chic ensemble, which took inspiration from her recent return to California (she and Prince Harry moved to Santa Barbara last month after spending time in Los Angeles). After months of virtual appearances that gave fans just a small glimpse of her ensembles, the video shows Meghan in a pair of striped Anine Bing trousers, $250, paired with a simple white top and black sandals by Stella McCartney (which she kicked off to go barefoot for part of the conversation).
> 
> She topped her outfit off with a $356 straw hat featuring a black ribbon detail by Janessa Leone. The accessories brand announced on Instagram that "in honor of this important conversation" they would donate 10% of proceeds made through online orders through Sunday to I Am a Voter, a "nonpartisan movement dedicated to creating a cultural shift around voting and civic engagement."
> 
> Meghan, 39, also spoke about realizing "it's not mutually exclusive to be a feminist and be feminine."
> 
> Steinem, 86, then replied, "Well, you can be a feminist and be masculine and a guy."
> "Like my husband!" Meghan said. "I love that when he just came in he said, 'You know that I’m a feminist too, right Gloria?! It's really important to me that you know that.' "
> 
> Meghan also spoke about how Prince Harry, 35, will be a positive influence on their 1-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> "I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification," she said. "That there’s no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which of course includes women."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Received a Bracelet from Gloria Steinem — and It Carries a Special Message
> 
> 
> During their backyard chat, Meghan Markle wore bracelets gifted to her from Gloria Steinem with a special message about women supporting each other
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com





1LV said:


> ^^^^^^  Where is ceejay and her tiny, tiny, tiny violins??


Can't you hear them???


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> On topic of financial independence. Bad news, no one wants H&M as speakers, so they are looking to produce instead.
> 
> Speaking fees are gravy. If you are smart, your terms will be that the host pay for expenses (hotel rooms, airfare for you and your posse) in the first place. The you get paid A BIG FEE (A LOT), you do have to pay your staff salaries but the rest is pure gravy. You are out nothing to begin with even if no one attends the conference.
> 
> Producing is another matter entirely. Producers put up the money to finance a film. They may lose their investment if film does bad box office, it is a gamble and a good return is not assured by having a well-known producer. Ex Mick Jagger has never made money on the films he produced, he lost his investments.
> 
> The Obamas are (supposedly) producers but I have failed to notice that they have actually produced anything yet.  They were smart, Michelle wrote the bestseller (cannot remember if he has written anything in the last 4 years) was paid a fortune that feathered the nest so they have the capital to do producing.
> 
> But who needs an H &M autobiography now that Omid has told it all? The autobiography option has gone away.


Well .. according to a Producer friend of mine, the Producers have to 'secure' the $$$ for the project .. rarely are they the actual money!  Nowadays, they oftentimes turn to Private Equity firms who are willing to put in $$$ for the project; HOWEVER (and that is a big however), it's not like the days of past where the project would get "Angel Money" (as it was called).  These PE firms want to ensure that they get their money back, and oftentimes .. their money three-fold!  Even crowdfunding (which replaced the "Angel Money") has become less flexible than they were in the past.  The crowdfunders pretty much want a 'guarantee' that they aren't going to lose their shirt and as such, the Producer(s) have to put together a Mission Statement and Business Plan which the Investor(s) review with great detail (if they are smart!).  

I think H&M will likely get funding, due to who HE is (not her) .. BUT, you are 100% correct in that if the project tanks, that will adversely affect their likelihood of getting another project funded.  But, but, but .. they always have that back-up plan - i.e., the Bank of Charles!


----------



## mdcx

pukasonqo said:


> She is tone deaf to other’s situations, mind you nobody expects her to wear trackies but none of her clothes are cheap and they are beyond the price range of “normal” people
> She wore a VB shirt to her photo opp of handling baby supplies
> Her theme song:



Remember the Sayonara to Zara party? M thinks that "people with money" only purchase luxury level goods apparently. Her insecurity about her status is really obvious since many old money types bang about in very nondescript cars/clothes.


----------



## bag-mania

Jessica Mulroney is back on Instagram. Of all things she posted photos from Harry and Meghan‘s wedding.  Both Vanity Fair and People thought this was newsworthy enough to write articles about. Why? I’m not putting the links here because they don’t deserve to get hits from that nonsense.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Remember the Sayonara to Zara party? M thinks that "people with money" only purchase luxury level goods apparently. Her insecurity about her status is really obvious since many old money types bang about in very nondescript cars/clothes.


right - doesn't warren buffet drive an older car and live in a modest home?  but he's in a whole different category


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Remember the Sayonara to Zara party? M thinks that "people with money" only purchase luxury level goods apparently. Her insecurity about her status is really obvious since many old money types bang about in very nondescript cars/clothes.


I don't know how her "friends" felt about that sayonara to zara party but to me it seemed kind of insulting


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney is back on Instagram. Of all things she posted photos from Harry and Meghan‘s wedding.  Both Vanity Fair and People thought this was newsworthy enough to write articles about. Why? I’m not putting the links here because they don’t deserve to get hits from that nonsense.


They use each other. JM & MM are birds of a feather.


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> Remember the Sayonara to Zara party? M thinks that "people with money" only purchase luxury level goods apparently. Her insecurity about her status is really obvious since many old money types bang about in very nondescript cars/clothes.


There's a saying in my native language that basically boils down to "New Money screams, Old money quietly goes about its business".  It's much more poetic in the other language LOL, but it basically describes MM to a T.  She may have married into old money, but she's new to it and everything is Me Me MEEEEE!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> if more and more people are disliking them, then how long will it take for the *media* (and the celebs who support them) to figure it out and stop promoting them?



The media, like the US media, *sdkitty*? Ha ha, rofling!!!

The media are universally disliked here now bc they are absolutely CLUELESS about the mindset of the public.
Not until the journalists have a "focus group" confirming that Prince Duf@ss & Meghan Markle are YES, universally disliked, then journalists will pivot with a battle-cry, "Off WITH THEIR HEADS".
And that will be that.

A few other minor observations about these two grifters:

~ Can easily ascertain that Harry has been spoilt ROTTEN by the BRF from the moment his mommy died, and will continue to be, from the look of this drama. We are watching continued positive reinforcement of negative behavior by dad and granny, instead of good behavior being rewarded.

So, yes Harry is a world-class @-hole, and to be a better dad, brother, son, etc, Harry could own his sh!t.
That would be AUTHENTIC. THAT will be REAL.
And that's when people open their wallets.
But. Oh. Wait.
Their corporate team isn't on board with that message bc Meghan thinks it might not sell enough product to line everyone's bank accounts <Carrot-top's message does not include her, so it is off the table>.

So, like many people in his gen, Harry has lowered himself to playing the victim card, and frankly, it is absolutely nauseating.
This Harry, up close and personal, is not going anywhere without his messiah, ie Harry's pouty-face stays forever and do not expect him to do the right thing by his entire family, whom he owes at least that much.

And if Harry is so unappreciative, and is genuinely not interested in being part of the BRF, except for commercialization of his issues in, "Finding Freedom", <like he is running from murderous terrorists> and yet, Harry is one of the people that BENEFITS the most from this very expensive high-maintenance BRF.
What signal does this give to the citizens of the UK?
Why are the BRF necessary now?

~ It is pretty ominous that my opin of the BRF has changed considerably during the past year.

If the BRF are going to continue to lavishly support these two grifters, H&M while they publically and blatantly lie, leave obligations unmet, disclose royal confidential info, make inappropriate political statements, yet all of this goes unchecked by their dad and granny?
My respect for dad and granny is gone.
Personally, if this is the way they conduct themselves then my vote is NO to the BRF, they can step down now.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Jessica Mulroney is back on Instagram. Of all things she posted photos from Harry and Meghan‘s wedding.  Both Vanity Fair and People thought this was newsworthy enough to write articles about. Why? I’m not putting the links here because they don’t deserve to get hits from that nonsense.


I checked, but it's private...


----------



## Jktgal

marietouchet said:


> Today's name for the foundation is the Markle Windsor Foundation per DM
> I guess they are not counting on getting to keep Sussex



It's official then, the Windsors have been markled!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said, @VigeeLeBrun    Was it the pandemic? The failing economy? Philip’s absence? QE’s absence? Andrew’s mess? H&M’s mess? H&M’s lectures? Us ‘morons’ fed up with the pomp [or lack of]? 

Completely agree, something has indeed made the BRF much less likable and much less needed this past year. Supposedly, QE once said that for the monarchy to be believed, she must be seen. Initially, the zoom calls seemed to satisfy everyone, but those have ended so she can be on vacation. Perhaps that is the mistake. Few others get to take a vacation, why should she, especially when she had stayed inside and away for so long?  Once upon a time, her refusal to hand over the reign seemed the ultimate display of duty. Now, it is looking selfish. Best advice is to quit while one is ahead. 




VigeeLeBrun said:


> _~ It is pretty ominous that my opin of the BRF has changed considerably during the past year.
> 
> If the BRF are going to continue to lavishly support these two grifters, H&M while they publically and blatantly lie, leave obligations unmet, disclose royal confidential info, make inappropriate political statements, yet all of this goes unchecked by their dad and granny?
> My respect for dad and granny is gone.
> Personally, if this is the way they conduct themselves then my vote is NO to the BRF, they can step down now._


----------



## doni

On the Queen doing something about these two. They are entertaining, irritating and clueless, but it is not like they are guilty of some major crime. Look at Prince Andrew, accused of being complacent and/or complicit in an affair involving force prostitution of teenagers. It doesn’t get much worse than that... Yes, he is no longer a working royal but he remains HRH, a Duke and in the line of succession. He alone can renounce all that. Witness King Felipe in Spain, who has been begging his sister, whose husband is in prison, to renounce her succession rights. But she refuses. Their father, the King emeritus, was put under enough pressure to abdicate (which is his right and an act of personal will), but there he is, in United Emirates, running from scrutiny over his finances and moral behavior, while very much keeping his King title.

That is the WHOLE POINT of monarchy. Entitlement by birth. Meaning, entitlement unrelated to your personality, talents or behavior. The Queen for all her might, is no more entitled to her titles and status than Harry is. The nature of hs rights is completely the same and all his. Questioning this is questioning the whole system of monarchy and aristrocracy, and a Queen is the last one who is going to do such a thing for obvious reasons. So, in terms of work, representation, role... yes whatever. But status, position and the moneys that come it? That is all about, and only about, birth rights.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said, @VigeeLeBrun    Was it the pandemic? The failing economy? Philip’s absence? QE’s absence? Andrew’s mess? H&M’s mess? H&M’s lectures? Us ‘morons’ fed up with the pomp [or lack of]?
> 
> Completely agree, something has indeed made the BRF much less likable and much less needed this past year. Supposedly, QE once said that for the monarchy to be believed, she must be seen. Initially, the zoom calls seemed to satisfy everyone, but those have ended so she can be on vacation. Perhaps that is the mistake. Few others get to take a vacation, why should she, especially when she had stayed inside and away for so long?  Once upon a time, her refusal to hand over the reign seemed the ultimate display of duty. Now, it is looking selfish. Best advice is to quit while one is ahead.


You do realise she’s 94.  I don’t know many 94 year olds still working do you?  She has red boxes every day, even on holiday.  I’m not sure why you’re getting so worked up?


----------



## CarryOn2020

More hype:








						Meghan Markle revisits her pre-royal style with these subtle moves
					

Meghan Markle, who now lives in Santa Barbara, California, with husband Prince Harry, 35, and their son Archie, one, has showcased her laidback Californian fashion in recent appearances.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Can't you hear them???
> 
> 
> View attachment 4830780
> View attachment 4830782


Lol!!  I do now!


----------



## bag-mania

The media grasps onto anything even remotely Meghan-related to report. Us Weekly is announcing that her ex Trevor just had a baby girl with his wife.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The media grasps onto anything even remotely Meghan-related to report. Us Weekly is announcing that her ex Trevor just had a baby girl with his wife.


oh, I'm excited


----------



## marietouchet

When will people cath on to thir behav


sdkitty said:


> if more and more people are disliking them, then how long will it take for the media (and the celebs who support them) to figure it out and stop promoting them?


Two parts to question - when will the Yanks catch on ? When will the Brits ?

We, as avid readers of the Daily Mail, know most Brits have caught on.Will there be sanctions from on high? Andrew figures into the mix - the BRF will treat H&M and A fairly, one relative to the other. A is accused of serious crimes, while H&M are simply greedy,rude.
When will Charles and the Queen react ? Charles will review finances maybe next March 2021 - at the supposed annual review, an opportunity to revoke the title.
Boris Johnson is too busy to worry and surely he has sent the ball squarely in the court of Charles & QEII, and they move at the speed of a glacier, slowly ... and everything hinges on the health of QEII, if she gets sick, there will be more delays. 

The US press has not caught on at all, Yanks are insensitive to the issue of living off daddy's money and/or public funding. The way the BRF is paid is too convoluted for Yanks to understand ... and no one cares if daddy pays. 
And Yanks dont understand titles or care if they are misused.  
And H&M have friends in media, Oprah, Gayle etc so be prepared for a lot of fluff US articles on the bracelet given to M by Gloria. 
H&M will have a pass in the US media unless they REALLY misbehave (in a legal sense) ALA Andrew or Johnny Depp.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> When will people cath on to thir behav
> 
> Two parts to question - when will the Yanks catch on ? When will the Brits ?
> 
> We, as avid readers of the Daily Mail, know most Brits have caught on.Will there be sanctions from on high? Andrew figures into the mix - the BRF will treat H&M and A fairly, one relative to the other. A is accused of serious crimes, while H&M are simply greedy,rude.
> When will Charles and the Queen react ? Charles will review finances maybe next March 2021 - at the supposed annual review, an opportunity to revoke the title.
> Boris Johnson is too busy to worry and surely he has sent the ball squarely in the court of Charles & QEII, and they move at the speed of a glacier, slowly ... and everything hinges on the health of QEII, if she gets sick, there will be more delays.
> 
> The US press has not caught on at all, Yanks are insensitive to the issue of living off daddy's money and/or public funding. The way the BRF is paid is too convoluted for Yanks to understand ... and no one cares if daddy pays.
> And Yanks dont understand titles or care if they are misused.
> And H&M have friends in media, Oprah, Gayle etc so be prepared for a lot of fluff US articles on the bracelet given to M by Gloria.
> H&M will have a pass in the US media unless they REALLY misbehave (in a legal sense) ALA Andrew or Johnny Depp.


probably right about US media.  But like her or not, Oprah is smart.  So maybe she will eventually see these two as losers.
If the public loses interest in them and Charles doesn't cut them off, then they could end up like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.  Living a quiet and wealthy life.  At least I think that's what they did.  Then again, this would drive Meghan crazy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oprah is very smart and talented. She knows what works and what doesn’t.  She tried to help Fergie and it didn’t really work. Sure, Fergie sold some books, but not the massive sales that was expected. After the initial ooh-ing and aw-ing ends, Diana may have fizzled, too. We just don’t know. We Americans can be very tight with our dollars, especially now.  IMO, our rich and powerful tolerate royalty and behave politely as long they get something in return, but in no way do we worship these people or envy the system that supports them. As has been noted, so many royals have legal issues and hang out with sketchy people. Andrew has done more damage here than the Brits may realize. We see the sham for what is.  Now, if H&M return to the UK, all the better. We won’t give a hoot then. Right now, they are in our ‘house‘, leaving a huge footprint on our space and boasting about their superior knowledge. I know of no one who supports _that_.


----------



## bag-mania

Interest in H&M will eventually burn out because they have absolutely nothing to offer. They are not talented or skilled at anything, they are not experts in anything, they have nothing to say that hasn't already been said by others who are much smarter with better credentials.

What can they say or do that anyone wants to pay to see?


----------



## sdkitty

Latest news I've seen is Meghan may endorse someone for President.  I'm so excited.  I really need her advice on who to vote for.  But apparently some people think she can bring the youth vote.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> Latest news I've seen is Meghan may endorse someone for President.  I'm so excited.  I really need her advice on who to vote for.  But apparently some people think she can bring the youth vote.


The “youth vote”?  Then they need someone younger than MM.  To an 18 year old, almost 40, is old!!!
Also what makes her think that she knows more about American politics when she hasn’t been living here in almost 2 years?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Latest news I've seen is Meghan may endorse someone for President.  I'm so excited.  I really need her advice on who to vote for.  But apparently some people think she can bring the youth vote.



 As if her opinion matters. How cute! We don't have to be psychics to know who she will pick. Having Meghan as a supporter should be considered a liability. She brings down everything she touches.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> The “youth vote”?  Then they need someone younger than MM.  To an 18 year old, almost 40, is old!!!
> Also what makes her think that she knows more about American politics when she hasn’t been living here in almost 2 years?


and they said she may have a career in politics in the future 
no wonder really - after all she is so Very Smart


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> and they said she may have a career in politics in the future
> no wonder really - after all she is so Very Smart


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haaaaa.  Her own husband said they were old. 

Now this guy can’t get a job.  








						Prince Harry lookalike hasn't secured a single booking since Megxit
					

Henry Morley says the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to quit the royal family has seen interest in his appearances plummet as the public think the couple have abandoned their country.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who will attend?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who will attend?



it's a year away right?
I would think Harry would have to go
Dont know about the ball and chain


----------



## CarryOn2020

If inappropriate, let me know or remove it.








						The world’s platform for change
					

Change.org is the world’s largest petition platform, using technology to empower more than 200 million users to create the change they want to see.




					www.change.org


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> There's a saying in my native language that basically boils down to *"New Money screams, Old money quietly goes about its business".*  It's much more poetic in the other language LOL, but it basically describes MM to a T.  She may have married into old money, but she's new to it and everything is Me Me MEEEEE!!



In another life, I remember to be shocked with the ostentatious traits of some 'nouveau riche'. Now that I'm older, my attitude has changed to 'you've got lots of money, happy for you. Have fun and enjoy it!'. And I sincerely mean it. What bothers me is hypocrisy, condescending attitudes, and using others for personal gain. Am I describing MM? 



doni said:


> That is the WHOLE POINT of monarchy. *Entitlement by birth. Meaning, entitlement unrelated to your personality, talents or behavior.*


We live in a world where many people still live in extreme poverty. I always thought that many of us, by being born in countries with more resources or more affluent families, are lucky by birth. 

While I agree with you that the whole point of monarchy is questionable; I also think that it can give a positive contribution to countries. For example, QE promotes national unity and stability; she dedicated her entire life to her country and is respected and admired by the British people in general. As long as the contribution to society is positive... Obviously, behaviors like the ones from Randy Andy, and other members of the BRF, weaken the monarchy and must be condemned.


----------



## Emeline

sdkitty said:


> Latest news I've seen is Meghan may endorse someone for President.  I'm so excited.  I really need her advice on who to vote for.  *But apparently some people think she can bring the youth vote*.


I think MM has  convinced herself she's 11 years younger, a perpetual 28. Except she's not.
She should embrace the age she is. In 11 years she'll be 50.  Time marches on for all of us.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> I think MM has  convinced herself she's 11 years younger, a perpetual 28. Except she's not.
> She should embrace the age she is. In 11 years she'll be 50.  Time marches on for all of us.


ha
and it marches pretty fast


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hilarious on so many levels:
_This week, Megan climbed into a pair of £200 trousers teamed with £500 vegan leather sandals and topped off with a £300 straw sun hat to usher 86-year-old feminist icon Gloria Steinem into a deckchair and have a simple ol' 'backyard chat'.

Honestly, it would take a heart of stone not to scream with laughter at the pretentiousness._









						JAN MOIR: Meghan speak - a guide for less than woke folk
					

JAN MOIR Harry and Meghan are ensconced in California and I just don't know what the hell they are talking about any more.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> probably right about US media.  But like her or not, Oprah is smart.  So maybe she will eventually see these two as losers.
> If the public loses interest in them and Charles doesn't cut them off, then they could end up like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.  Living a quiet and wealthy life.  At least I think that's what they did.  Then again, this would drive Meghan crazy.


I think Oprah is paradoxically doing the polite British thing - O was invited to wedding, so she is making nice with H&M, it is only polite while you look to see what way the wind is blowing 

There had been a story - fake news? that many of M's celebrity wedding guests eg George & Amal, Oprah etc were barely acquainted with the bride, but she had a half of the church to fill, so she picked celebrities

It is M's Canadian friends eg Jessica M and David Foster that did the biggest favors for M, at least at first ... they seem cautious about M now (well, J has maybe been Markled ... )

MY BAD I forgot to mention yet another category of people interested in H&M - those from the Commonwealth, more so the Canadians than the Aussies maybe but still a major omission on my part


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hilarious on so many levels:
> _This week, Megan climbed into a pair of £200 trousers teamed with £500 vegan leather sandals and topped off with a £300 straw sun hat to usher 86-year-old feminist icon Gloria Steinem into a deckchair and have a simple ol' 'backyard chat'.
> 
> Honestly, it would take a heart of stone not to scream with laughter at the pretentiousness._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Meghan speak - a guide for less than woke folk
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR Harry and Meghan are ensconced in California and I just don't know what the hell they are talking about any more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"But now they have rediscovered their voices, what exactly are they saying? Your guess is as good as mine." I love it!

Jan Moir's guide "to the real meaning behind the words of this epic feminist summit" is a must read imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A summit!!! A full-blown summit.  Not a lil frolick in the backyard, nope, a summit.
That will look spectacular on the CV.  By golly, this will get the money rolling in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> "But now they have rediscovered their voices, what exactly are they saying? Your guess is as good as mine." I love it!
> 
> Jan Moir's guide "to the real meaning behind the words of this epic feminist summit" is a must read imo.



I am laughing too...Meghanella is genius.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh the shade.

"WHAT SHE MEANS: No, I didn't object when people curtsied to me in the UK. Nor when I get special services and VIP treatment in Soho House because of who I am.

Nor when my rank as a royal wife gives me access to people like you, Gloria, and to Oprah, Ellen, George, Amal and everyone else who ignored me when I was on Suits but knock on my door now.

No one has benefited more from rank than me, but it suits me now to pretend I got here on merit."


----------



## Chanbal

Emeline said:


> I think MM has  convinced herself she's 11 years younger, a perpetual 28. Except she's not.
> She should embrace the age she is. In 11 years she'll be 50.  Time marches on for all of us.


haha, stop counting please. Because in 11 years, I'll be *** Though, I will still be younger then ***  All this if COVID ends...


----------



## bag-mania

I'll say this for William and Kate, they are a class act. They are not being petty and they are giving Harry credit for helping even when he isn't there. Off topic, I love the photo _People_ chose. Harry looks so cranky, like a little baby! 

*Prince William and Prince Harry Issue Rare Joint Statement About Plans to Honor Mom Princess Diana*
The long-awaited statue to honor Princess Diana will be installed next year on what would have been the late royal's 60th birthday — July 1, 2021.

Her sons Prince William, 38, and Prince Harry, 35, issued a rare joint statement on Friday announcing that the statue will stand in the garden of their mother's former home, Kensington Palace, and help people "reflect on her life and legacy."

The announcement, which came from the Kensington Palace offices of William and his wife Kate Middleton, comes just three days before what will be the 23rd anniversary of Diana's death in 1997.

It marks the first time William and Harry have spoken publicly together since Harry and wife Meghan Markle moved to their new home in Santa Barbara, California, with their 1-year-old son Archie, following their decision to step down from their roles as senior working royals earlier this year.

Plans for the statue were first announced in February 2017, the year of many commemorations of Diana's life, as it marked 20 years since she died in a car crash in Paris. She was just 36.



The statue was “commissioned to mark the twentieth anniversary of her death and recognize her positive impact in the UK and around the world,” the palace said in a brief statement.

“The statue will be installed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace on 1st July 2021, marking The Princess’s 60th birthday,” the statement continues. “The Princes hope that the statue will help all those who visit Kensington Palace to reflect on their mother’s life and her legacy.”

After consulting with senior officials and friends, the princes commissioned Ian Rank-Broadley, the sculptor behind the image of their grandmother Queen Elizabeth that has been used to decorate all British coins since 1998, as the person to create the tribute.

Royal sources say that the design stages had been progressing well, but the installation was delayed because of the ongoing COVID-19 crisis.

The brothers initially pulled together a committee of some of those closest to them, including Diana’s sister Lady Sarah McCorquodale and their former chief of staff, Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, to help find a suitable designer and concept.

At the time his role was announced in December 2017, Rank-Broadley said in a statement, “It is my sole and highest intention to fulfill the expectations of Their Royal Highnesses in creating a lasting and fitting memorial to their late mother Diana, Princess of Wales.”









						Prince William and Prince Harry Issue Rare Joint Statement About Plans to Honor Mom Princess Diana
					

Prince William and Prince Harry announce the long-awaited statue to honor their mom Princess Diana will be installed on what would have been her 60th birthday next year




					people.com


----------



## Traminer

@ _£500 vegan leather sandals

No comment .... _


----------



## gracekelly

Traminer said:


> @ _£500 vegan leather sandals
> 
> No comment .... _


I just knew these had to be Stella. What a crock of sh-t. She puts these absurd price tags on her designs and none of them are worth it. Bad enough to see the absurd pricing  on leather bags and shoes, but this takes the cake!  I boycott her in general because she think her name is worth so much and puts it on crap.  You know this was all merching.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa.  Her own husband said they were old.
> 
> Now this guy can’t get a job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lookalike hasn't secured a single booking since Megxit
> 
> 
> Henry Morley says the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to quit the royal family has seen interest in his appearances plummet as the public think the couple have abandoned their country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I came across this link via Twitter and I had to post the top rated comment of it. LOL!


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> So Gloria gave her a bracelet that is also available for sale on her website? For $48.00? OK.
> How meaningful.  Also, my jewelry box from when my daughter was in preschool must be worth a fortune.
> 
> Gloria must not have heard the tiara story. Because unless those are real rubies I dont see MM getting a lot of use out of this.
> 
> View attachment 4830560


This bracelet is insulting because it is infantile in design. I still have the baby bracelet that was put on me when I was born that this imitates. Surely Gloria could have come up with something more adult. And with a better message.


----------



## kemilia

Traminer said:


> @ _£500 vegan leather sandals
> 
> No comment .... _


By my calculations (google pounds to dollars) that outfit, to sit in the backyard with GS (woo hoo (sarcasm)), cost $1335. 

So many (millions in the US alone) NORMAL people (those that MM plans on exploiting for some docu) have no money for rent, mortgage, food, car payments, literally NOTHING and she sits around dressed in nondescript, over-priced clothing gushing her word salad like the ninny she is. Heck, her extensions alone could feed a family for a week.

Poor dogs


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I came across this link via Twitter and I had to post the top rated comment of it. LOL!
> View attachment 4831597


That’s why they are now  shopping pictures of Archie, and the reason she was so mad that the pap got a shot of him and Doria. They waited too long and nobody cares.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> This bracelet is insulting because it is infantile in design. I still have the baby bracelet that was put on me when I was born that this imitates. Surely Gloria could have come up with something more adult. And with a better message.


I've got my baby bracelet too! So tiny, I treasure it.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> By my calculations (google pounds to dollars) that outfit, to sit in the backyard with GS (woo hoo (sarcasm)), cost $1335.
> 
> So many (millions in the US alone) NORMAL people (those that MM plans on exploiting for some docu) have no money for rent, mortgage, food, car payments, literally NOTHING and she sits around dressed in nondescript, over-priced clothing gushing her word salad like the ninny she is. Heck, her extensions alone could feed a family for a week.
> 
> Poor dogs


The clothing doesn’t even look as expensive as it is. Some people have the rare talent of taking good clothing and making it look terrible.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> The clothing doesn’t even look as expensive as it is. Some people have the rare talent of taking good clothing and making it look terrible.


Hey, at least she has one talent.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> In another life, I remember to be shocked with the ostentatious traits of some 'nouveau riche'.While I agree with you that the whole point of monarchy is questionable; I also think that it can give a positive contribution to countries. For example, QE promotes national unity and stability; she dedicated her entire life to her country and is respected and admired by the British people in general. As long as the contribution to society is positive... Obviously, behaviors like the ones from Randy Andy, and other members of the BRF, weaken the monarchy and must be condemned.




Do concur, Chanbal.
As a stalwart supporter of the BRF for a half-decade, there has never been a singular event or member of the BRF that has persuaded me that their expiration date has well, passed.

Not until H&M.


----------



## gracekelly

Someone said the two of them looked like refugees from the 70’s. 

i would have worn a pretty summer dress and used my femininity as my message of female empowerment.   Looking like a boho hippie didn’t prove a thing. I give Gloria a pass because women her age often continue to dress in clothing reminiscent of the peak of their careers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> By my calculations (google pounds to dollars) that outfit, to sit in the backyard with GS (woo hoo (sarcasm)), cost $1335.
> 
> *So many (millions in the US alone) NORMAL people (those that MM plans on exploiting for some docu) have no money for rent, mortgage, food, car payments, literally NOTHING* and she sits around dressed in nondescript, over-priced clothing gushing her word salad like the ninny she is. Heck, her extensions alone could feed a family for a week.
> 
> Poor dogs



She is so friggin' tone-deaf she won't see how insulting it is to have someone like her doing such a show. I imagine the show will revolve around them earnestly telling everybody else what they must do to help others. She'll probably double-down on her use of BIG SAD EYES and her over expressive tone of voice.


----------



## gelbergirl

How reliable would Dylan Howard's Royals at War book be??


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> There's a saying in my native language that basically boils down to "New Money screams, Old money quietly goes about its business".  It's much more poetic in the other language LOL, but it basically describes MM to a T.  She may have married into old money, but she's new to it and everything is Me Me MEEEEE!!


EXACTLY .. know this all too well!  My neighborhood in Connecticut had folks of 'old' wealth and then the nouveau riche.  The old money folks had modest homes, didn't drive super fancy cars (maybe an old Benz) and went about their business.  The inside of their houses were not ostentatious at all!  The Grand Dame Mrs. Moore was just the nicest person ever (I used to take care of her animals when they would to on holiday in Europe).  The nouveau riche?!?! .. uggh, UGLY in so many ways, and their personalities reflected that!  They thought that their sh!t didn't stink; their houses were ugly architecture, ugly furniture, ostentatious autos, waaaaaay too much plastic surgery and they thought that since they built their big White Box house on the TOP of the hill (fantastic view of Hartford), that they 'OWNED' the entire area much to the dismay of their neighbors who had been there years ago ('old' money)!  I *once *(yes only 1 time) babysat their 3 children, but holy crap .. they locked the oldest daughter in her room because they didn't want me to "see" her (she had mild mental retardation .. I used to see her on the bus and helped her many times .. so her parents locking her in her bedroom?!?! .. that was SICK!  The middle son was a nice kid, but the youngest son?!?! .. OMG, brat to the nth degree!!! He threw a fit because I wouldn't let him watch a scary movie.  So he goes about getting his father's large kitchen knife (which shouldn't have been out in the open in the first place!) .. and literally used it to "chop up" their grand piano, broke lamps, etc. - it got so bad, that I had to call the parents to come home (and yes - they were pissed because they were at this very fancy restaurant where it took months to get a reservation)! 

They come home and go "oh well" .. WTF?!?!?  Then, they decide that they aren't going to pay me the quoted rate .. because I couldn't "control" their youngest son .. WHAT????? 

The next day, that BRAT of a kid lights a fire in our backyard!  How did we know it was him?!?! .. because the fireman saw him 'watching' the blaze!  He was still pissed at me, so he decides to light the fire .. knowing full well that our entire family was in the house.  This was a SICK kid, and that was just the start of his arson!  He decided one day to 'attempt' to burn down the other houses on the top of the hill because, after all, his house was at the tippy-top.  Well, the winds kicked up and guess whose house burned to the ground!?!!?  Thank god that the entire family was not hurt!


marietouchet said:


> When will people cath on to thir behav
> 
> Two parts to question - when will the Yanks catch on ? When will the Brits ?
> 
> We, as avid readers of the Daily Mail, know most Brits have caught on.Will there be sanctions from on high? Andrew figures into the mix - the BRF will treat H&M and A fairly, one relative to the other. A is accused of serious crimes, while H&M are simply greedy,rude.
> When will Charles and the Queen react ? Charles will review finances maybe next March 2021 - at the supposed annual review, an opportunity to revoke the title.
> Boris Johnson is too busy to worry and surely he has sent the ball squarely in the court of Charles & QEII, and they move at the speed of a glacier, slowly ... and everything hinges on the health of QEII, if she gets sick, there will be more delays.
> 
> The US press has not caught on at all, Yanks are insensitive to the issue of living off daddy's money and/or public funding. The way the BRF is paid is too convoluted for Yanks to understand ... and no one cares if daddy pays.
> And Yanks dont understand titles or care if they are misused.
> And H&M have friends in media, Oprah, Gayle etc so be prepared for a lot of fluff US articles on the bracelet given to M by Gloria.
> H&M will have a pass in the US media unless they REALLY misbehave (in a legal sense) ALA Andrew or Johnny Depp.


Not all Yanks support H&M, unfortunately .. it's the US Media who support them by constantly reporting on their "wonderful" (sic) actions.  I think, to a certain degree, many folks who were brought up in New England have a better understanding of the BRF as there are A LOT of expat Brits that live in the New England states.  I have found that many of them DO NOT support the monarchy and believe that they should be given the 'boot'!  

Until H&M make a major misstep (which they will do IMO), the US Media will continue to write their fluff pieces .. BUT, if/when they mess up, then things will change and the US Media will be on them like white on rice!  Just like their Africa debacle, their narcissism will eventually create a situation which will show their 'true' selves.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> and they said she may have a career in politics in the future
> no wonder really - after all she is so Very Smart


 Deceitful, greedy, selfish, manipulative. . . She just might have a very bright future in politics.


----------



## Chanbal

kemilia said:


> By my calculations (google pounds to dollars) that outfit, to sit in the backyard with GS (woo hoo (sarcasm)), cost $1335.
> 
> *So many (millions in the US alone) NORMAL people (those that MM plans on exploiting for some docu) *have no money for rent, mortgage, food, car payments, literally NOTHING and she sits around dressed in nondescript, over-priced clothing gushing her word salad like the ninny she is. Heck, her extensions alone could feed a family for a week.
> 
> Poor dogs


Wouldn't care for the price tag if she was paying for her pretentious lifestyle with her own money/work. Unfortunately, you are absolutely right, the 'normal people' will get the bill.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Not all Yanks support H&M, unfortunately .. it's the US Media who support them by constantly reporting on their "wonderful" (sic) actions. I think, to a certain degree, many folks who were brought up in New England have a better understanding of the BRF as there are A LOT of expat Brits that live in the New England states. I have found that many of them DO NOT support the monarchy and believe that they should be given the 'boot'!
> 
> Until H&M make a major misstep (which they will do IMO), the US Media will continue to write their fluff pieces .. BUT, if/when they mess up, then things will change and the US Media will be on them like white on rice!  Just like their Africa debacle, their narcissism will eventually create a situation which will show their 'true' selves.



See, I don't think H&M will get themselves into that much trouble. They would have to do something truly horrible. Being a hypocrite isn't a crime. The American media will not criticize a WOC and most of the press outlets here seem to have collectively decided she was a victim of racism. That explains all the gushing over them (that and being _well compensated_ by the publicity agencies).

H&M will likely gradually lose whatever popularity or appeal they have, but the media will not be directly responsible for it.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Someone said the two of them looked like refugees from the 70’s.
> 
> i would have worn a pretty summer dress and used my femininity as my message of female empowerment.   Looking like a *boho hippie* didn’t prove a thing. I give Gloria a pass because women her age often continue to dress in clothing reminiscent of the peak of their careers.


Would she be copying Tatiana Santo Domingo's hippie chic style? We know that originality is not MM forte. I thought that Gloria looked great for her age, but I wouldn't rule out senility...


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> I just knew these had to be Stella. What a crock of sh-t. She puts these absurd price tags on her designs and none of them are worth it. Bad enough to see the absurd pricing  on leather bags and shoes, but this takes the cake!  I boycott her in general because she think her name is worth so much and puts it on crap.  You know this was all merching.



Not saying the pricing makes sense, but I actually have a Stella bag that I’ve used nearly every day for the past 5 years and it still looks new... definitely holding up better than many other more expensive design bags. 

But on topic: interesting blind item re Archie. The comments are fully aligned with most of the opinions on this thread.








						Baby Needs To Start Earning - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] While this actress continues to put herself in the headlines on a regular basis, have you noticed that something has been missing for the past few months? Her baby. While she continuously pleads for privacy and talks about safety… it turns out those are not the primary reasons you...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I just knew these had to be *Stella*. What a crock of sh-t. She puts these absurd price tags on her designs and none of them are worth it. Bad enough to see the absurd pricing  on leather bags and shoes, but this takes the cake!  *I boycott her in general because she think her name is worth so much and puts it on crap*.  You know this was all merching.


Me too!  She's another person who got to the top with connections, or ahem, _rank_.


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> Not saying the pricing makes sense, but I actually have a Stella bag that I’ve used nearly every day for the past 5 years and it still looks new... definitely holding up better than many other more expensive design bags.
> 
> But on topic: interesting blind item re Archie. The comments are fully aligned with most of the opinions on this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baby Needs To Start Earning - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] While this actress continues to put herself in the headlines on a regular basis, have you noticed that something has been missing for the past few months? Her baby. While she continuously pleads for privacy and talks about safety… it turns out those are not the primary reasons you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


"She believes that any appearance of the baby has significant value. She has been trying for months to strike a deal for a cover story for $2M+..."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> "She believes that any appearance of the baby has significant value. She has been trying for months to strike a deal for a cover story for $2M+..."


her little meal ticket...poor kid


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> ha
> and it marches pretty fast



Tell me about it! Only 4 years until my 50th class reunion


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> Latest news I've seen is Meghan may endorse someone for President.  I'm so excited.  I really need her advice on who to vote for.  But apparently some people think she can bring the youth vote.



A while ago, I asked Kid1 if he knew who Prince Harry was and who he was married to.  I was curious to see what, if anything, might have filtered through to him and his generation since he reads a lot and keeps up with the news. His response:  _Prince Who?   _Asked the same of Kid2 when I talked to her as well.  Same response!  _Prince Who?_

I think people who follow the royals and those who follow celebrity news know who H & M are and that's about it.  I follow along because I love British history, literature, music, the royal jewels, etc and loved my visits to the UK.  I've always had a soft spot for the Queen and both William and Harry, especially since their mother died and their father married his mistress which had to be painful for them, even if they cover it up well and are civil.  Otherwise, I don't pay that much attention to other celebrities and don't post in other celeb threads, other than Will/Kate. So, if they would stop issuing statements and staging PR events with their photographer in tow, I think they'd have plenty of privacy.


----------



## poopsie

Traminer said:


> @ _£500 vegan leather sandals
> 
> No comment .... _





gracekelly said:


> I just knew these had to be Stella. What a crock of sh-t. She puts these absurd price tags on her designs and none of them are worth it. Bad enough to see the absurd pricing  on leather bags and shoes, but this takes the cake!  I boycott her in general because she think her name is worth so much and puts it on crap.  You know this was all merching.




As a vegan I can tell you we are used to being overcharged for everything. 
It never ceases to amaze me what they charge for simple plant based products vs meat


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> She is so friggin' tone-deaf she won't see how insulting it is to have someone like her doing such a show. I imagine the show will revolve around them earnestly telling everybody else what they must do to help others. *She'll probably double-down on her use of BIG SAD EYES *and her over expressive tone of voice.



Is Margaret Keane still around?  Wouldn't it be ah-MAY-zing if she could do a portrait of MeGain?
Those damn paintings creeped the eff out of me as a kid. Worse than the eyes in the funhouse that followed you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> Deceitful, greedy, selfish, manipulative. . . She just might have a very bright future in politics.


And like many other politicians now, speaks out of her a$$!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> "She believes that any appearance of the baby has significant value. She has been trying for months to strike a deal for a cover story for $2M+..."


But...but...I thought they wanted _*privacy *_for little Arch?!!?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> But...but...I thought they wanted _*privacy *_for little Arch?!!?


Privacy has now a new synonym: megabucks or meghanbucks


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Tell me about it! Only 4 years until my 50th class reunion


are you going?


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> probably right about US media.  But like her or not, Oprah is smart.  So maybe she will eventually see these two as losers.
> If the public loses interest in them and Charles doesn't cut them off, then they could end up like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.  Living a quiet and wealthy life.  At least I think that's what they did.  Then again, this would drive Meghan crazy.



Oprah is smart but has hitched herself to a few questionable wagons, like Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz.



sdkitty said:


> her little meal ticket...poor kid



I don’t think there’s a market for babies like there was when Angelina and Brad’s twins were born.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They have waited too long to sell us on Archie. The interest ended with seeing the lil guy in a full diaper. Eww.
From what we have seen so far, he seems like every other 1 year old, cute and pleasant.  He may not realize that he has very stiff competition with those Cambridge kids. They have some hilarious facial expressions.


----------



## Traminer

gracekelly said:


> I just knew these had to be Stella. What a crock of sh-t. She puts these absurd price tags on her designs and none of them are worth it. Bad enough to see the absurd pricing  on leather bags and shoes, but this takes the cake!  I boycott her in general because she think her name is worth so much and puts it on crap.  You know this was all merching.



So it's even worth than I thought!


----------



## Traminer

CarryOn2020 said:


> They have waited too long to sell us on Archie. The interest ended with seeing the lil guy in a full diaper. Eww.
> From what we have seen so far, he seems like every other 1 year old, cute and pleasant.  He may not realize that he has very stiff competition with those Cambridge kids. They have some hilarious facial expressions.



Three cheers for the Cambridge kids!


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> And like many other politicians now, speaks out of her a$$!


Pretty much all of them sooner or later.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They have waited too long to sell us on Archie. The interest ended with seeing the lil guy in a full diaper. Eww.
> From what we have seen so far, he seems like every other 1 year old, cute and pleasant.  He may not realize that he has very stiff competition with those Cambridge kids. They have some hilarious facial expressions.


that little girl is esp adorable....I agree Archie looks cute like any baby - nothing special


----------



## Emeline

Traminer said:


> Three cheers for the Cambridge kids!


And three cheers for Archie too. 
I really hope he has a wonderful nanny.


----------



## sdkitty

Emeline said:


> And three cheers for Archie too.
> I really hope he has a wonderful nanny.


and the bigger and more interactive he gets, Harry may enjoy playing with him


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> and the bigger and more interactive he gets, Harry may enjoy playing with him


Will give them both something to do.


----------



## bellecate

kemilia said:


> *By my calculations (google pounds to dollars) that outfit, to sit in the backyard with GS (woo hoo (sarcasm)), cost $1335.*
> 
> So many (millions in the US alone) NORMAL people (those that MM plans on exploiting for some docu) have no money for rent, mortgage, food, car payments, literally NOTHING and she sits around dressed in nondescript, over-priced clothing gushing her word salad like the ninny she is. Heck, her extensions alone could feed a family for a week.
> 
> Poor dogs



And put that into Canadian funds that's  $1748.63, for a backyard chat.  As my grandmother used to say, 'her opinion of herself couldn't get any higher" .


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> And put that into Canadian funds that's  $1748.63, for a backyard chat.  As my grandmother used to say, 'her opinion of herself couldn't get any higher" .


and do her stans need to know she's wearing stuff they could never buy?  maybe they love her so much they're beyond any kind of envy or resentment....they just dream of being her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> THRIVE



in plastic 'emeralds' 

Never mind a bracelet, she could do a hair-band 'tiara' version


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She is so friggin' tone-deaf she won't see how insulting it is to have someone like her doing such a show. I imagine the show will revolve around them earnestly telling everybody else what they must do to help others. She'll probably double-down on her use of BIG SAD EYES and her over expressive tone of voice.





bellecate said:


> And put that into Canadian funds that's  $1748.63, for a backyard chat.  As my grandmother used to say, 'her opinion of herself couldn't get any higher" .


Your grandmother and mine would have gotten along together, mine would have said "THAT woman needs her comeuppance and soon!"


----------



## papertiger

Traminer said:


> @ _£500 vegan leather sandals
> 
> No comment .... _



Sounds better than £500 plastic sandals - oh wait...that's what _£500 vegan leather sandals _means


----------



## csshopper

There is an article in the DM that Doria is in LA, signed up to teach a "hippy jewelry" making class at a local Community College near to her home.

First of all, it means she is not in Montecito being grandmotherly and second, maybe that's why her daughter was nauseatingly, gushingly overcompensating for Gloria's bracelets.  Maybe Mom will start producing items for Gloria and then MeMeMeaghan could get a cut and help the family budget.


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> in plastic 'emeralds'
> 
> Never mind a bracelet, she could do a hair-band 'tiara' version


...which could have DUCHESS plastered across it.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Someone said the two of them looked like refugees from the 70’s.
> 
> i would have worn a pretty summer dress and used my femininity as my message of female empowerment.   Looking like a boho hippie didn’t prove a thing. I give Gloria a pass because women her age often continue to dress in clothing reminiscent of the peak of their careers.



I would live in a '70s style bubble forever (if we could start the decade around '67) so I can't beach about these 2.

I think Gloria looked glorious - and M looked okay. It's hard for women to wear anything and not get criticised. 

The mutual love-fest, lick-a$$ thing NO, tasteless, cheap and vomit making. I've heard more worthwhile discussions on feminism on QVC


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Is Margaret Keane still around?  Wouldn't it be ah-MAY-zing if she could do a portrait of MeGain?
> Those damn paintings creeped the eff out of me as a kid. Worse than the eyes in the funhouse that followed you



I had to look it up, but YES she is! She will turn 93 in a couple of weeks. Not sure if she is still working, however. She painted mostly children but occasionally she painted women as well. Here’s one I found that has a passing resemblance to Meghan. We can pretend!


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Tell me about it! Only 4 years until my 50th class reunion



I've never been to a class reunion. But then every school I've been to has been demolished or become something else. 

I don't mind MM thinking young. If it motivates her, fine. It's when she spins it out for PR that it grates. Doesn't anybody grow-up and accept they're an adult anymore? This whole 'the young royals', like wha? Compared to the Queen, everybody's young, Gloria Steinem's included.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I had to look it up, but YES she is! She will turn 93 in a couple of weeks. Not sure if she is still working, however. She painted mostly children but occasionally she painted women as well. Here’s one I found that has a passing resemblance to Meghan. We can pretend!
> View attachment 4831781


big wide eyes like M


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> big wide eyes like M



Yes but she could look sadder. The girl in the painting is clearly thriving, not merely existing. She is probably one of those normal people I’ve heard tell about.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> There is an article in the DM that Doria is in LA, signed up to teach a "hippy jewelry" making class at a local Community College near to her home.
> 
> First of all, it means she is not in Montecito being grandmotherly and second, maybe that's why her daughter was nauseatingly, gushingly overcompensating for Gloria's bracelets. Maybe Mom will start producing items for Gloria and then MeMeMeaghan could get a cut and help the family budget.


Better be true for Doria's own sanity. It doesn't look like a piece of cake being around that couple.

Though, you might be right on the bracelets.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I would live in a '70s style bubble forever (if we could start the decade around '67) so I can't beach about these 2.
> 
> I think Gloria looked glorious - and M looked okay. It's hard for women to wear anything and not get criticised.
> 
> The mutual love-fest, lick-a$$ thing NO, tasteless, cheap and vomit making. I've heard more worthwhile discussions on feminism on QVC



Years ago I read a quote from some pundit that said that the 70's was the decade that taste forgot.  Looking back, I had some great outfits!  I actually kept a couple for sentimental reasons. 

Back in the day  Gloria used to wear black 24/7 in every picture.    Black roll neck and pants.  It suited her.  Where they happened to be meeting, her outfit came close.  We have been having a colossal heat wave and even where they were, it was really hot so Gloria showing up dressed like that was a bit much.


----------



## Aimee3

What I wonder:  if it was so darn hot, why did they have to sit outside when MM owns a huge house with 19 bathrooms?  Does she not have any furniture inside the house so she can entertain?


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> What I wonder:  if it was so darn hot, why did they have to sit outside when MM owns a huge house with 19 bathrooms?  Does she not have any furniture inside the house so she can entertain?



I believe it was because of Covid. By staying outside (at least while they were being videotaped) and keeping 6 feet apart they were social distancing. It was for the optics.


----------



## rose60610

Steinem is 86 years old. Is this how MM and Gloria stay relevant? Who's using the other more? And MM brings a hat to chat with Gloria but couldn't bring herself to wear one during the Grenfell Tower memorial function with the Queen. As for the "HM" necklace she wore in 2016, are we sure it didn't stand for "Her Majesty" like she was practicing for the role?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

bellecate said:


> And put that into Canadian funds that's  $1748.63, for a backyard chat.  As my grandmother used to say, 'her opinion of herself couldn't get any higher" .


add to that the Cartier “Love” bracelet...
and I know GS was/is a big icon for the feminist movement but selling those bead bracelets for 40 bucks? I hope the money goes towards assisting low income families or victims of DV but even then...
Maybe I should kidnap a couple of preschoolers and get them to string some plastic beads empowered w my shamanic powers...


----------



## maryg1

Bets are open:









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to return to the UK next year, royal expert claims
					

The former royals will return for several important royal events. Click here to find out when Prince Harry may return to the UK.




					www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bon Voyage  



maryg1 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to return to the UK next year, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The former royals will return for several important royal events. Click here to find out when Prince Harry may return to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk


----------



## Emeline

maryg1 said:


> Bets are open:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to return to the UK next year, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The former royals will return for several important royal events. Click here to find out when Prince Harry may return to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk


Might be good those two announced their plans before their review in March. 
The RF may be motivated to dole out more consequences in advance of the gate crashing.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t think there’s a market for babies like there was when Angelina and Brad’s twins were born.



Plus Angelina and Brad are *STARS* and people were dying to know more about their relationship and family.  It's only what Meghan hopes to be, but doesn't seem to realize she has nowhere near the star power.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Your grandmother and mine would have gotten along together, mine would have said "THAT woman needs her comeuppance and soon!"


OMG she absolutely could NOT refer to MM as "THAT WOMAN"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bon Voyage


And,

"Don't come back
Gwan, go
Don't come back
I won't cry
I'll be fine"  

Tarrus Riley - Don't Come Back


----------



## purseinsanity

maryg1 said:


> Bets are open:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to return to the UK next year, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The former royals will return for several important royal events. Click here to find out when Prince Harry may return to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk


As my hubby says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out"


----------



## CarryOn2020

And Gloria Gaynor’s “I will Survive”.  
So many choices. 



Chanbal said:


> And,
> 
> "Don't come back
> Gwan, go
> Don't come back
> I won't cry
> I'll be fine"
> 
> Tarrus Riley - Don't Come Back


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Better be true for Doria's own sanity. It doesn't look like a piece of cake being around that couple.
> 
> Though, you might be right on the bracelets.


I think Doria is a piece of the puzzle that we have not quite figured out yet ... 
Kudos to Doria for her elegant, classy and quiet behavior - she was incredibly gracious around the time of the wedding


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I think Doria is a piece of the puzzle that we have not quite figured out yet ...
> Kudos to Doria for her elegant, classy and quiet behavior - she was incredibly gracious around the time of the wedding


Smiling and saying nothing can get you far.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So wish I could just say nothing but lately every day I see something that reminds me of _them. _Today it is these bracelets, similar to GS. Apparently they are very chic, vogue, etc.   My baby bracelet, I guess, could be put on a necklace?  Then, I would really feel the ‘mutton dressed as lamb’ stares. Think I will pass on this trend. 

_And so *Happy Gri Gri* was born, a jewelry studio led by *Lilly*, 9, *Mona*, 10, and *Jules*, 12, the friends of her children. A pleasant project, which has been selling its playful and personalized jewelry across the world the last month, thanks to a serious Instagram account. The must? All profits are donated to the Fondation de France._








						Vogue Paris stylist Géraldine Saglio reveals her top 5 wardrobe essentials
					

The Vogue Paris fashion editor at large takes the Vogue.fr questionnaire.




					www.vogue.fr


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> So wish I could just say nothing but lately every day I see something that reminds me of _them. _Today it is these bracelets, similar to GS. Apparently they are very chic, vogue, etc.   My baby bracelet, I guess, could be put on a necklace?  Then, I would really feel the ‘mutton dressed as lamb’ stares. Think I will pass on this trend.
> 
> _And so *Happy Gri Gri* was born, a jewelry studio led by *Lilly*, 9, *Mona*, 10, and *Jules*, 12, the friends of her children. A pleasant project, which has been selling its playful and personalized jewelry across the world the last month, thanks to a serious Instagram account. The must? All profits are donated to the Fondation de France._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vogue Paris stylist Géraldine Saglio reveals her top 5 wardrobe essentials
> 
> 
> The Vogue Paris fashion editor at large takes the Vogue.fr questionnaire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.fr


Didn't MM guest edit an edition?  Wouldn't surprise me if this was somehow linked.  My daughter and her friends make these for each other at bead stores for about $3 total.  No jewelry making experience necessary.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IIRC, MM guest edited British Vogue. This article is from French Vogue. I, too, am guessing all of this stuff is “linked”. 
Too many coincidences to be random.

ETA: hope your daughter’s bracelets make it to USA Vogue 




purseinsanity said:


> Didn't MM guest edit an edition?  Wouldn't surprise me if this was somehow linked.  My daughter and her friends make these for each other at bead stores for about $3 total.  No jewelry making experience necessary.


----------



## Aimee3

OMG New York Times best sellers list has Finding Freedom on it!  I can’t believe people are actually buying this book!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ah, ok, a long-distance marriage?  Okaaaay.
Or is it immigration issues?


_He added: 'We've got a whole Rugby League world cup coming next year. I definitely plan on coming back. I would have been back already had it not been for Covid.'_








						Prince Harry hosts video call for Rugby League's 125th birthday
					

The Duke of Sussex, 35, joined a virtual call alongside staff and volunteers from the Rugby Football League, hosting  his first ever Zoom quiz during the appearance.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> her little meal ticket...poor kid


Poor kid is right; I predict (sadly) that he will need a LOT of psychiatric help in his teen years and possibly beyond, between a major Narcissist mother and no-Nuts JCMH .. yikes!


----------



## CeeJay

maryg1 said:


> Bets are open:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to return to the UK next year, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The former royals will return for several important royal events. Click here to find out when Prince Harry may return to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk


Ehhhhhhh .. do I see Harry going back?!?! .. yup - - but Meghan?!?! .. NOPE, she will find some excuse not to attend .. I honestly DO NOT see her ever setting foot in the UK again, after all .. she could be boo'd (c'mon our British friends - you NEED to do it, forget your manners)!!!  Personally, I would LOVE to see her get her comeuppance .. but we all know that she would say that they are 'racist'.


----------



## Tootsie17

Aimee3 said:


> OMG New York Times best sellers list has Finding Freedom on it!  I can’t believe people are actually buying this book!


I wonder how much money H and M will get from their non-participation in the book? M wouldn't let a book about her be told without her hand in the cookie jar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Poor kid is right; I predict (sadly) that he will need a LOT of psychiatric help in his teen years and possibly beyond, between a major Narcissist mother and no-Nuts JCMH .. yikes!



Can you imagine if they'd had a girl? From my own experience I can say my brothers definitely don't get the brunt of my mother's erratic behaviours, cruel actions and mood swings.


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> Bets are open:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to return to the UK next year, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The former royals will return for several important royal events. Click here to find out when Prince Harry may return to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk



That article is based solely on speculation by Omid Scobie. Funny how he claims to know exactly what H&M will do next year but he says he didn’t talk directly to them while writing their “biography.” (It’s irritating to call a book that only covers a span of three years a biography.)


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can you imagine if they'd had a girl? From my own experience I can say my brothers definitely don't get the brunt of my mother's erratic behaviours, cruel actions and mood swings.



Let’s hope it doesn’t come up.  Hopefully she wouldn’t be like Angelina Jolie and dress her daughters in unflattering ways so that they couldn’t outshine her beauty.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Ehhhhhhh .. do I see Harry going back?!?! .. yup - - but Meghan?!?! .. NOPE, she will find some excuse not to attend .. I honestly DO NOT see her ever setting foot in the UK again, after all .. she could be boo'd (c'mon our British friends - you NEED to do it, forget your manners)!!!  Personally, I would LOVE to see her get her comeuppance .. but we all know that she would say that they are 'racist'.


IDK...she would miss out on photo ops...and anyone who says anything about her would be racist....we'll see


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Ehhhhhhh .. do I see Harry going back?!?! .. yup - - but Meghan?!?! .. NOPE, she will find some excuse not to attend .. I honestly DO NOT see her ever setting foot in the UK again, after all .. she could be boo'd (c'mon our British friends - you NEED to do it, forget your manners)!!!  Personally, I would LOVE to see her get her comeuppance .. but we all know that she would say that they are 'racist'.


When all else fails...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

There ought to be a law.....against the life-size portrait of Soobie-Doobie in the Daily Mail today, honestly this is the actual pic size, not digitally reformatted:


----------



## Emeline

VigeeLeBrun said:


> There ought to be a law.....against the life-size portrait of Soobie-Doobie in the Daily Mail today, honestly this is the actual pic size, not digitally reformatted:
> 
> View attachment 4832715


When talked to the cosmetic surgeon, what did he say?
Maybe..."I'd like something from the animatronic range."


----------



## bellecate

VigeeLeBrun said:


> There ought to be a law.....against the life-size portrait of Soobie-Doobie in the Daily Mail today, honestly this is the actual pic size, not digitally reformatted:
> 
> View attachment 4832715



At first I thought he was one of those Ken doll lookalike guys that have had all the PS done. Scary


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> At first I thought he was one of those Ken doll lookalike guys that have had all the PS done. Scary
> View attachment 4832748


maybe he asked the PS to make him look like Meghan


----------



## Chanbal

"It's possible that Meghan or someone from Team Sussex asked Mulroney to take down the pic, considering reports earlier this summer that the Duchess was actively distancing herself from her longtime friend amid the fallout.

"Meghan obviously can't be seen in public with her, she needs to cool it for now, but it will be surprising if she doesn't get back in touch because Jess knows a lot," a source told _The Sun_ in June."


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 4832796
> 
> "It's possible that Meghan or someone from Team Sussex asked Mulroney to take down the pic, considering reports earlier this summer that the Duchess was actively distancing herself from her longtime friend amid the fallout.
> 
> "Meghan obviously can't be seen in public with her, she needs to cool it for now, but it will be surprising if she doesn't get back in touch because Jess knows a lot," a source told _The Sun_ in June."


Did she use a scissors and cut the kids out of all the wedding pictures or have then digitally erased?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Did she use a scissors and cut the kids out of all the wedding pictures or have then digitally erased?


that veil.....that kind of veil over the face is for first time brides (or back in the day, virgins)....not a third-time bride of age 37....just my never to be humble opinion


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that veil.....that kind of veil over the face is for first time brides (or back in the day, virgins)....not a third-time bride of age 37....just my never to be humble opinion


You and the Queen!  Me too lol!  It was too much and I think the expressions on the faces of the family were part of this.  They had no idea she was going to do this.  This was really giving them all the bird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems to me respect is a two-way street. MM did not show respect to the royals, so why would she expect it in return? 
The veil incident is proof, along with the lack of hat when she was with QE, ad nauseam. Since she knew this was a short term gig, why bother to form relationships? Interestingly enough, we know she merged well with Cory’s mom and Trevor’s family. Hmmm, methinks she had an agenda from day 1.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> You and the Queen!  Me too lol!  It was too much and I think the expressions on the faces of the family were part of this.  They had no idea she was going to do this.  This was really giving them all the bird.



If you look at footage of both Wales sons weddings, there is such a difference...Wills and Kate, everyone smiling and obviously happy. Harry and Meghanella, very somber atmosphere where some family members looked downright grumpy. I wonder why???


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> You and the Queen!  Me too lol!  It was too much and I think the expressions on the faces of the family were part of this.  They had no idea she was going to do this.  This was really giving them all the bird.


didn't know that


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could be: 
— they knew it was a sham
— the expense and demands were beyond acceptable
— the lone Doria just made everyone feel awkward
— Charles walking her down the aisle, while touching, also awkward [he wanted H to be a girl]

With these 2, lots of toes were stepped on, lots of feathers ruffled unnecessarily, lots of awkwardness which is most definitely not royal




QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you look at footage of both Wales sons weddings, there is such a difference...Wills and Kate, everyone smiling and obviously happy. Harry and Meghanella, very somber atmosphere where some family members looked downright grumpy. I wonder why???


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you look at footage of both Wales sons weddings, there is such a difference...Wills and Kate, everyone smiling and obviously happy. Harry and Meghanella, very somber atmosphere where some family members looked downright grumpy. I wonder why???


I thought some of them were snickering.  They certainly were rolling their eyeballs during the sermon, which was really pretty rude.  Zara was heavily pregnant at the time and she later said all she could think about was needing to have a pee!  The Queen had a thunderous expression on her face when she saw the veil.  The agreed thing was no veil and someone decided otherwise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Add in the odd-looking OS and all the Hwood celebs. 
Makes me uncomfortable even now.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to me respect is a two-way street. MM did not show respect to the royals, so why would she expect it in return?
> The veil incident is proof, along with the lack of hat when she was with QE, ad nauseam. Since she knew this was a short term gig, why bother to form relationships? Interestingly enough, we know she merged well with Cory’s mom and Trevor’s family. Hmmm, methinks she had an agenda from day 1.


If you want an Italian guy to love you, better be nice to his mother!  Right @CeeJay?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Add in the odd-looking OS and all the Hwood celebs.
> Makes me uncomfortable even now.


At the time, all the Hollywood types didn't really hit me as an oddity.  It was only later when people were discussing the lack of family and that she didn't know the people she did invite.  What did she tell Harry?  That she knew the Clooneys?  Amal and George took this invite and showboated it to death.


----------



## Lodpah

To put things in perspective in these troubling times and with MM and JCMH a d their entitlement where a little discretion and humbleness should be observed because so many people are homeless, hungry and without, we just happened to drop off stuff at Goodwill people were rummaging thru the items, and one guy grabbed a great condition three stuffed animal my husband put down and his eyes lit up and said he was getting it for his daughter for her birthday and the wife grabbed some nice clothes and a beautiful dress I was getting rid of for her other daughter. Makes me want to give up more items and I will do that. 

I cried. They are existing and thriving despite their circumstances.

My point is no one should be made guilty of what they can afford but to lecture people while they sit in their high castles to the people living in sand castles is not human, it’s wicked and despicable, MM and JCMH.


----------



## lalame

People like M+H should stick to lecturing their own behind closed doors. They have enough "rich only need apply" events and venues to do that in. Stop polluting the public domain. Celebrities of all people should know their audience.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today’s posts show how out-of-touch, tone-deaf, selfish H&M have been from Day 1. It began prior to the wedding and continues to this day. It has become so tiresome and irritating. 

Excellent post, Lodpah. 
Meaningful actions are the only through this current mess. We all need to help each other. Thank you.




Lodpah said:


> To put things in perspective in these troubling times and with MM and JCMH a d their entitlement where a little discretion and humbleness should be observed because so many people are homeless, hungry and without, we just happened to drop off stuff at Goodwill people were rummaging thru the items, and one guy grabbed a great condition three stuffed animal my husband put down and his eyes lit up and said he was getting it for his daughter for her birthday and the wife grabbed some nice clothes and a beautiful dress I was getting rid of for her other daughter. Makes me want to give up more items and I will do that.
> 
> I cried. They are existing and thriving despite their circumstances.
> 
> My point is no one should be made guilty of what they can afford but to lecture people while they sit in their high castles to the people living in sand castles is not human, it’s wicked and despicable, MM and JCMH.


----------



## marietouchet

My gosh 2342 pages of H&M gossip while the salacious Andrew has to share his gossip thread with Epstewin, and there are only like 80 pages there
How we manage to go on and on about H&M while ignoring Andrew ?

IMHO it is because there is radio silence about Andrew

Whereas there is a story a day about H&M. Today we had the video of them at school supply event in LA - the H&M PR machine made sure we knew about that. NOW WE KNOW THAT h&m TOOK NOT ONLY A PHOTOGRAPHER BUT ALSO A VIDEOGRAPHER 
We have discussed the Omid book for eons, but the H&M team were not even silent on that - we were not interviewed, we did not have cross words with granny
There is the kerfuffle about the 5 friends and the lawsuit , drip, drip, drip, M could make that story go away if she dropped her suit
Shucks its is a shame that real estate is so widely to all, H&M did not broadcast about the 18 baths although surely the inches of columns devoted to the loos must have grated. So, to divert us from loogate, we now unprecedented details on the ginormous flat that Will has at Kensington.  No proof that H&M leaked that, but the story went on and on about the size .... the article smacked of two petty kids irate that Will's loos have not been better covered. Will has an EXERCISE room !

There is an endless drip, drip, drip about H&M - no radio silence there, and actually there is pretty solid evidence that they fanned the flames by leaking their own stuff and helping Omid.

I sad it before that Doria's silence is golden , ... a lot of the 2342 pages of gossip would have not have happened if someone else had taken a hint

Being outspoken is a double edged sword


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meaningful actions are the only through this current mess. We all need to help each other.



As many of you know because I couldn't stop talking about it for a while my special needs cat died an unreal 7 weeks ago. I had just bought him a new supply of medication (in fact I bought TWO boxes as I was so certain he'd recover and use it up and thought I was being resourceful / environmentally friendly with shipping. I even bought him a new bed that we had for only five days before he died - and at this point he only wanted to be held anyway, so he probably used it for 25 mins total - but that one I gave to my brother's dog as she loves it) as well as a new batch of a very expensive medical food. So finally on Friday I called his vet and asked if they could use the items and they said they'd happily accept them as they do have pet owners who can hardly afford the vet bill and just cannot pay for the specialized food (which he ate exclusively, but it's usually used to boost underweight pets or nurse them back to health after surgery, so the 30 tins will probably help several pets). I don't think I can make myself go in just yet but I will have someone drop it off and feel a bit comforted knowing some other pet will have that little bit of extra care. 

But Lodpah now inspired me to go through my closet as well. I dropped a lot of weight since February, and I know I'm too lazy to try to sell bunches of barely worn stuff, so I'll see if I can donate a good chunk to a woman's shelter or some community project.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> didn't know that


There is video ... M came up the aisle on Charles's arm, then ditched him so she could go to the altar alone - giving herself away

Mostly all you saw was the longer walk with Charles and the camera angle for the last bit was bad but it is there, and it was in full view of HM


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 4832796
> 
> "It's possible that Meghan or someone from Team Sussex asked Mulroney to take down the pic, considering reports earlier this summer that the Duchess was actively distancing herself from her longtime friend amid the fallout.
> 
> "Meghan obviously can't be seen in public with her, she needs to cool it for now, but it will be surprising if she doesn't get back in touch *because Jess knows a lot*," a source told _The Sun_ in June."


Whooo-wheeee .. KEY WORDS right there!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Whooo-wheeee .. KEY WORDS right there!!!



Oh how I wish someone close to her would finally spill the beans. That would be epic.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As many of you know because I couldn't stop talking about it for a while my special needs cat died an unreal 7 weeks ago. I had just bought him a new supply of medication (in fact I bought TWO boxes as I was so certain he'd recover and use it up and thought I was being resourceful / environmentally friendly with shipping. I even bought him a new bed that we had for only five days before he died -



Very, very sorry about your sweet kitty.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> You and the Queen!  Me too lol!  It was too much and I think the expressions on the faces of the family were part of this.  They had no idea she was going to do this.  This was really giving them all the bird.


Count me in on that as well; just Meghan and her "markled" memories of the past ..


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> If you want an Italian guy to love you, better be nice to his mother!  Right @CeeJay?


ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY @gracekelly !!!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As many of you know because I couldn't stop talking about it for a while my special needs cat died an unreal 7 weeks ago. I had just bought him a new supply of medication (in fact I bought TWO boxes as I was so certain he'd recover and use it up and thought I was being resourceful / environmentally friendly with shipping. I even bought him a new bed that we had for only five days before he died - and at this point he only wanted to be held anyway, so he probably used it for 25 mins total - but that one I gave to my brother's dog as she loves it) as well as a new batch of a very expensive medical food. So finally on Friday I called his vet and asked if they could use the items and they said they'd happily accept them as they do have pet owners who can hardly afford the vet bill and just cannot pay for the specialized food (which he ate exclusively, but it's usually used to boost underweight pets or nurse them back to health after surgery, so the 30 tins will probably help several pets). I don't think I can make myself go in just yet but I will have someone drop it off and feel a bit comforted knowing some other pet will have that little bit of extra care.
> 
> But Lodpah now inspired me to go through my closet as well. I dropped a lot of weight since February, and I know I'm too lazy to try to sell bunches of barely worn stuff, so I'll see if I can donate a good chunk to a woman's shelter or some community project.


so sorry for the loss of your beloved cat.  I had a similar experience.  My cat was not really well for a few years.  But he wasn't terminal.  So I refilled his meds and then he went into organ failure.  I donated some of his stuff to the local cat rescue.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> so sorry for the loss of your beloved cat.  I had a similar experience.  My cat was not really well for a few years.  But he wasn't terminal.  So I refilled his meds and then he went into organ failure.  I donated some of his stuff to the local cat rescue.



I'm sorry  I feel you get used to the ailments of a not quite healthy pet and trust things will be ok like always.

Mine had several severe birth defects but we managed. Then within two weeks he went from "Alright, let's draw blood in three months to see where we're at with the newly discovered liver issues" to "We urgently advise to put him down because we've never seen liver parameters that bad" (I had insisted they draw blood again because he was so obviously not himself). Apparently the vet told my mother and sister they (four vets in total) had been discussing his lab results and feared he'd either fall into a coma or go into liver induced seizures before they could put him down. I'm still not at peace with it all.


----------



## CeeJay

Wishful thinking?!?!?! .. I see MM just HAD TO mention the *****'s 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ered-Spotify-megadeal-exclusive-podcasts.html


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry  I feel you get used to the ailments of a not quite healthy pet and trust things will be ok like always.
> 
> Mine had several severe birth defects but we managed. Then within two weeks he went from "Alright, let's draw blood in three months to see where we're at with the newly discovered liver issues" to "We urgently advise to put him down because we've never seen liver parameters that bad" (I had insisted they draw blood again because he was so obviously not himself). Apparently the vet told my mother and sister they (four vets in total) had been discussing his lab results and feared he'd either fall into a coma or go into liver induced seizures before they could put him down. I'm still not at peace with it all.


It's really such a difficult thing to go through.  Ours  had maliganant tumours in his ear which caused him to scratch and splatter blood on the walls.  This was not terminal and not really treatable.  One specialist wanted to remove his entire ear canal but I didn't want to do that to a 15-year-old cat and our PC vet said absolutely not.  So we gave him his thyroid meds and nursed his ear as best we could.  Then he appeared to be bloated.  Vet said it's not bloating; it's organ failure and advised me that it was time - he said there is only so much we can ask of our animals.
You never feel you've done the right thing at these times.  Could treat them more, could have ended the misery sooner.....we just do what we can.

I'm glad we have our two young ones now.  Selfish but I wanted to enjoy years of (hopefully) good health.  And I really hope they will be healthy because they are Hell to get in the carrier to go to the vet.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry  I feel you get used to the ailments of a not quite healthy pet and trust things will be ok like always.
> 
> Mine had several severe birth defects but we managed. Then within two weeks he went from "Alright, let's draw blood in three months to see where we're at with the newly discovered liver issues" to "We urgently advise to put him down because we've never seen liver parameters that bad" (I had insisted they draw blood again because he was so obviously not himself). Apparently the vet told my mother and sister they (four vets in total) had been discussing his lab results and feared he'd either fall into a coma or go into liver induced seizures before they could put him down. I'm still not at peace with it all.


So sorry about your kitty; we had a similar issue with the first adoption that my Husband and I did together.  She kept on developing Bladder stones, so after 3 operations (poor thing) .. they finally figured out that it was the food that she ate that had been causing it.  So, we changed her food for and for a bit, all was good .. until she stopped eating (and this cat loved to eat).  Come to find out, she had developed kidney issues as well such that we had to put fluids into her every day.  My husband has major-league issues with Needles, so I had to do it and trust me, it was not easy at all.  After one holiday in Italy (where a good friend of mine took care of her), she said to us "I don't think she has sight in 1 eye"; we were surprised because she always seemed fine at home (duh - later we realized that it was because it WAS her home).  Come to find out, yup .. she had lost sight in 1 eye and soon after that, would become blind.  It breaks my heart even writing about this because we just LOVED her so much; she was just the most special kitty .. but you know when it's their time and I just couldn't bear to see her suffer because that's just not right for them.  

It takes some time to get over that; it took us a few years ..


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As many of you know because I couldn't stop talking about it for a while my special needs cat died an unreal 7 weeks ago. I had just bought him a new supply of medication (in fact I bought TWO boxes as I was so certain he'd recover and use it up and thought I was being resourceful / environmentally friendly with shipping. I even bought him a new bed that we had for only five days before he died - and at this point he only wanted to be held anyway, so he probably used it for 25 mins total - but that one I gave to my brother's dog as she loves it) as well as a new batch of a very expensive medical food. So finally on Friday I called his vet and asked if they could use the items and they said they'd happily accept them as they do have pet owners who can hardly afford the vet bill and just cannot pay for the specialized food (which he ate exclusively, but it's usually used to boost underweight pets or nurse them back to health after surgery, so the 30 tins will probably help several pets). I don't think I can make myself go in just yet but I will have someone drop it off and feel a bit comforted knowing some other pet will have that little bit of extra care.
> 
> But Lodpah now inspired me to go through my closet as well. I dropped a lot of weight since February, and I know I'm too lazy to try to sell bunches of barely worn stuff, so I'll see if I can donate a good chunk to a woman's shelter or some community project.


That’s fantastic and I’m so sorry about your cat. I look at it this way someone would actually be using the clothes we don’t need now, instead of the closet.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> It takes some time to get over that; it took us a few years ..



That actually makes me feel more normal. How something so small can leave such a big hole.


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As many of you know because I couldn't stop talking about it for a while my special needs cat died an unreal 7 weeks ago. I had just bought him a new supply of medication (in fact I bought TWO boxes as I was so certain he'd recover and use it up and thought I was being resourceful / environmentally friendly with shipping. I even bought him a new bed that we had for only five days before he died - and at this point he only wanted to be held anyway, so he probably used it for 25 mins total - but that one I gave to my brother's dog as she loves it) as well as a new batch of a very expensive medical food. So finally on Friday I called his vet and asked if they could use the items and they said they'd happily accept them as they do have pet owners who can hardly afford the vet bill and just cannot pay for the specialized food (which he ate exclusively, but it's usually used to boost underweight pets or nurse them back to health after surgery, so the 30 tins will probably help several pets). I don't think I can make myself go in just yet but I will have someone drop it off and feel a bit comforted knowing some other pet will have that little bit of extra care.
> 
> But Lodpah now inspired me to go through my closet as well. I dropped a lot of weight since February, and I know I'm too lazy to try to sell bunches of barely worn stuff, so I'll see if I can donate a good chunk to a woman's shelter or some community project.


My heart goes out to you for losing your cat. I have two myself and I love them to infinity and beyond.


----------



## papertiger

So sorry for everyone who's lost their beloved kitties. 

Totally OT

MM and JCMH who? 

Animals are so much more important than these two wasters


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Wishful thinking?!?!?! .. I see MM just HAD TO mention the *****'s
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ered-Spotify-megadeal-exclusive-podcasts.html


"Sources said money is 'no object' for Spotify and Meghan will be able to more or less name her price'." 
If money is 'no object' for Spotify, they should donate to the development of safe vaccines against COVID, education (education for all is a must, many universities are hurting and would appreciate donations...), create new jobs (so many families lost their income due to this virus), mental health, homeless... 

@ Lodpah, I did the same last week and dropped some boxes at a thrifty store. I'm now looking for a reliable place that sells more selected donated items and uses all the profit to feed and educate homeless kids. If anyone has any ideas or suggestions, please share... 

The last thing I want is to sponsor foundations like the ones MM&H keep launching.


----------



## Miss Liz

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That actually makes me feel more normal. How something so small can leave such a big hole.


We had a similar experience caring for our dear cat Gracie who thankfully lived to 16-1/2 yrs. but spent the last Year and a half with terminal medical issues and less quality of life than she deserved. She let us know when it was time.  Our hearts were broken for her sweet spirit. Very soon after she passed I learned through the rescue community of an orphaned kitten found on the streets of Phoenix. She needed us and I know I needed her, my dear little Finley. It is bittersweet because their lives are so short and they give us so much love.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As many of you know because I couldn't stop talking about it for a while my special needs cat died an unreal 7 weeks ago. I had just bought him a new supply of medication (in fact I bought TWO boxes as I was so certain he'd recover and use it up and thought I was being resourceful / environmentally friendly with shipping. I even bought him a new bed that we had for only five days before he died - and at this point he only wanted to be held anyway, so he probably used it for 25 mins total - but that one I gave to my brother's dog as she loves it) as well as a new batch of a very expensive medical food. So finally on Friday I called his vet and asked if they could use the items and they said they'd happily accept them as they do have pet owners who can hardly afford the vet bill and just cannot pay for the specialized food (which he ate exclusively, but it's usually used to boost underweight pets or nurse them back to health after surgery, so the 30 tins will probably help several pets). I don't think I can make myself go in just yet but I will have someone drop it off and feel a bit comforted knowing some other pet will have that little bit of extra care.
> 
> But Lodpah now inspired me to go through my closet as well. I dropped a lot of weight since February, and I know I'm too lazy to try to sell bunches of barely worn stuff, so I'll see if I can donate a good chunk to a woman's shelter or some community project.



I'm so sorry for the loss of your dear kitty. I lost mine four years ago and still feel it keenly; we are so lucky to have them in our lives even though the time together is far too short.
Your generosity to cats and cat parents in need is such a wonderful way to honor his memory.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Miss Liz said:


> We had a similar experience caring for our dear cat Gracie who thankfully lived to 16-1/2 yrs. but spent the last Year and a half with terminal medical issues and less quality of life than she deserved. She let us know when it was time.  Our hearts were broken for her sweet spirit. Very soon after she passed I learned through the rescue community of an orphaned kitten found on the streets of Phoenix. She needed us and I know I needed her, my dear little Finley. It is bittersweet because their lives are so short and they give us so much love.



mods, you can def delete this post!
Just adding another voice that echos the gratitude of a loving pet~  my Burmese lil'furball, Coco Chanel has seen me through the darkest days and back again into the light <major life-changing accident>. Have no words, and probably don't need any to describe the wonderful gift of companionship that our pets give to us.


----------



## bag-mania

Aw man, my sympathy to all of you who have lost a beloved pet. I’m right there with you.  They give us so much and it is horrible to lose them. 

Back to H&M. Is anyone else skeptical about the Spotify rumor? I assume “sources say” means their publicists or Meghan herself. Spotify wouldn’t drop hints before the deal was done or say Meghan could “name her price” because that is terrible business. It sounds made up.


----------



## rose60610

Sorry for all the kitties though they were fortunate to have PF mommies. Back to the topic of the Thread Losers...you know how you can be on the internet and then hook into links that lead to other links that... well I ended up on MM's Wiki page--Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. Anybody in the mood for an over-the-top sanitized gagfest have at it. It makes MM sound like she actually has a non-blood-sucking soul. And in the right hand top box of why the subject is important, their spouse, etc--instead of listing "Children", it says "Issue" for Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.  It implies that Archie will always be on the Crown gravy train--AKA, MM's forever meal ticket.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Aw man, my sympathy to all of you who have lost a beloved pet. I’m right there with you.  They give us so much and it is horrible to lose them.
> 
> Back to H&M. Is anyone else skeptical about the Spotify rumor? I assume “sources say” means their publicists or Meghan herself. Spotify wouldn’t drop hints before the deal was done or say Meghan could “name her price” because that is terrible business. It sounds made up.


My sympathy as well to all that lost a pet.

I wouldn't be surprised if they approached Spotify through one of their well connected 'protectors'... Remember when H asked the Disney CEO for a job for MM, he didn't know that was being taped.


----------



## drifter

I never comment although I read this thread regularly.  The purported Spotify deal makes me mad cos Spotify doesn't pay artists very much but they can afford to give these 2 people who can't create anything original a "money no object deal"?!  I really hope it isn't true!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Back to H&M. Is anyone else skeptical about the Spotify rumor? I assume “sources say” means their publicists or Meghan herself. Spotify wouldn’t drop hints before the deal was done or say Meghan could “name her price” because that is terrible business. It sounds made up.



Jup, that sounds like the stupid PR fluff they put out to make themselves look more important. I know we are not very fond of Harry right now, but can be pause for a moment and realize it's never news about him painting him as priceless and overachieving? Go figure.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love podcasts.  I don’t think H and M have a clue what it takes to have one that would be interesting.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I love podcasts.  I don’t think H and M have a clue what it takes to have one that would be interesting.



It’s not as hard if you just plan to copy/steal what other more successful people have done. Let others  do the research and concept work then come along two weeks later and do their episode but with lots of inflection! Chances are they wouldn’t have the same audience to call them out on it.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> That’s fantastic and I’m so sorry about your cat. I look at it this way someone would actually be using the clothes we don’t need now, instead of the closet.


I've been donating to Goodwill.  I think they sell some and maybe give some to people in need.  but at least if they sell it, the money goes to charity.  I was having trouble finding a place to take my items.  I'd get there and they would say they were full for the day.  I found one near home that's not a store - just a donation center with bins; they took my stuff.  sometimes it's hard to make the decision to part with something but once you do, it feels good.


----------



## sdkitty

Miss Liz said:


> We had a similar experience caring for our dear cat Gracie who thankfully lived to 16-1/2 yrs. but spent the last Year and a half with terminal medical issues and less quality of life than she deserved. She let us know when it was time.  Our hearts were broken for her sweet spirit. Very soon after she passed I learned through the rescue community of an orphaned kitten found on the streets of Phoenix. She needed us and I know I needed her, my dear little Finley. It is bittersweet because their lives are so short and they give us so much love.


we're getting OT here but please post a pic of Finley in the Animalicious subforum


----------



## bag-mania

Their mere presence has already irritated the neighbors. 




Here's what Montecito residents are finding out about their new neighbors, Prince Harryand Meghan Markle ... wherever they go, tourists, helicopters and paparazzi follow.

The quiet little town outside Santa Barbara is still buzzing about its newest residents, who moved into a multi-million dollar mansion, but some locals are already getting fed up with the area's new normal.

Harry and Meghan haven't even been seen in public, and their mere presence is driving folks wild ... not because of them, but because of the influx of paparazzi on the hunt for the shot.

The scene on the ground is pretty hectic, especially for an affluent area that's supposed to be an enclave for celebs looking to escape the limelight ... choppers are zooming over Harry and Meghan's hood, sometimes 4 times a day, and paps are staking out their home and a nearby shopping center.

The wayward royals are also attracting tourists ... we're told more visitors are showing up in town and asking local shop owners if they've seen Harry and Meghan.

Montecito is famously known as a no-paparazzi zone -- Ellen DeGeneres, Oprah, Rob Lowe, Carol Burnett, Jane Lynch and the Kardashians have no problem dining out and shopping in on the low -- but everything's changed since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moved in.

Most locals tell us they want the paps to give it a rest, because they feel things are getting to the point where everyone's privacy is being compromised, and they're super annoyed.

As we reported ... Harry and Meghan surfaced in Los Angeles last week, working with a charity to help children in need ... but they still haven't been seen in Montecito.

Locals are bracing for the worst ... they're expecting Harry and Meghan to finally venture out after the pandemic, which they fear will amp things up in a big way.

Word to the wise ... if you visit Montecito, don't regurgitate anything you read about Harry and Megan putting the town on the map. Locals say it's been a high-society town long before the royals came knocking.









						Meghan and Harry's Montecito Move Causes Headaches For New Neighbors
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle haven't been seen in Montecito, but the town is still crawling with paparazzi and it's pissing off locals.




					www.google.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’s not as hard if you just plan to copy/steal what other more successful people have done. Let others  do the research and concept work then come along two weeks later and do their episode but with lots of inflection! Chances are they wouldn’t have the same audience to call them out on it.


I think maybe she has figured out that at her age she's not going to suddenly become a big movie star.  He role is to be an inspirational personality


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe she has figured out that at her age she's not going to suddenly become a big movie star.  He role is to be an inspirational personality



Oh, I’m sure she believes she has lots of wisdom to offer the masses. None of it is based on her personal experience of course, but stuff she thinks sounds good. 

Covid-19 put a crimp in her original plans. Nobody wants to pay for a virtual public speaking engagement. She had to come up with a way to make money that doesn’t require travel or live audiences.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So sorry to read of everyone‘s loss. People or pets, all loss tests our faith, especially in a pandemic. Yesterday, I attended virtual funeral for a dear friend from high school. He was a veterinarian. Shaking at my head at the coincidence (?) of _this_ thread being off-topic on _that_ day over our furry friends. Amazing , just amazing. Take care, all. These are indeed strange times.

Back to topic:  yes, I agree with the neighbors. I am fed up with these grifters, too.  Can‘t they just stay in their McMansion and out of the papers?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Back to topic:  yes, I agree with the neighbors. I am fed up with these grifters, too.  Can‘t they just stay in their McMansion and out of the papers?



It was all so predictable. Harry and Meghan wailing about their persecution by the media and the paparazzi in particular. So they moved to the one place with the most paparazzi in the world. Because that’s the way to stay away from paparazzi!  Of course they are cloistered safely away in their well-secured mansion. It’s everybody else who must deal with the havoc they created.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if they are in the media so much because QE et al. are on vacation.




bag-mania said:


> It was all so predictable. Harry and Meghan wailing about their persecution by the media and the paparazzi in particular. So they moved to the one place with the most paparazzi in the world. Because that’s the way to stay away from paparazzi!  Of course they are cloistered safely away in their well-secured mansion. It’s everybody else who must deal with the havoc they created.


----------



## Miss Liz

sdkitty said:


> we're getting OT here but please post a pic of Finley in the Animalicious subforum



Thank you sdkitty, I posted her photo there. ❤


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I love podcasts.  I don’t think H and M have a clue what it takes to have one that would be interesting.


They will have professionals doing the legwork for them... They came to the US to make money, lots of money... 'normal people' must foot the bill for the pretentious life style of a "tacky" actress and a “troublesome clown” prince.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I've been donating to Goodwill.  I think they sell some and maybe give some to people in need.  but at least if they sell it, the money goes to charity.  I was having trouble finding a place to take my items.  I'd get there and they would say they were full for the day.  I found one near home that's not a store - just a donation center with bins; they took my stuff.  sometimes it's hard to make the decision to part with something but once you do, it feels good.


I also like Goodwill and donate there every year, but I'm now looking for a donation center that takes more selected items and prices them correctly. A similar idea to TRR, but instead of being a for profit organization, it would donate 100% of the proceeds of the sales to charity.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I’m sure she believes she has lots of wisdom to offer the masses. None of it is based on her personal experience of course, but stuff she thinks sounds good.
> 
> Covid-19 put a crimp in her original plans. Nobody wants to pay for a virtual public speaking engagement. She had to come up with a way to make money that doesn’t require travel or live audiences.


I don't think she has the "charisma" of an Oprah....what she has now is a high profile and a bunch of stans who love her because she's is WOC (IMO) and a Duchess....will see how well they do with monetizing it


----------



## rose60610

Are we talking about the same person who demands privacy, delivered meals for 20 minutes but lowered her anti-covid face mask so she could be recognized? If she plays her cards right, why doesn't she release some photos in dribs and drabs for big bucks--of Archie pushing food off his high chair, Harry washing his socks in the sink, herself doing meditation yoga in the backyard? I mean, don't they want to produce a show about "normal" people? They could pretend to be normal themselves, and the sugars would eat it up. Then maybe the helicopters would stop and paps not jump out of the bushes so much. Oh wait, we're talking about the same person who wanted an army worth of security to feel important, so don't wait for the hovering paps to tone down. But when they do, rest assured M will think of something to get them all back so she can play victim and complain about lack of privacy some more.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Here's what Montecito residents are finding out about their new neighbors, Prince Harryand Meghan Markle ... wherever they go, tourists, helicopters and paparazzi follow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Montecito Move Causes Headaches For New Neighbors
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle haven't been seen in Montecito, but the town is still crawling with paparazzi and it's pissing off locals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com





CarryOn2020 said:


> Back to topic:  yes, I agree with the neighbors. I am fed up with these grifters, too.  Can‘t they just stay in their McMansion and out of the papers?





CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they are in the media so much because QE et al. are on vacation.


MM&H are doing whatever they can to have the paparazzi around. They need the paparazzi to stay 'relevant' and make their money. QE might be on vacation, but I would think she knows well what's going on...


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

drifter said:


> I never comment although I read this thread regularly.  The purported Spotify deal makes me mad cos *Spotify doesn't pay artists very much but they can afford to give these 2 people who can't create anything original a "money no object deal"?!*  I really hope it isn't true!



This. *drifter*, you hit a nerve in me, and feel free to post here more often!

Grrrr, those two soulless grifters are Monday-morning despicable. 

On a more positive note, my lil'furbaby is still with me  
<and usually next to me while reading this thread>


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they are in the media so much because QE et al. are on vacation.



They are in the media so much because they are paying two or three publicity agencies to get her press several times a week. And also because they are so polarizing. They have fans who are looking for them and they have people who don’t like them who want to see what batsh*t crazy stuff they are up to. 

Both types lead to thousands of searches every day. That’s all the motivation the media needs to keep putting stories in daily, no matter how lame they may be.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wisely, QE maintains a ‘no comment’ policy. Guessing, behind the palace doors, she is laughing and thinking “keep it up, Harry’, every day of this media blitz is more money you will lose when we meet again.”  When is the year review? January or March?  Once again, nothing is simple with these 2.




Chanbal said:


> MM&H are doing whatever they can to have the paparazzi around. They need the paparazzi to stay 'relevant' and make their money. QE might be on vacation, but I would think she knows well what's going on...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wisely, QE maintains a ‘no comment’ policy. Guessing, behind the palace doors, she is laughing and thinking “keep it up, Harry’, every day of this media blitz is more money you will lose when we meet again.”  When is the year review? January or March?  Once again, nothing is simple with these 2.



I bet this whole family doesn't feel like laughing anymore. I know if it was my brother / son / grandson I'd think about how I could kidnap him and the baby and get rid of his hostage taker in the most elegant way.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I’m sure she believes she has lots of wisdom to offer the masses. None of it is based on her personal experience of course, but stuff she thinks sounds good.
> 
> Covid-19 put a crimp in her original plans. Nobody wants to pay for a virtual public speaking engagement. She had to come up with a way to make money that doesn’t require travel or live audiences.



Charlatans, both of them!  from Prince to pathetic, I mean H was a loved prince, despite his flaws and now, just a sham!  There is no words for Nutmeg... a parasite, a pair of parasite, whiny pair too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Meghan didn’t think much about it but had to include it in the book? Right... How dare Kate take care of her kids...outrageous! The nerve of that woman! Didn’t Kate realize that she needed to experience the two greatest lovers of all time that instant? Of course Meghan comes before her kids! Why didn’t Harry tell her?

Man, they can’t miss a dig can they? It’s the stupidest stuff... 









						Meghan Markle Was Apparently Disappointed Kate Middleton Missed Her Introduction to the Royal Family
					

Meghan met the in-laws at an informal tea.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry  I feel you get used to the ailments of a not quite healthy pet and trust things will be ok like always.
> 
> Mine had several severe birth defects but we managed. Then within two weeks he went from "Alright, let's draw blood in three months to see where we're at with the newly discovered liver issues" to "We urgently advise to put him down because we've never seen liver parameters that bad" (I had insisted they draw blood again because he was so obviously not himself). Apparently the vet told my mother and sister they (four vets in total) had been discussing his lab results and feared he'd either fall into a coma or go into liver induced seizures before they could put him down. I'm still not at peace with it all.


I'm so sorry about your kitty. The holes they leave in us are so big but the joy and fun stuff while they're with us (memories) help a lot (at least for me, though I'm tearing up now).


----------



## kemilia

drifter said:


> I never comment although I read this thread regularly.  The purported Spotify deal makes me mad cos Spotify doesn't pay artists very much but they can afford to give these 2 people who can't create anything original a "money no object deal"?!  I really hope it isn't true!


I think this "money is no object" deal is just more wishful thinking by their "PR" (her) team.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Aw man, my sympathy to all of you who have lost a beloved pet. I’m right there with you.  They give us so much and it is horrible to lose them.
> 
> Back to H&M. Is anyone else skeptical about the Spotify rumor? I assume “sources say” means their publicists or Meghan herself. Spotify wouldn’t drop hints before the deal was done or say Meghan could “name her price” because that is terrible business. It sounds made up.


I'm sure hoping that is the case, because truly .. that is PATHETIC!  There are SO many other causes that could be denoted to!  I'm wondering if MM put this out there to get Spotify to 'advertise' their availability (since they can't get in front of the CEO, etc. - like they did with Disney)!  If this becomes true, then I'm done with Spotify; have no desire to support an organization that 'donates' to these 2 grifters!


----------



## scarlet555

Sol Ryan said:


> Meghan didn’t think much about it but had to include it in the book? Right... How dare Kate take care of her kids...outrageous! The nerve of that woman! Didn’t Kate realize that she needed to experience the two greatest lovers of all time that instant? Of course Meghan comes before her kids! Why didn’t Harry tell her?
> 
> Man, they can’t miss a dig can they? It’s the stupidest stuff...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Was Apparently Disappointed Kate Middleton Missed Her Introduction to the Royal Family
> 
> 
> Meghan met the in-laws at an informal tea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4833962




why continue this breadcrumb of the same news Nutmeg?  We get it, Kate was so distortedly mean to you, boo-hoo, get over it, there are more important things in this world than your whining about everything...


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I'm sure hoping that is the case, because truly .. that is PATHETIC!  There are SO many other causes that could be denoted to!  I'm wondering if MM put this out there to get Spotify to 'advertise' their availability (since they can't get in front of the CEO, etc. - like they did with Disney)!  If this becomes true, then I'm done with Spotify; have no desire to support an organization that 'donates' to these 2 grifters!



It is also possible the Spotify story was completely fabricated by the British tabloid media. They appear to be the only ones reporting it.  Spotify is a European company but I think if the rumors had substance they would be reported here as well.

Maybe it is a preemptive opportunity for subscribers to contact Spotify and tell them just how much they don’t want the Meghan and Harry show.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I've been donating to Goodwill.  I think they sell some and maybe give some to people in need.  but at least if they sell it, the money goes to charity.  I was having trouble finding a place to take my items.  I'd get there and they would say they were full for the day.  I found one near home that's not a store - just a donation center with bins; they took my stuff.  sometimes it's hard to make the decision to part with something but once you do, it feels good.


Alas, Goodwill is a very prominent anti-LGBQT proponent, so they will not be getting any of my items.  I would prefer to donate to organizations like the Cancer Society or Diabetes; things that have affected my family personally.


----------



## Pessie

Not surprised she got the Disney elephant gig - with a memory like Meghan has for every little tiny perceived slight??  Who could possibly compete?


----------



## A1aGypsy

CeeJay said:


> Alas, Goodwill is a very prominent anti-LGBQT proponent, so they will not be getting any of my items.  I would prefer to donate to organizations like the Cancer Society or Diabetes; things that have affected my family personally.



I’m shocked to read this as they provided LGBTQ2 supports where I live until they had to close. I know Salvation Army has terrible policies in this regard but i cannot find anything from Goodwill. Can you point me to Goodwill’s policies? I’m so disappointed.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Alas, Goodwill is a very prominent anti-LGBQT proponent, so they will not be getting any of my items.  I would prefer to donate to organizations like the Cancer Society or Diabetes; things that have affected my family personally.


hmm....didn't know that
honestly, they're just the most convenient for me but I'll see what other options I have


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m shocked to read this as they provided LGBTQ2 supports where I live until they had to close. I know Salvation Army has terrible policies in this regard but i cannot fund anything from Goodwill. Can you point me to Goodwill’s policies? I’m so disappointed.





sdkitty said:


> hmm....didn't know that
> honestly, they're just the most convenient for me but I'll see what other options I have


*OMG .. ME BAD!!!* .. you are right, it's Salvation Army .. not Goodwill!!!  Sorry, major BLONDE moment on my behalf!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> *OMG .. ME BAD!!!* .. you are right, it's Salvation Army .. not Goodwill!!!  Sorry, major BLONDE moment on my behalf!


Happy to know because I've been donating to Goodwill for several years. I stopped donating to Salvation Army when once they came to our house to pick up furniture and started choosing the pieces, so we called a different organization (I can't remember if it was Goodwill, this was several yeas ago) that was very happy to take everything.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *OMG .. ME BAD!!!* .. you are right, it's Salvation Army .. not Goodwill!!!  Sorry, major BLONDE moment on my behalf!


oh good cause they're pretty convenient for me


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whew!  They are closest to me, too. 
I’m sure if I looked closely, they would have policies I disagree with. Still, someone will benefit from my stuff. I do give monetary donations to causes I believe in, so all is well.




sdkitty said:


> oh good cause they're pretty convenient for me


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whew!  They are closest to me, too.
> I’m sure if I looked closely, they would have policies I disagree with. Still, someone will benefit from my stuff. I do give monetary donations to causes I believe in, so all is well.


same here....I choose my charities.....I don't buy into the checkout people at the stores asking if I want to donate to the hospital, etc.  My donations aren't that large but I like to choose organizations I like


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> OMG New York Times best sellers list has Finding Freedom on it!  I can’t believe people are actually buying this book!


I wonder if their best seller list is as "reliable" as their other general "reporting" nowadays


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t know who these people are but clearly Meghan has found herself a new defender to replace Jessica Mulroney.  The article’s author, Erin Vanderhoof, writes a pro-Meghan story for Vanity Fair almost every week. She has aspirations of becoming the next Omid Scobie.  

*Meghan and Harry Invite Jameela Jamil and James Blake Into Their Quarantine Bubble*
On August 22, *Jameela Jamil* and her boyfriend, musician *James Blake,* were photographed strolling the beach in the small Santa Barbara County community of Montecito. Most people might use a day on the beach to disconnect from social media, but instead Jamil used the time to make Twitter comments defending *Meghan Markle,*herself a recent Montecito transplant, against internet trolls. In a post that also slammed *Prince Andrew* for his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, Jamil said Meghan was targeted online because of her race, adding “And because she’s smart, strong, opinionated, rebellious, beautiful, happy and has everything they never will.”

That Jamil was sticking up for Meghan while strolling in the duchess’s new hometown initially seemed like a mere coincidence. This weekend, however, the _Sun_ reported that Jamil and Blake did visit Meghan and *Prince Harry* at their new home on August 23, the day after they were photographed on the beach. “Jameela and James drove up to Montecito from Los Angeles and spent time with Meghan and Harry,” a source told the newspaper. “They also had a stroll on the beach but Meghan and Harry didn’t venture out with them.”

Though Meghan and Harry highlighted Jamil’s Instagram on the @SussexRoyal account in May 2019, the two women didn’t actually speak until Meghan chose her for the cover of the Forces for Change issue of British _Vogue_ later that summer. “Meghan called me herself,” Jamil told _Grazia Magazine_ in August 2019. “I missed the call three times before I finally answered, I wanted to punch myself!” Jamil also said that Meghan was a fan of her show, _The Good Place,_ and made a reference to a line where Jamil’s character, Tahani Al Jamil, claims that she introduced Meghan and Harry. “‘She said she’s grateful to Tahani for introducing her to Harry. I just replied, ‘You’re welcome,’” Jamil said.

It’s unclear if Blake and Jamil’s visit to Montecito was the first time the couples had gotten together in person. The visit would have also been around the same time that Meghan met with *Gloria Steinem* to discuss the importance of voting. 

Until recently, Meghan and Harry were houseguests at *Tyler Perry’s* Beverly Hills mansion while the producer was at work in Atlanta. In July, the couple bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom home with plenty of luxury amenities in Montecito. According to TMZ, Jamil and Blake aren’t the only visitors Harry and Meghan have attracted to the enclave. Though it has long been considered a paparazzi-free zone, the outlet reports that Meghan and Harry’s arrival has attracted plenty of photographers and tourists trying to get a glimpse.









						Meghan and Harry Invite Jameela Jamil and James Blake Into Their Quarantine Bubble
					

One day after the Good Place actor defended Meghan on Twitter, she and Blake reportedly made a visit to the Sussex home in Montecito.




					www.google.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know who these people are but clearly Meghan has found herself a new defender to replace Jessica Mulroney.  The article’s author, Erin Vanderhoof, writes a pro-Meghan story for Vanity Fair almost every week. She has aspirations of becoming the next Omid Scobie.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry Invite Jameela Jamil and James Blake Into Their Quarantine Bubble*
> On August 22, *Jameela Jamil* and her boyfriend, musician *James Blake,* were photographed strolling the beach in the small Santa Barbara County community of Montecito. Most people might use a day on the beach to disconnect from social media, but instead Jamil used the time to make Twitter comments defending *Meghan Markle,*herself a recent Montecito transplant, against internet trolls. In a post that also slammed *Prince Andrew* for his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, Jamil said Meghan was targeted online because of her race, adding “And because she’s smart, strong, opinionated, rebellious, beautiful, happy and has everything they never will.”
> 
> That Jamil was sticking up for Meghan while strolling in the duchess’s new hometown initially seemed like a mere coincidence. This weekend, however, the _Sun_ reported that Jamil and Blake did visit Meghan and *Prince Harry* at their new home on August 23, the day after they were photographed on the beach. “Jameela and James drove up to Montecito from Los Angeles and spent time with Meghan and Harry,” a source told the newspaper. “They also had a stroll on the beach but Meghan and Harry didn’t venture out with them.”
> 
> Though Meghan and Harry highlighted Jamil’s Instagram on the @SussexRoyal account in May 2019, the two women didn’t actually speak until Meghan chose her for the cover of the Forces for Change issue of British _Vogue_ later that summer. “Meghan called me herself,” Jamil told _Grazia Magazine_ in August 2019. “I missed the call three times before I finally answered, I wanted to punch myself!” Jamil also said that Meghan was a fan of her show, _The Good Place,_ and made a reference to a line where Jamil’s character, Tahani Al Jamil, claims that she introduced Meghan and Harry. “‘She said she’s grateful to Tahani for introducing her to Harry. I just replied, ‘You’re welcome,’” Jamil said.
> 
> It’s unclear if Blake and Jamil’s visit to Montecito was the first time the couples had gotten together in person. The visit would have also been around the same time that Meghan met with *Gloria Steinem* to discuss the importance of voting.
> 
> Until recently, Meghan and Harry were houseguests at *Tyler Perry’s* Beverly Hills mansion while the producer was at work in Atlanta. In July, the couple bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom home with plenty of luxury amenities in Montecito. According to TMZ, Jamil and Blake aren’t the only visitors Harry and Meghan have attracted to the enclave. Though it has long been considered a paparazzi-free zone, the outlet reports that Meghan and Harry’s arrival has attracted plenty of photographers and tourists trying to get a glimpse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Invite Jameela Jamil and James Blake Into Their Quarantine Bubble
> 
> 
> One day after the Good Place actor defended Meghan on Twitter, she and Blake reportedly made a visit to the Sussex home in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com





bag-mania said:


> I don’t know who these people are but clearly Meghan has found herself a new defender to replace Jessica Mulroney.  The article’s author, Erin Vanderhoof, writes a pro-Meghan story for Vanity Fair almost every week. She has aspirations of becoming the next Omid Scobie.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry Invite Jameela Jamil and James Blake Into Their Quarantine Bubble*
> On August 22, *Jameela Jamil* and her boyfriend, musician *James Blake,* were photographed strolling the beach in the small Santa Barbara County community of Montecito. Most people might use a day on the beach to disconnect from social media, but instead Jamil used the time to make Twitter comments defending *Meghan Markle,*herself a recent Montecito transplant, against internet trolls. In a post that also slammed *Prince Andrew* for his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, Jamil said Meghan was targeted online because of her race, adding “And because she’s smart, strong, opinionated, rebellious, beautiful, happy and has everything they never will.”
> 
> That Jamil was sticking up for Meghan while strolling in the duchess’s new hometown initially seemed like a mere coincidence. This weekend, however, the _Sun_ reported that Jamil and Blake did visit Meghan and *Prince Harry* at their new home on August 23, the day after they were photographed on the beach. “Jameela and James drove up to Montecito from Los Angeles and spent time with Meghan and Harry,” a source told the newspaper. “They also had a stroll on the beach but Meghan and Harry didn’t venture out with them.”
> 
> Though Meghan and Harry highlighted Jamil’s Instagram on the @SussexRoyal account in May 2019, the two women didn’t actually speak until Meghan chose her for the cover of the Forces for Change issue of British _Vogue_ later that summer. “Meghan called me herself,” Jamil told _Grazia Magazine_ in August 2019. “I missed the call three times before I finally answered, I wanted to punch myself!” Jamil also said that Meghan was a fan of her show, _The Good Place,_ and made a reference to a line where Jamil’s character, Tahani Al Jamil, claims that she introduced Meghan and Harry. “‘She said she’s grateful to Tahani for introducing her to Harry. I just replied, ‘You’re welcome,’” Jamil said.
> 
> It’s unclear if Blake and Jamil’s visit to Montecito was the first time the couples had gotten together in person. The visit would have also been around the same time that Meghan met with *Gloria Steinem* to discuss the importance of voting.
> 
> Until recently, Meghan and Harry were houseguests at *Tyler Perry’s* Beverly Hills mansion while the producer was at work in Atlanta. In July, the couple bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom home with plenty of luxury amenities in Montecito. According to TMZ, Jamil and Blake aren’t the only visitors Harry and Meghan have attracted to the enclave. Though it has long been considered a paparazzi-free zone, the outlet reports that Meghan and Harry’s arrival has attracted plenty of photographers and tourists trying to get a glimpse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Invite Jameela Jamil and James Blake Into Their Quarantine Bubble
> 
> 
> One day after the Good Place actor defended Meghan on Twitter, she and Blake reportedly made a visit to the Sussex home in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


had to google this person
according to wiki, she is "openly queer" and has had a relationship with James Blake for the past five years....excuse me but isn't that a contradiction?
anyway, it seems she and M are using each other (IMO)


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> had to google this person
> according to wiki, she is "openly queer" and has had a relationship with James Blake for the past five years....excuse me but isn't that a contradiction?
> anyway, it seems she and M are using each other (IMO)


I really liked her on the Good Place, which is done now. On that show she played a constant name-dropper, celeb-chaser socialite--apparently fiction turns out to be fact! Eesh, what people will do for fame.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> had to google this person
> according to wiki, she is "openly queer" and has had a relationship with James Blake for the past five years....excuse me but isn't that a contradiction?
> anyway, it seems she and M are using each other (IMO)



Somehow I doubt they are the Hollywood A-listers Meghan hoped would be visiting them when they got to LA. Ellen is apparently their neighbor and hasn’t come calling, although maybe that is due to her show’s scandal.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Somehow I doubt they are the Hollywood A-listers Meghan hoped would be visiting them when they got to LA. Ellen is apparently their neighbor and hasn’t come calling, although maybe that is due to her show’s scandal.


apparently this woman is "on the spectrum" of being gay - seems she announced she was "queer" when it was convenient for her to say that, but she "prefers boys".....seems like a good match for Meghan


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is this why they announced their podcasts? To compete with Camilla?  Unreal, just unreal.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...milla-parker-bowles-royal-family-barack-*****


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is this why they announced their podcasts? To compete with Camilla?  Unreal, just unreal.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...milla-parker-bowles-royal-family-barack-*****


well, to be fair, don't they announce something just about every day?


----------



## poopsie

So isn't Harry getting any visitors?
So far only MEMEMEMEMEghan has had any. 
Granted they have only been a pair of nobodies and a has been but still.............
Better get used to it Harry old chap. Second fiddle is as good as it gets for you


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> So isn't Harry getting any visitors?
> So far only MEMEMEMEMEghan has had any.
> Granted they have only been a pair of nobodies and a has been but still.............
> Better get used to it Harry old chap. Second fiddle is as good as it gets for you


well H did talk to Gloria - told her he was a feminist too


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> well H did talk to Gloria - told her he was a feminist too


LOL I'm sure it was in passing as MEMEMEMEMEGHAN and HER guest were headed out to the garden


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> LOL I'm sure it was in passing as MEMEMEMEMEGHAN and HER guest were headed out to the garden


I'll admit I'm biased but from the way I see them I doubt she has much respect for H.  This great love story doesn't look so great to me


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'll admit I'm biased but from the way I see them I doubt she has much respect for H.  This great love story doesn't look so great to me


It was never a love story imo... Here are some recycled news:

*Meghan Markle is a Diva, Not a Social Justice Feminist Icon*

*She essentially married into money and is trying to use her husband’s family name as leverage to create a career for herself.

*It’s easy to spend other people’s money, but you can’t buy status and class, unfortunately.

*It was reported that Meghan’s spending habits were drawing the attention of the Queen.

*Meghan Markle is an anti-feminist. Her reported actions, if true, do nothing to further the cause of women.






						Meghan Markle is a Diva, Not a Social Justice Feminist Icon – CCN.com
					






					www.ccn.com


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is upset (or at least pretending to be).

*Prince Harry ‘upset’ he and Meghan Markle can’t join William and Kate at Balmoral*
Prince Harry is "upset" he can't fly over from the US to join his family at Balmoral for their annual summer trip, it has been claimed.

Prince William and Kate Middleton arrived along with their kids at the royal estate in Aberdeenshire on Friday, where they saw the Queen and Prince Philip for the first time in months.

But while the Duke of Sussex is understood to be "frustrated" that he's stuck in California due to the coronavirus pandemic, wife Meghan Markle is reportedly more content. 

"[She] doesn’t feel like she’s missing out," an insider told InTouch Weekly.

She’s been too busy decorating their new Montecito mansion."

Back in March, the Sussexes accepted an invitation to the highland castle for the late summer reunion, but Covid-19 hampered their plans, the Sunday Times previously reported.

It comes after news Harry, 35, is set to miss the high-profile King Power Royal Charity Polo Day at the end of September.

He and William, 38, have taken part in the event - which raises millions for charity - for the past 15 years.

Harry's absence has further fuelled rumours of a rift between the two brothers.

However, on Saturday, in a Zoom call to mark Rugby League's 125th birthday, the duke said that only coronavirus has stopped him from returning to the UK.

In the Zoom quiz of players, coaches and volunteers from the sport, he also vowed to fly home for the Rugby League World Cup next year.









						Prince Harry ‘upset’ he and Meghan unable to join William and Kate at Balmoral
					

Prince Harry is understood to be frustrated the coronavirus pandemic has prevented him visiting Balmoral Castle with the rest of the royals, with William and Kate having arrived on Friday




					www.google.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Harry is upset (or at least pretending to be).
> 
> *Prince Harry ‘upset’ he and Meghan Markle can’t join William and Kate at Balmoral*
> Prince Harry is "upset" he can't fly over from the US to join his family at Balmoral for their annual summer trip, it has been claimed.
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton arrived along with their kids at the royal estate in Aberdeenshire on Friday, where they saw the Queen and Prince Philip for the first time in months.
> 
> But while the Duke of Sussex is understood to be "frustrated" that he's stuck in California due to the coronavirus pandemic, wife Meghan Markle is reportedly more content.
> 
> "[She] doesn’t feel like she’s missing out," an insider told InTouch Weekly.
> 
> She’s been too busy decorating their new Montecito mansion."
> 
> Back in March, the Sussexes accepted an invitation to the highland castle for the late summer reunion, but Covid-19 hampered their plans, the Sunday Times previously reported.
> 
> It comes after news Harry, 35, is set to miss the high-profile King Power Royal Charity Polo Day at the end of September.
> 
> He and William, 38, have taken part in the event - which raises millions for charity - for the past 15 years.
> 
> Harry's absence has further fuelled rumours of a rift between the two brothers.
> 
> However, on Saturday, in a Zoom call to mark Rugby League's 125th birthday, the duke said that only coronavirus has stopped him from returning to the UK.
> 
> In the Zoom quiz of players, coaches and volunteers from the sport, he also vowed to fly home for the Rugby League World Cup next year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘upset’ he and Meghan unable to join William and Kate at Balmoral
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is understood to be frustrated the coronavirus pandemic has prevented him visiting Balmoral Castle with the rest of the royals, with William and Kate having arrived on Friday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Yeah, I just read that one. Its definitely either pretending or it’s bs...he hasn’t shown that he cares one bit about his family so far... just their money... It’s all about him. Why would he want to be around snobs anyway? Remember what he told faux “Greta”? He was in the military, he’s normal unlike the rest of his family... It’s not like Will or Kate ever had jobs... oh wait... they did...









						Prince Harry hoax call in full from Megxit agony to thoughts on Trump
					

Two Russian pranksters posed as Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg, 17, and her dad Svante as they tricked Prince Harry into opening up about his wife Meghan Markle, son Archie, quitting royal life and dealing with Donald *****




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Maybe Jameela and Mememe bond over their Piers Morgan problem lol









						It's Piers Morgan vs Jameela Jamil again as he mocks viral Munchausen's claims
					

Their feud has been reignited.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## zen1965

They did not visit Balmoral last year. So what‘s the fuss about?


----------



## Chagall

I saw a tribute to Diana on the anniversary of her death. Several viewers were discussing the fact that JCMH didn’t leave the BRF completely because if MM, but rather that she was a conduit to helping him leave. The speculation was that Harry knew Charles and QE2 were behind Diana’s death. This would explain their odd permissive behaviour regarding Harry. Very interesting concept! Let’s face it there were a lot of things that didn’t add up regarding her death.


----------



## Pessie

Chagall said:


> I saw a tribute to Diana on the anniversary of her death. Several viewers were discussing the fact that JCMH didn’t leave the BRF completely because if MM, but rather that she was a conduit to helping him leave. The speculation was that Harry knew Charles and QE2 were behind Diana’s death. This would explain their odd permissive behaviour regarding Harry. Very interesting concept! Let’s face it there were a lot of things that didn’t add up regarding her death.


Oh please, she was in a high speed car accident and not wearing a seatbelt.  The driver had been off duty and drinking prior to being ordered back to drive the car.  
I do feel sorry for Harry that this sort of conspiracy cr*p about his mother‘s death is still being pushed out for money.  I can’t imagine what it must be like for Harry and William.


----------



## Chagall

Pessie said:


> Oh please, she was in a high speed car accident and not wearing a seatbelt.  The driver had been off duty and drinking prior to being ordered back to drive the car.
> I do feel sorry for Harry that this sort of conspiracy cr*p about his mother‘s death is still being pushed out for money.  I can’t imagine what it must be like for Harry and William.


Think what you want but the simplest answer is not ALWAYS the correct one! Things happen all the time that are underhanded and dishonest. Check out the number of people filling up prisons. It has gone on throughout history and often in the BRF. I simply stated that it was an interesting concept!


----------



## Pessie

Chagall said:


> Think what you want but the simplest answer is not ALWAYS the correct one! Things happen all the time that are underhanded and dishonest. Check out the number of people filling up prisons. It has gone on throughout history and often in the BRF. I simply stated that it was an interesting concept!


So you’re seriously claiming that the Queen and Prince Charles had Diana murdered.  
Amazing Prince Harry’s still with us in that case.


----------



## Chagall

Pessie said:


> So you’re seriously claiming that the Queen and Prince Charles had Diana murdered.
> Amazing Prince Harry’s still with us in that case.


Re-read my post.


----------



## Pessie

Chagall said:


> Re-read my post.


The only person wearing a seat belt in the car that night survived the crash.  If Diana had worn one so would she.  I think the poor woman should be allowed to rest in peace.
Ending this, using the ignore function.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> well H did talk to Gloria - told her he was a feminist too


Interesting how the chats were both at the H&M house, people must want to go to Montecito - a real draw lol


----------



## Chanbal

@ *Chagall *
People saying that MM "was a conduit to helping" H leave the BRF are giving too much credit to H. He looks like a marionette in MM hands. Someone that likes to play victim cards would support such rumors.

Charles is a decent person imo and wouldn't get involved in such horrendous... There was an investigation that concluded the accident was caused by speeding, and the driver's blood test came out also positive for alcohol. However, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wants to reignite this type of rumors to discredit the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Harry is upset (or at least pretending to be).
> 
> *Prince Harry ‘upset’ he and Meghan Markle can’t join William and Kate at Balmoral*
> Prince Harry is "upset" he can't fly over from the US to join his family at Balmoral for their annual summer trip, it has been claimed.
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton arrived along with their kids at the royal estate in Aberdeenshire on Friday, where they saw the Queen and Prince Philip for the first time in months.
> 
> But while the Duke of Sussex is understood to be "frustrated" that he's stuck in California due to the coronavirus pandemic, wife Meghan Markle is reportedly more content.
> 
> "[She] doesn’t feel like she’s missing out," an insider told InTouch Weekly.
> 
> She’s been too busy decorating their new Montecito mansion."
> 
> Back in March, the Sussexes accepted an invitation to the highland castle for the late summer reunion, but Covid-19 hampered their plans, the Sunday Times previously reported.
> 
> It comes after news Harry, 35, is set to miss the high-profile King Power Royal Charity Polo Day at the end of September.
> 
> He and William, 38, have taken part in the event - which raises millions for charity - for the past 15 years.
> 
> Harry's absence has further fuelled rumours of a rift between the two brothers.
> 
> However, on Saturday, in a Zoom call to mark Rugby League's 125th birthday, the duke said that only coronavirus has stopped him from returning to the UK.
> 
> In the Zoom quiz of players, coaches and volunteers from the sport, he also vowed to fly home for the Rugby League World Cup next year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘upset’ he and Meghan unable to join William and Kate at Balmoral
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is understood to be frustrated the coronavirus pandemic has prevented him visiting Balmoral Castle with the rest of the royals, with William and Kate having arrived on Friday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


It's possible he is upset.  He's out of his element and as someone pointed out, all the "visitors" who some to their mansion are for Meghan.


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> @ *Chagall *
> People saying that MM "was a conduit to helping" H leave the BRF are giving too much credit to H. He looks like a marionette in MM hands. Someone that likes to play victim cards would support such rumors.
> 
> Charles is a decent person imo and wouldn't get involved in such horrendous... There was an investigation that concluded the accident was caused by speeding, and the driver's blood test came out also positive for alcohol. However, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wants to reignite this type of rumors to discredit the BRF.


I didn’t say this I am reporting what quite a lot of people were saying. Haven’t really followed this much. Certainly Harry is weak.


----------



## Chanbal

Another trip to LA on their crusade to attract paparazzi: 

*In memory of Princess Diana: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plant his late mother's favorite flower forget-me-nots with preschool children in LA to mark 23rd anniversary of her death *


*Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised children at a preschool centre in Los Angeles yesterday *(and made sure to get the traditional photo-ops)









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
					

Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Another trip to LA on their crusade to attract paparazzi:
> 
> *In memory of Princess Diana: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plant his late mother's favorite flower forget-me-nots with preschool children in LA to mark 23rd anniversary of her death*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised children at a preschool centre in Los Angeles yesterday *(and made sure to get the traditional photo-ops)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Well that's nice

but it's more usual to do those things in private moments

except when you're hoping to capitalise on your poor mother's memory/death to help your career 

If I was a little child I would be thinking:
 "Sorry, who?" 
"Who are these 2 people?" 
"The US has a Royal family, really?" 
"Where's Sussex?" 
"Sorry, where's Great Britain again?"  
"Is that the same place we fought the War of Independence from almost 250 years ago?"
"Is that the same family we fought the War of Independence from around 250 years ago?"
"Why are we doing this again" 
"why are there so many photographers?"


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Another trip to LA on their crusade to attract paparazzi:
> 
> *In memory of Princess Diana: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plant his late mother's favorite flower forget-me-nots with preschool children in LA to mark 23rd anniversary of her death*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised children at a preschool centre in Los Angeles yesterday *(and made sure to get the traditional photo-ops)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ugh, even more pathetic, they brought their own photographers again.

"Look at us! We're working side by side with cute little children! Did you see that these are 'children in need'? We're planting flowers in honor of my mother, she was much beloved by the world!"

Oh, and to top it all off Omid (I didn't talk to H&M while writing my book about them) Scobie knows exactly what they are doing so he can give it to the press like a good little lapdog reporter.

According to the couple's biographer Omid Scobie, the couple went on to play nursery rhymes in the garden with the youngsters and also spent time reading books about gardening and vegetables.'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

And if M&H last another two years, it'll be the 25th anniversary.  They'll have a blowout pity fest complete with figurines, candles and Christmas ornaments. Archie will be forced to play some sappy sick role he can't understand commemorating his dead grandmother to rake in more bucks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Planting flowers????  Ridiculous. So much jealousy of the Cambridge’s.  Here in the US, we have so many more important things that need our attention. *Diana is most definitely *not* one of them. * Let that woman rest in peace, Shameless grifters. Sign the petition. Stop this nonsense.








						Sign the Petition
					

No US funding for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Security in the US!




					www.change.org
				




No matter how much you try, H, you are no Will.
M, you are no Kate.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Another trip to LA on their crusade to attract paparazzi:
> 
> *In memory of Princess Diana: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plant his late mother's favorite flower forget-me-nots with preschool children in LA to mark 23rd anniversary of her death*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised children at a preschool centre in Los Angeles yesterday *(and made sure to get the traditional photo-ops)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


oh, they just can't stop looking for attention


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> oh, they just can't stop looking for attention



And they have NO original ideas. Ick, just ick.


----------



## Pessie

Paint-by-Numbers PR.  So sickly and clumsy you (almost) want to cringe for their ineptitude.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> And they have NO original ideas. Ick, just ick.


their MO seems to be just get attention, by whatever means.....sickening


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Planting flowers????  Ridiculous. So much jealousy of the Cambridge’s.  Here in the US, we have so many more important things that need our attention. *Diana is most definitely *not* one of them. * Let that woman rest in peace, Shameless grifters. Sign the petition. Stop this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> No US funding for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Security in the US!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.change.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No matter how much you try, H, you are no Will.
> M, you are no Kate.


Thanks for posting this here. I didn't know that " the US Diplomatic Special Services paid for the couple's security when they flew to Miami to make money." and I totally agree with "THIS is not the responsibility of the US tax payer."


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> Maybe Jameela and Mememe bond over their Piers Morgan problem lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's Piers Morgan vs Jameela Jamil again as he mocks viral Munchausen's claims
> 
> 
> Their feud has been reignited.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk



The more I read about Jameela the more she and Meghan seem like two attention-seeking peas in a pod. She considers herself to be woke and is even more self-righteous and outspoken about it than Meghan. Piers got on her after it became clear that Jameela has major issues. Over the years it has been noticed on social media that she has claimed to have a freakishly high number of illnesses, accidents, allergies, and other medical conditions. The circumstances of these incidents vary from report to report, she can't keep all of her stories straight. It came to a head earlier in the year when she posted a photo of peanut butter-filled pretzels on Instagram after saying awhile back that she has peanut allergies.

Apparently she came out as queer after HBO cast her as a host on a voguing competition show for HBO Max. HBO received lots of complaints that "she was too straight to insert herself into a space created by and belonging to the LGBTQ community." Did she come out as gay because it's true or was it so she could keep the job, who knows?

She's been caught maybe lying so many times that I wouldn't think Meghan would want that as her LA celebrity defender. Meghan's got the lying and exaggeration covered on her end and doesn't need Jameela's help for that.


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this here. I didn't know that " the US Diplomatic Special Services paid for the couple's security when they flew to Miami to make money." and I totally agree with "THIS is not the responsibility of the US tax payer."


As it was not the responsibility of the Canadian government either!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, even more pathetic, they brought their own photographers again.
> 
> "Look at us! We're working side by side with cute little children! Did you see that these are 'children in need'? We're planting flowers in honor of my mother, she was much beloved by the world!"
> 
> Oh, and to top it all off Omid (I didn't talk to H&M while writing my book about them) Scobie knows exactly what they are doing so he can give it to the press like a good little lapdog reporter.
> 
> According to the couple's biographer Omid Scobie, the couple went on to play nursery rhymes in the garden with the youngsters and also spent time reading books about gardening and vegetables.'


.. *and WHAT ABOUT their OWN child Archie????*  Why didn't they bring him along; meet the other children and play? .. hmmmmm???


----------



## Pessie

CeeJay said:


> .. *and WHAT ABOUT their OWN child Archie????*  Why didn't they bring him along; meet the other children and play? .. hmmmmm???


Great point.  Nanny’s day off?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. *and WHAT ABOUT their OWN child Archie????*  Why didn't they bring him along; meet the other children and play? .. hmmmmm???



Archie is back home running wild and free with the dogs. They are raising him as their own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chagall said:


> As it was not the responsibility of the Canadian government either!



Yet, they can afford a McMansion in one of the tony-ist zip codes.  Rrrrright.

Why does the UK think the US wants to fund these grifters? Hoping the IRS is following them closely.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> their MO seems to be just get attention, by whatever means.....sickening


Yup, I actually think they have outdone the Kardashian's .. god, that is just HORRIFIC!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> It's possible he is upset.  He's out of his element and as someone pointed out, all the "visitors" who some to their mansion are for Meghan.


But they would've never known who she was if she hadn't married H so he's he's at least worth _something_ that way. 

These visitors will vanish over time if they stay here in the US, there's always a new dog & pony show over the horizon. 

Edward & Wallis faded away and he was a King, nobody cared once the scandal died down, that's how the royal family plays it--stay calm and carry on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Yup, I actually think they have outdone the Kardashian's .. god, that is just HORRIFIC!


Nahhhhhh
Kylie just outdid everybody yesterday - she zipped into Paris - via private plane - for a meeting with Coty then a photo op at the Louvre 

I thought there are 14 day quarantines between US & Europe (14 days to get in, then another 14 days to get back home)  ie the reason that Harry has not gone to Balmoral this summer, or at least that was the excuse in yesterday's DM post


----------



## marietouchet

OK, lets get on it ! ANyone have better snaps ?

Did anyone notice Meghan's feet in the snaps from the Diana forget me not photo op ? 
In the photo I saw, Daily Mail, it looked like she had a pointy toe shoe pump on the right foot - let's assume flat ballerina, not stiletto
Her left foot was hard to see
Mostly her feet were cropped out of the snaps 

Who wears ballerinas to go dig in the dirt ?
Doesnt anyone in Montecito own a pair of Wellies ???


----------



## marietouchet

Meghan Markle Was Seen Shopping at Whole Foods in Jeans and Ballet Flats — ELLE
					

A fan shared info about the sighting from January 2020, right before Meghan dressed up in denim this week to volunteer in L.A.




					apple.news
				




ask and ye shall  get ... environmentally friendly Rothy ballerinas
bottom of article shows the $145 shoes in the mud


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yet, they can afford a McMansion in one of the tony-ist zip codes.  Rrrrright.
> 
> Why does the UK think the US wants to fund these grifters? Hoping the IRS is following them closely.



We don't. 

Most of us think the 'grifters' should pay for themselves in all respects - like other 'normal' people they so desperately want to pretend they are.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Nahhhhhh
> Kylie just outdid everybody yesterday - she zipped into Paris - via private plane - for a meeting with Coty then a photo op at the Louvre
> 
> I thought there are 14 day quarantines between US & Europe (14 days to get in, then another 14 days to get back home)  ie the reason that Harry has not gone to Balmoral this summer, or at least that was the excuse in yesterday's DM post


WHAT??? .. I did not see that, and yes .. especially since LA is a COVID "hotspot" - 
1)  There should have NOT been any flight to Paris (I bet she flew from that damn airport near me - Van Nuys) 
2)  Yes - as far as I recall, Europe was forbidding the entry of Americans 
3)  Yes - she should have quarantined for 14 days 

Obviously .. $$$ .. gets you everywhere and gets one what they want, when they want - pathetic.  I saw about a month ago, Diane Von Furstenburg and her family have a wonderful holiday in the South of Italy on their mega-yacht .. how nice when the rest of us plebes have to stay inside.  Really effin' PISSES ME OFF!


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> Another trip to LA on their crusade to attract paparazzi:
> 
> *In memory of Princess Diana: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plant his late mother's favorite flower forget-me-nots with preschool children in LA to mark 23rd anniversary of her death*
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised children at a preschool centre in Los Angeles yesterday *(and made sure to get the traditional photo-ops)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Those are petunias, not Diana's fave forget-me-nots. Not that H&M would know or care--a photo op is a photo op.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> OK, lets get on it ! ANyone have better snaps ?
> 
> Did anyone notice Meghan's feet in the snaps from the Diana forget me not photo op ?
> In the photo I saw, Daily Mail, it looked like she had a pointy toe shoe pump on the right foot - let's assume flat ballerina, not stiletto
> Her left foot was hard to see
> Mostly her feet were cropped out of the snaps
> 
> Who wears ballerinas to go dig in the dirt ?
> Doesnt anyone in Montecito own a pair of Wellies ???



Does anyone believe Diana's favourite flowers were forget-me-nots?

Seems a bit too convenient for copy to me. I'd like proof.

And what's with the planned  Diana statue (Ken Gardens) or this children's performance all of a sudden anyway? 

Leaves a nasty taste in my mouth.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this here. I didn't know that " the US Diplomatic Special Services paid for the couple's security when they flew to Miami to make money." and I totally agree with "THIS is not the responsibility of the US tax payer."



They may have received even more freebies courtesy of the US taxpayer. Fortunately, Meghan is incapable of keeping her big mouth shut. She had to get on her soapbox and spout  her anti-***** political views right as they were moving here, giving him the opportunity to retaliate by announcing that US taxpayers would not be funding any security for them. 

She was already so accustomed to getting favors she didn’t think. Daddy Charles had to open the checkbook for security.


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> Does anyone believe Diana's favourite flowers were forget-me-nots?
> 
> Seems a bit too convenient for copy to me. I'd like proof.
> 
> And what's with the planned  Diana statue (Ken Gardens) or this children's performance all of a sudden anyway?
> 
> Leaves a nasty taste in my mouth.



If it isn’t true, then it was a rumour started by her brother long ago. Although, I’m pretty sure she must have said she enjoyed them during her life as there are so many pictures of her holding bouquets of them from formal events where they had been given to her.

Her brother claimed he gave her some at six. 

As for the statue, that has been in the works for a while as well.  They initially announced it in 2017.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. *and WHAT ABOUT their OWN child Archie????*  Why didn't they bring him along; meet the other children and play? .. hmmmmm???


maybe they don't want him mingling with the common folk


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Meghan Markle Was Seen Shopping at Whole Foods in Jeans and Ballet Flats — ELLE
> 
> 
> A fan shared info about the sighting from January 2020, right before Meghan dressed up in denim this week to volunteer in L.A.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ask and ye shall  get ... environmentally friendly Rothy ballerinas
> bottom of article shows the $145 shoes in the mud


she actually went shopping herself? isn't that what servants are for?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Is it me or MM is copying Kate all the way, first was the children's charity, then planting flowers, right after Kate did the same. Nothing I meant absolutely nothing H&M do is original!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *In memory of Princess Diana: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plant his late mother's favorite flower forget-me-nots with preschool children in LA to mark 23rd anniversary of her death*



Ugh. I am for sure a sentimental person, but why would families at a LA pre-school care what a British princess's favourite flowers were? WTF.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I am for sure a sentimental person, but why would families at a LA pre-school care what a British princess's favourite flowers were? WTF.



I bet they didn't tell the kids about that. They had their little charity gig already lined up and the flowers were a way to tie in the anniversary of Diana's death for the media.


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> If it isn’t true, then it was a rumour started by her brother long ago. Although, I’m pretty sure she must have said she enjoyed them during her life as there are so many pictures of her holding bouquets of them from formal events where they had been given to her.
> 
> Her brother claimed he gave her some at six.
> 
> As for the statue, that has been in the works for a while as well.  They initially announced it in 2017.



Thanks A1 

I'm so cynical about these 2, but fair enough.

Apparently, Diana had quite a few favourite flowers including, white lilies, white roses, tulips, narcissi and Cosmo daisies besides forget-me-nots.

Can't help but think narcissi would have been more appropriate - for the planters anyway

In a LA pre-school garden is still bizarre though IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> .. *and WHAT ABOUT their OWN child Archie????*  Why didn't they bring him along; meet the other children and play? .. hmmmmm???


You know...'cause of COVID


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Nahhhhhh
> Kylie just outdid everybody yesterday - she zipped into Paris - via private plane - for a meeting with Coty then a photo op at the Louvre
> 
> I thought there are 14 day quarantines between US & Europe (14 days to get in, then another 14 days to get back home)  ie the reason that Harry has not gone to Balmoral this summer, or at least that was the excuse in yesterday's DM post


I thought US citizens weren't even allowed in most of Europe!  Yet Kylie, Brad Pitt, Tom Hanks, etc., all seem to have no problem.  JCMH somehow does though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comment section:

"Markle took her trophy Harry out for some pics and remind everyone that he's Diana son... nothing else is going for poor hostage these days.. from hero to zero"

So true it hurts.


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> Thanks A1
> 
> I'm so cynical about these 2, but fair enough.
> 
> Apparently, Diana had quite a few favourite flowers including, white lilies, white roses, tulips, narcissi and Cosmo daisies besides forget-me-nots.
> 
> Can't help but think narcissi would have been more appropriate - for the planters anyway
> 
> In a LA pre-school garden is still bizarre though IMO.



Oh, I throw no shade at your criticism- planting flowers for a photo op in memory of your mother seems gross. And incredibly ironic given his previous comments about the press, photos and coping with her death.


----------



## marietouchet

Timing is every thing ..

Harry is missing a charity polo match in the UK, he has not missed that for 15 years, but Will will be there

Harry was not there in the UK to announce - along with Will - the Diana garden to be unveiled next year. So, H made certain to do a Diana related activity on his own. Funny that , JCMH planted petunias not forget me nots, supposedly throwing out some forget me not seeds, but the plants that Diana loved are not in the shot


----------



## V0N1B2

Pessie said:


> ... I can’t imagine what it must be like for Harry *and William.*


This bears repeating.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Harry was not there in the UK to announce - along with Will - the Diana garden to be unveiled next year. So, H made certain to do a Diana related activity on his own. Funny that , *JCMH planted petunias not forget me nots, supposedly throwing out some forget me not seeds, but the plants that Diana loved are not in the shot*



Harry wouldn't know a petunia from the hole in his ...  but I digress. Harry showed up for the photo op like he was told to do. Arranging to have symbolic flowers that have _very deep meaning_ is his wife's idea.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> WHAT??? .. I did not see that, and yes .. especially since LA is a COVID "hotspot" -
> 1)  There should have NOT been any flight to Paris (I bet she flew from that damn airport near me - Van Nuys)
> 2)  Yes - as far as I recall, Europe was forbidding the entry of Americans
> 3)  Yes - she should have quarantined for 14 days
> 
> Obviously .. $$$ .. gets you everywhere and gets one what they want, when they want - pathetic.  I saw about a month ago, Diane Von Furstenburg and her family have a wonderful holiday in the South of Italy on their mega-yacht .. how nice when the rest of us plebes have to stay inside.  Really effin' PISSES ME OFF!


you must check out the article , great chuckle , wonderful example of social distancing and mask wearing 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...crop-Paris-causing-fans-snicker-lockdown.html 

the outfit was indescribable ... but an obvious homage to haute couture with all the Dior logos 
thankfully, only the Mona Lisa was in the shot at the Louvre


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Harry wouldn't know a petunia from the hole in his ...  but I digress. Harry showed up for the photo op like he was told to do. Arranging to have symbolic flowers that have _very deep meaning_ is his wife's idea.


Forget me nots grow here like weeds, great for a “the gardener has not come for three weeks “ look
poor choice for so cal which is often drought stricken Since they are not not xeric plants and need water as do petunias


----------



## poopsie

Grifters BEWARE!!!!!





__





						Montecito Swindler Gets Three Years for $3.4 Million Investment Scam - The Santa Barbara Independent
					

Montecito resident Efstratios “Elias” Argyropoulos fleeced his victims by offering them the opportunity to invest in companies like Facebook and Twitter before they went public.




					www.independent.com
				




*Montecito Swindler Gets Three Years for $3.4 Million Investment Scam*






                                                                                           By                                                                                                            Nick Welsh 
Mon Aug 31, 2020 | 4:35pm                                                    



Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
Click to print (Opens in new window)

 



Montecito resident Efstratios “Elias” Argyropoulos was sentenced Monday in federal court to serve three years behind bars for orchestrating a five-year investment fraud scheme — running 2010-2015 — that federal authorities say bilked 130 people out of $3.4 million. In addition, federal judge George Wu ordered Argyropoulos to pay the $3.4 million back.


As president and sole shareholder of Prima Ventures, a financial services firm, Argyropoulos, now 73, fleeced his victims by offering them the opportunity to invest in companies like Facebook, Twitter, Etsy, Alibaba, and e-Waste before they went public, despite him having no ability to do so. Argyropoulos was active in the Greek Orthodox Church and represented himself as a big-hearted entrepreneurial guru involved in such organizations as Paralyzed Veterans of America and the American Heart Association.


Argyropoulos got into hot water five years ago with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), which investigated his fraudulent behavior and filed civil action against him. After that, the FBI followed suit and initiated the criminal investigation, which led to Argyropoulos pleading guilty to wire fraud last year. According to the Department of Justice, Argyropoulos diverted investor funds into other uses, such as day-trading in stocks, gambling, buying cars, and paying for insurance bills and legal expenses arising from the SEC action against him.


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> As it was not the responsibility of the Canadian government either!



All their expenses must be paid by MM&H. Just to put up with this ridiculous couple, people in the US should get a tax break.  



CeeJay said:


> .. *and WHAT ABOUT their OWN child Archie????*  Why didn't they bring him along; meet the other children and play? .. hmmmmm???


@CeeJay are you forgetting the request of $2 million for Archie's pictures? The article was posted here a couple of days ago.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Forget me nots grow here like weeds, great for a “the gardener has not come for three weeks “ look
> *poor choice for so cal which is often drought stricken *Since they are not not xeric plants and need water as do petunias



Hey, those flowers only needed to live as long as the photo shoot. Even if they wither away next week they will have served their purpose.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Hey, those flowers only needed to live as long as the photo shoot. Even if they wither away next week they will have served their purpose.



Next week nothing. They probably won't make it through the week_end_ as we are due for triple digit heat by Saturday


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Grifters BEWARE!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montecito Swindler Gets Three Years for $3.4 Million Investment Scam - The Santa Barbara Independent
> 
> 
> Montecito resident Efstratios “Elias” Argyropoulos fleeced his victims by offering them the opportunity to invest in companies like Facebook and Twitter before they went public.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Montecito Swindler Gets Three Years for $3.4 Million Investment Scam*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By                                                                                                            Nick Welsh
> Mon Aug 31, 2020 | 4:35pm
> 
> 
> 
> Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
> Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
> Click to print (Opens in new window)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montecito resident Efstratios “Elias” Argyropoulos was sentenced Monday in federal court to serve three years behind bars for orchestrating a five-year investment fraud scheme — running 2010-2015 — that federal authorities say bilked 130 people out of $3.4 million. In addition, federal judge George Wu ordered Argyropoulos to pay the $3.4 million back.
> 
> 
> As president and sole shareholder of Prima Ventures, a financial services firm, Argyropoulos, now 73, fleeced his victims by offering them the opportunity to invest in companies like Facebook, Twitter, Etsy, Alibaba, and e-Waste before they went public, despite him having no ability to do so. Argyropoulos was active in the Greek Orthodox Church and represented himself as a big-hearted entrepreneurial guru involved in such organizations as Paralyzed Veterans of America and the American Heart Association.
> 
> 
> Argyropoulos got into hot water five years ago with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), which investigated his fraudulent behavior and filed civil action against him. After that, the FBI followed suit and initiated the criminal investigation, which led to Argyropoulos pleading guilty to wire fraud last year. According to the Department of Justice, Argyropoulos diverted investor funds into other uses, such as day-trading in stocks, gambling, buying cars, and paying for insurance bills and legal expenses arising from the SEC action against him.


So they got the mansion of the 19 toilets from Scarface, they are neighbors of Efstratios “Elias” Argyropoulos... Living the dream among pals in Montecito.


----------



## CarryOn2020

That is what I thought. What perplexes me is that H&M believe Americans care oh so much about Diana. Most of us don’t. We have been over her for a very long time. Sure, initially, we paid attention to the tributes, but those wear thin after the second or third year. We now are well aware of all (?) the issues she had and how she used/manipulated the media. We don’t find that stuff very attractive, especially after years of Kartrashians.  Clearly, today's stunt was really all about them. SMH, not even her fave flower. That is weird stuff. 


papertiger said:


> We don't.
> Most of us think the 'grifters' should pay for themselves in all respects - like other 'normal' people they so desperately want to pretend they are.



RE: Balmoral  If H really wanted to be there, couldn’t he call Elton for a free ride? He has done it before. Why stop now?

RE: Polo  Same as above — call Elton

RE: Archie  He is their meal ticket. They want $2 million, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Hey, those flowers only needed to live as long as the photo shoot. *Even if they wither away next week they will have served their purpose.


Agree, the flowers only need to last a couple of hours. They could have planted flowers in memory of Diana in their own garden.  This couple uses everything possible to attract the attention of paparazzi.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> You know...'cause of COVID


But it was OK to expose the children at the daycare to the Harkles?  Not!  

They were planting petunias and sowing the seeds of the Forget Me Not.  

Gee, they keep coming to LA, which they hated.  How odd.  Did they take the private plane again or travel with a phalanx of security vehicles like a dignitary.  They are so important!

This showing  up at random places to get their pictures taken is pretty old. They aren't kidding anyone.  Real volunteers don't travel with their own photographer.  Even the celebs that make hospital visits to sick children don't do this.  If there are pictures  taken with a child, it is usually a parent or hospital worker who is doing it to commemorate the occasion.  These people are so transparent as to their real intentions.


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh, I throw no shade at your criticism- planting flowers for a photo op in memory of your mother seems gross. *And incredibly ironic given his previous comments about the press, photos and coping with her death.*



100%


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is what I thought. What perplexes me is that H&M believe Americans care oh so much about Diana. Most of us don’t. We have been over her for a very long time. Sure, initially, we paid attention to the tributes, but those wear thin after the second or third year. We now are well aware of all (?) the issues she had and how she used/manipulated the media. We don’t find that stuff very attractive, especially after years of Kartrashians.  Clearly, today's stunt was really all about them. SMH, not even her fave flower. That is weird stuff.
> 
> 
> RE: Balmoral  If H really wanted to be there, couldn’t he call Elton for a free ride? He has done it before. Why stop now?
> 
> RE: Polo  Same as above — call Elton
> 
> RE: Archie  He is their meal ticket. They want $2 million, right?


Archie is their meal ticket, and they were told to put some real clothing on him.  They are currently deciding if they want to spend the money on that


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ya!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> OK, lets get on it ! ANyone have better snaps ?
> 
> Did anyone notice Meghan's feet in the snaps from the Diana forget me not photo op ?
> In the photo I saw, Daily Mail, it looked like she had a pointy toe shoe pump on the right foot - let's assume flat ballerina, not stiletto
> Her left foot was hard to see
> Mostly her feet were cropped out of the snaps
> 
> Who wears ballerinas to go dig in the dirt ?
> Doesnt anyone in Montecito own a pair of Wellies ???


For the ones that pay attention to detail, where is the 'linked not ranked' bracelet? Bead bracelets are usually fun for preschoolers, and would have made her new friend Gloria so proud...


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Yup, I actually think they have outdone the Kardashian's .. god, that is just HORRIFIC!



Mmmmmmmmm...............not yet.
The day that MEMEMEMEMEghan is pap snapped strolling through some random 7/11 parking lot in the middle of the night wearing trash bag chic is the day she will have merely caught up to them.
IDK what it will take to actually *surpass*  them. PMK is the best. And while it is apparent that MEMEMEMEMEghan is following Kris' playbook right down the line she will NEVER be able to surpass her until she is capable of coming up with an original idea


----------



## LittleStar88

Well, I've read 2,351 pages here and still have no idea what they "do for a living". Other than freeload and troll for attention.

Frankly, what they are doing now looks no different from what they complained about doing when part of the Firm - plant flowers, coo over little kids, and smile for the cameras. 

And sit around in chairs on the grass and have avocado toast and word salads with Gloria while someone takes pictures?

Color me confused, or maybe I am the one who is dim, but I am not yet understanding any of it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Isn‘t Doria going to have her classes make these chic bead bracelets? Maybe classes haven’t started yet.



Chanbal said:


> For the ones that pay attention to detail, where is the 'linked not ranked' bracelet? Bead bracelets are usually fun for preschoolers, and would have make her new friend Gloria so proud...



Better sit down for this: Sunshine Sachs and Assistance League of LA are on the same street!!!!! Cole Avenue in LA.
unreal!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is anyone concerned that they are trying to establish a ‘royal court’ over here?
Since they couldn’t do it in the UK, they are trying it here. QE and Charles need to stop them asap.

Also, concerned about whether they had permission to post the children‘s photos. The parents should sue.


----------



## Chanbal

Wrong post, very tired today.


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> Mmmmmmmmm...............not yet.
> The day that MEMEMEMEMEghan is pap snapped strolling through some random 7/11 parking lot in the middle of the night wearing trash bag chic is the day she will have merely caught up to them.
> IDK what it will take to actually *surpass*  them. PMK is the best. And while it is apparent that MEMEMEMEMEghan is following Kris' playbook right down the line she will NEVER be able to surpass her until she is capable of coming up with an original idea


I’ve said it before and I ll say it again.  If she ever had an original thought it died of loneliness.


----------



## Roie55

So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I've read 2,351 pages here and still have no idea what they "do for a living". Other than freeload and troll for attention.
> 
> Frankly, what they are doing now looks no different from what they complained about doing when part of the Firm - plant flowers, coo over little kids, and smile for the cameras.
> 
> And sit around in chairs on the grass and have avocado toast and word salads with Gloria while someone takes pictures?
> 
> Color me confused, or maybe I am the one who is dim, but I am not yet understanding any of it.


well, no one is making her wear a hat or natural looking nail polish


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Why do certain mind sets always want to shut down anything they don't agree with?
If you don't like it do what people USED to do and ignore it


----------



## poopsie

Roie55 said:


> So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.



If you don't agree with something just IGNORE it. This is a GOSSIP thread in case you haven't noticed. I don't think you could have possibly read the entire thread or you would have seen that it has been mentioned too many times to count that Harry is on board with it all.
To come  stomping in here and throwing around demands and ultimatums and casting aspersions on us isn't the best way to make your case #sorrynotsorry


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> If you don't agree with something just IGNORE it. This is a GOSSIP thread in case you haven't noticed. I don't think you could have possibly read the entire thread or you would have seen that it has been mentioned too many times to count that Harry is on board with it all.
> To come  stomping in here and throwing around demands and ultimatums and casting aspersions on us isn't the best way to make your case #sorrynotsorry


agree, asking for the thread to be shut down is out of line


----------



## poopsie

Would that be considered an example of 'cancel culture'


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> maybe they don't want him mingling with the common folk


HA - yes, us "Normal" folk?!??!!


----------



## gracekelly

Roie55 said:


> So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.



You are certainly entitled to your opinion as is every person on this thread.  Just to give you the heads up, as you obviously have not read this thread beyond one page, Purse Forum Moderators and Ownership post here, so I really doubt that you will get your wish to shut the thread down.  We adhere to free speech done in a polite fashion so  you are welcome to say whatever you like


----------



## Roie55

gracekelly said:


> You are certainly entitled to your opinion as is every person on this thread.  Just to give you the heads up, as you obviously have not read this thread beyond one page, Purse Forum Moderators and Ownership post here, so I really doubt that you will get your wish to shut the thread down.  We adhere to free speech done in a polite fashion so  you are welcome to say whatever you like


I have read about half the thread - not just 1 page, i keep hoping to see some positive posts but its all about bashing Meagan.


----------



## csshopper

Roie55 said:


> So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.


As Megs pointed out in her statement closing down the Thread you had been posting in earlier today, thePF, stays away from politics and religion so they are reasons to end a Thread. 

We are not discussing those topics, we're talking about character traits like deception, hypocrisy, meanness, narcissism, jealousy, greed, spitefulness, pomposity etc exhibited by two people who actively seek public attention and by their behaviors, call attention to those traits, and leave themselves open for comment, since they are public figures. Act it. own it. 

Understood that not everyone will see it the same way, but we are easily avoided.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that complain about this thread, be assured many of us will stop posting here when MM will stop using PR-teams, paparazzi and whatever she can to inundate us with pompous news about their pretentious life.

I just opened an article to read about Juan Carlos, and here is a screenshot of what I've got:
A video of MM in the middle of an article about the Spanish Royal Family


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that complain about this thread, be assured many of us will stop posting here when MM will stop using PR-teams, paparazzi and whatever she can to inundate us with pompous news about their pretentious life.
> 
> I just opened an article to read about Juan Carlos, and here is a screenshot of what I've got:
> A video of MM in the middle of an article about the Spanish Royal Family
> 
> View attachment 4835490


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that complain about this thread, be assured many of us will stop posting here when MM will stop using PR-teams, paparazzi and whatever she can to inundate us with pompous news about their pretentious life.
> 
> I just opened an article to read about Juan Carlos, and here is a screenshot of what I've got:
> A video of MM in the middle of an article about the Spanish Royal Family
> 
> View attachment 4835490


----------



## mdcx

Roie55 said:


> So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.


Hatred is pretty strong. My feelings towards H&M are more along the lines of disgust with their behaviour, which is what I am judging. Their behaviour is on full display day after day due to Ms relentless PR onslaught. You yourself don't know M personally either I would assume, yet you obviously have positive feelings about M? When she steps off the publicity rollercoaster, which she could do at any moment, this thread would likely slow all the way down. M actively seeks PR opportunities and has gone out of her way to draw attention to her points of view on everything from the BRF to politics, race, etc etc. It would be very possible for M&H to live a low key life in California with no PR, yet somehow they end up in the Daily Mail everyday. It's not an accident, it's what M wants.


----------



## bag-mania

Roie55 said:


> You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.



As near as I can tell Harry had always performed his royal duties. There is no evidence that leaving was always in the cards for him. If what you claim was true, he could have left the BRF at any time once he reached adulthood in the years before he married Meghan. He was always to free to do so if he had wanted it.  They did an interview while they were engaged saying how much they were both looking forward to doing royal work together and Meghan in particular was gushing about it. What do you believe that was about? Was she lying through her teeth for the camera?

No, she was the catalyst and driving force behind it. It is called Megxit for that reason.


----------



## Jktgal

Roie55 said:


> I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities.



You were their nanny?


----------



## Pessie

Roie55 said:


> So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.


But you think it’s perfectly OK that you assume to know Harry’s thoughts and actions?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Roie55 said:


> Enough with the Meagan bashing.





> I have read about half the thread - not just 1 page, i keep hoping to see some positive posts but its all about bashing Meagan.



You might not have read through this thread as thoroughly as you think because her name is Meghan.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You might not have read through this thread as thoroughly as you think because her name is Meghan.


With all the $$$ they’ve spent on PR Meghan’s got to be pretty pi$$ed people still can’t get her name right


----------



## CarryOn2020

I admit I was surprised in January to find out Harry wanted out of the royal family. His dislike and discomfort with his lot in life seemed immature and disrespectful, IMO. Sources tell us he wanted out for years, before MM. So, ok, they let him go. Now, he is still complaining about his life. By copying other members of his family, he appears to be setting up a ‘royal court‘ over here. All of us should be protesting that idea, for all kinds of reasons. As many have said, H&M are delusional about their relevance, their popularity. MM, too, has her own issues which we Americans saw through a long time ago. She is one of many Hwood types who has minimal talent. She was never an Emmy contender on Suits, never part of the daily conversation until H.

I agree that the thread name should be changed. I vote for _Harry&Meghan who_?









						Meghan and Harry run for influential people list with 50% of votes
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are in the running for a spot on Time magazine's 2020 list of the 100 most influential people - and their fans are working hard to make it a reality.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_Forty-nine percent of readers who gave their opinion on the pair said they deserve a place on the list while 51 percent said they did not. Despite Meghan and Harry's fans campaigning for the couple, so far support for the duo is lagging behind that for Black Lives Matter protesters.

ETA:  _We, the commoners, will always discuss the downfall of a British royal. Never doubt that.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I admit I was surprised in January to find out Harry wanted out of the royal family. His dislike and discomfort with his lot in life seemed immature and disrespectful, IMO. Sources tell us he wanted out for years, before MM. So, ok, they let him go. Now, he is still complaining about his life. By copying other members of his family, he appears to be setting up a ‘royal court‘ over here. All of us should be protesting that idea, for all kinds of reasons. As many have said, H&M are delusional about their relevance, their popularity. MM, too, has her own issues which we Americans saw through a long time ago. She is one of many Hwood types who has minimal talent. She was never an Emmy contender on Suits, never part of the daily conversation until H.
> 
> I agree that the thread name should be changed. I vote for _Harry&Meghan who_?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry run for influential people list with 50% of votes
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are in the running for a spot on Time magazine's 2020 list of the 100 most influential people - and their fans are working hard to make it a reality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Forty-nine percent of readers who gave their opinion on the pair said they deserve a place on the list while 51 percent said they did not. Despite Meghan and Harry's fans campaigning for the couple, so far support for the duo is lagging behind that for Black Lives Matter protesters.
> 
> ETA:  _We, the commoners, will always discuss the downfall of a British royal. Never doubt that.


LOVE THE MISSION STATEMENT IN THE LAST LINE


----------



## LittleStar88

Roie55 said:


> I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held.



I agree about Harry doing some non-royal things. Like naked billiards and dressing as a Nazi. Probably more stuff I have forgotten.


----------



## bag-mania

I was going to vote on the Time magazine poll but I didn't want to give them my email address. I'm so jaded at this point I suspect the poll is rigged anyway.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania Agree, these things are rigged. Still, even with that, they are definitely not a fave. 
These 2 have manipulated too many stories. Just consider that yesterday’s flower-planting was at a place on the same street as their PR office. The same street???? Zero effort from these people.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree that the thread name should be changed. I vote for _Harry&Meghan who_?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry run for influential people list with 50% of votes
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are in the running for a spot on Time magazine's 2020 list of the 100 most influential people - and their fans are working hard to make it a reality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _ETA:  _We, the commoners, will always discuss *the downfall of a British royal*. Never doubt that.





marietouchet said:


> LOVE THE *MISSION STATEMENT* IN THE LAST LINE



@CarryOn2020 One of COVID-19 complications seems to be psychosis, as if the world was not suffering from it already. "Vote for my babies Harry and Meghan!" 

@marietouchet It looks like the mission statement is the downfall of the BRF and the establishment of a  Californian Futile & Pretentious Family.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry blamed by angry school parents for 'not respecting rules'*

Meghan and Prince Harry's latest public appearance have angered a few US parents asked to follow strict rules to keep themselves, teachers and children as safe as possible amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex visited the Assistance League Preschool Learning Center in Los Angeles on Monday, which has been providing early education service to children in need for more than 100 years. 

Photographs showing Meghan and Harry planting flowers next to children at this centre sparked annoyance among those who, over the past few days, have been asked not to accompany their sons and daughters inside their schools no matter how young they were.

Taking to Twitter, Jill Harris wrote: "I could not even hold my daughter’s hand and take her into school last week when she started kindergarten.

"These two just 'turn up and break the rules' whenever they feel like it?"

Another social media user, Jackie L, replied to this tweet adding: "Exactly I can’t take a pencil to my child right now. NO visitors. No exceptions. 

"They have no respect for the rules as they are 'humanitarians' they are the exception?

"BS kids in the US have no clue what a Duke/Duchess even is but they can come in when I can’t...for a pic?!?"

Other Twitter users appeared to be puzzled by Meghan and Harry's decision to be in close contact with children as schools are reopening across the world.

Twitter user SugarFreeZone wrote: "I think any charity for children is lovely, kudos for that. 

"But... did they really need to have their favourite photographer there?

"And why, if the school children's own parents aren’t allowed inside due to COVID, they are there, with their photographer??"

Briana added: "I've also heard that in some schools only one parent is allowed to come in at a time.

"This is the wrong moment to add strangers to the mix."

And social media user Tiffany B said: "I really feel this is in poor taste.  

"California COVID guidelines are very strict.

"Most daycares and preschools are not allowing parents on premisses even if it’s their child’s first time, nor are they allowing parent volunteers, yet these two were allowed in with a photographer?"

The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has issued guidance, last updated in mid-July, for education providers and early care sites.

Under the section named 'creating a safe environment for children and caregivers', the guidance read: "Modify daily operations to minimize exposures (e.g. avoid the use of touchscreens for sign-in/out, ask parents to bring their own pens to sign in, implement valet services or have staff meet children as they arrive to avoid parents coming into the childcare centre). 

Other counties in California are urging parents to stay outside of the buildings when dropping off children.

The guidance issued by the Santa Clara County read: "Parents or other individuals dropping off or picking up older children or youth by car should be encouraged to remain in their vehicles to the extent possible.

"If in-person drop-off or pickup is necessary, only a single individual should drop off or pick up the child/youth."

Express.co.uk has contacted the Assistance League for comment.

Meghan and Harry's visit took place on the 23rd anniversary of the death of Princess Diana.

To remember her, the couple planted some Forget-Me-Not seeds - her favourite flower. 

The pair also played nursery rhymes and read books about gardening, vegetables and planting.

The whole engagement took place outside, where it is believed there are fewer chances of spreading the virus.

Meghan and Harry both wore face coverings as well as the children they interacted with.

The Sussexes had previously worked with this organisation, which aims at improving the lives of children in need "through philanthropy, dedicated service, and compassionate programmes", as stated on the League's website.

The preschool service welcomes students aged between 3 and 5 from local low-income families. 









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry blamed by angry school parents
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's decision to visit a childcare centre in Los Angeles has sparked controversy in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

@*bag-mania *I guess those rightfully angry parents will not be voting for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

American moms are *not* to be trifled with. Ever.

Waiting for the lawsuits, 5, 4, 3, 2,... They should never use other people’s children when claiming ‘privacy’ for their own kid. They got away with it in Africa, but not here, not now, nope, not going to happen.

On another blog, someone mentioned that Grace Kelly never did stuff like this, even tho she was an American actress, won an Oscar, was Princess of Monaco, known for her humanitarian efforts, etc. She did not use other people’s children as props. W&K don’t even do that, do they? Tacky, condescending, possibly illegal. Such a stupid idea. Shame to any corporation that supports these 2.


----------



## scarlet555

Roie55 said:


> So much hatred on this thread for people none of you know and you can't assume to know their thoughts and actions. This needs to be shut down, what a toxic thread. I watched Harry as a baby with his Mom & brother, growing up after her death he always did non-royal activities. You could see back then he would not do anything typically royal - he disliked the life and all it held. Him leaving royal life was always on the cards, no woman made that decision for him. Enough with the Meagan bashing. Seriously ladies - what the hell is wrong with you all. @Vlad @Megs this needs to be shut down.



Why don't you post something positive and back it up with a link?  Most posters here point out these two wannabee's hypocrisy with links to back their views.  You are welcome to criticize any post, not even with a mildly logical explanation of why you think it's wrong, a lot of us here want to hear what fans like about them.  For example, I'm super pissed they want to be independent and want freedom but accept money from Charles.   Don't you find that ridiculous, as an adult, and not a young adult either?   No links for ya, i'm still at work, lol.


----------



## gracekelly

A good example of self serving behavior that puts others at risk. I would suggest that they stay home and plant flowers and read to Archie.   For two people who couldn’t wait to leave LA they seem to be back here regularly. Did they fly again?  Even if they drove, they left a big carbon footprint for a very brief visit


----------



## Suncatcher

There is an article in the NYT that Harry and Meghan have signed a multi-year deal with Netflix for an undisclosed sum to produce content. To me this suggests that the deal is not a rich one, otherwise we would have heard bragging about the amount and how lucrative it is. I would not be surprised it is more of a trial to see if they are successful. Meghan did that Disney voiceover about the elephants and I have never heard of that movie being a huge success for Disney. Again, if it was a runaway hit we would have heard about it.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

Please don’t delete this thread! I’m a fan of the royals & love hearing the Megan & Harry gossip - positive & negative! I was in London during their wedding & it was a very exciting time. Didn’t get a wedding invite but I did get a mug - 12 pounds for the tiny thing! 

Please keep posting everyone!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry blamed by angry school parents for 'not respecting rules'*
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry's latest public appearance have angered a few US parents asked to follow strict rules to keep themselves, teachers and children as safe as possible amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex visited the Assistance League Preschool Learning Center in Los Angeles on Monday, which has been providing early education service to children in need for more than 100 years.
> 
> Photographs showing Meghan and Harry planting flowers next to children at this centre sparked annoyance among those who, over the past few days, have been asked not to accompany their sons and daughters inside their schools no matter how young they were.
> 
> Taking to Twitter, Jill Harris wrote: "I could not even hold my daughter’s hand and take her into school last week when she started kindergarten.
> 
> "These two just 'turn up and break the rules' whenever they feel like it?"
> 
> Another social media user, Jackie L, replied to this tweet adding: "Exactly I can’t take a pencil to my child right now. NO visitors. No exceptions.
> 
> "They have no respect for the rules as they are 'humanitarians' they are the exception?
> 
> "BS kids in the US have no clue what a Duke/Duchess even is but they can come in when I can’t...for a pic?!?"
> 
> Other Twitter users appeared to be puzzled by Meghan and Harry's decision to be in close contact with children as schools are reopening across the world.
> 
> Twitter user SugarFreeZone wrote: "I think any charity for children is lovely, kudos for that.
> 
> "But... did they really need to have their favourite photographer there?
> 
> "And why, if the school children's own parents aren’t allowed inside due to COVID, they are there, with their photographer??"
> 
> Briana added: "I've also heard that in some schools only one parent is allowed to come in at a time.
> 
> "This is the wrong moment to add strangers to the mix."
> 
> And social media user Tiffany B said: "I really feel this is in poor taste.
> 
> "California COVID guidelines are very strict.
> 
> "Most daycares and preschools are not allowing parents on premisses even if it’s their child’s first time, nor are they allowing parent volunteers, yet these two were allowed in with a photographer?"
> 
> The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has issued guidance, last updated in mid-July, for education providers and early care sites.
> 
> Under the section named 'creating a safe environment for children and caregivers', the guidance read: "Modify daily operations to minimize exposures (e.g. avoid the use of touchscreens for sign-in/out, ask parents to bring their own pens to sign in, implement valet services or have staff meet children as they arrive to avoid parents coming into the childcare centre).
> 
> Other counties in California are urging parents to stay outside of the buildings when dropping off children.
> 
> The guidance issued by the Santa Clara County read: "Parents or other individuals dropping off or picking up older children or youth by car should be encouraged to remain in their vehicles to the extent possible.
> 
> "If in-person drop-off or pickup is necessary, only a single individual should drop off or pick up the child/youth."
> 
> Express.co.uk has contacted the Assistance League for comment.
> 
> Meghan and Harry's visit took place on the 23rd anniversary of the death of Princess Diana.
> 
> To remember her, the couple planted some Forget-Me-Not seeds - her favourite flower.
> 
> The pair also played nursery rhymes and read books about gardening, vegetables and planting.
> 
> The whole engagement took place outside, where it is believed there are fewer chances of spreading the virus.
> 
> Meghan and Harry both wore face coverings as well as the children they interacted with.
> 
> The Sussexes had previously worked with this organisation, which aims at improving the lives of children in need "through philanthropy, dedicated service, and compassionate programmes", as stated on the League's website.
> 
> The preschool service welcomes students aged between 3 and 5 from local low-income families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry blamed by angry school parents
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's decision to visit a childcare centre in Los Angeles has sparked controversy in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I'd like to see these parents reactions publicized here in the US


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> There is an article in the NYT that Harry and Meghan have signed a multi-year deal with Netflix for an undisclosed sum to produce content. To me this suggests that the deal is not a rich one, otherwise we would have heard bragging about the amount and how lucrative it is. I would not be surprised it is more of a trial to see if they are successful. Meghan did that Disney voiceover about the elephants and I have never heard of that movie being a huge success for Disney. Again, if it was a runaway hit we would have heard about it.



I figured somebody would throw them a bone and see if they can come up with something. The real question is can they create content anybody is interested in? Meghan must not have been pleased with the original NYT article. They had to post a correction (I wonder if it is true):

*Correction:*_ Sept. 2, 2020
An earlier version of this article referred incorrectly to a source of income for Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan. They do not draw income from the Duchy of Cornwall, as they did before they left Britain. _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *Correction:*_ Sept. 2, 2020
> An earlier version of this article referred incorrectly to a source of income for Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan. They do not draw income from the Duchy of Cornwall, as they did before they left Britain. _



Oh? This is probably just code for "Charles read the writing on the wall and is now funding them privately".


----------



## csshopper

It will be interesting to see what they have planned to counteract what will probably be excellent press the week of September 14 when the photo project initiated by the Duchess of Cambridge, "Hold Still" goes on line. Note the three photo categories selected by Kate, they focus on celebrating real people coping with challenging times, not paparazzi shots of her doing her "job" as a Royal.

*From the National Portrait Gallery website:*

"Spearheaded by The Duchess of Cambridge, Patron of the National Portrait Gallery, _Hold Still_, a portrait of our nation in 2020, is an ambitious community project to create a unique collective portrait and capture the spirit and feelings of the nation as we deal with the coronavirus outbreak.

_Hold Still_ invited people of all ages, from across the UK, to submit a photographic portrait which they had taken during lockdown, *focussed on three core themes – helpers and heroes, your new normal and acts of kindness*. We have been overwhelmed by the number and range of extraordinary images we received.  From over 31,000 submissions, a selection panel, including The Duchess, the Gallery’s Director Nicholas Cullinan, author and broadcaster Lemn Sissay, Chief Nursing Officer for England Ruth May, and award-winning photographer Maryam Wahid, have chosen 100 images, which will feature in a special digital exhibition launching on The Gallery’s website on 14 September. The final 100 portraits create a snapshot of the UK over the past few months and reflect resilience and bravery, humour and sadness, creativity and kindness, and human tragedy and hope. A selection of these photographs will also be shown in cities across the UK later in the year."

This could be the week we see Archie pictures posted?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I would hate for this thread to be deleted, and I get that most posters have very strong feelings about M & H, but it would be great to tone down the vitriol against anyone who doesn't share the same outrage and anguish. It just makes it less fun to read (and I know I know, no one is forcing me to but this is my go to forum when I need an escape from the awful real life news these days and there just aren't that many active celebrity threads at the moment)! 

Anyway for example I thought this was a reasonable and fairly balanced comment...



donutsprinkles said:


> I am probably going to be disregarded as a "fan," and nothing I write will be of consequnce to any of you, but it's a message board, so here I go.
> 
> I bought the book, and I am sure many others did for similar reasons. I thought it would discuss more about how Prince Harry and his new family are transitioning away from the British monarchy, but the first few pages are like a gossip blog and not my taste for non-fiction. This is the fault of the writers. It's not to my taste, as I do not watch entertainment TV or read gossip magazines. I wish I had known more about the authors' works or at least been able to read an abstract before I bought it on release day.
> 
> Although the writing style isn't to my taste, one thing that's written about in the first few pages that I did not realize about "royal correspondents/journalists" is that they *are on* the properties, compounds, estates (I don't know what they're called) and *following* the royal families in order to write articles about their lives, then it's approved by the royal family.
> 
> I cannot imagine how bizarre this must be. I guess I never really thought about it when I see those gossip mags in the line at the grocery store, etc. Like I said, I am only in the first chapters, but I am hoping it talks more about how he will try to transition into a working job that isn't based on the royal family (in as much as it can be possible, given he cannot completely separate himself from it, and the public has no desire to, apparently).
> 
> *Things I do not understand:* vitriol towards Meghan Markle--why? There aren't whole threads and YT channels on Prince Andrew, a character I find more disturbing, given ongoing legal movings regarding his associates, but I digress. Rehashing Prince Harry's youth and wearing a Nazi uniform. If I got into a tizzy every time a privileged young person did something racist, sexist or xenophobic, I wouldn't be able to survive living in the U.S. When do adults get to grow from their mistakes and blunders? Or do we have to go back every 5-10 years and try people in the court of public opinion for all past behaviors on a daily basis?
> 
> Final notes: I am intrigued by what MM and PH had proposed initially with their charitable initiatives and environmentally conscious businesses, even if they themselves aren't/weren't able to live up to the ideal. If you're famous, might as well try to do something to raise awareness. With that said: no one is the perfect environmentalist, no one is the perfect minimalist, but I do like the idea of encouraging ourselves to be better, even while we are ourselves works in progress until we die.



Which was immediately met by...



elvisfan4life said:


> Someone remind me where the ignore button is!!!!



So no other views are allowed? Even a benign question? I am sure this isn't the intent but it makes the thread seem cliquey and unwelcoming.   

Anyway I realize I will probably be added to a lot of those ignore lists now but I thought it was worth trying to explain how intimidating it feels for an "outsider" to join.


----------



## Tootsie17

Please don't feel intimidated by stating your opinions. All points of views are welcome here, at least, that has been my experience. Now, everyone may not agree with you, and may voice that in a strong manner.  The people who post on this thread are intelligent and usually will back up their viewpoints with facts.  I love this thread and have been thankful for it since the beginning of the covid quarantine.  It's hilarious and just a fabulous time for me reading unimportant gossip.


----------



## lalame

Here's a story from Variety about the Netflix deal too: https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-netlix-1234757040/



> Here's their statement on it:
> _“Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.
> Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope.
> As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us, as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.
> We are pleased to work with Ted and the team at Netflix whose unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.”_




I trust it was a big deal. It may even be so big they know it would generate bad press if it were made public. Their statement is just so eyeroll.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Here's a story from Variety about the Netflix deal too: https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-netlix-1234757040/
> 
> 
> 
> I trust it was a big deal. It may even be so big they know it would generate bad press if it were made public. Their statement is just so eyeroll.




Ah, this will be the show about "normal people" we heard about last week. They will go around featuring human interest stories about inspirational figures in various communities. It won't be ratings gold but it will satisfy those who complain Netflix doesn't offer enough feel-good programming. I'm sure it's good money (to most of us) but it won't pay all of their mansion expenses.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> Here's a story from Variety about the Netflix deal too: https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-netlix-1234757040/
> 
> 
> 
> I trust it was a big deal. It may even be so big they know it would generate bad press if it were made public. Their statement is just so eyeroll.


I gotta give her credit re: the word-salad. She's really good at it.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I gotta give her credit re: the word-salad. She's really good at it.


yes a good BS'r


----------



## Vlad

I see no reason for this thread to be shut down.

If its tone is too upsetting or one vehemently disagrees with the posters here, there's always the option to place this thread on ignore by pressing the IGNORE button on the top of this page.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I figured somebody would throw them a bone and see if they can come up with something. The real question is can they create content anybody is interested in? Meghan must not have been pleased with the original NYT article. They had to post a correction (I wonder if it is true):
> 
> *Correction:*_ Sept. 2, 2020
> An earlier version of this article referred incorrectly to a source of income for Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan. They do not draw income from the Duchy of Cornwall, as they did before they left Britain. _


sorry for duplicate post, see below where I cite the article


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I figured somebody would throw them a bone and see if they can come up with something. The real question is can they create content anybody is interested in? Meghan must not have been pleased with the original NYT article. They had to post a correction (I wonder if it is true):
> 
> *Correction:*_ Sept. 2, 2020
> An earlier version of this article referred incorrectly to a source of income for Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan. They do not draw income from the Duchy of Cornwall, as they did before they left Britain. _


This lack of income from the duchy could be true, technically speaking...
Charles has been redoing his businesses, in anticipation of becoming king 









						Prince Charles 'will not renew lease' on 'Duchy Originals' farm
					

The royal, 71, will not renew the lease on Home Farm in Gloucester, one of the main farms to supply the luxury Waitrose Duchy Organic brand, when its current term ends in April 2020.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> This lack of income from the duchy could be true, technically speaking...
> Charles has been redoing his businesses, supposedly in anticipation of becoming king When he won’t have time for organic farming
> The article was some months ago, so, sorry , I cannot find it now, possibly was DM But could have been the Times
> C has a bunch of companies that manage the duchy, and has been not renewing licenses here and there .. closing this business or what not, totally normal business stuff, but so convoluted that I had difficulty following ..
> to get back to H&M ... it may be true they are not longer being paid by the ABC business since ABC has recently been closed or had its charter modified
> that said, there is nothing precluding C from having found amother avenue DEF to provide them money, one with tax advantages or that is less subject to public scrutiny
> IMHO one of H&M problems has been that their brusque actions got people questioning the public funding for the BRF  .
> C may have been doing a preemptive strike to better insulate the duchy from comment in light of the current royal messes



I can see it going either way. Charles may indeed still be funneling money to them through some avenue that is not the Duchy. What I'd like to think is that after reading _Finding Freedom_ the family may have privately cut off the outspoken sponge couple. Not everything has to appear in the news and H&M would look lame if they complained about losing their allowance after all of their big talk about making it on their own and buying the most expensive LA-area house they could find.


----------



## Lounorada

Well... if they had stuck to their word and disappeared out of sight to live a private, independent life as they apparently left the Royal Family to do, then no one would be talking about them as they would be out of sight (and the media). But seeing as they make a way to get themselves reported on in the media EVERY day, showing they want anything but a private life, then people are going to continue to talk about them and point out the constant hypocrisy they show in pretty much everything they do and say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would hate for this thread to be deleted, and I get that most posters have very strong feelings about M & H, but it would be great to tone down the vitriol against anyone who doesn't share the same outrage and anguish. It just makes it less fun to read (and I know I know, no one is forcing me to but this is my go to forum when I need an escape from the awful real life news these days and there just aren't that many active celebrity threads at the moment)!
> 
> Anyway for example I thought this was a reasonable and fairly balanced comment...
> 
> 
> 
> Which was immediately met by...
> 
> 
> 
> So no other views are allowed? Even a benign question? I am sure this isn't the intent but it makes the thread seem cliquey and unwelcoming.
> 
> Anyway I realize I will probably be added to a lot of those ignore lists now but I thought it was worth trying to explain how intimidating it feels for an "outsider" to join.



I don’t like when I see things like this happen.  I thought donutsprinkles had a very well thought out comment and a few of us tried to engage and explain our views. I like conversation. It’s like when I post, I try to put up articles with the sources of my information. Admittedly, I don’t always if I’m tired, but I try to cite my sources.

I liked Meghan and Harry in the beginning. I thought she’d be good for him and that he’d matured from his childish behavior, but as we’ve seen with their tacit approval of Omid’s book attacking his family, their approval of a fan who posts hateful comments about the BRF, and the faux eco-warroring while driving an Escalade and living in a 16 bed/bath house while take private jets, they aren’t nice people and are the exact opposite of what they want from everyone else.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle phoned fan linked to Twitter TROLL
					

The woman, who Prince Harry and Meghan Markle told they were 'so moved and happy' after she raised £45,000, runs another Twitter account which has branded the Duchess of Cambridge a 'b****'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The more and more we see of Harry and Meghan, the more we see that Will and Kate were covering his behavior.

*_Edited to remove a messed up quote_


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I can see it going either way. Charles may indeed still be funneling money to them through some avenue that is not the Duchy. What I'd like to think is that after reading _Finding Freedom_ the family may have privately cut off the outspoken sponge couple. Not everything has to appear in the news and H&M would look lame if they complained about losing their allowance after all of their big talk about making it on their own and buying the most expensive LA-area house they could find.



This article says Charles still pays  but no one knows how








						Prince Charles' annual income from Duchy of Cornwall rises to £22.2m
					

Charles uses his Duchy income to pay for his official duties, his London office and charitable work. He also funds the public duties of William and Kate and some of their private costs.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Netflix is desperate right now. Competition is fierce and customers are not happy with the selection. They are offering free movies to non-members. Several of us mentioned earlier that we had dropped Netflix.








						Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
					

Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.




					www.nytimes.com
				





ETA: Thank you, Vlad


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> This article says Charles still pays  but no one knows howHohttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8460347/Prince-Charles-annual-income-Duchy-Cornwall-rises-3-22-2million.html



The article is from June, before their whinefest of a book came out. I'm hoping Charles reconsiders, if not now at least by early next year.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> Here's a story from Variety about the Netflix deal too: https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-netlix-1234757040/
> I trust it was a big deal. It may even be so big they know it would generate bad press if it were made public. Their statement is just so eyeroll.


I'm surprised the article didn't state "as new *YOUNG *parents"


----------



## bag-mania

Interesting how the _NYT_ uses the term "Megawatt Deal" to describe the Netflix arrangement. What does that mean? It certainly does not refer to money, wattage is unit of power. I can only assume it refers to H&M's star power and _that_ is debatable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Netflix co-chief executive Ted Sarandos, who has been courting the couple for quite some time, said he’s “incredibly proud” that they chose Netflix and not, say, those chumps over at Peacock.
Markle, a former Suits and Hallmark star, and Prince Harry have been hinting at a Hollywood takeover for some time.








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Will Reign Over Netflix
					

With an astounding development deal to make movies and shows.




					www.vulture.com
				



_
Guess what kind of programming is headed Netflix’s way?

ETA: call the IRS! Is he planning on staying here? Not with that title


----------



## MaseratiMomma

lalame said:


> Here's a story from Variety about the Netflix deal too: https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-netlix-1234757040/
> 
> 
> 
> I trust it was a big deal. It may even be so big they know it would generate bad press if it were made public. Their statement is just so eyeroll.


They possibly had to be the ones signing NDAs this time


----------



## CarryOn2020

_He has served on Spotify’s board since 2016, and in 2020 was bumped up to Co-CEO of Netflix.








						Ted Sarandos
					

Sarandos has gone from buying DVDs in bulk to ne of the entertainment industry’s biggest power brokers. From Netflix’s new digs in Hollywood, he oversees the streamer’s massive, d…




					variety.com
				



_
Connections, connections! So obvious they want to control our thinking by controlling what we view.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Netflix is desperate right now. Competition is fierce and customers are not happy with the selection. They are offering free movies to non-members. Several of us mentioned earlier that we had dropped Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
> 
> 
> Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Thank you, Vlad




What are you streaming instead of Netflix? I don't have cable. We have Prime bur meh. Hulu?


----------



## Sol Ryan

poopsie said:


> What are you streaming instead of Netflix? I don't have cable. We have Prime bur meh. Hulu?



I have sling, prime and Disney+


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prime covers our streaming needs. Due to so many repeats and sub-standard choices, we stopped Netflix, now we will most definitely not rejoin. Much of what Hwood ships out is awful, shows lack of imagination and skill. Disney has the skill. Hulu is good for the classics, too.









						The Best Video Streaming Services for 2022
					

Looking to cut the cord? You have many excellent options beyond Amazon Prime Video, Hulu, and Netflix. Our in-depth guide compares the top video streaming services based on price, catalog, and other criteria.




					www.pcmag.com
				



_As mentioned, a video streaming service's success largely depends on what its library offers. That's why so many services are investing heavily in developing high-quality original content._

Comparisons from June, 2020. TL DR, Prime has largest library, maybe not all of it is high quality
_








						How Netflix, Prime Video, and Hulu compare to new streaming rivals like Disney Plus and HBO Max
					

Netflix is the streaming champion with 183 million worldwide subscribers, but Amazon Prime Video has the most content.




					www.businessinsider.com
				



_


----------



## lalame

I bet Netflix paid them big money, especially since it's gotten more competitive with all these other streaming services. I do think lots of people will watch their show - both haters and admirers. If I have Netflix at that time, I'll tune in out of curiosity I'm sure.


----------



## lalame

One thing I'll say is Harry is a pretty lucky man because it's been clear for a long time he was dying to leave the BRF (the duty/fame part) and he probably had little skills to make major money independently. Now he's found someone with the big ambition to do all that and he has to do little but tag along for the ride. Well bravo H. Good luck with that.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I bet Netflix paid them big money, especially since it's gotten more competitive with all these other streaming services. I do think lots of people will watch their show - both haters and admirers. If I have Netflix at that time, I'll tune in out of curiosity I'm sure.



Since neither of them have had any experience in production they will have to hire/form a company consisting of all people who can do that work. It won't be cheap. Netflix has money but not so much to throw around for celebrity vanity projects. Still, they have made a fortune on lower budget hits like _Cheer_ and _Tiger King._ I guess they can afford to wait and see what H&M can do with the "normal people."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Since neither of them have had any experience in production they will have to hire/form a company consisting of all people who can do that work. It won't be cheap. Netflix has money but not so much to throw around for celebrity vanity projects. Still, they have made a fortune on lower budget hits like _Cheer_ and _Tiger King._ I guess they can afford to wait and see what H&M can do with the "normal people."



“normal people”... that just ticks me off... like wth? Why do they think they’re better than everyone else? What makes them superior? We’re supposed to be equal. They’re in America.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Netflix is desperate right now. Competition is fierce and customers are not happy with the selection. They are offering free movies to non-members. Several of us mentioned earlier that we had dropped Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
> 
> 
> Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Thank you, Vlad



I've stopped watching Netflix


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prime covers our streaming needs. Due to so many repeats and sub-standard choices, we stopped Netflix, now we will most definitely not rejoin. Much of what Hwood ships out is awful, shows lack of imagination and skill. Disney has the skill. Hulu is good for the classics, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Video Streaming Services for 2022
> 
> 
> Looking to cut the cord? You have many excellent options beyond Amazon Prime Video, Hulu, and Netflix. Our in-depth guide compares the top video streaming services based on price, catalog, and other criteria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pcmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _As mentioned, a video streaming service's success largely depends on what its library offers. That's why so many services are investing heavily in developing high-quality original content._
> 
> Comparisons from June, 2020. TL DR, Prime has largest library, maybe not all of it is high quality
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Netflix, Prime Video, and Hulu compare to new streaming rivals like Disney Plus and HBO Max
> 
> 
> Netflix is the streaming champion with 183 million worldwide subscribers, but Amazon Prime Video has the most content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Same reasons


----------



## gelbergirl

SoCalGal2016 said:


> Please don’t delete this thread! I’m a fan of the royals & love hearing the Megan & Harry gossip - positive & negative! I was in London during their wedding & it was a very exciting time. Didn’t get a wedding invite but I did get a mug - 12 pounds for the tiny thing!
> 
> Please keep posting everyone!
> 
> View attachment 4836127



You are adorable.


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> I bet Netflix paid them big money, especially since it's gotten more competitive with all these other streaming services. I do think lots of people will watch their show - both haters and admirers. If I have Netflix at that time, I'll tune in out of curiosity I'm sure.



Nah...........The only hate-watching I'm into are the now LA Chargers


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> The article is from June, before their whinefest of a book came out. I'm hoping Charles reconsiders, if not now at least by early next year.


Agree info is a bit stale, but even back then no one said the duchy paid
The duchy has a special arrangement with Inland Revenue AKA IRS, Charles was facing the prospect years ago of paying taxes like everyone else (til then it was tax exempt) but he volunteered to pay something and cut a deal, he deducts William's expenses so paying for non royal Harry out of the duchy would be touchy


----------



## justwatchin

Netflix


CarryOn2020 said:


> Netflix is desperate right now. Competition is fierce and customers are not happy with the selection. They are offering free movies to non-members. Several of us mentioned earlier that we had dropped Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
> 
> 
> Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Thank you, Vlad


I can’t imagine what the content may be for whatever they been hired to come up with but predict it will go into the Netflix void. Netflix has a lot of programs but a lot are filler and not interesting.
And what happened to that eco-friendly travel agency they came up with and the foundation for Archie?
I guess M is hoping to get the recognition she didn’t get from her cable show career and H is getting a paying job?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Netflix is desperate right now. Competition is fierce and customers are not happy with the selection. They are offering free movies to non-members. Several of us mentioned earlier that we had dropped Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
> 
> 
> Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Thank you, Vlad


Want to drop Netflix, but I need a nice justification to give to my family. I can't use the duchess excuse, because they don't know who 'this girl' is, and Harry is not on their list of people to pay attention to. Please share any ideas that you may have.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Want to drop Netflix, but I need a nice justification to give to my family. I can't use the duchess excuse, because they don't know who 'this girl' is, and Harry is not on their list of people to pay attention to. Please share any ideas that you may have.



TBH what they offer is just really sh*tty (I'm in Europe though, so it might be different). Like 20 year old movies, none of the series I'd hoped I could watch, and even the documentaries are underwhelming besides a few food formats. If I wasn't on a family plan I'd absolutely not pay for it.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> I gotta give her credit re: the word-salad. She's really good at it.





sdkitty said:


> yes a good BS'r



This sums up my feelings.  They are throwing gum at the wall to see what sticks. I am pretty sure that all this consists of is a deal to throw ideas at Netflix to see what interests them.  The deal means they don't go to anyone else and Netflix maintains the options, but no money has changed hands. Considering that all the other big ones. Disney, Apple etc have turned them down, this is what is left.  Netfix wasn't on the A list. These two have a short attention span and could never come up with a series and I think that a streaming service is more inclined in that direction.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> TBH what they offer is just really sh*tty (I'm in Europe though, so it might be different). Like 20 year old movies, none of the series I'd hoped I could watch, and even the documentaries are underwhelming besides a few food formats. If I wasn't on a family plan I'd absolutely not pay for it.


I think the same of Amazon Prime and some of the series or movies they make aren't that great.  I sat through most of Radioactive, which was about Marie Curie, but didn't think it was very good.  All the pay cable channels are no better.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I've read 2,351 pages here and still have no idea what they "do for a living". Other than freeload and troll for attention.
> 
> *Frankly, what they are doing now looks no different from what they complained about doing when part of the Firm - plant flowers, coo over little kids, and smile for the cameras.*
> 
> And sit around in chairs on the grass and have avocado toast and word salads with Gloria while someone takes pictures?
> 
> Color me confused, or maybe I am the one who is dim, but I am not yet understanding any of it.



Yup and they were able to wear prettier clothing lol!


----------



## rose60610

I'm curious what M&H consider "normal" people. Reality TV? Like those veterinarian shows on Nat Geo Wild? Or people who have a "strange inheritance"? They're "normal" people who have something interesting about them. Nobody's going to want to watch somebody who slogs though a regular day at work, comes home, eats a meal, does house chores, whatever. Big whoop. To get Meghan to focus on somebody, they're going to have to ply her with pity and awe. That's it! For anybody wanting to "be discovered" they should contact M, pour on sympathy, admiration, and syrupy adoration.  She'll find a way to put them on camera


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe Covid has sharpened our criteria for quality programming. The insincere, the fluff, the inauthentic is much more transparent now than ever.  Anything Hwood rolls out had better be top notch, A+, Crème de la Crème, meaningful, soul-enhancing. Why pay for less than the best?

ETA:  The best shows as always will be entertaining. They will lift our spirits rather than lecture us or drag us down or try to score political points. I felt the Marie Curie film was a downer and not really inspirational. Even tho I do not speak French, I was totally captivated by The Bureau. So far, I have not seen or heard anything of quality from these 2 grifters.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> American moms are *not* to be trifled with. Ever.
> 
> Waiting for the lawsuits, 5, 4, 3, 2,... They should never use other people’s children when claiming ‘privacy’ for their own kid. They got away with it in Africa, but not here, not now, nope, not going to happen.
> 
> On another blog, someone mentioned that Grace Kelly never did stuff like this, even tho she was an American actress, won an Oscar, was Princess of Monaco, known for her humanitarian efforts, etc. She did not use other people’s children as props. W&K don’t even do that, do they? Tacky, condescending, possibly illegal. Such a stupid idea. Shame to any corporation that supports these 2.


well if there is a lawsuit then there would have to be new about that in the media, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> TBH what they offer is just really sh*tty (I'm in Europe though, so it might be different). Like 20 year old movies, none of the series I'd hoped I could watch, and even the documentaries are underwhelming besides a few food formats. If I wasn't on a family plan I'd absolutely not pay for it.


Same here, I only have Prime, Netflix, and Britbox because of family.


----------



## mdcx

They are being paid for their name value which means that the usual production teams etc will do all the work, M&H will agree to X Y or Z projects having their name attached and away they go. It will give M what she wants which is money and status.
Based on M's track record, I would expect H to be ditched in the next few years. She gets what she wants from people, then discards them.


----------



## CeeJay

When I saw this, I immediately canceled my subscription to Netflix!  Honestly, not really a big deal-e-oh because I haven't found much to watch and that Hollywood series started off good but then was a major clunker.  But, just look at this ..
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...eyve-signed-deal-Netflix-undisclosed-sum.html

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 's new deal with Netflix to provide 'content that gives hope' and 'inspirational family content' could be worth as much as $150m, industry insiders say *
*.. are you freakin' kidding me?????  Family content? .. how the 'F' would SHE know about family???  The hypocrisy here is just UFB! *


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> When I saw this, I immediately canceled my subscription to Netflix!  Honestly, not really a big deal-e-oh because I haven't found much to watch and that Hollywood series started off good but then was a major clunker.  But, just look at this ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...eyve-signed-deal-Netflix-undisclosed-sum.html
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 's new deal with Netflix to provide 'content that gives hope' and 'inspirational family content' could be worth as much as $150m, industry insiders say *
> *.. are you freakin' kidding me?????  Family content? .. how the 'F' would SHE know about family???  The hypocrisy here is just UFB! *


I emailed Netflix they about to lose me.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> When I saw this, I immediately canceled my subscription to Netflix!  Honestly, not really a big deal-e-oh because I haven't found much to watch and that Hollywood series started off good but then was a major clunker.  But, just look at this ..
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...eyve-signed-deal-Netflix-undisclosed-sum.html
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 's new deal with Netflix to provide 'content that gives hope' and 'inspirational family content' could be worth as much as $150m, industry insiders say *
> *.. are you freakin' kidding me?????  Family content? .. how the 'F' would SHE know about family???  The hypocrisy here is just UFB! *



H&M deal of *as much as $150m* with Netflix will provide *inspirational family content that gives hope* to 'normal people' that probably make about 45K/year.    
In 2019, the per capita personal income was 45,623 
• U.S. - Per capita personal income 2019 | Statista


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> H&M deal of *as much as $150m* with Netflix will provide *inspirational family content that gives hope* to 'normal people' that probably make about 45K/year.
> In 2019, the per capita personal income was 45,623
> • U.S. - Per capita personal income 2019 | Statista


.. and how the hell is Harry going to speak to this?????  Secondly, it's not like Meghan's father made just $45k per year when he was the lighting Director for "Married With Children" .. a HUGELY popular TV show!!!  In addition, she went to pricey private schools and University .. at $45k per year, a kid would likely have to pay for University themselves (loan), get a scholarship -or- work and go to school at night (which is what I had to do).  Lastly, do "normal" people live in Montecito??! .. this whole notion of them giving "hope" to us "normal" (aka: poor) folks just frosts my cookies!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I emailed Netflix they about to lose me.



I hope everyone who cancels Netflix because of this contacts them to tell them why.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> H&M deal of *as much as $150m* with Netflix will provide *inspirational family content that gives hope* to 'normal people' that





Lodpah said:


> I emailed Netflix they about to lose me.



Did they say anything
I'm searching for a replacement even as we speak


----------



## Genie27

gracekelly said:


> This sums up my feelings.  They are throwing gum at the wall to see what sticks. I am pretty sure that all this consists of is a deal to throw ideas at Netflix to see what interests them.  The deal means they don't go to anyone else and Netflix maintains the options, but no money has changed hands. Considering that all the other big ones. Disney, Apple etc have turned them down, this is what is left.  Netfix wasn't on the A list. These two have a short attention span and could never come up with a series and I think that a streaming service is more inclined in that direction.


Biopic based on the thrilling saga that was Finding Freebies?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I hope everyone who cancels Netflix because of this contacts them to tell them why.


You bet!  I would think that a Netflix contract has clauses for ratings, audience, etc. Though, they will have all their Omids watching the program from morning to night and .


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> H&M deal of *as much as $150m* with Netflix will provide *inspirational family content that gives hope* to 'normal people' that probably make about 45K/year.
> In 2019, the per capita personal income was 45,623
> • U.S. - Per capita personal income 2019 | Statista



Hope doesn’t pay the bills.

Why does this make me think of this kind of stuff?


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Did they say anything
> I'm searching for a replacement even as we speak


Please share if you find a replacement, so I can 'sell it' to my kid. I rarely watch anything on Netflix.


----------



## bag-mania

Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.

"Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming




					www.google.com


----------



## lalame

I would be a lot more interested if they did something like a behind the scenes look at the royal lifestyle or the last 2 years of their lives. I know, they wouldn't, but at least it's something they have real experience with.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.
> 
> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Please watch our program/show and don't forget to donate to 10 percent of your gross income.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.
> 
> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



what a bunch of BS
These two have no experience doing anything of qualifying work with any diverse communities to educate anyone
Nutmeg is known for Yacht girl social climber z level actress never done any work for anyone then married British royalty and complained about herSelf while being in an impoverished Africa. 
while harry is known for his antics and nazi uniform Vegas party More than anything

so what have they established and what can they teach us?  I want to know.  Why would I listen to these two morons?  No degrees or experience of any kind except for nutmeg the exploiter and harry the embarrassing follower.


----------



## mdcx

The part about M that I object to the most is the idea that she is somehow a font of wisdom about resilience, family, struggle, love etc. Come on! She's a heartless social climber who married rich and is monetising the heck out of it no matter what the cost to other people. 
The only people I cam imagine looking up to her are those who also want to marry royalty, then abscond with the title and cash.


----------



## rose60610

The key word is "*could*" be worth as much as 150 million. But first they'd have to deliver. And not crash and burn. If producing these things were so easy, why aren't there way more people doing it? Plenty of people have mega serious money to get started and leverage from there. If you're well known and connected you get others to manage and do all the grunt work for you. You pay them and take credit. Not sure if M&H could swing it without help from The Firm. Maybe that's why they want to focus on "normal" people. They don't command the payouts as much as celebrities.


----------



## Lodpah

poopsie said:


> Did they say anything
> I'm searching for a replacement even as we speak


Yeah the chat girl only so sorry I can help you cancel. I then told her to let her higher ups know and she said the chat is recorded. Lol they don’t care until they see subscriptions drop.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.
> 
> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Let us pray the grifters have declared themselves gods to the normal people. They are our saviors to worship at their altar of word salad and fakery.

No loves, you don’t bring hope you bring an image like those magazines who turn a lot of impressionable young people to get sick because of images.

Once you repair your fractured relationship by bringing hope to your family then maybe I can take you two a little more seriously. It starts from the inside.

Maybe you should check in your family’s mental health, financial struggles and fix that.


----------



## lalame

They really should go full on lifestyle influencer like they want... it would be more authentic. The "royal patron goes to Hollywood" shtick is just getting annoying. It's irritating when people say "she's been interested in charity for years" as a reason why it makes so much sense for her to do speeches and get Netflix deals. Lots of people are "interested in charity"... that's not her claim to fame here. I have no beef against any celebrity getting fat Netflix deals but at least embrace the capitalism honestly instead of trying to pass it off as a world service.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> Let us pray the grifters have declared themselves gods to the normal people. They are our saviors to worship at their altar of word salad and fakery.
> 
> No loves, you don’t bring hope you bring an image like those magazines who turn a lot of impressionable young people to get sick because of images.
> 
> Once you repair your fractured relationship by bringing hope to your family then maybe I can take you two a little more seriously. It starts from the inside.
> 
> Maybe you should check in your family’s mental health, financial struggles and fix that.


The fact that Meghan's sister is a long term sufferer of multiple sclerosis and is wheelchair bound does make me wonder why M hasn't done the decent thing and bought her a house or somehow made things easier for her. And yes, I am well aware how difficult family relationships can be, but if I was suddenly loaded and a family member was struggling, I would help them out for sure. I feel similarly about her dad who is not in great health in Mexico. But no, the illusion of charity to strangers is preferable I guess.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.
> 
> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/
> 
> 
> bag-mania said:
> 
> 
> 
> Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.
> 
> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOTE
> *If as this says, they signed a multi year deal ....... guess that means they won’t be returning at the one year review.  Surprise!  *(Not)
Click to expand...


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> Behold! A big ol’ plate of corny word salad. We can only hope they hire real writers for the actual programming.
> 
> "Our lives, both independent of each other, and as a couple have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection," Meghan and Harry said in a statement. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Sign Netflix Deal and Promise 'Inspirational Family Programming'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix and are set to make documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Oof!  I don’t understand how (why?!) people swallow this Shining A Light bs without laughing out loud.  H and M aren’t qualified to teach anyone anything.  The hypocrisy is off the scale, and it’s sooo patronising to the financially independent “normal” people out there managing real life challenges without whining about it.  Experts on normal family relationships my a***


----------



## Genie27

I hear a chorus of angels as they drone on about their glorious independent lives. 

Enough with “shining a light” on everyone and everything - the “normals” will need to wear shades for protection from all the strobe lights they’ve been focusing upon us. 
Go.Away


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> They really should go full on lifestyle influencer like they want... it would be more authentic. The "royal patron goes to Hollywood" shtick is just getting annoying. It's irritating when people say "she's been interested in charity for years" as a reason why it makes so much sense for her to do speeches and get Netflix deals. Lots of people are "interested in charity"... that's not her claim to fame here. I have no beef against any celebrity getting fat Netflix deals but at least embrace the capitalism honestly instead of trying to pass it off as a world service.



Fixed!: "she's been interested in [_PROFITING FROM]_ charity for years"


----------



## marietouchet

NETFLIX DEAL
I am tired of my news feeds full of H&M - my newspapers are full of them
I hope they will get busy, and stop spending time and effort on silly leaks to media about flower planting
NETFLIX is great - it is a subscription service - and you can chose not to subscribe, or to look at/ignore the videos

I dont want to cancel them, i want to tune out


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> The key word is "*could*" be worth as much as 150 million. But first they'd have to deliver. And not crash and burn. If producing these things were so easy, why aren't there way more people doing it? Plenty of people have mega serious money to get started and leverage from there. If you're well known and connected you get others to manage and do all the grunt work for you. You pay them and take credit. Not sure if M&H could swing it without help from The Firm. Maybe that's why they want to focus on "normal" people. They don't command the payouts as much as celebrities.



Yep, they could easily still blow it. They made the pitch and the promises and now it's time for the work. They need to hire the right people, come up with interesting concepts, then actually make it happen. So far Meghan's attention span has been like a fruit fly's, flitting from subject to subject and never hovering any one place very long. If they turn it all over to a studio and just slap their names on it, then I can see something coming out in a year or two. If they want to be more hands-on I think it will take them a lot longer.


----------



## elvisfan4life

With the state of the world I seriously don't understand why anyone would be remotely interested in this pair!! Starve her of all publicity please it would be akin to starving her of.oxygen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Did they say anything
> I'm searching for a replacement even as we speak


I recently got HBO and there is so much old inventory to watch.....I've gone through multiple seasons of several VG shows.  I got it via Cox so don't know what it would cost to stream direct from HBO (or maybe you've had it in the past and have seen the shows I'm watching)


----------



## bag-mania

And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!

*'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*

You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.

No, seriously.

Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.

Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'

But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.

The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.

Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.

Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'

Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.

How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?

The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.

'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'

Sorry, WHAT?

This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?

They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.

What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?

Then came the funniest bit.

'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'

I laughed out loud at this point.

Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?

As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.

But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:

1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.

2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.

3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.

4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.

5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.

6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.

7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.

8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'

9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.

10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.









						PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
					

PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!
> 
> *'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*
> 
> You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.
> 
> No, seriously.
> 
> Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
> 
> Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'
> 
> But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.
> 
> The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.
> 
> Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.
> 
> Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.
> 
> How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?
> 
> The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.
> 
> 'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?
> 
> They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.
> 
> What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?
> 
> Then came the funniest bit.
> 
> 'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'
> 
> I laughed out loud at this point.
> 
> Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?
> 
> As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.
> 
> But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:
> 
> 1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.
> 
> 2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.
> 
> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.
> 
> 5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.
> 
> 6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.
> 
> 7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.
> 
> 8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'
> 
> 9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.
> 
> 10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


love this, particularly "is Meghan ok?:


----------



## youngster

mdcx said:


> The fact that Meghan's sister is a long term sufferer of multiple sclerosis and is wheelchair bound does make me wonder why M hasn't done the decent thing and bought her a house or somehow made things easier for her. And yes, I am well aware how difficult family relationships can be, but if I was suddenly loaded and a family member was struggling, I would help them out for sure. I feel similarly about her dad who is not in great health in Mexico. But no, *the illusion of charity to strangers is preferable I guess.*



For sure, they likely won't be contributing a dime (or a pence) of their own money to any charity or foundation.  This is all photo op philanthropy to keep their names and faces in the news.  Otherwise, they wouldn't show up with a photographer in tow. 

I think we'll see lots of this from the two of them over the months and even years, until the people that run these programs or schools or charities tell them no, don't come here. It's unlikely they'll be invited back to that school they went to the other day.  If I were a parent there, or a member of the staff, I'd be really upset that these two strangers just waltzed in during a pandemic and exposed the kids and staff needlessly to extra people.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> love this, particularly "is Meghan ok?:



I would watch any of his ideas. Unfortunately, I imagine it will actually be a lot of whatever they believe to be "inspirational" content and insipid children's programming.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!
> 
> *'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*
> 
> You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.
> 
> No, seriously.
> 
> Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
> 
> Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'
> 
> But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.
> 
> The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.
> 
> Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.
> 
> Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.
> 
> How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?
> 
> The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.
> 
> 'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?
> 
> They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.
> 
> What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?
> 
> Then came the funniest bit.
> 
> 'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'
> 
> I laughed out loud at this point.
> 
> Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?
> 
> As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.
> 
> But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:
> 
> 1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.
> 
> 2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.
> 
> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.
> 
> 5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.
> 
> 6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.
> 
> 7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.
> 
> 8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'
> 
> 9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.
> 
> 10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


@bag-mania this is a great article by Piers Morgan, thanks for posting it. It is impossible that American journalists don't detect on their radars so much hypocrisy coming from MM&H. Why are they so quiet? Who helped MM&H get the Netflix deal? Oprah?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!
> 
> *'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*
> 
> You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.
> 
> No, seriously.
> 
> Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
> 
> Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'
> 
> But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.
> 
> The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.
> 
> Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.
> 
> Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.
> 
> How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?
> 
> The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.
> 
> 'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?
> 
> They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.
> 
> What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?
> 
> Then came the funniest bit.
> 
> 'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'
> 
> I laughed out loud at this point.
> 
> Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?
> 
> As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.
> 
> But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:
> 
> 1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.
> 
> 2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.
> 
> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.
> 
> 5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.
> 
> 6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.
> 
> 7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.
> 
> 8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'
> 
> 9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.
> 
> 10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Do you think the Queen and Charles see this?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania this is a great article by Piers Morgan, thanks for posting it. It is impossible that American journalists don't detect on their radars so much hypocrisy coming from MM&H. Why are they so quiet? Who helped MM&H get the Netflix deal? Oprah?



Hypocrisy? That doesn't matter to journalists since they engage in it regularly within their own field. It was reported back in January that H&M left the UK due to racism. For the US media right now the worst thing you can be accused of is being a racist. No journalist who wants to continue working is going to step anywhere near that minefield.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania this is a great article by Piers Morgan, thanks for posting it. It is impossible that American journalists don't detect on their radars so much hypocrisy coming from MM&H. Why are they so quiet? Who helped MM&H get the Netflix deal? Oprah?


I don't know what to think.  I think for now the american media thinks there is still interest in them.  and at this time, no one wants to be accused of racism.  After all, what other reason not to like her?


----------



## rose60610

Isn't being paid a lot of money for doing virtually nothing the highest form of "entitlement" possible? Shouldn't they be suffering from or at the very least acknowledging they got this deal solely by being entitled? They should be wallowing in entitlement guilt. But they're not. Unless I'm missing something.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> *Isn't being paid a lot of money for doing virtually nothing the highest form of "entitlement" possible?* Shouldn't they be suffering from or at the very least acknowledging they got this deal solely by being entitled? They should be wallowing in entitlement guilt. But they're not. Unless I'm missing something.



That is all Harry has ever known and Meghan has proven to be a quick study on the subject. Besides, I'm sure they don't consider it to be nothing. They have their pride and their egos. They believe every one of their plans and schemes is pure genius.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is all Harry has ever known and Meghan has proven to be a quick study on the subject. Besides, I'm sure they don't consider it to be nothing. They have their pride and their egos. They believe every one of their plans and schemes is pure genius.


for sure.  and she is working hard thinking up ways to monetize her fame.  I know we're supposed to give H equal credit but it just seems more like her to be craving the limelight so much.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> for sure.  and she is working hard thinking up ways to monetize her fame.  I know we're supposed to give H equal credit but it just seems more like her to be craving the limelight so much.



It is. It will be impossible for her to behave like a normal producer and only have her name on the credits of the end product. She will want to be seen and heard. I am already imagining a show where Meghan interviews somebody about their inspirational achievements and finds some way to insinuate a story about herself into it.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Do you think the Queen and Charles see this?


Of course it will get to the Queen and Charles - their have staff to brief them on this stuff but Piers - not being a fan of H&M - is old news

BTW Edward Earl of Wessex used to have a production company that did some films - documentaries - the films irritated the BRF and he was shut down, of course, he chose to remain an official  member of the BRF (and receive financing from Queen and/or government).

But if the H&M films tread on BRF turf ... the only question is whether Charles can or will continue to finance them behind the scenes, we will not know that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I dislike Pierce as a person, but this is pretty genius (all of them, but that was my favourite).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> That is all Harry has ever known and Meghan has proven to be a quick study on the subject. Besides, I'm sure they don't consider it to be nothing. They have their pride and their egos. They believe every one of their plans and schemes is pure genius.



I suppose you're right. M&H will claim they worked excruciatingly hard for everything they have and deserving of every penny of nine digit compensation. Wait, compensation is when you receive money from actually DOING something. You know, like working your a$$ off, prioritizing necessities, paying bills, juggling time commitments, taking care of your family and donating to causes important to you etc. Then being told every ill in the world is because of you and you should feel guilty. So I wonder how much M&H are going to donate from their entitled haul.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Piers killed it with those show titles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wish the Frogmore Cottage show had been about the renovations!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> So I wonder how much M&H are going to donate from their entitled haul.



You know they will want the publicity and credit for doing good, therefore they will donate money to _their own_ charity. That way they can still keep it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes to Oprah as well as others.  Guessing Tyler didn’t want them 








						Obamas Settling Into New Role as Netflix Producers
					

As their first Netflix project nears release, Barack and Michelle ***** use their star power to court talent like Denzel Washington and signal interest in apolitical projects.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com
				




We need to understand the connections so that we understand ‘why’ these things are happening. As usual, it isn’t what you know but who you know.  There is a reason many of us have noticed a drop in the Netflix programming. Everyone’s agenda is obvious. It is all a slippery slope.




Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania this is a great article by Piers Morgan, thanks for posting it. It is impossible that American journalists don't detect on their radars so much hypocrisy coming from MM&H. Why are they so quiet? Who helped MM&H get the Netflix deal? Oprah?


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I've stopped watching Netflix


Unrelated to the H&M announcement, we stopped our subscription about a month ago. Some of their shows are very hyped. We couldn't be bothered to finish them...


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Of course it will get to the Queen and Charles - their have staff to brief them on this stuff but Piers - not being a fan of H&M - is old news
> 
> BTW Edward Earl of Wessex used to have a production company that did some films - documentaries - the films irritated the BRF and he was shut down, of course, he chose to remain an official  member of the BRF (and receive financing from Queen and/or government).
> 
> But if the H&M films tread on BRF turf ... the only question is whether Charles can or will continue to finance them behind the scenes, we will not know that



Although at that time I don't think Edward was funded by UK tax payers, whereas M&H took our money, claimed for expenses including vastly extravagant wardrobe, had their 'cottage' renovated beyond any footballer's wife's fantasy, and then left saying they'd been oppressed and imprisoned.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> The fact that Meghan's sister is a long term sufferer of multiple sclerosis and is wheelchair bound does make me wonder why M hasn't done the decent thing and bought her a house or somehow made things easier for her. And yes, I am well aware how difficult family relationships can be, but if I was suddenly loaded and a family member was struggling, I would help them out for sure. I feel similarly about her dad who is not in great health in Mexico. But no, *the illusion of charity to strangers is preferable* I guess.


.. but you see, that *will never happen*!!!  These 2 grifters will never give a dime out to any people or charities; have they yet? (oh wait - the Elephant Foundation, right?).


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. but you see, that *will never happen*!!!  These 2 grifters will never give a dime out to any people or charities; have they yet? (oh wait - the Elephant Foundation, right?).


and esp to her sister who talked to the press about her....although it could be a smart move - make her look like a kind, forgiving person....but highly doubtful


----------



## youngster

I don't know anything about Hollywood production deals but this isn't Netflix's first rodeo and there are likely numerous, lengthy conditions and caveats in their deal with JCMH and MM that protects them.  The bottom line is whether these two can produce excellent, high quality content that people actually want to watch and do watch, week after week.  Easier said that done. So, this deal might pay up to $150 million or it might pay hardly at all.  If there is anyone out there familiar with Hollywood production deals, it would be interesting to know more about how they work!

Coincidentally, DH and I recently decided to cancel our Netflix subscription because neither of us have been using it.


----------



## CeeJay

When I canceled my Netflix subscription, it asked "why?" .. one was the "Other" category and I very clearly noted that I would not support a service that provides a venue for Meghan Markle and Harry to spout their nonsense and their never-ending hypocrisy.  Not that Netflix will care a bit, but I did my part.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> When I canceled my Netflix subscription, it asked "why?" .. one was the "Other" category and I very clearly noted that I would not support a service that provides a venue for Meghan Markle and Harry to spout their nonsense and their never-ending hypocrisy.  Not that Netflix will care a bit, but I did my part.


you tried
if thousands of people did this maybe they'd take notice
I was going to send a message to vanity fair but bailed when they stared asking for my info


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> you tried
> if thousands of people did this maybe they'd take notice
> I was going to send a message to vanity fair but bailed when they stared *asking for my info*



I feel you!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> When I canceled my Netflix subscription, it asked "why?" .. one was the "Other" category and I very clearly noted that I would not support a service that provides a venue for Meghan Markle and Harry to spout their nonsense and their never-ending hypocrisy.  Not that Netflix will care a bit, but I did my part.



Somebody will read it. Whether it ever gets to the higher ups who make decisions is anyone's guess.


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> The part about M that I object to the most is the idea that she is* somehow a font of wisdom about resilience, family, struggle, love e*tc. Come on! She's a heartless social climber who married rich and is monetising the heck out of it no matter what the cost to other people.
> The only people I cam imagine looking up to her are those who also want to marry royalty, then abscond with the title and cash.



When did marrying into royalty make anyone an expert in anything?  Where the F is her lifelong work to charity?  The picture ops do not count, please... Is the world  blind with this chick's antics?  Is TPF and Piers Morgan the only people who sees her?  I think England got a good sense of her, but why not more booing when she was there.  She is a royal NUT CASE.  She has no shame, no humility, no dignity, prancing around for picture ops delivering food for various charities, reaching out to random charities, talking non sense in word salads that make no sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I don't know anything about Hollywood production deals but this isn't Netflix's first rodeo and there are likely numerous, lengthy conditions and caveats in their deal with JCMH and MM that protects them.  The bottom line is whether these two can produce excellent, high quality content that people actually want to watch and do watch, week after week.  Easier said that done. So, this deal might pay up to $150 million or it might pay hardly at all.  *If there is anyone out there familiar with Hollywood production deals, it would be interesting to know more about how they work!*
> 
> Coincidentally, DH and I recently decided to cancel our Netflix subscription because neither of us have been using it.



I don't know how they work either. Does Netflix front them millions or do they only get the cash when they start delivering the end product?


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I dislike Pierce as a person, but this is pretty genius (all of them, but that was my favourite).


Me took though Woke Me Up ... got me humming the tune.

All of these are excellent, though.


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I wish the Frogmore Cottage show had been about the renovations!


yes, like a Love it or List It.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Somebody will read it. Whether it ever gets to the higher ups who make decisions is anyone's guess.


Someone (probably a "normal" person) will read it and mention it to others, word gets around.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Follow the _money_ trail which is the same as the _connections_ trail.  Lots of money is changing hands.
Yes, the trail goes back the BRF. Remember the hype and promos for David Attenborough‘s documentary, Our Planet? Remember how Charles and Will promoted it? That show was a Netflix documentray. Also, a BBC show.  These days we must pay attention to _who_ is involved. 









						The BBC and Netflix team up for new David Attenborough nature documentary | Engadget
					

Set aside a weekend to lie on the couch and gawp at the wonder of our natural world, because David Attenborough is making another documentary series exploring the fascinating lives of animals..




					www.engadget.com


----------



## gracekelly

The threat of all your Netflix cancellations is really funny to me. I have procrastinated getting   it and last week told the DH that I might finally sign up for it.   I told him I would get it and binge watch the good stuff and then cancel.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I don't know how they work either. Does Netflix front them millions or do they only get the cash when they start delivering the end product?



Just a guess, but I would think that it is structured in a way to benefit Netflix and keep their risk and out-of-pocket costs as low as possible.  This $150 million dollar deal could be simply that Netflix has first right of refusal for any program/content/idea these two come up with and, if they never give them the go ahead on any idea or project, they are not obligated to pay them anything at all.  

However, if they give them the go ahead on a project, they might commit money to produce it, pay them for it, then air it if it met their standards.  It's a highly competitive market out there though with tons of other content and competition for eyeballs and attention.  People pitch ideas all the time and few actually get into production and even fewer make it on air.  They'll have an advantage over your average producer though and their project or projects will likely get extra attention. 

I'm actually looking forward to this lolol, I want to see if it is that easy to be a big shot Hollywood producer!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Although at that time I don't think Edward was funded by UK tax payers, whereas M&H took our money, claimed for expenses including vastly extravagant wardrobe, had their 'cottage' renovated beyond any footballer's wife's fantasy, and then left saying they'd been oppressed and imprisoned.



AGREE AGREE AGREE about the scandal of Frogmore decorating expenses that remain unpaid , arghhh. 

But, Edward did get public funds ca 1980s-1992 when he had " a career in entertainment " (see Wiki para on Ardent). The para on Activities says he was doing BRF type roles ca 1990. He did both entertainment and BRF work at one time. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Edward,_Earl_of_Wessex#Marriage 

Edward was on the Civil List until 1992 (see below) at the time of his business but now ALL of his money comes from the Queen who in turn gets public funds via the Sovereign Grant.  So, he gets public funds , one might say, indirectly now ...

H&M and E no longer receive DIRECT public funds but receive discretionary monies from Charles and QEII. Who knows if H&M and E pay taxes on these gifts of money (in the US it would be taxable income...)  



*PRINCE EDWARD and Sophie, Countess of Wessex do not take public funding, instead relying entirely on the Queen for their living expenses, after the couple sacrificed their business careers following a series of embarrassing gaffes.Article date is 2019

The Queen took Edward – along with Princess Margaret, Prince Andrew, Princess Anne and the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester off the Civil List in 1992. 









						Royal bailout: How Queen pays for Edward's lifestyle entirely from private expenses
					

PRINCE EDWARD and Sophie, Countess of Wessex do not take public funding, instead relying entirely on the Queen for their living expenses, after the couple sacrificed their business careers following a series of embarrassing gaffes.




					www.express.co.uk
				



*


----------



## gracekelly

Definition of normal people :  

All sugars
people who love word salad
all people who still use HRH when addressing them
people who give them things for free
people who give them money for doing nothing
people who do not demand any discernible skills (see above)
people who have 16 bathrooms in their home. 
people who never criticize
people who hate the Daily Mail
people who like to sue



Open to additional suggestions. Feel free.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> AGREE AGREE AGREE about the scandal of Frogmore decorating expenses that remain unpaid , arghhh.
> 
> But, Edward did get public funds ca 1980s-1992 when he had " a career in entertainment " (see Wiki para on Ardent). The para on Activities says he was doing BRF type roles ca 1990. He did both entertainment and BRF work at one time.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Edward,_Earl_of_Wessex#Marriage
> 
> Edward was on the Civil List until 1992 (see below) at the time of his business but now ALL of his money comes from the Queen who in turn gets public funds via the Sovereign Grant.  So, he gets public funds , one might say, indirectly now ...
> 
> H&M and E no longer receive DIRECT public funds but receive discretionary monies from Charles and QEII. Who knows if H&M and E pay taxes on these gifts of money (in the US it would be taxable income...)
> 
> 
> 
> *PRINCE EDWARD and Sophie, Countess of Wessex do not take public funding, instead relying entirely on the Queen for their living expenses, after the couple sacrificed their business careers following a series of embarrassing gaffes.Article date is 2019
> 
> The Queen took Edward – along with Princess Margaret, Prince Andrew, Princess Anne and the Dowager Duchess of Gloucester off the Civil List in 1992.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal bailout: How Queen pays for Edward's lifestyle entirely from private expenses
> 
> 
> PRINCE EDWARD and Sophie, Countess of Wessex do not take public funding, instead relying entirely on the Queen for their living expenses, after the couple sacrificed their business careers following a series of embarrassing gaffes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



So basically, they're _all_ liggers (slang for useless freeloaders)


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Just a guess, but I would think that it is structured in a way to benefit Netflix and keep their risk and out-of-pocket costs as low as possible.  This $150 million dollar deal could be simply that Netflix has first right of refusal for any program/content/idea these two come up with and, if they never give them the go ahead on any idea or project, they are not obligated to pay them anything at all.
> 
> However, if they give them the go ahead on a project, they might commit money to produce it, pay them for it, then air it if it met their standards.  It's a highly competitive market out there though with tons of other content and competition for eyeballs and attention.  People pitch ideas all the time and few actually get into production and even fewer make it on air.  They'll have an advantage over your average producer though and their project or projects will likely get extra attention.
> 
> I'm actually looking forward to this lolol, I want to see if it is that easy to be a big shot Hollywood producer!


Yup!  It’s all about options for projects.   

Every Tom DicK and Harry (oops,) is listed as an executive producer. It’s an ego thing. Next time watching a movie see how many there are of them.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> So basically, they're _all_ liggers (slang for useless freeloaders)



I think you always knew where some of your tax GBP were going.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> So basically, they're _all_ liggers (slang for useless freeloaders)


Well, Edward, to his credit, after ditching his business, became a total credit to the BRF in the dark post Diana years. 
Ca 2000 - 2010, the Queen & Philip started to travel less.  Charles was divorced and sort of undesirable for events requiring a BRF couple.  He married Camilla in 2005 but it took years for her to be accepted. Meanwhile Sophie and Edward did piles of royal weddings on behalf of the Queen. A lot of work for them and well done.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> The threat of all your Netflix cancellations is really funny to me. I have procrastinated getting   it and last week told the DH that I might finally sign up for it.   I told him I would get it and binge watch the good stuff and then cancel.


To be honest with you, this is the 2nd time I canceled it!  The last few shows I watched just did not hold my interest, and why pay for something that you don't watch enough to support the cost?!?!  Honestly, I watch such little TV and Movies anyhow; I'm BIG on reading .. that seems to hold my attention better!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!
> 
> *'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*
> 
> You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.
> 
> No, seriously.
> 
> Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
> 
> Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'
> 
> But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.
> 
> The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.
> 
> Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.
> 
> Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.
> 
> How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?
> 
> The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.
> 
> 'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?
> 
> They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.
> 
> What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?
> 
> Then came the funniest bit.
> 
> 'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'
> 
> I laughed out loud at this point.
> 
> Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?
> 
> As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.
> 
> But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:
> 
> 1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.
> 
> 2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.
> 
> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.
> 
> 5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.
> 
> 6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.
> 
> 7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.
> 
> 8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'
> 
> 9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.
> 
> 10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Oh my god this is brilliant.  G actually didn't realize they were just producing... so it won't even be about their lives? That was the only bit that might actually potentially interest me. Also ugh the hubris of calling your own stuff "inspirational" even before it is created.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I'm actually looking forward to this lolol, I want to see if it is that easy to be a big shot Hollywood producer!



It is when you come in with centuries of wealth and privilege...


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> It is when you come in with centuries of wealth and privilege...



Well, Prince Edward tried it about 20 years ago and it was a flop and all the investors in his production company lost all their money apparently.  I think it opens doors for sure, gets you those meetings, and clearly got them their Netflix deal.  They jumped to the front of the line over probably hundreds of others who have been writing and pitching ideas for decades.  

But, now they actually have to deliver the goods, in a much more competitive environment than Prince Edward faced 20 years ago, though they are more famous for sure.  Still, if you have no actual talent or significant experience in writing, producing, and creating content for TV or movies then I think it's actually a daunting task. What the two of them think is amazing, people might not care about or want to watch, no matter if they got the best writers in Hollywood to sign on.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> Well, Prince Edward tried it about 20 years ago and it was a flop and all the investors in his production company lost all their money apparently.  I think it opens doors for sure, gets you those meetings, and clearly got them their Netflix deal.  They jumped to the front of the line over probably hundreds of others who have been writing and pitching ideas for decades.
> 
> But, now they actually have to deliver the goods, in a much more competitive environment than Prince Edward faced 20 years ago, though they are more famous for sure.  Still, if you have no actual talent or significant experience in writing, producing, and creating content for TV or movies then I think it's actually a daunting task. What the two of them think is amazing, people might not care about or want to watch, no matter if they got the best writers in Hollywood to sign on.



Isn't producing basically just putting up the money? I'm not an expert but that's what I always assumed... like you choose the story that someone else has already written or pitched you, then find the director to work with the writer to package it all up into content. Being the money you would get creative leadership rights but you're not actually the one doing the (creative) work. I imagine you're mostly focused on the sales-y piece, convincing people to sign on, getting the distribution deal (Netflix), managing the promotion strategy, etc?


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Oh my god this is brilliant.  G actually didn't realize they were just producing... so it won't even be about their lives? That was the only bit that might actually potentially interest me. Also ugh the hubris of calling your own stuff "inspirational" even before it is created.


she's big on hubris


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Isn't producing basically just putting up the money? I'm not an expert but that's what I always assumed... like you choose the story that someone else has already written or pitched you, then find the director to work with the writer to package it all up into content. Being the money you would get creative leadership rights but you're not actually the one doing the (creative) work. I imagine you're mostly focused on the sales-y piece, convincing people to sign on, getting the distribution deal (Netflix), managing the promotion strategy, etc?



They often make the big decisions/overall control (as you mentioned). And yes some do put money in and that's all they do for their credit (executive producer) but I think it's usually more about securing the money from outside investors and moving things along.

You don't think that these 2 are going to part with a penny do you?  Why break habits formed over a lifetime?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes to Oprah as well as others.  Guessing Tyler didn’t want them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obamas Settling Into New Role as Netflix Producers
> 
> 
> As their first Netflix project nears release, Barack and Michelle ***** use their star power to court talent like Denzel Washington and signal interest in apolitical projects.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We need to understand the connections so that we understand ‘why’ these things are happening. As usual, it isn’t what you know but who you know.  There is a reason many of us have noticed a drop in the Netflix programming. Everyone’s agenda is obvious. It is all a slippery slope.


MM& H, please don't do it in name of charity! It is more hypocrisy than I can swallow today.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> and esp to her sister who talked to the press about her....although it could be a smart move - make her look like a kind, forgiving person....but highly doubtful


The sister has been very quiet. I believe she was going to write a book. I wonder if she was kindly reminded of a potential lawsuit.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Isn't producing basically just putting up the money? I'm not an expert but that's what I always assumed... like you choose the story that someone else has already written or pitched you, then find the director to work with the writer to package it all up into content. Being the money you would get creative leadership rights but you're not actually the one doing the (creative) work. I imagine you're mostly focused on the sales-y piece, convincing people to sign on, getting the distribution deal (Netflix), managing the promotion strategy, etc?



Yes, your understanding and mine is basically the same, but I think the level of involvement depends on how much they want to be involved.  Sometimes Executive Producers do very little, just attach their names to projects.  Other times they are involved to a much greater degree. In general though, producers plan and coordinate an entire production from start to finish. They come up with the idea or option the book or screenplay. Sometimes producers are writers themselves and are producing their own material or they hire writers as well as directors and actors and crew.  Figure out the financing and distribution.  Basically, shepherd a project start to finish.   

So, MM and Harry could come up with a couple of ideas and then hire an experienced producer and say _"go forth and implement our inspirational and ground-breaking TV show about normal people with a budget of $XXX"  _and then stay out of it for the most part or, they could choose to be much more heavily involved and actually take on day-to-day responsibilities.   It's a ton of work that requires a lot of energy and talent to pull off and a huge knowledge of how things work in Hollywood and what the public actually wants to watch.  Even brilliant producers have had flops where something just doesn't quite work, no matter how great the idea or talented the director and cast and crew. I'm sure MM learned a lot from her ex-husband, the producer guy, but it's gotta be different when you are actually doing it for the first time and spending real money.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> So, this deal might pay up to $150 million or *it might pay hardly at all*.  If there is anyone out there familiar with Hollywood production deals, it would be interesting to know more about how they work!
> 
> Coincidentally, DH and I recently decided to cancel our Netflix subscription because neither of us have been using it.


@youngster love your optimism, but whoever is helping MM&H to get these deals will help them to get professional help to do the work... They will only have to smile and recite word salads.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> @youngster love your optimism, but whoever is helping MM&H to get these deals will help them to get professional help to do the work... They will only have to smile and recite word salads.



I agree that they likely will hire top writers, directors, crew, actors, etc., but it won't matter if the basic premise isn't a good one, or they misjudged the public and its appetite for whatever content they are selling.  Even amazing writers and producers have produced horrible stuff that flopped.  They could hire the best writer, best director, best crew, best everything and it could all end up a big mess.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a quick thought, is it possible H&M, Charles, Will,,,,is it _possible_ this Netflix association was set up long ago?  I’m feeling the drama has all been staged and well-known by the powers that be.

Netflix’s Ted Sarandos guy is quoted as saying that he has wanted them on board for quite some time. It would explain the wedding guests, the dramatic leaving (they _had_ to make it look like QE, Charles and Will were upset), the OS book, the daily outings, etc.

Is that possible? Have we all been played? Way too many coincidences for me. Of course, I could be wrong. 

This lil quote got me thinking we are being used, along with OS calling us ‘morons’  - 








						Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
					

Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.




					www.nytimes.com
				



_Netflix executives have said the Obamas have also proved to be valuable as a magnet for other deals: In Hollywood, the cool kids want to be around other cool kids._


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a quick thought, is it possible H&M, Charles, Will,,,,is it _possible_ this Netflix association was set up long ago?  I’m feeling the drama has all been staged and well-known by the powers that be.
> 
> Netflix’s Ted Sarandos guy is quoted as saying that he has wanted them on board for quite some time. It would explain the wedding guests, the dramatic leaving (they _had_ to make it look like QE, Charles and Will were upset), the OS book, the daily outings, etc.
> 
> Is that possible? Have we all been played?


I doubt it. Sarandos is a TV executive. He’s going to be much more proficient in BS word salad than Meghan could ever hope to be. Lies mean nothing to him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

True, he was Spotify before Netflix. It may be worth noting his current wife is former ambassador to Bahamas. 



bag-mania said:


> I doubt it. Sarandos is a TV executive. He’s going to be much more proficient in BS word salad than Meghan could ever hope to be. Lies mean nothing to him.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I think the same of Amazon Prime and some of the series or movies they make aren't that great.  I sat through most of Radioactive, which was about Marie Curie, but didn't think it was very good.  All the pay cable channels are no better.


If COVID has taught me anything, it's how little actors, celebrities, entertainers, athletes and TV in general matter to me any more!


----------



## bag-mania

You cannot escape her. Allure magazine sent me an email announcing a sale on Tatcha skin care. Look at the subject line, this is how Tatcha is being promoted. If I used that incredibly overpriced, over-exaggerated brand, I would be reconsidering it right now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> When did marrying into royalty make anyone an expert in anything?  *Where the F is her lifelong work *to charity?  The picture ops do not count, please... Is the world  blind with this chick's antics?  Is TPF and Piers Morgan the only people who sees her?  I think England got a good sense of her, but why not more booing when she was there.  She is a royal NUT CASE.  She has no shame, no humility, no dignity, prancing around for picture ops delivering food for various charities, reaching out to random charities, talking non sense in word salads that make no sense.


If you google 'Markle yacht', you may still find images of her lifelong work. I read that the BRF cleaned many of those sites at the time of the weeding, but you may still get a hint about the lifelong experiences they (Harry is there too) can share on their upcoming Neflix program. Though, I didn't find them family oriented.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> The threat of all your Netflix cancellations is really funny to me. I have procrastinated getting   it and last week told the DH that I might finally sign up for it.   I told him I would get it and binge watch the good stuff and then cancel.


In the process of doing the same.


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> The fact that Meghan's sister is a long term sufferer of multiple sclerosis and is wheelchair bound does make me wonder why M hasn't done the decent thing and bought her a house or somehow made things easier for her. And yes, I am well aware how difficult family relationships can be, but if I was suddenly loaded and a family member was struggling, I would help them out for sure. I feel similarly about her dad who is not in great health in Mexico. But no, the illusion of charity to strangers is preferable I guess.


Well, if she helps her family, there's no need for photographers


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just imagine the promo for these documentaries:
The son of the next King of England presents ____


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a quick thought, is it possible H&M, Charles, Will,,,,is it _possible_ this Netflix association was set up long ago?  I’m feeling the drama has all been staged and well-known by the powers that be.
> 
> Netflix’s Ted Sarandos guy is quoted as saying that he has wanted them on board for quite some time. It would explain the wedding guests, the dramatic leaving (they _had_ to make it look like QE, Charles and Will were upset), the OS book, the daily outings, etc.
> 
> Is that possible? Have we all been played? Way too many coincidences for me. Of course, I could be wrong.
> 
> This lil quote got me thinking we are being used, along with OS calling us ‘morons’  -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Sign Megawatt Netflix Deal (Published 2020)
> 
> 
> Six months after ceasing to be working members of the British royal family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are Hollywood producers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Netflix executives have said the Obamas have also proved to be valuable as a magnet for other deals: In Hollywood, the cool kids want to be around other *cool kids*._



Yes, the cool kids, these two are not so cool.  Can't compare them to *****'s.  I mean Michelle O has accomplished so much without being the first lady, she graduated from Princeton/ then Harvard law, then did non-profit...  Barack ***** was president for two terms.  Need I say more?

If Nutmeg has lowered her Ego, she may have accomplished so much more in England, now she has to call organizations and the paps and do lame 'I was here' pap photos, I 'volunteered' pap photos with her husband as prop.

Hey mods, can't we say the President Barack *****'s name?


----------



## poopsie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would hate for this thread to be deleted, and I get that most posters have very strong feelings about M & H, but it would be great to tone down the vitriol against anyone who doesn't share the same outrage and anguish. It just makes it less fun to read (and I know I know, no one is forcing me to but this is my go to forum when I need an escape from the awful real life news these days and there just aren't that many active celebrity threads at the moment)!
> *So no other views are allowed? Even a benign question? I am sure this isn't the intent but it makes the thread seem cliquey and unwelcoming*.
> *Anyway I realize I will probably be added to a lot of those ignore lists now but I thought it was worth trying to explain how intimidating it feels for an "outsider" to join.*



It is hard to self censor when your viewpoint is not the prevailing one. I understand completely


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe the cancellations followed by re-sign-ups will wreak havoc with their registration system  Haha.

So much of this reminds me of the financial troubles that Fergie got into as well as Andy’s mess. This kind of deal should have been hush-hush and done through shell companies. Once again they have damaged QE’s reign.




gracekelly said:


> The threat of all your Netflix cancellations is really funny to me. I have procrastinated getting   it and last week told the DH that I might finally sign up for it.   I told him I would get it and binge watch the good stuff and then cancel.




Now this:








						Netflix to screen sordid Diana musical after Harry & Meghan's £112m deal
					

NETFLIX is to screen a tacky musical about Princess Diana — after signing up her son Harry and his wife Meghan in a £112million deal. In the show the Queen calls the tragic princess a “tart”, while…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would hate for this thread to be deleted, and I get that most posters have very strong feelings about M & H,* but it would be great to tone down the vitriol against anyone who doesn't share the same outrage and anguish.* It just makes it less fun to read (and I know I know, no one is forcing me to but this is my go to forum when I need an escape from the awful real life news these days and there just aren't that many active celebrity threads at the moment)!
> 
> Anyway for example I thought this was a reasonable and fairly balanced comment...
> 
> 
> 
> Which was immediately met by...
> 
> 
> 
> So no other views are allowed? Even a benign question? I am sure this isn't the intent but it makes the thread seem cliquey and unwelcoming.
> 
> Anyway I realize I will probably be added to a lot of those ignore lists now but I thought it was worth trying to explain how intimidating it feels for an "outsider" to join.





poopsie said:


> It is hard to self censor when your viewpoint is not the prevailing one. I understand completely





Chanbal said:


> @*donutsprinkles *
> 1) Congratulations on your new book, enjoy it! You may want also to read some of the articles (links) provided in this thread.
> 2) I didn't read the book by Omid S, only some parts. What I read was clearly written to please MM. However, it also supported some comments in this thread, but we may have a different interpretation of the facts. For example,  when the book described some of her demands (ex. tiara, staff, etc) in a favorable light, we found them rather unreasonable.
> 3) Above everything, we are tired of so much hypocrisy. Quoting the former transport minister Norman Baker 'A carnivore advocating vegetarianism'.
> 4) If MM & H would stop their daily spamming news, people would forget them.
> 5) FYI, there is a thread on Andrew. He has been very quiet and not cluttering the news.


@OriginalBalenciaga you quoted a post from @donutsprinkles, but to be fair, most of the replies to that post were rather respectful and welcoming (mine is quoted above). I can't speak for the other members here, but I don't have strong feelings about MM & H, I'm just tired of so much hypocrisy.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



She is saying the story was all made up. But she doesn’t have the best history of truthfulness so what does that mean?


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Isn't producing basically just putting up the money? I'm not an expert but that's what I always assumed... like you choose the story that someone else has already written or pitched you, then find the director to work with the writer to package it all up into content. Being the money you would get creative leadership rights but you're not actually the one doing the (creative) work. I imagine you're mostly focused on the sales-y piece, convincing people to sign on, getting the distribution deal (Netflix), managing the promotion strategy, etc?


You arrange financing and put the package together and are supposed to be the captain of the ship. Many things are made and then the production company has trouble finding someone to distribute and that is why some projects take longer to get to the screen. 

An example is Robert Downey, Jr. who with his wife Susan have a production company called Team Downey.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_Downey  They were attached to Warner Brothers for several years and have since left and work projects with other studios.  His last project was Perry Mason on HBO which was really a great show.  His wife was working in production well before he met her and probably runs the company on a day to day.  This is a real production company run by two professionals.  The Harkles are playacting and don't have a clue.  I have to mention that kudos are due to Robert for overcoming a drug addiction problem that help land him in prison for a time.  He was very fortunate that Hollywood supported him many times and valued his considerable talent.  He credits his wife for helping him with all of this.


RE financing:  Hello Russian guys who allowed you to squat in Vancouver and sold you the house!  Nothing like a little money laundering!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix to screen sordid Diana musical after Harry & Meghan's £112m deal
> 
> 
> NETFLIX is to screen a tacky musical about Princess Diana — after signing up her son Harry and his wife Meghan in a £112million deal. In the show the Queen calls the tragic princess a “tart”, while…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



That musical sounds like the most horrible piece of work ever created, a parody of a parody. Why do I want to watch it?


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Her response really shocks me.  This is  self preservation at work.  The word must be out that MM is poison as previously, JJ was singing MM's praises like they were BFF.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That musical sounds like the most horrible piece of work ever created, a parody of a parody. Why do I want to watch it?



Well maybe if I do break down and sign up for Netflix lololol!  Actually I don't find the idea of this very appealing.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Well maybe if I do break down and sign up for Netflix lololol!  Actually I don't find the idea of this very appealing.



I’m amazed a show like that ever got funding. There is a lot of garbage that passes for theater these days. I was hoping it was a joke. It sounds like the most mean-spirited, awful idea they could have thought up. 

If it is true it goes to show how low the bar is for a program to qualify to air on Netflix however.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Well, if she helps her family, *there's no need for photographers*


Haha, since when? Photographers are likely on her speed dial.


----------



## lalame

All the streaming sites have terrible content somewhere in there. It's just one of many titles brought in by some studio contract or other I'm sure. Doubt anyone is watching all the movies to filter on quality. Exception may be HBO.

Sorta off topic but I saw a pretty interesting documentary on Netflix on Amazon Prime last night. I love their underdog story.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> RE financing:  Hello Russian guys who allowed you to squat in Vancouver and sold you the house!  Nothing like a little money laundering!



Speaking of Vancouver: In today's DM, the MOST OUTRAGEOUS hypocrisy yet :  This from the woman who was pictured a few days ago with her very own Paparazzi Posse to capture pictures of the charming little low income kids in a Pre School for whom she and the tag-along were planting flowers. No attempt to shield those children, they were exploited, about which some of their parents publicly complained.   

Yet, she, files a lawsuit , another day, another dollar, because a photographer snapped a picture of her with a swaddled Archie, completely hidden from sight (who really knows if it was him? It could have been a mannequin, would not put it past her to pull that kind of stunt) and unrecognizable. She and dogs were clearly visible. They were in a park.

Take away from this: I"m rich and you can't have my picture unless I profit from it, and using poor little kids to do it is just fine.
Also, money must be getting tight, this happened nine months ago, and it's just now an issue. Maybe they finally put pen to paper and figured out how much it's going to cost to keep all those toilets in Montecito flushed and stocked with toilet tissue and figured they better keep generating a money stream. Lawsuit!

*Meghan Markle sues picture agency over photos of her walking with son Archie in a park on Vancouver Island*

*The Duchess of Sussex is taking legal action against  Splash News and Pictures*
*Her action centres on pictures of Meghan and Archie taken in a park in January*
*None of the images show her son's face and also feature two of her dogs*
*They say they misuse private information and breach the Data Protection Ac*


----------



## gracekelly

She is hoping to get enough money to pay for the Executive Membership card at Costco so she can get in/out and buy toilet paper for the 16 bathrooms.

Or maybe the pap agency didn't give her the amount of money agreed upon and this is her way of getting it.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Covid has sharpened our criteria for quality programming. The insincere, the fluff, the inauthentic is much more transparent now than ever.  Anything Hwood rolls out had better be top notch, A+, Crème de la Crème, meaningful, soul-enhancing. Why pay for less than the best?
> 
> ETA:  The best shows as always will be entertaining. They will lift our spirits rather than lecture us or drag us down or try to score political points. I felt the Marie Curie film was a downer and not really inspirational. Even tho I do not speak French, I was totally captivated by The Bureau. So far, I have not seen or heard anything of quality from these 2 grifters.




Ok, slightly OT, but I LOVED the Bureau.  I have liked a couple of other French TV series also.  Alas, I can’t speak French but I do enjoy being surrounded by people who are - even if they are on the TV!

I can’t imagine what H&M could possibly Bring to the table as projects.  I think they are trying to be a junior version of the Obamas, patently absurd as that is!  To me, the only interesting thing about H is that he was born into the BRF.  And the only interesting thing about M is that she married into the BRF.  Can’t think of an interesting thing they did while in the BRF and now that they are only BRF adjacent, they have zero to offer.  Ugh....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hilarious. 

_The agreement is so similar to that which Netflix signed two years ago with another A-list celebrity couple – Barack and Michelle ***** – that chief executive Ted Sarandos didn't bother to supply new quotes for the press release._









						TOM LEONARD: Harry and Meghan's Netflix deal is a repeat of Obama's
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex - a former actress, let's not forget - were always going to be casting an appreciative eye at what Hollywood had to offer.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> I can’t imagine what H&M could possibly Bring to the table as projects.  *I think they are trying to be a junior version of the Obamas, patently absurd as that is!  *To me, the only interesting thing about H is that he was born into the BRF.  And the only interesting thing about M is that she married into the BRF.  Can’t think of an interesting thing they did while in the BRF and now that they are only BRF adjacent, they have zero to offer.  Ugh....


Absurd is a very mild word...  



CarryOn2020 said:


> Hilarious.
> 
> _The agreement is so similar to that which Netflix signed two years ago with another A-list celebrity couple – Barack and Michelle ***** – that chief executive Ted Sarandos didn't bother to supply new quotes for the press release._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TOM LEONARD: Harry and Meghan's Netflix deal is a repeat of Obama's
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex - a former actress, let's not forget - were always going to be casting an appreciative eye at what Hollywood had to offer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm speechless.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hypocrisy? That doesn't matter to journalists since they engage in it regularly within their own field. It was reported back in January that H&M left the UK due to racism. For the US media right now the worst thing you can be accused of is being a racist. No journalist who wants to continue working is going to step anywhere near that minefield.





sdkitty said:


> I don't know what to think.  I think for now the american media thinks there is still interest in them.  and at this time, no one wants to be accused of racism.  After all, what other reason not to like her?


You are probably right, but it is sad. The dislike of many people towards MM&H has nothing to do with racism. People should be able to state their opinions/facts without fear of repercussion.


----------



## lalame

Remember Jameela Jamil? She just responded to all the stores about her and M+H. The tabloids are so stupid. You really have to second guess most things they put out. 

_"LOL. Went to a hotel in SB [Santa Barbara] for a romantic getaway with my boyfriend... and have seen 8 days of articles with increasingly ridiculous stories, none of which are consistent, none of which make sense... (all to now create the lie that she controls me and coordinates my every move.)" Jamil wrote on Twitter.

"I’ve met this woman once. Ever. #BestFriends These articles are a strategy to now blame her for MY every word and move. And to attempt to discredit my calling them out as if it isn’t a *FACT* that they bully and harass her for clicks, to feed Britain’s already sturdy xenophobia." _


----------



## lalame

From Page Six.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Her response really shocks me.  This is  self preservation at work.  The word must be out that MM is poison as previously, JJ was singing MM's praises like they were BFF.



She is still praising her though and blaming the racist press.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!
> 
> *'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*
> 
> You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.
> 
> No, seriously.
> 
> Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
> 
> Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'
> 
> But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.
> 
> The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.
> 
> Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.
> 
> Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.
> 
> How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?
> 
> The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.
> 
> 'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?
> 
> They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.
> 
> What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?
> 
> Then came the funniest bit.
> 
> 'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'
> 
> I laughed out loud at this point.
> 
> Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?
> 
> As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.
> 
> But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:
> 
> 1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.
> 
> 2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.
> 
> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.
> 
> 5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.
> 
> 6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.
> 
> 7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.
> 
> 8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'
> 
> 9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.
> 
> 10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Piers can be a real jerk, but man this was funny!!


----------



## papertiger

I don't know if this has already been posted but this quote is from here (sorry, Daily Fail again) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-Harry-Meghan-Markles-150m-Netflix-deal.html

Most of it is just bla bla bla but a few quotes they've got are interesting (to me at least)

"...any deals they are making will be scrutinised by the royal household.

'Under the terms of their deal to forgo their royal duties, they agreed any commercial deals would be subject to discussion.'

Harry and Meghan got the green light to broker commercial deals in January - but the moneymaking projects will be scrutinised by the Queen after a year.

The historic agreement ruled the couple will drop their HRH titles, pay back £2.4million of taxpayer cash and no longer receive public funds.

In exchange, they were allowed to quit frontline duties and given licence to expand their Sussex Royal brand.

Yet Her Majesty, who is understood to be anxious the couple could use their royal credentials to line their pockets, will be watching them closely.

Insiders told MailOnline the blueprint thrashed out at Sandringham is subject to an annual review in the Spring of 2021, although a date has not yet been confirmed."

and

"Tom Harrington, a broadcast industry expert at Enders Analysis said 'The Sussexes may imagine they will dictate the shows they want to make but Netflix will have a firm hand on the tiller.

A senior industry source said that Meghan would 'believe she's getting full creative control' but that the executive producer's credits she was likely to receive were 'thrown around like confetti'.

'TV networks, Netflix included, don't let the lunatics run the asylum,' the source said. 'Meghan will no doubt want to cast herself as Mother Teresa but that's not how it's going to pan out.'"

Bit in there about Edward's failed company too - wow that went through some serious cash. These people are worse at budgeting than me.

I guess it's just a public announcement that they are being watched.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is still praising her though and blaming the racist press.


That's how I understood it too


----------



## chicinthecity777

I wonder how many of those "celebs" who keep saying MM was subject to British media racism actually have listened or read any of the British media outlet. I must admit I didn't really follow them at first so my experience is limited. But I genuinely have not seen or read anything overtly racist against MM in British media apart from the incident with Princess Michael of Kent which wasn't media's doing. I also don't read much tabloids so maybe there were more on those. It would be educational to know just exactly what was said that they deemed it was racist. I genuinely would like to see.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

Has anyone checked with Mo'Nique to see what she thinks of this deal?  I think of her every time Netflix announces a huge deal.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I wonder how many of those "celebs" who keep saying MM was subject to British media racism actually have listened or read any of the British media outlet. I must admit I didn't really follow them at first so my experience is limited. But I genuinely have not seen or read anything overtly racist against MM in British media apart from the incident with Princess Michael of Kent which wasn't media's doing. I also don't read much tabloids so maybe there were more on those. It would be educational to know just exactly what was said that they deemed it was racist. I genuinely would like to see.



There are some comments from people which are, I haven't seen anything in the media itself (up to 9-ish months I had to comment on media as part of my work).

Obviously, comments could be from anyone anywhere, just as there are racists and all kind of '...ists everywhere. Some of the comments are also totally sexist but apparently that's OK, so common as not even register or not worth worrying about.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if Trevor will offer advice?  He is a ‘real’ Hwood producer, right? Hmmmm.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if Trevor will offer advice?  He is a ‘real’ Hwood producer, right? Hmmmm.


Bet he’s got advice for Harry!!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if Trevor will offer advice?  He is a ‘real’ Hwood producer, right? Hmmmm.



If Trevor has a brain in his head he is probably so grateful to be done with the drama, and I bet it was always drama. Hopefully he learned something from the experience and picked a more stable woman to be his second wife.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Her response really shocks me.  This is  self preservation at work.  The word must be out that MM is poison as previously, JJ was singing MM's praises like they were BFF.


she seems to want to have it both ways (same as her sexual orientation).....she only met M once but she is defending her as a victim of racism.....just like she is gay but she prefers boys (oh excuse me she is on the "queer spectrum" or something like that)


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> Piers can be a real jerk, but man this was funny!!



It is! You have to give credit where it is due, the man can be hilarious when he's motived enough. I don't think I have ever received so many "likes" for one post, 47 and counting.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she seems to want to have it both ways (same as her sexual orientation).....she only met M once but she is defending her as a victim of racism.....just like she is gay but she prefers boys (oh excuse me she is on the "queer spectrum" or something like that)



And don't forget about all of her many ailments. It's a miracle she is up and walking around among us!

Once someone's honesty has been shown to be sorely lacking, I can't be bothered to try to figure out whether she has finally said something truthful. I can believe DM made up the whole JJ visit. But I can also believe JJ met with H&M and is lying now to protect MM in hopes that having the connection will get her something in the future.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> From Page Six.
> 
> View attachment 4837776




This makes a lot more sense.  Thanks for posting this @lalame! Still, even $2 million to them is crazy to me as neither has any producing experience at all. ETA: Though Netflix is likely smart enough to make sure that they don't even have to pay that if nothing they produce is actually picked up by Netflix.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> This makes a lot more sense.  Thanks for posting this @lalame! Still, even $2 million to them is crazy to me as neither has any producing experience at all. ETA: Though Netflix is likely smart enough to make sure that they don't even have to pay that if nothing they produce is actually picked up by Netflix.



If I were some poor soul who has been struggling for years to make it in the industry, or even a recent graduate with a degree in Film & Television and a huge student loan, I would be banging my head against the wall right now.


----------



## csshopper

At one point early on in Megxit there was an article that David Foster was "like a father to Harry." He has ties to Netflix as the subject of a documentary. Wonder if he is any part of this?


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> At one point early on in Megxit there was an article that David Foster was "like a father to Harry." He has ties to Netflix as the subject of a documentary. Wonder if he is any part of this?


how do they even know each other?


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> There are some comments from people which are, I haven't seen anything in the media itself (up to 9-ish months I had to comment on media as part of my work).
> 
> Obviously, comments could be from anyone anywhere, just as there are racists and all kind of '...ists everywhere. Some of the comments are also totally sexist but apparently that's OK, so common as not even register or not worth worrying about.


I get it, yes there will always been some racist pr1ck no matter where you go but their accusation was very specific that the UK Media was racist, which I really haven't seen any evidence so far, especially that I normally frequent "mainstream" media outlets and they are normally very woke. So I am curious which media outlet has said what for them to brand the entire UK media as racist towards them.

On a separate note related to Netflix, I have been scrolling on Twitter early today and there were people cancelling Netflix and telling their customer service they were cancelling because of their association with H&M. They even had screenshots to prove it. I thought it was funny...


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> how do they even know each other?



Foster’s current wife is MM’s BFF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> If I were some poor soul who has been struggling for years to make it in the industry, or even a recent graduate with a degree in Film & Television and a huge student loan, I would be banging my head against the wall right now.



It’s a ‘who-ya-know’ circle in Hwood and beyond.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

bag-mania said:


> If Trevor has a brain in his head he is probably so grateful to be done with the drama, and I bet it was always drama. Hopefully he learned something from the experience and picked a more stable woman to be his second wife.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> She is hoping to get enough money to pay for the Executive Membership card at Costco so she can get in/out and buy toilet paper for the 16 bathrooms.
> 
> Or maybe the pap agency didn't give her the amount of money agreed upon and this is her way of getting it.


She should get the business one, so she can enter an hour early to get more of the privacy she craves oh so much!


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> Bet he’s got advice for Harry!!


"RUN!!!!"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Wonder if Trevor will offer advice?*  He is a ‘real’ Hwood producer, right? Hmmmm.





1LV said:


> *Bet he’s got advice for Harry!*!


Run!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> "RUN!!!!"


haha, I didn't see this and just posted the same.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Foster’s current wife is MM’s BFF.


oh yeah, forgot about that one. I still don't buy him being a dad to H


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Foster’s current wife is MM’s BFF.


They're BFFs??? Didn't think MM had any except those who can get her something. What can the former American Idol person do for her?


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> They're BFFs??? Didn't think MM had any except those who can get her something. What can the former American Idol person do for her?


well she has a very wealthy husband with show biz connections
but he's in the music business so maybe not that many useful connections for them.....I know what his wife saw in him though


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> haha, I didn't see this and just posted the same.


Great minds think alike!


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> I wonder how many of those "celebs" who keep saying MM was subject to British media racism actually have listened or read any of the British media outlet. I must admit I didn't really follow them at first so my experience is limited. But I genuinely have not seen or read anything overtly racist against MM in British media apart from the incident with Princess Michael of Kent which wasn't media's doing. I also don't read much tabloids so maybe there were more on those. It would be educational to know just exactly what was said that they deemed it was racist. I genuinely would like to see.


Marie Christine von Reibnitz is considered a bad apple by some, but one bad apple shouldn't spoil the whole bunch. Apart of that stupid brooch incident, I don't know what is the evidence behind those "celebs" statements on British media racism. I condemn racism of all forms and would like to see such evidence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

okaaaay, Hwood BFF’s.
Very different from real world bff’s.



sdkitty said:


> oh yeah, forgot about that one. I still don't buy him being a dad to H





redney said:


> They're BFFs??? Didn't think MM had any except those who can get her something. What can the former American Idol person do for her?


----------



## lanasyogamama

From the Onion. The comments on the Facebook post are great









						Prince Harry And Meghan Markle’s Netflix Deal Plans
					

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Markle signed a multiyear deal with Netflix to produce a range of programming highlighting issues they care about. The Onion offers a first look into the royal couple’s Netflix deal plans.




					www.theonion.com


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> I get it, yes there will always been some racist pr1ck no matter where you go but their accusation was very specific that the UK Media was racist, which I really haven't seen any evidence so far, especially that I normally frequent "mainstream" media outlets and they are normally very woke. So I am curious which media outlet has said what for them to brand the entire UK media as racist towards them.
> 
> On a separate note related to Netflix, I have been scrolling on Twitter early today and there were people cancelling Netflix and telling their customer service they were cancelling because of their association with H&M. They even had screenshots to prove it. I thought it was funny...



I'm not plugged into British media but the one I've seen that disgusted me was the infamous "straight outta Compton" one from Daily Mail. Which was just stupid on top of being offensive.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> how do they even know each other?


David Foster is a Canadian , and very ambitious and  good at networking , see documentary
DF is a tight friend of ex PM Mulroney - see documentary, Jessica’s Father in law
the wife of DF is supposed to be a friend of MM, but I have no solid evidence on that
he supposedly arranged for the house in Vancouver, Canada


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lanasyogamama  Game of No Throne!  Perfect!

Technically though, they have 16 ‘thrones’ in their house.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> David Foster is a Canadian , and very ambitious and  good at networking , see documentary
> DF is a tight friend of ex PM Mulroney - see documentary, Jessica’s Father in law



Always the Who ya kno! game!  

If I felt like putting in the effort, I would make a diagram of ‘who knows whom‘ in the Harkle world. It is getting impossible to keep up.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> how do they even know each other?


*Prince Harry and David Foster Are 'Like Father and Son ...*
https://people.com/royals/katharine...ry-david-foster-relationship-like-father-son/ - 565k - Cached - Similar pages 
May 19, 2020 *...* Katharine McPhee reconnected with former schoolmate Meghan Markle last year , and she says their husbands *David Foster and Prince Harry*


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always the Who ya kno! game!


Yup , I saw the DF documentary, he is a very good music producer , amazing hits and success
but equally ambitious, motivated 
FYI he was married to Yolanda , mom to the Hadid trio Gigi et al,, and yes he was on her show RHOBH , housewives of Beverly Hills


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always the Who ya kno! game!
> 
> If I felt like putting in the effort, I would make a diagram of ‘who knows whom‘ in the Harkle world. It is getting impossible to keep up.


But of course, there are two sides to eveything ... Jameela says she barely knows MM despite being MM’s pick as an Outstanding force for change in the Vogue issue


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Yup , I saw the DF documentary, he is a very good music producer , amazing hits and success
> but equally ambitious, motivated
> FYI he was married to Yolanda , mom to the Hadid trio Gigi et al,, and yes he was on her show RHOBH , housewives of Beverly Hills


he is successful but seems kind of smarmy to me


----------



## CeeJay

Well, as we all suspected some time back, how much you want to bet that H&M will be showing up for those Oscar & Emmy parties?!?!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we all suspected some time back, how much you want to bet that H&M will be showing up for those Oscar & Emmy parties?!?!



this would be a better bet than the stock market now


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> he is successful but seems kind of smarmy to me


Isn't Katherine .. what? .. his 5th wife???  I think I said this before, but a dear friend of mine who's ex-husband was a famous rock musician, had a party where his band was celebrating the drop of a new record.  Well, David was there and absolutely hated the fact that he wasn't getting "enough attention" and then starts to proceed to sit down at their piano telling everyone to "shut up" and hear "real music"!  Bottom line, he is a major-league pr!ck!  As long as Yolanda was calling him "her king", he was in the marriage .. but the minute the Lyme disease started kicking in, he wanted no part in that marriage and moved on .. that is how he is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice how most of the articles about the Netflix deal criticize Harry‘s involvement. Most of it centers around his monetizing the Royals and his being used to advertise smarmy shows.  Very few articles criticize her role in all of this which underscores her fake feminism.

I hope my invitation to the year-review doesn’t get lost in the mail. My file is about 10 inches thick.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Isn't Katherine .. what? .. his 5th wife???  I think I said this before, but a dear friend of mine who's ex-husband was a famous rock musician, had a party where his band was celebrating the drop of a new record.  Well, David was there and absolutely hated the fact that he wasn't getting "enough attention" and then starts to proceed to sit down at their piano telling everyone to "shut up" and hear "real music"!  Bottom line, he is a major-league pr!ck!  As long as Yolanda was calling him "her king", he was in the marriage .. but the minute the Lyme disease started kicking in, he wanted no part in that marriage and moved on .. that is how he is.


ick


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we all suspected some time back, how much you want to bet that H&M will be showing up for those Oscar & Emmy parties?!?!


maybe the parties - like Vanity Fair - but not the Oscars I don't think - hope not


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I'm not plugged into British media but the one I've seen that disgusted me was the infamous "straight outta Compton" one from Daily Mail. Which was just stupid on top of being offensive.



There was also the awful cartoon with Archie. I thought the stories calling her exotic before they were married were awful too. I agree there there has been some racist coverage in the British media, but not all British media is racist. That’s a broad stroke.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> maybe the parties - like Vanity Fair - but not the Oscars I don't think - hope not



If they are invited, my guess is the real A listers will get the most screen time. The A listers insist on deference, respect, best seats, most camera time, etc. Otherwise, it isn’t worth their time to show up. H&M  may get the invite, but they will be pushed aside when the talent shows up.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> I'm not plugged into British media but the one I've seen that disgusted me was the infamous "straight outta Compton" one from Daily Mail. Which was just stupid on top of being offensive.


But DM is not the whole of U.K. media! That's the bit people failed to understand. There are many other (much more respected) main stream media outlets in the UK and I have never read anything racist towards MM on there. If they use DM brush to paint the whole of UK media, it's not only unfair, it's also ignorant! If they said certain tabloids in the UK are racist towards MM, I would have agreed, but these celebs keep saying UK media is racist and that's simply untrue!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> oh yeah, forgot about that one. I still don't buy him being a dad to H



What does it say that it was ever even thought of. What must PC be thinking/feeling? This was the man who walked MM down the isle in place of her own father because he couldn't be there. This is the man that bank-roles their 'adventures' because having everything wasn't good enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> maybe the parties - like Vanity Fair - but not the Oscars I don't think - hope not



Are there parties in the near future? Germany just cancelled carnival, which a) is a huge deal and b) street carnival is not until February 2021. We also cancelled St. Martin's parades (November) and most Christmas fairs.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> There was also the awful cartoon with Archie. I thought the stories calling her exotic before they were married were awful too. I agree there there has been some racist coverage in the British media, but not all British media is racist. That’s a broad stroke.


Disclosure: I am not defending calling MM exotic; however, it is important to have in mind that calling a woman exotic is often seen as a compliment. 

"The definition of exotic is someone or something that is foreign or unusual in an interesting way." www.yourdictionary.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Disclosure: I am not defending calling MM exotic; however, it is important to have in mind that calling a woman exotic is often seen as a compliment.
> 
> "The definition of exotic is someone or something that is foreign or unusual in an interesting way." www.yourdictionary.com



I agree... there are times where it is a compliment but I while wasn’t able to find it in my two minute search,  I remember reading an article talking about her exotic dna... that was the one I thought was rude. I hate when I don’t have time for sources. (I just found it and it’s just stupid... ugh... )









						RACHEL JOHNSON: Sorry Harry, but she has failed my Mum Test
					

When I look at Meghan Markle – the American  actress currently starring as




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




But that said... it’s the Daily Mail.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> RACHEL JOHNSON: Sorry Harry, but she has failed my Mum Test
> 
> 
> When I look at Meghan Markle – the American  actress currently starring as
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can this women never dress appropriately? Even in this probably edited picture I see a panty line.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are there parties in the near future? Germany just cancelled carnival, which a) is a huge deal and b) street carnival is not until February 2021. We also cancelled St. Martin's parades (November) and most Christmas fairs.



I am also skeptical about whether there will be any big Hollywood parties until next spring at the earliest. They are still hopeful though and won't want to cancel anything since its still several months away.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are there parties in the near future? Germany just cancelled carnival, which a) is a huge deal and b) street carnival is not until February 2021. We also cancelled St. Martin's parades (November) and most Christmas fairs.


well this would be next year so hope there is an end to this pandemic some day


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> maybe the parties - like Vanity Fair - but not the Oscars I don't think - hope not


Oh, I would bet my (non-existent paycheck) that she will *MAKE SURE* to be there!!!  This is what she has been planning all along with her stepping on/using and then markling people on her climb up ..


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can this women never dress appropriately? Even in this probably edited picture I see a panty line.


yes, edited is what I was thinking.....never saw her butt or legs look that good in any other pics


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I would bet my (not-existent paycheck) that she will *MAKE SURE* to be there!!!  This is what she has been planning all along with her stepping on/using and then markling people on her climb up ..


don't you need to have some sort of legit reason to be at the Oscars?


----------



## bag-mania

So what is happening with all the charities/companies they created, Archewell, Sussex Royal, Travalyst, MWX Foundation? Which one of them is the front for the production business?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they are invited, my guess is the real A listers will get the most screen time. The A listers insist on deference, respect, best seats, most camera time, etc. Otherwise, it isn’t worth their time to show up. H&M  may get the invite, but they will be pushed aside when the talent shows up.


HA .. but, but, but .. you remember how she pushed Harry around and walked in front of him, right?  She is ruthless in her quest for fame; don't think the "real talent" will stop HER!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are there parties in the near future? Germany just cancelled carnival, which a) is a huge deal and b) street carnival is not until February 2021. We also cancelled St. Martin's parades (November) and most Christmas fairs.


Not that I'm aware of; LA is still in lock-down and NYC is just a tad better, but nothing being held inside.  Yes, various things have already been canceled here as well .. the Rose Bowl Parade (in Pasadena) has been canceled for the first time EVER!


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Disclosure: I am not defending calling MM exotic; however, it is important to have in mind that calling a woman exotic is often seen as a compliment.
> 
> "The definition of exotic is someone or something that is foreign or unusual in an interesting way." www.yourdictionary.com





Sol Ryan said:


> I agree... there are times where it is a compliment but I while wasn’t able to find it in my two minute search,  I remember reading an article talking about her exotic dna... that was the one I thought was rude. I hate when I don’t have time for sources. (I just found it and it’s just stupid... ugh... )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RACHEL JOHNSON: Sorry Harry, but she has failed my Mum Test
> 
> 
> When I look at Meghan Markle – the American  actress currently starring as
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that said... it’s the Daily Mail.....



Calling someone exotic is not a compliment... I've heard that more times than I can count. It's like saying to someone, "hey you look unusual" (per that definition itself). Please don't call people exotic... call them beautiful, attractive, striking - those are positive words. Exotic is what you describe "interesting" objects.

And btw this is not a statement on the intention of the person saying it. People can absolutely be well-intentioned, but this is going to offend the people who are being "complimented." Good opportunity to match intent and effect.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I'm still laughing at the idea of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan going on TV to tell "average" folk how to pull themselves up by their boot strings and live better lives.  It boggles the mind, not to mention the incongruity that either of them knows a thing about "average" folk.


----------



## sdkitty

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm still laughing at the idea of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan going on TV to tell "average" folk how to pull themselves up by their boot strings and live better lives.  It boggles the mind, not to mention the incongruity that either of them knows a thing about "average" folk.


well, Meghan did grow up pretty average - except for the dad being in show biz.....but it's arrogant of them to tell us "regular people" how to live IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

It's the calling out "featuring normal people" that is off-putting... when your audience is said "normal people"!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Calling someone exotic is not a compliment... I've heard that more times than I can count. It's like saying to someone, "hey you look unusual" (per that definition itself). Please don't call people exotic... call them beautiful, attractive, striking - those are positive words. Exotic is what you describe "interesting" objects.
> 
> And btw this is not a statement on the intention of the person saying it. People can absolutely be well-intentioned, but this is going to offend the people who are being "complimented." Good opportunity to match intent and effect.


Agreed, I think the word can easily be taken either way. Best not to risk it.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

These two grifters are the embodiment of walking-talking Attention Deficit Disorder, hope they get help soon. 
They simply bounce from one headline to another without successfully fulfilling most obligations to fruition. 
Their idea of RESPONSIBILITY is laughable, their idea of HONESTY is negligible.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Calling someone exotic is not a compliment... I've heard that more times than I can count. It's like saying to someone, "hey you look unusual" (per that definition itself). Please don't call people exotic... call them beautiful, attractive, striking - those are positive words. Exotic is what you describe "interesting" objects.
> 
> And btw this is not a statement on the intention of the person saying it. People can absolutely be well-intentioned, but this is going to offend the people who are being "complimented." Good opportunity to match intent and effect.


I appreciate your opinion. I don't recall to ever have used the word exotic to describe a person, but I can see other people using it as a compliment. I recall 'exotic' to be often applied to Bond girls. Looking back, those movies were rather sexist. Growing up, I really enjoyed watching them, but I remember to be very annoyed with the way some 'Bond girls' were portrayed, particularly in the movies from the Sean Connery Era. In the end, we all need to have an open mind, learn from each other, and do better.


----------



## Chanbal

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm still laughing at the idea of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan going on TV to tell "average" folk how to pull themselves up by their boot strings and live better lives.  It boggles the mind, not to mention the incongruity that either of them knows a thing about "average" folk.





sdkitty said:


> well, Meghan did grow up pretty average - except for the dad being in show biz.....but it's arrogant of them to tell us "regular people" how to live IMO


I agree. Duchess Meghan will condescendingly teach us on how to live more meaningful lives (ex donating to good causes like a certain foundation ), and Prince Harry will pretend that doesn't see us all ('normal people') as aliens, and will try to blend in. And of course, he will do whatever MM asks him to do.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> Calling someone exotic is not a compliment... I've heard that more times than I can count. It's like saying to someone, "hey you look unusual" (per that definition itself). Please don't call people exotic... call them beautiful, attractive, striking - those are positive words. Exotic is what you describe "interesting" objects.
> 
> And btw this is not a statement on the intention of the person saying it. People can absolutely be well-intentioned, but this is going to offend the people who are being "complimented." Good opportunity to match intent and effect.



To me, plants are exotic, not people. I don’t use the term and hence why I took offense to the article. I apologize if I didn’t make that clear in my prior comment. I just re-read the article and realized it was dumber than I remembered.

_*edited for clarity._


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> But DM is not the whole of U.K. media! That's the bit people failed to understand. There are many other (much more respected) main stream media outlets in the UK and I have never read anything racist towards MM on there. If they use DM brush to paint the whole of UK media, it's not only unfair, it's also ignorant! If they said certain tabloids in the UK are racist towards MM, I would have agreed, but these celebs keep saying UK media is racist and that's simply untrue!


I have a few snippets from the Times to post - mainstream top notch media - will post that in a bit - the snippets are certainly examples of fairness in reporting at several levels 
Pls stay tuned , hard to type from phone and get it right


----------



## CarryOn2020

Words do change meanings over time. Long ago ‘Nice’ used to mean ‘silly, dumb’, from the Latin ‘nescio’ which means I do not know.
It seems ‘exotic’ is one of the words. I have never used the word to describe anything. After looking it up today, I understand the racist as well as the demeaning connotations.

MM’s friend? Priyanka Chopra explained her dislike of the word in 2017:
_Along with rejection, Chopra experienced plenty of prejudice, which she admittedly takes offence to, particularly when people call her exotic. "When somebody else calls you exotic, exotic is a box — it’s the stereotype of snake charmers and face jewelry," she said. "You’re just that stereotype. But I don’t get offended anymore. I used to get offended by things that were said to me, or how I was seen. Now I educate. If I get pissed off, I’ll educate in a sassy way. Other times I educate in a Gandhi-like way. You know — I have my moods."








						Don't Call Priyanka Chopra (Or Any Woman Of Colour) 'Exotic'
					

"We can call ourselves that. You can’t call us that."




					www.huffingtonpost.ca
				



_
I do appreciate her response has evolved such that she no longer gets offended but educates the person. I really do believe this is the positive way forward.  We just cannot take in other people’s negative energy. While I’m sure H&M discussed the possibilities of racism and prejudice while performing their royal roles, up close it must have been offensive and disgusting. That said, maybe it would have been better to educate people. Call out the offensive comments and have security keep those people away. Much like Doria kept people at a proper distance, it seems H&M’s security could have too. Would that have helped? I really do not know.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Isn't Katherine .. what? .. his 5th wife???  I think I said this before, but a dear friend of mine who's ex-husband was a famous rock musician, had a party where his band was celebrating the drop of a new record.  Well, David was there and absolutely hated the fact that he wasn't getting "enough attention" and then starts to proceed to sit down at their piano telling everyone to "shut up" and hear "real music"!  Bottom line, he is a major-league pr!ck!  As long as Yolanda was calling him "her king", he was in the marriage .. but the minute the Lyme disease started kicking in, he wanted no part in that marriage and moved on .. that is how he is.


I remember all his Grammys on the piano--what an ego he has but it was probably the first time anyone watching the show had ever heard about him. "Her King"--yucko.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> yes, edited is what I was thinking.....never saw her butt or legs look that good in any other pics


That looks like a Kartrashian-level photoshopped pic.


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> To me, plants are exotic, not people. I don’t use the term and hence why I took offense to the article. I apologize if I didn’t make that clear in my prior comment. I just re-read the article and realized it was dumber than I remembered.
> 
> _*edited for clarity._


I've seen it used in conjunction with sports cars--Lotus-type cars--you know they exist and see one once in a while, though they are probably all over in LA, BH, etc. (not much in the Midwest hence it's an exotic sports car).


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> And here comes the first wave of backlash. (Note to self: Don't do anything to get on Piers Morgan's radar.) Enjoy!
> 
> *'Around the world in 80 private jets' and other adventures: PIERS MORGAN presents a hilarious sneak preview of the woke TV the world can expect from Meghan and Harry's $150million Netflix deal*
> 
> You've got to hand it to Meghan and Harry.
> 
> No, seriously.
> 
> Pulling off a $150 million Hollywood production deal is an amazing achievement when your combined experience of producing anything in Hollywood could be written on the back of a postage stamp.
> 
> Their entire joint CV would read something like: 'Meghan was a suitcase girl on Deal or No Deal and an actress on Suits, a TV show made in Canada. And Harry's shown some real thespian promise with his hostage video performances on camera during lockdown.'
> 
> But their stupendously rich paymasters Netflix didn't hire the Duke and Duchess for their experience, or lack of it.
> 
> The world's most successful streaming giants hired them because they're royal, titled, and therefore, as we've seen since the announcement yesterday, can generate spectacular global media attention just by breaking wind in public.
> 
> Netflix is betting on that media attention generating enough new subscribers to justify the massive price tag.
> 
> Hence the comically over-the-top gushing statement from its co-CEO and chief content officer, Ted Sarandos: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> Sarandos is one of the smartest guys I've ever met in the media gamepo, but even he must have struggled not to giggle as he read all that disingenuous sycophantic drivel.
> 
> How could anyone possibly feel 'inspired' by Meghan and Harry's 'authenticity, optimism and leadership' or 'resilience' given that they've spent the past two years whining, quitting, living off rich people and preaching about equality from their position of supreme elitism?
> 
> The couple's own statement was even more comically absurd.
> 
> 'Our lives,' it began, 'both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit: of courage, resilience, and the need for connection.'
> 
> Sorry, WHAT?
> 
> This is the same Meghan and Harry who've gutlessly run away from royal duty, and disconnected themselves from everyone and everything, to become shameless money-grabbing celebrities - right?
> 
> They continued that they intend to shine a light on 'people and causes around the world' by 'creating content that informs but also gives hope' and want Netflix to help them 'share impactful content that unlocks action'.
> 
> What does that even mean? Where is this action currently being locked, and what is it?
> 
> Then came the funniest bit.
> 
> 'As new parents,' they said, 'making inspirational family programming is also important to us as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens.'
> 
> I laughed out loud at this point.
> 
> Two people who've so heartlessly and ruthlessly deserted their own families are now going to be telling us how to be good families?
> 
> As so often, this latest Meghan and Harry move is beyond parody.
> 
> But what they have inspired is me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke, self-serving productions that I look forward to seeing on Netflix from Megxit Productions:
> 
> 1) HOW TO HAVE YOUR ROYAL CAKE AND EAT IT - An inspiring and educational film in which the Sussexes throw vegan tea (Echinacea, obviously!) parties at their palatial Santa Barbara mansion for random strangers and explain how to milk (Almond…obviously!) the Royal Family brand name for massive financial gain.
> 
> 2) AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 PRIVATE JETS - A lavish travel docu-series in which we follow the Duke and Duchess around as they bang on endlessly about the environment, saving the planet and the urgent need to reduce one's carbon footprint during live broadcasts filmed aboard their famous friends' private jets. Cameos from George Clooney, Sir Elton John and bankers from JP Morgan.
> 
> 3) THE BROTHER GRIMM - An animated children's film depicting a fierce sibling rivalry between a saintly, much-misunderstood sensitive caring hero named Harry who never does anything wrong and his evil older brother William who has the audacity to think being the heir to the throne gives him some kind of entitlement to be treated differently, and even worse, had the bloody gall to suggest Harry think hard about marrying an ultra-woke, fame-hungry, much older American C-list actress divorcee social climber with a history of dumping people.
> 
> 4) MEAT THE PARENT FOCKERS - A horror movie reboot of the popular comedy movie franchise starring the heroine's father Thomas – played by Robert de Niro – who gets disowned for daring to do exactly what his daughter did and collude with paparazzi, and ends up suffering a grisly demise when furious Meghan throws him into a meat-packing mincer during an angry reunion. She immediately blames the incident on the 'racist media'.
> 
> 5) THE FROWN – A regal drama sequel to The Crown in which a rogue asteroid hits Sandringham during Christmas lunch, wiping out the top tier of the Royal Family, and meaning Harry and Meghan – who snubbed the holiday to be on Oprah's yacht instead - finally become King and Queen. Unfortunately, having got what they so badly craved, they spend so much time whining about everything ('The gold-plated Buckingham Palace toilet seats don't have enough gold in them!) and greedily exploiting their new-found status (Meghan is caught selling 'boring' royal art on eBay) that the British public rises up in fury and demands Prince Andrew replaces them as Monarch to reintroduce some integrity to the throne.
> 
> 6) KEEPING UP WITH THE SUSSEXES – A Kardashian-style 24/7 fly-on-the-wall reality show featuring Harry and Meghan as two very private people leading very private lives with lots of scenes involving their son Archie who they want to keep very private.
> 
> 7) FROGMORE COTTAGE – An enthralling Downtown Abbey style period drama set inside the lavish walls of the Sussexes' home in England where a huge privileged family spend the entire time plotting against each other and settling endless petty scores.
> 
> 8) IS MEGHAN OK? - A powerful mental health documentary filmed at the height of the pandemic when health workers earning a pittance were dying in their droves trying to save lives. It features Meghan, wearing a suit of armor once worn by Joan of Arc, sitting inside billionaire star Tyler Perry's Beverly Hills mansion, being served chilled champagne by a butler, as Harry washes her laundry, asking the one burning question everyone in the world was asking as Covid-19 ran riot – 'WHY DOES NOBODY ASK MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK?'
> 
> 9) WOKE ME UP BEFORE YOU GO GO - A musical about a ginger-haired teetotal kale-munching pop star named Harry Prince that falls for a fame-hungry B-list actress who forces him to abandon his family and country, wokes him to within an inch of his life, and then dumps him for Leonardo DiCaprio when he offers her co-star role in Titanic 2.
> 
> 10) I DON'T WANT TO BE A VACUOUS CELEBRITY ANY MORE, GET ME OUT OF HERE – Harry finally grows a pair big enough to escape his woke hell, comes home, plays naked billiards, re-joins the Army and marries one of the dim blonde Young Conservatives that his brother told him he should marry in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN'S sneak preview of Meghan and Harry's Netflix deal
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry have inspired me to now cast a crystal ball and look into the future to imagine the kind of hyper-woke productions  on Netflix from Megxit Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Years ago female models and actresses would go on go-sees or castings and the following notes would be written against their names, either 'girl-next-door' (or too GND) meaning too plain/ordinary or 'exotic' (or too exotic) meaning foreign/unusual. Either meant you didn't get the job and neither were complimentary.  This is why I have some sympathy for MM wanting to fit in in terms of her acting career, even to the point of having plastic surgery and shouldn't be ridiculed for it. 

The word exotic has never been exclusively about WOC, in Europe they used the term to cover all non-Western Europeans, this was when the threat was from the East, even a name could be too 'exotic' to give a baby or meant this was not a girl to date (as discussed at length in Döblin's Berlin Alexanderplatz 1929).


----------



## marietouchet

A snippet from the Times , paid subscription so link would not work , top notch British news, not tabloid
two articles this week, the first is on the suit about photo with baby carrier in Canada 
the writer refers mostly to the Duchess, and lapses into her first name only once, then calling  her just Meghan, while the terms Prince Harry and Master Archie are used 
typical of British use of titles, H was born a Prince, not Meghan, nor Archie , they mostly use Meghans title of Duchess
so yes, she is referenced in a different manner than her husband and her son, not discrimination, just the existing convoluted system of titles


----------



## marietouchet

Another Times article where the highlighted part is typical of British journalism , it gives numbers about their finances, but no editorial comments , kind of typical lead  them to knowledge Journalism  (hoping the readers will pull the correct conclusion)
the little blurb says so much in so few inches 
when I did the snip I failed to notice the right at the left, that Edward’s Ardent productions ws closed at such a late date, I left that bit in 
so, these were two articles, just this week, from the mainstream British press, compare to accounts in the Daily Mail


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

How do they even continue to finance all of these lawsuits? Geez. The article makes a good point... if she saw the paparazzi and carried on, in a PUBLIC park, how can she even argue her privacy was infringed upon? Is this not an open and shut case in Canadian law?


----------



## Emeline

*Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month*









						Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month
					

LOS ANGELES—Confirming reports of their joint foray into the entertainment industry, an excited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced Thursday they had signed a deal with Netflix to access thousands of films and TV shows for just $8.99 a month. “We couldn’t be more pleased to share that we’re...




					www.theonion.com
				




Can't. Stop. Laughing.


----------



## Genie27

Emeline said:


> *Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES—Confirming reports of their joint foray into the entertainment industry, an excited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced Thursday they had signed a deal with Netflix to access thousands of films and TV shows for just $8.99 a month. “We couldn’t be more pleased to share that we’re...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theonion.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't. Stop. Laughing.


Me neither.......................................


----------



## chicinthecity777

How is the privacy they so craved working out for them? Their "sources" couldn't stop talking to the press for a minute. How can anybody not see through this hypocrisy???

Am I the only one who has absolutely no interest in seeing any photos of that family?


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> *She is hoping to get enough money to pay for the Executive Membership card at Costco so she can get in/out and buy toilet paper for the 16 bathrooms.*
> 
> Or maybe the pap agency didn't give her the amount of money agreed upon and this is her way of getting it.








lanasyogamama said:


> From the Onion. The comments on the Facebook post are great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle’s Netflix Deal Plans
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Markle signed a multiyear deal with Netflix to produce a range of programming highlighting issues they care about. The Onion offers a first look into the royal couple’s Netflix deal plans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theonion.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4838371


'Game Of No Throne'









Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm still laughing at the idea of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan going on TV to tell "average" folk how to pull themselves up by their boot strings and live better lives.  It boggles the mind, not to mention the incongruity that either of them knows a thing about "average" folk.









marietouchet said:


> Another Times article where the highlighted part is typical of British journalism , it gives numbers about their finances, but no editorial comments , kind of typical lead  them to knowledge Journalism  (hoping the readers will pull the correct conclusion)
> the little blurb says so much in so few inches
> when I did the snip I failed to notice the right at the left, that Edward’s Ardent productions ws closed at such a late date, I left that bit in
> so, these were two articles, just this week, from the mainstream British press, compare to accounts in the Daily Mail
> 
> View attachment 4838737


That's a crazy amount of money going out every month... and especially the $40k a MONTH for 30 years!!!!


----------



## lalame

Lounorada said:


> That's a crazy amount of money going out every month... and especially the $40k a MONTH for 30 years!!!!
> View attachment 4838764



And that's before taxes or maintenance! Though ya know, these people live in a different world. That's probably not that much money for them when they have endless safety nets.


----------



## papertiger

Emeline said:


> *Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES—Confirming reports of their joint foray into the entertainment industry, an excited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced Thursday they had signed a deal with Netflix to access thousands of films and TV shows for just $8.99 a month. “We couldn’t be more pleased to share that we’re...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theonion.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't. Stop. Laughing.



Basically it's a free advert


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> Isn't Katherine .. what? .. his 5th wife???  I think I said this before, but a dear friend of mine who's ex-husband was a famous rock musician, had a party where his band was celebrating the drop of a new record.  Well, David was there and absolutely hated the fact that he wasn't getting "enough attention" and then starts to proceed to sit down at their piano telling everyone to "shut up" and hear "real music"!  Bottom line, he is a major-league pr!ck!  As long as Yolanda was calling him "her king", he was in the marriage .. but the minute the Lyme disease started kicking in, he wanted no part in that marriage and moved on .. that is how he is.


Oh my, thank you for this goss! The fact that David Foster met Katherine when she was 20 on American Idol, sang at her first wedding, then got with her years later even with the huge age difference is creepy to me. Katherine is very much a grifter, just like M.


----------



## mdcx

"Exotic" is usually used to mean "pretty and non-white" when describing people. Hence its offensiveness.

As far as no party season in LA at present, this is probably good for M in one way - no blind items or just direct quotes from people who met her in person and found her behaviour to be rude/grasping/selfish etc etc. She may miss the kid glove treatment she was given as a member of the BRF yet!


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Oh my, thank you for this goss! The fact that David Foster met Katherine when she was 20 on American Idol, sang at her first wedding, then got with her years later even with the huge age difference is creepy to me. Katherine is very much a grifter, just like M.


yes, she and her husband are both creepy to me


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they are invited, my guess is the real *A listers will get* the most screen time. The A listers insist on deference, respect, *best seats, most camera time*, etc. Otherwise, it isn’t worth their time to show up. *H&M  may get the invite, but they will be pushed aside when the talent shows up.*


Should we have a betting contest? I bet that if MM & H will not get front row seats, they will bring their own chairs and photographers. There is no way they will not get all the limelight they are entitled to.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> It's the calling out "featuring normal people" that is off-putting... when your audience is said "normal people"!


but we need to understand that "normal" people aren't as smart or as "woke" as Meghan.....we need her to guide us


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Well, as we all suspected some time back, how much you want to bet that H&M will be showing up for those Oscar & Emmy parties?!?!


I'm sure you're right.  Makes me even happier I stopped watch that drivel over 10 years ago!


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Isn't Katherine .. what? .. his 5th wife???  I think I said this before, but a dear friend of mine who's ex-husband was a famous rock musician, had a party where his band was celebrating the drop of a new record.  Well, David was there and absolutely hated the fact that he wasn't getting "enough attention" and then starts to proceed to sit down at their piano telling everyone to "shut up" and hear "real music"!  Bottom line, he is a major-league pr!ck!  As long as Yolanda was calling him "her king", he was in the marriage .. but the minute the Lyme disease started kicking in, he wanted no part in that marriage and moved on .. that is how he is.


He certainly did not come across as anything but a massive ego on that show!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can this women never dress appropriately? Even in this probably edited picture I see a panty line.


Maybe she's hoping to get a (subtle, but still in your face) underwear deal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm still laughing at the idea of Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan going on TV to tell "average" folk how to pull themselves up by their boot strings and live better lives.  It boggles the mind, not to mention the incongruity that either of them knows a thing about "average" folk.


It also highlights their attitude of "we're up here", all you "normal, average" folks are "down there".


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's hoping to get a (subtle, but still in your face) underwear deal.


the duchess is above all that now I think


----------



## CarryOn2020

After looking at those racist comments, I began feeling sorry for MM, so I watched the old videos of her pre-wedding as well as with H. After watching those old videos, it occurred to me that she used the whole royal gig for all it was worth — with H’s encouragement and acceptance. Yes, they had this plannned. Yes, they have been disrespectful to QE and Charles.  I have no sympathy for them. Another observation: they both have aged and not in a good way. They look much older and much more haggard that just a few years ago.


----------



## Chanbal

Emeline said:


> *Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Excited Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Sign Deal With Netflix To Access Thousands Of Films, TV Shows For Just $8.99 A Month
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES—Confirming reports of their joint foray into the entertainment industry, an excited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced Thursday they had signed a deal with Netflix to access thousands of films and TV shows for just $8.99 a month. “We couldn’t be more pleased to share that we’re...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theonion.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't. Stop. Laughing.


I pay $12.99/month. Should I call Netflix and ask for the royal discount?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Should we have a betting contest? I bet that if MM & H will not get front row seats, they will bring their own chairs and photographers. There is no way they will not get all the limelight they are entitled to.



I could never bet against the A listers. They throw shade like no one else, especially to z listers. 
Wonder if they offer a masterclass in rising above the fray with style and aplomb?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  [I pay $12.99/month.]

That what‘s we paid before we cancelled several weeks ago.


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> Oh my, thank you for this goss! The fact that David Foster met Katherine when she was 20 on American Idol, sang at her first wedding, then got with her years later even with the huge age difference is creepy to me. Katherine is very much a grifter, just like M.


TOTALLY 100% agree, and word has it that she's in the process of building her 'meal ticket' (having a baby).  Honestly, at his age??? .. he would likely never see that kid become an adult.  Honestly, I can't even say how much I loathe women like this .. (her & MM)


----------



## VickyB

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's hoping to get a (subtle, but still in your face) underwear deal.


Duchess’s Dainties!!!!! meagan’s mischief?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Basically it's a free advert


Would they get a commission to bring new subscribers?


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> TOTALLY 100% agree, and word has it that she's in the process of building her 'meal ticket' (having a baby).  Honestly, at his age??? .. he would likely never see that kid become an adult.  Honestly, I can't even say how much I loathe women like this .. (her & MM)


I loathe women like this, as well as men that age who keep rebuilding families, often at the expense of the families they've already had!


----------



## purseinsanity

VickyB said:


> Duchess’s Dainties!!!!! meagan’s mischief?


The Tig Thong, Mspanx, Mmmmskims (because you know she's not original at all!), and my personal favorite: The Duchess' Meow...shall I go on?


----------



## purseinsanity

LOL my husband just asked me why in the world am I googling "words for underwear that start with 'M'"?


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Please share if you find a replacement, so I can 'sell it' to my kid. I rarely watch anything on Netflix.



IDK if any of these actually replace Netflix but they are free........Tubi, IMDB, Pluto
I'm currently rewatching Mad Men on IMDB
We're going to try the 30 day free trial that Hulu offers. They have a bundle with Disney and ESPN
And maybe the CBS all Access thru Prime
I suppose we could hook up the old DVD player as we have 100s but I prefer streaming. Makes it easier to zip through
Before the BF moved in I used to watch more YouTube than anything.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Extract from the book.  and


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> So what is happening with all the charities/companies they created, Archewell, Sussex Royal, Travalyst, MWX Foundation? Which one of them is the front for the production business?


I was wondering about this. It's like they announce a new cause every day but we never hear anything about it afterwards.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> I was wondering about this. It's like they announce a new cause every day but we never hear anything about it afterwards.


“What that old thing?  Never mind that, look at THIS!”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Extract from the book.  and
> View attachment 4839004



Aside from the ridiculous claim: after a drought a downpour really does not do much. In fact, the dried out land cannot soak up enough water quickly enough, so most of it ends up in flowing waters like rivers instead of groundwater reservoirs, and as soon as rain enters flowing waters it's effectively "lost" for irrigation. Just sayin'.

The saints should have finetuned their miracle.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I start to think Finding Freedom is a children's book... they mis-marketed it!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I pay $12.99/month. Should I call Netflix and ask for the royal discount?



Just tell them you think they should pay


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Would they get a commission to bring new subscribers?



You mean like 'introduce a friend'? If they still have any.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Markled?









						Netflix Inc. stock falls Thursday, underperforms market
					

Shares of Netflix Inc. shed 4.90% to $525.75 Thursday, on what proved to be an all-around poor trading session for the stock market, with the S&P 500 Index...




					www.marketwatch.com
				




NETFLIX INC.Stock , NFLX
516.05-9.70-1.84%
Pre-market
 Official Close 9/4/2020 
nas


----------



## CarryOn2020

The son of the next King of England:









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sign a £100million Netflix deal
					

Six months after they quit the Royal Family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have announced a mega-bucks deal to make TV series, films and children's programmes for Netflix.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







I know, I know, it’s tacky. I just couldn’t resist.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> IDK if any of these actually replace Netflix but they are free........Tubi, IMDB, Pluto
> I'm currently rewatching Mad Men on IMDB
> We're going to try the 30 day free trial that Hulu offers. They have a bundle with Disney and ESPN
> And maybe the CBS all Access thru Prime
> I suppose we could hook up the old DVD player as we have 100s but I prefer streaming. Makes it easier to zip through
> Before the BF moved in I used to watch more YouTube than anything.


Thanks @poopsie I will look into it. Mad Men is a great show, I may watch it again. Just finished Father Brown on Britbox.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Extract from the book.  and
> View attachment 4839004


Does anyone know ? Is that a real quote from the book ? 
it is too hilarious, surely Omid was not silly enough to write that


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The son of the next King of England:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sign a £100million Netflix deal
> 
> 
> Six months after they quit the Royal Family, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have announced a mega-bucks deal to make TV series, films and children's programmes for Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4839014
> 
> 
> 
> I know, I know, it’s tacky. I just couldn’t resist.


In the ever flutuating world of JCMH
yesterdays news said the deal was worth $150m, now its ales has plunged by 1/3 ? I am not investing in that stock market ...
jusy goes to show how reporters cannot seem to get things right

AND
the deal is Surely tied to performance, they might get $150m if things go outstanding, but they might lose money , or at least have the company fail to make enough to cover their expenses, if th8ngs go south


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> I start to think Finding Freedom is a children's book... they mis-marketed it!


Leave it to the British to turn the book into a comic TV series like, for example, "Are you being served?". I'm already anticipating many  .

John Inman would have made a great 'Harry'...


----------



## Mendocino

Chanbal said:


> Thanks @poopsie I will look into it. Mad Men is a great show, I may watch it again. Just finished Father Brown on Britbox.


I love Father Brown, especially the Flambeau episodes.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I was wondering about this. It's like they announce a new cause every day but we never hear anything about it afterwards.


Jack of all trades, master of none.


----------



## Chanbal

From their beloved and loyal Scobie-doo:
*"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are now 'operating in a way they have been desperate to for some time' after being 'held back by tradition and hierarchy' in the royal family, biographer claims*

Speaking on his podcast Heirpod, Omid Scobie said that since stepping back as working members of the royal family in March, *the couple had been 'thriving' and had 'taken their careers as philanthropists to a whole other level', *adding: 'It shows how much they were held back by tradition, hierarchy and stubbornness within the institution." 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-hierachy-royal-family-biographer-claims.html

Does Scobie-doo mean that MM&H took their careers as recipients of philanthropy to a whole other level?


----------



## Mendocino

Given the age of The Queen and our COVID-altered society, I think that we may see a regency in a few years. If we do perhaps Charles will be helping William take on the responsibilities of managing the Duchy of Cornwall more quickly than previously planned.

If this happens, then it's in H & M's best interests to have their financial ducks in a row because I believe William will put the needs of the Duchy and his obligations to The Crown before financially supporting H & M.

I thought about this before discovering the book described the layout of W & K's house. There is only one way the authors could have gotten that information. Such a betrayal.

Edited for punctuation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

*Will anyone watch Harry and Meghan on Netflix? Poll shows 64% of Brits are not interested at all*
And a poll suggests Harry and Meghan are going to have an uphill battle in getting people to tune into their programming, with only 3% of UK respondents saying they are ‘very interested’.










						Will anyone watch Harry and Meghan on Netflix? Poll shows 64% of Brits are not interested at all
					

A poll has revealed 64% of people are not at all interested in the royal couple's programming.




					www.yahoo.com
				




The single male vote must have been from the beloved Omid...


----------



## Staci_W

chicinthecity777 said:


> Extract from the book.  and
> View attachment 4839004


I think I threw up a little. Who would read that drivel? What writer would put their name on it? I'm embarrassed for Omid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> In the ever flutuating world of JCMH
> yesterdays news said the deal was worth $150m, now its ales has plunged by 1/3 ? I am not investing in that stock market ...
> jusy goes to show how reporters cannot seem to get things right
> 
> AND
> the deal is Surely tied to performance, they might get $150m if things go outstanding, but they might lose money , or at least have the company fail to make enough to cover their expenses, if th8ngs go south



My understanding is they have not been paid anything so far. I think, but could be wrong, the _deal_ works like this:
— whatever show they put together, it must be shown to Netflix who maintains ownership of the ideas, etc. If the show is a success, great. Everyone gets paid. If Netflix decides the show will be a flop, Netflix archives the show, no money has changed hands. If Netflix decides to ‘rework’ the idea and that show succeeds, Netflix gets all the monies.

Oh and the best part, Netflix will expect them to promote all kinds of shows. With smiles on their faces. In other words, Netflix owns them from now on. IMO, they traded one gilded cage for another. QE, Charles and the team ought to be horrified. Please correct me as needed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Staci_W said:


> I think I threw up a little. Who would read that drivel? What writer would put their name on it? I'm embarrassed for Omid.



Not embarrassed at all, not me. He was paid for this stuff. He knew what he was doing.  I’m guessing they collaborated with OS. Positive or negative, they wanted the publicity. They certainly have kept people talking about them. To be sure, it’s a Faustian bargain, stay tuned, The H&M show is not over yet.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> In the ever flutuating world of JCMH
> yesterdays news said the deal was worth $150m, *now its ales has plunged by 1/3* ? I am not investing in that stock market ...
> jusy goes to show how reporters cannot seem to get things right
> 
> AND
> the deal is Surely tied to performance, they might get $150m if things go outstanding, but they might lose money , or at least have the company fail to make enough to cover their expenses, if th8ngs go south



The deal is quoted in the U.S. papers in American dollars at $150 million, but in the UK they are quoting that it's worth around £100 million in British pounds, though it should be closer to £125 million for the exchange rate to work out correctly. But, it's really doubtful the deal is worth anywhere around $150 million. That kind of money is reserved for massively successful writers/producers like Shonda Rhimes with proven track records of major hits.  She got $150 million apparently. The estimate that I saw a day or so ago is that Harry and MM's deal is likely around $2 million. That was in the NY Post/Page 6.  Pretty much impossible to know how much the deal actually is worth, but it is likely way, way less than $150 million and will be highly dependent on their producing something that Netflix actually wants to air.  

And, the fellow in the London Times article posted a few pages back said that Netflix pays for either talent or access, and MM and Harry are being paid for their access to the "upper reaches of British society and around the world".   Hilarious.  Pretty sure that the "upper reaches of British society" will take their cue from the Queen and Charles and William.  I doubt you'll be able to persuade Will and Kate to show up at the UK premiere of whatever Netflix show Harry and MM are pushing. They'll have a "schedule conflict".


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I loathe women like this, as well as men that age who keep rebuilding families, often at the expense of the families they've already had!


You are SO right, and yes .. oftentimes, much to the detriment of the families that were there way before.  Uggh ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> And, the fellow in the London Times article posted a few pages back said that Netflix pays for either talent or access, and MM and Harry are being paid for their access to the "upper reaches of British society and around the world".



I have a lingering feeling that the upper reaches of British society would a) rather side with the BRF and b) have no desire to risk being featured in another tell-all book, so they'll want to keep their distance.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *Will anyone watch Harry and Meghan on Netflix? Poll shows 64% of Brits are not interested at all*
> And a poll suggests Harry and Meghan are going to have an uphill battle in getting people to tune into their programming, with only 3% of UK respondents saying they are ‘very interested’.
> View attachment 4839126
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will anyone watch Harry and Meghan on Netflix? Poll shows 64% of Brits are not interested at all
> 
> 
> A poll has revealed 64% of people are not at all interested in the royal couple's programming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The single male vote must have been from the beloved Omid...


so total 12 percent who will likely watch - at least once.  doesn't sound like a winner for netflix to me


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Markled?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Inc. stock falls Thursday, underperforms market
> 
> 
> Shares of Netflix Inc. shed 4.90% to $525.75 Thursday, on what proved to be an all-around poor trading session for the stock market, with the S&P 500 Index...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marketwatch.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NETFLIX INC.Stock , NFLX
> 516.05-9.70-1.84%
> Pre-market
> Official Close 9/4/2020
> nas


HA HA HA HA .. and will it continue to fall?!?!?!  Thanks for a great laugh this morning!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA HA .. and will it continue to fall?!?!?!  Thanks for a great laugh this morning!


seriously though, do we think this is connected to them signing H&M?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> seriously though, do we think this is connected to them signing H&M?


No, I don't .. but there is a LOT of competition in that space and will continue to more as time goes on.  It does; however, push Netflix to be very choosy on what they put their money on, so if H&M don't come up with content that Netflix deems worthy, then their "whompin'" deal will fail to be so big ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> No, I don't .. but there is a LOT of competition in that space and will continue to more as time goes on.  It does; however, push Netflix to be very choosy on what they put their money on, so if H&M don't come up with content that Netflix deems worthy, then their "whompin'" deal will fail to be so big ..


would be fun to blame them though


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> seriously though, do we think this is connected to them signing H&M?


Unlikely. The market has been down in general but Netflix's fall was indeed bigger than the index fall.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> Unlikely. The market has been down in general but Netflix's fall was indeed bigger than the index fall.


.. yup, but as Netflix is publicly traded, you know that those stockholders truly hold the purse strings!  I agree with many here who have said that H&M likely got more like $2m versus the £ 100 or $150m that the "news" is reporting.  However, if H&M do have a big clunker first-time out, that may be it for them .. there is no such thing as "Angel $$$" any more, these investors wan't double-digit returns nowadays.


----------



## poopsie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Unlikely. The market has been down in general but Netflix's fall was indeed bigger than the index fall.



I Googled Netflix Meghan Harry cancellation and got a slew of responses. They all said basically the same thing but  the coverage was there


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> so total 12 percent who will likely watch - at least once.  doesn't sound like a winner for netflix to me


Did you see the size of the 'sample'? LMAO


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> I Googled Netflix Meghan Harry cancellation and got a slew of responses. They all said basically the same thing but  the coverage was there


Yes!
*








						Netflix viewers cancel subscription after deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry's new deal with Netflix has led some fans to cancel their subscriptions with the streaming service.




					www.express.co.uk
				











						Netflix viewers cancel subscription after deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry - Usa Daily Express
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who quit royal duties earlier this year for a new life of financial freedom in America, have secured a multi-million pound agreement with Netflix to make their own shows. But some people took to Twitter and claimed they were cancelling their subscriptions after...




					usadailyexpress.com
				











						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: Netflix viewers cancel subscription after deal | Royal | News - financial-press
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who quit royal duties earlier this year for a...




					financial-press.uk
				



*


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Did you see the size of the 'sample'? LMAO


200 people


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> 200 people



No, I did not vote. 

Surely behind palace walls, numerous phone calls and emails have been sent these last 48 hours. 
Counting on “OS” to keep us informed.


----------



## chicinthecity777

poopsie said:


> Did you see the size of the 'sample'? LMAO





Chanbal said:


> 200 people


I think one of the biggest pollsters in the UK called YouGov did a similar poll with a much large sample base had a similar result.


----------



## poopsie

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think one of the biggest pollsters in the UK called YouGov did a similar poll with a much large sample base had a similar result.


I always look at the sample parameters. I wish that age of respondents was included as I think younger people would have a more favorable view of them.
Cosmetic sample surveys always crack me up. They are invariably small, like 20 women, and include the disclaimer that the miraculous results touted are not typical. They never mention the age etc of the participants. They remind me of the adverts for shape wear showing young thin models.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> seriously though, do we think this is connected to them signing H&M?


The market took a dive that day. Don't think we can totally blame the Markles for this. But you never know.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Markled?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Inc. stock falls Thursday, underperforms market
> 
> 
> Shares of Netflix Inc. shed 4.90% to $525.75 Thursday, on what proved to be an all-around poor trading session for the stock market, with the S&P 500 Index...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marketwatch.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NETFLIX INC.Stock , NFLX
> 516.05-9.70-1.84%
> Pre-market
> Official Close 9/4/2020
> nas



Haha all tech stocks took a beating this week. This deal is so small in the grand scheme of Netflix finances I’m sure it wouldn’t register any effect on the actual stock price.

With regard to deal size, I bet it’s somewhere in between $2m and $150m. $2m seems too low to me for what Netflix would pay for let’s face it, a global celebrity. That sounds like a deal for a complete newcomer without any built in fame.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> No, I don't .. but there is a LOT of competition in that space and will continue to more as time goes on.  It does; however, push Netflix to be very choosy on what they put their money on, so if H&M don't come up with content that Netflix deems worthy, then their "whompin'" deal will fail to be so big ..


Netflix is looking for their next House of Cards (sans molester) or Stranger Things, I doubt these 2 can come up with anything close.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> would be fun to blame them though


Sure would. 

Maybe investors are seeing H&M's humongous deal (if they are to be believed, which they should not) as Netflix scraping the bottom of the barrel for content.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Undoubtedly, Netflix is hoping H will bring in those stellar British actors/friends of his (as if)
The only problem - most of those stellar British actors have too self-respect to sign on for a Netflix deal. They put their love of their craft way above the cold hard cash. Wait, wait a minute, in post-Covid times, maybe not.

Perhaps Julien Fellowes can spin out another Downton Abby-ish show. He has at least 4 that I know of. 
The ones I have seen: Monarch of the Glen, DnAb, Belgravia, The English Game.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly, *Netflix is hoping H will bring in those stellar British actors/friends of his*.
> The only problem - most of those stellar British actors have too self-respect to sign on for a Netflix deal. They put their love of their craft way above the cold hard cash. Wait, wait a minute, in post-Covid times, maybe not.
> 
> Perhaps Julien Fellowes can spin out another Downton Abby-ish show. He has at least 4 that I know of.


The other problem is that they've likely already been Markled.


----------



## csshopper

In other media news, it's the Fading Finding Freedom in Bookseller lists.

Only one month after publication, they are completely missing from the NYT Best Seller Non Fiction list 1-15, September 13, 2020 per information on line. Meantime, Michelle's book is still on the list after 90, yes 90, weeks. 

Amazon, which caught on to a manipulation of reviews by their besotted fans, shows the book ranked *#738* in Hardback and *#1508* in Kindle sales.

And at Barnes and Nobel it continues to slide, currently at *#396*

 Can't find a list for rankings in Bargain Books, yet.


----------



## Chanbal

*Will Meghan Markle scoop the Oscar she's dreamt of since she was seven? Former Suits actress hopes her Netflix deal with land her an Academy Award*
‘An Oscar is all Meg has ever wanted,’ said one long-time friend. ‘She used to practise her acceptance speech in the mirror with a hairbrush when she was a kid of seven. She would also practise her signature in preparation for all the autographs she would give. Her absolute dream was to achieve the EGOT – the grand slam of showbusiness – which is winning an Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony award.








						Will Meghan Markle scoop Oscar she's dreamt of since she was seven?
					

In addition to funding her lavish lifestyle, The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Meghan is hoping that the deal she and Harry have struck with Netflix could land her childhood dream - an Academy Award.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




To help MM finding her dream, here is a link for Crown Awards, they will take care of her needs:








						Star & Achievement Trophies | Victory Deluxe Trophies
					

Crown's Gold Victory Trophy Is The Perfect Way To Award All Those Deserving! This Classy And Elegant Award Is Sure To Stand Out at Your Awards Presentation.  Additional Info: FREE Engraving Up To 40 Characters!




					www.crownawards.com


----------



## poopsie

Totally OT but it is 111 at my house 
It is usually hotter in LA.......... wonder how those flowers they planted are doing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Totally OT but it is 111 at my house
> It is usually hotter in LA.......... *wonder how those flowers they planted are doing*


This is what I call a concerned citizen. Or a bored one due to Covid restrictions. 
I can't believe that I'm reading an article about the Oscar dreams  of MM on a beautiful Saturday, when I was supposed to be on a faraway beach...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is what I call a concerned citizen. Or a bored one due to Covid restrictions.
> I can't believe that I'm reading an article about the Oscar dreams  of MM on a beautiful Saturday, when I was supposed to be on a faraway beach...



Sorry to hear about interrupted plans. Same thing for me. It stuns me that I have felt so inspired to add my thoughts to this thread. Usually, I just lurk. Love reading this one, it’s the best one on the web.

Guessing H&M are inside not worrying about the flowers. On their way to SunshineS, they will see them.
If wilted, probably won’t stop by. They made the children water the plants.

RE: Oscar - didn’t we all practice our speeches when we were 7?

ETA: EGOT is her only option. A Pulitzer is out of her league


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly, Netflix is hoping H will bring in those stellar British actors/friends of his (as if)
> The only problem - most of those stellar British actors have too self-respect to sign on for a Netflix deal. They put their love of their craft way above the cold hard cash. Wait, wait a minute, in post-Covid times, maybe not.
> 
> Perhaps Julien Fellowes can spin out another Downton Abby-ish show. He has at least 4 that I know of.
> The ones I have seen: Monarch of the Glen, DnAb, Belgravia, The English Game.



I think NFlx is thinking more fly on the wall access all areas to M&H's 'normal people'

S1:E1. All QEII's Tiaras and Crown Jewels, all modelled by MM naturally

S1:E2. Exclusive access to Princess Michael of Kent's jewellery collection

S1.E3. TV special: At home with Shelly and Barra (a Netflix all-star collaboration M&B X M&H)

S1.E4 Inside Kate and Will's home, floor-plan and access-points explained in-depth

S1.E5 How to style coordinating revenge outfits

S1.E6 Suffering with Narcism, survivors guide to thriving (not just existing)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sorry to hear about interrupted plans. Same thing for me. It stuns me that I have felt so inspired to add my thoughts to this thread. Usually, I just lurk. Love reading this one, it’s the best one on the web.
> 
> Guessing H&M are inside not worrying about the flowers. On their way to SunshineS, they will see them.
> If wilted, probably won’t stop by. They made the children water the plants.
> 
> RE: Oscar - didn’t we all practice our speeches when we were 7?
> 
> ETA: EGOT is her only option. A Pulitzer is out of her league


I guess many of us have interrupted plans that we hope to resume after covid, but it is taking so long... I'm also surprised for being so inspired to post here, but this thread is a lot of fun. Going back to the flowers, I guess MM&H forgot them immediately after the last photo... They look like those pop-up shops, I'm waiting to see where is going to be the next one.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I guess many of us have interrupted plans that we hope to resume after covid, but it is taking so long... I'm also surprised for being so inspired to post here, but this thread is a lot of fun. Going back to the flowers, I guess MM&H forgot them immediately after the last photo... They look like those pop-up shops, I'm waiting to see where is going to be the next one.


She forgot about the Forget Me Nots


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> This is what I call a concerned citizen. Or a bored one due to Covid restrictions.
> I can't believe that I'm reading an article about the Oscar dreams  of MM on a beautiful Saturday, when I was supposed to be on a faraway beach...


Well, I guess I would now fall into the former.
This is what I saw leaving work


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> In other media news, it's the Fading Finding Freedom in Bookseller lists.
> 
> Only one month after publication, they are completely missing from the NYT Best Seller Non Fiction list 1-15, September 13, 2020 per information on line. Meantime, Michelle's book is still on the list after 90, yes 90, weeks.
> 
> Amazon, which caught on to a manipulation of reviews by their besotted fans, shows the book ranked *#738* in Hardback and *#1508* in Kindle sales.
> 
> And at Barnes and Nobel it continues to slide, currently at *#396*
> 
> Can't find a list for rankings in Bargain Books, yet.


because Michelle has someting to say


----------



## poopsie

And this is in the hills behind our place


Water tanker Helo just went over a few minutes ago


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Well, I guess I would now fall into the former.
> This is what I saw leaving work
> View attachment 4839654


I know....we can see it from our house....concerning


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Well, I guess I would now fall into the former.
> This is what I saw leaving work
> View attachment 4839654


Fires, covid... this has been a terrible year. Hope you are all OK.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Fires, covid... this has been a terrible year. Hope you are all OK.


We should be
We learned a lot from 2003 Cedar Fire. 
@sdkitty  were you here for that?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Those are close. Hope it and the heatwave end soon. Y’ all take good care. Mother Nature is not messing around. We dodged Hurricane Laura and Jojo, but it’s high season for hurricanes now.  Not sure we can dodge 3 in a row. Still, hoping for a quiet season. 

Wonder if some of those helicopters flying over H&M’s place were firefighters, not paps. Phisht - How conceited they are to think it’s always about them.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> We should be
> We learned a lot from 2003 Cedar Fire.
> @sdkitty  were you here for that?


yes
a few people we knew lost homes
really tough


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> And this is in the hills behind our place
> View attachment 4839663
> 
> Water tanker Helo just went over a few minutes ago





poopsie said:


> And this is in the hills behind our place
> View attachment 4839663
> 
> Water tanker Helo just went over a few minutes ago


from our window


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Totally OT but it is 111 at my house
> It is usually hotter in LA.......... wonder how those flowers they planted are doing


 From the Weather Channel Montecito web page a few minutes ago.

.RED FLAG WARNING IN EFFECT FROM FROM 6 PM THIS EVENING THROUGH 10 PM MONDAY EVENING FOR THE SANTA BARBARA COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND SOUTH COAST DUE TO GUSTY SUNDOWNER WINDS, LOW RELATIVE HUMIDITY, AND VERY HOT TEMPERATURES... ...RED FLAG WARNING IN EFFECT FROM 6 PM SUNDAY EVENING THROUGH 10 PM MONDAY EVENING FOR THE LOS ANGELES AND VENTURA COUNTY MOUNTAINS DUE TO GUSTY NORTH WINDS, LOW RELATIVE HUMIDITY, AND VERY HOT TEMPERATURES... .Strong high pressure will continue to bring a dangerous heat wave and low humidities to Southwest California through at least Labor Day. The very hot and unstable conditions will bring a significant threat of large plume dominated fires during this time. Gusty Sundowner winds across southern Santa Barbara county and gusty northerly winds in the Los Angeles and Ventura county mountains (especially near the Interstate 5 corridor) will likely bring critical fire weather conditions to these areas, resulting in the issuance of the Red Flag Warning. The critically dry fuels in these areas will result in a greater threat of fire ignitions as well as rapid fire growth. With an extremely hot air mass in place, the development of Sundowner winds will likely push temperatures even hotter across the south coast of Santa Barbara County and adjacent foothills, where temperatures of 95 to 110 degrees and humidities between 8 and 15 percent will be likely in the foothills and wind prone coastal areas.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

@poopsie I'm thinking it was 2007 that the city shut down and several friends lost homes?


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> From the Weather Channel Montecito web page a few minutes ago.
> 
> .RED FLAG WARNING IN EFFECT FROM FROM 6 PM THIS EVENING THROUGH 10 PM MONDAY EVENING FOR THE SANTA BARBARA COUNTY MOUNTAINS AND SOUTH COAST DUE TO GUSTY SUNDOWNER WINDS, LOW RELATIVE HUMIDITY, AND VERY HOT TEMPERATURES... ...RED FLAG WARNING IN EFFECT FROM 6 PM SUNDAY EVENING THROUGH 10 PM MONDAY EVENING FOR THE LOS ANGELES AND VENTURA COUNTY MOUNTAINS DUE TO GUSTY NORTH WINDS, LOW RELATIVE HUMIDITY, AND VERY HOT TEMPERATURES... .Strong high pressure will continue to bring a dangerous heat wave and low humidities to Southwest California through at least Labor Day. The very hot and unstable conditions will bring a significant threat of large plume dominated fires during this time. Gusty Sundowner winds across southern Santa Barbara county and gusty northerly winds in the Los Angeles and Ventura county mountains (especially near the Interstate 5 corridor) will likely bring critical fire weather conditions to these areas, resulting in the issuance of the Red Flag Warning. The critically dry fuels in these areas will result in a greater threat of fire ignitions as well as rapid fire growth. With an extremely hot air mass in place, the development of Sundowner winds will likely push temperatures even hotter across the south coast of Santa Barbara County and adjacent foothills, where temperatures of 95 to 110 degrees and humidities between 8 and 15 percent will be likely in the foothills and wind prone coastal areas.


Dear Harry
Welcome to the hot mess that is California. 
Please heed the warnings and prepare accordingly. I know that you think that these things could never happen to you but they can. 
Now might be a good time for you all  to pack up and head back to Tyler's. Please remember to take the dogs. 
Don't wait for the evacuation notices. It can get very hectic with everyone trying to get out at once. Sometimes not everyone does.
The fire by my house is a few miles east but as the smoke is blowing out over the ocean  if the winds kick up it will be heading my way. I've already got the cat carriers ready along with some valuables. Probably not going to have to go but better ready than not.


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Dear Harry
> Welcome to the hot mess that is California.
> Please heed the warnings and prepare accordingly. I know that you think that these things could never happen to you but they can.
> Now might be a good time for you all  to pack up and head back to Tyler's. Please remember to take the dogs.
> Don't wait for the evacuation notices. It can get very hectic with everyone trying to get out at once. Sometimes not everyone does.
> The fire by my house is a few miles east but as the smoke is blowing out over the ocean  if the winds kick up it will be heading my way. I've already got the cat carriers ready along with some valuables. Probably not going to have to go but better ready than not.


Poopsie, holding good thoughts for you. I'm in Wine Country, dealt with this 2 weeks ago. Scary times and the fear is of a fast wind driven fire. Have been dealing with these issues for over 50 years as I was first in S.Cal and evacuated twice because of Santa Ana winds. Never gets any easier. I'm an "OG" in more ways than years of membership in tPF.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> @poopsie I'm thinking it was 2007 that the city shut down and several friends lost homes?


2007 was the Witch Creek fire. Wasn't it behind Mt. Miguel? Had a coworker lose their house in that one. She rescued turtles and they all perished.  
Cedar fire  2003 was way worse for us. 
I hate that this seems to be the new normal. 
I don't recall it being so bad when MM was living here before. She chose a dangerous area with lots of undeveloped acreage.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Poopsie, holding good thoughts for you. I'm in Wine Country, dealt with this 2 weeks ago. Scary times and the fear is of a fast wind driven fire. Have been dealing with these issues for over 50 years as I was first in S.Cal and evacuated twice because of Santa Ana winds. Never gets any easier. I'm an "OG" in more ways than years of membership in tPF.


Oh geeze you all have really had a rough go of it these past few years. Just awful


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> 2007 was the Witch Creek fire. Wasn't it behind Mt. Miguel? Had a coworker lose their house in that one. She rescued turtles and they all perished.
> Cedar fire  2003 was way worse for us.
> I hate that this seems to be the new normal.
> I don't recall it being so bad when MM was living here before. She chose a dangerous area with lots of undeveloped acreage.


I thought it was 07 but maybe it was the cedar fire.  Everyone in the county was told to stay home - not go to work.  Ashes everywhere.  I had friends in north country whose homes burned and one in lakeside.  in each case the fire took their house and left the neighbors intact


----------



## bag-mania

Harry and Meghan are not worried about fires. They are enjoying the In-N-Out Burger and getting publicity over it.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Can't Get Enough of This Fast-Food Restaurant*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry seem to be enjoying the luxuries of the west coast. ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new go-to spot on their 90-minute drive from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara is In-N-Out Burger.

The couple has stopped by a few times on their way home from meetings and appearances. Last Monday, after the preschool garden planting, they stopped at the drive thru and all of the employees nearly lost their minds. They were all yelling and laughing, and could not believe Meghan and Harry were ordering burgers from the drive thru. Rumor has it, Harry has already learned about the secret menu.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Have a Favorite Fast-Food Restaurant
					

ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have a new go-to spot on their drive from L.A. to Santa Barbara.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> I thought it was 07 but maybe it was the cedar fire.  Everyone in the county was told to stay home - not go to work.  Ashes everywhere.  I had friends in north country whose homes burned and one in lakeside.  in each case the fire took their house and left the neighbors intact


Yes! Like tornadoes!
Welp, according to Google weather it is currently 78 in Montecito.  Just clicked down to 99 here.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are not worried about fires. They are enjoying the In-N-Out Burger and getting publicity over it.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Can't Get Enough of This Fast-Food Restaurant*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry seem to be enjoying the luxuries of the west coast. ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new go-to spot on their 90-minute drive from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara is In-N-Out Burger.
> 
> The couple has stopped by a few times on their way home from meetings and appearances. Last Monday, after the preschool garden planting, they stopped at the drive thru and all of the employees nearly lost their minds. They were all yelling and laughing, and could not believe Meghan and Harry were ordering burgers from the drive thru. Rumor has it, Harry has already learned about the secret menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Have a Favorite Fast-Food Restaurant
> 
> 
> ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have a new go-to spot on their drive from L.A. to Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Since when is it a 90 minute drive??????
Assuming that they drive


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Yes! Like tornadoes!
> Welp, according to Google weather it is currently 78 in Montecito.  Just clicked down to 99 here.


I think it was 90 even at the beach today


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are not worried about fires. They are enjoying the In-N-Out Burger and getting publicity over it.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Can't Get Enough of This Fast-Food Restaurant*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry seem to be enjoying the luxuries of the west coast. ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new go-to spot on their 90-minute drive from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara is In-N-Out Burger.
> 
> The couple has stopped by a few times on their way home from meetings and appearances. Last Monday, after the preschool garden planting, they stopped at the drive thru and all of the employees nearly lost their minds. They were all yelling and laughing, and could not believe Meghan and Harry were ordering burgers from the drive thru. Rumor has it, Harry has already learned about the secret menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Have a Favorite Fast-Food Restaurant
> 
> 
> ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have a new go-to spot on their drive from L.A. to Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


*Next it’ll be pap walks at gas station parking lots. *


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> *Next it’ll be pap walks at gas station parking lots. *


and those gas station employees will be really excited


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> *Next it’ll be pap walks at gas station parking lots. *





poopsie said:


> Mmmmmmmmm...............not yet.
> The day that MEMEMEMEMEghan is pap snapped strolling through some random 7/11 parking lot in the middle of the night wearing trash bag chic is the day she will have merely caught up to them.
> IDK what it will take to actually *surpass*  them. PMK is the best. And while it is apparent that MEMEMEMEMEghan is following Kris' playbook right down the line she will NEVER be able to surpass her until she is capable of coming up with an original idea



GMTA! 
You know it's only a matter of time


----------



## pukasonqo

Thinking of you guys during this fire season, last year we started having fires as early as July all the way til January 
Keep safe, seems to be getting dryer and dryer both in the USA and Oz


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> Since when is it a 90 minute drive??????
> Assuming that they drive



That sounds normal to me on a weekend.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

The Creek fire started last night and flared up today. It's very worrisome. ~1,000 people were trapped by Mammoth Pool reservoir and it's hard to tell current status, looks like ~150 are still there.  https://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article245524785.html
I live hundreds of miles away but the winds are bringing the smoke in thick to my area.


----------



## csshopper

dney, post: 34034511, member: 6137"]
The Creek fire started last night and flared up today. It's very worrisome. ~1,000 people were trapped by Mammoth Pool reservoir and it's hard to tell current status, looks like ~150 are still there.  https://www.com/news/local/article245524785.html
I live hundreds of miles away but the winds are bringing the smoke in thick to my area.
[/QUOTE]smoke from our fires 2 weeks ago was measured 600 miles out in the Pacific Ocean.
Don’t mean to hijack the thread, but for our non California PF members, it may put into perspective the intensity of our fire vulnerability all over the state. and MM and JCMH are not immune. If not for her craving for fame and supposed fortune, the English countryside would seem much safer.


----------



## eunaddict

...what's wrong with waiting your turn to speak?! Especially when you're the most junior and newest member of the BRF in the interview.

ETA: I'd posted before I got to reading about the fires in California. From someone currently living in Australia (and buckling up for the yearly fire season)...I hope the heatwave ends, the fires get under control and y'all stay safe.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is the video in the latest law suit.


----------



## csshopper

She’s a mess of a mother. He looks like a movie prop that’s been thrust at her and she doesn’t know what to do with him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> She’s a mess of a mother. He looks like a movie prop that’s been thrust at her and she doesn’t know what to do with him.



I try to not pile judgement on parents, especially when I don't have kids on my own, but I have not seen one single picture or video where she appeared to be comfortable with him. And what about that weird video when visiting Desmond Tutu where she sank her fingernails into his chest when he didn't react the way she wanted him to? WTF.


----------



## Pessie

If there were an oscar for most ridiculously staged pap walk she‘d be a dead cert


----------



## Luvbolide

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is the video in the latest law suit.





She is something else!  How can there be a reasonable expectation of privacy when out walking in a public park?  Not to mention the fact that little Archie can hardly be said to have any damages - can’t even see his face.  Ridiculous!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Luvbolide said:


> She is something else!  How can there be a reasonable expectation of privacy when out walking in a public park?  Not to mention the fact that little Archie can hardly be said to have any damages - can’t even see his face.  Ridiculous!


Pure speculation here, could this all be one big publicity stunt? I mean she can't possibly win this, can she? She was visibly smiling in that video.


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> She is something else!  How can there be a reasonable expectation of privacy when out walking in a public park?  Not to mention the fact that little Archie can hardly be said to have any damages - can’t even see his face.  Ridiculous!


And, this was in January. It is obvious nine months later neither of them were harmed in any way.
She is trolling for $$$ to pay the mortgage.
There is absolutely nothing royal about this money grubbing opportunist!


----------



## drifter

apologies if this has been posted before:
https://pagesix.com/2020/09/03/insi...and-meghan-markles-reported-150m-netflix-pay/

by the way, someone's summarised all the freebies for us based on the bestseller finding freebies:
https://pagesix.com/2020/08/22/prince-harry-meghan-markle-got-millions-in-freebies-book-claims/


----------



## chicinthecity777

Well that didn't take long!

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser for wounded soldiers due to be shown on Amazon after signing £112million deal with rivals Netflix *









						Harry and Meghan pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser
					

The music and comedy show was set to be held in California next summer, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex planning to make speeches.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



Is there anything they wouldn't sell for money??? Like principles?


----------



## maryg1

Prince Philip 'shattered by Prince Harry’s decision to leave UK'
					

Prince Philip felt Prince Harry leaving the UK was settling for a dereliction of duty, accorning to the author of a new royal biography.




					www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk
				




Prince Philip doesn’t approve people who leave their duties, I do believe he’s livid


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> I think NFlx is thinking more fly on the wall access all areas to M&H's 'normal people'
> 
> S1:E1. All QEII's Tiaras and Crown Jewels, all modelled by MM naturally
> 
> S1:E2. Exclusive access to Princess Michael of Kent's jewellery collection
> 
> S1.E3. TV special: At home with Shelly and Barra (a Netflix all-star collaboration M&B X M&H)
> 
> S1.E4 Inside Kate and Will's home, floor-plan and access-points explained in-depth
> 
> S1.E5 How to style coordinating revenge outfits
> 
> S1.E6 Suffering with Narcism, survivors guide to thriving (not just existing)



Forward thinking for that tricky second season 

S2. E1 My mother Diana Part 1

S2. E2 My mother Diana Part 2

S2. E3  My mother Diana Part 3

S2. E4 My mother Diana Part 4

S2. E5 My mother Diana Part 5

S2. E6 My mother Diana Part 6



—-------------------------------------------------

I'd just like to add my voice to all those that are Impacted in any way to the current fires raging. I was there in 2007 and can still remember the smell of the smoke coming from the hillside, my eyes were streaming even though we must have been miles away.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well that didn't take long!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser for wounded soldiers due to be shown on Amazon after signing £112million deal with rivals Netflix *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser
> 
> 
> The music and comedy show was set to be held in California next summer, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex planning to make speeches.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there anything they wouldn't sell for money??? Like principles?


At first, I thought, oh they will just move the fundraiser over to Amazon ... which they may do ..
But the Amazon deal appears to be a personal for-profit deal, whereas I would have assumed (perhaps incorrectly) the original deal benefited a charitable organisation ...
Hmmm Invictus was the real feather in Prince Harry's cap ... sad to see its legacy tarnished


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

So Archie's purpose is two-fold: 1) He's Meghan's lifelong meal ticket to the BRF; 2) He's used to frame paps to generate lawsuits

And why quit the Invictus games fundraiser just because Amazon is involved? M&H still sponge off the BRF after they dumped them, so why can't they continue their relationship with Invictus?  Are M&H the only ones entitled to dump somebody and never the other way around? What happened to the stiff upper lip? What do these wounded vets owe H&M? Haven't they suffered enough?


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 4839872
> 
> 
> ...what's wrong with waiting your turn to speak?! Especially when you're the most junior and newest member of the BRF in the interview.
> 
> ETA: I'd posted before I got to reading about the fires in California. From someone currently living in Australia (and buckling up for the yearly fire season)...I hope the heatwave ends, the fires get under control and y'all stay safe.


she is just so annoying


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well that didn't take long!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser for wounded soldiers due to be shown on Amazon after signing £112million deal with rivals Netflix *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser
> 
> 
> The music and comedy show was set to be held in California next summer, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex planning to make speeches.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there anything they wouldn't sell for money??? Like principles?


”philanthropy” innit 


papertiger said:


> Forward thinking for that tricky second season
> 
> S2. E1 My mother Diana Part 1
> 
> S2. E2 My mother Diana Part 2
> 
> S2. E3  My mother Diana Part 3
> 
> S2. E4 My mother Diana Part 4
> 
> S2. E5 My mother Diana Part 5
> 
> S2. E6 My mother Diana Part 6
> 
> 
> 
> —-------------------------------------------------
> 
> I'd just like to add my voice to all those that are Impacted in any way to the current fires raging. I was there in 2007 and can still remember the smell of the smoke coming from the hillside, my eyes were streaming even though we must have been miles away.


I read a report earlier that they’re “in talks“ to do a Di documentary - about her “life and legacy“.  That this would be disgusting but not shocking says it all.  Pity her legacy involves her youngest son behaving like a complete sh!t


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> She is something else!  How can there be a reasonable expectation of privacy when out walking in a public park?  Not to mention the fact that little Archie can hardly be said to have any damages - can’t even see his face.  Ridiculous!





chicinthecity777 said:


> Pure speculation here, could this all be one big publicity stunt? I mean she can't possibly win this, can she? She was visibly smiling in that video.



Wasn’t this the pap stroll she took when she went back to Canada after she left Harry to face the music once Megxit was revealed? She had full eye contact and smiles for the camera the entire time. She called the paps herself or else was very happy they found her. If the photographer bothered her why was she beaming like she won the lottery?

But of course they must remind us every month or so just how in demand they are by the media and how persecuted they are by the paparazzi. Maybe they have a deal with their law firm that every 5th lawsuit is free.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> ”philanthropy” innit
> 
> I read a report earlier that they’re “in talks“ to do a Di documentary - about her “life and legacy“.  That this would be disgusting but not shocking says it all.  Pity her legacy involves her youngest son behaving like a complete sh!t


all this Diana stuff is starting to look kind of parasitic


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> At first, I thought, oh they will just move the fundraiser over to Amazon ... which they may do ..
> But the Amazon deal appears to be a personal for-profit deal, whereas I would have assumed (perhaps incorrectly) the original deal benefited a charitable organisation ...
> Hmmm Invictus was the real feather in Prince Harry's cap ... sad to see its legacy tarnished



Yes,................ Invictus  was a feather in _Harry's _ cap. Nothing to do with _her_. Therefore it must go


----------



## kemilia

pukasonqo said:


> Thinking of you guys during this fire season, last year we started having fires as early as July all the way til January
> Keep safe, seems to be getting dryer and dryer both in the USA and Oz


Here in the Chicago-land area, normally we have about 4 inches of rain in August, this year less than an inch. Yep, things are getting hotter and drier all over the planet. Very scary ...


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Here in the Chicago-land area, normally we have about 4 inches of rain in August, this year less than an inch. Yep, things are getting hotter and drier all over the planet. Very scary ...


but there's no global warming, right?


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> but there's no global warming, right?


You got that right!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> *Wasn’t this the pap stroll she took when she went back to Canada after she left Harry to face the music once Megxit was revealed? She had full eye contact and smiles for the camera the entire time. *She called the paps herself or else was very happy they found her. If the photographer bothered her why was she beaming like she won the lottery?
> 
> But of course they must remind us every month or so just how in demand they are by the media and how persecuted they are by the paparazzi. Maybe they have a deal with their law firm that every 5th lawsuit is free.


That's what I thought!


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Here in the Chicago-land area, normally we have about 4 inches of rain in August, this year less than an inch. Yep, things are getting hotter and drier all over the planet. Very scary ...



It depends on where you live. Here in Maryland we had just under 12 inches of rain in August. That is freakishly high. We normally have about 3 inches of rain in the summer months. The ground has been completely saturated for weeks and there have been falling trees from all the storms and soft, loose soil.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> It depends on where you live. Here in Maryland we had just under 12 inches of rain in August. That is freakishly high. We normally have about 3 inches of rain in the summer months. The ground has been completely saturated for weeks and there have been falling trees from all the storms and soft, loose soil.



yes that’s why the preferred term now is “climate change” since the phenomenon is about extremes not just warming. Some areas seem to get annual catastrophic tornadoes now.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> yes that’s why the preferred term now is “climate change” since the phenomenon is about extremes not just warming. Some areas seem to get annual catastrophic tornadoes now.


it's pretty scary - fires, floods, mudslides, hurricanes.....almost Biblical.  I don't have kids but still it seems only decent to want to care about the earth and future generations (not to mention bad things that are happening right now)


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well that didn't take long!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser for wounded soldiers due to be shown on Amazon after signing £112million deal with rivals Netflix *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan pull the plug on glittering Invictus Games fundraiser
> 
> 
> The music and comedy show was set to be held in California next summer, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex planning to make speeches.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there anything they wouldn't sell for money??? Like principles?



IMO, the Daily Mail is reaching. The fundraiser was scheduled for April... makes sense that they would cancel it due to coronavirus. Lots of concerts and other big events are getting canceled that far out since they take months and months to plan.

What does it have to do with Amazon or Netflix... that’s just where a recording or documentary about the event would have been shown. Defies logic that someone would cancel and event due to a change in how the recording is handled.

edit to add.. I read the invictus games had a budget of just $1.8m. I would hope Harry and Meghan kick in a ton of money after all these lucrative deals.


----------



## sdkitty

@poopsie  I just saw now that at least 10 homes burned....didn't know that.  and fire is zero percent contained.  Feel for those people and all the people with large animals trying to get out of there yesterday. Hope we never face that.  Our cats are Hell to get into a carrier.  the property we live on was a burn at one time (but due to that there are no trees on the property so I guess that's helpful).

and they're saying possible rolling blackouts.  hope that doesn't happen

Sorry for OT


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Well, I guess I would now fall into the former.
> This is what I saw leaving work
> View attachment 4839654


CRAP!!!!  I've seen this too many times out here and with the heat we are having?!?! .. no bueno!  But, at least we don't have (in addition to the heat) the Santa Ana winds because that is what creates (well - other than the homeless with their fires) the big fires out here.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Dear Harry
> Welcome to the hot mess that is California.
> Please heed the warnings and prepare accordingly. I know that you think that these things could never happen to you but they can.
> Now might be a good time for you all  to pack up and head back to Tyler's. Please remember to take the dogs.
> Don't wait for the evacuation notices. It can get very hectic with everyone trying to get out at once. Sometimes not everyone does.
> The fire by my house is a few miles east but as the smoke is blowing out over the ocean  if the winds kick up it will be heading my way. I've already got the cat carriers ready along with some valuables. Probably not going to have to go but better ready than not.


OMG stay safe!  How scary.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are not worried about fires. They are enjoying the In-N-Out Burger and getting publicity over it.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Can't Get Enough of This Fast-Food Restaurant*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry seem to be enjoying the luxuries of the west coast. ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new go-to spot on their 90-minute drive from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara is In-N-Out Burger.
> 
> The couple has stopped by a few times on their way home from meetings and appearances. Last Monday, after the preschool garden planting, they stopped at the drive thru and all of the employees nearly lost their minds. They were all yelling and laughing, and could not believe Meghan and Harry were ordering burgers from the drive thru. Rumor has it, Harry has already learned about the secret menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Have a Favorite Fast-Food Restaurant
> 
> 
> ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have a new go-to spot on their drive from L.A. to Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Good God, is every little thing they do considered newsworthy?  And oh, Harry is such a smart boy!  He already learned the secret menu!


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> IMO, the Daily Mail is reaching. The fundraiser was scheduled for April... makes sense that they would cancel it due to coronavirus. Lots of concerts and other big events are getting canceled that far out since they take months and months to plan.
> 
> What does it have to do with Amazon or Netflix... that’s just where a recording or documentary about the event would have been shown. Defies logic that someone would cancel and event due to a change in how the recording is handled.
> 
> edit to add.. I read the invictus games had a budget of just $1.8m. *I would hope Harry and Meghan kick in a ton of money after all these lucrative deals*.


I wouldn't hold my breath.


----------



## purseinsanity

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 4839872
> 
> 
> ...what's wrong with waiting your turn to speak?! Especially when you're the most junior and newest member of the BRF in the interview.



Didn't she learn that in kindergarten?  "Wait your turn to speak"?  Her self importance is off the charts.


----------



## purseinsanity

drifter said:


> by the way, someone's summarised all the freebies for us based on the bestseller finding freebies:
> https://pagesix.com/2020/08/22/prince-harry-meghan-markle-got-millions-in-freebies-book-claims/


I hope the IRS is paying attention.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> CRAP!!!!  I've seen this too many times out here and with the heat we are having?!?! .. no bueno!  But, at least we don't have (in addition to the heat) the Santa Ana winds because that is what creates (well - other than the homeless with their fires) the big fires out here.


I was just outside watering plants....it's over 90 on our covered patio
thank goodness for A/C and as you say, no santa ana winds


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> drifter said:
> by the way, someone's summarised all the freebies for us based on the bestseller finding freebies:
> https://pagesix.com/2020/08/22/prince-harry-meghan-markle-got-millions-in-freebies-book-claims/



Here is the list of names mentioned, in order named in the article which is written chronologically:
SoHo house
Markus Anderson
Jessica Mulroney
Diptique 
QE
Clooneys
Serena
Elton
Google
Russian Oligarch
TylerP 

Same names that continue to appear in these recent articles. Charles was left out of the article. 
Can’t shake the feeling these grifters are playing all of us.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the list of names mentioned, in order named in the article which is written chronologically:
> SoHo house
> Markus Anderson
> Jessica Mulroney
> Diptique
> QE
> Clooneys
> Serena
> Elton
> Google
> Russian Oligarch
> TylerP
> 
> Same names that continue to appear in these recent articles. Charles was left out of the article.
> Can’t shake the feeling these grifters are playing all of us.


I honestly don't understand how people (who say they've read this whole thread) can say we are snarky or mean for disliking her.  How to you not dislike someone who gets offended she's not the first to be speaking when she is the newest to the family and least important in terms of rank?


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the list of names mentioned, in order named in the article which is written chronologically:
> SoHo house
> Markus Anderson
> Jessica Mulroney
> Diptique
> QE
> Clooneys
> Serena
> Elton
> Google
> Russian Oligarch
> TylerP
> 
> Same names that continue to appear in these recent articles. Charles was left out of the article.
> Can’t shake the feeling these grifters are playing all of us.



I don’t feel played. Earn that money and pay your state taxes, H+M.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> IMO, the Daily Mail is reaching. The fundraiser was scheduled for April... makes sense that they would cancel it due to coronavirus. Lots of concerts and other big events are getting canceled that far out since they take months and months to plan.
> 
> What does it have to do with Amazon or Netflix... that’s just where a recording or documentary about the event would have been shown. Defies logic that someone would cancel and event due to a change in how the recording is handled.
> 
> edit to add.. I read the invictus games had a budget of just $1.8m. I would hope Harry and Meghan kick in a ton of money after all these lucrative deals.


I don't buy it. Many events have moved to virtual and they have already attended many of them. There is no need to pull out from it now. They could have helped to plan sonething different if they really cared! This cause was supposed to be the closest to Harry's heart after all! SMH! Things are gradually return to normal here and I don't see strong reason for something planned for next April should be pulled now.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't buy it. Many events have moved to virtual and they have already attended many of them. There is no need to pull out from it now. They could have helped to plan sonething different if they really cared! This cause was supposed to be the closest to Harry's heart after all! SMH! Things are gradually return to normal here and I don't see strong reason for something planned for next April should be pulled now.


they really care - about themselves


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> they really care - about themselves


Yep! That pretty sums it up for them!


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't buy it. Many events have moved to virtual and they have already attended many of them. There is no need to pull out from it now. They could have helped to plan sonething different if they really cared! This cause was supposed to be the closest to Harry's heart after all! SMH! Things are gradually return to normal here and I don't see strong reason for something planned for next April should be pulled now.



That’s a good point. They could just switch to virtual. Though question, do they even need to fundraise if they don’t think the games themselves will happen? Weren’t they canceled last year?

Generally for live events though, it depends on your risk tolerance. My company has canceled all our live events through summer next year. What could be converted to virtual will be but some events that can’t (like incentive trip type of events) were just canceled. With big events you have to put the brakes on very early if you’re going to do that.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> That’s a good point. They could just switch to virtual. Though question, do they even need to fundraise if they don’t think the games themselves will happen? Weren’t they canceled last year?
> 
> Generally for live events though, it depends on your risk tolerance. My company has canceled all our live events through summer next year. What could be converted to virtual will be but some events that can’t (like incentive trip type of events) were just canceled. With big events you have to put the brakes on very early if you’re going to do that.


It can happen because team sports have all resumed here, including soccer, cricket etc, just without spectators inside the stadium. They are all available on TV etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

My SO just received info from the soccer team he supports re going back to watch the games in person of the new season games starting next week. They will not start with full capacity though. But games are definitely on.


----------



## csshopper

This was in the DM article: 

"The glittering music and comedy show was set to be held in California in June 2021 and broadcast on Amazon, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex planning to make speeches during the event. 

Officials at the foundation were reportedly 'stunned' after a lawyer for the Sussexes informed them they would not be going ahead with the event last week, shortly before the Netflix deal was announced. 

According to a report in the Sunday Times, the lawyer cited a 'conflict' of plans with another streaming service. 

A source involved in the planning of the event told the publication: 'It's very bad form and everyone at Invictus is gutted."


----------



## lalame

Maybe it’s a recognition of how tasteless it looks for this couple to hold a fundraiser for their pet project after news of them striking a major deal were released (whether the $$ is true or not). Okay, doubt they’d think that but I think that.  It’s a good cause but why are they fundraising if they’re so loaded supposedly.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Dear Harry
> Welcome to the hot mess that is California.
> Please heed the warnings and prepare accordingly. I know that you think that these things could never happen to you but they can.
> Now might be a good time for you all  to pack up and head back to Tyler's. Please remember to take the dogs.
> Don't wait for the evacuation notices. It can get very hectic with everyone trying to get out at once. Sometimes not everyone does.
> The fire by my house is a few miles east but as the smoke is blowing out over the ocean  if the winds kick up it will be heading my way. I've already got the cat carriers ready along with some valuables. Probably not going to have to go but better ready than not.


@poopsie .. thinking of you, and know what you are going through.  Last year, we had 3 fires near us .. including the one near the Getty which EVERYONE took photos of.  The smoke was SOOOOOOOO thick that you could not go outside and one of our cats was meowing like crazy.  We ended up putting all the fans on in the house and that helped. 

What people (like Harry) don't realize, is that it only takes 1 stinkin' spark to jump (and they can jump highways, mountains, etc.) to start a fire and sadly, when there is that much dry underbrush, it doesn't take long for that sucker to get big .. quickly.  We have already had 2 fires very near to us in the Selpulveda Basin; alas .. started by the too many homeless encampments.  The LAPD and LAFD move them, but they come right back.  Thankfully, we don't have the winds right now .. but you are right, you need to be alert and have everything ready for a quick evacuation.  GOOD LUCK!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I honestly don't understand how people (who say they've read this whole thread) can say we are snarky or mean for disliking her.  How to you not dislike someone who gets offended she's not the first to be speaking when she is the newest to the family and least important in terms of rank?



They are seeing her the way they want her to be. They are not looking closely or wondering about the motives for what she does. They are completely taking her at her word. That includes the American media. I found this piece of nonsense, not from a tabloid or an entertainment magazine, but from NBC News. As usual their biases are showing and they have decided that the “inspirational” symbolic message behind Meghan and Harry is too important to allow to be damaged with an examination of the facts. Such a load of emotional, one-sided BS coming from a news source that was once greatly respected years ago. I truly miss the days when news employees actually did their jobs and didn’t blindly believe what they were told because they liked the story so much. 

*The Harry and Meghan Netflix deal proves Hollywood, and America, won the revolution*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex can have more power over their lives and influence over everyone else from Hollywood than from Buckingham Palace.

Harry and Meghan are embracing the American lifestyle, with its opportunity to remake yourself as well as create content — not just be content.

Harry and Meghan parted ways with Buckingham Palace and gave up their titles and state funding for royal duties in January. But this week made it clear just what they traded the royal realm for. On Wednesday, hundreds of years after revolutionaries made the case for the supremacy of the American system and decades after Hollywood began to beam its influence farther and wider than the British Empire ever did, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex swapped life in the British royal family for a multiyear deal with Netflix.

The couple are writing a new chapter in the age-old American story of reinvention and self-determination by announcing that they are rejecting the British monarchy for the stuff of American dreams. They've decided they can have more power over their lives and influence over everyone else from Hollywood than from Buckingham Palace.

Per the Netflix deal, Harry and Meghan's yet-to-be-named production company will make "documentaries, docu-series, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming." Though details are scant, it sounds a lot like the ambitions of another royal-ish American couple, Barack and Michelle *****.

And who better to deliver this endorsement of American versus European celebrity than a biracial actress and lifestyle blogger hitched to a second-born prince who insisted on serving in combat and marrying for love? As cultural critic Syreeta McFadden has noted, Meghan and Harry's relationship is remarkablebecause it means "the old colonial order has eroded, at least in part, among even the remaining aristocracy."

Perhaps because of that, when Meghan tried her best to accommodate the British royal family while remaining an autonomous agent, she was treated abysmally in the British press. She had to endure racist comments, criticism that shetouched her pregnant belly too much, judgment of her ability to mother and even hold her child properly, gossip about her relationship with her fatherand snide asides about her past divorce.

It's unsurprising, then, that this latest move would elicit more hate. Social media users are mocking the couple for saying they wanted a private life and then moving to Santa Barbara, California. A British talk show hostsaid the partnership with Netflix "'irritates the hell out of me. ... They have been given this deal because of who they are, not because what they have proved they can do."

But Meghan is having the last laugh as she and Harry fully embrace America. Despite what the British press would have you believe, Harry has made it clear that he's not being dragged kicking and screaming. With a well-documented ambivalence about royal life, Harry has been candid about the traumatic effect the death of his mother, Princess Diana, had on him. He experienced panic attacks andsought counseling.

"I can safely say that losing my mum at the age of 12 and then shutting down all of my emotions for the last 20 years has had a quite serious effect on not only my personal life, but also my work, as well," he said on a podcast in 2017. It's no secret that he blames the British media for causing her tragic car accident, and it only seems logical that he would want both to protect his family and to exert control over his life with a fresh start in a different place.

Meghan and Harry have indicated that they see the opportunity with Netflixas a chance to reverse some of the pain and scorn they've experienced. "Through our work with diverse communities and their environments, to shining a light on people and causes around the world, our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope," the couple explained in a statement about the partnership. "As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us, as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens."

The focus on family combats ways that Meghan has been criticized — for a fractured relationship with her father, for her divorce and for her totally normal behavior during pregnancy and new motherhood. And the "truthful and relatable lens" is a direct strike at the media for distorting the narrative that is Harry and Meghan's lived experience.

We all know that the American myths of rags to riches and upward mobility are just that: stories we tell to define core values of a country that is still fairly new. Has America failed to help people make those myths a reality? You bet. But in choosing to relocate to America, Meghan and Harry are saying it's more desirable to take a chance in America and be Hollywood producers than to remain in the British monarchy.

While British tabloids are once again mocking the couple over the move, it's a moot point. Harry and Meghan are embracing the American lifestyle, with its opportunity to remake yourself as well as create content — not just be content. The fact is that Harry and Meghan are more in control of the royal story than anyone back in the U.K.









						Opinion | Who needs the monarchy when you can rule Hollywood?
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex can have more power over their lives and influence over everyone else from Hollywood than from Buckingham Palace.




					www.google.com


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Maybe it’s a recognition of how tasteless it looks for this couple to hold a fundraiser for their pet project after news of them striking a major deal were released (whether the $$ is true or not). Okay, doubt they’d think that but I think that.  It’s a good cause but why are they fundraising if they’re so loaded supposedly.



 Invictus hoped this would raise at least a million dollars, Beyonce and Ed Sheehan were supposedly possible participants.

From the article in the DM:

"Harry said yes to doing this last year and everything was still moving forwards until a few weeks ago. 

'This was going to be a big moment for Invictus where the pot is pretty empty, and it has left them in the lurch. Harry needs to pull his finger out to find another way to raise funds for them."

My take away from this: Harry made a commitment to continue supporting Invictus through this fund raiser. It would benefit Invictus.

                                    Netflix deal is made and Harry bails on "his" most important charity because of a perceived conflict with Amazon/Netflix. Instead he aligns himself with Netflix, which benefits he and Meaghan, not Invictus. As we know "what Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets" and what she wants is money, money, money for them, not his charity.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> 2007 was the Witch Creek fire. Wasn't it behind Mt. Miguel? Had a coworker lose their house in that one. She rescued turtles and they all perished.
> Cedar fire  2003 was way worse for us.
> I hate that this seems to be the new normal.
> I don't recall it being so bad when MM was living here before. She chose a dangerous area with lots of undeveloped acreage.


With the exception of living in Woodland Hills (teenage years), I don't think she lived in any places where the fires would be close.  Now, that being said, Woodland Hills is close to Calabasas, and they have had their share of fires in the last few years!  There is a reason why my LA friends call Woodland Hills/Calabasas .. "the Inferno"!


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I honestly don't understand how people (who say they've read this whole thread) can say we are snarky or mean for disliking her.  How to you not dislike someone who gets offended she's not the first to be speaking when she is the newest to the family and least important in terms of rank?



To be totally objective here, I think people tend to believe stories based on whether they like the subject or not. And people who like M disbelieve the stories so they think we must be really hateful if we not only believe them but pile on and then construe her intentions based on what may be fake stories. The tabloids do write a lot of fake stories about, well, every celebrity. I’ve seen people here react the same way for Kate Middleton stories, which may seem totally fake to those people but people who dislike Kate will latch on. And I’m not criticizing it; to this day you’re not going to convince me Christian Bale isn’t a gem or Prince Andrew didn’t do whatever horrible thing is reported. It’s just two sides of the same coin really.

I just think this is all fun gossip but do I believe half the stuff reported about M+H? Nah, and neither do I about any celebrity. Too many have turned out to be blatantly false. I judge more based on undisputed facts like interviews they give and their actions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I honestly don't understand how people (who say they've read this whole thread) can say we are snarky or mean for disliking her.  How to you not dislike someone who gets offended she's not the first to be speaking when she is the newest to the family and least important in terms of rank?



Very few of the recent articles are about her. 98% of the dislike is directed at him. She is doing what she has always done — merching, monetizing her ‘friends’ and family, and tossing word salads — that is who she was and is. He, though, is showing us his other side. Good by to ‘fun H‘ and hello to ‘spoiled, jelly jealous, disrespectful H‘ who shows a lack of caring for his family while taking their money. The guy is swimming in hate-filled jabs at his brother and father and their families.

@bag-mania That NBC opinion piece is hilarious and shows they are pandering to this ‘golden couple’.  Google was the sponsor of eco-summit. Perhaps they want H to speak again. All of these people are connected. Yes, H&M are being used, but they seem to like it. The BRF is looking worse and worse with each passing day. Are we certain Andrew has not visited them?


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Invictus hoped this would raise at least a million dollars, Beyonce and Ed Sheehan were supposedly possible participants.
> 
> From the article in the DM:
> 
> "Harry said yes to doing this last year and everything was still moving forwards until a few weeks ago.
> 
> 'This was going to be a big moment for Invictus where the pot is pretty empty, and it has left them in the lurch. Harry needs to pull his finger out to find another way to raise funds for them."
> 
> My take away from this: Harry made a commitment to continue supporting Invictus through this fund raiser. It would benefit Invictus.
> 
> Netflix deal is made and Harry bails on "his" most important charity because of a perceived conflict with Amazon/Netflix. Instead he aligns himself with Netflix, which benefits he and Meaghan, not Invictus. As we know "what Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets" and what she wants is money, money, money for them, not his charity.



The Invictus spokesperson said it had nothing to do with Amazon/Netflix but was a coronavirus issue... why aren’t they aligned on the messaging? Did they ask Invictus to lie? Or is the statement from the lawyer quoted false? Leaves a lot of questions and a bad taste in one’s mouth. M+H need to put out a statement ASAP that they would personally be kicking in the money that would’ve been raised otherwise this makes them look terrible.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I honestly don't understand how people (who say they've read this whole thread) can say we are snarky or mean for disliking her.  How to you not dislike someone who gets offended she's not the first to be speaking when she is the newest to the family and least important in terms of rank?



I saw them on some interview thing and she was speaking a-plenty.

Personally, I'm only upset if I'm passed over to speak if I disagree with what's being said, have something important additionally to say or someone clearly talked on my behalf without my permission. It's hard being a woman in this world so she's probably experienced a lot of that (as I'm sure many here have too) but it seems the reason why she feels silenced is because she's not doing_ all_ the talking, _all_ the time. 

MM wants to go first so she's quotable and be agreed with, she doesn't want to go last because all she can do is reiterate and agree with someone else. The cause is not what's important to her, the cause just gives her the opportunity to be personally 'responsible' /thanked/mentioned for any further publicity/progress/attention every time the cause is.

As for this latest lawsuit, it makes her look silly and out of control, the opposite of what I think she wants to project. If every time you step outside the door you sue someone, pretty soon everyone is going to stop doing business or getting involved with you. Lawsuits are  for people what wars are for nations, ridiculously expensive and to be avoided unless absolutely necessary, in the end resources are finite and you can't fight on all fronts at once.


----------



## csshopper

`deleted. off topic


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania That Google opinion piece is hilarious and shows they are pandering to this ‘golden couple’.  Google was the sponsor of eco-summit. Perhaps they want H to speak again. All of these people are connected. Yes, H&M are being used, but they seem to like it. The BRF is looking worse and worse with each passing day. Are we certain Andrew has not visited them?



Just to clarify, that article was not from Google. I used Google to search for it so that was why it is in the URL. If you open the link you will see the author is an employee of NBC News and it is on their website.  I think it’s important to make that distinction because we generally like to think of a news organization as being more credible than a search engine (or a tabloid). And yet...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not surprised about the mixed messages from H&M.  Seems to be their preferred style of operating.
Really too bad that the Invictus Games are treated unkindly. They have been through enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Forward thinking for that tricky second season
> 
> S2. E1 My mother Diana Part 1
> 
> S2. E2 My mother Diana Part 2
> 
> S2. E3  My mother Diana Part 3
> 
> S2. E4 My mother Diana Part 4
> 
> S2. E5 My mother Diana Part 5
> 
> S2. E6 My mother Diana Part 6



Does it make me a bad person that I laughed? They really don't have anything else going for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

In the contract with Netflix there would absolutely be a clause preventing them from appearing or working on behalf of other streaming services. 

Invictus is a great charity and has done great things for people I am close to. If it is true that they gave up this event due to the Netflix deal (and the timing makes it highly suspicious), then that is truly truly awful.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does it make me a bad person that I laughed? They really don't have anything else going for them.


Nope, not at all!  Sure, I feel badly for Harry that his mother died when he was a child, just as I feel badly for anyone that went through that.  Harry though did not have to deal with being a latchkey kid, being abused by his remaining parent's new significant other, or worry about how to get through each day by not having enough to eat, have a roof over his head, paying for college, or most other "normal" problems that may come along.  The guilt over Diana dying that the BRF may or may not have is beyond.  Enough already.  He's been spoiled his whole life and now his actions prove he's also been a brat.


----------



## purseinsanity

Just wondering, as a British citizen, I believe Harry can go back any time he'd like.  Archie is a British citizen as well.  So what if he has to quarantine in one of his many residences?  It's not like he's busy doing anything else.  The claim he can't go back because of COVID is absurd.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Good God, is every little thing they do considered newsworthy?  And oh, Harry is such a smart boy!  He already learned the secret menu!


HA HA HA .. when I saw that I just shook my head, like WHO-THE-F#CK cares?!?!?!?!  So, is he going to get 'animal style', or maybe more than 3 patties (I think the limit is 5?!?!).  So, does that mean we're going to have J-C-M-H-Burger-Boy ?!?!?!  Oh wait .. I thought MM didn't eat 'meat' anymore?!?!!?


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. when I saw that I just shook my head, like WHO-THE-F#CK cares?!?!?!?!  So, is he going to get 'animal style', or maybe more than 3 patties (I think the limit is 5?!?!).  So, does that mean we're going to have J-C-M-H-Burger-Boy ?!?!?!  Oh wait .. I thought MM didn't eat 'meat' anymore?!?!!?


I'm sure MM gets the grilled cheese.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I was just outside watering plants....it's over 90 on our covered patio
> thank goodness for A/C and as you say, no santa ana winds


We had 113 yesterday and today is supposed to be hotter!  That being said, in addition to everything, LA is having rolling blackouts .. how nice, right???  I just find this UFB; a city this large and they cannot find a way to handle the power???  Heck - Boston (built in the 1700s) had its issues, but NEVER, EVER did we have to employ 'rolling blackouts'.  As I've said many times, THANK GOD for my Pool because if the power goes out, guess where I will be?????


----------



## redney

Wondering if Wills is texting JCMH saying WTF are you doing, man? Get your act together.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I saw them on some interview thing and she was speaking a-plenty.
> 
> Personally, I'm only upset if I'm passed over to speak if I disagree with what's being said, have something important additionally to say or someone clearly talked on my behalf without my permission. It's hard being a woman in this world so she's probably experienced a lot of that (as I'm sure many here have too) but it seems the reason why she feels silenced is because she's not doing_ all_ the talking, _all_ the time.
> 
> MM wants to go first so she's quotable and be agreed with, she doesn't want to go last because all she can do is reiterate and agree with someone else. The cause is not what's important to her, the cause just gives her the opportunity to be personally 'responsible' /thanked/mentioned for any further publicity/progress/attention every time the cause is.
> 
> As for this latest lawsuit, it makes her look silly and out of control, the opposite of what I think she wants to project. If every time you step outside the door you sue someone, pretty soon everyone is going to stop doing business or getting involved with you. Lawsuits are  for people what wars are for nations, ridiculously expensive and to be avoided unless absolutely necessary, in the end resources are finite and you can't fight on all fronts at once.


I for one can definitely speak to the 'how women are treated' in the Corporate World, and yes .. oftentimes, I was the last on the "program".  BUT .. let me tell you, I actually found that extremely advantageous .. because unlike my male counterparts, I wouldn't speak about the "new" fund/Portfolio or the requirements, but to the WOMEN in the organization and WHAT PART they could participate in and (potentially) make a difference.  Can't even say HOW MANY times .. guess who the audience remembered???  Yes, even some of the younger men would come up and compliment me, but the women??!?! .. definitely.  Hence the reason why when the Company decided to set up a mentoring program, I was one of the first asked (and pleased to do so).  Her *****ing about going last just shows me that it's really not about the "content" per se, but again .. SHE HAS TO BE THE CENTER OF ATTENTION!  This is what my friends who knew her back in HS days have said to me since day 1!


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> Wondering if Wills is texting JCMH saying WTF are you doing, man? Get your act together.


No way, MM would release those messages to one of her Omids immediately... H can't be trusted.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> Just wondering, as a British citizen, I believe Harry can go back any time he'd like.  Archie is a British citizen as well.  So what if he has to quarantine in one of his many residences?  It's not like he's busy doing anything else.  The claim he can't go back because of COVID is absurd.


Correct. They just need to self-isolate/quarantine for 14 days on arrival and they can do this at home. And they can just fly private. There is no excuse really.


----------



## bag-mania

Variety reported a couple of weeks ago that H&M had been meeting with various networks  trying to get a production contract since June. They had been rejected by some before they could wrangle the Netflix deal. Companies were not fighting over them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More like H texting Will saying ‘Send the jet ASAP.  Get me the f* out of this inferno. I  Mom’.


----------



## rose60610

First M complains about not living, only existing; then they dump the BRF, frame Archie to sue paps, exploit a dead mother to deliver paid speeches and now are rumored to produce a Netflix about said dead mother. How low will they go? Gotta wonder if the dead mother angle reeled in and clinched the Netflix deal. Curious if William and the rest will refuse to play ball when interviewed for the documentary. If they don't "cooperate" will the documentary be forced to morph into a movie complete with no name D Listers? Followed by sequels of how Harry was saved by Meghan from the big oppressive evil BRF, fled to horrible rotten America where they secured a 150 million dollar American business deal all the while describing themselves as victims, making it all on their own. While still accepting money from The Crown. Had Diana lived there'd be no legacy to milk. Meghan must be smugly elated she was tragically killed while young. To not exponentially leverage tragedy and Harry's new-found psychological wounds would be such wasted monetary opportunity.


----------



## Lounorada

chicinthecity777 said:


> Extract from the book.  and
> View attachment 4839004












Chanbal said:


> *Will Meghan Markle scoop the Oscar she's dreamt of since she was seven? *Former Suits actress hopes her Netflix deal with land her an Academy Award









purseinsanity said:


> She forgot about the Forget Me Nots


Forgot-Them-Lots





bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are not worried about fires. They are enjoying the In-N-Out Burger and getting publicity over it.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Can't Get Enough of This Fast-Food Restaurant*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry seem to be enjoying the luxuries of the west coast. ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new go-to spot on their 90-minute drive from Los Angeles to Santa Barbara is In-N-Out Burger.
> 
> The couple has stopped by a few times on their way home from meetings and appearances. Last Monday, after the preschool garden planting, they stopped at the drive thru and all of the employees nearly lost their minds. They were all yelling and laughing, and could not believe Meghan and Harry were ordering burgers from the drive thru. Rumor has it, Harry has already learned about the secret menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Have a Favorite Fast-Food Restaurant
> 
> 
> ET has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have a new go-to spot on their drive from L.A. to Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com










chicinthecity777 said:


> This is the video in the latest law suit.





chicinthecity777 said:


> Pure speculation here, could this all be one big publicity stunt? I mean she can't possibly win this, can she? She was visibly smiling in that video.


And looking straight into that camera lens like her pay cheque depended on it.


----------



## chowlover2

bag-mania said:


> It depends on where you live. Here in Maryland we had just under 12 inches of rain in August. That is freakishly high. We normally have about 3 inches of rain in the summer months. The ground has been completely saturated for weeks and there have been falling trees from all the storms and soft, loose soil.


It's the same in PA, we had 11in for the month of August and that's much higher than normal. The other freaky thing are straight line winds. Same thing as a tornado, but they don't touch ground. We had one about 3 summers ago and the winds took everything from the 12 ft and up, rather than from the ground. My whole county was w/o power for 5 days, when I got out I could see why. Even Wawa was closed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. when I saw that I just shook my head, like WHO-THE-F#CK cares?!?!?!?!  So, is he going to get 'animal style', or maybe more than 3 patties (I think the limit is 5?!?!).  So, does that mean we're going to have J-C-M-H-Burger-Boy ?!?!?!  Oh wait .. I thought MM didn't eat 'meat' anymore?!?!!?


hate to defend her but it is possible she got a cheese sandwich...they serve that


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> hate to defend her but it is possible she got a cheese sandwich...they serve that



Is it cheese, tho? Is the meat really meat? 
asking for friend


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it cheese, tho? Is the meat really meat?
> asking for friend


not sure if you're kidding but I've had it....seems like cheese....they do it up same as a burger on the bun with lettuce etc
I rarely eat any fast food but we go to In N Out when travelling.  Honestly I don't see the big deal.  The potatoes are made fresh. Other than that it's fine but not that fabulous IMO


----------



## bag-mania

chowlover2 said:


> It's the same in PA, we had 11in for the month of August and that's much higher than normal. *The other freaky thing are straight line winds. Same thing as a tornado, but they don't touch ground.* We had one about 3 summers ago and the winds took everything from the 12 ft and up, rather than from the ground. My whole county was w/o power for 5 days, when I got out I could see why. Even Wawa was closed.



Yes! It was a derecho. I never knew what those were until I experienced one here about eight years ago.

I love Wawa. I was so happy when they expanded into Maryland.


----------



## chowlover2

bag-mania said:


> Yes! It was a derecho. I never knew what those were until I experienced one here about eight years ago.
> 
> I love Wawa. I was so happy when they expanded into Maryland.


I actually live in the town next to Wawa, so I have been fortunate to enjoy them my whole life. I really won't go anywhere else. My brother lives in MD when he moved there he was so bummed out there was no Wawa. Luckily they are spring up all over the East Coast.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> not sure if you're kidding but I've had it....seems like cheese....they do it up same as a burger on the bun with lettuce etc
> I rarely eat any fast food but we go to In N Out when travelling.  Honestly I don't see the big deal.  The potatoes are made fresh. Other than that it's fine but not that fabulous IMO



Many many reviewers say food quality is outstanding, the top of the tops. I have never tried one, so now I’m searching for one.
Here’s the secret menu.  Yum!









						15 Items To Order From In-N-Out’s Secret Menu Right Now
					

The secret menu at In-N-Out Burger includes animal-style fries, the Flying Dutchman, a chili cheese dog, and a monkey-style shake.




					www.bustle.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

I wanted to cut H&M some slack, I really do! They have to make money somehow if they want to be financially independent. But their recent moves are tacky after tackier! It's really low stuff! How they have fallen from the royals to become cheap soulless celebs who would sell their mother (literally) for money and fame! SMH!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many many reviewers say food quality is outstanding, the top of the tops. I have never tried one, so now I’m searching for one.
> Here’s the secret menu.  Yum!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15 Items To Order From In-N-Out’s Secret Menu Right Now
> 
> 
> The secret menu at In-N-Out Burger includes animal-style fries, the Flying Dutchman, a chili cheese dog, and a monkey-style shake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com


We love In 'n out! We went often when we travelled in the areas! Their secret menu is not to be missed!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many many reviewers say food quality is outstanding, the top of the tops. I have never tried one, so now I’m searching for one.
> Here’s the secret menu.  Yum!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15 Items To Order From In-N-Out’s Secret Menu Right Now
> 
> 
> The secret menu at In-N-Out Burger includes animal-style fries, the Flying Dutchman, a chili cheese dog, and a monkey-style shake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com


some of these things look very tempting (and fattening) but I've had the grilled cheese and I don't think it's as great as this writer says....cheese fries look good and I'll have to tell DH about the grilled peppers you can ask for


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> some of these things look very tempting (and fattening) but I've had the grilled cheese and I don't think it's as great as this writer says....cheese fries look good and I'll have to tell DH about the grilled peppers you can ask for



Yes, agree, it does indeed look fattening, but delicious. My original question was a serious one bc I‘ve never had the pleasure to eat at one. Sometimes these fast food places get a negative rating for not being real food.

I’m impressed these are popular in LA, the land of the thinnest people. Guessing H was indeed shocked. Good for him being willing to try.


----------



## CeeJay

[QUOTE="bag-mania, post: 34035466, member: 49675"

While British tabloids are once again mocking the couple over the move, it's a moot point. Harry and Meghan are embracing the American lifestyle, with its opportunity to remake yourself as well as create content — not just be content. *The fact is that Harry and Meghan are more in control of the royal story than anyone back in the U.K.*
[/QUOTE]
HA - or so they think!!!  Sorry Harry, but until you two "truly" find financial freedom, your paycheck still comes from the BRF and they could just de-fund you!  Wish they would and take away those BLASTED titles!!!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, agree, it does indeed look fattening, but delicious. My original question was a serious one bc I‘ve never had the pleasure to eat at one. Sometimes these fast food places get a negative rating for not being real food.
> 
> I’m impressed these are popular in LA, the land of the thinnest people. Guessing H was indeed shocked. Good for him being willing to try.


Last year was the FIRST YEAR that In-'N-Out did not win top burger in LA County!  The new winner (and I think it's a repeat this year) is HiHo .. and of course, I've had it (Cheeseburgers is the last guilty pleasure I have - but it's about 1x/month)!  Don't get me wrong, In-'N-Out is good and yes, the meat is so fresh .. that it has to be delivered from a distance where it is NOT frozen!  That is why you don't see them outside of the West Coast, although they have expanded into AZ, Texas and I believe Utah?  I always get the "Protein Style" which is the Cheeseburger (double-double of course) wrapped in Lettuce (super-fresh) and never get their fries because that is the only thing I don't like about them.  Since the Potatoes are so fresh (and freshly washed in cold water) .. when they are put into the fryer, they do not come out crisp (so if you are a huge Fries lover - ask for the "extra crispy").  Meanwhile, HiHo also specializes in doubles or triples (num), but use Waygu beef .. which is SPECTACULAR!!!  OMG!!!  

Just a funny .. when the I-N-O opened in Texas, there was a line of cars the entire time (to the point where there were traffic jams and the cops had to come in to help)!!  Goes to show you, there are RABID fans of this place ..


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> some of these things look very tempting (and fattening) but I've had the grilled cheese and I don't think it's as great as this writer says....cheese fries look good and I'll have to tell DH about the grilled peppers you can ask for


The fries are meh IMO; haven't ever had their Cheese fries .. not for me!


----------



## CeeJay

If anyone is interested, especially any of you in MBA or former-MBA programs .. this was a required read when I was at Bain & Company .. 
https://www.amazon.com/N-Out-Burger-Behind-Counter-Fast-Food/dp/0061346721


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Last year was the FIRST YEAR that In-'N-Out did not win top burger in LA County!  The new winner (and I think it's a repeat this year) is HiHo .. and of course, I've had it (Cheeseburgers is the last guilty pleasure I have - but it's about 1x/month)!  Don't get me wrong, In-'N-Out is good and yes, the meat is so fresh .. that it has to be delivered from a distance where it is NOT frozen!  That is why you don't see them outside of the West Coast, although they have expanded into AZ, Texas and I believe Utah?  I always get the "Protein Style" which is the Cheeseburger (double-double of course) wrapped in Lettuce (super-fresh) and never get their fries because that is the only thing I don't like about them.  Since the Potatoes are so fresh (and freshly washed in cold water) .. when they are put into the fryer, they do not come out crisp (so if you are a huge Fries lover - ask for the "extra crispy").  Meanwhile, HiHo also specializes in doubles or triples (num), but use Waygu beef .. which is SPECTACULAR!!!  OMG!!!
> 
> Just a funny .. when the I-N-O opened in Texas, there was a line of cars the entire time (to the point where there were traffic jams and the cops had to come in to help)!!  Goes to show you, there are RABID fans of this place ..


I agree with you.  INO is good, but I don't see what all the fuss is about.  Their fries are awful...give me McDonald's fries any day of the week, LOL.  I tried their "grilled cheese" and it was literally one slice of cheese in the regular hamburger bun with lettuce.  Very disappointing IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I agree with you.  INO is good, but I don't see what all the fuss is about.  Their fries are awful...give me McDonald's fries any day of the week, LOL.  I tried their "grilled cheese" and it was literally one slice of cheese in the regular hamburger bun with lettuce.  Very disappointing IMO.


I know
I get the grilled cheese sometimes because I get digestive problems when travelling....I'd just as soon have grilled cheese on grilled bread - the usual way.  it's just something to eat


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

About the burger joint: she made him quit coffee, but feeds him fast food? Well.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> About the burger joint: she made him quit coffee, but feeds him fast food? Well.


Wait, what?? .. I hadn't heard that!!!  What's the problem with Coffee???  Next thing you know, we're likely going to hear about the absolutely FABULOUS, SUPER-DUPER Green Morning Shake that she makes with all her OVER-THE-TOP WORD SALAD!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Wait, what?? .. I hadn't heard that!!!  What's the problem with Coffee???  Next thing you know, we're likely going to hear about the absolutely FABULOUS, SUPER-DUPER Green Morning Shake that she makes with all her OVER-THE-TOP WORD SALAD!!!



_Meghan typically tries to avoid caffeine in the afternoons, instead opting for a green juice to get an energy boost.

Speaking to Today, she explained: "It's easy to fall into the trap of rushing for a coffee when you hit that 4 p.m. slump. But if I blend some apple, kale, spinach, lemon, and ginger in my Vitamix in the morning and bring it to work, I always find that sipping on that is a much better boost than a cup of espresso."_









						Meghan Markle's daily diet revealed - and you'll never guess her favourite dish
					

The Duchess of Sussex lives a healthy LA lifestyle. From breakfast to dinner, discover what Prince Harry's wife's go-to meals are, including one we'd never expect!




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## lalame

In N Out is so overrated. I don't get it. So many better chains out there, like Shake Shack or Culver's.


----------



## mdcx

Our lockdown has been extended so bring on the crazy M antics as I need the distraction! 
Is there a rolling list of M's active court cases at present? Seems like she's suing everyone.


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> Just wondering, as a British citizen, I believe Harry can go back any time he'd like.  Archie is a British citizen as well.  So what if he has to quarantine in one of his many residences?  It's not like he's busy doing anything else.  The claim he can't go back because of COVID is absurd.



Yes, you're right, he can go back any time: my son, a British citizen, went to London last week, no problem at all.....AND he's a "normal" person  not a British prince!


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> Yes, you're right, he can go back any time: my son, a British citizen, went to London last week, no problem at all.....AND he's a "normal" person  not a British prince!


Just for your information, if your son went to London from Italy then he doesn't need to self-isolate for 14 days. People enter England from the U.S. are required to self-isolate for 14 days before they can move around. It has nothing to do with citizenship. The same rule apply to UK citizens as well as foreigners. It's done by which country they travel from.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> Just for your information, if your son went to London from Italy then he doesn't need to self-isolate for 14 days. People enter England from the U.S. are required to self-isolate for 14 days before they can move around. It has nothing to do with citizenship. The same rule apply to UK citizens as well as foreigners. It's done by which country they travel from.



Ah ok, you're right, from the US there's still quarantine. My son lives in NYC and came to Italy in June, he has double nationality British and Italian and he quarantined 14 days when he arrived. Since then he's been travelling within Europe so that doesn't count.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many many reviewers say food quality is outstanding, the top of the tops. I have never tried one, so now I’m searching for one.
> Here’s the secret menu.  Yum!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15 Items To Order From In-N-Out’s Secret Menu Right Now
> 
> 
> The secret menu at In-N-Out Burger includes animal-style fries, the Flying Dutchman, a chili cheese dog, and a monkey-style shake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com


Just read the secret menu.  Gained five pounds.  Thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Great, now I want a burger (and I'm not even a big meat eater at all). Good thing I live out in the woods and even a mundane McDonald's is a 25 mins drive (we don't have In-and-out in Germany anyway).


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> About the burger joint: she made him quit coffee, but feeds him fast food? Well.


made him quit beer too?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Meghan typically tries to avoid caffeine in the afternoons, instead opting for a green juice to get an energy boost.
> 
> Speaking to Today, she explained: "It's easy to fall into the trap of rushing for a coffee when you hit that 4 p.m. slump. But if I blend some apple, kale, spinach, lemon, and ginger in my Vitamix in the morning and bring it to work, I always find that sipping on that is a much better boost than a cup of espresso."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's daily diet revealed - and you'll never guess her favourite dish
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex lives a healthy LA lifestyle. From breakfast to dinner, discover what Prince Harry's wife's go-to meals are, including one we'd never expect!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


"bring it to work"?  does that mean carry it to her home office?  where she goes to plot the next photo op?


----------



## Annawakes

Is she getting paid by Vitamix?


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Is she getting paid by Vitamix?


probably so
would she plug something for free?  could be like product placement in movies


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Question: the lawsuit she has going on over pap photos of that walk with the baby, I thought I read something about Archie's face being photo'd, but I never saw his face, only his dangling arms & legs. So were there pics of his dangling face too? 

And the only reason I can see for bringing this lawsuit now (pics from January) is attention, she is the thirstiest person ever.


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> Yes, you're right, he can go back any time: my son, a British citizen, went to London last week, no problem at all.....AND he's a "normal" person  not a British prince!


MM and JCMH take note:  things "normal" people can do...you know, in case you need material for your shows on what normal people do.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Great, now I want a burger (and I'm not even a big meat eater at all). *Good thing I live out in the woods* and even a mundane McDonald's is a 25 mins drive (*we don't have In-and-out in Germany anyway*).


Well, luckily you can be like MM in other ways: you can also pee in the woods and impress JCMH if you'd like.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Is she getting paid by Vitamix?


Haha that was my first thought as well!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Well, luckily you can be like MM in other ways: you can also pee in the woods and impress JCMH if you'd like.



Well, one of my rules: never date a guy who has a kid with a crazy ex, because once they share a child you can never get rid of her.


----------



## lalame

duna said:


> Ah ok, you're right, from the US there's still quarantine. My son lives in NYC and came to Italy in June, he has double nationality British and Italian and he quarantined 14 days when he arrived. Since then he's been travelling within Europe so that doesn't count.


Is he single? Lol


----------



## rose60610

_"But if I blend some apple, kale, spinach, lemon, and ginger in my Vitamix"_

wow. where does she ever find the time to chop it up? she always dazzles us. 

My dentist says that some of the grossest stained teeth he's seen are from patients who juice a lot and never think to drink some water or rinse their mouths afterward. Juicing is fine, but follow up with something doesn't let it stain. Apparently M takes care of her teeth or gets new ones now and then.


----------



## Sharont2305

News just in


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933


Hooray! And about bl**dy time too


----------



## duna

lalame said:


> Is he single? Lol



No..... And he's gay, lol!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933


how did they manage that?
and what do you suppose they are saying about it remaining their residence?
I thought M would never set foot in England again


----------



## csshopper

Finally a good move on their part.

Interesting that JCMH is described as being the source. Frogmore is their "family" home there, the source of the repayment funds is a contract that includes both he and his MEMEMeghan, yet only he has repaid the money.

I wonder if the well deserved crushing criticisms of their horrid behaviors has finally started to penetrate his besottedness and this action is his attempt to regain favor with his fellow countrymen?

There were 63 pages, last time I looked, yesterday of comments on a JCMH and MM article, and they were as scathing as I have ever read._ Loathing_ in tone and not what he would have wanted to read.

Whatever the motivation, at least he got this right.  (Note to those who claim we only "bash" on this thread. We do pay attention to well done actions, problem is there have been so few.)


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> Question: the lawsuit she has going on over pap photos of that walk with the baby, I thought I read something about Archie's face being photo'd, but I never saw his face, only his dangling arms & legs. So were there pics of his dangling face too?
> 
> And the only reason I can see for bringing this lawsuit now (pics from January) is attention, she is the thirstiest person ever.


The face of Archie was not visible in any of the photos 
In the continental European press, a standard is never show the face of a child, blur it out if need be
the US press has fewer qualms about showing children eg the faces of Gwen Stefani sons when they go to church
diff places , diff laws
that said, I do not know the specifics of the UK law, and the suit is being brought in the UK


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> how did they manage that?
> and what do you suppose they are saying about it remaining their residence?
> I thought M would never set foot in England again


My guess ...  Charles chose to help fund them this way, rather than subsidize for The California McMansion mortgage ...
this makes sense, the bill for Frogmore taints QEII and Charles (why do they put up with this?) so this is a way to calm down a justifiable criticism of the monarchy, it is a win for QEII and C, and avoids the issue of C paying to subsidize things in the USA (not the UK)


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> My guess ...  Charles chose to help fund them this way, rather than pay for The California McMansion mortgage ...
> this makes sense, the bill for Frogmore taints QEII and Charles (why do they put up with this ?) so this is a way to calm , it is a win for QEII and C and gets rid of a justifiable criticism of the monarchy


Ps Omid is the one saying they MAY go back to the UK, not them
The pretence of keeping their UK residence was for show, to make it seem - for a while - like they had not permanently decamped


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> My guess ...  Charles chose to help fund them this way, rather than pay for The California McMansion mortgage ...
> this makes sense, the bill for Frogmore taints QEII and Charles (why do they put up with this ?) so this is a way to calm , it is a win for QEII and C and gets rid of a justifiable criticism of the monarchy


what about them keeping this as their home?  a backup plan?  sits empty and has to be maintained?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933


About bloody time indeed!


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> what about them keeping this as their home?  a backup plan?  sits empty and has to be maintained?


The Times article , I posted a snippet a ways back, alluded to their paying 18k pounds a month rent for Frogmore, in addition to repaying the 2M pounds renovation costs , two types of Frogmore payments a month, and wow 18k is a lot ...
I think they will keep up the pretense of Frogmore for a bit, but, have no plans for a long stay anytime soon
They can always find an extra garret room at Buck House, Windsor, Sandringham etc If they come


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> what about them keeping this as their home?  a backup plan?  sits empty and has to be maintained?


I doubt anyone here cares, I know I don’t.  I think they’re just saving face by putting this out.


----------



## A1aGypsy

That’s fantastic. I actually do not care what they do with their lives, as long as I’m not paying for it and they aren’t flippantly offending laws that other, hard working civil servants would be fired and prosecuted for going near. 

If they don’t want to be royals, fine. If they want to be movie stars or influencers or have a goopier version of goop, great. Find your passion, live your dreams. Do you and thrive.

Just not on my dime, thank you.

(I also find the wording very interesting)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933


Would someone explain to me in simple words where he suddenly finds all that money lying around that had been neatly tied up in trust funds before?


----------



## marietouchet

Andrew, Anne have been seen at Balmoral grouse shooting.
Sounds like A & A have been called for a pow-wow
JCMH was supposed to be at Balmoral this summer, but has the covid reason to zoom in instead.

This has been a summer full of BRF news, and perhaps more will come out. 

I have always thought the handling of Andrew & that of H&M were linked.  As a grandmother, mother, QEII would surely strive to treat her family fairly, and equally (if possible), as the head of the family (not the monarch).


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> what about them keeping this as their home?  a backup plan?  sits empty and has to be maintained?


maybe I got it wrong about the source of the funds ...  thinking the money was via Charles ... 
one of you lovely people pointed out the interesting wording of the news blurb, and I reread it ... 
The blurb says the repayment was by the Duke of Sussex - no mention of the Duchess ... hmmm 
JCMH could have used the money from this personal trust (set up by Diana)

As to keeping it as their UK residence hmmm I will believe it when I see it ... But maybe they are paying 18k pounds a month for it as per The Times

But Frogmore, and Frogmore Cottage have sat for a long time unused (and maintained by the crown), so what is a little longer ...


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Would someone explain to me in simple words where he suddenly finds all that money lying around that had been neatly tied up in trust funds before?


I don't know where they found the money but they must knew that they couldn't get away with buying £13m house (even with a mortgage) and still not repaying the cost of Frogmore renovation.

ETA, ah yes the good old bank of daddy!


----------



## CarryOn2020

So,  I cancelled my Nflix subscription in early July.
Am I to understand that my dollars have been used to pay for Frogmore’s renovation????

*Noooooo*, that is wrong on so many levels. Why aren’t more people protesting this? We have been played, horribly played!
Good riddance, Nflix.









						Prince Harry pays back the £2.4m owed for renovating Frogmore Cottage
					

The repayment for renovation work on Frogmore Cottage was made possible thanks to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new multi-million pound Netflix deal, a source said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933


----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> Netflix is looking for their next House of Cards (sans molester) or Stranger Things, I doubt these 2 can come up with anything close.


M&H will produce shows that are very PC and boring, shows that manage to offend – and interest – no one.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Would someone explain to me in simple words where he suddenly finds all that money lying around that had been neatly tied up in trust funds before?


The news blurb stated the repayment was by the Duke of Sussex - no mention of the Duchess.  It could be that H was forced to use some of his own capital (from Diana). He has/had 25 M pounds or thereabouts. He can well afford the 2 M in renovation costs.

The trustees of his money may have allowed this use of his capital since Frogmore reno costs are so upsetting. H&M never planned to stay in the UK, Kensington Palace was not good enough for them, so they spent 2M of the public's money on Frogmore where they lived for maybe 9 months ...

I can see that the trustees might not allow him to spend his capital outside of the UK, but this use of the money at least has the benefit of addressing the awful optics of their greedy expenditures


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry pays back the £2.4m owed for renovating Frogmore Cottage
					

The repayment for renovation work on Frogmore Cottage was made possible thanks to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new multi-million pound Netflix deal, a source said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






marietouchet said:


> The news blurb stated the repayment was by the Duke of Sussex - no mention of the Duchess.  It could be that H was forced to use some of his own capital (from Diana). He has/had 25 M pounds or thereabouts. He can well afford the 2 M in renovation costs.
> 
> The trustees of his money may have allowed this use of his capital since Frogmore reno costs are so upsetting. They never planned to stay in the UK, Kensington Palace was not good enough for them, so they spent 2M of the public's money on Frogmore where they lived for maybe 9 months ...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry pays back the £2.4m owed for renovating Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> The repayment for renovation work on Frogmore Cottage was made possible thanks to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's new multi-million pound Netflix deal, a source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yes the DM says the Netflix deal made the repayment possible , thanks for the DM cite @CarryOn2020 

BUT NETFLIX has a deal with H&M as a pair, but H is the only one mentioned in conjunction with the repayment .. SHE got no credit for the repayment - that is unlike her ...

So, I still think the money came from Harry's trust, but it was freed up since he now has some sort of income stream

Well, maybe NETFLIX paid him/her/them 2.4 M pounds up front ???


----------



## Emeline

Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933


I'm very glad the debt was settled.
The property may come in handy. H may need a place of his own back home one day.
Shouldn't be too expensive to convert the yoga studio to a billiards room.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, they will never touch his trust fund. The debt was most likely in H’s name b/c MM is not a UK citizen and this is BRF property. This Nflix is money they have not earned, so guessing it was paid upfront.  Perhaps Charles saw they were really going to get Nflix money, so he paid off the Frogmore debt so they would get positive PR. Epic fail.

In any case, I hope this is the end of Nflix. More people should cancel, stocks should drop lower and that company goes away. Reed Hastings likes to play “the Keeper” game with his employees. They should vote him out. So many bad deals, so many awful shows. Signing these 2 grifters is the last straw.




marietouchet said:


> Yes the DM says the Netflix deal made the repayment possible , thanks for the DM cite @CarryOn2020
> 
> BUT NETFLIX has a deal with H&M as a pair, but H is the only one mentioned in conjunction with the repayment .. SHE got no credit for the repayment - that is unlike her ...
> 
> So, I still think the money came from Harry's trust, but it was freed up since he now has some sort of income stream
> 
> Well, maybe NETFLIX paid him/her/them 2.4 M pounds up front ???




ETA:  Frogmore remains their UK home.


----------



## Katel

Sharont2305 said:


> News just in
> 
> View attachment 4840933





sdkitty said:


> how did they manage that?
> and what do you suppose they are saying about it remaining their residence?
> I thought M would never set foot in England again





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Would someone explain to me in simple words where he suddenly finds all that money lying around that had been neatly tied up in trust funds before?


Haha yes... do we believe this? Optics anyone? Another fun hostage photo post:


----------



## CarryOn2020

What exactly is a “contribution”?  
QE gave H&M FCott for a wedding present. QE gave them the reno money. After 3-4 years of no payment, they make a contribution and keep FCott.  Wow.  Who is playing whom????? 





Katel said:


> Haha yes... do we believe this? Optics anyone? Another fun hostage photo post:
> 
> View attachment 4841047


----------



## bag-mania

In a sense it is pointless to speculate about where the money came from or how much they have. H&M will never want for cash, even living as extravagantly as they do. They have the biggest golden parachute in the world with the BRF. They will never have to live modestly like the normal people they want to do shows about.  It’s part of the privilege of being royal, they won’t be allowed to fail because it would make the family look bad.


----------



## Pessie

Katel said:


> Haha yes... do we believe this? Optics anyone? Another fun hostage photo post:
> 
> View attachment 4841047


I’d hate to see him on a bad hair day....


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> In a sense it is pointless to speculate about where the money came from or how much they have. H&M will never want for cash, even living as extravagantly as they do. They have the biggest golden parachute in the world with the BRF. They will never have to live modestly like the normal people they want to do shows about.  It’s part of the privilege of being royal, they won’t be allowed to fail because it would make the family look bad.



All true. A good explanation of why we got rid that crowd years ago. Many of us strongly dislike they are back and taking our dollars again. 

Nflix though is an American company with shareholders.  We the people can cancel them.  Nothing personal, just business.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> What exactly is a “contribution”?
> QE gave H&M FCott for a wedding present. QE gave them the reno money. After 3-4 years of no payment, they make a contribution and keep FCott.  Wow.  Who is playing whom?????


No she didn’t.  It remains a property of the crown, but has been designated for their use.  Not everything is some big conspiracy theory.


----------



## rose60610

As long as they're attempting to re-build burned bridges, why don't H&M donate to the Invictus participants that they dumped? 

I'd like to know who kicked them in the pants and made them realize that their moaning woes of victimhood and pleas for pity weren't working. Somebody woked them. Was paying back Frogmore a desperate olive branch to the BRF so they'd cooperate when H&M start producing the Netflix doc about the Royal Family? Nothing is done out of kindness of hearts with these two, it's all calculations.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Well, luckily you can be like MM in other ways: you can also pee in the woods and impress JCMH if you'd like.



Having just spent a month in the Yukon *real* camping, I would have impressed JCMH many times!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Would someone explain to me in simple words where he suddenly finds all that money lying around that had been neatly tied up in trust funds before?



In his dad's pocket.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> As long as they're attempting to re-build burned bridges, why don't H&M donate to the Invictus participants that they dumped?
> 
> I'd like to know who kicked them in the pants and made them realize that their moaning woes of victimhood and pleas for pity weren't working. Somebody woked them. Was paying back Frogmore a desperate olive branch to the BRF so they'd cooperate when H&M start producing the Netflix doc about the Royal Family? Nothing is done out of kindness of hearts with these two, it's all calculations.


The Express, yet another UK tabloid, says their hand was forced into doing the repayment due to the news of the Netflix deal, take that with a grain a of salt ... 
the Netflix deal and the repayment are linked somehow, but how ? We dont know for certain


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> All true. A good explanation of why we got rid that crowd years ago. Many of us strongly dislike they are back and taking our dollars again.
> 
> Nflix though is an American company with shareholders.  We the people can cancel them.  Nothing personal, just business.


INDEED!!! .. just look around Boston and Lexington & Concord, where the battles took place (and yes, on Patriots Day there is a re-enactment every year).  Many suffered and died to get rid of the Crown (my father's family had a member die in the War); so it really pisses me off that the American Media continues to use the "Duke & Duchess" titles!!!  NO, NO, NO and NO!!!


----------



## Emeline

marietouchet said:


> The Express, yet another UK tabloid, says their hand was forced into doing the repayment due to the news of the Netflix deal, take that with a grain a of salt ...
> the Netflix deal and the repayment are linked somehow, but how ? We dont know for certain


Maybe  a combo of Montecito mansion purchase along with the Netflix deal was the driving force for the Frogmore payoff.
The Harkles seem to be swimming in cash. It would have been  a very poor look  to continue to delay paying off the debt.

That said, I tend to think it was dear ole dad who probably wrote the check. (Or most of it.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

For some reason Scobie's tweet about the Frogmore repayment showed up in my Twitter feed (which I use professionally and not to stalk Harry and Meghan) and I made the mistake of checking the comments. OMG he must have a) blocked all critical voices and b) attracted all the stans because the comments are freaking ridiculous. Screaming for William and Kate to now lose Anmer Hall was one of the saner comments I feel (as it is a pretty insane request you can imagine the rest of the comments).


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> As long as they're attempting to re-build burned bridges, why don't H&M donate to the Invictus participants that they dumped?
> 
> I'd like to know who kicked them in the pants and made them realize that their moaning woes of victimhood and pleas for pity weren't working. Somebody woked them. Was paying back Frogmore a desperate olive branch to the BRF so they'd cooperate when H&M start producing the Netflix doc about the Royal Family? Nothing is done out of kindness of hearts with these two, *it's all calculations*.





marietouchet said:


> The Express, yet another UK tabloid, *says their hand was forced* into doing the repayment due to the news of the Netflix deal, take that with a grain a of salt ...
> the Netflix deal and the repayment are linked somehow, but how ? We dont know for certain


*100% AGREE* .. that everything they do is calculated for sure.  Personally, I think that .. with the Netflix Announcement, then the situation with the Invictus Games (_which IMO makes Harry look very BAD_), that yeah .. I think their hand was forced to repay for Frogmore to make *themselves *"look good".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Annawakes said:


> Is she getting paid by Vitamix?




to be fair I refer to mine as a Vitamix too.


----------



## Pessie

Emeline said:


> Maybe  a combo of Montecito mansion purchase along with the Netflix deal was the driving force for the Frogmore payoff.
> The Harkles seem to be swimming in cash. It would have been  a very poor look  to continue to delay paying off the debt.
> 
> That said, I tend to think it was dear ole dad who probably wrote the check. (Or most of it.)


I dunno, but it would be ironic wouldn’t it if having finally done the decent thing, he didn’t get the credit for it?


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> *100% AGREE* .. that everything they do is calculated for sure.  Personally, I think that .. with the Netflix Announcement, then the situation with the Invictus Games (_which IMO makes Harry look very BAD_), that yeah .. I think their hand was forced to repay for Frogmore to make *themselves *"look good".


And it all was disclosed on a USA holiday weekend , calculated ....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why would they care? None of it is their money.
They only care about the publicity, being popular so they can hang with the other popular kids. If Nflix stock continues to decline, they may need to make other changes in their lives. They make this announcement on our holiday so Nflix stock improves tomorrow. Watch what happens. Looks like Hastings is preparing his stockholders for a downturn. He has said he does not expect more subscribers for the 4th Q.


----------



## rose60610

A lot of investors, including very small investors made tons of $$ on Netflix stock, the share price would have to plummet badly for anybody to lose much, depending when they bought. For H not to pay off Frogmore after that mega deal would be senseless, Frogmore is chump change in that scheme of things. They could have bought an even more expensive place in CA with that deal. The lawsuit gigs are probably for beer money and backup plans. I wonder if Charles or even the Queen behind closed doors sent a secret emissary of sorts to hammer out the Netflix deal to help repair M&H's fall from grace to make them look a little less pathetic and somewhat savvy. If Harry didn't have a tragically killed young mother to exploit for a Netflix movie I don't think the deal would have been nearly as lucrative.


----------



## lalame

I just signed up for Netflix recently. I cycle through the streaming subscriptions each quarter. I admire Netflix as a company... M&H are just a blip in their history. They take risks and I appreciate it. By definition sometimes you strike out but better to try.

I also think it’s good news they paid back for the renovations. Very right for them to start paying back all debts now that their N deal is public.


----------



## marietouchet

Agonizing over the use of verb tenses ... present vs past vs future 
Prince Harry pays back the £2.4m owed for renovating Frogmore Cottage 
https://mol.im/a/8706695
The title uses the verb pays , as in he is currently doing it 
The summary of the article says “will pay “
Then a later paragraph says “has paid “
Well that about covers it ..:


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> how did they manage that?
> and what do you suppose they are saying about it remaining their residence?
> I thought M would never set foot in England again


She strikes me as the type of woman who likes having more than one residence.  So "above" the normal folks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_“He_ made a _contribution_ that covered the _necessary_ renovations.“

So, _he_ paid something, not her.  Is _contribution_ a synonym for repayment?  Which renovations are _necessary?  Fcott _is still his.
No receipts, no total costs, no transparency.

Nflx — article from last year, but it explains the streaming issues. No company is a sure thing, except maybe Disney and Amazon.








						Netflix Has 175 Days Left To Pull Off A Miracle... Or It's All Over
					

Most investors assume Netflix is the future of TV, but it's actually the opposite—Netflix's days are numbered.




					www.forbes.com
				




_While Netflix is running into debt “trying out” new shows, Disney already has the best of the best in its arsenal.

ETA: from April, 2020   https://www.thestreet.com/investing...re-down-despite-crushing-subscriber-estimates
On Wednesday, Netflix announced that it planned to raise $1 billion in debt that it will use for "general business purposes, which may include content acquisitions, production and development, capital expenditures, investments, working capital and potential acquisitions and strategic transactions.” Netflix had $14.17 billion in debt at the end of March. _


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> A lot of investors, including very small investors made tons of $$ on Netflix stock, the share price would have to plummet badly for anybody to lose much, depending when they bought. For H not to pay off Frogmore after that mega deal would be senseless, Frogmore is chump change in that scheme of things. They could have bought an even more expensive place in CA with that deal. The lawsuit gigs are probably for beer money and backup plans. I wonder if Charles or even the Queen behind closed doors sent a secret emissary of sorts to hammer out the Netflix deal to help repair M&H's fall from grace to make them look a little less pathetic and somewhat savvy. If Harry didn't have a tragically killed young mother to exploit for a Netflix movie I don't think the deal would have been nearly as lucrative.


Very true, but Hastings is well known as a 'slash & burn' and has no qualms about letting people go, should it have to come to something like that.


----------



## csshopper

Just curious, can US Citizens own property in Britain? Since she never became, and probably never intended to, a Citizen of the UK, maybe it's usual that only Harry would be the party in the transaction.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know where they found the money but they must knew that they couldn't get away with buying £13m house (even with a mortgage) and still not repaying the cost of Frogmore renovation.
> 
> ETA, ah yes the good old bank of daddy!


Maybe they're reading this thread!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they're reading this thread!


.. unlikely since it's not EFFUSIVE and CONSTANT praise !


----------



## gracekelly

I think Charles or the Queen paid for it.  I wouldn't be surprised if they turn it into an office building or staff quarters again.  If it really is that nice. maybe one of the younger royals will live in it.  The repayment is mentioned as only for the reno and not for the agreed upon rent.  They are never going to live in it and if by a wild chance Harry comes back to visit, he won't be staying there.  They are finished with Frog Cottage.


----------



## MaseratiMomma

A1aGypsy said:


> If they want to be movie stars or influencers or have a goopier version of goop, great.


Thank You !!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Philip Views Prince Harry Leaving Royal Family as 'Dereliction of Duty,' New Book Claims
					

Prince Philip sees grandson Prince Harry's departure from the royal family as a 'dereliction of duty,' a new biography by Ingrid Seward claims




					people.com


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> _“He_ made a _contribution_ that covered the _necessary_ renovations.“
> 
> So, _he_ paid something, not her.  Is _contribution_ a synonym for repayment?  Which renovations are _necessary?  Fcott _is still his.
> No receipts, no total costs, no transparency.
> 
> Nflx — article from last year, but it explains the streaming issues. No company is a sure thing, except maybe Disney and Amazon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Has 175 Days Left To Pull Off A Miracle... Or It's All Over
> 
> 
> Most investors assume Netflix is the future of TV, but it's actually the opposite—Netflix's days are numbered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _While Netflix is running into debt “trying out” new shows, Disney already has the best of the best in its arsenal.
> 
> ETA: from April, 2020   https://www.thestreet.com/investing...re-down-despite-crushing-subscriber-estimates
> On Wednesday, Netflix announced that it planned to raise $1 billion in debt that it will use for "general business purposes, which may include content acquisitions, production and development, capital expenditures, investments, working capital and potential acquisitions and strategic transactions.” Netflix had $14.17 billion in debt at the end of March. _



This article is from 2018... I think we can safely say Netflix survived the 175 days. These days interest is so low, it’s probably good value for companies to take on debt. I did a quick google and saw this interesting chart:


----------



## lalame

Read this in Vanity Fair. The mystery continues:



Another lawsuit? Truth be told I get this one, because the story made him look super bad. If untrue, he can have his day in court.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame  If I am reading everything correctly, the Forbes article is from May, 2019. The first photo is from 2018.  Still,  the 175 days have passed and Nflix lives on.  Even tho Nflx is still in debt as are many companies, it’s safe to say they will be around for awhile longer.  Now, if only Shondra Rhimes would send us another outstanding series, I might rejoin (but I doubt it.)








						Netflix to raise $1 billion to fund original content
					

Netflix Inc <NFLX.O> said on Wednesday it plans to raise about $1 billion in debt to beef up original content, a day after the streaming pioneer doubled its own projections for new customers as stuck-at-home users binged on movies and shows.




					www.reuters.com
				




As awful as it may be, surely by now H&M expect negative press. They have pushed so much nonsense at us that few can feel sorry for them. Once again their timing on the announcements is way off. To us ‘morons’, it does appear to be a ‘conflict of interest’  issue. But these lawsuits — geez, just because they _can_ doesn’t mean they _should_. As Oprah says, do they want to be right or do they want to be happy?


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> @lalame  If I am reading everything correctly, the Forbes article is from May, 2019. The first photo is from 2018.  Still,  the 175 days have passed and Nflix lives on.  Even tho Nflx is still in debt as are many companies, it’s safe to say they will be around for awhile longer.  Now, if only Shondra Rhimes would send us another outstanding series, I might rejoin (but I doubt it.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix to raise $1 billion to fund original content
> 
> 
> Netflix Inc <NFLX.O> said on Wednesday it plans to raise about $1 billion in debt to beef up original content, a day after the streaming pioneer doubled its own projections for new customers as stuck-at-home users binged on movies and shows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As awful as it may be, surely by now H&M expect negative press. They have pushed so much nonsense at us that few can feel sorry for them. Once again their timing on the announcements is way off. To us ‘morons’, it does appear to be a ‘conflict of interest’  issue. But these lawsuits — geez, just because they _can_ doesn’t mean they _should_. As Oprah says, do they want to be right or do they want to be happy?



You're totally right about the article, I just saw the date on the image haha. I would love another Shonda Rhimes series.... funny to think M just a few years ago would probably kill to get a place on one of those series. Now she's competing with Shonda directly (is that even considered competition?).

They are really plowing away at those lawsuits. They need to prioritize. If it were me, I'd probably sue over the Invictus thing since that's a matter of professional reputation and it's his passion project. The family stuff or pictures? Just leave it alone.


----------



## Chanbal

Good news for the UK TPF members:

*RICHARD KAY: All pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future - and the couple's £2.4million cheque for Frogmore Cottage means their divorce from Britain is final*

A source close to the couple confirmed that they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales, either from the Duchy of Cornwall or his private income.

This, too, marks a fork in the road for Harry and Meghan, although insiders suggest they may already have received the full amount of the stipend they expected from Charles for this year anyway.

What it does do, however, is signal that their divorce from Britain is permanent, while removing any pretence that they might still have a future role in the Royal Family.









						RICHARD KAY: Pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future
					

RICHARD KAY: A source close to the couple confirmed they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.


----------



## mdcx

Now if they would just relinquish the titles and any pretence that they are still acting as members of the BRF, we could all move on!
But no, M wants it all - free agent to secure as much cash as poss in America and speak out on hot button issues, plus titled member of the BRF when she wants to lord it above the poorz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If “the source close to the couple” is OS, then I don’t believe Bank of Dad has closed.  I do believe they all want the ‘drumbeat’ of criticism to stop. The only way to do that is for H and A to step out of the succession line. Voluntarily would be ideal because it would save us all from some drama. 

*2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.*
Completely agree. Well said. Thank you. 





Chanbal said:


> Good news for the UK TPF members:
> 
> *RICHARD KAY: All pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future - and the couple's £2.4million cheque for Frogmore Cottage means their divorce from Britain is final*
> 
> A source close to the couple confirmed that they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales, either from the Duchy of Cornwall or his private income.
> 
> This, too, marks a fork in the road for Harry and Meghan, although insiders suggest they may already have received the full amount of the stipend they expected from Charles for this year anyway.
> 
> What it does do, however, is signal that their divorce from Britain is permanent, while removing any pretence that they might still have a future role in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: A source close to the couple confirmed they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Good news for the UK TPF members:
> 
> *RICHARD KAY: All pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future - and the couple's £2.4million cheque for Frogmore Cottage means their divorce from Britain is final*
> 
> A source close to the couple confirmed that they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales, either from the Duchy of Cornwall or his private income.
> 
> This, too, marks a fork in the road for Harry and Meghan, although insiders suggest they may already have received the full amount of the stipend they expected from Charles for this year anyway.
> 
> What it does do, however, is signal that their divorce from Britain is permanent, while removing any pretence that they might still have a future role in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: A source close to the couple confirmed they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.C



Assuming this is true, then great!  When you're pushing 40 and getting a favorable business deal where you no longer have to sponge off of Da-Da and Nana AKA The Queen of England, then GOODY!  Oh Happy Day for H&M! So does this mean that Frogmore is on the airbnb list? How many minutes after getting the final Crown stipend did this go into effect? What kind of conversation took place? Maybe......

*Charles*: Happy for you son, sounds like you got a good Netflix deal (cough cough we made a few calls for you) so now you're, like, REALLY independent from us silly blokes at Buckingham. 

*JCMH*: Thanks Dad! Meghan has great plans! We've really gotta deliver on the doc about Mum's crash in the tunnel and how I got PTSD 23 years later from it or we'll be royally screwed!  Oh well, at least we'd still be royal then somehow! 

*Charles*: Sure, son, whatever you say. Congrats! (Oh Camilla My Darling, now that Harry is on U.S. soil taking full advantage of the capitalist system that his horrid adopted nation has provided, giving them up to 150 million dollars, we can fully enjoy ourselves and not worry about him. He's even paid for the Frogmore renovations! We can put it on airbnb! Thank God Will and Kate have got good sense and not played any kind of Victim Game. We can kick back until I'M King!)

*JCMH*: I'm really excited Dad! Meghan really knows how to control my every move! I wonder if you and Grandma were behind the scenes of this, but it doesn't matter now! My Meggie is calling me so I have to RUN! Cheerio!


----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> Now if they would just relinquish the titles and any pretence that they are still acting as members of the BRF, we could all move on!
> But no, M wants it all - free agent to secure as much cash as poss in America and speak out on hot button issues, plus titled member of the BRF when she wants to lord it above the poorz.



MM without her association to the BRF would continue being an unknown person. She will try to keep titles and whatever she can, Netflix would never look at her without the link to the BRF.



CarryOn2020 said:


> If “the source close to the couple” is OS, then I don’t believe Bank of Dad has closed.  I do believe they all want the ‘drumbeat’ of criticism to stop. The only way to do that is for H and A to step out of the succession line. Voluntarily would be ideal because it would save us all from some drama.
> 
> *2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.*
> Completely agree. Well said. Thank you.



Bank of Dad is likely only done with the allowance for 2020, which included the payment of Frogmore renovation. I don't believe the renovation money came from the Netflix deal, MM would not allow that.


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> INDEED!!! .. just look around Boston and Lexington & Concord, where the battles took place (and yes, on Patriots Day there is a re-enactment every year).  Many suffered and died to get rid of the Crown (my father's family had a member die in the War); so it really pisses me off that the American Media continues to use the "Duke & Duchess" titles!!!  NO, NO, NO and NO!!!


Agreed! I live near Valley Forge where so many American soldiers suffered. This Duke & Duchess titles are absolute BS in the US!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ... 

*Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
_*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_

CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm

"Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.

But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.

If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.

And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.

Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.

Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.

Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.

One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”

Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.

Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”

Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Good news for the UK TPF members:
> 
> *RICHARD KAY: All pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future - and the couple's £2.4million cheque for Frogmore Cottage means their divorce from Britain is final*
> 
> A source close to the couple confirmed that they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales, either from the Duchy of Cornwall or his private income.
> 
> This, too, marks a fork in the road for Harry and Meghan, although insiders suggest they may already have received the full amount of the stipend they expected from Charles for this year anyway.
> 
> What it does do, however, is signal that their divorce from Britain is permanent, while removing any pretence that they might still have a future role in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: A source close to the couple confirmed they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.


I hope this is true.  They’re irreversibly damaged goods here (deservedly so) - far better suited to the life Meghan had planned for them in the US. 
Poor Archie though, he’s going to be one lonely little kid.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."


Well well well, I guess there goes MM's next lawsuit! Before long they would have sued all media outlets in the UK. But (un)fortunately they can't silence the media! The media here won't bow to anybody in place of freedom of speech!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."



OMG yes. Michelle is everything Meghan will never be, and it irks me to no end that US media paints them to be even remotely in the same league.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they're reading this thread!


I’m not convinced he can read, and she doesn’t need to since she knows everything about everything.


----------



## marietouchet

The Observer, see below, is just one news outlet that has/had the Frogmore  Cottage (FC) story all garbled. Arghh cannot stand sloppy journalism. Trying to see the list of day, after this weekend stories. If you want, just skip to the summary ...

1. The Crown still OWNS FC - ignore stories that say "the Queen GAVE it to H&M". see Wiki
2. QEII ALLOWS/ALLOWED H&M the use of FC, just as she ALLOWS her other relatives eg the Kents & Gloucesters apartments at Kensington Palace. Such lodgings have traditionally been called GRACE AND FAVOR homes. See Wiki
3. The relatives  pay a "commercial rent" for KP, eg Pss Michael fussed at the time over her annual rent of 120k pounds/year (ca 2008). see DM below
4. H&M had TWO TYPES of debt on FC - monthly rent (18k pounds/mo) & reno costs - 2.4 M pounds.  See Times article & DM below.
5. This weekend's articles say that FC will remain the UK residence of H&M.
6. The weekend articles stated the reno cost has/will be paid by the Duke of Sussex.

SUMMARY:
Now that the 2,400,000 pound  reno costs are out of the way (haha), H&M still owe a MONTHLY RENT of $18,000 pounds on FC.
WOW that is a whole lot of rent for a place they have seen in 1 year.

REFERENCES
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_and_favour  Derfinitions

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...00-year-rent-Kensington-Palace-apartment.html
Pss Michael rent for Kensington









						Prince Harry and Meghan Are Spending $22,000 a Month on Frogmore Cottage Repayment
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are paying back the Sovereign Trust for the $3 million spent renovating the royal Windsor residence.




					observer.com
				



.
The Observer, above, confused the monthly rent and payment for the reno costs - it says H&M were paying 22k

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8326801/At-Harry-Meghan-paying-Frogmore.html
DM states 18k pounds/mo rent  AND 2.4 M in reno costs - two distinct types of debst for FC

The Time article is sadly subscription only, I posted a snippet a way and a link is useless - subscription fee required


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> The Observer, see below, is just one news outlet that has/had the Frogmore  Cottage (FC) story all garbled. Arghh cannot stand sloppy journalism. Trying to see the list of day, after this weekend stories. If you want, just skip to the summary ...
> 
> 1. The Crown still OWNS FC - ignore stories that say "the Queen GAVE it to H&M". see Wiki
> 2. QEII ALLOWS/ALLOWED H&M the use of FC, just as she ALLOWS her other relatives eg the Kents & Gloucesters apartments at Kensington Palace. Such lodgings have traditionally been called GRACE AND FAVOR homes. See Wiki
> 3. The relatives  pay a "commercial rent" for KP, eg Pss Michael fussed at the time over her annual rent of 120k pounds/year (ca 2008). see DM below
> 4. H&M had TWO TYPES of debt on FC - monthly rent (18k pounds/mo) & reno costs - 2.4 M pounds.  See Times article & DM below.
> 5. This weekend's articles say that FC will remain the UK residence of H&M.
> 6. The weekend articles stated the reno cost has/will be paid by the Duke of Sussex.
> 
> SUMMARY:
> Now that the 2,400,000 pound  reno costs are out of the way (haha), H&M still owe a MONTHLY RENT of $18,000 pounds on FC.
> WOW that is a whole lot of rent for a place they have seen in 1 year.
> 
> REFERENCES
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_and_favour  Derfinitions
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...00-year-rent-Kensington-Palace-apartment.html
> Pss Michael rent for Kensington
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Are Spending $22,000 a Month on Frogmore Cottage Repayment
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are paying back the Sovereign Trust for the $3 million spent renovating the royal Windsor residence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> observer.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> The Observer, above, confused the monthly rent and payment for the reno costs - it says H&M were paying 22k
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8326801/At-Harry-Meghan-paying-Frogmore.html
> DM states 18k pounds/mo rent  AND 2.4 M in reno costs - two distinct types of debst for FC
> 
> The Time article is sadly subscription only, I posted a snippet a way and a link is useless - subscription fee required


Yes, it is my understanding that they will need to continue to pay rent for Frogmore if they wish to keep it as their residence. 

I am surprised that Observer has been this sloppy!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I think Charles or the Queen paid for it.  I wouldn't be surprised if they turn it into an office building or staff quarters again.  If it really is that nice. maybe one of the younger royals will live in it.  The repayment is mentioned as only for the reno and not for the agreed upon rent.  They are never going to live in it and if by a wild chance Harry comes back to visit, he won't be staying there.  They are finished with Frog Cottage.


Agreed; read somewhere this morning (alas - at 4am, so forgive my remembering the 'where') .. that H&M are not being considered as "Royals" anymore.  Ah - wait, it had to be the Daily Mail because the comments were priceless .. MANY said "take away the titles" (to which I 100% support - after all, they are in America and we don't use them)!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> I hope this is true.  They’re irreversibly damaged goods here (deservedly so) - far better suited to the life Meghan had planned for them in the US.
> Poor Archie though, he’s going to be one lonely little kid.



I totally understand, but I'm not happy with her plans for the US. The money for her pretentious lifestyle and political aspirations will end up coming from taxpayers, something is very wrong that allows that.



Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."



Comparing MM to MO is absurd...

I sincerely hope (and expect) that MO will distance herself from MM. 'Complacent is complicit', using a quote that the duchess likes to use. 

Dear MO, in the name of the tremendous respect you have earned from us, please don't be complicit... don't associate your name to this. This country deserves better.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Good news for the UK TPF members:
> 
> *RICHARD KAY: All pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future - and the couple's £2.4million cheque for Frogmore Cottage means their divorce from Britain is final
> 
> A source close to the couple* confirmed that they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales, either from the Duchy of Cornwall or his private income.
> 
> This, too, marks a fork in the road for Harry and Meghan, although insiders suggest they may already have received the full amount of the stipend they expected from Charles for this year anyway.
> 
> What it does do, however, is signal that their divorce from Britain is permanent, while removing any pretence that they might still have a future role in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: A source close to the couple confirmed they were no longer receiving financial support from Harry's father, the Prince of Wales.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2020 has been a terrible year for us in the US, and we still have to put up with this couple.



 I'd say take the story with a grain of salt. The source close to the couple had to have been Omid Scobie. It likely wasn't any of the "protected five" young mothers from the Daily Mail lawsuit. Seriously, do they have any other people acting as sources for them?


----------



## CeeJay

Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."


Cannot even say HOW MUCH I love this!!!!! 

I see @Chanbal posted the article that I referenced previously - thank you!!!  In regards to those titles (that MM still wants so hard to retain!?!) .. as long as I breathe, I will write to every darn US Media rag, etc. and indicate "STOP USING TITLES IN THE US - WE FOUGHT A WAR TO REMOVE THEM AND THEY ARE NOT VALID HERE"!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> This article is from 2018... I think we can safely say Netflix survived the 175 days. These days interest is so low, it’s probably good value for companies to take on debt. I did a quick google and saw this interesting chart:
> 
> View attachment 4841335


Referred to Mezzanine Debt or Hybrid Debt in the Private Equity world (most of the times a Hedge Fund) which is also considered the highest risk, but can result in great returns too.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Philip Views Prince Harry Leaving Royal Family as 'Dereliction of Duty,' New Book Claims
> 
> 
> Prince Philip sees grandson Prince Harry's departure from the royal family as a 'dereliction of duty,' a new biography by Ingrid Seward claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


wow something that's not positive from People


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."


perfect


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> wow something that's not positive from People


Good, let's hope it continues!  Let's see if Scoobie-Dummy-Doo tries to call it differently ..


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *....although insiders suggest they may already have received the full amount of the stipend they expected from Charles for this year anyway.*



This is most likely what happened.  They got their full allowance for 2020 of whatever (1 - 2 million GBP) and figure they'll be OK in 2021 what with their Netflix deal, though I'm guessing that most other sources of income (like speaking engagements) are off the table probably for all of 2021.


----------



## marietouchet

there is yet another garbled story in the dm that fails to distinguish between monthly rent and part payment of the renovation
I give up
this one assumes they will never use Frogmore again , which disagrees with the weekend news
RICHARD KAY: Pretence is gone, Harry and Meghan have no Royal future
https://mol.im/a/8707289[/QUOTE]


----------



## LittleStar88

I'm sure Harry will go back, and even Archie, before MM does. I don't see those two hanging out at Frogmore alone. Harry (and Archie) sans MM will stay someplace else owned by BRF.

If she were to return, I am guessing she will stay in some posh hotel (or some famous person's home) and not anywhere owned or overseen by any member of the BRF. She would go alone and Harry/Archie would stay behind in the US.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Philip Views Prince Harry Leaving Royal Family as 'Dereliction of Duty,' New Book Claims
> 
> 
> Prince Philip sees grandson Prince Harry's departure from the royal family as a 'dereliction of duty,' a new biography by Ingrid Seward claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


From the book: "giving up his homeland and everything he cared about for a life of self-centered celebrity in North America.” this hits the nail in the head!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I totally understand, but I'm not happy with her plans for the US. The money for her pretentious lifestyle and political aspirations will end up coming from taxpayers, something is very wrong that allows that.
> 
> 
> 
> Comparing MM to MO is absurd...
> 
> I sincerely hope (and expect) that MO will distance herself from MM. 'Complacent is complicit', using a quote that the duchess likes to use.
> 
> Dear MO, in the name of the tremendous respect you have earned from us, please don't be complicit... don't associate your name to this. This country deserves better.


I think Michelle will be too gracious to say anything negative about M but I do hope she keeps her distance and doesn't encourage this crap


----------



## lalame

I agree about Michelle... she gets nothing out of actively throwing shade at Meghan and why would she even care? Meghan is just one of dozens and dozens of celebrities in her orbit with charitable interests. Whether they're true or not, Michelle has better things to worry about and address than exposing celebrities. These people deal with heads of state and industry. WTF is M+H?


----------



## bag-mania

In private Harry's entire family must feel so betrayed and be totally disgusted with him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

For me, it is important that H and Arxie give up their place in the succession.  As long as he stays in the line-up, he is disrupting the success of the BRF. Andrew should do that as well. Titles are important, but the line-up matters more, if I understand the system. I think this was a big issue for Edward, too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> From the book: "giving up his homeland and everything he cared about for a life of self-centered celebrity in North America.” this hits the nail in the head!



Except he did not give up his homeland. That is deceptive. He is still Prince, still gets allowance from Bank of Dad,  still in the succession line-up. FCott is still his.  In reality, he gave up nothing.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Except he did not give up his homeland. That is deceptive. He is still Prince, still gets allowance from Bank of Dad,  still in the succession line-up. FCott is still his.  In reality, he gave up nothing.


Sadly, I agree .. especially with what has transpired with the Invictus Games fiasco, Hazza needs to eat some crow.  He really should give up his succession line-up, and get rid of the titles (not his Prince, but the Duke & Duchess).  As we all know; however, MM steers the boat and I don't think she will EVER give up that title unless the BRF simply takes them away (which I think they should do just to 'somewhat' appease the British people that Harry has turned his back on).  While Prince Philip may be an old man, I can just IMAGINE how pissed off he is, especially since Hazza was their 'favorite' grandson!


----------



## Pessie

CeeJay said:


> Sadly, I agree .. especially with what has transpired with the Invictus Games fiasco, Hazza needs to eat some crow.  He really should give up his succession line-up, and get rid of the titles (not his Prince, but the Duke & Duchess).  As we all know; however, MM steers the boat and I don't think she will EVER give up that title unless the BRF simply takes them away (which I think they should do just to 'somewhat' appease the British people that Harry has turned his back on).  While Prince Philip may be an old man, I can just IMAGINE how pissed off he is, especially since Hazza was their 'favorite' grandson!


Nope, British people no longer care about Harry and his succession position is immaterial because the line of succession is secure through the Cambridges.  I think the only people chafing about his rank are Harry and his wife


----------



## CarryOn2020

@CeeJay
They both keep _most _of their charities.  They got what they wanted - half in, half out.
This is why I continue to say that *we all have been played*!  Enough with the H&M deceptions and even the BRF deceptions.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Sadly, I agree .. especially with what has transpired with the Invictus Games fiasco, Hazza needs to eat some crow.  He really should give up his succession line-up, and get rid of the titles (not his Prince, but the Duke & Duchess).  As we all know; however, MM steers the boat and I don't think she will EVER give up that title unless the BRF simply takes them away (which I think they should do just to 'somewhat' appease the British people that Harry has turned his back on).  While Prince Philip may be an old man, I can just IMAGINE how pissed off he is, especially since Hazza was their 'favorite' grandson!


disgusting to me that she talks about how she is now free so speak her mind here in the US, tells people to vote, etc. but wants to be call duchess....call that having your cake and eating it


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> In private Harry's entire family must feel so betrayed and be totally disgusted with him.


On a personal level I bet they do. Jealousy does terrible things to people, and I don’t think anyone had the faintest idea how much resentment he bore his brother for being born first.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> On a personal level I bet they do. Jealousy does terrible things to people, and I don’t think anyone had the faintest idea how much resentment he bore his brother for being born first.


that's ridiculous....by being second born he has much less responsibility but who knows how people's emotions work?


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> that's ridiculous....by being second born he has much less responsibility but who knows how people's emotions work?


I agree.  All the privilege and none of the responsibilities sounds perfect to me


----------



## purseinsanity

Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."


MM's "white house aspirations"?  She certainly can't be First Lady, so is she seriously deluded herself that her voice is to be used to be President?  LOLOL.


----------



## Sol Ryan

purseinsanity said:


> MM's "white house aspirations"?  She certainly can't be First Lady, so is she seriously deluded herself that her voice is to be used to be President?  LOLOL.



I'd have to vote for Kanye...


----------



## bag-mania

Somehow they didn't drive home to Harry how critical duty is to the royal family. Either that or Meghan was able to talk him into abandoning everything he had learned. She dangled HOLLYWOOD in front of him like luring a child with candy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Pessie said:


> Nope, British people no longer care about Harry and his succession position is immaterial because the line of succession is secure through the Cambridges.  I think the only people chafing about his rank are Harry and his wife


Yep! The chance of him being the king is very very small (unless something really bad happens to Wills). 

I do agree that Andrew should be removed completely from anything to do with the BRF!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Somehow they didn't drive home to Harry how critical duty is to the royal family. Either that or Meghan was able to talk him into abandoning everything he had learned. She dangled HOLLYWOOD in front of him like luring a child with candy.



Once he left the army and everyone wondered what he would do, the articles have said that he wanted out of his BRF duties. Apparently, he did not like showing up at events and smiling. Yes, it is tiring dressing up, shaking hands, smiling, eating rubber chicken, flashbulbs everywhere, blah blah. The perks, tho, far outweigh smiling at us tiresome ‘morons’. The finest new cars, the finest vintage cars, the finest clothes, the finest china, the finest security, the front row seats, free parking, every whim being give first priority, ad nauseam.

Instead of dealing with an understanding and patient parent, he will now be following every request Nflx throws at him. Photos, interviews are mandatory.  He will find out that the American rope-line is equally tiresome.

Yes, he, Andrew, and Arxi need to give up their succession. Why aren’t the media and the UK govt. insisting on this?


----------



## CeeJay

Sadly, I think Diana played a big part in Harry's resent .. she was quoted as saying that she didn't worry about William, it was Harry that worried her.  Sadly, after her death, I think many in the BRF over-compensated given Harry's age and of course, Charles had the "guilt" in regards to his affair with Camilla.  I actually have a former colleague whose family was similar; the eldest was expected to excel and get into Harvard and be a physician.  As a result, in her teenage years, she started to rebel which required them to seek psychiatric help for her.  Meanwhile, the younger child was spoiled rotten because  1.  she was a girl  and 2.  Daddy's girl - and because he was not around much, just gave in to her every ask.  When she hit her teen years, she also rebelled .. but in a very different way than her elder sibling .. such that she had to be hospitalized many times.  Each family is different - sadly (and I can sure speak to my F-up'd family), each child takes it differently.  I am VERY different than my sisters and have always thought - "okay, I didn't have a great childhood, but what didn't beat me has made me a LOT stronger".


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I think Michelle will be too gracious to say anything negative about M but I do hope she keeps her distance and doesn't encourage this crap





lalame said:


> I agree about Michelle... she gets nothing out of actively throwing shade at Meghan and why would she even care? Meghan is just one of dozens and dozens of celebrities in her orbit with charitable interests. Whether they're true or not, Michelle has better things to worry about and address than exposing celebrities. These people deal with heads of state and industry. WTF is M+H?



It is possible to distance yourself in a very gracious, effective and discreet manner without the need of throwing shade at anybody. Some things in life are done not for personal gain, but to advance causes. People like MM delay true progress, and should be discouraged imho.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Read this in Vanity Fair. The mystery continues:
> 
> View attachment 4841338
> 
> Another lawsuit? Truth be told I get this one, because the story made him look super bad. If untrue, he can have his day in court.


The Japanese gov't has said that the Olympics are going on in 2021 no matter what.  By the time the Invictus fund raiser will take place, many venues will be up and running.  I wouldn't give up on this so fast.  There are other factors at play including one upsmanship with Netflix by Amazon.  Harry is not the one to make the final decision in any event.  All he was ever going to do was show up and make a 5 minute speech full of trite word salad.


----------



## melissatrv

They have shown their true colors.  None of us were buying their "need for privacy" story, but for the rest of the public, I hope it is obvious now it was all about money. ONLY money.  They want to earn it, more than they would in in the BRF, with none of the responsibilities, and no one to tell them how to spend it.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> It is possible to distance yourself in a very gracious, effective and discreet manner without the need of throwing shade at anybody. Some things in life are done not for personal gain, but to advance causes. People like MM delay true progress, and should be discouraged imho.



Not sure it'd end up being so discreet... it makes headlines when M+H eat out at In-N-Out for God's sake, much less having a former First Lady distancing herself from them in an unsolicited public statement. It would be dragging them down into the drama... nah, they don't need that and frankly I prefer it that a respectable person like her keeps out of this mess. She seems like she's just minding her own business and the media is dragging her into the narrative with M.


----------



## lalame

Why do the British media still refer to Meghan as the Duchess of Sussex? Do any of them just call her Meghan? Is it a courtesy thing or legal or statement of support...? I've been wondering.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh the arrogance! They are as difficult and scheming as we thought. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands*

They really are royal pains.

Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a long list of demands involving their speaking appearances — including an upfront guarantee of the exact amount of money they will be paid and the ability to choose who introduces them and moderates the event, a report said Tuesday.

Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle — who last week inked a multimillion-dollar production deal with Netflix — recently signed on with the New York-based powerhouse Harry Walker Agency to rep them for speaking engagements.

According to a four-page “Virtual Event Request Form” devised by HWA for the royal duo, the pair will have the say-so on every detail of their online appearances, said London’s Telegraph, which obtained a copy of the conditions.

For example, “The choice of Introducer and Moderator will be at the final discretion of the Speaker,” the form states.

In addition, “The Fee will need to be paid directly from the contracting organization’s account.”

The couple is believed to be able to command up to $1 million per speech.

Before they agree to anything, the couple wants an estimate on the number of any attendees and a description of “who they are.’’

Also utmost on their mind are the sponsors.

Harry and Meghan insist on knowing everyone helping to fund the event — “corporations, individuals, members of the organization and government entities or organizations’’ —and “what they are receiving in return for their sponsorship.’’

The pair said they want to be told whether “any live or pre-recorded program elements will run concurrently with the Speaker’s presentation” and who else might be speaking.

“What will the audience see on screen? Will you incorporate any branding? What will the Speaker see on screen immediately prior to and during their presentation?” the form asks.

The prince and Meghan even want to know what “connection format” the event will be broadcast through, to spare them the embarrassment of an unexpected technological glitch.

The pair stepped down as senior royals in March, saying they did so in part to achieve “financial independence.’’

They are now living in California.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands: report
					

They really are royal pains.




					pagesix.com


----------



## rose60610

When a family such as the BRF gives you everything on a silver platter and more, and you kick them in the teeth and say "No thanks, nice knowing you, we're pulling up stakes and see ya' later", why would M even want to keep any titles they gave her? What an exploiting, gold digging leech of a user. As if Netflix or anyone else would have given her the time of day without JCMH. I'll give her credit for landing a dupe with the fame to put her in the limelight. I wonder who was all on her list to make that happen. Harry couldn't have been the only one, but she hit a home run in recruiting a household name prince. She probably pinches herself everyday, "Was I really able to trap the BRF into my woven web? Dang I'm good, and lucky that Harry of all people is such an idiot".  I'll give her that.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oh the arrogance! They are as difficult and scheming as we thought.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands*
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a long list of demands involving their speaking appearances — including an upfront guarantee of the exact amount of money they will be paid and the ability to choose who introduces them and moderates the event, a report said Tuesday.
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle — who last week inked a multimillion-dollar production deal with Netflix — recently signed on with the New York-based powerhouse Harry Walker Agency to rep them for speaking engagements.
> 
> According to a four-page “Virtual Event Request Form” devised by HWA for the royal duo, the pair will have the say-so on every detail of their online appearances, said London’s Telegraph, which obtained a copy of the conditions.
> 
> For example, “The choice of Introducer and Moderator will be at the final discretion of the Speaker,” the form states.
> 
> In addition, “The Fee will need to be paid directly from the contracting organization’s account.”
> 
> The couple is believed to be able to command up to $1 million per speech.
> 
> Before they agree to anything, the couple wants an estimate on the number of any attendees and a description of “who they are.’’
> 
> Also utmost on their mind are the sponsors.
> 
> Harry and Meghan insist on knowing everyone helping to fund the event — “corporations, individuals, members of the organization and government entities or organizations’’ —and “what they are receiving in return for their sponsorship.’’
> 
> The pair said they want to be told whether “any live or pre-recorded program elements will run concurrently with the Speaker’s presentation” and who else might be speaking.
> 
> “What will the audience see on screen? Will you incorporate any branding? What will the Speaker see on screen immediately prior to and during their presentation?” the form asks.
> 
> The prince and Meghan even want to know what “connection format” the event will be broadcast through, to spare them the embarrassment of an unexpected technological glitch.
> 
> The pair stepped down as senior royals in March, saying they did so in part to achieve “financial independence.’’
> 
> They are now living in California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands: report
> 
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Two people with nothing useful to say,  but have the right to demand whatever they want. Though, whoever agrees with their demands and invites them to speak, or helps them to get speaking gigs, is not better than them.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

bag-mania said:


> Oh the arrogance! They are as difficult and scheming as we thought.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands*
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a long list of demands involving their speaking appearances — including an upfront guarantee of the exact amount of money they will be paid and the ability to choose who introduces them and moderates the event, a report said Tuesday.
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle — who last week inked a multimillion-dollar production deal with Netflix — recently signed on with the New York-based powerhouse Harry Walker Agency to rep them for speaking engagements.
> 
> According to a four-page “Virtual Event Request Form” devised by HWA for the royal duo, the pair will have the say-so on every detail of their online appearances, said London’s Telegraph, which obtained a copy of the conditions.
> 
> For example, “The choice of Introducer and Moderator will be at the final discretion of the Speaker,” the form states.
> 
> In addition, “The Fee will need to be paid directly from the contracting organization’s account.”
> 
> The couple is believed to be able to command up to $1 million per speech.
> 
> Before they agree to anything, the couple wants an estimate on the number of any attendees and a description of “who they are.’’
> 
> Also utmost on their mind are the sponsors.
> 
> Harry and Meghan insist on knowing everyone helping to fund the event — “corporations, individuals, members of the organization and government entities or organizations’’ —and “what they are receiving in return for their sponsorship.’’
> 
> The pair said they want to be told whether “any live or pre-recorded program elements will run concurrently with the Speaker’s presentation” and who else might be speaking.
> 
> “What will the audience see on screen? Will you incorporate any branding? What will the Speaker see on screen immediately prior to and during their presentation?” the form asks.
> 
> The prince and Meghan even want to know what “connection format” the event will be broadcast through, to spare them the embarrassment of an unexpected technological glitch.
> 
> The pair stepped down as senior royals in March, saying they did so in part to achieve “financial independence.’’
> 
> They are now living in California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands: report
> 
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Hate to be the one to break it to you but as a VIP Event Manager, none of those things that allegedly they are asking for is out of the ballpark for requests by high-profile speakers.


----------



## rose60610

Whoever has the ability to pay a million for a speech has the entire world from which to choose. So why would anyone select Harry or Meghan for a million when they could get a head of state or someone else with the ability to utter a sentence without self pity for less than a million? H's fame comes from inheritance/heritage and M's come from marrying somebody with royal inheritance /heritage. As for actual talent, business savvy, inspiration, or achievement once could book a myriad of wonderful speakers for a million or less. JP Morgan had $$ to burn so they didn't care when they hired these dorks. JP knew their audience was going to be tuned out, gone, or drunk by the time M&H opened their mouths and spewed a pity fest about Diana. Going forward, any company will have to justify to its audience the logistics of hiring whomever to speak.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@rose60610   Great questions, here are my thoughts:
Why choose H&M for your event? The sponsors get access to the son of the next King of England, possibly even the current Queen. QE and Charles have millions of dollars, control thousands of acres, and have access to all important power around the globe. Everyone and anyone will take their calls.

the titles — BRF doesn’t need those, they have succession rights. Their position is secured for life. Andrew will never lose his title so why should H&M? Remember, H hasn’t really given up anything. He is still Prince, still gets allowance from Bank of Dad, still in the succession line-up. FCott is still his.  He gets to make his demands as he has done his entire life. H&M have duped so many people into believing they have done something significant. They haven’t.  No big deal not to have them at various events.  Especially with Covid, it seems that it was very easy for the BRF to move on without them. They just weren’t that important.


----------



## pixiejenna

I can’t imagine why anyone would hire either one of them to speak let alone pay them 1 million and up to speak. Megan is word salad and Harry who has a lot of public speaking under his belt he’s not much better than Megan. Other than the possibility of gaining access to the royal family what other insensitive could one have? Which is not something easy to obtain when people are not having in person speeches everything is done online. Also I can’t imagine any company spending 1 million + on a speaker when the economy is so poor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Straight-Laced said:


> Opinion from The Telegraph (respected UK broadsheet).  Surprise, surprise - Meghan doesn't even take advice from her mentor ...
> 
> *Stop comparing Meghan to Michelle ***** - they are worlds apart*
> _*As speculation grows over Meghan Markle and her White House aspirations her relationship with the former First Lady is under the spotlight*_
> 
> CELIA WALDEN7 September 2020 • 7:00pm
> 
> "Back in mid-August, when Meghan Markle gave her first interview from her and Harry’s new Santa Barbara home, we were given a clearer picture of the embattled couple’s safe haven. Along with the price tag – $14.7 million – nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms we already knew about, we were treated to a tantalising glimpse of the views and the vintage Martin Lawrence Bullard-inspired decor.
> 
> But all I really wanted to see was Meghan’s ‘strategy bunker.’ Because there has to be one, and in my head it looks a lot like the White House’s Situation Room: a plush 5,000 square foot global intelligence centre, complete with mahogany conference table and high-backed leather chairs. In my mind, it’s from this bunker (and the vast digital image of a rainbow-shaped career plan mounted on the soundproofed wall) that the Duchess is able to chart her journey from C-list actress to President of the United States.
> 
> If it were ever in doubt that this could be the possible end game, a new clause appended to the trademark registration of the couple’s sustainable travel project, Travalyst, should help dispel that. In documents released by the Intellectual Property Office in London this week, “lobbying with respect to laws regarding sustainable travel” has been added to that 2019 registration.
> 
> And with influencing governments now openly on the agenda and Meghan having become increasingly politically active in the US in recent weeks – urging Americans to vote on November 3 – a 2024 bid seems inevitable. Indeed the odds on her running and winning were recently slashed to 100 to 1.
> 
> Meghan’s rainbow starts with the royal title – gained and then promptly lost – before rising up, nonetheless, in a glorious curve of personal achievement. Her September 2019 guest editorship of British Vogueis charted, along with her Disney nature documentary, Elephant, the following year. And of course, the £112 million Netflix deal signed last weekis up there. But it’s the relationship she has so painstakingly forged with Michelle *****, and the parallels we are supposed to draw, that are to take her to the end of that rainbow.
> 
> Suddenly Michelle isn’t just an “inspiration”, “mentor” and “friend” – as she shmoozily described the former First Lady in her Vogue Q&A– but a kindred spirit and fellow ceiling smasher: a woman whose slow, steady and selfless push towards a better world is a triumph over adversity.
> 
> Only there’s a problem with these parallels. Namely that they are lazy, preposterous, baseless guff. Growing up as a privately educated schoolgirl in Hollywood is unlikely to have given Meghan the same insights as the ones Michelle gleaned being raised in a cramped apartment on the wrong side of Chicago. Equally, struggling to get roles on daytime telly soaps thanks to her “ethnically ambiguous” looks is a rather smaller violin to saw away on than defying every high school teacher’s expectation to win a place at Princeton University, where Michelle was made to feel “like a visitor on campus”, before going on to excel at Harvard Law School.
> 
> One of these two women met her husband at the Chicago law firm where she was one of just two African Americans in the department; the other was set up on a blind date by a member of London’s society set, after allegedly putting the word out that she was keen to land a “famous British man.”
> 
> Then there’s the small matter of intellectual rigor. Meghan may have been described as “Hollywood smart” in the past, but Hollywood smart to Michelle ***** smart is what dog years are to human years. The former First Lady would never have taken it upon herself to scrawl “inspirational messages of support” on bananas handed out as part of food packs to sex workers. She would never have alienated powerful figures like, say, the Queen of England in her blinkered and toe-curlingly transparent attempts to carve her own path.
> 
> Despite being effectively muted by her husband’s presidency and forced to downplay her own ambitions and intelligence, Michelle would never have been overheard icily muttering “Don’t I have a voice?”, as Meghan was revealed to have done at an early public event in which she was humiliatingly made to wait in line alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Whereas Michelle resolutely refused to whinge throughout her years in the White House, knowing that her voice would be heard in time, Meghan has done nothing but complain from day one, ironically flouting the one piece of public advice her mentor once gave her. “Take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything,” the former First Lady offered up as counsel to Meghan in an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2018. “Like me, Meghan probably never dreamed she’d have a life like this and the pressure you feel can sometimes feel like a lot.”
> 
> Was Michelle being disingenuous? I suspect young Meghan dreamed of precisely the life she has today. Only rather than it feeling “like a lot,” it won’t now feel like nearly enough."


Celia Walden just happens to be the wife of Piers Morgan.


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> On a personal level I bet they do. Jealousy does terrible things to people, and I don’t think anyone had the faintest idea how much resentment he bore his brother for being born first.


I personally don't think he has ever minded being the second born tbh. He has been shown on film saying no one in the family wants to be King or Queen. Also when I think either George or Charlotte was born someone from the press asked him, again on film, how do you feel about being pushed down the line of succession (or words to that effect) and he replied, it's great. I'm sure he also has said the more the merrier for me. 

Also, can I be cheeky and ask politely that posters stop referring to the Queen as the Queen of England and Prince Charles as the future King of England?  Off I scuttle....


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> I personally don't think he has ever minded being the second born tbh. He has been shown on film saying no one in the family wants to be King or Queen. Also when I think either George or Charlotte was born someone from the press asked him, again on film, how do you feel about being pushed down the line of succession (or words to that effect) and he replied, it's great. I'm sure he also has said the more the merrier for me.
> 
> Also, can I be cheeky and ask politely that posters stop referring to the Queen as the Queen of England and Prince Charles as the future King of England?  Off I scuttle....



I agree with you... I don’t see any jealousy for not being first born. Didn’t seem like he ever wanted to be part of that institution in the first place. I think it’s a mix of extreme privilege + millennialism (speaking as a millennial) that makes him want the fame, glory and money but none of the duty.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Whoever has the ability to pay a million for a speech has the entire world from which to choose. So why would anyone select Harry or Meghan for a million when they could get a head of state or someone else with the ability to utter a sentence without self pity for less than a million? H's fame comes from inheritance/heritage and M's come from marrying somebody with royal inheritance /heritage. As for actual talent, business savvy, inspiration, or achievement once could book a myriad of wonderful speakers for a million or less. JP Morgan had $$ to burn so they didn't care when they hired these dorks. JP knew their audience was going to be tuned out, gone, or drunk by the time M&H opened their mouths and spewed a pity fest about Diana. Going forward, any company will have to justify to its audience the logistics of hiring whomever to speak.



I think it’s just because M+H happen to be trending now. They aren’t radically more sophisticated people now than before they got married... they didn’t get asked to do these things then. Funny how that happens.


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> Whoever has the ability to pay a million for a speech has the entire world from which to choose. So why would anyone select Harry or Meghan for a million when they could get a head of state or someone else with the ability to utter a sentence without self pity for less than a million? H's fame comes from inheritance/heritage and M's come from marrying somebody with royal inheritance /heritage. As for actual talent, business savvy, inspiration, or achievement once could book a myriad of wonderful speakers for a million or less. JP Morgan had $$ to burn so they didn't care when they hired these dorks. JP knew their audience was going to be tuned out, gone, or drunk by the time M&H opened their mouths and spewed a pity fest about Diana. Going forward, any company will have to justify to its audience the logistics of hiring whomever to speak.


That's the bit I don't get. I used to organise events with speakers in my (very big) corporate (like JPM) and we can get some really good speakers with impressive CVs like OBEs and MBEs, Olympic medallists, award winning entrepreneurs etc for pretty in-expensive fees. I learned so much from those people. And yes, they do coordinate a lot with the organisers before hand etc. What could you possibly learn from them? The only thing I can think of from Harry was his mental health struggle. But what he has done now is a very bad example of the consequence of that! They are experts at abandoning ones' families and filing lawsuits though, as well as starting an initiative but never follow through with it. 

They obviously need to earn a living somehow with mortgage, rent, legal fees, private travelling and all that. So I shall wait to see what they will produce for Netflix.


----------



## marietouchet

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Hate to be the one to break it to you but as a VIP Event Manager, none of those things that allegedly they are asking for is out of the ballpark for requests by high-profile speakers.


The list of demands article is recent dated 08 Sep 2020,but two weeks ago it was reported no one wanted them as speakers, thus, they were forced into being producers

All I have learned from the saga of H&M, is that the reports are grossly inaccurate, not up to date , unspecific

All I know is the TIMING is everything ... ex there is one day of good news (forget me nots & NETFLIX big fat deal) to offset the next days bad news (QEII not told of NETFLIX, Invictus is being thrown under bus ..), then a day of vague info (Frogmore costs are paid/ being paid/ will be paid)

I do believe that QEII is deliberately being discreet, she has not spoken yet


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I personally don't think he has ever minded being the second born tbh. He has been shown on film saying no one in the family wants to be King or Queen. Also when I think either George or Charlotte was born someone from the press asked him, again on film, how do you feel about being pushed down the line of succession (or words to that effect) and he replied, it's great. I'm sure he also has said the more the merrier for me.
> 
> Also, can I be cheeky and ask politely that posters stop referring to the Queen as the Queen of England and Prince Charles as the future King of England?  Off I scuttle....


Good point, we do a sloppy job on titles, me included, ex there is no Kate, her husband calls her Catherine and (if I could type better) I would call her the Duchess of Cambridge (so many letters to type, and I am such a bad typist)


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh the arrogance! They are as difficult and scheming as we thought.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands*
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a long list of demands involving their speaking appearances — including an upfront guarantee of the exact amount of money they will be paid and the ability to choose who introduces them and moderates the event, a report said Tuesday.
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle — who last week inked a multimillion-dollar production deal with Netflix — recently signed on with the New York-based powerhouse Harry Walker Agency to rep them for speaking engagements.
> 
> According to a four-page “Virtual Event Request Form” devised by HWA for the royal duo, the pair will have the say-so on every detail of their online appearances, said London’s Telegraph, which obtained a copy of the conditions.
> 
> For example, “The choice of Introducer and Moderator will be at the final discretion of the Speaker,” the form states.
> 
> In addition, “The Fee will need to be paid directly from the contracting organization’s account.”
> 
> The couple is believed to be able to command up to $1 million per speech.
> 
> Before they agree to anything, the couple wants an estimate on the number of any attendees and a description of “who they are.’’
> 
> Also utmost on their mind are the sponsors.
> 
> Harry and Meghan insist on knowing everyone helping to fund the event — “corporations, individuals, members of the organization and government entities or organizations’’ —and “what they are receiving in return for their sponsorship.’’
> 
> The pair said they want to be told whether “any live or pre-recorded program elements will run concurrently with the Speaker’s presentation” and who else might be speaking.
> 
> “What will the audience see on screen? Will you incorporate any branding? What will the Speaker see on screen immediately prior to and during their presentation?” the form asks.
> 
> The prince and Meghan even want to know what “connection format” the event will be broadcast through, to spare them the embarrassment of an unexpected technological glitch.
> 
> The pair stepped down as senior royals in March, saying they did so in part to achieve “financial independence.’’
> 
> They are now living in California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands: report
> 
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


controlling their image.....I can understand that.  but they aren't worth anywhere near a million dollars IMO


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think it’s just because M+H happen to be trending now. They aren’t radically more sophisticated people now than before they got married... they didn’t get asked to do these things then. Funny how that happens.


I'd take Greta Thunberg over them Any Day.  And she (if she was paid) would use the money for a good cause.  These two aren't Doing Anything, just talking and posing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Good point, we do a sloppy job on titles, me included, ex there is no Kate, her husband calls her Catherine and (if I could type better) I would call her the Duchess of Cambridge (so many letters to type, and I am such a bad typist)



To be fair: after her wedding she was asked if she preferred Catherine over Kate and she said she was still very much Kate *shrugs* Obviously that was like 10 years ago, though.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's the bit I don't get. I used to organise events with speakers in my (very big) corporate (like JPM) and we can get some really good speakers with impressive CVs like OBEs and MBEs, Olympic medallists, award winning entrepreneurs etc for pretty in-expensive fees. I learned so much from those people. And yes, they do coordinate a lot with the organisers before hand etc. What could you possibly learn from them? The only thing I can think of from Harry was his mental health struggle. But what he has done now is a very bad example of the consequence of that! They are experts at abandoning ones' families and filing lawsuits though, as well as starting an initiative but never follow through with it.
> 
> They obviously need to earn a living somehow with mortgage, rent, legal fees, private travelling and all that. So I shall wait to see what they will produce for Netflix.


and where does the money for the speaking engagements go?  supposedly to their foundation?  if that's the case then their financial independence will depend on Netflix and whatever other show biz deals they can get.  I don't have Netflix and I wouldn't watch them or anything the produced if I did.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> and where does the money for the speaking engagements go?  supposedly to their foundation?


Well, your guess is good as mine! Who knows apart from themselves? There is nothing stopping them to pay themselves salaries and deduct expenses from. I haven't heard anything about any work their "foundation" has been doing anyway...


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, your guess is good as mine! Who knows apart from themselves? There is nothing stopping them to pay themselves salaries and deduct expenses from. I haven't heard anything about any work their "foundation" has been doing anyway...


right.....so what is stopping them?  the could give grants to worthy organizations.  maybe start with some of the ones they have had photo ops with - Angels in LA where she brought food to people and pulled down her mask?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> controlling their image.....I can understand that.  but they aren't worth anywhere near a million dollars IMO



They can ask as a first point of neg (you can ask for anything, don't mean you're getting anything) but if they dug their heels in, in all respects, they'd be wildly overestimating their importance.

They get huge media coverage but actually overshadow everything they're involved with. Right now I'd say they're at the tipping point. They could be the invited esteemed guests of honour or the clowns that make fun of the proceedings and turn the event into a circus.

Some of the requests could not be guaranteed. Very often speakers are replacements at short notice or media channels/platforms have to be switched for example.

In signing agreements like that is basically giving them last word on approval for any changes at all in any/all of those areas or H&M can pull out and still be paid. They are not only asking for control over their portion of events/image but effectively could be running the show.

I can see them doing that once before they're considered a liability. Many huge names are on the speaking circuit. Looking how they sue everyone, would you book them?


----------



## CarryOn2020

They need to grab the headlines while they can. The post-Covid world is coming!  The A listers are ready for that spotlight to shine on them. Farewell to H&M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Now Omid is in bed with Netflix. Apparently anybody can do shows for them.

*Now the Sussexes' biographer is working with Netflix! Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie films with the media giant days after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $150million deal*

Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie has revealed he is filming with Netflix days after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex signed a $150million megadeal with the media giant.

Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, who recently bought a $14million mansion in Santa Barbara, announced a new deal with the streaming service last week, and said they wanted to provide 'hope and inspiration' with their upcoming projects.

Omid shared a snap on his Instagram page yesterday revealing he was 'shooting a little something with Netflix', although he did not reveal what the project would be. It is not known whether the project is linked to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. 

Royal editor Omid wrote the controversial biography Finding Freedom which  raised eyebrows for its gushing praise and intimate knowledge of the Duke and the Duchess - but the couple claimed they were not interviewed and did not contribute to the book.

His move to work with the media giant comes days after a royal source claimed Meghan and Prince Harry failed to tell the Queen, 94, about their Netflix deal, which could be worth as much as $150million, before announcing it to the world.

Her Majesty had to be told by her aides about the couple's new venture - which involves a yet-to-be-named production company set on making documentaries, feature films and children's programming.

A source told The Sun: 'Harry did not inform the Queen about the Netflix deal.'

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have never produced a TV show, will make documentaries, films, scripted and kids’ programmes in the new partnership.

'Her Majesty is all too aware of the pitfalls of when senior royals embark on lucrative projects - Prince Edwards’ production flop and some of the deals Sarah Ferguson has signed over the years to name a few,' the source told Fabulous.

'Her view is simple, the Royals are not for sale and danger surrounds high profile roles outside of the institution itself.'

They added, however, that the Queen, 'knowing her grandson Harry as she does', will appreciate that the duke and duchess can not be talked out of their plans. 

Harry and Meghan said last week they had founded a production company to make documentaries, feature films, scripted shows and children's programmes.

They vowed to make 'impactful content that unlocks action' and name-checked Netflix chief executive Ted Sarandos and spoke of the firm's 'unprecedented reach'.

They are expected to make content which includes work on 'mental health', an animated series about women, a nature documentary and shows on community service. 

However, royal officials 'will examine Harry and Meghan's Netflix deal' after they agreed to approval of any new commercial ventures when they quit public life, according to a source.

A palace insider claimed that despite ditching official duties any profit-oriented plans would be 'subject to discussion'.

Harry and Meghan got the green light to broker commercial deals in January - but the moneymaking projects will be scrutinised by the Queen after a year.

The historic agreement ruled the couple will drop their HRH titles, pay back £2.4million of taxpayer cash and no longer receive public funds.

In exchange, they were allowed to quit frontline duties and given licence to expand their brand.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biographer films with Netflix
					

Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie has revealed he is filming with Netflix days after the Duke, 35,  and Duchess of Sussex, 39, signed a $150million megadeal with the US media giant.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> right.....so what is stopping them?  the could give grants to worthy organizations.  maybe start with some of the ones they have had photo ops with - Angels in LA where she brought food to people and pulled down her mask?



I doubt we'll hear. A matter of privacy. The sprinkle garnish on that word salad will be "given heart-felt, substantial, anonymous donations"


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I doubt we'll hear. A matter of privacy. The sprinkle garnish on that word salad will be "given heart-felt, substantial, anonymous donations"


what?  don't they need to brag about everything they do?


----------



## lanasyogamama

It has to drive them crazy that “The Harkles” nickname is sticking.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what?  don't they need to brag about everything they do?



They will. They'll say they've given HUGE anonymous donations


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think they are struggling to get booked hence all the PR pieces out there recently.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> They will. They'll say they've given HUGE anonymous donations


Where all the numbers are to the right of the decimal point??


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think they are struggling to get booked hence all the PR pieces out there recently.


Not to mention all the articles about how much they are being paid. The numbers are way too high to be believed.   Nobody thinks they are worth that much. I think a media conglomerate should hire them to give a speech about why they sue the media.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, *who have never produced a TV show*, will make documentaries, films, scripted and kids’ programmes in the new partnership.
> 
> '*Her Majesty is all too aware of the pitfalls of when senior royals embark on lucrative project*s - Prince Edwards’ production flop and some of the deals Sarah Ferguson has signed over the years to name a few,' the source told Fabulous.
> 
> '*Her view is simple, the Royals are not for sale and danger surrounds high profile roles outside of the institution itself*.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biographer films with Netflix
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie has revealed he is filming with Netflix days after the Duke, 35,  and Duchess of Sussex, 39, signed a $150million megadeal with the US media giant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



These are the key points to me.  The Queen will be watching them carefully, she's seen other royals go down this path and . . . they've never produced anything.  People work for years in the industry before they are ready to take on producing responsibilities.  I'm sure MM learned a lot from her ex-husband but it's different when you have to do it yourself. You can have all the talent and energy in the world (and they don't have any obvious talent in either writing or producing), and a project can still flop.  

I admit, I am super curious to see what these two produce though lolol!  But, I'll have to be content with reading reviews. We just cancelled our Netflix subscription coincidentally at around the same time of their deal, and wouldn't reactivate it to watch their documentaries or an animated series or children's programs. Funny, because all of those items on their list . . . documentaries, animated series, and children's programs . . . are some of the most difficult to create and be successful.


----------



## kipp

papertiger said:


> I can see them doing that once before they're considered a liability. Many huge names are on the speaking circuit. *Looking how they sue everyone, would you book them?*



THIS


----------



## CeeJay

pixiejenna said:


> I can’t imagine why anyone would hire either one of them to speak let alone pay them 1 million and up to speak. Megan is word salad and Harry who has a lot of public speaking under his belt he’s not much better than Megan. Other than the possibility of gaining access to the royal family what other insensitive could one have? Which is not something easy to obtain when people are not having in person speeches everything is done online. Also I can’t imagine any company spending 1 million + on a speaker when the economy is so poor.


Hmmmmm .. the only people that I could see hiring them, is some very rich Russian Oligarch .. who, in essence .. wants that access to a member of the BRF regardless of whether or not they are still "truly" in it.  I could just see .. "_okay, I'll pay you the $1m .. but .. you have to ..._"      WHAT A MESS!


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> These are the key points to me.  The Queen will be watching them carefully, she's seen other royals go down this path and . . . they've never produced anything.  People work for years in the industry before they are ready to take on producing responsibilities.  I'm sure MM learned a lot from her ex-husband but it's different when you have to do it yourself. You can have all the talent and energy in the world (and they don't have any obvious talent in either writing or producing), and a project can still flop.
> 
> I admit, I am super curious to see what these two produce though lolol!  But, I'll have to be content with reading reviews. We just cancelled our Netflix subscription coincidentally at around the same time of their deal, and wouldn't reactivate it to watch their documentaries or an animated series or children's programs. Funny, because all of those items on their list . . . documentaries, animated series, and children's programs . . . are some of the most difficult to create and be successful.



My guess is they will pay talent to do the creative/hard work, and just slap MM & JCMH's names on it to get attention.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> I personally don't think he has ever minded being the second born tbh. He has been shown on film saying no one in the family wants to be King or Queen. Also when I think either George or Charlotte was born someone from the press asked him, again on film, how do you feel about being pushed down the line of succession (or words to that effect) and he replied, it's great. I'm sure he also has said the more the merrier for me.
> 
> Also, can I be cheeky and ask politely that posters stop referring to the Queen as the Queen of England and Prince Charles as the future King of England?  Off I scuttle....


Oh you *cheeky minx*!!!  *HA HA HA HA HA ..*


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. the only people that I could see hiring them, is some very rich Russian Oligarch .. who, in essence .. wants that access to a member of the BRF regardless of whether or not they are still "truly" in it.  I could just see .. "_okay, I'll pay you the $1m .. but .. you have to ..._"      WHAT A MESS!



This tracks with all the Russian associations with their Airbnbs across Canada.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Now Omid is in bed with Netflix. Apparently anybody can do shows for them.
> 
> *Now the Sussexes' biographer is working with Netflix! Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie films with the media giant days after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $150million deal*
> 
> Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie has revealed he is filming with Netflix days after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex signed a $150million megadeal with the media giant.
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, who recently bought a $14million mansion in Santa Barbara, announced a new deal with the streaming service last week, and said they wanted to provide 'hope and inspiration' with their upcoming projects.
> 
> Omid shared a snap on his Instagram page yesterday revealing he was 'shooting a little something with Netflix', although he did not reveal what the project would be. It is not known whether the project is linked to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
> 
> Royal editor Omid wrote the controversial biography Finding Freedom which  raised eyebrows for its gushing praise and intimate knowledge of the Duke and the Duchess - but the couple claimed they were not interviewed and did not contribute to the book.
> 
> His move to work with the media giant comes days after a royal source claimed Meghan and Prince Harry failed to tell the Queen, 94, about their Netflix deal, which could be worth as much as $150million, before announcing it to the world.
> 
> Her Majesty had to be told by her aides about the couple's new venture - which involves a yet-to-be-named production company set on making documentaries, feature films and children's programming.
> 
> A source told The Sun: 'Harry did not inform the Queen about the Netflix deal.'
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have never produced a TV show, will make documentaries, films, scripted and kids’ programmes in the new partnership.
> 
> 'Her Majesty is all too aware of the pitfalls of when senior royals embark on lucrative projects - Prince Edwards’ production flop and some of the deals Sarah Ferguson has signed over the years to name a few,' the source told Fabulous.
> 
> 'Her view is simple, the Royals are not for sale and danger surrounds high profile roles outside of the institution itself.'
> 
> They added, however, that the Queen, 'knowing her grandson Harry as she does', will appreciate that the duke and duchess can not be talked out of their plans.
> 
> Harry and Meghan said last week they had founded a production company to make documentaries, feature films, scripted shows and children's programmes.
> 
> They vowed to make 'impactful content that unlocks action' and name-checked Netflix chief executive Ted Sarandos and spoke of the firm's 'unprecedented reach'.
> 
> They are expected to make content which includes work on 'mental health', an animated series about women, a nature documentary and shows on community service.
> 
> However, royal officials 'will examine Harry and Meghan's Netflix deal' after they agreed to approval of any new commercial ventures when they quit public life, according to a source.
> 
> A palace insider claimed that despite ditching official duties any profit-oriented plans would be 'subject to discussion'.
> 
> Harry and Meghan got the green light to broker commercial deals in January - but the moneymaking projects will be scrutinised by the Queen after a year.
> 
> The historic agreement ruled the couple will drop their HRH titles, pay back £2.4million of taxpayer cash and no longer receive public funds.
> 
> In exchange, they were allowed to quit frontline duties and given licence to expand their brand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's biographer films with Netflix
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom author Omid Scobie has revealed he is filming with Netflix days after the Duke, 35,  and Duchess of Sussex, 39, signed a $150million megadeal with the US media giant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm sure it has nothing to do with JCMHMM, because they never collaborate with Omid!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure it has nothing to do with JCMHMM, because they never collaborate with Omid!



Wonder how she feels about someone riding _her _coattails


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure it has nothing to do with JCMHMM, because they never collaborate with Omid!



Yep, even though Omid has barely written about anything that wasn't Meghan and Harry in the last three years, somehow he earned it on his own merit.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, your guess is good as mine! Who knows apart from themselves? There is nothing stopping them to pay themselves salaries and deduct expenses from. I haven't heard anything about any work their "foundation" has been doing anyway...


and their accountants and attorneys who I'm sure have to sign NDs


----------



## sdkitty

another American media outlet sticks up for them. (I can't open the whole article but you can get the gist)
From the daily beast:








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Pay Back $3.1 Million, but the Media Won’t Let Go
					

Harry and Meghan have paid back the $3.1 million they owed U.K. taxpayers. A Netflix deal gives them financial independence. But don’t expect their tabloid tormentors to let up.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. the only people that I could see hiring them, is some very rich Russian Oligarch .. who, in essence .. wants that access to a member of the BRF regardless of whether or not they are still "truly" in it.  I could just see .. "_okay, I'll pay you the $1m .. but .. you have to ..._"      WHAT A MESS!


You are so right! They got a house deal (heavily reduced price) from a Russian Oligarch,  stayed at the house of another one in Canada ... There is a lot of money around that needs to be... Yes, they will likely have other deals coming up.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> another American media outlet sticks up for them. (I can't open the whole article but you can get the gist)
> From the daily beast:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Pay Back $3.1 Million, but the Media Won’t Let Go
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have paid back the $3.1 million they owed U.K. taxpayers. A Netflix deal gives them financial independence. But don’t expect their tabloid tormentors to let up.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Victims of tabloid tormentors, BRF... professional victims. Poor guys!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They need to grab the headlines while they can. *The post-Covid world is coming!*  The A listers are ready for that spotlight to shine on them. Farewell to H&M.


@CarryOn2020 I hope you are right, I'm so tired of the Covid world.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> They will. They'll say they've given HUGE anonymous donations


They are that type of "behind the scenes" people for real donations & work 

The only show up for the sandwiches and Forget-Me-Nots


----------



## CeeJay

Oh geez .. look at what I just had, but I didn't call the PAPS or the NEWS!!!


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Oh the arrogance! They are as difficult and scheming as we thought.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands*
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Sussex have issued a long list of demands involving their speaking appearances — including an upfront guarantee of the exact amount of money they will be paid and the ability to choose who introduces them and moderates the event, a report said Tuesday.
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle — who last week inked a multimillion-dollar production deal with Netflix — recently signed on with the New York-based powerhouse Harry Walker Agency to rep them for speaking engagements.
> 
> According to a four-page “Virtual Event Request Form” devised by HWA for the royal duo, the pair will have the say-so on every detail of their online appearances, said London’s Telegraph, which obtained a copy of the conditions.
> 
> For example, “The choice of Introducer and Moderator will be at the final discretion of the Speaker,” the form states.
> 
> In addition, “The Fee will need to be paid directly from the contracting organization’s account.”
> 
> The couple is believed to be able to command up to $1 million per speech.
> 
> Before they agree to anything, the couple wants an estimate on the number of any attendees and a description of “who they are.’’
> 
> Also utmost on their mind are the sponsors.
> 
> Harry and Meghan insist on knowing everyone helping to fund the event — “corporations, individuals, members of the organization and government entities or organizations’’ —and “what they are receiving in return for their sponsorship.’’
> 
> The pair said they want to be told whether “any live or pre-recorded program elements will run concurrently with the Speaker’s presentation” and who else might be speaking.
> 
> “What will the audience see on screen? Will you incorporate any branding? What will the Speaker see on screen immediately prior to and during their presentation?” the form asks.
> 
> The prince and Meghan even want to know what “connection format” the event will be broadcast through, to spare them the embarrassment of an unexpected technological glitch.
> 
> The pair stepped down as senior royals in March, saying they did so in part to achieve “financial independence.’’
> 
> They are now living in California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle list appearance demands: report
> 
> 
> They really are royal pains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com





Them getting paid $1m to talk complete and utter gibberish and play eternal victim is laughable. 
But it would be great if someone would pay them to _stop _talking and go away to live their private life they so desperately wanted to live


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think this worths a re-post! Comments on the DM article about Harry's lookalike hadn't got any bookings since Megxit!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. the only people that I could see hiring them, is some very rich Russian Oligarch .. who, in essence .. wants that access to a member of the BRF regardless of whether or not they are still "truly" in it.  I could just see .. "_okay, I'll pay you the $1m .. but .. you have to ..._"      WHAT A MESS!


I doubt very much H&M can provide anybody any access to the BRF!


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4843242
> 
> Them getting paid $1m to talk complete and utter gibberish and play eternal victim is laughable.
> But it would be great if someone would pay them to _stop _talking and go away to live their private life they so desperately wanted to live



If I thought they would take that deal I would start a GoFundMe for them myself.  Unfortunately, it’s not just about cash for them (although the cash is extremely important) it is also about the attention and fame.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> *If I thought they would take that deal I would start a GoFundMe for them myself. * Unfortunately, it’s not just about cash for them (although the cash is extremely important) it is also about the attention and fame.


 @ the bolded. Also, I agree with you that it's not just about money with them, attention and fame is just as important.


----------



## CeeJay

Lounorada said:


> @ the bolded. Also, I agree with you that it's not just about money with them, attention and fame is just as *THE MOST* important.


Fixed that for you ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder what the Hollywood elite thinks of them? Are they mostly still supportive of H&M even when their own pitches for multimillion dollar contracts have not been as successful?  There is bound to be some resentment with so much money being offered to these producing neophytes.


----------



## LValmalvr

Boy, there is a lot of hate on this thread.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what the Hollywood elite thinks of them? Are they mostly still supportive of H&M even when their own pitches for multimillion dollar contracts have not been as successful?  There is bound to be some resentment with so much money being offered to these producing neophytes.


so far no one dares say a word against them....don't wanna be racist ya know


----------



## rose60610

Like somebody said earlier, who would book H&M for anything? They burned bridges with the BRF so there's no royal access to suck up to. A million bucks can get a speaker with something valuable to offer. The Netflix gig came through only because of who they're related to. They have to prove themselves capable of putting together a program enough people will want to watch. Unless they hire somebody to do it for them, I don't think they can pull it off. The hired person first has to survive M's reputation of being difficult. Considering how she's gone through servants, I don't see how somebody is going to want to be their patsy. Unless they think they can buy Ken Burns, they may have a steep upward climb. I hope Burns or somebody else huge isn't dumb enough to join forces with these whiners for a one-off merged project in order to save their hides.


----------



## sdkitty

LValmalvr said:


> Boy, there is a lot of hate on this thread.


more like disdain


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Fixed that for you ..


she is living the dream, being one of the most famous women in the world


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Fixed that for you ..


100%


----------



## melissatrv

I wish they would be stripped of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles.  Harry would still be Prince Harry but Meghan would then be known as Princess Henry (Harry) just like Princess Michael.  She would HATE that LOL.


----------



## CeeJay

melissatrv said:


> I wish they would be stripped of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles.  Harry would still be Prince Harry but Meghan would then be known as Princess Henry (Harry) just like Princess Michael.  She would HATE that LOL.


You think so? .. I would think that she would LOVE the Princess title even more!


----------



## bag-mania

*Netflix co-CEO Reed Hastings reveals 'smart' Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'shopped' themselves 'around all major companies' before signing their lucrative deal - and predicts they will produce the site's 'most viewed content' next year*

*Hastings, 59, who is the co-founder and co-CEO of the streaming giant, was on CNBC on Wednesday morning, when he discussed Harry and Meghan's deal *
*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's contract with Netflix is rumored to be worth between $100 and $150 million *
*Hastings refused to discuss further details of the contract - including its worth - but said he is 'so excited' about it *
*'It is going to be epic entertainment,' he predicted, adding that the couple has 'developed a great eye for stories' *
*Hastings also confirmed that former Suits star Meghan has no plans to act in any of the shows they create, insisting their focus 'is on being producers' *

Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings has revealed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent time 'shopping' themselves around to 'all the major companies' before inking a deal with the streaming site - which is said to be worth a whopping $100 million.

The 59-year-old, who is also the co-CEO of the streaming company, praised the 'smart' couple for considering all their options before signing a contract with his site, explaining that he believes they ultimately did a deal with Netflix because 'we put together the best complete package'.

'I'm so excited about that deal,' Hastings said during an appearance on CNBC on Wednesday. 'They're smart, they were shopping it around across all the major companies and I think we really put together the best complete package.'

The billionaire businessman did not reveal which other companies the couple was in talks with, however Harry, 35, and Meghan, 39, both have pre-existing relationships with other major entertainment giants, including Apple and Disney.

Indeed, the Duchess of Sussex's first job after she and Harry quit the royal family was as a narrator for the Disney+ documentary Elephants, which was released in April, while her husband revealed last year that he had partnered with Oprah Winfrey on a mental health project for Apple TV+. 

However in August, Prince Harry made his debut on Netflix, appearing in Rising Phoenix, a documentary about the Paralympic Games that premiered on August 26. It is unclear whether he and Meghan had completed their deal with the streaming site when he took part in the film, or whether it was part of their incredibly lucrative contract.

While Hastings would not share any other information about the specifics of the deal - including how much Harry and Meghan received - he did tell CNBC host Andrew Ross Sorkin that he believes their content will be among 'the most exciting' and 'most viewed' on the site next year.

'It's going to be epic entertainment,' he said, explaining: 'We're going to do a wide range of entertainment with them. I can't tell you anymore than that about it at this point, but I think it will be some of the most exciting, most viewed content next year.'

Hastings did address rumors about whether former Suits star Meghan is planning to return to acting and make an appearance in the shows that she and Harry produce, insisting that the couple are entirely focused on 'being producers' rather than on-screen talent.

'The real focus for them is on being producers and on building that production capacity,' he insisted, while also noting that, despite their limited experience as producers, the couple has 'developed a great eye for stories'.

In a previous interview, Hastings' co-CEO Ted Sarandos, spoke of the duo's 'pride' that Meghan and Harry had ultimately decided to sign a deal with their site, saying: 'We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'









						Netflix co-CEO says Harry and Meghan 'shopped' themselves around
					

Hastings, 59, who is the co-founder and co-CEO of the streaming giant, was on CNBC on Wednesday morning, when he discussed Harry and Meghan's deal.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

LValmalvr said:


> Boy, there is a lot of hate on this thread.



Naaahhhhhh
I think LOATHE or LOATHING is a much better choice

LOATHE
verb
feel intense dislike or *disgust* for


----------



## lulu212121

I am so happy I dropped Netflix last week!


----------



## Chanbal

*Princess Sofia Weighs in on Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Decision to Step Down*
In a new documentary titled _Princess Sofia: Project Playground _(which aired on September 3 on Sweden's TV4,)_, _the 35-year-old royal was asked if she and her husband, Prince Carl Philip of Sweden, would ever consider following in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s footsteps with their family. “No. Not really. I think I have found such a fantastic balance, and I really see it as a positive that I have made it through these stormy years,” she said, according to_ People. _“It is such a huge advantage, in that we have the opportunity to stand a little in both worlds.”








						Princess Sofia Weighs in on Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Decision to Step Down
					

Princess Sofia of Sweden is addressing Meghan Markle and Prince...




					www.yahoo.com
				



It's nice to see how Sofia gracefully acknowledges the advantage of being a member of a royal family.


----------



## chicinthecity777

melissatrv said:


> I wish they would be stripped of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles.  Harry would still be Prince Harry but Meghan would then be known as Princess Henry (Harry) just like Princess Michael.  She would HATE that LOL.


Read something on Twitter that Queen can't strip them of the titles. It's down to the Parliament and rumour has it that some MP are working on a motion. No guarantee it's going to pass though.


----------



## LittleStar88

LValmalvr said:


> Boy, there is a lot of hate on this thread.






sdkitty said:


> more like disdain



Not hate, but definitely disappointed by the people they have turned out to be. 

Actually, I think Harry may be a little dim (or whipped) and is just following MM's lead.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

RE: Netflix and canceling subscription...

I just got Netflix a couple of months ago and plan to keep it. I figure staying subscribed and not watching the Harry & Meghan programming will speak more than canceling the service altogether. Also, I have too many shows to get through before I give up Netflix  

If they are looking at metrics and performance of programming (metrics matter), they will see what percentage of their viewers are watching a program. If Netflix is filled with people who do not like H&M and don't watch their programs, the metrics won't be there to support the continuation of this expensive venture.


----------



## marietouchet

for those who love IRONY ...

Coffee took forever to brew so I glanced at the DM. Oprah , Amal and George are soon holding a VIRTUAL gala, for a cancer center if I remember correctly

And bad girl that I am , I checked out the long list of glittering celebs who will attend, including David Foster & Jane Fonda ... Guess who was not on the list of expected attendees ? And O, A and G were all at their wedding ...

I guessed Oprah has COVID licked for big fat charity galas, she is not letting COVID deter her from a charitable fund raiser, good for her

This puts the Invictus cancellation in such bad light ...


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Read something on Twitter that Queen can't strip them of the titles. It's down to the Parliament and rumour has it that some MP are working on a motion. No guarantee it's going to pass though.


I should think that QEII would consult with her government before making a rash decision
Last night's poll showed 98 percent of people want the titles revoked ...


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *Netflix co-CEO Reed Hastings reveals 'smart' Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'shopped' themselves 'around all major companies' before signing their lucrative deal - and predicts they will produce the site's 'most viewed content' next year*
> 
> *Hastings, 59, who is the co-founder and co-CEO of the streaming giant, was on CNBC on Wednesday morning, when he discussed Harry and Meghan's deal *
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's contract with Netflix is rumored to be worth between $100 and $150 million *
> *Hastings refused to discuss further details of the contract - including its worth - but said he is 'so excited' about it *
> *'It is going to be epic entertainment,' he predicted, adding that the couple has 'developed a great eye for stories' *
> *Hastings also confirmed that former Suits star Meghan has no plans to act in any of the shows they create, insisting their focus 'is on being producers' *
> 
> Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings has revealed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent time 'shopping' themselves around to 'all the major companies' before inking a deal with the streaming site - which is said to be worth a whopping $100 million.
> 
> The 59-year-old, who is also the co-CEO of the streaming company, praised the 'smart' couple for considering all their options before signing a contract with his site, explaining that he believes they ultimately did a deal with Netflix because 'we put together the best complete package'.
> 
> 'I'm so excited about that deal,' Hastings said during an appearance on CNBC on Wednesday. 'They're smart, they were shopping it around across all the major companies and I think we really put together the best complete package.'
> 
> The billionaire businessman did not reveal which other companies the couple was in talks with, however Harry, 35, and Meghan, 39, both have pre-existing relationships with other major entertainment giants, including Apple and Disney.
> 
> Indeed, the Duchess of Sussex's first job after she and Harry quit the royal family was as a narrator for the Disney+ documentary Elephants, which was released in April, while her husband revealed last year that he had partnered with Oprah Winfrey on a mental health project for Apple TV+.
> 
> However in August, Prince Harry made his debut on Netflix, appearing in Rising Phoenix, a documentary about the Paralympic Games that premiered on August 26. It is unclear whether he and Meghan had completed their deal with the streaming site when he took part in the film, or whether it was part of their incredibly lucrative contract.
> 
> While Hastings would not share any other information about the specifics of the deal - including how much Harry and Meghan received - he did tell CNBC host Andrew Ross Sorkin that he believes their content will be among 'the most exciting' and 'most viewed' on the site next year.
> 
> 'It's going to be epic entertainment,' he said, explaining: 'We're going to do a wide range of entertainment with them. I can't tell you anymore than that about it at this point, but I think it will be some of the most exciting, most viewed content next year.'
> 
> Hastings did address rumors about whether former Suits star Meghan is planning to return to acting and make an appearance in the shows that she and Harry produce, insisting that the couple are entirely focused on 'being producers' rather than on-screen talent.
> 
> 'The real focus for them is on being producers and on building that production capacity,' he insisted, while also noting that, despite their limited experience as producers, the couple has 'developed a great eye for stories'.
> 
> In a previous interview, Hastings' co-CEO Ted Sarandos, spoke of the duo's 'pride' that Meghan and Harry had ultimately decided to sign a deal with their site, saying: 'We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix co-CEO says Harry and Meghan 'shopped' themselves around
> 
> 
> Hastings, 59, who is the co-founder and co-CEO of the streaming giant, was on CNBC on Wednesday morning, when he discussed Harry and Meghan's deal.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yes, it's quite intelligent of one to consider all of your options and take the best deal.    If Harry does it, it's apparently earth shattering news LOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Princess Sofia Weighs in on Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Decision to Step Down*
> In a new documentary titled _Princess Sofia: Project Playground _(which aired on September 3 on Sweden's TV4,)_, _the 35-year-old royal was asked if she and her husband, Prince Carl Philip of Sweden, would ever consider following in the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s footsteps with their family. “No. Not really. I think I have found such a fantastic balance, and I really see it as a positive that I have made it through these stormy years,” she said, according to_ People. _“It is such a huge advantage, in that we have the opportunity to stand a little in both worlds.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Sofia Weighs in on Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Decision to Step Down
> 
> 
> Princess Sofia of Sweden is addressing Meghan Markle and Prince...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's nice to see how Sofia gracefully acknowledges the advantage of being a member of a royal family.


Yep, and I think she was better known to TV audiences than MM.  Sofia "gave up everything" to marry her prince as well.  At least she's graceful about it.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> for those who love IRONY ...
> 
> Coffee took forever to brew so I glanced at the DM. Oprah , Amal and George are soon holding a VIRTUAL gala, for a cancer center if I remember correctly
> 
> And bad girl that I am , I checked out the long list of glittering celebs who will attend, including David Foster & Jane Fonda ... Guess who was not on the list of expected attendees ? And O, A and G were all at their wedding ...
> 
> I guessed Oprah has COVID licked for big fat charity galas, she is not letting COVID deter her from a charitable fund raiser, good for her


@marietouchet
Thanks to you and DM, MM&H will now make a surprise appearance at the Virtual Gala!  Pop-ups for photo-ops is one of their top skills.

Omid is now checking on how to join a meeting on Zoom without an invite.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulu212121 said:


> I am so happy I dropped Netflix last week!


Right now #cancelNetflix is trending on Twitter because of "Cuties". I am sure H&M will save the day though, given their God status described in Finding Freebies!


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> I should think that QEII would consult with her government before making a rash decision
> Last night's poll showed 98 percent of people want the titles revoked ...


My understanding is it's not for Queen to decide. It's down to the Parliament.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I should think that QEII would consult with her government before making a rash decision
> Last night's poll showed 98 percent of people want the titles revoked ...



It’s the succession, not the titles, that matters most. H&M could end all the dissension if they voluntarily gave up H’s place in the line-up. H&M got everything they wanted — half in, half out. All perks, no work.  He is still prince, still in the succession line-up, still getting an allowance, still able to live at FCott, etc. This guy made a lot of noise about leaving the BRF, yet he is still very connected to them. Just like Andrew — still enjoying the perks with no work. It makes QE (Elizabeth) look weaker than the Diana debacle did.

On Twitter today, #CancelNetflix is trending. Most are protesting one of their shows involving girls.  Ut oh.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s the succession, not the titles, that matters most. H&M could end all the dissension if they voluntarily gave up H’s place in the line-up. H&M got everything they wanted — half in, half out. All perks, no work.  He is still prince, still in the succession line-up, still getting an allowance, still able to live at FCott, etc. This guy made a lot of noise about leaving the BRF, yet he is still very connected to them. Just like Andrew — still enjoying the perks with no work. It makes QE (Elizabeth) look weaker than the Diana debacle did.
> 
> On Twitter today, #CancelNetflix is trending. Most are protesting one of their shows involving girls.  Ut oh.


It’s been stated here several times already, it’s not a matter for Harry or the Queen to decide.  The succession is determined by birth and governed by act of parliament.  And Harry is a Prince by birth, he can’t be un-princed.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> It’s been stated here several times already, it’s not a matter for Harry or the Queen to decide.  The succession is determined by birth and governed by act of parliament.  And Harry is a Prince by birth, he can’t be un-princed.


can she be un-duchessed?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> It’s been stated here several times already, it’s not a matter for Harry or the Queen to decide.  The succession is determined by birth and governed by act of parliament.  And Harry is a Prince by birth, he can’t be un-princed.



He can voluntarily resign(?) [abdicate?] renounce his place in line. Many have done it in the past.
If he really wanted out, why not resign renounce his place in the succession?  Hmmmm.

ETA: Andrew is still in the line-up as well as carrying the title of Prince.  Seriously, QE needs to clean up these issues.









						How Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Surprising Move Fits Into Royals History
					

The Queen has just spoken




					time.com


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> can she be un-duchessed?


Same thing I think - would have to be approved by parliament.  We have a constitutional monarchy.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is an interesting thread:


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> He can voluntarily resign(?) [abdicate?] his place in line. Many have done it in the past.
> If he really wanted out, why not resign his place in the succession?  Hmmmm.


Many, er no, not in Britain??  Firstly it’s makes the difference to absolutely nothing.  He will never be King.  Secondly he’s in the succession by birth, you can’t change that.  Other non-working members of the RF such as Princess Anne’s children still have a place in the line of succession.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

On refusing to be prince, yes, there is a precedent ... not anytime recently ... one of Queen Victoria's granddaughters gave up her princess-hood - of her own volition ... sadly there are so many grandchildren and I cant remember her name ... maybe someone can help me, I want to say it was a Louise, but there was more than one grandaughter named Louise
Various grandchildren changed titles (downgraded)








						Descendants of Queen Victoria - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just checked out the #cancelnetflix stuff on Twitter.  That show Cuties looks very disturbing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Duke of Windsor did it.  In an effort to restore a modicum of respect for the BRF, Andrew and Harry need to renounce their place in line.








						Abdication of Edward VIII - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





ETA:  We live in strange times where anything can happen. It is possible, not likely, still possible for Harry or Andrew to be king.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: titles
IIRC, they agreed not to use the HRH which, as far as I know, they have not used those.
QE gave them the Duke and Duchess titles. Couldn’t she remove those?  Couldn’t they agree not to use those?
For me, this is way too much drama and shady negotiations for one family, especially now. 
The people involved should step up and fix it. IMO.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Duke of Windsor did it.  In an effort to restore a modicum of respect for the BRF, Andrew and Harry need to renounce their place in line.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abdication of Edward VIII - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  We live in strange times where anything can happen. It is possible, not likely, still possible for Harry or Andrew to be king.


The Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne because by choosing to marry Wallis (a divorced woman) he no longer met the criteria to be King applicable in law at that time.  Parliament approved it.  Princess Margaret didn’t marry Peter Townsend - also a divorced man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> The Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne because by choosing to marry Wallis (a divorced woman) he no longer met the criteria to be King applicable in law at that time.  Parliament approved it.  Princess Margaret didn’t marry Peter Townsend - also a divorced man.



Yes, I understand that.
With H&M, they wanted out. Why are they maintaining the Duke/Duchess connection as well as a place in succession?
To me, it shows how spoiled H is.  He could end all the dissension so easily. He is choosing not to.

ETA: He himself has said he just wants to be called Harry. The media should respect that.
ETA2: Netflix figured out how to throw shade at the BRF, esp Andrew, with the Cuites show. Interesting what they did there.


----------



## marietouchet

Regarding titles, not the line of succession - see previous post on Edward VIII on LOS - thank you for that link @CarryOn2020 

Can the Queen revoke the titles ? Parliament might grumble a bit in public , but there will be no formal change without PRIOR agreement between the Queen and Parliament

Titles are "granted" by the Queen - it is her own prerogative (supposedly), but she will say nothing until she has an agreement with Boris and Parliament and she does nothing quickly.  For ex, the title of Duke of Sussex was floated (in the press) for Harry, years before Meghan, it had been expected for years, so, it was not granted in a hurry

Yes, Parliament and the PM can  "meddle" in titles, for ex they suggested the title of Duchess of Cornwall for Wallis, had she agreed to a morganatic marriage with Edward VIII, none of which happened, but that was not widely known at the time, only later

Personally, I think the Queen will be the last to agree to revocation, Boris and Charles would have to convince her.

Also, nothing will be done without looking to the precedents of Andrew and the Duke of Windsor - Windsor did not lose the duchy even when he flirted with Germany ca WWII. There has been radio silence in the matter of Epstein and Andrew. We dont know what is going on there.


----------



## doni

Pessie said:


> It’s been stated here several times already, it’s not a matter for Harry or the Queen to decide.  The succession is determined by birth and governed by act of parliament.  And Harry is a Prince by birth, he can’t be un-princed.


He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
As for precedent, Edward VIII abdicated renouncing his rights and those of potential heirs. So really, no big deal.
I personally  do not see why he should renounce though... if being less that super bright and not doing much of any purpose was an obstacle to be in the line of succession, monarchy as a system would have disappeared long ago...
Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I understand that.
> With H&M, they wanted out. Why are they maintaining the Duke/Duchess connection as well as a place in succession?
> To me, it shows how spoiled H is.  He could end all the dissension so easily. He is choosing not to.
> 
> ETA: He himself has said he just wants to be called Harry. The media should respect that.


I’ve tried to explain and I’m not going to keep posting the same answers to the same questions.  It makes the thread dull IMO  
A more pertinent question would be why Americans persist in using (and making a fuss of) H&Ms titles in a country thats a republic??  The people should act on that one, surely.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> I doubt very much H&M can provide anybody any access to the BRF!


What I should have said, is that let's say they do something stupid where they get involved in something outside their realm of experience (like this would never happen - right?) .. then the Oligarch could potentially have dirt on them that could them be used to get the BRF to have to do something (like pay $$$).


----------



## Pessie

doni said:


> He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
> As for precedent, Edward VIII abdicated renouncing his rights and those of potential heirs. So really, no big deal.
> I personally  do not see why he should renounce though... if being less that super bright and not doing much of any purpose was an obstacle to be in the line of succession, monarchy as a system would have disappeared long ago...
> Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.


...because he (Edward) wanted to marry a divorced woman.  At that time it wasn’t permitted, by law, for the monarch to marry a divorcee.


----------



## CarryOn2020

doni said:


> He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
> ...
> Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.



I can’t speak for all Americans. All of this H&M discussion is really pointing at Andrew. H&M just made it easy to keep the BRF in the news. Now, Netflix with its choice of programming subtly is connecting the dots.


----------



## bisousx

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is an interesting thread:




Def an interesting thread. Disney donated $3-4m into the Sussex Foundation which is now being liquidated.


----------



## doni

Pessie said:


> ...because he (Edward) wanted to marry a divorced woman.  At that time it wasn’t permitted, by law, for the monarch to marry a divorcee.


Yes but my point is, it was his privilege to renounce and anyone can do the same.
My understanding is not that it was not permitted by law (divorce was legal in the UK and, after all, the Anglican Church was founded by a King who wished to divorce...). But the Church, the Parliament and the government (which threatened to resign if he went ahead) did not approve (incidentally, Churchill supported him). He could still have married, but he knew it would be a big mess and huge crisis.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> I just checked out the #cancelnetflix stuff on Twitter.  That show Cuties looks very disturbing.


I also cancelled Netflix a while back so I haven't (and can't & won't) watched it. I watched a clip of it posted by someone on Twitter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
> As for precedent, Edward VIII abdicated renouncing his rights and those of potential heirs. So really, no big deal.
> I personally  do not see why he should renounce though... if being less that super bright and not doing much of any purpose was an obstacle to be in the line of succession, monarchy as a system would have disappeared long ago...
> Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.


Personally, I don't think JCMH will EVER renounce his succession or titles .. think about it, if he even EVER thought about it, we all know that MM would say "ON NO YOU WON'T .."


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> for those who love IRONY ...
> 
> Coffee took forever to brew so I glanced at the DM. Oprah , Amal and George are soon holding a VIRTUAL gala, for a cancer center if I remember correctly
> 
> And bad girl that I am , I checked out the long list of glittering celebs who will attend, including David Foster & Jane Fonda ... Guess who was not on the list of expected attendees ? And O, A and G were all at their wedding ...
> 
> I guessed Oprah has COVID licked for big fat charity galas, she is not letting COVID deter her from a charitable fund raiser, good for her
> 
> This puts the Invictus cancellation in such bad light ...


It’s in support of Diabetes and I did exactly what you did and checked it out.

Would not surprise me to see a sudden Sussex donation and MM creeping in, this is the group she LUSTS for.

 Harry is on a project with Oprah.
He pimped his wife off to Disney for voice over work, lacking any honor or character he’s capable of doing it for a charity gig: Remember “What M wants, M gets”.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> Def an interesting thread. Disney donated $3-4m into the Sussex Foundation which is now being liquidated.
> 
> View attachment 4843752



Is anything we read on Twitter ever true?


----------



## Pessie

doni said:


> Yes but my point is, it was his privilege to renounce and anyone can do the same.
> My understanding is not that it was not permitted by law (divorce was legal in the UK and, after all, the Anglican Church was founded by a King who wished to divorce...). But the Church, the Parliament and the government (which threatened to resign if he went ahead) did not approve (incidentally, Churchill supported him). He could still have married, but he knew it would be a big mess and huge crisis.


Edward couldn’t marry Wallis and remain King.  He had to choose.  it’s relevant to this thread in that the Queen rules with the consent of parliament- she doesn’t just get to lop peoples heads off and do whatever she pleases.  Things have changed a lot since Henry VIII was in charge.  And Henry didn’t divorce, he had his inconvenient marriages declared illegal and therefore void - ie they didn’t exist.


----------



## kemilia

poopsie said:


> Wonder how she feels about someone riding _her _coattails


You mean her green cape!


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Is anything we read on Twitter ever true?



In the video, Bob says the money is in Harry’s foundation now.


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Def an interesting thread. Disney donated $3-4m into the Sussex Foundation which is now being liquidated.
> 
> View attachment 4843752


Disney has been having losses, park tickets are very expensive for most American families... What is the rationale behind a 3 million donation to a foundation that nobody understands its purpose?


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Is anything we read on Twitter ever true?


If you read the actual thread, you will see people have provided screenshots of the account filings. Those are public records with Company's house in the UK.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Disney has been having losses, park tickets are very expensive for most American families... What is the rationale behind a 3 million donation to a foundation that nobody understands its purpose?



Hush money? Money laundering?  Just ask the FBI. [I have watched too many episodes of The Bureau and Yellowstone]


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> In the video, Bob says the money is in Harry’s foundation now.





chicinthecity777 said:


> If you read the actual thread, you will see people have provided screenshots of the account filings. Those are public records with Company's house in the UK.



Sorry I’m looking at it on my phone and didn’t watch the video. Did it say how long ago the donation was made? The reason I ask is Bob Iger stepped down as CEO earlier in the year and, while he is still an important figure at Disney, I didn’t know he was giving away money like that. I had wondered if any donation Disney made was pre-Megxit.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Is anything we read on Twitter ever true?


Well, do DM, People magazine, etc only ever write the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?


----------



## A1aGypsy

$3 million is chump change for Disney.  

I think the answer to why Disney (Oprah et al) all support HM & MM is because they are royalty. Just because they are quasi royalty adjacent right now doesn’t mean that’s won’t change or, even if it doesn’t, he is still the recent favourite grandson of one of the more powerful people in the world. 

People like to have an in with powerful people. A favour left unpaid. You never know when that connection might prove beneficial.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, it’s here-we-go-again time. Not surprising these questions appear around H&M financial issues. Sarah & Andrew had financial issues, too. The lack of transparency causes this.

According to this article, it’s no wonder that these royals are so arrogant. Powerful people, indeed.




__





						Sovereign immunity - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_In constitutional monarchies the sovereign is the historical origin of the authority which creates the courts. Thus the courts had no power to compel the sovereign to be bound by them as they were created by the sovereign for the protection of his or her subjects.[citation needed] This rule was commonly expressed by the popular legal maxim rex non potest peccare, meaning "the king can do no wrong"._


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, it’s here-we-go-again time. Not surprising these questions appear around H&M financial issues. Sarah & Andrew had financial issues, too. The lack of transparency causes this.
> 
> According to this article, it’s no wonder that these royals are so arrogant. Powerful people, indeed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sovereign immunity - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _In constitutional monarchies the sovereign is the historical origin of the authority which creates the courts. Thus the courts had no power to compel the sovereign to be bound by them as they were created by the sovereign for the protection of his or her subjects.[citation needed] This rule was commonly expressed by the popular legal maxim rex non potest peccare, meaning "the king can do no wrong"._


Historical being the operative word there


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, do DM, People magazine, etc only ever write the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?



Oh, hell no! Neither does _The New York Times, The Washington Post,_ or any other news source. I wish there was such a thing as a truthful, unbiased media. Sadly there isn’t.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, do DM, People magazine, etc only ever write the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?


The subject is subtle due to the complex medieval links between the monarchy and the UK government - way too subtle for PEOPLE

PS I thought twice about using the word medieval, but relented because it is absolutely accurate ....


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Disney has been having losses, park tickets are very expensive for most American families... What is the rationale behind a 3 million donation to a foundation that nobody understands its purpose?



Don't forget there are also tax (and social) benefits to charitable contributions. Disney makes tons of charitable contributions in good years and bad years, to their credit.


----------



## doni

Pessie said:


> Edward couldn’t marry Wallis and remain King.  He had to choose.  it’s relevant to this thread in that the Queen rules with the consent of parliament- she doesn’t just get to lop peoples heads off and do whatever she pleases.  Things have changed a lot since Henry VIII was in charge.  And Henry didn’t divorce, he had his inconvenient marriages declared illegal and therefore void - ie they didn’t exist.


I believe that is not exactly correct. Legally he could marry and remain King. He had lots of pressure not to do so, until the choice was, in effect, one or the other. But for example MPs (among which Churchill) supported his wish to marry Wallis and remain King. There was debate. And no law preventing it.
The Queen doesn’t rule over the line of succession. She cannot take anyone out of it. Everyone in it have rights of exactly the same nature as hers. That’s a reason why in the past, poison was so popular among royals.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is an interesting thread:




Hmm sketchy... theoretically couldn't their foundation grant the $3m to a BRF-associated charity in the UK to "repay" for the renovations? They shouldn't be able to do this as there's a clear conflict of interest/self-dealing issue here but #wealthy #privileged so...

I'm kinda surprised people are so shocked they could pay off the $3m... that's not actually that much money, especially when you consider people like that don't pay for anything else. How much could you save by not paying rent, food, clothes, etc? What about if all your ancestors didn't have to either, and you benefit from their money or inherited it and it just grew for generations?


----------



## Pessie

doni said:


> The Queen doesn’t rule over the line of succession. She cannot take anyone out of it. Everyone in it have rights of exactly the same nature as hers. That’s a reason why in the past, poison was so popular among royals.


We‘re in agreement on this point, she can’t go “Harry, you’re fired!”   It’s not a meritocracy.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Hmm sketchy... theoretically couldn't their foundation grant the $3m to a BRF-associated charity in the UK to "repay" for the renovations? They shouldn't be able to do this as there's a clear conflict of interest/self-dealing issue here but #wealthy #privileged so...
> 
> *I'm kinda surprised people are so shocked they could pay off the $3m*... that's not actually that much money, especially when you consider people like that don't pay for anything else. How much could you save by not paying rent, food, clothes, etc? What about if all your ancestors didn't have to either, and you benefit from their money or inherited it and it just grew for generations?



I agree, it's not that much from their perspective. Their future as money-makers depends on them having a relatively clean reputation. They were already getting plenty of criticism for not paying off their renovation debt after buying the expensive Santa Barbara property. Once the $$$ Netflix deal was announced they had to get off their butts and pay it back or else risk earning a long term nickname like "royal deadbeats."


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> Hmm sketchy... theoretically couldn't their foundation grant the $3m to a BRF-associated charity in the UK to "repay" for the renovations? They shouldn't be able to do this as there's a clear conflict of interest/self-dealing issue here but #wealthy #privileged so...
> 
> I'm kinda surprised people are so shocked they could pay off the $3m... that's not actually that much money, especially when you consider people like that don't pay for anything else. How much could you save by not paying rent, food, clothes, etc? What about if all your ancestors didn't have to either, and you benefit from their money or inherited it and it just grew for generations?



That’s a great point. No wonder Harry is so screwed up. I think many people look at the royal lifestyle at surface level with a little envy about their wealthy lifestyle, but being born into a life with little chance to build self esteem based on accomplishments and merit.. it could do a lot of damage. No wonder he was ripe for the plucking. I mean, I love money as much as anyone else, but I love making money and the thrill associated with calculated risk taking and reaping benefits of good investments more than just having it.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> It’s in support of Diabetes and I did exactly what you did and checked it out.
> 
> Would not surprise me to see a sudden Sussex donation and MM creeping in, this is the group she LUSTS for.
> 
> Harry is on a project with Oprah.
> He pimped his wife off to Disney for voice over work, lacking any honor or character he’s capable of doing it for a charity gig: Remember “What M wants, M gets”.


I'm not sure he pimped her as much as it was likely more MM demanding he talking to Disney and tout her.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure he pimped her as much as it was likely more MM demanding he talking to Disney and tout her.



Exactly. As awkward as Harry was in the video you could tell Meghan pushed him into doing it. One person's pimping is another's networking.


----------



## Gabs007

Pessie said:


> Edward couldn’t marry Wallis and remain King.  He had to choose.  it’s relevant to this thread in that the Queen rules with the consent of parliament- she doesn’t just get to lop peoples heads off and do whatever she pleases.  Things have changed a lot since Henry VIII was in charge.  And Henry didn’t divorce, he had his inconvenient marriages declared illegal and therefore void - ie they didn’t exist.



Actually he did divorce Catherine of Aragon after he wasn't granted an annulment, because he didn't call it a divorce didn't less make it so and eventually lead to the split from Rome, and he kept her in conditions that really made her demise a bit quicker. Btw Henry VIII went a bit further, he beheaded the other "inconvenient marriages" apart from Jane Seymour who died in childbed and Anne of Cleves, Anne Boyen and Catherine Howard both got the chop, Catherine Parr survived him (barely).

Legally the Queen doesn't rule with the consent of parliament, she has the power to dissolve parliament and technically and legally lying to the Queen is still a good reason to have your head chopped off, bit of a shame that this doesn't happened anymore, given recent developments


----------



## Pessie

Gabs007 said:


> Actually he did divorce Catherine of Aragon after he wasn't granted an annulment, because he didn't call it a divorce didn't less make it so and eventually lead to the split from Rome, and he kept her in conditions that really made her demise a bit quicker. Btw Henry VIII went a bit further, he beheaded the other "inconvenient marriages" apart from Jane Seymour who died in childbed and Anne of Cleves, Anne Boyen and Catherine Howard both got the chop, Catherine Parr survived him (barely).
> 
> Legally the Queen doesn't rule with the consent of parliament, she has the power to dissolve parliament and technically and legally lying to the Queen is still a good reason to have your head chopped off, bit of a shame that this doesn't happened anymore, given recent developments


It wasn’t a divorce as the marriage was declared legally invalid - on the grounds she had been legally married to his elder brother Arthur and that that marriage had been consummated, it was annulled on the grounds of consanguinity- ie she was his sister.  I can’t be bothered to argue this any more.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Oh, hell no! Neither does _The New York Times, The Washington Post,_ or any other news source. I wish there was such a thing as a truthful, unbiased media. Sadly there isn’t.


Amen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania  agree, MM pushed him to chat with Iger. Willow Bay’s shocked expression was priceless. I think I saw a slight eye-roll. These zillionaires typically show up with their perfect poker faces. H&M should learn that (me too 

@lalame  agree, in their world $3mil is pennies. They probably never understood the fuss for such a small amount. Same for the $14mil house. They run in high-end circles, so those amounts are not that much. Rules are different in that world. The 16 bathrooms though are a bit much.

@Pessie  Admittedly, I understand little to nothing of the system of the British monarchy. If I read the Wiki article correctly, it indicated QE cannot be arrested nor anyone on the “verges” of the palace.  No idea if true, but it may explain why Andrew stays where he stays.  From all that I have read, it is clear to me that Harry talks out of both sides of his mouth, as we say. He could indeed renounce his place in the succession as well as his title. No idea why he has not done this other than he does enjoy the privilege it gives him.  It’s the half in-half out idea that the media said would never happen. It is exactly what has happened, imo. Although it has been a busy day for me, I think those are my main points — Andrew and Harry’s place in the succession.  Wish they both would renounce it. 

_According to the legal encyclopedia Halsbury’s Laws of England, members of the royal household cannot be arrested in civil proceedings, they cannot be cuffed in a monarch’s presence, and no arrest can take place in or near the palace._








						Can the Queen, Kate Middleton or Other Members of the Royal Family Get Arrested?
					

When you think of the perks of being a royal so many things come to mind like the fact that they are rich and famous, have regal titles, and live in palaces. But another one not too many people are aware of is a little something called Sovereign Immunity. So what exactly does the term mean …




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## zen1965

Wow.


----------



## Pessie

Gabs007 said:


> That is nice that you can't be bothered, but you might want to look up REAL history, the marriage was never annulled by the Catholic church, which eventually led to the split with Rome.
> 
> Tbh I can't be bothered to argue with people who don't take history seriously and take novels as history, I prefer people who actually do real research and check real history, Henry and his father jumped through hoops to declare the 1st marriage as invalid on grounds it was not consumated, then he changed his tune and tried to get it annulled WHICH NEVER HAPPENED. Real history dear, something you don't seem to do, so obviously we are not compatible. Be well and have fun reading those novels. Bye


If you have to resort to slinging insults about you’ve lost the argument.
ETA - some of my lockdown reading


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Y'all please.


----------



## Tootsie17

doni said:


> He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
> As for precedent, Edward VIII abdicated renouncing his rights and those of potential heirs. So really, no big deal.
> I personally  do not see why he should renounce though... if being less that super bright and not doing much of any purpose was an obstacle to be in the line of succession, monarchy as a system would have disappeared long ago...
> Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.


I don't think H will ever give up his title or renounce his position, unless Meghan wanted him to. I think she would return to the BRF before losing her duchess title.


----------



## Tootsie17

@CeeJay...Sorry I didn't read your comment before posting mine.  I just had to comment so quickly after reading comments by @doni.
Meghan will not give up her title without a BIG fight.  I'm waiting patiently to see how it plays it.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> ...because he (Edward) wanted to marry a divorced woman.  At that time it wasn’t permitted, by law, for the monarch to marry a divorcee.


times certainly have changed....H married a woman who was married at least twice before and she walked down the aisle with a veil over her face in front of millions of tv viewers


----------



## bag-mania

If this article is to be believed the royal family isn’t planning to do anything about titles or anything else regarding H&M. 











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle leave royals 'looking over shoulders'
					

Writing in Town and Country, Victoria Murphy said the monarchy had been left 'looking over its shoulder' after the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, announced their Netflix megadeal.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

H said he wanted out of the BRF.  Why not renounce the place in the succession line?
My answer: because _that_ is precisely where the privilege is.


I’ve added the link to the January Forbes article so others would see what we saw. It is wrong to say they gave up their royal titles. They did not, have not and, as many of us speculate, they will not. They only agreed to not use HRH. They are actively using the others.








						Prince Harry On Giving Up Royal Titles: ‘It Brings Me Great Sadness That It Has Come To This’
					

Prince Harry said there wasn’t another option.




					www.forbes.com
				




ETA: @bag-mania  they won’t do anything now or in the future. To me, this shows how ineffective that system is 2020.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

_@CarryOn2020 According to the legal encyclopedia Halsbury’s Laws of England, members of the royal household cannot be arrested in civil proceedings, they cannot be cuffed in a monarch’s presence, and no arrest can take place in or near the palace._

This is nothing new for royal houses. CP Mary was involved in a car accident years ago and nothing happened. Under Danish laws royals are darn near untouchable.
Ditto, when a young CP Haakon of Norway had a car accident (in the early 1990's I believe). It wasn't even reported in the news in deference to his grandfather, King Olav.


----------



## lalame

Are titles STILL that prestigious to this day? If you've publicly left the BRF, what benefit do the titles confer upon you still? I don't get it, is it like giving up a last name you grew up with? What is the emotional attachment...

American sensibility speaking here but the only titles I hold onto are my job title and once I leave it, I consider myself done.


----------



## poopsie

Gabs007 said:


> Actually he did divorce Catherine of Aragon after he wasn't granted an annulment, because he didn't call it a divorce didn't less make it so and eventually lead to the split from Rome, and he kept her in conditions that really made her demise a bit quicker. Btw Henry VIII went a bit further, he beheaded the other "inconvenient marriages" apart from Jane Seymour who died in childbed and Anne of Cleves, Anne Boyen and Catherine Howard both got the chop, Catherine Parr survived him (barely).
> 
> Legally the Queen doesn't rule with the consent of parliament, she has the power to dissolve parliament and technically and legally lying to the Queen is still a good reason to have your head chopped off, bit of a shame that this doesn't happened anymore, given recent developments



Makes me want to go watch Anne of the Thousand Days


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: titles
> IIRC, they agreed not to use the HRH which, as far as I know, they have not used those.
> QE gave them the Duke and Duchess titles. Couldn’t she remove those?  Couldn’t they agree not to use those?
> For me, this is way too much drama and shady negotiations for one family, especially now.
> The people involved should step up and fix it. IMO.



Of course she could. And his Earl of Dumbarton title.

"A possible visit by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Dumbarton is in serious doubt amid calls for them to be stripped of their Scottish title."









						Dumbarton Royal visit in doubt after Harry and Meghan's announcement
					

Chief executive of Republic organisation says couple should be stripped of their Scottish title.




					www.dailyrecord.co.uk
				




Charles upon succession could also decree Archie not to automatically be a ennobled to a Prince and sixth inline.

Did you know that Harry had to ask permission of the Queen to marry Meghan? Obviously she said yes. All prince and princesses up to and including sixth in line need to ask permission and their choice is not guaranteed.

If Archie doesn't become a prince he'll be free to marry whoever and do whatever.

H&M would hate it though. Their whole schtick was letting people think they were being so 'of the people' and not burdening A with a title whilst knowing he was going to be a Prince automatically some day anyway.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> The Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne because by choosing to marry Wallis (a divorced woman) he no longer met the criteria to be King applicable in law at that time.  Parliament approved it.  Princess Margaret didn’t marry Peter Townsend - also a divorced man.



At that time the Queen had to approve her choice. She didn't.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
> As for precedent, Edward VIII abdicated renouncing his rights and those of potential heirs. So really, no big deal.
> I personally  do not see why he should renounce though... if being less that super bright and not doing much of any purpose was an obstacle to be in the line of succession, monarchy as a system would have disappeared long ago...
> Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.



She can strip him of his HRH, his Dukedom and his Earldom. She can't take away his Prince title.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> ...because he (Edward) wanted to marry a divorced woman.  At that time it wasn’t permitted, by law, for the monarch to marry a divorcee.



Let's face it everyone wanted shot of both of them - any reason would have done.


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> Def an interesting thread. Disney donated $3-4m into the Sussex Foundation which is now being liquidated.
> 
> View attachment 4843752



Wow, the elephants won't forget!


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle's Friend Jessica Mulroney Deletes Royal Wedding Photos After ‘Bullying’*
The mother-of-three, who recently made her public Instagram private, promptly took to her Instagram Stories to explain her actions, according to the outlet, attributing her decision to three years of 'bullying and hatred'.

Her post reportedly read:



> People often ask why I delete certain posts. The amount of bullying and hatred I've had to put up with for 3 years... I'm tired of looking at it. Be kind. Be gracious. We are grown ups... stop acting like teenagers. Real women don't put down other women.











						Meghan Markle's Friend Jessica Mulroney Deletes Royal Wedding Photos After ‘Bullying’
					

The stylist explained her decision to remove pictures from her Instagram




					www.yahoo.com
				




"Put down" is what she did to Exeter, please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## shiba

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle's Friend Jessica Mulroney Deletes Royal Wedding Photos After ‘Bullying’*
> The mother-of-three, who recently made her public Instagram private, promptly took to her Instagram Stories to explain her actions, according to the outlet, attributing her decision to three years of 'bullying and hatred'.
> 
> Her post reportedly read:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Friend Jessica Mulroney Deletes Royal Wedding Photos After ‘Bullying’
> 
> 
> The stylist explained her decision to remove pictures from her Instagram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Put down" is what she did to Exeter, please correct me if I'm wrong.



Pot meet kettle - downright bullied her. Has she not learned to keep her mouth shut?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Their whole schtick was letting people think they were being so 'of the people' and not burdening A with a title whilst knowing he was going to be a Prince automatically some day anyway.



Thank you! Exactly my issue with H&M. The deceptions, the pretense, the inaccuracies. He could renounce it all but he doesn’t want to. Let’s hope the lectures stop with the nflix deal. Once things reopen (and they will), zoom calls will taper off, H&M will have serious competition beyond W&K and we can all move on. Cheers


----------



## mdcx

I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_

Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$): 

Jeff Bezos
Elon Musk 
Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
Any male Hwood studio head
Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!


----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_
> 
> Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$):
> 
> Jeff Bezos
> Elon Musk
> Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
> Any male Hwood studio head
> Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
> David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
> I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!


I don't know the answer to your question about the duchess title. 
About a potential 4th DH, I put my money on Bezos figuratively and literally... My Amazon bills are high.


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_
> 
> Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$):
> 
> Jeff Bezos
> Elon Musk
> Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
> Any male Hwood studio head
> Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
> David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
> I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!



She's too woke for Elon or Jeff IMO. I put my money on a different Silicon Valley CEO/founder or Hwood studio head.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure he pimped her as much as it was likely more MM demanding he talking to Disney and tout her.


I think you're right and more accurate. What I wrote was poorly stated, I think "pandered" (meaning giving someone anything they want in an attempt to please them) is a better description of his behavior.


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> Many, er no, not in Britain??  Firstly it’s makes the difference to absolutely nothing.  He will never be King.  Secondly he’s in the succession by birth, you can’t change that.  Other non-working members of the RF such as Princess Anne’s children still have a place in the line of succession.


Even Princess Margaret's 4 grandchildren are 23rd - 26th in line.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The thing is, most other non-working royals have not been publicly badmouthing the royal family and sold insider info to Scobie (like the layout of William's and Kate's country estate, still can't get over that one).


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, most other non-working royals have not been publicly badmouthing the royal family and sold insider info to Scobie (like the layout of William's and Kate's country estate, still can't get over that one).


That was an absolute disgusting thing to do. Awful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also I just don't get the hate for Kate out of pure jealousy. The woman just doesn't strike me as someone who'd waste time on going out of her way to make MM miserable. None of her staff have ever uttered so much as one bad word about her (something MM can't claim, and that goes back to her starlet days). Too bad she was quicker so snag the more prestigious prince (but also, I feel Wills would not have fallen for MM's shtick).


----------



## byzina

mdcx said:


> I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_
> 
> Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$):
> 
> Jeff Bezos
> Elon Musk
> Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
> Any male Hwood studio head
> Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
> David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
> I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!



I would bet on a politician. Michelle, keep an eye out.


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> At that time the Queen had to approve her choice. She didn't.



Precisely. Edward was already King, so needed noone‘s permission. There was no law whatsoever about the King not being married to a divorced woman.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> Precisely. Edward was already King, so needed noone‘s permission. There was no law whatsoever about the King not being married to a divorced woman.



This was in response to Margret marrying Townsend


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_
> 
> Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$):
> 
> Jeff Bezos
> Elon Musk
> Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
> Any male Hwood studio head
> Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
> David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
> I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!



She'll lose all titles if she marries again because all the titles are by marriage only.

If she were a duchess or countess in her own right she would retain her own titles.


----------



## Tootsie17

Sharont2305 said:


> That was an absolute disgusting thing to do. Awful.


Thank you for mentioning this and I totally agree.  This matter just seems to get glossed over without any serious thought as to how O got the very personal info.  Any person with half a brain knows it was M and H.  W and K know exactly how O obtained the details of their home. American entertainment news never bring this point up when talking about the book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

mdcx said:


> I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_
> 
> Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$):
> 
> Jeff Bezos
> Elon Musk
> Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
> Any male Hwood studio head
> Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
> David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
> I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!



I am dying over Elon Musk as a choice. She is definitely not his type


----------



## Tootsie17

papertiger said:


> She'll lose all titles if she marries again because all the titles are by marriage only.
> 
> If she were a duchess or countess in her own right she would retain her own titles.


I think M will hang on to H forever because she probably already knows she will lose the title if she remarries. Her next victim would have to be super rich and powerful for her to say bye-bye to her duchess title. Or maybe, she would get a new title if she married another royal.  Oh the horror!!


----------



## Gabs007

papertiger said:


> She'll lose all titles if she marries again because all the titles are by marriage only.
> 
> If she were a duchess or countess in her own right she would retain her own titles.



Would that not depend on the divorce settlement? If you recall, Diana (while being technically and aristo though of lower rank) kept some of her titles, most notably the Princess of Wales, she lost the Her Royal Highness title but remained Princess of Wales, which she wasn't in her own right. If you look at fashion, DvF should have never used the title after her own divorce but retained it (well not quite officially but as the name of her fashion brand) despite being divorced and then even remarried, which is usually the end of a title you didn't inherit


----------



## sdkitty

byzina said:


> I would bet on a politician. Michelle, keep an eye out.


LOL
I think Michelle's husband is FAR smarter than H....no worries there


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> She's too woke for Elon or Jeff IMO. I put my money on a different Silicon Valley CEO/founder or Hwood studio head.


Haha, a Silicon Valley CEO/founder or Hwood studio head are certainly prime candidates, but I wouldn't discard Elon or Jeff yet. They can be very w$k$...


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> I think the real question is - when M marries her next hubby, will she maintain her Duchess of Sussex title? I say, _yessiree Bob!_
> 
> Potential third/4th hubbies I'm sure M is considering (in order of perceived u$efulne$$):
> 
> Jeff Bezos
> Elon Musk
> Any high-wealth male Silicon Valley CEO
> Any male Hwood studio head
> Tom Cruise (surprised he hasn't been connected with someone since his "marriage" to KH)
> David Foster (when he gets sick of K)
> I would die to be a fly on the wall at one of the BRF gatherings right now!



Before answering who it will be, we should examine what Meghan brings to the table as far as her ability to attract such high profile men. She is certainly physically beautiful. She has a duchess title but she would almost certainly lose it in a divorce (unless she uses it as a bargaining chip in the settlement). She is a Hollywood producer but it's still a long, long road before she can show she was worth Netflix's gamble on her. She is a philanthropist and supposedly runs multiple charities, however there isn't any record yet of her actually helping anyone other than giving inspirational pep talks online and performing single, short visits to various local charities. Oh, and it's rumored she has amazing sex skills. Well, that alone could be enough!

On the downside: She's almost 40 and time is always the enemy when marrying for money. Grabbing onto the man's arm and batting her big eyes like a young girl is not going to cut it for the caliber of big fish she would want to catch. She has a _very_ public history now and she can't control over how others think of her. She has a phoniness about her that at least 50% of people pick up on right away. She is never going to be as popular as she is at this moment and she has lost nearly a year of schmoozing with celebs and pimping networking due to the pandemic. Am I missing anything else?


----------



## Chanbal

This might address how MM feels about titles:
*Meghan Was Devastated When Harry Was Stripped of His Military Titles*
An inside source told Scobie and Durand, "That’s been a tough pill to swallow, and the one that has been most painful to Meghan witness him go through. It’s the one that made Harry emotional."

Speaking to a friend, Meghan reportedly called the demotion "so unnecessary." She continued, "And it’s not just taking something away from him, it’s also that entire military veteran community. You can see how much he means to them, too. So why? The powers are unfortunately greater than me."








						Meghan Was Devastated When Harry Was Stripped of His Military Titles
					

Meghan thought the demotion was "so unnecessary."




					www.yahoo.com
				




If the duchess title will be stripped, the search for a next DH might become very attractive. I wonder if QE is thinking about this possibility.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Before answering who it will be, we should examine what Meghan brings to the table as far as her ability to attract such high profile men. She is certainly physically beautiful. She has a duchess title but she would almost certainly lose it in a divorce (unless she uses it as a bargaining chip in the settlement). She's a Hollywood producer but it's still a long, long road before she can show she was worth Netflix's gamble on her. She's a philanthropist and supposedly runs multiple charities, however there isn't any record yet of her actually helping anyone other than giving inspirational pep talks online and performing single, short visits to various local charities. Oh, and it's rumored she has amazing sex skills. Well, that alone could be enough!
> 
> On the downside: She's almost 40 and time is always the enemy when marrying for money. Grabbing onto the man's arm and batting her big eyes like a young girl is not going to cut it for the caliber of big fish she would want to catch. She has a _very_ public history now and she can't control over how others think of her. She has a phoniness about her that at least 50% of people pick up on right away. She is never going to be as popular as she is at this moment and she has lost nearly a year of schmoozing with celebs and pimping networking due to the pandemic. Am I missing anything else?


If you look at Bezos and who he is with now, it seems to me likely that it was chemistry or sex appeal that attracted him.  That can be manufacturered to an extent I guess--She is an actress.  I agree, at 40, she's getting up there and that wide eyed business seems phony.
As far as being beautiful, IMO she's pretty but not spectacular in the looks dept.  There are plenty of women I could name who have better bodies.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If you look at Bezos and who he is with now, it seems to me likely that it was chemistry or sex appeal that attracted him.  That can be manufacturered to an extent I guess--She is an actress.  I agree, at 40, she's getting up there and that wide eyed business seems phony.
> As far as being beautiful, IMO she's pretty but not spectacular in the looks dept.  There are plenty of women I could name who have better bodies.



Perception of beauty is so individual that I hesitate to say anything other than to acknowledge that she has nothing to worry about as far as looks. I just don't see how she has much to offer any of these men as a wife. Particularly when you imagine the spectacularly public fallout that would come from a divorce with Harry. Their love story that was pushed on us by the media and that so many bought into, all blown to smithereens. The divorce would be ugly and she would demand an extremely generous settlement. There would likely be a Scobie sequel book on the way.

After all that went down, what rich man would possibly want to touch her with a 10 ft. pole?


----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan is too long in the tooth for these guys.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Speaking to a friend, Meghan reportedly called the demotion "so unnecessary." She continued, "And it’s not just taking something away from him, it’s also that entire military veteran community. You can see how much he means to them, too. So why? The powers are unfortunately greater than me."



Oh you mean the veteran community you two ditched to attend the Lion King premiere? You obviously didn't feel you owed anything to those men and women Harry meant so much to. 

This. Woman. Makes. Me. So. Angry.


----------



## Gabs007

Chanbal said:


> This might address how MM feels about titles:
> *Meghan Was Devastated When Harry Was Stripped of His Military Titles*
> An inside source told Scobie and Durand, "That’s been a tough pill to swallow, and the one that has been most painful to Meghan witness him go through. It’s the one that made Harry emotional."
> 
> Speaking to a friend, Meghan reportedly called the demotion "so unnecessary." She continued, "And it’s not just taking something away from him, it’s also that entire military veteran community. You can see how much he means to them, too. So why? The powers are unfortunately greater than me."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Was Devastated When Harry Was Stripped of His Military Titles
> 
> 
> Meghan thought the demotion was "so unnecessary."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the duchess title will be stripped, the search for a next DH might become very attractive. I wonder if QE is thinking about this possibility.



She might have been devastated because it happened to a guy she loves and it means a lot to him? I honestly do not get the hatred that is poured upon her, I would take her any time over the insipid brunette Barbie that Kate is, from a similar background (i.e. not titled but her jobs were all on account of what her parents could buy, as she really has no other talent than "waiting for a prince" aka her nickname) - if I had a daughter, I would prefer her to have a role model that goes out and does things, instead of being an arm piece that waits for a guy to pick her as a hired womb and then keeping up appearances while he plays around. 21st century ladies, we really aren't any longer chained to the kitchen sink or arm pieces


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Before answering who it will be, we should examine what Meghan brings to the table as far as her ability to attract such high profile men. She is certainly physically beautiful. She has a duchess title but she would almost certainly lose it in a divorce (unless she uses it as a bargaining chip in the settlement). She is a Hollywood producer but it's still a long, long road before she can show she was worth Netflix's gamble on her. She is a philanthropist and supposedly runs multiple charities, however there isn't any record yet of her actually helping anyone other than giving inspirational pep talks online and performing single, short visits to various local charities. Oh, and it's rumored she has amazing sex skills. Well, that alone could be enough!
> 
> On the downside: She's almost 40 and time is always the enemy when marrying for money. Grabbing onto the man's arm and batting her big eyes like a young girl is not going to cut it for the caliber of big fish she would want to catch. She has a _very_ public history now and she can't control over how others think of her. She has a phoniness about her that at least 50% of people pick up on right away. She is never going to be as popular as she is at this moment and she has lost nearly a year of schmoozing with celebs and pimping networking due to the pandemic. Am I missing anything else?


bag-mania, you are spot on!  In support of your comment about her narrow, self serving philanthropic involvement, there is a WMM (Women Moving Millions) Virtual Summit concluding today underwritten by the Gates Foundation and PJT Partners (described as a global advisory focused investment bank.) The antithesis of Meghan, the women in WMM  began their work in 2005, 15 years ahead of her. Their focus is on the work, not on garnering publicity for themselves doing it. 

From the WMM web site:
_ Today, WMM is the largest community of individuals giving $1 million or more to resource women and girls and has elevated the power of women’s philanthropy to accelerate progress toward gender equality. Our mission is to catalyze unprecedented resources for the advancement of women and girls. As a growing global community, our members have collectively made bold commitments of over $680 million and are using the power of their voice and influence to inspire others to invest with a gender lens._

Of course there is a need for individuals and groups on a smaller scale to also engage in this work. But my point is, Meghan acting and preaching at us as if SHE has the answers and SHE is the single most important agent for change is really ludicrous and the high profile men she would pursue would not be impressed.


----------



## LittleStar88

Gabs007 said:


> She might have been devastated because it happened to a guy she loves and it means a lot to him? I honestly do not get the hatred that is poured upon her, I would take her any time over the insipid brunette Barbie that Kate is, from a similar background (i.e. not titled but her jobs were all on account of what her parents could buy, as she really has no other talent than "waiting for a prince" aka her nickname) - if I had a daughter, I would prefer her to *have a role model that goes out and does things*, instead of being an arm piece that waits for a guy to pick her as a hired womb and then keeping up appearances while he plays around. 21st century ladies, we really aren't any longer chained to the kitchen sink or arm pieces


----------



## Pessie

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4845064
> 
> View attachment 4845065


Very empowering


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gabs007

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4845064
> 
> View attachment 4845065



Oh you found some pictures where she acted, do you want kudos for that or was that google. Btw all that hatred, it seems to be the green eyed envy monster, I totally get it, but let's be realistic, it won't make anybody more attractive hating somebody attractive. She had a career of her own, which is more than can be said for most of the women who married into the family. And she really helped him mature, long way away from the guy who wore a swastica on his arm. I think she did something right there, he stands with her and his family, good for him, I totally get that some people are jealous, but hey, it is what it is. As I said, if I had a daughter, I would rather pick an accomplished female who takes charge of her life over an insipid hanger on, tastes may differ, not my problem.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Before answering who it will be, we should examine what Meghan brings to the table as far as her ability to attract such high profile men. She is certainly physically beautiful. She has a duchess title but she would almost certainly lose it in a divorce (unless she uses it as a bargaining chip in the settlement). She is a Hollywood producer but it's still a long, long road before she can show she was worth Netflix's gamble on her. She is a philanthropist and supposedly runs multiple charities, however there isn't any record yet of her actually helping anyone other than giving inspirational pep talks online and performing single, short visits to various local charities. Oh, and it's rumored she has amazing sex skills. Well, *that alone could be enough!*
> 
> On the downside: She's almost 40 and time is always the enemy when marrying for money. Grabbing onto the man's arm and batting her big eyes like a young girl is not going to cut it for the caliber of big fish she would want to catch. She has a _very_ public history now and she can't control over how others think of her. She has a phoniness about her that at least 50% of people pick up on right away. She is never going to be as popular as she is at this moment and she has lost nearly a year of schmoozing with celebs and pimping networking due to the pandemic. Am I missing anything else?



That alone is definitely enough! But in a scenario with a wealthy man in a stale marriage and a beautiful contender who knows exactly what to say at the right time, they're toast. Just wait for it. A lot of men won't care about phoniness or bad reputations, if they're already unhappy and want to feel the excitement of days past, they're easy targets.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Of course there is a need for individuals and groups on a smaller scale to also engage in this work. But my point is, *Meghan acting and preaching at us as if SHE has the answers and SHE is the single most important agent for change is really ludicrous *and the high profile men she would pursue would not be impressed.



Now that she has the Netflix deal I think she will devote her energy towards the avenue that will make her money. I doubt we'll see her mentioning those causes again that she was pushing for the last couple months while waiting for the contract to be signed.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> That alone is definitely enough! But in a scenario with a wealthy man in a stale marriage and a beautiful contender who knows exactly what to say at the right time, they're toast. Just wait for it. A lot of men won't care about phoniness or bad reputations, if they're already unhappy and want to feel the excitement of days past, they're easy targets.



But the LA area alone has hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pretty young women who would love nothing more than having some rich dude take care of them and buy them things. They don't even all demand marriage and they don't come with all the baggage of a Meghan. Plus most of these men are concerned about their legacy, that would mean having offspring if they don't already have some. Meghan isn't likely to be helpful in that regard either.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> But the LA area alone has hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pretty young women who would love nothing more than having some rich dude take care of them and buy them things. They don't even all demand marriage and they don't come with all the baggage of a Meghan. Plus most of these men are concerned about their legacy, that would mean having offspring if they don't already have some. Meghan isn't likely to be helpful in that regard either.



I don't think Meghan sold Harry on buying her nice things and being a kept woman like the girls you described (and there are lots!).. Agreed, lots of rich guys wouldn't mind having a hot girlfriend/wife that looks great as arm candy.

Meghan almost certainly swayed him by presenting exactly what Harry's been yearning for: a life "free" from the shackles of his awful family, all while selling him a vision of being the dream philanthrophic couple... you know, the next O's.

Unlike most actresses, Meghan's always dressed neat and conservatively (for Hollywood standards) and persuaded him that her life goal, which would become _their_ life goal, was to build a legacy far greater than being sixth in line could offer. I could see it from a mile away when they first got together, even when I was a fan of hers.

I imagine that with the next guy she will target, she'll have to change her strategy and there will be a sucker to fall for it.


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> He can do it himself. it is a right the Queen cannot take from him, but he can renounce it.
> As for precedent, Edward VIII abdicated renouncing his rights and those of potential heirs. So really, no big deal.
> I personally  do not see why he should renounce though... if being less that super bright and not doing much of any purpose was an obstacle to be in the line of succession, monarchy as a system would have disappeared long ago...
> Now, Prince Andrew, that’s another story.


Harry has many titles and the technicalities  of each are different ...
He was born Prince Harry
He received the duchy of Sussex , and is also Earl of Dumbarton, one is an English title, the other is Scottish , two different titles
He has the royal style of HRH, but is not supposed to use it 
So, at least four different types of titles
I believe he can abdicate any or all of them ... 
Can they be revoked ?  Different answer for each of the 4 titles depends on the technicalities in the letters patent (sic) which granted the titles, Parliament, the Queen, English public opinion, Scottish public opinion, UK public opinion, possibly Commonwealth public opinion etc
At the moment, he is sort of a bit in and a bit out since he cannot use HRH but has the rest technically, but, in a practical sense, titles are not worth much if staying in the US - time will tell if he goes back to the U.K.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Harry has many titles and the technicalities  of each are different ...
> He was born Prince Harry
> He received the duchy of Sussex , and is also Earl of Dumbarton, one is an English title, the other is Scottish , two different titles
> He has the royal style of HRH, but is not supposed to use it
> So, at least four different types of titles
> I believe he can abdicate any or all of them ...
> Can they be revoked ?  Different answer for each of the 4 titles depends on the technicalities in the letters patent (sic) which granted the titles, Parliament, the Queen, English public opinion, Scottish public opinion, UK public opinion, possibly Commonwealth public opinion etc
> At the moment, he is sort of a bit in and a bit out since he cannot use HRH but has the rest technically, but, in a practical sense, titles are not worth much if staying in the US - time will tell if he goes back to the U.K.


On the titles ... 
I think it would be interesting to know exactly how the U.K. handles the case of Zara, for example ...
She technically has no titles, but surely gets some sort of preferential treatment as the Queen’s granddaughter 
I have no idea how they handle that from a protocol point of view


----------



## Essaeeeee

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4845064
> 
> View attachment 4845065


So you have a problem with her work now? Pretty sure the story is that Kate caught Will's attention modelling lingerie. Let's say it as it is. You all think she's not white enough to be a royal so everything she does it wrong


----------



## sdkitty

Essaeeeee said:


> So you have a problem with her work now? Pretty sure the story is that Kate caught Will's attention modelling lingerie. Let's say it as it is. You all think she's not white enough to be a royal so everything she does it wrong


no, it's her actions, not her race that gets the criticism here


----------



## Essaeeeee

sdkitty said:


> no, it's her actions, not her race that gets the criticism here


Yes her actions which is not much different from what the rest of them do but somehow is wrong coming from her. Only thing that is different in her is her race.


----------



## lalame

Meghan's gorgeous, especially by Silicon Valley standards. She has aged well. She wouldn't have trouble here. Not every rich dude marries a supermodel neuroscientist role model.  Actually most don't.


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> Meghan's gorgeous, especially by Silicon Valley standards. She has aged well. She wouldn't have trouble here. Not every rich dude marries a supermodel neuroscientist role model.  Actually most don't.



Yep. Meghan is gorgeous and classy looking. She wears a lot of looks well. Her look and style stands out, in a good way, against all the Kardashian wannabes in the world right now.


----------



## lalame

Elon is with Grimes, for God's sake lol. To each their own but she certainly doesn't have any of those characteristics you expect a rich guy to be into (and maybe that was the attraction!).


----------



## redney

bisousx said:


> Yep. Meghan is gorgeous and classy looking. She wears a lot of looks well. Her look and style stands out, in a good way, against all the Kardashian wannabes in the world right now.


But latest Zoom screenshots shows her a little more....ummmm....smoother. She's quite possibly falling in the Beverly Hills lookalike face brigade.


----------



## Essaeeeee

redney said:


> But latest Zoom screenshots shows her a little more....ummmm....smoother. She's quite possibly falling in the Beverly Hills lookalike face brigade.


Many women in the limelight end up having work done because of insecurities. I don't think they should be attacked for that. I don't like the Kardashians because they try to pass off their plastic surgeries as real to profit off of. If Meghan's not doing that I don't see the problem.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Essaeeeee

Pessie said:


> seems there are new members and *new* members on tpf these days...


This account is 10 months old but ok I guess new people are not allowed to give their opinions on things. I'll leave this thread now because I don't want to get attacked for being *new*


----------



## poopsie

Essaeeeee said:


> So you have a problem with her work now? Pretty sure the story is that Kate caught Will's attention modelling lingerie. Let's say it as it is. You all think she's not white enough to be a royal so everything she does it wrong





Essaeeeee said:


> Yes her actions which is not much different from what the rest of them do but somehow is wrong coming from her. Only thing that is different in her is her race.



Oh please
She may be genotypically heterozygous but she presents otherwise phenotypically
please pardon the clumsy bio 101 reference
I disliked her before I ever knew she was of mixed race. I never even heard of her until Harry. She herself chose to label and present herself as white when it 'suited' her. Now that she can make more of the other side of her heritage she is choosing to go down that path.
She is so transparently desperate to be relevant that I fully expect her to take Harry's nurtz out of her purse and have them surgically attached so she can court the transgender crowd. It's 2020 so nothing is beyond belief at this point.
You have no idea who is sitting on the other side of a keyboard so choosing to paint EVERYONE who has a different take on things than you do as racist is sophomoric and oh so tiresome


----------



## LittleStar88

Essaeeeee said:


> So you have a problem with her work now? Pretty sure the story is that Kate caught Will's attention modelling lingerie. Let's say it as it is. You all think she's not white enough to be a royal so everything she does it wrong



Are you accusing me of racism?


----------



## marietouchet

Yall ...


----------



## bisousx

Essaeeeee said:


> This account is 10 months old but ok I guess new people are not allowed to give their opinions on things. I'll leave this thread now because I don't want to get attacked for being *new*



You’re most welcome here


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I don't think Meghan sold Harry on buying her nice things and being a kept woman like the girls you described (and there are lots!).. Agreed, lots of rich guys wouldn't mind having a hot girlfriend/wife that looks great as arm candy.
> 
> Meghan almost certainly swayed him by presenting exactly what Harry's been yearning for: a life "free" from the shackles of his awful family, all while selling him a vision of being the dream philanthrophic couple... you know, the next O's.
> 
> Unlike most actresses, Meghan's always dressed neat and conservatively (for Hollywood standards) and persuaded him that her life goal, which would become _their_ life goal, was to build a legacy far greater than being sixth in line could offer. I could see it from a mile away when they first got together, even when I was a fan of hers.
> 
> I imagine that with the next guy she will target, she'll have to change her strategy and there will be a sucker to fall for it.



Maybe so. I cannot see whatever charisma she may possess so I am unable to see her appeal. 

I just can’t imagine a scenario where she could score another rich guy she could control like Harry.  And I think she really likes being in charge.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Maybe so. I cannot see whatever charisma she may possess so I am unable to see her appeal.
> 
> I just can’t imagine a scenario where she could score another rich guy she could control like Harry.  And I think she really likes being in charge.



I’m thinking of Wendi Deng and Rupert Murdoch. He was already older, wiser and should’ve known better.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I’m thinking of Wendi Deng and Rupert Murdoch. He was already older, wiser and should’ve known better.



True enough. I don’t know much about her. Was she well known before marrying him?  I looked it up and see they were married 13 or 14 years. Not a bad run. I wonder if H&M can last beyond the 7-8 year mark.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> True enough. I don’t know much about her. Was she well known before marrying him?  I looked it up and see they were married 13 or 14 years. Not a bad run. I wonder if H&M can last beyond the 7-8 year mark.



I don’t think Wendi was famous before the marriage but she made her intentions clear...  there was no dispute among the Murdoch family or the press that she was this golddigging, social climbing tiger lady. I say this with awe and respect to her lol I find her fascinating! Even with her reputation, she’s still rubbing shoulders (among other things) with world leaders and living the life. So in conclusion, I don’t feel like a questionable reputation would stop MM as long as there’s a guy willing to play along.

At least Wendi isn’t out there giving away the floor plans to her in-laws’ vault


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> True enough. I don’t know much about her. Was she well known before marrying him?  I looked it up and see they were married 13 or 14 years. Not a bad run. I wonder if H&M can last beyond the 7-8 year mark.





bisousx said:


> I don’t think Wendi was famous before the marriage but she made her intentions clear...  there was no dispute among the Murdoch family or the press that she was this golddigging, social climbing tiger lady. I say this with awe and respect to her lol I find her fascinating! Even with her reputation, she’s still rubbing shoulders (among other things) with world leaders and living the life. So in conclusion, I don’t feel like a questionable reputation would stop MM as long as there’s a guy willing to play along.
> 
> At least Wendi isn’t out there giving away the floor plans to her in-laws’ vault



Had my story crossed and had to correct myself... 

Wendi wasn't famous and actually is a controversial figure. Wendi was "adopted" and brought her to the US by a couple... then she and the "dad" started an affair. Soooooo Wendi certainly knows what she's doing. I'll add though Wendi is no trophy wife; she's well-educated and successful in her own right.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I don’t think Wendi was famous before the marriage but she made her intentions clear...  there was no dispute among the Murdoch family or the press that she was this golddigging, social climbing tiger lady. I say this with awe and respect to her lol I find her fascinating! Even with her reputation, she’s still rubbing shoulders (among other things) with world leaders and living the life. So in conclusion, I don’t feel like a questionable reputation would stop MM as long as there’s a guy willing to play along.
> 
> At least Wendi isn’t out there giving away the floor plans to her in-laws’ vault



It could make a difference that Meghan is already so famous. Most everyone saw her all over the news building up to the wedding and later about Megxit. What kind of man is going to knowingly sign on to be with a woman who provokes such life changing decisions from her man as stepping down from being royalty?


----------



## zen1965

19 year-old Wendy was „adopted“ by Jack Cherry and his wife. Jack then proceeded to ditch the wife and marry Wendi. Murdoch came much later.
She’s a piece of work. I‘ll give her that.


----------



## Tootsie17

Essaeeeee said:


> Yes her actions which is not much different from what the rest of them do but somehow is wrong coming from her. Only thing that is different in her is her race.


If she were white I would be just as upset by her actions.  For me, it is all about her conduct and character. If you read through this thread, look at videos that have been posted featuring her and H, you may see a different side to her. I don't want her dead. I want people to see that there is more than meets the eye with M. H is a willing victim and he no angel either.  Also, this is just fun gossip, nothing serious.


----------



## bag-mania

zen1965 said:


> 19 year-old Wendy was „adopted“ by Jack Cherry and his wife. Jack then proceeded to ditch the wife and marry Wendi. Murdoch came much later.
> She’s a piece of work. I‘ll give her that.



Okay, now I have to read up about her.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> It could make a difference that Meghan is already so famous. Most everyone saw her all over the news building up to the wedding and later about Megxit. *What kind of man is going to knowingly sign on to be with a woman who provokes such life changing decisions from her man as stepping down from being royalty?*



I feel like with many mysteries in life, exceptions to logic are made depending on how good one’s very specific skill sets are.  

It’s kinda like how countless men throw away loving marriages with beautiful wife and children in tow. Why do they do that? It makes no sense yet it can and does happen - often.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> What kind of man is going to knowingly sign on to be with a woman who provokes such life changing decisions from her man as stepping down from being royalty?



Friendly reminder — He did not step down from being royal. He still is a prince, still 6th in succession, still gets BRF money, still has FCott, still has charities, blah blah.

My two cents — neither H nor MM will have any difficulty finding the next love. Only requirement is to have money, lots of money.


----------



## CeeJay

Essaeeeee said:


> Many women in the limelight end up having work done because of insecurities. I don't think they should be attacked for that. I don't like the Kardashians because they try to pass off their plastic surgeries as real to profit off of. If Meghan's not doing that I don't see the problem.


Sorry to say, but Meghan has had a fair amount of "work" .. which her Father (who she has now "markled") paid for.  She was a cute girl, but all that work is what truly made her much more attractive.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> It could make a difference that Meghan is already so famous. Most everyone saw her all over the news building up to the wedding and later about Megxit. What kind of man is going to knowingly sign on to be with a woman who provokes such life changing decisions from her man as stepping down from being royalty?


  Meghan was little known coming into the RF.  So “the family she never had” and all that was accepted entirely at face value.  She‘s too famous now to pull that reinvention trick again.  Everyone knows everything - thanks to sources “close to” H&M, all the various court cases, and of course the relentless yapping of Omid Scobie.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Friendly reminder — He did not step down from being royal. He still is a prince, still 6th in succession, still gets BRF money, still has FCott, still has charities, blah blah.
> 
> My two cents — neither H nor MM will have any difficulty finding the next love. Only requirement is to have money, lots of money.



True enough, but I think to the casual observers who don't understand the way the BRF works it sure looks like he gave up a lot to make her happy. To some that "sacrifice" looks like true love and to others it would look like manipulation.


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> Meghan was little known coming into the RF.  So “the family she never had” and all that was accepted entirely at face value.  She‘s too famous now to pull that reinvention trick again.  Everyone knows everything - thanks to sources “close to” H&M, all the various court cases, and of course the relentless yapping of Omid Scobie.



YES. There is too much known about her out there. If there is one thing wealthy, powerful people don't like it's lawsuits, unless THEY are the ones filing them. There is just too much potential chaos involved in engaging in a relationship with Meghan.

ETA: Any man can be blinded by sex and/or love. But these guys didn't reach where they are by being easy targets. Not everyone is a lonely, somewhat gullible prince hoping to get someone to marry him because he's tired of being his brother and sister-in-law's third wheel.


----------



## Essaeeeee

[LQUOTE="poopsie, post: 34045982, member: 184125"]
Oh please
She may be genotypically heterozygous but she presents otherwise phenotypically
please pardon the clumsy bio 101 reference
I disliked her before I ever knew she was of mixed race. I never even heard of her until Harry. She herself chose to label and present herself as white when it 'suited' her. Now that she can make more of the other side of her heritage she is choosing to go down that path.
She is so transparently desperate to be relevant that I fully expect her to take Harry's nurtz out of her purse and have them surgically attached so she can court the transgender crowd. It's 2020 so nothing is beyond belief at this point.
You have no idea who is sitting on the other side of a keyboard so choosing to paint EVERYONE who has a different take on things than you do as racist is sophomoric and oh so tiresome
[/QUOTE]
I'm  baffled hearing this. How did you ever see her and not realize she was mixed race?
PS: Your rant here is extremely crass and unnecessarily nasty towards someone whom you don't personally know. And I don't understand how the mods let such things stay up but close entire threads elsewhere for minor disagreement.


----------



## bisousx

Pessie said:


> Meghan was little known coming into the RF.  So “the family she never had” and all that was accepted entirely at face value.  She‘s too famous now to pull that reinvention trick again.  Everyone knows everything - thanks to sources “close to” H&M, all the various court cases, and of course the relentless yapping of Omid Scobie.



Ok, this is a good point. I could see how a man would avoid MM like he would avoid a Taylor Swift. Not many would want their private life aired out in a hit song, or a teen fantasy novel penned by Omid Scobie.


----------



## marietouchet

Everyone is welcome here but please yall ... , repeating myself


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> Ok, this is a good point. I could see how a man would avoid MM like he would avoid a Taylor Swift. Not many would want their private life aired out in a hit song, or a teen fantasy novel penned by Omid Scobie.



Oh I don't know, there's got to be some kind of notoriety status in having a Taylor Swift hit song written about you. Young girls will be singing about you for years to come. Not too shabby!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> YES. There is too much known about her out there. If there is one thing wealthy, powerful people don't like it's lawsuits, unless THEY are the ones filing them. There is just too much potential chaos involved in engaging in a relationship with Meghan.
> 
> *ETA: Any man can be blinded by sex and/or love. But these guys didn't reach where they are by being easy targets. Not everyone is a lonely, somewhat gullible prince hoping to get someone to marry him because he's tired of being his brother and sister-in-law's third wheel.*



I've been surprised how stupid some of these guys are though about their personal life. Like Google cofounder Sergey Brin, who had an affair with a junior staffer awhile back; ex CEO and Chairman Eric Schmidt with med student girlfriend 1/2 his age (he recently gave her a 10 carat ring); McDonalds ex CEO whose reputation is in tatters over affairs with junior staffers; Apttus ex-CEO who was fired after an affair with a staffer... the list just goes on and on.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I've been surprised how stupid some of these guys are though about their personal life. Like Google cofounder Sergey Brin, who had an affair with a junior staffer awhile back; *ex CEO and Chairman Eric Schmidt with med student girlfriend 1/2 his age (he recently gave her a 10 carat ring)*; McDonalds ex CEO whose reputation is in tatters over affairs with junior staffers; Apttus ex-CEO who was fired after an affair with a staffer... the list just goes on and on.



When it comes to affairs, anything goes. It's that same old story, they don't believe they'll get caught or that anything will go wrong with their lovers. Eric Schmidt may have given one of his side pieces a big honking ring, but he's sure not marrying her. He's long been separated from his wife but they have never divorced. I think they have kind of a Bill and Hillary arrangement going. Still married on paper because it suits both of them but in reality they each do their own thing.


----------



## rose60610

bisousx said:


> I’m thinking of Wendi Deng and Rupert Murdoch. He was already older, wiser and should’ve known better.



So true. That was a real head scratcher. Deng was smart and ambitious, Murdoch was freshly divorced and maybe bored. Ripe for the picking, really should have known better. Not unlike how Leona Helmsley pursued Harry Helmsley, that's going back a long way. I'm not going to fault Meghan for being ambitious and landing Harry. Good for her. It was her incessant "poor me, I'm a victim of this world famous family that gave me effing everything so why doesn't the whole world feel sorry for me" attitude.


----------



## bisousx

rose60610 said:


> So true. That was a real head scratcher. Deng was smart and ambitious, Murdoch was freshly divorced and maybe bored. Ripe for the picking, really should have known better. Not unlike how Leona Helmsley pursued Harry Helmsley, that's going back a long way. I'm not going to fault Meghan for being ambitious and landing Harry. Good for her. It was her incessant "poor me, I'm a victim of this world famous family that gave me effing everything so why doesn't the whole world feel sorry for me" attitude.



Age must be a huge factor. My parents, I’m sure, were extremely sharp in their day. But now they are falling prey to so many people and scams, I can hardly keep up with trying to protect them. I could see how even someone savvy could let their guard down later in life.


----------



## Lodpah

Spot on


----------



## csshopper

Essaeeeee said:


> [LQUOTE="poopsie, post: 34045982, member: 184125"]
> Oh please
> She may be genotypically heterozygous but she presents otherwise phenotypically
> please pardon the clumsy bio 101 reference
> I disliked her before I ever knew she was of mixed race. I never even heard of her until Harry. She herself chose to label and present herself as white when it 'suited' her. Now that she can make more of the other side of her heritage she is choosing to go down that path.
> She is so transparently desperate to be relevant that I fully expect her to take Harry's nurtz out of her purse and have them surgically attached so she can court the transgender crowd. It's 2020 so nothing is beyond belief at this point.
> You have no idea who is sitting on the other side of a keyboard so choosing to paint EVERYONE who has a different take on things than you do as racist is sophomoric and oh so tiresome


I'm  baffled hearing this. How did you ever see her and not realize she was mixed race?
PS: Your rant here is extremely crass and unnecessarily nasty towards someone whom you don't personally know. And I don't understand how the mods let such things stay up but close entire threads elsewhere for minor disagreement.
[/QUOTE]
Essaeeeee,
I am really curious what you see in Meghan that you believe readily identifies her as mixed race? 

I, too, had no idea when she first came into prominence as JCMH's new squeeze and didn't care afterwards. I can think of so many people in my life who are not mixed race, yet have her hair, skin, eye coloring. Or maybe it's just that I don't try to find ways to label people as to their race or ethnicity. 

My issues with her are her lack of character, not her genetics.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Similar things happen to women, too. My theory is that once someone smells money on a person, they zero in. It’s who ya know, not what ya know. With MM, she herself has said she can be a variety of ethnicities. She also had the support and connections of SoHo house as well as Trevor and other Hwood people. I guess if you hang around SoHo house long enough, you‘ll find your ticket  

@bag-mania   I agree.   The thing that baffles me is how many people want to believe the H&M lie. He gave up nothing. The media hype was and is ridiculous. It’s almost as if the media doesn’t want us thinking for ourselves.  Gasp.


from 2017 Vogue, an opinion worth reading and understanding:








						The Problem With Calling Meghan Markle the “First Black Princess”
					

“Meghan Markle is the type of black that the majority of right-leaning white America wishes we all could be, if there were to be blackness at all.”




					www.vogue.com
				




ETA:  this is from 2016 by MM herself. “It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress.” 








						Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
					

'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman




					www.elle.com


----------



## sdkitty

Essaeeeee said:


> Yes her actions which is not much different from what the rest of them do but somehow is wrong coming from her. Only thing that is different in her is her race.


oh, does Kate tug on her husband's arm and pull him in the direction she wants him to walk (when he's trying to stop and acknowledge someone)? or step in front of him when he's talking to people?
who are "the rest of them"?


----------



## redney

Essaeeeee said:


> Many women in the limelight end up having work done because of insecurities. I don't think they should be attacked for that. I don't like the Kardashians because they try to pass off their plastic surgeries as real to profit off of. If Meghan's not doing that I don't see the problem.


An observation is not an attack.


----------



## mdcx

Essaeeeee said:


> So you have a problem with her work now? Pretty sure the story is that Kate caught Will's attention modelling lingerie. Let's say it as it is. You all think she's not white enough to be a royal so everything she does it wrong


You seem to be implying that if M was of a different race, no-one would have any criticisms of her whatsoever? Bizarre.


----------



## sdkitty

Essaeeeee said:


> Many women in the limelight end up having work done because of insecurities. I don't think they should be attacked for that. I don't like the Kardashians because they try to pass off their plastic surgeries as real to profit off of. If Meghan's not doing that I don't see the problem.


I don't know if the kardashians try to deny they've had work done  
I don't see how they possibly could deny it....couple of them are like plastic dolls


----------



## poopsie

Essaeeeee said:


> [LQUOTE="poopsie, post: 34045982, member: 184125"]
> Oh please
> She may be genotypically heterozygous but she presents otherwise phenotypically
> please pardon the clumsy bio 101 reference
> I disliked her before I ever knew she was of mixed race. I never even heard of her until Harry. She herself chose to label and present herself as white when it 'suited' her. Now that she can make more of the other side of her heritage she is choosing to go down that path.
> She is so transparently desperate to be relevant that I fully expect her to take Harry's nurtz out of her purse and have them surgically attached so she can court the transgender crowd. It's 2020 so nothing is beyond belief at this point.
> You have no idea who is sitting on the other side of a keyboard so choosing to paint EVERYONE who has a different take on things than you do as racist is sophomoric and oh so tiresome


I'm  baffled hearing this. How did you ever see her and not realize she was mixed race?
PS: Your rant here is extremely crass and unnecessarily nasty towards someone whom you don't personally know. And I don't understand how the mods let such things stay up but close entire threads elsewhere for minor disagreement.
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps I didn't realize she was mixed race because until very recently that wasn't how she chose to present herself. Even knowing, she still doesn't look mixed to me. Why do you assume that everyone sees things the way that you do? 
As to my crass rant being offensive to you I'm sorry that you were offended by my choice of the word nurtz. As for being unnecessarily nasty towards someone you don't personally know, well...................who was it that posted calling us racist and mean? 
Again, why do certain people always want to shut down anything they disagree with? There was no mention of religion or politics or profanity that would violate the rules here.


----------



## Essaeeeee

csshopper said:


> I'm  baffled hearing this. How did you ever see her and not realize she was mixed race?
> PS: Your rant here is extremely crass and unnecessarily nasty towards someone whom you don't personally know. And I don't understand how the mods let such things stay up but close entire threads elsewhere for minor disagreement.


Essaeeeee,
I am really curious what you see in Meghan that you believe readily identifies her as mixed race?

I, too, had no idea when she first came into prominence as JCMH's new squeeze and didn't care afterwards. I can think of so many people in my life who are not mixed race, yet have her hair, skin, eye coloring. Or maybe it's just that I don't try to find ways to label people as to their race or ethnicity.

My issues with her are her lack of character, not her genetics.
[/QUOTE]
Idk I remember reading about her character in suits and she always looked mixed race to me compared to her co-stars. Maybe it's because I'm a WOC myself. I was baffled that people didn't realize ************* was half Black half Indian too. 

You all say its lack of character which makes you hate her but I don't see 2400 pages of hate being poured towards Andrew for being a child rapist or his mother for protecting him from arrest or his father for all the insulting things he's always said and done. Instead they get heaps of praise in this very thread. Clearly their character is more rotten than Meghan's but that doesn't bother you all too much. So I guess to an onlooker it just looks like you are all a bunch of racists.


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> Idk I remember reading about her character in suits and she always looked mixed race to me compared to her co-stars. Maybe it's because I'm a WOC myself. I was baffled that people didn't realize ************* was half Black half Indian too.
> 
> You all say its lack of character which makes you hate her but I don't see 2400 pages of hate being poured towards Andrew for being a child rapist or his mother for protecting him from arrest or his father for all the insulting things he's always said and done. Instead they get heaps of praise in this very thread. Clearly their character is more rotten than Meghan's but that doesn't bother you all too much. So I guess to an onlooker it just looks like you are all a bunch of racists.



Okay, that's just untrue. Nearly every person in here has been to the Prince Andrew/Epstein thread to discuss how VILE Prince Andrew is. You don't see 2400 pages of it there because frankly, what is to discuss? We all agree on it, he doesn't really show his face that much, he doesn't do paid speeches, we don't see a headline when he eats at a freakin restaurant, he didn't just sign a big Netflix deal... so what exactly is there to discuss? NO ONE HERE has praised Andrew.

And btw, even Meghan and Harry have refused to condemn him and they actually know the man. Why do you put that burden on strangers instead of people actually close to him?


----------



## csshopper

I have no idea who (row of stars) is, so am not sure why it’s relevant?

It’s been a long time since this thread started, but I can’t recall any heaps of praise for Andrew.

And any negative commentary on Meaghan’s lack of character is based on a whole human being, not just a white half or a black half. She could be a blue eyed blond Norwegian and I would still dislike her based on her behaviors.


----------



## Essaeeeee

Yeah ofcourse there won't be news about Andrew. He's not going to call on the media everytime he assaults someome now will he?

And the BRF and British media are working together to suppress news about him. Ok you all don't praise Andrew agreed. But you do praise his parents who are actively protecting him and obstructing the investigation. I would think that is poorer character than signing a Netflix deal. Or being a serial adulterer like Charles( and William? Wasn't that news suppressed too). But they get heaps of praises here too.

So raping children is OK, denying justice is OK, blatant racism, sexism, classism coming out of Philips mouth is OK, adultery is OK but being an actress or signing a Netflix deal is not?


----------



## Mendocino

Pessie said:


> Edward couldn’t marry Wallis and remain King.  He had to choose.  it’s relevant to this thread in that the Queen rules with the consent of parliament- she doesn’t just get to lop peoples heads off and do whatever she pleases.  Things have changed a lot since Henry VIII was in charge.  And Henry didn’t divorce, he had his inconvenient marriages declared illegal and therefore void - ie they didn’t exist.


Regarding Henry the Vlll, it always bothered me when it was written that he had divorced Katharine of Aragon. He'd married her after he got a Papal Dispensation to marry his brother's widow.  The Dispensation was granted on Katherine's avowal that her marriage to Prince Arthur had never been consummated. Driven by his desire for a living legitimate male heir, he attempted to annul his marriage, claiming Katharine had indeed consummated her marriage to Arthur. The Pope didn't grant his approval leading Henry to declare himself head of The Church of England annul his marriage to Katherine.

He also had his fourth marriage to Anne of Cleves annulled.

Edited for spelling.


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> Yeah ofcourse there won't be news about Andrew. He's not going to call on the media everytime he assaults someome now will he?
> 
> And the BRF and British media are working together to suppress news about him. Ok you all don't praise Andrew agreed. But you do praise his parents who are actively protecting him and obstructing the investigation. I would think that is poorer character than signing a Netflix deal. Or being a serial adulterer like Charles( and William? Wasn't that news suppressed too). But they get heaps of praises here too.
> 
> So raping children is OK, denying justice is OK, blatant racism, sexism, classism coming out of Philips mouth is OK, adultery is OK but being an actress or signing a Netflix deal is not?



What on earth are you talking about? OF COURSE THAT'S NOT OKAY. You know what else is not okay? Murder, racism, drinking while driving, and a lot of things... multiple things can be wrong *at the same time*.

You answered your own question. No news about Andrew -> nothing new to discuss. How many times do you think people can say the same "this guy SUCKS A LOT" when there is no additional news? We talk about Meghan because there is DAILY NEWS so there is something new to react to every day. If Meghan and Harry stop getting themselves in the news, you won't hear anyone talking about them.

Sure, we can talk about Charles's adultery... but that was legitimately what, 30 years ago? How long are people going to beat a dead horse? Yes, that man was a jacka$$.... but he's not still cheating, so what else am I going to say about it?

BTW, so answer me - Meghan and Harry haven't said anything about Andrew. Meghan says it herself, silence is complicity... so... do you think that's okay? I said it - Andrew is a vile abuser. Let's see if world philanthropists M+H are willing to say the same.


----------



## lalame

And for Goodness sake, there is nothing wrong with getting a Netflix deal. The issue people have with M+H is they made this big show of fleeing the BRF for privacy, but the reality is they want to actually chase fame and money. What intensely private person do you know who gives paid speeches for company conferences, gives taped interviews with celebrities, supports books about themselves which brings daily press sound bytes, or signs multi-year Netflix deals? I have no problem with any actor or actress who does all that but just be honest about it.

And BTW, that Queen you think is so horrible for protecting Andrew... Meghan and Harry haven't said anything about her either. So again, WHY do you put the burden on people who don't know her but give these people who actually know and actively support her a pass?


----------



## Essaeeeee

I'm not saying Meghan is perfect. I'm just saying that nothing she has *done* is worth 2400 pages of ranting with it being solely about her character. I agree she's attention seeking and entitled and a hypocrite. But the rest of that group is pretty much the same without having 2400 pages worth of criticism. It's not like there aren't multiple news articles everyday talking nonsense about Kate or any of the royals but those just don't get shared with the same anger and hate as Meghan's does.

Also you can't say it's not racism when literally the very first comments on her in this very thread are racist in nature. I just went and checked. Page 45 onwards if you want to read.


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> I'm not saying Meghan is perfect. I'm just saying that nothing she has *done* is worth 2400 pages of ranting with it being solely about her character. I agree she's attention seeking and entitled and a hypocrite. But the rest of that group is pretty much the same without having 2400 pages worth of criticism. It's not like there aren't multiple news articles everyday talking nonsense about Kate or any of the royals but those just don't get shared with the same anger and hate as Meghan's does.
> 
> Also you can't say it's not racism when literally the very first comments on her in this very thread are racist in nature. I just went and checked. Page 45 onwards if you want to read.



I really can't speak to that since I only started posting a few months ago. We're all different people... any one post doesn't represent all of us. Are you sure 2400 pages are all negative anyway? 

Here's my take. Wills and Kate are pretty boring - they show up, do their jobs, exactly what has been expected of them and the other family members do. Cut ribbons and wear pretty clothes. There's not really much to have an opinion about, unless your opinion is they're boring (that's my opinion). It's kinda boring to talk about boring people, so I rarely post in there unless there's an outfit I enjoyed.

Meghan and Harry are taking historic action, they're in the news everyday for something "off script" for the royal family (which means controversy just like with Diana)... so there's just much more to react to. Kate had her day too when she was the new shiny thing, public attention means public scrutiny and fascination.

Now I ask you... how exactly is it racist to dislike Meghan? There has been a lot of positivity here aimed at Michelle O, Tyler Perry, and heck even other black British elite. On the other hand, people here have also trashed Wallis, who was basically the (white) "Meghan" of yesteryear. So is it really inconceivable that people just dislike the specific traits of leaving the BRF to chase money (H+M) or hedonism (Wallis + Edward) while still expecting to benefit from the privileges of royal status and money? Of any race??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Essaeeeee

lalame said:


> I really can't speak to that since I only started posting a few months ago. We're all different people... any one post doesn't represent all of us. Are you sure 2400 pages are all negative anyway?
> 
> Here's my take. Wills and Kate are pretty boring - they show up, do their jobs, exactly what has been expected of them and the other family members do. Cut ribbons and wear pretty clothes. There's not really much to have an opinion about, unless your opinion is they're boring (that's my opinion). It's kinda boring to talk about boring people, so I rarely post in there unless there's an outfit I enjoyed.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are taking historic action, they're in the news everyday for something "off script" for the royal family (which means controversy just like with Diana)... so there's just much more to react to. Kate had her day too when she was the new shiny thing, public attention means public scrutiny and fascination.
> 
> Now I ask you... how exactly is it racist to dislike Meghan? There has been a lot of positivity here aimed at Michelle O, Tyler Perry, and heck even other black British elite. On the other hand, people here have also trashed Wallis, who was basically the (white) "Meghan" of yesteryear. So is it really inconceivable that people just dislike the specific traits of leaving the BRF to chase money (H+M) or hedonism (Wallis + Edward) while still expecting to benefit from the privileges of royal status and money? Of any race??



There is dislike then there is hate. Yeah even I criticize her actions but then move on. This thread has multiple pages of comments even on days there is no news about them.

Let me list down all the made up stuff I have read in this forum:
1. Meghan is a prostitute who got fame by being a yatch girl.
2. Meghan faked her pregnancy
3. Meghan doesn't care for her child because she doesn't post enough pictures of him for you all to criticize.
4. Meghan abuses Harry
5. Meghan's mom wasn't in her life
6. Meghan's mom is a criminal
I have also read stuff about how people want to send her hate mail and attack her if they see her in public. They have also wishes for her death.

I just don't get what she has done to get this much hate.


----------



## Essaeeeee

lalame said:


> I really can't speak to that since I only started posting a few months ago. We're all different people... any one post doesn't represent all of us. Are you sure 2400 pages are all negative anyway?
> 
> Here's my take. Wills and Kate are pretty boring - they show up, do their jobs, exactly what has been expected of them and the other family members do. Cut ribbons and wear pretty clothes. There's not really much to have an opinion about, unless your opinion is they're boring (that's my opinion). It's kinda boring to talk about boring people, so I rarely post in there unless there's an outfit I enjoyed.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are taking historic action, they're in the news everyday for something "off script" for the royal family (which means controversy just like with Diana)... so there's just much more to react to. Kate had her day too when she was the new shiny thing, public attention means public scrutiny and fascination.
> 
> Now I ask you... how exactly is it racist to dislike Meghan? There has been a lot of positivity here aimed at Michelle O, Tyler Perry, and heck even other black British elite. On the other hand, people here have also trashed Wallis, who was basically the (white) "Meghan" of yesteryear. So is it really inconceivable that people just dislike the specific traits of leaving the BRF to chase money (H+M) or hedonism (Wallis + Edward) while still expecting to benefit from the privileges of royal status and money? Of any race??



Additionally, in regards to you saying there is positivity about other black people here, that's like saying you are not racist because you have black friends. There are still berating comments here because Oprah or Tyler P were kind to H&M and how they are dumb for that and how MO is dumb for not publicly calling Meghan a meanie. You don't have to be full on 'I hate all black people' and recite the N-word hundreds of times to be racist. Subtle racism is still racism.

Just because it's a gossip thread doesn't mean it has to be cesspool of misogyny and racism. You can call out someone without having to call them a scheming baby mama or a prostitute because she had to do sex scenes as part of her acting. Just because she wasn't Grace Kelly famous doesn't mean that her career before marriage was farce.


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> There is dislike then there is hate. Yeah even I criticize her actions but then move on. This thread has multiple pages of comments even on days there is no news about them.
> 
> Let me list down all the made up stuff I have read in this forum:
> 1. Meghan is a prostitute who got fame by being a yatch girl.
> 2. Meghan faked her pregnancy
> 3. Meghan doesn't care for her child because she doesn't post enough pictures of him for you all to criticize.
> 4. Meghan abuses Harry
> 5. Meghan's mom wasn't in her life
> 6. Meghan's mom is a criminal
> I have also read stuff about how people want to send her hate mail and attack her if they see her in public. They have also wishes for her death.
> 
> I just don't get what she has done to get this much hate.



I don’t hate her... I literally just said she’s gorgeous, I liked her work, and I liked her place in the family before they left the BRF. You know we’re not all responsible for all 2400 pages right? Most pop in once in awhile, lose interest and disappear, then come back in if a news story interests them. I don’t believe any of those stories you just listed... I’d be surprised if any one member believed even half of those things. You’re taking like 2400 pages of commentary over years and assuming everyone agrees much less is responsible for all of it.

Um racism is a belief an entire race is inferior to you. You’re saying I can like 999 black people but if I dislike 1, it couldn’t possibly because of the actions of that 1 but it is because I’m racist? Here’s a few other people who annoy me... Johnny Depp, Olivia Munn, and Jennifer Lopez. Are you accusing me of being racist against white, Asian, and Latino folks too??? Geez.


----------



## Lodpah

Essaeeeee said:


> Essaeeeee,
> I am really curious what you see in Meghan that you believe readily identifies her as mixed race?
> 
> I, too, had no idea when she first came into prominence as JCMH's new squeeze and didn't care afterwards. I can think of so many people in my life who are not mixed race, yet have her hair, skin, eye coloring. Or maybe it's just that I don't try to find ways to label people as to their race or ethnicity.
> 
> My issues with her are her lack of character, not her genetics.


Idk I remember reading about her character in suits and she always looked mixed race to me compared to her co-stars. Maybe it's because I'm a WOC myself. I was baffled that people didn't realize ************* was half Black half Indian too.

You all say its lack of character which makes you hate her but I don't see 2400 pages of hate being poured towards Andrew for being a child rapist or his mother for protecting him from arrest or his father for all the insulting things he's always said and done. Instead they get heaps of praise in this very thread. Clearly their character is more rotten than Meghan's but that doesn't bother you all too much. So I guess to an onlooker it just looks like you are all a bunch of racists.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe because this a JCMH and MM thread? Maybe you can open a thread for that monster Andrew.


----------



## Essaeeeee

lalame said:


> I don’t hate her... I literally just said she’s gorgeous, I liked her work, and I liked her place in the family before they left the BRF. You know we’re not all responsible for all 2400 pages right? Most pop in once in awhile, lose interest and disappear, then come back in if a news story interests them. I don’t believe any of those stories you just listed... I’d be surprised if any one member believed even half of those things. You’re taking like 2400 pages of commentary over years and assuming everyone agrees much less is responsible for all of it.
> 
> Um racism is a belief an entire race is inferior to you. You’re saying I can like 999 black people but if I dislike 1, it couldn’t possibly because of the actions of that 1 but it is because I’m racist? Here’s a few other people who annoy me... Johnny Depp, Olivia Munn, and Jennifer Lopez. Are you accusing me of being racist against white, Asian, and Latino folks too??? Geez.



No I am talking about the regulars here who are the once constantly repeating that. I will say that you are the only regular on this thread who seems to have a rational dislike of her. I have seen you defend her when people go crazy and don't think you are racist.

Since you told me to read this thread I did do that. Page 45 is when she's mentioned first and you can see people commenting negative things then who are still commeting now so I can summarize that these people beleive everything that I meantioned.

Again, I have first hand witnessed the soft racism that I'm talking about where someone might be ok with POCs in general but don't beleive they are good enough for some perceived higher position. I have had relationship where my ex' mother had no problem with POC in general but felt that I wasn't good enough for her family.

I feel some people in this thread are just not happy that Meghan has a royal title because she's a POC which is the reason they want her to be stripped off her title.


----------



## lalame

And btw, in between news bytes, we fill up pages talking about cats, jobs, clothes, COVID, health, money, monarchy, media... you know, building a community of gals. it’s not all negative and it’s not even all Meghan or Harry. Join in!  Your thoughts are welcome, and you can add the positivity you think is missing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Essaeeeee said:


> I'm  baffled hearing this. How did you ever see her and not realize she was mixed race?



It didn't click for me either before I saw her mother.


----------



## Pessie

Essaeeeee said:


> This account is 10 months old but ok I guess new people are not allowed to give their opinions on things. I'll leave this thread now because I don't want to get attacked for being *new*


Post away - where has anyone told you not to or made a victim of you?  But if a new *cough* member uses their very first post on the site to address the owners by name and accuse them of double standards, and every other subsequent post to aggressively lambast the posters on this thread for racism it looks disingenuous IMO.


----------



## Pessie

Mendocino said:


> Regarding Henry the Vlll, it always bothered me when it was written that he had divorced Katharine of Aragon. He'd married her after he got a Papal Dispensation to marry his brother's widow.  The Dispensation was granted on Katherine's avowal that her marriage to Prince Arthur had never been consummated. Driven by his desire for a living legitimate male heir, he attempted to annul his marriage, claiming Katharine had indeed consummated her marriage to Arthur. The Pope didn't grant his approval leading Henry to declare himself head of The Church of England annul his marriage to Katherine.
> 
> He also had his fourth marriage to Anne of Cleves annulled.
> 
> Edited for spelling.


Thank you!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> oh, does Kate tug on her husband's arm and pull him in the direction she wants him to walk (when he's trying to stop and acknowledge someone)? or step in front of him when he's talking to people?
> who are "the rest of them"?


 Maybe she places that strategical ellbow in his ribs when nobody is looking. Not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I have no idea who (row of stars) is, so am not sure why it’s relevant?



A female vize president candidate


----------



## Essaeeeee

Pessie said:


> Post away - where has anyone told you not to or made a victim of you?  But if a new *cough* member uses their very first post on the site to address the owners by name and accuse them of double standards, and every other subsequent post to aggressively lambast the posters on this thread for racism it looks disingenuous IMO.


This forum is great but I have nothing to contribute so I usually lurk. The ************* thing irked me so I questioned them and was satisfied with Megs' rational so went back to lurking. I am lambasting you all here because posting such images in response to a nonnegative post was uncalled for. If the founders have a problem with me giving my opinion they are free to ban me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Essaeeeee said:


> Or being a serial adulterer like Charles( and William? Wasn't that news suppressed too). But they get heaps of praises here too.



The Wills affair was a rumour brought into the world by dear Meghan's camp, not a fact someone with an agenda surpressed.



> So raping children is OK, denying justice is OK, blatant racism, sexism, classism coming out of Philips mouth is OK, adultery is OK but being an actress or signing a Netflix deal is not?



Now you're being ridiculous, and I'm sure you know it. Please find the one person who says raping children is ok, racism is cool and cheating is acceptable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> What on earth are you talking about? OF COURSE THAT'S NOT OKAY. You know what else is not okay? Murder, racism, drinking while driving, and a lot of things... multiple things can be wrong *at the same time*.
> 
> You answered your own question. No news about Andrew -> nothing new to discuss. How many times do you think people can say the same "this guy SUCKS A LOT" when there is no additional news? We talk about Meghan because there is DAILY NEWS so there is something new to react to every day. If Meghan and Harry stop getting themselves in the news, you won't hear anyone talking about them.
> 
> Sure, we can talk about Charles's adultery... but that was legitimately what, 30 years ago? How long are people going to beat a dead horse? Yes, that man was a jacka$$.... but he's not still cheating, so what else am I going to say about it?
> 
> BTW, so answer me - Meghan and Harry haven't said anything about Andrew. Meghan says it herself, silence is complicity... so... do you think that's okay? I said it - Andrew is a vile abuser. Let's see if world philanthropists M+H are willing to say the same.



You said it way better than me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Essaeeeee said:


> 3. Meghan doesn't care for her child because she doesn't post enough pictures of him for you all to criticize.



Said no one ever.



> 4. Meghan abuses Harry



I don't know, I don't walk around ellbowing my partner to be the center of attention.



> 5. Meghan's mom wasn't in her life



But that's a documented fact and not an insult anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Essaeeeee said:


> There is dislike then there is hate. Yeah even I criticize her actions but then move on. This thread has multiple pages of comments even on days there is no news about them.
> 
> Let me list down all the made up stuff I have read in this forum:
> 1. Meghan is a prostitute who got fame by being a yatch girl.
> 2. Meghan faked her pregnancy
> 3. Meghan doesn't care for her child because she doesn't post enough pictures of him for you all to criticize.
> 4. Meghan abuses Harry
> 5. Meghan's mom wasn't in her life
> 6. Meghan's mom is a criminal
> I have also read stuff about how people want to send her hate mail and attack her if they see her in public. They have also wishes for her death.
> 
> I just don't get what she has done to get this much hate.


Give it a rest it’s not hate. This is not a love fest or hate fest thread on MM. Love bomb her all you want and contribute and stop attacking others for their opinions. You keep going on scolding people about ‘hate’ and NOTHING you say will convince some to change their opinion on the content of MM character.

Lol you seem just as obsessed to force your option down on others. What do you want us to do? Give her platitudes and worship her to your delight? Dahling, I’m not white but even I see thru the grifter’s machinations.

Trust me you ain’t going to get points for defending her. You’re likely to get markled like all the people and left standing behind.

MM theme song, sooner or later:


Friends all tried to warn me
But I held my head up high
All the time they warned me
But I only passed them by
They all tried to tell me
But I guess I didn't care
I turned my back and
Left them standing there
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Joey tried to help me find a job
A while ago
When I finally got it I didn't want to go
The party Mary gave for me
When I just walked away
Now there's nothing left for me to say
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Years have passed and I keep thinking
What a fool I've been
I look back into the past and
Think of way back then
I know that I lost everything I thought I that could win
I guess I should have listened to my friends
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Source: Musixmatch

Songwriters: Lalo Schifrin / Mike Curb


----------



## Pessie

Essaeeeee said:


> This forum is great but I have nothing to contribute so I usually lurk. The ************* thing irked me so I questioned them and was satisfied with Megs' rational so went back to lurking. I am lambasting you all here because posting such images in response to a nonnegative post was uncalled for. If the founders have a problem with me giving my opinion they are free to ban me.


And if you are unhappy with anything posted here you should report it.  That’s how the site operates.  If you find this entire thread to your distaste you now have the facility to ignore it entirely, or ignore individual members if they annoy you.
Scolding and attacking other members for holding an opinion about Meghan and Harry you don’t agree with, isn’t going to change anyone’s opinion of them and is against tpf rules.  Join the discussion instead and post something about the topic.


----------



## doni

Mendocino said:


> Regarding Henry the Vlll, it always bothered me when it was written that he had divorced Katharine of Aragon. He'd married her after he got a Papal Dispensation to marry his brother's widow.  The Dispensation was granted on Katherine's avowal that her marriage to Prince Arthur had never been consummated. Driven by his desire for a living legitimate male heir, he attempted to annul his marriage, claiming Katharine had indeed consummated her marriage to Arthur. The Pope didn't grant his approval leading Henry to declare himself head of The Church of England annul his marriage to Katherine.
> 
> He also had his fourth marriage to Anne of Cleves annulled.
> 
> Edited for spelling.


I think both sides of this discussion are right.

Yes, indeed, once the Church of England was established (following his row with the Pope) he had the Archibisbop (I believe?) anul the marriage to Catherine.

However, he had not married Catherine under the Church of England. He had married her in catholic marriage. As the marriage was not anulled by the relevant tribunals, it continued to exist under canon law (a very detailed and precise jurisdiction) and before the eyes of God to boot. This was the understanding of Catherine herself.

So from that perspective it was a divorce, whereby he was free to marry again, and give that marriage enough legitimacy under the laws of the land so that the resulting children would be deemed legitimate, and not bastards (who cannot be in the succession line even if recognized).

It is the same nowadays. If you marry in the Catholic Church you can divorce and marry, but you cannot marry again in Church because the catholic marriage continues to exist (if not anulled). Likewise, Henry could not have entered into  catholic marriage with anyone else while Catherine was alive.
So from that perspective the marriage was not anulled


----------



## Pessie

doni said:


> I think both sides of this discussion are right.
> 
> Yes, indeed, once the Church of England was established (following his row with the Pope) he had the Archibisbop (I believe?) anul the marriage to Catherine.
> 
> However, he had not married Catherine under the Church of England. He had married her in catholic marriage. As the marriage was not anulled by the relevant tribunals, it continued to exist under canon law (a very detailed and precise jurisdiction) and before the eyes of God to boot. This was the understanding of Catherine herself.
> 
> So from that perspective it was a divorce, whereby he was free to marry again, and give that marriage enough legitimacy under the laws of the land so that the resulting children would be deemed legitimate, and not bastards (who cannot be in the succession line even if recognized).
> 
> It is the same nowadays. If you marry in the Catholic Church you can divorce and marry, but you cannot marry again in Church because the catholic marriage continues to exist (if not anulled). Likewise, Henry could not have entered into  catholic marriage with anyone else while Catherine was alive.
> So from that perspective the marriage was not anulled


As you say it depends on your perspective.  Henry still considered himself a catholic.  He rejected the authority of the Pope over the church in England, and set himself up in supreme authority instead.  So it was an annulment in England, but not to anyone loyal to the Pope.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A female vize president candidate



The one who was accused of prostituting herself earlier in this thread. By some of the posters who apparently worship a certain FLOTUS. But there is no racism.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I don’t understand why both can’t be true...most posters truly don’t like her behavior AND at times she has been a victim of racism.

Can’t we at least acknowledge it’s an issue? By immediately becoming personally defensive it shuts down any possible conversation which is a shame.

I also think there is a tremendous amount of anger right now... some might even say rage  ...there’s overwhelming stress and anxiety and a lot of intensity seems to be channeled into this thread. Maybe it’s serving as some kind of outlet, a coping mechanism so we don’t start screaming at our kids or partners or coworkers or the grocery store clerk?


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don’t understand why both can’t be true...most posters truly don’t like her behavior AND at times she has been a victim of racism.
> 
> Can’t we at least acknowledge it’s an issue? By immediately becoming personally defensive it shuts down any possible conversation which is a shame.
> 
> I also think there is a tremendous amount of anger right now... some might even say rage  ...there’s overwhelming stress and anxiety and a lot of intensity seems to be channeled into this thread. Maybe it’s serving as some kind of outlet, a coping mechanism so we don’t start screaming at our kids or partners or coworkers or the grocery store clerk?


I agree with this. I think there are bit of both going on. Not directed at any particular posters. I think there is a lot of anger from both sides.

Having an opinion is not against forum rules but attacking members is though. I suggest using ignore function.


----------



## maryg1

Gabs007 said:


> 21st century ladies, we really aren't any longer chained to the kitchen sink or arm pieces


You’re right, 21st century.
So you would say a woman should work hard to gain success in her job, and not rely on her husband(s) to get jobs/getting rich/living a luxury life.
All the opposite of what MM has done.
If I had daughters, I would suggest other women as their role model, be it politicians, actresses, athletes, no matter what job they do.


----------



## maryg1

Essaeeeee said:


> Or being a serial adulterer like Charles( and William? Wasn't that news suppressed too). But they get heaps of praises here too.
> 
> So raping children is OK, denying justice is OK, blatant racism, sexism, classism coming out of Philips mouth is OK, adultery is OK but being an actress or signing a Netflix deal is not?


There were rumors that MM left her husband soon after she met H, so?
And nobody says all the above is right, but this is MM&JCMH thread, Andrew has a separate one.
The couple discussed here has proven multiple times to be only interested in getting (other people’s) money and keeping titles that can open doors to them, so why should I like people that have these beliefs?
Calling racist every people that criticize what PoC do is not doing good to the cause.
There is good and bad everywhere, it is not determined by race.
If you read carefully the thread you will find posts praising Michelle O. for what has reached in life.
Same thread, 2 WoC, 2 different goals in life, one gets praises and one gets criticism.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Where in *this *thread has anyone posted those comments? I need page numbers and post numbers.
Have you reported those posts? Are they made by legit TPF’ers or just people who sign up, make unsubstantiated claims and leave?

Seems to me that you are making extraordinary claims without support. Maybe other websites post that stuff. I have not seen it here. For our posts, almost all of us include links to reputable sites that support our comments. Yes, we put in the effort to educate readers about the facts concerning H&M. If they maintained their privacy, no one would care what they did.

Just as you are entitled to your opinion, so are we.  Disagreement is ok.  



Essaeeeee said:


> There is dislike then there is hate. Yeah even I criticize her actions but then move on. This thread has multiple pages of comments even on days there is no news about them.
> 
> Let me list down all the made up stuff I have read in this forum:
> 1. Meghan is a prostitute who got fame by being a yatch girl.
> 2. Meghan faked her pregnancy
> 3. Meghan doesn't care for her child because she doesn't post enough pictures of him for you all to criticize.
> 4. Meghan abuses Harry
> 5. Meghan's mom wasn't in her life
> 6. Meghan's mom is a criminal
> I have also read stuff about how people want to send her hate mail and attack her if they see her in public. They have also wishes for her death.
> 
> I just don't get what she has done to get this much hate.


----------



## maryg1

Essaeeeee said:


> I feel some people in this thread are just not happy that Meghan has a royal title because she's a POC which is the reason they want her to be stripped off her title.


No, people want BOTH M&H to be stripped of their title, not only her, because they are simply using it for their connections and don’t want to do the jobs that come with their titles.
I don’t know if it was posted here or if I read it elsewhere, there is another WoC in UK (a countess? Don’t remember)
I don’t think anybody here would ask to strip her of her titles.
You’re most welcome to stay here


----------



## CarryOn2020

Please make an effort to read the posts here. For good reason, 95% are anti-Harry.
Again, kindly report any and all posts you feel violate the TPF TOS.






Essaeeeee said:


> No I am talking about the regulars here who are the once constantly repeating that. I will say that you are the only regular on this thread who seems to have a rational dislike of her. I have seen you defend her when people go crazy and don't think you are racist.
> 
> Since you told me to read this thread I did do that. Page 45 is when she's mentioned first and you can see people commenting negative things then who are still commeting now so I can summarize that these people beleive everything that I meantioned.
> 
> Again, I have first hand witnessed the soft racism that I'm talking about where someone might be ok with POCs in general but don't beleive they are good enough for some perceived higher position. I have had relationship where my ex' mother had no problem with POC in general but felt that I wasn't good enough for her family.
> 
> I feel some people in this thread are just not happy that Meghan has a royal title because she's a POC which is the reason they want her to be stripped off her title.


----------



## maryg1

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> The one who was accused of prostituting herself earlier in this thread. By some of the posters who apparently worship a certain FLOTUS. But there is no racism.


It must be me that don’t understand, but how is accusing someone of prostituting herself is racist?
Let’s be honest...many many many women use their “charme” to get jobs and promotion. It is widely done, in every part of the world, I’ve witnessed that in my job too, and I’ve never worked for big companies where big money or fame was involved.
It is disgusting, but it is there, and TBH I’m not scandalized anymore.
(Nb: I’m not saying that the politician involved did prostitute herself, I don’t know her past. I’m only saying that that attitude doesn’t belong to a specific race)


----------



## Essaeeeee

CarryOn2020 said:


> Where in *this *thread has anyone posted those comments? I need page numbers and post numbers.
> Have you reported those posts? Are they made by legit TPF’ers or just people who sign up, make unsubstantiated claims and leave?
> 
> Seems to me that you are making extraordinary claims without support. Maybe other websites post that stuff. I have not seen it here. For our posts, almost all of us include links to reputable sites that support our comments. Yes, we put in the effort to educate readers about the facts concerning H&M. If they maintained their privacy, no one would care what they did.
> 
> Just as you are entitled to your opinion, so are we.  Disagreement is ok.


Listen I'm not going through 2400 pages to get you references. I don't read about these 2 elsewhere so what I have mentioned are from here. I just don't think reporting will do much when one of the mods is frequently posting here. If it should be removed she would've removed it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Then, why not read a thread you enjoy? There are so many wonderful threads on TPF to choose from. Why continue to read one you dislike? H&M are adults who are public figures. They can defend themselves and do not need anyone here to defend them. Most of us are not public figures. 

Perhaps you could start a “H&M Fan Support“ thread?





Essaeeeee said:


> Listen I'm not going through 2400 pages to get you references. I don't read about these 2 elsewhere so what I have mentioned are from here. I just don't think reporting will do much when one of the mods is frequently posting here. If it should be removed she would've removed it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LLa

poopsie said:


> Perhaps I didn't realize she was mixed race because until very recently that wasn't how she chose to present herself.



How would she present herself differently as mixed race?


----------



## Essaeeeee

Who said I don't read the other threads?
They must be criticized but there's no need to call them prostitutes and wish for them to die to do the same. Or say she's a Kardashian because she's mixed race.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Then, why not read a thread you enjoy? There are so many wonderful threads on TPF to choose from. Why continue to read one you dislike? H&M are adults. They can defend themselves and do not need anyone here to defend them.
> 
> Perhaps you could start a “H&M Fan Support“ thread?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Okaaay. 
Pressing the ‘ignore’ button.



Essaeeeee said:


> Who said I don't read the other threads?
> They must be criticized but there's no need to call them prostitutes and wish for them to die to do the same. Or say she's a Kardashian because she's mixed race.


----------



## maryg1

Essaeeeee said:


> Who said I don't read the other threads?
> They must be criticized but there's no need to call them prostitutes and wish for them to die to do the same. Or say she's a Kardashian because she's mixed race.


She was compared to the K because she does everything to get attention and be on the magazines, not for being mixed race.


----------



## Chanbal

I guess many of us agree with Philip on this:

*Prince Philip Thinks Prince Harry Has "Abdicated His Responsibilities" for a Life of "Self-Centered Celebrity"*

Prince Philip "has found it hard to understand exactly what it was that made his grandson’s life so unbearable. As far as Philip was concerned, Harry and Meghan had everything going for them: a beautiful home, a healthy son, and a unique opportunity to make a global impact with their charity work.... 









						Prince Philip Thinks Prince Harry Has "Abdicated His Responsibilities" for a Life of "Self-Centered Celebrity"
					

Prince Philip REALLY went there.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

maryg1 said:


> She was compared to the K because she does everything to get attention and be on the magazines, not for being mixed race.


Wait a minute!!! KK is mixed race? First time I heard this!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I get it, I really do...no one wants to feel like they are being attacked or called out.

But denying it completely feels a bit like gas lighting.

Can we at least agree there is racism (not anyone personally, just that it exists)?

And that in some cases it may have impacted the response to her (not everyone, no one in particular here)?

And that there are instances where that has occurred in this thread (not all, but just that it has happened)?

If you need examples, this was the very first post in response to the news he was dating her...



> Wonder if she will try to become a baby mama?


----------



## zen1965

Bravo to the Duke of Edinburgh.


----------



## maryg1

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I get it, I really do...no one wants to feel like they are being attacked or called out.
> 
> But denying it completely feels a bit like gas lighting.
> 
> Can we at least agree there is racism (not anyone personally, just that it exists)?
> 
> And that in some cases it may have impacted the response to her (not everyone, no one in particular here)?
> 
> And that there are instances where that has occurred in this thread (not all, but just that it has happened)?
> 
> If you need examples, this was the very first post in response to the news he was dating her...



I’m not English mother tongue, so please waste a minute to educate me.
Is “baby mama” referred to PoC? Because I translate that sentence to “wonder if she will try to get pregnant asap so that she can get a life time connection to the BRF”


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A female vize president candidate


OT but I had an exchange with a "real" racist (lots of them where I live) who thought she was half NA.  told him she was half Indian not NA and he wouldn't believe me.


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I get it, I really do...no one wants to feel like they are being attacked or called out.
> 
> But denying it completely feels a bit like gas lighting.
> 
> Can we at least agree there is racism (not anyone personally, just that it exists)?
> 
> And that in some cases it may have impacted the response to her (not everyone, no one in particular here)?
> 
> And that there are instances where that has occurred in this thread (not all, but just that it has happened)?
> 
> If you need examples, this was the very first post in response to the news he was dating her...



Some of us have acknowledged time and time again that there are certain comments that seem racist and uncalled for.

I however disagree that other people’s racism have impacted the response to her.

Quite a few people here started off as fans of Meghan and Harry. I did a search on myself in this thread once, and I saw it for myself.

M&H started off with a few haters and naysayers, but after revealing their intentions and horrid personalities,their actions really turned people away.


Also, in response to Eeesane, I don’t think MM was a yacht girl because she’s a PoC. I could believe she was one because she’s an actress, and one who spent her free time at Soho house throwing herself at rich men and well connected women who could elevate her to the next level.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A female vize president candidate


Queen,
 Thanks for solving that mystery for me. My eyes crossed after about the eighth star as I was trying to count and figure it out.


----------



## lalame

I don’t think anyone is denying racism exists but that’s a pretty serious accusation about specific people here. I haven’t read through this entire thread but the examples here don’t pass the test for me. And I'm a WOC!!!

*Comparing M to Kardashians:* These two people have the most active threads in TPF.... is it because they're both mixed race? No... because they're both trendy, their whole life is in the public eye, and you see news about them if they sneeze (self promotion PR game strong).
*Wanting M to die:* I have literally never seen this said. That's ridiculous and I highly doubt anyone who posts actively thinks this. Someone was clearly having a dramatic day when/if they said this.
*Suggesting she's a baby mama:* I wouldn't call M this but this term isn't racial (maybe used to be but even then idk). There was even a movie about a white chick being a baby mama lol. It's part of the all-race lexicon now with pop culture.


----------



## marietouchet

maryg1 said:


> I’m not English mother tongue, so please waste a minute to educate me.
> Is “baby mama” referred to PoC? Because I translate that sentence to “wonder if she will try to get pregnant asap so that she can get a life time connection to the BRF”


Trying my best to explain colloquial English expressions

"baby mama" is used for the mother of a man's child, usually when the couple is not married
Similarly, "baby daddy" is for the father of a woman's child, usually when they are not married

The expressions usually relate to marital status, not race/POC - I have seen the expressions used for non POC

The expressions are used when it is not obvious (or the writer does not care to specify) what current relationship the parents have, eg  divorced, dating, hate each other, engaged etc, it simply indicates the parents have a child together, although it might be used in a derogatory fashion (not a complement)

That is general use, cannot speak to the way in which it was used in the post specifically, poster can clarify, if something else was meant


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> OT but I had an exchange with a "real" racist (lots of them where I live) who thought she was half NA.  told him she was half Indian not NA and he wouldn't believe me.



Why would that make any difference to him anyway??? lol head scratcher, that one is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Why would that make any difference to him anyway??? lol head scratcher, that one is.


can't talk politics here but I'll just say there are plenty of people around my area who "hate" liberals and POC


----------



## bisousx

@lalame and @marietouchet, both explanations are excellent.

I do recall the term babymama having its origins in the AA community and if I recall correctly it became a more widely popular term through tv shows.
So to me, it could be a racist thing to say.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> can't talk politics here but I'll just say there are plenty of people around my area who "hate" liberals and POC



I get that part but why would it make a difference if she was NA or Indian to that person? Is one somehow better or worse than the other? Edit: maybe I don't even want to know... some mindsets don't deserve to be understood


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Why would that make any difference to him anyway??? lol head scratcher, that one is.


I was about to ask that. When I see someone, I don't immediately try to figure out what race they are, I just see them as people! If they wish to tell me the specific details then fine. But it's not required! I judge people by their actions and conducts!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I get that part but why would it make a difference if she was NA or Indian to that person? Is one somehow better or worse than the other? Edit: maybe I don't even want to know... some mindsets don't deserve to be understood


IDK....it just annoyed me that he was misrepresenting/misunderstanding....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Page 63, post #932 sums up this thread even tho it was written 3 years ago.  Notice the post is about MM‘s behavior, nothing about ethnicity.  When people come from vastly different backgrounds, typically people will say the marriage won’t last, especially with Harry‘s track record of unstable relationships. 

_Oct 19, 2017_

_#932_
_I don’t think Meghan Markle is all that interesting. She loves all this spotlight and that bit with the Vanity Fair cover - which was dreadfully dull and calculating - confirmed that for me. I thought she was interesting at first, but the more I learn about her the less I like her. IF they make it down the aisle I doubt it will last._


----------



## CarryOn2020

I don’t buy into H or MM’s victim routine. H has shown racist and anti-Semitic behavior. MM had a privileged childhood of private schools, nice homes, nice clothes, and connections to powerful people. Both are wealthy, both are public figures [which means they need to be held accountable for words and actions], both have access to the best of the best. They are people of privilege.  To say they are victims is to diminish real victims.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t buy into H or MM’s victim routine. H has shown racist and anti-Semitic behavior. MM had a privileged childhood of private schools, nice homes, nice clothes, and connections to powerful people. Both are wealthy, both are public figures [which means they need to be held accountable for words and actions], both have access to the best of the best. They are people of privilege.  To say they are victims is to diminish real victims.


can I like this multiple times?


----------



## bag-mania

Frankly, it’s easy to explain why I dislike Meghan so much. She’s a self-absorbed  hypocrite who desperately seeks attention wherever she can while feigning a need for privacy. Like today where she released a zoom chat to the press about the one-year anniversary of the Smart Works clothing line. That nonstory exists solely so that she can feed her ego by giving inspirational platitudes from her living room such as this:

"People can say that so much of Smart Works is about the clothes themselves but it's really not ... all of that stuff is the exterior but it's what it does for you on the inside that ends up being the best accessory. It’s the confidence, it's what is built within, that is the piece that you walk out of that room with and walk into the interview with."


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Frankly, it’s easy to explain why I dislike Meghan so much. She’s a self-absorbed  hypocrite who desperately seeks attention wherever she can while feigning a need for privacy. Like today where she released a zoom chat to the press about the one-year anniversary of the Smart Works clothing line. That nonstory exists solely so that she can feed her ego by giving inspirational platitudes from her living room such as this:
> 
> "People can say that so much of Smart Works is about the clothes themselves but it's really not ... all of that stuff is the exterior but it's what it does for you on the inside that ends up being the best accessory. It’s the confidence, it's what is built within, that is the piece that you walk out of that room with and walk into the interview with."


agree but for me the biggest irritant was her saying how no one asked how she felt - while visiting a country of very underprivileged people.....instead of appreciating what she had - which was A LOT - she was complaining that she wasn't thriving.....that is what I hold against her and it has Nothing to do with her race


----------



## Essaeeeee

sdkitty said:


> agree but for me the biggest irritant was her saying how no one asked how she felt - while visiting a country of very underprivileged people.....instead of appreciating what she had - which was A LOT - she was complaining that she wasn't thriving.....that is what I hold against her and it has Nothing to do with her race



Oh ok. Was this you time traveling?



sdkitty said:


> boo hoo....sorry if this is callous but if the B-level actress can't stand the heat, she can get out of the relationship
> 
> From the Daily Beast:
> 
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-time-off-work-struggling-with-attention.html
> 
> 
> *IT AIN’T EASY*
> *Prince Harry’s Girlfriend Meghan Markle Takes Time Off Work, Struggling With Attention*
> Harry’s new girlfriend Meghan Markle is struggling to cope with the attention and is taking some time off work. Is this why Harry went public?
> 
> 
> 
> *TOM SYKES*
> *11.10.16 2:06 AM ET*
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s new girlfriend Meghan Markle is taking some time off from filming her TV show _Suits_ as she tries to come to terms with what Harry has described as a “wave of abuse and harassment” since their relationship became public knowledge.
> 
> Page Six reports the actress, 35, has told her bosses she needs to skip filming for her USA Network show in Toronto this week because she has “something important to do.”
> 
> Page Six reports: “The reason for the absence is being kept a closely guarded secret, but insiders speculate that Markle is meeting with lawyers to help manage her turbulent and sudden rise to international fame.”
> 
> 
> If Markle is having trouble coping with the attention since it was disclosed she is dating Harry, it may explain why, earlier this week, Prince Harry, 32, issued an unprecedented public statement accusing both mainstream and social-media trolls of racist abuse in coverage of his relationship with his new American girlfriend, who has one white parent and one black parent.
> 
> Kensington Palace declined to tell The Daily Beast exactly which stories they were referring to, but a _Daily Mail_ story headlined “Harry’s Girl Is (Almost) Straight Outta Compton” is in the frame.
> 
> “It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm,” the letter said.
> 
> Kensington Palace listed a string of complaints in the letter, citing “nightly legal battles” to keep defamatory stories out of papers; Markle’s mother “having to struggle past photographers” in order to get to her front door; the attempts of “reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home”; and “substantial bribes” being offered by papers to Markle’s ex-boyfriend along with the “bombardment of nearly every friend, co-worker, and loved one in her life” as papers seek information on her.


----------



## Sol Ryan

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I get it, I really do...no one wants to feel like they are being attacked or called out.
> 
> But denying it completely feels a bit like gas lighting.
> 
> Can we at least agree there is racism (not anyone personally, just that it exists)?
> 
> And that in some cases it may have impacted the response to her (not everyone, no one in particular here)?
> 
> And that there are instances where that has occurred in this thread (not all, but just that it has happened)?
> 
> If you need examples, this was the very first post in response to the news he was dating her...



I agree with you on this. There has been some racist coverage of Meghan and I have seen some things in this thread that have made me pause occasionally.

This doesn’t mean that all criticism of Meghan and Harry is racist (not that I’m saying you are saying that). They’ve done a lot of things I find wrong and really I have more issues with Harry.

Travalyst/Barefoot Google Speech/etc- Why lecture Me on green travel when he’s driving an Escalade, flying on private jets and living in a 16 bed/bath house for 3 people? I don’t care if they want to fly on private planes, but don’t tell me not to if they aren’t going to follow their own advice.









						Prince Harry's eco-tourism appeal condemned after Travalyst summit
					

PRINCE HARRY's plea for sustainable tourism has been slapped down by a former transport minister, who claimed the Duke of Sussex is "lacking credibility" over this subject.




					www.express.co.uk
				











						Meg and Harry 'flew on Tyler Perry's $150m jet to move to his $18m mansion'
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have reportedly flew on Tyler Perry’s $150million (£120m) private jet to move into his $18million (£15m) Beverly Hills mega-mansion. The Duke and Duchess of Sus…




					www.the-sun.com
				











						'Eco-warriors' Prince Harry & Meghan Markle drive off in gas guzzling SUV
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry were snapped hopping into a gas-guzzling SUV in Los Angeles last week. The couple were seen wearing coronavirus face masks as they stepped out in Beverly Hills on Fri…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				











						Prince Harry reportedly got a pedicure at a $600-a-night hotel before giving a barefoot speech at Google Camp
					

Prince Harry reportedly treated himself to $60 pedicure before jetting off to Italy, the Mail Online reports.




					www.insider.com
				











						Prince Harry reportedly chartered an $8,000 private helicopter days before giving a speech on climate change
					

Two days after taking a private helicopter from London to Birmingham, The Duke of Sussex urged 12,000 fans to take action against climate change.




					www.insider.com
				




The Revisionist History: Don’t tell me that Harry didn’t know there was paparazzi in the US when he came here for his naked billiard weekend in Vegas. How stupid are we supposed to be? 








						Well, they do call it close protection: Prince Harry pictured in Las Vegas pool party jacuzzi with his VERY relaxed bodyguard
					

These new photographs show the third in line to the throne splashing around at a VIP bungalow at the MGM Grand in the heart of Sin City.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



And yet, here they claim they moved to the US to get away from the paps... 








						Duke and Duchess of Sussex sue Los Angeles paparazzi over alleged drone pictures of Archie
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are suing paparazzi for invasion of privacy after drones were allegedly used to take pictures of their son Archie at the house where they are staying in Los Angeles. In a 10-page legal complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California the couple said...




					currently.att.yahoo.com
				




My issues with Meghan are a little more complicated. One is claiming women’s empowerment while using a title she got through marrying into a family that was apparently so awful that they had to put out abook to tell us that Kate didn’t take her shopping.If they were so awful, why would you want to be associated with them?  If we’re equal, why do they need to use those titles? This is America, we fought a war against Harry’s family so those titles don’t mean anything here...









						Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's relationship reportedly changed after one shopping trip
					

Here's everything to know...




					www.marieclaire.co.uk
				




My other is with her using the The Duchess of Sussex title in politics. I have no problem with Meghan Markle speaking her mind politically, voting etc.. It’s 100% her right as a US citizen and I believe everyone should participate in voting, but I do take issue with The Duchess of Sussex (note the title) speaking politically. She’s a representative of the BRF and thus the British government. Seeing the DoS title on political stuff is scares me because I’m legit scared it will cause problems later if someone wants to claim meddling in the election. When she did the video with Gloria Steinem, Makers posted it with the DoS title. I can agree or disagree with Meghan Markle, who cares, but I take offense to The Duchess of Sussex or Prince Harry getting involved in our politics, much like I would anyone else from the BRF. If Will or Kate did it, I’d be in their thread complaining as well, but they know not to do it. 









						Meghan Markle received special gift with a hidden meaning behind it
					

MEGHAN MARKLE was given a special gift during her conversation with Gloria Steinem for MAKERS Women.




					www.express.co.uk
				




I’m ambivalent over their Netflix deal. I don’t have Netflix and never have so y’all will have to tell me about anything they make. If they used it to pay back the British taxpayers, great. If it was the money from Disney that paid back Frogmore, I hope someone is able to prove it, because that’s shady.  I hope Archie grows to be a happy and healthy child, but my issues are with Harry and Meghan’s Hypocrisy. One minute, they were forced out of they royal family because it was so awful for them and they next, their leaving was planned before they got married. They were going to hit the ground running,  but were never going to stay? They were 2 different engagement stories. Nothing is real with them.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'discussed Megxit before marrying'
					

The explosive new biography Finding Freedom will detail how the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 38, 'discussed Megxit before marrying', sources told The Sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				











						Harry and Meghan: Interview in full
					

The newly engaged couple spoke to the BBC's Mishal Husain on Monday afternoon.



					www.bbc.com
				











						Harry and Meghan got secretly engaged 'two months before they told the world'
					

Prince Harry proposed to Meghan Markle during their trip to Botswana in August 2017, according to a new book, despite previously saying the engagement took place over a chicken dinner




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



And poor Ina....
https://www.bravotv.com/the-feast/i...recipe-prince-harry-proposed-to-meghan-markle

There’s a lot here and I hope it makes sense, I’m not great with words but that sums up the issues I can think of at the moment.. I’m sure there’s other thing, but at the moment, it’s the lies and double-standards mostly and some concern about decorum... and I really really don’t like Harry... 
Also, I think Andrew is slime.


----------



## scarlet555

Sol Ryan said:


> I agree with you on this. There has been some racist coverage of Meghan and I have seen some things in this thread that have made me pause occasionally.
> 
> This doesn’t mean that all criticism of Meghan and Harry is racist (not that I’m saying you are saying that). They’ve done a lot of things I find wrong and really I have more issues with Harry.
> 
> Travalyst/Barefoot Google Speech/etc- Why lecture Me on green travel when he’s driving an Escalade, flying on private jets and living in a 16 bed/bath house for 3 people? I don’t care if they want to fly on private planes, but don’t tell me not to if they aren’t going to follow their own advice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's eco-tourism appeal condemned after Travalyst summit
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY's plea for sustainable tourism has been slapped down by a former transport minister, who claimed the Duke of Sussex is "lacking credibility" over this subject.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg and Harry 'flew on Tyler Perry's $150m jet to move to his $18m mansion'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have reportedly flew on Tyler Perry’s $150million (£120m) private jet to move into his $18million (£15m) Beverly Hills mega-mansion. The Duke and Duchess of Sus…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Eco-warriors' Prince Harry & Meghan Markle drive off in gas guzzling SUV
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry were snapped hopping into a gas-guzzling SUV in Los Angeles last week. The couple were seen wearing coronavirus face masks as they stepped out in Beverly Hills on Fri…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry reportedly got a pedicure at a $600-a-night hotel before giving a barefoot speech at Google Camp
> 
> 
> Prince Harry reportedly treated himself to $60 pedicure before jetting off to Italy, the Mail Online reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry reportedly chartered an $8,000 private helicopter days before giving a speech on climate change
> 
> 
> Two days after taking a private helicopter from London to Birmingham, The Duke of Sussex urged 12,000 fans to take action against climate change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Revisionist History: Don’t tell me that Harry didn’t know there was paparazzi in the US when he came here for his naked billiard weekend in Vegas. How stupid are we supposed to be?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, they do call it close protection: Prince Harry pictured in Las Vegas pool party jacuzzi with his VERY relaxed bodyguard
> 
> 
> These new photographs show the third in line to the throne splashing around at a VIP bungalow at the MGM Grand in the heart of Sin City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yet, here they claim they moved to the US to get away from the paps...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex sue Los Angeles paparazzi over alleged drone pictures of Archie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are suing paparazzi for invasion of privacy after drones were allegedly used to take pictures of their son Archie at the house where they are staying in Los Angeles. In a 10-page legal complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California the couple said...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My issues with Meghan are a little more complicated. One is claiming women’s empowerment while using a title she got through marrying into a family that was apparently so awful that they had to put out abook to tell us that Kate didn’t take her shopping.If they were so awful, why would you want to be associated with them?  If we’re equal, why do they need to use those titles? This is America, we fought a war against Harry’s family so those titles don’t mean anything here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's relationship reportedly changed after one shopping trip
> 
> 
> Here's everything to know...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My other is with her using the The Duchess of Sussex title in politics. I have no problem with Meghan Markle speaking her mind politically, voting etc.. It’s 100% her right as a US citizen and I believe everyone should participate in voting, but I do take issue with The Duchess of Sussex (note the title) speaking politically. She’s a representative of the BRF and thus the British government. Seeing the DoS title on political stuff is scares me because I’m legit scared it will cause problems later if someone wants to claim meddling in the election. When she did the video with Gloria Steinem, Makers posted it with the DoS title. I can agree or disagree with Meghan Markle, who cares, but I take offense to The Duchess of Sussex or Prince Harry getting involved in our politics, much like I would anyone else from the BRF. If Will or Kate did it, I’d be in their thread complaining as well, but they know not to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle received special gift with a hidden meaning behind it
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE was given a special gift during her conversation with Gloria Steinem for MAKERS Women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m ambivalent over their Netflix deal. I don’t have Netflix and never have so y’all will have to tell me about anything they make. If they used it to pay back the British taxpayers, great. If it was the money from Disney that paid back Frogmore, I hope someone is able to prove it, because that’s shady.  I hope Archie grows to be a happy and healthy child, but my issues are with Harry and Meghan’s Hypocrisy. One minute, they were forced out of they royal family because it was so awful for them and they next, their leaving was planned before they got married. They were going to hit the ground running,  but were never going to stay? They were 2 different engagement stories. Nothing is real with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'discussed Megxit before marrying'
> 
> 
> The explosive new biography Finding Freedom will detail how the Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 38, 'discussed Megxit before marrying', sources told The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan: Interview in full
> 
> 
> The newly engaged couple spoke to the BBC's Mishal Husain on Monday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan got secretly engaged 'two months before they told the world'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry proposed to Meghan Markle during their trip to Botswana in August 2017, according to a new book, despite previously saying the engagement took place over a chicken dinner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And poor Ina....
> https://www.bravotv.com/the-feast/i...recipe-prince-harry-proposed-to-meghan-markle
> 
> There’s a lot here and I hope it makes sense, I’m not great with words but that sums up the issues I can think of at the moment.. I’m sure there’s other thing, but at the moment, it’s the lies and double-standards mostly and some concern about decorum... and I really really don’t like Harry...
> Also, I think Andrew is slime.



you deserve respect, speaking with links...


----------



## Jktgal

Wow you all have patience I'll never have.

Back to the usual programming..


----------



## sdkitty

Essaeeeee said:


> Oh ok. Was this you time traveling?


time travelling?  did I say anything about her race?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@sdkitty and @Sol Ryan @bag-mania much appreciation and gratitude to you.
You have maintained the same point of view about H&M from day 1 until now.
You carefully have expressed your substantive opinions and provided sources. I appreciate the time and effort you put into your thoughtful posts.
 You express disagreement with grace and aplomb.
 Thank you both for bringing light to this thread.
Looking forward to more of your outstanding posts


----------



## Sol Ryan

scarlet555 said:


> fan or foe, you deserve respect, speaking with links...
> I wish the fans did more of that.



I try to be fair in my criticisms. I really was happy for Harry when he got married. I’ll admit, I personally thought it was fast, but I was happy for him, figured they’re adults. I want everyone to be happy. I didn’t know anything about Meghan, so all I cared was if she made Harry happy.

Harry with Will and Kate had had such a PR makeover with Invictus and all their outings that he seemed like he grew up and was a nice guy. He seemed like the fun one. 

Its just a shame to see that was all fake... I’ve just gotten worn down now.. . Every time I turn around I feel like it’s another hostage looking zoom video or over sharing story. I wish they’d go away and have their privacy... I don’t think Katie Price is in the news as much as they are... 

If they want privacy, why do I need to know that Harry’s cooking skillls have “a way to go”?









						Prince Harry 'cooked Meghan 3 course dinner' for birthday 'while Doria babysat'
					

Meghan turned 39 on Tuesday and kept the day very much a private, family affair - with a source saying the Sussexes enjoyed the day as a family before Harry cooked a romantic meal




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Essaeeeee

sdkitty said:


> time travelling?  did I say anything about her race?


It was an article about how she was being harassed with racist comments and you said since she's a B list actress she should either just suffer or leave the relationship. All this after one article was posted about her in the thread. 

You said you only hate her for her Africa comments but were hating on her 3 years ago too? You call her a hypocrite and liar but do the same?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> agree but for me the biggest irritant was her saying how no one asked how she felt - while visiting a country of very underprivileged people.....instead of appreciating what she had - which was A LOT - she was complaining that she wasn't thriving.....that is what I hold against her and it has Nothing to do with her race



Yep, using an interview where she was on an official visit to underprivileged people for the BRF to make it a pity party all about herself didn’t jibe with her philanthropic aspirations.  She must have thought it was worth the tone-deafness for all the sympathy she garnered.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@sdkitty  I‘ve got your back on this one. No need to respond.


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> It was an article about how she was being harassed with racist comments and you said *since she's a B list actress she should either just suffer or leave the relationship.* All this after one article was posted about her in the thread.
> 
> You said you only hate her for her Africa comments but were hating on her 3 years ago too? You call her a hypocrite and liar but do the same?



Why do you read hate in that though... every celebrity has complained about privacy, unfair coverage, etc. What else can one say but.... you get paid in obscene money and access; if you don't like the downsides to the rewards, then leave.... or don't and just chill out? Other celebs have said too that it's annoying AF when other celebs complain about that stuff. It's not relatable and annoying to those of us who understand usually work means you get paid to deal with hard stuff you wouldn't do for free. That's what the money is for.

And just to be super crystal clear, no one should put up with racist harassment for any amount of money. That's not OK. Meghan is absolutely right to be livid about that. But her complaining about people not asking if she's "okay" (on an african tour) is just icky and privileged. I don't HATE her for that... I just think it's really, really lame and it didn't endear me to her.


----------



## sdkitty

Essaeeeee said:


> It was an article about how she was being harassed with racist comments and you said since she's a B list actress she should either just suffer or leave the relationship. All this after one article was posted about her in the thread.
> 
> You said you only hate her for her Africa comments but were hating on her 3 years ago too? You call her a hypocrite and liar but do the same?


well, if I was allowed to say what I think about Michelle and Barack here or if you could see the threads (now gone from the forum) about Trayvon Martin, maybe you wouldn't think I was a racist.  Or maybe you still would.

I'll admit I did criticize her before the Africa thing.  You got me there   But back then before she married him, she could have left the relationship.  Instead she went ahead, had the huge wedding, got all the goodies that went with it - including, maybe most importantly, huge fame - and then she couldn't thrive.  Sorry I don't like her.  Don't like him as much as I used to either.

Doesn't mean I hate her or I'm racist.
Sorry you, as a WOC, feel that way but there are other WOC on this thread who don't agree with your POV.


----------



## lalame

Re press coverage: I think tabloid media in any country are just smutty... they throw everything at the wall to see what will stick, and ranging from completely stupid alien abduction stuff to vile race-tinged stuff like the Compton piece from Daily Mail. It sucks but to me I guess it does ultimately come down to... if you're a public figure, you're exposed to insane numbers of people some of whom are deadbeats and will tear you down. Fame isn't about getting 100% support, fair coverage when you put yourself out there to BILLIONS of people. If you can't handle it, don't be in the position... many have specifically said "no thanks." If you go to bat though, stick it out... it's unfortunate if you bow out after 1-2 years, STILL WANT THE BENEFITS, and demand pity or adulation.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m still hoping for the day when Meghan‘s fans come here to explain why they like her so much. What is it about her that they admire that I am not seeing? I genuinely want to understand that.


----------



## Essaeeeee

lalame said:


> Why do you read hate in that though... every celebrity has complained about privacy, unfair coverage, etc. What else can one say but.... you get paid in obscene money and access; if you don't like the downsides to the rewards, then leave.... or don't and just chill out? Other celebs have said too that it's annoying AF when other celebs complain about that stuff. It's not relatable and annoying to those of us who understand usually work means you get paid to deal with hard stuff you wouldn't do for free. That's what the money is for.
> 
> And just to be super crystal clear, no one should put up with racist harassment for any amount of money. That's not OK. Meghan is absolutely right to be livid about that. But her complaining about people not asking if she's "okay" (on an african tour) is just icky and privileged. I don't HATE her for that... I just think it's really, really lame and it didn't endear me to her.


I'm sorry, what??? You think just because she gets paid lots of money racism is ok and she shouldn't complain? This just feels surreal to me. You all actually think this? That being rich makes racism ok? Like are you gatekeeping racism? I'm done with this forum lol. Feels like a high school mean girls cliche here.


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> I'm sorry, what??? You think just because she gets paid lots of money racism is ok and she shouldn't complain? This just feels surreal to me. You all actually think this? That being rich makes racism ok? Like are you gatekeeping racism? I'm done with this forum lol. Feels like a high school mean girls cliche here.



I literally just said, which you even quoted:

*And just to be super crystal clear, no one should put up with racist harassment for any amount of money. That's not OK. Meghan is absolutely right to be livid about that. *


----------



## lalame

The nuance here: it's totally valid to demand unracist coverage. It's NOT valid to complain about any negative coverage whatsoever, or invasion of privacy, and seek pity, when you have willingly stepped into pretty much one of the MOST visible, well-known famous families through umm centuries. I have no problem with M complaining about racist media coverage. Let's say that again. Meghan is absolutely in the right to complain about racist media coverage. I have no sympathy for a famous, privileged, and wealthy person who complains that they're "too famous" basically and not everyone loves them.


----------



## CeeJay

Essaeeeee said:


> Who said I don't read the other threads?
> They must be criticized but there's no need to call them prostitutes and wish for them to die to do the same. Or say she's a Kardashian because she's mixed race.


*NO ONE in this thread HAS EVER said that they wanted her to DIE .. EVER!!!!  *Were there accusations of her being a Yacht Girl?!?! .. yes, but it came from other articles not a particular TPF person accusing her as such.  As another poster indicated, oftentimes the discussion comes about because of some media story!


----------



## CarryOn2020

She was never a B lister.  She has always been a Z lister.








						Princess who posed in lads mags, found reality TV fame and is pals with pornstar
					

Princess Sofia of Sweden is a passionate charity supporter, who is now volunteering in a hospital during the coronavirus crisis, but her past is very different




					www.mirror.co.uk
				












						Meghan Markle - IMDb
					

Rachel Meghan Markle is an US-born member of the British royal family and a former film and television actress. Meghan Markle was born on August 4, ...




					www.imdb.com
				



[on being a bi-racial actress]_ I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon._









						Meghan Markle demands to work only with A-list directors
					

The former Suits actress is worried critics are going to be hard on her so she needs to nab a breakout role with the right director attached to the project, an industry source told DailyMail.com.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m confused.
When did she receive money for her work as a royal? Royals don’t get paid. The media’s racist comments are a continual issue in the UK as well as here and everywhere, too. Doubtful she can stop people from thinking their evil thoughts by just fuming about it or by suing these papers. Keep fighting the good fight and minds will change. We aren’t where we want or need to be, still we are better off than we were. Keep going forward, not backward. Focus on the future.

Did the racism happen as a royal or in Hwood? Even with Harvey gone, old and new Hwood always has and will have issues. The sexism, the ageism, the elitism are also intolerable. ETA: Reforms are needed in that industry. The burden is now on H&M to run an effective and diverse studio. They should let Tyler Perry lead them. 



lalame said:


> I literally just said, which you even quoted:
> 
> *And just to be super crystal clear, no one should put up with racist harassment for any amount of money. That's not OK. Meghan is absolutely right to be livid about that. *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m confused.
> When did she receive money for her work as a royal? Royals don’t get paid. The media’s racist comments are a continual issue in the UK as well as here and everywhere, too. Doubtful she can stop people from thinking their evil thoughts by just fuming about it or by suing these papers. Keep fighting the good fight and minds will change. We aren’t where we want or need to be, still we are better off than we were. Keep going forward, not backward. Focus on the future.
> 
> Did the racism happen as a royal or in Hwood? Even with Harvey gone, old and new Hwood always has and will have issues. The sexism, the ageism, the elitism are also intolerable. ETA: Reforms are needed in that industry. The burden is now on H&M to run an effective and diverse studio. They should let Tyler Perry lead them.



I know they don't take a paycheck but they have every living expense and more paid for - that's what I meant by money.


----------



## Lodpah

you all, you getting baited. She’s not contributing she’s dividing and wants to get into an argument cause she knows there’s nothing positive to post.

MM has not done anything worthy for humanity. She spouts off on things she knows nothing about except that she beguiles people with her fake sincerity.


----------



## Lodpah

So many WOC are in high positions of power, maybe not in the entertainment field but as generals, colonels, businesses, etc. they not thirsty they are smart and rose up thru the ranks.


----------



## youngster

Essaeeeee said:


> I'm sorry, what??? *You think just because she gets paid lots of money racism is ok and she shouldn't complain? *This just feels surreal to me. You all actually think this? That being rich makes racism ok? Like are you gatekeeping racism? I'm done with this forum lol. Feels like a high school mean girls cliche here.



How could you possibly misunderstand what @lalame posted?   This is exactly what @lalame wrote:
*And just to be super crystal clear, no one should put up with racist harassment for any amount of money. *


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Might as well jump in now and make a few additional comments, even though I have only caught up to page 2406 of this thread.

*Essa*, pls stop hijacking this thread for your own personal ambition. 
REALLY. Just control yourself, or you will start to remind readers here that you are, well, like the way MM, your yacht-girl counter-part cannot seem to control herself.   

You are welcome to think whatever you like but in fairness to all here on tPF: Meg, Vlad, all of the mods, and readers alike ~ I have never witnessed anything even close to a post with an intent to cast a racial slur, so cease & desist with the nasty posts bc you do not "like" the fact that the majority here do not support your point of view of MM. 

Now back on topic to the world's biggest losers, ie the whiny grifters. and the topic du jour....will MM marry another billionaire IF Harry casts her aside? 
lol, bc we know MM is not going anywhere without BOTH OF HER MEAL TICKETS.

Well, my thoughts?
Wendy Deng <ewww> was a slip-up for Murdoch, just like Heather whats-her-name was for Paul McCartney - big mistakes in judgment, but imo we are all human and have all made mistakes but just not publically.

And hopefully, MM might be a mistake for Harry.
Although I think not, Harry has proven himself to be a thoroughly spoilt, nasty, and entitled adult.

Yes, readers, to my knowledge, MM is definitely not cast in the mold of Dasha Zhukova, who case in point, did recently marry two (2) billionaires in quick succession. 

Make no mistake, MM has made too many enemies too quickly. 
They are silently waiting, and have long memories esp of being cast publically as the "bad guy".

Think Wills & Kate are going to forget the lovely quotes, pics, etc from that sickening American divorcee who hijacked one of their best friend's lives in the middle of a global pandemic leaving them to pick up the pieces with the relatives? 

Anyway, MM chances of bagging a billionaire after nasty carrot-top are -10 trillion or did I miss something here?


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> So many WOC are in high positions of power, maybe not in the entertainment field but as generals, colonels, businesses, etc. they not thirsty they are smart and rose up thru the ranks.



and if they paused or posed every time some bigot *******s ridiculed them or made fun of them for whatever reason whether racist or sexist, WOC or POC could not make it beyond pure whining.

She’s a self centered hypocrite because I can see what she is doing and I can’t believe people are buying her crap!!! It’s like when you see people getting duped, how can you not call it out. but I still don’t Hate her.  
Also this is a gossip thread about H and M and no one has to To have a link, but if you are going to accuse people on this thread, let there be links.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Essaeeeee said:


> There is dislike then there is hate. Yeah even I criticize her actions but then move on. This thread has multiple pages of comments even on days there is no news .....*I just don't get what she has done to get this much hate.*



*Essa*, sorry girlfriend, you do NOT want to get it.

Please post some original content for us to read.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Before answering who it will be, we should examine what Meghan brings to the table as far as her ability to attract such high profile men. She is certainly physically beautiful. She has a duchess title but she would almost certainly lose it in a divorce (unless she uses it as a bargaining chip in the settlement). She is a Hollywood producer but it's still a long, long road before she can show she was worth Netflix's gamble on her. She is a philanthropist and supposedly runs multiple charities, however there isn't any record yet of her actually helping anyone other than giving inspirational pep talks online and performing single, short visits to various local charities. *Oh, and it's rumored she has amazing sex skills. Well, that alone could be enough!*



Apparently, that's really all that Wallis Simpson had going for her.  And she snagged a king!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This might address how MM feels about titles:
> *Meghan Was Devastated When Harry Was Stripped of His Military Titles*
> An inside source told Scobie and Durand, "That’s been a tough pill to swallow, and the one that has been most painful to Meghan witness him go through. It’s the one that made Harry emotional."
> 
> Speaking to a friend, Meghan reportedly called the demotion "so unnecessary." She continued, "And it’s not just taking something away from him, it’s also that entire military veteran community. You can see how much he means to them, too. So why? The powers are unfortunately greater than me."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Was Devastated When Harry Was Stripped of His Military Titles
> 
> 
> Meghan thought the demotion was "so unnecessary."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the duchess title will be stripped, the search for a next DH might become very attractive. I wonder if QE is thinking about this possibility.


Really MM?  If he's so important to the military, why are you both cancelling the Invictus fundraiser to benefit veterans?


----------



## purseinsanity

Gabs007 said:


> She might have been devastated because it happened to a guy she loves and it means a lot to him? I honestly do not get the hatred that is poured upon her, I would take her any time over the insipid brunette Barbie that Kate is, from a similar background (i.e. not titled but her jobs were all on account of what her parents could buy, as she really has no other talent than "waiting for a prince" aka her nickname) - *if I had a daughter, I would prefer her to have a role model that goes out and does things, instead of being an arm piece that waits for a guy to pick her as a hired womb and then keeping up appearances while he plays around. 21st century ladies, we really aren't any longer chained to the kitchen sink or arm pieces*


*Absolutely*!  But what exactly has MM done on her own that is so note worthy that she didn't do precisely because of who she married? Most people (if they'd even heard of her before) knew her from holding a suitcase or as a minor actress in a show most of us never heard of.  She wouldn't have "accomplished" even Zoom meetings on her own in the same conference as MO.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4845064
> 
> View attachment 4845065



Sorry!  Just saw your post after I posted mine!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Apparently, that's really all that Wallis Simpson had going for her.  And she snagged a king!


well, she was apparently a specialist - a dominatrix


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I've been surprised how stupid some of these guys are though about their personal life. Like Google cofounder Sergey Brin, who had an affair with a junior staffer awhile back; ex CEO and Chairman Eric Schmidt with med student girlfriend 1/2 his age (he recently gave her a 10 carat ring); McDonalds ex CEO whose reputation is in tatters over affairs with junior staffers; Apttus ex-CEO who was fired after an affair with a staffer... the list just goes on and on.


It's a tale as old as time.  Gold digging woman goes after rich old man, rich old man goes after sexy younger trophy woman.  I personally think both are idiots, but if it works for the parties involved (and both are of sound minds and not old and demented), it is what it is.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> It's a tale as old as time.  Gold digging woman goes after rich old man, rich old man goes after sexy younger trophy woman.  I personally think both are idiots, but if it works for the parties involved (and both are of sound minds and not old and demented), it is what it is.


the demented thing reminds me of Anna Nicole Smith - beautiful young woman with very old husband


----------



## CarryOn2020

W wins the day! So well spoken with a positive & fun message 
This is leadership.



Sharont2305 said:


>


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Really MM?  If he's so important to the military, why are you both cancelling the Invictus fundraiser to benefit veterans?


Hypocrisy as usual...

It is easy for them to abdicate responsibilities, but don't want to abdicate the titles...


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I don’t think anyone is denying racism exists but that’s a pretty serious accusation about specific people here. I haven’t read through this entire thread but the examples here don’t pass the test for me. *And I'm a WOC*!!!
> 
> *Wanting M to die:* I have literally never seen this said. That's ridiculous and I highly doubt anyone who posts actively thinks this. Someone was clearly having a dramatic day when/if they said this.




*As am I.* I admit I'm a later lurker to this thread, but it moves so fast that I've seen quite a few pages and I don't recall anyone EVER saying something that vile. "Hate" is a strong term. I might "hate" someone who intentionally greatly harmed one of my loved ones, especially my children. I can't "hate" someone I've never met. I was ambivalent towards her when she first got with JCMH, because I knew nothing about her. I wasn't overjoyed because she was biracial, nor did I not like her because of that either. I've grown to dislike her with her behavior and attitude. Just because I don't kowtow to someone who happens to be biracial, doesn't suddenly make me a racist, an anti feminist, or pro child pornographer. That type of leap is disgusting to me. And I also do participate in the Prince Andrew thread, and even though he's white, I don't recall posting any compliments about him either. And let's not forget racists come from all races. I've unfortunately had my share of racism hurled my way, and it wasn't just from white people. It still amazes me when posters who do not agree resort to labeling others as racist, because that's obviously the ONLY reason someone may be disliked.


----------



## purseinsanity

.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I was about to ask that. *When I see someone, I don't immediately try to figure out what race they are, I just see them as people! If they wish to tell me the specific details then fine. But it's not required! I judge people by their actions and conducts!*


Amen!!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Might as well jump in now and make a few additional comments, even though I have only caught up to page 2406 of this thread.
> 
> *Essa*, pls stop hijacking this thread for your own personal ambition.
> REALLY. Just control yourself, or you will start to remind readers here that you are, well, like the way MM, your yacht-girl counter-part cannot seem to control herself.
> 
> You are welcome to think whatever you like but in fairness to all here on tPF: Meg, Vlad, all of the mods, and readers alike ~ I have never witnessed anything even close to a post with an intent to cast a racial slur, so cease & desist with the nasty posts bc you do not "like" the fact that the majority here do not support your point of view of MM.
> 
> Now back on topic to the world's biggest losers, ie the whiny grifters. and the topic du jour....will MM marry another billionaire IF Harry casts her aside?
> lol, bc we know MM is not going anywhere without BOTH OF HER MEAL TICKETS.
> 
> Well, my thoughts?
> Wendy Deng <ewww> was a slip-up for Murdoch, just like Heather whats-her-name was for Paul McCartney - big mistakes in judgment, but imo we are all human and have all made mistakes but just not publically.
> 
> And hopefully, MM might be a mistake for Harry.
> Although I think not, Harry has proven himself to be a thoroughly spoilt, nasty, and entitled adult.
> 
> Yes, readers, to my knowledge, MM is definitely not cast in the mold of Dasha Zhukova, who case in point, did recently marry two (2) billionaires in quick succession.
> 
> Make no mistake, MM has made too many enemies too quickly.
> They are silently waiting, and have long memories esp of being cast publically as the "bad guy".
> 
> Think Wills & Kate are going to forget the lovely quotes, pics, etc from that sickening American divorcee who hijacked one of their best friend's lives in the middle of a global pandemic leaving them to pick up the pieces with the relatives?
> 
> Anyway, MM chances of bagging a billionaire after nasty carrot-top are -10 trillion or did I miss something here?


*LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this* .. and my god, do we have the same opinions on all of these gals!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure how hating liberals is racist either?  Liberals and conservatives come in all colors.


hating liberals isn't necessarily racist but (and I'm generalizing) a lot of the people who hate "liberals" are racist. 
I won't go further with this as we're getting close to politics


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> *Absolutely*!  But what exactly has MM done on her own that is so note worthy that she didn't do precisely because of who she married? Most people (if they'd even heard of her before) knew her from holding a suitcase or as a minor actress in a show most of us never heard of.  She wouldn't have "accomplished" even Zoom meetings on her own in the same conference as MO.


.. and as most of you know, I DO know people who DID know her before her Suitcase days and her Cable TV show, and didn't give 2 thumbs up.  The more crap she and Harry pull, my friends just roll their eyes and tell me more stories .. honestly, it's NO surprise to me as to why she has not had a lot of "friends".


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> hating liberals isn't necessarily racist but (and I'm generalizing) a lot of the people who hate "liberals" are racist.
> I won't go further with this as we're getting close to politics



I've met plenty of racist liberals. Give me a break. There's no one way street.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I've met plenty of racist liberals. Give me a break. There's no one way street.


ok
maybe I'm wrong on this 
I know there are conservatives who are not racist
again, can't really say more as it would be politics


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> W wins the day! So well spoken with a positive & fun message
> This is leadership.


I just wish he could have said it from the heart, you could tell he was reading something (okay, okay .. it's a personal pet-peeve of mine)!


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> I've met plenty of racist liberals. Give me a break. There's no one way street.



THIS
All day every day.


----------



## Lounorada

Fully caught up on the past several pages and all I can say is this thread can be exhausting at times...






_Sometimes_ you just gotta ignore people/threads/opinions/posts on here that you don't like or agree with. 
Let the ish that irritates your soul GO!


----------



## Annawakes

I always think.....Here we go again.....


----------



## threadbender

sdkitty said:


> agree but for me the biggest irritant was her saying how no one asked how she felt - while visiting a country of very underprivileged people.....instead of appreciating what she had - which was A LOT - she was complaining that she wasn't thriving.....that is what I hold against her and it has Nothing to do with her race


I remember that as being my big eye opener. It was so wrong. 
Go ahead and look for posts saying I disliked her before that. May have some. 
I do remember hoping for the best for them. I didn't know much about her. Realized later that she had been in an episode of Castle and she had kind of creeped me out. lol
But, I did want them to succeed. Thought it was nice that Harry had met someone.
I was wrong. So wrong. Well, he did meet someone and perhaps, she is his perfect match. Now, I don't care much for either of them. 
I do read posts here and elsewhere about them. Some of their antics are so OTT that you almost have to look!
I don't "hate" anyone and certainly do not wish death on people, particularly people who have absolutely no affect on my life. lol I can dislike or despise or cringe but that is my right. 
The biggest turning point was that interview saying no one asked if she was OK. I love the one woman who did the parody on it. She literally lipsyncs to it but with her in the video rather than Meghan Markle. It is so perfect.
Anyway, I don't like mm but it is due to her character and not the color of her skin.


----------



## Katel

She is hysterical!



Also hahaha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> Fully caught up on the past several pages and all I can say is this thread can be exhausting at times...
> 
> View attachment 4846271
> 
> View attachment 4846272
> 
> 
> _Sometimes_ you just gotta ignore people/threads/opinions/posts on here that you don't like or agree with.
> Let the ish that irritates your soul GO!
> View attachment 4846293


Am I right or am I right? And a bottle of wine... haha, love it! 

Some posts are better ignored. There is no need to be rude, members here are fun and open minded.


----------



## threadbender

Katel said:


> She is hysterical!
> 
> 
> 
> Also hahaha



Yes, thank you!!! I did not remember her name!!


----------



## Miss Liz

Once there was potential for a 21st century romance, with the fairy tale wedding, beautiful child, and a happy ending.
Instead we got two deeply delusional people who bring out the worst in each other, disrespect their families, and carry on atrociously as their story unfolds on the world stage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@sdkitty  Maggie Foster has the right idea   Enjoy her hilarious twitter feed!

Meggie Foster @meggiefoster
·Jul 28
_EXC Boris Johnson has launched the search for a new £100,000-plus a year spokesman to become the face of the Government in televised press conferences from this Autumn. A job ad asks for someone to "communicate with the nation on behalf of the Prime Minister". Apply by Aug 21._

Okay okay I’ll do it. However, the only party I support is in Ibiza.


----------



## Jktgal

I've been checking back for a Maggie Markle Megflix episode, that is just made for meme/parody. There are already some on twitter but not Maggie level funny....

Tried to post this earlier but link didn't seem to work.


----------



## Jktgal

Annawakes said:


> I always think.....Here we go again.....



But now we have @Sol Ryan's most excellent post to bump up for the next thread hater.


----------



## Toulouse

CarryOn2020 said:


> Where in *this *thread has anyone posted those comments? I need page numbers and post numbers.
> Have you reported those posts? Are they made by legit TPF’ers or just people who sign up, make unsubstantiated claims and leave?
> 
> Seems to me that you are making extraordinary claims without support. Maybe other websites post that stuff. I have not seen it here. For our posts, almost all of us include links to reputable sites that support our comments. Yes, we put in the effort to educate readers about the facts concerning H&M. If they maintained their privacy, no one would care what they did.
> 
> Just as you are entitled to your opinion, so are we.  Disagreement is ok.


The yacht girl claim for one has repeatedly been made in this thread, even within the last few days. I actually called out one such post in this thread not that long ago.


----------



## scarlet555

Yacht girl claim has been linked with nutmeg for a long time,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> Speaking to a friend, Meghan reportedly called the demotion "so unnecessary." She continued, "And it’s not just taking something away from him, it’s also that entire military veteran community. You can see how much he means to them, too. So why? The powers are unfortunately greater than me."



I have to go back to this. That last sentence, I just can't. Is there anyone more full of herself than MM? But eh, I've never heard Kate open a speech with "As a member of the royal family" either, so...


----------



## lalame

I just watched the Diana: In Her Own Words documentary on Netflix and boy that family treated her awful. I’m glad Kate and Meghan were more welcome when they joined. But it really makes you wonder how much turmoil there might be behind closed doors that isn’t revealed. I wonder if Meghan watches Diana coverage to get some perspective on how much the institution has progressed already... if only she would’ve seen it through and hopefully continued the trend. Instead of hitting the eject button altogether. :/


----------



## drifter

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Might as well jump in now and make a few additional comments, even though I have only caught up to page 2406 of this thread.
> 
> *Essa*, pls stop hijacking this thread for your own personal ambition.
> REALLY. Just control yourself, or you will start to remind readers here that you are, well, like the way MM, your yacht-girl counter-part cannot seem to control herself.
> 
> You are welcome to think whatever you like but in fairness to all here on tPF: Meg, Vlad, all of the mods, and readers alike ~ I have never witnessed anything even close to a post with an intent to cast a racial slur, so cease & desist with the nasty posts bc you do not "like" the fact that the majority here do not support your point of view of MM.
> 
> Now back on topic to the world's biggest losers, ie the whiny grifters. and the topic du jour....will MM marry another billionaire IF Harry casts her aside?
> lol, bc we know MM is not going anywhere without BOTH OF HER MEAL TICKETS.
> 
> Well, my thoughts?
> Wendy Deng <ewww> was a slip-up for Murdoch, just like Heather whats-her-name was for Paul McCartney - big mistakes in judgment, but imo we are all human and have all made mistakes but just not publically.
> 
> And hopefully, MM might be a mistake for Harry.
> Although I think not, Harry has proven himself to be a thoroughly spoilt, nasty, and entitled adult.
> 
> Yes, readers, to my knowledge, MM is definitely not cast in the mold of Dasha Zhukova, who case in point, did recently marry two (2) billionaires in quick succession.
> 
> Make no mistake, MM has made too many enemies too quickly.
> They are silently waiting, and have long memories esp of being cast publically as the "bad guy".
> 
> Think Wills & Kate are going to forget the lovely quotes, pics, etc from that sickening American divorcee who hijacked one of their best friend's lives in the middle of a global pandemic leaving them to pick up the pieces with the relatives?
> 
> Anyway, MM chances of bagging a billionaire after nasty carrot-top are -10 trillion or did I miss something here?



I find Wendi Deng and Dasha Zhukova way more fascinating than MM!  I doubt MM can bag a billionaire - they aren't as easy to control as JCMH who is barely a millionaire.


----------



## sdkitty

Jktgal said:


> I've been checking back for a Maggie Markle Megflix episode, that is just made for meme/parody. There are already some on twitter but not Maggie level funny....
> 
> Tried to post this earlier but link didn't seem to work.



Ha...so on point


----------



## duna

drifter said:


> I find Wendi Deng and *Dasha Zhukova* way more fascinating than MM!  I doubt MM can bag a billionaire - they aren't as easy to control as JCMH who is barely a millionaire.



If I remember correctly Dasha Zhukova comes from a rich family herself......anyway, definately more interesting than MM!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toulouse said:


> The yacht girl claim for one has repeatedly been made in this thread, even within the last few days. I actually called out one such post in this thread not that long ago.



You are correct that the yacht girl rumor has been made repeatedly. Did she or didn‘t she?  Nobody knows. Does it matter? Not really. Is it fair to mention the rumor? Absolutley, this is a gossip thread and the yacht girl rumor has been part of her gossip from the beginning. Why? Possibly because she was an unknown who had some mean ’friends‘. Or because she has strong SoHo house connections which has its own set of rumors. Since the marriage itself,  there are plenty of examples that show her character so maybe this rumor will end.  Also, it is entirely believeable that H would prefer those party girls to the serious, aristocratic ones. Remember his nude LA parties, the drunken exits from the clubs, the Nazi shirt, etc.  The criticisms about H&M are more about their own character and their own behavior than just rumors.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I just watched the Diana: In Her Own Words documentary on Netflix and boy that family treated her awful. I’m glad Kate and Meghan were more welcome when they joined. But it really makes you wonder how much turmoil there might be behind closed doors that isn’t revealed. I wonder if Meghan watches Diana coverage to get some perspective on how much the institution has progressed already... *if only she would’ve seen it through and hopefully continued the trend. Instead of hitting the eject button altogether.* :/



I honestly don't have a problem with the two of them hitting the eject button. I understand that life in the BRF with its strict rules and strict hierarchy might not be for everyone. It was the way they behaved and how they handled their exit, not long after the huge $50 million dollar wedding. I don't have to re-list the lawsuits, the pity party documentary, Harry's petulant demeanor, etc.  We all know the details.  If they were really interested in privacy and being "normal", they'd be living quietly in some lovely manor house in the UK countryside attending a few engagements, not suing everyone at the drop of a hat, and not issuing press releases every other day. The tabloids would lose interest pretty quickly. But, that's not actually what either of them wanted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I honestly don't have a problem with the two of them hitting the eject button. I understand that life in the BRF with its strict rules and strict hierarchy might not be for everyone. It was the way they behaved and how they handled their exit, not long after the huge $50 million dollar wedding. I don't have to re-list the lawsuits, the pity party documentary, Harry's petulant demeanor, etc.  We all know the details.  If they were really interested in privacy and being "normal", they'd be living quietly in some lovely manor house in the UK, countryside attending a few engagements, not suing everyone at the drop of a hat, and not issuing press releases every other day. The tabloids would lose interest pretty quickly. But, that's not actually what either of them wanted.



You’re right, it’s their right to leave but I personally just think it’s such a missed opportunity. Or should I say a lot of fanfare for nothing. :/


----------



## lalame

drifter said:


> I find Wendi Deng and Dasha Zhukova way more fascinating than MM!  I doubt MM can bag a billionaire - they aren't as easy to control as JCMH who is barely a millionaire.


Wendi is totally fascinating! (Don’t know too much about Dasha) Not only accomplished on her own but fashionable and... I mean the woman bags billionaires and heads of state.


----------



## Annawakes

lalame said:


> Wendi is totally fascinating! (Don’t know too much about Dasha) Not only accomplished on her own but fashionable and... I mean the woman bags billionaires and heads of state.


I just googled her.  I never heard of her before.  I think she needs her own thread 

eta: Putin?!?!?


----------



## purseinsanity

Toulouse said:


> The yacht girl claim for one has repeatedly been made in this thread, even within the last few days. I actually called out one such post in this thread not that long ago.


Can someone tell me what yacht girl means??


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Can someone tell me what yacht girl means??


you might find it searching this thread but my understanding is they are women who go out on yachts with wealthy men and entertain them....may or may not be sex involved


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I honestly don't have a problem with the two of them hitting the eject button. I understand that life in the BRF with its strict rules and strict hierarchy might not be for everyone. It was the way they behaved and how they handled their exit, not long after the huge $50 million dollar wedding. I don't have to re-list the lawsuits, the pity party documentary, Harry's petulant demeanor, etc.  We all know the details.  If they were really interested in privacy and being "normal", they'd be living quietly in some lovely manor house in the UK countryside attending a few engagements, not suing everyone at the drop of a hat, and not issuing press releases every other day. The tabloids would lose interest pretty quickly. But, that's not actually what either of them wanted.



This so much.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure if this is the same as what Nflix is showing.  She was too young to marry the heir, too young for all the instant media attention, simply too young. As she grew up, she became more and more vindictive and most willing to tell all to everyone. How embarrassing for her children. They must live with all of the things she revealed  and live with the knowledge that everyone knows. What happened to parents wanting the best for their children? This was not the best for Will & H.

So, what was her point? what outcome did she want? Did Fergie accomplish anything by telling the world how awful she had it? There are better ways to handle marital problems. Publicly begging for sympathy does not work. I do see plenty of parallels with H’s issues. His jealousy of W&K mirrors Diana’s jealousy of Charles and Cam.  Diana, it seems, did not understand that she was responsible for her own happiness. She never found it.  I doubt H will either. A tragic tale, to be sure.


----------



## rose60610

I just googled Dasha also, agree, she needs her own thread. After Wendi bagged Murdoch and cranked out a couple of mega meal tickets, that 14 year marriage by itself springboarded her to other world's most powerful men as investors, contacts and/or lovers. I didn't realize she founded Artsy with Dasha. To say Wendi is highly cutthroat ambitious is an understatement. Even without Murdoch she'd have achieved something, but marrying a billionaire helps sidestep a lot. Wendi negotiated a very successful divorce including, I believe, her daughters being entitled to tons of Newscorp stock. Although Harry isn't nearly as wealthy as others, I wonder if Meghan figures his profile is sufficient to launch her into billionaire orbit if the marriage doesn't pan out. She isn't going to leave him for some run-of-the-mill millionaire. Wendi is 51 and looks great. Meghan looks great but she's got to lose the "poor me" attitude. I don't believe powerful men go for women, wealthy or not, who feel sorry for themselves.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I honestly don't have a problem with the two of them hitting the eject button. I understand that life in the BRF with its strict rules and strict hierarchy might not be for everyone. It was the way they behaved and how they handled their exit, not long after the huge $50 million dollar wedding. I don't have to re-list the lawsuits, the pity party documentary, Harry's petulant demeanor, etc.  We all know the details.  If they were really interested in privacy and being "normal", they'd be living quietly in some lovely manor house in the UK countryside attending a few engagements, not suing everyone at the drop of a hat, and not issuing press releases every other day. The tabloids would lose interest pretty quickly. But, that's not actually what either of them wanted.


And my sympathy is at low-ebb worrying about the COVID victims whose problems are not self-inflicted


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> His jealousy of W&K mirrors Diana’s jealousy of Charles and Cam.



I mean, her husband was sleeping around. W&K just do their freaking jobs. Also, I still can't get over the fact how many happy pictures of the three and especially Harry and Kate float around. So did he fake it all that time? I feel he's not capable of acting that well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said. The victim routine is so unattractive. In these days of women‘s empowerment, victim does not play well. Most of these billionaires’ women fly under the radar. I had never heard of Dasha and know little of Wendi.
ETA:  MM likes the media too much, a major turn off for the billionaire. Has anyone heard from the woman Bezos left his wife for? She was all over the news for awhile. Now, nothing.



rose60610 said:


> I just googled Dasha also, agree, she needs her own thread. After Wendi bagged Murdoch and cranked out a couple of mega meal tickets, that 14 year marriage by itself springboarded her to other world's most powerful men as investors, contacts and/or lovers. I didn't realize she founded Artsy with Dasha. To say Wendi is highly cutthroat ambitious is an understatement. Even without Murdoch she'd have achieved something, but marrying a billionaire helps sidestep a lot. Wendi negotiated a very successful divorce including, I believe, her daughters being entitled to tons of Newscorp stock. Although Harry isn't nearly as wealthy as others, I wonder if Meghan figures his profile is sufficient to launch her into billionaire orbit if the marriage doesn't pan out. She isn't going to leave him for some run-of-the-mill millionaire. Wendi is 51 and looks great. Meghan looks great but she's got to lose the "poor me" attitude. I don't believe powerful men go for women, wealthy or not, who feel sorry for themselves.


----------



## bisousx

rose60610 said:


> I just googled Dasha also, agree, she needs her own thread. After Wendi bagged Murdoch and cranked out a couple of mega meal tickets, that 14 year marriage by itself springboarded her to other world's most powerful men as investors, contacts and/or lovers. I didn't realize she founded Artsy with Dasha. To say Wendi is highly cutthroat ambitious is an understatement. Even without Murdoch she'd have achieved something, but marrying a billionaire helps sidestep a lot. Wendi negotiated a very successful divorce including, I believe, her daughters being entitled to tons of Newscorp stock. Although Harry isn't nearly as wealthy as others, I wonder if Meghan figures his profile is sufficient to launch her into billionaire orbit if the marriage doesn't pan out. She isn't going to leave him for some run-of-the-mill millionaire. Wendi is 51 and looks great. Meghan looks great but she's got to lose the "poor me" attitude. I don't believe powerful men go for women, wealthy or not, who feel sorry for themselves.



There’s not many traits more unattractive than a victim mentality. That’s why I find Wendi’s ruthlessness utterly fascinating. She’ll stab you in the back and the front to get herself and her daughters ahead, but you won’t catch her whining tearfully on camera about the choices she made, which brought circumstances she chose for herself. She’s too busy making that paper and banging one powerful politician after another


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020 *She was too young to marry the heir, too young for all the instant media attention, simply too young.* As she grew up, she became more and more vindictive and most willing to tell all to everyone. 

I've read that even before she ever met him, Diana spent a lot of time staring at a poster of Charles in his formal Prince of Wales regalia, dreaming of some day becoming the Princess of Wales. IMO (and others as well) she never was in love with Charles, the man. Like many young girls, her main goal/dream in life was just being the Princess of Wales.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, her husband was sleeping around. W&K just do their freaking jobs. Also, I still can't get over the fact how many happy pictures of the three and especially Harry and Kate float around. So did he fake it all that time? I feel he's not capable of acting that well.



Yes, Charles had the long-term affair with Cam, possibly other women. A new book links Phillip with 12(?) women. So far, thankfully, QE has not done a tell-all interview.  Aside from typical sibling rivalry as well as being pushed further down the line by W&K’s children, H disliked the palace telling him to let Charles and W go first. To me, this seems similar to Diana being told not to compete with Charles. Harry feels he is more popular than Will just as Diana felt she was more popular than Charles. Silly, spoiled and childish, absolutely. I’m guessing people who are flattered their entire life, waited on hand and foot, I’m guessing they have adjustment issues when they see someone else getting more attention. 








						Prince Harry and Meghan Felt Overshadowed and Snubbed By William and Kate, New Biography Reveals
					

In the first excerpt from the upcoming Finding Freedom, authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand reveal just how tense things became among the former “Fab Four.”




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

At the beginning of that show, Diana says, back in the 80s, times were so awful in the UK that people wanted the fairy tale. Initially, she was fine to play her part. Then,  real life stepped in. How dreadful.  In pandemic times, I cannot feel sorry for Diana or Harry.

Even with Hwood actors and actresses, fame at a young age causes so many issues. 



Maggie Muggins said:


> @CarryOn2020 *She was too young to marry the heir, too young for all the instant media attention, simply too young.* As she grew up, she became more and more vindictive and most willing to tell all to everyone.
> 
> I've read that even before she ever met him, Diana spent a lot of time staring at a poster of Charles in his formal Prince of Wales regalia, dreaming of some day becoming the Princess of Wales. IMO (and others as well) she never was in love with Charles, the man. Like many young girls, her main goal/dream in life was just being the Princess of Wales.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I feel a lot of sympathy for Diana because of her age and yes, she was troubled and no one seemed to want to help her. She and Charles had a very toxic thing going on - she said when she was pregnant she actually threw herself down the stairs because she could never get Charles's attention. She was quite troubled, in the wrong environment for anyone troubled. I feel sympathy for anyone with mental illness at a young age.

I don't think she was truly in love with Charles but was young and impressionable enough to think it was love. I think that can work, but only if both want it to work and Charles didn't care if it worked or not it seems. It's a shame.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020 At the beginning of that show, Diana says, back in the 80s, times were so awful in the UK that people wanted the fairy tale. Initially, she was fine to play her part. Then, real life stepped in. How dreadful. In pandemic times, I cannot feel sorry for Diana or Harry.

Even with Hwood actors and actresses, fame at a young age causes so many issues. 

I've never felt sorry for Diana. IMO, once she realized the power she wielded, she showed her true colors...  a high maintenance drama queen with tinges of narcissism. 
Strange how the elders at home used to say, girls marry their father and boys marry their mother.  This seems so true with Harry; MM is similar to Diana in so many ways.


----------



## marietouchet

Stepping away from gossip, reading a good nordic noir book, found a good quote that applies to the journalism about JCMH

“there were two kinds of newspaper reporters. ‘The first kind digs in the ground for the truth. He stands down in the hole shoveling out dirt. But up on top there’s another guy, shoveling the dirt back in. He’s the second kind. There’s always a duel going on between these two. The fourth estate’s test of strength for dominance, which never ends. You’ve got some journalists who want to expose and reveal things. You’ve got other journalists who run errands for those in power and help conceal what’s really happening.’”

— Sidetracked (Kurt Wallander Mystery Book 5) by Henning Mankell








						Sidetracked (Kurt Wallander Mystery Book 5)
					

Quote shared via Kindle: "there were two kinds of newspaper reporters. ‘The first kind digs in the ground for the truth. He stands down in the hole shoveling out dirt. But up on top there’s another guy, shoveling the dirt back in. He’s the second kind. Ther...




					a.co


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure if this is the same as what Nflix is showing.  She was too young to marry the heir, too young for all the instant media attention, simply too young. As she grew up, she became more and more vindictive and most willing to tell all to everyone. How embarrassing for her children. They must live with all of the things she revealed  and live with the knowledge that everyone knows. What happened to parents wanting the best for their children? This was not the best for Will & H.
> 
> So, what was her point? what outcome did she want? Did Fergie accomplish anything by telling the world how awful she had it? There are better ways to handle marital problems. Publicly begging for sympathy does not work. I do see plenty of parallels with H’s issues. His jealousy of W&K mirrors Diana’s jealousy of Charles and Cam.  Diana, it seems, did not understand that she was responsible for her own happiness. She never found it.  I doubt H will either. A tragic tale, to be sure.




It's not this documentary... the one on Netflix didn't have a 3rd person narrator; it was all from her taped interviews. I think she wanted to "clear her name" so to speak, since it seems like the palace basically blamed her for their marriage falling apart. She mentions QEII told her it was her bulimia that ruined that marriage - nothing of Charles's affair. And the public seems to have painted her as a cold, domineering personality in the marriage (I gather this based on an interview where the newsperson asked her "so is it true you're cold as the newspapers report?" lol). It seemed like a cathartic experience to finally say her peace. Was it right? IDK, it was a cry for help from a troubled person. The whole thing is unfortunate.


----------



## lalame

It's frankly amazing William turned out well-adjusted considering all that family drama. I really believe that family learned some hard lessons from what happened with Diana and stepped up with the kids. Harry... well it is interesting, he seems like he adopted more of Diana's rebellious, self-destructive, and escapist traits. In the Netflix documentary she says she always saw herself moving out of the UK and marrying a foreigner. Harry obviously absorbed some of those dreams of hers.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

William was lucky because he went away to Eton (away from a toxic environment) and also spent time with QEII (I believe during his lunch breaks) learning about his future role.


----------



## Aimee3

I feel so sorry for Diana.  She was so very young and naive when she married Charles.  He IMHO was horrible to her.  He was lying from the very beginning
(Camilla).  I think that would be shattering to any bride, never mind one as young as Diana.  I can’t blame her for the way she reacted.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> I feel so sorry for Diana.  She was so very young and naive when she married Charles.  He IMHO was horrible to her.  He was lying from the very beginning
> (Camilla).  I think that would be shattering to any bride, never mind one as young as Diana.  I can’t blame her for the way she reacted.


I agree.  She was a very young (and probably neurotic) girl, not even a woman really.  Yes she learned to be calculating later but still, not sure I blame her.  And as she matured physically, style-wise, behavior-wise, she easily outshone Charles.  The people's princess.  She had star quality. And I do think she had a real ability to relate to people.


----------



## bag-mania

I feel sorry for Diana too.  Anybody who thinks “oh she should’ve known what to expect,” she was 19-years-old  and a prince wanted to marry her. I think she can be forgiven for believing that he must really have wanted her.  She didn’t know beforehand what a mean bastard Charles was or that he selected her because his family was riding his ass to just pick somebody already. 

It’s easy to write scandalous books about dead famous people because they can’t sue you. You can always find somebody with an ax to grind to “help.” Salacious books about celebrities sell great and make lots of money. I take most of the biographies about Diana that have come out in the last 20 years with a huge grain of salt. As we saw with the Omid Scobie book, just because it’s a biography doesn’t mean it’s not full of fiction.


----------



## lalame

Her parents had a toxic marriage too. That probably made her more prone to falling for a knight in shining armor who was going to take her away... In the documentary, she said she always dreamed of marrying someone who would be kind of like a father to her and protect her. She went to the wrong place for that!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I didn’t realize Diana cut herself until I watched the documentary. Eeek, paired with the bulimia, that is serious self harm. The pressures of her role were too much, too soon.  Remember, Sarah wrote of her awful experience with the BRF, too. Charles and Andrew were not equipped to deal with these issues.  Knowing this, why would Kate or MM want to work for this family? No job is worth one’s sanity. Tragic, just tragic.


----------



## redney

I also just finished the Diana: In Her Own Words documentary on Netflix. A quote that stood out for me was on the morning of her wedding she woke up early, and said it felt like "a lamb being led to slaughter." She had figured out the Camilla thing already and even talked with her sister or flatmates days prior about getting out of the wedding. Whoever it was responded something like "oh no, you can't do that, your face is on the tea towels", referencing all of the wedding souvenirs already produced and for sale. 

Although only 19, she knew. Perhaps she thought Charles would change or perhaps she did believe it's too late now and had no choice.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

This marriage was concocted between the Queen Mother and one of her old friends. I can see the old bag’s face in my mind, but I can’t remember her name. QEII always catered to her mother’s wishes and taught her children to respect their granny as such. So Charles eventually consented to the marriage probably quite reluctantly. I know this marriage was wrong on so many levels and I said the same in 1981. Back then, I wasn’t interested in royalty and didn’t watch the wedding nor follow their progress.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lady Ruth Fermoy, a courtier. While aristocrats, Diana’s family was a long-line of courtiers.
Dame Barbara Cartland, a romance novel writer, was her step-grandmother. Perhaps that is where Diana got her ideas of what marriage should be.








						The 50 Most Fascinating Facts About Princess Diana's Life
					

Her grandmother was a lady in waiting. Her maternal grandmother, Ruth Roche, was a member of the court of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother. The two were close




					www.popsugar.com
				











						What to Know About the Royal Blood in Princess Diana's Family
					

She was seen as "the girl next door" at the time of her fairytale wedding, but that door was located in an unusually elite neighborhood




					time.com
				






Maggie Muggins said:


> This marriage was concocted between the Queen Mother and one of her old friends. I can see the old bag’s face in my mind, but I can’t remember her name. QEII always catered to her mother’s wishes and taught her children to respect their granny as such. So Charles eventually consented to the marriage probably quite reluctantly. I know this marriage was wrong on so many levels and I said the same in 1981. Back then, I wasn’t interested in royalty and didn’t watch the wedding nor follow their progress.


----------



## redney

Maggie Muggins said:


> This marriage was concocted between the Queen Mother and one of her old friends. I can see the old bag’s face in my mind, but I can’t remember her name. QEII always catered to her mother’s wishes and taught her children to respect their granny as such. So Charles eventually consented to the marriage probably quite reluctantly. I know this marriage was wrong on so many levels and I said the same in 1981. Back then, I wasn’t interested in royalty and didn’t watch the wedding nor follow their progress.


I read somewhere years ago Montbattan was involved somehow to advise Charles on a suitable wife/future queen. Camilla and others Charles had dated weren't aristocratic enough nor were they virgins. Diana met both criteria. Charles had dated her sister Sarah a few years before Diana, so he was sniffing around the Spencers already.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> I read somewhere years ago Montbattan was involved somehow to advise Charles on a suitable wife/future queen. Camilla and others Charles had dated weren't aristocratic enough nor were they virgins. Diana met both criteria. Charles had dated her sister Sarah a few years before Diana, so he was sniffing around the Spencers already.



Lord Mountbatten was Charles’s mentor and he offered marriage advice which Charles took to heart. Maybe he listened because it was Mountbatten who was responsible for Charles’s parents meeting for the first time. 

At one point Mountbatten was hoping Charles might consider marrying his granddaughter Amanda Ellingworth.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I didn’t realize Diana cut herself until I watched the documentary. Eeek, paired with the bulimia, that is serious self harm. The pressures of her role were too much, too soon.  Remember, Sarah wrote of her awful experience with the BRF, too. Charles and Andrew were not equipped to deal with these issues.  Knowing this, why would Kate or MM want to work for this family? No job is worth one’s sanity. Tragic, just tragic.



Well, Kate is more self-assured than both Diana and Sarah and came from happy and stable home. That makes a huge difference. Diana came from a broken home with little or no guidance. For instance, she was 17 or 18 when she was photographed wearing a sheer skirt without proper undergarments. I knew how to dress like a 'proper lady' by age 13/14, maybe even twelve. 
Many people don't like Charles and blame him for all of Diana's problems, but she came into the marriage with a sh!!!t load of problems and insecurities. Don't know if I would've coped any better than Charles if my husband had carried such baggage into our marriage.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

redney said:


> I read somewhere years ago Montbattan was involved somehow to advise Charles on a suitable wife/future queen. Camilla and others Charles had dated weren't aristocratic enough nor were they virgins. Diana met both criteria. Charles had dated her sister Sarah a few years before Diana, so he was sniffing around the Spencers already.



Yes, Charles dated quite a few ladies, but always seemed to go back to Camilla. I don't think he would've taken an interest in Diana unless he was pushed into it; he would've considered her to young and immature at the time.


----------



## chowlover2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, Charles had the long-term affair with Cam, possibly other women. A new book links Phillip with 12(?) women. So far, thankfully, QE has not done a tell-all interview.  Aside from typical sibling rivalry as well as being pushed further down the line by W&K’s children, H disliked the palace telling him to let Charles and W go first. To me, this seems similar to Diana being told not to compete with Charles. Harry feels he is more popular than Will just as Diana felt she was more popular than Charles. Silly, spoiled and childish, absolutely. I’m guessing people who are flattered their entire life, waited on hand and foot, I’m guessing they have adjustment issues when they see someone else getting more attention.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Felt Overshadowed and Snubbed By William and Kate, New Biography Reveals
> 
> 
> In the first excerpt from the upcoming Finding Freedom, authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand reveal just how tense things became among the former “Fab Four.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Does anyone else remember Kanga? She was a mistress along with Cam, but Diana was on her side. it's a fascinating story.


----------



## bag-mania

Meh. I can’t muster up even the tiniest shred of sympathy for Charles. He had auditioned (dated) many young women for the position of being his wife. He had years to find a bride and he dragged his feet so long he was finally forced to do something. He saw Diana’s shyness and youth and believed she would be compliant and easy to control. He was wrong. He was an experienced man in his 30s, she was 19 and very naive.  In my mind he will always be a royal douchebag.


----------



## CarryOn2020

chowlover2 said:


> Does anyone else remember Kanga? She was a mistress along with Cam, but Diana was on her side. it's a fascinating story.



Yes, she had a very tragic life.





						The lonely death of Charles's other mistress
					

She was the Australian who married a peer and became a prince's lover. But the affair broke her heart and unhinged her mind.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kinda like his brother? his entitled 2nd son?  H wanted to rebel, shock the family, just like Diana did with Hasmet and Dodi. 
Yeah, all these royals have feet of clay. They are a disaster, but they give us plenty to talk about. 



bag-mania said:


> Meh. I can’t muster up even the tiniest shred of sympathy for Charles. He had auditioned (dated) many young women for the position of being his wife. He had years to find a bride and he dragged his feet so long he was finally forced to do something. He saw Diana’s shyness and youth and believed she would be compliant and easy to control. He was wrong. He was an experienced man in his 30s, she was 19 and very naive.  In my mind he will always be a royal douchebag.


----------



## creme fraiche

I find it fascinating that so many people actually hold royal marriages up to the moral code underpinning modern marriages.  Even as a teenager I understood that marrying a royal was a job and a business contract as opposed to a love one - a basic study of history makes that pretty evident.  Love marriages were rare in those circles and loving ones matrimonial partner was more a matter of luck than design.  I blame the Victorian PR machine organised by Prince Albert for this.  I remember being a history obsessed teen and deciding that if it were offered to me, I'd much rather be the Royal Mistress as opposed to the Queen.  Loads of strong, impressive females were mistresses (Diane de Poitiers, Marquise de Montespan, Mme de Pompadour, Nell Gwynn) whereas most people don't even know the names of the spouses.  Mind you, being the Mistress was also a business arrangement as opposed to a love one, but the woman did seem to get more out of them than the wife did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've never felt sorry for Diana. IMO, once she realized the power she wielded, she showed her true colors...  a high maintenance drama queen with tinges of narcissism.



That's how I feel about the adult Diana too. No doubt the naive young girl was wronged, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> At one point Mountbatten was hoping Charles might consider marrying his granddaughter Amanda Ellingworth.



And he did. But when it first came up she was a mere 17 and her mother said a firm no. The next time around Mountbatten had been killed in a terrorist attack and Amanda refused to marry into the royal family as she was fearing for her life. I don't even know why I know this because I think this all went down before I was even born LOL


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I agree.  She was a very young (and probably neurotic) girl, not even a woman really.  Yes she learned to be calculating later but still, not sure I blame her.  And as she matured physically, style-wise, behavior-wise, she easily outshone Charles.  The people's princess.  She had star quality. And I do think she had a real ability to relate to people.



In the documentary they showed footage of the public commentary at the time of her death and one woman said, “she was a royal who seemed human, she made lots of mistakes but just like we would.” That’s exactly how I think of her... she seemed so painfully shy and awkward and vulnerable, almost too real to be a part of that steely institution.


----------



## bag-mania

Looking back, I’m glad Diana kind of busted loose and did what she damn well pleased. I hope she found some happiness in her short life,  even if it was only in the arms of lovers.

She loved her sons dearly. I wonder what she would think of what is going on with them.


----------



## byzina

Chanbal said:


> I guess many of us agree with Philip on this:
> 
> *Prince Philip Thinks Prince Harry Has "Abdicated His Responsibilities" for a Life of "Self-Centered Celebrity"*
> 
> Prince Philip "has found it hard to understand exactly what it was that made his grandson’s life so unbearable. As far as Philip was concerned, Harry and Meghan had everything going for them: a beautiful home, a healthy son, and a unique opportunity to make a global impact with their charity work....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip Thinks Prince Harry Has "Abdicated His Responsibilities" for a Life of "Self-Centered Celebrity"
> 
> 
> Prince Philip REALLY went there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



I can't understand it either. And that is weird that Harry is compared to Edward VIII because the latter gave up the throne to get married to the woman he loved and Harry had everything for a happy life.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Looking back, I’m glad Diana kind of busted loose and did what she damn well pleased. I hope she found some happiness in her short life,  even if it was only in the arms of lovers.
> 
> She loved her sons dearly. I wonder what she would think of what is going on with them.


yes, whatever else one can say about her, she appeared to be a very loving mother.  Hard to guess what she would think about H&M.  Then again, if she had survived maybe he would have turned out differently.  Losing a parent at that age would have to be transformative.  And while anyone losing a parent is bad, losing her and then having all the public attention would be a different experience.  Charles appeared to step up and be a good father but that doesn't make up for the loss.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

byzina said:


> I can't understand it either. And that is weird that Harry is compared to Edward VIII because the latter gave up the throne to get married to the woman he loved and Harry had everything for a happy life.


When Edward VIII gave up the throne, he reneged on his oath to serve crown and country thereby abdicating all responsibilities that come with the oath. Harry abdicated his responsibilities to crown and country... similar but not quite the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, whatever else one can say about her, she appeared to be a very loving mother.  Hard to guess what she would think about H&M.  Then again, if she had survived maybe he would have turned out differently.  Losing a parent at that age would have to be transformative.  And while anyone losing a parent is bad, losing her and then having all the public attention would be a different experience.  Charles appeared to step up and be a good father but that doesn't make up for the loss.



It’s impossible to say. Their upbringing was so unusual by our conventional standards. Both boys were enrolled in boarding school at age 8.  Diana would visit them every weekend but they had to get used to not having parents in their lives daily at a very young age. Harry was 12 when she died which is kind of a crazy age for kids anyway.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’s impossible to say. Their upbringing was so unusual by our conventional standards. Both boys were enrolled in boarding school at age 8.  Diana would visit them every weekend but they had to get used to not having parents in their lives daily at a very young age. Harry was 12 when she died which is kind of a crazy age for kids anyway.


yes, each child, in addition to parenting, has their own personality.  And the age difference between Harry and William could have made a difference.  William was still a kid but a bit older.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I still maintain H gave up very little. He has kept up his charity work, albeit at a distance. Abdicated is just too strong a word for what H did. Of course, abdication feeds MM’s fantasy of a man giving up everything for her.  The media is creating these false stories. Is it just to sell mags? I don’t know, it all seems wrong.

As any mother does, Diana would encourage H to be happy, follow his bliss. Doubtful she would be any more influential than Charles.
IMO, Diana wasn’t a happy person. At the end, she wasn’t living the dream. The footage from the hotel on her last night is heartbreaking. She isn’t smiling, isn’t upbeat, and isn’t projecting warmth. She looks like anyone else passing thru the lobby.  I guess in that sense she was like Marilyn Monroe who knew how to turn on her star power and how to turn it off.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, Diana wasn’t a happy person. At the end, she wasn’t living the dream. *The footage from the hotel on her last night is heartbreaking. She isn’t smiling, isn’t upbeat, and isn’t projecting warmth. She looks like anyone else passing thru the lobby. * I guess in that sense she was like Marilyn Monroe who knew how to turn on her star power and how to turn it off.



I actually feel better about her from what you said here. She was free and she didn’t have to fake it or play the game anymore. She could just be a person. And keep in mind she didn’t know those were the last photos that were ever going to be taken of her. If she had known I’m sure she would’ve smiled (and NOT gotten in that car).


----------



## lalame

I think Diana would've supported whatever those boys did. Now I wonder what she would think of their wives! I think she'd get on particularly well with Kate... they're both shy and seem to have a lot of similar personality traits. Her lifestyle would look more like Harry's now though if she got her wish to live abroad. Just my humble opinion, I think she'd find Meghan too "Miss Congeniality" to be close to (just me projecting, as a shy/awkward soul myself haha) but they'd probably have a fine relationship.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think Diana would've supported whatever those boys did. Now I wonder what she would think of their wives! I think she'd get on particularly well with Kate... they're both shy and seem to have a lot of similar personality traits. Her lifestyle would look more like Harry's now though if she got her wish to live abroad. Just my humble opinion, I think she'd find Meghan too "Miss Congeniality" to be close to (just me projecting, as a shy/awkward soul myself haha) but they'd probably have a fine relationship.


she and Kate both grew up British and (allegedly) both wanted to marry royals maybe since childhood.  Diana was from aristocratracy and Kate was from a "regular" rich family.  But I don't think Diana was a snob in that way.  So I agree, they would have quite a bit in common.  Don't know what she'd think of M but I'm sure she would have been supportive of Harry marrying her if that's what he wanted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I feel she would have been fine with MM if she thought she was treating Harry right and was good for him. If she treats him the way we suspect I doubt Diana would have been on board with that at all.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel she would have been fine with MM if she thought she was treating Harry right and was good for him. If she treats him the way we suspect I doubt Diana would have been on board with that at all.


we can only guess.  I think she would have been supportive in the decision of a bride.  as for the rest, we will never know.
Anyway for me (and I don't know him) he seems to have gone from being a cute "spunky" little boy to a stubborn, entitled, immature man.


----------



## marietouchet

Sitting at hairdresser , reading news of California fires and unseasonable snow , my thoughts go out to all , hang in there xxoo
Ps while social distancing and wearing mask per local laws , I sadly realize we don’t all have the privilege of going to hairdresser these days


----------



## Jktgal

Is it an anniversary or something that we have a flood of Dianaflix? Isn't there a Diana thread?


----------



## csshopper

Looking at pictures of Harry with William and Kate he was bright eyed and energized, even his hair looked healthier. Now he looks wan, scruffy and ground down. The Videos are horrid. 

It feels like she is trying to “build” a new Harry, one completely under her control, and IMO it’s not going well.

Early on he made a statement about “the family she never had.”  Bullocks, she had 2  of them in fact, and chose to abandon both. So she knew from the get go just how to play him presenting herself as another victim and here we are. 

If Diana were alive it would have been a whole different script, I think Ms Markle would have had a to have very different plan for conquest. Harry would not have been so needy if his Mum were alive and well.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yes, each child, in addition to parenting, has their own personality.  And the age difference between Harry and William could have made a difference.  William was still a kid but a bit older.


I once read that each child in a family has their own version of what family life was like.   Even with their shared sorrow of losing Diana, each boy processed things  differently


----------



## CeeJay

creme fraiche said:


> I find it fascinating that so many people actually hold royal marriages up to the moral code underpinning modern marriages.  Even as a teenager I understood that marrying a royal was a job and a business contract as opposed to a love one - a basic study of history makes that pretty evident.  Love marriages were rare in those circles and loving ones matrimonial partner was more a matter of luck than design.  I blame the Victorian PR machine organised by Prince Albert for this.  I remember being a history obsessed teen and deciding that if it were offered to me, I'd much rather be the Royal Mistress as opposed to the Queen.  Loads of strong, impressive females were mistresses (Diane de Poitiers, Marquise de Montespan, Mme de Pompadour, Nell Gwynn) whereas most people don't even know the names of the spouses.  Mind you, being the Mistress was also a business arrangement as opposed to a love one, but the woman did seem to get more out of them than the wife did.


100% agree with this; if you look at history .. RARELY .. did the Royal Couple marry for love!  Heck, it's still somewhat that way with European families (and some American) that have TONS of money .. it's all about keeping that $$$ in that societal "layer"!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Early on he made a statement about “the family she never had.”  Bullocks, she had 2  of them in fact, and chose to abandon both. So she knew from the get go just how to play him presenting herself as another victim and here we are.



That was my defining moment. I read that and thought "I know exactly what you've been feeding him."

I also agree that had Diana lived he would have probably not had this huge void a skilled schemer would be able to both detect and fill for a bit before their true colours showed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Jktgal _Is it an anniversary or something that we have a flood of Dianaflix? Isn't there a Diana thread?  _In just a minute, I have one last, most precious pearl of wisdom to share with the world   I know, we’ve gone way off topic. Apologies

Seriously, whatever “it” factor H had, it is now gone. Maybe it is his unhealthy lifestyle catching up with him or maybe it’s the Spencer genes catching up to him  or something unknown, his eyes have lost the shine. Although Diana may have been an unhappy person, she took time for positive self-care and had impeccable style. Even with a cheating husband and 2 rambunctious boys and well into her 30s when many have given up, she looked great!

Do we know if they are still in Cali?  Completely agree with @marietouchet. Hurricanes on one coast, fires on the other and snow, too. 2020 is not going away quietly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Sitting at hairdresser , reading news of California fires and unseasonable snow , my thoughts go out to all , hang in there xxoo
> Ps while social distancing and wearing mask per local laws , I sadly realize we don’t all have the privilege of going to hairdresser these days


Thanks!!! .. the other day was horrible with the smoke, but from what I've heard, LAFD has made progress in containing the fire that was closer to us.  I really feel for those up in San Francisco and Oregon (my sister is right across the river in Vancouver, WA - when she sent me pics?!?! .. OMG)!!


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> Is it an anniversary or something that we have a flood of Dianaflix? Isn't there a Diana thread?



The anniversary of her death was two weeks ago, otherwise I don’t know why there would be shows about her.  Except maybe because there are no original ideas in Hollywood and they all tend to steal each other’s plans and that’s why we get multiple versions coming out at the same time.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I really feel for those up in San Francisco and Oregon (my sister is right across the river in Vancouver, WA - when she sent me pics?!?! .. OMG)!!



Ugh, I saw about the guy in Oregon who was arrested twice in 12 hours for setting fires. They released him the first time and he went out and started doing it again right away. They believe he set about a dozen  fires but they think they were able to get them all under control. Just evil!


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, I saw about the guy in Oregon who was arrested twice in 12 hours for setting fires. They released him the first time and he went out and started doing it again right away. They believe he set about a dozen  fires but they think they were able to get them all under control. Just evil!


Is this mental illness? I guess it has to be, sad.

Here in Chicago-land the skies are hazy and everything has a yellow cast, being told it is Cali-fire related.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@QueenofWrapDress I also agree that had Diana lived he would have probably not had this huge void a skilled schemer would be able to both detect and fill for a bit before their true colours showed. 

Totally agree with you. He would have taken a totally different road altogether.

Here he is so sad, but also very angry. Made me think he would seek vengeance. Every time, he pulled a stunt as in Nazi uniform, naked party and falling out of bars drunk, I said, "Getting even with Granny, Henry?" IMO, MM provided the right stimuli for retribution against RF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana’s sister Sarah


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry and George, Sarah’s son


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2016, more on H’s behavior - should the public  expect better of him now?









						'P***d' Prince smokes, drinks and strips fellow guest in two-day wedding bender
					

PRINCE Harry partied at his cousin’s wedding by stripping one of his pals naked. He enjoyed a two-day bender as George McCorquodale, Princess Diana’s nephew, tied the knot. The night before the wed…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Is this mental illness? I guess it has to be, sad.
> 
> Here in Chicago-land the skies are hazy and everything has a yellow cast, being told it is Cali-fire related.



I’m sure they’ll check him out but he had his own homemade molotov cocktail when they caught him. He knew exactly what he was doing and he wanted to keep doing it.

They’ve arrested four arsonists so far in Oregon alone. This guy is responsible for setting a fire that burned 1000 acres and killed two people. I hope they lock him up and throw away the key.

To keep this post on topic, I hope Harry, Meghan, and Archie are safe from the fires.





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## pukasonqo

I am not a Monarchist (lived in London for a bit and never understood the fervour) and the way I see it is by accident of birth and marriage that people join the club
Diana was treated like a filly: can she breed, is she good looking, has good genes? And she was only 19
JCMH only brush w the common people was when he was in the Army (if the soldiers he mixed w weren’t vetoed), has lived a very privileged life where his overt anti semitism and boorish behaviour were down played: the nazi uniform and the boozing come to mind
I think (for what is worth) that MM and JCMH bring out the worst of each other, they are not particularly bright (well, he certainly isn’t) and without the coat of the BRF nobody would care about them
Why I am reading this thread? Because it is entertaining


----------



## kemilia

pukasonqo said:


> I am not a Monarchist (lived in London for a bit and never understood the fervour) and the way I see it is by accident of birth and marriage that people join the club
> Diana was treated like a filly: can she breed, is she good looking, has good genes? And she was only 19
> JCMH only brush w the common people was when he was in the Army (if the soldiers he mixed w weren’t vetoed), has lived a very privileged life where his overt anti semitism and boorish behaviour were down played: the nazi uniform and the boozing come to mind
> I think (for what is worth) that MM and JCMH bring out the worst of each other, they are not particularly bright (well, he certainly isn’t) and without the coat of the BRF nobody would care about them
> Why I am reading this thread? *Because it is entertaining*


Me too!


----------



## lalame

Maggie Muggins said:


> @QueenofWrapDress I also agree that had Diana lived he would have probably not had this huge void a skilled schemer would be able to both detect and fill for a bit before their true colours showed.
> 
> Totally agree with you. He would have taken a totally different road altogether.
> 
> Here he is so sad, but also very angry. Made me think he would seek vengeance. Every time, he pulled a stunt as in Nazi uniform, naked party and falling out of bars drunk, I said, "Getting even with Granny, Henry?" IMO, MM provided the right stimuli for retribution against RF.
> 
> View attachment 4847979



I think he has said himself that in this moment, he was filled with anger - not just about her death but how he had to still put on a show for the people who indirectly caused her death (via the strong public interest in her). Maybe he has grown to delight in upsetting the public so much it adds fuel to the fire of this whole Megxit thing.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure they’ll check him out but he had his own homemade molotov cocktail when they caught him. He knew exactly what he was doing and he wanted to keep doing it.
> 
> They’ve arrested four arsonists so far in Oregon alone. This guy is responsible for setting a fire that burned 1000 acres and killed two people. I hope they lock him up and throw away the key.
> 
> To keep this post on topic, I hope Harry, Meghan, and Archie are safe from the fires.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Well, he is one loser dude, this is what he does to feel like a somebody. How can anyone deliberately go out to do this hellish stuff is beyond me. Ms Karma--are you watching?

Do something to help, MM & spouse, with no cameras or reporters around. And yes, I hope the Harkles are safe, and JCMH is FINALLY realizing what horror and hardship really look like. Even if they are safe from the fires, there are the mudslides to worry about. I remember their buddy Oprah sloshing around on her estate a few years back, so much mud. And then there are those giant boulders that roll down into houses, even those with 19 potties.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think he has said himself that in this moment, he was filled with anger - not just about her death but how he had to still put on a show for the people who indirectly caused her death (via the strong public interest in her). Maybe he has grown to delight in upsetting the public so much it adds fuel to the fire of this whole Megxit thing.



I understand that, I really do. For me, many funerals turn into ‘shows’. H isn’t the only one who has experienced this. I wish mature people had spent more time with H. Undoubtedly, some used her death to promote their own agendas (big bad media, us irritating _morons_ who buy trash mags, big bad unfeeling Queen, etc.).   Telling an impressionable 12 year old those kind of ideas is irresponsible, imo.  I‘m not saying some of that isn’t true, but still it _is_ the public who pays their bills. It _is_ the public who made Diana the icon she was. We bought those mags and books. Charles knew whoever he chose as a wife would cause a feeding frenzy for the media which would help the UK economy. Harry needs someone to be honest with him, so he can move onward. Seems he is still filled with anger.









						Princess Diana was an economic force with ‘no living equivalent’
					

“Diana would sell thousands of copies of magazines, but it went beyond that,” said royal author and commentator Robert Jobson,




					www.marketwatch.com
				



_What has been overlooked, however, was the way Princess Diana was an economic powerhouse in her own right.
“Diana would sell thousands of copies of magazines, but it went beyond that,” said royal author and commentator Robert Jobson, who said her “combination of both superstar and royal” contributed to a sense that “Britain was bigger than it actually was.”_









						Death of Diana, Princess of Wales - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_Anti-depressants and traces of an anti-psychotic in his blood may have worsened Paul's inebriation.  No evidence was found that paparazzi were near the car when it crashed. In 2008, the jury at a British inquest returned a verdict of unlawful killing through grossly negligent driving by Paul and following vehicles. It was also found that none of the occupants of the car were wearing a seat belt._









						The Queen's Strange Comment She Made When She Heard of Princess Diana's Death and What It Could Mean
					

Princess Diana’s death affected more than just the Royal Family. It devastated and shocked the world. The Queen's reaction to her death is worth noting.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



_The Queen was bewildered and caught up by the mood of suspicion as to what had caused the accident. Her first comment, upon being told of Diana’s death, was to say: ‘Someone must have greased the brakes,’” Seward wrote. _


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Sorry to say, but Meghan has had a fair amount of "work" .. which her Father (who she has now "markled") paid for.  She was a cute girl, but all that work is what truly made her much more attractive.


The really good work came after the suitcase job.  Someone really helpful posted a video and it was eye opening. The most perfect subtle changes, but quite a few subtle changes!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, Diana wasn’t a happy person. At the end, she wasn’t living the dream. The footage from the hotel on her last night is heartbreaking. She isn’t smiling, isn’t upbeat, and isn’t projecting warmth. She looks like anyone else passing thru the lobby.  I guess in that sense she was like Marilyn Monroe who knew how to turn on her star power and how to turn it off.


She was only in Paris, after having notified the paps to document her trip, to try and make the ex-boyfriend (a Pakistan-born heart surgeon) jealous.  Who can be happy doing that -- going out with another guy to make the guy you really love want to get back with you?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> She was only in Paris, after having notified the paps to document her trip, to try and make the ex-boyfriend (a Pakistan-born heart surgeon) jealous.  Who can be happy doing that -- going out with another guy to make the guy you really love want to get back with you?


that was a story that went around.....that basically the doctor was her true love and Dodi was just for fun-- she wouldn't have married him....but trying to make the doctor jealous?  we don't really know.  It was sad the way she died.  I believe it was the driver's fault.  The paps may have contributed but if the driver wasn't impaired he would have most likely been able to control the car.  and if she had been wearing a seatbelt she likely would have survived.  but I think maybe back then it would have been pretty common to go w/o a seatbelt in a limo?

bottom line - if you believe in fate, it was her time


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> The really good work came after the suitcase job.  Someone really helpful posted a video and it was eye opening. The most perfect subtle changes, but quite a few subtle changes!


I saw that video. She had even more work done after she married JCMH. I almost choked when one of her stans called her a natural beauty.


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> I saw that video. She had even more work done after she married JCMH. I almost choked when one of her stans called her a natural beauty.


There were a few photos of M where she looked like that woman who had 8 babies at once. I don’t remember her name because they called her Octomom.


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> The really good work came after the suitcase job.  Someone really helpful posted a video and it was eye opening. The most perfect subtle changes, but quite a few subtle changes!


That was me! Here it is again if anyone missed it. To be honest, I watched a lot of Lorry's other videos and compared to everyone else she does, Meghan's are pretty restrained lol. Aside from the nose job, mostly botox tricks. The ones that shocked me are Olivia Munn and Amber Heard - now that is quite a bit of work. And Amber was someone I considered in my top 3 most beautiful women ever.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame  thank you for this very convincing video. Yes, MM has indeed had work done. She has beautiful features and looks similar to lots of Hwood actresses. Glossy hair, shiny makeup, lots of lipgloss, beautiful figure. Other than ill-fitting clothes, I have no issues with how she looks. It’s what she says and does. After watching the Di documentary, I’m convinced MM took some of Di’s lines - I want to modernize the monarchy, I had no support, etc.  She, a divorced nearly 40 year old career woman, is no Diana so the words ring hollow.  For an actresses trained in Hwood, so many of MM’s interviews look fake, like she’s an amateur,  odd.

With H, he needs to give up the alcohol and cigs. Can’t imagine what he will look like at 40, yikes. The Cali sun will be tough on his skin, not a good look. The hair, mercy. Again it‘s his behavior that I find atrocious. At 32 years old, he goes to his cousin’s wedding. The night after the wedding, he gets drunk, pins a guy down and strips this guy naked. Wow, that is really odd behavior. Nobody thought he had issues????  The BRF just let him spiral out of control. Says a lot about them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020  so many 'likes' for your post!

IMO, it's obvious that Harry needed mental health assessment and support immediately after Diana's death. Perhaps it was suggested or tried, but how cooperative he have been, we'll never know. Some people feel too much shame at having to admit they have mental issues to seek help.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> That was me! Here it is again if anyone missed it. To be honest, I watched a lot of Lorry's other videos and compared to everyone else she does, Meghan's are pretty restrained lol. Aside from the nose job, mostly botox tricks. The ones that shocked me are Olivia Munn and Amber Heard - now that is quite a bit of work. And Amber was someone I considered in my top 3 most beautiful women ever.



Yes!! I always thought Amber was absolutely stunning and natural, to a point.  In Hollywood, you can't have your own nose or teeth, but aside from that, I didn't realize Amber wasn't a natural beauty.

Lorry's videos are fascinating and most of us can't figure out what the differences are without her pinpointing them. Her Meg video was fascinating too.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this a joke? A notebook from MM was "thoughtful" and flowers from Kate "were not enough" for MM... disgusting! These people have no shame...

*"Meghan Markle gave Kate Middleton a sweet gift when they first met *Meghan brought a ...Smythson notebook... How thoughtful of Meghan!"








						Meghan Markle gave Kate Middleton a sweet gift when they first met
					

What a kind gesture!




					www.yahoo.com
				




*Kate Middleton Once Offered Meghan Markle Flowers as a Peace Offering, but It Was Too Little...*








						Meghan Reportedly Rejected Flowers From Kate During Their (*Breathes Heavy Sigh*) Royal Feud
					

Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> @lalame  thank you for this very convincing video. Yes, MM has indeed had work done. She has beautiful features and looks similar to lots of Hwood actresses. Glossy hair, shiny makeup, lots of lipgloss, beautiful figure. Other than ill-fitting clothes, I have no issues with how she looks. It’s what she says and does. After watching the Di documentary, I’m convinced MM took some of Di’s lines - I want to modernize the monarchy, I had no support, etc.  She, a divorced nearly 40 year old career woman, is no Diana so the words ring hollow.  For an actresses trained in Hwood, so many of MM’s interviews look fake, like she’s an amateur,  odd.
> 
> With H, he needs to give up the alcohol and cigs. Can’t imagine what he will look like at 40, yikes. The Cali sun will be tough on his skin, not a good look. The hair, mercy. Again it‘s his behavior that I find atrocious. At 32 years old, he goes to his cousin’s wedding. The night after the wedding, he gets drunk, pins a guy down and strips this guy naked. Wow, that is really odd behavior. Nobody thought he had issues????  The BRF just let him spiral out of control. Says a lot about them.



I think they’ve tried to get him help. He’s talked about it in the past and for a while there he was doing better... I just think we’re seeing the real him now without Will and Kate making him look nice... but we also don’t know if he’s still in treatment for his issues (nor is it any of our business, but I hope he has/was/is gotten/getting the help he needs/ed). There are people with mental issues in my family and it’s exhausting. Our issues are fairly mild in comparison to others I know, but every time I think everything is getting better, it all goes wrong again... I may not like him, but I don't wish mental problems on anyone or their family.









						Prince William and Prince Harry’s Complicated Relationship Over the Years
					

Prince William and Prince Harry have faced ups and downs in their relationship over the years — get the details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


>



Awww, poor iddle Harry, having to put such a brave face on things all the time


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


>





I always enjoyed the pix of the three of them.  They always looked like they were having a good time.  Don’t see many pix of H smiling like that anymore.  

Of course, I don’t know any of them, but I feel that K is (most) always positive and in a good mood but that M seems to be focusing on negative things and constantly raising issues. It feels like M brings out the worst in H.  I am so sick and tired of them focusing on and exaggerating the most minor of perceived slights.  FFS, they have all of the tools to have a wonderful life - get on with it already!


----------



## Pessie

^^ can you image Meghan letting go like this?  Not in a million


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


>




Hu? No Duke of Sussex? I can't tell if they know something we don't know or if they used it like you would a nickname for a loved one. They seem to not be the type to be publicly snarky.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Also, the choice of picture, the three of them. No Meghan. I can hear it now "why didn't they choose a picture with me in it? Why one with her in it? I'm your wife!" 
And the fact that William and Harry are "apart" in it, lol


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> Also, the choice of picture, the three of them. No Meghan. I can hear it now "why didn't they choose a picture with me in it? Why one with her in it? I'm your wife!"
> And the fact that William and Harry are "apart" in it, lol




Sounds just like what I would expect from her.  Harping on every little perceived slight and making a huge deal out of it.  There seems to be so little communication between them that each little thing is obsessed over.  Ugh...


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The stans are trolling KP's Insta complaining why Meghan isn't in the picture honoring her husband's birthday. When was it decided this woman is the centre of the universe?

(others pointed out that Anne's husband wasn't included in her recent birthday wishes either, but of course, that is absolutely not the same in the stans' eyes)


----------



## Sharont2305

The three insta posts look fine to me, a brother, father and grandmother wishing Harry a happy birthday. If Meghan had behaved and still had the Sussex Royal IG then she could have posted as many photos of herself as she wanted... Oh, and one of Harry being as it is HIS special day after all.


----------



## Genie27

I wonder what picture the Sussex Royal Insta will post......or rather, which charity will be honoured with a Ducal zoom call or “surprise” visit?


----------



## Genie27

Luvbolide said:


> I am so sick and tired of them focusing on and exaggerating the most minor of perceived slights


It’s probably Festivus everyday in the new mansion.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> The three insta posts look fine to me, a brother, father and grandmother wishing Harry a happy birthday. If Meghan had behaved and still had the Sussex Royal IG then she could have posted as many photos of herself as she wanted... Oh, and one of Harry being as it is HIS special day after all.


Harry’s genuinely happy and enjoying himself in those photos, there’s no fakery or filters there.  That‘s why those images were chosen.
Meghan edits (aka lies about) her past history and has done the same to Harry’s - as if he were living some bleak awful life and she rescued him from it.  It’s all absolute b*llocks.
I’m happy if the stans are working themselves into a silly froth about these pictures.  I think the stan cult around Meghan (and the way she openly encourages it) is completely poisonous.


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> Harry’s genuinely happy and enjoying himself in those photos, there’s no fakery or filters there.  That‘s why those images were chosen.
> Meghan edits (aka lies about) her past history and has done the same to Harry’s - as if he were living some bleak awful life and she rescued him from it.  It’s all absolute b*llocks, but her gullible fans lap it up.


Exactly, I'm not buying into the he hated Royal life and wanted to escape. OK, I'm sure there are parts he didn't enjoy but that's the same for most people in their jobs. I think he loved the meeting the people and charity parts, he seemed to be very at home doing that, I'd say especially the military side. It's such a shame he's been blind sided by love.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, I'm not buying into the he hated Royal life and wanted to escape. OK, I'm sure there are parts he didn't enjoy but that's the same for most people in their jobs. I think he loved the meeting the people and charity parts, he seemed to be very at home doing that, I'd say especially the military side. It's such a shame he's been blind sided by love.


I think you’re absolutely right.  
And he’s been blindsided alright, but people in happy loving relationships don’t look like Harry does.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, I'm not buying into the he hated Royal life and wanted to escape. OK, I'm sure there are parts he didn't enjoy but that's the same for most people in their jobs. I think he loved the meeting the people and charity parts, he seemed to be very at home doing that, I'd say especially the military side. It's such a shame he's been blind sided by love.



My impression was that he disliked the intrusive media after his wedding. Because the dreaded media was treating MM just like his mother. [Hmmm, wonder where that idea came from?] Never saw an article saying he wanted out of royal life until around 2017. There were articles about his dislike of feeling like an extra when around W&K, but nothing that said he wanted out. Then the wedding, the ‘dreaded media‘ narrative, the lawsuits, the ‘Do-as-I-say’ lectures,  the coming to America where there are no tabloids (whaaaa?). So now, he has dropped most of his charities and is rarely seen volunteering even tho he lives in a city with active volunteer groups.

The last straw for me is OS calling H&M critics ‘morons’.  No condemnation from H&M over that? wow. To me, that is revealing of who H is now. As many others have said, if these 2 don’t want criticism, then stay out of the media. If they want privacy, then stay home.  They said it best when they said they wanted to be _half-in, half-out. _They want the glory without the work, the money without being held accountable. That won’t happen in 2020.









						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s critics nicknamed “morons” by “Finding Freedom” author Omid Scobie | FR24 News English
					






					www.fr24news.com
				



_“I would love to see the tears and energy every now and then that these morons spend on an inactive royal being used on Prince Andrew’s horrific mess,” the author tweeted on Saturday.
He added: “Or is there nothing worse than a woman of color with a voice? ”
Scobie is of course referring to revelations Prince Andrew had ties to the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein._


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> My impression was that he disliked the intrusive media after his wedding. Because the dreaded media was treating MM just like his mother. [Hmmm, wonder where that idea came from?] Never saw an article saying he wanted out of royal life until around 2017. There were articles about his dislike of feeling like an extra when around W&K, but nothing that said he wanted out. Then the wedding, the ‘dreaded media‘ narrative, the lawsuits, the ‘Do-as-I-say’ lectures,  the coming to America where there are no tabloids (whaaaa?). So now, he has dropped most of his charities and is rarely seen volunteering even tho he lives in a city with active volunteer groups.
> 
> The last straw for me is OS calling H&M critics ‘morons’.  No condemnation from H&M over that? wow. To me, that is revealing of who H is now. As many others have said, if these 2 don’t want criticism, then stay out of the media. If they want privacy, then stay home.  They said it best when they said they wanted to be _half-in, half-out. _They want the glory without the work, the money without being held accountable. That won’t happen in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s critics nicknamed “morons” by “Finding Freedom” author Omid Scobie | FR24 News English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fr24news.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“*I would love to see the tears and energy every now and then that these morons spend on an inactive royal *being used on Prince Andrew’s horrific mess,” the author tweeted on Saturday.
> He added: “Or is there nothing worse than a woman of color with a voice? ”
> Scobie is of course referring to revelations Prince Andrew had ties to the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein._


In response to the bolded, I’d love to be a fly on the wall when OS expends tears and energy clinging to Harry and crying when the two of them are Markled.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


>



Interesting image, yes, very symbolic, someone spent hours picking the photo
1. Hmm no Meghan - that was DELIBERATE, but why? given K is in the shot ... must be things going on behind the scenes in the UK .. we do not know
2. Harry is in front of William with Kate far behind. According to precedence rules, H come after W & K, so, this shot was chosen deliberately to highlight Harry, quite a loving shot actually from his brother


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> 1. Hmm no Meghan - that was DELIBERATE, but why? given K is in the shot ... must be things going on behind the scenes in the UK .. we do not know



Kate is in the shot because it's her and William's shared Instagram, not William's alone, and they were both congratulating him. And Meghan is not in the shot because duh, it's not her birthday. I honestly did not look at the picture and went "Good thing they excluded her" because there was simply no reason for her to be there so it never crossed my mind before the stans were having nervous break-downs over the new insult.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


>





Sharont2305 said:


> Also, the choice of picture, the three of them. No Meghan. I can hear it now "why didn't they choose a picture with me in it? Why one with her in it? I'm your wife!"
> And the fact that William and Harry are "apart" in it, lol


The picture seems to speak "we have your back" or "we are here for you"... I bet MM didn't like it. H must be very confused and divided between staying close to his son (likely the most important person in his life) and missing his other life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


>




Nice photo. Will is really grimacing that he "can't keep up" when in reality both K & W are probably letting him win. I like the Queen's photo with him. Her back is turned toward the camera so the focus is on him. See Meghan? It can be done!


----------



## Chanbal

We have already one of *MM* responses to the happy pictures from the BRF:

*Prince Harry is 'happier than ever' and 'thriving within his professional life' at the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died - and doesn't miss his old life at all as he turns 36, royal expert claims*
The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, *according to Omid Scobie*.









						Prince Harry 'happier than ever' on 36th birthday, royal expert claims
					

The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, Omid Scobie told Vanity Fair.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> We have already one of *MM* responses to the happy pictures from the BRF:
> 
> *Prince Harry is 'happier than ever' and 'thriving within his professional life' at the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died - and doesn't miss his old life at all as he turns 36, royal expert claims*
> The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, *according to Omid Scobie*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'happier than ever' on 36th birthday, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, Omid Scobie told Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



There’s OS, as usual, making himself part of the story. Kinda like Andrew Morton. Gotta control the narrative.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> There’s OS, as usual, making himself part of the story. Kinda like Andrew Morton. Gotta control the narrative.


Scoobydo is now a royal expert???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Scoobydo is now a royal expert???*


Where is the puke icon when you need it?!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> We have already one of *MM* responses to the happy pictures from the BRF:
> 
> *Prince Harry is 'happier than ever' and 'thriving within his professional life' at the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died - and doesn't miss his old life at all as he turns 36, royal expert claims*
> The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, *according to Omid Scobie*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'happier than ever' on 36th birthday, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, Omid Scobie told Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



At this point there's really nothing beneath Scobie. Didn't he use to be a real journalist? Also, help a girl out, which professional life exactly?

For some reason Harry just doesn't look all that happy, but what do we know.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Scoobydo is now a royal expert???



I caught that too. Shouldn’t it say “self-proclaimed royal expert.” Then again, isn’t every royal expert self-proclaimed? It’s not like it’s an actual job.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Found one.  Scoobydo you're a real inspiration. NOT!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

If true, then why not step out of the succession line?  Why take money from the British people? 
Yet another lie. 



Chanbal said:


> We have already one of *MM* responses to the happy pictures from the BRF:
> 
> *Prince Harry is 'happier than ever' and 'thriving within his professional life' at the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died - and doesn't miss his old life at all as he turns 36, royal expert claims*
> The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age his mother Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, *according to Omid Scobie*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'happier than ever' on 36th birthday, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who today turns the same age Princess Diana was when she died, is 'very content' with his marriage and family and 'thriving' in his professional life, Omid Scobie told Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> I caught that too. Shouldn’t it say “self-proclaimed royal expert.” Then again, isn’t every royal expert self-proclaimed? It’s not like it’s an actual job.


Scobie has the kind of face that makes you wish you had a custard pie to hand


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> Scobie has the kind of face that makes you wish you had a custard pie to hand



Yes! You can see his smarmy, obsequious personality in his expressions.

Not that I blame him for kissing Meghan's @ss. She is the only reason he is known by anyone. His book about them sold thousands and now he's a published author. He owes her a lot but it is a symbiotic relationship, she has someone (possibly on the payroll) who only gives her glowing praise.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I caught that too. Shouldn’t it say “self-proclaimed royal expert.” Then again, isn’t every royal expert self-proclaimed? It’s not like it’s an actual job.


Self-proclaimed moron, wimp, ass-kisser... plenty of title possibilities to add to his resume.


----------



## csshopper

A split screen shot between the picture of the laughing Harry posted by Prince Charles in honor of his son's birthday and one from a "bunker" video would cast serious shade on the pronouncements that Harry is "happier than ever" and "doesn't miss his old life at all."

One wonders what "data" Scobie amassed before writing something clearly intended to be hurtful and disparaging to the RF. But if the hack could see beyond MeAgain, planted firmly in front of his short sighted face, he might ponder that such a statement disparages Diana as well, "his old life" in total included his Mum.

Do the Sussexes have the equivalent of Amazon's Alexa turned on so Scobie can hear them daily go about this fabulous life of theirs? Does MeAgain text him her Daily Diary pages for what is sure to be a follow up book followed by the Netflix adaptation produced by guess who? Is he clairvoyant but stuck channeling MeAgain? Does he live in the guest house? Disguise himself as the Pool Boy and jot notes as he goes about his business? One wonders how he knows it all beyond all others, but more importantly one wonders why a Prince of the Realm allows a marginally skilled writer to put forth this drivel and clearly does nothing to discourage it. We know the answer: Rachel Meghan Markle Engleston (almost Vitiello but after a 2 years relationship he still wasn't rich enough) Windsor, the _Duchess of Sell to the highest bidder_.


----------



## Pessie

csshopper said:


> A split screen shot between the picture of the laughing Harry posted by Prince Charles in honor of his son's birthday and one from a "bunker" video would cast serious shade on the pronouncements that Harry is "happier than ever" and "doesn't miss his old life at all."
> 
> One wonders what "data" Scobie amassed before writing something clearly intended to be hurtful and disparaging to the RF. But if the hack could see beyond MeAgain, planted firmly in front of his short sighted face, he might ponder that such a statement disparages Diana as well, "his old life" in total included his Mum.
> 
> Do the Sussexes have the equivalent of Amazon's Alexa turned on so Scobie can hear them daily go about this fabulous life of theirs? Does MeAgain text him her Daily Diary pages for what is sure to be a follow up book followed by the Netflix adaptation produced by guess who? Is he clairvoyant but stuck channeling MeAgain? Does he live in the guest house? Disguise himself as the Pool Boy and jot notes as he goes about his business? One wonders how he knows it all beyond all others, but more importantly one wonders why a Prince of the Realm allows a marginally skilled writer to put forth this drivel and clearly does nothing to discourage it. We know the answer: Rachel Meghan Markle Engleston (almost Vitiello but after a 2 years relationship he still wasn't rich enough) Windsor, the _Duchess of Sell to the highest bidder_.


I think Scobes gets a To Do List emailed at 5 every morning


----------



## kipp

Although Scobie isn't a lady, [he] "doth protest too much, methinks."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

William and Kate Send Harry Birthday Love With Telling Throwback Photo
					

Prince William and Duchess Kate took to Instagram to send Prince Harry birthday love on Tuesday, September 15 — read more




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Oops sorry!  Didn't realize it was already posted!


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> I think Scobes gets a To Do List emailed at 5 every morning


I think he gets one of MM updated binders every day...

"Meghan was often 'seen carrying binders full of research on Royal ..."









						Finding Freedom authors did speak to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

In the author's note for the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes' biography Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand write they 'have spoken with, when appropriate, the couple'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> My impression was that he disliked the intrusive media after his wedding. Because the dreaded media was treating MM just like his mother. [Hmmm, wonder where that idea came from?] Never saw an article saying he wanted out of royal life until around 2017. There were articles about his dislike of feeling like an extra when around W&K, but nothing that said he wanted out. Then the wedding, the ‘dreaded media‘ narrative, the lawsuits, the ‘Do-as-I-say’ lectures,  the coming to America where there are no tabloids (whaaaa?). So now, he has dropped most of his charities and is rarely seen volunteering even tho he lives in a city with active volunteer groups.
> 
> The last straw for me is OS calling H&M critics ‘morons’.  No condemnation from H&M over that? wow. To me, that is revealing of who H is now. As many others have said, if these 2 don’t want criticism, then stay out of the media. If they want privacy, then stay home.  They said it best when they said they wanted to be _half-in, half-out. _They want the glory without the work, the money without being held accountable. That won’t happen in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s critics nicknamed “morons” by “Finding Freedom” author Omid Scobie | FR24 News English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.fr24news.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“I would love to see the tears and energy every now and then that these morons spend on an inactive royal being used on Prince Andrew’s horrific mess,” the author tweeted on Saturday.
> He added: “Or is there nothing worse than a woman of color with a voice? ”
> Scobie is of course referring to revelations Prince Andrew had ties to the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein._


I know he said he didn't want his wife to suffer as his mother did. But to me it seems like two different issues.  Diana (in his mind) being stalked and chased to her death.  Vs Meghan being attacked verbally (or in writing) with racism.


----------



## maryg1

In the picture I see H running away from W&K, I think it was quite an ironic picture to choose


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I know he said he didn't want his wife to suffer as his mother did. But to me it seems like two different issues.  *Diana (in his mind) being stalked and chased to her death.*  Vs Meghan being attacked verbally (or in writing) with racism.


I guess JCMH never got the memo, that Diana used to give the paps a heads-up re upcoming events/engagements. So yeah, just blame the paps.

Edited to add that, I realize that it would be very difficult for him to acknowledge that a drunk driver, lack of seat belt use, etc caused his mother's death.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I guess JCMH never got the memo, that Diana used to give the paps a heads-up re upcoming events/engagements. So yeah, just blame the paps.


I think (and Brits can correct me) she sometimes wanted them and then sometimes not....so I guess when you open that can of worms....


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> @lalame  thank you for this very convincing video. Yes, MM has indeed had work done. She has beautiful features and looks similar to lots of Hwood actresses. Glossy hair, shiny makeup, lots of lipgloss, beautiful figure.


According to my friends that knew the Markles very well in Meghan's teenage years, that was when she started the various procedures .. new teeth, refined nose, etc. -- and DADDY paid for all of it!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> According to my friends that knew the Markles very well in Meghan's teenage years, that was when she started the various procedures .. new teeth, refined nose, etc. -- and DADDY paid for all of it!


the daddy that is basically dead to her now


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> According to my friends that knew the Markles very well in Meghan's teenage years, that was when she started the various procedures .. new teeth, refined nose, etc. -- and DADDY paid for all of it!



And Trevor picked up the rest


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana used the media, just as H&M do. Yes, some in the media wrote mean articles about Diana. She read those, focused on their every mean word and became angry because of it.  This is the problem with fame. Actors, politicians, anyone in the public eye, understand how fickle the press is. Build up someone only to tear them down. Surprising that MM, the nearly 40 yr old Hwood career woman, didn’t know this would happen.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/diana-and-the-media-she-used-them-and-they-used-her-until-the-day-she-died/2017/08/24/c98418ca-812d-11e7-b359-15a3617c767b_story.html
		


Paul Burrell:
_However, he made clear he thinks Diana and Markle's experiences are different, pointing out that Diana was frequently physically harassed by members of the press.








						Princess Diana's former butler says seeing Meghan Markle battle with British tabloids is like 'witnessing history again'
					

Burrell believes Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's lawsuits against the media are an attempt to prevent history from repeating itself.




					www.insider.com
				



_


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I guess JCMH never got the memo, that *Diana used to give the paps a heads-up re upcoming events/engagements*. So yeah, just blame the paps.



Let's be a little more evenhanded about that. Diana began contacting the media after she realized that since they were going to write about her anyway, she might as well take back some control over the narrative they presented of her. She desperately wanted to get her side of the story out there. Also, by giving them full access to her on occasion, it allowed her to have a little freedom from them at other times. Over the years she gradually had to learn how to play the media game. You must give something in order to get something in return. She didn't do it so she could have pretty photos taken of her. She was trying to establish some boundaries and balance within her dealings with the press.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> The last straw for me is OS calling H&M critics ‘morons’.  No condemnation from H&M over that? wow. To me, that is revealing of who H is now. As many others have said, if these 2 don’t want criticism, then stay out of the media. If they want privacy, then stay home.  They said it best when they said they wanted to be _half-in, half-out. _They want the glory without the work, the money without being held accountable. That won’t happen in 2020.


WHAT??? .. Scoobie-Scummie-Doo called "us" MORONS?!?!  While I have a Twitter account, I'm never really on it .. I may just have to get active again ..


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Let's be a little more evenhanded about that. Diana began contacting the media after she realized that since they were going to write about her anyway, she might as well take back some control over the narrative they presented of her. She desperately wanted to get her side of the story out there. Also, by giving them full access to her on occasion, it allowed her to have a little freedom from them at other times. Over the years she gradually had to learn how to play the media game. You must give something in order to get something in return. She didn't do it so she could have pretty photos taken of her. She was trying to establish some boundaries and balance within her dealings with the press.



Do you think that's why Meghan and Harry do it today? Hmm, I'd say for them as they're on the cusp of launching a bunch of things I think they're probably doing it as (self-)promotion. For Diana she didn't really have much to gain, financially, aside from putting more attention to her causes and like you said throw them a bone in order to get her side of the story out.

I can't really blame her for doing the tell-all with Andrew Morton. Was it mature? Probably not but I wouldn't be able to take having my marriage blamed on me in the public, when she was suffering so much from it.


----------



## Tootsie17

CeeJay said:


> WHAT??? .. Scoobie-Scummie-Doo called "us" MORONS?!?!  While I have a Twitter account, I'm never really on it .. I may just have to get active again ..


Scoobie-Scummie-Doo LOL!!! His name is perfect for mocking. Though, all in good fun and not mean-spirited.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Do you think that's why Meghan and Harry do it today? Hmm, I'd say for them as they're on the cusp of launching a bunch of things I think they're probably doing it as (self-)promotion. For Diana she didn't really have much to gain, financially, aside from putting more attention to her causes and like you said throw them a bone in order to get her side of the story out.
> 
> I can't really blame her for doing the tell-all with Andrew Morton. Was it mature? Probably not but I wouldn't be able to take having my marriage blamed on me in the public, when she was suffering so much from it.



I think Meghan very much wants to control the narrative but having their need to earn money first and foremost kind of muddies the water when it comes to how their complaints are taken. Many of Meghan and Harry's complaints sound like whining spoiled children. I don't really blame Diana for the book either. It must be frustrating as hell to have all the power in your life held by others. I understand the desire to try to take it back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Almost from the beginning, she was friends with several reporters, had lunches with them, let them know where she would be, and took their advice on style. Anna Wintour was with her from the beginning. Yes, she used the friendly ones to report about  her work on AIDS, land mines as well as other issues.  She made political enemies with some of her causes, too.









						Diana was queen of the media she loved and hated
					

If Diana were alive today would she be all over social media the way she was all over old media?



					www.usatoday.com
				




ETA: this PBS Frontline transcript:
_Who initiated the contacts, where did the meetings take place and what did the Princess hope to get out of them? Those who, like Earl Spencer, despise the tabloids for intruding on the privacy of public figures may be surprised at the answer. For it appears that the Princess -- the most hunted woman of her age -- was as much the wooer as the wooed*.  *According to sources close to Buckingham Palace, it was she who made the first approach when, at the beginning of 1996, she surreptitiously invited the editors of the four main tabloids -- the *Mirror, *the *Sun, *the *Daily Mail* and the *Express* -- for lunch at Kensington Palace.


			Readings - Diana And The Tabloids | Princess And The Press | FRONTLINE | PBS
		

_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry Used to Have Several Secret Social Media Accounts
					

"Around the time of their first encounter, [Meghan] began to follow a mysterious-looking Instagram account by the name of @SpikeyMau5."




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




Remember, too, while H preaches hatred of social media, he was, maybe still is, an avid user. Plenty of rumors about his usage.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Let's be a little more evenhanded about that. Diana began contacting the media after she realized that since they were going to write about her anyway, she might as well take back some control over the narrative they presented of her. She desperately wanted to get her side of the story out there. Also, by giving them full access to her on occasion, it allowed her to have a little freedom from them at other times. Over the years she gradually had to learn how to play the media game. You must give something in order to get something in return. She didn't do it so she could have pretty photos taken of her. She was trying to establish some boundaries and balance within her dealings with the press.


I don’t blame Diana for trying to protect herself from the press. However, I blame her for influencing an impressionable child. IMO, she probably frequently disparaged the press in his presence for him to react the way he did. There are numerous vids/pics of Harry sticking out his tongue at the press while she giggles like a school girl instead of correcting this behaviour.





__





						harry, diana, car - Yahoo Video Search Results
					

The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web.




					video.search.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

As awful as the media was during Diana’s days, some say in many ways they have improved. Is it a Faustian pact the royals make in order to maintain their lifestyle?  In the 21st century, are we really ready to accept their polished, glossy, saccharine narrative?









						Why has the British press been so hung up on Harry and Meghan?
					

The intrusive U.K. media coverage of Harry and Meghan played a major role in their decision to pull back from royal duties.




					www.csmonitor.com
				



_Some press-watchers say the coverage of Harry and Meghan had been relatively restrained, a legacy of the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in 1997 while being chased through Paris by paparazzi. Newspaper editors subsequently swore off paparazzi photos and refrained from photographing without permission her sons, Harry and William.

The global celebrity of Diana and her love-hate relationship with the cameras epitomized the implicit Faustian pact between the crown and the popular press, which keeps them in the public eye and shores up their legitimacy in a modern democracy.


ETA: _ IMO, it’s the amount the money they cost the taxpayers as well as the fawning US coverage that I dislike. Each country must decide if it wants to use taxpayers‘ dollars to support a royal lifestyle. Years ago, we in the USA made that decision. I don’t see us changing it any time soon. I admit it - I bought the Diana mags and books, I got up early to watch the wedding, I studied royal history. I won’t get fooled again. In fact, I am watching very closely which companies are supporting royals now.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: this PBS Frontline transcript:
> _Who initiated the contacts, where did the meetings take place and what did the Princess hope to get out of them? Those who, like Earl Spencer, despise the tabloids for intruding on the privacy of public figures may be surprised at the answer. For it appears that the Princess -- the most hunted woman of her age -- was as much the wooer as the wooed*.  **According to sources close to Buckingham Palace*, it was she who made the first approach when, at the beginning of 1996, she surreptitiously invited the editors of the four main tabloids -- the *Mirror, *the *Sun, *the *Daily Mail* and the *Express* -- for lunch at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> Readings - Diana And The Tabloids | Princess And The Press | FRONTLINE | PBS
> 
> 
> _



This is what we should look for in articles like this. The information was supplied by "sources close to Buckingham Palace." Now perhaps it was true, but you have to consider that since it was employees working for the Queen who gave the statements, can you really call them unbiased? Do such unnamed sources deserve our belief?


----------



## CarryOn2020

A young mom who wanted to be a friend rather than parent. 



Maggie Muggins said:


> I don’t blame Diana for trying to protect herself from the press. However, I blame her for influencing an impressionable child. IMO, she probably frequently disparaged the press in his presence for him to react the way he did. There are numerous vids/pics of Harry sticking out his tongue at the press while she giggles like a school girl instead of correcting this behaviour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harry, diana, car - Yahoo Video Search Results
> 
> 
> The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> video.search.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> This is what we should look for in articles like this. The information was supplied by "sources close to Buckingham Palace." Now perhaps it was true, but you have to consider that since it was employees working for the Queen who gave the statements, can you really call them unbiased? Do such unnamed sources deserve our belief?



True, we do know for certain Anna Wintour was involved early on. We do know Richard Kay was a regular invitee. Andrew Morton was an unknown who got the nod by being a friend of a friend.








						How ANDREW MORTON got the Diana tapes that made history
					

The year was 1991. Diana was approaching 30 and the idea that her marriage was in dire trouble seemed unthinkable at the time. Andrew Morton was sent tapes from the princess by a go-between.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Inside the Wild Life of a Royal Correspondent
					

These veteran reporters follow Meghan, Harry, Kate, and William 24/7—here's how they get their information.




					www.marieclaire.com
				



It might sound like a dream job (and in many ways it is), but reporting on the royals presents a unique set of challenges. There's the delicate balance of getting a good story, while not being too salacious. Royal reporters must try their best not to piss off the the Queen & co. And securing sources can be thorny.


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> Scoobie-Scummie-Doo LOL!!! His name is perfect for mocking. Though, all in good fun and not mean-spirited.


Correct, not mean-spirited .. but I do think he could be a little bit more professional and not call H&M naysayers "morons"!  To me, that reeks of Junior High School behavior (oh - there you go, the two 13-year-old's bond)!!  HA!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> It might sound like a dream job (and in many ways it is), but reporting on the royals presents a unique set of challenges. There's the delicate balance of getting a good story, while not being too salacious. Royal reporters must try their best not to piss off the the Queen & co. And securing sources can be thorny.



It's not a job I would want while trying to maintain the illusion of being impartial. There would have to be constant journalistic compromises made.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Let's be a little more evenhanded about that. Diana began contacting the media after she realized that since they were going to write about her anyway, she might as well take back some control over the narrative they presented of her. She desperately wanted to get her side of the story out there. Also, by giving them full access to her on occasion, it allowed her to have a little freedom from them at other times. Over the years she gradually had to learn how to play the media game. You must give something in order to get something in return. She didn't do it so she could have pretty photos taken of her. She was trying to establish some boundaries and balance within her dealings with the press.



Paparazzi are not the press, they worked with indirectly the press.

Most were freelance chancers who were looking for the golden ticket photo that propelled them into a fortune with one 'priceless' photo.

The press would pay huge sums for these special photos but these 'photographers' hardly ever worked directly for the press and were freelance.  Diana gave stories and pictures to the press, but never worked with the pack that hunted her down for snaps.

The price of photos are now usually worth far less now that members of the public nearly all carry phones that can take photos and vids whenever and wherever.

H&M's argument is that the press won't do as they're told and just publish what they're sent through their PR machine. They want 'Hello'  type fawning and undiluted idolisation that darling Prince Harry has become used to minus a few 'hiccups' not scrutiny and holding to account.


----------



## bag-mania

Who wants to take bets on what kind of Harry birthday stories will be hitting the press by morning? I'm guessing we'll be regaled with every little detail of a romantic 7-course birthday dinner Meghan cooked all by herself (with a tiny bit of assistance from a famous LA restaurant/caterer). Whatever the cake is we can be sure it is Meghan's own recipe!


----------



## gracekelly

I want a vegan chicken with banana bread stuffing.  Chickpea cookies with vegan choc chips.  Don't forget the warm beer.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I want a vegan chicken with banana bread stuffing.  Chickpea cookies with vegan choc chips.  Don't forget the warm beer.


is he allowed to drink beer?  thought she made him stop drinking


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> is he allowed to drink beer?  thought she made him stop drinking



One small glass of beer might be okay as long as it is organic.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> is he allowed to drink beer?  thought she made him stop drinking



It's his birthday!  Have a heart!


bag-mania said:


> One small glass of beer might be okay as long as it is organic.



Yes, and it is synthetic no-calorie beer.  I'm afraid that it will be served in paper cups as all the glasses were broken when the Hold Still photography exhibition opened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Who wants to take bets on what kind of Harry birthday stories will be hitting the press by morning? I'm guessing we'll be regaled with every little detail of a romantic 7-course birthday dinner Meghan cooked all by herself (with a tiny bit of assistance from a famous LA restaurant/caterer). Whatever the cake is we can be sure it is Meghan's own recipe!



And she presented him with her new face (yes, again) and a resetting of her engagement ring.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> And she presented him with her new face (yes, again) and a resetting of her engagement ring.



That would only be fair, considering he has paid for both.


----------



## Annawakes

Y’all!


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Y’all!



And people complain about the posters on this thread.  We are a very witty group!


----------



## djuna1




----------



## gracekelly

Hmmm.  I want to see the canceled check after it clears the bank.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ina’s suggestions:





__





						Barefoot Contessa
					






					barefootcontessa.com
				




ETA: her Eton Mess is appropriate


----------



## CarryOn2020

$130,000 gift could be a stove? refrigerator?  dishwater? Unused wedding presents?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ina’s suggestions:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barefoot Contessa
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> barefootcontessa.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: her Eton Mess is appropriate


I learned about Eton Mess about a year ago/  The DH was reading an article in the Financial Times and it was an interview with an author and she ordered it at the interview lunch.  We had to look it up as we didn't know what it was.   I have a hunch that Harry doesn't want to be reminded of his academic achievements at Eton


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> $130,000 gift could be a stove? refrigerator?  dishwater? Unused wedding presents?



A gift card to a store that closed during Covid.


----------



## csshopper

From the Daily Mail an article pointing out all the things we have commented on, in one telling paragraph he talks about the fact the pictures chosen by family are several years old because no recent ones of Harry smiling can be found.....


*Oh Harry, how we miss the way you were: Often now Prince Harry appears careworn... So how poignant that his family posted birthday greetings online with these beaming pictures, writes RICHARD KAY*


----------



## gracekelly

Harry:  oh so sorry.  The comma was supposed to be a decimal point and it is really $130.00


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> A gift card to a store that closed during Covid.


You are ON FIRE today @gracekelly !!!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Who wants to take bets on what kind of Harry birthday stories will be hitting the press by morning? I'm guessing we'll be regaled with every little detail of a romantic 7-course birthday dinner Meghan cooked all by herself (with a tiny bit of assistance from a famous LA restaurant/caterer). Whatever the cake is we can be sure it is Meghan's own recipe!



I've been very busy and almost missed on this one. 

I bet that MM will recreate a certain wood environment on their vast backyard to celebrate H bday. She can't afford to lose the soulmate position after those happy pictures from the BRF. 

For the ones that have forgotten or joined this thread at a later time, H found his soulmate when MM "went for a pee in the woods". I'm still 









						Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
					

The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> $130,000 gift could be a stove? refrigerator?  dishwater? Unused wedding presents?


Are you talking about old appliances left behind in the house by Scarface?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> $130,000 gift could be a stove? refrigerator?  dishwater? Unused wedding presents?



Or the Dior kaftan she wore in Morocco?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bye bye Barbados!








						Barbados to remove Queen as head of state in 2021
					

A speech written by PM Mia Mottley quoted the nation's first premier Errol Barrow's warning against 'loitering on colonial premises'




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				



_Barbados has announced its intention to remove the Queen as its head of state and become a republic by November, 2021._

Who’s next


----------



## purseinsanity

OMG you are all killing it tonight!


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bye bye Barbados!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barbados to remove Queen as head of state in 2021
> 
> 
> A speech written by PM Mia Mottley quoted the nation's first premier Errol Barrow's warning against 'loitering on colonial premises'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Barbados has announced its intention to remove the Queen as its head of state and become a republic by November, 2021._
> 
> Who’s next



Wow the Prime Minister's comments in this are fire! Love it.


----------



## Pessie

djuna1 said:


>



Pity they had to be embarrassed into this by the stans 


rose60610 said:


> Or the Dior kaftan she wore in Morocco?


Surprised she hasn’t been inspired by Diana and auctioned off the clothes she doesn‘t need anymore in her new life.
ETA - oops what am I thinking - that was Williams idea wasn’t it  Non starter then.


----------



## Pessie

Hmm the Barbadians don’t want to risk Harry and Meghan decamping overnight to one of their Russian billionaires holiday mansions, demanding 24 hr security and full on attention


----------



## byzina

I wonder how the Netflix Cuties scandal will influence the image of the company in general. I've just read that people are unsubscribing 8 times more than usual. No wonder that the RF are concerned about the content HM will produce.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I've been very busy and almost missed on this one.
> 
> I bet that MM will recreate a certain wood environment on their vast backyard to celebrate H bday. She can't afford to lose the soulmate position after those happy pictures from the BRF.
> 
> For the ones that have forgotten or joined this thread at a later time, H found his soulmate when MM "went for a pee in the woods". I'm still
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'delightfully surprised' when Meghan happily peed in the woods
> 
> 
> The book, co-written by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, lifts the lid on the the events that led to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex deciding to take a step back from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


oh, "happily" peed in the woods.  I don't think so.  It's not that easy for us women to do that.


----------



## marietouchet

Pessie said:


> Hmm the Barbadians don’t want to risk Harry and Meghan decamping overnight to one of their Russian billionaires holiday mansions, demanding 24 hr security and full on attention


Well, Edward VIII was given the governorship of a Caribbean island (sorry, cant remember which..) in the WWII - to keep him out of Europe
I guess Barbados wants to nominate its own governor


----------



## Pessie

marietouchet said:


> Well, Edward VIII was given the governorship of a Caribbean island (sorry, cant remember which..) in the WWII - to keep him out of Europe
> I guess Barbados wants to nominate its own governor


Yes I know.  I was simply posting in jest.


----------



## marietouchet

On the CAMPFED donation, nice thing to do, nice

CURIOUS thing to do

Surely a nice charity, but somehow a wooden donation if the celebrity has no personal connection to the cause (of the style: my mother died of the disease ...)

The BRF never gives away money, in part since a social rule is never give cash since it allows people to put a number of how much you care.

JCMH must need a tax deduction and/or some good press in light of the INVICTUS disaster

I remember when Harry was alone in London, early this year, Jon Bon Jovi came to record an Invictus theme song at Abbey Road, should have been a big splash, it was an embarassing whimper which at the time I chalked up to COVID, but likely the fate of INVICTUS has been in the balance since the beginning of Megxit

Harry had a personal connection to INVICTUS so his work was memorable

The effort towards CAMPFED does not make up for INVICTUS


----------



## marietouchet

Omid may have hitched his horse to the wrong wagon 

It seems like JCMH is erasing all ties with the BRF & UK, OK, his/her prerogative.  To compare, Diana, had some five years from her separation to her death and was never far out of BRF circles or the UK, so, there was a UK story after her separation.

But, Omid was a minor BRF reporter, he got a book deal but now what ? The new life of JCMH is alien to his expertise - where is his future?

And what of his MIA co-author? LOL


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Or the Dior kaftan she wore in Morocco?


The home decor purchased for Frogmore Cottage ?


----------



## marietouchet

Look at this...








						Inside Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex's royal residence, Bagshot Park — HELLO! | Bagshot, Lady louise windsor, Royal residence
					

Mar 30, 2020 - The Earl and Countess of Wessex have called Bagshot Park in Surrey their home for over 20 years, after moving in following their royal wedding in 1999. Prince Edward and Sophie live in the mansion house with their two children – Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn – and until...




					pin.it
				




Hello Mag did a recent article on Edward’s ginormous house, this would have never happened years back ... the type of BRF stuff that has always been absent from the press... 

There is a 2020 trend about disclosing the BRF lifestyle

OK I get it, the JCMH house was publicly listed with realtors, so, we know the number of baths
Omid blabbed about Will’s apartment at Kensington


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The BRF never gives away money, in part since a social rule is never give cash since it allows people to put a number of how much you care.



William has occasionally given money to causes, e.g. to Captain Tom Moore's campaign.

But yeah, why would people known to be stingy with their own money suddenly shell out such a big sum? I am still not convinced they can afford it, and it's certainly not coming from the goodness of their hearts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

It's getting them publicity (surprise!  ) and cheaper than paying legal fees for a lawsuit you're going to lose.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> William has occasionally given money to causes, e.g. to Captain Tom Moore's campaign.
> 
> But yeah, why would people known to be stingy with their own money suddenly shell out such a big sum? I am still not convinced they can afford it, and it's certainly not coming from the goodness of their hearts.



Afford is an abstract term for people who have unlimited safety net.... these guys can spend their very last dollar because they know they'll get a bail out from Charles or Granny.


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t think it is their money. This isn’t in character with their prior actions.  People pledge money all the time and then don’t follow through. The charity is  too embarrassed to go after the people because it is bad PR all around.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> William has occasionally given money to causes, e.g. to Captain Tom Moore's campaign.
> 
> But yeah, why would people known to be stingy with their own money suddenly shell out such a big sum? I am still not convinced they can afford it, and it's certainly not coming from the goodness of their hearts.


You are correct , I cannot remember about the TM contribution, did they announce an amount ? 
BUT TM is a NATIONAL hero - the Queen just knighted him, one of her few personal appearances during COVID


----------



## bag-mania

Did Netflix give them a generous sign-on bonus? All this throwing money around started the moment the production contract was announced.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Michelle O is partnered with Camfed. No quid pro quo?  

The tweet said it was a $130,000 gift.  A gift could be anything, doesn’t mean real dollars.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Michelle O is partnered with Camfed. No quid pro quo?
> 
> The tweet said it was a $130,000 gift.  *A gift could be anything, doesn’t mean real dollars.*



It was 5,200 copies of "Finding Freedom."


----------



## csshopper

Maybe Camfed gets a “free video” of JCMH and MM and a serving of word salad and that’s the value the entitled twosome put on it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Did Netflix give them a generous sign-on bonus? All this throwing money around started the moment the production contract was announced.


That’s my guess.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Michelle O is partnered with Camfed. No quid pro quo?
> 
> The tweet said it was a $130,000 gift.  A gift could be anything, doesn’t mean real dollars.


While most of us would think $130k is great, for them .. this is chump change!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> While most of us would think $130k is great, for them .. this is chump change!



Is it, though...until recently, they were living on an allowance that while grand for all of us barely met their extravagant needs. Still not buying Netflix just handed them 150 billions just because.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it, though...until recently, they were living on an allowance that while grand for all of us barely met their extravagant needs. Still not buying Netflix just handed them *150 billions* just because.



Fortunately it was only _maybe_ 150 million. There is nothing about these two that makes them worthy of being billionaires.


----------



## csshopper

I  was not familiar with CAMFED and wondered at the connection between the charity and the Sussexes.

It's an organization with a 25 year history of work in sub Africa on behalf of education for young women, which would also explain MO's support. The head is the 27th Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, who has an impressive resume. 

Harry's interest in Africa is well documented and one he shares with Meghan. So it makes sense and is a worthy gesture. Good on them. With their track record of self promotion seeming to be their primary motivation in all things, I admit it's hard not to be skeptical.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Absolutely,  good cause.  I still want to see the cancelled check because I do not trust these 2. Charities are often used to launder money. These days nothing is as it seems.  Every single thing they do is for themselves. The fact the Squad people are involved makes the whole thing seem shady. 


_Happy Birthday to Harry and belated Happy Birthday to Meghan, and congratulations to the Sussex Squad for such a successful, generous campaign!_








						Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan thank fans with generous donation on the duke's birthday
					

The Sussex Squad started a campaign to raise money for CAMFED to celebrate the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's birthdays.




					ca.hellomagazine.com
				






csshopper said:


> I  was not familiar with CAMFED and wondered at the connection between the charity and the Sussexes.
> 
> It's an organization with a 25 year history of work in sub Africa on behalf of education for young women, which would also explain MO's support. The head is the 27th Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, who has an impressive resume.
> 
> Harry's interest in Africa is well documented and one he shares with Meghan. So it makes sense and is a worthy gesture. Good on them. With their track record of self promotion seeming to be their primary motivation in all things, I admit it's hard not to be skeptical.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> It was 5,200 copies of "Finding Freedom."


Is each copy really worth $25?  the author's writing certainly isn't...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Staci_W

Essaeeeee said:


> So you have a problem with her work now? Pretty sure the story is that Kate caught Will's attention modelling lingerie. Let's say it as it is. You all think she's not white enough to be a royal so everything she does it wrong


When you overuse racism as an excuse is takes away from actual racism.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> On the CAMPFED donation, nice thing to do, nice
> 
> CURIOUS thing to do
> 
> Surely a nice charity, but somehow a wooden donation if the celebrity has no personal connection to the cause (of the style: my mother died of the disease ...)
> 
> The BRF never gives away money, in part since a social rule is never give cash since it allows people to put a number of how much you care.
> 
> JCMH must need a tax deduction and/or some good press in light of the INVICTUS disaster
> 
> I remember when Harry was alone in London, early this year, Jon Bon Jovi came to record an Invictus theme song at Abbey Road, should have been a big splash, it was an embarassing whimper which at the time I chalked up to COVID, but likely the fate of INVICTUS has been in the balance since the beginning of Megxit
> 
> Harry had a personal connection to INVICTUS so his work was memorable
> 
> The effort towards CAMPFED does not make up for INVICTUS


I'm wondering where they came up with the amount?  $130,000 is an odd number.  Why not $150, 200 or even 100K?  130?  Is that the amount they owe on something?


----------



## 1LV

The Camfed donation probably has more to do with having a connection to MO than charity.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> I  was not familiar with CAMFED and wondered at the connection between the charity and the Sussexes.
> 
> It's an organization with a 25 year history of work in sub Africa on behalf of education for young women, which would also explain MO's support. The head is the 27th Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, who has an impressive resume.
> 
> Harry's interest in Africa is well documented and one he shares with Meghan. So it makes sense and is a worthy gesture. Good on them. With their track record of self promotion seeming to be their primary motivation in all things, I admit it's hard not to be skeptical.


When did M's African interest start? 

I don't recall anything pre-JCMH about her being all gung-ho on Africa, seems (unless I am totally wrong) it oddly sprouted when she met him (and impressed him with her pee'ing in the woods skills--who knew that's all it would take to bag a prince?)


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, it’s the Michelle connection. If they actually donate the dollars, great. 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make $130,000 donation to CAMFED
					

Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, made the donation to CAMFED, which supports girls' education across Africa, after fans launched a fundraising drive in honour of the couple's birthdays.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_The couple have a long-standing relationship with CAMFED, which is a partner of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry and Meghan serve as president and vice president of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust and were allowed to retain their positions after stepping back from official royal duties this year.
Prince Harry visited a CAMFED project in Zambia in 2018 and paid a separate visit to the organisation during his solo visit to Malawi on the Sussexes' African tour in 2019. 
The Duchess of Sussex met one of the regional leaders of CAMFED at a Women's Day event in London in 2019.  
The money raised from the Sussex Squad Birthday Fundraiser 2020 will fund higher education scholarships for young women across Africa. _


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> I'm wondering where they came up with the amount?  $130,000 is an odd number.  Why not $150, 200 or even 100K?  130?  Is that the amount they owe on something?


a Times article said they made a matching donation, individuals contributed to celebrate  the couple’s recent birthdays and H&M matched the total
see previous post, the contribution fund was the Sussex Squad Birthday Foundation
the Times failed to mention any Sussex history with the charity


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> When did M's African interest start?
> 
> I don't recall anything pre-JCMH about her being all gung-ho on Africa, seems (unless I am totally wrong) it oddly sprouted when she met him (and impressed him with her pee'ing in the woods skills--who knew that's all it would take to bag a prince?)


This is listed in Wikipedia: "In 2016, Markle became a global ambassador for World Vision Canada, traveling to Rwanda for the Clean Water Campaign."

It could have been one of the "hooks" she used to get his attention. Later sealed with a "pee."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> This is listed in Wikipedia: "In 2016, Markle became a global ambassador for World Vision Canada, traveling to Rwanda for the Clean Water Campaign."
> 
> It could have been one of the "hooks" she used to get his attention. Later sealed with a "pee."


Just saying, MM was not representing Canada in any official capacity as this is a religious organization.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Fortunately it was only _maybe_ 150 million. There is nothing about these two that makes them worthy of being billionaires.



Haha, yes, I got carried away!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely,  good cause.  I still want to see the cancelled check because I do not trust these 2. Charities are often used to launder money. These days nothing is as it seems.  Every single thing they do is for themselves. The fact the Squad people are involved makes the whole thing seem shady.
> 
> 
> _Happy Birthday to Harry and belated Happy Birthday to Meghan, and congratulations to the Sussex Squad for such a successful, generous campaign!_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan thank fans with generous donation on the duke's birthday
> 
> 
> The Sussex Squad started a campaign to raise money for CAMFED to celebrate the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's birthdays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.hellomagazine.com


I am such a CYNIC, bad me. ... 
Is anyone else thinking like me ? They had no idea their squad would be so generous in contributions, the size of their matching donation was unexpectedly large ...  
I used to really appreciate H&M - they were doing well around the time of the wedding , the trips to Australia & Africa were great too - except for the final interview 
I keep asking myself to try to appreciate them a bit more now 
Personally, I have no patience due to lockdown, must work on that


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, it’s the Michelle connection. If they actually donate the dollars, great.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make $130,000 donation to CAMFED
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, made the donation to CAMFED, which supports girls' education across Africa, after fans launched a fundraising drive in honour of the couple's birthdays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The couple have a *long-standing *relationship with CAMFED, which is a partner of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry and Meghan serve as president and vice president of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust and were allowed to retain their positions after stepping back from official royal duties this year.
> Prince Harry visited a CAMFED project in Zambia in 2018 and paid a separate visit to the organisation during his solo visit to Malawi on the Sussexes' African tour in 2019.
> The Duchess of Sussex met one of the regional leaders of CAMFED at a Women's Day event in London in 2019.
> The money raised from the Sussex Squad Birthday Fundraiser 2020 will fund higher education scholarships for young women across Africa. _


Crazy what constitutes "long-standing" nowadays. What, a year or 2?


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Crazy what constitutes "long-standing" nowadays. What, a year or 2?



Absolutely, and eating a salad while on a 10 minute phone call with someone famous constitutes “having lunch together.” It’s amazing how fast you can become close to someone when it is advantageous to you.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Absolutely, and eating a salad while on a 10 minute phone call with someone famous constitutes “having lunch together.” It’s amazing how fast you can become close to someone when it is advantageous to you.


MM is thisclose to calling MO an “old friend”.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> MM is thisclose to calling MO an “old friend”.


yeah right


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> MM is thisclose to calling MO an “old friend”.



She'll get Omid or one of her many PR people to do it for her. One day it we'll notice it slipped in there in a _People_ magazine article, then all of the other publications will pick it up and the next thing you know they are besties.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Has this been posted before? JCMH & MM to appear on TV.









						Harry and Meghan to star in the first ever televised TIME's 100 list
					

TIME's 100 Most Influential People list will be broadcast in a TV special on Sept. 22 - the first ever televised version of the celebration as in-person events have been axed due to the pandemic.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> I am such a CYNIC, bad me. ...
> Is anyone else thinking like me ? They had no idea their squad would be so generous in contributions, the size of their matching donation was unexpectedly large ...
> I used to really appreciate H&M - they were doing well around the time of the wedding , the trips to Australia & Africa were great too - except for the final interview
> I keep asking myself to try to appreciate them a bit more now
> Personally, I have no patience due to lockdown, must work on that


Trust me, you are not the only cynic here .. their actions are what make all of us suspect their "supposed" charity, etc.  In addition, the constant lying about the "long-time" friendships with some people that have never even met them?!?! .. how can one trust people  who lie constantly???


----------



## marietouchet

On Time 100 Most Influential people shindig ...

Another comparison of 2 news articles that dont seem to agree, neither seems to have it right 

People, the arbiter of all things titular, states they are discarding their titles for the event using just first names. I don’t know if this is accurate or  I suspect a misinterpretation of their source ie E! News

On the other hand the DM article refers to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Wow ! No title for her and from a U.K. publication ... stuns me ... that is NOT done in the UK, a putdown??? l(At minimum, she has the right  to be known as Princess Henry, if you ignore Sussex..)



			Protected Blog › Log in
		










						Harry and Meghan to star in the first ever televised TIME's 100 list
					

TIME's 100 Most Influential People list will be broadcast in a TV special on Sept. 22 - the first ever televised version of the celebration as in-person events have been axed due to the pandemic.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> On Time 100 Most Influential people shindig ...
> 
> Another comparison of 2 news articles that dont seem to agree, neither seems to have it right
> 
> People, the arbiter of all things titular, states they are discarding their titles for the event using just first names. I don’t know if this is accurate or  I suspect a misinterpretation of their source ie E! News
> 
> On the other hand the DM article refers to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Wow ! No title for her and from a U.K. publication ... stuns me ... that is NOT done in the UK, a putdown??? l(At minimum, she has the right  to be known as Princess Henry, if you ignore Sussex..)
> 
> 
> 
> Protected Blog › Log in
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan to star in the first ever televised TIME's 100 list
> 
> 
> TIME's 100 Most Influential People list will be broadcast in a TV special on Sept. 22 - the first ever televised version of the celebration as in-person events have been axed due to the pandemic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's not that, it's based on data and algorithms from  search engines. People google 'Meghan' or 'Megan Markle' and NOT the 'Duchess of Sussex', same with 'Prince Harry' and NOT the 'Duke of Sussex'. That's it, just commerce.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It's not that, it's based on data and algorithms from  search engines. People google 'Meghan' or 'Megan Markle' and NOT the 'Duchess of Sussex', same with 'Prince Harry' and NOT the 'Duke of Sussex'. That's it, just commerce.


YOU GOT IT ! Yup, it is commerce ... they have not ditched their titles


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> It's not that, it's based on data and algorithms from  search engines. People google 'Meghan' or 'Megan Markle' and NOT the 'Duchess of Sussex', same with 'Prince Harry' and NOT the 'Duke of Sussex'. That's it, just commerce.



Not sure this would be the reason... there's no difference in search results between calling them "Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex" vs just "Meghan Markle." The key words (their names) still appear either way.

These 100 Most Influential lists are so stupid.


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince William Is Reportedly "Livid" About Harry and Meghan's Netflix Deal*
*It has to do with *_*The Crown.*

Trigger warning: Descriptions of bulimia._ Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's newest move in their post-life move is reportedly ratcheting up the tension between the couple and the remaining members of the senior royal family. Earlier this month, the couple announced they have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix, thought to be worth more than $100 million. They'll produce content from feature films, scripted shows, a possible documentary on Princess Diana, children's programming, and a bunch of other binge-worthy content.

Not everyone is exactly thrilled about this, unfortunately. According to _The Sun, _many senior royals are very much against this new deal and the fact Harry would partner with the same company that produces _The Crown_.

"William and other senior royals are incredibly uncomfortable about this drama and livid Harry is now in partnership with the company that's airing it," said an insider to the publication. Any good royal fan knows that the royal family isn't exactly keen on _The Crown. _Still_, _the latest season, out on November 15, is set to cover Princess Diana's battle with bulimia.

Diana opened up about her struggles with the eating disorder in a 1995 interview with BBC, saying, "It was a symptom of what was going on in my marriage. I was crying out for help, but giving the wrong signals, and people were using my bulimia as a coat on a hanger: They decided that was the problem—Diana was unstable."

The production company Left Bank Pictures, which makes _The Crown _for Netflix, says they took extra precautions when filming this season and with the eating disorder scenes in particular. In a statement, the production company said, "Producers worked closely with the eating disorder charity, BEAT, to ensure that their portrayal of Princess Diana's bulimia in season four was both accurate to the disorder and sensitively handled."

Regardless the family is still reportedly upset. According to the insider, the royal family "wouldn't expect one of their own to take money made by the profits of shows like this."









						Prince William Is Reportedly "Livid" About Harry and Meghan's Netflix Deal
					

It has to do with The Crown.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## lalame

I was asking earlier why some media outlets still use their Duke/Duchess titles. Is it a legal thing in UK or just courtesy to the royal family? Not surprised the US outlets aren't doing that... those titles are pretty useless here. I suppose if they are legally granted those titles by the queen (or whoever), it must be something they have whether they choose to use it with the public or not.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lalame said:


> I was asking earlier why some media outlets still use their Duke/Duchess titles. Is it a legal thing in UK or just courtesy to the royal family? Not surprised the US outlets aren't doing that... those titles are pretty useless here. I suppose if they are legally granted those titles by the queen (or whoever), it must be something they have whether they choose to use it with the public or not.



The Queen usually gives a title (approved by Parliament) so the spouse has a title as well, instead of being called by the husband's title as in Princess Henry, Princess Edward, Princess Andrew.


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> Trust me, you are not the only cynic here .. their actions are what make all of us suspect their "supposed" charity, etc.  In addition, the constant lying about the "long-time" friendships with some people that have never even met them?!?! .. how can one trust people  who lie constantly???


 
So freaking sad and pathetic to be calling people their friends, like when Liza Minnelli came out and said they weren't friends.  Don't even blame the tabloid when you told them to print it.  If Nutmeg didn't leak the information herself, she would have sued that tabloid already.  









						Liza Minnelli Says She's "Never Met" Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Condemns Tabloid's "Fabrication"
					

A report in a British tabloid claimed Harry's friendship with Minnelli had helped him "find his feet" in L.A.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				





*Liza Minnelli Says She's "Never Met" Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Condemns Tabloid's "Fabrication"*
A report in a British tabloid claimed Harry's friendship with Minnelli had helped him "find his feet" in L.A.





BY CHLOE FOUSSIANES
 JUN 15, 2020




Fullscreen


WATCH: Everything to Know About Harry and Meghan’s Exit

After the British tabloid the _Sun_ published an article claiming that Prince Harry had struck up a friendship with Liza Minnelli, the actress was quick to shut down the paper's claims.
As royal reporter Omid Scobie pointed out on Twitter, Minnelli posted a link to the article on Facebook, alongside a message refuting it. "While I wish them well, I have never met Prince Harry and Meghan. Any statement to the contrary is a complete fabrication," the actress wrote.
This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

The article in question alleged that Minnelli had reached out to Prince Harry because she had been a friend of Princess Diana's. While it apparently isn't true that she contacted Harry, Minnelli was indeed friendly with the late Princess.
“I was lucky enough to count Princess Di as a friend," the actress has said. "I was first introduced to her when she came backstage after a concert I did in London. Then we'd bump into each other at premieres or events where she'd be the guest of honour. We'd fall into conversation then we'd meet for tea… My instinct was to protect her. We talked about everything under the sun. She loved music."
Other pals of Diana's have since befriended Harry and Meghan. Elton John in particular comes to mind; memorably, the musician sang at the couple's royal wedding reception, and later welcomed them for a private stay at his home in Nice, France. After the Sussexes were criticized for traveling by private jet to his estate, John came to their defense. "Prince Harry’s Mother, Diana Princess Of Wales was one of my dearest friends," he said. "I feel a profound sense of obligation to protect Harry and his family from the unnecessary press intrusion that contributed to Diana’s untimely death."


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> These 100 Most Influential lists are so stupid.


Umm excuse me, but I take exception to that.
I was voted one of the 100 most influential women between the ages of 49-55 in my two person office.


----------



## csshopper

Shreiks of jealous rage are probably bouncing off the walls in the Markleville estate with this news being released:

*Prince William is set to join a star-studded line-up to give a virtual TED talk about climate change alongside environmentalist Al Gore and A-list actor Chris Hemsworth*

*Prince William, 38, to make TED Talk debut to discuss climate change in October*
*Duke of Cambridge will join a star-studded virtual conference on the topic *
*Will appear on panel with environmentalist Al Gore and actor Chris Hemsworth *
*Comes after the Duke launched the Earthshot prize initiative earlier this year *


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Shreiks of jealous rage are probably bouncing off the walls in the Markleville estate with this news being released:
> 
> *Prince William is set to join a star-studded line-up to give a virtual TED talk about climate change alongside environmentalist Al Gore and A-list actor Chris Hemsworth*
> 
> *Prince William, 38, to make TED Talk debut to discuss climate change in October*
> *Duke of Cambridge will join a star-studded virtual conference on the topic *
> *Will appear on panel with environmentalist Al Gore and actor Chris Hemsworth *
> *Comes after the Duke launched the Earthshot prize initiative earlier this year *


You know who could invite herself.  She has done that before.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Has this been posted before? JCMH & MM to appear on TV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan to star in the first ever televised TIME's 100 list
> 
> 
> TIME's 100 Most Influential People list will be broadcast in a TV special on Sept. 22 - the first ever televised version of the celebration as in-person events have been axed due to the pandemic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


this must make them feel good


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> *Prince William Is Reportedly "Livid" About Harry and Meghan's Netflix Deal*
> *It has to do with *_*The Crown.*
> 
> Trigger warning: Descriptions of bulimia._ Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's newest move in their post-life move is reportedly ratcheting up the tension between the couple and the remaining members of the senior royal family. Earlier this month, the couple announced they have signed a multiyear deal with Netflix, thought to be worth more than $100 million. They'll produce content from feature films, scripted shows, a possible documentary on Princess Diana, children's programming, and a bunch of other binge-worthy content.
> 
> Not everyone is exactly thrilled about this, unfortunately. According to _The Sun, _many senior royals are very much against this new deal and the fact Harry would partner with the same company that produces _The Crown_.
> 
> "William and other senior royals are incredibly uncomfortable about this drama and livid Harry is now in partnership with the company that's airing it," said an insider to the publication. Any good royal fan knows that the royal family isn't exactly keen on _The Crown. _Still_, _the latest season, out on November 15, is set to cover Princess Diana's battle with bulimia.
> 
> Diana opened up about her struggles with the eating disorder in a 1995 interview with BBC, saying, "It was a symptom of what was going on in my marriage. I was crying out for help, but giving the wrong signals, and people were using my bulimia as a coat on a hanger: They decided that was the problem—Diana was unstable."
> 
> The production company Left Bank Pictures, which makes _The Crown _for Netflix, says they took extra precautions when filming this season and with the eating disorder scenes in particular. In a statement, the production company said, "Producers worked closely with the eating disorder charity, BEAT, to ensure that their portrayal of Princess Diana's bulimia in season four was both accurate to the disorder and sensitively handled."
> 
> Regardless the family is still reportedly upset. According to the insider, the royal family "wouldn't expect one of their own to take money made by the profits of shows like this."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William Is Reportedly "Livid" About Harry and Meghan's Netflix Deal
> 
> 
> It has to do with The Crown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Reports of Meghan’s courageous battle with a life-threatening eating disorder dropping in 3...2...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## viciel

V0N1B2 said:


> Reports of Meghan’s courageous battle with a life-threatening eating disorder dropping in 3...2...



Nah, she won't pick eating disorder - the image is not "perfect" enough even for a D-list actress, if anything she's going to pick being harassed by some powerful hollywood person which caused damper in her career - which will perfectly explain when she was never an A-lister - because of her courageous refusal to lower herself to sell her body and soul. A N D. . . cue the tears and the purposeful swallow of her throat and that deep deep sigh.


----------



## bag-mania

viciel said:


> Nah, she won't pick eating disorder - the image is not "perfect" enough even for a D-list actress, if anything she's going to pick being harassed by some powerful hollywood person which caused damper in her career - which will perfectly explain when she was never an A-lister - because of her courageous refusal to lower herself to sell her body and soul.



Agreed. She doesn’t release any story unless she’s the absolutely perfect heroine or else maybe the victim of jealous meanies. Revealing an eating disorder or a mental illness would be showing a flaw and that must never be allowed to happen. Harry has flaws, not Meghan. She’s Mary freakin’ Poppins!


----------



## 1LV

viciel said:


> Nah, she won't pick eating disorder - the image is not "perfect" enough even for a D-list actress, if anything she's going to pick being harassed by some powerful hollywood person which caused damper in her career - which will perfectly explain when she was never an A-lister - because of her courageous refusal to lower herself to sell her body and soul. A N D. . . cue the tears and the purposeful swallow of her throat and that deep deep sigh.


Perfect!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

viciel said:


> Nah, she won't pick eating disorder - the image is not "perfect" enough even for a D-list actress, if anything she's going to pick being harassed by some powerful hollywood person which caused damper in her career - which will perfectly explain when she was never an A-lister - because of her courageous refusal to lower herself to sell her body and soul. A N D. . . cue the tears and the purposeful swallow of her throat and that deep deep sigh.


Excellent! You sound like a drama teacher. Bet you could teach MM how to become an A-lister because she sure can't do on her own.


----------



## CeeJay

viciel said:


> Nah, she won't pick eating disorder - the image is not "perfect" enough even for a *Z*D*-list actress*, if anything she's going to pick being harassed by some powerful hollywood person which caused damper in her career - which will perfectly explain when she was never an A-lister - because of her courageous refusal to lower herself to sell her body and soul. A N D. . . cue the tears and the purposeful swallow of her throat and that deep deep sigh.


Here, fixed that for you ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I made the Time list many years ago, but these are matters we should not discuss. Ya kno, privacy, please. 

Seriously, just focus on who owns Time. Then it becomes easy to understand why certain (ahem) people were chosen. As with many other businesses, the billionaires with an agenda have taken over publishing and media. Everything has a bias these days.

===
MM, the expert humble bragger, will suffer from stress and anxiety from working in Hwood. The pressures to be beautiful, slim, wear beautiful clothes every day, etc,etc etc are exhausting. She will need to check into the hospital suffering from exhaustion soon.

ETA: are we certain they are in Montecito?


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I was asking earlier why some media outlets still use their Duke/Duchess titles. Is it a legal thing in UK or just courtesy to the royal family? Not surprised the US outlets aren't doing that... those titles are pretty useless here. I suppose if they are legally granted those titles by the queen (or whoever), it must be something they have whether they choose to use it with the public or not.


Titles are commonplace in the U.K. , not just aristo titles but also military, education, government etc, it is a courtesy to use them. For ex, Mr Jones leaving the military at the level of captain will be known as Captain Jones for the rest of his life. And yes, there is an inferred pecking order - captains outrank lieutenants. There is a class system that is quite pronounced. 
In print today, the Times referred to the Duke of Edinburgh, not Philip. 
IMHO it is rude not to use a title in public eg in print, in the U.K. if you know it, and first names are a no-no. Duchess of Cambridge is good form, Kate is not. 
Yes, you can choose not to use a title by making it known that you choose to be addressed simply as Mr. Windsor  , Harry or whatever , your choice to use a lesser appellation.
Ex Elton John does not use his Sir in the US, but does in the U.K.


----------



## tiktok

csshopper said:


> Shreiks of jealous rage are probably bouncing off the walls in the Markleville estate with this news being released:
> 
> *Prince William is set to join a star-studded line-up to give a virtual TED talk about climate change alongside environmentalist Al Gore and A-list actor Chris Hemsworth*
> 
> *Prince William, 38, to make TED Talk debut to discuss climate change in October*
> *Duke of Cambridge will join a star-studded virtual conference on the topic *
> *Will appear on panel with environmentalist Al Gore and actor Chris Hemsworth *
> *Comes after the Duke launched the Earthshot prize initiative earlier this year *



Cue the Archie photos...


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Titles are commonplace in the U.K. , not just aristo titles but also military, education, government etc, it is a courtesy to use them. For ex, Mr Jones leaving the military at the level of captain will be known as Captain Jones for the rest of his life. And yes, there is an inferred pecking order - captains outrank lieutenants. There is a class system that is quite pronounced.
> In print today, the Times referred to the Duke of Edinburgh, not Philip.
> IMHO it is rude not to use a title in public eg in print, in the U.K. if you know it, and first names are a no-no. Duchess of Cambridge is good form, Kate is not.
> Yes, you can choose not to use a title by making it known that you choose to be addressed simply as Mr. Windsor  , Harry or whatever , your choice to use a lesser appellation.
> Ex Elton John does not use his Sir in the US, but does in the U.K.



Thanks for this explainer... definitely not what I'm used to!


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> Shreiks of jealous rage are probably bouncing off the walls in the Markleville estate with this news being released:
> 
> *Prince William is set to join a star-studded line-up to give a virtual TED talk about climate change alongside environmentalist Al Gore and A-list actor Chris Hemsworth*
> 
> *Prince William, 38, to make TED Talk debut to discuss climate change in October*
> *Duke of Cambridge will join a star-studded virtual conference on the topic *
> *Will appear on panel with environmentalist Al Gore and actor Chris Hemsworth *
> *Comes after the Duke launched the Earthshot prize initiative earlier this year *




When I first saw this the other day, I laughed out loud.  After all, hasn’t H the eco-travel business czar preempted the environmentalist space?!?!  Wouldn’t it be fun to be a fly on the wall!  And, of course, by accepting this role and not fobbing it off to H, William has once again treated H in an unbelievably cruel fashion.


----------



## mdcx

marietouchet said:


> Titles are commonplace in the U.K. , not just aristo titles but also military, education, government etc, it is a courtesy to use them. For ex, Mr Jones leaving the military at the level of captain will be known as Captain Jones for the rest of his life. And yes, there is an inferred pecking order - captains outrank lieutenants. There is a class system that is quite pronounced.
> In print today, the Times referred to the Duke of Edinburgh, not Philip.
> IMHO it is rude not to use a title in public eg in print, in the U.K. if you know it, and first names are a no-no. Duchess of Cambridge is good form, Kate is not.
> Yes, you can choose not to use a title by making it known that you choose to be addressed simply as Mr. Windsor  , Harry or whatever , your choice to use a lesser appellation.
> Ex Elton John does not use his Sir in the US, but does in the U.K.


If you grew up in a Commonwealth country, most people refer to the royals by first name or by something inaccurate like Princess Diana in casual conversation, but we do know these are not the correct formal titles and that you would never address them by that formally.
It is viewed as very over the top to insist that people use your title, usually other people do know and use it when required, or else they find out later and think wow that aristo was so laid back for being Earl So and So...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> Cue the Archie photos...



Speaking of Archie...read yesterday that Kate got stuck in traffic on a London bridge and decided to unbuckle Louis and walk around that bridge to show him ships that were sailing on the water underneath. The future queen of the UK and #5 in line mingling with their subjects, when #7 in line's mother is just too famous to do that. LOL for days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> When I first saw this the other day, I laughed out loud.  After all, hasn’t H the eco-travel business czar preempted the environmentalist space?!?!  Wouldn’t it be fun to be a fly on the wall!  And, of course, by accepting this role and not fobbing it off to H, William has once again treated H in an unbelievably cruel fashion.



Isn't it ironic Harry could have had his part in all of this, hadn't he decided to leave?


----------



## Pautinka

Chanbal said:


> The picture seems to speak "we have your back" or "we are here for you"... I bet MM didn't like it. H must be very confused and divided between staying close to his son (likely the most important person in his life) and missing his other life.


Hello everyone! My first comment on this thread but long-time lurker. I just want to say that when I first saw this photo I immediately thought of the phrase "doing a runner" ie running off and leaving all your responsibilities behind for others to pick up the mess you have left in your wake.  To my mind, this is what this pic insinuates.


----------



## papertiger

Pautinka said:


> Hello everyone! My first comment on this thread but long-time lurker. I just want to say that when I first saw this photo I immediately thought of the phrase "doing a runner" ie running off and leaving all your responsibilities behind for others to pick up the mess you have left in your wake.  To my mind, this is what this pic insinuates.



It's very interesting how we all interpret the picture in different ways. 

The way I saw it was "we were a happy team and we still love him/you"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pautinka

papertiger said:


> It's very interesting how we all interpret the picture in different ways.
> 
> The way I saw it was "we were a happy team and we still love him/you"


I hope so, pt. I'm sure they do still love him very much but I did see it as a little dig. Maybe I have just woken up in a cynical mood this morning!!


----------



## papertiger

Pautinka said:


> I hope so, pt. I'm sure they do still love him very much but *I did see it as a little dig*. Maybe I have just woken up in a cynical mood this morning!!



I think that's in there too, kind of "this is how we prefer to remember you"


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> It's very interesting how we all interpret the picture in different ways.
> 
> The way I saw it was "we were a happy team and we still love him/you"




That is what first came to my mind, too!  That and “plus we let you win!”


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> It's not that, it's based on data and algorithms from  search engines. People google 'Meghan' or 'Megan Markle' and NOT the 'Duchess of Sussex', same with 'Prince Harry' and NOT the 'Duke of Sussex'. That's it, just commerce.


A lot of media outlets, here in the UK and elsewhere, still refer to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> A lot of media outlets, here in the UK and elsewhere, still refer to the Duchess of Cambridge as Kate Middleton.



Exactly


----------



## Pessie

mdcx said:


> If you grew up in a Commonwealth country, most people refer to the royals by first name or by something inaccurate like Princess Diana in casual conversation, but we do know these are not the correct formal titles and that you would never address them by that formally.
> It is viewed as very over the top to insist that people use your title, usually other people do know and use it when required, or else they find out later and think wow that aristo was so laid back for being Earl So and So...


 It’s considered rather vulgar to insist on being addressed by your full title in inappropriate situations.
Was it (Sir) Ben Kingsley who was subject to a lot of ribbing in the press for insisting all his friends call him Sir Ben after receiving his knighthood?


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Here, fixed that for you ..


Never fails to make me laugh!


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> Thanks for this explainer... definitely not what I'm used to!


I patterned it on the Times reporting, so , it was accurate yesterday as to what is used in print , not face to face visits as pointed out by @mdcx and @Pessie
And yes what you say for the first greeting might be relaxed afterwards if you keep on chatting
And EJ was introduced as Sir Elton by Graham Norton on his tv show
And Liz Hurley introduced Prince Charles at a gala as His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales
And as to the class consciousness of the U.K., I got that from Brian Eno’s book , he is a great observer of character
But a stiffer system than in the US


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> It’s considered rather vulgar to insist on being addressed by your full title in inappropriate situations.
> Was it (Sir) Ben Kingsley who was subject to a lot of ribbing in the press for insisting all his friends call him Sir Ben after receiving his knighthood?



As they say, "'Sir' isn't really between friends or 'Sir' will come between friends".

And that's true. But I have a title and lots of people 'forget about it' but not that of my male counterparts. Similar to Mr. So and so for their male colleagues but first names for their female colleagues.

It's on the person with the title to set the tone. If Sir Ben asks to be called Sir Ben, actually in the scheme of things, he is entitled to be as he's a Lord.

It is bad form to make a friend call you Sir Ben, but just as bad form not to unless Lord Kingsley waives the privilege.

KBEs are different (knighted foreigners) which is why 'Sir' Bob, Bob Geldof (he of 1980s Band Aid) should _not_ be addressed as Sir Bob although he often mistakenly is. He is Irish and a KBE.

For any written or offical form the highest rank should always be used. Anyone below that rank should use highest rank to address the person in any setting. Anyone senior would use highest rank on letters and documents, and in speaking to that person in person if unknown to them, also if talking to someone _they_ don't know or the third party doesn't know, but informal and/or associative if known to everyone (i.e. known in society).

So it depends on the situation, public v private, formal v informal, unknown/uncertain/foreigner v same circle/class e.g. "We've invited the Prince of Wales to dinner, do you know him?" to Guest X versus  "Bertie's promised to drop-in, don't you know" to Eton buddy.


The entire 'dance' is hierarchical.
Firstly, one is not supposed to address anyone you've never met before but _must_ wait to be introduced. If forced by circumstance you're supposed to talk about the weather and hope some clues come along the way so you can say "are you Foggies' son?" or "are you one of Derbyshire Smyth-Heaohringtons by any chance?". If no-one guesses by a serious pause the game is considered a truce, as it's clear they have no-one and nothing in common.

Introductions are all important: The order of introduction will be hierarchal too: In spite of someone being younger, even having the same titles, one Lord, Lady or Duchess can outrank another:
Between similar ranks, title and association and then clues as to interests:
Lord P: "Lord H, this is Lord Y (of higher rank than you) son of Lord X" (also higher rank than you) (or will use 'Smarmy' for Lord X, school nick names stick through life and are code of 'we grew-up together') Lord Y, as you may have heard, is a fantastic shot (code for it is safe to talk about hunting).
Lord H: How do you do do Lord Y, I trust your father's keeping well?
Lord "Very well, how do you do? My father's well, I trust Lady H is too"
Lord P "I'll leave you two to talk grouse and pheasants, excuse me" (I have to introduce lots of other people otherwise the room will be silent save for talking about the weather).

Between ranks that are familiar to each other but not similar,
"Good morning Smith, is my horse ready?" (no title including Mr., the boy will always be a boy till he's retired)
"Good morning Lord W, ready Sir" (Only speak when spoken to and answer when asked a question, always finish with Sir)

"Good morning Nancy, should you have lit the fires by now?" (First besides friends and family, first names are for children and maids, although lady's maids, senior staff and women with trades get to be called by their surnames except when visiting on duty, when they are called by their employer's last name)
"Good morning Lord W, just finishing Sir, so sorry m'lord" (maids and female staff are not supposed to meet men of senior rank, speak when spoken to and answer when asked a question, always finish with Sir, disappear).


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> As they say, "'Sir' isn't really between friends or 'Sir' will come between friends".
> 
> And that's true. But I have a title and lots of people 'forget about it' but not that of my male counterparts. Similar to Mr. So and so for their male colleagues but first names for their female colleagues.
> 
> It's on the person with the title to set the tone. If Sir Ben asks to be called Sir Ben, actually in the scheme of things, he is entitled to be as he's a Lord.
> 
> KBEs are different (knighted foreigners) which is why 'Sir' Bob, Bob Geldof (he of 1980s Band Aid) should not be addressed as Sir Bob although he often mistakenly is. He is Irish and a KBE.
> 
> For any written or offical form the highest rank should always be used. Anyone below that rank should use highest rank to address the person in any setting. Anyone senior would use highest rank on letters and documents, and in speaking to that person in person if unknown to them, also if talking to someone _they_ don't know or the third party doesn't know, but informal and/or associative if known to everyone (i.e. known in society).
> 
> So it depends on the situation, public v private, formal v informal, unknown/uncertain/foreigner v same circle/class e.g. "We've invited the Prince of Wales to dinner, do you know him?" to Guest X versus  "Bertie's promised to drop-in, don't you know" to Eton buddy.
> 
> It is bad form to make a fiend call you Sir Ben, but just as bad form not to unless Lord Kingsley waives the privilege.
> 
> The entire 'dance' is hierarchical.
> Firstly, one is not supposed to address anyone you've never met before but _must_ wait to be introduced. If forced by circumstance you're supposed to talk about the weather and hope some clues come along the way so you can say "are you Foggies' son?" or "are you one of Derbyshire Smyth-Heaohringtons by any chance". If no-one guesses by a serious pause the game is considered a truce as it's clear they have no-one and nothing in common.
> 
> Introductions are all important: The order of introduction will be hierarchal too: In spite of someone being younger, even having the same titles, one Lord, Lady or Duchess can outrank another:
> Between similar ranks, title and association and then clues as to interests:
> Lord P: "Lord H, this is Lord Y (of higher rank than you) son of Lord X (also higher rank than you)" (or 'Smarmy', school nick names stick through life and are code we grew-up together) Lord Y, as may have heard, is a fantastic shot (it is safe to talk about hunting).
> Lord H: How do you do do Lord Y, I trust your father's keeping well?
> Lord "Very well, how do you do? My father's well, I trust Lady H is too"
> Lord P "I'll leave you two to talk grouse and pheasants, excuse me" (I have to introduce lots of other people otherwise the room will be silent save for talking about the weather).
> 
> Between ranks that are familiar to each other but not similar,
> "Good morning Smith, is my horse ready?" (no title including Mr., the boy will always be a boy till he's retired)
> "Good morning Lord W, ready Sir" (Only speak when spoken to and answer when asked a question, always finish with Sir)
> 
> "Good morning Nancy, should you have lit the fires by now" (First besides friends and family, first names are for children and maids, although lady's maids, senior staff and women with trades get to be called by their surnames except when visiting when they are called by their employer's last name)
> "Good morning Lord W, just finishing Sir, so sorry m'lord" (maids and female staff are not supposed to meet men of senior rank, speak when spoken to and answer when asked a question, always finish with Sir, disappear).


The analogy to a dance is perfect ...


----------



## marietouchet

Deleted, duplicate post, sorry, i have not had my coffee yet


----------



## marietouchet

There is a forfeiture committee
Queen STRIPS Harvey Weinstein of his 2004 CBE
https://mol.im/a/8747525


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> It’s considered rather vulgar to insist on being addressed by your full title in inappropriate situations.



People who are confident enough can let it go. Others give speeches "as a member of a royal family" or publish a press release that they are still 6th in line (though the way that one was worded makes me think that he didn't think that up himself but his puppeteer).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> And that's true. But I have a title and lots of people 'forget about it' but not that of my male counterparts. Similar to Mr. So and so for their male colleagues but first names for their female colleagues.



When my bff sent out birth announcements for her daughter her own mother took issue with the fact she put her name as Dr. XX (which legally IS her name) because she thought it was bragging and her partner at the time doesn't have a PhD. I was like "You worked da*n hard for that thing, put it in there."

And in your case I would insist too, as they are deliberately being rude. Also thank you for that lesson in how to navigate the waters of society, very interesting.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When my bff sent out birth announcements for her daughter her own mother took issue with the fact she put her name as Dr. XX (which legally IS her name) because she thought it was bragging and her partner at the time doesn't have a PhD. I was like "You worked da*n hard for that thing, put it in there."
> 
> And in your case I would insist too, as they are deliberately being rude. Also thank you for that lesson in how to navigate the waters of society, very interesting.


I too have a forgotten alphabet soup after my name, and I earned every vowel and consonant 
Military personnel earned their rank as well
The Queen's honours are received for achievements, earned as well - sort like the US President's Medals 

Then there are the hereditary titles which just have no equivalent in the US, except in certain circles, eg Boston, there are the well known families - I hesitate to use the word Brahmin - totally accurate at one time, now certainly inappropriate. But, my fav T S Eliot's wiki page states he was " Born in St. Louis, Missouri, to a prominent Boston Brahmin family "









						T. S. Eliot - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Pautinka said:


> Hello everyone! My first comment on this thread but long-time lurker. I just want to say that when I first saw this photo I immediately thought of the phrase "doing a runner" ie running off and leaving all your responsibilities behind for others to pick up the mess you have left in your wake.  To my mind, this is what this pic insinuates.


Welcome and I see your point. H on the pursuit of a "self-centered celebrity" life is certainly causing mess for the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> As they say, "'Sir' isn't really between friends or 'Sir' will come between friends".
> 
> And that's true. But *I have a title and lots of people 'forget about it' but not that of my male counterparts. *Similar to Mr. So and so for their male colleagues but first names for their female colleagues.
> 
> It's on the person with the title to set the tone. If Sir Ben asks to be called Sir Ben, actually in the scheme of things, he is entitled to be as he's a Lord.
> 
> It is bad form to make a friend call you Sir Ben, but just as bad form not to unless Lord Kingsley waives the privilege.
> 
> KBEs are different (knighted foreigners) which is why 'Sir' Bob, Bob Geldof (he of 1980s Band Aid) should _not_ be addressed as Sir Bob although he often mistakenly is. He is Irish and a KBE.
> 
> For any written or offical form the highest rank should always be used. Anyone below that rank should use highest rank to address the person in any setting. Anyone senior would use highest rank on letters and documents, and in speaking to that person in person if unknown to them, also if talking to someone _they_ don't know or the third party doesn't know, but informal and/or associative if known to everyone (i.e. known in society).
> 
> So it depends on the situation, public v private, formal v informal, unknown/uncertain/foreigner v same circle/class e.g. "We've invited the Prince of Wales to dinner, do you know him?" to Guest X versus  "Bertie's promised to drop-in, don't you know" to Eton buddy.
> 
> 
> The entire 'dance' is hierarchical.
> Firstly, one is not supposed to address anyone you've never met before but _must_ wait to be introduced. If forced by circumstance you're supposed to talk about the weather and hope some clues come along the way so you can say "are you Foggies' son?" or "are you one of Derbyshire Smyth-Heaohringtons by any chance?". If no-one guesses by a serious pause the game is considered a truce, as it's clear they have no-one and nothing in common.
> 
> Introductions are all important: The order of introduction will be hierarchal too: In spite of someone being younger, even having the same titles, one Lord, Lady or Duchess can outrank another:
> Between similar ranks, title and association and then clues as to interests:
> Lord P: "Lord H, this is Lord Y (of higher rank than you) son of Lord X" (also higher rank than you) (or will use 'Smarmy' for Lord X, school nick names stick through life and are code of 'we grew-up together') Lord Y, as you may have heard, is a fantastic shot (code for it is safe to talk about hunting).
> Lord H: How do you do do Lord Y, I trust your father's keeping well?
> Lord "Very well, how do you do? My father's well, I trust Lady H is too"
> Lord P "I'll leave you two to talk grouse and pheasants, excuse me" (I have to introduce lots of other people otherwise the room will be silent save for talking about the weather).
> 
> Between ranks that are familiar to each other but not similar,
> "Good morning Smith, is my horse ready?" (no title including Mr., the boy will always be a boy till he's retired)
> "Good morning Lord W, ready Sir" (Only speak when spoken to and answer when asked a question, always finish with Sir)
> 
> "Good morning Nancy, should you have lit the fires by now?" (First besides friends and family, first names are for children and maids, although lady's maids, senior staff and women with trades get to be called by their surnames except when visiting on duty, when they are called by their employer's last name)
> "Good morning Lord W, just finishing Sir, so sorry m'lord" (maids and female staff are not supposed to meet men of senior rank, speak when spoken to and answer when asked a question, always finish with Sir, disappear).


haha when I was younger used to be puzzled with that.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Thanks for this explainer... definitely not what I'm used to!


From my companies "cultural" training, when working in the UK (_but an American citizen_) .. while it is "nice" to address one with their title moniker, we as Americans are not 'required' to do so.  Same situation with bowing/kneeling .. as Americans, it is a "nice" thing to do, but not required and in some cases (in some cases, it is recommended that Americans DO NOT bow since we do not recognize the Monarchy).


----------



## CarryOn2020

As for titles, H&M‘s _half in-half out_ policy certainly does cause confusion and dismay, doesn’t it?
Interesting QE is stripping titles. Now, what about Andrew? H&M? Still, it’s good to be Queen?








						Why the Queen’s money never goes down | Letter
					

Letter: Former Liberal ******** MP Norman Baker on public ownership of the crown estate and the result of a ‘stupid’ change to the royal finance arrangements by former chancellor George Osborne




					www.theguardian.com
				




Are there any sightings of H&M in Cali?  Wouldn’t surprise me to find out they are away, ya kno, for safety reasons.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> As for titles, H&M‘s _half in-half out_ policy certainly does cause confusion and dismay, doesn’t it?
> Interesting QE is stripping titles. Now, what about Andrew? H&M? Still, it’s good to be Queen?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the Queen’s money never goes down | Letter
> 
> 
> Letter: Former Liberal ******** MP Norman Baker on public ownership of the crown estate and the result of a ‘stupid’ change to the royal finance arrangements by former chancellor George Osborne
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are there any sightings of H&M in Cali?  Wouldn’t surprise me to find out they are away, ya kno, for safety reasons.



When you look at the list of who has been stripped of their titles, H&M would have to do something _terrible_ to have their titles revoked. 

Lord (and Baron) Archer, who wouldn't know the truth if it hit him on the head and has been in prison hasn't been stripped. 

Unfortunately she can never strip Andrew of his Prince title because he remains her son.


----------



## KellyObsessed

papertiger said:


> It's very interesting how we all interpret the picture in different ways.
> 
> The way I saw it was "we were a happy team and we still love him/you"


When I saw the photo, I thought it was a message to Harry; Run Harry, Run! Lol
I think Harry in his heart of hearts, regrets leaving his family and friends behind; but like many husbands, he moves into his wife's social world.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this true? All the right buzzwords: freedom, rich benefactors, worked hard.  









						Harry 'joined a helicopter club in California to take Meghan & Archie on trips'
					

PRINCE Harry has joined a helicopter club in California so he can take Meghan Markle and Archie on family trips, a source claims.  The Duke of Sussex, 36, qualified as an Apache helicopter com…




					www.the-sun.com
				



_“Having your own licence gives you that freedom.”

The source added that the prince doesn’t have his own helicopter, “at least yet”, but added that there “will be plenty of rich benefactors with helicopters who would love the royal association.”_


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this true? All the right buzzwords: freedom, rich benefactors, worked hard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'joined a helicopter club in California to take Meghan & Archie on trips'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has joined a helicopter club in California so he can take Meghan Markle and Archie on family trips, a source claims.  The Duke of Sussex, 36, qualified as an Apache helicopter com…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“Having your own licence gives you that freedom.”
> 
> The source added that the prince doesn’t have his own helicopter, “at least yet”, but added that there “will be plenty of rich benefactors with helicopters who would love the royal association.”_



I'm skeptical. It's been five years since Harry left the military. He never showed any interest in flying his own helicopter in that time? I guess he always had access to free flights because of who he is until now.

Flying an Apache is different than flying a commercial helicopter and I'm certain he always had an overseer looking out for him. If I were a rich LA  "benefactor" I sure wouldn't want to let JCMH practice on my private helicopter after several years of not flying.


----------



## bisousx

I think he wants to make some new friends in the area, kinda like how some of us mortals join book clubs to socialize lol


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I think he wants to make some new friends in the area, kinda like how some of us mortals join book clubs to socialize lol



Wait, I didn’t think Meghan allowed him to have friends. Maybe the helicopter club is acceptable to her since there are likely few, if any, female members.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> I too have a forgotten alphabet soup after my name, and I earned every vowel and consonant
> Military personnel earned their rank as well
> The Queen's honours are received for achievements, earned as well - sort like the US President's Medals
> 
> Then there are the hereditary titles which just have no equivalent in the US, except in certain circles, eg Boston, there are the well known families - I hesitate to use the word Brahmin - totally accurate at one time, now certainly inappropriate. But, my fav T S Eliot's wiki page states he was " Born in St. Louis, Missouri, to a prominent Boston Brahmin family "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> T. S. Eliot - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


.. and dog-gone-it-all, the "Boston Brahmin" moniker still exists and is STILL used to this day!  Case in point, my Husband's first wife?!?! .. yup, "Boston Brahmin" family (_and her Mother was NONE too happy when her daughter decided to marry - "heaven forbid" a Jewish guy .. until she found out that his father was a Doctor -and- the head of Children's Hospital in Boston_)!  

At my mother-in-law's funeral, the HB's former MIL shows up reeking of privilege .. and I get the "nose in the air" when meeting her.  Barely a word said and I thought to myself "_okay - whatever .._", but then .. at the house (_sitting shiva_) .. all of a sudden, she comes up and starts talking to me in a very animated fashion.  I thought to myself "_okay - she's odd too_" and moments later told my HB about it.  He says to me "_oh - HA, I told her about your ancestry_"!  UFB that some still behave like this, but that type of snobbery still exists big-time and sorry to say, but it is definitely worse in the UK than in the US!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Wait, I didn’t think Meghan allowed him to have friends. Maybe the helicopter club is acceptable to her since there are likely few, if any, female members.



Bezos’s new (now old news) gf is a helicopter pilot.  Hmmm, look out, MM.









						Jeff Bezos' new girlfriend Lauren Sanchez, 49, is very ‘persuasive’
					

A source has described Lauren Sanchez as 'very persuasive' and said she likes to 'have fun.' They added that although Bezos and Sanchez appear 'polar opposites' they are actually well suited.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this true? All the right buzzwords: freedom, rich benefactors, worked hard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'joined a helicopter club in California to take Meghan & Archie on trips'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has joined a helicopter club in California so he can take Meghan Markle and Archie on family trips, a source claims.  The Duke of Sussex, 36, qualified as an Apache helicopter com…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“Having your own licence gives you that freedom.”
> 
> The source added that the prince doesn’t have his own helicopter, “at least yet”, but added that there “will be plenty of rich benefactors with helicopters who would love the royal association.”_


*Oh brother* (with a capital B)!!!  I had thought that Harry never passed the Helicopter test and as such, could not actually fly them!  However, if I recall, Harry managed to procure a picture of himself "at the wheel" such that it looked like he was a Helicopter pilot (_wasn't William a 'real' Helicopter pilot_)?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I'm skeptical. It's been five years since Harry left the military. He never showed any interest in flying his own helicopter in that time? I guess he always had access to free flights because of who he is until now.
> 
> Flying an Apache is different than flying a commercial helicopter and I'm certain he always had an overseer looking out for him. If I were a rich LA  "benefactor" I sure wouldn't want to let JCMH practice on my private helicopter after several years of not flying.


In addition to flying them out here in California where the weather conditions are significantly different than Afghanistan!  Let's not forget the tragic situation that caused Kobe Bryant (and others') death when a (supposedly) experienced pilot crashed the 'copter into the mountains due to poor visual and wind conditions!


----------



## Annawakes

I was just going to say too, William is the real helicopter pilot.  As far as I know Harry didn’t have a job flying helicopters like William did.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Found this on Quora. 

What does Meghan Markle’s mother do?




Agueda Sanchez
·
5h ago


Most of us know that Meghan Markle’s mother is a social worker. Doria received a Master of Social Work in 2011. She passed her social work licensing exam in 2015.
After graduating, Doria worked as a social worker for a mental health clinic in Los Angeles until 2018. She resigned the clinic right after Meghan’s wedding to Prince Harry in May, 2018.
The three million dollar question is: what does Doria do now? Well, in 2018 there was an article where “a source” said Doria quit her job to pursue her dream of opening her own practice, working with the elderly. Her own business, a private practice! Maybe a private pay service provider? No insurance, only cash.
Let’s take a look at this business, her dream:





On April 20, 2019, a new business was filed in Delaware, “Loving Kindness Senior Care Management, Inc.” Doria Ragland is the CEO, Secretary, and Chief Financial Officer! This “new business” was incorporated in California on October 22, 2019. If you are wondering why file it in Delaware? From Delaware.gov:




Delaware is also known to some people for having shell corporations, but who filed this company? Let’s look at some familiar names:




These men are Meghan’s advisers, her team. Meghan was allegedly working with her team throughout the whole time she was living in the UK:




Her agent, her lawyer and her manager, so who filed for Doria’s business? If you guessed the lawyer, you are right!








He had me at prolific! So nice of him to file businesses that have nothing to do with the industry. I wonder how much he charged??
From the “Loving Kindness Senior Care Management Website”




Don’t you just love quotes? It reminds me of something, but I can’t quite figure it out. Maybe I need to drink some TIGnanello to remember. What about payments?




Now that we know what Doria is doing, would you consider her business for your loved ones? Will you choose Loving Kindness?
#Chooselovingkindness
My opinion only. All pictures/documents from public sites. NFR. Credit to Porne Michaels and Caron Wood.
Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
Meghan Markle’s mom quits job at mental health clinic
Shell corporation - Wikipedia


----------



## lalame

That's interesting... I think it's nice she's still working even though she could probably retire in Meghan's orbit. She must really enjoy what she does.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lawsuits in 5,4,3,2,....


====
The private pay bothers me. Seniors are so very vulnerable. That’s all I‘ll say.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lawsuits in 5,4,3,2,....
> 
> 
> ====
> The private pay bothers me. Seniors are so very vulnerable. That’s all I‘lol say.



like the documentary about Guardians?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> like the documentary about Guardians?



I am not familiar with this documentary.

ETA: this one? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7348082/
Horrific.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am not familiar with this documentary.
> 
> ETA: this one? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7348082/
> Horrific.



It’s a gut wrenching documentary 

I have no opinion on what Doria is doing. Hopefully she will be hands-on and ensuring clients are well taken care of. I’ve lived next to senior homes that were run out of single family properties and some of the stuff I hear out of their windows is really questionable (people calling out for help).


----------



## lalame

Private pay isn't really unusual. Most families pay for non-medical in-home care out of pocket anyway as Medicare and insurance don't cover that on a long-term basis.


----------



## csshopper

Not illegal, but I think she is doing this as a tax dodge. Businesses set up in Delaware but operating elsewhere do not have to pay corporate taxes.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Not illegal, but I think she is doing this as a tax dodge. Businesses set up in Delaware but operating elsewhere do not have to pay corporate taxes.



Oh, I wish that were true haha. My DH had a business incorporated in DE and most definitely paid corporate taxes to CA where he operated (and NY too). CA does not play around with its taxes! You must mean businesses incorporated in DE but not operating there don’t have to pay corporate taxes _to DE. _But you do have to pay them to the state where you operate.

A lot of businesses incorporate in DE because it has more protections for privacy, corporation shareholders, and has a more business-savvy court system.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Oh, I wish that were true haha. My DH had a business incorporated in DE and most definitely paid corporate taxes to CA where he operated (and NY too). CA does not play around with its taxes! You must mean businesses incorporated in DE but not operating there don’t have to pay corporate taxes _to DE. _But you do have to pay them to the state where you operate.
> 
> A lot of businesses incorporate in DE because it has more protections for privacy, corporation shareholders, and has a more business-savvy court system.


Thanks for clarifying that and thank goodness  Given the financial beating we’ve taken from Covid and all the fires we need all the revenue we can generate in California!


----------



## Pessie

CeeJay said:


> .. and dog-gone-it-all, the "Boston Brahmin" moniker still exists and is STILL used to this day!  Case in point, my Husband's first wife?!?! .. yup, "Boston Brahmin" family (_and her Mother was NONE too happy when her daughter decided to marry - "heaven forbid" a Jewish guy .. until she found out that his father was a Doctor -and- the head of Children's Hospital in Boston_)!
> 
> At my mother-in-law's funeral, the HB's former MIL shows up reeking of privilege .. and I get the "nose in the air" when meeting her.  Barely a word said and I thought to myself "_okay - whatever .._", but then .. at the house (_sitting shiva_) .. all of a sudden, she comes up and starts talking to me in a very animated fashion.  I thought to myself "_okay - she's odd too_" and moments later told my HB about it.  He says to me "_oh - HA, I told her about your ancestry_"!  UFB that some still behave like this, but that type of snobbery still exists big-time and sorry to say, but it is definitely worse in the UK than in the US!


This is a classic example showing even where there aren't titles people still come up with a myriad of ways to be sniffy about each other.  Happens everywhere


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Not illegal, but I think she is doing this as a tax dodge. Businesses set up in Delaware but operating elsewhere do not have to pay corporate taxes.


seems like she must be getting help from DD...a Beverly Hills attorney?  the Delaware corp setup is pretty common


----------



## marietouchet

IMHO , come on guys, lets be positive

1. Dont read too much into Doria incorporating herself.  Maybe she wants to be self employed and was told to encapsulate legal liability. If D is sued, then her relatives assets cannot be attached. Good for her to show initiative.

2. Helo club, OK good, JCMH is mingling ... great idea.  This is a good thing... Hobbies are good ...

This would not be a expensive PRIVATE club ($$$$$ as a monthly fee, even if you dont go) as in London where you go for expensive meals and drinks ala Annabels (sp?)
I think this is a club for helo flyers, not for people who just ride in them (could be wrong...). 
but likely a group of lying enthusiasts, you putter around, talk the expensive repair bills, talk about how long it has taken to get your helo through the annual inspection and repair extravaganza, gossip about mechanics, compare headphones.  A way to get to know the pilots, teachers, schedule lessons etc. Then go for a modest beer after the flight.

Helos are NOT a cheap hobby but he can afford it.  Helo hours are way more expensive than your average little Cessna fixed wing practice hours, and so it attracts a diff crowd than airplanes, enthusiasts who actually want to fly the helo, not be driven.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Oh, I wish that were true haha. My DH had a business incorporated in DE and most definitely paid corporate taxes to CA where he operated (and NY too). CA does not play around with its taxes! You must mean businesses incorporated in DE but not operating there don’t have to pay corporate taxes _to DE. _But you do have to pay them to the state where you operate.
> 
> *A lot of businesses incorporate in DE because it has more protections for privacy, corporation shareholders, and has a more business-savvy court system*.


THIS ⬆ .. I incorporated my business in DE, but I still had to pay taxes in MASS ..


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Helos are NOT a cheap hobby but he can afford it.  Helo hours are way more expensive than your average little Cessna fixed wing practice hours, and so it attracts a diff crowd than airplanes, enthusiasts who actually want to fly the helo, not be driven.


He would be better off joining a Range Rover Club; there are tons out here .. and it is a great way to 4-wheel through the desert (but .. yes, there are women in these clubs .. I used to be in one -- tons of fun)!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I’m thinking the helicopter club story is BS. So far only the British tabloids are reporting it. If it were true, they certainly have their own publicists who would have placed the story with the US media. 

No, I stand by what I said before, Harry isn’t allowed to have friends.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> I’m thinking the helicopter club story is BS. So far only the British tabloids are reporting it. If it were true, they certainly have their own publicists who would have placed the story with the US media.
> 
> No, I stand by what I said before, Harry isn’t allowed to have friends.


Yeah, he isn’t allowed his old friends and hobbies so he‘s not about to be allowed any new ones.


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> Yeah, he isn’t allowed his old friends and hobbies so he‘s not about to be allowed any new ones.



The only possible exceptions would be celebrities who may prove to be useful. Even those would have to be Meghan-approved. None of this “joining a club and making friends with random strangers” nonsense.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> He would be better off joining a Range Rover Club; there are tons out here .. and it is a great way to 4-wheel through the desert (but .. yes, there are women in these clubs .. I used to be in one -- tons of fun)!!



That's a thing??? Funny, I never knew. With Range Rovers, helicopters, and polo, I think Harry will have a lot of hobbies to fill in all that time he would've been doing his royal duties.


----------



## lalame

Guess Jessica and Meghan are still “on.” Why would I think Meghan would ever address issues in her own circle vs lecturing on other people’s lives. Silence is complicity indeed.




Also how funny how she calls out atrocious tabloid culture but not the social media culture that would make a person overreact to a random Instagram post and threaten someone’s livelihood.


----------



## scarlet555

Why do I *not* believe her comments on Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be sincere, 
she uses words that are ...just dumb and out of place.


----------



## bisousx

CeeJay said:


> He would be better off joining a Range Rover Club; there are tons out here .. and it is a great way to 4-wheel through the desert (but .. yes, there are women in these clubs .. I used to be in one -- tons of fun)!!



I did not know that! I’ve had a RR for almost 6 yrs now and never took it off roading. Need to look it up now


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> That's a thing??? Funny, I never knew. With Range Rovers, helicopters, and polo, I think Harry will have a lot of hobbies to fill in all that time he would've been doing his royal duties.


Yup .. there are Range Rover clubs all over the world!  Rabid fans (_like my husband who had a '82 Series III Stage 1 monster in Masai Red - British Drive - see pictures below_) LOVE to drive off-road  -and-  get together with other enthusiasts to eat, drink and talk about Land Rovers till the end-of-time!  Let me tell you, if you are single .. you will for sure meet a lot of men!  The HB would drive his "Landie", and I had my "Vogue" (_Range Rover_).  Alas, our expeditions were throughout New England .. BUT, when we went to the Southwest (_Arches, Grand Canyon, Monument Valley, etc_.) and rented Land Rover vehicles -- WOW, those were EPIC drives!!!!  

Unfortunately, the HB could not take his beloved car (_below_) to California (_when we moved_).  He keeps on looking at similar vehicles out here, but honestly .. these "monsters" are like a boat that has its hands in your pockets too many times!


----------



## Pessie

bisousx said:


> I did not know that! I’ve had a RR for almost 6 yrs now and never took it off roading. Need to look it up now


I got a free half day off-roading lesson from LR when I bought mine.  Fantastic experience!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m going to tell this once and for all 
With a comparable and delible past, Meghan will forever be known as a litigious woman of jealousy, a Blogger of word salads, and a grifter of deep conviction. She has been sad example of desperation to numerous impressionable girls. Sue her, forget her, and, for love of all things holy, run from her. 


What MM said about RBG:
'With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction. She has been a true inspiration to me since I was a girl. Honor her, remember her, act for her,' Markle continued.








						Meghan Markle calls RBG the 'Justice of Courage'
					

'With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction,' Markle said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*where do people learn to talk/write like this????*





lalame said:


> Guess Jessica and Meghan are still “on.” Why would I think Meghan would ever address issues in her own circle vs lecturing on other people’s lives. Silence is complicity indeed.
> 
> View attachment 4853272
> 
> 
> Also how funny how she calls out atrocious tabloid culture but not the social media culture that would make a person overreact to a random Instagram post and threaten someone’s livelihood.


----------



## Pessie

scarlet555 said:


> Why do I *not* believe her comments on Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be sincere,
> she uses words that are ...just dumb and out of place.


And fake...
Just looked at comments on the DM article about her statement on RBG - majority seem to be from the US and v negative.  Maybe this is a bandwagon too far?


----------



## CarryOn2020

What MM’s English teachers should have told her:

With an incomparable and indelible legacy [Choose 1], Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance [brilliant woman], a Justice of courage [courageous Supreme Court Justice of the US] and a human of deep conviction [the leading voice for gender equality]. She has been a true inspiration [use Active voice = Truly, she has inspired me...] to me since I was a girl [such a hackneyed thought]. Honor her, remember her, act for her, [Let us honor Justice Ginsburg’s efforts by continuing to fight for gender equality] ' Markle continued.


ETA:  shaking my head, just shaking my head at Northwestern

I dissent. MM could have used one or two of RBG’s profound quotes: 
_A professor quotes the legal scholar Paul Freund’s observation about the Supreme Court: Its justices, Freund once said, “should never be influenced by the weather of the day but inevitably they will be influenced by the climate of the era.”_








						The Ruth Bader Ginsburg Fandom Was Never Frivolous
					

The kitschy celebrations of the justice have always insisted, in their way, that the personal is judicial.




					www.theatlantic.com
				











						Internet Famous: Ruth Baby Ginsburg
					

The legend of Ruth Baby Ginsburg is another case of an unlikely and perfect convergence, right from its inception.



					www.columbusalive.com


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Why do I *not* believe her comments on Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be sincere,
> she uses words that are ...just dumb and out of place.


she's saying what she believes is politically correct and it's ok but who needs to hear it from her? (oh, her stans I guess)


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> she's saying what she believes is politically correct and it's ok but who needs to hear it from her? (oh, her stans I guess)



Seems like she has a low opinion of those stans if they need to be told RBG was a ‘woman’ and a ‘human‘.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m going to tell this once and for all
> With a comparable and delible past, Meghan will forever be known as a litigious woman of jealousy, a Blogger of word salads, and a grifter of deep conviction. She has been sad example of desperation to numerous impressionable girls. Sue her, forget her, and, for love of all things holy, run from her.
> 
> 
> What MM said about RBG:
> 'With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction. She has been a true inspiration to me since I was a girl. Honor her, remember her, act for her,' Markle continued.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle calls RBG the 'Justice of Courage'
> 
> 
> 'With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction,' Markle said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *where do people learn to talk/write like this????*



I might be sick...could be food poisoning though...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> she's saying what she believes is politically correct and it's ok but who needs to hear it from her? (oh, her stans I guess)


It’s all about hacking other people’s achievements by association IMO. Not nice.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> What MM’s English teachers should have told her



I don’t think Meghan paid attention in English class. She clearly spent her time honing her drama skills in theater class.


----------



## csshopper

It's a wonder she didn't try to claim RBG as a "bestie" so give her credit for maybe realizing that would be going too far. A friend and I had a casual bet about whether or not MM would chime in to get some of the attention, I "won" as I said "of course she will."


----------



## marietouchet

Great post here on the Sasha Swire diary publication, pertains more to Andrew then to JCMH 





__





						Prince Andrew
					

I didn't even know who the director of Cuties was until I saw it in this thread. Can't speak for everyone else, but while I love to support underrepresented groups in any domain... these people are not immune to criticism. They aren't perfect. I'm an immigrant WOC. I'm not perfect, I don't...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m going to tell this once and for all
> With a comparable and delible past, Meghan will forever be known as a litigious woman of jealousy, a Blogger of word salads, and a grifter of deep conviction. She has been sad example of desperation to numerous impressionable girls. Sue her, forget her, and, for love of all things holy, run from her.
> 
> 
> What MM said about RBG:
> 'With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction. She has been a true inspiration to me since I was a girl. Honor her, remember her, act for her,' Markle continued.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle calls RBG the 'Justice of Courage'
> 
> 
> 'With an incomparable and indelible legacy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance, a Justice of courage, and a human of deep conviction,' Markle said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *where do people learn to talk/write like this????*


I never use the word indelible on a day to day basis , a press release writer found that word was found In a  thesaurus , speaking as a person with a world class 800-SAT Level vocabulary lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Great post here on the Sasha Swire diary publication, pertains more to Andrew then to JCMH
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> I didn't even know who the director of Cuties was until I saw it in this thread. Can't speak for everyone else, but while I love to support underrepresented groups in any domain... these people are not immune to criticism. They aren't perfect. I'm an immigrant WOC. I'm not perfect, I don't...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com



IDK, this seems accurate:
_Lady Swire's reaction to Prince Harry's engagement to Meghan Markle in 2017 is to predict 'trouble ahead'. The future Duchess of Sussex is 'eating the redhead for breakfast', she declares; he is 'clearly not as clever as she is'. _


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> IDK, this seems accurate:
> _Lady Swire's reaction to Prince Harry's engagement to Meghan Markle in 2017 is to predict 'trouble ahead'. The future Duchess of Sussex is 'eating the redhead for breakfast', she declares; he is 'clearly not as clever as she is'. _


IDK who Lady Swire is but this seems pretty accurate to me


----------



## mdcx

All I can think is, Kate and William are pretty lucky that M&H decamped to the US. M particularly seems like someone who never lets go of a grudge, and needs to be in the papers daily. Best to keep these people as far from you as possible, ideally in another continent!


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> *It's a wonder she didn't try to claim RBG as a "bestie"* so give her credit for maybe realizing that would be going too far. A friend and I had a casual bet about whether or not MM would chime in to get some of the attention, I "won" as I said "of course she will."


Too Funny!!


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> What MM’s English teachers should have told her:
> 
> With an incomparable and indelible legacy [Choose 1], Ruth Bader Ginsburg will forever be known as a woman of brilliance [brilliant woman], a Justice of courage [courageous Supreme Court Justice of the US] and a human of deep conviction [the leading voice for gender equality]. She has been a true inspiration [use Active voice = Truly, she has inspired me...] to me since I was a girl [such a hackneyed thought]. Honor her, remember her, act for her, [Let us honor Justice Ginsburg’s efforts by continuing to fight for gender equality] ' Markle continued.
> 
> 
> ETA:  shaking my head, just shaking my head at Northwestern
> 
> I dissent. MM could have used one or two of RBG’s profound quotes:
> _A professor quotes the legal scholar Paul Freund’s observation about the Supreme Court: Its justices, Freund once said, “should never be influenced by the weather of the day but inevitably they will be influenced by the climate of the era.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Ruth Bader Ginsburg Fandom Was Never Frivolous
> 
> 
> The kitschy celebrations of the justice have always insisted, in their way, that the personal is judicial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Internet Famous: Ruth Baby Ginsburg
> 
> 
> The legend of Ruth Baby Ginsburg is another case of an unlikely and perfect convergence, right from its inception.
> 
> 
> 
> www.columbusalive.com



After reading her comments on RBG, I am quite convinced she is a narcissistic nut job who proabalby doesn’t have a PR team and if she does, she doesn’t listen to them, insisting obviously on writing crap like this herself.


----------



## Katel

Has anyone seen this article?

Titania McGrath is a satire character ...
It’s a subscription, so I haven’t read it ... she names MeGain as a “hero” lol


----------



## Straight-Laced

^^
From the 'Titania McGrath' piece in The Sunday Times (UK) last week. 'Titania' is a creation of the writer and comedian Andrew Doyle  
*   "If the kids are old enough to read, they’re old enough to be right-on. In this extract from her first book for children, the activist radical intersectionalist poet Titania McGrath introduces the next generation to six inspiring activists.*
If you’re an adult, kindly go away and read something else. Good — now ancient prying eyes have been averted, we may speak candidly. As a young person, you represent the next generation of intersectional warrior queens. I make no apologies for using advanced terminology such as “intersectional”, because I refuse to patronise you in the way your parents have done. I know that there is wisdom in youth. The first words I spoke as a baby were: “Seize the means of production.”

As a young person in a world swarming with cryptofascists, you will need guidance, which is why I have penned _My First Little Book of Intersectional Activism_. Even if you haven’t yet learnt how to read, you should carry it with you wherever you go to prove you’re not a bigot. 

Some of you might be thinking that, in the wake of a deadly pandemic, social justice activism should take a back seat, or that our concerns now seem relatively trivial. On the contrary, it is crucial that we all work together to ensure that this pandemic does not distract us from the far more serious problem of people being misgendered on Twitter.

In a series of groundbreaking and poignant chapters — extracted here — I take you on a journey with the most inspiring individuals in history. I’ve had to leave out some of the more obvious luminaries, such as Florence Nightingale. But given that Nightingale never said anything in support of nonbinary rights, we must assume that she was transphobic.

*Meghan Markle, Temporary Princess*

Once upon a time there was an American girl called Meghan whose destiny it was to single-handedly reinvent the British royal family. One day in 2016, Meghan went on a blind date with a boy called Harry Windsor, grandson of the Queen, then fifth in line to the throne. Prince Harry often went on blind dates, as this is the traditional method of courtship for ginger-haired men.
Many commentators in the media applauded the fact that the royal family was finally poised to embrace diversity. Up until now, this stale old institution had been staunchly British (except Prince Philip, who was Greek, and the rest of them, who were German).

The first thing she did after their wedding was to decolonise his wardrobe. This meant throwing out anything made by companies that exploited workers in the Third World, anything that appropriated fabrics or designs from other cultures and anything with a swastika on it. Harry spent the first few days of his honeymoon sitting around in his pants.

One day, British Vogue invited Meghan to be guest editor. She accepted enthusiastically, because there’s no better way to promote equality and expose the evils of consumer culture than by fronting one of the world’s leading fashion magazines. Meghan helped Harry to write an article about “unconscious bias”. As Harry repeatedly insisted, he was a freethinker who would never allow those around him to control his opinions. This was one of the first things Meghan taught him to say.

In spite of all their efforts to save the world, poor Meghan and Harry were always being picked on by the press, so they eventually decided to stand down as “senior royals”. This was an excellent decision, because it meant that although they would continue to receive attention from the press, they wouldn’t have to bother doing any actual work.

And they both lived happily ever after."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

British journalist Jan Moir on what I always felt about MM's public engagements:

"Moir accused Markle of slipping into "glutinous actress mode, as if she were rather hammily playing herself in some future episode of TV's The Crown." Her advice? "If only she could dial down the full beam of worried sympathy that strobes from her lovely eyes at every opportunity and give it a rest with the endless Lady Bountiful arm-pats, I think people would like her more… [she] would do well to note that the most successful royals keep their distance and their dignity."


----------



## kemilia

Straight-Laced said:


> ^^
> From the 'Titania McGrath' piece in The Sunday Times (UK) last week. 'Titania' is a creation of the writer and comedian Andrew Doyle
> *   "If the kids are old enough to read, they’re old enough to be right-on. In this extract from her first book for children, the activist radical intersectionalist poet Titania McGrath introduces the next generation to six inspiring activists.*
> If you’re an adult, kindly go away and read something else. Good — now ancient prying eyes have been averted, we may speak candidly. As a young person, you represent the next generation of intersectional warrior queens. I make no apologies for using advanced terminology such as “intersectional”, because I refuse to patronise you in the way your parents have done. I know that there is wisdom in youth. The first words I spoke as a baby were: “Seize the means of production.”
> 
> As a young person in a world swarming with cryptofascists, you will need guidance, which is why I have penned _My First Little Book of Intersectional Activism_. Even if you haven’t yet learnt how to read, you should carry it with you wherever you go to prove you’re not a bigot.
> 
> Some of you might be thinking that, in the wake of a deadly pandemic, social justice activism should take a back seat, or that our concerns now seem relatively trivial. On the contrary, it is crucial that we all work together to ensure that this pandemic does not distract us from the far more serious problem of people being misgendered on Twitter.
> 
> In a series of groundbreaking and poignant chapters — extracted here — I take you on a journey with the most inspiring individuals in history. I’ve had to leave out some of the more obvious luminaries, such as Florence Nightingale. But given that Nightingale never said anything in support of nonbinary rights, we must assume that she was transphobic.
> 
> *Meghan Markle, Temporary Princess*
> 
> Once upon a time there was an American girl called Meghan whose destiny it was to single-handedly reinvent the British royal family. One day in 2016, Meghan went on a blind date with a boy called Harry Windsor, grandson of the Queen, then fifth in line to the throne. Prince Harry often went on blind dates, as this is the traditional method of courtship for ginger-haired men.
> Many commentators in the media applauded the fact that the royal family was finally poised to embrace diversity. Up until now, this stale old institution had been staunchly British (except Prince Philip, who was Greek, and the rest of them, who were German).
> 
> The first thing she did after their wedding was to decolonise his wardrobe. This meant throwing out anything made by companies that exploited workers in the Third World, anything that appropriated fabrics or designs from other cultures and anything with a swastika on it. Harry spent the first few days of his honeymoon sitting around in his pants.
> 
> One day, British Vogue invited Meghan to be guest editor. She accepted enthusiastically, because there’s no better way to promote equality and expose the evils of consumer culture than by fronting one of the world’s leading fashion magazines. Meghan helped Harry to write an article about “unconscious bias”. As Harry repeatedly insisted, he was a freethinker who would never allow those around him to control his opinions. This was one of the first things Meghan taught him to say.
> 
> In spite of all their efforts to save the world, poor Meghan and Harry were always being picked on by the press, so they eventually decided to stand down as “senior royals”. This was an excellent decision, because it meant that although they would continue to receive attention from the press, they wouldn’t have to bother doing any actual work.
> 
> And they both lived happily ever after."


Love this! Thank you for posting.


----------



## youngster

Seems pretty obvious that MM is "checking in with JM everyday" likely not because she's "the kindest friend", but to make sure she stays in line, firmly on MM's side with the lawsuit looming.  With a 10 year BFF friendship, JM knows _a lot _about MM and her life pre-Harry and could do her serious damage.  A kind friend would have publicly defended JM when her whole life blew up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

@*youngster *I couldn't agree more. MM lack of public support to JM was very revealing. Of course, MM is staying in touch privately, she needs to make sure that JM doesn't spill the beans. 
To me, MM & JM are soulmates, twin sisters...


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder why they haven’t started a new Instagram account yet.


----------



## Pessie

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder why they haven’t started a new Instagram account yet.


They aren’t doing anything?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Pessie said:


> They aren’t doing anything?


Touché


----------



## marietouchet

Straight-Laced said:


> ^^
> From the 'Titania McGrath' piece in The Sunday Times (UK) last week. 'Titania' is a creation of the writer and comedian Andrew Doyle
> *   "If the kids are old enough to read, they’re old enough to be right-on. In this extract from her first book for children, the activist radical intersectionalist poet Titania McGrath introduces the next generation to six inspiring activists.*
> If you’re an adult, kindly go away and read something else. Good — now ancient prying eyes have been averted, we may speak candidly. As a young person, you represent the next generation of intersectional warrior queens. I make no apologies for using advanced terminology such as “intersectional”, because I refuse to patronise you in the way your parents have done. I know that there is wisdom in youth. The first words I spoke as a baby were: “Seize the means of production.”
> 
> As a young person in a world swarming with cryptofascists, you will need guidance, which is why I have penned _My First Little Book of Intersectional Activism_. Even if you haven’t yet learnt how to read, you should carry it with you wherever you go to prove you’re not a bigot.
> 
> Some of you might be thinking that, in the wake of a deadly pandemic, social justice activism should take a back seat, or that our concerns now seem relatively trivial. On the contrary, it is crucial that we all work together to ensure that this pandemic does not distract us from the far more serious problem of people being misgendered on Twitter.
> 
> In a series of groundbreaking and poignant chapters — extracted here — I take you on a journey with the most inspiring individuals in history. I’ve had to leave out some of the more obvious luminaries, such as Florence Nightingale. But given that Nightingale never said anything in support of nonbinary rights, we must assume that she was transphobic.
> 
> *Meghan Markle, Temporary Princess*
> 
> Once upon a time there was an American girl called Meghan whose destiny it was to single-handedly reinvent the British royal family. One day in 2016, Meghan went on a blind date with a boy called Harry Windsor, grandson of the Queen, then fifth in line to the throne. Prince Harry often went on blind dates, as this is the traditional method of courtship for ginger-haired men.
> Many commentators in the media applauded the fact that the royal family was finally poised to embrace diversity. Up until now, this stale old institution had been staunchly British (except Prince Philip, who was Greek, and the rest of them, who were German).
> 
> The first thing she did after their wedding was to decolonise his wardrobe. This meant throwing out anything made by companies that exploited workers in the Third World, anything that appropriated fabrics or designs from other cultures and anything with a swastika on it. *Harry spent the first few days of his honeymoon sitting around in his pants.*
> 
> One day, British Vogue invited Meghan to be guest editor. She accepted enthusiastically, because there’s no better way to promote equality and expose the evils of consumer culture than by fronting one of the world’s leading fashion magazines. Meghan helped Harry to write an article about “unconscious bias”. As Harry repeatedly insisted, he was a freethinker who would never allow those around him to control his opinions. This was one of the first things Meghan taught him to say.
> 
> In spite of all their efforts to save the world, poor Meghan and Harry were always being picked on by the press, so they eventually decided to stand down as “senior royals”. This was an excellent decision, because it meant that although they would continue to receive attention from the press, they wouldn’t have to bother doing any actual work.
> 
> And they both lived happily ever after."


A crucial point - the author uses British English, not US English. The word PANTS is British for underwear, white PANTS in the US refers to long leg coverings AKA TROUSERS in the UK. 
This is one of the most difficult differences in the Englishes on either side of the pond.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> A crucial point - the author uses British English, not US English. The word PANTS is British for underwear, white PANTS in the US refers to long leg coverings AKA TROUSERS in the UK.
> This is one of the most difficult differences in the Englishes on either side of the pond.


You just made me laugh .. thank you!  I sooooooooooo remember the first time saying "Pants" to my British colleagues and they howled because I said "I have a rip in my Pants and need to buy some more, where should I go?"  After they finally gained composure, they informed me of the difference (UK - Pants versus US Pants) .. to which I got red-faced but vowed I would never make that mistake again!


----------



## Sharont2305

And the American vest is totally different to our British vest. And suspenders, that's another one I chuckle at


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> And the American vest is totally different to our British vest. And suspenders, that's another one I chuckle at



Wait... what's suspenders? lol


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Wait... what's suspenders? lol


garter belt?


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Suspenders* (American English, Canadian English, Australian English) or braces (British English, Australian English) are fabric or leather straps worn over the shoulders to hold up trousers.








						Suspenders - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> And the American vest is totally different to our British vest. And suspenders, that's another one I chuckle at



and never mind 'fanny pack'


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> And the American vest is totally different to our British vest. And suspenders, that's another one I chuckle at


HA HA HA .. yes, SUSPENDERS is another good one!


----------



## CeeJay

.. and then you have the 'PEACE' sign (fingers) backwards to us Yanks, but I know what it means over there!!!  As a matter of fact, it drives me NUTS when I see various US celebrities doing that .. obviously not knowing what it means in Britain!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Thongs. My extremely British mil was screeching after me the first summer I met her that she “LOVED MY THONGS” at a festival. My bil almost choked at the look on my face. Sigh.


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the birthday celebrations:
*Prince Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan Markle 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says*
Amanda wrote: "Despite Palace protocol dictating that spouses are not included in pictures celebrating royal birthdays, it must have hurt Prince Harry deeply to see that the images released by his grandmother, father and brother to celebrate his 36th birthday all excluded his wife Megs.

And according to one royal expert, the apparent snub was made all the worse after the Duchess of Cambridge, was included in one image of Harry with William.








						Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says
					

A royal expert has claimed Prince Harry must have been upset over the fact other Royal Family members failed to include Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in the images they shared to mark his birthday




					www.dailystar.co.uk
				




*Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family*
Prince Charles organized a group Zoom call for the royal family in honor of Harry's special day. 

"Meghan baked a cake and Harry blew out candles. Archie made them laugh when he also blew them out."

Speaking of Archie, the youngest member of The Firm stole the show when he called his grandpa, Prince Charles, "Pa" during the call.

Will and Kate were out attending royal engagements on Harry's birthday, presumably during the time of the call. 









						Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family
					

"There was some excuse made about why Will wasn’t there."




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Still on the birthday celebrations:
> *Prince Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan Markle 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says*
> Amanda wrote: "Despite Palace protocol dictating that spouses are not included in pictures celebrating royal birthdays, it must have hurt Prince Harry deeply to see that the images released by his grandmother, father and brother to celebrate his 36th birthday all excluded his wife Megs.
> 
> And according to one royal expert, the apparent snub was made all the worse after the Duchess of Cambridge, was included in one image of Harry with William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says
> 
> 
> A royal expert has claimed Prince Harry must have been upset over the fact other Royal Family members failed to include Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in the images they shared to mark his birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family*
> Prince Charles organized a group Zoom call for the royal family in honor of Harry's special day.
> 
> "Meghan baked a cake and Harry blew out candles. Archie made them laugh when he also blew them out."
> 
> Speaking of Archie, the youngest member of The Firm stole the show when he called his grandpa, Prince Charles, "Pa" during the call.
> 
> Will and Kate were out attending royal engagements on Harry's birthday, presumably during the time of the call.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family
> 
> 
> "There was some excuse made about why Will wasn’t there."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Oh ffs... this is getting rediculous... grow up Harry.

What a man-child, how dare Kate wish him happy birthday.... jerk.

Also, how dare they... no one made them move across the world. Why should Will and Kate have move their work schedules and lives around for them? Some people work and have a sense of duty...  They were probably picking up the slack for the workload Meghan and Harry abandoned when they moved to California. Gods I hate entitled people...


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Still on the birthday celebrations:
> *Prince Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan Markle 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says*
> Amanda wrote: "Despite Palace protocol dictating that spouses are not included in pictures celebrating royal birthdays, it must have hurt Prince Harry deeply to see that the images released by his grandmother, father and brother to celebrate his 36th birthday all excluded his wife Megs.
> 
> And according to one royal expert, the apparent snub was made all the worse after the Duchess of Cambridge, was included in one image of Harry with William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says
> 
> 
> A royal expert has claimed Prince Harry must have been upset over the fact other Royal Family members failed to include Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in the images they shared to mark his birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family*
> Prince Charles organized a group Zoom call for the royal family in honor of Harry's special day.
> 
> "Meghan baked a cake and Harry blew out candles. Archie made them laugh when he also blew them out."
> 
> Speaking of Archie, the youngest member of The Firm stole the show when he called his grandpa, Prince Charles, "Pa" during the call.
> 
> Will and Kate were out attending royal engagements on Harry's birthday, presumably during the time of the call.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family
> 
> 
> "There was some excuse made about why Will wasn’t there."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



That’s interesting that it’s a policy (not to include spouses in birthday images). Of all the random rules... well if true grow up Harry!


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Thongs. My extremely British mil was screeching after me the first summer I met her that she “LOVED MY THONGS” at a festival. My bil almost choked at the look on my face. Sigh.



Did she mean your sandals? What do you call sandals where the leather goes in-between your toes? 

We also say thong for 'backless' knickers (panties)

As Oscar Wilde once wrote, *"We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language."*


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Did she mean your sandals? What do you call sandals where the leather goes in-between your toes?
> 
> We also say thong for 'backless' knickers (panties)
> 
> As Oscar Wilde once wrote, *"We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language."*



Depends... Flip flops, if you’re talking about the casual rubber kinds like Havaianas. I don’t think there is a special name for the more dressy, heeled kinds made of leather... I’d just call them sandals.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> Thongs. My extremely British mil was screeching after me the first summer I met her that she “LOVED MY THONGS” at a festival. My bil almost choked at the look on my face. Sigh.


We call them flip flops in the UK, very rarely they're called thongs, to me thongs are knickers that has no bottom, only string.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> We call them flip flops in the UK, very rarely they're called thongs, to me thongs are knickers that has no bottom, only string.


Yep, thongs is the Aussie name for flip flops


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> Yep, thongs is the Aussie name for flip flops


Yeah, I thought it was more Australian than British


----------



## Pessie

CeeJay said:


> .. and then you have the 'PEACE' sign (fingers) backwards to us Yanks, but I know what it means over there!!!  As a matter of fact, it drives me NUTS when I see various US celebrities doing that .. obviously not knowing what it means in Britain!


Peace sign is the same here, it’s only an insult when the back of the fingers faces out.  Its supposed to date back to the battle of Agincourt, where the English archers used to sign to show the defeated French they were still fit to draw their longbows (2 fingers required).


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> We call them flip flops in the UK, very rarely they're called thongs, to me thongs are knickers that has no bottom, only string.



We call all sandals that have a toe-post throng sandals.

That's how 'thongs' got their name



			https://www.russellandbromley.co.uk/thongbird/431957?gclid=Cj0KCQjwnqH7BRDdARIsACTSAdugZxVD3-dJk5QreEHpw_XnWuq-VcwRWhVJ5DMbEOrK_PeYydCsIIgaAkIxEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
		


Flip-flops are just the flat rubber versions. Perhaps it was a trade name. I think it was after the name they made


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> We call all sandals that have a toe-post throng sandals.
> 
> That's how 'thongs' got their name
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.russellandbromley.co.uk/thongbird/431957?gclid=Cj0KCQjwnqH7BRDdARIsACTSAdugZxVD3-dJk5QreEHpw_XnWuq-VcwRWhVJ5DMbEOrK_PeYydCsIIgaAkIxEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds


Well that’s news to me, I never heard thongs till I dated an Aussie


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan Markle 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says*
> Amanda wrote: "Despite Palace protocol dictating that spouses are not included in pictures celebrating royal birthdays, it must have hurt Prince Harry deeply to see that the images released by his grandmother, father and brother to celebrate his 36th birthday all excluded his wife Megs.



So protocol, which he grew up with, says so (and everyone stuck to it for other birthdays this year), but he must be deeply hurt? Yeah right. I don't know, don't these people have final editors who kindly let them know their scribblings don't make sense at all?



> And according to one royal expert, the apparent snub was made all the worse after the Duchess of Cambridge, was included in one image of Harry with William.



Well, that might be because it is their shared Instagram account. The feminist in Meghan can't possibly want Kate to step back, can she?


----------



## papertiger

Interesting history of the 'flip-flop' here: https://www.heddels.com/2018/04/history-flip-flop/ 

Ancient Greeks had toe posts between different toes and the modern thong is more of Japanese origin. 

To save you reading it all, apparently the first cheap flip-flops came to the US via GIs stationed in Japan after WWII 

Actually, M wears her thong (sorry US citizens) sandals well. I cannot.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Interesting history of the 'flip-flop' here: https://www.heddels.com/2018/04/history-flip-flop/
> 
> Ancient Greeks had toe posts between different toes and the modern thong is more of Japanese origin.
> 
> To save you reading it all, apparently the first cheap flip-flops came to the US via GIs stationed in Japan after WWII
> 
> Actually, M wears her thong (sorry US citizens) sandals well. I cannot.
> 
> View attachment 4854490
> 
> 
> View attachment 4854491


I'd call those sandals too.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Another just got Merkled! 
The full article is behind a pay wall which I don't have access to: 








						Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp
					

The Duchess of Sussex has sacked the barrister leading her legal battle against a national newspaper, replacing him with one of his arch rivals as the court ca




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




*Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp*

The duchess is suing Associated Newspapers Limited over an article that reproduced parts of a handwritten letter she had sent to her father

The Duchess of Sussex has sacked the barrister leading her legal battle against a national newspaper, replacing him with one of his arch rivals as the court case resumes today.
David Sherborne, whose clients have included Diana, Princess of Wales, and more recently the actor Johnny Depp, will no longer act for the duchess when the case against the _Mail on Sunday_ continues, _The Times_ has confirmed.

Mr Sherborne lost the first pre-trial hearing in May. As a result the duchess was ordered to pay the newspaper £67,888 in legal costs.

David Sherborne, with Johnny Depp outside court in July, has been replaced with an arch rival by the Duchess of Sussex
WILL OLIVER/EPA-EFE/REX
Justin Rushbrooke, QC, has confirmed to _The Times_ that he will represent the *former television actress *in future hearings.

The QC is said to have impressed her when standing in for Mr Sherborne...


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> And the *American vest* is totally different to our British vest. And suspenders, that's another one I chuckle at



What's the US vest in British English?? I have no idea.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

duna said:


> What's the US vest in British English?? I have no idea.....


Underwear - actually you can get tops shaped like a (usually refers to a mans) vest, and we call those vest tops, just to add to the general confusion 



chicinthecity777 said:


> Another just got Merkled!
> The full article is behind a pay wall which I don't have access to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has sacked the barrister leading her legal battle against a national newspaper, replacing him with one of his arch rivals as the court ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp*
> 
> The duchess is suing Associated Newspapers Limited over an article that reproduced parts of a handwritten letter she had sent to her father
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has sacked the barrister leading her legal battle against a national newspaper, replacing him with one of his arch rivals as the court case resumes today.
> David Sherborne, whose clients have included Diana, Princess of Wales, and more recently the actor Johnny Depp, will no longer act for the duchess when the case against the _Mail on Sunday_ continues, _The Times_ has confirmed.
> 
> Mr Sherborne lost the first pre-trial hearing in May. As a result the duchess was ordered to pay the newspaper £67,888 in legal costs.
> 
> David Sherborne, with Johnny Depp outside court in July, has been replaced with an arch rival by the Duchess of Sussex
> WILL OLIVER/EPA-EFE/REX
> Justin Rushbrooke, QC, has confirmed to _The Times_ that he will represent the *former television actress *in future hearings.
> 
> The QC is said to have impressed her when standing in for Mr Sherborne...


I wonder if he told her to drop the case??  “Television actress”


----------



## chicinthecity777

Pessie said:


> I wonder if he told her to drop the case??  “Television actress”


I know! A former television actress while at it! I had to chuckle on that one!


----------



## duna

Pessie said:


> Underwear - actually you can get tops shaped like a (usually refers to a mans) vest, and we call those vest tops, just to add to the general confusion
> 
> 
> I wonder if he told her to drop the case??  “Television actress”



Oh, I'm British and for me a vest is underwear.....so it's underwear in American aswell?


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> What's the US vest in British English?? I have no idea.....


A U.S. vest is apparently a waistcoat in the U.K. however I have seen a waistcoat referred to as a vest in the UK so I don't think it's all cut and dry with this one.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> A U.S. vest is apparently a waistcoat in the U.K. however I have seen a waistcoat referred to as a vest in the UK so I don't think it's all cut and dry with this one.



Ah ok,  thanks, so vest is a waistcoat in the US: I never knew!


----------



## Pessie

duna said:


> Oh, I'm British and for me a vest is underwear.....so it's underwear in American aswell?


Sorry I misunderstood your question, I thought you meant the opposite.  I’m British too


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> A U.S. vest is apparently a waistcoat in the U.K. however I have seen a waistcoat referred to as a vest in the UK so I don't think it's all cut and dry with this one.



It's always a waistcoat with a 3 piece suit. Vest is always underwear. 

I think where it's confusing now are how British companies are using US words for global sales. Hence 'blush' and not 'blusher'

or "Pa" instead of grandpa according to https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-charles-delighted-after-baby-22715118 at which everybody's "delighted"


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sorry for the sandal / underwear distraction but I learnt a few things as a result!

A vest to me is a waistcoat without sleeves. If that is a waistcoat in the UK, what is the sleeved version called?


----------



## chicinthecity777

A1aGypsy said:


> Sorry for the sandal / underwear distraction but I learnt a few things as a result!
> 
> A vest to me is a waistcoat without sleeves. If that is a waistcoat in the UK, what is the sleeveless version called?


Waistcoats


----------



## A1aGypsy

So, just no distinction?


----------



## doni

A1aGypsy said:


> Sorry for the sandal / underwear distraction but I learnt a few things as a result!
> 
> A vest to me is a waistcoat without sleeves. If that is a waistcoat in the UK, what is the sleeveless version called?



What is a waistcoat with sleeves?


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> What is a waistcoat with sleeves?


I thought it would be a jacket/blazer. Very confused...


----------



## A1aGypsy

Nope. It’s called a ‘waistcoat’ on the order form by the UK providers. Lol. It’s part of the barristers robes. (It’s under the robe)


----------



## doni

A1aGypsy said:


> Nope. It’s called a ‘waistcoat’ on the order form by the UK providers. Lol. It’s part of the barristers robes. (It’s under the robe)
> 
> View attachment 4854602


Ah ok!   But that is a waistcoat because it has no sleeves even if it is attached to the robe. The sleeves are of the robe so to speak


----------



## A1aGypsy

doni said:


> Ah ok!   But that is a waistcoat because it has no sleeves even if it is attached to the robe. The sleeves are of the robe so to speak



No, it has sleeves. The sleeves are not attached to the robe. The waistcoat has sleeves and the robe is completely separate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

A1aGypsy said:


> Nope. It’s called a ‘waistcoat’ on the order form by the UK providers. Lol. It’s part of the barristers robes. (It’s under the robe)
> 
> View attachment 4854602


This would be a specific item for legal system usage. It's not for normal commercial context. If you go to a gentlemen's tailor here, a waistcoat is without sleeves.


----------



## doni

A1aGypsy said:


> No, it has sleeves. The sleeves are not attached to the robe. The waistcoat has sleeves and the robe is completely separate.
> 
> View attachment 4854603


Ok! so confusing!  

I guess this is were the word came from. At some point they stop wearing this type of jacket under a coat, save the sleeveless version?
My attorney coat has no such thing, just the robe


----------



## A1aGypsy

Lol,  language and how it develops is so interesting.


----------



## Pessie

doni said:


> Ok! so confusing!
> 
> I guess this is were the word came from. At some point they stop wearing this type of jacket under a coat, save the sleeveless version?
> My attorney coat has no such thing, just the robe


There’s no collar on it, I wonder if that’s why they’re calling it a waistcoat?


----------



## doni

Pessie said:


> There’s no collar on it, I wonder if that’s why they’re calling it a waistcoat?


I’d have thought it would have been because it is cut at the waist? No idea though


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think I may have figured it out. There are references to waistcoats with “stocking” sleeves from the war. So it may be that they just at some point in history just incorporated the sleeves into the waistcoat to eliminate the extra layer. 

Doni, where do you live (if you are comfortable saying) that robes but uses the term attorney? That’s an interesting combo.

(I’m sorry! I know, wildly off topic)


----------



## doni

A1aGypsy said:


> I think I may have figured it out. There are references to waistcoats with “stocking” sleeves from the war. So it may be that they just at some point in history just incorporated the sleeves into the waistcoat to eliminate the extra layer.
> 
> Doni, where do you live (if you are comfortable saying) that robes but uses the term attorney? That’s an interesting combo.



We don’t use the term attorney, but it seems more generic than barrister which is such a specific British thing... Lawyer is too generic.
I am a qualified to plead under several European bars, but I mostly wear the Belgian robe (as _avocat_) . This. So flattering. Not.




(That‘s not me by the way. She is the model in the online shop. Yes, there are such things nowadays for court robes   )


----------



## lanasyogamama

I saw on Instagram that Gloria S. said  that she and MM were cold calling voters. Way to stay out of politics.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> Underwear - actually you can get tops shaped like a (usually refers to a mans) vest, and we call those vest tops, just to add to the general confusion
> 
> 
> I wonder if he told her to drop the case??  “Television actress”


so she loves to sue people and to fire attorneys.....I have a friend who is like this (on a much smaller scale of course).  To me, it seems like my friend feels powerful when she hires attorneys


----------



## CobaltBlu

I dont even want to ask y'all to stay on topic because I am literally enchanted by the waistcoat discussion.

In Mexico, by the way, flip flips/thongs are called chanclas, and kids better behave because the chancla throw is a real thing, and a way some moms and abuelitas get kids to behave (yes, its awful, but its a thing....)  = la chancla voladora - flying chancla


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw on Instagram that Gloria S. said  that she and MM were cold calling voters. Way to stay out of politics.











						Duchess of Sussex is 'cold-calling US voters' ahead of election
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 39, who is currently living in her $14 million Santa Barbara mansion, has been cold-calling Americans to ask them to vote, Gloria Steinem told Access Hollywood.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

This is likely one of the reasons why MM is calling (daily) JM behind the scenes:

*Meghan Markle 'co-operated' with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers in latest privacy battle*
A document presented to the court, in which Meghan is referred to as 'C' (claimant) maintains: 'If C provided extensive cooperation to the authors and permitted a detailed account of her private life, relationships, thoughts and feelings to be published, including references to her relationship and communications with her father, it is difficult to see how she can complain that the Letter should not have been published because 'it contained the Claimant's deepest and most private thoughts and feelings.'
They claim that in his statement Mr Scobie seems to confirm that people 'working on behalf of C (Meghan) co-operated with the authors and gave them the names of people close to C who would help and that the authors spoke to such people and received information from them.'

Meghan is claiming costs at an estimated £1.4 million, which is being disputed by ANL as being too high.









						Meghan Markle co-operated with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers
					

Meghan is accused of  'collaborating' with the authors of the book about her royal life, the latest hearing of her High Court action against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday will hear today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CobaltBlu

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw on Instagram that Gloria S. said  that she and MM were cold calling voters. Way to stay out of politics.



Wait what?


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> This is likely one of the reasons why MM is calling (daily) JM behind the scenes:
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'co-operated' with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers in latest privacy battle*
> A document presented to the court, in which Meghan is referred to as 'C' (claimant) maintains: 'If C provided extensive cooperation to the authors and permitted a detailed account of her private life, relationships, thoughts and feelings to be published, including references to her relationship and communications with her father, it is difficult to see how she can complain that the Letter should not have been published because 'it contained the Claimant's deepest and most private thoughts and feelings.'
> They claim that in his statement Mr Scobie seems to confirm that people 'working on behalf of C (Meghan) co-operated with the authors and gave them the names of people close to C who would help and that the authors spoke to such people and received information from them.'
> 
> Meghan is claiming costs at an estimated £1.4 million, which is being disputed by ANL as being too high.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle co-operated with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers
> 
> 
> Meghan is accused of  'collaborating' with the authors of the book about her royal life, the latest hearing of her High Court action against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday will hear today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They go on to say Scobie could be cross examined when the case gets to court - that would be very interesting.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> This is likely one of the reasons why MM is calling (daily) JM behind the scenes:
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'co-operated' with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers in latest privacy battle*
> A document presented to the court, in which Meghan is referred to as 'C' (claimant) maintains: 'If C provided extensive cooperation to the authors and permitted a detailed account of her private life, relationships, thoughts and feelings to be published, including references to her relationship and communications with her father, it is difficult to see how she can complain that the Letter should not have been published because 'it contained the Claimant's deepest and most private thoughts and feelings.'
> They claim that in his statement Mr Scobie seems to confirm that people 'working on behalf of C (Meghan) co-operated with the authors and gave them the names of people close to C who would help and that the authors spoke to such people and received information from them.'
> 
> Meghan is claiming costs at an estimated £1.4 million, which is being disputed by ANL as being too high.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle co-operated with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers
> 
> 
> Meghan is accused of  'collaborating' with the authors of the book about her royal life, the latest hearing of her High Court action against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday will hear today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They should all sue her for invasion of their privacy  ugh quoted the wrong message sorry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

CobaltBlu said:


> Wait what?


I have posted a link to the DM article on this above.


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> They go on to say Scobie could be cross examined when the case gets to court - that would be very interesting.



Wonder if Omid is willing to perjure himself to prove what a loyal brown-noser he is to Meghan.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> Wonder if Omid is willing to perjure himself to prove what a loyal brown-noser he is to Meghan.


It’s a toughie - he‘s making a lot of money out of the connection (not to mention is she actually paying him??), on the other hand perjury could land him a prison sentence!


----------



## Sol Ryan

chicinthecity777 said:


> Duchess of Sussex is 'cold-calling US voters' ahead of election
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, who is currently living in her $14 million Santa Barbara mansion, has been cold-calling Americans to ask them to vote, Gloria Steinem told Access Hollywood.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say as long as she’s saying “I’m Meg”, I’m okay with this. I don’t see her using the DoS or Makers using it. This looks like the Daily Mail using the title and she can’t help that. She’s an American Citizen and she does have a right to participate in her government. I just have a problem when she calls herself the Duchess of Sussex while being political. If I missed it, then she’s wrong, but in the article I didn’t see where she or the organization actually called her Duchess of Sussex like we have in the past.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> Duchess of Sussex is 'cold-calling US voters' ahead of election
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, who is currently living in her $14 million Santa Barbara mansion, has been cold-calling Americans to ask them to vote, Gloria Steinem told Access Hollywood.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is kind of a funny way to put it (cold calling). Not inaccurate, but it's more commonly called canvassing which has a SLIGHTLY less annoying association haha. Celebrities are known to do things like this at election time. But what would someone who hasn't lived in the US in what, 10 years, add to the discussion that she is actually calling up strangers to talk about it?


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> It’s a toughie - he‘s making a lot of money out of the connection (not to mention is she actually paying him??), on the other hand perjury could land him a prison sentence!



He owes her for pretty much everything he has, but that’s not enough reason to risk getting locked up for her. If it comes down to it his sense of self-preservation will kick in.  He knows Meghan wouldn’t do it for him. Why should he do it for her?


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> This is kind of a funny way to put it (cold calling). Not inaccurate, but it's more commonly called canvassing which has a SLIGHTLY less annoying association haha. Celebrities are known to do things like this at election time. But what would someone who hasn't lived in the US in what, 10 years, add to the discussion that she is actually calling up strangers to talk about it?



How many actually answer? I think I’ve gotten 15 calls the past week that have come up “Political Call” on my caller iD just this past week... ignore... lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> This is kind of a funny way to put it (cold calling). Not inaccurate, but it's more commonly called canvassing which has a SLIGHTLY less annoying association haha. Celebrities are known to do things like this at election time. But what would someone who hasn't lived in the US in what, 10 years, add to the discussion that she is actually calling up strangers to talk about it?



Callers are given ‘talking points‘ by whichever candidate or party they are calling for.  I do what @Sol Ryan does — either block the calls or hang up.  I guess it helps volunteers feel useful.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> This is kind of a funny way to put it (cold calling). Not inaccurate, but it's more commonly called canvassing which has a SLIGHTLY less annoying association haha. Celebrities are known to do things like this at election time. But what would someone who hasn't lived in the US in what, 10 years, add to the discussion that she is actually calling up strangers to talk about it?


You cannot "cold call" people as part of the political canvassing in the UK (it's against the law), you can send post or call at your door (in the latter case I never answer as we live in secure gated block). So in that sense, it is cold-calling to us hence the terminology was used. I don't see the difference from someone calling you to sell you double glazing windows! LOL!


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Wait what?


I HATE HATE HATE cold robo calls, please dont call me


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> You cannot "cold call" people as part of the political canvassing in the UK (it's against the law), you can send post or call at your door (in the latter case I never answer as we live in secure gated block). So in that sense, it is cold-calling to us hence the terminology was used. I don't see the difference from someone calling you to sell you double glazing windows! LOL!



Exactly the same idea as a call centers. Annoying, invasive and ought to be illegal.


----------



## marietouchet

Pessie said:


> They should all sue her for invasion of their privacy  ugh quoted the wrong message sorry


If I find a chance... will post snippets from this mornings' Times - which is on the other computer only - MM is changing lawyers in the DM suit, ditching Johnny Depp and Diana's lawyer
I will say - the Depp lawyer ... ughhh that he could not convince his client to settle out of court, avoiding two weeks of solid mud slinging ...
But, I guess, I have the same issue about the MM suit, it has gone on this long with too much bad publicity (and costs) - MM seems to be as stubborn as Depp about the no-win suit, maybe a new lawyer can move the line of scrimmage

OHHHH and ... another Times snippet
William and Kate are making progress winning out of court with Tatler, the annoying sections of the article on Kate (she was tired due to Megxit..)  are being quietly removed from online copies at Tatler
I DID NOT KNOW they bother to do this ie edit the online copies, it is a good thing , a simple , easy moral victory , perhaps a bit hollow since the original articles are still in hard copy, but , if I were them, I would take it, a CLASSY win


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly the same idea as a call centers. Annoying, invasive and *ought to be illegal.*



I totally agree! In my neck of the woods we are pestered by call centers. I only answer numbers I know both on my home phone and on my mobile. It really should be illegal.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Wonder if Omid is willing to perjure himself to prove what a loyal brown-noser he is to Meghan.



Omid was willing to take Meghan’s diary notes and expose the family vault layout so a little lying wouldn’t phase him. Besides, he’s pot committed already. If he backtracks in court then he’s outing himself as a liar when he said M&H weren’t directly involved.


----------



## rose60610

My guess Meghan's election cold calling script is just another way for her to get paid for something. I'm sure she was given a script to recite. I'd love to hear her word salad version though. At the end you'd have no idea who or what she was even talking about, except for the part about asking to feel sorry for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

chicinthecity777 said:


> You cannot "cold call" people as part of the political canvassing in the UK (it's against the law), you can send post or call at your door (in the latter case I never answer as we live in secure gated block). So in that sense, it is cold-calling to us hence the terminology was used. I don't see the difference from someone calling you to sell you double glazing windows! LOL!



It’s really annoying in the US, especially if you’re in a swing state. It’s non-stop texts and calls with spoofed numbers... I usually have my phone just set to forward to voicemail, but I’m taking care of a relative so I can’t screen calls at the moment... Sooo aggravating... my relative is registered independent... I turned their ringer off and told their doctors to call me...


----------



## CarryOn2020

With all that’s happening in the next 3 months [elections, SC nominations, MM’s lawsuit, COVID], 2020 is going out with bang! 

@rose60610  I don’t think she is being paid if she is making calls for politicians or a party, she is volunteering.


----------



## Pessie

lalame said:


> This is kind of a funny way to put it (cold calling). Not inaccurate, but it's more commonly called canvassing which has a SLIGHTLY less annoying association haha. Celebrities are known to do things like this at election time. But what would someone who hasn't lived in the US in what, 10 years, add to the discussion that she is actually calling up strangers to talk about it?


The Mail choosing their words carefully, they managed to squeeze in the $14m mansion references a couple of times too   


rose60610 said:


> My guess Meghan's election cold calling script is just another way for her to get paid for something. I'm sure she was given a script to recite. I'd love to hear her word salad version though. At the end you'd have no idea who or what she was even talking about, except for the part about asking to feel sorry for her.


I bet she managed less than half the calls that Gloria did


----------



## creme fraiche

Not certain if this was answered already, but what the US calls vests is called a tank top in the UK.  Not certain what the UK name for this is.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Duchess of Sussex is 'cold-calling US voters' ahead of election
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, who is currently living in her $14 million Santa Barbara mansion, has been cold-calling Americans to ask them to vote, Gloria Steinem told Access Hollywood.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


oh please
she came home to vote but she wants to be called Duchess
and are those real calls or robo calls with her voice recorded?  I'd bet the latter.  wish she'd call me so I could tell her what I think


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> You cannot "cold call" people as part of the political canvassing in the UK (it's against the law), you can send post or call at your door (in the latter case I never answer as we live in secure gated block). So in that sense, it is cold-calling to us hence the terminology was used. I don't see the difference from someone calling you to sell you double glazing windows! LOL!



Haha yes I agree it's essentially the same but it's just funny to hear them described this way; they usually aren't called that here. Kind of like calling a leather purse "cow skin purse."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Too bad for MM. Here’s today’s real story: H got a new hair-do and looks like some dental work. His face looks very full, too. Possibly new shirt?









						Prince Harry shows off his freshly trimmed hair in new video for walk
					

Speaking from his $14 million mansion in California, Prince Harry, 36, showed off a new shorter hairstyle as he shared a message of support with participants of a charity walk.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> oh please
> she came home to vote but she wants to be called Duchess
> and are those real calls or robo calls with her voice recorded?  I'd bet the latter.  wish she'd call me so I could tell her what I think


It sounds like they were live calls that they were making together. Though how often is Meghan really doing this... sounds like she just came over to do it as part of whatever activity they planned for this event.


----------



## zinacef

marietouchet said:


> I HATE HATE HATE cold robo calls, please dont call me


But but it Will be special—- remember the food delivery—- she will let you know that it’s her calling!  Very very personal that would make you keep a recording of it! DoS indeed!


----------



## marietouchet

Tatler backs down in wrangle over Duchess of Cambridge profile
					

A row between the royal family and the aristocracy’s favourite magazine has ended with Tatler deleting chunks of a profile on the Duchess of Cambridge. Sources




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				



Hope the link works - Will and Kate work with Tatler out of Court


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> It sounds like they were live calls that they were making together. Though how often is Meghan really doing this... sounds like she just came over to do it as part of whatever activity they planned for this event.



You can bet she did the absolute minimum number of calls possible to get credit for doing the project with Gloria S.  She drops these righteous quests as soon as the press gives her coverage and goes on to the next one.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sol Ryan said:


> It’s really annoying in the US, especially if you’re in a swing state. It’s non-stop texts and calls with spoofed numbers... I usually have my phone just set to forward to voicemail, but I’m taking care of a relative so I can’t screen calls at the moment... Sooo aggravating... my relative is registered independent... I turned their ringer off and told their doctors to call me...


They have really cracked down on cold-calling here in the UK in the last few years. I have noticed a big improvement. There is also an app on my Sumsung phone, using which you can report scammers, it goes to a database so next time the same number calls someone else it will show up as "suspected scam" and you can block it straight away without answering. I believe other phones have similar apps. I almost never answer calls from numbers I am not familiar with.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> It sounds like they were live calls that they were making together. Though how often is Meghan really doing this... sounds like she just came over to do it as part of whatever activity they planned for this event.


I can't believe that she would take the time to do a lot of these.  and would she risk rejection?  maybe only if she called one of us PF members


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Haha yes I agree it's essentially the same but it's just funny to hear them described this way; they usually aren't called that here. Kind of like calling a leather purse "cow skin purse."


ha, don't get me started with purse v.s. bag!


----------



## marietouchet

Meghan ‘let friends collaborate on book’
					

The Duchess of Sussex allowed friends to share information about her with the authors of a book to make sure that her story was told in a favourable way, the High Court was told yesterday.The claim was made by lawyers for the Mail on Sunday in the latest hearing in the duchess’s legal action over it




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				



Meghan let friends talk to Omid which does not bode well for her suit about letter before by too private to publish
Wow trial will cost her 1.8 M and the defendant 1.2 M pounds


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

zinacef said:


> But but it Will be special—- remember the food delivery—- she will let you know that it’s her calling!  Very very personal that would make you keep a recording of it! DoS indeed!





sdkitty said:


> I can't believe that she would take the time to do a lot of these.  and would she risk rejection?  maybe only if she called one of us PF members



If only one of us was able to get a call and record it.. then we’d know if she used the title at least Lol...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> If only one of us was able to get a call and record it.. then we’d know if she used the title at least Lol...



If the calls are live, then, yes, she most definitely used the title(s). She is far too needy, superficial, desperate, egotistical not to use the title(s).  Confident people do not need the title. The lawsuits tell us how insecure she is.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> Omid was willing to take Meghan’s diary notes and expose the family vault layout so a little lying wouldn’t phase him. Besides, he’s pot committed already. If he backtracks in court then he’s outing himself as a liar when he said M&H weren’t directly involved.



It isn’t a crime for him to lie to the media or to lie in his book. It would be a crime if he lies while under oath. Scobie is a weaselly opportunist. He’ll support her right up until it looks bad for him, then he’ll be out to protect himself. If they ask him where he got the specific info in his book he’d better have a rock solid answer.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t a crime for him to lie to the media or to lie in his book. It would be a crime if he lies while under oath. Scobie is a weaselly opportunist. He’ll support her right up until it looks bad for him, then he’ll be out to protect himself. If they ask him where he got the specific info in his book he’d better have a rock solid answer.


Wasn't it in the back of the book saying H&M were interviewed for the book? He can't retract that now.


----------



## csshopper

MEGHAN, Pullllease call m


sdkitty said:


> oh please
> she came home to vote but she wants to be called Duchess
> and are those real calls or robo calls with her voice recorded?  I'd bet the latter.  wish she'd call me so I could tell her what I think


sdkitty-
I'm with you, if she called me she'd get an earful starting with "This is just the latest example of your incessant hypocrisy" since  9 months ago you were widely quoted in multiple media sources saying... "
*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry refuse to live in LA until ***** leaves office: report*

AOL.COM EDITORS
Jan 13th 2020 10:35AM


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> MEGHAN, Pullllease call m
> 
> sdkitty-
> I'm with you, if she called me she'd get an earful starting with "This is just the latest example of your incessant hypocrisy" since  9 months ago you were widely quoted in multiple media sources saying... "
> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry refuse to live in LA until ***** leaves office: report*
> 
> AOL.COM EDITORS
> Jan 13th 2020 10:35AM


Wish I had a dollar every time, past and present, someone promised to leave if (whoever) was elected/re-elected.


----------



## Pautinka

papertiger said:


> and never mind 'fanny pack'


I'm glad you said it...I've been trying to pluck up the courage!!!


----------



## redney

Oooooo I would love it if she called me. Ever see those articles online where people messed with scammer calls/emails? I would have a great time with her bwah hahaha!


----------



## kemilia

1LV said:


> Wish I had a dollar every time, past and present, someone promised to leave if (whoever) was elected/re-elected.


I'm with you here. Wish they would leave already!


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Wish I had a dollar every time, past and present, someone promised to leave if (whoever) was elected/re-elected.



The hypocrisy of a Hollywood celebrity. In that sense H&M fit right in. They are all talk with no follow through, especially if it involves any inconvenience or discomfort to themselves.


----------



## marietouchet

Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp 





__





						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## bisousx

Of course she did.  Off topic: The US really needs to adopt UK’s loser-pays court system.. it would weed out so many frivolous lawsuits.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, what will be their excuse when this lawyer loses their case? Personally, I am not seeing a privacy violation.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> Of course she did.  Off topic: The US really needs to adopt UK’s loser-pays court system.. it would weed out so many frivolous lawsuits.



I believe you do have to go through a step where a judge or jury gives your lawsuit the green light to continue... and that should weed out truly merit-less lawsuits.

In the UK, the loser ALWAYS pays the winner court fees? How is that even possible, like if the victim were low-income or really anything but extremely wealthy to be able to afford two sets of legal fees?


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I believe you do have to go through a step where a judge or jury gives your lawsuit the green light to continue... and that should weed out truly merit-less lawsuits.
> 
> In the UK, the loser ALWAYS pays the winner court fees? How is that even possible, like if the victim were low-income or really anything but extremely wealthy to be able to afford two sets of legal fees?



I think you have to ask for costs. Then you may only be awarded part of your costs as a percentage or fixed sum and these all need to be verifiable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Re the Court Case: Meghan is probably already prepping for this and salivating at the chance to finally be a lead in a legal drama. She will feel at ease, having been in this setting before. She could be practicing her victim look in the mirror as I type this. She may even be  pulling out old "Suits" scripts to see if any good lines can be replayed.

There are so many ways this could play out especially with her father showing up to testify, if that still happens. He has been quoted as, would be expected, wanting to see his grandson Archie. Archie could be a player. If Grandpa Markle got his wish, would it affect his approach to the trial? Especially if Archie could have been coached and on seeing his Grandpa Markle, called him by some pet name. Grandpa's going to melt. (I admit to being cynical but I bet that Archie saw pictures of Charles over and over accompanied by a prompt of "this is Pa" or "Smile at Pa," or "Wave at Pa" "Say 'Pa' Archie" so that during Harry's birthday video he called Charles "Pa" and you could almost hear the purse strings loosening again.

Harry will be in this also, I predict. He has already demonstrated he is willing to disrespect his Grandmother, the Queen on more than one occasion, in favor of bowing to his wife and her neediness . And it appears he is getting away with it, which has caused me to think a little differently about HRH (Andrew has put another tinge on it as well). If called to testify I wouldn't assume that even under oath JCMH is telling the whole truth about anything that might mar his wife's reputation in any way and if there is collateral damage to the Crown, so be it.

I think Meghan will use this for mega Media Time and on going headlines: A change of heart and a reconciliation with her Father, all is forgiven, he has a place to stay up the coast in Montecito when he wants to see family? She gets the glow of sprinkling fairy dust and a "happy ever after" and see? she is generous and loving about someone other than self.

Or, if things get too hot for Meghan and the 5 friends about sources of information, might Harry end up in the Witness Box and proclaim HE was the source of the intimate details and floor plans and vaults etc etc, to deflect from them. Again, don't bother to think about any hurt or harm to TRF, it's all about "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets." 

Markle and Maroney are symbiotic, both are users and they use each other best. I think Jessica's latest "we are family" is a prelude to what's coming in January and each will protect the other.

Stay tuned, not that we'll have any choice. Unless some other major story from TRF breaks at the same time and then she will be bereft.


----------



## Tootsie17

csshopper said:


> Re the Court Case: Meghan is probably already prepping for this and salivating at the chance to finally be a lead in a legal drama. She will feel at ease, having been in this setting before. She could be practicing her victim look in the mirror as I type this. She may even be  pulling out old "Suits" scripts to see if any good lines can be replayed.
> 
> There are so many ways this could play out especially with her father showing up to testify, if that still happens. He has been quoted as, would be expected, wanting to see his grandson Archie. Archie could be a player. If Grandpa Markle got his wish, would it affect his approach to the trial? Especially if Archie could have been coached and on seeing his Grandpa Markle, called him by some pet name. Grandpa's going to melt. (I admit to being cynical but I bet that Archie saw pictures of Charles over and over accompanied by a prompt of "this is Pa" or "Smile at Pa," or "Wave at Pa" "Say 'Pa' Archie" so that during Harry's birthday video he called Charles "Pa" and you could almost hear the purse strings loosening again.
> 
> Harry will be in this also, I predict. He has already demonstrated he is willing to disrespect his Grandmother, the Queen on more than one occasion, in favor of bowing to his wife and her neediness . And it appears he is getting away with it, which has caused me to think a little differently about HRH (Andrew has put another tinge on it as well). If called to testify I wouldn't assume that even under oath JCMH is telling the whole truth about anything that might mar his wife's reputation in any way and if there is collateral damage to the Crown, so be it.
> 
> I think Meghan will use this for mega Media Time and on going headlines: A change of heart and a reconciliation with her Father, all is forgiven, he has a place to stay up the coast in Montecito when he wants to see family? She gets the glow of sprinkling fairy dust and a "happy ever after" and see? she is generous and loving about someone other than self.
> 
> Or, if things get too hot for Meghan and the 5 friends about sources of information, might Harry end up in the Witness Box and proclaim HE was the source of the intimate details and floor plans and vaults etc etc, to deflect from them. Again, don't bother to think about any hurt or harm to TRF, it's all about "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets."
> 
> Markle and Maroney are symbiotic, both are users and they use each other best. I think Jessica's latest "we are family" is a prelude to what's coming in January and each will protect the other.
> 
> Stay tuned, not that we'll have any choice. Unless some other major story from TRF breaks at the same time and then she will be bereft.


Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day and night.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone believe she’s going to show up for court? She doesn’t have the cojones, particularly since things don’t seem to be going her way. I fully expect them to  use COVID as their excuse for not going. She’ll let the lawyers do the work and maybe give her testimony via a Zoom call.


----------



## Luvbolide

CobaltBlu said:


> I dont even want to ask y'all to stay on topic because I am literally enchanted by the waistcoat discussion.
> 
> In Mexico, by the way, flip flips/thongs are called chanclas, and kids better behave because the chancla throw is a real thing, and a way some moms and abuelitas get kids to behave (yes, its awful, but its a thing....)  = la chancla voladora - flying chancla





I know that I shouldn't laugh, but the pic of the mom throwing her flip flop so far and hitting her daughter really made me laugh.  She is kind of like the Steph Curry of flip flops!


----------



## VickyB

I'm just so happy she wasn't featured at the Emmys!!!!!!!!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Okay, it seems like the children have broken all of their toys and now the adults have entered the room <via this thread>.

Must state that the adopted look-the-other-way attitude of the BRF regarding the antics of H&M has gone on long enough imo, and is now almost as unacceptable as H&M’s behavior.

Is it any wonder that Harry could give a Sh!t about his actions? And continues to be a Buffon? Well, surprise surprise bc now we know why.

Watching the BRF give a free-pass to both H&M after their continued new lows, directed many times towards the BRF for almost a year now <the book, the lawsuits, the new MacMansion, the over the top meaningless marriage celebration when it sure sounds like they were going to bail even then, and now cold calling during an election, excuse me?> and the BRF does NOTHING?

Why would Harry show any respect to an institution that now seemingly does not respect itself?

There are discreet ways to publicly state   displeasure, am sure that the gentle readers here can envision numerous strategies to take H&M down a few notches.

That it has not been done has been noticed.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> This is likely one of the reasons why MM is calling (daily) JM behind the scenes:
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'co-operated' with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers in latest privacy battle*
> A document presented to the court, in which Meghan is referred to as 'C' (claimant) maintains: 'If C provided extensive cooperation to the authors and permitted a detailed account of her private life, relationships, thoughts and feelings to be published, including references to her relationship and communications with her father, it is difficult to see how she can complain that the Letter should not have been published because 'it contained the Claimant's deepest and most private thoughts and feelings.'
> They claim that in his statement Mr Scobie seems to confirm that people 'working on behalf of C (Meghan) co-operated with the authors and gave them the names of people close to C who would help and that the authors spoke to such people and received information from them.'
> 
> Meghan is claiming costs at an estimated £1.4 million, which is being disputed by ANL as being too high.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle co-operated with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers
> 
> 
> Meghan is accused of  'collaborating' with the authors of the book about her royal life, the latest hearing of her High Court action against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday will hear today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




This is going to be fun!  Wonder how many attorneys she will have hired and fired by the time of trial!  Do courts in the UK allow cameras or audio taping?


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Wonder if Omid is willing to perjure himself to prove what a loyal brown-noser he is to Meghan.



He may try to "cover her" during a cross-exam, but if the opposing attorney is good at it, Scobie is likely to get picked apart.  Don't think he is smart enough to survive a withering cross, particularly where the environment is one he is not accustomed to.  I hope that courts in Britain allow cameras!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I think the RF is playing a waiting game. Instead of chastising MM & Harry now, they might be waiting for the court case to resolve itself so they won't be accused of trying to influence the outcome. If MM loses, which it appears to be heading in that direction, it could mean vindication for the RF. Also, as it has been stated before the RF does not wash its laundry in public. That chore belongs to the likes of Diana, Harry and MM and Sarah to some degree.


----------



## Chanbal

How is Omid & and his master going to explain this contradiction? 

*Meghan did not collaborate with authors of Finding Freedom, High Court hears*
A spokesperson for the couple told _The Independent _on numerous occasions that the couple were not involved and that _Finding Freedom_ was based on the authors’ own experiences in the royal household.

Now Meghan Markle’s lawyers have reiterated the same point in the latest stage of her legal action against Associated Newspapers (ANL), publisher of _The Mail on Sunday_ and _Mail Online_.









						Meghan did not collaborate with authors of Finding Freedom, High Court hears
					

The claim comes in the latest stage of the Duchess of Sussex’s legal action against Associated Newspapers




					www.yahoo.com
				



Authors' note included in the kindle version of Finding F. (screenshot from Amazon Reviews, I didn't buy the book)


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> *I believe you do have to go through a step where a judge or jury gives your lawsuit the green light to continue... and that should weed out truly merit-less lawsuits.*
> 
> In the UK, the loser ALWAYS pays the winner court fees? How is that even possible, like if the victim were low-income or really anything but extremely wealthy to be able to afford two sets of legal fees?



Are you referring to the US system? If so, meritless civil suits get passed thru the system all the time. It sadly doesn’t work that way IRL.


----------



## bisousx

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Okay, it seems like the children have broken all of their toys and now the adults have entered the room <via this thread>.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it any wonder that Harry could give a Sh!t about his actions? And continues to be a Buffon? Well, surprise surprise bc now we know why.
> 
> Watching the BRF give a free-pass to both H&M after their continued new lows, directed many times towards the BRF for almost a year now <the book, the lawsuits, the new MacMansion, the over the top meaningless marriage celebration when it sure sounds like they were going to bail even then, and now cold calling during an election, excuse me?> and the BRF does NOTHING?
> 
> Why would Harry show any respect to an institution that now seemingly does not respect itself?
> 
> There are discreet ways to publicly state   displeasure, am sure that the gentle readers here can envision numerous strategies to take H&M down a few notches.
> 
> That it has not been done has been noticed.



Agreed, they look complicit. Except for Will and Kate, who are obviously pissed.


----------



## mdcx

Gosh, she's a litigious wee thing isn't she? Most of us are rarely involved in legal action but Meghan has been keeping lawsuits churning over non stop the last few years.


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> Gosh, she's a litigious wee thing isn't she? Most of us are rarely involved in legal action but Meghan has been keeping lawsuits churning over non stop the last few years.




These lawsuits are proof she a) is looking for a windfall while getting someone else to pay for legal fees throughout. b) is keeps a diary of every perceived slight made by anyone/anything - just in case c) is not only willing to lie under oath (if she wasn't involved in the book, why isn't she sue OS?) but asks others to lie on her behalf. 

And this is the person who puts herself up as a role model and advocate of decency and democracy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> In the UK, the loser ALWAYS pays the winner court fees? How is that even possible, like if the victim were low-income or really anything but extremely wealthy to be able to afford two sets of legal fees?



Same system in Germany, BUT if you're low income you can apply for financial help before the trial. If they think you have a good chance of winning, they will pay for a lawyer of your choice and any other fees that come up even if you happen to lose - if you win, the loser pays. If they think you are a ligitous nutjob who sues as a hobby with no real prospect of success they will shut down your application to begin with, if you insist to still go to court and then lose the joke's on you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> I believe you do have to go through a step where a judge or jury gives your lawsuit the green light to continue... and that should weed out truly merit-less lawsuits.
> 
> In the UK, the loser ALWAYS pays the winner court fees? How is that even possible, like if the victim were low-income or really anything but extremely wealthy to be able to afford two sets of legal fees?





bisousx said:


> Of course she did.  Off topic: The US really needs to adopt UK’s loser-pays court system.. it would weed out so many frivolous lawsuits.


It's not so cut and dry re legal fees. I am not in legal field but my SO works in a industry involves very rich people with massive egos in elite team sport so he has experience in several civil suits before. Firstly there is no jury in civil cases, the judge decide everything. Civil suit are filed with the High Court, which is very expensive. The filing itself is £10k. The max costs on each side are set by the judge at the start of the case after an initial reading of the outline of the case. That will be the max you can recover from the other side. Then the judge can also decide you can only recover a portion of that based on their verdict. In one case my SO was an witness, the final cost of that case of the plaintiff was £1.2m! And the judge ordered both sides to pay their own costs! You can apply for legal aid if you can't pay for legal costs and have a serious case.

Anyway, the cost MM was ordered to pay is related to the part of the suit which the judge decided it had no remit. In the UK, the lawyers can't coach the plaintiff or witness. They have to set out the case / their statement themselves. So the throw away part of the case would be solely brought on by MM, not prompted by her legal team in any way. She can't say she was mis-guided by her legal team to file that part of the suit. It is possible that her legal team would have advised her that that part might not hold up but she must have insisted on it.

And no cameras will be allowed in the court room and it will not be televised. The court may use video link though because of Covid.

I can see MM being massively disappointed at the UK legal system as it has a lot of differences from the ones she's "familiar" with in Suit.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Same system in Germany, BUT if you're low income you can apply for financial help before the trial. If they think you have a good chance of winning, they will pay for a lawyer of your choice and any other fees that come up even if you happen to lose - if you win, the loser pays. If they think you are a ligitous nutjob who sues as a hobby with no real prospect of success they will shut down your application to begin with, if you insist to still go to court and then lose the joke's on you.



As I said earlier, there is no guarantee legal costs will be paid by the loser in the UK.

I'm not in the legal profession but I lived with 2 barristers and a lawyer for 4 years (not that makes me an expert at all but I kinda got the basics).

If someone wins, the winner_ may_ be able to get some _or_ all costs paid from the losing side. A Costs Order is made by a judge (if it ends-up in court). The Judge assesses how much and to be paid and by whom.

In the UK it's very difficult to get legal aid.

Some UK lawyers use the no win, no fee. Usually, only when they know they have a sure win of course.

All I know is the lawyers are always in a win-win situation (apologies to any lawyers).


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> All I know is the lawyers are always in a win-win situation (apologies to any lawyers).




Sometimes though, clients don’t pay. It happens...

In continental Europe (civil law system) you are generally not allowed to link lawyer fees to the result of the case. That discourages ambulance chasers and class actions. Where CFAs (no win/no fee) are allowed like in the UK, they typically don’t include court and barrister fees. Reimbursement of costs by the loosing party has to be asked separatedly and it is up to the judge. Normally it is awarded, but for example if it is employees against employers or consumer protection matters or such matters where there is a clear unbalance of power, in many countries unsuccessful plaintiffs will not be asked to pay the defendant’s costs (unless there is bad faith) in order not to discourage litigation and thus effective protection.

But yes, the system is very different from the US. If she came into it thinking this is an episode of Suits (I for one ocassionally watched and enjoyed the series btw), she is in for a shock.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not so cut and dry re legal fees. I am not in legal field but my SO works in a industry involves very rich people with massive egos in elite team sport so he has experience in several civil suits before. Firstly there is no jury in civil cases, the judge decide everything. Civil suit are filed with the High Court, which is very expensive. The filing itself is £10k. The max costs on each side are set by the judge at the start of the case after an initial reading of the outline of the case. That will be the max you can recover from the other side. Then the judge can also decide you can only recover a portion of that based on their verdict. In one case my SO was an witness, the final cost of that case of the plaintiff was £1.2m! And the judge ordered both sides to pay their own costs! You can apply for legal aid if you can't pay for legal costs and have a serious case.
> 
> Anyway, the cost MM was ordered to pay is related to the part of the suit which the judge decided it had no remit. In the UK, the lawyers can't coach the plaintiff or witness. They have to set out the case / their statement themselves. So the throw away part of the case would be solely brought on by MM, not prompted by her legal team in any way. She can't say she was mis-guided by her legal team to file that part of the suit. It is possible that her legal team would have advised her that that part might not hold up but she must have insisted on it.
> 
> And no cameras will be allowed in the court room and it will not be televised. The court may use video link though because of Covid.
> 
> I can see MM being massively disappointed at the UK legal system as it has a lot of differences from the ones she's "familiar" with in Suit.


Clearly, I need to brush up on UK civil trials, maybe marathon a good TV show, or find recordings of all two weeks of the Johnny Depp mess and watch it for educational purposes


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> Sometimes though, clients don’t pay. It happens...
> 
> In continental Europe (civil law system) you are generally not allowed to link lawyer fees to the result of the case. That discourages ambulance chasers and class actions. Where CFAs (no win/no fee) are allowed like in the UK, they typically don’t include court and barrister fees. Reimbursement of costs by the loosing party has to be asked separatedly and it is up to the judge. Normally it is awarded, but for example if it is employees against employers or consumer protection matters or such matters where there is a clear unbalance of power, in many countries unsuccessful plaintiffs will not be asked to pay the defendant’s costs (unless there is bad faith) in order not to discourage litigation and thus effective protection.
> 
> But yes, the system is very different from the US. If she came into it thinking this is an episode of Suits (I for one ocassionally watched and enjoyed the series btw), she is in for a shock.


Darn, darn, darn ... for education purposes was thinking of watching a few years of SUITS to educate me on UK civil trials, I like to be rigorous in research matters


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> These lawsuits are proof she a) is looking for a windfall while getting someone else to pay for legal fees throughout. b) is keeps a diary of every perceived slight made by anyone/anything - just in case c) is not only willing to lie under oath (if she wasn't involved in the book, why isn't she sue OS?) but asks others to lie on her behalf.
> 
> And this is the person who puts herself up as a role model and advocate of decency and democracy?



The lack of credibility is shocking!

People like MM delay the advance of women's causes or any other causes they get involved imho.


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


> The lack of credibility is shocking!
> 
> People like MM delay the advance of women's causes or any other causes they get involved imho.



Plus these „vanity lawsuits“ block the courts and keep them from deciding on real and urgent matters!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The lack of credibility is shocking!
> 
> People like MM delay the advance of women's causes or any other causes they get involved imho.


I wonder how long it will take for people to realize they've been duped?!!


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wonder how long it will take for people to realize they've been duped?!!



Maybe never. I've come to the conclusion that people see what they want to see and don't believe anything they don't like.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Maybe never. I've come to the conclusion that people see what they want to see and don't believe anything they don't like.


I couldn’t agree more.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Maybe never. I've come to the conclusion that people see what they want to see and don't believe anything they don't like.


Wow, your quote could also describe narcissistic personalities... blaming everyone else for their failures... Like going ahead with a project when everybody else says stop. Or forgoing proper research before acting on a hunch, because they are "so smart, intelligent and know everything" unlike us dummies.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wonder how long it will take for people to realize they've been duped?!!


Some people may never realize that they have been duped. Others they know very well, but don't want or can't act on it (ex. BRF). And of course, some of the major supporters are also very aware of what's going on, but being phony is not an issue to them.

With all the positive and/or negative publicity, MM & H will keep profiting from deals like Netflix, Scarface's mansion, foundations, and lawsuits, which may end up giving them a lot of power. Phony role models are a danger to society. Let's see if justice prevails and it will be established that the 'famous' letter was written intentionally to be public and not to be confidential as MM claims.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> Another just got Merkled!
> The full article is behind a pay wall which I don't have access to:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has sacked the barrister leading her legal battle against a national newspaper, replacing him with one of his arch rivals as the court ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan fires lawyer who represented Johnny Depp*
> 
> The duchess is suing Associated Newspapers Limited over an article that reproduced parts of a handwritten letter she had sent to her father
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has sacked the barrister leading her legal battle against a national newspaper, replacing him with one of his arch rivals as the court case resumes today.
> David Sherborne, whose clients have included Diana, Princess of Wales, and more recently the actor Johnny Depp, will no longer act for the duchess when the case against the _Mail on Sunday_ continues, _The Times_ has confirmed.
> 
> Mr Sherborne lost the first pre-trial hearing in May. As a result the duchess was ordered to pay the newspaper £67,888 in legal costs.
> 
> David Sherborne, with Johnny Depp outside court in July, has been replaced with an arch rival by the Duchess of Sussex
> WILL OLIVER/EPA-EFE/REX
> Justin Rushbrooke, QC, has confirmed to _The Times_ that he will represent the *former television actress *in future hearings.
> 
> The QC is said to have impressed her when standing in for Mr Sherborne...


*.. and here we go again!  I'm starting to think that Meghan wants to be the top-dog of the Guinness World Records in the "Most Defendant Lawsuits" category .. sheesh! *


----------



## CeeJay

CobaltBlu said:


> I dont even want to ask y'all to stay on topic because I am literally enchanted by the waistcoat discussion.
> 
> In Mexico, by the way, flip flips/thongs are called chanclas, and kids better behave because the chancla throw is a real thing, and a way some moms and abuelitas get kids to behave (yes, its awful, but its a thing....)  = la chancla voladora - flying chancla



HA HA HA .. had to laugh at this one because my Italian mother did the same!  If either my sister or I got out of line, you would get that flip flop/thong/sandal - whatever thrown into the back of your head (or your back - her aim wasn't the best)!!!!


----------



## Luvbolide

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not so cut and dry re legal fees. I am not in legal field but my SO works in a industry involves very rich people with massive egos in elite team sport so he has experience in several civil suits before. Firstly there is no jury in civil cases, the judge decide everything. Civil suit are filed with the High Court, which is very expensive. The filing itself is £10k. The max costs on each side are set by the judge at the start of the case after an initial reading of the outline of the case. That will be the max you can recover from the other side. Then the judge can also decide you can only recover a portion of that based on their verdict. In one case my SO was an witness, the final cost of that case of the plaintiff was £1.2m! And the judge ordered both sides to pay their own costs! You can apply for legal aid if you can't pay for legal costs and have a serious case.
> 
> Anyway, the cost MM was ordered to pay is related to the part of the suit which the judge decided it had no remit. In the UK, the lawyers can't coach the plaintiff or witness. They have to set out the case / their statement themselves. So the throw away part of the case would be solely brought on by MM, not prompted by her legal team in any way. She can't say she was mis-guided by her legal team to file that part of the suit. It is possible that her legal team would have advised her that that part might not hold up but she must have insisted on it.
> 
> And no cameras will be allowed in the court room and it will not be televised. The court may use video link though because of Covid.
> 
> I can see MM being massively disappointed at the UK legal system as it has a lot of differences from the ones she's "familiar" with in Suit.




Thank you for all of this!  Your system is very different from ours in the US.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not so cut and dry re legal fees. I am not in legal field but my SO works in a industry involves very rich people with massive egos in elite team sport so he has experience in several civil suits before. Firstly there is no jury in civil cases, the judge decide everything. Civil suit are filed with the High Court, which is very expensive. The filing itself is £10k. The max costs on each side are set by the judge at the start of the case after an initial reading of the outline of the case. That will be the max you can recover from the other side. Then the judge can also decide you can only recover a portion of that based on their verdict. In one case my SO was an witness, the final cost of that case of the plaintiff was £1.2m! And the judge ordered both sides to pay their own costs! You can apply for legal aid if you can't pay for legal costs and have a serious case.
> 
> Anyway, the cost MM was ordered to pay is related to the part of the suit which the judge decided it had no remit. In the UK, the lawyers can't coach the plaintiff or witness. They have to set out the case / their statement themselves. So the throw away part of the case would be solely brought on by MM, not prompted by her legal team in any way. She can't say she was mis-guided by her legal team to file that part of the suit. It is possible that her legal team would have advised her that that part might not hold up but she must have insisted on it.
> 
> And no cameras will be allowed in the court room and it will not be televised. The court may use video link though because of Covid.
> 
> I can see MM being massively disappointed at the UK legal system as it has a lot of differences from the ones she's "familiar" with in Suit.



I think there are certain specific civil claims that can still be decided by a jury in the UK.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is likely one of the reasons why MM is calling (daily) JM behind the scenes:
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'co-operated' with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers in latest privacy battle*
> A document presented to the court, in which Meghan is referred to as 'C' (claimant) maintains: 'If C provided extensive cooperation to the authors and permitted a detailed account of her private life, relationships, thoughts and feelings to be published, including references to her relationship and communications with her father, it is difficult to see how she can complain that the Letter should not have been published because 'it contained the Claimant's deepest and most private thoughts and feelings.'
> They claim that in his statement Mr Scobie seems to confirm that people 'working on behalf of C (Meghan) co-operated with the authors and gave them the names of people close to C who would help and that the authors spoke to such people and received information from them.'
> 
> Meghan is claiming costs at an estimated £1.4 million, which is being disputed by ANL as being too high.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle co-operated with Finding Freedom authors, claim lawyers
> 
> 
> Meghan is accused of  'collaborating' with the authors of the book about her royal life, the latest hearing of her High Court action against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday will hear today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well *QUELLE SURPRISE*, not!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> This is kind of a funny way to put it (cold calling). Not inaccurate, but it's more commonly called canvassing which has a SLIGHTLY less annoying association haha. Celebrities are known to do things like this at election time. But what would someone who hasn't lived in the US in what, 10 years, add to the discussion that she is actually calling up strangers to talk about it?


.. I wouldn't doubt for a split-second that she tells them EXACTLY who is calling "Hi - this is the Duchess of Sussex calling .." since I'm sure she is expecting the called individual to fawn all over her!  Is she calling on behalf of a certain political party, or just calling to say "VOTE"?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. I wouldn't doubt for a split-second that she tells them EXACTLY who is calling "Hi - this is the Duchess of Sussex calling .." since I'm sure she is expecting the called individual to fawn all over her!  *Is she calling on behalf of a certain political party, or just calling to say "VOTE"?*



It depends on how "cold" the call was. I'm assuming she was given a short list of people to call who were already prepped to talk to a celebrity. The chances of Gloria and Meghan randomly calling names from the phone directory (does anyone still have these?) is nil! It was all a planned performance to get media attention, right up both of their alleys.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> My guess Meghan's election cold calling script is just another way for her to get paid for something. I'm sure she was given a script to recite. I'd love to hear her word salad version though. At the end you'd have no idea who or what she was even talking about, except for the part about asking to feel sorry for her.


Yeah, go ahead Meghan .. call me .. as you will get an *ear-full* !!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if they are reading our comments?  Or — is the universe trying to tell H&M to let.it.go?


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Of course she did.  Off topic: The US really needs to adopt UK’s loser-pays court system.. it would weed out so many frivolous lawsuits.


Agreed, but the defendant can file for punitive damages (as I did with one case - but as the Plaintiff) .. and if the Court deems the suit to be frivolous, then it would be likely that they will grant the punitive damages request.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle looks ‘more trustworthy’ than the Queen, according to face-scanning algorithm that reveal portraits show their subjects looking more dependable as living standards improve*

*Researchers trained an algorithm to scan faces for signs of trustworthiness*
*They then ran the algorithm over selfies from Instagram and fine art portraits*
*They found a clear link between increased living standards and trustworthiness*
*The team also scanned images of famous faces and compared how trustworthy they appeared including the Queen, Meghan Markle and Queen Elizabeth I *
Meghan Markle 'looks more trustworthy' than the Queen when comparing their faces, authors of a new study into changes in portraits over 500 years claim.

Experts from PSL Research University created an algorithm that scans faces in painted portraits and photographs to determine the trustworthiness of the person. 

The authors used the trustworthiness tool to discover that as living standards improved since 1500 AD, so did the trustworthiness of the subjects of a portrait. 

As part of the process of training the model, researcher compared some famous faces to ancient portraits - including the Queen and Meghan Markle to Elizabeth I.

Meghan appeared three and a half times more trustworthy than Elizabeth I, but Her Majesty the Queen was one and a half times more trustworthy, authors found. 

The algorithm doesn't assess trustworthiness in itself - rather the qualities and traits the sitters of a portrait wanted to portray in their image, authors explained. 

'It is possible that Megan Markle is not a trustworthy person, but on average her appearance in her portrait makes her look trustworthy,' said author Nicolas Baumard.

Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...hy-Queen-face-scanning-algorithm-reveals.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well...yeah. Maybe that algorhythm is faulty.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well...yeah. Maybe that algorhythm is faulty.



It is the most ridiculous and pointless bit of "research." What does it matter if someone _looks_ trustworthy? The best con artists and frauds in the world are the people that others think look like you can trust them. And comparing old paintings to modern photos? That proves absolutely nothing.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm so sorry Omid but we had to do this. We need to stop DM from using your (our) great creation against us. No worries, it is not like you have much credibility anyway. And, you are apparently covered by a “creative license”, so you will be fine. “All's well that ends well.” 

*Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims*








						Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims
					

The Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have issued a scathing dismissal of claims in her biography as “extremely anodyne”, “the product of creative licence” or “inaccurate” as they insist she could not have cooperated with its authors. The Duchess’s legal team accused the authors of Finding Freedom of...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims*



I would feel bad for him, but having studied her for so long he really could have known better, couldn't he. Also the timeframe is interesting to me...I feel if true they'd have spoken up the minute the book got published, not now when it serves them. But what do I know.

ETA: I wonder if he'll still kiss the ground she walks on from now on.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well...yeah. Maybe that algorhythm is faulty.





bag-mania said:


> It is the most ridiculous and pointless bit of "research." What does it matter if someone _looks_ trustworthy? The best con artists and frauds in the world are the people that others think look like you can trust them. And comparing old paintings to modern photos? That proves absolutely nothing.


Was it a faulty algorithm or the work of a superb plastic surgeon?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Was it a faulty algorithm or the work of a superb plastic surgeon?



Good point.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> .. I wouldn't doubt for a split-second that she tells them EXACTLY who is calling "Hi - this is the Duchess of Sussex calling .." since I'm sure she is expecting the called individual to fawn all over her!  Is she calling on behalf of a certain political party, or just calling to say "VOTE"?



You mean like: 

"Greetings, I know I need no introduction, but I am the Duchess of Sussex, as you obviously already know! I'm so inspired by the humanity brought before me, voting is an incomparable and indelible legacy which I've known since I was a little girl. Voters are a true inspiration to me, they are people of brilliance, courage, and deepest conviction. I even vote for myself  myself when I'm notified there is an election because voting is the most important impactful action we as humanitarians and children of the Earth can possibly take. As I've told H, one must thrive, not just survive. I used to be only existing, not living. Even when I was wearing $130,000 Dior kaftans that some Commonwealth I never knew about paid for. Nobody asked me if I was OK. But now, asking you to vote has given my money grubbing  life new meaning. Please vote. You can even write in my name. Remember to capitalize 'Duchess of Sussex'. It is with profound gratitude that you vote for me vote!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I'm so sorry Omid but we had to do this. We need to stop DM from using your (our) great creation against us. No worries, it is not like you have much credibility anyway. And, you are apparently covered by a “creative license”, so you will be fine. “All's well that ends well.”
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have issued a scathing dismissal of claims in her biography as “extremely anodyne”, “the product of creative licence” or “inaccurate” as they insist she could not have cooperated with its authors. The Duchess’s legal team accused the authors of Finding Freedom of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Lol! I was just coming here to post this...

I have a couple thoughts... When is the lawsuit? Surely if the book is full of embellishments they wouldn’t let it stand. But I also can’t help but go the full conspiracy theorist and wonder if it was planned... oh I hope they put Omid on the stand and he has to claim his book is full of lies or turn on them.... this could be fun....


----------



## Sol Ryan

rose60610 said:


> You mean like:
> 
> "Greetings, I know I need no introduction, but I am the Duchess of Sussex, as you obviously already know! I'm so inspired by the humanity brought before me, voting is an incomparable and indelible legacy which I've known since I was a little girl. Voters are a true inspiration to me, they are people of brilliance, courage, and deepest conviction. I even vote for myself  myself when I'm notified there is an election because voting is the most important impactful action we as humanitarians and children of the Earth can possibly take. As I've told H, one must thrive, not just survive. I used to be only existing, not living. Even when I was wearing $130,000 Dior kaftans that some Commonwealth I never knew about paid for. Nobody asked me if I was OK. But now, asking you to vote has given my money grubbing  life new meaning. Please vote. You can even write in my name. Remember to capitalize 'Duchess of Sussex'. It is with profound gratitude that you vote for me vote!"



Talk about throwing away your vote....


----------



## scarlet555

Saw this similar headline below waiting in line at the grocery on a cover of gossip magazine, if only... 









						Meghan Markle, Harry Pretending To Have Perfect Life In Montecito While Sleeping In Separate Bedrooms
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are allegedly bickering over money and sleeping in separate bedrooms in Montecito.




					www.entertaintimes.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> Saw this similar headline below waiting in line at the grocery on a cover of gossip magazine, if only...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Harry Pretending To Have Perfect Life In Montecito While Sleeping In Separate Bedrooms
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are allegedly bickering over money and sleeping in separate bedrooms in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com



Weren't there really nasty rumours of fights when they were on tour while she was pregnant as well? I wonder when he'll cut his losses, take the kid and go back to the UK.

That said, that website seems to be one of the shadier sources...one of the links in the article went to a complete nonsense piece about how Archie wouldn't have to ask Kate Middleton for permission to get married because only 1 to 6th in line have to ask (note: Wills will be the ruling king by the time, not Kate, and Archie might be #5 by then) but Meghan was so enraged she thought about confronting Kate about it. WTF is this ridiculousness, none of it makes sense whatsoever.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Weren't there really nasty rumours of fights when they were on tour while she was pregnant as well? I wonder when he'll cut his losses, take the kid and go back to the UK.



He wouldn't dare. She's the alpha in that relationship. He'll leave when she tells him he can leave and not a minute earlier.


----------



## Lodpah

Sol Ryan said:


> Lol! I was just coming here to post this...
> 
> I have a couple thoughts... When is the lawsuit? Surely if the book is full of embellishments they wouldn’t let it stand. But I also can’t help but go the full conspiracy theorist and wonder if it was planned... oh I hope they put Omid on the stand and he has to claim his book is full of lies or turn on them.... this could be fun....


I thought at one point she wanted the book released early?


----------



## Lodpah

MM tribute to the strong  Ruth Bader Ginsburg was an affront to women who make a difference. If she so admired her why didn’t she include her in the 15 most influential women in Vogue?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> MM tribute to the strong  Ruth Bader Ginsburg was an affront to women who make a difference. If she so admired her why didn’t she include her in the 15 most influential women in Vogue?



I guess RBG wouldn't have been interested in fawning over her.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would feel bad for him, but having studied her for so long he really could have known better, couldn't he. Also the timeframe is interesting to me...I feel if true they'd have spoken up the minute the book got published, not now when it serves them. But what do I know.
> 
> ETA: I wonder if he'll still kiss the ground she walks on from now on.


Queen, totally agree with you. 

I think he thought he was special, well, he was especially useful, until he wasn't, because the book bombed in most markets, except with her stans, as doing the opposite of what they intended. Taken in total it clearly showed they were not victims, but instead they are  whiny,  hypocritical, grubbing, selfish, narcissistic users of people. 

 Sing-Song-School yard chant: "Omar's getting  Markled!" "Omar's getting Markled!" "Omar's getting Markled!"


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I'm so sorry Omid but we had to do this. We need to stop DM from using your (our) great creation against us. No worries, it is not like you have much credibility anyway. And, you are apparently covered by a “creative license”, so you will be fine. “All's well that ends well.”
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex's lawyers issue scathing dismissal of Finding Freedom claims
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have issued a scathing dismissal of claims in her biography as “extremely anodyne”, “the product of creative licence” or “inaccurate” as they insist she could not have cooperated with its authors. The Duchess’s legal team accused the authors of Finding Freedom of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Oopps, another one got Markled! Who else is left??? Lol!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Sing-Song-School yard chant: "Omar's getting  Markled!" "Omar's getting Markled!" "Omar's getting Markled*!"*


This is all done in the name of the greater good. Scoobie-doo, JM, MM... are all complicit imo. Working "behind the scenes" seems to be a favorite thing of the duchess...

@*chicinthecity777 *I would prefer that you would be right, but their hypocrisy levels are very high... I believe that being "markled" is just for the sake of appearances (and lawsuit) in this case.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Honestly this is such car crash TV material!


----------



## csshopper

chicinthecity777 said:


> Oopps, another one got Markled! Who else is left??? Lol!


Scobie had a co author, Carolyn Durand, she, smart lady, kept such a low profile I had to go back just now to find her name. But whatever hits him, will stick to some extent to her as well. Ah, the price of fame.


----------



## chicinthecity777

csshopper said:


> Scobie had a co author, Carolyn Durand, she, smart lady, kept such a low profile I had to go back just now to find her name. But whatever hits him, will stick to some extent to her as well. Ah, the price of fame.


Yeah. Scobie is the one who wrote a statement for the suit though. I wonder if she keeps quiet, she might not get dragged into all this.


----------



## Sol Ryan

csshopper said:


> Scobie had a co author, Carolyn Durand, she, smart lady, kept such a low profile I had to go back just now to find her name. But whatever hits him, will stick to some extent to her as well. Ah, the price of fame.



I’m curious about her. It’s odd she’s in none of the press. I wonder if Omid will try to throw her under the bus or if she just served as and editor on it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> I thought at one point she wanted the book released early?


It was said via a source (what else?). So she can now deny she ever said it.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yeah. Scobie is the one who wrote a statement for the suit though. I wonder if she keeps quiet, she might not get dragged into all this.


She will get dragged into it because her name is on the cover.  The sugars are blaming her for dragging him in to write the book.  Sounds like the Scobie defense strategy to me.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Amanda wrote: "Despite Palace protocol dictating that spouses are not included in pictures celebrating royal birthdays, *it must have hurt Prince Harry deeply to see that the images released by his grandmother, father and brother to celebrate his 36th birthday all excluded his wife Megs.*
> 
> And according to one royal expert, the apparent snub was made all the worse after the Duchess of Cambridge, was included in one image of Harry with William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry ‘deeply hurt’ as Meghan 'left out' of birthday messages, writer says
> 
> 
> A royal expert has claimed Prince Harry must have been upset over the fact other Royal Family members failed to include Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, in the images they shared to mark his birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will and Kate Skipped Harry's "Awkward" Birthday Zoom Call with the Royal Family





1. Hey JCMH! MM wasn't in your birthday photos because IT WASN'T HER BIRTHDAY, it was _yours_. I didn't see you complaining when they shared solo photos of MM for her brithday.
2. The reason a picture with Kate was used on The Kensington Royal instagram post was because it was a joint birthday wish from W&K because you know, they are a married couple and have been for quite some time now and also it's THEIR instagram account, they will share whatever damn photos they want to share.
also...
3. I don't blame W&K for skipping that awkward zoom call, it's wise to avoid stressful situations in life, when possible.




marietouchet said:


> Meghan ‘let friends collaborate on book’
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex allowed friends to share information about her with the authors of a book to make sure that her story was told in a favourable way, the High Court was told yesterday.The claim was made by lawyers for the Mail on Sunday in the latest hearing in the duchess’s legal action over it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan let friends talk to Omid which does not bode well for her suit about letter before by too private to publish
> Wow trial will cost her 1.8 M and the defendant 1.2 M pounds









CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they are reading our comments?  Or — is the universe trying to tell H&M to let.it.go?



They're going after the Sunday Times now?! They really need to find some real hobbies to fill their time.
This must be the two of them every time they see a story written about them that _they _deem 'negative'...


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, go ahead Meghan .. call me .. as you will get an *ear-full* !!!!


I swear my first thought when I read she would be making calls was “please call CeeJay, please call CeeJay...”


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> If only one of us was able to get a call and record it.. then we’d know if she used the title at least Lol...


even if she didn't call herself duchess on these calls, if she uses the title any time and then puts on this big show of what an American patriort she is, I have an issue with it


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> even if she didn't call herself duchess on these calls, if she uses the title any time and then puts on this big show of what an American patriort she is, I have an issue with it



Eh.... I don’t know... I’m trying to be fair here. I think my prior posts have shown I have no love for either one of them. That said, she hasn’t been stripped of the title so I think there are times she can still use it, if her and Netflix use it and the BRF lets them, that’s not my beef. I think it’s dumb, this is America and we went to war to get rid of Harry’s family and their titles from telling us what to do. I reserve my right to point out how dumb I think it is when it they use the titles in non-political settings, much like I do when my co-workers list every cert they’ve ever received in their email signature. Is it their right? Yes. Is it dumb? Yes. 

I just don’t think The Duchess of Sussex as a rep of the British government should be involved in our political processes, which is what she would be if she used the title and not just Meghan Markle. Like I’ve said previously, I think she still has a right to participate since she’s a citizen, it’s just how she went about with Makers using the title that I have a problem with. So I would be curious to hear one of the calls. She’s caused herself an interesting conundrum. I don’t know why she insists on keeping the title if the BRF and Britain were so horrible to her, but here we are.

I think her portraying herself as an American Patriot would be offensive to anyone who has actually served or worked for this country. I don’t understand anyone who portrays themselves this way... the greatest Americans I’ve known were selfless.

_*edited for an attempt at clarity lol_


----------



## csshopper

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was said via a source (what else?). So she can now deny she ever said it.


chicinthecity777,
  4 1/2 months ago on May 12 the story below was published in the Daily Mail, and it appeared in others. She didn't get her wish and the book was released in August. It did "set the record straight", but not in the way she intended. Fast forward to September, the book is now full of falsehoods and "anodyne" (people are scrambling for their dictionaries). REALLY? Then why the wish to rush it into distribution in May? If anyone is curious and still wants to read it, at least one format is available as of a few hours ago on eBay for $2.99 and free shipping. 

She is becoming completely utterly laughable. It's a mystery to me what her PR team does? Have they been Markled and she is flying solo, thinking she can hoodwink the world? If it can be believed, the Sussexes hired a PR guru who had worked for the Gates' and the Group that was to get them mega deals on the speaking circuit were gifted at scoring high profile, high paying gigs.  

Seems at least one of these folks should have sat her down by now and charted out in chronological order her/their outings/public pronouncements, videos, internet gibberish postings, law suit declarations, etc and shown them how the contradictions are piling up. It's a train wreck. If I were one of the (5?) friends who seem to be sources I think I would be squirming by now. Jessica Mulroney knows the game so she is already establishing herself as "family". Wonder where Marcus fits into all this?

*EXCLUSIVE: 'It's been anything but a fairy tale.' Meghan wants Finding Freedom biography released NOW, believing it will set the record straight, reveal her vulnerable side and shatter her image as a rude, demanding diva*

*Meghan Markle wants the upcoming biography on her and Prince Harry's life to be released sooner rather than later, DailyMail.com can reveal*
*The upcoming book titled Finding Freedom: Harry, Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family is set to be released worldwide online on August 11*
*A friend said: 'She said the book will finally set the record straight and show the world why they were left with no other choice than to leave the royal life'*
*DailyMail.com revealed last week Tyler Perry sent his $150M private plane to pick up the couple from Canada to bring them to his $18M Beverly Hills home*
*But despite her high-flying lifestyle, Meghan 'wants to shatter this image of being a demanding diva on her quest for fame and power,' the insider said*
*They added: 'Meghan seems to think that readers will finally understand the monumental anguish and turmoil she had to endure with a stiff upper lip'*
*The friend also revealed Meghan 'had plenty to say about what went into the book, much more than the public is being led to believe'*


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Scobie had a co author, Carolyn Durand, she, smart lady, kept such a low profile I had to go back just now to find her name. But whatever hits him, will stick to some extent to her as well. Ah, the price of fame.





Sol Ryan said:


> I’m curious about her. It’s odd she’s in none of the press. I wonder if Omid will try to throw her under the bus or if she just served as and editor on it.



She has spent the last 15 years writing about the royals. She tweets about them almost daily. Not sure why Omid got the lion’s share of the credit other than he was the driving force behind the book. Here’s her Twitter. It’s pretty obvious she prefers the Sussexes to the Cambridges, although she doesn’t say anything bad about the Cambridges. 



			https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=CarolynDurand


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She has spent the last 15 years writing about the royals. She tweets about them almost daily. Not sure why *Omid got the lion’s share of the credit* other than he was the driving force behind the book. Here’s her Twitter. It’s pretty obvious she prefers the Sussexes to the Cambridges, although she doesn’t say anything bad about the Cambridges.
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=CarolynDurand


Omid got the lion’s share of the credit because he is linked to MA & MM. He is the one that gets the information directly from the source.

I'm eating words


----------



## lanasyogamama

They look stressed


----------



## CarryOn2020

Again MM’s teachers or attorneys have  let her down:
Anodyne = not likely to provoke dissent or offense; inoffensive, often deliberately so.

Okaaaay, excuse meee, I find these quotes highly offensive! Maybe I’m not woke enough, shouldn’t family drama stay in the family ?? 









						Stunning Claim: Prince Charles Wouldn’t Support Son Harry’s Extra Charity Work
					

The book Finding Freedom revealed the complications when it came to funding management between the father and the sons.




					okmagazine.com
				



  The excerpts from the book reveal that Prince Charles, who is noted to fund several charities through revenue from his estates, had much control over the “purse strings.” This was the reason for the fallout between the Cambridges and the Sussexes. “They actually genuinely have to debate who gets what amount of money from their father to fund their projects,” an aide says, as per the book, adding that there is an ”inherent hierarchy, and that is really tricky.”
——
“Where you are born in this family dictates your position of power, and because of that, Harry has always come second to his brother, especially when it comes to funding. There were times in the past that Harry wanted to take on bigger projects and do more work, but he couldn’t get the money to support it. William was always the priority. A lot of their quarrels have been over budgets. That’s what happens when you are in business with your family,” says the source in the book

ETA: trying to figure out how to remove this hyperlink...got it!


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again MM’s teachers or attorneys have  let her down:
> Anodyne = not likely to provoke dissent or offense; inoffensive, often deliberately so.
> 
> Okaaaay, excuse meee, I find these quotes highly offensive! Maybe I’m not woke enough, shouldn’t family drama stay in the family ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stunning Claim: Prince Charles Wouldn’t Support Son Harry’s Extra Charity Work
> 
> 
> The book Finding Freedom revealed the complications when it came to funding management between the father and the sons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The excerpts from the book reveal that Prince Charles, who is noted to fund several charities through revenue from his estates, had much control over the “purse strings.” This was the reason for the fallout between the Cambridges and the Sussexes. “They actually genuinely have to debate who gets what amount of money from their father to fund their projects,” an aide says, as per the book, adding that there is an ”inherent hierarchy, and that is really tricky.”
> ——
> “Where you are born in this family dictates your position of power, and because of that, Harry has always come second to his brother, especially when it comes to funding. There were times in the past that Harry wanted to take on bigger projects and do more work, but he couldn’t get the money to support it. William was always the priority. A lot of their quarrels have been over budgets. That’s what happens when you are in business with your family,” says the source in the book
> 
> ETA: trying to figure out how to remove this hyperlink...got it!



Comparing projects... A) Travelyst- travel site initiative led by Mr. PrivateJet, Booking.com and Visa Or B) Earthshot Prize with David Attenborough? I don’t know which one seems more credible and thought out?

Maybe that’s why they didn’t get the money? Ugh... everything is an insult...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Comparing projects... A) Travelyst- travel site initiative led by Mr. PrivateJet, Booking.com and Visa Or B) Earthshot Prize with David Attenborough? I don’t know which one seems more credible and thought out?
> 
> Maybe that’s why they didn’t get the money? Ugh... everything is an insult...



Absolutley, insults are everywhere with the perpetual victims! How dare the Queen!
I thought the insult was over the tiara. Nope, the true snub:
_Prince Harry was reportedly left devastated when he noticed something was missing from the desk belonging to The Queen.
During The Queen’s annual Christmas speech, photos of her family were displayed.
There was a portrait of Prince Philip, the Cambridge family, Prince Charles and Camilla and The Queen’s late father – George VI.
However, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were nowhere in sight_.








						Prince Harry 'reevaluated royal life after upsetting snub from The Queen'
					

Prince Harry was upset The Queen didn't feature his photo on her desk. Read more about this story by clicking here.




					www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again MM’s teachers or attorneys have  let her down:
> Anodyne = not likely to provoke dissent or offense; *inoffensive*, often deliberately so.
> 
> Okaaaay, excuse meee, I find these quotes highly offensive! Maybe I’m not woke enough, shouldn’t family drama stay in the family ??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stunning Claim: Prince Charles Wouldn’t Support Son Harry’s Extra Charity Work
> 
> 
> The book Finding Freedom revealed the complications when it came to funding management between the father and the sons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The excerpts from the book reveal that Prince Charles, who is noted to fund several charities through revenue from his estates, had much control over the “purse strings.” This was the reason for the fallout between the Cambridges and the Sussexes. “They actually genuinely have to debate who gets what amount of money from their father to fund their projects,” an aide says, as per the book, adding that there is an ”inherent hierarchy, and that is really tricky.”
> ——
> “Where you are born in this family dictates your position of power, and because of that, Harry has always come second to his brother, especially when it comes to funding. There were times in the past that Harry wanted to take on bigger projects and do more work, but he couldn’t get the money to support it. William was always the priority. A lot of their quarrels have been over budgets. That’s what happens when you are in business with your family,” says the source in the book
> 
> ETA: trying to figure out how to remove this hyperlink...got it!


The very mild reprimand to Omid was obviously done only for the sake of the lawsuit against the Associated Newspapers. MM & her lawyers are trying to neutralize the cooperation on the book argument. Omid's claims will be portrayed as inoffensive and protected by a 'creative license'. After all is done with the lawsuit, Omid will resume his job of speaking on behalf of his beloved duchess. My 2 cents.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley, insults are everywhere with the perpetual victims! How dare the Queen!
> I thought the insult was over the tiara. Nope, the true snub:
> _Prince Harry was reportedly left devastated when he noticed something was missing from the desk belonging to The Queen.
> During The Queen’s annual Christmas speech, photos of her family were displayed.
> There was a portrait of Prince Philip, the Cambridge family, Prince Charles and Camilla and The Queen’s late father – George VI.
> However, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were nowhere in sight_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'reevaluated royal life after upsetting snub from The Queen'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was upset The Queen didn't feature his photo on her desk. Read more about this story by clicking here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertainmentdaily.co.uk



Which is really bs when you figure they started it by not showing up for Christmas to do their “plotting” to begin with... You can’t call the Queen to tell her if you’re coming for Christmas? Come on! I always let my relatives know if I’m coming sothey can plan and they don’t run the Commonwealth...









						Queen 'forced to make call to Harry to see if he was coming for Christmas'
					

The Queen allegedly took the unheard of move to call Harry herself to see if he and Meghan would be spending Christmas at Sandringham




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> The very mild reprimand to Omid was obviously done only for the sake of the lawsuit against the Associated Newspapers. MM & her lawyers are trying to neutralize the cooperation on the book argument. Omid's claims will be portrayed as inoffensive and protected by a 'creative license'. After all is done with the lawsuit, Omid will resume his job of speaking on behalf of his beloved duchess. My 2 cents.



I wonder what Harper’s Bazaar will think of the book being fake...





__





						Omid Scobie Royal Editor At Large
					






					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




MM’s game could have real repercussions for him... so I’m curious if he fights back... this could be very interesting to watch...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Enjoy! We’ve earned it —


----------



## mdcx

lanasyogamama said:


> They look stressed



Gosh she's so darn pretentious and condescending with that "eyebrows raised, wry smile, nodding while I impart wisdom" thing.
H pontificating blindly. 
Translated into plain English: "stop criticising us via social media as it's messing with our ca$hflow."


----------



## Sol Ryan

Welp.... that didn’t last long... the title is back... again, cool if it said Meghan Markle.... not cool with the Duchess of Sussex... I was trying to fast forward through to see what the Hamilton peeps did and got surprised by Meghan... :/

She shows up at the 2 hour 42 min mark if the shortcut doesn’t work.



Hope it’s okay to post, just trying to show use of the title... not be political...


----------



## Sol Ryan

Ah heck, last post of the night.... are these numbers right?









						Meghan Markle and U.K. Tabloid Blasted Over Cost of Privacy Case
					

Meghan Markle and a U.K. newspaper she is suing for privacy have been accused of "disproportionate" costs in a court fight over the breakdown of her relationship with her father.




					www.newsweek.com
				




Good grief...


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> “Where you are born in this family dictates your position of power, and because of that, Harry has always come second to his brother, especially when it comes to funding. There were times in the past that Harry wanted to take on bigger projects and do more work, but he couldn’t get the money to support it. William was always the priority. A lot of their quarrels have been over budgets. That’s what happens when you are in business with your family,” says the source in the book



OMG - such a shock that the birth order in the royal family dictates your position of power!!! I mean, who could have possibly guessed it when they’ve enjoyed a position of immense privilege and wealth their whole life due to an accident of birth into an archaic institution!!! And dear Meg, who knew nothing about the royal family, never heard of primogeniture and always assumed the royal family is a democracy where everyone’s word salad gets heard with an equal amount of attention - to have such a rude awakening!!! Soul crushing indeed, so unfair.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle looks ‘more trustworthy’ than the Queen, according to face-scanning algorithm that reveal portraits show their subjects looking more dependable as living standards improve*
> 
> *Researchers trained an algorithm to scan faces for signs of trustworthiness*
> *They then ran the algorithm over selfies from Instagram and fine art portraits*
> *They found a clear link between increased living standards and trustworthiness*
> *The team also scanned images of famous faces and compared how trustworthy they appeared including the Queen, Meghan Markle and Queen Elizabeth I *
> Meghan Markle 'looks more trustworthy' than the Queen when comparing their faces, authors of a new study into changes in portraits over 500 years claim.
> 
> Experts from PSL Research University created an algorithm that scans faces in painted portraits and photographs to determine the trustworthiness of the person.
> 
> The authors used the trustworthiness tool to discover that as living standards improved since 1500 AD, so did the trustworthiness of the subjects of a portrait.
> 
> As part of the process of training the model, researcher compared some famous faces to ancient portraits - including the Queen and Meghan Markle to Elizabeth I.
> 
> Meghan appeared three and a half times more trustworthy than Elizabeth I, but Her Majesty the Queen was one and a half times more trustworthy, authors found.
> 
> The algorithm doesn't assess trustworthiness in itself - rather the qualities and traits the sitters of a portrait wanted to portray in their image, authors explained.
> 
> 'It is possible that Megan Markle is not a trustworthy person, but on average her appearance in her portrait makes her look trustworthy,' said author Nicolas Baumard.
> 
> Read more: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...hy-Queen-face-scanning-algorithm-reveals.html




Sounds like a complete waste of time and money.  Should have sent the $ for this to a worthy charity.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

tiktok said:


> OMG - such a shock that the birth order in the royal family dictates your position of power!!! I mean, who could have possibly guessed it when they’ve enjoyed a position of immense privilege and wealth their whole life due to an accident of birth into an archaic institution!!! *And dear Meg, who knew nothing about the royal family, never heard of primogeniture and always assumed the royal family is a democracy where everyone’s word salad gets heard with an equal amount of attention - to have such a rude awakening!!! Soul crushing indeed, so unfair.*


I'll wager you're pretty close to the mark. Betcha that Meghan didn't research the RF before getting involved. Betcha she thought the Queen/King was elected by popular vote. Betcha she didn't understand the role of the Prince of Wales as heir to the throne. Betcha she thought, that since Harry was so popular, he could jump to the front of the line by wining the popularity vote, thereby displacing William and possibly Charles so that she could eventually become queen. Betcha when she finally understood the facts, she planned Megxit.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would feel bad for him, but having studied her for so long he really could have known better, couldn't he. Also the timeframe is interesting to me...I feel if true they'd have spoken up the minute the book got published, not now when it serves them. But what do I know.
> 
> ETA: I wonder if he'll still kiss the ground she walks on from now on.




I totally agree on the timing issue.  The book was supposed to set the record straight.  But instead it is half fiction - with no comment from the Duchess of Litigation until the other side blasts her.

Can you imagine being a junior lawyer on this case - someone has to go through these stupid books, articles and videos with a fine tooth comb.


----------



## Pessie

lanasyogamama said:


> They look stressed



Wow, they do, terribly stressed.


Sol Ryan said:


> Welp.... that didn’t last long... the title is back... again, cool if it said Meghan Markle.... not cool with the Duchess of Sussex... I was trying to fast forward through to see what the Hamilton peeps did and got surprised by Meghan... :/
> 
> She shows up at the 2 hour 42 min mark if the shortcut doesn’t work.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope it’s okay to post, just trying to show use of the title... not be political...



That‘s wrong on every level.  She is so vain.


Maggie Muggins said:


> I'll wager you're pretty close to the mark. Betcha that Meghan didn't research the RF before getting involved. Betcha she thought the Queen/King was elected by popular vote. Betcha she didn't understand the role of the Prince of Wales as heir to the throne. Betcha she thought, that since Harry was so popular, he could jump to the front of the line by wining the popularity vote, thereby displacing William and possibly Charles so that she could eventually become queen. Betcha when she finally understood the facts, she planned Megxit.


I think Meghan (like her stans) thought it was a popularity contest, and she could become THE star in the Monarchy.  That’s what she meant by “single-handedly modernising the monarchy”.  She wasn’t kidding with that Queen Meghan, King Harry sh*t, that’s how bonkers she is


----------



## byzina

lanasyogamama said:


> They look stressed




New version of "American Gothic"


----------



## doni

Luvbolide said:


> Can you imagine being a junior lawyer on this case - someone has to go through these stupid books, articles and videos with a fine tooth comb.


It could actually be quite fun  

Although it does feel it was a junior lawyer idea to argue the book is fiction, unauthorized, all lies and speculation but, wait for it, _inoffensive_. Hence why we are not suing the authors unlike these newspaper articles which are also unauthorized, all lies and speculation... What a genius!


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> It could actually be quite fun
> 
> Although it does feel it was a junior lawyer idea to argue the book is fiction, unauthorized, all lies and speculation but, wait for it, _inoffensive_. Hence why we are not suing the authors unlike these newspaper articles which are also unauthorized, all lies and speculation... What a genius!





Yup, she's painted herself into a corner. 

Even if the book was 'inoffensive' she would have had a better chance of putting out an injunction against it before it was released and deliberately chose not to. There had been plenty of opportunity time wise too. 

And that OS puts out further regular updates on the couple's life with no comment (from the couple who comment on everything) also is inconsistent with this scenario.


----------



## sdkitty

you know what I'd like to see? the two of them on Dancing With The Stars.  Of course that's beneath them but I'd probably watch.  She would have to actually perform and the talking and wide eyed stuff would be secondary.


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> you know what I'd like to see? the two of them on Dancing With The Stars.  Of course that's beneath them but I'd probably watch.  She would have to actually perform and the talking and wide eyed stuff would be secondary.


Coming your way in 2021......


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

I know this is the daily star but the judge did order this.

*Meghan Markle ordered to hand over six months' worth of private WhatsApp messages*
Before her case against the Mail on Sunday goes to trial, the Duchess will have to submit "photos, FaceTime logs and WhatsApp messages" from a six-month period in 2019









						Meghan Markle ordered to hand over six months of private WhatsApp messages
					

Before her case against the Mail on Sunday goes to trial, the Duchess will have to submit "photos, FaceTime logs and WhatsApp messages" from a six-month period in 2019



					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

It also says that she will give evidence in person rather than video link.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> It also says that she will give evidence in person rather than video link.


Yup even Johnny Depp had to be in London , wearing a mask
Christmas at Sandringham ??? 
And the witnesses will have to appear if called - which might be a last minute decision - Jessica and Misha will have to be available just as Vanessa Paradis & Winona Ryder were on all for Johnny


----------



## chicinthecity777

So she has achieved exactly the opposite of what she claimed she wanted - privacy.


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> Yup even Johnny Depp had to be in London , wearing a mask


They didn't have to, they chose to. The option is there if you want it.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> They didn't have to, they chose to. The option is there if you want it.


You might be correct, I am failing in  my quest to educate myself on the nuances of the London high court , if the court could just bend the rules, and make a circus out of it - A LA O J Simpson - and televise, I should be so happy 
That is me being facetious


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> You might be correct, I am failing in  my quest to educate myself on the nuances of the London high court , if the court could just bend the rules, and make a circus out of it - A LA O J Simpson - and televise, I should be so happy
> That is me being facetious


My SO's business associate have just attended 2 High Court via video links in the last few months, one he was the defendent, one he was the plaintiff. The video option is available because of the pandemic. 

They will never allow any court hearing to be televised, unless in some very extreme circumstances. It's not like the U.S.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> you know what I'd like to see? the two of them on Dancing With The Stars.  Of course that's beneath them but I'd probably watch.  She would have to actually perform and the talking and wide eyed stuff would be secondary.


 And it would give her further opportunities to lead him around.

Thanks for a good laugh to start my day!


----------



## Annawakes

chicinthecity777 said:


> It also says that she will give evidence in person rather than video link.


This will be the performance of her life.  She has four months to prepare.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> My SO's business associate have just attended 2 High Court via video links in the last few months, one he was the defendent, one he was the plaintiff. The video option is available because of the pandemic.
> 
> They will never allow any court hearing to be televised, unless in some very extreme circumstances. It's not like the U.S.


Thank goodness they will never televise, I am a firm believer that sometimes there is WTMI - way too much information


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> And it would give her further opportunities to lead him around.
> 
> Thanks for a good laugh to start my day!


actually he would have to be led around by a professional dancer 
wonder if he'd be a good sport or a pouty boy


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> Thank goodness they will never televise, I am a firm believer that sometimes there is WTMI - way too much information


Agreed. But any members of the public can apply to sit in on the hearings. If it wasn't for covid, people would be queuing outside the court house in the morning to try to get in. I think for video link, there is a limit on number of participants via some system. So the details of the hearing can and will still be reported. 

MM better be ready!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Between this and the Johnny Depp suit, I hope all the celebrities understand that you don’t create lawsuits in the UK unless you are willing to have all of your own dirty laundry aired publicly.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> you know what I'd like to see? the two of them on Dancing With The Stars.  Of course that's beneath them but I'd probably watch.  She would have to actually perform and the talking and wide eyed stuff would be secondary.



I think she'd be pretty good, but she'd never risk being put to the popular vote.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> I know this is the daily star but the judge did order this.
> 
> *Meghan Markle ordered to hand over six months' worth of private WhatsApp messages*
> Before her case against the Mail on Sunday goes to trial, the Duchess will have to submit "photos, FaceTime logs and WhatsApp messages" from a six-month period in 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ordered to hand over six months of private WhatsApp messages
> 
> 
> Before her case against the Mail on Sunday goes to trial, the Duchess will have to submit "photos, FaceTime logs and WhatsApp messages" from a six-month period in 2019
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


Yeah, but how many phones does she have? Would she use her official private phone to communicate 'important' details (ex Will & Kate info) with MA & Omib?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> They look stressed




I was actually more interested in what the dog was doing in the background. Can we please just see more of the dog?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> actually he would have to be led around by a professional dancer
> wonder if he'd be a good sport or a pouty boy



He'd go sick before the first episode. 

Can't dance without a backbone.


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> He'd go sick before the first episode.
> 
> Can't dance without a backbone.


Oh. My. God.  That is hilarious.  Twisted, but funny.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> It also says that she will give evidence in person rather than video link.



I'll believe it when it happens. Four months is plenty of time to come up with excuses for not being able to do it or to drop the case entirely. Meghan doesn't do well under pressure. If things look like they won't go her way she'll bail on it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m obsessed with the body language in the video.  I feel like she’s taking up 60% of the bench, and he’s making himself small. And they aren’t holding hands! I’m worried.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> I'll believe it when it happens. Four months is plenty of time to come up with excuses for not being able to do it or to drop the case entirely. Meghan doesn't do well under pressure. If things look like they won't go her way she'll bail on it.


Me too - I think she’ll do a “poor me“ and dress bailing out as being for / or at the request of the RF to save face.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Agreed. But any members of the public can apply to sit in on the hearings. If it wasn't for covid, people would be queuing outside the court house in the morning to try to get in. I think for video link, there is a limit on number of participants via some system. So the details of the hearing can and will still be reported.
> 
> MM better be ready!


Now that I remember, we were treated to chalk drawings of Johnny and Amber - good to see the artistic community is getting support through COVD times 
Ghislaine Maxwell also got chalk drawings at her hearing - she kind of looked like an evil witch - moody, pointy eyebrows 
Meghan, if she know hat is good for her will bring her own artist, who will know which is her better side, and can cousel her on what clothes look best in the witness box


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I was actually more interested in what the dog was doing in the background. Can we please just see more of the dog?



Yes, she looks like fun. At least the dog is happy in that family.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> Between this and the Johnny Depp suit, I hope all the celebrities understand that you don’t create lawsuits in the UK unless you are willing to have all of your own dirty laundry aired publicly.


That's definitely the case but wouldn't it be the same in the U.S.? Would the public be spared the details?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m obsessed with the body language in the video.  I feel like she’s taking up 60% of the bench, and he’s making himself small. And they aren’t holding hands! I’m worried.



You are so right. He is leaning away from her. If it wasn't for the armrest he would be off of the bench. At least she isn't gripping on to him. Although that's only because they are at home and there is no reason for her to be all possessive over him.


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m obsessed with the body language in the video.  I feel like she’s taking up 60% of the bench, and he’s making himself small. And they aren’t holding hands! I’m worried.


Yes, you're absolutely right, I thought this picture looked off. She's not clinging on to him, that's not like her, lol. 
See Meghan, you can do it!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yes, she looks like fun. At least the dog is happy in that family.


He was let out of the laundry room so he’s happy.


----------



## marietouchet

I thought you would be interested in this story from The Times - Harry and Meghan ‘crossed a line’ in US election video









						Donald Trump says he’s ‘not a fan’ of Meghan after she urges Americans to vote
					

President ***** has criticised the Duchess of Sussex after she and Prince Harry urged Americans to vote in the presidential election and hinted at their support




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




two ! times articles in line crossing ...

Harry lecturing about elections ... don’t get me started .... distasteful


----------



## marietouchet

I thought you would be interested in this story from The Times - Meghan sets record straight on ‘false claims in royal book’









						Meghan sets record straight on ‘false claims in royal book’
					

As reviews go, it is definitely one star. And given that it came from the Duchess of Sussex herself, the message is clear: Meghan did not think much of Finding




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




more on Meghan tossing Omid under bus , his book does not support her legal case


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I was actually more interested in what the dog was doing in the background. Can we please just see more of the dog?


they have so much to teach all of us lesser people


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> they have so much to teach all of us lesser people



Exactly, the can train us to be kind. Like dogs. My whole life I've dreamed of being trained by a duchess.


----------



## scarlet555

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m obsessed with the body language in the video.  I feel like she’s taking up 60% of the bench, and he’s making himself small. And they aren’t holding hands!* I’m worried.*



LOL!
But seriously, he doesn't look well/or even normal.  Usually people try to have the 'I'm on camera face', in this video he isn't even trying.  I don't think he is doing well, there are rumors out there about trouble in paradise, I can't help but think, there is some truth to it...


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> I was actually more interested in what the dog was doing in the background. Can we please just see more of the dog?


Ok, this is childish of me but I know what I was hoping the dog would do in the background. 

And both of them do not look good, but at least no wrinkly old polo shirt on him.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just seen the news story on BBC News, they didn't show the clip though, they were mentioned as Prince Harry and his wife Meghan. Buckingham Palace have commented saying that as he is no longer a member of the Royal Family, those views are his own.


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> I thought you would be interested in this story from The Times - Meghan sets record straight on ‘false claims in royal book’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan sets record straight on ‘false claims in royal book’
> 
> 
> As reviews go, it is definitely one star. And given that it came from the Duchess of Sussex herself, the message is clear: Meghan did not think much of Finding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> more on Meghan tossing Omid under bus , his book does not support her legal case


MM is definitely throwing Scobie under the bus! Ouch! Is there anybody who won't be Markled I wonder.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

tiktok said:


> Exactly, the can train us to be kind. Like dogs. *My whole life I've dreamed of being trained by a duchess.*



Ah, but which one of you two would be wearing the hip-high, spiked-heeled leather boots and holding the whips???


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> He was let out of the laundry room so he’s happy.



I’m thinking that dog is Harry’s best friend now.


----------



## sdkitty

scathing commentary on Harry from Washington Observer


			Prince Harry's rather silly Joe Biden endorsement


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> scathing commentary on Harry from Washington Observer
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's rather silly Joe Biden endorsement


He really needs to stay out of what is none of his business.  Someone needs to remind him about the Revolutionary War. Oh right, he wasn’t a very good student so probably slept through that class   Does he recall his ancestor King George lll?  Thought not


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's definitely the case but wouldn't it be the same in the U.S.? Would the public be spared the details?


I am so not an expert on this, but in the Johnny Depp thread someone said that in the UK they collect a massive amount of evidence where in the US it seems like the evidence is much more narrowly focused on specific conversations that are in question.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> He really needs to stay out of what is none of his business.  Someone needs to remind him about the Revolutionary War. Oh right, he wasn’t a very good student so probably slept through that class   Does he recall his ancestor King George lll?  Thought not



At the very least, I know he saw Hamilton, Lin Manuel talked about how awkward it was seeing it with Harry beside him. Did he at least pay attention to that?

He’s not helping.









						Lin-Manuel Miranda says he's 'really glad' Prince Harry didn't take the King George III storyline personally when he came to see 'Hamilton'
					

Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, saw a performance of Miranda's "Hamilton" at the Victoria Palace Theatre in London in August.




					www.insider.com
				




Mind, he probably didn’t pay attention so that’s why he didn’t take it personally....


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He really needs to stay out of what is none of his business.  Someone needs to remind him about the Revolutionary War. Oh right, he wasn’t a very good student so probably slept through that class   Does he recall his ancestor King George lll?  Thought not


he's just doing what the boss says he should do


----------



## CarryOn2020

@sdkitty  That article!  I couldn’t get past the fourth sentence:

_These days, Prince Harry is an archetype of the entitled upper middle-class British twit.
_


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> actually he would have to be led around by a professional dancer
> wonder if he'd be a good sport or a pouty boy



sdkitty,

 POUTY for sure. He looks like he's been sucking too many lemons off his California mansion's  trees. 

To clarify my original post: I think she would end up leading him around, having pushed aside the assigned professional because as we know SHE is the best at everything and he will do what he's told to do.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> He was let out of the laundry room so he’s happy.


gracekelly,
  Had to leave more than an emoji, I burst out laughing and am still chuckling as I type. GREAT one!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> Exactly, the can train us to be kind. Like dogs. My whole life I've dreamed of being trained by a duchess.



Oh no, all stern words and word-salad, she'd probably give all my treats and toys to charity


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> He really needs to stay out of what is none of his business.  Someone needs to remind him about the Revolutionary War. Oh right, he wasn’t a very good student so probably slept through that class   Does he recall his ancestor King George lll?  Thought not



He doesn't recall anyone he wasn't at a party with. 

Actually, he doesn't remember who he was/wasn't at a party with either.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> He really needs to stay out of what is none of his business.  Someone needs to remind him about the Revolutionary War. Oh right, he wasn’t a very good student so probably slept through that class   Does he recall his ancestor King George lll?  Thought not


I was seriously unimpressed when President Asterisk kept commenting on Brexit and the leadership of my country, so yes, absolutely, everybody needs to stay out of politics in the country where they don’t get to vote  
Harry just looks like a complete idiot at this point.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I am so not an expert on this, but in the Johnny Depp thread someone said that in the UK they collect a massive amount of evidence where in the US it seems like the evidence is much more narrowly focused on specific conversations that are in question.



Truckloads of evidence is sifted through. My barrister friends have wheeled-trolleys not bags (although maybe that's not so much the case we have more digital).


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> Ok, this is childish of me but I know what I was hoping the dog would do in the background.
> 
> And both of them do not look good, but at least no wrinkly old polo shirt on him.



Hahaha I was waiting for it, too!!!!


----------



## Pessie

LittleStar88 said:


> Hahaha I was waiting for it, too!!!!


And me


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I was seriously unimpressed when President Asterisk kept commenting on Brexit and the leadership of my country, so yes, absolutely, everybody needs to stay out of politics in the country where they don’t get to vote
> Harry just looks like a complete idiot at this point.



I'm just laughing at President Asterisk. 

Harry looks like he doesn't have a braincell. Seriously man, get a job. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a life.


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> I was seriously unimpressed when President Asterisk kept commenting on Brexit and the leadership of my country, so yes, absolutely, everybody needs to stay out of politics in the country where they don’t get to vote
> Harry just looks like a complete idiot at this point.


Totally agree that if it isn't your country, you should keep your mouth shut!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> @sdkitty  That article!  I couldn’t get past the fourth sentence:
> 
> _These days, Prince Harry is an archetype of the entitled upper middle-class British twit.
> _



This is especially scathing because he's born into the 'ruling class'. 

To be likened to someone from the dreaded middle-classes, let alone an archetype will be worse than just calling him a pink farmyard animal with curly tail to JCMH.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I'm just laughing at President Asterisk.
> 
> Harry looks like he doesn't have a braincell. Seriously man, get a job. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a life.


I don't think he has any of the above.  His life here is nothing like he thought it would be, but that is not entirely due to Covid.  He gave up his friends, families and responsibilities without thinking it through.  Of course that is the major problem for both of them, not thinking things through.  I think the shock of his life was when he was told that he couldn't have the half in/half out.  They thought that with her US citizenship and his UK citizenship and Archie having both, that they would just waltz between the two countries whenever they liked.  I don't believe that she ever intended to become a UK citizen.  That was just another story in a long list of stories.  Giving up his military appointments and patronages was never something he thought he was going to have to do.  I think that bothers him more than not seeing his family.  He didn't care about joining them at Balmoral or Sandringham when he was still there.  Think he misses it now?  I wonder.... 

I think the only thing that makes him happy at this point is his son.


----------



## Pessie

o


gracekelly said:


> I don't think he has any of the above.  His life here is nothing like he thought it would be, but that is not entirely due to Covid.  He gave up his friends, families and responsibilities without thinking it through.  Of course that is the major problem for both of them, not thinking things through.  I think the shock of his life was when he was told that he couldn't have the half in/half out.  They thought that with her US citizenship and his UK citizenship and Archie having both, that they would just waltz between the two countries whenever they liked.  I don't believe that she ever intended to become a UK citizen.  That was just another story in a long list of stories.  Giving up his military appointments and patronages was never something he thought he was going to have to do.  I think that bothers him more than not seeing his family.  He didn't care about joining them at Balmoral or Sandringham when he was still there.  Think he misses it now?  I wonder....
> 
> I think the only thing that makes him happy at this point is his son.


 They really fell for the “Royal Superstars“ headline - and I don’t think for a single minute they considered the prospect that the RF would say “no thanks - off you go”


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@papertiger  "Harry looks like he doesn't have a braincell. Seriously man, get a job. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a life."

Maybe, just maybe, too much alcohol from  an early age, fried that lonely brain cell. Sometimes, he looks like he isn't all there.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> @papertiger  "Harry looks like he doesn't have a braincell. Seriously man, get a job. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a life."
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, too much alcohol from  an early age, fried that lonely brain cell. Sometimes, he looks like he isn't all there.



Sadly, you may be right.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Totally agree that if it isn't your country, you should keep your mouth shut!


Exactly, just like if you marry into a Royal Family from another country, you learn and respect those traditions and protocols that goes over, above and before any feelings you may have.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> @papertiger  "Harry looks like he doesn't have a braincell. Seriously man, get a job. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a life."
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, too much alcohol from  an early age, fried that lonely brain cell. Sometimes, he looks like he isn't all there.


I think he led a very sheltered life.  His time in the military was probably the high point of his life as far as feeling like a productive person.  He hooked up with this woman, who he saw as progresssive, inspirational, etc. and now he finds himself in a strange country with no family or friends (except for M and his child).  At loose ends, just doing what he's told.  I can't imagine that feels good.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, just like if you marry into a Royal Family from another country, you learn and respect those traditions and protocols that goes over, above and before any feelings you may have.


Exactly and I have always felt that is true when you visit any country in general.  I would not be wearing a crop top walking down the street in Saudi Arabia.  If you are asked to cover your head or wear long pants and sleeves  at a religious shrine, you do it.  Arrogance is not attractive or smart.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think he led a very sheltered life.  His time in the military was probably the high point of his life as far as feeling like a productive person.  He hooked up with this woman, who he saw as progresssive, inspirational, etc. and now he finds himself in a strange country with no family or friends (except for M and his child).  At loose ends, just doing what he's told.  I can't imagine that feels good.


Boo Hoo.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, just like if you marry into a Royal Family from another country, you learn and respect those traditions and protocols that goes over, above and before any feelings you may have.


Especially if you’re hoovering up all the perks and privileges that come with said marriage


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> @papertiger  "Harry looks like he doesn't have a braincell. Seriously man, get a job. Or a hobby. Or an interest. Or a life."
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, too much alcohol from  an early age, fried that lonely brain cell. Sometimes, he looks like he isn't all there.


Sometimes?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think he led a very sheltered life.  His time in the military was probably the high point of his life as far as feeling like a productive person.  He hooked up with this woman, who he saw as progresssive, inspirational, etc. and now he finds himself in a strange country with no family or friends (except for M and his child).  At loose ends, just doing what he's told.  I can't imagine that feels good.



I think he likes having someone else make all the decisions for him. He has never been particularly assertive or ambitious. Harry is the human equivalent of a plastic bag blowing in the wind. He goes wherever he is taken.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> They really fell for the “Royal Superstars“ headline - and I don’t think for a single minute they considered the prospect that the RF would say “no thanks - off you go”



I've wondered before if they thought their brash move would whip the BRF into obedience.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I would not be wearing a crop top walking down the street in Saudi Arabia.



I'd hope so because that would get you both molested and arrested quickly 



> If you are asked to cover your head or wear long pants and sleeves  at a religious shrine, you do it.  Arrogance is not attractive or smart.



I am still not over her sloppy look at that mosque, with her uncombed hair sticking out of the rag she thought would do as hijab and naked arms. Especially not when around the same time Kate went to Pakistan and had one outfit win after another and brought both a comb and proper head coverings (and it's not like she went all IS woman either, she elegantly slung it around her head with some hair showing...but she looked perfectly groomed and like she made an effort, not like she had rolled out of bed too late and grabbed whatever she found on her way out of the door).


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd hope so because that would get you both molested and arrested quickly
> 
> 
> 
> I am still not over her sloppy look at that mosque, with her uncombed hair sticking out of the rag she thought would do as hijab and naked arms. Especially not when around the same time Kate went to Pakistan and had one outfit win after another and brought both a comb and proper head coverings (and it's not like she went all IS woman either, she elegantly slung it around her head with some hair showing...but she looked perfectly groomed and like she made an effort, not like she had rolled out of bed too late and grabbed whatever she found on her way out of the door).


Wearing the crop top and driving there  before it was legal for women to drive would  definitely have gotten me arrested lol!  Seriously,  it was a point to make.  When I was in Turkey and going to the Blue Mosque, I definitely made sure that I was dressed  properly and wearing a head scarf.  Her outfit was ridiculous,


----------



## scarlet555

lanasyogamama said:


> Sometimes?



lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

Smart, witty, insightful, these are best comments on the internet! Y’all win the day! 
Maybe now QE will actually do something to stop this.

====
great article @sdkitty — This writer tells it like it is:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/prince-harrys-rather-silly-joe-*****-endorsement/ar-BB19lJgx_“This election I'm not going to be able to vote in the U.S." Harry continued, "But many of you may not know that I haven't been able to vote in the U.K. my whole life. As we approach this November, it's vital that we reject hate speech, misinformation, and online negativity."

*There's simultaneous idiocy and irony in those words. *

For a start, it's actually untrue that Harry hasn't been able to vote in the U.K. While it is a tradition of Britain's unwritten constitution that Royals don't vote, they are legally entitled to do so. That tradition supports the Royal Family's modern role as non-political actors in British democracy. *But that non-voter Harry is now telling Americans not simply how to vote, but also to reject "online negativity," is the height of arrogance.*

Harry must also know that his words will infuriate Downing Street and Buckingham Palace. After all, as even a nominal British Royal, Harry is expected to avoid commentary on matters of foreign political import, especially as they risk inflaming the sensitivities of President *****, the leader of Britain's closest ally._

Yeah, this lil stunt will have a huge impact.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> How is Omid & and his master going to explain this contradiction?
> 
> *Meghan did not collaborate with authors of Finding Freedom, High Court hears*
> A spokesperson for the couple told _The Independent _on numerous occasions that the couple were not involved and that _Finding Freedom_ was based on the authors’ own experiences in the royal household.
> 
> Now Meghan Markle’s lawyers have reiterated the same point in the latest stage of her legal action against Associated Newspapers (ANL), publisher of _The Mail on Sunday_ and _Mail Online_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan did not collaborate with authors of Finding Freedom, High Court hears
> 
> 
> The claim comes in the latest stage of the Duchess of Sussex’s legal action against Associated Newspapers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Authors' note included in the kindle version of Finding F. (screenshot from Amazon Reviews, I didn't buy the book)
> View attachment 4855452


We need to add this one to the list of all-time lies .. e.g., "_the check is in the mail_"!  Honestly, she is more stupid than I thought .. she will eventually get found out and then what?!?! .. claim she's the victim yet again??!!?! .. that is getting VERY OLD!


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone watch the entire Time 100 video? I think Harry might just be lazy and that's why he's slumped against the armrest. They still do that thing where they look at each other when the other one starts speaking. And Harry says again how he wasn't able to vote when he was in England. Both of them are telling the masses what to do. Geez, these two pretentious knuckleheads!


----------



## Lodpah

Can someone send this to Harry? I don’t appreciate him meddling in our politics. That’s a big no no. Even though the Brits ran so fast our hounds couldn’t catch ‘em one did


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m obsessed with the body language in the video.  I feel like she’s taking up 60% of the bench, and he’s making himself small. And they aren’t holding hands! I’m worried.


Also notice that JCMH is in the opposite direction .. as in "you stay in YOUR corner".  As part of our Management Training, we were required to take a class in reading Body Language.  At first, I was like "are you kidding me?" .. but I actually learned a LOT from that class, and it appears to me that Harry is pulling away and that is interesting.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Smart, witty, insightful, these are best comments on the internet! Y’all win the day!
> Maybe now QE will actually do something to stop this.
> 
> ====
> great article @sdkitty — This writer tells it like it is:
> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/prince-harrys-rather-silly-joe-*****-endorsement/ar-BB19lJgx_“This election I'm not going to be able to vote in the U.S." Harry continued, "But many of you may not know that I haven't been able to vote in the U.K. my whole life. As we approach this November, it's vital that we reject hate speech, misinformation, and online negativity."
> 
> *There's simultaneous idiocy and irony in those words. *
> 
> For a start, it's actually untrue that Harry hasn't been able to vote in the U.K. While it is a tradition of Britain's unwritten constitution that Royals don't vote, they are legally entitled to do so. That tradition supports the Royal Family's modern role as non-political actors in British democracy. *But that non-voter Harry is now telling Americans not simply how to vote, but also to reject "online negativity," is the height of arrogance.*
> 
> Harry must also know that his words will infuriate Downing Street and Buckingham Palace. After all, as even a nominal British Royal, Harry is expected to avoid commentary on matters of foreign political import, especially as they risk inflaming the sensitivities of President *****, the leader of Britain's closest ally._
> 
> Yeah, this lil stunt will have a huge impact.


“This election I am not going to be able to vote in the US”
Oh dear does that mean he will be seeking citizenship ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> “This election I am not going to be able to vote in the US”
> Oh dear does that mean he will be seeking citizenship ?


IF (a big IF) he does seek US Citizenship, then there goes the title .. since we Americans do not 'recognize' those titles.  I just cannot see him going along with that ..


----------



## Lodpah

Honestly for all their shenanigans Harry meddling in politics of his hist country makes me ill. If I go to the UK and state tell them who to vote for I’m sure I won’t be welcome.

So now I will state my opinion at this point Prince Charles is not strong enough to sit on the throne. If he can’t control his child and yes his child cause he’s still funding them.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> “This election I am not going to be able to vote in the US”
> Oh dear does that mean he will be seeking citizenship ?


well, if M tells him to he may


----------



## Lodpah

I’m so upset now and I’m on a roll. We allied with GB during WW2 and I’ve been to Normandy and to see all the grave markers this stupidity of Prince Harry makes me so angry. Don’t tell us how to vote and don’t lecture us here in the US.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CeeJay said:


> IF (a big IF) he does seek US Citizenship, then there goes the title .. since we Americans do not 'recognize' those titles.  I just cannot see him, ie *HER *going along with that ..



Hey, *CeeJay*, fixed that sentence for you!


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> IF (a big IF) he does seek US Citizenship, then there goes the title .. since we Americans do not 'recognize' those titles.  I just cannot see him going along with that ..


The Duchess of Sussex and Harry.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Lodpah said:


> *I’m so upset now and I’m on a roll.* We allied with GB during WW2 and I’ve been to Normandy and to see all the grave markers this stupidity of Prince Harry makes me so angry. Don’t tell us how to vote and don’t lecture us here in the US.



THIS. *Lodpah*, is where I was a few days ago regarding the misbehaving antics of this grifter couple.
Reign them in, Lizzie, before they create more of a mess for you.


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Also notice that JCMH is in the opposite direction .. as in "you stay in YOUR corner".  As part of our Management Training, we were required to take a class in reading Body Language.  At first, I was like "are you kidding me?" .. but I actually learned a LOT from that class, and it appears to me that Harry is pulling away and that is interesting.



CeeJay- His hands caught my attention, he literally is twiddling his thumbs several times.

*twiddle one's thumbs*
Be bored or idle, as in _There I sat for three hours, twiddling my thumbs, while he made call after call_. This expressionalludes to the habit of idly turning one's thumbs about one another during a period of inactivity. [Mid-1800s]
See also: thumb, twiddle
The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Copyright © 2003, 1997 by The Christine Ammer 1992 Trust.Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Wearing the crop top and driving there  before it was legal for women to drive would  definitely have gotten me arrested lol!  Seriously,  it was a point to make.  When I was in Turkey and going to the Blue Mosque, I definitely made sure that I was dressed  properly and wearing a head scarf.  Her outfit was ridiculous,



I cringe at the infamous Reformation one...While I like it personally, it seems very inappropriate for a royal visit. Found a pic:


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> MM tribute to the strong  Ruth Bader Ginsburg was an affront to women who make a difference. If she so admired her why didn’t she include her in the 15 most influential women in Vogue?


Because she's only interested in attaching herself to women who are currently in the news.  MM disgusts me.  Whatever your politics, no one can dispute that RBG was intelligent and a champion of women's rights.  MM trying to ride a dead woman's coattails is about as low as you can get.  And MM goes low most of the time!


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the ill-fitting engagement coat to the green hornet, she showed the world she has no idea how to dress.  She does win the shoe game.

If H becomes US citizen, the taxman will call.  That could become v ugly for the BRF.

H fidgets and physically moves away from MM because he knows damn well he should not make these comments. QE must be furious. Agree, PCharles is not fit to be king. He lets H run wild. But then, QE has Andrew. It may be game over for BRF.

ETA:  just watched the Vote video again. H is truly nervous, but more interesting was the look he gave MM. Seems like she stepped on his line and he kinda glares at her.  Although she seemed uncomfortable, she still had her smirk on.  At the end, he does get the last word which is unusual for this pair.  How long before Phillip calls and removes all titles, FCott and all cars?


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> So she has achieved exactly the opposite of what she claimed she wanted - privacy.


Well, I don't think any of us here were fooled into thinking she actually wanted privacy.


----------



## rose60610

If anyone was watching Pres. *****'s press conference today, this question was asked by a reporter and answered:

Q: "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election and essentially encouraged people to vote for *** *****. I wanted to get your reaction to that." 

A: *****: "I'm not a fan of hers...I'm sure she's heard that before. I'll say this, I wish a lot of luck to Harry -- because he's going to need it."

 Ouch. But we've been saying that for over 2000 pages. I thought it was an odd question for the reporter to ask in light of all that's going on today. Who cares what M & JCMH think about anything? But the answer was pretty good.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> If anyone was watching Pres. *****'s press conference today, this question was asked by a reporter and answered:
> 
> Q: "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election and essentially encouraged people to vote for *** *****. I wanted to get your reaction to that."
> 
> A: *****: "I'm not a fan of hers...I'm sure she's heard that before. I'll say this, I wish a lot of luck to Harry -- because he's going to need it."
> 
> Ouch. But we've been saying that for over 2000 pages. I thought it was an odd question for the reporter to ask in light of all that's going on today. Who cares what M & JCMH think about anything? But the answer was pretty good.



I think famous people get any and everything thrown at them during press conferences.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Because she's only interested in attaching herself to women who are currently in the news.  MM disgusts me.  Whatever your politics, no one can dispute that RBG was intelligent and a champion of women's rights.  MM trying to ride a dead woman's coattails is about as low as you can get.  And MM goes low most of the time!


Right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

If you've ever seen Jeeves and Wooster, H is Wooster but without the charm. Privileged but very dim, unable to function without his retinue of staff who basically keep him in line. M obviously tells him what to do, but without people structuring his whole day for him and organising every detail and reigning in his immature/ill-advised impulses, he is probably really just going off the rails.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the ill-fitting engagement coat to the green hornet, she showed the world she has no idea how to dress.  She does win the shoe game.
> 
> If H becomes US citizen, the taxman will call.  That could become v ugly for the BRF.
> 
> H fidgets and physically moves away from MM because he knows damn well he should not make these comments. QE must be furious. Agree, PCharles is not fit to be king. He lets H run wild. But then, QE has Andrew. *It may be game over for BRF.*


I doubt it very much. The RF survived Diana and Sarah and I think they'll survive these two idiots, MM & H. BP has stated that Harry doesn't speak for them. Harry is over 21, so he can literally do as he pleases... the same as us when we reach 18 or 21 depending on where we live. His prince title cannot be removed, he would have to do that himself. It takes an act of Parliament to remove the dukedom. You can write to Boris or ask ***** to ask Boris. Or, maybe talk to MM because I'm almost positive, that she gives Harry his marching orders and we know "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets."


----------



## youngster

Lodpah said:


> I’m so upset now and I’m on a roll. We allied with GB during WW2 and I’ve been to Normandy and to see all the grave markers this stupidity of Prince Harry makes me so angry. Don’t tell us how to vote and don’t lecture us here in the US.



It's pretty ironic, isn't it? A prince of the United Kingdom, a descendant of George III, the fellow we kicked to the curb so that we could establish a constitutional republic, has sauntered across the pond to seek his fortune because he wasn't rich enough or appreciated enough or important enough in the UK . . . telling _us_ to vote and telling us fairly clearly who he'd prefer us to vote for.  This just isn't done and how can he not know that?  

He's not important enough for me to get angry over, and he's just one of a hundred celebrities saying the same thing, but I sure wish Charles or the Queen would make a phone call and lay down the law.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> It's pretty ironic, isn't it? A prince of the United Kingdom, a descendant of George III, the fellow we kicked to the curb so that we could establish a constitutional republic, has sauntered across the pond to seek his fortune because he wasn't rich enough or appreciated enough or important enough in the UK . . . telling _us_ to vote and telling us fairly clearly who he'd prefer us to vote for.  This just isn't done and how can he not know that?
> 
> He's not important enough for me to get angry over, and he's just one of a hundred celebrities saying the same thing, but I sure wish Charles or the Queen would make a phone call and lay down the law.


haha!  Sauntered across the pond!  Love that!  Not important or rich enough in the UK!  Isn't that telling it like it was and is!  He's nothing without his Granny and he has no money without his daddy.


----------



## tiktok

rose60610 said:


> If anyone was watching Pres. *****'s press conference today, this question was asked by a reporter and answered:
> 
> Q: "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election and essentially encouraged people to vote for *** *****. I wanted to get your reaction to that."
> 
> A: *****: "I'm not a fan of hers...I'm sure she's heard that before. I'll say this, I wish a lot of luck to Harry -- because he's going to need it."
> 
> Ouch. But we've been saying that for over 2000 pages. I thought it was an odd question for the reporter to ask in light of all that's going on today. Who cares what M & JCMH think about anything? But the answer was pretty good.



Well to be fair, he does have a well documented history of saying nasty things about women who dare to disagree with him.


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> It's pretty ironic, isn't it? A prince of the United Kingdom, a descendant of George III, the fellow we kicked to the curb so that we could establish a constitutional republic, has sauntered across the pond to seek his fortune because he wasn't rich enough or appreciated enough or important enough in the UK . . . telling _us_ to vote and telling us fairly clearly who he'd prefer us to vote for.  This just isn't done and how can he not know that?
> 
> He's not important enough for me to get angry over, and he's just one of a hundred celebrities saying the same thing, but I sure wish Charles or the Queen would make a phone call and lay down the law.


I love your reply! You’re right. Celebrities entertain us and we can turn them off and in at our will but Harry? He’s kinda like a political entity I think, without a throne.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@youngster -  totally  your comment.  This Vote video is a game-changer, not just for them but for Charles and QE.
Pairing them with Andrew’s disgrace, yeah, it will not be long for the world to lose complete respect for this BRF.  Diana and Sarah‘s damage was nothing compared to these 3, H&M&Andy.  They have made a mockery of the royal system. Thinking it will be tough times ahead for the UK.

ETA: Reports are China is buying up the Caribbean. They may have been behind Barbados’ exit. Other islands may follow. The world is definitely changing.


----------



## Lounorada

Sol Ryan said:


> Welp.... that didn’t last long... the title is back... again, cool if it said Meghan Markle.... not cool with the Duchess of Sussex... I was trying to fast forward through to see what the Hamilton peeps did and got surprised by Meghan... :/
> 
> She shows up at the 2 hour 42 min mark if the shortcut doesn’t work.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope it’s okay to post, just trying to show use of the title... not be political...





Between this and that other video of the two of them all I can think of is the utter entitlement of them thinking it's 100% acceptable to be out urging for people to vote for who _they _want and prefer to be elected. Whether you agree with their political opinions or not, they should NOT be out there using Royal titles while showing strong opinions about a particular political party. Especially Harry, when he's publicly telling people which way to vote in a country that he's not from and doesn't even hold citizenship not to mention that he knows the rules around politics in his family. 
Stop being pretentious little f**kers and show some respect to the politically neutral royal family who you are supposed to be representing and the same family whose titles you are using to further your fame and wealth.
The arrogance, entitlement, privilege and selfishness these two show every time they open their mouths is just sickening. They are insufferable.


----------



## youngster

Lodpah said:


> I love your reply! You’re right. Celebrities entertain us and we can turn them off and in at our will but Harry? He’s kinda like a political entity I think, without a throne.



I don't see either Harry or MM as a political entity, they are just celebrities and generally they get the fluffy celebrity treatment.  Their press releases get re-printed by the likes of People and other entertainment sites to fill up space and then on to the next puffy, fluffy piece.  Now, having stuck his red head into the U.S. election, that's going to earn him some scrutiny and some criticism, probably a lot of criticism, from many different directions.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Lounorada Post: 36,822
Yes, yes a thousand times. Thank you for stating it as it really is.


----------



## gracekelly

Diana and Sarah were not malignant people.  They may have made some wrong choices, but they didn't set out to damage the hand that was feeding them, i.e. the monarchy.  Why did Meghan state at the very beginning that she was going to modernize the monarchy?  There are times when I really do think that someone had it in mind to do as much damage as possible and somehow she was the tool.  I know that sounds paranoid, but this entire situation has been a little bizarre ever since he met her, married her and then left with her.  All the contention, bad behavior, family disharmony....who would have thought it would come to this?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Diana and Sarah were not malignant people.  They may have made some wrong choices, but they didn't set out to damage the hand that was feeding them, i.e. the monarchy.  Why did Meghan state at the very beginning that she was going to modernize the monarchy?  There are times when I really do think that someone had it in mind to do as much damage as possible and somehow she was the tool.  I know that sounds paranoid, but this entire situation has been a little bizarre ever since he met her, married her and then left with her.  All the contention, bad behavior, family disharmony....who would have thought it would come to this?


I've always said that Harry would try to avenge Diana's death by trying to destroy the RF, whom he blames for Diana's death... and along comes a spider... oops I mean MM.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If anyone was watching Pres. *****'s press conference today, this question was asked by a reporter and answered:
> 
> Q: "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election and essentially encouraged people to vote for *** *****. I wanted to get your reaction to that."
> 
> A: *****: "I'm not a fan of hers...I'm sure she's heard that before. I'll say this, I wish a lot of luck to Harry -- because he's going to need it."
> 
> Ouch. But we've been saying that for over 2000 pages. I thought it was an odd question for the reporter to ask in light of all that's going on today. Who cares what M & JCMH think about anything? But the answer was pretty good.



What? How pathetic that a member of the White House press corps gave political credibility to H&M by asking such an inane question. Another example of the news media being just as gaga for celebrities as the entertainment media.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Maggie Muggins  Wow, I have never considered that would be a possibility. As we have said before, H is eaten away with jealousy and ignorance.  However their drama ends, it will not be happy.

_@gracekelly _spot on, dear one, spot on.  We only know a fraction of what is really going on. There is so much more that we do not know, especially about the finances. The billionaires undoubtedly will have the last word, but the way this H&M drama is unfolding convinces me something else is afoot. There has definitely been a shift, and it isn’t just COVID, not sure but it could be Brexit. _”There are times when I really do think that someone had it in mind to do as much damage as possible and somehow she was the tool.” _ Her glaring stares at William were just weird. If ever a girl is being used by men, this one most surely is. ETA: it could explain why H is such a nervous wreck.

All my opinion, as always.


----------



## Jktgal

That Time video is perfect fodder for Meggie Markle. Any day now...

And I think dumb Wooster is indeed going to be able to vote in USA next time. Good riddance is probably heard all across the UK. He deserves it.  America has the capacity to bring him to his knees. No royal status to protect him. Go to town, America!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've always said that Harry would try to avenge Diana's death by trying to destroy the RF, whom he blames for Diana's death... and along comes a spider... oops I mean MM.


Agree. I said before triple threat of covid/deep econ recession, anti monarchists, and rogue royals may just do it for the BRF.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Harry is the human equivalent of a plastic bag blowing in the wind. He goes wherever he is taken.


#dead


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> I cringe at the infamous Reformation one...While I like it personally, it seems very inappropriate for a royal visit. Found a pic:
> 
> View attachment 4857236


I am shaped kind of like Megan, and I know better than to try to wear something belted.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

V0N1B2 said:


> #dead


I literally laughed out loud and woke up the dog.


----------



## csshopper

V0N1B2 said:


> #dead


I vote for the Plastic Bag, much more energy and entertaining than the Montecito  sad SACK.


----------



## Sol Ryan

youngster said:


> I don't see either Harry or MM as a political entity, they are just celebrities and generally they get the fluffy celebrity treatment.  Their press releases get re-printed by the likes of People and other entertainment sites to fill up space and then on to the next puffy, fluffy piece.  Now, having stuck his red head into the U.S. election, that's going to earn him some scrutiny and some criticism, probably a lot of criticism, from many different directions.



Unfortunately, with the HRH, they are still representing the Royal Family which does make them Representatives of the British Government, especially if Charles is still supporting them. (I guess if the the BRF doesn’t want them representing them, they need to whisper to parliament)... We haven’t gotten confirmation from the BRF that they really are financially independent from Charles, we’ve seen before that their definition of financially independent and everyone else’s is different...


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Yes, Yes, Yes!








						Meghan Markle labels November vote 'most important of our lifetime'
					

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said it refused to comment on 'not a working member of the Royal Family' in a stinging response to the couple.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*_Former Liberal ******** MP Norman Baker, the author of the book And What Do You Do? What The Royal Family Don't Want You To Know, said Harry should not speak out about US politics while he is still a 'representative' of the UK. 

'I think it's appropriate for any private citizen to comment on the US election. *The problem is that Harry has retained his HRH status and is not a private citizen but still a representative of this country,'* Mr Baker told MailOnline. 

'He needs to stop trying to have a foot in both camps - royal when it suits him and private when it doesn't.

'Or to turn on its head the old phrase, I agree with what he says but disagree with his right to say it.'_

The article goes on...

_Royals even in this country are entitled to their opinion and, such as the very vocal the Prince of Wales and Prince William voice them, particularly on the environment and the natural world. They see this as leadership.

'The important part is that they are not partisan, as for *the monarch or her direct heir to be partisan could cause a constitutional crisis*.'

Mr Jobson said he was '*increasingly open' to the idea of stripping the Sussexes of their royal titles for their own benefit and that of the royal family.   *

'Frankly, I think it would be better for Harry to withdraw, along with his son, from the line of succession to avoid further confusion,' he said. 

*>>>>*'By saying they are HRHs and the Duke and Duchess, but not allowed to use the titles, just confuses the situation.*<<<<*

'With that issue out of the way, Meghan encouraging people to vote is something that would be praised not criticised.

'She speaks well and has passion for political issues. Without a royal title to hold her back it may set her free to pursue a political career.

'Ditching his title, and that includes 'Prince' would free up Harry too, in the land where he says he is happy and wants to make this life and where titles mean nothing.'  _

Oh yeah, I am open to this idea, too.  Counting on you, UK, to see this one through!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> @youngster -  totally  your comment. *This Vote video is a game-changer, not just for them but for Charles and QE.
> Pairing them with Andrew’s disgrace, yeah, it will not be long for the world to lose complete respect for this BRF. * Diana and Sarah‘s damage was nothing compared to these 3, H&M&Andy.  They have made a mockery of the royal system. Thinking it will be tough times ahead for the UK.....
> 
> ETA: Reports are China is buying up the Caribbean. They may have been behind Barbados’ exit. Other islands may follow. The world is definitely changing.



*CarryOn*, always entertained by your posts. You and a few other members echo my recent, v strong thoughts about the immense damage that H&M have done directly to the BRF in this political and socio-economic climate.

Can say at my advanced age, and having been on the right side of history with my predictions so far, my guess is that to underestimate the hand that feeds you is a huge misstep. 
The BRF should pull-in the reigns bc the optics are horrific not only to US citizens but probably to the UK en masse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you, @gracekelly  @VigeeLeBrun You are most gracious and kind. Wonder if Hermes would issue a scarf design with a green cape on it?

From what I’m reading the UK papers aren’t too happy with the BRF’s response — “ he’s not a working royal” 
What does that mean? He can do as he pleases? Kinda like Andy?  Um no, that doesn’t work for us.  Without the titles, he is just like the rest of us. 

H should consider that when President Asterisk wishes you ‘good luck‘ with your wife, the story is no longer about voting but about something else entirely.  Will&Kate must be laughing themselves silly now, especially at H’s new hair-do.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> We need to add this one to the list of all-time lies .. e.g., "_the check is in the mail_"!  Honestly, she is more stupid than I thought .. she will eventually get found out and then what?!?! .. claim she's the victim yet again??!!?! .. that is getting VERY OLD!


From what I understood she went to the UK to find an English (rich) husband and, with the extraordinary help of MA, she married Harry. The BRF opened so many doors for her to do well and shine. Instead, she spent millions on clothes, treated the staff poorly and let her impatience and exaggerated ambition destroy what could have been a fulfilled life. In the US, she started staging ridiculous photo-ops, filling lawsuits, presenting herself as duchess in a country that doesn't have a royal family, lecturing people that in many cases are a lot more educated than she is...  I have to agree with you, she doesn't look smart.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> What? How pathetic that a member of the White House press corps gave political credibility to H&M by asking such an inane question. Another example of the news media being just as gaga for celebrities as the entertainment media.



Brava! I also like the unvarnished answer. In general, when certain women get criticized fairly or hammered in response to their own attacks, the Media love to rush to their defense and cry "misogyny", like how dare they get called out. Then some women are always fair game to be drawn and quartered.  News media journalists these days are often just a bunch of activist whores, like we're obligated to care about celebrity opinion. Sadly one sees this even in the White House press corps.


----------



## threadbender

Well, President ***** actually wished Harry luck, saying he needs it with mm. lol I paraphrased it but that was the gist. She must be thrilled. lol

ETA Ooops, I see it was posted already. Shows that I really need to read the entire thread prior to posting anything!


----------



## Luvbolide

lanasyogamama said:


> Between this and the Johnny Depp suit, I hope all the celebrities understand that you don’t create lawsuits in the UK unless you are willing to have all of your own dirty laundry aired publicly.




That is not specific to the U.K.  it is incumbent on the attorneys to make sure that a client understands exactly what kind of evidence will come in from both sides.  Need to be careful about what doors you open!  But, of course, MM knows better than any lawyer because she played a lawyer on TV!


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> Well, President ***** actually wished Harry luck, saying he needs it with mm. lol I paraphrased it but that was the gist. She must be thrilled. lol



She’ll be thrilled that she can play the victim again. Everyone is so mean to her!
The media is happy to help her with that. TMZ is referring to it as being “a sexist dig” which is ridiculous.


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> Just seen the news story on BBC News, they didn't show the clip though, they were mentioned as Prince Harry and his wife Meghan. Buckingham Palace have commented saying that as he is no longer a member of the Royal Family, those views are his own.




Ouch...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> She’ll be thrilled that she can play the victim again. Everyone is so mean to her!
> The media is happy to help her with that. TMZ is referring to it as being “a sexist dig” which is ridiculous.



Well... they both gave the same message; she's the one who's actually a US citizen and Harry not only isn't, but is also a (supposedly politically-neutral) prince of the UK for life; and HARRY is the one who needs the help because she's so awful? I would definitely call that a sexist dig. 
Anyone who looks at my history in this thread knows I'm not a fan of either of them, but between them, Harry has waaaaay less reason to interfere or say anything about the US election than she does, so if anything she's the one who needs luck with him because he's definitely the dumber one.


----------



## Luvbolide

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4857283
> 
> Between this and that other video of the two of them all I can think of is the utter entitlement of them thinking it's 100% acceptable to be out urging for people to vote for who _they _want and prefer to be elected. Whether you agree with their political opinions or not, they should NOT be out there using Royal titles while showing strong opinions about a particular political party. Especially Harry, when he's publicly telling people which way to vote in a country that he's not from and doesn't even hold citizenship not to mention that he knows the rules around politics in his family.
> Stop being pretentious little f**kers and show some respect to the politically neutral royal family who you are supposed to be representing and the same family whose titles you are using to further your fame and wealth.
> The arrogance, entitlement, privilege and selfishness these two show every time they open their mouths is just sickening. They are insufferable.




Best side eye ever!  And I agree with your post - no one says MM can’t vote, she just doesn’t need to share her views with us.  If I want advice on voting, I won’t be turning to a suitcase girl who hasn’t even lived in the US for years.  And poor dumb Harry - politically neutral means just that. Best course of action - stay out of the politics of other nations.  We don’t care about your views - even when we agree with them!


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> What? How pathetic that a member of the White House press corps gave political credibility to H&M by asking such an inane question. Another example of the news media being just as gaga for celebrities as the entertainment media.




I took it as the reporter was pimping President Asterisk into saying something stupid or insulting or both, which is his wont.  Especially when he has no script.  Didn’t work this time, though.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Meghan and Harry ‘eager to be back for Christmas to spend time with family'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex want Archie to spend more time with his great-grandmother the Queen after spending months apart due to the coronavirus pandemic




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




That would be an awkward Christmas dinner....


----------



## csshopper

Sol Ryan said:


> Meghan and Harry ‘eager to be back for Christmas to spend time with family'
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex want Archie to spend more time with his great-grandmother the Queen after spending months apart due to the coronavirus pandemic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be an awkward Christmas dinner....


Translation: we’ve been caught out dissing Granny, the expected adulation for our wonderfullness has not materialized as we thought it would, the book was not the answer, and people are making jokes about us......time to head back to do damage repair. Once a Prince, always a Prince so they have to take me and Meghan can manage a C level act for a few weeks. And everyone loves a baby, right “Pa”?


----------



## rose60610

Sol Ryan said:


> Meghan and Harry ‘eager to be back for Christmas to spend time with family'
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex want Archie to spend more time with his great-grandmother the Queen after spending months apart due to the coronavirus pandemic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be an awkward Christmas dinner....



And they have only three months to think of an excuse why they can't go. That doesn't reek of "losers". When in reality it's because they won't be invited. Good luck with that.


----------



## Pessie

youngster said:


> It's pretty ironic, isn't it? A prince of the United Kingdom, a descendant of George III, the fellow we kicked to the curb so that we could establish a constitutional republic, has sauntered across the pond to seek his fortune because he wasn't rich enough or appreciated enough or important enough in the UK . . . telling _us_ to vote and telling us fairly clearly who he'd prefer us to vote for.  This just isn't done and how can he not know that?
> 
> He's not important enough for me to get angry over, and he's just one of a hundred celebrities saying the same thing, but I sure wish Charles or the Queen would make a phone call and lay down the law.


He‘s an adult.  He comes from a free country and he’s living in a free country.  He can speak his mind.  I don’t understand why he’s being given the airtime to make such a plonker of himself.


Sol Ryan said:


> Meghan and Harry ‘eager to be back for Christmas to spend time with family'
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex want Archie to spend more time with his great-grandmother the Queen after spending months apart due to the coronavirus pandemic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be an awkward Christmas dinner....


I’ve noticed every time they make a serious misstep there’s suddenly something placed in the press about coming home, or a fond news item about the Royal Family.  The statement from the palace yesterday was a big deal - publicly distancing the family from the Sussexes in a way I’ve never seen before.


----------



## Pessie

Oh dear god no!  Now she’s popping up on America’s got talent  Is there anywhere safe from silly Meghan (“Duchess of Sussex” btw) posting one of her *heartfelt*  messages??


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> Well... they both gave the same message; she's the one who's actually a US citizen and Harry not only isn't, but is also a (supposedly politically-neutral) prince of the UK for life; and HARRY is the one who needs the help because she's so awful? I would definitely call that a sexist dig.
> Anyone who looks at my history in this thread knows I'm not a fan of either of them, but between them, Harry has waaaaay less reason to interfere or say anything about the US election than she does, so if anything she's the one who needs luck with him because he's definitely the dumber one.



I don't think it's sexist... it's probably because Harry has actually spent time with him during some visits to the UK, and presumably is polite and etc. when entertaining heads of state so he assumes Harry's fine with him. Meghan refused to see him during that one visit so he got the hint long ago she doesn't like him. Anyone who doesn't like him, he dislikes.


----------



## doni

lalame said:


> I cringe at the infamous Reformation one...While I like it personally, it seems very inappropriate for a royal visit. Found a pic:
> 
> View attachment 4857236


Honestly, I think HRH showing us his underwear is rather worse than hers...

I cannot believe he is complaining that he doesn‘t have the right to vote... Even if it was true, which it isn’t, it’d be by reason of a circumstance of extreme privilege and influence, not deprivation or discrimination... Very bizarre...


----------



## CarryOn2020

A refresher —

MM said: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/06/*****-meghan-markle-nasty
It was prior to the election in 2016 that the former _Suits_ star appeared on _The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore_, saying, “Yes, of course, President ***** is divisive. Think about female voters alone, right? I think it was in 2012 the ********** Party lost the female vote by 12 points … That is a huge number, and with as misogynistic as ***** is, and so vocal about it, that is a huge chunk of it.”

***** said:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9196110/donald-*****-meghan-markle-nasty-comment-uk-visit/
Told of Meghan’s barbs by The Sun, Mr. ***** insisted it was the first time he’d heard them.
He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.”
When told Meghan had threatened to leave for Canada if he won in 2016, he countered: “A lot of people are moving here (to the US).”
He also revealed that he had no idea that he wouldn’t be meeting Meghan on his three-day state visit to the UK.
He said: “I didn’t know that. I hope she is OK.”
He predicted she will make “a very good” American princess.
On her joining the Royal Family, he added: “It is nice, and I am sure she will do excellently.
“She will be very good. I hope she does (succeed).”

And so, the media circus began


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> Translation: we’ve been caught out dissing Granny, the expected adulation for our wonderfullness has not materialized as we thought it would, the book was not the answer, and people are making jokes about us......time to head back to do damage repair. Once a Prince, always a Prince so they have to take me and Meghan can manage a C level act for a few weeks. And everyone loves a baby, right “Pa”?




Plus we have to go to the U.K. anyway so that we are there and out of quarantine in time for MM’s January 11 trial date!  Who are they kidding?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Give them enough time, they will sink their own ship.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> A refresher —
> 
> MM said: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2019/06/*****-meghan-markle-nasty
> It was prior to the election in 2016 that the former _Suits_ star appeared on _The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore_, saying, “Yes, of course, President ***** is divisive. Think about female voters alone, right? I think it was in 2012 the ********** Party lost the female vote by 12 points … That is a huge number, and with as misogynistic as ***** is, and so vocal about it, that is a huge chunk of it.”
> 
> ***** said:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9196110/donald-*****-meghan-markle-nasty-comment-uk-visit/
> Told of Meghan’s barbs by The Sun, Mr. ***** insisted it was the first time he’d heard them.
> He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.”
> When told Meghan had threatened to leave for Canada if he won in 2016, he countered: “A lot of people are moving here (to the US).”
> He also revealed that he had no idea that he wouldn’t be meeting Meghan on his three-day state visit to the UK.
> He said: “I didn’t know that. I hope she is OK.”
> He predicted she will make “a very good” American princess.
> On her joining the Royal Family, he added: “It is nice, and I am sure she will do excellently.
> “She will be very good. I hope she does (succeed).”
> 
> And so, the media circus began



That's actually a fairly restrained response from him haha.


----------



## Lodpah

Found this on the net: great analogy for those two.



Have you read the fairytale “the fisherman and his wife ? “

There is a poor fisherman who lives with his wife in a hovel by the sea. One day the fisherman catches a fish, which claims to be an enchanted prince, and begs to be set free. The fisherman kindly releases it. When his wife hears the story, she says he ought to have had the fish grant him a wish. She insists that he go back and ask the flounder to grant her wish for a nice house.

The fisherman returns to the shore but is uneasy when he finds that the sea seems to becoming turbid, as it was so clear before. He makes up a rhyme to summon the flounder, and it grants the wife's wish. The fisherman is pleased with his new wealth, but the wife is not and demands more, and demands that her husband go back and wish that he be made a king. Reluctantly, he does, and gets his wish. But again and again, his wife sends him back to ask for more and more. The fisherman knows this is wrong but there is no reasoning with his wife. He says they should not annoy the flounder, and be content with what they have been given, but his wife is not content. Each time, the flounder grants the wishes with the words: "just go home again, she has it already" or similar, but each time the sea grows more and more fierce.

Eventually, the wife wishes to command the sun, moon and heavens, and she sends her husband to the flounder with the wish "I want to become equal to God". When that final wish is made, the flounder says: "just go home again, she is already sitting in the old hovel again". And with that, the sea becomes calm once more.

the fisherman = prince Harry

the greedy wife =Megalodon

the flounder = Queen Elisabeth


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Megalodon.    I love this thread!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

MM appeared on America’s Got Talent yesterday. She inserts herself into EVERYTHING.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Found this on the net: great analogy for those two.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you read the fairytale “the fisherman and his wife ? “
> 
> There is a poor fisherman who lives with his wife in a hovel by the sea. One day the fisherman catches a fish, which claims to be an enchanted prince, and begs to be set free. The fisherman kindly releases it. When his wife hears the story, she says he ought to have had the fish grant him a wish. She insists that he go back and ask the flounder to grant her wish for a nice house.
> 
> The fisherman returns to the shore but is uneasy when he finds that the sea seems to becoming turbid, as it was so clear before. He makes up a rhyme to summon the flounder, and it grants the wife's wish. The fisherman is pleased with his new wealth, but the wife is not and demands more, and demands that her husband go back and wish that he be made a king. Reluctantly, he does, and gets his wish. But again and again, his wife sends him back to ask for more and more. The fisherman knows this is wrong but there is no reasoning with his wife. He says they should not annoy the flounder, and be content with what they have been given, but his wife is not content. Each time, the flounder grants the wishes with the words: "just go home again, she has it already" or similar, but each time the sea grows more and more fierce.
> 
> Eventually, the wife wishes to command the sun, moon and heavens, and she sends her husband to the flounder with the wish "I want to become equal to God". When that final wish is made, the flounder says: "just go home again, she is already sitting in the old hovel again". And with that, the sea becomes calm once more.
> 
> the fisherman = prince Harry
> 
> the greedy wife =Megalodon
> 
> the flounder = Queen Elisabeth



I think I've mentioned this story about 5 times in this thread. 

It's basically the plot of H&M's life except he was born into royalty, was bought up in a palace and (said he) wanted to become a fisherman. She was never the contented wife from the beginning, she was always mega-greedy. As a subject of Her Majesty I can't liken our Queen to a fish or I'll be sent to the gallows, but I do wish she'd wave her 'magic' sceptre (sacred symbol for authority and sovereignty) and turn them both into mice.


----------



## rose60610

And notice with America's Got Talent how she HAD to interject her own son "Archie" into the conversation to make this wrongfully 36 year incarcerated guy's appearance a little about themselves. In other words, had this guy not been named "Archie" or "Harry" she would not have cared one iota. What a user. She's grabbing onto anything and everything. Her desperation is palpable. Using RBG's death, AGT's contestant, 86 year old Gloria Steinem, she isn't beneath anything to insert herself anywhere. Any day now she'll be coming out with some "original" pumpkin spice recipes, and ideas for Halloween decorations. Poor baby Archie. M is probably researching everybody named "Archie" so she'll be ready to spring into action over any camera worthy thing they do. You'd think with a potential 150 million Netflix deal she wouldn't be so desperate to keep herself in the public eye. As she begs and sues for privacy. Leads me to wonder if she's afraid she can't fulfill the Netflix contract conditions. So their Netflix Diana movie is going to have to be over-the-top salacious and scandalous to attract a sufficient number of viewer eyeballs. Nothing like throwing your own tragically killed iconic mother-in-law under a fleet load of buses to save your own skin. Of course it's going to pain them greatly to be forced to divulge such sensitive never-before-heard-of buried royal secrets, and they'll be dabbing their eyes with color coordinated hankies in preview interviews.


----------



## Pessie

rose60610 said:


> And notice with America's Got Talent how she HAD to interject her own son "Archie" into the conversation to make this wrongfully 36 year incarcerated guy's appearance a little about themselves. In other words, had this guy not been named "Archie" or "Harry" she would not have cared one iota. What a user. She's grabbing onto anything and everything. Her desperation is palpable. Using RBG's death, AGT's contestant, 86 year old Gloria Steinem, she isn't beneath anything to insert herself anywhere. Any day now she'll be coming out with some "original" pumpkin spice recipes, and ideas for Halloween decorations. Poor baby Archie. M is probably researching everybody named "Archie" so she'll be ready to spring into action over any camera worthy thing they do. You'd think with a potential 150 million Netflix deal she wouldn't be so desperate to keep herself in the public eye. As she begs and sues for privacy. Leads me to wonder if she's afraid she can't fulfill the Netflix contract conditions. So their Netflix Diana movie is going to have to be over-the-top salacious and scandalous to attract a sufficient number of viewer eyeballs. Nothing like throwing your own tragically killed iconic mother-in-law under a fleet load of buses to save your own skin. Of course it's going to pain them greatly to be forced to divulge such sensitive never-before-heard-of buried royal secrets, and they'll be dabbing their eyes with color coordinated hankies in preview interviews.


Cynical doesn’t even begin to describe it 
Have to say I’m wondering when the wheels are going to fall off the Duchess’s bandwagon.  Its hard to believe people are still swallowing her opportunistic self-serving bs.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> I think famous people get any and everything thrown at them during press conferences.


But maybe, with this stoopid video, they have crossed a line and entered into the US public's awareness--not a good thing for the grifters to do. We (USA) do not like being told what to do by others, especially outsiders, which he is.


----------



## rcy

anyone else find it a little funny that they're basically fessing up to watching reality tv?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Anyone who doesn't like him, he dislikes.



That is true for everybody. If someone blatantly announced her dislike of me the way Meghan has, I'd dislike her right back. 

The US media is of course clutching their pearls and playing it up to Meghan's advantage. Their hatred of ***** overshadows everything else. Elle magazine called it a "gross remark." What was gross about it? Frankly, considering what he's said about other people, Meghan got off very easy.


----------



## bag-mania

rcy said:


> anyone else find it a little funny that they're basically fessing up to watching reality tv?



What else do they have to do? They have been isolated for months in a mansion during a pandemic. They have probably already played tennis on their private tennis court and swam in their pools. Once they have taken a crap in all of their 19 toilets, it's time to turn on the TV! They aren't going to watch that educational stuff like they want to produce for Netflix, they want to watch something that's actually entertaining.


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> MM appeared on America’s Got Talent yesterday. She inserts herself into EVERYTHING.



Does anyone actually watch this show?

Also, a little giggle about the strategically placed books (WOMEN) and $100 Diptyque candle in the background.


----------



## csshopper

Interesting body language analysis in the article from the Daily Mail. She points out all the "tells" and it's clear Meghan is in charge of this show. Harry seems to be progressively more diminished. Earl of DUMBarton indeed! (with apologies to the Scots who bear the burden of this association).

*Prince Harry appeared 'regretful' and 'tense' when he spoke about the US election in Time 100 video and knew he could 'fall out with his family' but was kept 'on message' by Meghan Markle, body language expert claims*

*Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, have urged citizens to register to vote*
*Duke and Duchess of Sussex appeared in new video for Time 100 yesterday  *
*Prince Harry said he was ineligible to vote and had never been able to in the UK*
*The Duchess of Sussex also spoke of the 'most important election of our lifetime'*
*Body language expert said the Duke appeared 'uncomfortable' and 'tense' in clip*
*Judi James revealed Prince Harry used 'distraction rituals' which hinted he is aware of the potential fall-out with the royal family*


----------



## bag-mania

She is so desperate to appear relevant. What is she going to do after the election? Without going into specifics, whichever candidate wins there is likely going to be controversy and uproar. Will she try to insert herself into that mess too?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> She is so desperate to appear relevant. What is she going to do after the election? Without going into specifics, whichever candidate wins there is likely going to be controversy and uproar. Will she try to insert herself into that mess too?



Show off a new hair do? new make-up? new decor?
Yes, H&M are with us until we the people rise up, stop supporting them and their causes and move on to someone else.
Or Netflix drops them.


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> Interesting body language analysis in the article from the Daily Mail. She points out all the "tells" and it's clear Meghan is in charge of this show. Harry seems to be progressively more diminished. Earl of DUMBarton indeed! (with apologies to the Scots who bear the burden of this association).
> 
> *Prince Harry appeared 'regretful' and 'tense' when he spoke about the US election in Time 100 video and knew he could 'fall out with his family' but was kept 'on message' by Meghan Markle, body language expert claims*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, have urged citizens to register to vote*
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex appeared in new video for Time 100 yesterday  *
> *Prince Harry said he was ineligible to vote and had never been able to in the UK*
> *The Duchess of Sussex also spoke of the 'most important election of our lifetime'*
> *Body language expert said the Duke appeared 'uncomfortable' and 'tense' in clip*
> *Judi James revealed Prince Harry used 'distraction rituals' which hinted he is aware of the potential fall-out with the royal family*


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4857800


LittleStar, perfect picture. 

This dummy looks happier with the potential to be more animated, than the other "dummy" in Montecito.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

I find it hilarious [in a snarky way] that in the “Talent” video, she is wearing the same shirt Kelly Rutherford wore on her Instagram a few days ago.
These people are so interchangeable, zero originality.

ETA: the photo


----------



## marietouchet

Just me being petty , ok it is not their real house decor, it is a TV set in the house, but gosh I hate the decor , so antisceptically curated to death,gray does not flatter her imho, it is a cold, dreary decor out of the Adams family 
Butt the decor gets points for product placement , she must be a Diptique ambassador, note the Netflix book 


Inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $14 million mansion
https://mol.im/a/8767377


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Just me being petty , ok it is not their real house, it is a TV set, but gosh I hate the decor , so antisceptically curated to death,gray does not flatter her imho, it is a cold, dreary decor out of the Adams family
> 
> 
> Inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $14 million mansion
> https://mol.im/a/8767377



Aw now, I think it shows a pretentious, aspirational person who has no clue and no authenticity.
‘Antiseptically curated’  = perfect phrase for it. Guessing she kept the DQ candle.

ETA: every designer I know is asking ‘Why? Why would you _do that_?’


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4857283
> 
> Between this and that other video of the two of them all I can think of is the utter entitlement of them thinking it's 100% acceptable to be out urging for people to vote for who _they _want and prefer to be elected. Whether you agree with their political opinions or not, they should NOT be out there using Royal titles while showing strong opinions about a particular political party. Especially Harry, when he's publicly telling people which way to vote in a country that he's not from and doesn't even hold citizenship not to mention that he knows the rules around politics in his family.
> Stop being pretentious little f**kers and show some respect to the politically neutral royal family who you are supposed to be representing and the same family whose titles you are using to further your fame and wealth.
> The arrogance, entitlement, privilege and selfishness these two show every time they open their mouths is just sickening. They are insufferable.


right....I happen to agree with their choice but don't need to hear it from them


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins  Wow, I have never considered that would be a possibility. As we have said before, H is eaten away with jealousy and ignorance.  However their drama ends, it will not be happy.
> 
> _@gracekelly _spot on, dear one, spot on.  We only know a fraction of what is really going on. There is so much more that we do not know, especially about the finances. The billionaires undoubtedly will have the last word, but the way this H&M drama is unfolding convinces me something else is afoot. There has definitely been a shift, and it isn’t just COVID, not sure but it could be Brexit. _”There are times when I really do think that someone had it in mind to do as much damage as possible and somehow she was the tool.” _ Her glaring stares at William were just weird. If ever a girl is being used by men, this one most surely is. ETA: it could explain why H is such a nervous wreck.
> 
> All my opinion, as always.


maybe I need to read the thread more carefully but don't understand the "girl being used by men" comment


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She’ll be thrilled that she can play the victim again. Everyone is so mean to her!
> The media is happy to help her with that. TMZ is referring to it as being “a sexist dig” which is ridiculous.


I have to disagree with you there


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> MM appeared on America’s Got Talent yesterday. She inserts herself into EVERYTHING.


and as Duchess


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> maybe I need to read the thread more carefully but don't understand the "girl being used by men" comment



The spin is she is this powerful, independent woman. The truth is she would be nowhere without the men. Sure, she uses them, but they are using her. H used her so he could exit the BRF. He used her to ‘get back’ at his dad. He demanded an expensive wedding because he felt he was entitled to the same as his brother. Charles used her to score some points with the public. He wanted to appear more modern. Omid continues to use her to further his own career.  Markus, same as Omid.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aw now, I think it shows a pretentious, aspirational person who has no clue and no authenticity.
> ‘Antiseptically curated’  = perfect phrase for it. Guessing she kept the DQ candle.
> 
> ETA: every designer I know is asking ‘Why? Why would you _do that_?’


I would like to see some happy colors , a la the colors Michelle ***** was known for , Teal, rose gold, yellow, purple etc upbeat stuff
Bright colors are not a universal no no


----------



## lanasyogamama

I totally agree that she wanted to show off the room.  Congrats on the candle MM!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> The spin is she is this powerful, independent woman. The truth is she would be nowhere without the men. Sure, she uses them, but they are using her. H used her so he could exit the BRF. *He used her to ‘get back’ at his dad. He demanded an expensive wedding because he felt he was entitled to the same as his brother. Charles used her to score some points with the public. He wanted to appear more modern.* Omid continues to use her to further his own career.  Markus, same as Omid.


Yeah...  since when does the husband pay for the entire wedding? The bride or her family pays for most of it. The groom usually pays for the flowers, the booze and the rehearsal dinner. However, most modern couples share all the expenses. I'll wager the Queen paid a big chunk of change for that wedding. So much for modern and equal-rights Me-again, who paid diddly squat for her pure and virginal wedding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I would like to see some happy colors , a la the colors Michelle ***** was known for , Teal, rose gold, yellow, purple etc upbeat stuff
> Bright colors are not a universal no no



H&M seem to use 1 color only. They should take note of W&K’s decor -








						Prince William and Princess Kate's home decor style tricks you should know
					

Take inspiration from The Prince and Princess of Wales' private residence in Kensington Palace




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, did anyone else find it interesting that the BP statement saying Harry was no longer a working member of the BRF and so whatever he said was his private business didn't even care to mention MM?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yeah...  since when does the husband pay for the entire wedding? The bride or her family pays for most of it. The groom usually pays for the flowers, the booze and the rehearsal dinner. However, most modern couples share all the expenses. I'll wager the Queen paid a big chunk of change for that wedding. So much for modern and equal-rights Me-again, who paid diddly squat for her pure and virginal wedding.



Guessing Trevor paid for his wedding, too.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Just me being petty , ok it is not their real house decor, it is a TV set in the house, but gosh I hate the decor , so antisceptically curated to death,gray does not flatter her imho, it is a cold, dreary decor out of the Adams family
> Butt the decor gets points for product placement , she must be a Diptique ambassador, note the Netflix book
> 
> 
> Inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $14 million mansion
> https://mol.im/a/8767377



Is it gray? I thought it was beige, many shades of quiet, drab, inoffensive beige. If there is only going to be one thing that will stand out in her staged, home set, it's going to be Meghan. There is no reason for viewers to be distracted by bright colors or patterns. Focus on her! Absorb her wisdom! She is so much more enlightened than we are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Trevor paid for his wedding, too.


Yes, I would believe that. I think MM always got away or shied away from paying for anything. Starting with her dad... then all the men she could use... she grabbed all the freebies she felt entitled too.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Is it gray? I thought it was beige, many shades of quiet, drab, inoffensive beige. If there is only going to be one thing that will stand out in her staged, home set, it's going to be Meghan. There is no reason for viewers to be distracted by bright colors or patterns. Focus on her! Absorb her wisdom! She is so much more enlightened than we are.


Must get out my Pantone set ... maybe greige? Something from the dishwater color family


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, did anyone else find it interesting that the BP statement saying Harry was no longer a working member of the BRF and so whatever he said was his private business didn't even care to mention MM?



This is where the BRF messed up. Whether the BRF agrees or not, H is still a representative of the Royal family, just like Uncle Andrew. What H says and does reflects on who the BRF is. There is no private business when these people are living off the taxpayers.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I would believe that. I think MM always got away or shied away from paying for anything. Starting with her dad... then all the men she could use... she grabbed all the freebies she felt entitled too.



Yes, her entire life she has relied on men to take care of her. She relied on men to achieve her wealth and status. She's a feminist you know!


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> And notice with America's Got Talent how she HAD to interject her own son "Archie" into the conversation to make this wrongfully 36 year incarcerated guy's appearance a little about themselves. In other words, had this guy not been named "Archie" or "Harry" she would not have cared one iota. What a user. She's grabbing onto anything and everything. Her desperation is palpable. Using RBG's death, AGT's contestant, 86 year old Gloria Steinem, she isn't beneath anything to insert herself anywhere. Any day now she'll be coming out with some "original" pumpkin spice recipes, and ideas for Halloween decorations. Poor baby Archie. M is probably researching everybody named "Archie" so she'll be ready to spring into action over any camera worthy thing they do. You'd think with a potential 150 million Netflix deal she wouldn't be so desperate to keep herself in the public eye. As she begs and sues for privacy. Leads me to wonder if she's afraid she can't fulfill the Netflix contract conditions. So their Netflix Diana movie is going to have to be over-the-top salacious and scandalous to attract a sufficient number of viewer eyeballs. Nothing like throwing your own tragically killed iconic mother-in-law under a fleet load of buses to save your own skin. Of course it's going to pain them greatly to be forced to divulge such sensitive never-before-heard-of buried royal secrets, and they'll be dabbing their eyes with color coordinated hankies in preview interviews.


Well you don’t have to wait long. Her PR put out an article of how Vanessa Bryant is like MM re her mother.

I read somewhere that MM asks to be a part of something, not invited. Seems true as you will recall that we read “how surprised” the recipients are. Also I read that she asked to be a part of the Times thing. She was never nominated to be in it.
Kinda sad to think about it. Allegedly she has 3 PR firms so you know they are the n overdrive. They bring up things like 3 years ago in articles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s our inspirational photo for the day  



The hair.   we know he had hair thickening plugs added, but now it looks like he is wearing a toupee with a top and sides. Does anyone know?


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> I would like to see some happy colors , a la the colors Michelle ***** was known for , Teal, rose gold, yellow, purple etc upbeat stuff
> Bright colors are not a universal no no





CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M seem to use 1 color only. They should take note of W&K’s decor -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Princess Kate's home decor style tricks you should know
> 
> 
> Take inspiration from The Prince and Princess of Wales' private residence in Kensington Palace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com



I don't think bold colors like that would look right in their home, since it's a mediterranean style. Their decor seems pretty trendy/common now among that type of California coastal home. Though I hate beige; a creamy white would've looked much more fresh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I don't think bold colors like that would look right in their home, since it's a mediterranean style. Their decor seems pretty trendy/common now among that type of California coastal home. Though I hate beige; a creamy white would've looked much more fresh.



The walls seem to be a yellow beige which doesn’t really work with the white/griege decor. Agree the decor is trendy, common and needs a refresh. Nothing really personal or meaningful.  Difficult to believe H would feel comfortable there, especially after living in those beautiful palaces with museum-worthy paintings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> I find it hilarious [in a snarky way] that in the “Talent” video, she is wearing the same shirt Kelly Rutherford wore on her Instagram a few days ago.
> These people are so interchangeable, zero originality.
> 
> ETA: the photo
> View attachment 4857805



Correction: DM says her shirt is V. Beckham.








						Inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $14 million mansion
					

Meghan Markle, 39, offered royal fans an intimate glimpse into the plush lounge in the $14 million California mansion she shares with Prince Harry, 35, and Archie, one, during appearance today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> The walls seem to be a yellow beige which doesn’t really work with the white/griege decor. Agree the decor is trendy, common and needs a refresh. Nothing really personal or meaningful.  Difficult to believe H would feel comfortable there, especially after living in those beautiful palaces with museum-worthy paintings.



They've been living in borrowed homes for it seems like ages so it's probably just nice to have a "home" haha. I much prefer this to Tyler Perry's decor, that's for sure. I'm looking forward to seeing more of their home... I actually quite like it, but I live in a coastal California house haha. I think this is probably just an office in their home, not the actual living room. It seems very small in scale when you think about such a big house.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame    Love the coastal California style. The creamy whites paired with the natural woods and stone are stunning.


----------



## gracekelly

There is nothing unique about this decor and it could  have been assembled by a stylist from a staging company in an hour. A sofa from Living Spaces and some art books and a candle and flowers. Some simple prints. There is nothing personal unless you count the books for show that have never been looked at.  Not impressed. She is clutching that black leather pillow because her video acting coach said she was waving her hands around too much in prior videos and it was distracting.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Does anyone actually watch this show?
> 
> Also, a little giggle about the strategically placed books (WOMEN) and $100 Diptyque candle in the background.



I hate it even when my colleagues virtue signal at online meetings. Their alphabetically organised, leather-bound, prize-winning literature forming a strategic line of brilliance by association is so annoying, especially when they can't string a sentence together or have an original idea.

I've thought about putting my most uncool things behind me like my inherited portrait of Lenin and big mink coat. Setting the scene into hot topic, virtue signaling is depeche mode and gauche.

All MM seems to read are Associated Press tabloids, Internet name alerts, SM, Who's Who and America's got Talent.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> They've been living in borrowed homes for it seems like ages so it's probably just nice to have a "home" haha. I much prefer this to Tyler Perry's decor, that's for sure. I'm looking forward to seeing more of their home... I actually quite like it, but I live in a coastal California house haha. I think this is probably just an office in their home, not the actual living room. It seems very small in scale when you think about such a big house.


we actually have light warm grey walls in most of our house and love it


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I hate it even when my colleagues viture signal at online meetings. Their alphabetically organised, leather-bound, prize-winning literature forming a strategic line of brilliance by association is so annoying, especially when they can't string a sentence together or have an original idea.
> 
> I've thought about putting my most uncool things behind me like my inherited portrait of Lenin and big mink coat. Setting the scene into hot topic, virtue signaling is depeche mode and gauche.
> 
> All MM seems to read are Associated Press tabloids, Internet name alerts, SM, Who's Who and America's got Talent.


My favorite example of this is a guy on a financial show we watch every morning. For months he has been shown  in a sterile looking room  I told the DH that it looks like his wife threw him out of the house and he is broadcasting from a room at the Holiday Inn. Generic picture on the wall and a floor lamp!

@papertiger How about some shrunken heads hanging behind you?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

The room could be the color it was when they bought the house. They may even have bought it partially furnished. I don't see the privacy kids renovating their mansion right away. They spent months shopping around until they found one  they liked enough where they could move right in. What we can be certain really shows MEGHAN is the accessories. All of those books were carefully chosen by her to convey the right amount of wokeness and awareness. I doubt those spines have ever been opened and read. They are merely props to give off the image she wants everyone to see.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> My favorite example of this is a guy on a financial show we watch every morning. For months he has been shown  in a sterile looking room  I told the DH that it looks like his wife threw him out of the house and he is broadcasting from a room at the Holiday Inn. Generic picture on the wall and a floor lamp!
> 
> @papertiger How about some shrunken heads hanging behind you?



Now that is a man who likes his privacy. He allows no one to have even the slightest insight into who he is.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> The room could be the color it was when they bought the house. They may even have bought it partially furnished. I don't see the privacy kids renovating their mansion right away. They spent months shopping around until they found one  they liked enough where they could move right in. What we can be certain really shows MEGHAN is the accessories. All of those books were carefully chosen by her to convey the right amount of wokeness and awareness. I doubt those spines have ever been opened and read. They are merely props to give off the image she wants everyone to see.


The room and the videos are so humorless, no soul, inspiration, no sparkle
I think back to Michelle - who had the grace and style to dance with a turnip on Sesame Street (yes, true !) - that lady has/had soul


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> I hate it even when my colleagues viture signal at online meetings. Their alphabetically organised, leather-bound, prize-winning literature forming a strategic line of brilliance by association is so annoying, especially when they can't string a sentence together or have an original idea.
> 
> I've thought about putting my most uncool things behind me like my inherited portrait of Lenin and big mink coat. Setting the scene into hot topic, virtue signaling is depeche mode and gauche.
> 
> All MM seems to read are Associated Press tabloids, Internet name alerts, SM, Who's Who and America's got Talent.


Does she buy her books by the woke yard?  My zoom vote goes to the person who has a proper lived in home - whether it’s got the cats litter tray somewhere in the distance, a pile of kids shoes, some proper family photos kicking around or a shelf with books showing actual creasing to the spine  Whatever. Everything else is just froth and poserism.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s our inspirational photo for the day
> 
> View attachment 4857888
> 
> The hair.   we know he had hair thickening plugs added, but now it looks like he is wearing a toupee with a top and sides. Does anyone know?


What a drab dull unremarkable setting. A $14M home and this is the best outdoor space they could film in? That rickety old weathered bench, floppy foliage and blah green grass?
Are there no flowers in California? Plus they both look absolutely miserable.
That is certainly not a Town & Country worthy yard. Eep


----------



## gracekelly

I’m voting for rooms to go courtesy of the home staging company. Soulless is a good description. Yes, those books are from the Woke Book of the Month Club Van. Just a wee bit too obvious.

Good point about being plunked down on some grass. The coastal climate is more flower friendly during the hot temps we have had. They should have been in a more garden like setting. He looked terrible and she looked drab and ordinary.  Those hair extensions are out of control.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s our inspirational photo for the day
> 
> View attachment 4857888
> 
> The hair.   we know he had hair thickening plugs added, but now it looks like he is wearing a toupee with a top and sides. Does anyone know?


I think he got some plugs..so he's also growing out the sides to let it look like it's just naturally "filling in"  OR growing out the sides to start prepping for the comb-over if the plugs don't take.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The room and the videos are so humorless, no soul, inspiration, no sparkle
> I think back to Michelle - who had the grace and style to dance with a turnip on Sesame Street (yes, true !) - that lady has/had soul



The difference is women like Michelle are confident and have no fear of showing who they are to the world. 

Meghan is full of fear. We will never see her being the first, or even among the first 100, to support any particular cause. She only speaks out on issues that already have a large base of support. She wants the credit without risking any controversy. She plays it safe. That is someone who lacks confidence.


----------



## Pessie

TC1 said:


> I think he got some plugs..so he's also growing out the sides to let it look like it's just naturally "filling in"  OR growing out the sides to start prepping for the comb-over if the plugs don't take.


Never mind the hair - he needs to plug in his brain


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> The difference is women like Michelle are confident and have no fear of showing who they are to the world.
> 
> Meghan is full of fear. We will never see her being the first, or even among the first 100, to support any particular cause. She only speaks out on issues that already have a large base of support. She wants the credit without risking any controversy. She plays it safe. That is someone who lacks confidence.


She‘s always acting what she thinks is the part.  “Look, this is me being Royal“  “Look this is me being a Philanthropist”  “Look this is me being in lurve“ Etc Etc.   Ad tedium.


----------



## lalame

V0N1B2 said:


> What a drab dull unremarkable setting. A $14M home and this is the best outdoor space they could film in? That rickety old weathered bench, floppy foliage and blah green grass?
> Are there no flowers in California? Plus they both look absolutely miserable.
> That is certainly not a Town & Country worthy yard. Eep



It seems like they went out of their way to not show anything toooo nice - hence the backdrop of corners, up against the walls, and this is probably just a corner of their yard. I totally get that and my company executives are coached to do the same too actually. When you live in a $30m house for example and your audience are people making a fraction, you are probably mindful not to look too "Town & Country." I don't think there's anything wrong with either approach and it probably depends on the occasion. I can definitely see them trying to get an AD video walkthrough done one day when the "woke" thing doesn't become their main shtick.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> I doubt it very much. The RF survived Diana and Sarah and I think they'll survive these two idiots, MM & H. BP has stated that Harry doesn't speak for them. Harry is over 21, so he can literally do as he pleases... the same as us when we reach 18 or 21 depending on where we live. His prince title cannot be removed, he would have to do that himself. It takes an act of Parliament to remove the dukedom. You can write to Boris or ask ***** to ask Boris. Or, maybe talk to MM because I'm almost positive, that she gives Harry his marching orders and we know "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets."


Understood .. I just think that neither of them should use their "titles" here in the US!!  Unfortunately, as we have seen .. Meghan ESPECIALLY seems to love using that title, but being American and (supposedly) so smart, she should realize that titles are not used and/or recognized here in the US.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> @youngster -  totally  your comment.  This Vote video is a game-changer, not just for them but for Charles and QE.
> Pairing them with Andrew’s disgrace, yeah, it will not be long for the world to lose complete respect for this BRF.  Diana and Sarah‘s damage was nothing compared to these 3, H&M&Andy.  They have made a mockery of the royal system. Thinking it will be tough times ahead for the UK.
> 
> ETA: Reports are China is buying up the Caribbean. They may have been behind Barbados’ exit. Other islands may follow. The world is definitely changing.


Oh how fantastic .. NOT!!!  Chinese foreign nationals have bought tons of Properties on the West Coast, from California all the way up to Vancouver, BC.  They pay cash and top dollar, and as such, the Property values are going sky-high.  So many purchased homes in one town in SoCAL, such that the entire town is now Chinese .. all the businesses are Chinese and all the non-Chinese had to move out.  There was a horrible incident in the high school in that town; Chinese foreign nationals in the high school didn't like non-Chinese students and bullied them and in one case, beat up the girl so bad that she had to be hospitalized for some time.  The "leader" of the gang is (I believe) now in Jail .. how sick is that?


----------



## bag-mania

Does every publication have their hand out for cash and, more interestingly, does Meghan get a cut of the commission for the products sold? The following disclosure from the _People_ article about Meghan's home decor.

*Products in this story are independently selected and featured editorially. If you make a purchase using these links we may earn commission.*








						Meghan Markle Cheers On Prince Harry at Polo Tournament Near Their California Home
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoyed the California sunshine at a weekend polo tournament




					people.com


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Oh how fantastic .. NOT!!!  Chinese foreign nationals have bought tons of Properties on the West Coast, from California all the way up to Vancouver, BC.  They pay cash and top dollar, and as such, the Property values are going sky-high.  So many purchased homes in one town in SoCAL, such that the entire town is now Chinese .. all the businesses are Chinese and all the non-Chinese had to move out.  There was a horrible incident in the high school in that town; *Chinese foreign nationals in the high school didn't like non-Chinese students and bullied them and in one case, beat up the girl so bad that she had to be hospitalized for some time.  *The "leader" of the gang is (I believe) now in Jail .. how sick is that?



Did this story get covered in the news in California? I certainly have not heard about it here on the east coast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Not trying to hijack this thread, but this article emphasizes the growing disparity between a working Royal who does something noteworthy and productive for his country and one who has cut and run and sits zombie like spewing platitudes on foreign shores. Wonder if MM will try to insert herself via commenting.....

*Now Bafta moves to improve diversity: Prince William backs plan to invite 1,000 new members from 'diverse communities' after he attacked the 'whiteness and maleness' of the awards in a damning speech*

*Duke of Cambridge helped push through 120 diversity innovations at Bafta *
*Gave speech about award's overwhelming 'whiteness and maleness' in February*
*New measures include discounted rates, conscious voter training and plans to put the British back into Bafta by putting the spotlight on British films *


----------



## CeeJay

Pessie said:


> Oh dear god no!  Now she’s popping up on America’s got talent  Is there anywhere safe from silly Meghan (“Duchess of Sussex” btw) posting one of her *heartfelt*  messages??


Hmmmmm .. well, from wishes of being 'only an A Lister' to stooping down to this program?!?! .. quite a drop Meghan!


----------



## Lounorada

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4857800












bag-mania said:


> Is it gray? I thought it was beige, many shades of quiet, drab, inoffensive beige. If there is only going to be one thing that will stand out in her staged, home set, it's going to be Meghan. *There is no reason for viewers to be distracted by bright colors or patterns. Focus on her! Absorb her wisdom! She is so much more enlightened than we are.*


Soon enough she'll be making an entrance for a tv appearance like this...






CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s our inspirational photo for the day
> 
> View attachment 4857888
> 
> The hair.   we know he had hair thickening plugs added, but now it looks like he is wearing a toupee with a top and sides. Does anyone know?





This looks like a screenshot from some new horror movie coming out soon, just in time for Halloween. The whole setting including them look so dreary and creepy looking.


----------



## Lodpah

Not to derail the thread but I love candles and I need to switch it up. Jo Malone candles or Diptyque? Just because so think MM is a nut case I do purchase what I like.  As a matter of fact I’ve got a bottle of Tignanello but she was not the catalyst to make me buy it.


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> Not to derail the thread but I love candles and I need to switch it up. Jo Malone candles or Diptyque? Just because so think MM is a nut case I do purchase what I like.  As a matter of fact I’ve got a bottle of Tignanello but she was not the catalyst to make me buy it.



Dear lord, I would hope that is okay for any of us to like a product she likes lol. It's not guilt by association here.

I prefer diffusers over candles so I can only speak to that but... those 2 brands are so different in their approach, it depends on the vibe you like. Dyptique scents to me are a little more sexy, earthy, real while Jo Malone's are more of a refined feel like a posh hotel or department store. They each make multiple scents of course but I think those are their strengths generally.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My favorites!




__





						Trudon | Candlemaker since 1643
					

Founded in 1643, on the threshold of the reign of Louis XIV, Cire Trudon is the oldest Candlemaker in the world still active today. Throughout the 17th century, the manufacturer became the Royal Wax Manufacturer and official supplier in the French court, then to Napoléon Bonaparte. Cire Trudon...




					trudon.com
				



https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/garden/waxing-extravagant.html  Jackie O used Rigaud








						Rigaud Paris | Créateur de la bougie parfumée
					

Rigaud Candles FR



					www.bougies-rigaud.com


----------



## lalame

I actually was thinking the other day about how fitting it is that Kate used Jo Malone candles at her wedding while Meghan used Dyptique. I think that highlights the differences in their styles. Dypstique being a little more of a wild earthiness while Jo Malone is polished.


----------



## bag-mania

Here's E's take on Harry and Meghan possibly losing their titles. 





__





						Celebrity Videos, Red Carpet Videos, Movie Trailers - E! Online
					

See hot celebrity videos, E! News Now clips, interviews, movie premiers, exclusives, and more!




					www.eonline.com


----------



## lalame

I just noticed even CNN uses their titles. Bizarre.


----------



## bisousx

CeeJay said:


> Oh how fantastic .. NOT!!!  Chinese foreign nationals have bought tons of Properties on the West Coast, from California all the way up to Vancouver, BC.  They pay cash and top dollar, and as such, the Property values are going sky-high.  So many purchased homes in one town in SoCAL, such that the entire town is now Chinese .. all the businesses are Chinese and all the non-Chinese had to move out.  There was a horrible incident in the high school in that town; Chinese foreign nationals in the high school didn't like non-Chinese students and bullied them and in one case, beat up the girl so bad that she had to be hospitalized for some time.  The "leader" of the gang is (I believe) now in Jail .. how sick is that?



Was this in Rowland Heights? If so, they bullied and assaulted a Chinese girl. Maybe she was American-Chinese.

Either way, the real tragedy stems from all these wealthy parents shipping their kids off to boarding school or foreign countries with no supervision, usually under the guise of getting a better education.

I suspect a lot of it has to do with enjoying status back home about being able to afford sending children off for foreign schooling.

I made a similar comment about Harry who appears to have grow up devoid of authentic and hands-on familial relationships   and was mocked, but as you can see, bad things sometimes happen when kids feel like they’re shipped off and abandoned.









						Chinese teens sentenced in brutal Rowland Heights beatings
					

POMONA >> Three teens from China were sentenced Wednesday for the brutal beating of two girls in separate incidents last year in Rowland Heights.Yunyao “Helen” Zhai received 13 …




					www.sgvtribune.com


----------



## CeeJay

Pessie said:


> Never mind the hair - he needs to plug in his *brain *


I don't think he has one ..


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> My favorites!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trudon | Candlemaker since 1643
> 
> 
> Founded in 1643, on the threshold of the reign of Louis XIV, Cire Trudon is the oldest Candlemaker in the world still active today. Throughout the 17th century, the manufacturer became the Royal Wax Manufacturer and official supplier in the French court, then to Napoléon Bonaparte. Cire Trudon...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> trudon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/garden/waxing-extravagant.html  Jackie O used Rigaud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rigaud Paris | Créateur de la bougie parfumée
> 
> 
> Rigaud Candles FR
> 
> 
> 
> www.bougies-rigaud.com


I’m going to look into that. Thanks!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Did this story get covered in the news in California? I certainly have not heard about it here on the east coast.


Yes, indeed .. in both the Newspapers and TV News.  The sad thing is that the student who got beat up and hospitalized is Chinese-American, and apparently, the Chinese foreign nationals accused her of not being "Chinese enough"!  I have seen this first hand, with Chinese colleagues who believe that even though someone is ethnically Chinese, heaven forbid they were born outside of mainlaind China!  Heck, even Hong Kong folks are viewed as not being "Chinese enough"!  However, beating up and killing people because of that?!?!?! .. NO BUENO!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Dear lord, I would hope that is okay for any of us to like a product she likes lol. It's not guilt by association here.
> 
> I prefer diffusers over candles so I can only speak to that but... those 2 brands are so different in their approach, it depends on the vibe you like. Dyptique scents to me are a little more sexy, earthy, real while Jo Malone's are more of a refined feel like a posh hotel or department store. They each make multiple scents of course but I think those are their strengths generally.


I refuse to have candles in my house, given that it is all wood (and glass) .. typical of a Mid-Century Modern home.  In addition, when you live in a super-dry climate where just a tiny bit of a flame can set a mega-fire .. nope, not for me!!!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I just noticed even CNN uses their titles. Bizarre.
> View attachment 4858127



CNN's ratings are poor and they have had some credibility issues. Using that title shows that the network has deference towards Meghan when she has done nothing to earn such respect. Celebrity love!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Lodpah said:


> Not to derail the thread but I love candles and I need to switch it up. Jo Malone candles or Diptyque? Just because so think MM is a nut case I do purchase what I like.  As a matter of fact I’ve got a bottle of Tignanello but she was not the catalyst to make me buy it.


Dyptique Ambre is my absolute fave! (wasn't too eager to admit that after seeing the replies MM/Kate comparison)


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Yes, indeed .. in both the Newspapers and TV News.  The sad thing is that the student who got beat up and hospitalized is Chinese-American, and apparently, *the Chinese foreign nationals accused her of not being "Chinese enough*"!  I have seen this first hand, with Chinese colleagues who believe that even though someone is ethnically Chinese, heaven forbid they were born outside of mainlaind China!  Heck, even Hong Kong folks are viewed as not being "Chinese enough"!  However, beating up and killing people because of that?!?!?! .. NO BUENO!



 Awful! How arrogant and xenophobic do you have to be to come to live in another country and then attack a citizen of that country for not being exactly like you? That girl had more right to be there than they had.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I’m going to look into that. Thanks!



Rigaud Christmas candles smell delightful. https://www.candledelirium.com/rigaud-candles/rigaud-cypres-demi-candle/
I’ve never tried LeLabo.
This Balmain X Trudon. It has the cool X in the title, swoon 
My, my, imagine that on my shelf. Seriously, I think it borders on pretentious. Not sure I want my house to smell like gunpowder.








						Balmain x Trudon | TRUDON
					

In addition to the leathery, Atlas cedarwood, gunpower and cigar notes, the new scent features the mysterious and distinguished addition of a black rose.




					trudon.com


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Was this in Rowland Heights? If so, they bullied and assaulted a Chinese girl. Maybe she was American-Chinese.
> 
> Either way, the real tragedy stems from all these wealthy parents shipping their kids off to boarding school or foreign countries with no supervision, usually under the guise of getting a better education.
> 
> I suspect a lot of it has to do with enjoying status back home about being able to afford sending children off for foreign schooling.
> 
> I made a similar comment about Harry who appears to have grow up devoid of authentic and hands-on familial relationships   and was mocked, but as you can see, bad things sometimes happen when kids feel like they’re shipped off and abandoned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese teens sentenced in brutal Rowland Heights beatings
> 
> 
> POMONA >> Three teens from China were sentenced Wednesday for the brutal beating of two girls in separate incidents last year in Rowland Heights.Yunyao “Helen” Zhai received 13 …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sgvtribune.com


Yup, that's it .. but I saw similar situations in Pasadena.  When we first moved out to CA from Boston, we knew that we weren't going to immediately buy a house until we got a better feel for SoCal and the areas that we wanted to look at .. so, we rented an Apartment in the "Old Town" section of Pasadena.  The place that we were in was a more up-scale Apartment building (and we were lucky enough to have the top floor corner unit)!  However, in the 2nd year, we saw this HUGE influx of very young Chinese nationals .. and they were breaking all the rules.  The entire complex was NO SMOKING, yet these kids would be smoking in their units in addition to the hallways, such that it would filter in to the various Apartments.  We complained to the Property Manager, and that was when we found out that .. yup, sure enough .. these kids were sent over to the US by their parents to go to US High Schools such that they would meet the CA residency rules in relation to applying to various CA Universities (without having to pay the out-of-Country costs).  The problem was that these kids were installed in these apartments without ANY type of supervision; Mom & Dad just paid the rent.  After having our downstairs neighbor constantly smoking and even worse, cranking up their music at 3am (my husband and I both worked remotely for East Coast firms .. so we were up at 6am!) .. that was it for me.  No matter how many times the Property Manager "spoke" to them (she actually had to bring in a translator) .. they would still continue on with their horrible behavior and the worst was when we happened to get into the elevator with them and one of the gals spit right on me!!!  Uh - you DO NOT get to do that to me, and I'm a LOT larger than them.  I did not get physical with them, but I gave them a tongue-lashing (they probably didn't understand) .. such that I made it very clear that I would be reporting them.  That was it .. the Property Manager started the eviction paperwork (she was done with them too) .. but, true to form .. they just packed up the essentials and high-tailed it out of there in the middle of the night.  When we finally found our house, we were very glad to get the heck out of there!


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> Yup, that's it .. but I saw similar situations in Pasadena.  When we first moved out to CA from Boston, we knew that we weren't going to immediately buy a house until we got a better feel for SoCal and the areas that we wanted to look at .. so, we rented an Apartment in the "Old Town" section of Pasadena.  The place that we were in was a more up-scale Apartment building (and we were lucky enough to have the top floor corner unit)!  However, in the 2nd year, we saw this HUGE influx of very young Chinese nationals .. and they were breaking all the rules.  The entire complex was NO SMOKING, yet these kids would be smoking in their units in addition to the hallways, such that it would filter in to the various Apartments.  We complained to the Property Manager, and that was when we found out that .. yup, sure enough .. these kids were sent over to the US by their parents to go to US High Schools such that they would meet the CA residency rules in relation to applying to various CA Universities (without having to pay the out-of-Country costs).  The problem was that these kids were installed in these apartments without ANY type of supervision; Mom & Dad just paid the rent.  After having our downstairs neighbor constantly smoking and even worse, cranking up their music at 3am (my husband and I both worked remotely for East Coast firms .. so we were up at 6am!) .. that was it for me.  No matter how many times the Property Manager "spoke" to them (she actually had to bring in a translator) .. they would still continue on with their horrible behavior and the worst was when we happened to get into the elevator with them and one of the gals spit right on me!!!  Uh - you DO NOT get to do that to me, and I'm a LOT larger than them.  I did not get physical with them, but I gave them a tongue-lashing (they probably didn't understand) .. such that I made it very clear that I would be reporting them.  That was it .. the Property Manager started the eviction paperwork (she was done with them too) .. but, true to form .. they just packed up the essentials and high-tailed it out of there in the middle of the night.  When we finally found our house, we were very glad to get the heck out of there!


I’ve got some Chinese in my genes so I feel ok saying this. You should see the trash they leave behind when they vacate. Used toilet paper just strewn in the floor, nasty so nasty you need a decontamination team to clean out. I guess they don’t have maids to do it so.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rigaud Christmas candles smell delightful. https://www.candledelirium.com/rigaud-candles/rigaud-cypres-demi-candle/
> I’ve never tried LeLabo.
> This Balmain X Trudon. It has the cool X in the title, swoon
> My, my, imagine that on my shelf.  @papertiger would this be gauche?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Balmain x Trudon | TRUDON
> 
> 
> In addition to the leathery, Atlas cedarwood, gunpower and cigar notes, the new scent features the mysterious and distinguished addition of a black rose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> trudon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4858141




Totally, you should just send it to me!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Just me being petty , ok it is not their real house decor, it is a TV set in the house, but gosh I hate the decor , so antisceptically curated to death,gray does not flatter her imho, it is a cold, dreary decor out of the Adams family
> Butt the decor gets points for product placement , she must be a Diptique ambassador, note the Netflix book
> 
> 
> Inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $14 million mansion
> https://mol.im/a/8767377



It looks like a house that has been staged to sell fast, like everything they do.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I refuse to have candles in my house, given that it is all wood (and glass) .. typical of a Mid-Century Modern home.  In addition, when you live in a super-dry climate where just a tiny bit of a flame can set a mega-fire .. nope, not for me!!!


Totally agree.  Nothing that burns unattended.  When my next door neighbor fires up his outside wood burning pizza oven , I freak!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It looks like a house that has been staged to sell fast, like everything they do.


It could be completely filled with rental furniture.  You don't furnish a house like this overnight.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> There is nothing unique about this decor and it could  have been assembled by a stylist from a staging company in an hour. A sofa from Living Spaces and some art books and a candle and flowers. Some simple prints. There is nothing personal unless you count the books for show that have never been looked at.  Not impressed. She is clutching that black leather pillow because her video acting coach said she was waving her hands around too much in prior videos and it was distracting.


I posted that the house looked staged to sell fast before reading this. Real estate agents do this in my neighborhood when they have a house for sale. It is amazing how fast they furnish an entire house.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It could be completely filled with rental furniture.  You don't furnish a house like this overnight.



They probably just hired some celeb interior designer to wave a magic wand before moving in.

As someone just wrote, all this show of confidence is lack of any real self-confidence. This was why the refurb was a ridiculous amount of money at Frogmore, the cost was above and beyond make liveable. This is why she has to fly someone in from Paris to do her hair when London's teeming with hairdressers.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Oh how fantastic .. NOT!!!  *Chinese foreign nationals have bought tons of Properties on the West Coast, from California all the way up to Vancouver, BC. * They pay cash and top dollar, and as such, the Property values are going sky-high.  So many purchased homes in one town in SoCAL, such that the entire town is now Chinese .. all the businesses are Chinese and all the non-Chinese had to move out.  There was a horrible incident in the high school in that town; Chinese foreign nationals in the high school didn't like non-Chinese students and bullied them and in one case, beat up the girl so bad that she had to be hospitalized for some time.  The "leader" of the gang is (I believe) now in Jail .. how sick is that?


They are also buying many properties in several European countries and in other parts of the world.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I just noticed even CNN uses their titles. *Bizarre*.
> View attachment 4858127


And ridiculous!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. well, from wishes of being 'only an A Lister' to stooping down to this program?!?! .. quite a drop Meghan!


she's getting closer to Dancing With the Stars 
When you think about it, she would have been overjoyed to be on DWTS before she hooked Harry.  Now she is Such An Important Person - and of course a Duchess


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> It could be completely filled with rental furniture.  You don't furnish a house like this overnight.



That's a good point! They wouldn't even have any furniture to begin with, right, since they've been moving about for so long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> That's a good point! They wouldn't even have any furniture to begin with, right, since they've been moving about for so long.



They cannot be weighed down by furniture. They need to make those late-night escapes. Haaaa.
======
@CeeJay  That is awful. What kind of parent raises a spitter?  That is solid boundary that should never be crossed. At least you were able to get out of that situation. Those girls, though. Mercy. Interesting that they volunteered for the fire camp program (which I was unfamiliar with until now).   Sadly, it isn’t just Chinese students. I’ve heard of issues with students from all over the world. As the article mentioned, high School Foreign Exchange students typically have serious difficulties which causes the host family to regret ever saying ‘yes’. Sometimes it goes the other way and turns into a wonderful experience with the families becoming life-long friends. College exchange students are another issue, too.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Holy macaroni, looks like the ball is in the BRFs' court, so to speak or NOT?
Any bets, ladies & gents about what will come to fruition?

First Piers, now this piece of bad bad news.

*Daily Mail UK:

"The sky-high cost of tour that tore Royal Family apart: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's African trip cost £250,000 making it the most expensive jaunt by The Firm last year, as total travel bill hits £5.3m"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkles-big-tour-Africa-tore-Royals-apart.html*


----------



## marietouchet

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Holy macaroni, looks like the ball is in the BRFs' court, so to speak or NOT?
> Any bets, ladies & gents about what will come to fruition?
> 
> First Piers, now this piece of bad bad news.
> 
> *Daily Mail UK:
> 
> "The sky-high cost of tour that tore Royal Family apart: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's African trip cost £250,000 making it the most expensive jaunt by The Firm last year, as total travel bill hits £5.3m"
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkles-big-tour-Africa-tore-Royals-apart.html*


If you get to the bottom it cites a 35 M pound shortfall due to COVID and that the Queen will not ask for reimbursement 
Yet another  article, can’t find now, said the govt was thinking of making up the drop


----------



## marietouchet

A £35m hole in the Queen’s purse 





__





						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Holy macaroni, looks like the ball is in the BRFs' court, so to speak or NOT?
> Any bets, ladies & gents about what will come to fruition?
> 
> First Piers, now this piece of bad bad news.
> 
> *Daily Mail UK:
> 
> "The sky-high cost of tour that tore Royal Family apart: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's African trip cost £250,000 making it the most expensive jaunt by The Firm last year, as total travel bill hits £5.3m"
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arkles-big-tour-Africa-tore-Royals-apart.html*


It is amazing the amount of money that MM & H have been spending, money that doesn't belong to them... 

There is a couple of intriguing statements in the article: 

"Buckingham Palace also confirmed yesterday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have paid an *'undisclosed*' sum upfront for the rental and refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage." Why undisclosed?

"The accounts also revealed that Prince Charles handed the Cambridges and Sussexes no less than £5.6million – £556,000 more than he gave them last year." Wasn't the budget good enough for MM?


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> It is amazing the amount of money that MM & H have been spending, money that doesn't belong to them...
> 
> There is a couple of intriguing statements in the article:
> 
> "Buckingham Palace also confirmed yesterday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have paid an *'undisclosed*' sum upfront for the rental and refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage." Why undisclosed?
> 
> "The accounts also revealed that Prince Charles handed the Cambridges and Sussexes no less than £5.6million – £556,000 more than he gave them last year." Wasn't the budget good enough for MM?



Not to mention the amount of money they're spending on housing that the other family members avoid by "living at home" so to speak. Well not for me to tell wealthy people what to do with their money but that is a lot of waste.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> A £35m hole in the Queen’s purse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


"Buckingham Palace has revealed that income will fall by £5 million a year for the next three years because Windsor Castle and other tourist attractions were forced to close during lockdown." 

MM&H's allowance can cover the loss of income, easily resolved!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal _It is amazing the amount of money that MM & H have been spending, money that doesn't belong to them..._
Exactly! I couldn’t agree more. It is not, was not and will not be their money.


----------



## Lodpah

They most think we are stupid people. It’s the court case is why she’s heading back and oh to probably do some damage control. 








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Heading Back to the United Kingdom for the Holidays
					

The pair have plans to celebrate the Christmas season with the royal family—COVID-19 guidelines permitting.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Not to mention the amount of money they're spending on housing that the other family members avoid by "living at home" so to speak. Well not for me to tell wealthy people what to do with their money but that is a lot of waste.


The problem is that most of the money they have been wasting is taxpayer money. Then they distribute a couple of sandwiches and pencils and call themselves philanthropists.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> They most think we are stupid people. It’s the court case is why she’s heading back and oh to probably do some damage control.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Heading Back to the United Kingdom for the Holidays
> 
> 
> The pair have plans to celebrate the Christmas season with the royal family—COVID-19 guidelines permitting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


They also need to show that they still have a close relationship with the queen, they are family. Without that many doors will eventually close.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> They also need to show that they still have a close relationship with the queen, they are family. Without that *many doors will eventually close.*



Agreed, *Chanbal*.
Those "doors" should be firmly closed at this point.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> What? How pathetic that a member of the White House press corps gave political credibility to H&M by asking such an inane question. Another example of the news media being just as gaga for celebrities as the entertainment media.


I have literally no respect for the media any more.  Everything is biased.  Just give me the facts and let me make my own decisions and conclusions.  I would look like an idiot on Jay Leno if he interviewed me on current events because I don't know what's real or not any more and thus do not watch any news.  It's very easy to pick to pick up on the reporter's bias though.  Disgusting.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Editorial from The Times (UK) today - cut 'em loose !!! 

*The Times view on Prince Harry’s plea to American voters: Royal Prerogative*
*The Duke of Sussex has shown a flagrant disregard for protocol that suggests it is time for a clean break*
LEADING ARTICLE Friday September 25 2020, 12.01am BST, The Times

"When the Duke of Sussex insists, through his spokesman, that his plea to Americans to “reject hate speech” in the forthcoming presidential election was “not in reference to any specific political party or candidate” he is being entirely disingenuous. No one, least of all concerned courtiers employed to advise Harry’s grandmother, believe his protestations. When President XXXXX came to Britain last year, Harry did a good impression of a sulky teenager in trying to avoid the visitor. It is crystal clear that the duke is urging voters to back XXX XXXXX. President XXXXX has responded in his customarily ungracious fashion by tweeting that he is “not a fan” of the duchess and sarcastically wishing her husband good luck.

If his defence of his intervention is dishonest, the substance of the duke’s remarks betrays at best naivety and at worst arrogance, combined with a profound misconception of the responsibilities expected of the family from whose membership he derives his ability to attract media coverage. Buckingham Palace says that the duke was speaking as a private citizen. Even if he were one, which he isn’t, it is bad manners to lecture voters of a country in which you are a recently arrived guest about how to cast their ballot in their national election.

As things stand, the duke retains a status exalted far above the ordinary. The clue is in the name. He retains his HRH honorific, although he is committed not to use it. He remains the Duke of Sussex. He is sixth in line to the throne. He has promised, as per the statement he and his wife issued in January, that “everything they do will uphold the values of Her Majesty”. Pretty near the top of a list of Her Majesty’s values is not endorsing particular candidates in elections. The duke has embarrassed the Queen and damaged his family’s, and through it, his country’s, standing in the world.

In the Californian circles of the duke and duchess, opposing Mr XXXXX may not appear controversial. For Harry, however, it is. He tacitly acknowledged the requirement to keep quiet when he told his audience he had never voted in a UK election. That is because, although not disenfranchised by law, the convention is that members of the royal family do not exercise their right to vote, such is the importance placed on their impartiality. Given there was a UK election last December, the duke obeyed the convention as recently as nine months ago, only to have forgotten its spirit since.

The royals are expected scrupulously to refrain from controversial comment. The monarchy could not long survive repeated forays into politics. The Prince of Wales has previously drawn criticism for his opinions on the environment and lobbying for his preferred causes. During the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 the Queen told a wellwisher she hoped that people would “think very carefully about the future”. Widely interpreted as a plea to preserve the Union, this intervention, however innocuous, exposed her to an accusation of partisanship unique in her reign.

Harry’s remarks, delivered with deliberation, in public and concerning a bitterly contentious election, belong to a different order of magnitude. The 12-month period of “trial separation” after the decision by the duke and duchess to step back from royal duties is at its halfway stage. It is beginning to look as if a complete break may be the best solution, sooner rather than later. If Harry really wants to be free to express himself like any other regular guy, he should fully become one."


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

*purseinsanity*, totally concur ie your comment about the media.

The sleezy-cheesy dirty hands of Harry and Meghan’s PR teams and for-hire media hacks are sickeningly obvious these days.

Yes, we are on to you - yes, talking to YOU, spoilt-brat along with that Miss Thing you brought home.
No matter how many PR teams you hire, and go ahead, you can ghost-write yourself a million books about yourself and no-one will believe a word you say bc you have proved that your words mean NOTHING as YOUR ACTIONS HAVE PROVED.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bag-mania said:


> What? How pathetic that a member of the White House press corps gave political credibility to H&M by asking such an inane question. Another example of the news media being just as gaga for celebrities as the entertainment media.





rose60610 said:


> News media journalists these days are often just a bunch of activist whores, like we're obligated to care about celebrity opinion. Sadly one sees this even in the White House press corps.



The question was from Nikki Schwab of the Daily Mail.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

rose60610 said:


> If anyone was watching Pres. *****'s press conference today, this question was asked by a reporter and answered:
> 
> Q: "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle chimed in on the U.S. election and essentially encouraged people to vote for *** *****. I wanted to get your reaction to that."
> 
> A: *****: "I'm not a fan of hers...I'm sure she's heard that before. I'll say this, I wish a lot of luck to Harry -- because he's going to need it."
> 
> Ouch. But we've been saying that for over 2000 pages. *I thought it was an odd question for the reporter to ask* in light of all that's going on today. Who cares what M & JCMH think about anything? But the answer was pretty good.



Not an odd question if you consider the source - this wasn't one of the usual political reporters. It was Nikki Schwab - a reporter from The Daily Mail - hardly unbiased in regards to Harry and Meghan.  Will they be taking questions from TMZ next?


----------



## Sol Ryan

Straight-Laced said:


> Editorial from The Times (UK) today - cut 'em loose !!!
> 
> *The Times view on Prince Harry’s plea to American voters: Royal Prerogative*
> *The Duke of Sussex has shown a flagrant disregard for protocol that suggests it is time for a clean break*
> LEADING ARTICLE Friday September 25 2020, 12.01am BST, The Times
> 
> "When the Duke of Sussex insists, through his spokesman, that his plea to Americans to “reject hate speech” in the forthcoming presidential election was “not in reference to any specific political party or candidate” he is being entirely disingenuous. No one, least of all concerned courtiers employed to advise Harry’s grandmother, believe his protestations. When President XXXXX came to Britain last year, Harry did a good impression of a sulky teenager in trying to avoid the visitor. It is crystal clear that the duke is urging voters to back XXX XXXXX. President XXXXX has responded in his customarily ungracious fashion by tweeting that he is “not a fan” of the duchess and sarcastically wishing her husband good luck.
> 
> If his defence of his intervention is dishonest, the substance of the duke’s remarks betrays at best naivety and at worst arrogance, combined with a profound misconception of the responsibilities expected of the family from whose membership he derives his ability to attract media coverage. Buckingham Palace says that the duke was speaking as a private citizen. Even if he were one, which he isn’t, it is bad manners to lecture voters of a country in which you are a recently arrived guest about how to cast their ballot in their national election.
> 
> As things stand, the duke retains a status exalted far above the ordinary. The clue is in the name. He retains his HRH honorific, although he is committed not to use it. He remains the Duke of Sussex. He is sixth in line to the throne. He has promised, as per the statement he and his wife issued in January, that “everything they do will uphold the values of Her Majesty”. Pretty near the top of a list of Her Majesty’s values is not endorsing particular candidates in elections. The duke has embarrassed the Queen and damaged his family’s, and through it, his country’s, standing in the world.
> 
> In the Californian circles of the duke and duchess, opposing Mr XXXXX may not appear controversial. For Harry, however, it is. He tacitly acknowledged the requirement to keep quiet when he told his audience he had never voted in a UK election. That is because, although not disenfranchised by law, the convention is that members of the royal family do not exercise their right to vote, such is the importance placed on their impartiality. Given there was a UK election last December, the duke obeyed the convention as recently as nine months ago, only to have forgotten its spirit since.
> 
> The royals are expected scrupulously to refrain from controversial comment. The monarchy could not long survive repeated forays into politics. The Prince of Wales has previously drawn criticism for his opinions on the environment and lobbying for his preferred causes. During the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 the Queen told a wellwisher she hoped that people would “think very carefully about the future”. Widely interpreted as a plea to preserve the Union, this intervention, however innocuous, exposed her to an accusation of partisanship unique in her reign.
> 
> Harry’s remarks, delivered with deliberation, in public and concerning a bitterly contentious election, belong to a different order of magnitude. The 12-month period of “trial separation” after the decision by the duke and duchess to step back from royal duties is at its halfway stage. It is beginning to look as if a complete break may be the best solution, sooner rather than later. If Harry really wants to be free to express himself like any other regular guy, he should fully become one."



I pretty much agree with most of this. Harry should stay out of it, but now that he‘s opened his mouth, acting like his words weren‘t an endorsement is disingenuous and dishonorable. If your gonna say something stand up and say it and stand behind it. This bs of word salad and mistruths needs to stop. He shouldn’t be involved in our politics as he represents a foreign government, but now now that he’s opened his mouth I’m losing more respect for him by trying to backtrack and acting like certain other people who like to act like video recording technology doesn’t exist and deny reality. (Although to be honest, I didn’t really have much respect left for him, let’s be honest... my feelings on Harry have been clear) M&H are just the same. We have eyes and ears... ugh...

I think it would be funny if he got his citizenship and the IRS got to have fun with his finances...

I really used to like Harry a lot... ugh... I can’t think of a word to describe him.... he’s encroached on territory that isn’t his and I’m offended... I don’t care about the sentiment...and that annoys me

man things are complicated... if he was just Harry Markle, no title, not supported by Charles/the BRF I wouldn’t even really care... it’s the English Prince thing that gets me... He’s not here to Lord over us...

I need to figure out how to set my news filters to hide stuff on them... I can’t escape the two of them lately... it’s so frustrating. I’m completely burned out.  It’s like 8 news stories a day of M&H... isn’t there something better happening in the world?  New sneakers coming out? Anything?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> I have literally no respect for the media any more.  Everything is biased.  Just give me the facts and let me make my own decisions and conclusions.  I would look like an idiot on Jay Leno if he interviewed me on current events because I don't know what's real or not any more and thus do not watch any news.  It's very easy to pick to pick up on the reporter's bias though.  Disgusting.



As noted this was a question from the Daily Mail. Real journalists are under attack these days, best not to add fuel to the fire regarding the first amendment.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Meghan and Harry could learn something from Luxembourg’s HGD Guillaume and son Prince Charles, first and second in the line of succession to the Luxembourg grand ducal throne as compared to Harry and Archie, who are sixth and seventh of the British succession.
There have been several photo shoots since Prince Charles’s birth May 10, 2020. His parents weren’t hiding him, while waiting for the million dollar photo shoot.

Stéphanie leaving the hospital with newborn son, Charles  May13, 2020.
https://scanpix.no/spWebApp/search.action?search.searchString=stephanie luxembourg with son

Prince Charles Baptism, September 19, 2020.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...es-Luxembourg-looks-adorable-christening.html

More pics
https://www.rexfeatures.com/search/...=&viah=Y&stk=N&sft=&timer=N&requester=&iprs=f

Tree planting at 'Parc Pescatore' in Luxembourg City, Sept 21, 2020 in honour of Prince Charles’s birth.
https://instagram.fath3-4.fna.fbcdn...=259dc6f3c2bdf9ce9d8a26944fc087ad&oe=5F905787


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love this editorial. It covers all the reasons why H is a huge problem for BRF.  Non-working or not, he is still claiming royalty and is not a private citizen. He could clean up this mess with one letter to the Queen. That he has chosen not to, after 8 months, shows how much of a jerk he is.



Straight-Laced said:


> Friday September 25 2020, 12.01am BST, The Times
> As things stand, *the duke retains a status exalted far above the ordinary. The clue is in the name. He retains his HRH honorific, although he is committed not to use it. He remains the Duke of Sussex. He is sixth in line to the throne. He has promised, as per the statement he and his wife issued in January, that “everything they do will uphold the values of Her Majesty”. *Pretty near the top of a list of Her Majesty’s values is not endorsing particular candidates in elections. The duke has embarrassed the Queen and damaged his family’s, and through it, his country’s, standing in the world.


----------



## papertiger

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Not an odd question if you consider the source - this wasn't one of the usual political reporters. It was Nikki Schwab - a reporter from The Daily Mail - hardly unbiased in regards to Harry and Meghan.  Will they be taking questions from TMZ next?



Sent to combine those 3 names together whatever answer for the sake of mega-clickbait.


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> I pretty much agree with most of this. Harry should stay out of it, but now that he‘s opened his mouth, acting like his words weren‘t an endorsement is disingenuous and dishonorable. If your gonna say something stand up and say it and stand behind it. This bs of word salad and mistruths needs to stop. He shouldn’t be involved in our politics as he represents a foreign government, but now now that he’s opened his mouth I’m losing more respect for him by trying to backtrack and acting like certain other people who like to act like video recording technology doesn’t exist and deny reality. (Although to be honest, I didn’t really have much respect left for him, let’s be honest... my feelings on Harry have been clear) M&H are just the same. We have eyes and ears... ugh...
> 
> I think it would be funny if he got his citizenship and the IRS got to have fun with his finances...
> 
> I really used to like Harry a lot... ugh... I can’t think of a word to describe him.... he’s encroached on territory that isn’t his and I’m offended... I don’t care about the sentiment...and that annoys me
> 
> man things are complicated... if he was just Harry Markle, no title, not supported by Charles/the BRF I wouldn’t even really care... it’s the English Prince thing that gets me... He’s not here to Lord over us...
> 
> I need to figure out how to set my news filters to hide stuff on them... I can’t escape the two of them lately... it’s so frustrating. I’m completely burned out.  It’s like 8 news stories a day of M&H... isn’t there something better happening in the world?  New sneakers coming out? Anything?



Isn't it funny that in this digitised age we (the plebs/consumers/users/masses) cannot have an 'ignore' unction like we do on TPF. I notice of YT I only have to watch 1 vid on bees and forever I am forever in a hive of vids about insects and honey. Not only that, some 15 year old YT worker has decided that only octogenarians like bees so suddenly all adverts are about bladder control and Zimmer frames.

There should be a NOT this/these 'X' button on search engines .

The entire MO of the internet is 100% built for commerce (I see the irony of my writing this on a handbag forum, but I come here as much for the friendship and information).

I don't think I would ignore M and JCMH though. They are an interesting contemporary case study for everything that is wrong with our times


----------



## Sharont2305

Let's see what she does now in light of Jack and Eugenie's news.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Let's see what she does now in light of Jack and Eugenie's news.



At least she wasn't around to ruin it for them like their wedding.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> Let's see what she does now in light of Jack and Eugenie's news.


Awww, they’ll likely get a little vid from the inmates of Le Chateau de Beige


----------



## maryg1

Sharont2305 said:


> Let's see what she does now in light of Jack and Eugenie's news.


What news? Is she pregnant?


----------



## Sharont2305

maryg1 said:


> What news? Is she pregnant?


Yes


----------



## maryg1

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes


Read it just now in the news
another cutie on its way!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

There have been a slew of stories this past week of the two grifters addressing second baby rumors, as in wait for it....bc that card will be played right before they board their green new deal, err private jet bound for London. 

Apologies, gentle readers, so sick of the aberrant follies of H&M that I cannot be bothered to lift my index finger to cut & paste the aforementioned word-salad baby rumor links here for you to easily reference. 

Interestingly, while visiting the Daily Mail UK yesterday, had a moment to peruse the readers' comments of a few of the H&M articles and compare them to the readers' comments of another high-profile couple whose actions could be considered controversial right now, Boris Johnson and his fiancè, Carrie Symonds who took off for a vaca with three (3) GFs and their new baby@Lake Como recently. Boris Johnson remained in London, obviously, with his many responsibilities.

Public sentiment?  Readers empathized with Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds, and thought after the past few excruciating months a vaca was in order for her, and even though many readers freely admitted that right now the thought of a vaca is non-existent, due to lack of funds, lack of a job, etc. The Daily Mail readers certainly did not begrudge anyone one moment of happiness. 

On the other hand, if the Daily Mail's readership is any indication of public sentiment about H&M <and the BRF> it might be fair to say that as of right this minute as far as damage control & public perception, if the BRF does not get this situation well in hand, H&M just may very well be Lizzie's Waterloo.

We will wait and see, but this H&M debacle, on the heels of Randy Andy's latest picadillo <you know what I'm talking about> well is it any wonder that even the most STAUNCH supporter of the strategic response of  "just look the other way and pretend it's not happening" knows that the path of least resistance is not always best?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

VigeeLeBrun said:


> There have been a slew of stories this past week of the two grifters addressing second baby rumors, as in wait for it....bc that card will be played right before they board their green new deal, err private jet bound for London.
> 
> Apologies, gentle readers, so sick of the aberrant follies of H&M that I cannot be bothered to lift my index finger to cut & paste the aforementioned word-salad baby rumor links here for you to easily reference.
> 
> Interestingly, while visiting the Daily Mail UK yesterday, had a moment to peruse the readers' comments of a few of the H&M articles and compare them to the readers' comments of another high-profile couple whose actions could be considered controversial right now, Boris Johnson and his fiancè, Carrie Symonds who took off for a vaca with three (3) GFs and their new baby@Lake Como recently. Boris Johnson remained in London, obviously, with his many responsibilities.
> 
> Public sentiment?  Readers empathized with Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds, and thought after the past few excruciating months a vaca was in order for her, and even though many readers freely admitted that right now the thought of a vaca is non-existent, due to lack of funds, lack of a job, etc. The Daily Mail readers certainly did not begrudge anyone one moment of happiness.
> 
> On the other hand, if the Daily Mail's readership is any indication of public sentiment about H&M <and the BRF> it might be fair to say that as of right this minute as far as damage control & public perception, if the BRF does not get this situation well in hand, H&M just may very well be Lizzie's Waterloo.
> 
> We will wait and see, but this H&M debacle, on the heels of Randy Andy's latest picadillo <you know what I'm talking about> well is it any wonder that even the most STAUNCH supporter of the strategic response of  "just look the other way and pretend it's not happening" knows that the path of least resistance is not always best?



I think this is why a breakdown of finances was issued by the palace (or _more_ than 'allowed to be made public') H&M cost the tax payers more than any other working royals for more than one trip (even though it probably does cost a lot to tour from place to place in Africa rather than a jaunt from Devon to Wales within the UK). Prince Charles made £210K trip to Oman to pay condolences to the Sultan's family https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...estate-buckingham-palace-tourism-b595534.html so he's not much better but it's not been highlighted (MM, quick, get on the phone, new PR op!)

QEII is reported to perhaps make-uo the projected £35M shortfall of the public purse

The message is clear and an confirmation of the recent distancing of H&M from the BRF. https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/24/buck...-and-meghan-after-us-election-video-13319117/ and also talky talky about BRF putting their hands in their own pockets.

When it comes to it, I very much doubt the Queen will have to open her Launer and fish out spare change. Certainly no Rembrandt will have to leave one of the many palaces. They'll be a deal, or they'll sell one of the public owned art works from a basement at Brighton Pavilion that they think no one will miss (again).

So much spin from all direction I'm dizzy from all the BS


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Editorial from The Times (UK) today - cut 'em loose !!!
> 
> *The Times view on Prince Harry’s plea to American voters: Royal Prerogative*
> *The Duke of Sussex has shown a flagrant disregard for protocol that suggests it is time for a clean break*
> LEADING ARTICLE Friday September 25 2020, 12.01am BST, The Times
> 
> "When the Duke of Sussex insists, through his spokesman, that his plea to Americans to “reject hate speech” in the forthcoming presidential election was “not in reference to any specific political party or candidate” he is being entirely disingenuous. No one, least of all concerned courtiers employed to advise Harry’s grandmother, believe his protestations. When President XXXXX came to Britain last year, Harry did a good impression of a sulky teenager in trying to avoid the visitor. It is crystal clear that the duke is urging voters to back XXX XXXXX. President XXXXX has responded in his customarily ungracious fashion by tweeting that he is “not a fan” of the duchess and sarcastically wishing her husband good luck.
> 
> If his defence of his intervention is dishonest, the substance of the duke’s remarks betrays at best naivety and at worst arrogance, combined with a profound misconception of the responsibilities expected of the family from whose membership he derives his ability to attract media coverage. Buckingham Palace says that the duke was speaking as a private citizen. Even if he were one, which he isn’t, it is bad manners to lecture voters of a country in which you are a recently arrived guest about how to cast their ballot in their national election.
> 
> As things stand, the duke retains a status exalted far above the ordinary. The clue is in the name. He retains his HRH honorific, although he is committed not to use it. He remains the Duke of Sussex. He is sixth in line to the throne. He has promised, as per the statement he and his wife issued in January, that “everything they do will uphold the values of Her Majesty”. Pretty near the top of a list of Her Majesty’s values is not endorsing particular candidates in elections. The duke has embarrassed the Queen and damaged his family’s, and through it, his country’s, standing in the world.
> 
> In the Californian circles of the duke and duchess, opposing Mr XXXXX may not appear controversial. For Harry, however, it is. He tacitly acknowledged the requirement to keep quiet when he told his audience he had never voted in a UK election. That is because, although not disenfranchised by law, the convention is that members of the royal family do not exercise their right to vote, such is the importance placed on their impartiality. Given there was a UK election last December, the duke obeyed the convention as recently as nine months ago, only to have forgotten its spirit since.
> 
> The royals are expected scrupulously to refrain from controversial comment. The monarchy could not long survive repeated forays into politics. The Prince of Wales has previously drawn criticism for his opinions on the environment and lobbying for his preferred causes. During the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 the Queen told a wellwisher she hoped that people would “think very carefully about the future”. Widely interpreted as a plea to preserve the Union, this intervention, however innocuous, exposed her to an accusation of partisanship unique in her reign.
> 
> Harry’s remarks, delivered with deliberation, in public and concerning a bitterly contentious election, belong to a different order of magnitude. The 12-month period of “trial separation” after the decision by the duke and duchess to step back from royal duties is at its halfway stage. It is beginning to look as if a complete break may be the best solution, sooner rather than later. If Harry really wants to be free to express himself like any other regular guy, he should fully become one."


I like this ....and from a reputable newspaper, not tabloid, right?


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I pretty much agree with most of this. Harry should stay out of it, but now that he‘s opened his mouth, acting like his words weren‘t an endorsement is disingenuous and dishonorable. If your gonna say something stand up and say it and stand behind it. This bs of word salad and mistruths needs to stop. He shouldn’t be involved in our politics as he represents a foreign government, but now now that he’s opened his mouth I’m losing more respect for him by trying to backtrack and acting like certain other people who like to act like video recording technology doesn’t exist and deny reality. (Although to be honest, I didn’t really have much respect left for him, let’s be honest... my feelings on Harry have been clear) M&H are just the same. We have eyes and ears... ugh...
> 
> I think it would be funny if he got his citizenship and the IRS got to have fun with his finances...
> 
> I really used to like Harry a lot... ugh... I can’t think of a word to describe him.... he’s encroached on territory that isn’t his and I’m offended... I don’t care about the sentiment...and that annoys me
> 
> man things are complicated... if he was just Harry Markle, no title, not supported by Charles/the BRF I wouldn’t even really care... it’s the English Prince thing that gets me... He’s not here to Lord over us...
> 
> I need to figure out how to set my news filters to hide stuff on them... I can’t escape the two of them lately... it’s so frustrating. I’m completely burned out.  It’s like 8 news stories a day of M&H... isn’t there something better happening in the world?  New sneakers coming out? Anything?


that's the problem....the rest of the news is worse...that's why we're here for the distraction


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> I have literally no respect for the media any more.  Everything is biased.  Just give me the facts and let me make my own decisions and conclusions.  I would look like an idiot on Jay Leno if he interviewed me on current events because I don't know what's real or not any more and thus do not watch any news.  It's very easy to pick to pick up on the reporter's bias though.  Disgusting.


We really, really need an “AMEN!” button.


----------



## Pessie

1LV said:


> We really, really need an “AMEN!” button.


We need a no (US) politics button


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think this is why a breakdown of finances was issued by the palace (or _more_ than 'allowed to be made public') H&M cost the tax payers more than any other working royals for more than one trip (even though it probably does cost a lot to tour from place to place in Africa rather than a jaunt from Devon to Wales within the UK). Prince Charles made £210K trip to Oman to pay condolences to the Sultan's family https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...estate-buckingham-palace-tourism-b595534.html so he's not much better but it's not been highlighted (MM, quick, get on the phone, new PR op!)
> 
> QEII is reported to perhaps make-uo the projected £35M shortfall of the public purse
> 
> The message is clear and an confirmation of the recent distancing of H&M from the BRF. https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/24/buck...-and-meghan-after-us-election-video-13319117/ and also talky talky about BRF putting their hands in their own pockets.
> 
> When it comes to it, I very much doubt the Queen will have to open her Launer and fish out spare change. Certainly no Rembrandt will have to leave one of the many palaces. They'll be a deal, or they'll sell one of the public owned art works from a basement at Brighton Pavilion that they think no one will miss (again).
> 
> So much spin from all direction I'm dizzy from all the BS


If I remember ... the trip to Oman got all messed up ...
Yes, done at last minute due to unforeseen circumstances (death of ruler), Camilla does not do spur of the moment trips (issues with flying) so it was C alone  - no issue there ...
Some sort of H&M kerfuffle broke during the trip and Charles might have scurried back, and cut trip short - that bit should not have happened while C was away - totally avoidable kerfuffle
Yes, dizzy over BS - well said, what ever happened to decorum, I miss the elegance of that


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> If I remember ... the trip to Oman got all messed up ...
> Yes, done at last minute due to unforeseen circumstances (death of ruler), Camilla does not do spur of the moment trips (issues with flying) so it was C alone  - no issue there ...
> Some sort of H&M kerfuffle broke during the trip and Charles might have scurried back, and cut trip short - that bit should not have happened while C was away - totally avoidable kerfuffle
> Yes, dizzy over BS - well said, what ever happened to decorum, I miss the elegance of that


Meghan happened, that's what


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Apologies if this has been posted before. The article is from March 12, 2019.

*Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane'*
A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals









						Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
					

A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I can't say what I want because it would be politics



It doesn’t have to be political. I’ll give you an example of leading journalism without giving away the exact details. A few years back a large corporation was shopping around various large cities in the US, planning to set up a new headquarters. The newspapers and TV news broadcasts reported about it in regard to my city. Rather than only giving the facts about the proposed headquarters, they projected their opinions into the story, such as what having the company would mean to the community and whether it should be welcome here. They put their own spin on it. 

Readers/viewers are free to disagree with what is presented to them but most don’t put that much thought into it because they believe they can trust the news. Journalists wield a huge amount of influence so I don’t see them as victims. 

I wish I had seen Meghan on  America's Got Talent.  Whatever dignity she has is going away fast.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It doesn’t have to be political. I’ll give you an example of leading journalism without giving away the exact details. A few years back a large corporation was shopping around various large cities in the US, planning to set up a new headquarters. The newspapers and TV news broadcasts reported about it in regard to my city. Rather than only giving the facts about the proposed headquarters, they projected their opinions into the story, such as what having the company would mean to the community and whether it should be welcome here. They put their own spin on it.
> 
> Readers/viewers are free to disagree with what is presented to them but most don’t put that much thought into it because they believe they can trust the news. Journalists wield a huge amount of influence so I don’t see them as victims.
> 
> I wish I had seen Meghan on  America's Got Talent.  Whatever dignity she has is going away fast.


I'll PM you


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Most "journalist" and actually commentators.  There's a huge difference.  We can thank our universities for this.  Harry and Meghan are (well, maybe not Harry) well aware of this and it's why they (and, most well known people) are so careful about disseminating information about themselves.  

There are a number of commentators I enjoy, but I certainly don't look to them for "just the facts."


----------



## bisousx

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this has been posted before. The article is from March 12, 2019.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane'*
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca



Wonder if the hive has infiltrated TPF at times  I haven’t seen our resident MM fan in awhile! It’s not nice to poor Kate to be referred to as a bland bowl of oatmeal but it sure was entertaining to read.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Wonder if the hive has infiltrated TPF at times


I'll bet at least one of them did


----------



## Etriers

I just Googled Meghan‘s special appearance on America’s Got Talent.  Amazing.  What a powerful story and such a positive and wonderful use of one’s celebrity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another admission that she misled/lied/deceived everyone from the beginning! Since H&M would need to give up the titles, I cannot wait for her to run - the sooner, the better 









						Meghan Markle would 'consider running for president,' source claims
					

Meghan Markle, 39, would 'seriously consider running for president' if she ever 'gave up' her title, a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_'One of the reasons she was so keen not to give up her American citizenship was so she had the option to go into politics,' a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl. 'I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles she would seriously consider running for president.' _

I, too, would fail the Jay Leno quiz. After a lifetime devoted to learning, paying attention and being woke when the rest of the world was asleep, I feel a small amount of pride for saying that, too. Ignorance is kinda bliss, no?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another admission that she misled/lied/deceived everyone from the beginning! Since H&M would need to give up the titles, I cannot wait for her to run - the sooner, the better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'consider running for president,' source claims
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, would 'seriously consider running for president' if she ever 'gave up' her title, a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _'One of the reasons she was so keen not to give up her American citizenship was so she had the option to go into politics,' a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl. 'I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles she would seriously consider running for president.' _
> 
> I, too, would fail the Jay Leno quiz. After a lifetime devoted to learning, paying attention and being woke when the rest of the world was asleep, I feel a small amount of pride for saying that, too. Ignorance is kinda bliss, no?


If a title is preventing MM to run for president, QE please give her ten more titles! I have been anxiously waiting for a women to be elected, but even to consider a person like MM ... I can't find words to express what I think...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> If a title is preventing MM to run for president, QE please give her ten more titles! I have been anxiously waiting for a women to be elected, but even to consider a person like MM ... I can't find words to express what I think...



H&M give up titles and all claims to succession, she runs for office, she spends millions of dollars, she loses. Nightmare ends.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> If a title is preventing MM to run for president, QE please give her ten more titles! I have been anxiously waiting for a women to be elected, but even to consider a person like MM ... I can't find words to express what I think...


Not to worry... if she loses the duchess title, she will then be known as HRH Princess Henry.  A perfect match to Princess Michael of Kent.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> We need a no (US) politics button





1LV said:


> We really, really need an “AMEN!” button.





Pessie said:


> Awww, they’ll likely get a little vid from the inmates of Le Chateau de Beige



We urgently need a vomit button, so quick and easy for commenting on their vids


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M give up titles and all claims to succession, she runs for office, she spends millions of dollars, she loses. Nightmare ends.



I agree with you, but I would still prefer not to risk having her run for office... We need really smart, honest, and hardworking people to head this country. In the short period that she had access to UK taxpayer funds, she spent huge amounts in clothing, trips... the numbers are all over the news. 



Maggie Muggins said:


> Not to worry... if she loses the duchess title, she will then be known as HRH Princess Henry.  A perfect match to Princess Michael of Kent.


I agree, they are a perfect match. They could become bff.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> We urgently need a vomit button, so quick and easy for commenting on their vids


Off subject , your avatar is David Bowie ? Very cool


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but I would still prefer not to risk having her run for office... We need really smart, honest, and hardworking people to head this country. In the short period that she had access to UK taxpayer funds, she spent huge amounts in clothing, trips... the numbers are all over the news.
> 
> 
> I agree, they are a perfect match. They could become bff.


Yep, they can call each other Mickey & Hank.


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yep, they can call each other Mickey & Hank.


Princess Hank.  I like it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but I would still prefer not to risk having her run for office... We need really smart, honest, and hardworking people to head this country. In the short period that she had access to UK taxpayer funds, she spent huge amounts in clothing, trips... the numbers are all over the news.
> I agree, they are a perfect match. They could become bff.



Seriously, because ignorance is never bliss:
- Yes, the numbers are staggering. To foster some good will, they should pay it all back. The wedding, the trips, it was all a scam. Charles really should show leadership, a strong backbone (!), on this topic.
- Indeed, we do need smart, honest, hardworking people leading this country. We know H&M aren’t it.
- If H renounces titles (including Prince), succession, financial ties to the BRF,  would she still be Princess Henry?
I‘m confused about this issue -
_The former Liberal ******** MP Norman Baker, author of And What Do You Do? – What the Royal Family Don’t Want You to Know, said: “Any private citizen is entitled to comment on the US election. The problem with Harry is he is not a private citizen because he has retained his HRH status. What he wants to try and do is have a foot in both camps, to be a royal when it suits him and a private citizen when it doesn’t.

“So if he drops the HRH, he can comment to his heart’s content on whatever he wants. But as long as he’s HRH he is to some extent representing the country.”








						Harry and Meghan criticised after video urging Americans to vote
					

Duke and Duchess of Sussex call on voters to ‘reject hate speech and misinformation’ in video




					www.theguardian.com
				



_
The David Bowie avatar is the coolest e.v.e.r.


----------



## Chanbal

Cavalier Girl said:


> Most "journalist" and actually commentators.  There's a huge difference.  We can thank our universities for this.  Harry and Meghan are (well, maybe not Harry) well aware of this and it's why they (and, most well known people) are so careful about disseminating information about themselves.
> 
> There are a number of commentators I enjoy, but I certainly don't look to them for "just the facts."


I wish some commentators were more impartial on their praises and criticisms. One should be able to praise something that has been done right independently of agreeing or not with whoever did it. I became tired of commentators that only find things to attack or praise depending on what view/part they support.


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Princess Hank.  I like it.



Me too.
Because H is still HRH, etc., she must know she cannot hold office in the US, right? So, all of these articles about her running are just click-bait? Designed to irritate and distract the public?  Jerks. Major jerks.  Hope they get a bill for all their UK expenditures.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> - Yes, the numbers are staggering. *To foster some good will, they should pay it all back.* The wedding, the trips, it was all a scam. Charles really should show leadership, a strong backbone (!), on this topic.
> 
> _*“So if he drops the HRH, he can comment to his heart’s content on whatever he wants. *But as long as he’s HRH he is to some extent representing the country.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan criticised after video urging Americans to vote
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex call on voters to ‘reject hate speech and misinformation’ in video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> The David Bowie avatar is the coolest e.v.e.r.


You have my vote for both statements in bold.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m going to throw this out here. I sympathize with Archie on AGT and he’s a terrific singer but MM going on tv to just praise him is sorta of discrimination. Was it hard to
[QUOTE="Etriers, post: 340751
[/QUOTE]

Yes it was but my belief is she should have praised all the contestants. Once again like all the Serena Williams’ match she attended unfortunately the awesome guy lost. It seems whatever or whoever she supports tend to have a negative influence. I do give Archie the contestant my biggest well wish fir a great future.


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> Princess Hank.  I like it.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Me too.
> Because H is still HRH, etc., she must know she cannot hold office in the US, right? So, all of these articles about her running are just click-bait? Designed to irritate and distract the public?  Jerks. Major jerks.  Hope they get a bill for all their UK expenditures.



HRH the Princess Hank, President of Unite States... Is it good enough? 

Oops, need to work. Have a wonderful day!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> I wish some commentators were more impartial on their praises and criticisms. *One should be able to praise something that has been done right independently of agreeing or not with whoever did it.* I became tired of commentators that only find things to attack or praise depending on what view/part they support.



Totally agree, *Chanbal*.
We have a saying in our family, "It's not WHO is RIGHT, it is WHAT is RIGHT".
That seems to cover most issues.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> HRH the Princess Hank, President of Unite States... Is it good enough?
> 
> Oops, need to work. Have a wonderful day!


Lol!!  Where’s that vomit button???


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Me too.
> Because H is still HRH, etc., she must know she cannot hold office in the US, right? So, all of these articles about her running are just click-bait? Designed to irritate and distract the public?  Jerks. Major jerks.  Hope they get a bill for all their UK expenditures.


Totally agree.


----------



## bag-mania

I want her to run. We’d finally know for sure about those yacht girl rumors. No way that wouldn’t come out.

Alas, I know she doesn’t want to work that hard. She would only want to do the fun events and she would be like a deer in the headlights when questioned at a press conference.


----------



## Mendocino

Sol Ryan said:


> I pretty much agree with most of this. Harry should stay out of it, but now that he‘s opened his mouth, acting like his words weren‘t an endorsement is disingenuous and dishonorable. If your gonna say something stand up and say it and stand behind it. This bs of word salad and mistruths needs to stop. He shouldn’t be involved in our politics as he represents a foreign government, but now now that he’s opened his mouth I’m losing more respect for him by trying to backtrack and acting like certain other people who like to act like video recording technology doesn’t exist and deny reality. (Although to be honest, I didn’t really have much respect left for him, let’s be honest... my feelings on Harry have been clear) M&H are just the same. We have eyes and ears... ugh...
> 
> I think it would be funny if he got his citizenship and the IRS got to have fun with his finances...
> 
> I really used to like Harry a lot... ugh... I can’t think of a word to describe him.... he’s encroached on territory that isn’t his and I’m offended... I don’t care about the sentiment...and that annoys me
> 
> man things are complicated... if he was just Harry Markle, no title, not supported by Charles/the BRF I wouldn’t even really care... it’s the English Prince thing that gets me... He’s not here to Lord over us...
> 
> I need to figure out how to set my news filters to hide stuff on them... I can’t escape the two of them lately... it’s so frustrating. I’m completely burned out.  It’s like 8 news stories a day of M&H... isn’t there something better happening in the world?  New sneakers coming out? Anything?


I haven't found a filter, but I've made the decision not to click on articles that have their names in the thumbnail, as clicks encourage the media to publish stories about the subject.

And this just in from our Good News desk: Princess Eugenie is expecting a baby!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Totally agree.  Nothing that burns unattended.  When my next door neighbor fires up his outside wood burning pizza oven , I freak!


RIGHT?? .. I have a very nasty neighbor who (in the middle of a RED FLAG week!) .. is outside with his screaming children firing up that Barbeque (the old-fashioned kind with NO TOP)!!!  I finally had to report him to the neighborhood organization because every time I asked him nicely to not do it, he would spout F-bombs like he was in a War.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another admission that she misled/lied/deceived everyone from the beginning! Since H&M would need to give up the titles, I cannot wait for her to run - the sooner, the better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'consider running for president,' source claims
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, would 'seriously consider running for president' if she ever 'gave up' her title, a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _'One of the reasons she was so keen not to give up her American citizenship was so she had the option to go into politics,' a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl. 'I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles she would seriously consider running for president.' _
> 
> I, too, would fail the Jay Leno quiz. After a lifetime devoted to learning, paying attention and being woke when the rest of the world was asleep, I feel a small amount of pride for saying that, too. Ignorance is kinda bliss, no?


When I saw this, I thought .. "hmmmm, there must be some big BRF news that MM is trying to subdue" and sure enough, I then see the news about Eugenie!  Yet again, MM has to make sure to get her name out there; what a pathetic person (not even going to call her human at this point) she is!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> When I saw this, I thought .. "hmmmm, there must be some big BRF news that MM is trying to subdue" and sure enough, I then see the news about Eugenie!  Yet again, MM has to make sure to get her name out there; what a pathetic person (not even going to call her human at this point) she is!


and and and ... The story about BRF finances / 35 M pound shortfall/ expensive trips just came out - that is not flattering to H&M

Actually, now that I think of the timing ... after months of summer 2019 complaints about private planes , carbon footprint , JCMH did the fall junket to Africa for which events were

1. Africa trip ended
2. Meghan whined that no one was asking about her / did big AWFUL interview
3. Trip to Vancouver

It was likely around this time - end of Africa trip - that the court figured out the cost of the African junket - coupled with bad optics of the summer of carbon footprint/private plane to see Elton, designer duds ...

Perhaps courtiers brought up the trip expenses ca Africa trip, and THAT triggered interview & Vancouver ...

Maybe it has been about MONEY for a long time, ie not getting an infinite budget for clothes & junkets

Maybe we should have followed the money better rather than obsessing about narcissism LOL 

Her issue is she thought she married a billionaire, not a mere millionaire, she wants private planes not first class


----------



## csshopper

Given the information “came from a source close to the couple” I don’t give it much credence.

Probably Scobie sucking up again to bolster MM’s delusion of grandeur and importance. He’s so close to them, they would trip over him if they turned around too fast.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> *Maybe we should have followed the money better rather than obsessing about narcissism* LOL


But don't you see that narcissism is the reason for the huge expenditures... nothing but the best and most expensive was good enough for this duo... I wonder if the BRF gave them no-limit credit cards for their personal use, which they totally abused. I know that some royal houses provide credit cards to newlyweds going on honeymoon or members going on vacations/holidays, but I've never heard of any abuse... then again we'd probably never hear about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Given the information “came from a source close to the couple” I don’t give it much credence.
> 
> Probably Scobie sucking up again to bolster MM’s delusion of grandeur and importance. He’s so close to them, they would trip over him if they turned around too fast.



It’s the same H&M noise we have heard all along. Nothing new there. Agree with @CeeJay - they ‘trotted out this old horse‘ to steal joy from Eugenie’s news and to please their Netflix overlords. Another backfire which generates more discussion of H renouncing titles and exposes their big lie (hint: from day one, they planned to leave).

@marietouchet - always follow the money, always. Consider the bill for their hair-do’s.  In and of itself, it is very telling. His plugs + toupee, her straighteners and hair dye, that bill must be astronomical. Nothing authentic about these two.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rigaud Christmas candles smell delightful. https://www.candledelirium.com/rigaud-candles/rigaud-cypres-demi-candle/
> I’ve never tried LeLabo.
> This Balmain X Trudon. It has the cool X in the title, swoon
> My, my, imagine that on my shelf. Seriously, I think it borders on pretentious. Not sure I want my house to smell like gunpowder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Balmain x Trudon | TRUDON
> 
> 
> In addition to the leathery, Atlas cedarwood, gunpower and cigar notes, the new scent features the mysterious and distinguished addition of a black rose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> trudon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4858141


Not sure about the gunpowder part but it does sound nice. My issue with these candles is price, While am not a rich person I do spend $$ on candles but sometimes they don't live up to the description (when burning) and then it's too late. 

But I just know MM had that in the background because it was pricey and someone told her to have it, IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?? .. I have a very nasty neighbor who (in the middle of a RED FLAG week!) .. is outside with his screaming children firing up that Barbeque (the old-fashioned kind with NO TOP)!!!  I finally had to report him to the neighborhood organization because every time I asked him nicely to not do it, he would spout F-bombs like he was in a War.


When we had terrible fires back in the aughts and you could see the flames way up to the north, I came home from work one night and smelled smoke!  It was MY idiotic neighbor firing up the oven!  I couldn't believe that he was doing that in light of what was going on.  I think another neighbor told him no bueno, and he has not done it again when there are active fires.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Meghan and Harry could learn something from Luxembourg’s HGD Guillaume and son Prince Charles, first and second in the line of succession to the Luxembourg grand ducal throne as compared to Harry and Archie, who are sixth and seventh of the British succession.
> There have been several photo shoots since Prince Charles’s birth May 10, 2020. His parents weren’t hiding him, while waiting for the million dollar photo shoot.
> 
> Stéphanie leaving the hospital with newborn son, Charles  May13, 2020.
> https://scanpix.no/spWebApp/search.action?search.searchString=stephanie luxembourg with son
> 
> Prince Charles Baptism, September 19, 2020.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...es-Luxembourg-looks-adorable-christening.html
> 
> More pics
> https://www.rexfeatures.com/search/...=&viah=Y&stk=N&sft=&timer=N&requester=&iprs=f
> 
> Tree planting at 'Parc Pescatore' in Luxembourg City, Sept 21, 2020 in honour of Prince Charles’s birth.
> https://instagram.fath3-4.fna.fbcdn...=259dc6f3c2bdf9ce9d8a26944fc087ad&oe=5F905787


And I think we will see the same when Princess Eugenie has her child.  No hiding and proud parents.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I think this is why a breakdown of finances was issued by the palace (or _more_ than 'allowed to be made public') H&M cost the tax payers more than any other working royals for more than one trip (even though it probably does cost a lot to tour from place to place in Africa rather than a jaunt from Devon to Wales within the UK). Prince Charles made £210K trip to Oman to pay condolences to the Sultan's family https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...estate-buckingham-palace-tourism-b595534.html so he's not much better but it's not been highlighted (MM, quick, get on the phone, new PR op!)
> 
> QEII is reported to perhaps make-uo the projected £35M shortfall of the public purse
> 
> The message is clear and an confirmation of the recent distancing of H&M from the BRF. https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/24/buck...-and-meghan-after-us-election-video-13319117/ and also talky talky about BRF putting their hands in their own pockets.
> 
> When it comes to it, I very much doubt the Queen will have to open her Launer and fish out spare change. Certainly no Rembrandt will have to leave one of the many palaces. They'll be a deal, or they'll sell one of the public owned art works from a basement at Brighton Pavilion that they think no one will miss (again).
> 
> So much spin from all direction I'm dizzy from all the BS


Why did the Sussex trip to SA cost more than the Cambridge's trip to Pakistan?  That trip was worth every penny and extremely successful and really textbook for how a trip should be conducted.


----------



## Lodpah

Nah I have faith in the American people that MM would not get enough votes to even be in the running for President.  There’s a lane she has to cross. It will go die like Kanye’s bid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another admission that she misled/lied/deceived everyone from the beginning! Since H&M would need to give up the titles, I cannot wait for her to run - the sooner, the better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'consider running for president,' source claims
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, would 'seriously consider running for president' if she ever 'gave up' her title, a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _'One of the reasons she was so keen not to give up her American citizenship was so she had the option to go into politics,' a source close to the couple claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl. 'I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles she would seriously consider running for president.' _
> 
> I, too, would fail the Jay Leno quiz. After a lifetime devoted to learning, paying attention and being woke when the rest of the world was asleep, I feel a small amount of pride for saying that, too. Ignorance is kinda bliss, no?


I remember discussions on tPF prior to the marriage and posters were discussing if she could be fast tracked for UK citizenship.  I recall  the answer was no and she had to have the same residency requirements as anyone else.  I put this along with her "conversion" to the Church of England in the salt bag full of lies.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Not to worry... if she loses the duchess title, she will then be known as HRH Princess Henry.  A perfect match to Princess Michael of Kent.



Princess Michael will send her the Blackamoor brooch as a welcome gift.


----------



## kemilia

Maggie Muggins said:


> Meghan and Harry could learn something from Luxembourg’s HGD Guillaume and son Prince Charles, first and second in the line of succession to the Luxembourg grand ducal throne as compared to Harry and Archie, who are sixth and seventh of the British succession.
> There have been several photo shoots since Prince Charles’s birth May 10, 2020. His parents weren’t hiding him, while waiting for the million dollar photo shoot.
> 
> Stéphanie leaving the hospital with newborn son, Charles  May13, 2020.
> https://scanpix.no/spWebApp/search.action?search.searchString=stephanie luxembourg with son
> 
> Prince Charles Baptism, September 19, 2020.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...es-Luxembourg-looks-adorable-christening.html
> 
> More pics
> https://www.rexfeatures.com/search/...=&viah=Y&stk=N&sft=&timer=N&requester=&iprs=f
> 
> Tree planting at 'Parc Pescatore' in Luxembourg City, Sept 21, 2020 in honour of Prince Charles’s birth.
> https://instagram.fath3-4.fna.fbcdn...=259dc6f3c2bdf9ce9d8a26944fc087ad&oe=5F905787


He is one cute Baby, a real chubby little guy (the best kind!). 
Thanks for these pics!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Nah I have faith in the American people that MM would not get enough votes to even be in the running for President.  There’s a lane she has to cross. It will go die like Kanye’s bid.



True, oh, she will never win.  Still as @bag-mania says, if she is egotistical enough to run for office, finally we will hear the truth on yacht-girl.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> and and and ... The story about BRF finances / 35 M pound shortfall/ expensive trips just came out - that is not flattering to H&M
> 
> Actually, now that I think of the timing ... after months of summer 2019 complaints about private planes , carbon footprint , JCMH did the fall junket to Africa for which events were
> 
> 1. Africa trip ended
> 2. Meghan whined that no one was asking about her / did big AWFUL interview
> 3. Trip to Vancouver
> 
> It was likely around this time - end of Africa trip - that the court figured out the cost of the African junket - coupled with bad optics of the summer of carbon footprint/private plane to see Elton, designer duds ...
> 
> Perhaps courtiers brought up the trip expenses ca Africa trip, and THAT triggered interview & Vancouver ...
> 
> Maybe it has been about MONEY for a long time, ie not getting an infinite budget for clothes & junkets
> 
> Maybe we should have followed the money better rather than obsessing about narcissism LOL
> 
> Her issue is she thought she married a billionaire, not a mere millionaire, she wants private planes not first class


To quote my DH, "it's always about the money and who has the deep pockets."  When has she ever shown herself to be DISinterested in money?  Never.  Everything in the last video had a price tag attached and the DM did her a huge service with that annotated picture showing every item.  Everything in that video was a fake as her pleather pants.


----------



## gracekelly

All this political office talk is just blather and a way to get clicks and keep her name out there.  Everything lately has been about her.  He is quickly fading into the woodwork and becoming the Invisible Prince.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Nah I have faith in the American people that MM would not get enough votes to even be in the running for President.  There’s a lane she has to cross. It will go die like Kanye’s bid.


It will never get as far as the people.  She would have to invent her own political party as none of the established ones would go near her with a barge pole.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Princess Michael will send her the Blackamoor brooch as a welcome gift.



I almost choked on my tea with this one! Thanks!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Princess Michael will send her the Blackamoor brooch as a welcome gift.


MM will tell princess Michael "in no uncertain terms" that the Blackamoor brooch is not enough. Adding a tiara and a few other pieces will suffice.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s the same H&M noise we have heard all along. Nothing new there. Agree with @CeeJay - they ‘trotted out this old horse‘ to steal joy from Eugenie’s news and to please their Netflix overlords. Another backfire which generates more discussion of H renouncing titles and exposes their big lie (hint: from day one, they planned to leave).
> 
> @marietouchet - always follow the money, always. Consider the bill for their hair-do’s.  In and of itself, it is very telling. His plugs + toupee, her straighteners and hair dye, that bill must be astronomical. Nothing authentic about these two.


The more I think about it, the more I think "what a sh!tty thing to do to Eugenie .. and for the 2nd time"!  Look, I get it as far as Meghan is concerned, given her need to be the absolute CENTER of attention, but what about Harry? .. wasn't he close to Eugenie and Beatrice when growing up?  I thought they were, but sheesh .. first Meghan's "announcement" of her Pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding and now another happy event for them .. and Meghan has to put out that STUPID and INSIPID crap about her running for US President?!?!  C'mon???


----------



## A1aGypsy

No matter what I or anyone else thinks of Markle, that whole brooch thing was awful and hateful.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

A1aGypsy said:


> No matter what I or anyone else thinks of Markle, that whole brooch thing was awful and hateful.


I was just comparing both women as being overbearing and deluded as to their importance.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> No matter what I or anyone else thinks of Markle, that whole brooch thing was awful and hateful.



I think we all can agree on this.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s the same H&M noise we have heard all along. Nothing new there. Agree with @CeeJay - they ‘trotted out this old horse‘ to steal joy from Eugenie’s news and to please their Netflix overlords. Another backfire which generates more discussion of H renouncing titles and exposes their big lie (hint: from day one, they planned to leave).
> 
> @marietouchet - always follow the money, always. Consider the bill for their hair-do’s.  In and of itself, it is very telling. His plugs + toupee, her straighteners and hair dye, that bill must be astronomical. Nothing authentic about these two.


I would say it seems to me (and I don't know them of course) that even their relationship with each other may not be authentic.  She seems like a phony who is using him and he is just trying to follow along with her plans and schemes.  Is there anything real there?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> The more I think about it, the more I think "what a sh!tty thing to do to Eugenie .. and for the 2nd time"!  Look, I get it as far as Meghan is concerned, given her need to be the absolute CENTER of attention, but what about Harry? .. wasn't he close to Eugenie and Beatrice when growing up?  I thought they were, but sheesh .. first Meghan's "announcement" of her Pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding and now another happy event for them .. and Meghan has to put out that STUPID and INSIPID crap about her running for US President?!?!  C'mon???


Harry probably didn't know or understand what she was doing.....not that I'm defending him - I just think she is the pack leader


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

CeeJay said:


> The more I think about it, the more I think "what a sh!tty thing to do to Eugenie .. and for the 2nd time"!  Look, I get it as far as Meghan is concerned, given her need to be the absolute CENTER of attention, but what about Harry? .. wasn't he close to Eugenie and Beatrice when growing up?  I thought they were, but sheesh .. first Meghan's "announcement" of her Pregnancy at Eugenie's wedding and now another happy event for them .. and Meghan has to put out that STUPID and INSIPID crap about her running for US President?!?!  C'mon???


Eugenie looks so happy these days, and they shared their news in a very natural way.  No drama!  Hooray!  Meg who?!


----------



## CeeJay

Pessie said:


> Eugenie looks so happy these days, and they shared their news in a very natural way.  No drama!  Hooray!  Meg who?!


I'm super happy for them, they seem like a lovely couple!! .. and guess what?!?! .. they don't have to "pretend" to be friends with Amal and George because Jack is the European Manager for Casamigos Tequila (George Clooney's Tequilla company).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Eugenie was so welcoming of MM too, and see how she thanked her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And Sarah looks like she is happier than ever.  
www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8773047/Sarah-Ferguson-reads-book-magical-grandmother-hours-Princess-Eugenie-announces-pregnancy.html


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eugenie was so welcoming of MM too, and see how she thanked her.


Mind you, we don't know what happens behind closed doors, but from the way it seemed .. many of the BRF were extremely welcoming of MM, but obviously .. SHE didn't think so (heaven forbid Kate didn't invite her to go shopping with her)!  It also goes to show that, indeed, Harry seems to be content to do Meghan's bidding .. ruining years of friendship with his pals (who date back to his school years), his relatives, etc. -- all for a whack-job of a narcissist who always has to HAVE HER WAY!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> RIGHT?? .. I have a very nasty neighbor who (in the middle of a RED FLAG week!) .. is outside with his screaming children firing up that Barbeque (the old-fashioned kind with NO TOP)!!!  I finally had to report him to the neighborhood organization because every time I asked him nicely to not do it, he would spout F-bombs like he was in a War.



Ugh, there is always one a-hole neighbor. I still can't get over those people a couple weeks ago who started the El Dorado fire by shooting off fireworks at their stupid gender reveal party. I know at least one firefighter died and over 22,000 acres burned because some self-indulgent soon-to-be parents wanted to celebrate themselves!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

In theory I love looking at fireworks, but I'd never have one after I found out how bad it is for both the environment and wildlife, and I'd be completely fine with them being heavily restricted or even forbidden for New Year's. Yet the big environmentalists had to have one for their wedding, but of course in the meantime we learned those two like to talk the talk without walking the walk.


----------



## purseinsanity

Pessie said:


> Oh dear god no!  Now she’s popping up on America’s got talent  Is there anywhere safe from silly Meghan (“Duchess of Sussex” btw) posting one of her *heartfelt*  messages??


Whaaat???  Because she's so talented?  Is she judging??  WTF.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> MM appeared on America’s Got Talent yesterday. She inserts herself into EVERYTHING.


Was she carrying a suitcase with the winner's name in it?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eugenie was so welcoming of MM too, and see how she thanked her.


I think MM is jealous because Eugenie is a PRINCESS, not a Duchess. Yet with Harry 6th in line and Eugenie further down at 10th in line for succession I think MEME feels as Harry's wife she can throw shade. 

If I have it deciphered correctly, when Harry and Meghan are together at Royal functions, Eugenie would have to curtsy to them both, because Harry out ranks her in the line of succession, and in that scenario Meghan takes on his ranking of 6th in line. 

BUT, if Eugenie and Meghan were at a function where Harry was not also in attendance, then Meghan would have to curtsy to Eugenie because Eugenie is a "Blood Princess"(only those _born_ a Princess: Princess Anne, Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie, Princess Charlotte) and regardless of rank in line of succession(10th vs Harry's 6th), Eugenie has to be honored with a curtsy. MM probably resents it, so my cynical assessment is she looks for opportunities to divert attention from Eugenie to show, she thinks, how important she is.  Except, it's starting to get more obvious that really it's because MM is a petty narcissist.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I think MM is jealous because Eugenie is a PRINCESS, not a Duchess. Yet with Harry 6th in line and Eugenie further down at 10th in line for succession I think MEME feels as Harry's wife she can throw shade.



The dukedom is actually worth more than Harry's princely title he was born with. It's just that Meghan acquired any title she holds only through marriage. 



> BUT, if Eugenie and Meghan were at a function where Harry was not also in attendance, then Meghan would have to curtsy to Eugenie because Eugenie is a "Blood Princess"(only those _born_ a Princess: Princess Anne, Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie, Princess Charlotte) and regardless of rank in line of succession(10th vs Harry's 6th), Eugenie has to be honored with a curtsy. MM probably resents it, so my cynical assessment is she looks for opportunities to divert attention from Eugenie to show, she thinks, how important she is.  Except, it's starting to get more obvious that really it's because MM is a petty narcissist.



There was also word MM disliked how close Harry and the York girls, especially Eugenie, were, so she quickly set out to put an end to that. And I can believe that because that's just how she rolls. 

Our confident feminist just can't have her husband have other meaningful relationships because she feels threatened by everything.


----------



## marietouchet

Can’t Wait ... Poll in November issue
Look at this... 








						Inside the November issue | First lady, Duchess, Markle
					

Sep 25, 2020 - In a year in which so much has changed, Tatler once again polled the nation on how they feel about Meghan post-Megxit




					pin.it


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s simple jealousy and envy. Both H&M had and continue to have a terrible case of it. Today’s nonsense proves how sick these 2 really are.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s simple jealousy and envy. Both H&M had and continue to have a terrible case of it. Today’s nonsense proves how sick these 2 really are.



Speaking of jealousy, check out the newest post by KP (reposted over on the W&K-Thread). I feel someone might be quietly raging.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And that is how the son of the future king of the UK throws shade to the number 6 in line.
Game, set, match to William.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Can’t Wait ... Poll in November issue
> Look at this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the November issue | First lady, Duchess, Markle
> 
> 
> Sep 25, 2020 - In a year in which so much has changed, Tatler once again polled the nation on how they feel about Meghan post-Megxit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pin.it


Here, I found a link on another forum I visit. Enjoy. 









						Inside the November issue
					

In a year in which so much has changed, Tatler once again polled the nation on how they feel about Meghan post-Megxit




					www.tatler.com


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here, I found a link on another forum I visit. Enjoy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the November issue
> 
> 
> In a year in which so much has changed, Tatler once again polled the nation on how they feel about Meghan post-Megxit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


Be still my beating heart ... thanks
Wow the article talks of this weeks events ... hmmm .... how could those have been factored into a poll that publishes in hard copy on 1 October ? 
So don’t know about synopsis ... 
where is my magazine ? Grump


----------



## gracekelly

Why The Unstable Sussexes Are Detrimental To The Monarchy
					

The People haven’t just spoken, they are screaming and yelling. The nation are letting the Royal Family know their disgust and disapproval at the Sussexes latest antics. Their two minute poli…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com
				




Harry Markle is having a seizure.  Mad doesn't describe it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Why The Unstable Sussexes Are Detrimental To The Monarchy
> 
> 
> The People haven’t just spoken, they are screaming and yelling. The nation are letting the Royal Family know their disgust and disapproval at the Sussexes latest antics. Their two minute poli…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Markle is having a seizure.  Mad doesn't describe it.



Oh wow she's on fire.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow she's on fire.



YES! A full strip, by golly, is definitely called for. 

_Therefore, it means that they can resurrect them at will, and things have gone too far and they can’t be trusted, and so a full strip is necessary._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ok, what is going on with her elbow/left arm in the clip?  Does she have a twitch?


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Why The Unstable Sussexes Are Detrimental To The Monarchy
> 
> 
> The People haven’t just spoken, they are screaming and yelling. The nation are letting the Royal Family know their disgust and disapproval at the Sussexes latest antics. Their two minute poli…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Markle is having a seizure.  Mad doesn't describe it.



gracekelly,

 WOW. As much as I thought I knew about MM, the whole sequence about the "bump" was jaw dropping, especially the 5 day explosion from tote clutching the mid section to tight white dress bulging over a bump complete with protruding belly button. What came to mind is she would know the source for a prop pregnancy bump and is conniving enough to use it.  Surrogate mother somewhere? 

My next thought was, this reads like some of the great posts our astute thinking and polished writing tpf members have been penning for thousands of posts. Certainly demonstrates the breadth, shore to shore, and the depth of the rancor these two generated.

A post in the DM Comment section of one of the articles today labeled them the "Toxic Twosome" and someone else commented in another post that if MM were president that would make JCMH "First Lady." Ouch!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> As much as I thought I knew about MM, the whole sequence about the "bump" was jaw dropping, especially the 5 day explosion from tote clutching the mid section to tight white dress bulging over a bump complete with protruding belly button.



I don't think it's unusual for a pregnant belly to basically explode overnight, but they usually don't tend go, uh, go away for a bit. But also, do we really think she put on weight just to fool us all? Her face was so swollen for weeks after the birth, it wasn't even back to normal at Trooping the Colours.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, what is going on with her elbow/left arm in the clip?  Does she have a twitch?



She is trying to control the need to use hand motions.  There has been coaching and she was told that the hand motions are distracting on these videos.  She is holding onto her knees for dear life so she won't move her hands.

BTW, I never noticed the stain on her blouse until Harry Markle mentioned it and showed the large picture.  Really!  Wear clean clothes for a video.  Maybe if she had lifted her arms, we would have see pit stains again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just why.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think it's unusual for a pregnant belly to basically explode overnight, but they usually don't tend go, uh, go away for a bit. But also, do we really think she put on weight just to fool us all? Her face was so swollen for weeks after the birth, it wasn't even back to normal at Trooping the Colours.


Honestly, don’t know what to think. The whole pregnancy, birth, shut down of any regular sharing about the baby has been weird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Honestly, don’t know what to think. The whole pregnancy, birth, shut down of any regular sharing about the baby has been weird.



No photos since Easter?  Both H&M looking frazzled, unkempt, and only sitting.  It is definitely weird and creepy.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Honestly, don’t know what to think. The whole pregnancy, birth, shut down of any regular sharing about the baby has been weird.



Archie is the only part of their lives where they genuinely  want privacy. Even the dogs get more photos taken of them. I suppose that’s better for him, he doesn’t need to be a celebrity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Archie is the only part of their lives where they genuinely  want privacy. Even the dogs get more photos taken of them. I suppose that’s better for him, he doesn’t need to be a celebrity.



IDK, seems odd. IIRC, they were looking for offers to sell his photos, then we heard nothing. Now, she does this odd, off-script statement about the name connection along with the arm twitch, negative vibes, that all I get from these two, negative vibes.  I hadn’t noticed the dirty shirt either.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> *No photos since Easter?*  Both H&M looking frazzled, unkempt, and only sitting.  It is definitely weird and creepy.



Not quite. You forgot about that riveting performance Meghan gave reading a children’s book to Archie. He wasn’t impressed in the video but I believe that was the most recent Archie sighting we’ve had. Well, not counting the drone photo of Doria pushing him around in a stroller that they are trying to sue unknown paparazzi over.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hadn’t noticed the dirty shirt either.



Maybe Archie spit up on her. Can we count the stain as a sighting?


----------



## mdcx

gracekelly said:


> She is trying to control the need to use hand motions.  There has been coaching and she was told that the hand motions are distracting on these videos.  She is holding onto her knees for dear life so she won't move her hands.
> 
> BTW, I never noticed the stain on her blouse until Harry Markle mentioned it and showed the large picture.  Really!  Wear clean clothes for a video.  Maybe if she had lifted her arms, we would have see pit stains again.


I thought I saw a stain on her blouse, then thought to myself "_no, she's not a slob like me, she would have checked everything!_" Lol.

ETA clarifying comma


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA:  @bag-mania  Apologies, I thought the reading was Easter. The reading was his birthday in May, smh.  In my defense, the book was about a rabbit 


Maggie Muggins said:


> Here, I found a link on another forum I visit. Enjoy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the November issue
> 
> 
> In a year in which so much has changed, Tatler once again polled the nation on how they feel about Meghan post-Megxit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com



Thank you for link. I would have missed this section.



Spoiler: “Poll Results”



Following Megixit, the majority of people who expressed an opinion, 68 per cent, agree that Meghan and Harry should have their titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex taken away from them. 63 per cent also agree that as a British royal, Meghan should not be commenting on American politics - an interesting finding considering the furore surrounding her and Harry’s decision to film a video urging people to vote in the US elections earlier this week. More than a third of those with a view think that Meghan has political ambitions of her own, with 35 per cent agreeing that Meghan wants to be president of the United States one day. For the full results, pick up the November issue, on newsstands Thursday 1 October.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Am I to believe that all those sophisticated Gates Foundation execs that are now working for *Grifters-R-Us* have never, and I mean, silly me, have NEVER run any focus groups for H&M, as these "professionals" were developing their comprehensive Marketing Plans for digital and print?

Stunned.

Hell, I could have been within -/+ 3 points of Tatlers "Poll Results", and thanks, *CarryOn* for the amusement on a slow Friday night <all nights are the same these days, lol>.*

So H&M are spending Charlie and Lizzie's money wantonly doing exactly WHAT and WHY?
Just in order to make themselves into millionaires in the US after they were already millionaires in the UK <but now squandering other peoples' money in the process, natch>.

Does anyone else here see how crazy this sounds?
Its beginning to appear that there are way too many "bad guys" in this story.
Please BRF put an end to this MADNESS.

*ex-Manhattan and Silicon Valley Tech/Analytics/Marketing/Sales exec


----------



## csshopper

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Am I to believe that all those sophisticated Gates Foundation execs that are now working for *Grifters-R-Us* have never, and I mean, silly me, have NEVER run any focus groups for H&M, as these "professionals" were developing their comprehensive Marketing Plans for digital and print?
> 
> Stunned.
> 
> Hell, I could have been within -/+ 3 points of Tatlers "Poll Results", and thanks, *CarryOn* for the amusement on a slow Friday night <all nights are the same these days, lol>.*
> 
> So H&M are spending Charlie and Lizzie's money wantonly doing exactly WHAT and WHY?
> Just in order to make themselves into millionaires in the US after they were already millionaires in the UK <but now squandering other peoples' money in the process, natch>.
> 
> Does anyone else here see how crazy this sounds?
> Its beginning to appear that there are way too many "bad guys" in this story.
> Please BRF put an end to this MADNESS.
> 
> *ex-Manhattan and Silicon Valley Tech/Analytics/Marketing/Sales exec


----------



## csshopper

Posted in error and can't figure out how to delete it.   I'm old and it's been a long day.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

csshopper said:


> Posted in error and can't figure out how to delete it.   *I'm old and it's been a long day.*



SAME, *csshopper*, and you truly made me lol.
Thx, needed that!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Apparently, it's been confirmed that Charles stopped using Duchy of Cornwall funds to pay for H & M expenses in March, when they stopped being working royals. No one seems to know if Charles is using his personal funds to support them now. And for those, who keep asking to have the titles removed, it requires an act of Parliament to remove an HRH or a Dukedom. Harry's princely title cannot be removed unless he renounces it himself since he was born a prince.


----------



## Chanbal

There is a Poll towards the end of the article that shows 87% yes for "Should Harry and Meghan lose their royal titles?" It has about 9K votes. 












						Meghan Markle Reportedly "Would Seriously Consider Running For President” If She Gives Up Her Title
					

I mean...she has my vote.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

H should man up and remove himself from the succession as well as all titles. In order to save some dignity for the BRF and his family, H should renounce it all. No more of the half-in, half-out nonsense. Of course, he won’t go voluntarily because he wants the drama, the attention, the gnashing of teeth, the foot-stomping. I feel like this whole time he is daring QE and Charles to take action. Sheesh, such a selfish person, especially during a pandemic and poor economy. MM could go first, but that is unlikely, she is another selfish person.


----------



## csshopper

VigeeLeBrun said:


> SAME, *csshopper*, and you truly made me lol.
> Thx, needed that!



You are kind! Thank you. Have always enjoyed your posts through the years in other Forums on tpf.  I am an "OG" in more than tpf member years. 76.

Am in a tinder box part of CA, which these days means most of the state. Have been notified of a Red Flag Warning going into effect from 9 PM tomorrow through 8 AM Monday, which means high fire danger due to heat, dry weather, and winds. It could, in worse case scenario, mean "Leave NOW".  Power will be turned off preventively. This will be the 3rd time in less than a month and "fire season" has barely begun. A year ago my area was evacuated for a week, fortunately our homes were spared, but it does raise the anxiety level when a Warning is issued.

I had started to respond to your post to say. "Yes, I agree with you 100%! Craziness and it needs to end now." when the Warning Notification beeped.

 During the down time Sunday look forward to checking in when able for a diversion. Thoroughly enjoy the members here and have also learned a lot! 

Apologies for the interruption and now "back to our regularly scheduled program," "The Saga of the Sinking Sussexes".


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> H should man up and remove himself from the succession as well as all titles. In order to save some dignity for the BRF and his family, H should renounce it all. No more of the half-in, half-out nonsense. Of course, he won’t go voluntarily because he wants the drama, the attention, the gnashing of teeth, the foot-stomping. I feel like this whole time he is daring QE and Charles to take action. Sheesh, such a selfish person, especially during a pandemic and poor economy. MM could go first, but that is unlikely, she is another selfish person.


ITA, but the second he does, MM will move on to another meal ticket.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> Why The Unstable Sussexes Are Detrimental To The Monarchy
> 
> 
> The People haven’t just spoken, they are screaming and yelling. The nation are letting the Royal Family know their disgust and disapproval at the Sussexes latest antics. Their two minute poli…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Markle is having a seizure.  Mad doesn't describe it.


I’m all for taking the p*ss out of these two twerps and Harry Markle is usually a fun read, but this is a bit OTT.  Sounds like he’s about to burst a blood vessel and it’s not so funny IMO.  Having said that bumpgate is weird.  

I think we need to be patient and wait for the review in Jan, I expect changes then.  In the vote video Harry appears to be teeing up an application for US citizenship - by saying he can’t vote now, to me he’s implying I’ll be voting later.


----------



## Pessie

purseinsanity said:


> ITA, but the second he does, MM will move on to another meal ticket.


I agree, I think no title, no marriage!


----------



## Lodpah

*Well, I was there and I saw what you did, I saw it with my own two eyes
So you can wipe off that grin, I know where you've been
It's all been a pack of lies*



The anger in Phil Collin's face in this video says it all:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

^^ Gandalf on guitar!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Grifters-R-Us*



Thanks for the laugh


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> ITA, but the second he does, MM will move on to another meal ticket.




That should be motivation for him to do it!  (Not that it would be for this nitwit!)


----------



## kemilia

IMO, he will never give up his rank/titles in RF. He may not be a rocket scientist but he's smart enough to know enough to not let go of that safety net. If (when) the marriage goes ka-blooey he will return to the nest that he's always known.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> IMO, he will never give up his rank/titles in RF. He may not be a rocket scientist but he's smart enough to know enough to not let go of that safety net. If (when) the marriage goes ka-blooey he will return to the nest that he's always known.


unless the boss tells him to, which she won't....because then she would not be the Duchess


----------



## bag-mania

I doubt they will voluntarily give up the titles and if they are taken away that would buy them at least another year of victimhood to parlay into more “look at us” press. No, the best we can hope for is watching more ups and downs until they finally either snap or run out of causes to insert themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I doubt they will voluntarily give up the titles and if they are taken away that would buy them at least another year of victimhood to parlay into more “look at us” press. No, the best we can hope for is watching more ups and downs until they finally either snap or run out of causes to insert themselves.


at this point, what are they?  professional victims/preachers of "woke"?  So smug


----------



## duna

gracekelly said:


> Why The Unstable Sussexes Are Detrimental To The Monarchy
> 
> 
> The People haven’t just spoken, they are screaming and yelling. The nation are letting the Royal Family know their disgust and disapproval at the Sussexes latest antics. Their two minute poli…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Markle is having a seizure.  Mad doesn't describe it.



Amen to this!!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> at this point, what are they?  professional victims/preachers of "woke"?  So smug



They are something inexplicable that hasn’t existed before as near as I can tell. They fit right in with everything else about 2020.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are something inexplicable that hasn’t existed before as near as I can tell. They fit right in with everything else about 2020.


part of the reality/Internet trend


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> They are something inexplicable that hasn’t existed before as near as I can tell. They fit right in with everything else about 2020.


Oh my gosh, so true!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> I am an "OG" in more than tpf member years. 76.
> 
> Am in a tinder box part of CA, which these days means most of the state. Have been notified of a Red Flag Warning going into effect from 9 PM tomorrow through 8 AM Monday, which means high fire danger due to heat, dry weather, and winds. It could, in worse case scenario, mean "Leave NOW".  Power will be turned off preventively. This will be the 3rd time in less than a month and "fire season" has barely begun. A year ago my area was evacuated for a week, fortunately our homes were spared, but it does raise the anxiety level when a Warning is issued.
> 
> I had started to respond to your post to say. *"Yes, I agree with you 100%! Craziness and it needs to end now."* when the Warning Notification beeped.
> 
> During the down time Sunday look forward to checking in when able for a diversion. Thoroughly enjoy the members here and have also learned a lot!
> 
> Apologies for the interruption and now "back to our regularly scheduled program," "The Saga of the Sinking Sussexes".


@csshopper I admire you for disclosing your age, some of us try to keep that information secrete even from ourselves. 

We live in a time of uncontrolled fires, covid, lack of tolerance, lack of respect, excessive greed, ... I also "*agree with you 100%! Craziness and it needs to end now."*

Retuning to our 'beloved' couple, what puzzles me most is: who do they think they are to deserve millions of taxpayer funds? They look at themselves as entitled to be famous and have a luxurious life without sparing any expense on themselves. Then, calling themselves activists and philanthropist after a couple of silly videos and photo-op sandwich distribution events is simply outrageous.

"The Duke and *Duchess of Sussex*'s ten-day trip with their then four-month-old son *Archie* to southern African in September 2019 *cost the taxpayer nearly £246,000*, new accounts show." How many people could have been fed in Africa with only 1/2 of that money? 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal tour of Africa was the most expensive for 2019 to 2020
					

The Royal Household published its annual financial statement, the Sovereign Grant Report, for the financial year 2019 to 2020 on Friday




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @csshopper I admire you for disclosing your age, some of us try to keep that information secrete even from ourselves.
> 
> We live in a time of uncontrolled fires, covid, lack of tolerance, lack of respect, excessive greed, ... I also "*agree with you 100%! Craziness and it needs to end now."*
> 
> Retuning to our 'beloved' couple, what puzzles me most is: who do they think they are to deserve millions of taxpayer funds? They look at themselves as entitled to be famous and have a luxurious life without sparing any expense on themselves. Then, calling themselves activists and philanthropist after a couple of silly videos and photo-op sandwich distribution events is simply outrageous.
> 
> "The Duke and *Duchess of Sussex*'s ten-day trip with their then four-month-old son *Archie* to southern African in September 2019 *cost the taxpayer nearly £246,000*, new accounts show." How many people could have been fed in Africa with only 1/2 of that money?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal tour of Africa was the most expensive for 2019 to 2020
> 
> 
> The Royal Household published its annual financial statement, the Sovereign Grant Report, for the financial year 2019 to 2020 on Friday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


two thumbs up to your post.....my thoughts exactly - who do they think they are? esp her.  he was born a prince so I can understand his feeling of entitlement.  She is apparently just a spoiled brat who now finds herself in the position of being rich and famous and has delusions of grandeur.  As I've said before, I don't have a problem with the positions they have on social justice issues but I don't need their advice.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Honestly, don’t know what to think. The whole pregnancy, birth, shut down of any regular sharing about the baby has been weird.


Trying to say this in a graceful way ... the lack of birth/baby details did not surprise me, given she became a first time mother later in life
Sophie and Edward had had to handle the difficult issues of Louise's premature birth
I dont need to know all the details


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> two thumbs up to your post.....my thoughts exactly - who do they think they are? esp her.  he was born a prince so I can understand his feeling of entitlement.  She is apparently just a spoiled brat who now finds herself in the position of being rich and famous and has delusions of grandeur.  As I've said before, I don't have a problem with the positions they have on social justice issues but I don't need their advice.



I also don't have a problem with their positions on social justice, but I have a problem when people use social justice (a very serious matter) for profit or self-promotion. If one really cares about social justice doesn't waste huge amounts of taxpayer funds on herself/himself. 

The fact that he was born a prince, and she wasn't, doesn't make him more entitled imho. If it is true that he wanted to depart from the BRF, he should have done it graciously, with dignity, and renouncing to his titles. The problem is that he may have never seriously considered to leave the BRF, and he may have just fallen under MM spell... He may now be very lost, and for that I feel sorry for him. My 2 cents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> H should man up and remove himself from the succession as well as all titles. In order to save some dignity for the BRF and his family, H should renounce it all. No more of the half-in, half-out nonsense. *Of course, he won’t go voluntarily because he wants the drama, the attention, the gnashing of teeth, the foot-stomping.* I feel like this whole time he is daring QE and Charles to take action. Sheesh, such a selfish person, especially during a pandemic and poor economy. MM could go first, but that is unlikely, she is another selfish person.


It's Déjà vu... I see H&M trying to replicate Diana's exit from the RF, although I don't think she was ever this bad and she certainly wasn't repulsive like this duo. Methinks, the RF will be better prepared this time. If I remember correctly, I think that Parliament, in the past, has removed someone from the line of succession, but I have to check it out. Also, I think their punishment won't happen until the January review and it seems like an eternity to wait for retribution.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's Déjà vu... I see H&M trying to replicate Diana's exit from the RF, although I don't think she was ever this bad and she certainly wasn't repulsive like this duo. Methinks, the RF will be better prepared this time. If I remember correctly, I think that Parliament, in the past, has removed someone from the line of succession, but I have to check it out. Also, I think their punishment won't happen until the January review and it seems like an eternity to wait for retribution.


yes, it's time to H to start acting like an adult....sorry (very sorry) about his mom but time to man up now like your big brother


----------



## chicinthecity777

Came across this on twitter. Could it be or it was reaching?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@chicinthecity777  Wow, I had not connected those dots. Yes, it was deliberate, but it took awhile before anyone figured it out. Haaaa.

Came across this on T&C website. Yay to Anne for showing how it should be done.
_But Anne knows how to play it, too. She wasn't about to wrap her face in velvet or golden tassels, those visual trappings of royalty. No, she kept it simple: all crisp and white, paired with a classic casual Anne outfit. The truly powerful, you see, don't have to bother with that overbearing nonsense—just a small monogram will do._
www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a34055042/princess-anne-monogram-face-mask/?utm_campaign=likeshopme&utm_medium=instagram&utm_source=dash%20hudson&utm_content=www.instagram.com/p/CFmqBrBn7dW/



Spoiler: The article



*Princess Anne Wears Monogram Face Mask, Achieves New Level of Enlightenment*
*The power that mask has.*
By Chloe Foussianes
Sep 17, 2020





Max Mumby/IndigoGetty Images
It's no secret that we over here at _Town & Country_ worship at the altar of Princess Anne, but even Princess Royal supplicants can be surprised by her power—power we're reminded of when she does something truly transcendent, like wear a monogrammed face mask.
Several working royals have embraced the reusable cloth mask in recent months, as they've resumed in-person engagements following the U.K.'s coronavirus lockdown this spring. And they've done pretty well for themselves: Kate Middleton opting for a demure Liberty print model from Amaia London, Camilla wearing a covering printed with peacock feathers, a gift from a friend. But not one of them have ascended to the heights that Anne did on Tuesday, when she wore a face mask emblazoned with her royal monogram—a design that features a small crown above an "A" for Anne. (See it in all its glory below.)
That's right: not only did Anne wear a personalized mask, but she used the official emblem bestowed upon her by the monarchy—a flex if there ever was one. Any old chap could have a face mask embroidered with their initials; only a member of the House of Windsor could remind you of their royal blood with a simple monogram.
But Anne knows how to play it, too. She wasn't about to wrap her face in velvet or golden tassels, those visual trappings of royalty. No, she kept it simple: all crisp and white, paired with a classic casual Anne outfit. The truly powerful, you see, don't have to bother with that overbearing nonsense—just a small monogram will do.


----------



## bag-mania

Disney+ has a new movie called  “The Secret Society of Second-Born Royals.”  From what I’ve read it’s kind of a kid version of X-Men. Second born royal children go off to school to learn to be superheroes. Why they didn’t get Harry on board for this I’ll never know. His superpower could be petulance.  









						Secret Society of Second-Born Royals - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA:  Swoon alert — Take a moment and look at W&K’s thread. Be prepared to smile!

@bag-mania  I’m a second born, not royal, but the fight is similar  Seriously, people need to accept their birth order and get on with life. That said, where is this school? I have a cape 




Chanbal said:


> I also don't have a problem with their positions on social justice, but I have a problem when people use social justice (a very serious matter) for profit or self-promotion. If one really cares about social justice doesn't waste huge amounts of taxpayer funds on herself/himself.
> 
> The fact that he was born a prince, and she wasn't, doesn't make him more entitled imho. If it is true that he wanted to depart from the BRF, he should have done it graciously, with dignity, and renouncing to his titles. The problem is that he may have never seriously considered to leave the BRF, and he may have just fallen under MM spell... He may now be very lost, and for that I feel sorry for him. My 2 cents.



Nah, I don’t feel sorry for him. He did this fully aware of the consequences.
Personally,  I know very little about their positions on social justice, their finances and their own agenda. Much of what they say is pablum and their actions do not match their words, so how can anyone know them? Certainly I disagree with many of the lectures and their false humility - 16 bathrooms says it all. Also, some people they call friends (no names) clearly have an agenda with a different worldview than mine. That’s ok, I have no issue with people expressing their thoughts, we need all voices to make the world better. H would do well to remember this as he fights these lawsuits. Just because he has the microphone, it does not make him right. Same to her, too.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  Swoon alert — Take a moment and look at W&K’s thread. Be prepared to smile!
> 
> @bag-mania  I’m a second born, not royal, but the fight is similar  Seriously, people need to accept their birth order and get on with life. That said, where is this school? I have a cape
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, I don’t feel sorry for him. He did this fully aware of the consequences.
> Personally,  I know very little about their positions on social justice, their finances and their own agenda. Much of what they say is pablum and their actions do not match their words, so how can anyone know them? *Certainly I disagree with many of the lectures and their false humility - 16 bathrooms says it all. *Also, some people they call friends (no names) clearly have an agenda with a different worldview than mine. That’s ok, I have no issue with people expressing their thoughts, we need all voices to make the world better. H would do well to remember this as he fights these lawsuits. Just because he has the microphone, it does not make him right. Same to her, too.



Their positions on social justice are certainly very ambiguous. As you said, 16 bathrooms (19 according to Zillow) says it all! They put Charles and QE in a very tough position. I wouldn't be very surprised if they will be 'encouraged' (forced) to renounce their titles with the excuse of being free to pursue political activities. The hefty sums for their trips and other perks are putting a nice price tag on "their false humility."


----------



## Chanbal

They were shown a red card: 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's US election intervention 'violated' terms of Megxit deal with Queen, say senior aides - as they discuss how to distance London royals from couple









						Sussexes' election intervention 'violated' terms of deal with Queen
					

Harry and Meghan's comments, in which they called on American voters to 'reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity', have been widely interpreted to be a swipe at president *****.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> They were shown a red card:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's US election intervention 'violated' terms of Megxit deal with Queen, say senior aides - as they discuss how to distance London royals from couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes' election intervention 'violated' terms of deal with Queen
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's comments, in which they called on American voters to 'reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity', have been widely interpreted to be a swipe at president *****.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I think MM is all about pushing buttons and seeing how far she can go, whether it was from the beginning with something as stupid as insisting on wearing a messy bun, not wearing hose like the other royals (gasp!) or wearing un-royal nail polish.  She's testing their boundaries repeatedly, now even more so, and Harry is just along for the ride.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Came across this on twitter. Could it be or it was reaching?



why would they want to emulate this unhappy couple?


----------



## mdcx

sdkitty said:


> why would they want to emulate this unhappy couple?


Diana cosplay is part of how Meghan got control, and keeps control of H imo.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Diana cosplay is part of how Meghan got control, and keeps control of H imo.



Except Harry is Diana in his photo, leaning away on the armrest. Meghan is in the dominant Charles position.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I also don't have a problem with their positions on social justice, but I have a problem when people use social justice (a very serious matter) for profit or self-promotion. If one really cares about social justice doesn't waste huge amounts of taxpayer funds on herself/himself.
> 
> *The fact that he was born a prince, and she wasn't, doesn't make him more entitled imho. If it is true that he wanted to depart from the BRF, he should have done it graciously, with dignity, and renouncing to his titles. The problem is that he may have never seriously considered to leave the BRF,* and he may have just fallen under MM spell... He may now be very lost, and for that I feel sorry for him. My 2 cents.



I think he's always wanted to leave but... he wouldn't have been capable of doing all that on his own. He had no real career to fall back on, at least one that would've let him leave and still enjoy that lifestyle. He lucked out when he met her because probably no other woman of right mind would've married into all that just to leave it within 2 years.... and still find him a way to continue a lavish lifestyle. He's so mediocre, and her, well, she's driven if nothing else so in some ways it's a very advantageous match for both.


----------



## Chanbal

Everything seems to be very calculated:

*Prince Harry Seemed "Regretful" and "Tense" During His Time 100 Interview, Body Language Expert Says*
"It’s possible he still needs to look like the guest rather than the host here to avoid looking like someone who is lecturing on a subject that doesn’t personally involve him," she said. "









						Prince Harry Seemed "Regretful" and "Tense" During His Time 100 Interview, Body Language Expert Says
					

"Harry would have been well aware of the potential fall-out..."




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Sharont2305

Re the new Cambridge photos, now that's a good use of a bench.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I think MM is all about pushing buttons and seeing how far she can go, whether it was from the beginning with something as stupid as insisting on wearing a messy bun, not wearing hose like the other royals (gasp!) or wearing un-royal nail polish.  She's testing their boundaries repeatedly, now even more so, and Harry is just along for the ride.



Yeah, but she's also dealing with people who let her trash the playroom and choose to ignore what a sh*tty little brat they've raised. So why would she behave.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Everything seems to be very calculated:
> 
> *Prince Harry Seemed "Regretful" and "Tense" During His Time 100 Interview, Body Language Expert Says*
> "It’s possible he still needs to look like the guest rather than the host here to avoid looking like someone who is lecturing on a subject that doesn’t personally involve him," she said. "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Seemed "Regretful" and "Tense" During His Time 100 Interview, Body Language Expert Says
> 
> 
> "Harry would have been well aware of the potential fall-out..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


He looked extremely uncomfortable.  He’s always liked to think of himself as a rebel, but he‘s consistently rebel-lite in real life.  I think it’s penetrated the thick fog that swamps his brain that he might just have gone too far this time.  Fool.


----------



## chicinthecity777

mdcx said:


> Diana cosplay is part of how Meghan got control, and keeps control of H imo.





sdkitty said:


> why would they want to emulate this unhappy couple?


Agree with mdcx, It's not about the couple, it's about Diana and MM being the "new" Diana.


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Agree with mdcx, It's not about the couple, it's about Diana and MM being the "new" Diana.


Definitely.  Very little of what they do is about them recently - it’s all about Meghan - what she wants, and who she wants to snipe at.


----------



## bag-mania

I think the BRF has its hands tied. The reality is H&M are adults living in another country and they can do as they please. Now that they have announced they have money coming in, maybe Charles won’t be quite as generous but even that isn’t certain.

I assume they are bending over backwards with the emotional twosome because they don’t want them to spill more personal information to the media out of spite. That description of the floor plan of W&K’s home in the book could have been the first shot fired.


----------



## Chanbal

@lalame it looks like the article below agrees with some of your comments, "He wanted out, whether he realised it fully or not, and Meghan was his ticket." I'm still not able to give him that much credit, but I may change my mind. In any event, the last comment is perfect "I just hope the poor deluded boy knows what he’s letting himself in for." I agree with @*Pessie*, he is a fool!

An interesting quote: "It would appear to be – and I am increasingly certain of this – a deliberate act of aggression designed to leave the Queen with no choice but to strip the pair of their Royal titles."@*viciel*

*SARAH VINE: Do Meghan Markle and Prince Harry actually WANT to be stripped of their titles?*

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8776651/SARAH-VINE-Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-actually-WANT-stripped-titles.html


----------



## viciel

I can't decide who's going to just rip the bandage on H&M - will it be QE2, Charles, or William? My money's on William (?) - sometimes you need someone without the old guard's sentimentalism and one is closest to the danger of a house of cards collapsing in an instant to make a swift call. Everyone loves QE2, she can do no wrong, Charles has to tread carefully because of the whole Diana/Camilla history, William is the next generation and the Cambridges are working so darn hard to keep the monarchy going and seem relevant, so he probably feels the need to put duty above it all and do major loser control.


----------



## 1LV

I wonder if Harry feels he wields a power like never before.


----------



## viciel

1LV said:


> I wonder if Harry feels he wields a power like never before.



On the contrary, It think he feels more of a loser deep down. Power is the ability to what one wants regardless of the current. Power is not throwing undercooked spaghetti on the wall hoping at least one string will stick. Megan is clearly overcompensating because she realizes that the world knows her husband is a total loser who has zero ability to build a career of his own (partying doesn't count), but you can't mold a boy into a man if they never finished growing up. And Harry is clearly still dealing with an identity crisis - super unhealthy dynamics.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think he's always wanted to leave but... he wouldn't have been capable of doing all that on his own. He had no real career to fall back on, at least one that would've let him leave and still enjoy that lifestyle. He lucked out when he met her because probably no other woman of right mind would've married into all that just to leave it within 2 years.... and still find him a way to continue a lavish lifestyle. He's so mediocre, and her, well, she's driven if nothing else so in some ways it's a very advantageous match for both.


no other woman


viciel said:


> On the contrary, It think he feels more of a loser deep down. Power is the ability to what one wants regardless of the current. Power is not throwing undercooked spaghetti on the wall hoping at least one string will stick. Megan is clearly overcompensating because she realizes that the world knows her husband is a total loser who has zero ability to build a career of his own (partying doesn't count), but you can't mold a boy into a man if they never finished growing up. And Harry is clearly still dealing with an identity crisis - super unhealthy dynamics.


but does she really want him to be powerful or does she prefer to be the boss and just control him?


----------



## 1LV

viciel said:


> On the contrary, It think he feels more of a loser deep down. Power is the ability to what one wants regardless of the current. Power is not throwing undercooked spaghetti on the wall hoping at least one string will stick. Megan is clearly overcompensating because she realizes that the world knows her husband is a total loser who has zero ability to build a career of his own (partying doesn't count), but you can't mold a boy into a man if they never finished growing up. And Harry is clearly still dealing with an identity crisis - super unhealthy dynamics.


I agree with you about what power is, but I think he’s easily deluded.


----------



## Chanbal

viciel said:


> On the contrary, It think he feels more of a loser deep down. Power is the ability to what one wants regardless of the current. Power is not throwing undercooked spaghetti on the wall hoping at least one string will stick. Megan is clearly overcompensating because she realizes that the world knows her husband is a total loser who has zero ability to build a career of his own* (partying doesn't count)*, but you can't mold a boy into a man if they never finished growing up. And Harry is clearly still dealing with an identity crisis - super unhealthy dynamics.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> Asked what he thought of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s decision to interfere in the US presidential election, he just gave a wry smile and said: ‘I wish a lot of luck to Harry… because he’s gonna need it.’



I swear this is the one sentence he's said since he's been on my radar I wholeheartedly agree with. And in case someone wonders why I don't feel the same way about Meghan needing luck...she'll be ok. She doesn't lose sleep about other people, she just moves on and decides she didn't like them anyway and that was it. He on the other hand is very obviously fragile and labile with lots of unprocessed trauma...he will be a shell of a man once she's done with him and discards of him.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I swear this is the one sentence he's said since he's been on my radar I wholeheartedly agree with. And in case someone wonders why I don't feel the same way about Meghan needing luck...she'll be ok. *She doesn't lose sleep about other people, she just moves on and decides she didn't like them anyway and that was it.* He on the other hand is very obviously fragile and labile with lots of unprocessed trauma...he will be a shell of a man once she's done with him and discards of him.


Lack of empathy- common to narcissists! Harry will need a lot of luck and help to deal with this.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I swear this is the one sentence he's said since he's been on my radar I wholeheartedly agree with. And in case someone wonders why I don't feel the same way about Meghan needing luck...she'll be ok. She doesn't lose sleep about other people, she just moves on and decides she didn't like them anyway and that was it. He on the other hand is very obviously fragile and labile with lots of unprocessed trauma...he will be a shell of a man once she's done with him and discards of him.


I think MM lives her life by Coco Chanel's quote:  "I don't care what you think about me, I don't think about you at all."  MM clearly moves on and doesn't give a damn about anyone else, no matter who they are, what they've done to help her, or how much they may have loved her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ChanelFan29

I rarely post in here, mostly just pop in to read periodically.  I got "Finding Freedom" from my library last week.  I have to say, it's the most surreal thing I have ever read in a long while and I'm only 40% through.  Megan is made out to be a saint and this perfect person.  Reminds me of my psycho SIL, she's ALWAYS the victim.  Really strange book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ChanelFan29 said:


> I rarely post in here, mostly just pop in to read periodically.  I got "Finding Freedom" from my library last week.  I have to say, it's the most surreal thing I have ever read in a long while and I'm only 40% through.  Megan is made out to be a saint and this perfect person.  Reminds me of my psycho SIL, she's ALWAYS the victim.  Really strange book.



Thank you for taking one for the team. I couldn't bring myself to get and read it because at this point Scobie's delusions are really getting on my nerves as well. They even teach in creative writing that your hero will be flat and boring if you paint them in a saintly light LOL


----------



## bag-mania

ChanelFan29 said:


> I rarely post in here, mostly just pop in to read periodically.  I got "Finding Freedom" from my library last week.  I have to say, it's the most surreal thing I have ever read in a long while and I'm only 40% through.  Megan is made out to be a saint and this perfect person.  Reminds me of my psycho SIL, she's ALWAYS the victim.  Really strange book.



That’s what happens when a book is written with the subject’s full cooperation, approval, and likely oversight.

I bet you are glad you didn’t pay for it, other than with your time.


----------



## bag-mania

Looking for opinions. Do you believe Meghan has poisoned Harry’s mind against his family? Or, does he still care for them as much as before, but he’s putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan and her “needs?”


----------



## Pessie

ChanelFan29 said:


> I rarely post in here, mostly just pop in to read periodically.  I got "Finding Freedom" from my library last week.  I have to say, it's the most surreal thing I have ever read in a long while and I'm only 40% through.  Megan is made out to be a saint and this perfect person.  Reminds me of my psycho SIL, she's ALWAYS the victim.  Really strange book.


You're a brave woman, the extracts I read were too much for me  


bag-mania said:


> Looking for opinions. Do you believe Meghan has poisoned Harry’s mind against his family? Or, does he still care for them as much as before, but he’s putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan and her “needs?”


i really don’t know.  He used to have a life, he had lots of hobbies and long term friends - he had his own charitable interests.  All of that’s gone now and he’s just left with the giant chip on his shoulder.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Looking for opinions. Do you believe Meghan has poisoned Harry’s mind against his family? Or, does he still care for them as much as before, but he’s putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan and her “needs?”


I think MM has definitely played on his weaknesses & insecurities.  I do think he still cares for the Royal Family, but maybe that’s just what I want to believe. And I think he is putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan because either he doesn’t realize it yet or isn't ready to admit he made a mistake.  Short answer: Yes.


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Looking for opinions. Do you believe Meghan has poisoned Harry’s mind against his family? Or, does he still care for them as much as before, but he’s putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan and her “needs?”



I don’t think Meghan poisoned Harry’s opinion of his family. I think he was deeply disturbed by the cold family he grew up in and the way his mother was treated (probably exacerbated and tortured by the endless documentaries, stories on TV about her while he’s silently trying to grieve). He had no choice than to push his feelings aside for years or disassociate from it in order to continue on in a public position. I don’t think he felt that leaving his position was a real option until he met Meghan. Whatever she presented to him since they got together, they have plotted together and this is the result. He looks lost and overwhelmed.


----------



## youngster

bisousx said:


> I don’t think Meghan poisoned Harry’s opinion of his family. I think he was deeply disturbed by the cold family he grew up in and the way his mother was treated (probably exacerbated and tortured by the endless documentaries, stories on TV about her while he’s silently trying to grieve). He had no choice than to push his feelings aside for years or disassociate from it in order to continue on in a public position. I don’t think he felt that leaving his position was a real option until he met Meghan. Whatever she presented to him since they got together, they have plotted together and this is the result. He looks lost and overwhelmed.



Is the family really that cold or is that propaganda put out by Harry or others to prop up their reasons for leaving?  I'm sure Diana, and probably Sarah, likely thought they were cold and they probably were to the two of them, at the end especially. They were both the outsiders.  Mark Phillips has been very quiet for years and I think he still gets on well with Princess Anne.  

The family seems to be chatty and friendly with one another when we see them at various events, depending on the event. (I mean, I wouldn't expect them to be all smiles and hugs and laughter at memorial services and certain other events.)  Their family is unique and there are lines you don't cross, things you don't say, when your granny is Queen and your father is the Prince of Wales and your brother is the heir. You have to go through staff to speak to the Queen for example. That may cause some formality in their relationships, a distance between them simply due to the circumstances. But, I think the Queen and Charles do love Harry.  Can't imagine how the rest of them feel about him.      I can understand why William takes refuge with Kate's family though.  He has this wonderful, close to normal kind of life with them.


----------



## bisousx

youngster said:


> Is the family really that cold or is that propaganda put out by Harry or others to prop up their reasons for leaving?  I'm sure Diana, and probably Sarah, likely thought they were cold and they probably were to the two of them, at the end especially. They were both the outsiders.  Mark Phillips has been very quiet for years and I think he still gets on well with Princess Anne.
> 
> The family seems to be chatty and friendly with one another when we see them at various events, depending on the event. (I mean, I wouldn't expect them to be all smiles and hugs and laughter at memorial services and certain other events.)  Their family is unique and there are lines you don't cross, things you don't say, when your granny is Queen and your father is the Prince of Wales and your brother is the heir. You have to go through staff to speak to the Queen for example. That may cause some formality in their relationships, a distance between them simply due to the circumstances. But, I think the Queen and Charles do love Harry.  Can't imagine how the rest of them feel about him.      I can understand why William takes refuge with Kate's family though.  He has this wonderful, close to normal kind of life with them.



I don’t know if Harry put out any of his own propaganda. I formulated my opinion when watching a couple documentaries and shows like The Crown where (like you mentioned) Charles and Anne had to schedule in time to speak with their own mother, didn’t have any say in their own life choices like which uni to go to, and the lack of real bonding or warmth looked like it would be a miserable caged life for some.

Some personalities like Kate’s would thrive in this environment, especially since it’s her own choice to join the family as an adult..  but for someone like Harry who had no choice, he must have always been wondering what a real, regular life would be like.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also when Diana died and the Queen stayed behind with William and Harry instead of returning to London the public felt this was a cold snub while the royal correspondents unisono said this was the one and only time during her reign she put family matters over duty. And when arrangements were made for the funeral etc. Philip made it very clear to palace aides that the boys were their priority and they expected things to be handled in their best interest. Also Harry was close to his cousins and Kate pre Meghan - he is not a good enough actor to be faking it for years, which is proven by lots of footage of a sulking Harry when things didn't go his way


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also when Diana died and the Queen stayed behind with them instead of returning to London the public felt this was a cold snub while the royal correspondents unisono said this was the one and only time during her reign she put family matters over duty. And when arrangements were made for the funeral etc. Philip made it very clear to palace aides that the boys were their priority and they expected things to be handled in their best interest. Also Harry was close to his cousins and Kate pre Meghan - he is not a good enough actor to be faking it for years, which is proven by lots of footage of a sulking Harry when things didn't go his way



Agree, but if Harry had a real bond with his family and in laws, it wouldn’t be so easy for a woman to come in and fleece him of those relationships. I think he had some deep seated resentment to allow this dumpster fire to ensue.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Looking for opinions. Do you believe Meghan has poisoned Harry’s mind against his family? Or, does *he still care for them as much as before, but he’s putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan and her “needs*?”



I'll go with the highlighted part. I like/hope to think that somewhere in that messed up brain of his that he hasn't rewritten his history about the happy times he had with his family and friends.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> Agree, but if Harry had a real bond with his family and in laws, it wouldn’t be so easy for a woman to come in and fleece him of those relationships. I think he had some deep seated resentment to allow this dumpster fire to ensue.



I have a relative of a relative (my cousin's cousin) who was the doted on only child. I actually went to school with him and saw them at family functions for years. A normal, happy family with the parents owning a medium-sized enterprise the guy was supposed to inherit because remenber, only child. They financed his university degree, they bought him a house, and they were not the horrible meddling helicoper kind of parents either.

Well, he met his wife, and interesting things happened: suddenly he insisted his father, who was still working at the time, put the company he was supposed to inherit in his name now (guy was 29 at that time, it's not like he had been in waiting position for 50 years like Charles), which the dad refused. Girl would also pick fights with his mother, then blame her (of course she could just be a horrible MIL, hadn't other people e.g. my godmother witnessed some of these encounters and said the wife was completely out of line) and it escalated so badly that now they refuse to speak with the parents and won't let them see their grandson. It happens.. You just need one ruthless party with an agenda and one who is either weak or not that smart or both.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Is the family really that cold or is that propaganda put out by Harry or others to prop up their reasons for leaving?  I'm sure Diana, and probably Sarah, likely thought they were cold and they probably were to the two of them, at the end especially. They were both the outsiders.  Mark Phillips has been very quiet for years and I think he still gets on well with Princess Anne.
> 
> The family seems to be chatty and friendly with one another when we see them at various events, depending on the event. (I mean, I wouldn't expect them to be all smiles and hugs and laughter at memorial services and certain other events.)  Their family is unique and there are lines you don't cross, things you don't say, when your granny is Queen and your father is the Prince of Wales and your brother is the heir. You have to go through staff to speak to the Queen for example. That may cause some formality in their relationships, a distance between them simply due to the circumstances. But, I think the Queen and Charles do love Harry.  Can't imagine how the rest of them feel about him.      I can understand why William takes refuge with Kate's family though.  He has this wonderful, close to normal kind of life with them.


I recall the story or footage when Charles was just a small boy greeting his mother after she had been travelling and she didn't hug or kiss him - shook his hand maybe?
It is possible that she was a better grandmother than she was a mother though....


----------



## Pessie

bisousx said:


> I don’t think Meghan poisoned Harry’s opinion of his family. I think he was deeply disturbed by the cold family he grew up in and the way his mother was treated (probably exacerbated and tortured by the endless documentaries, stories on TV about her while he’s silently trying to grieve). He had no choice than to push his feelings aside for years or disassociate from it in order to continue on in a public position. I don’t think he felt that leaving his position was a real option until he met Meghan. Whatever she presented to him since they got together, they have plotted together and this is the result. He looks lost and overwhelmed.


It was common for the aristocracy in general to have little to do with it’s children.  Children lived in the nursery and were packed off to boarding school at the age of around 7.  



sdkitty said:


> I recall the story or footage when Charles was just a small boy greeting his mother after she had been travelling and she didn't hug or kiss him - shook his hand maybe?
> It is possible that she was a better grandmother than she was a mother though....


I’m not sure people who put on a display of private feelings in public are necessarily better parents than those that choose not to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> It was common for the aristocracy in general to have little to do with it’s children.  Children lived in the nursery and were packed off to boarding school at the age of around 7.
> 
> 
> I’m not sure people who put on a display of private feelings in public are necessarily better parents than those that choose not to.


well, hugging your child isn't all that intimate IMO....look at Kate and Will....but those were different times


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a relative of a relative (my cousin's cousin) who was the doted on only child. I actually went to school with him and saw them at family functions for years. A normal, happy family with the parents owning a medium-sized enterprise the guy was supposed to inherit because remenber, only child. They financed his university degree, they bought him a house, and they were not the horrible meddling helicoper kind of parents either.
> 
> Well, he met his wife, and interesting things happened: suddenly he insisted his father, who was still working at the time, put the company he was supposed to inherit in his name now (guy was 29 at that time, it's not like he had been in waiting position for 50 years like Charles), which the dad refused. Girl would also pick fights with his mother, then blame her (of course she could just be a horrible MIL, hadn't other people e.g. my godmother witnessed some of these encounters and said the wife was completely out of line) and it escalated so badly that now they refuse to speak with the parents and won't let them see their grandson. It happens.. You just need one ruthless party with an agenda and one who is either weak or not that smart or both.



It sounds like your relative had a nice upbringing on paper but it doesn’t mean that he was *close* with his parents. You wouldn’t know unless he opened up to someone about his side.

There’s a lot of people’s private lives that we don’t know. I rarely tell friends about my past (esp about my narc mother) because unless they have a similar person in their lives, they wouldn’t understand. But my mother loves to retell history with family and friends about how doting she was, perfect mother who provided for her children in every way.

It’s part of why I don’t even bother to explain. Most people dismiss your stories if you had a privileged childhood. I have yet to watch Paris Hilton’s documentary but I heard she opens up about her abuse.. not surprisingly, most people are mocking her as if having money or being around it absolves inner pain.


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> well, hugging your child isn't all that intimate IMO....look at Kate and Will....but those were different times


Exactly, different generation, very different culture.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> There’s a lot of people’s private lives that we don’t know. I rarely tell friends about my past (esp about my narc mother) because unless they have a similar person in their lives, they wouldn’t understand. But my mother loves to retell history with family and friends about how doting she was, perfect mother who provided for her children in every way.



I could have written this, so it's not that I don't understand. I'm just saying sometimes perfectly normal relationships get out of hand when the right set of circumstances arrives.


----------



## Lodpah

It makes sense now that in the past royalty married other royalty and kept in the line. They understand the rigorous formality that comes with keeping things in the bloodline.


----------



## Chanbal

xx


sdkitty said:


> I recall the story or footage when Charles was just a small boy greeting his mother after she had been travelling and she didn't hug or kiss him - shook his hand maybe?
> It is possible that she was a better grandmother than she was a mother though....


Times have changed. People used to be more formal in public, particularly in Europe.


----------



## maryg1

bag-mania said:


> That description of the floor plan of W&K’s home in the book could have been the first shot fired.


if that’s the case, they’re not dumb and spoilt, they’re evil.


----------



## maryg1

Chanbal said:


> *SARAH VINE: Do Meghan Markle and Prince Harry actually WANT to be stripped of their titles?*
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8776651/SARAH-VINE-Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-actually-WANT-stripped-titles.html


“No more dreary wet weekends pressing the flesh with commoners for Harry: it’s all Netflix and chia seeds now”
sad but true, the couple that sell themselves as “we’re just like you” don’t want to be among ordinary people, they want to be with poweful and glamouros people only


----------



## CarryOn2020

In the past, other than the Duke of Windsor and possibly Margaret, we saw the married-in’s struggle and speak out against the family/royal structure. H is this younger generation’s only family member to say negative things about his family, right?  Pre-MM, he talked of his dislike of his role, his issues with Charles, and the lack of opportunities for him. He is definitely consistent in his complaints.

From 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/21/prince-harry-afghanistan
_He also revealed his disdain and distrust of some sections of the media and described how his father constantly reminded him to behave more like a member of the royal family._

Notice in this 2013 video that H struggles to contain his nervousness - his voice is strong and steady, his hands are locked tight but his legs seem to show discomfort or nerves. Sitting still may be a real effort for him:    [Having a good hair day, it looks amazing]

The discomfort in the most recent ‘bench’ video reminds me of the tension he showed at Abbey. Does this guy ever really relax? If he is so uncomfortable in the limelight, why continue to put himself out there?  Clearly, life with MM is not bringing real happiness.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the past, other than the Duke of Windsor and possibly Margaret, we saw the married-in’s struggle and speak out against the family/royal structure. H is this younger generation’s only family member to say negative things about his family, right?  Pre-MM, he talked of his dislike of his role, his issues with Charles, and the lack of opportunities for him. He is definitely consistent in his complaints.
> 
> From 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/21/prince-harry-afghanistan
> _He also revealed his disdain and distrust of some sections of the media and described how his father constantly reminded him to behave more like a member of the royal family._
> 
> Notice in this 2013 video that H struggles to contain his nervousness - his voice is strong and steady, his hands are locked tight but his legs seem to show discomfort or nerves. Sitting still may be a real effort for him:    [Having a good hair day, it looks amazing]
> 
> The discomfort in the most recent ‘bench’ video reminds me of the tension he showed at Abbey. Does this guy ever really relax? If he is so uncomfortable in the limelight, why continue to put himself out there?  Clearly, life with MM is not bringing real happiness.




He looks so cute here. What happened to Hot Prince Ginge 

So yeah... my opinion is that it wouldn’t take much for a newcomer to listen carefully, swoop in and take advantage of his already existing mixed feelings about his family and life.

To me it looks like Harry got along with his family but it doesn’t mean he was deeply close with any of them. He acts like someone who felt dismissed and frustrated with no one to confide in. Hence the pouty faces in public.

It’s easy to be friendly with everyone when you’re young and having a great time (ie, Harry seen partying with his cousins in the London scene) but when you get older and grow more agitated with your life, that’s when flimsy relationships fall apart.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The discomfort in the most recent ‘bench’ video reminds me of the tension he showed at Abbey. Does this guy ever really relax? If he is so uncomfortable in the limelight, why continue to put himself out there?  Clearly, life with MM is not bringing real happiness.



Really we have no idea what makes Harry happy. He enjoys the perks, wealth, and fame that comes with his title and status. I don’t think he would ever have left if it meant giving  all that up. Meghan offered him a plan where they would still have all that and more  and they wouldn’t have to answer to anyone. Not having complete control over her life chafed Meghan and she persuaded him to see things her way.  I don’t think it will make him any happier but maybe he is more relaxed because he is not expected to do much. He will do an occasional video like the Time 100 but that is already planned/written for him. He’s not doing as many speeches as he did when he was working for the Royals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems to me H never bought into the ‘princely behavior’ idea, thus the conflicts with Charles. As he was moved further down the succession line, bitterness set in. He is the type of guy most mother’s warn their daughters about. A nearly 40 yr old man with daddy issues is not solid husband material, Prince or not.  Money, entitlement, none of that brings happiness.

So, this story that was whispered about weeks ago is true?!  Wow.


Spoiler: MM’s mother 












						Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
					

The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I swear this is the one sentence he's said since he's been on my radar I wholeheartedly agree with. And in case someone wonders why I don't feel the same way about Meghan needing luck...she'll be ok. She doesn't lose sleep about other people, she just moves on and decides she didn't like them anyway and that was it. He on the other hand is very obviously fragile and labile with lots of unprocessed trauma...he will be a shell of a man once she's done with him and discards of him.


THIS - 100%!!!  Sadly, I have known other women like this, who (in essence) just chew you up and then spit you out.  They do it regardless of gender as well .. bottom line, if you have something that they want, they will go out of their way to procure it and then once they do, they "move on".  This happened to me very early in my career, and honestly .. I'm glad it did because it gave me the ability to recognize this early on .. such that when I met male/female like this, I would move on.  

I used to feel sorry for Harry, but now .. don't know.  Is he that DUMB or is he just so enamored of her that he doesn't recognize it.  The last outage, where they took on US Politics, boy-oh-boy .. he did NOT look comfortable to me at all .. and actually looked like he was pulling away from Meghan (but of course - she poked him in the ribs - not literally .. to DO HIS JOB)!!!  Lately, there have been a number of snippets where (supposedly) H&M broke one of the tenants of their Megexit agreement .. which has resulted in many more folks saying that the titles should be taken away.  Should be interesting .. but could Harry have 'woken up' a little bit???  Hmmmm ..


----------



## csshopper

Meghan systematically, it seems, cut her family off, both white and black, with the exception of Doria, for reasons apparent only to her.  

I think she figured out pre relationship (the story she put out that she didn’t know who he was is ludicrous), later refined as they dated, his weaknesses and how to use them. Outcome, he is increasingly estranged from his family and certainly physically removed. Two of a kind.

Result, he’s completely in her grip. The conversations probably center on “We are victims and ONLY we understand each other.“ 

He’s emotionally insecure and she’s made herself the indispensable crutch.
Under her tutelage he gets support in dissing his family and she gets the control she craves.

The glitch is it looks like he got what he thought he wanted, but it doesn’t look like it is making him happy. She will not concern herself with that. If necessary she’ll just move on.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Clearly, life with MM is not bringing real happiness.


I couldn't agree more with you. He looks lost and unhappy. He seems to be doing whatever MM (and/or MA) wants him to do. He needs to find himself and act on what he really wants ASAP. It will not be easy! He will likely prioritize Archie and I saw a headline about MM planning baby #2. He will certainly need a lot of luck.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Looking for opinions. Do you believe Meghan has poisoned Harry’s mind against his family? Or, does he still care for them as much as before, but he’s putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan and her “needs?”


It seems to me that he thought the “grass was greener” and went along with MM’s scheme and now that he’s here and not with the royal family, he is realizing the grass isn’t greener after all.  I think perhaps he does miss being in the U.K. with all those perks.


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> It sounds like your relative had a nice upbringing on paper but it doesn’t mean that he was *close* with his parents. You wouldn’t know unless he opened up to someone about his side.
> 
> There’s a lot of people’s private lives that we don’t know. I rarely tell friends about my past (esp about my narc mother) because unless they have a similar person in their lives, they wouldn’t understand. But my mother loves to retell history with family and friends about how doting she was, perfect mother who provided for her children in every way.
> 
> It’s part of why I don’t even bother to explain. Most people dismiss your stories if you had a privileged childhood. I have yet to watch Paris Hilton’s documentary but I heard she opens up about her abuse.. not surprisingly, most people are mocking her as if having money or being around it absolves inner pain.


Where I grew up in Connecticut was a very privileged area.  The funny thing, is that we used to joke that since we lived at the "bottom" of the hill (as opposed to the top with exquisite houses and views of Hartford), we were the "poor" family!  Of course, many of the neighborhood kids and I were good friends and oftentimes played together.  They would come to my house, I would go to their house, and a few things struck me .. 

Every time the kid asked for something (which in our family was too expensive), they got it
Rarely was there any interaction between the kid and their parents, it was oftentimes the nanny who made lunch, etc. 
There was ZERO supervision whilst we were in the pool.  At first, I never mentioned this to my parents because I knew they would say "no pool then", but then I had to rescue one of the younger kids and that was it .. my mother forbade me from going to their house to go into the pool. 
etc. - I could go on.  As we all grew up, my parents still kept a close watch on me (thank you older sister who was the rebel and hence, my other sister and I got the "watchful eye") .. but what this did is kept me out of trouble, because sadly, every single one of my neighbors' kids got into trouble .. drugs, petty theft, setting fires, etc.  I was the only one of the kids who went to University and it was in my 20's that the first neighbor's kid committed suicide.  Another committed suicide a few years after that; bottom line .. not a single one of them is alive today.  So, a lot of $$$ means what??? .. nothing .. it does not buy happiness and that has been my mantra for MANY years.  Do I enjoy the nice things in life? .. sure, but when I see parents thinking "oh, I'll just give Johnny the $$$ or just say YES because it's easier" .. that makes me very sad.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this story that was whispered about weeks ago is true?!  Wow.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: MM’s mother
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
> 
> 
> The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wow is the right word. It looks like the association to Harry (BRF) has been very good for both mother and daughter.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Meghan systematically, it seems, cut her family off, both white and black, with the exception of Doria, for reasons apparent only to her.
> 
> I think she figured out pre relationship (the story she put out that she didn’t know who he was is ludicrous), later refined as they dated, his weaknesses and how to use them. Outcome, he is increasingly estranged from his family and certainly physically removed. Two of a kind.
> 
> Result, he’s completely in her grip. The conversations probably center on “We are victims and ONLY we understand each other.“
> 
> He’s emotionally insecure and she’s made herself the indispensable crutch.
> Under her tutelage he gets support in dissing his family and she gets the control she craves.
> 
> The glitch is it looks like he got what he thought he wanted, but it doesn’t look like it is making him happy. She will not concern herself with that. If necessary she’ll just move on.


I think I've figured out why Doria is still in the picture .. she NEVER talks to anyone and simply will not RESPOND on anything written about her.  That's *exactly* what MM would want; someone to just keep quiet and not make any waves .. that way, MM is the ONLY one who can shine!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I think I've figured out why Doria is still in the picture .. she NEVER talks to anyone and simply will not RESPOND on anything written about her.  That's *exactly* what MM would want; someone to just keep quiet and not make any waves .. that way, MM is the ONLY one who can shine!



Possibly she is benefitting financially


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does everyone know (or remember) this lil mishap? Seems H has often needed a bailout. Hmmmm.








						Prince Harry's charity saved from cash crisis by Tory donor Ashcroft
					

PRINCE Harry's charity to help starving children in Africa has been bailed out by a £250,000 donation from one of the Conservative Party's richest benefactors.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Pessie

csshopper said:


> The glitch is it looks like he got what he thought he wanted, but it doesn’t look like it is making him happy. She will not concern herself with that. If necessary she’ll just move on.





Aimee3 said:


> It seems to me that he thought the “grass was greener” and went along with MM’s scheme and now that he’s here and not with the royal family, he is realizing the grass isn’t greener after all.  I think perhaps he does miss being in the U.K. with all those perks.


When they bunked off to Canada in January they declared they’d carry on with being Royals in the UK, and also live in America.  Harry thought back then he’d get to keep his Military roles, pop back home to carry out any fun Royal duties he fancied, and get to do glamorous overseas tours on behalf of the Queen.  He thought they’d be Royal Superstars and make a lot of money out of it exploiting it in the US.
Things have turned out very differently and his personal popularity is through the floor.  He’s not got what he wanted at all.
ETA - he was allegedly devastated at his picture being left off the Queens desk - imagine how cut he must be to hear the Palace tell the worlds press he no longer speaks for the RF


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to me H never bought into the ‘princely behavior’ idea, thus the conflicts with Charles. As he was moved further down the succession line, bitterness set in. He is the type of guy most mother’s warn their daughters about. A nearly 40 yr old man with daddy issues is not solid husband material, Prince or not.  Money, entitlement, none of that brings happiness.
> 
> So, this story that was whispered about weeks ago is true?!  Wow.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: MM’s mother
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
> 
> 
> The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Not sure if D bought a business - that would NOT be my guess (funds came from ???), or if she self-incorporated - allowing herself, and maybe a few others,  to provide elder care
Was thinking ...    D was a social worker - a job in the public eye dealing with underprivileged people, perhaps very uncomfortable as the mother  of the woman who had a $50M wedding, I can see that D might have left that job due to MM's high profile
The incorporation makes sense - there are liability issues with elder care, and this way, JCMH would be legally separate - not suable - in the case of a dispute
It is MM's lawyer that did the work perhaps to insulate MM from liability


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> I think I've figured out why Doria is still in the picture .. she NEVER talks to anyone and simply will not RESPOND on anything written about her.  That's *exactly* what MM would want; someone to just keep quiet and not make any waves .. that way, MM is the ONLY one who can shine!


Agree D makes no waves ... but, all we know is that she and MM are not fighting in public 
D seems absent most of the time


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly she is benefitting financially



Doria may be rewarded for her silence, and by extension her loyalty.  For the sake of her image Meghan must have at least one relative who she is not feuding with publicly. Otherwise it might look like SHE is the problem.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does everyone know (or remember) this lil mishap? Seems H has often needed a bailout. Hmmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's charity saved from cash crisis by Tory donor Ashcroft
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry's charity to help starving children in Africa has been bailed out by a £250,000 donation from one of the Conservative Party's richest benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


Story goes back to 2009 and concerns Sentebale charity . I don’t read much into this , but could be wrong , some thoughts 
1. Long time ago - 11 years ago, H was 25 ?
2. Wasn’t Harry in the military then ? Or was that the year of Las Vegas striptease ? I don’t think Harry had much influence then 
3. Sentebale is a fav charity of Harry’s , I think there was a Sentebale charity polo match at one time 
4. Does not sound like H personally mismanaged anything, rather that he might have called in a favor 
5. The amount is not ginormous


----------



## Allisonfaye

Now I have seen everything. 










						Meghan and Harry Are Embarrassing Themselves
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s latest political stunt was carried out for Time magazine’s list of 100 influential people. The pair sat on a bench, spoke of “compassion” and the “global community” and the importance of everyone’s being nicer to each other online, and then -- what else? -- the...




					www.yahoo.com
				




...What’s behind all this? Raw ambition and an insatiable hunger for power. _Vanity Fair_says: “[Markle’s] representatives insist she has no plan to run for office, but a close friend suggests it’s the main reason she didn’t give up her American citizenship when marrying into the royal family.” *Apparently, she may run for president as early as 2024....*


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the past, other than the Duke of Windsor and possibly Margaret, we saw the married-in’s struggle and speak out against the family/royal structure. H is this younger generation’s only family member to say negative things about his family, right?  Pre-MM, he talked of his dislike of his role, his issues with Charles, and the lack of opportunities for him. He is definitely consistent in his complaints.
> 
> From 2013: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/21/prince-harry-afghanistan
> _He also revealed his disdain and distrust of some sections of the media and described how his father constantly reminded him to behave more like a member of the royal family._
> 
> Notice in this 2013 video that H struggles to contain his nervousness - his voice is strong and steady, his hands are locked tight but his legs seem to show discomfort or nerves. Sitting still may be a real effort for him:    [Having a good hair day, it looks amazing]
> 
> The discomfort in the most recent ‘bench’ video reminds me of the tension he showed at Abbey. Does this guy ever really relax? If he is so uncomfortable in the limelight, why continue to put himself out there?  Clearly, life with MM is not bringing real happiness.




The video really shows you how much anger he had about the media even that early on. So is it really M leading the charge on these lawsuits? It seems like he got his muzzle off with the BRF's rules and he's now able to get all the "revenge" he wants on the media. I wouldn't be surprised if he was the one whipping her into a frenzy to be honest.


----------



## lalame

Allisonfaye said:


> Now I have seen everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Are Embarrassing Themselves
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s latest political stunt was carried out for Time magazine’s list of 100 influential people. The pair sat on a bench, spoke of “compassion” and the “global community” and the importance of everyone’s being nicer to each other online, and then -- what else? -- the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...What’s behind all this? Raw ambition and an insatiable hunger for power. _Vanity Fair_says: “[Markle’s] representatives insist she has no plan to run for office, but a close friend suggests *it’s the main reason she didn’t give up her American citizenship when marrying into the royal family.*” Apparently, she may run for president as early as 2024....



I don't think this makes sense... why would anyone give up citizenship when you marry a foreigner unless you were required to? Plus she didn't automatically get British citizenship when she married Harry, so you can't really give up your only citizenship.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> I don't think this makes sense... why would anyone give up citizenship when you marry a foreigner unless you were required to? Plus she didn't automatically get British citizenship when she married Harry, so you can't really give up your only citizenship.



I was mainly commenting about the idea of her running for President.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is kind of genius...I just saw them being referred to as Mrs. Common and Mr. Wealth


----------



## lalame

Allisonfaye said:


> I was mainly commenting about the idea of her running for President.



I know, I was reacting specifically to what the "sources" said. All of it is absurd.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Story goes back to 2009 and concerns Sentebale charity . I don’t read much into this , but could be wrong , some thoughts
> 1. Long time ago - 11 years ago, H was 25 ?
> 2. Wasn’t Harry in the military then ? Or was that the year of Las Vegas striptease ? I don’t think Harry had much influence then
> 3. Sentebale is a fav charity of Harry’s , I think there was a Sentebale charity polo match at one time
> 4. Does not sound like H personally mismanaged anything, rather that he might have called in a favor
> 5. The amount is not ginormous



To me, it shows a pattern of irresponsible behavior.  If at 25, I had been entrusted with 250K of other people’s money,  and I had a bunch of royal advisors, I would not have squandered it.  Reputation is everything. Too many people have bailed him out. This is what leads to his entitled behavior.

@lalame  Yes, I do believe he leads her on to a certain extent. She seems ok with it. [personally, by now, I would be tired of it.]


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Where I grew up in Connecticut was a very privileged area.  The funny thing, is that we used to joke that since we lived at the "bottom" of the hill (as opposed to the top with exquisite houses and views of Hartford), we were the "poor" family!  Of course, many of the neighborhood kids and I were good friends and oftentimes played together.  They would come to my house, I would go to their house, and a few things struck me ..
> 
> Every time the kid asked for something (which in our family was too expensive), they got it
> Rarely was there any interaction between the kid and their parents, it was oftentimes the nanny who made lunch, etc.
> There was ZERO supervision whilst we were in the pool.  At first, I never mentioned this to my parents because I knew they would say "no pool then", but then I had to rescue one of the younger kids and that was it .. my mother forbade me from going to their house to go into the pool.
> etc. - I could go on.  As we all grew up, my parents still kept a close watch on me (thank you older sister who was the rebel and hence, my other sister and I got the "watchful eye") .. but what this did is kept me out of trouble, because sadly, every single one of my neighbors' kids got into trouble .. drugs, petty theft, setting fires, etc.  I was the only one of the kids who went to University and it was in my 20's that the first neighbor's kid committed suicide.  Another committed suicide a few years after that; bottom line .. not a single one of them is alive today.  So, a lot of $$$ means what??? .. nothing .. it does not buy happiness and that has been my mantra for MANY years.  Do I enjoy the nice things in life? .. sure, but when I see parents thinking "oh, I'll just give Johnny the $$$ or just say YES because it's easier" .. that makes me very sad.


so true - money doesn't buy happiness
I watched the George Harrison documentary on HBO and was struck by what he said - that as soon as the beatles became very wealthy they realized that wasn't it.  He eventually became very spiritual and according to his wife he had a beautiful death.  (not that I think it's a good thing that he died in his 50's but he was ready)


----------



## rose60610

If H wanted to leave the RF before he met Meghan, then I find couple of things peculiar. He was in the military for ten years, rising to the rank of Captain. You'd think he'd have had sufficient leadership skills by then to leave on his own. Meghan comes along and they go through a couple of years of pomp and circumstance and the grandiose over the top wedding. Then they pull the plug? To me, they clearly used and took advantage of the BRF to springboard their sense of "gracing us with their presence" personas. Had Harry left the BRF before me met M, she wouldn't have given him the time of day. Had she married JCMH after he left the Crown she'd have been given an afterthought blurb on page 18. They must have planned their "escape" together from the get go, leveraging the Firm's notoriety for their own personal gain, cranking out Archie like sports victors churn out the championship T shirt the next day. It wasn't enough to exploit the Firm and expediently bake a baby meal ticket, M had to go into an overdrive pity party, like look how hard she had it, living a royal existence. Then H's pity drivel with JP Morgan. Netflix would not have wanted them if they were mere non-royals. I'm surprised they didn't blow it with their woe-are-we attitudes. They should have blown it! And lucky us, H&M are telling people how to vote and trying to convince us to that they are some kind of role models to look up to.  Hah! Take advantage of the family who gives you every extravagance, whine about it, give them the shove off, but leverage that generosity to a Hollywood contract, then pass yourself off as some kind of authority/role model? They're nuts, maybe sociopathic. They evoke zero sympathy and exhibit traits they criticize others for. They are slimy people. Poor Archie.


----------



## lalame

Oh my, wouldn't it be something if it turns out Harry was the mastermind puppeteer manipulating Meghan's ambition and drive in order to engineer a departure from the BRF, go after his media enemies, and humiliate the family/institution as revenge?  Then he divorces her after a few years to return to the BRF, Netflix money in hand, and throws all the blame on her... now both real and Hwood royalty. And marries a shy British gal!!

Not sure I give him that much credit as a political strategist but hey, I'd watch that movie!


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> Oh my, wouldn't it be something if it turns out Harry was the mastermind puppeteer manipulating Meghan's ambition and drive in order to engineer a departure from the BRF, go after his media enemies, and humiliate the family/institution as revenge?  Then he divorces her after a few years to return to the BRF, Netflix money in hand, and throws all the blame on her... now both real and Hwood royalty. And marries a shy British gal!!
> 
> Not sure I give him that much credit as a political strategist but hey, I'd watch that movie!



I'd definitely watch that movie! Great twist!


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Now I have seen everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Are Embarrassing Themselves
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s latest political stunt was carried out for Time magazine’s list of 100 influential people. The pair sat on a bench, spoke of “compassion” and the “global community” and the importance of everyone’s being nicer to each other online, and then -- what else? -- the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...What’s behind all this? Raw ambition and an insatiable hunger for power. _Vanity Fair_says: “[Markle’s] representatives insist she has no plan to run for office, but a close friend suggests it’s the main reason she didn’t give up her American citizenship when marrying into the royal family.” *Apparently, she may run for president as early as 2024....*


the idea of her running for president is ludicrous but then again, we have seen some crazy things happen in politics lately


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame @rose60610  Yes, in the back of my mind, this is what I am thinking is closer to the truth, especially when I watch the engagement interview. He used her.  She _thought_ she was the mastermind, but no.  There is so much we do not know, but the BRF does know.  That they remain silent tells the story, imho.

ETA: He was raised to be the star of the show. He is well-versed in manipulation. Trained by MI6? LOL, who knows?


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Oh my, wouldn't it be something if it turns out Harry was the mastermind puppeteer manipulating Meghan's ambition and drive in order to engineer a departure from the BRF, go after his media enemies, and humiliate the family/institution as revenge?  Then he divorces her after a few years to return to the BRF, Netflix money in hand, and throws all the blame on her... now both real and Hwood royalty. And marries a shy British gal!!
> 
> Not sure I give him that much credit as a political strategist but hey, I'd watch that movie!


I don't think Harry ever got that much credit in his life. He will love reading your post, it will be good for his ego after what he has been through.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is the role of the second-born. Gotta make the heir look good by comparison. Margaret did it for QE, Andy did it for Charles, now H is doing it for Wills.  It solidifies the future of the monarchy. Apologies for repeating myself, Shakespeare wrote about this stuff. Every hero (heir) needs a foil.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> @lalame @rose60610  Yes, in the back of my mind, this is what I am thinking is closer to the truth, especially when I watch the engagement interview. He used her.  She _thought_ she was the mastermind, but no.  There is so much we do not know, but the BRF does know.  That they remain silent tells the story, imho.
> 
> ETA: He was raised to be the star of the show. He is well-versed in manipulation. Trained by MI6? LOL, who knows?


He was raised to always be second.
Enough with the conspiracy theories


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Harry ever got that much credit in his life. He will love reading your post, it will be good for his ego after what he has been through.


I was wondering if he reads any of the commentary saying she's leading him around by the nose and how that makes him feel.  Mad I'll bet.  Just like he seems to be angry at a lot of things.  Pouty, grumpy man-boy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> He was raised to always be second.
> Enough with the conspiracy theories



I see this as more patterns of behavior in the family. Yes, he was raised to be second and to walk out on the balcony to thunderous applause. He was trained to support his family which he is doing by looking awful in comparison.

ETA: by keeping his kid out of the spotlight,  he is keeping the focus on the adorable Cambridge kids.


----------



## lalame

Lol I like how the idea of Harry being a cunning strategist is considered so outlandish it's a conspiracy theory. That boy really does not get much credit. (he hasn't earned it)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

lalame said:


> Lol I like how the idea of Harry being a cunning strategist is considered so outlandish it's a conspiracy theory. That boy really does not get much credit. (he hasn't earned it)


I was referring to the secret service reference.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The monarchy needs the drama to stay relevant, especially during a pandemic. What else would we discuss?  H&M provide much clickbait, no?

ETA: @Pessie  We know royals receive training on driving cars, handling guns, etc.  We know Wills learned long ago to test his friendships to find the leakers. Why wouldn’t H? We know BRF security is provided by the intelligence service.   For me, it is not a big leap to think the services are watching what goes on. We don’t know all the details and that is ok, we just know they are involved. Here is one recent article - the word ”deliberately” stands out:








						The Queen visits MI5
					

This morning The Queen visited MI5, the UK’s domestic counter-intelligence and security agency.




					www.royal.uk
				



_During the war, visits to troops by members of The Royal Family were deliberately organised to distract attention from operations._


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> Now I have seen everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Are Embarrassing Themselves
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s latest political stunt was carried out for Time magazine’s list of 100 influential people. The pair sat on a bench, spoke of “compassion” and the “global community” and the importance of everyone’s being nicer to each other online, and then -- what else? -- the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...What’s behind all this? Raw ambition and an insatiable hunger for power. _Vanity Fair_says: “[Markle’s] representatives insist she has no plan to run for office, *but a close friend suggests it’s the main reason she didn’t give up her American citizenship when marrying into the royal family*.” *Apparently, she may run for president as early as 2024....*


This is pure **, she wouldn't have to give up her American citizenship. Though, MM via 'a close friend' will spread this to make her look good for her political aspirations. This will go together with woke, activist, philanthropist, duchess... Did I forget saint?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I was wondering if he reads any of the commentary saying she's leading him around by the nose and how that makes him feel.  Mad I'll bet.  Just like he seems to be angry at a lot of things.  Pouty, grumpy man-boy.


Well, he seems to have a lot of free time. Do you think she confiscates his iphone/ipad?


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> The monarchy needs the drama to stay relevant, especially during a pandemic. What else would we discuss?  H&M provide much clickbait, no?


I think that’s a nonsensical statement, but then I think you‘re just trying to be provocative, and I’m not here for that


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Well, he seems to have a lot of free time. Do you think she confiscates his iphone/ipad?


she might


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> I think that’s a nonsensical statement, but then I think you‘re just trying to be provocative, and I’m not here for that



I appreciate your opinion. Let me assure you and all that I am not here to provoke, challenge or upset anyone.  I don’t believe any of us really know what is going on, so it is all speculation.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Doria may be rewarded for her silence, and by extension her loyalty.  For the sake of her image Meghan must have at least one relative who she is not feuding with publicly. Otherwise it *might look* like SHE is the problem.


"Might look"???? .. SHE is the problem!!!  When you have markled as many as she has, for sure .. those people were not the problem!


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Story goes back to 2009 and concerns Sentebale charity . I don’t read much into this , but could be wrong , some thoughts
> 1. Long time ago - 11 years ago, H was 25 ?
> 2. Wasn’t Harry in the military then ? Or was that the year of Las Vegas striptease ? I don’t think Harry had much influence then
> 3. Sentebale is a fav charity of Harry’s , I think there was a *Sentebale charity polo match* at one time
> 4. Does not sound like H personally mismanaged anything, rather that he might have called in a favor
> 5. The amount is not ginormous


.. and this is what always used to slay me, a Polo Match?????  Let's face it, those that compete and/or watch these matches are not those that are poor, so the irony of having a Polo Match with very wealthy people give $$$'s to those that TRULY need it?? .. I don't know, I think something else could have been done .. not a Polo Match!


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> I think the BRF has its hands tied. The reality is H&M are adults living in another country and they can do as they please. Now that they have announced they have money coming in, maybe Charles won’t be quite as generous but even that isn’t certain.
> 
> I assume they are bending over backwards with the emotional twosome because they don’t want them to spill more personal information to the media out of spite. *That description of the floor plan of W&K’s home in the book could have been the first shot fired.*


I'm still shocked by that being included in 'Freedom Was Not Found' . I can't understand why on earth there would be a need to put into a book such extremely private and personal info about other people who have young children to protect. It's so callous, petty, untrustworthy and disturbing.





Allisonfaye said:


> Now I have seen everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Are Embarrassing Themselves
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s latest political stunt was carried out for Time magazine’s list of 100 influential people. The pair sat on a bench, spoke of “compassion” and the “global community” and the importance of everyone’s being nicer to each other online, and then -- what else? -- the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Apparently, she may run for president as early as 2024....*


This would be hilarious. She wouldn't last 5 mins in politics. I can only imagine her in a debate, any sign of an insult or negative comment and she'd be like....


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> Where I grew up in Connecticut was a very privileged area.  The funny thing, is that we used to joke that since we lived at the "bottom" of the hill (as opposed to the top with exquisite houses and views of Hartford), we were the "poor" family!  Of course, many of the neighborhood kids and I were good friends and oftentimes played together.  They would come to my house, I would go to their house, and a few things struck me ..
> 
> Every time the kid asked for something (which in our family was too expensive), they got it
> Rarely was there any interaction between the kid and their parents, it was oftentimes the nanny who made lunch, etc.
> There was ZERO supervision whilst we were in the pool.  At first, I never mentioned this to my parents because I knew they would say "no pool then", but then I had to rescue one of the younger kids and that was it .. my mother forbade me from going to their house to go into the pool.
> etc. - I could go on.  As we all grew up, my parents still kept a close watch on me (thank you older sister who was the rebel and hence, my other sister and I got the "watchful eye") .. but what this did is kept me out of trouble, because sadly, every single one of my neighbors' kids got into trouble .. drugs, petty theft, setting fires, etc.  I was the only one of the kids who went to University and it was in my 20's that the first neighbor's kid committed suicide.  Another committed suicide a few years after that; bottom line .. not a single one of them is alive today.  So, a lot of $$$ means what??? .. nothing .. it does not buy happiness and that has been my mantra for MANY years.  Do I enjoy the nice things in life? .. sure, but when I see parents thinking "oh, I'll just give Johnny the $$$ or just say YES because it's easier" .. that makes me very sad.


I feel like you grew up in a John Cheever story. Love reading your comments.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the past, other than the Duke of Windsor and possibly Margaret, we saw the married-in’s struggle and speak out against the family/royal structure. H is this younger generation’s only family member to say negative things about his family, right?  Pre-MM, he talked of his dislike of his role, his issues with Charles, and the lack of opportunities for him. He is definitely consistent in his complaints.....
> The discomfort in the most recent ‘bench’ video reminds me of the tension he showed at Abbey. Does this guy ever really relax? If he is so uncomfortable in the limelight, why continue to put himself out there?  Clearly, life with MM is not bringing real happiness.



Okay, my knee-jerk reaction, and not saying it's a FAIR reaction, y'all, "judging a book by its cover" but all I could think is, what the H3ll is happening to that man <Harry>???

Disclaimer: Anyone that has given birth at least ONCE certainly has first-hand experience of looking-like-a-hot-mess but feeling AMAZING!!!
But I must add, that it probably is not the case with Harry.

Unfortunately, Harry looks BADLY OFF HIS ROCKER, and there he sits in his 14-bathroom house with ALL of the time in the world and with *all of the money anyone could possibly need* <that is what Meghan Markle's business plan is post-Megxit, right?> and his Royal Highna$$ cannot get his sh*t together enough to go on camera and look decent <even out of respect for granny and the country he supposedly no longer represents?>.

Still not feeling your vibe,* Grifters-R-US*, please stop.



sdkitty said:


> so true - money doesn't buy happiness
> I watched the George Harrison documentary on HBO and was struck by what he said - that as soon as the beatles became very wealthy *they realized that wasn't it*.  He eventually became very spiritual and according to his wife he had a beautiful death.  (not that I think it's a good thing that he died in his 50's but he was ready)



*sdkitty*, had to comment on your lovely post this evening and your quote from George Harrison.

Such a relief to hear a simple phrase stating an obvious truth, esp during these troubled times when even our heroes <yes, we have discovered that our idols seem to have quickly grown feet of clay>.
Yes, we are noticing this constant thirst for MORE & BETTER, oblivious to their greed and their insatiable need.
Like *that is all there is,* and quite frankly I'm sick of it.

Thankful that gentle readers can come home here to tPF, even if it is a quick stop at this Grifters-R-Us thread to check out #HRH_GoingToSeedFast & Miss_Things's grossly tone-deaf antics letting us know that H&M do not *realize that this isn't it*.

Yes, Harry and Meghan Markle's genuine phoniness, greediness, narcissism, spitefulness, lying, cheatin', nasty, snarky, selfishly bratty behavior is so PAINFULLY OBVIOUS <now to the entire world too> esp after Meghan brazenly published her CRAZY I'm-shooting-myself-in-the-foot but So-Starved-for-Attention bio by Scoube-Doubie after her grand Megxit.

A little OT mods, and feel free to delete.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> Agree, but if Harry had a real bond with his family and in laws, it wouldn’t be so easy for a woman to come in and fleece him of those relationships. I think he had some deep seated resentment to allow this dumpster fire to ensue.


I'm not so sure about that.  I've seen many instances, even in my own family, where men were exceptionally close to their mothers, but seem to shift that adoration to their wives and almost forget their "original" family and blend into their wives' families.  MM is an oddball in that she basically has no family to speak of as far as she's concerned.  My great uncle shockingly (shockingly because he was from a culture that reveres men children and don't give as much weight historically to female children) once told me he preferred having daughters because, "A son is a son until he takes a wife; a daughter is a daughter for all her life."  Again, MM is the oddball.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Well, he seems to have a lot of free time. Do you think she confiscates his iphone/ipad?


LOL I wonder if he has a screen time limit.  One of my favorite things to do is cut off my kids' wifi when it's time for dinner!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> LOL I wonder if he has a screen time limit.  One of my favorite things to do is cut off my kids' wifi when it's time for dinner!



He says in his army vid that he loves PlayStation and Xbox.  I doubt she would dare to cut off his wi-fi. Her free ride would end abruptly. I still believe that when the final chapter of the Grifters-R-Us (excellent term, @VigeeLeBrun) is written, H will not be as daft as many think he is, MM will not be as smart as some think she is, and the BRF will be firmly in control. Still, H&M have been one of the best Covid shows. Looking forward to more of their missteps.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOL *I wonder if he has a screen time limit.* One of my favorite things to do is cut off my kids' wifi when it's time for dinner!





CarryOn2020 said:


> He says in his army vid that he loves PlayStation and Xbox.  *I doubt she would dare to cut off his wi-fi. *Her free ride would end abruptly. I still believe that when the final chapter of the Grifters-R-Us (excellent term, @VigeeLeBrun) is written, H will not be as daft as many think he is, MM will not be as smart as some think she is, and the BRF will be firmly in control. Still, H&M have been one of the best Covid shows. Looking forward to more of their missteps.


If he doesn't have a screen limit time, can play Xbox games 24/7, perhaps he has parental controls that only show pre-approved websites.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> LOL I wonder if he has a screen time limit.  One of my favorite things to do is cut off my kids' wifi when it's time for dinner!



I wonder what he would think if he wandered in here. Or even better, I wonder if she has ever seen this thread. That would be hilarious.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not so sure about that.  *I've seen many instances, even in my own family, where men were exceptionally close to their mothers, but seem to shift that adoration to their wives and almost forget their "original" family and blend into their wives' families. * MM is an oddball in that she basically has no family to speak of as far as she's concerned.  My great uncle shockingly (shockingly because he was from a culture that reveres men children and don't give as much weight historically to female children) once told me he preferred having daughters because, "A son is a son until he takes a wife; a daughter is a daughter for all her life."  Again, MM is the oddball.


There's an old saying that goes something like this, "When your daughter marries you gain a son-in-law. When your son marries, you lose a son."


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> There's an old saying that goes something like this, "When your daughter marries you gain a son-in-law. When your son marries, you lose a son."


A terrible old saying, but often true.


----------



## tiktok

*THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!* 









						Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*

*Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
*Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
*'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *


----------



## bisousx

Not going to lie, the amount of money they got for the deal is impressive. They should drop their silly privacy lawsuits asap. I would totes film a reality show for $112m if it was guaranteed to be tasteful, highlighted all of my best angles, oh and made me look like Mother Teresa


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *



In other words, MM & H will participate on a Big Brother type of show. What "Grifters-R-Us" do for money!!! Are we going to see them doing house cleaning? 16 bathrooms (19 according to Zillow) can be the subject of many episodes. Some comments on the article are hilarious. Here is one:


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> In other words, MM & H will participate on a Big Brother type of show. What "Grifters-R-Us" do for money!!! Are we going to see them doing house cleaning? 16 bathrooms (19 according to Zillow) can be the subject of many episodes. Some comments on the article are hilarious. Here is one:
> 
> View attachment 4861432


Who wants to watch unkempt Harry not prepping to zoom bomb people and name drop his mother?


----------



## mdcx

No words. Will poor little Archie be seen on this show? I did wonder if this was always the plan - get people to tune in to see him, since he is basically hidden away 24/7 otherwise.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> In other words, MM & H will participate on a Big Brother type of show. What "Grifters-R-Us" do for money!!! Are we going to see them doing house cleaning? 16 bathrooms (19 according to Zillow) can be the subject of many episodes. Some comments on the article are hilarious. Here is one:
> 
> View attachment 4861432


Keep up with the Harkles.  Awful.  Poor Archie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: @Pessie  We know royals receive training on driving cars, handling guns, etc.  We know Wills learned long ago to test his friendships to find the leakers. Why wouldn’t H? We know BRF security is provided by the intelligence service.   For me, it is not a big leap to think the services are watching what goes on. We don’t know all the details and that is ok, we just know they are involved. Here is one recent article - the word ”deliberately” stands out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen visits MI5
> 
> 
> This morning The Queen visited MI5, the UK’s domestic counter-intelligence and security agency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _During the war, visits to troops by members of The Royal Family were deliberately organised to distract attention from operations._



I don't find it that hard to believe either. I know a guy who's father was a scientist working on the development of new weapons, and that whole family not only had their own security recruited from intelligence, the kids had driving, self-defense and survival training taught by agents as well in case someone tried to kidnapp them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *



Ugh. I bet people will tune in if only out of curiosity. I won't BTW, I can't bare to see her even in short videos.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't find it that hard to believe either. I know a guy who's father was a scientist working on the development of new weapons, and that whole family not only had their own security recruited from intelligence, the kids had driving, self-defense and survival training taught by agents as well in case someone tried to kidnapp them.


Royal Protection Officers are an elite section of the Police - MI6 is the UKs foreign security service, MI5 internal/domestic security.
The Queen as the current Head of State, and Princes Charles and (more recently) William as future Kings are regularly briefed by the Govt and Security Services.  Harry and other RF members are not.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I bet people will tune in if only out of curiosity. I won't BTW, I can't bare to see her even in short videos.


Two things:
I sort of want the Kardashians back...

Also, I wish I had a way to pull my work chat logs that wouldn’t get me fired lol.... I predicted a reality show in Feb... lol

Why would you want to go from Royal to Reality star?!


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I bet people will tune in if only out of curiosity. I won't BTW, I can't bare to see her even in short videos.


Me neither, her voice really grates on me  and you just know it’s going to be really cloying stuff targeting the American market for Royal gloop.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

purseinsanity said:


> "A son is a son until he takes a wife; a daughter is a daughter for all her life."


You’re clearly NOT of Italian origin


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Two things:
> I sort of want the Kardashians back...
> 
> Also, I wish I had a way to pull my work chat logs that wouldn’t get me fired lol.... I predicted a reality show in Feb... lol
> 
> Why would you want to go from Royal to Reality star?!



Money?

A timely article:








						Reality TV’s New Reality in the COVID Era
					

Is it safe to stick strangers in a house—and do we still want to watch?




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *


I have to say that I told you so! I predicted this a while back! So much so for privacy! The hypocrisy!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love how they say “they agreed” as if it weren’t her idea!


----------



## Allisonfaye

maryg1 said:


> You’re clearly NOT of Italian origin



Wow, you nailed that. 



bag-mania said:


> I wonder what he would think if he wandered in here. Or even better, I wonder if she has ever seen this thread. That would be hilarious.



NORMALLY, I would say it's ridiculous to think someone famous would wander into something like this. But for some reason, with MM, I could see it.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *


hypocritical and tacky.  if this (assuming it's true) doesn't move the RF to do something about them, I don't know what will


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> hypocritical and tacky.  if this (assuming it's true) doesn't move the RF to do something about them, I don't know what will


Reminds me of 
1. Philip who was behind the 1960s documentary on the BRF - innocuous but controversial at the time - a family barbecuing does not have the same cachet
2. Edward whose production company pap'd William at Eton, got E into hot water


----------



## lanasyogamama

Now it’s coming out that she secured a bunch of domains for a 2024 presidential run. I cannot!!!


----------



## Tootsie17

1LV said:


> I think MM has definitely played on his weaknesses & insecurities.  I do think he still cares for the Royal Family, but maybe that’s just what I want to believe. And I think he is putting all of his focus and effort into Meghan because either he doesn’t realize it yet or isn't ready to admit he made a mistake.  Short answer: Yes.


I agree and also think Harry may be focusing on Archie.  Having lost a parent, I think he wants the best for his son, even if he thinks that means giving Meghan everything she wants.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Now it’s coming out that she secured a bunch of domains for a 2024 presidential run. I cannot!!!


surely this isn't true....could she be that crazy and full of herself?


----------



## Pessie

lanasyogamama said:


> Now it’s coming out that she secured a bunch of domains for a 2024 presidential run. I cannot!!!


She’s a planner


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> Two things:
> I sort of want the Kardashians back...
> 
> Also, I wish I had a way to pull my work chat logs that wouldn’t get me fired lol.... I predicted a reality show in Feb... lol
> 
> *Why would you want to go from Royal to Reality star?*!


Desperation. 

All of their grandiose plans to make buckets of "financial independence" moolah have fallen flat, and they obviously need buckets of money. Very sad and funny, really. For them to go this route (if true) is embarrassing, maybe this is a message to the RF to send more money or else ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Now it’s coming out that she secured a bunch of domains for a 2024 presidential run. I cannot!!!



Please say you are joking. PLEASE.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I bet people will tune in if only out of curiosity. I won't BTW, I can't bare to see her even in short videos.


If I had Netflix I would maybe tune in once but I doubt I'm make it through an episode


----------



## Handbag1234

Just glanced at the news headlines and it said 'Poisoned Putin critic Navalny visited by Merkle in hospital'. I thought, wow MM moves fast. I thought she's hot footed it to Germany to increase her profile, and gained another worthy 'cause'....... then I realised it was Merkle not Markle


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> If I had Netflix I would maybe tune in once but I doubt I'm make it through an episode.  Really I think you'd have to be a stan to find it interesting watching them go out "doing good".....wonder if Netflix will make them show their home life - like the Kardashians


----------



## lanasyogamama

I may have posted without due diligence. I saw this on insta, but I don’t know how to validate.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I bet people will tune in if only out of curiosity. I won't BTW, I can't bare to see her even in short videos.


I got it , I got it ! 
She sees reality TV as a stepping stone to the presidency, cf Donald


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I bet people will tune in if only out of curiosity. I won't BTW, *I can't bare to see her even in short videos.*



Neither can I, she gets SOOO much on my nerves....I refuse to read or watch ANYTHING that has to do with these two...well, except this thread of course, it's just soooo entertaining


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute. H&M making a reality show of...drumroll...wait for it...THEMSELVES! Cameras following them for three months? That'll be easy to condense into a 5 minute segment. I mean, how many different ways can you sit and whine? What will they do for the rest? Call celebrities that hang up on them? Make "unannounced" house visits wearing masks to "normal people" who go ga-ga when H&M lower their masks? 
Following in the footsteps of Paris Hilton, Kardashians, Housewives of Wherever, etc? Then there's the "Shark Tanks, Apprentice, Survivor, Fear Factor, the Voice" and other types of reality shows. Stay tuned for the merchandising trinkets-fragrances, room fresheners, coffee mugs, etc. Viewers watched the Kardashians and Paris realizing they were exploiting themselves for a buck and  "Shark Tank" and The Voice" to see everyday people strive to accomplish something. When you start out as senior royals and degrade that heritage to make a reality TV show about yourselves to meet the conditions of a Netflix contract, it reeks of desperate exploitation. I can't see any member of the BRF consenting to be interviewed for their show. I think we'll be "treated" to seeing Harry trying to potty train Archie. Or Meghan making vegan appetizers for an Oprah visit. Or Harry breaking down crying over his mother's death as he plays peek-a-boo with Archie. If the show fails to attract enough ratings and Netflix won't pay up, all H&M have to do is sue Netflix! Talk about a fall from grace. From BRF to basically Hollywood cartoon caricature. Thanks Meghan! This feeds nicely into a Plan B life of politics, where being a senator gets you on the ground floor of behind the scenes situations. For several politicians, they started out as "average" people and then built nine figure investment portfolios all the while being paid under 200K a year. Doing the people's work, of course.


----------



## duna

maryg1 said:


> You’re clearly NOT of Italian origin



LOL, Mary, SO true!!!


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> Not going to lie, the amount of money they got for the deal is impressive. They should drop their silly privacy lawsuits asap. I would totes film a reality show for $112m if it was guaranteed to be tasteful, highlighted all of my best angles, oh and made me look like Mother Teresa



Me too. They are being paid an obscene amount to promote themselves. If this is true, I’ll have to admit Meghan is an excellent businesswoman. There is no downside. For any critics who bring up that they wanted privacy, they can say that helping the charities is far more important and they are willing to sacrifice their privacy for that reason. It’s all BS but their fans will buy it because they want to believe they are wonderful. 

I hope they call it “Finding Freedom: The Series.”


----------



## bisousx

That’s an excellent amount of money even in the celebrity world. With complete control over the project and guarantees their branding won’t be tarnished by reality TV’s usual table flipping, trashy hysterics... I’d say that’s the power move they’ve been waiting for. I don’t think they even need any connection to the RF any longer if the deal is true. It would show that H&M parlayed their fame well up to this point. Whether or not Harry is faring well with his new life, his mental health is of $$$econdary concern.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> That’s an excellent amount of money even in the celebrity world. With complete control over the project and guarantees their branding won’t be tarnished by reality TV’s usual table flipping, trashy hysterics... I’d say that’s the power move they’ve been waiting for. I don’t think they even need any connection to the RF any longer if the deal is true. It would show that H&M parlayed their fame well up to this point. Whether or not Harry is faring well with his new life, his mental health is of $$$econdary concern.



There is one little glitch. It has to be entertaining. If the show is only about Meghan and Harry going from place to place talking about doing good it will be a big snorefest. It will get excellent ratings for the first episode and drop like a stone after that. You can get away with that kind of philanthropy show on public television, but not for Netflix. A popular show there lasts maybe two months. We can be sure the Prince Harry and Meghan show will never be as talked about as Tiger King (except maybe here).


----------



## chicinthecity777

Apparently they issued a statement saying it wasn't a reality TV show. It's a documentary!


----------



## Pessie

Finding Freedom Vol 2 will be subtitled “How to Sell Your Soul“


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Apparently they issued a statement saying it wasn't a reality TV show. It's a documentary!


I saw something that said they wouldn't be appearing in a show about them but might show up in parts of episodes they produce - something to that effect


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> There is one little glitch. It has to be entertaining. If the show is only about Meghan and Harry going from place to place talking about doing good it will be a big snorefest. It will get excellent ratings for the first episode and drop like a stone after that. You can get away with that kind of philanthropy show on public television, but not for Netflix. A popular show there lasts maybe two months. We can be sure the Prince Harry and Meghan show will never be as talked about as Tiger King (except maybe here).



 at Harry, Meghan and Tiger King in one sentence. My morning is starting off well. And you’re right, we’ll have to see if it entertains or not.


----------



## jennlt

bisousx said:


> at Harry, Meghan and Tiger King in one sentence. My morning is starting off well. And you’re right, we’ll have to see if it entertains or not.



They are all Netflix royalty!


----------



## chicinthecity777

If they preach about reject online hate speech, why don't they do something about their own fans?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comments are spot on!


----------



## Chanbal

The feedback on the reality show proposal was likely not what they anticipated and are already denying it. It looks like Netflix will pay them now to promote "* their nonprofit Archewell*" instead. Going to be paid to find donors for their own foundation! Wow! If true, this is what can be called a great business deal! May not be charitable, but profitable $$$$$... 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Deny Report They're Starring in a Reality Show for Netflix*
The couple will be producing films and series for the streaming giant including scripted series, docu-series, documentaries, features and children's shows. They will use those programs to focus on the issues that are important to them and *reflect the causes that their nonprofit Archewell will nurture and champion*.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Deny Report They're Starring in a Reality Show for Netflix
					

A U.K. paper reported the couple wanted to give the public a "glimpse into their lives"




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> Apparently they issued a statement saying it wasn't a reality TV show. It's a documentary!


It’s a fine line!


----------



## purseinsanity

maryg1 said:


> You’re clearly NOT of Italian origin


LOL no, but I often wish I was, as I am obsessed with anything Italian!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> surely this isn't true....could she be that crazy and full of herself?


Yes


----------



## Genie27

chicinthecity777 said:


> Apparently they issued a statement saying it wasn't a reality TV show. It's a documentary!


Q: What's the difference between a Reality TV show and a documentary?
A: Delusions of Grandeur

Hmmm, I wonder if it will be narrated by Sir David.

(edit - wrong Attenborough.)


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> There is one little glitch. It has to be entertaining. If the show is only about Meghan and Harry going from place to place talking about doing good it will be a big snorefest. It will get excellent ratings for the first episode and drop like a stone after that. You can get away with that kind of philanthropy show on public television, but not for Netflix. A popular show there lasts maybe two months. We can be sure the Prince Harry and Meghan show will never be as talked about as Tiger King (except maybe here).


Maybe she'll resort to posing in Playboy and a sex tape with Harry a la Kim Kardashian?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Genie27 said:


> Q: What's the difference between a Reality TV show and a documentary?
> A: Delusions of Grandeur
> 
> Hmmm, I wonder if it will be narrated by Sir David.
> 
> (edit - wrong Attenborough.)


Sir David Beckham isn’t known for having a great voice!


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I saw something that said they wouldn't be appearing in a show about them but might show up in parts of episodes they produce - something to that effect


And of course if they do, it would be all about them!


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> The feedback on the reality show proposal was likely not what they anticipated and are already denying it. It looks like Netflix will pay them now to promote "* their nonprofit Archewell*" instead. Going to be paid to find donors for their own foundation! Wow! If true, this is what can be called a great business deal! May not be charitable, but profitable $$$$$...
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Deny Report They're Starring in a Reality Show for Netflix*
> The couple will be producing films and series for the streaming giant including scripted series, docu-series, documentaries, features and children's shows. They will use those programs to focus on the issues that are important to them and *reflect the causes that their nonprofit Archewell will nurture and champion*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Deny Report They're Starring in a Reality Show for Netflix
> 
> 
> A U.K. paper reported the couple wanted to give the public a "glimpse into their lives"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


They’re quickly looking behind the cushions and under the sofa for Plan B


----------



## chicinthecity777

It's all PR stunt! You put a feeler out there to see how the public will react. If they like it, run with it, if they don't, deny it! It's been used for years by PR firms / spin doctors.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> There is one little glitch. It has to be entertaining. If the show is only about Meghan and Harry going from place to place talking about doing good it will be a big snorefest. It will get excellent ratings for the first episode and drop like a stone after that. You can get away with that kind of philanthropy show on public television, but not for Netflix. A popular show there lasts maybe two months. We can be sure the Prince Harry and Meghan show will never be as talked about as Tiger King (except maybe here).


Was Celebrity Apprentice entertaining ?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pessie said:


> Finding Freedom Vol 2 will be subtitled *“How to Sell Your Soul“*


 How to sell your soul to the devil. Major  !!!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The feedback on the reality show proposal was likely not what they anticipated and are already denying it. It looks like Netflix will pay them now to promote "* their nonprofit Archewell*" instead. Going to be paid to find donors for their own foundation! Wow! If true, this is what can be called a great business deal! May not be charitable, but profitable $$$$$...
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Deny Report They're Starring in a Reality Show for Netflix*
> The couple will be producing films and series for the streaming giant including scripted series, docu-series, documentaries, features and children's shows. They will use those programs to focus on the issues that are important to them and *reflect the causes that their nonprofit Archewell will nurture and champion*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Deny Report They're Starring in a Reality Show for Netflix
> 
> 
> A U.K. paper reported the couple wanted to give the public a "glimpse into their lives"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Is Archewell the charity that was rejected by the US patent office because they didn’t have a definitive description of what it was? Maybe that was one of their other starter charities. 

I’m sure a bunch of small charities will want to get some attention this way. I’m not convinced it will lead to donations but it would lead to awareness. 

 Hopefully they use that money to give a generous donation to each charity they feature. It is only fair since they are using them.


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> Is Archewell the charity that was rejected by the US patent office because they didn’t have a definitive description of what it was? Maybe that was one of their other starter charities.
> 
> I’m sure a bunch of small charities will want to get some attention this way. I’m not convinced it will lead to donations but it would lead to awareness.
> 
> Hopefully they use that money to give a generous donation to each charity they feature. It is only fair since they are using them.


They may expect the charities to cover their "travel" and other expenses since they will be "shining a light" on said charity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Was Celebrity Apprentice entertaining ?



I couldn’t say, but the celebrity version of the show ran 8 seasons. I don’t see H&M getting anywhere near that.

It does make me wonder. Maybe this is part of her plan for the presidency. Reality TV all the way, baby!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I couldn’t say, but the celebrity version of the show ran 8 seasons. I don’t see H&M getting anywhere near that.
> 
> It does make me wonder. Maybe this is part of her plan for the presidency. Reality TV all the way, baby!


Those two have more than a little in common.

ETA:  And both would probably deny it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Pessie said:


> They’re quickly looking behind the cushions and under the sofa for Plan B


An idea or the medication?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure a bunch of small charities will want to get some attention this way. I’m not convinced it will lead to donations but it would lead to awareness.
> 
> *Hopefully they use that money to give a generous donation to each charity they feature. *It is only fair since they are using them.


Awareness is critical to fundraising...

@bag-mania you are starting the week on a very optimistic note!


----------



## marietouchet

Genie27 said:


> They may expect the charities to cover their "travel" and other expenses since they will be "shining a light" on said charity.


No no no ... there is no doubt charities will have to pay the travel , security and entourage tag
And it is not cheap ... Hillary used to have a posse of about 10 people just for speeches, not for something fancy like a campaign appearance, and that was just for her, Bill had another 10 people in his posse


----------



## Pessie

purseinsanity said:


> An idea or the medication?


It’s where they last put Markus Anderson


----------



## lalame

There are people who buy up domains predicting that they might one day need to be used, so they can sell it to that person. You can make pretty decent money doing it too! Wonder if this is that?



lanasyogamama said:


> I may have posted without due diligence. I saw this on insta, but I don’t know how to validate.
> View attachment 4861652


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *



This sounds incredibly boring. Watching people ... volunteer or learn about charities? You might as well just volunteer yourself for God’s sake. I bet once they realize this is not going to entertain people the screen time will suddenly start getting a lot more “dramatic.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Trying to stay on topic. Agree H&M have stepped in it now.


----------



## gracekelly

I am so excited!  A mockumentary! I suspect I will nod off in the first 5 minutes.  There will probably feature her hair extensions on one episode.
In the meantime, Piers Morgan has given up a synopsis of what to expect.  lol!









						PIERS MORGAN presents a sneak preview of the Sussexes' new TV show
					

For a while now, I've been suggesting that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are behaving like a royal version of the Kardashians - a pair of ludicrously hypocritical narcissists at war with their families




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

chicinthecity777 said:


> Apparently they issued a statement saying it *was*n't a *reality TV show*. It's a documentary!



Apologies, *chic*, fixed that for you!

Hmmm, according to google about 3-seconds ago...
_"*Reality is focused more on the individual episode's arc, even if it's part of a continued story (as lives tend to continue in a forward manner).* Documentary is focused more on the full product. And that product could be an eight-episode season of a series that may be picked up for more episodes/seasons later."_

Grifters-R-Us, you are starring in your own reality tv show right here in the US of A.

There is a definitive absence of "full product", let alone any sort of "focus", necessary for this endeavor to be titled anything other than what it is - and by the process of elimination, it must be, well what?
There goes doll-face Meghan Markel, star of her own reality tv-series.
Bravo!

Also, still no word from the parent about his errant child? Is Charlie home? Hello, anybody?

Also, not endorsing ANYONE here but at least the KUWTK are an insanely tight fam & stick together <exception you-know-who> UNLIKE Meghan Markle who seemingly causes strife in all of her family relationships, and now even her husband's family.

Also, when standing in the queue behind Mama Jenner@Beverly Hills Starbucks a few years ago, she was totally under the radar & pleasant, the OPPOSITE of  LOOK-AT-ME-Markle.


----------



## gracekelly

So once this gets started what are we going to call them?  The Markletrashians?  The Sussexsuckians? The Susstrashians?  Help me out guys!


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> So once this gets started what are we going to call them?  The Markletrashians?  The Sussexsuckians? The Susstrashians?  Help me out guys!


* Susstrashions !!!     *


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> surely this isn't true....*could she be that crazy and full of herself?*


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Also, not endorsing ANYONE here but at least the KUWTK are an insanely tight fam & stick together <exception you-know-who> UNLIKE Meghan Markle who seemingly causes strife in all of her family relationships, and now even her husband's family.
> 
> Also, when standing in the queue behind Mama Jenner@Beverly Hills Starbucks a few years ago, she was totally under the radar & pleasant, the OPPOSITE of  LOOK-AT-ME-Markle.



I don't know what 2020 is doing to me but I've really started giving the Kardashians some due respect lol. I watched the Netflix People vs OJ Simpson docudrama this weekend and it is pretty amazing to see Kris as an anonymous SAHM. How far she's come... I bet H+M look down on people like the Kardashians without any self-awareness that they're just trying but failing at the same type of business.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> An idea or the medication?



There's medication called Plan B?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> There are people who buy up domains predicting that they might one day need to be used, so they can sell it to that person. You can make pretty decent money doing it too! Wonder if this is that?



That is likely the case. It’s ridiculous to imagine a Meghan campaign could ever happen. There’s no way she could ever raise the kind of money she would need to become a viable candidate and we know she sure as hell won’t spend any of her own money. She’s not Kanye!


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> There's medication called Plan B?



 LMAO Google it. I bet H+M have some time to go before they'd need Plan B.


----------



## papertiger

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Apologies, *chic*, fixed that for you!
> 
> Hmmm, according to google about 3-seconds ago...
> _"*Reality is focused more on the individual episode's arc, even if it's part of a continued story (as lives tend to continue in a forward manner).* Documentary is focused more on the full product. And that product could be an eight-episode season of a series that may be picked up for more episodes/seasons later."_
> 
> Grifters-R-Us, you are starring in your own reality tv show right here in the US of A.
> 
> There is a definitive absence of "full product", let alone any sort of "focus", necessary for this endeavor to be titled anything other than what it is - and by the process of elimination, it must be, well what?
> There goes doll-face Meghan Markel, star of her own reality tv-series.
> Bravo!
> 
> Also, still no word from the parent about his errant child? Is Charlie home? Hello, anybody?
> 
> Also, not endorsing ANYONE here but at least the KUWTK are an insanely tight fam & stick together <exception you-know-who> UNLIKE Meghan Markle who seemingly causes strife in all of her family relationships, and now even her husband's family.
> 
> Also, when standing in the queue behind Mama Jenner@Beverly Hills Starbucks a few years ago, she was totally under the radar & pleasant, the OPPOSITE of  LOOK-AT-ME-Markle.



I've just finished work. For a second I read Meghan Market


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> * Susstrashions !!!     *



I think they may need to keep the 'sex' in there or they will lose a major part of their audience


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> There's medication called Plan B?



Ep 1. 

H finds Plan B down the back of the sofa whilst looking for spare chance to pay the mortgage while M was out practicing social distancing and finding 10 new ways to keep her hands still. M walks in to find H upset but it doesn't register coz he looks the same as usual... at dinner H plans to confront M and practices in front of the mirror...

Entire episode right there 

Ep2 

The mirror replies.../H confronts M over avocado toast, micro greens and their favourite vegan donuts/ M is outrages at H's hideous and unfounded accusations / M convinces H Plan B are alternative medicine for delaying severe cases of normality / H downs the rest of the Plan B pack and waits for medicine to kick in...

TBC 

There you go, we're giving them content ideas for gratis. 

Who says we don't love them?


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> So once this gets started what are we going to call them?  The Markletrashians?  The Sussexsuckians? The Susstrashians?  Help me out guys!



Project Runaways? 
Markle Tank Survivor?
Desperate Housewives of Montecito?
The Voice Who Can't Shut UP?
Schmuck Dynasty?
Totally Lost? 
Extreme Royal Makeover?
Always A Bride Never A Bridesmaid? 
Royally Screwed Up? 
How To Scam Netflix?
Fresh Prince of Duchess Derriere? 
How to Marry a Millionaire and Divorce an Entire Continent?
Duke of Puke?
Just Call Me World's Biggest Loser?


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Ep 1.
> 
> H finds Plan B down the back of the sofa whilst looking for spare chance to pay the mortgage while M was out practicing social distancing and finding 10 new ways to keep her hands still. M walks in to find H upset but it doesn't register coz he looks the same as usual... at dinner H plans to confront M and practices in front of the mirror...
> 
> Entire episode right there
> 
> Ep2
> 
> The mirror replies.../H confronts M over avocado toast, micro greens and their favourite vegan donuts/ M is outrages at H's hideous and unfounded accusations / M convinces H Plan B are alternative medicine for delaying severe cases of normality / H downs the rest of the Plan B pack and waits for medicine to kick in...
> 
> TBC
> 
> There you go, we're giving them content ideas for gratis.
> 
> Who says we don't love them?


.....and to give us all a well deserved break from all the emotional trauma of Episodes 1 and 2, episode 3 will be watching beige paint dry on the wall of bathroom no. 11


----------



## Pautinka

"The Con-Artist Formerly Known As Prince"?


----------



## Pessie

rose60610 said:


> Project Runaways?
> Markle Tank Survivor?
> Desperate Housewives of Montecito?
> The Voice Who Can't Shut UP?
> Schmuck Dynasty?
> Totally Lost?
> Extreme Royal Makeover?
> Always A Bride Never A Bridesmaid?
> Royally Screwed Up?
> How To Scam Netflix?
> Fresh Prince of Duchess Derriere?
> How to Marry a Millionaire and Divorce an Entire Continent?
> Duke of Puke?
> Just Call Me World's Biggest Loser?


Losers inc.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I don't know what 2020 is doing to me but I've really started giving the Kardashians some due respect lol. I watched the Netflix People vs OJ Simpson docudrama this weekend and it is pretty amazing to see Kris as an anonymous SAHM. How far she's come... I bet H+M look down on people like the Kardashians without any self-awareness that they're just trying but failing at the same type of business.



Atleast the Kardashians are honest about who they are...


----------



## papertiger

Pautinka said:


> "The Con-Artist Formerly Known As Prince"?



Blessed be the memory of the great Purple one Formally Known As, he of many talents, hardworking and heart of gold, that title is too good for JCMH.


----------



## Pautinka

papertiger said:


> Blessed be the memory of the great Purple one Formally Known As, he of many talents, hardworking and heart of gold, that title is too good for JCMH.


True, true!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I am so excited!  A mockumentary! I suspect I will nod off in the first 5 minutes.  There will probably feature her hair extensions on one episode.
> In the meantime, Piers Morgan has given up a synopsis of what to expect.  lol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN presents a sneak preview of the Sussexes' new TV show
> 
> 
> For a while now, I've been suggesting that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are behaving like a royal version of the Kardashians - a pair of ludicrously hypocritical narcissists at war with their families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



OMG Piers Morgan was inspired! Thanks for posting this!

"For a while now, I've been suggesting that Meghan Markle and her puppet Prince Harry are behaving like a royal version of the Kardashians. In other words, a pair of ludicrously hypocritical, attention-seeking narcissists constantly at war with their families."

"Obviously, some of us who knew her before she sank her claws into poor Harry know exactly who the 'real' Meghan Markle is – a shockingly ruthless social climbing piece of work prepared to ditch anyone and anything in her desperate craving for ever greater dollops of fame and fortune."

 'We're so, like, f*cked. Call Oprah."


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> So once this gets started what are we going to call them?  The Markletrashians?  The Sussexsuckians? The Susstrashians?  Help me out guys!


If we are voting, I go with "Sussexsuckians".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, at this point I feel Piers needs couple therapy with MM, but I'd lie if I said I didn't enjoy this quote from the Daily Mail article:

"Obviously, some of us who knew her before she sank her claws into poor Harry know exactly who the 'real' Meghan Markle is – a shockingly ruthless social climbing piece of work prepared to ditch anyone and anything in her desperate craving for ever greater dollops of fame and fortune."


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Project Runaways?
> Markle Tank Survivor?
> Desperate Housewives of Montecito?
> The Voice Who Can't Shut UP?
> Schmuck Dynasty?
> Totally Lost?
> Extreme Royal Makeover?
> Always A Bride Never A Bridesmaid?
> Royally Screwed Up?
> How To Scam Netflix?
> Fresh Prince of Duchess Derriere?
> How to Marry a Millionaire and Divorce an Entire Continent?
> Duke of Puke?
> Just Call Me World's Biggest Loser?



Or contemporary fashion inspired:

T HRL SS

T HRL (His/Her Royal Lowness)  Sussex Show

Roll credits
Opening shot, camera 1, filter on, soft focus and warm light >
> H&M monograms embroidered in pink and blue on neutral grey in one of the (16) bathrooms
> Camera 3 pan to H's fancy dress uniform on back of the door
> dolly shot to Emerald crown
>  fade to neutral grey and
>  ACTION H burning toast whilst M pretends she'd not refreshing the Daily Fail for the 13th time


----------



## gracekelly

I am going to borrow this from @rose60610 for the title of the premier episode.

_How to Marry a Millionaire and Divorce an Entire Continent? _

I believe that this episode, as the pilot, will set up the premise of the series.  It will definitely include the _infamous no one asked me if I was OK segment _of the SA documentary and footage from the _Goodbye UK Tour _and the famous_ Commonwealth church service _were Meghan was blanked by Kate and Sophie.  Additional footage provided by the video team employed by the Sussex for this tour.  I am especially looking forward to several scenes of moist almost tearful eyes. (She will never go the full monty with a big cry because it will ruin her eye make-up)


----------



## bag-mania

They have inspired some of Piers' best work in years. I like this one.

_Episode Three: ALL ABOUT ARCHIE To show just how much they want to protect their young son's privacy, Meghan and Harry devote an entire show to him. She reads Archie books including Animal Farm by George Orwell but adds a modern woke interpretation. 'All non-binary animals are equal,' she explains, 'but some are more equal than others, though none will ever be as equal as us obviously.' Harry then takes Archie hunting…for bees. 'We need millions of them to pollinate all Mom's avocados and almonds.' Archie is bemused. 'Do they die doing that?' he asks. Harry nods. 'Yes, many of them do, son, but it's all for a good cause – Mom's eco-warrior woke credentials!'_


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, at this point I feel Piers needs couple therapy with MM, but I'd lie if I said I didn't enjoy this quote from the Daily Mail article:
> 
> "Obviously, some of us who knew her before she sank her claws into poor Harry know exactly who the 'real' Meghan Markle is – a shockingly ruthless social climbing piece of work prepared to ditch anyone and anything in her desperate craving for ever greater dollops of fame and fortune."



Frankly, this was a beyond succinct description!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, at this point I feel Piers needs couple therapy with MM, but I'd lie if I said I didn't enjoy this quote from the Daily Mail article:
> 
> "Obviously, some of us who knew her before she sank her claws into poor Harry know exactly who the 'real' Meghan Markle is – a shockingly ruthless social climbing piece of work prepared to ditch anyone and anything in her desperate craving for ever greater dollops of fame and fortune."



Piers is still just PO he never got an invite to the wedding and the exclusive on the Megxit scoop.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Peers is still just PO he never got an invite to the wedding and the exclusive on the Megxit scoop.



He is enjoying his hissy fit though and how good of him to share it with us


----------



## CarryOn2020

Any thoughts on how or why this story was released?  Disgruntled Netflix employee?   Netflix overlords reminding the Sussexsuckians who is boss? A reminder the deal was not for cartoons and nature docs? MM trying to steal Eugenie’s positive baby news?

Netflix Reed Hastings interview on the data-driven culture of entertainment. H&M talk begins around the 5:20 mark.  My take-away: oh,yes, they are expected to “tell their story”. Note the names Reed uses for H&M. 

ETA: forgot the link: https://www.economist.com/podcasts/...reedhastingshowmuchmorecannetflixgrowpodcasts


----------



## Pessie

And of course every good series needs a good theme song.  My vote goes to HRH JCMH singing “Should’ve been ME!!”


----------



## lulilu

The fact that they haven't had their comeuppence is proof positive to me that karma doesn't exist.

He has always behaved like a spoiled snotty pouty immature child.  He doesn't even have to good grace or manners to pretend to at least be polite at public functions.  All those photos of him scowling and pouting, and others trying to cajole him out of it -- a disgrace for a grown man, let alone a member of TRF, at public functions.

They are both despicable.  I will never watch anything they are involved in producing or as participants.  Do they think people need THEM to learn how to be charitable?  The unmitigated gall.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Any thoughts on how or why this story was released?  Disgruntled Netflix employee?   Netflix overlords reminding the Sussexsuckians who is boss? A reminder the deal was not for cartoons and nature docs? MM trying to steal Eugenie’s positive baby news?
> 
> Netflix Reed Hastings interview on the data-driven culture of entertainment. H&M talk begins around the 5:20 mark.  My take-away: oh,yes, they are expected to “tell their story”.
> 
> ETA: forgot the link: https://www.economist.com/podcasts/...reedhastingshowmuchmorecannetflixgrowpodcasts



Reed says (7.07) "Harry and Meghan, it's a really fascinating story of human evolution." 

Like what?!!! Sorry, what? 

Obviously, Reed has been eating Meghan's word-salad for breakfast. 

Basically, he doesn't know what they're going to do and they don't know what they're going to do but until they do they'll talk word-salad with endlessly, fascinating and mature words of nature and a horizon of specialness for the future.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Reed says (7.07) "Harry and Meghan, it's a really fascinating story of human evolution."
> 
> Like what?!!! Sorry, what?
> 
> Obviously, Reed has been eating Meghan's word-salad for breakfast.
> 
> Basically, he doesn't know what they're going to do and they don't know what they're going to do but until they do they'll talk word-salad with endlessly, fascinating and mature words of nature and a horizon of specialness for the future.



No idea why Reed would say that or what he meant, but he is the CEO. Surely, he is aware every word he says carries weight. Either he made a horrible gaffe or something else is going on. I found it revealing that he calls H, Prince Harry and MM, Meghan.  So much for JCMH, another lie. H wants all the trappings of royalty. And MM gets no respect.  Brutal world out there, isn’t it?  Although he says data is not the only metric used for Netflix shows, his actions speak louder. Doubt H&M will have as much creative control as they want. Guessing Disney would have been a wiser choice


----------



## kemilia

bellecate said:


> * Susstrashions !!!     *


Yes, this one gets my vote.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming giant about the trove of homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars (£77.9million), insiders said.

Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage, including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from royal life, during negotiations with Netflix._








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
					

The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming giant about the trove of homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars (£77.9million), insiders said.
> 
> Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage, including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from royal life, during negotiations with Netflix._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
> 
> 
> The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Now we know what Marcus has been doing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming giant about the trove of homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars (£77.9million), insiders said.
> 
> Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage, including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from royal life, during negotiations with Netflix._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
> 
> 
> The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If they were working royals at the time then the Palace should go through the footage first (and the tax payer should get a refund!)


----------



## rose60610

If H&M have a "trove" of footage of the BRF, can't the other members of the BRF or other people in the recordings sue them? Or prevent them from airing it? You know Meghan would if the shoe were on the other foot. M&H used them for Life in the U.S. Money Fodder. Did the other royals realize they were being recorded for a future Netflix deal? Don't tell me for one second that Meghan wasn't planning on leveraging the Megxit footage for personal financial gain.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> If H&M have a "trove" of footage of the BRF, can't the other members of the BRF or other people in the recordings sue them? Or prevent them from airing it? You know Meghan would if the shoe were on the other foot. M&H used them for Life in the U.S. Money Fodder. Did the other royals realize they were being recorded for a future Netflix deal? Don't tell me for one second that Meghan wasn't planning on leveraging the Megxit footage for personal financial gain.



For me, it explains the tawdry green outfit and the glossy smirk with the evil glare at William.  There were rumors of this filming back then, but people dismissed it.  No wonder W&K did not want anything to do with them. Daily, they are making Charles look weaker.


----------



## melissatrv

There is a petition in the UK for her to be stripped of the Duchess title on the basis that she is not a citizen there.  Why wasn't her citizenship pushed through?  I am quite sure it could have been fast tracked but she obviously planned this move back to the US since day one.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming giant about the trove of homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars (£77.9million), insiders said.
> 
> Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage, including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from royal life, during negotiations with Netflix._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
> 
> 
> The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was obvious they were compiling footage since they have been taking their own videographers with them to events and on trips.





papertiger said:


> If they were working royals at the time then the Palace should go through the footage first (and the tax payer should get a refund!)



They should go through it because other royals will be included and they should have a right to sign off and sign or not sign a waiver  on whether they wish to be included.  This is why she was grinning continually at the Commonwealth service.


----------



## melissatrv

This is the first belly laugh I have had since COVID started.  Gold. Pure gold. 




gracekelly said:


> I am so excited!  A mockumentary! I suspect I will nod off in the first 5 minutes.  There will probably feature her hair extensions on one episode.
> In the meantime, Piers Morgan has given up a synopsis of what to expect.  lol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN presents a sneak preview of the Sussexes' new TV show
> 
> 
> For a while now, I've been suggesting that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are behaving like a royal version of the Kardashians - a pair of ludicrously hypocritical narcissists at war with their families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## melissatrv

The reality show should start with Meghan bragging a la Christina Anstead style about her new fabulous life, fab royal husband and baby, super mansion, glamorous celeb friends....then maybe it will foreshadow the Sussex divorce before the series ends season one.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> There's medication called Plan B?


Yep, at least in the US.  Aka "the morning after pill".  Helps prevent unwanted pregnancies.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> LMAO Google it. I bet H+M have some time to go before they'd need Plan B.


Especially if they're socially distancing from each other.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Any thoughts on how or why this story was released?  Disgruntled Netflix employee?   Netflix overlords reminding the Sussexsuckians who is boss? A reminder the deal was not for cartoons and nature docs? MM trying to steal Eugenie’s positive baby news?
> 
> Netflix Reed Hastings interview on the data-driven culture of entertainment. H&M talk begins around the 5:20 mark.  My take-away: oh,yes, they are expected to “tell their story”. Note the names Reed uses for H&M.
> 
> ETA: forgot the link: https://www.economist.com/podcasts/...reedhastingshowmuchmorecannetflixgrowpodcasts


Did I hear well that Netflix is 15 billions in debt? According to Hastings, (Prince) Harry and Meghan will tell incredible stories that can change the world and, at the same time, they will talk about their new life, a fascinating story of human evolution, so they will be well understood... 

Is the show going to be a follow up to Finding Freedom? I thought they were already well understood, I wonder if he needs a copy of Piers Morgan's last article.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> If we are voting, I go with "Sussexsuckians".


How about "SusNOsexsuckians"


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Or contemporary fashion inspired:
> 
> T HRL SS
> 
> T HRL (His/Her Royal Lowness)  Sussex Show
> 
> Roll credits
> Opening shot, camera 1, filter on, soft focus and warm light >
> > H&M monograms embroidered in pink and blue on neutral grey in one of the (16) bathrooms
> > Camera 3 pan to H's fancy dress uniform on back of the door
> > dolly shot to Emerald crown
> >  fade to neutral grey and
> >  ACTION H burning toast whilst M pretends she'd not refreshing the Daily Fail for the 13th time


Don't forget the stained shirt she wore on something.  (America's Got Talent?  I have no clue because I can't bear to watch anything where she opens her mouth or simply even is.)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming giant about the trove of homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars (£77.9million), insiders said.
> 
> Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage, including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from royal life, during negotiations with Netflix._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
> 
> 
> The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Harry and Meghan could create a Netflix documentary with sensational home footage recorded during their departure from the Royal Family, it was claimed last night."

I understood well, it is going to be a follow up to Finding Freedom. They must contract Omid for the script!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The rumors were that she hid the video equipment with her capes. With the lumps and bumps she had, that is believable.  All the people who helped her do this should come forward with explanations. I gotta give a side eye to  the women and H who have propelled MM and her trashy(?) tactics to the forefront. Some things just are not done. Filming your relatives is #1.

Omid is fighting his own battles with the truth: https://www.the-sun.com/news/1546650/omid-scobie-lying-times-33-actually-38/
*Scobie's interview also revealed:*

_Coronavirus is the "pause Prince Harry needed"_
_Scobie doesn't even know if Harry and Meghan like him - saying "there will always be that distance between the Sussexes and the press"_
_He blames two NDAs for preventing him from giving the details on the dismissals of two Sussex staffers_
_He claims Meghan Markle's friends who didn't want to be involved in Finding Freedom "changed their minds six months later" over how she had been treated_
_Scobie revealed how he is a glutton for detail and *got great scoops thanks to his "natural knack for lip reading" *_
_And he said he had to call the police over threats to burn his house down_
_During his chat with the magazine, the author said a profile by Times journalist Andrew Billen had given his age as just 33 - which led to criticism from readers who revealed he was older.

Scobie denied telling the journalist his age in that interview, and said: "I'm 38 years old, not 33._

ETA: Need more popcorn


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget the stained shirt she wore on something.  (America's Got Talent?  I have no clue because I can't bear to watch anything where she opens her mouth or simply even is.)



Don't all stone me at once, but I kinda felt sorry/embarrassed for her for that. 

Except of course, since she thinks she's perfect all the time, and that will be major 'trauma trigger'  for her (and her staff) and "There will NO forgiveness, heads-will-roll  coz NO ONE TOLD ME  and no asks me if I'm OK now " .

Forget what I said. Check a mirror before going in front of the nation


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> "Harry and Meghan could create a Netflix documentary with sensational home footage recorded during their departure from the Royal Family, it was claimed last night."
> 
> I understood well, it is going to be a follow up to Finding Freedom. *They must contract Omid for the script!*



So he can (not) contact her


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The rumors were that she hid the video equipment with her capes. With the lumps and bumps she had, that is believable.  All the peoples who helped her do this should come forward with explanations. I gotta give a side eye to all the women and H who have propelled MM and her trashy(?) tactics to the forefront. Some things just are not done. *Filming your relatives is #1.*



Without their permission 

Still, when it all turns sour she can deny it being her or the family and say they're outtakes of The Crown


----------



## Annawakes

If I were the RF I’d be wanting to see what footage she has.  Maybe bring a lawsuit of my own.  Isn’t it illegal to film people without their permission or knowledge?  

definitely need more popcorn.  It’s a train wreck!

I thought their netflix deal was supposed to feature “normal people”. Another lie!!!!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Don't all stone me at once, but I kinda felt sorry/embarrassed for her for that.



Truth be told, I was feeling that I had been too harsh in my criticisms, too negative. Then today‘s nonsense happened.  Each misstep increases in egregious behavior. They are both awful as is anyone who champions these 2 to us. We deserve better.  Team W&K for the win. Whatever the proper thing to do with the grifters is, I am counting on the UK to do it. Enough already.  No one should see her peeing in the woods while H plays on his ‘x-box’ in the background. Bring back TigerKing.

My natural knack for lip-reading is calling BS on the whole scam.


----------



## youngster

Let's say that MM and Harry were filming their lives during the Megexit negotiations, and in the aftermath, in preparation for some kind of "documentary".  (They can call it a "documentary" but it's really Real Lives of the British Royal Family: Harry's Warped Version.)  Does anyone think they informed _any _of the people on the other side of their phone calls or conference calls that they were being recorded?   Is this not illegal in the UK?  How is this not an invasion of the privacy of anyone who was recorded without their knowledge?

Filming themselves during and after Megexit also indicates massive premeditation on their part, that they always planned to use or sell the material one day. Otherwise, why would they bother to film themselves. The two of them are just out of control.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> So he can (not) contact her


I support Netflix to contract Omid for the follow up to FF. MM can continue providing 'her facts' and direction, but Netflix needs Omid's unique and inspiring 'cheesy chick flick' je ne sais quoi.


----------



## Lounorada

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *






They are more and more like the Kardashians with each passing day. 
Using charity as a focus point to pass it off as a docuseries is a reach when as clear as day this will be a reality show because of their lack of doing any charity work.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The rumors were that she hid the video equipment with her capes. With the lumps and bumps she had, that is believable.  All the people who helped her do this should come forward with explanations. I gotta give a side eye to  the women and H who have propelled MM and her trashy(?) tactics to the forefront. Some things just are not done. Filming your relatives is #1.
> 
> Omid is fighting his own battles with the truth: https://www.the-sun.com/news/1546650/omid-scobie-lying-times-33-actually-38/
> *Scobie's interview also revealed:*
> 
> _Coronavirus is the "pause Prince Harry needed"_
> _Scobie doesn't even know if Harry and Meghan like him - saying "there will always be that distance between the Sussexes and the press"_
> _He blames two NDAs for preventing him from giving the details on the dismissals of two Sussex staffers_
> _He claims Meghan Markle's friends who didn't want to be involved in Finding Freedom "changed their minds six months later" over how she had been treated_
> _Scobie revealed how he is a glutton for detail and *got great scoops thanks to his "natural knack for lip reading" *_
> _And he said he had to call the police over threats to burn his house down_
> _During his chat with the magazine, the author said a profile by Times journalist Andrew Billen had given his age as just 33 - which led to criticism from readers who revealed he was older.
> 
> Scobie denied telling the journalist his age in that interview, and said: "I'm 38 years old, not 33._
> 
> ETA: Need more popcorn


It looks like his master MM pulled the rug from under him. Poor Omid, he's just misunderstood!


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> *THEY WANT PRIVACY!!!!!!!!!!! HARRY IS TRAUMATIZED BY CAMERAS BECAUSE OF HIS MOTHER!!!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'have agreed to star in Netflix reality series'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are hoping to 'give people a glimpse into their lives and see all the charity work they do', according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'have agreed to star in fly-on-the-wall Netflix reality series with cameras following them for three months'*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry have reportedly agreed to star in a Netflix reality series *
> *Docuseries will follow couple for 3 months and focus on their charitable work *
> *'It will all be very tasteful, and not Katie Price and Peter Andre-style reality TV,' a source said  *


I laughed out loud when I saw this!!!!  So much for Meghan ONLY starring in A-List Movies, working with ONLY A-List Producers/Directors, etc. - what happened to that?!?!  Oh yeah, right .. ‘cos she’s Z-LIST all the way and this will likely see both of them go to the Antarctic of that “list”.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I laughed out loud when I saw this!!!!  So much for Meghan ONLY starring in A-List Movies, working with ONLY A-List Producers/Directors, etc. - what happened to that?!?!  Oh yeah, right .. ‘cos she’s Z-LIST all the way and this will likely see both of them go to the Antarctic of that “list”.


Yep, this together with Piers Morgan's article provided a few nice laughs today. Let's see how the couple is going to surprise the world tomorrow.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Sol Ryan said:


> *At least the Kardashians are honest about who they are.*..



THIS. 

Stopped reading right here at your post, *Sol*.
Thank you for nailing one of the main reasons that Megan and Harrys's recent road-show, Grifters-R-Us is *beyond* annoying these days.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> Reed says (7.07) "Harry and Meghan, it's a really *fascinating story of human evolution*."
> 
> Like what?!!! Sorry, what?
> 
> Obviously, Reed has been eating Meghan's word-salad for breakfast.
> 
> Basically, he doesn't know what they're going to do and they don't know what they're going to do but until they do they'll talk word-salad with endlessly, fascinating and mature words of nature and a horizon of specialness for the future.




WAIT.ONE. MOMENT.

Does Reed comprehend the English language? What is he implying?
Why are Grifters-R-Us such a "fascinating story of human evolution"?
Any guesses?

This is C-R-A-Z-Y, and Netflix, you just LOST our account.


----------



## gracekelly

There was a rumor that the courtiers didn't want her at Sandringham because they thought she would record the meeting.  Not so far fetched an idea as it turns out.  

I am leaning toward the opinion that the only reason that they were offered anything by NF is because they showed the executives a sampling of their videos.  If they shopped this to Disney or anyone else, they didn't want to touch this as being to risky if there are other royals being shown in the footage.  They don't do sensationalism like this.  HBO does this sort of thing, but the jury has usually weighed in or the people are so guilty that they don't worry about law suits.  I could easily see a restraining order out on any of this.  Of course the publicity will be priceless and that is all any of them care about.  This is when you cross the line from famous to infamous and not in a good way.


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> WAIT.ONE. MOMENT.
> 
> Does Reed comprehend the English language? What is he implying?
> Why are Grifter-R-Us such a "fascinating story of human evolution"?
> Any guesses?
> 
> This is C-R-A-Z-Y, and Netflix, you just LOST our account.


For Harry it is a *de*volution.


----------



## justwatchin

rose60610 said:


> If H&M have a "trove" of footage of the BRF, can't the other members of the BRF or other people in the recordings sue them? Or prevent them from airing it? You know Meghan would if the shoe were on the other foot. M&H used them for Life in the U.S. Money Fodder. Did the other royals realize they were being recorded for a future Netflix deal? Don't tell me for one second that Meghan wasn't planning on leveraging the Megxit footage for personal financial gain.


And Harry must have been aware/complicit if she was filming or maybe he was a willing participant. If this is true, then it’s appalling and he should be booted out of the Firm/Family for good.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Let's brace ourselves for more damage by MM, a new book is almost here (October 15)!

*Battle of Brothers *by Robert Lacey

From bestselling author and historical consultant to the award-winning Netflix series _The Crown_, an unparalleled insider account of tumult, secrecy and schism in the Royal family. (Amazon)

"It will apparently lay bare details of William's misgivings towards the speed of Harry and Meghan Markle's relationship, as well as his feelings on Megxit, which saw the Sussexes quit the royal family.

The book is also expected to include the Queen's 'angry' response towards Harry and Meghan's decision."









						Buckingham Palace braces for more revelations in new tell-all book
					

Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of a Family in Tumult is written by British historian Robert Lacey, whose previous works have included a biography of the Queen.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bisousx

justwatchin said:


> And Harry must have been aware/complicit if she was filming or maybe he was a willing participant. If this is true, then it’s appalling and he should be booted out of the Firm/Family for good.



This is all on the Royal Family by now. If they haven’t completely cut off Harry by now, it’s their problem and idk why anyone but the British taxpayers should care.


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess is that they hope the RF does something to stop them, thus confirming there are tapes.  Then it will be rumors and sensationalism.  I predict something a la “The Battle for Late Night” complete with cheesy “re-enactors”.  They are quite the malicious circus sideshow.


----------



## Chanbal

A replacement for Omid Scobie has been found: Sean Smith 

*Meghan Misunderstood *
*Meghan Misunderstood* is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.

Meghan was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.

Meghan was targeted for her gender, her race, her nationality and her profession. The abuse became so bad that seventy-two female MPs signed a letter of solidarity against the ‘often distasteful and misleading press’, calling out the ‘outdated colonial undertones’ of the stories.



			https://www.amazon.com/Meghan-Misunderstood-Sean-Smith-ebook


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> A replacement for Omid Scobie has been found: Sean Smith
> 
> *Meghan Misunderstood *
> *Meghan Misunderstood* is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
> 
> *Meghan was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless;* a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Meghan-Misunderstood-Sean-Smith-ebook


I was led to believe that the women' right project was a class project for which Meghan keeps taken credit.  'Feeding the homeless' was a grade requirement (don't remember which grade) for all students attending the same Catholic School as Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

It’s to be expected that writers are jumping on the bandwagon to write biographies about her, both the pros and cons. People are interested and there’s money to be made. I doubt this guy has anything new to say but it’ll give the stans something to read.


----------



## bag-mania

Netflix expressed interest in working with them way back in January before they had officially left. So they may not have had to pitch too hard to get the contract. It’s possible Netflix came to them.









						Netflix may want to work with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

Netflix is already showing interest in landing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle for future work. “Who wouldn’t be interested?” the streaming service’s chief content officer, T…




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I was led to believe that the women' right project was a class project for which Meghan keeps taken credit.  'Feeding the homeless' was a grade requirement (don't remember which grade) for all students attending the same Catholic School as Meghan.


Yes, these are the type of projects done in catholic schools. Some of them are useful to show as extracurricular activities in college applications. It is ridiculous for a ~40 year old woman to have them in her resume.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Knowing that the secret (speak into my cape) tapes were indeed being made, I cannot feel sorry for the MissUnderstood MM movement. It is looking like she deliberately irritated and baited people to get a reaction for her show, knowing full well what the plan was. Kinda like Jerry Springer royal style — wondering if her advocates truly despise the BRF or really didn’t understand how devious she is. Weird stuff.  I am beginning to question the love between this couple. Was it all business for her and family revenge for him? Imagine the stress of this on a 90-plus yr old couple. Team W&K for the win!

“a fascinating story of human evolution”???? Is that some kind of woke talk for something I am unaware of? If so, please educate. Never heard of this in terms of a ‘love story’. Wth other story do they have to tell?  Diana’s death?  I don’t follow this Reed guy so I don’t know how he typically talks. Is this normal for him to use inflammatory words? Weird.


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> “a fascinating story of human evolution”???? Is that some kind of woke talk for something I am unaware of? If so, please educate. Never heard of this in terms of a ‘love story’. Wth other story do they have to tell?  Diana’s death?  I don’t follow this Reed guy so I don’t know how he typically talks. Is this normal for him to use inflammatory words? Weird.



Maybe we’re reading too much into it and it’s just that word salad is a contagious disease?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> A replacement for Omid Scobie has been found: Sean Smith
> 
> *Meghan Misunderstood *
> *Meghan Misunderstood* is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
> Meghan was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. *Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.*
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Meghan-Misunderstood-Sean-Smith-ebook


I laughed at the Piers article, but this sentence actually made me spit out the water I was drinking from laughing so hard.  "An extraordinarily accomplished life"???  Because she worked in a soup kitchen and wrote a letter as a kid?  Are you F'ing kidding me?  WOWWWWW!  I guess if that's all it takes to be beyond accomplished, most of us are in another stratosphere!


----------



## purseinsanity

VigeeLeBrun said:


> WAIT.ONE. MOMENT.
> 
> Does Reed comprehend the English language? What is he implying?
> Why are Grifters-R-Us such a "fascinating story of human evolution"?
> Any guesses?
> 
> This is C-R-A-Z-Y, and Netflix, you just LOST our account.


Did he really say *human evolution*???    Why?? Because they each married someone from a different race? Well, then, I evolved the human race 20 years before they did! WTFH.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Yes, these are the type of projects done in catholic schools. Some of them are useful to show as extracurricular activities in college applications. It is ridiculous for a ~40 year old woman to have them in her resume.


Yep.  My daughter has to do these things, as do all parents of students.  I guess I am continually evolving the human race.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> Let's brace ourselves for more damage by MM, a new book is almost here (October 15)!
> 
> *Battle of Brothers *by Robert Lacey
> 
> From bestselling author and historical consultant to the award-winning Netflix series _The Crown_, an unparalleled insider account of tumult, secrecy and schism in the Royal family. (Amazon)
> 
> "It will apparently lay bare details of William's misgivings towards the speed of Harry and Meghan Markle's relationship, as well as his feelings on Megxit, which saw the Sussexes quit the royal family............"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace braces for more revelations in new tell-all book
> 
> 
> Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of a Family in Tumult is written by British historian Robert Lacey, whose previous works have included a biography of the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Thanks, *Chanbal*!

Hmmm, thought the Daily Mail article had a few insightful comments.

For example, this one:

_"MM has caused nothing but drama. Thanks, Harry. *On another note, I see MM is on the agenda for Fortune's Most Powerful Women Summit tomorrow. A colleague is attending so I peeked at the agenda last week. MM wasn't on the agenda then, but she is now; as of this morning -- and get this.... to discuss how we build/rebuild our digital world!! *Seriously?? What does she know about this?? *She is not a tech expert!! *This is a case of "fill the agenda" because last week, her timeslot was TBD. If *her speaking* had been planned (*bought!*) well in advance, she would've leaked it herself weeks ago._

Now, at this point, I'm bumping UP the amount of BLAME that shld be placed directly on Charles' shoulders.

Cut-off their ATM cards for a start, Charles, you walking piece of wet-toast!
You probably NEVER said NO to your youngest son and now you <we> are paying the price.

Well, Meghan Markle & Stooge Harry is making a fool out of your fricken ancient parents and you.
So, show some respect and MAN-UP, or STEP ASIDE and let Wills & KATE handle these two idiots!!!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Did he really say *human evolution*???  Why?? Because they each married someone from a different race? Well, then, I evolved the human race 20 years before they did! WTFH.



Yes, he referred to human evolution (see below). It is probably called the Hastings's Theory of Evolution!

Copy and past from previous post:
According to Hastings, (Prince) Harry and Meghan will tell incredible stories that can change the world and, at the same time, they will talk about their new life, a fascinating story of human evolution, so they will be well understood..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Did he really say *human evolution*???  Why?? Because they each married someone from a different race? Well, then, I evolved the human race 20 years before they did! WTFH.


We are all part of the human race with people of various ethnicities. If MM doesn't understand that concept then she shouldn't be discussing it. If she considers herself biracial, then she must be part human + some other unknown entity.


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> WAIT.ONE. MOMENT.
> 
> Does Reed comprehend the English language? What is he implying?
> Why are Grifters-R-Us such a "fascinating story of human evolution"?
> Any guesses?
> 
> This is C-R-A-Z-Y, and Netflix, you just LOST our account.





purseinsanity said:


> Did he really say *human evolution*???  Why?? Because they each married someone from a different race? Well, then, I evolved the human race 20 years before they did! WTFH.



 Maybe he meant that in a French Revolution type of way... Like M+H are the beginning of the end of the British royal establishment or just a major evolution of it. I suppose if the next generation of them grow up to copy Uncle and Auntie M+H, Wills and Kate could be the last of the "old guard" of royals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Couldn’t sleep, goggled ‘Reed Hastings human evolution’.  Hastings does use the word ‘evolution‘ many times in his talks. He seems proud of how Nflix has evolved from the dvd world to streaming. He thinks the world of AI will be next to evolve.  Perhaps he does think of H&M as people who have evolved from royal to normal??  Haaaa, big mistake that is.









						Netflix CEO Reed Hastings Says the Robots Are Coming (and It's Not a New Show)
					

"It’s unclear which type of intelligence will emerge dominant in 100, 150 years," Hastings said in Barcelona this week.




					www.inc.com


----------



## Lodpah

Found this on the net. Amal Clooney's resignation as Special Envoy for Media Freedom. Apparently, she resigned after MM and Harry's speech (can't remember which one and the Barbados decided to remove QE2 as Head of State). In a gist from my understanding of the OP its because Amal attended the wedding of Harry and Meghan and when they insulted the Nation State, Amal failed to denounce them them so she had no choice but to resign as how can the BRF allow MM and Harry to say one thing as Senior Royals as diplomats and the Parliament does not speak out but when they issued a release regarding Harry and MM on the US Elections, it was not fair, you can't comment on one and not the other.  I don't know but wherever these two nitwits speak they leave a trail of destruction. I can't image how angry, if they even are, Amal and George Clooney must be to be associated with these two nitwits. This is just a rehash of what I found on the Net explaining the situation and not my own opinion.


By Email18 September 2020

The Rt Hon Dominic Raab, MP

Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

King Charles StreetLondonSW1A 2AH

Dear Foreign Secretary,

I write to submit my resignation as the United Kingdom’s Special Envoy on Media Freedom.

When the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (as it then was) asked me to serve as Special Envoy on Media Freedom, the role was described as one in which I would assist the UK in championing the right to a free press around the world. My role was intended to help promote action that governments could take to ensure that existing international obligations relating to media freedom are enforced in accordance with international law. I accepted the role because I believe in the importance of the cause, and appreciate the significant role that the UK has played and can continue to play in promoting the international legal order.

In these circumstances I have been dismayed to learn that the government intends to pass legislation – the Internal Market Bill - which would, by the government’s own admission, ‘break international law’ if enacted. (1) I was also concerned to note the position taken by the Government that although it is an ‘established principle of international law that a state is obliged to discharge its treaty obligations in good faith’, the UK’s ‘Parliament is sovereign as a matter of domestic law and can pass legislation which is in breach of the UK’s Treaty obligations’.

(2)

Although the government has suggested that the violation of international law would be ‘specific and limited’, it is lamentable for the UK to be speaking of its intention to violate an international treaty signed by the Prime Minister less than a year ago. Out of respect for the professional working relationship I have developed with you and your senior colleagues working on human rights, I deferred writing this letter until I had had a chance to discuss this matter with you directly. But having now done so and received no assurance that any change of position is imminent, I have no alternative but to resign from my position.

I am disappointed to have to do so because I have always been proud of the UK’s reputation as a champion of the international legal order, and of the culture of fair play for which it is known. However, very sadly, it has now become untenable for me, as Special Envoy, to urge other states to respect and enforce international obligations while the UK declares that it does not intend to do so itself. As the President of the Bar Council of England and Wales has affirmed, undermining the rule of law that ‘this country is built on … will fatally puncture people’s faith in our justice system’.

(3)

And it threatens to embolden autocratic regimes that violate international law with devastating consequences all over the world. Foreign Secretary, I strongly believe in the importance of the media freedom campaign that the UK and Canada are leading, and I commend you on your role in spearheading the creation of a UK human rights sanctions regime that furthers its goals. I believe the UK can be a tremendous force for good. But for the reasons outlined above, I am no longer prepared to serve as the government’s Envoy at this time. A statement relating to my functions on the High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom is annexed to this letter.






Came on the heels of this:


----------



## Lodpah

I'm truly convinced MM is on a mission to destroy the BRF. She is probably backed by someone and she has an agenda to destroy the very hand that fed her.  I believe Prince Charles is also a big supporter of MM doing this.  What's surprising is that with all that GB has at its disposal as far as intelligence they are allowing these two to carry on with no consequences. Poor QE2, in her twilight years she has no peace.  

Prince William needs to be King.


----------



## Pessie

Lodpah said:


> Found this on the net. Amal Clooney's resignation as Special Envoy for Media Freedom. Apparently, she resigned after MM and Harry's speech (can't remember which one and the Barbados decided to remove QE2 as Head of State). In a gist from my understanding of the OP its because Amal attended the wedding of Harry and Meghan and when they insulted the Nation State, Amal failed to denounce them them so she had no choice but to resign as how can the BRF allow MM and Harry to say one thing as Senior Royals as diplomats and the Parliament does not speak out but when they issued a release regarding Harry and MM on the US Elections, it was not fair, you can't comment on one and not the other.  I don't know but wherever these two nitwits speak they leave a trail of destruction. I can't image how angry, if they even are, Amal and George Clooney must be to be associated with these two nitwits. This is just a rehash of what I found on the Net explaining the situation and not my own opinion.
> 
> 
> By Email18 September 2020
> 
> The Rt Hon Dominic Raab, MP
> 
> Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs
> 
> Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
> 
> King Charles StreetLondonSW1A 2AH
> 
> Dear Foreign Secretary,
> 
> I write to submit my resignation as the United Kingdom’s Special Envoy on Media Freedom.
> 
> When the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (as it then was) asked me to serve as Special Envoy on Media Freedom, the role was described as one in which I would assist the UK in championing the right to a free press around the world. My role was intended to help promote action that governments could take to ensure that existing international obligations relating to media freedom are enforced in accordance with international law. I accepted the role because I believe in the importance of the cause, and appreciate the significant role that the UK has played and can continue to play in promoting the international legal order.
> 
> In these circumstances I have been dismayed to learn that the government intends to pass legislation – the Internal Market Bill - which would, by the government’s own admission, ‘break international law’ if enacted. (1) I was also concerned to note the position taken by the Government that although it is an ‘established principle of international law that a state is obliged to discharge its treaty obligations in good faith’, the UK’s ‘Parliament is sovereign as a matter of domestic law and can pass legislation which is in breach of the UK’s Treaty obligations’.
> 
> (2)
> 
> Although the government has suggested that the violation of international law would be ‘specific and limited’, it is lamentable for the UK to be speaking of its intention to violate an international treaty signed by the Prime Minister less than a year ago. Out of respect for the professional working relationship I have developed with you and your senior colleagues working on human rights, I deferred writing this letter until I had had a chance to discuss this matter with you directly. But having now done so and received no assurance that any change of position is imminent, I have no alternative but to resign from my position.
> 
> I am disappointed to have to do so because I have always been proud of the UK’s reputation as a champion of the international legal order, and of the culture of fair play for which it is known. However, very sadly, it has now become untenable for me, as Special Envoy, to urge other states to respect and enforce international obligations while the UK declares that it does not intend to do so itself. As the President of the Bar Council of England and Wales has affirmed, undermining the rule of law that ‘this country is built on … will fatally puncture people’s faith in our justice system’.
> 
> (3)
> 
> And it threatens to embolden autocratic regimes that violate international law with devastating consequences all over the world. Foreign Secretary, I strongly believe in the importance of the media freedom campaign that the UK and Canada are leading, and I commend you on your role in spearheading the creation of a UK human rights sanctions regime that furthers its goals. I believe the UK can be a tremendous force for good. But for the reasons outlined above, I am no longer prepared to serve as the government’s Envoy at this time. A statement relating to my functions on the High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom is annexed to this letter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Came on the heels of this:



No this is nothing to do with Meghan and Harry, it’s about Brexit politics.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> There was a rumor that the courtiers didn't want her at Sandringham because they thought she would record the meeting.  Not so far fetched an idea as it turns out.
> 
> I am leaning toward the opinion that the only reason that they were offered anything by NF is because they showed the executives a sampling of their videos.  If they shopped this to Disney or anyone else, they didn't want to touch this as being to risky if there are other royals being shown in the footage.  They don't do sensationalism like this.  HBO does this sort of thing, but the jury has usually weighed in or the people are so guilty that they don't worry about law suits.  I could easily see a restraining order out on any of this.  Of course the publicity will be priceless and that is all any of them care about.  This is when you cross the line from famous to infamous and not in a good way.



and she's suing for loss of privacy


----------



## Pessie

Lodpah said:


> I'm truly convinced MM is on a mission to destroy the BRF. She is probably backed by someone and she has an agenda to destroy the very hand that fed her.  I believe Prince Charles is also a big supporter of MM doing this.  What's surprising is that with all that GB has at its disposal as far as intelligence they are allowing these two to carry on with no consequences. Poor QE2, in her twilight years she has no peace.
> 
> Prince William needs to be King.


Meghan and Harry behaving badly = Charles deliberately undermining the Monarchy and his life’s work.  OK


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Maybe he meant that in a French Revolution type of way... Like M+H are the beginning of the end of the British royal establishment or just a major evolution of it. I suppose if the next generation of them grow up to copy Uncle and Auntie M+H, Wills and Kate could be the last of the "old guard" of royals.



That's what I understood. 

But then give up your titles and buy a 3 bed semi in the suburbs


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> and she's suing for loss of privacy


You couldn’t make it up


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Let's say that MM and Harry were filming their lives during the Megexit negotiations, and in the aftermath, in preparation for some kind of "documentary".  (They can call it a "documentary" but it's really Real Lives of the British Royal Family: Harry's Warped Version.)  Does anyone think they informed _any _of the people on the other side of their phone calls or conference calls that they were being recorded?   Is this not illegal in the UK?  How is this not an invasion of the privacy of anyone who was recorded without their knowledge?
> 
> Filming themselves during and after Megexit also indicates massive premeditation on their part, that they always planned to use or sell the material one day. Otherwise, why would they bother to film themselves. The two of them are just out of control.



It's illegal to film/record anyone in the UK in any commercial capacity, even for research or training purposes. You have to get the agreement/waiver of all parties on each occasion first. Even footage taken privately that is later used for commercial exploitation needs clearance. Even if you accidentally record someone whilst filming another that's given permission can't be used. I would think it would be the same inside private property (or if it says 'no filming' to members of the public as it says even inside Crown property) and the same for filming others' personal possessions.  

Out in public, in the interest of the public and for the purposes of whistle blowing etc is a different matter


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> I laughed out loud when I saw this!!!!  So much for Meghan ONLY starring in A-List Movies, working with ONLY A-List Producers/Directors, etc. - what happened to that?!?!  Oh yeah, right .. ‘cos she’s Z-LIST all the way and this will likely see both of them go to the Antarctic of that “list”.



and if it gets around the filmed the BRF and others surreptitiously, do they think anyone in Hollywood is going to welcome them into their homes or invite them anywhere? They're a liability.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These people are the gift that keeps on giving, in the same way herpes would. WTF is going on with these two and why is nobody willing to stop them.


----------



## justwatchin

papertiger said:


> and if it gets around the filmed the BRF and others surreptitiously, do they think anyone in Hollywood is going to welcome them into their homes or invite them anywhere? They're a liability.


Excellent point!


----------



## maryg1

papertiger said:


> and if it gets around the filmed the BRF and others surreptitiously, do they think anyone in Hollywood is going to welcome them into their homes or invite them anywhere? They're a liability.


Wasn’t she that was found taking pictures inside BP while she was told not to?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

maryg1 said:


> Wasn’t she that was found taking pictures inside BP while she was told not to?



I didn't know. 

I can't believe I'm still surprised by anything these 2 get up to. They literally behave like con-artists (@Pautinka is not wrong!)


----------



## Annawakes

Hmm.  I never thought of it that way. That Charles is tacitly allowing them to tear down the monarchy.  Maybe he is resentful the Q has not handed him the reins yet.  Or also resentful about how everyone loves W&K and is talking about how W needs to be King next.  He’s so old already, his “reign” would be a tiny blip anyway.  Maybe that’s why he isn’t doing anything.  He’d maybe much rather just retire to his duchy and stop having to do royal duties, if there isn’t a royal family anymore.  
All speculation of course!


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> Yes, these are the type of projects done in catholic schools. Some of them are useful to show as extracurricular activities in college applications. It is ridiculous for a ~40 year old woman to have them in her resume.


At the Catholic HS in my town the kids HAVE to do "community service."  *HAVE. TO.*

Made things a little easier for me when I needed volunteers to work our farmers market. There were forms I had to fill out and sign for the kids at the end of each week that they turned into their school counselors or whoever tracked this service. (all these kids were really nice and hard workers, btw)


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> At the Catholic HS in my town the kids HAVE to do "community service."  *HAVE. TO.*
> 
> Made things a little easier for me when I needed volunteers to work our farmers market. There were forms I had to fill out and sign for the kids at the end of each week that they turned into their school counselors or whoever tracked this service. (all these kids were really nice and hard workers, btw)


Astute observation about the impact of religion ... yes the Catholic Church is much more good deed oriented than the Church of England, something that dates back to the Reformation , H &M were raised in different religious cultures


----------



## lanasyogamama

Even if you go to public school, you have to do community service to get your conformation in the Catholic Church.  I volunteered at the hospital, delivering flowers.  I’m a total hero.


----------



## drifter

I hope their reality show rumours are fake.  Reality tv is supposed to be a guilty pleasure!  Why did they have to go and ruin good bad tv for us?!


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Astute observation about the impact of religion ... yes the Catholic Church is much more good deed oriented than the Church of England, something that dates back to the Reformation , *H &M were raised in different religious cultures*


Well, MM certainly didn't seem to incorporate anything about true community service the Catholic Church may have tried to instill in her.  She did one volunteer thing for Catholic school and shouts it from the rooftops constantly.  The only other times she does "service" is when her photographers are around to document it.  She's FOS.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I am really embarrassed for them. At least the Kardashians were honest fame-mongers.  Its absolutely cringe-worthy to think that they were secretly recording their interactions with the BRF and are selling it now. That is really not very woke!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> *I'm truly convinced MM is on a mission to destroy the BRF.* She is probably backed by someone and she has an agenda to destroy the very hand that fed her.  I believe Prince Charles is also a big supporter of MM doing this.  What's surprising is that with all that GB has at its disposal as far as intelligence they are allowing these two to carry on with no consequences. Poor QE2, in her twilight years she has no peace.
> 
> Prince William needs to be King.


Oh, MM is definitely trying to destroy the BRF, but only because she thinks, that in the end, she and JCMH will be the last two 'royals' left standing so that they will be crowned queen and king.


----------



## purseinsanity

MM is Queen of something all right:  delusional behavior!


----------



## CarryOn2020

There are indeed the anti-monarchist who would destroy all things royal, yet are they offering anything in replacement? Someone will live in those palaces, wear that jewellery, drive those cars, etc. If H&M are the best they offer, then we’re all in trouble. Probably good to remember that not all of H&M’s _friends_ value the BRF. Too soon to know who is using whom. Also, good to remember that while MM attended Catholic private schools, she converted to Judaism when she married Trevor and was supposed to convert to Church of England for Harry. That didn’t happen.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> A replacement for Omid Scobie has been found: Sean Smith
> 
> *Meghan Misunderstood *
> *Meghan Misunderstood* is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
> 
> Meghan was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.
> 
> Meghan was targeted for her gender, her race, her nationality and her profession. The abuse became so bad that seventy-two female MPs signed a letter of solidarity against the ‘often distasteful and misleading press’, calling out the ‘outdated colonial undertones’ of the stories.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Meghan-Misunderstood-Sean-Smith-ebook


Oh good lord.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Knowing that the secret (*speak into my cape*) tapes were indeed being made, I cannot feel sorry for the MissUnderstood MM movement. It is looking like she deliberately irritated and baited people to get a reaction for her show, knowing full well what the plan was. Kinda like Jerry Springer royal style — wondering if her advocates truly despise the BRF or really didn’t understand how devious she is. Weird stuff.  I am beginning to question the love between this couple. Was it all business for her and family revenge for him? Imagine the stress of this on a 90-plus yr old couple. Team W&K for the win!
> 
> “a fascinating story of human evolution”???? Is that some kind of woke talk for something I am unaware of? If so, please educate. Never heard of this in terms of a ‘love story’. Wth other story do they have to tell?  Diana’s death?  I don’t follow this Reed guy so I don’t know how he typically talks. Is this normal for him to use inflammatory words? Weird.


Truly, truly LOL!!!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Even if you go to public school, you have to do community service to get your conformation in the Catholic Church.  I volunteered at the hospital, delivering flowers.  I’m a total hero.


You should advertise about your vocation to become Mother Teresa #2.
 Wait, #3, MM already took the #2 spot or was it the #1? She can't stand being #2...


----------



## rose60610

CobaltBlu said:


> I am really embarrassed for them. At least the Kardashians were honest fame-mongers.  Its absolutely cringe-worthy to think that they were secretly recording their interactions with the BRF and are selling it now. *That is really not very woke!*



Maybe it's "the new woke". As in, if Meghan does something anyone else would be crucified for, it's fine!. Especially if she can sell it to Netflix for a gazillion dollars. She might be on a mission to destroy the BRF in a Trojan Horse kind of way. She'd have been a bit more successful if one of her strategies wasn't to cry for pity and sympathy, assuming everyone would be fawning all over her and feeling sorry for her. As soon as she went down that path, she was burning bridges and turning public opinion against her. She's probably all giddy that Prince Andrew is a perv and feeds into the notion that the BRF should be destroyed. What she's forgetting is that the Crown has a mere thousand year history and resources that make her Netflix deal look like a shopping trip to a thrift store. Currently, Meghan's persona is an unsympathetic one except to her sugars who appear easily swayed by emotion. Emotion is no match for an institution that's survived numerous real wars just fine. Besides, when Meghan claimed she didn't know about the Crown's colonies, despite the fact that flowers of each were embroidered into her wedding gown and she had a degree in Int'l Relations.... her stupidity rose to the level of her self-pity. Let them revel in their rubles from Netflix, it's only a matter of time before they self destruct. Maybe with a little help behind the scenes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are indeed the anti-monarchist who would destroy all things royal, yet are they offering anything in replacement? Someone will live in those palaces, wear that jewellery, drive those cars, etc. If H&M are the best they offer, then we’re all in trouble. Probably good to remember that not all of H&M’s _friends_ value the BRF. Too soon to know who is using whom. *Also, good to remember that while MM attended Catholic private schools, she converted to Judaism when she married Trevor and was supposed to convert to Church of England for Harry. That didn’t happen.*


Really?  Wow, she changes religion like people change underwear.  She really uses then discards anything and everything, doesn't she?


----------



## Pessie

Breaking news.  The court has just ruled against Meghan, meaning the Mail can use Finding Freedom in its defence against the privacy action concerning the infamous letter to her Dad.
Talk about being hoist by your own petard


----------



## Annawakes

Pessie said:


> Breaking news.  The court has just ruled against Meghan, meaning the Mail can use Finding Freedom in its defence against the privacy action concerning the infamous letter to her Dad.
> Talk about being hoist by your own petard


Time to get a new lawyer


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Maybe it's "the new woke". As in, if Meghan does something anyone else would be crucified for, it's fine!. Especially if she can sell it to Netflix for a gazillion dollars. She might be on a mission to destroy the BRF in a Trojan Horse kind of way. She'd have been a bit more successful if one of her strategies wasn't to cry for pity and sympathy, assuming everyone would be fawning all over her and feeling sorry for her. As soon as she went down that path, she was burning bridges and turning public opinion against her. She's probably all giddy that Prince Andrew is a perv and feeds into the notion that the BRF should be destroyed. What she's forgetting is that the Crown has a mere thousand year history and resources that make her Netflix deal look like a shopping trip to a thrift store. Currently, Meghan's persona is an unsympathetic one except to her sugars who appear easily swayed by emotion. Emotion is no match for an institution that's survived numerous real wars just fine. Besides, when Meghan claimed she didn't know about the Crown's colonies, despite the fact that flowers of each were embroidered into her wedding gown and she had a degree in Int'l Relations.... her stupidity rose to the level of her self-pity. Let them revel in their rubles from Netflix, it's only a matter of time before they self destruct. Maybe with a little help behind the scenes


Gosh damnit.  Where is that Amen button???


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you, Omid.  

Seems there is confusion, not just mine, about whether MM actually converted to Judaism.








						Is Meghan Markle Jewish?
					

“The spokesman also confirmed that Meghan’s Jewish background would not prevent her from having an ‘interfaith’ marriage there."




					www.jpost.com
				












						Why is Meghan Markle Getting Baptized Before Wedding?
					

The American actress wasn't raised in the Anglican Church like her fiancé.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are indeed the anti-monarchist who would destroy all things royal, yet are they offering anything in replacement? If H&M are the best they offer, then we’re all in trouble. Probably good to remember that not all of H&M’s _friends_ value the BRF. Too soon to know who is using whom. *Also, good to remember that while MM attended Catholic private schools, she converted to Judaism when she married Trevor and was supposed to convert to Church of England for Harry. That didn’t happen.*


Some people convert to their spouse's religion to form a deeper bond, but when conversion becomes a habit, how can we believe that someone has strong and lasting religious beliefs... Changing religions for power & riches, seems so amoral and if true for MM, it is sickening.    BTW, I'm not the religious sort, but I didn't marry (our 42nd anniversary is next March) for power & riches.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Some people convert to their spouse's religion to form a deeper bond, but when conversion becomes a habit, how can we believe that someone has strong and lasting religious beliefs... Changing religions for power & riches, seems so amoral and if true for MM, it is sickening.    BTW, I'm not the religious sort, but I didn't marry (our 42nd anniversary is next March) for power & riches.



The name Murkey Markle is so appropriate for her.  Nothing is clear with her and her family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Also, good to remember that while MM attended Catholic private schools, she converted to Judaism when she married Trevor and was supposed to convert to Church of England for Harry. That didn’t happen.



She did convert to Judaism? Are you sure? That's a whole lot of work to put in, and she doesn't strive me as the one choosing the hard way. Also, didn't she convert the week before the wedding? I think I remember seeing headlines.

But yeah, if that is true she is starting to remind me of Runaway Bride...anyone remember when Richard Gere starts asking the fiancés left at the altar how Julia Roberts liked her eggs...and it was without fail the guy of the moment's favourite?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Maybe it's *"the new woke"*. As in, if Meghan does something anyone else would be crucified for, it's fine!. Especially if she can sell it to Netflix for a gazillion dollars. She might be on a mission to destroy the BRF in a Trojan Horse kind of way. She'd have been a bit more successful if one of her strategies wasn't to cry for pity and sympathy, assuming everyone would be fawning all over her and feeling sorry for her. As soon as she went down that path, she was burning bridges and turning public opinion against her. She's probably all giddy that Prince Andrew is a perv and feeds into the notion that the BRF should be destroyed. What she's forgetting is that the Crown has a mere thousand year history and resources that make her Netflix deal look like a shopping trip to a thrift store. Currently, Meghan's persona is an unsympathetic one except to her sugars who appear easily swayed by emotion. Emotion is no match for an institution that's survived numerous real wars just fine. Besides, when Meghan claimed she didn't know about the Crown's colonies, despite the fact that flowers of each were embroidered into her wedding gown and she had a degree in Int'l Relations.... her stupidity rose to the level of her self-pity. Let them revel in their rubles from Netflix, it's only a matter of time before they self destruct. Maybe with a little help behind the scenes


By the "*new woke*" are you referring to a popular form of woke in which wealthy people get paid millions to discuss social justice issues or attend opulent Champagne and Caviar parties to schmooze business contacts, raise money for their own nonprofit foundations??? All in name of good & woke causes.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, Omid.
> 
> Seems there is confusion, not just mine, about whether MM actually converted to Judaism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle Jewish?
> 
> 
> “The spokesman also confirmed that Meghan’s Jewish background would not prevent her from having an ‘interfaith’ marriage there."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.jpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is Meghan Markle Getting Baptized Before Wedding?
> 
> 
> The American actress wasn't raised in the Anglican Church like her fiancé.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



When you change your religion as easily your underwear, you obviously don't believe in anything at all.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are indeed the anti-monarchist who would destroy all things royal, yet are they offering anything in replacement? *Someone will live in those palaces, wear that jewellery, drive those cars, etc. *If H&M are the best they offer, then we’re all in trouble. Probably good to remember that not all of H&M’s _friends_ value the BRF. Too soon to know who is using whom. Also, good to remember that while MM attended Catholic private schools, she converted to Judaism when she married Trevor and was supposed to convert to Church of England for Harry. That didn’t happen.


The "new woke"!?


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Omid, he may have been thrown under the bus for nothing:

*Harry and Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used as evidence against her in privacy battle with Associated Newspapers, judge rules after court heard she or her friends 'co-operated' with authors









						Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used  in MoS privacy fight
					

Meghan Markle today lost her fight to block claims she co-operated with authors of royal biography 'Finding Freedom' after a judge said it can be used as evidence in her Mail on Sunday privacy battle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> When you change your religion as easily your underwear, you obviously don't believe in anything at all.


I think she has always remained true to her own religion. The Church of the Almighty Dollar.  The only real conversion with baptism was in the Anglican Church. That was as honest as everything else she does. Not.


----------



## papertiger

So she's happy to do a bit of cultural appropriation if the mood moves her https://www.jpost.com/omg/is-meghan-markle-jewish-515324

"Markle, who is best known for her role on the USA Network drama “Suits,” was married to Jewish producer Trevor Engelson from 2011 to 2013. As Tominey notes, the pair had a Jewish wedding in Jamaica (complete with a “Jewish chair dance,” meaning the hora).

Markle’s father is Irish and her mother is African-American. She wrote an essay for _Elle _magazine in 2015 about her identity (it was subsequently published in _Elle UK,_ one of the publications that has misstated her Jewish identity). The essay did not mention any Jewish ancestry or hint at a past conversion to Judaism."

The so called "Jewish chair dance" (which is not the Hora) is only danced at Jewish Orthodox Ashkenazi weddings. If you don't have a Mitzvah, walk around the groom 7 times and have a gender segregated wedding, then IMO, you should think twice before mounting a chair and dancing with a ribbon between you and your husband.

All the edited highlights for Princess.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I'm truly convinced MM is on a mission to destroy the BRF. She is probably backed by someone and she has an agenda to destroy the very hand that fed her. * I believe Prince Charles is also a big supporter of MM doing this.  *What's surprising is that with all that GB has at its disposal as far as intelligence they are allowing these two to carry on with no consequences. Poor QE2, in her twilight years she has no peace.
> 
> Prince William needs to be King.



No, I don't see Charles being on board with this in a million years. When you have devoted your entire life to something you don't suddenly decide it's a good idea to destroy it when you are in your 70s. He's been waiting his turn all this time. It makes no sense for him to turn on it now. 

Charles has never been a particularly strong man. The fact that he has lost any influence or control over his kid shouldn't surprise anyone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Poor Omid, he may have been thrown under the bus for nothing:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used as evidence against her in privacy battle with Associated Newspapers, judge rules after court heard she or her friends 'co-operated' with authors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used  in MoS privacy fight
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle today lost her fight to block claims she co-operated with authors of royal biography 'Finding Freedom' after a judge said it can be used as evidence in her Mail on Sunday privacy battle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



I wonder if this will cause a settlement. She will use some lame excuse like she can’t devote the time needed because she is a busy working mom. Lol!  If she persists she, Scobie and her phantom friends can look forward to being totally eviscerated in court.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Poor Omid, he may have been thrown under the bus for nothing:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used as evidence against her in privacy battle with Associated Newspapers, judge rules after court heard she or her friends 'co-operated' with authors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used  in MoS privacy fight
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle today lost her fight to block claims she co-operated with authors of royal biography 'Finding Freedom' after a judge said it can be used as evidence in her Mail on Sunday privacy battle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


BUMP! BUMP!  (That’s Meghan backing up the bus to check on him)


----------



## gracekelly

I am hoping she is arrogant enough to go to court so they can show how untruthful she is. I hate to call anyone a liar, but if the shoe fits...


----------



## CeeJay

mdcx said:


> I feel like you grew up in a John Cheever story. Love reading your comments.


Thanks .. sometimes I think Cheever lived in the odd little hideout attached to our attic (it was a favorite place of mine to hide from my mother when she was mad at me)!!


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> So she's happy to do a bit of cultural appropriation if the mood moves her https://www.jpost.com/omg/is-meghan-markle-jewish-515324
> 
> "Markle, who is best known for her role on the USA Network drama “Suits,” was married to Jewish producer Trevor Engelson from 2011 to 2013. As Tominey notes, the pair had a Jewish wedding in Jamaica (complete with a “Jewish chair dance,” meaning the hora).
> 
> Markle’s father is Irish and her mother is African-American. She wrote an essay for _Elle _magazine in 2015 about her identity (it was subsequently published in _Elle UK,_ one of the publications that has misstated her Jewish identity). The essay did not mention any Jewish ancestry or hint at a past conversion to Judaism."
> 
> The so called "Jewish chair dance" (which is not the Hora) is only danced at Jewish Orthodox Ashkenazi weddings. If you don't have a Mitzvah, walk around the groom 7 times and have a gender segregated wedding, then IMO, you should think twice before mounting a chair and dancing with a ribbon between you and your husband.
> 
> All the edited highlights for Princess.


She’s always acting a part 
Meanwhile they’ll be getting the beers in at the Mail tonight!


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> Poor Omid, he may have been thrown under the bus for nothing:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used as evidence against her in privacy battle with Associated Newspapers, judge rules after court heard she or her friends 'co-operated' with authors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan biography 'Finding Freedom' CAN be used  in MoS privacy fight
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle today lost her fight to block claims she co-operated with authors of royal biography 'Finding Freedom' after a judge said it can be used as evidence in her Mail on Sunday privacy battle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Idk about “poor Omid”... play with snakes, may get bitten.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> By the "*new woke*" are you referring to a popular form of woke in which wealthy people get paid millions to discuss social justice issues or attend opulent Champagne and Caviar parties to schmooze business contacts, raise money for their own nonprofit foundations??? All in name of good & woke causes.



That's part of it! The other part is that depending who you are, you're celebrated with media slobbering adoration. If you're someone who the media aren't a fan of, you're drawn and quartered for doing the same thing. I wish somebody would make a flow chart so we'd know when to be offended, how much to be offended, when to ignore or make a million excuses for stupid moves, and when it's permissible to be free to think independently.


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> When you change your religion as easily your underwear, you obviously don't believe in anything at all.


This 1 million times! Ugh... I have relatives who I call religion shoppers. The change churches like they change haircuts. Every time the religion tells them they shouldn’t do something, there’s some advantage to changing religion or they’ve done something wrong (which is usually morally wrong, like cheating or pilfering), instead of confessing and saying Hail Marys they change religions....they’ve been Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, etc... they’re with some super tv church last time I checked... ugh... they’re the worst holier-than-thou people though...

I’ll just be the best person I can be, say my Hail Marys and talk it out at the Gates man... if I don’t get in, ah well...


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did convert to Judaism? Are you sure? That's a whole lot of work to put in, and she doesn't strive me as the one choosing the hard way. Also, didn't she convert the week before the wedding? I think I remember seeing headlines.
> 
> But yeah, if that is true she is starting to remind me of Runaway Bride...anyone remember when Richard Gere starts asking the fiancés left at the altar how Julia Roberts liked her eggs...and it was without fail the guy of the moment's favourite?



I was just thinking, "wow that's a LOT of work to convert to Judaism" but then I remembered... look who we're talking about   she left one of the oldest institutions in history. So of course she would convert in and out of Judaism! This lady is not afraid of a mountain of work and drama.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I was just thinking, "wow that's a LOT of work to convert to Judaism" but then I remembered... look who we're talking about   she left one of the oldest institutions in history. So of course she would convert in and out of Judaism! This lady is not afraid of a mountain of work and drama.



Perhaps she is more the type to sing the song without carrying the tune?  A semblance of effort without breaking any fingernails, so to speak 

ETA: easy to do this when the moral compass is fixed on $$


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sol Ryan said:


> I’ll just be the best person I can be, say my Hail Marys and talk it out at the Gates man... if I don’t get in, ah well...


Ah, don't worry, some of the most ethical, moral and loyal people I've met are atheists, so you'd be in good company, if there really is a hell... However, a few months back, it was reported that the Pope said there is no hell.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> I am hoping she is arrogant enough* to go to court *so they can show how untruthful she is. I hate to call anyone a liar, but if the shoe fits...



My knee-jerk was that at this point we shld expect an out of court settlement, and then remembered the MadCow Meghan is delusional, so the rules don't apply.

My prediction?
Grifters-R-Us will make an appearance in court, with Miss Thing wearing an obvious baby-bump and a fake tear.

Netflix episode: 2021 Kissing Granny's Arse


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I am so excited!  A mockumentary! I suspect I will nod off in the first 5 minutes.  There will probably feature her hair extensions on one episode.
> In the meantime, Piers Morgan has given up a synopsis of what to expect.  lol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN presents a sneak preview of the Sussexes' new TV show
> 
> 
> For a while now, I've been suggesting that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are behaving like a royal version of the Kardashians - a pair of ludicrously hypocritical narcissists at war with their families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


You NEVER disappoint; always love your comments!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, at this point I feel Piers needs couple therapy with MM, but I'd lie if I said I didn't enjoy this quote from the Daily Mail article:
> 
> "Obviously, some of us who knew her before she sank her claws into poor Harry know exactly who the 'real' Meghan Markle is – a shockingly ruthless social climbing piece of work prepared to ditch anyone and anything in her desperate craving for ever greater dollops of fame and fortune."


Well, as I've said *many *times in this thread, he's spot-on with his assessment based on what my friends have told me about her.  She started VERY EARLY in life using and then ditching people on her quest up .. without any regard whatsoever as to their feelings.  I get that Piers is pissed off that she 'markled' him, but he also needs to MOVE ON .. but, he's dead-on with what he is saying about her!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ah, don't worry, some of the most ethical, moral and loyal people I've met are atheists, so you'd be in good company, if there really is a hell... However, a few months back, it was reported that the Pope said there is no hell.



Agreed. I have friends who are atheist as well and you’ll never meet abetter group. I just figure you should live your life with honor and morals which is why I can’t understand Harry at all.If you don’t champion those valuesin your own life, why would you think the Queen would want you representing her? I don’t get how they still have they Commonwealth jobs...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming giant about the trove of homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars (£77.9million), insiders said.
> 
> Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage, including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from royal life, during negotiations with Netflix._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
> 
> 
> The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ah .. so here we go, the 'real' reason why Meghan wanted in .. she wanted the "behind the scenes BRF footage" .. BUT, BUT, BUT .. can the BRF put a ki-bash on it????


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Time to get a new lawyer


Or sue the original one.


----------



## gracekelly

What if Harry was wearing the mike at Sandringham?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> What if Harry was wearing the mike at Sandringham?



Can you imagine that amount of betrayal? That poor family would be crushed.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I am hoping she is arrogant enough to go to court so they can show how untruthful she is. I hate to call anyone a liar, but if the shoe fits...



"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!" (Sir Walter Scott, 1808).  Take note, MeMeMeghan.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> What if Harry was wearing the mike at Sandringham?



I imagine it’ll be time to send him to the Tower  jk


----------



## marietouchet

Hilarious .. and look at the source , the Times , even they are chuckling at how silly things have gotten

Oh my gosh , could it be the writer is a lurker here, we came up with all of this eons ago ...

Meghan and Harry, the TV show  — a first look at the script* 





__





						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Hilarious .. and look at the source , the Times , even they are chuckling at how silly things have gotten
> 
> Meghan and Harry, the TV show  — a first look at the script*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


LOL.  People have a lot of time on their hands.  As do I, since I pore voraciously through this thread!  I find all of you more fun to read than anything else out there!


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> I imagine it’ll be time to send him to the Tower  jk


Is the rack still working?

ETA. If he was miked up then the rack is not out of the question.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!" (Sir Walter Scott, 1808).  Take note, MeMeMeghan.


Bet Scobie would have attributed this to Shakespeare   Madam, you are a Renaissance woman. Physician, scholar and a member of this thread . And you have superb taste in handbags.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> WAIT.ONE. MOMENT.
> 
> Does Reed comprehend the English language? What is he implying?
> Why are Grifters-R-Us such a "fascinating story of human evolution"?
> Any guesses?
> 
> This is C-R-A-Z-Y, and Netflix, you just LOST our account.


They lost mine the *MINUTE* I heard that they had signed a deal with "Grifters-R-Us" (just love that @VigeeLeBrun )!!!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> They lost mine the *MINUTE* I heard that they had signed a deal with "Grifters-R-Us" (just love that @VigeeLeBrun )!!!


I never had NF. I wanted to see The Crown and Handmaiden.  I guess I was Markled. haha!  I will  try for a free month and then cancel.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Ah .. so here we go, the 'real' reason why Meghan wanted in .. she wanted the "behind the scenes BRF footage" .. BUT, BUT, BUT .. *can the BRF put a ki-bash on it????*



My understanding is if footage was shot without the consent of those involved it cannot be aired. A release form must be signed for anyone recognizable. I suppose they could try to get around it by blotting out the faces but it would be obvious who they are so that wouldn't work.

The exception is news broadcasts, and a Netflix show doesn't qualify.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I laughed at the Piers article, but this sentence actually made me spit out the water I was drinking from laughing so hard.  "An extraordinarily accomplished life"???  Because she worked in a soup kitchen and wrote a letter as a kid?  Are you F'ing kidding me?  WOWWWWW!  I guess if that's all it takes to be beyond accomplished, most of us are in another stratosphere!


Yes indeed, we are .. meanwhile, she's circling Uranus constantly ..


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Bet Scobie would have attributed this to Shakespeare   Madam, you are a Renaissance woman. Physician, scholar and a member of this thread . And you have superb taste in handbags.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Yes indeed, we are .. meanwhile, she's circling Uranus constantly ..


This is my level of maturity:  The word Uranus still makes me giggle


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Hilarious .. and look at the source , the Times , even they are chuckling at how silly things have gotten
> 
> Oh my gosh , could it be the writer is a lurker here, we came up with all of this eons ago ...
> 
> Meghan and Harry, the TV show  — a first look at the script*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


They’re dragging them so hard.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> That's part of it! The other part is that depending who you are, you're celebrated with media slobbering adoration. If you're someone who the media aren't a fan of, you're drawn and quartered for doing the same thing. I wish somebody would make a flow chart so we'd know when to be offended, how much to be offended, when to ignore or make a million excuses for stupid moves, and when it's permissible to be free to think independently.



Actually, I have great sympathy for many causes, just not those who use them to promote themselves and think they are getting to Heaven the easy way

I'm issuing trigger warnings on future messages


----------



## Tootsie17

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are indeed the anti-monarchist who would destroy all things royal, yet are they offering anything in replacement? Someone will live in those palaces, wear that jewellery, drive those cars, etc. If H&M are the best they offer, then we’re all in trouble. Probably good to remember that not all of H&M’s _friends_ value the BRF. Too soon to know who is using whom. Also, good to remember that while MM attended Catholic private schools, she converted to Judaism when she married Trevor and was supposed to convert to Church of England for Harry. That didn’t happen.


She wants to destroy the BRF, but keep her title. PURE INSANITY!


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I was just thinking, "wow that's a LOT of work to convert to Judaism" but then I remembered... look who we're talking about   she left one of the oldest institutions in history. So of course she would convert in and out of Judaism! This lady is not afraid of a mountain of work and drama.



Marrying someone of another faith does not mean you've converted though.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> Some people convert to their spouse's religion to form a deeper bond, but when conversion becomes a habit, how can we believe that someone has strong and lasting religious beliefs... Changing religions for power & riches, seems so amoral and if true for MM, it is sickening.    BTW, I'm not the religious sort, but I didn't marry (our 42nd anniversary is next March) for power & riches.


True .. I've had two friends (both originally Roman Catholic) who converted to Judaism to marry their spouses.  They both told me that doing that is no small task, and is to be taken very seriously.  One ended up divorcing her spouse and is now re-married to a man who is Roman Catholic, but she didn't "re-convert" .. the other is still with her husband and is quite devoted to her new faith.  Neither my husband (Jewish) or I (Roman Catholic) are very "religious" (as a matter of fact I consider myself agnostic), so there was never any question that I would not convert .. even his parents didn't ask!


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> They’re dragging them so hard.
> 
> View attachment 4863050


This is so unlike the Times, they dont make fun of the BRF
I guess it is open season now that Buck House has stated it will not comment since H&M are not senior royals


----------



## chicinthecity777

The Times is getting their revenge because Harry is suing them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> This is so unlike the Times, they dont make fun of the BRF
> I guess it is open season now that Buck House has stated it will not comment since H&M are not senior royals


It's about time, the news outlets start commenting negatively on JCMH? They are such imitators and just following TPF's lead.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle Says 'Bots And Trolls' Are Changing How We Interact 'Online And Off'
					

The Duchess of Sussex spoke about reevaluating the state of the digital landscape on Tuesday.




					www.huffpost.com
				







I know I know, it’s click bait, but please vote - results right now 58% W&K: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kate-middleton-new-job-scouts_n_5f732fcbc5b6f622a0c4d045


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's about time, the news outlets start commenting negatively on JCMH? They are such imitators and just following TPF's lead.


Absolutely!  I've read not so glowing reviews lately that almost reiterate word for words things we've said here ("word salad" for example!)!  I wonder who's been lurking?


----------



## bag-mania

Such an obvious hypocrite and still the US media adores her. She was speaking at _Fortune's_ virtual "Most Powerful Women Summit." There is 100% chance she invited herself to participate. The MO is exactly the same as with the virtual summit for women voters last month, she is "interviewing" the head of the organization.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I can’t decide if I am a bot or troll.
Off to find our evil overboard who knows everything. 

ETA: to clarify, it appears she thinks we are dimwits who cannot think for ourselves. Since we disagree with her, we require her insight and guidance, so she tells us what to think and say.  Yes, I find people like this nauseating, usually they are from the world of Hwood, and definitely worthy of snark.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I get that Piers is pissed off that she 'markled' him, but *he also needs to MOVE ON* .. but, he's dead-on with what he is saying about her!


Very sorry @CeeJay, but I have to disagree on this one. Piers shouldn't move on, he should keep writing... His articles on the saga of the duchess are simply hilarious. Can't wait to read the next one...


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Hilarious .. and look at the source , the Times , even they are chuckling at how silly things have gotten
> 
> Oh my gosh , could it be the writer is a lurker here, we came up with all of this eons ago ...
> 
> Meghan and Harry, the TV show  — a first look at the script*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



the Times publishing this type of article on the duchess  Love it!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Marrying someone of another faith does not mean you've converted though.



I know, they were saying she had actually converted (but seems like there is doubt on that).


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I am so excited!  A mockumentary! I suspect I will nod off in the first 5 minutes.  There will probably feature her hair extensions on one episode.
> In the meantime, Piers Morgan has given up a synopsis of what to expect.  lol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN presents a sneak preview of the Sussexes' new TV show
> 
> 
> For a while now, I've been suggesting that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are behaving like a royal version of the Kardashians - a pair of ludicrously hypocritical narcissists at war with their families
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I hope he keeps writing. Very witty and insightful!


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> I know, they were saying she had actually converted (but seems like there is doubt on that).


She probably said she was going to, just like she said about her English citizenship and joining the Church of England.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Confusion, thy name is MM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, The Times is on fire. "Meghan in the sitting room, empowering America"...that IS snarky LOL


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Coincidently, late last night or early this morning <genetic chronic insomnia> was curious to the total view stat for this thread bc it seemed that recently more and more articles echoed many of the topics here on this thread but appearing a day later <date check news now, too much news is fake>.

Maybe a coincidence, idk.

Many of us that post on this thread have been on tPF literally forever and we forget how popular tPF has become online.
Especially now, with people homebound due to a plethora of issues, some global, some not.

Interesting, always enjoy new points of view - mine certainly have EVOLVED since taking notice of Miss Thing's and the Spoilt Brat's behavior. If anyone had told me that my opin of the BRF would change so drastically ~ and well, simply disgusted at the BRF's lame-duck attitude and now do question the validity of any practical reason to have a monarchy at all.

If the BRF cannot set a stellar example of excellent values and common sense, then maybe they are simply taking up space.
As far as H&M? Nope, I cannot approve of what I know is not right.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Such an obvious hypocrite and still the US media adores her. She was speaking at _Fortune's_ virtual "Most Powerful Women Summit." There is 100% chance she invited herself to participate. The MO is exactly the same as with the virtual summit for women voters last month, she is "interviewing" the head of the organization.


I wish she would stop crashing successful women's meetings, she is precisely the opposite of a role model.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Much as I’ve suspected — it’s all our fault. It is our interpretation. We have misled ourselves. Because she has a communication degree from Northwestern, so  “She is flawless.  They are the perfect couple” - repeat that 100x.


_Meghan said Tuesday that much of the backlash she has faced isn’t focused on what she’s said, but rather the way that things have been interpreted. 
“If you look back at anything that I’ve said, it’s really interesting because what ends up being inflammatory it seems is people’s interpretations of it. But if you listen to what I actually say, it’s not controversial,” she said._

ETA: Controversial?  There she goes, mind-f*ing us. We never said her words are controversial. Stupid, yes. Daft, absolutely.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> I wish she would stop crashing successful women's meetings, she is precisely the *opposite of a role model.*



Meghan Markle's name attached to ANYTHING is a discredit.
If she is speaking, it's a lightweight, paid-to-play <her team is paying> engagement.

If my adult DDs told me that they LIKED MEGHAN MARKLE that would send red flags of alert to all.
Not what we aspire to in our family.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wish she would stop crashing successful women's meetings, she is precisely the opposite of a role model.



She has a certain cunning way of linking herself with the work that others are doing and then getting vicarious credit for being involved. In her childhood she learned that everyone loves volunteers. Showing up once and doing the bare minimum will get her just as much admiration as the ones who are there every day.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Very sorry @CeeJay, but I have to disagree on this one. Piers shouldn't move on, he should keep writing... His articles on the saga of the duchess are simply hilarious. Can't wait to read the next one...


100% agree .. I love his snark on her, but what I meant is that he should stop putting his personal feelings into his columns (e.g., she "markled" me and didn't invite me to the wedding .. that type of stuff).


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> She has a certain cunning way of linking herself with the work that others are doing and then getting vicarious credit for being involved. In her childhood she learned that everyone loves volunteers. *Showing up once and doing the bare minimum will get her just as much admiration as the ones who are there every day.*



Yes, Meghan Markle sure reminds me the "1-Minute Employee', ie arrives precisely 1-minute before the boss and leaves precisely 1-minute afterward.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I wish she would stop crashing successful women's meetings, she is precisely the opposite of a role model.


*THIS, THIS and THIS* .. she is EXACTLY what I hated in the Corporate America venue .. in essence, the "slept to the top" type of woman!  Give me a woman who has truly worked her a$$ off, mentored others, created new products, significantly increased the bottom line (while reducing cost) .. all the while, doing it in a predominantly male environment where oftentimes, they were the only one in the boardroom (not to also mention .. didn't necessarily "fit" the usual profile - e.g., didn't wear the stale business suit and white shirt)!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Yes, Meghan Markle sure reminds me the "1-Minute Employee', ie arrives precisely 1-minute before the boss and leaves precisely 1-minute afterward.


.. and BOOM, yet again @VigeeLeBrun .. you NAILED it, so true!!!  I know you and have seen this "1-Minute Employee" first-hand!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sweet, Sweet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Speaking at the opening of the Fortune Most Powerful Women summit: 

*Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'









						Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
					

The Duchess of Sussex has said her allegedly "inflammatory" opinions are only down to "people's interpretation" of her authentic self, insisting: "If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial". The Duchess said negative reactions to her comments are




					www.yahoo.com
				



*
The above brings to mind an old saying: "do what i say but don't do what i do." What I say and what I do are quite distinct matters! So ignore what I do, and just believe in what I say and follow my instructions... Repeat after me ... So much hypocrisy...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sweet, Sweet
> 
> View attachment 4863158


Sorry @CarryOn2020, but this poll is rigged; the results were 99% (K&W) and 1% (MM&H).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @CarryOn2020, but this poll is rigged; the results were 99% (K&W) and 1% (MM&H).



I voted 4 times.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Speaking at the opening of the Fortune Most Powerful Women summit:
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has said her allegedly "inflammatory" opinions are only down to "people's interpretation" of her authentic self, insisting: "If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial". The Duchess said negative reactions to her comments are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> The above brings to mind an old saying: "do what i say but don't do what i do." What I say and what I do are quite distinct matters! So ignore what I do, and just believe in what I say and follow my instructions... Repeat after me ... So much hypocrisy...


========

To state the obvious: if she doesn’t pay attention to the criticisms, how does she know it’s negative? 
H said in his Afghan video that he reads every word. Nothing they say can be trusted.


----------



## CeeJay

HA HA HA HA HA .. the latest BS MM is spewing!!! .. If she doesn't "pay attention" to criticism, then why in hell is she suing Tom, Dick & Harry?? (ooops - need another name for the last one)!!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kle-says-doesnt-focus-criticism-flattery.html


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> ========
> 
> To state the obvious: if she doesn’t pay attention to the criticisms, how does she know it’s negative?
> H said in his Afghan video that he reads every word. Nothing they say can be trusted.


You beat me to it, but *GMTA* (*G*reat *M*inds *T*hink *A*like)!!


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Speaking at the opening of the Fortune Most Powerful Women summit:
> 
> *Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has said her allegedly "inflammatory" opinions are only down to "people's interpretation" of her authentic self, insisting: "If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial". The Duchess said negative reactions to her comments are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> The above brings to mind an old saying: "do what i say but don't do what i do." What I say and what I do are quite distinct matters! So ignore what I do, and just believe in what I say and follow my instructions... Repeat after me ... So much hypocrisy...



I actually completely agree with what she's saying here... her words are actually never controversial. Also never provocative, original, innovative, or novel... that's my problem with these speeches she gives. It's the same old talking points. Maybe if she were to go spread her insight on how women are strong or helping the needy is kewl to Yemen or something it may actually be an accomplishment.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA HA HA .. the latest BS MM is spewing!!! .. If she doesn't "pay attention" to criticism, then *why in hell is she suing* Tom, Dick & *Harry*?? (ooops - need another name for the last one)!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kle-says-doesnt-focus-criticism-flattery.html


You are a visionary!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ========
> 
> To state the obvious: if she doesn’t pay attention to the criticisms, how does she know it’s negative?
> H said in his Afghan video that he reads every word. Nothing they say can be trusted.



For the longest time she maintained she never read the press about herself at all, even when she was already complaining how the racist British press was bullying her. She must have magic skills....or she is just full of it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For the longest time she maintained she never read the press about herself at all, even when she was already complaining how the racist British press was bullying her. She must have magic skills....or she is just full of it.


And she never sued the press or denied what the press said about them, oh wait...


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I actually completely agree with what she's saying here... her words are actually never controversial. Also never provocative, original, innovative, or novel... that's my problem with these speeches she gives. It's the same old talking points. Maybe if she were to go spread her insight on how women are strong or helping the needy is kewl to Yemen or something it may actually be an accomplishment.



This is my problem with her and Harry. I don’t always have a problem with what they say, it’s what they do that disgusts me. Hypocrites. Actions speak louder than words...

Yall can rehash my previous posts for sources... but telling me to be concious of my carbon footprint and the way they live their lives is absolute bs.

ugh... I don’t know how anyone buys into their $#!+.... grumble....


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> .. and BOOM, yet again @VigeeLeBrun .. you NAILED it, so true!!!  I know you and have seen this "1-Minute Employee" first-hand!


I've *employed* some of these 1 minute employees in the past. I loved how they'd think they were getting away with it  then when they least expected it...I hope that happens to MM.  She truly believes she is tricking us all!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has said her allegedly "inflammatory" opinions are only down to "people's interpretation" of her authentic self, insisting: "If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial". The Duchess said negative reactions to her comments are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Okay, she's right.  I only read what she's said, I don't listen to it, because simply watching her mouth open to spew forth nonsense makes me change the channel or close the webpage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Sol Ryan  Agree, their message is false, inauthentic and downright irritating.  
Let‘s enjoy some positivity. Admittedly, I am not a HuffPost reader, this is fun:


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> ugh... I don’t know how anyone buys into their $#!+.... grumble....



No one seemed to care about her thoughts before she got married.... and him - well, what thoughts?  Now suddenly she's God's gift to society.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA HA HA .. the latest BS MM is spewing!!! .. If she doesn't "pay attention" to criticism, then why in hell is she suing Tom, Dick & Harry?? (ooops - need another name for the last one)!!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...kle-says-doesnt-focus-criticism-flattery.html


Keep Harry on the list just in case she sues him for divorce


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I know, they were saying she had actually converted (but seems like there is doubt on that).



I read it was an often quoted mistake in one issue of Elle


----------



## CarryOn2020

5 articles - wow, just wow








						Meghan loses court battle over book
					

The Duchess of Sussex has lost a court battle to block claims she allegedly co-operated with the authors of Finding Freedom.




					www.news.com.au
				




_Meghan, who is currently living in the US with Prince Harry and their one-year-old son Archie, is suing ANL over five articles in total, two in the MoS and three on MailOnline, which were published in February 2019, and reproduced parts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father in August 2018.

ANL wholly denies the allegations, particularly the Duchess’s claim that the letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning, and says it will hotly contest the case.

A ten-day trial is expected to provisionally begin on January 11._

2021 off to roaring start -


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I read it was an often quoted mistake in one issue of Elle



Correct, there has been much backtracking on her choice of religion.  Seems odd that she has not made the effort to set the record straight. No idea if Omid addresses this topic. I guess it is her distorted way of keeping her name in the mags.

ETA:  editing so as not to create excessive posts — no wonder she blathers on about trolls and bots. Old news worth remembering:


Spoiler: 70% of her followers are bots!












						Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
					

A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals




					www.macleans.ca
				




Accounts within a Duchess of Sussex Twitter community were analysed and about 1,000 found to have tweeted more than two-and-a-half-million times since September, the Telegraph reports.








						Meghan Markle fan Twitter accounts that post 'obsessively' about Duchess 'linked to Russian conspiracy theories'
					

MEGHAN Markle fan Twitter accounts that post “obsessively” about her have been linked to Russian conspiracy theories, an investigation has found. Accounts within a Duchess of Sussex Twi…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely the Queen is paying attention - expensive court cases, possibility of MM testifying, drop in polls, QE’s own staff refusing to quarantine over Christmas. Tough times, to be sure.









						Why Sandringham staff have refused to commit themselves to a small Covid palace bubble over Christmas
					

The Queen may have to spend Christmas at Windsor for the first time in 33 years




					www.tatler.com


----------



## papertiger

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Yes, Meghan Markle sure reminds me the "1-Minute Employee', ie arrives precisely 1-minute before the boss and leaves precisely 1-minute afterward.



Sounds fair enough. 

I think she is more like the 1 min employer:
Sent "Me This Week" and "Please do ASAP" word-salad list as long as a menu, automated for 5am so people think she'd actually been up and working. 
Waltzes in midday after a spa and a "terribly important meeting with a VVIP" after hair blow-out
Off to to "terribly important charity lunch" with a wave of the back of the hand and "Have fun guuuysss" out the door


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Sol Ryan  Agree, their message is false, inauthentic and downright irritating.
> Let‘s enjoy some positivity. Admittedly, I am not a HuffPost reader, this is fun:
> 
> View attachment 4863254


Please don't forget to post when our beloved couple reaches the 1% mark.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely the Queen is paying attention - expensive court cases, possibility of MM testifying, drop in polls, QE’s own staff refusing to quarantine over Christmas. Tough times, to be sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Sandringham staff have refused to commit themselves to a small Covid palace bubble over Christmas
> 
> 
> The Queen may have to spend Christmas at Windsor for the first time in 33 years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


That’s interesting about Sandringham.  But, who normally caters to her at Sandringham during Christmas?  So, is it an issue this year because they want to keep the same team between BP and Sandringham? So the BP team doesn’t want to go with her.  It’s so interesting they’re all rebelling together.  Seems like people are feeling like maybe the royals aren’t *all that* anymore?


----------



## bag-mania

Damn, how many presumably intelligent people have fallen for her spiel? I can’t believe the editor of Fortune is calling her powerful. What has she done to deserve all this respect? She married a freaking prince, that’s it. Bizarre!

_During a one-on-one with Fortune's senior editor Ellen McGirt at the magazine's Most Powerful Women virtual summit on Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex was asked her advice to those with platforms who want to weigh in on the important issues of the day._

_“You’re not the only powerful woman who has had a sitting president take a shot at you, mobs come at you, powerful people and powerful forces try to take you down or try to disparage your message,” McGirt said.

Meghan replied, saying she doesn’t listen to all the “noise” out there and is focused on living a “purpose-driven life” and following her “own moral compass.”_

_“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_










						Meghan Markle Shares the Inspiring Quote She Displayed in Her Room 'Many Moons Ago'
					

Meghan Markle reveals the Georgia O'Keefe quote that resonates with her now more than ever




					people.com


----------



## kipp

^^^ Well, MM certainly does have a "purpose driven life"!


----------



## tiktok

Annawakes said:


> That’s interesting about Sandringham.  But, who normally caters to her at Sandringham during Christmas?  So, is it an issue this year because they want to keep the same team between BP and Sandringham? So the BP team doesn’t want to go with her.  It’s so interesting they’re all rebelling together.  Seems like people are feeling like maybe the royals aren’t *all that* anymore?



I realize as an American I have no real understanding of royalty, but it does seem like such an archaic notion these days, especially when these “royals” show us every day just how much they are “just like us”. If that’s the case why do they deserve all this privilege and deference they didn’t earn? If Harry was born to a normal family he would probably be working at Nando’s...


----------



## marietouchet

Why does the BP team not want to follow ?

I will guess , the BP people want some time off.  They have been with her for how many months ? Boris Johnson has suggested six more months of lockdown, so Sandringham people don’t want to get stuck for 6 mos
It is like being stuck on a sequestered jury , not a picnic


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> 5 articles - wow, just wow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan loses court battle over book
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has lost a court battle to block claims she allegedly co-operated with the authors of Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Meghan, who is currently living in the US with Prince Harry and their one-year-old son Archie, is suing ANL over five articles in total, two in the MoS and three on MailOnline, which were published in February 2019, and reproduced parts of a handwritten letter she sent to her father in August 2018.
> 
> ANL wholly denies the allegations, particularly the Duchess’s claim that the letter was edited in any way that changed its meaning, and says it will hotly contest the case.
> 
> A ten-day trial is expected to provisionally begin on January 11._
> 
> 2021 off to roaring start -


Thank you for counting the number of suits pending, I was wondering


----------



## Annawakes

kipp said:


> ^^^ Well, MM certainly does have a "purpose driven life"!


Hey at least she quoted Georgia OKeefe and didn’t plagiarize it!


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> QE’s own staff refusing to quarantine over Christmas.






marietouchet said:


> Why does the BP team not want to follow ?
> 
> I will guess , the BP people want some time off.  They have been with her for how many months ? Boris Johnson has suggested six more months of lockdown, so Sandringham people don’t want to get stuck for 6 mos
> It is like being stuck on a sequestered jury , not a picnic



So the minimum wage earning support staff aren’t willing to give up a month+ of family time in service to their liege over Christmas?

Off with their heads!

Whatever’s next? Ravens leaving the Tower? I know their wings are clipped, but still...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

Genie27 said:


> So the minimum wage earning support staff aren’t willing to give up a month+ of family time in service to their liege over Christmas?
> 
> Off with their heads!
> 
> Whatever’s next? Ravens leaving the Tower? I know their wings are clipped, but still...


I’m kidding of course. The age of lifelong serfdom to a company or family by the loyal retainer is thankfully almost dead.


----------



## mdcx

So, all is takes to be considered a powerful woman is....marrying a rich, high-status man. Got it.
M is looking like she has had a vat of fillers injected imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mdcx said:


> So, all is takes to be considered a powerful woman is....marrying a rich, high-status man. Got it.
> *M is looking like she has had a vat of fillers injected imo.*


 But... she's a natural beauty...


----------



## rose60610

Meghan's definition of "WOKE":  "I married SO rich, as in BRF RICH, so whatever I say must be adhered to, or YOU are not woke. Whatever word salad I utter must be applauded by at least ten rags to reach those who are SOOO beneath me. Whatever crap I spew must be worshipped as newsworthy and brilliant. When I'm offended, YOU must be offended. When I deem anything "OK" then YOU must not detract from it and go along with Sonny


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares the Inspiring Quote She Displayed in Her Room 'Many Moons Ago'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals the Georgia O'Keefe quote that resonates with her now more than ever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Bwahaha sure. The narcissist that thrives on flattery and adulation just doesn't care. Gimme a break.


----------



## maryg1

bag-mania said:


> _ It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares the Inspiring Quote She Displayed in Her Room 'Many Moons Ago'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals the Georgia O'Keefe quote that resonates with her now more than ever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


How do people actually believe her, when she was moaning just because  nobody asked if she was ok?


----------



## Pessie

maryg1 said:


> How do people actually believe her, when she was moaning just because  nobody asked if she was ok?


The more she insists on showing her real self the more I’m embarrassed for her.  Before she became as famous as she wanted to be, she could backtrack, contradict, exaggerate, lie, dump, reinvent herself and move on to the next target - but now it’s all on tape and in print.  Her back catalogue is there for everyone to pore over.
Can‘t wait for the 2024 debates quite frankly!


----------



## Pessie

Duplicate


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Damn, how many presumably intelligent people have fallen for her spiel? I can’t believe the editor of Fortune is calling her powerful. What has she done to deserve all this respect? She married a freaking prince, that’s it. Bizarre!
> 
> _During a one-on-one with Fortune's senior editor Ellen McGirt at the magazine's Most Powerful Women virtual summit on Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex was asked her advice to those with platforms who want to weigh in on the important issues of the day._
> 
> _“You’re not the only powerful woman who has had a sitting president take a shot at you, mobs come at you, powerful people and powerful forces try to take you down or try to disparage your message,” McGirt said.
> 
> Meghan replied, saying she doesn’t listen to all the “noise” out there and is focused on living a “purpose-driven life” and following her “own moral compass.”_
> 
> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares the Inspiring Quote She Displayed in Her Room 'Many Moons Ago'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals the Georgia O'Keefe quote that resonates with her now more than ever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I think most people listen to their own moral compass. 

I think MM may like check she's not sitting in a magnetic field before consulting hers.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mdcx said:


> So, all is takes to be considered a powerful woman is....marrying a rich, high-status man. Got it.
> M is looking like she has had a vat of fillers injected imo.



It really is pathetic.  Do you think she asked to be on the panel?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lanasyogamama said:


> It really is pathetic.  Do you think *she asked* to be on the panel?



*lym*, yes.
<mic drop>


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares the Inspiring Quote She Displayed in Her Room 'Many Moons Ago'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals the Georgia O'Keefe quote that resonates with her now more than ever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I find this very interesting, as she is suing a newspaper for articles criticizing her but not suing the authors of the FF book because it is not offensive. Sound like two quite different drains to me...

I do think she is a natural beauty fillers or not, she is very pretty.


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> I find this very interesting, as she is suing a newspaper for articles criticizing her but not suing the authors of the FF book because it is not offensive. Sound like two quite different drains to me...
> 
> I do think she is a natural beauty fillers or not, she is very pretty.


I think her natural look was very cute but it's not the same look she has now.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think her natural look was very cute but it's not the same look she has now.
> View attachment 4863718


She used to be a mini me for her mother


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> I do think she is a natural beauty fillers or not, she is very pretty.



Have you seen her original face, though? What you see today is not how she looked before she started to have procedures in her teens. I'll give her that, she picked a great plastic surgeon who was subtle and didn't make it obvious, though I feel her newest changes aren't quite as subtle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I think most people listen to their own moral compass.
> 
> I think MM may like check she's not sitting in a magnetic field before consulting hers.


I'm starting to update myself on the important news of the day (this thread), and "sitting in a magnetic field" made me laugh out loud!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> It really is pathetic.  Do you think she asked to be on the panel?


Her PR-team & friends (MA&O?) must be working overtime to get her gigs. The 'pathetic' word is a very kind one for this.


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> That’s interesting about Sandringham.  But, who normally caters to her at Sandringham during Christmas?  So, is it an issue this year because they want to keep the same team between BP and Sandringham? So the BP team doesn’t want to go with her.  It’s so interesting they’re all rebelling together.  Seems like people are feeling like maybe the royals aren’t *all that* anymore?


I read that a team would have to isolate for a min of a month - no family visits at the holidays, plus the possibility of an extension beyond the month


----------



## Chanbal

I'm just posting this here because of the title, the article doesn't say anything new:
*Meghan Markle, a martyr to misinformation: Duchess insists she doesn't pay attention to 'criticism OR flattery', saying she's focused on 'spending time' with Prince Harry and 'watching our little one grow'*








						Meghan Markle says she doesn't focus on 'criticism or flattery'
					

Meghan, 39, addressed the virtual summit on Tuesday afternoon, when she took part in a one-on-one conversation about 'creating humane tech'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




A martyr that keeps throwing under the bus family, friends, allies, ... anyone that crosses her path or stops being useful to her. I think that whoever is supporting her has an agenda, and it is not a good one.


----------



## bag-mania

maryg1 said:


> How do people actually believe her, when she was moaning just because  nobody asked if she was ok?



I can guarantee that these women from the summits who are gushing over her do not know about that. They never saw her pity-me interview. They think she is what she tells them she is, a STRONG WOMAN WHO WANTS TO BRING IMPORTANT CHANGE!

If they _do_ know how she really is it means they overlook it because it's in the best interest of their organization to have her there for promotional purposes.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> I'm just posting this here because of the title, the article doesn't say anything new:
> *Meghan Markle, a martyr to misinformation: Duchess insists she doesn't pay attention to 'criticism OR flattery', saying she's focused on 'spending time' with Prince Harry and 'watching our little one grow'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she doesn't focus on 'criticism or flattery'
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, addressed the virtual summit on Tuesday afternoon, when she took part in a one-on-one conversation about 'creating humane tech'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A martyr that keeps throwing under the bus family, friends, allies, ... anyone that crosses her path or stops being useful to her. I think that whoever is supporting her has an agenda, and it is not a good one.


I don’t know, I think it’s all too easy to accuse everyone of having an agenda, but in my experience people are generally very kind, and most people want to help if they can.  That’s what she takes advantage of, and I’m sure she’s left a lot of hurt people in the trail of wreckage and burnt bridges behind her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I'm just posting this here because of the title, the article doesn't say anything new:
> *Meghan Markle, a martyr to misinformation: Duchess insists she doesn't pay attention to 'criticism OR flattery', saying she's focused on 'spending time' with Prince Harry and 'watching our little one grow'*


Is that why she's suing the daily mail?    To quote "her allegations that journalists had acted dishonestly and had caused the rift between her and her estranged father Thomas by ‘digging up dirt’ to portray Meghan in a 'negative light'. "


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> She used to be a mini me for her mother


I think she also looks a lot like her father in the first picture.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I can guarantee that these women from the summits who are gushing over her do not know about that. They never saw her pity-me interview. They think she is what she tells them she is, a STRONG WOMAN WHO WANTS TO BRING IMPORTANT CHANGE!
> 
> If they _do_ know how she really is it means they overlook it because it's in the best interest of their organization to have her there for promotional purposes.



I don't think most people care one way or another about Meghan... her only value to these things is she's famous and particularly hot in this pop culture news cycle. She's not saying anything the people in that room haven't already heard tons of times before.


----------



## lalame

It's probably much easier to have Meghan versus an expert in a field like an accomplished actor, businessperson, athlete, etc.... with an expert, you'd have to do some research into their field and tailor the story to the theme of the event. With someone like Meghan, what're you really going to ask about? "Tell us how you accomplished .... err... um.... so what do you think is wrong in the world today?" "What should women do?" "What do you think about this thing or that?" It's like a conversation you'd have with a stranger off the street.


----------



## chicinthecity777

*Experts Tell Meghan Markle 'Get Out Now' After Blow in Tabloid Privacy Case*








						Experts Tell Meghan Markle 'Get Out Now' After Blow in Tabloid Privacy Case
					

Meghan Markle could make bad publicity worse unless she drops her tabloid privacy case following a setback this week, experts tell Newsweek.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Experts Tell Meghan Markle 'Get Out Now' After Blow in Tabloid Privacy Case*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Experts Tell Meghan Markle 'Get Out Now' After Blow in Tabloid Privacy Case
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle could make bad publicity worse unless she drops her tabloid privacy case following a setback this week, experts tell Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


They’ve been reading this thread again


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't think most people care one way or another about Meghan... her only value to these things is she's famous and particularly hot in this pop culture news cycle. She's not saying anything the people in that room haven't already heard tons of times before.



It's a perspective thing too. We want to know what she's going to do next so we read all of these schlock articles about her. Most people aren't getting their daily dose of Meghan. Those people are happily oblivious to all of the negative traits we've observed over the past two years.

There must be other desperate celebrities who are promoting themselves during COVID that we haven't noticed. Does anyone know of someone else who is currently doing the Meghan routine?


----------



## chicinthecity777

*Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book*








						Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book
					

The Duchess of Sussex has lost another round in her legal battle with The Mail on Sunday after the newspaper won the right to use a recent book about her in its




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

We will see if arrogant stupidity rules the day. Only a delusional person would want to face the opposing QC after the admission of the book to the suit. They will throw it back on her to prove that any of her privacy has been breached. All they have to do is get some evidence that she spoke to the 5 friends or the authors and she is cooked.  A good attorney will trip her up despite any amount of coaching she receives    They will goad her into a response. That is why these guys get paid the big bucks.  She does not think fast on her feet. Everything she says is scripted. If they throw her a question she is not prepared for, she’s done


She will lose the copyright issue if it is shown that she broadcasted this letter. The paper only published selected portions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> We will see if arrogant stupidity rules the day. Only a delusional person would want to face the opposing QC after the admission of the book to the suit. They will throw it back on her to prove that any of her privacy has been breached. All they have to do is get some evidence that she spoke to the 5 friends or the authors and she is cooked.  A good attorney will trip her up despite any amount of coaching she receives    They will goad her into a response. That is why these guys get paid the big bucks.  *She does not think fast on her feet. Everything she says is scripted. If they throw her a question she is not prepared for, she’s done*
> 
> 
> She will lose the copyright issue if it is shown that she broadcasted this letter. The paper only published selected portions.



Spot on. 
I don't think she's ever been in any interview situation that hasn't been all fluff. She destroys herself with dumb statements. M is so full of contradictions that lawyers will have a field day. All they have to do use her own words against her. When cornered she's going to cry "why are people so mean to me?" and whip out a handkerchief to dry her tears. As though the lawsuits were not her idea to begin with.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Damn, how many presumably intelligent people have fallen for her spiel? I can’t believe the editor of Fortune is calling her powerful. What has she done to deserve all this respect? She married a freaking prince, that’s it. Bizarre!
> 
> _During a one-on-one with Fortune's senior editor Ellen McGirt at the magazine's Most Powerful Women virtual summit on Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex was asked her advice to those with platforms who want to weigh in on the important issues of the day._
> 
> _“You’re not the only powerful woman who has had a sitting president take a shot at you, mobs come at you, powerful people and powerful forces try to take you down or try to disparage your message,” McGirt said.
> 
> Meghan replied, saying she doesn’t listen to all the “noise” out there and is focused on living a “purpose-driven life” and following her “own moral compass.”_
> 
> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares the Inspiring Quote She Displayed in Her Room 'Many Moons Ago'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals the Georgia O'Keefe quote that resonates with her now more than ever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


.. and of course, she has to use someone else's quote (sadly Georgia O'Keefe - one of my all-time favorite women)!  Look at what Georgia did .. and that was MANY years ago, what has MM done? .. big-whoop, married a pouting-stupid-a$$ of a "Prince"???


----------



## bag-mania

I think she’ll ride the attention train all the way until right before the court date and then drop it. Either that or she’s paid all five witnesses plus Scobie with her Netflix advance to say what she needs them to say.


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> We will see if arrogant stupidity rules the day. Only a delusional person would want to face the opposing QC after the admission of the book to the suit. They will throw it back on her to prove that any of her privacy has been breached. All they have to do is get some evidence that she spoke to the 5 friends or the authors and she is cooked.  A good attorney will trip her up despite any amount of coaching she receives    They will goad her into a response. That is why these guys get paid the big bucks.  She does not think fast on her feet. Everything she says is scripted. If they throw her a question she is not prepared for, she’s done
> 
> 
> She will lose the copyright issue if it is shown that she broadcasted this letter. The paper only published selected portions.


I’m sure her lawyers will prep her before she takes the stand.  That’s allowed in the U.K. right?  For starters, they’ll rein her in.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> *I don't think most people care one way or another about Meghan*... her only value to these things is she's famous and particularly hot in this pop culture news cycle. She's not saying anything the people in that room haven't already heard tons of times before.




*lalame*, you are too kind.

The ONLY people who probably "care" about Meghan Markle at this point, are the people on her payroll, and/or making a profit off of her via the BRF.

It's a shame but that's life grifter-style, symbiotic relationships only!

And worth repeating guys, Meghan will show up in court <hey, she can handle it, she prepped@Suits, remember?> 
MM in court with a baby bump and a huge tear.
Those big bad lawyers better not make her cry!

AND, have we forgotten her Netflix reality-tv deal?
More footage for the series! Yes, DISGUSTING.
Hello? Charles? PLEASE PHONE HOME!!!


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> I’m sure her lawyers will prep her before she takes the stand.  That’s allowed in the U.K. right?  For starters, *they’ll rein her in.*



Good luck with that. It's possible she MIGHT listen to them since money is on the line. She wasn't the greatest student of the BRF and seemed to enjoy breaking or pushing protocols. The best thing she could do to help herself is to keep her mouth shut as much possible.


----------



## bellecate

Aimee3 said:


> I’m sure her lawyers will prep her before she takes the stand.  That’s allowed in the U.K. right?  For starters, they’ll rein her in.



I don’t think she’ll allow them to rein her in. My impression of her is that she considers herself smarter than anyone else and would go ahead and do and say what *she *believes is best. Completely disregarding anything her lawyers might suggest. She has shown so far not to have ever taken the guidance of anyone.


----------



## lalame

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *lalame*, you are too kind.
> 
> *The ONLY people who probably "care" about Meghan Markle at this point, are the people on her payroll, and/or making a profit off of her via the BRF.
> 
> It's a shame but that's life grifter-style, symbiotic relationships only!*
> 
> And worth repeating guys, Meghan will show up in court <hey, she can handle it, she prepped for this moment during Suits!> with a baby bump and a huge tear.
> Those big bad lawyers better not make her cry!
> 
> AND, have we forgotten her Netflix reality-tv deal?
> More footage for the series! Yes, DISGUSTING.
> Hello? Charles? PLEASE PHONE HOME!!!



It's the Hollywood way! True, I should've clarified... no one, except the people who make money from her, care much.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How is it possible that she has become as obnoxious as the presidential election?  Have decorum and manners left the planet?
This is why W&K shine. They appear calm, authentic, reasoned, and thoughtful. The world doesn't need this constant assault of _fake_ victimhood by 2 grifters.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Misunderstood *
> 
> *Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.*









Pessie said:


> Breaking news.  *The court has just ruled against Meghan, meaning the Mail can use Finding Freedom in its defence against the privacy action concerning the infamous letter to her Dad.*
> Talk about being hoist by your own petard









Chanbal said:


> Speaking at the opening of the Fortune Most Powerful Women summit:
> *Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex: 'If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has said her allegedly "inflammatory" opinions are only down to "people's interpretation" of her authentic self, insisting: "If you listen to what I actually say, it's not controversial". The Duchess said negative reactions to her comments are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Actually...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has lost another round in her legal battle with The Mail on Sunday after the newspaper won the right to use a recent book about her in its
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



WTF that could buy someone a house. Such a gross waste of money.


----------



## scarlet555

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has lost another round in her legal battle with The Mail on Sunday after the newspaper won the right to use a recent book about her in its
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



Retribution?  Live and learn...


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Philip, 99, is 'very disappointed' by Meghan Markle's failure to 'support the monarchy' and can't understand why she prioritised having 'her voice' over helping Harry in his duties, royal expert claims*








						Prince Philip is 'disappointed' by Meghan not supporting the monarchy
					

The Duke of Edinburgh, 99, who gave up his naval career to support the Queen, was 'irritated' when Meghan Markle, 39, failed to do the same in favour of having 'her voice', Ingrid Seward told Sky News.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Dear Prince Philip,

MM was never interested in supporting the monarchy; though, please be assured she didn't fail to use the monarchy to promote herself. And, if the BRF doesn't put a stop to it, she will continue using the monarchy for many years to come. I don't want to sound pessimist, but perhaps until the monarchy is disassembled. 

She has 100% right to prioritize 'her voice', and I can't blame her for that. However, I would have also preferred that she would prioritize 'helping Harry in his duties' with the BRF; this would have spared us of so many word salads and hypocrisy each time she speaks.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> How is it possible that *she has become as obnoxious as the presidential election?  Have decorum and manners left the planet?*
> This is why W&K shine. They appear calm, authentic, reasoned, and thoughtful. The world doesn't need this constant assault of _fake_ victimhood by 2 grifters.



Yes, love this post. tbh mainly bc you read my mind,* CarryOn*.
Last night's debacle <will say no more> was literally UNBEARABLE. 

Leading me to believe this morning, that right now, all decorum and manners have left this planet. 

Maybe my angst lies in the fact that it is a disappointment when an honored INSTITUTION such as the BRF, does NOT stand up to insults, disrespectful behavior, lies, security leaks, etc on a grand and v public scale from insiders, it is a poor lead to follow. 

Is that an example of how we should act when grifter-style comes to a city near us?  
Shut our eyes w/a stiff-upper-lip and all that? 

Not sure that exactly WORKS IN 2020.


----------



## gracekelly

If she shows up, I am waiting for the belly clutching "I think I am having a miscarriage."  Or she will refuse to fly because she thinks she is pregnant.  All this baby talk is the plant now for all of this.  I remember when a mafia don showed up in a NYC court in his bathrobe claiming mental incompetence.









						Vincent (Chin) Gigante is arrested while wearing a bathrobe in Greenwich Village in 1990
					

Vincent (the Chin) Gigante is one of many named in the $143 million window scam.




					www.nydailynews.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have you seen her original face, though? What you see today is not how she looked before she started to have procedures in her teens. I'll give her that, she picked a great plastic surgeon who was subtle and didn't make it obvious, though I feel her newest changes aren't quite as subtle.


According to my friends that knew her in her High School days, her first Nose procedure was done in the summer of her Senior Year and when she came back to school, people did notice (although - yes it was subtle).  She had MANY more procedures after that .. her Dad paying for them all (and look at what he gets .. NADA, NOTHING, ZED, ZERO ..)


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I think she’ll ride the attention train all the way until right before the court date and then drop it. Either that or she’s paid all five witnesses plus Scobie with her Netflix advance to say what she needs them to say.


Nope .. she's not going to give ANY OF THEM a dime of her "hard-earned" $$$ (and we sure know Harry won't kick in any)!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF that could buy someone a house. Such a gross waste of money.


Not out here in SoCal .. that's CHUMP change!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, I’m worried that she’s successful in the “fake it til you make it” sense. Like now she can say that she was one of Fortune’s most powerful women, and that will lead to the next panel, etc.


----------



## marietouchet

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Yes, love this post. tbh mainly bc you read my mind,* CarryOn*.
> Last night's debacle <will say no more> was literally UNBEARABLE.
> 
> Leading me to believe this morning, that right now, all decorum and manners have left this planet.
> 
> Maybe my angst lies in the fact that it is a disappointment when an honored INSTITUTION such as the BRF, does NOT stand up to insults, disrespectful behavior, lies, security leaks, etc on a grand and v public scale from insiders, it is a poor lead to follow.
> 
> Is that an example of how we should act when grifter-style comes to a city near us?
> Shut our eyes w/a stiff-upper-lip and all that?
> 
> Not sure that exactly WORKS IN 2020.


I cannot take credit for this amazing bon mot - last night was like a Verzuz competition


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

This.

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-mar...k-lives-matter-fortune-powerful-women-1535348

"Meghan Markle.....scrapped a pre-taped speech for her old high school in order to back Black Lives Matter, she has revealed......
And I didn't sit down and write anything and I didn't ask anyone for help about how I should word this.

I was just in tears thinking about it and explaining to my husband why I thought that it was so heartbreaking, certainly for me, to be back in Los Angeles and it feeling so reminiscent to the state of Los Angeles with the riots after the Rodney King beating."

Say what? You too, Newsweek?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF that could buy someone a house. Such a gross waste of money.


I agree with you, it is gross.


----------



## Annawakes

Wow, I hadn't thought about her potentially showing up in court with a baby bump.  Talk about media circus!!!!!!!!  It's gonna be good!


----------



## Aimee3

bellecate said:


> I don’t think she’ll allow them to rein her in. My impression of her is that she considers herself smarter than anyone else and would go ahead and do and say what *she *believes is best. Completely disregarding anything her lawyers might suggest. She has shown so far not to have ever taken the guidance of anyone.


I should’ve said they’ll “try” to rein her in.  The more she says, the more they’ll have to use against her.  As fun and amusing trials are on tv, it’s not like that in real life.


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> This.
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-mar...k-lives-matter-fortune-powerful-women-1535348
> 
> "Meghan Markle.....scrapped a pre-taped speech for her old high school in order to back Black Lives Matter, she has revealed......
> And I didn't sit down and write anything and I didn't ask anyone for help about how I should word this.
> 
> I was just in tears thinking about it and explaining to my husband why I thought that it was so heartbreaking, certainly for me, to be back in Los Angeles and it feeling so reminiscent to the state of Los Angeles with the riots after the Rodney King beating."
> 
> Say what? You too, Newsweek?


Uggh .. and you and I both know (living in the LA area) that she was not even CLOSE to the Rodney King riots!  Did she see it on TV? .. yes, very likely .. but it's just hard for me to believe that she "suffered" so badly here given her Woodland Hills (Country Club area) house, private school education, great University education, multiple Plastic Surgeries, etc. -- heck, she likely had it better than many other folks!


----------



## Chanbal

VigeeLeBrun said:


> This.
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-mar...k-lives-matter-fortune-powerful-women-1535348
> 
> "Meghan Markle.....scrapped a pre-taped speech for her old high school in order to back Black Lives Matter, she has revealed......
> And I didn't sit down and write anything and I didn't ask anyone for help about how I should word this.
> 
> I was just in tears thinking about it and explaining to my husband why I thought that it was so heartbreaking, certainly for me, to be back in Los Angeles and it feeling so reminiscent to the state of Los Angeles with the riots after the Rodney King beating."
> 
> Say what? You too, Newsweek?


You seem to have omitted the part that "Meghan Markle cried"... Many of us also cried, but coming from her, I wonder if the expression "crocodile tears" applies. I sincerely hope not. 

For the ones that are not familiar with this old expression:
*crocodile tears*. An insincere display of grief. This term comes from the mistaken notion that *crocodiles* weep while eating their prey, one held in ancient Roman times. www.dictionary.com › browse › crocodile-tears


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, I’m worried that she’s successful in the *“fake it til you make it”* sense. Like now she can say that she was one of Fortune’s most powerful women, and that will lead to the next panel, etc.


Yep, you are very right! This is why I don't appreciate whoever is supporting this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  Philip is right. Since he understands royalty better than anyone else, he *must* *must* *must* take action. Get his sons, Charles and Andrew, under control. Insist that Charles get his whiny brat under control. Cut off finances, cars, travel, food, water, electricity, cut off whatever the hell works. :scissors: Tell the Palace staff to stop talking to the press, of course everyone can celebrate Christmas. Sheesh. 

Throw a fit, Philip. There is nothing like a 99 yr old man, full of vim and vigor, storming the palace   Show the young-un‘s how things get done. By golly, do it, man.


----------



## Lodpah

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Experts Tell Meghan Markle 'Get Out Now' After Blow in Tabloid Privacy Case*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Experts Tell Meghan Markle 'Get Out Now' After Blow in Tabloid Privacy Case
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle could make bad publicity worse unless she drops her tabloid privacy case following a setback this week, experts tell Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


How is she not suing her friends then? That’s my question. If she was so concerned about the leak why did she not cross claim her friends? Any lawyers here?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal  Philip is right. Since he understands royalty better than anyone else, he *must* *must* *must* take action. Get his sons, Charles and Andrew, under control. Insist that Charles get his whiny brat under control. Cut off finances, cars, travel, food, water, electricity, cut off whatever the hell works. :scissors: Tell the Palace staff to stop talking to the press, of course everyone can celebrate Christmas. Sheesh.
> 
> Throw a fit, Philip. There is nothing like a 99 yr old man, full of vim and vigor, storming the palace   Show the young-un‘s how things get done. By golly, do it, man.



I sometimes feel a 20 years younger Philip would have put a halt to this circus a long time ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Her track record of clawing her way into the BRF, rushing to the 50 million dollar wedding altar, only to turn around and complain about her harsh life all the while loving every moment on camera, suing for privacy, then dumping the BRF to parlay her newfound celebrity into a Netflix deal doesn't help her credibility. Clearly she'll do anything for money and will use and abuse any person, monarchy, or tool to obtain it. I think we all like money (so we can purchase nice handbags and aspire to comfortable lives) but the average person wouldn't target a life of royal luxury, whine about it, then use it to fuel lawsuits for a buck and pimp it for Hollywood deals. The BRF was so duped. I hope they sue her and Prince Dope for even thinking about producing a Netflix movie about Diana or The Firm.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sometimes feel a 20 years younger Philip would have put a halt to this circus a long time ago.



He still can. He has survived countless wars, seen real devastation up close and personal, has suffered real loss and knows how to motivate people. Never underestimate those guys. He has his reasons for letting things spiral so far down.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sometimes feel a 20 years younger Philip would have put a halt to this circus a long time ago.


Meghan and Harry would love the blame for the mess they created to be shifted to someone else. The responsibility lies entirely with them IMO.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pessie said:


> Meghan and Harry would love the blame for the mess they created to be shifted to someone else. The responsibility lies entirely with them IMO.


Yes! It's so easy to blame BP for MM & JCMH's actions instead of the two adults, who ditched their royal duties to become rich and famous, by engaging in all kinds of questionable deals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember when Diana wouldn’t leave Charles, Philip got involved by exchanging letters with her. Perhaps that’s why DM posted their story.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember when Diana wouldn’t leave Charles, Philip got involved by exchanging letters with her. Perhaps that’s why DM posted their story.



Ah, but by the that time  Charles and Diana despised each other. Harry and Meghan are a united front thinking only of themselves. Phillip is a toothless old lion with no power in this situation.


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> Meghan and Harry would love the blame for the mess they created to be shifted to someone else. The responsibility lies entirely with them IMO.


They just did.









						Meghan Markle Seemingly Confirms Prince William and Kate Middleton Were the Reason Behind Megxit in New Interview
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle also reportedly violated the deal they made with Queen Elizabeth when the urged Americans to vote.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				




They are blaming Will and Kate.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> They just did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Seemingly Confirms Prince William and Kate Middleton Were the Reason Behind Megxit in New Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle also reportedly violated the deal they made with Queen Elizabeth when the urged Americans to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are blaming Will and Kate.


Wow, who would've thought that #6 would or should receive the same perks as #2 in line to the throne. MM & JCMH never cease to amaze. They are so jealous.


----------



## Tootsie17

Maggie Muggins said:


> Wow, who would've thought that #6 would or should receive the same perks as #2 in line to the throne. MM & JCMH never cease to amaze. They are so jealous.


W and K must get quite a few perks to make H and M so jealous.  I guess M's reported $500,000 wardrobe allowance doesn't buy much these days and pales by comparison to some of Kate's perks. M should have done her BRF protocol homework before marrying H.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. and you and I both know (living in the LA area) that she was not even CLOSE to the Rodney King riots!  Did she see it on TV? .. yes, very likely .. but it's just hard for me to believe that she "suffered" so badly here given her Woodland Hills (Country Club area) house, private school education, great University education, multiple Plastic Surgeries, etc. -- heck, she likely had it better than many other folks!


Well, I WAS living in South Central during the Rodney King riots and it was absolutely terrifying.  I've seen lots of awful things on TV, and to compare watching something to actually being in the midst of it is not the same.  She was what?  11 at the time of the riots?  She was so woke even back then that she had her finger on the pulse at that early age?  I call BS.  I may have to take a break from this thread simply because everything I read she says pi$$es me off more and more.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Well, I WAS living in South Central during the Rodney King riots and it was absolutely terrifying.  I've seen lots of awful things on TV, and to compare watching something to actually being in the midst of it is not the same.  She was what?  11 at the time of the riots?  She was so woke even back then that she had her finger on the pulse at that early age?  I call BS.  *I may have to take a break from this thread simply because everything I read she says pi$$es me off more and more.*


I understand...It's difficult to focus on all our good fortunes during this damn pandemic. Sometimes I get so angry when reading about this ungrateful, selfish and oh-woe-is-me, rich, little, little madam... But on reflection, I'm thankful for being just plain me, lucky to be alive with my husband, and puppy.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

purseinsanity said:


> Well, I WAS living in South Central during the Rodney King riots and it was absolutely terrifying.  I've seen lots of awful things on TV, and *to compare watching something to actually being in the midst of it is not the same.*  She was what?  11 at the time of the riots?  She was so woke even back then that she had her finger on the pulse at that early age?  I call BS.  I may have to take a break from this thread simply because everything I read she says pi$$es me off more and more.



omg, *purseinsanity*, so true!

Always thought of myself as an extremely compassionate person until a few events occurred that were life-changing <ie terrifying> and I realized that regardless of an individual's depth of natural compassion there are some events in life that are so forceful that to fully comprehend them, they must be experienced directly.

Wars, rioting mobs, terrorism, random acts of violence, even forceful natural events such as hurricanes, tsunamis, etc. are the types of events of which I write.

Hey Meghan Markle, stop hitching your gold-digging wagon to every issue du jour!

What will you remember next?  JFK's assassination? Maybe you were MM@Kent State too? MM@Silicon Valley w/Sergy & Larry? Ummm, wait for it....MM@The Fall of the BRF 2020!!! Absolutely terrifying.  Got it.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. and you and I both know (living in the LA area) that she was not even CLOSE to the Rodney King riots!  Did she see it on TV? .. yes, very likely .. but it's just hard for me to believe that she "suffered" so badly here given her Woodland Hills (Country Club area) house, private school education, great University education, multiple Plastic Surgeries, etc. -- heck, she likely had it better than many other folks!





purseinsanity said:


> Well, I WAS living in South Central during the Rodney King riots and it was absolutely terrifying.  I've seen lots of awful things on TV, and to compare watching something to actually being in the midst of it is not the same.  She was what?  11 at the time of the riots?  She was so woke even back then that she had her finger on the pulse at that early age?  I call BS.  I may have to take a break from this thread simply because everything I read she says pi$$es me off more and more.



I'm too young to remember what it was like after the riots specifically... but was it similar to the recent civil unrest with George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, etc? I COULD understand it if she meant it was an unsettling period for everyone, even if you weren't literally there. It's been pretty emotionally rough lately, and I live far far far away from where those events took place.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I'm too young to remember what it was like after the riots specifically... but was it similar to the recent civil unrest with George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, etc? I COULD understand it if she meant it was an unsettling period for everyone, even if you weren't literally there. It's been pretty emotionally rough lately, and I live far far far away from where those events took place.


I can understand that.  It's just that when it comes to MM, she's so disingenuous that it's hard to imagine her feeling "unsettled" about anything that doesn't directly affect her.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> They just did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Seemingly Confirms Prince William and Kate Middleton Were the Reason Behind Megxit in New Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle also reportedly violated the deal they made with Queen Elizabeth when the urged Americans to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are blaming Will and Kate.


Yes I’m aware they are, my comments were in the context of the discussion here blaming Prince Philip and other elderly members of the Royal Family for not wading in.  Quite why a very old man in frail health should be held to task over this mess baffles me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

So having tested the waters and been roundly ridiculed MM is now hotly denying reports she ever intended to run for high office   There’s a pattern here isn’t there? 
What next? I wonder, in this her oh so  “purposeful life” - time to roll out that line of Archie merch maybe?  Start a few bump rumours perhaps?  Girls gotta stay “relevant“ don’t you know...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> Meghan and Harry would love the blame for the mess they created to be shifted to someone else. The responsibility lies entirely with them IMO.



I'm not blaming him, just stating that a younger Philip would probably have had a lot to say.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> W and K must get quite a few perks to make H and M so jealous.  I guess M's reported $500,000 wardrobe allowance doesn't buy much these days and pales by comparison to some of Kate's perks. M should have done her BRF protocol homework before marrying H.



But it's a well-known fact Charles upped both their general allowance and Meghan's frivolous clothes allowance when they first got married to set them up and also paid for furnishing Frogmore. That year at least they received way more money than the future king who was three children. Also I don't think Kate has ever spent nearly a million bucks in clothes in less than a year.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I'm too young to remember what it was like after the riots specifically... but was it similar to the recent civil unrest with George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, etc? I COULD understand it if she meant it was an unsettling period for everyone, even if you weren't literally there. It's been pretty emotionally rough lately, and I live far far far away from where those events took place.



But she has been said she SAW them (and conventiently forgot to mention "on TV", making it sound like she was right there which is highly unlikely as CeeJay pointed out because she didn't live close back then). Twisting the truth to make herself more important than she is really, which is a well-known pattern with her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> Yes I’m aware they are, my comments were in the context of the discussion here blaming Prince Philip and other elderly members of the Royal Family for not wading in.  Quite why a very old man in frail health should be held to task over this mess baffles me.



Please stop entertaining this. I did not blame anyone (and if we want to be nitpicky, also never mentioned anyone else whatsoever), I merely stated a younger, more energetic and more impatient Philip wouldn't have held back because his temperament was well known.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please stop entertaining this. I did not blame anyone (and if we want to be nitpicky, also never mentioned anyone else whatsoever), I merely stated a younger, more energetic and more impatient Philip wouldn't have held back because his temperament was well known.


I was replying to someone else here not you.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But it's a well-known fact Charles upped both their general allowance and Meghan's frivolous clothes allowance when they first got married to set them up and also paid for furnishing Frogmore. That year at least they received way more money than the future king who was three children. Also I don't think Kate has ever spent nearly a million bucks in clothes in less than a year.



And where are those clothes now?

Now that she prefers a more 'casual' and 'relaxed' style?

If she isn't wearing them to promote the United Kingdom anymore, the justification for having to wear (often French owned) labels, then are they are already in a landfill somewhere or just bing eaten by moths stuffed in a wardrobe at Frogmore?

Is her $1M+ 'Working' Royal wardrobe going to be returned to the people who paid for it?

Or can we expect to see the tailored items among the rails at Smart Works, an organisation that still boasts her as their Patron and has a whole page devoted to her?

Since I was one of the people who paid for her (and Frog Prince's) wardrobe I think I have a right to know.


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But it's a well-known fact Charles upped both their general allowance and Meghan's frivolous clothes allowance when they first got married to set them up and also paid for furnishing Frogmore. That year at least they received way more money than the future king who was three children. Also I don't think Kate has ever spent nearly a million bucks in clothes in less than a year.


Yes, you're right. I remember reading that K spent less on clothes than M. M probably received many perks and should be happy, since so many people are not nearly as lucky financially as she and H have been.  M is never satisfied with what she has. She likely never compares herself to the average person, that's so beneath her. If she had done a little research on the RF, maybe she would have realized that she and H would never be equals to W and K.  Therefore, she should be happy with all the blessings and perks she has. M being a narcissist, will never have this epiphany, I believe.


----------



## kemilia

Pessie said:


> So having tested the waters and been roundly ridiculed MM is now hotly denying reports she ever intended to run for high office   There’s a pattern here isn’t there?
> What next? I wonder, in this her oh so  “purposeful life” - time to roll out that line of Archie merch maybe?  Start a few bump rumours perhaps?  Girls gotta stay “relevant“ don’t you know...


She must have a whole room filled with Barilla in that tacky mega-mansion, she throws so much of it against the wall.


----------



## drifter

Now, I wonder how much she contributed to the noise and vitriol in the world.  I also thought that criticism would go the way of the courtroom, not down the drain?  No?


----------



## kemilia

As for why the BRF isn't reining them in, cutting them off, whatever, QE set a timeline for review, and that's coming up quickly (I'm sure there's a calendar somewhere in the lots-o-bathroom mansion with a date circled in red). The long game is being played here.

If something changed prior to the review date (titles removed, money cut off) the grifters would use this to promote their "woe-is-we" story and I feel the BRF is too smart and patient to fall into their icky little web. Probably just M's web really, I don't think H has enough brain cells under his plugs to be anything but pouty.

Just my opinion--if I was the Q, they would have nothing at this point!


----------



## bag-mania

What could the BRF possibly do? Give them a stern talking-to? 

Meghan and Harry are loose cannons and the Queen is smart enough to know that any reaction at all on her part would be used as ammunition against the BRF. Even without saying or doing anything many Sussex supporters are still criticizing the family. Taking away the titles would stir up a hornets nest of angry Meghan fans.


----------



## Handbag1234

Just seen JCMH preaching to the word about BLM. He had 'no idea' previously, living his super privileged life that he was born into. Really? What surprise.... There he is lecturing us from his super expensive mansion paid for by his father, next in line to the British throne, who makes his money from a crown estate he inherited. Oh the irony. If JCMH & MM  had given up all their wealth and were living in a modest house in a deprived part of London working regular jobs in social care I'd have a bit more respect.


----------



## Chanbal

CO seems to be right on the statements below, MM&H have been doing $$$$ very well in the US and the press keeps praising them (rather embarrassing imo) ... Is this going to change? When is the press going to stop praising this couple that has not done anything productive so far? 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have a bright future in the US because Americans are 'easy to please' and will 'applaud' behaviour scorned by Brits, socialite and royal cousin Christina Oxenberg claims*
'To be adored in America, all Harry and Meghan need to do is pick up a dog from a shelter. Americans are easy to please. What draws scorn in England will be applauded in the States.'

She added that the press coverage will be 'positive rather than petulant' and that American journalists are likely to treat the couple 'very well'.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will do well in the US
					

Socialite Christina Oxenberg, daughter of Princess Elizabeth of Yugoslavia, a second cousin of Prince Charles, spoke to Tatler about Harry and Meghan's future in the US.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Pessie

Handbag1234 said:


> Just seen JCMH preaching to the word about BLM. He had 'no idea' previously, living his super privileged life that he was born into. Really? What surprise.... There he is lecturing us from his super expensive mansion paid for by his father, next in line to the British throne, who makes his money from a crown estate he inherited. Oh the irony. If JCMH & MM  had given up all their wealth and were living in a modest house in a deprived part of London working regular jobs in social care I'd have a bit more respect.


I watched that through too, and OMIG weren’t they boring?  How they managed to make a subject as topical and relevant as BLM and racism so damn dull is an art in itself.  Bet they don’t get many second dinner party invites.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> What could the BRF possibly do? Give them a stern talking-to?
> 
> Meghan and Harry are loose cannons and the Queen is smart enough to know that any reaction at all on her part would be used as ammunition against the BRF. Even without saying or doing anything many Sussex supporters are still criticizing the family. Taking away the titles would stir up a hornets nest of angry Meghan fans.


Agree - title removal hmmmm , does not fix problem 
Take away Sussex , and they become Prince Henry and Princess Henry ... which would of course mutate to Prince Harry , which is OK, and Princess Meghan, which is incorrect - she was not born royal.
Diana was the Princess of Wales, but incorrectly known as Princess Diana ... 
Thorny mess, difficult either way , the term Princess Meghan makes a mockery of the whole (antiquated) system 
If you adhere to the title system, then Princess Meghan is a bitter pill to swallow esp for Anne, Charlotte etc

On the subject of why nothing has overtly been done ... 
Charles and Camilla are visiting Northern Ireland in person ! 
Too much of a coincidence ?  The Ireland / Northern Ireland border is a huge issue under Brexit, and Ireland is making waves 

I agree with a  previous poster that nothing  will happen til the one year review , too much else to cope with


----------



## bag-mania

Handbag1234 said:


> Just seen JCMH preaching to the word about BLM. He had 'no idea' previously, living his super privileged life that he was born into. Really? What surprise.... There he is lecturing us from his super expensive mansion paid for by his father, next in line to the British throne, who makes his money from a crown estate he inherited. Oh the irony. If JCMH & MM  had given up all their wealth and were living in a modest house in a deprived part of London working regular jobs in social care I'd have a bit more respect.



It is so disgusting that they need to insert themselves into everything that is in the news, but _only if it is very current!_ If they had bailed out of the family a few years ago I'm sure they would have been all into the #MeToo movement. But since that has died down in the media, issues like that are of no interest to them. There's no personal benefit in it.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> It is so disgusting that they need to insert themselves into everything that is in the news, but _only if it is very current!_ If they had bailed out of the family a few years ago I'm sure they would have been all into the #MeToo movement. But since that has died down in the media, issues like that are of no interest to them. There's no personal benefit in it.


This.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> CO seems to be right on the statements below, MM&H have been doing $$$$ very well in the US and the press keeps praising them... Is this going to change?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have a bright future in the US because Americans are 'easy to please' and will 'applaud' behaviour scorned by Brits, socialite and royal cousin Christina Oxenberg claims*
> 'To be adored in America, all Harry and Meghan need to do is pick up a dog from a shelter. Americans are easy to please. What draws scorn in England will be applauded in the States.'
> 
> She added that the press coverage will be 'positive rather than petulant' and that American journalists are likely to treat the couple 'very well'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will do well in the US
> 
> 
> Socialite Christina Oxenberg, daughter of Princess Elizabeth of Yugoslavia, a second cousin of Prince Charles, spoke to Tatler about Harry and Meghan's future in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I agree with her to a point. As Americans we do not hold our celebrities to a standard of conduct. However, the British have expectations of a certain degree of dignity and honor from their royalty.  But here, as Harry and Meghan keep beating their social justice drum for the various causes, the media actually seems quite pleased with them.

I disagree with her view that Andrew was being "used" by Jeffrey Epstein and didn't know it. That's a load of BS.


----------



## Lodpah

I think MM and JCMH are desperate to return so they can get more info and do more damage to the RF since they have to produce for Metflix. They need material after all to earn their money.


----------



## gracekelly

This was published in The Sun newspaper

THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
The details include:

Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
Details of Doria's employment and educational history
Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
Who said 'I love you' first
Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
Meghan's birth plan
Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
Details of gifts after Achie's birth
Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
Details about the Sandringham summit
How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey


----------



## gracekelly

Time to settle Meg


----------



## youngster

I took a look through some of the comments in the DM article on Prince Philip.  There was this one that popped out at me and I wonder if our UK posters can confirm if true?  I guess MM can always say that she is working on her UK citizenship and plans to be a dual citizen or something, even if she has zero intention of ever becoming a UK citizen.

_. . . The Queen bestowed the Duchess title on MM "with the understanding that she becomes a British citizen". *Titles can't be given to non citizens.* It was given to her as a matter of course, if prematurely, when Harry was given the Sussex Dukedom as a wedding gift. It also honoured Meghan, as the former Duke of Sussex played a large role in abolishing slavery in the Caribbean. MM has officially abandoned her application for citizenship, so she is not legally allowed to be a Duchess. It's feasible the Queen will take the title off her, whether Harry loses his Dukedom or not. This is not reprisal, it's the law. There are many things coming up in MM's future that will knock the smirk off her face. Harry also faces legal reprimand, but currently has a door still open. But the Queen will not hesitate to cut him off to preserve the Monarchy. At least the American Mrs Simpson was a British citizen when made a duchess on marrying Edward. _


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey


Awesome detail, thank you , go team !!!! 
I do so appreciate finding out the facts rather than reading a fluff piece full of judgmental words, I prefer to make up my own mind


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I agree with her to a point. As Americans we do not hold our celebrities to a standard of conduct. However, the British have expectations of a certain degree of dignity and honor from their royalty.  But here, as Harry and Meghan keep beating their social justice drum for the various causes, the media actually seems quite pleased with them.
> 
> I disagree with her view that Andrew was being "used" by Jeffrey Epstein and didn't know it. That's a load of BS.


Yep, I refrained myself from commenting on her views on Randy Andy. Though, she was very right on predicting the success of the duke & duchess in the US. I'm not very pleased with the media here these days. Hypocrisy seems to be welcome and contagious. We need more factual journalism.


----------



## marietouchet

Meghan Markle says Black Lives Matter protests are 'a beautiful thing'
https://mol.im/a/8794139
Oh dear ... gobsmacked at HIS lecture  on the subject ..
Will refrain from saying more , grump !

PS I am woefully behind on the subject, this may have been posted before, mea culpa


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I took a look through some of the comments in the DM article on Prince Philip.  There was this one that popped out at me and I wonder if our UK posters can confirm if true?  I guess MM can always say that she is working on her UK citizenship and plans to be a dual citizen or something, even if she has zero intention of ever becoming a UK citizen.
> 
> _. . . The Queen bestowed the Duchess title on MM "with the understanding that she becomes a British citizen". *Titles can't be given to non citizens.* It was given to her as a matter of course, if prematurely, when Harry was given the Sussex Dukedom as a wedding gift. It also honoured Meghan, as the former Duke of Sussex played a large role in abolishing slavery in the Caribbean. MM has officially abandoned her application for citizenship, so she is not legally allowed to be a Duchess. It's feasible the Queen will take the title off her, whether Harry loses his Dukedom or not. This is not reprisal, it's the law. There are many things coming up in MM's future that will knock the smirk off her face. Harry also faces legal reprimand, but currently has a door still open. But the Queen will not hesitate to cut him off to preserve the Monarchy. At least the American Mrs Simpson was a British citizen when made a duchess on marrying Edward. _


Great catch!  Looks like TQ could save his face by taking it from her only. The question is will he get huffy and say if you take it from her then you need to take it from me?  I think TQ can do what she likes lol!  She can stand on law.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey



This was a real emotional rollercoaster to read.


----------



## gracekelly

And Mr Scobie what is your response to this list?


----------



## bisousx

gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey



that’s a lot of lip reading, Omid!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> CO seems to be right on the statements below, MM&H have been doing $$$$ very well in the US and the press keeps praising them (rather embarrassing imo) ... Is this going to change? When is the press going to stop praising this couple that has not done anything productive so far?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have a bright future in the US because Americans are 'easy to please' and will 'applaud' behaviour scorned by Brits, socialite and royal cousin Christina Oxenberg claims*
> 'To be adored in America, all Harry and Meghan need to do is pick up a dog from a shelter. Americans are easy to please. What draws scorn in England will be applauded in the States.'
> 
> She added that the press coverage will be 'positive rather than petulant' and that American journalists are likely to treat the couple 'very well'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will do well in the US
> 
> 
> Socialite Christina Oxenberg, daughter of Princess Elizabeth of Yugoslavia, a second cousin of Prince Charles, spoke to Tatler about Harry and Meghan's future in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I think she overstates it a tad. Americans are not "easy to please"... we just don't bat an eyelash at self-promoting people making $$$$ from doing nothing remarkable. Hello, Kardashians, RHO (every US metro), basically every Bravo show, etc... we don't recognize royalty so why on earth would we have high expectations of them.


----------



## gracekelly

Frantic calls to all stores in the vicinity of Casa Montecito looking to purchase paper plates. All the crockery has been broken.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I took a look through some of the comments in the DM article on Prince Philip.  There was this one that popped out at me and I wonder if our UK posters can confirm if true?  I guess MM can always say that she is working on her UK citizenship and plans to be a dual citizen or something, even if she has zero intention of ever becoming a UK citizen.
> 
> _. . . The Queen bestowed the Duchess title on MM "with the understanding that she becomes a British citizen". *Titles can't be given to non citizens.* It was given to her as a matter of course, if prematurely, when Harry was given the Sussex Dukedom as a wedding gift. It also honoured Meghan, as the former Duke of Sussex played a large role in abolishing slavery in the Caribbean. MM has officially abandoned her application for citizenship, so she is not legally allowed to be a Duchess. It's feasible the Queen will take the title off her, whether Harry loses his Dukedom or not. This is not reprisal, it's the law. There are many things coming up in MM's future that will knock the smirk off her face. Harry also faces legal reprimand, but currently has a door still open. But the Queen will not hesitate to cut him off to preserve the Monarchy. At least the American Mrs Simpson was a British citizen when made a duchess on marrying Edward. _



Ipso facto MM is not a British Citizen, never been a duchess, and therefore NOT a duchess. 

Good to know


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> CO seems to be right on the statements below, MM&H have been doing $$$$ very well in the US and the press keeps praising them (rather embarrassing imo) ... Is this going to change? When is the press going to stop praising this couple that has not done anything productive so far?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have a bright future in the US because Americans are 'easy to please' and will 'applaud' behaviour scorned by Brits, socialite and royal cousin Christina Oxenberg claims*
> 'To be adored in America, all Harry and Meghan need to do is pick up a dog from a shelter. Americans are easy to please. What draws scorn in England will be applauded in the States.'
> 
> She added that the press coverage will be 'positive rather than petulant' and that American journalists are likely to treat the couple 'very well'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will do well in the US
> 
> 
> Socialite Christina Oxenberg, daughter of Princess Elizabeth of Yugoslavia, a second cousin of Prince Charles, spoke to Tatler about Harry and Meghan's future in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Easy to stand tall when the bar is low.


----------



## Pessie

youngster said:


> I took a look through some of the comments in the DM article on Prince Philip.  There was this one that popped out at me and I wonder if our UK posters can confirm if true?  I guess MM can always say that she is working on her UK citizenship and plans to be a dual citizen or something, even if she has zero intention of ever becoming a UK citizen.
> 
> _. . . The Queen bestowed the Duchess title on MM "with the understanding that she becomes a British citizen". *Titles can't be given to non citizens.* It was given to her as a matter of course, if prematurely, when Harry was given the Sussex Dukedom as a wedding gift. It also honoured Meghan, as the former Duke of Sussex played a large role in abolishing slavery in the Caribbean. MM has officially abandoned her application for citizenship, so she is not legally allowed to be a Duchess. It's feasible the Queen will take the title off her, whether Harry loses his Dukedom or not. This is not reprisal, it's the law. There are many things coming up in MM's future that will knock the smirk off her face. Harry also faces legal reprimand, but currently has a door still open. But the Queen will not hesitate to cut him off to preserve the Monarchy. At least the American Mrs Simpson was a British citizen when made a duchess on marrying Edward. _


Interesting, I don’t know.  I do remember they both said she intended to become a British citizen, which obviously never happened.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Great catch!  Looks like TQ could save his face by taking it from her only. The question is will he get huffy and say if you take it from her then you need to take it from me?  I think TQ can do what she likes lol!  She can stand on law.





papertiger said:


> Ipso facto MM is not a British Citizen, never been a duchess, and therefore NOT a duchess.
> 
> Good to know



I wonder though, if she can just say "I'm working on my UK citizenship, I plan to become a dual citizen, blah blah blah" and then not work on it at all and let time pass?  Though, the Queen could call that bluff and tell her they could fast track her citizenship so that she could retain her Duchess title. Perhaps that is not possible though for political reasons? Maybe they can't fast track it and she has to go through the usual process which includes a general residency requirement of 5 continuous years (thanks, internet)!  

When they first got married, that wasn't likely considered an issue.  They thought she'd, you know,_ actually live in the UK _since she married Harry.  So, the 5 years would pass and she'd get her citizenship. Now, its a huge stumbling block when she will likely only spend a few days each year in the UK.  So, yeah, the Queen likely could move on removing her title at some point, but I think she is letting events unfold.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, she is now woke and he is now woke, right?  I did not know the beholder could declare himself woke. Thought wokeness is bestowed by others on a person. If they have to tell us they are woke, are they really woke? A conundrum. 

Looks like she is copying KimK‘s look. Tsk tsk. 








						Meghan Markle says Black Lives Matter protests are 'a beautiful thing'
					

Meghan Markle today praised the Black Lives Matter protests in America as a 'beautiful thing' during a video interview about racism in the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, she is now woke and he is now woke, right?  I did not know the beholder could declare himself woke. Thought wokeness is bestowed by others on a person. If they have to tell us they are woke, are they really woke? A conundrum.
> 
> Looks like she is copying KimK‘s look. Tsk tsk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says Black Lives Matter protests are 'a beautiful thing'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle today praised the Black Lives Matter protests in America as a 'beautiful thing' during a video interview about racism in the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Kim owns her tacky  looks. MM is trying to pretend that it’s not.


----------



## tiktok

lalame said:


> I think she overstates it a tad. Americans are not "easy to please"... we just don't bat an eyelash at self-promoting people making $$$$ from doing nothing remarkable. Hello, Kardashians, RHO (every US metro), basically every Bravo show, etc... we don't recognize royalty so why on earth would we have high expectations of them.



Exactly. I think the big difference is that in the US they're perceived as "yet another pair of celebrities", whereas in the UK they were truly expected to be humanitarians, represent the queen and do some good in the world. 
In the US, they're no different than any other celeb / influencer like the reality TV bunch, and people know and accept they do everything possible to stay in the news. People may click articles and take fashion cues from MM, but no one will take them seriously as actual contributors to society. People don't think of them as humanitarians any more than they do the average housewife. That's also why I think the queen taking or not taking away the titles is irrelevant in the US - the titles did the job to make them a household name and now no one cares.

So if their wish was to build fame and fortune as yet another empty-headed celeb famous for being famous - they may very well succeed, but if they expect to be respected and taken seriously like the Obamas or Oprah, they will fail miserably, because they are as fake and transparent as they come.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, she is now woke and he is now woke, right?  I did not know the beholder could declare himself woke. Thought wokeness is bestowed by others on a person. If they have to tell us they are woke, are they really woke? A conundrum.
> 
> Looks like she is copying KimK‘s look. Tsk tsk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says Black Lives Matter protests are 'a beautiful thing'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle today praised the Black Lives Matter protests in America as a 'beautiful thing' during a video interview about racism in the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What is she wearing?  Leather pants? Is it cold there or something?  She definitely does not dress like a royal anymore.  

I watched 30 seconds and then couldn’t watch any more.


----------



## Annawakes

Wait a minute !  I just watched that clip from Americas got talent.  Leather pants!!!  Maybe it is her new signature .

btw that clip sounded sooo contrived. “Not just partial to the name”.  Ha.  Ha.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I wonder though, if she can just say "I'm working on my UK citizenship, I plan to become a dual citizen, blah blah blah" and then not work on it at all and let time pass?  Though, the Queen could call that bluff and tell her they could fast track her citizenship so that she could retain her Duchess title. Perhaps that is not possible though for political reasons? Maybe they can't fast track it and she has to go through the usual process which includes a general residency requirement of 5 continuous years (thanks, internet)!
> 
> When they first got married, that wasn't likely considered an issue.  They thought she'd, you know,_ actually live in the UK _since she married Harry.  So, the 5 years would pass and she'd get her citizenship. Now, its a huge stumbling block when she will likely only spend a few days each year in the UK.  So, yeah, the Queen likely could move on removing her title at some point, but I think she is letting events unfold.



Good point. 

Yet, what I'm saying is that until she is granted British citizenship she cannot be a duchess (by law) and and has no entitlement to use the title - anywhere. 

It would be like doing a professional course and putting letters after your name bofire taking the exam. Just because you're taking a course doesn't mean you've qualified. It's legally fraud to present yourself as something you're not entitled to be.

I think the reason why they were granted use their titles early was because of WORK as A) any minute she was going to become British and B) capitalising on the momentum of their popularity at the time of their marriage, taking on Royal Duties and patronages. 

It could have also been because the Queen absolutely not want the incorrect title of Princess Megan to be in common usage (as happened to 'Princess Diana) 

She has abandoned her pursuit of her British citizenship and she's stopped working (on behalf of BRF/UK). She no longer has any claim to the title she uses.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yippee, now they are preaching to the UK. Guessing this is part of the half in-half out plan.  The way they are sitting, my my, he is mansplaining and manspreading. She looks, uh, uneven.  Both are super glossy and blurry, just like Khloe and Kim.


----------



## Genie27

gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey


So much info about her 'feelings' - it's almost as if Scobie could read her lips. 
Hahahahahaha
Or her notes/diary


----------



## bag-mania

Now we know what kind of oppression she was enduring while in England. It's an example of how she was merely existing because she was not allowed to wear leather pants. There is likely a dramatic chapter about it in _Finding Freedom_.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippee, now they are preaching to the UK. Guessing this is part of the half in-half out plan.  The way they are sitting, my my, he is mansplaining and manspreading. She looks, uh, uneven.  Both are super glossy and blurry, just like Khloe and Kim.



Ha, I was just thinking... maybe this is why they felt the need to move to the US: now they feel license to lecture both countries equally.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Now we know what kind of oppression she was enduring while in England. It's an example of how she was merely existing because she was not allowed to wear leather pants. There is likely a dramatic chapter about it in _Finding Freedom_.



Don’t forget the slash top! This is how to modernise the dusty old BRF. Wear slashy clothes.  










						SLASH LONG SLEEVE TOP
					

Assymetrical Slash Long Sleeve Top. Victor says: Perfect on all skins tones and sizes. For work and date night.




					www.glemaud.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t forget the slash top! This is how to modernise the dusty old BRF. Wear slashy clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SLASH LONG SLEEVE TOP
> 
> 
> Assymetrical Slash Long Sleeve Top. Victor says: Perfect on all skins tones and sizes. For work and date night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glemaud.com



I don’t normally comment on clothes because I care about accessories, not clothes... but why wear a shirt that makes your chest look droopy?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t forget the slash top! This is how to modernise the dusty old BRF. Wear slashy clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SLASH LONG SLEEVE TOP
> 
> 
> Assymetrical Slash Long Sleeve Top. Victor says: Perfect on all skins tones and sizes. For work and date night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glemaud.com



She's just an LA girl trying to teach the world how to be the best they can be (meaning be just like her). You have to love how so many of the articles about it identify and provide the prices and links so readers can buy her outfit for themselves. Opportunists abound!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey


Oh, but they are mistaken.  The authors took "creative liberties" remember?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t normally comment on clothes because I care about accessories, not clothes... but why wear a shirt that makes your chest look droopy?



Shhh, we shouldn’t tell the woke empress she has no taste.  The bird’s nest artwork is there for a reason!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I refrained myself from commenting on her views on Randy Andy. Though, she was very right on predicting the success of the duke & duchess in the US. I'm not very pleased with the media here these days. Hypocrisy seems to be welcome and contagious. We need more factual journalism.


The "news" media in the US today is more like the National Enquirer.  Rubbish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> She's just an LA girl trying to teach the world how to be the best they can be (meaning be just like her). You have to love how so many of the articles about it identify and provide the prices and links so readers can buy her outfit for themselves. Opportunists abound!



Since the designer is Haitian, she wants to highlight his work.  For me, I wanted to see how the top was styled and how it looked on the designer’s model. After looking at his other clothes, he seems to like cut-outs. Very modern.

Certainly, she will listed on his _about_ page :
_The Victor Glemaud collection has been worn by celebrities and influencers including Ashley Graham, Dominique Jackson, Florence Pugh, Hailey Baldwin, Issa Rae, Laura Harrier, Margot Robbie, Michelle Williams, Iman and Selena Gomez, and has garnered press in many outlets from The New York Times to Vogue Italia._


----------



## Pessie

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t normally comment on clothes because I care about accessories, not clothes... but why wear a shirt that makes your chest look droopy?


Its not flattering.  I thought it looked like she’d been wrestling it and lost the fight


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Wait a minute !  I just watched that clip from Americas got talent.  Leather pants!!!  Maybe it is her new signature .
> 
> btw that clip sounded sooo contrived. “Not just partial to the name”.  Ha.  Ha.


Everything she says sounds contrived.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Frantic calls to all stores in the vicinity of Casa Montecito looking to purchase paper plates. All the crockery has been broken.


brilliant ! YOUR COMMENT MADE MY DAY THANK YOU


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shhh, we shouldn’t tell the woke empress she has no taste.  The bird’s nest artwork is there for a reason!



I’d rather have bare walls!  I had to enlarge the pics to see what the h3ll was on the wall!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Everything she says sounds contrived.



That's because it is. She is extremely careful not to say anything that hasn't already been said by others so she knows it is safe for her to do it. She doesn't want to make any slip ups that would cause criticism. In Meghan's world PC stands only for political correctness. Sorry, Prince Charles!


----------



## Handbag1234

Pessie said:


> I watched that through too, and OMIG weren’t they boring?  How they managed to make a subject as topical and relevant as BLM and racism so damn dull is an art in itself.  Bet they don’t get many second dinner party invites.


I switched off after a short while. Yes totally boring and trying sooo hard.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippee, now they are preaching to the UK. Guessing this is part of the half in-half out plan.  The way they are sitting, my my, he is mansplaining and manspreading. She looks, uh, uneven.  Both are super glossy and blurry, just like Khloe and Kim.



Had to look it up Structural Racism , a definition that I found

The complex system by which racism is developed, maintained and protected is often referred to as structural racism. The term was developed in part to help people working towards racial equity emphasize the idea that racism in society is a system, with a clear structure, and with multiple components. 









						Fundamentals, Core Concepts, Structural Racism
					

<p class="font_8">In early 2000, <a href="http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/docs/rcc/aspen_structural_racism2.pdf"><u>The Aspen Institute Roundtable on Community Change</u></a> convened an influential group of key thinkers, academics, and activists to discuss and define...




					www.racialequitytools.org
				




Oh dear ... oh dear ... oh dear ... isn't Harry biting the upper class system that put him where he is ie rich and at the top of the UK pecking order? Badly done Harry ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

She should hire a stylist with the Netflix cash.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> And where are those clothes now?
> 
> Now that she prefers a more 'casual' and 'relaxed' style?
> 
> If she isn't wearing them to promote the United Kingdom anymore, the justification for having to wear (often French owned) labels, then are they are already in a landfill somewhere or just bing eaten by moths stuffed in a wardrobe at Frogmore?
> 
> Is her $1M+ 'Working' Royal wardrobe going to be returned to the people who paid for it?
> 
> Or can we expect to see the tailored items among the rails at Smart Works, an organisation that still boasts her as their Patron and has a whole page devoted to her?
> 
> Since I was one of the people who paid for her (and Frog Prince's) wardrobe I think I have a right to know.



I feel she could at least auction them off and donate that money. I mean, seeing how her soul was crushed and she was merely existing there are probably no happy memories attached anyway.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since the designer is Haitian, she wants to highlight his work.  For me, I wanted to see how the top was styled and how it looked on the designer’s model. After looking at his other clothes, he seems to like cut-outs. Very modern.
> 
> Certainly, she will listed on his _about_ page :
> _The Victor Glemaud collection has been worn by celebrities and influencers including Ashley Graham, Dominique Jackson, Florence Pugh, Hailey Baldwin, Issa Rae, Laura Harrier, Margot Robbie, Michelle Williams, Iman and Selena Gomez, and has garnered press in many outlets from The New York Times to Vogue Italia._



This might be an undergarment issue again, but even the thumbnail for the shirt didn’t look flattering. I usually like cutouts on clothes. They work on like the midsection or legs... maybe different fabric here would be better... this just looks droopy...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> _There are many things coming up in MM's future that will knock the smirk off her face. _



One can only hope.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear ... oh dear ... oh dear ... isn't Harry biting the upper class system that put him where he is ie rich and at the top of the UK pecking order? Badly done Harry ...



Both Harry and Meghan are classic examples of "Generation Me," millennials who have plenty of confidence and tolerance but also lots of entitlement and narcissism. That would explain why they feel qualified to preach their opinions to everybody about everything even though they have no first-hand experience. It likely explains their popularity among others of their generation as well.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I think she overstates it a tad. Americans are not "easy to please"... we just don't bat an eyelash at self-promoting people making $$$$ from doing nothing remarkable. Hello, Kardashians, RHO (every US metro), basically every Bravo show, etc... *we don't recognize royalty so why on earth would we have high expectations of them.*


I agree that we in the US don't recognize royalty, but why is she still being called duchess here? While I don't like at all to read the "easy to please" part, the fact that MM&H have been doing extraordinarily well ($$$$) in the States makes it difficult to contradict her argument. The media needs to change its approach to MM&H imo. Harry was not even criticized by the media here for his public statements on the upcoming elections.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Both Harry and Meghan are classic examples of "Generation Me," millennials who have plenty of confidence and tolerance but also lots of entitlement and narcissism. That would explain why they feel qualified to preach their opinions to everybody about everything even though they have no first-hand experience. It likely explains their popularity among others of their generation as well.



This ticks me off because they are older than me... Everything bad that is said about my generation (And that Harry and Meghan do) is not embodied by me. I just want people to have a fair chance and work hard, and these two besmirching my generation’s good name makes me sick. They’re frauds. I work my rear off to barely get by and am taking care of my elderly family and working full time because there isn’t anyone else to do it. If I get 3 hours of sleep a night I’m lucky. These two being given everything and whining that no one asks how she is doing is crap.

rant over... I’m tired...


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippee, now they are preaching to the UK. Guessing this is part of the half in-half out plan.  The way they are sitting, my my, he is mansplaining and manspreading. She looks, uh, uneven.  Both are super glossy and blurry, just like Khloe and Kim.



That outfit looks as flattering on her as the ones KK wears.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I agree that we in the US don't recognize royalty, but why is she still being called duchess here? While I don't like at all to read the "easy to please" part, the fact that MM&H have been doing extraordinarily well ($$$$) in the States makes it difficult to contradict her argument. The media needs to change its approach to MM&H imo. *Harry was not even criticized by the media here for his public statements on the upcoming elections.*



That is only because he was saying what the media wanted to hear. Had Harry supported someone else in his election rant, I'd be willing to bet he would have been slammed for days here for inserting himself where he didn't belong. Nobody ever said the media was fair, but they will use him just as he uses them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> This ticks me off because they are older than me... Everything bad that is said about my generation (And that Harry and Meghan do) is not embodied by me. I just want people to have a fair chance and work hard, and these two besmirching my generation’s good name makes me sick. They’re frauds. I work my rear off to barely get by and am taking care of my elderly family and working full time because there isn’t anyone else to do it. If I get 3 hours of sleep a night I’m lucky. These two being given everything and whining that no one asks how she is doing is crap.
> 
> rant over... I’m tired...



I'm sorry you are struggling. You are wonderful for taking on all that responsibility and I hope your family members cherish you and also that your load might somehow lighten.


----------



## marietouchet

Per Evening Standard article, cited earlier , JCMH is celebrating BHM overachievers , cool , I looked that up ...
Black History Month is in the spring ...
So confused ... I play a fashion game and this month we are styling only Hispanic outfits, since it is Hispanic Heritage Month ... 
I am trying so hard to wake up and become woke , may go back to sleep, my calendar is full


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Both Harry and Meghan are classic examples of *"Generation Me," millennials who have plenty of confidence and tolerance but also lots of entitlement and narcissism. *That would explain why they feel qualified to preach their opinions to everybody about everything even though they have no first-hand experience. It likely explains their popularity among others of their generation as well.


Agree with your assessment with the exception of the tolerance part. MM showed no tolerance towards the staff in the UK... family, friends...


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Per Evening Standard article, cited earlier , JCMH is celebrating BHM overachievers , cool , I looked that up ...
> *Black History Month is in the spring* ...
> So confused ... I play a fashion game and this month we are styling only Hispanic outfits, since it is Hispanic Heritage Month ...
> I am trying so hard to wake up and become woke , may go back to sleep, my calendar is full



I believe I read in one of the articles that it is in October in England.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippee, now they are preaching to the UK. Guessing this is part of the half in-half out plan.  The way they are sitting, my my, he is mansplaining and manspreading. She looks, uh, uneven.  Both are super glossy and blurry, just like Khloe and Kim.



The US is not enough for them, they want to go global!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Agree with your assessment with the exception of the tolerance part. MM showed no tolerance towards the staff in the UK... family, friends...



Meghan is what we'll call "tolerant on paper."   

She'll be tolerant of everything it is socially expected for her to be tolerant of, anything else is taken on a case by case basis.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Hmmm, so even though H&M broke and continue to ignore their side of the agreement, we all believe the BRF is obliged to stand-down and WAIT.

Tell me, why?
That January deadline is now non-existent due to the agreement being broken long ago by H&M.

At this point, it has been more than 9-months of a sh$t-show from Grifters-R-Us, and as they began, so they will go.
My plea is for the BRF to stop them at this point, for goodness sake.
They are making a mockery of the monarchy.


----------



## V0N1B2

gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Sol Ryan You are a saint. I applaud your efforts and wish you and your family the best of everything. We can get through this H&M debacle together. Rest well, this stuff will here when you’re ready.  

@bag-mania _plenty of confidence and tolerance but also lots of entitlement and narcissism_ = and very insecure. Sadly this doesn’t just apply to one age-group. 

@marietouchet   BHM is in Feb. in the US. My understanding is that it is Oct. in the UK.  I could be wrong.

@VigeeLeBrun Love love this!   I just know there is a bigger plan with QE playing the long game. I just don’t know what that game is. Is she trying to get Charles to step aside? I wonder. 

@V0N1B2  total boss vid! Respect


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


>



#20  Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017 
Anyone know what that is about?


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> I agree that we in the US don't recognize royalty, but *why is she still being called duchess here*? While I don't like at all to read the "easy to please" part, the fact that MM&H have been doing extraordinarily well ($$$$) in the States makes it difficult to contradict her argument. The media needs to change its approach to MM&H imo. Harry was not even criticized by the media here for his public statements on the upcoming elections.



Regarding why she is still being called Duchess here, maybe it's just an easy way to identify her to the masses of people who don't know who the heck she is. I mean, if she were introduced as MM, most of the audience would go . . . _who?_  But, the "Duchess of. . . "  and it gives people a frame of reference and maybe it jogs their memory a bit. The title confers status automatically and provides at least some reason as to why she's speaking or presenting or whatever.  Just a guess.  It's hilarious though.  She's been to Sussex once, I think. But, that's why she's hanging on to the title and keeps using it.
ETA:  And that's why she keeps popping up everywhere too, she is trying to raise her profile in the U.S. because unless you read the entertainment mags or the tabloids or follow the royals in general, the general population doesn't know who she is. She's going to keep popping up too, with Harry in tow, trying to raise their profile and keep their names in at least the entertainment headlines.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lanasyogamama said:


> She should *hire a stylist* with the Netflix cash.



Awww, please don't give Miss Thing any grandiose ideas, *lanas.*
Let Meghan keep it au natural.

Her chicken cutlets are the perfect accent while her Goop vajayjay candle is lit. 
<is this cable? otherwise, I can clean that sentence up!>

Go for it, Harry. Don't think there will be a queue lining up to steal your gal.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry you are struggling. You are wonderful for taking on all that responsibility and I hope your family members cherish you and also that your load might somehow lighten.



Thanks. Most of the time I’m fine. My relative just got out of the hospital couple weeks ago and keeping up with their follow up appointments, home care, well care and my work is driving me batty, plus they’re in pain which makes it harder. I’m so tired I keep forgetting to brush my teeth if that says anything. Hopefully they get better soon, I want to go back to my multi-page diatribes complete with sources on what Harry’s done wrong....lol


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> What is she wearing?  *Leather pants? Is it cold there or something?  *She definitely does not dress like a royal anymore.
> 
> I watched 30 seconds and then couldn’t watch any more.


The air conditioning at the mansion of the 16 (or 19) toilets is working very well... Congratulations for surviving 30 seconds, I can't even start the video.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Regarding why she is still being called Duchess here, maybe it's just an easy way to identify her to the masses of people who don't know who the heck she is. I mean, if she were introduced as MM, most of the audience would go . . . _who?_  But, the "Duchess of. . . "  and it gives people a frame of reference and maybe it jogs their memory a bit. The title confers status automatically and provides at least some reason as to why she's speaking or presenting or whatever.  Just a guess.  It's hilarious though.  She's been to Sussex once, I think. But, that's why she's hanging on to the title and keeps using it.



Sad, but, oh so true. 
The US media, and now it seems the UK, thinks we ”easy to please” folks are also daft and dim.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The air conditioning at the mansion of the 16 (or 19) toilets is working very well... Congratulations for surviving 30 seconds, I can't even start the video.



It’s Pleather, baby.  

The art work:  https://www.barlogastudios.com/  Of all the choices, they chose:


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> That is only because he was saying what the media wanted to hear. Had Harry supported someone else in his election rant, I'd be willing to bet he would have been slammed for days here for inserting himself where he didn't belong. Nobody ever said the media was fair, but they will use him just as he uses them.


100%


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippee, now they are preaching to the UK. Guessing this is part of the half in-half out plan.  The way they are sitting, my my, he is mansplaining and manspreading. She looks, uh, uneven.  Both are super glossy and blurry, just like Khloe and Kim.



Omid posting again on behalf of the couple?  Didn't MM throw Omid under the bus? Is he a masochist?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> The US is not enough for them, they want to go global!


World domination!


----------



## QuelleFromage

I clicked on trending threads and accidentally ended up on page 1 of this thread...... and was so happy at all the positivity. It might be worth a re-read.....


----------



## CarryOn2020

QuelleFromage said:


> I clicked on trending threads and accidentally ended up on page 1 of this thread...... and was so happy at all the positivity. It might be worth a re-read.....



The tide has definitely turned against Harry. Some say he did it to himself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QuelleFromage

CarryOn2020 said:


> The tide has definitely turned against Harry. Some say he did it to himself.


I just think it's worth looking at. I don't want to wade into this tread because there's no room for my dissent, but it was really nice to remember how adorable we all thought Harry was and that we defended his parentage. Frankly you can hate MM if you want to (I love her, sorry) but he's been an amazing husband IMO.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QuelleFromage said:


> I just think it's worth looking at. I don't want to wade into this tread because there's no room for my dissent, but it was really nice to remember how adorable we all thought Harry was and that we defended his parentage. Frankly you can hate MM if you want to (I love her, sorry) but he's been an amazing husband IMO.



I certainly value your opinion and understand how the opinions of H have indeed changed.  We know so much more about him now, so our opinions have been that much more refined. Since I do not interact with H&M in real life, I can only base my opinion on their stories, videos, photos that show the choices they’ve made. They have chosen to live in the public eye, so it is fair to point out the good, the bad, the ugly. Most celebrities and others are fake, especially when merching. The best thing H&M could do is stop talking, stop posing and start doing. Not too surprisingly, this is exactly what the rest of the BRF does.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I agree that we in the US don't recognize royalty, but why is she still being called duchess here? While I don't like at all to read the "easy to please" part, the fact that MM&H have been doing extraordinarily well ($$$$) in the States makes it difficult to contradict her argument. The media needs to change its approach to MM&H imo. Harry was not even criticized by the media here for his public statements on the upcoming elections.



I think she's being called Duchess out of courtesy, but doubt anyone would treat her differently than any other person. I certainly wouldn't be standing up when she walks into a room or anything like that. Did Harry say something controversial about the elections? I may have missed it. In the US anyone can make $$$$ or voice an opinion about the elections so can't really criticize them for that. The main criticism is they do things that BRF watchers would consider unbecoming for royalty. But not that many people in the US are knowledgeable or care about all that, IMO. So the train keeps on moving. They are just another celebrity couple, albeit one that happens to keep getting clicks or whatever in this moment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QuelleFromage said:


> Frankly you can hate MM if you want to (I love her, sorry) but he's been an amazing husband IMO.



Would you mind sharing why you love her? Not being snarky at all, it's just that with all the info out there in the open  - and I don't mean gossip rags, just their own words, actions and less than flattering moments captured on video - what makes one find her endearing? But yeah, while Harry is not innocent in the current mess I still remember the soft spot I'd had for him for years before things went downhill :/


----------



## lalame

QuelleFromage said:


> I just think it's worth looking at. I don't want to wade into this tread because there's no room for my dissent, but it was really nice to remember how adorable we all thought Harry was and that we defended his parentage. Frankly you can hate MM if you want to (I love her, sorry) but he's been an amazing husband IMO.



I don't think you've said anything mutually exclusive in there.... I certainly defend his parentage and do think he's a good husband! But I also think he's immature and rather mediocre as a person. He was cute as a kid (aren't all kids cute?) but his actions over time have been disappointing. I think he was lucky to get Meghan or any of his girlfriends.


----------



## Tootsie17

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t normally comment on clothes because I care about accessories, not clothes... but why wear a shirt that makes your chest look droopy?


Thank you for saying it! I was thinking that knit shirt looks terrible on her and was a terrible choice for a video.


----------



## lalame

I liked her top and thought she looked good in it.  But I think I like her style more than most others on this thread in general.


----------



## QuelleFromage

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Would you mind sharing why you love her? Not being snarky at all, it's just that with all the info out there in the open  - and I don't mean gossip rags, just their own words, actions and less than flattering moments captured on video - what makes one find her endearing? But yeah, while Harry is not innocent in the current mess I still remember the soft spot I'd had for him for years before things went downhill :/


OK....I will tell you how I really feel and please, no one flame me - I am answering because I was asked genuinely and nicely.

First, I think MM was treated appallingly by the British press. I do think it was incredibly racist and things were said and done that are way, way over the line. I could not have handled it. As a mixed-race person I can't overstate what it is like to see anyone of color join the BRF. These are the "princesses" little girls grow up seeing. It's a big deal for me and my family. So to see that and then to see everything from the blackamoor brooch to the chimp cartoon and on and on....that's like killing a dream to me. I've looked and looked and tried to make a comparison to how Kate was treated and it's far out of balance.

Second I guess I am what is derided as "woke" but I LIKE how Harry has evolved from some of his somewhat embarrassing past, and I don't have a major issue with anything they've said to the media. I also don't think she's running the ship...it seems like a partnership to me. She's not a milquetoast and she hasn't just taken what's been thrown at her and I admire that. She seems tough to me but not evil. 

That's just me, and again, I am not a long term part of this thread and don't want to argue. I like them, and I'm not going to come back to this thread to make any further case as to why, so again, please don't flame. Cool?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QuelleFromage said:


> OK....I will tell you how I really feel and please, no one flame me - I am answering because I was asked genuinely and nicely.



You know, I try to ask this question to all newbies who are in the fan camp, and not once has anyone actually had an answer that went beyond insults towards the majority of the regular posters. Yours I found very eloquent even though I might not agree with all of your findings (obviously I was as appalled as you were at the Princess Michael and chimpanzee incidents and I don't think anyone here would support this at all). So thank you for taking the time!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

QuelleFromage said:


> I just think it's worth looking at. I don't want to wade into this tread because there's no room for my dissent, but it was really nice to remember how adorable we all thought Harry was and that we defended his parentage. Frankly you can hate MM if you want to (*I love her*, sorry) but *he's been an amazing husband* IMO.



Aww, *QuelleF*, so glad you made yourself known!!!  

Hate is a v strong word <my DDs were not allowed to use THAT word ever, lol> and not exactly descriptive of my H&M opin.

It's less than hate, and not a feeling.
How to explain?

Maybe this way:
During my journey in this life when someone MUCH more fortunate than myself <there is ALWAYS someone w/more of something, right?> assists my family or myself in the achievement of a goal, a desire, a life-long dream, a step-up in a career, social or personal endeavor, and after THEIR generosity is accepted, it is also rewarded with MY continued loyalty to that individual or institution that so generously took notice and GAVE something important to me or mine. 

M&H were given the sun, moon & stars by a family that had everything and did not have to be so kind in spirit and with finances. 
And M&H acted disgracefully at every turn.

Also, the BRF acted with the BEST intentions towards M&H, and it shows, unlike M&H intentions.
Motive simply means everything to me.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> #20  Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Anyone know what that is about?



Get up 
Drink 
Go to bed


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I believe I read in one of the articles that it is in October in England.


Thanks Google Is not woke and failed to tell me there is no universal BHM and gave me the US one when I used the search terms BHM UK


----------



## Tootsie17

QuelleFromage said:


> OK....I will tell you how I really feel and please, no one flame me - I am answering because I was asked genuinely and nicely.
> 
> First, I think MM was treated appallingly by the British press. I do think it was incredibly racist and things were said and done that are way, way over the line. I could not have handled it. As a mixed-race person I can't overstate what it is like to see anyone of color join the BRF. These are the "princesses" little girls grow up seeing. It's a big deal for me and my family. So to see that and then to see everything from the blackamoor brooch to the chimp cartoon and on and on....that's like killing a dream to me. I've looked and looked and tried to make a comparison to how Kate was treated and it's far out of balance.
> 
> Second I guess I am what is derided as "woke" but I LIKE how Harry has evolved from some of his somewhat embarrassing past, and I don't have a major issue with anything they've said to the media. I also don't think she's running the ship...it seems like a partnership to me. She's not a milquetoast and she hasn't just taken what's been thrown at her and I admire that. She seems tough to me but not evil.
> 
> That's just me, and again, I am not a long term part of this thread and don't want to argue. I like them, and I'm not going to come back to this thread to make any further case as to why, so again, please don't flame. Cool?
> [/QUOTE
> No flame.  I always like to read different points of view on this thread.  I'm tired and have forgotten how to post correctly.  Sorry ya'll.


----------



## marietouchet

Covid reading , I am on the intro to the book that Andrew Morton ghost wrote for Diana , the revised edition, printed after her death 

Interesting anecdote there , talking about the amourette of Charles and Camilla ca 1990. Before there had been any solid confirmation but everyone knew ... 
The courtiers around each of Diana and Charles were covering up for Charles, eg Charles was in hospital, Camilla was closer, visited first and the courtiers had to track police reports of Diana’s car from London, so they could get rid of C before D arrived 
Anyway, Morton concludes D developed a profound distrust of the courtiers because they hid the affair and lied about it to her

Gotta believe that distrust of the courtiers rubbed off on Harry , surely, he also read the foreword to the book


----------



## CarryOn2020

@QuelleFromage  thanks so much for your explanation. I am glad you are here and support your opinion. I may not agree with all of  it, and that is ok, I still value and appreciate you. I am not here to change minds and I want to hear the other point of view. You are correct - the brooch, the chimp, the horrid threats, slurs, etc. - all of that should never be tolerated. I do wish there had been more honesty and transparency in the beginning rather than the media hype.  Your explanation is so well-written that I can feel the disappointment and sorrow you feel at having a “dream killed”.  It is so easy for all of us to get swept up in the magic of royalty - the diamonds, the cars, the gowns, the perfect way of living, etc. I got up early to watch the wedding! Sadly, Disney and the royals disappoint us. I do not believe that Harry has evolved in any way from his past. My concern is that someday we will find out exactly how cruel he has been to MM, much as Charles was to Diana.

I do wish MM would offer an explanation of why she did not know about the racism. The ’in love’ answer just doesn’t work for a nearly 40 yr old who had been married before. Diana, yes, she was barely 20.  A 35-40 year old is different.  I thought she was wiser than that. Her mother certainly would be. So, how did she miss it?  Harry should have made it clear to MM what she was up against.  For him to say he didn’t know the racism existed, nooooo, I don’t believe that. He was heavily criticized for his “Paki” comment.  Was his apology then a joke?  No, he did what Charles, Andrew, William did to their wives - he immaturely disregarded and dismissed important facts. Even in today’s video, he arrogantly says ”no one else has managed to do this before us”.  That is a lie. He is still full of himself. This is why he deserves the negative coverage. That is why I mock today’s woke message from the couple in the mega-mansion with 19 bathrooms. All just my opinion. Take care, xoxo

Here’s a short history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_Kingdom


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Get up
> Drink
> Go to bed


This was just before the wedding, M was at Sandringham , very unusual for a non spouse 
I remember a kerfuffle about shooting on Boxing Day, M disapproved and wanted H not to take part
Did not read Omid’s book so maybe this is not the incident


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> @QuelleFromage  thanks so much for your explanation. I am glad you are here and support your opinion. I may not agree with all of  it, and that is ok, I still value and appreciate you. I am not here to change minds and I want to hear the other point of view. You are correct - the brooch, the chimp, the horrid threats, slurs, etc. - all of that should never be tolerated. I do wish there had been more honesty and transparency in the beginning rather than the media hype.  Your explanation is so well-written that I can feel the disappointment and sorrow you feel at having a “dream killed”.  It is so easy for all of us to get swept up in the magic of royalty - the diamonds, the cars, the gowns, the perfect way of living, etc. I got up early to watch the wedding! Sadly, Disney and the royals disappoint us. I do not believe that Harry has evolved in any way from his past. My concern is that someday we will find out exactly how cruel he has been to MM, much as Charles was to Diana.
> 
> I do wish MM would offer an explanation of why she did not know about the racism. The ’in love’ answer just doesn’t work for a nearly 40 yr old who had been married before. Diana, yes, she was barely 20.  A 35-40 year old is different.  I thought she was wiser than that. Her mother certainly would be. So, how did she miss it?  Harry should have made it clear to MM what she was up against.  For him to say he didn’t know the racism existed, nooooo, I don’t believe that. He was heavily criticized for his “Paki” comment.  Was his apology then a joke?  No, he did what Charles, Andrew, William did to their wives - he immaturely disregarded and dismissed important facts. Even in today’s video, he arrogantly says ”no one else has managed to do this before us”.  That is a lie. He is still full of himself. This is why he deserves the negative coverage. That is why I mock today’s woke message from the couple in the mega-mansion with 19 bathrooms. All just my opinion. Take care, xoxo
> 
> Here’s a short history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_Kingdom


@QuelleFromage  and @CarryOn2020 thanks for the insights, I welcome them 
Yes, excellent point , how could she not have known ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Covid reading , I am on the intro to the book that Andrew Morton ghost wrote for Diana , the revised edition, printed after her death
> 
> Interesting anecdote there , talking about the amourette of Charles and Camilla ca 1990. Before there had been any solid confirmation but everyone knew ...
> The courtiers around each of Diana and Charles were covering up for Charles, eg Charles was in hospital, Camilla was closer, visited first and the courtiers had to track police reports of Diana’s car from London, so they could get rid of C before D arrived
> Anyway, Morton concludes D developed a profound distrust of the courtiers because they hid the affair and lied about it to her
> 
> Gotta believe that distrust of the courtiers rubbed off on Harry , surely, he also read the foreword to the book



Morton is desperate for $$$.  There is a video where Diana herself explains all of this and that she knew the courtiers were lying and she knew the truth. She had her own investigators. Diana knew about the intertwined CC bracelet before she walked down the aisle. Her sisters knew about Camilla prior to the wedding. They told her since her face was on the tea towels, it was too late to back out.

That is my point. In all of these instances, everyone knew everything. So, who is really at fault?  If I know the house is on fire and I walk in anyway, shouldn’t I expect to be burned?  When Charles says Diana was brave enough to take on the marriage, it’s very telling. He knows what royal life is all about - a show. Will and Harry said the same thing about their brides.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> _During a one-on-one with Fortune's senior editor Ellen McGirt at the magazine's Most Powerful Women virtual summit on Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex was asked her advice to those with platforms who want to weigh in on the important issues of the day._
> 
> _“You’re not the only powerful woman who has had a sitting president take a shot at you, mobs come at you, powerful people and powerful forces try to take you down or try to disparage your message,” McGirt said.
> 
> Meghan replied, saying she doesn’t listen to all the “noise” out there and is focused on living a “purpose-driven life” and following her “own moral compass.”_
> 
> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_









chicinthecity777 said:


> *Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan hit with £178,000 legal bill after losing battle over book
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has lost another round in her legal battle with The Mail on Sunday after the newspaper won the right to use a recent book about her in its
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


Ohhh Chaaaarles!






gracekelly said:


> This was published in The Sun newspaper
> 
> THE Mail on Sunday this week won a bid to use Finding Freedom as part of its defence against Meghan Markle's privacy claim.
> Today, the publisher revealed 49 details from the book they allege show the duchess cooperated with the authors of the biography.
> The details include:
> 
> Personal correspondence between Meghan and her mother Doria Ragland
> Details of Doria's employment and educational history
> Meghan's personal conversations with a co-worker at a soup kitchen in Los Angeles
> Her weekly routine while at Northwestern University
> How Meghan felt about having to shoot a sex scene while she was a struggling actor in 2008
> Her feelings around her relationship with her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, who has never spoken publicly about their marriage
> Detailed account of Meghan's relationship with Cory Vitiello
> Details about Meghan and Prince Harry's first date - including whether they kissed goodnight and what they drank
> Information about their second date at Prince Harry's then home, Nottingham Cottage - including details of the decor of the house
> Who said 'I love you' first
> Detailed account of their holiday in Botswana in 2016 including where they stayed and her bathroom routines
> Prince Harry's relationship with Prince William before and after he met Meghan
> A report on the advice Thomas Markle gave Meghan Markle about money management
> An account of Prince Harry's first meeting with Doria
> Text messages Meghan sent to friend Jessica Mulroney
> Details about Prince Harry's conversations with Thomas Markle
> What happened when Meghan met Prince William as well as a description of Prince William's home
> Meghan's feelings about finding out a Suits love scene she had starred in was uploaded to Pornhub
> Advice given by the Palace communications team and Meghan's reaction
> Prince Harry's daily routine during Christmas time in 2017
> Meghan's relationship with Kate Middleton and how she felt about the duchess
> Prince Harry's feelings about being photographed at a wedding in Jamaica in 2017
> Details about the wedding reception of Pippa Middleton and James Matthews
> Details of their holidays to Turkey and Botswana in 2017 - including who hosted them and what they ate
> Information about a conversation between Prince William and Prince Harry about the Duke of Cambridge's feelings about Meghan Markle and the impact on their relationship
> Meghan's feelings about Harry's proposal
> How Meghan felt about leaving Toronto to move to London
> How Meghan felt about meeting the Queen for the first time in October 2017
> Meghan's communications with her mum after moving to London
> Details about Christmas celebrations in 2017 including how Meghan felt about the brooch worn by Princess Michael of Kent
> Meghan's feelings about a friend Ninaki Priddy speaking to the press about her
> Meghan's faith and private conversation with Justin Wlby, the Archbishop of Canterbury
> What Prince Harry said at the altar to his father and Meghan Markle just before the wedding ceremony
> Detailed account of speeches at the couple's wedding along with what was on the menu
> Details of the couple's visit to Lake Como to spend time with George and Amal Clooney
> Information about a private meeting between Meghan, Harry and the Queen to pick the duchess' wedding tiara
> An account of a disagreement between Prince Harry and one of the Queen's assistants, Angela Kelly
> Details around Prince Harry and Prince William's estrangement
> Details about Meghan Markle's baby shower and the Palace's reaction
> Meghan's birth plan
> Private correspondence from Prince Harry and Meghan to their friends after Archie's birth
> Details of gifts after Achie's birth
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's childcare arrangements
> Meghan's work on the SussexRoyal Instagram account
> Meghan and Harry's feelings about the Palace communications team
> Meghan and Harry's living arrangements while in Canada in 2019
> Details about the Sandringham summit
> How Prince Harry felt about the split from the royal family
> Meghan's feelings about her last engagement as a royal at Westminster Abbey










Reading this list really makes it obvious how trashy this book is.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I think she's being called Duchess out of courtesy, but doubt anyone would treat her differently than any other person. I certainly wouldn't be standing up when she walks into a room or anything like that. Did Harry say something controversial about the elections? I may have missed it. *In the US anyone can make $$$$ or voice an opinion about the elections so can't really criticize them for that.* The main criticism is they do things that BRF watchers would consider unbecoming for royalty. But not that many people in the US are knowledgeable or care about all that, IMO. So the train keeps on moving. They are just another celebrity couple, albeit one that happens to keep getting clicks or whatever in this moment.



Why would someone call MM duchess out of courtesy? It puzzles me! 

Unfortunately, in the US I live, not everyone can make $$$$. The number of people experiencing homelessness increased almost exponentially in the last several years. Many families are struggling to pay their bills. It is impossible to stay indifferent to the waste of taxpayer and other funds by this couple. A couple worried with social justice as they want us to believe. 

While in the US, and in several other countries fortunately, anyone can voice their opinion on elections, it is not particularly polite to do it publicly when one is not in her/his own country. It has to do with good manners and Harry should know better. My 2 cents.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Expect lots of media-hype on this show of voting. 
One article I read recently (too tired to look it up now) referred to MM as “the first royal ever to vote in an election”.   
Now, we know why she continues to use the title.



Chanbal said:


> Why would someone call MM duchess out of courtesy? It puzzles me!
> 
> Unfortunately, in the US I live, not everyone can make $$$$. The number of people experiencing homelessness increased almost exponentially in the last several years. Many families are struggling to pay their bills. It is impossible to stay indifferent to the waste of taxpayer and other funds by this couple. A couple worried with social justice as they want us to believe.
> 
> While in the US, and in several other countries fortunately, anyone can voice their opinion on elections, it is not particularly polite to do it publicly when one is not in her/his own country. It has to do with good manners and Harry should know better. My 2 cents.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Why would someone call MM duchess out of courtesy? It puzzles me!
> 
> Unfortunately, in the US I live, not everyone can make $$$$. The number of people experiencing homelessness increased almost exponentially in the last several years. Many families are struggling to pay their bills. It is impossible to stay indifferent to the waste of taxpayer and other funds by this couple. A couple worried with social justice as they want us to believe.
> 
> While in the US, and in several other countries fortunately, anyone can voice their opinion on elections, it is not particularly polite to do it publicly when one is not in her/his own country. It has to do with good manners and Harry should know better. My 2 cents.



To me it's like Sir Ian McKellen (who I LOVE!!) ... I don't believe in the British honorary titles but I'll use it just out of courtesy if I see other people do. I don't think about whether he deserves the title, if it's a serious title, etc. I think the media just gets into the habit if they see others doing it. I agree it's bizarre that she hasn't yet put it out there "don't call me duchess, that's not what we do in the US." I have to wonder if she or her PR puts out guidelines instructing people to call her that...

On the bright side, I see more and more young people calling out her hypocrisy about being woke and still partaking in the royalty thing in general. But for media companies, they only care about the almighty click and catering to their cash cow. She's it for the moment!


----------



## lalame

_“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_

Oh brother. You had to quote Georgia O'Keefe for THAT nugget of wisdom?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Expect lots of media-hype on this show of voting.
> One article I read recently (too tired to look it up now) referred to MM as “the first royal ever to vote in an election”.
> Now, we know why she continues to use the title.


I used to watch the news in the morning and before going to bed, I don't do it anymore. The quality is getting worse and worse... Stay safe and stay well!


----------



## QuelleFromage

CarryOn2020 said:


> @QuelleFromage  thanks so much for your explanation. I am glad you are here and support your opinion. I may not agree with all of  it, and that is ok, I still value and appreciate you. I am not here to change minds and I want to hear the other point of view. You are correct - the brooch, the chimp, the horrid threats, slurs, etc. - all of that should never be tolerated. I do wish there had been more honesty and transparency in the beginning rather than the media hype.  Your explanation is so well-written that I can feel the disappointment and sorrow you feel at having a “dream killed”.  It is so easy for all of us to get swept up in the magic of royalty - the diamonds, the cars, the gowns, the perfect way of living, etc. I got up early to watch the wedding! Sadly, Disney and the royals disappoint us. I do not believe that Harry has evolved in any way from his past. My concern is that someday we will find out exactly how cruel he has been to MM, much as Charles was to Diana.
> 
> I do wish MM would offer an explanation of why she did not know about the racism. The ’in love’ answer just doesn’t work for a nearly 40 yr old who had been married before. Diana, yes, she was barely 20.  A 35-40 year old is different.  I thought she was wiser than that. Her mother certainly would be. So, how did she miss it?  Harry should have made it clear to MM what she was up against.  For him to say he didn’t know the racism existed, nooooo, I don’t believe that. He was heavily criticized for his “Paki” comment.  Was his apology then a joke?  No, he did what Charles, Andrew, William did to their wives - he immaturely disregarded and dismissed important facts. Even in today’s video, he arrogantly says ”no one else has managed to do this before us”.  That is a lie. He is still full of himself. This is why he deserves the negative coverage. That is why I mock today’s woke message from the couple in the mega-mansion with 19 bathrooms. All just my opinion. Take care, xoxo
> 
> Here’s a short history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_Kingdom





marietouchet said:


> @QuelleFromage  and @CarryOn2020 thanks for the insights, I welcome them
> Yes, excellent point , how could she not have known ?


OK...so my response to this is that it is not possible to know how something feels until you experience it. Especially if you are the first in your situation.
There were no Black people in the BRF to tell MM how it would be nor how it would feel. Harry didn't have a clue - how could he possibly?
I am sure she had both warning and  anticipation of negativity and equally sure that it was worse than anyone expected it to be. I lived in the UK a long time and it shocked me. Brexit shocked a lot of Britons, too. Xenophobia is powerful and yet intangible. Even the guy who drew the chimp cartoon said he didn't think it was racist - because through HIS experience, it very possibly did not register.
Anyone who has EVER been in a situation of being hated for how they were born/who they are (and I don't mean personality) will tell you - that's not something you can imagine or truly understand until you're in it.
This just isn't something where "surely she should have known"....that is not how racism works, and it is definitely not how it works anytime anyone knocks down a barrier. 

I would like to peacefully bow out here. Much love to all


----------



## CarryOn2020

@QuelleFromage   Yes, in fact I do know first hand about _“being hated for how they were born/who they are (and I don't mean personality)”.  _This question isn’t directed at you necessarily. Knowing all that we know, what things would MM have wanted done differently? I would like to hear her thoughts on this. Remembering the BRF is a job which has a protocol for everyone in the line-up. Harry is 6th, so he does not have equal claim that William does. What should he have done differently? This article spells it out clearly. At least, it would be a start:








						The British royal family has turned a blind eye to its racist past
					

Queen Elizabeth II never apologized for the monarchy's connection to the British slave trade, or for other instances of racism by the royal family.




					www.insider.com
				




_The UK's system of an inherited head of state is racist by default," Tatchell told Insider.

"The title of head of state is bestowed on the first-born descendants in each successive generation of the all-white royal family. A non-white person is therefore excluded from holding the title of head of state, at least for the foreseeable future. This is institutional racism."

ETA:  _This is why Harry should step out of succession. If he is committed to changing the system, then step out of the line-up.


----------



## rose60610

QuelleFromage said:


> I just think it's worth looking at. I don't want to wade into this tread because there's no room for my dissent, but it was really nice to remember how adorable we all thought Harry was and that we defended his parentage. Frankly you can hate MM if you want to (I love her, sorry) but *he's been an amazing husband IMO.*




QuelleFromage, I've enjoyed reading your posts in other threads. I totally agree that Harry has been an amazing husband. He hasn't simply given or provided Meghan with absolutely everything, but has supported everything she has said and done. He's even moved to California for her! He supports her in everything, so I agree he has been an amazing husband. Unless he is in agreement with every one of her moves and thoughts, it's as though he hasn't any ideas on his own. He's placating everything she wants. For now. And maybe he actually enjoys it. If so, more power to them! At the beginning, I was rooting for the both of them. Meghan is very pretty. She seemed well spoken at the time. It appeared the UK public was happy and favorable toward them. Meghan seemed to be very gracious and kind to those she met. The wedding was spectacular and I loved every minute of it. For them to go through all the motions, then turn on a dime and say "We're outta here and by the way nobody asked me if I was OK", that just left a few bitter tastes. IMO. There are some who think kindly on it all, and that's fine. I just observe and conclude the whole relationship was a game to Meghan whose ultimate focus was to score it big in Hollywood and land a dupe stepping stone to make it happen. If, however, Harry is complicit in the whole thing, then they've achieved their mutual goal. So OK. Regardless, I think they did take advantage of the Crown's generosity that gave them the gravitas to ingratiate themselves to plastic Hollywood. That signs huge checks. That being said, your kind words about M&H are appreciated and give a good perspective. Fond wishes.


----------



## viciel

lalame said:


> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> Oh brother. You had to quote Georgia O'Keefe for THAT nugget of wisdom?


Is that quote from a reputable publication? Because it's O'Keeffe with two "f". Either way, she just rolled over in her grave.


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> @QuelleFromage   Yes, in fact I do know first hand about _“being hated for how they were born/who they are (and I don't mean personality)”.  _This question isn’t directed at you necessarily. Knowing all that we know, what things would MM have wanted done differently? I would like to hear her thoughts on this. Remembering the BRF is a job which has a protocol for everyone in the line-up. Harry is 6th, so he does not have equal claim that William does. What should he have done differently? This article spells it out clearly. At least, it would be a start:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The British royal family has turned a blind eye to its racist past
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II never apologized for the monarchy's connection to the British slave trade, or for other instances of racism by the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The UK's system of an inherited head of state is racist by default," Tatchell told Insider.
> 
> "The title of head of state is bestowed on the first-born descendants in each successive generation of the all-white royal family. A non-white person is therefore excluded from holding the title of head of state, at least for the foreseeable future. This is institutional racism."
> 
> ETA:  _This is why Harry should step out of succession. If he is committed to changing the system, then step out of the line-up.



The whole institution represents everything that is anti pluralism, globalism, democracy and progress.
Given that the monarch is the head of the church it excludes every religion that isn’t Church of England, and I highly doubt there is precedence for a gay monarch where the heir is born of a surrogate or a sperm donor. I’m also not sure if the monarch changing gender was ever considered.

However, if you welcome the title and the privilege, which our beloved couple certainly did (hello $50M wedding and $1M wardrobe - or was that £?), you get all the embedded racism and other antiquated qualities that come with it.
To be clear, I’m not justifying racism in the press or the public - that’s abhorrent, but you should have done your diligence on what you’re getting yourself into as far as the foundations of the institution go.


----------



## bag-mania

viciel said:


> Is that quote from a reputable publication? Because it's O'Keeffe with two "f". Either way, she just rolled over in her grave.



I posted the original article and I believe it was from People magazine. However, that story was picked up by others, including CNBC and Marie Claire, which also have the misspelling.

There are so many proofreading errors in web articles. The companies are in such a hurry to get the stories up that blatant mistakes like a misspelled name are the collateral damage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

QuelleFromage said:


> OK....I will tell you how I really feel and please, no one flame me - I am answering because I was asked genuinely and nicely.
> 
> First, I think MM was treated appallingly by the British press. I do think it was incredibly racist and things were said and done that are way, way over the line. I could not have handled it. As a mixed-race person I can't overstate what it is like to see anyone of color join the BRF. These are the "princesses" little girls grow up seeing. It's a big deal for me and my family. So to see that and then to see everything from the blackamoor brooch to the chimp cartoon and on and on....that's like killing a dream to me. I've looked and looked and tried to make a comparison to how Kate was treated and it's far out of balance.
> 
> Second I guess I am what is derided as "woke" but I LIKE how Harry has evolved from some of his somewhat embarrassing past, and I don't have a major issue with anything they've said to the media. I also don't think she's running the ship...it seems like a partnership to me. She's not a milquetoast and she hasn't just taken what's been thrown at her and I admire that. She seems tough to me but not evil.
> 
> That's just me, and again, I am not a long term part of this thread and don't want to argue. I like them, and I'm not going to come back to this thread to make any further case as to why, so again, please don't flame. Cool?


But what exactly is so special about her other than she has married into the largely white BRF and has a mixed-race? Maybe it's that I have grown up in a multi cultural world, but that is not an achievement in and of itself imo.
The racism thing was to be expected and I think it was reasonably minor in scale.
In terms of the opportunities and demands the role as working member of the BRF represented, they were significant. M knew that though, she was provided all the necessary information certainly. 
My position is that M did not like being told what to do, and envisioned her role after marriage as being that of Disney princess - swanning around spending money and having commoners bow and scrape to her.
The fact that she threw her own family and the BRF under the bus has really taken away most of the goodwill towards her imo.
I really can't see much to recommend her from her behaviour, and apart from being wealthy due to her marriage, there is little of substance there.
So much more could have come from her role in the BRF had she stayed as a working Royal. Now, she is just another wealthy housewife on a mission to be more famous, more adored etc etc.
I don't get what her personal attributes are that make her any more worthy of admiration that anyone else who married rich.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Covid reading , I am on the intro to the book that Andrew Morton ghost wrote for Diana , the revised edition, printed after her death
> 
> Interesting anecdote there , talking about the amourette of Charles and Camilla ca 1990. Before there had been any solid confirmation but everyone knew ...
> The courtiers around each of Diana and Charles were covering up for Charles, eg Charles was in hospital, Camilla was closer, visited first and the courtiers had to track police reports of Diana’s car from London, so they could get rid of C before D arrived
> Anyway, Morton concludes D developed a profound distrust of the courtiers because they hid the affair and lied about it to her
> 
> Gotta believe that distrust of the courtiers rubbed off on Harry , surely, he also read the foreword to the book



JCMH doesn't seem to mind using the same network to coverup a few less savoury incidents of his own.


----------



## papertiger

A video lecture on racism is an easy sell (I hope), no one (sane) is going to argue with anti-racist statement, great for noise making/provoking content on the day she loses a point in court.

For 2 people who are so anti-media they sure love to use the same channels and MO. 

Makes you wonder what they and their PR team are going to put out if and when they lose AP case.


----------



## Lodpah

Just a little lighthearted entertainment. Remember when MM name was bandied around as a Bond girl? Well the ultimate Bond girl was QE2.


----------



## rengb6

QuelleFromage said:


> OK....I will tell you how I really feel and please, no one flame me - I am answering because I was asked genuinely and nicely.
> 
> First, I think MM was treated appallingly by the British press. I do think it was incredibly racist and things were said and done that are way, way over the line. I could not have handled it. As a mixed-race person I can't overstate what it is like to see anyone of color join the BRF. These are the "princesses" little girls grow up seeing. It's a big deal for me and my family. So to see that and then to see everything from the blackamoor brooch to the chimp cartoon and on and on....that's like killing a dream to me. I've looked and looked and tried to make a comparison to how Kate was treated and it's far out of balance.
> 
> Second I guess I am what is derided as "woke" but I LIKE how Harry has evolved from some of his somewhat embarrassing past, and I don't have a major issue with anything they've said to the media. I also don't think she's running the ship...it seems like a partnership to me. She's not a milquetoast and she hasn't just taken what's been thrown at her and I admire that. She seems tough to me but not evil.
> 
> That's just me, and again, I am not a long term part of this thread and don't want to argue. I like them, and I'm not going to come back to this thread to make any further case as to why, so again, please don't flame. Cool?



Thank you for saying this. I'm in camp 'neutral' when it comes to MM but the Blackamoore brooch was completely inappropriate. I was surprised to see something so low class on here.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I believe I read in one of the articles that it is in October in England.


And the rest of the UK


----------



## QuelleFromage

Mods, could you please remove my posts? I asked to end the discussion from my side, I put the thread on ignore, but I am still getting alerts on replies to my posts (should that happen when a thread is on "ignore"?).


----------



## marietouchet

Tootsie17 said:


> Thank you for saying it! I was thinking that knit shirt looks terrible on her and was a terrible choice for a video.


The outfit is vegan and sustainable, and has a style vibe that caters to a younger woke audience


----------



## Tootsie17

lalame said:


> I liked her top and thought she looked good in it.  But I think I like her style more than most others on this thread in general.


I usually don't have a problem with how she dresses.  Some of the blouses/shirts she has worn in other videos have been very flattering. I think I may have been turned off because M just wore a tan blouse a few days ago that was a better choice, but just my opinion.


----------



## marietouchet

QuelleFromage said:


> Mods, could you please remove my posts? I asked to end the discussion from my side, I put the thread on ignore, but I am still getting alerts on replies to my posts (should that happen when a thread is on "ignore"?).


Come on guys, cut it out !


----------



## Tootsie17

marietouchet said:


> The outfit is vegan and sustainable, and has a style vibe that caters to a younger woke audience


Whatever outfit you choose to wear, just make sure that it flatters you. Whether it is vegan, sustainable or caters to younger woke audience, it should make you look good.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rengb6 said:


> Thank you for saying this. I'm in camp 'neutral' when it comes to MM but the Blackamoore brooch was completely inappropriate. I was surprised to see something so low class on here.



What do you mean? We were all in agreement that was inappropriate and a low blow of Princess Michael, several people have said so, there was only one person who felt the cultural background of Blackamoor art needed to be considered, and I don't think anyone really agreed with that either.


----------



## rengb6

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What do you mean? We were all in agreement that was inappropriate and a low blow of Princess Michael, several people have said so, there was only one person who felt the cultural background of Blackamoor art needed to be considered, and I don't think anyone really agreed with that either.


What i meant is that I hadn't heard the news of Princess Michael wearing that broach until I came on TPF and read it. I'm not saying the people on this thread are low class, I'm saying the Princess is low class, and that I heard the news on this forum.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rengb6 said:


> What i meant is that I hadn't heard the news of Princess Michael wearing that broach until I came on TPF and read it. I'm not saying the people on this thread are low class, I'm saying the Princess is low class, and that I heard the news on this forum.



Thanks for clarifying!


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> And the rest of the UK


Thanks for the note, until yesterday, I did not know that the celebratory months eg BHM, Hispanic History, Breast Cancer etc might be celebrated at different times across the globe - actually, kinda makes sense, never dawned on me , learn something everyday

And I just looked it up, the UK Hispanic Latino month coincides with that in the USA.  I did note the name is a bit different - Latino is added in the UK




__





						Celebrate Hispanic/Latino Heritage Month at UK | University of Kentucky College of Arts & Sciences
					






					hs.as.uky.edu
				




I am geeky, I try to get the terminology correct ... Went and looked up the definitions of Hispanic and Latino and that did not help make the difference CRYSTAL CLEAR,  I have omitted the multiple confusing/conflicting definitions found so as to not bore everyone


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

QuelleFromage said:


> These are the "princesses" little girls grow up seeing. It's a big deal for me and my family. So to see that and then to see everything from the blackamoor brooch to the chimp cartoon and on and on....that's like killing a dream to me.



Your dream is to join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value? Never let anyone tell you anything is impossible, although likelihood is higher if you have private education, weekly facials, acting lessons etc. from a very young age.


----------



## marietouchet

Tootsie17 said:


> Whatever outfit you choose to wear, just make sure that it flatters you. Whether it is vegan, sustainable or caters to younger woke audience, it should make you look good.


Well, if I remember correctly, we mostly felt the green outfit - ca London March 2020 - did not fit so well either ...

I have recently - due to COVID - been researching tailoring standards - keeps me amused and out of trouble, everyone needs a hobby LOL


----------



## marietouchet

Fascinating op-ed
I thought you would be interested in this story from The Times - Harry and Meghan Show misses the point









						Harry and Meghan Show misses the point
					

Now that they are TV presenters, I suppose we must think of the Sussexes — like Piers and Susanna, or Richard and Judy — as Harry and Meghan.Unlike many, I have always wanted them to succeed. The symbolism of their mixed-race union could have sent a potent message to the world that in this country a




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## lalame

Jktgal said:


> Your dream is to join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value? Never let anyone tell you anything is impossible, although likelihood is higher if you have private education, weekly facials, acting lessons etc. from a very young age.



100%! "Prince marrying commoner" fairy tale in reality -> Prince marries the 1%. I do think it's cool that the BRF would marry out of their race because.. hey, that's interesting. Doesn't happen every day. But I'd have a higher likelihood of achieving something far greater myself, like becoming a CEO or even winning the lottery.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> To me it's like Sir Ian McKellen (who I LOVE!!) ... I don't believe in the British honorary titles but I'll use it just out of courtesy if I see other people do. I don't think about whether he deserves the title, if it's a serious title, etc. I think the media just gets into the habit if they see others doing it. I agree it's bizarre that she hasn't yet put it out there "don't call me duchess, that's not what we do in the US." I have to wonder if she or her PR puts out guidelines instructing people to call her that...
> 
> On the bright side, I see more and more young people calling out her hypocrisy about being woke and still partaking in the royalty thing in general. But for media companies, they only care about the almighty click and catering to their cash cow. She's it for the moment!


Don't know if this is because I grew up in New England, lived on land that was a former colonial homestead -or- that the Revolutionary War (and the reason for it) were drummed into our heads (and then living in Boston for so many years) .. but for me, I go by the "we as Americans do not recognize the monarchy and as such, we do not need to adhere to addressing them with their title" (the same goes true for when American players are playing at Wimbledon .. they actually do not have to bow, but many times do).  Now, if I were to meet the QEII or one of the other more 'senior' Royals, would I be nice and address them by title? .. yes, likely .. but that is also out of respect.  Since I have ZERO respect for both MM and JCMH, I would not address them by title .. and frankly, I'm sick to death of seeing that constantly in the US media .. however, as you have rightly said, many times its click-bait.


----------



## QuelleFromage

Jktgal said:


> Your dream is to join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value? Never let anyone tell you anything is impossible, although likelihood is higher if you have private education, weekly facials, acting lessons etc. from a very young age.


That's a really unfair thing to say. What I am TALKING about I seeing yourself reflected in culture, even pop culture, moments that women of color don't usually see.
You don't know me and you don't know one thing about my life, my schooling, my family, etc., so please save your sarcasm.
The ad feminem attacks are something I specifically asked this thread to refrain from so I could honestly answer the question asked (nicely) of me.


----------



## bag-mania

I appreciate that QuellFromage gave her POV when asked. I know many of us were wondering why Meghan’s fans like her and she was nice enough to give us her reason.

Nobody is going to change anyone's mind and that’s fine.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QuelleFromage said:


> That's a really unfair thing to say. What I am TALKING about I seeing yourself reflected in culture, even pop culture, moments that women of color don't usually see.
> You don't know me and you don't know one thing about my life, my schooling, my family, etc., so please save your sarcasm.
> The ad feminem attacks are something I specifically asked this thread to refrain from so I could honestly answer the question asked (nicely) of me.


Yes, you have the right to express your opinions as you have the right to disagree with our opinions. However, you don't have the right to choose how we agree or disagree with you, unless you block our responses, which is your privilege to do. 
Frankly, what caught my eye, was your user name comprised of two French words, that didn't agree with each other.  Fromage = masculine noun. Quel(le) = adjective that modifies and agrees with a noun. Therefore I would use quel fromage in a French sentence. Exception: If Quelle is a first name and Fromage is a surname. End of French lesson.


----------



## gracekelly

Tootsie17 said:


> *Whatever outfit you choose to wear, just make sure that it flatters you. *Whether it is vegan, sustainable or caters to younger woke audience, it should make you look good.


This!  I love the idea of pleather, but have yet to see a fabrication that doesn’t scream fake. I am hoping that the technology will I prove and the fabric will continue to improve.   The top is a total fail to me even on the fashion model. It is so tight fitting that a strapless bra will totally show and unless you have a pair of breast implants that stand at attention and don’t require support of any type, the top will not look good.


----------



## A1aGypsy

QuelleFromage said:


> That's a really unfair thing to say. What I am TALKING about I seeing yourself reflected in culture, even pop culture, moments that women of color don't usually see.
> You don't know me and you don't know one thing about my life, my schooling, my family, etc., so please save your sarcasm.
> The ad feminem attacks are something I specifically asked this thread to refrain from so I could honestly answer the question asked (nicely) of me.




Good lord. She said she didn’t feel comfortable posting but did so because she was engaged in a polite manner. She provided her viewpoint in a neutral and polite manner. What does she get in response? Rudeness in the form of mocking of what raises her hopes and also (??) her alias? Why?? 

I mean, fair, she doesn’t get to tell you how to respond. But can she not expect some civility? 

It would be really nice to have some discourse in this thread.  I’d love to understand the other side.


----------



## lalame

QuelleFromage said:


> That's a really unfair thing to say. What I am TALKING about I seeing yourself reflected in culture, even pop culture, moments that women of color don't usually see.
> You don't know me and you don't know one thing about my life, my schooling, my family, etc., so please save your sarcasm.
> The ad feminem attacks are something I specifically asked this thread to refrain from so I could honestly answer the question asked (nicely) of me.



I think you're being a bit sensitive. That poster (and me too who agreed with her) was commenting on the royal institution and didn't really make any mean assumptions about you, your lifestyle, or anything like that. No one is out to insult you here. You're bracing for something that hasn't yet happened. This is a forum... conversations happen... conversations by definition require some back and forth commentary addressing what the other person said.


----------



## QuelleFromage

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, you have the right to express your opinions as you have the right to disagree with our opinions. However, you don't have the right to choose how we agree or disagree with you, unless you block our responses, which is your privilege to do.
> Frankly, what caught my eye, was your user name comprised of two French words, that didn't agree with each other.  Fromage = masculine noun. Quel(le) = adjective that modifies and agrees with a noun. Therefore I would use quel fromage in a French sentence. Exception: If Quelle is a first name and Fromage is a surname. End of French lesson.


WELL....since we are being "frank" and  you're criticizing the French in my username 1) my father was French 2) It's a French pun, the gender is feminine because I am female, and if you don't recognize the joke, that's not my problem.
I ASKED not to be flamed and I think it was a reasonable request. As we say in Britain, you're a nasty muggins. End of English lesson


----------



## QuelleFromage

lalame said:


> I think you're being a bit sensitive. That poster (and me too who agreed with her) was commenting on the royal institution and didn't really make any mean assumptions about you, your lifestyle, or anything like that. No one is out to insult you here. You're bracing for something that hasn't yet happened. This is a forum... conversations happen... conversations by definition require some back and forth commentary addressing what the other person said.


She said, and I quote : _Your dream is to join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value? Never let anyone tell you anything is impossible, although likelihood is higher if you have private education, weekly facials, acting lessons etc. from a very young age._

^^^^That's snarky and mean. It *makes fun *of my point about growing up mixed-race. It even suggests that I don't have a "good" background. But you know what? THAT is why I didn't want to answer the very nice poster who asked me a fair question. Because I would get snarky meanness for expressing something quite genuine and personal.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QuelleFromage said:


> WELL....since we are being "frank" and  you're criticizing the French in my username 1) my father was French 2) It's a pun, the gender is feminine because I am female, and if you don't recognize the joke, that's not my problem.
> I ASKED not to be flamed and I think it was a reasonable request. As we say in Britain, you're a nasty muggins. End of English lesson


No problem! You don't recognize a joke either, however, I don't have any nasty names to call you. Live long and prosper.


----------



## CarryOn2020

today I saw 3 women clearly 40ish with cut-out tops on.  Age has nothing to do with it, imo. Some of us remember the oh-so-cool FlashDance look 

Article from 2014: https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2014/apr/16/princess-michael-father-nazi-ss-officer
For us RoyalWatchers, it has been well known for years that Princess Michael has a shady past and is disliked in the BRF.  Some women are just mean-spirited. This is why for me it is indeed surprising MM would claim she did not know about the BRF, even Harry tries to work that claim. All of this info is well known. There are plenty of books, videos, website, tweets, etc. so anyone can find out. To me, this thread is interesting because most posters are well read and highly educated.

The Princess Culture - numerous studies on this topic, google it if you want details. Gloria Steinem, RBG, and many others preached against the idea that there is a Prince Charming and that he will rescue the damsel. They preached that empowerment, self reliance, education, etc. would serve women better than waiting for Prince Charming. If you aren’t familiar with reviews of Grimm’s Fairy Tales, google it.








						The 'princess industrial complex' is inescapable — is that bad for girls?
					

Disney princesses are everywhere. We asked some experts what they think about that.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

QuelleFromage said:


> She said, and I quote : _Your dream is to join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value? Never let anyone tell you anything is impossible, although likelihood is higher if you have private education, weekly facials, acting lessons etc. from a very young age._
> 
> ^^^^That's snarky and mean. It *makes fun *of my point about growing up mixed-race. It even suggests that I don't have a "good" background. But you know what? THAT is why I didn't want to answer the very nice poster who asked me a fair question. Because I would get snarky meanness for expressing something quite genuine and personal.



I 100000% do not think that's what she meant, and I'm only even speaking up for her because I 100001% hope you do not think that's what I meant when I agreed. If a "good" background = private education, weekly facials, and acting lessons then none of us have good backgrounds. Come on, no one would mean something that ridiculous. What it does make fun of, and I wholeheartedly agree with, is the "prince marries commoner" narrative being a fairytale because the truth is they're never really commoners and let's remind ourselves that the royal institution is indeed an outdated, classist, unmeritorious one... and to be clear I am not saying that is YOUR narrative, I'm saying that has been a big theme that has been painted about this marriage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2013:








						Are Grimm’s Fairy Tales too twisted for children?
					

Stephen Evans explores the twisted world of Grimm's Fairy Tales – bedtime stories complete with mutilation, cannibalism, infanticide and incest.




					www.bbc.com


----------



## CeeJay

QuelleFromage said:


> She said, and I quote : _Your dream is to join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value? Never let anyone tell you anything is impossible, although likelihood is higher if you have private education, weekly facials, acting lessons etc. from a very young age._
> 
> ^^^^That's snarky and mean. It *makes fun *of my point about growing up mixed-race. It even suggests that I don't have a "good" background. But you know what? THAT is why I didn't want to answer the very nice poster who asked me a fair question. Because I would get snarky meanness for expressing something quite genuine and personal.


See, I took her response in a very different way and to me, it was not snarky .. but I do recognize that many times based on one's background and history, it can be taken a very different way.  

In regards to the "_join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value_" .. to me it meant that if you are the type of person who values themselves based on your OWN merits (_this is me big-time_), then joining a family who doesn't truly care what you have done on your own .. that might be tough to take (_would be for me_).  As far as the nondemocratic, well .. they are a monarchy, so not ********ic at all!  

The 2nd statement (_again - to me_) was more of a poke not at you but at Meghan.  In my opinion, while she may want to play the "poor mixed-race card" .. she really can't in many respects.  She grew up (_somewhat_) privileged .. her father was an award-winning Lighting Director for a very well-known TV show that ran many seasons, she lived (_for many years_) with him in a very nice area of Woodland Hills (_the Valley_), attended Private Schools (_funded by her Father_), was enrolled in additional theatre and dance classes (_at the expense of her father_) and had a fair amount of plastic surgery (_again - funded by her father_) and lastly, attended a very nice University funded by her Father (_majoring in International Relations/Theatre_).  So, what I think the poster meant re: "_nothing is impossible_" .. was more along the lines that in many respects Meghan had a LOT of advantages early on, networked very well (but left a lot of 'former' friends behind) .. and used that to get to meet Harry.  Is she a good networker? .. I would say absolutely, but .. what I personally dislike about her is the hypocrisy and more importantly how she has used up and then left behind many people that helped her to be where she is today (and I have friends that were "markled" and it hurts when a supposed friend does that to you)!  Is her father perfect? .. no, but no one is and while none of us can truly speak to the family dynamic, I do feel like he has now got the short end of the stick and he's not a young (or very healthy) man.  IMO .. she should just stop the lawsuits and repair those relationships and stop trying so hard to "inspire" all of us 'low-end' people!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> What it does make fun of, and I wholeheartedly agree with, is the "prince marries commoner" narrative being a fairytale because the truth is they're never really commoners and let's remind ourselves that the royal institution is indeed an outdated, classist, unmeritorious one... and to be clear I am not saying that is YOUR narrative, I'm saying that has been a big theme that has been painted about this marriage.



IMO, H&M‘s marriage is about Harry wanting power.  MM wants it, too.

In Harry’s dreams, he thinks Will abdicates so Harry gets the throne. He is playing the race card to force Will out. Harry says in yesterday’s video that the UK must remove systemic racism. The BRF _*is*_ the systemic racism. In their system, only whites can be king/queen unless they marry a person of a different ethnicity. QE, Charles, Will all saw through H&M’s cheap power play. That’s why she smirks.

ETA:  this is the stuff of Shakespeare and more recently Game of Thrones. It is all about power.


----------



## lalame

Maybe it's just me but I never really related to the whole "It could happen to me" implication behind the hoop-la of royalty marrying commoners. This has happened a few times... Queen Rania, Grace Kelly, Marie-Chantal Miller, Diana, etc. They're all still like 1% in wealth, beauty, heritage, or whatever. I do think it's cool that there's now a WOC in the royal family but as a WOC as well I can't say it feels any more attainable or relatable to me. That's just my humble opinion.


----------



## gracekelly

Please fellow tPFers. The thread has become derailed. The thread topic is specific to two people and not ourselves. 

This is an interesting article in the DM about an article published in The Times of London. 









						Trevor Phillips compares Prince Harry to '1980s polytechnic lecturer'
					

Trevor Phillips also said Meghan's claim that she 'didn't realise that there was a Black History Month in Britain' was a mistake as it was first celebrated in 1987. The couple took part in a Zoom call yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Here is a copy of The Times article . 


Trevor Phillips

Friday October 02 2020, 12.01am, The Times

Now that they are TV presenters, I suppose we must think of the Sussexes — like Piers and Susanna, or Richard and Judy — as Harry and Meghan.

Unlike many, I have always wanted them to succeed. The symbolism of their mixed-race union could have sent a potent message to the world that in this country at least, we have found ways to bridge the racial divisions that risk destroying other societies. They’re the kind of people who can pontificate and tell us how much they care but who don’t have to wrestle with the problem of running a country and tackling these issues.

But if they want to use their star power for good they need to change their production team pronto. Their new show marking the start of Black History Month, celebrating a list of “next generation trailblazers”, made me want to look away.

Meghan told us, with a wide-eyed gasp, that she had never realised that Britain might have a Black History Month. A mistake. The first BHM was launched in 1987. For at least two decades it has been officially celebrated by British governments of every stripe, and marked by members of the royal family. Meghan simply reminded us how little she learnt about Britain and, in particular, that she was unaware of the one moment in the year when Black Britain is acknowledged by Establishment Britain.

I feel sorry for Harry when he uses terms like “structural racism” that he doesn’t appear to understand and which make him sound like a 1980s polytechnic lecturer. It’s the sort of empty jargon you’d expect him to be fed by the fashionable types behind this appeal.

He puzzlingly reminded us that while London was “celebrated as one of the most diverse cities in the world” when “you get out on the street and you actually talk to people it doesn’t feel as diverse as it actually is”. Seriously? Two out of every five Londoners are non-white. Diversity isn’t so easy to miss in the capital. Thirty years ago I filmed Harry on a clandestine visit with his mother and brother to meet the homeless near Waterloo. What happened to that boy? Perhaps a stroll down the less fashionable streets of London would, in the words of Ralph McTell’s song, show the couple something to make them change their minds.

There is nothing wrong with the “trailblazers” he and Meghan have chosen. Several are admirable artists, actors, athletes and activists. But Black History Month was inaugurated to show that we black folk are wealth creators, inventors and professionals. This list has no doctors, scientists, lawyers, business leaders or teachers. The Harry and Meghan Show has fallen straight into the oldest trap in the book: showing black folk as interesting but not important, prominent but not powerful. Sadly this may say less about black Britain and more about a couple who could have changed the world but have settled for pleading, “Let me entertain you.”


----------



## gracekelly

Mr Phillips packs quite a lot into his article. I hope the Sussex read it. Interesting insights into how they are being perceived. I wonder if his thoughts will make an impression on them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Mr Phillips packs quite a lot into his article. I hope the Sussex read it. Interesting insights into how they are being perceived. I wonder if his thoughts will make an impression on them.



Doubt it. Their reaction to any critism seems to be either defiance or victimhood, but never "Ok you might have a point".


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doubt it. Their reaction to any critism seems to be either defiance or victimhood, but never "Ok you might have a point".


They would never say anything publicly, but it might engender some plate tossing if there are any left in the cupboard.


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 
I recall that you mentioned the bird nest artwork, here is a little more info on it: 

*Were Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's $360 nest prints a housewarming gift from OPRAH? Small independent photography studio was featured in the media mogul's magazine in August*









						Did Oprah Winfrey give Prince Harry and Meghan Markle the nest photos?
					

Californian Barloga studios, which created Meghan Markle, 39, and Prince Harry's, 36, bird nest artwork were featured in the couple's friend Oprah Winfrey's magazine this summer.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The prints are from Californian Barloga Studios, featured in Oprah's magazine.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> Mr Phillips packs quite a lot into his article. I hope the Sussex read it. Interesting insights into how they are being perceived. I wonder if his thoughts will make an impression on them.


He does, well said Trevor, refreshing perspective.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  I never doubt their connections. Nothing they do is original which is one more reason why they lack authenticity.  The nests are not to my tastes but the studio certainly does have other beautiful work.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Just for the record, 2 WOC married into BRF and 1 WOC became a Viscountess. https://thegrio.com/2018/05/18/blac...-3-women-who-paved-the-way-for-meghan-markle/ 
One WOC married into Liechtenstenstein royal family. https://www.blackpast.org/global-af...f-liechtenstein-nee-angela-gisela-brown-1958/


----------



## lalame

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for the record, 2 WOC married into BRF and 1 WOC became a Viscountess. https://thegrio.com/2018/05/18/blac...-3-women-who-paved-the-way-for-meghan-markle/
> One WOC married into Liechtenstenstein royal family. https://www.blackpast.org/global-af...f-liechtenstein-nee-angela-gisela-brown-1958/



Thanks for dropping the knowledge as usual!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for the record, 2 WOC married into BRF and 1 WOC became a Viscountess. https://thegrio.com/2018/05/18/blac...-3-women-who-paved-the-way-for-meghan-markle/
> One WOC married into Liechtenstenstein royal family. https://www.blackpast.org/global-af...f-liechtenstein-nee-angela-gisela-brown-1958/



The Lichtenstein royal couple are like... the much more accomplished, wealthy, and actually private version of Harry and Meghan. Why didn't they get more press... oh, what an interesting concept:


----------



## bag-mania

Harry and Meghan are showing just how unprepared they are to run with the big dogs. Nice-sounding but oversimplified platitudes will only get them so far (as least in the UK apparently). While here in the US the media is still eating up all of their well-meaning nonsense with a spoon.


----------



## lulilu

purseinsanity said:


> Really?  Wow, she changes religion like people change underwear.  She really uses then discards anything and everything, doesn't she?



*I don't believe she really converted to Judaism.  It is far more complicated and requires more devotion than I believe she would give.*



lalame said:


> _“There are always going to be naysayers,” Meghan continued. “But at the end of the day…you know, I used to have a quote up in my room many, many moons ago and it resonates now perhaps more than ever when you see the vitriol and noise that can be out in the world. It’s by Georgia O’Keefe and it’s: ‘I have already settled it for myself so flattery and criticism go down the same drain and I am quite free.’ "_
> 
> Oh brother. You had to quote Georgia O'Keefe for THAT nugget of wisdom?



*At least (and I think for the first time) she attributed one of her bon mots to the original author instead of plageriazing.  She is pretty shameless about taking others words.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are showing just how unprepared they are to run with the big dogs. Nice-sounding but oversimplified platitudes will only get them so far (as least in the UK apparently). While here in the US the media is still eating up all of their well-meaning nonsense with a spoon.



Indeed they are unprepared platitud-istas. They have ‘overplayed their hand‘, ‘lost the plot’, given us ‘tmi’.  Now the losses on the court cases are adding up, their clothes are mundane, their hair (!), their decor is being scrutinized and criticized, their videos are un-inspiring word salads.  Nextflix surely wants its money back.


----------



## rose60610

I have one observation on Meghan, she certainly went into very successful turbo mode when you think about it: meets Harry June 2016, marries into BRF quite soon thereafter, Archie, moves to Canada, then CA, Netflix deal. All in four years time. She's kinda like a human Concorde. She moved fast! I don't think Harry knows what hit him. I'll give her credit for landing one of the world's most famous bachelors who became putty in her hands. It's like she saw her age climbing toward the "my-looks-are-going-to-start-to-fade-years and I'd better move fast". And she did. She shot for the moon, landed, and remains a successful space cadet. Cut-throat Hollywood probably appreciates how she operates and thinks highly of her.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Indeed they are unprepared platitud-istas. They have ‘overplayed their hand‘, ‘lost the plot’, given us ‘tmi’.  Now the losses on the court cases are adding up, their clothes are mundane, their hair (!), their decor is being scrutinized and criticized, their videos are un-inspiring word salads.  *Nextflix surely wants its money back.*



I don't think the execs at Netflix is smart enough to know they made a bad deal. That guy who announced signing them was so eager and pleased thinking he's going to get some great programming out of them. Maybe they will make something popular. I imagine there are lots of out-of-work writers and production people in Hollywood who are desperate to pitch ideas to the hot new producer couple who have been handed a bigger budget than some companies have that have been around for years.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I don't think the execs at Netflix is smart enough to know they made a bad deal. That guy who announced signing them was so eager and pleased thinking he's going to get some great programming out of them. Maybe they will make something popular. I imagine there are lots of out-of-work writers and production people in Hollywood who are desperate to pitch ideas to the hot new producer couple who have been handed a bigger budget than some companies have that have been around for years.


No report said they got any money upfront, the proceeds may entirely be performance-driven 
As they would say in Las Vegas, Netflix may be betting on the Come


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> No report said they got any money upfront, the proceeds may entirely be performance-driven
> As they would say in Las Vegas, Netflix may be betting on the Come



I really hope that is the case. Perhaps it was a coincidence that they appeared to pay off a couple of their debts right after the Netflix deal was announced.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I have one observation on Meghan, she certainly went into very successful turbo mode when you think about it: meets Harry June 2016, marries into BRF quite soon thereafter, Archie, moves to Canada, then CA, Netflix deal. All in four years time. She's kinda like a human Concorde. She moved fast! I don't think Harry knows what hit him. I'll give her credit for landing one of the world's most famous bachelors who became putty in her hands. It's like she saw her age climbing toward the "my-looks-are-going-to-start-to-fade-years and I'd better move fast". And she did. She shot for the moon, landed, and remains a successful space cadet. Cut-throat Hollywood probably appreciates how she operates and thinks highly of her.



She had help


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I don't think the execs at Netflix is smart enough to know they made a bad deal. That guy who announced signing them was so eager and pleased thinking he's going to get some great programming out of them. Maybe they will make something popular. I imagine there are lots of out-of-work writers and production people in Hollywood who are desperate to pitch ideas to the hot new producer couple who have been handed a bigger budget than some companies have that have been around for years.



Those guys are smart IMO but more importantly they're OK with risks. It's the Silicon Valley model... they operate like venture capitalists, funding promising projects to reap rewards. 90% fail, and that's well accepted by VC's. The 10% that succeed make it all worth it. They're willing to throw all sorts of irons into the fire to find the next GOT, The Crown, Stranger Things, etc.


----------



## Chanbal

@gracekelly, thanks for posting Trevor Phillips's article. I enjoyed reading it. 

Though, I believe that initially many people wanted H&M to succeed. Things changed when their phony and opportunistic behaviors became very obvious. 


@CarryOn2020
I also think that MM&H would love to see Will out. I feel sorry for Will, he seems to have a sense of duty like QE. The BRF needs to reassess the situation with MM&H and change their strategy before it gets too late. The upcoming new book might not help the already complicated situation:  

*'As dangerous as the Abdication': Prince Harry and William's breach is WORSE than anyone thinks (and started EARLIER), claims biographer behind new book laying bare devastating inside story - as he says Meghan was handled 'appallingly'* 

‘What you’ve got to realise is that the whole strategy of the monarchy was based on them sticking together. Meghan changed all that. She is difficult. She has an incredible and dangerous level of self-belief.

I agree with this : "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, as depicted in the book, are self-pitying, and assume an astonishing level of entitlement." 









						Prince Harry and William rift worse than you think says biographer
					

Robert Lacey's new book Battle Of Brothers picks apart the feud between Prince William and Prince Harry, a breach in the Royal family that is 'as dangerous as the Abdication'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I really hope that is the case. Perhaps it was a coincidence that they appeared to pay off a couple of their debts right after the Netflix deal was announced.


Or the payment could have been required by the contract ie to ensure they might still be marketable in the uk , frogmore was the most egregious problem they had, not paying might have totally burnt their uk bridges
And they need a U.K. house if they are to do U.K. shows


----------



## marietouchet

About trying to maintain influence in the U.K. 

It took me awhile to figure out what JCMH were talking about this last week, they were aiming at BLM/BHM in the U.K. , not the us
They shifted their focus from the us election to the U.K. and I failed to follow that , maybe others did too


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> About trying to maintain influence in the U.K.
> 
> It took me awhile to figure out what JCMH were talking about this last week, they were aiming at BLM/BHM in the U.K. , not the us
> They shifted their focus from the us election to the U.K. and I failed to follow that , maybe others did too


They were getting heat for speaking out on the US elections and now they are getting heat for their inane comments about and during  Black History Month.  They need to find another planet where their comments won't get them into trouble.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They were getting heat for speaking out on the US elections and now they are getting heat for their inane comments about and during  Black History Month.  *They need to find another planet where their comments won't get them into trouble.*


May I suggest Planet X?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> May I suggest Planet X?


They just found three buried lakes on Mars.  Could work.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> Mr Phillips packs quite a lot into his article. I hope the Sussex read it. Interesting insights into how they are being perceived. I wonder if his thoughts will make an impression on them.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doubt it. Their reaction to any critism seems to be either defiance or victimhood, but never "Ok you might have a point".



Can see all of H&M minions scrambling to come up with a Plan B, if Meghan perchance stumbles upon Mr Philip's sentiments.

Crazy 2020!!!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Mr Phillips packs quite a lot into his article. I hope the Sussex read it. Interesting insights into how they are being perceived. I wonder if his thoughts will make an impression on them.



It's hard to pull the wool over Phillip's eyes. 

We live in hope. although, in ref to these two, also fear.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Question: how does one embed a link into a word(s)? Thanks.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> They just found three buried lakes on Mars.  Could work.





Chanbal said:


> May I suggest Planet X?





VigeeLeBrun said:


> Can see all of H&M minions scrambling to come up with a Plan B, if Meghan perchance stumbles upon Mr Philip's sentiments.
> 
> Crazy 2020!!!



Plan B (the non-medication kind),  Planet X by way of 3 month vacation on Mars by the lakes. Sounds good to me. 

I'll start a GoFundMe, coz their Netflix deal won't be enough


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Plan B (the non-medication kind),  Planet X by way of 3 month vacation on Mars by the lakes. Sounds good to me.
> 
> I'll start a GoFundMe, coz their Netflix deal won't be enough



They need to contact Elon Musk and find out if they can hitch a ride on Space X.  They can get Net Flix to pay the cost of the journey to Musk as they film a documentary of the trip and subsequent landing.  The possibilities for merching space suits and souvenirs is endless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Question: how does one embed a link into a word(s)? Thanks.


New Harkles

See the T with the arrows, next to it is the paperclip thingy. Click the paperclip. Copy/paste the URL, then type your word or phrase. I did it with New Harkles. The words with the link  are in red.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> @gracekelly, thanks for posting Trevor Phillips's article. I enjoyed reading it.
> 
> Though, I believe that initially many people wanted H&M to succeed. Things changed when their phony and opportunistic behaviors became very obvious.
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020
> I also think that MM&H would love to see Will out. I feel sorry for Will, he seems to have a sense of duty like QE. The BRF needs to reassess the situation with MM&H and change their strategy before it gets too late. The upcoming new book might not help the already complicated situation:
> 
> *'As dangerous as the Abdication': Prince Harry and William's breach is WORSE than anyone thinks (and started EARLIER), claims biographer behind new book laying bare devastating inside story - as he says Meghan was handled 'appallingly'*
> 
> ‘What you’ve got to realise is that the whole strategy of the monarchy was based on them sticking together. Meghan changed all that. She is difficult. She has an incredible and dangerous level of self-belief.
> 
> I agree with this : "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, as depicted in the book, are self-pitying, and assume an astonishing level of entitlement."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William rift worse than you think says biographer
> 
> 
> Robert Lacey's new book Battle Of Brothers picks apart the feud between Prince William and Prince Harry, a breach in the Royal family that is 'as dangerous as the Abdication'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Cited article is an excellent summary of the points against JCMH

Not a balanced account, but in tandem with Omid’s version, does detail the whole affair


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent summary of yesterday’s word stew:








						The Harkles Hang Onto The Black History Month Bandwagon
					

Black History Month is important, yet we find the Sussex duo hitching themselves to a cause in collaboration with a tabloid. Yes, I know they said they wouldn’t speak to tabloids ever, ever a…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com
				



_There is more stuttering, as he claims to have had an awakening because he didn’t know of these issues. We all knew Harry was dim, but now he’s admitting it because he can read a newspaper, and watch the news like the rest of us, and if we can be informed (because we choose to be) then so can he. It was obvious he didn’t care, and all he thought about was having a good time, and didn’t bother with anything else. Now he has to look as if he cares, because he needs funding from these charities and causes for his wallet._


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent summary of yesterday’s word stew:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Harkles Hang Onto The Black History Month Bandwagon
> 
> 
> Black History Month is important, yet we find the Sussex duo hitching themselves to a cause in collaboration with a tabloid. Yes, I know they said they wouldn’t speak to tabloids ever, ever a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _There is more stuttering, as he claims to have had an awakening because he didn’t know of these issues. We all knew Harry was dim, but now he’s admitting it because he can read a newspaper, and watch the news like the rest of us, and if we can be informed (because we choose to be) then so can he. It was obvious he didn’t care, and all he thought about was having a good time, and didn’t bother with anything else. Now he has to look as if he cares, because he needs funding from these charities and causes for his wallet._



Okay, I figured I'd give it a go and try and listen to their drivel. Didn't get to far before I couldn't listen further. I will say this though to Mr Woke JKMH, a word to the wise when being proud of your wokeness. When referring to young black men the term for the female would be not be young black girls but it would be young black women. Maybe you need to take your Woke 101 class again.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Okay, I figured I'd give it a go and try and listen to their drivel. Didn't get to far before I couldn't listen further. I will say this though to Mr Woke JKMH, a word to the wise when being proud of your wokeness. *When referring to young black men the term for the female would be not be young black girls but it would be young black women. *Maybe you need to take your Woke 101 class again.









Oh Harry.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Oh Harry.


Too funny! The Brit, playing the part of a Frenchman, but he couldn't even correctly pronounce the name of his character... Picard with a silent 'd' at the end.


----------



## Jktgal

QuelleFromage said:


> That's a really unfair thing to say. What I am TALKING about I seeing yourself reflected in culture, even pop culture, moments that women of color don't usually see.



Indeed visually, by dint of her skin colour, she represents something. However, were she mixed southeast Asian (as me) I would not consider her representing my 'culture'. M has more in common with Kate Middleton in terms of how she was raised (private education, the right social circles, extracurricular lessons, trips abroad, etc) than the common southeast Asian. Broad brush here for the world 'culture' but mimicking yours.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Blind Gossip

Yeah, YouTube still posts the video. Once a z lister...the comments are hilarious


Spoiler: The video








ETA: swooning over these sophisticated TPF tools


----------



## Jktgal

Thanks for flagging Robert Lacey and hus  new book - this one is the one I'd follow the serial of.
I wonder if the author is behind the Harry Markle website.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not going???  Thought they were going and looking forward to it. Hmmmm.








						Why Harry and Meghan Won’t Be Spending Christmas With the Queen
					

Transatlantic travel isn’t a given in the COVID era, but Harry’s rocky relationship with his brother is also said to be playing a part.




					www.vanityfair.com
				




_However, one thing is certain: Wherever the queen spends Christmas, she won’t be joined by her grandson Prince Harry and his family, who have told friends they are “not ready” to head back to the U.K. for a festive family reunion.

According to a source close to the duke, Harry and Meghan have no plans to return to the U.K. in December, meaning they will miss a royal Christmas for the second year running._


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not going???  Thought they were going and looking forward to it. Hmmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Harry and Meghan Won’t Be Spending Christmas With the Queen
> 
> 
> Transatlantic travel isn’t a given in the COVID era, but Harry’s rocky relationship with his brother is also said to be playing a part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _However, one thing is certain: Wherever the queen spends Christmas, she won’t be joined by her grandson Prince Harry and his family, who have told friends they are “not ready” to head back to the U.K. for a festive family reunion.
> 
> According to a source close to the duke, Harry and Meghan have no plans to return to the U.K. in December, meaning they will miss a royal Christmas for the second year running._


Is it possible they were told in no uncertain terms to stay away, so they are telling their so-called friends that it is their wishes to stay home?


----------



## drifter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blind Gossip
> 
> Yeah, YouTube still posts the video. Once a z lister...the comments are hilarious
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: swooning over these sophisticated TPF tools




Thanks for the video!  I felt a little embarrassed for her.  She was trying so hard to be sexy (and failed IMO), just like how she's trying so hard to be "humanitarian" and "woke" now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Question: how does one embed a link into a word(s)? Thanks.



If you click on reply, between the big T and the little icon for insert graphic there's the link symbol. If you click it you can insert the word you want to show and the URL.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jktgal said:


> Thanks for flagging Robert Lacey and hus  new book - this one is the one I'd follow the serial of.
> I wonder if the author is behind the Harry Markle website.



This book I might actually consider getting because Lacey has a reputation for doing his research and used to be an investigative journalist...even though I don't agree with him saying the BRF should have given Meghan more. Who is she to always expect the extra goodies?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Prince William is praised for having the duty gene but described as having a terrible temper. "

So I guess he is indeed the grandson of his grandfather haha.


----------



## Jktgal

Lols


----------



## doni

Chanbal said:


> @gracekelly, thanks for posting Trevor Phillips's article. I enjoyed reading it.
> 
> Though, I believe that initially many people wanted H&M to succeed. Things changed when their phony and opportunistic behaviors became very obvious.
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020
> I also think that MM&H would love to see Will out. I feel sorry for Will, he seems to have a sense of duty like QE. The BRF needs to reassess the situation with MM&H and change their strategy before it gets too late. The upcoming new book might not help the already complicated situation:
> 
> *'As dangerous as the Abdication': Prince Harry and William's breach is WORSE than anyone thinks (and started EARLIER), claims biographer behind new book laying bare devastating inside story - as he says Meghan was handled 'appallingly'*
> 
> ‘What you’ve got to realise is that the whole strategy of the monarchy was based on them sticking together. Meghan changed all that. She is difficult. She has an incredible and dangerous level of self-belief.
> 
> I agree with this : "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, as depicted in the book, are self-pitying, and assume an astonishing level of entitlement."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William rift worse than you think says biographer
> 
> 
> Robert Lacey's new book Battle Of Brothers picks apart the feud between Prince William and Prince Harry, a breach in the Royal family that is 'as dangerous as the Abdication'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is one of the most interesting and insightful takes on this mess that I have seen in a long time. And it brings the focus back to the brothers, which is where it should be.

I do believe Meghan was handled appallingly. Both in terms of the Palace not knowing what to do with her and in terms of being not very nicely treated. Katherine was also badly treated. Letizia of Spain was very badly treated. Teresa of Luxembourg was looked down by her MIL until the day she passed away... Anyone who comes into a royal family without belonging to the club is going to be treated appallingly in my view. I myself don’t think I would be able to endure all those little (and big) humiliations... For that, you either have to be very clear this is what you want and be very determined to get there (like Letizia), and/or have a spouse who can really guide you and support you through it all. 
But in the case of Meghan I think this was not what she wanted. She didn’t even know what the whole circus was about. And her husband has been totally clueless in handling the situation. The whole mess is his doing more than anyone else... Interesting to see where this will lead. We are at a turning point time for European royalty I feel, and every little thing that goes on with royals matters.


----------



## Sharont2305

This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)
> 
> View attachment 4866585



ITA....except I wouldn't call them "muppets" , it's an insult to the real muppets, which I adore by the way


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> I do believe Meghan was handled appallingly. Both in terms of the Palace not knowing what to do with her and in terms of being not very nicely treated.



Possibly (I still think she got a lot of perks right away the other royal wifes didn't), but not only was she not singled out, I also strongly feel she's a quitter. Like if it doesn't go her way she is done within five minutes instead of sitting it out and even giving it an earnest try. Also I could respect walking away from an unhealthy situation (in fact, had they just quit royal duty quietly and with class, I doubt very few people, me included, would have put blame on them)...but Meghan walked away not because her circumstances were oh so horrible but because she couldn't be the star of the show, and I have no love for an inflated ego.


----------



## kemilia

duna said:


> ITA....except I wouldn't call them "muppets" , it's an insult to the real muppets, which I adore by the way


Love the Muppets! 

I have a little dog (chihuahua mix) that sounds/barks/demands just like Miss Piggy when she wants to be lifted up to the sofa, makes me laugh every time (maybe she thinks I'm Kermy).


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> ITA....except I wouldn't call them "muppets" , it's an insult to the real muppets, which I adore by the way


LOL, muppet(s) is used in Britain as slang for silly people.


----------



## drifter

whoever advised them to buy those bird's nest pictures and have Harry sit under them must really not like him.  I keep thinking of his hair situation when I see the bird's nest pictures


----------



## maryg1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Prince William is praised for having the duty gene but described as having a terrible temper. "
> 
> So I guess he is indeed the grandson of his grandfather haha.


I thought about his grand grandfather, Q.E.’s dad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

Sharont2305 said:


> This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)
> 
> View attachment 4866585


I don’t think anyone linked directly to the RF should write things like that, totally inappropriate


----------



## jennlt

maryg1 said:


> I don’t think anyone linked directly to the RF should write things like that, totally inappropriate


His niece is probably mortified.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think the bird’s nest picture resembles a crown of thorns.  Harry sitting under it seems like a deliberate attempt at a certain visual image.  Total me me me martyr complex.  Uh!


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Saturday!


----------



## Sharont2305

jennlt said:


> His niece is probably mortified.


But probably agrees,


----------



## marietouchet

I read all the DM excerpts from the Brothers Fury book
Awesome compilation of the times JCMH really trod on the toes of the FIRM ,  it is LONG serious list

Struck by one thing, there were 3 lawsuits filed during Africa trip - M about letter , and two more filed by H. I dont remember Harry's lawsuits at all - but add those to the 5 filed by M
And M now owes how much for the letter lawsuit ? 300,000 pounds total ... their legal bills are ginormous


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, muppet(s) is used in Britain as slang for silly people.



Ah ok,  LOL, I didn't know, it wasn't used in my days.....that shows how old I am and for how long I haven't lived in the UK!


----------



## Pessie

I had a softer spot for Harry when he was unashamedly over-privileged and enjoying it.  Since growing a Hollywood conscience he‘s unbearable.  He reminds me of those people who give up smoking or take up cycling.  Within the week they’ve bought all the gear, and are telling you what do do with your life at every opportunity.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blind Gossip
> 
> Yeah, YouTube still posts the video. Once a z lister...the comments are hilarious
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: swooning over these sophisticated TPF tools





drifter said:


> Thanks for the video!  I felt a little embarrassed for her.  She was trying so hard to be sexy (and failed IMO), just like how she's trying so hard to be "humanitarian" and "woke" now.



I also felt embarrassed for her, the video is rather vulgar. It is similar to some of her pictures that circulated on the web at one point.



doni said:


> This is one of the most interesting and insightful takes on this mess that I have seen in a long time. And it brings the focus back to the brothers, which is where it should be.
> 
> I do believe Meghan was handled appallingly. Both in terms of the Palace not knowing what to do with her and in terms of being not very nicely treated. Katherine was also badly treated. Letizia of Spain was very badly treated. Teresa of Luxembourg was looked down by her MIL until the day she passed away... Anyone who comes into a royal family without belonging to the club is going to be treated appallingly in my view. I myself don’t think I would be able to endure all those little (and big) humiliations... For that, you either have to be very clear this is what you want and be very determined to get there (like Letizia), and/or have a spouse who can really guide you and support you through it all.
> But in the case of Meghan I think this was not what she wanted. She didn’t even know what the whole circus was about. And her husband has been totally clueless in handling the situation. The whole mess is his doing more than anyone else... Interesting to see where this will lead. We are at a turning point time for European royalty I feel, and every little thing that goes on with royals matters.



There is that common saying about 'not being good enough for the in-laws'. Though, compared to Kate, she got a few extra perks.

Edited due to a stupid mistake on my part. @Sharont2305 your post on Kate's uncle is spot-on!


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> I had a softer spot for Harry when he was unashamedly over-privileged and enjoying it.  Since growing a *Hollywood conscience *he‘s unbearable.  He reminds me of those people who give up smoking or take up cycling.  Within the week they’ve bought all the gear, and are telling you what do do with your life at every opportunity.


The 'Hollywood conscience' made me laugh. Would H&MM be considered 'Hollywood woke'?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

doni said:


> Teresa of Luxembourg was looked down by her MIL until the day she passed away...


Maria Theresa! The PM ordered the Waringo Investigation to investigate several reports involving MT's tantrums and handling of the palace staff. The investigation revealed that MT was an overbearing boss at the palace. In the end, the government appointed a Marshal of the Court to oversee staff hiring and firing in consultation with the Grand Duke and asked that the Grand Duke take charge of his court instead of MT.  I believe, like so many others, that GD Josephine Charlotte is now vindicated.


----------



## Aminamina

Kudos to Kate's uncle! For once, we can see her side of a family acting independently(well, I hope W is on with it) and on her behalf in a manner commonly understood. Why can't they when The Duche$$ is so "strong voiced", free as a bird and is being phrased for it, lol.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aminamina said:


> Kudos to Kate's uncle! For once, we can see her side of a family acting independently(well, I hope W is on with it) and on her behalf in a manner commonly understood. Why can't they when *The Duche$$ is so "strong voiced",* free as a bird and is being phrased for it, lol.


IMO, egotistical persons like MM don't last very long in royal courts/circles. They want the limelight all to themselves.


----------



## kemilia

drifter said:


> whoever advised them to buy those bird's nest pictures and have Harry sit under them must really not like him.  I keep thinking of his hair situation when I see the bird's nest pictures


Me too! It looks like a big ball of knotted up hair on top of his head, like what I get out of my hairbrush at the end of the week. Take those pics down--too trendy and fake Cali.


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> But probably agrees,


Add QE too. Can't say it but ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, egotistical persons like MM don't last very long in royal courts/circles. They want the limelight all to themselves.


Agree, but if she keeps punching below[the belt] and getting scores, c'Mon - someone has to respond accordingly at last. Dear Uncle treated them well.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Sharont2305 said:


> This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)
> 
> View attachment 4866585



Thanks, *Sharon*, wld have totally missed this item.
It took a minute to digest this bon mot during breakfast courtesy of Kate's uncle.

My knee-jerk reaction to this was 100% agreement before even registering his relationship with Grifters-R-Us,
ie Gary & Carol->Kate & Wills->Meghan & Harry

*doni*, disagree respectfully.
Meghan Markle knew well what she was getting into with the BRF.
She was raised, not in a cornfield in Ohio but in the MIDDLE of celeb-world USA.
Her dad worked in the business, she worked in the business.
They know the world & network of celebs & fame v well, esp in Los Angles, California.

BRF & Christmas? Thoughts?
No invite to H&M. They are persona non grata at this point. Too too much.

Seriously, should Meghan Markle be welcomed anywhere near a BRF private residence post-Scoubie-Doubiegate?
Security leaks are taken quite seriously by all CEOs, let alone the BRF?
My highly-educated guess?
NOT FUNNY. NOT FORGOTTEN.

Let alone Netflix, the MacMansion, political statements, blah blah blah...the beat goes on.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blind Gossip
> 
> Yeah, YouTube still posts the video. Once a z lister...the comments are hilarious
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: swooning over these sophisticated TPF tools




This video is hilarious. She is truly the Duchess of Hypocrisy. 

Which is worse, being a self-proclaimed feminist who took a job looking alluring and erotic for a men’s magazine? Or being a self-proclaimed vegan who took that same job that shows her grilling and eating meat? 

Oh Meghan! Absolutely nothing about you is real.


----------



## kemilia

Aminamina said:


> Kudos to Kate's uncle! For once, we can see her side of a family acting independently(well, I hope W is on with it) and on her behalf in a manner commonly understood. Why can't they when The Duche$$ is so "strong voiced", free as a bird and is being phrased for it, lol.


The truth hurts.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> This video is hilarious. She is truly the Duchess of Hypocrisy.
> 
> Which is worse, being a self-proclaimed feminist who took a job looking alluring and erotic for a men’s magazine? Or being a self-proclaimed vegan who took that same job that shows her grilling and eating meat?
> 
> Oh Meghan! Absolutely nothing about you is real.


This is a Blind Gossip article, easily guessed and the comments are not kind. She grabs onto anything that can get her money and attention. Warning to the Ginger--you have an expiration date.


----------



## doni

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *doni*, disagree respectfully.
> Meghan Markle knew well what she was getting into with the BRF.
> She was raised, not in a cornfield in Ohio but in the MIDDLE of celeb-world USA.
> Her dad worked in the business, she worked in the business.
> They know the world & network of celebs & fame v well, esp in Los Angles, California.


In my view the world of European royalty has very little to do with the world and network of celebs and fame. Especially that of LA.
But I agree she probably though she knew. And likely vastly overestimated the network, celebrity and fame side of it.
She didn’t realize networking meant dining with the snob German aunt who wears Blackmoor broches and a bunch of other old aristo chums dressed in rags and smelling of horses, and that celebrity meant accompanying the Queen to inaugurate some random bridge in a mining Northern town she’d never heard of on a bleak rainy day. Again, Harry’s fault more than anything.


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> Ah ok,  LOL, I didn't know, it wasn't used in my days.....that shows how old I am and for how long I haven't lived in the UK!


Thank you Sharon for the muppet translation, we are a team, we help !


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> This is a Blind Gossip article, easily guessed and the comments are not kind. She grabs onto anything that can get her money and attention. Warning to the Ginger--you have an expiration date.



At the time she took the job she had no clue her social climbing would take her to such heights. I can understand why she tried to bury it.

It doesn’t show much in the way of acting ability but at least she kept her clothes on.


----------



## Sol Ryan

doni said:


> In my view the world of European royalty has very little to do with the world and network of celebs and fame. Especially that of LA.
> But I agree she probably though she knew. And likely vastly overestimated the network, celebrity and fame side of it.
> She didn’t realize networking meant dining with the snob German aunt who wears Blackmoor broches and a bunch of other old aristo chums dressed in rags and smelling of horses, and that celebrity meant accompanying the Queen to inaugurate some random bridge in a mining Northern town she’d never heard of on a bleak rainy day. Again, Harry’s fault more than anything.



If she really didn’t know what the job entailed, I don’t know how it was anyone’s fault but her own. Every time Kate goes out we see a clip of what charity she visited and what she wore. I can’t stand it when people play dumb.., it’s like when she says she didn’t know what the Commonwealth was or Harry says he didn’t know about racism. I’m pretty sure his mother would be embarrassed. It’s all fake... they can just say they didn’t like the job... no one conned them.

Not only that, but if Meghan was treated appallingly by the BRF, how was Kate treated? She wasn’t allowed any of the perks Meghan got so quickly. They kept telling Wills to drop her.









						With Queen Elizabeth’s Christmas invitation, Meghan Markle will enjoy a perk Kate Middleton didn’t
					

Even Kate Middleton didn’t get invited to spend Christmas with Queen Elizabeth II before she married Prince William.




					www.mercurynews.com


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)
> 
> View attachment 4866585


Additional comments by Gary Goldsmith:

‘They have abdicated the UK for the US and obviously don’t give a damn about the Royal family.'

‘We’ve all had enough of them lecturing us. *You can’t sell your soul to Netflix for a reported £150 million and then dictate to Mother England*.’ Wow!










						Kate Middleton's uncle Gary Goldsmith calls Harry and Meghan 'muppets'
					

Gary Goldsmith, who is the brother of Kate's mother Carole Middleton,  pleaded with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to 'shut the F up' and let Britons get on with 'saving lives' amid coronavirus.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




In the US, we have also "had enough of them lecturing us."


----------



## youngster

Sol Ryan said:


> It’s all fake... they can just say they didn’t like the job... no one conned them>"



This is exactly right, I'd be a lot more tolerant of the two of them if they had just come out and told the truth, that they didn't like the duties, the routine, the hierarchy, and playing second fiddle to William and Kate.  They wanted to be richer and more famous and wield more influence than they could have ever had with Harry towing the line as #6.


----------



## marietouchet

Off topic .. 
Would like to thank everyone here for the hours of amusement provided during the year of COVID
I have actually learned a lot, I dont agree with everything but I start thinking and go look up stuff, priceless, thank you to ALL, and that means everyone, all point of view


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Possibly (I still think she got a lot of perks right away the other royal wifes didn't), but not only was she not singled out, I also strongly feel she's a quitter. Like if it doesn't go her way she is done within five minutes instead of sitting it out and even giving it an earnest try. Also I could respect walking away from an unhealthy situation (in fact, had they just quit royal duty quietly and with class, I doubt very few people, me included, would have put blame on them)...but Meghan walked away not because her circumstances were oh so horrible but because she couldn't be the star of the show, and I have no love for an inflated ego.


Her behavior has been like this for a very long time; remember .. her Father spoiled her rotten (according to my friends), so .. yes, if she feels as though she has no more use for something, she moves on .. and quickly.


----------



## lalame

Sharont2305 said:


> This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)
> 
> View attachment 4866585



Wowww this is quite a statement. I'm shocked to see family members, who actually know them, with these opinions. I always leave some allowance that "the public have got it all wrong" but a candid statement from someone who knows them says something. I can't imagine he's the only one in the family who would feel this way, or he wouldn't feel so comfortable saying it publicly.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> Wowww this is quite a statement. I'm shocked to see family members, who actually know them, with these opinions. I always leave some allowance that "the public have got it all wrong" but a candid statement from someone who knows them says something. I can't imagine he's the only one in the family who would feel this way, or he wouldn't feel so comfortable saying it publicly.


As to comments from the extended family ... and in view of the Brother's Rift book ... 
I remember M's first Xmas at Sandringham, H got in hot water gushing the BRF was the family that M never had ...   
What a hoot three years later ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Prince William is praised for having the duty gene but described as having a terrible temper. "
> 
> So I guess he is indeed the grandson of his grandfather haha.



When people are described as having a "terrible temper", I always wonder if it's absolutely true vs "doesn't suffer fools" or finally runs out of patience with people/reporters/snoops/gossips who truly are a pain in the a$$ or can't shut up. In those cases, I don't blame the accused for cutting somebody off or whatever, especially if they cast aspersions. Even somebody in line to be King. At the same time, when you're raised as a royal you're used to having servants waiting on you hand and foot and I can see growing up with a short fuse. So who knows. Sometimes there's a fine line between being EXTREMELY patient vs allowing yourself to be treated like a doormat. I think most people can be very patient with some things and then not have patience for certain other things. When you're very famous, your security detail or assistants often run interference for you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal   Yes, the video is vulgar and shows her Z list skills. Plus, as @bag-mania says, she is supposedly vegan and a feminist. This is why she is viewed as a desperate opportunist. I applaud Uncle Gary for expressing his disgust at the H&M mess. Every day they fall further down the hypocrisy hole. 

Applause and kudos for those Cambridge kids talking to Attenborough.  My my, at their young age, they have such a strong, positive video presence. Fun things happen at W&K’s place.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> As to comments from the extended family ... and in view of the Brother's Rift book ...
> I remember M's first Xmas at Sandringham, H got in hot water gushing *the BRF was the family that M never had* ...
> What a hoot three years later ...



Well, the BRF WAS the family Meghan never had....ANY USE FOR.... except when giving her everything including a global platform to leverage with Hollywood execs that otherwise would never have given her the time of day.


----------



## mia55

Love it!!!!









						Hypocrites Meghan and Harry beg for privacy — but are hungry for attention
					

Meghan and Harry insist they’re desperate for privacy — so why do they keep hogging the limelight?




					www.google.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, he has been here 151 days, only 32 days to go before tax man calleth.  








						Prince Harry 'faces tax bill without break from Los Angeles mansion'
					

Prince Harry has been in the US for at least 151 days after moving to Los Angeles with his wife Meghan and their baby son Archie in early May. If he reaches 183 days he is legally liable to pay taxes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

First time trying a link hope it works. I found this quite funny.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he has been here 151 days, only 32 days to go before tax man calleth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'faces tax bill without break from Los Angeles mansion'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been in the US for at least 151 days after moving to Los Angeles with his wife Meghan and their baby son Archie in early May. If he reaches 183 days he is legally liable to pay taxes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He will just go visit Canada for a weekend ... no big deal ... 
No U.K. trip for Xmas , that decision seems timed to the bad press from the Brothers Rift book


----------



## Chanbal

mia55 said:


> Love it!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hypocrites Meghan and Harry beg for privacy — but are hungry for attention
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry insist they’re desperate for privacy — so why do they keep hogging the limelight?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Great article!!! Maureen Callahan seems to be one of the very few American journalists with courage to write about what this couple represents, hypocrisy!

"It’s only been ten months since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced they were leaving the British royal family in search of “privacy” — yet they have never been so much in our faces, sanctimoniously and hypocritically telling us how to live and who to vote for, all while signing a reported $100 million deal with Netflix."

"Yes, this formerly unknown *C-list** Z-list* actress who couldn’t hack the cosseted existence of a senior royal, whose entire adult life has been spent in search of a spotlight she now claims to disdain, thinks she has the grit, intellect and real-world experience necessary for the top job."

@CeeJay  I corrected one of Callahan's statements for you (in bold).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> He will just go visit Canada for a weekend ... no big deal ...
> No U.K. trip for Xmas , that decision seems timed to the bad press from the Brothers Rift book


I think the border is still closed at least on the Canadian side and they aren't letting in just any Tom, Dick or Harry...


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> He will just go visit Canada for a weekend ... no big deal ...
> No U.K. trip for Xmas , that decision seems timed to the bad press from the Brothers Rift book


They can visit JM's kids and deliver the Xmas presents ahead of time... They can also do one of their charity appearances/pop-up photo ops at a dog shelter or some other woke event to justify crossing the border.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think the border is still closed at least on the Canadian side and they aren't letting in just any Tom, Dick or Harry...


Is the border open on the Mexican side? They could adopt a dog there, it will look woke.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One weekend away?  Is that really all it takes to avoid the IRS?  Wow.

@Chanbal  Perhaps visit Thomas?


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Great article!!! Maureen Callahan seems to be one of the very few American journalists with courage to write about what this couple represents, hypocrisy!
> 
> "It’s only been ten months since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced they were leaving the British royal family in search of “privacy” — yet they have never been so much in our faces, sanctimoniously and hypocritically telling us how to live and who to vote for, all while signing a reported $100 million deal with Netflix."
> 
> "Yes, this formerly unknown *C-list** Z-list* actress who couldn’t hack the cosseted existence of a senior royal, whose entire adult life has been spent in search of a spotlight she now claims to disdain, thinks she has the grit, intellect and real-world experience necessary for the top job."
> 
> @CeeJay  I corrected one of Callahan's statements for you (in bold).


HA HA HA .. yes, saw that .. GREAT job!  Maybe I should comment on her article that that was the only thing that was wrong!!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. yes, saw that .. GREAT job!  Maybe I should comment on her article that that was the only thing that was wrong!!


She did such a great job with the article, it was likely a typo...


----------



## Chanbal

mia55 said:


> Love it!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hypocrites Meghan and Harry beg for privacy — but are hungry for attention
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry insist they’re desperate for privacy — so why do they keep hogging the limelight?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


@mia55 thank you for posting this article!

Is there anybody here with a direct connection to the Buckingham Palace? Would love to have this article forwarded to QE, W&K... (and also to uncle Gary).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he has been here 151 days, only 32 days to go before tax man calleth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'faces tax bill without break from Los Angeles mansion'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been in the US for at least 151 days after moving to Los Angeles with his wife Meghan and their baby son Archie in early May. If he reaches 183 days he is legally liable to pay taxes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


.. this really stinks if he can just make a weekend trip that would allow him to get away with not paying taxes!  He wants to live in America?.. well then Hazza, pony-up those green-backs just like the rest of us have to!  If H&M do indeed get $$$ from Netflix, boy-oh-boy, is the IRS going to have a field-day snooping into their revenues.  Lastly, you want to live in swanky Montecito, well then you better do by them and pay your CA taxes as well!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> @mia55 thank you for posting this article!
> 
> Is there anybody here with a direct connection to the Buckingham Palace? Would love to have this article forwarded to QE, W&K... (and also to uncle Gary).


I would love it if the other fawning magz/ragz, etc. start to follow suit .. seriously?!?! .. their hypocrisy is way more than "transparent"  now!


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> One weekend away?  Is that really all it takes to avoid the IRS?  Wow.
> 
> @Chanbal  Perhaps visit Thomas?



No, the rule is about being in the US for 183 days, they don’t have to be consecutive, so going away for a couple of days every time but spending the majority of the year in the US still requires most humans to pay US taxes (Harry may have special arrangements like a diplomatic visa, who knows).


----------



## chowlover2

bellecate said:


> First time trying a link hope it works. I found this quite funny.



" dead " Thanks so much for posting!


----------



## bag-mania

It’s not that easy to get out of paying taxes. They certainly owe on that million dollar paycheck they got from JP Morgan back in January. Besides this is their “forever home” now, surely he understands he has to pay taxes in his new home.  

Of course nothing has changed for Meghan. As a US citizen she naturally still has to file a tax return.


----------



## viciel

lalame said:


> The Lichtenstein royal couple are like... the much more accomplished, wealthy, and actually private version of Harry and Meghan. Why didn't they get more press... oh, what an interesting concept:
> 
> View attachment 4866039


Because whether or not someone has class has nothing to do with one's skin color. I'm dying to see how long MM's going to milk this. Thanks for sharing this!


----------



## viciel

bag-mania said:


> It’s not that easy to get out of paying taxes. They certainly owe on that million dollar paycheck they got from JP Morgan back in January. Besides this is their “forever home” now, surely he understands he has to pay taxes in his new home.
> 
> Of course nothing has changed for Meghan. As a US citizen she naturally still has to file a tax return.


I'm waiting for her to "quit" her American citizenship in an outrage after certain event in November or basically anytime before tax season.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> No, the rule is about being in the US for 183 days, they don’t have to be consecutive, so going away for a couple of days every time but spending the majority of the year in the US still requires most humans to pay US taxes (Harry may have special arrangements like a diplomatic visa, who knows).



If he is no longer recognized by the BRF as a ‘working royal’, how could he have a diplomatic visa?  Methinks this could be a problem or another lawsuit?


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he is no longer recognized by the BRF as a ‘working royal’, how could he have a diplomatic visa?  Methinks this could be a problem or another lawsuit?


Maybe because they are still half in and half out of the BRF?
I looked up the 183 day “rule” and if I read it correctly, as a non US citizen, it’s 183 days spread over 3 years!  So if JCMH doesn’t have special status, he only has around another 30 days that he can be in the US for the next 2 1/2 years without having to pay taxes. With all the lawyers they have on their payroll, they should have been aware of this.


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> No, the rule is about being in the US for 183 days, they don’t have to be consecutive, so going away for a couple of days every time but spending the majority of the year in the US still requires most humans to pay US taxes (Harry may have special arrangements like a diplomatic visa, who knows).



It would be very unfortunate to swing a Diplomatic Visa for H, because he officially informed the World he no longer wishes to represent the UK anymore in an official capacity.

He certainly doesn't represent any aspect of the (elected) Government because that would be against the (UK) law. 

Granting him diplomatic status would make the US complicit in allowing him diplomatic privileges when he doesn't qualify (legally). 

It would also make the virtue of him being a British Prince/Duke count when the same country fought long and hard to free itself as a colony and from the same RF.

Turning that on its head, this 'woke' supposedly anti-colonial Prince would be seen to be asking for privilege from a former colony on account of his Royal status. This would undoubtedly place the 'ranked' before 'linked'. Although this wouldn't worry hop-along-for-the-ride Harry, this hypocrisy would be in writing. 

Prince, who'd also be exerting his HRH status (which he's promised not to use). Again, wouldn't worry JCMH but inconvenient before Jan. 

He's also in business with his wife, a US citizen, let them try to get out of paying taxes on the NF millions. He is a British citizen and his capital cannot be taxed. Only his interest from these (if he's being paid these and not leaving them in the bank), and his payments for work the last 8 months.


----------



## Genie27

Aimee3 said:


> Maybe because they are still half in and half out of the BRF?
> I looked up the 183 day “rule” and if I read it correctly, as a non US citizen, it’s 183 days spread over 3 years!  So if JCMH doesn’t have special status, he only has around another 30 days that he can be in the US for the next 2 1/2 years without having to pay taxes. With all the lawyers they have on their payroll, they should have been aware of this.


Perhaps the lawyers and accountants are well versed in sheltering income. If billionaires can pay three digit tax, while still living large, then our two grifters can certainly do the same.


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> Perhaps the lawyers and accountants are well versed in sheltering income. If billionaires can pay three digit tax, while still living large, then our two grifters can certainly do the same.



Except Billionaires usually have brains and have most of their funds in assets that appreciate and buy a residence in Monaco and pretend they live there for the required months of any one year.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> One weekend away?  Is that really all it takes to avoid the IRS?  Wow.
> 
> @Chanbal  Perhaps visit Thomas?


I was joking when I said a weekend would reset the clock ... So I looked it up   ... I thought it was 183 days per calendar year, no, that is wrong...

"Even without having a green card, a person who spends 31 days in the United States during the current year and *183 days during a three-year period *that includes the current year and the two years immediately before that, is *considered* a *resident* alien"





__





						us resident - Google Search
					





					www.google.com
				




The way that I read tha, I was wrong, if you leave after 180 days, go away a way two days, then come back for 3 days, he hits the 183 limit, gotta pay with or without a green card

My bad, I had misreported, he is toast for US taxes, unless someone can find a special dispensation for illuminati clause somewhere in the US tax code.

At minimum, he will need lots of $400//hr help from lawyers and accountants to help manage his travel schedule.  It is not cheap to pay nothing in taxes


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


>




Love to them both and his mother, however, I think the operative words here are "since they were looking for LA runners"

Perhaps Harry's diplomatic title will be "Ambassador" (for the London Marathon) for US tax breaks. I thought 3 X winner and twice record holder Paula Radcliffe was the official Ambassador this year. Excuse me, didn't know super-speedy Harry could beat that in terms of experience.









						Flora is back in partnership with the London Marathon and Paula Radcliffe is their ambassador
					

London Marathon Events announced Flora will return in a new partnership with the event, running from 2020 until 2023. They were previously the headline sponsor of the London Marathon from 1996 to 2009




					run247.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@papertiger
"Perhaps Harry's diplomatic title will be "*Ambassador*" (for the London Marathon) for US tax breaks. I thought 3 X winner and twice record holder Paula Radcliffe was the official Ambassador this year. Excuse me, didn't know super-speedy Harry could beat that in terms of experience." 

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that 'special events Ambassadors' get special status from any country. I thought they wore sashes, lapel buttons, tiaras, etc. setting them apart from the crowd for whatever event they represent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


>




Sure, give the petulant child candy for misbehaving. At this point I am getting slightly impatient with the BRF (assuming he was made ambassador by the Queen and allowed to keep it).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, give the petulant child candy for misbehaving. At this point I am getting slightly impatient with the BRF (assuming he was made ambassador by the Queen and allowed to keep it).



Didn't the Queen recently state that Harry speaks for himself and doesn't represent BP/RF?

ETA: At one time H&MM were appointed Commonwealth youth ambassadors or some such thing. He didn't have special status in Canada because of that appointment and Canada is part of the Commonwealth.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry isn’t an ambassador. He’s a runaway prince manchild who is caught up in delusions of grandeur with his Hollywood wife.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, give the petulant child candy for misbehaving. At this point I am getting slightly impatient with the BRF (assuming he was made ambassador by the Queen and allowed to keep it).


This wouldn't be anything to do with the Queen, and never has been. This is not considered a Royal duty, quite a lot of "ambassadorial" would be more personal than Royal.


----------



## CeeJay

Harry the "Ambassador", puhleeze ..

.. and, the folks are incorrect re: hardest marathon to get into!  The hardest marathon to get into is the *BOSTON Marathon*; I used to go to the end of my street and watch it every year.  The only year that I didn't get to watch it, was .. of course, the year of the Boston Marathon bombing .. and our office was RIGHT towards the finish line, so you betcha .. we heard it and felt the bombs.  Horrible, horrible day ..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> This wouldn't be anything to do with the Queen, and never has been. This is not considered a Royal duty, quite a lot of "ambassadorial" would be more personal than Royal.



So not one of his patronages? Good to know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW Sophie ran 1,5 miles or so in honour of one of her patronages in London today. Both Kate and Meghan wanted to run the (full) London marathon and were told no due to security issues, so that is probably the one little perk COVID has had.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Maggie Muggins said:


> Didn't the Queen recently state that Harry speaks for himself and doesn't represent BP/RF?
> 
> ETA: At one time H&MM were appointed Commonwealth youth ambassadors or some such thing. He didn't have special status in Canada because of that appointment and Canada is part of the Commonwealth.



Ya know, after the BRF statement that H&MM don’t speak for them, someone really should have asked them if/why they are President of the Commonwealth Trust?









						Harry and Meghan say Commonwealth must confront and right past wrongs
					

The couple spoke of the need to acknowledge the past in a video call on the Black Lives Matter movement




					www.standard.co.uk
				




*fixing grammar... eep!


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> Ya know, after the BRF statement that H&MM don’t speak for them, someone really should have asked them if/why they President of the Commonwealth Trust?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say Commonwealth must confront and right past wrongs
> 
> 
> The couple spoke of the need to acknowledge the past in a video call on the Black Lives Matter movement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


They talk about "must right past wrongs", are they planning to return the absurd amount of taxpayer money  spent on the (most expensive) tour of Africa???


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> Ya know, after the BRF statement that H&MM don’t speak for them, someone really should have asked them if/why they President of the Commonwealth Trust?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say Commonwealth must confront and right past wrongs
> 
> 
> The couple spoke of the need to acknowledge the past in a video call on the Black Lives Matter movement
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


My god, STFU JCMH!!!!  Why do I feel that other Commonwealth countries might just want to go the same route as Barbados?!?!  If he's not speaking for the BRF, then he should just effin' SHUT UP!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Harry the "Ambassador", puhleeze ..
> 
> .. and, the folks are incorrect re: hardest marathon to get into!  The hardest marathon to get into is the BOSTON Marathon; I used to go to the end of my street and watch it every year.  The only year that I didn't get to watch it, was .. of course, the year of the Boston Marathon bombing .. and our office was RIGHT towards the finish line, so you betcha .. we heard it and felt the bombs.  Horrible, horrible day ..


I miss watching the end of the Boston Marathon on Boylston Street, and then go for a cappuccino & cannoli  at North End... I was not in Boston when the bombing happened, but followed on television. It was horrible!


----------



## lalame

Genie27 said:


> Perhaps the lawyers and accountants are well versed in sheltering income. If billionaires can pay three digit tax, while still living large, then our two grifters can certainly do the same.



They probably deduct up the wazoo - certainly the private security, spacious home office, cars, etc.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I miss watching the end of the Boston Marathon on Boylston Street, and then go for a cappuccino & cannoli  at North End... I was not in Boston when the bombing happened, but followed on television. It was horrible!


I was right off of Beacon Street (near Coolidge Corner - Beacon & Harvard) .. about the 23-mile marker.  What always shocked me is HOW FAST those elite runners were, literally zip right past you!  The problem was that my street and many others would be blocked off the entire day (oftentimes until at/around 9pm) at night! .. so, if you had to get something, you had to walk to get it (which wasn't so bad since there was a Trader Joes right down the street .. thank god)!  

The day of the bombing was HORRIBLE, truly!  At first, when we heard the noise and felt the shake of the building, we thought "oh crap - a train must have slammed into the Back Bay station" .. but then we heard the 2nd blast and I said to my colleague "uh - I'm pretty sure that was a bomb".  Since she was the floor monitor, she got the news pretty quickly and sure enough .. 2 bombings.  We saw the crowds screaming and running, police and fire folks around .. bedlam!  After about 45 minutes, we had to evacuate our building and we had to go the "back" route which was down very dusty and narrow cement stairs and then through the Garage/Parking area.  We then had to walk (at least) 1 mile away from the site .. NO ONE was allowed on mass transport, and you COULD NOT retrieve your car from the parking structure (that's where my car was)!  Thankfully, a very dear friend (and colleague) of mine lived in the Back Bay area, so we decided to just go to her house and wait until we got an "all clear".  Well, that didn't happen .. we were all "shelter in place", so I had to call the HB and tell him that I had to stay at my friend's house!  Thank god she had plenty of food & WINE .. so we just ate and watched the news.  Since I was considered an "essential" employee, I had no choice but to have to go into work, so .. wearing the same clothes (yuck), etc. - I had to walk back to work .. and as usual, I was the only person on my floor.  Thankfully, I was able to retrieve my car (thanks to the Boston Police) and go home and worked remotely the next few days.  It was a sad day for so many reasons; the loss of people, damage to the stores and while the Boston Marathon is a world sporting event, it was also a loss of innocence IMO .. we would never get that back.


----------



## Chanbal

The duchess title seems to have been removed from the more recent news about this glorious couple; are they getting used to the possibility of losing their titles? It used to be duchess all over the news, particularly on Yahoo... In any event, their PR-team continues working hard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Interesting that you all would bring up the Boston bombings (I will never forget some of the pictures released that day...that guy who lost his legs being transported away in a wheelchair and his face was basically completely out of blood and a sick grey...and the horror in his eyes) when they found a bomb at Cologne Central Station yesterday. Press says it was unable to detonate, our friend who's a detective in Cologne told us it was completely functional, they just found it early enough. What times are we living in :/ Sometimes I'm happy I'm stuck at home for the time being.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Harry the "Ambassador", puhleeze ..
> 
> .. and, the folks are incorrect re: hardest marathon to get into!  The hardest marathon to get into is the *BOSTON Marathon*; I used to go to the end of my street and watch it every year.  The only year that I didn't get to watch it, was .. of course, the year of the Boston Marathon bombing .. and our office was RIGHT towards the finish line, so you betcha .. we heard it and felt the bombs.  Horrible, horrible day ..


Maybe this is a like a European makeup thing ... like where Lancome or Chanel hires Isabella Rosselini or Catherine Deneuve as their beauty-products-for-grannies ambassador ? with all the free makeup you can carry ??


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wish she would stop crashing successful women's meetings, she is precisely the opposite of a role model.


and yet she still seems to get credit for being a powerful woman....and so woke she can tell us all what to do


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting that you all would bring up the Boston bombings (I will never forget some of the pictures released that day...that guy who lost his legs being transported away in a wheelchair and his face was basically completely out of blood and a sick grey...and the horror in his eyes) when they found a bomb at Cologne Central Station yesterday. Press says it was unable to detonate, our friend who's a detective in Cologne told us it was completely functional, they just found it early enough. What times are we living in :/ Sometimes I'm happy I'm stuck at home for the time being.


In addition to the Boston bombings, remember .. Boston was also involved in the 9/11 disaster .. as both planes that hit the Trade Towers had left from Boston (and yes - again, i was the only one in the office for an entire week)!  

Yes, it is scary times for sure and in cities that have mass transportation, it was something I ALWAYS used to think about.  Boston has a HUGE student population, and those kids all carry backpacks, so I used to think .. "gee, how easy would that be for them to blow up one of the bigger stations underground" .. scared the ever-living-sh!t out of me!  In some respects, I'm happy that my work hours used to be so crazy that I had to drive into work!  Here in LA, most people do drive (hence the traffic) even though there is great bus transport and some trains that can be taken.  Being home right now?!?! .. I'll take it!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> No one seemed to care about her thoughts before she got married.... and him - well, what thoughts?  Now suddenly she's God's gift to society.


right....she got a huge platform by marrying into royalty - and then trashed the royals


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> and yet she still seems to get credit for being a powerful woman....and so woke she can tell us all what to do


Hi @sdkitty !! .. missed you, was about ready to send you an EM as I hadn't seen you on here!  Hope you and the hubs are well!  (and the kitties of course)!!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I took the original comment about tax avoidant billionaires as a jab at someone who hasn't left his new residence, a spacious white neoclassical building in the US capital, for the past four years due to job requirements, and about whom was just revealed he paid 750 bucks of taxes in 2017.



Since I'm Mod I have to take the position of tgeyBRF and add my 'no comment'


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> @papertiger
> "Perhaps Harry's diplomatic title will be "*Ambassador*" (for the London Marathon) for US tax breaks. I thought 3 X winner and twice record holder Paula Radcliffe was the official Ambassador this year. Excuse me, didn't know super-speedy Harry could beat that in terms of experience."
> 
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that 'special events Ambassadors' get special status from any country. I thought they wore sashes, lapel buttons, tiaras, etc. setting them apart from the crowd for whatever event they represent.



I was joking, should have added   

Totally, if they diid ambassadors for say Dior or North Face could claim diplomatic immunity for criminal activity as well as tax break as well  respective wardrobe.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> The duchess title seems to have been removed from the more recent news about this glorious couple; are they getting used to the possibility of losing their titles? It used to be duchess all over the news, particularly on Yahoo... In any event, their PR-team continues working hard.
> 
> View attachment 4867992


They should do a BBC and call them Prince Harry and his wife.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hi @sdkitty !! .. missed you, was about ready to send you an EM as I hadn't seen you on here!  Hope you and the hubs are well!  (and the kitties of course)!!


thanks 
I was off the PC for awhile and don't post much using my phone....thanks for asking...hope you and yours are well too


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, give the petulant child candy for misbehaving. At this point I am getting slightly impatient with the BRF (assuming he was made ambassador by the Queen and allowed to keep it).



He's not ambassador for anything representating anything except by private appointment by himself. 

He's actually TAKING the position of an Olympic and national champion WOMAN athlere that spent almost her whole life dedicated to sport. SHOVED her out the way for publicity and annointded himself ambassador when SHE is the OFFICIAL ambassador of the London Marathon 2020-23.. 

How 'feminist is that Megs and Gloria? 
How 'woke' is that?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So not one of his patronages? Good to know.



Totally adhoc and opportunistic, totally engendered for this photo op


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> He's not ambassador for anything representating anything except by private appointment by himself.
> 
> He's actually TAKING the position of an Olympic and national champion WOMAN athlere that spent almost her whole life dedicated to sport. SHOVED her out the way for publicity and annointded himself ambassador when SHE is the OFFICIAL ambassador of the London Marathon 2020-23..
> 
> How 'feminist is that Megs and Gloria?
> How 'woke' is that?



WTF??? How?


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> and yet she still seems to get credit for being a powerful woman....and so woke she can tell us all what to do


Interesting diametrically opposite approaches ..
MM is trying to be superwoman righting all wrongs with her magic bracelets , sprinkling her powers to empower all others
While Sophie and Kate are trying to be mere mortals eg picking up trash and going to Girl Scout shindigs
Different strokes

PS After I wrote this about sprinkling powers  ... the paradigm reminded me of something .. toucher les écrouelles ... The French  kings could supposedly cure tuberculosis by touching the poor - a bit more powerful than the English or Spanish kings who showed humility by washing the feet of the poor 
The MM paradigm is very French, she is out to cure things 





						Toucher des écrouelles
					

De tous temps, les souverains ont appuyé leur pouvoir sur la monnaie, l’armée, la justice, la religion et les médias. Quant à la santé, s’ils la reconnurent très tôt comme un fondamental de la politique, ils ne pouvaient pas la manipuler à leur guise, et les médecins, de par leur ignorance, ont...



					www.lemonde.fr
				



.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF??? How?



Unless he's working for either Virgin Money or Flora (margerine) he has no business walking in Paula Radcliffe speedy shoes 






						Latest News
					

All the latest news from the Virgin Money London Marathon




					www.virginmoneylondonmarathon.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Interesting diametrically opposite approaches ..
> MM is trying to be superwoman righting all wrongs with her magic bracelets , sprinkling her powers to empower all others
> While Sophie and Kate are trying to be mere mortals eg picking up trash and going to Girl Scout shindigs
> Different strokes
> 
> PS After I wrote this about sprinkling powers  ... the paradigm reminded me of something .. toucher les écrouelles ... The French  kings could supposedly cure tuberculosis by touching the poor - a bit more powerful than the English or Spanish kings who showed humility by washing the feet of the poor
> The MM paradigm is very French, she is out to cure things


Don't forget King Henry 1st of England who practiced this as well.  
Translated article


----------



## zinacef

CeeJay said:


> I was right off of Beacon Street (near Coolidge Corner - Beacon & Harvard) .. about the 23-mile marker.  What always shocked me is HOW FAST those elite runners were, literally zip right past you!  The problem was that my street and many others would be blocked off the entire day (oftentimes until at/around 9pm) at night! .. so, if you had to get something, you had to walk to get it (which wasn't so bad since there was a Trader Joes right down the street .. thank god)!
> 
> The day of the bombing was HORRIBLE, truly!  At first, when we heard the noise and felt the shake of the building, we thought "oh crap - a train must have slammed into the Back Bay station" .. but then we heard the 2nd blast and I said to my colleague "uh - I'm pretty sure that was a bomb".  Since she was the floor monitor, she got the news pretty quickly and sure enough .. 2 bombings.  We saw the crowds screaming and running, police and fire folks around .. bedlam!  After about 45 minutes, we had to evacuate our building and we had to go the "back" route which was down very dusty and narrow cement stairs and then through the Garage/Parking area.  We then had to walk (at least) 1 mile away from the site .. NO ONE was allowed on mass transport, and you COULD NOT retrieve your car from the parking structure (that's where my car was)!  Thankfully, a very dear friend (and colleague) of mine lived in the Back Bay area, so we decided to just go to her house and wait until we got an "all clear".  Well, that didn't happen .. we were all "shelter in place", so I had to call the HB and tell him that I had to stay at my friend's house!  Thank god she had plenty of food & WINE .. so we just ate and watched the news.  Since I was considered an "essential" employee, I had no choice but to have to go into work, so .. wearing the same clothes (yuck), etc. - I had to walk back to work .. and as usual, I was the only person on my floor.  Thankfully, I was able to retrieve my car (thanks to the Boston Police) and go home and worked remotely the next few days.  It was a sad day for so many reasons; the loss of people, damage to the stores and while the Boston Marathon is a world sporting event, it was also a loss of innocence IMO .. we would never get that back.


Thank you for sharing your first hand experience, it was just unimaginable. I work with the doctors on the tent On the end of the line. i work with group of them  that run on major marathon and for Boston, that particular year, they signed up as medical. They were supposed to fly home on the same day but they weren’t able to. So shaken by what happened. felt like 9/11 all over again, but anyways. Don’t mean to derail the thread from the ....ambassador (???)


----------



## Chanbal

The new pops on the block is DF, and Xmas is going to be with papa David and mama Katharine:

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will spend Christmas with his 'surrogate' father David Foster and wife Katharine McPhee, a source claims*
'She’s really excited and is planning on doing all the traditions she grew up with as a child, including the cooking.'

Who is going to share all those yummy recipes with us? Omid?  

Xmas with pops David

@CarryOn2020, thanks for the instructions on creating links...


----------



## viciel

Chanbal said:


> The new pops on block is DF, and Xmas is going to be with papa David and mama Katharine:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will spend Christmas with his 'surrogate' father David Foster and wife Katharine McPhee, a source claims*
> 'She’s really excited and is planning on doing all the traditions she grew up with as a child, including the cooking.'
> 
> Who is going to share all those yummy recipes with us? Omid?
> 
> Xmas with pops David
> 
> @CarryOn2020, thanks for the instructions on creating links...



I will say, if they have to shag up with another "power" couple, McPhee needs a friend, and maybe for Foster 6th time's the charm?

Oh wait, did I say shag? I meant shack, though nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to MM.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Totally adhoc and opportunistic, totally engendered for this photo op



Engineered not engendered, Freudian slip from my autocorrect


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love this banter about Mr. Ambassador, y’all make my day 

The DM has not received the message. They are still posting: _The Duke of Sussex - who is also patron of the London Marathon Charitable Trust - posed with runners who were starting off in a much sunnier Los Angeles park._

Patron????  ambassador??? US taxpayer??? H’s real Foster (!) family???  We need this nonsense clarified ASAP.

ETA:  Kudos to Sophie who actually ran in the marathon. H‘s randomly popping up shows desperation. He should stay home.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> The new pops on the block is DF, and Xmas is going to be with papa David and mama Katharine:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will spend Christmas with his 'surrogate' father David Foster and wife Katharine McPhee, a source claims*
> 'She’s really excited and is planning on doing all the traditions she grew up with as a child, including the cooking.'
> 
> Who is going to share all those yummy recipes with us? Omid?
> 
> Xmas with pops David
> 
> @CarryOn2020, thanks for the instructions on creating links...



Going full Hollywood, eh? Do they even bother keeping "little people" friends anymore, or is that just for photo ops when they're helping the needy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Up until now I was still convinced H was just in for the ride because M pulls his strings but he seems to increasingly enjoy spouting nonsense. Oh well. I'll go and watch the video of the Cambridge kids for the 5th time because they are cute and their parents know how to behave.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Up until now I was still convinced H was just in for the ride because M pulls his strings but he seems to increasingly enjoy spouting nonsense. Oh well. I'll go and watch the video of the Cambridge kids for the 5th time because they are cute and their parents know how to behave.


 I watched the video, and it is really cute.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MM wants to pitch herself as the first royal to vote ever, first royal to vote in US election.
So, is the lack of titles indicating she is not a royal now?   We need an official word.

BTW, what’s the story of their kid? Has his name changed? Cannot recall H referring to him by name. They seemed to have settled on little one or little guy.  Wonder if H saw an actual Archie and Veronica comic and freaked!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love this banter about Mr. Ambassador, y’all make my day
> 
> The DM has not received the message. They are still posting: _The Duke of Sussex - who is also patron of the London Marathon Charitable Trust - posed with runners who were starting off in a much sunnier Los Angeles park._
> 
> Patron????  ambassador??? US taxpayer??? H’s real Foster (!) family???  We need this nonsense clarified ASAP.
> 
> ETA:  Kudos to Sophie who actually ran in the marathon. H‘s randomly popping up shows desperation. He should stay home.



I agree. Kudos for whoever ran the marathon. 

I should explain, Harry is the Patron of the Charitable Trust but NOT the London Marathon Ambassador. It was especially important this year because the run was closed too amateurs. 

From the article post #37870:

"The 2020 Virgin Money London Marathon – The 40th Race – takes place on Sunday 4 October. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, there will be elite races only on a closed-loop course around St James’s Park and the thousands of mass runners will be participating in The 40th Race by running the 26.2 mile distance on a course of their choice from wherever they are in the world."

It's not his job to promote himself but attend and oversee the charitable causes. He's totally turned this to be about himself - and no face mask naturally.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM wants to pitch herself as the first royal to vote ever, first royal to vote in US election.
> So, is the lack of titles indicating she is not a royal now?   We need an official word.
> 
> BTW, what’s the story of their kid? Has his name changed? Cannot recall H referring to him by name. They seemed to have settled on little one or little guy.  Wonder if H saw an actual Archie and Veronica comic and freaked!



I think on the last vid I endured he was looking to buy a black doll for his "children" and was horrified to find there were none. Not sure which store he went to but last time I went to Hamleys (HUGE toy shop, Regent St. London) there were plenty of black dolls, one of which my friend's daughter chose. 

If what he means by children is inject some "oops I let it slip, I hope no one will notice, nudge nudge, hint hint" Then I really pleased because no one seems to have noticed he used the plural term for child rather than the singular meaning Archie a boy who'd love to play with dolls (good for him if that's true too)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you for these clarifications,  @papertiger

I missed the ‘children’ reference, mostly because I didn’t watch the whole vid.  These 2 appear dull and heavily made-up on my screen, so it’s difficult to watch. No dolls? Do they have Wal*mart and Target in Cali? In our stores, there are tons of dolls of all ethnicity. Of course, Amazon will deliver right to the doorstep. Maybe he didn’t really look. Wait, would this be another lie ?  Wow.


----------



## chicinthecity777

49 examples that Harry and Maghan helped writing Finding Freedom:


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel she could at least auction them off and *donate that money*. I mean, seeing how her soul was crushed and she was merely existing there are probably no happy memories attached anyway.


That cracked me up!  Surely you jest.  These two actually donating money selflessly with no other motive!  Bahahahahaha!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for these clarifications,  @papertiger
> 
> I missed the ‘children’ reference, mostly because I didn’t watch the whole vid.  These 2 appear dull and heavily made-up on my screen, so it’s difficult to watch. No dolls? Do they have Wal*mart and Target in Cali? In our stores, there are tons of dolls of all ethnicity. Of course, Amazon will deliver right to the doorstep. Maybe he didn’t really look. Wait, would this be another lie ?  Wow.



He said "your children..." blah blah to be fair but he was talking personally and since I don't have any children I just assumed he meant his 

There was an article a few years ago that raised the issue of the lack of diversity reflected in dolls in the UK high street. It's an interesting issue to raise, and I personally haven't been to every high street in the UK to check, but in London, there are many toy stores that have dolls that reflect different ethnicities. I have had to buy plenty of little girl presents and I am very happy that stores and online are reflecting their customers' wants.

Not sure how many shops JCMH checked out before spouting-off on another issue he doesn't haven't have much of a clue about. I cannot stand the holier-than-thou attitude.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Don't forget King Henry 1st of England who practiced this as well.
> Translated article



Ah yes, the royal touch.  I’ve read that QE and many others believe she was chosen by God, similar to ministers. Some think of it as a calling.  The laying on of hands, the washing of feet, anointing, etc., all of this is in the Bible. Since usually the poor lived in close, horrible, unsanitary conditions while the royals lived in huge, pristine palaces, it is understandable how the ‘royal touch’ idea took hold. Back then, no one knew about social distancing or viral clouds. We have learned much in 2020 but still a long way to go.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> He say "your children..." blah blah to be fair but he was talking personally and since I don't have any children I just assumed I meant his
> 
> There was an article a few years ago that raised the issue of the lack of diversity reflected in dolls in the UK high street. It's an interesting issue to raise, and I personally haven't been to every high street in the UK to check, but in London, there are many toy stores that have dolls that reflect different ethnicities. I have had to buy plenty of little girl presents and I am very happy that stores and online are reflecting their customers' wants.
> 
> Not sure how many shops JCMH checked out before spouting-off on another issue he doesn't haven't have much of a clue about. I cannot stand the holier-than-thou attitude.



OK, I found the quote 

"you go in to a shop with your children and you only see white dolls" 

He didn't mean me because I have no kids.

So instead of talking properly like Prince Charles who makes sure there's no misunderstanding and uses the impersonal 'one' as in "one goes shopping and doesn't find quails eggs so much anymore" Harry uses 'you' which most people use to retell their experience or you as in the person they're speaking to. 

So I leave it to your judgement, 

Did JCMH mean talk from personal experience when buying a doll from some unspecified but real toyshop?

Or (white Prince) was Harry talking on behalf of (presumably black) parents he's never met (remember not being allowed a voice / Black History Month)? 

Considering the intention of the video I really hope it's not the latter. He takes patronising to a whole new level, and I don't mean the offical kind.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> Thanks. Most of the time I’m fine. My relative just got out of the hospital couple weeks ago and keeping up with their follow up appointments, home care, well care and my work is driving me batty, plus they’re in pain which makes it harder. I’m so tired I keep forgetting to brush my teeth if that says anything. Hopefully they get better soon, I want to go back to my multi-page diatribes complete with sources on what Harry’s done wrong....lol


You sound like an angel!  Hopefully you get some relief soon!


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> He's not ambassador for anything representating anything except by private appointment by himself.
> *
> He's actually TAKING the position of an Olympic and national champion WOMAN athlere that spent almost her whole life dedicated to sport. SHOVED her out the way for publicity and annointded himself ambassador when SHE is the OFFICIAL ambassador of the London Marathon 2020-23..*
> 
> How 'feminist is that Megs and Gloria?
> How 'woke' is that?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Did JCMH mean talk from personal experience when buying a doll from some unspecified but real toyshop?
> 
> Or (white Prince) was Harry talking on behalf of (presumably black) parents he's never met (remember not being allowed a voice / Black History Month)?
> 
> Considering the intention of the video I really hope it's not the latter. He takes patronising to a whole new level, and I don't mean the offical kind.



PT, it is extremely kind of you to listen to their word salad again. Clearly, you lead by example  Thank you.

I thought he was merely repeating a version of MM’s Christmas story about her father, unable to find a mixed race Barbie, he ingeniously combined parts of dolls to make one doll. Although I know MM wants to believe that he is the only person to think to do this, I have known other parents who do that and more.  Again, nothing original from H&M. Doubt he has ever been in a Wal*mart. Doubt he has ever bought a doll (that’s women’s work). Certain that he is one of the most obnoxious first-time parents ever.  In today’s marathon photo, he looks worse than on the home video. Slumpy posture, lack of energy or enthusiasm, wrinkles, that hair(!).  He is just going through the motions, wishing he could be king. IMO.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4868170


Thanks Lounorada! Maggie Smith, Murder by Death.    I really enjoyed that movie...


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> today I saw 3 women clearly 40ish with cut-out tops on.  Age has nothing to do with it, imo. Some of us remember the oh-so-cool FlashDance look
> 
> Article from 2014: https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2014/apr/16/princess-michael-father-nazi-ss-officer
> For us RoyalWatchers, it has been well known for years that Princess Michael has a shady past and is disliked in the BRF.  Some women are just mean-spirited. This is why for me it is indeed surprising MM would claim she did not know about the BRF, even Harry tries to work that claim. All of this info is well known. There are plenty of books, videos, website, tweets, etc. so anyone can find out. To me, this thread is interesting because most posters are well read and highly educated.
> 
> *The Princess Culture - numerous studies on this topic, google it if you want details. Gloria Steinem, RBG, and many others preached against the idea that there is a Prince Charming and that he will rescue the damsel. They preached that empowerment, self reliance, education, etc. would serve women better than waiting for Prince Charming. *If you aren’t familiar with reviews of Grimm’s Fairy Tales, google it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 'princess industrial complex' is inescapable — is that bad for girls?
> 
> 
> Disney princesses are everywhere. We asked some experts what they think about that.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usatoday.com


I find Princess Michael loathsome.
ITA with GS and RBG and all women who preach this, as my mother pounded this into my brain since I was young, and I am now pounding it into my daughter's brain.  I do find it sad that with social media now, it seems more and more girls and women think being pretty, sexy and leaving little to the imagination is what gets them their golden ticket.  The golden ticket is not free, and often carries a hefty price.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> See, I took her response in a very different way and to me, it was not snarky .. but I do recognize that many times based on one's background and history, it can be taken a very different way.
> 
> In regards to the "_join a nondemocratic, feudal family where merit has zero value_" .. to me it meant that if you are the type of person who values themselves based on your OWN merits (_this is me big-time_), then joining a family who doesn't truly care what you have done on your own .. that might be tough to take (_would be for me_).  As far as the nondemocratic, well .. they are a monarchy, so not ********ic at all!
> 
> The 2nd statement (_again - to me_) was more of a poke not at you but at Meghan.  In my opinion, while she may want to play the "poor mixed-race card" .. she really can't in many respects.  She grew up (_somewhat_) privileged .. her father was an award-winning Lighting Director for a very well-known TV show that ran many seasons, she lived (_for many years_) with him in a very nice area of Woodland Hills (_the Valley_), attended Private Schools (_funded by her Father_), was enrolled in additional theatre and dance classes (_at the expense of her father_) and had a fair amount of plastic surgery (_again - funded by her father_) and lastly, attended a very nice University funded by her Father (_majoring in International Relations/Theatre_).  So, what I think the poster meant re: "_nothing is impossible_" .. was more along the lines that in many respects Meghan had a LOT of advantages early on, networked very well (but left a lot of 'former' friends behind) .. and used that to get to meet Harry.  Is she a good networker? .. I would say absolutely, but .. what I personally dislike about her is the hypocrisy and more importantly how she has used up and then left behind many people that helped her to be where she is today (and I have friends that were "markled" and it hurts when a supposed friend does that to you)!  Is her father perfect? .. no, but no one is and while none of us can truly speak to the family dynamic, I do feel like he has now got the short end of the stick and he's not a young (or very healthy) man.  IMO .. she should just stop the lawsuits and repair those relationships and stop trying so hard to "inspire" all of us 'low-end' people!


Well said!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Okay, I figured I'd give it a go and try and listen to their drivel. Didn't get to far before I couldn't listen further. I will say this though to Mr Woke JKMH, a word to the wise when being proud of your wokeness. *When referring to young black men the term for the female would be not be young black girls but it would be young black women*. Maybe you need to take your Woke 101 class again.


And this is the same man that was offended that Will called MM "That Girl"??


----------



## Sol Ryan

purseinsanity said:


> You sound like an angel!  Hopefully you get some relief soon!



Thanks. Most would call me anything but. Lol. Normally I’m a bit of a handful  We’re having good days and bad days. Hopefully back on an upward trend. Looking forward to getting back to my rants soon lol  In the meantime, enjoying reading, y’all are keeping me entertained and up to date. Love yall!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blind Gossip
> 
> Yeah, YouTube still posts the video. Once a z lister...the comments are hilarious
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: swooning over these sophisticated TPF tools



God help me, I actually watched this because I rightfully assumed she wasn't speaking.  When they showed her squatting for a split second, my first thought was, that's probably what she did to pee in the woods to get Harry!


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> ITA....except I wouldn't call them "muppets" , it's an insult to the real muppets, which I adore by the way


ITA!  Maybe he meant to say puppets  He should've said Harry stop being MM's puppet!


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> Thanks. Most would call me anything but. Lol. Normally I’m a bit of a handful  We’re having good days and bad days. Hopefully back on an upward trend. *Looking forward to getting back to my rants soon lol*  In the meantime, enjoying reading, y’all are keeping me entertained and up to date. Love yall!


I'm looking forward to that as well!


----------



## purseinsanity

Pessie said:


> I had a softer spot for Harry when he was unashamedly over-privileged and enjoying it.  Since growing a Hollywood conscience he‘s unbearable.  He reminds me of those people who give up smoking or take up cycling.  Within the week they’ve bought all the gear, and are telling you what do do with your life at every opportunity.


Yes, or people who suddenly become born again.  Many are unbearable, trying to convert you constantly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting info from the Saga of the Brothers:

*Prince William enraged Prince Harry by asking Princess Diana's brother Earl Spencer to step in and stop him rushing into marriage to Meghan Markle, explosive new book claims*

Cressida Bonas, his last serious girlfriend before Meghan Markle, came to feel he was a damaged and self-obsessed young man. 'No matter how educated, talented, rich or cool you believe you are,' she posted enigmatically on her Instagram page, 'how you treat people ultimately tells it all.' She complained to friends that Harry had a neurosis about the media. He'd rant and complain about paparazzi lurking where clearly there were none, she said.

MM-Sometime during that first summer and autumn together in 2016, Harry introduced his girlfriend to his father and his grandmother, who thoroughly approved. The problem was William. For his part, William was worried that his brother was going too fast in his courtship and he didn't shrink from saying so when Harry started talking about getting hitched. 'This all seems to be moving rather quickly,' William was said to have remarked to Harry doubtfully, on the testimony of more than one friend. 'Are you sure?'

Spencer-From time to time Diana's younger brother had played something of an honorary godfather to both boys in the years since the death of their mother, and their uncle agreed with William to see what he could do. The result of the Spencer intervention was an even more bitter explosion. Once again Harry refused to slow down.

Powerful movements at the time -'Right now,' said Meghan, 'with so many campaigns like #MeToo and #TimesUp, there's no better time to continue to shine a light on women feeling empowered and people supporting them.' Because only the previous month a $13 million legal defence fund had been created, linked to MeToo and TimesUp, seeking legislation to discipline and punish companies that tolerated sexual harassment.

Sussex Royal-The following day, which just happened to be William's 37th birthday, Harry and Meghan trademarked 'Sussex Royal — The Foundation Of The Duke And Duchess Of Sussex'. Sussex Royal was the work of Harry, Meghan and her team of American advisers headed by the powerful Hollywood talent and PR agency Sunshine Sachs — the creation of the amiably named Ken Sunshine and PR guru Shawn Sachs.

The Sun took up the same theme: 'OUR ROYALS SHOULD KEEP THEIR POLITICAL OPINIONS PRIVATE.' It was a formidable chorus of disapproval — and not just from commentators.

Saga of the Brothers


----------



## CarryOn2020

@purseinsanity  Yes, indeed, she certainly has a long list of disgusting comments and behaviors. 
If you want to know the details, here they are: 
Background Read “In the media”  The Rent-A-Kents 

I still wonder why MM didn’t do her research. 
I found these links in a few seconds — and I have no interest or plans to marry into the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @purseinsanity  Yes, indeed, she certainly has a long list of disgusting comments and behaviors.
> If you want to know the details, here they are:
> Background Read “In the media”  The Rent-A-Kents
> 
> *I still wonder why MM didn’t do her research.
> I found these links in a few seconds — and I have no interest or plans to marry into the BRF.*


I have no doubt that the BRF was thoroughly researched by MM. Information on Princess Michael of Kent was irrelevant for MM imo.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Cressida Bonas, his last serious girlfriend before Meghan Markle, came to feel he was a damaged and self-obsessed young man. *'No matter how educated, talented, rich or cool you believe you are,' *she posted enigmatically on her Instagram page, 'how you treat people ultimately tells it all.' She complained to friends that Harry had a neurosis about the media. He'd rant and complain about paparazzi lurking where clearly there were none, she said.



Who's she talking about? Surely not Harry?

Edit: Never mind. I missed the "you believe you are" part. Carry on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought he was merely repeating a version of MM’s Christmas story about her father, unable to find a mixed race Barbie, he ingeniously combined parts of dolls to make one doll. Although I know MM wants to believe that he is the only person to think to do this, I have known other parents who do that and more.



Humble apologies, all.  My version of the MM story is inexcusably wrong, shamefully incorrect, not-even-close. I have never heard of The Hearts, they sound lovely. 

Here is the story - https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/10551648/meghan-markle-christmas-present-dad-thomas-girl-doll/
_In_ _order to help her feel comfortable and proud of her heritage, Thomas bought her a sweet gift for Christmas when she was seven. 

The duchess, 38, wrote on her now-defunct blog The Tig: “I had been fawning over a boxed set of Barbie dolls.

“It was called The Heart Family and included a mum doll, a dad doll, and two children. This perfect nuclear family was only sold in sets of white dolls or black dolls.

“On Christmas morning, swathed in glitter-flecked wrapping paper, there I found my Heart Family: a black mum doll, a white dad doll, and a child of each colour._

Again, apologies.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Interesting info from the Saga of the Brothers:
> 
> *Prince William enraged Prince Harry by asking Princess Diana's brother Earl Spencer to step in and stop him rushing into marriage to Meghan Markle, explosive new book claims*
> 
> Cressida Bonas, his last serious girlfriend before Meghan Markle, came to feel he was a damaged and self-obsessed young man. 'No matter how educated, talented, rich or cool you believe you are,' she posted enigmatically on her Instagram page, 'how you treat people ultimately tells it all.' She complained to friends that Harry had a neurosis about the media. He'd rant and complain about paparazzi lurking where clearly there were none, she said.
> 
> MM-Sometime during that first summer and autumn together in 2016, Harry introduced his girlfriend to his father and his grandmother, who thoroughly approved. The problem was William. For his part, William was worried that his brother was going too fast in his courtship and he didn't shrink from saying so when Harry started talking about getting hitched. 'This all seems to be moving rather quickly,' William was said to have remarked to Harry doubtfully, on the testimony of more than one friend. 'Are you sure?'
> 
> Spencer-From time to time Diana's younger brother had played something of an honorary godfather to both boys in the years since the death of their mother, and their uncle agreed with William to see what he could do. The result of the Spencer intervention was an even more bitter explosion. Once again Harry refused to slow down.
> 
> Powerful movements at the time -'Right now,' said Meghan, 'with so many campaigns like #MeToo and #TimesUp, there's no better time to continue to shine a light on women feeling empowered and people supporting them.' Because only the previous month a $13 million legal defence fund had been created, linked to MeToo and TimesUp, seeking legislation to discipline and punish companies that tolerated sexual harassment.
> 
> Sussex Royal-The following day, which just happened to be William's 37th birthday, Harry and Meghan trademarked 'Sussex Royal — The Foundation Of The Duke And Duchess Of Sussex'. Sussex Royal was the work of Harry, Meghan and her team of American advisers headed by the powerful Hollywood talent and PR agency Sunshine Sachs — the creation of the amiably named Ken Sunshine and PR guru Shawn Sachs.
> 
> The Sun took up the same theme: 'OUR ROYALS SHOULD KEEP THEIR POLITICAL OPINIONS PRIVATE.' It was a formidable chorus of disapproval — and not just from commentators.
> 
> Saga of the Brothers



This is the first book about them that sounds like it’s worth reading.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The new pops on the block is DF, and Xmas is going to be with papa David and mama Katharine:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will spend Christmas with his 'surrogate' father David Foster and wife Katharine McPhee, a source claims*
> 'She’s really excited and is planning on doing all the traditions she grew up with as a child, including the cooking.'
> 
> Who is going to share all those yummy recipes with us? Omid?
> 
> Xmas with pops David
> 
> @CarryOn2020, thanks for the instructions on creating links...



When you are so obnoxious as a couple that you have alienated all of your family on both sides so you have to spend Christmas with acquaintances.

Except for you, Doria. I guess you’ll have to find a friend to spend Christmas with because it doesn’t sound like you were invited.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _Cressida Bonas, his last serious girlfriend before Meghan Markle, came to feel he was a damaged and self-obsessed young man. 'No matter how educated, talented, rich or cool you believe you are,' she posted enigmatically on her Instagram page, 'how you treat people ultimately tells it all.' She complained to friends that Harry had a neurosis about the media. He'd rant and complain about paparazzi lurking where clearly there were none, she said.
> 
> Spencer-From time to time Diana's younger brother had played something of an honorary godfather to both boys in the years since the death of their mother, and their uncle agreed with William to see what he could do. The result of the Spencer intervention was an even more bitter explosion. Once again Harry refused to slow down._
> 
> Saga of the Brothers



_A damaged and self-obsessed young man!_
Charles, we are looking at you.  Very dangerous combination.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> _A damaged and self-obsessed young man!_
> Charles, we are looking at you.  Very dangerous combination.


One can only help someone, who wants to be helped and I think that sadly, Harry prefers to wallow in self-pity.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Who's she talking about? Surely not Harry?
> 
> Edit: Never mind. I missed the "you believe you are" part. Carry on.



Yes, Harry! While Cressida preferred to stay away from some of Harry's peculiarities, MM embraced them like there was no tomorrow... I couldn't agree more with Cressida on 'how you treat people ultimately tells it all.'


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Humble apologies, all.  My version of the MM story is inexcusably wrong, shamefully incorrect, not-even-close. I have never heard of The Hearts, they sound lovely.
> 
> Here is the story - https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/10551648/meghan-markle-christmas-present-dad-thomas-girl-doll/
> _In_ _order to help her feel comfortable and proud of her heritage, Thomas bought her a sweet gift for Christmas when she was seven.
> 
> The duchess, 38, wrote on her now-defunct blog The Tig: “I had been fawning over a boxed set of Barbie dolls.
> 
> “It was called The Heart Family and included a mum doll, a dad doll, and two children. This perfect nuclear family was only sold in sets of white dolls or black dolls.
> 
> *“On Christmas morning, swathed in glitter-flecked wrapping paper, there I found my Heart Family: a black mum doll, a white dad doll, and a child of each colour.*_
> 
> Again, apologies.


Thomas was such a sweet dad. This is even more shocking when you look at the way she treated her father and siblings...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> When you are so obnoxious as a couple that you have alienated all of your family on both sides so you have to spend Christmas with acquaintances.
> 
> Except for you, Doria. I guess you’ll have to find a friend to spend Christmas with because it doesn’t sound like you were invited.


Doria is the exception that proves the rule!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I have no doubt that the BRF was thoroughly researched by MM. Information on Princess Michael of Kent was irrelevant for MM imo.


Yes, her claim that she had no idea who JCMH was is laughable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Doria is the exception that proves the rule!



Of course, this is only 1 photo, they look to be quite happy and kind.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/10551648/meghan-markle-christmas-present-dad-thomas-girl-doll/


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Thomas was such a sweet dad. This is even more shocking when you look at the way she treated her father and siblings...



imo the dad (and the half-sister) is a jackass. You can give me the world but if you start selling stories to the media about me or bad-mouthing me to the world... you're gone. Doesn't matter if they're true, that's not cool.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A bottle of Red

Sharont2305 said:


> This, from Catherine's Uncle Gary ( Carol's brother)
> 
> View attachment 4866585


An awful thing to say coming from a man who beat his wife in public


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear, is QE sending a signal?


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> OK, I found the quote
> 
> "you go in to a shop with your children and you only see white dolls"
> 
> He didn't mean me because I have no kids.
> 
> So instead of talking properly like Prince Charles who makes sure there's no misunderstanding and uses the impersonal 'one' as in "one goes shopping and doesn't find quails eggs so much anymore" Harry uses 'you' which most people use to retell their experience or you as in the person they're speaking to.
> 
> So I leave it to your judgement,
> 
> Did JCMH mean talk from personal experience when buying a doll from some unspecified but real toyshop?
> 
> Or (white Prince) was Harry talking on behalf of (presumably black) parents he's never met (remember not being allowed a voice / Black History Month)?
> 
> Considering the intention of the video I really hope it's not the latter. He takes patronising to a whole new level, and I don't mean the offical kind.


He’s literally making up things to be outraged about.  I was given a black doll (as well as some white ones) as a child, and I wasn’t born yesterday.


----------



## Pessie

I feel like I’ve run a marathon every time I sit through one of their videos


----------



## Luvbolide

Poor pathetic Harry - all wrapped up in a million slights - the vast majority of which are in his head.  So he is happy to turn his back on his family during the holidays to show them how angry he is.  But Harry, you dolt, you are nearly 40 years old and you are a father.  Yes, remember little Archie?  Your grandparents are nearly 100 years old, FFS.  Do you think they will live forever?!?!  You are depriving Archie of the chance to be around his great-grandparents.  Even if he is too young to have lots of memories of them, you can take lots of photos of him with them that he can enjoy throughout his life.  Not to mention his 3 adorable cousins whom he will barely know.  Remember, there will come a day when Archie and the Cambridge kids will be the adults of your family.  The bonds they develop as kids will become stronger as they grow up.

But hey, you and MM clearly think only of yourselves - best to cast aside the ties to your families and spend time (and special holidays) with people you barely know.  How fulfilling.  Great job of putting Archie first.  What parents you will make...


----------



## Jktgal

lalame said:


> imo the dad (and the half-sister) is a jackass. You can give me the world but if you start selling stories to the media about me or bad-mouthing me to the world... you're gone. Doesn't matter if they're true, that's not cool.



I think her family felt M treated them badly so they resorted to the media. It's similar I think with M, who felt she was badly treated by the BRF and resorted to badmouthing K&W, crashing E's wedding, etc. It seems a family trait.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> right....she got a huge platform by marrying into royalty - and then trashed the royals


Commonly known as biting the hand that feeds you.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for these clarifications,  @papertiger
> 
> I missed the ‘children’ reference, mostly because I didn’t watch the whole vid.  These 2 appear dull and heavily made-up on my screen, so it’s difficult to watch. No dolls? Do they have Wal*mart and Target in Cali? In our stores, there are tons of dolls of all ethnicity. Of course, Amazon will deliver right to the doorstep. Maybe he didn’t really look. Wait, would this be another lie ?  Wow.


Ditto for the stores around me--different skin tones all over in the doll aisle. 

And when was he last in a regular store (Target, Walmart) looking at dolls? I realize these are US stores but he's been here awhile. They both just spout whatever they think makes them look "woke", get called out on it and jump to the next trendy topic hoping that it will be a winner ($$$$).


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> Ditto for the stores around me--different skin tones all over in the doll aisle.
> 
> And when was he last in a regular store (Target, Walmart) looking at dolls? I realize these are US stores but he's been here awhile. They both just spout whatever they think makes them look "woke", get called out on it and jump to the next trendy topic hoping that it will be a winner ($$$$).


Last year Disney Princess dolls were the rage, and they are back for this Xmas,  Mulan, Tiana, Jasmine and Moana are POC - Princesses of color


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> God help me, I actually watched this because I rightfully assumed she wasn't speaking.  When they showed her squatting for a split second, my first thought was, that's probably what she did to pee in the woods to get Harry!


gawd


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Thomas was such a sweet dad. This is even more shocking when you look at the way she treated her father and siblings...


I feel somewhat vindicated after being told by one of MM's stans that I was "lying", as I've indicated many times that I have friends that knew Meghan and the family during her High School years (they also knew Thomas in a professional capacity) .. they could not have said nicer things about him.  Meghan however? .. not such nice things; quelle surprise!


----------



## youngster

Pessie said:


> He’s literally making up things to be outraged about.  I was given a black doll (as well as some white ones) as a child, and I wasn’t born yesterday.



When I was buying my kids dolls and such about 20 -25 years ago, there were many different ethnicities available.  I remember waiting around for my little girl to pick out a gift and and it taking_ forever _because she couldn't make up her mind between all the choices. She also had a collection of American Girl miniatures that were "dolls of many lands" in super detailed, ethnic dress from around the world which were just gorgeous.  I still have those tucked away.  Now, going back to the 70's, my Barbies were mostly white but we also had the first AA Barbie, Christie, which was issued back in the late 60's or around there.  I loved Christie.  I loved all my Barbie's, I was a kid who loved dolls. 

Anyway, long story, but just meant to say I have no idea where Harry is shopping or what he is talking about since you can find all different ethnicities of doll in all kinds of stores and have been able to do so for literally decades.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> imo the dad (and the half-sister) is a jackass. You can give me the world but if you start selling stories to the media about me or bad-mouthing me to the world... you're gone. Doesn't matter if they're true, that's not cool.


Samantha (half-sister), yes .. I agree, she has 'issues' and in some cases, yes .. Thomas did things he shouldn't have.  In regards to the letter that MM wrote (and is suing based on contents being "published" in various media outlets) .. that, I do not agree with and I think Thomas was defending himself.  Let's face it, MM has a tendency to talk sh1t (outright lies) about various things and people.  If someone did that to me and it was dishonest, you better believe that I would speak up & out and make sure that the TRUTH was told.  It kind of goes to MM's huge issue of having anything "negative" (that she deems as such) to be said about her.


----------



## Sol Ryan

This could get entertaining....










						Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
					

Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh, this is going to piss off poor little Hazza; wasn't this the one that he was so upset about having to relinquish???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh dear


----------



## Chanbal

Why is she even considered powerful?

*Meghan Markle's 'eye blocks' and 'animalistic throat tightening' are signs her ego was left '**raging**' when she was told 'she's not the only powerful woman' during Fortune's virtual summit, body expert claims*

The Duchess of Sussex showed signs that she 'doesn't like being told she's not the only powerful woman' during Fortune's virtual summit, a body language expert has claimed. 

He pinpoints the exact moment he feels the Duchess shows signs of being uncomfortable - and puts it down to the moment Fortune senior editor Ellen McGirt tells her she's 'not the only powerful woman involved in this equation'.


----------



## gracekelly

Yes, Harry is a man in search of a slight. What a sad way to go through life. He really picked up the victim act from his wife. I hope Archie doesn’t pick up this trait or he will be an insufferable child and always  whining that another kid took his toy etc.


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> When I was buying my kids dolls and such about 20 -25 years ago, there were many different ethnicities available.  I remember waiting around for my little girl to pick out a gift and and it taking_ forever _because she couldn't make up her mind between all the choices. She also had a collection of American Girl miniatures that were "dolls of many lands" in super detailed, ethnic dress from around the world which were just gorgeous.  I still have those tucked away.  Now, going back to the 70's, my Barbies were mostly white but we also had the first AA Barbie, Christie, which was issued back in the late 60's or around there.  I loved Christie.  I loved all my Barbie's, I was a kid who loved dolls.
> 
> Anyway, long story, but just meant to say I have no idea where Harry is shopping or what he is talking about since you can find all different ethnicities of doll in all kinds of stores and have been able to do so for literally decades.


If he was on speaking terms with MM’s dad Harry could ask him where he bought the ones for MM when she was a little girl.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Why is she even considered powerful?
> 
> *Meghan Markle's 'eye blocks' and 'animalistic throat tightening' are signs her ego was left '**raging**' when she was told 'she's not the only powerful woman' during Fortune's virtual summit, body expert claims*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex showed signs that she 'doesn't like being told she's not the only powerful woman' during Fortune's virtual summit, a body language expert has claimed.
> 
> He pinpoints the exact moment he feels the Duchess shows signs of being uncomfortable - and puts it down to the moment Fortune senior editor Ellen McGirt tells her she's 'not the only powerful woman involved in this equation'.


Hmmmmm .. interesting!  I remember having to take a Body Language class in my MBA program, and at first I thought "_seriously_?" .. but I have to say that it was one of the BEST classes I ever took!  Verbiage is one thing, but the body language doesn't lie unless one has had serious training to project something else (_and we all know how "skilled" her acting is_ .. *Z-minus*)!!


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Looks like the year "review" is starting ...


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ok, now we wait for the Grifters PR team(s) to find something word-saladish to post as a volley back.

M is probably digging in her mega-closets for some unstained blouse, H is looking for the polo shirt he left on the floor a few days ago, house-staff is yelling at the dog to get off the Zoom sofa so the Grifters are READY for their closeup.


----------



## Pessie

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It’s going to sting a bit  but I think the service deserves better than H.  He prioritised Beyoncé over their memorial service if I remember correctly?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

youngster said:


> *When I was buying my kids dolls and such about 20 -25 years ago, there were many different ethnicities available. *
> ...Anyway, long story, but just meant to say *I have no idea where Harry is shopping* or what he is talking about since you can find all different ethnicities of doll in all kinds of stores and have been able to do so for literally decades.



Pluheez, the only place Harry is allowed to shop is his HER closet, do you think he is allowed out of the house, or DORIA could not assist?


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It’s to be expected. Harry hasn’t been doing right by them in a long while. He’s too distracted with his personal drama. They deserve better than having Harry literally “phone it in” once or twice a year.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> Why is she even considered powerful?
> 
> *Meghan Markle's 'eye blocks' and 'animalistic throat tightening' are signs her ego was left '**raging**' when she was told 'she's not the only powerful woman' during Fortune's virtual summit, body expert claims*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex showed signs that she 'doesn't like being told she's not the only powerful woman' during Fortune's virtual summit, a body language expert has claimed.
> 
> He pinpoints the exact moment he feels the Duchess shows signs of being uncomfortable - and puts it down to the moment Fortune senior editor Ellen McGirt tells her she's 'not the only powerful woman involved in this equation'.



Do you have a link to this article?


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> It’s to be expected. Harry hasn’t been doing right by them in a long while. He’s too distracted with his personal drama. They deserve better than having Harry literally “phone it in” once or twice a year.






Pessie said:


> It’s going to sting a bit  but I think the service deserves better than H.  He prioritised Beyoncé over their memorial service if I remember correctly?



I agree, but with the way Harry behaves, you know it’s going to be a personal affront to him that Will is taking over... didn’t have to be this way. I am going to get popcorn ready though.


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> Ok, now we wait for the Grifters PR team(s) to find something word-saladish to post as a volley back.
> 
> M is probably digging in her mega-closets for some *un**stained blouse*, H is looking for the polo shirt he left on the floor a few days ago, house-staff is yelling at the dog to get off the Zoom sofa so the Grifters are READY for their closeup.


Fixed it for you ..


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CeeJay said:


> Harry the "Ambassador", puhleeze ..
> 
> .. and, the folks are incorrect re: hardest marathon to get into!  The hardest marathon to get into is the *BOSTON Marathon*; I used to go to the end of my street and watch it every year.  The only year that I didn't get to watch it, was .. of course, the year of the Boston Marathon bombing .. and our office was RIGHT towards the finish line, so you betcha .. we heard it and felt the bombs.  Horrible, horrible day ..











						Everything You Need to Know About Running All 6 Abbott World Marathon Majors
					

From the hardest marathon to get into (it’s not Boston) to the easiest course to run.




					www.runnersworld.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Within the last 7 days, in no particular order we learn:
1. Cressida spotted H’s mental issues
2. MM detests sharing the ‘powerful woman’ designation
3. H loses Captain General of Royal Marines  to W = ouch!
4. H&M celebrating Christmas with the Fosters
5. QE supports news media
6. MM lawsuit debacle & OS lipreads
7. H argued with Uncle Earl Spencer over MM - maybe that is why Diana’s sisters were in the baby’s christening photos?
8. Kate’s uncle tells H&M to stfu
9. H had a racial awakening ... again
10. We are swooning over ThoseCambridgeKids

My goodness, H&M need to learn a new word : overexposure :  Enough already!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Everything You Need to Know About Running All 6 Abbott World Marathon Majors
> 
> 
> From the hardest marathon to get into (it’s not Boston) to the easiest course to run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.runnersworld.com


Well, I guess it depends on where you look because the article that I saw said Boston was the hardest to get into .. whatevs, not a biggie to me.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> Ok, now we wait for the Grifters PR team(s) to find something word-saladish to post as a volley back.
> 
> M is probably digging in her mega-closets for some unstained blouse, H is looking for the polo shirt he left on the floor a few days ago, house-staff is yelling at the dog to get off the Zoom sofa so the Grifters are READY for their closeup.


They are going to throw their red clothing into the fire pit.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Within the last 7 days, in no particular order we learn:
> 1. Cressida spotted H’s mental issues
> 2. MM detests sharing the ‘powerful woman’ designation
> 3. H loses Captain General of Royal Marines  to W = ouch!
> 4. H&M celebrating Christmas with the Fosters
> 5. QE supports news media
> 6. MM lawsuit debacle & OS lipreads
> 7. H argued with Uncle Earl Spencer over MM - maybe that is why Diana’s sisters were in the baby’s christening photos?
> 8. Kate’s uncle tells H&M to stfu
> 9. H had a racial awakening ... again
> 10. We are swooning over ThoseCambridgeKids
> 
> My goodness, H&M need to learn a new word : overexposure :  Enough already!


The Cambridge kids have the number one spot for me!


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> I agree, but with the way Harry behaves, you know it’s going to be a personal affront to him that Will is taking over... didn’t have to be this way. I am going to get popcorn ready though.


Yup!  Now it is Harry throwing the crockery. He is bigger and stronger and I worry how the kitchen walls are going to take it.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I agree, but with the way Harry behaves, you know it’s going to be a personal affront to him that Will is taking over... didn’t have to be this way. I am going to get popcorn ready though.



If Harry was a rational man he would understand that William is the only choice. Charles’ plate is full and he’s at an age where he needs to be scaling back.

He wants to keep everything he had before even though he cannot possibly perform his duties. You can’t have it all, Harry. You gave it up willingly, no sense crying about it now.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> If Harry was a rational man he would understand that William is the only choice. Charles’ plate is full and he’s at an age where he needs to be scaling back.
> 
> He wants to keep everything he had before even though he cannot possibly perform his duties. You can’t have it all, Harry. You gave it up willingly, no sense crying about it now.


There was talk that Princess Anne might get it, but perhaps they thought  she was too old.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> They are going to throw their red clothing into the fire pit.


I don't know why, but this brought up memories of GoT!  Sigh


----------



## youngster

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Pluheez, the only place Harry is allowed to shop is his HER closet, do you think he is allowed out of the house, or DORIA could not assist?



You know, maybe he took a time machine back to 1980 to go shopping because it would have been a valid point about the diversity (or lack of) in kids dolls and toys back_ then_.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> 10. We are swooning over ThoseCambridgeKids


You mean ThosePeskyCambridgeKids a la Scooby Doo (pun intended)


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Samantha (half-sister), yes .. I agree, she has 'issues' and in some cases, yes .. Thomas did things he shouldn't have.  In regards to the letter that MM wrote (and is suing based on contents being "published" in various media outlets) .. that, I do not agree with and I think Thomas was defending himself.  Let's face it, MM has a tendency to talk sh1t (outright lies) about various things and people.  If someone did that to me and it was dishonest, you better believe that I would speak up & out and make sure that the TRUTH was told.  It kind of goes to MM's huge issue of having anything "negative" (that she deems as such) to be said about her.



I don't blame him for the letter like you said but I think he started the downward spiral. The only reason we even care about the letter is because he started trying to sell his story and doing dumb things like staging photos. He should've shut up and ducked out of the limelight like Doria.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I don't blame him for the letter like you said but I think he started the downward spiral. The only reason we even care about the letter is because he started trying to sell his story and doing dumb things like staging photos. He should've shut up and ducked out of the limelight like Doria.


Well, again .. I kind of get his beef.  Doria was in/out of Meghan's life whereas Thomas was THE person who took care of her (primarily) and sadly truly spoiled Meghan.  It wasn't just the "taking care" of Meghan; he "paid" for what she has/has had .. acting lessons, dance lessons, all the plastic surgery, etc. -- so, is he trying to make a buck? .. yeah probably and that is not ideal (agree with you on that and can relate as my father did the same to me).  

On the other hand, truly .. given all that he had done for her and if we are to believe in the stories of him living in Mexico (and I'm sure that's because he simply could no longer afford LA) and he needed a few $$$ .. then why couldn't she help him?  Who knows, maybe she did and he was asking for more? .. we don't really know the whole story.  

In many respects, yes .. Doria did the right thing in keeping her mouth shut.  Again, do we know for sure that she has received $$$ for it? .. some "stories" said that she got a $6m house, she has now started her own company .. I think she has benefited in some respects.  

I think (at least) it would behoove Meghan to put the past in the past and let her Dad see his grandson .. (my opinion)!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Well, again .. I kind of get his beef.  Doria was in/out of Meghan's life whereas Thomas was THE person who took care of her (primarily) and sadly truly spoiled Meghan.  It wasn't just the "taking care" of Meghan; he "paid" for what she has/has had .. acting lessons, dance lessons, all the plastic surgery, etc. -- so, is he trying to make a buck? .. yeah probably and that is not ideal (agree with you on that and can relate as my father did the same to me).
> 
> On the other hand, truly .. given all that he had done for her and if we are to believe in the stories of him living in Mexico (and I'm sure that's because he simply could no longer afford LA) and he needed a few $$$ .. then why couldn't she help him?  Who knows, maybe she did and he was asking for more? .. we don't really know the whole story.
> 
> In many respects, yes .. Doria did the right thing in keeping her mouth shut.  Again, do we know for sure that she has received $$$ for it? .. some "stories" said that she got a $6m house, she has now started her own company .. I think she has benefited in some respects.
> 
> I think (at least) it would behoove Meghan to put the past in the past and let her Dad see his grandson .. (my opinion)!



I think the only reason Doria has probably stayed in good graces is by not speaking out and not asking for more money than Meghan is willing to give her. I think she was probably supporting Thomas to some extent but maybe not as much as he wanted... or at the end of the day he wanted to make money "on his own" from the media instead of asking his child for more. I can totally get that. He probably underestimated how much of a buffoon it would make both of them look. No heroes here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> You know, maybe he took a time machine back to 1980 to go shopping because it would have been a valid point about the diversity (or lack of) in kids dolls and toys back_ then_.



Okaaay, I have way too much extra time . MM was born in 1981. She said her doll story happened at age 7.  Mattel introduced The Heart Family in 1985. So, time machine H back to ‘87, he can find all kinds of dolls. 






						The Heart of the Issue: Mattel’s Forgotten Family
					

Over the years, Barbie has had countless competitors, including Jem and the Holograms, the Disney Princesses, and even Spectra, the chic pink-haired gal from outer space with metallic limbs and eye makeup rivaling the likes of David Bowie. Among the many contenders, none have challenged Barbie...




					www.museumofplay.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you’re wondering, Spectra and Tom Comet.  Oh yeah, we were cool, so cool.


----------



## lalame

It's almost a cliche how common it is for families to come apart when money or fame come into the equation... I really respect Jamie Foxx for this reason... he found his mom and dad who had abandoned him as a baby and invited both of them into his home. Now they all live in the same house (of course Jamie prob has several homes) and he supports them. Definition of being a bigger person. Thomas, Samantha and Meghan can take a lesson.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Barbie and the rockers -  issued in ‘86.  Hello, gorgeous.
See, just a wee bit of effort, H, you can find a doll.  This is the USA. We know dolls, baby


.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> It's almost a cliche how common it is for families to come apart when money or fame come into the equation... I really respect Jamie Foxx for this reason... he found his mom and dad who had abandoned him as a baby and invited both of them into his home. Now they all live in the same house (of course Jamie prob has several homes) and he supports them. Definition of being a bigger person. Thomas, Samantha and Meghan can take a lesson.


Didn't know that, but yes .. totally agree with you .. GOOD FOR HIM!  Lots of respect for that ..


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I think the only reason Doria has probably stayed in good graces is by not speaking out and not asking for more money than Meghan is willing to give her. *I think she was probably supporting Thomas to some extent but maybe not as much as he wanted*... or at the end of the day he wanted to make money "on his own" from the media instead of asking his child for more. I can totally get that. He probably underestimated how much of a buffoon it would make both of them look. No heroes here!



I don't believe Meghan ever supported her father. We would have heard it shouted from the rooftops from her camp if she had been paying anything for him. Meghan wanted to be viewed as the sympathetic party and wouldn't have missed that golden opportunity to look like a saint.

Meghan sees men as a source of money, starting with her dad and moving on to her husbands.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is awkward for H, but a delight for the runners:


_Chudney gushed that Harry was “so laid back” in the excited post.

She wrote: “I received an email and we were told the London Marathon Ambassador was going to meet with us. That day was today and we found out the Ambassador was The Duke of Sussex! Prince Harry !!!

“He’s so laid back and very down to earth. He actually asked if we could sit on the floor. The interview was more like a conversation with a friend.

“What an experience it was. I never imagined myself chatting with Prince Harry.

“It’s one for the books. I will never forget that day.

“The official photos and videos will be emailed to us. It was from Mark’s phone. Prince Harry happily agreed to take pictures with our phones and yes there were masks, hand sanitizers and social media ”_








						Prince Harry inspires London Marathon runners with heartwarming ‘So down to earth’ surprise |  Royal |  News | FR24 News English
					






					www.fr24news.com
				




Video here:








						Prince Harry inspires London Marathon runners with surprise video
					

PRINCE HARRY surprised a group of runners preparing to mark the virtual London Marathon with a heartwarming visit in LA on Sunday.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Within the last 7 days, in no particular order we learn:
> 1. Cressida spotted H’s mental issues
> 2. MM detests sharing the ‘powerful woman’ designation
> 3. H loses Captain General of Royal Marines  to W = ouch!
> 4. H&M celebrating Christmas with the Fosters
> 5. QE supports news media
> 6. MM lawsuit debacle & OS lipreads
> 7. H argued with Uncle Earl Spencer over MM - maybe that is why Diana’s sisters were in the baby’s christening photos?
> 8. Kate’s uncle tells H&M to stfu
> 9. H had a racial awakening ... again
> 10. We are swooning over ThoseCambridgeKids
> 
> My goodness, H&M need to learn a new word : overexposure :  Enough already!


And to add to the list 
Diana was conned into the infamous Martin Bashir TV interview - where she admitted adultery - by faked bank account payments (supposedly) showing her brother's staff had leaked to the press


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I don't believe Meghan ever supported her father. *We would have heard it shouted from the rooftops from her camp if she had been paying anything for him.* Meghan wanted to be viewed as the sympathetic party and wouldn't have missed that golden opportunity to look like a saint.
> 
> Meghan sees men as a source of money, starting with her dad and moving on to her husbands.



Her people did say that in the legal filings. I highly doubt they'd lie in legal statements submitted to the court. Can't find where I first read it but it's mentioned in this article: https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri... fighting back,him financially over the years.


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Do you have a link to this article?


To get the article just click on the word 'raging' (red, title).


----------



## gracekelly

He said, a long time ago, that he had receipts for the uni payments. If she sent him money she should have receipts as well.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Her people did say that in the legal filings. I highly doubt they'd lie in legal statements submitted to the court. Can't find where I first read it but it's mentioned in this article: https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a33356018/meghan-markle-denies-fathers-claim-that-she-never-helped-him-financially/#:~:text=Meghan Markle is fighting back,him financially over the years.



She has no clue if the loan taken by her father to pay for her education has been repaid. Wow, this says a lot about how much she cares for him. 

"According to the documents, *Thomas Markle** took out a loan to help pay for Meghan's education at Northwestern University. Although she says she's unaware if the loan has been repaid,* Meghan began voluntarily providing Thomas with financial support after her acting career took off."


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Her people did say that in the legal filings. I highly doubt they'd lie in legal statements submitted to the court. Can't find where I first read it but it's mentioned in this article: https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a33356018/meghan-markle-denies-fathers-claim-that-she-never-helped-him-financially/#:~:text=Meghan Markle is fighting back,him financially over the years.



Thanks, I hope it come out in court what the statement "voluntary contributions" actually means coming from Meghan.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> He said, a long time ago, that he had receipts for the uni payments. If she sent him money she should have receipts as well.



I'm certain she does, unless she paid him in cash or gold bouillon haha. But doubt any of us will be seeing either receipts unless they accuse the other of lying about the support... doesn't seem like either of them are.


----------



## gracekelly

Jessica Mulroney Might Write a Tell-All Book About Her Friendship with Meghan Markle, Apparently
					

She reportedly feels like she "has nothing to lose."




					www.marieclaire.com
				




Think she will do it?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> There was talk that Princess Anne might get it, but perhaps they thought  she was too old.



Knowing Anne, she probably said, "Sorry, diary's full!". 

This year she's been promoted to General in the Army _and_ Air Chief Marshal in the RAF (Royal Air Force).

The Prices Royal "involved with over 300 charities, organisations and military regiments in the UK and overseas" (royal.uk). I think she's got enough to do.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Knowing Anne, she probably said, "Sorry, diary's full!".
> 
> This year she's been promoted to General in the Army _and_ Air Chief Marshal in the RAF (Royal Air Force).
> 
> The Prices Royal "involved with over 300 charities, organisations and military regiments in the UK and overseas" (royal.uk). I think she's got enough to do.



True!  She is a very busy woman!  She does so much that you never hear about.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> You know, maybe he took a time machine back to 1980 to go shopping because it would have been a valid point about the diversity (or lack of) in kids dolls and toys back_ then_.



I didn't see any media comment pull him up on this ridiculousness. I guess they don't go shopping with their children either.

One second of research and found out 2020 is the year that Black Barbie is 40 years old (very glamorous and gorgeous, I had to sit on my hands to stop myself from buying the anniversary doll). They also have the most lovey Ella Fitzgerald and I may just have to get her.

There are all kinds of dolls out there. Do these 2 not have a search engine between them?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Fixed it for you ..


You so bad!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> True!  She is a very busy woman!  She does so much that you never hear about.



And she's another female Olympic Athlete that should be celebrated. 

Too busy wailing on about these scheming narcissists.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Barbie and the rockers -  issued in ‘86.  Hello, gorgeous.
> See, just a wee bit of effort, H, you can find a doll.  This is the USA. We know dolls, baby
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4868944



I'd like to join the band 

I just autocorrected my autocorrect, it wrote 'I'd like to joint the band' - different band Mr. Autocorrect


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Jessica Mulroney Might Write a Tell-All Book About Her Friendship with Meghan Markle, Apparently
> 
> 
> She reportedly feels like she "has nothing to lose."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think she will do it?



This is a threat. 

I guess she has nothing to lose, and nothing else to do either.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> This is a threat.
> 
> I guess she has nothing to lose, and nothing else to do either.



hahaha!  Nothing else to do.  Tired of Botox, plastic surgery and taking care of her kids?


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> I didn't see any media comment pull him up on this ridiculousness. I guess they don't go shopping with their children either.
> 
> One second of research and found out 2020 is the year that Black Barbie is 40 years old (very glamorous and gorgeous, I had to sit on my hands to stop myself from buying the anniversary doll). They also have the most lovey Ella Fitzgerald and I may just have to get her.
> 
> There are all kinds of dolls out there. Do these 2 not have a search engine between them?



Wasn't Christie issued back in the late 60's?  I could swear I had a Christie doll in the early/mid 70's.  She should be at least 50 . . . I'll have to go use my own search engine lol and figure this out.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Jessica Mulroney Might Write a Tell-All Book About Her Friendship with Meghan Markle, Apparently
> 
> 
> She reportedly feels like she "has nothing to lose."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think she will do it?


I don't think JM will gain much by writing a tell-all about book about MM at the present time. However, she will allow the rumors to spread, it is a way to exert some control over her 'best friend' imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ahhh, here we go. William’s fault that H had/has a drug/drinking problem. 









						Harry and William's feud began long before Meghan came on the scene
					

The roots of the rift between the brothers actually took hold long before Meghan came on the scene as did their own psychological pain, which began in early childhood.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Jessica Mulroney Might Write a Tell-All Book About Her Friendship with Meghan Markle, Apparently
> 
> 
> She reportedly feels like she "has nothing to lose."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think she will do it?



She's nasty so I wouldn't put it past her BUT I also think she has so much to lose reputation-wise by doing that..... I don't know, or it's another schill piece just to get back into M's good graces... (barf)


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Wasn't Christie issued back in the late 60's?  I could swear I had a Christie doll in the early/mid 70's.  She should be at least 50 . . . I'll have to go use my own search engine lol and figure this out.



I have to admit I went from teddies to records. I wanted the clothes but not the actual doll. I only got into dolls later for their camp quality, the Jackie O doll for example (I think 1990s) with all those those retro miniature replica outfits were TDF down to the little pearl necklace  

Absolutely loving some of these super chic examples made this year this year:









						Meet the Black History Month Barbies dressed by ‘Queen & Slim’ designer
					

Each look for the Barbies was inspired by three color themes: monochromatic, snakeskin mixed with black and white and sherbet colors.




					nypost.com
				




JCMH was talking about the present not even history, he was just talking out of his royal a*se (because he is one).


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> She's nasty so I wouldn't put it past her BUT I also think she has so much to lose reputation-wise by doing that..... I don't know, or it's another schill piece just to get back into M's good graces... (barf)



Or as @papertiger said above, it's a threat. Markle her and she'll tell all.

Can't say that's a good basis for a continuing friendship but JM might want help rehabilitating her reputation and rebuilding her connections and she thinks MM and Harry can help with that.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, here we go. William’s fault that H had/has a drug/drinking problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William's feud began long before Meghan came on the scene
> 
> 
> The roots of the rift between the brothers actually took hold long before Meghan came on the scene as did their own psychological pain, which began in early childhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That is where I do feel sorry for them both. They could have have grief therapy after the death of their mother but I doubt it was entertained as a thought let alone a plan. However, to blame W for not taking responsibility for H (parental control anyone????) is ridiculous. W probably had his own demons.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Or as @papertiger said above, it's a threat. Markle her and she'll tell all.
> 
> Can't say that's a good basis for a continuing friendship but JM might want help rehabilitating her reputation and rebuilding her connections and she thinks MM and Harry can help with that.


In theory she could write a book that is not all bad.  It could be about MM's time in Toronto and helping her with her wardrobe before and after marriage.  It could be sympathetic and if it is, then I see Meghan's hand in it.  Another like Finding Freedom.  This one may be called _Finding Free Clothes._


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, here we go. William’s fault that H had/has a drug/drinking problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William's feud began long before Meghan came on the scene
> 
> 
> The roots of the rift between the brothers actually took hold long before Meghan came on the scene as did their own psychological pain, which began in early childhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Diana was very young and unstable... Both kids must have suffered a lot. Though, she loved them a lot, and tried to be a great mother. Those years prior to her death were very tragic. I feel sorry for all of them, including Charles that didn't know how to deal with the situation. Plenty of time has past, it is not fair to blame Will for Harry's continuous stupidity imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> That is where I do feel sorry for them both. They could have have grief therapy after the death of their mother but I doubt it was entertained as a thought let alone a plan. However, to blame W for not taking responsibility for H (parental control anyone????) is ridiculous. W probably had his own demons.



It is certainly sad for all concerned. Why is this book being published _now_?

Agree @Chanbal , Diana was unstable and Charles seems to have been in a dreamworld, even still is. Both parents handled their marriage horribly. Not sure why, but it seems that the BRF looked the other way or gave unwelcomed advice.   That said, many children have successfully endured selfish parents and their divorce.  These are children without the resources, education, lifestyle that these 2 boys had and still have. Those children survived, learned to take care of themselves and move forward. More is expected from privileged people (noblesse oblige).  Harry has had time to sort it all out, yet currently he seems stuck in blaming others. He seems to have strong Spencer genes which may contribute to his issues. Whatever the reason, it is clear H needs help. Based on the marathoners vid, he may not be getting the help he needs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Vintage Leather

papertiger said:


> I didn't see any media comment pull him up on this ridiculousness. I guess they don't go shopping with their children either.
> 
> One second of research and found out 2020 is the year that Black Barbie is 40 years old (very glamorous and gorgeous, I had to sit on my hands to stop myself from buying the anniversary doll). They also have the most lovey Ella Fitzgerald and I may just have to get her.
> 
> There are all kinds of dolls out there. Do these 2 not have a search engine between them?



I think a lot of the confusion is coming about because of the difference between Barbie and Christine.  Christine was one of  Barbie's Best Friends in the 1960s.
 Talking Christine was released in 1968, and she was the first black fashion-sized doll. She was actually released periodically  until 2005, at which point she got replaced with Nikki. 

In the 1980s, Barbie herself started having different skin tones and hair tones, and they gradually decreased the number of "friends" they produced.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

papertiger said:


> I didn't see any media comment pull him up on this ridiculousness. I guess they don't go shopping with their children either.....*There are all kinds of dolls out there. Do these 2 not have a search engine between them?these 2 not have a search engine between them?*



Thanks, *pt*.

Yes, of course the press/media would know that there are a diverse collection of ethnicities available to buy online or in-store.

The fact that journalists, etc pile-on hate PUBLICLY when anyone disagrees with their narrative, AND continue to give a free-pass to individuals like Meghan Markle & HRH Grifters-R-Us is a relatively new phenomenon in this country.
Despicable!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Vintage Leather said:


> I think a lot of the confusion is coming about because of the difference between Barbie and Christine.  Christine was one of  Barbie's Best Friends in the 1960s.
> Talking Christine was released in 1968, and she was the first black fashion-sized doll. She was actually released periodically  until 2005, at which point she got replaced with Nikki.
> 
> In the 1980s, Barbie herself started having different skin tones and hair tones, and they gradually decreased the number of "friends" they produced.



I had a Theresa doll and I adored her because she looked like me.. now I have a Curvy Barbie with Blue Hair as my Mascot in my office... because that represents me...

I got her a new outfit and the Accessories from the Robotics Engineer Barbie... because that’s the fun... 









						Barbie Toys & Playsets | Mattel
					

Find a wide selection of Barbie toys and playsets on Mattel.com. Shop Barbie dolls, fashions, dollhouses and more today!




					barbie.mattel.com
				












						Barbie Toys & Playsets | Mattel
					

Find a wide selection of Barbie toys and playsets on Mattel.com. Shop Barbie dolls, fashions, dollhouses and more today!




					barbie.mattel.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love this ! A mascot!  Such a delightfully fun idea. She is a hottie.



Sol Ryan said:


> I had a Theresa doll and I adored her because she looked like me.. now I have a Curvy Barbie with Blue Hair as my Mascot in my office... because that represents me...
> 
> I got her a new outfit and the Accessories from the Robotics Engineer Barbie... because that’s the fun...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barbie Toys & Playsets | Mattel
> 
> 
> Find a wide selection of Barbie toys and playsets on Mattel.com. Shop Barbie dolls, fashions, dollhouses and more today!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> barbie.mattel.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barbie Toys & Playsets | Mattel
> 
> 
> Find a wide selection of Barbie toys and playsets on Mattel.com. Shop Barbie dolls, fashions, dollhouses and more today!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> barbie.mattel.com


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> It's almost a cliche how common it is for families to come apart when money or fame come into the equation... I really respect Jamie Foxx for this reason... he found his mom and dad who had abandoned him as a baby and invited both of them into his home. Now they all live in the same house (of course Jamie prob has several homes) and he supports them. Definition of being a bigger person. Thomas, Samantha and Meghan can take a lesson.


I didn't know that.  From the few stories I've read about Jamie Foxx, he comes across as a really nice, decent human being, whether it's helping Ed Sheran before anyone had ever heard of him, or helping accident victims.  Another lesson these idiots could take away.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, here we go. William’s fault that H had/has a drug/drinking problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William's feud began long before Meghan came on the scene
> 
> 
> The roots of the rift between the brothers actually took hold long before Meghan came on the scene as did their own psychological pain, which began in early childhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Typical entitled, delusional dimwit.  Everything wrong is someone else's fault.


----------



## shiba

youngster said:


> You know, maybe he took a time machine back to 1980 to go shopping because it would have been a valid point about the diversity (or lack of) in kids dolls and toys back_ then_.



I think Cabbage Patch dolls were one of the more inclusive of that generation


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, here we go. William’s fault that H had/has a drug/drinking problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William's feud began long before Meghan came on the scene
> 
> 
> The roots of the rift between the brothers actually took hold long before Meghan came on the scene as did their own psychological pain, which began in early childhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The author of this new book doesn’t seem to have a positive opinion of any of the royals. It makes me wonder if he was an only child if he believes that an older sibling should bear responsibility for the problems and mistakes of a younger sibling. He has an unrealistic vision of family dynamics.


----------



## Annawakes

shiba said:


> I think Cabbage Patch dolls were one of the more inclusive of that generation


Oh man, I loooved Cabbage Patch dolls as a kid but never got one .  My parents said it was too expensive!


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I didn't know that.  From the few stories I've read about Jamie Foxx, he comes across as a really nice, decent human being, whether it's helping Ed Sheran before anyone had ever heard of him, or helping accident victims.  Another lesson these idiots could take away.



All that and you still don't see Jamie going around preaching about how to be a better human...  Too busy, you know, actually working and doing good deeds instead of talking about it.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

After a wonderful day, I sat down with my lil’furball, CoCo Chanel to watch entertainment for the evening.

Any guesses, ladies & gents?

It must be Meghan Markle Monday on the Hallmark Channel bc the movie, _Harry’s, I mean, _Dater’s Handbook, ladies & gents.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The author of this new book doesn’t seem to have a positive opinion of any of the royals. It makes me wonder if he was an only child if he believes that an older sibling should bear responsibility for the problems and mistakes of a younger sibling. He has an unrealistic vision of family dynamics.



I agree. In the Prince William thread, @Mendocino posted a YouTube video from 2006. It shows Ant and Dec interviewing H, Charles and William. Very enlightening to watch the body language and dynamics that were happening back then. Although only a 2 years age difference between H & W, William sounds and acts so much more mature and situationally aware than H, or even Charles.

William dominates in confidence as well as taking up 2/3 of the sofa.  King William has plans!


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> After a wonderful day, I sat down with my lil’furball, CoCo Chanel to watch entertainment for the evening.
> 
> Any guesses, ladies & gents?
> 
> It must be Meghan Markle Monday on the Hallmark Channel bc the movie, _Harry’s, I mean, _Dater’s Handbook, ladies & gents.
> 
> View attachment 4869283
> 
> View attachment 4869282


did she have a lead role in a hallmark movie?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun @sdkitty  2020 just keeps on punching


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

A few additional pics so you do not have to watch the movie, lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> did she have a lead role in a hallmark movie?



Affirmative, *sdkitty*.


----------



## eunaddict

bisousx said:


> Do you have a link to this article?




I didn't see the article posted so here it is. Her body language is telling, as is that head shake when she says "it's about being authentic".

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-ego-left-raging-Forunes-virtual-summit.html


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Affirmative, *sdkitty*.


must have been a high point in her career pre-harry


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

sdkitty said:


> must have been a high point in her career pre-harry



*sdkittty*, the movie, Dater’s Handbook, is circa 2016.

It’s a cute Rom-Com, and giving MM credit where credit is due. She does a credible job acting in it - and we know now where she may have honed her dating skills.

The movie’s premise is about a woman who changes her personality in order to snag a man.
Disclaimer:
Unlike Scoubie-Doubie, am not H&M's friend and have no idea if Meghan Markle channeled her character in the movie while dating HRH Unloyal Royal.


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> Oh man, I loooved Cabbage Patch dolls as a kid but never got one .  My parents said it was too expensive!


Get one now, it's never too late!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Get one now, it's never too late!



I totally support this... you should see my pandemic LEGO collection lol... can’t go out, who needs purses? Lol I’ll buy legos


----------



## mdcx

doni said:


> In my view the world of European royalty has very little to do with the world and network of celebs and fame. Especially that of LA.
> But I agree she probably though she knew. And likely vastly overestimated the network, celebrity and fame side of it.
> She didn’t realize networking meant dining with the snob German aunt who wears Blackmoor broches and a bunch of other old aristo chums dressed in rags and smelling of horses, and that celebrity meant accompanying the Queen to inaugurate some random bridge in a mining Northern town she’d never heard of on a bleak rainy day. Again, Harry’s fault more than anything.


A comment somewhere that M realised that her role was to be a "civil servant in a tiara", and once she realised, she was out.
I think it extremely unlikely that all of this was not explained to her in painstaking detail before the engagement was even signed off by the Palace. They have staff specifically to guide/teach her about this stuff. But she thought she could change it all once married just by dint of her sheer enthusiasm or something. Wrong.


----------



## mdcx

eunaddict said:


> I didn't see the article posted so here it is. Her body language is telling, as is that head shake when she says "it's about being authentic".
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-ego-left-raging-Forunes-virtual-summit.html


I feel like rage-face is M's default setting. It goes away only when she is getting what she wants, or grifting hard to get it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

eunaddict said:


> I didn't see the article posted so here it is. Her body language is telling, as is that head shake when she says "it's about being authentic".
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...s-ego-left-raging-Forunes-virtual-summit.html


Am I the only who can't watch the entire interview?!! Her voice and mannerisms just grate on my nerves.


----------



## mdcx

Maggie Muggins said:


> Am I the only who can't watch the entire interview?!! Her voice and mannerisms just grate on my nerves.


I find her extremely rehearsed and non-genuine. It reminds me a lot of her performances in Suits that I saw - lots of long doe-eyed stares, supposed to imply deep thought I guess. Lots of word salad, basically whatever the listener wants to hear.
All that ridiculous business about how her words were misinterpreted, I suppose some people eat that up.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mdcx said:


> I find her *extremely rehearsed and non-genuine*. It reminds me a lot of her performances in Suits that I saw - lots of long doe-eyed stares, supposed to imply deep thought I guess. Lots of word salad, basically whatever the listener wants to hear.
> All that ridiculous business about how her words were misinterpreted, I suppose some people eat that up.


Thanks. That sums it up for me too.


----------



## Pessie

mdcx said:


> I find her extremely rehearsed and non-genuine. It reminds me a lot of her performances in Suits that I saw - lots of long doe-eyed stares, supposed to imply deep thought I guess. Lots of word salad, basically whatever the listener wants to hear.
> All that ridiculous business about how her words were misinterpreted, I suppose some people eat that up.


She’s only been on my radar since the engagement interview.  But I found her performance inauthentic at that time and inauthentic ever since then.  She’s always acting, and she’s not a good actress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> This is a threat.
> 
> I guess she has nothing to lose, and nothing else to do either.



Wasn't Meghan "family" like a hot minute ago?


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't Meghan "family" like a hot minute ago?


In zeleb-land the deep and meaningful has a short shelf life


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> That is where I do feel sorry for them both. They could have have grief therapy after the death of their mother but I doubt it was entertained as a thought let alone a plan. However, to blame W for not taking responsibility for H (parental control anyone????) is ridiculous. W probably had his own demons.


I remember Harry saying that it was his brother who “saved” him. That it was William who had actually convinced him to go to therapy to deal with his trauma at the time of his wild youth years... ?

Edit to say, found it, this is what Harry said only a little while ago:

_Harry also revealed that his older brother Prince William urged him to get professional help, telling him: “Look, you really need to deal with this. It is not normal to think that nothing has affected you.”

“It’s all about timing,” Harry said. “And for me personally, my brother–bless him–was a huge support to me. He kept saying, ‘This is not right; this is not normal. You need to talk to [someone] about stuff. It’s OK.’ My way of dealing with it was sticking my head in the sand, refusing to ever think about my mom, because why would that help?”_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I finally made it through the article of how it's all William's fault, and you know what? I'm the oldest of four and no, I do not feel responsible for my siblings' poor decisions. Plus, if 16yo William was drinking and giving alcohol to his 14yo brother maybe their father should have intervened instead of riding into the sunset with Camilla. I was considering getting the book because the author is an accomplished writer and known as a meticulous researcher, but if he really wrote Harry picked the Nazi shirt because it flattered his complexion and totally forgot the symbol was there I have to question his intelligence (author's in this case because what a stupid argument is this).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> _“It’s all about timing,” Harry said. “And for me personally, my brother–bless him–was a huge support to me. He kept saying, ‘This is not right; this is not normal. You need to talk to [someone] about stuff. It’s OK.’ My way of dealing with it was sticking my head in the sand, refusing to ever think about my mom, because why would that help?”_



And now he's gone to the other extreme which is obsessing over her and her death.


----------



## Lodpah

So what’s this lawsuit against MM about?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And now he's gone to the other extreme which is obsessing over her and her death.



*QofWD*, totally agree.

View this as a case of Harry going from one emotional extreme to another, and only he can help himself at this point.

Also not my fav position ie prefer my life to be a steady stream of moderation in all, etc.

My sight is set on the world stage bc the universe has tilted slightly during the past few weeks, ladies and gents with regard to Grifters-R-Us.

Brief recap:
Kate’s uncle publicly addressed Harry & Meghan Markle with an F-you aimed squarely at BOTH.
<Yes, did read the post here about him being a “public wife-beater, let me state this clearly: just bc I agree with one social media statement does NOT mean I defer to that individual for all opinions.>
Also, of course QEII knew about this quote on social media far in advance and signed-off on it. Let’s not be naive here. She knew, they all knew. Game. Set. Match.

Also, piling it on this past week is the assignment of Wills to one of HRH DisLoyal Royal’s previous positions in the non-profit world

A court ruling against Miss Thing, and a zoom event where DisLoyal showed up looking unkept, unhappy, & unsympathetic to ANY cause

Last but not least, A BREATH OF FRESH AIR IN THE ROOM, Meghan is called out by Fortune@summit, not the only powerful woman...ouch, Meghan, your disguise is slipping, omg is that the real you showing?

Also, a minor point but someone may relate: for the past 40-years there were rumors about QEII & lineage - at one point years ago many stories were written about the fact that QEII was unwilling to pass the crown to HRH PC for a variety of reasons including weakness of character, I kid you not.

The year 2020 has provided <to moi, at least> with answers to many questions about these articles, which coincidently disappeared after Camilla, etc.

Cannot not trust HRH PC with the monarchy, he cannot rule - that is very clear now. He does not have the ability to reconcile or discipline Harry it seems, let alone a beloved nation such as the UK.

Yes, am now in the Kate & Wills forever camp. And once they are at the helm of the BRF ship, well let’s say, some people are gonna shape up or else.

Also, have eaten literally buckets of popcorn while reading this thread during the past 8-months, thanks for the entertainment! All of you have provided me with countless moments of laughter and/or simply a different point of view.

Guess, I must up my game for the Grifters-R-Us main feature streaming soon on Netflix, & coming to a Universe near us.
Suggestions? Forecasts? Opins?


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> So what’s this lawsuit against MM about?
> 
> View attachment 4869455
> View attachment 4869456
> View attachment 4869457




Sometimes lunatics file lawsuits.  From what little we can see, this looks like one of those.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@VigeeLeBrun  Spot on, dear lady. Your post says it all.  Balance is indeed the key. While H&M have tried to push the BRF off the rails, W&K have steered a steady course.  PC, although he has shown forward thinking on several issues, his leadership seems weak, especially on his homefront. Harry continues to be a reminder of how weak he was and is as a father.  None of QE’s other children have messed up their own kids like PC has. To me, that speaks volumes.  Team King William 

Since H&M have failed to inspire anyone with their home videos, Netflix surely realises they have bet on the wrong horses.  May be time to re-evaluate the terms.

@Luvbolide  The lawsuit _does look _like a lunatic one, yet something about H&M‘s antics feels like it could be true. Since I have zero respect for H&M, this payoff is entirely believable. It makes sense of the nonsense. Of course, a similar accusation was hurled at Jackie O, so maybe not. Then again, it’s only a million dollars, just pennies to that crowd.

ETA:  just now reading that the author of the Battle of the Brothers, Robert Lacey, wrote The Crown, a shining star in Netflix’s crown. Now I understand the anti-William articles. Have they all sold their souls to the Netflix overlords?


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Time-limit to edit my post has expired, and to clarify, although most tPF thread readers here knew my intention after reading my words, “Cannot not trust HRH PC with the monarchy”

Edit: “Cannot trust HRH PC with the monarchy”


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Jessica Mulroney Might Write a Tell-All Book About Her Friendship with Meghan Markle, Apparently
> 
> 
> She reportedly feels like she "has nothing to lose."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Think she will do it?





papertiger said:


> This is a threat.
> 
> I guess she has nothing to lose, and nothing else to do either.



I’m thinking this rumor was fabricated. The article is from back in July and we haven’t heard anymore about a book from Jessica.  

Isn’t she one of the “five young mothers” who will need to testify in Meghan’s case in a few months?


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> True!  She is a very busy woman!  She does so much that you never hear about.



Are you telling me you can do things and not announce them?



mdcx said:


> A comment somewhere that M realised that her role was to be a "civil servant in a tiara", and once she realised, she was out.
> I think it extremely unlikely that all of this was not explained to her in painstaking detail before the engagement was even signed off by the Palace. They have staff specifically to guide/teach her about this stuff. But she thought she could change it all once married just by dint of her sheer enthusiasm or something. Wrong.



For someone that claims to not want to wear a tiara, she sure caused a fuss about the one for her wedding day.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I feel like rage-face is M's default setting. It goes away only when she is getting what she wants, or grifting hard to get it.


there is also the smug face and the grin for the cameras


----------



## marietouchet

After all this time, I thought that Camilla had earned her place in the BRF and that Charles W & H had gotten to a truce over D
Golly this new book, just rakes it all up again ... 
One has to get on with life and figure out how to cope 20 years after the fact, anger is no longer productive after 20 years , you need to get to  acceptance  

5 phases of grief - denial, anger, bargaining, depression and finally acceptance 
See Eliz Kubler Ross 








						Five Stages of Grief by Elisabeth Kubler Ross & David Kessler
					

Five Stages of Grief - by Elisabeth Kubler Ross & David Kessler explained in their classic work, On Grief and Grieving




					grief.com
				



.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Am I the only who can't watch the entire interview?!! Her voice and mannerisms just grate on my nerves.


me too....I stopped at "purpose driven life"
she just seems so smug to me
It must be really heady go to from a peak of being in a Hallmark TV movie to being treated as - what? The Duchess I guess


----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> A comment somewhere that M realised that her role was to be a *"civil servant in a tiara"*, and once she realised, she was out.





lanasyogamama said:


> For someone that claims to not want to wear a tiara, she sure caused a fuss about the one for her wedding day.



She didn't want to be a "civil servant", she was (is) perfectly OK with wearing tiaras.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> Are you telling me you can do things and not announce them?
> 
> For someone that claims to not want to wear a tiara, she sure caused a fuss about the one for her wedding day.


If I recall correctly, she asked to bring a tiara on their African tour.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> After all this time, I thought that Camilla had earned her place in the BRF and that Charles W & H had gotten to a truce over D
> Golly this new book, just rakes it all up again ...
> *One has to get on with life and figure out how to cope 20 years after the fact, anger is no longer productive after 20 years , you need to get to  acceptance *
> 
> 5 phases of grief - denial, anger, bargaining, depression and finally acceptance
> See Eliz Kubler Ross
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Five Stages of Grief by Elisabeth Kubler Ross & David Kessler
> 
> 
> Five Stages of Grief - by Elisabeth Kubler Ross & David Kessler explained in their classic work, On Grief and Grieving
> 
> 
> 
> 
> grief.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


There will always be someone with an agenda, who wants Charles bypassed in the line of succession... all the ones who want him to still suffer for Diana's untimely death. It's surprising that they don't support H&MM more because that is also their goal to eliminate everyone before them so they can become king & queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Just catching up in this thread so this is a bit late, but black dolls have been around for longer than the 1960’s.  There are black dolls made of composition and bisque (1930’s or even earlier) as well as rubber Dolls from the 1950’s.  These wouldn’t be in a regular store today but available on the secondary market, antique stores, or thru collectors.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Am I the only who can't watch the entire interview?!! Her voice and mannerisms just grate on my nerves.


Nope.  I can barely stand to look at still pictures of her any more.


----------



## purseinsanity

Pessie said:


> She’s only been on my radar since the engagement interview.  But I found her performance inauthentic at that time and inauthentic ever since then.  She’s always acting, and she’s not a good actress.


I agree.  You nailed it.  I'd never heard of her before Harry.  Her interviews seemed completely rehearsed and disingenuous.  And now we know that they were lying about their engagement!


----------



## purseinsanity

Luvbolide said:


> Sometimes lunatics file lawsuits.  From what little we can see, this looks like one of those.


Maybe she's getting a taste of her own medicine


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> After all this time, I thought that Camilla had earned her place in the BRF and that Charles W & H had gotten to a truce over D
> Golly this new book, just rakes it all up again ...
> One has to get on with life and figure out how to cope 20 years after the fact, anger is no longer productive after 20 years , you need to get to  acceptance



William and Harry aren't the first children to strongly dislike their stepmother and they certainly had better reasons for it than most. I think they grew to accept her for the most part or at least that is how the family chose to portray it. However, you reap what you sow. Some things are too difficult to forgive and forget. Camilla's participation in the ugly story of their parents' marriage still happened, in spite of her earning her place since then.

I am a bit surprised Camilla apparently blabbed to friends/family about William's temper and how he yells at Charles. But maybe I shouldn't be because she has always been all for Charles. She has her own children so she's never viewed Harry and William as being hers.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> William and Harry aren't the first children to strongly dislike their stepmother and they certainly had better reasons for it than most. I think they grew to accept her for the most part or at least that is how the family chose to portray it. However, you reap what you sow. Some things are too difficult to forgive and forget. Camilla's participation in the ugly story of their parents' marriage still happened, in spite of her earning her place since then.
> 
> I am a bit surprised Camilla apparently blabbed to friends/family about William's temper and how he yells at Charles. But maybe I shouldn't be because she has always been all for Charles. She has her own children so she's never viewed Harry and William as being hers.


Two things 
I dont know when C blabbed about W - could have been 30 years ago, when she was just a mistress, does not excuse it but I do think she has learned to be tight lipped over the decades

In general, all these memoir books have an issue that drives me bonkers - anecdotes are never accurately dated, and to me, it is important whether the blabbing was recent or decades ago .. 

Yes, C & C & D - a nasty mess, I can see that the boys might have taken their mother's side at the time - 20 - 30 years ago AND WITH CAUSE

But, D has been gone for 23 years, and C is there, the boys need to have some sort of truce with their father , their mother is not coming and Camilla is not leaving


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> For someone that claims to not want to wear a tiara, she sure caused a fuss about the one for her wedding day.



She also asked for one for her first trip with Harry. Charles had to tell her it was inappropriate. So for someone who doesn't care she sure cares a lot. Also for someone who doesn't believe in ranks she sure tyrannized her staff.


----------



## Sophisticatted

William and his step-sister Laura used to have major arguments about who was to blame for the dissolution of their parents’ marriages.  Her daughter was a flower girl in William and Kate’s wedding.  

It has been said that Camilla keeps one of her prior homes and stays there when she wants to visit with her children.


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> William and his step-sister Laura used to have major arguments about who was to blame for the dissolution of their parents’ marriages.  Her daughter was a flower girl in William and Kate’s wedding.
> 
> It has been said that Camilla keeps one of her prior homes and stays there when she wants to visit with her children.


Yes Camilla has a separate home and does not always stay at Charles or other Brf house


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> But, D has been gone for 23 years, and C is there, the boys need to have some sort of truce with their father , their mother is not coming and Camilla is not leaving



In reality Harry/William and Charles/Camilla likely got along fine most of the time, but peace and civility doesn't sell books. Every family is going to have occasional discord and drama. From the excerpts it's obvious the author focused on that to spice up his book and make it more interesting, which will lead to more sales. The instances described may have happened but they may represent only a tiny portion of the whole story.


----------



## marietouchet

I am stunned - 3 major books - Lady CC, Omid, Brothers -  in the year of Megxit - it is like the authors all saw this coming - someone reads royal tea (pun intended) leaves much better than I do


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> me too....I stopped at "purpose driven life"
> she just seems so smug to me
> It must be really heady go to from a peak of being in a Hallmark TV movie to being treated as - what? The Duchess I guess


.. yes, and let us not forget that little 'clip' of her in some TV show in a car giving 'head' to some dude!  I heard she tried very hard to get that one off the internet!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. yes, and let us not forget that little 'clip' of her in some TV show in a car giving 'head' to some dude!  I heard she tried very hard to get that one off the internet!


didn't hear about that one... I guess she wasn't purpose driven then


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Claims*

Prince Harry was left "fighting back tears" after he and wife Meghan Markle were snubbed by the palace on his final royal job, a new book claims.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had already announced their departure from royal life when they attended the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey, in London, in March.

The event was their final taste of life as senior working royals but it was not a happy occasion, historian Robert Lacey claims.

The couple were expecting to process into the church behind Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles and Prince William in recognition of their status within the family, even though they had quit, _Battle of Brothers_ claims.

However, they were demoted to filing in separately in a move that highlighted Harry's status as a "spare," in the sense he is not a direct heir to the throne, the author writes.

Lacey, a consultant on Netflix series _The Crown_, writes: "In 2018 and 2019, Harry and Meghan had walked down the aisle in the main procession.

"But, in 2020, they were being shunted aside on their final appearance as working royals in Britain.

"As now glaringly 'junior' members of the family, the Sussexes would simply have to shuffle their way to their seats and take their place on the sidelines.

According to the book, Prince William decided he would not enter as part of the main procession out of sensitivity to his younger brother.

However, the move was not enough to spare Harry's blushes as the order of service was not updated, meaning those in church could read what the original plan had been.

Lacey writes: "Within minutes of each other, the two princes and their wives slipped quietly into their seats, then sat waiting for the Queen and Prince Charles to process in senior splendour down the aisle.

"The only problem was that 2,000 orders of service had already been distributed round the Abbey, explaining that William and Kate would enter and process with the main royal party—and making no mention at all of Harry and Meghan.

"So there was the snub in black and white — set out for all to see.

"Observers also noted that Harry's face was 'quite tense and unsmiling' — and that when William sat down close to him, he barely greeted his brother.

"Throughout the service, Meghan megawatted away with her best TV smile but, as the ceremony progressed, Harry appeared to grow gloomier.

"According to one observer, 'his accelerated blinking even suggested he might have been fighting back tears.'"









						Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Says
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were snubbed "in black and white" during their final royal job when they expected to walk behind Queen Elizabeth II, a new royal book claims.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## bag-mania

Robert Lacey is incredibly sympathetic to Harry. He overlooks nearly everything Harry does and places the blame/responsibility on the others.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Claims*
> 
> Prince Harry was left "fighting back tears" after he and wife Meghan Markle were snubbed by the palace on his final royal job, a new book claims.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had already announced their departure from royal life when they attended the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey, in London, in March.
> 
> The event was their final taste of life as senior working royals but it was not a happy occasion, historian Robert Lacey claims.
> 
> The couple were expecting to process into the church behind Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles and Prince William in recognition of their status within the family, even though they had quit, _Battle of Brothers_ claims.
> 
> However, they were demoted to filing in separately in a move that highlighted Harry's status as a "spare," in the sense he is not a direct heir to the throne, the author writes.
> 
> Lacey, a consultant on Netflix series _The Crown_, writes: "In 2018 and 2019, Harry and Meghan had walked down the aisle in the main procession.
> 
> "But, in 2020, they were being shunted aside on their final appearance as working royals in Britain.
> 
> "As now glaringly 'junior' members of the family, the Sussexes would simply have to shuffle their way to their seats and take their place on the sidelines.
> 
> According to the book, Prince William decided he would not enter as part of the main procession out of sensitivity to his younger brother.
> 
> However, the move was not enough to spare Harry's blushes as the order of service was not updated, meaning those in church could read what the original plan had been.
> 
> Lacey writes: "Within minutes of each other, the two princes and their wives slipped quietly into their seats, then sat waiting for the Queen and Prince Charles to process in senior splendour down the aisle.
> 
> "The only problem was that 2,000 orders of service had already been distributed round the Abbey, explaining that William and Kate would enter and process with the main royal party—and making no mention at all of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> "So there was the snub in black and white — set out for all to see.
> 
> "Observers also noted that Harry's face was 'quite tense and unsmiling' — and that when William sat down close to him, he barely greeted his brother.
> 
> "Throughout the service, Meghan megawatted away with her best TV smile but, as the ceremony progressed, Harry appeared to grow gloomier.
> 
> "According to one observer, 'his accelerated blinking even suggested he might have been fighting back tears.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Says
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were snubbed "in black and white" during their final royal job when they expected to walk behind Queen Elizabeth II, a new royal book claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


well, we've seen Harry pouting and looking angry in public....like a boy....I used to like him but now I'm not that sympathetic....he and his wife made their bed....no one forced them to run away


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Robert Lacey is incredibly sympathetic to Harry. He overlooks nearly everything Harry does and places the blame/responsibility on the others.



Lacey is part of Team Netflix.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> me too....I stopped at "purpose driven life"
> she just seems so smug to me
> It must be really heady go to from a peak of being in a Hallmark TV movie to being treated as - what? The Duchess I guess


Did she plagiarize Rick Warren from his book The Purpose Driven Life?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lacey is part of Team Netflix.



There goes any credibility he had. I knew he was stretching the facts when he outright blamed William for Harry abusing alcohol and drugs and having to go to rehab. At least we now know his book is just another royal family hit piece.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Claims*
> 
> Prince Harry was left "fighting back tears" after he and wife Meghan Markle were snubbed by the palace on his final royal job, a new book claims.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had already announced their departure from royal life when they attended the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey, in London, in March.
> 
> The event was their final taste of life as senior working royals but it was not a happy occasion, historian Robert Lacey claims.
> 
> The couple were expecting to process into the church behind Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles and Prince William in recognition of their status within the family, even though they had quit, _Battle of Brothers_ claims.
> 
> However, they were demoted to filing in separately in a move that highlighted Harry's status as a "spare," in the sense he is not a direct heir to the throne, the author writes.
> 
> Lacey, a consultant on Netflix series _The Crown_, writes: "In 2018 and 2019, Harry and Meghan had walked down the aisle in the main procession.
> 
> "But, in 2020, they were being shunted aside on their final appearance as working royals in Britain.
> 
> "As now glaringly 'junior' members of the family, the Sussexes would simply have to shuffle their way to their seats and take their place on the sidelines.
> 
> According to the book, Prince William decided he would not enter as part of the main procession out of sensitivity to his younger brother.
> 
> However, the move was not enough to spare Harry's blushes as the order of service was not updated, meaning those in church could read what the original plan had been.
> 
> Lacey writes: "Within minutes of each other, the two princes and their wives slipped quietly into their seats, then sat waiting for the Queen and Prince Charles to process in senior splendour down the aisle.
> 
> "The only problem was that 2,000 orders of service had already been distributed round the Abbey, explaining that William and Kate would enter and process with the main royal party—and making no mention at all of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> "So there was the snub in black and white — set out for all to see.
> 
> "Observers also noted that Harry's face was 'quite tense and unsmiling' — and that when William sat down close to him, he barely greeted his brother.
> 
> "Throughout the service, Meghan megawatted away with her best TV smile but, as the ceremony progressed, Harry appeared to grow gloomier.
> 
> "According to one observer, 'his accelerated blinking even suggested he might have been fighting back tears.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Says
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were snubbed "in black and white" during their final royal job when they expected to walk behind Queen Elizabeth II, a new royal book claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com




You can see the incredible amount of stress on their faces that day
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
. Well with the exception of one of them.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Claims*
> 
> Prince Harry was left "fighting back tears" after he and wife Meghan Markle were snubbed by the palace on his final royal job, a new book claims.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had already announced their departure from royal life when they attended the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey, in London, in March.
> 
> The event was their final taste of life as senior working royals but it was not a happy occasion, historian Robert Lacey claims.
> 
> The couple were expecting to process into the church behind Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles and Prince William in recognition of their status within the family, even though they had quit, _Battle of Brothers_ claims.
> 
> However, they were demoted to filing in separately in a move that highlighted Harry's status as a "spare," in the sense he is not a direct heir to the throne, the author writes.
> 
> Lacey, a consultant on Netflix series _The Crown_, writes: "In 2018 and 2019, Harry and Meghan had walked down the aisle in the main procession.
> 
> "But, in 2020, they were being shunted aside on their final appearance as working royals in Britain.
> 
> "As now glaringly 'junior' members of the family, the Sussexes would simply have to shuffle their way to their seats and take their place on the sidelines.
> 
> According to the book, Prince William decided he would not enter as part of the main procession out of sensitivity to his younger brother.
> 
> However, the move was not enough to spare Harry's blushes as the order of service was not updated, meaning those in church could read what the original plan had been.
> 
> Lacey writes: "Within minutes of each other, the two princes and their wives slipped quietly into their seats, then sat waiting for the Queen and Prince Charles to process in senior splendour down the aisle.
> 
> "The only problem was that 2,000 orders of service had already been distributed round the Abbey, explaining that William and Kate would enter and process with the main royal party—and making no mention at all of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> "So there was the snub in black and white — set out for all to see.
> 
> "Observers also noted that Harry's face was 'quite tense and unsmiling' — and that when William sat down close to him, he barely greeted his brother.
> 
> "Throughout the service, Meghan megawatted away with her best TV smile but, as the ceremony progressed, Harry appeared to grow gloomier.
> 
> "According to one observer, 'his accelerated blinking even suggested he might have been fighting back tears.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Says
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were snubbed "in black and white" during their final royal job when they expected to walk behind Queen Elizabeth II, a new royal book claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I can understand Harry's tears, he was leaving an environment he has known all his life. It must have been very difficult for him. Though, he needed to learn that actions have consequences. His impulsive marriage will keep bringing consequences. MM did a lot of research on him and on the BRF, he should have done the same and followed Will advice. 

William was very nice by deciding to join his brother and "not enter as part of the main procession". Harry should stop feeling so entitled and accept the fact that, fortunately, William is the one that is supposed to be king.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> You can see the incredible amount of stress on their faces that day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4870071
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Well with the exception of one of them.



MM is contemplating one more family to use and discard. Greed is all over her eyes.  

H should have been smarter and check on how MM treated her own family before getting married to her. Her dad seemed to have a been great dad, sponsored her demands, including taking a loan to pay for her education. After starting to make significant money as a z-list actress, she didn't even bother to check if the loan had been repaid. The way she treated her first husband after becoming a little more famous...


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> You can see the incredible amount of stress on their faces that day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4870071
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Well with the exception of one of them.



She isn't going to let her husband and his family being unhappy get in the way of her taking a good photo. That would require empathy on her part. Narcissists can't feel that, only their own pain matters.


----------



## Annawakes

Um, what did he think was going to happen?  They announced they were stepping back as senior royals.  Then he’s upset they can’t walk down the procession with the senior royals.

William was quite gracious.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Claims*
> 
> Prince Harry was left "fighting back tears" after he and wife Meghan Markle were snubbed by the palace on his final royal job, a new book claims.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had already announced their departure from royal life when they attended the Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey, in London, in March.
> 
> The event was their final taste of life as senior working royals but it was not a happy occasion, historian Robert Lacey claims.
> 
> The couple were expecting to process into the church behind Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles and Prince William in recognition of their status within the family, even though they had quit, _Battle of Brothers_ claims.
> 
> However, they were demoted to filing in separately in a move that highlighted Harry's status as a "spare," in the sense he is not a direct heir to the throne, the author writes.
> 
> Lacey, a consultant on Netflix series _The Crown_, writes: "In 2018 and 2019, Harry and Meghan had walked down the aisle in the main procession.
> 
> "But, in 2020, they were being shunted aside on their final appearance as working royals in Britain.
> 
> "As now glaringly 'junior' members of the family, the Sussexes would simply have to shuffle their way to their seats and take their place on the sidelines.
> 
> According to the book, Prince William decided he would not enter as part of the main procession out of sensitivity to his younger brother.
> 
> However, the move was not enough to spare Harry's blushes as the order of service was not updated, meaning those in church could read what the original plan had been.
> 
> Lacey writes: "Within minutes of each other, the two princes and their wives slipped quietly into their seats, then sat waiting for the Queen and Prince Charles to process in senior splendour down the aisle.
> 
> "The only problem was that 2,000 orders of service had already been distributed round the Abbey, explaining that William and Kate would enter and process with the main royal party—and making no mention at all of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> "So there was the snub in black and white — set out for all to see.
> 
> "Observers also noted that Harry's face was 'quite tense and unsmiling' — and that when William sat down close to him, he barely greeted his brother.
> 
> "Throughout the service, Meghan megawatted away with her best TV smile but, as the ceremony progressed, Harry appeared to grow gloomier.
> 
> "According to one observer, 'his accelerated blinking even suggested he might have been fighting back tears.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Fighting Back Tears' after Snub on Final Royal Job, Book Says
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were snubbed "in black and white" during their final royal job when they expected to walk behind Queen Elizabeth II, a new royal book claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



This makes him look like a petulant and spoiled child. For God's sake, you chose to leave so you can do non-royal things - and NOT do royal things. This is one of them.


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She also asked for one for her first trip with Harry. Charles had to tell her it was inappropriate. So for someone who doesn't care she sure cares a lot. Also for someone who doesn't believe in ranks she sure tyrannized her staff.


Interesting that she didn't ask the Queen.  Probably too afraid she would be told off and instead, tried to work her femme fatale skills on PC. Glad that didn't work out either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> Um, what did he think was going to happen?  They announced they were stepping back as senior royals.  Then he’s upset they can’t walk down the procession with the senior royals.
> 
> William was quite gracious.



H&M wanted and expected a half-in/half-out deal. Apparently without consulting anyone of consequence, they planned to _step back, _not _step down.  _My guess is after years of getting his way and with MM’s support, Harry thought (?) this half-in/half-out plan would not be controversial. Before this H disaster and the covid, I thought Charles should stay as the heir. It seems the rumors were true - King Charles would be disaster. He is not ageing as well as QE and Philip. Cams is looking a bit unwell, too. Now that W&K have emerged as leaders and their kids are older, William would be the best choice.

From Jan, 2020:
A separate Buckingham Palace statement makes clear the couple is “required” to step back from royal duties. Any doubts over whether they could be both in and out, is now clarified. The latter has prevailed.


----------



## lalame

Maggie Muggins said:


> Am I the only who can't watch the entire interview?!! Her voice and mannerisms just grate on my nerves.





mdcx said:


> I find her extremely rehearsed and non-genuine. It reminds me a lot of her performances in Suits that I saw - lots of long doe-eyed stares, supposed to imply deep thought I guess. Lots of word salad, basically whatever the listener wants to hear.
> All that ridiculous business about how her words were misinterpreted, I suppose some people eat that up.



ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.

Here's the vid:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.
> 
> Here's the vid:




Funnily I saw a speech she gave somewhere after they got engaged (ETA to clarify: I saw the speech after they got engaged and I found her insufferable during the engagement interview, the speech was a few years old at that point) and was like "OMG I would have actually liked that version of her." In hindsight though, she was maybe just better at hiding her black soul back then. Narcissists tend to spiral out of control at some point.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.
> 
> Here's the vid:




Now we know she can become whatever she believes will serve her best, a human chameleon. Fascinating and a little creepy at the same time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M wanted and expected a half-in/half-out deal. Apparently without consulting anyone of consequence, they planned to _step back, _not _step down.  _My guess is after years of getting his way and with MM’s support, Harry thought (?) this half-in/half-out plan would not be controversial. Before this H disaster and the covid, I thought Charles should stay as the heir. It seems the rumors were true - King Charles would be disaster. He is not ageing as well as QE and Philip. Cams is looking a bit unwell, too. Now that W&K have emerged as leaders and their kids are older, William would be the best choice.
> 
> From Jan, 2020:
> A separate Buckingham Palace statement makes clear the couple is “required” to step back from royal duties. Any doubts over whether they could be both in and out, is now clarified. The latter has prevailed.


QE will likely stay in power for as long as health permits. It's possible that Charles will be king for only a short period of time. Charles may prefer to be an emeritus king and act as a counselor to Will.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> QE will likely stay in power for as long as health permits. It's possible that Charles will be king for only a short period of time. Charles may prefer to be an emeritus king and act as a counselor to Will.


QE II will be Queen till she dies, and then Charles will be King.  Younger royals have taken on more workload as the Queen has grown older but she‘ll not give up being Queen.  She regards it as a lifelong duty.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> QE II will be Queen till she dies, and then Charles will be King.  Younger royals have taken on more workload as the Queen has grown older but she‘ll not give up being Queen.  She regards it as a lifelong duty.


I'm not expert but I don't think they can just skip Charles


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.
> 
> Here's the vid:




Great find, @lalame Thank you
Consider this: according to YouTube, that interview was in 2016. MM was 35 yrs old. Harry is now 36.
In the video, she looks freer and much less burdened than now.  Still there are the hand waving, the open shirt, the hair touching, the perpetual grin. A new thing is a teeth thing after she stops smiling - not exactly clear what she is doing. The lack of word salad really stands out.  All that said, she has such positive, happy energy and does indeed seem charming and, yes, cute. I would have guessed her to be late 20s. The marriage seems to be dragging both H&M down. Sad to see that.

@sdkitty you are correct, skipping dear Charles is not an option. Unless ill,  it is very unlikely that he would opt out.  Still, IMO, William is a much stronger leader than Charles. I doubt H or Prince Andrew would ever opt out, too.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lalame said:


> ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.
> 
> Here's the vid:



I watched it twice just to be fair. Maybe she was just nervous, but I think she was acting... the little giggles, over the top facial expressions, overreactions to questions, quick and exaggerated hand movements. Am I being too critical?


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> QE II will be Queen till she dies, and then Charles will be King.  Younger royals have taken on more workload as the Queen has grown older but she‘ll not give up being Queen.  She regards it as a lifelong duty.





sdkitty said:


> I'm not expert but I don't think they can just skip Charles


Yep, I agree. Unless, QE becomes mentally incapacitated, she will keep on going. I don't think Charles will be skipped, but he may want to become a king for only a short period of time. After he gets his title, he may prefer to abdicate to Will. Will will be a good king imo. Hopefully, people like Lacey, MM...will not succeed in destroying his image.


----------



## Lounorada

Sol Ryan said:


> This could get entertaining....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William to take Prince Harry's role  as head of Royal Marines
> 
> 
> Prince William, 38, has been invited to take on Prince Harry's, 36, role Captain General of Royal Marines after the Duke of Sussex was stripped of the title in March, sources told The Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Expect tantrums and scathing made-up stories about William to surface in the media over the coming days.




VigeeLeBrun said:


> After a wonderful day, I sat down with my lil’furball, CoCo Chanel to watch entertainment for the evening.
> Any guesses, ladies & gents?
> It must be Meghan Markle Monday on the Hallmark Channel bc the movie, _Harry’s, I mean, _Dater’s Handbook, ladies & gents.
> View attachment 4869283
> 
> View attachment 4869282
> View attachment 4869313





VigeeLeBrun said:


> A few additional pics so you do not have to watch the movie, lol.
> View attachment 4869290
> View attachment 4869291
> View attachment 4869293
> 
> View attachment 4869295
> View attachment 4869299








Even through screenshots her acting looking dreadful


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great find, @lalame Thank you
> Consider this: according to YouTube, that interview was in 2016. MM was 35 yrs old. Harry is now 36.
> In the video, she looks freer and much less burdened than now.  Still there are the hand waving, the open shirt, the hair touching, the perpetual grin. A new thing is a teeth thing after she stops smiling - not exactly clear what she is doing. The lack of word salad really stands out.  All that said, she has such positive, happy energy and does indeed seem charming and, yes, cute. I would have guessed her to be late 20s. The marriage seems to be dragging both H&M down. Sad to see that.



I think she's licking her teeth between takes (or what she thinks is between takes) to make sure she doesn't get lipstick on them. I do this too actually haha. You're so right about the positive energy. Sad.



Maggie Muggins said:


> I watched it twice just to be fair. Maybe she was just nervous, but I think she was acting... the little giggles, over the top facial expressions, overreactions to questions, quick and exaggerated hand movements. Am I being too critical?



I think she's a bubbly girl by nature... how wide she smiles in old photos from childhood makes me think so. Some of it is probably a bit for show since I mean she's getting interviewed... she's thinking she needs to be high-energy, funny, charming, etc. It looks BAD to be low-energy as an interviewee. But I think this is probably closer to her true personality than what we're seeing now.

I mentioned it before but she gives me geeky theater kid vibes, like Anne Hathaway and Chris Evans. Spazzy, giggly, and smiley.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.
> 
> Here's the vid:






CarryOn2020 said:


> Great find, @lalame Thank you
> Consider this: according to YouTube, that interview was in 2016. MM was 35 yrs old. Harry is now 36.
> *In the video, she looks freer and much less burdened than now. * Still there are the hand waving, the open shirt, the hair touching, the perpetual grin. A new thing is a teeth thing after she stops smiling - not exactly clear what she is doing. The lack of word salad really stands out.  All that said, she has such positive, happy energy and does indeed seem charming and, yes, cute. I would have guessed her to be late 20s. The marriage seems to be dragging both H&M down. Sad to see that.


She seems to have always been a very ambitious person, but now she may have become a prisoner of her own uncontrolled greed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I agree. Unless, QE becomes mentally incapacitated, she will keep on going. I don't think Charles will be skipped, but he may want to become a king for only a short period of time. After he gets his title, he may prefer to abdicate to Will. Will will be a good king imo. Hopefully, people like Lacey, MM...will not succeed in destroying his image.


Each king/queen takes an oath to serve the crown and the country and so, I don't see Charles ever abdicating. Just as it was with Edward VIII, that would be considered a dereliction of duty.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Each king/queen takes an oath to serve the crown and the country and so, I don't see Charles ever abdicating. Just as it was with Edward VIII, that would be considered a dereliction of duty.



Rules and the way royal families are seen have changed over the years. For example, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands has handed very elegantly the throne to Prince Willem-Alexander.

Charles doesn't seem too conventional. I appreciate the fact that he became an advocate for organic agriculture several years before the rest of us. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to hand the throne to Will after a couple of years.


----------



## viciel

lalame said:


> ITA. I actually remember watching a Suits interview of her when she was just getting well-known where I thought she seemed so cute and charming. She actually has a personality here, I guess that was before she found the light and became humanity's savior.
> 
> Here's the vid:



I actually feel like she was also playing a character in this clip - she's trying too hard. The girl just wants to be liked by EVERYONE.


----------



## sdkitty

viciel said:


> I actually feel like she was also playing a character in this clip - she's trying too hard. The girl just wants to be liked by EVERYONE.


yeah, I find her annoying her too


----------



## viciel

Chanbal said:


> Interesting info from the Saga of the Brothers:
> 
> MM-Sometime during that first summer and autumn together in 2016, Harry introduced his girlfriend to his father and his grandmother, who thoroughly approved. The problem was William. For his part, William was worried that his brother was going too fast in his courtship and he didn't shrink from saying so when Harry started talking about getting hitched. 'This all seems to be moving rather quickly,' William was said to have remarked to Harry doubtfully, on the testimony of more than one friend. 'Are you sure?'
> 
> Spencer-From time to time Diana's younger brother had played something of an honorary godfather to both boys in the years since the death of their mother, and their uncle agreed with William to see what he could do. The result of the Spencer intervention was an even more bitter explosion. Once again Harry refused to slow down.


This is a classic example of psychological reactance - the more you get disapproval from family whom know you the best, the more they're actually pushing you towards the other person.


----------



## Chanbal

MM may have purchased a mansion from Scarface recently, but her connections to a certain type of millionaires goes back several years:

*Meghan and the 'McMafia' millionaire: Property tycoon who posed with the stars forfeits £10m police say came from money laundering for gangsters


*
Mansoor Hussain and MM in 2013

money laundering


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Rules and the way royal families are seen have changed over the years. For example, *Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands has handed very elegantly the throne to Prince Willem-Alexander.*
> 
> Charles doesn't seem too conventional. I appreciate the fact that he became an advocate for organic agriculture several years before the rest of us. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to hand the throne to Will after a couple of years.


This sounds more like an old custom in the Netherlands. Queen Wilhelmina inherited the throne from her father, King William III who died in 1890. She abdicated in 1948 for her daughter Queen Juliana, who then abdicated in 1980 for Queen Beatrix. I don't foresee Willem-Alexander ever abdicating.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She looked so pretty in that video. I don’t think the filler or other procedures she’s been doing suit her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  Love Queen B. Her hat game is strong! Willem and Max are superb. It’s been a smooth transition.
Money Laundering friend from 2013!?! My oh my. Wonder if she and he connected through SoHo?

_In one photograph, which he repeatedly posted on social media, he can be seen hugging Meghan Markle at the Global Gift Gala in London in 2013, three years before she met Prince Harry. _

bringing_  _and :wine:


----------



## CarryOn2020

viciel said:


> This is a classic example of psychological reactance - the more you get disapproval from family whom know you the best, the more they're actually pushing you towards the other person.



It is also the stuff of great literature. Shakespeare wrote the play inspired by Bandello’s novela from the 1500s. He was inspired by the Romans and other writers from long ago.









						Matteo Bandello - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> She looked so pretty in that video. I don’t think the filler or other procedures she’s been doing suit her.



I was wondering about that. I couldn’t decide if it’s because of the cosmetic procedures or if she had just hit the peak of her good looks in her early 30s and now she’s on the slow decline.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> There goes any credibility he had. I knew he was stretching the facts when he outright blamed William for Harry abusing alcohol and drugs and having to go to rehab. At least we now know his book is just another royal family hit piece.


I think it's still good as he lays out the happenings in detail so we can make our own conclusions. I think he actually makes William sound cool.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Maggie Muggins said:


> This sounds more like an old custom in the Netherlands. Queen Wilhelmina inherited the throne from her father, King William III who died in 1890. She abdicated in 1948 for her daughter Queen Juliana, who then abdicated in 1980 for Queen Beatrix. I don't foresee Willem-Alexander ever abdicating.



Honestly, I think the Benelux system is the best - the old king is around to give advice while the new queen puts her stamp on things.  

I think that WA will follow his mother and grandmother's lead. He will let Catharina-Amelia have a semi-private family life - he will rule while she meets her love, raises her young family and decide how to focus her energy. Once she's established as a strong successor, then he'll gracefully step back and provide advice and backup.


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> I think it's still good as he lays out the happenings in detail so we can make our own conclusions. *I think he actually makes William sound cool.*



True, except you can tell that wasn’t his intention. It’s bad enough he wants the reader to think William was responsible for Harry’s substance abuse but then he claims that William should have faced as much criticism as Harry did about the Nazi costume because he didn’t talk Harry out of it. That’s a bit over the top.

Lacey obviously doesn’t believe the old saying about not being your brother’s keeper. I speculated last night that maybe Lacey was an only child, but now I’m wondering if he was the younger brother to a more popular sibling. His defense of Harry is almost like he takes it personally.


----------



## mshermes

sdkitty said:


> didn't hear about that one... I guess she wasn't purpose driven then


In case you want to see it.....it was a 90210 reboot (2008). I had posted this a long time ago.








						Meghan Markle is seen performing sex act in a CAR on 90210
					

Since embarking on a romance with Prince Harry, many of Megan Markle's former roles have come back to haunt her - a number of which have shown her range.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

Pessie said:


> QE II will be Queen till she dies, and then Charles will be King.  Younger royals have taken on more workload as the Queen has grown older but she‘ll not give up being Queen.  She regards it as a lifelong duty.


Right?  Unless Charles dies before his mother he will be King.
The end.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> You can see the incredible amount of stress on their faces that day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4870071
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Well with the exception of one of them.


Meghan looks like she's concealing a knife and thinking of the moment she's going to plunge it into the back of Kate then William.


----------



## Pessie

sdkitty said:


> I'm not expert but I don't think they can just skip Charles


You’re right that’s not how it works.  Who would “they“ be anyway that made such a decision?  Charles is heir, it’s his birthright.


Chanbal said:


> Yep, I agree. Unless, QE becomes mentally incapacitated, she will keep on going. I don't think Charles will be skipped, but he may want to become a king for only a short period of time. After he gets his title, he may prefer to abdicate to Will. Will will be a good king imo. Hopefully, people like Lacey, MM...will not succeed in destroying his image.


Charles has worked and waited his entire adult life, he will be King eventually.  And for everyone saying Charles is weak and useless and it’s his fault Harry is the way he is, let’s remember he’s Williams father too.  Let’s give him some credit.  
If the Queen were to become mentally incapacitated he would be made Prince Regent, and carry out the duties required of the Monarch, but the Queen would remain the Queen.  


V0N1B2 said:


> Right?  Unless Charles dies before his mother he will be King.
> The end.


Exactly.  It’s not a popularity contest, or a beauty contest, or a who’s ageing best contest, or a meritocracy.  I’m losing track of how many times we’ve been over this ground   And if other countries do things differently, so what?  That’s another country.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> MM may have purchased a mansion from Scarface recently, but her connections to a certain type of millionaires goes back several years:
> 
> *Meghan and the 'McMafia' millionaire: Property tycoon who posed with the stars forfeits £10m police say came from money laundering for gangsters
> 
> View attachment 4870299
> *
> Mansoor Hussain and MM in 2013
> 
> money laundering


Do they share eyebrow technician


----------



## duna

Annawakes said:


> Um, what did he think was going to happen?  They announced they were stepping back as senior royals.  Then he’s upset they can’t walk down the procession with the senior royals.
> 
> William was quite gracious.



THIS. Also, a few pages back we read that he was very upset at having to leave his position as Captain General of the Royal Marines, he said he was* forced* to: well, well, well, you don't say?? Talk about having his cake and eating it!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> THIS. Also, a few pages back we read that he was very upset at having to leave his position as Captain General of the Royal Marines, he said he was* forced* to: well, well, well, you don't say?? Talk about wanting his cake and eating it!!



Harry is always a victim, nothing is ever his fault.  Harry, as a our guest, and his PR team should know his victim song is tiresome, wearing thin. Plenty of people have more serious stories to tell.

RE: Charles.  In 2020, anything is possible. He does look a bit unwell so who would blame him for taking a break? He has been ahead of the times and created many positive opportunities for many. Good on him. Then, there’s the family stuff.  None of us would give a hoot about the current issues in the BRF *if *it hadn’t reared it’s ugly head on our shores. It certainly does appear the current system is not working too well for those in the succession line, so perhaps a change of rules is appropriate or, at least, something to consider. That’s all we are suggesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

dp


----------



## needlv

duna said:


> THIS. Also, a few pages back we read that he was very upset at having to leave his position as Captain General of the Royal Marines, he said he was* forced* to: well, well, well, you don't say?? Talk about having his cake and eating it!!



do you recall all the articles of lip readers about the commonwealth service?  Harry was very upset that Will just greeted him with “hello Harry” and he sulked / got angry during the service...
The photo of them leaving the service says it all.  H looks angry...


----------



## Sharont2305

needlv said:


> do you recall all the articles of lip readers about the commonwealth service?  Harry was very upset that Will just greeted him with “hello Harry” and he sulked / got angry during the service...
> The photo of them leaving the service says it all.  H looks angry...


And it was the first time I've seen Catherine look so cross.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> And it was the first time I've seen Catherine look so cross.



Yes, they all looked very sullen, except MM who was grinning the whole time!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And it was the first time I've seen Catherine look so cross.



And I can't blame her one bit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Yes, they all looked very sullen, except MM who was grinning the whole time!



Remember how she looked at Canada House when she da*n well knew they'd be dropping a huge bomb on the BRF a few hours later? I swear this woman thrives off destruction and hurting people.


----------



## 1LV

Annawakes said:


> Um, what did he think was going to happen?  They announced they were stepping back as senior royals.  Then he’s upset they can’t walk down the procession with the senior royals.
> 
> William was quite gracious.


Be careful what you ask for, right?


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> This sounds more like an old custom in the Netherlands. Queen Wilhelmina inherited the throne from her father, King William III who died in 1890. She abdicated in 1948 for her daughter Queen Juliana, who then abdicated in 1980 for Queen Beatrix. I don't foresee Willem-Alexander ever abdicating.


Queen Juliana suffered from dementia - that was the reason she abdicated, there is no such story for Beatrix - she just wanted to retire?


----------



## marietouchet

Pessie said:


> You’re right that’s not how it works.  Who would “they“ be anyway that made such a decision?  Charles is heir, it’s his birthright.
> 
> Charles has worked and waited his entire adult life, he will be King eventually.  And for everyone saying Charles is weak and useless and it’s his fault Harry is the way he is, let’s remember he’s Williams father too.  Let’s give him some credit.
> If the Queen were to become mentally incapacitated he would be made Prince Regent, and carry out the duties required of the Monarch, but the Queen would remain the Queen.
> 
> Exactly.  It’s not a popularity contest, or a beauty contest, or a who’s ageing best contest, or a meritocracy.  I’m losing track of how many times we’ve been over this ground   And if other countries do things differently, so what?  That’s another country.


Until  late 2019-2020, I would say Charles had worked to earn his spot in the succession, Camilla was no longer marginalized and was no longer a HUGE liability (can she Queen? IMHO, no... Princess Consort is a yes)

But there has been so much HUGE 2019 - 2020 turmoil in the UK - Brexit / COVID at the time of all the BRF ugliness (Andrew, H&M, BRF costs the taxpayer too much, private airplanes, massive reduction in BRF income due to COVID etc). H&M may the the least of issues, Ghislaine could cause lots of furor over Andrew ...

It will depend on how long QEII lives, whether QEII can establish a presence post COVID and what pro-active steps Charles can take to right the ship - QEII will have to approve any plans but he will have to spearhead efforts to calm things down. 
Will Charles be king? Different answer today and 5 years from now.. I dont think he would be bypassed but he might choose to be passed over, not exactly his choice, public opinion and politics will dictate his actions 

Stay tuned is my opinion


----------



## chicinthecity777

In a book store here. Still over priced me thinks!


----------



## Vintage Leather

marietouchet said:


> Queen Juliana suffered from dementia - that was the reason she abdicated, there is no such story for Beatrix - she just wanted to retire?



The catalyst was that her youngest son, Prince Frisco, was in a terrible skiing accident which resulted in brain damage and his eventual death. It was also just around the time of her 75th birthday, and she would have been one of the oldest monarchs in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. (Everyone else abdicated or died before the age of 75)

As she said in her abdication speech, “Responsibility for our country must now lie in the hands of a new generation”


----------



## bag-mania

Charles had Covid-19 back in June. At the time it sounded like a relatively mild case compared to others, but it had to have taken a lot out of him at his age. It's possible he is still suffering from fatigue and other recurring symptoms. I am sure they are being careful with his schedule so he doesn't overdo it. William and his cousins will have to make up the difference.

The family must view Harry's abandonment as a big slap in the face, considering all the whining he and Meghan have been doing.


----------



## Chanbal

Reading that Harry's passion is "helping disadvantaged people" made me sad for him. He would have a much better chance of fulfilling his passion as part of the BRF imo.

*Meghan Markle 'won't ever want a way back' into the royal family after she and Prince Harry 'burnt significant bridges beyond repair' because it's no place for someone with political ambition, royal expert claims*

'In the past few months, Harry and Meghan have burnt some significant bridges that may be beyond repair,' Penny said.

'Right now, that doesn't seem to bother them. And I can't see Meghan ever wanting a way back. What she discovered in her brief spell as a working member, is the British royal family is no place for someone with political ambition.

'I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles she would seriously consider running for president.'

However, Penny suggested that Harry doesn't have the same political ambitions and instead his passion lies with helping disadvantaged people.

She added that it's likely 'he will find his way back' one day as it took a long time for the prince to discover his talents.

Political Ambitions


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Reading that Harry's passion is "helping disadvantaged people" made me sad for him. He would have a much better chance of fulfilling his passion as a part of the BRF imo.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'won't ever want a way back' into the royal family after she and Prince Harry 'burnt significant bridges beyond repair' because it's no place for someone with political ambition, royal expert claims*
> 
> 'In the past few months, Harry and Meghan have burnt some significant bridges that may be beyond repair,' Penny said.
> 
> 'Right now, that doesn't seem to bother them. And I can't see Meghan ever wanting a way back. What she discovered in her brief spell as a working member, is the British royal family is no place for someone with political ambition.
> 
> 'I think if Meghan and Harry ever gave up their titles *she would seriously consider running for president.'*
> 
> However, Penny suggested that Harry doesn't have the same political ambitions and instead his passion lies with helping disadvantaged people.
> 
> She added that it's likely 'he will find his way back' one day as it took a long time for the prince to discover his talents.
> 
> Political Ambitions



I can't imagine on what grounds she could possibly be candidated, I have no idea how it works in the US, but who would vote for her? maybe a handful of stans.....


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> In a book store here. Still over priced me thinks!
> 
> View attachment 4870706


I wouldn't buy even for $1, too much clutter in my house at present time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't buy even for $1, too much clutter in my house at present time.



Neither would I, not even if my bookshelves were empty.....


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I can't imagine on what grounds she could possibly be candidated, I have no idea how it works in the US, but who would vote for her? maybe a handful of stans.....


Love your optimism. I hope she doesn't!


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Love your optimism. I hope she doesn't!



LOL, I guess nowadays just about anybody can give it a try: in my neck of the woods (I won't say where!) we have total morons governing us, people who have not even been to high school let alone university! Oh well......


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> LOL, I guess nowadays just about anybody can give it a try: in my neck of the woods (I won't say where!) we have total morons governing us, people who have not even been to high school let alone university! Oh well......


seriously?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Charles had Covid-19 back in June. At the time it sounded like a relatively mild case compared to others, but it had to have taken a lot out of him at his age. It's possible he is still suffering from fatigue and other recurring symptoms. I am sure they are being careful with his schedule so he doesn't overdo it. William and his cousins will have to make up the difference.
> 
> The family must view Harry's abandonment as a big slap in the face, considering all the whining he and Meghan have been doing.



He might also be more selective choosing his engagements. He has mellowed with age. What may look like a weakness to some, it's probably his way to prioritize (this requires courage). He is overall a decent person imo.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> I can't imagine on what grounds she could possibly be candidated, I have no idea how it works in the US, but who would vote for her? maybe a handful of stans.....



It will NEVER happen. It's too much work. It doesn't pay enough. It's usually a thankless job and she needs to be adored. Being in politics means she will be criticized and she can't play the pity-card because she would be expected to have more emotional strength than a five-year-old. It is not her scene at all.

The only reason it has come up is because the upcoming election is in the news. Once that is over any political ambitions will flit away in the wind. She will move on to insert herself (and Harry) into whatever is the next current event.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It will NEVER happen. It's too much work. It doesn't pay enough. It's usually a thankless job and she needs to be adored. Being in politics means she will be criticized and she can't play the pity-card because she would be expected to have more emotional strength than a five-year-old. It is not her scene at all.
> 
> The only reason it has come up is because the upcoming election is in the news. Once that is over any political ambitions will flit away in the wind. She will move on to insert herself (and Harry) into whatever is the next current event.


I see her more trying to get the job of UN ambassador like Angie and Audrey Hepburn....has the "purpose driven" element and also a certain glamour (following the footsteps of these two)

correction - UNICEF, not UN


----------



## Chanbal

Vintage Leather said:


> The catalyst was that her youngest son, Prince Frisco, was in a terrible skiing accident which resulted in brain damage and his eventual death. It was also just around the time of her 75th birthday, and she would have been one of the oldest monarchs in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. (Everyone else abdicated or died before the age of 75)
> 
> *As she said in her abdication speech, “Responsibility for our country must now lie in the hands of a new generation”*


After a certain age might make sense for some people to abdicate, there is nothing wrong with it. They can continue serving the country as Queen emerita/King emeritus.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> It will NEVER happen. It's too much work. It doesn't pay enough. It's usually a thankless job and she needs to be adored. Being in politics means she will be criticized and she can't play the pity-card because she would be expected to have more emotional strength than a five-year-old. It is not her scene at all.
> 
> The only reason it has come up is because the upcoming election is in the news. Once that is over any political ambitions will flit away in the wind. She will move on to insert herself (and Harry) into whatever is the next current event.



Right. I was about to say the same. Even local politics is subject to combative opposition. And I'm sick of women candidates who say "vote for me because I'm a woman" like that's all the criteria needed. I vote based on policies, not chromosomes, connections, or pity. Meghan would find she can't sue her way political victory when people are mean to her.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I see her more trying to get the job of UN ambassador like Angie and Audrey Hepburn....has the "purpose driven" element and also a certain glamour (following the footsteps of these two)



I could see that. It wouldn't be time-consuming and she would get lots of credit from the media for "being involved." I'd like to believe they would have better sense than to choose her but I know better.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Charles had Covid-19 back in June. At the time it sounded like a relatively mild case compared to others, but it had to have taken a lot out of him at his age. It's possible he is still suffering from fatigue and other recurring symptoms. I am sure they are being careful with his schedule so he doesn't overdo it. William and his cousins will have to make up the difference.
> 
> The family must view Harry's abandonment as a big slap in the face, considering all the whining he and Meghan have been doing.


Agree, I too suspect Charles is not at 100 % health wise


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I can't imagine on what grounds she could possibly be candidated, I have no idea how it works in the US, but who would vote for her? maybe a handful of stans.....


In the US, one might one’s way up through the ranks eg start in Congress, but that is not super high profile, and pays nothing, takes time

The other approach , a la Bloomberg, Donald, Ross Perot, is to be Uber rich and pay for your campaign, that won’t work, H&M don’t have enough money to bankroll a campaign


----------



## A1aGypsy

Honestly, I think many people in this thread downplay Charles ambition. 

He’s not in the background because of illness or age but rather because he is preparing to assume the throne and he knows any significant gesture has the potential to destabilize the on-going relevance of the monarchy.


----------



## lalame

duna said:


> I can't imagine on what grounds she could possibly be candidated, I have no idea how it works in the US, but who would vote for her? maybe a handful of stans.....



Even Kanye is running (supposedly)... enough said lol. I'm okay with that actually, a fool and his (or her) money are soon parted. Hopefully it helps the local economy.


----------



## Jktgal

duna said:


> I can't imagine on what grounds she could possibly be candidated, I have no idea how it works in the US, but who would vote for her? maybe a handful of stans.....


That's what the world thought of Donald Asterisk. Since his success I think Kanye Meghan types are emboldened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

What has she achieved anyway? Qualifications are a bare minimum. We don't value royalty so if that's her main achievement she's not going to get far... having people agree with you isn't enough. You need them to respect you and trust you based on a track record. Kim Kardashian would have better credentials having built a giant empire.


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> LOL, I guess nowadays just about anybody can give it a try: in my neck of the woods (I won't say where!) we have total morons governing us, people who have not even been to high school let alone university! Oh well......


.. and I bet I know exactly where you are because at one time, it was an area that I had to travel to for business and boy-oh-boy, WOW .. unbelievable .. for example: 

He says - "_you talk funny - you from England_?" 
I reply - "_no, I'm from New England originally_" 
He says - "_that's what I said - England_" 
I replied - "_no, New England, that region in the United States_?" 
He replies - "yeah, England - like I said"
Needless to say, since this was a "business" meeting, I stopped that conversation cold .. but YIKES!  When I talked to one of his colleagues, he told me "oh well, you know .. Jimma stopped schooling in the 6th grade" .. HOLY CRAP!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> .. and I bet I know exactly where you are because at one time, it was an area that I had to travel to for business and boy-oh-boy, WOW .. unbelievable .. for example:
> 
> He says - "_you talk funny - you from England_?"
> I reply - "_no, I'm from New England originally_"
> He says - "_that's what I said - England_"
> I replied - "_no, New England, that region in the United States_?"
> He replies - "yeah, England - like I said"
> Needless to say, since this was a "business" meeting, I stopped that conversation cold .. but YIKES!  When I talked to one of his colleagues, he told me "oh well, you know .. Jimma stopped schooling in the 6th grade" .. HOLY CRAP!


Ive had the conversation (with Americans) 
"Are you from England?" 
"No, I'm from Wales" 
"Where's that?" 
"It's in Great Britain" 
"Oh, I see. Ive never met someone from England before"
"You still haven't, I'm Welsh" 
"It's all the same though, isn't it?" 

I kid you not.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> What has she achieved anyway? Qualifications are a bare minimum. We don't value royalty so if that's her main achievement she's not going to get far... having people agree with you isn't enough. You need them to respect you and trust you based on a track record. Kim Kardashian would have better credentials having built a giant empire.



So far Meghan is a big fat zero in accomplishments (unless you count marrying a prince). She can't seem to stick with anything. Even her own charities have been created and forgotten within a few months due to her not knowing what to do with them. She doesn't have any ideas except for the ones she steals from other people. Nobody is counting on Meghan to save the world.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> So far Meghan is a big fat zero in accomplishments (unless you count marrying a prince). She can't seem to stick with anything. Even her own charities have been created and forgotten within a few months due to her not knowing what to do with them. She doesn't have any ideas except for the ones she steals from other people. Nobody is counting on Meghan to save the world.



Doubt she could even get voted into state gov't in CA, probably the most friendly state possible to a person like her, much less at a federal level. Ask me again in 10 years though... who knows what the future holds.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Doubt she could even get voted into state gov't in CA, probably the most friendly state possible to a person like her, much less at a federal level. Ask me again in 10 years though... who knows what the future holds.



That's why I think the whole _Meghan wants to run for president_ rumor must have been a fabricated story created by her PR team to keep her in the news. And it worked, we are talking about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Kim Kardashian would have better credentials having built a giant empire.



Also the Kardashians, like them or not, are consequent people. They decided that 14 years of having their every step broadcasted was enough, they arranged for the show to end behind the scenes, then informed their fan base. No beating around the bush, planting rumours or outright lies to cover up their real agenda, they just have had enough and are acting on it.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Ive had the conversation (with Americans)
> "Are you from England?"
> "No, I'm from Wales"
> "Where's that?"
> "It's in Great Britain"
> "Oh, I see. Ive never met someone from England before"
> "You still haven't, I'm Welsh"
> "It's all the same though, isn't it?"
> 
> I kid you not.


I am NOT at all surprised; many Americans have NO CLUE as to Geography which is so sad .. but I do think it depends on where you grew up and obviously, the education one got.  Typically, when you grow up in New England, you are very well aware of World Geography, especially when it comes to Great Britain, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Northern Ireland, etc. -- because, many of the folks have that ancestry (1/2 of mine).  In addition, many have ancestry from other countries in Europe - Italy, Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, etc.  I had to take (and pass) various tests in Geography, Country Capitals as well as have proficiency in at least 2 languages besides English (thank god I could use Italian for one of them - the other was Latin)!  

I find that out here where I am, not as many folks are as well versed re: Europe because many have Asian ancestry (so they do know that part of the world).  The HB and I have managed to get some major European finds at Estate Sales because the folks out here just don't know as much about the artifacts (good for us)!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *So far Meghan is a big fat zero in accomplishments (unless you count marrying a prince). *She can't seem to stick with anything. Even her own charities have been created and forgotten within a few months due to her not knowing what to do with them. She doesn't have any ideas except for the ones she steals from other people. Nobody is counting on Meghan to save the world.



This is because you are reading & posting on this thread, and you are a well informed TPF 'citizen'.
However, the list of accomplishments she will likely provide to the general public may have as many pages as this thread. Keep in mind all the sandwiches, pencils, zoom calls...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So far Meghan is a big fat zero in accomplishments (unless you count marrying a prince). She can't seem to stick with anything. Even her own charities have been created and forgotten within a few months due to her not knowing what to do with them. She doesn't have any ideas except for the ones she steals from other people. Nobody is counting on Meghan to save the world.


you better count marrying a prince because that is her major accomplishment


----------



## bag-mania

You know it's a shame we have to give the side eye to the motives behind everything they do. This is a nice story that might help promote this woman's business but I hope it wasn't done for self-serving purposes by H&M.

*Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business*
When the year started, Taylor Jay would have no idea that one of her creations would be worn by the Duke of Sussex. But the coronavirus pandemic has been anything but predictable.

Prince Harry recently wore one of her Champagne and Honey face coverings, posing with runners in Los Angeles before they ran a virtual version of the London Marathon.


Jay is one of the many proud, Black-owned businesses in the Bay Area that was forced to adapt quickly to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. What she originally envisioned to be a women's clothing brand at the beginning of the year, Taylor Jay Collections adjusted to start making masks, and taking orders online.

The Bay Area native had hoped to run her clothing store on the corner of Broadway and 24th, with a packed calendar of events throughout the year, but a Prince Harry sighting with one of her newly-made products must be nice as well.

When ABC7 News profiled Taylor's journey as a Black small business owner, she told us about her pandemic transition, assisted by a grant from the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce, which ensured that her business would keep going too.









						Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business
					

ROYALLY GOOD NEWS! Prince Harry was just seen wearing a mask designed by a Black-owned business from Oakland.




					abc7news.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> You know it's a shame we have to give the side eye to the motives behind everything they do. This is a nice story that might help promote this woman's business but I hope it wasn't done for self-serving purposes by H&M.
> 
> *Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business*
> When the year started, Taylor Jay would have no idea that one of her creations would be worn by the Duke of Sussex. But the coronavirus pandemic has been anything but predictable.
> 
> Prince Harry recently wore one of her Champagne and Honey face coverings, posing with runners in Los Angeles before they ran a virtual version of the London Marathon.


===
Self serving, merching opportunity, and trying to steal headlines from W&K. 
===


----------



## CarryOn2020

Charles weak? Is it weakness with him or entitlement? From day one, he was _the one who will be king_. Not sure birthrights are as important in the 21st century as they were long ago, but what is important are the choices he has made. Guaranteed there will be plenty of positive articles about Charles - he has done many good things - as well as numerous negatives. He’s got the family drama, he’s got the picky personal preferences and odd quirks, he does have quite a problem with putting his foot in his mouth, such as not knowing what ‘in love’ means and wanting to be Camilla’s personal product 
A few tidbits: https://www.rd.com/list/queen-elizabeth-prefer-not-know-prince-charles/


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Charles weak? *Is it weakness with him or entitlement? *From day one, he was _the one who will be king_. Not sure birthrights are as important in the 21st century as they were long ago, but what is important are the choices he has made. Guaranteed there will be plenty of positive articles about Charles - he has done many good things - as well as numerous negatives. He’s got the family drama, he’s got the picky personal preferences and odd quirks, he does have quite a problem with putting his foot in his mouth, such as not knowing what ‘in love’ means and wanting to be Camilla’s personal product
> A few tidbits: https://www.rd.com/list/queen-elizabeth-prefer-not-know-prince-charles/



It doesn't have to be one or the other, it may well be both.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It doesn't have to be one or the other, it may well be both.



I guess it is the same for Harry, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

CeeJay said:


> I am NOT at all surprised; many Americans have NO CLUE as to Geography which is so sad .. but I do think it depends on where you grew up and obviously, the education one got.  Typically, when you grow up in New England, you are very well aware of World Geography, especially when it comes to Great Britain, Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Northern Ireland, etc. -- because, many of the folks have that ancestry (1/2 of mine).  In addition, many have ancestry from other countries in Europe - Italy, Portugal, Spain, France, Germany, etc.  I had to take (and pass) various tests in Geography, Country Capitals as well as have proficiency in at least 2 languages besides English (thank god I could use Italian for one of them - the other was Latin)!
> 
> I find that out here where I am, not as many folks are as well versed re: Europe because many have Asian ancestry (so they do know that part of the world).  The HB and I have managed to get some major European finds at Estate Sales because the folks out here just don't know as much about the artifacts (good for us)!!


It reminds me of a song by a Chilean group, Los Prisioneros: Latinoamerica es un pueblito al sur the los Estados Unidos (Latinamerica is a little town south of the USA), it seems that for some there is nothing beyond Tijuana


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Reading that Harry's passion is "helping disadvantaged people" made me sad for him. He would have a much better chance of fulfilling his passion as part of the BRF imo.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'won't ever want a way back' into the royal family after she and Prince Harry 'burnt significant bridges beyond repair' because it's no place for someone with political ambition, royal expert claims*
> She added that it's likely 'he will find his way back' one day as *it took a long time for the prince to discover his talents*.


That's lovely.  I'm glad he's discovered them.  Maybe he'll now want to share his talents with everyone?


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> What has she achieved anyway? Qualifications are a bare minimum. We don't value royalty so if that's her main achievement she's not going to get far... having people agree with you isn't enough. You need them to respect you and trust you based on a track record. Kim Kardashian would have better credentials having built a giant empire.


At this rate, I say Kris Jenner for president!  That woman may not have the best morals (let's face it, I don't think morality runs rampant in most politicians), but damn she can make an empire out of nothing but a golden shower.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> It doesn't have to be one or the other, it may well be both.


Yes.  I wish Charles had paid as much attention to Harry as he paid to his organic gardening. Harry should have had more oversight when growing up.  There was a lack of discipline with him  which is evidenced by things he says and does.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> You know it's a shame we have to give the side eye to the motives behind everything they do. This is a nice story that might help promote this woman's business but I hope it wasn't done for self-serving purposes by H&M.
> 
> *Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business*
> When the year started, Taylor Jay would have no idea that one of her creations would be worn by the Duke of Sussex. But the coronavirus pandemic has been anything but predictable.
> 
> Prince Harry recently wore one of her Champagne and Honey face coverings, posing with runners in Los Angeles before they ran a virtual version of the London Marathon.
> View attachment 4871268
> 
> Jay is one of the many proud, Black-owned businesses in the Bay Area that was forced to adapt quickly to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. What she originally envisioned to be a women's clothing brand at the beginning of the year, Taylor Jay Collections adjusted to start making masks, and taking orders online.
> 
> The Bay Area native had hoped to run her clothing store on the corner of Broadway and 24th, with a packed calendar of events throughout the year, but a Prince Harry sighting with one of her newly-made products must be nice as well.
> 
> When ABC7 News profiled Taylor's journey as a Black small business owner, she told us about her pandemic transition, assisted by a grant from the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce, which ensured that her business would keep going too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business
> 
> 
> ROYALLY GOOD NEWS! Prince Harry was just seen wearing a mask designed by a Black-owned business from Oakland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abc7news.com



Does it irritate anyone else that celebrities get kudos just for wearing things? I get that they can bring a lot of business/attention to those who need it but geez this stuff gets more attention than the people who've been doing the work all their lives. I eye roll whenever they say Meghan supported XYZ small business because she wore a damn bracelet... great for that business but can we stop saying she's some philanthropist because of it? Wearing stuff is not an achievement.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> .. and I bet I know exactly where you are because at one time, it was an area that I had to travel to for business and boy-oh-boy, WOW .. unbelievable .. for example:
> 
> He says - "_you talk funny - you from England_?"
> I reply - "_no, I'm from New England originally_"
> He says - "_that's what I said - England_"
> I replied - "_no, New England, that region in the United States_?"
> He replies - "yeah, England - like I said"
> Needless to say, since this was a "business" meeting, I stopped that conversation cold .. but YIKES!  When I talked to one of his colleagues, he told me "oh well, you know .. Jimma stopped schooling in the 6th grade" .. HOLY CRAP!


LOL, I was in a business meeting and we were just making small talk at first.  One woman asked another woman if she'd gone to visit her daughter in Florida (we were in the US).  She responded by saying, "I don't like to travel internationally".  The room went dead silent.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> At this rate, I say Kris Jenner for president!  That woman may not have the best morals (let's face it, I don't think morality runs rampant in most politicians), but damn she can make an empire out of nothing but a golden shower.



The woman is a force!.  How many people can make that much money and create fame for her family when they have no real talents other than showing up in front of a camera.  Either she is a genius, or her advisers are platinum plated.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> You know it's a shame we have to give the side eye to the motives behind everything they do. This is a nice story that might help promote this woman's business but I hope it wasn't done for self-serving purposes by H&M.
> 
> *Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business*
> When the year started, Taylor Jay would have no idea that one of her creations would be worn by the Duke of Sussex. But the coronavirus pandemic has been anything but predictable.
> 
> Prince Harry recently wore one of her Champagne and Honey face coverings, posing with runners in Los Angeles before they ran a virtual version of the London Marathon.
> View attachment 4871268
> 
> Jay is one of the many proud, Black-owned businesses in the Bay Area that was forced to adapt quickly to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. What she originally envisioned to be a women's clothing brand at the beginning of the year, Taylor Jay Collections adjusted to start making masks, and taking orders online.
> 
> The Bay Area native had hoped to run her clothing store on the corner of Broadway and 24th, with a packed calendar of events throughout the year, but a Prince Harry sighting with one of her newly-made products must be nice as well.
> 
> When ABC7 News profiled Taylor's journey as a Black small business owner, she told us about her pandemic transition, assisted by a grant from the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce, which ensured that her business would keep going too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry spotted wearing face mask made by Oakland Black business
> 
> 
> ROYALLY GOOD NEWS! Prince Harry was just seen wearing a mask designed by a Black-owned business from Oakland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abc7news.com


I'm happy for her that she's getting a shoutout, but is this really news worthy??  The brand of a face mask?  Are you F'ing kidding me?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> At this rate, I say Kris Jenner for president!  That woman may not have the best morals (let's face it, I don't think morality runs rampant in most politicians), but damn she can make an empire out of nothing but a golden shower.



Oh Kris would get sh*t done, no doubt about that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, I was in a business meeting and we were just making small talk at first.  One woman asked another woman if she'd gone to visit her daughter in Florida (we were in the US).  She responded by saying, "I don't like to travel internationally".  The room went dead silent.



Wait, 2 ways to interpret that — one racist, xenophobic and the other, laughing in a lighthearted way at someone’s ignorance.  Which way are we going here?


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> At this rate, I say Kris Jenner for president!  That woman may not have the best morals (let's face it, I don't think morality runs rampant in most politicians), but damn she can make an empire out of nothing but a golden shower.





gracekelly said:


> The woman is a force!.  How many people can make that much money and create fame for her family when they have no real talents other than showing up in front of a camera.  Either she is a genius, or her advisers are platinum plated.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh Kris would get sh*t done, no doubt about that.



Kris is incredible. I believe she was "just" a SAHM before the fame, right? Of course that's hard work but it's not like she had great business training or expertise to build on... she propelled herself while raising 6 kids. I can barely imagine working while having 1 child, much less 6 AND learning a new job AND growing it to become an empire - AND making sure all 6 kids became multi-millionaires themselves by 30. The lady has my respect.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Does it irritate anyone else that celebrities get kudos just for wearing things? I get that they can bring a lot of business/attention to those who need it but geez this stuff gets more attention than the people who've been doing the work all their lives. I eye roll whenever they say Meghan supported XYZ small business because she wore a damn bracelet... great for that business but can we stop saying she's some philanthropist because of it? Wearing stuff is not an achievement.



Yes, particularly when the celebrity is often given the items they are wearing/promoting by the companies.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm happy for her that she's getting a shoutout, but is this really news worthy??  The brand of a face mask?  Are you F'ing kidding me?



To be fair it was a local news channel’s story. Now if it is picked up tomorrow by People and Vanity Fair we’ll know Sunshine Sachs has been hard at work.


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> Kris is incredible. I believe she was "just" a SAHM before the fame, right? Of course that's hard work but it's not like she had great business training or expertise to build on... she propelled herself while raising 6 kids. I can barely imagine working while having 1 child, much less 6 AND learning a new job AND growing it to become an empire - AND making sure all 6 kids became multi-millionaires themselves by 30. The lady has my respect.



Her late husband was a tremendous cut throat celebrity attorney.  If even only 3% of him rubbed off on her, she learned A LOT and executed that knowledge. Kudos to her! I read also that when she met Bruce Jenner, it was her that morphed him into a much more successful corporate and circuit speaker. Then of course he eventually became Caitlyn. That's a heck of a whirlwind journey but then I also read about a Navy Seal that also underwent a sex change (now Kristin Beck). But yes, Kris is a force of nature. I like her. Especially when asked in an interview how does she handle all of the criticism? She answered, "I'm a very blessed person".  That was a classy answer. (not sayin' all the K stuff, err...could be called "classy", but Kris is a smart and calculating person. With an actual personality.)


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I'm happy for her that she's getting a shoutout, but is this really news worthy??  The brand of a face mask?  Are you F'ing kidding me?





lalame said:


> Does it irritate anyone else that celebrities get kudos just for wearing things? I get that they can bring a lot of business/attention to those who need it but geez this stuff gets more attention than the people who've been doing the work all their lives. I eye roll whenever they say Meghan supported XYZ small business because she wore a damn bracelet... great for that business but can we stop saying she's some philanthropist because of it? Wearing stuff is not an achievement.




Since he was given it after meeting them for PR purposes he shouldn't have have been given any kudos. In fact he should have gone there wearing (any) mask and just kept it on

Same meet.

NOT earring mask and we have a story about the London Marathon




Suddenly wearing mask and we have a whole new story a couple of days later about masks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Since he was given it after meeting them for PR purposes he shouldn't have have been given any kudos. In fact he should have gone there wearing (any) mask and just kept it on
> 
> Same meet.
> 
> NOT earring mask and we have a story about the London Marathon
> 
> View attachment 4871679
> 
> 
> Suddenly wearing mask and we have a whole new story a couple of days later about masks
> 
> View attachment 4871680


Ironic MONEY is writ large on those race numbers.  All Sussexcesses are about these days.


----------



## chicinthecity777

We knew she was going to use the title!

Gloria Steinem tells Ellen how Meg ended up introducing herself as The Duchess of Sussex to the people they were cold calling... [03:10]  Really...?!?? Using the title to speak to potential voters in the US...?!?? Because Markle wasn't enough...!!


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> We knew she was going to use the title!
> 
> Gloria Steinem tells Ellen how Meg ended up introducing herself as The Duchess of Sussex to the people they were cold calling... [03:10]  Really...?!?? Using the title to speak to potential voters in the US...?!?? Because Markle wasn't enough...!!



Interesting how Ellen quickly skated past that 
“It was Meghan’s idea...”  No kidding


----------



## chicinthecity777

Pessie said:


> Interesting how Ellen quickly skated past that
> “It was Meghan’s idea...”  No kidding


Of course it was! SMH!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> We knew she was going to use the title!
> 
> Gloria Steinem tells Ellen how Meg ended up introducing herself as The Duchess of Sussex to the people they were cold calling... [03:10]  Really...?!?? Using the title to speak to potential voters in the US...?!?? Because Markle wasn't enough...!!




Did you expect anything else?


----------



## Chanbal

A few sentences from a nice article confirming that the UK has "the 'right' brother as heir in line to the throne":

*RICHARD KAY: Prince William's 'Earthshot' prize proves he's a world away from Prince Harry*

For a brief moment Prince William steps out of his royal role and abandons the instinctive caution that usually colours his pronouncements, to show that his passion for preserving the planet is matched by his pragmatism. 

His intervention with the establishment of an elaborately funded and ambitious Nobel-style international prize to recognise the ideas and technologies that may safeguard all our futures, does not just mark his emergence as a major player on the global environmental stage. 

It also demonstrates that he has grasped the immense influence he exerts. 

And in an instant it serves to dramatically highlight the chasm between his ideas and approach and those of Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex. 

While Harry and Meghan have antagonised many with their woke agenda, their hectoring manner and their hypocrisy, William has quietly pursued his ideals with modesty and an easy smile. It has been the same with his response to the Covid-19 pandemic. 

From California, the Sussexes risked compromising the impartiality of the Royal Family with their bizarre claims that the scale of the health crisis had been exaggerated by the media — the media they despise, of course. Contrast that with the actions of William, Kate and their children. 

Week after week during lockdown, they led the nation's response to the selfless courage of the NHS and other key workers as they joined in the clap for carers from the doorstep of their Norfolk home. 

And by allowing the focus to fall as much on George, Charlotte and Louis, they did it with grace and generosity. 

Photographs of George and his sister helping to deliver meals and other supplies to elderly neighbours on the Sandringham estate were not just charming, but a public relations triumph. 

In video calls and on Zoom, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have also demonstrated an instinct for divining the mood of the nation with timely contributions. 

This is a coming of age for Prince William and reflects a maturity, growing confidence and an ability to show leadership on an issue on which his brother's attempts to articulate a stance have been muddled to say the least. (Remember how those lectures from Harry on climate change and global warming coincided with him using private jets?) 

And while William showed a very human side by allowing his children to royally upstage him in their engaging chat with David Attenborough about spiders and monkeys, Harry was triggering another storm — this time about the U.S. election. 

It was once said that when it came to the Queen and Princess Margaret we got the 'right' sister for monarch. 

Many are now amending that pithy observation to argue that when it comes to William and Harry we have the 'right' brother as heir in line to the throne.


Will vs Harry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well said. Wills and Kate really rose to the occasion, and I admire their parenting style (as in, they have the perfect balance of affording the kids privacy and as normal of a childhood as it goes when you're the next heir to the throne, but also not kicking up a fuss because the public wants to see a picture now and then and just providing them themselves).


----------



## marietouchet

A1aGypsy said:


> Honestly, I think many people in this thread downplay Charles ambition.
> 
> He’s not in the background because of illness or age but rather because he is preparing to assume the throne and he knows any significant gesture has the potential to destabilize the on-going relevance of the monarchy.


This week Charles quietly flew off to the Gulf States, I think, a head of state died and C presented condolences...Charles was gone so W&K entertained a different head of state in London
Spur of the moment diplomatic trip - required - but his last condolence trip - maybe 6 mos ago - was on the list of most expensive trips due to private plane, last minute planning etc
I do not think the trip made the list of engagements in the Times, but foreign trips often do not, for security reasons
So, he is doing his job, which can  be expensive, and he is keeping a low profile, This is a good example of unavoidable cost of the UK head of state

Yes, he is preparing to be king, he has reorganized the Duchy of Cornwall business

He has been covering for QEII for months , as have W&K


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet  If only Charles could get the messy personal stuff behind him, he is ready and has been ready for the top job.


----------



## bag-mania

Ladies, the Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy strike again! Although in reality none of the royals are particularly eco-conscious. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry top the Royal Family's gas-guzzling league says energy firm after couple's African tour generated hefty carbon footprint*

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are 'least eco-friendly Royals', a survey claims*
*Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged less with environmental charities and engagements than other Royals between March 2019 and 2020*
*They also had the third-worst carbon footprint, producing 'six tonnes of CO2'*
*Prince Charles has the worst travel footprint of the 10 Royals considered*
*Energy firm SaveOnEnergy surveyed eco-credentials of top Royals including the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles and Camilla, and Prince William and Kate *
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been branded the least eco-friendly Royals by an energy firm which found that their African tour generated a hefty carbon footprint. 

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged considerably less with environmental charities and engagements between March 2019 and last March than the other Royals, while they also had the third-worst carbon footprint, producing an estimated three tonnes of CO2 each as a result of their trip around Africa. 

An energy comparison firm has also found that Prince Charles, who has a reputation for being environmentally conscious, has the worst travel footprint of the 10 Royals considered, producing an estimated nine tonnes of CO2 in the last year.

Prince William, who has launched a prestigious global environment prize to reverse the effects of climate change in the next decade, has the second-worst travel footprint, producing an estimated five tonnes of CO2.

SaveOnEnergy's surveyed the eco-credentials of the Queen, Prince Philip, Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, Prince William and Kate Middleton, Harry and Meghan, Princess Anne and Prince Edward.

The firm worked out which members of the Royal Family are the most and least eco-friendly by extracting and analysing data on their travel carbon footprint, environmental patronages, environmental engages and eco-conscious lifestyle choices. 




It then devised a scoring system which awarded or deducted points from the Royals based on their environmental ethos and practice.

SaveOnEnergy also found that Meghan, Kate Middleton and Harry are least supportive of environmental charities, with none or two links to groups while Charles is involved with 69 eco-friendly charities.

Meanwhile Prince Philip and the Duchess of Sussex participated in no environmental engagements in the last year, while the Queen managed to attend two.

Charles attended the most environmental engagements, 14 in the past year – which could account for why his estimated travel footprint is so high. Camilla and Prince Edward came in second, attending 11 fewer engagements than the Prince of Wales.

However, Meghan has the most sustainable fashion record, with 10 reported instances of the Duchess wearing sustainable brands including Stella McCartney, Rothy, Veja and Millie.

The Duchess of Cambridge came in second, with six reported instances of Kate wearing sustainable fashion brands like Beulah London and Daniella Draper.

Princess Anne placed in third after been spotted three times in eco-friendly brands or recycling outfits. Following behind in joint fourth are the Queen and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, with just one instance of both Royals opting for sustainable clothing according to the media.

The survey also found that most Royals are 'active' on social media, with Prince Charles and Camilla being the most vocal of all – making 69 posts on Twitter and Instagram containing words like 'sustainable', 'warming', 'recycling' and 'environmental'.



The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were also keen to speak about eco-issues online, with a total of 21 environment-related social media posts each. Prince Harry was also vocal about environmental issues online, earning a total of 10 points in the Eco-Friendly Royals Index.

The Queen mentioned eco-issues nine times on social media, while Meghan made just five references to eco-related matters online.

SaveOnEnergy found mentions in the media of just five Royals using an electric car – Charles, Philip, Kate, Harry and Meghan.

Energy expert Linda Dodge from SaveOnEnergy told MailOnline: 'The environment is one of the most pressing issues of our times and we all must play our part in taking responsibility and being more eco-friendly. 

'This is particularly true of influential figures in society such as the Royal Family.' 

To determine the carbon footprint of each royal, SaveOnEnergy referenced the Royal Travel Report to find the trips made year ending March 31 this year.

It compared CO2 emissions in both years by using the Royal Travel Report for the year ending March 31, 2019. The list only considers trips costing at least £15,000.

SaveOnEnergy chose to exclude Prince Andrew from this campaign and study.









						Meghan and Harry 'top the Royal Family's gas-guzzling league'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged less with environmental charities  between March 2019 and 2020 than the other Royals, and had the third-worst carbon footprint, an energy firm says.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> We knew she was going to use the title!
> 
> Gloria Steinem tells Ellen how Meg ended up introducing herself as The Duchess of Sussex to the people they were cold calling... [03:10]  Really...?!?? Using the title to speak to potential voters in the US...?!?? Because Markle wasn't enough...!!




God I wish TPF had an eye-roll reaction. I need something between "Haha" and "Angry" for moments like these. And how ironic that she pulls out the title while discussing Americans' civic duty.


----------



## Ettena

rose60610 said:


> Her late husband was a tremendous cut throat celebrity attorney.  If even only 3% of him rubbed off on her, she learned A LOT and executed that knowledge. Kudos to her! I read also that when she met Bruce Jenner, it was her that morphed him into a much more successful corporate and circuit speaker. Then of course he eventually became Caitlyn. That's a heck of a whirlwind journey but then I also read about a Navy Seal that also underwent a sex change (now Kristin Beck). But yes, Kris is a force of nature. I like her. Especially when asked in an interview how does she handle all of the criticism? She answered, "I'm a very blessed person".  That was a classy answer. (not sayin' all the K stuff, err...could be called "classy", but Kris is a smart and calculating person. With an actual personality.)



True! I find it hard to respect the Kardashian clan, but damn do they know how to hustle. Kourtney though... She needs to stop complaining, it's killing me how ungrateful and whiny she is compared to the other members of the family. Building fame can't be easy, even though it seems like it from the outside.


----------



## 1LV

lalame said:


> God I wish TPF had an eye-roll reaction. I need something between "Haha" and "Angry" for moments like these. And how ironic that she pulls out the title while discussing Americans' civic duty.


Maybe you will get your eye-roll and I’ll get my Amen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ettena said:


> True! I find it hard to respect the Kardashian clan, but damn do they know how to hustle. Kourtney though... She needs to stop complaining, it's killing me how ungrateful and whiny she is compared to the other members of the family. Building fame can't be easy, even though it seems like it from the outside.



It takes a wise woman: 
_The matriarch has always pushed her kids into expanding their brand, from everything to trying out music careers to fashion designing, and in return, Kris gets 10%._








						Kris Jenner Is A Genius Who Wanted You To Hate Her All Along
					

Say what you want about the Kardashians, but there are undeniable estimates that the California clan is worth somewhere in the billions of dollars. You may not like them, but you can't deny that is some serious cache. But here is something you may not know: Kris Jenner is the mastermind behind...




					www.ranker.com


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> God* I wish TPF had an eye-roll reaction*. I need something between "Haha" and "Angry" for moments like these. And how ironic that she pulls out the title while discussing Americans' civic duty.



 Don't forget about this little guy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ettena

bag-mania said:


> Yes, particularly when the celebrity is often given the items they are wearing/promoting by the companies.



Not to mention they have a whole team of stylists telling them down to their nailpolish what to wear. News outlets in my country often have headlines like "the princess showed up in a coat worth over two thousand bucks!" or something along those lines. Yeah, she was probably gifted it for free by the brand, I doubt she use our tax money to buy haute couture... I honestly expect the royals to look good and represent my country with pride, I don't want the rest of the world to think we live in a communistic wasteland because the queen is wearing fast fashion or ill fitting clothes. They're our mascots, they ought to look good, and they should plan what to wear in public settings. But ditching the crown because fame was more important than duty... Not even gonna go there - actually, I am. Meghan got exactly what she wanted. What's the word I'm looking for... Opportunist?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Don't forget about this little guy!


  can this work for Amen?


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Does it irritate anyone else that celebrities get kudos just for wearing things? I get that they can bring a lot of business/attention to those who need it but geez this stuff gets more attention than the people who've been doing the work all their lives. I eye roll whenever they say Meghan supported XYZ small business because she wore a damn bracelet... great for that business but can we stop saying she's some philanthropist because of it? Wearing stuff is not an achievement.


Even worse, is that many times the celebs are "gifted" the merchandise .. simply because a picture of wearing said merchandise will be published and the maker will get "publicity".  On a flight back to LA from Boston, I sat next to a woman who was a Celeb Agent, and she told me what I would "have to do" in order to get my Jewelry publicity.  Honestly, I was rather outraged .. these are the gosh-darn people who can AFFORD high-end Jewelry, and I'm just supposed to give it to them .. so that my name gets into a magazine???  Heck NO!  I told her "you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry - no discounts and no gifting"!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> God I wish TPF had an eye-roll reaction. I need something between "Haha" and "Angry" for moments like these. And how ironic that she pulls out the title while discussing Americans' civic duty.


Gosh-darn-it-all .. I wish she had cold-called me because if she had the gall to use that title with me, she would get a WORD-SLAPPING (no salad) from me!!!!!  HS and University Debate Team head?!?! .. yeah, go ahead and try to beat me MM!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, 2 ways to interpret that — one racist, xenophobic and the other, laughing in a lighthearted way at someone’s ignorance.  Which way are we going here?


Well, I personally was shocked that she, as a US citizen, didn't realize Florida was part of the US, and that she didn't "have to travel internationally".


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Well, I personally was shocked that she, as a US citizen, didn't realize Florida was part of the US, and that she didn't "have to travel internationally".



I was always shocked yet entertained by these Jay Leno Jaywalking videos.
This one is on geography -


----------



## 1LV

Just read that K. McPhee & D. Foster are expecting a baby.  Harry’s gonna be a big brother!!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I was always shocked yet entertained by these Jay Leno Jaywalking videos.
> This one is on geography -



THIS WAS MY ABSOLUTE favorite part of his show; however, it was rather sad to see how stupid many of these people were.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From a Sept, 2020 Newsweek article. Gloria points out the issue with “Princess“


Spoiler: Steinem on Markle



*Meghan Markle's 'Princess' Status 'is a Problem,' Gloria Steinem Says*
By Jack Royston  On 9/22/20 at 11:37 AM EDT
Meghan Markle cold-called voters with Gloria Steinem―and the feminist icon claims her friend's "princess" status "is a problem."

The Duchess of Sussex sat down with the journalist and activist in her backyard to talk about the importance of voting for digital magazine _Makers Women_ in August.

Steinem has revealed the pair also got their phones out to ring Americans and urge them to go to the ballot box in November.

She showered Meghan with praise but also spoke out against the monarchy, saying "we had a revolution to get rid of royalty."

Steinem told _Access Hollywood_: "She has a kind of stereotype hanging over her head ― which is 'princess'.

"*The whole idea of 'princess,' you know, is a problem. I mean, we had a whole revolution to get rid of royalty.*

"So, Meg is herself―smart, authentic, funny, political.

"She came home to vote and the first thing we did, and why she came to see me, was we sat at the dining room table where I am right now and we cold-called voters.

"Said 'hello I'm Meg' and 'hello I'm Gloria' and 'are you going to vote?' That was her initiative."
Meghan still holds the title Princess Henry of Wales, which was given to her when she married Harry in May 2018, despite stepping back from royal duties.

She has also previously listed her occupation as "Princess of the United Kingdom" prior to quitting as a senior working royal.

While Harry and Meghan relinquished their public funding and formal royal roles, they have never publicly denounced the Monarchy.

They remain president and vice president of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust and in a January speech the prince revealed he had hoped to continue serving Queen Elizabeth II.


At a London event for his charity, Sentebale, he said: "Our hope was to continue serving the Queen, the Commonwealth, and my military associations, but without public funding.

"Unfortunately, that wasn't possible."

He added: "I was born into this life, and it is a great honor to serve my country and the Queen."

During Meghan's chat with Steinem, the actress revealed that Prince Harry proudly told the activist that he is a feminist too.

She said: "I look at our son and what a beautiful example that he gets to grow up with a father who is so comfortable owning that as part of his own self-identification.

"That there's no shame in being someone who advocates for fundamental human rights for everyone, which of course includes women."










						Meghan Markle's 'Princess' Status 'is a Problem,' Gloria Steinem Says
					

Meghan Markle's 'princess' status was a 'stereotype hanging over her head,' Gloria Steinem says after the pair cold-called voters together.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Just read that K. McPhee & D. Foster are expecting a baby.  Harry’s gonna be a big brother!!



Bwahaha, I was just going to post that H's new stepmom is expecting!


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> THIS WAS MY ABSOLUTE favorite part of his show; however, it was rather sad to see how stupid many of these people were.


I remember in my day and age at school, we had to take a whole YEAR of world geography.  A lot of our assignments were making maps where we had to draw in the mountains, rivers, valleys, etc in annoying messy color coded India ink.  I hated it but Because of that class, I get the Jeopardy questions on geography right almost always.


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, they actually got a win in court for a change. Make of it what you will.

*Harry and Meghan Get an Apology After Suing Paparazzi*
*A celebrity news agency in Los Angeles also agreed to turn over photos of the couple’s young son and destroy its copies after a settlement in an invasion-of-privacy case.*

The case of the unauthorized backyard photographs of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor has been solved. And the legal outcome, unveiled on Thursday by his parents, Prince Harry and Meghan, has left one of Hollywood’s biggest paparazzi agencies with its tail between its legs.

In July, the couple filed an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit over photographs taken with a drone and zoom cameras of the 14-month-old Archie as he played with his maternal grandmother in their backyard. At the time, the family was staying at a secluded estate in Beverly Hills owned by the entertainment mogul Tyler Perry. They did not name the defendants in the lawsuit because they did not know who they were.

The filing allowed their lawyer, Michael J. Kump, to send fact-finding subpoenas to the three biggest celebrity news agencies in Los Angeles: Backgrid, Splash News and X17.

The culprit turned out to be X17, which, according to a settlement agreement filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, has agreed to turn over the photos to the family, destroy any copies in its archives or databases and never again traffic in any photos of the couple or their son taken by similar means “in any private residence or the surrounding private grounds.”

François Navarre, who owns X17 with his wife, Brandy, also agreed to apologize. X17 will also pay a portion of the family’s legal fees, according to Mr. Kump.

In blunt terms, Harry and Meghan, who have clashed repeatedly with the British news media over privacy concerns, sent a stark message to American paparazzi agencies with the case: You come after us, and we will come after you.

“We apologize to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son for the distress we have caused,” X17 said in a statement. “We were wrong to offer these photographs and commit to not doing so again.”

Mr. Kump said in a statement, “All families have a right, protected by law, to feel safe and secure at home.”

The couple, who resettled in California this year after a dramatic decampment from the House of Windsor, sued under a so-called paparazzi law, by which a person can be held liable civilly for intruding airspace to take photographs of a person on private property. The law was enacted in 1998 and last updated in 2015. It also covers wild driving by celebrity photographers while stalking their subjects — the kind of behavior that bedeviled Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, who died in 1997 after her sedan crashed while trying to escape paparazzi on motorcycles.

Harry and Meghan — beloved by millions of fans, who see them as daring and modern, and vilified by an equally vehement faction that sees their tradition-spurning actions as unbecoming — have taken an unusually hard-line approach with the tabloid news media. In April, complaining of “an economy of click bait and distortion” and coverage that was “distorted, false and invasive beyond reason,” they told four leading British tabloid publishers that they would no longer deal with them. Meghan has sued the publisher of The Mail on Sunday, the sister paper of The Daily Mail, for publishing a private letter that she had sent to her estranged father in 2018. Another lawsuit, aimed at Splash News, involves photographs that were taken of Meghan and Archie this year in Vancouver, British Columbia.

In the X17 case, Harry and Meghan discovered that someone was shopping photos of their son to outlets around the world and had claimed they had been taken in public, according to the complaint, which noted that Archie had not been in public since the family arrived in Southern California. The photographs were published in the German magazine Bunte. Lawyers for the couple were able to move quickly enough to prevent their publication in the United States and Britain, however.

“Some paparazzi and media outlets have flown drones a mere 20 feet above the house, as often as three times a day, to obtain photographs of the couple and their young son in their private residence (some of which have been sold and published),” the lawsuit said. “Others have flown helicopters above the backyard of the residence, as early as 5:30 a.m. and as late as 7:00 p.m., waking neighbors and their son, day after day. And still others have even cut holes in the security fence itself to peer through it.”

X17 describes itself on its website as “Hollywood’s leading celebrity photo agency, servicing tens of thousands of media outlets around the world with our high quality photos and videos.” Variety magazine has characterized the operation as “a veritable spider web of photographers and undercover informants.” In 2003, Mr. Navarre had to pay Jennifer Aniston $550,000 to settle an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit over photos of her sunbathing topless in her backyard.

“Yeah, sure, it’s always a question of private life versus public life,” Mr. Navarre told The Los Angeles Times in 2007. “But you have an easy way to escape that. Get out of Los Angeles."

In August, Harry and Meghan did just that, moving from Mr. Perry’s home in Beverly Hills to one in Montecito, an oceanside enclave about an hour northwest of Malibu. The couple bought the seven-acre estate for $14.7 million. It is gated and shrouded by trees.

The paparazzi helicopters have followed.









						Harry and Meghan Get an Apology After Suing Paparazzi (Published 2020)
					

A celebrity news agency in Los Angeles also agreed to turn over photos of the couple’s young son and destroy its copies after a settlement in an invasion-of-privacy case.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Aimee3

1LV said:


> Just read that K. McPhee & D. Foster are expecting a baby.  Harry’s gonna be a big brother!!


Wonder if Foster will make the baby be quiet while Foster is playing the piano


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Even worse, is that many times the celebs are "gifted" the merchandise .. simply because a picture of wearing said merchandise will be published and the maker will get "publicity".  On a flight back to LA from Boston, I sat next to a woman who was a Celeb Agent, and she told me what I would "have to do" in order to get my Jewelry publicity.  Honestly, I was rather outraged .. these are the gosh-darn people who can AFFORD high-end Jewelry, and I'm just supposed to give it to them .. so that my name gets into a magazine???  Heck NO!  I told her "you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry - no discounts and no gifting"!


Remember the Sharon Stone lawsuit?  Harry Winston gave her diamond stud earrings to wear on loan to an event (Oscars?) and she refused to return them. They sued her  to get them back. I believe it actually went to court. She said that she should be allowed to keep them because SHARON STONE wore them and gave them  publicity. In the end she gave them back, but she was able to wear them for at least a year!


Yes, it annoys me to no end seeing them wear the clothes for free that I/we are expected to pay for.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> THIS WAS MY ABSOLUTE favorite part of his show; however, it was rather sad to see how stupid many of these people were.


Our shining future leaders.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Even worse, is that many times the celebs are "gifted" the merchandise .. simply because a picture of wearing said merchandise will be published and the maker will get "publicity".  On a flight back to LA from Boston, I sat next to a woman who was a Celeb Agent, and she told me what I would "have to do" in order to get my Jewelry publicity.  Honestly, I was rather outraged .. these are the gosh-darn people who can AFFORD high-end Jewelry, and I'm just supposed to give it to them .. so that my name gets into a magazine???  Heck NO!  I told her "you can consider me the Hermes of Jewelry - no discounts and no gifting"!


I remember, going back many years, Oprah went on her show and crowed that she got her Robert Lee Morris jewellery for free and since it was the '80s, he was extremely popular and very expensive. (This was before he cheapened himself with generic QVC stuff.)

Anyway, giving a very rich woman free jewellery and then her bragging about it turned me off O forever.  lol


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Her late husband was a tremendous cut throat celebrity attorney.  If even only 3% of him rubbed off on her, she learned A LOT and executed that knowledge. Kudos to her! I read also that when she met Bruce Jenner, it was her that morphed him into a much more successful corporate and circuit speaker. Then of course he eventually became Caitlyn. That's a heck of a whirlwind journey but then I also read about a Navy Seal that also underwent a sex change (now Kristin Beck). But yes, Kris is a force of nature. I like her. Especially when asked in an interview how does she handle all of the criticism? She answered, "I'm a very blessed person".  That was a classy answer. (not sayin' all the K stuff, err...could be called "classy", but Kris is a smart and calculating person. With an actual personality.)


Are we talking about Rob Sr?  Because if we are, he was not a cut throat celebrity attorney, he gave up his lawyer license and went into the music business and did moderately well, but not great.

If we're not talking about Rob Sr, who are we talking about?  lol


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Are we talking about Rob Sr?  Because if we are, he was not a cut throat celebrity attorney, he gave up his lawyer license and went into the music business and did moderately well, but not great.
> 
> If we're not talking about Rob Sr, who are we talking about?  lol


I don't claim to know a lot about him but he was portrayed in the OJ movie as being pretty decent


----------



## rose60610

Rob K reactivated his law license to help defend OJ Simpson, who'd been a good friend and best man at his wedding. As such he couldn't be called to testify in the Simpson trial. Kinda ballsy.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Remember the Sharon Stone lawsuit?  Harry Winston gave her diamond stud earrings to wear on loan to an event (Oscars?) and she refused to return them. They sued her  to get them back. I believe it actually went to court. She said that she should be allowed to keep them because SHARON STONE wore them and gave them  publicity. In the end she gave them back, but she was able to wear them for at least a year!
> 
> 
> Yes, it annoys me to no end seeing them wear the clothes for free that I/we are expected to pay for.


I hope she had to pay their lawyers' fees.  If that's not an example of over the top entitlement, I don't know what is.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Remember the Sharon Stone lawsuit?  Harry Winston gave her diamond stud earrings to wear on loan to an event (Oscars?) and she refused to return them. They sued her  to get them back. I believe it actually went to court. She said that she should be allowed to keep them because SHARON STONE wore them and gave them  publicity. In the end she gave them back, but she was able to wear them for at least a year!
> 
> 
> Yes, it annoys me to no end seeing them wear the clothes for free that I/we are expected to pay for.


Totally annoying, and it annoys me just as much that bloggers get free stuff to shove down my throat!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Rob K reactivated his law license to help defend OJ Simpson, who'd been a good friend and best man at his wedding. As such he couldn't be called to testify in the Simpson trial. Kinda ballsy.


True, he did do that, but not sure he was a "cutthroat" celebrity attorney.  I think Kris has the real brains in that family.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I hope she had to pay their lawyers' fees.  If that's not an example of over the top entitlement, I don't know what is.



And at the very least it likely made Winston and other jewelers write up a strong contract saying "OMG  we know you're God's gift, but really we expect the stuff back immediately after the award show on said date."


----------



## Chanbal

Another Zoom crash by the infamous couple:

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will join activist Malala Yousafzai for virtual chat about the importance of women's right to education to mark International Day of the Girl*

The news comes days after a body language expert claimed the Duchess showed signs that she 'doesn't like being told she's not the only powerful woman' during a recent Fortune's virtual summit.

Ms Yousafzai was shot in the head by a Taliban gunman at the age of 15 after campaigning for girls to be educated in her native Pakistan. Malala, who was airlifted to Britain after the shooting and made a full recovery. 

She later founded the non-profit fund to support her work raising awareness of the difficulties facing girls accessing education, and went on to become the youngest-ever Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2014.

While Prince Harry previously met with Malala at the 2014 WE Day assembly in London, it is unknown if Meghan has ever spoken with the activist before. 

Taking advantage of Malala???


----------



## bag-mania

*Spoof 'Meghan Markle for President 2020' website appears using her real quotes promising to bring 'equality, empowerment, and kindness' in the 'confrontational world we live in'*

*Spoof 'Meghan for President' website has been set up ahead of US election *
*Fake site claims royal is set to be in the running to become next US President*
*Site features several photographs of Duchess along with inspirational quotes *
A spoof 'Meghan for President' website has been set up claiming that the royal is going to be competing against Donald ***** and Joe ***** in a bid to become the next US President.   

The website, which is called meghanforpresident.com and features photographs of the Duchess of Sussex, 38, at several engagements, appeared just weeks before US voters are due to vote in the presidential election.

A post, which is thought to have been written by fans of the royal and has been falsely credited to the Duchess of Sussex, claims Meghan opted to run for President 'after months of reflection and internal discussions.'

It reads: 'After many months of reflection and internal discussions, I have heard your calls to become President of the United States of America. 





'It is with your encouragement, particularly over the last few months, that I feel prepared to make this decision.'

'With your support I believe we can bring equality, empowerment, and kindness to this dangerous, aggressive and confrontational world we live in.'

Elsewhere, the website features a 'contribute' tab which encourages users to get involved in the campaign - but the link doesn't actually lead anywhere. 

The post also features a series of powerful quotes - including: 'Together, we will lead. We will lead with love. We will lead with compassion. We will use our voice. We will lead. Together.'

Another reads: 'A brighter tomorrow begins today. We are going to rebuild, rebuild and rebuild until it is rebuilt. Because when the foundation is broken, so are we.'

It also includes direct quotes that Meghan has previously used - including comments from a 2015 interview with InStyle where she said: 'I’ve also learned that saying 'no' is just as valuable as saying 'yes.' It’s something that, I think, comes with age and really having a sense of your self-worth.'

However. many were quick to take to social media to say that the Duchess of Sussex shouldn't run for President while she she maintains her royal title, while others were excited by the mere prospect. 

'I can’t see the US wanting a president that has a British Royal title,' wrote one, while a second commented: 'This should be enough to get the titles dropped.'

A third added: 'Could this be a possibility in 2024?'

The spoof website comes after Prince Harry and Meghan called on American voters to 'reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity' in 'the most important election of our life.' 

Their comments, which came in a Time 100 video to go with the publication of this year's list of the most influential people, have been widely interpreted to be a swipe at U.S. president Donald *****. The list does not include the royal couple.

Members of the royal family are supposed to be politically neutral, and under the Sandringham accord - agreed in March when the pair quit their royal duties - the Sussexes vowed that 'everything they do will uphold the values of Her Majesty'.









						Spoof 'Meghan Markle for President 2020' appears
					

A fake 'Meghan for President' website has been set up claiming that the royal, 39, has decided to run for President 'after months of reflection and internal discussions.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Another Zoom crash by the infamous couple:
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will join activist Malala Yousafzai for virtual chat about the importance of women's right to education to mark International Day of the Girl*
> 
> The news comes days after a body language expert claimed the Duchess showed signs that she 'doesn't like being told she's not the only powerful woman' during a recent Fortune's virtual summit.
> 
> Ms Yousafzai was shot in the head by a Taliban gunman at the age of 15 after campaigning for girls to be educated in her native Pakistan. Malala, who was airlifted to Britain after the shooting and made a full recovery.
> 
> She later founded the non-profit fund to support her work raising awareness of the difficulties facing girls accessing education, and went on to become the youngest-ever Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2014.
> 
> While Prince Harry previously met with Malala at the 2014 WE Day assembly in London, it is unknown if Meghan has ever spoken with the activist before.
> 
> Taking advantage of Malala


She'll probably tell all that she's Malalas mentor


----------



## CobaltBlu

those quotes are hilarious.


----------



## Aimee3

rose60610 said:


> And at the very least it likely made Winston and other jewelers write up a strong contract saying "OMG  we know you're God's gift, but really we expect the stuff back immediately after the award show on said date."
> [/QUOT
> 
> Maybe that’s why the big name high end jewelers send “guards” along with the jewelry so that at the end of the evening, the guard takes the loaned pieces back!


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> those quotes are hilarious.



Only the very freshest word salad, one statement after another that sounds nice but means nothing!


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Revealed: How Prince Harry made an 'embarrassing' faux pas when he placed an arm around Malala Yousafzai at a charity event - and he even received a telling off from her MOTHER*









						Prince Harry made embarrassing faux pas while meeting Malala Yousafzai
					

The Duke of Sussex met Malala Yousafzai while back stage at the We Day assembly at the Wembley Arena, London, back in 2014.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







yes, this is how he looked at the event


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

1LV said:


> Just read that K. McPhee & D. Foster are expecting a baby.  Harry’s gonna be a big brother!!


The both have their anchor babies now, so the child support and maintenance is locked in. Now onto their next bigger better richer husbands!


----------



## CeeJay

1LV said:


> Just read that K. McPhee & D. Foster are expecting a baby.  Harry’s gonna be a big brother!!


GROSS! .. now she will have her 'meal' ticket just like her BFF Meghan!


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> I remember in my day and age at school, we had to take a whole YEAR of world geography.  A lot of our assignments were making maps where we had to draw in the mountains, rivers, valleys, etc in annoying messy color coded India ink.  I hated it but Because of that class, I get the Jeopardy questions on geography right almost always.


Same .. and I LOVED making the maps, but having artistic abilities sure was helpful!


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> Another Zoom crash by the infamous couple:
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will join activist Malala Yousafzai for virtual chat about the importance of women's right to education to mark International Day of the Girl*
> 
> The news comes days after a body language expert claimed the Duchess showed signs that she 'doesn't like being told she's not the only powerful woman' during a recent Fortune's virtual summit.
> 
> Ms Yousafzai was shot in the head by a Taliban gunman at the age of 15 after campaigning for girls to be educated in her native Pakistan. Malala, who was airlifted to Britain after the shooting and made a full recovery.
> 
> She later founded the non-profit fund to support her work raising awareness of the difficulties facing girls accessing education, and went on to become the youngest-ever Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2014.
> 
> While Prince Harry previously met with Malala at the 2014 WE Day assembly in London, it is unknown if Meghan has ever spoken with the activist before.
> 
> Taking advantage of Malala???


I predict M will talk 90% of the time, word salads, Malala will get 7% and H will squeeze in 3% of empty phrases.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Remember the Sharon Stone lawsuit?  Harry Winston gave her diamond stud earrings to wear on loan to an event (Oscars?) and she refused to return them. They sued her  to get them back. I believe it actually went to court. She said that she should be allowed to keep them because SHARON STONE wore them and gave them  publicity. In the end she gave them back, but she was able to wear them for at least a year!
> 
> 
> Yes, it annoys me to no end seeing them wear the clothes for free that I/we are expected to pay for.


Oh yes, I do remember that!!!  Given that I have had many friends who have worked high-end retail (especially in Jewelry), the stories that they have told me are priceless.  Sharon Stone?? .. totally expect that behavior from her, but some of the worst celeb's would be surprising to many here.  When I moved out to LA and planned to do some trunk shows, I was 'warned' by many Shop/Boutique owners about certain celebrities and not to be surprised when they bring up the "gift me" or "I'll pay wholesale" lines.  I told all of them that my response will be "I will politely decline your offer - thank you".  Just PISSES me off because, as I said, they can afford the high-end pieces and that's what all of my pieces are!  Arrrrgggghhhh!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> I remember, going back many years, Oprah went on her show and crowed that she got her Robert Lee Morris jewellery for free and since it was the '80s, he was extremely popular and very expensive. (This was before he cheapened himself with generic QVC stuff.)
> 
> Anyway, giving a very rich woman free jewellery and then her bragging about it turned me off O forever.  lol


I heard the "real" story about Oprah and that "Hermes incident" years ago, as my French colleague's sister worked AT THAT Boutique!  It did not happen as Oprah said it did, and that was it for me (until another friend told me that she had worked for Oprah and what had happened to her).  I do not like Oprah, she is a fake (gee - I guess that is why she and Meghan get along so well -- peas in a pod)!


----------



## gracekelly

I have some Robert Lee Morris pieces pre QVC shopping network, but his doing that was the kiss of death for me every buying his things again.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Rob K reactivated his law license to help defend OJ Simpson, who'd been a good friend and best man at his wedding. As such he couldn't be called to testify in the Simpson trial. Kinda ballsy.


Ballsy - so he wouldn’t be called to testify about hiding the evidence we all saw him walking with.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> GROSS! .. now she will have her 'meal' ticket just like her BFF Meghan!


Interesting, DF has five grown daughters ...


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Interesting, DF has five grown daughters ...


Harry's sisters?


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> *Spoof 'Meghan Markle for President 2020' website appears using her real quotes promising to bring 'equality, empowerment, and kindness' in the 'confrontational world we live in'*
> 
> *Spoof 'Meghan for President' website has been set up ahead of US election *
> *Fake site claims royal is set to be in the running to become next US President*
> *Site features several photographs of Duchess along with inspirational quotes *
> A spoof 'Meghan for President' website has been set up claiming that the royal is going to be competing against Donald ***** and Joe ***** in a bid to become the next US President.
> 
> The website, which is called meghanforpresident.com and features photographs of the Duchess of Sussex, 38, at several engagements, appeared just weeks before US voters are due to vote in the presidential election.
> 
> A post, which is thought to have been written by fans of the royal and has been falsely credited to the Duchess of Sussex, claims Meghan opted to run for President 'after months of reflection and internal discussions.'
> 
> It reads: 'After many months of reflection and internal discussions, I have heard your calls to become President of the United States of America.
> 
> View attachment 4872189
> View attachment 4872190
> 
> 
> 'It is with your encouragement, particularly over the last few months, that I feel prepared to make this decision.'
> 
> 'With your support I believe we can bring equality, empowerment, and kindness to this dangerous, aggressive and confrontational world we live in.'
> 
> Elsewhere, the website features a 'contribute' tab which encourages users to get involved in the campaign - but the link doesn't actually lead anywhere.
> 
> The post also features a series of powerful quotes - including: 'Together, we will lead. We will lead with love. We will lead with compassion. We will use our voice. We will lead. Together.'
> 
> Another reads: 'A brighter tomorrow begins today. We are going to rebuild, rebuild and rebuild until it is rebuilt. Because when the foundation is broken, so are we.'
> 
> It also includes direct quotes that Meghan has previously used - including comments from a 2015 interview with InStyle where she said: 'I’ve also learned that saying 'no' is just as valuable as saying 'yes.' It’s something that, I think, comes with age and really having a sense of your self-worth.'
> 
> However. many were quick to take to social media to say that the Duchess of Sussex shouldn't run for President while she she maintains her royal title, while others were excited by the mere prospect.
> 
> 'I can’t see the US wanting a president that has a British Royal title,' wrote one, while a second commented: 'This should be enough to get the titles dropped.'
> 
> A third added: 'Could this be a possibility in 2024?'
> 
> The spoof website comes after Prince Harry and Meghan called on American voters to 'reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity' in 'the most important election of our life.'
> 
> Their comments, which came in a Time 100 video to go with the publication of this year's list of the most influential people, have been widely interpreted to be a swipe at U.S. president Donald *****. The list does not include the royal couple.
> 
> Members of the royal family are supposed to be politically neutral, and under the Sandringham accord - agreed in March when the pair quit their royal duties - the Sussexes vowed that 'everything they do will uphold the values of Her Majesty'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoof 'Meghan Markle for President 2020' appears
> 
> 
> A fake 'Meghan for President' website has been set up claiming that the royal, 39, has decided to run for President 'after months of reflection and internal discussions.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Would she expect Americans to call her President Duchess?


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Revealed: How Prince Harry made an 'embarrassing' faux pas when he placed an arm around Malala Yousafzai at a charity event - and he even received a telling off from her MOTHER*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry made embarrassing faux pas while meeting Malala Yousafzai
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex met Malala Yousafzai while back stage at the We Day assembly at the Wembley Arena, London, back in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4872292
> 
> 
> yes, this is how he looked at the event



What a dope.


----------



## Chanbal

*'TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE'*

The Duke of Cambridge, who with wife Kate yesterday met Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky, has fronted the documentary A Planet For Us All. And today he will be interviewed on BBC Radio 4’s Today with veteran campaigner Sir David Attenborough.

The Earthshot Prize

While his younger brother JCMH was having a 3-hour dinner with his new vegan family at a "pricey steakhouse in Montecito"

McPhee and Foster arrived first at Lucky's at 7:20pm, while Harry and Meghan pulled up 10 minutes later in a chauffeured SUV with security.

The Hollywood woke couple


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal Notice MM is wearing her coat on her shoulders and covering her stomach.  She’ll do anything to steal someone’s joy. Absolutely anything.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Harry's sisters?


Half sisters , and each one had an opinion on the DF video , Netflix , I think , don’t shoot me for mentioning that streaming channel ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Picture from the Daily Mail. Plastic pants seem to be her newest 'thing'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

HaHa!  What we wear to an exclusive Montecito restaurant:

MM = Plastic pants, wrinkled coat, sloppy hair, merching the bag
H = untucked (for half-tuck?), rolled up sleeves, no tie





bellecate said:


> View attachment 4872419
> 
> 
> Picture from the Daily Mail. Plastic pants seem to be her newest 'thing'.


----------



## chowlover2

CarryOn2020 said:


> HaHa!  What we wear to an exclusive Montecito restaurant:
> 
> MM = Plastic pants, wrinkled coat, sloppy hair, merching the bag
> H = untucked (for half-tuck?), rolled up sleeves, no tie


And what I believe are Manolo mules. What a hot mess...


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> Same .. and I LOVED making the maps, but having artistic abilities sure was helpful!


I have large handwriting and there was never enough room on the darn map to write the names of every darn mountain and river.  India ink is permanent and my fingers were full of it.  Too bad we didn’t know each other then. You could’ve made my maps and I would’ve done your other homework!!!


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> Would she expect Americans to call her President Duchess?



I would lose all respect for anyone who did. Fortunately it’s never going to come up.


----------



## mdcx

I see Harry has given his one grey polo shirt the night off.


----------



## mdcx

I believe M's shoes are the Manolo Blahnik Maysale Jewel 40 Mule.
*

*


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal Notice MM is wearing her coat on her shoulders and covering her stomach.  She’ll do anything to steal someone’s joy. Absolutely anything.



She really loves to get the pregnancy speculation going, even for the umpteenth time.  I guess they are thrilled they finally found other celebrities willing to socialize and be seen with them.


----------



## pukasonqo

lanasyogamama said:


> What a dope.


 The incident w Malala happened in 2014


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> The incident w Malala happened in 2014



His pre-woke years. Just show up looking a bit rough, touch all the girlies because, ya kno, he doesn’t need to respect anyone’s boundaries.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> View attachment 4872419
> 
> 
> Picture from the Daily Mail. *Plastic pants seem to be her newest 'thing'.*



Very eco-vegan friendly and so appropriate for a steakhouse!


----------



## scarlet555

CeeJay said:


> I heard the "real" story about Oprah and that "Hermes incident" years ago, as my French colleague's sister worked AT THAT Boutique!  It did not happen as Oprah said it did, and that was it for me (until another friend told me that she had worked for Oprah and what had happened to her).  I do not like Oprah, she is a fake (gee - I guess that is why she and Meghan get along so well -- peas in a pod)!


Spill!


----------



## duna

1LV said:


> Just read that K. McPhee & D. Foster are expecting a baby.  Harry’s gonna be a big brother!!



Excuse my ignorance, but who are these people?? I'm obviously not American


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but who are these people?? I'm obviously not American


I have no clue either, lol, I keep seeing their names and because of their involvement with H&M I can't be bothered googling them, lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She went to the same school as MM (although a few years later), was on a singer talent show and has starred in TV series (I did watch Scorpion when it was on German TV). He is a big fish actually, Canadian songwriter, composer and producer. He was nominated for a Grammy nearly 50 times and won 16 or so. He was married to Yolanda Hadid before McPhee but quickly checked out of that marriage when Yolanda inconvenienced him by (is it by or with?) becoming sick.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

chowlover2 said:


> And what I believe are Manolo mules. What a hot mess...



Manolo mules which cost over $2000.....Actually I just checked the Royal Fashion thread, they are AED 3,650, whatever that is....well, it sounds like a lot anyway ( besides the fact that I wouldn't be seen dead in them...)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Manolo mules which cost over $2000.....Actually I just checked the Royal Fashion thread, they are AED 3,650, whatever that is....well, it sounds like a lot anyway ( besides the fact that I wouldn't be seen dead in them...)



AED 3650 is about $995.


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> Manolo mules which cost over $2000.....Actually I just checked the Royal Fashion thread, they are AED 3,650, whatever that is....well, it sounds like a lot anyway ( besides the fact that I wouldn't be seen dead in them...)





QueenofWrapDress said:


> AED 3650 is about $995.


In any case, very eco-friendly and down to earth shoes! Not elite at all!


----------



## RAINDANCE

A very perceptive comment to the Macphee/Foster news yesterday 

_When a person has 4 ex-spouses, I don't care if their BS victim stories are true or not, the problem is NOT (just) the exes. But I suspect McPhee knew this and was just looking for *her 'propeller man'* (man that takes a virtual 'nobody' and helps propel them into the 'somebody' they tried and failed to become on their own). _

I find it very sad that Prince Harry has become this - a propeller man. Not excusing him in anyway for his own 50% contribution to their mess but they could, as a couple, have done so much good if their joint neediness for more (money, fame, adulation, attention) and complete lack of self-awareness had not run riot. 

Neither appear to understand the difference between popularity and importance. IMO there needs to be a very real discussion about the line of succession in the UK. In Norway, it is limited to 7, being the king's two children and their children. This would of course not cut Harry or Archie out but I personally believe he should stand down (or be stood down) if he is to continue down a commercial path - can't have it both ways !


----------



## Pessie

duna said:


> Manolo mules which cost over $2000.....Actually I just checked the Royal Fashion thread, they are AED 3,650, whatever that is....well, it sounds like a lot anyway ( besides the fact that I wouldn't be seen dead in them...)


 I really like her shoes! The rest of the outfit though, is the usual rumpled, crumpled, scruffy affair.


----------



## 1LV

duna said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but who are these people?? I'm obviously not American


Sorry for any confusion.  Katharine McPhee and David Foster.  Katharine is an (American) actress/singer married to (Canadian) David, a big time music producer.


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> I have no clue either, lol, I keep seeing their names and because of their involvement with H&M I can't be bothered googling them, lol


MM & Harry’s current “best friends”.  K said D is like a father to H.  I’m positive Meghan and Katharine would be devastated to know Katharine and David aren’t as famous as they think they are.


----------



## 1LV

jennlt said:


> Would she expect Americans to call her President Duchess?


US President Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex and Princess of the United Kingdom.  (Didn’t she show her occupation as Princess of the UK on something?)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> US President Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex and Princess of the United Kingdom.  (Didn’t she show her occupation as Princess of the UK on something?)



Archie's birth certificate, but that was probably not in her hands really.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Archie's birth certificate, but that was probably not in her hands really.


Oh.  It sounded like something she would do.


----------



## Annawakes

I still think M has pipe dreams of the presidency just to one-up Kate.  One can tell she detests being lower in rank to Kate.  (So much for “linked not ranked”.)

I don’t believe she is truly interested in politics anyway.  She just wants to swan around and be praised for changing the world.  But not really do anything about it except fluffy zoom calls and inserting herself in the newest news.


----------



## jennlt

1LV said:


> US President Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex and Princess of the United Kingdom.  (Didn’t she show her occupation as Princess of the UK on something?)



I was being facetious. The normal form of address is the honorific of "President" followed by the person's last name but in this case, I believe she'd prefer to use both titles rather than a mere last name. Because, you know, she's linked not ranked.


----------



## 1LV

jennlt said:


> I was being facetious. The normal form of address is the honorific of "President" followed by the person's last name but in this case, I believe she'd prefer to use both titles rather than a mere last name. Because, you know, she's linked not ranked.


So was I.  Lol!  She seems to bring out that side in most of us here.  The next question is which song would be played when she makes her grand entrance?


----------



## Pessie

1LV said:


> So was I.  Lol!  She seems to bring out that side in most of us here.  The next question is which song would be played when she makes her grand entrance?


My way!


----------



## 1LV

Pessie said:


> My way!


I’ve got to hand it to her.  Her way is working great for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

When she was still HRH — 








						Royal Baby Archie's Birth Certificate Was Just Released
					

The document officially confirms where he was born.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> I still think M has pipe dreams of the presidency just to one-up Kate.  One can tell she detests being lower in rank to Kate.  (So much for “linked not ranked”.)
> 
> I don’t believe she is truly interested in politics anyway.  She just wants to swan around and be praised for changing the world.  But not really do anything about it except fluffy zoom calls and inserting herself in the newest news.



H&M could have been part of Wills‘ Earthshot which looks to be the real thing. It has been compared to the 90s LiveAid = a cool thing.
Coulda woulda shoulda.


ETA:  All any princess needs to do is waltz in, twirl, sprinkle fairy dust, twirl and leave.  Surely, MM can twirl.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M could have been part of Wills‘ Earthshot which looks to be the real thing. It has been compared to the 90s LiveAid = a cool thing.
> Coulda woulda shoulda.



But then she couldn't have been queen bee.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> When she was still HRH —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Baby Archie's Birth Certificate Was Just Released
> 
> 
> The document officially confirms where he was born.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4872891


LOL, she still is, unfortunately


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, she still is, unfortunately



But but but, she cannot use it, right?


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> You can see the incredible amount of stress on their faces that day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4870071
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Well with the exception of one of them.


except for the actress


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> But but but, she cannot use it, right?


That's right, and I'm sure she's gutted she can't use it even though she still is one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> That's right, and I'm sure she's gutted she can't use it even though she still is one.



Wonder what they will put on the next child’s certificate for the titles and jobs? Grifters extraordinaire? 
Perhaps they won’t release that one to the public.


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but who are these people?? I'm obviously not American


David Foster is an insanely successful music producer for Celine Dion, Streisand etc but with an insanely large ego, he just financed his own biopic on Netflix , on his fifth , or so, marriage to a woman half his age which is around 70, he has five grown daughters
DF used to be married to Yolanda, mother of Gigi and Bella Hadid, the models 
His latest wife, Katherine McPhee, made her name on a reality tv competition show, whose name I cannot remember, and went to the same school as MM, but the ladies did not know each other well back then 
If you want to know more , the biopic is a great place to start, I went through the 2 hr show in like 10 min, he has an overbearing, egotistical manner, not my thing, but insanely talented


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder what they will put on the next child’s certificate for the titles and jobs? Grifters extraordinaire?
> Perhaps they won’t release that one to the public.


They won't have to, they'll be "private citizens" by then.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> David Foster is an insanely successful music producer for Celine Dion, Streisand etc but with an insanely large ego, he just financed his own biopic on Netflix , on his fifth , or so, marriage to a woman half his age which is around 70, he has five grown daughters
> DF used to be married to Yolanda, mother of Gigi and Bella Hadid, the models
> His latest wife, Katherine McPhee, made her name on a reality tv competition show, whose name I cannot remember, and went to the same school as MM, but the ladies did not know each other well back then
> If you want to know more , the biopic is a great place to start, I went through the 2 hr show in like 10 min, he has an overbearing, egotistical manner, not my thing, but insanely talented


yes, I saw him on some tv show years ago....came across as full of himself and rather pompous.....I recall he bragged about working with Boz Scaggs and I think that probably isn't something Boz would be bragging about


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> While his younger brother JCMH was having a 3-hour dinner with his new *vegan family* at a "*pricey steakhouse* in Montecito"


Anyone else see the absurd irony here?!?!?! .. 2 Vegan's go to a Steakhouse?!?!?!


----------



## Annawakes

CeeJay said:


> Anyone else see the absurd irony here?!?!?! .. 2 Vegan's go to a Steakhouse?!?!?!


Are they really vegan?  What does a vegan order at a fancy steakhouse??  Salads????????

their lies are so confusing I can’t keep up


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Are they really vegan?  What does a vegan order at a fancy steakhouse??  Salads????????
> 
> their lies are so confusing I can’t keep up


I'm sure you can order a salad at a steak house - and maybe a baked potato.  maybe H still eats meat


----------



## Chanbal

If this is true : *Congressman demands UK government strip Meghan and Harry of their royal titles accusing them of using being called Prince and Duchess to 'interfere' in U.S. election

Shocked, stupefied and surprised.*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> If this is true : *Congressman demands UK government strip Meghan and Harry of their royal titles accusing them of using being called Prince and Duchess to 'interfere' in U.S. election
> 
> Shocked, stupefied and surprised.*


oh please
I'm not a fan of H&M but this guy should go do some work for his constituents.....really? he has time for this?


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure you can order a salad at a steak house - and maybe a baked potato.  maybe H still eats meat


She probably ordered a word salad!


----------



## marietouchet

Deleted


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Vegan is one of those specialty diets , where it is super hard to eat out unless you go to a vegan restaurant ... keto is similar
> Eating out with a friend on one if those diets - arghhhhh - it takes 2 hrs to pick the restaurant , and 4 hrs to order everything specially cooked
> I am old school - you eat what is in front of you - and never ask for special treatment , I am just mortified of all the special requirements
> And I too have been on a diet forever - allergies - I am just quiet about my needs ..


yes I guess vegan is different than just vegetarian.....maybe she just had water


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Deleted


I have a "special" diet due to medical reasons, but in general .. can eat at pretty much any type of restaurant .. I just make sure that I can have things "on the side" or make minor modifications.  So true though .. I have a vegan friend, and about the only thing we can do together (pre-COVID) was have coffee!  Just way too difficult to have any meal with her.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> oh please
> I'm not a fan of H&M but this guy should go do some work for his constituents.....really? he has time for this?


Never heard about this guy before and I am speechless...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> oh please
> I'm not a fan of H&M but this guy should go do some work for his constituents.....really? he has time for this?


But, that is the exact procedure to follow... a USA request/complaint would get Boris Johnson's attention. Then the British gov't in consultation with BP would either go ahead or nix it.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> But, that is the exact procedure to follow... a USA request/complaint would get Boris Johnson's attention. Then the British gov't in consultation with BP would either go ahead or nix it.


right....but really (and again I'm not a fan of these two) - are they interfering in any meaningful way?  and doesn't this guy have something better to spend his time on with a pandemic going on?


----------



## 1LV

Apparently we aren’t the only ones *****ing about the titles and voting speeches.


----------



## csshopper

First, William establishes himself as a leader, following a 2 year study on how best to proceed, on issues of the environment and announced the "Earthshot Environment Prize" plus showcasing his work with Sir David Attenborough. The antithesis of the Grifters who  in an instant open mouths and spew platitudes without ever planning, let alone spending 2 years in development of a concept into fruition.

Then in an article posted on the Harpers Bazaar website October 4th, we learn William has been supporting this group, The Passage, for years and very clearly, without any word salad can state why it's important to him.

*Prince William Pens Cookbook Foreword Celebrating Homeless Charity's 40th Anniversary*

Prince William has written the foreword for A Taste of Home, a new cookbook from The Passage, the U.K.'s largest resource center for homeless and insecurely housed people. The organization is releasing the book to celebrate its 40th anniversary—a history that William has seen much of, as he first visited the charity alongside his mother, Princess Diana, in 1993.

 "The visits I made as a child to this place left a deep and lasting impression upon me—about how important it is to ensure that everyone in our society, especially the poorest, are treated with respect, dignity and kindness, and are given the opportunities to fulfil their potential in life," he said in a statement at the time.

MAJOR shade to the platitude spouting whiners. They become more irrelevant each week.

Re: a separate article on the Foster/Sussex dinner. David must really look forward to time with JCMH who is too dim witted to provide much conversation of interest, thus giving David the audience he craves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps the Nflix deal has really upset his constituents?
I’ve never heard of the guy, so who knows. I have warned about overexposure — they have done it to themselves. Zero sympathy.

ETA:  We now know MM has had some shady _friends_.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> yes I guess vegan is different than just vegetarian.....maybe she just had water


Vegan means no animal products eg egg , milk , butter 
The issue is that those are used as undisclosed ingredients in everything


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> If this is true : *Congressman demands UK government strip Meghan and Harry of their royal titles accusing them of using being called Prince and Duchess to 'interfere' in U.S. election
> 
> Shocked, stupefied and surprised.*



I mentioned the possibility of this happening weeks ago... this is why I said she needed to stop using that title in political stuff and Harry needed to stay out of it.


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> I mentioned the possibility of this happening weeks ago... this is why I said she needed to stop using that title in political stuff and Harry needed to stay out of it.


While I totally agree that this Congressman has BETTER things to do than this, this just makes me laugh .. silly!!!


----------



## kemilia

duna said:


> Manolo mules which cost over $2000.....Actually I just checked the Royal Fashion thread, they are AED 3,650, whatever that is....well, it sounds like a lot anyway ( besides the fact that I wouldn't be seen dead in them...)


Am I the only one that can't walk well in heeled mules? I wear (shuffle) them in and carry them out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Hey, they inserted themselves into the election by using a national TV appearance (which was supposed to be about influential people and NOT about politics) to make their political statement. They opened themselves up to criticism and now they have it. If they can't handle a little heat maybe being social justice warriors isn't for them. 

And sure the congressman has better things to do, but I'm not exactly upset that he took the time to make a stink about it.


----------



## kemilia

marietouchet said:


> David Foster is an insanely successful music producer for Celine Dion, Streisand etc but with an insanely large ego, he just financed his own biopic on Netflix , on his fifth , or so, marriage to a woman half his age which is around 70, he has five grown daughters
> DF used to be married to Yolanda, mother of Gigi and Bella Hadid, the models
> His latest wife, Katherine McPhee, made her name on a reality tv competition show, whose name I cannot remember, and went to the same school as MM, but the ladies did not know each other well back then
> If you want to know more , the biopic is a great place to start, I went through the 2 hr show in like 10 min, he has an overbearing, egotistical manner, not my thing, but insanely talented


What I remember about him from the Real Housewives of Bev Hills is his piano literally covered with Grammys and Yolanda calling him "her king"--just before he dumped her due to her contracting Lyme disease. What a winner.


----------



## kemilia

marietouchet said:


> Vegan means no animal products eg egg , milk , butter
> The issue is that those are used as undisclosed ingredients in everything


Yep, being dairy intolerant I have found that things like dried milk are used in many prepared/processed foods so I always take a lactose type pill before eating anything I'm not sure about (learned the hard way with my love of cinnamon-crunch bagels from Panera--immediate bloating).


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Hey, they inserted themselves into the election by using a national TV appearance (which was supposed to be about influential people and NOT about politics) to make their political statement. They opened themselves up to criticism and now they have it. If they can't handle a little heat maybe being social justice warriors isn't for them.
> 
> And sure the congressman has better things to do, but I'm not exactly upset that he took the time to make a stink about it.


Again, Amen.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kemilia said:


> Am I the only one that can't walk well in heeled mules? I wear (shuffle) them in and carry them out.


I don't wear them anymore. Stopped a long time ago... they went flip, flop, slide; flip, flop, slide; flip, flop slide into the garbage...


----------



## Sol Ryan

CeeJay said:


> While I totally agree that this Congressman has BETTER things to do than this, this just makes me laugh .. silly!!!





bag-mania said:


> Hey, they inserted themselves into the election by using a national TV appearance (which was supposed to be about influential people and NOT about politics) to make their political statement. They opened themselves up to criticism and now they have it. If they can't handle a little heat maybe being social justice warriors isn't for them.
> 
> And sure the congressman has better things to do, but I'm not exactly upset that he took the time to make a stink about it.



I never said it was a valid complaint... just that there would be complaints of foreign interference if they used their titles in politics.  I think it’s dumb too... but I think it’s dumber that H&M are using their titles in the US.

We are living in crazy times...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> *Prince William Pens Cookbook Foreword Celebrating Homeless Charity's 40th Anniversary*



I might order it, the list of contributors is really interesting (e.g. my favourite food writer Yotam Ottolenghi).


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Are they really vegan?  What does a vegan order at a fancy steakhouse??  Salads????????
> 
> their lies are so confusing I can’t keep up


Plastic is not echo-friendly. It'll kills all animals in the end, ncluding humans.


----------



## lalame

I don't think they're vegans... did they say so or where does that come from? IIRC there was much ado made about Meghan's "famous" roasted chicken that apparently made Harry fall in love with her or whatever. She also pointed out her favorite fish monger on a video tour of Toronto once.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> David Foster is an insanely successful music producer for Celine Dion, Streisand etc but with an insanely large ego, he just financed his own biopic on Netflix , on his fifth , or so, marriage to a woman half his age which is around 70, he has five grown daughters
> DF used to be married to Yolanda, mother of Gigi and Bella Hadid, the models
> His latest wife, Katherine McPhee, made her name on a reality tv competition show, whose name I cannot remember, and went to the same school as MM, but the ladies did not know each other well back then
> If you want to know more , the biopic is a great place to start, I went through the 2 hr show in like 10 min, he has an overbearing, egotistical manner, not my thing, but insanely talented



I watched that too! He says himself he was a jackass to his previous wives and regrets doing the things he did. The biopic shows a pretty honest look at all his personality flaws, with his children and even Katherine talking about them. I think he's the epitome of that arrogant genius persona.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't think they're vegans... did they say so or where does that come from? IIRC there was much ado made about Meghan's "famous" roasted chicken that apparently made Harry fall in love with her or whatever. She also pointed out her favorite fish monger on a video tour of Toronto once.



Not sure if she ever actually claimed to be vegan and then bailed on it later or if she just spewed rhetoric about it. From _InTouch _magazine Meghan "has previously waxed lyrical about the benefits of following a plant-based ethical lifestyle." So if she hasn't outright said it, she implied it enough where it was generally believed she was vegan.


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> Anyone else see the absurd irony here?!?!?! .. 2 Vegan's go to a Steakhouse?!?!?!



This sounds like the beginning of a legit joke.  You nailed it CeeJay!  I’m surprised there wasn’t some paparazzi in the restaurant to tell us what they ordered!


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> *Are they really vegan? * What does a vegan order at a fancy steakhouse??  Salads????????
> 
> their lies are so confusing I can’t keep up



Whether the duchess is vegan or not has generated controversy. Here is an article that may address your question: *Meghan Markle's daily diet revealed: what the Duchess loves to eat *with the input of our dearest Omid!

to be or not to be vegan


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Whether the duchess is vegan or not has generated controversy. Here is an article that may address your question: *Meghan Markle's daily diet revealed: what the Duchess loves to eat *with the input of our dearest Omid!
> 
> to be or not to be vegan



Yeah I'm going to say not a vegan


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't think they're vegans... did they say so or where does that come from? IIRC there was much ado made about Meghan's "famous" roasted chicken that apparently made Harry fall in love with her or whatever. She also pointed out her favorite fish monger on a video tour of Toronto once.


I thought he fell in love when she peed in the woods


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Yeah I'm going to say not a vegan



Could she be considered a part-time vegan?  Or is Archie the vegan one?

*Meghan Markle angers the Queen with vegan plans for Archie - Is raising a baby vegan safe? *

Meghan and Harry are known for their alternative lifestyle choices and try to avoid animal by-products.

Recent reports that they’re planning to raise little Archie Harrison as a vegan have received a mixed response.

But given Meghan is a practising vegan herself, at least in part, there is no reason why she wouldn’t be able to give Archie the healthiest start possible.

part-time vegan?


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Yeah I'm going to say not a vegan


and why would she say she tries to eat vegan a lot of the time as opposed to vegetarian?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Could she be considered a part-time vegan?  Or is Archie the vegan one?
> 
> *Meghan Markle angers the Queen with vegan plans for Archie - Is raising a baby vegan safe? *
> 
> Meghan and Harry are known for their alternative lifestyle choices and try to avoid animal by-products.
> 
> Recent reports that they’re planning to raise little Archie Harrison as a vegan have received a mixed response.
> 
> But given Meghan is a practising vegan herself, at least in part, there is no reason why she wouldn’t be able to give Archie the healthiest start possible.
> 
> part-time vegan?


who says the queen is angry over this?  why would she care?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I thought *he fell in love* when she peed in the woods


I thought it was a toss-up between the roast chicken and peeing in the woods. It's so life-altering, we should probably vote on it.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> who says the queen is angry over this?  why would she care?


I've no idea, and from the same article: "A royal insider told The Sun: “Meghan keeps pushing the boundaries with the Royals and it’s not being well-received, least of all by Her Majesty."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I've no idea, and from the same article: "A royal insider told The Sun: “Meghan keeps pushing the boundaries with the Royals and it’s not being well-received, least of all by Her Majesty."


IDK who's putting this out there.  Again, I don't like her but if she wants to feed the kid veggies, I see no harm in it.  I actually feel bad about eating meat from the perspective of the killing of the animals but I still do it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I've no idea, and from the same article: "A royal insider told The Sun: “Meghan keeps pushing the boundaries with the Royals and it’s not being well-received, least of all by Her Majesty."


The Queen has better things to do than this. The royal insider is probably total bs and just H&MM trying to appear relevant.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Can someone tell me is there a bandwagon MM hasn't jumped on?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> IDK who's putting this out there.  Again, I don't like her but if she wants to feed the kid veggies, I see no harm in it.  I actually feel bad about eating meat from the perspective of the killing of the animals but I still do it.





Maggie Muggins said:


> The Queen has better things to do than this. The royal insider is probably total bs and just H&MM trying to appear relevant.


agree with the above


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Anyone else see the absurd irony here?!?!?! .. 2 Vegan's go to a Steakhouse?!?!?!


The irony continues...Stella vegan bag and she is wearing shoes with leather soles.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> IDK who's putting this out there.  Again, I don't like her but if she wants to feed the kid veggies, I see no harm in it.  I actually feel bad about eating meat from the perspective of the killing of the animals but I still do it.



I stopped eating red meat this year and don't even miss it anymore.  If that's ever on the roadmap for you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I thought it was a toss-up between the roast chicken and peeing in the woods. It's so life-altering, we should probably vote on it.




Is Ina out of the picture now? Their stories change so fast my head spins!










						I Made Meghan Markle’s Engagement Chicken and Now I’m in Love
					

With myself.




					www.thecut.com
				




_Markle isn’t the first to experience the amorous powers of roast chicken. In 2004, Glamour popularized the concept of Engagement Chicken, a roast chicken so exquisitely delicious, it will make your partner propose to you after you make it.

Is that what Meghan had in mind the night Harry proposed? I’m not sure. But there’s a good chance she used the celebrated recipe of another royal: Ina of the House Garten, First of Her Name (Maybe), the Barefoot Contessa, Queen of Entertaining and the Food Network, Khaleesi of East Hampton, Breaker of Diets, and Lover of Jeffrey. In an interview with Good Housekeeping in 2016, Meghan said, “There is nothing as delicious (or as impressive) as a perfectly roasted chicken. If you have an Ina Garten-level roasted-chicken recipe, it’s a game changer. I bring that to parties and make a lot of friends.”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

David Foster — 5 marriages, 5 daughters
Looks like the longest was to Linda Thompson, mother of Jenner‘s sons
Looks like he has connections too several, well-connected, prominent Hwood families.  Definitely getting a ‘propeller man’ vibe.









						David Foster - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_Foster has been married five times and has five biological daughters and seven grandchildren. His first child, Allison Jones Foster (b. 1970), was born when David was 20. He placed her for adoption and reconnected with her when she was 30.[38] His first marriage was to singer and writer B.J. Cook.[39] Cook and Foster had one daughter together, Amy Skylark (b. 1973), a songwriter and author.[39]

He married his second wife, Rebecca Dyer, on October 27, 1982, and they divorced in 1986.[40] They had three daughters: Sara (b. 1981), Erin (b. 1982), and Jordan. Foster is the father-in-law of former professional tennis player Tommy Haas, who is married to Sara.

He married his third wife, actress Linda Thompson, in 1991 and divorced in 2005.[41] The two became a songwriting team, collaborating on several songs, including "I Have Nothing", performed by Whitney Houston in The Bodyguard (1992), and "Grown-Up Christmas List".[42] Foster was stepfather to Brody and Brandon Jenner (Linda's sons with Caitlyn Jenner), who both grew up living in his Malibu home. Both Jenner boys did a short-lived TV reality show called The Princes of Malibu at Foster and Thompson's home, starring themselves, Thompson, and Foster.

In 1992, Foster was driving a Chevrolet Suburban on the Pacific Coast Highway when he struck actor and dancer Ben Vereen, who was walking along the highway near his Malibu home. Vereen was critically injured, but recovered after going through physical rehabilitation.[43][44]

Foster married his fourth wife, Dutch model Yolanda Hadid in Beverly Hills, California, on November 11, 2011.[45] David had three stepchildren from Yolanda Foster's previous marriage to Mohamed Hadid:, Gigi (b. 1995), Bella (b. 1996), and Anwar (b. 1999). On December 1, 2015, Foster announced that after four years of marriage and nine years together, he and Yolanda had made the decision to divorce.[46] The divorce was finalized in May 2017.[47]

In June 2018, Foster became engaged to Katharine McPhee of American Idol fame.[48] On June 28, 2019, Foster and McPhee married at the Armenian Church of St Yeghiche, South Kensington in London.[49] On October 8, 2020, it was reported that Foster and McPhee were expecting their first child together.

His sister, producer Jaymes Foster, is the mother of Clay Aiken's son, Parker Foster Aiken.[50] He is a cousin of race car driver Billy Foster._


----------



## CarryOn2020

More contradictory statements:

_








						Prince Harry 'could face a telling off from the Queen'
					

It is thought that Palace staff have been told to ready Frogmore Cottage for the imminent return of the duke - without mention of Meghan Markle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



A source told The Sun: 'Staff at Windsor have been told to prepare for the possibility Harry could come back.

'They are told that it could be within weeks but Meghan's name was not mentioned. 

'There are all sorts of issues to speak about — not only his political statements but also his visa situation in the US.

'Even though he would have to isolate for two weeks, the estate is large enough for talks in a socially distanced way.'   _


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I mentioned the possibility of this happening weeks ago... this is why I said she needed to stop using that title in political stuff and Harry needed to stay out of it.


this guy may be doing H&M a favor - making them look like a legitimate threat.  ha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I’m not buying that Harry would go back just to get chewed out by the Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I’m not buying that Harry would go back just to get chewed out by the Queen.



Thinking it’s about that pesky visa issue


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Could she be considered a part-time vegan?  Or is Archie the vegan one?
> 
> *Meghan Markle angers the Queen with vegan plans for Archie - Is raising a baby vegan safe? *
> 
> Meghan and Harry are known for their alternative lifestyle choices and try to avoid animal by-products.
> 
> Recent reports that they’re planning to raise little Archie Harrison as a vegan have received a mixed response.
> 
> But given Meghan is a practising vegan herself, at least in part, there is no reason why she wouldn’t be able to give Archie the healthiest start possible.
> 
> part-time vegan?


What's a "Part time Vegan"?  Is it like being "Like a Virgin"?


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thinking it’s about that pesky visa issue


And USA tax issue - he was getting close to the 183 day rule (mentioned earlier by other posters) and would owe taxes in the USA!


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> Can someone tell me is there a bandwagon MM hasn't jumped on?


Yeah, the keeping of the Royal rules and protocol bandwagon


----------



## doni

I would be surprised the Queen would give a toss what one of her many great grand children eats or not... She has more important things to worry about.

As to them avoiding animal products, Meghan for sure has worn a lot of leather, but maybe it is a new thing.


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> Plastic is not echo-friendly. It'll kills all animals in the end, ncluding humans.


Nothing us humans do is eco-friendly.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and why would she say she tries to eat vegan a lot of the time as opposed to vegetarian?



She probably doesn't know the difference


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Can someone tell me is there a bandwagon MM hasn't jumped on?



Going to work?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I visited my grandmother earlier today and she had out at stack of those housewife gossip mags written for I imagine middle aged frumpy women (grandma is 92). Three of them had MM on the cover and very, uh, unflattering articles inside. I felt the German press was neutral leaning on rooting for MM but apparently that is slowly changing (that said, those magazines are not what I'd consider serious press, but I also remember an article in my daily newspaper a week or so ago that might have said things like "entitled" and "pretending to want privacy but really craving attention").

I skimmed the articles (they are usually so badly written I just can't) and my favourite sentence was "Ausgebildet als Schauspielerin, eingebildet als "Star"" LOL (trained as an actress, arrogant as a "star", but in German there's quite a clever wordplay).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

doni said:


> As to them avoiding animal products, *Meghan for sure has worn a lot of leather,* but maybe it is a new thing.


And, don't forget the whips, that she uses to keep JCMH in line! 
* Fixed the quote


----------



## rose60610

Was the quip about the Queen not being thrilled about a vegan diet for Archie simply another invented blurb for Meghan to cry "Victim of persecution"?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Was the quip about the Queen not being thrilled about a vegan diet for Archie simply another invented blurb for Meghan to cry "Victim of persecution"?


and also to brag about being vegan? when other sources say she eats chicken?  much ado about nothing.  my nephew (now grown) decided as a young child he didn't want to eat meat


----------



## kemilia

needlv said:


> And USA tax issue - he was getting close to the 183 day rule (mentioned earlier by other posters) and would owe taxes in the USA!


How many days has he been in the US?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I visited my grandmother earlier today and she had out at stack of those housewife gossip mags written for I imagine middle aged frumpy women (grandma is 92). Three of them had MM on the cover and very, uh, unflattering articles inside. I felt the German press was neutral leaning on rooting for MM but apparently that is slowly changing (that said, those magazines are not what I'd consider serious press, but I also remember an article in my daily newspaper a week or so ago that might have said things like "entitled" and "pretending to want privacy but really craving attention").
> 
> I skimmed the articles (they are usually so badly written I just can't) and my favourite sentence was "Ausgebildet als Schauspielerin, eingebildet als "Star"" LOL (trained as an actress, arrogant as a "star", but in German there's quite a clever wordplay).



When MM was in the UK, she became (un)popular, not only in Germany, but also in other European countries. I recall to have seen rather unfavorable headlines about her during the last time I was in Europe. I suppose they were caused by her exaggerated spending habits and ruthless attitude towards staff. At that time, she was not on my radar. I only started paying more attention to her after COVID started and I became annoyed with the overwhelming (useless) news released by her PR-team.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I stopped eating red meat this year and don't even miss it anymore.  If that's ever on the roadmap for you.


The only Red Meat that I eat is the occasional Cheeseburger; it's the only cheat item on my list as everything else was given up years ago (and after all - we are in Southern California, the land of Cheeseburgers)!!


----------



## youngster

needlv said:


> And USA tax issue - he was getting close to the 183 day rule (mentioned earlier by other posters) and would owe taxes in the USA!



Yes, for sure. The rule applies for the 3 year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before that. So, if he is approaching the 183 day mark just for 2020, he could not come back to the U.S. for roughly 3 years before the clock would start ticking again and he could avoid being treated as a resident for income tax purposes (with MM filing "married filing separately", as opposed to "married filing jointly").   I doubt he plans to stay away long so he is almost certainly going to be taxed as a U.S. resident for 2020. Slipping in and out of the country for a week or two or three isn't going to change that.

_You will be considered a United States resident for tax purposes if you meet the substantial presence test for the calendar year. To meet this test, you must be physically present in the United States (U.S.) on at least:_

_31 days during the current year, and_
_183 days during the 3-year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before that, counting:_
_All the days you were present in the current year, and_
_1/3 of the days you were present in the first year before the current year, and_
_1/6 of the days you were present in the second year before the current year._


----------



## CarryOn2020

He has been here about 160 days, right?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> He has been here about 160 days, right?


He may have some special privileges as part of the BRF. His stay in the UK may help with some technicalities... We will probably never know.


----------



## nyshopaholic

Today's Page Six in the New York Post referenced the article from The Daily Mail:









						Prince Harry heads home for tough talk with Queen
					

Questions are swirling around Buckingham Palace once again after staffers received orders to get the royal couple's former home, Frogmore Cottage, ready for a visit soon from Harry.




					pagesix.com
				




*Prince Harry heads home for tough talk with Queen    *
By Melanie Gray

Prince Harry is finally flying across the pond to visit his grandmother after months in the US, but will wife Meghan Markle be with him? And will Queen Elizabeth strip his titles — or his visa — after his biting comments on the *****-***** race?

Questions are swirling around Buckingham Palace once again after staffers received orders to get the royal couple’s former home, Frogmore Cottage, ready for a visit soon from Harry, The Daily Mail reported.

No mention, though, was made whether Markle is coming along, and that has tongues wagging — as does the purpose of the visit, which insiders speculate will be a tough conversation between the 94-year-old Queen and her grandson about his call on American voters to “reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity” and the fallout from what one GOP congressman described as foreign election meddling.

“Harry and Meghan have burnt some significant bridges that may be beyond repair,” royal biographer Penny Junor told The Mirror. “Right now, that doesn’t seem to bother them. And I can’t see Meghan ever wanting a way back.”

The get-out-the-vote message, made with Markle, has offended ***** supporters — and the president himself — who consider Harry’s words to be an tactic endorsement of ******** Joe *****.

Rep. Jason Smith (R-Missouri) is so hot under the collar that he wrote a letter to the British ambassador requesting that the Queen tell the royal couple to shut up or strip their titles and privileges.

Smith acknowledged the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are private citizens, but that their titles carry weight with Americans and give the impression that they speak for the Royal Family.

The Queen distanced herself from all the politics talk, stating the Duke “is not a working member of the royal family” and was speaking in “a personal capacity.”

Smith’s request — about both titles and privileges — could be seriously considered by the Queen, especially if Prime Minister Boris Johnson formally advises her to remove the titles.

The congressman’s reference to privileges touches on Harry’s immigration status, which isn’t clear because the US treats the matter as private and he hasn’t ever commented on it.

The prince could be on a two-year immigrant visa as the spouse of an American or a diplomatic passport because of his royal ties.

If Harry has a diplomatic passport, he breaches diplomatic protocol if he speaks about politics in any way and he can’t make political donations.


----------



## Chanbal

nyshopaholic said:


> Today's Page Six in the New York Post referenced the article from The Daily Mail:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry heads home for tough talk with Queen
> 
> 
> Questions are swirling around Buckingham Palace once again after staffers received orders to get the royal couple's former home, Frogmore Cottage, ready for a visit soon from Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *If Harry has a diplomatic passport, he breaches diplomatic protocol if he speaks about politics in any way and he can’t make political donations.*



He may be in significant trouble if he is using a diplomatic passport, but nothing that good lawyers can't fix for him.


----------



## marietouchet

H is toast , he will pay US Income taxes based on the usual residency requirements - that have been extensively researched by everyone. As soon as he bought a house here, it became obvious that he intends to spend enough time here that weaseling out of the residency test is impossible 

I know they have lawyers and accountants to weasel out of stuff, but the H&M burn rate is astronomical due in part to paying the lawyers, accountants, security, and honestly how much have they earned so far ? Nothing in comparison to their ginormous expenses , but their being spendthrifts is another issue ...

That said, yes, there may be special tax rules that apply for people of his exalted status , stuff our research has failed to turn up

Returning to U.K. ? Maybe ... But there have been various stories - that turned out to be fake -  about his location for the last 6 months , stay tuned
There are a lot of if , buts and ands regarding travel to Europe from the US these days ... and the U.K. rules are quite tight these days, tighter than France - where Kylie snuck in
Finally, the COVID restrictions for seeing QEII are super tight, And H will not get an exemption due to her vulnerability and age


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> He may be in significant trouble if he is using a diplomatic passport, but nothing that good lawyers can't fix for him.


I can't see him having a diplomatic passport since the Queen has already stated that he doesn't represent the RF nor do I see him representing the British gov't either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Any claims of exalted status, diplomatic passport, Royal exceptions, etc. - anything like that and expect the crowds to roar. This is the kind of privilege people dislike. It is shameful for them to lecture anyone and to cry victim.  This is why so many of us have said QE and Charles needed to fix this weeks ago. Clearly the BRF has misjudged the mood of the American people.


----------



## gracekelly

If he goes back it is preparation for the one year review. I think they want to get things ironed out in advance so BP isn’t hit with another Meghan Manifesto

Thank you @youngster for your  visa/tax post. It would appear that they have him in a tax situation. He is here as a businessman not as a diplomat.   The horror that a Royal is “in trade!”  Lol!  Cant decide if Jane Austen would be shocked, think it’s funny or approve.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> H is toast , he will pay US Income taxes based on the usual residency requirements - that have been extensively researched by everyone. As soon as he bought a house here, it became obvious that he intends to spend enough time here that weaseling out of the residency test is impossible



The sad thing is, those two jerks most likely will never feel consequences. The BRF will cough up a few more millions to not let them go bankrupt instead of letting them fend for themselves for once.


----------



## Lodpah

I think the tax issues alone will be the catalyst for the BRF to strip these two. I’m sure the BRF won’t want their financials out there for the world to see.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sad thing is, those two jerks most likely will never feel consequences. The BRF will cough up a few more millions to not let them go bankrupt instead of letting them fend for themselves for once.


That would be very disappointing if they did that. The Harkles want to be grown ups so let them pay their own way.


----------



## CobaltBlu

If she is stupid enough to file jointly, all of his assets and worldwide income are subject to taxation regardless of whether he lives in the US or not, or has ever stepped foot there (which obviously he has).  

They could so easily make a number of terrible tax mistakes that would cost millions.     
If they do not shield his assets they are the stupidest people on earth. 





__





						Non-American Spouse: US Tax Implications | Washington, DC |
					

Non-American Spouse: US Tax Implications - US Tax Implications of a Non-American Spouse by Jane A. Bruno, J.D. It is quite common for Americans living overseas to meet and marry a non-American. Often the couple stays overseas and the foreign spouse acquires no US status. In this case, the spouse...




					www.americansabroad.org


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> H is toast , he will pay US Income taxes based on the usual residency requirements - that have been extensively researched by everyone. As soon as he bought a house here, it became obvious that he intends to spend enough time here that weaseling out of the residency test is impossible
> 
> I know they have lawyers and accountants to weasel out of stuff, but the H&M burn rate is astronomical due in part to paying the lawyers, accountants, security, and honestly how much have they earned so far ? Nothing in comparison to their ginormous expenses , but their being spendthrifts is another issue ...
> 
> That said, yes, there may be special tax rules that apply for people of his exalted status , stuff our research has failed to turn up
> 
> Returning to U.K. ? Maybe ... But there have been various stories - that turned out to be fake -  about his location for the last 6 months , stay tuned
> There are a lot of if , buts and ands regarding travel to Europe from the US these days ... and the U.K. rules are quite tight these days, tighter than France - where Kylie snuck in
> Finally, the COVID restrictions for seeing QEII are super tight, And H will not get an exemption due to her vulnerability and age


Why do I get the sense that no matter how quickly they are going through their (if that) $$$, that the "Bank of Charles" will always be their backup?  That's why I think that PC needs to stop funding them or give them a 'ceiling' (you get $$$ this year and that is it).   Of course, they have their Netflix "backup" .. if that EVER surfaces (given their great [sic] track record)!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sad thing is, those two jerks most likely will never feel consequences. The BRF will cough up a few more millions to not let them go bankrupt instead of letting them fend for themselves for once.



That is true. They won’t be allowed to fail, it would reflect poorly on the BRF. Besides there are many grown children of rich people all over the world who have their lives completely funded by their parents. It’s part of the genetic lottery win of being born into a wealthy family.


----------



## csshopper

Meantime in her quest to be the most victimized person on the planet, Mopey Meghan is quoted during a podcast with vulnerable teen-agers discussing mental health saying "*'I was the most trolled person in the entire world in 2019', says Meghan Markle as she and Prince Harry speak to US teenagers for World Mental Health Day podcast from their Santa Barbara villa*

As with most things Meghan, the data is questionable, and perhaps selectively applied, since there are multiple articles on line that mention lists of such things and she does not encompass the "entire world" except in her own narcissism. Guessing Scoobie Doo was perhaps her source for the data.

The full article is on the DM web page, I only got this far and then had to stop as the gag reflex was setting in:

"Meghan later added that she is now 'doing really well', and said: 'The past few months have been* layered *for everyone, *we certainly can't complain, we are fortunate we all have our health, we have rooves over our heads." 

LAYERED?* What the???? 

And I'm thinking she left the most important item off her list of health and "rooves" (Frogmore and Montecito?), we have an infinite source of money to extort from the BRF in support of our work to educate the world and spread our brilliance to the masses. 

GRRRR.


----------



## papertiger

nyshopaholic said:


> Today's Page Six in the New York Post referenced the article from The Daily Mail:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry heads home for tough talk with Queen
> 
> 
> Questions are swirling around Buckingham Palace once again after staffers received orders to get the royal couple's former home, Frogmore Cottage, ready for a visit soon from Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry heads home for tough talk with Queen    *
> By Melanie Gray
> 
> Prince Harry is finally flying across the pond to visit his grandmother after months in the US, but will wife Meghan Markle be with him? And will Queen Elizabeth strip his titles — or his visa — after his biting comments on the *****-***** race?
> 
> Questions are swirling around Buckingham Palace once again after staffers received orders to get the royal couple’s former home, Frogmore Cottage, ready for a visit soon from Harry, The Daily Mail reported.
> 
> No mention, though, was made whether Markle is coming along, and that has tongues wagging — as does the purpose of the visit, which insiders speculate will be a tough conversation between the 94-year-old Queen and her grandson about his call on American voters to “reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity” and the fallout from what one GOP congressman described as foreign election meddling.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan have burnt some significant bridges that may be beyond repair,” royal biographer Penny Junor told The Mirror. “Right now, that doesn’t seem to bother them. And I can’t see Meghan ever wanting a way back.”
> 
> The get-out-the-vote message, made with Markle, has offended ***** supporters — and the president himself — who consider Harry’s words to be an tactic endorsement of ******** Joe *****.
> 
> Rep. Jason Smith (R-Missouri) is so hot under the collar that he wrote a letter to the British ambassador requesting that the Queen tell the royal couple to shut up or strip their titles and privileges.
> 
> Smith acknowledged the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are private citizens, but that their titles carry weight with Americans and give the impression that they speak for the Royal Family.
> 
> The Queen distanced herself from all the politics talk, stating the Duke “is not a working member of the royal family” and was speaking in “a personal capacity.”
> 
> Smith’s request — about both titles and privileges — could be seriously considered by the Queen, especially if Prime Minister Boris Johnson formally advises her to remove the titles.
> 
> The congressman’s reference to privileges touches on Harry’s immigration status, which isn’t clear because the US treats the matter as private and he hasn’t ever commented on it.
> 
> The prince could be on a two-year immigrant visa as the spouse of an American or a diplomatic passport because of his royal ties.
> 
> If Harry has a diplomatic passport, he breaches diplomatic protocol if he speaks about politics in any way and he can’t make political donations.



*LOL. He's been ordered home! 

About time. *

On JCMH becoming a diplomat. He burnt any hope when he spouted off about a foreign election and spreading misinformation about his own voting rights in the UK. A diplomat he is NOT.

Again, H&M want their cake and eat it too. He will prob ask QE2 to wave her magic wand but I think it's too late. You can't say you're not representing the State and then be given a diplomatic passport. 

from https://www.careerexplorer.com/careers/diplomat/ 

*"What is a Diplomat?*
A diplomat is someone who is appointed by a nation state to represent and protect that nation's interests abroad. The four ranks of diplomats are determined by international law, and include ambassadors, envoys, ministers, and charge d'affaires. In modern diplomacy there are a number of ranks below ambassador. These ranks now rarely show a mission's importance, but rather show the diplomat's seniority within their own nation's diplomatic career ladder. This modern ranking system follows a similar, but not exactly parallel, pattern in different countries, and is as follows:


Ambassador (High Commissioner in Commonwealth missions); Ambassador at large
Minister
Minister-Counselor
Counselor
First Secretary
Second Secretary
Third Secretary
Attache
Assistant Attache"


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Any claims of exalted status, diplomatic passport, Royal exceptions, etc. - anything like that and expect the crowds to roar. This is the kind of privilege people dislike. It is shameful for them to lecture anyone and to cry victim.  This is why so many of us have said QE and Charles needed to fix this weeks ago. *Clearly the BRF has misjudged the mood of the American people.*



Not just Americans, but their own


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I can't see him having a diplomatic passport since the Queen has already stated that he doesn't represent the RF nor do I see him representing the British gov't either.


In general, a diplomatic passport has a duration of 5 years. He could still have a valid diplomatic passport when entering the US.  He will likely not be able to renew it, but all these are just suppositions!


----------



## sdkitty

now they're walking back the "not OK" appearance?  says she was tired








						Meghan Markle Explains Famous ‘Not OK’ Interview: ‘I Was Tired’
					

The Duchess of Sussex spoke on “Teenager Therapy,” a podcast hosted by five California high school seniors.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Meantime in her quest to be the most victimized person on the planet, Mopey Meghan is quoted during a podcast with vulnerable teen-agers discussing mental health saying "*'I was the most trolled person in the entire world in 2019', says Meghan Markle as she and Prince Harry speak to US teenagers for World Mental Health Day podcast from their Santa Barbara villa*
> 
> As with most things Meghan, the data is questionable, and perhaps selectively applied, since there are multiple articles on line that mention lists of such things and she does not encompass the "entire world" except in her own narcissism. Guessing Scoobie Doo was perhaps her source for the data.
> 
> The full article is on the DM web page, I only got this far and then had to stop as the gag reflex was setting in:
> 
> "Meghan later added that she is now 'doing really well', and said: 'The past few months have been* layered *for everyone, *we certainly can't complain, we are fortunate we all have our health, we have rooves over our heads."
> 
> LAYERED?* What the????
> 
> And I'm thinking she left the most important item off her list of health and "rooves" (Frogmore and Montecito?), we have an infinite source of money to extort from the BRF in support of our work to educate the world and spread our brilliance to the masses.
> 
> GRRRR.


apparently her stans are teens - or women who act like teens


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> apparently her stans are teens - or women who act like teens



They are.  I read some of their posts on another site and it makes your head spin.  The toxic things they say not only about the Cambridges, but they even included the Obamas for supporting Earthshot!  There is fanatical delusional thinking that is really unhinged.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They are.  I read some of their posts on another site and it makes your head spin.  The toxic things they say not only about the Cambridges, but they even included the Obamas for supporting Earthshot!  There is fanatical delusional thinking that is really unhinged.


her stans have a problem with Michelle and Barak?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> They are.  I read some of their posts on another site and it makes your head spin.  The toxic things they say not only about the Cambridges, but they even included the Obamas for supporting Earthshot!  There is fanatical delusional thinking that is really unhinged.



WTFFF. The Obamas and Cambridges have been actual friends for years, and why wouldn't they support a great, well researched project for an extremely important cause? The Sussexes could have had a part in it would they not have been so extra.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> now they're walking back the "not OK" appearance?  says she was tired
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Explains Famous ‘Not OK’ Interview: ‘I Was Tired’
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex spoke on “Teenager Therapy,” a podcast hosted by five California high school seniors.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


That 'not Ok' has been so criticized that obviously she needed to provide an official excuse and started with the teenagers. One more bandwagon that MM has jumped on, speaking to US teenagers @chicinthecity777


----------



## marietouchet

I wonder why she was the most trolled person ...

Harry and Meghan chat to teens on World Mental Health Day podcast
https://mol.im/a/8826497


----------



## marietouchet

The April 20 entry has a great summary of the year of JCMH


PIERS MORGAN hoped for a kinder, less snarling world after Covid
https://mol.im/a/8826969


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> her stans have a problem with Michelle and Barak?


We are accused of being racists because we don't like MM's character, so wouldn't her stans be racists also for dissing the Obamas... I'm guessing that the 'racist' complaints apply to poor, poor Me-again *only *because she is so persecuted and such a victim.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They are.  I read some of their posts on another site and it makes your head spin.  The toxic things they say not only about the Cambridges, but they even included the Obamas for supporting Earthshot!  There is fanatical delusional thinking that is really unhinged.


IMO most of these people are young girls (or immature women) who got so excited to see her marry a prince and identified with her (or wished they could be like her).  Too bad she isn't such a great role model as it turns out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> IMO most of these people are young girls (or immature women) who got so excited to see her marry a prince and identified with her (or wished they could be like her).  Too bad she isn't such a great role model as it turns out.



Hit.
Nail.
Head.
!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They are.  I read some of their posts on another site and it makes your head spin.  The toxic things they say not only about the Cambridges, but they even included the *Obamas for supporting Earthshot*!  There is fanatical delusional thinking that is really unhinged.



It was indeed a very supportive tweet from a certain former US president: "It’s going to take a lot of big-thinking and innovation to save the one planet we’ve got—and that’s why @KensingtonRoyal’s leadership on climate change can make a real difference."

I don't recall any tweet from this same president or his wife in support of the duchess's woke or philanthropic  activities.   

Great Tweet


----------



## Vintage Leather

I wonder if, when Harry was whining to fake-Greta, the "only thing we do is give out prizes" was a snide reference to Earthshot?


----------



## Lounorada

CobaltBlu said:


> If she is stupid enough to file jointly, all of his assets and worldwide income are subject to taxation regardless of whether he lives in the US or not, or has ever stepped foot there (which obviously he has).
> They could so easily make a number of terrible tax mistakes that would cost millions.
> If they do not shield his assets they are the stupidest people on earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Non-American Spouse: US Tax Implications | Washington, DC |
> 
> 
> Non-American Spouse: US Tax Implications - US Tax Implications of a Non-American Spouse by Jane A. Bruno, J.D. It is quite common for Americans living overseas to meet and marry a non-American. Often the couple stays overseas and the foreign spouse acquires no US status. In this case, the spouse...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.americansabroad.org









csshopper said:


> *'I was the most trolled person in the entire world in 2019', says Meghan Markle as she and Prince Harry speak to US teenagers for World Mental Health Day podcast from their Santa Barbara villa*
> As with most things Meghan, the data is questionable, and perhaps selectively applied, since there are multiple articles on line that mention lists of such things and she does not encompass the "entire world" except in her own narcissism. Guessing Scoobie Doo was perhaps her source for the data.
> The full article is on the DM web page, I only got this far and then had to stop as the gag reflex was setting in:
> *"Meghan later added that she is now 'doing really well', and said: 'The past few months have been layered for everyone,* *we certainly can't complain, we are fortunate we all have our health, we have rooves over our heads." *
> 
> LAYERED? What the????
> 
> And I'm thinking she left the most important item off her list of health and "rooves" (Frogmore and Montecito?), we have an infinite source of money to extort from the BRF in support of our work to educate the world and spread our brilliance to the masses.
> 
> GRRRR.





She's one of those people who is never listening to what the other person is saying but just waiting for the other person to stop talking so they can talk about themselves/tell a story about themselves that relates to the topic being discussed. True narcissistic style, reminds me of that narcissistic ex-boss of mine I mentioned before, never listened to a word you said to her... insufferable 



sdkitty said:


> now they're walking back the "not OK" appearance?  says she was tired
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Explains Famous ‘Not OK’ Interview: ‘I Was Tired’
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex spoke on “Teenager Therapy,” a podcast hosted by five California high school seniors.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## mdcx

9000 comments on the DM article about Meghan's podcast with those HS students. When will she grasp that the pity party "I was bullied" routine isn't going over like it used to?


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> If he goes back it is preparation for the one year review. I think they want to get things ironed out in advance so BP isn’t hit with another *Meghan Manifesto*
> 
> Thank you @youngster for your  visa/tax post. It would appear that they have him in a tax situation. He is here as a businessman not as a diplomat.   The horror that a Royal is “in trade!”  Lol!  Cant decide if Jane Austen would be shocked, think it’s funny or approve.



*Meghan Manifesto *is such a perfect term that one wonders why it hasn't become an everyday expression. Or at least it hasn't YET. It can also be used as a synonym for "pity party".


----------



## rose60610

I can think of many other people who were trolled far worse than Meghan. And they don't complain. Because they feel very fortunate which is something Meghan has never said she is. She married into the BRF and the way she's complained and sought pity you'd think she got hoodwinked and forced into a marriage in which she was abused. I don't doubt there have been some critical comments or racist comments along the way, but when one looks at what she gained vs the few instances of comments by clods, she clearly wants to milk and leverage the negative into a permanent "poor me" narrative she can cash in on. Even Harry has jumped on her bandwagon by resurrecting Diana's death into his own "poor me" narrative. I can hear Meghan order Harry "Look, we can use your mom's tragic death as a great cash cow. Practice the teary puppy dog look, here's how you do it. Even though you were in the military for ten years and were subjected to all kinds of explosions, you have to all of a sudden develop severe reactions to loud noises to make it look good. So do you want to make big bucks or not? Practice teary puppy dog!" 

Now the rest of us have to deal with the blows that come our way. And we don't have the BRF as back up. We suck it up, take it, and deal with it. If we DID have the BRF on our side, I don't think many of us would have taken pleasure in trashing it, burning bridges, and begging for pity. I dunno, was QEII supposed to order the Royal Air Force to drop weapons on Meghan's detractors?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now that their karma is catching up to them (their speaking/job offers have diminished and she is no longer being touted as the goddess-of-the-world) , they begin the grovelling process. It won’t work, even a second kid cannot save these losers. No sympathy, zero fff’s. We are looking forward to H’s telling off


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now that their karma is catching up to them (their speaking/job offers have diminished and she is no longer being touted as the goddess-of-the-world) , they begin the grovelling process. It won’t work, even a second kid cannot save these losers. No sympathy, zero fff’s. We are looking forward to H’s telling off



We won’t ever see them groveling. There is so much pride and ego tied up in both their personalities. They would never admit they were wrong about anything.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMG!!!  No one is asking them to be part of these ‘events’. They are begging for any chance to be included. Haaaa.










						Harry and Meghan chat to teens on World Mental Health Day podcast
					

Meghan Markle has said that she 'was the most trolled person in the entire world in 2019' as she and Prince Harry made their podcast debut for World Mental Health Day.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



The Sussexes learned about the podcast - which usually features five students from Loara High School in Anaheim, Orange County - after reading a New York Times profile of the teenagers in July. 
After listening to a few episodes of the series, they decided they wanted to support the teens' work. They recorded the episode this week in their new hometown of Montecito, with all the participants wearing masks during the recording. 
*According to Hello! magazine, Prince Harry and Meghan led the group in deep breathing exercises ahead of the podcast in order to help sooth nerves.*


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG!!!  No one is asking them to be part of these ‘events’. They are begging for any chance to be included. Haaaa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan chat to teens on World Mental Health Day podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has said that she 'was the most trolled person in the entire world in 2019' as she and Prince Harry made their podcast debut for World Mental Health Day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes learned about the podcast - which usually features five students from Loara High School in Anaheim, Orange County - after reading a New York Times profile of the teenagers in July.
> After listening to a few episodes of the series, they decided they wanted to support the teens' work. They recorded the episode this week in their new hometown of Montecito, with all the participants wearing masks during the recording.
> *According to Hello! magazine, Prince Harry and Meghan led the group in deep breathing exercises ahead of the podcast in order to help sooth nerves.*



MM&H could perhaps add 'event crashers' to their long list of achievements. 

They led deep breathing exercises in group in time of covid!


----------



## bag-mania

This isn’t the first time where you can tell she’s extremely sensitive about her age. She wasn’t going to admit to these highschoolers just how old she really is. I wonder if she’s hoping they might actually believe she is only 25. From her speech during their podcast: 

“That’s so big you can’t even think of what that feels like. I don’t care if you’re 15 or you’re 25, if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging,” she added.


----------



## bag-mania

OMG. This is just shameless. She doesn’t miss a trick.  

*Meghan Markle Honors Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Her Outfit During Podcast Appearance*
The duchess wore a RBG face mask, and a t-shirt featuring a quote from the late icon.
Both Meghan and Harry dressed casually for the podcast recording, which took place in a COVID-19 secure Montecito location. The Duchess of Sussex's outfit was particularly important as she paid tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away last month at age 87.

Firstly, per Entertainment Tonight Canada, Meghan wore a mask which had the phrase "When There are Nine" embroidered on it. This is, of course, in reference to RBG's famous reply when asked the question, "When will the Supreme Court have enough women?" As noted by the publication, the duchess paid further tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice by also wearing a Ruth Bader Ginsburg t-shirt.









						Meghan Markle Honors Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Her Outfit During Podcast Appearance
					

The duchess wore a RBG face mask, and a t-shirt featuring a quote from the late icon.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> It was indeed a very supportive tweet from a certain former US president: "It’s going to take a lot of big-thinking and innovation to save the one planet we’ve got—and that’s why @KensingtonRoyal’s leadership on climate change can make a real difference."
> 
> I don't recall any tweet from this same president or his wife in support of the duchess's woke or philanthropic  activities.
> 
> Great Tweet




Cant fool those Os - with 4 Ivy League degrees between them!  I expect that they are particularly proud of and encouraging to the "younger generation" as the brunt of these climate change issues/problems are likely to fall on them and their kids.  Most lawyers that I know are more than very used to hearing BS or woke-speak or whatever it is being called today.  Long used to just tuning it out...


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> OMG. This is just shameless. She doesn’t miss a trick.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Honors Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Her Outfit During Podcast Appearance*
> The duchess wore a RBG face mask, and a t-shirt featuring a quote from the late icon.
> Both Meghan and Harry dressed casually for the podcast recording, which took place in a COVID-19 secure Montecito location. The Duchess of Sussex's outfit was particularly important as she paid tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away last month at age 87.
> 
> Firstly, per Entertainment Tonight Canada, Meghan wore a mask which had the phrase "When There are Nine" embroidered on it. This is, of course, in reference to RBG's famous reply when asked the question, "When will the Supreme Court have enough women?" As noted by the publication, the duchess paid further tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice by also wearing a Ruth Bader Ginsburg t-shirt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Honors Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Her Outfit During Podcast Appearance
> 
> 
> The duchess wore a RBG face mask, and a t-shirt featuring a quote from the late icon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com




Stay. Away. From. RBG.  As if you knew thing one about her until a couple of months ago.  Grrrrrr...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> Stay. Away. From. RBG.  As if you knew thing one about her until a couple of months ago.  Grrrrrr...



All she needed to know was that Ginsberg was a highly respected woman with a lengthy legacy which Meghan could exploit to look involved and in touch. In short, another bandwagon to jump on.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> All she needed to know was that Ginsberg was a highly respected woman with a lengthy legacy which Meghan could exploit to look involved and in touch. In short, another bandwagon to jump on.




So true!  Just as long as MM doesn't turn up in the same RBG t-shirt that I have - LOL!!  (Okay, I have 2 in different colors!)


----------



## scarlet555

She is so thirsty to stay relevant it is embarrassing, and when people call her out on it, she calls it being trolled, then complains about being attacked and being a the victim, why do people like her?  Please explain in a logical sense ... any stans out there?  I am super serious.  I just made a drink cocktail called “sit down and STFU” and It’s ready for her.


----------



## scarlet555

Luvbolide said:


> So true!  Just as long as MM doesn't turn up in the same RBG t-shirt that I have - LOL!!  (Okay, I have 2 in different colors!)



You need to post those Tshirts, I haven’t seen them.


----------



## Luvbolide

scarlet555 said:


> She is so thirsty to stay relevant it is embarrassing, and when people call her out on it, she calls it being trolled, then complains about being attacked and being a the victim, why do people like her?  Please explain in a logical sense ... any stans out there?  I am super serious.  I just made a drink cocktail called “sit down and STFU” and It’s ready for her.




Sounds like a cocktail I would enjoy!  When I think about the things that countless nameless trolls on the internet said (and some still say) about former first lady MO, it still shocks me.  Funny, I don't recall MO once whining about it.  Wish MM would take a page from her book - this endless whining is soooo obnoxious.  

Guess it never occurred to her that some kids have to deal with real-life adult problems which can cause them mental health issues - they aren't just whining because somebody anonymous on the internet said something mean about them.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> OMG. This is just shameless. She doesn’t miss a trick.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Honors Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Her Outfit During Podcast Appearance*
> The duchess wore a RBG face mask, and a t-shirt featuring a quote from the late icon.
> Both Meghan and Harry dressed casually for the podcast recording, which took place in a COVID-19 secure Montecito location. The Duchess of Sussex's outfit was particularly important as she paid tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who passed away last month at age 87.
> 
> Firstly, per Entertainment Tonight Canada, Meghan wore a mask which had the phrase "When There are Nine" embroidered on it. This is, of course, in reference to RBG's famous reply when asked the question, "When will the Supreme Court have enough women?" As noted by the publication, the duchess paid further tribute to the late Supreme Court Justice by also wearing a Ruth Bader Ginsburg t-shirt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Honors Ruth Bader Ginsburg with Her Outfit During Podcast Appearance
> 
> 
> The duchess wore a RBG face mask, and a t-shirt featuring a quote from the late icon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


RBG was (is) an admirable Woman that dedicated her entire life to her work. It is really upsetting seeing her name associated to self-promoting events.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> RBG was (is) an admirable Woman that dedicated her entire life to her work. It is really upsetting seeing her name associated to self-promoting events.




I agree 100% - RBG is a bit of a patron saint to women lawyers and law students and I hate to see little Miss Jump on Every Bandwagon tagging along!  Oh well, she will be off on a new tangent soon...I have a feeling she will be coming K.Harris' way soon!


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> She is so thirsty to stay relevant it is embarrassing, and when people call her out on it, she calls it being trolled, then complains about being attacked and being a the victim, why do people like her?  Please explain in a logical sense ... any stans out there?  I am super serious.  I just made a drink cocktail called “sit down and STFU” and It’s ready for her.



Better make a couple of those, @scarlet555


----------



## Jktgal

sdkitty said:


> now they're walking back the "not OK" appearance?  says she was tired
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Explains Famous ‘Not OK’ Interview: ‘I Was Tired’
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex spoke on “Teenager Therapy,” a podcast hosted by five California high school seniors.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Awwww, I'm sure African women will symphatise. And recommend working the fields as obviously yoga isn't working to keep her energy up.....


Source


----------



## Luvbolide

scarlet555 said:


> You need to post those Tshirts, I haven’t seen them.



Ashamed to admit this, but in all this time I still haven't figured out how to post pix! (Perhaps a late-in-the-pandemic project!)


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Better make a couple of those, @scarlet555




All crazy Nutmeg does is complain, complain, complain, and inserts herself mostly inappropriately at random events, to ... you guessed it, complain.  From the article above 
”That’s so big you can’t even think of what that feels like. I don’t care if you’re 15 or you’re 25, if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging,” she added.

I’m not sure she has anything in common with any of these kids she is talking to, as a social climber.  I hardly think those kids are putting themselves in situations that call for criticism the way she is doing.  How is she a victim all the time, even victims don’t want to be victims except for pity party drama queens disillusioned wannabe duchess, she refers herself as.  Most doctors don’t want to be known as or called doctors outside of work Setting.  WTF is with her brain?


----------



## chicinthecity777

She was lying again! She was not the most trolled celeb in 2019. A simple Google search gets this result. Most trolls celebs in 2019:


----------



## Lodpah

I’m starting to pity MM. She’s utterly desperate to be relevant and Harry, I’ll just ignore him. They must be paying so much money for  their PR that their PR are desperate to promote them they have their spinning wheel going round and round 24/7. It’s like clockwork, every few days they rehash something old in the news.


----------



## gelbergirl

why is she talking about herself being trolled when the world has very important things going on


----------



## chicinthecity777

gelbergirl said:


> why is she talking about herself being trolled when the world has very important things going on


Because we didn't ask if she was OK!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> I’m starting to pity MM. She’s utterly desperate to be relevant and Harry, I’ll just ignore him. They must be paying so much money for  their PR that their PR are desperate to promote them they have their spinning wheel going round and round 24/7. It’s like clockwork, every few days they rehash something old in the news.




I am kind of surprised that their PR folks haven’t had a talk with them about the generally excoriating comments on all of these stupid pieces that they place.  I would worry less about getting in the press daily and more about trying to turn around the generally negative - and increasingly unanimous bad impression that they create.

Oh don’t tell me, something more for MM to whine about.


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> She was lying again! She was not the most trolled celeb in 2019. A simple Google search gets this result. Most trolls celebs in 2019:
> 
> View attachment 4874921


Ok.  When you’re disliked/trolled more than Number 6....  Just saying.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Wait, I thought they were at $1m a pop for speaking? OK I know this is just tabloids:



			https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1346159/meghan-markle-prince-harry-titles-duke-duchess-of-sussex-royal-family-news/amp?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## drifter

Somehow, MM complaining about how she was the most trolled person in the world etc. seems insensitive.  I'm sure mental health problems are far more serious than being trolled.  .  It's not as if she couldn't get any professional help to help her cope with the trolling.  And she fed the trolls so well.  BTW, I always thought the common teenage response to "old people"(any adult) talking about anything was eye-rolling and "you're so lame and old".  The teenagers deserve medals for being so polite.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Meantime in her quest to be the most victimized person on the planet, Mopey Meghan is quoted during a podcast with vulnerable teen-agers discussing mental health saying "*'I was the most trolled person in the entire world in 2019', says Meghan Markle as she and Prince Harry speak to US teenagers for World Mental Health Day podcast from their Santa Barbara villa*
> 
> As with most things Meghan, the data is questionable, and perhaps selectively applied, since there are multiple articles on line that mention lists of such things and she does not encompass the "entire world" except in her own narcissism. Guessing Scoobie Doo was perhaps her source for the data.
> 
> The full article is on the DM web page, I only got this far and then had to stop as the gag reflex was setting in:
> 
> "Meghan later added that she is now 'doing really well', and said: 'The past few months have been* layered *for everyone, *we certainly can't complain, we are fortunate we all have our health, we have rooves over our heads."
> 
> LAYERED?* What the????
> 
> And I'm thinking she left the most important item off her list of health and "rooves" (Frogmore and Montecito?), we have an infinite source of money to extort from the BRF in support of our work to educate the world and spread our brilliance to the masses.
> 
> GRRRR.


I've never seen the word "rooves" and I was in the publishing biz for decades (legal pub but still saw a lot of words "regular"   people could easily understand).

The few sites that came up while googling seem to feel this is an archaic version of "roofs", generally it's something like "being so glad to have *A ROOF* over our heads". And all the jillions of flyers I get throughout the summer from roofing companies for a new roof--they don't use this word either. This could be common usage in the UK and/or Canada but sheesh--she has lived in the US most of her life.

Leave it to her to word-salad just about anything.


----------



## Sharont2305

Brit here, never heard rooves before.


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> why is she talking about herself being trolled when the world has very important things going on



The truth? Because deep down in her heart absolutely nothing is as important as herself and how she is treated. Most of the time she is smart enough to not show that but she cannot always stop her true nature from coming through, particularly when she’s doing these impromptu interviews where she is supposed to talk normally and can’t follow an obvious script/plan.


----------



## bellecate

kemilia said:


> I've never seen the word "rooves" and I was in the publishing biz for decades (legal pub but still saw a lot of words "regular"   people could easily understand).
> 
> The few sites that came up while googling seem to feel this is an archaic version of "roofs", generally it's something like "being so glad to have *A ROOF* over our heads". And all the jillions of flyers I get throughout the summer from roofing companies for a new roof--they don't use this word either. This could be common usage in the UK and/or Canada but sheesh--she has lived in the US most of her life.
> 
> Leave it to her to word-salad just about anything.


Not used in Canada. Roof is what is over our heads. Megain using ‘roove ’ makes me think 1) her spelling is atrocious perhaps she’s not to literate, or 2) she’s  a pretentious ________ that looks up obscure words to sound above us common folk.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> This isn’t the first time where you can tell she’s extremely sensitive about her age. She wasn’t going to admit to these highschoolers just how old she really is. I wonder if she’s hoping they might actually believe she is only 25. From her speech during their podcast:
> 
> “That’s so big you can’t even think of what that feels like. I don’t care if you’re 15 *or you’re 25*, if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging,” she added.


Good catch bag-mama! She sure doesn't want these kids to know she's looking at the big four-O right in the eye!


----------



## marietouchet

yOU


mdcx said:


> 9000 comments on the DM article about Meghan's podcast with those HS students. When will she grasp that the pity party "I was bullied" routine isn't going over like it used to?


You diod notice - she was wearing a Bader Ginsburg tshirt, and a mask with an RBG quote

PS sorry this thread moves so fast, this was already covered


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I've never seen the word "rooves" and I was in the publishing biz for decades (legal pub but still saw a lot of words "regular"   people could easily understand).
> 
> The few sites that came up while googling seem to feel this is an archaic version of "roofs", generally it's something like "being so glad to have *A ROOF* over our heads". And all the jillions of flyers I get throughout the summer from roofing companies for a new roof--they don't use this word either. This could be common usage in the UK and/or Canada but sheesh--she has lived in the US most of her life.
> 
> Leave it to her to word-salad just about anything.



Yet another of the peculiarities of Meghan. The plural of hoof is hooves and not hoofs. I guess she thought it was the same with roof. (Not that I’d expect her to know anything about “hooves” unless she used to ride horses.  )


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Brit here, never heard rooves before.


I think that is a spelling checker invention for the plural of roof ...
I recognize the problem, I routinely write in French, Italian, everyday American English, business Euro/British English and my spelling checkers go bananas - I think they are in rebellion - they are very woke fighting about the U in color/colour

PS I looked it up, it is actually the 1753 Samuel Johnson spelling









						Plural of "roof"?
					

Roofs is generally used, but is rooves archaic or just wrong?




					english.stackexchange.com


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> She was lying again! She was not the most trolled celeb in 2019. A simple Google search gets this result. Most trolls celebs in 2019:
> 
> View attachment 4874921


what's Adele trolled for? weight loss?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I recognize the problem, I routinely write in French, Italian, everyday American English, business Euro/British English and my spelling checkers go bananas - I think they are in rebellion - they are very woke fighting about the U in color/colour



I learned British English in school and used it all through university, but hang out in lots of American dominated online spaces so I'm sure my English is an embarrassing mix by now.



> PS I looked it up, it is actually the 1753 Samuel Johnson spelling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plural of "roof"?
> 
> 
> Roofs is generally used, but is rooves archaic or just wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> english.stackexchange.com


----------



## marietouchet

On the RBG tshirt - yet another foray into US politics, since the Supreme Court hearings are any day now ...

Interesting ... she wears the shirt while complaining of being trolled .. some might say she brings it on herself ... she put the target on her own chest, so to speak


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> what's Adele trolled for? weight loss?


Adele was trolled for cultural misappropriation - she had her hair in African-style topknots (sorry, I cannot recall the correct name for the hairstyle) and I think was wearing a swimsuit with Jamaican colors (black, red, green, yellow) 
Naomi Campbell came to her defense saying Adele is OK, she is from Brixton


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lots of reading this morning to catch up on this thread. My conclusion: BP should remove all their titles except Earl & Countess of Dumbarton and shorten it to Earl & Countess of Dumb.  So sorry citizens of Dumbarton, Scotland that these two fools should represent you in any way. If I were you, I would seriously suggest changing the town's name as to have absolutely no connection to them.


----------



## purseinsanity

Luvbolide said:


> I agree 100% - RBG is a bit of a patron saint to women lawyers and law students and I hate to see little Miss Jump on Every Bandwagon tagging along!  Oh well, she will be off on a new tangent soon...I have a feeling she will be coming K.Harris' way soon!


Next, we'll see MM trying to get a law degree without going to law school a la Kim Kardashian


----------



## purseinsanity

Jktgal said:


> Awwww, I'm sure African women will symphatise. And recommend working the fields as obviously yoga isn't working to keep her energy up.....


Having travelled to Africa and India among other places, I've seen first hand how HARD people there actually have to work, even to simply get fresh water.  These two buffoons don't have a clue, and it irritates me no end that they act like they do.  I had a close friend who would always say "My poor sister has had such a hard life" because she was bulimic.  Uh, no, she has a mental illness, which make may life hard, but she did not a hard life growing up.  She had two loving parents who are still married, never was sexually, mentally, or physically abused, went to private schools, and always had food, shelter, and clothing.  She also had extensive counseling and therapy to help with her illness.  There are millions of people who would gladly have grown up that way.  Kind of sounds like how MM grew up, except the two parents that are still married.


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> All crazy Nutmeg does is complain, complain, complain, and inserts herself mostly inappropriately at random events, to ... you guessed it, complain.  From the article above
> ”That’s so big you can’t even think of what that feels like. I don’t care if you’re 15 or you’re 25, if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging,” she added.
> 
> I’m not sure she has anything in common with any of these kids she is talking to, as a social climber.  I hardly think those kids are putting themselves in situations that call for criticism the way she is doing.  How is she a victim all the time, even victims don’t want to be victims except for pity party drama queens disillusioned wannabe duchess, she refers herself as.  *Most doctors don’t want to be known as or called doctors outside of work Setting*.  WTF is with her brain?


I've known some that do.  Usually they're the ones with very low self esteem and feel the need to dictate their resume any chance they get to have others hold them in a higher light.  Hmmm, sounds like someone we know?


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Next, we'll see MM trying to get a law degree without going to law school a la Kim Kardashian


Hellooo.  Unlike Kim, MM doesn’t need a law degree.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> what's Adele trolled for? weight loss?



That's what I was wondering aswell.....

OK, I hadn't read the following posts....Still doesn't make sense but, whatever.....


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Interesting ... she wears the shirt while complaining of being trolled .. some might say she brings it on herself ... she put the target on her own chest, so to speak



She wore the shirt so that the press would report it and she would get lots of positive attention. Any criticism is “trolling” in her mind since it wasn’t part of her plan.

She doesn’t see it as bringing it on herself, she sees it as mean, jealous people interfering with her business.


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> That's what I was wondering aswell.....
> 
> OK, I hadn't read the following posts....Still doesn't make sense but, whatever.....


See post 38, 390 
Oh my gosh, nearly 40,000 posts on this dynamic duo....


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> what's Adele trolled for? weight loss?


Adele and MM are reportedly close friends, they could perhaps have hired the same source of internet trolls.


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> See post 38, 390
> Oh my gosh, nearly 40,000 posts on this dynamic duo....



Thanks *Marietouchet*!


----------



## Pautinka

Sharont2305 said:


> Brit here, never heard rooves before.


It's what I was taught at school in UK  (1980s) as being correct but it's possibly not in use much these days.  Perhaps MM was given "English English" classes rather than etiquette classes before joining the BRF?


----------



## Pautinka

Maggie Muggins said:


> Lots of reading this morning to catch up on this thread. My conclusion: BP should remove all their titles except Earl & Countess of Dumbarton and shorten it to Earl & Countess of Dumb.  So sorry citizens of Dumbarton, Scotland that these two fools should represent you in any way. If I were you, I would seriously suggest changing the town's name as to have absolutely no connection to them.


Just as long as it's not changed to Markleton.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> what's Adele trolled for? weight loss?


I have no idea.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> what's Adele trolled for? weight loss?





marietouchet said:


> Adele was trolled for cultural misappropriation - she had her hair in African-style topknots (sorry, I cannot recall the correct name for the hairstyle) and I think was wearing a swimsuit with Jamaican colors (black, red, green, yellow)
> Naomi Campbell came to her defense saying Adele is OK, she is from Brixton


I don't think this is it re Adele. The stats for most trolled were for the year of 2019, the cultural appropriation incident happened this year in August 2020 when Nottinghill carnival was cancelled due to covid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I visited my grandmother earlier today and *she had out at stack of those housewife gossip mags written for I imagine middle aged frumpy women (grandma is 92)*. Three of them had MM on the cover and very, uh, unflattering articles inside. I felt the German press was neutral leaning on rooting for MM but apparently that is slowly changing (that said, those magazines are not what I'd consider serious press, but I also remember an article in my daily newspaper a week or so ago that might have said things like "entitled" and "pretending to want privacy but really craving attention").



_*Sorry, but are you saying that only "middle aged frumpy women" read gossip?  I could be wrong, but I think this thread is rife with gossip and we are not all middle aged nor frumpy.  *_




csshopper said:


> *Meghan Markle as she and Prince Harry speak to US teenagers for World Mental Health Day podcast from their Santa Barbara villa . . .*
> 
> "Meghan later added that she is now 'doing really well', and said: 'The past few months have been* layered *for everyone, *we certainly can't complain, we are fortunate we all have our health, we have rooves over our heads."
> 
> LAYERED?* What the????



_*I saw that "layered" statement and had/have no idea what that means.  I guess it's because I am not woke enough.  (Seriously, what does it mean?)*_


----------



## CeeJay

drifter said:


> Somehow, MM complaining about how she was the most trolled person in the world etc. seems insensitive.  I'm sure mental health problems are far more serious than being trolled.  . It's not as if she couldn't get any professional help to help her cope with the trolling. And she fed the trolls so well. BTW, I always thought the common teenage response to "old people"(any adult) talking about anything was eye-rolling and "you're so lame and old". The teenagers deserve medals for being so polite.


But, but .. *wait*, how would she know that she was the most trolled woman in the world, after all .. just a few days earlier, didn't she say that "_I don't read things about myself_" (and then quoted Georgia O'Keefe)?????  True to form, she can't even keep her lies straight anymore .. pathetic!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> _*Sorry, but are you saying that only "middle aged frumpy women" read gossip?  I could be wrong, but I think this thread is rife with gossip and we are not all middle aged nor frumpy.  *_




No, I am saying that Germany has this certain type of gossip mags that have content (and adds) for this very target audience and these were some of them.

I am also not saying all middle aged women are frumpy. You need to thumb through these mags to get what I mean.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I learned British English in school and used it all through university, but hang out in lots of American dominated online spaces so I'm sure my English is an embarrassing mix by now.


American by birth, but in addition to American English, we spoke Italian to my Grandmother and Mother.  Spent a year in "Secondary School" (Brit version of "High School"), so had to learn all the various words, different spellings, etc.  Working in a large Global Financial Services company, I worked overseas (London, Edinburgh, Dublin, Paris, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Zurich, etc.) .. I had to make sure to use the correct 'terms' - especially in written materials.  You know what?!?! .. I LOVED it!!!  I guess I'm weird, but I've always been interested in semantics, the creation of language and similarities/differences .. so, you shouldn't feel bad at all .. you should BE PROUD of what you've done!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> (London, Edinburgh, Dublin, Paris, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Zurich, etc.)



I so badly wanted to go to London, Edinburgh and Paris this year, but then COVID happened *sigh* I also used to love Amsterdam until a stupid ex ruined it for me haha. Funnily the Dutch beach is closer to me than the German North Sea.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I so badly wanted to go to London, Edinburgh and Paris this year, but then COVID happened *sigh* I also used to love Amsterdam until a stupid ex ruined it for me haha. Funnily the Dutch beach is closer to me than the German North Sea.



I was supposed to go to London and Sussex last spring/summer, to deal with my mother's Estate, together with my sister who lives there.....instead I'm stuck in Rome with Covid  (I don't HAVE Covid!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I was supposed to go to London and Sussex last spring/summer, to deal with my mother's Estate, together with my sister who lives there.....instead I'm stuck in Rome with Covid  (I don't HAVE Covid!)



So frustrating. I realize I am whining about first world problems but I wasn't prepared for that thing to make itself comfortable for good :/


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I so badly wanted to go to London, Edinburgh and Paris this year, but then COVID happened *sigh* I also used to love Amsterdam until a stupid ex ruined it for me haha. Funnily the Dutch beach is closer to me than the German North Sea.


Oh believe me, I understand .. we wanted to go to our beloved Bella Italia, but nope .. and couldn't even go back East (Boston) to see family and go to a funeral.  The furthest I go at this point, is outside to swim in my pool .. at least I'm out of the house!  

I can't even imagine the German North Sea because, in general, the North Sea is some rough bit of water!!!


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> I was supposed to go to London and Sussex last spring/summer, to deal with my mother's Estate, together with my sister who lives there.....instead I'm stuck in Rome with Covid  (I don't HAVE Covid!)


You are in my BELOVED ROMA!!!!! .. my absolute favorite City in the world!!!  I would love to move there, but the husband says no - moved to the Italian countryside (I am working on my Italian citizenship)!!


----------



## Annawakes

purseinsanity said:


> Next, we'll see MM trying to get a law degree without going to law school a la Kim Kardashian


She did play one on TV.  I’m sure she’s awaiting her honorary law degree based on that


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Pessie  &  @chicinthecity777 
I'm sorry that my post engendered any distress.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Pessie  &  @chicinthecity777
> I'm sorry that my post engendered any distress.


No need to apologise. I don't think your post was political.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I so badly wanted to go to London, Edinburgh and Paris this year, but then COVID happened *sigh* I also used to love Amsterdam until a stupid ex ruined it for me haha. Funnily the Dutch beach is closer to me than the German North Sea.





CeeJay said:


> Oh believe me, I understand .. we wanted to go to our beloved Bella Italia, but nope .. and couldn't even go back East (Boston) to see family and go to a funeral.  The furthest I go at this point, is outside to swim in my pool .. at least I'm out of the house!
> 
> I can't even imagine the German North Sea because, in general, the North Sea is some rough bit of water!!!


I had such a hard time accepting that I couldn't travel until the end of 2020. I had a trip booked to Boston in April, which I had to cancel. My trips to Europe have been very short in recent years, so I had everything arranged to spend there ~3 months this year. I just hope we all will be able to travel in 2021. I bet we will be posting a lot less about MM&H...


----------



## bag-mania

And as if on cue, here they are pushing their way in and taking over someone else’s advocacy to steal the credit and overshadow the person responsible. How can two people be so pathetically disgraceful? 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Team Up with Malala Yousafzai for International Day of the Girl*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry joined forces with Malala Yousafzai on Sunday to celebrate International Day of the Girl.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex took part in a live video chat with the 23-year-old Pakistani activist in a conversation that saw the trio "discuss the barriers preventing 130 million girls from going to school and why it's essential that we champion every girl's right to learn."

"When young girls have access to education everyone wins and everyone succeeds. It just opens the door for societal success at the highest level," Meghan said at the start of the virtual chat, going on to emphasize how much the coronavirus pandemic has exacerbated the lack of access to education.

“It’s not just robbing a society of the cultural richness that comes with educating young girls," she continued. "It’s also robbing these young girls of childhood.”

Championing the fight for girls' education has been a cause near and dear to Meghan’s heart for years.

“What I had realized very early on was that when women have a seat at the table, conversations in terms of policy change, conversations in terms of legislation and the dynamics of the community are all shifted,” Meghan added.

“And when you have to see how you get a woman to embrace her voice, you have to start with where she is a young girl,” she explained.

Harry also spoke to the impact education can have on climate change.

“The importance of girls’ education to help defer climate change is absolutely critical,” he remarked, noting that education can help open economic doors, “which makes you less susceptible to disaster.”

“So much is at stake when we don’t give a young woman the opportunity to learn and to get an education," Meghan added.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Team Up with Malala Yousafzai for International Day of the Girl
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry joined forces with Malala Yousafzai on Sunday to celebrate International Day of the Girl




					people.com


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> I was supposed to go to London and Sussex last spring/summer, to deal with my mother's Estate, together with my sister who lives there.....instead I'm stuck in Rome with Covid  (I don't HAVE Covid!)


It's frustrating, but I'm jealous you're stuck in Rome!  I would love to be there!!  You don't want to know where I'm stuck...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> And as if on cue, here they are pushing their way in and taking over someone else’s advocacy to steal the credit and overshadow the person responsible. How can two people be so pathetically disgraceful?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Team Up with Malala Yousafzai for International Day of the Girl*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry joined forces with Malala Yousafzai on Sunday to celebrate International Day of the Girl.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex took part in a live video chat with the 23-year-old Pakistani activist in a conversation that saw the trio "discuss the barriers preventing 130 million girls from going to school and why it's essential that we champion every girl's right to learn."
> 
> "When young girls have access to education everyone wins and everyone succeeds. It just opens the door for societal success at the highest level," Meghan said at the start of the virtual chat, going on to emphasize how much the coronavirus pandemic has exacerbated the lack of access to education.
> 
> “It’s not just robbing a society of the cultural richness that comes with educating young girls," she continued. "It’s also robbing these young girls of childhood.”
> 
> Championing the fight for girls' education has been a cause near and dear to Meghan’s heart for years.
> 
> “What I had realized very early on was that when women have a seat at the table, conversations in terms of policy change, conversations in terms of legislation and the dynamics of the community are all shifted,” Meghan added.
> 
> “And when you have to see how you get a woman to embrace her voice, you have to start with where she is a young girl,” she explained.
> 
> Harry also spoke to the impact education can have on climate change.
> 
> “The importance of girls’ education to help defer climate change is absolutely critical,” he remarked, noting that education can help open economic doors, “which makes you less susceptible to disaster.”
> 
> “So much is at stake when we don’t give a young woman the opportunity to learn and to get an education," Meghan added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Team Up with Malala Yousafzai for International Day of the Girl
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry joined forces with Malala Yousafzai on Sunday to celebrate International Day of the Girl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Totally tried to steal her thunder, disgraceful. I am so disgusted with these 2.

MM and H cannot even _begin _to understand the courage of someone like Yousafzai, what she stands for and what she's been through: https://malala.org/malalas-story


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> It's frustrating, but I'm jealous you're stuck in Rome!  I would love to be there!!  You don't want to know where I'm stuck...


I join you on the jealousy, I would love to be in Rome. I can close my eyes and go all the way to Trastevere, to one of those neighborhood restaurants in a narrow street, have a glass of red wine, violins playing...


----------



## csshopper

Did she really just say that Covid was good for providing them the time with Archie?

Meghan added: *'It's just fantastic and in so many ways we are fortunate to have this time to watch him grow. In the absence of Covid, we would be travelling and working more externally and we'd have missed a lot of those moments.' *

Harry added: 'These are really special moments, but we have been working really, really hard.'

I wonder how long it takes her to write this drivel: *The Duchess also added that the couple were raising their eighteen-month-old son Archie 'in a way where everything about his nourishment is about educational substance and how you can learn and how you can grow.' *

I feel soo sorry for this child, he should be in England digging in the dirt and playing games with his cousins George and Charlotte and Louis.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Totally treid to steal her thunder, disgraceful. I am so disgusted with these 2.
> 
> MM and H cannot even _begin _to understand the courage of someone like Yousafzai, what she stands for and what she's been through: https://malala.org/malalas-story


This!  Malala is still so young and she’s already achieved so much in her life.


csshopper said:


> Did she really just say that Covid was good for providing them the time with Archie?
> 
> Meghan added: *'It's just fantastic and in so many ways we are fortunate to have this time to watch him grow. In the absence of Covid, we would be travelling and working more externally and we'd have missed a lot of those moments.' *
> 
> Harry added: 'These are really special moments, but we have been working really, really hard.'
> 
> I wonder how long it takes her to write this drivel: *The Duchess also added that the couple were raising their eighteen-month-old son Archie 'in a way where everything about his nourishment is about educational substance and how you can learn and how you can grow.' *
> 
> I feel soo sorry for this child, he should be in England digging in the dirt and playing games with his cousins George and Charlotte and Louis.


Yeah, that “nourishment“ and “educational substance” bs was the point at which I switched off.  There’s something absurd about her speechifying about the value of education while failing to string a single meaningful sentence together.
I feel very sorry for Archie, and I wonder how isolated he is?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Did she really just say that Covid was good for providing them the time with Archie?
> 
> Meghan added: *'It's just fantastic and in so many ways we are fortunate to have this time to watch him grow. In the absence of Covid, we would be travelling and working more externally and we'd have missed a lot of those moments.' *
> 
> Harry added: 'These are really special moments, but we have been working really, really hard.'
> 
> I wonder how long it takes her to write this drivel: *The Duchess also added that the couple were raising their eighteen-month-old son Archie 'in a way where everything about his nourishment is about educational substance and how you can learn and how you can grow.' *
> 
> I feel soo sorry for this child, he should be in England digging in the dirt and playing games with his cousins George and Charlotte and Louis.


They are all over the place. They have been "working really, really hard" to annoy us with their hypocrisy.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I join you on the jealousy, I would love to be in Rome. I can close my eyes and go all the way to Trastevere, to one of those neighborhood restaurants in a narrow street, have a glass of red wine, violins playing...


Me three!!!! .. I can't even say how many IG accounts I follow that are situated in Rome!


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Did she really just say that Covid was good for providing them the time with Archie?
> I wonder how long it takes her to write this drivel: *The Duchess also added that the couple were raising their eighteen-month-old son Archie 'in a way where everything about his nourishment is about educational substance and how you can learn and how you can grow.' *


Really?? .. and how much can an 18-month pick up on this "so educational" tripe???


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> They have been "working really, really hard" to annoy us with their hypocrisy.



Oh, hypocrisy comes naturally to them. No effort required.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How come Wills and Kate, who have far more important things to do, know their children even though Covid is a fairly new thing? It is well known that unless they are abroad they make time to drop them off at school themselves.


----------



## marietouchet

Re People article on the 130 million uneducated girls/women
I don’t have a subscription but would cancel if I could 
People magazine used to be fun stuff read at hairdresser for a giggle
this article is neither fun nor educational , it is content free word salad


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> I've known some that do.  Usually they're the ones with very low self esteem and feel the need to dictate their resume any chance they get to have others hold them in a higher light.  Hmmm, sounds like someone we know?


LOL, true... I was in a museum committee where a woman introduced herself as Dr.  ............, when the host of the committee said ‘nice to meet you ....,’ (just her name), the Doctor corrected her and said, “Dr. .............” It was hilarious, to me anyway.  I understand, maybe they believe they have worked very hard to become ’doctor’, whether PHD or MD, but, in NutMeg’s case, it’s like insisting to be called Doctor Megan Markle when she was given an Doctors honorary degree and then being stripped of it, and then introducing herself to everyone as Doctor Megan Markle.  Just an analogy....


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Re People article on the 130 million uneducated girls/women
> I don’t have a subscription but would cancel if I could
> People magazine used to be fun stuff read at hairdresser for a giggle
> this article is neither fun nor educational , it is content free word salad


I cancelled People years ago, once I got the impression anyone can pay them to write a flattering article about themselves nowadays.  No interest.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Totally tried to steal her thunder, disgraceful. I am so disgusted with these 2.
> 
> MM and H cannot even _begin _to understand the courage of someone like Yousafzai, what she stands for and what she's been through: https://malala.org/malalas-story


I AGREE, YES ! I think the word salad does a disservice to Malala. Not that the article said so, but about a tenth of the 130 Million women are in Pakistan, I would have liked to know ... Also an issue in sub Saharan Africa (I did my due diligence and researched the subject)

And what is JCMH going to do about this ? Be specific.. Hold a gala???  Boris Johnson has worked on the subject, did they call him ?

And again they are losing focus  and spreading themselves too thin  ... this is a GLOBAL issue, and does not pertain to the USA or UK only

I get confused by their talking about US issues one day, UK stuff the next then hopping to Pakistan (& Africa), this goes to the subject of where and what are they hoping to do? Be specific ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you to all for these outstanding comments! Absolutely the best reading on the internet 

So, the KimK transformation is complete?








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry join Malala Yousafzai for virtual chat
					

The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, joined Malala Yousafzai, 23, for a virtual chat about the challenges girls around the world face accessing education in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




@marietouchet  He will just whine about it, er, shine a light on it. Then, others can do the real work.


----------



## Annawakes

Is societal really a word?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> LOL, true... I was in a museum committee where a woman introduced herself as Dr.  ............, when the host of the committee said ‘nice to meet you ....,’ (just her name), the Doctor corrected her and said, “Dr. .............” It was hilarious, to me anyway.  I understand, maybe they believe they have worked very hard to become ’doctor’, whether PHD or MD, but, in NutMeg’s case, it’s like insisting to be called Doctor Megan Markle when she was given an Doctors honorary degree and then being stripped of it, and then introducing herself to everyone as Doctor Megan Markle.  Just an analogy....


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Re People article on the 130 million uneducated girls/women
> I don’t have a subscription but would cancel if I could
> People magazine used to be fun stuff read at hairdresser for a giggle
> this article is neither fun nor educational , it is content free word salad


This is a serious subject y'all, dont go mess with my gossip rags, if I want to read a serious report I turn to The Times or Wall St Journal not People


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you to all for these outstanding comments! Absolutely the best reading on the internet
> 
> So, the KimK transformation is complete?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry join Malala Yousafzai for virtual chat
> 
> 
> The Duke, 35, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, joined Malala Yousafzai, 23, for a virtual chat about the challenges girls around the world face accessing education in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @marietouchet  He will just whine about it, er, shine a light on it. Then, others can do the real work.


Yes, there will be whining and illumination, the pair just does not communicate with my inner geek


Annawakes said:


> Is societal really a word?


Google said yes, I had to look it up, not a word I use in casual conservation

relating to society or social relations. "societal change"


----------



## LittleStar88

They come off as wanting to get their fingers into everything possible, and appear more like coattail-riding opportunists.


----------



## A1aGypsy

scarlet555 said:


> LOL, true... I was in a museum committee where a woman introduced herself as Dr.  ............, when the host of the committee said ‘nice to meet you ....,’ (just her name), the Doctor corrected her and said, “Dr. .............” It was hilarious, to me anyway.  I understand, maybe they believe they have worked very hard to become ’doctor’, whether PHD or MD, but, in NutMeg’s case, it’s like insisting to be called Doctor Megan Markle when she was given an Doctors honorary degree and then being stripped of it, and then introducing herself to everyone as Doctor Megan Markle.  Just an analogy....



I think this can be a touchy subject. 

I have a friend who is a highly educated and highly skilled neurologist. She specializes and also does forensic and pathology work. She does a lot of charity work. The events are usually styled “Dr. & Mr hislastname”. Inevitably at every event, people will refer to her husband as doctor. Once he corrects them, they will then introduce her as Mrs hislastname, even though he clearly tells them that she is the doctor. 

It just isn’t cool.  She earned that title. And it’s bull**** that, because she is a woman, people specifically choose not to use it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> I think this can be a touchy subject.
> 
> I have a friend who is a highly educated and highly skilled neurologist. She specializes and also does forensic and pathology work. She does a lot of charity work. The events are usually styled “Dr. & Mr hislastname”. Inevitably at every event, people will refer to her husband as doctor. Once he corrects them, they will then introduce her as Mrs hislastname, even though he clearly tells them that she is the doctor.
> 
> It just isn’t cool.  She earned that title. And it’s bull**** that, because she is a woman, people specifically choose not to use it.



Exactly. I roll my eyes at people who are c*cky about it, but with women I feel they are so often deliberately robbed of their achievements that I kind of understand if they insist.


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> I think this can be a touchy subject.
> 
> I have a friend who is a highly educated and highly skilled neurologist. She specializes and also does forensic and pathology work. She does a lot of charity work. The events are usually styled “Dr. & Mr hislastname”. Inevitably at every event, people will refer to her husband as doctor. Once he corrects them, they will then introduce her as Mrs hislastname, even though he clearly tells them that she is the doctor.
> 
> It just isn’t cool.  She earned that title. And it’s bull**** that, because she is a woman, people specifically choose not to use it.



Doctor = earned, recognised throughout the world
Duchess = given, not recognised in republics


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Doctor = earned, recognised throughout the world
> Duchess = given, not recognised in republics



Given to her husband no less, not her personally *coughs*


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> Doctor = earned, recognised throughout the world
> Duchess = given, not recognised in republics



Yup, definitely wasn’t commenting on that. I was commenting on the museum story and that sometimes there is another side.


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Yup, wasn’t commenting on that. I was commenting on the museum story and that sometimes there is another side.



I was agreeing with you


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> I was agreeing with you



Oh good. I hoped it didn’t seem like I was a MM apologist suddenly.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan is trying to be all things to all people--from addressing teen audiences and trying insinuate that she's in her 20's, to hanging with women in their 80's (Steinem) or pretending to have been so familiar with RBG or O'Keefe. Is she showing off her wokeness? Nobody seems off limits. She's cloyingly desperate to be on camera. As for being grateful for Covid so they get to see more of Archie, what she really seems to be saying is that if they were able to travel freely she'd have invited herself to many more events. Hmm. Are they praying for another pandemic during Archie's teen years so they can spend more time with him then? Other people are able to make time for their own children EVEN WHEN THERE'S NO PANDEMIC! Surely Meghan must marvel at that.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> They come off as wanting to get their fingers into everything possible, and *appear* more like coattail-riding opportunists.


Fixed that for you .. HA HA HA!!


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Meghan is trying to be all things to all people--from addressing teen audiences and *trying insinuate that she's in her 20's*, to hanging with women in their 80's (Steinem) or pretending to have been so familiar with RBG or O'Keefe. Is she showing off her wokeness? Nobody seems off limits. She's cloying desperate to be on camera. As for being grateful for Covid so they get to see more of Archie, what she really seems to be saying is that if they were able to travel freely she'd have invited herself to many more events. Hmm. Are they praying for another pandemic during Archie's teen years so they can spend more time with him then? Other people are able to make time for their own children EVEN WHEN THERE'S NO PANDEMIC! Surely Meghan must marvel at that.


I think 'in her mind', she still is in her [early] 20's .. however, she seems to act as though she's still in her [early] teen years!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pessie said:


> Yeah, that “nourishment“ and “educational substance” bs was the point at which I switched off.  There’s something absurd about her speechifying about the value of education while failing to string a single meaningful sentence together.
> I feel very sorry for Archie, and I wonder how isolated he is?


I hope she's holding Archie while spouting that educational drivel and that he gives her drivel from both ends at the same time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh good. I hoped it didn’t seem like I was a MM apologist suddenly.



No  . 

IMO, it's totally different for a 5-min duchess to insist on being called Duchess at every opportunity than for a real doctor to insist on people calling her by her real name.  

Would someone be happy to be called Mrs if she was a Miss (or vice versa)? Would someone mind being called Mr if they were a Mrs? It's not their name. 

It's actually a real thing that people love to strip women of their professional titles and do it often purposely or unconsciously. Happens all the time.


----------



## scarlet555

A1aGypsy said:


> I think this can be a touchy subject.
> 
> I have a friend who is a highly educated and highly skilled neurologist. She specializes and also does forensic and pathology work. She does a lot of charity work. The events are usually styled “Dr. & Mr hislastname”. Inevitably at every event, people will refer to her husband as doctor. Once he corrects them, they will then introduce her as Mrs hislastname, even though he clearly tells them that she is the doctor.
> 
> It just isn’t cool.  She earned that title. And it’s bull**** that, because she is a woman, people specifically choose not to use it.



People choosing not to use it in a formal setting is different and I see your point .  Perhaps that doctor in my story felt her title was downplayed, she did do the schooling for her chiropractor degree and worked hard, again, not talking about Nutmeg obviously who is ridiculous, but it was such a casual setting for all the committee attendees to get to know each other, not an award or formal event.  I’m not sure how MD or PHD Or chiropractors or pharmacist pharm D , want to be addressed in casual settings, perhaps they can chime in.   The host was also a doctor and did not introduce themselves as such.  It’s a personal preference... and a touchy subject, yes.  Appreciate your take


----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> I think this can be a touchy subject.
> 
> I have a friend who is a highly educated and highly skilled neurologist. She specializes and also does forensic and pathology work. She does a lot of charity work. The events are usually styled “Dr. & Mr hislastname”. Inevitably at every event, people will refer to her husband as doctor. Once he corrects them, they will then introduce her as Mrs hislastname, even though he clearly tells them that she is the doctor.
> 
> It just isn’t cool.  She earned that title. And it’s bull**** that, because she is a woman, people specifically choose not to use it.


Very familiar with the subject, and I couldn't agree more with you!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Exactly. I roll my eyes at people who are c*cky about it, but with women I feel they are so often deliberately robbed of their achievements that I kind of understand if they insist.


Good point.  Female physicians are often assumed to be nurses even by patients.  Sexism still exists!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Meghan is trying to be all things to all people--from addressing teen audiences and trying insinuate that she's in her 20's, to hanging with women in their 80's (Steinem) or pretending to have been so familiar with RBG or O'Keefe. Is she showing off her wokeness? Nobody seems off limits. She's cloying desperate to be on camera. As for being grateful for Covid so they get to see more of Archie, what she really seems to be saying is that if they were able to travel freely she'd have invited herself to many more events. Hmm. Are they praying for another pandemic during Archie's teen years so they can spend more time with him then? Other people are able to make time for their own children EVEN WHEN THERE'S NO PANDEMIC! Surely Meghan must marvel at that.


I found that an odd thing to say as well.  What would they normally have been so busy doing that they'd miss that much time with Archie??  Kate and William seem to be able to find time to spend with their kids.  MM and JCMH are so much more in demand that THANK GOD for COVID so Archie gets some attention?


----------



## StylishMD

purseinsanity said:


> Good point.  Female physicians are often assumed to be nurses even by patients.  Sexism still exists!


Every.damn.day
even after Introducing  myself as ‘Dr’
Even WITH the big ass name tag that says ‘Physician’
and there’s also housekeeping and dietary
(and I mean no disrespect to ANYONE who works in those profession)


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I found that an odd thing to say as well.  What would they normally have been so busy doing that they'd miss that much time with Archie??  Kate and William seem to be able to find time to spend with their kids.  MM and JCMH are so much more in demand that *THANK GOD for COVID so Archie gets some attention*?



It is very understandable! Crashing zoom meetings takes a lot less time than crashing live events, so they have more time for little Archie. MM & H are also getting more of our attention due to COVID.


----------



## Genie27

To continue our OT discussion, and irrelevant to our erstwhile Dukess and her penchant for titles and curtsies - A friend posted a news-photo a while back showing a group pic of 6 people in the medical field, who had done something charitable, impressive and obviously noteworthy. The caption read more or less as follows: From L to R: Dr Male FullName, Debra, Mary, Dr Male Full Name, Jane and Dr Male Full Name.
The person who posted the article then listed the qualifications/LinkedIn pages of all three women - all Docs in their own right. No titles, no equal weight to their contributions or earned qualifications.

I tried to find it but my friend is a very prolific poster.


----------



## Genie27

marietouchet said:


> I AGREE, YES ! I think the word salad does a disservice to Malala. Not that the article said so, but about a tenth of the 130 Million women are in Pakistan, I would have liked to know ... Also an issue in sub Saharan Africa (I did my due diligence and researched the subject)
> 
> And what is JCMH going to do about this ? Be specific.. Hold a gala???  Boris Johnson has worked on the subject, did they call him ?
> 
> And again they are losing focus  and spreading themselves too thin  ... this is a GLOBAL issue, and does not pertain to the USA or UK only
> 
> I get confused by their talking about US issues one day, UK stuff the next then hopping to Pakistan (& Africa), this goes to the subject of where and what are they hoping to do? Be specific ...


They are global influencers. There is noting they can’t shine a flashlight on briefly, before moving on to the next crises du jour. So many problems, so little bandwidth and zoom time.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Totally tried to steal her thunder, disgraceful. I am so disgusted with these 2.
> 
> MM and H cannot even _begin _to understand the courage of someone like Yousafzai, what she stands for and what she's been through: https://malala.org/malalas-story


Absolutely and this beautiful young lady did not need the fakery support of the grifters. She stands on her own.


----------



## Stansy

Genie27 said:


> To continue our OT discussion, and irrelevant to our erstwhile Dukess and her penchant for titles and curtsies - A friend posted a news-photo a while back showing a group pic of 6 people in the medical field, who had done something charitable, impressive and obviously noteworthy. The caption read more or less as follows: From L to R: Dr Male FullName, Debra, Mary, Dr Male Full Name, Jane and Dr Male Full Name.
> The person who posted the article then listed the qualifications/LinkedIn pages of all three women - all Docs in their own right. No titles, no equal weight to their contributions or earned qualifications.
> 
> I tried to find it but my friend is a very prolific poster.



yes!! You should see the sh!tstorm someone received on linkedin for posting a pic of this young woman holding a sign that said „I am the doctor my mom wanted me to marry“. WTF ??!!


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> To continue our OT discussion, and irrelevant to our erstwhile Dukess and her penchant for titles and curtsies - A friend posted a news-photo a while back showing a group pic of 6 people in the medical field, who had done something charitable, impressive and obviously noteworthy. The caption read more or less as follows: From L to R: Dr Male FullName, Debra, Mary, Dr Male Full Name, Jane and Dr Male Full Name.
> The person who posted the article then listed the qualifications/LinkedIn pages of all three women - all Docs in their own right. No titles, no equal weight to their contributions or earned qualifications.
> 
> I tried to find it but my friend is a very prolific poster.



I'd love to see that. It's so bl**dy typical


----------



## Luvbolide

I can't believe that these two clowns talk about how hard they are working.  Totally tone deaf.  There are families working their tail ends off to try to keep family-run small businesses that have been around for years afloat. Crashing Zoom calls from your however-the-hell-many bedroom house for 2 people and a baby isn't exactly the same.  Arghhhh...they drive me crazy with this BS.

As I mentioned earlier, I think that their PR folks are doing them a serious disservice.  Before their plaster their faces everywhere and let them spout ridiculous tone deaf drivel, they should be working on making themselves more appealing so that they don't end up with thousands of nasty comments on every single article about them.

Although I suppose that to MM these comments are all part of the "almost unsurvivable" trolling that she claims to have received.  Some of these kids that they were spouting word salad at on that day (mental health day) no doubt have suffered from some serious issues like homelessness, food insecurity, physical/emotional or sexual abuse and the like. But no, MM had it MUCH worse because people were being mean to her.  Call a whaaaambulance!  Blech....


----------



## papertiger

Stansy said:


> yes!! You should see the sh!tstorm someone received on linkedin for posting a pic of this young woman holding a sign that said „I am the doctor my mom wanted me to marry“. WTF ??!!



It's close to what Malala fights for too. And we think we are so sorted in the West.

There's a mug on Etsy that says 'Be the doctor your parents wanted you to marry'. Great present for students going to Med school (of either gender).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It's close to what Malala fights for too. And we think we are so sorted in the West.
> 
> There's a mug on Etsy that says 'Be the doctor your parents wanted you to marry'. Great present for students going to Med school (of either gender).



My youngest brother who is in med school brought his new gf over the summer who is in his program, a year below him. That girl is so seriously bright and smart, I bet most guys have nothing on her.

Also, on Malala...I recently got into a Twitter discussion (which I try to avoid haha) because some men (of course) claimed women in the west are spoiled and should stop whining about their rights - this was after a teenage girl in Iran was killed by her father after she ran away with a man 15 years older. Father walked free, pedo wasn't touched by oh so enraged father. So I said that while my heart breaks for her I refuse to see my needs met just because my father doesn't try to murder me in my sleep. WTF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> You are in my BELOVED ROMA!!!!! .. my absolute favorite City in the world!!!  I would love to move there, but the husband says no - moved to the Italian countryside (I am working on my Italian citizenship)!!



I agree with your hubby, Rome is total chaos!! I would have gone elsewhere ages ago if my kids didn't live here, well except for the one in NYC who wants to come back to Europe anyway, I want to be near them and see my grandkids grow!!

Sorry, off topic!!


----------



## Luvbolide

Meanwhile, I thought that this article just about sums it up...wonder who will break it to them - LOL!!

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry brand under threat – 'zero interest' without royal links*

Meghan and Prince Harry could be paid several hundreds of thousands of pounds for a speaking engagement now that they are no longer tied to the Royal Family as full-time working members. But their stellar worth sits with their links to royalty, according to Brand and reputation management expert Eric Schiffer. 


Mr Schiffer warned there would have been "zero interest" in Harry Wales and Meghan Markle from organisations interested in hiring paid speakers at their events.
He told Express.co.uk: "If neither of them had royalty ties there would be zero interest.
"And they get a premium because they have now created a tie with Hollywood.

"As a couple, I think we could see a low-to-medium level six figures for speaking engagements." 


However, the chairman of Reputation Management Consultants added this eye-watering figure applies only to the Duke and Duchess as a couple.

He continued: "Their value is collective.

"The power is in the couple, it’s not in the individuals.

"In either of the individuals [as paid speakers] the value is decimated


"But Harry would always have more value because of where he comes from.

"Meghan's value is amplified significantly because of the royal heritage."

It is not known whether Meghan and Harry have taken part in any paid speaking engagement yet, after the coronavirus pandemic forced all organisations to cancel their events or move them to online platforms.

Meghan joined the Royal Family on May 19 2018, upon tying the knot with Harry at St George's Chapel in Windsor.  

This is from the Express, which seems like a British tabloid.  Got a kick out of it anyway, though!


----------



## doni

I also cut some slack to women using their professional titles even when it may be not so appropriate. Here in Germany, dr. titles are very important, not just medical doctors, but Ph.Ds. People have them in the door bells, for passers by to see. And it can be particularly relevant for women. I have this friend, a lawyer, her parents are Korean, and she worked so hard to get her doctorate while bringing up two babies because she understood that, being of Korean origin and a woman, it was essential to gain respect and acceptance in her field. She gets upset when people miss her Dr. when it does not happen to others, and she is right. So sometimes she may overdo it and who can blame her.

OT off. What I don‘t get is this, corona is so good to us because we get to spend time with Archie instead of traveling all over the place and not seeing him.
But who would oblige them to travel all over the place? They are not working for the Royal family so they can do as they wish. Plus, aren’t they opposed to non essential traveling on environmental grounds?
Basically what they are saying is, it is nice to have time with Archie, but if it was up to us we would rather choose to be traveling all over the place?

I guess what they wanted was to be empathetic to people that may be in the position of enjoying seeing their kids instead of going to the office. Which is just not the same kind of choice though...
The thing about the nourishment and education, I didn’t understand one single word of it, but English is not my first language...
It is fascinating this, in terms of celebrity culture, really.


----------



## chicinthecity777

So MM, tells millions of viewers that being criticised online is "almost unsurvivable". While having a high profile PR link up with Malala Yousafzai, who literally survived being shot in the head! You can't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


----------



## Pessie

chicinthecity777 said:


> So MM, tells millions of viewers that being criticised online is "almost unsurvivable". While having a high profile PR link up with Malala Yousafzai, who literally survived being shot in the head! You can't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


It’s insane


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> They come off as wanting to get their fingers into everything possible, and appear more like coattail-riding opportunists.


They're the Grandstand Duo, grabbing any "cause" that will get them in the news/media and hopefully it sticks (and makes them $$$$). 

What I'm watching is how long before these people doing genuine work with these causes realize that these two aren't helping the issue/causes and are just grabbing onto/inserting themselves for their own benefit? Seriously, all these two have done is whine about how hard and awful things have been for* them.*


----------



## kemilia

Luvbolide said:


> I can't believe that these two clowns talk about how hard they are working.  Totally tone deaf.  There are families working their tail ends off to try to keep family-run small businesses that have been around for years afloat. Crashing Zoom calls from your however-the-hell-many bedroom house for 2 people and a baby isn't exactly the same.  Arghhhh...they drive me crazy with this BS.
> 
> As I mentioned earlier, I think that their PR folks are doing them a serious disservice.  Before their plaster their faces everywhere and let them spout ridiculous tone deaf drivel, they should be working on making themselves more appealing so that they don't end up with thousands of nasty comments on every single article about them.
> 
> Although I suppose that to MM these comments are all part of the "almost unsurvivable" trolling that she claims to have received.  Some of these kids that they were spouting word salad at on that day (mental health day) no doubt have suffered from some serious issues like homelessness, food insecurity, physical/emotional or sexual abuse and the like. But no, MM had it MUCH worse because people were being mean to her.  *Call a whaaaambulance!*  Blech....


Love this! I will be using this for some individuals in my own little circle.


----------



## kemilia

doni said:


> I also cut some slack to women using their professional titles even when it may be not so appropriate. Here in Germany, dr. titles are very important, not just medical doctors, but Ph.Ds. People have them in the door bells, for passers by to see. And it can be particularly relevant for women. I have this friend, a lawyer, her parents are Korean, and she worked so hard to get her doctorate while bringing up two babies because she understood that, being of Korean origin and a woman, it was essential to gain respect and acceptance in her field. She gets upset when people miss her Dr. when it does not happen to others, and she is right. So sometimes she may overdo it and who can blame her.
> 
> OT off. What I don‘t get is this, corona is so good to us because we get to spend time with Archie instead of traveling all over the place and not seeing him.
> But who would oblige them to travel all over the place? They are not working for the Royal family so they can do as they wish. Plus, aren’t they opposed to non essential traveling on environmental grounds?
> Basically what they are saying is, it is nice to have time with Archie, but if it was up to us we would rather choose to be traveling all over the place?
> 
> I guess what they wanted was to be empathetic to people that may be in the position of enjoying seeing their kids instead of going to the office. Which is just not the same kind of choice though...
> *The thing about the nourishment and education, I didn’t understand one single word of it, but English is not my first language...*
> It is fascinating this, in terms of celebrity culture, really.


No worries--American English is my first, and sadly, only language, and I didn't understand what she was blabbing about either. 

She just had to toss some word salad out there--the little guy is a BABY and just needs to be loved, fed and well-cared for.


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> I'd love to see that. It's so bl**dy typical


I wish I could find it to share here - I scrolled back on my friend’s FB posts for 20 minutes and only got to mid July.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> So MM, tells millions of viewers that being criticised online is "almost unsurvivable". While having a high profile PR link up with Malala Yousafzai, who literally survived being shot in the head! You can't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


and Malala is showing her deep respect here....for what I'm not sure...for being Duchess?


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> *Meghan** and Prince Harry could be paid several hundreds of thousands of pounds for a speaking engagement *now that they are no longer tied to the Royal Family as full-time working members. But their stellar worth sits with their links to royalty, according to Brand and reputation management expert Eric Schiffer.


Unless they are paid to entertain the audience with their out of place (self-pity) comments and pompous/condescending attitude (particularly from MM), I wonder why would they be paid for speaking engagements. Several hundreds of thousands of pounds is still a lot of money that could be donated to worthy causes.



doni said:


> OT off. *What I don‘t get is this, corona is so good to us because we get to spend time with Archie instead of traveling all over the place and not seeing him.*
> But who would oblige them to travel all over the place? They are not working for the Royal family so they can do as they wish. Plus, aren’t they opposed to non essential traveling on environmental grounds?
> Basically what they are saying is, it is nice to have time with Archie, but if it was up to us we would rather choose to be traveling all over the place?


I also don't get it (unless I'm joking). They are not obliged to crash any meeting, they don't seem to add any valid input to the crashed meetings...  I don't see any empathy coming from them towards their family or anyone in general. I only see two people with an ostentatious life style that don't miss an opportunity to call attention to themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> So MM, tells millions of viewers that being criticised online is "almost unsurvivable". While having a high profile PR link up with Malala Yousafzai, who literally survived being shot in the head! You can't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


her whining while being in Such a Privileged position is despicable.....uugh....and people are giving her respect.  I don't get it


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> and Malala is showing her deep respect here....for what I'm not sure...for being Duchess?


I honestly don't understand what Malala sees in them, or anybody sees in them but guess I am biased! I am sure their fans have a lot good things to say about them...


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I honestly don't understand what Malala sees in them, or anybody sees in them but guess I am biased! I am sure their fans have a lot good things to say about them...


I'm with you.  I'll admit to being biased too.  But really? unsurvivable?  when we're in a pandemic and in addition to all the extremely underpriveleged people who have always existed, people all over the world are dying from the virus....come on


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I'm with you.  I'll admit to being biased too.  But really? unsurvivable?  when we're in a pandemic and in addition to all the extremely underpriveleged people who have always existed, people all over the world are dying from the virus....come on


New achievement add to her CV - survived on-line trolling!  don't get me wrong it's a big issue, but she's hardly the only person who has received negative tweets on-line. And she said she didn't read anything written about her anyway, no?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> New achievement add to her CV - survived on-line trolling!  don't get me wrong it's a big issue, but she's hardly the only person who has received negative tweets on-line. And she said she didn't read anything written about her anyway, no?


right...it's not a good thing but unsurvivable?  
who gave her Such high expectations on life?  she must Thrive, not just survive....now she practically couldn't survive because people were picking on her


----------



## duna

I'm sooo waiting for the Queen to summon JCMH!!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I'm sooo waiting for the Queen to summon JCMH!!


the queen seems like a very patient woman


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> the queen seems like a *very patient* woman


Just like most of us, when we have to deal with morons or idiots or _insert a name_.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> right...it's not a good thing but unsurvivable?
> who gave her Such high expectations on life?  she must Thrive, not just survive....now she practically couldn't survive because people were picking on her


This tweet sums up pretty well!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> I honestly don't understand what Malala sees in them, or anybody sees in them but guess I am biased! I am sure their fans have a lot good things to say about them...



Meghan and Harry have carefully cultivated their image so that unless you are actively following them you may not see through the facade. They have been out there waving their flag of GOOD INTENTIONS from the moment they left, what with the sporadic charity visits and Zoom calls. Most people are not looking closely enough to see the blatant hypocrisy. As for their fans, they see them the way they want them to be. Whether they became emotionally invested in the Hallmark-like story of Meghan as the biracial American divorcee becoming a duchess or Harry as the prince who walked away from it all for luuuuuuuv, they don't want to let go of the image they fabricated in their heads.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Meghan and Harry have carefully cultivated their image so that unless you are actively following them you may not see through the facade. They have been out there waving their flag of GOOD INTENTIONS from the moment they left, what with the sporadic charity visits and Zoom calls. Most people are not looking closely enough to see the blatant hypocrisy. As for their fans, they see them the way they want them to be. Whether they became emotionally invested in the Hallmark-like story of Meghan as the biracial American divorcee becoming a duchess or Harry as the prince who walked away from it all for luuuuuuuv, they don't want to let go of the image they fabricated in their heads.


I will never forget a black actress (whose name I don't recall right now) on The View saying Meghan fell in looove with a man who just happened to be a prince.....this is a "mature" woman (age-wise).  Come on.  Even if she does love him you can't take the prince part out of it.  He was the Huge Catch.


----------



## Chanbal

Well... This is the description of a delusional person imo:

*Meghan Markle told her PR team that she wanted to be the 'most famous person on the planet' before she and Harry quit the Royal Family, Lady Colin Campbell claims*
According to the author, this included the Duchess of Sussex telling her PR team that her ambition was to be the best known celebrity in the world, a mission that could only be realised by being 'controversial'.

Speaking on Graham Norton's BBC podcast, Lady Colin Campbell said: 'I started writing that book because last year I knew privately that Meghan - with Harry's connivance was getting up to all sorts of things in America that she was completely forbidden from doing as a royal.

'To be the most famous person on earth, it's a very deliberate policy and it has to involve a tremendous amount of controversy, otherwise you're just not that famous.'

narcissist personality


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan found online trolling "nearly unsurvivable", she would not last 5 minutes if she were to run for any office. If she did run, it'd be a voluntary decision on her part so the last thing she could do is complain about being attacked. She couldn't hack it. If she were serious about it, she might want to start with getting on a library board. But there would be required meetings to attend and where would she ever find the time? At least she'd have access to books on the British Commonwealth that she didn't know about.  

If she were to read this thread, could she survive?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I honestly don't understand what Malala sees in them, or anybody sees in them but guess I am biased! I am sure their fans have a lot good things to say about them...



I mean, I don't even understand what he sees in her.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I will never forget a black actress (whose name I don't recall right now) on The View saying Meghan fell in looove with a man who just happened to be a prince.....this is a "mature" woman (age-wise).  Come on.  Even if she does love him you can't take the prince part out of it.  He was the Huge Catch.



I can understand the psychology of it to some degree. There is no doubt that Meghan was a positive symbol to many WOC when the engagement was announced.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I can understand the psychology of it to some degree. There is no doubt that Meghan was a positive symbol to many WOC when the engagement was announced.


And it went downhill from there.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I can understand the psychology of it to some degree. There is no doubt that Meghan was a positive symbol to many WOC when the engagement was announced.


I can understand to a certain extent but as a independent woman, (I wouldn't even call myself a feminist) marrying into a rich and privileged family isn't an achievement or an improvement to me. It wouldn't be a big deal to me and I would never trade places with MM.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I honestly don't understand what Malala sees in them, or anybody sees in them but guess I am biased! I am sure their fans have a lot good things to say about them...


Malala’s charity is represented by Sunshine Sachs. We have seen this association between charities repped  by them and and the Sussex  on prior occasions.   To me that is not a good look.  She did ask them for a donation and her charity prefers hard cash. She’ll have a long wait.

I am more annoyed at them giving out mental health advice. Not their place and they are not professionals. It was an all about Meghan video again and her whining anyway. The kids gained nothing from this experience except the sense that they would never participat in something like this again.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> I can understand to a certain extent but as a independent woman, (I wouldn't even call myself a feminist) marrying into a rich and privileged family isn't an achievement or an improvement to me. It wouldn't be a big deal to me and I would never trade places with MM.



True, but there are some who look to marrying up as an indication of success even in this day and age. There are likely lots of women who think marrying into royalty to attain high status is the ultimate dream, even if they wouldn't want to admit it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

rose60610 said:


> If she were to read this thread, could she survive?



I have a feeling someone on her staff does read it....  just a feeling.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> True, but there are some who look to marrying up as an indication of success even in this day and age. There are likely lots of women who think marrying into royalty to attain high status is the ultimate dream, even if they wouldn't want to admit it.



I would LOVE to marry into money.  Marrying into royalty though is like a job in itself... it would really depend on whether me and the royal had the same goals/outlook on fame, privacy, work schedules, etc.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I would LOVE to marry into money.  Marrying into royalty though is like a job in itself... it would really depend on whether me and the royal had the same goals/outlook on fame, privacy, work schedules, etc.


When I was young and in my 20’s I don’t know that I would have liked all the restrictions.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> I have a feeling someone on her staff does read it....  just a feeling.



I think you are correct. Occasionally I have considered that when I am writing a post, but I haven't allowed it to inhibit me.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I would LOVE to marry into money.  Marrying into royalty though is like a job in itself... it would really depend on whether me and the royal had the same goals/outlook on fame, privacy, work schedules, etc.



We know from the engagement interviews that Meghan and Harry said they were on the same page as far as their goals. However, the reality was far less glamorous and much more work than Meghan anticipated and here we are!


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I'm sooo waiting for the Queen to summon JCMH!!


Good news ? 
Kanye got into the UK and got called out by Piers Morgan for no 14 day quarantine
I figure there is some special thing whereby a US doctor can certify that you have quarantined for 14 days and the UK will accept that ???
So, you can get into the UK from the US. Getting through HMS Bubble to see the Queen is another matter entirely 

No clue whether K can ever come home again ... lol


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Good news ?
> Kanye got into the UK and got called out by Piers Morgan for no 14 day quarantine
> I figure there is some special thing whereby a US doctor can certify that you have quarantined for 14 days and the UK will accept that ???
> So, you can get into the UK from the US. Getting through HMS Bubble to see the Queen is another matter entirely
> 
> No clue whether K can ever come home again ... lol


money buys many things


----------



## bellecate

Luvbolide said:


> I can't believe that these two clowns talk about how hard they are working.  Totally tone deaf.  There are families working their tail ends off to try to keep family-run small businesses that have been around for years afloat. Crashing Zoom calls from your however-the-hell-many bedroom house for 2 people and a baby isn't exactly the same.  Arghhhh...they drive me crazy with this BS.
> 
> As I mentioned earlier, I think that their PR folks are doing them a serious disservice.  Before their plaster their faces everywhere and let them spout ridiculous tone deaf drivel, they should be working on making themselves more appealing so that they don't end up with thousands of nasty comments on every single article about them.
> 
> Although I suppose that to MM these comments are all part of the "almost unsurvivable" trolling that she claims to have received.  Some of these kids that they were spouting word salad at on that day (mental health day) no doubt have suffered from some serious issues like homelessness, food insecurity, physical/emotional or sexual abuse and the like. But no, MM had it MUCH worse because people were being mean to her.  Call a whaaaambulance!  Blech....



I don’t think it’s so much their PR firm doing them a disservice but that it’s Megain (know it all)telling them what to do.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> her whining while being in Such a Privileged position is despicable.....uugh....and people are giving her respect.  I don't get it





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I don't even understand what he sees in her.



I think he sees in her what he needs to see. Someone to tell him what to do and someone that is a victim.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I think he sees in her what he needs to see. Someone to tell him what to do and someone that is a victim.


a victim who's dominating him?  yes, the media is out to get her just like his mom.  he's a case of arrested development


----------



## lalame

Random but I was looking at Pottery Barn today and noticed they sell an item named Markle. Guess what it is...   A mirror. Had a good chuckle about it.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Good news ?
> Kanye got into the UK and got called out by Piers Morgan for no 14 day quarantine
> I figure there is some special thing whereby a US doctor can certify that you have quarantined for 14 days and the UK will accept that ???
> So, you can get into the UK from the US. Getting through HMS Bubble to see the Queen is another matter entirely
> 
> No clue whether K can ever come home again ... lol



I don't think anyone knows how to handle Kanye so he does what he wants. Nobody wants to feel the wrath of his Twitter storm because they told him "no." It looks like he's in London with North, I don't know whether Kim and the other kids are with them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't think anyone knows how to handle Kanye so he does what he wants. Nobody wants to feel the wrath of his Twitter storm because they told him "no." It looks like he's in London with North, I don't know whether Kim and the other kids are with them.


the british government is afraid of his tweets?  more likely IMO he got some lawyer to arrange something for him


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the british government is afraid of his tweets?  more likely IMO he got some lawyer to arrange something for him



Well, he is a presidential candidate in at least a dozen states, perhaps he got some sort of diplomatic dispensation. It's 2020, nothing is too weird.


----------



## Chanbal

One more bandwagon:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Are all women’s magazines these days written for celebrity-crazed tweens?  Check out this poorly written article from Cosmo, full of Harry and Meghan love and William-bashing.  









						Apparently Prince William "Couched" His Judgy Comments About Meghan Markle as "Concern" for Her
					

NOT TODAY, WILLIAM.




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				



.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Meghan and Harry have carefully cultivated their image so that unless you are actively following them you may not see through the facade. They have been out there waving their flag of GOOD INTENTIONS from the moment they left, what with the sporadic charity visits and Zoom calls. Most people are not looking closely enough to see the blatant hypocrisy. As for their fans, they see them the way they want them to be. Whether they became emotionally invested in the Hallmark-like story of Meghan as the biracial American divorcee becoming a duchess or *Harry as the prince who walked away from it all for luuuuuuuv*


I really did laugh out loud at this!  Thanks!


----------



## CarryOn2020

And in another part of the palace, Kate looks *amazing* today. Very polished, poised and professional.  She makes it look truly effortless — and in a pandemic! No complaining, no dissing her kids, no fussing.  Just professional and beautiful.









						Kate Middleton visits Natural History Museum for photography award
					

The Duchess of Cambridge, 38, appeared elegant in a glamorous black suit during the visit to the Natural History Museum ahead of the virtual award ceremony tomorrow night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

These two are officially beyond pathetic. I can’t even find a word that describes how disgusted I am with these two whiny, self entitled juvenile, nauseating..........



Chanbal said:


> One more bandwagon:
> 
> View attachment 4876458


----------



## Straight-Laced

Comment in the The Telegraph UK today from Celia Walden - aka Mrs Piers Morgan - on the lack of sensitivity and empathy displayed during Covid times by this spoiled couple in a bubble, but mostly by What About Me-Meghan :


*Harry and Meghan epitomise the true Covid Divide*
The Sussexes live in a bubble at the best of times. If they're going to weigh in, it needs to be done cautiously – and with empathy
CELIA WALDEN 12 OCTOBER 2020

*"*Altruistic: showing a disinterested and selfless concern for the wellbeing of others; unselfish. Perhaps the Duchess of Sussex should have looked up the adjective before inviting a group of California teens who had set up their “relaxed but altruistic” podcast, Teenager Therapy, into her Santa Barbara home for a bout of virtue signalling on Mental Health Day.

Because there sat these three kids, eager to discuss the teen anxieties and experiences that have been heightened to a crippling level during the pandemic – and they couldn’t get a word in edgeways. You see, Meghan wanted to “speak personally”, and turn Teenager Therapy, once again, into All About Meghan.

“I’m told that in 2019 I was the most trolled person in the entire world– male or female,” she announced, as the trio of teens were forced to bite back their own tales of isolation and estrangement in order to make room for her irrepressible #feelings.

*Teenager Therapy*
@TeenagerTherapy

OUR EPISODE WITH HARRY AND MEGHAN IS OUT!
3:11 AM · Oct 11, 2020

A few words would have killed the Duchess’s violin solo dead. Adele was, in fact, the most trolled person of 2019 (weight loss), with reality star Gemma Collins(fatness, bad make-up) in second place. But the only words worth hearing were hers. “Now, for eight months of that, I wasn’t even visible,” Meghan went on and, again, one imagines the teens watching their precious time draining away, all those notes made on the key issues to highlight during the podcast – the epidemic of depression and suicide among teens – wasted.

“I was on maternity leave or with a baby. But what was able to just be manufactured and churned out… That’s so big, you can’t even think about what that feels like,” Meghan insisted, despite apparently having devoted a great deal of time to thinking about what that felt like for her.

“Because I don’t care if you’re 15 or 25” – that much was obvious – “if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging… it’s almost unsurvivable.”

Somehow, Meghan seems to have struggled valiantly on in her and Harry’s £11 million Santa Barbara mansion, a tidy £112 million Netflix deal under her Givenchy belt. Although some might question the “emotional health” of a woman who saw fit, the very next day, to stress how much “really good family time” she, Harry and their son Archie enjoyed during lockdown. In a YouTube discussion to mark the International Day of the Girl on Sunday, Markle marvelled at “having this time” to watch their son grow.

“In the absence of Covid, we would be travelling and working more externally and we would miss a lot of those moments.” Which was heart-warming stuff and, despite a last-minute save from Harry – who was left to point out that, “at the same time… we completely understand and get how challenging this is for absolutely everyone” – makes one question whether there is a degree of deafness beyond tone-deafness.

A cursory Google search on this brings up something called “Disconnection Syndrome”, which seems apt, encompassing as it does the “perceptual deficits” that can accompany “auditory incapacity” in cases of extreme deafness.

Because the Covid Divide isn’t just geographical and sociological but mental – with the Sussexes epitomising the lack of sensitivity the pandemic has shown up in some with regard to the less fortunate.

Not only will Markle’s own in-laws be unable to enjoy “really good family time” for some months, holed up as the Queen and Prince Philip are in their ‘HMS Bubble’, but thousands of ordinary people will also have been devastated by Covid in a similar way, and with no silver lining to be found.

One would hope that most of us are aware of this divide. It’s the reason I didn’t regale my neighbour – whose lungs are still devastated by a month-long battle with the virus in March – with anecdotes of the glorious mummy-and-me time I spent with my daughter during lockdown. It’s the reason I didn’t send my parents, who have been in semi-isolation since late February, photographs of the trip to France we were lucky enough to have managed in August. It’s also the reason I baulk at the people who persist even now in pushing the “it’s all a giant over-reaction” narrative, and don’t bother lowering their voices to say: “It’s not like you and I even know anyone who got Covid, is it?”

The pandemic has divided us emotionally, physically, financially and politically. And given how different all of our experiences have been over the past six months, it’s easy to slip up and be insensitive. But for celebrity figures like Meghan and Harry, who live in a bubble at the best of times, those risks are twofold. So if they are going to weigh in, it needs to be done cautiously, altruistically – and with empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. Meghan would do well to look it up. *"*

​


----------



## CarryOn2020

“I was on maternity leave or with *a baby*.”

Is it their child?
Mothers typically use a reflexive for their offspring, such as ‘my’. Doesn’t maternity leave include after the birth? 
What is _wrong_ with her???
Couldn’t agree more with Celia Walden - H&M’s selfishness is becoming increasingly obvious to all. They scream $$$$.

ETA:


----------



## Sol Ryan

Straight-Laced said:


> Comment in the The Telegraph UK today from Celia Walden - aka Mrs Piers Morgan - on the lack of sensitivity and empathy displayed during Covid times by this spoiled couple in a bubble, but mostly by What About Me-Meghan :
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan epitomise the true Covid Divide*
> The Sussexes live in a bubble at the best of times. If they're going to weigh in, it needs to be done cautiously – and with empathy
> CELIA WALDEN 12 OCTOBER 2020
> 
> *"*Altruistic: showing a disinterested and selfless concern for the wellbeing of others; unselfish. Perhaps the Duchess of Sussex should have looked up the adjective before inviting a group of California teens who had set up their “relaxed but altruistic” podcast, Teenager Therapy, into her Santa Barbara home for a bout of virtue signalling on Mental Health Day.
> 
> Because there sat these three kids, eager to discuss the teen anxieties and experiences that have been heightened to a crippling level during the pandemic – and they couldn’t get a word in edgeways. You see, Meghan wanted to “speak personally”, and turn Teenager Therapy, once again, into All About Meghan.
> 
> “I’m told that in 2019 I was the most trolled person in the entire world– male or female,” she announced, as the trio of teens were forced to bite back their own tales of isolation and estrangement in order to make room for her irrepressible #feelings.
> 
> *Teenager Therapy*
> @TeenagerTherapy
> 
> OUR EPISODE WITH HARRY AND MEGHAN IS OUT!
> 3:11 AM · Oct 11, 2020
> 
> A few words would have killed the Duchess’s violin solo dead. Adele was, in fact, the most trolled person of 2019 (weight loss), with reality star Gemma Collins(fatness, bad make-up) in second place. But the only words worth hearing were hers. “Now, for eight months of that, I wasn’t even visible,” Meghan went on and, again, one imagines the teens watching their precious time draining away, all those notes made on the key issues to highlight during the podcast – the epidemic of depression and suicide among teens – wasted.
> 
> “I was on maternity leave or with a baby. But what was able to just be manufactured and churned out… That’s so big, you can’t even think about what that feels like,” Meghan insisted, despite apparently having devoted a great deal of time to thinking about what that felt like for her.
> 
> “Because I don’t care if you’re 15 or 25” – that much was obvious – “if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging… it’s almost unsurvivable.”
> 
> Somehow, Meghan seems to have struggled valiantly on in her and Harry’s £11 million Santa Barbara mansion, a tidy £112 million Netflix deal under her Givenchy belt. Although some might question the “emotional health” of a woman who saw fit, the very next day, to stress how much “really good family time” she, Harry and their son Archie enjoyed during lockdown. In a YouTube discussion to mark the International Day of the Girl on Sunday, Markle marvelled at “having this time” to watch their son grow.
> 
> “In the absence of Covid, we would be travelling and working more externally and we would miss a lot of those moments.” Which was heart-warming stuff and, despite a last-minute save from Harry – who was left to point out that, “at the same time… we completely understand and get how challenging this is for absolutely everyone” – makes one question whether there is a degree of deafness beyond tone-deafness.
> 
> A cursory Google search on this brings up something called “Disconnection Syndrome”, which seems apt, encompassing as it does the “perceptual deficits” that can accompany “auditory incapacity” in cases of extreme deafness.
> 
> Because the Covid Divide isn’t just geographical and sociological but mental – with the Sussexes epitomising the lack of sensitivity the pandemic has shown up in some with regard to the less fortunate.
> 
> Not only will Markle’s own in-laws be unable to enjoy “really good family time” for some months, holed up as the Queen and Prince Philip are in their ‘HMS Bubble’, but thousands of ordinary people will also have been devastated by Covid in a similar way, and with no silver lining to be found.
> 
> One would hope that most of us are aware of this divide. It’s the reason I didn’t regale my neighbour – whose lungs are still devastated by a month-long battle with the virus in March – with anecdotes of the glorious mummy-and-me time I spent with my daughter during lockdown. It’s the reason I didn’t send my parents, who have been in semi-isolation since late February, photographs of the trip to France we were lucky enough to have managed in August. It’s also the reason I baulk at the people who persist even now in pushing the “it’s all a giant over-reaction” narrative, and don’t bother lowering their voices to say: “It’s not like you and I even know anyone who got Covid, is it?”
> 
> The pandemic has divided us emotionally, physically, financially and politically. And given how different all of our experiences have been over the past six months, it’s easy to slip up and be insensitive. But for celebrity figures like Meghan and Harry, who live in a bubble at the best of times, those risks are twofold. So if they are going to weigh in, it needs to be done cautiously, altruistically – and with empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. Meghan would do well to look it up. *"*
> 
> ​


I so agree with this... because on the one hand while I sort of understand what MM was trying to say, she was better off not saying it. It comes off completely tone deaf. I’ve mentioned before I’m taking care of sick family and working full time, if it wasn’t for wfh status because of COVID, I’d have to take a leave of absence, which would mean a loss of pay... so while its awful, and I’m burning the candle at both ends and melting the wax in the middle, atleast I have money coming in. At the same time, I hate that I know 4 people with Covid, 2 died and 1 is having to relearn to walk... I wouldn’t wish this on anyone and hope it gets better soon...

My okay circumstance wasn’t worth all this suffering... I’d rather figure something else out than gloat over how great my life is when so many have died or are suffering...


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> “I was on maternity leave or with *a baby*.”
> 
> Is it their child?
> *Mothers typically use a reflexive for their offspring, such as ‘my’. Doesn’t maternity leave include after the birth?
> What is wrong with her???*
> Couldn’t agree more with Celia Walden - H&M’s selfishness is becoming increasingly obvious to all. They scream $$$$.
> 
> ETA:



Narcissism again? She doesn’t want any competition for the focus of her story even from her own child. That’s why when she talks about him, it’s almost always about how she is affected by what he is doing.   Archie as an accessory, at least that’s how it seems to me.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## mdcx

Straight-Laced said:


> Comment in the The Telegraph UK today from Celia Walden - aka Mrs Piers Morgan - on the lack of sensitivity and empathy displayed during Covid times by this spoiled couple in a bubble, but mostly by What About Me-Meghan :
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan epitomise the true Covid Divide*
> The Sussexes live in a bubble at the best of times. If they're going to weigh in, it needs to be done cautiously – and with empathy
> CELIA WALDEN 12 OCTOBER 2020
> 
> *"*Altruistic: showing a disinterested and selfless concern for the wellbeing of others; unselfish. Perhaps the Duchess of Sussex should have looked up the adjective before inviting a group of California teens who had set up their “relaxed but altruistic” podcast, Teenager Therapy, into her Santa Barbara home for a bout of virtue signalling on Mental Health Day.
> 
> Because there sat these three kids, eager to discuss the teen anxieties and experiences that have been heightened to a crippling level during the pandemic – and they couldn’t get a word in edgeways. You see, Meghan wanted to “speak personally”, and turn Teenager Therapy, once again, into All About Meghan.
> 
> “I’m told that in 2019 I was the most trolled person in the entire world– male or female,” she announced, as the trio of teens were forced to bite back their own tales of isolation and estrangement in order to make room for her irrepressible #feelings.
> 
> *Teenager Therapy*
> @TeenagerTherapy
> 
> OUR EPISODE WITH HARRY AND MEGHAN IS OUT!
> 3:11 AM · Oct 11, 2020
> 
> A few words would have killed the Duchess’s violin solo dead. Adele was, in fact, the most trolled person of 2019 (weight loss), with reality star Gemma Collins(fatness, bad make-up) in second place. But the only words worth hearing were hers. “Now, for eight months of that, I wasn’t even visible,” Meghan went on and, again, one imagines the teens watching their precious time draining away, all those notes made on the key issues to highlight during the podcast – the epidemic of depression and suicide among teens – wasted.
> 
> “I was on maternity leave or with a baby. But what was able to just be manufactured and churned out… That’s so big, you can’t even think about what that feels like,” Meghan insisted, despite apparently having devoted a great deal of time to thinking about what that felt like for her.
> 
> “Because I don’t care if you’re 15 or 25” – that much was obvious – “if people are saying things about you that aren’t true, what that does to your mental and emotional health is so damaging… it’s almost unsurvivable.”
> 
> Somehow, Meghan seems to have struggled valiantly on in her and Harry’s £11 million Santa Barbara mansion, a tidy £112 million Netflix deal under her Givenchy belt. Although some might question the “emotional health” of a woman who saw fit, the very next day, to stress how much “really good family time” she, Harry and their son Archie enjoyed during lockdown. In a YouTube discussion to mark the International Day of the Girl on Sunday, Markle marvelled at “having this time” to watch their son grow.
> 
> “In the absence of Covid, we would be travelling and working more externally and we would miss a lot of those moments.” Which was heart-warming stuff and, despite a last-minute save from Harry – who was left to point out that, “at the same time… we completely understand and get how challenging this is for absolutely everyone” – makes one question whether there is a degree of deafness beyond tone-deafness.
> 
> A cursory Google search on this brings up something called “Disconnection Syndrome”, which seems apt, encompassing as it does the “perceptual deficits” that can accompany “auditory incapacity” in cases of extreme deafness.
> 
> Because the Covid Divide isn’t just geographical and sociological but mental – with the Sussexes epitomising the lack of sensitivity the pandemic has shown up in some with regard to the less fortunate.
> 
> Not only will Markle’s own in-laws be unable to enjoy “really good family time” for some months, holed up as the Queen and Prince Philip are in their ‘HMS Bubble’, but thousands of ordinary people will also have been devastated by Covid in a similar way, and with no silver lining to be found.
> 
> One would hope that most of us are aware of this divide. It’s the reason I didn’t regale my neighbour – whose lungs are still devastated by a month-long battle with the virus in March – with anecdotes of the glorious mummy-and-me time I spent with my daughter during lockdown. It’s the reason I didn’t send my parents, who have been in semi-isolation since late February, photographs of the trip to France we were lucky enough to have managed in August. It’s also the reason I baulk at the people who persist even now in pushing the “it’s all a giant over-reaction” narrative, and don’t bother lowering their voices to say: “It’s not like you and I even know anyone who got Covid, is it?”
> 
> The pandemic has divided us emotionally, physically, financially and politically. And given how different all of our experiences have been over the past six months, it’s easy to slip up and be insensitive. But for celebrity figures like Meghan and Harry, who live in a bubble at the best of times, those risks are twofold. So if they are going to weigh in, it needs to be done cautiously, altruistically – and with empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. Meghan would do well to look it up. *"*
> 
> ​


Great take on the whole subject.
Some people are going through pure hell due to covid and if you are lucky enough not to be, then zip it! 
Meghan seems to think sharing all her me me me stories is an act of charity in and of itself. "Reaching out" to a charity just to create self-promoting video content is incredibly bizarre. Does she donate money? Are people in these charities starting to get the picture?


----------



## Pessie

mdcx said:


> Great take on the whole subject.
> Some people are going through pure hell due to covid and if you are lucky enough not to be, then zip it!
> Meghan seems to think sharing all her me me me stories is an act of charity in and of itself. "Reaching out" to a charity just to create self-promoting video content is incredibly bizarre. Does she donate money? Are people in these charities starting to get the picture?


“Reaching out” is the new - I’m gatecrashing this gig 
What‘s going to be interesting is how many invitations they get to return to these organisations.  So far it’s a series of one off performances from the Harkles as far as I can see.


----------



## doni

Chanbal said:


> One more bandwagon:
> 
> View attachment 4876458



Really, I don‘t want to be overtly critical to them, but to me this is terrible, because it epitomizes everything that is wrong (in my mind) with celebrity culture today. The idea that being gossip famous for whom you marry and being taken pictures in nice outfits equals with “leading the world” or being some sort of moral compass and major role model... I mean, Jackie Kennedy was mega famous, yes, and actually in a position of some political influence for a while, and we never heard of her “leading in the global stage”... What is this about!? I hope American members don’t get offended when I say, I don‘t think this would be happening if Meghan was anything but American... It will spread to the rest of the world though, this nonsense, sooner or later.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> And in another part of the palace, Kate looks *amazing* today. Very polished, poised and professional.  She makes it look truly effortless — and in a pandemic! No complaining, no dissing her kids, no fussing.  Just professional and beautiful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton visits Natural History Museum for photography award
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 38, appeared elegant in a glamorous black suit during the visit to the Natural History Museum ahead of the virtual award ceremony tomorrow night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She's proving that you don't have to be born Royal to be Royal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Although I prefer Kate’s hairstyle, simple tank and trim blazer over MM’s, both women look good.









						Kate Middleton's blazer looks just like one worn by Meghan Markle
					

Kate Middleton wore a £1,240 tuxedo jacket from Alexander McQueen in a video filmed in the Natural History Museum in London. Royal fans say it looks like an outfit worn by Meghan Markle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  MM’s sleeves look like they need a good tailor.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I prefer Kate’s hairstyle, simple tank and trim blazer over MM’s, both women look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's blazer looks just like one worn by Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton wore a £1,240 tuxedo jacket from Alexander McQueen in a video filmed in the Natural History Museum in London. Royal fans say it looks like an outfit worn by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  MM’s sleeves look like they need a good tailor.


MM seems to always need a good tailor.  As pretty as I think she is she always looks thrown together.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Nice try Sugars.


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> I hope American members don’t get offended when I say, *I don‘t think this would be happening if Meghan was anything but American*... It will spread to the rest of the world though, this nonsense, sooner or later.



It would not be happening if Meghan was anything but a Hollywood-raised American. The average American woman wouldn't have a clue how to turn her marriage into a money-making venture within months (weeks?) of saying the vows. As an actress Meghan already had all the contacts with the individuals and agencies she needed to set her plan in motion. I am not letting Harry off the hook either. He had a history of dating actresses and models, so we know indulging in the overblown celebrity lifestyle greatly appealed to him.

I agree with you about celebrity-obsessed culture. Putting a bunch of actors, musicians, and athletes up on pedestals while those who work hard to contribute to the wellbeing of society mostly go unnoticed is nuts. It says something about humanity when our need to be entertained overshadows all else.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> I agree with you about celebrity-obsessed culture. Putting a bunch of actors, musicians, and athletes up on pedestals while those who work hard to contribute to the wellbeing of society mostly go unnoticed is nuts. It says something about humanity when our need to be entertained overshadows all else.



I came across a comment on one of those recent “most influential“ lists pointing out the absence of any scientists, economists, medics, business people etc.  Too true.  If anyone needs a voice at the moment it’s the über qualified, skilled people missing from these pointless lists, not a bit part actress who prats about with every good cause that crosses her screen and calls it philanthropy


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

doni said:


> Really, I don‘t want to be overtly critical to them, but to me this is terrible, because it epitomizes everything that is wrong (in my mind) with celebrity culture today. The *idea that being gossip famous for whom you marry and being taken pictures in nice outfits equals with “leading the world” or being some sort of moral compass and major role model*... I mean, Jackie Kennedy.....What is this about!? I hope American members don’t get offended when I say, I don‘t think this would be happening if *Meghan was anything but American*... It will spread to the rest of the world though, this nonsense, sooner or later.





bag-mania said:


> It would not be happening if* Meghan was anything but a Hollywood-raised American*. The average American woman wouldn't have a clue how to turn her marriage into a money-making venture within months (weeks?) of saying the vows. As an actress Meghan already had all the contacts with the individuals and agencies she needed to set her plan in motion...........agree with you about *celebrity-obsessed culture*. Putting a bunch of actors, musicians, and athletes up on pedestals while those who work hard to contribute to the wellbeing of society mostly go unnoticed is nuts. It says something about humanity when our need to be entertained overshadows all else.



*doni* & *bag-mania*, coincidently, was thinking the exact same thing yesterday!

Why? Why would any person in their right mind believe that bc an individual is famous they are more qualified to speak about anything and everything else in the world?
Bc they are good-looking or handsome? GREAT at acting? So I am supposed to believe an actor?

Hmmm, that goes beyond belief.
Back on topic...waiting for the rug to be pulled out from under Grifters-R-US by Granny this week, lost all respect for PC


----------



## limom

Pessie said:


> I came across a comment on one of those recent “most influential“ lists pointing out the absence of any scientists, economists, medics, business people etc.  Too true.  If anyone needs a voice at the moment it’s the über qualified, skilled people missing from these pointless lists, not a bit part actress who prats about with every good cause that crosses her screen and calls it philanthropy


These two women are the most influential to me and their discovery will revolutionize medicine in the near fortune.


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2020/10/07/nobel-prize-chemistry/
		

I stan!


----------



## Chanbal

I know we don't have many diva's fans here, but just in case ... MM will show on "how to lead on the world stage" for only $1,750 (a lot less than a Chanel bag), it sounds like a bargain! The attendees may learn on how to marry a rich and well-know prince, hire an efficient PR-agency to put you all over the news... A lot cheaper and more practical than paying for a college education or performing real work. Forget scientists, medics, economists, judges...


----------



## RAINDANCE

Ladies - you may be heartened to know my 17 year old daughter (hoping to be a doctor) has recently done a project on Crispr gene editing and these two amazing women are her inspirational women, and in fact none of DD's crowd are interested in Meghan or Harry and what they have to (unintelligibly) say AT ALL.


----------



## RAINDANCE

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020 to

*Emmanuelle Charpentier*
Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens, Berlin, Germany

*Jennifer A. Doudna*
University of California, Berkeley, USA

_“for the development of a method for genome editing”_

Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna have discovered one of gene technology’s sharpest tools: the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors. Using these, researchers can change the DNA of animals, plants and microorganisms with extremely high precision. This technology has had a revolutionary impact on the life sciences, is contributing to new cancer therapies and may make the dream of curing inherited diseases come true.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> I know we don't have many diva's fans here, but just in case ... MM will show on "how to lead on the world stage" for only $1,750 (a lot less than a Chanel bag), it sounds like a bargain! The attendees may learn on how to marry a rich and well-know prince, hire an efficient PR-agency to put you all over the news... A lot cheaper and more practical than paying for a college education or performing real work. Forget scientists, medics, economists, judges...
> 
> View attachment 4877041



Wait,* Chanbal*, is Meghan Markle charging her fans $1750 to stream her 15-min word-salad?

Like the Kardashians/E! charge fans $ to watch streaming content of their reality TV-shows?


----------



## bag-mania

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Why? Why would any person in their right mind believe that bc an individual is famous they are more qualified to speak about anything and everything else in the world?
> Bc they are good-looking or handsome? GREAT at acting? So I am supposed to believe an actor?



Partly I blame it on the dumbing down of America. Maybe it is happening in other countries too but it is worse here. Pop culture always panders to the least common denominator. Some of the most popular celebrities sound like total morons when you hear them speak, yet they are still loved just for being famous. Being intelligent and well educated is not valued as much anymore. Neither is working hard to reach a goal if there is an easy way to get it. 

Look at me, sounding like a grumpy old fart! I am this close to starting a sentence "Why back in my day..."


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

RAINDANCE said:


> The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020 to
> 
> *Emmanuelle Charpentier*
> Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens, Berlin, Germany
> 
> *Jennifer A. Doudna*
> University of California, Berkeley, USA
> 
> _“for the development of a method for genome editing”_
> 
> Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna have discovered one of gene technology’s sharpest tools: the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors. Using these, researchers can change the DNA of animals, plants and microorganisms with extremely high precision. This technology has had a revolutionary impact on the life sciences, is contributing to new cancer therapies and may make the dream of curing inherited diseases come true.



Totally off-topic, will cease & desist but was just thinking about this yesterday, toooo!!!

Back to that gosh-awful trainwreck, H&M, they really SUCK the air out of any room 

So grateful that my relatives have nothing in common w/them


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sorry -  I know I went OT - the link to Washington Post didn't work for me so my post made no sense without the background info.

I was wondering the other day exactly what M&H want to achieve with their actions and projects and for a minute wondered if Meghan just wants to be the most famous woman in the world ? I suspect that might actually be the case. I can't comprehend the level of drive, resentment and neediness required to pursue that as a goal. I dismissed the rumors that Meghan was jealous of Catherine but am wondering now if that's true?


----------



## limom

RAINDANCE said:


> Sorry -  I know I went OT - the link to Washington Post didn't work for me so my post made no sense without the background info.
> 
> I was wondering the other day exactly what M&H want to achieve with their actions and projects and for a minute wondered if Meghan just wants to be the most famous woman in the world ? I suspect that might actually be the case. I can't comprehend the level of drive, resentment and neediness required to pursue that as a goal. I dismissed the rumors that Meghan was jealous of Catherine but am wondering now if that's true?


Oh please, where is the harm in informing people about two women who deserve all the praise in the world?
I forgot that the Post is now restricting access. Thank you for your post.


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Oh please, where is the harm in informing people about two women who deserve all the praise in the world?
> I forgot that the Post is now restricting access. Thank you for your post.


As to viability of links ... I post a lot of links to The Times, subscriber service
They seem to let one share an article or two, some of the services let you see 3-5 articles for free, others none and as a subscriber, it is hard for me to know if everyone else can enjoy the links since I have no prob personally


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> I can understand the psychology of it to some degree. There is no doubt that Meghan was *a positive symbol to many WOC when the engagement was announced.*



I must be dum but when they announced their engagement a) I had never heard of her b) I thought she was Caucasian, someone told me she was a WOC and I fell from the clouds c) I really liked her in the beguining......


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Must chime in that FT.com <my daily paper> has an idiot-proof gift share link that is amazing


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

duna said:


> I must be dum but when they announced their engagement a) I had never heard of her b) I thought she was Caucasian, someone told me she was a WOC and I fell from the clouds c) I really liked her in the beguining......



*duna*, my DDs & I had watched SUITS for years, never knew MM's name, race, religion, nothing...she was so UNMARKETABLE....UNMARKLEable, I mean


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> I must be dum but when they announced their engagement a) I had never heard of her b) I thought she was Caucasian, someone told me she was a WOC and I fell from the clouds c) I really liked her in the beguining......


She has had a lot of works done to look more and more like Caucasian over the years. If you google her earlier photos, you can see she had a lot more Afro features. She looked cute then! Now she just looks like another cookie-cutter face which had a lot of work done. It's sad.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

RAINDANCE said:


> I was wondering the other day exactly what M&H want to achieve with their actions and projects and for a minute wondered if *Meghan just wants to be the most famous woman in the world* ?


Apparently, that's a yes. She probably thinks that being the most famous person in the USA equals being the most famous person in the world. Obviously,  she doesn't realize that world citizens may think otherwise. 
The USA is third in terms of world population at 4.23%. The big hitters, some whom never heard of her, include include China at 18.0%, India at 17.5%, Indonesia at 3.45% for total of 38.95% of world pop. To that, add all the smaller countries, that also never heard of her. Oh MM, Duchess of Egomania, you've got a long, long way to go, baby!


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I would LOVE to marry into money.  Marrying into royalty though is like a job in itself... it would really depend on whether me and the royal had the same goals/outlook on fame, privacy, work schedules, etc.


I would never want to marry into Royalty, the restrictions would kill me.  Marrying into money?! .. yeah, it helps .. BUT, for me, I would still need a great deal of independence to do my own thing.  Where I grew up and then when I lived in Washington DC, for sure .. I saw a lot (_too many - IMO_) women that were chasing those rich guys (_many times - married_) just to marry into that $$$.  Some managed to do so, but I would have to say (_sadly_) that 99.9% of them live pretty unhappy lives .. the mantra of "_*money does not buy happiness*_" is one that I have seen all too often.  I would prefer (_again my opinion_) to have the $$$ of my own accord, of what I worked hard for .. and to me, then I can enjoy that!


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I prefer Kate’s hairstyle, simple tank and trim blazer over MM’s, both women look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's blazer looks just like one worn by Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton wore a £1,240 tuxedo jacket from Alexander McQueen in a video filmed in the Natural History Museum in London. Royal fans say it looks like an outfit worn by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  MM’s sleeves look like they need a good tailor.


Her clothing never fits her right, she dresses for the body she wishes she had instead of what she has.


----------



## marietouchet

Am dying to know how many subscribed to the $1750 Wonder Woman summit ? Any one know ?


----------



## eunaddict

CeeJay said:


> the mantra of "_*money does not buy happiness*_" is one that I have seen all too often.



Someone once told me "If you _marry for money_, you end up _earning_ every penny." I've always taken it to mean that where there is money but no love, the work of staying married is so much harder (and more miserable) than if there were love involved, that you end up more than paying for that choice.

---


CarryOn2020 said:


> Kate Middleton's blazer looks just like one worn by Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton wore a £1,240 tuxedo jacket from Alexander McQueen in a video filmed in the Natural History Museum in London. Royal fans say it looks like an outfit worn by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Come on, it's a black blazer worn as part of an all black ensemble. I've been wearing similar outfits since I was a teenager in the 2000s (so technically, guess both women are copying me...hah). And women wear it daily as part of our work wear armour. To insinuate that it's a copycat look is such a stretch.


----------



## redney

CeeJay said:


> I would never want to marry into Royalty, the restrictions would kill me.  Marrying into money?! .. yeah, it helps .. BUT, for me, I would still need a great deal of independence to do my own thing.  Where I grew up and then when I lived in Washington DC, for sure .. I saw a lot (_too many - IMO_) women that were chasing those rich guys (_many times - married_) just to marry into that $$$.  Some managed to do so, but I would have to say (_sadly_) that 99.9% of them live pretty unhappy lives .. the mantra of "_*money does not buy happiness*_" is one that I have seen all too often.  I would prefer (_again my opinion_) to have the $$$ of my own accord, of what I worked hard for .. and to me, then I can enjoy that!


In my area there are a lot of wealthy and unhappy wives (yes, all women in my unscientific observation). As the old saying goes, "If you marry for money you earn every penny."


----------



## Cavalier Girl

duna said:


> I must be dum but when they announced their engagement a) I had never heard of her b) I thought she was Caucasian, someone told me she was a WOC and I fell from the clouds c) I really liked her in the beguining......



Then, I must be dumb right along with you, Duna.  I had the exact same response.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Narcissism again? She doesn’t want any competition for the focus of her story even from her own child. That’s why when she talks about him, it’s almost always about how she is affected by what he is doing.   Archie as an *accessory meal ticket*,  at least that’s how it seems to me.


Fixed that for you ..


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> Really, I don‘t want to be overtly critical to them, but to me this is terrible, because it epitomizes everything that is wrong (in my mind) with celebrity culture today. The idea that being gossip famous for whom you marry and being taken pictures in nice outfits equals with “leading the world” or being some sort of moral compass and major role model... I mean, Jackie Kennedy was mega famous, yes, and actually in a position of some political influence for a while, and we never heard of her “leading in the global stage”... What is this about!? I hope American members don’t get offended when I say, I don‘t think this would be happening if Meghan was anything but American... It will spread to the rest of the world though, this nonsense, sooner or later.


I think it depends on the person, but yes .. let's face it, to make it in America is pretty much the goal of many celebs (Actors, Musicians, etc.).  Unfortunately, the fawning that many of these celebs get in the business is pathetic and IMO nauseating (hence the reason why many of them think they are "gods" on Earth)!   Friends of mine who have worked with some of them, and tell me various stories?!?! .. OMG!!!  I can tell you that I would absolutely NEVER be able to work in that business because I am 100% honest and will speak my mind big-time!  Heck, I've done it when I've been in a store (Grocery or Retail) and they act up expecting me to fawn to them .. HELL NO!  I wish that this wasn't the case because many of them need a good kick in the a$$ and hear the truth!


----------



## bag-mania

Another lame contribution from a fangirl "journalist" for Cosmo. It is sycophantic hack writers like this which explains why Meghan has so many fans, "she is extremely down to earth, nice, and kind" indeed. 

*Royal Author Claims Meghan Markle Faced "Animosity" at the Palace and "Someone Hated Her"*
Royal historian Robert Lacey has a new dramatically-titled book coming out called_ Battle of the Brothers_, meaning he's currently doing ye old promotional interview rounds. And they're honestly almost as !!!! as the book itself. During a chat with the _Sunday Times_ (via _The Mirror_), Robert basically confirmed that Duchess Meghan was treated super poorly by the Palace, who had open animosity for her. *He even claimed that one person (who he wouldn't name) actively "hated" her, which is insane because she is extremely down to earth, nice, and kind—which is more than we can say for some members of the royal family, ahem.*

"There was personal animosity in the palace towards Meghan—and the feeling is mutual," Lacey said. "There was somebody in the palace—and I can't name them—who hated Meghan. There is no love lost there."

As everyone knows, Meghan and Harry ended up stepping down from senior royal duties and fully moving away from England. It was a pretty major royal upheaval, but considering the unrelenting and racist criticism directed towards Meghan—and the fact that the Palace was clearly less than supportive of her—it's hardly surprising that they wanted to leave. Wouldn't you? Exactly









						Royal Author Claims Meghan Markle Faced “Animosity” at the Palace and “Someone Hated Her”
					

Ugh, no wonder she left.




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more bandwagon:
> 
> View attachment 4876458


"Fortune's Most Poweful Women Next Gen"??  Really??  If this summit was "How to Social Climb Spectacularly then Complain Constantly", it would be more appropriate for her to participate.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Are all women’s magazines these days written for celebrity-crazed tweens?  Check out this poorly written article from Cosmo, full of Harry and Meghan love and William-bashing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently Prince William "Couched" His Judgy Comments About Meghan Markle as "Concern" for Her
> 
> 
> NOT TODAY, WILLIAM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


With social media and all the emoji use, I don't think editors even edit any more.  The amount of misspellings alone drives me bat $hit crazy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> “I was on maternity leave or with *a baby*.”


She could've substituted the word "Prop".  That would come across as more genuine.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It would not be happening if Meghan was anything but a Hollywood-raised American. The average American woman wouldn't have a clue how to turn her marriage into a money-making venture within months (weeks?) of saying the vows. As an actress Meghan already had all the contacts with the individuals and agencies she needed to set her plan in motion. I am not letting Harry off the hook either. He had a history of dating actresses and models, so we know indulging in the overblown celebrity lifestyle greatly appealed to him.
> *
> I agree with you about celebrity-obsessed culture. Putting a bunch of actors, musicians, and athletes up on pedestals while those who work hard to contribute to the wellbeing of society mostly go unnoticed is nuts. It says something about humanity when our need to be entertained overshadows all else.*


Absolutely.  Unfortunately, this is not just an American phenomenon.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Prince William "Couched" His Judgy Comments About Meghan Markle as "Concern" for Her
> 
> 
> NOT TODAY, WILLIAM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .




Did the author have a bad relationship with their sibling - the whole editorial bit about "annoying sibling having any say over [their] lives" sounds awfully personal lol.

Like, is this a cultural thing? My entire extended family with people in their 50s and 60s still ask for and offer advice to their siblings - business decisions, family decisions, property etc.; and the vast majority are grateful for advice offered. Especially if it's from someone who has been there, done that and if it comes from the heart.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> With social media and all the emoji use, I don't think editors even edit any more.  The amount of misspellings alone drives me bat $hit crazy!





eunaddict said:


> Did the author have a bad relationship with their sibling - the whole editorial bit about "annoying sibling having any say over [their] lives" sounds awfully personal lol.
> 
> Like, is this a cultural thing? My entire extended family with people in their 50s and 60s still ask for and offer advice to their siblings - business decisions, family decisions, property etc.; and the vast majority are grateful for advice offered. Especially if it's from someone who has been there, done that and if it comes from the heart.



Apparently this Mehera Bonner is a freelancer who writes entertainment content for multiple web sites. She knocks out several articles a week according to Muck Rack. She writes the way I suspect she and her readers talk, with lots of exaggerated drama and emotion. Editors? What are those?


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Apparently this Mehera Bonner is a freelancer who writes entertainment content for multiple web sites. She knocks out several articles a week according to Muck Rack. She writes the way I suspect she and her readers talk, with lots of exaggerated drama and emotion. Editors? What are those?






For someone who focuses on the royals, she seems to make mountains out of molehills on purpose (or has very little functional knowledge of the family) - like that Commonwealth Day Service walk-in; H&M were grumpy they weren't included in the walk-in but the only royals originally included were those in line to the throne (Will & Kate chose not to join after the fuss H&M kicked up). Bonner framed it as a snub despite "H&M still working (at that point) for the BRF"....but technically so were like 10 other people who weren't in the walk-in.

Also, gosh my high school teacher would have slaughtered me for starting any piece of writing with "Kay" (it's not even the right way of writing that out - 'kay?), how people like that become (technically speaking) published writers is an insult to the language, education standards AND Cosmo's readers.


----------



## Luvbolide

limom said:


> These two women are the most influential to me and their discovery will revolutionize medicine in the near fortune.
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2020/10/07/nobel-prize-chemistry/
> 
> 
> I stan!




I agree - this is awesome - particularly since one of them is on the faculty of my alma mater.  

Reminds me of being at a football game with 90,000 fans in the stadium giving a well-deserved very loud halftime ovation to what was then the most recent Nobel laureate.  Funny/odd to think how often that occurs for the football team but virtually never for luminaries in various academic fields.

Not sure that this is a particularly American issue - seems that more and more people are increasingly interested in celebrity culture and “reality stars”.  Sad when one thinks about it.  Ok, rant over.


----------



## marietouchet

About someone hating Meghan And the Cosmo article that referenced the Times ...

Here is the original interview with Lacey, which is relatively anti William and pro Meghan, the Cosmo author did not deviate much from this 
The Times does say that Lacey had to remove the story of Meghan hater from the book , too controversial, so all that remains is a gross platitude without context , a hater ... what does that mean ?
But the article does say the animosity was mutual, it takes two to tango ... and M bears some of the responsibility for the feud 









						Someone in the palace hated Meghan, says Battle of Brothers author
					

Robert Lacey’s latest book on the monarchy is still four days from publication, but already he’s getting hate mail from furious Prince William fans. “There is s




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 4877378
> 
> 
> For someone who focuses on the royals, she seems to make mountains out of molehills on purpose (or has very little functional knowledge of the family) - like that Commonwealth Day Service walk-in; H&M were grumpy they weren't included in the walk-in but the only royals originally included were those in line to the throne (Will & Kate chose not to join after the fuss H&M kicked up). Bonner framed it as a snub despite "H&M still working (at that point) for the BRF"....but technically so were like 10 other people who weren't in the walk-in.
> 
> Also, gosh my high school teacher would have slaughtered me for starting any piece of writing with "Kay" (it's not even the right way of writing that out - 'kay?), how people like that become (technically speaking) published writers is an insult to the language, education standards AND Cosmo's readers.



This is the state of journalism these days. They tell you what they want you to think. By using slang and short, simple statements, it makes it palatable for those "dumb downed" readers I mentioned earlier who can't be bothered to think for themselves.


----------



## Luvbolide

eunaddict said:


> Someone once told me "If you _marry for money_, you end up _earning_ every penny." I've always taken it to mean that where there is money but no love, the work of staying married is so much harder (and more miserable) than if there were love involved, that you end up more than paying for that choice.
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> Come on, it's a black blazer worn as part of an all black ensemble. I've been wearing similar outfits since I was a teenager in the 2000s (so technically, guess both women are copying me...hah). And women wear it daily as part of our work wear armour. To insinuate that it's a copycat look is such a stretch.




That seemed ridiculous to me as well - half of the working women that I know have worn black suits for years !  But had to chuckle at the pix in the article - K looks lovely and her suit fits her perfectly, whereas MM has that ridiculous hair in her face with the wrong camisole and an ill-fitting suit on.  What is up with those pants?!?!


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> About someone hating Meghan And the Cosmo article that referenced the Times ...
> 
> Here is the original interview with Lacey, which is relatively anti William and pro Meghan, the Cosmo author did not deviate much from this
> The Times does say that Lacey had to remove the story of Meghan hater from the book , too controversial, so all that remains is a gross platitude without context , a hater ... what does that mean ?
> But the article does say the animosity was mutual, it takes two to tango ... and M bears some of the responsibility for the feud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone in the palace hated Meghan, says Battle of Brothers author
> 
> 
> Robert Lacey’s latest book on the monarchy is still four days from publication, but already he’s getting hate mail from furious Prince William fans. “There is s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



It sounds like "Battle of Brothers" may be Finding Freedom 2.0. Only in Lacey's case he seems to have an ax to grind with the BRF.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> I would never want to marry into Royalty, the restrictions would kill me.  Marrying into money?! .. yeah, it helps .. BUT, for me, I would still need a great deal of independence to do my own thing.  Where I grew up and then when I lived in Washington DC, for sure .. I saw a lot (_too many - IMO_) women that were chasing those rich guys (_many times - married_) just to marry into that $$$.  Some managed to do so, but I would have to say (_sadly_) that 99.9% of them live pretty unhappy lives .. the mantra of "_*money does not buy happiness*_" is one that I have seen all too often.  I would prefer (_again my opinion_) to have the $$$ of my own accord, of what I worked hard for .. and to me, then I can enjoy that!



Marrying into money doesn't preclude you from earning your own money or take away your independence... It just means marrying someone who presumably you love who makes money in their own right. Whether you work is your own choice!


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Another lame contribution from a fangirl "journalist" for Cosmo. It is sycophantic hack writers like this which explains why Meghan has so many fans, "she is extremely down to earth, nice, and kind" indeed.
> 
> *Royal Author Claims Meghan Markle Faced "Animosity" at the Palace and "Someone Hated Her"*
> Royal historian Robert Lacey has a new dramatically-titled book coming out called_ Battle of the Brothers_, meaning he's currently doing ye old promotional interview rounds. And they're honestly almost as !!!! as the book itself. During a chat with the _Sunday Times_ (via _The Mirror_), Robert basically confirmed that Duchess Meghan was treated super poorly by the Palace, who had open animosity for her. *He even claimed that one person (who he wouldn't name) actively "hated" her, which is insane because she is extremely down to earth, nice, and kind—which is more than we can say for some members of the royal family, ahem.*
> 
> "There was personal animosity in the palace towards Meghan—and the feeling is mutual," Lacey said. "There was somebody in the palace—and I can't name them—who hated Meghan. There is no love lost there."
> 
> As everyone knows, Meghan and Harry ended up stepping down from senior royal duties and fully moving away from England. It was a pretty major royal upheaval, but considering the unrelenting and racist criticism directed towards Meghan—and the fact that the Palace was clearly less than supportive of her—it's hardly surprising that they wanted to leave. Wouldn't you? Exactly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Author Claims Meghan Markle Faced “Animosity” at the Palace and “Someone Hated Her”
> 
> 
> Ugh, no wonder she left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com




Ugh - what is with Cosmo and MM?  And since when is disliking someone racist?  Soooo sick of that constant drumbeat.  I have come to dislike her, based entirely on her personality.  Had she not sought to become the world’s biggest star and kept out of the press, I think a lot of people would like her more.  The more she shows of herself, the less I want to see!


----------



## Luvbolide

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 4877378
> 
> 
> For someone who focuses on the royals, she seems to make mountains out of molehills on purpose (or has very little functional knowledge of the family) - like that Commonwealth Day Service walk-in; H&M were grumpy they weren't included in the walk-in but the only royals originally included were those in line to the throne (Will & Kate chose not to join after the fuss H&M kicked up). Bonner framed it as a snub despite "H&M still working (at that point) for the BRF"....but technically so were like 10 other people who weren't in the walk-in.
> 
> Also, gosh my high school teacher would have slaughtered me for starting any piece of writing with "Kay" (it's not even the right way of writing that out - 'kay?), how people like that become (technically speaking) published writers is an insult to the language, education standards AND Cosmo's readers.



IMO, it is ridiculous to call her a news writer when she “focuses” on celebrities and royalty.  Or am I old fashioned in thinking such a focus is feature writing?  (Or complete BS on a bad day?))


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Another lame contribution from a fangirl "journalist" for Cosmo. It is sycophantic hack writers like this which explains why Meghan has so many fans, "she is extremely down to earth, nice, and kind" indeed.
> 
> *Royal Author Claims Meghan Markle Faced "Animosity" at the Palace and "Someone Hated Her"*
> Royal historian Robert Lacey has a new dramatically-titled book coming out called_ Battle of the Brothers_, meaning he's currently doing ye old promotional interview rounds. And they're honestly almost as !!!! as the book itself. During a chat with the _Sunday Times_ (via _The Mirror_), Robert basically confirmed that Duchess Meghan was treated super poorly by the Palace, who had open animosity for her. *He even claimed that one person (who he wouldn't name) actively "hated" her, which is insane because she is extremely down to earth, nice, and kind—which is more than we can say for some members of the royal family, ahem.*
> 
> "There was personal animosity in the palace towards Meghan—and the feeling is mutual," Lacey said. "There was somebody in the palace—and I can't name them—who hated Meghan. There is no love lost there."
> 
> As everyone knows, Meghan and Harry ended up stepping down from senior royal duties and fully moving away from England. It was a pretty major royal upheaval, but considering the unrelenting and racist criticism directed towards Meghan—and the fact that the Palace was clearly less than supportive of her—it's hardly surprising that they wanted to leave. Wouldn't you? Exactly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Author Claims Meghan Markle Faced “Animosity” at the Palace and “Someone Hated Her”
> 
> 
> Ugh, no wonder she left.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com



Ew, that bolded statement doesn't look good for the royal family either. Do they actually think H or M look good or feel good about people trashing H's family? This looks like a 16 year old wrote it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> That seemed ridiculous to me as well - half of the working women that I know have worn black suits for years !  But had to chuckle at the pix in the article - K looks lovely and her suit fits her perfectly, whereas MM has that ridiculous hair in her face with the wrong camisole and an ill-fitting suit on.  What is up with those pants?!?!



Kate always wears clothes that fit her impeccably, starting with her wedding dress. How is it even possible a couture wedding dress didn't fit properly, and why would you not invest in a good tailor if you are already buying expensive clothes to begin with?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It sounds like "Battle of Brothers" may be Finding Freedom 2.0. Only in Lacey's case he seems to have an ax to grind with the BRF.



So weird. I thought he was a) a respected author and b) had a good working relationship with the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate always wears clothes that fit her impeccably, starting with her wedding dress. How is it even possible a couture wedding dress didn't fit properly, and why would you not invest in a good tailor if you area already buying expensive clothes to begin with?


Kate is always appropriate - her clothes, her hair, her behavior performing royal duties, her mothering, pics of the kids......No one is perfect but she seems to come very close.
I think maybe Meghan thought, being an American actress, she would outshine Kate - wrong


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate always wears clothes that fit her impeccably, starting with her wedding dress. How is it even possible a couture wedding dress didn't fit properly, and why would you not invest in a good tailor if you area already buying expensive clothes to begin with?




It is funny - or pathetic really - that Kate’s clothes always fit her perfectly, no bunching up or wrinkling up, when MM is just the opposite.  And you are right -a good tailor would make all the difference.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> It sounds like "Battle of Brothers" may be Finding Freedom 2.0. Only in Lacey's case he seems to have an ax to grind with the BRF.


AGREE THAT IS THE FLAVOR OF THE CITED ARTICLE, THE BOOK IS NOT OUT FOR ANOTHJER WEEK

PS got to thinking about the hater ... Is this Pss Michael due to broochgate? Eugenie or Angela Kelly due to tiaragate?  Philip due to his shooting party that M disapproved of ? there are so many possibilities .... 

I just find the mention of the hater is useless out of context, the word HATER is quite pejorative, OK, maybe it is a fair term, but if you are going to be negative, give us some context ... 

I hate when people use nasty language without a glimmer of a justification


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> Kate is always appropriate - her clothes, her hair, her behavior performing royal duties, her mothering, pics of the kids......No one is perfect but she seems to come very close.
> I think maybe Meghan thought, being an American actress, she would outshine Kate - wrong



I feel like Kate is doing - and looking- better and better.  Though some of that may be by comparison.  She also sounds sincere when she speaks.  So different from MM.


----------



## CeeJay

eunaddict said:


> Also, gosh my high school teacher would have slaughtered me for starting any piece of writing with "Kay" (it's not even the right way of writing that out - 'kay?), how people like that become (technically speaking) published writers is an insult to the language, education standards AND Cosmo's readers.


It seems as though many of these so-called "writers" nowadays have truly no sense of how things should be written, many times it appears to be one-step above text messages!  A former colleague of mine was telling me just the other day that he (and the other managers) have to oftentimes 'review' the emails sent from their younger staff to the various Clients (since the Client staff is usually in more managerial/Executive staff).  That's pathetic .. again, as someone else mentioned .. the dumbing down of America so that Johnnie/Susie would feel "left behind".  UGGH .. a major pet-peeve of mine!


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I prefer Kate’s hairstyle, simple tank and trim blazer over MM’s, both women look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's blazer looks just like one worn by Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton wore a £1,240 tuxedo jacket from Alexander McQueen in a video filmed in the Natural History Museum in London. Royal fans say it looks like an outfit worn by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  MM’s sleeves look like they need a good tailor.



I think both look good too... I mean it's a basic black blazer, DM! Can we talk about how ridiculous DM is getting with the ads? You can't even see the big ad going down the left side in this screenshot but what on earth... how does anyone read them regularly with this horrible experience


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So weird. I thought he was a) a respected author and b) had a good working relationship with the BRF.



I'm sure what he is saying is genuinely his opinion. His perception of the situation could be influenced by factors we are not aware of though. In one of his other excerpts he has immense sympathy for any of the royals born in the "spare" position, he mentions Margaret and Andrew specifically. I am sticking with my theory that Lacey was the younger brother to a much more popular sibling and even now as an old man he still hasn't let go of his bitterness. I think he was the Harry in his family.


----------



## doni

What I don’t understand is this narrative that they left because they were badly treated. I mean, there is speculation, gossip, things that friends supposedly say, biographers that may or many have not talked to the couple... It is anyone guess. What we know for sure is what they put in black and white in painstaking detail when this mess started after they came back from Canada. They filled up pages of that new website of theirs with exactly what they wanted. And it was never suggested that they wanted to leave. Instead, they wished to renounced the 5% sovereign grant so as to be free to earn their own money on top of Charles’ allowance. They wanted to continue to serve and represent the Queen and maintain their patronages. They planned to keep Frogmore and travel back and forth between the US and the UK with a security detail paid by the British taxpayer. They wished to get out of the Royal rota system and bring their own media to events. Hey, they wanted to rovolutionise the way the Royal family did charity. And all of it under the moniker Sussex Royal.

They didn’t want to leave. Only when they were told they could not have their cake and eat it, and that they must make a choice between serving the Royal Family and making their own money, they decided to leave. 

It is remarkable how they have been able to change the narrative of what actually happened.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Marrying into money doesn't preclude you from earning your own money or take away your independence... It just means marrying someone who presumably you love who makes money in their own right. Whether you work is your own choice!


Not always, and sadly .. I know too many women who thought that when they married their husbands, but not soon after - were pressured to have a baby and then it was "_you stay home_".  That's just been my experience, but honestly .. heck, I would be the first to admit that if I married rich and the HB did let me have my own career and truly wanted me to make my own mark, yup .. would have loved that.  One of the things that I've noticed recently (especially as I am not a 'spring chicken' female anymore), is that my experience and intellect seem to scare the bejesus out of a lot of the younger (male) managers.  Am I happy that I would have to take a job many rungs down the ladder from where I used to be? .. hell no, but Corporate American simply doesn't seem to want to hire older female, experienced and more expensive staff .. they want young, cheap and male.  When I got the latest rejection with this comment "over-qualified", I really got a good chuckle out of it.  I guess my too many years at the Executive level in Financial Services and my Ivy League education was too much for them .. their loss IMO!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Not always, and sadly .. I know too many women who thought that when they married their husbands, but not soon after - were pressured to have a baby and then it was "_you stay home_".  That's just been my experience, but honestly .. heck, I would be the first to admit that if I married rich and the HB did let me have my own career and truly wanted me to make my own mark, yup .. would have loved that.  One of the things that I've noticed recently (especially as I am not a 'spring chicken' female anymore), is that my experience and intellect seem to scare the bejesus out of a lot of the younger (male) managers.  Am I happy that I would have to take a job many rungs down the ladder from where I used to be? .. hell no, but Corporate American simply doesn't seem to want to hire older female, experienced and more expensive staff .. they want young, cheap and male.  When I got the latest rejection with this comment "over-qualified", I really got a good chuckle out of it.  I guess my too many years at the Executive level in Financial Services and my Ivy League education was too much for them .. their loss IMO!



IMO this is more about men than about men with money. This happens to men who are dirt poor too, and I've seen friends who went down this path because of cultural pressure not money - or they just preferred to stay at home themselves of course. 

I wouldn't be with a domineering man who pressured me to stay at home - rich or not. Anyway, I have a hard time believing any man "lets" you have anything... you seem to get what you want.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW a screenshot of the Malala video call just showed up in my news feed...since when does she wear so much make-up? Not that I care, but seeing she barely bothered to put on mascara for her wedding it didn't seem to be her style until recently.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Not always, and sadly .. I know too many women who thought that when they married their husbands, but not soon after - were pressured to have a baby and then it was "_you stay home_".  That's just been my experience, but honestly .. heck, I would be the first to admit that if I married rich and the HB did let me have my own career and truly wanted me to make my own mark, yup .. would have loved that.  One of the things that I've noticed recently (especially as I am not a 'spring chicken' female anymore), is that my experience and intellect seem to scare the bejesus out of a lot of the younger (male) managers.  Am I happy that I would have to take a job many rungs down the ladder from where I used to be? .. hell no, but Corporate American simply doesn't seem to want to hire older female, experienced and more expensive staff .. they want young, cheap and male.  When I got the latest rejection with this comment "over-qualified", I really got a good chuckle out of it.  I guess my too many years at the Executive level in Financial Services and my Ivy League education was too much for them .. their loss IMO!


unfortunately it's difficult for older women in the workforce in almost every job.  If you are an actress, a bartender, a dancer or any profession where you're selling your desirability, aging isn't going to be good.  If you do office work - whether management or support - eventually there will be younger, more energetic and cheaper labor to replace you.
There are exceptions but in general, getting older kinda sucks.
And even with women in charge at the top, this can happen.  Business wants cheaper labor if they can get it.  It's all about the money.

getting OT - sorry


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe Meghan thought, being an American actress, she would outshine Kate - wrong



You nailed it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

RAINDANCE said:


> The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020 to
> 
> *Emmanuelle Charpentier*
> Max Planck Unit for the Science of Pathogens, Berlin, Germany
> 
> *Jennifer A. Doudna*
> University of California, Berkeley, USA
> 
> _“for the development of a method for genome editing”_
> 
> Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna have discovered one of gene technology’s sharpest tools: the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors. Using these, researchers can change the DNA of animals, plants and microorganisms with extremely high precision. This technology has had a revolutionary impact on the life sciences, is contributing to new cancer therapies and may make the dream of curing inherited diseases come true.


What angers me is women like these are not getting anywhere near the exposure as MM! These women are the real role models! Not some failed actress ex-royal nobody!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like they smeared lots of Vaseline on the camera.









						Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'drug addicts'
					

Meghan, 39, took part in the Fortune's Most Powerful Women Next Gen Virtual Summit on Tuesday afternoon.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'DRUG ADDICTS' - despite once being an avid Instagram fan - and refers to the Royal Family only as 'the institution' as she takes part in $1,750 virtual summit

ETA: wonder if she fusses at H about his x-box addiction?


----------



## melissatrv

chicinthecity777 said:


> What angers me is women like these are not getting anywhere near the exposure as MM! These women are the real role models! Not some failed actress ex-royal nobody!



If one of the Kardashians posts a selfie to Instagram, it will get more attention in 10 minutes than these women.  It's sad, but we live in a society that endlessly feeds narcissists like MM. Social media enables them to get their narcissistic supply whenever they need it.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> IMO this is more about men than about men with money. This happens to men who are dirt poor too, and I've seen friends who went down this path because of cultural pressure not money - or they just preferred to stay at home themselves of course.
> 
> I wouldn't be with a domineering man who pressured me to stay at home - rich or not. Anyway, I have a hard time believing any man "lets" you have anything... you seem to get what you want.


Neither would I, I could spot that trait very quickly .. and I would move on.  To me, the #1 quotient was intelligence and that we had similar interests.  I've always been the breadwinner, and that's okay (HB - former Egyptologist & then IT) and  he's always been very supportive.  However, that all being said .. it would be FANTASTIC if he did make more $$$ - HA!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just in case anyone is wondering about the Vaseline trick. As the article says, there are better options in today’s world 









						The Vaseline Trick That Gave Old Hollywood Actresses Their Glow
					

The Vaseline Trick That Gave Old Hollywood Actresses Their Glow




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s take a poll. These are two headlines of new Meghan articles. The first is from Harpers Bazaar and the second from Entertainment Tonight. Which headline is the bigger lie? 

*Meghan Markle Says Every Risk and Opportunity She Takes Is for Her Son, Archie

Or 

Meghan Markle Shares Why She Distanced Herself From Social Media*


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like they smeared lots of Vaseline on the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'drug addicts'
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, took part in the Fortune's Most Powerful Women Next Gen Virtual Summit on Tuesday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'DRUG ADDICTS' - despite once being an avid Instagram fan - and refers to the Royal Family only as 'the institution' as she takes part in $1,750 virtual summit
> 
> ETA: wonder if she fusses at H about his x-box addiction?


Are you kidding me??? .. so, does that mean that she's an ADDICT? .. my vote?? .. 100%.  This nut-job cannot stay out of the press for a SINGLE day!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me??? .. so, does that mean that she's an ADDICT? .. my vote?? .. 100%.  This nut-job cannot stay out of the press for a SINGLE day!



She is signaling us that she has a serious problem  
[as if we didn’t already know]


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Let’s take a poll. These are two headlines of new Meghan articles. The first is from Harpers Bazaar and the second from Entertainment Tonight. Which headline is the bigger lie?
> 
> *Meghan Markle Says Every Risk and Opportunity She Takes Is for Her Son, Archie
> 
> Or
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares Why She Distanced Herself From Social Media*



This is soooo unfair, because the bigger lie is clearly the Social Media headline. She reads and absorbs everything, so does H. Otherwise how would they know about the “culture of hate”, mean comments, blah blah.  Such liars.

ETA:  she would never refer to Arch as ‘her son’.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Let’s take a poll. These are two headlines of new Meghan articles. The first is from Harpers Bazaar and the second from Entertainment Tonight. Which headline is the bigger lie?
> 
> *Meghan Markle Says Every Risk and Opportunity She Takes Is for Her Son, Archie
> 
> Or
> 
> Meghan Markle Shares Why She Distanced Herself From Social Media*



Both headlines are big lies imo, so I will have to leave my ballot blank!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I know we don't have many diva's fans here, but just in case ... MM will show on "how to lead on the world stage" for only $1,750 (a lot less than a Chanel bag), it sounds like a bargain! The attendees may learn on how to marry a rich and well-know prince, hire an efficient PR-agency to put you all over the news... A lot cheaper and more practical than paying for a college education or performing real work. Forget scientists, medics, economists, judges...
> 
> View attachment 4877041


Her only "action" is filing lawsuits and trying to train her tag along husband on how to better present himself on video, and right now neither one seems to be particularly successful.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> What angers me is women like these are not getting anywhere near the exposure as MM! These women are the real role models! Not some failed actress ex-royal nobody!



Maybe she will try and ride their coattails.  Tell us that science was her favorite subject and she wanted to become a physician scientist.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is soooo unfair, because the bigger lie is clearly the Social Media headline. She reads and absorbs everything, so does H. Otherwise how would they know about the “culture of hate”, mean comments, blah blah.  Such liars.
> 
> ETA:  she would never refer to Arch as ‘her son’.



This.  They inhale everything and spend hours hashing it over and figuring out retribution lol!


----------



## mdcx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate always wears clothes that fit her impeccably, starting with her wedding dress. How is it even possible a couture wedding dress didn't fit properly, and why would you not invest in a good tailor if you are already buying expensive clothes to begin with?


Kate is humble enough and sensible enough to actually listen to wardrobe advisors. Imagine if you had someone on staff guiding you through how to dress correctly for your public role in the BRF and instead you said "screw it, I'll do my own thing!". Meghan really must have offended so many people on staff during her brief time in the UK!


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> I would never want to marry into Royalty, the restrictions would kill me.  Marrying into money?! .. yeah, it helps .. BUT, for me, I would still need a great deal of independence to do my own thing.  Where I grew up and then when I lived in Washington DC, for sure .. I saw a lot (_too many - IMO_) women that were chasing those rich guys (_many times - married_) just to marry into that $$$.  Some managed to do so, but I would have to say (_sadly_) that 99.9% of them live pretty unhappy lives .. the mantra of "_*money does not buy happiness*_" is one that I have seen all too often.  I would prefer (_again my opinion_) to have the $$$ of my own accord, of what I worked hard for .. and to me, then I can enjoy that!


There's that expression "when you marry for money, you earn every cent."


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like they smeared lots of Vaseline on the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'drug addicts'
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, took part in the Fortune's Most Powerful Women Next Gen Virtual Summit on Tuesday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'DRUG ADDICTS' - despite once being an avid Instagram fan - and refers to the Royal Family only as 'the institution' as she takes part in $1,750 virtual summit
> 
> ETA: wonder if she fusses at H about his x-box addiction?



So many inane thoughts in here... especially this. A user is a widely established term in technology for people who directly, well, USE a tool or product.

'There are very few things in this world where you call the person who's engaging with it "a user". People who are addicted to drugs are called users and people who are on social media are called users,' Meghan said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me??? .. so, does that mean that she's an ADDICT? .. my vote?? .. 100%.  This nut-job cannot stay out of the press for a SINGLE day!


Since this is the analogy she chooses to draw we should refer to her as a DEALER.  She deliberately fuels SM, with leaks, “reaching out”, photo ops, pap strolls...we’ve seen it all from Meghan Markle.  
She even calls up the most rabid of her SM followers to heap praise on them, rewarding the behaviour she’s now condemning.


----------



## Suncatcher

lalame said:


> So many inane thoughts in here... especially this. A user is a widely established term in technology for people who directly, well, USE a tool or product.
> 
> 'There are very few things in this world where you call the person who's engaging with it "a user". People who are addicted to drugs are called users and people who are on social media are called users,' Meghan said.


This is not an original thought from Meghan Markle. This is lifted from the Social Dilemna pretty much wore for word. Seems like she just watched the documentary and attributed the comment as her own.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Suncatcher said:


> This is not an original thought from Meghan Markle. This is lifted from the Social Dilemna pretty much wore for word. Seems like she just watched the documentary and attributed the comment as her own.


She should hold a seminar on plagiarism! She's very good at it!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is soooo unfair, because the bigger lie is clearly the Social Media headline. She reads and absorbs everything, so does H. Otherwise how would they know about the “culture of hate”, mean comments, blah blah.  Such liars.
> 
> ETA:  she would never refer to Arch as ‘her son’.



Reminds me of parents who blame TV/Films/Music/etc/'x' for all the evils of the world. Even in the 1920s they blamed crime and antisocial behaviour on the 'Penny Dreadfuls' and the movies. 

Just like everything, like people, there is good and bad social media. Social media reflects those that use it, and pretty much that's everyone with a device. 

People are social media, social media are just people (and mostly young) 

Is she saying that people, especially those that are young, are a culture of haters? I thought she was on 'the people's' side. 

If I hated the modern world so much I would do what many do, off to a remote place and live without a phone/computer. She would never need to be in another article again.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Since this is the analogy she chooses to draw we should refer to her as a DEALER.  She deliberately fuels SM, with leaks, “reaching out”, photo ops, pap strolls...we’ve seen it all from Meghan Markle.
> She even calls up the most rabid of her SM followers to heap praise on them, rewarding the behaviour she’s now condemning.



Exactly: Subscribe here! Like me! Praise me in the comments below! The Tea on my life!  The real-I-tea on my life! Unboxing my leaf picture here! Tagging the A list here! Like me, Like ME, LIKE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!! Make me some Gd darn £$£$£$£$£$£$£$£$£$!!!!!!!! stupid people 


What is she (and he, coz without each other they'd be permanent fluff in Soho House) but the 'Duke and Duchess of content creation', 



Skip it, 'Duke and Duchess of content creation' sounds too good for them


----------



## Jktgal

Addicts, lol. No bigger addicts than the Meghain fans tho. Hater in the BRF? I would guess it's Prince Phillip. He would see right through her given his rumored womanizing ways. Takes one to know one.

Also, interesting that the messy bun and tendrils are not seen again. Guess that was reserved for the institution. Tho her addiction to banishing her afro curls also still strong.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me??? .. so, does that mean that she's an ADDICT? .. my vote?? .. 100%.  This nut-job cannot stay out of the press for a SINGLE day!


Note the important stuff - spaghetti straps for a $1750  business call - hmmm , but the real prize is the pattern - target marks on her nipples

This is the choice of a tarty actress, jacket required for business - see Wall Street Journal fashion magazine

Even I know that spaghetti strap pastie shirt is a non starter .... Come on,  white GAP tshirt & jacket/cardi 

She needs to execute her stylist

PS thinking to Victoria Beckham, she wore provocative outfits early on, but ditched them when she became a business person
If you want people to treat you as a sleazy rock star then wear ...
I you want to be taken seriously, then wear something else
Supposedly VB gave MM advice to be herself ... I dont think MM quite understood


----------



## marietouchet

Addicts ... hmmmm  interesting choice of VERY PEJORATIVE word, that was deliberately used to put down a lot of people 

There is a theory floating around, that MM has told her team to make her look controversial  - to attract more clicks - OK , she has succeeded, but not in a good way


----------



## Pautinka

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like they smeared lots of Vaseline on the camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'drug addicts'
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, took part in the Fortune's Most Powerful Women Next Gen Virtual Summit on Tuesday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle compares social media users to 'DRUG ADDICTS' - despite once being an avid Instagram fan - and refers to the Royal Family only as 'the institution' as she takes part in $1,750 virtual summit
> 
> ETA: wonder if she fusses at H about his x-box addiction?


May I add to this paragraph in the article that people who use people are also called users? Something she is more of an expert at than social media even. Seems to me she is like a trapped snake, hissing continually in a mad frenzy with people not knowing what she is going to lash her poisoned tongue at next. She is a bampot.


----------



## Annawakes

That camisole top is completely inappropriate.  Does she not want to be taken seriously?  Makes no sense at all. @marietouchet is absolutely right.  The choice of a tarty actress!


----------



## Pessie

Pautinka said:


> May I add to this paragraph in the article that people who use people are also called users? Something she is more of an expert at than social media even. Seems to me she is like a trapped snake, hissing continually in a mad frenzy with people not knowing what she is going to lash her poisoned tongue at next. She is a bampot.
> 
> View attachment 4878060


Good point!!  


Annawakes said:


> That camisole top is completely inappropriate.  Does she not want to be taken seriously?  Makes no sense at all. @marietouchet is absolutely right.  The choice of a tarty actress!


I thought this an odd choice for a serious event, and its out of synch with her recent zoom outfits as well


----------



## Chanbal

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Wait, Chanbal, is Meghan Markle charging her fans $1750 to stream her 15-min word-salad?*
> 
> Like the Kardashians/E! charge fans $ to watch streaming content of their reality TV-shows?


Yes, and it looks like you have missed it.  Don't worry because DM will kindly share all those words of wisdom with us.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The “users” thing is so dumb. First off, like someone said she totally stole it from The Social Network, second, as an IT person, that’s what we call the people who interact with our  systems.


----------



## marietouchet

Pautinka said:


> May I add to this paragraph in the article that people who use people are also called users? Something she is more of an expert at than social media even. Seems to me she is like a trapped snake, hissing continually in a mad frenzy with people not knowing what she is going to lash her poisoned tongue at next. She is a bampot.
> 
> View attachment 4878060


Thanks for posting the photo of the spaghetti strap top with target on nipple  - a picture is worth a thousand words


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Yes, and it looks like you have missed it.  Don't worry because DM will kindly share all those words of wisdom with us.


Some priceless comments on DM - “the one place this woman belongs is in an institution“


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Pautinka said:


> May I add to this paragraph in the article that people who use people are also called users? Something she is more of an expert at than social media even. Seems to me she is like a trapped snake, hissing continually in a mad frenzy with people not knowing what she is going to lash her poisoned tongue at next. She is a bampot.
> 
> View attachment 4878060



She should perhaps have added to her statement something like 'people who use others are called users, but enough about me!'


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me??? .. so, does that mean that she's an ADDICT? .. my vote?? .. 100%.  This nut-job cannot stay out of the press for a SINGLE day!


fame addict?  attention whore?  so smug


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> Good point!!
> 
> I thought this an odd choice *for a serious event*, and its out of synch with her recent zoom outfits as well


Serious event?


----------



## marietouchet

Anybody else creeped out by her saying that everything she does is for Archie ???

A child can get a complex when a parent says I did that (less than stellar) behaviour on YOUR behalf  ..

I am a strict believer that under-age children are OFF LIMITS for discussion , completely

Parents of famous kids open Pandora's box when they start a discussion on their children


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *Anybody else creeped out by her saying that everything she does is for Archie ???*
> 
> A child can get a complex when a parent says I did that (less than stellar) behaviour on YOUR behalf  ..
> 
> I am a strict believer that under-age children are OFF LIMITS for discussion , completely


Is it possible that she meant Archwell?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Is it possible that she meant Archwell?


The DM article stated 
" Meghan added that her son Archie is her main motivation for getting involved in a number of major issues, explaining that she feels she has a duty to 'make [the world] a better place for him"

but, you could be right , maybe she has been misquoted and was referring to another child in the family .... hmmm


----------



## rose60610

Gotta wonder if wearing the camisole top was simply another way to get people to comment on her weird choice of clothes for that occasion. So she can call herself a victim again and complain that all women should be taken seriously regardless what they wear. 

So let's all wear bikinis to funerals.


----------



## marietouchet

Another hmmmm ... 

OK people paid $1750 to see her and others 

Doesnt it cheapen the symposium-for-profit if you give away the content ? 

I would think the symposium would impose an NDA - non disclosure agreement - on the speakers ... that way the organizers can make money from selling the synopsis/booklet/DVD 

I am using the rock concert paradigm - if the promoter is taping the event, then the performers are expected to avoid their own taping , then the promoter can sell the DVD six months later, the whole subject is quite delicate for music performers , the contract spells out who has the rights to any recordings of the event


----------



## lalame

Annawakes said:


> That camisole top is completely inappropriate.  Does she not want to be taken seriously?  Makes no sense at all. @marietouchet is absolutely right.  The choice of a tarty actress!



Now even I can't defend this style choice! Very unflattering.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Gotta wonder if wearing the camisole top was simply another way to get people to comment on her weird choice of clothes for that occasion. So she can call herself a victim again and complain that all women should be taken seriously regardless what they wear.
> 
> So let's all wear bikinis to funerals.



Oh no, that was so everyone will think she is so young and cool and irreverent. She does her own thing! She's the opposite of the stodgy old BRF. Why, she is a trendsetter!


----------



## csshopper

She is too narcissistic to recognize she brings NOTHING to this discussion other than her title “The Duchess of Sussex” and she only has that because of her husband.

Look at the line up of participants, everyone but Meghan has a blurb under their picture with their name and their professional vitae/ positions indicating why they belong in this group. All she has is “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex”. 

Numbed to the point where my immediate reaction to any new Markle pontification is BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. As Suncatcher pointed out in her post, frequently someone else said it first and better.

The outfit besides being unprofessional, especially in this setting, gives her a look in the picture like someone posting on a dating website, trying to cast the “I’m sexy and smart” lure. The one dim witted JCMH fell for.

I think she is rushing to be on line as much as possible as a Duchess, fearing the title might soon be having an expiration date. We can only hope!


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> She is too narcissistic to recognize she brings NOTHING to this discussion other than her title “The Duchess of Sussex” and she only has that because of her husband.
> 
> Look at the line up of participants, everyone but Meghan has a blurb under their picture with their name and their professional vitae/ positions indicating why they belong in this group. All she has is “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex”.
> 
> Numbed to the point where my immediate reaction to any new Markle pontification is BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. As Suncatcher pointed out in her post, frequently someone else said it first and better.
> 
> The outfit besides being unprofessional, especially in this setting, gives her a look in the picture like someone posting on a dating website, trying to cast the “I’m sexy and smart” lure. The one dim witted JCMH fell for.
> 
> I think she is rushing to be on line as much as possible as a Duchess, fearing the title might soon be having an expiration date. We can only hope!


agree wholeheartedly
and if she's so happy to be back home to vote, why not use Meghan Markle (or whatever her married name is, w/o the Duchess title)?  wants her cake and eat it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since she says she does it all for Archie, maybe she wants to add Mother of the Year to her resume?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since she says she does it all for Archie, maybe she wants to add *Mother* of the Year to her resume?


If the surrogate story is true, then the title should go to her as she has "held" and nurtured Archie much more than MM ever will.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> Are you kidding me??? .. so, does that mean that she's an ADDICT? .. my vote?? .. 100%.  This nut-job cannot stay out of the press for a SINGLE day!



Ironic, isn't it?  They went on and on about their lack of privacy and yet here they are, popping up almost every day.  But, this is going to be how they operate for the foreseeable future.  They have no choice really, they have to build and maintain a high profile in the U.S., if they have any hope of generating interest in their reality series or documentary or anything else they produce while also commanding big dollars for speeches down the road.  Without the personal appearances at various events for the BRF and on behalf of the Queen, they are out of the news stream otherwise.  So, expect to see MM and Harry everywhere that they and their PR firm can get them invited or they can invite themselves.  I don't see this lasting for very long though, not years and years. There are only so many times that event organizers and charities and businesses want to hear the same generic comments over and over.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Ironic, isn't it?  They went on and on about their lack of privacy and yet here they are, popping up almost every day.  But, this is going to be how they operate for the foreseeable future.  They have no choice really, they have to build and maintain a high profile in the U.S., if they have any hope of generating interest in their reality series or documentary or anything else they produce while also commanding big dollars for speeches down the road.  Without the personal appearances at various events for the BRF and on behalf of the Queen, they are out of the news stream otherwise.  So, expect to see MM and Harry everywhere that they and their PR firm can get them invited or they can invite themselves.  I don't see this lasting for very long though, not years and years. There are only so many times that event organizers and charities and businesses want to hear the same generic comments over and over.


ha
when you think about it, who have been the successful reality stars?  I don't watch that stuff but I think Jessica Simpson who didn't know what tuna was - acted ditsy and the Kardashians who weren't exactly high brow.  So how much interest will their posing as humanitarians generate?  not very entertaining IMO


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> ha
> when you think about it, who have been the successful reality stars?  I don't watch that stuff but I think Jessica Simpson who didn't know what tuna was - acted ditsy and the Kardashians who weren't exactly high brow.  So how much interest will their posing as humanitarians generate?  not very entertaining IMO


She can always do a real house wife series... just sayin'


----------



## viciel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since she says she does it all for Archie, maybe she wants to add Mother of the Year to her resume?



Oh no darling! Mother of the Year is a title for commoners, not for the DS, it's Mother of the Century, of the World love.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, this will indeed be fun!  









						Rocker Tommy Lee 'wants to build his dream home next door to Meghan & Harry'
					

MOTLEY Crue wild man Tommy Lee – featured in an infamous “sex tape” with then-wife Pamela Anderson – is planning to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s new neighbor, The Sun can re…




					www.the-sun.com
				



MOTLEY Crue wild man Tommy Lee - featured in an infamous "sex tape" with then-wife Pamela Anderson - is planning to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s new neighbor, The Sun can reveal.

Tattooed rocker Tommy just spent his 58th birthday checking out a $2.3million three-acre plot where it is believed he wants to build his dream home, just a stone’s throw from Meghan and Harry’s $14million home in Montecito, California.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since she says she does it all for Archie, maybe she wants to add Mother of the Year to her resume?



She will


----------



## papertiger

I don't care what she wears to do the talking, it's what comes out of her mouth that's highly inappropriate


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, this will indeed be fun!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rocker Tommy Lee 'wants to build his dream home next door to Meghan & Harry'
> 
> 
> MOTLEY Crue wild man Tommy Lee – featured in an infamous “sex tape” with then-wife Pamela Anderson – is planning to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s new neighbor, The Sun can re…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MOTLEY Crue wild man Tommy Lee - featured in an infamous "sex tape" with then-wife Pamela Anderson - is planning to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s new neighbor, The Sun can reveal.
> 
> Tattooed rocker Tommy just spent his 58th birthday checking out a $2.3million three-acre plot where it is believed he wants to build his dream home, just a stone’s throw from Meghan and Harry’s $14million home in Montecito, California.



Ha! They can look forward to at least a year of listening to the sounds of construction and having heavy equipment going up and down their street.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> She should perhaps have added to her statement something like 'people who use others are called users, but enough about me!'


*THIS is perfect .. 100% true!!! *


----------



## marietouchet

First time out in weeks, hairdresser, I am eternally thankful.  Just trying to be sane in the days of COVID, folks around me are sick, winter is coming and gardening time is on the wane, trying not to go out for wine or ice cream for caloric reasons, oh and sick dog

Yes, I spend too much time online ...and now that I think of it,  I am offended at being called a USER/ADDICT.  (OK, simple solution, I dont have to read anything about JCMH ever again, problem solved... BLOCK EM !)

Hmmmm  She is using nasty language to call out social media folks that use nasty language about others ...  She is trolling her trolls.

Isn't she guilty of the same sins that she is calling out in others ??? 

What was it our grandmothers all said to us ? When others hits below the belt, dont stoop low.  And to make sure I was using the correct term, I went and looked up the definition of stooping low, first one I found .. 

"To *lower* one's ethical standards (or perceived standards) by behaving in a malignant, self-centered, or despicable manner. In the wake of these vicious attacks, it's horrible to think that our fellow citizens could *stoop so low* in the name of patriotism. "


----------



## Chanbal

To @rose60610, @lalame , and other TPF members intrigued by the dress choice:

"The mother-of-one, who is known for her love of designer brands and rarely wears the same outfits twice, looked elegant in a $328 blue and white strappy dress from African American designer Tracy Reese's sustainable label Hope for Flowers for the occasion.

The designer is a celebrity-favorite, with Meghan's friends Michelle ***** and Oprah Winfrey previously wearing her gowns."

The dress


----------



## Chanbal

*'She plagiarized!' Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' Netflix doc The Social Dilemma as viewers point out her comparing social media users to drug addicts was almost IDENTICAL to quote in the movie*
'Meghan plagiarizes so casually, it's become laughable now,' one person added, while another wrote: 'Someone clearly watched The Social Dilemma recently...'

Wow


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *'She plagiarized!' Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' Netflix doc The Social Dilemma as viewers point out her comparing social media users to drug addicts was almost IDENTICAL to quote in the movie*
> 'Meghan plagiarizes so casually, it's become laughable now,' one person added, while another wrote: 'Someone clearly watched The Social Dilemma recently...'
> 
> Wow


LOL.  Proves some of our posters here are way ahead in their observations!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes to all of this. This Covid world,   Wishing you and all health and peace. 


RE: MM - this clip from 2015 revealed all I need to know about her which is why I don’t believe anything she says.
Fake, Lying, Insincere, Pretender. For other reasons, I don’t believe Harry either.









						Meghan Markle admits she lied to casting directors for a part
					

The clip from a promotional appearance Meghan did for Suits shows her confessing to lying. Meghan and Harry have already begun a transition phase of living in Canada and the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_She tells the panel: 'I was Taft-Harteleyed, which is I pretended I was union.... and you have to... it was the pilot called Century City with Héctor Elizondo'

'And I got there, and they're like - so you're union' 

'And I'm like of course, I'm union I mean yeah absolutely. And then I wasn't.' 

'To this day those casting directors will never hire me'.   _

*'I was such a fraud.' *



marietouchet said:


> First time out in weeks, hairdresser, I am eternally thankful.  Just trying to be sane in the days of COVID, folks around me are sick, winter is coming and gardening time is on the wane, trying not to go out for wine or ice cream for caloric reasons, oh and sick dog
> 
> Yes, I spend too much time online ...and now that I think of it,  I am offended at being called a USER/ADDICT.  (OK, simple solution, I dont have to read anything about JCMH ever again, problem solved... BLOCK EM !)
> 
> Hmmmm  She is using nasty language to call out social media folks that use nasty language about others ...  She is trolling her trolls.
> 
> Isn't she guilty of the same sins that she is calling out in others ???
> 
> What was it our grandmothers all said to us ? When others hits below the belt, dont stoop low.  And to make sure I was using the correct term, I went and looked up the definition of stooping low, first one I found ..
> 
> "To *lower* one's ethical standards (or perceived standards) by behaving in a malignant, self-centered, or despicable manner. In the wake of these vicious attacks, it's horrible to think that our fellow citizens could *stoop so low* in the name of patriotism. "


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *'She plagiarized!' Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' Netflix doc The Social Dilemma as viewers point out her comparing social media users to drug addicts was almost IDENTICAL to quote in the movie*
> 'Meghan plagiarizes so casually, it's become laughable now,' one person added, while another wrote: 'Someone clearly watched The Social Dilemma recently...'
> 
> Wow



Well, of course she did. She has never had an original thought in her head. Wasn't she accused of lifting a line from _Grey's Anatomy_ for a speech earlier in the year? She was also accused a few months back of heavily paraphrasing part of a Steve Jobs speech from several years ago. Is it any surprise the actress duchess would steal an idea from a movie?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is the bloom falling off of H&M? Or is it more like Karma? 
Finally!




Chanbal said:


> *'She plagiarized!' Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' Netflix doc The Social Dilemma as viewers point out her comparing social media users to drug addicts was almost IDENTICAL to quote in the movie*
> 'Meghan plagiarizes so casually, it's become laughable now,' one person added, while another wrote: 'Someone clearly watched The Social Dilemma recently...'
> 
> Wow


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> *'She plagiarized!' Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' Netflix doc The Social Dilemma as viewers point out her comparing social media users to drug addicts was almost IDENTICAL to quote in the movie*
> 'Meghan plagiarizes so casually, it's become laughable now,' one person added, while another wrote: 'Someone clearly watched The Social Dilemma recently...'
> 
> Wow


Finally.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is the bloom falling off of H&M? Or is it more like Karma?
> Finally!


Oops!  Responded before I read yours.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes to all of this. This Covid world,   Wishing you and all health and peace.
> 
> 
> RE: MM - this clip from 2015 revealed all I need to know about her which is why I don’t believe anything she says.
> Fake, Lying, Insincere, Pretender. For other reasons, I don’t believe Harry either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she lied to casting directors for a part
> 
> 
> The clip from a promotional appearance Meghan did for Suits shows her confessing to lying. Meghan and Harry have already begun a transition phase of living in Canada and the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _She tells the panel: 'I was Taft-Harteleyed, which is I pretended I was union.... and you have to... it was the pilot called Century City with Héctor Elizondo'
> 
> 'And I got there, and they're like - so you're union'
> 
> 'And I'm like of course, I'm union I mean yeah absolutely. And then I wasn't.'
> 
> 'To this day those casting directors will never hire me'.   _
> 
> *'I was such a fraud.' *


She’s still a fraud.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Finally.



I'll only be satisfied if the US media reports it. I am guessing they will continue to look the other way and ignore it as they have with Meghan's other mistakes.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> To @rose60610, @lalame , and other TPF members intrigued by the dress choice:
> 
> "The mother-of-one, who is known for her love of designer brands and rarely wears the same outfits twice, looked elegant in a $328 blue and white strappy dress from African American designer Tracy Reese's sustainable label Hope for Flowers for the occasion.
> 
> The designer is a celebrity-favorite, with Meghan's friends Michelle ***** and Oprah Winfrey previously wearing her gowns."
> 
> The dress


Hers must have been custom tailored to have gotten the booby targets just perfect
The model in the stock shot, she does not have those 
Again, her stylist is a nincompoop to have not noticed ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

DailyMail has it. Twitter is on fire with it. I can hear plates crashing and screeching from Cali. The world is woke now 








						Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' The Social Dilemma
					

Meghan, 39, joined Fortune's Most Powerful Women Next Gen Virtual Summit on Tuesday, when she spoke about the dangers of social media 'addiction'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







bag-mania said:


> I'll only be satisfied if the US media reports it. I am guessing they will continue to look the other way and ignore it as they have with Meghan's other mistakes.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> DailyMail has it. Twitter is on fire with it. I can hear plates crashing and screeching from Cali. The world is woke now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is accused of 'ripping off' The Social Dilemma
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, joined Fortune's Most Powerful Women Next Gen Virtual Summit on Tuesday, when she spoke about the dangers of social media 'addiction'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Call me a cynic but I don't expect the story to go beyond DM, since they are considered to have a grudge against her because of the lawsuit. I am not holding my breath waiting for the entertainment mags or the news media here to touch it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

You decide!


----------



## Suncatcher

I don’t post much on this thread - because all of you are so eloquent and astute in your observations and I have little else to add - but as soon as I saw the headline of that article I knew right away it was lifted from the Netflix documentary. I would have been okay had she attributed the quote to its source and then agreed but she did not. And I had to call her out on her plagiarism.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes to all of this. This Covid world,   Wishing you and all health and peace.
> 
> 
> RE: MM - this clip from 2015 revealed all I need to know about her which is why I don’t believe anything she says.
> Fake, Lying, Insincere, Pretender. For other reasons, I don’t believe Harry either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she lied to casting directors for a part
> 
> 
> The clip from a promotional appearance Meghan did for Suits shows her confessing to lying. Meghan and Harry have already begun a transition phase of living in Canada and the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _She tells the panel: 'I was Taft-Harteleyed, which is I pretended I was union.... and you have to... it was the pilot called Century City with Héctor Elizondo'
> 
> 'And I got there, and they're like - so you're union'
> 
> 'And I'm like of course, I'm union I mean yeah absolutely. And then I wasn't.'
> 
> 'To this day those casting directors will never hire me'.   _
> 
> *'I was such a fraud.' *


"Was"??  I think she meant to say, "I AM such a fraud"!


----------



## sdkitty

Suncatcher said:


> I don’t post much on this thread - because all of you are so eloquent and astute in your observations and I have little else to add - but as soon as I saw the headline of that article I knew right away it was lifted from the Netflix documentary. I would have been okay had she attributed the quote to its source and then agreed but she did not. And I had to call her out on her plagiarism.


again - she's so arrogant and full of herself....who would dare to accuse such a woke person?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder why she gave credit to O’Keeffe?  Just google plagiarism and MM - she has quite a record - this is not a one-off situation.

ETA: We gotta laugh:


----------



## Sol Ryan

Suncatcher said:


> I don’t post much on this thread - because all of you are so eloquent and astute in your observations and I have little else to add - but as soon as I saw the headline of that article I knew right away it was lifted from the Netflix documentary. I would have been okay had she attributed the quote to its source and then agreed but she did not. And I had to call her out on her plagiarism.



Hi, welcome to the thread


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Wonder why she gave credit to O’Keeffe*?  Just google plagiarism and MM - she has quite a record - this is not a one-off situation.
> 
> ETA: We gotta laugh:
> View attachment 4878458


It was probably a slip up.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder why she gave credit to O’Keeffe?



She wanted to look smart and cultured by knowing the name of an artist of course.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She wanted to look smart and cultured by knowing the name of an artist of course.


Oh come on, how much smarter could one be than the fabulous Duchess?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> You decide!




Ugh you should have warned me it was a video of her speaking, I thought it was just more text. I wasn't prepared! She really dehumanizes her in-laws, doesn't she? "The institution" instead of "the Royal family".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> Oh come on, how much smarter could one be than the fabulous Duchess?


No one, I guess! Not even poor Queen Maxima, who only has a Master's Degree in Economics.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh you should have warned me it was a video of her speaking, I thought it was just more text. I wasn't prepared! She really dehumanizes her in-laws, doesn't she? "The institution" instead of "the Royal family".


I think she really does think she is all that.  Wonder if she thinks she's on the level of someone like Amal Clooney, who is highly accomplished or Oprah who really did transform herself from growing up the hard way to being one of the most powerful women in the country.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> You decide!



There aren't enough words to really describe her... arrogance, ignorance,  ingratitude, egotism, etc.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> There aren't enough words to really describe her... arrogance, ignorance,  ingratitude, egotism, etc.


I have to say delusions of grandeur again


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> There aren't enough words to really describe her... arrogance, ignorance,  ingratitude, egotism, etc.


Add this to the list: _bombastic_ (adjective - using high-sounding but meaningless language). Fondly referred to as word salad here


----------



## Lodpah

As an aside I was watching an old movie where the term “be the catalyst for change” was uttered. Hmmm . . . who says that all the time?


----------



## Lodpah

If Prince Charles pays their taxes would the IRS look at as a gift tax? Asking for a friend


----------



## rose60610

So it's a dress and not a camisole, the resulting look is the same when you know what you look like on a computer screen. Complete with the target placements.  Wearing a strapless dress the next time she can attribute to a said cause, it'll still look inappropriate.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why would you choose a maxi dress for a seated interview?!


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> One more bandwagon:
> 
> View attachment 4876458





The only global stage she leads is the Global Stage of Narcissistic Hypocrites.



doni said:


> *Really, I don‘t want to be overtly critical to them, but to me this is terrible, because it epitomizes everything that is wrong (in my mind) with celebrity culture today. The idea that being gossip famous for whom you marry and being taken pictures in nice outfits equals with “leading the world” or being some sort of moral compass and major role model*... I mean, Jackie Kennedy was mega famous, yes, and actually in a position of some political influence for a while, and we never heard of her “leading in the global stage”... What is this about!? I hope American members don’t get offended when I say, I don‘t think this would be happening if Meghan was anything but American... It will spread to the rest of the world though, this nonsense, sooner or later.


My thoughts exactly @doni, totally agree.




Pautinka said:


> May I add to this paragraph in the article that people who use people are also called users? Something she is more of an expert at than social media even. Seems to me she is like a trapped snake, hissing continually in a mad frenzy with people not knowing what she is going to lash her poisoned tongue at next. She is a bampot.
> 
> View attachment 4878060






This is a comparison she made and said out loud to the public? Okkkaayyy. Then that must make her the equivalent of a drug lord of social media because she creates content/stories, deals them to the media and public & partakes in social media herself. She ticks all three boxes. She is also an idiot for making that comparison.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> Why would you choose a maxi dress for a seated interview?!


MM replies, "Because I'm the Duchess of Everything to Everybody and therefore, I do as I please."


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> There aren't enough words to really describe her... arrogance, ignorance,  ingratitude, egotism, etc.



 Don’t forget phony!


----------



## Lodpah

She’s a jackass of all trades but master of none.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> To @rose60610, @lalame , and other TPF members intrigued by the dress choice:
> 
> "The mother-of-one, who is known for her love of designer brands and rarely wears the same outfits twice, looked elegant in a $328 blue and white strappy dress from African American designer Tracy Reese's sustainable label Hope for Flowers for the occasion.
> 
> The designer is a celebrity-favorite, with Meghan's friends Michelle ***** and Oprah Winfrey previously wearing her gowns."
> 
> The dress





She is so totally ridiculous!  First, she marries into the BRF and then proceeds to buy a whole new - and shockingly expensive - wardrobe.  She rarely wears the same thing twice, so presumably continues to spend $$ on fancy new clothes. Now she learns of a new (to her) concept - sustainable clothing.  Woo hoo - perfect excuse to replace her entire wardrobe, apparently without considering whether a given outfit fits her or is appropriate for a given occasion.  I can see her smug smile thinking that once again she has shown herself to be smarter and more woke than Kate.

Meanwhile, Kate has her wardrobe of well made and well fitting clothes, which she wears more than one time.  And she dresses her children the same way.  No, her clothes aren’t flashy or extremely expensive, as that would be utterly inappropriate.  Kate was doing sustainable before MM ever heard of it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> She’s a jackass of all trades but master of none.


Worth a thousand up votes. Damn near choked on my drink when I laughed!


----------



## Lodpah

Maggie Muggins said:


> Worth a thousand up votes. Damn near choked on my drink when I laughed!


It’s an old saying. But it’s usually towards a guy lol.


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh. As I expected the US news media can’t kiss her ass enough. The _New York Times_ believes every word she says. If anyone wonders why I have so little respect for the press, this is just one small reason.   





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4878517
> 
> The only global stage she leads is the Global Stage of Narcissistic Hypocrites.
> 
> 
> My thoughts exactly @doni, totally agree.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4878543
> 
> 
> This is a comparison she made and said out loud to the public? Okkkaayyy. Then that must make her the equivalent of a drug lord of social media because she creates content/stories, deals them to the media and public & partakes in social media herself. She ticks all three boxes. She is also an idiot for making that comparison.



I live for your gifs!!!


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. As I expected the US news media can’t kiss her ass enough. The _New York Times_ believes every word she says. If anyone wonders why I have so little respect for the press, this is just one small reason.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



"She said she closed down her personal accounts for “self-preservation.” - right, and we all believe she doesn't have secret accounts and doesn't read every single word that's being uttered about her, as well as everything being said about Will and Kate. Sure, Saint Meghan. 
What galls me the most about her is that she thinks everything is stupid. Her husband may believe that because he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but she seems to be at least slightly more intelligent.


----------



## rose60610

tiktok said:


> "She said she closed down her personal accounts for “self-preservation.” - right, and we all believe she doesn't have secret accounts and doesn't read every single word that's being uttered about her, as well as everything being said about Will and Kate. Sure, Saint Meghan.
> What galls me the most about her is that she thinks everything is stupid. Her husband may believe that because he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but she seems to be at least slightly more intelligent.



I just read this too in the NYT.  She always complains and plays the victim and treats Archie as a fashion accessory, like stuffing a chihuahua in a handbag. How about offering a solution or some coping mechanisms for online trolling/bullying? I don't believe in censoring social media, we've already seen how Facebook and Twitter shut down accounts of substantiated stories THEY don't like while turning a blind eye to proven false propaganda based on "anonymous sources".  Meghan's "woe is me" crap is exhausting.  She claims she's working every day "for Archie". Oh BS, she only trots out the kid when there's a buck to be made. For someone who claims to crave privacy, why does she insert herself everywhere? She's insufferable. I think she'll be in trouble when Archie starts to talk and says something like "Mommy can't shut up".


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> To @rose60610, @lalame , and other TPF members intrigued by the dress choice:
> 
> "The mother-of-one, who is known for her love of designer brands and rarely wears the same outfits twice, looked elegant in a $328 blue and white strappy dress from African American designer Tracy Reese's sustainable label Hope for Flowers for the occasion.
> 
> The designer is a celebrity-favorite, with Meghan's friends Michelle ***** and Oprah Winfrey previously wearing her gowns."
> 
> The dress



Odd that you never really saw her wearing charity-affiliated clothing before she became a royal... she mostly wore your average lux brands.  What changed, Meghan... or are you just more aware of having a perfectly crafted image as a saint now.


----------



## Lodpah

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4878517
> 
> The only global stage she leads is the Global Stage of Narcissistic Hypocrites.
> 
> 
> My thoughts exactly @doni, totally agree.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4878543
> 
> 
> This is a comparison she made and said out loud to the public? Okkkaayyy. Then that must make her the equivalent of a drug lord of social media because she creates content/stories, deals them to the media and public & partakes in social media herself. She ticks all three boxes. She is also an idiot for making that comparison.


True


----------



## Lodpah

She has an outstanding make up artist.






Or she really is a changeling


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> She always complains and plays the victim and treats Archie as a fashion accessory, like stuffing a chihuahua in a handbag.



This is so sad but also so true.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I see that MM's transformation to KK is almost complete look wise. It’s sad! I really do like her more natural look, you know when she had cute freckles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I see that MM's transformation to KK is almost complete look wise. It’s sad! I really do like her more natural look, you know when she had cute freckles.



What's up with her, midlife crisis?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Can’t validate, but there is evidence that the Meghan’s Mirror blog was getting its data from her and it’s been shut down.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's up with her, midlife crisis?


no idea but I don't like the way it is going.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Ha! They can look forward to at least a year of listening to the sounds of construction and having heavy equipment going up and down their street.



The heavy metal of construction followed by the heavy metal of percussion


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> no idea but I don't like the way it is going.



What mid-life? Daily Fail is still churning out articles with her age as "39" and probably will for the next 10 years.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> She wanted to look smart and cultured by knowing the name of an artist of course.



There's no point in knowing after the fact (the fact of getting caught out for plagiarism)


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh you should have warned me it was a video of her speaking, I thought it was just more text. I wasn't prepared! She really dehumanizes her in-laws, doesn't she? "The institution" instead of "the Royal family".



She knows her late-MIL is famous for calling them 'the firm' which made people chuckle at the time in that funny/not funny way. I think she tried to do something similar. 

Funnily enough, the British Monarchy in genera and historically is an institution but that's not what she meant, she meant the family. As someone who married into the family knowing them and of her own accord she is part of and benefiting from that 'institution'. She can always get divorced from that 'institution' if it suits, boom, problem solved, but it doesn't suit, she's milking it for all she's 'worth'. JCMH can always ask to remove himself from the line of succession and asked to be excused of all tittles and duties. But he doesn't, he clings to everything he can as though his life depended on it, which ironically it probably does, certainly his marriage does.

People who cannot and will not separate themselves what they know is bad/bad for them are often called dependent or *addicts* or users. 

I'd also like to point out that the term 'users' (Netflics and otherwise) is considered very unPC at least in my profession and not an expression most woke/PC/normal people would use to describe real people who have substance/alcohol abuse problems, officially they are classed as 'vulnerable people'. Disclaimer, I don't see MM and JCMH as vulnerable in any, users


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> Add this to the list: _bombastic_ (adjective - using high-sounding but meaningless language). Fondly referred to as word salad here



and one of the diagnostic check-list key tests to tick-off that displays narcissistic behavioural traits, even NPD


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> If Prince Charles pays their taxes would the IRS look at as a gift tax? Asking for a friend



The tax-paying public of Great Britain certainly would, but maybe in a whole different way.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> So it's a dress and not a camisole, the resulting look is the same when you know what you look like on a computer screen. Complete with the target placements.  Wearing a strapless dress the next time she can attribute to a said cause, it'll still look inappropriate.



I think it would be OK in August, it's just weirder to be wearing a high-Summer dress in the middle of October (Northern hemisphere). Odd. Odd is the word.


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4878517
> 
> The only global stage she leads is the Global Stage of Narcissistic Hypocrites.
> 
> 
> My thoughts exactly @doni, totally agree.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4878543
> 
> 
> This is a comparison she made and said out loud to the public? Okkkaayyy. Then that must make her the equivalent of a drug lord of social media because she creates content/stories, deals them to the media and public & partakes in social media herself. She ticks all three boxes. She is also an idiot for making that comparison.



 She thinks we're all stupid, we see the Matrix


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> She has an outstanding make up artist.
> 
> View attachment 4878740
> 
> 
> View attachment 4878741
> 
> Or she really is a changeling
> 
> View attachment 4878742



 he's called Mr. Filter


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I see that MM's transformation to KK is almost complete look wise. It’s sad! I really do like her more natural look, you know when she had cute freckles.


well she doesn't have the large butt yet


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Odd that you never really saw her wearing charity-affiliated clothing before she became a royal... she mostly wore your average lux brands.  What changed, Meghan... or are you just more aware of having a perfectly crafted image as a saint now.


well yes
before she was a working actress now she is a working self-promoter


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's up with her, midlife crisis?


More like "It's _STILL_ not all about me WTF???" crisis.


----------



## marietouchet

Yes, the MM makeup evolution is fascinating

Her makeup for Malala was the most striking - redder lips, darker/more pronounced brows, shiny/glowy complexion, freckles/beauty spots hidden, very KK
Malala did not rely on her looks for recognition - I mean that as a SUPER complement, but the wording may be awkward, Malala is the one person to not upstage on looks - you can keep it super simple
So, why the full court press on mu for Malala? Gauche?

Compare Malala to Gloria Steinem in her day - GS was a babe, heck she wrote an expose on working at the Playboy Club, ie she was gorg enough to be hired, Gloria has/had a je ne sais quoi - balancing seriousness and babeness is an art form - if you want to be taken seriously ... and of course, teh 60s-70s - Gloria heyday - were different times - the strictures of the 50s were gone
MM hid under a hat for GS ... no KK look

The mu/outfits are not wrong, but I am having trouble figuring out the messaging, it is all over the place


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> She has an outstanding make up artist.
> 
> View attachment 4878740
> 
> 
> 
> Or she really is a changeling


Strait out of Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum! She looks totally embalmed.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Odd that you never really saw her wearing charity-affiliated clothing before she became a royal... she mostly wore your average lux brands.  *What changed, Meghan... or are you just more aware of having a perfectly crafted image as a saint now.*



She is a z-list (@CeeJay ) actress and she will dress for the role as needed imo. 

Mental health, social justice, women's empowerment, etc are presently very hot topics in the US. Involvement in hot topics gives a better chance for fame, paid interventions/speeches, deals, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

MM is like a kid given free rein in a candy store.  Everything she probably dreamed of as a little girl is now at her fingertips.  She’s all over the place tasting everything.  Overindulgence usually doesn’t end well.


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> MM is like a kid given free rein in a candy store.  Everything she probably dreamed of as a little girl is now at her fingertips.  She’s all over the place tasting everything.  Overindulgence usually doesn’t end well.


Verruca Salt anyone?


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> Verruca Salt anyone?


Exactly!


----------



## Allisonfaye

Wow, just saw a headline that H is going home for the holidays without her? I am not able to keep up with this thread so sorry if this is already in here.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> well she doesn't have the large butt yet


You just wait... Joking aside, her face is looking more and more like KK every day!


----------



## lanasyogamama

She’s erased whatever it was that made her face cute and interesting.


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> You just wait... Joking aside, her face is looking more and more like KK every day!


Didn’t MM turn down an invitation from Kim to get together or something?  I got the impression she thought she was better than KK.  Ironic if true.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Verruca Salt anyone?



You beat me to it. I WANT IT NOW!!!


----------



## maryg1

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, just saw a headline that H is going home for the holidays without her? I am not able to keep up with this thread so sorry if this is already in here.


As far as I read, the Queen requested his presence to discuss their speech about US vote. I don’t think she was too pleased.


----------



## Tootsie17

maryg1 said:


> As far as I read, the Queen requested his presence to discuss their speech about US vote. I don’t think she was too pleased.


Nothing makes you feel lower than low when you are scolded by your grandmother because she usually loves and spoils you rotten. Maybe this has been Harry's problem all along as many have said on this thread. I sure would LOVE to eavesdrop on the meeting between the two.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Verruca Salt anyone?


"Wonka assures Charlie that *Veruca* will continue to be a spoiled brat, but maybe she will be a bit wiser for the wear."


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, just saw a headline that H is going home for the holidays without her? I am not able to keep up with this thread so sorry if this is already in here.


Yesterday, I read that THEY (at least two of H/M and A) will go back to London only for the Jan trial about the famous letter, they will miss Xmas with the Queen - but then the regular Sandringham Xmas is a non starter due to COVID

I also read that he has been taking secret trips to the UK ???? 
Not sure how much is true, all of the above just shows how contradictory the sources are

The acid test: BP has not commented on their/his travel plans and they also have not confirmed that the Frogmore debt has been paid - past tense


----------



## marietouchet

Another interesting tidbit that helps put all the BRF todo in perspective. Those palaces are a fortune to maintain....

The Duke of Gloucester - senior royal, first cousin of QEII, he was born a prince -was trolled yesterday.
- he moved out of a BIG flat at Kensington, and into a little one at the old KP stables. The old stables required 1M pounds of refurb - electrical, mechanical, asbestos removal , not decorating, just bring the space up to code. So, the 1M pounds for the new Gloucester flat at the stables was the issue.

Why move? His kids are grown and he does not need the space, and the BIG flat was intended for H&M until they turned their noses up at KP and went to Frogmore.

Gloucester was downsizing - good, but the H&M rejection of the KP flat upset all the plans, causing both the stables and Frogmore to be needlessly renovated (G could have stayed put in the end).

Gloucester does pay a "commercial" rent for his digs.

In the days of COVD, the extra 1 M is hard to tolerate, but, not the fault of Gloucester

A good insight about the BRF and finances, and the optics of it all


----------



## papertiger

Tootsie17 said:


> Nothing makes you feel lower than low when you are scolded by your grandmother because she usually loves and spoils you rotten. Maybe this has been Harry's problem all along as many have said on this thread. I sure would LOVE to eavesdrop on the meeting between the two.


----------



## lalame

I agree about all the extra makeup. My first thought was maybe she's not great at makeup and she doesn't have access to a professional MUA anymore... but there was so much hullabaloo about how she's "so good" she does her own makeup for events anyway. So that theory is out.

Maybe overcompensating for not having easy access to botox, facialists, etc anymore?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I agree about all the extra makeup. My first thought was maybe she's not great at makeup and she doesn't have access to a professional MUA anymore... but there was so much hullabaloo about how she's "so good" she does her own makeup for events anyway. So that theory is out.
> 
> Maybe overcompensating for not having easy access to botox, facialists, etc anymore?


there's lots of money where they live so I would think she could get whatever services she wants at her home...and the way she is, if she had to have someone drive from LA, that would be fine too.  After all she's the Duchess....money is no object


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> there's lots of money where they live so I would think she could get whatever services she wants at her home...and the way she is, if she had to have someone drive from LA, that would be fine too.  After all she's the Duchess....money is no object



To my eye, she looks more botox-ed than ever. Of course, it is a video so it could be lighting, makeup, filters, etc. In short, nothing is real with her. Nothing.

RE: Harry — they have such a huge credibility problem that anything is believable. He could be sorting out his residency/citizenship issues, making more videos, playing x-box, etc. Since he has been quiet this week, I expect we will hear something soon.  QE and William are visiting a lab today. Surely he will want to upstage that. 








						Queen tells Porton Down professor rising Covid rates 'were expected'
					

The Queen described rising coronavirus cases as 'horrible,' during an engagement at Porton Down laboratory which saw her leave a royal residence for the first time in seven months.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if H will have a chance to get a new gray shirt whilst in London.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I agree about all the extra makeup. My first thought was maybe she's not great at makeup and she doesn't have access to a professional MUA anymore... but there was so much hullabaloo about how she's "so good" she does her own makeup for events anyway. So that theory is out.
> 
> Maybe overcompensating for not having easy access to botox, facialists, etc anymore?


Botox is a medical procedure , thus an essential service ?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes to all of this. This Covid world,   Wishing you and all health and peace.
> 
> 
> RE: MM - this clip from 2015 revealed all I need to know about her which is why I don’t believe anything she says.
> Fake, Lying, Insincere, Pretender. For other reasons, I don’t believe Harry either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she lied to casting directors for a part
> 
> 
> The clip from a promotional appearance Meghan did for Suits shows her confessing to lying. Meghan and Harry have already begun a transition phase of living in Canada and the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _She tells the panel: 'I was Taft-Harteleyed, which is I pretended I was union.... and you have to... it was the pilot called Century City with Héctor Elizondo'
> 
> 'And I got there, and they're like - so you're union'
> 
> 'And I'm like of course, I'm union I mean yeah absolutely. And then I wasn't.'
> 
> 'To this day those casting directors will never hire me'.   _
> 
> *'I was such a fraud.' *


Can't remember where I read it (_and it's probably been deleted off the internet by Meghan and/or her "friends"_), but she also admitted to lying .. saying she was Caucasian in order to get acting parts.  Well, she got the "fraud" right, that is for sure!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Botox is a medical procedure , thus an essential service ?



In her mind, rules don’t apply to ‘Royalty“. It’s her California, money talks and she will be happy for Harry to pay for whatever she needs wants.

@CeeJay  This article is from 2016. I’m sure there are plenty of articles when she discussed her ethnicity.








						Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
					

'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman




					www.elle.com
				



Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I think she really does think she is all that.  Wonder if she thinks she's on the level of someone like Amal Clooney, who is highly accomplished or Oprah who really did transform herself from growing up the hard way to being one of the most powerful women in the country.


Oh, I'm sure she thinks so .. in addition to her "close friendship" with Michelle O-b-a-m-a (after all - she played a lawyer on TV, right?)


----------



## CeeJay

jennlt said:


> Add this to the list: _bombastic_ (adjective - using high-sounding but meaningless language). Fondly referred to as word salad here


HA .. yes, just like a former colleague of mine who I nicknamed the "bomb" (he never realized that it really referred to being bombastic)!!!


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I think it would be OK in August, it's just weirder to be wearing a high-Summer dress in the middle of October (Northern hemisphere). Odd. Odd is the word.


Sept & Oct are our hottest months in Southern California, and it's been up in the high 90's/100+ lately.  However, all that being said, I feel that that 'dress' was highly inappropriate for that "outing".


----------



## TC1

MM seems like the type to me to be all preachy about voting..yet not vote herself. Like Kanye..hasn't he been quoted as saying he's never voted? Lawd.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s erased whatever it was that made her face cute and interesting.


Didn't she once claim she would tell MUA to NOT cover up her freckles?  What happened to that?


----------



## TC1

purseinsanity said:


> Didn't she once claim she would tell MUA to NOT cover up her freckles?  What happened to that?


She forgot she fabricated that comment


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it (_and it's probably been deleted off the internet by Meghan and/or her "friends"_), but she also admitted to lying .. saying she was Caucasian in order to get acting parts.  Well, she got the "fraud" right, that is for sure!


that's when it was convenient to be white...now she can take advantage of being a WOC


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> In her mind, rules don’t apply to ‘Royalty“. It’s her California, money talks and she will be happy for Harry to pay for whatever she needs wants.
> 
> @CeeJay  This article is from 2016. I’m sure there are plenty of articles when she discussed her ethnicity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role.



One of my WOC friends refers to her derisively as a "WOCC", A Woman of Convenient Color.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Didn't she once claim she would tell MUA to NOT cover up her freckles?  What happened to that?



As with everything else, if she is talking she is lying. I hate to say it but she might have a future in politics after all. She already has the US press propping her up and all she had to do was offer up some word salad that they liked.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Didn't she once claim she would tell MUA to NOT cover up her freckles?  What happened to that?



She markled her freckles.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> One of my WOC friends refers to her derisively as a "WOCC", A Woman of Convenient Color.


yep, glad to hear that from a WOC


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> As with everything else, if she is talking she is lying. I hate to say it but she might have a future in politics after all. She already has the US press propping her up and all she had to do was offer up some word salad that they liked.



I don't think she could hang with the level of criticism towards politicians in the US - her skin is way too thin. 

*Like she does with everything else, when it gets too hot or she can't handle the criticism, she will bail and run away.* And whining about it later will only provide more fodder for those who don't like her.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> As with everything else, if she is talking she is lying. I hate to say it but she might have a future in politics after all. She already has the US press propping her up and all she had to do was offer up some word salad that they liked.


It may go nowhere, but they did at least send an automated email acknowledging receipt.  I wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times about my concern their reporter Jenny Gross violated the Times' standards of journalism, always seeking to print the facts, by writing a puff piece about MM's statements on Social Media. Mentioned by ignoring the blatant plagiarism with the Netflix movie, readily recognized by many readers, and the availability of other examples on line with a few key strokes, and by her hypocritical statements about use of social media, again easily found on line, they did not meet the standard of ethical journalism for which they strive.  An exaggeration perhaps, but really am sick and tired of her blathering going unchallenged.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> It may go nowhere, but they did at least send an automated email acknowledging receipt.  I wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times about my concern their reporter Jenny Gross violated the Times' standards of journalism, always seeking to print the facts, by writing a puff piece about MM's statements on Social Media. Mentioned by ignoring the blatant plagiarism with the Netflix movie, readily recognized by many readers, and the availability of other examples on line with a few key strokes, and by her hypocritical statements about use of social media, again easily found on line, they did not meet the standard of ethical journalism for which they strive.  An exaggeration perhaps, but really am sick and tired of her blathering going unchallenged.



Oh wow, good for you! I am so cynical it didn’t occur to me to write a letter to the editor.  Whether it falls on deaf ears or not, I bet it felt really good writing it.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> It may go nowhere, but they did at least send an automated email acknowledging receipt.  I wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times about my concern their reporter Jenny Gross violated the Times' standards of journalism, always seeking to print the facts, by writing a puff piece about MM's statements on Social Media. Mentioned by ignoring the blatant plagiarism with the Netflix movie, readily recognized by many readers, and the availability of other examples on line with a few key strokes, and by her hypocritical statements about use of social media, again easily found on line, they did not meet the standard of ethical journalism for which they strive.  An exaggeration perhaps, but really am sick and tired of her blathering going unchallenged.


The NYC is riding on reputation from the past.  It hasn't been good for the last several years. It is no longer "the newspaper of record" IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't think she could hang with the level of criticism towards politicians in the US - her skin is way too thin.
> 
> *Like she does with everything else, when it gets too hot or she can't handle the criticism, she will bail and run away.* And whining about it later will only provide more fodder for those who don't like her.


Not to mention that these professional politicians have staff that tell they how to act and what to say at particular times and events.  She doesn't listen to anyone.


----------



## Pautinka

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it (_and it's probably been deleted off the internet by Meghan and/or her "friends"_), but she also admitted to lying .. saying she was Caucasian in order to get acting parts.  Well, she got the "fraud" right, that is for sure!


Was it this, her BABE entry? (From Pinterest.)


----------



## Chanbal

Pautinka said:


> Was it this, her BABE entry? (From Pinterest.)
> 
> View attachment 4879521



She is indeed a "WOCC, A Woman of Convenient Color" @csshopper


----------



## chicinthecity777

Pautinka said:


> Was it this, her BABE entry? (From Pinterest.)
> 
> View attachment 4879521


Supermodel?????


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I agree about all the extra makeup. My first thought was maybe she's not great at makeup and she doesn't have access to a professional MUA anymore... but there was so much hullabaloo about how she's "so good" she does her own makeup for events anyway. So that theory is out.
> 
> Maybe overcompensating for not having easy access to botox, facialists, etc anymore?


I just had my scar 'revised' (for the 3rd time); the guy I go to is an ENT in addition to doing reconstructive Facial Plastic Surgery .. and believe me, they were BUSY as all heck .. so, she can likely see a PS and other beauty places.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> Supermodel?????


Can you imagine if one of us, real people, had lied on our resume and gotten  caught... we'd been escorted out the door. Honesty was a requirement back in the days... Is it still as important today? Please, all you young ones, tell me it is still so.  I'm glad to be a retired old lady.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> MM seems like the type to me to be all preachy about voting..yet not vote herself. Like Kanye..hasn't he been quoted as saying he's never voted? Lawd.



Does she drive? pay taxes? Or does she use a ‘shell’ company to cover all of that?
Why people don‘t register to vote:








						The Most Common Myths About Voter Registration, Debunked
					

The midterm elections are only a few weeks off, and if ever there’s a time to participate in the electoral process, it’s now. But as of November 2016, only 70 percent of U.S. citizens over age 18 were registered to vote, which means that more than 65 million people who are eligible to register...




					lifehacker.com
				



_Kinda myth/kinda true = In most states, voter registration is one of many lists used to call jurors. 
InTexas or New York, for example, you can be summoned for jury duty if your name appears on a voter registration list, or if you have a state ID; have filed for income tax or unemployment; etc. In these states, being registered to vote makes you no more likely to get called for jury duty than simply having a driver’s license.

States like California, Maine, and Florida, on the other hand, leave voter registration lists out of the jury summons process entirely; they use other lists (like drivers licenses and utility company lists) to find jurors.

This claim is not completely baseless, however. It’s true that there are some counties in a handful of states that exclusively use voter registration lists to summon jurors. As far as I can tell, they are Louisiana, Alabama, South Dakota, and Tennessee’s Eastern District and Western District (but weirdly NOTTennessee’s Middle District). If avoiding jury duty at all costs is your ultimate goal, you can look at your own district court’s website to find out exactly how they get you. (And if you want to go down a deep rabbit hole of reading the minutiae of your state’s statutes on juror selection, have at it.)

*Bottom line: *In the majority of states, registering to vote makes you no more likely to get called for jury duty than having a state ID or paying state taxes_


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> It may go nowhere, but they did at least send an automated email acknowledging receipt.  I wrote a letter to the editor of the New York Times about my concern their reporter Jenny Gross violated the Times' standards of journalism, always seeking to print the facts, by writing a puff piece about MM's statements on Social Media. Mentioned by ignoring the blatant plagiarism with the Netflix movie, readily recognized by many readers, and the availability of other examples on line with a few key strokes, and by her hypocritical statements about use of social media, again easily found on line, they did not meet the standard of ethical journalism for which they strive.  An exaggeration perhaps, but really am sick and tired of her blathering going unchallenged.


*APPLAUSE*, *APPLAUSE*, *APPLAUSE* ..  thank you! I'm pretty pissed about the NYT too as I *used* to think that it was one of the few "ethical" news outlets .. yet, we see this with many nowadays .. unfortunately!


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Supermodel*?????


 .. WOW, she is truly delusional!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> *APPLAUSE*, *APPLAUSE*, *APPLAUSE* ..  thank you! I'm pretty pissed about the NYT too as I *used* to think that it was one of the few "ethical" news outlets .. yet, we see this with many nowadays .. unfortunately!


CeeJay- you're an inspiration, you always can be counted on to tell it straight!


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Oh wow, good for you! I am so cynical it didn’t occur to me to write a letter to the editor.  Whether it falls on deaf ears or not, I bet it felt really good writing it.


 yes. it did!


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> She’s a jackass of all trades but master of none.


So accurate 








purseinsanity said:


> I live for your gifs!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lounorada  Simply the best!
Bringing in The Chairman of the Board to wish cheers to all - stepping out of the helicopter with a drink = thriving, no?


----------



## bag-mania

Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF   









						Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
					

The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
> 
> 
> The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
> 
> 
> The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



"Meghan Markle is in the middle of a reinvention. After stepping away from royal duties in January, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been busy in Los Angeles, building their lives as private citizens. The couple made headlines in September with the announcement of their production company and multiyear deal with Netflix, and as philanthropists, the pair have been taking on speaking engagements, interviews, and public appearances connected to causes they hold dear. Much of their recent work has been via Zoom or teleconferencing, but the Duchess still sends messages through her outfit choices, even over webcam. Markle’s wardrobe has always reflected her socially-conscious viewpoint, and lately, she’s doubled down on ethical dressing by exclusively wearing brands that focus on the common good in her interviews." 

It's obvious that MM and her PR agency are behind this idiotic publication. It's also obvious that Vogue has little consideration for its readers!


----------



## Chanbal

For MM's fans, here is a rare opportunity to live close to her:
*Ellen flips her Montecito mansion: Talk show host lists Bali-inspired home with mountain and ocean views for $39.9million - two years after buying it for $27million DM*

The house is impressive and the comments fun:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> "Meghan Markle is in the middle of a reinvention. After stepping away from royal duties in January, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been busy in Los Angeles, building their lives as private citizens. The couple made headlines in September with the announcement of their production company and multiyear deal with Netflix, and as philanthropists, the pair have been taking on speaking engagements, interviews, and *public appearances [do they mean the restaurant? Where else have H&M been recently?  Half-truths, tsk tsk.] *connected to causes they hold dear. Much of their recent work has been via Zoom or teleconferencing, but the Duchess still sends messages through her outfit choices, even over webcam. Markle’s wardrobe has always reflected her socially-conscious viewpoint, and lately, she’s doubled down on ethical dressing by exclusively wearing brands that focus on the common good in her interviews."
> 
> It's obvious that *MM and her PR agency are behind this idiotic publication. * It's also obvious that Vogue has little consideration for its readers!



  

ETA: Ellen’s house is beautiful, but, sadly,  it only has 5.5 bathrooms (if I read the article correctly).


----------



## chowlover2

Lodpah said:


> She has an outstanding make up artist.
> 
> View attachment 4878740
> 
> 
> View attachment 4878741
> 
> Or she really is a changeling
> 
> View attachment 4878742


Look at that vein in her forehead in the 2018 pic, I never noticed that before.


----------



## Lodpah

You know something? The papers are desperate to make them popular and I can imagine cost of their PR bill. The more they flagellate their way into the mainstream the people will be sick of them.

I do hope JCHM realizes what he’s missing when he goes home and an intervention is staged so that he can leave the cult of Megladon. Let the Queen slay and maybe he can finally say this:



and when Megladon tries to get his attention let this be his theme song:



or this:


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Sept & Oct are our hottest months in Southern California, and it's been up in the high 90's/100+ lately.  However, all that being said, I feel that that 'dress' was highly inappropriate for that "outing".



Oh you KNOW that huge house is running A/C every day to a perfect 73 Degrees.



bag-mania said:


> Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
> 
> 
> The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



Okay we all need to markle that “Markle Sparkle” name. Please. Please??


----------



## Sol Ryan

Lodpah said:


> You know something? The papers are desperate to make them popular and I can imagine cost of their PR bill. The more they flagellate their way into the mainstream the people will be sick of them.
> 
> I do hope JCHM realizes what he’s missing when he goes home and an intervention is staged so that he can leave the cult of Megladon. Let the Queen slay and maybe he can finally say this:
> 
> 
> 
> and when Megladon tries to get his attention let this be his theme song:
> 
> 
> 
> or this:




I don’t think an intervention would work. I still think Harry’s at least 50% in on it if not more. Meghan is probably running with an idea that he had as far as she can take it (which might be farther than he intended, but it was still his idea... to dramatize: he might even occasionally say this wasn’t what he wanted, and the response from Meghan might be that it was his idea... but I don’t necessarily want to put all the blame on Meghan for this mess. She just saw opportunity and ran with it, Harry put it there if you believe Omid’s book). He said what he thought to faux-Greta regarding politics. I think what we’re seeing is revenge for Harry not being special enough. He’s a spoiled man child. If the BRF thought there was hope for him, I don’t think Will and Kate would have turned on him, they’d just be exasperated. Will and Kate look done. That last engagement wasn’t the look of “My brother/Brother-in-law is and idiot who married the wrong person” that was “My brother/brother-in-law is a traitor to everything we hold dear”. I think they‘ve known Harry, tried to help him and find him to have betrayed them.

I’d be surprised if there are any fun family meetups with all the family again anytime soon... even if M&H were to split up (which I’d be surprised at... they’d atleast be business married, it’s too lucrative for them to separate), Harry’s shown his true colors.... I think it will take a long time to fix that especially if Kate isn’t willing to help mend the bridge.









						Looks Like ‘Megxit’ Was Actually Prince Harry’s Idea
					

Just as we suspected.




					www.thecut.com
				












						Russian hoax raises questions over Sussexes' security
					

Royal expert sounds alarm after Prince Harry seemingly duped into thinking he was talking to Greta Thunberg




					www.theguardian.com
				




I didn’t share a pic of the last engagement because we’ve all seen it and I’m just sick of looking at it.... 3 miserable people with one smiling goofy person in an ill fitting dress who doesnt seem to care that everyone else is miserable and doesn’t understand the importance of the occasion.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
> 
> 
> The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



I only buy Vogue Italia now, subscriptions to all other magazines have been cancelled.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am still sceptical. Yes, maybe it was his idea. But maybe the narcissist made her victim believe it was his idea, and the knight in shining armor that he is he thinks taking the blame is part of the deal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I only buy Vogue Italia now, subscriptions to all other magazines have been cancelled.



I really want to like Vogue (haven't tried Italy though, just the German version), but I don't want to dress in ridiculously ugly but oh so edgy runway outfits that cost a monthly salary.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> You know something? The papers are desperate to make them popular and I can imagine cost of their PR bill. The more they flagellate their way into the mainstream the people will be sick of them.
> 
> I do hope JCHM realizes what he’s missing when he goes home and an intervention is staged so that he can leave the cult of Megladon. Let the Queen slay and maybe he can finally say this:
> 
> 
> 
> and when Megladon tries to get his attention let this be his theme song:
> 
> 
> 
> or this:




Who Sussex, Duchess of where? 

Who cares! Music is great. 

My mother used to sing me the Jimmy Cliff when I was little and sad, I had tears in my eyes just playing it, thank you


----------



## Sharont2305

I love this picture, I wonder if Harry's seen it.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really want to like Vogue (haven't tried Italy though, just the German version), but I don't want to dress in ridiculously ugly but oh so edgy runway outfits that cost a monthly salary.



I was talking to my friend last night who's worked in fashion forever. We both remember buying fashion magazines with the same thrill as some on tPF by a new bag. He managed to buy Vogue Italia cover 100 Ltd Ed this month and he's not even going to take it out of the plastic wrapping.

I really enjoy the editorial when the designs, colours, stylists, models, photographer etc come together and create something amazing. The '12 best coats' that all look the same or telling me how I should behave/think not so much.

I used to be a part of that world, and I know what those people are like, _the Devil Wears Prada_ and _Absolutely Fabulous_ were mild and flattering towards them. Mostly beaches hanging around a few majorly talented artists for the lure of freebies and partly charley...and we're back to MM .


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t think an intervention would work. I still think Harry’s at least 50% in on it if not more. Meghan is probably running with an idea that he had as far as she can take it (which might be farther than he intended, but it was still his idea... to dramatize: he might even occasionally say this wasn’t what he wanted, and the response from Meghan might be that it was his idea... but I don’t necessarily want to put all the blame on Meghan for this mess. She just saw opportunity and ran with it, Harry put it there if you believe Omid’s book). He said what he thought to faux-Greta regarding politics. I think what we’re seeing is revenge for Harry not being special enough. He’s a spoiled man child. If the BRF thought there was hope for him, I don’t think Will and Kate would have turned on him, they’d just be exasperated. Will and Kate look done. That last engagement wasn’t the look of “My brother/Brother-in-law is and idiot who married the wrong person” that was “My brother/brother-in-law is a traitor to everything we hold dear”. I think they‘ve known Harry, tried to help him and find him to have betrayed them.
> 
> I’d be surprised if there are any fun family meetups with all the family again anytime soon... even if M&H were to split up (which I’d be surprised at... they’d atleast be business married, it’s too lucrative for them to separate), Harry’s shown his true colors.... I think it will take a long time to fix that especially if Kate isn’t willing to help mend the bridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks Like ‘Megxit’ Was Actually Prince Harry’s Idea
> 
> 
> Just as we suspected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian hoax raises questions over Sussexes' security
> 
> 
> Royal expert sounds alarm after Prince Harry seemingly duped into thinking he was talking to Greta Thunberg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t share a pic of the last engagement because we’ve all seen it and I’m just sick of looking at it.... 3 miserable people with one smiling goofy person in an ill fitting dress who doesnt seem to care that everyone else is miserable and doesn’t understand the importance of the occasion.



 

Completely agree - this was all Harry. She is being taken along for the ride. Her ego thinks it has been her idea. Not true. 
Completely agree - they won’t divorce any time soon. Even tho the body language in the recent videos is way off, Harry won’t leave her. Now, because they are so very woke, they may try for the avant-garde open marriage idea. We’ll see.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love love  The fall colors, the genuine smile, the wave, the royal crown on the car. *This* is royalty.



Sharont2305 said:


> I love this picture, I wonder if Harry's seen it.
> 
> View attachment 4879951


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> You know something? The papers are desperate to make them popular and I can imagine cost of their PR bill. The more they flagellate their way into the mainstream the people will be sick of them.
> 
> I do hope JCHM realizes what he’s missing when he goes home and an intervention is staged so that he can leave the cult of Megladon. Let the Queen slay and maybe he can finally say this:
> 
> 
> 
> and when Megladon tries to get his attention let this be his theme song:
> 
> 
> 
> or this:



Somebody’s on a roll!  Lol!  Love it!


----------



## sdkitty

Pautinka said:


> Was it this, her BABE entry? (From Pinterest.)
> 
> View attachment 4879521


supermodel?  if you believe in astrology, the Leo sign makes sense


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
> 
> 
> The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


she is just benefitting from being a WOC in a high profile positon at the right time....has done little to earn the attention she is getting IMO...not to mention that until recently, she didn't seem to be so proud be be a WOC


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> I love this picture, I wonder if Harry's seen it.
> 
> View attachment 4879951


Holy Moley! That back seat is about the size of my dinky bathroom! 

I would love to take a spin in that vehicle (QE not necessary but it sure would be nice to have her along for the ride).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Taken from the other thread:

JAN MOIR: In the Duchess Olympics, Kate gets the gold

"To be honest, I used to think that Kate was a bit boring, but have now had to reconsider and reshuffle my pack of royal favourites. In this modern world, amid the turbulence on social media and the clamour to matter, the Duchess of Cambridge manages to care about issues without making the issue about herself.

She pitches an image of intelligent interest in a cause instead of exuding howling self-interest and always hits the right note of raising public awareness instead of grabbing the moral high ground and lecturing the public. Unlike other royals I could mention."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have come to believe that these two clowns couldn't have done the Cambridges a bigger favour with their shenanigans.


----------



## Aimee3

Of course Meghan’s a SUPERModel.  She may have once modeled for a SUPERmarket opening.  With her word salad, that would make her a SUPERModel!


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have come to believe that these two clowns couldn't have done the Cambridges a bigger favour with their shenanigans.


I think that all the California stuff motivated the Queen to get out yesterday with William, good for her
I loved seeing her perky pink coat


----------



## Chanbal

@Lodpah They must be paying their PR agency a lot:

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will host TIME100 Talk on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience after Duchess compared social media users to drug addicts*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will host a special edition of TIME100 Talks on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience on Tuesday. It comes after Meghan Markle made a bold comparison between social media users and drug addicts during her latest virtual summit appearance on Tuesday (pictured)

Presented in partnership with P&G and themed around the topic of 'Engineering a Better World,' the special episode is set to reflect Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's Duchess' focus on building online communities that are more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy .

The royal couple will also discuss what that means for supporting and accelerating progress on critical issues like gender equity, racial justice, and climate change.

Dan Macsai, TIME executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, added: 'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world.

'We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time.'

The episode will feature conversations with a range of guests, including Reddit co-founder and founder of 776 Alexis Ohanian, and Rappler CEO and executive editor Maria Ressa.

They will also discuss creating safe, trustworthy and compassionate online communities with TIME editor in chief and CEO Edward Felsenthal during the show.

TIME100 Talks has convened more than 100 notable guests - including U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, advocate Rev. Bernice A. King, immunologist Dr. Anthony Fauci, UNHCR Special Envoy Angelina Jolie, musicians John Legend and Elton John, Speaker of the House Nancy ****** and the Dalai Lama.

*Censure?*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> You know something? *The papers are desperate to make them popular and I can imagine cost of their PR bill. *The more they flagellate their way into the mainstream the people will be sick of them.



Entertainment publications aside, publicists should not be able to get such flattering coverage from a news outlet like the _New York Times _for their clients. That means the editors at _NYT_ must genuinely believe that printing the piffle Meghan spews is more important than confirming whether she actually practices what she preaches. I've said it before, the US media bought into the whole "Harry and Meghan had to leave the UK due to racism" narrative. I think most of the US media is bending over backwards to support and even promote Meghan because they believe she was mistreated. They won't look too closely at the facts. Facts are inconsequential when compared with appearing woke and righteous!


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> "Meghan Markle is in the middle of a reinvention. After stepping away from royal duties in January, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been busy in Los Angeles, building their lives as private citizens. The couple made headlines in September with the announcement of their production company and multiyear deal with Netflix, and as philanthropists, the pair have been taking on speaking engagements, interviews, and public appearances connected to causes they hold dear. Much of their recent work has been via Zoom or teleconferencing, but the Duchess still sends messages through her outfit choices, even over webcam. Markle’s wardrobe has always reflected her socially-conscious viewpoint, and lately, she’s doubled down on ethical dressing by exclusively wearing brands that focus on the common good in her interviews."
> 
> It's obvious that MM and her PR agency are behind this idiotic publication. It's also obvious that Vogue has little consideration for its readers!



How can one be known for “ethical dressing” when they are also known for never wearing something twice. Nothing “ethical” about that.


----------



## LittleStar88

It's incredible to me that these two get air time/paid to broadcast their _thoughts and opinions_. They are so far out of touch with reality right now because they are so focused on themselves... I don't even want to hear what they "think" about anything.

Meghan doesn't know bullying. I was bullied so hard for the first 18 years of my life but I don't feel the need to tell everyone about it, use it to diminish other people's plights, or whine about it at every chance I get. Has anyone ever told her that the opinions of people who don't know you do not matter? Has she ever looked at other "famous people" and how they are constantly picked apart as sport? This is life - especially as a person in the public eye. She wanted this public life (be it actor, "model", or whatever it is she defines herself to be now... And if she can't handle it maybe she should reevaluate what she is doing with her life.

She needs to seriously get over herself.


----------



## LittleStar88

bellecate said:


> How can one be known for “ethical dressing” when they are also known for never wearing something twice. Nothing “ethical” about that.



The first thing I thought about was that ugly transparent black bedazzled muumuu parfait Valentino thing she wore that time... I would love to see how she is rewearing or upcycling that mess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> The first thing I thought about was that ugly transparent black bedazzled muumuu parfait Valentino thing she wore that time... I would love to see how she is rewearing or upcycling that mess.



My favourite of the piles of burned up money: the 80000 bucks pregnancy caftan worn for a whopping two hours, or was it three? But hey, this is the woman who needed a 20000 bucks couture dress for her engagement pictures when a future queen and a blood princess both wore ready-to-wear day dresses that retailed for around 400.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> supermodel?  if you believe in astrology, *the Leo sign makes sense*



Her need to be the center of attention is obvious. Harry is a Virgo. Their marriage could work out fine as long as Harry remembers he cannot criticize her and I think she has him too well trained to do that.


----------



## lalame

LittleStar88 said:


> The first thing I thought about was that ugly transparent black bedazzled muumuu parfait Valentino thing she wore that time... I would love to see how she is rewearing or upcycling that mess.
> 
> View attachment 4880230



Omg I loved this dress.


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t think an intervention would work. I still think Harry’s at least 50% in on it if not more. Meghan is probably running with an idea that he had as far as she can take it (which might be farther than he intended, but it was still his idea... to dramatize: he might even occasionally say this wasn’t what he wanted, and the response from Meghan might be that it was his idea... but I don’t necessarily want to put all the blame on Meghan for this mess. She just saw opportunity and ran with it, Harry put it there if you believe Omid’s book). He said what he thought to faux-Greta regarding politics. I think what we’re seeing is revenge for Harry not being special enough. He’s a spoiled man child. If the BRF thought there was hope for him, I don’t think Will and Kate would have turned on him, they’d just be exasperated. Will and Kate look done. That last engagement wasn’t the look of “My brother/Brother-in-law is and idiot who married the wrong person” that was “My brother/brother-in-law is a traitor to everything we hold dear”. I think they‘ve known Harry, tried to help him and find him to have betrayed them.
> 
> I’d be surprised if there are any fun family meetups with all the family again anytime soon... even if M&H were to split up (which I’d be surprised at... they’d atleast be business married, it’s too lucrative for them to separate), Harry’s shown his true colors.... I think it will take a long time to fix that especially if Kate isn’t willing to help mend the bridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks Like ‘Megxit’ Was Actually Prince Harry’s Idea
> 
> 
> Just as we suspected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian hoax raises questions over Sussexes' security
> 
> 
> Royal expert sounds alarm after Prince Harry seemingly duped into thinking he was talking to Greta Thunberg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn’t share a pic of the last engagement because we’ve all seen it and I’m just sick of looking at it.... 3 miserable people with one smiling goofy person in an ill fitting dress who doesnt seem to care that everyone else is miserable and doesn’t understand the importance of the occasion.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Completely agree - this was all Harry. She is being taken along for the ride. Her ego thinks it has been her idea. Not true.
> Completely agree - they won’t divorce any time soon. Even tho the body language in the recent videos is way off, Harry won’t leave her. Now, because they are so very woke, they may try for the avant-garde open marriage idea. We’ll see.



Now I totally agree with you ladies but I'd go one step further. Harry probably brought the desire but Meghan came in and did something about it. He's dim and I'd bet he wanted to leave and still live it up among celebrities but wouldn't even know how to go about getting the money for that. I give her credit for doing whatever it took... and it was ugly but she made it happen.


----------



## Aimee3

bellecate said:


> How can one be known for “ethical dressing” when they are also known for never wearing something twice. Nothing “ethical” about that.


Wait, you forgot about JCMH’s grey tee shirt that’s been worn, and possibly slept in, many times!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> @Lodpah They must be paying their PR agency a lot:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will host TIME100 Talk on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience after Duchess compared social media users to drug addicts*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will host a special edition of TIME100 Talks on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience on Tuesday. It comes after Meghan Markle made a bold comparison between social media users and drug addicts during her latest virtual summit appearance on Tuesday (pictured)
> 
> Presented in partnership with P&G and themed around the topic of 'Engineering a Better World,' the special episode is set to reflect Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's Duchess' focus on building online communities that are more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy .
> 
> The royal couple will also discuss what that means for supporting and accelerating progress on critical issues like gender equity, racial justice, and climate change.
> 
> Dan Macsai, TIME executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, added: 'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world.
> 
> 'We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time.'
> 
> The episode will feature conversations with a range of guests, including Reddit co-founder and founder of 776 Alexis Ohanian, and Rappler CEO and executive editor Maria Ressa.
> 
> They will also discuss creating safe, trustworthy and compassionate online communities with TIME editor in chief and CEO Edward Felsenthal during the show.
> 
> TIME100 Talks has convened more than 100 notable guests - including U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, advocate Rev. Bernice A. King, immunologist Dr. Anthony Fauci, UNHCR Special Envoy Angelina Jolie, musicians John Legend and Elton John, Speaker of the House Nancy ****** and the Dalai Lama.
> 
> *Censure?*



Their contribution sounds 'fascinating'


----------



## Annawakes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Taken from the other thread:
> 
> JAN MOIR: In the Duchess Olympics, Kate gets the gold
> 
> "To be honest, I used to think that Kate was a bit boring, but have now had to reconsider and reshuffle my pack of royal favourites. In this modern world, amid the turbulence on social media and the clamour to matter, the Duchess of Cambridge manages to care about issues without making the issue about herself.
> 
> She pitches an image of intelligent interest in a cause instead of exuding howling self-interest and always hits the right note of raising public awareness instead of grabbing the moral high ground and lecturing the public. Unlike other royals I could mention."


Awesome.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Entertainment publications aside, publicists should not be able to get such flattering coverage from a news outlet like the _New York Times _for their clients. That means the editors at _NYT_ must genuinely believe that printing the piffle Meghan spews is more important than confirming whether she actually practices what she preaches. I've said it before, the US media bought into the whole "Harry and Meghan had to leave the UK due to racism" narrative. I think most of the US media is bending over backwards to support and even promote Meghan because they believe she was mistreated. They won't look too closely at the facts. Facts are inconsequential when compared with appearing woke and righteous!


I was watching a documentary called Bad Boys Billionaires and there was a sales 
executive from a major luxury magazine about a man who wanted to make a mark with his jewelry so he hired PR to get the buzz going. The magazines loved it because it made the mags a lot of money creating the buzz and getting him out there. Very informative so I imagine it’s the same with these two. Also that fortune thing I read that to be part of it one has to pay a huge sum to be in the clique. Wonder if she paid.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Her need to be the center of attention is obvious. Harry is a Virgo. Their marriage could work out fine as long as Harry remembers he cannot criticize her and I think she has him too well trained to do that.



It won't even come down to criticism. As soon as he forgets to praise her there will be problems. As soon as her needs are not met by him and she stages stuff to make herself feel better and him more jealous he won't be able to cope either.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Vogue is featuring Meghan’s fashion. Markle sparkle! WTF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Spotlighting Ethical Fashion In Her Second Act
> 
> 
> The duchess-turned-film-producer’s use of sustainably-sourced labels, Etsy finds, and female-founded brands sends a message.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



Proof that Vogue has REALLY gone downhill. I used to like the fashion spreads, I can live without them now. Women's Wear Daily is far better, costly, but doesn't feature celebrities who whine over their good fortune and feel sorry for themselves as they sip champagne in their gazillion dollar close-gated mansions.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I was watching a documentary called Bad Boys Billionaires and there was a sales
> executive from a major luxury magazine about a man who wanted to make a mark with his jewelry so he hired PR to get the buzz going. The magazines loved it because it made the mags a lot of money creating the buzz and getting him out there. Very informative so I imagine it’s the same with these two. Also that fortune thing I read that to be part of it one has to pay a huge sum to be in the clique. Wonder if she paid.



Of course she did. That's how it works, naive to think otherwise. 

How do you think most prizes are won and honours are given? 

Cross my palm with silver and I'll tell you...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> Now I totally agree with you ladies but I'd go one step further. Harry probably brought the desire but Meghan came in and did something about it. He's dim and I'd bet he wanted to leave and still live it up among celebrities but wouldn't even know how to go about getting the money for that. I give her credit for doing whatever it took... and it was ugly but she made it happen.



Yeah, you said what I meant better than I could. I think in Meghan he found someone who had the connections in Hollywood to get him out of the BRF humdrum and get him the fame he wants. He never wanted to quietly live in Africa. Right now, everything that’s happening is a win-win for Harry. He gets to look like a knight in shining armor defending his family while Meghan gets the blame. No matter what happens he gets to go back to the BRF as long as he gets there before Wills is King.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> The first thing I thought about was that ugly transparent black bedazzled muumuu parfait Valentino thing she wore that time... I would love to see how she is rewearing or upcycling that mess.
> 
> View attachment 4880230


Did she wear a slip ? Need to know ...


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Proof that Vogue has REALLY gone downhill. I used to like the fashion spreads, I can live without them now. Women's Wear Daily is far better, costly, but doesn't feature celebrities who whine over their good fortune and feel sorry for themselves as they sip champagne in their gazillion dollar close-gated mansions.


They did not use the photo of her in the dress, the one with the booby targets - proof positive   that her stylist reads this forum


----------



## marietouchet

bellecate said:


> How can one be known for “ethical dressing” when they are also known for never wearing something twice. Nothing “ethical” about that.


Your post is awesome, that has been bothering me forever with the disposable outfit mentality of celebrities


----------



## marietouchet

I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas 


Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour
https://mol.im/a/8840231


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour
> https://mol.im/a/8840231



Now I've seem it again, I like the outside more but the inside a lot less than I thought previously. 

I think Harry must have bought it for the cellar


----------



## gracekelly

*le sigh*
My two brothers said I was a Princess. I once had a British boyfriend who called me Duchess (he was an exchange student for a year.). I had a musical comedy career singing and dancing in youth group shows  I modeled for a video when I was in HS that was to illustrate, for the school board,  the need for an update of HS facilities And everyone said I was a super model because the vote passed to remodel the entire school.   I played monopoly with my younger brother and regularly ended up as a real estate magnate with millions of dollars. In short, I have been a Princess, Duchess, actress, supermodel and millionaire.  See that wasn't so difficult.  I’m not impressed Meghan. Been there and done that


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> It's incredible to me that these two get air time/paid to broadcast their _thoughts and opinions_. They are so far out of touch with reality right now because they are so focused on themselves... I don't even want to hear what they "think" about anything.
> 
> Meghan doesn't know bullying. I was bullied so hard for the first 18 years of my life but I don't feel the need to tell everyone about it, use it to diminish other people's plights, or whine about it at every chance I get. Has anyone ever told her that the opinions of people who don't know you do not matter? Has she ever looked at other "famous people" and how they are constantly picked apart as sport? This is life - especially as a person in the public eye. She wanted this public life (be it actor, "model", or whatever it is she defines herself to be now... And if she can't handle it maybe she should reevaluate what she is doing with her life.
> 
> She needs to seriously get over herself.


wonder if she needs to jump on the "me too" bandwagon....hasn't done that one yet


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour
> https://mol.im/a/8840231



The bastards *lie.*
Several days ago, on another site, I read that H&M never moved in to the Montecito property and have been renting a place elsewhere.  My first thought was nooooo, they would never.  I expect this sort of BS from MM, but not from the BRF. All the stories of Charles and the financing, etc. = *LIES*. Wow. In the royal world, reputation is everything. In an effort to restore a modicum of respectability and credibility, Harry needs to be removed from succession. If this lie is not enough cause, I don’t know what it would take.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The bastards *lie.*
> Several days ago, on another site, I read that H&M never moved in to the Montecito property and have been renting a place elsewhere.  My first thought was nooooo, they would never.  I expect this sort of BS from MM, but not from the BRF. All the stories of Charles and the financing, etc. = *LIES*. Wow. In the royal world, reputation is everything. In an effort to restore a modicum of respectability and credibility, Harry needs to be removed from succession. If this lie is not enough cause, I don’t know what it would take.


so who is to know what to believe?


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour
> https://mol.im/a/8840231



Very classy that they will NOT allow adult filming there!


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> The bastards *lie.*
> Several days ago, on another site, I read that H&M never moved in to the Montecito property and have been renting a place elsewhere.  My first thought was nooooo, they would never.  I expect this sort of BS from MM, but not from the BRF. All the stories of Charles and the financing, etc. = *LIES*. Wow. In the royal world, reputation is everything. In an effort to restore a modicum of respectability and credibility, Harry needs to be removed from succession. If this lie is not enough cause, I don’t know what it would take.


Oh please, not again  There’s enough to be annoyed about with these two without inventing a conspiracy of LIES in shouty fonts , and Harry’s position in the succession is irrelevant, he will never be King.  I’m out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lanasyogamama  They’ll allow any kind of filming for the right price.  How will they know?
Sounds very much like they have established a SoHo house setup.

What bastards.

Here is a thought from another site,  perhaps all this anti-social media talk from MM and her crowd of wealthy friends (names excluded) is because they don’t want anyone else to monetize as they themselves did.  Now, that so many of us have figured out how to monetize it, the old-timers are pissed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> so who is to know what to believe?



We the people must scream for total transparency. I’m wary of anyone advocating for silence.  Although a dying company, shame on TIME for promoting these 2 as ‘influential’ people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> Oh please, not again  There’s enough to be annoyed about with these two without inventing a conspiracy of LIES in shouty fonts , and Harry’s position in the succession is irrelevant, he will never be King.  I’m out.



What has been invented?
So what if he won’t be king? Is the king the only one held to a high standard of conduct? Just like Andrew, he still gets money from the BRF. He still swans around and monetizes himself as a prince. He still uses his connections to benefit himself and others. He still is leader of charities. QE needs to clean up this mess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> What has been invented?
> So what if he won’t be king? Just like Andrew, he still gets money from the BRF. He still swans around as and monetizes himself as a prince. He still uses his connections to benefit himself and others. He still is leader of charities. QE needs to clean up this mess.


Oh ffs.  Charles has said he’s no longer funding them, and they’re no longer receiving the sovereign grant.  But that’s not good enough for you.  Save your indignation for the Americans encouraging their nonsense.  The repetition of the same few points again and again and again, 24/7, is becoming very dull for me, so I‘m leaving this thread.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Their contribution sounds 'fascinating'


May I add ?


----------



## Sophisticatted

This blogger wrote about their house. She is an interior decorator with an eye for details. In this post she also write about other homes and what designers works she thinks would work for their house.

Anyway, I believe they bought the house and are filming from it.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour*
> https://mol.im/a/8840231



Removed comments because this is possible an old listing. It is called "benefit of the doubt"


----------



## CarryOn2020

What does “Engineering a Better World” mean?  Will we still have free speech? Will we now have internet police? This is craziness from people who started it, made a fortune with it and now want it regulated to satisfy their tastes. Yes, I’m looking at Alexis Ohanian, Serena’s husband.  I cannot be the only one who sees the hypocrisy.









						The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Convene Special Edition of TIME100 Talks on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience
					

On October 20th, Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, will host a specially curated edition of TIME100 Talks




					time.com
				



_On Oct. 20, “Engineering a Better World” Will Bring Together Experts, Advocates, Online Creators and Journalists to Discuss the Pursuit of a More Compassionate, Safe, and Trustworthy Digital World


ETA: _the picture must be someone’s idea of a joke.


----------



## bag-mania

Has this been posted yet? The Duke and Duchess of Privacy have had their photographers back in for a professional shoot. And of course that joyous news must be shared with all of the usual media suspects.

It is a nice photo. Some are reporting that it is Diana's watch Meghan is wearing. Anyone know?

ETA: Put _Time_ in as another sellout publication to the altar of celebrity. They used to be considered a reliable news magazine with integrity many years ago. I can't begin to comment on this quote: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100."

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are all smiles in a newly released portrait.

In the sophisticated, black-and-white image, both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are suited up in their new Montecito, California home. Meghan wears a sleek, fitted blazer, plain white T-shirt, and trousers with her hair in her signature waves. Meanwhile, Prince Harry pairs his suit with a button-down oxford and no tie. The royal couple looks relaxed and at ease in the portrait, with the duchess seemingly photographed mid-laughter.

The image was captured by Matt Sayles, a Los Angeles based photographer who focuses on creating images that "reflect a more inclusive image of beauty" and highlight stories from underrepresented communities. The snapshot coincides with news of the couple's upcoming stint as hosts and emcees for their TIME100 virtual conversation, titled "Engineering a Better World."


A source close to the Sussexes tells _BAZAAR.com_ that the couple was personally involved in selecting the theme, curating the topics, and choosing the guests for their respective episode a part of the TIME100 virtual conversations. Both the duke and duchess are expected to make opening and closing remarks as well as help moderate discussions featuring high-profile experts, advocates, online creators, and journalists to discuss the pursuit of a "more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy digital world."

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, in a statement. "We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time."









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait
					

The royal couple look relaxed, refreshed, and at ease for a new photo taken at their Montecito home.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

So maybe Matt can tell us why he didn’t ask Harry to place his right hand where we can see it. It looks he is, uh, doing something ’private’, no? 




bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted yet? The Duke and Duchess of Privacy have had their photographers back in for a professional shoot. And of course that joyous news must be shared with all of the usual media suspects.
> 
> It is a nice photo. Some are reporting that it is Diana's watch Meghan is wearing. Anyone know?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are all smiles in a newly released portrait.
> 
> In the sophisticated, black-and-white image, both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are suited up in their new Montecito, California home. Meghan wears a sleek, fitted blazer, plain white T-shirt, and trousers with her hair in her signature waves. Meanwhile, Prince Harry pairs his suit with a button-down oxford and no tie. The royal couple looks relaxed and at ease in the portrait, with the duchess seemingly photographed mid-laughter.
> 
> The image was captured by Matt Sayles, a Los Angeles based photographer who focuses on creating images that "reflect a more inclusive image of beauty" and highlight stories from underrepresented communities. The snapshot coincides with news of the couple's upcoming stint as hosts and emcees for their TIME100 virtual conversation, titled "Engineering a Better World."
> View attachment 4880529
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes tells _BAZAAR.com_ that the couple was personally involved in selecting the theme, curating the topics, and choosing the guests for their respective episode a part of the TIME100 virtual conversations. Both the duke and duchess are expected to make opening and closing remarks as well as help moderate discussions featuring high-profile experts, advocates, online creators, and journalists to discuss the pursuit of a "more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy digital world."
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, in a statement. "We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait
> 
> 
> The royal couple look relaxed, refreshed, and at ease for a new photo taken at their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> wonder if she needs to jump on the "me too" bandwagon....hasn't done that one yet



I would say that she tried. She became very interested when still in the UK, see below from Post #37,895:

Powerful movements at the time -'Right now,' said Meghan, 'with so many campaigns like *#MeToo* and *#TimesUp*, there's no better time to continue to shine a light on women feeling empowered and people supporting them.' Because only the previous month a $13 million legal defence fund had been created, linked to MeToo and TimesUp, seeking legislation to discipline and punish companies that tolerated sexual harassment.


----------



## Annawakes

It’s a nice photo, I can say that much.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So maybe Matt can tell us why he didn’t ask Harry to place his right hand where we can see it. It looks he is, uh, doing something ’private’, no?


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour
> https://mol.im/a/8840231



I would think this is from the previous owner. It says the listing was posted before they bought their home. They probably didn't realize the home had been posted for rent elsewhere... seems innocent. I don't see any indication here that this is current. 

Btw, it's CA lol it's always "Fall."


----------



## marietouchet

Don’t be put off by silly title ,Kris actually has meaningful stuff to say about social media and it’s impact on celebrity 


Kris Jenner blames social media for the end of KUWK
https://mol.im/a/8847773


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I would think this is from the previous owner. It says the listing was posted before they bought their home. They probably didn't realize the home had been posted for rent elsewhere... seems innocent. I don't see any indication here that this is current.
> 
> Btw, it's CA lol it's always "Fall."



that's what I read into it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sure, she does. Now, that their show was cancelled due to lack of interest. 
See how it works?  She and her family make zillions using social media. The family continues to spew out the same garbage year after year. We the people get bored. We change the channel. Now, they are not making as many zillions. 

So, blame social media. Advocate for stricter regulations. The people will never see it coming. Easy peasy.




marietouchet said:


> Don’t be put off by silly title ,Kris actually has meaningful stuff to say about social media and it’s impact on celebrity
> 
> 
> Kris Jenner blames social media for the end of KUWK
> https://mol.im/a/8847773


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> that's what I read into it



Have you tried to reserve it? Some have tried to reserve the space. It still works.
With all their other lies, this is just one more. No surprise. They think we are stupid. They are frauds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> I think in Meghan he found someone who had the connections in Hollywood to get him out of the BRF humdrum and get him the fame he wants.



But...she never had enough connections to make *herself* famous until she married him.


----------



## gracekelly

Breya



I just did it hon, it took me all the way through the payment process as I pretended to be a film producer so yes it’s available to rent for two weeks in December! I tried for November and yep it’s available fir $11.700! They don’t live here!


----------



## gracekelly

If they live in it, are they writing off this as a place of business aka studio?  I would not think that the zoning of this portion of Montecito would allow using a home as a studio or business enterprise.  They could still live there and also rent it out at certain times.  I have been doubting lately whether they actually own the place.  This is all so murky.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing another SoHo house-type setup  
Wonder how the neighbours feel.




gracekelly said:


> If they live in it, are they writing off this as a place of business aka studio?  I would not think that the zoning of this portion of Montecito would allow using a home as a studio or business enterprise.  They could still live there and also rent it out at certain times.  I have been doubting lately whether they actually own the place.  This is all so murky.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing another SoHo house-type setup
> Wonder how the neighbours feel.


Maybe Soho House is the real owner. The neighbors will not want extra traffic in the neighborhood even if the property has parking for 50 cars as stated.  I know what it is like when filming is going on in my town.  Lots of big trucks lots of cars, fake motorcycle cops who are paid to direct traffic. but sit there drinking coffee instead and are useless.

The fact that the Nov/Dec dates were available is suspicious and the only think that makes me think that this listing on giggster.com is not leftover from before it was "purchased."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would say that she tried. She became very interested when still in the UK, see below from Post #37,895:
> 
> Powerful movements at the time -'Right now,' said Meghan, 'with so many campaigns like *#MeToo* and *#TimesUp*, there's no better time to continue to shine a light on women feeling empowered and people supporting them.' Because only the previous month a $13 million legal defence fund had been created, linked to MeToo and TimesUp, seeking legislation to discipline and punish companies that tolerated sexual harassment.


but she's not saying she was a victim....that's what I was thinking she might want to do


----------



## lalame

Y'all if you post your house up for airbnb and then sell your house... no one tells airbnb to take it down automatically. Anyone can book it up until the moment the old or new owner takes it down. If you don't tell the new owner, they wouldn't know the house is listed either. I think we're reading a little too much into this.


----------



## bag-mania

Renting out the house they supposedly live in would be beyond tacky. I don’t see them doing anything that damaging to their image. They are supposed to be so wealthy they don’t care! Is there any chance that this is the wrong house? I mean there might be others that look very similar in the area.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> but she's not saying she was a victim....that's what I was thinking she might want to do


My mistake @sdkitty, I was thinking in terms of another bandwagon to jump on. This 'so called' private couple is publicly involved in almost everything that it gets confusing...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sure, the evidence is somewhat weak at this point. Yet, there is something entirely plausible about the story. H&M are indeed shady people who are fast and loose with the facts. Eventually, the whole truth will be known. Since the already-sue’d DM printed it, I’m thinking they researched it.  Consider this article from ArchDigest, 2018.










						Why You Should Be Renting Your Home to Location Scouts Instead of Travelers
					

Your totally average house might be the perfect movie set




					www.architecturaldigest.com
				





Spoiler: Location location



*Why You Should Be Renting Your Home to Location Scouts Instead of Travelers*
*Your totally average house might be the perfect movie set*
By Tim Nelson
August 7, 2018





Photo: Courtesy of Giggster
The idea of letting strangers pay to use your house or apartment like a hotel might’ve seemed creepy a decade ago, but Airbnb is now a widely accepted way to travel and generate supplementary income. Why, then, do we not consider renting out our homes for other purposes? One southern California start-up is doing just that with a new service that helps homeowners earn a little extra cash—and potentially make their property famous in the process.
Instead of showing off your home to traveling millennials, Giggster is an Airbnb-esque platform that gets it in front of the photographers, film producers, and location scouts in search of a space suitable to use in their creative project. The inspiration for the concept came to CEO Yuri Baranovs back in 2016, shortly after a location scout knocked on his door to see if he’d be willing to have his home used in an episode of _CSI: Miami_. Once Yuri learned more about the logistics of location scouting—and saw how much production crews were willing to pay for access to his home—the potential value of a service that makes private homes accessible to the entertainment industry became obvious.




You can definitely picture a movie being filmed here, right?
Photo: Courtesy of Giggster
Since launching in beta back in January of 2017, Giggster has grown to include a library of 3,000 potential filming and photography locations across Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and Atlanta. Options range from modernist suburban mansions to dilapidated properties to some of the most all-American homes you wouldn’t stop to look at twice. Giggster says the average booking nets property owners just north of $2,200, which is a pretty decent haul given that many gigs run for just over a day. Commercial clients have included major brands like Marc Jacobs and Spotify, with content producers ranging in size from major Hollywood studios to scrappy DIY projects.
As Giggster’s head of marketing Reagan Cook tells it, their list-it-yourself model effectively expands the marketplace for production venues by shining a light on the kinds of properties that are usually overlooked by Hollywood location agencies. “We’re educating homeowners about a world that they didn’t even know existed," he says. "We have some hosts who’ve made $10,000 to $20,000 to $30,000, and before Giggster, they’d never listed their house anywhere before.” Sounds too good to be true, right? Not when you consider how much money is being pumped into the entertainment industry.
Even more good news: You don't have to have an impeccable house for it to be a great film set. The kinds of locations that would be a real-estate broker’s (or film audience’s) worst nightmare often end up raking in the dough. “If you have a very quirky or ugly house or very gritty or disheveled place, that could also be very successful,” Reagan says. “There aren’t a lot of seedy motels that are willing to accommodate film production, so that’s kind of an interesting dynamic of the industry.” On the other hand, you’ll find plenty of lovely homes listed on the service, and even famous shooting locations like Jackie Treehorn’s swanky digs from _The Big Lebowski_. The owner of a meticulously curated midcentury-modern home, Brian Cooper saw advantages to opening his place up to photographers and film crews rather than traditional Airbnb guests. “I figured it would be a more lucrative opportunity for me than Airbnb,” he said via email. “There are no overnight stays. It's a 12-hour shoot, and they wrap and it's all finished.” In addition to having a well-defined aesthetic for the home, Brian credits his success on the platform to the professional photos Giggster took for his listing.




A listing on Giggster features a graffiti-strewn building.
Photo: Courtesy of Giggster
Giggster makes a point to collaborate, rather than compete, with the big location agencies that have ruled Hollywood since the days when people still sent faxes. But there’s no doubt that making filming locations available via an intuitive and accessible format opens the door for creative upstarts looking to succeed without the traditional studio infrastructure. “I think the biggest area of growth is coming from that kid that’s starting his own comedy series and doesn’t have a ton of budget but needs to shoot in a new location every week and has $1,000 to spend on that,” Reagan says. “Before Giggster, there was really no good way of a renter making that possible.”
It’s probably silly to think that a location-finding platform could single-handedly revolutionize the entertainment industry. But with plans to expand beyond its current four core markets, Giggster definitely could become a viable alternative or complement to Airbnb for those looking to earn some money on the side. If nothing else, it should make for a good story.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> *le sigh*
> My two brothers said I was a Princess. I once had a British boyfriend who called me Duchess (he was an exchange student for a year.). I had a musical comedy career singing and dancing in youth group shows  I modeled for a video when I was in HS that was to illustrate, for the school board,  the need for an update of HS facilities And everyone said I was a super model because the vote passed to remodel the entire school.   I played monopoly with my younger brother and regularly ended up as a real estate magnate with millions of dollars. In short, I have been a Princess, Duchess, actress, supermodel and millionaire.  See that wasn't so difficult.  I’m not impressed Meghan. Been there and done that


And best of all you are our "Red Queen" !


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t think of an scenario with this  of this that isn’t somewhat embarrassing to them. Even if the rental was from before they owned the house, it’s still kind of cheapens the property in my opinion.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Have you tried to reserve it? Some have tried to reserve the space. It still works.
> With all their other lies, this is just one more. No surprise. They think we are stupid. They are frauds.



They don't do adult filming and I'm an adult. Have been for quite a few years . What else can I say, except I don't care that much, I mostly just come here to have fun  .


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh surely, they will claim they did not know, just like all their other lies. Full disclosure, I know nothing about real estate in Montecito. Still, it seems likely an agent of an unsold property would market it as a _potential_ Hwood movie property. For some, that is a sell-point. For most, it does indeed cheapen the property. 

ETA:  who doesn’t want to be in a Nancy Myers movie?  Those kitchens



lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t think of an scenario with this  of this that isn’t somewhat embarrassing to them. Even if the rental was from before they owned the house, it’s still kind of cheapens the property in my opinion.


----------



## lalame

It's not uncommon for these large estates to be rented out to be honest... lots of parties, weddings, and photo shoots happen in the area. I don't have a negative impression of that personally. A lot of them are either owned by a property management company anyway or simply wealthy people who wanna make some easy money on a 4th or 5th home.

I just doubt these guys would do it with this home. My $.02.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sure, the evidence is somewhat weak at this point. Yet, there is something entirely plausible about the story. H&M are indeed shady people who are fast and loose with the facts. Eventually, the whole truth will be known. Since the already-sue’d DM printed it, I’m thinking they researched it.  Consider this article from ArchDigest, 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why You Should Be Renting Your Home to Location Scouts Instead of Travelers
> 
> 
> Your totally average house might be the perfect movie set
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.architecturaldigest.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Location location
> 
> 
> 
> *Why You Should Be Renting Your Home to Location Scouts Instead of Travelers*
> *Your totally average house might be the perfect movie set*
> By Tim Nelson
> August 7, 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo: Courtesy of Giggster
> The idea of letting strangers pay to use your house or apartment like a hotel might’ve seemed creepy a decade ago, but Airbnb is now a widely accepted way to travel and generate supplementary income. Why, then, do we not consider renting out our homes for other purposes? One southern California start-up is doing just that with a new service that helps homeowners earn a little extra cash—and potentially make their property famous in the process.
> Instead of showing off your home to traveling millennials, Giggster is an Airbnb-esque platform that gets it in front of the photographers, film producers, and location scouts in search of a space suitable to use in their creative project. The inspiration for the concept came to CEO Yuri Baranovs back in 2016, shortly after a location scout knocked on his door to see if he’d be willing to have his home used in an episode of _CSI: Miami_. Once Yuri learned more about the logistics of location scouting—and saw how much production crews were willing to pay for access to his home—the potential value of a service that makes private homes accessible to the entertainment industry became obvious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can definitely picture a movie being filmed here, right?
> Photo: Courtesy of Giggster
> Since launching in beta back in January of 2017, Giggster has grown to include a library of 3,000 potential filming and photography locations across Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, and Atlanta. Options range from modernist suburban mansions to dilapidated properties to some of the most all-American homes you wouldn’t stop to look at twice. Giggster says the average booking nets property owners just north of $2,200, which is a pretty decent haul given that many gigs run for just over a day. Commercial clients have included major brands like Marc Jacobs and Spotify, with content producers ranging in size from major Hollywood studios to scrappy DIY projects.
> As Giggster’s head of marketing Reagan Cook tells it, their list-it-yourself model effectively expands the marketplace for production venues by shining a light on the kinds of properties that are usually overlooked by Hollywood location agencies. “We’re educating homeowners about a world that they didn’t even know existed," he says. "We have some hosts who’ve made $10,000 to $20,000 to $30,000, and before Giggster, they’d never listed their house anywhere before.” Sounds too good to be true, right? Not when you consider how much money is being pumped into the entertainment industry.
> Even more good news: You don't have to have an impeccable house for it to be a great film set. The kinds of locations that would be a real-estate broker’s (or film audience’s) worst nightmare often end up raking in the dough. “If you have a very quirky or ugly house or very gritty or disheveled place, that could also be very successful,” Reagan says. “There aren’t a lot of seedy motels that are willing to accommodate film production, so that’s kind of an interesting dynamic of the industry.” On the other hand, you’ll find plenty of lovely homes listed on the service, and even famous shooting locations like Jackie Treehorn’s swanky digs from _The Big Lebowski_. The owner of a meticulously curated midcentury-modern home, Brian Cooper saw advantages to opening his place up to photographers and film crews rather than traditional Airbnb guests. “I figured it would be a more lucrative opportunity for me than Airbnb,” he said via email. “There are no overnight stays. It's a 12-hour shoot, and they wrap and it's all finished.” In addition to having a well-defined aesthetic for the home, Brian credits his success on the platform to the professional photos Giggster took for his listing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A listing on Giggster features a graffiti-strewn building.
> Photo: Courtesy of Giggster
> Giggster makes a point to collaborate, rather than compete, with the big location agencies that have ruled Hollywood since the days when people still sent faxes. But there’s no doubt that making filming locations available via an intuitive and accessible format opens the door for creative upstarts looking to succeed without the traditional studio infrastructure. “I think the biggest area of growth is coming from that kid that’s starting his own comedy series and doesn’t have a ton of budget but needs to shoot in a new location every week and has $1,000 to spend on that,” Reagan says. “Before Giggster, there was really no good way of a renter making that possible.”
> It’s probably silly to think that a location-finding platform could single-handedly revolutionize the entertainment industry. But with plans to expand beyond its current four core markets, Giggster definitely could become a viable alternative or complement to Airbnb for those looking to earn some money on the side. If nothing else, it should make for a good story.



One of my teachers used to do this (then again her husband and one of her sons were actors) and they often do this at my club. However, bear in mind what I said about Lucy Worsley and her shenanigans whilst filming at our club - and she was only a presenter.

You must factor in insurance (and change cover if need be). Not be precious about mess and belongings whatever the crew promise. Even if breakages would be paid for, you better have you assessor's reports, receipts and paperwork before the production company winds-up on the project. Then there's the depreciation (say you have oak parquet flooring and a ton of lighting equipment is wheeled over and deeply scratched - that's not a hypothetical scenario, that's happened at my club in the Grade 1 listed library, but rental to film companies is part of our revenue stream) re-decorating costs, deep cleaning costs. In private residences, leaving front and back doors open day when anyone could walk in unnoticed if they had a mind to. They couldn't have my house and I'm not even that home proud.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will host TIME100 Talk on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience after Duchess compared social media users to drug addicts*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will host a special edition of TIME100 Talks on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience on Tuesday. It comes after Meghan Markle made a bold comparison between social media users and drug addicts during her latest virtual summit appearance on Tuesday (pictured)
> 
> Presented in partnership with P&G and themed around the topic of 'Engineering a Better World,' the special episode is set to reflect Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle's Duchess' focus on building online communities that are more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy .
> 
> The royal couple will also discuss what that means for supporting and accelerating progress on critical issues like gender equity, racial justice, and climate change.
> 
> Dan Macsai, TIME executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, added: 'The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world.
> 
> 'We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time.'
> 
> The episode will feature conversations with a range of guests, including Reddit co-founder and founder of 776 Alexis Ohanian, and Rappler CEO and executive editor Maria Ressa.
> 
> They will also discuss creating safe, trustworthy and compassionate online communities with TIME editor in chief and CEO Edward Felsenthal during the show.
> 
> TIME100 Talks has convened more than 100 notable guests - including U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, advocate Rev. Bernice A. King, immunologist Dr. Anthony Fauci, UNHCR Special Envoy Angelina Jolie, musicians John Legend and Elton John, Speaker of the House Nancy ****** and the Dalai Lama.






Another 'TaLk'? Seriousy? They've clearly never heard of the phrase _less is more _




bag-mania said:


> ETA: Put _Time_ in as another sellout publication to the altar of celebrity. They used to be considered a reliable news magazine with integrity many years ago. I can't begin to comment on this quote: *"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, TIME executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100."*
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are all smiles in a newly released portrait.
> 
> In the sophisticated, black-and-white image, both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are suited up in their new Montecito, California home. Meghan wears a sleek, fitted blazer, plain white T-shirt, and trousers with her hair in her signature waves. Meanwhile, Prince Harry pairs his suit with a button-down oxford and no tie. The royal couple looks relaxed and at ease in the portrait, with the duchess seemingly photographed mid-laughter.
> 
> The image was captured by Matt Sayles, a Los Angeles based photographer who focuses on creating images that "reflect a more inclusive image of beauty" and highlight stories from underrepresented communities. The snapshot coincides with news of the couple's upcoming stint as hosts and emcees for their TIME100 virtual conversation, titled "Engineering a Better World."
> View attachment 4880529
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes tells _BAZAAR.com_ that the couple was personally involved in selecting the theme, curating the topics, and choosing the guests for their respective episode a part of the TIME100 virtual conversations. Both the duke and duchess are expected to make opening and closing remarks as well as help moderate discussions featuring high-profile experts, advocates, online creators, and journalists to discuss the pursuit of a "more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy digital world."
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, in a statement. "We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait
> 
> 
> The royal couple look relaxed, refreshed, and at ease for a new photo taken at their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## lalame

I don't even have the emotional energy to read that article about the TIME100. At least Kim K puts out content that's actually useful sometimes, like makeup tips.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> What does “Engineering a Better World” mean?  Will we still have free speech? Will we now have internet police? This is craziness from people who started it, made a fortune with it and now want it regulated to satisfy their tastes. Yes, I’m looking at Alexis Ohanian, Serena’s husband.  I cannot be the only one who sees the hypocrisy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Convene Special Edition of TIME100 Talks on the State of Our Shared Digital Experience
> 
> 
> On October 20th, Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, will host a specially curated edition of TIME100 Talks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _On Oct. 20, “Engineering a Better World” Will Bring Together Experts, Advocates, Online Creators and Journalists to Discuss the Pursuit of a More Compassionate, Safe, and Trustworthy Digital World
> 
> 
> ETA: _the picture must be someone’s idea of a joke.


Couldn’t they have published a better picture of her?  This one does her no favors.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> If they live in it, are they writing off this as a place of business aka studio?  I would not think that the zoning of this portion of Montecito would allow using a home as a studio or business enterprise.  They could still live there and also rent it out at certain times.  I have been doubting lately whether they actually own the place.  *This is all so murky*.



What intrigues me most is this information from the same DM article:

"The Sussexes' home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house... The palatial residence, set in 10 acres, was originally *put on the market in May 2014 for $36million..."* This is about what Ellen D is currently asking for her house (*$39.9million*, three  bedrooms and 4.5 bathrooms in main house) in the same neighborhood.

How were MM&H able to buy the 16 toilet mansion for only 14.5 millions?


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> Couldn’t they have published a better picture of her?  This one does her no favors.



Neither of them IMHO. It's just an average pic in fashionable blk/wht


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> What intrigues me most is this information from the same DM article:
> 
> "The Sussexes' home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house... The palatial residence, set in 10 acres, was originally *put on the market in May 2014 for $36million..."* This is about what Ellen D is currently asking for her house (*$39.9million*, three  bedrooms and 4.5 bathrooms in main house) in the same neighborhood.
> 
> How were MM&H able to buy the 16 toilet mansion for only 14.5 millions?



A few factors I think...

1. Home market dipped during COVID
2. This house was probably more current in 2014 than it is now.
3. Ellen's house is WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY nicer lol. I mean compare:





Meghan's house is probably going to cost a million just to renovate it.

Edit: Also it seems like Ellen's place has 10 bathrooms total but more importantly it is close to 10 acres with ocean views.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But...she never had enough connections to make *herself* famous until she married him.



Oh yeah, I never said Meghan didn’t gain from it. She had knowledge, Harry gave her opportunity. It was mutual benefit for both of them. I said it before, without Harry she’d still be chasing Ashley Cole or the Made in Chelsea set...



gracekelly said:


> If they live in it, are they writing off this as a place of business aka studio?  I would not think that the zoning of this portion of Montecito would allow using a home as a studio or business enterprise.  They could still live there and also rent it out at certain times.  I have been doubting lately whether they actually own the place.  This is all so murky.



I thought they bought it with trust through Meghan’s Frim Fram LLC... admittedly I don’t understand these things... I try not to own things...









						Harry & Meg take out £7.25m mortgage on 9 bed, 16 bath pad 'with stripper pole'
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan are believed to have taken out a massive £7.25m mortgage on their lavish nine bedroom, 16 bathroom estate – which they are calling their “sanctuary”. The c…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> If they live in it, are they writing off this as a place of business aka studio?  I would not think that the zoning of this portion of Montecito would allow using a home as a studio or business enterprise.  They could still live there and also rent it out at certain times.  I have been doubting lately whether they actually own the place.  This is all so murky.


Remember this is one if the Brf family businesses-  paying visitors who schlep through the house


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Remember this is one if the Brf family businesses-  paying visitors who schlep through the house


haha!  I considered that!  However, the family usually has decamped to another estate someplace.  Or the place is so large that they are living in a totally different portion that the public never sees.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> If they live in it, are they writing off this as a place of business aka studio?  I would not think that the zoning of this portion of Montecito would allow using a home as a studio or business enterprise.  They could still live there and also rent it out at certain times.  I have been doubting lately whether they actually own the place.  This is all so murky.


Ps if they try to rent and fail due to decor not being spiffy enough , then the 1M redecorating is tax deductible


----------



## CarryOn2020

We laugh at the word salad junk they spew at us, we need to pay closer attention bc something far more sinister is at play. H&M have secured a permanent spot on the noisiest platform available = Silicon Valley tech gods who now have a guilty conscience, probably bc they have children of their own. Yes, they want to take our freedoms away. In fact, they are using a UK prince to do it.
How revolting 

Food for thought: google ‘center for humane technology reviews‘. Thank you, TIME, for the heads-up. I had never heard of this group until today.

@Chanbal according to @Sol Ryan article, they are “believed” to have taken out a mortgage. I want to see the receipts for this mortgage.

@lalame  to my eye, Ellen’s house is beautifully done. Seems some Cali builders are obsessed with bathrooms.

@papertiger  there are other photos in that series, all in b&w because, ya kno, they are ahead of the times [snark]


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Remember this is one if the Brf family businesses-  paying visitors who schlep through the house



And we are supposed to believe they didn’t plan this???? Way too many coincidences for this to be ‘random’.  Only question is who else was part of this monetizing plan?


----------



## csshopper

$700 an hour, It could take that long to find all the bathrooms and test how well each toilet flushes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Taking a break for a while. Will be playing my favourite game, The Elder Scrolls Online, where I can wield any weapon, fight the bad guys and save the good guys, all in the name of a king or a queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely they use those ingenious low-flush toilets and reclaimed water for all the landscaping.


Taking a break watching Succession, season 2. Such a relaxed, loving family. Haha.




csshopper said:


> $700 an hour, It could take that long to find all the bathrooms and test how well each toilet flushes.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The could probably use the house and grounds for weddings and receptions.  Prince Charles has turned quite a few properties into rentals.


----------



## gracekelly

Sophisticatted said:


> The could probably use the house and grounds for weddings and receptions.  Prince Charles has turned quite a few properties into rentals.



Years ago, I went to a chamber music concert at a private home in West LA.  I could tell that the house had been greatly remodeled.  The grounds were magnificent with terraces etc.  When the concert started, I looked around the living room and realized that the pictures on the wall were cheap prints and the furniture was not at all expensive.  Later I had to go into the kitchen for some reason and saw a bank of two double ovens, huge fridge, professional gas cook tops, two dishwashers and then the light bulb went off.  I knew the home belonged to an attorney and his wife  who did actually live there.  I realized that they remodeled the house specifically so they could rent it out for events.  Later, one of the other attendees said they had attended a wedding there.  This man and his wife  had a plan and I am sure they had worked out all the tax benefits etc.  I recall telling my husband that I wouldn't like to live like that as it was like living in a hotel done up for other people.

I don't see Harry figuring out something like this, but some business manager types might have suggested it.  Since as @marietouchet pointed out, the titled in the UK are used to the concept of having strangers traipsing around their homes when they are not there.  However, the Harkles would have to decorate as the couple  did in West LA.  Tasteful but inexpensive furniture as it is a given that the home will get abused by the renters.  They just might keep whatever came with the house in place and only decorate a few rooms that they are actually using.  That's if they actually bought the house and actually live there.  I have my doubts about everything they do and say.


----------



## Lodpah

Saw this online and it's apropos for these two:

It is an interesting conundrum.

“Enough about me talking about me. Why don't you talk about me now?”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps H&M are the ones renting this house? Maybe they did not buy it. This would be consistent with Harry’s royal experience.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps H&M are the ones renting this house? Maybe they did not buy it. This would be consistent with Harry’s royal experience.



They might be renting it from themselves as a tax dodge. Not sure if California has laws against that, but I’ve seen it where I’m from.


----------



## maryg1

I know many of you won’t agree with me, but I don’t like their home at all. 
the gardens are great, but both the exterior and the interior are built to recreate and old Tuscan villa, and scream so much “Fake!!!”to me.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Wow!


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> The first thing I thought about was that ugly transparent black bedazzled muumuu parfait Valentino thing she wore that time... I would love to see how she is rewearing or upcycling that mess.
> 
> View attachment 4880230


She did wear that striped maxi dress while pregnant and then once again later.


----------



## maryg1

Double post.


----------



## Chanbal

maryg1 said:


> I know many of you won’t agree with me, but I don’t like their home at all.
> the gardens are great, but both the exterior and the interior are built to recreate and old Tuscan villa, *and scream so much “Fake!!!”to me.*



The house is perfect for them imo.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> They might be renting it from themselves as a tax dodge. Not sure if California has laws against that, but I’ve seen it where I’m from.



It occurred to me that they could get a tax benefit by using the property as a business expense. Could they claim it as their offices for their new production company?


----------



## csshopper

Another example of monumental hypocrisy from 2 Grifters who espouse their need for privacy, file frivolous lawsuits about it, but OPEN THEIR residence for detailed revelation and commercial exposure?

They are consistently amazing in their duplicity.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> It occurred to me that they could get a tax benefit by using the property as a business expense. Could they claim it as their offices for their new production company?


I know though that the IRS has gotten very strict about what is considered an office or offices in your house in the last several years.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I know though that the IRS has gotten very strict about what is considered an office or offices in your house in the last several years.



If there is a way around that I’m sure their lawyers will inform them. They seem to have people looking out for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

A lucid moment from Lacey:

"He also claimed the Duke of Cambridge has been proved 'right' to have concerns about the former actress causing 'problems' within the Firm.

Mr Lacey said he finds the Duke and Duchess of Sussex 'too preachy' and claimed William, 38, who recently launched his ambitious Earthshot Prize, does more for some progressive causes than his brother and sister-in-law.

Mr Lacey also suggested that, should Harry's role of Head of the Royal Marines be given to William, it would signal 'the end' of their relationship."

Saga of the Brothers


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> It's not uncommon for these large estates to be rented out to be honest... lots of parties, weddings, and photo shoots happen in the area. I don't have a negative impression of that personally. A lot of them are either owned by a property management company anyway or simply wealthy people who wanna make some easy money on a 4th or 5th home.
> 
> I just doubt these guys would do it with this home. My $.02.



This. Doesn’t the article say the listing was created before the house sold?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> A lucid moment from Lacey:
> 
> "He also claimed the Duke of Cambridge has been proved 'right' to have concerns about the former actress causing 'problems' within the Firm.
> 
> Mr Lacey said he finds the Duke and Duchess of Sussex 'too preachy' and claimed William, 38, who recently launched his ambitious Earthshot Prize, does more for some progressive causes than his brother and sister-in-law.
> 
> Mr Lacey also suggested that, should Harry's role of Head of the Royal Marines be given to William, it would signal 'the end' of their relationship."
> 
> Saga of the Brothers




I disagree with the headline of that article. *Meghan Markle could 'pedal back' on her woke speeches after realising it puts Prince Harry's relationship with his family at risk, royal expert claims*

Meghan absolutely does not want Harry to have a close relationship with his family.  She doesn’t want any competition for influence over him. The proof of that is she got him as far away from them as she could.

She won’t give up the speeches as long as she is getting positive attention from most of the media and the people she needs to impress.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I am thinking of the neighbors. When I move into a house, I want to know if the neighbors are running a business out of their house. That will affect the traffic as well as the number of visitors and lots of other issues. It may also lower the home’s value because quality of life can disappear when there is a business next door. Typically, the homeowners association regulates that stuff.  We have laws about that here, surely Cali does too.

@bag-mania  Perhaps H&M have been told to cool it, so she is trying to make herself look cooperative. Also, she may not have any offers, so she is protecting her reputation.  Surprising and shocking that they could not have figured out that their idiotic comments would damage the BRF.   She won’t give up the lectures if she is getting paid — unless she works a deal with the BRF to buy her silence. Mercy, this grifting has lots of angles.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> It occurred to me that they could get a tax benefit by using the property as a business expense. Could they claim it as their offices for their new production company?



Yes, they can deduct a proportion of their house/home expenses like utilities, mortgage interest, property taxes for the part of the property that they use as office space.  However, the IRS looks really, really carefully at these deductions as there has been _lots_ of fraud. It's an invitation for further questions, to take that deduction but, if they do it right, yes, they can.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted yet? The Duke and Duchess of Privacy have had their photographers back in for a professional shoot. And of course that joyous news must be shared with all of the usual media suspects.
> 
> It is a nice photo. Some are reporting that it is Diana's watch Meghan is wearing. Anyone know?
> 
> ETA: Put _Time_ in as another sellout publication to the altar of celebrity. They used to be considered a reliable news magazine with integrity many years ago. I can't begin to comment on this quote: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100."
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are all smiles in a newly released portrait.
> 
> In the sophisticated, black-and-white image, both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are suited up in their new Montecito, California home. Meghan wears a sleek, fitted blazer, plain white T-shirt, and trousers with her hair in her signature waves. Meanwhile, Prince Harry pairs his suit with a button-down oxford and no tie. The royal couple looks relaxed and at ease in the portrait, with the duchess seemingly photographed mid-laughter.
> 
> The image was captured by Matt Sayles, a Los Angeles based photographer who focuses on creating images that "reflect a more inclusive image of beauty" and highlight stories from underrepresented communities. The snapshot coincides with news of the couple's upcoming stint as hosts and emcees for their TIME100 virtual conversation, titled "Engineering a Better World."
> View attachment 4880529
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes tells _BAZAAR.com_ that the couple was personally involved in selecting the theme, curating the topics, and choosing the guests for their respective episode a part of the TIME100 virtual conversations. Both the duke and duchess are expected to make opening and closing remarks as well as help moderate discussions featuring high-profile experts, advocates, online creators, and journalists to discuss the pursuit of a "more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy digital world."
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, in a statement. "We look forward to working with them tSio elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait
> 
> 
> The royal couple look relaxed, refreshed, and at ease for a new photo taken at their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


"Signature" waves now? I don't recall seeing the extensions all wavy before. 

The messy bun was more of a signature "do" but whatever.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 4880567
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4880568
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breya
> 
> I just did it hon, it took me all the way through the payment process as I pretended to be a film producer so yes it’s available to rent for two weeks in December! I tried for November and yep it’s available fir $11.700! They don’t live here!


TMZ broke the news that this was their new home a few months back, how did they get this so wrong? 

They are generally good with their detective work UNLESS they are cutting H&M some slack for some reason and letting them hide somewhere else. Hmmm...


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> TMZ broke the news that this was their new home a few months back, how did they get this so wrong?
> 
> They are generally good with their detective work UNLESS they are cutting H&M some slack for some reason and letting them hide somewhere else. Hmmm...



When we finally learn the truth, it will be more shocking than we can imagine. If H&M say they did not know about the ‘rent business’, they look even dumber than people thought. If they say they knew, they will need to admit that they misled everyone. Embarrassing either way.  No way this story has a happy ending.


----------



## lanasyogamama

maryg1 said:


> I know many of you won’t agree with me, but I don’t like their home at all.
> the gardens are great, but both the exterior and the interior are built to recreate and old Tuscan villa, and scream so much “Fake!!!”to me.



I completely agree. The interior design looks very dated to me, super circa 1990. It just looks cluttered. For some of that is constantly talking about how modern she is, this isn’t it.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I disagree with the headline of that article. *Meghan Markle could 'pedal back' on her woke speeches after realising it puts Prince Harry's relationship with his family at risk, royal expert claims*
> 
> Meghan absolutely does not want Harry to have a close relationship with his family.  She doesn’t want any competition for influence over him. The proof of that is she got him as far away from them as she could.
> 
> She won’t give up the speeches as long as she is getting positive attention from most of the media and the people she needs to impress.


Agree with you, this is why I didn't bother to copy and paste it! The only thing that could make her "pedal back" would be a conditional demand to keeping titles and other perks from the BRF.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> It occurred to me that they could get a tax benefit by using the property as a business expense. Could they claim it as their offices for their new production company?


Oh, yeah, that is the reason ... no question

But the deduction - for rooms used for business - helps but is not a slam dunk

For ex, you have $1M business expense for redecorating the whole house.  $250 k of which was used to redo the interview studio rooms used as studios, and have only $250,000 of  interview income. You can use $250,000 of the expenses to offset the income - and pay no income tax on the $250,000 of income. So, the tax savings are maybe $100k - assuming a tax rate of 40 %. So, you spent $1M redoing the house but saved only $100k in taxes ... you are still $900k out of pocket

You cant deduct the redecorating costs of the nursery for ex - we will assume Archie's rooms are not used for business. It is hard to claim that the wine cellar, and pool are used for business, so the cellar,  nursery, pool decorating cant be deducted UNLESS ...  you have another business renting out them out at $700/hr

I think the house rental is real - could be wrong - and a way to subsidize any decorating/reno costs.

They supposedly just forked out how many million for Frogmore reno ??? their burn rate is too high, they need to cash in anyway they can. The income is not yet ROLLING in to offset the investment they have made/ will need to make in staff, decorating , travel etc


----------



## lalame

maryg1 said:


> I know many of you won’t agree with me, but I don’t like their home at all.
> the gardens are great, but both the exterior and the interior are built to recreate and old Tuscan villa, and scream so much “Fake!!!”to me.



I love that style. Large parts of CA were developed fairly recently so it has a mish mosh of lots of random styles from different eras. But you can tell the previous owners didn’t put too much money or upkeep into it... I hope M+H can better maintain the stone and wild ivy I saw in the photos. The inside is very much dated and in need of renovation. I think it would be gorgeous if they took it in more of an aged modern direction like what Kim and Kanye did to their house. See pix of that here:https://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/i-cant-believe-how-different-kim-kardashian-and-kanyes


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> When we finally learn the truth, it will be more shocking than we can imagine. If H&M say they did not know about the ‘rent business’, they look even dumber than people thought. If they say they knew, they will need to admit that they misled everyone. Embarrassing either way.  No way this story has a happy ending.



Isn’t that the MO with these two though?  Meghan, International Studies student didn’t know what the Commonwealth was? Prince Harry of Las Vegas party infamy didn’t know about US Paparazzi? They apparently don’t know anything? True or not true, they'll claim they didn’t know...  (That said, if it’s from significantly before they bought the house, they may not have known... be funny when the renters show up...)


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Couldn’t they have published a better picture of her?  This one does her no favors.


I don't like to compliment her but I think this is a good picture.  Her hair (er extensions) looks good and I like the black & white
and they almost look like a real couple


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't like to compliment her but I think this is a good picture.  Her hair (er extensions) looks good and I like the black & white
> and they almost look like a real couple



I'd like the picture if it was a random shot, but it's posed and the fake coy laugh she shows just rubs me wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Oh, yeah, that is the reason ... no question
> 
> But the deduction - for rooms used for business - helps but is not a slam dunk
> 
> For ex, you have $1M business expense for redecorating the whole house.  $250 k of which was used to redo the interview studio rooms used as studios, and have only $250,000 of  interview income. You can use $250,000 of the expenses to offset the income - and pay no income tax on the $250,000 of income. So, the tax savings are maybe $100k - assuming a tax rate of 40 %. So, you spent $1M redoing the house but saved only $100k in taxes ... you are still $900k out of pocket
> 
> You cant deduct the redecorating costs of the nursery for ex - we will assume Archie's rooms are not used for business. It is hard to claim that the wine cellar, and pool are used for business, so the cellar,  nursery, pool decorating cant be deducted UNLESS ...  you have another business renting out them out at $700/hr
> 
> I think the house rental is real - could be wrong - and a way to subsidize any decorating/reno costs.
> 
> They supposedly just forked out how many million for Frogmore reno ??? their burn rate is too high, they need to cash in anyway they can. The income is not yet ROLLING in to offset the investment they have made/ will need to make in staff, decorating , travel etc



If there are any tax experts on this thread, I would love to know if someone could really deduct those costs IF they never actually rent the place out for shoots.  It seems very easy to make costly renovations, put those rooms on that rent website, take the tax deductions and then just turn anyone down who wants to legitimately rent the property for a shoot...like having your cake and eating it too.  If that’s all it takes, everyone would do that!  Am I missing something?


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Oh you KNOW that huge house is running A/C every day to a perfect 73 Degrees.


I wonder if the Power in that area is as expensive as LADWP (which is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS)!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> TMZ broke the news that this was their new home a few months back, how did they get this so wrong?
> 
> They are generally good with their detective work UNLESS they are cutting H&M some slack for some reason and letting them hide somewhere else. Hmmm...


They could have been fed this info by SS.  Never investigated anything.  Why would they question it?


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> I'd like the picture if it was a random shot, but it's posed and the fake coy laugh she shows just rubs me wrong.


It is very purposely posed.  He is looking at the camera as one would for an official portrait.  She is not which takes your eye away from him.  It's like she is undercutting him in a joint portrait.

The house looked dated to me.  Maybe they really like that style as it looks like the Mel Gibson house and the Tyler Perry house.  The house styles have moved on to the Farmhouse look in the LA area, but where they are, the villa esthetic is still strong when you are in the foothills.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I don't like to compliment her but I think this is a good picture.  Her hair (er extensions) looks good and I like the black & white
> and they almost look like a real couple


I always thought she was pretty, more so in the beginning, but to me the nose and chin look odd in this photo.  I do think JCMH looks better than we‘re used to seeing him.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> If there are any tax experts on this thread, I would love to know if someone could really deduct those costs IF they never actually rent the place out for shoots.  It seems very easy to make costly renovations, put those rooms on that rent website, take the tax deductions and then just turn anyone down who wants to legitimately rent the property for a shoot...like having your cake and eating it too.  If that’s all it takes, everyone would do that!  Am I missing something?


That does not exactly work ...  the expenses in excess of revenues are not really super useful tax-wise


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I only buy Vogue Italia now, subscriptions to all other magazines have been cancelled.


HA - pretty much the same although, I will buy the British Vogue if there are articles I want to read.  American Vogue is a TOTAL JOKE and has been for years IMO!


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> If there are any tax experts on this thread, I would love to know if someone could really deduct those costs IF they never actually rent the place out for shoots.  It seems very easy to make costly renovations, put those rooms on that rent website, take the tax deductions and then just turn anyone down who wants to legitimately rent the property for a shoot...like having your cake and eating it too.  If that’s all it takes, everyone would do that!  Am I missing something?



I have no idea about the States, please step in if you do. 

But certainly in the UK, if you rent the place out say 12 times and the renovate/refurb you could off-set all renovations and refurb against the income made from the rental, you basically get your makeover for free. 

Perhaps the houses's taxes can also be off-set. For instance, in the UK we have council tax, in Scotland if you rent out your house as say a holiday home (i.e. its classed as a business) then you don't have to pay council tax as you've attracted business into the area (or whatever reason). It would probably be the same if you rented out for filming purposes. BTW, I don't rent out my home(s) I just know this because a few of our friends have. 

What's more for filming purposes, houses/homes/places don't have to be spectacular, there's actually more of a shortage of shabby/'real' homes for filming. Not all TV, vids, ads and films are fantasy/glamour-fests.


----------



## youngster

Aimee3 said:


> If there are any tax experts on this thread, I would love to know if someone could really deduct those costs IF they never actually rent the place out for shoots.  It seems very easy to make costly renovations, put those rooms on that rent website, take the tax deductions and then just turn anyone down who wants to legitimately rent the property for a shoot...like having your cake and eating it too.  If that’s all it takes, everyone would do that!  Am I missing something?



They can convert the property to business/investment property if they choose. Any significant remodeling to the physical premises (new cabinets, new floors, new fixtures, new roof, etc.) would increase their cost basis and they _could_ take a depreciation deduction for the premises, though it is spread over a long time (27.5 years).  If they purchased furniture and such for the property so that it was considered a "furnished" rental, then the cost of all items under $2,500 could be deducted in the year of purchase against any income that is earned. However, any item over $2,500 would need to be capitalized and depreciated over 5 years.  The key is that you have to be consistent with the application and keep good records and provide a detailed list of items.  All of this can only be done if you actually earn income from renting the property out.  You can't redecorate, pretend list it, never rent it out, and deduct all these expenses.   Also, once you start depreciating a property and taking that deduction each year, if you sell it . . . you have to recapture all that depreciation and it is taxed at your normal ordinary income tax rate. Any gain on the property is taxed at capital gain tax rates. It gets complicated for sure very quickly.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I'd like the picture if it was a random shot, but it's posed and the fake coy laugh she shows just rubs me wrong.


she rubs me wrong in general


----------



## Aimee3

youngster said:


> They can convert the property to business/investment property if they choose. Any significant remodeling to the physical premises (new cabinets, new floors, new fixtures, new roof, etc.) would increase their cost basis and they _could_ take a depreciation deduction for the premises, though it is spread over a long time (27.5 years).  If they purchased furniture and such for the property so that it was considered a "furnished" rental, then the cost of all items under $2,500 could be deducted in the year of purchase against any income that is earned. However, any item over $2,500 would need to be capitalized and depreciated over 5 years.  The key is that you have to be consistent with the application and keep good records and provide a detailed list of items.  All of this can only be done if you actually earn income from renting the property out.  You can't redecorate, pretend list it, never rent it out, and deduct all these expenses.   Also, once you start depreciating a property and taking that deduction each year, if you sell it . . . you have to recapture all that depreciation and it is taxed at your normal ordinary income tax rate. Any gain on the property is taxed at capital gain tax rates. It gets complicated for sure very quickly.



Thank you so much!!!


----------



## bisousx

I'm enjoying the conversation as usual, just wondering why there are pages of chatting when the article states that the Giggster listing opened prior to the sale of the house  If the previous owner put it on Giggster, the account owner would need to delete the listing or request for its removal. Otherwise it's pretty tough. There's plenty of stories of people who purchase existing vacation rentals and cannot open up listings with their new address because the previous owner refused to close down their listing. I'd need more confirmation that it's Harry and Meghan trying to list their home out, which I highly doubt because they have a baby and it would require locking up all their belongings every time the place is rented out. Very tedious work for hourly rentals. I don't see it.

It is much more plausible that the previous owner put it on Giggster to offset costs while it was listed for sale and hasn't bothered to take down the listing.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> I am speechless , figured it must be photos from previous owner ... but there is a high chair in the kitchen , pool photos are recent, the umbrellas were deployed in real estate shots, here there are fall coverings for pool chairs and umbrellas
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion can be rented for $700 an hour
> https://mol.im/a/8840231


*BUT*, *BUT*, *BUT* .. what about *their *privacy???????


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> *le sigh*
> My two brothers said I was a Princess. I once had a British boyfriend who called me Duchess (he was an exchange student for a year.). I had a musical comedy career singing and dancing in youth group shows  I modeled for a video when I was in HS that was to illustrate, for the school board,  the need for an update of HS facilities And everyone said I was a super model because the vote passed to remodel the entire school.   I played monopoly with my younger brother and regularly ended up as a real estate magnate with millions of dollars. In short, I have been a Princess, Duchess, actress, supermodel and millionaire.  See that wasn't so difficult.  I’m not impressed Meghan. Been there and done that


*YOU ARE STILL all of the above, one classy lady!!!!!  *

I was also called a "Princess" by a male roommate during my University days (we rented a big house off campus .. there were 6 of us in that house)!  He called me that because I grew up in Connecticut and he came from the Steel towns in western Pennsylvania (and honest to god, sounded exactly like Rocky Balboa!!!).


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Very classy that they will NOT allow adult filming there!


Hee hee hee .. the "adult filming" is done in the Valley, I should know .. my former neighbor (thank god he moved - couldn't stand him) was a cameraman for said films (he told me - TMI).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I have no idea about the States, please step in if you do.
> 
> But certainly in the UK, if you rent the place out say 12 times and the renovate/refurb you could off-set all renovations and refurb against the income made from the rental, you basically get your makeover for free.
> 
> Perhaps the houses's taxes can also be off-set. For instance, in the UK we have council tax, in Scotland if you rent out your house as say a holiday home (i.e. its classed as a business) then you don't have to pay council tax as you've attracted business into the area (or whatever reason). It would probably be the same if you rented out for filming purposes. BTW, I don't rent out my home(s) I just know this because a few of our friends have.
> 
> What's more for filming purposes, houses/homes/places don't have to be spectacular, there's actually more of a shortage of shabby/'real' homes for filming. Not all TV, vids, ads and films are fantasy/glamour-fests.


Basically , same rules in the US , the income can pay for the Reno costs but you have to be renting it out for real and at $700/hr that is a lot of hours if one postulates $1M in reno


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> We the people must scream for total transparency. I’m wary of anyone advocating for silence.  Although a dying company, shame on TIME for promoting these 2 as ‘influential’ people.


Agreed ..  yet another magazine that I *USED TO* read, no more!


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Basically , same rules in the US , the income can pay for the Reno costs but you have to be renting it out for real and at $700/hr that is a lot of hours if one postulates $1M in reno


1M $ in Reno costs is a total guess ,  but honestly the decor is dated and if you do frivolous stuff that is not out of line - 14 year old house - the appliances , air conditioners ,bath fixtures are getting old , landscaping needs a tune up


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> 1M $ in Reno costs is a total guess ,  but honestly the decor is dated and if you do frivolous stuff that is not out of line - 14 year old house - the appliances , air conditioners ,bath fixtures are getting old , landscaping needs a tune up


Going to cost lots more than i mill.  You are so right!  When you look at it closely, everything needs replacement.  The regular maintenance costs are ridiculous as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I think it would be gorgeous if they took it in more of an aged modern direction like what Kim and Kanye did to their house. See pix of that here:https://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/i-cant-believe-how-different-kim-kardashian-and-kanyes



When I look at Kim's house I think they completely gutted it, then forgot to redecorate. I am a minimalist when it comes to interior, overdecorated spaces give me shortness of breath, but their house has no soul at all.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Going to cost lots more than i mill.  You are so right!  When you look at it closely, everything needs replacement.  The regular maintenance costs are ridiculous as well.


Stripper pole removal is not cheap
Butcher block kitchen tops !
But honestly , giving up my sanctuary for a few days would be too painful , it is not as if they have lots of homes to go too


----------



## CeeJay

Pessie said:


> Oh ffs.  Charles has said he’s no longer funding them, and they’re no longer receiving the sovereign grant.  But that’s not good enough for you.  Save your indignation for the Americans encouraging their nonsense.  The repetition of the same few points again and again and again, 24/7, is becoming very dull for me, so I‘m leaving this thread.


NO!! .. please don't, you always have great information .. please STAY!!!!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> _On Oct. 20, “Engineering a Better World” Will Bring Together Experts, Advocates, Online Creators and Journalists to Discuss the Pursuit of a *More Compassionate, Safe, and Trustworthy Digital World*_


According to whom??? .. see, that's the problem, it depends on WHERE the individual is looking!  Sadly, nowadays .. there are some sites which point to all these conspiracy theories (_e.g., the moon landing never happened_) .. and you get people who 100% believe this stuff.  So, what will identify a "safe & trustworthy" site/world???? .. are they going to invent a "rating" system like movies?  Their modus operandi has been that only those sites that are fawning over them are "safe & trustworthy" .. *PUHLEEZE*!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted yet? The Duke and Duchess of Privacy have had their photographers back in for a professional shoot. And of course that joyous news must be shared with all of the usual media suspects.
> 
> It is a nice photo. Some are reporting that it is Diana's watch Meghan is wearing. Anyone know?
> 
> ETA: Put _Time_ in as another sellout publication to the altar of celebrity. They used to be considered a reliable news magazine with integrity many years ago. I can't begin to comment on this quote: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100."
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are all smiles in a newly released portrait.
> 
> In the sophisticated, black-and-white image, both Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are suited up in their new Montecito, California home. Meghan wears a sleek, fitted blazer, plain white T-shirt, and trousers with her hair in her signature waves. Meanwhile, Prince Harry pairs his suit with a button-down oxford and no tie. The royal couple looks relaxed and at ease in the portrait, with the duchess seemingly photographed mid-laughter.
> 
> The image was captured by Matt Sayles, a Los Angeles based photographer who focuses on creating images that "reflect a more inclusive image of beauty" and highlight stories from underrepresented communities. The snapshot coincides with news of the couple's upcoming stint as hosts and emcees for their TIME100 virtual conversation, titled "Engineering a Better World."
> View attachment 4880529
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes tells _BAZAAR.com_ that the couple was personally involved in selecting the theme, curating the topics, and choosing the guests for their respective episode a part of the TIME100 virtual conversations. Both the duke and duchess are expected to make opening and closing remarks as well as help moderate discussions featuring high-profile experts, advocates, online creators, and journalists to discuss the pursuit of a "more compassionate, safe, and trustworthy digital world."
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, both TIME100 alumni, are among the most influential voices in the world," said Dan Macsai, _TIME_ executive editor and editorial director of the TIME100, in a statement. "We look forward to working with them to elevate essential voices and highlight real solutions to some of the most pressing issues of our time."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Appear in a New Stunning Black-and-White Portrait
> 
> 
> The royal couple look relaxed, refreshed, and at ease for a new photo taken at their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I am *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED* I tell you .. I think this is the first time I've ever seen her *not looking directly into the camera* .. hmmmmmm.


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> Stripper pole removal is not cheap
> Butcher block kitchen tops !
> But honestly , giving up my sanctuary for a few days would be too painful , it is not as if they have lots of homes to go too



I hope the stripper pole is still there... it was the only thing interesting about the house. Everything else was pretentious BS....


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I am *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED* I tell you .. I think this is the first time I've ever seen her *not looking directly into the camera* .. hmmmmmm.



So deliberately posed for body language to make her look user friendly and like she is shy.  We know how shy she is, don't we?


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> I hope the stripper pole is still there... it was the only thing interesting about the house. Everything else was pretentious BS....



At least they could resell the stripper pole.  The rest is for the trash heap.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> *At least they could resell the stripper pole.  The rest is for the trash heap.*



*grace*, after going MIA from this thread for a week, and thinking that today was Sunday all day, thanks for making my first post read today on this thread to be so amusing, for lack of a better word. Meghan? Harry? Stripper poles?
Obviously, I have some catching up to do. 

Before I resume reading, must say that this thread moves like a FRICKEN FREIGHT TRAIN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT!!!

There may not be a customer base for H&M LOVERS, but gee, there certainly might be one for us non-believers who won't drink H&M's kool-aid, and that of their PR teams, and most news organizations today. Just sayin' ladies & gents.


----------



## Diamondbirdie

These two just exasperate me. Why are they posing for “official” photos when they actually have opted out and have NO role?? Quite, quite bizarre.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I am *SHOCKED*, *SHOCKED* I tell you .. I think this is the first time I've ever seen her *not looking directly into the camera* .. hmmmmmm.



That’s how we know she’s lying and she does read what is being said about her on social media. I’m sure this thread isn’t the only place on the web that has discussed at length how her eyes lock on to any nearby camera lens with the same intensity as a border collie’s eyes lock on to a sheep.  

She is adjusting her technique accordingly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

back @VigeeLeBrun

Agree that, at 2595 pages and counting, this thread moves quickly. On other websites, their anti-H&M threads move a bit faster than this with much more gossip-y and kinda entertaining posts. The thing is - with the lies, the royal-not-royal usage of titles, the Diana triggers, the W&K shade, etc., these 2 stir up so much negativity toward brand BRF that, when H&M’s year review is finished, brand BRF will need some renovation, just like H&M’s houses.


----------



## marietouchet

bisousx said:


> I'm enjoying the conversation as usual, just wondering why there are pages of chatting when the article states that the Giggster listing opened prior to the sale of the house  If the previous owner put it on Giggster, the account owner would need to delete the listing or request for its removal. Otherwise it's pretty tough. There's plenty of stories of people who purchase existing vacation rentals and cannot open up listings with their new address because the previous owner refused to close down their listing. I'd need more confirmation that it's Harry and Meghan trying to list their home out, which I highly doubt because they have a baby and it would require locking up all their belongings every time the place is rented out. Very tedious work for hourly rentals. I don't see it.
> 
> It is much more plausible that the previous owner put it on Giggster to offset costs while it was listed for sale and hasn't bothered to take down the listing.


Agree that is a possibility .. the story could be bogus ...

but it is such a giggle to hypothesize about this

On the question about locking up stuff .... dunno I went through the Seville Alcazar when Game of Thrones was filming there,  UNESCO world heritage site much more valuable than JCMH bibelots
There were chaperones for the crew, lots of locked marked areas - off limits to crew, guards for the building and filming was during the tourist off season ... A pain but possible ...

One point - H and M never have an empty house, they have PAs, nanny, cook, maid, PR staff, stylists, makeup artist , security , their own film crews Etc 
Damage and theft are always an issue when you have staff/servants. Diana’s watch is in a safe when not in use, insurance covers the Ming vases 
Just a different ethos, if you have staff in an expensive house , you deal with theft/damage rather than try to make it never happen like the rest of us


----------



## CarryOn2020

So true, @marietouchet  In the multi-million dollar real estate world, the rules are somewhat different. Still, I would be surprised to find out their neighborhood allows this sort of business to operate. For numerous reasons, I don’t believe they really live there. Whatever photos and videos they release are really just promos for the location, the products, etc. Surely, their lawyers would have discovered this Giggster entry when they researched the property. Or at least the lawyers would have asked the previous owners if they had posted the house on other websites. If not, then we’ll have another lawsuit to follow. 




marietouchet said:


> Agree that is a possibility .. the story could be bogus ...
> 
> but it is such a giggle to hypothesize about this
> 
> On the question about locking up stuff .... dunno I went through the Seville Alcazar when Game of Thrones was filming there,  UNESCO world heritage site much more valuable than JCMH bibelots
> There were chaperones for the crew, lots of locked marked areas - off limits to crew, guards for the building and filming was during the tourist off season ... A pain but possible ...
> 
> One point - H and M never have an empty house, they have PAs, nanny, cook, maid, PR staff, stylists, makeup artist , security , their own film crews Etc
> Damage and theft are always an issue when you have staff/servants. Diana’s watch is in a safe when not in use, insurance covers the Ming vases
> Just a different ethos, if you have staff in an expensive house , you deal with theft/damage rather than try to make it never happen like the rest of us


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> So true, @marietouchet  In the multi-million dollar real estate world, the rules are somewhat different. Still, I would be surprised to find out their neighborhood allows this sort of business to operate. For numerous reasons, I don’t believe they really live there. Whatever photos and videos they release are really just promos for the location, the products, etc. Surely, their lawyers would have discovered this Giggster entry when they researched the property. Or at least the lawyers would have asked the previous owners if they had posted the house on other websites. If not, then we’ll have another lawsuit to follow.



They don't live in an HOA so as long as they follow county guidelines I doubt the neighborhood is in a position to stop this. This stuff happens in expensive neighborhoods all the time... for example you can tell when the Kardashians travel, they rent a house wherever they stay (can you tell I've started watching KUWTK?). They clearly film there hours and hours a day and no doubt these are nice neighborhoods.

All that said I highly doubt this is a real listing from them. It seemed like the house had been vacant for awhile so it was probably a business manager or attorney listing it to make the owners some extra dollars then didn't care enough to take it down after the home was sold. Some people just don't care about that stuff once it's no longer their problem.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Undoubtedly, there are loopholes. Aren’t there zoning laws in Montecito?  If zoned residential, can they run a business out of the house? Of course, covid has change many of the WFH rules. Still, since we are in a pandemic, is it wise to have lots of traffic in the neighborhood? Definitely first world problems and definitely not my problem 

Resolved [maybe]: _Their Montecito home was listed on Giggster, where it could be rented for a film shoot for $700 an hour, the Daily Mail also reported. The listing has been deleted._








						Meghan Markle outfit and jewels for ‘deja vu’ official portrait total $382K
					

The couple appears in the black-and-white photo both wearing in suits — but on closer look, Markle’s outfit isn’t so simple.




					pagesix.com


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly, there are loopholes. Aren’t there zoning laws in Montecito?  If zoned residential, can they run a business out of the house? Of course, covid has change many of the WFH rules. Still, since we are in a pandemic, is it wise to have lots of traffic in the neighborhood? Definitely first world problems and definitely not my problem



You can definitely run a business out of your home in a residential neighborhood... very common even before COVID. Airbnb or event rentals are so common these days too. I actually had a few estates in Santa Barbara on my list to host my wedding last year. Many beautiful houses in that area.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> So true, @marietouchet  In the multi-million dollar real estate world, the rules are somewhat different. Still, I would be surprised to find out their neighborhood allows this sort of business to operate. For numerous reasons, I don’t believe they really live there. Whatever photos and videos they release are really just promos for the location, the products, etc. Surely, their lawyers would have discovered this Giggster entry when they researched the property. Or at least the lawyers would have asked the previous owners if they had posted the house on other websites. If not, then we’ll have another lawsuit to follow.



Lawyers? It doesn’t work that way. Lawyers don’t have magical abilities to scour the internet for random stuff like a Giggster listing. Title companies wouldn’t have found out either. What is illegal or unethical about buying a property previously rented out on a website for photoshoots that would require the attention of a lawyer?


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly, there are loopholes. Aren’t there zoning laws in Montecito?  If zoned residential, can they run a business out of the house? Of course, covid has change many of the WFH rules. Still, since we are in a pandemic, is it wise to have lots of traffic in the neighborhood? Definitely first world problems and definitely not my problem
> 
> Resolved [maybe]: _Their Montecito home was listed on Giggster, where it could be rented for a film shoot for $700 an hour, the Daily Mail also reported. The listing has been deleted._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle outfit and jewels for ‘deja vu’ official portrait total $382K
> 
> 
> The couple appears in the black-and-white photo both wearing in suits — but on closer look, Markle’s outfit isn’t so simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



You can, unless it’s explicitly written into local laws and codes against short term rentals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> Lawyers? It doesn’t work that way. Lawyers don’t have magical abilities to scour the internet for random stuff like a Giggster listing. Title companies wouldn’t have found out either. What is illegal or unethical about buying a property previously rented out on a website for photoshoots that would require the attention of a lawyer?



My lawyers do indeed scour the internet for that stuff. They may not do it themselves, but they have investigators who do. When I am buying a property, I want a clear deed and title. I don’t want random people showing up at the door, claiming they rented my house. Ewwwww. Now that I know about ‘location scouting’, Airbnb, etc.,  I will add those  to the list of things to beware of. All it takes is one unpleasant neighbor to make life very uncomfortable. Such a crazy world we have made for ourselves.


----------



## lalame

I had actually never even thought of this scenario, that a home you purchase could be listed on those sites, before this thread. It’s actually a good point to check... I bought my home just last year and it wouldn’t even occur to me (also didn’t deal with lawyers or investigators). We’re all still catching up to technology...


----------



## lalame

Going back to M+H, I must have missed it in the listing but Page Six shared an aerial photo from Giggster and I was surprised. I didn’t think the property was that big!




Of course this is probably quaint compared to what Harry is used to...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I have learned so much from the knowledgeable, wise TPF’ers 
Their place is:
PRICE: $14.7 million
SIZE: 18,691 square feet, 9 bedrooms, 16 bathrooms








						Inside Meghan and Harry’s Montecito Mansion
					

Visit the post for more.




					www.dirt.com
				




Lots of space, especially for 3/4 people! Ya kno, the more I think about it, the more it does make sense to rent out the unused spaces. Harry is used to it, so why not? Other than the reasons we’ve listed. Now I am wondering if I know people who do this and just don’t talk about it. Hmmmm.


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> I hope the stripper pole is still there... it was the only thing interesting about the house. Everything else was pretentious BS....



I think my issue with it was it didn't know what it wanted to be 

I'm not minimalist at all really, nor do I like living rooms that look like aircraft hangers, but it just looked like a cluttered mess, even in that large space. To my mind, there needs to be some semblance of overall plan or taste


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> So deliberately posed for body language to make her look user friendly and like she is shy.  We know how shy she is, don't we?



She wants to be everything and everyone. Most actresses do.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Going back to M+H, I must have missed it in the listing but Page Six shared an aerial photo from Giggster and I was surprised. I didn’t think the property was that big!
> 
> View attachment 4881671
> 
> 
> Of course this is probably quaint compared to what Harry is used to...




If it has parking for 50 cars and 16-19 bathrooms it must be fairly sizeable. 

Or do you mean you thought it would be bigger?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> That’s how we know she’s lying and she does read what is being said about her on social media. I’m sure this thread isn’t the only place on the web that has discussed at length how her eyes lock on to any nearby camera lens with the same intensity as a border collie’s eyes lock on to a sheep.
> 
> She is adjusting her technique accordingly.



Thanks, literally, just spilled my tea down my tee


----------



## Vintage Leather

lalame said:


> Okay we all need to markle that “Markle Sparkle” name. Please. Please??



That’s the name of her cousin’s cannabis company.


----------



## Pautinka

Vintage Leather said:


> That’s the name of her cousin’s cannabis company.


Haha!! Personally, when I hear "Markle Sparkle" I just think of the word "vajazzle". Interesting word association process there.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think my issue with it was it didn't know what it wanted to be
> 
> I'm not minimalist at all really, nor do I like living rooms that look like aircraft hangers, but it just looked like a cluttered mess, even in that large space. To my mind, there needs to be some semblance of overall plan or taste


Typical
It is decorated in typical US traditional style which is a hodge podge style - a bit of Italian , Spanish , and mid century modern
American traditional is terribly eclectic by European standards
The US version of Queen Anne is quite a pop art style collage worthy of Marcel Duchamp


----------



## marietouchet

Maybe we can agree that , at least the previous owners were trying to rent out the place for filming, it is perhaps a thing done in the neighborhood


----------



## marietouchet

While doing non JCMH stuff, and researching English decorating trends, found a distracting anecdote about English acid wit- that can be agonizingly painful 

I was researching some of the insouciant work of Nicky Haslam - a VERY famous English decorator / Renaissance man - worked for Prince Charles.

NH is an acerbic wit - think Oscar Wilde and all the mess he go into with his wit - and produced a list of things he finds common. quite a chuckle - just to explain what common means to him









						This list of things society designer Nicky Haslam finds common is utterly random and very funny
					

Here’s Nicky Haslam, who as everyone knows – Google, Google – is society’s pre-eminent observer of style and designer to the rich and famous. ‘Society decorator’ Nicky has come up with a list of things he finds common. Actually it’s his second list of this sort of thing, and it’s very much worth...




					www.thepoke.co.uk
				




I found comment about Meghan's family that might be amusing - NH found Meghan's family common  - this was from the time of the wedding and Thomas Markle kerfuffle









						Prince Charles' friend says Meghan's dress 'was made of concrete'
					

Nicky Haslam, 78, who is a good friend of the royals, launched a verbal assault on the Duchess of Sussex's family whom he deems 'common.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I do think the NH comment was a bit rude/too acid, surely  the type of stuff that drove MM to say people hated her.  I do think this one was a bit too much, the comment would have ruffled my feathers  - English wit can be painful, just to take MM's side for 5 minutes.


----------



## doni

I don‘t get the concept of private people having official pictures? What does that even mean?


marietouchet said:


> While doing non JCMH stuff, and researching English decorating trends, found a distracting anecdote about English acid wit- that can be agonizingly painful
> 
> I was researching some of the insouciant work of Nicky Haslam - a VERY famous English decorator / Renaissance man - worked for Prince Charles.
> 
> NH is an acerbic wit - think Oscar Wilde and all the mess he go into with his wit - and produced a list of things he finds common. quite a chuckle - just to explain what common means to him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This list of things society designer Nicky Haslam finds common is utterly random and very funny
> 
> 
> Here’s Nicky Haslam, who as everyone knows – Google, Google – is society’s pre-eminent observer of style and designer to the rich and famous. ‘Society decorator’ Nicky has come up with a list of things he finds common. Actually it’s his second list of this sort of thing, and it’s very much worth...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thepoke.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I found comment about Meghan's family that might be amusing - NH found Meghan's family common  - this was from the time of the wedding and Thomas Markle kerfuffle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles' friend says Meghan's dress 'was made of concrete'
> 
> 
> Nicky Haslam, 78, who is a good friend of the royals, launched a verbal assault on the Duchess of Sussex's family whom he deems 'common.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do think the NH comment was a bit rude/too acid, surely  the type of stuff that drove MM to say people hated her.  I do think this one was a bit too much, the comment would have ruffled my feathers  - English wit can be painful, just to take MM's side for 5 minutes.


I think it does kind of reveal that indeed, the main problem many would have had with Meghan was her being “common”, i.e., middle class, American, an actress, etc., rather than her race. Note that when he is going on about common he is actually talking about the white part of her family...
If she had been an African princess, no one would have deemed her common.
But yes, nasty and vicious nevertheless.


----------



## marietouchet

More from my non JCMH interests, I thought ... MEGXIT spawns a number 1 Blues hit !

I have a secret life as a rock chick who swoons over Joe Bonamassa -  blues virtuoso - HUGE sales though you may have never heard of him unless you follow Blues, not R&B, not rap, not jazz etc 

Brand new album, recorded at Abbey Road no less, written in London at the time of MEGXIT.  Just read the reviews and lyrics for the title track of the ROYAL TEA album. In the interview, he says the title track reflects the chaos of Megxit - that was going down while writing

(Royal tea)
Wake up in your garden
(Royal tea)
Champagne from the fountain
Hiding out in your palace
Diamonds dipping from your chalice
The honey's sweet but the bees will sting
At the door of your reckoning 






						Joe Bonamassa - Royal Tea Lyrics | AZLyrics.com
					

Joe Bonamassa "Royal Tea": (Royal tea) Story about my past and future (Royal tea) Had to bow to kiss her I done give you life A...



					www.azlyrics.com


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> I don‘t get the concept of private people having official pictures? What does that even mean?
> 
> I think it does kind of reveal that indeed, the main problem many would have had with Meghan was her being “common”, i.e., middle class, American, an actress, etc., rather than her race. Note that when he is going on about common he is actually talking about the white part of her family...
> If she had been an African princess, no one would have deemed her common.
> But yes, nasty and vicious nevertheless.


Agree, middle class is a burden in the upper English class and aristocracy
There are stories that Camilla - a commoner herself - vetoed Kate originally, as being too middle class

Also agree that may be the issue was not race, but class, and the acid English wit

PS NH is a great buddy of Pss Michael of broochgate fame ... lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> PS NH is a great buddy of Pss Michael of broochgate fame ... lol



I am kind of not surprised, he sounds insufferable.


----------



## doni

marietouchet said:


> Agree, middle class is a burden in the upper English class and aristocracy
> There are stories that Camilla - a commoner herself - vetoed Kate originally, as being too middle class


Camilla was not titled but I wouldn’t call her a commoner in the slightest. She comes from nobility and her family was classic gentry.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree, middle class is a burden in the upper English class and aristocracy
> There are stories that Camilla - a commoner herself - vetoed Kate originally, as being too middle class
> 
> *Also agree that may be the issue was not race, but class, and the acid English wit*
> 
> PS NH is a great buddy of Pss Michael of broochgate fame ... lol



Classism certainly is what NH was showing in that article, but isn’t it primarily the same thing? You don’t choose your race and you don’t choose the class you were born into. In life’s lottery you may be born into a family of incredible wealth or one of abject poverty or anywhere in between. 

That Nicky Hassan sounds like a petty little man who uses his acid wit to belittle others as a way to inflate his own self-importance. I don’t really understand the British class system. Are people who try to rise up from the class they were born into usually accused of being social climbers? How can it be wrong to try to better your situation?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> While doing non JCMH stuff, and researching English decorating trends, found a distracting anecdote about English acid wit- that can be agonizingly painful
> 
> I was researching some of the insouciant work of Nicky Haslam - a VERY famous English decorator / Renaissance man - worked for Prince Charles.
> 
> NH is an acerbic wit - think Oscar Wilde and all the mess he go into with his wit - and produced a list of things he finds common. quite a chuckle - just to explain what common means to him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This list of things society designer Nicky Haslam finds common is utterly random and very funny
> 
> 
> Here’s Nicky Haslam, who as everyone knows – Google, Google – is society’s pre-eminent observer of style and designer to the rich and famous. ‘Society decorator’ Nicky has come up with a list of things he finds common. Actually it’s his second list of this sort of thing, and it’s very much worth...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thepoke.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I found comment about Meghan's family that might be amusing - NH found Meghan's family common  - this was from the time of the wedding and Thomas Markle kerfuffle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles' friend says Meghan's dress 'was made of concrete'
> 
> 
> Nicky Haslam, 78, who is a good friend of the royals, launched a verbal assault on the Duchess of Sussex's family whom he deems 'common.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do think the NH comment was a bit rude/too acid, surely  the type of stuff that drove MM to say people hated her.  I do think this one was a bit too much, the comment would have ruffled my feathers  - English wit can be painful, just to take MM's side for 5 minutes.


I wonder why he finds Doria not common...not that I have a problem with her but....maybe it's that she keeps her mouth shut and doesn't cause any embarassment


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> If it has parking for 50 cars and 16-19 bathrooms it must be fairly sizeable.
> 
> Or do you mean you thought it would be bigger?



I didn’t know it was that big... I thought it was just a big house but not a full on compound situation. Didn’t know about the 50 cars either... wow.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Thought about this for a few-minutes, ie NH and his so-called "acid wit".
This nasty piece of work, a man who first of all, looks like he cld use a good shower to remove the profuse sweat, uttering silly untruths that are demeaning to most people is just unattractive and negative.

If this is an example of one of PC "friends", well it has me running in the opposite direction.

Also, back to the LOVE STORY of the century, Grifters-R-US:
M&H's McMansion looks about the right size for both of their egos, imo.

They are gonna need all of those 19 bathrooms when Meghan Markle & Chump-Change HRH Harry's heads explode - SH$T EVERYWHERE!!!
<Sorry, guys, my bad>


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Thought about this for a few-minutes, ie NH and his so-called "acid wit".
> This nasty piece of work, a man who first of all, looks like he cld use a good shower to remove the profuse sweat, uttering silly untruths that are demeaning to most people is just unattractive and negative.
> 
> If this is an example of one of PC "friends", well it has me running in the opposite direction
> 
> M&H's McMansion looks about the right size for both of their egos, imo.


Showering is _so_ common


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

doni said:


> *Showering is so common*



NAILED it, *doni*!
Bravo!


----------



## V0N1B2

marietouchet said:


> More from my non JCMH interests, I thought ... MEGXIT spawns a number 1 Blues hit !
> 
> I have a secret life as a rock chick who swoons over Joe Bonamassa -  blues virtuoso - HUGE sales though you may have never heard of him unless you follow Blues, not R&B, not rap, not jazz etc
> 
> Brand new album, recorded at Abbey Road no less, written in London at the time of MEGXIT.  Just read the reviews and lyrics for the title track of the ROYAL TEA album. In the interview, he says the title track reflects the chaos of Megxit - that was going down while writing
> 
> (Royal tea)
> Wake up in your garden
> (Royal tea)
> Champagne from the fountain
> Hiding out in your palace
> Diamonds dipping from your chalice
> The honey's sweet but the bees will sting
> At the door of your reckoning
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Bonamassa - Royal Tea Lyrics | AZLyrics.com
> 
> 
> Joe Bonamassa "Royal Tea": (Royal tea) Story about my past and future (Royal tea) Had to bow to kiss her I done give you life A...
> 
> 
> 
> www.azlyrics.com


Interesting.
"The honey's sweet but the bees will sting at the door of your reckoning..."


PS: love Joe B. (and his stuff with Beth Hart) - will keep an eye out for this new recording.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Omg that fake hair in the portrait...wow so over the top fake...wig? Extensions? Both? Looks ridiculous.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly, there are loopholes. Aren’t there zoning laws in Montecito?  If zoned residential, can they run a business out of the house? Of course, covid has change many of the WFH rules. Still, since we are in a pandemic, is it wise to have lots of traffic in the neighborhood? Definitely first world problems and definitely not my problem
> 
> Resolved [maybe]: _Their Montecito home was listed on Giggster, where it could be rented for a film shoot for $700 an hour, the Daily Mail also reported. The listing has been deleted._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle outfit and jewels for ‘deja vu’ official portrait total $382K
> 
> 
> The couple appears in the black-and-white photo both wearing in suits — but on closer look, Markle’s outfit isn’t so simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I so do not believe that ring cost or is worth $350K.


----------



## jennlt

kemilia said:


> I so do not believe that ring cost or is worth $350K.


 Blue Nile has a 3.02ct, F color, VVS2 clarity, GIA cushion cut diamond for $38,789. Not cheap but a far cry from $350,000!


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I love this picture, I wonder if Harry's seen it.
> 
> View attachment 4879951


Is that William?


----------



## bag-mania

Old news, but here is Robert Lacey’s take on ”Tiaragate.” It goes to show he is capable of criticizing Harry after all. It’s the first time we’ve heard him focusing on Harry’s anger issues.

The awkward moment apparently went down after Harry told staff members working on the royal wedding that "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" after she was told she couldn't wear her first-choice tiara for the big day. Apparently, the Queen wasn't a fan of the declaration. In a short excerpt shared by the Mirror, Lacey writes:

“Not for the first time, nor sadly the last, the word 'no' pushed a button inside him and he flew into a rage. There were dressers and flunkies present, guarding and organizing the jewels, so it was inevitable that his now-famous exclamation should find its way to the outside world—What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!

Her Majesty did not approve. 'Meghan cannot have whatever she wants,' was was reported to have replied. 'She gets the tiara that she's given by me."








						The Queen Reportedly Shut Down Prince Harry's Demand That Meghan Markle Get Her Way on Her Wedding Day
					

"Meghan cannot have whatever she wants."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## Lodpah

So Ms. Non Credentialed aka DoS aka grifter sits  in her castle and lectures the unwashed masses while she is gorging on the most scrumptious baccanalian buffet ever known to humans and we are supposed to be thankful and bow down and acknowledge her witchy wisdom? When pigs fly and salmon walk on the sidewalk and sing. Ok. She needs to get over self because I don’t think the world can contain her massive ego and pumps Harry’s Blimp cause it will get deflated. Harry is such a dimwit, like how stupid can one be? I mean how good was that fish Harry that reeled you in?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The masses -  sometimes my autocorrect leaves off the M 
Year-end review is coming, so I suggest they mind their p’s and q’s. 
Wonder if Harry is already at the palace due to the residency issues.
Has anyone heard thunderous rage? Plates crashing? Windows broken?


----------



## Lodpah

Harry will be singing this soon, I suppose.  


You made a fool of me
But them broken dreams have got to end
Hey, woman, you got the blues
'Cause you ain't got no one else to use
There's an open road that leads nowhere
So just make some miles between here and there
There's a hole in my head where the rain comes in
You took my body and played to win
Ha, ha, woman, it's a cryin' shame
But you ain't got nobody else to blame
Evil woman
Evil woman
Evil woman
Evil woman
Rolled in from another town
Hit some gold, too hard to settle down
But a fool and his money soon go separate ways
And you found a fool lyin' in a daze
Ha, ha, woman, what you gonna do
You destroyed all the virtues that the Lord gave you
It's so good that you're feelin' pain
But you better get your face on board the very next train
Evil woman
Evil…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That Nicky Hassan sounds like a petty little man who uses his acid wit to belittle others as a way to inflate his own self-importance. I don’t really understand the British class system. *Are people who try to rise up from the class they were born into usually accused of being social climbers? How can it be wrong to try to better your situation?*


There is absolutely nothing wrong with a person trying to better his/her situation. The term 'social climber' is usually applied to a person that achieves a higher social status by means other than his/her own work and then he/she  becomes a lot more demanding and higher maintenance than people born in that particular status. In another life, I knew people with noble titles that didn't use them. In my humble opinion, noble titles are outdated. MM's exaggerated use of 'duchess', her demanding reputation in the UK, and her preachy attitude in the US may have contributed to earn also the 'social climber' title.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I wonder why he finds Doria not common...not that I have a problem with her but....maybe it's that she keeps her mouth shut and doesn't cause any embarassment


Doria was more reserved and that worked in her favor imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Diamondbirdie said:


> These two just exasperate me. *Why are they posing for “official” photos when they actually have opted out and have NO role?? Quite, quite bizarre.*


I couldn't agree more. It looks like MM&H are trying to reproduce in the US what royal families do in countries with monarchies. It is very bizarre...


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> While doing non JCMH stuff, and researching English decorating trends, found a distracting anecdote about English acid wit- that can be agonizingly painful
> 
> I was researching some of the insouciant work of Nicky Haslam - a VERY famous English decorator / Renaissance man - worked for Prince Charles.
> 
> NH is an acerbic wit - think Oscar Wilde and all the mess he go into with his wit - and produced a list of things he finds common. quite a chuckle - just to explain what common means to him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This list of things society designer Nicky Haslam finds common is utterly random and very funny
> 
> 
> Here’s Nicky Haslam, who as everyone knows – Google, Google – is society’s pre-eminent observer of style and designer to the rich and famous. ‘Society decorator’ Nicky has come up with a list of things he finds common. Actually it’s his second list of this sort of thing, and it’s very much worth...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thepoke.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I found comment about Meghan's family that might be amusing - NH found Meghan's family common  - this was from the time of the wedding and Thomas Markle kerfuffle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles' friend says Meghan's dress 'was made of concrete'
> 
> 
> Nicky Haslam, 78, who is a good friend of the royals, launched a verbal assault on the Duchess of Sussex's family whom he deems 'common.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do think the NH comment was a bit rude/too acid, surely  the type of stuff that drove MM to say people hated her.  I do think this one was a bit too much, the comment would have ruffled my feathers  - English wit can be painful, just to take MM's side for 5 minutes.



I believe some members here agree with his description of the £200,000 Givenchy bridal gown: "it didn't fit, among other things,' he adds. 'It should have been made of thinner stuff, it seemed to be made of concrete.''


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry Pranked the Queen by Recording a Hilarious Outgoing Voicemail Message on Her Personal Phone*
"Harry reportedly used the opportunity to record the following voice mail message on his grandmother's cell: 'Hey, wassup? This is Liz! Sorry I'm away from the throne. For a hotline to Philip, press one; for Charles, press two; for the corgis, press three."

Harry before MM


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Is that William?


Yes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

William took over two new patronages from his grandparents. Really, there is so much change going on within the BRF with the older generation being, well, old. The two clowns could totally have found their place and made it big instead of coming dangerously close to being no more than two cartoon figures.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> William took over two new patronages from his grandparents. Really, there is so much change going on within the BRF with the older generation being, well, old. The two clowns could totally have found their place and made it big instead of coming dangerously close to being no more than two cartoon figures.


they didn't even try.  she has such a big ego and he is such a temperamental man-boy.  I may be mean spirited where they're concerned but I hope their big plan to be the most famous and beloved couple on the planet is a huge fail.


----------



## Chanbal

Lacey trying to find excuses for the 'spare' and his wife:

*Royal family was 'cruel to spare heir' Prince Harry and 'edged him and Meghan out' because they were 'rock stars' who 'overshadowed William and Kate', royal expert claims*

Lacey suggests that Harry's unhappiness with his role as the 'spare' only continued to grow stronger over the years, particularly as they grew older and it became increasingly obvious that William - and his wife Kate - were being primed to take over the throne, while the younger sibling was given less attention and status.

With Meghan as the driving force, she and Harry quickly became the 'rock stars' of the royal family, Lacey explained. But while that may have done great things for the public reputation of the centuries-old monarchy, their increasingly popularity did not sit well with senior aides behind closed doors.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex bucked almost every royal tradition, which caused issues within Buckingham Palace - particularly between Meghan and the senior royal aides, who struggled to accept that the former actress wasn't willing to simply adapt to customs and practices that had been in place for centuries.

This, coupled with concerns about Meghan and Harry overshadowing the most senior members of the firm - the Queen, Prince Charles, William, and Kate - prompted palace aides to work on ways to 'edge out' the couple, Lacey claims.

But Lacey said it has dawned on Meghan that her speaking out about 'more extreme' subjects could be detrimental to her husband's position within the royal family .

He also claimed that the Duke of Cambridge has been proved 'right' to have concerns about the former actress causing 'problems' within the Firm.

The 'spare' and his wife


----------



## limom

OMFG WE DO NOT CARE!!!!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The two clowns could totally have found their place and made it big instead of coming dangerously close to being no more than two cartoon figures.



Except their egos are too big to ever be satisfied with having just a place among the others. She does not share attention well.  She wants all the media focus she receives by carefully picking the issues to speak about which are currently in the news. When the story is over, so is her interest in it. It wasn’t his idea but I think Harry was happy enough to go along with it. I’m sure his life is infinitely easier now because he only has to answer to one person, instead of various members of his family and advisers. Why it must feel like a promotion to him!


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> I always thought she was pretty, more so in the beginning, but to me the nose and chin look odd in this photo.  I do think JCMH looks better than we‘re used to seeing him.


Because he actually looks like he's bathed!


----------



## 1LV

I wonder how well it would sit with Lacey (and the likes of him) if I went to his house and told him what he’s doing wrong and how we were gonna be doing things now.  And then I hurled accusations when he told me thanks but no thanks, that he’d continue to run his house as he always had.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I thought I read somewhere that Lacey usually gives a copy of his work prior to publishing so they can comment.  This time, they sent his work back to him unopened.  He’s probably mad that they don’t respect his work anymore.  He’s crying out for attention.  Just like the Harkles.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> William took over two new patronages from his grandparents. Really, there is so much change going on within the BRF with the older generation being, well, old. The two clowns could totally have found their place and made it big instead of coming dangerously close to being no more than two cartoon figures.


You’re right, but that would have meant actual work and they don’t do that.  Opening the old age home for retired race horses is not on their list of glam things to do.   Harry would knock back another beer and tell them “send Sophie” and Meghan would say “ not now, I have to return some of the clothes I borrowed even though Charles paid for them....giggle giggle.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the ‘new’ photo [which looks so much like Diana’s b&w photos]

Why are they showing off Diana’s jewelry? Who cares? While, in some cases, it can be a way to honor the deceased, it also signals that the guy is not spending his money on jewelry for his beloved. Kinda cheap?  For all the dings on Charles, he certainly did and does give gorgeous jewels to his ladies. Harry, not so much? Diana chose pieces she liked and looked good on her, not so sure she would expect DiL‘s to wear her stuff, copy her style. Surely she would encourage each DiL to find her own style.  Notice QE wears the heirloom jewelry well because she wears it her way.

This excessive copying of Diana = living in the past. Not very woke, IMO. Wonder if Harry calls MM ‘mother’?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Because he actually looks like he's bathed!


Yes he looks cleaner, but he also looks like his hemorrhoids are acting up. Or maybe it is the bilateral orchiectomy that is causing his discomforted expression.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the ‘new’ photo [which looks so much like Diana’s b&w photos]
> 
> Why are they showing off Diana’s jewelry? Who cares? While, in some cases, it can be a way to honor the deceased, it also signals that the guy is not spending his money on jewelry for his beloved. Kinda cheap?  For all the dings on Charles, he certainly did and does give gorgeous jewels to his ladies. Harry, not so much? Diana chose pieces she liked and looked good on her, not so sure she would expect DiL‘s to wear her stuff, copy her style. Surely she would encourage each DiL to find her own style.  Notice QE wears the heirloom jewelry well because she wears it her way.
> 
> This excessive copying of Diana = living in the past. Not very woke, IMO. Wonder if Harry calls MM ‘mother’?


Only during..........


----------



## gracekelly

Showing off the jewelry is akin to a hunter showing off his trophies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly, there are loopholes. Aren’t there zoning laws in Montecito?  If zoned residential, can they run a business out of the house? Of course, covid has change many of the WFH rules. Still, since we are in a pandemic, is it wise to have lots of traffic in the neighborhood? Definitely first world problems and definitely not my problem
> 
> Resolved [maybe]: _Their Montecito home was listed on Giggster, where it could be rented for a film shoot for $700 an hour, the Daily Mail also reported. The listing has been deleted._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle outfit and jewels for ‘deja vu’ official portrait total $382K
> 
> 
> The couple appears in the black-and-white photo both wearing in suits — but on closer look, Markle’s outfit isn’t so simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



The $382K figure is a little misleading since her diamond engagement ring was $350k of that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Showing off the jewelry is akin to a hunter showing off his trophies.



So true, so true. That is exactly what it is, especially in this photo.  How does she not understand that? Not really the feminist way.



Allisonfaye said:


> The $382K figure is a little misleading since her diamond engagement ring was $350k of that.


The $350k figure is misleading, too. Two of those stones are Diana’s, so they are valued with that factored in. Doubt he spent any of his money on that ring.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the ‘new’ photo [which looks so much like Diana’s b&w photos]
> 
> *Why are they showing off Diana’s jewelry?* Who cares? While, in some cases, it can be a way to honor the deceased, it also signals that the guy is not spending his money on jewelry for his beloved. Kinda cheap?  For all the dings on Charles, he certainly did and does give gorgeous jewels to his ladies. Harry, not so much? Diana chose pieces she liked and looked good on her, not so sure she would expect DiL‘s to wear her stuff, copy her style. Surely she would encourage each DiL to find her own style.  Notice QE wears the heirloom jewelry well because she wears it her way.
> 
> This excessive copying of Diana = living in the past. Not very woke, IMO. Wonder if Harry calls MM ‘mother’?


Because Kate wears Diana's jewelry, so MM needs to show to the world that she has also access to it. In any event, a gold Cartier watch is always a beautiful piece.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Because Kate wears Diana's jewelry, so MM needs to show to the world that she has also access to it. In any event, a gold Cartier watch is always a beautiful piece.



Yes, indeed, all the pieces are beautiful.  Wondering how well they fit the message and these pandemic times? Surely the influential, wokest-ever couple would not be flaunting the wealth, would they?  The focus of the photo is on the jewelry, after we get past Harry’s awkward hand placement and her looking down, almost subservient.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, indeed, all the pieces are beautiful.  Wondering how well they fit the message and these pandemic times? *Surely the influential, wokest-ever couple would not be flaunting the wealth, would they? * The focus of the photo is on the jewelry, after we get past Harry’s awkward hand placement and her looking down, almost subservient.


Haha, they would. Only the 'wokest-ever couple' with desire of becoming the most famous couple on the planet is entitled to to have an abundance of wealth while preaching on the beauty of a simple and private life.


----------



## gracekelly

Funny how woke rhymes with joke.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> Funny how woke rhymes with joke.



As well as "broke", "soak", "poke".  

As in "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye for being so mean to us."


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> As well as "broke", "soak", "poke".
> 
> As in "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye for being so mean to us."





AND.......Sound like someone we know?

*Moak*

Moak: 1. a person or group of people who believe with deep conviction that they are absolutely perfect, standing head and shoulders above everyone else in all categories. 2. a person or group of peopl [..]


Source: urbandictionary.com


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> AND.......Sound like someone we know?
> 
> *Moak*
> 
> Moak: 1. a person or group of people who believe with deep conviction that they are absolutely perfect, standing head and shoulders above everyone else in all categories. 2. a person or group of peopl [..]
> 
> 
> Source: urbandictionary.com



 It’s as though the word was created just for her.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Maybe Soho House is the real owner. The neighbors will not want extra traffic in the neighborhood even if the property has parking for 50 cars as stated.  I know what it is like when filming is going on in my town.  Lots of big trucks lots of cars, fake motorcycle cops who are paid to direct traffic. but sit there drinking coffee instead and are useless.
> 
> The fact that the Nov/Dec dates were available is suspicious and the only think that makes me think that this listing on giggster.com is not leftover from before it was "purchased."


*RIGHT???* .. in addition to all the trucks and people, oftentimes the "neighborhood" is told that they cannot come outside and/or that cars and other "personal" property are to be removed (we have had that happen numerous times as they used to film a popular TV program that was set in the 60's/70's and our neighborhood since the majority of the houses are Mid-Century Modern homes).

So, given all that .. are these two who sooooooooooooooo neeeeeeeeed privacy really going to be happy with all these folks around (and let's face it, it's highly likely that paps would get in there too).  It does make me wonder - is this "Ad" fake?  -or-  do they, in fact, live elsewhere and that this house was purchased to be (in essence) a money-maker for them?


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *RIGHT???* .. in addition to all the trucks and people, oftentimes the "neighborhood" is told that they cannot come outside and/or that cars and other "personal" property are to be removed (we have had that happen numerous times as they used to film a popular TV program that was set in the 60's/70's and our neighborhood since the majority of the houses are Mid-Century Modern homes).
> 
> So, given all that .. are these two who sooooooooooooooo neeeeeeeeed privacy really going to be happy with all these folks around (and let's face it, it's highly likely that paps would get in there too).  It does make me wonder - is this "Ad" fake?  -or-  do they, in fact, live elsewhere and that this house was purchased to be (in essence) a money-maker for them?


I‘m still going with money laundering.


----------



## jennlt

rose60610 said:


> As well as "broke", "soak", "poke".
> 
> As in "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye for being so mean to us."



Or "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye 'cause they're not woke."


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> As well as "broke", "soak", "poke".
> *As in "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye for being so mean to us."*





jennlt said:


> *Or "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye 'cause they're not woke."*


You are all inspired today!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Or
 "Let the *moaks* soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye 'cause they're not woke."


----------



## Chanbal

MM's request to her PR agency of becoming the most famous person in the world might come through. Here are a few comments (screenshots) to Lacey's DM article from Australia, Antartica, Canada, US, UK...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Don't know why they need an "official" portrait... celebrities like them take photos all the time so kind of weird to designate it as "official." 

I don't see anything wrong with the watch, though. It's very nice that she wears heirlooms from Diana. I would cherish jewelry from my DH's long-passed mother. Has nothing to do with whether he buys me fancier jewelry or not. And let's face it, who is really going to accuse either of them of being cheap or not spending enough money on each other? That's all a bit of fluff.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Funny how woke rhymes with joke.





rose60610 said:


> As well as "broke", "soak", "poke".
> 
> As in "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye for being so mean to us."





gracekelly said:


> AND.......Sound like someone we know?
> 
> *Moak*
> 
> Moak: 1. a person or group of people who believe with deep conviction that they are absolutely perfect, standing head and shoulders above everyone else in all categories. 2. a person or group of peopl [..]
> 
> 
> Source: urbandictionary.com







jennlt said:


> Or "Let's soak the BRF so we're not broke, then poke them in the eye 'cause they're not woke."



Joking asside 

Can't we 'poke them with a toke in the eye' (in light of her nephew's business)?


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Don't know why they need an "official" portrait... celebrities like them take photos all the time so kind of weird to designate it as "official."
> 
> I don't see anything wrong with the watch, though. It's very nice that she wears heirlooms from Diana. I would cherish jewelry from my DH's long-passed mother. Has nothing to do with whether he buys me fancier jewelry or not. And let's face it, who is really going to accuse either of them of being cheap or not spending enough money on each other? That's all a bit of fluff.


that B/W photo is "official" ?
well Diana was an icon so wearing her jewelry isn't like wearing the average MIL's stuff....I'm sure she's quite happy to identify with Diana


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> that B/W photo is "official" ?
> well Diana was an icon so wearing her jewelry isn't like wearing the average MIL's stuff....I'm sure she's quite happy to identify with Diana



That's what I'm gathering here, based on people saying it's "official"... tell me if I'm wrong though.

Who wouldn't wear Diana's jewelry really haha if she were our MIL? Whether she's just an average person or a huge global style icon, I'd certainly be over the moon to be given the opportunity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I don't see anything wrong with the watch, though. It's very nice that she wears heirlooms from Diana. I would cherish jewelry from my DH's long-passed mother. Has nothing to do with whether he buys me fancier jewelry or not. And let's face it, who is really going to accuse either of them of being cheap or not spending enough money on each other? That's all a bit of fluff.



It would be a nice touch if MM hadn't been so obsessed with both copying Diana in the past and trying to market herself as the new Diana. It just leaves a weird aftertaste. Everything she does has an agenda.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Don't know why they need an "official" portrait... celebrities like them take photos all the time so kind of weird to designate it as "official."
> 
> I don't see anything wrong with the watch, though. It's very nice that she wears heirlooms from Diana. I would cherish jewelry from my DH's long-passed mother. Has nothing to do with whether he buys me fancier jewelry or not. And let's face it, who is really going to accuse either of them of being cheap or not spending enough money on each other? That's all a bit of fluff.



I think it's nice both women wear heirloom pieces too. That's what they're there for. 

Perhaps they're launching an album 

I can see the blurb now: 

'We bring you the greatest love story and the most remarkable Zoom hits from the 'most influential power couple' who ever walked the Earth, now for the first time in one place'


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would be a nice touch if MM hadn't been so obsessed with both copying Diana in the past and trying to market herself as the new Diana. It just leaves a weird aftertaste.


I don't see any resemblence to diana in her.....if H wanted someone like his mom I would think he would have looked for a British aristocrat.....they say diana's bloodline was more royal than the current RF

I should probably clarify that - not just physical - I don't see her as being like Diana in behavior either


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> I think it's nice both women wear heirloom pieces too. That's what they're there for.
> 
> Perhaps they're launching an album
> 
> I can see the blurb now:
> 
> 'We bring you the greatest love story and the most remarkable Zoom hits from the 'most influential power couple' who ever walked the Earth, now for the first time in one place'



Haha yeah not to mention she had such nice stuff... I'd buy it if I could but even better if free.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Haha yeah not to mention she had such nice stuff... I'd buy it if I could but even better if free.



The Aqua came from Asprey and Diana loved it. More than her e-ring apparently, I suppose it was more her colour.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The Aqua came from Asprey and Diana loved it. More than her e-ring apparently, I suppose it was more her colour.


does M have that ring?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't see any resemblence to diana in her.....if H wanted someone like his mom I would think he would have looked for a British aristocrat.....they say diana's bloodline was more royal than the current RF
> 
> I should probably clarify that - not just physical - I don't see her as being like Diana in behavior either



Maybe she behaves like Diana towards H. That's really all he cares about.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> does M have that ring?



Jup. Harry gave it to her before the wedding reception.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Maybe she behaves like Diana towards H. That's really all he cares about.


she'd have to be quite the actress


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> does M have that ring?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. Harry gave it to her before the wedding reception.


hope he gets it back if they divorce


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> hope he gets it back if they divorce



She's not giving that up


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> The Aqua came from Asprey and Diana loved it. More than her e-ring apparently, I suppose it was more her colour.



That's a gorg ring but I always thought it seemed a little in competition with Kate's ring.... battle of the blue rings from mom.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> She's not giving that up


probably right....he wouldn't have been crafty enough to have a prenup


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> That's a gorg ring but I always thought it seemed a little in competition with Kate's ring.... battle of the blue rings from mom.



I'm sure she is forever p*ssed Kate got proposed to first. Doesn't matter that she probably secretly would have hated the design had she had to wear it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This recent photo was used to promote the TIME100 talk, so maybe that is why it is considered ‘official’.  Seems to be a work photo, so why flash the MIL jewels? People aren’t dumb. We know he has given her Diana’s stuff.  So what? Is this an appropriate occasion to bring in Diana’s memory? By my count, MM is wearing 4 pieces of jewelry - 3 are supposedly Diana’s. In a pandemic with numerous job losses, food lines and zoom talks all about being compassionate, this is one more tone-deaf, ridiculous attempt by H&M to show what? He’s Diana’s kid?  If, and that is a huge if, he has given her any jewelry of his or her choosing, why not wear that?

Yes, I do believe he is cheap, he doesn’t buy jewelry for her (like his dad did and does) and he is still fighting with W&K. His smirk says all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> probably right....he wouldn't have been crafty enough to have a prenup



Prenups aren't legally binding in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If, and that is a huge if, he has given her any jewelry of his or her choosing, why not wear that?



Because unless he bought her the Hope diamond (or made grandma hand over the Koh-i Noor bwaha) nothing could have the same impact as Diana's pieces. She wears them to legitimate herself, not for sentimental reasons.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> This recent photo was used to promote the TIME100 talk, so maybe that is why it is considered ‘official’.  Seems to be a work photo, so why flash the MIL jewels? People aren’t dumb. We know he has given her Diana’s stuff.  So what? Is this an appropriate occasion to bring in Diana’s memory? By my count, MM is wearing 4 pieces of jewelry - 3 are supposedly Diana’s. In a pandemic with numerous job losses, food lines and zoom talks all about being compassionate, this is one more tone-deaf, ridiculous attempt by H&M to show what? He’s Diana’s kid?  If, and that is a huge if, he has given her any jewelry of his or her choosing, why not wear that?
> 
> Yes, I do believe he is cheap, he doesn’t buy jewelry for her (like his dad did and does) and he is still fighting with W&K. His smirk says all.



You're criticizing her for wearing too fancy of jewelry while criticizing him for being cheap for not buying her fancy jewelry? Seems a bit at odds.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prenups aren't legally binding in the UK.



And maybe that was one of the reasons Meghan was so invested in finding a rich, famous, BRITISH guy


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would be a nice touch if MM hadn't been so obsessed with both copying Diana in the past and trying to market herself as the new Diana. *It just leaves a weird aftertaste. Everything she does has an agenda.*



Well said!  Same for him.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> probably right....he wouldn't have been crafty enough to have a prenup


I would think that he has a prenup, the BRF must have requested one.

@QueenofWrapDress  I just saw your comment about prenups not being legally binding in the UK.


----------



## lalame

There's no legal contract mechanism in the UK where people can divvy up things in advance of divorce?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame  I’ll clarify. I am criticizing
-H&M for using Diana’s jewelry in a work photo
-MM for going along with Harry’s ‘mother issues’ https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...ersation-with-princess-diana-phone-call.html/
-Harry for not buying special jewelry for his beloved, expensive or not
-MM for not staying true to her personal preferences. Look at previous photos and zoom vids. She wore much different jewelry, usually just the wedding ring. Remember South Africa? Yes, hypocrites.
-H&M for imitating Diana’s style

Could make a longer list, but we already have 2500 pages of stuff. As @QueenofWrapDress said, this photo* - It just leaves a weird aftertaste.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

She did indeed have other choices:








						All the jewellery Meghan Markle has been gifted or borrowed from the royal family
					

From rings and bracelets to tiaras and more.




					www.vogue.com.au
				




that diamond tennis bracelet would look good, no? Ooops, it’s from Charles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> You're criticizing her for wearing too fancy of jewelry while criticizing him for being cheap for not buying her fancy jewelry? Seems a bit at odds.



Diana seemed to wear jewellery appropriately, and she certainly wore it, every picture shows her wearing some very mice pieces, if even her watch to walk though possible landmines, although the jewellery was her own, not her MIL's.

I wear my jewellery as much as I can even if I'm not going anywhere. Just coz I have it so why not? Better than sitting in a draw.

I also love it when others dress-up, even for the supermarket. 

I like to see jewellery being worn by MM, but there is definitely a weird thing that goes on in her head about her and Diana. When she wears the jewellery we are reminded of her mission in life (to be the next Diana, Queen of People's Hearts) and that's weird. We would rather she be herself and stop pretending to be someone/something else.


----------



## lalame

Fair enough, ladies. I think it's pretty innocuous - sometimes she wears Diana's jewelry and sometimes she doesn't. This occasion doesn't seem particularly special to me to call it out over another instance where she may be wearing her own jewelry. But it's all in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## lalame

Judging by that Vogue list though... I think we can all agree the BRF-given jewels are probably the nicest items she owns. She should wear them more often.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I like to see jewellery being worn by MM, but there is definitely a weird thing that goes on in her head about her and Diana. When she wears the jewellery we are reminded of her mission in life (to be the next Diana, Queen of People's Hearts) and that's weird. We would rather she be herself and stop pretending to be someone/something else.


MM will never be a Queen of People's Hearts, she is already a Queen of Hypocrisy!


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would be a nice touch if MM hadn't been so obsessed with both copying Diana in the past and *trying to market herself as the new Diana*. It just leaves a weird aftertaste. Everything she does has an agenda.


100% - all of it, especially the bold.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prenups aren't legally binding in the UK.


no way she would give that ring back if she doesn't have to


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM will never be a Queen of People's Hearts, she is already a Queen of Hypocrisy!



She is the Queen of Stans. I know this because anytime you read Meghan comments on an entertainment page and her fans show up to defend her, at least one of them will inevitably say “YAAAAAAS MY QUEEN!!!”


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Yes he looks cleaner, but he also looks like his hemorrhoids are acting up. Or maybe it is the bilateral orchiectomy that is causing his discomforted expression.


Why does Harry never seem to know what to do with his left hand?  He always hides it in weird ways.  Even when they announced their engagement, he had it tucked into his coat on his chest.  I found it so odd and kept thinking, does he think he's Napoleon or something?  This picture is even worse!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure she is forever p*ssed Kate got proposed to first. Doesn't matter that she probably secretly would have hated the design had she had to wear it.


I'm sure she would've had it redesigned to suit her better


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And maybe that was one of the reasons Meghan was so invested in finding a rich, famous, BRITISH guy


Wow, if it was, she certainly does her homework!  I would've had no clue about prenups in the UK.  I've never looked into it in the US!  It's pretty pointless when you have nothing and marry someone else with nothing.  Half of nothing is nothing.


----------



## rose60610

For all of these supposed charities Meghan supports, why is there precious little news on these charities?  These days, if anyone gives $20 to any organization they get classified as "philanthropists".


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4883214


Making sure everyone sees it.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She is the Queen of Stans. I know this because anytime you read Meghan comments on an entertainment page and her fans show up to defend her, at least one of them will inevitably say *“YAAAAAAS MY QUEEN!!!”*


Do you think MM or people working for her PR agency write some of the comments? They organize photo-ops, news release, so I wonder if they also organize her reviews at some point.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Do you think MM or people working for her PR agency write some of the comments? They organize photo-ops, news release, so I wonder if they also organize her reviews at some point.


I assume that they start by not doing so, so, that reviews are (theoretically) honest opinions, but if they want to convey a message, sure they do that 

Everything else is so calculated, the diptyich (sp?) candles, the Time magazine books, the curated jewelry - all of that is purposeful 
I think the step stone in the new posed photo - on her pinky - is too small to be the Diana aqua

On the other hand, the gold Cartier watch is either the Diana watch or a (rented) clone - they are still available, that Tand Francaise model is a deliberate plant in the photo - it is an 18k yellow gold watch - VERY HEAVY - difficult to wear unless you are used to heavy bracelets - and the watch bracelet is super wide - a lot of gold

I doubt M would buy such a heavy watch unless she intended to wear it, and we have not seen her wear it before so either inerited or rented 

Kate wears a Cartier watch too, but hers is silver in color and possibly the lighter more manageable stainless version,


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Do you think MM or people working for her PR agency write some of the comments? They organize photo-ops, news release, so I wonder if they also organize her reviews at some point.



Anything is possible and I don’t doubt that some of that is going on. However, she does seem to have a loyal, vocal core of fans. How large that group actually is may have been greatly exaggerated.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Robert Lacey's book is getting mostly poor reviews on Amazon. Readers are disappointed that it doesn't really focus on William and Harry and there is little new information. Here are a few of them.


_1.0 out of 5 stars_ The truth
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 18, 2020
Verified Purchase
This book is nothing more than gossip. You could have found the information on the internet if you done a little research, and a few things they put in there was untrue Don't waste your money half of the book is past royal history I didn't want to know that they used hot bed pans to smuggle in new born babies into the royal bed when a royal Heir to the throne is needed and wasn't produced naturally. Neither did I want to know about the same story of Charles and Dianna's marriage that was told over and over again. Most of the book was about other members of the royal family.
I won’t be buying anymore royal rubbish, the last book I sent back “Finding Freedom” .

_1.0 out of 5 stars_ Disappointing, old news
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 18, 2020
Verified Purchase
A complete rehash of previous press articles/ books, word for word- disappointing, nothing new. Opportunistic given recent events but doesn’t add anything. Save your money

_1.0 out of 5 stars_ No “untold details” and no “real, unvarnished story” to see here. Take a hard pass.
Reviewed in the United States on October 20, 2020
I put this book right in there with “Royals At War” as far as “nothing-to-read-here-that-hasn’t-been-read” books, which is most disappointing since once again an author has claimed that their book was going to be full of untold details and reveals. This book relies heavily on news articles and re-hashed things that we can find ourselves by a simple internet search (and in many cases, have already read either in print or online); and throw in a couple name-dropping sources, but not necessarily real palace insiders. I enjoy reading books about the Royals, William and Harry in particular, so I was really looking forward to reading this one and hoping to learn something about what actually unfolded behind the scenes that would change the dynamic of the closeness of the brotherhood bond that we’d witnessed all throughout their lives until now. Unfortunately my excitement fell short relatively quickly into reading this book when I realized it really wasn’t going to live up to its title or description and really didn't have anything new to report. Way too much of it doesn’t even focus on William and Harry, contrary to the cover photo. I can honestly say I didn’t learn anything by reading this book. It was a quick read and I could’ve easily stopped, but decided to finish it up – hoping it would actually reveal something, anything – which it did not. The title of this book, as well as the photo on the cover showing William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, is completely misleading. If you’re looking for a book that has the inside story on what really happened behind the scenes between William and Harry, this is not that book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How disappointing. He's done way better in the past.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Robert Lacey's book is getting mostly poor reviews on Amazon. Readers are disappointed that it doesn't really focus on William and Harry and there is little new information. Here are a few of them.
> 
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ The truth
> Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 18, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> This book is nothing more than gossip. You could have found the information on the internet if you done a little research, and a few things they put in there was untrue Don't waste your money half of the book is past royal history I didn't want to know that they used hot bed pans to smuggle in new born babies into the royal bed when a royal Heir to the throne is needed and wasn't produced naturally. Neither did I want to know about the same story of Charles and Dianna's marriage that was told over and over again. Most of the book was about other members of the royal family.
> I won’t be buying anymore royal rubbish, the last book I sent back “Finding Freedom” .
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ Disappointing, old news
> Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 18, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> A complete rehash of previous press articles/ books, word for word- disappointing, nothing new. Opportunistic given recent events but doesn’t add anything. Save your money
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ No “untold details” and no “real, unvarnished story” to see here. Take a hard pass.
> Reviewed in the United States on October 20, 2020
> I put this book right in there with “Royals At War” as far as “nothing-to-read-here-that-hasn’t-been-read” books, which is most disappointing since once again an author has claimed that their book was going to be full of untold details and reveals. This book relies heavily on news articles and re-hashed things that we can find ourselves by a simple internet search (and in many cases, have already read either in print or online); and throw in a couple name-dropping sources, but not necessarily real palace insiders. I enjoy reading books about the Royals, William and Harry in particular, so I was really looking forward to reading this one and hoping to learn something about what actually unfolded behind the scenes that would change the dynamic of the closeness of the brotherhood bond that we’d witnessed all throughout their lives until now. Unfortunately my excitement fell short relatively quickly into reading this book when I realized it really wasn’t going to live up to its title or description and really didn't have anything new to report. Way too much of it doesn’t even focus on William and Harry, contrary to the cover photo. I can honestly say I didn’t learn anything by reading this book. It was a quick read and I could’ve easily stopped, but decided to finish it up – hoping it would actually reveal something, anything – which it did not. The title of this book, as well as the photo on the cover showing William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, is completely misleading. If you’re looking for a book that has the inside story on what really happened behind the scenes between William and Harry, this is not that book.


Wonder how long until the negative reviews disappear?


----------



## purseinsanity

William Didn’t Think ‘Highly’ of Palace Saying Meghan Was in Labor After Birth
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle snuck home with son Archie before the palace’s ‘misleading statement’ about the duchess going into labor, a new book claims — details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Robert Lacey's book is getting mostly poor reviews on Amazon. Readers are disappointed that it doesn't really focus on William and Harry and there is little new information. Here are a few of them.
> 
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ The truth
> Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 18, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> This book is nothing more than gossip. You could have found the information on the internet if you done a little research, and a few things they put in there was untrue Don't waste your money half of the book is past royal history I didn't want to know that they used hot bed pans to smuggle in new born babies into the royal bed when a royal Heir to the throne is needed and wasn't produced naturally. Neither did I want to know about the same story of Charles and Dianna's marriage that was told over and over again. Most of the book was about other members of the royal family.
> I won’t be buying anymore royal rubbish, the last book I sent back “Finding Freedom” .
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ Disappointing, old news
> Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 18, 2020
> Verified Purchase
> A complete rehash of previous press articles/ books, word for word- disappointing, nothing new. Opportunistic given recent events but doesn’t add anything. Save your money
> 
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ No “untold details” and no “real, unvarnished story” to see here. Take a hard pass.
> Reviewed in the United States on October 20, 2020
> I put this book right in there with “Royals At War” as far as “nothing-to-read-here-that-hasn’t-been-read” books, which is most disappointing since once again an author has claimed that their book was going to be full of untold details and reveals. This book relies heavily on news articles and re-hashed things that we can find ourselves by a simple internet search (and in many cases, have already read either in print or online); and throw in a couple name-dropping sources, but not necessarily real palace insiders. I enjoy reading books about the Royals, William and Harry in particular, so I was really looking forward to reading this one and hoping to learn something about what actually unfolded behind the scenes that would change the dynamic of the closeness of the brotherhood bond that we’d witnessed all throughout their lives until now. Unfortunately my excitement fell short relatively quickly into reading this book when I realized it really wasn’t going to live up to its title or description and really didn't have anything new to report. Way too much of it doesn’t even focus on William and Harry, contrary to the cover photo. I can honestly say I didn’t learn anything by reading this book. It was a quick read and I could’ve easily stopped, but decided to finish it up – hoping it would actually reveal something, anything – which it did not. The title of this book, as well as the photo on the cover showing William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan, is completely misleading. If you’re looking for a book that has the inside story on what really happened behind the scenes between William and Harry, this is not that book.


Lacey's book is getting such diametrically opposite summaries ... some call it pro H, others say it is pro W,  contradictory 

Some reviews say the spare heir was treated CRUELLY - do those words come from the reviewer or the book ?  In those reviews, the book comes off sounding like a hagiography authored by Omid ie super pro JCMH ... 

Other reviews are more pro William & nuanced, eg  William asked Charles Spencer to tell H not to rush into marriage , not a bad thing? Or was it meddling ?? 

It is one thing not to like a book - badly written, confusing, too one sided ... but another when the synopses make it sound like the reviewers were reading different books 

Other reviews complain that Lacey is no longer on his game , an author problem ...  that could explain why the synopses are all over the palce


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> William Didn’t Think ‘Highly’ of Palace Saying Meghan Was in Labor After Birth
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle snuck home with son Archie before the palace’s ‘misleading statement’ about the duchess going into labor, a new book claims — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


Typical internet story - The title is pure CLICK BAIT bait and is mismatched to the story

To me, the story is about the secrecy behind the birth, that William was distressed by the press release being untimely / after the fact, is the not the salient point , IMHO, feel free to disagree

Just reading interesting book - the German Suitcase by Greg Dinallo , enjoyable read, one of the themes is modern journalism issues - internet writers versus serious newspaper Pulitzer journalists


----------



## lanasyogamama

Shouldn’t the word cruelly be limited to treatment like torture? Kate offering MM a ride to the city center downtown seem to apply.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Shouldn’t the word cruelly be limited to treatment like torture? Kate offering MM a ride to the city center downtown seem to apply.



Agree - CRUEL is a poor choice of words when discussing spare heirs eg Margaret, Andrew, Harry

Like it or not - I am not here to defend the system - the English system is based on primogeniture - the eldest gets the lion's share, and the youngest nothing. The system goes back to the days of the Saxons , it is what it is

By definition, the youngest DOES NOT get treated the same , it is not cruelty, it is history/culture/custom. It is not some last minute decision where dad changed the will, it has been like that for a thousand years. Tough cookies

More reading anecdotes - see Dorothy L Sayers short story on the birth of Lord Peter Wimsey's sons, Peter CHOSE to entail his estate - it would all go to his oldest, it was a choice based on custom, it was the thing that one did ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Shouldn’t the word cruelly be limited to treatment like torture? Kate offering MM a ride to the city center downtown seem to apply.



H&M are all about the drama. Every perceived slight, real or imagined, is given their _hyperbole treatment. [_Ya kno, kinda like junior hi girls do.]  For me, it is one more indication of their immaturity.

Watched about 3 minutes of the TIME show. Another video that restates the obvious, nothing informative, nothing inspirational, just words, words, words. It is now painful to watch. Alexis Ohanian is guilty of word salad, too. I would be embarrassed to be connected to that sh**tshow. Please excuse my language, there is no other way to characterize it.

ETA:  word salad is too kind. Simply said, these videos are ear-poison. Best advice, use a filter


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Lacey's book is getting such diametrically opposite summaries ... some call it pro H, others say it is pro W,  contradictory
> 
> Some reviews say the spare heir was treated CRUELLY - do those words come from the reviewer or the book ?  In those reviews, the book comes off sounding like a hagiography authored by Omid ie super pro JCMH ...
> 
> Other reviews are more pro William & nuanced, eg  William asked Charles Spencer to tell H not to rush into marriage , not a bad thing? Or was it meddling ??
> 
> It is one thing not to like a book - badly written, confusing, too one sided ... but another when the synopses make it sound like the reviewers were reading different books
> 
> Other reviews complain that Lacey is no longer on his game , an author problem ...  that could explain why the synopses are all over the palce



I think the biggest complaint was Lacey spent a substantial portion of the book regurgitating the history of Charles, Diana, and Camilla before getting into the boys' relationship. It tells me Lacey really didn't have any contacts close to the younger generation to rely on. He had to pad the book with what he knew.


----------



## gracekelly

Www.pagesix.com


Meghan Markle’s new pinky ring is a mystery no more.
When the Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry posed for a new portrait last week, Markle was pictured wearing a gold Cartier “Love” bracelet($6,550) and a Cartier watch believed to have been owned by Princess Diana.
Of course, she also sported her $350,000 diamond engagement ring, but there was also a new diamond ring on display that sparked speculation from royal watchers, who thought it could even be Diana’s famous aquamarine ring that Markle wore at her wedding reception and on tour to Australia.
*Page Six has now been told that the brunette, in fact, turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.
While Schwartz declined to comment, we’re also told that she made diamond earrings from the same set.*



i guess they decided not to report the diamonds as a gift. Thinking ahead to when they were leaving? Obviously  a little something from the King of Morocco.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> William Didn’t Think ‘Highly’ of Palace Saying Meghan Was in Labor After Birth
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle snuck home with son Archie before the palace’s ‘misleading statement’ about the duchess going into labor, a new book claims — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


"The confusion apparently struck a nerve with Harry’s big brother, *Prince William*, who “did not think too highly of Harry and Meghan’s ‘prima donna’ manoeuvres to conceal the birth of their son,” Lacey claims."

I can't blame William, MM's 'prima donna' attitude can 'struck a nerve' with everyone that pays a little more attention to what she says and does...


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> "The confusion apparently struck a nerve with Harry’s big brother, *Prince William*, who “did not think too highly of Harry and Meghan’s ‘prima donna’ manoeuvres to conceal the birth of their son,” Lacey claims."
> 
> I can't blame William, MM's 'prima donna' attitude can 'struck a nerve' with everyone that pays a little more attention to what she says and does...


I really think that the only reason she did it was to generate even more interest in herself. She knew the public would be interested in the baby, but that wasn’t enough for her. She had to outshine her own child.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> I really think that the only reason she did it was to generate even more interest in herself. She knew the public would be interested in the baby, but that wasn’t enough for her. She had to outshine her own child.


Another warning sign at the time that the road ahead with these two was going to be rocky. Knowing what we know now, they planned  from the beginning to leave "the firm" and emigrate to the colonies, they were thumbing their noses at the British people. Royal babies, especially those in the line of succession, have always generated interest and celebration at their births, town criers spread the word long before the Internet. It's not an invasion of any privacy, it's a shared acknowledgment of the Monarchy continuing on. 

Meghan and JCMH are PETTY and PEEVISH to an astonishing degree, it would have done them absolutely no harm to have been open about Archie's birth. What a stupid silly "game" to play.

If I were a Brit I would pray daily for  the Cambridge family to all live long and prosperous lives so the line of succession never has to dip to the level of JCMH and Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.


----------



## bag-mania

It is really _really_ important to them that we all check on others. Except of course for their own relatives. They are teaching a generation of impressionable teenagers how to be hypocrites. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on 'Really' Checking in on Others Right Now*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are continuing the conversation about creating safe and more equitable online communities.
The couple hosted a special edition of _TIME100 Talks_ on Tuesday, exploring the topic of "Engineering a Better World" with their guests, including Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian (who happens to be married to Meghan's pal Serena Williams!) and the hosts of Teenager Therapy, the podcast they recently appeared on to celebrate World Mental Health Day.

_TIME_ editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal kicked the episode off by asking the couple how they were doing amid the coronavirus pandemic, to which Harry commented on how that question has changed its meaning in recent months.

"I think when people ask, 'How are you?' I sense, you know, it's a case of 'Really, how are you?' Before this year, I think everyone sort of throws that term around and everyone's satisfied with a 'Yeah, I'm good. I'm fine, thanks.' And then it's moving on to something else," Harry said. "But I think you're quite right. This year, more so than ever, it really is a question of 'No, no, no. Actually, how are you?' "










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on 'Really' Checking in on Others Right Now
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hosted a special edition of TIME100 Talks, exploring the topic of "Engineering a Better World"




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I really think that the only reason she did it was to generate even more interest in herself. She knew the public would be interested in the baby, but that wasn’t enough for her. She had to outshine her own child.



I wouldn't be surprised, everything that comes from MM seems to be very calculated and fake.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Anything is possible and I don’t doubt that some of that is going on. However, she does seem to have a loyal, vocal core of fans. How large that group actually is may have been greatly exaggerated.


MM&H hired the right PR agency to take care of their needs. Sunshine Sachs is "known for using the so-called “dark arts” of public relations to improve the celebs’ reputations."


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It is really _really_ important to them that we all check on others. Except of course for their own relatives. They are teaching a generation of impressionable teenagers how to be hypocrites.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on 'Really' Checking in on Others Right Now*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are continuing the conversation about creating safe and more equitable online communities.
> The couple hosted a special edition of _TIME100 Talks_ on Tuesday, exploring the topic of "Engineering a Better World" with their guests, including Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian (who happens to be married to Meghan's pal Serena Williams!) and the hosts of Teenager Therapy, the podcast they recently appeared on to celebrate World Mental Health Day.
> 
> _TIME_ editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal kicked the episode off by asking the couple how they were doing amid the coronavirus pandemic, to which Harry commented on how that question has changed its meaning in recent months.
> 
> "I think when people ask, 'How are you?' I sense, you know, it's a case of 'Really, how are you?' Before this year, I think everyone sort of throws that term around and everyone's satisfied with a 'Yeah, I'm good. I'm fine, thanks.' And then it's moving on to something else," Harry said. "But I think you're quite right. This year, more so than ever, it really is a question of 'No, no, no. Actually, how are you?' "
> View attachment 4884069
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on 'Really' Checking in on Others Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hosted a special edition of TIME100 Talks, exploring the topic of "Engineering a Better World"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


All this makes me sad. Some people should stay away from impressionable teenagers and young adults. We need a healthier world...


----------



## csshopper

Headline from a US site that posts ratings of TV programs previously aired in the USA:

*Wednesday Ratings: "Harry and Meghan Specials Fail to Impress on ABC and Fox 'Super Bowl’s Greatest Commercials 2020' Leads CBS to Victory"*

Read more: https://programminginsider.com/wedn...ghan-specials-fail-to-impress-on-abc-and-fox/

Ratings for CBS Super Bowl Commercials program: 7.15 million viewers
Ratings for Markle JCMH TIME Word Salad Special:  3.24 million viewers 

Yes, yes several million is noteworthy, but I think it's indicative of their drawing power that more than twice as many people chose to watch old Super Bowl Commercials. 

From a more international perspective, 16 pages  of comments and counting, on the Daily Mail website in response to the program, seem to show the vast majority of those who did watch, didn't make it all the way through or wished they had chosen another option all together. One respondent from Wales used the description "word salad"....did we hear it here first? 

And do they really expect us to believe they did not head straight for their devices this morning to read the reactions to the program????


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Headline from a US site that posts ratings of TV programs previously aired in the USA:
> 
> *Wednesday Ratings: "Harry and Meghan Specials Fail to Impress on ABC and Fox 'Super Bowl’s Greatest Commercials 2020' Leads CBS to Victory"*
> 
> Read more: https://programminginsider.com/wedn...ghan-specials-fail-to-impress-on-abc-and-fox/
> 
> Ratings for CBS Super Bowl Commercials program: 7.15 million viewers
> Ratings for Markle JCMH TIME Word Salad Special:  3.24 million viewers
> 
> Yes, yes several million is noteworthy, but I think it's indicative of their drawing power that more than twice as many people chose to watch old Super Bowl Commercials.
> 
> From a more international perspective, 16 pages  of comments and counting, on the Daily Mail website in response to the program, seem to show the vast majority of those who did watch, didn't make it all the way through or wished they had chosen another option all together. One respondent from Wales used the description "word salad"....did we hear it here first?
> 
> And do they really expect us to believe they did not head straight for their devices this morning to read the reactions to the program????



Does anyone here want to take one for the team and watch it? I found the YouTube link but I cannot bring myself to spend even a few precious minutes of my life watching their overwhelming preachiness. It is worth reading the comments though, so many rabid H&M fans fawning at their altar. I feel like I need a shower. (I think you have to open the link separately to read the comments.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> All this makes me sad. Some people should stay away from impressionable teenagers and young adults. We need a healthier world...



Teens will see through the H&M hypocrisy. I know I have seen that bit about ‘how are you’ somewhere else, maybe in April(?), I will keep searching. Nothing they say or do is original.








						What to Ask Instead of ‘How Are You?’ During a Pandemic
					

Everyone’s doing badly. We need better questions to ask.




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> One respondent from Wales used the description "word salad"....did we hear it here first?



Ear poison, I tell ya it is ear poison. Protect yourselves, use a filter, dears.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone here want to take one for the team and watch it? I found the YouTube link but I cannot bring myself to spend even a few precious minutes of my life watching their overwhelming preachiness. It is worth reading the comments though, so many rabid H&M fans fawning at their altar. I feel like I need a shower. (I think you have to open the link separately to read the comments.)



I watched a couple of minutes....seems fake - like an infomercial....H looked like he was waiting to say his scripted lines

oh and that ridiculously long fake hair on her.....does she think she's fooling anyone or maybe it doesn't matter


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> What intrigues me most is this information from the same DM article:
> 
> "The Sussexes' home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house... The palatial residence, set in 10 acres, was originally *put on the market in May 2014 for $36million..."* This is about what Ellen D is currently asking for her house (*$39.9million*, three  bedrooms and 4.5 bathrooms in main house) in the same neighborhood.
> 
> How were MM&H able to buy the 16 toilet mansion for only 14.5 millions?


Again, the hypocrisy .. these are 2 folks who have said that their Netflix programs are to be focused on us "regular" people, that they inspirational in nature, and family-oriented  .. 

Okay, so - 

How many of us "regular" folk have a house with 16 bathrooms?? 
What inspiration will they provide us "regular" folk? .. Meghan:  "marry rich and then make sure to have that anchor baby" 
Lastly, how can they preach about "family" .. she has pretty much 'divorced' the majority of hers (exception being Doria and I wonder how much she truly sees of her mother), and well .. JCMH has now 'divorced' his "family" (the institution)! 
I'm already tired of these two and this is even before they put anything together and there is no way I would watch their crap; the only reason why I'm in here is that during these times, I need some "entertainment"!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone here want to take one for the team and watch it? I found the YouTube link but I cannot bring myself to spend even a few precious minutes of my life watching their overwhelming preachiness. It is worth reading the comments though, so many rabid H&M fans fawning at their altar. I feel like I need a shower. (I think you have to open the link separately to read the comments.)




I cannot, I've just eaten


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I watched a couple of minutes....seems fake - like an infomercial....H looked like he was waiting to say his scripted lines



To be fair Harry is not as comfortable being phony as his partner in altruism. He’s learning fast though.


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> Oh yeah, I never said Meghan didn’t gain from it. She had knowledge, Harry gave her opportunity. It was mutual benefit for both of them. I said it before, without Harry she’d still be chasing Ashley Cole or the Made in Chelsea set...
> 
> I thought they bought it with trust through Meghan’s *Frim Fram* LLC... admittedly I don’t understand these things... I try not to own things...


Seriously??? .. is this the name of her company???? .. that's pretty close to Flim-Flam which has a very definite meaning ..


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM&H hired the right PR agency to take care of their needs. Sunshine Sachs is *"known for using the so-called “dark arts” of public relations* to improve the celebs’ reputations."



Thank you for giving me a Harry Potter vibe to their PR.  

Whatever they are doing is working. I don’t think those comments for the YouTube video are bots or fakes. There actually are people out there (women and girls mostly) who absolutely love them.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone here want to take one for the team and watch it? I found the YouTube link but I cannot bring myself to spend even a few precious minutes of my life watching their overwhelming preachiness. It is worth reading the comments though, so many rabid H&M fans fawning at their altar. I feel like I need a shower. (I think you have to open the link separately to read the comments.)



I've tried, but I can't stand empty talks... I'm sorry I can't be of much help.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Thank you for giving me a Harry Potter vibe to their PR.
> 
> Whatever they are doing is working. I don’t think those comments for the YouTube video are bots or fakes. There actually are people out there (women mostly) who absolutely love them.


well, we know because we've had some on this thread who took every negative comment about her as if it directly affected them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

This article about niche-sports caught my eye. If H&M think this Hunger Games world will change any time soon, they are dreaming.








						The Mad, Mad World of Niche Sports Among Ivy League–Obsessed Parents
					

Where the desperation of late-stage meritocracy is so strong, you can smell it




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It is really _really_ important to them that we all check on others. Except of course for their own relatives. They are teaching a generation of impressionable teenagers how to be hypocrites.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on 'Really' Checking in on Others Right Now*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are continuing the conversation about creating safe and more equitable online communities.
> The couple hosted a special edition of _TIME100 Talks_ on Tuesday, exploring the topic of "Engineering a Better World" with their guests, including Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian (who happens to be married to Meghan's pal Serena Williams!) and the hosts of Teenager Therapy, the podcast they recently appeared on to celebrate World Mental Health Day.
> 
> _TIME_ editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal kicked the episode off by asking the couple how they were doing amid the coronavirus pandemic, to which Harry commented on how that question has changed its meaning in recent months.
> 
> "I think when people ask, 'How are you?' I sense, you know, it's a case of 'Really, how are you?' Before this year, I think everyone sort of throws that term around and everyone's satisfied with a 'Yeah, I'm good. I'm fine, thanks.' And then it's moving on to something else," Harry said. "But I think you're quite right. This year, more so than ever, it really is a question of 'No, no, no. Actually, how are you?' "
> View attachment 4884069
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on 'Really' Checking in on Others Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hosted a special edition of TIME100 Talks, exploring the topic of "Engineering a Better World"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> MM&H hired the right PR agency to take care of their needs. Sunshine Sachs is "known for using the so-called “dark arts” of public relations to improve the celebs’ reputations."




from 2019 (when _was_ that?)
_Meghan Markle has hired Sunshine PR to help her public image. It is headed up by Ken Sunshine, 71, (pictured) who has worked for disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and is known for using 'bare-knuckle tactics'_








						Meghan's PR MR Sunshine uses 'bare-knuckle tactics' to protect clients
					

Experts have warned that PR firm Sunshine Sachs, hired by the Sussexes, will struggle to understand the delicate balance between the public and the Royal family. It also uses 'bare-knuckle' tactics.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Seriously??? .. is this the name of her company???? .. that's pretty close to Flim-Flam which has a very definite meaning ..
> View attachment 4884156



That is the origin but you know anything Meghan names is deliberately chosen to be as trendy and pretentious as possible. The Tig anyone?

*Frim Fram*
Used to describe something that is so crazy and weird, it makes it hip and cool.

Originated from the song The Frim FramSauce by Nat King Cole. The song talked about total nonsense foods and hardly made sense, but it was one of the most memorable hits of its era.





						Urban Dictionary: frim fram
					

Used to describe something that is so crazy and weird, it makes it hip and cool. Originated from the song The Frim Fram Sauce by Nat King Cole. The song talked about total nonsense foods and hardly made sense, but it was one of the most memorable hits of its era.




					www.urbandictionary.com


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> from 2019 (when _was_ that?)
> _Meghan Markle has hired Sunshine PR to help her public image. It is headed up by Ken Sunshine, 71, (pictured) who has worked for disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and is known for using 'bare-knuckle tactics'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's PR MR Sunshine uses 'bare-knuckle tactics' to protect clients
> 
> 
> Experts have warned that PR firm Sunshine Sachs, hired by the Sussexes, will struggle to understand the delicate balance between the public and the Royal family. It also uses 'bare-knuckle' tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


A self proclaimed feminist, hired Harvey Weinstein's, world class perv major abuser of women, PR person to do her work.  WOW!

The breadth, depth, hugeness, of her hypocrisy is mind boggling. But I do remember reading an article about her wanting to be the most important person on the planet and being willing for some controversy to happen in that process. So, he must have been a planned, not random selection.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> from 2019 (when _was_ that?)
> _Meghan Markle has hired Sunshine PR to help her public image. It is headed up by Ken Sunshine, 71, (pictured) who has worked for disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and is known for using 'bare-knuckle tactics'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's PR MR Sunshine uses 'bare-knuckle tactics' to protect clients
> 
> 
> Experts have warned that PR firm Sunshine Sachs, hired by the Sussexes, will struggle to understand the delicate balance between the public and the Royal family. It also uses 'bare-knuckle' tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hired ca Sep 2019 ie when she was still a full time senior royal


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Headline from a US site that posts ratings of TV programs previously aired in the USA:
> 
> *Wednesday Ratings: "Harry and Meghan Specials Fail to Impress on ABC and Fox 'Super Bowl’s Greatest Commercials 2020' Leads CBS to Victory"*
> 
> Read more: https://programminginsider.com/wedn...ghan-specials-fail-to-impress-on-abc-and-fox/
> 
> Ratings for CBS Super Bowl Commercials program: 7.15 million viewers
> Ratings for Markle JCMH TIME Word Salad Special:  3.24 million viewers
> 
> Yes, yes several million is noteworthy, but I think it's indicative of their drawing power that more than twice as many people chose to watch old Super Bowl Commercials.
> 
> From a more international perspective, 16 pages  of comments and counting, on the Daily Mail website in response to the program, seem to show the vast majority of those who did watch, didn't make it all the way through or wished they had chosen another option all together. One respondent from Wales used the description "word salad"....did we hear it here first?
> 
> And do they really expect us to believe they did not head straight for their devices this morning to read the reactions to the program????



Just to clarify, I hadn’t opened those links about TV ratings until now. I didn’t realize they are for that pity party of a show they did back in January right before they left. The TIME100 deal this week was not televised. It was solely a virtual event, one of several TIME has had this year, and it likely didn’t have many views besides the stans.  I wanted to make sure it was known that they didn’t actually have a network TV appearance this week (which is a relief).


----------



## Jktgal

Thomas must be so excited, means any day now his child and her husband will check in to ask how he's doing...


----------



## gracekelly

Jktgal said:


> Thomas must be so excited, means any day now his child and her husband will check in to ask how he's doing...


Meghan:  Hi Dad!  How are you?  I mean, really...how *are* you?"

Thomas:  "On the advice of my attorney I can not answer that question.  See you at the trial."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hope they’re ready for this:








						Harry and Meghan are warned a black bear is prowling near their home
					

The wild black bear is believed to have been attracted to the wealthy area by Harry and Meghan's liberal neighbours' chicken coops in Montecito,




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Alexis Ohanian, today on TIME100 (bunch of BS’ers),  he needs to clarify what ‘de-radicalize a generation’ means. Many of us lived through the Vietnam War, the Chicago 7, the Watts Riots, Detroit, etc. I don’t care who his wife is, ‘de-radicalize a generation‘ is just wrong. Disturbing that H&M would join up with this language. Yes, words matter.

_“I was a history major at UVA and I studied post World War II sort of postwar Germany, the de-Nazification process basically that both West and East Germany went through.

And I never thought it would serve me now fifteen years later, but in a way it is. Because I do think there’s gonna be some work that will need to be done to de-radicalize a generation, especially here in the United States...”









						Reddit Co-Founder Alexis Ohanian Speaks with Meghan, Duchess of Sussex About Building a Better Tech Industry
					

Alexis Ohanian and Meghan Markle discuss the importance of social media and technology in a TIME100 Talks. Read the full transcript




					time.com
				




ETA:  this divisive language is what we do not need. Taking away freedom of speech is never the answer. If he really studied Nazi sh*t, then he is talking mind-control, propaganda, etc. Nothing good comes from that language. _


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alexis Ohanian, today on TIME100 (bunch of BS’ers),  he needs to clarify what ‘de-radicalize a generation’ means. Many of us lived through the Vietnam War, the Chicago 7, the Watts Riots, Detroit, etc. I don’t care who his wife is, ‘de-radicalize a generation‘ is just wrong. Disturbing that H&M would join up with this language. Yes, words matter.
> 
> _“I was a history major at UVA and I studied post World War II sort of postwar Germany, the de-Nazification process basically that both West and East Germany went through.
> 
> And I never thought it would serve me now fifteen years later, but in a way it is. Because I do think there’s gonna be some work that will need to be done to de-radicalize a generation, especially here in the United States...”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reddit Co-Founder Alexis Ohanian Speaks with Meghan, Duchess of Sussex About Building a Better Tech Industry
> 
> 
> Alexis Ohanian and Meghan Markle discuss the importance of social media and technology in a TIME100 Talks. Read the full transcript
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



what generation is he referring to? That is so odd from him...maybe I don’t understand what he’s saying?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> what generation is he referring to? That is so odd from him...maybe I don’t understand what he’s saying?



I don’t understand either. I do find it disturbing. Who are the radicals?
So many things wrong with his statement.

ETA:  Seee, he created the internet corner for those radicals and now he doesn’t like what they say. The hypocrisy! He owes an apology to all the wiser (older) people he criticized/ridiculed/banned when they told him he should not allow that stuff on his site. He became very wealthy off of it.
He says: _Because it’s just – I don’t know, I – and I’ll admit, you know it’s on the one hand it’s – it’s – it is disappointing to know that so much of this perspective I only really got once I, you know, once I – I married, well started dating but then certainly once I married my wife and once we had our daughter, it leveled it up to another – another place._


----------



## Chanbal

The text was likely provided by MM (and/or her PR agency) and the title was written by a well informed journalist.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they’re ready for this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are warned a black bear is prowling near their home
> 
> 
> The wild black bear is believed to have been attracted to the wealthy area by Harry and Meghan's liberal neighbours' chicken coops in Montecito,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Not to worry.  He smelled the word salad and ran away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Just to clarify, I hadn’t opened those links about TV ratings until now. I didn’t realize they are for that pity party of a show they did back in January right before they left. The TIME100 deal this week was not televised. It was solely a virtual event, one of several TIME has had this year, and it likely didn’t have many views besides the stans.  I wanted to make sure it was known that they didn’t actually have a network TV appearance this week (which is a relief).


Thanks for catching that! I apologize as it was unintentionally misleading.
interesting, however, that even with a prior performance that was not stellar, they are still generating offers.


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> Not to worry.  He smelled the word salad and ran away.



Not to worry, they learned to deal with bears in their days in the Canadian wilderness. She's an expert on everything after all.


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they’re ready for this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are warned a black bear is prowling near their home
> 
> 
> The wild black bear is believed to have been attracted to the wealthy area by Harry and Meghan's liberal neighbours' chicken coops in Montecito,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Clickbait. Black bears seek food both in the wild and from humans (trash) and aren't aggressive toward humans.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they’re ready for this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are warned a black bear is prowling near their home
> 
> 
> The wild black bear is believed to have been attracted to the wealthy area by Harry and Meghan's liberal neighbours' chicken coops in Montecito,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Has someone warned the bear tho?


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Thank you for giving me a Harry Potter vibe to their PR.
> 
> Whatever they are doing is working. I don’t think those comments for the YouTube video are bots or fakes. There actually are people out there (women and girls mostly) who absolutely love them.


Remember that saying: "Nobody ever went broke by underestimate public taste!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The text was likely provided by MM (and/or her PR agency) and the title was written by a well informed journalist.
> 
> View attachment 4884331



Do publications not even check their freaking headlines anymore before they publish them?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do publications not even check their freaking headlines anymore before they publish them?


Not sure about that, but they may check TPF. I clicked on the link today and the title has been changed:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Or they have someone like me who doublechecks everything three steps after it's left my hands and then makes ill-humoured phone calls.


----------



## zinacef

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t understand either. I do find it disturbing. Who are the radicals?
> So many things wrong with his statement.
> 
> ETA:  Seee, he created the internet corner for those radicals and now he doesn’t like what they say. The hypocrisy! He owes an apology to all the wiser (older) people he criticized/ridiculed/banned when they told him he should not allow that stuff on his site. He became very wealthy off of it.
> He says: _Because it’s just – I don’t know, I – and I’ll admit, you know it’s on the one hand it’s – it’s – it is disappointing to know that so much of this perspective I only really got once I, you know, once I – I married, well started dating but then certainly once I married my wife and once we had our daughter, it leveled it up to another – another place._


another word salad to make him sound legit and smart, from somebody who made money off “ these radicals”. He HAS to sound smart—- to be invited to TIME virtual picnic or else, he’s nothing but a daddy on the sideline watching the game.


----------



## bag-mania

zinacef said:


> another word salad to make him sound legit and smart, from somebody who made money off “ these radicals”. He HAS to sound smart—- to be invited to TIME virtual picnic or else, he’s nothing but a daddy on the sideline watching the game.



Exactly. He is protecting himself and his interests. Should someone get killed or seriously injured he doesn’t want the lawyers looking at him to bear any financial responsibility.


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle painted themselves as '**intellectuals**' and chose 'enigmatic' gestures when talking about running for political office, body language expert claims*


----------



## Genie27

Enigmatic gestures?

Like....
.l.. ..l.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they’re ready for this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are warned a black bear is prowling near their home
> 
> 
> The wild black bear is believed to have been attracted to the wealthy area by Harry and Meghan's liberal neighbours' chicken coops in Montecito,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I sincerely hope that bear makes it out of there alive.  I think Harry's guns have been taken from him so he won't be the one to kill it.
We had a mountain lion in our neighborhood years ago.  It was seen mostly on a multi acre lot but it got near enough to homes to scare the neighbors.  Authorities said useless to relocate it; they would only do something if if became an imminent threat. 
 It disappeared.  I'm quite sure a neighbor (perhaps fearful for their pets or kids) took matters into their own hands.  The poor animal was likely there due to wildfires driving it out of it's old location.  People are the demons of the earth.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they’re ready for this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are warned a black bear is prowling near their home
> 
> 
> The wild black bear is believed to have been attracted to the wealthy area by Harry and Meghan's liberal neighbours' chicken coops in Montecito,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Rich people problems. When you build a house in the hills you can't be upset when the animals who originally lived there come back through from time to time.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Not sure about that, but they may check TPF. I clicked on the link today and the title has been changed:
> View attachment 4884572


i THINK WE ARE INFLUENCERS - GO TEAM !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Remember that saying: "Nobody ever went broke by underestimate public taste!"


One of my fav quotes of all time by H L Mencken 






						nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people - Wiktionary
					






					en.wiktionary.org
				




If I may be permitted to be pedantic, the original quote is even better and more applicable to the dynamic duo 

*nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people*


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> One of my fav quotes of all time by H L Mencken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people - Wiktionary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wiktionary.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I may be permitted to be pedantic, the original quote is even better and more applicable to the dynamic duo
> 
> *nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people*


Well we can't use that original quote here since we are not in America. It's been used a lot here and it's all too true here too.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alexis Ohanian, today on TIME100 (bunch of BS’ers),  he needs to clarify what ‘de-radicalize a generation’ means. Many of us lived through the Vietnam War, the Chicago 7, the Watts Riots, Detroit, etc. I don’t care who his wife is, ‘de-radicalize a generation‘ is just wrong. Disturbing that H&M would join up with this language. Yes, words matter.
> 
> _“I was a history major at UVA and I studied post World War II sort of postwar Germany, the de-Nazification process basically that both West and East Germany went through.
> 
> And I never thought it would serve me now fifteen years later, but in a way it is. Because I do think there’s gonna be some work that will need to be done to de-radicalize a generation, especially here in the United States...”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reddit Co-Founder Alexis Ohanian Speaks with Meghan, Duchess of Sussex About Building a Better Tech Industry
> 
> 
> Alexis Ohanian and Meghan Markle discuss the importance of social media and technology in a TIME100 Talks. Read the full transcript
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this divisive language is what we do not need. Taking away freedom of speech is never the answer. If he really studied Nazi sh*t, then he is talking mind-control, propaganda, etc. Nothing good comes from that language. _



I didn't read the whole thing but I know what he's saying. I do not think he's talking about taking away freedom of speech or anything like that... but it's pretty clear in this country we are seeing political discourse grow to the extremes of the 2 poles. It's a problem exacerbated by social media, including, yes, reddit. It's also a big topic of discussion in tech workplaces today. I don't know which generation he's referring to but I see it across the board.

I think we're letting M + H "poison the well" a little too much here... not everything that touches this couple is wrong or ill-intentioned. What Alexis is saying here has been said by pretty much everyone these days, including presidents current and old.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle painted themselves as '**intellectuals**' and chose 'enigmatic' gestures when talking about running for political office, body language expert claims*


I am having trouble typing because I am laughing so hard

This from a man who thought it woukd be funny to wear a Nazi uniform.  His grandfather should have locked him up after that.


----------



## bag-mania

The Archewell web site is live. (Pssst! There isn't much of anything there yet.) May the celebrations commence! They are pretending they did something. Whoopdidoo! 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new Archewell foundation just took a big first step.

Archwell.com went live on Wednesday, featuring a simple homepage on a beige background along with an email sign-up form and contact information. The website also included the definitions of "arche" — a Greek word meaning “source of action" — and "well" — a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep.

Harry and Meghan announced in April, shortly after they officially stepped down as senior royals on March 31, that their new foundation would be called Archewell — a name that shares a connection with their son Archie, who turned 1 on May 6. In a statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex explained how they decided on the name, which predates their son’s name.

"Like you, our focus is on supporting efforts to tackle the global COVID-19 pandemic, but faced with this information coming to light, we felt compelled to share the story of how this came to be," the couple said in the statement.

"Before SussexRoyal came the idea of 'arche' — the Greek word meaning 'source of action,' " they continued. "We connected to this concept for the charitable organization we hoped to build one day, and it became the inspiration for our son’s name. To do something of meaning, to do something that matters. Archewell is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon. We look forward to launching Archewell when the time is right."









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's website for Archewell went live, marking the first step in setting up their new foundation




					people.com


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> The Archewell web site is live. (Pssst! There isn't much of anything there yet.) May the celebrations commence! They are pretending they did something. Whoopdidoo!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new Archewell foundation just took a big first step.
> 
> Archwell.com went live on Wednesday, featuring a simple homepage on a beige background along with an email sign-up form and contact information. The website also included the definitions of "arche" — a Greek word meaning “source of action" — and "well" — a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep.
> 
> Harry and Meghan announced in April, shortly after they officially stepped down as senior royals on March 31, that their new foundation would be called Archewell — a name that shares a connection with their son Archie, who turned 1 on May 6. In a statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex explained how they decided on the name, which predates their son’s name.
> 
> "Like you, our focus is on supporting efforts to tackle the global COVID-19 pandemic, but faced with this information coming to light, we felt compelled to share the story of how this came to be," the couple said in the statement.
> 
> "Before SussexRoyal came the idea of 'arche' — the Greek word meaning 'source of action,' " they continued. "We connected to this concept for the charitable organization we hoped to build one day, and it became the inspiration for our son’s name. To do something of meaning, to do something that matters. Archewell is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon. We look forward to launching Archewell when the time is right."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's website for Archewell went live, marking the first step in setting up their new foundation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



They put out press just for this? There's like 50 words total on this "live website."


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I didn't read the whole thing but I know what he's saying. I do not think he's talking about taking away freedom of speech or anything like that... but it's pretty clear in this country we are seeing political discourse grow to the extremes of the 2 poles. It's a problem exacerbated by social media, including, yes, reddit. It's also a big topic of discussion in tech workplaces today. I don't know which generation he's referring to but I see it across the board.
> 
> I think we're letting M + H "poison the well" a little too much here... not everything that touches this couple is wrong or ill-intentioned. What Alexis is saying here has been said by pretty much everyone these days, including presidents current and old.



Oh, I _know_ what they are saying. Most of us do. I just strongly disagree with it and strongly believe it unwise for them to espouse such ideas in a public forum. Maybe when they lose some more money, they will understand. It is right and proper to question these ‘influential’ people’s motives and statements. They seem to have inflated egos and spout off pompous ideas. IMO.

How do we know that in 10 years, when they are older, wiser and dealing with their older children, how do we know they won’t sing a different tune?  Many people thought Reddit was a ****ty website when it began. No one wanted the hate ideology then, no one wants it now. But no one needs to hear divisive words such as ‘de-radicalize a generation’. Notice they did not say how. Camps? Re-education? Censorship?  That is not our way and will not win any hearts and minds.  Throughout our history, we have dealt with plenty of haters. Too bad they didn’t study that section of history, no?

Their website is blank because their minds are blank. Yet, they lecture the rest of us. Gawd, I detest phoney poseurs.

ETA: _Among companies reporting earnings, Netflix (NFLX) and Snap (SNAP) reported results after the close Tuesday. Netflix dived 7%, while Snap soared 24%. 








						Futures Mixed On Stimulus News
					

Dow Jones futures were lower on coronavirus stimulus news early Wednesday. Netflix plunged 7%, while Snap soared 24% on earnings.




					www.investors.com
				



_


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, I _know_ what they are saying. Most of us do. I just strongly disagree with it and strongly believe it unwise for them to espouse such ideas in a public forum. Maybe when they lose some more money, they will understand. It is right and proper to question these ‘influential’ people’s motives and statements. They seem to have inflated egos and spout off pompous ideas. IMO.
> 
> How do we know that in 10 years, when they are older, wiser and dealing with their older children, how do we know they won’t sing a different tune?  Many people thought Reddit was a ****ty website when it began. No one wanted the hate ideology then, no one wants it now. But no one needs to hear divisive words such as ‘de-radicalize a generation’. Notice they did not say how. Camps? Re-education? Censorship?  That is not our way and will not win any hearts and minds.  Throughout our history, we have dealt with plenty of haters. Too bad they didn’t study that section of history, no?
> 
> Their website is blank because their minds are blank. Yet, they lecture the rest of us. Gawd, I detest phoney poseurs.



I just disagree about the radicalisation. I do think it's a problem, and certainly do not think the solution is any of the things you mentioned. Possible solutions: lessening the incentives for news outlets to be paid for clicks, so they actually are motivated to report on news objectively instead of in provocative and divisive ways designed to get the most emotional reactions and likes; crack down on bots on social media; the list goes on. Surely everyone can get on board with this.

Totally fine to question any and every person, whether they are influential or not. I'm just saying it seems like we're getting to the point where anything is written off negatively simply by being in proximity to M+H. It just doesn't compute for me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, they get the negativity because they are the ones putting it out there and merching off of it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think they kind of backed themselves into a corner with all this talk of the evils of social media? Now they will look hypocritical if they use social media to promote their wares. Maybe they don’t care.


----------



## lalame

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think they kind of backed themselves into a corner with all this talk of the evils of social media? Now they will look hypocritical if they use social media to promote their wares. Maybe they don’t care.



Yeah M + H are fools for making that their cause. Makes about as much sense as the Kardashians trashing reality TV. Edit to add... not to mention the hypocrisy about the press. It's like a circular firing squad between them, the news media, and social media. One person's got to stop first but unfortunately it probably won't be them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just can't with these two. Now a Greek word with a nice meaning was their inspiration to name their son a British middle class name that has NOTHING to do with it, just sounds similar? They sound more stupid by the minute.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I just disagree about the radicalisation. I do think it's a problem, and certainly do not think the solution is any of the things you mentioned. Possible solutions: lessening the incentives for news outlets to be paid for clicks, so they actually are motivated to report on news objectively instead of in provocative and divisive ways designed to get the most emotional reactions and likes; crack down on bots on social media; the list goes on. Surely everyone can get on board with this.
> 
> Totally fine to question any and every person, whether they are influential or not. I'm just saying it seems like we're getting to the point where anything is written off negatively simply by being in proximity to M+H. It just doesn't compute for me.



It frustrates me, they bring negativity to every cause they go near. They hurt the causes they say they want to help. I don’t for a second believe that they aren’t on social media any more... but that doesn’t mean there aren’t issues with social media...

I find myself wanting to argue against things I believe in just because Harry and Meghan have jumped onto a cause I agree with... like it’s an internal moment of, wait, I think the same, that can’t be right? (It’s like when I agree with Piers Morgan about them. What?!)

I think their methods are terrible. I don’t like the world salad... But I just have to remember that it’s someone else’s words/work/credit/spotlight they’ve stolen most of the time and not their own.

Just remember Netflix subscribers, don’t watch their content and if they don’t get views, the agreement won’t last long...


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> Yeah M + H are fools for making that their cause. Makes about as much sense as the Kardashians trashing reality TV. Edit to add... not to mention the hypocrisy about the press. It's like a circular firing squad between them, the news media, and social media. One person's got to stop first but unfortunately it probably won't be them.



You say things better than I can lol...


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think they kind of backed themselves into a corner with all this talk of the evils of social media? Now they will look hypocritical if they use social media to promote their wares. Maybe they don’t care.



They haven't worried about showing blatant hypocrisy so far. They are not about to start now. It's because H&M don't see themselves as being hypocrites. They actually believe they are helping people by telling them what they should be doing, presumably because we are all too dense to decide these things for ourselves and we need their wisdom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I find myself wanting to argue against things I believe in just because Harry and Meghan have jumped onto a cause I agree with... like it’s an internal moment of, wait, I think the same, that can’t be right? *(It’s like when I agree with Piers Morgan about them. What?!)*



It's the old proverb: The enemy of my enemy is my friend.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> They put out press just for this? There's like 50 words total on this "live website."


They are still trying to figure out what the site is going to do.  They are putting ideas on cards and letting the dog pick one.


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> I find myself wanting to argue against things I believe in just because Harry and Meghan have jumped onto a cause I agree with... like it’s an internal moment of, wait, I think the same, that can’t be right? (It’s like when I agree with Piers Morgan about them. What?!)



I totally agree and this is the road I really don't want to go down for myself. You can't let them have that power over you (and I mean "you" in the general sense). They're just strangers you don't even know or like... your ideas and your values are yours, they have nothing to do with them. Honestly it is a little alienating to see anyone putting down normal things that we probably like or do ourselves just because M does it. Even the color green! lol. 

I don't think there's a person on Earth who I dislike so much that everything they say, wear, do, buy, etc. is detestable to me. M + H included.. they're just people who do and say a lot of stupid crap but they're multi-dimensional people at the end of the day.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just can't with these two. Now a Greek word with a nice meaning was their inspiration to name their son a British middle class name that has NOTHING to do with it, just sounds similar? They sound more stupid by the minute.



They kind of boxed themselves in with the name.  Now they realize that they should have named Archie, Archewell and the site Archie.  Kind of reminds me of a woman who confided to me that she got the names backwards for her daughter and the dog.  She named the daughter Molly and the dog Gretchen and several months later realized that she should have done the reverse.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The Archewell web site is live. (Pssst! There isn't much of anything there yet.) May the celebrations commence! They are pretending they did something. Whoopdidoo!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new Archewell foundation just took a big first step.
> 
> Archwell.com went live on Wednesday, featuring a simple homepage on a beige background along with an email sign-up form and contact information. The website also included the definitions of "arche" — a Greek word meaning “source of action" — and "well" — a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep.
> 
> Harry and Meghan announced in April, shortly after they officially stepped down as senior royals on March 31, that their new foundation would be called Archewell — a name that shares a connection with their son Archie, who turned 1 on May 6. In a statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex explained how they decided on the name, which predates their son’s name.
> 
> "Like you, our focus is on supporting efforts to tackle the global COVID-19 pandemic, but faced with this information coming to light, we felt compelled to share the story of how this came to be," the couple said in the statement.
> 
> "Before SussexRoyal came the idea of 'arche' — the Greek word meaning 'source of action,' " they continued. "We connected to this concept for the charitable organization we hoped to build one day, and it became the inspiration for our son’s name. To do something of meaning, to do something that matters. Archewell is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon. We look forward to launching Archewell when the time is right."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's website for Archewell went live, marking the first step in setting up their new foundation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


but what have they done?  preach to everyone?  deliver food from their large SUV while pulling down masks to make sure the recipients know who they are?
have they donated anything substantial money-wise?


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> I totally agree and this is the road I really don't want to go down for myself. You can't let them have that power over you (and I mean "you" in the general sense). They're just strangers you don't even know or like... your ideas and your values are yours, they have nothing to do with them. Honestly it is a little alienating to see anyone putting down normal things that we probably like or do ourselves just because M does it. Even the color green! lol.
> 
> I don't think there's a person on Earth who I dislike so much that everything they say, wear, do, buy, etc. is detestable to me. M + H included.. they're just people who do and say a lot of stupid crap but they're multi-dimensional people at the end of the day.



yeah... I always try to be objective about things with them. It’s why I’ve been willing to give Meghan the benefit of the doubt before. 

At this point, I’ve got too much going on in my life. I just don’t care about them, they just seem diminished and desperate ever since they invited themselves to plant those flowers at that school... I do like talking to y’all though


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but what have they done?  preach to everyone?  deliver food from their large SUV while pulling down masks to make sure the recipients know who they are?
> have they donated anything substantial money-wise?



Oh come now, you cannot expect such shining examples of all that is righteous to do something so crass as giving money! No, nowadays what really matters is FEELINGS and WORDS and especially WORDS ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS. If you say what you feel with enough emotive conviction, nobody (particularly the US news media) will ever notice that you have done absolutely nothing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They will put anything on their website that you will click on because, baby, it’s all about the clicks $$ with them!
So go ahead, regulate all ya want, the rules do not apply to them. Click$$click$$.


@Sol Ryan your posts are brilliant & well written. H&M are green $$ with envy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> They kind of boxed themselves in with the name.  Now they realize that they should have named Archie, Archewell and the site Archie.  Kind of reminds me of a woman who confided to me that she got the names backwards for her daughter and the dog.  She named the daughter Molly and the dog Gretchen and several months later realized that she should have done the reverse.



They heard lil George‘s nickname was Archie, so they stole it. 
Their obsession with W&K is sick, really sick.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> They haven't worried about showing blatant hypocrisy so far. They are not about to start now. It's because H&M don't see themselves as being hypocrites. They actually believe they are helping people by telling them what they should be doing, presumably because we are all too dense to decide these things for ourselves and we need their wisdom.



Do as I say, not as I do.
Time for me to fly around the world in my personal 747, then I‘ll circle my mansion in my super-charged V12 SUV Rolls, then I’ll flush all my toilets before I lay sleep. Yay me. I’m the half-in, half-out royal.


----------



## Chanbal

MM &H's 150 million dollars deal says a lot about Nflix (bad) management. Several comments seem to agree with that.

*Netflix** stock plunges 7% after streaming giant revealed dramatic slowdown in new subscribers over the summer in its biggest earnings disappointment yet*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take a look at how King Willem and Queen Maxima apologized for their gigantic mess-up: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/royalty-fashion-thread.904519/page-1424#post-34127224

Now, instead of playing on his x-box,  if these phoney poseurs could admit their mistakes, followed with serious good deeds - without merching their apology - maybe the world would believe them.  

Olden days? Pop a hood? As if Harry ever touches the car’s engine. As if.








						Prince Harry calls opening the bonnet 'popping the hood'
					

Prince Harry, 36, spoke of 'popping the hood' as he swapped English for Americanisms after seven months living in the US during an appearance alongside Meghan Markle, 39, yesterday




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




'When driving a car and all the warning lights are going off, there is smoke pouring out of the hood. You are not going to keep on driving. 'You pull over. In the olden days, you'd probably pop the hood up, have a look under it and maybe fix it. 'But now, every single one of these new cars has a shield over top so you can't fix it - you've got to call experts in.'


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I am having trouble typing because I am laughing so hard
> 
> This from a man who thought it woukd be funny to wear a Nazi uniform.  His grandfather should have locked him up after that.



Although his great-great-uncle would have given him a medal, and thank goodness we got rid of him (too).


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Rich people problems. When you build a house in the hills you can't be upset when the animals who originally lived there come back through from time to time.


Some hunters subscribe to the theory that human urine is  repellant to bears (other hunters argue it's not), but, on the off chance it is true, Meghan could lessen the # of flushes in their 9 bathrooms and go pee in the woods. Harry would likely fall in love all over again.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle painted themselves as '**intellectuals**' and chose 'enigmatic' gestures when talking about running for political office, body language expert claims*


They can paint themselves however they want.  They're like Monet...pretty from far away, but up close, just a blob of colors (thoughts).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> The Archewell web site is live. (Pssst! There isn't much of anything there yet.) May the celebrations commence! They are pretending they did something. Whoopdidoo!
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new Archewell foundation just took a big first step.
> 
> Archwell.com went live on Wednesday, featuring a simple homepage on a beige background along with an email sign-up form and contact information. The website also included the definitions of "arche" — a Greek word meaning “source of action" — and "well" — a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep.
> 
> Harry and Meghan announced in April, shortly after they officially stepped down as senior royals on March 31, that their new foundation would be called Archewell — a name that shares a connection with their son Archie, who turned 1 on May 6. In a statement, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex explained how they decided on the name, which predates their son’s name.
> 
> "Like you, our focus is on supporting efforts to tackle the global COVID-19 pandemic, but faced with this information coming to light, we felt compelled to share the story of how this came to be," the couple said in the statement.
> 
> "Before SussexRoyal came the idea of 'arche' — the Greek word meaning 'source of action,' " they continued. "We connected to this concept for the charitable organization we hoped to build one day, and it became the inspiration for our son’s name. To do something of meaning, to do something that matters. Archewell is a name that combines an ancient word for strength and action, and another that evokes the deep resources we each must draw upon. We look forward to launching Archewell when the time is right."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Launch Website for Archewell Foundation 6 Months After Announcing Name
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's website for Archewell went live, marking the first step in setting up their new foundation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I read the name and still think "cookies"!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> MM &H's 150 million dollars deal says a lot about Nflix (bad) management. Several comments seem to agree with that.
> 
> *Netflix** stock plunges 7% after streaming giant revealed dramatic slowdown in new subscribers over the summer in its biggest earnings disappointment yet*
> View attachment 4885028
> View attachment 4885046
> View attachment 4885047


I think between these two idiots and Cuties (or whatever that movie was called), Netflix isn't doing themselves any favors.


----------



## redney

No one has noticed yet their "foundation" website uses .com (commercial) vs. .org (non-commercial)? Some enterprising soul has snapped up the www.archewellfoundation.org domain name. Rookie mistake, MM, your people forgot to buy the other domains and likely the slight misspellings too.

www.archewellfoundation.org is still blank but its corresponding Facebook page is up with this image below.  "slush fund"
https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Entertainment-Website/Archewell-Foundation-100870858272623/


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Years ago, I went to a chamber music concert at a private home in West LA.  I could tell that the house had been greatly remodeled.  The grounds were magnificent with terraces etc.  When the concert started, I looked around the living room and realized that the pictures on the wall were cheap prints and the furniture was not at all expensive.  Later I had to go into the kitchen for some reason and saw a bank of two double ovens, huge fridge, professional gas cook tops, two dishwashers and then the light bulb went off.  I knew the home belonged to an attorney and his wife  who did actually live there.  I realized that they remodeled the house specifically so they could rent it out for events.  Later, one of the other attendees said they had attended a wedding there.  This man and his wife  had a plan and I am sure they had worked out all the tax benefits etc.  I recall telling my husband that I wouldn't like to live like that as it was like living in a hotel done up for other people.
> 
> I don't see Harry figuring out something like this, but some business manager types might have suggested it.  Since as @marietouchet pointed out, the titled in the UK are used to the concept of having strangers traipsing around their homes when they are not there.  However, the Harkles would have to decorate as the couple  did in West LA.  Tasteful but inexpensive furniture as it is a given that the home will get abused by the renters.  They just might keep whatever came with the house in place and only decorate a few rooms that they are actually using.  That's if they actually bought the house and actually live there.  I have my doubts about everything they do and say.


I went to a vow renewal ceremony in a house in the hills above Beverly Hills; the views were quite spectacular!  We were told by the couple renewing their vows, that the house was occupied by the couple who owned it (_they were on the top / 4th floor_).  The yard was good-sized, such that in addition to a good-sized pool, there was plenty of room for a number of buffet tables, tables for eating/mingling with other guests, a series of couches and lounge chairs, a dance floor, and lastly, a stage such that a band or actors could put on a show.  Since the couple was originally from New Orleans, they (_somehow_) found a Zydeco band who were quite good, but LOUD as heck!  My brother-in-law (father to the son renewing his vows) told me how much $$$$$ they paid .. HOLY MOLEY!!!  In the 'guest' part of the house, as you said @gracekelly, you could clearly see that renovations had been done such that the house could support good-sized parties/events; however, there was nothing of great value.  That was not the case with the couple who owned the house, as they came home after 10pm, turned on the lights for their area, and WOW .. spectacular furniture and artwork!   Apparently, this is not that uncommon as the 'bride' told me that they had looked at quite a few houses before deciding on the one in which the event took place.


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> No one has noticed yet their "foundation" website uses .com (commercial) vs. .org (non-commercial)? Some enterprising soul has snapped up the www.archewellfoundation.org domain name. Rookie mistake, MM, your people forgot to buy the other domains and likely the slight misspellings too.
> 
> www.archewellfoundation.org is still blank but its corresponding Facebook page is up with this image below.  "slush fund"
> https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Entertainment-Website/Archewell-Foundation-100870858272623/
> View attachment 4885131


I took a screenshot before they change the profile picture.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  Love ❤️ Love your initiative!  
It’s only Wednesday.  What‘s next?


----------



## bag-mania

*Why Prince Harry’s Relationship with Prince Philip Still Hasn’t Recovered: “This Has Been a Great Shock”*

Ingrid Seward, author of Prince Philip Revealed, says that the Queen’s husband has been unable to comprehend why Harry, sixth in line to the throne, wanted to leave the royal family. Philip has now “walked away” from the situation after feeling that his advice fell on “deaf ears.”

While he was initially fond of Meghan and made a huge effort to be at the couple’s Windsor wedding despite having undergone a hip operation weeks before, the Duke “harbored doubts” about Harry’s wife. Seward’s book, the first major biography of Philip in over 30 years, reveals that he now compares Meghan to Wallis Simpson, who triggered the abdication crisis when she married the then-King Edward VIII in 1937. “For Philip, whose entire existence has been based on a devotion to doing his duty, it appeared that his grandson had abdicated his for the sake of his marriage to an American divorcee in much the same way as Edward VIII gave up his crown to marry Wallis Simpson in 1936,” Seward writes.

Seward has written more than twelve books on the royal family, and spoke to friends, aides and sources close to the Duke for Prince Philip Revealed. She writes that Philip was deeply upset by Harry and Meghan’s decision to quit the Firm, and could neither understand nor relate to Harry’s decision to leave the royal family. He was also deeply dismayed by how the couple treated the Queen, making the bombshell announcement about their exit on January 8 before consulting Her Majesty, who was in residence at Sandringham.

According to Seward’s book, “The Queen was informed ten minutes before the announcement went live on the website Sussex Royal. She was not amused. As Philip was in residence, he was also aware of the announcement and its implications.”

Speaking to Vanity Fair in an exclusive interview to mark the book’s release this week, Seward said:

“Philip simply cannot understand how Harry has behaved the way he has done. His grandson’s behavior is completely alien to him so not unnaturally the relationship has suffered. Don’t forget this is a man about to turn 100 who has devoted 68 years of his adult life to supporting the monarchy, and this has been a great shock. The Queen would not want him to worry at his age, but Philip’s absence from the Sandringham Summit spoke volumes. The fact that he was driven away from the big house at Sandringham before everyone even arrived signaled he didn’t want to be part of it.”

While the Queen is head of state, Philip has always been the head of the family, overseeing the running of the royal country estates and family matters. As Seward points out in her book, the Queen allowed Philip, who gave up his military career when they married, to rule the roost at home and he has always been the key decision maker when it comes to family issues. But while Philip tried to guide Harry and his new bride, he felt that his advice was ignored.

“Philip’s way is that he says his bit, and then steps back from the situation because he doesn’t like to interfere,” said Seward. “It was up to Harry and Meghan to listen but they didn’t and Philip has always been very protective of the Queen so if anyone upsets her, they upset him too. His mantra is the monarchy comes first, second, and third. He cuttingly reminded the late Diana, Princess of Wales that being a member of the royal family was not a popularity contest but involved everyone working together for the good of the institution of the monarchy.”

“Philip welcomed Meghan at the beginning, he knows what it’s like to be an outsider, and so he’s always very supportive of people marrying into the family,” Seward added. “He quite liked Meghan at first, but their actions have left a bad taste and as a consequence the relationship with Harry has suffered.”

According to Seward, it is not just Harry’s relationship with his grandfather that has changed since he met Meghan, but also his friendship with his oldest friends known as the “Glosse Posse,” based in Gloucestershire, close to Highgrove where Harry spent much of his childhood.

In Prince Philip Revealed Seward recounts how Harry, who was dating Meghan at the time, was the guest of honor at a shooting weekend in 2018, but pulled out at the last minute because Meghan didn’t want him to slaughter game birds. “At exactly 9 a.m. all the guns were waiting at the door to move off, but no sign of Harry,” Seward writes. “They didn’t quite know what to do so they waited and waited until Harry eventually appeared at the door in his dressing gown looking very sheepish. His embarrassed explanation was that Meghan did not want him to go out with the guns, which was extremely awkward as he was guest of honor.”

The story was relayed to Seward by a source close to the prince. “This is exactly the sort of behavior that led to Harry becoming more estranged from his oldest friends,” Seward said in the interview. “This wasn’t the Harry they knew; he would never have let them down. Harry knows how expensive it is and how much time goes into organizing a shoot. It was very rude and the general feeling was one of disbelief, because it was so out of character.”









						Why Prince Harry’s Relationship with Prince Philip Still Hasn’t Recovered: “This Has Been a Great Shock”
					

In her new biography Prince Philip Revealed, Ingrid Seward writes that the Queen’s husband has compared Meghan Markle to Wallis Simpson, even though he welcomed her to the family at first.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the guest of honor cancels while still in his bathrobe well past the time of departure!?!
Maybe I have been watching too much of HBO’s Succession, I am getting a very strong drug vibe from this story. Or a really really spoiled brat vibe. Maybe both.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, the guest of honor cancels while still in his bathrobe well past the time of departure!?!
> Maybe I have been watching too much of HBO’s Succession, I am getting a very strong drug vibe from this story. Or a really really spoiled brat vibe. Maybe both.



I didn’t think about drugs. I assumed she was keeping him under her thumb with her mad sex skills.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Why Prince Harry’s Relationship with Prince Philip Still Hasn’t Recovered: “This Has Been a Great Shock”*
> 
> Ingrid Seward, author of Prince Philip Revealed, says that the Queen’s husband has been unable to comprehend why Harry, sixth in line to the throne, wanted to leave the royal family. Philip has now “walked away” from the situation after feeling that his advice fell on “deaf ears.”
> 
> While he was initially fond of Meghan and made a huge effort to be at the couple’s Windsor wedding despite having undergone a hip operation weeks before, the Duke “harbored doubts” about Harry’s wife. Seward’s book, the first major biography of Philip in over 30 years, reveals that he now compares Meghan to Wallis Simpson, who triggered the abdication crisis when she married the then-King Edward VIII in 1937. “For Philip, whose entire existence has been based on a devotion to doing his duty, it appeared that his grandson had abdicated his for the sake of his marriage to an American divorcee in much the same way as Edward VIII gave up his crown to marry Wallis Simpson in 1936,” Seward writes.
> 
> Seward has written more than twelve books on the royal family, and spoke to friends, aides and sources close to the Duke for Prince Philip Revealed. She writes that Philip was deeply upset by Harry and Meghan’s decision to quit the Firm, and could neither understand nor relate to Harry’s decision to leave the royal family. He was also deeply dismayed by how the couple treated the Queen, making the bombshell announcement about their exit on January 8 before consulting Her Majesty, who was in residence at Sandringham.
> 
> According to Seward’s book, “The Queen was informed ten minutes before the announcement went live on the website Sussex Royal. She was not amused. As Philip was in residence, he was also aware of the announcement and its implications.”
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair in an exclusive interview to mark the book’s release this week, Seward said:
> 
> “Philip simply cannot understand how Harry has behaved the way he has done. His grandson’s behavior is completely alien to him so not unnaturally the relationship has suffered. Don’t forget this is a man about to turn 100 who has devoted 68 years of his adult life to supporting the monarchy, and this has been a great shock. The Queen would not want him to worry at his age, but Philip’s absence from the Sandringham Summit spoke volumes. The fact that he was driven away from the big house at Sandringham before everyone even arrived signaled he didn’t want to be part of it.”
> 
> While the Queen is head of state, Philip has always been the head of the family, overseeing the running of the royal country estates and family matters. As Seward points out in her book, the Queen allowed Philip, who gave up his military career when they married, to rule the roost at home and he has always been the key decision maker when it comes to family issues. But while Philip tried to guide Harry and his new bride, he felt that his advice was ignored.
> 
> “Philip’s way is that he says his bit, and then steps back from the situation because he doesn’t like to interfere,” said Seward. “It was up to Harry and Meghan to listen but they didn’t and Philip has always been very protective of the Queen so if anyone upsets her, they upset him too. His mantra is the monarchy comes first, second, and third. He cuttingly reminded the late Diana, Princess of Wales that being a member of the royal family was not a popularity contest but involved everyone working together for the good of the institution of the monarchy.”
> 
> “Philip welcomed Meghan at the beginning, he knows what it’s like to be an outsider, and so he’s always very supportive of people marrying into the family,” Seward added. “He quite liked Meghan at first, but their actions have left a bad taste and as a consequence the relationship with Harry has suffered.”
> 
> According to Seward, it is not just Harry’s relationship with his grandfather that has changed since he met Meghan, but also his friendship with his oldest friends known as the “Glosse Posse,” based in Gloucestershire, close to Highgrove where Harry spent much of his childhood.
> 
> In Prince Philip Revealed Seward recounts how Harry, who was dating Meghan at the time, was the guest of honor at a shooting weekend in 2018, but pulled out at the last minute because Meghan didn’t want him to slaughter game birds. “At exactly 9 a.m. all the guns were waiting at the door to move off, but no sign of Harry,” Seward writes. “They didn’t quite know what to do so they waited and waited until Harry eventually appeared at the door in his dressing gown looking very sheepish. His embarrassed explanation was that Meghan did not want him to go out with the guns, which was extremely awkward as he was guest of honor.”
> 
> The story was relayed to Seward by a source close to the prince. “This is exactly the sort of behavior that led to Harry becoming more estranged from his oldest friends,” Seward said in the interview. “This wasn’t the Harry they knew; he would never have let them down. Harry knows how expensive it is and how much time goes into organizing a shoot. It was very rude and the general feeling was one of disbelief, because it was so out of character.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry’s Relationship with Prince Philip Still Hasn’t Recovered: “This Has Been a Great Shock”
> 
> 
> In her new biography Prince Philip Revealed, Ingrid Seward writes that the Queen’s husband has compared Meghan Markle to Wallis Simpson, even though he welcomed her to the family at first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



QE and Philip are both in their 90s. They gave MM money and status, and she paid them back with a disgusting lack of respect and consideration.   

“Philip welcomed Meghan ... and made a huge effort to be at the couple’s Windsor wedding despite having undergone a hip operation weeks before"

"the bombshell announcement about their exit on January 8 before consulting Her Majesty...The Queen was informed ten minutes before the announcement went live on the website Sussex Royal"


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M don’t really give off a sexy vibe, IMO.  They definitely give off an out-of-it, tryin-too-hard, zombie vibe. But I could be wrong, I didn’t get the enigmatic, intellectual vibe either. 

Fun, smart, “it” couples = JFKjr and Carolyn Bessette; Cary Grant and Grace Kelly; Bogart and Bacall; Idris Elba and anyone, etc.


----------



## csshopper

redney said:


> No one has noticed yet their "foundation" website uses .com (commercial) vs. .org (non-commercial)? Some enterprising soul has snapped up the www.archewellfoundation.org domain name. Rookie mistake, MM, your people forgot to buy the other domains and likely the slight misspellings too.
> 
> www.archewellfoundation.org is still blank but its corresponding Facebook page is up with this image below.  "slush fund"
> https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Entertainment-Website/Archewell-Foundation-100870858272623/
> View attachment 4885131


They are so used to getting hand-outs they probably were waiting for someone else to spend any money necessary to do it right, and waited too long.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You know, I am not a fan of hunting because the concept of killing anything for fun is alien and quite psycho to me. BUT there's a difference between "My fiancée is an animal lover and I don't want to upset her" and "Meghan doesn't want me to go". One is being considerate and other one is having no balls, but what do I know. Also, the way he chose to "cancel"? WTFFF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xpost from the other thread: 

Our daily newspaper had an article today how William walks in Charles' footsteps regarding his commitment for the environment. It was really great to read and I didn't know he has a documentary on his cause out where he allowed the film crew to accompagny him for two years. How is it that one walks the walk, then presents the results, and one talks the talks without achieving anything?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They will put anything on their website that you will click on because, baby, it’s all about the clicks $$ with them!
> So go ahead, regulate all ya want, the rules do not apply to them. Click$$click$$.
> 
> 
> @Sol Ryan your posts are brilliant & well written. H&M are green $$ with envy.


so basically, they are just like the Kardashians but want to be seen as just like the former president & FLOTUS....without really contributing anything to society


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> I read the name and still think "cookies"!


Makes me want a Windmill cookie!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Why Prince Harry’s Relationship with Prince Philip Still Hasn’t Recovered: “This Has Been a Great Shock”*
> 
> Ingrid Seward, author of Prince Philip Revealed, says that the Queen’s husband has been unable to comprehend why Harry, sixth in line to the throne, wanted to leave the royal family. Philip has now “walked away” from the situation after feeling that his advice fell on “deaf ears.”
> 
> While he was initially fond of Meghan and made a huge effort to be at the couple’s Windsor wedding despite having undergone a hip operation weeks before, the Duke “harbored doubts” about Harry’s wife. Seward’s book, the first major biography of Philip in over 30 years, reveals that he now compares Meghan to Wallis Simpson, who triggered the abdication crisis when she married the then-King Edward VIII in 1937. “For Philip, whose entire existence has been based on a devotion to doing his duty, it appeared that his grandson had abdicated his for the sake of his marriage to an American divorcee in much the same way as Edward VIII gave up his crown to marry Wallis Simpson in 1936,” Seward writes.
> 
> Seward has written more than twelve books on the royal family, and spoke to friends, aides and sources close to the Duke for Prince Philip Revealed. She writes that Philip was deeply upset by Harry and Meghan’s decision to quit the Firm, and could neither understand nor relate to Harry’s decision to leave the royal family. He was also deeply dismayed by how the couple treated the Queen, making the bombshell announcement about their exit on January 8 before consulting Her Majesty, who was in residence at Sandringham.
> 
> According to Seward’s book, “The Queen was informed ten minutes before the announcement went live on the website Sussex Royal. She was not amused. As Philip was in residence, he was also aware of the announcement and its implications.”
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair in an exclusive interview to mark the book’s release this week, Seward said:
> 
> “Philip simply cannot understand how Harry has behaved the way he has done. His grandson’s behavior is completely alien to him so not unnaturally the relationship has suffered. Don’t forget this is a man about to turn 100 who has devoted 68 years of his adult life to supporting the monarchy, and this has been a great shock. The Queen would not want him to worry at his age, but Philip’s absence from the Sandringham Summit spoke volumes. The fact that he was driven away from the big house at Sandringham before everyone even arrived signaled he didn’t want to be part of it.”
> 
> While the Queen is head of state, Philip has always been the head of the family, overseeing the running of the royal country estates and family matters. As Seward points out in her book, the Queen allowed Philip, who gave up his military career when they married, to rule the roost at home and he has always been the key decision maker when it comes to family issues. But while Philip tried to guide Harry and his new bride, he felt that his advice was ignored.
> 
> “Philip’s way is that he says his bit, and then steps back from the situation because he doesn’t like to interfere,” said Seward. “It was up to Harry and Meghan to listen but they didn’t and Philip has always been very protective of the Queen so if anyone upsets her, they upset him too. His mantra is the monarchy comes first, second, and third. He cuttingly reminded the late Diana, Princess of Wales that being a member of the royal family was not a popularity contest but involved everyone working together for the good of the institution of the monarchy.”
> 
> “Philip welcomed Meghan at the beginning, he knows what it’s like to be an outsider, and so he’s always very supportive of people marrying into the family,” Seward added. “He quite liked Meghan at first, but their actions have left a bad taste and as a consequence the relationship with Harry has suffered.”
> 
> According to Seward, it is not just Harry’s relationship with his grandfather that has changed since he met Meghan, but also his friendship with his oldest friends known as the “Glosse Posse,” based in Gloucestershire, close to Highgrove where Harry spent much of his childhood.
> 
> In Prince Philip Revealed Seward recounts how Harry, who was dating Meghan at the time, was the guest of honor at a shooting weekend in 2018, but pulled out at the last minute because Meghan didn’t want him to slaughter game birds. “At exactly 9 a.m. all the guns were waiting at the door to move off, but no sign of Harry,” Seward writes. “They didn’t quite know what to do so they waited and waited until Harry eventually appeared at the door in his dressing gown looking very sheepish. His embarrassed explanation was that Meghan did not want him to go out with the guns, which was extremely awkward as he was guest of honor.”
> 
> The story was relayed to Seward by a source close to the prince. “This is exactly the sort of behavior that led to Harry becoming more estranged from his oldest friends,” Seward said in the interview. “This wasn’t the Harry they knew; he would never have let them down. Harry knows how expensive it is and how much time goes into organizing a shoot. It was very rude and the general feeling was one of disbelief, because it was so out of character.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry’s Relationship with Prince Philip Still Hasn’t Recovered: “This Has Been a Great Shock”
> 
> 
> In her new biography Prince Philip Revealed, Ingrid Seward writes that the Queen’s husband has compared Meghan Markle to Wallis Simpson, even though he welcomed her to the family at first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


LOL
really?  can this be true?  he went to the door in his dressing gown?
I hate the idea of hunting - killing for sport.  An activity that only humans do.  But the picture of him being whipped by his wife (or then fiance?) is pathetic


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, I am not a fan of hunting because the concept of killing anything for fun is alien and quite psycho to me. BUT there's a difference between "My fiancée is an animal lover and I don't want to upset her" and "Meghan doesn't want me to go". One is being considerate and other one is having no balls, but what do I know. Also, the way he chose to "cancel"? WTFFF.


I'm also not a fan of hunting, but he could have informed his friends ahead of time or quit the sport at another day. What they did was impolite and inconsiderate. 



sdkitty said:


> so basically, they are just like the Kardashians but want to be seen as just like the former president & FLOTUS....without really contributing anything to society



Never thought I would say this, but the Kardashians sound a lot more genuine.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a look at how King Willem and Queen Maxima apologized for their gigantic mess-up: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/royalty-fashion-thread.904519/page-1424#post-34127224
> 
> Now, instead of playing on his x-box,  if these phoney poseurs could admit their mistakes, followed with serious good deeds - without merching their apology - maybe the world would believe them.
> 
> Olden days? Pop a hood? As if Harry ever touches the car’s engine. As if.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry calls opening the bonnet 'popping the hood'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, spoke of 'popping the hood' as he swapped English for Americanisms after seven months living in the US during an appearance alongside Meghan Markle, 39, yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'When driving a car and all the warning lights are going off, there is smoke pouring out of the hood. You are not going to keep on driving. 'You pull over. In the olden days, you'd probably pop the hood up, have a look under it and maybe fix it. 'But now, every single one of these new cars has a shield over top so you can't fix it - you've got to call experts in.'


The Dutch RF had two COVID related snafus in 3 months - they went to Greece twice this year, and were snapped each time with non-socially distanced photos
Good that they owned up to it
Bad that they did not learn from the Aug 2020 snafu and repeated it in Oct
Bad that they thought they could get away with it via non-commercial flight - they flew a government plane hmmmmm ....

So, a good example of how the upper classes think they can get away with it and perhaps not the best role models for JCMH

To put things in perspective ... Maxima has been out and about without a mask for months , it is socially acceptable in the Netherlands ... so I think the real issue above was the trips to Greece - without no obvious quarantine


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> really?  can this be true?  he went to the door in his dressing gown?
> I hate the idea of hunting - killing for sport.  An activity that only humans do.  But the picture of him being whipped by his wife (or then fiance?) is pathetic



They were dating, perhaps this was only a matter of weeks before the wedding. I guess he preferred to spend the day in bed with Meghan rather than join his friends in the field.  That he blew off his friends so easily says a lot, either he was so overprivileged he was used to inconveniencing others or Meghan already had him firmly on her leash.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They were dating, perhaps this was only a matter of weeks before the wedding. I guess he preferred to spend the day in bed with Meghan rather than join his friends in the field.  That he blew off his friends so easily says a lot, either he was so overprivileged he was used to inconveniencing others or Meghan already had him firmly on her leash.


he was so smitten with her or so much under her control he was willing to alienate his close friends?  again, hunting is one area where I agree with her but the picture of him doing this makes him look weak and ridiculous to me


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I'm also not a fan of hunting, but he could have informed his friends ahead of time or quit the sport at another day. What they did was impolite and inconsiderate.
> 
> 
> 
> Never thought I would say this, but the Kardashians sound a lot more genuine.



that’s the weird thing, I was always so anti Kardashian, but now I can admit that they hustle and own that they want the spotlight.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> They were dating, perhaps this was only a matter of weeks before the wedding. I guess he preferred to spend the day in bed with Meghan rather than join his friends in the field.  That he blew off his friends so easily says a lot, either he was so overprivileged he was used to inconveniencing others or Meghan already had him firmly on her leash.


On the hunting thing ... I am not defending the sport, but trying to put it in perspective, it is a BIG TRADITION for the BRF

The BRF always shoots on Boxing day - after Xmas. Grouse shoot, I think. The tradition goes back centuries...
Typically, in the UK, birds are brought in for a shoot, you dont shoot the native birds
Philip organizes the hunt & pairs up shooters, it is HIS thing, he (not the Queen) is in charge - It is a HUGE family thing for Xmas & Philip
The whole family shoots birds - the most sought-after-invitation in the country is to shoot with Charles at Birkhall, Anne was recently spotted at a big grouse hunt.  They all do it VERY QUIETLY, rarely in the press.

Not attending the shoot is one  thing, publicly disparaging it is another. Hunting is a touchy subject in the UK, there are vocal people who oppose it, there are vocal supporters. People are jailed about this.

The whole thing is like having a mother-in-law who guzzles Xmas martinis, in front of a tee total grown child - difficult topic for any family.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> he was so smitten with her or so much under her control he was willing to alienate his close friends?  again, hunting is one area where I agree with her but the picture of him doing this makes him look weak and ridiculous to me



I dislike hunting too but I know that for many hunters it is part of their upbringing. That can be true for poor families as well as wealthy. It's fine if Harry decided on his own that he didn't enjoy it anymore. But if he blew off a commitment he previously wanted to do because Meghan disapproved, we know there was something unhealthy going on before the marriage.

I know of a couple like them, the husband was my husband's close friend from high school. When they married his wife quickly came up with reasons why her husband couldn't spend time with his old friends anymore. She arranged things so that only "wife-approved" friends, mostly from their church, were allowed to spend time with them. Before cell phones became the norm, my husband couldn't even be sure she would give his friend the message that he had called the house. Old friends stopped trying after awhile. They are still married after nearly 30 years but there is no doubt about who is in charge.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, I am not a fan of hunting because the concept of killing anything for fun is alien and quite psycho to me. BUT there's a difference between "My fiancée is an animal lover and I don't want to upset her" and "Meghan doesn't want me to go". One is being considerate and other one is having no balls, but what do I know. Also, the way he chose to "cancel"? WTFFF.


ITA.  I would have a hard time being with someone who hunted, so I actually understand MM there (shocking, I know!), but JCMH doing that to his friends is an A hole thing to do.  There are more diplomatic ways to do it, and as the ultimate diplomat, being a royal, he should've known better.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I would have a hard time being with someone who hunted, so I actually understand MM there (shocking, I know!), but JCMH doing that to his friends is an A hole thing to do.  There are more diplomatic ways to do it, and as the ultimate diplomat, being a royal, he should've known better.


and the picture of him in his night clothes is just funny


----------



## KellyObsessed

I personally could never kill anything, but I do know that bird hunters eat the game birds they shoot.  It's not just simply for the sport of killing   I guess in the big picture, whether they roast a store-bought chicken, or a game hunted bird; both have involved the loss of life.      I think Harry should have gone along, and if he had developed an aversion to shooting birds, he could easily take a bad shot.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a look at how King Willem and Queen Maxima apologized for their gigantic mess-up: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/royalty-fashion-thread.904519/page-1424#post-34127224
> 
> Now, instead of playing on his x-box,  if these phoney poseurs could admit their mistakes, followed with serious good deeds - without merching their apology - maybe the world would believe them.
> 
> Olden days? Pop a hood? As if Harry ever touches the car’s engine. As if.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry calls opening the bonnet 'popping the hood'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, spoke of 'popping the hood' as he swapped English for Americanisms after seven months living in the US during an appearance alongside Meghan Markle, 39, yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'When driving a car and all the warning lights are going off, there is smoke pouring out of the hood. You are not going to keep on driving. 'You pull over. In the olden days, you'd probably pop the hood up, have a look under it and maybe fix it. 'But now, every single one of these new cars has a shield over top so you can't fix it - you've got to call experts in.'


LOL, not sure all "new" cars have a shield over the top. As if Harry would know the coolant from the oil dipstick anyhow


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> On the hunting thing ... I am not defending the sport, but trying to put it in perspective, it is a BIG TRADITION for the BRF
> 
> The BRF always shoots on Boxing day - after Xmas. Grouse shoot, I think. The tradition goes back centuries...
> Typically, in the UK, birds are brought in for a shoot, you dont shoot the native birds
> Philip organizes the hunt & pairs up shooters, it is HIS thing, he (not the Queen) is in charge - It is a HUGE family thing for Xmas & Philip
> The whole family shoots birds - the most sought-after-invitation in the country is to shoot with Charles at Birkhall, Anne was recently spotted at a big grouse hunt.  They all do it VERY QUIETLY, rarely in the press.
> 
> Not attending the shoot is one  thing, publicly disparaging it is another. Hunting is a touchy subject in the UK, there are vocal people who oppose it, there are vocal supporters. People are jailed about this.
> 
> The whole thing is like having a mother-in-law who guzzles Xmas martinis, in front of a tee total grown child - difficult topic for any family.



I live on a 48,000 acre Grouse Moor, and one that PC used to shoot on, so you're spot on. It's traditional. However, the birds do live there all year. Not everyone goes on every shoot and many follow the shoot without holding a gun. What one doesn't do is keep everyone waiting by the door as daylight fades and clouds accumulate overhead. Just send 'someone' with a message first thing that you're not feeling 'tickertyboo', get over yourself and move on.

Personaly, whoever said drugs was probably right. Those that think MM has special powers, not really, H is easily influenced one way and then another. 

Kinda funny (peculiar, not HA ha) considering he has no compass at all that he lectures the world on their morrals. Whenever there is a choice, he always gets it wrong. Well, I guess it is a bit of a joke too, but not as much as he is.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> LOL, not sure all "new" cars have a shield over the top. As if Harry would know the coolant from the oil dipstick anyhow



Harry is a dipstick.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> LOL, not sure all "new" cars have a shield over the top. As if Harry would know the coolant from the oil dipstick anyhow



I know what 'popping the hood means (because I've watched American movies/films). However, I have absolutely no idea what he's talking about otherwise. US or UK, he could just speak in English.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I know what 'popping the hood means (because I've watched American movies/films). However, I have absolutely no idea what he's talking about otherwise. US or UK, he could just speak in English.



I think he did the right thing there since he was speaking to a largely American audience who would have likely been confused if he had said opening the bonnet. But all that shows is that he doesn't write his own scripts/speeches and I hope nobody is naive enough to believe that "interviews" like they did for TIME100 are unscripted. Wouldn't be surprised to find out it was rehearsed a few times.


----------



## marietouchet

KellyObsessed said:


> I personally could never kill anything, but I do know that bird hunters eat the game birds they shoot.  It's not just simply for the sport of killing   I guess in the big picture, whether they roast a store-bought chicken, or a game hunted bird; both have involved the loss of life.      I think Harry should have gone along, and if he had developed an aversion to shooting birds, he could easily take a bad shot.


Maggie Smith in Gosford Park had a different technique for avoiding the shoot, there is often a table set up for nibbles and drinks,  a lot of the ladies never leave the table, and I would not trust MS with a shotgun after a few sherries .... LOL


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> and the picture of him in his night clothes is just funny


I'm picturing Buzz & Woody (Toy Story) pajamas.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I'm picturing Buzz & Woody (Toy Story) pajamas.


I was pictureing a white knee length gown but looked it up.  apparently it was more like what yanks call a robe


----------



## Chanbal

KellyObsessed said:


> I personally could never kill anything, *but I do know that bird hunters eat the game birds they shoot.*  It's not just simply for the sport of killing   I guess in the big picture, whether they roast a store-bought chicken, or a game hunted bird; both have involved the loss of life.      I think Harry should have gone along, and if he had developed an aversion to shooting birds, he could easily take a bad shot.


I don't like hunting and it is absolutely correct that most hunters eat the animals they hunt. They were seen at a steakhouse not long ago, and they acknowledge to eat chickens. So they are not that strict about killing animals. He could have gone along with the event, avoid shooting, and refuse to participate in future hunting events. This was just another way that MM found to call attention to herself. My 2 cents.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't like hunting and it is absolutely correct that most hunters eat the animals they hunt. They were seen at a steakhouse not long ago, and they acknowledge to eat chickens. So they are not that strict about killing animals. He could have gone along with the event, avoid shooting, and refuse to participate in future hunting events. This was just another way that MM found to call attention to herself. My 2 cents.


or she wanted to dominate him and succeeded in doing so.....again, I agree with her on hunting but this was a last minute cancellation - could have been done better


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I think he did the right thing there since he was speaking to a largely American audience who would have likely been confused if he had said opening the bonnet. But all that shows is that he doesn't write his own scripts/speeches and I hope nobody is naive enough to believe that "interviews" like they did for TIME100 are unscripted. Wouldn't be surprised to find out it was rehearsed a few times.



Yeh, but what was he going on about?


----------



## sdkitty

KellyObsessed said:


> I personally could never kill anything, but I do know that bird hunters eat the game birds they shoot.  It's not just simply for the sport of killing   I guess in the big picture, whether they roast a store-bought chicken, or a game hunted bird; both have involved the loss of life.      I think Harry should have gone along, and if he had developed an aversion to shooting birds, he could easily take a bad shot.


well, they may eat the birds but I don't think they go out there for that reason....it's sport....and I just don't get it.  I know - particularly in certain parts of the country - it's very popular and they even think they're doing a good thing by controlling the deer population. but I just cant see the fun in killing something


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the shoot: He cancels on the day of the event. He cancels after the official start time. Unreal.

Pop the hood - almost noone here actually says that. By ‘shield’, he apparently meant the hood of the car.
Whoever coached him really did him a disservice.









						Prince Harry calls opening the bonnet 'popping the hood'
					

Prince Harry, 36, spoke of 'popping the hood' as he swapped English for Americanisms after seven months living in the US during an appearance alongside Meghan Markle, 39, yesterday




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



The Duke slipped in an 'Americanism' as he used a metaphor while speaking with social media experts including Meghan's best friend Serena William's husband Alexis Ohanian, saying: 'When driving a car and all the warning lights are going off, there is smoke pouring out of the hood. You are not going to keep on driving.

'You pull over. In the olden days, you'd probably pop the hood up, have a look under it and maybe fix it.'[/QUOTE]


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry is a dipstick.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the shoot: He cancels on the day of the event. He cancels after the official start time. Unreal.
> 
> Pop the hood - almost noone here actually says that. By ‘shield’, he apparently meant the hood of the car.
> Whoever coached him really did him a disservice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry calls opening the bonnet 'popping the hood'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, spoke of 'popping the hood' as he swapped English for Americanisms after seven months living in the US during an appearance alongside Meghan Markle, 39, yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke slipped in an 'Americanism' as he used a metaphor while speaking with social media experts including Meghan's best friend Serena William's husband Alexis Ohanian, saying: 'When driving a car and all the warning lights are going off, there is smoke pouring out of the hood. You are not going to keep on driving.
> 
> 'You pull over. In the olden days, you'd probably pop the hood up, have a look under it and maybe fix it.'


[/QUOTE]

I think he really must have been referring to the fact that so many functions in vehicles these days are computerized so the average person is not qualified to repair it. What he meant by shield is anyone's guess, that isn't a car term in the US or the UK as far as I know.

I say pop the hood or pop the trunk (what Britains call the boot).

ETA: We call the piece of glass you look through when you are driving a windshield, but it doesn't sound like that is what Harry meant.


----------



## CarryOn2020

When opening the hood of the car, it can make a “popping“ sound.
Somewhere I read that he used ‘shield’ to mean hood. Supposedly, he wanted to show off his American transformation. Sadly, it makes him sound like an oaf.  So clumsy, literally and metaphorically.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> When opening the hood of the car, it can make a “popping“ sound.
> Somewhere I read that he used ‘shield’ to mean hood. Supposedly, he wanted to show off his American transformation. Sadly, it makes him sound like an oaf.  So clumsy, literally and metaphorically.



He was trying to fit in. There is so much they do that is irritating, to me his weird comment is merely a 1 on a 10 point scale of annoying.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He was trying to fit in. There is so much they do that is irritating, to me his weird comment is merely a 1 on a 10 point scale of annoying.



Trying too hard to be something he is not = a continual issue for him.  One more reason why he is not likeable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It is a bit tragic really. MM has always been an overambitious grifter who would walk over dead bodies to achieve what she wanted, but Harry, 6th in line to the British throne, on his best way to become nothing more than a running gag. It is painful to watch.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is a bit tragic really. MM has always been an overambitious grifter who would walk over dead bodies to achieve what she wanted, but Harry, 6th in line to the British throne, on his best way to become nothing more than a running gag. It is painful to watch.



Don't feel too sorry for him. He made his own bed and he should face the consequences of his decisions. Besides I think they will have at least another year or so of living the high life and getting lots of press and attention before everything of interest about them has been wrung out and exhausted. I'm sure a big deal will be made about their first Netflix show. Whether it is successful will determine whether they get a chance to make more.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I think he really must have been referring to the fact that so many functions in vehicles these days are computerized so the average person is not qualified to repair it. What he meant by shield is anyone's guess, that isn't a car term in the US or the UK as far as I know.

I say pop the hood or pop the trunk (what Britains call the boot).

ETA: We call the piece of glass you look through when you are driving a windshield, but it doesn't sound like that is what Harry meant.
[/QUOTE]

I took it to mean the stupid piece of plastic lots of companies put over the engine (usually around where you put in fluid) to make the engine look pretty. Pointed out by Clarkson here: about the 2 minute 50 second mark)









						The One Tank (of fuel) Challenge, part 1/3 (Series 12, Episode 4)
					






					www.topgear.com


----------



## CobaltBlu

*Arche (/rki/; Ancient Greek: ): (n.)*
Greek word meaning “source of action"
*Well (/wel/): (n.)*
a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep

ER...  A well is not a place we go to dig deep. A well is an already existing thing that is already dug deep. We (not really Meghan or most people though) go there to get stuff out of it, usually water.  We dont go there to dig.  We do that until it's empty.  

Wells can, and often do, dry up, in which case they are just very sad reminders of times of plenty and places into which kids and animals fall and die. 

Either way, a well is definitely not a place we -- as in average people, who are not well diggers - (who technically do not go to a well to dig deep, but rather to a designated future well location where they set up a drilling system) go to dig anything.

Also, where do you go to dig deep? an archaeological site?  A mine? A rock quarry (not digging really though, is it?). My landscaper dug deep to plant a tree. I just don't think they know what a well is.

I think they need a professional, very good editor.  Who is an adult.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> I think they need a professional, very good editor.  Who is an adult.



LOL Indeed!


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> I know though that the IRS has gotten very strict about what is considered an office or offices in your house in the last several years.


They sure have!!!!  I recall my Accountant telling me "_if you have an 'office' at home, you have a much better reason for the IRS to audit you_"!  As such, even though I ran a branch office in my home, I *NEVER EVER* claimed it as an 'office'!!!


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> *Arche (/rki/; Ancient Greek: ): (n.)*
> Greek word meaning “source of action"
> *Well (/wel/): (n.)*
> a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep
> 
> ER...  A well is not a place we go to dig deep. A well is an already existing thing that is already dug deep. We (not really Meghan or most people though) go there to get stuff out of it, usually water.  We dont go there to dig.  We do that until it's empty.
> 
> Wells can, and often do, dry up, in which case they are just very sad reminders of times of plenty and places into which kids and animals fall and die.
> 
> Either way, a well is definitely not a place we -- as in average people, who are not well diggers - (who technically do not go to a well to dig deep, but rather to a designated future well location where they set up a drilling system) go to dig anything.
> 
> Also, where do you go to dig deep? an archaeological site?  A mine? A rock quarry (not digging really though, is it?). My landscaper dug deep to plant a tree. I just don't think they know what a well is.
> 
> I think they need a professional, very good editor.  Who is an adult.



You gave the name more consideration and attention than they did. I think they (well, she, since we know who named it) decided the name would translate to "plentiful action" or something to that effect. 

Much as in telling a joke, if you have to explain it then it isn't funny. She tried for cerebral but ended up with convoluted.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am thinking of the neighbors. When I move into a house, I want to know if the neighbors are running a business out of their house. That will affect the traffic as well as the number of visitors and lots of other issues. It may also lower the home’s value because quality of life can disappear when there is a business next door. Typically, the homeowners association regulates that stuff.  We have laws about that here, surely Cali does too.


----------



## gelbergirl

Yesterday I got an email from someone who sounded kind of sad & down.
I wasn't going to answer and then remembered this thread.... so I wrote back "Are you OK?"


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> or she wanted to dominate him and succeeded in doing so.....again, I agree with her on hunting but this was a last minute cancellation - could have been done better



It looks like she totally succeeded in dominating him. I wonder if they are really meant for each or, because of Archie, he just goes along with her plans. The comments about him being a more rude person after meeting MM made me feel sort of sorry for him. 

I wouldn't be surprised if they will try to reconnect with his family and friends, there is no way that MM will let that duchess title and the other perks from the BRF go away... I guess, we will have to wait and see what are their next moves.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> They sure have!!!!  I recall my Accountant telling me "_if you have an 'office' at home, you have a much better reason for the IRS to audit you_"!  As such, even though I ran a branch office in my home, I *NEVER EVER* claimed it as an 'office'!!!


Neither did I.  I did plenty of business related work in my office at home which was set up with fax, computer etc.  It wasn't worth the aggravation of taking the deduction.


----------



## gracekelly

Archie is learning to form sentences.  There is a report that his first complete sentence directed to his parents was "change my name to Tom."


----------



## rose60610

CobaltBlu said:


> *Arche (/rki/; Ancient Greek: ): (n.)*
> Greek word meaning “source of action"
> *Well (/wel/): (n.)*
> a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep
> 
> ER...  A well is not a place we go to dig deep. A well is an already existing thing that is already dug deep. We (not really Meghan or most people though) go there to get stuff out of it, usually water.  We dont go there to dig.  We do that until it's empty.
> 
> Wells can, and often do, dry up, in which case they are just very sad reminders of times of plenty and places into which kids and animals fall and die.
> 
> Either way, a well is definitely not a place we -- as in average people, who are not well diggers - (who technically do not go to a well to dig deep, but rather to a designated future well location where they set up a drilling system) go to dig anything.
> 
> Also, where do you go to dig deep? an archaeological site?  A mine? A rock quarry (not digging really though, is it?). My landscaper dug deep to plant a tree. I just don't think they know what a well is.
> 
> I think they need a professional, very good editor.  Who is an adult.



Whatever Meghan says a word means, she makes it mean it!  So what she SHOULD have named the Foundation was "Chrysos Well", 'chrysos' being the Greek word for 'gold'--so "digging deep for gold", AKA Gold-digger. Apologies to Greeks for messing up their language.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I don't like to compliment her but I think this is a good picture.  Her hair (er extensions) looks good and I like the black & white
> and they almost look like a real couple


Personally, I'm *SHOCKED *that she isn't looking *DIRECTLY *at the Camera with her Cheshire Cat smile!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I'm *SHOCKED *that she isn't looking *DIRECTLY *at the Camera with her Cheshire Cat smile!


I think I want to take back the compliment on her extensions....they are so long and obviously fake that it's excessive (IMO of course)....compared to Kate's beautiful real hair.  Now I'm sounding like some people who used to come here and make nasty remarks about Kate on this thread....oh well


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I try to be accurate , was trying to find where I found the reference to hunting birds being stocked in England, and happened upon ... 

https://a.co/4V2pPCN 

From my secret life as a rock chick, the fastest growing sport at the time of writing ... 

I have very eclectic hobbies ...


----------



## Allisonfaye

Did this get posted yet:






						Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
					

A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"




					knewz.com
				




..A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s relationship, saying the Duke is “deeply unhappy” in his marriage to his political activist wife...


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Did this get posted yet:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
> 
> 
> A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> knewz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ..A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s relationship, saying the Duke is “deeply unhappy” in his marriage to his political activist wife...


ha
pretty much what we've been saying...except I wouldn't give her the satisfaction of calling her a political activist


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> ha
> pretty much what we've been saying...except I wouldn't give her the satisfaction of calling her a political activist



I came across this site that states there are 4 types of activists: opportunists, idealists, radicals and realists. They provide a description for each type, and here is the first one: 

*Opportunists *engage in activism for their own gain. They may be after power, increased visibility, or even money. Opportunists can be easily dealt with by providing them with at least the perception of a partial victory. 

4 types of activists


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I came across this site that states there are 4 types of activists: opportunists, idealists, radicals and realists. They provide a description for each type, and here is the first one:
> 
> *Opportunists *engage in activism for their own gain. They may be after power, increased visibility, or even money. Opportunists can be easily dealt with by providing them with at least the perception of a partial victory.
> 
> 4 types of activists


perfect....not sure I agree that these are real activists but this describes her
another word for her IMO would be fame ho


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> I came across this site that states there are 4 types of activists: opportunists, idealists, radicals and realists. They provide a description for each type, and here is the first one:
> 
> *Opportunists *engage in activism for their own gain. They may be after power, increased visibility, or even money. Opportunists can be easily dealt with by providing them with at least the perception of a partial victory.
> 
> 4 types of activists



This is really interesting and I agree 100% that she fits the opportunists category.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Neither did I.  I did plenty of business related work in my office at home which was set up with fax, computer etc.  It wasn't worth the aggravation of taking the deduction.



Me too. Worked from home for years. I can see H+M deducting their home though because it's so big there's a lot of flexibility there to say they use it for work.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *Royal family was 'cruel to spare heir' Prince Harry and 'edged him and Meghan out' because they were 'rock stars' who 'overshadowed William and Kate', royal expert claims*


Give me a break; Harry has known .. what??? .. since birth that he was the "spare", so what the hell did he expect?? .. to be on equal footing with William?  Sadly, I think Harry was way over-indulged especially after Diana's death such that his expectations are ridiculous! .. and then add to that, Meghan's delusions of grandeur .. so that is one heady mix of toxicity (and hypocrisy)!   

Just saw that Harry and Meghan are supposed to go back to the UK (link to article below); personally, I don't think Meghan will go and as such, neither will Archie. 
https://www.vogue.com/article/why-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-are-returning-to-london


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Archie is learning to form sentences.  There is a report that his first complete sentence directed to his parents was "change my name to Tom."



He would never be allowed to have the same name as his estranged grandfather, er, either of his estranged grandfathers.


----------



## Sophisticatted

If she has to appear in court, then she will have to return.  Possibly before another shut-down or travel-ban.  (Ireland is shutting down again, for example).  If she doesn’t want to see the family, I doubt that they would care.  They may even be “too busy” to see her.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> If she has to appear in court, then she will have to return.  Possibly before another shut-down or travel-ban.  (Ireland is shutting down again, for example).  If she doesn’t want to see the family, I doubt that they would care.  They may even be “too busy” to see her.


Ireland is not part of the GB or the UK but I get what you say. 
Northern Ireland are having a "circuit breaker" as are we in Wales fron 6pm tonight. 
Not sure about Scotland. 
God knows what England are doing with their tier system, so no idea how it would affect H & M if they decided to grace us with their presence. Seems to me that Covid is an easy excuse for Meghan not to come here even if travel allowed.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> ha
> pretty much what we've been saying...except I wouldn't give her the satisfaction of calling her a political activist



 

Usually, 'activist' denotes some form of action.

There's very little action unless action = acting.

Maybe Vickers is talking about the Black Bear... I'd support the bear.


----------



## marietouchet

Feminism & the English aristocracy .... I can see how the English system that favors boys would have infuriated Meghan especially if Archie had been born a girl... (a girl cannot inherit the duchy of Sussex )

I posted a bit about the movie Gosford Park, and went and refreshed my memory on its creator Julian Fellowes 

Very interesting story on his wife , not allowed to inherit her father's title - due to sex. He campaigned to have aristocracy title laws changed similar to the Crown , where a woman can inherit (QEII). The Queen did not change the aristo laws per JF actions, but probably due to the stature of her family (Kitchener) and Fellowes himself, accorded the wife a rank and  privilege of her late father. 

So, the wife got a lovely rank to make up, but still she and her son cannot inherit the father's title which is now vacant. A bit complicated, as all things noble and titular , see Wiki for accurate details 









						Julian Fellowes - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




That is the way it is ...


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Ireland is not part of the GB or the UK but I get what you say.
> Northern Ireland are having a "circuit breaker" as are we in Wales fron 6pm tonight.
> Not sure about Scotland.
> God knows what England are doing with their tier system, so no idea how it would affect H & M if they decided to grace us with their presence. Seems to me that Covid is an easy excuse for Meghan not to come here even if travel allowed.


I keep reading about the complexity severity of lockdown in the UK & other spots in Europe, I send out warmest regards and hope everyone is OK


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> *Usually, 'activist' denotes some form of action.
> 
> There's very little action unless action = acting.*
> 
> Maybe Vickers is talking about the Black Bear... I'd support the bear.



This is because you have perhaps in mind the realist and/or the idealist activists, but I learned yesterday that there is another type of activist, the opportunist. I would think that for this latter type, acting is an important resource.  

I'm with you, and I also support the bear.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I keep thinking about the Jan 11 2021 lawsuit about the letter ... where MM would have to appear in court, maybe H too , maybe the 5 friends ...

Current stories seem to be that no one will join the Queen this year due to COVID, but H M &A could lunch with HM - under the rule of 6 - were they to appear in the UK ...

If MM goes back on for Jan 11, there is no more pretense that the cancellation of seeing the BRF/QEII for Xmas is due to COVID, she will have gotten in the country, quarantined - or gotten around that , rented a private plane with carbon footprint, figured out Archie during trial etc. 

The optics of the Xmas cancellation become horrid if she turns up on Jan 11 2021.

My personal guess is that A will not return to the UK in Jan 2021, I suspect that M fears that he could be taken away from her on UK soil, if the BRF/H were plotting a clandestine divorce operation a la Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise  - but that is a total guess, letting my imagination run wild


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *Feminism & the English aristocracy .... I can see how the English system that favors boys* would have infuriated Meghan especially if Archie had been born a girl... (a girl cannot inherit the duchy of Sussex )
> 
> I posted a bit about the movie Gosford Park, and went and refreshed my memory on its creator Julian Fellowes
> 
> Very interesting story on his wife , not allowed to inherit her father's title - due to sex. He campaigned to have aristocracy title laws changed similar to the Crown , where a woman can inherit (QEII). The Queen did not change the aristo laws per JF actions, but probably due to the stature of her family (Kitchener) and Fellowes himself, accorded the wife a rank and  privilege of her late father.
> 
> So, the wife got a lovely rank to make up, but still she and her son cannot inherit the father's title which is now vacant. A bit complicated, as all things noble and titular , see Wiki for accurate details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Julian Fellowes - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the way it is ...


Unfortunately, systems that 'favor boys' are not restrict to English aristocracy. We live in a world where top positions in governments, universities, businesses, etc have been largely male dominated. Things are fortunately changing due to the huge efforts of many women to overcome obstacles and their continued commitment to excellence. In my view, MM has nothing to do with these women.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Unfortunately, systems that 'favor boys' are not restrict to English aristocracy. We live in a world where top positions in governments, universities, businesses, etc have been largely male dominated. Things are fortunately changing due to the huge efforts of many women to overcome obstacles and their continued commitment to excellence.


Agree but that example is one where the favoritism is codified in law, despite efforts to change the law


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Agree but that example is one where it is codified in law



Laws are fortunately changing, see article below from 2011.  

Girls equal in British throne succession


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> My personal guess is that A will not return to the UK in Jan 2021, I suspect that M fears that he could be taken away from her on UK soil, if the BRF/H were plotting a clandestine divorce operation a la Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise  - but that is a total guess, letting my imagination run wild



I will speculate that Harry will stick to his guns and stay put. So far there is absolutely nothing to indicate he is unhappy and ready to bolt. Even if he were, the Queen would not risk an international incident in the press by lowering herself to the level of baby-snatching. Much better to pay off Meghan and let live in her mansion and raise Archie to be an overprivileged kid in Santa Barbara. They don't need Archie in the line of succession. They don't even need Harry. He has damaged his relationships and standing back home to such a degree I don't think he could ever go back to the way things were. He has burned his bridges to dust!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I will speculate that Harry will stick to his guns and stay put. So far there is absolutely nothing to indicate he is unhappy and ready to bolt. Even if he were, the Queen would not risk an international incident in the press by lowering herself to the level of baby-snatching. Much better to pay off Meghan and let live in her mansion and raise Archie to be an overprivileged kid in Santa Barbara. They don't need Archie in the line of succession. They don't even need Harry. He has damaged his relationships and standing back home to such a degree I don't think he could ever go back to the way things were. He has burned his bridges to dust!


Agree QEII and PC would never risk an international incident of baby-snatching, but MM mighty still take action to preclude that - Archie stays in US
Last week's story / Lacey book, was about MM not getting along with some (presumably) senior member of BRF (fake news??) but if true she might keep him away out of spite - she has not let her father see A ... and surely meeting the Cambridge cousins is not high on her list


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I will speculate that Harry will stick to his guns and stay put. So far there is absolutely nothing to indicate he is unhappy and ready to bolt. Even if he were,* the Queen would not risk an international incident in the press by lowering herself to the level of baby-snatching.* *Much better to pay off Meghan and let live in her mansion and raise Archie to be an overprivileged kid in Santa Barbara. *They don't need Archie in the line of succession. They don't even need Harry. He has damaged his relationships and standing back home to such a degree I don't think he could ever go back to the way things were. He has burned his bridges to dust!


Yep, I agree with you. QE will likely take a damage control approach, and move on.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree QEII and PC would never risk an international incident of baby-snatching, but MM mighty still take action to preclude that - Archie stays in US
> Last week's story / Lacey book, was about MM not getting along with some (presumably) senior member of BRF (fake news??) but if true she might keep him away out of spite - she has not let her father see A ... and surely meeting the Cambridge cousins is not high on her list



She'll stay away because she is a coward. She likes to stir the pot and create drama behind the scenes, but she won't mix it up and fight her own battles. She proved that back in January when they dropped the bombshell about Megxit and she quickly hightailed it back to Canada and left Harry to face the music alone. I still think she'll find a way so she won't have to appear in court. Either she'll drop the case at the last minute or find a way to give her testimony remotely.


----------



## marietouchet

Having postulated that Archie will not a Jan 2021 visit with his cousins ...  that is sad, the cousins in my family all get along wonderfully, such an asset, and sad when they moved away ... 

Now there is the DM story that Philip has cut ties with JCMH , sad 

Family can be a glorious asset , if you work at it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Repetitive? Canned messages? How dare they! In case you missed it, these two are on TIME100’s most influential. 










						Meghan and Harry slammed for 'repetitive' rant: 'Heard it all before!'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been criticsed for being "repetitive" by royal commentators.




					www.express.co.uk
				






Spoiler: The article



Meghan Markle, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, appeared on Time 100 upon the release of the publication's "most influential people". The Duke and Duchess of Sussex discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World". But royal commentators Rachel Bowie and Roberta Fiorito said their responses seemed "repetitive".
Speaking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Ms Bowie said: "I really like that in the way William is taking on the environment and stuff like that this is becoming a huge tent pole for Harry and Meghan.
"I like the sort of message that it's like, so many communities are being targeted by hate and technology is amplifying what's credible and true.
"Yesterday in particular just really anchored the fact for me that we can take it on on a personal level.
"We can quit Facebook. I've been trying to be more purposeful about my social media use but this is a systemic problem. I'm definitely on board with their message."
Ms Firito added: "What is the action though?
"The Sussexes have had a lot of these talks and listening to this part of Time 100 episode, it felt a little repetitive.
"When the editor-in-chief of Time asked them how are you doing and they did the whole, how are we _really_ doing.
"They just talked about that again in a way that felt a little too canned because we've heard it a couple of times. What's the plan?"





Meghan Markle and Harry discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World" (Image: EMPICS)

It comes as Meghan and Harry launched the website for their charitable organisation Archewell.

*A "landing page" has been set up for the venture, with those interested invited to submit their email address to receive updates about "activities and initiatives".*

The meaning of Archewell, which inspired their son Archie's name, is described for newcomers, with arche the "Greek word meaning 'source of action"' and well "a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep".

The website was launched to coincide with the couple's appearance on Tuesday on the Time100 Talks, when they spoke about the "global crisis" of misinformation that spreads online.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Repetitive? Canned messages? How dare they! In case you missed it, these two are on TIME100’s most influential.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry slammed for 'repetitive' rant: 'Heard it all before!'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been criticsed for being "repetitive" by royal commentators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The article
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, appeared on Time 100 upon the release of the publication's "most influential people". The Duke and Duchess of Sussex discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World". But royal commentators Rachel Bowie and Roberta Fiorito said their responses seemed "repetitive".
> Speaking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Ms Bowie said: "I really like that in the way William is taking on the environment and stuff like that this is becoming a huge tent pole for Harry and Meghan.
> "I like the sort of message that it's like, so many communities are being targeted by hate and technology is amplifying what's credible and true.
> "Yesterday in particular just really anchored the fact for me that we can take it on on a personal level.
> "We can quit Facebook. I've been trying to be more purposeful about my social media use but this is a systemic problem. I'm definitely on board with their message."
> Ms Firito added: "What is the action though?
> "The Sussexes have had a lot of these talks and listening to this part of Time 100 episode, it felt a little repetitive.
> "When the editor-in-chief of Time asked them how are you doing and they did the whole, how are we _really_ doing.
> "They just talked about that again in a way that felt a little too canned because we've heard it a couple of times. What's the plan?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World" (Image: EMPICS)
> 
> It comes as Meghan and Harry launched the website for their charitable organisation Archewell.
> 
> *A "landing page" has been set up for the venture, with those interested invited to submit their email address to receive updates about "activities and initiatives".*
> 
> The meaning of Archewell, which inspired their son Archie's name, is described for newcomers, with arche the "Greek word meaning 'source of action"' and well "a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep".
> 
> The website was launched to coincide with the couple's appearance on Tuesday on the Time100 Talks, when they spoke about the "global crisis" of misinformation that spreads online.


yes, they're getting kinda boring...and if I NEVER see that green cape outfit again, it will be fine with me


----------



## Sophisticatted

I doubt that William and Catherine would encourage time with Archie because of how rotten Meghan has been.  They know she doesn’t care about others feelings and would use Archie for her own end.  They would not want their children to become attached and then confused and hurt when they can’t see him any more.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Repetitive? Canned messages? How dare they! In case you missed it, these two are on TIME100’s most influential.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry slammed for 'repetitive' rant: 'Heard it all before!'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been criticsed for being "repetitive" by royal commentators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The article
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, appeared on Time 100 upon the release of the publication's "most influential people". The Duke and Duchess of Sussex discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World". But royal commentators Rachel Bowie and Roberta Fiorito said their responses seemed "repetitive".
> Speaking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Ms Bowie said: "I really like that in the way William is taking on the environment and stuff like that this is becoming a huge tent pole for Harry and Meghan.
> "I like the sort of message that it's like, so many communities are being targeted by hate and technology is amplifying what's credible and true.
> "Yesterday in particular just really anchored the fact for me that we can take it on on a personal level.
> "We can quit Facebook. I've been trying to be more purposeful about my social media use but this is a systemic problem. I'm definitely on board with their message."
> Ms Firito added: "What is the action though?
> "The Sussexes have had a lot of these talks and listening to this part of Time 100 episode, it felt a little repetitive.
> "When the editor-in-chief of Time asked them how are you doing and they did the whole, how are we _really_ doing.
> "They just talked about that again in a way that felt a little too canned because we've heard it a couple of times. What's the plan?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World" (Image: EMPICS)
> 
> It comes as Meghan and Harry launched the website for their charitable organisation Archewell.
> 
> *A "landing page" has been set up for the venture, with those interested invited to submit their email address to receive updates about "activities and initiatives".*
> 
> The meaning of Archewell, which inspired their son Archie's name, is described for newcomers, with arche the "Greek word meaning 'source of action"' and well "a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep".
> 
> The website was launched to coincide with the couple's appearance on Tuesday on the Time100 Talks, when they spoke about the "global crisis" of misinformation that spreads online.



The funny thing is they were on TIME's list of 100 influential people back in 2018 when they got married. They are not on the list this year, but you would never know it from all the fuss being made. They are interviewing/introducing a couple of the recipients for the show and you would think it was ALL ABOUT THEM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The funny thing is they were on TIME's list of 100 influential people back in 2018 when they got married. They are not on the list this year, but you would never know it from all the fuss being made. They are interviewing/introducing a couple of the recipients for the show and you would think it was ALL ABOUT THEM.



Thank you for the info. Since I gloss over these H&M articles, I missed that they aren’t on this year’s list. Eeeek!
So, it’s this Harry Walker agency putting them in our face daily?

https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-most-important-election-lifetime-time-100/
_Prince Harry and Meghan signed with the New York-based Harry Walker Agency earlier this year.  The agency also represents Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem and Jane Goodall — who are friends with the couple — in addition to Michelle and Barack *****, Hillary and Bill *******, Alex Rodriguez, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Tina Fey._


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the info. Since I gloss over these H&M articles, I missed that they aren’t on this year’s list. Eeeek!
> So, it’s this Harry Walker agency putting them in our face daily?
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-most-important-election-lifetime-time-100/
> _Prince Harry and Meghan signed with the New York-based Harry Walker Agency earlier this year.  The agency also represents Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem and Jane Goodall — who are friends with the couple — in addition to Michelle and Barack *****, Hillary and Bill *******, Alex Rodriguez, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Tina Fey._


must make her feel good to be in such company


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the info. Since I gloss over these H&M articles, I missed that they aren’t on this year’s list. Eeeek!
> So, it’s this Harry Walker agency putting them in our face daily?
> 
> https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-most-important-election-lifetime-time-100/
> _Prince Harry and Meghan signed with the New York-based Harry Walker Agency earlier this year.  The agency also represents Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem and Jane Goodall — who are friends with the couple — in addition to Michelle and Barack *****, Hillary and Bill *******, Alex Rodriguez, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Tina Fey._



There are multiple agencies working hard to make them a power couple. I'm sure they are being compensated accordingly. Time will tell whether they will be successful in the long term but they are certainly getting them a lot of attention for now.


----------



## bellecate

For giggles I signed up (with a very seldom used email I have) to their Archewell site. It says they will send me emails about its activities and initiatives.  I'm interested to see how many mailing lists they sell that email account to. As of now I receive no junk mail on that email address. What can I say, it's raining, there is a protest blockade on the highway so I can't go anywhere, covid and I am bored.


----------



## marietouchet

bellecate said:


> For giggles I signed up (with a very seldom used email I have) to their Archewell site. It says they will send me emails about its activities and initiatives.  I'm interested to see how many mailing lists they sell that email account to. As of now I receive no junk mail on that email address. What can I say, it's raining, there is a protest blockade on the highway so I can't go anywhere, covid and I am bored.


Wow cool - doing for the team ! Heck yes !


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Repetitive? Canned messages? How dare they! In case you missed it, these two are on TIME100’s most influential.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry slammed for 'repetitive' rant: 'Heard it all before!'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been criticsed for being "repetitive" by royal commentators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The article
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, appeared on Time 100 upon the release of the publication's "most influential people". The Duke and Duchess of Sussex discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World". But royal commentators Rachel Bowie and Roberta Fiorito said their responses seemed "repetitive".
> Speaking on the Royally Obsessed podcast, Ms Bowie said: "I really like that in the way William is taking on the environment and stuff like that this is becoming a huge tent pole for Harry and Meghan.
> "I like the sort of message that it's like, so many communities are being targeted by hate and technology is amplifying what's credible and true.
> "Yesterday in particular just really anchored the fact for me that we can take it on on a personal level.
> "We can quit Facebook. I've been trying to be more purposeful about my social media use but this is a systemic problem. I'm definitely on board with their message."
> Ms Firito added: "What is the action though?
> "The Sussexes have had a lot of these talks and listening to this part of Time 100 episode, it felt a little repetitive.
> "When the editor-in-chief of Time asked them how are you doing and they did the whole, how are we _really_ doing.
> "They just talked about that again in a way that felt a little too canned because we've heard it a couple of times. What's the plan?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry discussed the topic of "Engineering a Better World" (Image: EMPICS)
> 
> It comes as Meghan and Harry launched the website for their charitable organisation Archewell.
> 
> *A "landing page" has been set up for the venture, with those interested invited to submit their email address to receive updates about "activities and initiatives".*
> 
> The meaning of Archewell, which inspired their son Archie's name, is described for newcomers, with arche the "Greek word meaning 'source of action"' and well "a plentiful source or supply; a place we go to dig deep".
> 
> The website was launched to coincide with the couple's appearance on Tuesday on the Time100 Talks, when they spoke about the "global crisis" of misinformation that spreads online.



Repetitive, but what do people expect? This is a person that's been 39 for almost 15 months now. 

I actually don't mind if they just have one agenda, it's the popping up on everybody else's platform, whatever the cause, that I can't stand.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, they're getting kinda boring...and *if I NEVER see that green cape outfit again,* it will be fine with me



Well, @CarryOn2020 did issue a trigger (spoiler) warning


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Feminism & the English aristocracy .... I can see how the English system that favors boys would have infuriated Meghan especially if Archie had been born a girl... (a girl cannot inherit the duchy of Sussex )
> 
> I posted a bit about the movie Gosford Park, and went and refreshed my memory on its creator Julian Fellowes
> 
> Very interesting story on his wife , not allowed to inherit her father's title - due to sex. He campaigned to have aristocracy title laws changed similar to the Crown , where a woman can inherit (QEII). The Queen did not change the aristo laws per JF actions, but probably due to the stature of her family (Kitchener) and Fellowes himself, accorded the wife a rank and  privilege of her late father.
> 
> So, the wife got a lovely rank to make up, but still she and her son cannot inherit the father's title which is now vacant. A bit complicated, as all things noble and titular , see Wiki for accurate details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Julian Fellowes - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the way it is ...



The thing is, some British titles can indeed be inherited by daughters. I wonder what's the difference with those?


----------



## gracekelly

List of peerages inherited by women - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




I can happen when a remainder is created with the title so that it may pass to a daughter if there is no son.    The most important one recently was Lord Mountbatten of Burma's daughter, Patricia Knatchbull.  She passed away in 2017 and her son inherited the title.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the ‘new’ photo [which looks so much like Diana’s b&w photos]
> 
> Why are they showing off Diana’s jewelry? Who cares? While, in some cases, it can be a way to honor the deceased, it also signals that the guy is not spending his money on jewelry for his beloved. Kinda cheap?  For all the dings on Charles, he certainly did and does give gorgeous jewels to his ladies. Harry, not so much? Diana chose pieces she liked and looked good on her, not so sure she would expect DiL‘s to wear her stuff, copy her style. Surely she would encourage each DiL to find her own style.  Notice QE wears the heirloom jewelry well because she wears it her way.
> 
> This excessive copying of Diana = living in the past. Not very woke, IMO. Wonder if Harry calls MM ‘mother’?


I honestly think that Meghan *soooooooooooooooo *wants to be Diana; think about it .. Diana was (_likely_) the most popular person in both the US and UK .. and we all know that Meghan wants to be that, right????  So, she goes about wearing Diana's jewelry as an attention grabber (_that she is_) .. and of course, I also think that in some respects, it's Harry's F/U to his Father, Brother and to some extent .. QEII.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> List of peerages inherited by women - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can happen when a remainder is created with the title so that it may pass to a daughter if there is no son.    The most important one recently was Lord Mountbatten of Burma's daughter, Patricia Knatchbull.  She passed away in 2017 and her son inherited the title.



Is that the one Charles wanted to marry?


----------



## CobaltBlu

We really need some kind of H&M thread virtual honor award for this kind of service.
A plaque or sash, maybe a small tiara? Anyone have anything suitable?   This is above and beyond, doll. 




bellecate said:


> For giggles I signed up (with a very seldom used email I have) to their Archewell site. It says they will send me emails about its activities and initiatives.  I'm interested to see how many mailing lists they sell that email account to. As of now I receive no junk mail on that email address. What can I say, it's raining, there is a protest blockade on the highway so I can't go anywhere, covid and I am bored.


----------



## wisconsin

maryg1 said:


> You’re clearly NOT of Italian origin



Haha
Love it


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> For giggles I signed up (with a very seldom used email I have) to their Archewell site. It says they will send me emails about its activities and initiatives.  I'm interested to see how many mailing lists they sell that email account to. As of now I receive no junk mail on that email address. What can I say, it's raining, there is a protest blockade on the highway so I can't go anywhere, covid and I am bored.



Many of us don't want to contribute to their website clicks. So we are counting on you as our most distinguished  Arche-Reporter.


----------



## lalame

Interesting, Malala is a keynote speaker at a tech conference I'm going to. I'll let you ladies know if she wears a lot of makeup... it occured to me she might have overdone it on the makeup to blend in with Meghan in their Zoom call. She doesn't seem to wear that much makeup for other appearances.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Because Wikipedia is a rabbit hole I'm currently reading up on the peers of the UK. I feel Meghan would have liked the Duke of Westminster a lot, too bad she is way too old for him. But he is insanely rich (a billionaire when Harry has a measly 30 millions which are also tied up), quite handsome and not related to the evil BRF. 

Then again, she had to go with Harry because she didn't really want privacy but a catapult into stardom.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> MM &H's 150 million dollars deal says a lot about Nflix (bad) management. Several comments seem to agree with that.
> 
> *Netflix** stock plunges 7% after streaming giant revealed dramatic slowdown in new subscribers over the summer in its biggest earnings disappointment yet*
> View attachment 4885028
> View attachment 4885046
> View attachment 4885047


I cancelled my subscription the *minute* the announcement about the H&M 'deal' became public.  I also found; however, that they really didn't have anything I wanted to watch .. so ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> I honestly think that Meghan *soooooooooooooooo *wants to be Diana; think about it .. Diana was (_likely_) the most popular person in both the US and UK .. and we all know that Meghan wants to be that, right????  So, she goes about wearing Diana's jewelry as an attention grabber (_that she is_) .. and of course, I also think that in some respects, it's Harry's F/U to his Father, Brother and to some extent .. QEII.



and what's even more obvious is she's in every way closer to Wallis Simpson, who was just a little less popular


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because Wikipedia is a rabbit hole I'm currently reading up on the peers of the UK. I feel Meghan would have liked the Duke of Westminster a lot, too bad she is way too old for him. But he is insanely rich (a billionaire when Harry has a measly 30 millions which are also tied up), quite handsome and not related to the evil BRF.
> 
> Then again, she had to go with Harry because she didn't really want privacy but a catapult into stardom.



The 7th Dike is too _young_ for her, his father sadly died a few years ago.

Harry gets another however many Million when he turns 40 (from his great-grand mother she put in trust). I guess no divorce will be happening until for at least 4 years.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, that's what kind of mood I'm in tonight.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> really?  can this be true?  he went to the door in his dressing gown?
> I hate the idea of hunting - killing for sport.  An activity that only humans do.  But the picture of him being whipped by his wife (or then fiance?) is pathetic


*ENTITLED SPOILED BRAT* .. no wonder JCMH feels comfortable in the LA area, sounds a LOT like some of my neighbors!


----------



## CeeJay

Allisonfaye said:


> Did this get posted yet:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
> 
> 
> A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> knewz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ..A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s relationship, saying the Duke is “deeply unhappy” in his marriage to his political activist wife...


Wouldn't it be hilarious if Harry were to leave the marriage (_since we've all said it would be her_).  However, I don't think he would leave Archie and we all know that Meghan would *never* give up her meal ticket, even though she does not strike me as the maternal type at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooh, fairly certain MM will not leave for another 5 years. They may do a separate lives kinda thing, but she won’t leave him. What kind of man would take her? Notice how difficult Diana found it? Sarah too.  As for being the next Diana, never.  The world will not accept MM as Diana. It’s nothing to do with race. It is about her past. A divorced woman could never be a Diana2.0. Anyone who thinks that misses the appeal of Diana. IMO.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> She'll stay away because *she is a coward*. *She likes to stir the pot and create drama behind the scenes*, but she won't mix it up and fight her own battles. She proved that back in January when they dropped the bombshell about Megxit and she quickly hightailed it back to Canada and left Harry to face the music alone.


*THIS!!! .. 100% +++++ !!!* .. another behavior that was exhibited fairly early in her teenage years.  Given that her father over-indulged her (_and look where that has gotten him_), she expected that people bow to her rules/desires and if you didn't, you got markled.  My friends were quite stunned when Meghan (_at this time a Senior in High School_), pretty much demanded that they introduce her to some of their very well-known musicians .. and of course, they said 'no' because they respect the privacy of their clients!  She got all pissy, told her "friends" (_whoever she had at the time_) how "mean" they were to her and of course, their son got markled.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Unfortunately, systems that 'favor boys' are not restrict to English aristocracy. We live in a world where top positions in governments, universities, businesses, etc have been largely male dominated. Things are fortunately changing due to the huge efforts of many women to overcome obstacles and their continued commitment to excellence. In my view, MM has nothing to do with these women.


ITA.  Even in my culture, the eldest male gets literally everything, even as recently as the generation above me.  My mother had six older brothers, but when the oldest died with three daughters, and the next two sons did not have any children and had moved to the US, my grandfather gave everything to his fourth eldest son (*horrible* decision, but that's another story).  My paternal grandfather, on the other hand, always thought the system was idiotic and passed everything equally to his three sons and one daughter, giving each one quarter of his estate equally.  None of the sons objected and thought that that was the absolute fairest thing to do.  It apparently was shocking to the whole community.  Boggles the mind!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> For giggles I signed up (with a very seldom used email I have) to their Archewell site. It says they will send me emails about its activities and initiatives.  I'm interested to see how many mailing lists they sell that email account to. As of now I receive no junk mail on that email address. What can I say, it's raining, there is a protest blockade on the highway so I can't go anywhere, covid and I am bored.


Thanks for taking one for the team!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because Wikipedia is a rabbit hole I'm currently reading up on the peers of the UK. I feel Meghan would have liked the Duke of Westminster a lot, too bad she is way too old for him. But he is insanely rich (a billionaire when Harry has a measly 30 millions which are also tied up), quite handsome and not related to the evil BRF.
> 
> Then again, she had to go with Harry because she didn't really want privacy but a catapult into stardom.


*Shhhhhhhh* .. don't give her any ideas!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The 7th Dike is too _young_ for her, his father sadly died a few years ago.



That's what I said (or rather, I said, she's too old for him)  I feel this guy is really the most eligible bachelor in the UK, not Harry (even before he got hitched) - and he doesn't seem so troubled either. I remember reading that when he inherited millions from his grandfather at age 18 his parents petitioned to have that inheritance delayed a bit because they thought it would mess with him. 

Also it seems these days nobody can write anything without taking digs at the clowns...about Harriet Tomlinson, his girlfriend:

"But who is his little known girlfriend – she’s neither a fame-hungry pop princess nor an aspiring actress – here, _Tatler_ reveals all."

LOL


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  Even in my culture, the eldest male gets literally everything, even as recently as the generation above me.  My mother had six older brothers, but when the oldest died with three daughters, and the next two sons did not have any children and had moved to the US, my grandfather gave everything to his fourth eldest son (*horrible* decision, but that's another story).  My paternal grandfather, on the other hand, always thought the system was idiotic and passed everything equally to his three sons and one daughter, giving each one quarter of his estate equally.  None of the sons objected and thought that that was the absolute fairest thing to do.  It apparently was shocking to the whole community.  Boggles the mind!



My great-grandfather insisted my grandma and her elder sister get an education because he thought a boy would always find his way while a girl would be much better off and not at a man's will with something to show for. My grandma went to secretary school, was a head secretary for a local factory owner and earned more than my grandpa LOL


----------



## sdkitty

Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her. 








						Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
					

It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story




					www.tatler.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
> 
> 
> It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


If she does this, then how can she defend her case against DM??? Am I missing something?


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> If she does this, then how can she defend her case against DM??? Am I missing something?



She's fishing for a bidding war

If the total out bids the lawsuit she'll drop the action against AP (DM). She knows she won't win now anyway, this is confirmations she's been told the result is unlikely to be in her favour.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> She's fishing for a bidding war
> 
> If the total out bids the lawsuit she'll drop the action against AP (DM). She knows she won't win now anyway, this is confirmations she's been told the result is unlikely to be in her favour.


if what I've learned from watching legal dramas is correct, at some point her attorneys will tell her she has a no win case (if that's true) and she will drop it....having spent a lot of money for nothing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
> 
> 
> It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com



According to this article she's waving an expose of her time in the UK. She needs to be very careful. It's either a bluff for hush money or she feels she has nothing to lose - in which case there's another announcement coming.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> if what I've learned from watching legal dramas is correct, at some point her attorneys will tell her she has a no win case (if that's true) and she will drop it....having spent a lot of money for nothing



From all we know about her, she absolutely hates losing, it's the loss of face more than anything.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> From all we know about her, she absolutely hates losing, it's the loss of face more than anything.


I think maybe what she doesn't understand is that she has the stans or "base" who will love her no matter what.  but the rest of us aren't going to be won over by her diary or any of her PR.  She probably won't have opportunities for great acting roles because she isn't a great actress.  IMO her best option would have been to be a good royal but she wasn't thriving


----------



## CarryOn2020

Although this article was published in May and prior to FindingFreedom, we have turned a corner from “Oh wow” to ”just go”.  We know their story, yawn, there’s nothing new, nothing to see. That said, she should publish it, so it can be another epic fail. 

Now, when does Harry arrive in the UK to settle his pesky VISA issues?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> According to this article she's waving an expose of her time in the UK. She needs to be very careful. It's either a bluff for hush money or she feels she has nothing to lose - in which case there's another announcement coming.



I just don't see that announcement we're all waiting for anytime soon. He seems miserable, but he is also blaming anyone but his fame hungry wife.


----------



## bisousx

The article is from May. I doubt a diary would offer anything new coming after the release of Omid‘s book. Which is already written as if it was pulled directly from a schoolgirl’s diary.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
> 
> 
> It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


But .. wait, weren't she and JCMH sooooooooooooooooo busy with various events for the BRF, their expensive travel, their work on the Sussex Royal IG Account (_and plotting & scheming to merchandise those titles_?!?!), having a baby, moaning & groaning, moving to Canada and then to the US (_with all that 'secrecy'_) .. and then making sure that their PR firm gets some tidbit into the 'news' (_using that term lightly here_)?!!!?!   So, how is it that she has time to write a "diary" .. hmmmmm, so maybe Charles was right in booting her out of parts of the BRF that she was not supposed to go into???  If she truly comes out with something like this, it just shows her plan all along .. get juicy tidbits about the BRF in order to?!?: 

Get the BRF to give her a huge sum of $$$ - to shut her up
Get tons of $$$ to publish it 
Or .. use it as one of their Netflix "documentaries"??
Whatever .. it's DISGUSTING IMO!


----------



## Sophisticatted

But, other than Andrew, whose juicy tidbits are already out, more or less, what juicy tidbits could there be?

Everyone else seems to live boring , happily married lifestyles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just saw two shocking headlines, both in German or I'd screenshot: first was Meghan sought out a high profile divorce layer to develop a Plan B just in case (not buying that not because I don't think she'd want to be prepared, but not only does the puppet seem quite happy where he's at, I doubt it has crossed her mind that could change anytime soon), the other one was that she is secretly 6 months pregnant.  I guess it's just completely unlike Meghan to not milk that for the very last drop she can squeeze out of it. But who knows?


----------



## creme fraiche

I doubt Meghan would fit in with the Grosveners - he and his family are serious about their philanthropy and not dilletantes.  instead Of shining lights, they give their time and money without fanfare.  if The caliber of the people they marry is exemplified by Dan Snow, Meghan would not have a snowball’s chance in hell to enter that family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

creme fraiche said:


> I doubt Meghan would fit in with the Grosveners - he and his family are serious about their philanthropy and not dilletantes.  instead Of shining lights, they give their time and money without fanfare.  if The caliber of the people they marry is exemplified by Dan Snow, Meghan would not have a snowball’s chance in hell to enter that family.



Yeah, but she never fit in with the Windsors either.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
> 
> 
> It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


Old news , from before the publication of Omid’s book


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just saw two shocking headlines, both in German or I'd screenshot: first was Meghan sought out a high profile divorce layer to develop a Plan B just in case (not buying that not because I don't think she'd want to be prepared, but not only does the puppet seem quite happy where he's at, I doubt it has crossed her mind that could change anytime soon), the other one was that she is secretly 6 months pregnant.  I guess it's just completely unlike Meghan to not milk that for the very last drop she can squeeze out of it. But who knows?


Don’t be afraid of doing screenshots in other languages , please, merci


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> But, other than Andrew, whose juicy tidbits are already out, more or less, what juicy tidbits could there be?
> 
> Everyone else seems to live boring , happily married lifestyles.


Juicy is relative , could be earthshaking for Andrew, just merely annoying for the Cambridges
I don’t think the Andrew saga is over .. my guess


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just saw two shocking headlines, both in German or I'd screenshot: first was Meghan sought out a high profile divorce layer to develop a Plan B just in case (not buying that not because I don't think she'd want to be prepared, but not only does the puppet seem quite happy where he's at, I doubt it has crossed her mind that could change anytime soon), the other one was that she is secretly 6 months pregnant.  I guess it's just completely unlike Meghan to not milk that for the very last drop she can squeeze out of it. But who knows?


See, the first one .. yeah, I could believe that because California is a community-property state which means in the case of divorce, the couple splits 1/2 of the debt in addition to 'property'.  So, let's say that JCMH is notoriously cheap (which seems the case), and Meghan goes out and buys a lot of things and puts said items onto a Credit Card.  Well, JCMH would still be responsible for 1/2 of her debt .. nice, huh (not)!!!  In addition, that $14m house?? .. well, likely there would be an arbitration of sorts where one partner would have to buy out the other  -OR-  they sell it and simply split the "profit" (if there is one).  Lastly, there is Archie .. and while we know that Meghan is never going to give up her meal-ticket (until he is 18), JCMH would likely have to pay child support and Archie's residency would have to be decided on (US or UK)?  It can get very messy, even worse than Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt (and heck - they both have US residency)!  So, it wouldn't surprise me one bit that she has been doing her research should a divorce potentially occur.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> See, the first one .. yeah, I could believe that because California is a community-property state which means in the case of divorce, the couple splits 1/2 of the debt in addition to 'property'.  So, let's say that JCMH is notoriously cheap (which seems the case), and Meghan goes out and buys a lot of things and puts said items onto a Credit Card.  Well, JCMH would still be responsible for 1/2 of her debt .. nice, huh (not)!!!  In addition, that $14m house?? .. well, likely there would be an arbitration of sorts where one partner would have to buy out the other  -OR-  they sell it and simply split the "profit" (if there is one).  Lastly, there is Archie .. and while we know that Meghan is never going to give up her meal-ticket (until he is 18), JCMH would likely have to pay child support and Archie's residency would have to be decided on (US or UK)?  It can get very messy, even worse than Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt (and heck - they both have US residency)!  So, it wouldn't surprise me one bit that she has been doing her research should a divorce potentially occur.


Brad and Angie had substantial assets together and also, I think, both had quite a lot of money of their own before the marriage.  Whereas, Meghan didn't have much.  Most of their assets are from Harry's money (or his family's).  But still I'm sure if/when they divorce she will get half of everything plus keep all the jewelry, etc.
And little Archie will have to continue to live in a style to which he has been accustomed (with the money going to his mommie of course to do this)


----------



## Tootsie17

I don't think M will ever let H go. As Earth, Wind, and Fire sings, 'after the love is gone,' M knows without H, she is once again a nobody.


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> I don't think M will ever let H go. As Earth, Wind, and Fire sings, 'after the love is gone,' M knows without H, she is once again a nobody.


we all know that but with her delusions of grandeur she may think otherwise.....wonder what these two will be doing five years from now


----------



## Chanbal

Tootsie17 said:


> I don't think M will ever let H go. As Earth, Wind, and Fire sings, 'after the love is gone,' M knows without H, she is once again a nobody.


Which love are you talking about?


----------



## Tootsie17

Chanbal said:


> Which love are you talking about?


The love between a husband and wife.  I keep hoping that Harry will finally wake up and realize he's been fleeced, hood-winked, fooled, and love bombed by a narcissist. I doubt that he will ever understand the depths of his stupidity.


----------



## Chanbal

Tootsie17 said:


> The love between a husband and wife.  I keep hoping that Harry will finally wake up and realize he's been fleeced, hood-winked, fooled, and love bombed by a narcissist. I doubt that he will ever understand the depths of his stupidity.


I was joking. Not sure whether narcissists are capable of love.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I was joking. Not sure whether narcissists are capable of love.



Narcissists are only capable of self-love. They have that in abundance.


----------



## Tootsie17

Chanbal said:


> I was joking. Not sure whether narcissists are capable of love.


I thought you were.LOL!  My brain ceases to function properly after 9pm. I was just trying to be polite and answer your question.


----------



## bag-mania

*Top general accuses Prince Harry of turning his back on the Royal Marines after stepping down from ceremonial role as part of Megxit deal*

Prince Harry has been accused of turning his back on the Royal Marines and criticised for his behaviour by one of Britain’s most celebrated military commanders.

As part of the so-called Megxit deal that saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussexstep back as senior Royals earlier this year, Harry withdrew from his role as Captain General of the Marines.

However, the prestigious post was left vacant in the hope that he might resume his ceremonial duties next year after a 12-month review of the new arrangements.

But informed sources say the Prince has not been in touch by phone, letter nor email since his last appearance as an honorary Marine in March, prompting exasperated top brass to start considering a replacement.

Last night, Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the 1982 Falklands War, said: ‘I’m not trying to give him a lecture, but he has to take the job seriously and not just say, “Well, I’m still the Captain General and I’m going to live in Los Angeles and never visit the UK.” 

'It’s wrong. You can’t do that. He is expected to attend events and be around and be as accessible as his grandfather was.’

The Prince, who served two tours of duty in Afghanistan alongside Marines, was given the role by the Queen in 2017, succeeding the Duke of Edinburgh who had held the post for 64 years.

In a further apparent snub to the Armed Forces, Harry has failed to reply to a personal letter from Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, requesting more support for Britain’s military community. 

Lord Dannatt confirmed he had not received a reply to his note.

Last night, a spokesman for Prince Harry – who has continued his work with the Invictus Games initiative that he set up to support wounded, injured and sick armed forces personnel – did not respond to a request to comment. 

The Ministry of Defence declined to comment.









						News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
					

All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Vintage Leather

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooh, fairly certain MM will not leave for another 5 years. They may do a separate lives kinda thing, but she won’t leave him. What kind of man would take her? Notice how difficult Diana found it? Sarah too.  As for being the next Diana, never.  The world will not accept MM as Diana. It’s nothing to do with race. It is about her past. A divorced woman could never be a Diana2.0. Anyone who thinks that misses the appeal of Diana. IMO.



I don’t know.

There’s an old joke, “Sincerity is key. Once you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”

And if you think about it, we loved Di even as the tea-spilling (Morton book) crazy relationships divorcée. And I think that’s because 1) she was sincere about the things she believed in, 2) she was “like us” in that she a nursery school teacher and not foreign royalty, and 3) she looked amazing.

Diana was friends with her designers. She respected them, liked them, and they in turn protected her secrets and made her look fabulous. Even if you wince at 80s fashion, you have to admit she was the epitome of 80s Sloane ranger chic. Megan didn’t seem to cultivate that depth of relationships, but she if she had, if things fit a little better or flattered her a little more...

But the biggest hinderance to Megan’s ambition to be Diana 2.0 is the sincerity thing. I mean, she has fans due to #2. People like her because she’s a multiracial woman in a place where it isn’t common (the Royal family) and that she endured racism and walked away from it.

But anyone who spends more than a few minutes a week reading about her or listening to her- she loses her shine.
With delayed exposure, she comes off as genuine as a three-dollar bill. The sort of person who talks about hating publicity, then puts out a press release. The sort who talks about financial independence, but then defines independence as living off her father in law. A hustler who indulges in hypocrisy.

I want to like her, and that’s why she makes me angry. If she was a little smarter and a little more focused, I’d be defending her. Heck, I was defending her up until Eugenie’s wedding. All it would have taken was for her to demonstrate that she cares about something other than herself.


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
> 
> 
> It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


I don't think anyone really cares...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Vintage Leather said:


> I don’t know.
> 
> There’s an old joke, “Sincerity is key. Once you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”



IMO with her dignity, youthful beauty and sincerity,  Diana captivated most women from day 1. There was no pretence, no fast and furious effort to scrub the internet of incriminating photos, no shady past connections, etc. She made plenty of mistakes, fashion and protocol, but she didn’t stop. Plus, not for nothing, she married the heir to the throne. She showed up, worked hard and genuinely cared about her causes. Her HIV work cannot be underestimated.  Huge difference between the two women. As the ‘sordid‘ details spilled out about Charles and Diana’s personal life, her popularity began to slip a bit but the love tragedy just added depth to her beauty. We watched her grow up. She generously shared her children with the world. And then poof, in a tragic accident, she was gone.  MM does not have the personal history of growth that Diana had. MM spent her twenties posing for the camera, job or no job. Diana’s growth was visible and inspiring. MM seems to be the same poser now as she was at 20.


----------



## Vintage Leather

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO with her dignity, youthful beauty and sincerity,  Diana captivated most women from day 1. There was no pretence, no fast and furious effort to scrub the internet of incriminating photos, no shady past connections, etc. She made plenty of mistakes, fashion and protocol, but she didn’t stop. Plus, not for nothing, she married the heir to the throne. *She showed up, worked hard and genuinely cared about her causes.* Her HIV work cannot be underestimated.  Huge difference between the two women. As the ‘sordid‘ details spilled out about Charles and Diana’s personal life, her popularity began to slip a bit but the love tragedy just added depth to her beauty. We watched her grow up. She generously shared her children with the world. And then poof, in a tragic accident, she was gone.  MM does not have the personal history of growth that Diana had. MM spent her twenties posing for the camera, job or no job. Diana’s growth was visible and inspiring. MM seems to be the same poser now as she was at 20.



See, I think that if Megan had also showed up, worked hard and cared about her causes, we’d respect her.

When Diana got involved with the war against AIDS, it wasn’t trendy or popular. It was a little understood disease, that affected a segment of the population that many people liked to pretend didn’t exist. Heck, it was illegal to be gay in the U.K. until Diana was 6 years old. But she showed up, she campaigned for research, and she forced the world to see that thepeople fighting the disease were worthy of dignity.

Invictus Games was that for Harry. It was about an inconvenient truth: war leaves visible and invisible scars, and the people you stare at or ignore are worthy of respect. It was fun too - but it was something that he cared about and he put in the work. You thought that it was personal to him. Until all of a sudden, he didn’t show up and barely phoned in.

Megan doesn’t have a cause. I can’t label one thing or one charity that she believes in. Instead, she flits about, lands on something trending and regurgitates whatever is a mix of the most popular opinions, then flits to the next.

I don’t know. But honestly, I’m okay with the sexy photos if she owned up to them and didn’t try to pretend she was perfect. I just wish she’d stand for something, instead of falling for everything


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> In a further apparent snub to the Armed Forces, Harry has failed to reply to a personal letter from Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, requesting more support for Britain’s military community.
> 
> Lord Dannatt confirmed he had not received a reply to his note.



WTF. Was this guy raised by wolves or what happened? Can you see William doing this?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF. Was this guy raised by wolves or what happened? Can you see William doing this?



Harry has learned markling from the master. He has no use for contacts from his old life. He’s not going back to that. He is too busy self-promoting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF. Was this guy raised by wolves or what happened? Can you see William doing this?



I honestly think he doesn’t have people to reply on behalf of him and I doubt if he can actually write. Poor guy is not at fault


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, when a multi-millionaire lives in a $14 million mansion with 16 bathrooms, he can very well reply to the Lord General’s request. Even if it is a simple form letter, send an acknowledgment of the letter. Nobody likes to be ignored. Nobody.


----------



## bag-mania

mia55 said:


> I honestly think he doesn’t have people to reply on behalf of him and I doubt if he can actually write. Poor guy is not at fault



He is not illiterate and he doesn’t have a job anymore. There is nothing preventing him from handling his business, other than laziness, self-absorption, and/or indifference.

Since he always had people to do everything for him, maybe that’s why we never knew what a petulant little twerp he was until now. (Although we occasionally saw hints of it all his life.)


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> Meghan is thinking of publishing her diary.  she wants people to have compassion for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could the Duchess of Sussex's diary be published?
> 
> 
> It is thought the record could form the basis of a published work, offering Meghan’s side of the story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


Someone needs to tell MM...



and...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Top general accuses Prince Harry of turning his back on the Royal Marines after stepping down from ceremonial role as part of Megxit deal*
> 
> Prince Harry has been accused of turning his back on the Royal Marines and criticised for his behaviour by one of Britain’s most celebrated military commanders.
> 
> As part of the so-called Megxit deal that saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussexstep back as senior Royals earlier this year, Harry withdrew from his role as Captain General of the Marines.
> 
> However, the prestigious post was left vacant in the hope that he might resume his ceremonial duties next year after a 12-month review of the new arrangements.
> 
> But informed sources say the Prince has not been in touch by phone, letter nor email since his last appearance as an honorary Marine in March, prompting exasperated top brass to start considering a replacement.
> 
> Last night, Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the 1982 Falklands War, said: ‘I’m not trying to give him a lecture, but he has to take the job seriously and not just say, “Well, I’m still the Captain General and I’m going to live in Los Angeles and never visit the UK.”
> 
> 'It’s wrong. You can’t do that. He is expected to attend events and be around and be as accessible as his grandfather was.’
> 
> The Prince, who served two tours of duty in Afghanistan alongside Marines, was given the role by the Queen in 2017, succeeding the Duke of Edinburgh who had held the post for 64 years.
> 
> In a further apparent snub to the Armed Forces, Harry has failed to reply to a personal letter from Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, requesting more support for Britain’s military community.
> 
> Lord Dannatt confirmed he had not received a reply to his note.
> 
> Last night, a spokesman for Prince Harry – who has continued his work with the Invictus Games initiative that he set up to support wounded, injured and sick armed forces personnel – did not respond to a request to comment.
> 
> The Ministry of Defence declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


that's too bad.....seems to indicate he is Not his own man


----------



## Allisonfaye

Her kid is like...not even 2 yet?










						Meghan Markle talks about raising a mixed-race child
					

"I know that we have shared experiences of being in interracial marriages and raising small children who are of mixed race and how it plays into that."




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Her kid is like...not even 2 yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle talks about raising a mixed-race child
> 
> 
> "I know that we have shared experiences of being in interracial marriages and raising small children who are of mixed race and how it plays into that."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


this is very politically correct of her.  however, didn't she do everything to make herself look white or racially ambigious in her acting career?  and little Archie - while still young - looks like a white child.  so the conversation that black parents have to have with their kids (particularly sons) about things like how to behave with the police won't likely be necessary with her kid.
But you go Meghan, talk the talk.


----------



## kemilia

Allisonfaye said:


> Her kid is like...not even 2 yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle talks about raising a mixed-race child
> 
> 
> "I know that we have shared experiences of being in interracial marriages and raising small children who are of mixed race and how it plays into that."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Just another bandwagon to flit to.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Brad and Angie had substantial assets together and also, I think, both had quite a lot of money of their own before the marriage.  Whereas, Meghan didn't have much.  Most of their assets are from Harry's money (or his family's).  *But still I'm sure if/when they divorce she will get half of everything plus keep all the jewelry, etc.*
> And little Archie will have to continue to live in a style to which he has been accustomed (with the money going to his mommie of course to do this)


YUP .. that's what I think too!  She's going to be Dracula, and suck as much out of him and the BRF as she can! .. and of course, she always has her "Diary" to use as bait!


----------



## CeeJay

Vintage Leather said:


> See, I think that if Megan had also showed up, worked hard and cared about her causes, we’d respect her.
> 
> When Diana got involved with the war against AIDS, it wasn’t trendy or popular. It was a little understood disease, that affected a segment of the population that many people liked to pretend didn’t exist. Heck, it was illegal to be gay in the U.K. until Diana was 6 years old. But she showed up, she campaigned for research, and she forced the world to see that thepeople fighting the disease were worthy of dignity.
> 
> Invictus Games was that for Harry. It was about an inconvenient truth: war leaves visible and invisible scars, and the people you stare at or ignore are worthy of respect. It was fun too - but it was something that he cared about and he put in the work. You thought that it was personal to him. Until all of a sudden, he didn’t show up and barely phoned in.
> 
> Megan doesn’t have a cause. I can’t label one thing or one charity that she believes in. Instead, she flits about, lands on something trending and regurgitates whatever is a mix of the most popular opinions, then flits to the next.
> 
> I don’t know. But honestly, I’m okay with the sexy photos if she owned up to them and didn’t try to pretend she was perfect. I just wish she’d stand for something, instead of falling for everything


I disagree .. Meghan has a cause .. *HERSELF*!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Actually, am quite happy that Grifters-R-Us left the BRF, as my dad always said, "Don't let the door hit you in the arse!".

The BRF is better off without this TRAINWRECK of a couple, and we, the public get a rare glimpse of who Meghan Markle and her puppet Harry as they REALLY ARE under those fancy, fancy clothes as they repeat rehearsed sound-bytes written by their PR team:
Two very greedy, self-absorbed, extremely pretentious, delusional narcissists.

Good riddance to bad blood, as the saying goes.  

William & Kate will be better off without H&M and their shenanigans, maneuvering, and emotional manipulations at their court.
Actually, thank goodness H&M left the BRF!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

VigeeLeBrun said:


> William & Kate will be better off without H&M and their shenanigans, maneuvering, and emotional manipulations at their court.
> Actually, thank goodness H&M left the BRF!



William and Kate are the glowing winners. They were already doing a great job, but in comparison with these two it is pointed out to even the dullest person how different they are.


----------



## Chanbal

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Actually, am quite happy that Grifters-R-Us left the BRF, as my dad always said, "Don't let the door hit you in the arse!".*
> 
> The BRF is better off without this TRAINWRECK of a couple, and we, the public get a rare glimpse of who Meghan Markle and her puppet Harry as they REALLY ARE under those fancy, fancy clothes as they repeat rehearsed sound-bytes written by their PR team:
> Two very greedy, self-absorbed, extremely pretentious, delusional narcissists.
> 
> Good riddance to bad blood, as the saying goes.
> 
> William & Kate will be better off without H&M and their shenanigans, maneuvering, and emotional manipulations at their court.
> Actually, thank goodness H&M left the BRF!


@VigeeLeBrun you are not in the US, correct? Some of us would be also quite happy to see them leaving the US...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Yes he looks cleaner, but he also looks like his hemorrhoids are acting up. Or maybe it is the bilateral orchiectomy that is causing his discomforted expression.


Please ease up on the jokes before I choke to death... laughing... coughing... laughing... etc. Great post!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Chanbal said:


> @VigeeLeBrun* you are not in the US, correct? Some of us would be also quite happy to see them leaving the US...*



Sadly, alas I am in the US now by way of Switzerland & Sweden, huge influencers... and yes, you have my vote for Grifters-R-Us to depart these shores immediately. They can depart via private jet, will give them a pass this time BUT pls H&M if you have a heart its been a tough year here for EVERYONE NOT IN A $14M McMansion, couldn't you two take a second honeymoon <w/ or w/o> Archie back to the jungles of Africa THAT YOU LOVED SO MUCH, and kindly give us a break during this holiday season?

Plsssss!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CobaltBlu said:


> We really need some kind of H&M thread virtual *honor award* for this kind of service.
> A plaque or sash, maybe a small tiara? Anyone have anything suitable?   This is above and beyond, doll.


HMQ said she could borrow this tiara as a reward.
Tiara


----------



## CarryOn2020

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Sadly, alas I am in the US now by way of Switzerland & Sweden, huge influencers... and yes, you have my vote for Grifters-R-Us to depart these shores immediately. They can depart via private jet, will give them a pass this time BUT pls H&M if you have a heart its been a tough year here for EVERYONE NOT IN A $14M McMansion, couldn't you two take a second honeymoon <w/ or w/o> Archie back to the jungles of Africa THAT YOU LOVED SO MUCH, and kindly give us a break during this holiday season?
> 
> Plsssss!



Wait. Maybe we should rethink this Megxit2.
Since H&M have given us pages of endless camaraderie with popcorn & wine, perhaps they could leave  _after   _the next lockdown. Netflix has nothing as entertaining as these two grifters biting the hands that feed them. We have put in the time, researched every query, studied numerous photos — we must be rewarded for our efforts. On some corners of the internet, there are whispers MM may drop the lawsuits. We should discourage this nasty chatter. Inquiring minds must know who the 5 friends are, what Thomas did, and who in the palace hated her 

Let MM publish that diary, let them testify in open court (imagine!), let them survive thrive with no paps in a 16 bathroom McMansion with their neighbor TommyLee. We have earned some more fun at their expense, we need this lockdown escape, no? If we can‘t stop them, surely Gavin will step in.


ETA:  Even Max Mara is sparking joy on the MM ship yacht — let the good times begin!
https://us.maxmara.com/editorial/treasure-island-gifts


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> HMQ said she could borrow this tiara as a reward.
> Tiara


. I’ll take it.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> HMQ said she could borrow this tiara as a reward.
> Tiara


Lacey is now providing a not very credible justification for denying MM the Vladimir Tiara: 

"The emerald tiara that Meghan reportedly wanted to wear apparently has problematic history and the Queen didn't want her to wear a tiara associated with scandal at her wedding."

Yeah right!

Other sources seem to have a different opinion. The Vladimir Tiara is one of QE's favorites and she "chooses who has access to the royal collection, to which the tiara belongs, adding the reason she contested Meghan’s request was due to family rank." 



A favorite of QE!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Lacey is now providing a not very credible justification for denying MM the Vladimir Tiara:
> 
> "The emerald tiara that Meghan reportedly wanted to wear apparently has problematic history and the Queen didn't want her to wear a tiara associated with scandal at her wedding."
> 
> Yeah right!
> 
> Other sources seem to have a different opinion. The Vladimir Tiara is one of QE's favorites and she "chooses who has access to the royal collection, to which the tiara belongs, adding the reason she contested Meghan’s request was due to family rank."
> View attachment 4889037
> 
> 
> A favorite of QE!


That article is utter BS. As far as I know, no one other than the Queen (and past Queens) have worn The Vladimir Tiara. It is one of HM's favourite and she usually wears it at glittering events. Why should she lend it to this pretentious ***** when none of her family members have ever worn it!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Lacey is now providing a not very credible justification for denying MM the Vladimir Tiara:
> 
> "The emerald tiara that Meghan reportedly wanted to wear apparently has problematic history and the Queen didn't want her to wear a tiara associated with scandal at her wedding."
> 
> Yeah right!
> 
> Other sources seem to have a different opinion. The Vladimir Tiara is one of QE's favorites and she "chooses who has access to the royal collection, to which the tiara belongs, adding the reason she contested Meghan’s request was due to family rank."
> View attachment 4889037
> 
> 
> A favorite of QE!



QE II chooses who wears what and when. That's the beginning, middle and end of the story.

Any others are nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> QE II chooses who wears what and when. That's the beginning, middle and end of the story.
> 
> Any others are nonsense.



I agree. Why is Lacey coming up with so much nonsense to improve MM's image? Nflix deals?


----------



## marietouchet

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Sadly, alas I am in the US now by way of Switzerland & Sweden, huge influencers... and yes, you have my vote for Grifters-R-Us to depart these shores immediately. They can depart via private jet, will give them a pass this time BUT pls H&M if you have a heart its been a tough year here for EVERYONE NOT IN A $14M McMansion, couldn't you two take a second honeymoon <w/ or w/o> Archie back to the jungles of Africa THAT YOU LOVED SO MUCH, and kindly give us a break during this holiday season?
> 
> Plsssss!


Me too in the US despite Swiss-Welsh/English family, French education - English was my second language - taught to me in Received Pronunciation (AKA English posh) but  can do perfectly credible Southern Belle and San Fernando Valley girl accents too - very much a cultural hybrid


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry says his education and upbringing meant he didn't know unconscious bias existed until he 'walked a day in Meghan's shoes' as he interviews BLM campaigner who rescued white counter-protester*

So he will continue being an ignorant because walking in the shoes of people sitting in multi-million dollar deals and in the comfort of a 16-toilet mansion will certainly not provide the needed education. 

ignorance is bliss and hypocrisy is...


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle is 'shocked' by critics who think she is wading into politics because she feels telling people to vote in the US election 'shouldn't be controversial', Finding Freedom author claims*
Speaking to Elle.com, a source told Finding Freedom author Carolyn Durand: 'She thought she was saying something relatively uncontroversial, which is people should get involved and vote.'

Is Omid on vacation or on probation?

Shocked!!! the hypocrisy continues...

Happy Monday and a Great Week to All!


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> That article is utter BS. As far as I know, no one other than the Queen (and past Queens) have worn The Vladimir Tiara. It is one of HM's favourite and she usually wears it at glittering events. Why should she lend it to this pretentious ***** when none of her family members have ever worn it!


maybe the queen could send a signal by loaning it to Kate


----------



## marietouchet

The idea of loaning tiaras to family members did NOT exist until recently - princesses were each gifted tiaras at marriage

Margaret, Anne, Sarah and Sophie were gifted tiaras - all of which are likely to be (have been) sold and go outside the BRF - death duties British Museums have been busy buying up some of the more famous one eg the Fife tiara , but surely others are owned by foreign potentates - a bit annoying.

Diana was an exception. She had the Spencer tiara - from her family not BRF - on permanent loan. It reverted to her brother at her death. QEII gifted/ permanently loaned her the Lovers Knot tiara, that Diana rarely wore, it went back to the royal collection after her death. No one else wore it all tiose years but D. 

The first conspicuous tiara LOAN was for Kate's wedding - that tiara remains in the possession of QEII.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> The idea of loaning tiaras to family members did NOT exist until recently - princesses were each gifted tiaras at marriage
> 
> Margaret, Anne, Sarah and Sophie were gifted tiaras - all of which are likely to be (have been) sold and go outside the BRF - death duties British Museums have been busy buying up some of the more famous one eg the Fife tiara , but surely others are owned by foreign potentates - a bit annoying.
> 
> Diana was an exception. She had the Spencer tiara - from her family not BRF - on permanent loan. It reverted to her brother at her death. QEII gifted/ permanently loaned her the Lovers Knot tiara, that Diana rarely wore, it went back to the royal collection after her death. No one else wore it all tiose years but D.
> 
> The first conspicuous tiara LOAN was for Kate's wedding - that tiara remains in the possession of QEII.


Diana and Catherine were exceptions because of their future roles, both as Queen Consort.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry says his education and upbringing meant he didn't know unconscious bias existed until he 'walked a day in Meghan's shoes' as he interviews BLM campaigner who rescued white counter-protester*
> 
> So he will continue being an ignorant because walking in the shoes of people sitting in multi-million dollar deals and in the comfort of a 16-toilet mansion will certainly not provide the needed education.
> 
> ignorance is bliss and hypocrisy is...



I believe that a WOC can be targeted despite her wealth or perceived status. But JCMH never really thought about walking in anyone else's shoes before, not a woman, not a commoner, not someone of a different race nor colour, and certainly not a person that lives day to day, meal to meal in poverty. 

This absolutely smacks of being scripted by MM + PR. Harry being newly 'woke' is vomit-inducing. I would rather he would educate himself on what it's like to a UK citizen, on the verge of Brexit, isolated in the middle of a Covid epidemic having lost their job/income/home and seeing a couple who had millions lavished on their nuptials and indirectly still leaching off the Crown's public purse disguised as the Privy purse.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> maybe the queen could send a signal by loaning it to Kate


HMQ has already sent out a clear message by letting Beatrice wear the Queen Mary's Fringe Tiara (HM's wedding tiara) and a revised version her 1967 Norman Hartnell dress. 

ETA the appropriate date


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> maybe the queen could send a signal by loaning it to Kate



haha, probably she will


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I believe that a WOC can be targeted despite her wealth or perceived status. But JCMH never really thought about walking in anyone else's shoes before, not a woman, not a commoner, not someone of a different race nor colour, and certainly not a person that lives day to day, meal to meal in poverty.
> 
> This absolutely smacks of being scripted by MM + PR. Harry being newly 'woke' is vomit-inducing. I would rather he would educate himself on what it's like to a UK citizen, on the verge of Brexit, isolated in the middle of a Covid epidemic having lost their job/income/home and seeing a couple who had millions lavished on their nuptials and indirectly still leaching off the Crown's public purse disguised as the Privy purse.



I agree, WOCs can be targeted at several levels, and I'm not questioning that. I also don't question their messages, but I question their motives. 

In the past, MM presented herself as caucasian and lately she seems to be what was previously mentioned in this thread a "WOCC", A Woman of Convenient Color.'


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry says his education and upbringing meant he didn't know unconscious bias existed until he 'walked a day in Meghan's shoes' as he interviews BLM campaigner who rescued white counter-protester*
> 
> So he will continue being an ignorant because walking in the shoes of people sitting in multi-million dollar deals and in the comfort of a 16-toilet mansion will certainly not provide the needed education.
> 
> ignorance is bliss and hypocrisy is...



I couldn’t stop laughing at the word education. I don’t he ever paid attention in any class in his whole life. He definitely slept through WWII and the Nazis.  Was he not paying attention during the time he spent in the military?  That exposed him to men from all walks of life and cultures. Oh right, he was in that swaddled little bubble so he wouldn’t get injured. If he went back to the UK tomorrow he would forget whatever he learned in the US in a nanosecond. He has the attention span of a flea.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I couldn’t stop laughing at the word education. I don’t he ever paid attention in any class in his whole life. He definitely slept through WWII and the Nazis.  Was he not paying attention during the time he spent in the military?  That exposed him to men from all walks of life and cultures. Oh right, he was in that swaddled little bubble so he wouldn’t get injured. If he went back to the UK tomorrow he would forget whatever he learned in the US in a nanosecond. He has the attention span of a flea.


and what is he learning?  what Meghan teaches him.  they probably don't go anywhere much.  Oh wait, I think they did go to a fast food place once (In N Out?)

and they went out in their big SUV with their security staff delivering food once


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I couldn’t stop laughing at the word education. I don’t he ever paid attention in any class in his whole life. He definitely slept through WWII and the Nazis.  Was he not paying attention during the time he spent in the military?  That exposed him to men from all walks of life and cultures. Oh right, he was in that swaddled little bubble so he wouldn’t get injured. If he went back to the UK tomorrow he would forget whatever he learned in the US in a nanosecond. He has the attention span of a flea.



When did his woke training training start?

Did his upbringing and education not remind him which side of WWII we (GB) fought on?

He was actively caught making a racist remark whilst on military training only 11 years ago!!!! Did the reprimand he got not educate him, or did he choose to carry on regardless and just made sure he didn't get caught?









						Politicians condemn Prince Harry over 'racist' remark
					

St James's Palace apologises for comments made in video diary




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I believe that a WOC can be targeted despite her wealth or perceived status. But JCMH never really thought about walking in anyone else's shoes before, not a woman, not a commoner, not someone of a different race nor colour, and certainly not a person that lives day to day, meal to meal in poverty.
> 
> This absolutely smacks of being scripted by MM + PR. Harry being newly 'woke' is vomit-inducing. I would rather he would educate himself on what it's like to a UK citizen, on the verge of Brexit, isolated in the middle of a Covid epidemic having lost their job/income/home and seeing a couple who had millions lavished on their nuptials and indirectly still leaching off the Crown's public purse disguised as the Privy purse.


Word salad alert - what the heck is unconscious bias ?
Did it NEVER dawn on him that people of Indian/Pakistani origin (just as one example of a significant UK minority) would not receive automatic equal chance ??? 
One would have to be BRAIN DEAD not to notice ...


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> When did his woke training training start?
> 
> Did his upbringing and education not remind him which side of WWII we (GB) fought on?
> 
> He was actively caught making a racist remark whilst on military training only 11 years ago!!!! Did the reprimand he got not educate him, or did he choose to carry on regardless and just made sure he didn't get caught?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Politicians condemn Prince Harry over 'racist' remark
> 
> 
> St James's Palace apologises for comments made in video diary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


Excellent point about WWII ....


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Diana and Catherine were exceptions because of their future roles, both as Queen Consort.


Agree
Cue whining tone of voice - they got special treatment not accorded to Meghan  ...


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why can’t Sunshine Sachs get him better lighting for these zooms? He looks so dead eyed every time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ha!


Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'


https://mol.im/a/8880781


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Ha!
> 
> 
> Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/8880781


This is beyond ridiculous! They couldn't find a seat for a niece, uncle..., but... 

"In a sign of their apparent closeness to the couple, the Clooneys were given a 'prime pew' next to Lady Carolyn Warren, who is married to John Warren, the Queen's bloodstock adviser, and opposite Princess Margaret's son Viscount Linley.  

However the Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is beyond ridiculous! They couldn't find a seat for a nice, uncle..., but...
> 
> "In a sign of their apparent closeness to the couple, the Clooneys were given a 'prime pew' next to Lady Carolyn Warren, who is married to John Warren, the Queen's bloodstock adviser, and opposite Princess Margaret's son Viscount Linley.
> 
> However the Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson."


exactly.....she could not find one relative outside of her mother to even invite - never mind seat in a prominent place?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Why can’t Sunshine Sachs get him better lighting for these zooms? He looks so dead eyed every time.



You get that dead eyed look after you’ve sold your soul.  We must be polite and pretend we don’t notice


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> exactly.....she could not find one relative outside of her mother to even invite - never mind seat in a prominent place?


niece, not nice (sorry for the misspelling )

There was even an uncle that used his connections to get her a prestigious internship at the American embassy in Argentina...


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> Lacey is now providing a not very credible justification for denying MM the Vladimir Tiara:
> 
> "The emerald tiara that Meghan reportedly wanted to wear apparently has problematic history and the Queen didn't want her to wear a tiara associated with scandal at her wedding."
> 
> Yeah right!
> 
> Other sources seem to have a different opinion. The Vladimir Tiara is one of QE's favorites and she "chooses who has access to the royal collection, to which the tiara belongs, adding the reason she contested Meghan’s request was due to family rank."
> View attachment 4889037
> 
> 
> A favorite of QE!


What hypocrisy--she knew basically nothing about the RF traditions, "rules", etc. YET did enough research to know which tiara she wanted to wear for her wedding. 

As I used to say as a kid--"Baloney baloney salami".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> niece, not nice (sorry for the misspelling )
> 
> There was even an uncle that used his connections to get her a prestigious internship at the American embassy in Argentina...


right.  and even if you haven't remained in close contact with someone like that, when you're having a huge wedding, you would invite them, right?  I can't imagine she would be so sensitive to her closer relatives that not inviting them would stop her from inviting the uncle....sorry, I can't find anything to like about her


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I couldn’t stop laughing at the word education. I don’t he ever paid attention in any class in his whole life. He definitely slept through WWII and the Nazis.  Was he not paying attention during the time he spent in the military?  That exposed him to men from all walks of life and cultures. Oh right, he was in that swaddled little bubble so he wouldn’t get injured. If he went back to the UK tomorrow he would forget whatever he learned in the US in a nanosecond. He has the *attention span of a flea*.


You're being generous, a flea likely has more brain cells than Harry .. possibly a *single-cell **parameciu**m* would be more appropriate???


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Ha!
> 
> 
> Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/8880781


This doesn't surprise me one bit; I doubt that Oprah really "knew" them, or Gayle King or any of the other celebrities that Meghan felt needed to be invited in order to *UP HER visibility* in the Hollywood world .. it was NEVER about the BRF or Harry.  This is why I just don't get why people don't see the unbelievable transparency in her and what her MAIN goal was!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I had to unsubscribe to a podcast yesterday because one of the hosts said something like  “MM is an angel and anyone who says anything bad about her is trash”.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The Queen purchased Sarah’s tiara.  Sarah didn’t have a family tiara, being a commoner.  She (QE) tried to get it back in the divorce, but lost.  After that, wedding tiaras are LOANED.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> This doesn't surprise me one bit; I doubt that Oprah really "knew" them, or Gayle King or any of the other celebrities that Meghan felt needed to be invited in order to *UP HER visibility* in the Hollywood world .. it was NEVER about the BRF or Harry.  This is why I just don't get why people don't see the unbelievable transparency in her and what her MAIN goal was!


Yet people who were genuinely friends with Harry, I include Elton John and the Beckhams in that, were relegated to the 'cheap seats' and only saw the service on monitors.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is beyond ridiculous! They couldn't find a seat for a niece, uncle..., but...
> 
> "In a sign of their apparent closeness to the couple, the Clooneys were given a 'prime pew' next to Lady Carolyn Warren, who is married to John Warren, the Queen's bloodstock adviser, and opposite Princess Margaret's son Viscount Linley.
> 
> However the Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson."


The Brits at the wedding who knew about this and where the Clooneys were seated must have been stupefied.  Obviously THEY were being treated as if they were royalty.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Yet people who were genuinely friends with Harry, I include Elton John and the Beckhams in that, were relegated to the 'cheap seats' and only saw the service on monitors.


This was definitely a networking move for the the future transplantation to LA. That was always the end game.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> Yet people who were genuinely friends with Harry, I include Elton John and the Beckhams in that, were relegated to the 'cheap seats' and only saw the service on monitors.


Pretty surprising given the relationship between Diana and Elton.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> You get that dead eyed look after you’ve sold your soul.  We must be polite and pretend we don’t notice


It's so easy to lose one's sense of humour during this pandemic. Instead, just visit this thread to laugh with y'all. Feels really great!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I had to unsubscribe to a podcast yesterday because one of the hosts said something like  “MM is an angel and anyone who says anything bad about her is trash”.



Ugh. She sees her the way she wants her to be. That’s the problem with humanity in general, so many don't have the ability to be discerning. It’s so much easier to believe everything you are told about a celebrity as long as it’s nice and it makes you feel good. Building someone up as your hero and then realizing you _might_ have been mistaken is unacceptable to many. It means doubling-down on the support. I compare it to rabid sports fans who go on about how their team is going to win every game despite having a losing record. Clear, rational thinking is not a part of fandom.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This was definitely a networking move for the the future transplantation to LA. That was always the end game.


well George Clooney is in business to make successful movies so while he may have thought it would be a great opportunity to attend a royal wedding, I doubt he's going to cast a D-list actress in an A-list role when he produces his next film


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Yet people who were genuinely friends with Harry, I include Elton John and the Beckhams in that, were relegated to the 'cheap seats' and only saw the service on monitors.



As always, it's what Meghan wants Meghan gets. Elton wasn't _her_ friend. While he is a legend, he's getting kind of old and he's not in the public consciousness anymore. He couldn't give them that bump in status Meghan craved.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> well George Clooney is in business to make successful movies so while he may have thought it would be a great opportunity to attend a royal wedding, I doubt he's going to cast a D-list actress in an A-list role when he produces his next film


I also get the sense that George isn't a fool and knows when someone is trying to 'play' him.  He's had the same friends (including actors) for some time, and they are all known for being the more 'down-to-earth' types.  I don't think he would want to involve himself in the 'mess' these 2 have made for themselves and the BRF!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I also get the sense that George isn't a fool and knows when someone is trying to 'play' him.  He's had the same friends (including actors) for some time, and they are all known for being the more 'down-to-earth' types.  I don't think he would want to involve himself in the 'mess' these 2 have made for themselves and the BRF!


right...
and I'm sure Meghan would love to think she's in a league with someone like Amal - who has real accomplishments - Not


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

More law suit incoming? 









						Prince Harry Sends Legal Warning to the Same Newspaper Meghan Markle Is Suing
					

His lawyers accused the Mail on Sunday of publishing a “false and defamatory” article about his relationship with the British Armed Forces.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> More law suit incoming?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Sends Legal Warning to the Same Newspaper Meghan Markle Is Suing
> 
> 
> His lawyers accused the Mail on Sunday of publishing a “false and defamatory” article about his relationship with the British Armed Forces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


But wait, if he is no longer a "Senior member of the Royal Family" and that he was stripped of his Military Titles, should he even be commenting on this?  [Just thinking of when the 2 bone-heads decided to create the "vote" video and the BRF came back and said that he no longer represented them.]  Just thinkin' ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is he saying the Lord Dannatt is lying? The Major General? 
Wow.  Harry continues to be a jerk. 
_
Speaking to the Mail on Sunday, Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the 1982 Falklands War, said, “I’m not trying to give him a lecture, but he has to take the job seriously and not just say, ‘Well, I’m still the Captain General and I’m going to live in Los Angeles and never visit the UK.’ It’s wrong. You can’t do that. He is expected to attend events and be around and be as accessible as his grandfather was.”

The Mail on Sunday also suggested that Harry had snubbed Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, who wrote to the prince requesting more support for Britain’s military community but never received a reply. Sources close to the Duke, however, claim the letter was never sent on, and that his office has since been in touch to request a copy of the letter is sent to the duke’s staff in Los Angeles._




chicinthecity777 said:


> More law suit incoming?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Sends Legal Warning to the Same Newspaper Meghan Markle Is Suing
> 
> 
> His lawyers accused the Mail on Sunday of publishing a “false and defamatory” article about his relationship with the British Armed Forces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is he saying the Lord Dannatt is lying? The Major General?
> Wow.  Harry continues to be a jerk.
> 
> _Speaking to the Mail on Sunday, Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the 1982 Falklands War, said, “I’m not trying to give him a lecture, but he has to take the job seriously and not just say, ‘Well, I’m still the Captain General and I’m going to live in Los Angeles and never visit the UK.’ It’s wrong. You can’t do that. He is expected to attend events and be around and be as accessible as his grandfather was.”
> 
> The Mail on Sunday also suggested that Harry had snubbed Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, who wrote to the prince requesting more support for Britain’s military community but never received a reply. Sources close to the Duke, however, claim the letter was never sent on, and that his office has since been in touch to request a copy of the letter is sent to the duke’s staff in Los Angeles._


These two are ridiculous....who else on the level they think they are on goes around suing everyone?


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. She sees her the way she wants her to be. That’s the problem with humanity in general, so many don't have the ability to be discerning. It’s so much easier to believe everything you are told about a celebrity as long as it’s nice and it makes you feel good. Building someone up as your hero and then realizing you _might_ have been mistaken is unacceptable to many. It means doubling-down on the support. I compare it to rabid sports fans who go on about how their team is going to win every game despite having a losing record. Clear, rational thinking is not a part of fandom.



Guarantee you 90% of the people with nice things to say just don't really care that much and don't follow the thread week to week. It's more flippancy than determined support. They see some headlines, maybe have met her once or twice and had polite chit chat and that's all they really care to know. I know I've been on the other end where I rave about a celeb and someone corrects me that he's a so and so bad person because he said this or that in interviews... nice to be corrected but I didn't really care that much either way.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> I believe that a WOC can be targeted despite her wealth or perceived status. But JCMH never really thought about walking in anyone else's shoes before, not a woman, not a commoner, not someone of a different race nor colour, and certainly not a person that lives day to day, meal to meal in poverty.
> 
> This absolutely smacks of being scripted by MM + PR. Harry being newly 'woke' is vomit-inducing. I would rather he would educate himself on what it's like to a UK citizen, on the verge of Brexit, isolated in the middle of a Covid epidemic having lost their job/income/home and seeing a couple who had millions lavished on their nuptials and indirectly still leaching off the Crown's public purse disguised as the Privy purse.



I'm now of the opinion that the only way royals can be tolerated is if they do their public jobs, give the company line, stay in their lane, etc to remind us they're working for all that privilege OR sit down and shut up for the most part. Anything else is a nasty reminder that they're privileged beyond belief from an unjust system to begin with.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My cousin and I used to chat about Catherine, and she used to always say that she found her so boring, and I kept trying to remind her that that’s her job, to be boring and appropriate and look good.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is he saying the Lord Dannatt is lying? The Major General?
> Wow.  Harry continues to be a jerk.
> 
> _Speaking to the Mail on Sunday, Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the 1982 Falklands War, said, “I’m not trying to give him a lecture, but he has to take the job seriously and not just say, ‘Well, I’m still the Captain General and I’m going to live in Los Angeles and never visit the UK.’ It’s wrong. You can’t do that. He is expected to attend events and be around and be as accessible as his grandfather was.”
> 
> The Mail on Sunday also suggested that Harry had snubbed Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, who wrote to the prince requesting more support for Britain’s military community but never received a reply. Sources close to the Duke, however, claim the letter was never sent on, and that his office has since been in touch to request a copy of the letter is sent to the duke’s staff in Los Angeles._



I don’t understand the Mail on Sunday’s story at all. This is the first I’ve seen that the position was on hold for Harry. I had understood that he’d been forced to give it up and it’s been vacant. Last I saw Wills was up to take it over. If the position is no longer his, I don’t understand the expectation that he’d be working with them? Why would Hollywood Harry even care? It doesn’t even look like he cares about Invictus anymore since he joined Netflix...


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well George Clooney is in business to make successful movies so while he may have thought it would be a great opportunity to attend a royal wedding, I doubt he's going to cast a D-list actress in an A-list role when he produces his next film


If anything, perhaps George thought that Harry would invest in a future film.  Fat chance of that!


----------



## gracekelly

There is no mail service in Montecito.  There is no phone service in Montecito so not even fax service.  Email doesn't work either.  It's a sad state of affairs there and a depressed area. 
I have several nice bridges for sale.  Any takers?

I figured it out!  Lord Dannatt's letter was thrown out with a bunch of bills that came in the mail.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everything about that wedding was a scam. While the Hwood people look like the charlatans they are who cannot be trusted, QE shines ever brighter and wiser.


----------



## marietouchet

Deleted , link will not work, sorry
You guys are missing a great MM hagiography from a South African magazine


----------



## Lounorada

chicinthecity777 said:


> More law suit incoming?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Sends Legal Warning to the Same Newspaper Meghan Markle Is Suing
> 
> 
> His lawyers accused the Mail on Sunday of publishing a “false and defamatory” article about his relationship with the British Armed Forces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com







FFS. Proving yet again what a joke they are. The truth hurts sometimes JCMH, that's life and you should try and get used to that.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Everything about that wedding was a scam. While the Hwood people look like the charlatans they are who cannot be trusted, QE shines ever brighter and wiser.


What she did is a big NO!  People have long memories about things like this too.


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 4889856
> View attachment 4889865
> 
> 
> FFS. Proving yet again what a joke they are. The truth hurts sometimes JCMH, that's life and you should try and get used to that.


He is such a frickin' baby. Waah waah waah.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet  I did read it. So syrupy, clearly Nici de Wet is a good friend. The part about tailoring was one huge lie. Hahaha.
Here is another sample of Nici’s sycophantic work:








						OPINION | Confessions from the royal tour frontline | You
					

Nici de Wet is YOU’s senior journalist who reported from the ground during the Cape Town leg of their Royal Highnesses Africa tour – and this is her take on the experience.




					www.news24.com


----------



## bag-mania

Wonder if Harry was talking about himself and his own isolation here. 

The duke said: "For men who are isolated by themselves this can be a really dark place, unless you know the different solutions or different distractions that you can put into your life, whether it's going for a great walk or a run or just doing something that keeps you mentally and physically fit."









						'Living in Meghan's shoes' helped Prince Harry see racial bias
					

The Duke of Sussex says a privileged upbringing meant he did not understand unconscious racial bias.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

"LIVING IN MEGHAN'S SHOES..."
Which pair of Meghan's shoes, twerp Harry?

Do you mean that pair of stilettos that Meghan used to render you brainless & spineless, you stupid fool?

My gosh, someone pls tell Harry that he is completely irrelevant and he couldn't get a job as one of the Three Stooges if he tried.
Geez, he had everything, now petulant brat just keep your mouth SHUT, and stick to keeping Meghan happy.
And good luck with that, lol!


----------



## gracekelly

I wish I had photoshop capabilities so I could take a picture of Harry and have him wear a pair of her stilettos.


----------



## Lodpah

I haven't posted for a few days but I gotta get this off my chest. These two are the most self entitled pricks in the entire universe. I've been reading blogs like justshelter and I read heart breaking stories of people losing their homes, no food, and all the hardships going on in the world, yet they are so clueless and lecture people about whatever stupid things they have to say and companies give them money to do so. 

Well guess what you two dimwits (I have stronger language but I'm refraining)? Instead of babbling about useless things you two are exactly what the world is fighting against. I can't wait for the day these two are non relevant in the media.

How dumb and clueless are they?We are in a world wide crises and they speak so stupidly.  If they want to make a difference, sell those jewels, give money directly to people who are hurting. Word salad, that's all it is. Word salad that wilts quickly. 

I don't think there is that much interest in them, *people are too busy trying to survive cause right now people just want to survive, they have no time to thrive. *

I have the utmost respect for street walkers (cause they own it) than this charlatan and her genitalia-lobotomized, chained pet husband. They're the most twisted and ugly hearted people I've ever read about.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t understand the Mail on Sunday’s story at all. This is the first I’ve seen that the position was on hold for Harry. I had understood that he’d been forced to give it up and it’s been vacant. Last I saw Wills was up to take it over. If the position is no longer his, I don’t understand the expectation that he’d be working with them? Why would Hollywood Harry even care? It doesn’t even look like he cares about Invictus anymore since he joined Netflix...



I definitely recall that the position is on hold for Harry for their probationary year. There was some speculation (around April?) that Princess Anne might be the replacement so even then there were noises that Harry might be replaced. As you noted there was also speculation recently that William will take over. Notwithstanding that, I think there is a  strong feeling in the British Military that Harry is no longer wanted in this role, that he is not fulfilling his duties. IMO if he loses this position it is not because it was "taken away" from him, rather he didn't turn up for work for 10 months !

Quick aside also - Is he coming back/been back for his tax residency requirements yet ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M still don’t get it. Sad that they play the victim card, even now and especially with the military. Hilarious in a snarky way that they rented a place for the teen interview. Such liars. Finally, George Clooney says he doesn’t know them. Looking forward to more truths spilling out. 









						Harry and Meghan recorded podcast at $400 an hour rental property
					

Harry and Meghan recorded a podcast about teenage mental health at a luxury $400 an hour beach front rental property, DailyMail.com can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M still don’t get it. Sad that they play the victim card, even now and especially with the military. Hilarious in a snarky way that they rented a place for the teen interview. Such liars. Finally, George Clooney says he doesn’t know them. Looking forward to more truths spilling out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan recorded podcast at $400 an hour rental property
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan recorded a podcast about teenage mental health at a luxury $400 an hour beach front rental property, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



IIRC the article said the Clooneys didn’t know H&M *well*, which is different than not knowing them *at all*.  But I’m not giving H&M a pass either.  The Clooneys were invited for their status/connections and certainly M  wanted the world to think they were close friends.   OTOH didn’t Amal give M the use of the Clooneys private plane for M’s baby shower?  That’s the thing I don’t quite understand, unless Amal was on the plane too?


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> IIRC the article said the Clooneys didn’t know H&M *well*, which is different than not knowing them *at all*.  But I’m not giving H&M a pass either.  The Clooneys were invited for their status/connections and certainly M  wanted the world to think they were close friends.   OTOH didn’t Amal give M the use of the Clooneys private plane for M’s baby shower?  That’s the thing I don’t quite understand, unless Amal was on the plane too?


My 2 cents:

"the article said the Clooneys didn’t know H&M *well*"-A polite way to say that they have never met the couple before the weeding...

"OTOH didn’t Amal give M the use of the Clooneys private plane for M’s baby shower? " -the Clooneys were guests of honor at MM&H's weeding, this was likely a 'return on kindness' ... (and perhaps the Clooneys were also thinking about a potential stronger connection with the BRF in the future  )


----------



## CarryOn2020

_There are conflicting reports about how well the Clooneys knew the couple. _








						Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'
					

Writing in AirMail, Rachel Johnson reveals there's a 'story going around' that George and Amal Clooney confessed they didn't know the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moments before the royal wedding.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Well, as we’ve learned, with H&M nothing is simple.  



Spoiler: The article



George and Amal Clooney confessed they didn't know the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moments before the royal wedding, it is claimed. 

Hollywood actor George, 59, and human rights barrister Amal, 42, were among the 600 guests who witnessed Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, exchange vows at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, in May 2018.

In a sign of their apparent closeness to the couple, the Clooneys were given a 'prime pew' next to Lady Carolyn Warren, who is married to John Warren, the Queen's bloodstock adviser, and opposite Princess Margaret's son Viscount Linley.   

However the Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson.






Hollywood actor George, 59, and human rights barrister Amal, 42, were among the 600 guests invited to witness Prince Harry and Meghan Markle exchange vows at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, in May 2018. The couple were given a 'prime pew' opposite the family





The Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson. Pictured, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at their wedding

'There’s a story doing the rounds that while Carolyn Bartholomew, Diana’s former flatmate, was waiting for the wedding service to start, she turned to the couple alongside her and asked how they knew Harry or Meghan,' Johnson writes in online publication AirMail. '"We don’t," the Clooneys answered brightly.'



Carolyn, who attended the wedding with husband William, is Harry’s godmother and was one of three young women who shared Diana’s Earl’s Court flat and was privy to the secret when she first met Charles.

She was given one of the best seats in the house, opposite Prince William and Prince Charles.

Johnson added there were plenty of other celebrity invitees, including Oprah Winfrey, James Corden, and David and Victoria Beckham who 'could not possibly be old and dear friends of the bridal couple'.

Oprah Winfrey, Serena Williams and her husband Alexis Ohanian were seated near the Clooneys while the Beckhams, James Corden and his wife were further away. 





The Clooneys reportedly made the comment to Prince Harry's godmother Carolyn Bartholomew, who attended the wedding with husband William (pictured in 2004)

George and Amal caused a stir when they arrived at the royal wedding and were among the exclusive 200-strong guest list invited to party the night away at Frogmore House. George is said to have danced with both Meghan and Kate Middleton, 39. 

There are conflicting reports about how well the Clooneys knew the couple. 

Finding Freedom, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biography, claims the Clooneys hosted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on at least two occasions at their British home in Sonning, in Oxfordshire. 

The book adds that Harry and Meghan brought their dogs with them, and that George and Amal loved to take friends out by the lake.





Carolyn was one of three young women who shared Diana’s Earl’s Court flat and was privy to the secret when she first met Charles. Pictured, Diana and Carolyn at a friend's 1991 wedding

'There, they had a secluded decked area and inside was a lounge decorated with traditional club wood paneling, heavy drapes, dark velvets, plush chairs, and a bar.'

The biography also claims the Clooneys invited the royals to join them at Lake Como just weeks after the royal wedding, flying out on George's private jet.   

During the three-day visit, a source said, 'Meghan and Amal spent a lot of time relaxing by the pool and playing with the twins while George and Harry checked out George's motorbike collection. Harry took one of them out with one of his protection officers. George recently had an accident, so he wasn't back on his bike yet.''

'The duke and duchess weren't the only guests that weekend. Eugenie and her fiance, Jack Brooksbank, were already at the villa when Harry and Meghan arrived, their visits overlapping briefly.'

Amal also hired a private jet to fly Meghan home from her New York baby shower in February 2019.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _There are conflicting reports about how well the Clooneys knew the couple. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'
> 
> 
> Writing in AirMail, Rachel Johnson reveals there's a 'story going around' that George and Amal Clooney confessed they didn't know the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moments before the royal wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, as we’ve learned, with H&M nothing is simple.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The article
> 
> 
> 
> George and Amal Clooney confessed they didn't know the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moments before the royal wedding, it is claimed.
> 
> Hollywood actor George, 59, and human rights barrister Amal, 42, were among the 600 guests who witnessed Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, exchange vows at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, in May 2018.
> 
> In a sign of their apparent closeness to the couple, the Clooneys were given a 'prime pew' next to Lady Carolyn Warren, who is married to John Warren, the Queen's bloodstock adviser, and opposite Princess Margaret's son Viscount Linley.
> 
> However the Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood actor George, 59, and human rights barrister Amal, 42, were among the 600 guests invited to witness Prince Harry and Meghan Markle exchange vows at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, in May 2018. The couple were given a 'prime pew' opposite the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Clooneys reportedly told other guests they didn't know the happy couple well at all, according to Rachel Johnson. Pictured, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at their wedding
> 
> 'There’s a story doing the rounds that while Carolyn Bartholomew, Diana’s former flatmate, was waiting for the wedding service to start, she turned to the couple alongside her and asked how they knew Harry or Meghan,' Johnson writes in online publication AirMail. '"We don’t," the Clooneys answered brightly.'
> 
> 
> 
> Carolyn, who attended the wedding with husband William, is Harry’s godmother and was one of three young women who shared Diana’s Earl’s Court flat and was privy to the secret when she first met Charles.
> 
> She was given one of the best seats in the house, opposite Prince William and Prince Charles.
> 
> Johnson added there were plenty of other celebrity invitees, including Oprah Winfrey, James Corden, and David and Victoria Beckham who 'could not possibly be old and dear friends of the bridal couple'.
> 
> Oprah Winfrey, Serena Williams and her husband Alexis Ohanian were seated near the Clooneys while the Beckhams, James Corden and his wife were further away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Clooneys reportedly made the comment to Prince Harry's godmother Carolyn Bartholomew, who attended the wedding with husband William (pictured in 2004)
> 
> George and Amal caused a stir when they arrived at the royal wedding and were among the exclusive 200-strong guest list invited to party the night away at Frogmore House. George is said to have danced with both Meghan and Kate Middleton, 39.
> 
> There are conflicting reports about how well the Clooneys knew the couple.
> 
> Finding Freedom, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biography, claims the Clooneys hosted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on at least two occasions at their British home in Sonning, in Oxfordshire.
> 
> The book adds that Harry and Meghan brought their dogs with them, and that George and Amal loved to take friends out by the lake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carolyn was one of three young women who shared Diana’s Earl’s Court flat and was privy to the secret when she first met Charles. Pictured, Diana and Carolyn at a friend's 1991 wedding
> 
> 'There, they had a secluded decked area and inside was a lounge decorated with traditional club wood paneling, heavy drapes, dark velvets, plush chairs, and a bar.'
> 
> The biography also claims the Clooneys invited the royals to join them at Lake Como just weeks after the royal wedding, flying out on George's private jet.
> 
> During the three-day visit, a source said, 'Meghan and Amal spent a lot of time relaxing by the pool and playing with the twins while George and Harry checked out George's motorbike collection. Harry took one of them out with one of his protection officers. George recently had an accident, so he wasn't back on his bike yet.''
> 
> 'The duke and duchess weren't the only guests that weekend. Eugenie and her fiance, Jack Brooksbank, were already at the villa when Harry and Meghan arrived, their visits overlapping briefly.'
> 
> Amal also hired a private jet to fly Meghan home from her New York baby shower in February 2019.


I think any family - never mind royal - having a huge wedding would find it odd that the bride has No relatives invited except for her mom.  This must have raised questions in the queen's mind.  Who is this woman? Has she erased her past?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think any family - never mind royal - having a huge wedding would find it odd that the bride has No relatives invited except for her mom.  This must have raised questions in the queen's mind.  Who is this woman? Has she erased her past?



I bet it did, but there was nothing to be done about it. Harry wanted to marry her and that was that.


----------



## lanasyogamama

IIRC, the article said that the people next to them asked “How do you know H&M?” and they answered “We don’t!”


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I think any family - never mind royal - having a huge wedding would find it odd that the bride has No relatives invited except for her mom.  This must have raised questions in the queen's mind.  Who is this woman? Has she erased her past?



Of 600 or so guests, only 1 family member. Yes, that would give me pause.
As many TpF’ers suggested early on, it‘s odd, it’s weird and it indicates there is an issue, perhaps a full-on problem. Maybe now that George has commented on the relationship, others will ‘fess up. The door has been opened.


----------



## bag-mania

For all the massive media hype they have been getting, there have been very few other famous people who want to be linked with them or even appear with them. I won't count Gloria Steinem since that was clearly mutually beneficial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of 600 or so guests, only 1 family member. Yes, that would give me pause.
> As many TpF’ers suggested early on, it‘s odd, it’s weird and it indicates there is an issue, perhaps a full-on problem. Maybe now that George has commented on the relationship, others will ‘fess up. The door has been opened.


We can now wait for some sort of PR announcement of some wonderful cause/charity they will zoom bomb to whitewash this revelation. 

The crockery is most likely being thrown at 16 Bathrooms, Montecito, CA, USA.


----------



## gracekelly

My wish came true. Another wit managed the photoshop!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> My wish came true. Another wit managed the photoshop!
> 
> View attachment 4890438


This is hilarious. 
Lucky for me, I wasn't eating or drinking this time or it would have been a major choke.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> _There are conflicting reports about how well the Clooneys knew the couple. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'
> 
> 
> Writing in AirMail, Rachel Johnson reveals there's a 'story going around' that George and Amal Clooney confessed they didn't know the Duke and Duchess of Sussex moments before the royal wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, as we’ve learned, with H&M nothing is simple.



I think it's pretty clear that they invited the Clooneys and Oprah in order to kick start relationships with people that they identified as Hollywood power players. So, obviously, Megexit was being planned well before the wedding and well before any conflict arose with the Palace or any negative stories started appearing in the tabloid press.  MM probably figured out pretty quickly that she didn't like the duties or being told what to do and when to do it and how to dress and when to curtsy.  ETA:  Harry obviously wanted out too, for  this to have been planned so far in advance.  Looking back, I think they intended to leave from the start and then used the negative stories in the press and anything their perceived as a slight in their dealings with the Palace or the family to justify it.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> For all the massive media hype they have been getting, there have been very few other famous people who want to be linked with them or even appear with them. I won't count Gloria Steinem since that was clearly mutually beneficial.


They also share the same PR company (Sunshine Sachs), so I wouldn't doubt that SS put it together!


----------



## bag-mania

It is all an agenda! Because nothing Meghan had done could possibly be justifiably criticized. Meghan is a victim again! 

A source close to the Duchess says the constant attacks have been difficult. "She thought she was saying something relatively uncontroversial, which is people should get involved and vote. Then, it gets spun into a whole other thing. *There are people, especially in the tabloids, that will use whatever they can to go after this couple. There is no doubt there is an agenda."*

"The Duke and Duchess believe in civic action, civic duty, social responsibility, and an element of that is participating in the ********ic process, so all they have said is that they encourage people to get involved," the source continued. "What they’re trying to do with the foundation is link a lot of the issues they believe in and find the connective tissue in all of it and actually find potential solutions."

"It is worrying and frustrating things get distorted so easily and readily on a regular basis. She [Meghan] now feels, [and] admits, as she said the other day, she has to be constantly careful about what she says and stick to what she thinks will not be controversial. Even telling people to get involved in the ********ic process should not be a controversial subject."










						Inside Duchess Meghan’s Launch of Archewell and Why She’s Speaking Out Amid 'Distorted' Political Criticisms
					

Meghan and Harry's work is focused on racial injustice, gender equality, and more, and they're careful not to be controversial.




					www.elle.com


----------



## 1LV

@CeeJay, you’re on!  Get out here and bring your tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny violin!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> It is all an agenda! Because nothing Meghan had done could possibly be justifiably criticized. Meghan is a victim again!
> 
> A source close to the Duchess says the constant attacks have been difficult. "She thought she was saying something relatively uncontroversial, which is people should get involved and vote. Then, it gets spun into a whole other thing. *There are people, especially in the tabloids, that will use whatever they can to go after this couple. There is no doubt there is an agenda."*
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess believe in civic action, civic duty, social responsibility, and an element of that is participating in the ********ic process, so all they have said is that they encourage people to get involved," the source continued. "What they’re trying to do with the foundation is link a lot of the issues they believe in and find the connective tissue in all of it and actually find potential solutions."
> 
> "It is worrying and frustrating things get distorted so easily and readily on a regular basis. She [Meghan] now feels, [and] admits, as she said the other day, she has to be constantly careful about what she says and stick to what she thinks will not be controversial. Even telling people to get involved in the ********ic process should not be a controversial subject."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan’s Launch of Archewell and Why She’s Speaking Out Amid 'Distorted' Political Criticisms
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's work is focused on racial injustice, gender equality, and more, and they're careful not to be controversial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


This REALLY PISSES me off .. who asked *THEM *for help?????  Seriously? .. can they improve my life or others?  I think we all know the answer to that, sure H&M .. *put your MONEY where your mouths are* .. and that will *NEVER* happen!  If Meghan feels that she has to be "so careful" in the wording that she uses, I have a suggestion .. "*STFU .. NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY*"!!!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> This REALLY PISSES me off .. who asked *THEM *for help?????  Seriously? .. can they improve my life or others?  I think we all know the answer to that, sure H&M .. *put your MONEY where your mouths are* .. and that will *NEVER* happen!  If Meghan feels that she has to be "so careful" in the wording that she uses, I have a suggestion .. "*STFU .. NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY*"!!!



She's feigning hurt because she got a little backlash. She wanted to be universally lauded for saying "everyone should vote" even though that message has already been repeated ad nauseam via all media sources, by people more important than her, all year.

Believe it or not, Meghan, I don't think even your fans were oblivious to the fact that there is an election this year.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> It is all an agenda! Because nothing Meghan had done could possibly be justifiably criticized. Meghan is a victim again!
> 
> A source close to the Duchess says the constant attacks have been difficult. "She thought she was saying something relatively uncontroversial, which is people should get involved and vote. Then, it gets spun into a whole other thing. *There are people, especially in the tabloids, that will use whatever they can to go after this couple. There is no doubt there is an agenda."*
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess believe in civic action, civic duty, social responsibility, and an element of that is participating in the ********ic process, so all they have said is that they encourage people to get involved," the source continued. "What they’re trying to do with the foundation is link a lot of the issues they believe in and find the connective tissue in all of it and actually find potential solutions."
> 
> "It is worrying and frustrating things get distorted so easily and readily on a regular basis. She [Meghan] now feels, [and] admits, as she said the other day, she has to be constantly careful about what she says and stick to what she thinks will not be controversial. Even telling people to get involved in the ********ic process should not be a controversial subject."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan’s Launch of Archewell and Why She’s Speaking Out Amid 'Distorted' Political Criticisms
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's work is focused on racial injustice, gender equality, and more, and they're careful not to be controversial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



Ugh...my criticism was never about Meghan Markle saying people should vote. It was the Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry saying people should vote (and in a clearly partisan manner). Why should representatives of another country who walked away from their duty tell us to do ours?
Dig the hole deeper..... they just make themselves sound worse...


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> *I think it's pretty clear that they invited the Clooneys and Oprah in order to kick start relationships with people that they identified as Hollywood power players.* So, obviously, Megexit was being planned well before the wedding and well before any conflict arose with the Palace or any negative stories started appearing in the tabloid press.  MM probably figured out pretty quickly that she didn't like the duties or being told what to do and when to do it and how to dress and when to curtsy.  ETA:  Harry obviously wanted out too, for  this to have been planned so far in advance.  Looking back, I think they intended to leave from the start and then used the negative stories in the press and anything their perceived as a slight in their dealings with the Palace or the family to justify it.



I think she wanted also to show off her Hollywood connections. See how important I am...


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> She's feigning hurt because she got a little backlash. She wanted to be universally lauded for saying "everyone should vote" even though that message has already been repeated ad nauseam via all media sources, by people more important than her, all year.
> 
> Believe it or not, Meghan, I don't think even your fans were oblivious to the fact that there is an election this year.


The more I think about it, the more I think she is a major-league SICKO .. that requires all that attention, BUT .. then has to be fawned all over by the media and others.  Boy, Harry did pick a winner .. NOT!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think it's pretty clear that they invited the Clooneys and Oprah in order to kick start relationships with people that they identified as Hollywood power players. So, obviously, Megexit was being planned well before the wedding and well before any conflict arose with the Palace or any negative stories started appearing in the tabloid press.  MM probably figured out pretty quickly that she didn't like the duties or being told what to do and when to do it and how to dress and when to curtsy.  ETA:  Harry obviously wanted out too, for  this to have been planned so far in advance.  Looking back, I think they intended to leave from the start and then used the negative stories in the press and anything their perceived as a slight in their dealings with the Palace or the family to justify it.


if it was planned before the wedding, then shame on them, esp. Harry - to have this spectacular wedding....don't know if this was the case but if it was, then I wouldn't blame the RF if they cut him off entirely


----------



## Tootsie17

Chanbal said:


> I think she wanted also to show off her Hollywood connections. See how important I am...


Yes! 100% You called out her *true* *aspiration*.


----------



## gracekelly

How many others did she invite and they refused the invitation?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

Holy crap!  Is it me, or does Harry look like he got Botox in this video?  Definitely "fresher" complexion


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> How many others did she invite and they refused the invitation?


And what it really says about the ones, who accepted the invitation, but didn't even know her.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> And what it really says about the ones, who accepted the invitation, but didn't even know her.


I have to admit, that since the Clooneys didn't have to travel too far, it was pretty easy for them to say yes.  I'm also sure it appealed to their social climbing instincts to rub shoulders with the Royals.  I think that Diana's former flatmate's eyeballs must have been spinning when told that they didn't know the bride and groom.


----------



## bag-mania

melissatrv said:


> Holy crap!  Is it me, or does Harry look like he got Botox in this video?  Definitely "fresher" complexion




His journey towards the Dark Side is nearly complete.


----------



## Tootsie17

Maggie Muggins said:


> And what it really says about the ones, who accepted the invitation, but didn't even know her.


I think Reese Witherspoon declined H & M's wedding invitation stating that she did not know them or had never met them  I believe someone posted a brief video about it many, many pages back on this thread.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tootsie17 said:


> I think Reese Witherspoon declined H & M's wedding invitation stating that she did not know them or had never met them  I believe someone posted a brief video about it many, many pages back on this thread.


I remember that story.


----------



## Tootsie17

lanasyogamama said:


> I remember that story.


Thank you for remembering. I guess I'm not as forgetful as I think.


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> I have to admit, that since the Clooneys didn't have to travel too far, it was pretty easy for them to say yes.  I'm also sure it appealed to their social climbing instincts to rub shoulders with the Royals.  I think that Diana's former flatmate's eyeballs must have been spinning when told that they didn't know the bride and groom.



Tbh I totally get why someone who got an invitation to the wedding would accept it - it's a really cool once-in-a-lifetime experience to participate in such an event, see the royal family up close and personal, see the church decorated for royalty etc. Even if there wasn't a single camera to commemorate your presence or some PR angle to take advantage of, I think it's just a fun experience and memory. I see nothing wrong with going if the couple is superficial enough to invite you, I certainly would.


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> Tbh I totally get why someone who got an invitation to the wedding would accept it - it's a really cool once-in-a-lifetime experience to participate in such an event, see the royal family up close and personal, see the church decorated for royalty etc. Even if there wasn't a single camera to commemorate your presence or some PR angle to take advantage of, I think it's just a fun experience and memory. I see nothing wrong with going if the couple is superficial enough to invite you, I certainly would.



ITA. Even for celebrities who routinely meet other famous and rich people all the time, a royal wedding is on another level of exclusivity.


----------



## lalame

melissatrv said:


> Holy crap!  Is it me, or does Harry look like he got Botox in this video?  Definitely "fresher" complexion




Ugh I used to have so much sympathy for him as someone who didn’t want to be in the spotlight and seemed to shy away from it. How far he’s come... now he’s putting himself out there just to put himself out there. Nothing of value said here. Guess all those years he was just waiting for his moment to be a real celebrity.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> Ugh I used to have so much sympathy for him as someone who didn’t want to be in the spotlight and seemed to shy away from it. How far he’s come... now *he’s putting himself out there just to put himself out there. Nothing of value said here. *Guess all those years he was just waiting for his moment to be a real celebrity.



*lalame*, totally agree and am sure that Harry's BFs in his previous life are equally divided into two (2) groups:
1. Harry? Saw this coming a mile away! 
and
2. Did we ever really know you, Harry?

Want to pause for a second and thank everyone on this thread for making it such an entertaining read every single day. As stated previously, this thread does seem to have a mind of its own and Grifters-R-Us are so unapologetically GREEDY, and shamelessly oblivious to how out of step with reality they are with their new project Greedy-R-Us,  that I ALMOST <operative word here> feel SORRY for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is indeed the best thread, it’s all thanks to H&M for daily mis-stepping and our outstanding team of perceptive posters.    Surprisingly, we don’t make any of this stuff up. They really do put their foot in their mouth every single day. If Reese said no to the wedding, she gets my total respect. She must have had inside intel that this ‘wedding’ was a fraud and wasn‘t going to let them use her. Can’t imagine a well-known actor going only to be forced to sit in the back row. It sounds like the best seats were in our own homes. Wonder how much Oprah and Gail pushed some of this nonsense? They have been very quiet lately. Maybe QE will demand some repayment.


----------



## needlv

The Queen knew what kind of person she was...


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> It is all an agenda! Because nothing Meghan had done could possibly be justifiably criticized. Meghan is a victim again!
> 
> A source close to the Duchess says the constant attacks have been difficult. "She thought she was saying something relatively uncontroversial, which is people should get involved and vote. Then, it gets spun into a whole other thing. *There are people, especially in the tabloids, that will use whatever they can to go after this couple. There is no doubt there is an agenda."*
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess believe in civic action, civic duty, social responsibility, and an element of that is participating in the ********ic process, so all they have said is that they encourage people to get involved," the source continued. "What they’re trying to do with the foundation is link a lot of the issues they believe in and find the connective tissue in all of it and actually find potential solutions."
> 
> "It is worrying and frustrating things get distorted so easily and readily on a regular basis. She [Meghan] now feels, [and] admits, as she said the other day, she has to be constantly careful about what she says and stick to what she thinks will not be controversial. Even telling people to get involved in the ********ic process should not be a controversial subject."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan’s Launch of Archewell and Why She’s Speaking Out Amid 'Distorted' Political Criticisms
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's work is focused on racial injustice, gender equality, and more, and they're careful not to be controversial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


----------



## duna

One thing I have to grant them: every time I think they have touched the bottom and cannot do/say any worst, they actually can and do!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Ugh I used to have so much sympathy for him as someone who didn’t want to be in the spotlight and seemed to shy away from it. How far he’s come... now he’s putting himself out there just to put himself out there. Nothing of value said here. Guess all those years he was just waiting for his moment to be a real celebrity.


so glad we have him and his wife to tell us what is right and how to behave


----------



## drifter

apologies if this has been posted before:  https://blindgossip.com/famous-son-got-very-rough/#more-101411
as much as I dislike these 2, I do hope the blind isn't true.


----------



## bisousx

drifter said:


> apologies if this has been posted before:  https://blindgossip.com/famous-son-got-very-rough/#more-101411
> as much as I dislike these 2, I do hope the blind isn't true.



I doubt it. Harry isn’t bright but he used to be likeable and was never linked to these types of stories. Seems like it’s written about an American ex military man from a prominent family.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *lalame*, totally agree and am sure that Harry's BFs in his previous life are equally divided into two (2) groups:
> *1. Harry? Saw this coming a mile away!*
> and
> 2. Did we ever really know you, Harry?


I think I might have written something like this before, but here goes... I didn't watch Diana's funeral, but who could avoid the unending replays during newscasts. I saw Harry walking behind the casket. He was so angry; he was literally fuming. At the time, I told my hubby, that Harry would turn into a little hellion bent on destroying the BRF unless he received some mental health care. I believe HMQ also saw it coming as intuitive as she appears to be and that Harry was offered professional health support, but he wasn't very cooperative as he needed to sustain the anger to achieve his end goal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> I doubt it. Harry isn’t bright but he used to be likeable and was never linked to these types of stories. Seems like it’s written about an American ex military man from a prominent family.



Plus, he seems to be the more, uh, passive part. He enjoys having someone guide him around on a leash.


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle bids to postpone her High Court privacy action trial over letter to her estranged father Thomas published by the Mail On Sunday*
There have been a number of preliminary hearings in the case so far, and a hearing to consider costs and case management issues was due to take place tomorrow, ahead of a 10-day trial due to start in January.
But instead of that hearing, Mr Justice Warby will now hear an application by the duchess for the trial to be put back to a later date.
*Is MM afraid of losing?*


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle bids to postpone her High Court privacy action trial over letter to her estranged father Thomas published by the Mail On Sunday*
> There have been a number of preliminary hearings in the case so far, and a hearing to consider costs and case management issues was due to take place tomorrow, ahead of a 10-day trial due to start in January.
> But instead of that hearing, Mr Justice Warby will now hear an application by the duchess for the trial to be put back to a later date.
> *Is MM afraid of losing?*


See you Monday after the Depp case is decided .... dying to know that verdict - both Johnny and Amber have been so muddied


----------



## CarryOn2020

So now she wants a summary judgement???!!!
Darn. I was looking forward to the January show.

_Chris Ship@chrisshipitv__ 1h
Meghan's legal team is now applying for a "Summary Judgement" which would make the whole trial in January unnecessary. They say it's because they are so confident of their case in law and will argue tomorrow that the case should be determined on a "summary basis"._

The full story

And now this — forever in green:








						The Queen reigns supreme: Monarch is most popular Royal in UK poll
					

Public opinion soared for the Queen throughout the coronavirus pandemic as favourability for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex plummeted, a new poll revealed today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

Looks as though MM is gaining on Andrew in the polls.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So now she wants a summary judgement???!!!
> Darn. I was looking forward to the January show.
> 
> _Chris Ship@chrisshipitv__ 1h
> Meghan's legal team is now applying for a "Summary Judgement" which would make the whole trial in January unnecessary. They say it's because they are so confident of their case in law and will argue tomorrow that the case should be determined on a "summary basis"._
> 
> The full story
> 
> And now this — forever in green:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen reigns supreme: Monarch is most popular Royal in UK poll
> 
> 
> Public opinion soared for the Queen throughout the coronavirus pandemic as favourability for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex plummeted, a new poll revealed today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4891226


LOL.....I'm kinda surprised Kate isn't ahead of Will


----------



## gracekelly

@Maggie Muggins For all the times I watched the funeral,  I never picked up on his anger, but now that you mention it, I think you are right. It would explain a lot. It also might account for ill feelings towards his grandfather for making him walk behind the casket.

I don’t  believe a delay will be granted.   I do believe that she is afraid to to go back and testify and face the public and family.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> @Maggie Muggins For all the times I watched the funeral,  I never picked up on his anger, but now that you mention it, I think you are right. It would explain a lot. It also might account for ill feelings towards his grandfather for making him walk behind the casket.
> 
> I don’t  believe a delay will be granted.   I do believe that she is afraid to to go back and testify and face the public and family.


Or ashamed to go back.


----------



## Jktgal

drifter said:


> apologies if this has been posted before:  https://blindgossip.com/famous-son-got-very-rough/#more-101411
> as much as I dislike these 2, I do hope the blind isn't true.


Interesting. Only two names come up in the guesses. The last clue is pretty unique - the Markle signature move. Perhaps the base in question was not in the UK, that's why this story never came up. H did spend time at various military bases around the world incl USA. Local govternments are not going to touch him bc ... futile. Recent spat with military people might be why this story comes out now. His ex military buddies getting back at him. Gosh all so delicious, better than stuff on tv.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> So now she wants a summary judgement???!!!
> Darn. I was looking forward to the January show.
> 
> _Chris Ship@chrisshipitv__ 1h
> Meghan's legal team is now applying for a "Summary Judgement" which would make the whole trial in January unnecessary. They say it's because they are so confident of their case in law and will argue tomorrow that the case should be determined on a "summary basis"._
> 
> The full story


So, as we see .. yet again, "Ms. Chicken Little" doesn't really want to get into the "details" and muddy herself .. heaven forbid, afterall .. she is the MOAK supreme!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> And now this — forever in green:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen reigns supreme: Monarch is most popular Royal in UK poll
> 
> 
> Public opinion soared for the Queen throughout the coronavirus pandemic as favourability for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex plummeted, a new poll revealed today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4891226



It's quite an accomplishment to be nearly as hated as a gross sexual predator. Well done, Megs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

drifter said:


> apologies if this has been posted before:  https://blindgossip.com/famous-son-got-very-rough/#more-101411
> as much as I dislike these 2, I do hope the blind isn't true.





bisousx said:


> I doubt it. Harry isn’t bright but he used to be likeable and was never linked to these types of stories. Seems like it’s written about an American ex military man from a prominent family.





Jktgal said:


> Interesting. Only two names come up in the guesses. The last clue is pretty unique - the Markle signature move. Perhaps the base in question was not in the UK, that's why this story never came up. H did spend time at various military bases around the world incl USA. Local govternments are not going to touch him bc ... futile. Recent spat with military people might be why this story comes out now. His ex military buddies getting back at him. Gosh all so delicious, better than stuff on tv.



This is a toughie because I could see it being about either of the top choices in the comments. The only reason I might lean slightly towards Harry is the part about him being likable.

There are a remarkable number of similarities between the two men. Both are from privileged families and they receive protection because of it. Both lost their mothers in a car accident at a young age (as well as a sister in the other one's case). Both served time in the military. Both have a history of alcohol and drug abuse. Both have new wives with new babies. Both of those wives post inspiring messages about the environment, social justice, and mistreated workers on social media. This is a hard call to make!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's quite an accomplishment to be nearly as hated as a gross sexual predator. Well done, Megs.
> 
> Queen, You nailed it!
> 
> Had hoped maybe JCMH would go home and take her with him, probably not much chance of that in the near future.
> 
> Kudos to the Brits who have seen through these two Grifting Whining Narcissists. This poll sure has thrown a lot of vinegar on the word salad pronouncement lifestyle of the _DUMB_arton duo.
> 
> Predict they will only continue to plummet as William and Kate thrive by actively working on significant issues these two only vacuously preach about to an increasingly disenchanted audience. At the current rate of decline they may end up nearer to Andrew.
> 
> And on another note, seems like any program they develop will not be doing much to help the continuing sagging Netflix stock since interest in them is clearly lagging. Whatever money they got from that deal may become important as "Finding Freedom" is currently  ranked #6,429 on Amazon's Hardback Sales List. Definitely not an enduring source of income for them....


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> This is a toughie because I could see it being about either of the top choices in the comments. The only reason I might lean slightly towards Harry is the part about him being likable.
> 
> There are a remarkable number of similarities between the two men. Both are from privileged families and they receive protection because of it. Both lost their mothers in a car accident at a young age (as well as a sister in the other one's case). Both served time in the military. Both have a history of alcohol and drug abuse. Both have new wives with new babies. Both of those wives post inspiring messages about the environment, social justice, and mistreated workers on social media. This is a hard call to make!


well the other person who is mentioned is not one who is normally a topic of gossip....unless one is trying to use his actions against his family.....he isn't a public person so therefore not really of interest to people reading gossip IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well the other person who is mentioned is not one who is normally a topic of gossip....unless one is trying to use his actions against his family.....he isn't a public person so therefore not really of interest to people reading gossip IMO.



True, he isn't normally the subject of gossip but they worded it "he’s been in the news a lot lately," which he has been, perhaps even more so than Harry in recent weeks.

At the risk of being crass, I can't see Meghan letting Harry rough her up. Guys who are really into that don't suddenly stop being into it just because they got married. But, hey, maybe I'm wrong and she lets Harry get his freak on and he's so happy that it explains the iron grip she seems to have over him.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> True, he isn't normally the subject of gossip but they worded it "he’s been in the news a lot lately," which he has been, perhaps even more so than Harry in recent weeks.
> 
> At the risk of being crass, I can't see Meghan letting Harry rough her up. Guys who are really into that don't suddenly stop being into it just because they got married. But, hey, maybe I'm wrong and she lets Harry get his freak on and he's so happy that it explains the iron grip she seems to have over him.


or maybe there is no truth to the blind item about anyone....after all, it's a blind item.  could be total fiction, right?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> @Maggie Muggins For all the times I watched the funeral,  I never picked up on his anger, but now that you mention it, I think you are right. It would explain a lot. *It also might account for ill feelings towards his grandfather for making him walk behind the casket.*
> 
> I don’t  believe a delay will be granted.   I do believe that she is afraid to to go back and testify and face the public and family.


Was it really Prince Philip's idea to walk behind the casket? I was left to understand that it was Charles Spencer's suggestion. After all, he needed a big hoopla to keep people interested in visiting Diana's memorial at Althorp.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Was it really Prince Philip's idea to walk behind the casket? I was left to understand that it was Charles Spencer's suggestion. After all, he needed a big hoopla to keep people interested in visiting Diana's memorial at Althorp.


I recall the story that brave little Harry wanted to do it and his grandfather said "I'll do it with you"


----------



## A1aGypsy

Maggie Muggins said:


> Was it really Prince Philip's idea to walk behind the casket? I was left to understand that it was Charles Spencer's suggestion. After all, he needed a big hoopla to keep people interested in visiting Diana's memorial at Althorp.



My understanding was that Uncle Charles was firmly against the boys walking behind her casket and the RF insisted on the boys and Charles being there as well


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I recall the story that brave little Harry wanted to do it and his grandfather said "I'll do it with you"


Walking behind caskets may no longer be PC but was considered the height of respect at the time, certainly Philip had gone to enough state funerals to know of the custom , tho Charles and Charles might not personally have done so


----------



## CobaltBlu

tiktok said:


> Tbh I totally get why someone who got an invitation to the wedding would accept it - it's a really cool once-in-a-lifetime experience to participate in such an event, see the royal family up close and personal, see the church decorated for royalty etc. Even if there wasn't a single camera to commemorate your presence or some PR angle to take advantage of, I think it's just a fun experience and memory. I see nothing wrong with going *if the couple is superficial enough to invite you*, I certainly would.



I see what you did there!!  LOL









VigeeLeBrun said:


> *Want to pause for a second and thank everyone on this thread for making it such an entertaining read every single day.* As stated previously, this thread does seem to have a mind of its own and Grifters-R-Us are so unapologetically GREEDY, and shamelessly oblivious to how out of step with reality they are with their new project Greedy-R-Us, that I ALMOST <operative word here> feel SORRY for them.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I dunno, is this all really “delicious”? 

It’s a horrific story about a pattern of abusive behaviour towards women who were helpless and in positions of complete lack of control and power. 

If the blind is about him it’s awful and if it isn’t about him, but people mistakenly believe it is, it’s awful.

This isn’t gossip. This is sensationalizing predatory behaviour while downplaying the humanity of the women involved. I felt sick reading that.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I recall the story that brave little Harry wanted to do it and his grandfather said "I'll do it with you"


I believe you.   It seems that after Diana's funeral, all we had to do is skip to the next TV channel to watch a repeat of the funeral along with different interpretations depending on the narrator/reporter.


----------



## TC1

melissatrv said:


> Holy crap!  Is it me, or does Harry look like he got Botox in this video?  Definitely "fresher" complexion



Looks like the hair plugs are filling in as well


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> True, he isn't normally the subject of gossip but they worded it "he’s been in the news a lot lately," which he has been, perhaps even more so than Harry in recent weeks.
> 
> At the risk of being crass, I can't see Meghan letting Harry rough her up. Guys who are really into that don't suddenly stop being into it just because they got married. But, hey, maybe I'm wrong and she lets Harry get his freak on and he's so happy that it explains the iron grip she seems to have over him.


I keep on going back to the photos from that Jamaican wedding, the one she sorta invited herself to. 

This pics of them are not all lovey dovey, he looks really p*ssed. Then she magically turns into the "one". Something happened that turned his frown upside down.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Walking behind caskets may no longer be PC but was considered the height of respect at the time, certainly Philip had gone to enough state funerals to know of the custom , tho Charles and Charles might not personally have done so



I think it was very painful, but important for the boys to walk behind their mother's casket. I believe they wanted her to get all the respect she deserved. Diana got a beautiful farewell and those memories may have helped later on with their pain. She was a great mother with such a genuine smile. 

I feel sorry for Harry, he is very influenceable and MM seems to bring the worst out of him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

I'm scratching my head as to the possible US - prominent family guy?!?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think it was very painful, but important for the boys to walk behind their mother's casket. I believe they wanted her to get all the respect she deserved. Diana got a beautiful farewell and those memories may have helped later on with their pain.



I agree, I just feel having to do it in front of the whole world might have made it so much worse. I do believe death rituals can give comfort, and I personally really cherish the memories of spending time with my dying grandfather, just as I do not regret holding my cat during his last moments at all. But I am pretty sure had someone tried to hold a camera into my face or a huge audience had gathered while I was going through the worst experience of my life I would not have been so composed.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the blind item is very nasty.  People reading the comments will make assumptions about the people mentioned as the possible perps even if not true.  It is the kind of nasty that lingers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think the blind item is very nasty.  People reading the comments will make assumptions about the people mentioned as the possible perps even if not true.  It is the kind of nasty that lingers.



It is indeed uncomfortably close to defamation.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> I keep on going back to the photos from that Jamaican wedding, the one she sorta invited herself to.
> 
> This pics of them are not all lovey dovey, he looks really p*ssed. Then she magically turns into the "one". Something happened that turned his frown upside down.


I don't think that Vlad and Megs want X rated comments on their site, so I will refrain from answering.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I'm scratching my head as to the possible US - prominent family guy?!?!



A presidential candidate's son who seems to be a bit of an enfant terrible (or at least is painted to be right now).


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I keep on going back to the photos from that Jamaican wedding, the one she sorta invited herself to.
> 
> This pics of them are not all lovey dovey, he looks really p*ssed. Then she magically turns into the "one". Something happened that turned his frown upside down.


she must have put a spell on him


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she must have put a spell on him



I have a friend who is making a living with the, uh, spiritual (comes from a long line of famous fortune tellers and witches, one of whom even advised the German government at some point...not making that up!), and she has been saying this from the beginning and also that M makes her skin crawl.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a friend who is kind of making a living with the, uh, spiritual (comes from a long line of famous fortune tellers and witches, one of whom even advised the German government at some point...not making that up!), and she has been saying this from the beginning and also that M makes her skin crawl.


ooh....your friend has some psychic abilities and M makes her skin crawl?  interesting
So does your friend think he is still under the spell?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> ooh....your friend has some psychic abilities and M makes her skin crawl?  interesting
> So does your friend think he is still under the spell?


MM is bad juju.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she must have put a spell on him





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a friend who is making a living with the, uh, spiritual (comes from a long line of famous fortune tellers and witches, one of whom even advised the German government at some point...not making that up!), and she has been saying this from the beginning and also that M makes her skin crawl.



I thought Harry looked a bit dazed and confused at the wedding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> ooh....your friend has some psychic abilities and M makes her skin crawl?  interesting
> So does your friend think he is still under the spell?



She was once reading my cards and told me I would receive a call from an ex - a guy she had never met - and what he would say to me, pretty elaborate and specific, including some family news. He did call a few weeks later, and he basically said what she had told me word for word as if they were reading from the same script. Another time I was stopping by for coffee and gossip  and she asked me how my bff whom she also knows was dealing with the news of her partner and father of her child cheating on her. I was completely confused because I hadn't heard anything, but while I was driving home from her house bff called crying because she had just found out and confronted him. 

She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl.

I last saw her in late August and by then she still thought MM was controlling H's mind way beyond a normal messed up relationship dynamic. I was like "How would you even find these services, it's not like you can buy spells or demonic assistance on amazon!" (nor should you if you ask me...a card reading for fun is as far as I will go, not interested in inviting spooky encounters at all), but she didn't seem too worried about the logistics *shrugs*

And now y'all will be finally assured I am a complete nutjob LOL


----------



## marietouchet

Details on legal submissions - stall technique if you ask me , might get her past the 1 year review ? 

I thought you would be interested in this story - Meghan seeks to dodge witness box in Mail on Sunday privacy case









						Meghan seeks to dodge witness box in Mail on Sunday privacy case
					

The Duchess of Sussex has applied for a summary judgment in her legal action against The Mail on Sunday that would mean she could avoid going into the witness b




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4891481



Oh...do you all remember the footage of H not holding her hand or something when she wanted to during the wedding ceremony and the fake megawatt grin slipping from her face for a moment until she got it back together? I found that extremely creepy and sinister, like for a moment you could see the real her.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was once reading my cards and told me I would receive a call from an ex - a guy she had never met - and what he would say to me, pretty elaborate and specific, including some family news. He did call a few weeks later, and he basically said what she had told me word for word as if they were reading from the same script. Another time I was stopping by for coffee and gossip  and she asked me how my bff whom she also knows was dealing with the news of her partner and father of her child cheating on her. I was completely confused because I hadn't heard anything, but while I was driving home from her house bff called crying because she had just found out and confronted him.
> 
> She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl.
> 
> I last saw her in late August and by then she still thought MM was controlling H's mind way beyond a normal messed up relationship dynamic. I was like "How would you even find these services, it's not like you can buy spells or demonic assistance on amazon!" (nor should you if you ask me...a card reading for fun is as far as I will go, not interested in inviting spooky encounters at all), but she didn't seem too worried about the logistics *shrugs*
> 
> And now y'all will be finally assured I am a complete nutjob LOL


LOL
I was raised by a superstitious Irish mother.  She and her sister would sit around the table telling ghost stories.  so I'm not laughing at you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was once reading my cards and told me I would receive a call from an ex - a guy she had never met - and what he would say to me, pretty elaborate and specific, including some family news. He did call a few weeks later, and he basically said what she had told me word for word as if they were reading from the same script. Another time I was stopping by for coffee and gossip  and she asked me how my bff whom she also knows was dealing with the news of her partner and father of her child cheating on her. I was completely confused because I hadn't heard anything, but while I was driving home from her house bff called crying because she had just found out and confronted him.
> 
> She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl.
> 
> I last saw her in late August and by then she still thought MM was controlling H's mind way beyond a normal messed up relationship dynamic. I was like "How would you even find these services, it's not like you can buy spells or demonic assistance on amazon!" (nor should you if you ask me...a card reading for fun is as far as I will go, not interested in inviting spooky encounters at all), but she didn't seem too worried about the logistics *shrugs*
> 
> And now y'all will be finally assured I am a complete nutjob LOL


Enjoyed reading your post. I believe many people would agree with your friend on MM "controlling H's mind". I've no idea how she does it, but H looks like a marionette...


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh...do you all remember the footage of H not holding her hand or something when she wanted to during the wedding ceremony and the fake megawatt grin slipping from her face for a moment until she got it back together? I found that extremely creepy and sinister, like for a moment you could see the real her.



YES. I’m sure she saw it too. She has been extremely careful to keep her eyes on the whereabouts of the cameras since then.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Enjoyed reading your post. I believe many people would agree with your friend on MM "controlling H's mind". I've no idea how she does it, but H looks like a marionette...


It could be witchcraft but maybe it's more like regular manipulation.....she is stronger than him?  Like with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.  She was a dominatrix - maybe M too


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Details on legal submissions - stall technique if you ask me , might get her past the 1 year review ?
> 
> I thought you would be interested in this story - Meghan seeks to dodge witness box in Mail on Sunday privacy case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan seeks to dodge witness box in Mail on Sunday privacy case
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has applied for a summary judgment in her legal action against The Mail on Sunday that would mean she could avoid going into the witness b
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


"The Duchess of Sussex has applied for a summary judgment in her legal action against _The Mail on Sunday _that would mean she could avoid going into the witness box." 

Of course, she wants to avoid going into the witness box. A good lawyer could easily expose her contradictions.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Enjoyed reading your post. I believe many people would agree with your friend on MM "controlling H's mind". I've no idea how she does it, but H looks like a marionette...



I don’t know quite how she did it either. But I bet it involved getting strands of his hair, some nail clippings, perhaps a drop or two of blood, and then repeating incantations at midnight while burning special candles and incense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> YES. I’m sure she saw it too. She has been extremely careful to keep her eyes on the whereabouts of the cameras since then.



Unless her hatred of Kate got the better of her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know quite how she did it either. But I bet it involved getting strands of his hair, some nail clippings, perhaps a drop or two of blood, and then repeating incantations at midnight while burning special candles and incense.



Other...bodily liquids would do as well


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> It could be witchcraft but maybe it's more like regular manipulation.....she is stronger than him?  Like with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.  She was a dominatrix - maybe M too


She looks like a master in manipulation.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Other...bodily liquids would do as well



And would be readily available to her.


----------



## CeeJay

The more I think about it, I don't think MM has any secret "spell" on him per se (_although @gracekelly - totally agree with the bad juju_)!  I believe, given what we know now, that Harry has always wanted to be the "rock star" .. in other words, he hated the fact that he was always going to be viewed as a lesser person than William.  So, those pictures of the two of them at his friend's wedding in Jamaica, I believe that at that time .. he didn't want anything to do with MM (_supposedly, they had broken up_).  But, I think we can all say that she is relentless in her pursuit(s) and that regardless of what Harry may have thought at that time, she was not done with him yet. 

She likely worked her verbal word-salad nonsense into his head (_let's face it, he's a dolt_) .. and I believe, got him to truly believe that she would get him that 'one-up' on William that he seemed to so crave.  Look at the pictures of them initially together (_right before the wedding_) where she would be gripping onto him (_arms, hands, etc._) .. almost like "_don't worry, I've got you and we are in this 'together'_).  I've seen this nonsense happen before, and it's always shocked me that someone (_sadly - always females in the cases that I've seen_) have somehow been able to get their nails into the guy's skin such that regardless of the many thumbs-down the friends have provided, the person just thinks that "_NOPE - I know better_".  

Of course, then her pumping out her meal-ticket, and knowing of Harry's desire to have a child, well .. that was the nail in the coffin!  Who knows? .. will he wake up and smell the word-salad at some point? .. maybe, but alas - I do believe that Archie will also pull on his heartstrings and that he will not be able to take that next step (_away from her_) unless (_of course_), she gives him the boot (_can't say that I'm seeing that too at this point_) .. but boy, if they are unhappy, what a horrible life that would be!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know quite how she did it either. But I bet it involved getting strands of his hair, some nail clippings, perhaps a drop or two of blood, and then repeating incantations at midnight while burning special candles and incense.


If you add to all the above the people that she contracted to take care of her image, people that facilitated her blind dates with H (the blind one), MA, and a few others that seem to be helping her ...poor Harry! lol


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, this could also have been written for MM&H:  

"Those in the know shook their heads in disbelief. How on earth had a plain woman, in her late 30s managed to bewitch the most eligible bachelor in the world? What sinister hold did she have over him? And what were her secrets?"

Wallis's secrets


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was once reading my cards and told me I would receive a call from an ex - a guy she had never met - and what he would say to me, pretty elaborate and specific, including some family news. He did call a few weeks later, and he basically said what she had told me word for word as if they were reading from the same script. Another time I was stopping by for coffee and gossip  and she asked me how my bff whom she also knows was dealing with the news of her partner and father of her child cheating on her. I was completely confused because I hadn't heard anything, but while I was driving home from her house bff called crying because she had just found out and confronted him.
> 
> She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl.
> 
> I last saw her in late August and by then she still thought MM was controlling H's mind way beyond a normal messed up relationship dynamic. I was like "How would you even find these services, it's not like you can buy spells or demonic assistance on amazon!" (nor should you if you ask me...a card reading for fun is as far as I will go, not interested in inviting spooky encounters at all), but she didn't seem too worried about the logistics *shrugs*
> 
> And now y'all will be finally assured I am a complete nutjob LOL


"demonic assistance on amazon" LMAO!!!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Wow, this could also have been written for MM&H:
> 
> "Those in the know shook their heads in disbelief. How on earth had a plain woman, in her late 30s managed to bewitch the most eligible bachelor in the world? What sinister hold did she have over him? And what were her secrets?"
> 
> Wallis's secrets


There were rumors swirling about, at the time, that she learned things in a Chinese brothel.  I tend to doubt it, but it made for interesting gossip at the time.  I think she was good at coddling men.  Pamela Harriman had the same talent and she went very far in life because she was smart and didn't throw people away.


----------



## gracekelly

Tootsie17 said:


> "demonic assistance on amazon" LMAO!!!


lololol!   My DH's aunt used to entertain the  relatives with reading tea leaves.  My DH said they always laughed their heads off so I guess she was very clever at it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> YES. I’m sure she saw it too. She has been extremely careful to keep her eyes on the whereabouts of the cameras since then.



Remember Harry's military ceremony, when she made a faux pas of sitting down too early? She touched his back and patted the seat next to her to make him sit, but he refused. I believe this was the aftermath... caught on camera. 

Belle of the Bawl


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> lololol!   My DH's aunt used to entertain the  relatives with reading tea leaves.  My DH said they always laughed their heads off so I guess she was very clever at it.


Haha, had a Greek friend that used to read coffee cups. It was always a lot of fun.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl._
@QueenofWrapDress  Does she do readings virtually?  [asking for a friend  ]  
Seriously, these days, I feel so much negativity is in the air that any kind of cleansing would be very welcome.


----------



## marietouchet

The title ! Out damn spot ! Quoting Shakespeare here ...










						See All of the Times Meghan Markle Dressed Better Than Us on Zoom — Harper's Bazaar
					

The Duchess of Sussex's fashion looks embrace and celebrate her West Coast roots. The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow. While the news of the royal couple's landmark decision to...




					apple.news


----------



## CobaltBlu

^^
I am going to give that Morticia Adams Weave mess a big thumbs down.
It was awesomely campy in the original but on MM its looks like its wearing her.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The title ! Out damn spot ! Quoting Shakespeare here ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See All of the Times Meghan Markle Dressed Better Than Us on Zoom — Harper's Bazaar
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's fashion looks embrace and celebrate her West Coast roots. The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow. While the news of the royal couple's landmark decision to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Harpers Bazaar must pay this  “Bianca” person by the lie, er, line.   

“The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow.”


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> I think it was very painful, but important for *the boys* to walk behind their mother's casket. I believe they....


Wait, BOTH of them walked behind their mother’s casket?
*mind blown*


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can see her going low and saying that if he broke up with her it was because he wasn’t brave enough to date / marry a WOC.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> The title ! Out damn spot ! Quoting Shakespeare here ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See All of the Times Meghan Markle Dressed Better Than Us on Zoom — Harper's Bazaar
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's fashion looks embrace and celebrate her West Coast roots. The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow. While the news of the royal couple's landmark decision to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


My antiperspirant works better than hers.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Wait, BOTH of them walked behind their mother’s casket?
> *mind blown*



Sure did. I found this about it. Both William and Harry say it was a group family decision, also that Charles Spencer was against it. It’s interesting hearing the quotes from both boys. This wasn’t so long ago but William sounds polished and professional while Harry sounds like he can barely talk coherently.


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A presidential candidate's son who seems to be a bit of an enfant terrible (or at least is painted to be right now).


I dont think so, the description doesnt fit. The description says he is now a husband and father. Guy you thought of was already a father when he did his stint. Plus, he isnt that famous. Also, it doesnt say anything about guy being in USA. I only occassionally read blind gossip - are they always about people in America?

A few things abt it that makes it authentic to me: girls servicing guys off base still continue to service the guy for a while, and the way the issue was dealt with ('neither judicial systems would pursue case'). If Harry didnt exist, I would guess this to be some Arab-country prince.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> ^^
> I am going to give that Morticia Adams Weave mess a big thumbs down.
> It was awesomely campy in the original but on MM its looks like its wearing her.
> 
> View attachment 4891621
> 
> 
> View attachment 4891622


Cher still does it better.


----------



## Jktgal

A1aGypsy said:


> I dunno, is this all really “delicious”?
> 
> It’s a horrific story about a pattern of abusive behaviour towards women who were helpless and in positions of complete lack of control and power.
> 
> If the blind is about him it’s awful and if it isn’t about him, but people mistakenly believe it is, it’s awful.
> 
> This isn’t gossip. This is sensationalizing predatory behaviour while downplaying the humanity of the women involved. I felt sick reading that.



The blind doesnt say it's a pattern. William had said he was tired of being his bothers keeper. That made me think there are other darker episodes than being naked in public, wearing Nazi costumes etc which I feel in the grand scheme of things are really mild. This might also be why BRF lets M in - they think she will be able to control him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Revisionist history = ugh.









						The complicated truth behind William and Harry’s decision to walk behind Diana’s coffin
					

It was a sight that underlined the true impact of the crash in Paris that claimed the life of Diana, Princess of Wales. As her funeral procession got under way, on September 6th 1997, her two sons …




					royalcentral.co.uk
				



_The younger princes have both since confirmed that the decision for them to form part of the procession was a family one, made together._
...
_Previously, Harry had described the walk as something no child ”should be asked to do” but as he approached the twentieth anniversary of Diana’s death, he expressed his relief to have been involved. Harry also heaped praise on his father, the Prince of Wales, for the way he had cared for him and his brother at that most terrible time for them._

Wonder if some of the fuss about the funeral cortège is an effort to criticize Prince Phillip - Harry’s hatred of his family must run deep.








						TV documentary reopens painful chapter of duke's family past
					

A new Channel 4 documentary set to air next week will revisit the links between Prince Philip's older sisters, three of whom married leading German aristocrats, and the Nazi party.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## A1aGypsy

Jktgal said:


> The blind doesnt say it's a pattern. William had said he was tired of being his bothers keeper. That made me think there are other darker episodes than being naked in public, wearing Nazi costumes etc which I feel in the grand scheme of things are really mild. This might also be why BRF lets M in - they think she will be able to control him.



It said that it happened more than once and to multiple women. That’s a pattern.  And there is nothing to suggest it was either of these two people or not made up out of thin air.  That’s not ok. Neither is wearing a Nazi costume.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CobaltBlu said:


> ^^
> I am going to give that Morticia Adams Weave mess a big thumbs down.
> It was awesomely campy in the original but on MM its looks like its wearing her.
> View attachment 4891622


 You're so right. It's not becoming at all. Looks like two black horses' tails hanging over her head.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The title ! Out damn spot ! Quoting Shakespeare here ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See All of the Times Meghan Markle Dressed Better Than Us on Zoom — Harper's Bazaar
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's fashion looks embrace and celebrate her West Coast roots. The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow. While the news of the royal couple's landmark decision to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news





bag-mania said:


> Harpers Bazaar must pay this  “Bianca” person by the lie, er, line.
> 
> “The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow.”



The quality of the article matches the choice of pictures. Wearing a blouse with stains is very fashionable and professional!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The quality of the article matches the choice of pictures. Wearing a blouse with stains is very fashionable and professional!
> 
> View attachment 4891685


She  wore it to In n Out and the burger juice dripped.  It happens.


----------



## Jktgal

A1aGypsy said:


> It said that it happened more than once and to multiple women. That’s a pattern.  And there is nothing to suggest it was either of these two people or not made up out of thin air.  That’s not ok. Neither is wearing a Nazi costume.


Multiple women in that episode. Unless there is report of more, I would not say it's a pattern over his lifetime based on this article.

I agree with you this was somewhere where women have total lack of power.  I feel it was in a 3rd world country because of reverence to guy. In America this would have been sniffed by press/lawyers/politician looking to profit. In USA, a woman reports the president and she is still alive - if it were where I live, she would be dead or worse. Also, the fact that it happened several times indicate that this was not UK where prostitutes are licensed businesses and wouldnt tolerate this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl._
> @QueenofWrapDress  Does she do readings virtually?  [asking for a friend  ]
> Seriously, these days, I feel so much negativity is in the air that any kind of cleansing would be very welcome.



I think she does by phone unless something is seriously wrong, then she prefers in person readings. Her rituals, the client is never there, but she sometimes scares the neighbours LOL


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> Wait, BOTH of them walked behind their mother’s casket?
> *mind blown*



But wouldn't you know one was prepared better to be king because well, he will be and Harry won't.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jktgal said:


> I dont think so, the description doesnt fit. The description says he is now a husband and father. Guy you thought of was already a father when he did his stint. Plus, he isnt that famous. Also, it doesnt say anything about guy being in USA. I only occassionally read blind gossip - are they always about people in America?
> 
> A few things abt it that makes it authentic to me: girls servicing guys off base still continue to service the guy for a while, and the way the issue was dealt with ('neither judicial systems would pursue case'). If Harry didnt exist, I would guess this to be some Arab-country prince.



I am not thinking of anyone, I was just summarizing what people in the comments thought


----------



## maryg1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was once reading my cards and told me I would receive a call from an ex - a guy she had never met - and what he would say to me, pretty elaborate and specific, including some family news. He did call a few weeks later, and he basically said what she had told me word for word as if they were reading from the same script. Another time I was stopping by for coffee and gossip  and she asked me how my bff whom she also knows was dealing with the news of her partner and father of her child cheating on her. I was completely confused because I hadn't heard anything, but while I was driving home from her house bff called crying because she had just found out and confronted him.
> 
> She specializes in lifting spells and cleansing off negative energy, and she has a few stories that make MY skin crawl.
> 
> I last saw her in late August and by then she still thought MM was controlling H's mind way beyond a normal messed up relationship dynamic. I was like "How would you even find these services, it's not like you can buy spells or demonic assistance on amazon!" (nor should you if you ask me...a card reading for fun is as far as I will go, not interested in inviting spooky encounters at all), but she didn't seem too worried about the logistics *shrugs*
> 
> And now y'all will be finally assured I am a complete nutjob LOL


I’m the kind of person that likes to know what happens in the future, I would love to have a friend like yours!


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

bag-mania said:


> True, he isn't normally the subject of gossip but they worded it "he’s been in the news a lot lately," which he has been, perhaps even more so than Harry in recent weeks.
> 
> At the risk of being crass, I *can't see Meghan letting Harry rough her up. *Guys who are really into that don't suddenly stop being into it just because they got married. But, hey, maybe I'm wrong and she lets Harry get his freak on and he's so happy that it explains the iron grip she seems to have over him.



*bag-mania*, unfortunately, my opin of the human race is not as charitable as yours bc quite frankly, I think Meghan Markle is EXACTLY the type of person who if Harry did beat her up, she could & would emotionally extort him.
And to be clear: I DO NOT CONDONE any acts of violence against women!

Yes, that blind item made sense to many questions in my head surrounding this toxic couple, Grifters-R-Us.

For example, why has the BRF given the Royal formerly known as Prince Harry such a long leash and continue to fund his crazy <yes, crazy> lifestyle?
If the blind item is Harry, well there you have it, the BRF, of course, knew all about Harry's sick compulsions and has cut him loose.
They do not want him back.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Cher still does it better.
> 
> View attachment 4891646
> View attachment 4891646
> 
> View attachment 4891647


and (at least back in the day) it was her own hair


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The quality of the article matches the choice of pictures. Wearing a blouse with stains is very fashionable and professional!
> 
> View attachment 4891685


really - how did she and her staff miss that stain?


----------



## marietouchet

Why the long leash for Harry ? 
Maybe the polls tell us, Charles is way below William, C cannot afford to have a fiasco for Harrygate, and fall even further in public esteem - it is a critical juncture for C 
And does C really want it at his age ? Might he be inclined to abdicate responsibility ??

I did notice that Camilla is stupendously far down in the polls, I would have thought she had earned a place, but, no, she is evidently still a liability


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Why the long leash for Harry ?
> Maybe the polls tell us, Charles is way below William, C cannot afford to have a fiasco for Harrygate, and fall even further in public esteem - it is a critical juncture for C
> And does C really want it at his age ? Might he be inclined to abdicate responsibility ??
> 
> I did notice that Camilla is stupendously far down in the polls, I would have thought she had earned a place, but, no, she is evidently still a liability


if Diana was the people's princess I can understand many would still hold the whole affair against camilla - and charles too


----------



## marietouchet

She got a delay but no instant summary judgment - the SJ hearing will be in Jan 2021

Meghan Markle's privacy hearing delayed on 'confidential ground'
https://mol.im/a/8893125


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> She got a delay but no instant summary judgment - the SJ gearing will be in Jan 2021
> 
> Meghan Markle's privacy hearing delayed on 'confidential ground'
> https://mol.im/a/8893125


so if she is the one suing, then if her attorneys think she's losing, offering to settle wouldn't happen?  offering to settle would be by the one being sued?  so her only option would be to keep going or just drop the suit?  that would be a loss of face for her - dont think she's into that.  and Harry is now suing (or threating to sue?) someone else?  the are litigious creeps IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> She got a delay but no instant summary judgment - the SJ gearing will be in Jan 2021
> 
> Meghan Markle's privacy hearing delayed on 'confidential ground'
> https://mol.im/a/8893125



"Meghan's legal team cited a '*confidential ground*' for the adjournment at a hearing with no further details made public."

haha I wonder whether the excuse was pregnancy or covid?

Obviously, she wants to establish well (collect) her Nflix and other deals (including the BRF review) before risking being further exposed by the lawsuit.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so if she is the one suing then if her attorneys think she's losing, offering to settle wouldn't happen?  offering to settle would be by the one being sued?  so her only option would be to keep going or just drop the suit?  that would be a loss of face for her - dont think she's into that.  and Harry is now suing (or threating to sue?) someone else?  the are litigious creeps IMO


She might drop the suit. In one year, if covid is better controlled and people have resumed their normal lives, it will be a lot easier for her to drop the suit without being noticed.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> She might drop the suit. In one year, if covid is better controlled and people have resumed their normal lives, it will be a lot easier for her to drop the suit without being noticed.


meantime those legal bills are piling up....who pays for that?


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> She got a delay but no instant summary judgment - the SJ hearing will be in Jan 2021
> 
> Meghan Markle's privacy hearing delayed on 'confidential ground'
> https://mol.im/a/8893125



So, instead of her appearing in January:
_*The judge said he will hear the duchess's summary judgement application to have her case heard without a full trial on January 12.  *_

She and her lawyers missed the 10/21 deadline to reply to the newspaper's defense:
_*The duchess, who has missed the court's deadline to serve an updated 'reply' to the newspaper's defence, is also seeking to extend the deadline.
A document submitted to the court by the newspaper's lawyers reported that she had breached a court order for missing the October 21 deadline. She now has until November 13 to submit her re-amended reply. *_

Looks like all these are delaying tactics. Any trial now has been put off until Autumn 2021. Maybe her "reply" to the newspapers defense will be so weak that the judge will decide in favor of the newspapers without a trial in early January.  Result:  She doesn't have to testify.  Or, if it does go to trial in a year, public memory will have sufficiently faded so that she drops the case with some made up excuse.

Very curious as to what was so important that the trial had to be put off 10 more months though . . .  
*Mr Justice Warby today said he had considered the request and granted the delay until autumn next year - adding the 'primary basis' on which the adjournment was sought was 'confidential'.  *


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Meghan Markle's high-stakes privacy case has been delayed *until next October* after a secret hearing at London's High Court.








						Meghan Markle's privacy hearing delayed on 'confidential ground'
					

Meghan Markle's High Court privacy claim was delayed by ten months until October next year. Her lawyers asked for the delay at a 'confidentiality ground' hearing at London's High Court.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
So, nothing in Jan, 2021?   The longer this goes, the more their ‘brand’ will be shattered.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> meantime those legal bills are piling up....who pays for that?


This is a good question, but it looks like money is not a problem for MM.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Why the long leash for Harry ?
> Maybe the polls tell us, Charles is way below William, C cannot afford to have a fiasco for Harrygate, and fall even further in public esteem - it is a critical juncture for C
> And does C really want it at his age ? Might he be inclined to abdicate responsibility ??
> 
> I did notice that Camilla is stupendously far down in the polls, I would have thought she had earned a place, but, no, she is evidently still a liability


Charles and Camilla will never fully recover because the diehard Diana fans will always vote against them no matter how well they perform their duties.   Results also depend on who participates in these polls. TBH, sometimes polls can be overanalyzed or interpreted to prove whatever one wants to prove. As an aside, many people are still calling Charles and Camilla the same pejoratives used during Diana's time.


----------



## Chanbal

The duchess is very popular in the UK! The other nations didn't have a chance to chime in yet...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems like more people are markle-ing the Harkles.  Don’t they see what is happening or are their heads too far up their ****?
Charles really ought to wake up. 





Chanbal said:


> The duchess is very popular in the UK! The other nations didn't have a chance to chime in yet...
> 
> View attachment 4892070


----------



## youngster

I would bet that she told the judge she is either in early stages of pregnancy or going through IVF or some other fertility procedure, so she "can't" go back to the UK in January as a result, especially during a pandemic and due to her advanced maternal age. Just my guess of course.

Of course, the judge said he will hear MM's summary judgement application to have her case heard without a full trial on January 12 so that result will still be very interesting.  She is trying to get out of testifying herself and get her friends out of testifying in person as well, no matter what.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More info and comments here:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chris Ship

@chrisshipitv

The summary judgement decision will NOT be taken today. It will be heard at a later date as it was only filed by Meghan’s lawyers as recently as four working days ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chris Ship
@chrisshipitv

Meghan been given permission to apply for a “summary judgement”. Her legal team will make the case on 12/13 January 2021. Which was the date of the trial - before it got postponed today until October. A reminder, if successful, a summary judgement would mean NO TRIAL at all


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> so if she is the one suing, then if her attorneys think she's losing, offering to settle wouldn't happen?  offering to settle would be by the one being sued?  so her only option would be to keep going or just drop the suit?  that would be a loss of face for her - dont think she's into that.  and Harry is now suing (or threating to sue?) someone else?  the are litigious creeps IMO


Agree, the ball is in her court, she has to agree to settle or drop

I think the judgment to include the Omid book necessitated the delay, both sides would have needed that .... it is a big fat book to read, index, and cross reference to witness depositions etc

But the fact that the SJ was not granted immediately does not bode well for her ... the judge would have wanted to conclude things ASAP if possible, this legal action is too embarassingly costly for both sides


----------



## CarryOn2020

I don’t know, as Chris Ship pointed out, the SJ was filed only 4 days ago.
So, they really have not had time to prepare a response.

Will be waiting to see what happens in Jan. When is their yearly review? I thought it would be in Jan because they announced their departure then, but have read it could be March which is their last engagement.  





marietouchet said:


> Agree, the ball is in her court, she has to agree to settle or drop
> 
> I think the judgment to include the Omid book necessitated the delay, both sides would have needed that .... it is a big fat book to read, index, and cross reference to witness depositions etc
> 
> But the fact that the SJ was not granted immediately does not bode well for her ... the judge would have wanted to conclude things ASAP if possible, this legal action is too embarassingly costly for both sides


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I suppose a delay strategy forces their defendant to keep paying legal bills. Maybe they have worked out a deal with their own lawyers. Meanwhile, they can continue to garner sympathy because they haven't lost.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know quite how she did it either. But I bet it involved getting strands of his hair, some nail clippings, perhaps a drop or two of blood, and then repeating incantations at midnight while burning special candles and incense.


They would have to be very trendy and expensive candles.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> They would have to be very trendy and expensive candles.



Of course, they are part of the Diptyque Wicca series. They smell of tuberose and brimstone.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Meghan Markle's high-stakes privacy case has been delayed *until next October* after a secret hearing at London's High Court.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's privacy hearing delayed on 'confidential ground'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's High Court privacy claim was delayed by ten months until October next year. Her lawyers asked for the delay at a 'confidentiality ground' hearing at London's High Court.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> So, nothing in Jan, 2021?   The longer this goes, the more their ‘brand’ will be shattered.


Or they are hoping for just the opposite. They are going to drop something on NF for sure. Some kind of documentary showing how they are the Uber victims of the world so when the case goes against them everyone will say “see they were right, the world is against them!”


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Or they are hoping for just the opposite. They are going to drop something on NF for sure. Some kind of documentary showing how they are the Uber victims of the world so when the case goes against them everyone will say “see they were right, the world is against them!”


I can't wait for "the world" to figure out that they are very privileged people - not victims


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Or they are hoping for just the opposite. They are going to drop something on NF for sure. Some kind of documentary showing how they are the Uber victims of the world so when the case goes against them everyone will say “see they were right, the world is against them!”



Certainly, they are _hoping_ for the sympathy and to secure their victim status, possibly to use in negotiations with Charles. A few years ago, Charles had a copyright case and filed for a SJ. The judge granted the SJ.  I’m not entirely sure what a Summary Judgment is, so maybe it is considered a win for Charles.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> There were rumors swirling about, at the time, that she learned things in a Chinese brothel.  I tend to doubt it, but it made for interesting gossip at the time.  I think she was good at coddling men.  Pamela Harriman had the same talent and she went very far in life because she was smart and didn't throw people away.


SOOOOOOOOOOOO true .. Pamela Harriman was a 'master' at procuring the right men!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Certainly, they are _hoping_ for the sympathy and to secure their victim status, possibly to use in negotiations with Charles. A few years ago, Charles had a copyright case and filed for a SJ. The judge granted the SJ.  I’m not entirely sure what a Summary Judgment is, so maybe it is considered a win for Charles.


A Summary Judgment is a quiet quickie trial by judge -  no jury required, judge makes his mind up quietly based on what is presented, so all the evidence is pre-recorded - written is fine, not sure if video is OK - nothing spontaneously happens in court -  (arguably) fewer embarrassing details leak 
Arguably cheaper for both sides, if they were going to have to write it down anyway... cross examination is sloooooowwwwwww


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t know, as Chris Ship pointed out, the SJ was filed only 4 days ago.
> So, they really have not had time to prepare a response.
> 
> Will be waiting to see what happens in Jan. When is their yearly review? I thought it would be in Jan because they announced their departure then, but have read it could be March which is their last engagement.
> 
> View attachment 4892117


Yearly Review .... hmmm ... I have read lots of conflicting stuff as to the date (Jan ? Apr 2021?) and whether there will be one at all

The review idea was first floated in Jan 2020, but things evolved - in Jan they were going to keep Met security, be half in and out,
the famous meeting with the Queen etc.

I have read (fake news?) that finally Harry would not agree to a review at all  and gave up something (?) by taking a hard line. Maybe he was going to keep the military titles for a year, but those were dropped when he said no review, that could make sense. Or, maybe, they are receiving less money from PC. Endless possibilities ...

When Sarah and Diana were divorced - their settlements were uneven, in part because Andrew is not the heir but also because Sarah refused to sign a NDA, and she did indeed write a book. Yes, Diana blabbed to Martin Bashir ...

Your guess is as good as mine, but, I vote for no earlier than April 2021. And there may be delays - H&M need time to show more income than expenses - heck they have not done much yet, and the EXPENSES ... PC needs time to figure out how little money Cornwall will have due to COVID. I think the title question will be decided at the same time as Cornwall funds.

And we dont really know for certain - Buck House has not confirmed that they still get money from Cornwall or that Frogmore is really & truly PAID. IMHO, they still get funds and debt not fully discharged today


----------



## Chanbal

Lovely and caring daughter, the duchess 

*Duchess of Sussex's privacy trial delayed despite her father warning he 'could be dead tomorrow' *In a witness statement lodged before the court, Mr Markle - who suffers from a heart condition, shortness of breath and is pre-diabetic - urged for the trial to go ahead “as quickly as possible”. 
“None of my male relatives have ever lived beyond 80 years of age. I am a realist and I could die tomorrow. The sooner this case takes place the better,” he said. 

“I am clinically obese and I have gained more weight during the past few months because I have been unable to leave my house to take any exercise. 

“I don’t know what the position will be like in several months' time. 

“This case is causing me anxiety and I want to get it over with as quickly as possible”.

Shocking!!!


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Harpers Bazaar must pay this  “Bianca” person by the lie, er, line.
> 
> “The Duchess of Sussex has kept a fairly low profile since returning to California with Prince Harry and their young son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in tow.”


Harpers Bazaar may be kissing up hoping MM will do a cover for them like she did for Vogue. The stans would go crazy and they would probably sell a few more copies that month.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sorry, deleted post


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Harpers Bazaar may be kissing up hoping MM will do a cover for them like she did for Vogue. The stans would go crazy and they would probably sell a few more copies that month.



Many of the publications are shamelessly kissing H&M ass for unknown reasons. They must be getting something out of it, thousands of clicks from those who love them and hate them most likely.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Many of the publications are shamelessly kissing H&M ass for unknown reasons. They must be getting something out of it, thousands of clicks from those who love them and hate them most likely.


Can one buy clicks ? How much doe sit cost to have an intern write 1000 words ?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Can one buy clicks ?* How much doe sit cost to have an intern write 1000 words ?*



I wish I knew. I'd love to have a job writing BS about celebrities and getting paid for it. I'm giving it away free here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t know, as Chris Ship pointed out, the SJ was filed only 4 days ago.
> So, they really have not had time to prepare a response.
> 
> Will be waiting to see what happens in Jan. When is their yearly review? I thought it would be in Jan because they announced their departure then, but have read it could be March which is their last engagement.
> 
> View attachment 4892117


I wish this green cape outfit could be erased from the photo universe


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Harpers Bazaar may be kissing up hoping MM will do a cover for them like she did for Vogue. The stans would go crazy and they would probably sell a few more copies that month.


Uggh .. yes, that would likely be the case, but .. let me tell you, if they DARE to put ANY TITLE whatsoever related to her on their cover or w/in an article, you better believe I will be writing them a SCATHING comment in regards to it!  We DO NOT honor titles in the US, period - end-of-subject!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. yes, that would likely be the case, but .. let me tell you, if they DARE to put ANY TITLE whatsoever related to her on their cover or w/in an article, you better believe I will be writing them a SCATHING comment in regards to it!  We DO NOT honor titles in the US, period - end-of-subject!


On the subject of titles used in the US ...
Received a catalog, prepared for US market, of BBC videos, was amused that the actors were referenced by title as appropriate eg Sir Derek Jacobi, in a catalog for Xmas gift giving ...
In the immortal words of Shania Twain, “This dont impress me much “


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> SOOOOOOOOOOOO true .. Pamela Harriman was a 'master' at procuring the right men!



I read a lengthy biography on her. She was crafty. One of the things she did was take notes on individual men's preferences of drinks, foods, their business dealings, crazy details etc so that when she ran into them again (or strategized "chance" meetings) she could flatter them with her recollections. Women shielded their husbands from her. She was described as having become "a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings". She wasn't unattractive yet not a raving beauty either, but she excelled at captivating very powerful people. She married Winston Churchill's son (he was a dope) just for his connections to immerse herself into lofty circles. Unlike Meghan, she never wallowed in pity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, who at Nflix thinks these shows will attract viewers? 
Thought the “Real Housewives...” had cornered this market.









						David and Victoria Beckham 'land £16million deal with Netflix series'
					

It's claimed viewers will get to see 'hilarious' insights into the early stages of the former footballer's, 45, courtship with the former Spice Girl, 46




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  the article reads just like the Harkles’ announcement. Nflix must be desperate.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, who at Nflix thinks these shows will attract viewers?
> Thought the “Real Housewives...” had cornered this market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David and Victoria Beckham 'land £16million deal with Netflix series'
> 
> 
> It's claimed viewers will get to see 'hilarious' insights into the early stages of the former footballer's, 45, courtship with the former Spice Girl, 46
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  the article reads just like the Harkles’ announcement. Nflix must be desperate.



Is everybody pimping themselves out to Netflix these days? The Beckhams don’t need the money so they must crave the attention. I miss the days when celebrities wanted to keep their private lives separate from their public lives.


----------



## csshopper

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *bag-mania*, unfortunately, my opin of the human race is not as charitable as yours bc quite frankly, I think Meghan Markle is EXACTLY the type of person who if Harry did beat her up, she could & would emotionally extort him.
> And to be clear: I DO NOT CONDONE any acts of violence against women!
> 
> Yes, that blind item made sense to many questions in my head surrounding this toxic couple, Grifters-R-Us.
> 
> For example, why has the BRF given the Royal formerly known as Prince Harry such a long leash and continue to fund his crazy <yes, crazy> lifestyle?
> If the blind item is Harry, well there you have it, the BRF, of course, knew all about Harry's sick compulsions and has cut him loose.
> They do not want him back.



Vigee,

 It only took a few clicks to find this from 2016. Didn't look further. The woman did not claim abuse, I don't think all prostitutes are dominatrix, but he found one who is.

*Royally Screwed! Horny Prince Harry’s Vegas Dominatrix Fling Spills All*
*‘He’s a grower, not a shower,’ reveals Carrie Royale.*
Star StaffNovember 29, 2016


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Is everybody pimping themselves out to Netflix these days? The Beckhams don’t need the money so they must crave the attention. I miss the days when celebrities wanted to keep their private lives separate from their public lives.



i was so much more intrigued with celebs before social media. Now many of them seem desperate and uninteresting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did H sue over these articles? Were MM’s bananas to the sex workers an effort to compensate for H’s treatment of them?








						Stripper claiming she partied with Harry in Vegas now a dominatrix
					

Carrie Reichert, who claimed to have partied with Prince Harry in his Las Vegas hotel in 2012, is now a Lady. Under the name Lady Dominique, she bills herself as a 'mistress of pain.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: Not trying to pry, has anyone read her book? 








						Prince Harry's Vegas 'dominatrix': Light bondage, spanking was part of 2012 bash
					

Dominatrix Carrie Reichert, who embroiled Prince Harry in a kinky Las Vegas scandal, has claimed that the Sin City bash in 2012 involved bondage, spanking and S&M.The 42-year-old American dominatrix said that it was not a full bondage party, but it




					www.business-standard.com


----------



## bag-mania

Harry might not remember the prostitutes from the 2012 incident in Las Vegas. There was apparently a lot of cocaine and other drugs consumed at that party .


----------



## bag-mania

Netflix announced today they are raising their monthly rates $1 for the standard plan and $2 for the premium plan.  Everyone has to chip in to pay off the Markles and the Beckhams.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, who at Nflix thinks these shows will attract viewers?
> Thought the “Real Housewives...” had cornered this market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David and Victoria Beckham 'land £16million deal with Netflix series'
> 
> 
> It's claimed viewers will get to see 'hilarious' insights into the early stages of the former footballer's, 45, courtship with the former Spice Girl, 46
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  the article reads just like the Harkles’ announcement. Nflix must be desperate.



Not gonna lie, I’d consider watching Posh and Becks... me and him have the same LEGO set and Posh posting vids of him putting it together was a laugh.









						Victoria Beckham mocks husband David for struggling with £160 Lego set
					

Couple. Goals.




					metro.co.uk
				




Be built it faster than me... took me 6 months lol...

still not signing up for Netflix though....


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Sol Ryan Lego Land Rover? That‘s the kind of challenge I need now 
The Beckhams are entertainers and they know what sells. H&M, not so much.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Sol Ryan Lego Land Rover? That‘s the kind of challenge I need now
> The Beckhams are entertainers and they know what sells. H&M, not so much.


Yeah, it’s my dream car. Since I can’t afford one, my friends got it for me last year. Closest to the real one I’m probably going to get for a while lol... Next build is going to be the Nintendo Console. My relatives have been getting me LEGO gift cards since I’ve been trapped home...thank goodness lol.









						Nintendo Entertainment System™ 71374 | LEGO® Super Mario™ | Buy online at the Official LEGO® Shop US
					

Recreate the Nintendo Entertainment System™ in LEGO® style!




					www.lego.com


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Is everybody pimping themselves out to Netflix these days? The Beckhams don’t need the money so they must crave the attention. I miss the days when celebrities wanted to keep their private lives separate from their public lives.



She may want the money for her clothing line.  David sunk a ton into it and she had to go looking for investors.  Another husband would have told her to pack up the business.  When Carolyne Roehm was divorced from Henry Kravis, that was the end of her clothing line because he wasn't going to prop it up anymore.

The Beckhams know the reality show drill as they have been there and done that before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> She may want the money for her clothing line.  David sunk a ton into it and she had to go looking for investors.  Another husband would have told her to pack up the business.  When Carolyne Roehm was divorced from Henry Kravis, that was the end of her clothing line because he wasn't going to prop it up anymore.
> 
> The Beckhams know the reality show drill as they have been there and done that before.



i really wish she’d expand her sizing. I like her designs, but I had to buy everything from her Target Collab because that was the only way to get her clothes in a plus size. They are great interview clothes even for being Target. I really like the long wide leg style she has with sneakers... (mind, I’m also talking like I can afford her stuff at the moment lol).  I miss the good ol days of great Target Collabs... I will always regret missing out on the McQ stuff.

Somehow Becks makes Posh likeable. I find them amusing.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Harry might not remember the prostitutes from the 2012 incident in Las Vegas. There was apparently a lot of cocaine and other drugs consumed at that party .


I read somewhere that the Palace did some tricky negotiating to get some of the pics quashed--pics showing drugs, drug usage & women. It must have been pretty interesting if the nekkid pics were the ones the magazine got to publish--that those were the least offensive in the Palace's eyes.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I read a lengthy biography on her. She was crafty. One of the things she did was take notes on individual men's preferences of drinks, foods, their business dealings, crazy details etc so that when she ran into them again (or strategized "chance" meetings) she could flatter them with her recollections. Women shielded their husbands from her. She was described as having become "a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings". She wasn't unattractive yet not a raving beauty either, but she excelled at captivating very powerful people. She married Winston Churchill's son (he was a dope) just for his connections to immerse herself into lofty circles. Unlike Meghan, she never wallowed in pity.


your comment caused me to go look for pictures of her....woman led quite a life


			Pamela Harriman – Tee Makes


----------



## marietouchet

I would not make too much of  the confidential reason for adjournment - there is certainly pressure, from Buck House, to have as few details come  out as possible, and the whole story is soooo icky -  family fights - MM & Markles, H&M & BRF, Tom is ill , heck PC and QEII are not at the top of their game healthwise, COVID, 5 famous young mother friends who will be inconvenienced ... ughhh 

Pregnant MM went to New Zealand with zika raging ...


----------



## marietouchet

The lawsuit reminds me of Game of Thrones TV  show - so many hypotheses, so much gossip and that was not even during COVID, with us all stuck at home

The delay will allow us to chat about this for another year

All of the stories about Archie's clandestine birth and christening are trending .. If someone wanted to stop the gossip, the delay is not the way


----------



## CarryOn2020

*The delay will allow us to chat about this for another year*


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Sol Ryan Lego Land Rover? That‘s the kind of challenge I need now
> *The Beckhams are entertainers and they know what sells. H&M, not so much.*



*CarryOn*, you said it, and I concur, love posh & becks and their tribe ~ they have found the right balance w/the commercialization of their brand and their celeb status, social media, and authenticity.
Wld def watch a few episodes of their show even as background noise.



gracekelly said:


> She may want the money for her clothing line.  David sunk a ton into it and she had to go looking for investors.  Another husband would have told her to pack up the business.  When Carolyne Roehm was divorced from Henry Kravis, that was the end of her clothing line because *he wasn't going to prop it up anymore.
> 
> The Beckhams know the reality show drill as they have been there and done that before.*



*grace*, spot-on, ie your comment about the fashion industry and wealthy husbands. Having spent decades in the fashion industry & tech, a huge proportion of start-ups in the luxury market are simply hobbies that with a healthy infusion of cash from a partner, and there you have it, another "business" in the fashion industry.
A business that in all likelihood will fail due to fierce competition from private label, majors, etc.

The beckhams as opposed to H&M, do not preach, continually lecture and talk down to their audience.
H&M cld suck the air out of any room as soon as they open their mouths, they seem so very fake and up to no-good.


----------



## gracekelly

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *CarryOn*, you said it, and I concur, love posh & becks and their tribe ~ they have found the right balance w/the commercialization of their brand and their celeb status, social media, and authenticity.
> Wld def watch a few episodes of their show even as background noise.
> 
> 
> 
> *grace*, spot-on, ie your comment about the fashion industry and wealthy husbands. Having spent decades in the fashion industry & tech, a huge proportion of start-ups in the luxury market are simply hobbies that with a healthy infusion of cash from a partner, and there you have it, another "business" in the fashion industry.
> A business that in all likelihood will fail due to fierce competition from private label, majors, etc.
> 
> The beckhams as opposed to H&M, do not preach, continually lecture and talk down to their audience.
> H&M cld suck the air out of any room as soon as they open their mouths, they seem so very fake and up to no-good.


I remember the Beckham show from years ago. It showed her looking for a home in Beverly Hills. I actually enjoyed that show, which is saying something for me because I have never been interested  in or watching  all the Housewives Of ....shows   I recall someone spotting her locally  at her son’s soccer game and they said she was dressed down and very friendly. You always see them with their children and they have always appeared to be hands on parents.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I remember the Beckham show from years ago. It showed her looking for a home in Beverly Hills. I actually enjoyed that show, which is saying something for me because I have never been interested  in or watching  all the Housewives Of ....shows   I recall someone spotting her locally  at her son’s soccer game and they said she was dressed down and very friendly. You always see them with their children and they have always appeared to be hands on parents.


just staying together that long says a lot....of course not that I've said that, they could announce a split


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> The lawsuit reminds me of Game of Thrones TV  show - so many hypotheses, so much gossip and that was not even during COVID, with us all stuck at home
> 
> The delay will allow us to chat about this for another year
> 
> All of the stories about Archie's clandestine birth and christening are trending .. If someone wanted to stop the gossip, the delay is not the way


Right and the show Lost which really had everyone imagining all sorts of things. If the Harkles real life story is anything like endings of GoT and Lost, it will be a colossal disappointment lol!

Justice Warby could still end this in January   That would be a relief.  If MM really wants this to go on and get humiliated, then I really think she has a screw loose.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The delay will allow us to chat about this for another year*


And who knows how many bandwagons the grifters will jump on in a year? 
Heck, I can't keep track of this year, and it's not over yet.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> just staying together that long says a lot....of course not that I've said that, they could announce a split


Oh I think they have had their ups and downs and plenty of rumors about him, but they are still together.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> just staying together that long says a lot....of course not that I've said that, they could announce a split


Apparently, according to gossip here in the UK its a marriage of convenience now, to protect brand Beckham. Also, he keeps pumping money into her flailing business to keep her happy while he "plays away"


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, according to gossip here in the UK its a marriage of convenience now, to protect brand Beckham. Also, he keeps pumping money into her flailing business to keep her happy while he "plays away"


This makes sense. So when the kids are all grown they will part?  The daughter is still young.


----------



## marietouchet

Pls see no 9 on the hot 100 ... Moran is a great humorist 







						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

gracekelly said:


> Oh I think they have had their* ups and downs and plenty of rumors about him, but they are still together*.



Yes, *grace*, there have been whispers.
They have a "European" friendly-style approach to a long marriage, and it wld not surprise me if Posh & Becks remain together even when their youngest child is grown.
Why? The dating scene, and being single cannot be all that much fun here in LA even if your celebrity status is so large that the world is your oyster, dividing up earnings & the publicity of a divorce will ruin not ONE  (1) brand but multiple <the son, too> so if remaining en famille is an option even with a silly financial price-tag that is barely noticeable, well then, why not?


----------



## sdkitty

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Yes, *grace*, there have been whispers.
> They have a "European" friendly-style approach to a long marriage, and it wld not surprise me if Posh & Becks remain together even when their youngest child is grown.
> Why? The dating scene, and being single cannot be all that much fun here in LA even if your celebrity status is so large that the world is your oyster, dividing up earnings & the publicity of a divorce will ruin not ONE  (1) brand but multiple <the son, too> so if remaining en famille is an option even with a silly financial price-tag that is barely noticeable, well then, why not?


well, it would likely be a lot more fun for him to be single than for her.  sadly, a man that age is in his prime but not so much for a woman.  and I'm sure there's enough money to go around (if it comes to that).


----------



## Sol Ryan

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Yes, *grace*, there have been whispers.
> They have a "European" friendly-style approach to a long marriage, and it wld not surprise me if Posh & Becks remain together even when their youngest child is grown.
> Why? The dating scene, and being single cannot be all that much fun here in LA even if your celebrity status is so large that the world is your oyster, dividing up earnings & the publicity of a divorce will ruin not ONE  (1) brand but multiple <the son, too> so if remaining en famille is an option even with a silly financial price-tag that is barely noticeable, well then, why not?



Eh... they are one of the few famous couples I think/hope are real. I’ve always thought they were a laugh when they post their family vids. Also, somehow despite how over the top they were back in the day, they do seem to have brought out the best in each other...  I hope they don’t split... I’m invested as a Spice Girls fan and a Becks fan lol!


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Eh... they are one of the few famous couples I think/hope are real. I’ve always thought they were a laugh when they post their family vids. Also, somehow despite how over the top they were back in the day, they do seem to have brought out the best in each other...  I hope they don’t split... I’m invested as a Spice Girls fan and a Becks fan lol!


one of my biggest disappointments among celebs was when Susan Sarandon and tim robbins split....seems like there is almost no such thing as a permanent committment anymore esp with celebs....Jeff Bridges is an exception.  love him


----------



## scarlet555

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *CarryOn*, you said it, and I concur, love posh & becks and their tribe ~ they have found the right balance w/the commercialization of their brand and their celeb status, social media, and authenticity.
> Wld def watch a few episodes of their show even as background noise.
> 
> 
> 
> *grace*, spot-on, ie your comment about the fashion industry and wealthy husbands. Having spent decades in the fashion industry & tech, a huge proportion of start-ups in the luxury market are simply hobbies that with a healthy infusion of cash from a partner, and there you have it, another "business" in the fashion industry.
> A business that in all likelihood will fail due to fierce competition from private label, majors, etc.
> 
> The beckhams as opposed to H&M,* do not preach, continually lecture and talk down to their audience.*
> H&M cld suck the air out of any room as soon as they open their mouths, they seem so very fake and up to no-good.



Imagine if the Beckhams talked about every event/death/injustice-I would be so sick of them.  I'd be very interested to see their new show, they have done a good job depicting themselves in a favorable light (imo) despite all the rumors, perhaps listening to their HR team helps...  sometimes you really have to shut up to make it work, but that's hard to do.  Nutmeg is too eager and it shows... its embarrassing when other celebrating see how thirsty you are for the limelight... you're debranding yourself at this point.


----------



## Sol Ryan

scarlet555 said:


> Imagine if the Beckhams talked about every event/death/injustice-I would be so sick of them.  I'd be very interested to see their new show, they have done a good job depicting themselves in a favorable light (imo) despite all the rumors, perhaps listening to their HR team helps...  sometimes you really have to shut up to make it work, but that's hard to do.  Nutmeg is too eager and it shows... its embarrassing when other celebrating see how thirsty you are for the limelight... you're debranding yourself at this point.



That and they’ve learned to avoid the spotlight if necessary. Posh and Becks have had their share of scandals, but they’ve always managed to have them roll off their backs. When things get hot, they put a united front and go quiet.  It also probably helps that a lot of times they give their Money (the important part) to causes instead of trying to steal the limelight. Becks giving his salary to a Children’s charity always stands out to me.









						David Beckham will donate all PSG wages to children's charity in Paris
					

David Beckham has been unveiled as the latest expensive recruit at Paris Saint-Germain




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> one of my biggest disappointments among celebs was when Susan Sarandon and tim robbins split....seems like there is almost no such thing as a permanent committment anymore esp with celebs....Jeff Bridges is an exception.  love him


Another exception, Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson celebrated 32 years in April.


----------



## 1LV

Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Harry might not remember the prostitutes from the 2012 incident in Las Vegas. There was apparently a lot of cocaine and other drugs consumed at that party .



I think it is more a matter of hoping everyone else will forget. I would bet money he remembers at least some of it.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos


cute couple but I could stand to hear less about their sex life


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> cute couple but I could stand to hear less about their sex life


Agree.  Not something I care to be privy to.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> Eh... they are one of the few famous couples I think/hope are real. I’ve always thought they were a laugh when they post their family vids. Also, somehow despite how over the top they were back in the day, they do seem to have brought out the best in each other...  I hope they don’t split... I’m invested as a Spice Girls fan and a Becks fan lol!



Yeah, I like them together despite the nanny rumours. Also, years later (and several more weddings?) I have not recovered from the JLo / Marc Anthony divorce. Can't these celebs take one for the team LOL


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> I read somewhere that the Palace did some tricky negotiating to get some of the pics quashed--pics showing drugs, drug usage & women. It must have been pretty interesting if the nekkid pics were the ones the magazine got to publish--that those were the least offensive in the Palace's eyes.


In retrospect I am beginning to wonder if some of these incidents were a manifestation of his anger at the BRF for perceived injustices, a kind of "I don't give a darn, I'll do it if I want to, and too bad if they don't like it" even then. Especially in light of his disrespect so blatantly on display for even his Grandmother since MM came on the scene. She has been an enabler, but it was all there lurking in JCMH I think, before she arrived. It worked to her advantage to exploit it, and here we are. She had to try and remake his family dynamic to be more like hers and the stupid sod fell for it.


----------



## melissatrv

TC1 said:


> Looks like the hair plugs are filling in as well



Totally agree!  I think next on the list are veneers.  His teeth were never super white and he smoked for years.  Totally see him going all in Hollywood - under her "guidance" of course


----------



## Sharont2305

melissatrv said:


> Totally agree!  I think next on the list are veneers.  His teeth were never super white and he smoked for years.  Totally see him going all in Hollywood - under her "guidance" of course


I think the veneers are already there, quite subtle. Not so gappy now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the veneers are already there, quite subtle. Not so gappy now.


so he's going to lose character in his face as well as his person.....sad....he's not an actor; he's a prince


----------



## CarryOn2020

As my mother always said, “pretty is as pretty does” and “Actions speak louder than words”. 
He’s no prince. The Vegas story about H standing naked in front of the big window and yelling “look at these royal jewels” or something to that effect - it seems credible. Reminds me of a scene in HBO’s Succession with the younger son and his office window. Doesn’t matter how much money these guys have, if the training is _off _or non-existing, they will have major issues. Posh and Becks never tried to be something they are not. Plus she has a superb Hermes collection just waiting for Harper. I would certainly give their show a look. H&M, no.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> She may want the money for her clothing line.  David sunk a ton into it and she had to go looking for investors.  Another husband would have told her to pack up the business.  When Carolyne Roehm was divorced from Henry Kravis, that was the end of her clothing line because he wasn't going to prop it up anymore.
> 
> The Beckhams know the reality show drill as they have been there and done that before.


Yes, and from what I recall, he propped up her business more than one time and then said "no more"!


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> *grace*, spot-on, ie your comment about the fashion industry and wealthy husbands. Having spent decades in the fashion industry & tech, a huge proportion of start-ups in the luxury market are simply hobbies that with a healthy infusion of cash from a partner, and there you have it, another "business" in the fashion industry.
> A business that in all likelihood will fail due to fierce competition from private label, majors, etc.


Sadly, nowadays .. much of Fashion (designers, brands, stores) .. are funded by Private Equity investors (saw tons of that before I left the Alternatives business).  It's sad because these PE investors are all about the 3 years in-&-out rule; in other words, if the "business" does not make a profit w/in those 3 years, they divest.  Many businesses (especially now) simply cannot turn a healthy profit (double-digit is what they like) in just 3 years; heck - it usually takes 5 years to build a brand!  I had heard through some friends of mine that, yes, Victoria was looking for investors, but many are simply not interested in backing her because she hasn't turned a profit no matter how "famous" her husband and/or she is!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so he's going to lose character in his face as well as his person.....sad....he's not an actor; he's a prince



He’ll end up looking as artificial and plastic on the outside as he is on the inside. That seems appropriate to me.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting comments from Robert Jobson:

*The Queen will 'step down next year' and hand over the monarchy to Prince Charles when she reaches the age of 95, royal biographer claims*

Described Prince Harry's comments about subconscious racial bias as 'bare-faced hypocrisy
Following on from Harry's comments on the subject of his own subconscious bias this week, Jobson says: 'I find this bare-faced hypocrisy, coming out from them [Harry and Meghan].
'I remember him making racial slurs about an Asian officer which was filmed by himself and distributed by his friends and he had to apologise for making racial comments. I find Harry telling everyone else that they are structurally racist hypocritical.' 


bare-faced hypocrisy


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Interesting comments from Robert Jobson:
> 
> *The Queen will 'step down next year' and hand over the monarchy to Prince Charles when she reaches the age of 95, royal biographer claims*
> 
> Described Prince Harry's comments about subconscious racial bias as 'bare-faced hypocrisy
> Following on from Harry's comments on the subject of his own subconscious bias this week, Jobson says: 'I find this bare-faced hypocrisy, coming out from them [Harry and Meghan].
> 'I remember him making racial slurs about an Asian officer which was filmed by himself and distributed by his friends and he had to apologise for making racial comments. I find Harry telling everyone else that they are structurally racist hypocritical.'
> 
> 
> bare-faced hypocrisy


He also made racial comments about a Pakistani classmate at Eton, and had to apologize for it!


----------



## bag-mania

Agree with his hypocrisy comment but I disagree with his speculation about the Queen stepping down. I swear these Royal “experts” and biographers don’t know anything more than we do. If you follow up and check their accuracy, they’re almost always wrong.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> He also made racial comments about a Pakistani classmate at Eton, and had to apologize for it!



Yes, but he has been 'wokenized' by the 'Queen of Woke' . He is now a different man (hypocrite 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





). According to Piers:

“And now he’s become this ‘King of Woke’ - it’s so depressing. Every day they do these videos from their mansion in California lecturing us about climate change when they’re not getting on Elton John’s private plane and so on.

“I look at Harry and he looks like one of those poor people in a hostage video. You want to send in the SAS to rescue him.”

Piers has singled out the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as being key culprits in the ‘woke’ culture - and when the couple announced they were stepping down as senior royals, his advice for the Queen was to get rid of the “whining eco-crazed leeches” before it’s too late.

“They want to be in their $11 million mansion in Santa Barbara lecturing the world about equality which in itself is laughable.

King of Woke


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Agree with his hypocrisy comment but I disagree with his speculation about the Queen stepping down. I swear these Royal “experts” and biographers don’t know anything more than we do. If you follow up and check their accuracy, they’re almost always wrong.


right.  I thought the queen was there for life unless she becomes incapacitated


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> right.  I thought the queen was there for life unless she becomes incapacitated


Some royal expert this person is!  The Queen may give more duties to Charles and William, but she is never going to step down.  Mr. Lacey should retire to the country and shut up.


----------



## Chanbal

Is there a TPF detective that would like to help the expert on 'being victimized' and her husband, the 'King of Woke' come up with an explanation on how "Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, got so much of the detail in the book so right, without their cooperation"?  

According to Tim Teeman, this is one of the pertinent questions:

*"*How did Scobie and Durand get the words said over the phone between daughter and father so precise?"

“Dad, we need to know if this is true or not, because my team is going to try to stop this story running—if you are telling me it’s fake,” Meghan allegedly said to her father over the phone. “If they do that, they’re going out of their way to protect you. *Dad, you’re telling me you’re being victimized, right?*”

*"Now Meghan and Harry have some time to figure out how to explain how the book’s authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, got so much of the detail in the book so right, without their cooperation." 
*
Any (false) explanation will do! 

Unsolved Mystery


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Some royal expert this person is!  The Queen may give more duties to Charles and William, but she is never going to step down.  Mr. Lacey should retire to the country and shut up.



I couldn't agree more, it is time for Mr. Lacey to embrace his retirement.

I wouldn't blame the Queen if she would want to spend the last years of her life more privately, but would be a tough decision for her imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I couldn't agree more, it is time for Mr. Lacey to embrace his retirement.
> 
> I wouldn't blame the Queen if she would want to spend the last years of her life more privately, but would be a tough decision for her imo.



Wonder if he and his crowd are trying to push her out by “leaking“ this fake news. Seems a tacky thing to do. Doubtful it will work.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if he and his crowd are trying to push her out by “leaking“ this fake news. Seems a tacky thing to do. Doubtful it will work.


I don't think she's gonna be pushed out by some gossip....she seems a very calm and patient woman


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> I couldn't agree more, it is time for Mr. Lacey to embrace his retirement.
> 
> I wouldn't blame the Queen if she would want to spend the last years of her life more privately, but would be a tough decision for her imo.



I don’t think she would. It’s very hard on some to spend their life working and then sit on the sidelines. My father retired and after only a year he was bored to tears and itching for a project or business to start. I don’t think I will ever retire either... if I have one whole day off with nothing to do, I feel the existential crisis coming on.


----------



## csshopper

bisousx said:


> I don’t think she would. It’s very hard on some to spend their life working and then sit on the sidelines. My father retired and after only a year he was bored to tears and itching for a project or business to start. I don’t think I will ever retire either... if I have one whole day off with nothing to do, I feel the existential crisis coming on.
> [/QUOTE
> 
> Bisoux, totally agree with you, unless she was incapacitated, in which case there are protocols to deal with it.
> 
> As she declared on her 21st birthday:
> 
> "*I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.
> 
> But I shall not have strength to carry out this resolution alone unless you join in it with me, as I now invite you to do: I know that your support will be unfailingly given. God help me to make good my vow, and God bless all of you who are willing to share in it."*
> 
> She epitomizes that now cliched phrase, "Keep Calm and Carry On."


----------



## sdkitty

yes, she has been through a lot more serious crises than what's going on now


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Is there a TPF detective that would like to help the expert on 'being victimized' and her husband, the 'King of Woke' come up with an explanation on how "Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, got so much of the detail in the book so right, without their cooperation"?
> 
> According to Tim Teeman, this is one of the pertinent questions:
> 
> *"*How did Scobie and Durand get the words said over the phone between daughter and father so precise?"
> 
> “Dad, we need to know if this is true or not, because my team is going to try to stop this story running—if you are telling me it’s fake,” Meghan allegedly said to her father over the phone. “If they do that, they’re going out of their way to protect you. *Dad, you’re telling me you’re being victimized, right?*”
> 
> *"Now Meghan and Harry have some time to figure out how to explain how the book’s authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, got so much of the detail in the book so right, without their cooperation." *
> 
> Any (false) explanation will do!
> 
> Unsolved Mystery



Omid and Carolyn had access to the Harry Potter cloak of invisibility.  They were tailing, and lurking the Harkles all the time.  They were privy to their innermost thoughts as well as they took a weekend course in mind reading.  Once this comes out in court, it will all make perfect sense as to how FF isn't a work of fiction and does relate true events and conversations.  Oh yes, they snuck into the Hall of Architectural records to copy the floor plans of the Her Maj's jewel vault and the plans of Anmer Hall.  These two have nothing on MI6,MI5,  FBI, CIA, KGB and the Stasi.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Omid and Carolyn had access to the Harry Potter cloak of invisibility.  They were tailing, and lurking the Harkles all the time.  They were privy to their innermost thoughts as well as they took a weekend course in mind reading.  Once this comes out in court, it will all make perfect sense as to how FF isn't a work of fiction and does relate true events and conversations.  Oh yes, they snuck into the Hall of Architectural records to copy the floor plans of the Her Maj's jewel vault and the plans of Anmer Hall.  These two have nothing on MI6,MI5,  FBI, CIA, KGB and the Stasi.


Brilliant, I can't see any judge capable of questioning this type of evidence. This might inspire JK Rowling to write her next book.

"Omid and Carolyn had access to the Harry Potter cloak of invisibility" with the help of Lord Voldemort.


----------



## Chanbal

Before being 'King of Woke', "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s"

"A friend said: ‘The Prince of Wales enjoyed popping into Frogmore Cottage to see his youngest grandchild and is sad that he hasn’t seen him for so long. He has missed much of his development since he is now growing up in the USA.

'Other members of the family are very sad at not seeing him. Everyone really misses Archie – they feel it’s particularly sad for the Queen and Prince Philip."

Everyone misses Archie


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Before being 'King of Woke', "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s"
> 
> "A friend said: ‘The Prince of Wales enjoyed popping into Frogmore Cottage to see his youngest grandchild and is sad that he hasn’t seen him for so long. He has missed much of his development since he is now growing up in the USA.
> 
> 'Other members of the family are very sad at not seeing him. Everyone really misses Archie – they feel it’s particularly sad for the Queen and Prince Philip."
> 
> Everyone misses Archie


And in Montecito California there is a wretched beech who is pleased to know she has achieved her objective, has complete control over her emasculated puppet, and has given the BRF the big finger. What power for her to revel in alone, just the way she likes it. Doria may be a nice lady, but she hardly makes up for all who have been jettisoned. 

When Phillip and the Queen die I wonder if he will be allowed to attend, or if they do go as a couple, what she will do in an attempt to divert attention to herself? 

Checked in on anyone lately Harry?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Before being 'King of Woke', "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s"
> 
> "A friend said: ‘The Prince of Wales enjoyed popping into Frogmore Cottage to see his youngest grandchild and is sad that he hasn’t seen him for so long. He has missed much of his development since he is now growing up in the USA.
> 
> 'Other members of the family are very sad at not seeing him. Everyone really misses Archie – they feel it’s particularly sad for the Queen and Prince Philip."
> 
> Everyone misses Archie



This entire situation, all of it, every single thing, is painfully _*weird *_and most unhealthy. The world deserves better. There needs to be a law that anyone receiving massive amounts of public attention & tax dollars must be of sound mind in a sound body, must follow proper decorum, must measure up or stfu.  Enough with the ’disrupters’.

ETA: _Royal_ used to mean something dignified. H&M should not be permitted to ‘trash’ it, IMO.  Anyone else ready for a hero?



Spoiler: We need a hero!





Where have all the good men gone
And where are all the Gods?
Where's the streetwise Hercules to fight the rising odds?
Isn't there a white knight upon a fiery steed?
Late at night I toss and I turn
And I dream of what I need
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
He's gotta be strong
And he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
He's gotta be sure
And it's gotta be soon
And he's gotta be larger than life
Larger than life (ah ah)
Somewhere after midnight
In my wildest fantasy
Somewhere just beyond my reach
There's someone reaching back for me
Racing on the thunder and rising with the heat
It's gonna take a Superman to sweep me off my feet (yeah)
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
He's gotta be strong
And he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
He's gotta be sure
And it's gotta be soon
And he's gotta be larger than life
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
Up where the mountains meet the Heavens above
Out where the lightning splits the sea
I could swear there is someone, somewhere
Watching me
Through the wind, and the chill, and the rain
And the storm, and the flood
I can feel his approach like a fire in my blood
(Like a fire in my blood, like a fire in my blood)
(Like a fire in my blood, like a fire in my oh, oh)
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
He's gotta be strong and he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
He's gotta be sure
And it's gotta be soon
And he's gotta be larger than life
I need a hero
I'm holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night
He's gotta be strong and he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
He's gotta be sure
And it's gotta be soon
And he's gotta be larger than life
I need a hero
I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> This entire situation, all of it, every single thing, is painfully _*weird *_and most unhealthy. The world deserves better. There needs to be a law that anyone receiving massive amounts of public attention & tax dollars must be of sound mind in a sound body, must follow proper decorum, must measure up or stfu.  Enough with the ’disrupters’.
> 
> ETA: _Royal_ used to mean something dignified. H&M should not be permitted to ‘trash’ it, IMO.  Anyone else ready for a hero?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: We need a hero!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where have all the good men gone
> And where are all the Gods?
> Where's the streetwise Hercules to fight the rising odds?
> Isn't there a white knight upon a fiery steed?
> Late at night I toss and I turn
> And I dream of what I need
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
> He's gotta be strong
> And he's gotta be fast
> And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
> He's gotta be sure
> And it's gotta be soon
> And he's gotta be larger than life
> Larger than life (ah ah)
> Somewhere after midnight
> In my wildest fantasy
> Somewhere just beyond my reach
> There's someone reaching back for me
> Racing on the thunder and rising with the heat
> It's gonna take a Superman to sweep me off my feet (yeah)
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
> He's gotta be strong
> And he's gotta be fast
> And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
> He's gotta be sure
> And it's gotta be soon
> And he's gotta be larger than life
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
> Up where the mountains meet the Heavens above
> Out where the lightning splits the sea
> I could swear there is someone, somewhere
> Watching me
> Through the wind, and the chill, and the rain
> And the storm, and the flood
> I can feel his approach like a fire in my blood
> (Like a fire in my blood, like a fire in my blood)
> (Like a fire in my blood, like a fire in my oh, oh)
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
> He's gotta be strong and he's gotta be fast
> And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
> He's gotta be sure
> And it's gotta be soon
> And he's gotta be larger than life
> I need a hero
> I'm holding out for a hero 'til the end of the night
> He's gotta be strong and he's gotta be fast
> And he's gotta be fresh from the fight
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the morning light
> He's gotta be sure
> And it's gotta be soon
> And he's gotta be larger than life
> I need a hero
> I'm holdin' out for a hero 'til the end of the night
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo
> Woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo, woo




I've no idea with the BT song has to do with it but I watched/listened it 3 times anyway 

I was thinking about 'disrupters' in general last night. People perceive them as rebels that disrupt the status quo, in the past perhaps that was so. Now it's more likely to be be that they're far more likely to_ be_ the establishment (corporations, conglomerates, understaffed digital empires, greedy individuals) that steel from individuals/public purse and shut down small businesses and never pay tax.

What it must be like to devastate an entire tradition, nation and trash history and think you're sooooo fabulous. Harry needs to be his own hero.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I've no idea with the BT song has to do with it but I watched/listened it 3 times anyway
> 
> I was thinking about 'disrupters' in general last night. People perceive them as rebels that disrupt the status quo, in the past perhaps that was so. Now it's more likely to be be that they're far more likely to_ be_ the establishment (corporations, conglomerates, understaffed digital empires, greedy individuals) that steel from individuals/public purse and shut down small businesses and never pay tax.
> 
> What it must be like to devastate an entire tradition, nation and trash history and think you're sooooo fabulous. Harry needs to be his own hero.



Yes, disrupters did shine lights in many places that needed improving. When the disrupters began, they weren’t trying to lower standards. They wanted improvements. As typical, the media hyped it so now everyone wants to join the band, sing the same song, try to be so cool. Yawn.



Seems to me, as we enter another lockdown, the world really _needs_ a hero now, this minute.  A 2020 hero - larger than life, a knight in shining armor, a real-life Hercules. Heck, someone who can _solve_ these issues, not make them worse. H&M with their nothing-burger lectures and victim-loving [_everyone misses the rarely-seen Archie??? who???_] zoom vids amplify the need for better, just better. Perhaps a Department of Better isn’t such a silly idea. Maybe Ian Fletcher can shine his light.









						#W1A.  A statement from the Department of Alternative Facts…
					

The BBC’s Head of Values Ian Fletcher (Hugh Bonneville) is once again throwing open the revolving doors to New Broadcasting House to allow cameras to film series three of W1A.  The cameras will be following Ian and his team during and post...




					www.hughbonneville.uk
				



_Ian Fletcher, Head of Values, says: “We are lucky to have the cameras back at an exciting time for the BBC. In a period where we’re looking to identify as many Creative Efficiency Opportunities as possible we’ve been faced with some tough choices, but the good news about that is that in lots of ways tough choices are actually easier than easy choices because there are fewer options to choose from so that’s all good.”_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German InTouch (not exactly known for their serious journalism, though) reports Harry was seen leaving a building that hosts a celebrity divorce laywer in NYC. That said I bet a NYC skyscraper has more than one tennant, so who knows whom he was really seeing. 

The article is extremely anti Meghan, something I haven't really seen with the younger, trendy magazines before.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German InTouch (not exactly known for their serious journalism, though) reports Harry was seen leaving a building that hosts a celebrity divorce laywer in NYC. That said I bet a NYC skyscraper has more than one tennant, so who knows whom he was really seeing.
> 
> The article is extremely anti Meghan, something I haven't really seen with the younger, trendy magazines before.


maybe the tide is turning....I'll believe it when I hear something negative about her on US media


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German InTouch (not exactly known for their serious journalism, though) reports Harry was seen leaving a building that hosts a celebrity divorce laywer in NYC. That said I bet a NYC skyscraper has more than one tennant, so who knows whom he was really seeing.
> 
> The article is extremely anti Meghan, something I haven't really seen with the younger, trendy magazines before.


someting negative about them in daily beast....I can't open the whole article but you get the gist








						Meghan Markle’s Father ‘Could Die Tomorrow,’ and Wants His Day in Court
					

Thomas Markle says he wants to give evidence ASAP, while he is still healthy enough. Plus, Andrew’s after-dark visits to the queen, and Harry and Meghan’s plummeting popularity.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I've no idea with the BT song has to do with it but I watched/listened it 3 times anyway
> 
> I was thinking about 'disrupters' in general last night. People perceive them as rebels that disrupt the status quo, in the past perhaps that was so. Now it's more likely to be be that they're far more likely to_ be_ the establishment (corporations, conglomerates, understaffed digital empires, greedy individuals) that steel from individuals/public purse and shut down small businesses and never pay tax.
> 
> What it must be like to devastate an entire tradition, nation and trash history and think you're sooooo fabulous. Harry needs to be his own hero.


The former Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Disruption


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German InTouch (not exactly known for their serious journalism, though) reports Harry was seen leaving a building that hosts a celebrity divorce laywer in NYC. That said I bet a NYC skyscraper has more than one tennant, so who knows whom he was really seeing.
> 
> The article is extremely anti Meghan, something I haven't really seen with the younger, trendy magazines before.


Obviously he had business that required him to appear in person and not via zoom... I wonder if he flew commercial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> And in Montecito California there is a wretched beech who is pleased to know she has achieved her objective, has complete control over her emasculated puppet, and has given the BRF the big finger. What power for her to revel in alone, just the way she likes it. Doria may be a nice lady, but she hardly makes up for all who have been jettisoned.
> 
> When Phillip and the Queen die I wonder if he will be allowed to attend, or if they do go as a couple, what she will do in an attempt to divert attention to herself?
> 
> Checked in on anyone lately Harry?



Statements like "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s" suggest that he was not planning on leaving the BRF. This statement gives the impression that H was anxious to find a wife and have kids, and MM opportunistically took advantage of that.

@QueenofWrapDress It will be very difficult for Harry to divorce MM. She will have a second kid if needed. Without H, MM would have to resume her life of a z-list actress.  As @CeeJay would say, she can't lose her meal tickets.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Before being 'King of Woke', "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s"
> 
> "A friend said: ‘The Prince of Wales enjoyed popping into Frogmore Cottage to see his youngest grandchild and is sad that he hasn’t seen him for so long. He has missed much of his development since he is now growing up in the USA.
> 
> 'Other members of the family are very sad at not seeing him. Everyone really misses Archie – they feel it’s particularly sad for the Queen and Prince Philip."
> 
> Everyone misses Archie


I wonder.....IMO the queen is a decent person and very conscientious about her duties.  but I don't know if she is like a conventional grandma.  I'm basing this on what (little) I know about how she was as a mother to Charles - not hugging him/shaking his hand.
William and Kate seem like "real" loving parents to their kids ....not sure about H&M.  They're keeping it secret for now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Statements like "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s" suggest that he was not planning on leaving the BRF. This statement gives the impression that H was anxious to find a wife and have kids, and MM opportunistically took advantage of that.
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress It will be very difficult for Harry to divorce MM. She will have a second kid if needed. Without H, MM would have to resume her life of a z-list actress.  As @CeeJay would say, she can't lose her meal tickets.



So true, MM does take advantage of the vulnerable Harry. Still, plenty of reports claim, once he left the army, he wanted out. Correction, half-in, half-out. Spoiled enough, entitled enough to expect he would get whatever he wanted.  

I don’t see a divorce either. I do see an ‘open’ marriage.  Remember during their engagement interview, they boasted that H slipped in and out of Canada at his pleasure. They can easily move around without anyone knowing, especially now. If MM ‘needs’ the second kid, I expect her to use a surrogate. In her world, she is rightfully concerned with her looks. I doubt she will have 2. One is enough of a meal ticket. Like many Hwood wives before her, she knows what she is doing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> In retrospect I am beginning to wonder if some of these incidents were a manifestation of his anger at the BRF for perceived injustices, a kind of "I don't give a darn, I'll do it if I want to, and too bad if they don't like it" even then. Especially in light of his disrespect so blatantly on display for even his Grandmother since MM came on the scene. She has been an enabler, but it was all there lurking in JCMH I think, before she arrived. It worked to her advantage to exploit it, and here we are. She had to try and remake his family dynamic to be more like hers and the stupid sod fell for it.


Agree. This rash behaviour, not necessarily the actual events, was more or less predictable, when one could see the anger consuming him during and after Diana's funeral.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> so he's going to lose character in his face as well as his person.....sad....he's not an actor; he's a prince


If truth be told, I don't think he had much character to begin with; he was too much indulged as I child.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> If truth be told, I don't think he had much character to begin with; he was too much indulged as I child.


I guess what I was trying to say is all the Hollywood costmetics, etc., is not "normal" for a male from the RF (I don't think)


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I guess what I was trying to say is all the Hollywood costmetics, etc., is not "normal" for a male from the RF (I don't think)



Agree.  In their part of Hwood, to stay relevant (employed), one must look young.  Clooney is allowed the gray hair because he has a youthful face and body. QE, Charles, Phillip, Anne, etc. have all aged naturally and beautifully, imo. British actresses and actors, too, seem to age naturally. Not blaming anyone,  Hwood, Dallas, NYC, Florida seem to encourage the other look. Not sure that trend will change any time soon. Having been through a skin cancer ordeal, I understand why a good surgeon is so important.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree.  In their part of Hwood, to stay relevant (employed), one must look young.  Clooney is allowed the gray hair because he has a youthful face and body. QE, Charles, Phillip, Anne, etc. have all aged naturally and beautifully, imo. British actresses and actors, too, seem to age naturally. Not blaming anyone,  Hwood, Dallas, NYC, Florida seem to encourage the other look. Not sure that trend will change any time soon. Having been through a skin cancer ordeal, I understand why a good surgeon is so important.


maybe....but he is still a member of the RF even if he's not performing his duties and is living in Hollywood with his shallow (trying to be deep) biatch of a wife


----------



## Chanbal

This is a screenshot because I don't want to give more clicks to ridiculous articles. Though, it is fair to say that they lied because they are liars.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to give more clicks to ridiculous articles. Though, it is fair to say that they lied because they are liars.
> 
> View attachment 4895228


the do seem to be keeping him pretty much hidden...why?  waiting for the right paycheck?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to give more clicks to ridiculous articles. Though, it is fair to say that they lied because they are liars.
> 
> View attachment 4895228


This is part of her brilliant plan to create interest in themselves.  They just used the baby as an excuse.  She thinks it is subtle, but now has been done so many times that it is pretty transparent.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> the do seem to be keeping him pretty much hidden...why?  waiting for the right paycheck?


Either a paycheck or he is so cross eyed they don't want pictures of him out there.


----------



## bagshopr

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to give more clicks to ridiculous articles. Though, it is fair to say that they lied because they are liars.
> 
> View attachment 4895228


I won't click either but that headline...Seriously????? What a joke.
Also I don't think that Harry looked angry at Diana's funeral walk, I think he was focusing hard on fighting back tears. And I doubt that the rest of the Royal Family misses Archie, they don't even know him. He is a nonentity in their lives.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> And in Montecito California there is a wretched beech who is pleased to know she has achieved her objective, has complete control over her emasculated puppet, and has given the BRF the big finger. What power for her to revel in alone, just the way she likes it. Doria may be a nice lady, but she hardly makes up for all who have been jettisoned.
> 
> When Phillip and the Queen die I wonder if he will be allowed to attend, or if they do go as a couple, what she will do in an attempt to divert attention to herself?
> 
> Checked in on anyone lately Harry?


*Divert attention to herself?!?!? .. seriously?!?!?* .. HA, how much you want to bet that she will MAKE SURE that all the attention is on her, even if it is a funeral!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to give more clicks to ridiculous articles. Though, it is fair to say that they lied because they are liars.
> 
> View attachment 4895228



This is what is wrong with the world, in a nutshell.  To H&M, it is ok to lie to the public and still accept the public’s money. We know they have lied about many other things as well. Why give him a microphone?  Seriously, Charles looks weaker and weaker.

From the article — yes, I clicked:


Spoiler: Ok to lie



Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have made a point of doing things their own way and that definitely included how they handled the birth of their son, Archie Harrison. 

In his new book, Battle of Brothers: William and Harry – The Inside Story of a Family in Tumult, royal historian and biographer Robert Lacey explains that Harry and Meghan were less-than-honest with the press (and, by extension, the masses of royal fans around the world) when it came to announcing Archie's arrival. 


Even though Archie was born at 5:26 in the morning on May 5, 2019, the Palace didn't announce anything about the birth until 2 p.m. that afternoon. What's more, when the Palace did make an announcement, it was a misleading statement that implied Meghan had just gone into labor, when in reality, she and Harry were already home with Archie by that time.

The decision famously angered Harry's older brother, Prince William, who had followed the longstanding royal tradition of presenting each of his children to the public within hours of their births. Harry and Meghan made a conscious choice to buck that tradition though. According to Lacey, their strong demand for privacy had to do with Harry's late mother, Princess Diana.

"Harry and Meghan were resolute that their newborn baby's first sight of the world should not bet he same insane and lethal camera-flashing that had attended — had actually brought about — the death of Diana," Lacey writes in the book.

Honestly, as reasons to eschew a longstanding family tradition go, that's definitely a good one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Statements like "Harry always said he looked forward to raising his family with William’s" suggest that he was not planning on leaving the BRF. This statement gives the impression that H was anxious to find a wife and have kids, and MM opportunistically took advantage of that.
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress It will be very difficult for Harry to divorce MM. She will have a second kid if needed. Without H, MM would have to resume her life of a z-list actress.  As @CeeJay would say, she can't lose her meal tickets.


Even if they divorced, MM has her meal-ticket in Archie, and IMO .. she doesn't seem to be someone who has the maternal instinct so I just don't see her having another child.  Now, what I could see, however (_and this would be before a divorce_) is an adoption .. given their "wokeness" .. a child of color or another ethnicity who they would tout to the world - "_*oh - look at what we have done, we are so great*_"!!!  Bottom line, what I was going to say, is that regardless of whether or not they stay together .. I truly do not believe that Meghan will ever have to go back to work as she will most likely get a very tidy sum .. *BUT*, she will still NEED to be the *center of the universe*!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Even if they divorced, MM has her meal-ticket in Archie, and IMO .. she doesn't seem to be someone who has the maternal instinct so I just don't see her having another child.  Now, what I could see, however (_and this would be before a divorce_) is an adoption .. given their "wokeness" .. a child of color or another ethnicity who they would tout to the world - "_*oh - look at what we have done, we are so great*_"!!!  Bottom line, what I was going to say, is that regardless of whether or not they stay together .. I truly do not believe that Meghan will ever have to go back to work as she will most likely get a very tidy sum .. *BUT*, she will still NEED to be the *center of the universe*!


You may be onto to something with an adoption.  Perhaps a reason for the court delay?


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to give more clicks to ridiculous articles. Though, it is fair to say that they lied because they are liars.
> 
> View attachment 4895228


We really, really need a  added to the 'like bar'.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Even if they divorced, MM has her meal-ticket in Archie, and IMO .. she doesn't seem to be someone who has the maternal instinct so I just don't see her having another child.  Now, what I could see, however (_and this would be before a divorce_) is an adoption .. given their "wokeness" .. a child of color or another ethnicity who they would tout to the world - "_*oh - look at what we have done, we are so great*_"!!!  Bottom line, what I was going to say, is that regardless of whether or not they stay together .. I truly do not believe that Meghan will ever have to go back to work as she will most likely get a very tidy sum .. *BUT*, she will still NEED to be the *center of the universe*!


that would be in keeping with her desire to be like Angelina Jolie


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> You may be onto to something with an adoption.  Perhaps a reason for the court delay?


I just don't see her having another child; well .. let me put it more precisely .. HER getting pregnant again!  As another poster stated, yes .. she could also have a surrogate, but somehow I don't think that would go over well with Harry.  However, if they adopt .. and it's a child that they can "market" per se, yup .. totally see that!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> that would be in keeping with her desire to be like Angelina Jolie


DONK .. *you are RIGHT*; didn't even think about that!!!  Good one @sdkitty !!!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Ha!
> 
> 
> Clooneys 'claimed they didn't know the Sussexes at their wedding'
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/8880781


Then why go?  I understand it's a royal wedding...simply to be photographed?  All these people are hypocrites.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is he saying the Lord Dannatt is lying? The Major General?
> Wow.  Harry continues to be a jerk.
> 
> _Speaking to the Mail on Sunday, Major General Julian Thompson, who led 3 Commando Brigade during the 1982 Falklands War, said, “I’m not trying to give him a lecture, but he has to take the job seriously and not just say, ‘Well, I’m still the Captain General and I’m going to live in Los Angeles and never visit the UK.’ It’s wrong. You can’t do that. He is expected to attend events and be around and be as accessible as his grandfather was.”
> 
> The Mail on Sunday also suggested that Harry had snubbed Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, who wrote to the prince requesting more support for Britain’s military community but never received a reply. _*Sources close to the Duke, however, claim the letter was never sent on, and that his office has since been in touch to request a copy of the letter is sent to the duke’s staff in Los Angeles.*


AKA "The dog ate my homework".


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Then why go?  I understand it's a royal wedding...simply to be photographed?  All these people are hypocrites.


it would be an experience going to a royal wedding....I would


----------



## purseinsanity

melissatrv said:


> Holy crap!  Is it me, or does Harry look like he got Botox in this video?  Definitely "fresher" complexion



He's starting to look like the Halloween mask version of himself.


----------



## purseinsanity

Tootsie17 said:


> I think Reese Witherspoon declined H & M's wedding invitation stating that she did not know them or had never met them  I believe someone posted a brief video about it many, many pages back on this thread.


At least Reese seems to have some integrity!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> At least Reese seems to have some integrity!


yeah, helps overcome that awful behavior when her husband was arrested and she mouthed off at the cop


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Other...bodily liquids would do as well


Maybe she also saw him pee in the woods?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what is wrong with the world, in a nutshell.  To H&M, it is ok to lie to the public and still accept the public’s money. We know they have lied about many other things as well. Why give him a microphone?  *Seriously, Charles looks weaker and weaker.*


It was stated a bit ago, that Charles hasn't given H&MM any Duchy money since they quit being full-time royals. There was no pronouncement on whether or not he was privately funding them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> it would be an experience going to a royal wedding....I would


I would go too!  I went to a dumb jewelry party once because I was curious about the $6M house it was in!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Then why go?  I understand it's a royal wedding...simply to be photographed?  All these people are hypocrites.


 There is a lot of hypocrisy in Hollywood, so not contesting that. Though, attending a royal wedding as a guest of honor sounds like a fun tourist attraction, why not?  



purseinsanity said:


> At least Reese seems to have some integrity!



She probably didn't get the invite...


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Then why go?  I understand it's a royal wedding...simply to be photographed?  All these people are hypocrites.



Yes.  Be photographed, be seen and tell all their frenemies they were there.



sdkitty said:


> it would be an experience going to a royal wedding....I would



*blushing*  Me too lol!


purseinsanity said:


> At least Reese seems to have some integrity!


She didn't want to be used. Plus she could have been filming.   She is a pretty busy actress.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry could learn from his brother's sense of duty:

Prince William secretly battled coronavirus in April - days after his father Prince Charles contracted it - and was left 'struggling to breathe,' according to a report.

The Duke of Cambridge, 38, did not reveal he was sick because he didn't want to alarm the public.

Following the news that his father and the Prime Minister had both fallen ill, William believed that going public with his sickness would only add to the nation's anxieties.

Will and COVID


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Then why go?  I understand it's a royal wedding...simply to be photographed?  All these people are hypocrites.


And, maybe I have missed any recent news, but Oprah, another prominently displayed attendee, has been strangely silent on MM and JCMH? Nothing lately on her deal announced in 2019 with JCMH to co produce some Mental health documentaries for Apple TV that were to stream in 2020?


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> And, maybe I have missed any recent news, but Oprah, another prominently displayed attendee, has been strangely silent on MM and JCMH? Nothing lately on her deal announced in 2019 with JCMH to co produce some Mental health documentaries for Apple TV that were to stream in 2020?



There’s no telling. Perhaps Oprah is still trying to make it up to Tyler Perry for vouching for them. Wasn’t she the contact between them that led to H&M living in his house?


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> And, maybe I have missed any recent news, but Oprah, another prominently displayed attendee, has been strangely silent on MM and JCMH? Nothing lately on her deal announced in 2019 with JCMH to co produce some Mental health documentaries for Apple TV that were to stream in 2020?


interesting that they moved into Oprah's neighborhood and we haven't heard of her welcoming them or anything like that....of course, she doesn't live there full time but anyway...


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Maggie Muggins   Charles looks weak because his credibility has been diminished by H&M. Letting H&M lie to the public weakens Charles and even QE. Once the trust is gone, the gig is up. Why should we believe anything from them? Do they really support those causes? The palace seems to understand that point and rightfully let their dissatisfaction be known. William is playing with fire by not fessing up about his illness. We the people will put up with a lot of stuff,  until the lies begin. That is the crossing the line. Full stop.  H&M compromised the entire regime with their lies. Yes, they are smirking at the gullible public. Privacy is and was such a BS excuse.

RE: the quiet ones — Oprah and Doria have gone silent. Perhaps that explains the daily zoom vids. It is their effort to distract the gullible public from noticing people are missing. I really don’t understand how anyone can excuse the lies.

@Chanbal  thank you for the article.  It confirmed all suspicions about these charlatans, grifters, losers. Their intention was to deceive the public. Everyone should let that sink in. They deliberately chose to deceive the public. Shameful.

ETA:  How they really feel:


----------



## mdcx

purseinsanity said:


> He's starting to look like the Halloween mask version of himself.


Definitely looks like he's been "freshened". I'm sure the teeth will be next.
Those hand gestures are ridiculous - am sure M instructed him to do that to try and build a connection or something.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Harry could learn from his brother's sense of duty:
> 
> Prince William secretly battled coronavirus in April - days after his father Prince Charles contracted it - and was left 'struggling to breathe,' according to a report.
> 
> The Duke of Cambridge, 38, did not reveal he was sick because he didn't want to alarm the public.
> 
> Following the news that his father and the Prime Minister had both fallen ill, William believed that going public with his sickness would only add to the nation's anxieties.
> 
> Will and COVID


If this report is accurate, I can't fault William for his caring approach. He had youth and resilience on his side and probably excellent medical care to fight the illness and he obviously succeeded. Who knows if it would've been better to tell the public. This is an instance of "he's damned if does and damned if he doesn't." In any case, there would be naysayers with either choice.


----------



## mdcx

Maggie Muggins said:


> If this report is accurate, I can't fault William for his caring approach. He had youth and resilience on his side and probably excellent medical care to fight the illness and he obviously succeeded. Who knows if it would've been better to tell the public. This is an instance of "he's damned if does and damned if he doesn't." In any case, there would be naysayers with either choice.


Meghan would have given H no choice if he had gotten it - front cover of People magazine or bust!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Always best to tell the truth. 
Knowing they lie, everything they promote will now be questioned. It’s the ‘Caesar’s wife‘ idea — gotta stay above suspicion. Condescension is never a good look.  imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mdcx said:


> Meghan would have given H no choice if he had gotten it - front cover of People magazine or bust!


Yep, HRH sleaziness Me-again. 
What bothers me the most about this whole H&MM mess is the HRH gender inequality. Beatrice and Eugenie, who are both HRH princesses, cannot transfer there styles and titles to their husband. Meanwhile Harry transferred both to his wife. Grifting Me-again became a royal highness while the princesses’ husbands, who seem to be more honorable, cannot become HRH. Isn’t it high time for all royal houses to think about changing the system.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yep, HRH sleaziness Me-again.
> What bothers me the most about this whole H&MM mess is the HRH gender inequality. Beatrice and Eugenie, who are both HRH princesses, cannot transfer there styles and titles to their husband. Meanwhile Harry transferred both to his wife. Grifting Me-again became a royal highness while the princesses’ husbands, who seem to be more honorable, cannot become HRH. Isn’t it high time for all royal houses to think about changing the system.


Maggie, your post caused this thought: MM would be very jealous of the Princesses, and if I remember the protocol, she would have to curtsy to them. May explain the deliberate oneupmanship on her part to drop the pregnancy bomb at Eugenie and Jack' wedding and distract from Eugenie as bride.  And shame on her turd of a husband for letting her do it, he and Eugenie were described for years as being pals. Others may have figured this out a long time ago. It's still a shock to me sometimes to realize how truly diabolical MM is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always best to tell the truth.
> Knowing they lie, everything they promote will now be questioned. It’s the ‘Caesar’s wife‘ idea — gotta stay above suspicion. Condescension is never a good look.  imo.



xpost from the other thread:

You seem pretty invested in this, but: does a public figure really have to reveal all medical information? It's not like he put out a fake statement saying Kate was in labour when she had already given birth (and to be honest as much as I dislike MM I wouldn't have held it against her had they just kept quiet and then announced the birth instead of inventing yet another story).


----------



## Sharont2305

Conversation held in Canada, or wherever the hell they were, in April. 
M: Harry, maybe we should go back, ya know, to show concern? 
H: yeah, I'll go. 
M: No, well go together, do you know what this means? 
H: no. 
M: Well, if anything happens to your pa and brother, George will be next in line. Granny is old so who knows when she goes. Can you not see? When that happens, SOMEONE has to be in charge till George comes of age, it has to be ME as Queeeeeen, and you can help! Sorry, you'll be Prince Regent, but I can still be Queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> xpost from the other thread:
> 
> You seem pretty invested in this, but: does a public figure really have to reveal all medical information? It's not like he put out a fake statement saying Kate was in labour when she had already given birth (and to be honest as much as I dislike MM I wouldn't have held it against her had they just kept quiet and then announced the birth instead of inventing yet another story).



Indeed, and answered in the other thread.
The Truth is like a breath of fresh air — bring it on. Here again, notice how Charles & Albert etc. handled this. They told the truth. Charles has told the truth all along. Sad his arrogant sons think they are above it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Indeed, and answered in the other thread.
> The Truth is like a breath of fresh air — bring it on. Here again, notice how Charles & Albert etc. handled this. They told the truth. Charles has told the truth all along. Sad his arrogant sons think they are above it.


I think Harry and Will had 2 very different reasons (selfish vs. altruistic) to delay their news.

Harry delayed sharing a moment of joy, about his son being born, with the taxpayers that were paying the couple's bills, because MM told him so. Her selfish reasons were already discussed in this thread.

Will delayed sharing the news about being sick, because the morale was already low due to the scary news about COVD-19 (so many people were dying because of the virus). As he said, the PM and PC were sick, and he felt that more bad news wouldn't help his country at a time of so much anxiety.

my 2 cents.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I think Harry and Will had 2 very different reasons (selfish vs. altruistic) to delay their news.
> 
> Harry delayed sharing a moment of joy, about his son being born, with the taxpayers that were paying the couple's bills, because MM told him so. Her selfish reasons were already discussed in this thread.
> 
> Will delayed sharing the news about being sick, because the morale was already low due to the scary news about COVD-19 (so many people were dying because of the virus). As he said, the PM and PC were sick, and he felt that more bad news wouldn't help his country at a time of so much anxiety.
> 
> my 2 cents.


Indeed, I think that for William, it's a need-to-know basis as he is second in the line and HMQ was healthy at the time. But, I understand that some feel the need to know the daily royal minutia.


----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> Even if they divorced, MM has her meal-ticket in Archie, and IMO .. she doesn't seem to be someone who has the maternal instinct so I just *don't see her having another child. * Now, what I could see, however (_and this would be before a divorce_)* is an adoption *.. given their "wokeness" .. a child of color or another ethnicity who they would tout to the world - "_*oh - look at what we have done, we are so great*_"!!!  Bottom line, what I was going to say, is that regardless of whether or not they stay together .. I truly do not believe that Meghan will ever have to go back to work as she will most likely get a very tidy sum .. *BUT*, she will still NEED to be the *center of the universe*!



I sincerely hope they neither have another child nor do they adopt one: who would want two parents like them?? Poor little Archie is more than enough, considering how many children their are in this world who have to put up with crazy parents!


----------



## duna

I don't think William could take such a decision on his own, if it's true that he had Covid, surely the Queen and Charles would have instructed him.


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I sincerely hope they neither have another child nor do they adopt one: who would want two parents like them?? Poor little Archie is more than enough, considering how many children their are in this world who have to put up with crazy parents!


yes but to play devil's advocate, if they adopted a child from some place in the world where people are going hungry, that child would at least have a much better life in terms of food and material things


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> yes but to play devil's advocate, if they adopted a child from some place in the world where people are going hungry, that child would at least have a much better life in terms of food and material things


Good question. What is better, a full belly and poor parental involvement or a half-full belly and a normal environment? The child would probably choose the full belly. I just hope, that whoever is in charge of the agency they choose, can see H&MM as the grifters they are.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good question. What is better, a full belly and poor parental involvement or a half-full belly and a normal environment? The child would probably choose the full belly. I just hope, that whoever is in charge of the agency they choose, can see H&MM as the grifters they are.



It would be better to have a full belly and indifferent parental involvement. Keep in mind children aren't put up for adoption if a normal environment is available to them within their own family, a grandparent, aunt, or uncle willing to raise them for instance. Sure, if they adopted, they would use it as an "aren't we the world's most wonderful, loving people?" moment, à la Jolie. But for that particular child it would be like hitting the lottery. He/she would at the very least live in a fabulous home, have all material needs met, be given an education, and most importantly be taken out of a bad situation. Personally I don't see H&M going the adoption route, but I know better than to be surprised by anything they do.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@bag-mania I agree, but I hope the agency or whomever would choose parents with better character than H&MM.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Indeed, I think that for William, it's a need-to-know basis as he is second in the line and HMQ was healthy at the time. But, I understand that some feel the need to know the daily royal minutia.


MM&H could have been silent and delayed their news, but instead they decided to lie about the time that their son was born. This goes along with the several lies associated to MM, such as being caucasian or pretending' to be in an union to get a role...  

Will just decided to delay sharing the bad news about being sick (probably after consulting QE), so he could avoid worrying people at a very difficult time. 

These two events can't be compared...


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Either a paycheck or he is so cross eyed they don't want pictures of him out there.


He has his mother’s strabismus, the Wessex family handled Louise’s squint with great dignity , L was never hidden out of sight


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> ^^
> I am going to give that Morticia Adams Weave mess a big thumbs down.
> It was awesomely campy in the original but on MM its looks like its wearing her.
> 
> View attachment 4891621
> 
> 
> View attachment 4891622


Dead on!!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Many of the publications are shamelessly kissing H&M ass for unknown reasons. They must be getting something out of it, thousands of clicks from those who love them and hate them most likely.


As I've said before, I've lost any and all respect for US "news" publications.  They have all turned into biased, gossip rags.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> @bag-mania I agree, but I hope the agency or whomever would choose parents with better character than H&MM.



As much as I dislike them I don't believe they would be abusive to any child. That said, narcissistic parents are difficult to deal with even without cruelty. There may be an updated retelling of "Mommie Dearest" in the future from an adopted child or even from Archie.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did H sue over these articles? Were MM’s bananas to the sex workers an effort to compensate for H’s treatment of them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stripper claiming she partied with Harry in Vegas now a dominatrix
> 
> 
> Carrie Reichert, who claimed to have partied with Prince Harry in his Las Vegas hotel in 2012, is now a Lady. Under the name Lady Dominique, she bills herself as a 'mistress of pain.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Not trying to pry, has anyone read her book?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's Vegas 'dominatrix': Light bondage, spanking was part of 2012 bash
> 
> 
> Dominatrix Carrie Reichert, who embroiled Prince Harry in a kinky Las Vegas scandal, has claimed that the Sin City bash in 2012 involved bondage, spanking and S&M.The 42-year-old American dominatrix said that it was not a full bondage party, but it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.business-standard.com


Suddenly, MM's constant leather pants make sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> Not gonna lie, I’d consider watching Posh and Becks... me and him have the same LEGO set and Posh posting vids of him putting it together was a laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham mocks husband David for struggling with £160 Lego set
> 
> 
> Couple. Goals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be built it faster than me... took me 6 months lol...
> 
> still not signing up for Netflix though....


As attractive as David Beckham is, I don't think I could listen to his voice for an hour, much less a whole series!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> As I've said before, I've lost any and all respect for US "news" publications.  They have all turned into biased, gossip rags.



Absolutely. It's been a gradual process over the last 30 or so years. Almost every story has an agenda behind it.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> As much as I dislike them I don't believe they would be abusive to any child. That said, narcissistic parents are difficult to deal with even without cruelty. There may be an updated retelling of "Mommie Dearest" in the future from an adopted child or even from Archie.



No I don't think they would be abusive, just difficult to get on with.


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> I don't think William could take such a decision on his own, if it's true that he had Covid, *surely the Queen and Charles would have instructed him.*



I wasn’t going to say _that_, but I was thinking it. If she and/or he instructed W to keep quiet, wonder if others have been instructed to keep quiet about their issues (Andrew?).  I really do not understand why anyone would think it is a big deal to have the palace make a simple statement saying W had it. Perhaps it would have helped the public to take the virus more seriously.  No matter. The salient point here is they chose not to tell.  Looks bad on all levels, esp with Andrew’s mess.  Transparency is their friend in these times. Good on Charles for being honest. IMO.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Suddenly, MM's constant leather pants make sense.


And Harry wearing pink shooties!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Suddenly, MM's constant leather pants make sense.



Are they leather?  Or like most things H&M, faux leather (aka, pleather)?


----------



## gracekelly

duna said:


> I sincerely hope they neither have another child nor do they adopt one: who would want two parents like them?? Poor little Archie is more than enough, considering how many children their are in this world who have to put up with crazy parents!


Totally agree. This child would be adopted for all the wrong reasons.   A ”woke show baby” that would end  up  being forgotten.   I get Joan Crawford vibes.


----------



## bag-mania

*Johnny Depp Libel Defeat Spells Trouble for Meghan Markle's Tabloid Lawsuit*

Johnny Depp's libel defeat shows Meghan Markle's tabloid privacy case could "blow up" in her face, lawyers have said.

The _Pirates of the Caribbean_ star saw the High Court in London dramatically rule it was accurate for British media to call Depp a "wife-beater."

The actor shares the same solicitor, Jenny Afia, from law firm Schillings, as the Duchess of Sussex hired for her case against the _Mail on Sunday_.

When Meghan first launched the privacy and copyright action in October last year she also had the same barrister, David Sherborne, though she sacked him over the summer.

Amber Melville-Brown, head of the media and reputation at law firm Withers, told _Newsweek_: "I definitely think there's a lesson here for Meghan—watch out because litigation is a very dangerous game.

"A decision to push the nuclear button of litigation can blow up in a claimant's face.

"She has watched and everybody has watched this disastrous libel action with accusations being thrown by one and another, the private details of their private lives coming out for all to see.

"Meghan must be sitting at home thinking to herself: 'There but for the grace of God go I.'

"It's by the grace of her own litigation. She could be going in the same direction. Has she still got the stomach for the fight?

"Does she want to see herself in the same position, being subject to hostile cross-examination, her private life and her private thoughts on display?"

Depp's libel case against U.K. tabloid _The Sun_ came after an article referred to him as a "wife-beater," offering scarce additional details.

However, over the course of what became known as the "libel trial of the century," extraordinary details and images from his marriage emerged.

Among them, pictures of former wife Amber Heard's bruised face after she said he attacked her, as well as messages Depp sent in which he said he wanted to burn and drown her.

The BBC reported that after today's ruling, Afia, both Meghan and Depp's solicitor, said: "This decision is as perverse as it is bewildering."

Mark Stephens, who previously represented Julian Assange, told _Newsweek_ Depp's reputation was damaged by the material he was forced to disclose to the court—and Meghan faced a similar risk.

The U.K.-based attorney, of Howard Kennedy, said: "The salutary lesson for Meghan is that celebrities don't always win.

"It's very difficult to lose a libel action in London but if you overstate it or if you lie then you are in real difficulties and worse than that is the disclosure of all your personal relationships.

"He had to give disclosure of WhatsApp messages, which showed he was taking large amounts of drugs while he was in Australia.

"How Meghan curates her reputation through friends and PR people and connections is not something that she wants to show how that sausage is made. She will only be subject to criticism for it, win or lose."

He added: "When you get a high-profile client like her you don't say 'oh yes, we'll sort that out for you no problem.'

"You say: 'Yes, I can deal with this but you need to understand disclosure and you need to understand cross-examination.

"'If you want to go ahead after that then there's an issue that we can take for you.'

"She seems to have woken up in the middle of this case suddenly finding that all her connections with her friends and her private messages are going to be examined and picked over forensically and that she's going to be cross-examined on the truth of what's going on.

"Those are problems for her."









						Johnny Depp Libel Defeat Spells Trouble for Meghan Markle's Tabloid Lawsuit
					

Meghan Markle's solicitor represented Johnny Depp in his libel defeat to a U.K. tabloid—and lawyers say there are lessons for the Duchess of Sussex in her own privacy case.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> There’s no telling. Perhaps Oprah is still trying to make it up to Tyler Perry for vouching for them. Wasn’t she the contact between them that led to H&M living in his house?


Hmmmmmm .. while I'm not necessarily an Oprah fan per se, I do think she is very astute and has a 'sense' about people.  Obviously, in the beginning, I do think she was thrilled to go to their wedding and get into 'bed' with them re: Mental Health documentary, but given their behavior as of late, the lies, the hypocrisy .. and who knows what Tyler may have said, she may just have decided to take a step back for the time being.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> "She seems to have woken up in the middle of this case suddenly finding that all her connections with her friends and her private messages are going to be examined and picked over forensically and that she's going to be cross-examined on the truth of what's going on.
> 
> "Those are problems for her."



She really is not very bright, is she? I bet her lawyers told her so from the get-go, but of course Ms. Knowitall knew best.


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> I sincerely hope they neither have another child nor do they adopt one: who would want two parents like them?? Poor little Archie is more than enough, considering how many children their are in this world who have to put up with crazy parents!


Could not agree with you more, and sadly .. I predict that poor Archie is going to have to have a LOT of psychological and/or psychiatric needs as he ages (and sadly, as much $$$ as they may have, what difference does it make - I knew people like this growing up and sadly, not a single one of them is alive today).


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I wasn’t going to say _that_, but I was thinking it. If she and/or he instructed W to keep quiet, wonder if others have been instructed to keep quiet about their issues (Andrew?).  I really do not understand why anyone would think it is a big deal to have the palace make a simple statement saying W had it. Perhaps it would have helped the public to take the virus more seriously.  No matter. The salient point here is they chose not to tell.  Looks bad on all levels, esp with Andrew’s mess.  Transparency is their friend in these times. Good on Charles for being honest. IMO.


Hmmm
The high level Brits that came down sick , Boris , PC , PW may have all been exposed at the infamous Commonwealth ceremony - think MM green dress 
I can see that hysteria might have ensued if the announcement had been timely 
There were how many dignitaries there ? Over a thousand ... the Queen was there too


----------



## bisousx

CeeJay said:


> Could not agree with you more, and sadly .. I predict that poor Archie is going to have to have a LOT of psychological and/or psychiatric needs as he ages (and sadly, as much $$$ as they may have, what difference does it make - I knew people like this growing up and sadly, not a single one of them is alive today).



This. Growing up with a narcissist as a parent is nothing to scoff at, if not full blown emotional abuse. There’s hundreds of thousands of people in those “daughters/children of narcisisst” online support groups, if you ask them if they would trade a loving and safe childhood for more food on the table, you’d be surprised at the answers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm
> The high level Brits that came down sick , Boris , PC , PW may have all been exposed at the infamous Commonwealth ceremony - think MM green dress
> I can see that hysteria might have ensued if the announcement had been timely
> There were how many dignitaries there ? Over a thousand ... the Queen was there too



Hysteria?  Have some faith in the public. We know how to deal with the tough stuff.  Maybe some of the 20-35 year olds can’t handle it, but the rest of us prefer honesty to patronizing BS.  Here’s one way we have to describe this, kinda crude so be warned:


Spoiler: Americanism



Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh my gosh ... if the Queen , Pc and Pw were all incapacitated at the same time .. according to medieval traditions , Harry would be regent. for George - what a thought !
Now I get why they delayed announcing lol (intended as a joke ...) LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bad times for the
> 
> 
> Hysteria?  Have some faith in the public. We know how to deal with the tough stuff.  Maybe some of the 20-35 year olds can’t handle it, but the rest of us prefer honesty to patronizing BS.  Here’s one way we have to describe this, kinda crude so be warned:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Americanism
> 
> 
> 
> Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.


Was not trying to justify the actions , just putting in perspective of the huge commonwealth service where they all contracted it maybe


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh ... if the Queen , Pc and Pw were all incapacitated at the same time .. according to medieval traditions , Harry would be regent. for George - what a thought !
> Now I get why they delayed announcing lol



From what I’ve read, they did not announce it until after it was leaked. If he had it April, it took 5 months for the news to leak.
From what we know, no one was incapacitated, so no need of a Regent.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Onward to the real issues: 









						Katharine McPhee and David Foster are house hunting in Montecito
					

A source close to Foster, 70, and McPhee, 36, said they want their child to grow up alongside Archie in the family friendly area near Santa Barbara, California.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I would go too!  I went to a dumb jewelry party once because I was curious about the $6M house it was in!


Yeah, I've done stuff like that too,


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> From what I’ve read, they did not announce it until after it was leaked. If he had it April, it took 5 months for the news to leak.
> From what we know, no one was incapacitated, so no need of a Regent.


As my wimsey (sic) takes me .. all I could think of ... 
Shades of the Princes in the Tower, when their evil uncle (AKA Richard III) usurped the throne, when he was regent 
Yes, I do read too much medieval stuff


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm
> The high level Brits that came down sick , Boris , PC , PW may have all been exposed at the infamous Commonwealth ceremony - think MM green dress
> I can see that hysteria might have ensued if the announcement had been timely
> There were how many dignitaries there ? Over a thousand ... the Queen was there too


The non disclosure at the time of his illness reflects the “keep calm and carry on” philosophy of the Monarch, from whom he probably had to take direction. 

He did “carry on” with a list of video and zoom appointments during that time. She is probably proud of him.


----------



## marietouchet

I forgot about Andrew being next in line after Harry ...









						Why Prince William Kept His Coronavirus Diagnosis a Secret from the Public — People
					

Prince William wasn't the only member of the royal family who tested positive for COVID-19 this spring




					apple.news


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh ... if the Queen , Pc and Pw were all incapacitated at the same time .. according to medieval traditions , Harry would be regent. for George - what a thought !
> Now I get why they delayed announcing lol (intended as a joke ...) LOL



I can see MM running down to the crown storage room and grabbing the crown she wanted all along... MINE! MINE MINE MINE!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Onward to the real issues:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katharine McPhee and David Foster are house hunting in Montecito
> 
> 
> A source close to Foster, 70, and McPhee, 36, said they want their child to grow up alongside Archie in the family friendly area near Santa Barbara, California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I only browsed the article, so let me know if I understood its message well.

Dad David and son Harry will be finally reunited in the beautiful Montecito, Archie and his new uncle will be growing up together... Both 'young' mothers were schoolmates,  married for  (of $$$$?), and are now really really . Love Happy Endings!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I only browsed the article, so let me know if I understood its message well.
> 
> Dad David and son Harry will be finally reunited in the beautiful Montecito, Archie and his new uncle will be growing up together... Both 'young' mothers were schoolmates,  married for  (of $$$$?), and are now really really . Love Happy Endings!


The photo of David Foster is interesting ... he too has strabismus


----------



## Lodpah

As to  delaying her trial she’s waiting for her father to pass away, that’s my opinion. If she can discard people like trash her heart is made of stone.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Johnny Depp Libel Defeat Spells Trouble for Meghan Markle's Tabloid Lawsuit*
> 
> Johnny Depp's libel defeat shows Meghan Markle's tabloid privacy case could "blow up" in her face, lawyers have said.
> 
> The _Pirates of the Caribbean_ star saw the High Court in London dramatically rule it was accurate for British media to call Depp a "wife-beater."
> 
> The actor shares the same solicitor, Jenny Afia, from law firm Schillings, as the Duchess of Sussex hired for her case against the _Mail on Sunday_.
> 
> When Meghan first launched the privacy and copyright action in October last year she also had the same barrister, David Sherborne, though she sacked him over the summer.
> 
> Amber Melville-Brown, head of the media and reputation at law firm Withers, told _Newsweek_: "I definitely think there's a lesson here for Meghan—watch out because litigation is a very dangerous game.
> 
> "A decision to push the nuclear button of litigation can blow up in a claimant's face.
> 
> "She has watched and everybody has watched this disastrous libel action with accusations being thrown by one and another, the private details of their private lives coming out for all to see.
> 
> "Meghan must be sitting at home thinking to herself: 'There but for the grace of God go I.'
> 
> "It's by the grace of her own litigation. She could be going in the same direction. Has she still got the stomach for the fight?
> 
> "Does she want to see herself in the same position, being subject to hostile cross-examination, her private life and her private thoughts on display?"
> 
> Depp's libel case against U.K. tabloid _The Sun_ came after an article referred to him as a "wife-beater," offering scarce additional details.
> 
> However, over the course of what became known as the "libel trial of the century," extraordinary details and images from his marriage emerged.
> 
> Among them, pictures of former wife Amber Heard's bruised face after she said he attacked her, as well as messages Depp sent in which he said he wanted to burn and drown her.
> 
> The BBC reported that after today's ruling, Afia, both Meghan and Depp's solicitor, said: "This decision is as perverse as it is bewildering."
> 
> Mark Stephens, who previously represented Julian Assange, told _Newsweek_ Depp's reputation was damaged by the material he was forced to disclose to the court—and Meghan faced a similar risk.
> 
> The U.K.-based attorney, of Howard Kennedy, said: "The salutary lesson for Meghan is that celebrities don't always win.
> 
> "It's very difficult to lose a libel action in London but if you overstate it or if you lie then you are in real difficulties and worse than that is the disclosure of all your personal relationships.
> 
> "He had to give disclosure of WhatsApp messages, which showed he was taking large amounts of drugs while he was in Australia.
> 
> "How Meghan curates her reputation through friends and PR people and connections is not something that she wants to show how that sausage is made. She will only be subject to criticism for it, win or lose."
> 
> He added: "When you get a high-profile client like her you don't say 'oh yes, we'll sort that out for you no problem.'
> 
> "You say: 'Yes, I can deal with this but you need to understand disclosure and you need to understand cross-examination.
> 
> "'If you want to go ahead after that then there's an issue that we can take for you.'
> 
> "She seems to have woken up in the middle of this case suddenly finding that all her connections with her friends and her private messages are going to be examined and picked over forensically and that she's going to be cross-examined on the truth of what's going on.
> 
> "Those are problems for her."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Johnny Depp Libel Defeat Spells Trouble for Meghan Markle's Tabloid Lawsuit
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's solicitor represented Johnny Depp in his libel defeat to a U.K. tabloid—and lawyers say there are lessons for the Duchess of Sussex in her own privacy case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com





Lodpah said:


> As to  delaying her trial she’s waiting for her father to pass away, that’s my opinion. If she can discard people like trash her heart is made of stone.



She will only drop the case after getting all of her deals settled imo. She will likely use the father's health or some other excuse. She can't risk to have all of her tactics being publicly exposed.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> She will only drop the case after getting all of her deals settled imo. She will likely use the father's health or some other excuse. She can't risk to have all of her tactics being publicly exposed.


Her father was quoted in a magazine that he wants this over quickly as his health is not good. What daughter puts her father in this situation? He was not abusive, he provided for her and yes he is not perfect and made mistakes but he’s still her father. I believe she does not want him in her life because he does not fit her narrative.


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh ... if the Queen , Pc and Pw were all incapacitated at the same time .. according to medieval traditions , Harry would be regent. for George - what a thought !
> Now I get why they delayed announcing lol (intended as a joke ...) LOL


You all might think I’m crazy and I believe that’s her goal. From the beginning this tread was posted I suspected she’s so evil you guys have no clue. She bewitched Harry. I’ve said that time and time again.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh ... if the Queen , Pc and Pw were all incapacitated at the same time .. according to medieval traditions , Harry would be regent. for George - what a thought !
> Now I get why they delayed announcing lol (intended as a joke ...) LOL


All it takes is an act of Parliament to appoint a regent similar to The Regency Act of 1953, that bypassed Princess Margaret and appointed Prince Philip as potential regent to Charles in case of HM's demise. A similar act in 2020 could bypass Harry and Andrew (who are both over 18, next in the line of succession, but terrible prospects) and assign Beatrice as potential regent to George.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Lots of comments on the Daily Mail speculating she asked for a 9 month delay due to pregnancy, hoping for sympathy?


----------



## chicinthecity777

csshopper said:


> Lots of comments on the Daily Mail speculating she asked for a 9 month delay due to pregnancy, hoping for sympathy?


Rumours are flying on twitter that she is delaying it because she's having another baby but most are saying via a surrogate.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> The photo of David Foster is interesting ... he too has strabismus



Hmmmm... Maybe Meghan and David go back a little bit. Harry...


----------



## gracekelly

She can drop the case and say it is obvious from the Depp trial that high profile people can't get a fair trial in the UK.  Playing the victim again.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> All it takes is an act of Parliament to appoint a regent similar to The Regency Act of 1953, that bypassed Princess Margaret and appointed Prince Philip as potential regent to Charles in case of HM's demise. A similar act in 2020 could bypass Harry and Andrew (who are both over 18, next in the line of succession, but terrible prospects) and assign Beatrice as potential regent to George.



Appointing Harry or Andrew as regents would lead to the end of the monarchy in the UK imo. I wonder if Kate could act as regent, probably not. Beatrice or Edward, QE youngest son, would perhaps be well accepted. In any event, it's great that Will is fine.



csshopper said:


> Lots of comments on the Daily Mail speculating she asked for a 9 month delay due to pregnancy, hoping for sympathy?



Perfect timing! 



chicinthecity777 said:


> Rumours are flying on twitter that she is delaying it because she's having another baby but most are saying via a surrogate.



A surrogate would make the pregnancy a lot easier, and she would still get the benefits of a 2nd kid...



gracekelly said:


> She can drop the case and say it is obvious from the Depp trial that high profile people can't get a fair trial in the UK.  Playing the victim again.



You just gave her the perfect excuse. She will drop the case just to protect the privacy of her family and the 'young mothers', she is such a martyr!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Rumours are flying on twitter that she is delaying it because she's having another baby but most are saying via a surrogate.


 
If there was a surrogate there would be no reason for her to delay her court proceedings, certainly not for 9 months. Didn’t the court pick the rescheduled time anyway? 

I just don’t see there being more babies. Meghan doesn’t like to share attention and babies are little, bald attention hogs.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> If there was a surrogate there would be no reason for her to delay her court proceedings, certainly not for 9 months. Didn’t the court pick the rescheduled time anyway?
> 
> I just don’t see there being more babies. Meghan doesn’t like to share attention and babies are little, bald attention hogs.



The request could have still been made by informing the judge that she was expecting a new baby and omitting the surrogate part.

Kate has 3 kids, so she may feel the need to have a few more. She may use surrogates or adopt, it's hard to get rid of pregnancy pounds, particularly for a 'young mother' in her 40s.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The request could have still been made by informing the judge that she was expecting a new baby and omitting the surrogate part.
> 
> Kate has 3 kids, so she may feel the need to have a few more. She may use surrogates or adopt, it's hard to get rid of pregnancy pounds, particularly for a 'young mother' in her 40s.



Can you imagine Meghan missing the opportunity to milk a pregnancy for maximum media value, surrogate or not? Never!! 

She’s got Harry and she’s got Archie. She’s got a glamorous home in Santa Barbara and a huge contract with Netflix.  She has everything she wants  (with the exception of the adoration of all humanity). She doesn’t have any use for more little anchors.


----------



## bag-mania

Somehow, despite how the American media feels about it, the family will do okay even though they will be denied the presence of H&M and Archie for Christmas.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> All it takes is an act of Parliament to appoint a regent similar to The Regency Act of 1953, that bypassed Princess Margaret and appointed Prince Philip as potential regent to Charles in case of HM's demise. A similar act in 2020 could bypass Harry and Andrew (who are both over 18, next in the line of succession, but terrible prospects) and assign Beatrice as potential regent to George.


absolutely, that is the way it is done in modern times, but I like the medieval precedent of appointing the evil Richard III uncle as Regent, and sending George and Louis to the tower via the traitors gate, much more to chat about


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> As my wimsey (sic) takes me .. all I could think of ...
> Shades of the Princes in the Tower, when their evil uncle (AKA Richard III) usurped the throne, when he was regent
> Yes, I do read too much medieval stuff


Oooh I love all that stuff!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> If there was a surrogate there would be no reason for her to delay her court proceedings, certainly not for 9 months. Didn’t the court pick the rescheduled time anyway?
> 
> I just don’t see there being more babies. Meghan doesn’t like to share attention and babies are little, bald attention hogs.


Call me callous, but I wouldn't doubt that she's faking a pregnancy to get a delay in her trial, then claim to have a "miscarriage" to use that for the "woe is me" tactic.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine Meghan missing the opportunity to milk a pregnancy for maximum media value, surrogate or not? Never!!
> 
> She’s got Harry and she’s got Archie. She’s got a glamorous home in Santa Barbara and a huge contract with Netflix.  She has everything she wants  (with the exception of the adoration of all humanity). She doesn’t have any use for more little anchors.



You are probably right, let's wait and see.  Unless, out of the blue COVID ends  (and we have better things to do), we will keep following the DM news...


----------



## Annawakes

Those headlines about the RF pining over Archie are so ridiculous.  They don’t even know him.  Probably only seen him a handful of times.


----------



## bisousx

Annawakes said:


> Those headlines about the RF pining over Archie are so ridiculous.  They don’t even know him.  Probably only seen him a handful of times.



Thank you. I’m not a baby person so perhaps I don’t get it, but can somebody really be that attached to an extended family member they’ve met a handful of times (or less)?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Call me callous, but I wouldn't doubt that she's faking a pregnancy to get a delay in her trial, then claim to have a "miscarriage" to use that for the "woe is me" tactic.



Oh geez, I hope not. That’s too low even for her.

The latest pregnancy rumor started because someone noticed the court appearance happened to be pushed back nine months. It’s not like she’s planning to get pregnant in January. If she’s already pregnant now (or the surrogate is) the court date wouldn’t need to be pushed back so far or else she could have gone as originally planned. 

I’d guess she would express a fear of getting Covid to force the court delay before she would get pregnant.


----------



## duna

I don't know if surrogate pregnancies are legal in the UK, there not here in Italy and in most other European countries. Surely the RF would be against such a procedure? Even if it's legal in the UK, and I think only for UK nationals, wouldn't there be doubts about legitimacy or things like that, since JCMH is still sixth in line to the throne (let's NOT forget)?


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> If there was a surrogate there would be no reason for her to delay her court proceedings, certainly not for 9 months. Didn’t the court pick the rescheduled time anyway?
> 
> I just don’t see there being more babies. Meghan doesn’t like to share attention and babies are little, bald attention hogs.


That's the whole point because she will pretend she is having a baby but really using a surrogate in secret, she would never openly admit she is using a surrogate! And that's why she already know when it's gonna happen.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's the whole point because she will pretend she is having a baby but really using a surrogate in secret, she would never openly admit she is using a surrogate! And that's why she already know when it's gonna happen.



I don't think that would work, people, even just their staff, would see around with a flat tummy and the risk of the news spilling would be much too high....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies if this has already been posted: 

_The Queen hopes to reunite her family with a therapy session when they all get together for the Christmas holidays. She has reportedly summoned Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to join the festivities, to ensure any differences are reconciled._



Spoiler: QE’s counselling session 



*Royal Family LIVE: Queen plans Christmas holiday crisis meeting to reunite divided family*
*THE QUEEN has called for a group counselling session to help mend the growing rifts within the Royal Family, but her plans may be jeopardised by the coronavirus crisis. THIS BLOG IS NOW CLOSED.*
*Queen 'thought father would reign for many years' says expert*
The Queen hopes to reunite her family with a therapy session when they all get together for the Christmas holidays. She has reportedly summoned Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to join the festivities, to ensure any differences are reconciled.*  THIS BLOG IS NOW CLOSED. Click HERE for your latest royal updates*
But her plans have been thrown into doubt by the new lockdown restrictions set to be rolled out across England, lasting until early December. Uncertainty remains over whether the measures could be extended to cover the Christmas period. 
Large family gatherings and the mixing of households could be banned this Christmas. 
A royal insider told Australian magazine New Idea: “The fact that the Queen is even considering something as New-Age as a family counselling session given how old she is, shows how bad things are.”
They added: “The Queen doesn’t trust that the Sussexes, Cambridges and Prince Charles will ever be able to sort out their differences on their own, so it’s time for professional help.”






The Queen had hoped to have a group counselling session with the Royal Family (Image: Getty)
England will enter a second national lockdown from Thursday November 5, which is due to end on December 2.
But Cabinet Minister Michel Gove said the lockdown could well be extended, prompting fears the country will not be out by Christmas.
Even if a national lockdown has ended by December 25, the Government could prevent large family gatherings and reinstate the so-called "rule of six".
A cabinet minister has said it was "too early to say" what the rules will be at Christmas.








						Royal Family LIVE: Queen plans Christmas holiday crisis meeting
					

THE QUEEN has called for a group counselling session to help mend the growing rifts within the Royal Family, but her plans may be jeopardised by the coronavirus crisis. THIS BLOG IS NOW CLOSED.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> @bag-mania I agree, but I hope the agency or whomever would choose parents with better character than H&MM.


I hear you but I doubt there are enough good parents to go around for all the children in need


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I hear you but I doubt there are enough good parents to go around for all the children in need


True enough, as it seems we're evolving into a very selfish world, although the pandemic is bringing the best out of so many people. Maybe there is hope after all.


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I don't know if surrogate pregnancies are legal in the UK, there not here in Italy and in most other European countries. Surely the RF would be against such a procedure? Even if it's legal in the UK, and I think only for UK nationals, wouldn't there be doubts about legitimacy or things like that, since JCMH is still sixth in line to the throne (let's NOT forget)?


The French royals solved the problem of legitimacy, the whole court was present in the queens bedroom for the birth , talk about no privacy , ewwwwww
Harry should have done that , the secrecy just made lots of good gossip fodder


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Oooh I love all that stuff!


While we are on COVID lockdown, let’s at least have a sense of humor and whimsy , I can’t think of anything better than chatting about reinstating obsolete medieval customs


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> The French royals solved the problem of legitimacy, the whole court was present in the queens bedroom for the birth , talk about no privacy , ewwwwww
> Harry should have done that , the secrecy just made lots of good gossip fodder



Yes, I know  .....I was thinking about it just the other day when we were watching the episode of The Crown with the birth of Prince Andrew, I think, I thought how awful it must have been for queens in the old days!


----------



## marietouchet

Well written insightful analysis of the outcome of the Depp trial 

lest we forget -Johnny did not sue Amber - he sued the DM

just as MM is not suing Thomas - she is suing the DM 


JAN MOIR on the Johnny Depp courtroom horror 
https://mol.im/a/8907435


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Well written insightful analysis of the outcome of the Depp trial
> 
> lest we forget -Johnny did not sue Amber - he sued the DM
> 
> just as MM is not suing Thomas - she is suing the DM
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR on the Johnny Depp courtroom horror
> https://mol.im/a/8907435


They are both awful.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Well written insightful analysis of the outcome of the Depp trial
> 
> lest we forget -Johnny did not sue Amber - he sued the DM
> 
> just as MM is not suing Thomas - she is suing the DM
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR on the Johnny Depp courtroom horror
> https://mol.im/a/8907435



I like the way Jan Moir writes, so I clicked on her name for more articles. There is one about MM&H that may have already been posted here (nothing new there), but the title is so perfect that I had to copy and paste it here:

*JAN MOIR: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have taken us for fools. Now it's America's turn*

Moir is right, MM&H are taking us here in the US for fools...

accurate title, unfortunately


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I like the way Jan Moir writes, so I clicked on her name for more articles. There is one about MM&H that may have already been posted here (nothing new there), but the title is so perfect that I had to copy and paste it here:
> 
> *JAN MOIR: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have taken us for fools. Now it's America's turn*
> 
> Moir is right, MM&H are taking us here in the US for fools...
> 
> accurate title, unfortunately


well, there are plenty of fools in the US - but not on this thread - at least when it comes to these two


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  another excellent find!  

If these British royals want to take us on, go ahead. This will be fun 
Only fools so far are Nflix and a few Hwood has-been‘s/newbies.  The rest of us


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> She can drop the case and say it is obvious from the Depp trial that high profile people can't get a fair trial in the UK.  Playing the victim again.


I sure hope that she (or one of her minions) doesn't read this thread because .. she might just get this idea and USE it!  Yikes ..


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> While we are on COVID lockdown, let’s at least have a sense of humor and whimsy , I can’t think of anything better than chatting about reinstating obsolete medieval customs


You know what I was actually jealous of MM for?  Once I figured out WTF she was, that is.  All her instant access to items from actual history!  I would love to wander around those castles and palaces and the Tower and have private showings and see the jewels and artifacts.  Gives me goose bumps.  Yes, I'm a nerd


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> Yes, I know  .....I was thinking about it just the other day when we were watching the episode of The Crown with the birth of Prince Andrew, I think, I thought how awful it must have been for queens in the old days!


Yep.  I understand in many medieval European courts, countless people watched the, ahem, first intimate moments as well.  Can you imagine?


----------



## purseinsanity

sorry duplicate


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> *The French royals solved the problem of legitimacy, the whole court was present in the queens bedroom for the birth* , talk about no privacy , ewwwwww
> Harry should have done that , the secrecy just made lots of good gossip fodder


I'm not sure what that proved actually.  They knew the queen was the mother of the child, what's to prove the king is the actual father?


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure what that proved actually.  They knew the queen was the mother of the child, what's to prove the king is the actual father?


To prove that said baby came from the queen and some random baby wasn’t smuggled in to be the heir (if the queen was unable to have children, she wouldn’t be able to get someone else’s child to pass off as her own)


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, I won't legitimize them by linking the articles, but the usual suspects in the media are making a ridiculously big deal about Meghan voting. Oh yay! She can do what every one of the rest of us does! Isn't she amazing! 

Here are some of the absurd headlines:
*• Meghan Markle Is the First Modern Royal to Vote in a U.S. Presidential Election *(People)
*• Meghan Markle 'Is Voting' In The U.S. Election, Making Royal Family History *(Elle)
*• Meghan Markle’s Political Activism Won’t End After the Election *(Vanity Fair)
*• Meghan Markle and Prince Harry won't stop talking about politics after the election — and they shouldn't have to *(Insider)


----------



## Aimee3

Didn’t someone post many many pages ago that H&M were seen coming out of a building that housed a fertility clinic, although that wasn’t the only business at the location.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> To prove that said baby came from the queen and some random baby wasn’t smuggled in to be the heir (if the queen was unable to have children, she wouldn’t be able to get someone else’s child to pass off as her own)


Right, but the true heir is through the father right?  What's to say the queen wasn't involved in hanky panky, which I'm sure ran rampant in the court.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, I won't legitimize them by linking the articles, but the usual suspects in the media are making a ridiculously big deal about Meghan voting. Oh yay! She can do what every one of the rest of us does! Isn't she amazing!
> 
> Here are some of the absurd headlines:
> *• Meghan Markle Is the First Modern Royal to Vote in a U.S. Presidential Election *(People)
> *• Meghan Markle 'Is Voting' In The U.S. Election, Making Royal Family History *(Elle)
> *• Meghan Markle’s Political Activism Won’t End After the Election *(Vanity Fair)
> *• Meghan Markle and Prince Harry won't stop talking about politics after the election — and they shouldn't have to *(Insider)


I'm sure she didn't just mail it in.  She has to be seen actually casting a vote to establish her supremacy over us mere mortals at her ability to vote.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I like the way Jan Moir writes, so I clicked on her name for more articles. There is one about MM&H that may have already been posted here (nothing new there), but the title is so perfect that I had to copy and paste it here:
> 
> *JAN MOIR: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have taken us for fools. Now it's America's turn*
> *
> Moir is right, MM&H are taking us here in the US for fools...*
> 
> accurate title, unfortunately


Not all of us!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, I won't legitimize them by linking the articles, but the usual suspects in the media are making a ridiculously big deal about Meghan voting. Oh yay! She can do what every one of the rest of us does! Isn't she amazing!
> 
> Here are some of the absurd headlines:
> *• Meghan Markle Is the First Modern Royal to Vote in a U.S. Presidential Election *(People)
> *• Meghan Markle 'Is Voting' In The U.S. Election, Making Royal Family History *(Elle)
> *• Meghan Markle’s Political Activism Won’t End After the Election *(Vanity Fair)
> *• Meghan Markle and Prince Harry won't stop talking about politics after the election — and they shouldn't have to *(Insider)


she is not a royal to me
she gets to have it both ways?  to be called a royal while spouting her American political activism (which is basically she votes, like most of us)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she is not a royal to me
> she gets to have it both ways?  to be called a royal while spouting her American political activism (which is basically she votes, like most of us)



Blame this on the media. She didn't write those articles, though I'm certain she approves. She barely needs her publicists when she has the employees at national magazines and news bureaus eager to inflate her importance without even being on her payroll.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Blame this on the media. She didn't write those articles, though I'm certain she approves. She barely needs her publicists when she has the employees at national magazines and news bureaus eager to inflate her importance without even being on her payroll.


guess this all goes back to the initial excitement of an American biracial woman marrying a prince....and they're not gonna let what happened subsequent to that change their views


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> Right, but the true heir is through the father right?  What's to say the queen wasn't involved in hanky panky, which I'm sure ran rampant in the court.


Mmm not sure about the true heir coming through the father at least in other countries; think of Austria and Russia for example.  In those days you could always prove who the mother was if you saw the actual birth, but until there was DNA, you couldn’t prove paternity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

How long until we see her voting pic?


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> How long until we see her voting pic?


If we are lucky, she voted by mail - that is available in California - we might be spared the photo op


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Please delete post.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> guess this all goes back to the initial excitement of an American biracial woman marrying a prince....*and they're not gonna let what happened subsequent to that change their views*



Do they know what happened after? I doubt they bother to look closely at her. They found the narrative they want and they are sticking with it no matter what. Members of the media are not smarter or more insightful than anyone else and in the US it's #TeamMeghan all the way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not that I support our media, _how should the media refer to H&M_? QE says they do not represent royalty, but she has allowed much confusion with letting them keep and use the Duke and Duchess title. Certainly, with these lawsuit-happy grifters, the media wants to err on the side of caution, so they call MM a royal. Maybe QE can clarify this sooner rather than later. Meanwhile, we all have to live with this nonsense. One more reason to dislike the BRF


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not that I support our media, _how should the media refer to H&M_? QE says they do not represent royalty, but she has allowed much confusion with letting them keep and use the Duke and Duchess title. Certainly, with these lawsuit-happy grifters, the media wants to err on the side of caution, so they call MM a royal. Maybe QE can clarify this sooner rather than later. Meanwhile, we all have to live with this nonsense. One more reason to dislike the BRF


Maybe we could get BRF voodoo dolls to stick pins into them to punish all those nasty royals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe we could get BRF voodoo dolls to stick pins into them to punish all those nasty royals.



That seems extreme to me. I would appreciate some clear communication. That’s all, nothing more, nothing less. The half-in, half-out does not work. The longer they drag this out, the weaker blah blah. Starting to sound like a broken record.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

It was established last March that H&M were no longer working royals nor were they half in or half out. Most of us are waiting patiently for their yearly review to be dealt with. I think that is the reason they are actively trying to create their business probably knowing they might be seriously demoted.


----------



## bag-mania

They want it all. They want to be royal when it suits them. They are average citizens when that is convenient. Most importantly, they must be popular, wealthy celebrities always.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, how should the media refer to them?  They are still royals, yes?  So, MM is a royal. The headlines are correct.

ETA: @bag-mania  Not sure Harry can ever be considered an ‘average citizen’.  Many posters here have pointed out that he is and will always be a Prince. Perhaps it is time for MM to be referred to as Princess Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: @bag-mania *Not sure Harry can ever be considered an ‘average citizen’*. Many posters here have pointed out that he is and will always be a Prince. Perhaps it is time for MM to be referred to as Princess Harry.



I am thinking of his "Just Call Me Harry" moments. Naturally he doesn't want to ever be treated like an ordinary person. However, he likes to pretend that he is so likable and accessible that he's just like you and me.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I am thinking of his "Just Call Me Harry" moments. Naturally he doesn't want to ever be treated like an ordinary person. However, he likes to pretend that he is so likable and accessible that he's just like you and me.


he used to seem that way....now he just seems lost to me


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> he used to seem that way....now he just seems lost to me



You are very kind, @sdkitty.  To me, he seems like a big jerk, right next to Uncle Andy.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> he used to seem that way....now he just seems lost to me



He looks like he’s out of his element but not unhappy. It’s Meghan’s show and he’s content to be along for the ride.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, there are plenty of fools in the US - but not on this thread - at least when it comes to these two


Absolutely, we are not fooled by these two here. Quoting another brilliant title of Jan Moir:* The cause Meghan Markle is mostly supporting is the Me, Myself and I Foundation* 

Me title


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, I won't legitimize them by linking the articles, but the usual suspects in the media are making a ridiculously big deal about Meghan voting. Oh yay! She can do what every one of the rest of us does! Isn't she amazing!
> 
> Here are some of the absurd headlines:
> *• Meghan Markle Is the First Modern Royal to Vote in a U.S. Presidential Election *(People)
> *• Meghan Markle 'Is Voting' In The U.S. Election, Making Royal Family History *(Elle)
> *• Meghan Markle’s Political Activism Won’t End After the Election *(Vanity Fair)
> *• Meghan Markle and Prince Harry won't stop talking about politics after the election — and they shouldn't have to *(Insider)


@bag-mania The titles are enough, I refuse to click on those articles...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Yes, Harry isn't your average citizen, but he is definitely a jerk and probably even volatile at times and mostly unpredictable. I'm sure that being a very astute person, HM knows exactly how he behaves and is possibly giving him enough room and time to hang himself and will probably wait until his year is over to act.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They want it all. They want to be royal when it suits them. They are average citizens when that is convenient. Most importantly, they must be popular, wealthy celebrities always.


I think she wants to be inconic like Diana


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think she wants to be inconic like Diana



She doesn’t realize that the reason Diana became iconic was because her life was tragically cut short. Diana was always popular, sure, but she would never have reached icon status had she been able to live out a full life.

Meghan doesn’t want to die young so she should lower her aspirations as far as becoming an icon.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She doesn’t realize that the reason Diana became iconic was because her life was tragically cut short. Diana was always popular, sure, but she would never have reached icon status had she been able to live out a full life.
> 
> Meghan doesn’t want to die young so she should lower her aspirations as far as becoming an icon.


I suppose she might settle for being as popular as the living Diana


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I suppose she might settle for being as popular as the living Diana


haha, wishful thinking


----------



## chowlover2

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  I understand in many medieval European courts, countless people watched the, ahem, first intimate moments as well.  Can you imagine?


Yes, and the King would proudly show the blood stained sheets to the onlookers that proved her a virgin. And in the British court they modernized that by having an OB/GYN examine Diana to make sure Dians was a virgin. 
Of course that finally changed with Kate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chowlover2 said:


> Yes, and the King would proudly show the blood stained sheets to the onlookers that proved her a virgin. And in the British court they modernized that by having an OB/GYN examine Diana to make sure Dians was a virgin.
> Of course that finally changed with Kate.



So gross and misogynist. Who would ever find out anyway?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who said Royals aren’t involved in politics? Perhaps this explains H&M’s success — of course, Charles is supportive and involved:
The Great Reset - https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/prince-charles-pandemic-great-reset


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who said Royals aren’t involved in politics? Perhaps this explains H&M’s success — of course, Charles is supportive and involved:
> The Great Reset - https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/05/prince-charles-pandemic-great-reset



There is no comparison between MM with her "Me, Myself, and I" causes, and Charles's genuine interest on the environment. He was into organics before most of the world. He is seriously worried about our planet and I respect him for that. The title of the VF article is speculative/misleading imo.

He may have been fooled at one point by MM, but I think his views on the couple have changed. Though, Harry is still his son and Archie his grandson, so he is in a very tough situation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal check out the latest Time magazine on The Great Reset (their words, not mine)— Charles is very involved with the World Eco Forum issues. The issues are fraught with all sorts of emotion and politics, tldr. Some are saying he sees an opportunity to return the world to a monarchy which will give him a real kingdom instead of the figurehead role. He is giving H&M a prominent role so they can help make that happen. IMO, I do not want any of the BRF ruling the world.

All I know for certain there is a reason H&M continue to dominate the headlines. It may not be as altruistic as some think.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal check out the latest Time magazine on The Great Reset (their words, not mine)— Charles is very involved with the World Eco Forum issues. The issues are fraught with all sorts of emotion and politics, tldr. Some are saying he sees an opportunity *to return the world to a monarchy *which will give him a real kingdom instead of the figurehead role. He is giving H&M a prominent role so they can help make that happen. IMO, I do not want any of the BRF ruling the world.
> 
> All I know for certain there is a reason H&M continue to dominate the headlines. It may not be as altruistic as some think.


I enjoy following the BRF (particularly during COVID time), but returning the world to a monarchy is totally out of question, no way! Despite its limitations (nothing is perfect), there is nothing better than democracy.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> There is no comparison between MM with her "Me, Myself, and I" causes, and Charles's genuine interest on the environment. He was into organics before most of the world. He is seriously worried about our planet and I respect him for that. The title of the VF article is speculative/misleading imo.
> 
> He may have been fooled at one point by MM, but I think his views on the couple have changed. Though, Harry is still his son and Archie his grandson, so he is in a very tough situation.


Yes, PC has always been borderline political - climate control etc
Was looking for specific ways in which the Great Reset involves H&M, I failed to find 
Charles is touting his beehives and favorite classical music , I dont see H&M doing any of that


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Yes, PC has always been borderline political - climate control etc
> *Was looking for specific ways in which the Great Reset involves H&M, I failed to find*
> Charles is touting his beehives and favorite classical music , I dont see H&M doing any of that


Great, I hope they don't get involved. They have nothing to add to any cause.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal check out the latest Time magazine on The Great Reset (their words, not mine)— Charles is very involved with the World Eco Forum issues. The issues are fraught with all sorts of emotion and politics, tldr. Some are saying he sees an opportunity to return the world to a monarchy which will give him a real kingdom instead of the figurehead role. He is giving H&M a prominent role so they can help make that happen. IMO, I do not want any of the BRF ruling the world.
> 
> All I know for certain there is a reason H&M continue to dominate the headlines. It may not be as altruistic as some think.


 -
I agree H&M aren't altruistic....I don't agree Charles wants to rule the world - or return the monarchy to what it was....he was always interested in the environment


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> -
> I agree H&M aren't altruistic....I don't agree Charles wants to rule the world - or return the monarchy to what it was....he was always interested in the environment



And especially not by having a secret agreement with these clowns to behave as badly as possible to aid his cause. That ventures a bit too much into alu hat territory for me.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Yes, PC has always been borderline political - climate control etc
> Was looking for specific ways in which the Great Reset involves H&M, I failed to find
> Charles is touting his beehives and favorite classical music , I dont see H&M doing any of that


And about climate control and beehives, PC has some business sense - he has always managed the Duchy of Cornwall business - it is a ginormous farm
One thing I learned about PSS Anne - in her Country Life spread - is that she too has a huge farm BUSINESS, she does more than simply receive checks from the Sovereign Grant, she has her BRF job but also the job of managing her farm - again, business experience
No idea what Edward does with his country pile


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, I don't think Charles wants to take over the world, but from that article he comes off as being preachy. In that way he and his son and daughter-in-law are very much alike.

It's easy to sit back and tell industries how they should conduct business when he has never had to worry, even for a moment, about how he was going to make a living and pay his bills. Are we supposed to respect his opinion simply because he happened to be born into royalty? Charles doesn't know d*ck about business. He has always had staff to do the work for him. To me he comes across the same way as every other pompous celebrity know-it-all who feels compelled to tell the rest of us how we should do our jobs and live our lives. It's not that I'm against his message exactly, just his entitlement to spout it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I enjoy following the BRF (particularly during COVID time), but returning the world to a monarchy is totally out of question, no way! Despite its limitations (nothing is perfect), there is nothing better than democracy.


I don't know where people get their information, but England has a d-e-m-o-c-r-a-t-i-c-a-l-l-y elected Parliament with no input, coercing, campaigning or canvassing from/by the BRF.
I don't consider MM, Harry or Andrew to be royals because they don't have a clue what it is to be royal. HM may love them as family members, but I think she is righteous enough to condemn their behaviour as selfish, repugnant, callous, arrogant, etc. I'm just waiting patiently to see them receive their comeuppance.

ETA. To change **********ally elected... so many asterisk categories here.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't know where people get their information, but England has a d-e-m-o-c-r-a-t-i-c-a-l-l-y elected Parliament with no input, coercing, campaigning or canvassing from/by the BRF.
> I don't consider MM, Harry or Andrew to be royals because they don't have a clue what it is to be royal. HM may love them as family members, but I think she is righteous enough to condemn their behaviour as selfish, repugnant, callous, arrogant, etc. I'm just waiting patiently to see them receive their comeuppance.
> 
> ETA. To change **********ally elected... so many asterisk categories here.


but  GB wasn't always a democracy....the royals used to rule ....I think someone is trying to say charles wants to go back to that way


----------



## CarryOn2020

I encourage everyone to Google The Great Reset. It’s all public info. Yes, H&M are involved. MM announced her activism will continue. The more we know, the more we understand. 









						The Great Reset: How to Build a Better World Post-COVID-19
					

TIME and the World Economic Forum asked leading thinkers to share ideas for how to transform the way we live and work




					time.com
				



_The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to think about the kind of future we want. TIME partnered with the World Economic Forum to ask leading thinkers to share ideas for how to transform the way we live and work. _


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> but the GB wasn't always a democracy....the royals used to rule ....I think someone is trying to say charles wants to go back to that way


I see. I don't believe that about Charles. That sounds like something Prince Philip could have said years ago, but not today. However, I think that some people still want the BRF to be punished for the sins of their forebears.


----------



## sdkitty

you can't convince me that her PR people aren't behind this








						Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked
					

Duchess Meghan of Sussex voted in the 2020 presidential election, making history as first official British royal to do so.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> And about climate control and beehives, PC has some business sense - he has always managed the Duchy of Cornwall business - it is a ginormous farm



Its a bit more than a farm

The Duchy estate covers more than *130,965 acres* in 23 counties, and includes *67,460 acres* of Dartmoor, and flower farms on the Isles of Scilly. It also owns the Oval cricket ground and Dartmoor prison.
Everything in red and blue is part of the Duchy of Cornwall, so, not even the whole of Cornwall


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, today the Duchess of Cornwall was doing the job that JCMH has done since 2013.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I encourage everyone to Google The Great Reset. It’s all public info. Yes, H&M are involved. MM announced her activism will continue. The more we know, the more we understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Reset: How to Build a Better World Post-COVID-19
> 
> 
> TIME and the World Economic Forum asked leading thinkers to share ideas for how to transform the way we live and work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The COVID-19 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to think about the kind of future we want. TIME partnered with the World Economic Forum to ask leading thinkers to share ideas for how to transform the way we live and work. _



Is there anything that MM&H is not involved? I found the links below. One more cause for "ME, MYSELF, and I", truly disappointing!  


THE GREAT RESET
THE GREAT RESET 2


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> you can't convince me that her PR people aren't behind this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan of Sussex voted in the 2020 presidential election, making history as first official British royal to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


The title of the article is    I am posting it here to satisfy the curiosity without the need of more clicks in ridiculous articles:
*Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked *


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Its a bit more than a farm
> 
> The Duchy estate covers more than *130,965 acres* in 23 counties, and includes *67,460 acres* of Dartmoor, and flower farms on the Isles of Scilly. It also owns the Oval cricket ground and Dartmoor prison.
> Everything in red and blue is part of the Duchy of Cornwall, so, not even the whole of Cornwall
> 
> View attachment 4897732



He also owns an estate in Scotland


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Meanwhile, today the Duchess of Cornwall was doing the job that JCMH has done since 2013.




That should have been the headline - for many reasons.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The title of the article is    I am posting it here to satisfy the curiosity without the need of more clicks in ridiculous articles:
> *Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked *



She pretty obviously told us in her TIME 100 "Everyone needs to vote" segment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

sdkitty said:


> you can't convince me that her PR people aren't behind this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan of Sussex voted in the 2020 presidential election, making history as first official British royal to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



I'd bet the farm this is the first time she's ever voted.  She's only doing it now because it suits her narrative.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> He also owns an estate in Scotland


True, but I think he owns that himself, not as part of the Duchy, also a house here in Wales, again personally.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Is there anything that MM&H is not involved? I found the links below. One more cause for "ME, MYSELF, and I", truly disappointing!
> 
> 
> THE GREAT RESET
> THE GREAT RESET 2



Notice how the article’s verbiage matches theirs and Prince Charles‘s - sustainable, globally, tech, blah blah.  Charles is an organizer, gave a speech at Davos, probably gets a fee, made sure his kid is part of the group too.  I don’t believe it’s just a coincidence that they landed in the TIME100 which is part of the WEF. Not sure why QE has allowed PC to participate in such a visible way. IMO it is definitely political. Guessing this is the activism MM will do.

Somewhere I read MM voted by mail, so no photo op. Seems out of character for her.  Yes, she is a royal and she voted.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> True, but I think he owns that himself, not as part of the Duchy, also a house here in Wales, again personally.



Actually 2 in Scotland, Birkhall and Dumfries House. The second he paid for out of his own money (but then where did his own money come from? The BRF were not far off broke until George VI brokered a deal that meant the didn't pay tax) anyway, he did a grand job on the house and saved it from ruin and it has many visitors, employs locals as staff and has been great for the area so I'm not complaining).


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The title of the article is    I am posting it here to satisfy the curiosity without the need of more clicks in ridiculous articles:
> *Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked *


Like that's a great mystery.  
I'm dreading the time that she thinks wiping her own a$$ should be headline worthy as well.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Actually 2 in Scotland, Birkhall and Dumfries House. The second he paid for out of his own money (but then where did his own money come from? The BRF were not far off broke until George VI brokered a deal that meant the didn't pay tax) anyway, he did a grand job on the house and saved it from ruin and it has many visitors, employs locals as staff and has been great for the area so I'm not complaining).


Dumfries House looks gorgeous and homely. 
I'd forgotten about Birkhall, inherited from his Grandmother, The Queen Mother. It was initially acquired by Prince Albert.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@papertiger  Is that the house Camilla’s sister did the interior design?  If so, it is beautifully put together.
No question that he has succeeded in his businesses. His global agenda seems to be succeeding as well.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine Meghan missing the opportunity to milk a pregnancy for maximum media value, surrogate or not? Never!!
> 
> She’s got Harry and she’s got Archie. She’s got a glamorous home in Santa Barbara and a huge contract with Netflix.  She has everything she wants  (with the exception of the adoration of all humanity). She doesn’t have any use for more little anchors.


Whatever way she plans on producing baby #2, you can bet she is shopping around for a magazine for exclusive photos of the kid. PEOPLE magazine loves that kind of stuff.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> True, but I think he owns that himself, not as part of the Duchy, also a house here in Wales, again personally.





Sharont2305 said:


> Dumfries House looks gorgeous and homely.
> I'd forgotten about Birkhall, inherited from his Grandmother, The Queen Mother. It was initially acquired by Prince Albert.


I'm sure MM has the complete inventory $$$$


----------



## purseinsanity

justwatchin said:


> Whatever way she plans on producing baby #2, you can bet she is shopping around for a magazine for exclusive photos of the kid. PEOPLE magazine loves that kind of stuff.


And would go along so well with their "need for privacy".


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Like that's a great mystery.
> I'm dreading the time that she thinks wiping her own a$$ should be headline worthy as well.


That time will come after exhausting all woke causes. I just hope they will not be asking for taxpayer funds to pay for their security or any other services as they may try to get credit for the elections.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how the article’s verbiage matches theirs and Prince Charles‘s - sustainable, globally, tech, blah blah.  Charles is an organizer, gave a speech at Davos, probably gets a fee, made sure his kid is part of the group too.  I don’t believe it’s just a coincidence that they landed in the TIME100 which is part of the WEF. Not sure why QE has allowed PC to participate in such a visible way. IMO it is definitely political. Guessing this is the activism MM will do.
> 
> Somewhere I read MM voted by mail, so no photo op. Seems out of character for her.  Yes, she is a royal and she voted.


You may be onto something. Though, MM is not known for being original, I believe she has been accused of plagiarism. Let's wait and see...


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> @papertiger  Is that the house Camilla’s sister did the interior design?  If so, it is beautifully put together.
> No question that he has succeeded in his businesses. His global agenda seems to be succeeding as well.



Probably did Birkhall where they both reside when in Scotland. 

PC bought Dumfries House with his own money but through his Foundation. He paid for everything to be restored to its heyday (original) best including v. large collection of Chippendale furniture.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> Whatever way she plans on producing baby #2, you can bet she is shopping around for a magazine for exclusive photos of the kid. PEOPLE magazine loves that kind of stuff.



If it was another fame ho celebrity I'd say yes, but this is Meghan we're talking about. She doesn't like the press focusing on anyone but her. She has been surprisingly private with Archie. All of the Archie media we have seen so far has always featured *MEGHAN* (_with baby Archie_).


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> @papertiger  Is that the house Camilla’s sister did the interior design?  If so, it is beautifully put together.
> No question that he has succeeded in his businesses. His global agenda seems to be succeeding as well.



Some of us have been campaigning on climate change as well as other environmental issues since being at school (we were in the line of 'acid rain' and nuclear fallout from the Chernobyl tragedy. We couldn't eat reindeer, elk or any meat or anything that grazed on contaminated soil) certainly nothing grown. PC was talking about all of this, science proved most of what he was concerned even then. _That_ wasn't what was deemed political. His views on architecture _were_ though. He succeeded in terms of the environment because it's evidently worse, suddenly it's dawned on most sane people the Earth's resources are not infinite. 

Architecture is more appalling too but everyone (besides PC and me) seems to_ love_ row upon row of glass brick offices/studios/whatevers that have replaced hand-crafted stone and lime-mortar grand facades, everything in the City of London that is not listed (and some that were) have been pulled down. Shame PC didn't succeed there. 

Funny how 'politics' just ends-up meaning whatever's controversial. I think PC has given-up on saving London from the wrecking ball and Harry would like to swing it on Buckingham Palace and finish off what the Luftwaffe didn't manage 1941.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

UK please take them back or remove their titles, we don't have a monarchy in the US!  

*Defiant Meghan Markle insists her political activism 'won't end after the US election' despite criticism after she and Prince Harry broke royal tradition by wading publicly into politics*

A spokesperson for the Sussexes said the comments were 'not time specific', telling Insider: 'Part of being an active member of society is to take part in the ********ic process. So encouraging people to get involved in politics is something that is important.'

The spokesperson explained that while the Duke and Duchess' comments had been made 'at a very important part of the election cycle', they would continue to be political active in future months. 

Activism of convenience


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> UK please take them back or remove their titles, we don't have a monarchy in the US!
> 
> *Defiant Meghan Markle insists her political activism 'won't end after the US election' despite criticism after she and Prince Harry broke royal tradition by wading publicly into politics*
> 
> A spokesperson for the Sussexes said the comments were 'not time specific', telling Insider: 'Part of being an active member of society is to take part in the ********ic process. So encouraging people to get involved in politics is something that is important.'
> 
> The spokesperson explained that while the Duke and Duchess' comments had been made 'at a very important part of the election cycle', they would continue to be political active in future months.
> 
> Activism of convenience


While sitting on hold on my phone this afternoon waiting help from an on line vendor, I took a brief look at several pages of the comments on the Daily Mail site related to this item. There were almost 2800 at that time and they were blistering in the level of criticism of both she and Harry and were international in source. Every single thing we have pointed out in the posts here, but we have been more polite. Harry is little more than a dim witted emasculated buffoon to summarize and her true colors have become glowing neon and utterly repulsive to most. It was eye opening. If any of the MM, JCMH camp monitor the DM comments, they will see it will take more than Sunshine Sachs to make them palatable. Americans want them both out of here, Brits don't want either of them back. Both sides seem in complete agreement, wherever they are, no titles and sit down and shut up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Meanwhile, today the Duchess of Cornwall was doing the job that JCMH has done since 2013.




I found it very gracious of the RF account to include a picture of H AND M in their slide. I know they want to avoid more uproar, but at this point I couldn't stand to look at her smug face.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The title of the article is    I am posting it here to satisfy the curiosity without the need of more clicks in ridiculous articles:
> *Duchess Meghan makes history by voting in presidential election; doesn't say who she picked *



Wanna bet money if the election goes the way it is leaning right now there will be a piece out in 3...2...1 how our glorious Meghan INFLUENCED the results with her tireless activism?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> If it was another fame ho celebrity I'd say yes, but this is Meghan we're talking about. She doesn't like the press focusing on anyone but her. She has been surprisingly private with Archie. All of the Archie media we have seen so far has always featured *MEGHAN* (_with baby Archie_).



Though I feel this might be the one thing Harry might put his foot down with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Architecture is more appalling too but everyone (besides PC and me) seems to_ love_ row upon row of glass brick offices/studios/whatevers that have replaced hand-crafted stone and lime-mortar grand facades, everything in the City of London that is not listed (and some that were) have been pulled down. Shame PC didn't succeed there.



Oh if I ever happen to grow rich I'll buy and renovate one of these huge old brick fabric buildings or have one built from recycled materials.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wanna bet money if the election goes the way it is leaning right now there will be a piece out in 3...2...1 how our glorious Meghan INFLUENCED the results with her tireless activism?


I thought about that and wouldn't be too surprised if they try to have the tab for their security picked up by the new administration.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I thought about that and wouldn't be too surprised if they try to have the tab for their security picked up by the new administration.



I will write my congressman. I don’t care that I didn’t vote for him. I’m one of his constituents and he will hear from me before my tax dollars go to protecting more millionaires who can pay for their own security.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I enjoy following the BRF (particularly during COVID time), but returning the world to a monarchy is totally out of question, no way! Despite its limitations (nothing is perfect), there is nothing better than democracy.



I agree, but it depends what kind of monarchy: European monarchies are democracies aswell.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I don’t object to Charles, H&M‘s climate message.    I do object to the messenger.

Through the years, they have contributed greatly to the mess and they continue to contribute to the global footprint. They need to *own their role*.  He has mega-billions that could solve so many problems. Instead he keeps it for himself and continues to take taxpayer’s money. Isn’t it time for him to give up the private planes, trains and automobiles? the private lands? the private palaces? the jewels? the art?   All the criticisms levelled at H&M can be said of Charles. These sanctimonious billionaires should not be given free passes, especially when their lifestyle does not match their words. Charles figured out years ago how to monetize his message. As much money as Gates has given away, he still has plenty to have his Porsche car collection, multiple ultra-large houses, etc. If we peons need to make changes, so do they. Enough with their holier-than-thou messaging. If we learned anything from the past, surely it is the rich live and eat much differently than the workers. It is 2021, we do not need to reset to the dark ages. Words and actions need to match.

ETA: yes, I am skipping the last 2 months of 2020. I have had enough. Cheers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Some of us have been campaigning on climate change as well as other environmental issues since being at school (we were in the line of 'acid rain' and nuclear fallout from the Chernobyl tragedy. We couldn't eat reindeer, elk or any meat or anything that grazed on contaminated soil) certainly nothing grown. PC was talking about all of this, science proved most of what he was concerned even then. _That_ wasn't what was deemed political. His views on architecture _were_ though. He succeeded in terms of the environment because it's evidently worse, suddenly it's dawned on most sane people the Earth's resources are not infinite.
> 
> Architecture is more appalling too but everyone (besides PC and me) seems to_ love_ row upon row of glass brick offices/studios/whatevers that have replaced hand-crafted stone and lime-mortar grand facades, everything in the City of London that is not listed (and some that were) have been pulled down. Shame PC didn't succeed there.
> 
> Funny how 'politics' just ends-up meaning whatever's controversial. I think PC has given-up on saving London from the wrecking ball and Harry would like to swing it on Buckingham Palace and finish off what the Luftwaffe didn't manage 1941.



No question which countries have polluted the world. None of this happened overnight. Many highly educated and respected people have been at the forefront of these issues for years, not just the entitled princes. Many respected scientists have warned of a virus sweeping the world for years. Meanwhile, Charles and his crowd continued deepening their global footprint. His knowledge did not change his behavior.  So, why should he deliver the lectures?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Sol Ryan  You inspired my avatar!  Early days, still level 1, but going forward there will be a Land Rover.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I will write my congressman. I don’t care that I didn’t vote for him. I’m one of his constituents and he will hear from me before my tax dollars go to protecting more millionaires who can pay for their own security.



From what I read, working and paying bills are nor within their favorite activities. In contrast, they have a proven track record of splurging big time at the expense of taxpayers (ex: Africa tour, Frogmore renovation, security, etc). So we (TPF members) must keep an eye on it. 



duna said:


> I agree, but it depends what kind of monarchy: European monarchies are democracies aswell.



Those monarchies may make sense in some European countries, but certainly not here in the US. Though, we have fun reading about some of them.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> From what I read, working and paying bills are nor within their favorite activities. In contrast, they have a proven track record of splurging big time at the expense of taxpayers (ex: Africa tour, Frogmore renovation, security, etc). So we (TPF members) must keep an eye on it.
> 
> 
> 
> Those monarchies may make sense in some European countries, but certainly not here in the US. Though, we have fun reading about some of them.



Yes of course, here in Europe all the monarchies that still survive are centuries old. Of course they have changed in time and now they are almost entirely representative. I don't think, in this day and age, that there could be new monarchies sprouting up around the world! It's only tradition that keeps them going. I for one am glad we still have a monarchy in the UK.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t object to Charles, H&M‘s climate message.    I do object to the messenger.
> 
> Through the years, they have contributed greatly to the mess and they continue to contribute to the global footprint. They need to *own their role*.  He has mega-billions that could solve so many problems. Instead he keeps it for himself and continues to take taxpayer’s money. Isn’t it time for him to give up the private planes, trains and automobiles? the private lands? the private palaces? the jewels? the art?   All the criticisms levelled at H&M can be said of Charles. These sanctimonious billionaires should not be given free passes, especially when their lifestyle does not match their words. Charles figured out years ago how to monetize his message. As much money as Gates has given away, he still has plenty to have his Porsche car collection, multiple ultra-large houses, etc. If we peons need to make changes, so do they. Enough with their holier-than-thou messaging. If we learned anything from the past, surely it is the rich live and eat much differently than the workers. It is 2021, we do not need to reset to the dark ages. Words and actions need to match.
> 
> ETA: yes, I am skipping the last 2 months of 2020. I have had enough. Cheers.



The arrogance of today's royalty is they still believe they are leaders the way they were in the past. I don't care if a billionaire keeps all his money to himself and spends it on frivolous things. That's his business. But don't go telling the masses who don't have even the tiniest fraction of your wealth and privilege how they must make sacrifices you wouldn't make yourself. Charles doesn't have a clue about the struggle the average business owner has keeping their business afloat. A sudden change in an industry can mean hundreds of people are unemployed. All Charles needs to do is stay in his own lane and occasionally trot himself out for ceremonies to make his bland but encouraging speeches.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> While sitting on hold on my phone this afternoon waiting help from an on line vendor, I took a brief look at several pages of the comments on the Daily Mail site related to this item. There were almost 2800 at that time and they were blistering in the level of criticism of both she and Harry and were international in source. Every single thing we have pointed out in the posts here, but we have been more polite. Harry is little more than a dim witted emasculated buffoon to summarize and her true colors have become glowing neon and utterly repulsive to most. It was eye opening. If any of the MM, JCMH camp monitor the DM comments, they will see it will take more than Sunshine Sachs to make them palatable. Americans want them both out of here, Brits don't want either of them back. Both sides seem in complete agreement, wherever they are, no titles and sit down and shut up.


I am so proud of this team ! The politeness rocks !


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> Yes of course, here in Europe all the monarchies that still survive are centuries old. Of course they have changed in time and now they are almost entirely representative. I don't think, in this day and age, that there could be new monarchies sprouting up around the world! It's only tradition that keeps them going.* I for one am glad we still have a monarchy in the UK.*



I change my mind every day  

Not ideal, but I like a bit of pomp and circumstance occasionally. Plus, the thought of the horror that could replace it often sounds worse. 

If I was a US citizen though, I would be _incensed_ H&M are given media time/space to spout crap at regular (make that near-constant) as though their GB-given status counted there more than any other average American.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> While sitting on hold on my phone this afternoon waiting help from an on line vendor, I took a brief look at several pages of the comments on the Daily Mail site related to this item. There were almost 2800 at that time and they were blistering in the level of criticism of both she and Harry and were international in source. Every single thing we have pointed out in the posts here, but we have been more polite. Harry is little more than a dim witted emasculated buffoon to summarize and her true colors have become glowing neon and utterly repulsive to most. It was eye opening. If any of the MM, JCMH camp monitor the DM comments, they will see it will take more than Sunshine Sachs to make them palatable. Americans want them both out of here, Brits don't want either of them back. Both sides seem in complete agreement, wherever they are, no titles and sit down and shut up.


I vote for their removal and set them up on Tristan de Cunha .. 

_Tristan da Cunha_ colloquially Tristan, is a remote group of volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean. *It is the most remote inhabited archipelago in the world*, ...


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I thought about that and wouldn't be too surprised if they try to have the tab for their security picked up by the new administration.


I like to think not.  They are not here for diplomatic work.  If they try to shunt it to the CA gov I will really blow smoke out of my ears.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> I vote for their removal and set them up on Tristan de Cunha ..
> 
> _Tristan da Cunha_ colloquially Tristan, is a remote group of volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean. *It is the most remote inhabited archipelago in the world*, ...



I'd be feeling sorry for the Tristan da Cunhans


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I change my mind every day
> 
> Not ideal, but I like a bit of pomp and circumstance occasionally. Plus, the thought of the horror that could replace it often sounds worse.
> 
> If I was a US citizen though, I would be _incensed_ H&M are given media time/space to spout crap at regular (make that near-constant) as though their GB-given status counted there more than any other average American.


That is the think about the US, every A**hole can speak his piece whether born here or not.  Not saying I love it.  Actually it bugs me a lot if the person is not a citizen.  I consider it to be bad manners.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I vote for their removal and set them up on Tristan de Cunha ..
> 
> _Tristan da Cunha_ colloquially Tristan, is a remote group of volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean. *It is the most remote inhabited archipelago in the world*, ...


I voted a long time ago to send them to an ice floe in Alaska or the NW territories of Canada.  Send Archie to his cousins, he'll  be happy and fine.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> UK please take them back or remove their titles, we don't have a monarchy in the US!
> 
> *Defiant Meghan Markle insists her political activism 'won't end after the US election' despite criticism after she and Prince Harry broke royal tradition by wading publicly into politics*
> 
> A spokesperson for the Sussexes said the comments were 'not time specific', telling Insider: 'Part of being an active member of society is to take part in the ********ic process. So encouraging people to get involved in politics is something that is important.'
> 
> The spokesperson explained that while the Duke and Duchess' comments had been made 'at a very important part of the election cycle', they would continue to be political active in future months.
> 
> Activism of convenience



I love her political activism.  Remind me what she has done again...Oh right...nothing.  She just has a big mouth.


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> I like to think not.  They are not here for diplomatic work.  If they try to shunt it to the CA gov I will really blow smoke out of my ears.


If H would dye his hair and M would wear clothes that fit properly, would any of us recognize them?


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> If H would dye his hair and M would wear clothes that fit properly, would any of us recognize them?


You're right nobody would know who they are.  Actually, Meghan's looks are not that unique.  I just saw a print ad that made me look twice because the model in the ad looked just like her by coincidence.  If he shaved off his beard, he could just blend in as another balding ginger.


----------



## CarryOn2020

For most of us Americans, we detest the idea of royalty and, in particular, the BRF.  Sure, fun to read about and snark about, but, kindly keep them on your shores. For some unknown reason, the myth that we love the UK monarchy has sprung up, perhaps due to Diana. Admittedly, we did indeed like her. We do not want to be subjects of the Crown - _horribile dictu_!

Now, we have PCharles lecturing, too????  It’s too much, UK, too much. 

Well said, @papertiger 


papertiger said:


> If I was a US citizen though, *I would be incensed H&M are given media time/space to spout crap* at regular (make that near-constant) as though their GB-given status counted there more than any other average American.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I vote for their removal and set them up on Tristan de Cunha ..
> 
> _Tristan da Cunha_ colloquially Tristan, is a remote group of volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean. *It is the most remote inhabited archipelago in the world*, ...



They are British royalty. They need to stay in one of the BRF palaces and leave the rest of us alone. Enough with them and their 16 bathrooms.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I like to think not.  They are not here for diplomatic work.  If they try to shunt it to the CA gov I will really blow smoke out of my ears.


The Canadian government has already denied them funding because they are not part of the diplomatic corps. Besides, according to the polls, the PM  (whether red or blue) that even suggests paying for their security would lose in the following election.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are British royalty. They need to stay in one of the BRF palaces and leave the rest of us alone. Enough with them and their 16 bathrooms.


MM isn't a British citizen. She went through the motion, but abandoned it immediately after acquiring the title through marriage. I'm hoping the UK government finds a loophole, that states only UK citizens can use titles.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> MM isn't a British citizen. She went through the motion, but abandoned it immediately after acquiring the title through marriage. I'm hoping the UK government finds a loophole, that states only UK citizens can use titles.


She can 'title' all she wants, bottom line .. IT IS NOT RECOGNIZED in the US, we fought a war for that!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> She can 'title' all she wants, bottom line .. IT IS NOT RECOGNIZED in the US, we fought a war for that!


Remind the press here in the US about that, please please!!! They are a big reason why I joined this thread, those daily articles were making me


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> That is the think about the US, every A**hole can speak his piece whether born here or not.  Not saying I love it.  Actually it bugs me a lot if the person is not a citizen.  I consider it to be bad manners.


Yeah the freedom of speech thing is such a double edged sword, agree


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I like to think not.  They are not here for diplomatic work.  If they try to shunt it to the CA gov I will really blow smoke out of my ears.


I don't think so
I doubt the governor even knows who she is.....well, maybe Harry but anyway I don't think any of our senior government officials is that dumb


----------



## marietouchet

musings ...
feeling bad I almost ever contribute here to the consumerism threads anymore - not buying stuff in 2021
But I have noticed something REALLY GOOD ...
If we are NOT talking about everyone's bag purchases, we are sooooooooo much more well behaved ....
Thanks to all on this thread , in the days of COVID, I appreciate your good humour, wit - you guys make me laugh !!! Thanks


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *Remind the press here in the US about that*, please please!!! They are a big reason why I joined this thread, those daily articles were making me



Most of the press here were all "hooray for Meghan and Harry" when they walked away from the royal family because they were convinced they left because of racism from the British media. They are using the titles for her because they don't want to be accused of being disrespectful or racist towards her themselves. I'm sure the thinking is it's better to show extra deference than to be called out for not being formal enough.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PCharles is at the heart of H&M’s efforts. His “Great Reset” speech at Davos uses similar language. Through H&M, he is pushing his agenda on the US. He chose the wrong messengers which will ‘pollute’ his message.

Here’s the transcript from his January chat - note the similarities of the language:
_First of all: shifting our default setting to “sustainable”.
Second: outlining responsible transition pathways to decarbonise and move to net zero.
Third: reimagining industries through the lens of sustainable markets.
... 
With 2020 being seen as the “super year”, kick-starting a decade of action for people and planet,_








						We need revolutionary action to save the planet: full transcript of Prince Charles' Davos speech
					

Prince Charles has asked whether we want to go down in history as the people who did nothing to bring the world back from the brink.




					www.smh.com.au
				




default setting
sustainable
pathways
transition
reimagining
lens
markets
2020 is a super year????? Wow.

ETA: we need some bingo cards


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Most of the press here were all "hooray for Meghan and Harry" when they walked away from the royal family because they were convinced they left because of racism from the British media. They are using the titles for her because they don't want to be accused of being disrespectful or racist towards her themselves. I'm sure the thinking is it's better to show extra deference than to be called out for not being formal enough.


Many people are so afraid of being called racists that can't act normal anymore. I am all in favor of zero tolerance for racism (or any other type of discrimination), but this fear of being called racist only favors people like MM imo.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't think so
> I doubt the governor even knows who she is.....well, maybe Harry but anyway I don't think any of our senior government officials is that dumb


I hope you are right. They don't feel embarrassed to ask for whatever perks they want. They feel entitled, all that money spent on that Africa tour, private jets...  I still have the video of Harry, asking for a role for MM in a Disney movie, very fresh in my memory. He didn't care if there were other actresses better qualified for the role or really needed the job.


----------



## gracekelly

New Harry Markle









						The Letter Case ~ MM’s Desperate Tactics To Gain Control In 2021
					

When I first heard the news that MM’s legal team were filing a a flurry of court applications, an image popped into my head – her legal team as headlocked hamsters, all running on a slippery …




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I change my mind every day
> 
> Not ideal, but I like a bit of pomp and circumstance occasionally. Plus, the thought of the horror that could replace it often sounds worse.
> 
> If I was a US citizen though, I would be _incensed_ H&M are given media time/space to spout crap at regular (make that near-constant) as though their GB-given status counted there more than any other average American.


papertiger, count me among the citizens who are. And, on the issue of voting, she's an American citizen, mailed in her ballot like millions of others, as I did, and my vote carried just as much weight as hers. YAWN


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> I change my mind every day
> 
> Not ideal, but I like a bit of pomp and circumstance occasionally. Plus, the thought of the horror that could replace it often sounds worse.
> 
> If I was a US citizen though, I would be _incensed_ H&M are given media time/space to spout crap at regular (make that near-constant) as though their GB-given status counted there more than any other average American.



As an American, I see them as another set of random celebrities that have a platform just because they're XYZ trait usually having nothing to do with real achievement. :/ Incensed is not the right word when you see it all the time. I don't even blink.


----------



## Chanbal

Jan Moir on Charles: *Patch-Up Prince Charles isn't a paragon of thrift*
At the age of 71 the heir to the throne is in a fashion magazine actually talking about fashion. His clothes. His wardrobe. What he wears and how he wears it.
*Move over Meghan*


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Jan Moir on Charles: *Patch-Up Prince Charles isn't a paragon of thrift*
> At the age of 71 the heir to the throne is in a fashion magazine actually talking about fashion. His clothes. His wardrobe. What he wears and how he wears it.
> *Move over Meghan*


On the subject of royal fashion warrants ...  Decided I needed a barn style coat  - that is what Ralph Lauren would call it, AKA Barbour coat.  Barbour is a UK brand that has three warrants , QEII, PC and PP. Photos of the 3 of them in Barbour are all over the internet

Barbour coats are very nice casual jackets for mucking out the stables, grouse hunting or gardening but they retail for about $500 and up
They are (mostly) dry clean only, made of waxed cotton exterior - you brush off the mud, but don't wash it EVER whereas I would toss Ralph Laurens in the wash
Totally different paradigm for coat maintenance, harkens back to the 1930s - see Gosford Park - when your valet brushed off your clothes from the days hunt 

Some people - these days - would consider a non-washable muck-about coat is a contradiction in terms 

Anderson & Sheppard (sp?) also has a royal warrant from PC - Savile Row  tailor where a bespoke pair of trousers is about 2000 POUNDS - not dollars - the trou are absolutely TDF though 

So, royal fashion and warrants correspond to a very interesting niche in the LUXURY goods market - we are not talking M&S clothing - we are talking items in the Birkin/Kelly stratosphere of fashion - you will have B or K forever, but, acquisition cost is not for everyone


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet  Excellent observations. 
This is exactly where the criticisms of PC, et al. start and stop. He is an entitled prince, never had a real job, all costs for everything are paid by the taxpayer.  That means housing (multiple), utilities, staff, clothing, travel,  cars (!and they do have some guzzlers - still putts putt in the rolls), right down to his personal items — all paid for and shopped for by someone else.  Sure sure he has his duchy, his gardening, his painting, etc. Again, very little of his lifestyle reflects the lifestyle of his subjects. Very little.  Are PChas, H&M really the only messengers the UK has?  He may be a nice guy, I have no way to know that, but there is a huge gap between his lectures and his life. That’s true for H&M and all the other billionaires. One word - entitled. That is why no one paid close attention in the 60/70s to his lectures and why he is not a great choice now.  Same for H&M. Entitled people are hypocrites. Wearing sloppy clothes (H&M) makes them laughable.  They really ought to let the highly educated professionals do the talking. 

This article is from 2015, perhaps other things have been added- https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/51922/11-things-prince-charles-does-his-time


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> On the subject of royal fashion warrants ...  Decided I needed a barn style coat  - that is what Ralph Lauren would call it, AKA Barbour coat. * Barbour is a UK brand that has three warrants , QEII, PC and PP. Photos of the 3 of them in Barbour are all over the internet*
> 
> Barbour coats are very nice casual jackets for mucking out the stables, grouse hunting or gardening but they retail for about $500 and up
> They are (mostly) dry clean only, made of waxed cotton exterior - you brush off the mud, but don't wash it EVER whereas I would toss Ralph Laurens in the wash
> Totally different paradigm for coat maintenance, harkens back to the 1930s - see Gosford Park - when your valet brushed off your clothes from the days hunt
> 
> Some people - these days - would consider a non-washable muck-about coat is a contradiction in terms
> 
> Anderson & Sheppard (sp?) also has a royal warrant from PC - Savile Row  tailor where a bespoke pair of trousers is about 2000 POUNDS - not dollars - the trou are absolutely TDF though
> 
> So, royal fashion and warrants correspond to a very interesting niche in the LUXURY goods market - we are not talking M&S clothing - we are talking items in the Birkin/Kelly stratosphere of fashion - you will have B or K forever, but, acquisition cost is not for everyone



I have 2 Barbour coats from the 80's, still in great condition. A few years ago I sent them both to be rewaxed, they came back as good as new!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Note to the Grifters: So much for being "woke." Seems more like people "woke up" to the fact you are a couple of fatuous twits with little to offer. 

In today's Daily Mail:

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'aren't selling when on the cover of magazines, despite beautiful pictures' amid popularity plummet, Majesty editor-in-chief claims*

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'aren't selling when on the cover of magazines'*
*Majesty editor-in-chief Ingrid Seward remarked on Royally Obsessed podcast*
*The royal biographer said it came amid the couple's popularity plummeting*


----------



## bag-mania

Seeing Meghan and Harry on a magazine cover is almost enough to make me go to a different checkout line at the supermarket.


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I have 2 Barbour coats from the 80's, still in great condition. A few years ago I sent them both to be rewaxed, they came back as good as new!


Absolutely, that is why I got my Barbour waxed coat, it is a keeper , a Birkin in my closet of coats , not a disposable wear-once piece of apparel


----------



## A1aGypsy

Is climate change and the need for the world to find better options really that political though? 

I completely understand that implementation is rift with difficulty (how do we re-train, how do we bring up countries who rely upon or have not benefited from the use of polluting materials and systems for as long as others have etc). But is it really controversial to say, if we keep going as we are, we are going to be overrun by garbage and pollution? 

Or is this just an issue of walk the walk before talking the talk?


----------



## bellecate

A1aGypsy said:


> Is climate change and the need for the world to find better options really that political though?
> 
> I completely understand that implementation is rift with difficulty (how do we re-train, how do we bring up countries who rely upon or have not benefited from the use of polluting materials and systems for as long as others have etc). But is it really controversial to say, if we keep going as we are, we are going to be overrun by garbage and pollution?
> 
> Or is this just an issue of walk the walk before talking the talk?



Perhaps this is an issue for a different forum IMHO. I read these forums to get away from the daily bombardment of 'issues'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> Is climate change and the need for the world to find better options really that political though?
> 
> I completely understand that implementation is rift with difficulty (how do we re-train, how do we bring up countries who rely upon or have not benefited from the use of polluting materials and systems for as long as others have etc). But is it really controversial to say, if we keep going as we are, we are going to be overrun by garbage and pollution?
> 
> Or is this just an issue of walk the walk before talking the talk?



No, it is not political, IMO.  These 3 are the wrong messengers. They do not ‘walk their talk’.  As with many billionaires these days, it is too much holier-thou and not enough ‘put their money where their mouth is‘.  If they want us to support theit causes, they ought to do more than show up in a Rolls and wave.


ETA: oops. Did not see your comment, @bellecate. Let me know if I should delete my comments.  I view this topic the same as all the others. The grifters continue to prove their hypocrisy, their entitlement, etc.  Same stuff on every aspect of their lives. IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

The real el cheapo was the Duke of Windsor. Apparently he used to round up the used bars of soap from the guest rooms at The Fort, his country home, and use them up.  Wallis thought this was disgusting lol!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The real el cheapo was the Duke of Windsor. Apparently he used to round up the used bars of soap from the guest rooms at The Fort, his country home, and use them up.  Wallis thought this was disgusting lol!


those two were quite the pair.  were they disliked by the British people?


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Remind the press here in the US about that, please please!!! They are a big reason why I joined this thread, those daily articles were making me


Already on the case!!! .. have written to Town & Country, People and some others .. STOP calling her Duchess!


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> musings ...
> feeling bad I almost ever contribute here to the consumerism threads anymore - not buying stuff in 2021
> But I have noticed something REALLY GOOD ...
> If we are NOT talking about everyone's bag purchases, we are sooooooooo much more well behaved ....
> Thanks to all on this thread , in the days of COVID, I appreciate your good humour, wit - you guys make me laugh !!! Thanks


HA!! .. same here, really haven't bought anything worth noting and don't plan to in 2021!  One reason, is that I haven't been working for some time (Corporate America simply does not want an older "experienced" female, they want young, male & cheap).  As such, no need to buy "work" clothing .. and the pandemic really kind of brought to light that I have way too much to begin with and it is time to start paring down.  I've been selling quite a bit of stuff (most consignment, some eBay) and it feels good!  What has surprised me, is that there are DEFINITELY buyers are out there; they KNOW it's a buyer's market right now .. so if you have something that's been sitting in your closet but you don't use and don't really "love" anymore, think about selling it!  However, be prepared .. unfortunately, things are selling for a lot less, so it's very unlikely that you will get close to retail and especially over retail.  But, as I always say, if it's not being used and not as 'loved', it's money in the (that should be) in the Bank!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I've been selling quite a bit of stuff (most consignment, some eBay) and it feels good!  What has surprised me, is that there are DEFINITELY buyers are out there; they KNOW it's a buyer's market right now .. so if you have something that's been sitting in your closet but you don't use and don't really "love" anymore, think about selling it!  However, be prepared .. unfortunately, things are selling for a lot less, so it's very unlikely that you will get close to retail and especially over retail.  But, as I always say, if it's not being used and not as 'loved', it's money in the (that should be) in the Bank!



I went through my closet and sorted out so much stuff, many items still with tags on (not proud of that). It's not super expensive designer stuff, more of a middle ground, and I'm thinking about listing it for super cheap because if I make 10 bucks from 50 items it's still 500 bucks I wouldn't have otherwise.


----------



## A1aGypsy

bellecate said:


> Perhaps this is an issue for a different forum IMHO. I read these forums to get away from the daily bombardment of 'issues'.




Sorry, I was just trying to understand what people meant by political. Carry on.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went through my closet and sorted out so much stuff, many items still with tags on (not proud of that). It's not super expensive designer stuff, more of a middle ground, and I'm thinking about listing it for super cheap because if I make 10 bucks from 50 items it's still 500 bucks I wouldn't have otherwise.


Thankfully, I'm not one of those that purchase something and then never wear it (must be the Connecticut Yankee in me - HA)!!  But, I am the type to buy "multiples" of things that I like, and anyone in here whoever visits the Balenciaga Forums/Threads will see my closet FILLED with my Balenciaga bags (from the beginning '01 - 3/3 to some in 2012/2013).  I stopped buying them because I simply do not like Agneau leather, but even some of those are going to be on the chopping block (not the early ones, the one-of-a-kinds and/or very rare that I simply have not used).  I have found this to be rather cathartic in many respects; god knows .. when we (me I should say) finally retire, I sure as heck don't need that many bags .. and if (in fact) we do end up in Italy, I am NOT going to be carting all those things overseas!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Thankfully, I'm not one of those that purchase something and then never wear it (must be the Connecticut Yankee in me - HA)!!  But, I am the type to buy "multiples" of things that I like, and anyone in here whoever visits the Balenciaga Forums/Threads will see my closet FILLED with my Balenciaga bags (from the beginning '01 - 3/3 to some in 2012/2013).  I stopped buying them because I simply do not like Agneau leather, but even some of those are going to be on the chopping block (not the early ones, the one-of-a-kinds and/or very rare that I simply have not used).  I have found this to be rather cathartic in many respects; god knows .. when we (me I should say) finally retire, I sure as heck don't need that many bags .. and if (in fact) we do end up in Italy, I am NOT going to be carting all those things overseas!



Yeah I want to get rid of stuff that weights me down, and I only want to fill my closet (or house, or life) with good quality items I absolutely love and will use frequently.


----------



## Sol Ryan

_*edit-somehow I messed up my reply... bah!_

I love my Barbour and Belstaff waxed coats. Nordstrom Rack and TJ Max get them in pretty regularly in the fall now So I’ve been able to get them pretty reasonably priced (around 120$ for my Barbours) . Just sucks with the pandemic I don’t want them to get Covid on them. I’ve been wearing coats I can wash or put sanitizer on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

While we are on the subject of PC being so thrifty as to own only two (bespoke) coats ... 









						Prince Charles Has Been Consistently Wearing Two Coats Since the '80s — Town & Country
					

He may, in fact, only own the pair, We all have our favorite coats—the unbeatable, classic ones we bundle up in and wear on a rainy winter day or a crisp fall evening. So does the Prince of Wales. Indeed, Queen Elizabeth's son has worn the same two overcoats since the 1980s with pretty regular...




					apple.news
				




Is there no one in journalism who notices tailoring details ? Where are the editors when you need them ??

The photos show  a herringbone coat plus at least two camel hair coats, one with velvet collar and peak lapels, the other with camel hair collar and more modest lapels , the coats look alike - the man likes camel hair


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wanna bet money if the election goes the way it is leaning right now there will be a piece out in 3...2...1 how our glorious Meghan INFLUENCED the results with her tireless activism?


1000%!!


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> I vote for their removal and set them up on Tristan de Cunha ..
> 
> _Tristan da Cunha_ colloquially Tristan, is a remote group of volcanic islands in the south Atlantic Ocean. *It is the most remote inhabited archipelago in the world*, ...


Where is this in relation to Chunga Changa?


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Note to the Grifters: So much for being "woke." Seems more like people "woke up" to the fact you are a couple of fatuous twits with little to offer.
> 
> In today's Daily Mail:
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'aren't selling when on the cover of magazines, despite beautiful pictures' amid popularity plummet, Majesty editor-in-chief claims*
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'aren't selling when on the cover of magazines'*
> *Majesty editor-in-chief Ingrid Seward remarked on Royally Obsessed podcast*
> *The royal biographer said it came amid the couple's popularity plummeting*



It's called over-saturation. Why would anyone buy a magazine with them on the cover when there are countless DAILY news items about them in addition to all the interviews, etc.? How much more can people take??? 

Interestingly I saw that TJ Maxx's online store was selling Lady Colin Campbell's book about them... Unfortunately you can't search for it but if you look in the books section you'll find it. I thought it had just come out too...


----------



## Genie27

Mendocino said:


> Where is this in relation to Chunga Changa?


Only a short hop via private jet, of course!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> *It's called over-saturation. Why would anyone buy a magazine with them on the cover when there are countless DAILY news items about them in addition to all the interviews, etc.?* How much more can people take???
> 
> Interestingly I saw that TJ Maxx's online store was selling Lady Colin Campbell's book about them... Unfortunately you can't search for it but if you look in the books section you'll find it. I thought it had just come out too...


It's undoubtedly over-saturation, but I think it's also a way that people found to express their dislike of MM&H. I have no intention of buying any magazine with this (un)woke couple on the cover.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Note to the Grifters: So much for being "woke." Seems more like people "woke up" to the fact you are a couple of fatuous twits with little to offer.
> 
> In today's Daily Mail:
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'aren't selling when on the cover of magazines, despite beautiful pictures' amid popularity plummet, Majesty editor-in-chief claims*
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'aren't selling when on the cover of magazines'*
> *Majesty editor-in-chief Ingrid Seward remarked on Royally Obsessed podcast*
> *The royal biographer said it came amid the couple's popularity plummeting*


*UK's perception:* ‘Yet he still seems to be living off his name, that's the reason that all these things have come to them. ‘He wants to take advantage of all that but not put in the hard work on the other side. 

*US's perception: *Co-host Roberta Fiorito offered an American insight, adding: I feel like their popularity here skyrocketed.

Are American journalists that delusional/tone-deaf? Here are some reviews from people in US:






tone-deaf


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> *UK's perception:* ‘Yet he still seems to be living off his name, that's the reason that all these things have come to them. ‘He wants to take advantage of all that but not put in the hard work on the other side. I think that is the perception, though I think it's very different in the US.’
> 
> *US's perception: *Co-host Roberta Fiorito offered an American insight, adding: I feel like their popularity here skyrocketed.
> 
> Are American journalists that delusional/tone-deaf? Here are some reviews from people in US:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4899633
> 
> View attachment 4899629
> 
> tone-deaf



Is it really their popularity skyrocketed or is it just... non-stop PR? I swear they have had their machine on overdrive since coming here.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Is it really their popularity skyrocketed or is it just... non-stop PR? I swear they have had their machine on overdrive since coming here.


Their PR-machine is certainly working non-stop. They are investing in PR, so they can profit without putting in "the hard work".


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Is it really their popularity skyrocketed or is it just... non-stop PR? I swear they have had their machine on overdrive since coming here.


Yes, the saturation felt numbing at times.
I think maybe they were a novelty for awhile, and maybe a diversion for some weary of all the political drama in the news, but not so much anymore. If PR people think # of stories equates to popularity they underestimate us. After a few with no substance, they’re ignored.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Yes, the saturation felt numbing at times.
> I think maybe they were a novelty for awhile, and maybe a diversion for some weary of all the political drama in the news, but not so much anymore. If PR people think # of stories equates to popularity they underestimate us. After a few with no substance, they’re ignored.



ITA, I actually liked both of them much more when I hardly heard about them. Now I know wayyyyyyy more than I want or need to know. Do we really need to know she voted? I mean come on.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *US's perception: *Co-host Roberta Fiorito offered an American insight, adding: I feel like their popularity here skyrocketed.
> 
> Are American journalists that delusional/tone-deaf? Here are some reviews from people in US:



It is extremely generous of you to refer to this young woman as a journalist. Her official job is a “branded content editor” which as I understand it means she comes up with web content to try to make something popular (apparently in this case H&M?). She also cohosts a podcast about the Royals, but of course anyone and their brother can host a podcast so that isn’t exactly top credentials.


----------



## Chanbal

Heard comments about MM and Harry arguing on a restaurant, so I search the net and here is what I found:

Megan and Harry had a loud scandal at a restaurant near their new home in Santa Barbara. With emotions, Prince Harry got up from the table and left, and his wife stayed at the restaurant and sipped wine without being upset about the absence of her husband.


Wow, is this true?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Heard comments about MM and Harry arguing on a restaurant, so I search the net and here is what I found:
> 
> Megan and Harry had a loud scandal at a restaurant near their new home in Santa Barbara. With emotions, Prince Harry got up from the table and left, and his wife stayed at the restaurant and sipped wine without being upset about the absence of her husband.
> 
> 
> Wow, is this true?



Hmm. While I expect they probably argue at times like any married couple, this article is really sketchy. I’ve never heard of the publication before and they misspelled Meghan‘s name throughout. I’m thinking it’s probably bunk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Heard comments about MM and Harry arguing on a restaurant, so I search the net and here is what I found:
> 
> Megan and Harry had a loud scandal at a restaurant near their new home in Santa Barbara. With emotions, Prince Harry got up from the table and left, and his wife stayed at the restaurant and sipped wine without being upset about the absence of her husband.
> 
> 
> Wow, is this true?



Supposedly, Harry left the table in a huff. There is a blurry photo that shows H scowling and MM smirking. The photographer is in the bushes. To me, it looked like H was mad at being photographed. After that, they sent out almost daily smiling, happy, happy zoom vids. Searching for the photo now...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

If he didn’t like paparazzi taking his picture he could have moved almost anywhere else in the world that wouldn’t have constant paparazzi. Since he walked away in a huff I prefer to think it was because the restaurant dared to serve him bread that wasn’t warm and he went off to complain to management.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly, Harry left the table in a huff. There is a blurry photo that shows H scowling and MM smirking. The photographer is in the bushes. To me, it looked like H was mad at being photographed. After that, they sent out almost daily smiling, happy, happy zoom vids. Searching for the photo now...





bag-mania said:


> If he didn’t like paparazzi taking his picture he could have moved almost anywhere else in the world that wouldn’t have constant paparazzi. Since he walked away in a huff I prefer to think it was because the restaurant dared to serve him bread that wasn’t warm and he went off to complain to management.



Harry shouldn't be mad at being photographed. If he wanted a private life, shouldn't have hired a PR-team to put him and MM daily on the news.

I found more news about that event, but not sure how reliable those sites/links are (Ex: https://www.ccn.com/prince-harry-surplus-social-climber-meghan-markle/).


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Harry shouldn't be mad at being photographed. If he wanted a private life, shouldn't have hired a PR-team to put him and MM daily on the news.
> 
> I found more news about that event, but not sure how reliable those sites/links are (Ex: https://www.ccn.com/prince-harry-surplus-social-climber-meghan-markle/).


who knows what if anything he was mad about....maybe he just had his angry face on for a moment....fun to speculate tho


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Harry shouldn't be mad at being photographed. If he wanted a private life, shouldn't have hired a PR-team to put him and MM daily on the news.
> 
> I found more news about that event, but not sure how reliable those sites/links are (Ex: https://www.ccn.com/prince-harry-surplus-social-climber-meghan-markle/).


they made a decision that it would be easier to just be photographed and make speeches in the US than to do the royal duties....now they want to have their cake and eat it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Although I make no effort to remember the details of each H&M kerfuffle, IIRC, it was another diner who snapped a photo with her phone (not really a pap). I have scoured the internet with all kinds of search phrases, but can’t find the photo. Maybe they sued the diner ???

Agree, if they want any level of privacy, stay home. After all we’ve seen, heard and been through, I strongly believe the privacy excuse is complete BS.  We all know that anywhere we go, we are photographed. Isn’t that what these cell phones are for?  Maybe these super billionaire tech gods will figure out The Camera Solution during The Great Reset.  Haaaa.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

lalame said:


> ITA, I actually liked both of them much more when I hardly heard about them. Now I know wayyyyyyy more than I want or need to know. *Do we really need to know she voted? I mean come on.*



*lalame*, think that the repercussions of H&M's tacky efforts to win over the US consumer are being felt by their handlers.
Let's face it, guys, we can thank PC & the BRF for the continued Grifters-R-Us messaging of THEMSELVES  and their a@@ociated brand being stuffed down our throats until we hurl.

It's striking to me, ie H&M's visible posturing w/the US consumer even to the point of influencing the election via virtual media, when most celebs stepped aside, esp. since H&M had automatically by his birthright been given a free pass in the UK with their press & loving public.
Why? Still trying to wrap my head around their urgency to leave the BRF, surely the best place to be when hit with a pandemic and a possible dawning of global war?

Think that Occam's razor is the most viable answer: H&M are truly the most stupid "ROYAL" couple in history, and like, even I would not want to trade places with them right now.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Harry shouldn't be mad at being photographed. If he wanted a private life, shouldn't have hired a PR-team to put him and MM daily on the news.
> 
> I found more news about that event, but not sure how reliable those sites/links are (Ex: https://www.ccn.com/prince-harry-surplus-social-climber-meghan-markle/).


Johnny Lydon of the Sex Pistols said it best. The answer to their need for privacy was for them to get a council flat. lol!

From the Daily Mail

_Sex Pistols' *John Lydon* tells Harry and Meghan 'get a *council flat* and job' in major swipe. ... In an abstract from his new book I Could Be Wrong, I Could Be Right, obtained by the Mail Online, the musician went on to say he doesn't believe Meghan is the “right person for anyone”. 

I don’t get it at all,” John revealed.

“If they don’t want to be part of that [royal] institution, then why don’t they completely give up their titles and get a council flat and a job?_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> _In an abstract from his new book I Could Be Wrong, I Could Be Right, obtained by the Mail Online, the musician went on to say he doesn't believe Meghan is the “right person for anyone”. _



This.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Johnny Lydon of the Sex Pistols said it best.
> 
> _*“If they don’t want to be part of that [royal] institution, then why don’t they completely give up their titles and get a council flat and a job?*_


Now *THIS *is priceless!!!! .. add this to the MasterCard commercial ..


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> ITA, I actually liked both of them much more when I hardly heard about them. Now I know wayyyyyyy more than I want or need to know. *Do we really need to know she voted? I mean come on.*



So did millions of other Americans. I guess she wants a special participation award?


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> So did millions of other Americans. I guess she wants a special participation award?
> 
> View attachment 4900443



haha, no! She will tell *** in no uncertain terms that a participation award is not enough. She wants an invitation to the White House and some other perks.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would hope they are smart enough not to fight in public, but who knows?


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Now *THIS *is priceless!!!! .. add this to the MasterCard commercial ..



Someone on another site said who would have thought that we would be getting words of wisdom from Johnny Lydon. lol!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Someone on another site said who would have thought that we would be getting words of wisdom from Johnny Lydon. lol!


The man has some good qualities. He is caring (takes good care of sick wife) and is also preceptive. MM for him: "She seems like a narcissist to me and they’re very destructive". He could be a member here...


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The man has some good qualities. He is caring (takes good care of sick wife) and is also preceptive. MM for him: "She seems like a narcissist to me and they’re very destructive". He could be a member here...



I think he sounds like a good guy with common sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I would hope they are smart enough not to fight in public, but who knows?



*SMART acronym*, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely.

So no. I'm afraid your hopes are dashed.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> While we are on the subject of PC being so thrifty as to own only two (bespoke) coats ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles Has Been Consistently Wearing Two Coats Since the '80s — Town & Country
> 
> 
> He may, in fact, only own the pair, We all have our favorite coats—the unbeatable, classic ones we bundle up in and wear on a rainy winter day or a crisp fall evening. So does the Prince of Wales. Indeed, Queen Elizabeth's son has worn the same two overcoats since the 1980s with pretty regular...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there no one in journalism who notices tailoring details ? Where are the editors when you need them ??
> 
> The photos show  a herringbone coat plus at least two camel hair coats, one with velvet collar and peak lapels, the other with camel hair collar and more modest lapels , the coats look alike - the man likes camel hair


There are suddenly several stories about the PC (Prince Charles) wardrobe which is so PC (politically correct) - he is hanging out with (Meghan's buddy) Edward Enningful at Vogue - what's up ? 

I hope this is not a scheme cooked by Clarence House to outwoke Meghan - it is silly


----------



## Chanbal

Good for the courtiers. This is a serious event and couldn't be perceived as one more photo-op for the duke or duchess:

*Royal courtiers refuse Prince Harry's request to lay Remembrance Sunday wreath on his behalf*
Prince Harry’s request for a wreath to be laid at the Cenotaph on his behalf was refused by royal courtiers, it has emerged.

The Duke of Sussex had wanted to return to the UK for the event but would have had no official role, and was not invited, The Telegraph understands.

Remembrance


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Good for the courtiers. This is a serious event and couldn't be perceived as one more photo-op for the duke or duchess:
> 
> *Royal courtiers refuse Prince Harry's request to lay Remembrance Sunday wreath on his behalf*
> Prince Harry’s request for a wreath to be laid at the Cenotaph on his behalf was refused by royal courtiers, it has emerged.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex had wanted to return to the UK for the event but would have had no official role, and was not invited, The Telegraph understands.
> 
> Remembrance


One of the articles explained that - the wreath laying privilege is reserved for heads of state or senior members of the BRF


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> There are suddenly several stories about the PC (Prince Charles) wardrobe which is so PC (politically correct) - he is hanging out with (Meghan's buddy) Edward Enningful at Vogue - what's up ?
> 
> I hope this is not a scheme cooked by Clarence House to outwoke Meghan - it is silly



IMO, this is Charles beginning his Great Reset.  He creating a pathway to power for H&M and himself.  Guessing he was opposed to shutting excluding Harry out of Remembrance Sunday. Harry certainly is being mouthy about it — in all the papers. If he had not said anything, he would not have been missed. Someone should tell the entitled, selfish jerk that the RemSun is *not* about him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Duke of Sussex had wanted to return to the UK for the event but would have had no official role, and was not invited, The Telegraph understands.



Ugh that's painful to read. Yes, yes, I know, he made his bed and all, and I personally have said I wished the Queen would be harsher with them, but that must have hit him like a 1000 bricks.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Good for the courtiers. This is a serious event and couldn't be perceived as one more photo-op for the duke or duchess:
> 
> *Royal courtiers refuse Prince Harry's request to lay Remembrance Sunday wreath on his behalf*
> Prince Harry’s request for a wreath to be laid at the Cenotaph on his behalf was refused by royal courtiers, it has emerged.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex had wanted to return to the UK for the event but would have had no official role, and was not invited, The Telegraph understands.
> 
> Remembrance


again - wants to have his cake and eat it


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh that's painful too read. Yes, yes, I know, he made his bed and all, and I personally have said I wished the Queen would be harsher with them, but that must have hit him like a 1000 bricks.


think it could knock some sense into him?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh that's painful too read. Yes, yes, I know, he made his bed and all, and I personally have said I wished the Queen would be harsher with them, but that must have hit him like a 1000 bricks.



Does anyone really believe he did not understand this would be a result of his actions? Really? The guy is nearly 40 yrs old.
Either they really are as dumb as @VigeeLeBrun says or they are plotting something. In any case, how refreshing that the courtiers stood their ground. Wonder how many plates are getting tossed now?

ETA: Kate, Camilla, Sophie and QE really shine at this event. Truly a heartfelt remembrance. Let us never forget.


----------



## youngster

It boggles the mind that Harry thought he could continue on as Captain General of the Royal Marines while living in Santa Barbara.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> think it could knock some sense into him?



I'll go with no. He'll just keep wallowing in how he is treated poorly for no good reason.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does anyone really believe he did not understand this would be a result of his actions? Really?



I honestly don't know anymore CarryOn. You'd think he must have known because it just doesn't make sense, and yet he seems flabbergasted by the completely appropriate reactions he receives.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, this is Charles beginning his Great Reset.  He creating a pathway to power for H&M and himself.  Guessing he was opposed to shutting excluding Harry out of Remembrance Sunday. Harry certainly is being mouthy about it — in all the papers. If he had not said anything, he would not have been missed. Someone should tell the entitled, selfish jerk that the RemSun is *not* about him.


I dont like the big reset, I think trying to promote Charles as an arbiter of sustainable fashion is laughable. The man has done good things, but to reduce him to his wardrobe ????? 

And this is all too reminiscent of Meghan - she did some good stuff, but her stock is down today - she is not the one to emulate these days


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure I believe this:









						The Royal Family Marks Remembrance Sunday with a Socially Distanct Ceremony
					

See the photos here.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




Notably, this was the first Remembrance Sunday that Prince Andrew has missed since stepping back from his royal duties due to his association with Jeffrey Epstein. It also marks the first time Prince Harry has not been in attendance following his decision to exit royal life and move to North America. Per the Sunday Times, Harry asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf but "was denied by courtiers on the grounds that he is no longer representing the monarchy." The paper also reports that the Queen "was not made aware of her grandson's wish."


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure I believe this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family Marks Remembrance Sunday with a Socially Distanct Ceremony
> 
> 
> See the photos here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notably, this was the first Remembrance Sunday that Prince Andrew has missed since stepping back from his royal duties due to his association with Jeffrey Epstein. It also marks the first time Prince Harry has not been in attendance following his decision to exit royal life and move to North America. Per the Sunday Times, Harry asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf but "was denied by courtiers on the grounds that he is no longer representing the monarchy." The paper also reports that the Queen "was not made aware of her grandson's wish."


Remember the last Remembrance Day (2 years ago) kerfuffle with Meghan ? MM fussed that she was relegated to the second balcony ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh that's painful to read. Yes, yes, I know, he made his bed and all, and I personally have said I wished the Queen would be harsher with them, but that must have hit him like a 1000 bricks.



Good. Something/someone has to wake him from his sleep-walking- 'wokeness'


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Good. Something/someone has to wake him from his sleep-walking- 'wokeness'


I'm sorry but he comes across as not very intelligent...no wonder he was such as easy target for the grifter


----------



## Lodpah

Sorry Harry, welcome to the real world. As your light dims, your grifter wife’s will rise, albeit nefariously.









						Royal courtiers refuse Prince Harry's request to lay Remembrance Sunday wreath on his behalf
					

Prince Harry’s request for a wreath to be laid at the Cenotaph on his behalf was refused by royal courtiers, it has emerged. The Duke of Sussex had wanted to return to the UK for the event but would have had no official role, and was not invited, The Telegraph understands. He was said to have...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh that's painful to read. Yes, yes, I know, he made his bed and all, and I personally have said I wished the Queen would be harsher with them, but that must have hit him like a 1000 bricks.



Either he is really dim, or his PR people are dim and have no understanding of the royal system or it is his wife speaking.  I am going for a combo of all of the above.  This was just another pity party to make the public feel sorry for him like he is being separated from his homies.  His homies told him to take a walk after he abandoned them.



sdkitty said:


> again - wants to have his cake and eat it



The cake is really stale, but his taste buds have been so ruined by the wilted word salad with the rancid dressing that he doesn't realize it.  The PR people told him to wring the pity out of people for positive clicks.  Don't think it worked. 

Her Maj made a decision.  It sounds better for her if the decision was said to come from the courtiers.  I am sure she knew all about it.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure I believe this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family Marks Remembrance Sunday with a Socially Distanct Ceremony
> 
> 
> See the photos here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notably, this was the first Remembrance Sunday that Prince Andrew has missed since stepping back from his royal duties due to his association with Jeffrey Epstein. It also marks the first time Prince Harry has not been in attendance following his decision to exit royal life and move to North America. Per the Sunday Times, Harry asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf but "was denied by courtiers on the grounds that he is no longer representing the monarchy." The paper also reports that the Queen "*was not made aware of her grandson's wish."*



Likely translates to:  “Grandma didn’t care, cause you don’t listen and worse, you and wifey just can’t shut the F up”


----------



## LittleStar88

It’s difficult to have any pity for an adult who is sitting in his big mansion and whining victim as a result of his own choices. He knew what leaving the BRF would mean but he somehow thinks either it doesn’t apply to him or they were just kidding.

And again, somehow managing to make it all about him/them.

He can whine all he wants but in this current environment (coronavirus, lots of people struggling with real, actual problems like how to put food on the table or keep a roof over their heads) he just looks like a spoiled brat.

Life is not fair and adulting is hard. He needs to ask daddy to buy him a pair of big boy pants and start figuring this out. 

Hope Meghan was worth it. Seems he is being faced with some consequences that are painful for him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




Pathetic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




WTFFFF. Please ignore everything I have said today about feeling bad for him. What a freaking loser that man is and I want to puke on Meghan's poppy brooch.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



if they think they are going to steal the light from Will & Kate they're mistaken
But maybe it's sincere


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Pathetic.



Seriously. This is like wearing a wedding dress to get drunk on the day your ex gets married when you were not invited for obvious reasons.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



Sickening attention wh*res.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also it's a good thing their personal, private moments just happen to be photographed for the media, or else how would the peasants know to clap and cheer? Also, couldn't decide if the masked or unmasked pics were cuter so gave us both?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tell it, Piers:


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFFF. Please ignore everything I have said today about feeling bad for him. What a freaking loser that man is and I want to puke on *Meghan's poppy brooch*.



I read poppy as poopy ... Because everything they do is poopy now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

If this truly meant so much to them to pay respect, they could have done it privately without a photographer and announcing it.

Isn’t this the stuff they ran off to the US to avoid doing???


----------



## CarryOn2020

They missed an opportunity to highlight all military veterans. They had better show up on Veterans Day.  Would be a good idea to support Wreaths Across America.  So much they could have done!








						Learn about Wreaths Across America's Mission to Remember, Honor and Teach
					

Each December on National Wreaths Across America Day, our mission to Remember, Honor and Teach is carried out by coordinating wreath-laying ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery, as well as over 3,400 additional locations in all 50 U.S. states, at sea, and abroad. Help us by sponsoring...




					www.wreathsacrossamerica.org


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> They missed an opportunity to highlight all military veterans. They had better show up on Veterans Day.  Would be a good idea to support Wreaths Across America.  So much they could have done!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Learn about Wreaths Across America's Mission to Remember, Honor and Teach
> 
> 
> Each December on National Wreaths Across America Day, our mission to Remember, Honor and Teach is carried out by coordinating wreath-laying ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery, as well as over 3,400 additional locations in all 50 U.S. states, at sea, and abroad. Help us by sponsoring...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wreathsacrossamerica.org



Especially since Meghan ran her mouth about voting in the US election.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




Come on!  Having a photo op in a cemetery, what kind of folly is this?


----------



## akoko

Wow. Just shows how desperate for attention they are and to keep their royal status. But for me, these photos just emphasise how irrelevant to the issues facing this country they have become. Self centred and out of touch.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. This is like wearing a wedding dress to get drunk on the day your ex gets married when you were not invited for obvious reasons.


But they picked the flowerssssssss


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> But they picked the flowerssssssss


PS Remember ???? MM learned flower arranging at her baby shower , the most expensive shower known to mankind

And I dont remember them celebrating Memorial Day .. the equivalent US holiday

And she did not have to share a balcony, heck - how did they get all the other visitors off the field ?

Massively tone deaf


----------



## Sharont2305

Let's see what they have planned for Remembrance Day itself on the 11th.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In the US, we call Nov 11 Veterans Day.  









						5 Facts to Know About Veterans Day
					

Veterans Day is a well-known American holiday, but there are also a few misconceptions about it — like how it’s spelled or whom exactly it celebrates.



					www.defense.gov


----------



## lanasyogamama

I see MM has been working on her “I am sad” face. She didn’t even look directly into the camera!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. This is like wearing a wedding dress to get drunk on the day your ex gets married when you were not invited for obvious reasons.


if this was a competition between her and Kate for black coats (or whatever that black thing Meghan is wearing), Kate wins hands down


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



WOW .. those hair plugs that Harry was "supposed" to have, well .. welp .. they don't seem to be germinating!!!


----------



## youngster

Wondering what other ceremonies Harry intends to mimic while he's living in the U.S.?  Maybe we'll see him attend the opening of Santa Anita Race Track on the first day of Ascot.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



@CarryOn2020 Your post made me almost throw up after a delicious Godiva chocolate cake.
I have no words to comment, the pathetic pictures say everything.

For chocolate lovers, I recommend the Godiva chocolate cake from the Cheesecake Factory.


----------



## LittleStar88

I should add... Just seeing these photos and what they’ve done here gives me secondhand embarrassment. These two are so thirsty you can see right through it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> PS Remember ???? MM learned flower arranging at her baby shower , the most expensive shower known to mankind



Channelling CeeJay...LET ME FIX THAT FOR YOU: the most expensive shower MADE known to mankind. I am sure there are more filthily rich people who spend disgusting amounts of money on frivolities, they just usually know better than to show off and rub it into anyone else's faces.


----------



## youngster

I'm a little familiar with that particular cemetery as it isn't too far from where I grew up. It's not that big, freeway close by, and an easy drive to/from LAX.  

I also just looked it up and there are only two British Commonwealth graves in the entire cemetery. They likely had to have their people do some looking around to find some graves to visit.  It's not like you can just go to any cemetery and expect to find the graves of UK or Commonwealth soldiers in the U.S.  Kind of wonder how those two made it into a U.S. National Cemetery but perhaps they were married to American citizens who were veterans as well?  I always thought national cemeteries were reserved for veterans of the U.S. military and their spouses. 

Some other interesting little factoids about that cemetery that I just read. Wyatt Earp's father is buried there and so is Dean Martin's son, who was a USAF pilot and died when his jet crashed in 1987.  There are a fairly large number of Buffalo soldiers (African American soldiers who served in the Civil War) buried there.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. This is like wearing a wedding dress to get drunk on the day your ex gets married when you were not invited for obvious reasons.



 so true 

I didn't know why I'm laughing, it's such a sad, pathetic gesture and all for themselves, nothing to to do with honouring the dead.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Wondering what other ceremonies Harry intends to mimic while he's living in the U.S.?  Maybe we'll see him attend the opening of Santa Anita Race Track on the first day of Ascot.



Maybe they can stage their own opening of parliament and Trooping the Colours. On Meghan's birthday obviously.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe they can stage their own opening of parliament and Trooping the Colours. On Meghan's birthday obviously.



Meghan doesn't have birthdays anymore, she's still 39.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I should add... Just seeing these photos and what they’ve done here gives me secondhand embarrassment. These two are so thirsty you can see right through it.



Twitter is on fire too. People are not even being especially nasty like the stans insist they are, just disappointed and saying how it is:

"Using the dead to boost their image or repair their reputation. How cynical. Harry deserted the Marines to go at a Disney Lion King event. He abandoned injured vets who counted on him. He disrespected HM The Queen, his supreme commander in chief. Now, he fakes that he cares..."


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> It’s difficult to have any pity for an adult who is sitting in his big mansion and whining victim as a result of his own choices. He knew what leaving the BRF would mean but he somehow thinks either it doesn’t apply to him or they were just kidding.
> 
> And again, somehow managing to make it all about him/them.
> 
> He can whine all he wants but in this current environment (coronavirus, lots of people struggling with real, actual problems like how to put food on the table or keep a roof over their heads) he just looks like a spoiled brat.
> 
> *Life is not fair and adulting is hard. He needs to ask daddy to buy him a pair of big boy pants and start figuring this out.*
> 
> Hope Meghan was worth it. Seems he is being faced with some consequences that are painful for him.



Thank you for the highlighted part. Made me snort. Needed a good laugh after a tough day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, have they picked a church to strut into on Christmas day so they can graciously wave to their underlings? Asking for a friend.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe they can stage their own opening of parliament and Trooping the Colours. On Meghan's birthday obviously.



I think Harry will expect to be named Permanent Grand Marshall of the Rose Parade. Meghan will be Permanent Rose Parade Queen.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m sure the Burger King offer still stands


----------



## Chanbal

Pitiful image! DM-pictures


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Pitiful image! DM-pictures
> 
> View attachment 4901122


they really need to go get a job or something


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Let's see what they have planned for Remembrance Day itself on the 11th.



Hmmm....how about a Zoom chat with all his old army buddies?  A Zoom with vets at a rehab who are still recovering wounds received under the action/fire that Harry was kept 90 miles away from.  
A visit to the local VFW?  Oh wait!!!!  I happen to know from a patient that if you show up at Dunkin' Donuts wearing your uniform you can get a free coffee!  I bet there will be a pap there to take a picture!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Pitiful image! DM-pictures
> 
> View attachment 4901122


OMG!  This is so pathetic.  Putting up his own little wreath.  Awwwwwwwwwwwww.   

Hey guys!! He changed his shoes!!  Is this that awful suit with the bright green lining?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> OMG!  This is so pathetic.  Putting up his own little wreath.  Awwwwwwwwwwwww.
> 
> Hey guys!! He changed his shoes!!  Is this that awful suit with the bright green lining?


IDK ....she doesn't have her green cape on


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> Pitiful image! DM-pictures
> 
> View attachment 4901122


OMG. This is so pathetic. I am shocked that they are this foolish. Nevertheless, he will get some sense at some point and leave her. Only a matter of time.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> IDK ....she doesn't have her green cape on


No green cape because it got damaged on Halloween when she took a wrong turn on the broom.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> No green cape because it got damaged on Halloween when she took a wrong turn on the broom.


lol


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> OMG. This is so pathetic. I am shocked that they are this foolish. Nevertheless, he will get some sense at some point and leave her. Only a matter of time.


only if she runs out of the potion she's using on him


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> so true
> 
> I didn't know why I'm laughing, it's such a sad, pathetic gesture and all for themselves, nothing to to do with honouring the dead.



I can't imagine how hurt and sad William must be watching his brother turn into such a sad joke.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> I can't imagine how hurt and sad William must be watching his brother turn into such a sad joke.


I think he is more mad than sad.


----------



## LittleStar88

bellecate said:


> I can't imagine how hurt and sad William must be watching his brother turn into such a sad joke.



Can I add mortified to the list?


----------



## Chanbal

Two lost souls...


*Legend of picture:*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex during a *private* visit to the Los Angeles National Cemetery on Remembrance Sunday

They brought the photographers with them so their private visit could be well publicized. DM-pictures


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Two lost souls...
> View attachment 4901150
> 
> *Legend of picture:*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex during a *private* visit to the Los Angeles National Cemetery on Remembrance Sunday
> 
> They brought the photographers with them so their private visit could be well publicized. DM-pictures


what is she wearing? a coat-dress?


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> what is she wearing? a coat-dress?


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!








They're insufferable.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Two lost souls...
> View attachment 4901150
> 
> *Legend of picture:*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex during a *private* visit to the Los Angeles National Cemetery on Remembrance Sunday
> 
> They brought the photographers with them so their private visit could be well publicized. DM-pictures


This takes the cake.


----------



## zinacef

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



He even packed his medals when they moved, oh dear,  the military regalia is at the cleaners right now.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> what is she wearing? a coat-dress?





LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 4901161


@sdkitty it looks like @LittleStar88 found the designer of the coat. Walmart?


----------



## bag-mania

Oh geez, where do I begin?  It’s horrible enough to see the royal fame hos walking among the graves of our military dead. That they brought their own photographers along adds to their creepiness. LA can be an odd place, but I guarantee paparazzi are not hiding behind tombstones. Is nothing sacred anymore?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

bag-mania said:


> Is nothing sacred anymore?



Not to these two.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Seriously????


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THEY ARE SO OUT OF TOUCH, this is not a day about them and they have detracted from a very special solemn British celebration. It gets worse and worse.


----------



## Genie27

Perhaps they mean “private” as uninvited and unwelcome. 


LittleStar88 said:


> Life is not fair and adulting is hard. He needs to ask daddy to buy him a pair of big boy pants and start figuring this out.


since they are such eco-warriors perhaps Prince George  has some hand-me-down trousers to pass along.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



If you wanted to "personally recognize", why have a photographer and release official pictures, you a$$holes??


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> If this truly meant so much to them to pay respect, they could have done it privately without a photographer and announcing it.
> 
> Isn’t this the stuff they ran off to the US to avoid doing???


Allegedly.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> But they picked the flowerssssssss


Maybe they're the ones the kindergarteners planted at their other photo op?


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Seriously????
> 
> View attachment 4901234


What does one need a clutch for at the cemetery?  Mace for a ghoul?  I'm confused.


----------



## LittleStar88

Genie27 said:


> Perhaps they mean “private” as uninvited and unwelcome.
> 
> since they are such eco-warriors perhaps Prince George  has some hand-me-down trousers to pass along.



Rubber undies for the man baby.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh look, Harry is practicing his own word salad skills by participating in podcasts. 

Earlier, during an interview on a British military-minded podcast called Declassified, Harry said it was important to honor the Remembrance ritual, to pay tribute to those who served and to those who died.

"Remembrance Day for me is a moment for respect and for hope," he said on the podcast. "Respect for those who came before us and hope for a safer world. … Even when we can’t be together, we remember together."



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they're the ones the kindergarteners planted at their other photo op?



Nope, those perished after the photo-op. Today's flowers were picked by MM (or their gardener) "from their garden at their new home in Montecito", according to an article posted here.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




Why are they like this y'all. This would be so much more respectful if they just posted something to social media with a photo of a wreath or something. They look so shameless and attention-hungry.


----------



## Lodpah

Pathetic! Using the dead to photo op. Check her leaning to check in the camera angle. From the comments they ain’t fooling no one.


----------



## Lodpah

zinacef said:


> He even packed his medals when they moved, oh dear,  the military regalia is at the cleaners right now.


This is in your face optics to grandstand and take away from his brother. The medals tho! That’s a bit much don’t you think?


----------



## byzina

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




This shows how unexpected the complete drop out from the RF was for them. They must have thought they would come to the royal events with the most media coverage to get some free publicity for their glamorous Hollywood projects then leave all this boring routine for LA parties with celebrities.

They have a healthy child, a huge mansion ordinary people can only dream of, a job where they only go and give lectures from time to time when they want and, yet, sympathy is what they want to get. That is funny how they wrote in the DM that they blame the RF again but the Queen was unaware of Harry's request. How did they learn that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

I was wondering. That medal in the middle, is that the one for eating all your vegetables?  I know it’s not the one for cleaning his room because I saw the army tv interview and he didn’t even make his bed.


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!



Not just the medals but making it a photo op and a press release...ugh


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 Your post made me almost throw up after a delicious Godiva chocolate cake.
> I have no words to comment, the pathetic pictures say everything.
> 
> For chocolate lovers, I recommend the Godiva chocolate cake from the Cheesecake Factory.


Love the their Cheesecakes! Thanks for the recommendation though the peanut butter one does steal me away.


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> I'm a little familiar with that particular cemetery as it isn't too far from where I grew up. It's not that big, freeway close by, and an easy drive to/from LAX.
> 
> I also just looked it up and there are only two British Commonwealth graves in the entire cemetery. They likely had to have their people do some looking around to find some graves to visit.  It's not like you can just go to any cemetery and expect to find the graves of UK or Commonwealth soldiers in the U.S.  Kind of wonder how those two made it into a U.S. National Cemetery but perhaps they were married to American citizens who were veterans as well?  I always thought national cemeteries were reserved for veterans of the U.S. military and their spouses.
> 
> Some other interesting little factoids about that cemetery that I just read. Wyatt Earp's father is buried there and so is Dean Martin's son, who was a USAF pilot and died when his jet crashed in 1987.  There are a fairly large number of Buffalo soldiers (African American soldiers who served in the Civil War) buried there.


Thank you for the info, my BF & I often do research at older cemeteries and thinking about the lives of the buried people gives them respect and keeps them "alive", imo. 

Seeing these 2 grifters tromp around for a PHOTO OP amongst those that have served is nauseating to me, especially him with his medals (looks like a former ruler of some tin-pot country from an old '60's movie--all he needed was a raggedy uniform). When I saw this I thought "oh no--he's wearing medals!" 

This was soooo her idea to keep her puppet happy for the day, especially with the "meanies" back home denying him his wreath-laying role.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Oh geez, where do I begin?  It’s horrible enough to see the royal fame hos walking among the graves of our military dead. That they brought their own photographers along adds to their creepiness. LA can be an odd place, but I guarantee paparazzi are not hiding behind tombstones. *Is nothing sacred anymore?*


Exactly.


----------



## marietouchet

This awful photo op was surely in response to the recent rebuke (of Harry) by the British Marine General - interesting, this seems to be the first definitive sign of life clearly from Harry, not Meghan

But the childishness of the pair letting it leak that H was not allowed to lay a wreath in London, then doing the plastic photo op


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Others are fearing for the worst as well: 

"The Pound Shop & Pretend Royals of Santa Barbara at it again. Entirely expected, but no less disgraceful for that. Grrr. Self-promoting and merchandising as always.  Pathetic. What next? A private jet flypast come time for Trooping the Colour?"


----------



## joyeaux

sdkitty said:


> what is she wearing? a coat-dress?



Just coming in to say that the coat dress got me too!! I know she probably has PTSD putting it on and flashing back to life as OMGTheMOST Trolled Person on the Planet. I just cannot understand how they thought this would come off as anything other than thirsty and deluded.

I mean, all the girl wanted to do the day she rode around in a carriage with a diamond tiara on was not live as a royal who rides around in carriages with a diamond tiara on. Her goal was to impart wisdom to all of us lucky enough to be alive in her lifetime on her global stage while empowering women to stop climate change when hitting the ground running with a focus on misogynistic soap commercials through The Royal Foundation— I mean Sussex Royal— I mean Travlyst— I mean Archewell.

Geez people.


----------



## Chanbal

The titles of the DM articles published today say it all: 

*The fashion and celebrity snapper behind Harry and Meghan's LA cemetery photoshoot: Couple used photographer who's worked with Vogue and Kayne West's brand Yeezy 'to turn Remembrance Sunday into 'publicity stunt'*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle enlisted a celebrity fashion photographer who was worked with Kanye West and Vogue, to capture their Remembrance Sunday photo shoot. Private visit 1

*Revisiting her royal style: Meghan Markle swapped her relaxed LA look for custom Brandon Maxwell coat dress and $715 suede pumps to mark Remembrance Day with Harry*
The Duchess looked somber in a black belted wool satin faille jacket dress by US designer Brandon Maxwell, a favorite of high profile women including Michelle *****, which is understood to be a custom creation. Private visit 2


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Others are fearing for the worst as well:
> 
> "The Pound Shop & Pretend Royals of Santa Barbara at it again. Entirely expected, but no less disgraceful for that. Grrr. Self-promoting and merchandising as always.  Pathetic. What next? A private jet flypast come time for Trooping the Colour?"



Maybe a flyover with Harry in his helicopter????

So, where is a comment from QE, Charles??? Did they know in advance H&M were doing this?  Rumor is photos were taken days ago. Someone over there must have known. This makes the BRF look weaker and weaker. Maybe that is what The Great Reset is all about?  If so, it’s a sad way to end it. A global laughingstock.  Let’s see what Wednesday brings.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe a flyover with Harry in his helicopter????
> 
> So, where is a comment from QE, Charles??? Did they know in advance H&M were doing this?  Rumor is photos were taken days ago. Someone over there must have known. This makes the BRF look weaker and weaker. Maybe that is what The Great Reset is all about?  If so, it’s a sad way to end it. A global laughingstock.  Let’s see what Wednesday brings.


The BRF has to remove their titles, otherwise they risk being the laughingstock as you well said. I feel sorry for QE and Will, their are pretty serious about their roles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How bad is it that I enjoy reading through the DM comments...they are meaner than we could ever be and the Sucksexes deserve it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of comments, one of them says (I have no way to verify, but it sounds plausible) to take pictures at the cemetery you need a permit (besides the fact that a celebrity photographer obviously doesn't hang around waiting to be spontaneously called to fill a gap in his schedule), so no, this was not the reaction of a poor Harry being hurt by the BRF's horribly cold actions but planned well in advance.

ETA: also, the custom dress. That's not completed in a day.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I also just looked it up and there are only two British Commonwealth graves in the entire cemetery. They likely had to have their people do some looking around to find some graves to visit.  It's not like you can just go to any cemetery and expect to find the graves of UK or Commonwealth soldiers in the U.S.  *Kind of wonder how those two made it into a U.S. National Cemetery but perhaps they were married to American citizens who were veterans as well?  I always thought national cemeteries were reserved for veterans of the U.S. military and their spouses.*



There are exceptions. If these two had served in the armed forces of an ally during wartime and then became US citizens they could qualify to be buried in a US National Cemetery.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I don’t know the numbers, but we do have graves for the British soldiers from the Revolutionary War. Some are in Arlington, some around Massachusetts, some at other battlefields. Should we expect H&M to tour those?  I am really not being snarky, just want to be prepared for what’s ahead.  This could have been handled so much better!

Although an old article, they could begin here: https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/11/09/u-s-british-war-dead-honored-at-site-where-revolution-began
_Every year on the Sunday closest to Nov. 11 - the date World War I ended in 1918 - the church built in 1723 has held a special remembrance service for Britons living in or near Boston, complete with bagpipes and poppies. This year's commemoration will fall precisely on the 100th anniversary of the bloody Great War's end._

I guess I feel that these actions are a slap in the face to our military, their families, and the rest of us Americans. We do honor our soldiers, respectfully and lovingly. How dare they try to insinuate otherwise. The audacity is outrageous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

I feel like the BRF *not* commenting on this hot mess cry for attention only makes these two look even more flailingly desperate and sad. 

H&M look classless and are an embarrassment to the BRF, even when kept at such a distance.


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




This is the most disgusting, tone deaf, attention grabbing thing they've done.  It's so bad I find it mind boggling.  I read somewhere that it was raining in LA at this time -- does anyone know?  Was it photographed in advance of the day?




sdkitty said:


> what is she wearing? a coat-dress?



Her clothing appeared almost immediately on Megan's Mirror, her merch'ing site.  Shocking, really.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I'm a little familiar with that particular cemetery as it isn't too far from where I grew up. It's not that big, freeway close by, and an easy drive to/from LAX.
> 
> I also just looked it up and there are only two British Commonwealth graves in the entire cemetery. They likely had to have their people do some looking around to find some graves to visit.  It's not like you can just go to any cemetery and expect to find the graves of UK or Commonwealth soldiers in the U.S.  Kind of wonder how those two made it into a U.S. National Cemetery but perhaps they were married to American citizens who were veterans as well?  I always thought national cemeteries were reserved for veterans of the U.S. military and their spouses.
> 
> Some other interesting little factoids about that cemetery that I just read. Wyatt Earp's father is buried there and so is Dean Martin's son, who was a USAF pilot and died when his jet crashed in 1987.  There are a fairly large number of Buffalo soldiers (African American soldiers who served in the Civil War) buried there.


I get it now ... 
I wondered why they went to a cemetery in LA .. they were looking for Commonwealth graves, and there are likely none in Montecito ...


----------



## bag-mania

The "friend" who called all the media outlets and gave them the photos was either Meghan herself or a rep who she was feeding the information bit by bit. She couldn't resist putting something tying it to herself into the story.

The Los Angeles cemetery has a special significance to the duke and duchess as it is opposite the U.S. Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, which Meghan's grandfather Alvin Ragland used after serving in the US Coast Guard.

A friend of the couple told _Newsweek_: "It was important to the duke and duchess to be able to personally recognize Remembrance in their own way, to pay tribute to those who have served and to those who gave their lives."










						Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry face a new royal rift after Remembrance Sunday
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex marked an important U.K. date with a private visit to a Los Angeles cemetery after a request made to the royal family was rejected.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> The "friend" who called all the media outlets and gave them the photos was either Meghan herself or a rep who she was feeding the information bit by bit. She couldn't resist putting something tying it to herself into the story.
> 
> The Los Angeles cemetery has a special significance to the duke and duchess as it is opposite the U.S. Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, which Meghan's grandfather Alvin Ragland used after serving in the US Coast Guard.
> 
> A friend of the couple told _Newsweek_: "It was important to the duke and duchess to be able to personally recognize Remembrance in their own way, to pay tribute to those who have served and to those who gave their lives."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry face a new royal rift after Remembrance Sunday
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex marked an important U.K. date with a private visit to a Los Angeles cemetery after a request made to the royal family was rejected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Ok, but they were recognizing only Commonwealth soldiers , not any other nationality 

It is an issue that is very current these days, do you recognize a limited segment (of those concerned) or all concerned, you can get into problems either way


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Ok, but they were recognizing only Commonwealth soldiers , not any other nationality
> 
> It is an issue that is very current these days, do you recognize a limited segment (of those concerned) or all concerned, you can get into problems either way



I hope they were not that obtuse. As I understood it they lay flowers on the graves of the two Commonwealth soldiers, but they placed the wreath at a memorial monument in the cemetery that would include all those buried there. In that way they were trying to cover all bases I believe.


----------



## CarryOn2020

When he is on foreign shores, the Host country’s military must be honored. Bad form otherwise.
Somehow, I expect a UK soldier, much less a royal,  to know that. He has offended disrespected his own country’s military, his host country’s military, all their families and everyone else. What jerks!


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Ok, but they were recognizing only Commonwealth soldiers , not any other nationality
> 
> It is an issue that is very current these days, do you recognize a limited segment (of those concerned) or all concerned, you can get into problems either way



I think the wreath they placed at the obelisk had a more generic statement referring to all those who have served, but they specifically searched out the 2 Commonwealth graves amongst the thousands buried there.  It's not really that large a cemetery and has been at capacity for years though they are working on an expansion.  Like @kemilia, DH and I read up on and occasionally visit graveyards when travelling.  They are an amazing source of local history, wherever you happen to be. Almost every one will have some interesting local character or historic figure resting there.


----------



## bag-mania

It's amazing how we see this one way while others see it completely differently. For a totally opposite perspective, check out what Lainey has to say about it. Those evil royals! She is unabashedly onboard the Harry and Meghan love train.

*Prince Harry’s Wreath*
Remembrance services are ongoing this week across the Commonwealth to honour those who sacrificed for freedom. This has always been a major priority on the British royal calendar and it’s tradition to see senior members of the royal family gather to commemorate. Of course it looked different this year because of the pandemic but the Queen, Prince Charles, Camilla, Prince William and Kate were all present and accounted for on Remembrance Sunday.

But it’s Prince Harry who’s dominating headlines…because it’s been reported by The Sunday Times that he asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf and was rejected by courtiers at Buckingham Palace because he’s “no longer representing the monarchy”. Never mind that a photographer representing The Sun (a tabloid) was allowed to present a wreath and that numerous charities have done the same, and they could have found a way for, for example, Invictus to lay a wreath and for Prince Harry to be part of that. But whatever, sure, on paper, let them have their official reasons, they’re the royals, they can up and down defend who gets to represent them and their protocols.

My issue is…

Why make it public?

For whatever reason, sources inside Buckingham Palace felt the need to make it public that 1. Harry asked and 2. Harry was turned down. What is the reason? Is there any possible reason other than to humiliate him? To tell people that Harry is an outcast – to REMIND people, on Remembrance Sunday, of all days, that his wreath wasn’t welcome. That isn’t just petty. It’s cruel.

This is who they are, this is the kind of cruelty that those who work within the palace wanted to wield, this was the priority for them, on REMEMBRANCE SUNDAY. Because otherwise… again… why send this tip to the media? Why encourage this reporting? Why publicise a story that effectively takes focus away from the royals who were present in England to honour the fallen? Why DISRESPECT the fallen in this way?

That’s the question we should be asking.

As for Harry, he and Meghan Markle visited a cemetery yesterday in Los Angeles and photos were released of them paying their respects to Australian and Canadian soldiers.

And now they’re being accused of creating a photo opportunity, like it’s unusual for royals to be photographed paying their respects to those who have served and are serving. And besides, if he hadn’t done something to commemorate Remembrance Week, they would have dragged him for that too. “Oh look, Harry’s so American, he’s given up on his values.” It’s a no-win for him, made worse by the fact that people who work for his own family are out here trying to publicly embarrass him at a time when the focus should be on those in uniform. Real classy.









						Prince Harry's request to lay a wreath for Remembrance Sunday was reportedly rejected by Buckingham Palace according to the Sunday Times
					

Buckingham Palace's refusal to lay a wreath on Prince Harry's behalf for Remembrance Sunday is petty and cruel and my issue is that the news was made public by the Palace to humiliate him




					www.laineygossip.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The "friend" who called all the media outlets and gave them the photos was either Meghan herself or a rep who she was feeding the information bit by bit. She couldn't resist putting something tying it to herself into the story.
> 
> The Los Angeles cemetery has a special significance to the duke and duchess as it is opposite the U.S. Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, which Meghan's grandfather Alvin Ragland used after serving in the US Coast Guard.
> 
> A friend of the couple told _Newsweek_: "It was important to the duke and duchess to be able to personally recognize Remembrance in their own way, to pay tribute to those who have served and to those who gave their lives."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry face a new royal rift after Remembrance Sunday
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex marked an important U.K. date with a private visit to a Los Angeles cemetery after a request made to the royal family was rejected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Their own way means publicizing every step.  Such BS.  How about donate some money to the VA? How about show respect and keep it private?  Jerks.

@marietouchet  me too. As the living, it is our responsibility to take care of our cemeteries. We must respect the deceased - from all countries.


----------



## LittleStar88

IMHO... No matter where they placed wreaths and flowers, the entire thing was negated by the need to orchestrate the whole thing for publicity/their own personal gain. Not a single genuine thing about it.

If it was truly near and dear to their hearts, they would have done it and no one would have heard about it. 

I feel like I am beating a dead horse on this topic, but it is 100% poor taste on their part and really the lowest they have sunk to get attention at this point. Before I just found them annoying, now I am completely disgusted.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It's amazing how we see this one way while others see it completely differently.
> 
> _And now they’re being accused of creating a photo opportunity, like it’s unusual for royals to be photographed paying their respects to those who have served and are serving. And besides, if he hadn’t done something to commemorate Remembrance Week, they would have dragged him for that too._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's request to lay a wreath for Remembrance Sunday was reportedly rejected by Buckingham Palace according to the Sunday Times
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace's refusal to lay a wreath on Prince Harry's behalf for Remembrance Sunday is petty and cruel and my issue is that the news was made public by the Palace to humiliate him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.laineygossip.com



Flawed reasoning from that site.
Fact - it was indeed a photo op, planned and timed to upstage the BRF.
Fact - she merched the clothes.
Fact - never have seen another royal release photos of visiting a cemetery over here, so no, they did not pay their respects.
Fact - if he had done nothing, none would have said anything. We must say something now because he has disrespected us with these obnoxious photos.
Fact - Hasn’t MM heard of Veterans Day? Let’s see what they do.

ETA: these ‘fan’ sites want the clicks which equal $$$, even if they do not believe the stuff they are spewing out. Times are tough for lots of people right now. People will say anything for clicks.


----------



## LittleStar88

*They. Are. No. Longer. Royals.*

They do not deserve a royal platform upon which to speak - or sit - or preach - or dictate. 

They wanted a private life and make their own way. Now they look like little kids trying to emulate.

My head is going to explode now...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

As a Canadian, I prefer that Harry shuts up and stays out of sight until the next century. And, my hubby, who is a US citizen and retired navy officer, says Harry is totally out of line. I hope Harry has nightmares of brave soldiers of all nationalities rising up from their well deserved slumber to admonish him for his foolishness.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Flawed reasoning from that site.
> Fact - it was indeed a photo op, planned and timed to upstage the BRF.
> Fact - she merched the clothes.
> Fact - never have seen another royal release photos of visiting a cemetery over here, so no, they did not pay their respects.
> Fact - if he had done nothing, none would have said anything. We must say something now because he has disrespected us with these obnoxious photos.
> Fact - Hasn’t MM heard of Veterans Day? Let’s see what they do.



Well, Lainey's perspective is tainted from her many years of being absorbed with celebrity gossip and celebrity sketchy behavior. For the celebrities she writes about, blatant self-promotion is the norm. Staging their very own "honor the fallen" ceremony was a wonderful thing that shows HOW. MUCH. THEY. CARE. in her eyes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is it true that Andrew asked to have a wreath laid in his name, and it was done?

I think Laney is right that they are damned if they do damned if they don’t, but they back themselves into this corner.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fact - Hasn’t MM heard of Veterans Day? Let’s see what they do.



I don't expect them to be visiting the vets at the VA hospital. That's too depressing and she cannot show off her clothes! Meghan didn't want to do that kind of work when she was in the UK.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Loose Women viewers fume after Harry 'wanted wreath at Cenotaph'
					

The Duke of Sussex, 36, who now lives in the US after stepping back from royal duties in March, is thought to have been 'deeply saddened' after palace aides refused to grant his request.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Actually, @LittleStar88 , they are royals. Many on here remind me regularly that he was born a prince, so he is royal for Life. She married a prince, so she is royal until divorce, if that happens.

@lanasyogamama  hadn’t that one about Andrew. The truth of this disaster will be revealed eventually.  No one would have questioned H&M’s absence or lack of actions if they had done nothing. Most are so over them.  Wearing a $6K outfit in this economy is beyond acceptable to most.

One more obvious question - where was Doria? This was an effort to honor her father. Why didn’t she participate?


----------



## bag-mania

I thought the "Harry" wreath that the courtiers refused to put out had been made this year, but it was from last year and was available to use again. Knowing that, it doesn't seem so offensive to Harry. He wasn't there, so his wreath wasn't used. I suppose they could have taken his name off of the back of it and assigned it to someone else to carry out, but then people would be squawking about that.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> This is the most disgusting, tone deaf, attention grabbing thing they've done.  It's so bad I find it mind boggling.  I read somewhere that it was raining in LA at this time -- does anyone know?  Was it photographed in advance of the day?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her clothing appeared almost immediately on Megan's Mirror, her merch'ing site.  Shocking, really.


someone posted on the fashion thread it was a bespoke coat dress.....Nothing compared to Kate's beautiful coat (I feel I can say this because it's pretty clear they were trying to compete with Will and Kate)


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like the BRF *not* commenting on this hot mess cry for attention only makes these two look even more flailingly desperate and sad.
> 
> H&M look classless and are an embarrassment to the BRF, even when kept at such a distance.


I agree that   BP is ignoring them and there is a good reason.  The Harkles played us. The Harkles and SS knew that Harry’s request regarding the wreath would be denied and set it up for him to look like he was being treated badly so his visiting the US Vet Cemetery would make him look like the bigger aNd better person.   SS had the story in People magazine all set up and ready to roll out the second the pictures were released.  Meghan’s Mirror was no different. I am wondering when they actually made the visit. It could have been weeks ago.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe a flyover with Harry in his helicopter????



I hear a soon to be ex-prez has one at a fire sale price.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

They are pathetic frauds. Using any of the following words also describes them.  Fraud definition


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Anyone else starting to think Nutmeg and JCMH are being willfully stupid, and tone deaf?


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> The "friend" who called all the media outlets and gave them the photos was either Meghan herself or a rep who she was feeding the information bit by bit. She couldn't resist putting something tying it to herself into the story.
> 
> The Los Angeles cemetery has a special significance to the duke and duchess as it is opposite the U.S. Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, which Meghan's grandfather Alvin Ragland used after serving in the US Coast Guard.
> 
> A friend of the couple told _Newsweek_: "It was important to the duke and duchess to be able to personally recognize Remembrance in their own way, to pay tribute to those who have served and to those who gave their lives."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry face a new royal rift after Remembrance Sunday
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex marked an important U.K. date with a private visit to a Los Angeles cemetery after a request made to the royal family was rejected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



God the REACH to make her relevant here is so ridiculous. The cemetery has special significance to her because it's ACROSS THE STREET from an office building that does health insurance her GRANDFATHER used??? WTF?

I can just see my next press coverage for visiting CVS... this CVS has special significance for lalame because it's kitty corner to a McDonalds that was there in the 90's and her father enjoyed a Big Mac from time to time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cavalier Girl said:


> Anyone else starting to think Nutmeg and JCMH are being willfully stupid, and tone deaf?



To what end?  I’m missing the upside for this stunt.
Surely, by now they realize how many people justifiably dislike them.

ETA:  So, where was Doria? This was to honor her father. Hmmmmm.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

CarryOn2020 said:


> To what end? I’m missing the upside for this stunt.



There was no upside, and I'm guessing their tone deafness and stupidity come from good old arrogance.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lalame said:


> I can just see my next press coverage for visiting CVS... this CVS has special significance for lalame because it's kitty corner to a McDonalds that was there in the 90's and her father enjoyed a Big Mac from time to time.


Posters on this thread are so wonderfully funny and entertaining. Bet if we all got together, we could write, direct and produce another "Laugh-in" kind of show. Thank you all.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t know who the photographer is, but I did look at Brandon Maxwell’s Instagram and the picture is gone.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Do the US media outlets still reporting this as positive know about this? Anybody who can't see how bad this is should have their head examined!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Loose Women viewers fume after Harry 'wanted wreath at Cenotaph'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, who now lives in the US after stepping back from royal duties in March, is thought to have been 'deeply saddened' after palace aides refused to grant his request.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, @LittleStar88 , they are royals. Many on here remind me regularly that he was born a prince, so he is royal for Life. She married a prince, so she is royal until divorce, if that happens.
> 
> @lanasyogamama  hadn’t that one about Andrew. The truth of this disaster will be revealed eventually.  No one would have questioned H&M’s absence or lack of actions if they had done nothing. Most are so over them.  Wearing a $6K outfit in this economy is beyond acceptable to most.
> 
> One more obvious question - where was Doria? This was an effort to honor her father. Why didn’t she participate?


Doria seems to have bowed out of this sh!t show her daughter and son-in-law are starring in.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How bad is it that I enjoy reading through the DM comments...they are meaner than we could ever be and the Sucksexes deserve it.


My favorite comment used the quote "Good deeds should be done with intention, not _for_ _attention_". That sums it up perfectly.


----------



## rose60610

Why should anyone be surprised M&H are using dead soldiers for their own recognition, attention and self promotion? They started with H's own dead mother for pity points and million dollar speeches. Now that Alex Trebeck just died, I wonder how they'll weave his death into a story about themselves.  I'll take 'ASK ME IF I'M OK' SELF-ABSORBED NARCISSISTS for $2000.


----------



## lalame

1LV said:


> Doria seems to have bowed out of this sh!t show her daughter and son-in-law are starring in.



Doria seems like a solid and grounded person. I'm sure at some point she asked them WTF they were thinking since it's so out of the pale for the US and I can only imagine they said something pompous like, "They expect us to do _something_! People look up to us!" There's no other explanation than self-importance that they'd remotely think this was called for.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of comments, one of them says (I have no way to verify, but it sounds plausible) to take pictures at the cemetery you need a permit (besides the fact that a celebrity photographer obviously doesn't hang around waiting to be spontaneously called to fill a gap in his schedule), so no, this was not the reaction of a poor Harry being hurt by the BRF's horribly cold actions but planned well in advance.
> 
> ETA: also, the custom dress. That's not completed in a day.


Maybe she has had that dress in the back of one of her many many closets in case of a funeral back in the UK. I've read that royals travel with funeral attire "just in case."  I definitely think that if a death occurs (QE, PP, etc.) they will travel back for the event. Even her, but not the kid--he's staying right where he is, HEAVENS someone could get a picture of him.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I think Harry will expect to be named Permanent Grand Marshall of the Rose Parade. Meghan will be Permanent Rose Parade Queen.


*NEVER!!!* .. not as long as I'm breathing!!!!  I used to live in Pasadena and worked on the Rose Bowl Parade floats when I lived there!  *I would make a STINK that would be heard around the world! *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> *NEVER!!!* .. not as long as I'm breathing!!!!  I used to live in Pasadena and worked on the Rose Bowl Parade floats when I lived there!  *I would make a STINK that would be heard around the world! *



We count on you, CeeJay!


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Doria seems to have bowed out of this sh!t show her daughter and son-in-law are starring in.


I don't think she is that close to her mother  .....she's been put out there because she keeps her mouth shut and there is no one else in her family she is on even remotely positive terms with.


----------



## CeeJay

VickyB said:


> OMG. This is so pathetic. I am shocked that they are this foolish. Nevertheless, he will get some sense at some point and leave her. Only a matter of time.


I'm not shocked by their foolish behavior at all; I truly think that the two of them thought that they would indeed be able to be "half-in / half-out" of the BRF .. but yet, be able to make $$$ off their titles.  Because Harry is so dim, I think that Meghan told him that he would be able to do that, because I think that is what she thought .. because, you know .. they were the "*power couple*"!  I also think that Meghan was the one to put their "*see-ya, buh-bye*" BRF on their now defunked SussexRoyal website .. that, well .. the Queen and company would just have to go along with their "*demands*"!  It really speaks to Meghan's narcissism; after all .. she's really the "Queen" and if you say anything bad, then you are racist!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Do the US media outlets still reporting this as positive know about this? Anybody who can't see how bad this is should have their head examined!




Sadly, I don’t think they care. The US media is all about selling a story. They are committed to the Harry and Meghan as victims narrative and they will not waver. Check out Newsweek’s headline from a few hours ago.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

OK, Harry take notes:

Summarized from another blog: The wreaths were laid on behalf of institutions and not on behalf of a specific royal and there were no personal wreaths.

*Prince Charles*:
The Monarch's Wreath (not Elizabeth Windsor's wreath)
Prince of Wales Wreath (not Prince Charles' wreath)

*Captain of the Intelligence Corps* (on behalf of Prince Phillip):
Consort Wreath (not Prince Phillip's nor Duke of Edinburgh's wreath)

The Monarch/Sovereign, Consort, and Prince of Wales, being specific roles of the Monarchy, represented the Nation.

*Prince William*:
Royal Air Force Wreath (not Duke of Cambridge's wreath)

*Prince Edward*:
Royal Wessex Yeomanry Wreath (not Earl of Wessex' wreath)

*Princess Anne*:
The Royal Navy Wreath (not Princess Royal's wreath)

*Prince Edward of Kent*:
The Field Marshall Wreath (not Duke of Kent's wreath)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Do you happen to know which wreath Harry was laying down last year? And also, why does nobody look stuff like this up before writing a whole article about how the BRF mistreated Harry once again?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do you happen to know which wreath Harry was laying down last year? And also, why does nobody look stuff like this up before writing a whole article about how the BRF mistreated Harry once again?



If you look up The Sun’s article about it there is a photo and information about the wreath in question. They said it cost about $1,300 to make.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t know who the photographer is, but I did look at Brandon Maxwell’s Instagram and the picture is gone.


Brandon Maxwell has a dress in his collection called the "Duchess Satin Scoop-Neck Ball Gown", I wonder if he was inspired by MM, the muse??


Duchess dress


----------



## rose60610

Harry bought a $14 million dollar mansion, leads and has always led an opulent lifestyle complete with servants and private jet travel, has a multi million dollar "cottage", got a $50 million wedding--all with money he had not earned himself. He independently decided, with wifey, to cut off ties with the family that has given him all this. In turn, having no talent, he inks a deal with Netflix he would not have gotten without the royal background he discarded. Someone please explain how The Monarchy has been "cruel" to Harry. I'm waiting for a Dickensian comparison how Harry is so terribly treated that he can relate to the young impoverished orphans thrown out onto the street in old London.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

jennlt said:


> My favorite comment used the quote "Good deeds should be done with intention, not _for_ _attention_". That sums it up perfectly.



I liked this one (from a British poster who did some research) which makes it clear this was fully staged by a Vogue photographer who has also done work for Yeezy . Note the information about the weather...seems photos were not taken on the actual day. 

"The cemetery is near the Hollywood studios & H&M would have had to get extra permission from the cemetery, since it's closed S&S, but - was it that day? Some who live in the area said it was cloudy/raining on and off yesterday yet the skies are clear blue in the pics! However, the photographer is a highly paid portrait photographer who was hired & paid (confirmed via his website & other legit sources) who went with them & took the photos, it wasn't paparazzi. The article says they brought flowers from their garden, that wreath certainly was not from their garden, so they had to pre-order that somewhere & they had to do a search of where on the property 2 Commonwealth soldiers were buried, so this was planned ahead of time. Probably the minute after he asked to have someone place a wreath at the Cenotaph & got a 'no', his wife thought "oh what a great PR op, let's go do our own" & they planned this priceless PR stunt. The cemetery is about 45 min to an hour from Montecito."

Another fave was the person who pointed out they vilified her father for hiring a photographer to take pictures during the pre wedding dust up, yet have done exactly the same thing " except her father did not dishonor the dead".


----------



## CarryOn2020

He had it planned all along.









						How Prince Harry Will Acknowledge Remembrance Sunday in Los Angeles
					

Though he won't join the rest of the royal family at the Cenotaph, he will wear the poppy.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_Despite being in Los Angeles the prince was said to be determined to do something public to mark Remembrance Sunday._

2019 Video : https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/1...-washing-jacket-meghan-markle-makeup-smudged/


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> I liked this one (from a British poster who did some research) which makes it clear this was fully staged by a Vogue photographer who has also done work for Yeezy . Note the information about the weather...seems photos were not taken on the actual day.
> 
> "The cemetery is near the Hollywood studios & H&M would have had to get extra permission from the cemetery, since it's closed S&S, but - was it that day? Some who live in the area said it was cloudy/raining on and off yesterday yet the skies are clear blue in the pics! However, the photographer is a highly paid portrait photographer who was hired & paid (confirmed via his website & other legit sources) who went with them & took the photos, it wasn't paparazzi. The article says they brought flowers from their garden, that wreath certainly was not from their garden, so they had to pre-order that somewhere & they had to do a search of where on the property 2 Commonwealth soldiers were buried, so this was planned ahead of time. Probably the minute after he asked to have someone place a wreath at the Cenotaph & got a 'no', his wife thought "oh what a great PR op, let's go do our own" & they planned this priceless PR stunt. The cemetery is about 45 min to an hour from Montecito."
> 
> Another fave was the person who pointed out they vilified her father for hiring a photographer to take pictures during the pre wedding dust up, yet have done exactly the same thing " except her father did not dishonor the dead".



Very good points and I'd even add ... who wears heels like that to a grass lawn cemetery? Literally with every step she must be fully aware how unnatural this whole show is.


----------



## marietouchet

Maybe this is part of the issue ... MESSAGING .... The subject is somber, and full of  deep significance ... should be treated with respect.   

I went the original news sources for the photo op.  First, came up the CNN version - short and to the point, avoided the JCMH saga, did discuss the selection of the two tombs, and the obelisk, minimal links to all the gossip 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/11/09/uk/harry-meghan-remembrance-sunday-scli-intl-gbr/index.html 

The next version down is from PEOPLE, it has the same basic stuff but tosses in or links to the pout about not being able to lay wreath in  London, and what was happening at the UK ceremony

https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-meghan-markle-visit-la-cemetery-remembrance-day/ 

People is generally held to be sympathetic to the pair, but the PEOPLE version loses the message under the links to the gossipy stuff, IMHO


----------



## CarryOn2020

...and no one is asking where Doria was. This is her father, so why leave her out? 
Looking forward to seeing all of them front and center at the Veterans Day events. 
Otherwise they will look even worse than they do now.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t know the numbers, but we do have graves for the British soldiers from the Revolutionary War. Some are in Arlington, some around Massachusetts, some at other battlefields. Should we expect H&M to tour those?  I am really not being snarky, just want to be prepared for what’s ahead.  This could have been handled so much better!
> 
> Although an old article, they could begin here: https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/11/09/u-s-british-war-dead-honored-at-site-where-revolution-began
> _Every year on the Sunday closest to Nov. 11 - the date World War I ended in 1918 - the church built in 1723 has held a special remembrance service for Britons living in or near Boston, complete with bagpipes and poppies. This year's commemoration will fall precisely on the 100th anniversary of the bloody Great War's end._
> 
> I guess I feel that these actions are a slap in the face to our military, their families, and the rest of us Americans. We do honor our soldiers, respectfully and lovingly. How dare they try to insinuate otherwise. The audacity is outrageous.


Believe it or not, there are a lot of events in/around Boston (especially in Concord and Lexington) and because there are so many British ex-pats living in Boston, they are always there and they do dress up in their Redcoat uniforms.  It's actually rather fun to be honest, and some of them are extremely knowledgeable not only about the war but also what the Brits would do versus the Americans.   One Brit was a surgeon at one of the Boston Hospitals, and he had all these old (Revolutionary Wartime) implements that the Doctor on the battlefield would have used.  Mind you, rather gruesome, but interesting.  The HB and I kinda made a mistake though, as we drove up in my bright Red Range Rover, so they initially greeted us as Brits .. until we spoke - HA!!!


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Harry bought a $14 million dollar mansion, leads and has always led an opulent lifestyle complete with servants and private jet travel, has a multi million dollar "cottage", got a $50 million wedding--all with money he had not earned himself. He independently decided, with wifey, to cut off ties with the family that has given him all this. In turn, having no talent, he inks a deal with Netflix he would not have gotten without the royal background he discarded. Someone please explain how The Monarchy has been "cruel" to Harry. I'm waiting for a Dickensian comparison how Harry is so terribly treated that he can relate to the young impoverished orphans thrown out onto the street in old London.


After reading your post, the first thought that came to mind was: 'something is very wrong with our society'.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ...and no one is asking where Doria was. This is her father, so why leave her out?
> Looking forward to seeing all of them front and center at the Veterans Day events.
> Otherwise they will look even worse than they do now.



Doria was either home watching Archie or, perhaps more likely, off doing her own thing completely oblivious to the whole affair. I don't think they inform Doria of their plans unless it involves her directly.


----------



## bag-mania

We have come to expect them to place a "woe is me" article in _People_ whenever they feel butthurt. And they did not disappoint this time. I fully anticipate this incident to be coined Wreathgate at any moment. 

*Prince Harry 'Saddened and Disappointed' That His Request for a Remembrance Day Wreath Was Denied*
Prince Harry was "saddened and disappointed" that his request for a wreath of poppies to be laid on his behalf at the national memorial in London on Remembrance Sunday was turned down.

And, if the decision had been given the go-ahead, there was a wreath ready and waiting for him as the official organizers of the event, which honors those who have been killed and wounded in war, had created a display and set it aside for Harry, the Duke of Sussex, it has emerged.

But it was decided by courtiers and palace officials that he couldn’t have his wreath added to those from other members of the royal family because he and Meghan Markle are no longer working members of the institution. The couple, who went ahead with their own memorial ceremony at a Los Angeles cemetery on Sunday, stepped back from being frontline royals in March.

PEOPLE confirmed Sunday that Harry, who served in the Army for 10 years, rising to the rank of Captain and undertaking two tours of duty in Afghanistan, had asked for the wreath to be put there on his behalf as he was not able to be in the U.K. He “understands that he doesn’t have the same formal role in the family as he used to,” a source close to him adds. “But he was saddened and disappointed by the decision.”

As the story continued to unfold in the U.K. on Monday, _The Sun_ published a picture of the wreath, which laid unused in a factory in Kent during yesterday’s official ceremony headed by Harry’s grandmother, Queen Elizabeth.

Prince William and Prince Charles were among the royals leaving their tributes to the fallen at the Cenotaph.

The Queen, 94, who watched the ceremony from a balcony along with Kate Middleton and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, was not consulted about the decision about her grandson’s wreath.
Harry and Meghan, 39, went ahead with their own ceremony more than 5,000 miles away in Los Angeles early on Sunday. There, in a private ceremony, at the National Cemetery, the couple placed flowers picked from their garden in Santa Barbara, California, at the gravesites of two soldiers who fought for Commonwealth armed forces — one who had served in the Royal Australian Air Force and one from the Royal Canadian Artillery.

They also placed a wreath at an obelisk in the cemetery that features a plaque that's inscribed, "In Memory of the Men Who Offered Their Lives in Defense of Their Country."

Over the weekend, Harry told the _Declassified_ podcast about how he continues the British tradition of wearing a poppy in tribute to veterans and for “the soldiers I knew, as well as those I didn't. The soldiers who were by my side in Afghanistan, those who had their lives changed forever, and those that didn't come home.”

It was previously announced that Harry will retain the ranks of Major, Lieutenant Commander and Squadron Leader during a 12-month trial period following the couple's exit from their roles as senior members of the royal family. However, his honorary military positions will not be used.

“The military was a part of his upbringing and his life. He brought a lot to those guys and understood things. It is sad,” a palace insider previously told PEOPLE.









						Prince Harry 'Saddened and Disappointed' That His Request for a Remembrance Day Wreath Was Denied
					

Prince Harry is saddened that his Remembrance Day wreath request was denied and now lies unused in Royal British Legion headquarters after refusal to lay it at memorial




					people.com


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> Doria seems like a solid and grounded person. I'm sure at some point she asked them WTF they were thinking since it's so out of the pale for the US and I can only imagine they said something pompous like, "They expect us to do _something_! People look up to us!" There's no other explanation than self-importance that they'd remotely think this was called for.


I doubt Doria would even ask that; I think the only reason why she hasn't been markled is because she just keeps to herself and keeps her mouth shut!


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> ...and no one is asking where Doria was. *This is her father, so why leave her out?*
> Looking forward to seeing all of them front and center at the Veterans Day events.
> Otherwise they will look even worse than they do now.



Because Doria would steal Meghan's spotlight. Meghan can't share the attention.

Also, Doria is probably too smart to get involved in this circus.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Doria seems like a solid and grounded person. I'm sure at some point she asked them WTF they were thinking since it's so out of the pale for the US and I can only imagine they said something pompous like, "They expect us to do _something_! People look up to us!" There's no other explanation than self-importance that they'd remotely think this was called for.


well, we don't really know if Doria is solid and grounded.  If so, how did she end up with this as a daughter?  She does seem to mind her own business and not seek the spotlight


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> Why are they like this y'all. This would be so much more respectful if they just posted something to social media with a photo of a wreath or something. They look so shameless and attention-hungry.


You answered your own question.  Because they ARE shameless and attention hungry.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, Harry take notes:
> 
> Summarized from another blog: The wreaths were laid on behalf of institutions and not on behalf of a specific royal and there were no personal wreaths.
> 
> *Prince Charles*:
> The Monarch's Wreath (not Elizabeth Windsor's wreath)
> Prince of Wales Wreath (not Prince Charles' wreath)
> 
> *Captain of the Intelligence Corps* (on behalf of Prince Phillip):
> Consort Wreath (not Prince Phillip's nor Duke of Edinburgh's wreath)
> 
> The Monarch/Sovereign, Consort, and Prince of Wales, being specific roles of the Monarchy, represented the Nation.
> 
> *Prince William*:
> Royal Air Force Wreath (not Duke of Cambridge's wreath)
> 
> *Prince Edward*:
> Royal Wessex Yeomanry Wreath (not Earl of Wessex' wreath)
> 
> *Princess Anne*:
> The Royal Navy Wreath (not Princess Royal's wreath)
> 
> *Prince Edward of Kent*:
> The Field Marshall Wreath (not Duke of Kent's wreath)



that’s really interesting, thank you. 



Chanbal said:


> Brandon Maxwell has a dress in his collection called the "Duchess Satin Scoop-Neck Ball Gown", I wonder if he was inspired by MM, the muse??
> View attachment 4901588
> 
> Duchess dress



heavily discounted I see.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> well, we don't really know if Doria is solid and grounded.  If so, how did she end up with this as a daughter?  She does seem to mind her own business and not seek the spotlight



I figure she's grounded since she stayed in that same apt complex for years even after M made it big. Also she's basically the only one who hasn't spoken out in the press yet about them. She seems like she just wants to have as normal a life as possible out of the spotlight. Great people can raise terribly spoiled and entitled kids... happens all the time. Fame and money are also very corrupting so hard to say when M became "like this."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> that’s really interesting, thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> heavily discounted I see.



The dress is as popular as it's namesake lol


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> The "friend" who called all the media outlets and gave them the photos was either Meghan herself or a rep who she was feeding the information bit by bit. She couldn't resist putting something tying it to herself into the story.
> 
> The Los Angeles cemetery has a special significance to the duke and duchess as it is opposite the U.S. Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, which Meghan's grandfather Alvin Ragland used after serving in the US Coast Guard.
> 
> A friend of the couple told _Newsweek_: "It was important to the duke and duchess to be able to personally recognize Remembrance in their own way, to pay tribute to those who have served and to those who gave their lives."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry face a new royal rift after Remembrance Sunday
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex marked an important U.K. date with a private visit to a Los Angeles cemetery after a request made to the royal family was rejected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


WTF cares what hospital her grandfather was treated at?!!?  The cemetery thus holds a special place?  Give me a F'ing break!  Even for MM, that's a stretch.  She's such a stupid cow.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Believe it or not, there are a lot of events in/around Boston (especially in Concord and Lexington) and because there are so many British ex-pats living in Boston, they are always there and they do dress up in their Redcoat uniforms.  It's actually rather fun to be honest, and some of them are extremely knowledgeable not only about the war but also what the Brits would do versus the Americans.   One Brit was a surgeon at one of the Boston Hospitals, and he had all these old (Revolutionary Wartime) implements that the Doctor on the battlefield would have used.  Mind you, rather gruesome, but interesting.  The HB and I kinda made a mistake though, as we drove up in my bright Red Range Rover, so they initially greeted us as Brits .. until we spoke - HA!!!



Thank you @CeeJay   Those are fun, respectful and informative events. I loved them, too. All of this angst could have been avoided. Instead *they chose *to make it as awful and disrespectful as possible. Vengeance is not a good look. With Andrew’s mess and H&M, QE and Charles need to take action before all goodwill is gone.

@gracekelly is correct — we’ve all be played.  Well, we know what they say about payback, kinda like Karma. Without Doria to confirm her father’s experience, I’m calling bs on the Coast Guard story. Looking at the map, the cemetery and Coast Guard do not seem to be close together. So many questions need to be answered.

H&M are not trustworthy. @bag-mania  this story is all about Doria’s father, so, yes, she ought to be involved. IMO, we see how low H&M will stoop. I’m just not sure D‘s absence and silence indicates disapproval, kinda like QE and Charles. An official statement from these parents would set a better tone, even tho the _kids_ are 40 year olds.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Sadly, I don’t think they care. The US media is all about selling a story. They are committed to the Harry and Meghan as victims narrative and they will not waver. Check out Newsweek’s headline from a few hours ago.
> 
> View attachment 4901577


This is precisely what they were aiming out.  Looks like Jack fell for it.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> I liked this one (from a British poster who did some research) which makes it clear this was fully staged by a Vogue photographer who has also done work for Yeezy . Note the information about the weather...seems photos were not taken on the actual day.
> 
> "The cemetery is near the Hollywood studios & H&M would have had to get extra permission from the cemetery, since it's closed S&S, but - was it that day? Some who live in the area said it was cloudy/raining on and off yesterday yet the skies are clear blue in the pics! However, the photographer is a highly paid portrait photographer who was hired & paid (confirmed via his website & other legit sources) who went with them & took the photos, it wasn't paparazzi. The article says they brought flowers from their garden, that wreath certainly was not from their garden, so they had to pre-order that somewhere & they had to do a search of where on the property 2 Commonwealth soldiers were buried, so this was planned ahead of time. Probably the minute after he asked to have someone place a wreath at the Cenotaph & got a 'no', his wife thought "oh what a great PR op, let's go do our own" & they planned this priceless PR stunt. The cemetery is about 45 min to an hour from Montecito."
> 
> Another fave was the person who pointed out they vilified her father for hiring a photographer to take pictures during the pre wedding dust up, yet have done exactly the same thing " except her father did not dishonor the dead".



Where is this info coming from?  The Los Angeles National  Cemetery is in Westwood.  If is off the 405 freeway and you can see it quite clearly and the headstones as well.  The weather on Sunday was extremely windy.  There was no rain.  We had a tiny bit of rain  early Sat morning.   This area is not near Hollywood and I don't know which studio they are referring to.  I think the picture were done last week.  It was sunny and warm.    The drive is 1 hour and 20 min from Montecito to the Los Angeles National Cemetery (VA Cemetery) and it is 99-100 miles.


----------



## Lodpah

Since MM does not like to be usurped, I think her inauguration ball gown will be like this.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Since MM does not like to be usurped, I think her inauguration ball gown will be like this.
> 
> View attachment 4901678


what inaugural ball gown?  are you assuming they will be invited?  were they donors?


----------



## Lodpah

I just might dress up as Ole Hickory and protest her and Dimwit’s attendance. Lol


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> what inaugural ball gown?  are you assuming they will be invited?  were they donors?


Oh I’m sure they will be invited. After all she did that video.


----------



## Lodpah

Since I doubt the BRF will ship over a carriage she can bling out a carriage from the Amish people.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Oh I’m sure they will be invited. After all she did that video.


the video where she told the everyone to vote?
IDK....you don't have to be that important to attend one of these things....a friend of mine went to one because her husbands boss was a donor I guess....maybe one can buy tickets


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> the video where she told the everyone to vote?
> IDK....you don't have to be that important to attend one of these things....a friend of mine went to one because her husbands boss was a donor I guess....maybe one can buy tickets


I believe they will be invited. I mean it’s the biggest event ever every 4 years. The sad thing when “When Hail to the Chief” plays Harry will think it’s for him so they will stand and wait for the applause. Yes I think they are that arrogant.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I believe they will be invited. I mean it’s the biggest event ever every 4 years. The sad thing when “When Hail to the Chief” plays Harry will think it’s for him so they will stand and wait for the applause. Yes I think they are that arrogant.


there is no doubt she will want to attend
oops....it's the pandemic....probably won't be a big party


----------



## CarryOn2020

In ‘normal‘ times, there are lots of balls - about as many as there are hotels. The First Family usually stays about 10-15 minutes.  In covid times, they may cancel all the balls.








						United States presidential inaugural balls - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Aimee3

I have a question for the Brits (or anyone else who would know) because this thread is full of people who know!  Before the “rift”, if Harry wanted to talk to his grandmother, would he just call her on a private number, or did he have to go thru various ladies in waiting etc?  I’m assuming now it’s a completely difference scenario.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In ‘normal‘ times, there are lots of balls - about as many as there are hotels. The First Family usually stays about 10-15 minutes.  In covid times, they may cancel all the balls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United States presidential inaugural balls - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Why would MM&H be invited to the inaugural balls? It would be rather shocking if they get an invitation.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Why would MM&H be invited to the inaugural balls? It would be rather shocking if they get an invitation.


Because they owe her!

ETA   And if you don’t believe it just ask her.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> IMHO... No matter where they placed wreaths and flowers, the entire thing was negated by the need to orchestrate the whole thing for publicity/their own personal gain. Not a single genuine thing about it.
> 
> If it was truly near and dear to their hearts, they would have done it and no one would have heard about it.
> 
> I feel like I am beating a dead horse on this topic, but it is 100% poor taste on their part and really the lowest they have sunk to get attention at this point. Before I just found them annoying, now I am completely disgusted.



I think we've all agreed with you


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Because they owe her!
> ETA   And if you don’t believe it just ask her.



Depending on the ‘final result’, Harry was very friendly with Jill and Michele, mostly due to the military connection. Just Google when he visited the US during their time in office.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ...and no one is asking where Doria was. This is her father, so why leave her out?
> Looking forward to seeing all of them front and center at the Veterans Day events.
> Otherwise they will look even worse than they do now.





sdkitty said:


> well, we don't really know if Doria is solid and grounded.  If so, how did she end up with this as a daughter?  She does seem to mind her own business and not seek the spotlight


Doria is at home waiting for further instructions from MM. I think Doria knows how to play her game well. She became the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer for the Beverly Hills 'Loving Kindness' senior care company, not bad!


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Depending on the ‘final result’, Harry was very friendly with Jill and Michele, mostly due to the military connection. Just Google when he visited the US during their time in office.


Right, but when has she not taken credit for anything?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Loose Women viewers fume after Harry 'wanted wreath at Cenotaph'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, who now lives in the US after stepping back from royal duties in March, is thought to have been 'deeply saddened' after palace aides refused to grant his request.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, @LittleStar88 , they are royals. Many on here remind me regularly that he was born a prince, so he is royal for Life. She married a prince, so she is royal until divorce, if that happens.
> 
> @lanasyogamama  hadn’t that one about Andrew. The truth of this disaster will be revealed eventually.  No one would have questioned H&M’s absence or lack of actions if they had done nothing. Most are so over them.  Wearing a $6K outfit in this economy is beyond acceptable to most.
> 
> One more obvious question - where was Doria? This was an effort to honor her father. Why didn’t she participate?



I don't want to talk on behalf of @LittleStar88 but I think she meant they are not Senior Royals and that is very different. They were supposed to give up their royal duties when they stepped down. Their duties came with privileges and adoration. They hated the first but they miss the latter two. As my mother would have said whilst waving with the back of her hand and walking out the door with a shimmy and sigh "my heart breaks, see yer"


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> I have a question for the Brits (or anyone else who would know) because this thread is full of people who know!  Before the “rift”, if Harry wanted to talk to his grandmother, would he just call her on a private number, or did he have to go thru various ladies in waiting etc?  I’m assuming now it’s a completely difference scenario.


If QEII actually personally answers her mobile - the one she is rumored to own - then yes he could call direct, otherwise, he would have to go through the staff


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I don't want to talk on behalf of @LittleStar88 but I think she meant they are not Senior Royals and that is very different. They were supposed to give up their royal duties when they stepped down. Their duties came with privileges and adoration. They hated the first but they miss the latter two. As my mother would have said whilst waving with the back of her hand and walking out the door with a shimmy and sigh "my heart breaks, see yer"



Thank you for the clear explanation. I wasn’t aware of the distinction. Most of us probably think a royal is a royal. We see that still they are enjoying numerous privileges due to his birth. The latest photos showed that. He will always have those medals, correct? Now we know he is willing to wear them to flaunt his rank? Who knows what goes thru their minds. Not at all sure how QE and Charles can stop this nonsense.

ETA: completely agree with @LittleStar88 — my head is about to explode.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the clear explanation. I wasn’t aware of the distinction. Most of us probably think a royal is a royal. We see that still they are enjoying numerous privileges due to his birth. The latest photos showed that. He will always have those medals, correct? Now we know he is willing to wear them to flaunt his rank? Who knows what goes thru their minds. Not at all sure how QE and Charles can stop this nonsense.
> 
> ETA: completely agree with @LittleStar88 — my head is about to explode.



They can't strip him of his birth right (a Prince). Everything else is upped for grabs, including his medals if he dishonours his regiment.

I think Harry missed some of history lessons:

Harry please note:

No one is above the law of the land or allowed to pose a threat to constitutional stability of the nation for very long.

Elizabeth I killed her own cousin, another Queen (Mary Stewart).

'We' beheaded Charles I for treason when he got above himself (not easy for someone with Divine right).

Edward (PoW and as Edward VIII) was spied on by the secret services as a possible/potencial traitor, and he was King, not some 6th in-line little up-start. He was forced to abdicate to save face.


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> I believe they will be invited. I mean it’s the biggest event ever every 4 years. The sad thing when “When Hail to the Chief” plays Harry will think it’s for him so they will stand and wait for the applause. Yes I think they are that arrogant.



M is waiting to be called to be Secretary of State, and H to be Ambassador to Great Britain. Just think of all the dead people they can mingle with to promote themselves even further. Stockpile some more black dresses, Meghan, and keep the medals polished, Harry. Maybe they can pimp the Netflix deal to triple the initial offer.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, Harry take notes:
> 
> Summarized from another blog: The wreaths were laid on behalf of institutions and not on behalf of a specific royal and there were no personal wreaths.
> 
> *Prince Charles*:
> The Monarch's Wreath (not Elizabeth Windsor's wreath)
> Prince of Wales Wreath (not Prince Charles' wreath)
> 
> *Captain of the Intelligence Corps* (on behalf of Prince Phillip):
> Consort Wreath (not Prince Phillip's nor Duke of Edinburgh's wreath)
> 
> The Monarch/Sovereign, Consort, and Prince of Wales, being specific roles of the Monarchy, represented the Nation.
> 
> *Prince William*:
> Royal Air Force Wreath (not Duke of Cambridge's wreath)
> 
> *Prince Edward*:
> Royal Wessex Yeomanry Wreath (not Earl of Wessex' wreath)
> 
> *Princess Anne*:
> The Royal Navy Wreath (not Princess Royal's wreath)
> 
> *Prince Edward of Kent*:
> The Field Marshall Wreath (not Duke of Kent's wreath)


They should make The Cry Baby Wreath and Harry can go two weeks ahead of time, quarantine at one of the many homes available to him, and lay it down himself.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> In ‘normal‘ times, there are lots of balls - about as many as there are hotels. The First Family usually stays about 10-15 minutes.  In covid times, they may cancel all the balls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United States presidential inaugural balls - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



I don’t think H&M would be invited anyway, but you’re right, Covid-19 means a somewhat subdued inauguration celebration. Virtual parties aren’t the same.

We heard great news today about the vaccine but even in the best scenario it won’t be ready for the general public until spring.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Please, correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought there were very specific instances and rules when one could wear their medals. I’ve seen soldiers and veterans wear medals at the Cenotaph or War Memorial during November 11th ceremonies. Do the rules vary from country to country?


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> If QEII actually personally answers her mobile - the one she is rumored to own - then yes he could call direct, otherwise, he would have to go through the staff


Thank you Marie Touchet!  Your knowledge of the royals never ceases to amaze me!  Much appreciated for all of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> If QEII actually personally answers her mobile - the one she is rumored to own - then yes he could call direct, otherwise, he would have to go through the staff


I hope HM has now changed her number because Harry doesn't deserve quick access just to yell or cry like baby.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Oh I’m sure they will be invited. After all she did that video.


I'm sure she'll now try to cling onto ****** H, being that they're both half black and all.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure she'll now try to cling onto ****** H, being that they're both half black and all.


Actually, MM is a Caucasian of Convenience.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I hope HM has now changed her number because Harry doesn't deserve quick access just to yell or cry like baby.


She is probably like the rest of us, let’s the battery run down and forgets to charge it , not enough outlets in most palaces
And personally, I assume she reads her smartphone during meals, lol


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure she'll now try to cling onto ****** H, being that they're both half black and all.


she can try but I'm sure ****** will be very busy


----------



## bag-mania

Well what do you know? An American publication that is actually examining the cemetery photo op critically, looking at both sides. You could knock me over with a feather! Kudos to _Mercury News_!

*Harry and Meghan’s cemetery photo op shows depths of royal rift*
What’s the point of privately honoring soldiers who died while fighting for their countries if you don’t bring a celebrity photographer to document it?

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle apparently didn’t see the point, which is why they had a favorite fashion photographer, who has worked with Kanye West and Vogue, document what was otherwise billed as a personal visit Sunday. The couple, mirroring the actions of the Royal family in Britain, laid flowers and wreaths at the Los Angeles National Cemetery in honor of Remembrance Day, the U.K.’s version of Veteran’s Day, the Daily Mail reported.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex then had their P.R. people release photos to the media, showing Meghan in an elegant black frock, and Harry wearing his military ribbons and a traditional red poppy, looking somber as they laid flowers at the gravesites of two commonwealth soldiers, one who had served in the Royal Australian Air Force and one from the Royal Canadian Artillery, the Daily Mail and other outlets reported.

The flowers came from the garden of the couple’s new estate in Montecito, People reported. Harry and Megan also placed a wreath at an obelisk in the cemetery that features a plaque that’s inscribed, “In Memory of the Men Who Offered Their Lives in Defense of Their Country.”

The couple’s decision to turn an occasion to honor the war dead into a photo-op sparked the usual round of outrage in the U.K., with Piers Morgan, one of their most outspoken critics, calling the photos “a distasteful P.R. stunt,” the Daily Beast reported. The accompanying backlash also appeared to reflect the depths of the couple’s feud with Harry’s family, commentators said.

Daily Beast writer Tom Sykes pointed out that Buckingham Palace courtiers probably started this latest row by denying Harry’s “personal request” to lay a wreath in his name at the Remembrance Day ceremony his family attended at London’s Cenotaph Memorial the same day. Courtiers denied the request on the grounds that he no longer represents the monarchy since he and Meghan officially stepped down from the royal duties in March, the Sunday Times reported.

Harry was said to be “deeply saddened” by the courtiers’ decision, the Daily Beast reported. People close to the duke also denied accusations that his cemetery visit was merely a publicity stunt, saying it was an honest attempt to show respect for the war dead, The Sun reported.

While Queen Elizabeth reportedly was out of the loop on the courtiers’ decision, Sykes wrote that it was widely interpreted as clear confirmation that Harry’s grandmother and his father, Prince Charles, feel he should have absolutely no ceremonial role within the family.

Harry and Meghan also couldn’t be in London Sunday because of COVID-19 and because of their stormy break with the royal family. Harry and Meghan were present at last year’s ceremony; Harry joined his father, his brother, Prince William, and his since-disgraced uncle, Prince Andrew, in laying wreaths of poppies at the Cenotaph.

This year, it was just Charles and William laying the wreaths at the memorial, People reported.

Sykes wrote it was disappointing that Buckingham Palace couldn’t find a way to accommodate Harry’s wish to be seen to publicly pay his respects at the Cenotaph. After all, Harry spent 10 years in the army, set up the successful Invictus Games for disabled veterans and has otherwise raised money and awareness for the plight of wounded veterans, Sykes said.

“Given all that, it’s not completely unreasonable for him to think that he may still have a valuable role to play advocating for veterans,” Sykes wrote.

Someone close to Harry cited a podcast interview over the weekend, during which he talked about wanting to recognize Remembrance Day, “not only for all those people historically, but also for the people he knew that he lost,” The Sun reported.

“I don’t think that’s someone who does something like Remembrance Sunday as a publicity stunt,” the source said, adding that “the military family is probably one of the most important things to the duke, and will always be so.”

Still, it’s apparent Harry and Meghan’s decided to release their carefully curated photos, shot by Lee Morgan, to garner positive attention for themselves. They could also reasonably expect that their photos would overshadow the official ceremony in London.

One of the reasons that Harry and Meghan decided to leave the U.K. and depart royal duties is that they wanted to assert control over their own media coverage and branding. According to their well-documented complaints, the Sussexes felt that the royal family didn’t do enough to protect their privacy or Meghan from a critical tabloid media. The Sussexes also didn’t believe “the Firm” appreciated the power of their global celebrity.

Nonetheless, Daily Express royal reporter Richard Palmer tweeted that the cemetery photo-op was likely “to deepen Harry and Meghan’s rift with his family.” He asked, “Why the need to take a PR photographer and publicize your ‘private’ act of remembrance?”

Palmer also questioned why Harry and Meghan didn’t invite Los Angeles-based reporters to cover their cemetery visit, if their intention truly was to bring attention to the sacrifices made by soldiers in war.

“Britain Harry and Meghan have mainly done ‘engagements’ at which they seek to control the message by issuing photos and press releases afterwards,” Palmer said. “Where is the US media at these events? Isn’t a free press one of the western values we cherish and fight for?”









						Harry and Meghan’s cemetery photo op shows depths of royal rift
					

The Sussexes had a photographer accompany them for their Remembrance Day tribute at a Los Angeles ceremony, the same day the royal family paid tribute to the war dead in London.



					www.mercurynews.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> She is probably like the rest of us, let’s the battery run down and forgets to charge it , not enough outlets in most palaces
> *And personally, I assume she reads her smartphone during meals, lol*


Yes, I can see HM now in my mind's eye: She's attending a state banquet, wearing the Vladimir Emerald Tiara and reading her phone while the guest of honour is giving her/his boring speech.


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Since I doubt the BRF will ship over a carriage she can bling out a carriage from the Amish people.


JCMH will slink over to the Disney back lot, or maybe Disneyland and ask for Cinderella’s coach. He had no problem asking for work for her, so I’m sure he’d expect the wish would be granted.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> JCMH will slink over to the Disney back lot, or maybe Disneyland and ask for Cinderella’s coach. He had no problem asking for work for her, so I’m sure he’d expect the wish would be granted.


Haha . . . they’re made for movies so they’re basically for optics . . . doubt it can go a few feet. Good one tho befitting for two of them they walk on sinking ground.


----------



## Chanbal

Jan Moir is back: *Here lie the ruins of their reputation: By turning Remembrance Sunday into their own photo-op, JAN MOIR says Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have made a grave mistake*

Their latest caper is a new low, perhaps an all-time low, for how much lower can you go than organising your own photoshoot in a national military cemetery, a sacred place where war dead are laid to rest, then sending the pictures around the world to advertise the virtue and depth of your mourning?

Oh my God. Can’t someone save them from themselves? Halloween may be over, but not for this couple of blundering ghouls.

It is easy to see why Harry and Meghan wanted a new life for themselves, and who can blame them? Playing second fiddle to stuffy, dutiful William and Kate was never going to appeal.

Yet the difficult issue for the Sussexes now is that any success in America is predicated on their royal hinterland: on who they were, not who they want to be, on their past glories and not their future splendours.

So they have to keep acting like they are royal, making speeches and touring cemeteries at no one’s behest except their own.

If his mother could see that this is what her beloved son has been reduced to, she would weep.

It was only a morning’s work for the Sussexes, but it gave the world a glimpse into who they think they are, how they are doing and what they hope to become.

spooky stunt by Moir


----------



## chowlover2

CarryOn2020 said:


> In ‘normal‘ times, there are lots of balls - about as many as there are hotels. The First Family usually stays about 10-15 minutes.  In covid times, they may cancel all the balls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United States presidential inaugural balls - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


I know for JFK's Innauguration there were 10 balls.( I'm a huge Jackie fan ) She didn't even want to go to one, but JFK's Dr gave her some amphetamines, and she was able to attend 5. Of course JFK went to all 10. I think in these days with Covid and financial hardship there may be only a few or even just 1. I think Joe will want to set the tone for his new administration.


----------



## 1LV

Harry expecting to be included in royal ceremonies/duties that he gets to choose is like walking into a town hall meeting at the company you work for and announcing you quit because you don’t like what the company stands for, you don’t like the way it’s run and you don’t really like the people running it. . . And then getting your feelings hurt when you aren’t invited to the company picnic.  WTH?  Seriously, Harry.  What. The. Hell?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@1LV  Try to not to be too bothered by the BRF’s shenanigans. It is all a well orchestrated act. Would not be surprised to find out Harry acts with Charles’s approval. He had this lil show planned well in advance. It is why he did the podcast, so people would pay attention. Just get the popcorn and wait for the next outrageous act. Possibly — After years of loyal service, palace courtiers fired???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Harry expecting to be included in royal ceremonies/duties that he gets to choose is like walking into a town hall meeting at the company you work for and announcing you quit because you don’t like what the company stands for, you don’t like the way it’s run and you don’t really like the people running it. . . And then getting your feelings hurt when you aren’t invited to the company picnic.  WTH?  Seriously, Harry.  What. The. Hell?



Someone should send them a postcard stating this, it's perfect.


----------



## CanuckBagLover

I honestly don't what happened to Harry.  But it does sadden me greatly that he is estranged from his family, particularly from his brother.  Those two had been together through so much with their parents divorce and then the loss of their mother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Let’s see if (as someone else on this thread already mentioned) they do anything memorable tomorrow, on Veteran’s day.


----------



## marietouchet

1LV said:


> Harry expecting to be included in royal ceremonies/duties that he gets to choose is like walking into a town hall meeting at the company you work for and announcing you quit because you don’t like what the company stands for, you don’t like the way it’s run and you don’t really like the people running it. . . And then getting your feelings hurt when you aren’t invited to the company picnic.  WTH?  Seriously, Harry.  What. The. Hell?


Interesting, some bloggers/youtubers etc have candidly called out the photo op as pique in response to wreathgate - a year ago , bloggers would have been more circumspect about noting the correlation


----------



## Chanbal

A new biography by another royal expert, Sean Smith is coming up. I wonder if it was paid (ordered) by MM's PR-team. The several comments on the article say it all, no need to add more.

*Britain 'lost Meghan Markle within a week' of her wedding after she was 'turned from a very serious human rights campaigner into Prince Harry's hottie', author of new biography claims*
Royal expert Sean Smith appeared on Lorraine today to discuss his new book, Meghan Misunderstood, where he said the Duchess of Sussex, 39, had been 'a very serious person' before meeting the Duke, 35,

The royal biographer insisted: 'My feeling when I wrote the book is we lost her within a week actually. It was extraordinary. Here was a woman who went from being a human right's campaigner to Prince Harry's hottie, within a week.'

Meghan Misunderstood, right!


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.....H&M are so much worse than Wallis&Duke of Windsor.  How can he be so disrespectful — the medals???!!!




I agree, I find this "outing" of theirs absolutely sickening


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> A new biography by another royal expert, Sean Smith is coming up. I wonder if it was paid (ordered) by MM's PR-team. The several comments on the article say it all, no need to add more.
> 
> *Britain 'lost Meghan Markle within a week' of her wedding after she was 'turned from a very serious human rights campaigner into Prince Harry's hottie', author of new biography claims*
> Royal expert Sean Smith appeared on Lorraine today to discuss his new book, Meghan Misunderstood, where he said the Duchess of Sussex, 39, had been 'a very serious person' before meeting the Duke, 35,
> 
> The royal biographer insisted: 'My feeling when I wrote the book is we lost her within a week actually. It was extraordinary. Here was a woman who went from being a human right's campaigner to Prince Harry's hottie, within a week.'
> 
> Meghan Misunderstood, right!
> 
> View attachment 4902285



Someone remind me what human rights campaigning Meghan did before she met Harry? This particular “royal expert” jumped on the bandwagon a little late. Each biography that comes out about them sells less than the one before.


----------



## youngster

Spot on from Jan Moir's column in the DM:
*Yet the difficult issue for the Sussexes now is that any success in America is predicated on their royal hinterland: on who they were, not who they want to be, on their past glories and not their future splendours.*

_*So they have to keep acting like they are royal, making speeches and touring cemeteries at no one’s behest except their own.

For once the concept of public duty is gone and they are no longer serving the monarch and the country, what is left? Only the mirage of empty gesture and symbolism as they play-act being royal for an easily pleased audience. *_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Someone remind me what human rights campaigning Meghan did before she met Harry? This particular “royal expert” jumped on the bandwagon a little late. Each biography that comes out about them sells less than the one before.



Do you even go here? Meghan, a Mother Theresa at age 11, who completed a school project.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do you even go here? Meghan, a Mother Theresa at age 11, who completed a school project.



That's the only thing I could think of too.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> the video where she told the everyone to vote?
> IDK....you don't have to be that important to attend one of these things....a friend of mine went to one because her husbands boss was a donor I guess....maybe one can buy tickets


Let me be very clear about this .. there is *THE Inaugural Ball *and then there are TONS of others; however, most of those others will not see the President or Vice-President!  I went to two years ago (one at the French embassy - which was fantastic) and neither the President or VP were in attendance.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Spot on from Jan Moir's column in the DM:
> *Yet the difficult issue for the Sussexes now is that any success in America is predicated on their royal hinterland: on who they were, not who they want to be, on their past glories and not their future splendours.*
> 
> _*So they have to keep acting like they are royal, making speeches and touring cemeteries at no one’s behest except their own.
> 
> For once the concept of public duty is gone and they are no longer serving the monarch and the country, what is left? Only the mirage of empty gesture and symbolism as they play-act being royal for an easily pleased audience. *_


yes, it's pretty ridiculous....we have a President, not a monarchy; we don't need them to do these things.  Their PR people better come up with a new idea for them.  It's really ridiculous when you think about it.  She married him and became one of the most famous women in the world.  they threw that away and now they're running around trying to hold on to the attention (and unfortunately for them, during a pandemic).  Really ironic.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, it's pretty ridiculous....we have a President, not a monarchy; we don't need them to do these things.  Their PR people better come up with a new idea for them.  It's really ridiculous when you think about it.  She married him and became one of the most famous women in the world.  they threw that away and now they're running around trying to hold on to the attention (and unfortunately for them, during a pandemic).  Really ironic.



If we are to believe their latest PR nonsense, Meghan is very interested in politics so of course she wants to worm herself into that world however she can.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If we are to believe their latest PR nonsense, Meghan is very interested in politics so of course she wants to worm herself into that world however she can.


I think she'd have to find a role that didn't involve the people voting....I wonder if Harry would be willing/able to come up with enough money to buy her some sort of position?  but what?  I don't think someone with so little (really no) experience in anything but minor TV acting is going to be given an ambassadorship


----------



## youngster

In the comments section of the DM. a woman from the U.S. posted that her son-in-law has 3 generations of family buried there and he and her daughter visit that cemetery regularly.  It is always busy, there are always people there, which is my memory as well.  It's in a fairly busy area of L.A., pretty close to LAX.  So, they either had the cemetery shut down for their visit or they perhaps went on a day that it is closed to the public.  EIther way, they didn't want any of the pesky proletariat, visiting the graves of their relatives and friends, showing up in their photos.


----------



## Hurrem1001

I can’t stand either of them. I used to like Harry, then he married that muppet and completely changed. No thanks.


----------



## rose60610

Wouldn't it be great if Netflix starts to see H&M as liabilities and points out a contract condition that stipulates that if they act like losers the Netflix deal is off? Using dead soldiers solely to promote themselves is quite beyond the pale. What's next?...going to DC and marching back and forth in front of The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier? In designer funeral clothes, mournful expressions, professional makeup and a camera crew, of course.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

coachlover1000 said:


> I can’t stand either of them. I used to like Harry, then he married that muppet and completely changed. No thanks.


muppet is a compliment


----------



## Pautinka

CeeJay said:


> She can 'title' all she wants, bottom line .. IT IS NOT RECOGNIZED in the US, we fought a war for that!


Could someone please tell Countess Luann de Lesseps that titles of nobility don't work in the US then?   She's hilarious but really, enough already!!!


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> In the comments section of the DM. a woman from the U.S. posted that her son-in-law has 3 generations of family buried there and he and her daughter visit that cemetery regularly.  It is always busy, there are always people there, which is my memory as well.  It's in a fairly busy area of L.A., pretty close to LAX.  So, they either had the cemetery shut down for their visit or they perhaps went on a day that it is closed to the public.  EIther way, they didn't want any of the pesky proletariat, visiting the graves of their relatives and friends, showing up in their photos.



Right. I was going to suggest that maybe the pesky proletariat was photoshopped out. Bet then Meghan wouldn't be able to either stop from waving and smiling at them or suing them for invasion of privacy.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think she'd have to find a role that didn't involve the people voting....I wonder if Harry would be willing/able to come up with enough money to buy her some sort of position?  but what?  *I don't think someone with so little (really no) experience in anything but minor TV acting is going to be given an ambassadorship*



That's true, but who expected her to get as far as she already has with so little going for her? They were just handed a Netflix contract that people who have spent their entire careers in TV would envy and they have zero experience.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That's true, but who expected her to get as far as she already has with so little going for her? They were just handed a Netflix contract that people who have spent their entire careers in TV would envy and they have zero experience.


ok, but hopefully no one in government is going to dignify them with a position


----------



## CeeJay

Pautinka said:


> Could someone please tell Countess Luann de Lesseps that titles of nobility don't work in the US then?   She's hilarious but really, enough already!!!


HA .. yes, she is another one who just LOVES that title!!!  Funny tidbit about her, she is from the exact same town as me in Connecticut and I, for one, can tell you .. it's not swanky (primarily residential / farmland)!!!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> ok, but hopefully no one is government is going to dignify them with a postion



The President in-waiting was very clear that he was "Irish" distancing himself from even the BBC (British Broadcasting Company) so not sure Prince H of Wakes would be welcome there at all, and by association Duchess of a British county


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The President in-waiting was very clear that he was "Irish" distancing himself from even the (BBC British Broadcasting Company) so not sure Prince H of Wakes would be welcome there at all, and by association Duchess of a British county


his family is from Mayo, where my mother was born and raised


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ok, but hopefully no one is government is going to dignify them with a postion



I would hope nobody in the US government would be that foolish but you never know. The likelier offender would be the UN. They are notorious for naming celebrity ambassadors for this and that. Those are usually goodwill positions but it gives the celebrity a status boost that isn't necessarily deserved.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> That's true, but who expected her to get as far as she already has with so little going for her? They were just handed a Netflix contract that people who have spent their entire careers in TV would envy and they have zero experience.


 Agreed. One has to admit that. But typically, when one has been given SOOOOOOOO much, they are grateful. But M and H complain, throw it all away and cast themselves as victims, starving for attention. You'd think that after the mega Netflix deal they wouldn't be using dead soldiers to impress the planet with pseudo compassion. Alas, I am completely wrong.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I would hope nobody in the US government would be that foolish but you never know. The likelier offender would be the UN. They are notorious for naming celebrity ambassadors for this and that. Those are usually goodwill positions but it gives the celebrity a status boost that isn't necessarily deserved.


I've said before, I think she'd like to be like Angie, who works for UNICEF.  that might be something she could get.....she'd have plenty of photo ops and could bring the ginger boy along


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> his family is from Mayo, where my mother was born and raised



Disclaimer: I have no Irish ancestry nor American. I am absolutely non-partisan on Irish and US politics. 

But, odd that someone who could not be President if he was actually Irish (foreign, not born in the US) should be so _quick_ to say he has no words for the BBC because(?) he's 'Irish'. 

That was like Bang, BBC, you've been told. 

I don't see invitations to any of the British Royal Family, including H to future parties.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Disclaimer: I have no Irish ancestry nor American. I am absolutely non-partisan on Irish and US politics.
> 
> But, odd that someone who could not be President if he was actually Irish (foreign, not born in the US) should be so _quick_ to say he has no words for the BBC because(?) he's 'Irish'.
> 
> That was like Bang, BBC, you've been told.
> 
> I don't see invitations to any of the British Royal Family, including H to future parties.


not sure I understand....I thought he was proud of his Irish ancestry - not that he was saying anything directly about the Brits (or the royals/H&M)


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. One has to admit that. But typically, when one has been given SOOOOOOOO much, they are grateful. But M and H complain, throw it all away and cast themselves as victims, starving for attention. You'd think that after the mega Netflix deal they wouldn't be using dead soldiers to impress the planet with pseudo compassion. Alas, I am completely wrong.



Meghan is never satisfied. Her narcissism won't allow her to settle for reasonable goals. She craves (needs?) total adoration and admiration from the public and that is one thing she will never have.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I think she'd have to find a role that didn't involve the people voting....I wonder if Harry would be willing/able to come up with enough money to buy her some sort of position?  but what?  *I don't think someone with so little (really no) experience in anything but minor TV acting is going to be given an ambassadorship*



Sadly, I beg to differ. Over the decades, some of the most stupid and inept people have been given ambassadorships. They're often given to people who have bundled beaucoup cash for the new President or done other favors. Experience not required, that's what career State Department staff is for. Maybe Meghan will be Ambassador to Argentina. Didn't she spend ten minutes there and pick up complete fluency in Spanish? Besides, polo is big there (Harry would approve).  Some of the world's most prominent (and rich) polo players are from there, such as Nacho Figueras and Adolfo Cambiaso.  They're both in their 40's. Just sayin'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Someone remind me what human rights campaigning Meghan did before she met Harry? This particular “royal expert” jumped on the bandwagon a little late. Each biography that comes out about them sells less than the one before.


I wonder if this Omid replacement has been contacted by her PR-agency to write this biography.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Sadly, I beg to differ. Over the decades, some of the most stupid and inept people have been given ambassadorships. They're often given to people who have bundled beaucoup cash for the new President or done other favors. Experience not required, that's what career State Department staff is for. Maybe Meghan will be Ambassador to Argentina. Didn't she spend ten minutes there and pick up complete fluency in Spanish? Besides, polo is big there (Harry would approve).  Some of the world's most prominent (and rich) polo players are from there, such as Nacho Figueras and Adolfo Cambiaso.  They're both in their 40's. Just sayin'.


but would/could H pony up enough cash (assuming these things are for sale).  IDK - I'm thinking of pamela harriman who was mentioned in this thread.  she was made an ambassador after many years of fundraising.  what has M done?  urged people to vote?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Disclaimer: I have no Irish ancestry nor American. I am absolutely non-partisan on Irish and US politics.
> 
> *But, odd that someone who could not be President if he was actually Irish (foreign, not born in the US) should be so quick to say he has no words for the BBC because(?) he's 'Irish'.*
> 
> That was like Bang, BBC, you've been told.
> 
> I don't see invitations to any of the British Royal Family, including H to future parties.



This is the first I've heard about it. However, the universal truth with politicians is what they say and what they do are often very different things and we are talking about a lifelong politician. I cannot fathom the BBC being shut out by the President-elect.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this Omid replacement has been contacted by her PR-agency to write this biography.



Maybe. We have not heard about Omid in awhile but he's still putting out his fluffy H&M pieces for Harpers Baazar regularly.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Sadly, I beg to differ. Over the decades, some of the most stupid and inept people have been given ambassadorships. They're often given to people who have bundled beaucoup cash for the new President or done other favors. Experience not required, that's what career State Department staff is for. Maybe Meghan will be Ambassador to Argentina. Didn't she spend ten minutes there and pick up complete fluency in Spanish? Besides, polo is big there (Harry would approve).  Some of the world's most prominent (and rich) polo players are from there, such as Nacho Figueras and Adolfo Cambiaso.  They're both in their 40's. Just sayin'.


I agree with all the above, but they will likely prefer the UK Embassy. Harry could participate in all the BRF nice events.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> I think she'd have to find a role that didn't involve the people voting....I wonder if Harry would be willing/able to come up with enough money to buy her some sort of position?  but what?  I don't think someone with so little (really no) experience in anything but minor TV acting is going to be given an ambassadorship


Surely one of them deserves to be Ambassador of Chunga Changa ?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> not sure I understand....I thought he was proud of his Irish ancestry - not that he was saying anything directly about the Brits (or the royals/H&M)



He undoubtedly is (as he should be)

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...TdKBKdmxVR6MJeV5uDHNxBAHDcGqkoiDLj8Sr6uZudaBH
"Mr. *****, a quick word for the BBC,” BBC’s New York correspondent Nick Bryant can be heard asking.

“The BBC?” the president-elect said before responding with a smile: “I’m Irish.”

The exact date of the clip is unknown, but the lack of face masks suggested that it was archival footage."


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dear, we are talking about a great great great grandfather who lived in Ireland - that makes him 1/32 nd Irish , I think


----------



## Hurrem1001

sdkitty said:


> muppet is a compliment



Yep, it really is, unfortunately. Thing is, I can’t say what I really think about her on here...I’ll get myself sofa king banned!


----------



## Pautinka

marietouchet said:


> But they picked the flowerssssssss


Ah, but did they? I wouldn't be surprised if they stole them off a nearby grave!!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> He undoubtedly is (as he should be)
> 
> https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...TdKBKdmxVR6MJeV5uDHNxBAHDcGqkoiDLj8Sr6uZudaBH
> "Mr. *****, a quick word for the BBC,” BBC’s New York correspondent Nick Bryant can be heard asking.
> 
> “The BBC?” the president-elect said before responding with a smile: “I’m Irish.”
> 
> The exact date of the clip is unknown, but the lack of face masks suggested that it was archival footage."


Remember our chat in this thread , a month or so, about people not having a clear understanding of England vs Britain vs Wales vs UK 

Well you need to add the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland to the list of confused topics


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> He undoubtedly is (as he should be)
> 
> https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/en...TdKBKdmxVR6MJeV5uDHNxBAHDcGqkoiDLj8Sr6uZudaBH
> "Mr. *****, a quick word for the BBC,” BBC’s New York correspondent Nick Bryant can be heard asking.
> 
> “The BBC?” the president-elect said before responding with a smile: “I’m Irish.”
> 
> The exact date of the clip is unknown, but the lack of face masks suggested that it was archival footage."



Ah, I see. He was making an attempt at humor (albeit a lame attempt). I don't think he meant to offend anyone. He would probably be surprised if he knew that it was taken seriously.


----------



## Pautinka

Chanbal said:


> The titles of the DM articles published today say it all:
> 
> *The fashion and celebrity snapper behind Harry and Meghan's LA cemetery photoshoot: Couple used photographer who's worked with Vogue and Kayne West's brand Yeezy 'to turn Remembrance Sunday into 'publicity stunt'*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle enlisted a celebrity fashion photographer who was worked with Kanye West and Vogue, to capture their Remembrance Sunday photo shoot. Private visit 1
> 
> *Revisiting her royal style: Meghan Markle swapped her relaxed LA look for custom Brandon Maxwell coat dress and $715 suede pumps to mark Remembrance Day with Harry*
> The Duchess looked somber in a black belted wool satin faille jacket dress by US designer Brandon Maxwell, a favorite of high profile women including Michelle *****, which is understood to be a custom creation. Private visit 2


Yeurgh. "Cemetery" and "photoshoot". Two words that should never be paired together. Says it all.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear, we are talking about a great great great grandfather who lived in Ireland - that makes him 1/32 nd Irish , I think


well, the Irish are glad to claim him


----------



## Pautinka

lalame said:


> Very good points and I'd even add ... who wears heels like that to a grass lawn cemetery? Literally with every step she must be fully aware how unnatural this whole show is.


And talking about steps, it's disrespectful to walk right over the dead . You're supposed to walk around graves ( where I'm from in the UK at least ). More than her coatdress, it's the first thing I noticed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> not sure I understand....I thought he was proud of his Irish ancestry - not that he was saying anything directly about the Brits (or the royals/H&M)


When I worked in London, Edinburgh, and Dublin .. I would constantly hear "we (Irish) hate the Scots" or "we (Scots) hate the Irish" .. but the one overriding comment was "but we both hate the British".  Not that they were ever 'mean' to one another, but I was glad that as an American, I didn't have to deal with any of that nor the "class system"!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> When I worked in London, Edinburgh, and Dublin .. I would constantly hear "we (Irish) hate the Scots" or "we (Scots) hate the Irish" .. but the one overriding comment was "but we both hate the British".  Not that they were ever 'mean' to one another, but I was glad that as an American, I didn't have to deal with any of that nor the "class system"!


my Irish mother didn't much care for the English


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> muppet is a compliment


Elmo’s pissed.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Sadly, I beg to differ. Over the decades, some of the most stupid and inept people have been given ambassadorships. They're often given to people who have bundled beaucoup cash for the new President or done other favors. Experience not required, that's what career State Department staff is for. Maybe Meghan will be Ambassador to Argentina. Didn't she spend ten minutes there and pick up complete fluency in Spanish? Besides, polo is big there (Harry would approve).  Some of the world's most prominent (and rich) polo players are from there, such as Nacho Figueras and Adolfo Cambiaso.  They're both in their 40's. Just sayin'.


.. and (alas) I so agree with you on this!  When I lived in DC, my next door neighbor was the wife of a Career State Department employee; the minute a new administration would come in, off they would go.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Her best bet would have been to take up the Queen’s initial offer to retain her acting career.   Even though her acting is bad, she probably would have been given more consideration and respect than she actually deserves as a member of f the royal family and Harry could continue to be what he was.


----------



## jennlt

1LV said:


> Elmo’s pissed.


American or British pissed? Or both?


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> American or British pissed? Or both?



First the American definition, then the British way to feel better.


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> Her best bet would have been to take up the Queen’s initial offer to retain her acting career.   Even though her acting is bad, she probably would have been given more consideration and respect than she actually deserves as a member of f the royal family and Harry could continue to be what he was.



Except she never intended to keep working. You'll notice everything she does is positioned as being some kind of ultra volunteerism, not the commitment of an actual full-time job. The only thing she wants to do consistently is promote herself.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> First the American definition, then the British way to feel better.


Lol!  You beat me to it!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> In the comments section of the DM. a woman from the U.S. posted that her son-in-law has 3 generations of family buried there and he and her daughter visit that cemetery regularly.  It is always busy, there are always people there, which is my memory as well.  It's in a fairly busy area of L.A., pretty close to LAX.  So, they either had the cemetery shut down for their visit or they perhaps went on a day that it is closed to the public.  EIther way, they didn't want any of the pesky proletariat, visiting the graves of their relatives and friends, showing up in their photos.


I think you are thinking of Holy Cross and Hillside Cemeteries as they are closer to LAX.  Los Angeles National Cemetery is in Westwood.   Someone thought they could have been there very early in the morning.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Disclaimer: I have no Irish ancestry nor American. I am absolutely non-partisan on Irish and US politics.
> 
> But, odd that someone who could not be President if he was actually Irish (foreign, not born in the US) should be so _quick_ to say he has no words for the BBC because(?) he's 'Irish'.
> 
> That was like Bang, BBC, you've been told.
> 
> I don't see invitations to any of the British Royal Family, including H to future parties.


Why should they be invited at all. They are not here on a diplomatic mission and she hasn’t been a big donor to the DNC. I think it is a moot point as it would be irresponsible to have these large parties.


----------



## LittleStar88

Pautinka said:


> Yeurgh. "Cemetery" and "photoshoot". Two words that should never be paired together. Says it all.



Maybe they are going through a gothy phase?


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe they are going through a gothy phase?
> 
> View attachment 4902466


At least this gal has appropriate shoes/boots on!!!  Wearing heels in grass?!?! .. well, let's just say .. easy way to fall on your a$$!  Also agree with the other poster who said that walking over the graves of people is HIGHLY disrespectful!  Heck, I was taught that as a kid, you NEVER do that!


----------



## papertiger

Pautinka said:


> Yeurgh. "Cemetery" and "photoshoot". Two words that should never be paired together. Says it all.



 !


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe they are going through a gothy phase?
> 
> View attachment 4902466



They're not that cool


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> American or British pissed? Or both?


Is there a British Elmo?!?!


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> Is there a British Elmo?!?!


The Muppets made their debut on British TV in 1976 but I don't think Elmo was an original Muppet. 








						The Muppet Show, 1976 - British Classic Comedy
					

The Muppet Show, 1976 Many years ago when TV was good, Friday nights at 7.00pm didn’t mean Emmerdale it meant The Muppet Show. Today The Muppets are part of the Disney empire and you could be forgiven for thinking this was one of those American success stories that made it big here in Britain...




					www.britishclassiccomedy.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

1LV said:


> Elmo’s pissed.


Nor is Miss Piggy pleased.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> The Muppets made their debut on British TV in 1976 but I don't think Elmo was an original Muppet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Muppet Show, 1976 - British Classic Comedy
> 
> 
> The Muppet Show, 1976 Many years ago when TV was good, Friday nights at 7.00pm didn’t mean Emmerdale it meant The Muppet Show. Today The Muppets are part of the Disney empire and you could be forgiven for thinking this was one of those American success stories that made it big here in Britain...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.britishclassiccomedy.co.uk



No, he was never part of The Muppet Show. Elmo was always strictly on Sesame Street.

I don't think most Americans know that when British people call someone a "muppet" it's usually describing someone who is being an idiot or foolish. When we hear the word, we just think of the literal puppet characters.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> No, he was never part of The Muppet Show. Elmo was always strictly on Sesame Street.
> 
> I don't think most Americans know that when British people call someone a "muppet" it's usually describing someone who is being an idiot or foolish. When we hear the word, we just think of the literal puppet characters.


Thanks, @bag-mania.  I had no idea.  (And apologies to Elmo. Lol!)


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> At least this gal has appropriate shoes/boots on!!!  Wearing heels in grass?!?! .. well, let's just say .. easy way to fall on your a$$!  Also agree with the other poster who said that walking over the graves of people is HIGHLY disrespectful!  Heck, I was taught that as a kid, you NEVER do that!


apparently she didn't get that lesson and dimwit harry forgot


----------



## lanasyogamama

Poor Elmo is thinking “how did I get dragged into this?!”


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> No, he was never part of The Muppet Show. Elmo was always strictly on Sesame Street.
> 
> I don't think most Americans know that when British people call someone a "muppet" it's usually describing someone who is being an idiot or foolish. When we hear the word, we just think of the literal puppet characters.


Oops, I mixed up Jim Henson's shows! Elmo is a Muppet but on Sesame Street, as @bag-mania said.








						List of Sesame Street Muppets - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> Daily Beast writer Tom Sykes pointed out that Buckingham Palace courtiers probably started this latest row by denying Harry’s “personal request” to lay a wreath in his name at the Remembrance Day ceremony his family attended at London’s Cenotaph Memorial the same day.



H coulda called 101FLOWERS but then M wouldn't have the chance to twirl on dead people with her new custom dress....


----------



## sdkitty

Jktgal said:


> H coulda called 101FLOWERS but then M wouldn't have the chance to twirl on dead people with her new custom dress....


it's a bespoke coat dress )
nothing but the best for Harry's wife


----------



## Jktgal

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, Harry take notes:
> 
> Summarized from another blog: The wreaths were laid on behalf of institutions and not on behalf of a specific royal and there were no personal wreaths.
> 
> *Prince Charles*:
> The Monarch's Wreath (not Elizabeth Windsor's wreath)
> Prince of Wales Wreath (not Prince Charles' wreath)
> 
> *Captain of the Intelligence Corps* (on behalf of Prince Phillip):
> Consort Wreath (not Prince Phillip's nor Duke of Edinburgh's wreath)
> 
> The Monarch/Sovereign, Consort, and Prince of Wales, being specific roles of the Monarchy, represented the Nation.
> 
> *Prince William*:
> Royal Air Force Wreath (not Duke of Cambridge's wreath)
> 
> *Prince Edward*:
> Royal Wessex Yeomanry Wreath (not Earl of Wessex' wreath)
> 
> *Princess Anne*:
> The Royal Navy Wreath (not Princess Royal's wreath)
> 
> *Prince Edward of Kent*:
> The Field Marshall Wreath (not Duke of Kent's wreath)



They rejected the Grifter Pilot of Montecito wreath....


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> The President in-waiting was very clear that he was "Irish" distancing himself from even the BBC (British Broadcasting Company) so not sure Prince H of Wakes would be welcome there at all, and by association Duchess of a British county


I would think that her target will be KH, perhaps via MO. Let's hope the O****s read the British news about the duchess, because the American news are hopeless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaa??? A golf cart????
No need, then, to walk on graves????


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaa??? A golf cart????
> No need, then, to walk on graves????
> 
> View attachment 4902631



Not quite as dramatic to be driven right up to the photo spot in a golf cart as it was to march sadly across the graves of the dead.

Side note, I am surprised that they didn't move the cart out of the view of the photo (or photoshop it out).


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> Not quite as dramatic to be driven right up to the photo spot in a golf cart as it was to march sadly across the graves of the dead.
> 
> Side note, I am surprised that they didn't move the cart out of the view of the photo (or photoshop it out).



Too busy looking at themselves to see anything else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Not quite as dramatic to be driven right up to the photo spot in a golf cart as it was to march sadly across the graves of the dead.
> 
> Side note, I am surprised that they didn't move the cart out of the view of the photo (or photoshop it out).



My thoughts, too, but there it is. In the second photo, what happened to her other leg? Thought this photographer was tops in his field?








						Inside Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry’s Remembrance Sunday L.A. Cemetery Visit
					

The couple placed a wreath and laid hand-picked flowers from their home garden to honor fallen soldiers.




					www.elle.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaa??? A golf cart????
> No need, then, to walk on graves????
> 
> View attachment 4902631



They had to have arranged in advance to have a cemetery employee drive them (and their photographer) out in the cart to show them the exact graves they wanted to be photographed with. There are an estimated 90,000 graves there, most of them with nearly identical headstones. Meghan doesn’t have time to waste looking for them herself!

At least they didn’t have the limousine they likely arrived in in the shot. That was a tasteful touch.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> No, he was never part of The Muppet Show. Elmo was always strictly on Sesame Street.
> 
> I don't think most Americans know that when British people call someone a "muppet" it's usually describing someone who is being an idiot or foolish. When we hear the word, we just think of the literal puppet characters.


bagmania, no, did not know that. Thank you. One of the fun things about this thread is all the interesting facts that emerge and enlighten.


----------



## Lodpah

The whole world is focused on something bigger than them right now. They’re grasping at anything. Next up is a photo shoot at . . . I don’t know what could be lower than than what they did. I think the graveyard photo shoot is their public demise at credibility and fame. As a veteran myself I have no idea why Harry boy wore his medals to a private wreath laying.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thoughts, too, but there it is. In the second photo, what happened to her other leg? Thought this photographer was tops in his field?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry’s Remembrance Sunday L.A. Cemetery Visit
> 
> 
> The couple placed a wreath and laid hand-picked flowers from their home garden to honor fallen soldiers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


Carryon, I'll preface this by saying I would absolutely never make a joke at the expense of an amputee, but Meghan is not, so I will say perhaps this photo is an accidental metaphor that when it comes to all her superfluous lawsuits "she doesn't have a leg to stand on". And I agree with others, sloppy work by the photographer.


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> The whole world is focused on something bigger than them right now. They’re grasping at anything. Next up is a photo shoot at . . . I don’t know what could be lower than than what they did. I think the graveyard photo shoot is their public demise at credibility and fame. As a veteran myself I have no idea why Harry boy wore his medals to a private wreath laying.



Thank you for your service and protection of our freedoms.  Happy Veterans Day tomorrow!


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> but would/could H pony up enough cash (assuming these things are for sale).  IDK - I'm thinking of pamela harriman who was mentioned in this thread.  she was made an ambassador after many years of fundraising.  what has M done?  urged people to vote?



Great points. Perhaps Meghan's strategy is to hang around the White House, whine and be so annoying that they'll send her somewhere just to get rid of her.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> Thank you for your service and protection of our freedoms.  Happy Veterans Day tomorrow!


Thanks I spent way too many years in the Army


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Thanks I spent way too many years in the Army



I appreciate all you did and do to protect us. Thank you
_With gratitude for your service to America on Veterans Day and always._


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Carryon, I'll preface this by saying I would absolutely never make a joke at the expense of an amputee, but Meghan is not, so I will say perhaps this photo is an accidental metaphor that when it comes to all her superfluous lawsuits "she doesn't have a leg to stand on". And I agree with others, sloppy work by the photographer.



Yes, sloppy photoshopping. Yes, the photographer should have caught it. Why didn’t they see it?  What was wrong with the original that her leg couldn’t be in the photo? FFS.
Every. Single. Time. there is something odd with their stunts. The stunts are awful enough as they are, but then something odd gets added.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thoughts, too, but there it is. In the second photo, what happened to her other leg? Thought this photographer was tops in his field?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry’s Remembrance Sunday L.A. Cemetery Visit
> 
> 
> The couple placed a wreath and laid hand-picked flowers from their home garden to honor fallen soldiers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



Let’s not jump to conclusions.  Maybe the truly woke among us balance on one foot like a flamingo when they are paying their respects in a cemetery.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thoughts, too, but there it is. In the second photo, what happened to her other leg? Thought this photographer was tops in his field?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry’s Remembrance Sunday L.A. Cemetery Visit
> 
> 
> The couple placed a wreath and laid hand-picked flowers from their home garden to honor fallen soldiers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


Why are they wearing masks in one of the pictures?  There's not another soul around, except for the obvious photographer.  And all the dead that they're pretending to be paying respect to.


----------



## marietouchet

More on how to telephone the Queen

She has a phone on her night table in her bedroom - possibly a direct line, spends the whole day outside , or meeting people in public rooms with no visible phone, there is a large old fashioned intercom business phone in one shot of a desk - with a bazillion extensions and buttons - hotel style  - to get hold of her secretary et al, other desk shots do not show a phone - maybe it is under the piles of paper she won’t have anyone touch

Unless you call when she is in bed, you are not likely to get her directly unless she totes a mobile around in the ubiquitous purse

The contents of the purse have been discussed in many articles, but no one mentions a mobile in there

 YouTube , Daily News channel, a minute by minute glimpse into the queen’s day

PS dont know how accurate the source is, but lots of details - enough to enhance the credibility of the story

BUT my suspicions were roused when the narrator pronounced NORFOLK as NOR - FOLK with emphasis on the R and L - too funny


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thoughts, too, but there it is. In the second photo, what happened to her other leg? Thought this photographer was tops in his field?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Duchess Meghan and Prince Harry’s Remembrance Sunday L.A. Cemetery Visit
> 
> 
> The couple placed a wreath and laid hand-picked flowers from their home garden to honor fallen soldiers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



Hahaha! What the heck! And her legs look like broomsticks!


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> The whole world is focused on something bigger than them right now. They’re grasping at anything. Next up is a photo shoot at . . . I don’t know what could be lower than than what they did. I think the graveyard photo shoot is their public demise at credibility and fame. As a veteran myself *I have no idea why Harry boy wore his medals to a private wreath laying.*


There are not that many places in the US for H to display his medals. He probably missed the opportunity of taking them to the school photo-op, kids love bling.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

With Christmas fast approaching, I've been wondering how Meghan plans to upstage the Queen's speech on Christmas Day.


----------



## LittleStar88

carmen56 said:


> With Christmas fast approaching, I've been wondering how Meghan plans to upstage the Queen's speech on Christmas Day.



Pregnancy announcement?


----------



## duna

Pautinka said:


> Could someone please tell Countess Luann de Lesseps that titles of nobility don't work in the US then?   She's hilarious but really, enough already!!!



 Who the heck is this, I've never heard of her!!


----------



## LittleStar88

duna said:


> Who the heck is this, I've never heard of her!!



She is from the Real Housewives franchise


----------



## CarryOn2020

Homepage
					

We Are The Mighty is a veteran-led digital publisher and Emmy-award-winning media agency. WATM is owned by Recurrent Ventures.




					www.wearethemighty.com
				



#9

No idea who this group is, they list Harry as HRH


----------



## LittleStar88

LittleStar88 said:


> She is from the Real Housewives franchise




For some reason this song reminds me of the Tan Mom song  

More about Countess Luann. Maybe Meghan can increase her stock by making a song like this one.


----------



## lulilu

How many occasions have caused them to be "deeply saddened" at this point?  I find that term so pretentious when used by them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Is this where Me-gain sells her merchandise?

Meghan's Mirror


----------



## duna

LittleStar88 said:


> She is from the Real Housewives franchise




Ah, thanks! We don't get any of the Housewives in my neck of the woods....Thank goodness, we have enough rubbish television as it is!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> Is this where Me-gain sells her merchandise?
> 
> Meghan's Mirror


Yep!


----------



## Pautinka

LittleStar88 said:


> For some reason this song reminds me of the Tan Mom song
> 
> More about Countess Luann. Maybe Meghan can increase her stock by making a song like this one.


O.M.G!! I don't know which is bleeding most - my eyes or my ears. Rather a self-fulfilling title though. Perfect for you-know-who. I await the cover version....or maybe a duet between the two "ladies".


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if MM's PR machine is releasing this type of articles in preparation for benefit collection. 

*11 photos show Prince Harry's friendship with Joe ***** is nothing like his relationship with ******


Ready to take advantage!?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if MM's PR machine is releasing this type of articles in preparation for benefit collection.
> 
> *11 photos show Prince Harry's friendship with Joe ***** is nothing like his relationship with ******
> 
> 
> Ready to take advantage!?



Don't worry, I think this one is purely clickbait. What is sad is that it is so difficult to tell the difference these days.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Great points. *Perhaps Meghan's strategy is to hang around the White House, whine and be so annoying* that they'll send her somewhere just to get rid of her.



And that is why we have the Secret Service, a whole agency devoted to protecting our elected leaders from overzealous whack jobs.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Don't worry, I think this one is purely clickbait. What is sad is that it is so difficult to tell the difference these days.


I wish you are 100% right, but never underestimate the greed of this couple. As we know here, "Me, Myself, and I" will try to collect whatever possible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

Maggie Muggins said:


> Is this where Me-gain sells her merchandise?
> 
> Meghan's Mirror


I believe it is the name of the website.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> And that is why we have the Secret Service, a whole agency devoted to protecting our elected leaders from overzealous whack jobs.



Meghan did such a good job at brainwashing Harry that she may think she can make the Secret Service more woke and supportive of her. Surely they would be impressed and dazzled with Harry's medals as we all were when they oh-so-stoically trampled on graves. Problem is, Harry was a dupe ripe for the picking but the Secret Service can smell a suck up a mile away. If the SS knows what's good for them they'll ask her if she's OK. She'll respond by complaining how rough she has it and deserves an ambassadorship. After all, she has to make good on her Netflix contract, and a rags to riches movie about a Z Lister kicking the BRF to the curb and getting a White House appointment would fit the bill.


----------



## bellecate

Came across this going through some of my dad’s old paperwork. Thought it might be of interest here.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Meghan did such a good job at brainwashing Harry that she may think she can make the Secret Service more woke and supportive of her. Surely they would be impressed and dazzled with Harry's medals as we all were when they oh-so-stoically trampled on graves. Problem is, Harry was a dupe ripe for the picking but the Secret Service can smell a suck up a mile away. If the SS knows what's good for them they'll ask her if she's OK. She'll respond by complaining how rough she has it and deserves an ambassadorship. After all, she has to make good on her Netflix contract, and a rags to riches movie about a Z Lister kicking the BRF to the curb and getting a White House appointment would fit the bill.


If they want Secret Service protection, then they are asking all Americans to PAY FOR IT .. and NO, that won't happen!!!  Harry would only get it IF he is representing the BRF .. and we know, that is NO LONGER the case .. even the Queen said that!


----------



## gracekelly

They are not here on a diplomatic mission. There are here to make money. Period!  If they think that there are folks out there who want to jump their bones then they can pay for protection or take Krav M@ga lessons!


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


>



Priceless.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> There are not that many places in the US for H to display his medals. He probably missed the opportunity of taking them to the school photo-op, kids love bling.



I think it's harry that misses the bling. With no experienced valet to iron and dress 'HRH", there's only so much of grey polo tees one can take


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


>




"It was a great day out and my wife didn't slap me once."


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> If they want Secret Service protection, then they are asking all Americans to PAY FOR IT .. and NO, that won't happen!!!  Harry would only get it IF he is representing the BRF .. and we know, that is NO LONGER the case .. even the Queen said that!


There will be a revolution!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wish you are 100% right, but never underestimate the greed of this couple. As we know here, "Me, Myself, and I" will try to collect whatever possible.



Prince Charles undoubtedly loves these ‘connections’ 

It would so easy for H&M to take a political role, so easy. In the end, we will all pay for their protection. This is part of my outrage with the BRF’s attitude toward them. These issues to be resolved sooner rather than later.


----------



## mdcx

H and M really seem to be falling off the radar of the public's attention. Even that horrendous Remembrance Day cemetery stunt didn't do a lot to draw attention, compared to say six months ago. The world of celebrity moves quickly and without all the bling bling and pomp and ceremony and networks that the BRF offer, these two are just fading imo.


----------



## bag-mania

We have threads for all manner of celebrities here. Is there anyone else as thirsty and desperate for attention as these two? Even the usual egocentric, vain Hollywood stars have mostly kept to themselves during these Covid months.


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


>



This guy wins the day!


----------



## CobaltBlu

This is long overdue MT.
You have steadfastly kept us informed in all things royal; facts and tidbits shared so generously, and giving us all a rich and full context in which to discuss the latest shenanigans of the most recently deeply saddened royals.

I am sure everyone in this thread joins me in gratitude, and I, CB, have dug into the vault (unbeknownst to Meghan, this is a VERY SECRET vault), and chosen a humble something for you to swan around in during these socially-distant but still fashionable times.

Please pair it with a bespoke frock or dress coat and enjoy, with our hearty thanks.
It't not too much, right?

I am off to phone the Queen.....  cheers love!







marietouchet said:


> More on how to telephone the Queen
> 
> She has a phone on her night table in her bedroom - possibly a direct line, spends the whole day outside , or meeting people in public rooms with no visible phone, there is a large old fashioned intercom business phone in one shot of a desk - with a bazillion extensions and buttons - hotel style  - to get hold of her secretary et al, other desk shots do not show a phone - maybe it is under the piles of paper she won’t have anyone touch
> 
> Unless you call when she is in bed, you are not likely to get her directly unless she totes a mobile around in the ubiquitous purse
> 
> The contents of the purse have been discussed in many articles, but no one mentions a mobile in there
> 
> YouTube , Daily News channel, a minute by minute glimpse into the queen’s day
> 
> PS dont know how accurate the source is, but lots of details - enough to enhance the credibility of the story
> 
> BUT my suspicions were roused when the narrator pronounced NORFOLK as NOR - FOLK with emphasis on the R and L - too funny


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> We have threads for all manner of celebrities here. Is there anyone else as thirsty and desperate for attention as these two? Even the usual egocentric, vain Hollywood stars have mostly kept to themselves during these Covid months.



Answer: 
They are definitely the thirstiest pair to ever match a jacket lining to a dress. Definitely. They are absolutely parched. No one is thirstier than they. Royal or common.


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> This is long overdue MT.
> You have steadfastly kept us informed in all things royal; facts and tidbits shared so generously, and giving us all a rich and full context in which to discuss the latest shenanigans of the most recently deeply saddened royals.
> 
> I am sure everyone in this thread joins me in gratitude, and I, CB, have dug into the vault (unbeknownst to Meghan, this is a VERY SECRET vault), and chosen a humble something for you to swan around in during these socially-distant but still fashionable times.
> 
> Please pair it with a bespoke frock or dress coat and enjoy, with our hearty thanks.
> It't not too much, right?
> 
> I am off to phone the Queen.....  cheers love!
> 
> View attachment 4903361


Am speechless, thank you from the bottom of my heart 

Love the bling, sapphires are my birthstone , swoon


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> *Revisiting her royal style: Meghan Markle swapped her relaxed LA look for custom Brandon Maxwell coat dress and $715 suede pumps to mark Remembrance Day with Harry*
> The Duchess looked somber in a black belted wool satin faille jacket dress by US designer Brandon Maxwell, a favorite of high profile women including Michelle *****, which is understood to be a custom creation. Private visit 2





A custom-made outfit for that distasteful attention seeking photoshoot? Custom-made doesn't come cheap and it isn't made quickly. Makes it even more tacky that this performance was obviously planned in advance.... to take attention away from the actual working royals who were back in London paying their sincere respects as always on Remembrance Day. Then there's these two fools who chose a celebrity life over being working royals out here thinking that Remembrance Day is about them, although judging by the size of their over-inflated egos they probably think it's called Remember Me Day.




LittleStar88 said:


> IMHO... No matter where they placed wreaths and flowers, the entire thing was negated by the need to orchestrate the whole thing for publicity/their own personal gain. Not a single genuine thing about it.
> 
> If it was truly near and dear to their hearts, they would have done it and no one would have heard about it.
> 
> I feel like I am beating a dead horse on this topic, but it is 100% poor taste on their part and really the lowest they have sunk to get attention at this point. Before I just found them annoying, now I am completely disgusted.












Chanbal said:


> A new biography by another royal expert, Sean Smith is coming up. I wonder if it was paid (ordered) by MM's PR-team. The several comments on the article say it all, no need to add more.
> 
> *Britain 'lost Meghan Markle within a week' of her wedding after she was 'turned from a very serious human rights campaigner into Prince Harry's hottie', author of new biography claims*
> Royal expert Sean Smith appeared on Lorraine today to discuss his new book, Meghan Misunderstood, where he said the Duchess of Sussex, 39, had been 'a very serious person' before meeting the Duke, 35,
> 
> The royal biographer insisted: 'My feeling when I wrote the book is we lost her within a week actually. It was extraordinary. Here was a woman who went from being a human right's campaigner to Prince Harry's hottie, within a week.'
> 
> Meghan Misunderstood, right!
> 
> View attachment 4902285


A ' very serious human right's campaigner'? 


She has quite the imagination.




marietouchet said:


> Remember our chat in this thread , a month or so, about people not having a clear understanding of England vs Britain vs Wales vs UK
> 
> Well you need to add the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland to the list of confused topics


As someone who is half Irish & half English, I completely second this! 




CobaltBlu said:


> Answer:
> They are definitely the thirstiest pair to ever match a jacket lining to a dress. Definitely. They are absolutely parched. No one is thirstier than they. Royal or common.








chicinthecity777 said:


>




This guy tomorrow morning after JCMH sees this video:


----------



## Lodpah

CobaltBlu said:


> Answer:
> They are definitely the thirstiest pair to ever match a jacket lining to a dress. Definitely. They are absolutely parched. No one is thirstier than they. Royal or common.


I’d like to send them some emergency  IV drinks. Sometimes they go on sale at COSTCO, but alas that might not even quench their thirsts.


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Charles Is Ready for Queen Elizabeth to Step Down*
while Prince Charles could assume her royal responsibilities, his mother would still remain Britain’s monarch in name and title until Her Majesty passed away, at which point he would be crowned King and assume the throne.
Until then, “Charles has made it quite clear that he intends to slim down the monarchy and reduce the number of full-time working members of the family to those in the immediate line of succession,” Princess Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell told _Us Weekly._

Royal responsibilities in 2021


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Charles Is Ready for Queen Elizabeth to Step Down*
> while Prince Charles could assume her royal responsibilities, his mother would still remain Britain’s monarch in name and title until Her Majesty passed away, at which point he would be crowned King and assume the throne.
> Until then, “Charles has made it quite clear that he intends to slim down the monarchy and reduce the number of full-time working members of the family to those in the immediate line of succession,” Princess Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell told _Us Weekly._
> 
> Royal responsibilities in 2021



Ha! He might be ready but he doesn’t have the cojones to say that to her. You just sit there and wait your turn, Charles.


----------



## bag-mania

Of course they don’t understand. They are dedicated to duty. They can’t comprehend such self-absorption.











						Royal expert says Queen and Prince Philip ‘probably’ don’t understand why Harry quit
					

“I think it was a huge shock and then as very often happens shock then turns to irritation because you think why?”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ha! He might be ready but he doesn’t have the cojones to say that to her. You just sit there and wait your turn, Charles.


From what I understood, QE will continue being the queen, but Charles will assume most of the royal responsibilities when she turns 95. I wonder if that will affect MM&H status. It looks like the queen and Philip are not fooled by MM, but not sure about Charles.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if that will affect MM&H status. It looks like the queen and Philip are not fooled by MM, but not sure about Charles.



I don’t get the impression Harry and Charles are on good terms at all. If they were, Harry could have just called his father and asked him to make sure his wreath was put out. 

No, I bet Charles hates the damage Meghan has caused his family and the bad press they have had because of her. He’s having a birthday this weekend. I wonder if Harry will call him.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t get the impression Harry and Charles are on good terms at all. If they were, Harry could have just called his father and asked him to make sure his wreath was put out.
> 
> No, I bet Charles hates the damage Meghan has caused his family and the bad press they have had because of her. *He’s having a birthday this weekend. I wonder if Harry will call him.*



That's right, he will turn 72 on Saturday. MM&H will likely have a news release about their celebration.


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> For some reason this song reminds me of the Tan Mom song
> 
> More about Countess Luann. Maybe Meghan can increase her stock by making a song like this one.


Love Tan Mom! She is a total hoot. (love the Countess for just about the same reasons)


----------



## CanuckBagLover

bag-mania said:


> Ha! He might be ready but he doesn’t have the cojones to say that to her. You just sit there and wait your turn, Charles.


He's been ready for a long time!!! But I think he'll have to keep waiting for little longer.


----------



## CanuckBagLover

CeeJay said:


> If they want Secret Service protection, then they are asking all Americans to PAY FOR IT .. and NO, that won't happen!!!  Harry would only get it IF he is representing the BRF .. and we know, that is NO LONGER the case .. even the Queen said that!


Canada had the same issue while they were here in BC.  The Canadian taxpayers had to pick up the bill for their security and no one in Canada was supportive of that and we're part of the British Commonwealth.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Ha! He might be ready but he doesn’t have the cojones to say that to her. You just sit there and wait your turn, Charles.


Charles has been quoted as saying he isn't necessarily jumping up and down to be king as it means losing his mother, but he will accept any duties to lighten her load. Big difference!


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle's half sister, Samantha Markle, says the duchess' Remembrance tribute was an 'exploitative photo opportunity'*
"Well, don't get me started on the concept of photo scandals, because allegedly that was the reason she disowned our father," Samantha said, alluding to Thomas Markle's staged paparazzi photos ahead of Meghan and Harry's wedding in 2018, which he ultimately did not attend.
*All about photos*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Samantha! Where have you been? I like these quotes.

Samantha Markle continued: "So I was a bit shocked to see that on such an important topic — Remembrance and gratitude towards so many who have sacrificed their lives so we can live as we do today, as Harry said — that gratitude would be shown by an exploitative photo opportunity over fallen heroes."

"Archie has become somewhat of a phantom in the eyes of everybody, because he must be walking now and he wasn't present at the memorial," she said. "I think the world hopes for the best for him, but I can't address it now because we haven't seen him and I don't know that we will sadly."


----------



## youngster

mdcx said:


> H and M really seem to be falling off the radar of the public's attention. Even that horrendous Remembrance Day cemetery stunt didn't do a lot to draw attention, compared to say six months ago. The world of celebrity moves quickly and without all the bling bling and pomp and ceremony and networks that the BRF offer, these two are just fading imo.



This is exactly what so many have said from the beginning of Megexit, that once they left the family, they are just another pair of celebrities having to constantly keep their names in the press and work to stay famous.  So, they invite themselves to everything and create opportunities to remind everyone that Harry is still a prince and 6th in line! In case you forgot!  

They remind me more and more of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.  Here they both are on New Year's Eve, 1953, after their "coronation", wearing their paper crowns:


----------



## marietouchet

Well, they are already planning for the QEII platinum jubilee in 2022 ... so, the job wont be vacant any time soon


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder how many hours a day the Queen works. My mom is 87, and she’s really slowing down physically, although mentally she’s still so sharp.  But my mom could never do the long walks into events that QE does.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Charles Is Ready for Queen Elizabeth to Step Down*
> while Prince Charles could assume her royal responsibilities, his mother would still remain Britain’s monarch in name and title until Her Majesty passed away, at which point he would be crowned King and assume the throne.
> Until then, “Charles has made it quite clear that he intends to slim down the monarchy and reduce the number of full-time working members of the family to those in the immediate line of succession,” Princess Diana’s former butler Paul Burrell told _Us Weekly._
> 
> Royal responsibilities in 2021


how would the former butler know this?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> how would the former butler know this?


Burrell and Lacey should retire together so  they can share fairy tales.

Nobody puts Baby in the corner! The Queen will do as she does for as long as she wishes. These stupid men should stop mansplaining.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course,  Charles is ready. He wants to promote his Great Reset plan which will undoubtedly and conveniently include the youngest son who is politically connected to numerous US politicians. It’s all so simple — BRF rules again. What could possibly go wrong?



To clarify - the caring duo did nothing for the US veterans yesterday, correct? I do not look at their insta, tweets, etc., so I am curious if they even noted yesterday was Veterans Day in the US, the land where they reside.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course,  Charles is ready. He wants to promote his Great Reset plan which will undoubtedly and conveniently include the youngest son who is politically connected to numerous US politicians. It’s all so simple — BRF rules again. What could possibly go wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> To clarify - the caring duo did nothing for the US veterans yesterday, correct? I do not look at their insta, tweets, etc., so I am curious if they even noted yesterday was Veterans Day in the US, the land where they reside.


The office at the cemetery was inundated with call complaining about what they did.  I feel sorry for the staff who had all this thrown at them.

If these two really wanted to do somethong nice and achieve good PR a visit to a VA Hospital would  have done it. Then a picture with a patient would have been legit.  I think he would have good with that, but not his wife. No chance to merch clothes there.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> To clarify - the caring duo did nothing for the US veterans yesterday, correct? I do not look at their insta, tweets, etc., so I am curious if they even noted yesterday was Veterans Day in the US, the land where they reside.



Nope, nothing for the living US vets. I don't think they said anything on Memorial Day either, which is our equivalent of Remembrance Day.

And don't get me started on how they blew off Guy Fawkes Day last week. That would have made a spectacular photo op. Did the Gunpowder Plot mean nothing to you, Harry?! Although considering California still has fire restrictions maybe that isn't a good idea after all.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Look, again my position is - have at it if you are not spending tax payer’s money nor flouting the rules of public service. So, I care not what they do beyond that. As misguided and offensive as I found this.

However, it seems to me that they (and whomever is advising them) just aren’t being savvy. Sure he would have been criticized for not doing anything. But seems to me, the correct way to do this was a private attendance with a planted photo on some private person’s Instagram account that is then taken viral. Not a planned photo shoot with professional photographers. Come on now.


----------



## 1LV

A1aGypsy said:


> Look, again my position is - have at it if you are not spending tax payer’s money nor flouting the rules of public service. So, I care not what they do beyond that. As misguided and offensive as I found this.
> 
> However, it seems to me that they (and whomever is advising them) just aren’t being savvy. Sure he would have been criticized for not doing anything. But seems to me, the correct way to do this was a private attendance with a planted photo on some private person’s Instagram account that is then taken viral. Not a planned photo shoot with professional photographers. Come on now.


Apparently they’re not that smart.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Apparently they’re not that smart.


I think her problem is overestimating herself and his problem is he's not that smart and he also overestimates her


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> The office at the cemetery was inundated with call complaining about what they did.  I feel sorry for the staff who had all this thrown at them.
> 
> *If these two really wanted to do somethong nice and achieve good PR a visit to a VA Hospital would  have done it. Then a picture with a patient would have been legit. * I think he would have good with that, but not his wife. No chance to merch clothes there.



I can imagine this as Meghan's reaction to that proposal...


----------



## Aimee3

Just think how much money they’d save if they’d just listen to the advice on this thread!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

1LV said:


> Apparently they’re not that smart.


If their PR team suggested it or agreed with it, they are no smarter and should be fired.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> If their PR team suggested it or agreed with it, they are no smarter and should be fired.


I think that folks here have been thinking this for a very long time.  They have been given the worst advice ever.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s all understand that they did nothing, nada, nil, zilch for the US Veterans Day, the land where they reside.
wow.


----------



## Lodpah

Someone reported those pics were taken awhile back for their Netflix show.


----------



## rose60610

With Thanksgiving coming up, perhaps M&H could redeem themselves by listing all the things they're grateful for. But who am I kidding?  They're the only people I can think of who would whine, criticize, and demand pity over all the royal trappings they've enjoyed, their 14 million dollar house with 90 bathrooms, worldwide fame, Archie and a mega Netflix deal. Even though the Commonwealth doesn't celebrate Thanksgiving like the U.S., they might be grateful that now we're the ones stuck with ME-Gain and JCMH and not them. As if Covid didn't put a big enough downer on 2020. Any chance we could return them? Or does anybody have two one-way tickets to Chunga Changa?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course,  Charles is ready. He wants to promote his Great Reset plan which will undoubtedly and conveniently include the youngest son who is politically connected to numerous US politicians. It’s all so simple — BRF rules again. What could possibly go wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> To clarify - the caring duo did nothing for the US veterans yesterday, correct? I do not look at their insta, tweets, etc., so I am curious if they even noted yesterday was Veterans Day in the US, the land where they reside.


I didn't see anything about Veterans Day, but saw this today on DM:
*Prince Harry's close bond with Jill ***** revealed: Weeks after he and Meghan Markle interfered in US election, how Joe joked his wife had 'spent too much damn time' with the Duke of Sussex*
Good friends?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Back off, Charlie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I didn't see anything about Veterans Day, but saw this today on DM:
> *Prince Harry's close bond with Jill ***** revealed: Weeks after he and Meghan Markle interfered in US election, how Joe joked his wife had 'spent too much damn time' with the Duke of Sussex*
> Good friends?



Without wading into the political fray, she could certainly be one reason Harry thought the US worshipped him. There were so many visits with so much extensive media hype. Lots of giggles, admiring looks, etc.  Then, poof.  Could explain lots some of his behavior.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Back off, Charlie.
> 
> View attachment 4904075


A lot of us and Prince Charles as well, don't have to read a magazine to know that HM will never retire. She took an oath to serve until her dying day, and I'm sure she will do her utmost to keep it. Her family will help her by taking on more and more of her duties, but she will remain Queen until the end.


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> With Thanksgiving coming up, perhaps M&H could redeem themselves by listing all the things they're grateful for. But who am I kidding?  They're the only people I can think of who would whine, criticize, and demand pity over all the royal trappings they've enjoyed, their 14 million dollar house with 90 bathrooms, worldwide fame, Archie and a mega Netflix deal. Even though the Commonwealth doesn't celebrate Thanksgiving like the U.S., they might be grateful that now we're the ones stuck with ME-Gain and JCMH and not them. As if Covid didn't put a big enough downer on 2020. Any chance we could return them? Or does anybody have two one-way tickets to Chunga Changa?



I expect there will be some big, orchestrated photo opportunity showing them "feeding the less fortunate". And the details her entire carefully curated outfit will be available online immediately. 

Bonus: We will get to see how Harry's crop rotation Hair Club For Men procedure is coming along.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I think that folks here have been thinking this for a very long time.  They have been given the worst advice ever.


I sometimes wonder if they're given the right advice, but MM thinks she knows better and overrules?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooops, I forgot the link. Long live the Queen. Surely the Platinum Jubilee will be a tiara extravaganza - fun times ahead 










						The Queen Plans a “Blockbuster” Platinum Jubilee Celebration for 2022, and Quashes Rumors She Might Step Down
					

A four-day bank holiday will mark the monarch’s 70 years on the throne.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## threadbender

A1aGypsy said:


> Look, again my position is - have at it if you are not spending tax payer’s money nor flouting the rules of public service. So, I care not what they do beyond that. As misguided and offensive as I found this.
> 
> However, it seems to me that they (and whomever is advising them) just aren’t being savvy. Sure he would have been criticized for not doing anything. But seems to me, the correct way to do this was a private attendance with a planted photo on some private person’s Instagram account that is then taken viral. Not a planned photo shoot with professional photographers. Come on now.


Ordinarily, I might agree. However, this was so disrespectful. Our vets' graves should not be used for photo ops. And, by using this particular cemetery, I think they were using taxpayer money since we pay for it to be taken care of. I guess that is pushing it but, this makes me angry. My Uncle is in a grave in France and if some celebutante/royal was using his for such a thing, I would be livid!


----------



## kipp

Maggie Muggins said:


> A lot of us and Prince Charles as well, don't have to read a magazine to know that HM will never retire. She took an oath to serve until her dying day, and I'm sure she will do her utmost to keep it. Her family will help her by taking on more and more of her duties, but she will remain Queen until the end.


ABSOLUTELY THIS.  I was fortunate enough to attend Queen Elisabeth's birthday celebration/concert at Royal Albert Hall in April 2018 (during the Commonwealth meeting) and they replayed the tape of her speech from SA after her father had died---the speech where I believe she said she would rule as long as she lived.


----------



## Lodpah

I think their PR is messing with them, as long as their huge fees keep rolling in.


----------



## eunaddict

A1aGypsy said:


> But seems to me, the correct way to do this was a private attendance with a planted photo on some private person’s Instagram account that is then taken viral. Not a planned photo shoot with professional photographers. Come on now.



I was just thinking that placing flowers on the graves of the Commonwealth soldiers and then the wreath with a simple note, something along the lines of "In remembrance of those who served. - H&M". And then trusting that SOMEONE (given how well-cared for these cemeteries are) will find the wreath and make the connection and announce it to the world for them.

And then the media will be on the hunt for any recent photos of them leaving their gigantic, super-environmentally-friendly mansion in dark clothing (which someone on their end will be sure to provide, maybe like you said via some private instagram account). And they wouldn't have had to really lift a pinkie....PRwise to generate that buzz.

That being said, still so ridiculously inappropriate behaviour. Not every occasion makes for good PR.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

eunaddict said:


> I was just thinking that placing flowers on the graves of the Commonwealth soldiers and then the wreath with a simple note, something along the lines of "In remembrance of those who served. - H&M". And then trusting that SOMEONE (given how well-cared for these cemeteries are) will find the wreath and make the connection and announce it to the world for them.
> 
> And then the media will be on the hunt for any recent photos of them leaving their gigantic, super-environmentally-friendly mansion in dark clothing (which someone on their end will be sure to provide, maybe like you said via some private instagram account). And they wouldn't have had to really lift a pinkie....PRwise to generate that buzz.
> 
> That being said, still so ridiculously inappropriate behaviour. Not every occasion makes for good PR.


Inappropriate - yup ! Amazing the lack of dignity when you are deliberately pouting at your family - wreathgate - this awful photo op was payback to the BRF


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting difference ..
Charles is now promoting a sustainable clothing line - my original reaction was horrors! Lost the reference but Country Life magazine, perhaps

The whole idea made me think of Meghan promoting the Misha Nonoo black suit as business attire for the under-privileged - the suit looked OK, no idea as to quality, but 200 Pounds a piece was too high, the price defeated the purpose, and of course MM wore Manolos with the suit ... tone deaf

Well, the PC line is quite interesting - tweed jackets at 1500 pounds ! Sustainable clothing, investment pieces. After reflection. I am OK with the PC line, no attempt to be an inexpensive line for under privileged just sustainable and UK MANUFACTURE - YES !!!! And somehow the clothing line is appropriate to his station - not too cheap, not made in the Far East

Anyway, if you see the article, take a glance, fascinating comparison to her line

PS the message seemed effective to me, he is  traying to draw over the upper crust to his climate control agenda, he has the contacts , relates to them, there and is using his rolodex effectively, rather than trying to appeal to a different segment


----------



## CanuckBagLover

Maggie Muggins said:


> A lot of us and Prince Charles as well, don't have to read a magazine to know that HM will never retire. She took an oath to serve until her dying day, and I'm sure she will do her utmost to keep it. Her family will help her by taking on more and more of her duties, but she will remain Queen until the end.



She really is a remarkable women if you read about her life, and taking the throne at such a young age. And she has lead Great Britain through so many changes, post-war Great Britain, the transition of empire and decolonization to the creation of the Commonwealth, learning to navigate social media obsessed present day and keeping the Royal Family relevant. Overall I think she's done a very good job in being a uniting leader.   I think many will genuinely mourn her when she dies and I doubt there will be another Royal quite like her. I think she will be remembered as among one of the greatest Royals in history.

I actually wish Charles would abdicate in favour his son William.  But I doubt he'll do that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure what exactly is going on with the UK papers —
-3 days ago, the headline effectively was Charles was taking over & QE stepping down
-yesterday, the headline was QE is staying put as she vowed at her coronation (not promised, vowed)
-today, the headline  is Charles will step aside, followed by a flurry of “No, he will not”

Wonder who is behind all this kerfuffle? Palace courtiers? Somehow, tho, I suspect H&M, perhaps through their ‘PR‘ people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting points by @RAINDANCE  from the William&Kate thread:

_As has been explained Diana was styled Diana, Princess of Wales after her divorce but was not nor ever Princess Diana - using that name is incorrect although widely used by the press and public.
Example 
The wife of Prince Michael of Kent is Princess Michael of Kent - not Princess Marie-Christine
Similarly the wife of Mr Joe Blogs is Mrs Joe Bloggs - although this is now a rarely used salutation and would normally use Mrs Jane Bloggs. 

I think one of the reasons the BRF will be thinking very carefully about Harry's title in 2021 is that if he and his current wife are not styled Duke and Duchess of Sussex, he would revert to Prince Henry of Wales and his wife would then be Princess Henry of Wales. I don't think the British public are going to stand for the perceived elevation to Princess Meghan, even though this is an incorrect salutation, given our 2 "queens in waiting" are duchesses and I doubt anyone thinks this will not be used and exploited to its fullest extent by our expat royal when it suits us couple._


----------



## kemilia

CanuckBagLover said:


> She really is a remarkable women if you read about her life, and taking the throne at such a young age. And she has lead Great Britain through so many changes, post-war Great Britain, the transition of empire and decolonization to the creation of the Commonwealth, learning to navigate social media obsessed present day and keeping the Royal Family relevant. Overall I think she's done a very good job in being a uniting leader.   I think many will genuinely mourn her when she dies and I doubt there will be another Royal quite like her. I think she will be remembered as among one of the greatest Royals in history.
> 
> I actually wish Charles would abdicate in favour his son William.  But I doubt he'll do that.


All this QE discussion is making me excited about The Crown returning this Sunday (in the US). I am ready. (wish there was a wine & pizza emoji)


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> All this QE discussion is making me excited about The Crown returning this Sunday (in the US). I am ready. (wish there was a wine & pizza emoji)



THIS! I can hardly wait!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting points by @RAINDANCE  from the William&Kate thread:
> 
> _As has been explained Diana was styled Diana, Princess of Wales after her divorce but was not nor ever Princess Diana - using that name is incorrect although widely used by the press and public.
> Example
> The wife of Prince Michael of Kent is Princess Michael of Kent - not Princess Marie-Christine
> Similarly the wife of Mr Joe Blogs is Mrs Joe Bloggs - although this is now a rarely used salutation and would normally use Mrs Jane Bloggs.
> 
> I think one of the reasons the BRF will be thinking very carefully about Harry's title in 2021 is that if he and his current wife are not styled Duke and Duchess of Sussex, he would revert to Prince Henry of Wales and his wife would then be Princess Henry of Wales. I don't think the British public are going to stand for the perceived elevation to Princess Meghan, even though this is an incorrect salutation, given our 2 "queens in waiting" are duchesses and I doubt anyone thinks this will not be used and exploited to its fullest extent by our expat royal when it suits us couple._
> [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> CarryOn2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting points by @RAINDANCE  from the William&Kate thread:
> 
> _As has been explained Diana was styled Diana, Princess of Wales after her divorce but was not nor ever Princess Diana - using that name is incorrect although widely used by the press and public.
> Example
> The wife of Prince Michael of Kent is Princess Michael of Kent - not Princess Marie-Christine
> Similarly the wife of Mr Joe Blogs is Mrs Joe Bloggs - although this is now a rarely used salutation and would normally use Mrs Jane Bloggs.
> 
> I think one of the reasons the BRF will be thinking very carefully about Harry's title in 2021 is that if he and his current wife are not styled Duke and Duchess of Sussex, he would revert to Prince Henry of Wales and his wife would then be Princess Henry of Wales. I don't think the British public are going to stand for the perceived elevation to Princess Meghan, even though this is an incorrect salutation, given our 2 "queens in waiting" are duchesses and I doubt anyone thinks this will not be used and exploited to its fullest extent by our expat royal when it suits us couple._
Click to expand...

Interesting thing, if you are SUPER OLD SCHOOL ....
The nomenclature Mrs Jane Bloggs was used for a very particular situation -  that indicated her divorce from Joe, eg Mrs Wallis Simpson. If Joe remarried Liz, then Liz would be the new Mrs Joe Bloggs
So, the whole system, if used correctly - which is rare these days among hoi polloi - indicated marital status and divorce

Agree the alternatives to duke and duchess are quite awkward - Pss Henry of Wales, the press would get that all garbled up like they did for Diana


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CanuckBagLover said:


> I actually wish Charles would abdicate in favour his son William.  But I doubt he'll do that.


In all honesty, why should he? Because he can't be forgiven for his mistakes with Diana? Or because he married Camilla? There are so many reasons why one royal isn't skipped for another. If William takes the throne, then that leaves young George as Prince of Wales, which he will be called, even if his investiture occurs only after he reaches majority. That is too much pressure and too much scrutiny for a young child. He needs time and privacy to mature. Then there needs to be a potential regent appointed for George in case of William's untimely demise. S/he is usually the next royal over age 18 in the line of succession. Harry???


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all honesty, why should he? Because he can't be forgiven for his mistakes with Diana? Or because he married Camilla? There are so many reasons why one royal isn't skipped for another. If William takes the throne, then that leaves young George as Prince of Wales, which he will be called, even if his investiture occurs only after he reaches majority. That is too much pressure and too much scrutiny for a young child. He needs time and privacy to mature. Then there needs to be a potential regent appointed for George in case of William's untimely demise. S/he is usually the next royal over age 18 in the line of succession. Harry???


I'm not expert but my impression is they can't just skip anyway


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all honesty, why should he? Because he can't be forgiven for his mistakes with Diana? Or because he married Camilla? There are so many reasons why one royal isn't skipped for another. If William takes the throne, then that leaves young George as Prince of Wales, which he will be called, even if his investiture occurs only after he reaches majority. That is too much pressure and too much scrutiny for a young child. He needs time and privacy to mature. Then there needs to be a potential regent appointed for George in case of William's untimely demise. *S/he is usually the next royal over age 18 in the line of succession. Harry???*


Whoa, Nelly!!!  I never thought about that!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all honesty, why should he? Because he can't be forgiven for his mistakes with Diana? Or because he married Camilla? There are so many reasons why one royal isn't skipped for another. If William takes the throne, then that leaves young George as Prince of Wales, which he will be called, even if his investiture occurs only after he reaches majority. That is too much pressure and too much scrutiny for a young child. He needs time and privacy to mature. *Then there needs to be a potential regent appointed for George in case of William's untimely demise. S/he is usually the next royal over age 18 in the line of succession. Harry???
> *



EXACTLY, Harry's most important role always was to be available to act as regent is anything should happen to William. 
Although it does not have to be the sibling - I always understood QE2 arranged that Prince Phillip would be regent for Charles rather than Princess Margaret ( too flaky !) Obvious person for George would be Anne IMO ! Would be an absolute snub to Harry if William did that and it was made public, but how can Harry now be considered suitable ?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

RAINDANCE said:


> EXACTLY, Harry's most important role always was to be available to act as regent is anything should happen to William.
> Although it does not have to be the sibling - *I always understood QE2 arranged that Prince Phillip would be regent for Charles rather than Princess Margaret ( too flaky !)* Obvious person for George would be Anne IMO ! Would be an absolute snub to Harry if William did that and it was made public, but how can Harry now be considered suitable ?


I think Princess Margaret enjoyed the notoriety of being royal, but wanted the freedom to perform only fun engagements. Being next in the line of succession after her nephews and niece, she would have been the likely 'potential regent' candidate under normal circumstances. However, her unsuitability and lack of enthusiasm for hard/difficult work made Prince Philip the obvious choice. IMO, if offered the job, she more than likely would have refused it.

Andrew is next after Harry, but I'd bet my last dollar that he would be bypassed for Princess Beatrice, who is next after Andrew.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> EXACTLY, Harry's most important role always was to be available to act as regent is anything should happen to William.
> Although it does not have to be the sibling - I always understood QE2 arranged that Prince Phillip would be regent for Charles rather than Princess Margaret ( too flaky !) Obvious person for George would be Anne IMO ! Would be an absolute snub to Harry if William did that and it was made public, but how can Harry now be considered suitable ?



Anne is my first choice, too. Followed by Edward and Sophie or, if possible, Carole and Michael Middleton. Surely, William has taken the necessary steps.


----------



## Chanbal

Arch*** needs to make a ton of money to cover all this and more. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hire new US-based PR team including Pinterest's head of communications as they prepare to unveil Archewell*
The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, who now live in Santa Barbara with their son Archie, one, after stepping back from their royal duties in March, have recruited Christine Schirmer to lead their press team.

The former head of communications is joined by Toya Holness, who has been employed as the couple's press secretary, according to an announcement by the couple's PR firm, Sunshine Sachs, reported PRWeek.

The duke and duchess will also continue to employ Hollywood PR firm, Sunshine Sachs. The more the merrier!

Start thinking about donating!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anne is my first choice, too. Followed by Edward and *Sophie* or, if possible, *Carole* and *Michael Middleton*. Surely, William has taken the necessary steps.


The king/queen decides who the potential regent will be. The bolded names above will never be potential regents because they are not in the line of succession. Moreover Carole and Michael aren't royals nor in the line of succession. Prince Philip was an exception back in 1953 because of the lack of possible candidates. However, today there are enough direct royal descendants over age 18 from which to choose to avoid choosing civilians.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Arch*** needs to make a ton of money to cover all this and more.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hire new US-based PR team including Pinterest's head of communications as they prepare to unveil Archewell*
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, who now live in Santa Barbara with their son Archie, one, after stepping back from their royal duties in March, have recruited Christine Schirmer to lead their press team.
> 
> The former head of communications is joined by Toya Holness, who has been employed as the couple's press secretary, according to an announcement by the couple's PR firm, Sunshine Sachs, reported PRWeek.
> 
> The duke and duchess will also continue to employ Hollywood PR firm, Sunshine Sachs. The more the merrier!
> 
> Start thinking about donating!



They’ve been starting foundations, hiring people, shutting down foundations and firing people since they got married. I wonder if they’ll ever do anything else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it really necessary to announce the “new PR team”?  



Chanbal said:


> Arch*** needs to make a ton of money to cover all this and more.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hire new US-based PR team including Pinterest's head of communications as they prepare to unveil Archewell*
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, who now live in Santa Barbara with their son Archie, one, after stepping back from their royal duties in March, have recruited Christine Schirmer to lead their press team.
> 
> The former head of communications is joined by Toya Holness, who has been employed as the couple's press secretary, according to an announcement by the couple's PR firm, Sunshine Sachs, reported PRWeek.
> 
> The duke and duchess will also continue to employ Hollywood PR firm, Sunshine Sachs. The more the merrier!
> 
> Start thinking about donating!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> The king/queen decides who the potential regent will be. The bolded names above will never be potential regents because they are not in the line of succession. Moreover Carole and Michael aren't royals nor in the line of succession. Prince Philip was an exception back in 1953 because of the lack of possible candidates. However, today there are enough direct royal descendants over age 18 from which to choose to avoid choosing civilians.



Would King William be able to choose whomever he wanted?  With the plethora of stories about the rift between the brothers, I’m guessing Harry will not be a choice. Of course, I know very little about that part of the BRF, so I could be wrong.


----------



## LittleStar88

.


----------



## LittleStar88

tiktok said:


> They’ve been starting foundations, hiring people, shutting down foundations and firing people since they got married. I wonder if they’ll ever do anything else.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would King William be able to choose whomever he wanted?  With the plethora of stories about the rift between the brothers, I’m guessing Harry will not be a choice. Of course, I know very little about that part of the BRF, so I could be wrong.


When William is king, he can appoint a potential regent for George depending how old George (7yrs old today) will then be. I believe he would choose someone over 18 and from the line of succession as is the custom. Any Potential Regent Act has to be passed by Parliament.


----------



## rose60610

How many PR firms or teams have they gone through already? It's clear they don't listen to the advice they're paying for since every time M &/or H open their mouth or do anything they're a disaster.  My observation is that they're trying to destroy the PR industry by screwing up as much as they do, then fire team after team when the world doesn't fawn over their stupidity. Sometimes the best thing to do is to just shut up and wallow in the privacy they claim to demand. But then again, M couldn't sue for privacy invasion if she didn't throw herself in front of cameras, spew word salads and throw hissy fits over the attention she gets.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> When William is king, he can appoint a potential regent for George depending how old George (7yrs old today) will then be. I believe he would choose someone over 18 and from the line of succession as is the custom. Any Potential Regent Act has to be passed by Parliament.


Queen Victoria had to appoint a Regent when she was having her first child in case she died in childbirth  and the child lived. She had a fight to get Prince Albert  approved, but she won that round.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I have a feeling that with all the risks surrounding Covid, and the ages and risk factors of Charles and QE2, as well as Anne, the selection for Prince Regent for George has for all intents and purposes, already been made.  I think we saw that telegraphed at Beatrice's wedding with her dress and tiara....

She would be the logical choice in these Covid times.... certainly not Harry. 
They must have already put plans into place given Covid.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I'm not expert but my impression is they can't just skip anyway


Not that I'm aware of. Edward VIII abdicated and George VI became King, but I wouldn't call it skipping as King George was next in line. 
I used the word "skipping" in a previous post because I think there is no real reason, other than some people's preferences, as to why Charles should abdicate. To me, such an abdication would be like skipping a generation.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it really necessary to announce the “new PR team”?



They need all the attention they can get to their Arch*** foundation. It's time to donate before the end of the year. TPF members, particularly from this thread, start looking into your finances and see how much you can contribute to this good cause. Remember, the founders are high maintenance, so don't be frugal.


----------



## Chanbal

Sorry double post


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> They need all the attention they can get to their *Arch**** foundation. It's time to donate before the end of the year. TPF members, particularly from this thread, start looking into your finances and see how much you can contribute to this good cause. Remember, the founders are high maintenance, so don't be frugal.



Is Archewell a new TPF forbidden word? Like Trumpet, Obamarama, etc? It keeps getting asterisked (sp?)...


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Is Archewell a new TPF forbidden word? Like Trumpet, Obamarama, etc? It keeps getting asterisked (sp?)...


haha!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Is Archewell a new TPF forbidden word? Like Trumpet, Obamarama, etc? It keeps getting asterisked (sp?)...


Haha, good question! I don't know, just playing on the safe side.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> I have a feeling that with all the risks surrounding Covid, and the ages and risk factors of Charles and QE2, as well as Anne, the selection for Prince Regent for George has for all intents and purposes, already been made.  I think we saw that telegraphed at Beatrice's wedding with her dress and tiara....



Why though? Nothing wrong with Bea, but wouldn't that be entirely premature seeing George is currently 3rd in line and not in dire need of anyone covering for him.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Burrell and Lacey should retire together so  they can share fairy tales.*
> 
> Nobody puts Baby in the corner! The Queen will do as she does for as long as she wishes. These stupid men should stop mansplaining.



Yeah, Lacey should retire, but Mehera Bonner,  a Cosmopolitan contributor and Harkles fan states:

FYI, Lacey is a historian and advisor on Netflix's _The Crown_, so his thoughts are defffffffffinitely worth listening to! 
order of succession


----------



## needlv

I’m just going to comment that Kates outfit for Remembrance Day was exquisite.  The tailoring on her jacket is amazing.  Now compare that to what MM was wearing at her PR stunt at the graveside - and there is no comparison!


----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan is a broke down and busted hot mess duchess. She can only dream of reaching this level of perfection.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> They need all the attention they can get to their *Arch**** foundation. It's time to donate before the end of the year. TPF members, particularly from this thread, start looking into your finances and see how much you can contribute to this good cause. Remember, the founders are high maintenance, so don't be frugal.



I see what happened here! Cookie Monster thought it was an advertisement for the cookie company and he blocked it so he could get to the cookies first.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> I’m just going to comment that Kates outfit for Remembrance Day was exquisite.  The tailoring on her jacket is amazing.  Now compare that to what MM was wearing at her PR stunt at the graveside - and there is no comparison!
> View attachment 4904825


yes, Meghans bespoke coatdress wasn't very impressive....Kate looks awesome


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would King William be able to choose whomever he wanted?  With the plethora of stories about the rift between the brothers, I’m guessing Harry will not be a choice. Of course, I know very little about that part of the BRF, so I could be wrong.


In legal terms they probably hiring everyone so there’s no conflict of interest? I don’t know but sure sounds like it.


----------



## LittleStar88

Memes never get old...


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I’m just going to comment that Kates outfit for Remembrance Day was exquisite.  The tailoring on her jacket is amazing.  Now compare that to what MM was wearing at her PR stunt at the graveside - and there is no comparison!
> View attachment 4904825


Kate's outfit was exquisite, but MM's dull black frock was very grave.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think Princess Margaret enjoyed the notoriety of being royal, but wanted the freedom to perform only fun engagements. Being next in the line of succession after her nephews and niece, she would have been the likely 'potential regent' candidate under normal circumstances. However, her unsuitability and lack of enthusiasm for hard/difficult work made Prince Philip the obvious choice. IMO, if offered the job, she more than likely would have refused it.
> 
> Andrew is next after Harry, but I'd bet my last dollar that he would be bypassed for Princess Beatrice, who is next after Andrew.


Hmmm, Harry sounds a lot like his great aunt!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it really necessary to announce the “new PR team”?


For them?  Heck YES!!  Every little tidbit MUST be publicized.  After all, these are the same people that let it be known that Harry knew MM was the one for him after she peed in the woods.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> I have a feeling that with all the risks surrounding Covid, and the ages and risk factors of Charles and QE2, as well as Anne, the selection for Prince Regent for George has for all intents and purposes, already been made.  I think we saw that telegraphed at Beatrice's wedding with her dress and tiara....
> 
> She would be the logical choice in these Covid times.... certainly not Harry.
> They must have already put plans into place given Covid.


Not that I know any of these people personally, but Beatrice seems like a genuinely nice, down to earth person who maintains grace and dignity, and is obviously close to QE2.  She'd be a great choice.  And even more so, given how MM likes to upstage her and her sister and obviously separated them from their "close cousin" Harry.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> I’m just going to comment that Kates outfit for Remembrance Day was exquisite.  The tailoring on her jacket is amazing.  Now compare that to what MM was wearing at her PR stunt at the graveside - and there is no comparison!
> View attachment 4904825


I really like Kate.  Her style is impeccable, and she's obviously risen to the occasion and her role.  MM could learn a lot from her.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Kate's outfit was exquisite, but *MM's dull black frock was very grave*.


Pun intended?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan is a broke down and busted hot mess duchess. She can only dream of reaching this level of perfection.



Now we're being a bit unfair. I bet it's only because Kate, after not giving her a ride to the shops, never told her how to find a tailor.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Odd choice of words, it says MM hired them, not H&M?

*Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save her ailing image after Remembrance Day PR blunder*









						Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save image
					

THE Duchess of Sussex has taken on two new publicity experts in a desperate bid to bolster her ailing image. Meghan has appointed the US-based pair to head-up an urgently revamped press team follow…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CanuckBagLover

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all honesty, why should he? Because he can't be forgiven for his mistakes with Diana? Or because he married Camilla? There are so many reasons why one royal isn't skipped for another. If William takes the throne, then that leaves young George as Prince of Wales, which he will be called, even if his investiture occurs only after he reaches majority. That is too much pressure and too much scrutiny for a young child. He needs time and privacy to mature. Then there needs to be a potential regent appointed for George in case of William's untimely demise. S/he is usually the next royal over age 18 in the line of succession. Harry???



I'm not sure how the British still feel about how he treated Diana.  I'm sure there are people out there who harbour ill will.

But my personal reason is that William and Kate are much relatable and I would just like to see a younger generation lead and I think it would be interesting to see how they handle the role.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Odd choice of words, it says MM hired them, not H&M?
> 
> *Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save her ailing image after Remembrance Day PR blunder*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save image
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex has taken on two new publicity experts in a desperate bid to bolster her ailing image. Meghan has appointed the US-based pair to head-up an urgently revamped press team follow…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Not too surprising. Would Harry have a clue how to hire  publicists? I know their pretense is they work together on everything, but at some point you have to get things done and Meghan is desperate.     Harry doesn’t strike me as being interested in the business end and I bet he leaves all those decisions up to her.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Odd choice of words, it says MM hired them, not H&M?
> 
> *Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save her ailing image after Remembrance Day PR blunder*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save image
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex has taken on two new publicity experts in a desperate bid to bolster her ailing image. Meghan has appointed the US-based pair to head-up an urgently revamped press team follow…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



The choice of words is correct imo. MM's image is a lot more relevant than the image of her handbag husband (this is a purseforum ). So “She’s taken on two ambitious, smart, career-driven women who have her best interests at heart.” I wonder if those women are TPF members.

It's good that “Meghan is well aware that she and Harry are no longer the golden couple". When were they the golden couple? Am I missing something here?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Pun intended?


----------



## Chanbal

*Many happy returns, Charles! Queen and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge lead tributes to the **Prince of Wales** on his 72nd birthday*

Let's see what MM's new hires (PR-image rescue team) have planned for Charles. Any guesses?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's good that “Meghan is well aware that she and Harry are no longer the golden couple". When were they the golden couple? Am I missing something here?



The Sun article puts it out there — blunders, not mistakes. Wow.  

https://www.thesun.co.uk/who/meghan-markle/


Spoiler: Embarrassing PR Blunders



THE Duchess of Sussex has taken on two new publicity experts in a _desperate bid to bolster her ailing image_.
Meghan has appointed the US-based pair to head-up an urgently revamped press team following _several embarrassing PR blunders_.
News of the appointments comes after Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, were slammed for staging their own pictures in an LA Cemetery for Remembrance Sunday.

_A source said: “Meghan is well aware that she and Harry are no longer the golden couple._
Prince William and Kate can do no wrong now as far as the UK is concerned, whereas she and Harry are _seen as a self-interested couple who quit the Royal Family to pursue their own interests._

“_Meghan hopes to turn things around and show people how committed to doing good she is, and for them to see a different, more positive side to her._

“_Whilst this isn’t crisis management as such, given her popularity ratings right now, it’s not far off._
”She’s taken on two ambitious, smart, career-driven women who _have her best interests at heart._”

Widely respected Christine Weil Schirmer has been installed in a newly created head of communications role and Toya Holness has been appointed press secretary.

Both women recently changed their social media profiles to private - meaning only friends can see their photos and commentary
The couple will continue to employ Hollywood PR firm Sunshine Sachs and their UK-based PR James Holt will report to ex-Pinterest social media executive Christine.

Fittingly, former high school soccer star Toya — previously worked at marketing firm Deluxe — cites 2008 ITV show The Palace as her favourite programme.

Feminist Meghan would no doubt like the fact Toya, who has also worked for a London film PR company, states that her career goal is to “earn more money than her husband”.

The couple have also come in for criticism for repeatedly flying by private jet while spouting on about the need for climate control.
And they have been lecturing the public on global poverty — from the comfort of their £11million Californian mansion.

...the rest of article did not load.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Sun article puts it out there — blunders, not mistakes. Wow.
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/who/meghan-markle/
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Embarrassing PR Blunders
> 
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex has taken on two new publicity experts in a _desperate bid to bolster her ailing image_.
> Meghan has appointed the US-based pair to head-up an urgently revamped press team following _several embarrassing PR blunders_.
> News of the appointments comes after Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, were slammed for staging their own pictures in an LA Cemetery for Remembrance Sunday.
> 
> _A source said: “Meghan is well aware that she and Harry are no longer the golden couple._
> Prince William and Kate can do no wrong now as far as the UK is concerned, whereas she and Harry are _seen as a self-interested couple who quit the Royal Family to pursue their own interests._
> 
> “_Meghan hopes to turn things around and show people how committed to doing good she is, and for them to see a different, more positive side to her._
> 
> “_Whilst this isn’t crisis management as such, given her popularity ratings right now, it’s not far off._
> ”She’s taken on two ambitious, smart, career-driven women who _have her best interests at heart._”
> 
> Widely respected Christine Weil Schirmer has been installed in a newly created head of communications role and Toya Holness has been appointed press secretary.
> 
> Both women recently changed their social media profiles to private - meaning only friends can see their photos and commentary
> The couple will continue to employ Hollywood PR firm Sunshine Sachs and their UK-based PR James Holt will report to ex-Pinterest social media executive Christine.
> 
> Fittingly, former high school soccer star Toya — previously worked at marketing firm Deluxe — cites 2008 ITV show The Palace as her favourite programme.
> 
> Feminist Meghan would no doubt like the fact Toya, who has also worked for a London film PR company, states that her career goal is to “earn more money than her husband”.
> 
> The couple have also come in for criticism for repeatedly flying by private jet while spouting on about the need for climate control.
> And they have been lecturing the public on global poverty — from the comfort of their £11million Californian mansion.
> 
> ...the rest of article did not load.


I think this title further clarifies her real intentions:
*Meghan and Harry latest: Duchess hires publicity experts to save her image as Queen urged to STRIP their royal titles*
The move comes as it was reported the Queen has been urged to strip Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their royal titles "as soon as possible" to save the monarchy.

MM will do everything to keep that duchess title...

Stay away from my title!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It's good that “Meghan is well aware that she and Harry are no longer the golden couple". When were they the golden couple? Am I missing something here?



From the time the engagement was announced until at least a few months after the wedding they absolutely were the golden couple. They were extremely popular and everyone had such high hopes for them. They were even popular here for a while.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> From the time the engagement was announced until at least a few months after the wedding *they absolutely were the golden couple.* They were extremely popular and everyone had such high hopes for them. They were even popular here for a while.


They only became popular for me (and not in a good way) after they started cluttering the news with so many phony photo-ops and ridiculous articles about them. I didn't pay much attention to MM&H before that. I believe I wished them well at the time of their weeding and disconnected.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> From the time the engagement was announced until at least a few months after the wedding they absolutely were the golden couple. They were extremely popular and everyone had such high hopes for them. They were even popular here for a while.


Not for me, I saw right through her from the start because I couldn't believe that any sane person would marry a confused and disrespectful brat like Harry, who had already been dumped by two apparently decent girlfriends.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan is a broke down and busted hot mess duchess. She can only dream of reaching this level of perfection.


The only way MM will reach perfection is if she becomes a Borg.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *They only became popular for me (and not in a good way) after they started cluttering the news with so many phony photo-ops and ridiculous articles about them. *I didn't pay much attention to MM&H before that. I believe I wished them well at the time of their weeding and disconnected.



  Well said! Thank you.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> Odd choice of words, it says MM hired them, not H&M?
> 
> *Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save her ailing image after Remembrance Day PR blunder*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires two publicity experts in desperate bid to save image
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex has taken on two new publicity experts in a desperate bid to bolster her ailing image. Meghan has appointed the US-based pair to head-up an urgently revamped press team follow…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


She can hire a dozen, but if she never listens then nothing will change.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> *The only way MM will reach perfection is if she becomes a Borg*.




Well said! Thank you.
From the Wikipedia:
_The Borg are cybernetic organisms linked in a hive mind called "the Collective"._

She may already be one   but she’s lost her “link”.


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, if these two women were hired a month ago, and they were the ones who dreamt up the trip to the cemetery, then I think that they are as cuckoo clueless  as the Harkles.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, if these two women were hired a month ago, and they were the ones who dreamt up the trip to the cemetery, then I think that they are as cuckoo clueless  as the Harkles.


Can we say, it was a grave mistake?


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Not for me, I saw right through her from the start because* I couldn't believe that any sane person would marry a confused and disrespectful brat like Harry*, who had already been dumped by two apparently decent girlfriends.





gracekelly said:


> Honestly, *if these two women were hired a month ago, and they were the ones who dreamt up the trip to the cemetery, *then I think that they are as cuckoo clueless  as the Harkles.



These are great points!

@Maggie Muggins I would perhaps add that she even rushed into marry him.

@gracekelly If the new hires organized the trip to the cemetery, we can expect a lot of entertainment. I can't wait to see what they have in mind for Charles b-day. MM coming out of a birthday cake???


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> She can hire a dozen, but if she never listens then nothing will change.


there is a second (new) PR firm for Archewell, in addition to the (first) glitzy Hollywood PR team
I will see if I can find the cites
IMHO, If they have any hope of going back to the UK, then they need a 3rd team, sensitive to the issues and temperament in the UK, needs to know how to spell BREXIT

Perhaps some of their problem is that they are trying to influence the US and the UK at the same time, as if their message were universal ... boy, that seems like a tall order to me , the US and the UK are different , or has that not occurred to their team(s)?


----------



## rose60610

It made no sense for M&H to even go to the L.A. cemetery, much less turn it into a disastrous photo op. They begged out of the duties of the BRF and wanted to go independent. No more ribbon cuttings, nosegay acceptances, or representing the Crown at events. So what do they do? Schlep off to a U.S. cemetery with a camera crew, designer clothes and medals to pretend to care about deceased soldiers. Now they find themselves in a firestorm of criticism. It'd be nice and deserving if Netflix could fire them and terminate their mega contract. Lots of celebrities are publicity whores, but M&H take it to a new level. Using dead people purely as props for self promotion. They're an embarrassment. Let's see how long it takes to frame themselves as victims once again over the criticism.


----------



## K.D.

As I expected after some hints JCMH had another video call just now, this time with a contestant from Strictly! The contestant, now a presenter I think, was in the Invictus Games. Harry looked quite glum. Sure there will be some news articles soon with some screen shots


----------



## marietouchet

Got it, article detailing the 2 pr firms 

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hire a head of communications
https://mol.im/a/8946677

It is not clear whether or not the newbies were in place early enough to have master minded the cemetery photo op


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Can we say, it was a grave mistake?


Yep!  It was deadly.


----------



## papertiger

CanuckBagLover said:


> I'm not sure how the British still feel about how he treated Diana.  I'm sure there are people out there who harbour ill will.
> 
> But my personal reason is that William and Kate are much relatable and I would just like to see a younger generation lead and I think it would be interesting to see how they handle the role.



It's not up for discussion. I'm not even a staunch monarchist (it goes against logic). But, the Queen is our monarch, when she dies Charles will be King. When he dies, William will take over. End of, or end of the monarchy.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Can we say, it was a grave mistake?





gracekelly said:


> Yep!  It was deadly.


 You ladies are killing it today!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> You ladies are killing it today!


It's better for the soul to laugh than sit there like dead wood!


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Not for me, I saw right through her from the start because I couldn't believe that any sane person would marry a confused and disrespectful brat like Harry, who had already been dumped by two apparently decent girlfriends.



Well, he had to marry someone sometime (or never). I was actually thrilled that this presentable woman of the world, relationships behind her, in her late-30s, who could speak-up for herself was ready to take him on, and hoping she would live on 'Planet Royal' and appreciate all the privileges. I think she would have been very popular, had they seen to be doing stuff and otherwise kept quiet.

I actually think they're well matched. Both are equally confused and disrespectful opportunists.


----------



## Lodpah

Life ... is a tale Told by an idiots, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
Shakespeare. See I credit the author. I emphasized and added idiots instead of singular.


----------



## Lodpah

For MM:
Being born in a stable does not make one a horse. (In her quest to keep her titles)

For the two greatest cons in the BRF:

Lord Chancellor, did I deliver the speech well? I am glad of that, for there was nothing in it.

King George.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I'm looking forward to how they're going to screw up for Thanksgiving. The UK doesn't celebrate it so anything M&H do is something Buckingham Palace wouldn't be doing. Yippee! So M&H can't be upstaged by the pesky palace that's given them untold riches. I'm thinking they might dress up Archie as a woke Pilgrim being force fed a vegan meal by Duchess Mom. Hopefully Doria is in the picture to save Archie from his derelict parents.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Well, he had to marry someone sometime (or never). I was actually thrilled that this presentable woman of the world, relationships behind her, in her late-30s, who could speak-up for herself was ready to take him on, and hoping she would live on 'Planet Royal' and appreciate all the privileges. I think she would have been very popular, had they seen to be doing stuff and otherwise kept quiet.
> 
> I actually think they're well matched. Both are equally confused and disrespectful opportunists.


My initial thoughts on MM were that she was perfect for the task due to her experience with press, red carpets, experience (age), education (I thought she would be a quick learn of all things UK, but she failed to open that book)


----------



## rose60610

All MM had to do was shut up and go through the motions of being a royal. She used to have a great following and people were initially on her side, including me. She had the whole world and riches galore at her fingertips. Then every time she opened her mouth she sounded stupid and alienated people. She did perform a great snow job at pretending to enjoy the royal duties early on. Then it became apparent her relationship with Harry was just a big con job to climb the Hollywood ladder. Netflix really needs to yank their contract.


----------



## Aimee3

Let’s see...if the Queen takes their titles away, she will become Meghan Markle, formerly known as the Duchess of Sussex, so she will cleverly still have her title linked to her name!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> Let’s see...if the Queen takes their titles away, she will become Meghan Markle, formerly known as the Duchess of Sussex, so she will cleverly still have her title linked to her name!


Maybe the Queen will remove their HRH, duke and earl titles in exchange for a simple one like Lord and Lady of Sixteen Bathrooms. She can't remove his prince title.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> It is not clear whether or not the newbies were in place early enough to have master minded the cemetery photo op



I think the idea for the photo op came from the overactive, vindictive mind of Meghan. The two new publicists would have no idea that Harry’s wreath was not being put out nor would they care. No professional would focus on something so petty. I think Harry was all butthurt and Meghan told him they didn’t need the BRF to put out a wreath. They would do it themselves and do it better!  She barely needs an excuse to dress up in expensive clothes for a photo shoot anyway. She lives for that crap.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I'm looking forward to how they're going to screw up for Thanksgiving. The UK doesn't celebrate it so anything M&H do is something Buckingham Palace wouldn't be doing. Yippee! So M&H can't be upstaged by the pesky palace that's given them untold riches. I'm thinking they might dress up Archie as a woke Pilgrim being force fed a vegan meal by Duchess Mom. Hopefully Doria is in the picture to save Archie from his derelict parents.



I’ll predict we won’t hear a peep from them on Thanksgiving. They should still be a reeling from this latest fiasco. With Covid numbers going up again I don’t think they will risk repeating that “delivering food to the needy” photo shoot they did in the spring. Although I suppose the new publicists could come up with some fresh angle for them.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> All MM had to do was shut up and go through the motions of being a royal. She used to have a great following and people were initially on her side, including me. She had the whole world and riches galore at her fingertips. Then every time she opened her mouth she sounded stupid and alienated people. She did perform a great snow job at pretending to enjoy the royal duties early on. Then it became apparent her relationship with Harry was just a big con job to climb the Hollywood ladder. Netflix really needs to yank their contract.


but we didn't know at the beginning she was really just existing


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are H&M behind the “unearthed photos“ of William’s bachelor party? And Kate’s pre-William boyfriend stories?  



Spoiler: Links to the W&K stories 



ttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8949685/Kate-Middleton-pining-love-headed-Florence-gap-year.html








						Prince William's final bachelor party
					

Prince William takes to the dance floor with a blonde girl in a sexy basque after having knocked back shots of tequila, sambuca and several vodka and tonics at the K Bar on London's Fulham Road.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







get ready for this show — again, no MM?








						Prince Harry's joke about being with 100 women exposed
					

PRINCE HARRY made a joke about being with 100 women at a charity dinner, as it was confirmed the Duke of Sussex would be taking part in a special comedy night to raise millions for military veterans.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I'm thinking Nutmeg and JCMH will participate is some kind of Thanksgiving feeding the homeless photo-op.....um, I mean charity.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are H&M behind the “unearthed photos“ of William’s bachelor party? And Kate’s pre-William boyfriend stories?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Links to the W&K stories
> 
> 
> 
> ttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8949685/Kate-Middleton-pining-love-headed-Florence-gap-year.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William's final bachelor party
> 
> 
> Prince William takes to the dance floor with a blonde girl in a sexy basque after having knocked back shots of tequila, sambuca and several vodka and tonics at the K Bar on London's Fulham Road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> get ready for this show — again, no MM?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's joke about being with 100 women exposed
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY made a joke about being with 100 women at a charity dinner, as it was confirmed the Duke of Sussex would be taking part in a special comedy night to raise millions for military veterans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



If so..............two can play THAT game. Don't tell me MM and H don't have some dicey photos of their own that could somehow mysteriously end up in the public domain.  Handlers can order moles to get hold of those and have others drop or send them to various publications. And golly, how did they ever get found and turn up??


----------



## lanasyogamama

Those are not spicy bachelor party pics. Nice try Meg!


----------



## rose60610

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm thinking Nutmeg and JCMH will participate is some kind of Thanksgiving feeding the homeless photo-op.....um, I mean charity.



That's a reasonable expectation. Let's see if the "homeless" are staged actors oh-so-impressed by the kindness. You know how in The Mall in DC there are homeless "sleeping" on several of the park benches near the White House? I found it interesting that some of the "homeless" had the shabby clothes and disheveled hair etc, yet somehow found it possible to have manicured hands. Certainly after the Cemetery fiasco, M&H are not above hiring actors to pose as indigent people lining up for a meal. Whatever M will be wearing, surely it will contrast nicely with the color of her side dish. Harry will have to dig up another grey polo.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Got it, article detailing the 2 pr firms
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry hire a head of communications
> https://mol.im/a/8946677
> 
> *It is not clear whether or not the newbies were in place early enough to have master minded the cemetery photo op*


I'm afraid you are right and the new hires were not the masterminds behind the grave photo-op. MM didn't congratulate Charles on his birthday today. I was expecting to see her coming out of a birthday cake dressed as Superwoman...Very disappointed.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I'm afraid you are right and the new hires were not the masterminds behind the grave photo-op. MM didn't congratulate Charles on his birthday today. I was expecting to see her coming out of a birthday cake dressed as Superwoman...Very disappointed.


Another article suggests the 2nd firm was hired As a result of photo fiasco since MM realizes they are no longer a golden couple ... so brought in as fixers ??
I think the timing is a bit tight for that , how quick can one hire PR firms ? And make announcement ?
I suspect the change has been brewing for a while and neither the original nor revised PR teams were entirely responsible 
I put the responsibility for cemetery pix at the feet of Harry, who was annoyed at the wreath refusal, it was a knee jerk bit of pique for which he was the instigator


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> I'm looking forward to how they're going to screw up for Thanksgiving. The UK doesn't celebrate it so anything M&H do is something Buckingham Palace wouldn't be doing. Yippee! So M&H can't be upstaged by the pesky palace that's given them untold riches. I'm thinking they might dress up Archie as a woke Pilgrim being force fed a vegan meal by Duchess Mom. Hopefully Doria is in the picture to save Archie from his derelict parents.



Don't get your hopes high. The new hires (aka PR-image rescue team) may not allow her to dress up Archie as a woke Pilgrim or Harry as a turkey. They will have a traditional Thanksgiving dinner and private this time, but I may be wrong.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> I put the responsibility for cemetery pix at the feet of Harry, who was annoyed at the *wreath refusal*, it was a knee jerk bit of pique for which he was the instigator


I think the wreath fixation or whatever one wants to call it, was Harry's own creation. There were and are no personal wreaths laid during Remembrance Sunday. But…
1) Harry can be really stupid. Of course his name would have been on the wreath as the bearer, but that’s all. How could he not understand that he carried and laid the wreath for The Legion and not for Harry, the person.
2) If Harry understood #1, then the whole wreath business is a concocted story to make them appear victims again. 
3) They turned this whole episode into an opportunity to promote themselves as caring citizens by visiting that cemetery.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Thought this was a kind of interesting op-Ed...









						EMILY ANDREWS: Prince Harry take millions from Netflix...
					

EMILY ANDREWS: Surely everyone knows The Crown is just fiction: another TV costume drama by Netflix, that  'dream factory' that pumps out £12 billion worth of content each year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> Thought this was a kind of interesting op-Ed...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EMILY ANDREWS: Prince Harry take millions from Netflix...
> 
> 
> EMILY ANDREWS: Surely everyone knows The Crown is just fiction: another TV costume drama by Netflix, that  'dream factory' that pumps out £12 billion worth of content each year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Thanks for posting this article, it's quite interesting. If true, the statements below only show a low moral character...

"The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the Netflix documentary they have discussed making goes beyond the ‘inspirational family programming’ they initially promised.

Instead, it will centre on the couple’s first year after splitting from the Royal Family, their new life in California and the reasons why they fled Britain.

According to a well-placed source, the couple have video footage from when they left their Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, for the final time and their ‘farewell tour’ at Buckingham Palace. Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage – including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from Royal life – during negotiations with Netflix."

Disgusting!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Hopefully Doria is in the picture to save Archie from his derelict parents.



She didn't even want to raise her own child though, so why would she be a super doting grandma?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are H&M behind the “unearthed photos“ of William’s bachelor party? And Kate’s pre-William boyfriend stories?



Is he naked with Nazi regalia wrapped around his arm? And seeing they met when they were like what, 20? What scandalous, steamy stories that must be about Kate *rolls eyes*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this article, it's quite interesting. If true, the statements below only show a low moral character...
> 
> "The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the Netflix documentary they have discussed making goes beyond the ‘inspirational family programming’ they initially promised.
> 
> Instead, it will centre on the couple’s first year after splitting from the Royal Family, their new life in California and the reasons why they fled Britain.
> 
> According to a well-placed source, the couple have video footage from when they left their Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, for the final time and their ‘farewell tour’ at Buckingham Palace. Their representatives are thought to have pitched the footage – including personal videos recorded as they stepped back from Royal life – during negotiations with Netflix."
> 
> Disgusting!



I feel Netflix must be exceptionally stupid to buy that stuff. Do they really think the BRF will just sit back and not unleash an army of lawyers and probably have a good chance of winning?


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Those are not spicy bachelor party pics. Nice try Meg!


Those are pictures that have actually been published before, years ago.


----------



## Chanbal

I have no words to comment on this, apart that it makes me feel sad. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle May Soon Visit the White House*

Ever since *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* settled into their new home in California, the couple has made it clear they plan to be outspoken advocates for the politically charged causes they support.

But it turns out that, while the Sussexes' comments may have been perceived as political, their relationship with the Bidens is deeply personal: Harry has had a friendship with incoming First Lady *Dr. Jill ***** *for nearly a decade. While Harry and Meghan's friendship with the former President and First Lady *Barack and Michelle ****** is widely known, it's the prince's unlikely connection with Jill ***** that may prompt the duke and duchess to visit the White House after the president-elect is sworn in on Jan. 20.

Leeches?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hate that I will want to watch the Netflix show.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Make that hate watch.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think the wreath fixation or whatever one wants to call it, was Harry's own creation. There were and are no personal wreaths laid during Remembrance Sunday. But…
> 1) Harry can be really stupid. Of course his name would have been on the wreath as the bearer, but that’s all. How could he not understand that he carried and laid the wreath for The Legion and not for Harry, the person.
> 2) If Harry understood #1, then the whole wreath business is a concocted story to make them appear victims again.
> 3) They turned this whole episode into an opportunity to promote themselves as caring citizens by visiting that cemetery.


Wreath fixation - too funny !!! 
But, as serious influencers, we should stick to a single terminology. I think I invented the term WREATHGATE, and fell that I need to unilaterally impose that on all LOL


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are H&M behind the “unearthed photos“ of William’s bachelor party? And Kate’s pre-William boyfriend stories?


I wouldn't be surprised if they are behind this. Part of their image rescue process may include destroying the image of others... 

I am so tired of people that do nothing, are always politically correct, and take advantage of others to live in luxury. I wish this couple would live privately in their 16-toilet mansion and stopped their negative contributions to this country. COVID numbers are increasing, many families are hurting, young people are coming out of colleges without job offers, the rise in homelessness is shocking... We don't deserve these two parasites.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel Netflix must be exceptionally stupid to buy that stuff. Do they really think the BRF will just sit back and not unleash an army of lawyers and probably have a good chance of winning?


I hope they do, and the BRF wins. Though, MM and Netflix can do a lot of unnecessary damage to the BRF. Do you really think the BRF will remove their titles?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I hope they do, and the BRF wins. Though, MM and Netflix can do a lot of unnecessary damage to the BRF. Do you really think the BRF will remove their titles?



Based on the negative reviews of The Crown, these anti-royal shows may be way past their sell-by date.  NFlix needs to read the room
We the people just aren’t in the mood for hate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Do you really think the BRF will remove their titles?



I personally don't think so. I feel they might not be as induldent with her once divorce papers are signed, but as long as she's still an item with Harry they won't do anything crazy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H will always be Prince, MM will be Princess Henry (as long as she stays married to him). 
Doubt QE will remove anything other than funds. She has not removed anything from Andrew. 
If anything is removed (ahem), Charles will have to do it. We know he won’t. 
Maybe keeping them from participating in the festivities will be enough.  Seems to work well for Andrew. IMO


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally don't think so. I feel they might not be as induldent with her once divorce papers are signed, but as long as she's still an item with Harry they won't do anything crazy.


I agree with you. MM will not divorce H, she needs him to have her most wished 'celebrity status'.


----------



## purseinsanity

So it was Prince Charles' 72nd birthday.  I refuse to look directly at anything MM and JCMH put out, but none of the articles I read mentioned anything about these goons wishing him a happy birthday.  Did anyone else?  Maybe he really stopped funding them, and this was their revenge, to refuse to acknowledge his birthday?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Wreath fixation - too funny !!!
> But, as serious influencers, we should stick to a single terminology. I think I invented the term WREATHGATE, and fell that I need to unilaterally impose that on all LOL


I should have been clearer. Wreath fixation was intended to describe Harry's belief that he owned the wreath and that he could dictate when and where it should be laid and in his name, no less. But, all other classifications work for me.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are H&M behind the “unearthed photos“ of William’s bachelor party? And Kate’s pre-William boyfriend stories?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Links to the W&K stories
> 
> 
> 
> ttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8949685/Kate-Middleton-pining-love-headed-Florence-gap-year.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William's final bachelor party
> 
> 
> Prince William takes to the dance floor with a blonde girl in a sexy basque after having knocked back shots of tequila, sambuca and several vodka and tonics at the K Bar on London's Fulham Road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> get ready for this show — again, no MM?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's joke about being with 100 women exposed
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY made a joke about being with 100 women at a charity dinner, as it was confirmed the Duke of Sussex would be taking part in a special comedy night to raise millions for military veterans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


the fundraiser seems to be for American veterans...but somehow Harry managed to get in on it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

As someone mentioned a few pages ago, Harry phoned into the Dancing show yesterday. He is supporting his friend.
His Dad’s 70th?  Surely, it was all handled privately.









						Strictly Come Dancing: Prince Harry surprises viewers
					

The Duke of Sussex, 36, made his first TV appearance in the UK since he and his wife Meghan Markle stepped down as senior members of the royal family earlier this year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are H&M behind the “unearthed photos“ of William’s bachelor party? And Kate’s pre-William boyfriend stories?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Links to the W&K stories
> 
> 
> 
> ttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8949685/Kate-Middleton-pining-love-headed-Florence-gap-year.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William's final bachelor party
> 
> 
> Prince William takes to the dance floor with a blonde girl in a sexy basque after having knocked back shots of tequila, sambuca and several vodka and tonics at the K Bar on London's Fulham Road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> get ready for this show — again, no MM?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's joke about being with 100 women exposed
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY made a joke about being with 100 women at a charity dinner, as it was confirmed the Duke of Sussex would be taking part in a special comedy night to raise millions for military veterans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


So Will got drunk and danced with a young blonde woman?   Big story


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't even want to raise her own child though, so why would she be a super doting grandma?


to give doria the benefit of the doubt, it's possible Meghan was a handfull and/or wanted to go with her dad for the show biz connections


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> to give doria the benefit of the doubt, it's possible Meghan was a handfull and/or wanted to go with her dad for the show biz connections



Absolutely none of my business, but...shouldn’t NFlix cover this part of the story? We know next to nothing of her story. We know lots and lots about the royals and their palaces. So, to be fair (!), Doria should be included, right?


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> So Will got drunk and danced with a young blonde woman?   Big story


If that’s all the dirt they can dig up on Will, it’s pretty clean “dirt” if you ask me.  At least neither were naked, nor was Will stupid enough to be decked out in a Nazi uniform.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> I have no words to comment on this, apart that it makes me feel sad.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle May Soon Visit the White House*
> 
> Ever since *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* settled into their new home in California, the couple has made it clear they plan to be outspoken advocates for the politically charged causes they support.
> 
> But it turns out that, while the Sussexes' comments may have been perceived as political, their relationship with the Bidens is deeply personal: Harry has had a friendship with incoming First Lady *Dr. Jill ***** *for nearly a decade. While Harry and Meghan's friendship with the former President and First Lady *Barack and Michelle ****** is widely known, it's the prince's unlikely connection with Jill ***** that may prompt the duke and duchess to visit the White House after the president-elect is sworn in on Jan. 20.
> 
> Leeches?


 
Sad, the feeling of disgust is actually what comes to  my mind when reading this.


----------



## kipp

bellecate said:


> Sad, the feeling of disgust is actually what comes to  my mind when reading this.


Totally agree.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> If that’s all the dirt they can dig up on Will, it’s pretty clean “dirt” if you ask me.  At least neither were naked, nor was Will stupid enough to be decked out in a Nazi uniform.


and he left the party alone


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely none of my business, but...shouldn’t NFlix cover this part of the story? We know next to nothing of her story. We know lots and lots about the royals and their palaces. So, to be fair (!), Doria should be included, right?


They would have Omid or someone like him to provide whatever details they would like us to believe, pure fiction...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Sad, the feeling of disgust is actually what comes to  my mind when reading this.


her head might get so big it would explode if they got invited to the WH


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> and he left the party alone


I want to like this 100 times!!!!


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel Netflix must be exceptionally stupid to buy that stuff. Do they really think the BRF will just sit back and not unleash an army of lawyers and probably have a good chance of winning?



Considering all the unforced errors M&H have made, WreathGate being the most recent and a real doozy, their credibility fades more each day. Anyone with a few functioning brain cells have figured out that there's no depth low enough for these two. Meghan sold out her family before the marriage-Doria being the exception because it looks good to have mommy at the wedding- why wouldn't Harry sell out his? That's only being consistent. Meghan sold out hers to land Harry, Harry sees Netflix dollar signs to sell out his. Besides, they're buddies with the *****'*.  We all know politicians and celebrities have parasitic incestuous relationships, the common denominator is sucking off huge bank accounts. A centuries old royal family history?  PSFT! Who cares? When you can cash in your own family that made your global connections possible, why not? You don't need their name anymore, you've already landed. Which now makes the BRF dead weight in M&H's eyes. The only thing left to do is to leech off others' fame to promote themselves. And we all know M&H are pros at that. The White House is simply a target for connections, another breeding ground ripe for the picking. With a fat Netflix contract in their pocket, of course they're welcome. The place will be crawling with social climbing cockroaches. M&H fit right in. And the Media will be slobbering with goo goo eyed adoration at their presence. We'll be told how wonderful, brilliant and caring they are. I wonder how Meghan's clothes will fit. Can her new PR team get that right? Somehow I doubt it.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Sad, the feeling of disgust is actually what comes to  my mind when reading this.


widely known friendship with Michelle and Barak?  yeah in H&M's mind


----------



## marietouchet

bellecate said:


> Sad, the feeling of disgust is actually what comes to  my mind when reading this.


Honestly, the man in the White House has too much to do to waste time on them , IMHO. Let's see -  there is keep people safe from COVID,  deal with job losses due to  COVID and that is just off the top of my head


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can already foresee that if the Nflix show doesn’t get the reception they expect, they’ll claim it was all edited that way without their permission.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Rumour posted on Twitter:


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> So Will got drunk and danced with a young blonde woman?   Big story


No kidding. If they think that this will sully his rep then they really have nothing.   Will and Kate are so for beyond these two clowns that the attempts at hammering at their reps is ridiculous


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> As someone mentioned a few pages ago, Harry phoned into the Dancing show yesterday. He is supporting his friend.
> *His Dad’s 70th?  Surely, it was all handled privately.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strictly Come Dancing: Prince Harry surprises viewers
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, made his first TV appearance in the UK since he and his wife Meghan Markle stepped down as senior members of the royal family earlier this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don't think these two handle anything privately.  Everything is trumpeted up and put on blast.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think these two handle anything privately.  Everything is trumpeted up and put on blast.



Exactly. Including Meghan's colossal talent of peeing in the woods; and not being asked if she "was OK" which left her irreparably emotionally scarred.  And delivering food anonymously, taking off her mask to force the recipient to stare in awe. Oh wait, that wasn't anonymous. And of course, suing anyone she can think of.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> widely known friendship with Michelle and Barak?  yeah in H&M's mind





marietouchet said:


> Honestly, the man in the White House has too much to do to waste time on them , IMHO. Let's see -  there is keep people safe from COVID,  deal with job losses due to  COVID and that is just off the top of my head


If there is a thing I learned is not to underestimate people like MM (a wolf in sheep’s clothing). People who lack empathy have no problem in taking advantage of others for their own benefit. She found a way to gain access to QE, and I wouldn't be too surprised if she finds a way to connect with the man or woman in the WH.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> If there is a thing I learned is not to underestimate people like MM (a wolf in sheep’s clothing). People who lack empathy have no problem in taking advantage of others for their own benefit. She found a way to gain access to QE, and I wouldn't be too surprised if she finds a way to connect with the man or woman in the WH.


Exactly---she will figure out a way to invite herself and JCMH rather than the other way around.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think these two handle anything privately.  Everything is trumpeted up and put on blast.


Let's see what will happen with the new hires (PR-image rescue team). MM has been unusually quiet these last days.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM has been unusually quiet these last days.



That’s because she’s sitting home in her mansion wondering why her amazing PR ideas aren’t working out the way they should. Could it be she doesn’t know what the hell she’s doing? Naw, it must be the fault of the media or the public or anyone else but her.  Her ideas are all brilliant!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That’s because she’s sitting home in her mansion wondering why her amazing PR ideas aren’t working out the way they should. Could it be she doesn’t know what the hell she’s doing? Naw, it must be the fault of the media or the public or anyone else but her.  Her ideas are all brilliant!


Her new PR-team will have a lot of work implementing her brilliant ideas and at same time giving her a favorable image. If they succeed, Sunshine Sachs may go out of business.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Her new PR-team will have a lot of work implementing her brilliant ideas and at same time giving her a favorable image. If they succeed, Sunshine Sachs may go out of business.



I do find it kind of interesting that for all they talk of the evils of social media one of the new hires was the communications person for Pinterest...


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I do find it kind of interesting that for all they talk of the evils of social media one of the new hires was the communications person for Pinterest...



This is typical for MM&H. Quoting a UK minister, "a carnivore advocating vegetarianism".


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> So Will got drunk and danced with a young blonde woman?   Big story


You are supposed to do that at a bachelor party , right ?


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I do find it kind of interesting that for all they talk of the evils of social media one of the new hires was the communications person for Pinterest...



They are the Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy after all.


----------



## mshermes

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think these two handle anything privately.  Everything is trumpeted up and put on blast.


The only thing they seem to be able to handle privately is their child.  I am also realizing that this is a host/parasite relationship but the host and parasite keep changing.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> So Will got drunk and danced with a young blonde woman?   Big story



Not even a freshman college student would think of doing that. Or any wedding guest. Or any party attendee. Or any neighborhood gathering in a backyard marshmallow roast. Somebody stated here that Will left the party alone. oooooooh! Alert the goody two shoes of the world who surely cringe at anything that happens after evening vespers.  Young blonde women? Nothing but trouble! oooh! Here I go again. I take that back. In the era of #Me-Too, young blondes dancing with world famous royal inebriated blokes are victims. Even when they go home alone, I guess. Although, Will should not have put himself in the situation. That was dumb. However, considering what the Media sweeps under the rug, that's a TOTAL non-issue.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ah, compare the bachelor party photos to Harry’s Las Vegas party (or any other).
Will looks like a complete gentleman and Harry a total lech. Always has surprised me MM would want a guy like that.  There’s a reason the British women of polite society passed on the guy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ah, compare the bachelor party photos to Harry’s Las Vegas party (or any other).
> Will looks like a complete gentleman and Harry a total lech. Always has surprised me MM would want a guy like that.  There’s a reason the British women of polite society passed on the guy.


The word "entitlement" comes to mind whenever I think of Harry, except he seems to take it to extremes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@purseinsanity mentioned a few pages back that Harry sounded like his great aunt, Princess Margaret. Maybe this attitude comes with being the spare to the heir. I think Margaret felt the same entitlement as Harry, no real sense of duty, always having fun and yet, expecting to receive the same compensation as the ones doing the hard work.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> @purseinsanity mentioned a few pages back that Harry sounded like his great aunt, Princess Margaret. Maybe this attitude comes with being the spare to the heir. I think Margaret felt the same entitlement as Harry, no real sense of duty, always having fun and yet, expecting to receive the same compensation as the ones doing the hard work.



We can add Andrew to the  notorious spare list as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mshermes said:


> The only thing they seem to be able to handle privately is their child.  I am also realizing that this is a host/parasite relationship but the host and parasite keep changing.



And even with that they leave a feeling that it's not for Archie's best interest but to spite people. "Look, you can't see him!"


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And even with that they leave a feeling that it's not for Archie's best interest but to spite people. *"Look, you can't see him!"*



Which did, in some ways, already backfire on them. They were so precious about the birth announcement and newborn pictures and privacy, and then in the 2019 Christmas message* from QE2 in the family photos on display there was no family photo of HM&A or other baby photos of Archie. Lots was made in the UK press of this apparent snub as a major catalyst for Megxit but I think we all know that whilst the execution of Megxit was abrupt, there was plenty of planning beforehand. *So did QE2 deliberately snub H&M or did she respect the privacy that H&M themselves demanded of the press and public? *

I think QE2 is a very astute woman with absolutely no time for this game playing.  

I still believe that it was the Prince William/David Attenborough Earthshot prize project that Harry got the hump about at the end of 2019. I think Harry envisaged that HE was going to be the environmental protector prince. If reports are correct working relations had already broken down between the Cambridge's and Sussesex's team and H&M had made it plain they wanted to do their own projects. Accordingly, why then would William's team include Harry in this project ? The Earshot prize has been lauded widely _and has the potential _to be the global environmental equivalent of the Nobel prizes in year to come. It's a major achievement for William.

Repeatedly, we see H&M metaphorically sticking 2 fingers up at the BRF and the British public and then whining when they are excluded or criticised. 

* Can't wait to hear what she has to say this year ! My guess? one sentence: Harry left - we wish him well.


----------



## chicinthecity777

So on the one day when it would be totally appropriate to send out a public message of "Happy birthday" to Harry's father, they were completely silent! Could this pair sink any lower? 

Who else treats their dad poorly I wonder...


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> So on the one day when it would be totally appropriate to send out a public message of "Happy birthday" to Harry's father, they were completely silent! Could this pair sink any lower?
> 
> Who else treats their dad poorly I wonder...


Hmmmm 
I wonder if this straight BRF protocol ??? The photos on the desk at Christmas broadcast are carefully chosen - there is some reason or rhyme. Prince Michael never appears, yet is a first cousin... Similarly, one never hears that Michael sends public birthday wishes to family members. He is not a SENIOR member of the BRF any more than Harry.

It would be easy to hide behind protocol and not make birthdays wishes public - preventing our scrutiny of every word. That would be an easy road to take for Harry. Yes, taking the high road would be nice for him... sighhh 

Court protocol is nice at times, it resolves questions in an orderly manner, it divorces family questions from monarchy questions, BUT it can seem cruel if some are not included eg the York princesses - why are they not on the desk ?


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who else treats their dad poorly I wonder...



They are one of those annoying “we don’t need anyone but each other, it’s us against the world” couples. Meghan’s isolation tactics have successfully created a bubble around Harry that keeps other people away. Doria is the only exception and we don’t know how often they see her. She might live with them or she might visit occasionally, there’s no telling.

I’d like to think Harry had the decency to pick up the phone and call his dad on his birthday.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

In other words, this article suggests that Harry sold is soul to Nflix!   

*Prince Harry won't U-turn on his Netflix deal because he 'might AGREE' with The Crown's portrayal of 'cruel' royals while William will 'detest' depiction of 'wimp' Charles and 'stressed' Diana, say experts*

Prince Harry won't U-turn on his £75million Netflix deal despite the fierce criticism of The Crown's portrayal of his parents, royal commentators claimed today as they warned his brother Prince William will 'undoubtedly detest' the show's new series.

The Duke of Sussex is 'unlikely to see a clash' between the 'deeply intrusive' drama and the deal he and wife Meghan made, experts suggested as they pointed out it portrayed his parents Charles as a 'wimp' and 'brutal' and Diana as 'deeply stressed'.

Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams said Harry may even agree with the 'derisory portrayal of the Royal Family as a rather sinister, uncaring and often cruel institution'.

And the royal expert said: 'William will undoubtedly detest it. I think, if he watches it, he will see it as deeply intrusive and will think its portrayal of senior royals as so malign and ill-mannered as callous and the way it takes so many liberties with fact as deeply deplorable.

The Crown and Harry's Nflix deal


----------



## CarryOn2020

What did W&K do?  I don’t recall public wishes, but I could be wrong.  Cute photos of the kids = always a heart warmer

ETA:  Having a case of the Monday’s here - apologies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> In other words, this article suggests that Harry sold is soul to Nflix!
> 
> *Prince Harry won't U-turn on his Netflix deal because he 'might AGREE' with The Crown's portrayal of 'cruel' royals while William will 'detest' depiction of 'wimp' Charles and 'stressed' Diana, say experts*
> 
> Prince Harry won't U-turn on his £75million Netflix deal despite the fierce criticism of The Crown's portrayal of his parents, royal commentators claimed today as they warned his brother Prince William will 'undoubtedly detest' the show's new series.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is 'unlikely to see a clash' between the 'deeply intrusive' drama and the deal he and wife Meghan made, experts suggested as they pointed out it portrayed his parents Charles as a 'wimp' and 'brutal' and Diana as 'deeply stressed'.
> 
> Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams said Harry may even agree with the 'derisory portrayal of the Royal Family as a rather sinister, uncaring and often cruel institution'.
> 
> And the royal expert said: 'William will undoubtedly detest it. I think, if he watches it, he will see it as deeply intrusive and will think its portrayal of senior royals as so malign and ill-mannered as callous and the way it takes so many liberties with fact as deeply deplorable.
> 
> The Crown and Harry's Nflix deal



And, he absolutely hates his family as most immature children do, because it is always someone else’s fault.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did W&K do?  I don’t recall public wishes, but I could be wrong.  Cute photos of the kids = always a heart warmer


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did W&K do?  I don’t recall public wishes, but I could be wrong.  Cute photos of the kids = always a heart warmer



I believe W&K were the first to post their wishes to Charles:

*Prince William and Kate Middleton's sweet birthday message for Prince Charles revealed *Alongside the birthday wishes, the couple posted a picture of a smiling Charles to mark the occasion.

Charles b-day


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal you are amazing!  
In the style of H&M, thank you for shining your light and pointing me the way to enlightenment


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how I almost missed this article! Piers is becoming a must read here. 

*PIERS MORGAN: How can hypocrite Harry complain about how the press treated his mother but sell his soul for millions to Netflix sharks who've portrayed her as a shallow, vomiting lunatic and his father as a bullying, bed-hopping monster?*
In fact, far from being outraged by Netflix making a fortune by rubbishing the royals like this, his response has been to join his wife Meghan in striking their own massive multi-million-dollar deal with them.

By doing so, Harry is literally accepting money made from humiliating his own family, especially his own mother whose experience with the press he constantly holds up to demand greater deference for his wife Meghan.

And now, as a storm of controversy grows over this appallingly hypocritical decision, he's shut his eyes, stuck his hands over his ears, and buried himself into the sands of Santa Barbara in the desperate hope nobody will notice the astoundingly two-faced nature of his behaviour.

...

And how ironic that one Palace source described this season of The Crown as 'trolling on a Hollywood budget', given that Meghan and Harry recently bemoaned trolls on social media for spreading malicious unsubstantiated gossip that made their lives hell.

Perhaps the real reason behind Harry's grubby Netflix deal is that it offers him a protective blanket against any future season of The Crown focusing on more awkward recent royal events like him ruthlessly ditching his family and country to go and live in a Californian mansion and preach to us all about kindness and equality?

Regardless, his decision to sell his soul to the very company currently trading off his family's most intimate secrets and doing so in such a lurid, sensationalised, hurtful and fact-devoid way is a stinking betrayal by the self-proclaimed Prince of Privacy.

If Harry had any integrity left, he'd tear up his Netflix deal right now and apologise to his family for colluding with the enemy in such a distasteful manner.

But he won't.

We saw from the way he apparently hired a photographer to take nauseating self-promotional pictures of him and Meghan at a military graveside last week, seemingly to avenge the royals for refusing to let him have a wreath placed on Remembrance Sunday in absentia, that he's sadly lost all sense of moral decency in his dash to 'freedom' and lust for Kardashian-style American celebrity status. 

Instead, Harry will keep the Netflix millions and by doing so, he is giving his own tacit royal seal of approval to the company exploiting and trashing his family.

Shame on him.
Piers on The Crown


----------



## CarryOn2020

Piers does not hold back:

_But what I can say is that it portrays both Diana and Charles in an incredibly unflattering light.

She is depicted as a delusional, needy, childish, embarrassingly naïve, petulant and slightly bonkers bulimic, and he as a sour, resentful, cruel, nasty, poisonous, whiny, monstrous and ultimately loathsome piece of work.

...

Perhaps the real reason behind Harry's grubby Netflix deal is that it offers him a protective blanket against any future season of The Crown focusing on more awkward recent royal events like him ruthlessly ditching his family and country to go and live in a Californian mansion and preach to us all about kindness and equality?

Regardless, his decision to sell his soul to the very company currently trading off his family's most intimate secrets and doing so in such a lurid, sensationalised, hurtful and fact-devoid way is a stinking betrayal by the self-proclaimed Prince of Privacy.
If Harry had any integrity left, he'd tear up his Netflix deal right now and apologise to his family for colluding with the enemy in such a distasteful manner.

But he won't.
We saw from the way he apparently hired a photographer to take nauseating self-promotional pictures of him and Meghan at a military graveside last week, seemingly to avenge the royals for refusing to let him have a wreath placed on Remembrance Sunday in absentia, that he's sadly lost all sense of moral decency in his dash to 'freedom' and lust for Kardashian-style American celebrity status. 
Instead, Harry will keep the Netflix millions and by doing so, he is giving his own tacit royal seal of approval to the company exploiting and trashing his family.

*Shame on him.*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

But wait, there is more : stuff like this could really ruin the ‘golden couple’s’ reputation :









						Meghan ‘had help writing “private” letter to dad from palace aides’
					

MEGHAN Markle had help writing a “private” letter to her dad Thomas Markle from Palace aides, court documents claim. The Duchess of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers, the publi…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_But court documents say the letter was not Meghan's "own intellectual creation" in claims that could blow the case apart if proved to be true.

Lawyers for Associated Newspaper argue the letter was "copied" from an electronic draft.

And they say the Kensington Palace communications team "contributed to the writing" of the draft.
_
*'HELP WRITING LETTER'*
_The documents continue: "It is for the Claimant to prove she was the only person who contributed to the writing of the Electronic Draft. 

"Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the Defendant infers that Jason Knauf and/or others in the Kensington Palace Communications team contributed to the writing of the Electronic Draft. 


"Precisely which parts were the result of such contribution is uniquely known to the Claimant, Jason Knauf and others in the team."

Associated Newspapers claimed Prince Harry's wife had herself leaked details of the letter to the media through friends.

The publisher argued that Meghan was "pleased" when five friends spoke up to defend her in an interview with People Magazine, which mentioned the letter._


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> In other words, this article suggests that Harry sold is soul to Nflix!
> 
> *Prince Harry won't U-turn on his Netflix deal because he 'might AGREE' with The Crown's portrayal of 'cruel' royals while William will 'detest' depiction of 'wimp' Charles and 'stressed' Diana, say experts*
> 
> Prince Harry won't U-turn on his £75million Netflix deal despite the fierce criticism of The Crown's portrayal of his parents, royal commentators claimed today as they warned his brother Prince William will 'undoubtedly detest' the show's new series.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is 'unlikely to see a clash' between the 'deeply intrusive' drama and the deal he and wife Meghan made, experts suggested as they pointed out it portrayed his parents Charles as a 'wimp' and 'brutal' and Diana as 'deeply stressed'.
> 
> Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams said Harry may even agree with the 'derisory portrayal of the Royal Family as a rather sinister, uncaring and often cruel institution'.
> 
> And the royal expert said: 'William will undoubtedly detest it. I think, if he watches it, he will see it as deeply intrusive and will think its portrayal of senior royals as so malign and ill-mannered as callous and the way it takes so many liberties with fact as deeply deplorable.
> 
> The Crown and Harry's Nflix deal



This song is the first thing that popped into my mind when I read that. In fact I imagine  Meghan and Harry singing it. Maybe they could do their own version for Netflix.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how I almost missed this article! Piers is becoming a must read here.
> 
> *PIERS MORGAN: How can hypocrite Harry complain about how the press treated his mother but sell his soul for millions to Netflix sharks who've portrayed her as a shallow, vomiting lunatic and his father as a bullying, bed-hopping monster?*
> In fact, far from being outraged by Netflix making a fortune by rubbishing the royals like this, his response has been to join his wife Meghan in striking their own massive multi-million-dollar deal with them.
> 
> By doing so, Harry is literally accepting money made from humiliating his own family, especially his own mother whose experience with the press he constantly holds up to demand greater deference for his wife Meghan.
> 
> And now, as a storm of controversy grows over this appallingly hypocritical decision, he's shut his eyes, stuck his hands over his ears, and buried himself into the sands of Santa Barbara in the desperate hope nobody will notice the astoundingly two-faced nature of his behaviour.
> 
> ...
> 
> And how ironic that one Palace source described this season of The Crown as 'trolling on a Hollywood budget', given that Meghan and Harry recently bemoaned trolls on social media for spreading malicious unsubstantiated gossip that made their lives hell.
> 
> Perhaps the real reason behind Harry's grubby Netflix deal is that it offers him a protective blanket against any future season of The Crown focusing on more awkward recent royal events like him ruthlessly ditching his family and country to go and live in a Californian mansion and preach to us all about kindness and equality?
> 
> Regardless, his decision to sell his soul to the very company currently trading off his family's most intimate secrets and doing so in such a lurid, sensationalised, hurtful and fact-devoid way is a stinking betrayal by the self-proclaimed Prince of Privacy.
> 
> If Harry had any integrity left, he'd tear up his Netflix deal right now and apologise to his family for colluding with the enemy in such a distasteful manner.
> 
> But he won't.
> 
> We saw from the way he apparently hired a photographer to take nauseating self-promotional pictures of him and Meghan at a military graveside last week, seemingly to avenge the royals for refusing to let him have a wreath placed on Remembrance Sunday in absentia, that he's sadly lost all sense of moral decency in his dash to 'freedom' and lust for Kardashian-style American celebrity status.
> 
> Instead, Harry will keep the Netflix millions and by doing so, he is giving his own tacit royal seal of approval to the company exploiting and trashing his family.
> 
> Shame on him.
> Piers on The Crown



The fact that H&M have sold out the BRF for a buck shouldn't surprise anyone. Who on this thread said that? Oh that's right, I did. And others on this thread. Why let other producers make money from throwing your family under the bus when you can do it yourselves? This is how Meghan repays the man who walked her down the wedding aisle. And the family who provided them with all the royal trappings and untold luxuries. To empathetic normal people this sounds a little odd. Then again, it's nothing new. It reminds me of the same psychology of the Menendez brothers, remember them? They murdered their wealthy parents for the inheritance money.  There exist uber wealthy people who regardless how much they've been given can only wallow in self pity. As far as I'm concerned, if QEII sold off some of her master paintings and royal jewels and gave H&M $150 million cash from the proceeds, they'd still beaych and feel sorry for themselves. They have no use for gratitude. Ambition is great, I've no problem with anyone who has ambition. But when you sell out a family like the BRF to ingratiate yourselves to the fame whores of Hollywood, that's not ambition. That's psychosis. That plot was hatched before the 50 million dollar wedding. And what else do we read? They're buddies of the incoming *****. More social climbing opportunities! And this is the stuff that Hollywood rewards big time. How lovely. Can't wait to read the over-the-top love fest articles the Media has planned for H&M's White House arrival(s). And remember, if you don't agree that they are the most wonderful couple to grace our presence, then the knives are out for you. Get used to it.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> The fact that H&M have sold out the BRF for a buck shouldn't surprise anyone. Who on this thread said that? Oh that's right, I did. And others on this thread. Why let other producers make money from throwing your family under the bus when you can do it yourselves? This is how Meghan repays the man who walked her down the wedding aisle. And the family who provided them with all the royal trappings and untold luxuries. To empathetic normal people this sounds a little odd. Then again, it's nothing new. It reminds me of the same psychology of the Menendez brothers, remember them? They murdered their wealthy parents for the inheritance money.  There exist uber wealthy people who regardless how much they've been given can only wallow in self pity. As far as I'm concerned, if QEII sold off some of her master paintings and royal jewels and gave H&M $150 million cash from the proceeds, they'd still beaych and feel sorry for themselves. They have no use for gratitude. Ambition is great, I've no problem with anyone who has ambition. But when you sell out a family like the BRF to ingratiate yourselves to the fame whores of Hollywood, that's not ambition. That's psychosis. That plot was hatched before the 50 million dollar wedding. And what else do we read? They're buddies of the incoming *****. More social climbing opportunities! And this is the stuff that Hollywood rewards big time. How lovely. Can't wait to read the over-the-top love fest articles the Media has planned for H&M's White House arrival(s). And remember, if you don't agree that they are the most wonderful couple to grace our presence, then the knives are out for you. Get used to it.


Ambition is often a good thing.  I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth (more like a plastic one), and I got where I got by sheer determination, hard work, and good values instilled in me by my parents.  I did NOT run over others, especially my own family, to achieve my goals.  These two I'd classify more as "Ruthless" than "Ambitious".  Add "Repulsive" to that list while we're at it.


----------



## CobaltBlu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though? Nothing wrong with Bea, but wouldn't that be entirely premature seeing George is currently 3rd in line and not in dire need of anyone covering for him.


I was considering Covid and the fact that apparently Philip, Charles, and William have all had it; the RF must have considered what would happen if QE2 and Charles both got sick...  I would think.



sdkitty said:


> So Will got drunk and danced with a young blonde woman?   Big story



Seriously. Who among us hasn't done the same? LOL     EDIT:  Y'all know I'm kidding, right? (well mostly)


----------



## purseinsanity

There are millions (billions?) of people who don't grow up with "ideal" parents or family.  Harry's parents may not have been ideal, but he hasn't had to deal with ANY of the problems mere peons have to deal with.  He's never had any worry for his safety, finances, food, health, etc.  Entitlement at it's finest, and he still preaches about his "struggles" and "How unfair life is!".  JCMH should STFU and get over it.  Their act is wearing thin, especially in these times when so many people are struggling.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Ambition is often a good thing.  I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth (more like a plastic one), and I got where I got by sheer determination, hard work, and good values instilled in me by my parents.  I did NOT run over others, especially my own family, to achieve my goals.  These two I'd classify more as "Ruthless" than "Ambitious".  Add "Repulsive" to that list while we're at it.



Congrats on your success!  
I think that if you were in conversation with H&M, they'd react as though you were speaking a foreign language. What do you mean "hard work" and "determination"?  Wha?? Waddaya mean you earned your own money without stabbing your family in the back? Wha? You mean, people do that? No way. You gotta start out on top, complain how rough you have it, alienate everyone except Hollywood by complaining about how horrible the Royal life you clawed your way into is, wail some more, and then you too can get a 150 million Netflix deal. But you have to promise to attack every family member for the whole world to see. Because it upset you when other people did it. And the more your family gave you the more vicious the attacks must be. Follow? No? It's the Meghan and JCMH formula.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Congrats on your success!
> I think that if you were in conversation with H&M, they'd react as though you were speaking a foreign language. What do you mean "hard work" and "determination"?  Wha?? Waddaya mean you earned your own money without stabbing your family in the back? Wha? You mean, people do that? No way. You gotta start out on top, complain how rough you have it, alienate everyone except Hollywood by complaining about how horrible the Royal life you clawed your way into is, wail some more, and then you too can get a 150 million Netflix deal. But you have to promise to attack every family member for the whole world to see. Because it upset you when other people did it. And the more your family gave you the more vicious the attacks must be. Follow? No? It's the Meghan and JCMH formula.



So true.
Sadly, I have worked with some of  ‘the entitled’ brats of the world. They are always surprised to hear of someone’s struggles. They cannot imagine someone who does not know how to play ‘the game’, the one where ya get anything for free.  They learned early on how to ‘work’ people, especially parents. Or maybe grifting comes naturally. I have no idea. Like @purseinsanity, I worked for everything I have and am glad I did. Learned valuable lessons along way. Number 1 - who to avoid


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Congrats on your success!
> I think that if you were in conversation with H&M, they'd react as though you were speaking a foreign language. What do you mean "hard work" and "determination"?  Wha?? Waddaya mean you earned your own money without stabbing your family in the back? Wha? You mean, people do that? No way. You gotta start out on top, complain how rough you have it, alienate everyone except Hollywood by complaining about how horrible the Royal life you clawed your way into is, wail some more, and then you too can get a 150 million Netflix deal. But you have to promise to attack every family member for the whole world to see. Because it upset you when other people did it. And the more your family gave you the more vicious the attacks must be. Follow? No? It's the Meghan and JCMH formula.


Thank you!  I did have a supportive family that believed in me.  It takes a village, right?  Maybe JCMH didn't have any emotional support?  Who knows. At this point, I don't think many of us care!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> So true.
> Sadly, I have worked with some of  ‘the entitled’ brats of the world. They are always surprised to hear of someone’s struggles. They cannot imagine someone who does not know how to play ‘the game’, the one where ya get anything for free.  They learned early on how to ‘work’ people, especially parents. Or maybe grifting comes naturally. I have no idea. Like @purseinsanity, I worked for everything I have and am glad I did. Learned valuable lessons along way. Number 1 - who to avoid


I find that people who actually earn things on their own appreciate things much more than people who are simply gifted things.  I remember being on a flight where a guy surprised his GF with a brand new Birkin!  I was more excited than she was I think!  She squealed for a second, then threw it in the overhead squashed between some carryons with their wheels touching it.  I was mortified because I'd saved up for my first one and babied it LOL.


----------



## gracekelly

News flash!!  A story from www.thesun.uk

MEG'S COURT BATTLE *Meghan Markle ‘had help writing “private” letter to dad from palace aides’ court documents claim*


----------



## gracekelly

If this is true and someone leaked this, then there goes to the only part of the case that she could have won, i.e. the copy issue


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I find that people who actually earn things on their own appreciate things much more than people who are simply gifted things.  *I remember being on a flight where a guy surprised his GF with a brand new Birkin!  I was more excited than she was I think!  She squealed for a second, then threw it in the overhead squashed between some carryons with their wheels touching it.*  I was mortified because I'd saved up for my first one and babied it LOL.



Maybe this was one of those cases that in no uncertain terms a Birkin was not enough.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> This song is the first thing that popped into my mind when I read that. In fact I imagine  Meghan and Harry singing it. Maybe they could do their own version for Netflix.



Loved Cabaret! Thank you (and this sooo represents the grifters).


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> Ambition is often a good thing.  I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth (more like a plastic one), and I got where I got by sheer determination, hard work, and good values instilled in me by my parents.  I did NOT run over others, especially my own family, to achieve my goals.  These two I'd classify more as "Ruthless" than "Ambitious".  Add "Repulsive" to that list while we're at it.


Toss in "desperate" too.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm not usually interested in inspirational quotes I see on Facebook but I'll make an exception here. Too bad Meghan and Harry don't "do" social media. It's something they should think about.

*"This is not the year to get everything you want. This is the year to appreciate everything you have."*


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I'm not usually interested in inspirational quotes I see on Facebook but I'll make an exception here. Too bad Meghan and Harry don't "do" social media. It's something they should think about.
> 
> *"This is not the year to get everything you want. This is the year to appreciate everything you have."*



Spoiled, self-entitled children do not understand the concept of appreciation.

I don't feel as though Harry has every had to work for anything in his life. I truly feel for him having lost his mom, especially at such an early age, but he is not the only one to experience that in the world. Just one of the privileged few who could be coddled through it with the best of the best.

Meghan probably had to hustle a little more but she had access and connections to things most do not.

But both have had so much handed to them in so many ways. The concept of hard work and experiencing rock-bottom is lost on them.

If ever there were poster children for millennials, these two would be it! No offense to anyone within the millennial age group here.


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> *Spoiled, self-entitled children do not understand the concept of appreciation.*
> 
> I don't feel as though Harry has every had to work for anything in his life. I truly feel for him having lost his mom, especially at such an early age, but he is not the only one to experience that in the world. Just one of the privileged few who could be coddled through it with the best of the best.
> 
> Meghan probably had to hustle a little more but she had access and connections to things most do not.
> 
> But both have had so much handed to them in so many ways. The concept of hard work and experiencing rock-bottom is lost on them.
> 
> If ever there were poster children for millennials, these two would be it! No offense to anyone within the millennial age group here.



As much as Megain  wants to be part of the millennial generation she has missed that boat by a few decades. Spoiled yes, self-entitled yes, whiny sure but also throw in middle-aged with zero self awareness.


----------



## LittleStar88

bellecate said:


> As much as Megain  wants to be part of the millennial generation she has missed that boat by a few decades. Spoiled yes, self-entitled yes, whiny sure but also throw in middle-aged with zero self awareness.



Hehe - I had to check the cut-off date. I think she qualifies. Long in the tooth/leftover Christmas cake (despite what she thinks of herself she is past the freshness of her youth) but mentally and emotionally quite a few years behind.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> As much as Megain  wants to be part of the millennial generation she has missed that boat by a few decades. Spoiled yes, self-entitled yes, whiny sure but also throw in middle-aged with zero self awareness.





LittleStar88 said:


> Hehe - I had to check the cut-off date. I think she qualifies. Long in the tooth/leftover Christmas cake (despite what she thinks of herself she is past the freshness of her youth) but mentally and emotionally quite a few years behind.



I always get them wrong, so for reference here is the table:



She is more like a Xennial. 

*Xennials*

The cohort known as "Xennials" are composed of the oldest Millenials. This is a "crossover generation."

Born roughly between 1975 and 1985 plus or minus a few years.

The idea being that Xennials are more like the preceding Gen X than they are like Millenials.

According to Australian Sociologist, Dan Woodman, "The theory goes that the Xennials dated, and often formed ongoing relationships, pre-social media. They usually weren't on Tinder or Grindr, for their first go at dating at least. They called up their friends and the person they wanted to ask out on a landline phone, hoping that it wasn't their intended date's parent who picked up."


----------



## CarryOn2020

I feel like a young Lost Generation


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I feel like a young Lost Generation


Looking at our activity in this thread, we are certainly not The Silent Generation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I had to laugh at the title “silent generation”.  My mother in law was from that generation and boy, silent was not an adjective I would use to describe her!  “Negatively opinionated” is more like her.


----------



## LittleStar88

As a solid Gen X member, I am surprised we were even included in that chart above...

Generation Xers Have The Most Gen X Response To Being Left Off The List


----------



## bag-mania

Why are they still trying to make a Meghan/Diana connection? These are articles from Cosmopolitan and Town & Country today.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Why are they still trying to make a Meghan/Diana connection? These are articles from Cosmopolitan and Town & Country today.
> 
> View attachment 4907225
> 
> 
> View attachment 4907231


Or for Pet's sake


----------



## rose60610

I think the Media are desperate to portray Meghan as a poor hapless victim of the big bad royal family.  And if it means making comparisons between Diana's real problems or shortcomings (being a first time bride at age 19) and the fact that Meghan's problems stem from her ego, stupidity, entitlement attitude and age 36 re-tread bride history-- whatever unrealistic stretches they must cobble together, they'll do it. The real shame is that they actually print it. Certain media pets get 24/7 protection, and if you find fault with a media favorite, it's YOU who are the inferior. It's clear to many that Me-Me-Me-Meghan clawed her way into the BRF, kicked it to the curb, cried "cruelty", and leveraged Prince Dim into a Netflix contract where they'll take delight in smearing their benefactors for a bank deposit. 

CemeteryGate shows they've learned nothing and will likely self destruct in time. 

Even if they make 100 million + from Netflix, they're the type to burn through it. Even the Media won't be able to cover for them unless they hammer away at the POC angle over and over. How else could they explain that Kate has a positive image and Meghan doesn't? Sorry, when you drag a camera crew into a cemetery for Harry to display his medals and Meghan to rehearse her somber face for the Twitter feeds, the POC angle falls a zillion miles flat. When they burn through the Netflix dough, they won't be able to return to King William/Charles. The only thing that could save them (besides Preparation H commercials) is if Archie becomes a successful child actor. Wait a minute. Is that another reason to return to CA? To exploit their own child? They probably dream of turning Archie into another Olsen Twin success. And they'd screw up that money too.


----------



## Lodpah

Supposedly MM graduated from Northwestern and their goensare shiny royal blue. Docent is she wearing black here and did she bleach her skin?


----------



## Lodpah

I’m boring but MM is in the limelight and I don’t see an “it” factor to her. I guess that’s why she has practically hired all the PR firms in the world to “make” her.


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Supposedly MM graduated from Northwestern and their goensare shiny royal blue. Docent is she wearing black here and did she bleach her skin?
> 
> View attachment 4907479


In some photos you never know how they were taken. So, one item by itself is not a good indicator, ex my camera tends to add blue to everything (was this snap taken using my BLUE camera ? No one said I am a good photog...) 

A better indicator is to compare two items in the same shot, same camera, lighting, same blue filter 

Comparing mother and daughter, they look so much alike here , very natural , not too much makeup or IG filters

MM does not look like she did recently in her Malala interview with the Hollywood red lipstick , different foundation etc


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I’m boring but MM is in the limelight and I don’t see an “it” factor to her. I guess that’s why she has practically hired all the PR firms in the world to “make” her.



She doesn't have a universal It factor. She definitely has something that a small but vocal group of fans (and internet writers) have become emotionally invested in.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Well whatever uniqueness her fave had has been botoxed and fillered  away


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps this photo is from high school graduation???

_*Purple* keeper gowns custom designed for Northwestern and featuring the University crest are the standard regalia and must be worn by all participating candidates. Tassels feature the Northwestern seal signet and are worn on the left side at all times._


			Ordering Regalia: Commencement - Northwestern University
		





Lodpah said:


> Supposedly MM graduated from Northwestern and their goensare shiny royal blue. Docent is she wearing black here and did she bleach her skin?
> 
> View attachment 4907479


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Supposedly MM graduated from Northwestern and their goensare shiny royal blue. Docent is she wearing black here and did she bleach her skin?
> 
> View attachment 4907479


We are not fans of MM here, but I like this photo of her and her mother. Doria looks genuinely proud of her daughter.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Why are they still trying to make a Meghan/Diana connection? These are articles from Cosmopolitan and Town & Country today.
> 
> View attachment 4907225
> 
> 
> View attachment 4907231


What possible parallel could there be between Diana and Meghan.
One married a prince to fulfil her girlish dream of becoming the princess wales; bore two sons; sponsored good causes; became a style icon; left the RF; divorced and tragically died in France.
The other married a dumb prince for money and prestige; left the RF; moved to California to be near the Hollywood biggies; used her title to pimp herself and husband to gain notoriety; sponsored little if anything; tried to copy the other’s looks, but totally missed the mark.

ETA: Diana as a style icon.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> We are not fans of MM here, but I like this photo of her and her mother. Doria looks genuinely proud of her daughter.


Yes, it’s a lovely photo of them.


----------



## shrpthorn

marietouchet said:


> Perhaps some of their problem is that they are trying to influence the US and the UK at the same time, as if their message were universal ... boy, that seems like a tall order to me , *the US and the UK are different *, or has that not occurred to their team(s)?


But this happens so frequently today with social/ any type of media, the US and Canada are also different, but the expectation seems to be that both peoples think exactly the same way....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

shrpthorn said:


> But this happens so frequently today with social/ any type of media, the US and Canada are also different, but the expectation seems to be that both peoples think exactly the same way....


You hit the nail on the head


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> She doesn't have a universal It factor. She definitely has something that a small but vocal group of fans (*and internet writers whiners*) have become emotionally invested in.



Fixed it as I had read it


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> What possible parallel could there be between Diana and Meghan.
> One married a prince to fulfil her girlish dream of becoming the princess wales; bore two sons; sponsored good causes; became a style icon; left the RF; divorced and tragically died in France.
> The other married a dumb prince for money and prestige; left the RF; moved to California to be near the Hollywood biggies; used her title to pimp herself and husband to gain notoriety; sponsored little if anything; tried to copy the other’s looks, but totally missed the mark.
> 
> ETA: Diana as a style icon.



I think it is a desperate and lame attempt to prop up Meghan as some kind of figure to look up to since people generally looked up to Diana. In other words: Here we go again--using the deceased to promote themselves!  Only worse. Why? Cosmo and Town and Country's comparison of Diana is used to improve Meghan's very damaged image. The same Diana that M&H are intent on destroying HER image for their Netflix deal. So they'd better milk the hell out of Diana's favorability now before they turn the tables and cash in by portraying Diana as a closet royal whack job. But we know who the royal whack job really is.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> I think the Media are desperate to portray Meghan as a poor hapless victim of the big bad royal family.  And if it means making comparisons between Diana's real problems or shortcomings (being a first time bride at age 19) and the fact that Meghan's problems stem from her ego, stupidity, entitlement attitude and age 36 re-tread bride history-- whatever unrealistic stretches they must cobble together, they'll do it. The real shame is that they actually print it. Certain media pets get 24/7 protection, and if you find fault with a media favorite, it's YOU who are the inferior. It's clear to many that Me-Me-Me-Meghan clawed her way into the BRF, kicked it to the curb, cried "cruelty", and leveraged Prince Dim into a Netflix contract where they'll take delight in smearing their benefactors for a bank deposit.
> 
> CemeteryGate shows they've learned nothing and will likely self destruct in time.
> 
> Even if they make 100 million + from Netflix, they're the type to burn through it. Even the Media won't be able to cover for them unless they hammer away at the POC angle over and over. How else could they explain that Kate has a positive image and Meghan doesn't? Sorry, when you drag a camera crew into a cemetery for Harry to display his medals and Meghan to rehearse her somber face for the Twitter feeds, the POC angle falls a zillion miles flat. When they burn through the Netflix dough, they won't be able to return to King William/Charles. The only thing that could save them (besides Preparation H commercials) is if Archie becomes a successful child actor. Wait a minute. Is that another reason to return to CA? To exploit their own child? They probably dream of turning Archie into another Olsen Twin success. And they'd screw up that money too.


: "Preparation H commercials"


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> : "Preparation H commercials"



Just reading about them is enough to give me 'roids.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I think it is a desperate and lame attempt to prop up Meghan as some kind of figure to look up to since people generally looked up to Diana. In other words: Here we go again--using the deceased to promote themselves!  Only worse. Why? Cosmo and Town and Country's comparison of Diana is used to improve Meghan's very damaged image. The same Diana that M&H are intent on destroying HER image for their Netflix deal. So they'd better milk the hell out of Diana's favorability now before they turn the tables and cash in by portraying Diana as a closet royal whack job. But we know who the royal whack job really is.


only time will tell how this plays out but seems to me she squandered the opportunity of a lifetime (after falling in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> only time will tell how this plays out but seems to me she squandered the opportunity of a lifetime (after *falling in love* with a guy who just happened to be a prince)


Was it love or entrapment? Narcissists love themselves first and the leftover crumbs may go to their partner. If she was planning Megxit, even before the marriage, as some have stated, then Harry boy was just the means to an end.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Was it love or entrapment? Narcissists love themselves first and the leftover crumbs may go to their partner. If she was planning Megxit, even before the marriage, as some have stated, then Harry boy was just the means to an end.


I was being sarcastic....I don't believe for a minute that she just happened to fall in love with a prince...she targeted him IMO.  hopefully there is some love there but if she is a narcissist, then she only loves herself


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Was it love or entrapment? Narcissists love themselves first and the leftover crumbs may go to their partner. If she was planning Megxit, even before the marriage, as some have stated, then Harry boy was just the means to an end.


I believe she was planning to have a life of a royal celebrity flying in style between LA and London. The fact that QE didn't allow them to 'work' (in other words, to make appearances at events of their choice) as part-time royals was totally unexpected. It will be interesting to see what the BRF has planned for them at the upcoming 1 year review.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I believe she was planning to have a life of a royal celebrity flying in style between LA and London. The fact that QE didn't allow them to 'work' (in other words, to make appearances at events of their choice) as part-time royals was totally unexpected. It will be interesting to see what the BRF has planned for them at the upcoming 1 year review.



In the beginning I thought she did the entrapping (?), now I think H with the help of Marcus Anderson (where has he gone?), H ensnared her. While some of us plan a day or a year or 5 years ahead, with all of its money and land, the BRF plans decades and centuries ahead. Oprah, Gayle, Clooney, etc. seem to have realized they were played, too. Now they have stepped back, way back. Prince Charles and his Great Reset will want H&M to bring the Bidens along. It should be interesting to watch how this show develops


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Was it love or entrapment? Narcissists love themselves first and the leftover crumbs may go to their partner. If she was planning Megxit, even before the marriage, as some have stated, then Harry boy was just the means to an end.



She loved what his status would give her. I think she "love bombed" him. She made it appear like they absolutely had to be together and Harry, being the dim bulb he is, bought it hook, line, and sinker.

_*Ten signs of love bombing:*_
They lavish you with gifts
They can’t stop complimenting you
They bombard you with phone calls and texts
They want your undivided attention
They try to convince you that you’re soulmates
They want commitment and they want it now
They get upset when you place boundaries
They’re overly needy
You’re overwhelmed by their intensity
You feel unbalanced


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the beginning I thought she did the entrapping (?), now I think H with the help of Marcus Anderson (where has he gone?), H ensnared her. While some of us plan a day or a year or 5 years ahead, with all of its money and land, the BRF plans decades and centuries ahead. Oprah, Gayle, Clooney, etc. seem to have realized they were played, too. Now they have stepped back, way back. Prince Charles and his Great Reset will want H&M to bring the Bidens along. It should be interesting to watch how this show develops


Honestly, I don't think H has the brains to pull off anything, much else ensnare someone like MM, who's leagues ahead of him in using people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry played the ‘royal prince, son of Diana’ card.  He could love bomb her with cameras, magazine covers, coveted restaurant dinners,  RAF security, friends in very high places, private planes, top secret worlds, lifetime security, high octane lifestyle.  For a divorced, pushing 40 year old, all of that can seem very attractive. Oh sure, she had to do her part.  Mostly, though, I believe it was H reeling her in.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry played the ‘royal prince, son of Diana’ card.  He could love bomb her with cameras, magazine covers, coveted restaurant dinners,  RAF security, friends in very high places, private planes, top secret worlds, lifetime security, high octane lifestyle.  For a divorced, pushing 40 year old, all of that can seem very attractive. Oh sure, she had to do her part.  Mostly, though, I believe it was H reeling her in.


This sounds like the comedy of the century, boy meets girl or girl meets boy. Both use everything at their disposal to charm the other, thinking they're reeling in the big fish. In the end, both have been used by the other. I think I'll wait for the end of the movie.  (I can't find the popcorn emoji. )


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly, I don't think H has the brains to pull off anything, *much else ensnare someone like MM, who's leagues ahead of him in using people.*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the beginning I thought she did the entrapping (?), now I think H with the help of Marcus Anderson (where has he gone?), H ensnared her. While some of us plan a day or a year or 5 years ahead, with all of its money and land, the BRF plans decades and centuries ahead. Oprah, Gayle, Clooney, etc. seem to have realized they were played, too. Now they have stepped back, way back. Prince Charles and his Great Reset will want H&M to bring the Bidens along. It should be interesting to watch how this show develops


I'm not really buying Charles being involved with their shenanigans


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the beginning I thought she did the entrapping (?), now I think H with the help of Marcus Anderson (where has he gone?), H ensnared her. While some of us plan a day or a year or 5 years ahead, with all of its money and land, the BRF plans decades and centuries ahead. Oprah, Gayle, Clooney, etc. seem to have realized they were played, too. Now they have stepped back, way back. Prince Charles and his Great Reset will want H&M to bring the Bidens along. It should be interesting to watch how this show develops



I think the Bidens have much bigger things to keep them occupied right now than to make it look like they are wooing faux celebs and royalty. Trumpet is making the transition very difficult and Bidens have their work cut our for them with Covid, N Korea + assorted international issues, and a quagmire of other issues related to taking over for the next 4 years.

I don't think H&M are even remotely near Joe & Jill's radar. But I am sure H&M will find a way to insert themselves somewhere.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly, I don't think H has the brains to pull off anything, much else ensnare someone like MM, who's leagues ahead of him in using people.





bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4908080


Just playing devil's advocate here. Some people may not be academically oriented, but can still be extremely cunning or devious.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the Bidens have much bigger things to keep them occupied right now than to make it look like they are wooing faux celebs and royalty. Trumpet is making the transition very difficult and Bidens have their work cut our for them with Covid, N Korea + assorted international issues, and a quagmire of other issues related to taking over for the next 4 years.
> 
> I don't think H&M are even remotely near Joe & Jill's radar. But I am sure H&M will find a way to insert themselves somewhere.


they will find some sort of event to get invited to .....something to do with women, POC, Climate, whatever is open....being a WOC has become very useful to her in recent times


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I'm not really buying Charles being involved with their shenanigans



Maybe I’m a bit cynical, I don’t trust any of them. Too many ways they can all benefit.  Andrew seems to have done well, no?


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just playing devil's advocate here. Some people may not be academically oriented, but can still be extremely cunning or devious.


agree with your premise but I think the cunning or devious fits M better than H


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> agree with your premise but I think the cunning for devious fits M better than H



With anyone else, I’d agree. I certainly do not believe H is the brightest bulb on the tree, but. Just consider how many palace advisors he has access to.  Agree it appears he does not listen, I just do not buy he is the brave, lone warrior.  He is getting coached by someone. IMO everything he does is calculated, including the graveyard stunt.  Perhaps all they want is to keep his name in the papers.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just playing devil's advocate here. Some people may not be academically oriented, but can still be extremely cunning or devious.



True, but I don't think Harry is one of those. He might _believe_ he is cunning. Kind of like a dumb thief thinking he is a master criminal and then sitting in jail wondering how he got caught.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> True, but I don't think Harry is one of those. He might _believe_ he is cunning. Kind of like a dumb thief thinking he is a master criminal and then sitting in jail wondering how he got caught.



I don’t know, H has the royal court behind him.
Who does MM have? Her PR people?  They have proven to be lacking these last many months.
Neither one is capable of managing a world-wide operation on their own. The palace folks, they can do that in their sleep zzzzzz.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> True, but I don't think Harry is one of those. He might _believe_ he is cunning. Kind of like a dumb thief thinking he is a master criminal and then sitting in jail wondering how he got caught.


True enough. I never thought he had enough healthy brain cells to turn on that imaginary light bulb. 
Not Harry!


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> they will find some sort of event to get invited to .....something to do with women, POC, Climate, whatever is open....being a WOC has become very useful to her in recent times



I totally expect they will be invited to something. But of all of the women/POC/or whatever flavor of the moment people of notoriety I just don't see H&M high on that list in the eyes of the people in charge of sending invites from the white house. H&M have no clout, nothing relevant to say other than parroting what more influential and interesting/intelligent people have already said.

H&M and bandwagoners/coattail-riders and have nothing to offer to Bidens' cause or momentum.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> True enough. I never thought he had enough healthy brain cells to turn on that imaginary light bulb.
> Not Harry!



I think a potato offers more power to that light bulb...


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I totally expect they will be invited to something. But of all of the women/POC/or whatever flavor of the moment people of notoriety I just don't see H&M high on that list in the eyes of the people in charge of sending invites from the white house. H&M have no clout, nothing relevant to say other than parroting what more influential and interesting/intelligent people have already said.
> 
> H&M and bandwagoners/coattail-riders and have nothing to offer to Bidens' cause or momentum.



Nothing screams ‘privilege’ like Prince, son of the next King of the UK, etc.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I totally expect they will be invited to something. But of all of the women/POC/or whatever flavor of the moment people of notoriety I just don't see H&M high on that list in the eyes of the people in charge of sending invites from the white house. H&M have no clout, nothing relevant to say other than parroting what more influential and interesting/intelligent people have already said.
> 
> H&M and bandwagoners/coattail-riders and have nothing to offer to Bidens' cause or momentum.


right but hate to say it - don't underestimate her....they've managed to be included in other events - like the one where she spoke along with her "friend" Michelle


----------



## rose60610

JoeJill would be dumb to bring M&H into their fold. Doesn't mean Meghan isn't going to shoehorn herself into a White House appearance. Of course JJ are going to be invited to a State Dinner at BP without any help from the dimwits. But watch them try like crazy to be in attendance.  But I don't know where they're going to ditch Archie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> JoeJill would be dumb to bring M&H into their fold. Doesn't mean Meghan isn't going to shoehorn herself into a White House appearance. Of course JJ are going to be invited to a State Dinner at BP without any help from the dimwits. But watch them try like crazy to be in attendance.  But I don't know where they're going to ditch Archie.


I'm lost.....JJ? Joe and Jill? BP?


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I'm lost.....JJ? Joe and Jill? BP?



Joe and Jill Biiiiden + BP I think is Buckingham Palace.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe I’m a bit cynical, I don’t trust any of them. Too many ways they can all benefit.  Andrew seems to have done well, no?



This discussion is moving so fast that I'm almost lost.

I agree with you that Andrew seems to be doing well. MM&H have attracted so much (negative) attention that Andrew just needs to stay out of side and enjoy a quiet life.

I believe MM did all the entrapping. Harry was despaired to find a wife. William had is own family, his friends were getting married... He was also not happy to be just the spare, but didn't know what else to do. MM (and perhaps MA) understood his situation very well. It was her unique opportunity to score a big win and she didn't waste any time...

MM&H will manage to visit the White House next year, and not as tourists. They need as much visibility as possible to make money from Nflix, Arch***... Harry has plenty of money, but not enough to support their life style.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> right but hate to say it - don't underestimate her....they've managed to be included in other events - like the one where she spoke along with her "friend" Michelle


You mean like pushing her way past Secret Service Agents?  I met one of these guys once and he had no sense of humor and was like huge.  He had been on the FLOTUS detail for MO.  No getting past a guy like that.  If she showed up in the green cape dress with whatever she had going on underneath it that resembled a bomb vest, a SS guy would pat her down at the least and more likely have a female agent examine her thoroughly.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> right but hate to say it - don't underestimate her....they've managed to be included in other events - like the one where she spoke along with her "friend" Michelle


Unless she makes some more grave mistakes, she will manage to look good at a photo-op in the White House next year.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This discussion is moving so fast that I'm almost lost.
> 
> I agree with you that Andrew seems to be doing well. MM&H have attracted so much (negative) attention that Andrew just needs to stay out of side and enjoy a quiet life.
> 
> I believe MM did all the entrapping. Harry was despaired to find a wife. William had is own family, his friends were getting married... He was also not happy to be just the spare, but didn't know what else to do. MM (and perhaps MA) understood his situation very well. It was her unique opportunity to score a big win and she didn't waste any time...
> 
> MM&H will manage to visit the White House next year, and not as tourists. They need as much visibility as possible to make money from Nflix, Arch***... Harry has plenty of money, but not enough to support their life style.


I know that I am in the minority opinion here, but...I think that in a few years, Andrew will be seen more.  He will be on a balcony at some point and opening a cheese factory.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Unless she makes some more grave mistakes, she will manage to look good at a photo-op in the White House next year.


Why would she even be there?  They are not here as diplomats.  They never will be either.   There is no reason for them to be invited.  They do not represent The Queen in any capacity.  John Q Public from podunk has a better chance at a photo op with the President.


----------



## csshopper

Jill and Michelle's involvement with Harry a few years ago seemed centered mostly on his work with Invictus and support for wounded vets, those interactions were the setting for many photos. I read that Jill, being a military Mom, appreciated what he was doing and back then JCMH was a happier seeming personality and actively working in support of Invictus. Not sure Jill would be drawn to the mopey, dopey version of him now, especially having dissed the organization to go and pursue some money grubbing activity with MEMEME instead of being present at one of the big Invictus events plus no longer being hands on with the group. And the utter lack of connections between the Grifters and their families would be counter to the lifestyle of the B's and the O's.  I can see JCMH and MM possibly being invited to some event, lots of people are, but don't see them getting a featured role particularly if the coming review leads to their being distanced even more from any role as royalty. 

Harry and Meghan's disrespectful treatment of his grandmother would not sit well with the O's. Remember their State Visit to her in 2009 and there were such warm feelings that Michelle reached out and instinctively hugged her (which set off a protocol kerfuffle in some circles as one does not touch her Majesty), but the Queen was not offended and hugged her back in a mutual sign of respect.


----------



## sdkitty

OT  but I was watching a documentary about warren buffet last night.  One of the richest men in the world.  Lives in a nice home on Omaha but not a mansion and doesn't have 16 bathrooms.  Gives most of his money away.  If H&M want admiration maybe they should take a page out of his book - give something.  what a concept.  seems virtually all of H&M's effort goes into self-promotion.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Why would she even be there?  They are not here as diplomats.  They never will be either.   There is no reason for them to be invited.  They do not represent The Queen in any capacity.  John Q Public from podunk has a better chance at a photo op with the President.



The reason to get an invitation to the WH is the same as visiting the cemetery, school, videos/zoom meetings... The want photo-ops to show that they are relevant. H became a 'good friend' of JillB, MM will make him use that connection imo.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> OT  but I was watching a documentary about warren buffet last night.  One of the richest men in the world.  Lives in a nice home on Omaha but not a mansion and doesn't have 16 bathrooms.  Gives most of his money away.  If H&M want admiration maybe they should take a page out of his book - give something.  what a concept.  seems virtually all of H&M's effort goes into self-promotion.


WB is really admirable, he is a brilliant man. MM&H are anything but brilliant.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Why would she even be there?  They are not here as diplomats.  They never will be either.   There is no reason for them to be invited.  They do not represent The Queen in any capacity.  John Q Public from podunk has a better chance at a photo op with the President.



Why were they handed an enormously lucrative Netflix contract when they have no experience? Why are they being given daily coverage by legitimate media outlets for inane reasons? Why are some people incapable of seeing through their facade? They have accomplished so much that should have been impossible.

To answer your question, there is no reason for them to ever be at the White House. That said, I can almost guarantee they will try to wrangle an invitation. They likely already have their people hard at work trying to track down the right contacts. With the Covid situation any possible meeting is still many months down the road, but I would not take a bet that it would never happen.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I know that I am in the minority opinion here, but...I think that in a few years, Andrew will be seen more.  He will be on a balcony at some point and opening a cheese factory.


You may not be in minority. I also think that he will resume his public activities after the Epstein case becomes inactive. In the meantime, he benefits from MM desperate attempts to be the center of attention.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this Mehera Bonner part of MM's PR-team or on her payroll?
Last paragraph 
*Princess Diana's Former Aide Rudely Implies the Sussexes Want the "Shallow Flattery" of Celebs *by Mehera Bonner


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Why were they handed an enormously lucrative Netflix contract when they have no experience? Why are they being given daily coverage by legitimate media outlets for inane reasons? Why are some people incapable of seeing through their facade? They have accomplished so much that should have been impossible.
> 
> To answer your question, there is no reason for them to ever be at the White House. That said, I can almost guarantee they will try to wrangle an invitation. They likely already have their people hard at work trying to track down the right contacts. With the Covid situation any possible meeting is still many months down the road, but I would not take a bet that it would never happen.


I think  think they are moving from notoriety to notorious. There is controversy with that and it doesn’t usually engender an invitation to the White House.  The suit against MoS is  not going to have an easy outcome for her. Let’s see how her “team” can deal with that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

@bag-mania NF is going to take full advantage of linking The Crown with Harry and he sold his soul to them for that. The media, aside from being bombarded by their PR people, loves a dysfunctional family especially during a time of world wide crisis. A dysfunctional high profile family is even better particularly when they can wear crowns and tiaras. From  the point of view of NF, what’s not to love, especially when they can film it.


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> Why would she even be there?  They are not here as diplomats.  They never will be either.   There is no reason for them to be invited.  They do not represent The Queen in any capacity.  John Q Public from podunk has a better chance at a photo op with the President.





bag-mania said:


> Why were they handed an enormously lucrative Netflix contract when they have no experience? Why are they being given daily coverage by legitimate media outlets for inane reasons? Why are some people incapable of seeing through their facade? They have accomplished so much that should have been impossible.
> 
> To answer your question, there is no reason for them to ever be at the White House. That said, I can almost guarantee they will try to wrangle an invitation. They likely already have their people hard at work trying to track down the right contacts. With the Covid situation any possible meeting is still many months down the road, but I would not take a bet that it would never happen.




I think they absolutely will get invites to Inauguration party and to the WH.  With today's politicians, celebrities are a favorite for publicity, unless they are criminals or widely hated.  Look at how Oprah gets invitations.  And Kim K went to the WH on more than one occasion.  A star studded event is desirable to them.  And MH guarantee press coverage -- they are constantly in the press for whatever reason.


----------



## lulilu

I know I will get blasted for this, but I always thought Diana was "off."  The faces she pulled and weird poses were obvious attempts to obtain sympathy and notoriety.  I know she had some admirable charitable causes, but after the divorce she was living the high life, and welcomed publicity.  She welcomed publicity before that as well.  The press did not kill her.  The drunk driver did.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lulilu said:


> I know I will get blasted for this, but I always thought Diana was "off."  The faces she pulled and weird poses were obvious attempts to obtain sympathy and notoriety.  I know she had some admirable charitable causes, but after the divorce she was living the high life, and welcomed publicity.  She welcomed publicity before that as well.  The press did not kill her.  The drunk driver did.


I just listen to an amazing podcast called “You’re Wrong About”. They did a five part series on Diana, and I learned so much. The man driving the car had been off work for five hours and had no reason to believe he would be called back in. In addition, he was not even a licensed limo driver, but Dodi insisted he drive because he was the head of security for the hotel.


----------



## zlauren

lanasyogamama said:


> I just listen to an amazing podcast called “You’re Wrong About”. They did a five part series on Diana, and I learned so much. The man driving the car had been off work for five hours and had no reason to believe he would be called back in. In addition, he was not even a licensed limo driver, but Dodi insisted he drive because he was the head of security for the hotel.



That podcast is one of my faves, and the Diana series was so, so good and informative!


----------



## marietouchet

See DM articles one on Brad Pitt yesterday, one on H appeared this morning. Both were handing out food at food banks in LA - GOOD ! Sorry forgot to note the URLs

The pix of Brad were all selfies taken by onlookers - not really curated/photoshopped by anyone, the H pix were all professional and he still looked uncomfortable


----------



## Chanbal

Is H flying solo? To rescue MM's image, her new PR-team may have opted for no image! 

*Prince Harry cuts a casual figure in jeans and a face mask in Meghan's old neighbourhood as he hands out fresh fruit and produce for non-profit foundation which provides COVID-19 support for veterans and their families*
Prince Harry was spotted volunteering for a non-profit foundation providing COVID-19 support for veterans and their families, and at-risk communities in Compton, California, last week.

The event took place just a short drive from where Meghan Markle grew up and where her mother Doria lives in the View Park-Windsor Hills area of Los Angeles, approximately 20 minutes away, in a large yellow-colored detached home. It neighbors Crenshaw, an area that has been scarred by gang violence.

Alongside the image, the foundation penned: 'Today I had the honor of meeting and working alongside Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. He joined us in volunteering at Compton VFW for the Operation Nourish program packing and distributing food to our #Compton neighbors. He is very humble and kind.'

Later today, the royal will join a host of stars - including Bruce Springsteen and comedian Tiffany Haddish - at the annual Stand Up for Heroes event, which will broadcast online and on ABC News. 

Prince Harry, who was known for years as the 'joker' of the royal family, will get the chance to that infamous wit to the test when he takes part in a virtual comedy fundraiser for the Bob Woodruff Foundation, an organisation that aims to 'help veterans and military families thrive'.veterans in the US.

Where is MM?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Is H flying solo? To rescue MM's image, her new PR-team may have opted for no image!
> 
> *Prince Harry cuts a casual figure in jeans and a face mask in Meghan's old neighbourhood as he hands out fresh fruit and produce for non-profit foundation which provides COVID-19 support for veterans and their families*
> Prince Harry was spotted volunteering for a non-profit foundation providing COVID-19 support for veterans and their families, and at-risk communities in Compton, California, last week.
> 
> The event took place just a short drive from where Meghan Markle grew up and where her mother Doria lives in the View Park-Windsor Hills area of Los Angeles, approximately 20 minutes away, in a large yellow-colored detached home. It neighbors Crenshaw, an area that has been scarred by gang violence.
> 
> Alongside the image, the foundation penned: 'Today I had the honor of meeting and working alongside Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. He joined us in volunteering at Compton VFW for the Operation Nourish program packing and distributing food to our #Compton neighbors. He is very humble and kind.'
> 
> Later today, the royal will join a host of stars - including Bruce Springsteen and comedian Tiffany Haddish - at the annual Stand Up for Heroes event, which will broadcast online and on ABC News.
> 
> Prince Harry, who was known for years as the 'joker' of the royal family, will get the chance to that infamous wit to the test when he takes part in a virtual comedy fundraiser for the Bob Woodruff Foundation, an organisation that aims to 'help veterans and military families thrive'.veterans in the US.
> 
> Where is MM?


The DM had pix of this outing - Harry only


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She apparently trusts the puppet won't run wild.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I think they absolutely will get invites to Inauguration party and to the WH.  With today's politicians, celebrities are a favorite for publicity, *unless they are criminals or widely hated*.  Look at how Oprah gets invitations.  And Kim K went to the WH on more than one occasion.  A star studded event is desirable to them.  And MH guarantee press coverage -- they are constantly in the press for whatever reason.


ITA with you, but I think there have been a number of criminals already invited to the White House.  Wasn't Epstein and Ghislaine at some function there, just to name two?


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> ITA with you, but I think there have been a number of criminals already invited to the White House.  Wasn't Epstein and Ghislaine at some function there, just to name two?


There have always been criminals in and out of the White House, either as residents or guests.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She apparently trusts the puppet won't run wild.


I think this is more like part of MM's image rescue process, which is 'no image' of her in a couple of photo-ops. She needs to lie low for some time.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Why were they handed an enormously lucrative Netflix contract when they have no experience? Why are they being given daily coverage by legitimate media outlets for inane reasons? Why are some people incapable of seeing through their facade? They have accomplished so much that should have been impossible.
> 
> To answer your question, there is no reason for them to ever be at the White House. That said, I can almost guarantee they will try to wrangle an invitation. They likely already have their people hard at work trying to track down the right contacts. With the Covid situation any possible meeting is still many months down the road, but I would not take a bet that it would never happen.



They might try. But Mr B, as President, has more to gain with photos of people in direct line of succession.

So, it really depends on how long Covid lasts (a photo with any royal might be better than no royal at all at some point) and how deep that rift between BRF and H&M really is. If it's deep enough that a public photo op with H&M might cause any waves with the BRF and its handlers then maybe the Bs will hold off.

Politicians are nothing if not calculative. And it's much nicer to be hosted by both Buckingham and Kensington.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I think they absolutely will get invites to Inauguration party and to the WH.  With today's politicians, celebrities are a favorite for publicity, unless they are criminals or widely hated.  Look at how Oprah gets invitations.  And Kim K went to the WH on more than one occasion.  A star studded event is desirable to them.  And MH guarantee press coverage -- they are constantly in the press for whatever reason.


what inauguration parties?  it's a pandemic


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> I know I will get blasted for this, but I always thought Diana was "off."  The faces she pulled and weird poses were obvious attempts to obtain sympathy and notoriety.  I know she had some admirable charitable causes, but after the divorce she was living the high life, and welcomed publicity.  She welcomed publicity before that as well.  The press did not kill her.  The drunk driver did.


Were you talking about her interview with the BBC? There have been several documentaries about it recently due to the fake bank statement scandal. We watched one recently and she looked really bad in that interview. Too much eye make up and unnatural facial expressions. Words out there is that she was encouraged to do that interview by the BBC reporter using fake bank statements and they have opened a fresh inquiry into this.

Sorry back to topic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Why were they handed an enormously lucrative Netflix contract when they have no experience? Why are they being given daily coverage by legitimate media outlets for inane reasons? Why are some people incapable of seeing through their facade? They have accomplished so much that should have been impossible.



I think Netflix just seized an opportunity and tossed them a contract that likely has tons of conditions and might not result in much of a pay out, depending on what is actually produced, how watchable it is, and how many viewers they lure in.  There is probably little at risk for Netflix and if a Harry/MM reality show/documentary/pity party is boring or foolish or cringy, it may not even make it on the air. They won't let their marriage be seen as anything but 100% perfect, so no arguments or disagreements between them will be shown.  Just the two of them being filmed planning and going from one perceived good deed to another, pretending to still be royals doing royal stuff like laying wreaths, while taking sly (or not so sly) swipes at his family?  What a bore that could be.  The two of them are not particularly intelligent or witty. They could end up doing a lot of damage to themselves if they come off as clueless, out of touch, and entitled as they appear to be. The whole show could end up being nominated for "best comedy" if they aren't careful.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> what inauguration parties?  it's a pandemic


This!  JB has been very careful to wear a mask at all public appearances so I just don't see him encouraging large gatherings especially celebratory ones, unless the vaccine proves to be very effective before the inauguration.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I think this is more like part of MM's image rescue process, which is 'no image' of her in a couple of photo-ops. *She needs to lie low for some time.*



...For the rest of her life, hopefully


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> This!  JB has been very careful to wear a mask at all public appearances so I just don't see him encouraging large gatherings especially celebratory ones, unless the vaccine proves to be very effective before the inauguration.


And he hid away in the basement for months .... he is in the most vulnerable group


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> They might try. But Mr B, as President, has more to gain with photos of people in direct line of succession.
> 
> So, it really depends on how long Covid lasts (a photo with any royal might be better than no royal at all at some point) and how deep that rift between BRF and H&M really is. If it's deep enough that a public photo op with H&M might cause any waves with the BRF and its handlers then maybe the Bs will hold off.
> 
> Politicians are nothing if not calculative. And it's much nicer to be hosted by both Buckingham and Kensington.



The reason I can see it possibly working for them is there is still a large segment of the American population that doesn't care enough about them to follow what they do but still has a generally good impression of H&M. Imagine if you didn't know all that we've discussed here for the past 2+ years. Maybe the only thing you know is you watched their big wedding and then heard what the US media reported when H&M left England at the beginning of the year.

As you said politicians are calculative. As an older president, JB will want to have celebrity contacts who connect with younger Americans. H&M have been _selling themselves hard_ as being ecologically minded, social justice warriors. Here's hoping his advisors (whoever they end up being) are in touch and smart enough not to recommend these two grasping clowns.


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> ...For the rest of her life, hopefully


Haha, wishful thinking!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> I think they absolutely will get invites to Inauguration party and to the WH.  With today's politicians, celebrities are a favorite for publicity, unless they are criminals or widely hated.  Look at how Oprah gets invitations.  And Kim K went to the WH on more than one occasion.  A star studded event is desirable to them.  And MH guarantee press coverage -- they are constantly in the press for whatever reason.



Well, the surest way to be invited is to donate lots and lots of money, then donate some more.
Usually, the ‘handout’ goes one way - to the host.  Of course, heighten security makes the whole ordeal unpleasant and not really worth it. H&M seem to prefer to receive the handouts, not give them. Certainly not pay for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Google shows her to be a contributor to all the mags. She seems to be supportive (?) of H&M, but this last paragraph tells me she is all about ‘wagging the dog’ 

Taller explains the PR people  —  The PR ppl



Chanbal said:


> Is this Mehera Bonner part of MM's PR-team or on her payroll?
> Last paragraph
> 
> View attachment 4908318





Spoiler: Wag the dog



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wag_the_dog


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> What possible parallel could there be between Diana and Meghan.
> One married a prince to fulfil her girlish dream of becoming the princess wales; bore two sons; sponsored good causes; became a style icon; left the RF; divorced and tragically died in France.
> The other married a dumb prince for money and prestige; left the RF; moved to California to be near the Hollywood biggies; used her title to pimp herself and husband to gain notoriety; sponsored little if anything; tried to copy the other’s looks, but totally missed the mark.
> 
> ETA: Diana as a style icon.



Diana was also born an aristocrat, though not part of the London scene, married a man quite a bit older, and manipulated by her husband to be put up and shut-up: eyes-wide-shut. The other, pleading ignorance of the traditions of the 'firm', almost twice the life experience, plus experienced in terms of relationships (and weddings) slightly older than her husband, manipulated all that knew her, knew all about celeb. culture/paps before making the decision, eyes-wide-open.


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> I know I will get blasted for this, but I always thought Diana was "off."  The faces she pulled and weird poses were obvious attempts to obtain sympathy and notoriety.  I know she had some admirable charitable causes, but after the divorce she was living the high life, and welcomed publicity.  She welcomed publicity before that as well.  The press did not kill her.  *The drunk driver did*.


And not wearing a seatbelt.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> And not wearing a seatbelt.


I think the drunk limo driver was the major cause.  Yes, the paps played a role but if she had a sober driver this probably wouldn't have happened.  as far as the seatbelt, yes, but in those days I'm thinking it was probably pretty common not to wear one in a limo?
H wants to blame the paps though.  he's made up his mind.  he's mad at them.  comparing tabloid coverage of meghan to paps chasing diana is apples to oranges IMO.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I think the drunk limo driver was the major cause.  Yes, the paps played a role but if she had a sober driver this probably wouldn't have happened.  as far as the seatbelt, yes, but in those days I'm thinking it was probably pretty common not to wear one in a limo?
> H wants to blame the paps though.  he's made up his mind.  he's mad at them.  comparing tabloid coverage of meghan to paps chasing diana is apples to oranges IMO.


The latest wrinkle on the 23 - 25 year  old story of her death ... 
Bashir of BBC documentary fame (supposedly) concocted documents that staff (palace or her brother's) were spying on D - to get her to agree to the infamous interview
So, D became suspicious of all the staff, and thus, decided to forgo Met protection on the night of her death 
It is all Bashir/BBCs fault ... 

In the immortal words of the Eagles/Don Henley - GET OVER IT ! that was a 1/4 of a century ago


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The reason I can see it possibly working for them is there is still a large segment of the American population that doesn't care enough about them to follow what they do but still has a generally good impression of H&M. Imagine if you didn't know all that we've discussed here for the past 2+ years. Maybe the only thing you know is you watched their big wedding and then heard what the US media reported when H&M left England at the beginning of the year.
> 
> As you said politicians are calculative. As an older president, JB will want to have celebrity contacts who connect with younger Americans. H&M have been _selling themselves hard_ as being ecologically minded, social justice warriors. Here's hoping his advisors (whoever they end up being) are in touch and smart enough not to recommend these two grasping clowns.


I don't see how they don't lose their relevance.  They are not Greta Thunburg.  They are not royals (their choice).  Are they that glamorous?  Not to me.  What is left?  There are plenty of woke celebs.  How are they any more interesting or important than others?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't see how they don't lose their relevance.  They are not Greta Thunburg.  They are not royals (their choice).  Are they that glamorous?  Not to me.  What is left?  There are plenty of woke celebs.  How are they any more interesting or important than others?



There is nothing left, and yet...

People are still talking about them. WE are talking about them. As long as they keep putting themselves out there they will get lots of attention and that's what they are going after. They hop from current cause to current cause and then abandon them when no longer in the news. They don't have to be worthy people to be considered newsworthy. That much is clear.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't see how they don't lose their relevance.  They are not Greta Thunburg.  They are not royals (their choice).  Are they that glamorous?  Not to me.  What is left?  There are plenty of woke celebs.  How are they any more interesting or important than others?



As distasteful as it is, they are indeed royals. As many here have corrected me, Harry will always be ‘prince of the UK, etc’. Always.
As long as she remains married to him, she will always be ‘princess Henry’. QE may remove the Duke & Duchess titles, but that is highly doubtful. If QE did remove those, they still would be Prince and Princess Henry. We know PrChas won’t remove anything - he is funding their lifestyle, either directly or indirectly.

Some believe titles are the be-all-and-end-all. Notice how the Greek Royals and the Germans and others still use theirs.
For some, it is “a thing”.  All that said, it seems highly inappropriate for them to be invited to an event hosted by the ********s, unless they make a huge donation (with receipts).  I will say it again, nothing screams privilege like a royal title  - which after the year we have had is just wrong. All my opinion.

ETA: clearly, they will not be coming to my bubble’s party


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Please correct me if I’m wrong, I believe Peter _got in trouble _for merching his connections. We know Andrew did.
Absolutely we are still talking about them. Not because they are relevant to our world, but because they have power, money and land. Charles and his Great Reset is nothing to laugh at. H&M may very well play a role in that. Time will tell.









						As Harry flies to Canada, Peter Phillips is advertising milk
					

In a fresh twist to the row over the Duke and Duchess of Sussex seeking 'financial independence', Peter Phillips appears in two adverts for a state-owned dairy firm.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

The night Diana died was a compilation of events that led to disaster. If any one of them hadn't happened it might have ended differently.

Studies have been done about the effect on drivers who are being chased. There is an incredible adrenaline rush and dangerous driving happens. Even without being drunk, panicked driving quickly becomes reckless and good judgment goes out the window. That is why many cities have their police call off criminal pursuits if the speed gets too high. Criminals know this and use it to their advantage to get away. But it is the only way to try to prevent innocent drivers and pedestrians from being hurt or killed. There have been some cases where the police have been sued because they were chasing a criminal who then killed somebody with their vehicle. So pursuers can be held responsible. The paps should own their part in it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The night Diana died was a compilation of events that led to disaster. If any one of them hadn't happened it might have ended differently.
> 
> Studies have been done about the effect on drivers who are being chased. There is an incredible adrenaline rush and dangerous driving happens. Even without being drunk, panicked driving quickly becomes reckless and good judgment goes out the window. That is why many cities have their police call off criminal pursuits if the speed gets too high. Criminals know this and use it to their advantage to get away. But it is the only way to try to prevent innocent drivers and pedestrians from being hurt or killed. There have been some cases where the police have been sued because they were chasing a criminal who then killed somebody with their vehicle. So pursuers can be held responsible. The paps should own their part in it.



Well said, thank you.
For me, the bottom line is it is only a picture. Not worth dying over or endangering others.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said, thank you.
> For me, the bottom line is it is only a picture. Not worth dying over or endangering others.



That's true. I remember how aggressive paparazzi were back then. They would do anything the get the money shot! It wasn't unusual to see a dozen or more of them clustering up around a celebrity's limo, shoving their cameras in the windows, yelling, flashes going off. The paps of today are not nearly as rude or scary (they are still invasive but not as bad as before) and I think Diana's death may have had something to do with that change in behavior.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Angry that things were so chaotic and aggressive back then, absolutely agree with all that you said.


----------



## Chloe302225

Meghan Markle provided information to Finding Freedom via third party https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ents-reveal.html?ito=native_share_article-top


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> Meghan Markle provided information to Finding Freedom via third party https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ents-reveal.html?ito=native_share_article-top



Well, la-di-da! So much for Ms. Privacy being above all that. Even her stans must know that nonsense was spoon fed to Omid with Meghan's blessing and strong encouragement. I wish they would release the name of the third party, it was probably Meghan's personal assistant.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Well, la-di-da! So much for Ms. Privacy being above all that. Even her stans must know that nonsense was spoon fed to Omid with Meghan's blessing and strong encouragement. I wish they would release the name of the third party, it was probably Meghan's personal assistant.


bag-mania, same reaction here. Read the headline, thought "ho hum, that's old news" and moved on.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## bag-mania

Time to drop the lawsuit. Why waste everyone's time and money for another year when you are destined to lose? Oh, that's right, ATTENTION!!!


----------



## Lodpah

MM is so cunning. She knew what she was doing when she relayed her message. She’s so devious . . . and evil.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please correct me if I’m wrong, I believe Peter _got in trouble _for merching his connections. We know Andrew did.
> Absolutely we are still talking about them. Not because they are relevant to our world, but because they have power, money and land. Charles and his Great Reset is nothing to laugh at. H&M may very well play a role in that. Time will tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Harry flies to Canada, Peter Phillips is advertising milk
> 
> 
> In a fresh twist to the row over the Duke and Duchess of Sussex seeking 'financial independence', Peter Phillips appears in two adverts for a state-owned dairy firm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It was noticed that Peter was doing advertising around the time of Megxit when the BRF became BIG NEWS
Did P get into trouble with family? Dont know ..... He belongs to family but is not a senior paid royal, he kind of has free agent status - like his sister - she does endorsements, everyone knows that.  I never saw the  milk ad to know if there was something offensive to the family, it was a foreign ad, as I remember - in China not the UK ?

Andrew was a different issue - he was  a paid SENIOR member and a DIPLOMATIC envoy in trade matters, and used his influence, way bad, far beyond doing ads for milk


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> MM is so cunning. She knew what she was doing when she relayed her message. She’s so devious . . . and evil.



She set up her own father to be the dupe and take the fall. All to play the victim and look innocent and persecuted. She is as cold as ice with a heart of stone!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who wants to go?









						Diana The Musical | Official Site
					

The Tony-winning writers of Memphis and director of Come From Away bring the legend of Princess Diana to thrilling new life on Broadway.




					thedianamusical.com


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who wants to go?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana The Musical | Official Site
> 
> 
> The Tony-winning writers of Memphis and director of Come From Away bring the legend of Princess Diana to thrilling new life on Broadway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianamusical.com


I’m still mourning Eddie Van Halen . . . so H to the N.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who wants to go?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana The Musical | Official Site
> 
> 
> The Tony-winning writers of Memphis and director of Come From Away bring the legend of Princess Diana to thrilling new life on Broadway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianamusical.com



If they are showing it on Netflix why would anyone then pay $100 a ticket to see it on Broadway next year? They must know they've got a turkey on their hands and that's why it's coming out on TV. I feel sorry for theatre people. It's hard enough for them to eek out a living and Covid stopped everything about their livelihood.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> As distasteful as it is, they are indeed royals. As many here have corrected me, Harry will always be ‘prince of the UK, etc’. Always.
> As long as she remains married to him, she will always be ‘princess Henry’. *QE may remove the Duke & Duchess titles,* but that is highly doubtful. If QE did remove those, they still would be Prince and Princess Henry. We know PrChas won’t remove anything - he is funding their lifestyle, either directly or indirectly.
> 
> Some believe titles are the be-all-and-end-all. Notice how the Greek Royals and the Germans and others still use theirs.
> For some, it is “a thing”.  All that said, it seems highly inappropriate for them to be invited to an event hosted by the ********s, unless they make a huge donation (with receipts).  I will say it again, nothing screams privilege like a royal title  - which after the year we have had is just wrong. All my opinion.
> 
> ETA: clearly, they will not be coming to my bubble’s party


If QE takes the duchess title, she can still use Countess of *Dumb*arton. To simplify, she could abbreviate and use only Countess Dumb. I wonder what QE had that in mind when gave her that title.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who wants to go?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana The Musical | Official Site
> 
> 
> The Tony-winning writers of Memphis and director of Come From Away bring the legend of Princess Diana to thrilling new life on Broadway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianamusical.com


The Legend of Princess Diana??? Really? Is this just another production to take potshots at the RF? I'll pass nor will I watch it on Netflix.


----------



## joyeaux

bag-mania said:


> Time to drop the lawsuit. Why waste everyone's time and money for another year when you are destined to lose? Oh, that's right, ATTENTION!!!



And don’t forget, narcissism! I just cannot get over the brazen way she has flouted _centuries_ of tradition, sense of duty, and privilege to try and redefine it all... and when that didn’t work, packing up her toys (I.e. Harry and Archie) and leaving.



Here’s the Telegraph’s article on it... it’s behind a paywall so here’s the entire thing. They say it could have been Charles and Camilla that helped her draft that letter? 



*Meghan Markle admits giving personal information to the authors of Finding Freedom*
*In new court documents, the Duchess says she gave her own version of events to someone to be communicated to the authors*
By Victoria Ward 18 November 2020 • 8:45pm





The Duchess of Sussex said she was concerned that "her father’s narrative," that she had abandoned him, might be repeated  Credit: Doug Peters/EMPICS
The Duchess of Sussex has admitted passing information to the authors of Finding Freedom despite previously dismissing claims that she cooperated with them as a "conspiracy theory".
In new documents lodged with the High Court, she reveals she was concerned that "her father’s narrative” - that she had abandoned him and cut off contact - might be repeated, prompting her to intervene.
The Duchess says she gave her own version of events to someone else to pass on, so “the true position… could be communicated to the authors to prevent any further misrepresentation.”
It also emerged on Wednesday that the Duchess wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, on the advice of two “senior” members of the Royal Family.
The relatives are not named but it is known that the Sussexes went to stay with the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey, their home on the north coast in Caithness, in August 2018, shortly before the letter was sent.
Advertisement
The Duchess admits that Jason Knauf, then-Kensington Palace communications secretary, helped her compose the letter and informed other royal households that it was being written.
She insists that despite external collaboration, there was no discussion about the letter being used as part of a “media strategy” to enhance her image, a claim she describes as "misconceived and offensive."
The Duchess is suing Associated Newspapers, the owner of The Mail on Sunday, for breach of privacy and copyright after it published extracts of the letter.




The book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was an international bestseller Credit: NEIL HALL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
But lawyers on behalf of the newspaper allege that she breached her own privacy because she “permitted” details about her life to be shared with the authors of Finding Freedom, including “information about the letter”.
In September, the Duchess's legal team strenuously denied the allegation that she collaborated on the book, describing the argument as "false", "fantastical" and "a conspiracy theory".
Justin Rushbrooke, QC, said in written submissions that instead of getting information from confidential sources, all the authors did was "collate a vast amount of scraps of information".
However, the amended court documents reveal that the Duchess was “concerned” that Mr Markle’s allegations that she had “abandoned him and had not even tried to contact him” would be repeated, despite being false.
She therefore told someone she knew had already been approached by the book’s authors, Omid Scobie or Carolyn Durand, that they could convey “the true position.”
The Duchess is said to be unaware to what extent “this one item of information concerning her communications with her father” was shared.
Despite the intervention, she insists that she did not speak to Mr Scobie or Ms Durand about the book, never meeting with them or being interviewed formally or informally.
The documents state that neither the Duke nor the Duchess wanted any involvement with  the book and that the only interaction the Duchess had ever had with Mr Scobie was in March, when he was invited to Buckingham Palace as the couple bid farewell to staff.
As an example of the “creative licence” used, she says a claim that Prince Harry texted his father to tell him their son Archie had been born was “plainly false” as the Prince of Wales does not have a mobile phone.
Perhaps significantly, she admits that she does not know if the Kensington Palace communications team provided any information on her behalf.
The letter at the heart of the case was sent to Mr Markle in August 2018, three months after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s wedding.
As the newest member of the Royal Family, the Duchess “wanted to follow protocol” and so sought advice from two senior members on “how best to address the situation,” legal documents reveal.
As a result, she decided to write the letter in a bid to stop Mr Markle speaking to the press. In it, the Duchess accused her estranged father of breaking her heart "into a million pieces".
Once she had decided to write it, she informed Mr Knauf, who had become a close confidante and had been speaking to Mr Markle on a regular basis, particularly in the run-up to her wedding.




Jason Knauf
Mr Knauf was responsible for telling other senior members of the Royal households of the plan, the documents reveal.
The Duchess spent “many hours” working on a draft of the letter on her iPhone and shared it with both her husband, the Duke of Sussex, and Mr Knauf, “for support as this was a deeply painful process that they lived through with her,” she states.
Mr Knauf “provided feedback” in the form of “general ideas,” but no actual wording.
The document describes claims that they knew Mr Markle would reveal the contents of the letter once it was in the public domain as “ludicrous”.
Her lawyers argue that despite external collaboration, there was no discussion about the letter being used as part of a “media strategy” to enhance her image.
The document adds: “For the avoidance of doubt neither Mr Knauf (nor anybody else) created any part of the Electronic Draft or the Letter. The Claimant, and the Claimant alone, created the Electronic Draft, which she then transcribed by hand to her father as the Letter.”
The Mail on Sunday has argued that as the letter is not wholly original, the Duchess is not protected by copyright.
It has alleged that the letter simply recites “pre-existing facts and admonishment” including the Duchess’s views of Mr Markle and his conduct, and is therefore not her “own intellectual creation”.
A ten-day trial scheduled for January was postponed for at least nine months after the Duchess won a delay on confidential grounds.




Your Royal Appointment
Everything you need to know about the Royal family with exclusive analysis and content.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> Meghan Markle provided information to Finding Freedom via third party https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ents-reveal.html?ito=native_share_article-top


She was obviously advised by the lawyers to admit to that. However, they can't forget the FF's* acknowledgement: '*We have spoken with close friends of Harry and Meghan, royal aides and palace staff (past and present), the charities and organisations they have built long-lasting relationships with and, when appropriate, the couple themselves.'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Oh MM, shut your trap, you're already knee-deep in horse manure from all the lies you've had published on your behalf.

Question for lawyers on this thread... Can the MOS force her hand in any way now that this crap has been revealed?


----------



## CarryOn2020

joyeaux said:


> It also emerged on Wednesday that the Duchess wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, on the advice of two “senior” members of the Royal Family.
> The relatives are not named but it is known that the Sussexes went to stay with the *Prince of Wales *and the Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey, their home on the north coast in Caithness, in August 2018, shortly before the letter was sent.
> Advertisement



Just wait for all the facts — He has been involved from the very beginning.


----------



## bag-mania

joyeaux said:


> Here’s the Telegraph’s article on it... it’s behind a paywall so here’s the entire thing. *They say it could have been Charles and Camilla that helped her draft that letter?*
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle admits giving personal information to the authors of Finding Freedom*
> *In new court documents, the Duchess says she gave her own version of events to someone to be communicated to the authors*
> By Victoria Ward 18 November 2020 • 8:45pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was concerned that "her father’s narrative," that she had abandoned him, might be repeated  Credit: Doug Peters/EMPICS
> The Duchess of Sussex has admitted passing information to the authors of Finding Freedom despite previously dismissing claims that she cooperated with them as a "conspiracy theory".
> In new documents lodged with the High Court, she reveals she was concerned that "her father’s narrative” - that she had abandoned him and cut off contact - might be repeated, prompting her to intervene.
> The Duchess says she gave her own version of events to someone else to pass on, so “the true position… could be communicated to the authors to prevent any further misrepresentation.”
> It also emerged on Wednesday that the Duchess wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, on the advice of two “senior” members of the Royal Family.
> The relatives are not named but it is known that the Sussexes went to stay with the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey, their home on the north coast in Caithness, in August 2018, shortly before the letter was sent.
> Advertisement
> The Duchess admits that Jason Knauf, then-Kensington Palace communications secretary, helped her compose the letter and informed other royal households that it was being written.
> She insists that despite external collaboration, there was no discussion about the letter being used as part of a “media strategy” to enhance her image, a claim she describes as "misconceived and offensive."
> The Duchess is suing Associated Newspapers, the owner of The Mail on Sunday, for breach of privacy and copyright after it published extracts of the letter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was an international bestseller Credit: NEIL HALL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
> But lawyers on behalf of the newspaper allege that she breached her own privacy because she “permitted” details about her life to be shared with the authors of Finding Freedom, including “information about the letter”.
> In September, the Duchess's legal team strenuously denied the allegation that she collaborated on the book, describing the argument as "false", "fantastical" and "a conspiracy theory".
> Justin Rushbrooke, QC, said in written submissions that instead of getting information from confidential sources, all the authors did was "collate a vast amount of scraps of information".
> However, the amended court documents reveal that the Duchess was “concerned” that Mr Markle’s allegations that she had “abandoned him and had not even tried to contact him” would be repeated, despite being false.
> She therefore told someone she knew had already been approached by the book’s authors, Omid Scobie or Carolyn Durand, that they could convey “the true position.”
> The Duchess is said to be unaware to what extent “this one item of information concerning her communications with her father” was shared.
> Despite the intervention, she insists that she did not speak to Mr Scobie or Ms Durand about the book, never meeting with them or being interviewed formally or informally.
> The documents state that neither the Duke nor the Duchess wanted any involvement with  the book and that the only interaction the Duchess had ever had with Mr Scobie was in March, when he was invited to Buckingham Palace as the couple bid farewell to staff.
> As an example of the “creative licence” used, she says a claim that Prince Harry texted his father to tell him their son Archie had been born was “plainly false” as the Prince of Wales does not have a mobile phone.
> Perhaps significantly, she admits that she does not know if the Kensington Palace communications team provided any information on her behalf.
> The letter at the heart of the case was sent to Mr Markle in August 2018, three months after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s wedding.
> As the newest member of the Royal Family, the Duchess “wanted to follow protocol” and so sought advice from two senior members on “how best to address the situation,” legal documents reveal.
> As a result, she decided to write the letter in a bid to stop Mr Markle speaking to the press. In it, the Duchess accused her estranged father of breaking her heart "into a million pieces".
> Once she had decided to write it, she informed Mr Knauf, who had become a close confidante and had been speaking to Mr Markle on a regular basis, particularly in the run-up to her wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Knauf
> Mr Knauf was responsible for telling other senior members of the Royal households of the plan, the documents reveal.
> The Duchess spent “many hours” working on a draft of the letter on her iPhone and shared it with both her husband, the Duke of Sussex, and Mr Knauf, “for support as this was a deeply painful process that they lived through with her,” she states.
> Mr Knauf “provided feedback” in the form of “general ideas,” but no actual wording.
> The document describes claims that they knew Mr Markle would reveal the contents of the letter once it was in the public domain as “ludicrous”.
> Her lawyers argue that despite external collaboration, there was no discussion about the letter being used as part of a “media strategy” to enhance her image.
> The document adds: “For the avoidance of doubt neither Mr Knauf (nor anybody else) created any part of the Electronic Draft or the Letter. The Claimant, and the Claimant alone, created the Electronic Draft, which she then transcribed by hand to her father as the Letter.”
> The Mail on Sunday has argued that as the letter is not wholly original, the Duchess is not protected by copyright.
> It has alleged that the letter simply recites “pre-existing facts and admonishment” including the Duchess’s views of Mr Markle and his conduct, and is therefore not her “own intellectual creation”.
> A ten-day trial scheduled for January was postponed for at least nine months after the Duchess won a delay on confidential grounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Royal Appointment
> Everything you need to know about the Royal family with exclusive analysis and content.



So she played Charles and Camilla for fools? Convinced them to help her by pretending to be the helpless girl with horrible relatives. 

Meghan certainly doesn’t have much respect for her elders, does she? Her dad, C&C? I wonder how future king Charles feels about being used as a pawn in her game.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> So she played Charles and Camilla for fools? Convinced them to help her by pretending to be the helpless girl with horrible relatives.
> 
> Meghan certainly doesn’t have much respect for her elders, does she? Her dad, C&C? I wonder how future king Charles feels about being used as a pawn in her game.



He used her, she used him.  The more I learn, the more I am convinced he, H&M all planned every move of this ****show.  All of them played a role in this drama.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who wants to go?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana The Musical | Official Site
> 
> 
> The Tony-winning writers of Memphis and director of Come From Away bring the legend of Princess Diana to thrilling new life on Broadway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianamusical.com


Remember the David Foster documentary , the one  he paid for, he said in that he was working on three (sic) Broadway musicals, I wonder if this is one of his ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Remember the David Foster documentary , the one  he paid for, he said in that he was working on three (sic) Broadway musicals, I wonder if this is one of his ?



You are brilliant. Very small world.
We have all been played. 






						DIANA: A New Musical Will Open at the Longacre in the Spring | Shubert Organization
					






					shubert.nyc
				



Kelly Devine (Choreography) is a leading director and choreographer and recently won the 2019 Olivier Award for Best Choreography for Come From Away.
Choreography: Broadway: Come From Away (2017 Tony Award, Drama Desk Award and Outer Critics Circle nominations; 2019 Olivier Award Winner: Best Choreography); Rocky (2014 Tony Award and Drama Desk Award nominations); Rock of Ages (West End, UK Tour, Toronto, and Australia); Dr. Zhivago; Escape to Margaritaville. Off-Broadway: Rock of Ages, Fat Camp, Toxic Avenger, Frankenstein, Anne Wrecksick. International: Rocky (Germany), Dr. Zhivago (Australia, Korea), Cabaret, Romeo and Juliet (Stratford Shakespeare Festival). Opera: Faust (directed by Des McAnuff, NY Met & London ENO), Wozzeck (San Diego Opera). Regional: Diana (world premiere La Jolla Playhouse), Come From Away, Peter and the Starcatcher (La Jolla production for Disney Theatricals), A Christmas Story (Seattle’s 5th Avenue and Kansas City Rep), Private Fittings, Toxic Avenger, Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson. TV: “Katy Keene,” “Modern Love,” "Mozart in the Jungle," "Wormwood," “Dear Dumb Diary”. Film: Detroit (directed by Kathryn Bigelow), The Upside (Kevin Hart, Nicole Kidman, Bryan Cranston), Happy Texas. Kelly has several projects in development as director and choreographer including a new musical with *David Foster.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gotta love the hypocrisy - lol









						Prince Harry discusses 'quiet acts of service' after PR stunt fury
					

Harry, 36, took part in the star-studded Stand Up for Heroes virtual fundraiser on Monday night, alongside the likes of Jon Stewart and Bruce Springsteen.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_Prince Harry seems to have made a sudden U-turn about how acts of service should be carried out, preaching that 'service is what happens in the quiet... when people aren't watching' - just days after he and wife Meghan Markle were slammed for turning Remembrance Day into a 'tasteless publicity stunt'. 

While discussing the military and the impact of the pandemic at virtual veterans fundraiser Stand Up for Heroes, Harry, 36, claimed: 'As far as I see it, service is what happens in the quiet and in the chaos. It's what happens when people aren't looking and it's about how we take care of each other every single day.' 

The Duke of Sussex's views on 'quiet' acts of service are very much at odds with the heavily-criticized photoshoot that he and Meghan, 39, arranged on Remembrance Sunday, when they visited a Los Angeles cemetery to lay flowers at the graves of fallen Commonwealth soldiers - a move that sparked outrage on both sides of the Atlantic.   
_


----------



## bag-mania

It is amazing how different the perspective is depending on which media outlet is reporting. _Vanity Fair_ considers today’s court news to be a “triumph for Meghan” because she won’t have to face her father in court. 









						Meghan Markle Probably Won’t Have to Face Her Father In Court After All
					

The judge in her tabloid trial determined on Wednesday that Thomas Markle is not “an important witness”— at least, not important enough to have to fly to London.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta love the hypocrisy - lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry discusses 'quiet acts of service' after PR stunt fury
> 
> 
> Harry, 36, took part in the star-studded Stand Up for Heroes virtual fundraiser on Monday night, alongside the likes of Jon Stewart and Bruce Springsteen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry seems to have made a sudden U-turn about how acts of service should be carried out, preaching that 'service is what happens in the quiet... when people aren't watching' - just days after he and wife Meghan Markle were slammed for turning Remembrance Day into a 'tasteless publicity stunt'.
> 
> While discussing the military and the impact of the pandemic at virtual veterans fundraiser Stand Up for Heroes, Harry, 36, claimed: 'As far as I see it, service is what happens in the quiet and in the chaos. It's what happens when people aren't looking and it's about how we take care of each other every single day.'
> 
> The Duke of Sussex's views on 'quiet' acts of service are very much at odds with the heavily-criticized photoshoot that he and Meghan, 39, arranged on Remembrance Sunday, when they visited a Los Angeles cemetery to lay flowers at the graves of fallen Commonwealth soldiers - a move that sparked outrage on both sides of the Atlantic.   _



Seems he is doing exactly what he said he disliked doing with the BRF? Now Meghan is pimping him out for a new publicity angle... Doing exactly what he didn’t like to do?


----------



## rose60610

"Quiet" acts of service????? Since WHEN????  Oh, that's right! AFTER CemeteryGate. It's been a week since that stunt, thank GOD there are suffering vets for Harry to leech off now!!!  If Harry's "service" was so "quiet", why are we hearing about it?  Piece of advice to the beyond desperate fame whores: "Quiet" means shut your idiotic effing mouths, no camera crews, no "leaked" story to the press, no comment. Besides, if H&M are sooooooo important they require a small army of security guards, then why not write a big fat check to the cause instead of appearing for 2 minutes pretending to care? How can they afford to volunteer to do anything if their mega security must protect them??  How many more dead/indigent/unfortunate people must be used as cardboard props for H&M to exploit under the pretense of "caring" when you know full well Meghan and Harry likely wipe down everything with sani-wipes to distance themselves from the Unwashed? They're so fake they give plastic people a bad name. The Palace must be red-faced embarrassed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> The Palace must be red-faced embarrassed.


Why? Seems to me, that H&MM are the ones that should be embarrassed and ashamed, but they have no conscience and no moral fortitude. HM knew
exactly what Harry was marrying, but couldn't prevent it even if she wanted.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> So she played Charles and Camilla for fools? Convinced them to help her by pretending to be the helpless girl with horrible relatives.
> 
> Meghan certainly doesn’t have much respect for her elders, does she? Her dad, C&C? I wonder how future king Charles feels about being used as a pawn in her game.



The more I know the odder it seems. That someone sought an official's advice on writing a letter to their own father. Especially, when that same person has been very vocal about how those same people were so unwelcoming and had in for her from the start. I would have no trouble knowing what to write to my father.


----------



## byzina

joyeaux said:


> And don’t forget, narcissism! I just cannot get over the brazen way she has flouted _centuries_ of tradition, sense of duty, and privilege to try and redefine it all... and when that didn’t work, packing up her toys (I.e. Harry and Archie) and leaving.
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s the Telegraph’s article on it... it’s behind a paywall so here’s the entire thing. They say it could have been Charles and Camilla that helped her draft that letter?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle admits giving personal information to the authors of Finding Freedom*
> *In new court documents, the Duchess says she gave her own version of events to someone to be communicated to the authors*
> By Victoria Ward 18 November 2020 • 8:45pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was concerned that "her father’s narrative," that she had abandoned him, might be repeated  Credit: Doug Peters/EMPICS
> The Duchess of Sussex has admitted passing information to the authors of Finding Freedom despite previously dismissing claims that she cooperated with them as a "conspiracy theory".
> In new documents lodged with the High Court, she reveals she was concerned that "her father’s narrative” - that she had abandoned him and cut off contact - might be repeated, prompting her to intervene.
> The Duchess says she gave her own version of events to someone else to pass on, so “the true position… could be communicated to the authors to prevent any further misrepresentation.”
> It also emerged on Wednesday that the Duchess wrote to her estranged father, Thomas Markle, on the advice of two “senior” members of the Royal Family.
> The relatives are not named but it is known that the Sussexes went to stay with the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey, their home on the north coast in Caithness, in August 2018, shortly before the letter was sent.
> Advertisement
> The Duchess admits that Jason Knauf, then-Kensington Palace communications secretary, helped her compose the letter and informed other royal households that it was being written.
> She insists that despite external collaboration, there was no discussion about the letter being used as part of a “media strategy” to enhance her image, a claim she describes as "misconceived and offensive."
> The Duchess is suing Associated Newspapers, the owner of The Mail on Sunday, for breach of privacy and copyright after it published extracts of the letter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand was an international bestseller Credit: NEIL HALL/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
> But lawyers on behalf of the newspaper allege that she breached her own privacy because she “permitted” details about her life to be shared with the authors of Finding Freedom, including “information about the letter”.
> In September, the Duchess's legal team strenuously denied the allegation that she collaborated on the book, describing the argument as "false", "fantastical" and "a conspiracy theory".
> Justin Rushbrooke, QC, said in written submissions that instead of getting information from confidential sources, all the authors did was "collate a vast amount of scraps of information".
> However, the amended court documents reveal that the Duchess was “concerned” that Mr Markle’s allegations that she had “abandoned him and had not even tried to contact him” would be repeated, despite being false.
> She therefore told someone she knew had already been approached by the book’s authors, Omid Scobie or Carolyn Durand, that they could convey “the true position.”
> The Duchess is said to be unaware to what extent “this one item of information concerning her communications with her father” was shared.
> Despite the intervention, she insists that she did not speak to Mr Scobie or Ms Durand about the book, never meeting with them or being interviewed formally or informally.
> The documents state that neither the Duke nor the Duchess wanted any involvement with  the book and that the only interaction the Duchess had ever had with Mr Scobie was in March, when he was invited to Buckingham Palace as the couple bid farewell to staff.
> As an example of the “creative licence” used, she says a claim that Prince Harry texted his father to tell him their son Archie had been born was “plainly false” as the Prince of Wales does not have a mobile phone.
> Perhaps significantly, she admits that she does not know if the Kensington Palace communications team provided any information on her behalf.
> The letter at the heart of the case was sent to Mr Markle in August 2018, three months after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s wedding.
> As the newest member of the Royal Family, the Duchess “wanted to follow protocol” and so sought advice from two senior members on “how best to address the situation,” legal documents reveal.
> As a result, she decided to write the letter in a bid to stop Mr Markle speaking to the press. In it, the Duchess accused her estranged father of breaking her heart "into a million pieces".
> Once she had decided to write it, she informed Mr Knauf, who had become a close confidante and had been speaking to Mr Markle on a regular basis, particularly in the run-up to her wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Knauf
> Mr Knauf was responsible for telling other senior members of the Royal households of the plan, the documents reveal.
> The Duchess spent “many hours” working on a draft of the letter on her iPhone and shared it with both her husband, the Duke of Sussex, and Mr Knauf, “for support as this was a deeply painful process that they lived through with her,” she states.
> Mr Knauf “provided feedback” in the form of “general ideas,” but no actual wording.
> The document describes claims that they knew Mr Markle would reveal the contents of the letter once it was in the public domain as “ludicrous”.
> Her lawyers argue that despite external collaboration, there was no discussion about the letter being used as part of a “media strategy” to enhance her image.
> The document adds: “For the avoidance of doubt neither Mr Knauf (nor anybody else) created any part of the Electronic Draft or the Letter. The Claimant, and the Claimant alone, created the Electronic Draft, which she then transcribed by hand to her father as the Letter.”
> The Mail on Sunday has argued that as the letter is not wholly original, the Duchess is not protected by copyright.
> It has alleged that the letter simply recites “pre-existing facts and admonishment” including the Duchess’s views of Mr Markle and his conduct, and is therefore not her “own intellectual creation”.
> A ten-day trial scheduled for January was postponed for at least nine months after the Duchess won a delay on confidential grounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Royal Appointment
> Everything you need to know about the Royal family with exclusive analysis and content.



Of course, there is a huge difference between feeding the press with your "sincere" stories and sworn testimony. 
That was so obvious because the whole book is a huge portion of sugar syrup for MM plenty of facts that can be known only by witnesses.  I wouldn't be surprised if I learnt that MM wrote the whole book herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am kind of stunned that Meghan was enough of an idiot to go into that lawsuit thinking she would not have to lay bare information she'd rather not have exposed, e.g. that of course she was a source for Finding Freedom after publicly lying about it for months. I can only explain that to myself with her hubris and the narcisstic way of thinking she is above everyone. WTF?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am kind of stunned that Meghan was enough of an idiot to go into that law suit thinking she would not have to lay bare information she'd rather not have exposed, e.g. that of course she was a source for Finding Freedom after publicly lying about it for months. I can only explain that to myself with her hubris and the narcisstic way of thinking she is above everyone. WTF?


I think she truly believes she is above us all and untouchable.  She seems to have a God complex...someone who believes she must be thought about and adored at all times.
JCMH is on yet another televised something preaching, wearing his medals.  I didn't include the link because I can't bear to promote it, but it's on the magazine that starts with a P that seems to be their personal PR outlet.  MM is conspicuously absent.  Maybe new PR is telling her to stay back and try to let JCMH get back into everyone's good graces.  Must be driving her mad!


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> I think she truly believes she is above us all and untouchable.  She seems to have a God complex...someone who believes she must be thought about and adored at all times.
> JCMH is on yet another televised something preaching, wearing his medals.  I didn't include the link because I can't bear to promote it, but it's on the magazine that starts with a P that seems to be their personal PR outlet.  MM is conspicuously absent. * Maybe new PR is telling her to stay back and try to let JCMH get back into everyone's good graces.  *Must be driving her mad!


I wonder who FINALLY got through her extension-covered noggin and said "you are paying us to help you so shut the eff up and let us do our job!" 

Maybe they are thinking "who's gonna hire us after they see what we did with these two?"


----------



## 1LV

I wonder how much she paid someone to tell her to shut up?  It’s pretty obvious she’s keeping a low profile.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> MM is conspicuously absent.





1LV said:


> It’s pretty obvious she’s keeping a low profile.



You know this is going to cause wild pregnancy rumors.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am kind of stunned that Meghan was enough of an idiot to go into that lawsuit thinking she would not have to lay bare information she'd rather not have exposed, e.g. that of course she was a source for Finding Freedom after publicly lying about it for months. I can only explain that to myself with her hubris and the narcisstic way of thinking she is above everyone. WTF?



I thought it was a 'miscommunication' as to the fact that the BRF are (still) subject to the law (and not the other way around).


----------



## TC1

So now instead of 'handing out prizes" and "acts of kindness" on behalf of the BRF they have to pay a photog to follow them and take pics of staged ops to stay relevant? Lolz I'd say that backfired miserably


----------



## duna

Maggie Muggins said:


> Why? Seems to me, that H&MM are the ones that should be embarrassed and ashamed, but they have no conscience and no moral fortitude. HM knew
> exactly what Harry was marrying, but couldn't prevent it even if she wanted.
> 
> View attachment 4909238



LOL, that look speaks a thousand words!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> You know this is going to cause wild pregnancy rumors.


Hope it stays just rumours.  How can they raise children to become functioning adults when they don't have a moral compass!


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hope it stays just rumours.  How can they raise children to become functioning adults when they don't have a moral compass!



Now you know being a decent person isn't a requisite for being a parent. By that standard there are probably millions of people on this planet who had no business having children and they had them anyway.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Now you know being a decent person isn't a requisite for being a parent. By that standard there are probably millions of people on this planet who had no business having children and they had them anyway.


True. It's a good thing that some children can learn valuable lessons from others (teachers, mentors, etc. ) otherwise we'd have a lot more dysfunctional adults. Yes, sometimes it takes a village...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Today, from the CBC entertainment department.

*Why Season 4 of The Crown is facing criticism for its 'overly caricatured' history*
Article


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan keeps digging a deeper hole for herself.   Now she is trying to drag some royals down with her.   Good luck with that. They have you on ignore sweetie.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am kind of stunned that Meghan was enough of an idiot to go into that lawsuit thinking she would not have to lay bare information she'd rather not have exposed, e.g. that of course she was a source for Finding Freedom after publicly lying about it for months. I can only explain that to myself with her hubris and the narcisstic way of thinking she is above everyone. WTF?


She thought they would settle. She tried and they wouldn't play ball.


----------



## Tootsie17

It's been rather nice not hearing anything from Meghan this past week. I wonder long the silence will last?  On the other hand, I bet Harry is hearing an earful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tootsie17 said:


> It's been rather nice not hearing anything from Meghan this past week. I wonder long the silence will last?  On the other hand, I bet Harry is hearing an earful.



Careful, she’s behind you


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Careful, she’s behind you
> 
> View attachment 4909847



Lucky for Kate she wasn't standing on the edge of a cliff.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Lucky for Kate she wasn't standing on the edge of a cliff.



I mean, this is not even the worst picture. There are several where she stares at her with pure hatred. If that was me and I ever got to see those pics I'd burn a lot of sage and try to not be alone with the nutjob.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Today, from the CBC entertainment department.
> 
> *Why Season 4 of The Crown is facing criticism for its 'ove*


The trailer is hilarious. QEII meets Margaret Thatcher and tells the speechless PM that she (QEII) has guessed who might be in the Cabinet and has recently had a 90 % accuracy for previous cabinets.
Both women are caricatures, but in a humorous manner, the trailer makes me want to see the series because it is such a giggle. Two actresses at the top of their game. I did not think the trailer was inappropriate or disrespectful.

Interesting quote from article ...
*"The depiction of Princess Diana is accurate in the first instance in her being quite childlike and giggly and sort of in love," Tominey said. "But it depicts the relationship as being difficult from the very beginning. Well, that's not quite the case." *

Hmmm interesting... I just reread portion of Morton's book that Diana spoon fed him, so, I do believe at lot in that book.

What I learned from the book was that the bulimia began shortly after the announcement of the engagement. I thought D might have had it for years... She lost some amazing amount of weight before the wedding as noticed by her dress maker - who had to take in the wedding dress A LOT. Well, that is part  of the reason the dress seemed too big for her, it was ...

How could there not have been marriage problems early on - due to the bulimia? It was not a secret to anyone. How could the marriage have been easy early on, as suggested by the quote ? The quote is grossly simplifying things .. I seem to have that problem with a lot of today's superficial journalism -e the writer does not seem to have done his/her due diligence


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> She thought they would settle. She tried and they wouldn't play ball.


And she might have erroneously thought that being part of the BRF would provide pretty good cover ie QEII would take her side and tell the lawyers what to do


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> And she might have erroneously thought that being part of the BRF would provide pretty good cover ie QEII would take her side and tell the lawyers what to do


I definitely think she assumed that she would get clout from that association. Wrong again, Meg.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ya kno, if Brad Pitt can quitely volunteer, what is wrong with H&M?










						Brad Pitt has volunteered at last 30 times donating food around LA
					

Community leader DeAnthony Langston tells DailyMail.com that Brad Pitt first started volunteering in the summer and has been back about 30 times.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> What I learned from the book was that *the bulimia began shortly after the announcement of the engagement*. I thought D might have had it for years... She lost some amazing amount of weight before the wedding as noticed by her dress maker - who had to take in the wedding dress A LOT. Well, that is part of the reason the dress seemed too big for her, it was ...
> 
> How could there not have been marriage problems early on - due to the bulimia? It was not a secret to anyone.



Also from the Andrew Morton book, it was comments from Prince Charles about her weight and knowing about his affair with Camilla that started it.

The late princess shared in recorded tapes obtained by her biographer Andrew Morton that just weeks after her engagement, Charles put his hand on her waist and said, "Oh, a bit chubby here, aren't we?"

"That triggered off something in me," she said on the tapes, according to People.

She also shared that her husband's affair with Camilla Bowles contributed greatly to her eating disorder, Morton explains in a new foreword ahead of the republishing of the biography, "Diana: Her True Story — in Her Own Words."










						Prince Charles’ fat-shaming remark caused Princess Diana to become bulimic
					

Princess Diana revealed that a comment Prince Charles made about her weight triggered her to become bulimic.




					www.nydailynews.com


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ya kno, if Brad Pitt can quitely volunteer, what is wrong with H&M?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brad Pitt has volunteered at last 30 times donating food around LA
> 
> 
> Community leader DeAnthony Langston tells DailyMail.com that Brad Pitt first started volunteering in the summer and has been back about 30 times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Brad has his own agenda too.  He is fighting for shared custody of his children.  This not only relieves some stress with the hard work, it makes him look good too.  Another guy with the wife from hell.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Also from the Andrew Morton book, it was comments from Prince Charles about her weight and knowing about his affair with Camilla that started it.
> 
> The late princess shared in recorded tapes obtained by her biographer Andrew Morton that just weeks after her engagement, Charles put his hand on her waist and said, "Oh, a bit chubby here, aren't we?"
> 
> "That triggered off something in me," she said on the tapes, according to People.
> 
> She also shared that her husband's affair with Camilla Bowles contributed greatly to her eating disorder, Morton explains in a new foreword ahead of the republishing of the biography, "Diana: Her True Story — in Her Own Words."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles’ fat-shaming remark caused Princess Diana to become bulimic
> 
> 
> Princess Diana revealed that a comment Prince Charles made about her weight triggered her to become bulimic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nydailynews.com


It was also a reaction to seeing all the photographs of herself.  Kate used to weigh more as well when she was younger.  Plus the issue of having to wear couture level clothing 24/7/365.  It's a cocktail for weight loss.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> It was also a reaction to seeing all the photographs of herself.  Kate used to weigh more as well when she was younger.  Plus the issue of having to wear couture level clothing 24/7/365.  It's a cocktail for weight loss.



Yep. It was the '80s. Tabloids had no qualms about outright calling women "fat" in print. They aren't quite as bad these days but they still like to show the least flattering photos possible.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Also from the Andrew Morton book, it was comments from Prince Charles about her weight and knowing about his affair with Camilla that started it.
> 
> The late princess shared in recorded tapes obtained by her biographer Andrew Morton that just weeks after her engagement, Charles put his hand on her waist and said, "Oh, a bit chubby here, aren't we?"
> 
> "That triggered off something in me," she said on the tapes, according to People.
> 
> She also shared that her husband's affair with Camilla Bowles contributed greatly to her eating disorder, Morton explains in a new foreword ahead of the republishing of the biography, "Diana: Her True Story — in Her Own Words."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles’ fat-shaming remark caused Princess Diana to become bulimic
> 
> 
> Princess Diana revealed that a comment Prince Charles made about her weight triggered her to become bulimic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nydailynews.com


Excellent choice of supporting quote !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Brad has his own agenda too.  He is fighting for shared custody of his children.  This not only relieves some stress with the hard work, it makes him look good too.  *Another guy with the wife from hell.*



Meghan still has a long way to go before she gets to Angie-level wife from hell. She is dragging out that divorce for as long as she can.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is so funny!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ya kno, if Brad Pitt can quitely volunteer, what is wrong with H&M?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brad Pitt has volunteered at last 30 times donating food around LA
> 
> 
> Community leader DeAnthony Langston tells DailyMail.com that Brad Pitt first started volunteering in the summer and has been back about 30 times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Nailed it CarryOn2020, Brad does it from the heart according to this article, was weeks before the head of the group knew who it was behind the Covid mask, we know why JCMH does it, his keeper told him it would make them look good and likable and more bankable, all about the Grifters. Lots of reasons to like Brad, he is better looking than the dolt in the suit dragged down by old medals,  is brighter than the dim lightbulb from across the sea and has been sharing for years, Hurricane Katrina comes to mind, and since he so often evidently goes under the radar, probably a lot more. The coincidental timing of this totally threw shade on Harry. PR team needs to shelve both of them for awhile. On a side note, looked at the pictures featured on line of the Queen and Prince Phillip admiring the Anniversary card made by the Cambridge great grandchildren, Meghan is probably having a bad day.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yep. It was the '80s. Tabloids had no qualms about outright calling women "fat" in print. They aren't quite as bad these days but they still like to show the least flattering photos possible.


My favorite is when the DM trolls someone they don't like with a truly awful and unflattering picture and they caption it with "here is xyz showcasing her svelte figure and waistline in a stunning designer frock."  The reality is that xyz looks as big as a house and is wearing a huge bedsheet that wouldn't even make a mark down sale at Walmart.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Meghan still has a long way to go before she gets to Angie-level wife from hell. She is dragging out that divorce for as long as she can.


That may be, but MM is close in that she has dragged him away from his family brought out the worst in him and turned him into a laughingstock.  She is just being hellish in another way.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Also from the Andrew Morton book, it was comments from Prince Charles about her weight and knowing about his affair with Camilla that started it.
> 
> The late princess shared in recorded tapes obtained by her biographer Andrew Morton that just weeks after her engagement, Charles put his hand on her waist and said, "Oh, a bit chubby here, aren't we?"
> 
> "That triggered off something in me," she said on the tapes, according to People.


That doesn't make sense.  Camilla has always been fit, but never thin, I find it hard to believe Charles would say that about Diana. He obviously didn't care about Camilla's weight, just Diana's?  Diana was known for fantasy and she did blame him for a lot.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> That doesn't make sense.  Camilla has always been fit, but never thin, I find it hard to believe Charles would say that about Diana. He obviously didn't care about Camilla's weight, just Diana's?  Diana was known for fantasy and she did blame him for a lot.



It makes sense to me. He loved Camilla. Diana was the pretty little thing he picked to be his arm candy and bear his children. Her appearance was what he valued about her.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> That may be, but MM is close in that she has dragged him away from his family brought out the worst in him and turned him into a laughingstock.  She is just being hellish in another way.



I can’t argue with that. When all is said and done she may end up being worse. And we’ll be here with the popcorn, watching.


----------



## rose60610

People get blinded by what they believe is true love. Even if Diana were always stick thin, Charles would never have been in love with her as much as he was in love in Camilla. Camilla could have been "whatever" but Charles' love for her was there. 

I'm alway reminded by that astronaut woman, Lisa Nowak. If you want to read a weird story, google her. Highly accomplished friggin' astronaut, was on a shuttle mission, etc, married with 3 kids. Dated another astronaut who ended their relationship and moved onto another astronaut. (Who knew NASA was such a meat market?) Nowak went nuts, put on a disguise and adult diapers to drive nonstop to old beau's place, etc.  What a mess. And here's a person with a high IQ, astronaut bla bla bla, and becomes a nut job for "love".  Nobody is above anything.

The things people do for what they believe is love. Destroyed lives, ruined careers, bad outcomes, etc. 

Was Meghan ever really in love with Harry? She didn't have to be. She was good at rooting out a damaged spoiled royal and exploiting her find. Too bad Harry led a too pampered life to realize he was a dupe. But some people are willing dupes. For H to get rid of M would be to admit he was the ultimate dupe. I'd like to think he's realized that. His problem, not mine. Though a mega Netflix deal does soften the blow. But doesn't prevent such stupid maneuvers like using deceased or unfortunate people to leverage his pathetic image.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> People get blinded by what they believe is true love. Even if Diana were always stick thin, Charles would never have been in love with her as much as he was in love in Camilla. Camilla could have been "whatever" but Charles' love for her was there.
> 
> I'm alway reminded by that astronaut woman, Lisa Nowak. If you want to read a weird story, google her. Highly accomplished friggin' astronaut, was on a shuttle mission, etc, married with 3 kids. Dated another astronaut who ended their relationship and moved onto another astronaut. (Who knew NASA was such a meat market?) Nowak went nuts, put on a disguise and adult diapers to drive nonstop to old beau's place, etc.  What a mess. And here's a person with a high IQ, astronaut bla bla bla, and becomes a nut job for "love".  Nobody is above anything.
> 
> The things people do for what they believe is love. Destroyed lives, ruined careers, bad outcomes, etc.
> 
> Was Meghan ever really in love with Harry? She didn't have to be. She was good at rooting out a damaged spoiled royal and exploiting her find. Too bad Harry led a too pampered life to realize he was a dupe. But some people are willing dupes. For H to get rid of M would be to admit he was the ultimate dupe. I'd like to think he's realized that. His problem, not mine. Though a mega Netflix deal does soften the blow. But doesn't prevent such stupid maneuvers like using deceased or unfortunate people to leverage his pathetic image.


I always remember that astronaut story, and it reminds me of Oprah's story how she said on her TV show (when she did something crazy for a guy, running after his car), how she must have been insane. Past tense, we do crazy things.

But I don't think Diana really loved Charles, although she certainly wanted him to love her.


----------



## LittleStar88

This could be something directly out of Meghan‘s mouth...


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> But I don't think Diana really loved Charles, although she certainly wanted him to love her.



I think she was in love with him. Her youth and lack of experience didn’t prepare her to know what real love was.  

It’s the same reason why so few of us end up staying with our high school/college sweethearts for our whole lives. Our understanding of what love can be is still developing in our teens and 20s.


----------



## Chanbal

One more celebration that Harry missed, beautiful picture!


The monarch, 94, and the Duke of Edinburgh, 99, admired the colourful creation from Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two, alongside other cards and letters sent by well-wishers in a new official photograph to mark their 73rd wedding anniversary on Friday


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> *But I don't think Diana really loved Charles, although she certainly wanted him to love her.*



Diana was in love/infatuated with the Prince of Wales, not Charles. As a young girl, she'd spend time staring at a poster of Charles in his Prince of Wales regalia, dreaming of becoming the Princess of Wales. In effect, neither was in love with other, which doesn't bode well for a spectacular marriage.

Edited to fix quote


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I think she was in love with him. Her youth and lack of experience didn’t prepare her to know what real love was.
> 
> It’s the same reason why so few of us end up staying with our high school/college sweethearts for our whole lives. Our understanding of what love can be is still developing in our teens and 20s.


Very true - good point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Look what I found.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Maggie Muggins said:


> Diana was in love/infatuated with the Prince of Wales, not Charles. As a young girl, she'd spend time staring at a poster of Charles in his Prince of Wales regalia, dreaming of becoming the Princess of Wales. In effect, neither was in love with other, which doesn't bode well for a spectacular marriage.
> 
> Edited to fix quote



I sort of think Charles expected it to be a business marriage, much like many other aristocratic/upper class marriages. I don’t necessarily think that’s wrong either. A lot of marriages are that way. Just both parties are supposed to know what the marriage is going in. Discretion is expected. I’m not certain that Diana was willing to get her head around the world in Which she lived and still wanted the fairytale life of a princess.

The idea of marrying for love is a modern idea and honestly kinda overrated, you can fall out of love pretty easily. I think historically you marry someone your family kinda liked and that was mutually beneficial and you made it work, lest your family got involved and it all went wrong lol. (My Aunt had never met my uncle before they got married and I think they’ve been happily married 50 years now? So I guess they’re a success story lol) Although I’m not going to lie, life has sort have made me a cynic about these things...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Now you know being a decent person isn't a requisite for being a parent. *By that standard there are probably millions of people on this planet who had no business having children and they had them anyway.


----------



## Lodpah

What kind of person would just get rid of their family, especially her immediate family? We all have dramas, and we all get upset with our parents. No one is perfect and I’m sure mistakes are made but unless you’ve been abused, neglected and overall abandoned so you wipe out your history with your father, especially if he took good care of you. She’s one hardcore, insidious, black hearted person. Just can’t wrap around my head how she values fame and riches to her family. We all know the ending, as she gets older, the colder she will get and meaner. Those types of people eventually grow bitter over time with their jewels in their teeth. This is her best life now.

Yeah enjoy the spot light Meghan because the story has been written many times over.  Your calculated, scheming, maneuvering self serving soul is getting darker by the day. People that don’t know better only want one thing from you - to be associated with royalty and that’s your cockled husband. That’s all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more celebration that Harry missed, beautiful picture!
> View attachment 4910072
> 
> The monarch, 94, and the Duke of Edinburgh, 99, admired the colourful creation from Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two, alongside other cards and letters sent by well-wishers in a new official photograph to mark their 73rd wedding anniversary on Friday



BTW that brooch is the one she wore in their engagement pictures.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> One more celebration that Harry missed, beautiful picture!
> View attachment 4910072
> 
> The monarch, 94, and the Duke of Edinburgh, 99, admired the colourful creation from *Prince George, seven, Princess Charlotte, five, and Prince Louis, two,* alongside other cards and letters sent by well-wishers in a new official photograph to mark their 73rd wedding anniversary on Friday


Ouch, can we all hear more plates being thrown?


----------



## CarryOn2020

What is wrong with People? 









						Sexiest Man Alive 2020: Readers' Choice Poll Results
					

You voted, and the results are in: The sexiest men in every category, from Sexiest New Dad to Sexiest Man in a Mask




					people.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who wants to go?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana The Musical | Official Site
> 
> 
> The Tony-winning writers of Memphis and director of Come From Away bring the legend of Princess Diana to thrilling new life on Broadway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianamusical.com


there's a documentary on HBO about Diana - "Diana Our Mother" or something like that......I haven't had a desire to watch it....anyone seen it?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is wrong with People?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sexiest Man Alive 2020: Readers' Choice Poll Results
> 
> 
> You voted, and the results are in: The sexiest men in every category, from Sexiest New Dad to Sexiest Man in a Mask
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I guess they think this sells magazines


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> there's a documentary on HBO about Diana - "Diana Our Mother" or something like that......I haven't had a desire to watch it....anyone seen it?



It was bad enough watching the Diana stuff in The Crown.  Nothing in that show makes the BRF look remotely interesting or endearing.  These docudramas and musicals seem silly, especially now.

ETA:  Have you seen Gary Janetti’s insta today?  Now, that’s a dame!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Lodpah said:


> What kind of person would just get rid of their family, especially her immediate family? We all have dramas, and we all get upset with our parents. No one is perfect and I’m sure mistakes are made but unless you’ve been abused, neglected and overall abandoned so you wipe out your history with your father, especially if he took good care of you. She’s one hardcore, insidious, black hearted person. Just can’t wrap around my head how she values fame and riches to her family. We all know the ending, as she gets older, the colder she will get and meaner. Those types of people eventually grow bitter over time with their jewels in their teeth. This is her best life now.
> 
> Yeah enjoy the spot light Meghan because the story has been written many times over.  Your calculated, scheming, maneuvering self serving soul is getting darker by the day. People that don’t know better only want one thing from you - to be associated with royalty and that’s your cockled husband. That’s all.




I tried not to respond to this one, but I’ve gone all night and I’m going to have to. There are lots of reasons why a child might separate from their family that isn’t abusive. Parents can toxic and awful without being abusive. My coworkers cheered when my dad died and before that my friends had planned an escape route that Involved me changing my name to get away from my family. My parents weren’t abusive at all, but they were so overbearing and controlling that at 27 I still couldn’t make any decisions for myself. I couldn’t change jobs, buy clothes, date or hang out with friends without permission. I ended up wasting 5 years of my life in a dead end miserable truly abusive job (so bad they got investigated by the feds) that I hated because I worked in the same building at my parent which meant they could watch me.  Everything (including dates) had to be a secret and with people covering for me. If he hadn’t gotten sick (which became another way to control me) I would have walked away, never looked back and they wouldn’t have heard from me again other than Christmas cards sent through a proxy. In their eyes though, they loved me and were trying to protect me from the big scary world.

He’s passed on now and I’ve cut all but three of my relatives out of my life. The rest are con-artists, liars and generally not nice people.  I don’t see why I should have them in my life, but according to you I’m a black hearted person. I’ve spent all my life of warning people about my relatives only to get told I’m too harsh about them and then a couple years later to be told I’m right.... I think sometimes people are allowed to walk away from those they deem toxic. They almost cost me my new job by calling furious I had to work Christmas Eve when I was a new employee... like wth? Why should people drag you down just because they are related by blood?

Should MM try to patch things up with her dad? Who knows? We don’t know what happened behind closed doors. He could he been a great dad in public and not so great at home Or he could have been too great of a dad at home and this mess was the straw that broke the camel‘s back. It’s fun to speculate, but i wouldn’t paint all family situations with such a wide brush. Families are complicated.

Will and Kate would be justified to not talk to H&M again, they aren’t black hearted for not wanting their family’s mess in a book or Netflix. It’s their choice. Sometimes when your family becomes toxic, you have to let it go for your own mental health.


----------



## Chloe302225

sdkitty said:


> there's a documentary on HBO about Diana - "Diana Our Mother" or something like that......I haven't had a desire to watch it....anyone seen it?



I could be wrong but I think this was produced with William and Harry's consent. I believe this one contains interviews from the both of them. If it is the 1 think it is, it came out a few years ago around the 20th anniversary of her death.


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


> I could be wrong but I think this was produced with William and Harry's consent. I believe this one contains interviews from the both of them. If it is the 1 think it is, it came out a few years ago around the 20th anniversary of her death.


yes, the title implies it's told or endorsed by william and harry


----------



## marietouchet

Sol Ryan said:


> I tried not to respond to this one, but I’ve gone all night and I’m going to have to. There are lots of reasons why a child might separate from their family that isn’t abusive. Parents can toxic and awful without being abusive. My coworkers cheered when my dad died and before that my friends had planned an escape route that Involved me changing my name to get away from my family. My parents weren’t abusive at all, but they were so overbearing and controlling that at 27 I still couldn’t make any decisions for myself. I couldn’t change jobs, buy clothes, date or hang out with friends without permission. I ended up wasting 5 years of my life in a dead end miserable truly abusive job (so bad they got investigated by the feds) that I hated because I worked in the same building at my parent which meant they could watch me.  Everything (including dates) had to be a secret and with people covering for me. If he hadn’t gotten sick (which became another way to control me) I would have walked away, never looked back and they wouldn’t have heard from me again other than Christmas cards sent through a proxy. In their eyes though, they loved me and were trying to protect me from the big scary world.
> 
> He’s passed on now and I’ve cut all but three of my relatives out of my life. The rest are con-artists, liars and generally not nice people.  I don’t see why I should have them in my life, but according to you I’m a black hearted person. I’ve spent all my life of warning people about my relatives only to get told I’m too harsh about them and then a couple years later to be told I’m right.... I think sometimes people are allowed to walk away from those they deem toxic. They almost cost me my new job by calling furious I had to work Christmas Eve when I was a new employee... like wth? Why should people drag you down just because they are related by blood?
> 
> Should MM try to patch things up with her dad? Who knows? We don’t know what happened behind closed doors. He could he been a great dad in public and not so great at home Or he could have been too great of a dad at home and this mess was the straw that broke the camel‘s back. It’s fun to speculate, but i wouldn’t paint all family situations with such a wide brush. Families are complicated.
> 
> Will and Kate would be justified to not talk to H&M again, they aren’t black hearted for not wanting their family’s mess in a book or Netflix. It’s their choice. Sometimes when your family becomes toxic, you have to let it go for your own mental health.


There are toxic families and/or toxic family members , you betcha, it is complicated, agree 1000 %


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is wrong with People?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sexiest Man Alive 2020: Readers' Choice Poll Results
> 
> 
> You voted, and the results are in: The sexiest men in every category, from Sexiest New Dad to Sexiest Man in a Mask
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



These are some of the perks that you get when hiring (and paying them well) PR-agencies with good connections.

Unless Harry lives in the world portrayed in the book Blindness, he doesn't belong on the list of the sexiest men alive. Come to think of it, he wouldn't belong on the list even in Saramago's world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> These are some of the perks that you get when hiring (and paying them well) PR-agencies with good connections.
> 
> Unless Harry lives in the world portrayed in the book Blindness, he doesn't belong on the list of the sexiest men alive. Come to think of it, he wouldn't belong on the list even in Saramago's world.


it's a total sham
I think Michael B Jordan is a good actor and seems to be a very nice guy.  but sexiest?  not to me.  Now Idris Elba I could see....guess it's a matter of opinion but I'm pretty sure there are a bunch of people sitting around a table talking about who will sell more magazines - not who is most sexy


----------



## Lodpah

Sol Ryan said:


> I tried not to respond to this one, but I’ve gone all night and I’m going to have to. There are lots of reasons why a child might separate from their family that isn’t abusive. Parents can toxic and awful without being abusive. My coworkers cheered when my dad died and before that my friends had planned an escape route that Involved me changing my name to get away from my family. My parents weren’t abusive at all, but they were so overbearing and controlling that at 27 I still couldn’t make any decisions for myself. I couldn’t change jobs, buy clothes, date or hang out with friends without permission. I ended up wasting 5 years of my life in a dead end miserable truly abusive job (so bad they got investigated by the feds) that I hated because I worked in the same building at my parent which meant they could watch me.  Everything (including dates) had to be a secret and with people covering for me. If he hadn’t gotten sick (which became another way to control me) I would have walked away, never looked back and they wouldn’t have heard from me again other than Christmas cards sent through a proxy. In their eyes though, they loved me and were trying to protect me from the big scary world.
> 
> He’s passed on now and I’ve cut all but three of my relatives out of my life. The rest are con-artists, liars and generally not nice people.  I don’t see why I should have them in my life, but according to you I’m a black hearted person. I’ve spent all my life of warning people about my relatives only to get told I’m too harsh about them and then a couple years later to be told I’m right.... I think sometimes people are allowed to walk away from those they deem toxic. They almost cost me my new job by calling furious I had to work Christmas Eve when I was a new employee... like wth? Why should people drag you down just because they are related by blood?
> 
> Should MM try to patch things up with her dad? Who knows? We don’t know what happened behind closed doors. He could he been a great dad in public and not so great at home Or he could have been too great of a dad at home and this mess was the straw that broke the camel‘s back. It’s fun to speculate, but i wouldn’t paint all family situations with such a wide brush. Families are complicated.
> 
> Will and Kate would be justified to not talk to H&M again, they aren’t black hearted for not wanting their family’s mess in a book or Netflix. It’s their choice. Sometimes when your family becomes toxic, you have to let it go for your own mental health.


You have a perfect reason. She wrote off her entire family from the looks of it. You are justified in your reason.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said, @Sol Ryan  I was not going to comment either, I am relieved you did. I understand @Lodpah’s point - from the outside, it appears MM has treated her father harshly. Then, we read about her ex’es (mailing a wedding ring???) Still, since I am all too familiar with the ‘family’ experience @Sol Ryan  described, I don’t hold her separation from her family against her. Mercy, she is old enough to know what is best for her.  A 20 year old may be different, depending on the maturity level. So, if she wants to stop communicating with family members, it is her business. No public announcement is necessary. The lawsuit, though, makes it everyone’s business. Therein lies the issue.  If H&M could live quietly and privately (like W&K), no one would comment. It’s the public blasts that I find comment-worthy.

Her letter shows that MM didn’t ‘separate’ from her dad until the Harry wedding. The behavior she seems to object to was the selling of his photos, correct?  Based on what her actions have showed us, was she most upset that he thwarted her merching plan?  FWIW, I still find Doria sitting alone in that pew the most ridiculous wedding photo ever, especially when we know she has a large family.  It was all such a show.




Sol Ryan said:


> I tried not to respond to this one, but I’ve gone all night and I’m going to have to. There are lots of reasons why a child might separate from their family that isn’t abusive. Parents can toxic and awful without being abusive. My coworkers cheered when my dad died and before that my friends had planned an escape route that Involved me changing my name to get away from my family. My parents weren’t abusive at all, but they were so overbearing and controlling that at 27 I still couldn’t make any decisions for myself. I couldn’t change jobs, buy clothes, date or hang out with friends without permission. I ended up wasting 5 years of my life in a dead end miserable truly abusive job (so bad they got investigated by the feds) that I hated because I worked in the same building at my parent which meant they could watch me.  Everything (including dates) had to be a secret and with people covering for me. If he hadn’t gotten sick (which became another way to control me) I would have walked away, never looked back and they wouldn’t have heard from me again other than Christmas cards sent through a proxy. In their eyes though, they loved me and were trying to protect me from the big scary world.
> 
> He’s passed on now and I’ve cut all but three of my relatives out of my life. The rest are con-artists, liars and generally not nice people.  I don’t see why I should have them in my life, but according to you I’m a black hearted person. I’ve spent all my life of warning people about my relatives only to get told I’m too harsh about them and then a couple years later to be told I’m right.... I think sometimes people are allowed to walk away from those they deem toxic. They almost cost me my new job by calling furious I had to work Christmas Eve when I was a new employee... like wth? Why should people drag you down just because they are related by blood?
> 
> Should MM try to patch things up with her dad? Who knows? We don’t know what happened behind closed doors. He could he been a great dad in public and not so great at home Or he could have been too great of a dad at home and this mess was the straw that broke the camel‘s back. It’s fun to speculate, but i wouldn’t paint all family situations with such a wide brush. Families are complicated.
> 
> Will and Kate would be justified to not talk to H&M again, they aren’t black hearted for not wanting their family’s mess in a book or Netflix. It’s their choice. Sometimes when your family becomes toxic, you have to let it go for your own mental health.



ETAs because autocorrect is fighting me today.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> These are some of the perks that you get when hiring (and paying them well) PR-agencies with good connections.
> 
> Unless Harry lives in the world portrayed in the book Blindness, he doesn't belong on the list of the sexiest men alive. Come to think of it, he wouldn't belong on the list even in Saramago's world.


I thought People was in JCMH's pocket... why would he, a married man, want to be named the sexiest man ? Seems demeaning for someone trying (perhaps not effectively) to be something other than a pretty face ....
His PR people should be all over People


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sol Ryan said:


> I tried not to respond to this one, but I’ve gone all night and I’m going to have to. There are lots of reasons why a child might separate from their family that isn’t abusive. Parents can toxic and awful without being abusive. My coworkers cheered when my dad died and before that my friends had planned an escape route that Involved me changing my name to get away from my family. My parents weren’t abusive at all, but they were so overbearing and controlling that at 27 I still couldn’t make any decisions for myself. I couldn’t change jobs, buy clothes, date or hang out with friends without permission. I ended up wasting 5 years of my life in a dead end miserable truly abusive job (so bad they got investigated by the feds) that I hated because I worked in the same building at my parent which meant they could watch me.  Everything (including dates) had to be a secret and with people covering for me. If he hadn’t gotten sick (which became another way to control me) I would have walked away, never looked back and they wouldn’t have heard from me again other than Christmas cards sent through a proxy. In their eyes though, they loved me and were trying to protect me from the big scary world.
> 
> He’s passed on now and I’ve cut all but three of my relatives out of my life. The rest are con-artists, liars and generally not nice people.  I don’t see why I should have them in my life, but according to you I’m a black hearted person. I’ve spent all my life of warning people about my relatives only to get told I’m too harsh about them and then a couple years later to be told I’m right.... I think sometimes people are allowed to walk away from those they deem toxic. They almost cost me my new job by calling furious I had to work Christmas Eve when I was a new employee... like wth? Why should people drag you down just because they are related by blood?
> 
> Should MM try to patch things up with her dad? Who knows? We don’t know what happened behind closed doors. He could he been a great dad in public and not so great at home Or he could have been too great of a dad at home and this mess was the straw that broke the camel‘s back. It’s fun to speculate, but i wouldn’t paint all family situations with such a wide brush. Families are complicated.
> 
> Will and Kate would be justified to not talk to H&M again, they aren’t black hearted for not wanting their family’s mess in a book or Netflix. It’s their choice. Sometimes when your family becomes toxic, you have to let it go for your own mental health.


Yes! Congratulations! I applaud you 100% for leaving a toxic situation. It is difficult for others to appreciate the emotions one feels after fleeing a hell hole.


----------



## gracekelly

So www.express.uk has a story that Archie was left out of the card the kiddie Cambs sent to their grandparents.


*Kate crafts with George, Charlotte and Louis as Queen Instagrams card - Archie misses out*
*KATE MIDDLETON, 38, the Duchess of Cambridge, is also a mother of three to Prince George, seven, Charlotte, five, and Louis, two. The three children made an adorable card for their great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth II, 94, and Prince Philip, 99, on their 73rd anniversary.*

Why didn’t Archie Zoom call to his greatgrands?  Oh I know, their check from The Bank of Dad went missing in the holiday mail rush.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I thought People was in JCMH's pocket... why would he, a married man, want to be named the sexiest man ? Seems demeaning for someone trying (perhaps not effectively) to be something other than a *pretty face* ....
> His PR people should be all over People


When did he, a married man refuse advertisement and photo-ops? On the pretty face, you are very generous imo.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> So www.express.uk has a story that Archie was left out of the card the kiddie Cambs sent to their grandparents.
> 
> 
> *Kate crafts with George, Charlotte and Louis as Queen Instagrams card - Archie misses out*
> *KATE MIDDLETON, 38, the Duchess of Cambridge, is also a mother of three to Prince George, seven, Charlotte, five, and Louis, two. The three children made an adorable card for their great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth II, 94, and Prince Philip, 99, on their 73rd anniversary.*
> 
> Why didn’t Archie Zoom call to his greatgrands?  Oh I know, their check from The Bank of Dad went missing in the holiday mail rush.


Archie isn't the only great grandkids though, there's the Tindall and the Phillips girls. But poor Archie gets singled out, lol


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said, @Sol Ryan  I was not going to comment either, I am relieved you did. I understand @Lodpah’s point - from the outside, it appears MM has treated her father harshly. Then, we read about her ex’es (mailing a wedding ring???) Still, since I am all too familiar with the ‘family’ experience @Sol Ryan  described, I don’t hold her separation from her family against her. Mercy, she is old enough to know what is best for her.  A 20 year old may be different, depending on the maturity level. So, if she wants to stop communicating with family members, it is her business. No public announcement is necessary. The lawsuit, though, makes it everyone’s business. Therein lies the issue.  If H&M could live quietly and privately (like W&K), no one would comment. It’s the public blasts that I find comment-worthy.
> 
> Her letter shows that MM didn’t ‘separate’ from her dad until the Harry wedding. The behavior she seems to object to was the selling of his photos, correct?  Based on what her actions have showed us, was she most upset that he thwarted her merching plan?  FWIW, I still find Doria sitting alone in that pew the most ridiculous wedding photo ever, especially when we know she has a large family.  It was all such a show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETAs because autocorrect is fighting me today.



Agreed. I think MM was stupid trying to play the public the way she did. I admit, I initially felt bad for her because I identified with her from my family. If she’d wrote the letter and then didn’t try to play the gambit of having it play out in the courts and the press, she’d be much more sympathetic.

 When Samantha showed up at the palace putting on a spectacle it made MM look like the victim, but then things get complicated and we see there is hurt on both sides. Sometimes everyone needs to give up, but I could see where a grandfather might be really hurt to not see their grandson. Like i said... families are complicated messes... no one is 100% right or wrong. 

My family still reaches out to my parent because they don’t understand why I cut them out even after 30 years of bullying And second, third, eigth, twentieth chances... after I nearly lost my job Because of them it’s a bridge too far... that’s my livelihood and how I support my mom...


----------



## bellecate

Sol Ryan said:


> I tried not to respond to this one, but I’ve gone all night and I’m going to have to. There are lots of reasons why a child might separate from their family that isn’t abusive. Parents can toxic and awful without being abusive. My coworkers cheered when my dad died and before that my friends had planned an escape route that Involved me changing my name to get away from my family. My parents weren’t abusive at all, but they were so overbearing and controlling that at 27 I still couldn’t make any decisions for myself. I couldn’t change jobs, buy clothes, date or hang out with friends without permission. I ended up wasting 5 years of my life in a dead end miserable truly abusive job (so bad they got investigated by the feds) that I hated because I worked in the same building at my parent which meant they could watch me.  Everything (including dates) had to be a secret and with people covering for me. If he hadn’t gotten sick (which became another way to control me) I would have walked away, never looked back and they wouldn’t have heard from me again other than Christmas cards sent through a proxy. In their eyes though, they loved me and were trying to protect me from the big scary world.
> 
> He’s passed on now and I’ve cut all but three of my relatives out of my life. The rest are con-artists, liars and generally not nice people.  I don’t see why I should have them in my life, but according to you I’m a black hearted person. I’ve spent all my life of warning people about my relatives only to get told I’m too harsh about them and then a couple years later to be told I’m right.... I think sometimes people are allowed to walk away from those they deem toxic. They almost cost me my new job by calling furious I had to work Christmas Eve when I was a new employee... like wth? Why should people drag you down just because they are related by blood?
> 
> Should MM try to patch things up with her dad? Who knows? We don’t know what happened behind closed doors. He could he been a great dad in public and not so great at home Or he could have been too great of a dad at home and this mess was the straw that broke the camel‘s back. It’s fun to speculate, but i wouldn’t paint all family situations with such a wide brush. Families are complicated.
> 
> Will and Kate would be justified to not talk to H&M again, they aren’t black hearted for not wanting their family’s mess in a book or Netflix. It’s their choice. Sometimes when your family becomes toxic, you have to let it go for your own mental health.


Thank you for writing this, I'm sorry you had to go through what you did. We've also had to cut out the majority of my DH's family. One sister could be Megain's twin with just a bit more manipulation and nastiness thrown in. Controlling, unstable people are every bit as dangerous as physical abuse. As for her family, don't know them but from some accounts her father seemed decent. Who knows as to the dynamics there.


----------



## bag-mania

Her father seems a bit clueless but otherwise harmless. I don't think he contacted the media but when they contacted him and offered money for an interview he took it. Ideally he would have turned them all down but we don't know his financial situation and I think he was genuinely hurt that Meghan tried to control him. Samantha and her brother are bitter as hell towards Meghan and they likely have their reasons for that.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> Agreed. I think MM was stupid trying to play the public the way she did. I admit, I initially felt bad for her because I identified with her from my family. If she’d wrote the letter and then didn’t try to play the gambit of having it play out in the courts and the press, she’d be much more sympathetic.
> 
> When Samantha showed up at the palace putting on a spectacle it made MM look like the victim, but then things get complicated and we see there is hurt on both sides. Sometimes everyone needs to give up, but I could see where a grandfather might be really hurt to not see their grandson. Like i said... families are complicated messes... no one is 100% right or wrong.
> 
> My family still reaches out to my parent because they don’t understand why I cut them out even after 30 years of bullying And second, third, eigth, twentieth chances... after I nearly lost my job Because of them it’s a bridge too far... that’s my livelihood and how I support my mom...



I'm very sorry for what you went through. In the case of MM, the father was always very supportive of her. There is a video of a MM's teacher saying that he was a very behind the scenes person, but he always helped MM on her projects. The teacher mentioned that he was a very kind man. At the beginning, I also thought that the sister was crazy, but then I started to believe that she just saw how phony MM is and vented her frustration.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Her father seems a bit clueless but otherwise harmless. *I don't think he contacted the media but when they contacted him and offered money for an interview he took it.* Ideally he would have turned them all down but we don't know his financial situation and I think he was genuinely hurt that Meghan tried to control him. Samantha and her brother are bitter as hell towards Meghan and they likely have their reasons for that.


He probably thought that was OK to receive a monetary compensation for his interview. It is not unusual  for people to receive a check for speeches, lectures, or interviews. I still don't understand why MM was so upset with it. I feel sorry for him.


----------



## melissatrv

The best thing JCMH and MM can be now is disappear for about 6 months.  I prefer they never come back in the public eye, but a 6 month break with no photo ops, no social media, no interviews, might revive public interest, as this appears to be what they want.  They are so over-exposed now


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> He probably thought that was OK to receive a monetary compensation for his interview. It is not unusual  for people to receive a check for speeches, lectures, or interviews. *I still don't understand why MM was so upset with it. *I feel sorry for him.



The interview made Dad look tacky and by extension committed the unpardonable sin of not presenting Meghan in the best possible light.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The interview made Dad look tacky and by extension committed the unpardonable sin of not presenting Meghan in the best possible light.


Poor guy! She has been doing a much worse job for herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Poor guy! She has been doing a much worse job for herself.



Call me cynical, IMHO, Thomas did not fit the narrative. Remember he was in the wedding right up until he began talking about *not* meeting Harry and *not* being asked permission for the marriage. [My father would have been the same way. There is a proper order for marriages.]. Was Doria asked?

So why did Harry think it was ok not to ask the father for MM’s hand in marriage? In those early days, no criticism of Harry was allowed. He was still the perfect prince, son of Diana who as we all know was the Queen of People’s hearts, unloved only by her husband and the father of her children. [yawn, so much drama]   

Thomas’s questions were most unwelcomed, so much so they kicked him out of the show.  I believe the unpardonable sin was of not presenting Meghan *and Harry* in the best possible light.

ETA: little did they know how much criticism Harry would receive


----------



## csshopper

Agree and sympathize with all who have suffered personally with dysfunctional, destructive family and speak from personal experience. 

What I cannot accept about Meghan's relationships is that every single one of the family on both sides, except Doria, has been cut out, excised, vaporized. The odds of them ALL being toxic does not compute with me. Then add in some of the professional relationships that were Markled and IMO it paints a pretty damming picture of the kind of woman Lodpath described.

Finally, as a teen-ager the Court would have most likely given Meghan the option of choosing which parent to live with post divorce: Dad or Mom. She CHOSE Dad. Doria is presented now as the "good" parent, but where was she then and if she is so wonderful why did Meghan not chose to live with her?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Her father seems a bit clueless but otherwise harmless. I don't think he contacted the media but when they contacted him and offered money for an interview he took it. Ideally he would have turned them all down but we don't know his financial situation and *I think he was genuinely hurt that Meghan tried to control him*. Samantha and her brother are bitter as hell towards Meghan and they likely have their reasons for that.



IMO, he was being a “Dad”, protecting his little girl. Undoubtedly, he saw and heard things that put him off the BRF and especially Harry.

@csshopper  Doria continues to be silent.  Does she have a book deal, too?


ETA: 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ogmore-Cottage-pregnant-Princess-Eugenie.html
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'hand the keys of Frogmore Cottage to pregnant Princess Eugenie' and her husband Jack Brooksbank as they ship furniture to their £11m California mansion*

*Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank 'moved into Frogmore' two weeks ago *
*Property 'emptied by the Sussexes in the dead of night' ahead of the move in *


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Agree and sympathize with all who have suffered personally with dysfunctional, destructive family and speak from personal experience.
> 
> What I cannot accept about Meghan's relationships is that every single one of the family on both sides, except Doria, has been cut out, excised, vaporized. The odds of them ALL being toxic does not compute with me. Then add in some of the professional relationships that were Markled and IMO it paints a pretty damming picture of the kind of woman Lodpath described.
> 
> Finally, as a teen-ager the Court would have most likely given Meghan the option of choosing which parent to live with post divorce: Dad or Mom. She CHOSE Dad. Doria is presented now as the "good" parent, but where was she then and if she is so wonderful why did Meghan not chose to live with her?


I don't know of course but I suspect two things - Dad spoiled her more and he had the job in show biz


----------



## gracekelly

Just saw that about Frog Cottage!   So no casa for the Harkles!    Had a feeling that it would be given to one of the York girls.  

Seriously?  Shipping furniture to CA? Too far.   It probably isn't even worth the amount of money it will cost to ship it, though there probably isn't that much.


----------



## gracekelly

I think it's great that Eugenie will make use of the cottage.  She is well liked so people will be happy that she is getting the use of it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, he was being a “Dad”, protecting his little girl. Undoubtedly, he saw and heard things that put him off the BRF and especially Harry.
> 
> @csshopper  Doria continues to be silent.  Does she have a book deal, too?
> 
> 
> ETA:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ogmore-Cottage-pregnant-Princess-Eugenie.html
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'hand the keys of Frogmore Cottage to pregnant Princess Eugenie' and her husband Jack Brooksbank as they ship furniture to their £11m California mansion*
> 
> *Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank 'moved into Frogmore' two weeks ago *
> *Property 'emptied by the Sussexes in the dead of night' ahead of the move in *


"Property 'emptied by the Sussexes in the dead of night' ...Harry and Meghan had their possessions shipped off to California after 'removal vans pitched up in the dead of night and cleared out the cottage."

Wow, this article reads almost like a theft description.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Just saw that about Frog Cottage!   So no casa for the Harkles!    Had a feeling that it would be given to one of the York girls.
> 
> Seriously?  Shipping furniture to CA? Too far.   It probably isn't even worth the amount of money it will cost to ship it, though there probably isn't that much.


The cottage had possibly valuable pieces from the pre-remodel time.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Call me cynical, IMHO, Thomas did not fit the narrative.* Remember he was in the wedding right up until he began talking about *not* meeting Harry and *not* being asked permission for the marriage. [My father would have been the same way. There is a proper order for marriages.]. Was Doria asked?
> 
> So why did Harry think it was ok not to ask the father for MM’s hand in marriage? In those early days, no criticism of Harry was allowed. He was still the perfect prince, son of Diana who as we all know was the Queen of People’s hearts, unloved only by her husband and the father of her children. [yawn, so much drama]
> 
> Thomas’s questions were most unwelcomed, so much so they kicked him out of the show.  I believe the unpardonable sin was of not presenting Meghan *and Harry* in the best possible light.
> 
> ETA: little did they know how much criticism Harry would receive


Not cynical, realist! She was becoming an 'important' royal member, and Thomas didn't fit in. Better to get rid of him. I sincerely feel sorry for Thomas, for the ex-husband...


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Just saw that about Frog Cottage!   So no casa for the Harkles!    Had a feeling that it would be given to one of the York girls.
> 
> Seriously?  Shipping furniture to CA? Too far.   It probably isn't even worth the amount of money it will cost to ship it, though there probably isn't that much.


I was not able to find much info about the pre-remodel era of the cottage. However, here is some info that justifies the shipping costs: "The Queen is also believed to have given the couple a series of paintings from her own personal collection after they moved in." Each painting may cover the shipping costs many many times. 

Paintings


----------



## CarryOn2020

*ETA:
Please take note:  this article concerns Frogmore House, not H&M’s Frogmore Cottage.  
Initially, I was unaware of the difference.
Thank you @Chloe302225 *









						The Frogmore House Design Details That You Haven’t Heard Before
					

In recent years, the property has been associated with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But its story goes way back, as an archival AD story makes clear




					www.architecturaldigest.com
				



[/URL]


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure how much of this was tossed pre-reno, still beautiful photos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Frogmore House Design Details That You Haven’t Heard Before
> 
> 
> In recent years, the property has been associated with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But its story goes way back, as an archival AD story makes clear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.architecturaldigest.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4910909
> View attachment 4910910
> View attachment 4910911


Can you imagine the potential value of some of the pieces?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Can you imagine the potential value of some of the pieces?



All of which would look out of place in the Santa Barbara mansion. I can’t imagine Meghan keeping them. But if they’re valuable… 

Let’s hope they at least have the decency of waiting until his grandparents have passed on before contracting Sotheby’s auction house to sell the antiques for them.


----------



## eunaddict

Chanbal said:


> "Property 'emptied by the Sussexes in the dead of night' ...Harry and Meghan had their possessions shipped off to California after 'removal vans pitched up in the dead of night and cleared out the cottage."
> 
> Wow, this article reads almost like a theft description.



Considering that Eugenie and Jack have apparently lived in there for 2 weeks without much broadcasting about gifting/renting/key handovers AND the fact that the cottage was emptied in the dead of night (again without the usual fanfare expected from this couple), it sounds like someone got evicted.

 "You've gone? Good. Now, stay there."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure how much of this was tossed pre-reno, still beautiful photos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Frogmore House Design Details That You Haven’t Heard Before
> 
> 
> In recent years, the property has been associated with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But its story goes way back, as an archival AD story makes clear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.architecturaldigest.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4910909
> View attachment 4910910
> View attachment 4910911




This is Frogmore House, MM+H live in Frogmore Cottage. Different places entirely and nothing theiras removed. You can actually visit the grounds at some point during the year. Meghan and Harry's home was once  divided up staff quarters which is 1 of the main reasons it had to be renovated.


----------



## Chloe302225

Chanbal said:


> Can you imagine the potential value of some of the pieces?





bag-mania said:


> All of which would look out of place in the Santa Barbara mansion. I can’t imagine Meghan keeping them. But if they’re valuable…
> 
> Let’s hope they at least have the decency of waiting until his grandparents have passed on before contracting Sotheby’s auction house to sell the antiques for them.



Meghan and Harry lived in Frogmore Cottage not Frogmore House. Different places and safely where they should be.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 4910121


And so it begins.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is wrong with People?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sexiest Man Alive 2020: Readers' Choice Poll Results
> 
> 
> You voted, and the results are in: The sexiest men in every category, from Sexiest New Dad to Sexiest Man in a Mask
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Hahaha Harry the sexiest royal?  Now that's laughable.    Most mentally weak, maybe.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> So www.express.uk has a story that Archie was left out of the card the kiddie Cambs sent to their grandparents.
> 
> 
> *Kate crafts with George, Charlotte and Louis as Queen Instagrams card - Archie misses out*
> *KATE MIDDLETON, 38, the Duchess of Cambridge, is also a mother of three to Prince George, seven, Charlotte, five, and Louis, two. The three children made an adorable card for their great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth II, 94, and Prince Philip, 99, on their 73rd anniversary.*
> 
> Why didn’t Archie Zoom call to his greatgrands?  Oh I know, their check from The Bank of Dad went missing in the holiday mail rush.


And why in the world would Archie be included in a card Kate had her children make?  She's met him, what, once as far as we know?  Puhleese.  Stupid headlines.


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> This is Frogmore House, MM+H live in Frogmore Cottage. Different places entirely and nothing theiras removed. You can actually visit the grounds at some point during the year. Meghan and Harry's home was once  divided up staff quarters which is 1 of the main reasons it had to be renovated.



Thanks for clarifying. (Although I still wonder what they shipped over.)


----------



## bag-mania

Do Harry and Meghan own the  property? Because E News and GMA make it sound like they’re letting Eugenie live in their home out of the goodness of their hearts.


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is wrong with People?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sexiest Man Alive 2020: Readers' Choice Poll Results
> 
> 
> You voted, and the results are in: The sexiest men in every category, from Sexiest New Dad to Sexiest Man in a Mask
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com




I'm not saying we should objectify men (or women) with such labels. But, if we were going to do it...really, People Magazine?...Really?! It's like they didn't even try.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Do Harry and Meghan own the  property? Because E News and GMA make it sound like they’re letting Eugenie live in their home out of the goodness of their hearts.
> 
> View attachment 4910980
> 
> 
> View attachment 4910981



Last I checked they were paying rent on it.

eta: yeah... renting it...










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry pay large sum to cover rent of Frogmore Cottage
					

‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made a substantial contribution to the Sovereign Grant,’ royal source says




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

..Allowed! ...Shared!


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> ..Allowed! ...Shared!
> 
> View attachment 4910982



They’re so generous! Why they are too wonderful to be believed.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I was not able to find much info about the pre-remodel era of the cottage. However, here is some info that justifies the shipping costs: "The Queen is also believed to have given the couple a series of paintings from her own personal collection after they moved in." Each painting may cover the shipping costs many many times.
> 
> Paintings


I doubt they were given. Loaned more likely. TQ probably took them back a while ago.


----------



## gracekelly

The new hires are twisting the narrative. The Harkles aren’t sharing and the are not subletting to Eugene and Jack. The Queen cancelled the deal wuth the Harkles. They are gone so the house goes to someone who will live there. I suspect she paid the reno bill bill  and told Harry he was released from FC. All part of his separation as it is clear that he is on a different path.


----------



## purseinsanity

For those of you who don't know, I'm going to let you in on a little secret: 
_*I am ALLOWING the Queen and Prince Phillip to live at Buckingham Palace when they are in London!*_ 
(Who cares if I'm not British, nor own the property myself...isn't that so kind of me?  I, like the Harkles, do not let little technicalities such as that stand in the way of my do-goodness!)


----------



## Sophisticatted

The items were shipped to the Harkles to prove a point.  We are not waiting for you to return.  We do not want you back.  They have clearly fallen out of favor with the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I believe HM is sending very clear messages to H&MM: 
"When my grandchildren behave themselves, I reward them. I loaned my Queen Mary's Fringe Tiara and Norman Hartnell gown to my granddaughter, Beatrice for her wedding. To my granddaughter Eugenie, I loaned a better tiara than the one for your wedding. Now, I'm lending her and her husband, Frogmore Cottage. Suck it up buttercups."


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I believe HM is sending very clear messages to H&MM:
> "When my grandchildren behave themselves, I reward them. I loaned my Queen Mary's Fringe Tiara and Norman Hartnell gown to my granddaughter, Beatrice for her wedding. To my granddaughter Eugenie, I loaned a better tiara than the one for your wedding. Now, I'm lending her and her husband, Frogmore Cottage. Suck it up buttercups."


You nailed it.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> You nailed it.


Pure speculation on my part, but I wonder if the Queen and Phillip living together again has led to some conversations about H and M and he has encouraged her to toughen up in dealing with them?


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Pure speculation on my part, but I wonder if the Queen and Phillip living together again has led to some conversations about H and M and he has encouraged her to toughen up in dealing with them?


It wouldn't surprise me at all. Philip is the boss at home


----------



## Mendocino

Chloe302225 said:


> I could be wrong but I think this was produced with William and Harry's consent. I believe this one contains interviews from the both of them. If it is the 1 think it is, it came out a few years ago around the 20th anniversary of her death.


.
You're correct. I saw this documentary and it was made with the cooperation of and interviews with William and Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> What I cannot accept about Meghan's relationships is that every single one of the family on both sides, except Doria, has been cut out, excised, vaporized. The odds of them ALL being toxic does not compute with me. Then add in some of the professional relationships that were Markled and IMO it paints a pretty damming picture of the kind of woman Lodpath described.



This. I have a pretty dysfunctional family, so I can really sympathize and understand if people need to cut someone off. But all of them? The uncle who helped her get ahead with her studies, her lawyer niece she seemed to love dearly? Plus no childhood or otherwise youth friends left, none? Only the big celebrity names? Yeah, no. The problem is Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The cottage had possibly valuable pieces from the pre-remodel time.



It was pretty run down staff quarters.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I was not able to find much info about the pre-remodel era of the cottage. However, here is some info that justifies the shipping costs: "The Queen is also believed to have given the couple a series of paintings from her own personal collection after they moved in." Each painting may cover the shipping costs many many times.
> 
> Paintings



These are not gifts in the sense of "Do as you please, they are yours". It's understood that they can use them and they will be returned upon divorce, death or whatever.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These are not gifts in the sense of "Do as you please, they are yours". It's understood that they can use them and they will be returned upon divorce, death or whatever.


Just like the tiaras Catherine wears, permanently "on loan" but not yours to keep, till she's Queen lol. Even then they're not yours but belong to the Crown. That'll be fun, William (or Catherine) getting to decide who to loan the tiaras to


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> The new hires are twisting the narrative. The Harkles aren’t sharing and the are not subletting to Eugene and Jack. The Queen cancelled the deal wuth the Harkles. They are gone so the house goes to someone who will live there. I suspect she paid the reno bill bill  and told Harry he was released from FC. All part of his separation as it is clear that he is on a different path.


IMHO, most the story of Frogmore going to Eugenie is bogus fake news - my reasoning

- E just got an apartment at Kensington Palace, yes it was refurbed , no clue who paid for the electrical work and asbestos removal - required stuff, not decorating. There remains a large empty flat at KP, I believe - the one that JCMH was supposed to get ...
- Frogmore is like an hour from London - E is a London girl, her husband is a city boy, one never sees photos of her riding in the country like Anne
- E can stay with Andrew when in Windsor, he has lots of bedrooms and she is isolating with him at the moment, so plenty of room
- Way too much baggage associated with FC, is it finished ? Did JCMH really pay up ? Who wants JCMH as a landlord ? Wasnt MM the one who ruined E's wedding with pregnancy news ? Will QEII allow JCMH to sublet ??  In a word, FC has cooties ...
- Surely, if the venal JCMH was in need of BIG BUCKS, and if they had the right to sublet, they would sublet to someone more able to pay a fortune for living in a royal house - E is not made of money, can she afford to maintain two residences ??? She would still need some place in London, cant give that up

I dont think anyone is going to get a BIG FAT grace and favor pile in the year of COVID ...


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I don't know of course but I suspect two things - Dad spoiled her more and *he had the job in show biz*


Yeppers. 100%

She's been a conniver all her life; she will use anyone/any opportunity to advance herself (IMO, of course). 

Daddy is of no use anymore, while Doria, on the other hand, besides being a WOC, keeps her mouth shut and makes M look oh so woke. I feel she will dump Mom when there's nothing more to mine from their relationship.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> This is Frogmore House, MM+H live in Frogmore Cottage. Different places entirely and nothing theiras removed. You can actually visit the grounds at some point during the year. Meghan and Harry's home was once  divided up staff quarters which is 1 of the main reasons it had to be renovated.


Found this post that explains the differences between House and Cottage in a unique way.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> Last I checked they were paying rent on it.
> 
> eta: yeah... renting it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry pay large sum to cover rent of Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> ‘The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have made a substantial contribution to the Sovereign Grant,’ royal source says
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


They probably passed the rent obligations to Eugenie and husband. It's understandable imo.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> IMHO, most the story of Frogmore going to Eugenie is bogus fake news - my reasoning
> 
> - E just got an apartment at Kensington Palace, yes it was refurbed , no clue who paid for the electrical work and asbestos removal - required stuff, not decorating. There remains a large empty flat at KP, I believe - the one that JCMH was supposed to get ...
> - Frogmore is like an hour from London - E is a London girl, her husband is a city boy, one never sees photos of her riding in the country like Anne
> - E can stay with Andrew when in Windsor, he has lots of bedrooms and she is isolating with him at the moment, so plenty of room
> - Way too much baggage associated with FC, is it finished ? Did JCMH really pay up ? Who wants JCMH as a landlord ? Wasnt MM the one who ruined E's wedding with pregnancy news ? Will QEII allow JCMH to sublet ??  In a word, FC has cooties ...
> - Surely, if the venal JCMH was in need of BIG BUCKS, and if they had the right to sublet, they would sublet to someone more able to pay a fortune for living in a royal house - E is not made of money, can she afford to maintain two residences ??? She would still need some place in London, cant give that up
> 
> I dont think anyone is going to get a BIG FAT grace and favor pile in the year of COVID ...



You make several excellent points. It doesn't make sense for city people to sublet the Cottage, particularly if they already have a place to stay in the countryside (Windsor).
It's possible that this is just a 'cover up' for either eviction or abandonment of property to avoid paying rent.

Though, if H has the right to sublet, this right is likely restricted to the royal family.


----------



## Aimee3

I thought we read somewhere that Eugénie already moved in?  Although if it were the DM, likely just speculation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Well, Eugenie is pregnant and maybe a larger place with some grounds that they could settle in with the baby was appealing, especially during covid.  They can still stay at Kensington when they want to be in the city.  I could see them living there and it looks better to have the cottage occupied than sitting empty, newly renovated. 

What I'm curious about is the 2.4 million GBP spent (and supposedly paid back by Harry/MM) on the cottage renovations. No way that Harry/MM paid up that kind of money and then walked away.  Likely, they never paid a dime for the renovations and it was all Charles who paid it back for them.  Maybe the Queen stepped in and reimbursed Charles from her private funds and now is allowing Eugenie to live there rent free or pay some amount of rent.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems like an excellent setup for Eugenia - her parents and grandparents are close by. A KP apartment in London and a cottage in Windsor.










						Princess Eugenie moves into Harry and Meghan's Frogmore Cottage | ITV News
					

The house on the Windsor estate in Berkshire was Prince Harry’s and Meghan’s main home until they stepped down as working members of the Royal Family. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com
				



_Sources close to Harry and Meghan have confirmed that they will “retain financial responsibility” for the property.
It’s not know what contribution Eugenie and Jack will make towards the rent payments and bills.
Princess Eugenie and Mr Brooksbank are expected their first child in the new year.
It will be the Queen’s ninth great-grandchild.
Princess Eugenie and her husband are currently living in one of the residences at Kensington Palace in London.
However, Windsor means a lot to them, as Eugenie spent a lot of time there as a child and the couple decided to get married at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle in October 2018 – six months after Harry and Meghan.
Eugenie’s dad, Prince Andrew, and her mum, Sarah, Duchess of York, also live nearby at Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park.
Andrew and Fergie are divorced but they remain good friends and it’s widely acknowledged that they share the same house.
Prince Andrew stepped down from his royal duties in 2019 because of the on-going difficulties and criticism caused by his former friendship with the convicted sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The change of tenants at Frogmore Cottage was discussed in advance with other members of the Royal Family, we have been told._


----------



## gracekelly

Don’t make the mistake that what goes on with Frog Cot is the same as the real world where there are paper lease agreements etc.   No subletting  or rental agreements These are handshake agreements. The Queen said fine Harry, you aren’t living there so I am going to release You. I will pay back the reno  cost, and the cottage goes back to the Crown Estate and I will give it to Eugenie to live in. Period. Eugenie may only live there for a year or two. She will have a second child and look for a bigger place, but in the meantime, she will have a newly renovated larger place to live and be near her family.  This is all part of the clean sweep so that by March, there will be nothing left for Harry. If he ever wants to go back he will be on the ground floor and begging for something to do.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> You make several excellent points. It doesn't make sense for city people to sublet the Cottage, particularly if they already have a place to stay in the countryside (Windsor).
> It's possible that this is just a 'cover up' for either eviction or abandonment of property to avoid paying rent.
> 
> Though, if H has the right to sublet, this right is likely restricted to the royal family.


I cannot believe AT ALL that H has the right to sublet, nor would he ever be granted permission. NEVER.

Think of the mess, if he sublet a crown property (he does not own it at all...) to some horrid foreign potentate guilty of crimes against humanity? You may laugh at my suggestion, BUT Andrew has already gotten into a lot of hot water for selling his pile (that he owned outright) at Sunninghill to a foreign potentate.

If JCMH let go of the place, the property would revert to HM, then she would disposition it. She would never allow a foreigner (MM) to disposition a royal house. If QEII wants it to go to E, then all she has to do is to cut JCMH out of the loop, nice and tidy that.

Also, I doubt anything terribly grand can or will be done for the York Princesses overtly due to disgrace of Andrew.  QEII might do something, but totally quietly, in secret not blasted to the world via the DM.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Yeppers. 100%
> 
> She's been a conniver all her life; she will use anyone/any opportunity to advance herself (IMO, of course).
> 
> Daddy is of no use anymore, while Doria, on the other hand, besides being a WOC, keeps her mouth shut and makes M look oh so woke. I feel she will dump Mom when there's nothing more to mine from their relationship.


she apparently set doria up in business using a beverly hills attorney so if we assume this wasn't out of pure love, then I guess she thinks having doria on good terms is to her advantage.  doesn't mean they're very close or see each other often though.
I wonder if Meghan became the selfish opportunist she is because her father spoiled her or are some people just born with certain personality traits?
the half sister has never spoken against Doria, right?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Don’t make the mistake that what goes on with Frog Cot is the same as the real world where there are paper lease agreements etc.   No subletting  or rental agreements These are handshake agreements. The Queen said fine Harry, you aren’t living there so I am going to release You. I will pay back the reno  cost, and the cottage goes back to the Crown Estate and I will give it to Eugenie to live in. Period. Eugenie may only live there for a year or two. She will have a second child and look for a bigger place, but in the meantime, she will have a newly renovated larger place to live and be near her family.  This is all part of the clean sweep so that by March, there will be nothing left for Harry. If he ever wants to go back he will be on the ground floor and begging for something to do.


how small is this place?  aren't their "apartments" often huge?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems like an excellent setup for Eugenia - her parents and grandparents are close by. A KP apartment in London and a cottage in Windsor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie moves into Harry and Meghan's Frogmore Cottage | ITV News
> 
> 
> The house on the Windsor estate in Berkshire was Prince Harry’s and Meghan’s main home until they stepped down as working members of the Royal Family. | ITV National News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.itv.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Sources close to Harry and Meghan have confirmed that they will “retain financial responsibility” for the property.
> It’s not know what contribution Eugenie and Jack will make towards the rent payments and bills.
> Princess Eugenie and Mr Brooksbank are expected their first child in the new year.
> It will be the Queen’s ninth great-grandchild.
> Princess Eugenie and her husband are currently living in one of the residences at Kensington Palace in London.
> However, Windsor means a lot to them, as Eugenie spent a lot of time there as a child and the couple decided to get married at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle in October 2018 – six months after Harry and Meghan.
> Eugenie’s dad, Prince Andrew, and her mum, Sarah, Duchess of York, also live nearby at Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park.
> Andrew and Fergie are divorced but they remain good friends and it’s widely acknowledged that they share the same house.
> Prince Andrew stepped down from his royal duties in 2019 because of the on-going difficulties and criticism caused by his former friendship with the convicted sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein.
> The change of tenants at Frogmore Cottage was discussed in advance with other members of the Royal Family, we have been told._


Let’s stop pretending about “sources close to H&M”. This is just the PR person spinning the situation so it looks like the Sussex have control. They have no control over the property.  They don’t appear to have control over anything.  FC doesn’t belong to them. It’s a grace and favor and the Brooksbanks will pay a nominal rent to the Crown Estate.  The entire article is the DM shading the Harkles.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> she apparently set doria up in business using a beverly hills attorney so if we assume this wasn't out of pure love, then I guess she thinks having doria on good terms is to her advantage.  doesn't mean they're very close or see each other often though.
> I wonder if Meghan became the selfish opportunist she is because her father spoiled her or are some people just born with certain personality traits?
> the half sister has never spoken against Doria, right?


The Doria business venture , well that was all very sketchy in the press (fake news ?) but yes, controlling mom's business venture could very much help limit any legal liabilities (in the sense of MM cannot be sued for actions of mom).

We really known nothing tangible about D. For ex, is she living in LA or Montecito?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Call me cynical, IMHO, Thomas did not fit the narrative. Remember he was in the wedding right up until he began talking about *not* meeting Harry and *not* being asked permission for the marriage. [My father would have been the same way. There is a proper order for marriages.]. Was Doria asked?
> 
> So why did Harry think it was ok not to ask the father for MM’s hand in marriage? In those early days, no criticism of Harry was allowed. He was still the perfect prince, son of Diana who as we all know was the Queen of People’s hearts, unloved only by her husband and the father of her children. [yawn, so much drama]
> 
> Thomas’s questions were most unwelcomed, so much so they kicked him out of the show.  I believe the unpardonable sin was of not presenting Meghan *and Harry* in the best possible light.
> 
> ETA: little did they know how much criticism Harry would receive



When did Harry actually meet Mr. M before the wedding ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> When did Harry actually meet Mr. M before the wedding ?



To my knowledge, Harry did not meet Mr. Markle. Rightfully, imo, Thomas sees it as a weakness in Harry.
ETA:  in my family, that sort of thing reflects on the groom’s upbringing.  









						'Man up and meet me' - Thomas Markle's message to Prince Harry as he says he'll 'see Meghan in court'
					

Thomas Markle has asked Britain's Prince Harry to "man up" and meet him, as he spoke about how much he misses his daughter Meghan.




					www.independent.ie
				












						There's a Good Chance Prince Harry Will Never Meet His Father-in-Law, Thomas Markle
					

Meghan Markle's father Thomas hasn't met her husband or son yet -- and the way things are going, there's a good chance he never will.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				




May 20, 2020
Nothing about Prince Harry’s marriage to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has been typical, from the day they met to now, two years after they tied the knot. This unlikely couple overcame so many obstacles to stay together and now have begun forging a new path that’s separate from the rest of the royal family. Even the simplest rites of passage like meeting the in-laws haven’t gone as planned.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I have a pretty dysfunctional family, so I can really sympathize and understand if people need to cut someone off. *But all of them?* The uncle who helped her get ahead with her studies, her lawyer niece she seemed to love dearly? Plus no childhood or otherwise youth friends left, none? Only the big celebrity names? Yeah, no. The problem is Meghan.


What if you had several narcissists and one compulsive liar in your family and you were punished as a child no matter who was at fault? Then you reach adulthood and the parent still wants to control your life.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I have a pretty dysfunctional family, so I can really sympathize and understand if people need to cut someone off. But all of them? The uncle who helped her get ahead with her studies, her lawyer niece she seemed to love dearly? Plus no childhood or otherwise youth friends left, none? Only the big celebrity names? Yeah, no. The problem is Meghan.


right....I've said this before - surely she could have found some suitable relatives to invite to the wedding.....I wasn't aware of the lawyer niece but heard something about the uncle who helped her.....did she think having no one except her mother there was a good look?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> how small is this place?  aren't their "apartments" often huge?



I think the Cottage has 9-10 bedrooms. 

Not sure how many babies Eu and JB are planning on having, but I think they can live there comfortably for a while


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I think the Cottage has 9-10 bedrooms.
> 
> Not sure how many babies Eu and JB are planning on having, but I think they can live there comfortably for a while


really...how do you outgrow 9 bedrooms?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> To my knowledge, Harry did not meet Mr. Markle. Rightfully, imo, Thomas sees it as a weakness in Harry.
> ETA:  in my family, that sort of thing reflects on the groom’s upbringing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Man up and meet me' - Thomas Markle's message to Prince Harry as he says he'll 'see Meghan in court'
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle has asked Britain's Prince Harry to "man up" and meet him, as he spoke about how much he misses his daughter Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.ie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's a Good Chance Prince Harry Will Never Meet His Father-in-Law, Thomas Markle
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father Thomas hasn't met her husband or son yet -- and the way things are going, there's a good chance he never will.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May 20, 2020
> Nothing about Prince Harry’s marriage to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex has been typical, from the day they met to now, two years after they tied the knot. This unlikely couple overcame so many obstacles to stay together and now have begun forging a new path that’s separate from the rest of the royal family. Even the simplest rites of passage like meeting the in-laws haven’t gone as planned.



To never meet you F-I-L before marrying their daughter/son is really awful. It's basically telling Mr.M that he/his opinion doesn't matter. It's incredibly RUDE.

I don't know him, but that would be very upsetting for _any_ father. Never mind  MM telling _him_ her heart was broken “into a million pieces” in that letter. He was a total afterthought, in fact, really, it looks like he didn't fit-in her vanity project. He must have felt like he was an embarrassment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> really...how do you outgrow 9 bedrooms?




Most articles write 10 beds, but some 9.

From House Beautiful, earlier last year https://www.housebeautiful.com/uk/l.../prince-harry-meghan-markle-frogmore-cottage/ :


"The Grade II listed, two-storey, stucco-faced house with a parapet was a 10-bedroom property divided into five units (previously home to members of the royal staff), but it has now been completely renovated into a modern family home for the royal couple."

Obviously not big enough for H&M


----------



## rose60610

Anybody wanna speculate the Meghan and Harry will want to return to London "for a visit" and want to throw Eugenie out for the duration of their "visit", just because? I wouldn't put it past them. Why pass up such a great opportunity to humiliate another Royal? And if Eugenie refuses to leave, Meghan gets to pout and prove to the world that she's a huge victim again. Meghan will wait until after Eugenie has the baby so the imposition is at it's greatest. I wonder if Eugenie gets to remodel Frogmore to HER liking.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Most articles write 10 beds, but some 9.
> 
> From House Beautiful, earlier last year https://www.housebeautiful.com/uk/l.../prince-harry-meghan-markle-frogmore-cottage/ :
> 
> 
> "The Grade II listed, two-storey, stucco-faced house with a parapet was a 10-bedroom property divided into five units (previously home to members of the royal staff), but it has now been completely renovated into a modern family home for the royal couple."
> 
> Obviously not big enough for H&M
> 
> View attachment 4911372


and it's old...maybe too musty for "M"


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and it's old...maybe too musty for "M"



If you remember, they wanted to live at Windsor Castle. The Queen said NO.

So they obviously don't mind about age, it's just not GRAND enough.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> and it's old...maybe too musty for "M"



It may have been the Wallis connection.








						Wallis Simpson Is Buried on the Grounds of Frogmore House, the Place Meghan Markle Will Soon Call Home
					

The Duchess of Windsor's grave remains there to this day.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Anybody wanna speculate the Meghan and Harry will want to return to London "for a visit" and want to throw Eugenie out for the duration of their "visit", just because? I wouldn't put it past them. Why pass up such a great opportunity to humiliate another Royal? And if Eugenie refuses to leave, Meghan gets to pout and prove to the world that she's a huge victim again. Meghan will wait until after Eugenie has the baby so the imposition is at it's greatest. I wonder if Eugenie gets to remodel Frogmore to HER liking.



London to Windsor by train is approx 1hr 15min so if they're visiting London they wouldn't be even be thinking of staying at their former home. 

_If_ Eu and JM have the keys, the house has g o n e. 

It means it is no longer H&M's official residence or in any other capacity. 

In future, if they grace Britain with their presence, they'll have to book airbnb like everyone else.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> It may have been the Wallis connection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wallis Simpson Is Buried on the Grounds of Frogmore House, the Place Meghan Markle Will Soon Call Home
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Windsor's grave remains there to this day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



It has 33 acres, and the gardens are adjoining Windsor's grounds (where they asked the Queen if they could live). So I don't think a few bones would put either of them off.


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> really...how do you outgrow 9 bedrooms?



Why do you need 14 bathrooms?
We’re clearly plebs...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Just like the tiaras Catherine wears, permanently "on loan" but not yours to keep, till she's Queen lol. Even then they're not yours but belong to the Crown. That'll be fun, William (or Catherine) getting to decide who to loan the tiaras to



Good thing M is not interested anymore so there won't be another tiaragate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> What if you had several narcissists and one compulsive liar in your family and you were punished as a child no matter who was at fault? Then you reach adulthood and the parent still wants to control your life.



When I said all of them I meant all of them and not just her parents. Also for all we know Meghan wasn't an abused child but spoiled rotten. Plus what about the lack of friends...all bullies?


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> Anybody wanna speculate the Meghan and Harry will want to return to London "for a visit" and want to throw Eugenie out for the duration of their "visit", just because? I wouldn't put it past them. Why pass up such a great opportunity to humiliate another Royal? And if Eugenie refuses to leave, Meghan gets to pout and prove to the world that she's a huge victim again. Meghan will wait until after Eugenie has the baby so the imposition is at it's greatest. I wonder if Eugenie gets to remodel Frogmore to HER liking.



I think it's unlikely Megain ever steps foot in England again and if she did she would certainly stay in a high end hotel that could cater to her every wish and keep her in control. IMHO


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> If you remember, they wanted to live at Windsor Castle. The Queen said NO.
> 
> So they obviously don't mind about age, it's just not GRAND enough.



If they got to live at Windsor Castle, would they still have gone to CA? Or did they remodel Frogmore only to ditch it ten minutes later and move to "punish" the Queen?  Did they really think they could maintain Windsor and a Hollywood connection? Glad they couldn't get Windsor. They'd have remodeled it resemble the Magic Kingdom.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> If they got to live at Windsor Castle, would they still have gone to CA? Or did they remodel Frogmore only to ditch it ten minutes later and move to "punish" the Queen?  Did they really think they could maintain Windsor and a Hollywood connection? Glad they couldn't get Windsor. They'd have remodeled it resemble the Magic Kingdom.



They would have an apartment at Windsor (the Queen lives there too). 

but yes, can you imagine? Really, I think they wanted it for the bragging rights, but it's not too far from the Disney ideal, just more rounded and grey and less pointy and pink


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When I said all of them I meant all of them and not just her parents. Also for all we know Meghan wasn't an abused child but spoiled rotten. Plus what about the lack of friends...all bullies?


Sorry I was speaking mostly about real victims. Meghan had absolutely no reason to abandon so many. It can't compare to children, who learn early in life to trust few people, which can result in few or no long lasting friendships.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I find MM’s relationships far less worrying than Harry’s.  He convinced people for years that he really was this fun guy. Now that we have seen him with the mask somewhat off,  it is disturbing. He does need help and correctly realized that a public role does not suit him.

MM reminds me of so many people who use ’friends’ to make a quick dollar.  They have been doing it since elementary school with the parents’ encouragement.  They really do believe the stuff they read on Facebook, for example:
_As they say, people come into our lives for a reason, a season or a lifetime.
“When someone is in your life for a REASON, it is usually to meet a need you expressed. They have come to assist you through a difficulty; to provide you with guidance and support; to aid you physically, emotionally or spiritually. They seem like a godsend, and they are. They are there for the reason you need them to be there. Then, without any wrongdoing on your part…the relationship will end.”

“When some people come into your life for a SEASON, it is your turn to share, grow or learn. They bring you an experience of peace or make you laugh. They may teach you something you have never done. Believe it. It is real.” But this is only for a short period of time.

“LIFETIME relationships teach you lifetime lessons, things you must build upon in order to have a solid emotional foundation. Your job is to accept the lesson, love the person, and put what you have learned to use in all other relationships and areas of your life”. — source is unknown._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I find MM’s relationships far less worrying than Harry’s.  He convinced people for years that he really was this fun guy. Now that we have seen him with the mask somewhat off,  it is disturbing. He does need help and correctly realized that a public role does not suit him.
> 
> MM reminds me of so many people who use ’friends’ to make a quick dollar.  They have been doing it since elementary school with the parents’ encouragement.  They really do believe the stuff they read on Facebook, for example:
> _As they say, people come into our lives for a reason, a season or a lifetime.
> “When someone is in your life for a REASON, it is usually to meet a need you expressed. They have come to assist you through a difficulty; to provide you with guidance and support; to aid you physically, emotionally or spiritually. They seem like a godsend, and they are. They are there for the reason you need them to be there. Then, without any wrongdoing on your part…the relationship will end.”
> 
> “When some people come into your life for a SEASON, it is your turn to share, grow or learn. They bring you an experience of peace or make you laugh. They may teach you something you have never done. Believe it. It is real.” But this is only for a short period of time.
> 
> “LIFETIME relationships teach you lifetime lessons, things you must build upon in order to have a solid emotional foundation. Your job is to accept the lesson, love the person, and put what you have learned to use in all other relationships and areas of your life”. — source is unknown._



Friends order book for narcissists


----------



## marietouchet

What to make of this salad ?

It IS in The Times but comes only  from a source close to JcMH, not a joint press release from the bros  ...

I thought you would be interested in this story - Harry and William ‘stand united’ on Martin Bashir’s Diana interview









						Harry and William ‘stand united’ on Martin Bashir’s Diana interview
					

The Duke of Sussex has denounced attempts to “drive a wedge” between him and his brother over the controversy surrounding a historic BBC interview with their mother.A source close to Prince Harry described the suggestion that he was failing to support the Duke of Cambridge in protecting their mother




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> What to make of this salad ?
> 
> It IS in The Times but comes only  from a source close to JcMH, not a joint press release from the bros  ...
> 
> I thought you would be interested in this story - Harry and William ‘stand united’ on Martin Bashir’s Diana interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William ‘stand united’ on Martin Bashir’s Diana interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has denounced attempts to “drive a wedge” between him and his brother over the controversy surrounding a historic BBC interview with their mother.A source close to Prince Harry described the suggestion that he was failing to support the Duke of Cambridge in protecting their mother
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


I don't think they are standing united on anything these days


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I don't think they are standing united on anything these days
> standing with H would tarnish Will's rep IMO....sorry to say


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry I was speaking mostly about real victims. Meghan had absolutely no reason to abandon so many. It can't compare to children, who learn early in life to trust few people, which can result in few or no long lasting friendships.



Yes, I was absolutely not telling real victims of abuse how to feel or how to heal!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't think they are standing united on anything these days



I was going to say that.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> how small is this place?  aren't their "apartments" often huge?





sdkitty said:


> really...how do you outgrow 9 bedrooms?


Unless they broke down the walls, the bedrooms are small.  This was servants quarters and not a luxury home.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> What to make of this salad ?
> 
> It IS in The Times but comes only  from a source close to JcMH, not a joint press release from the bros  ...
> 
> I thought you would be interested in this story - Harry and William ‘stand united’ on Martin Bashir’s Diana interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William ‘stand united’ on Martin Bashir’s Diana interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has denounced attempts to “drive a wedge” between him and his brother over the controversy surrounding a historic BBC interview with their mother.A source close to Prince Harry described the suggestion that he was failing to support the Duke of Cambridge in protecting their mother
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk




So, it’s a ‘wedgie’,  is it?  I agree — failing to support William is ‘utterly horrid and offensive“.  Gotta laugh at this writing.


_The Duke of Sussex has denounced attempts to “drive a wedge” between him and his brother over the controversy surrounding a BBC interview with their mother.

A source close to Prince Harry described the suggestion that he was failing to support the Duke of Cambridge in protecting their mother’s legacy as “utterly horrid and offensive”._


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> When did Harry actually meet Mr. M before the wedding ?


According to the rumor bill, they met at Soho House in Toronto.  It makes sense and explains the overlapping time of her seeing Cory and Harry at the same time.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Unless they broke down the walls, the bedrooms are small.  This was servants quarters and not a luxury home.


I thought I saw on this thread that it was completely redone....guess that could have been cosmetic but I would think they would tear down walls to make larger rooms too

guess then it would no longer be nine bedrooms....but even if it was four or five, that's enough for a family....never mind they are not "normal" people


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, it’s a ‘wedgie’,  is it?  I agree — failing to support William is ‘utterly horrid and offensive“.  Gotta laugh at this writing.
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex has denounced attempts to “drive a wedge” between him and his brother over the controversy surrounding a BBC interview with their mother.
> 
> A source close to Prince Harry described the suggestion that he was failing to support the Duke of Cambridge in protecting their mother’s legacy as “utterly horrid and offensive”._


It is non-support  support for William , nothing official but just in case this is a bandwagon one should be on... H is there


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I thought I saw on this thread that it was completely redone....guess that could have been cosmetic but I would think they would tear down walls to make larger rooms too


Well all you have to do is read a London flat ad in one of the magazines, eg 5 bedrooms in 2200 Sq ft, to realize bedrooms are smaller across the pond 
But yeah, it sounded like they wanted to knock out all the walls at FC

I remember an article when Madonna groaned at the lack of speed in the UK for construction, she could not get her place redone fast enough , at any cost

I wonder, how much of the JCMH Reno was really accomplished ? 

FC was theirs only a year, they were living there, and it is Grade II historical - do not pass go, do not renovate without all sorts of permissions, drawings , sloowww 

My bet is that the demolition may have been done but the place may not really be entirely habitable , kind of embarrassing limbo condition until someone pays for it and the 18000 pounds a month won’t go far


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> According to the rumor bill, they met at Soho House in Toronto.  It makes sense and explains the overlapping time of her seeing Cory and Harry at the same time.



Did Harry ask Thomas for permission to marry MM?  The articles say he did not.  I know I know, some say it is too old school. But. There are good reasons why this is done. Fathers often see things the daughters don’t. Surely Harry was not raised to think he is above basic etiquette, was he?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did Harry ask Thomas for permission to marry MM?  The articles say he did not.  I know I know, some say it is too old school. But. There are good reasons why this is done. Fathers often see things the daughters don’t. Surely Harry was not raised to think he is above basic etiquette, was he?


it would have been a nice gesture but H was marrying a twice divorced almost-forty-year-old, not a young bride like diana.....


----------



## marietouchet

Ok, I went and snooped on Google earth for FC photos, has it been renovated ? The original photos show a bunch of weeds, so, it should be easy to tell if outside work was done  eg add paved car park ... theoretically ... 

Well, there are a lot of confusing Frogmore buildings, cottage , house and more, and goggle had trouble IDing the cottage, but I saw no obvious signs of landscaping and car park areas outside, yoga conservatory, veg garden, a new pool or tennis court , failed to find any of that

If you go look for yourself, beware FC photos are confused with Frogmore House photos everywhere


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> it would have been a nice gesture but H was marrying a twice divorced almost-forty-year-old, not a young bride like diana.....



True, she is divorcee. Perhaps ‘permission’ carries the incorrect connotation. Really, it is asking for a blessing from his future in-laws. Why should this marriage be different from others? I agree with Thomas on this issue.

Did Charles ask the Earl Spencer? 

https://www.weddingwire.com/wedding-ideas/asking-for-hand-in-marriage


----------



## gracekelly

I saw a mention on a site that FC was now 5 bedrooms so it appears that they did take down some walls.  I think the original bedrooms were as small as a nun's cell.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, she is divorcee. Perhaps ‘permission’ carries the incorrect connotation. Really, it is asking for a blessing from his future in-laws. Why should this marriage be different from others? I agree with Thomas on this issue.
> 
> Did Charles ask the Earl Spencer?
> 
> https://www.weddingwire.com/wedding-ideas/asking-for-hand-in-marriage


The word 'permission' is too strong.  I think H should have made an effort to meet his future in-laws, but MM may have discourage that.

I wonder if MM is regretting her greedy and ridiculous behavior. She could have had a great life working for the Firm, living in the Kensington Palace, spending holidays at Frogmore... She could have earned the respect of the people in UK instead of being a jester in the US.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The word 'permission' is too strong.  I think H should have made an effort to meet his future in-laws, but MM may have discourage that.
> 
> I wonder if MM is regretting her greedy and ridiculous behavior. She could have had a great life working for the Firm, living in the Kensington Palace, spending holidays at Frogmore... She could have earned the respect of the people in UK instead of being a jester in the US.


admit she made a mistake?  Hmm....doubt it.....maybe at some point


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The word 'permission' is too strong.  I think H should have made an effort to meet his future in-laws, but MM may have discourage that.
> 
> I wonder if MM is regretting her greedy and ridiculous behavior. She could have had a great life working for the Firm, living in the Kensington Palace, spending holidays at Frogmore... She could have earned the respect of the people in UK instead of being a jester in the US.


No way. People like her never think that way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaaa????


_
The two couples have now been dubbed the new 'Fab Four', a term once used to describe Harry, Meghan and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge_.    











						Harry 'struck deal to hand Frogmore without knowledge of royals'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who currently reside in an £11million mansion in California, reportedly discussed plans for Eugenie to move into the property without consulting the family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'struck deal to hand Frogmore Cottage over to Princess Eugenie without the knowledge of senior royals'*

*Eugenie, 30, and Jack Brooksbank 'moved into Windsor home two weeks ago'*
*Insider said senior royals were 'blindsided' by Meghan and Harry offering home *
Last night, sources said Meghan and Harry had moved possessions to the US
'Obviously the Queen was told after the couples had spoken about the plan.

'But it is very much a deal done between Harry, Meghan, Eugenie and Jack. There is a close bond between them.'

Eugenie, 30, and Mr Brooksbank, 34, reportedly moved into the five-bedroom home a fortnight ago after speaking directly with the Sussexes.

An insider claimed on Friday that Harry and Meghan had their possessions shipped off to California after 'removal vans pitched up in the dead of night and cleared out the cottage.'

This was said to be a 'pretty strong sign' the couple have 'no plans to return' to Windsor.


----------



## bisousx

I call BS. No way Eugenie would make a move behind her grandparents’ back.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bisousx said:


> I call BS. No way Eugenie would make a move behind her grandparents’ back.


H&MM's constant lying to appear relevant and important is nauseating. It's even worse if this story was concocted by their PR people.


----------



## Sophisticatted

FC is really not theirs to loan or give.  Everybody knows that.  The spin on all of this is just weird.


----------



## bag-mania

Keep in mind that sometimes the media will do 100% story fabrication and I think that’s the case here. “Sources” or not, there is no close bond between those two couples.  Meghan and Eugenie have likely only met a couple of times. And one of those times was attention hog Meghan upstaging Eugenie’s wedding by dramatically cradling her all of two-week pregnant belly.


----------



## rose60610

How could removal vans in the middle of the night go undetected by security?  Nobody patrols Windsor Castle at night? Really? It was a complete secret?  You mean like "paying respects" at a cemetery with a camera crew?  H&M blab like caged macaws when they should just shut up.  How could removal vans have been a quiet affair? The story line has more holes than leaky roof.


----------



## viciel

bisousx said:


> I call BS. No way Eugenie would make a move behind her grandparents’ back.


Especially given the current state of Daddy Prince Andrew's affairs.


----------



## Lodpah

I was watching binge watching a series and something a detective said jumped out at me. He said the worst trait of a narcissistic person is a narcissist who is also amoral. I had to look up that word. We normally hear immoral but a narcissist who’s amoral fits MM to make T. Scary and it makes sense how she can do the things she does. My opinion only.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Unless they broke down the walls, the bedrooms are small.  This was servants quarters and not a luxury home.


I think I did read that they did knock a few walls down to make it possibly a 5 bedroom house. 

ETA, oops, I didn't see your second post saying the same thing


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> I call BS. No way Eugenie would make a move behind her grandparents’ back.



This, plus I would be very surprised to learn she's still a fan of Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I saw a mention on a site that FC was now 5 bedrooms so it appears that they did take down some walls.  I think the original bedrooms were as small as a nun's cell.



On Wikki it says 4 beds and nursery (usually 2 or 3 rooms). That sounds like walls were taken down between each pair and probably there are now more bathrooms upstairs. 

Whatever the bedroom size and how ever many, it's still vast compared with what most people live in. For 2 people and a baby it seems spacious. But, I can almost see M recoiling at the thought that she did all that social climbing and scheming to live in a 4-5 bed house a couple of hours from London. That's not the fairytale princess ending _she_ was going to settle for.

I would love it just for the views and surrounding gardens.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, she is divorcee. Perhaps ‘permission’ carries the incorrect connotation. Really, it is asking for a blessing from his future in-laws. Why should this marriage be different from others? I agree with Thomas on this issue.
> 
> Did Charles ask the Earl Spencer?



I flipped book on MM/Megxit which said H did call Tom to ask for permission to marry - sorry dont remember which book

Recently subscribed to SCRIBD - a book service that seems to have a lot of trashy bios of celebrities , rock stars eg MM.  I cant abide buying those since I wont keep them or go back to them - and I usually tire after a few chapters of the gossip. There is a lot of non garbage stuff too - I adore JUST KIDS the bio of Mapplethorpe by Patti Smith - the kind of book that is never on AMAZON PRIME books

SCRIBD has the Lady Colin book on the Queen Mother ... evidently the QM had hoped to marry Edward VIII / Duke of Windsor not his younger brother, so, the QM feathers were ruffled when Wallis succeeded in marrying the man of her dreams, had not heard that , interesting account on the (lack of) education of QEII (never went to school, totally home schooled) as edicted by the QM


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, she is divorcee. Perhaps ‘permission’ carries the incorrect connotation. Really, it is asking for a blessing from his future in-laws. Why should this marriage be different from others? I agree with Thomas on this issue.
> 
> Did Charles ask the Earl Spencer?
> 
> https://www.weddingwire.com/wedding-ideas/asking-for-hand-in-marriage



I really feel strongly against this antiquated custom that comes directly from the idea that woman are chattel with no lawful ability to make their own decisions. I would not have been impressed if my husband had done this.

It would have been nice if he had met them. But she gets to decide who she marries all on her lonesome.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> If you remember, they wanted to live at Windsor Castle. The Queen said NO.
> 
> So they obviously don't mind about age, it's just not GRAND enough.



In addition to Windsor Castle, they tried also to live in one of the larger apartments at Kensington Palace (but unable to evict the current residents)... The Frogmore Cottage was likely never enough for them. Only the best for MM!  

"The pair had been said to have their eye on one of the larger apartments, but its current resident, The Queen’s cousin, The Duke of Gloucester, 74, and his wife Birgitte, 72, are reportedly unwilling to give it up."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just read that they themselves claimed on their website they chose Frogmore in huge part because the renovation was cheaper than that of the Kensingto Palace apartment meant for them (not the Gloucesters' one, another one that would have been only inhabitable around now due to extensive renovations...that said, didn't I also read the apartment for them had been renovated and they had refused it? Can't remember anymore), so they chose that to save the tax payer a buck. LMAO they really think anyone believes they care whose money they spend? In hindsight I wonder if Frogmore was kind of a sending them into exile because they were nothing but trouble with their grand wishes of their own court, a Windsor Castle apartment etc. If you compare it with Anmer Hall it is modest ("modest"), that must have driven Meghan up the wall.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> In addition to Windsor Castle, they tried also to live in one of the larger apartments at Kensington Palace (but unable to evict the current residents)... The Frogmore Cottage was likely never enough for them. Only the best for MM!
> 
> "The pair had been said to have their eye on one of the larger apartments, but its current resident, The Queen’s cousin, The Duke of Gloucester, 74, and his wife Birgitte, 72, are reportedly unwilling to give it up."



Perhaps they, like so many, thought the marriage would not last.


----------



## youngster

For all of our UK posters, it's being reported here and there that Harry/MM struck a deal separately with Jack/Eugenie over the use of Frogmore Cottage.  That seems odd (as in impossible).  Isn't the cottage a grace-and-favour arrangement?  Wouldn't they need the permission of the Queen to do anything with it?  That story about striking a deal with Eugenie and Jack and how close the two couples are seems like another ridiculous bit of fluff by their PR people. The two couples have probably spent all of a few hours together in total and I can't see Eugenie just calling up Harry and saying, hello there, can we move into your cottage since you aren't using it anymore? I think this was all the Queen's idea to put the place to use, and give Eugenie and Jack a larger place with the baby on the way, close to the Queen and close to Sarah/Andrew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I feel they are putting out that sh*t because they know the palace won't bother to comment.


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t think their PR people are feeding stories to Daily Mail. They are the enemy with Meghan’s lawsuit after all. I can see DM tweaking them by coming up with this tale however. It’s not true but it’s not bad enough for Meghan and Harry to sue again.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Is it time for another picture?


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> Let’s stop pretending about “sources close to H&M”. This is just the PR person spinning the situation so it looks like the Sussex have control. They have no control over the property.  They don’t appear to have control over anything.  FC doesn’t belong to them. *It’s a grace and favor and the Brooksbanks will pay a nominal rent to the Crown Estate.  *The entire article is the DM shading the Harkles.



*I thought the rules changed re these grace and favor residences and that they are charged market value rent.*



marietouchet said:


> I flipped book on MM/Megxit which said H did call Tom to ask for permission to marry - sorry dont remember which book
> 
> SCRIBD has the Lady Colin book on the Queen Mother ... evidently the QM had hoped to marry Edward VIII / Duke of Windsor not his younger brother, so, the QM feathers were ruffled when Wallis succeeded in marrying the man of her dreams, had not heard that , *interesting account on the (lack of) education of QEII (never went to school, totally home schooled) as edicted by the QM*



*I think QE2 always felt undereducated because of this.  She was schooled in the rules and duties that would apply to her when she became Queen and academic subjects were not the focus.  I also read that the QM often spent a lot of time with just William (not Harry) to expose him to what will be expected of him as King.  Supposedly made Harry feel bad.*


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read that they themselves claimed on their website they chose Frogmore in huge part because the renovation was cheaper than that of the Kensingto Palace apartment meant for them (not the Gloucesters' one, another one that would have been only inhabitable around now due to extensive renovations...that said, didn't I also read the apartment for them had been renovated and they had refused it? Can't remember anymore), so they chose that to save the tax payer a buck. LMAO they really think anyone believes they care whose money they spend? In hindsight I wonder if Frogmore was kind of a sending them into exile because they were nothing but trouble with their grand wishes of their own court, a Windsor Castle apartment etc. If you compare it with Anmer Hall it is modest ("modest"), that must have driven Meghan up the wall.



More spin from the Masters of Bull Dinky.   The Gloucesters were planning on moving for a while.  They were retiring from royal duties and they wanted to downsize.  They spent a ton of money renovating their home in the country and that's where they went.  They even had an auction of historical memorabilia that their kids didn't want and made quite a few bucks.  Their KP apartment will be going to William and Kate I think as offices or more living space.  At no time were the Harkles  given the choice of this apartment.  The Queen GIVES, remember?  Just like the tiaragate story. "Meghan will wear what I choose to give her to wear." (paraphrased) TQ chooses where they would live. Period.  They could ask for the moon and stars, and an apartment at Windsor, but  it wouldn't matter.  Not getting it.

I think one of the major problems of Frog Cot is that it is really unattractive on the outside.  It looks like a prison or a post office building.  If it had been prettier, Meghan might have liked it better.  I don't know how much you are allowed to do with a Grade 2 listed building.  Some nice landscaping would make a huge difference with accents that would not damage the building itself. It will be interesting to see what Eugenie does with it if anything.  (hint hint Eugenie, ask Edo, that's what  brother in laws with good taste are used for)

I was thinking that if the Queen was feeling generous, she could give Harry Ivy  Cottage that Eugenie is vacating or give him Nottingham Cottage where he used to live.  I could see her doing this if he has to have a legal address in the UK.  Nott Cott is really small at 1324 square ft and two bedrooms.  It really is a place to just  lay your head for a couple of days if you are in town.  Oh NO!  It only has one bathroom!  The horror!  After having 16 to choose from.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> *I thought the rules changed re these grace and favor residences and that they are charged market value rent.*


I'm thinking that the grace and favor rent is whatever the Crown Estate says it is and the Queen is the Crown Estate so.........


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Is it time for another picture?
> 
> View attachment 4912082


I have to tell  you that when I watched this on TV, my first reaction was this was the best TQ impersonator I had ever seen!  It took me 30 seconds to realize that it really was TQ!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> More spin from the Masters of Bull Dinky.   The Gloucesters were planning on moving for a while.  They were retiring from royal duties and they wanted to downsize.  They spent a ton of money renovating their home in the country and that's where they went.  They even had an auction of historical memorabilia that their kids didn't want and made quite a few bucks.  Their KP apartment will be going to William and Kate I think as offices or more living space.  At no time were the Harkles  given the choice of this apartment.  The Queen GIVES, remember?  Just like the tiaragate story. "Meghan will wear what I choose to give her to wear." (paraphrased) TQ chooses where they would live. Period.  They could ask for the moon and stars, and an apartment at Windsor, but  it wouldn't matter.  Not getting it.
> 
> I think one of the major problems of Frog Cot is that it is really unattractive on the outside.  It looks like a prison or a post office building.  If it had been prettier, Meghan might have liked it better.  I don't know how much you are allowed to do with a Grade 2 listed building.  Some nice landscaping would make a huge difference with accents that would not damage the building itself. It will be interesting to see what Eugenie does with it if anything.  (hint hint Eugenie, ask Edo, that's what  brother in laws with good taste are used for)
> 
> I was thinking that if the Queen was feeling generous, she could give Harry Ivy  Cottage that Eugenie is vacating or give him Nottingham Cottage where he used to live.  I could see her doing this if he has to have a legal address in the UK.  Nott Cott is really small at 1324 square ft and two bedrooms.  It really is a place to just  lay your head for a couple of days if you are in town.  Oh NO!  It only has one bathroom!  The horror!  After having 16 to choose from.


Grade II means can't touch the outside.

I'm part of a trust that manages a Grade I in London. I think demarcation of rules apply throughout England. 

Rules in Scotland are slightly different, I have a house in a conservation village,  again can change inside but not out. Wood for wood, stone for stone, colours have to be accordance with local history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’re acting like they bought the property and are now leasing it? I cannot.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Nott Cott is really small at 1324 square ft and two bedrooms.  It really is a place to just  lay your head for a couple of days if you are in town.  Oh NO!  It only has one bathroom!  The horror!  After having 16 to choose from.



I wouldn't minimize Nottingham Cottage; it is such is a lovely little pad to have in a prime London address. I prefer it to the 16-toilet mansion. Here are some pics from Pinterest:


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> They’re acting like they bought the property and are now leasing it? I cannot.



They are nothing to do with the property 

Sounds like the Queen gave a vacant Crown property , after a  £2.4M refurb, to a couple that will actually live there.

They can dribble nonsense all they like, nothing to do with them at all apart from they were obviously evicted and now have to save face.


----------



## youngster

Wow, are you sure that's Nottingham Cottage? Only 1324 square feet?  Quite beautiful!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is realtor.com’s review of NottCott — interesting observations for 2017








						Meghan Markle's New Home a Dump?! 5 Huge Flaws in Nottingham Cottage
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's impending marriage has the world buzzing about their future home: Nottingham Cottage. Sorry to say, it's a dump.




					www.realtor.com


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Wow, are you sure that's Nottingham Cottage? Only 1324 square feet?  Quite beautiful!


 There are a few pictures online, it's really cute imo


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't minimize Nottingham Cottage; it is such is a lovely little pad to have in a prime London address. I prefer it to the 16-toilet mansion. Here are some pics from Pinterest:
> 
> View attachment 4912181
> View attachment 4912182


That is most definitely not Nottingham Cottage.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is realtor.com’s review of NottCott — interesting observations for 2017
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's New Home a Dump?! 5 Huge Flaws in Nottingham Cottage
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's impending marriage has the world buzzing about their future home: Nottingham Cottage. Sorry to say, it's a dump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.realtor.com


Unless Dutton is comparing Nott Cott to Buckingham, she may have exaggerated when calling it a dump.


----------



## Sharont2305

This is Nottingham Cottage


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> That is most definitely not Nottingham Cottage.



Are you sure? Here is how some of the pictures are labeled:


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure? Here is how some of the pictures are labeled:
> 
> View attachment 4912279
> 
> View attachment 4912262


Absolutely, that dining area looks like the size of the entire floor plan of the cottage.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Wow, are you sure that's Nottingham Cottage? Only 1324 square feet?  Quite beautiful!


I think this could be Frogmore House.


----------



## gracekelly

Nott Cott is 2 bedrooms, 2 reception rooms and one bathroom.  1324 sq ft.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I think this could be Frogmore House.


I don't even think it's there, to be honest, her face looks pre Harry. Those stairs look American.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't even think it's there, to be honest, her face looks pre Harry. Those stairs look American.


Interesting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't even think it's there, to be honest, her face looks pre Harry. Those stairs look American.


You are right!  This was taken on her trip to Malta.  Same coat. Pictures were on the Tig.

*Malta (The TIG)*
When asked to go to Malta for ElleUK, to not only discover the beautiful island, but also the land from which my great grandmother hailed, I said yes without hesitation. It’s Malta! A beautiful…
More







Bloglovin'
3m followers


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure? Here is how some of the pictures are labeled:
> 
> View attachment 4912279
> 
> View attachment 4912262


I think Nott Cott is like Frog Cott, photos have been mixed up in the press


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, that dining area looks like the size of the entire floor plan of the cottage.


I also thought that the living room was big, but I recall to have lived in a 1300 sq ft apartment with a pretty big living room. Unless my memory is failing (this was in my old days of grad school), the apartment had plenty of room. What do you think about the picture below? It it Nott Cott? I love it.


Edited to add link: https://www.who.com.au/where-do-harry-and-meghan-live-see-inside-nottingham-cottage


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I think Nott Cott is like Frog Cott, photos have been mixed up in the press


The pictures may have all been mixed up, but Nott Cott is likely a lovely cottage. Will and Kate lived there for some time. The upper floor may have low ceilings as I read that Will had to stoop to avoid hitting his head on them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since very few photos of the interior are available, most sites offered what they _thought_ it looked like, rather than what it actually looks like.  My guess is that a Cali girl would be appalled at no AC, 1 bath, etc.  She was accustomed to grander surroundings. From what I’ve read, I could be wrong, most palaces are not grand in all the trimmings but rather in the antiques and the land.

Here is an example of possible designs for NottCott:








						Nottingham cottage: where the Duke & Duchess of Sussex will live and who should decorate it
					

A look at Nottingham Cottage, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will live, and who we think should decorate it for them




					www.houseandgarden.co.uk
				




ETA: IMO, no property owned by The Crown should be called a ‘dump’.

ETA2: The exterior looks like it should be in a Nancy Myers movie.  Beautiful!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't even think it's there, to be honest, her face looks pre Harry. Those stairs look American.


Unless Nott Cott is going to be in the video footage for the Netflix documentary, we may never see how it looks inside.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since very few photos of the interior are available, most sites offered what they _thought_ it looked like, rather than what it actually looks like.  My guess is that a Cali girl would be appalled at no AC, 1 bath, etc.  She was accustomed to grander surroundings. From what I’ve read, I could be wrong, most palaces are not grand in all the trimmings but rather in the antiques and the land.
> 
> Here is an example of possible designs for NottCott:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nottingham cottage: where the Duke & Duchess of Sussex will live and who should decorate it
> 
> 
> A look at Nottingham Cottage, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will live, and who we think should decorate it for them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.houseandgarden.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: IMO, no property owned by The Crown should be called a ‘dump’.
> 
> ETA2: The exterior looks like it should be in a Nancy Myers movie.  Beautiful!
> 
> View attachment 4912320


The photo below - two story L shaped building - is much different from that in the link above - boxy house with a dormer above , not full second story 

My money is on the snap in the link -with  dormer


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The photo below - two story L shaped building - is much different from that in the link above - boxy house with a dormer above , not full second story
> 
> My money is on the snap in the link -with  dormer



Here is the link to the photo I posted :  the site appears reputable, but I have no idea if it is the actual cottage or not








						nottingham-cottage - Celebrating British Design & Culture
					

Willow & Hall sells high quality sofa beds, sofas, armchairs and mattresses. . . the type of lovely products which would usually put a rather huge hole in your hard earned wallet.




					www.willowandhall.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Top image = https://www.houseandgarden.co.uk/ar...kle-home-nottingham-cottage-kensington-palace

Bottom image = https://www.willowandhall.co.uk/blog/how-to-give-your-home-the-royal-treatment/nottingham-cottage/




ETA: to muddy the waters further - https://ca.hellomagazine.com/royalty/02018080146515/meghan-markle-birthday-events-year-ahead/6


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since very few photos of the interior are available, most sites offered what they _thought_ it looked like, rather than what it actually looks like.  My guess is that a Cali girl would be appalled at no AC, 1 bath, etc.  She was accustomed to grander surroundings. From what I’ve read, I could be wrong, most palaces are not grand in all the trimmings but rather in the antiques and the land.
> 
> Here is an example of possible designs for NottCott:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nottingham cottage: where the Duke & Duchess of Sussex will live and who should decorate it
> 
> 
> A look at Nottingham Cottage, where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will live, and who we think should decorate it for them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.houseandgarden.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: IMO, no property owned by The Crown should be called a ‘dump’.



Many houses in New England don't have AC and it's not a big deal. I still think that Nott Cott must be a lot more beautiful than their 16 (or 19)-toilet mansion in Montecito. 

Will and Kate also lived at Nott Cott. It was also the house of the Duke of Gloucester, and his wife, Princess Alice ... But of course it was not good enough for MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Many houses in New England don't have AC and it's not a big deal. I still think that Nott Cott must be a lot more beautiful than their 16 (or 19)-toilet mansion in Montecito.
> 
> Will and Kate also lived at Nott Cott. It was also the house of the Duke of Gloucester, and his wife, Princess Alice ... But of course it was not good enough for MM.



Typically, the woodworking in these palaces and cottages is beyond compare because it was completed at time when true craftsmen put everything together by hand.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Typically, the woodworking in these palaces and cottages is beyond compare because it was completed at time when true craftsmen put everything together by hand.


Absolutely! I would also expect beautiful paintings, furniture, chandeliers... I wouldn't mind to have a little cottage like that in a prime London location.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't minimize Nottingham Cottage; it is such is a lovely little pad to have in a prime London address. I prefer it to the 16-toilet mansion. Here are some pics from Pinterest:
> 
> View attachment 4912181
> View attachment 4912182


That’s only 1324 sq ft?!!?  Now I understand why poor MM could not _possibly_ tolerate something so atrocious!!


----------



## viciel

purseinsanity said:


> That’s only 1324 sq ft?!!?  Now I understand why poor MM could not _possibly_ tolerate something so atrocious!!


That's definitely alot smaller in size than MM's head so yeah I don't blame them for not taking that. I mean, one must be able to get through the door right?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> That’s only 1324 sq ft?!!?  Now I understand why poor MM could not _possibly_ tolerate something so atrocious!!





viciel said:


> That's definitely alot smaller in size than MM's head so yeah I don't blame them for not taking that. I mean, one must be able to get through the door right?


And you are forgetting the ego. She really needs the 16 or 19 toilets...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> And you are forgetting the ego. She really needs the 16 or 19 toilets...



She needs that many to accommodate the amount of crap she puts out on a regular basis.


----------



## Sharont2305

This video, I assume, is in Frogmore Cottage, which would be similar to Nottingham Cottage. Quite normal looking for a cottage.
This I'd Nottingham Cottage, in the original pic I posted you can see the chimneys on the building behind it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> This video, I assume, is in Frogmore Cottage, which would be similar to Nottingham Cottage. Quite normal looking for a cottage.
> This I'd Nottingham Cottage, in the original pic I posted you can see the chimneys on the building behind it.




Wasn't that filmed in the cottage Eugenie shared with her husband, though? Which we all found weird at the time because why would the Sucksexes need more privacy than them?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't that filmed in the cottage Eugenie shared with her husband, though? Which we all found weird at the time because why would the Sucksexes need more privacy than them?


Could be, I can't remember what I read about where this was filmed. However, I still think Nottingham Cottage is more like this cottage, nothing grand at all.


----------



## marietouchet

There is a video on youtube - title is something like Diana's apartment at Kensington Palace - mostly photos not video clips of the place she shared with Charles. Things I remember from the youtube piece:

Colored walls, yellow, I think, and floral chintz, one might think the Queen Mum did the decorating - very granny like
LOTS of antiques, royal collection stuff that any museum would be happy to receive BUT the paintings are dull (200 year old varnish) and one has to like Georgian style and Stubbs
Her round dining table was super modest - seats four max - with rattan chairs (sic) 
One wall was covered in a medieval tapestry - nice if you like a King Arthur decor scheme

In a word, the place was furnished in a style diametrically opposite to that of McMansions in the US, and super different from the MM brand new black and white flat in Toronto which was 21rst century minimalist.

If you have ever seen the photos of the (over the top) ***** apartments in NY - all marble, crystal, gold and glitz - that what Americans expect to see in royal apartments but KP reality is quite different


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why am I so surprised...apparently really nobody associated with them has any kind of moral compass that's not swiftly overridden by opportunism. 

Frogmore Cottage Interior Designer Sued for Abandoning Other Client


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why am I so surprised...apparently really nobody associated with them has any kind of moral compass that's not swiftly overridden by opportunism.
> 
> Frogmore Cottage Interior Designer Sued for Abandoning Other Client



Wow MM&H have their names (indirectly) linked to one more lawsuit.

"Meghan and Harry dipped into their own pockets too, having to pay for anything 'movable' and anything in the cottage's gardens from their own money." So they sent trucks to pick up the 'movable' items and bring them to California. I wonder if they brought also the flowers.

I don't believe they paid back £2.4 million as a large part of that money was likely to take care of structural modifications.


----------



## Chanbal

A few interesting sentences from an article published today on DM about the saga JM&MM:

Claimed Jessica has 'put into contracts she will not talk about the Duchess'  

'Meghan said friends reflect friends and because of what's at stake she can no longer be associated with Jessica, at least not in public. 

Wow, MM is the epitome of a great friend! Yeah right!

JM&MM


----------



## bag-mania

Does Meghan actually have any friends besides Harry?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Does Meghan actually have any friends besides Harry?


well yes, all those people who threw her a baby shower 
does she ever see them?  probably not but it is a pandemic.  does she talk to them?  email them?  FB them.  I'm sure they are all in touch with her but sworn to secrecy


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> well yes, all those people who threw her a baby shower
> does she ever see them?  probably not but it is a pandemic.  does she talk to them?  email them?  FB them.  *I'm sure they are all in touch with her but sworn to secrecy*


Haha--right.
If she was chatting with any of them (Serena, Alma) that info would be "leaked" for sure, cover of their mouthpiece People mag even, lead article.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Does Meghan actually have any friends besides Harry?



MA? Their friendship seemed reciprocal. 

Harry may have screwed up his life to follow her, and I wonder if MM is H's friend.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Haha--right.
> If she was chatting with any of them (Serena, Alma) that info would be "leaked" for sure, cover of their mouthpiece People mag even, lead article.


or Vanity Fair


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well yes, all those people who threw her a baby shower
> does she ever see them?  probably not but it is a pandemic.  does she talk to them?  email them?  FB them.  I'm sure they are all in touch with her but sworn to secrecy



Yeah, but those are her celebrity (or wannabe) acquaintance "I use you, you use me"  friends. If she has a real confidant I don't know who it could be.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Harry may have screwed up his life to follow her, and *I wonder if MM is H's friend.*



She is his friend in that Harry is her most valuable possession. She won't rock the boat as long as she continues to need him. God help him if she ever decides he is expendable.

I don't think that will ever happen. I truly believe she has reached as high as she will get. There's no place to go but down and she will do anything to slow that descent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, but those are her celebrity (or wannabe) acquaintance "I use you, you use me"  friends. If she has a real confidant I don't know who it could be.


yes, of course you couldn't "hear" my sarcasm when I said "well"  I doubt any of of these women know her well.  now she has apparently "fired" her dear friend Jessica, guess that leaves "H"


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> She needs that many to accommodate the amount of crap she puts out on a regular basis.


BAM!  Brilliant!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Does Meghan actually have any friends besides Harry?



Not likely. After all, remember when MM was in Africa lamenting that 'not many people ask her if she's OK'?  That begs the question: How many people comprise "not many"? Did "only" 500 people ask? or virtually no one? If you're one of the ones who did, then you must have been granted VIP status. Until you were no longer of use. 

But not having any friends doesn't bother those who live their lives conniving how to take advantage of others. Besides, being a friend of Meghan's would be a thoroughly exhausting experience. You'd need the endurance of an Olympic marathoner to keep up. Meghan's self-pity could put entire Disney World into a depression. Remember when Meghan's beagle broke two legs in 2017? What do you want to bet that dog threw itself underneath an oncoming car because even he couldn't take it anymore???  I don't think Meghan ran it over because she'd have made sure it was dead (to get even more pity) and framed someone else.


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> Yeppers. 100%
> 
> She's been a conniver all her life; she will use anyone/any opportunity to advance herself (IMO, of course).
> 
> Daddy is of no use anymore, while Doria, on the other hand, besides being a WOC, keeps her mouth shut and makes M look oh so woke. I feel she will dump Mom when there's nothing more to mine from their relationship.


I said many times that friends of mine that knew the Markles very well during Meghan’s high school years, said that she was super-indulged by her father and that Doria didn’t seem to be around that much then.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> she apparently set doria up in business using a beverly hills attorney so if we assume this wasn't out of pure love, then I guess she thinks having doria on good terms is to her advantage.  doesn't mean they're very close or see each other often though.
> I wonder if Meghan became the selfish opportunist she is because her father spoiled her or are some people just born with certain personality traits?
> the half sister has never spoken against Doria, right?


I think it’s a combination, definitely her father spoiled her to much .. but living out here in LA and when a family member is in the “biz”, especially if on a very popular show, I think you see the stars being treated in particular ways that, to some, would be appealing. A former colleague of mine, her father was also in the “biz” (he was a Producer for a very well known show); some of her behaviors were so foreign to me until others explained her overindulged (bratty) behavior.  So, maybe they have higher expectations on what OTHERS will do for them?!?!?!


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Not likely. After all, remember when MM was in Africa lamenting that 'not many people ask her if she's OK'?  That begs the question: How many people comprise "not many"? Did "only" 500 people ask? or virtually no one? If you're one of the ones who did, then you must have been granted VIP status. Until you were no longer of use.
> 
> But not having any friends doesn't bother those who live their lives conniving how to take advantage of others. Besides, being a friend of Meghan's would be a thoroughly exhausting experience. You'd need the endurance of an Olympic marathoner to keep up. Meghan's self-pity could put entire Disney World into a depression. Remember when Meghan's beagle broke two legs in 2017? What do you want to bet that dog threw itself underneath an oncoming car because even he couldn't take it anymore???  I don't think Meghan ran it over because she'd have made sure it was dead (to get even more pity) and framed someone else.


Oh my god.  You’re hilarious!!!  I litreally laughed - no, snorted! - out loud.  That poor dog!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> And you are forgetting the ego. She really needs the 16 or 19 toilets...


Plus a few trees in the forrest to keep Harry excited......


----------



## Chanbal

@CeeJay we missed you here.

It looks like MM found a great PR-team. Her image has been impeccable lately -in other words, no image!

I wonder if she is quietly waiting to make Bezo's list. He is donating about 700 million of Amazon stock to non-profits.


----------



## csshopper

Wasn't there an article recently that she and JCMH are having Thanksgiving dinner with Kathryn McPhee and David Foster, AKA Harry's foster father, or something like that?  I think it said she was planning to cook? If so, stay tuned for the menu being posted so we peons will know what we should have served for Thursday's feast, if we were "woke" enough to do it like MEMEME.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Does Meghan actually have any friends besides Harry?



Jessica! She’s got Jess, dear sweet Jess. Or does she?   

_Commenting on their relationship, an unnamed source said: '[their] friendship is not what it was once, but it’s not because of [Exeter]. They’ve just grown apart. Of course, Meghan has been worried about Jess. She’ll always have love for her.'

Jessica confirmed the pair are still in regular contact, suggesting they remain close behind the scenes.  _









						Meghan Markle has 'grown apart' from Jessica Mulroney
					

Speaking to Page Six , Jessica Mulroney, 40, who lives in Toronto, said Meghan Meghan Markle, 39, 'constantly Facetimes and checks up on me' from her home in Santa Barbara.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Translation: Meghan Markle has no use for Jessica Mulroney anymore, so why would she invest in her further when she could simply tend to her own needs in the time saved.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Translation: Meghan Markle has no use for Jessica Mulroney anymore, so why would she invest in her further when she could simply tend to her own needs in the time saved.



I kind of feel that the relationship between those two went both ways - both benefitted. Now that Jessica doesn't fit Meghan's narrative, they will simply keep an friendly-not-friends relationship. More of a problem for Jessica, who gained a lot from the relationship and is now nothing without it.

Everything about Meghan is a transaction or business/image situation. Once you no longer hold any value to her, off you go. In some cases the other party doesn't go quietly - like her dad.

On the topic of her dad and Harry not having met him... I feel like in some cases for regular folk it may or may not be a big deal. But when you are world's most eligible bachelor Prince Hot Ginge and running in circles at that level of society, you would think it would be a must-do.

For Harry, he was probably thinking with his _Der_ _Wienerschnitzel _and not common sense. My guess is that Will saw that red flag (amongst other red flags) and Harry didn't like the obvious being pointed out to him.


----------



## bag-mania

Jessica was markled the moment there was a hint of scandal. It’s amazing how fast you can “grow apart.”  One news cycle did the trick.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> Grade II means can't touch the outside.
> 
> I'm part of a trust that manages a Grade I in London. I think demarcation of rules apply throughout England.
> 
> Rules in Scotland are slightly different, I have a house in a conservation village,  again can change inside but not out. Wood for wood, stone for stone, colours have to be accordance with local history.


Same rules for certain towns/villages in New England, but if you purchase a house that is part of a “historic walk” (Salem MA), and visitors walking around can view inside the house, then the inside must also be of “the period”. A dear friend purchased a house in the historic section of Salem, MA .. and not only did the interior visible to the public have to be of period, so did the doggone interior paint!  She had to buy special milk-based paint in order to paint the main living area (which was GORGEOUS)!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> You are right!  This was taken on her trip to Malta.  Same coat. Pictures were on the Tig.
> 
> *Malta (The TIG)*
> When asked to go to Malta for ElleUK, to not only discover the beautiful island, but also the land from which my great grandmother hailed, I said yes without hesitation. It’s Malta! A beautiful…
> More
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4912283
> View attachment 4912283
> 
> Bloglovin'
> 3m followers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4912284


Aarrgghh .. every time I see that “TIG” moniker, it drives me crazy given that this wine (Tignanello) is NOT pronounced with a hard ‘G’ .. the ‘G’ is silent!!! .. bonehead “international studies” Meghan!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> @CeeJay we missed you here.
> 
> It looks like MM found a great PR-team. Her image has been impeccable lately -in other words, no image!
> 
> I wonder if she is quietly waiting to make Bezo's list. He is donating about 700 million of Amazon stock to non-profits.


THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> For Harry, he was probably thinking with his _Der_ _Wienerschnitzel _and not common sense. My guess is that Will saw that red flag (amongst other red flags) and Harry didn't like the obvious being pointed out to him.



Not to be gross, but the sausage is Wiener. Wiener Schnitzel is breaded and fried calf.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Wasn't there an article recently that she and JCMH are having Thanksgiving dinner with Kathryn McPhee and David Foster, AKA Harry's foster father, or something like that?  I think it said she was planning to cook? If so, stay tuned for the menu being posted so we peons will know what we should have served for Thursday's feast, if we were "woke" enough to do it like MEMEME.


Yes, I remember that!  

But from what I recall about David Foster, there is no way that he’s going to eat some Tofu Turkey .. he likes his meat!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!



I missed that you had surgery, but I had wondered where you are! Get well soon!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Hope you feel better and can go home soon. Stay safe!


----------



## LPR200

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Feel better soon! Best wishes for a speedy recovery!


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


CeeJay - tell them to take really good care of you, you have a posse of posters at the bedside in your device (phone, pad, laptop etc) checking up. 

Seriously, hope the procedure was successful, you are resting as comfortably as can be expected, with an encouraging release date on the horizon.


----------



## jennlt

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Best wishes for a quick convalescence!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@CeeJay  If you need our voices, just whistle.  We will be there for ya 
Rest assured, we will keep the ‘golden couple’ far away as well as Light Watkins (can’t make this stuff up).  
Laughter is the best medicine.









						Meghan Markle
					

InStyle brings you the latest news on actress and duchess Meghan Markle, including her personal style, latest projects, and updates about her family.




					www.instyle.com
				



_Years before Meghan Markle was dealing with the pressure and expectations of preparing for a royal wedding, she was already learning the tools to help her relieve stress before her big day. The soon-to-be royal began meditating with instructor Light Watkins back when she was an actress on Suits and quickly took to the practice, incorporating not one but two sessions into her daily routine.
“I met Meghan through a mutual friend of ours about five years ago. This friend of ours is in the wellness space, and I think she had been working on some diet stuff with him,” Light Watkins, author of Bliss More ($16; amazon.com) told InStyle. “She’d been obviously familiar with the practice and had been doing it on her own and she was really intrigued by the fact that I was a meditation teacher and I do these trainings.”_

Take good care, dear one. The ‘wellness space’ awaits your arrival.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to be gross, but the sausage is Wiener. Wiener Schnitzel is breaded and fried calf.



Sounds EXACTLY like what MM has done to him.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Get well soon!


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!



Wha? NOOOOOOO!  You CAN'T leave this thread!!  We'd miss you and have to start another thread about MM's dopey missteps. Not that it can't be done....but still.   

Have a godspeed recovery. With a fine cocktail. And if you're advised not to have a cocktail.....just.....yet..... then I'll have one for you! Do get well!


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> @CeeJay we missed you here.
> 
> It looks like MM found a great PR-team. Her image has been impeccable lately -in other words, no image!
> 
> I wonder if she is quietly waiting to make Bezo's list. He is donating about 700 million of Amazon stock to non-profits.



Great point. Sadly, Bezos donating 700 MM in AMZN stock is like me donating $20. His net worth fluctuates a few billion each day. But I agree with your speculation that MM has Bezos in her 10 point red bullseye. Besides, Lauren Sanchez is 50, Meghan is 39....and if you compare Sanchez with Bezos' ex wife, Meghan fits the look too.  Hmmmm.  Bet MM has Amazon Prime. How do you order Bezos on a two hour delivery?  Oh wait!  HAVE HARRY DO IT!!!!  "Honey, the servants need 18 toilet brushes and they need them now!!  Make it happen!!"  And Harry drops a dime to Jeff. If it doesn't work, MM will need all sorts of AMZN orders NOW. Preferably by AMZN private helicopter landing in the backyard. Meghan won't even care if Jeff doesn't ask her if she's OK.  She'll be in LERVE!


----------



## chowlover2

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


I hope you feel much better soon!


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Missed you, glad to see you back. Heal well, stay safe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Wha? NOOOOOOO!  You CAN'T leave this thread!!  We'd miss you and have to start another thread about MM's dopey missteps. Not that it can't be done....but still.
> 
> Have a godspeed recovery. With a fine cocktail. And if you're advised not to have a cocktail.....just.....yet..... then I'll have one for you! Do get well!


Oh, please do!!!!!  Actually, I’ve already told the HB that he better have the Champers cold and ready to pop when I get home, although at this point, one glass will likely knock me out.


----------



## bag-mania

Where do we begin with this?












						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
					

"They’re being naive as they have been about lots of things in that they don’t realize that a big company like Netflix is going to want its pint of blood."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Where do we begin with this?
> 
> View attachment 4913066
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
> 
> 
> "They’re being naive as they have been about lots of things in that they don’t realize that a big company like Netflix is going to want its pint of blood."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Wait, so M&H want to make a drama, as in series, and not a movie, about the Royals? What do they plan on doing? a re-hash of Dynasty casting Brits instead of Americans in Denver?  Will Joan Collins play QEII??  Will Christopher Plummer play Prince Philip? (John Forsyth is dead) not many 90 + year old actors left. Meghan will want someone very homely to play Kate. Will one of the Kardashian's play Meghan? No....even they wouldn't stoop that low. Are M&H going to insist that Netflix ax most of their other shows? 

Is this really more of a strategy for M&H to reneg on the Netflix deal to keep the money and not be obligated to do anything? If it's legal to do so and M&H win the court case it'd inevitably spawn, then I'd have to hand it to the connivers.  On the other hand, it'd be like the organizers of the Triple Crown get to disqualify the Kentucky Derby winner from competing in the Preakness or Belmont Stakes. I think Netflix holds the cards here. If this wasn't in the what must have been a 500 page contract, then, no dice. Either that or Netflix has crappy lawyers.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Where do we begin with this?
> 
> View attachment 4913066
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
> 
> 
> "They’re being naive as they have been about lots of things in that they don’t realize that a big company like Netflix is going to want its pint of blood."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Levin's statement is perfect, but I don't believe they are being naives. MM knows very well what Nflix expects from them and is ready to provide. Disgusting!

"I think the way that he has left the Royal Family, the way he did it, and he’s changed. He’s almost unrecognizable from Prince Harry I spent a lot of time with. *But I think, you know, Meghan is desperate to earn lots of money *and Netflix offered them something. I think they’re being naive as they have been about lots of things in that they don’t realize that a big company like Netflix is going to want its pint of blood.* They’re going to delve in and get a lot of information that will absolutely decry the Royal Family."*


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Where do we begin with this?
> 
> View attachment 4913066
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
> 
> 
> "They’re being naive as they have been about lots of things in that they don’t realize that a big company like Netflix is going to want its pint of blood."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



I call BS.... I‘m pretty certain the Crown was always going to end. It’s hit the modern era. We‘re currently living it and Will and Kate etc are alive and well.... dramatizing them and replacing them with actors would be stupid. Also, the Crown is dramatized. Making the stories interesting is affecting real is affecting people who are alive, they are opening themselves up to liability too. (Are we going to have some fake Pippa jealousy? They going to fake making her rear bigger in the dress? ) it’d be like the Hallmark movies of Harry and Meghan’s romance.... bad. 

Even if they supposedly agreed, it was because it was ending anyway. If Netflix was pulling the funding, they would have tried to jump to Hulu or Amazon to stay on and finish out the story if they wanted to continue it.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Get well soon @CeeJay


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Where do we begin with this?
> 
> View attachment 4913066
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
> 
> 
> "They’re being naive as they have been about lots of things in that they don’t realize that a big company like Netflix is going to want its pint of blood."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Seems like some time back I read how the series would end before MM and JCMH‘s great love story and wedding.  Hard to believe MM would pass up an opportunity for more mud slinging if actually given a choice.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


I hope for your speedy recovery! tPF needs you 

I'm sure the Grifters will do something re: Thanksgiving Day that will be "leaked" and commented on by us here--providing you some entertainment.


----------



## Tootsie17

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


I wondered where you were.  I missed your sharp wit. Wishing you well as you recover.


----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> Oh, please do!!!!!  Actually, I’ve already told the HB that he better have the Champers cold and ready to pop when I get home, although at this point, one glass will likely knock me out.



 Cheers to you @CeeJay and get well soon!!


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> Same rules for certain towns/villages in New England, but if you purchase a house that is part of a “historic walk” (Salem MA), and visitors walking around can view inside the house, then the inside must also be of “the period”. A dear friend purchased a house in the historic section of Salem, MA .. and not only did the interior visible to the public have to be of period, so did the doggone interior paint!  She had to buy special milk-based paint in order to paint the main living area (which was GORGEOUS)!


I would love to visit Salem and other historical sites in New England! So far I've only visited ones in Virginia--Jamestown, Colonial Williamsburg (At Christmas time; I was in heaven.) and Mount Vernon.

I've family in Alexandria and love the colonial areas. In fact today would be the day I'd be on my way to the airport for my annual flight to Reagan, but the current situation changed those plans.

Sorry for the detour but your description of Salem brought my tendency towards historical geekiness to the forefront.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why am I so surprised...apparently really nobody associated with them has any kind of moral compass that's not swiftly overridden by opportunism.
> 
> Frogmore Cottage Interior Designer Sued for Abandoning Other Client


Does not surprise me ... decorating &  construction is a slow process with waiting lists in the UK. The American way is to try to circumvent the system by paying more to get to the top of lists. Madonna found out this does not work in the UK where you cant just throw money at a task to jump to the front of the queue.


----------



## Chanbal

On Bezos again! I wouldn't be surprised if Arch*** (aka MM) is trying to get funds from the current Bezos's charity spree to nonprofits. She may be able to point out that Harry and Bezos have a common interest/threat: 

"While Jeff Bezos spends billions on his 'Earth Fund,' Amazon is reportedly monitoring climate change groups including *Greta Thunberg*'s as potential threats"* 

Where the money is!*

@CeeJay We need to be creative to keep you entertained. The new PR team is working hard on the MM image rescue assignment, and MM&H are not making Yahoo or DM front page these days.


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> THANK YOU!  Still in a post-surgical Acute Rehab Facility, so let me say this ... THANK YOU ALL FOR KEEPING ME ENTERTAINED!!!


Get well soon, CeeJay!


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> I hope for your speedy recovery! tPF needs you
> 
> I'm sure the Grifters will do something re: Thanksgiving Day that will be "leaked" and commented on by us here--providing you some entertainment.


You betcha!  I’m sure Chef Meghan will make sure to publicize her OUTSTANDING Thanksgiving menu, which should be interesting.

From what I recall of the Real Housewives of BH franchise, I recall seeing Yolanda (the 4th Mrs. Foster) having many “My King” (yes - that’s what she called him) celebrations at Wallys in BH (a very nice place albeit $$$$). Wallys has a huge Wine Menu and oftentimes (used to) have wine tasting or pairings dinners, but I always recall that it was HEAVY on the Meat, Meat and Meat side (I used to have a hard time finding a main course)!  Remember, David is Canadian, Harry is a Brit .. so how much those two really going to care about a “traditional” Thanksgiving dinner?  Plus, knowing David’s penchant for Wine (he considers himself quite the Wine connoisseur), I bet there will be lots of Vino being poured. Poor Harry will probably get Meghan’s hand over his Wine Glass after one pour.  Oh, to be a fly on the wall ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Get well soon @CeeJay


@CeeJay good vibes are sent to you
It is Thanksgiving and I am thankful for the wit and humour you sprinkle here, thank you, miss you


----------



## CeeJay

Mendocino said:


> I would love to visit Salem and other historical sites in New England! So far I've only visited ones in Virginia--Jamestown, Colonial Williamsburg (At Christmas time; I was in heaven.) and Mount Vernon.
> 
> I've family in Alexandria and love the colonial areas. In fact today would be the day I'd be on my way to the airport for my annual flight to Reagan, but the current situation changed those plans.
> 
> Sorry for the detour but your description of Salem brought my tendency towards historical geekiness to the forefront.


Let me know when you want to visit the various places, as I can provide you with tons of info given that my father was both a Revolutionary and Civil War scholar.  He was very proud to have relatives fight in both wars.


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> Let me know when you want to visit the various places, as I can provide you with tons of info given that my father was both a Revolutionary and Civil War scholar.  He was very proud to have relatives fight in both wars.


Thank you so much!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> On Bezos again! I wouldn't be surprised if Arch*** (aka MM) is trying to get funds from the current Bezos's charity spree to nonprofits. She may be able to point out that Harry and Bezos have a common interest/threat:
> 
> "While Jeff Bezos spends billions on his 'Earth Fund,' Amazon is reportedly monitoring climate change groups including *Greta Thunberg*'s as potential threats"*
> 
> Where the money is!*
> 
> @CeeJay We need to be creative to keep you entertained. The new PR team is working hard on the MM image rescue assignment, and MM&H are not making Yahoo or DM front page these days.


Amazon is also wasteful. Returned products are sent by the truckloads to landfills. I mean why not send them to the poor/charities?
*
Hidden cameras and secret GPS trackers reveal that some products sent back to Amazon Canada are being liquidated by the truckload and even destroyed or sent to the landfill.

VIDEO

*


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Amazon is also wasteful. Returned products are sent by the truckloads to landfills. I mean why not send them to the poor/charities?
> 
> *Hidden cameras and secret GPS trackers reveal that some products sent back to Amazon Canada are being liquidated by the truckload and even destroyed or sent to the landfill.
> 
> VIDEO*


I agree with you, and I'm not promoting Amaz0n here. My post is only meant to be a joke about people desperate to "earn lots of money" and where the money is.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Does not surprise me ... decorating &  construction is a slow process with waiting lists in the UK. The American way is to try to circumvent the system by paying more to get to the top of lists. Madonna found out this does not work in the UK where you cant just throw money at a task to jump to the front of the queue.


HA HA HA - you just reminded me of the very oft comment made to many of my US Colleagues, who would try various ways to get in front and would be told “MIND THE QUEUE”!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Amazon is also wasteful. Returned products are sent by the truckloads to landfills. I mean why not send them to the poor/charities?
> 
> *Hidden cameras and secret GPS trackers reveal that some products sent back to Amazon Canada are being liquidated by the truckload and even destroyed or sent to the landfill.
> 
> VIDEO*



There are plenty of faulty and broken products on Amazon et al.  They should not ship those to the charities.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA - you just reminded me of the very oft comment made to many of my US Colleagues, who would try various ways to get in front and would be told “MIND THE QUEUE”!


Oh yes, I've been known to utter the immortal line "excuuuuse me, there is a queue."


----------



## Chanbal

Even DM is recycling news:
*Megxit: The Final Chapter?** Removal van arrives at empty Frogmore Cottage seven months after Harry and Meghan left UK for LA... as Princess Eugenie moves in*
Frogmore was given to Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, by the Queen in April 2018 a month before their wedding. Among the fittings in the cottage is a £5,000 designer bath produced by luxury firm William Holland, a supplier for the Soho House chain, which is made of gleaming copper and took 120 man hours to be hand beaten out. 

Though, some of the comments are fun and show their international reputation:


----------



## bag-mania

Most US publications are still reporting that Harry and Meghan are lending the house to Eugenie and her husband. I take it that none of the UK media are phrasing it that way?


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Even DM is recycling news:
> *Megxit: The Final Chapter?** Removal van arrives at empty Frogmore Cottage seven months after Harry and Meghan left UK for LA... as Princess Eugenie moves in*
> Frogmore was given to Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, by the Queen in April 2018 a month before their wedding. Among the fittings in the cottage is a £5,000 designer bath produced by luxury firm William Holland, a supplier for the Soho House chain, which is made of gleaming copper and took 120 man hours to be hand beaten out.
> 
> Though, some of the comments are fun and show their international reputation:
> View attachment 4913685
> 
> View attachment 4913686
> 
> View attachment 4913688
> 
> View attachment 4913689
> 
> View attachment 4913690





bag-mania said:


> Most US publications are still reporting that Harry and Meghan are lending the house to Eugenie and her husband. I take it that none of the UK media are phrasing it that way?



My local (US) news this morning said that Andrew is actually the one who paid the Frogmore renovation costs in September. It makes sense as it would benefit Eugenie. Has anyone else heard that?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Now I’m wondering if they said the renovation costs “had been paid” vs “we paid for xx” and Charles or Andrew actually paid.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> My local (US) news this morning said that Andrew is actually the one who paid the Frogmore renovation costs in September. It makes sense as it would benefit Eugenie. Has anyone else heard that?



Yes, I saw that it was actually Andrew too. USA Today reported it as follows:

In September, Andrew repaid 2.4 million pounds ($3.2 million) in British taxpayers’ money that was used to renovate the home before they moved.  Harry had made a contribution to the Sovereign Grant, the public money that goes to the royal family, which “fully covered the necessary renovation costs of Frogmore Cottage," according to the spokesperson.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Yes, I saw that it was actually Andrew too. US Today reported it as follows:
> 
> In September, Andrew repaid 2.4 million pounds ($3.2 million) in British taxpayers’ money that was used to renovate the home before they moved.  Harry had made a contribution to the Sovereign Grant, the public money that goes to the royal family, which “fully covered the necessary renovation costs of Frogmore Cottage," according to the spokesperson.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice



I just found the same article and was getting ready to post it!


----------



## marietouchet

Awesome example of different cultures - 16 million POUND house in London, location, location , location ...

5000 Sq ft, incl basements,  house is only 20 ft wide !, 5 beds but gotta walk up 4 flights 

Compare to Montecito ..... 




London mansion once owned by scandalous Duchess goes on sale
https://mol.im/a/8961933


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

More lies, deceptions, half truths, etc.  H&M must find it all so comical.
I am over them. No amount of PR or charity photos can rehabilitate their image in my book. Yours?




bag-mania said:


> Yes, I saw that it was actually Andrew too. USA Today reported it as follows:
> 
> In September, Andrew repaid 2.4 million pounds ($3.2 million) in British taxpayers’ money that was used to renovate the home before they moved.  Harry had made a contribution to the Sovereign Grant, the public money that goes to the royal family, which “fully covered the necessary renovation costs of Frogmore Cottage," according to the spokesperson.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> Even DM is recycling news:
> *Megxit: The Final Chapter?** Removal van arrives at empty Frogmore Cottage seven months after Harry and Meghan left UK for LA... as Princess Eugenie moves in*
> Frogmore was given to Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, by the Queen in April 2018 a month before their wedding. Among the fittings in the cottage is a £5,000 designer bath produced by luxury firm William Holland, a supplier for the Soho House chain, which is made of gleaming copper and took 120 man hours to be hand beaten out.
> 
> Though, some of the comments are fun and show their international reputation:
> View attachment 4913685
> 
> View attachment 4913686
> 
> View attachment 4913688
> 
> View attachment 4913689
> 
> View attachment 4913690


I join my voice to this fellow Californian and ask QE to take them back or give them an island.


@CarryOn2020 Their new PR-team may be efficient, but it is going to be very difficult to erase from our memories the 2724 pages of this thread.


----------



## chowlover2

Meghan has revealed she suffered a miscarriage in July...


----------



## chicinthecity777

The below is the entire article in bbc.co.uk: 
*Meghan Markle: Duchess of Sussex tells of miscarriage 'pain and grief'*
*The Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, has revealed she had a miscarriage in July, writing in an article of feeling "an almost unbearable grief".*
"I knew, as I clutched my firstborn child, that I was losing my second," Meghan said in a piece for the New York Times.
Meghan and Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, had their first child, Archie, on 6 May 2019.
Meghan wrote that "loss and pain have plagued every one of us in 2020".
She said in a morning in July this year, she felt a "sharp cramp" and hours later, from a hospital bed, watched "my husband's heart break as he tried to hold the shattered pieces of mine".


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Most US publications are still reporting that Harry and Meghan are lending the house to Eugenie and her husband. I take it that none of the UK media are phrasing it that way?


I have not seen anything on this reported by main stream media here in the UK. H&M don't own Frogmore Cottage and therefore cannot lend to anybody.


----------



## HermesHope

The news seems to have hit the BBC and the small local papers so far. The “big guns” will soon get the story online.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why publicize it now?  Hmmmm.
It is an opinion piece in the New York Times.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why publicize it now?  Hmmmm.


I was thinking the same.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So much pompeous word salad even in a moment of grief...and how bad have you damaged your public image if the first thought after hearing someone's sad news is not feeling sorry for them but wondering if it's even true? So many unnessary lies to make themselves look better or more interesting, I'm not convinced. Which is obviously a horrible thing to say.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much pompeous word salad even in a moment of grief...and how bad have you damaged your public image if the first thought after hearing someone's sad news is not feeling sorry for them but wondering if it's even true? So many unnessary lies to make themselves look better or more interesting, I'm not convinced. Which is obviously a horrible thing to say.


Again I thought that too, my first thought was lies. 
My second thought(s) were if indeed this is true, thankfully she didn't announce it just after Beatrice  and Edo got married or just after Eugenie and Jack announced they were having a baby.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why announce something this personal in the NYT? During Thanksgiving?  Right after the FrogCott move?
It’s all so suspicious. Nothing sympathetic about these two.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much pompeous word salad even in a moment of grief...and how bad have you damaged your public image if the first thought after hearing someone's sad news is not feeling sorry for them but wondering if it's even true? So many unnessary lies to make themselves look better or more interesting, I'm not convinced. Which is obviously a horrible thing to say.





Sharont2305 said:


> Again I thought that too, my first thought was lies.
> My second thought(s) were if indeed this is true, thankfully she didn't announce it just after Beatrice  and Edo got married or just after Eugenie and Jack announced they were having a baby.


The reason I was sceptical was that I clicked on the NYT article and read the title (and I stopped there) where it ended "are you OK?". I was like really? you are using this to justify how you behaved in Africa?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nothing says “privacy” more than an opinion piece in the NYT about her miscarriage. And they are suing the paps for publishing photos????


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice she still refers to Archie in the 3rd person. 









						Meghan Markle reveals she has suffered a miscarriage
					

The Duchess of Sussex has said she lost her second child after feeling a 'sharp cramp' while changing her son Archie's nappy in July.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_Other royal women have experienced the loss of an unborn baby, with the Queen's granddaughter Zara Tindall suffering two miscarriages before having her second child.

The Countess of Wessex lost her first baby in December 2001 when she was airlifted to hospital after suffering a potentially life-threatening ectopic pregnancy.

An estimated one in four pregnancies ends in a miscarriage according to the charity Tommy's, which funds research into miscarriages, stillbirths and premature births, with most women losing their babies during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy._


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much pompeous word salad even in a moment of grief...and how bad have you damaged your public image if the first thought after hearing someone's sad news is not feeling sorry for them but wondering if it's even true? So many unnessary lies to make themselves look better or more interesting, I'm not convinced. Which is obviously a horrible thing to say.



I have untold sympathy for those experiencing genuine grief and bereavement. 

But I'm obviously a total beach and the most PR/media-cynical person on the planet.

Timing is everything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

No MM, “are you ok” didn’t resonate, we were shocked you were complaining nobody had asked as you  if you were ok in a part of the world where so many have REAL problems.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why announce something this personal in the NYT? During Thanksgiving?  Right after the FrogCott move?
> It’s all so suspicious. Nothing sympathetic about these two.



Because she saw that Chrissy Tiegen and Christina Perri got favorable response to their losses, so why not use it?

What happened to the privacy they/she so desperately fled the UK for?


----------



## 1LV

I am truly sorry for MM and JCMH, and for anyone who suffers a miscarriage.  I can’t imagine the devastation, nor do I want to try.  I hope she isn’t so calculating as to milk this for all she can, but seeing the bit about “are you ok” and the timing of the news release sure makes me wonder.


----------



## Aimee3

I wonder if she’s pregnant now (again) since they wanted and were granted a nine month pause on the trial in the UK?


----------



## McP82

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is realtor.com’s review of NottCott — interesting observations for 2017
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's New Home a Dump?! 5 Huge Flaws in Nottingham Cottage
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's impending marriage has the world buzzing about their future home: Nottingham Cottage. Sorry to say, it's a dump.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.realtor.com


Well, that's a cheap shot coming from realtor.com, if they were the ones selling it in the first place, they wouldn't talk about it like that. But in any case, dissing those who don't like may be cool for a rapper, but coming from a real estate company, it sounds quite unprofessional... I mean, for example, I've sometimes mentioned tranio.com in press reviews I've done at work, as well as some other brokers I'm not mentioning that often, and I've never seen that sort of article from other sites.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> The reason I was sceptical was that I clicked on the NYT article and read the title (and I stopped there) where it ended "are you OK?". I was like really? you are using this to justify how you behaved in Africa?



But she was exhausted because she was breastfeeding...like millions of mothers who go back to work fulltime days or mere weeks after having a baby or take care of their toddlers on top of the newborn, all while not having the luxury of someone who cleans and cooks and takes the baby off you so you can rest. Cry me a river. Also, she obviously didn't breastfeed for very long if at all, or what did Archie eat while she was flying to the US to attend a tennis match?


----------



## rose60610

I skimmed the NYT article. It's covered under "Europe" (Europe?). You're telling me she went to the hospital without the paparazzi knowing about it? OK. So we had a P**** get nominated more than once for a Nobel Peace Prize and it wasn't mentioned once in the NYT.  Meghan needs a (IMO-fabricated) sympathy piece after her Cemetery-Gate disaster in time for Thanksgiving dinner talk and it's publicized all over. Media. "Journalists" these day are bigger "news" fellators than porn stars about who they write about and how. They might as well be sucking on huge vibrators as they type their stories.


----------



## mshermes

If she indeed suffered a miscarriage, I see no need to announce it in the NYT worded like a novella. The whole thing is not sitting right with me as she is all about attention and staying “relevant”. I am skeptical.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I guess at this stage I am biased so I see H&M can do no right. I personally find it tacky airing a miscarriage on national and international media. But then maybe I am too old fashioned and find all the over sharing all very tacky. 

I have a lot of sympathy for her miscarriage but not much for actually writing a piece about it in the media.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duchess of Cambridge Early Years Initiative and her photography competition, Diana Documentary, Queen and Prince Philip Anniversary showing a card made by three of their Great Grandchildren, Eugenie pregnancy, Charles’ birthday, Lupo passing away- feeling a bit left out of it all me thinks, and on the back of the recent disastrous Remembrance photos at the Cemetery.
"Perfect" timing I'd say. Four months after it happened.


----------



## chicinthecity777

If this is the best her new PR team could come up with then she really has no hope whatsoever. 

Also, this will do no favours for her law suit against DM. This is worse than Finding Freebies book. She wrote the intimate details herself and published it!


----------



## scarlet555

Talking about one’s miscarriage is anyone’s right, but ... for someone who screams they want privacy it’s a bit soon and in the tone of the essay, it sounds like she wants to be a spokesperson for it rather than share her story with the already existing platform.  I find her story very different than the story of Christie Teigen, and even as she uses the first person in her essay, it sounds like a third person description.  Her essay is full of imagery rather than emotion.   I am so biased though... everyone deals with grief differently I just don’t find anything she does genuine... she needs a new writer


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Please delete.


----------



## tiktok

chicinthecity777 said:


> If this is the best her new PR team could come up with then she really has no hope whatsoever.
> 
> Also, this will do no favours for her law suit against DM. This is worse than Finding Freebies book. She wrote the intimate details herself and published it!



It’s actually a decent “Thanksgiving in a pandemic while also raising awareness for women suffering miscarriages” piece. But a priceless PR piece in terms of impressing Americans who don’t normally read the gossip media.

I gotta say the transformation  of “are you ok” from a hallmark of tone-deafness in Africa to a compassionate show of concern for others in a pandemic/election year was brilliant indeed.

And yes it’s very sad that they’ve heartlessly exploited so many causes and situations for their own benefit that we can’t take it as a a given that she’s sharing her private pain for altruistic reasons only.

Cynicism aside, the responses are actually very moving. Anyone who has gone through such a situation has my full sympathy including H&M.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies, deceptions, half truths, etc.  H&M must find it all so comical.
> I am over them No amount of PR or charity photos can rehabilitate their image in my book. Yours?


With you, they are repulsive.
i know I sound  brutal but even the miscarriage story seems played. meaghan has to CONTROL it all. Why not a heartfelt announcement in July, why 4 months later when coincidentally her popularity has definitely deteriorated. And another hypocritical statement about reaching out.....go call your father MeMeMe


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice she still refers to Archie in the 3rd person.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals she has suffered a miscarriage
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has said she lost her second child after feeling a 'sharp cramp' while changing her son Archie's nappy in July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Other royal women have experienced the loss of an unborn baby, with the Queen's granddaughter Zara Tindall suffering two miscarriages before having her second child.
> 
> The Countess of Wessex lost her first baby in December 2001 when she was airlifted to hospital after suffering a potentially life-threatening ectopic pregnancy.
> 
> An estimated one in four pregnancies ends in a miscarriage according to the charity Tommy's, which funds research into miscarriages, stillbirths and premature births, with most women losing their babies during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy._



Zara and Sophie have class - the drivel that has just been disclosed reads like a badly written novel and anyway has she ever changed a nappy or really cuddled Archie ??? Publicity seeking takes a new low seriously poor me me me again while hundreds of thousands are dying of a killer disease why don't they just shut the hell up live the quiet private life they said they wanted and leave us alone


----------



## lulilu

I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh


It sounds like a very badly written script of a D TV movie! SMH!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maybe I’ve become so cynical, that I don’t believe her miscarriage story at all.  I even said weeks back when people speculated she’s avoiding going to the trial by claiming she’s pregnant, that she’ll “lose” the baby.

These people shielded the birth of their son by lying she’s in labor hours after she’d actually given birth, want privacy but do everything they can to get attention, and now this?  Why write about having a miscarriage in July when it’s now Thanksgiving?  She went around getting attention at Eugenie’s wedding by announcing her zygote.  If she’d actually been pregnant, I don’t believe for one second they wouldn’t have tried to capitalize on it back then.  I really don’t give one $hit about her “miscarriage” experience.  As usual, she’s looking to gain sympathy, but as far as I’m concerned, she’s cried wolf one too many times.


----------



## Chanbal

The lies coming from MM have been so many that I'm not commenting on the accuracy of the article. Did she write it herself? Is this publication the work (contacts) of her new PR-team? 

So many mothers have had miscarriages, and I feel sorry for them all. Though, the timing of this article is deplorable imo. It reads like one of their many staged activities. And of course, MM sends her opinion to an American newspaper using what it seems her only credential, the duchess tile!


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh


Nope


----------



## lulilu

I just read an article on Twitter that they announced she was expecting Archie during a week dedicated to miscarriage loss.


----------



## Jayne1

I find it hard to believe there was a real baby in that bump she cradled for 9 months, so believing she had a miscarriage? No.


----------



## purseinsanity

Ugh I broke my own rule and actually read the drivel.  “As I lay in a hospital bed”?  If she had, they’d have paps documenting everything.  “I clutched my infant son”?  He’s over a year old!  That’s not an infant any more!  And we are back to asking others “If they’re ok”.  This woman is utterly disgusting and repulsive.  Using others experiences and claiming to have gone through it for positive publicity?  I hope karma comes back to bite her in the a$$ one day.  Now she’ll be seen “volunteering” at The March of Dimes for all of five minutes.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I just read an article on Twitter that they announced she was expecting Archie during a week dedicated to miscarriage loss.


That I believe!  These two are as gone deaf as they come!


----------



## purseinsanity

It also claims they “informed their families”.  Who did you inform MeGain?  Doria?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh



Yeah...no.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I’ve become so cynical, that I don’t believe her miscarriage story at all.  I even said weeks back when people speculated she’s avoiding going to the trial by claiming she’s pregnant, that she’ll “lose” the baby.
> 
> These people shielded the birth of their son by lying she’s in labor hours after she’d actually given birth, want privacy but do everything they can to get attention, and now this?  Why write about having a miscarriage in July when it’s now Thanksgiving?  She went around getting attention at Eugenie’s wedding by announcing her zygote.  If she’d actually been pregnant, I don’t believe for one second they wouldn’t have tried to capitalize on it back then.  I really don’t give one $hit about her “miscarriage” experience.  As usual, she’s looking to gain sympathy, but as far as I’m concerned, she’s cried wolf one too many times.



I think you typed out what several of us think. The thing is, I still can't see how Harry could approve of making this up for basically Facebook likes. Dunno. It's very confusing.


----------



## LittleStar88

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh





chicinthecity777 said:


> It sounds like a very badly written script of a D TV movie! SMH!



Was going to say the whole scene paints a very dramatic picture, like something scripted.

I've had a miscarriage in the first trimester. It didn't make me fall down and sing a song but maybe my experience is not as dramatic as hers. So she and the baby just rolled around on the floor while she sang, rather than get up and phone the doctor right away? I think we are beyond needing to ask if she is ok - she isn't and should go get some mental help.

Miscarriage and loss can be horrible to experience, and I can't appreciate her need for attention by word salading her way for some attention.


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, I'll be a total ***** and say I think she's pulling a Courtney Stodden, faking a pregnancy and miscarriage for sympathy. She needs her "feel sorry for me, but aren't I so inspirational?" attention to make up for her recent cemetery gaffe.

Of course I cannot prove it but I actually took time out of my day to go back in the thread to see what she was doing in July (it's in the 2100–2200 range of pages). Among other things: she was giving an Instagram message for Harpers Bazaar, she did her big empowerment speech along with other female celebs for the Girls Up Summit, she and Harry were seen going to meetings in Beverly Hills in a "gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV", she was trying to keep her friends' identities secret in the lawsuit, Finding Freedom was about to come out (this was BEFORE they distanced themselves from it), she was complaining about Archie not having any friends because they were too famous to join a "Mommy and Me" class. What wasn't there in July was even the tiniest hint about a pregnancy.

For a woman who couldn't cradle her flat stomach enough in her first pregnancy, what are the chances she would have held on to this secret for four whole months? NIL! Maybe this miscarriage will be the reason they use to have a surrogate have a baby for them next year. We may be witnessing a background story being laid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Ugh I broke my own rule and actually read the drivel.  “As I lay in a hospital bed”?  If she had, they’d have paps documenting everything.  “I clutched my infant son”?  He’s over a year old!  That’s not an infant any more!  And we are back to asking others “If they’re ok”.  This woman is utterly disgusting and repulsive.  Using others experiences and claiming to have gone through it for positive publicity?  I hope karma comes back to bite her in the a$$ one day.  Now she’ll be seen “volunteering” at The March of Dimes for all of five minutes.



I browsed the article, and the way it is written is tacky and pretentious imo. 

Thought, it looks like they got what they wanted. The NYT comments (even the ones on DM) seem to be very positive. Should we congratulate her new PR-team?    

We need now a well-written article by Jan Moir to put all this in the right perspective.


----------



## scarlet555

elvisfan4life said:


> Zara and Sophie have class - the drivel that has just been disclosed reads like a badly written novel and anyway has she ever changed a nappy or really cuddled Archie ??? Publicity seeking takes a new low seriously *poor me* me me again while hundreds of thousands are dying of a killer disease why don't they just shut the hell up live the quiet private life they said they wanted and leave us alone



So F-ing overplayed!   I can't even believe I can't feel bad for her, and I actually cried reading Christie Teigen posts about her loss, albeit, it's a tad different- but I don't even like Christie is my point and I felt bad for her and John Legend!


----------



## 1LV

lulilu said:


> I just read an article on Twitter that they announced she was expecting Archie during a week dedicated to miscarriage loss.


Sounds about right.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Was going to say the whole scene paints a very dramatic picture, like something scripted.
> 
> I've had a miscarriage in the first trimester. It didn't make me fall down and sing a song but maybe my experience is not as dramatic as hers. So she and the baby just rolled around on the floor while she sang, rather than get up and phone the doctor right away? I think we are beyond needing to ask if she is ok - she isn't and should go get some mental help.
> 
> Miscarriage and loss can be horrible to experience, and I can't appreciate her need for attention by word salading her way for some attention.



I'm so sorry for your loss.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'll be a total ***** and say I think she's pulling a Courtney Stodden, faking a pregnancy and miscarriage for sympathy. She needs her "feel sorry for me, but aren't I so inspirational?" attention to make up for her recent cemetery gaffe.
> 
> Of course I cannot prove it but I actually took time out of my day to go back in the thread to see what she was doing in July (it's in the 2100–2200 range of pages). Among other things: she was giving an Instagram message for Harpers Bazaar, she did her big empowerment speech along with other female celebs for the Girls Up Summit, she and Harry were seen going to meetings in Beverly Hills in a "gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV", she was trying to keep her friends' identities secret in the lawsuit, Finding Freedom was about to come out (this was BEFORE they distanced themselves from it), she was complaining about Archie not having any friends because they were too famous to join a "Mommy and Me" class. What wasn't there in July was even the tiniest hint about a pregnancy.
> 
> For a woman who couldn't cradle her flat stomach enough in her first pregnancy, what are the chances she would have held on to this secret for four whole months? NIL! Maybe this miscarriage will be the reason they use to have a surrogate have a baby for them next year. We may be witnessing a background story being laid.



This crossed my mind. It was not like Chrissy Tiegen's situation where she was 20 weeks in and now they are using their experience to help Ronald McDonald House. Meghan is trolling for sympathy for herself with no interest in using it to give back somehow. I hate to feel this jaded towards MM, but she has put herself there.


----------



## 1LV

LittleStar88 said:


> Was going to say the whole scene paints a very dramatic picture, like something scripted.
> 
> I've had a miscarriage in the first trimester. It didn't make me fall down and sing a song but maybe my experience is not as dramatic as hers. So she and the baby just rolled around on the floor while she sang, rather than get up and phone the doctor right away? I *think we are beyond needing to ask if she is ok - she isn't and should go get some mental help.*
> 
> Miscarriage and loss can be horrible to experience, and I can't appreciate her need for attention by word salading her way for some attention.


Agree.  This is overboard even for her.


----------



## csshopper

Which hospital? When? 

It is utter claptrap that she dropped to the floor with her prop baby and sang a lullaby. Miscarriage pain is brutal and does she really think we believe she would sit there risking a bleed with him in her arms?  And no coincidence this appeared the same week as the Frogmore story. Eugenie and Jack and their baby get the home we worked so hard for, we had to leave because the meanies in the RF didn't like us, and now they have our home and a successful pregnancy and we don't. Victims once again, poor us!

As for dimwit, it is documented that his mother self harmed so maybe M's behavior is not as shocking to him as it might be to us. I think he has become so emasculated and continually stoked for anger against his family he will live by "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets." Just keep repeating it Harry.

I teared up reading the article and seeing the pictures of Chrissy and John, real people in real pain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> So F-ing overplayed!   I can't even believe I can't feel bad for her, and I actually cried reading Christie Teigen posts about her loss, albeit, it's a tad different- but I don't even like Christie is my point and I felt bad for her and John Legend!



I was raw and genuine. With Chrissy, I was one to raise an eyebrow when she couldn't stop posting pictures of her attending "business meetings" while on bedrest wearing nothing but panties claiming her employees were her friends (don't know, I rarely hang out with my friends nearly naked, pregnant or not), but when the news broke I really felt for her.

With Meghan, everything is a show, everything is directed, everything is exactly like she wants to be perceived, which leaves absolutely no room for real feelings. She is not a private person who wants to keep things to herself, she is a control freak who wants to paint herself in the best light possible.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> This crossed my mind. It was not like Chrissy Tiegen's situation where she was 20 weeks in and now they are using their experience to help Ronald McDonald House. Meghan is trolling for sympathy for herself with no interest in using it to give back somehow. I hate to feel this jaded towards MM, but she has put herself there.



It's genius in a diabolical way really. There is absolutely no risk of being exposed for her.

Nobody in the media is going to be insensitive enough to investigate and call her out for it. Thousands of women who have actually had miscarriages would come down on them like a ton of bricks if they tried.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why announce something this personal in the NYT? During Thanksgiving?  Right after the FrogCott move?
> It’s all so suspicious. Nothing sympathetic about these two.


right....why the public announcement?  and why doesn't she go ask her dad how he is?  he is elderly and has a heart condition.  she doesn't have it in her heart to show him some compassion?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was thinking hard what the "While I lay in a hospital bed" reminded me of. Anyone remember "While I was having lunch with Michelle ***** over my burgeoning belly"? Yeah.


----------



## bag-mania

Has anyone read the comments in the NYT? I feel sorry for all those women who have actually had miscarriages who were triggered by her editorial. I hate to think about them crying and reliving their own pain because of this piece.


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> So F-ing overplayed!   I can't even believe I can't feel bad for her, and I actually cried reading Christie Teigen posts about her loss, albeit, it's a tad different- but I don't even like Christie is my point and I felt bad for her and John Legend!


I did't follow Christie's social media but I assume she stuck to the subject - as opposed to making her miscarriage about the whole country/world and it's problems


----------



## marietouchet

Dawned on me, NY Times op-ed was required vehicle for communicating the story, she does not have a social media account, remember ??


----------



## Chanbal

Cavalier Girl said:


> I'm thinking Nutmeg and JCMH will participate is some kind of Thanksgiving feeding the homeless photo-op.....um, I mean charity.



I thought that this Thanksgiving would be uneventful for the Harkles. How I was wrong. They surpassed all expectations with today's NYT article.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Awareness Month
					

October is Pregnancy & Infant Loss Awareness Month If you or someone you care about has lost a child to stillbirth, miscarriage, SIDS, or any other cause at any point




					starlegacyfoundation.org
				




Just in case anyone has been triggered by this news, especially over a family holiday.  October was pregnancy & infant loss awareness month. The site has some helpful articles. Loss is always tragic, remember you are not alone.  Articles that trigger these emotions and memories are simply irresponsible. Shame on NYT for publishing it. H&M are crazy for causing this kind of disruption. I still blame Charles.

@bag-mania  totally agree — She is laying the groundwork for something. These two are never to be trusted.


----------



## bubablu

purseinsanity said:


> by announcing her zygote.


ROTFL ❤️


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> The reason I was sceptical was that I clicked on the NYT article and read the title (and I stopped there) where it ended "are you OK?". I was like really? you are using this to justify how you behaved in Africa?


SAME HERE .. it almost read to me as though she was desperately trying to justify that “are you OK” nonsense that happened.. how long ago?!?!  

Sad to say, but we used to have phrase in our family about “crying wolf” .. when so many lies have been perpetuated, it becomes hard to believe anything after that.


----------



## justwatchin

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh


Nope. I’m sorry that she experienced a miscarriage but her description of the event seems like she is trying her hand at dramatic writing(?) and not genuine.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Thank you all for writing all what I feel after reading this word vomit salad - it was nauseating. When will they stop?? 
Their hypocrisy is never-ending, so is their thirsty desperate need looking for head pats and validation. The article starts with the Daniel Steele-esque romance cheesy novel with "falling to the ground singing lullabuys  to Archie" then goes on to her political stomp and to the ARE YOU OK narrative back to the miscarriage and JCMH's white knuckles soaked in her tears. Is this an attempt for damage control for the tacky plotted look at us cemetary pics for the Veterans? And their  cry for privacy yet she spills I would assume, the most private time in a couple's life? But with Archie's birth, she was so secretive to even could not announce his birthdate at the time but now we get all the itty bitty details of a miscarriage?? It's just all so gross, the hypocrisy . I do hope they get backlash for this as so deserved. It comes to a point where you had to start to feel sorry for them because they are so off base and unhinged. Who acts like this??


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I did't follow Christie's social media but I assume she stuck to the subject - as opposed to making her miscarriage about the whole country/world and it's problems



That's how we know it's phony. If Meghan truly had a miscarriage the story would be ALL ABOUT MEGHAN AND HER FEELINGS!!! There wouldn't be any of that "we are the world, we're all in this together, list all events of the year" filler. 

But here's what gets me. What does Harry know? Is he in on the ruse?


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'll be a total ***** and say I think she's pulling a Courtney Stodden, faking a pregnancy and miscarriage for sympathy. She needs her "feel sorry for me, but aren't I so inspirational?" attention to make up for her recent cemetery gaffe.
> 
> Of course I cannot prove it but I actually took time out of my day to go back in the thread to see what she was doing in July (it's in the 2100–2200 range of pages). Among other things: she was giving an Instagram message for Harpers Bazaar, she did her big empowerment speech along with other female celebs for the Girls Up Summit, she and Harry were seen going to meetings in Beverly Hills in a "gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV", she was trying to keep her friends' identities secret in the lawsuit, Finding Freedom was about to come out (this was BEFORE they distanced themselves from it), she was complaining about Archie not having any friends because they were too famous to join a "Mommy and Me" class. What wasn't there in July was even the tiniest hint about a pregnancy.
> 
> For a woman who couldn't cradle her flat stomach enough in her first pregnancy, what are the chances she would have held on to this secret for four whole months? NIL! Maybe this miscarriage will be the reason they use to have a surrogate have a baby for them next year. We may be witnessing a background story being laid.


THANK YOU for your research, I was wondering the exact same thing!  If she was, in fact pregnant at that time, she would have been cradling that bump like it’s no tomorrow.. and I don’t recall seeing any pictures that made it appear that she was expecting.


----------



## sdkitty

WillstarveforLV said:


> Thank you all for writing all what I feel after reading this word vomit salad - it was nauseating. When will they stop??
> Their hypocrisy is never-ending, so is their thirsty desperate need looking for head pats and validation. The article starts with the Daniel Steele-esque romance cheesy novel with "falling to the ground singing lullabuys  to Archie" then goes on to her political stomp and to the ARE YOU OK narrative back to the miscarriage and JCMH's white knuckles soaked in her tears. Is this an attempt for damage control for the tacky plotted look at us cemetary pics for the Veterans? And their  cry for privacy yet she spills I would assume, the most private time in a couple's life? But with Archie's birth, she was so secretive to even could not announce his birthdate at the time but now we get all the itty bitty details of a miscarriage?? It's just all so gross, the hypocrisy . I do hope they get backlash for this as so deserved. It comes to a point where you had to start to feel sorry for them because they are so off base and unhinged. Who acts like this??


so far she seems to be getting lots of sympathy and positive attention....she picked something that few will dare accuse her of lying about


----------



## WillstarveforLV

justwatchin said:


> Nope. I’m sorry that she experienced a miscarriage but her description of the event seems like she is trying her hand at dramatic writing(?) and not genuine.


I totally got Danielle Steele vibes


----------



## CarryOn2020

WillstarveforLV said:


> I totally got Danielle Steele vibes



Me too, thank you for saying that.  
Wonder if she has ghost-written romance novels?


----------



## Sharont2305

WillstarveforLV said:


> I totally got Danielle Steele vibes


More like Mills & Boon. Not knocking M&B, I used to read a lot of them in my teens and early 20s.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diego Maradona, RIP, the beloved soccer player has passed away. 








						'I feel sick': Football legend Maradona dies of heart attack aged 60
					

The Argentinian football legend, 60, suffered a heart attack at home on Wednesday just two weeks after he was released from hospital following surgery for a bleed on his brain.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

Those two are among the most privileged people in this world yet all they want is sympathy that how they are so hard done by everybody. SMH! I do actually feel sorry for them because they will never be happy! Sad really!


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'll be a total ***** and say I think she's pulling a Courtney Stodden, faking a pregnancy and miscarriage for sympathy. She needs her "feel sorry for me, but aren't I so inspirational?" attention to make up for her recent cemetery gaffe.
> 
> Of course I cannot prove it but I actually took time out of my day to go back in the thread to see what she was doing in July (it's in the 2100–2200 range of pages). Among other things: she was giving an Instagram message for Harpers Bazaar, she did her big empowerment speech along with other female celebs for the Girls Up Summit, she and Harry were seen going to meetings in Beverly Hills in a "gas-guzzling Cadillac SUV", she was trying to keep her friends' identities secret in the lawsuit, Finding Freedom was about to come out (this was BEFORE they distanced themselves from it), she was complaining about Archie not having any friends because they were too famous to join a "Mommy and Me" class. What wasn't there in July was even the tiniest hint about a pregnancy.
> 
> For a woman who couldn't cradle her flat stomach enough in her first pregnancy, what are the chances she would have held on to this secret for four whole months? NIL! Maybe this miscarriage will be the reason they use to have a surrogate have a baby for them next year. We may be witnessing a background story being laid.


Thank you for going back and checking this thread. I couldn’t figure out how to do that except page by page and it would’ve taken a real long time so I gave up!  You are right. There would have been definite signs!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> More like Mills & Boon. Not knocking M&B, I used to read a lot of them in my teens and early 20s.



Her NYT piece reads like a pre-teen romance writer. Almost all 7th graders can write that stuff.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That's how we know it's phony. If Meghan truly had a miscarriage the story would be ALL ABOUT MEGHAN AND HER FEELINGS!!! There wouldn't be any of that "we are the world, we're all in this together, list all events of the year" filler.
> 
> But here's what gets me. What does Harry know? Is he in on the ruse?


well, this was an opportunity for her to not only share about her tragedy but also demonstrate again how "woke" she is


----------



## lanasyogamama

The pictures and video of Chrissy Teigan’s mom holding the baby were so heartbreaking.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I’ve become so cynical, that I don’t believe her miscarriage story at all.  I even said weeks back when people speculated she’s avoiding going to the trial by claiming she’s pregnant, that she’ll “lose” the baby.
> 
> These people shielded the birth of their son by lying she’s in labor hours after she’d actually given birth, want privacy but do everything they can to get attention, and now this?  Why write about having a miscarriage in July when it’s now Thanksgiving?  She went around getting attention at Eugenie’s wedding by announcing her zygote.  If she’d actually been pregnant, I don’t believe for one second they wouldn’t have tried to capitalize on it back then.  I really don’t give one $hit about her “miscarriage” experience.  As usual, she’s looking to gain sympathy, but as far as I’m concerned, she’s cried wolf one too many times.



Oh boy, I felt so conflicted reading the article about this (I didn’t read the original). I got the same weird vibes about the dramatic writing... it just seemed odd. But I am also sad for her if it’s true, which I will just take at face value as true until there’s proof otherwise.

I don’t think this is comparable to what Chrissy did because Chrissy tweets everything all the time... she’s built her community that way and so it wasn’t surprising she’d also use it to process some grief. Writing a nyt op Ed is just by definition asking for attention.. it’s not always a bad thing, like I learned a lot from Angelina Jolie’s op Ed awhile back about cancer. But the timing of this, the context of them “wanting privacy,” etc is just odd. Only thing I can think of is they wanted to put it out there themselves before it got leaked.. but why get so flowery? I don’t know, it’s all odd.

One thing I disagree with though is the opinion she shouldn’t have written it because it’s triggering... by that logic no one should write about the Holocaust, racism, rape, death. Etc. it’s all triggering! I don’t have a problem with people writing about trauma as a creative outlet, raise awareness, or whatever healing they need.


----------



## bag-mania

WillstarveforLV said:


> I totally got Danielle Steele vibes



I think of Meghan as being like every villainess in every soap opera ever aired. Always manipulating everyone around her, never getting caught, nobody sees through her facade. If it is like a soap someday she will make a big mistake and everyone will know what she is. Here's hoping truth follows fiction!


----------



## rose60610

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh



Agreed. As though servants would just let her lie there and listen to her sing? And she's "soothing-singing" while she's in supposed miscarriage pain? Everybody handles everything differently, but this is a stretch. And it's humiliating to women who suffered miscarriages, like, should they have been singing instead of crying in grief? Is this what Meghan is thankful for this Thanksgiving--another opportunity to hurl herself at people to make us feel pity instead of thankfulness? Like I said a few pages ago, MM could depress entire Disney World. Or at the very least, "announce" on any other day not celebrating gratitude. I looked at this thread during July also and noted the many things she was doing. Where did she slip in this trip to the hospital? She didn't cancel anything in July. Since when did she become master of the stiff upper lip that she condemned before? 

Any woman who the media whores do not drool over would have been investigated thoroughly and had witnesses/doctors/nurses dug up on her just to make sure she wasn't lying or exaggerating. Then the NYT and others would have relished blaming her busy schedule and bringing it on herself.  Since Meghan has the media trained, stay tuned for more bilge to be printed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why the NYT? 








						Opinion | Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers (Published 2017)
					

Have a point, and please get to it.




					www.nytimes.com
				






Spoiler: Tips for Op-Ed Writers



*Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers*
By Bret Stephens
Aug. 25, 2017
_As a summertime service for readers of the editorial pages who may wish someday to write for them, here’s a list of things I’ve learned over the years as an editor, op-ed writer and columnist._
1) A wise editor once observed that the easiest decision a reader can make is to stop reading. This means that every sentence has to count in grabbing the reader’s attention, starting with the first. Get to the point: Why does your topic matter? Why should it matter _today_? And why should the reader care what you, of all people, have to say about it?
2) The ideal reader of an op-ed is the ordinary subscriber — a person of normal intelligence who will be happy to learn something from you, provided he can readily understand what you’re saying. It is for a broad community of people that you must write, not the handful of fellow experts you seek to impress with high-flown jargon, the intellectual rival you want to put down with a devastating aside or the V.I.P. you aim to flatter with an oleaginous adjective.
3) The purpose of an op-ed is to offer an opinion. It is not a news analysis or a weighing up of alternative views. It requires a clear thesis, backed by rigorously marshaled evidence, in the service of a persuasive argument. Harry Truman once quipped that he wished he could hire only one-handed economists — just to get away from their “on the one hand, on the other” advice. Op-ed pages are for one-handed writers.





Getty Images
4) Authority matters. Readers will look to authors who have standing, either because they have expertise in their field or unique experience of a subject. If you can offer neither on a given topic you should not write about it, however passionate your views may be. Opinion editors are often keen on writers who can provide standing-with-surprise: the well-known environmentalist who supports nuclear power; the right-wing politician who favors transgender rights; the African-American scholar who opposes affirmative action.
5) Younger writers with no particular expertise or name recognition are likelier to get published by following an 80-20 rule: 80 percent new information; 20 percent opinion.
6) An op-ed should never be written in the style of a newspaper column. A columnist is a generalist, often with an idiosyncratic style, who _performs_ for his readers. An op-ed contributor is a specialist who seeks only to inform them.
7) Avoid the passive voice. Write declarative sentences. Delete useless or weasel words such as “apparently,” “understandable” or “indeed.” Project a tone of confidence, which is the middle course between diffidence and bombast.
8) Be _proleptic_, a word that comes from the Greek for “anticipation.” That is, get the better of the major objection to your argument by raising and answering it in advance. Always offer the other side’s strongest case, not the straw man. Doing so will sharpen your own case and earn the respect of your reader.
9) Sweat the small stuff. Read over each sentence — read it aloud — and ask yourself: Is this true? Can I defend every single word of it? Did I get the facts, quotes, dates and spellings exactly right? Yes, sometimes those spellings are hard: the president of Turkmenistan is Gurbanguly Malikguliyevich Berdymukhammedov. But, believe me, nothing’s worse than having to run a correction.
10) You’re not Proust. Keep your sentences short and your paragraphs tight.
11) A newspaper has a running conversation with its readers. Before pitching an op-ed you should know when the paper last covered that topic, and how your piece will advance the discussion.
12) Kill the clichés. If you want to give the reader an _outside the box _perspective on how to solve a _problem from hell_ by _reimagining_ _the_ _policy toolbox_ to include _stakeholder voices _— well, stop right there. Editors notice these sorts of expressions the way French chefs notice slices of Velveeta cheese: repulsive in themselves, and indicative of the mental slop that lies beneath.
13) If you find writing easy, you’re doing it wrong. One useful tip for aspiring writers comes from the film “A River Runs Through It,” in which the character played by Tom Skerritt, a Presbyterian minister with a literary bent, receives essays from his children and instructs them to make each successive draft “half as long.” If you want to write a successful 700-word op-ed, start with a longer draft, then cut and cut again. “The art of writing,” believed the minister, “lay in thrift.”
14) The editor is always right. She’s especially right when she axes the sentences or paragraphs of which you’re most proud. Treat your editor with respect by not second-guessing her judgment, belaboring her with requests for publication decisions or submitting sloppy work in the expectation that she will whip it into shape.
15) I’d wish you luck, but good writing depends on conscious choices, not luck. Make good choices.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her NYT piece reads like a pre-teen romance writer. Almost all 7th graders can write that stuff.


She probably thinks that Netflix will see it and think “wow - how profound, she’ll be able to write the drama-dies herself”!  Oy vay ..


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why publicize it now?  Hmmmm.
> It is an opinion piece in the New York Times.



I saw this and thought well she had to one up W & K's beloved dog. Timing is everything.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> I saw this and thought well she had to one up W & K's beloved dog. Timing is everything.


Which, incidentally, gained a lot more sympathy/empathy than Meggie has.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why the NYT?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers (Published 2017)
> 
> 
> Have a point, and please get to it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Tips for Op-Ed Writers
> 
> 
> 
> *Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers*
> By Bret Stephens
> Aug. 25, 2017
> _As a summertime service for readers of the editorial pages who may wish someday to write for them, here’s a list of things I’ve learned over the years as an editor, op-ed writer and columnist._
> 1) A wise editor once observed that the easiest decision a reader can make is to stop reading. This means that every sentence has to count in grabbing the reader’s attention, starting with the first. Get to the point: Why does your topic matter? Why should it matter _today_? And why should the reader care what you, of all people, have to say about it?
> 2) The ideal reader of an op-ed is the ordinary subscriber — a person of normal intelligence who will be happy to learn something from you, provided he can readily understand what you’re saying. It is for a broad community of people that you must write, not the handful of fellow experts you seek to impress with high-flown jargon, the intellectual rival you want to put down with a devastating aside or the V.I.P. you aim to flatter with an oleaginous adjective.
> 3) The purpose of an op-ed is to offer an opinion. It is not a news analysis or a weighing up of alternative views. It requires a clear thesis, backed by rigorously marshaled evidence, in the service of a persuasive argument. Harry Truman once quipped that he wished he could hire only one-handed economists — just to get away from their “on the one hand, on the other” advice. Op-ed pages are for one-handed writers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> 4) Authority matters. Readers will look to authors who have standing, either because they have expertise in their field or unique experience of a subject. If you can offer neither on a given topic you should not write about it, however passionate your views may be. Opinion editors are often keen on writers who can provide standing-with-surprise: the well-known environmentalist who supports nuclear power; the right-wing politician who favors transgender rights; the African-American scholar who opposes affirmative action.
> 5) Younger writers with no particular expertise or name recognition are likelier to get published by following an 80-20 rule: 80 percent new information; 20 percent opinion.
> 6) An op-ed should never be written in the style of a newspaper column. A columnist is a generalist, often with an idiosyncratic style, who _performs_ for his readers. An op-ed contributor is a specialist who seeks only to inform them.
> 7) Avoid the passive voice. Write declarative sentences. Delete useless or weasel words such as “apparently,” “understandable” or “indeed.” Project a tone of confidence, which is the middle course between diffidence and bombast.
> 8) Be _proleptic_, a word that comes from the Greek for “anticipation.” That is, get the better of the major objection to your argument by raising and answering it in advance. Always offer the other side’s strongest case, not the straw man. Doing so will sharpen your own case and earn the respect of your reader.
> 9) Sweat the small stuff. Read over each sentence — read it aloud — and ask yourself: Is this true? Can I defend every single word of it? Did I get the facts, quotes, dates and spellings exactly right? Yes, sometimes those spellings are hard: the president of Turkmenistan is Gurbanguly Malikguliyevich Berdymukhammedov. But, believe me, nothing’s worse than having to run a correction.
> 10) You’re not Proust. Keep your sentences short and your paragraphs tight.
> 11) A newspaper has a running conversation with its readers. Before pitching an op-ed you should know when the paper last covered that topic, and how your piece will advance the discussion.
> 12) Kill the clichés. If you want to give the reader an _outside the box _perspective on how to solve a _problem from hell_ by _reimagining_ _the_ _policy toolbox_ to include _stakeholder voices _— well, stop right there. Editors notice these sorts of expressions the way French chefs notice slices of Velveeta cheese: repulsive in themselves, and indicative of the mental slop that lies beneath.
> 13) If you find writing easy, you’re doing it wrong. One useful tip for aspiring writers comes from the film “A River Runs Through It,” in which the character played by Tom Skerritt, a Presbyterian minister with a literary bent, receives essays from his children and instructs them to make each successive draft “half as long.” If you want to write a successful 700-word op-ed, start with a longer draft, then cut and cut again. “The art of writing,” believed the minister, “lay in thrift.”
> 14) The editor is always right. She’s especially right when she axes the sentences or paragraphs of which you’re most proud. Treat your editor with respect by not second-guessing her judgment, belaboring her with requests for publication decisions or submitting sloppy work in the expectation that she will whip it into shape.
> 15) I’d wish you luck, but good writing depends on conscious choices, not luck. Make good choices.



Why the New York Times?  Because they have a reputation for integrity (not nearly as much today as they once had years ago, but enough). Many people will automatically believe the story is credible because NYT deemed to publish it. It’s a way to avoid uncomfortable questions being asked.


----------



## mshermes

No mention of it being a boy or girl. Hmmm.....


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> More like Mills & Boon. Not knocking M&B, I used to read a lot of them in my teens and early 20s.


I was thinking Georgette Heyer, I used to read her books a lot as a teen. 

His (JCMH) knuckles wet with OUR tears--this is privacy they craved?


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why the NYT?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers (Published 2017)
> 
> 
> Have a point, and please get to it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Tips for Op-Ed Writers
> 
> 
> 
> *Tips for Aspiring Op-Ed Writers*
> By Bret Stephens
> Aug. 25, 2017
> _As a summertime service for readers of the editorial pages who may wish someday to write for them, here’s a list of things I’ve learned over the years as an editor, op-ed writer and columnist._
> 1) A wise editor once observed that the easiest decision a reader can make is to stop reading. This means that every sentence has to count in grabbing the reader’s attention, starting with the first. Get to the point: Why does your topic matter? Why should it matter _today_? And why should the reader care what you, of all people, have to say about it?
> 2) The ideal reader of an op-ed is the ordinary subscriber — a person of normal intelligence who will be happy to learn something from you, provided he can readily understand what you’re saying. It is for a broad community of people that you must write, not the handful of fellow experts you seek to impress with high-flown jargon, the intellectual rival you want to put down with a devastating aside or the V.I.P. you aim to flatter with an oleaginous adjective.
> 3) The purpose of an op-ed is to offer an opinion. It is not a news analysis or a weighing up of alternative views. It requires a clear thesis, backed by rigorously marshaled evidence, in the service of a persuasive argument. Harry Truman once quipped that he wished he could hire only one-handed economists — just to get away from their “on the one hand, on the other” advice. Op-ed pages are for one-handed writers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> 
> 
> 4) Authority matters. Readers will look to authors who have standing, either because they have expertise in their field or unique experience of a subject. If you can offer neither on a given topic you should not write about it, however passionate your views may be. Opinion editors are often keen on writers who can provide standing-with-surprise: the well-known environmentalist who supports nuclear power; the right-wing politician who favors transgender rights; the African-American scholar who opposes affirmative action.
> 5) Younger writers with no particular expertise or name recognition are likelier to get published by following an 80-20 rule: 80 percent new information; 20 percent opinion.
> 6) An op-ed should never be written in the style of a newspaper column. A columnist is a generalist, often with an idiosyncratic style, who _performs_ for his readers. An op-ed contributor is a specialist who seeks only to inform them.
> 7) Avoid the passive voice. Write declarative sentences. Delete useless or weasel words such as “apparently,” “understandable” or “indeed.” Project a tone of confidence, which is the middle course between diffidence and bombast.
> 8) Be _proleptic_, a word that comes from the Greek for “anticipation.” That is, get the better of the major objection to your argument by raising and answering it in advance. Always offer the other side’s strongest case, not the straw man. Doing so will sharpen your own case and earn the respect of your reader.
> 9) Sweat the small stuff. Read over each sentence — read it aloud — and ask yourself: Is this true? Can I defend every single word of it? Did I get the facts, quotes, dates and spellings exactly right? Yes, sometimes those spellings are hard: the president of Turkmenistan is Gurbanguly Malikguliyevich Berdymukhammedov. But, believe me, nothing’s worse than having to run a correction.
> 10) You’re not Proust. Keep your sentences short and your paragraphs tight.
> 11) A newspaper has a running conversation with its readers. Before pitching an op-ed you should know when the paper last covered that topic, and how your piece will advance the discussion.
> 12) Kill the clichés. If you want to give the reader an _outside the box _perspective on how to solve a _problem from hell_ by _reimagining_ _the_ _policy toolbox_ to include _stakeholder voices _— well, stop right there. Editors notice these sorts of expressions the way French chefs notice slices of Velveeta cheese: repulsive in themselves, and indicative of the mental slop that lies beneath.
> 13) If you find writing easy, you’re doing it wrong. One useful tip for aspiring writers comes from the film “A River Runs Through It,” in which the character played by Tom Skerritt, a Presbyterian minister with a literary bent, receives essays from his children and instructs them to make each successive draft “half as long.” If you want to write a successful 700-word op-ed, start with a longer draft, then cut and cut again. “The art of writing,” believed the minister, “lay in thrift.”
> 14) The editor is always right. She’s especially right when she axes the sentences or paragraphs of which you’re most proud. Treat your editor with respect by not second-guessing her judgment, belaboring her with requests for publication decisions or submitting sloppy work in the expectation that she will whip it into shape.
> 15) I’d wish you luck, but good writing depends on conscious choices, not luck. Make good choices.



Why the NYT? You don't think Meghan would go to the Podunk Gazette, do you?  The NYT used to be a great newspaper, but it's spiraled into tabloidism as far as I'm concerned. I still like a lot of its sections, but when they focus on one of their darlings, you'd think the person walked on water and can do no wrong. Any transgressions are kindly ignored. I'm glad I got the most recent online pricing subscription at $1/week.  I was paying $28 a month but when I called to cancel they lowered it.


----------



## TC1

The series The Crown has been in the press a lot this week. Then they announce this, perhaps showing Netflix what type of coverage they can bring to the table?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

rose60610 said:


> I skimmed the NYT article. It's covered under "Europe" (Europe?). You're telling me she went to the hospital without the paparazzi knowing about it? OK. So we had a P**** get nominated more than once for a Nobel Peace Prize and it wasn't mentioned once in the NYT.  Meghan needs a (IMO-fabricated) sympathy piece after her Cemetery-Gate disaster in time for Thanksgiving dinner talk and it's publicized all over. Media. "Journalists" these day are bigger "news" fellators than porn stars about who they write about and how. They might as well be sucking on huge vibrators as they type their stories.



A quick google check reveals NYTs stories here and here, there are others as well but these were the first two in the search.

I realize this is a gossip thread, and it is such fun to speculate about H & M, but professional journalists are under attack so perhaps we can agree other alternative facts don't belong here?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I was thinking Georgette Heyer, I used to read her books a lot as a teen.
> 
> His (JCMH) knuckles wet with OUR tears--this is privacy they craved?



I loved Georgette Heyer books when I was a teen. In fact I picked one up at a used book sale a little while back. I'm hoping when I get around to reading it that I'll still love them!


----------



## bellecate

Saw this on Instagram. If they did suffer this loss, how sad that JCMH hadn’t shared it with his brother. Which family was it again that you had told M$H?  
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
  ETA this was from the Cambridge Instagram account.


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> No mention of it being a boy or girl. Hmmm.....



She deliberately said extremely little. You cannot be called out if you don't give any details. She could have been two weeks pregnant or six months. She rushed through about five sentences about the miscarriage at the very beginning and then spent over 15 paragraphs lamenting about all of the various ills currently in the world.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Why the New York Times?  Because they have a reputation for integrity (not nearly as much today as they once had years ago, but enough). Many people will automatically believe the story is credible because NYT deemed to publish it. It’s a way to avoid uncomfortable questions being asked.


What really pisses me off (and I know I’ve said this many times) is that they referred to her as “Duchess” .. STOP IT US MEDIA!!!!!!!  Especially in New York which was occupied by the British during the Revolutionary War and various skirmishes in/around the area .. how dare you????  Maybe it’s that I can trace my ancestry back to some that fought and lost their lives in our quest for independence that I’m more sensitive to it, but that would be like other countries who have fought for their independence and then referring to one of their citizens with a monarchist title from the the country that they fought against!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> so far she seems to be getting lots of sympathy and positive attention....she picked something that few will dare accuse her of lying about



Jup. Even German media is eating up that nonsense, titling "Meghan suffered a miscarriage while holding her son".


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. Even German media is eating up that nonsense, titling "Meghan suffered a miscarriage while holding her son".


I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she did have a misscarriage...the singing part seems contrived.  and, again, if she wants to talk about people asking how eachother are doing, what about your dad, Meghan?  Oh, would asking him how he's doing mess with your lawsuit?  the man raised her, educated her in fine schools, spoiled her, taught her she was the most special girl in the world.  now she can't forgive him while she is preaching to everyone else?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she did have a misscarriage...the singing part seems contrived.



It is entirely possible she did have a miscarriage even though I have my doubts. But the wording is so weird...like, did she cradle that poor kid until it was over or what? But yeah, collapsing on the floor and your first reaction is to sing a lullaby, come on now. Most people would cry out for help.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you for going back and checking this thread.* I couldn’t figure out how to do that except page by page* and it would’ve taken a real long time so I gave up!  You are right. There would have been definite signs!!!



Just for future reference, if you go to the page ranges at the top or bottom of the thread and click on the ellipsis [...] you can type in any page number you want. I had to guess about five or six times before I got to the right time period, but at least it was much quicker than going back a few pages at a time, which would take hours in this thread.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’ll believe her until there is evidence, but her writing definitely comes across as phony.  Assuming she did miscarry, that’s not how it went down.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she did have a misscarriage...the singing part seems contrived.  and, again, if she wants to talk about people asking how eachother are doing, what about your dad, Meghan?  Oh, would asking him how he's doing mess with your lawsuit?  the man raised her, educated her in fine schools, spoiled her, taught her she was the most special girl in the world.  now she can't forgive him while she is preaching to everyone else?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is entirely possible she did have a miscarriage even though I have my doubts. But the wording is so weird...like, did she cradle that poor kid until it was over or what? But yeah, collapsing on the floor and your first reaction is to sing a lullaby, come on now. Most people would cry out for help.



You are both far more gracious than I am. I would never say the horrible things I've said here if I thought for even a moment it could be true. The whole story is so contrived and phony I cannot suspend disbelief long enough to give her the benefit of the doubt. Kissing Harry's knuckles in the hospital? That's over the top for a Lifetime movie. 

I mean, come on, she's using her supposed personal tragedy to revisit her terribly self-absorbed Africa interview in an attempt to make it sound better. What woman who is in actual pain is focused on her image rehab? From the article:

“Are you OK?” a journalist asked me. I answered him honestly, not knowing that what I said would resonate with so many — new moms and older ones, and anyone who had, in their own way, been silently suffering. My off-the-cuff reply seemed to give people permission to speak their truth. But it wasn’t responding honestly that helped me most, it was the question itself.

Maybe doubting her makes me an evil person, if so I'll own it.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if MM&H had in mind Frogmore Cottage, Nott Cott, Charles's hefty allowance, and many other perks from being a member of the BRF, when they chose the article's title "The Losses We Share". 

Sorry about the cynicism, but...


----------



## Handbag1234

I have had many miscarriages and I reacted to each one slightly differently. In my personal experience there is no right or wrong way to deal with the physical loss or emotional
grief. I am inclined to believe her. MM’s way of writing isn’t for me, but if it brings the issues out into the open, and invites more open debate and discussion/acceptance that’s good in my opinion. Only a few people know what my husband and I went through and it was a lonely and isolating experience. I remain childless and have to regularly dodge the ‘why didn’t you have kids’ question, plus deal with many triggers and a form of PTSD.   I’m not here seeking pity or sympathy but to offer a different perspective.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she did have a misscarriage...the singing part seems contrived.  and, again, if she wants to talk about people asking how eachother are doing, what about your dad, Meghan?  Oh, would asking him how he's doing mess with your lawsuit?  the man raised her, educated her in fine schools, spoiled her, taught her she was the most special girl in the world.  now she can't forgive him while she is preaching to everyone else?


What slays me is that that she can't/wont speak with her dad and her dispute with him is over a staged phot shoot. OMG! The outrageous irony that she is mad because he had a staged photo shoot. Shake your head girl, maybe a few brain cells will stick together.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Just for future reference, if you go to the page ranges at the top or bottom of the thread and click on the ellipsis [...] you can type in any page number you want. I had to guess about five or six times before I got to the right time period, but at least it was much quicker than going back a few pages at a time, which would take hours in this thread.


Thank you. I had forgotten how!!!


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Saw this on Instagram. If they did suffer this loss, how sad that JCMH hadn’t shared it with his brother. Which family was it again that you had told M$H?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4914392
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA this was from the Cambridge Instagram account.


The Cambriges were very kind to post a nice picture and message. It's possible that she had one or more miscarriages in her life. Unfortunately, miscarriages are not uncommon. But all this drama in the article sounds phony as almost everything they do.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> Saw this on Instagram. If they did suffer this loss, how sad that JCMH hadn’t shared it with his brother. Which family was it again that you had told M$H?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4914392
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA this was from the Cambridge Instagram account.


That's not the Cambridges insta account.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> *She deliberately said extremely little. You cannot be called out if you don't give any details. *She could have been two weeks pregnant or six months. She rushed through about five sentences about the miscarriage at the very beginning and then spent over 15 paragraphs lamenting about all of the various ills currently in the world.



THIS.  All of it. Well said, @bag-mania
Waaaaay too much drama from MM, yet nothing from H.  Interesting.
Always remember, there is a time and place for everything.


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> That's not the Cambridges insta account.


My bad, it is the Cambridge Family account.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she did have a misscarriage...the singing part seems contrived.  and, again, if she wants to talk about people asking how eachother are doing, what about your dad, Meghan?  Oh, would asking him how he's doing mess with your lawsuit?  the man raised her, educated her in fine schools, spoiled her, taught her she was the most special girl in the world.  now she can't forgive him while she is preaching to everyone else?


THIS, THIS and THIS!!!  Every time I see that “are you OK?” BS, I think to myself .. hey, Meghan - why don’t you call your father and ask him that?? - HMMMMM?????  I wonder if she ever even asks Doria that question!


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> My bad, it is the Cambridge Family account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4914440


They wouldn't comment on something like that.


----------



## Chanbal

Good for QE!
*Queen Elizabeth Doesn't Intend to Comment on Meghan Markle's Miscarriage*
“The office of Queen Elizabeth said she would be making no comment on the ‘deeply personal’ issue. Prince Charles’ spokesperson said he would not be commenting on the ‘private’ issue. Prince William’s office said they would not comment.”

No comments!


----------



## bag-mania

The media blitz for this was prepared in advance. Expect numerous articles to appear in the coming weeks to rehash the _NYT_ piece. _Us_ magazine already has an article out from "sources" about how Doria was a tower of strength for Meghan. It also claims the royal family was told when it happened. 

As for the royal family members, they are “deeply saddened” about the _Suits_ alum’s July loss. “Harry told them early on when it happened, but as it’s such a private matter, they kept it to themselves,” the insider says. “[*Prince*] *Charles*, in particular, has been supporting the couple through their grief and regularly checks in on them.”










						Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Is Helping Her Heal After 'Painful Loss'
					

Doria Ragland has been 'a tower of strength’ for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry following their miscarriage, a source tells Us — details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> What slays me is that that she can't/wont speak with her dad and her dispute with him is over a staged phot shoot. OMG! The outrageous irony that she is mad because he had a staged photo shoot. *Shake your head girl, maybe a few brain cells will stick together.*


Nah - I don’t think her synapses fire anymore ..


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Handbag1234 said:


> I have had many miscarriages and I reacted to each one slightly differently. In my personal experience there is no right or wrong way to deal with the physical loss or emotional
> grief. I am inclined to believe her. MM’s way of writing isn’t for me, but if it brings the issues out into the open, and invites more open debate and discussion/acceptance that’s good in my opinion. Only a few people know what my husband and I went through and it was a lonely and isolating experience. I remain childless and have to regularly dodge the ‘why didn’t you have kids’ question, plus deal with many triggers and a form of PTSD.   I’m not here seeking pity or sympathy but to offer a different perspective.


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> As for the royal family members, they are “deeply saddened” about the _Suits_ alum’s July loss. “Harry told them early on when it happened, but *as it’s such a private matter, they kept it to themselves**,*” the insider says. “[*Prince*] *Charles*, in particular, has been supporting the couple through their grief and regularly checks in on them.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Is Helping Her Heal After 'Painful Loss'
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland has been 'a tower of strength’ for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry following their miscarriage, a source tells Us — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



Yep, so private to the privacy-seeking couple that they published it in the New York Times. SMH.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Good on the BRF. Showing everyone how to support one another in a *private* way.
@Chanbal - Great find!  from the yahoo article, this piece is her Diana moment :
_While this may seem like slow progress, consider the last time a royal was so raw about her experience with the press — Princess Diana’s 1995 Panorama interview comes to mind, as do the recorded tapes she provided biographer Andrew Morton for his 1996 biography Diana: In Her Own Words. When those revelations first came out, the royal family was horrified to have its privacy thus invaded, and wasted no time in distancing themselves from her._

Now, I understand. Diana.  Yeah, Harry ought to be red-faced over this exposure, especially with The Crown episodes.  
Drama, too much drama.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Yep, so private to the privacy-seeking couple that they published it in the New York Times. SMH.


so Doria wasn't much use to teenage Meghan but she is useful now apparently....the only person except for H to humanize her (and she doesn't even have to do anything - they can just use her name)


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> What really pisses me off (and I know I’ve said this many times) is that they referred to her as “Duchess” .. STOP IT US MEDIA!!!!!!!  Especially in New York which was occupied by the British during the Revolutionary War and various skirmishes in/around the area .. how dare you????  Maybe it’s that I can trace my ancestry back to some that fought and lost their lives in our quest for independence that I’m more sensitive to it, but that would be like other countries who have fought for their independence and then referring to one of their citizens with a monarchist title from the the country that they fought against!!!!



I'm on the other side of the Atlantic and I agree with you. 

Why wouldn't she? It's all she's got. 

What can they do? If given, the'd risk upsetting her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Media in the US stinks. NYT has become a tabloid that does not follow its own guidelines.
Do any of her PR people have NYT connections?

ETA:  I imagine Harry is curled up in a corner somewhere in one of the 16 bathrooms saying to Charles, “please, make her stop”.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so Doria wasn't much use to teenage Meghan but she is useful now apparently....the only person except for H to humanize her



Hypocrisy everywhere! This is obviously part of her image rescue process. As a royal commentator recently said, MM is desperate to make lots of money. Not sure which taboos she is breaking.  

*Charity bosses praise Meghan Markle for 'breaking down the stigma and shame' and 'taking us forward in leaps and bounds' after she revealed she had a miscarriage in an article for the New York Times*
Michelle Kennedy, who founded a virtual platform called Peanut for women to connect over issues related to motherhood and stillbirth, said the duchess had contacted her personally to thank her for creating the group - which she named after her own son who doctors told her was the size of a peanut at one point in her pregnancy.

She said: 'Meghan is someone who we know resonated with our user base from the first moment she was in the public eye and beyond, because she took the brave step of saying things that others certainly in the royal family hadn't yet said.

'She's breaking taboos, she's using her voice to normalise the feelings that every day women are experiencing.


Successful image rescue?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> Was going to say the whole scene paints a very dramatic picture, like something scripted.
> 
> I've had a miscarriage in the first trimester. It didn't make me fall down and sing a song but maybe my experience is not as dramatic as hers. So she and the baby just rolled around on the floor while she sang, rather than get up and phone the doctor right away? I think we are beyond needing to ask if she is ok - she isn't and should go get some mental help.
> 
> Miscarriage and loss can be horrible to experience, and I can't appreciate her need for attention by word salading her way for some attention.


Who hasn't had a miscarriage in the first trimester*.*  They're very common.  Apparently women have them before they even realize they are pregnant.

It was horrible, but I don't even think I told anyone, other than my husband.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Who hasn't had a miscarriage in the first trimester*.*  They're very common.  Apparently women have them before they even realize they are pregnant.
> 
> It was horrible, but I don't even think I told anyone, other than my husband.



March of Dimes info
That is why doctors say not to announce until _after_ the first trimester, especially if doing IVF [although some say that Is not true].
Didn’t Oprah do shows on this?
Any stigma and shame comes from the judgmental mothers.  Heartbreak, yes. Defeated, yes.  Immeasurable grief, yes. Pain, yes.  No woman should feel shame.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I'm on the other side of the Atlantic and I agree with you.
> 
> Why wouldn't she? It's all she's got.
> 
> What can they do? If given, the'd risk upsetting her.


Oh believe me, she’ll never give up that title .. but the US Media needs to STOP using it!


----------



## rose60610

Let's assume for a moment Meghan is telling the truth. Stretch, I know, but play along.  Considering her history of blunders and disasters, did she keep it a secret to whip out when needed to counter a bad PR move?  It sounds harsh to say she made it up, but her own history of actions make it very difficult to believe her. It was like an excuse to write up a blather salad in the NYT about all the world's ills as if they wouldn't have printed her drivel without a shock story to go along with it. I wonder if after CemeteryGate Netflix called to reconsider the offer, and this was her Hail Mary concoction to save the contract. It'd make Netflix look horrible mean to reneg on a wounded Princess. She'll get a lot of mileage out of this for not only past disasters but for the next five. In fact it'll be "You're so mean to me, don't you know what I've gone through?".  QEII and Charles stating "no comment" speaks volumes. For them to say anything would be obligating them to acknowledge every miscarriage any member of the RF had when they are extremely private in that regard. Watch Meghan twist that around for another pity play. Mean cold RF. William extending condolences isn't enough for her.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Oh believe me, she’ll never give up that title .. but the US Media needs to STOP using it!



They won't stop. They are falling all over themselves to try to appear respectful. They don't want to be accused of being racist like those journalists in the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> *Oh believe me, she’ll never give up that title* .. but the US Media needs to STOP using it!


Of course not! She hired a new (likely very costly) PR-team to clean up her image so she passes QE's next review. How can QE remove the title from a brave and caring victim?

@bag-mania I feel sorry to have to acknowledge that the US media is mostly terrible.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> QEII and Charles stating "no comment" speaks volumes. For them to say anything would be obligating them to acknowledge every miscarriage any member of the RF had when they are extremely private in that regard.



Zara and Sophie handled it all so much more elegantly.  This seems such a clumsy attempt to gain sympathy, lecture us that we do not know what her life is like, and gain more sympathy. As someone said earlier, she is on Angelina’s path. It won’t work. Too many of us have had a very difficult year. We know they have almost unimaginable wealth, a huge McMansion, plenty of cars, nannies, cooks, lots of lawyers and advisors.  She will be just fine, tragic as this is.  The real concern is Harry.

Does she even mention him in this piece?


----------



## bag-mania

You know what else was happening in July? Meghan was filing a lawsuit against unnamed paparazzi for daring to fly a drone over Tyler Perry's house and take photos of Archie when they lived there. She kept herself very busy in July. So brave...


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> You know what else was happening in July? Meghan was filing a lawsuit against unnamed paparazzi for daring to fly a drone over Tyler Perry's house and take photos of Archie when they lived there. She kept herself very busy in July. So brave...



Wasn‘t it in August she chatted with Steinem?


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> My bad, it is the Cambridge Family account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4914440


And that is how his brother had to learn about it?  Via the NY Times.  Just goes to show what their relationship is like.   So much for keeping private when you blab it out in the newspaper of woke.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Zara and Sophie handled it all so much more elegantly.  This seems such a clumsy attempt to gain sympathy, lecture us that we do not know what her life is like, and gain more sympathy. *As someone said earlier, she is on Angelina’s path. It won’t work. Too many of us have had a very difficult year. We know they have almost unimaginable wealth, a huge McMansion, plenty of cars, nannies, cooks, lots of lawyers and advisors.  She will be just fine, tragic as this is.  The real concern is Harry.



No surprises here, MM and the word elegance don't match!

She would be very lucky if she would be on Angie's path. Angelina is a beautiful and successful actress, she is also very wealthy (not via husband) and has a sound presence. Never in a million years MM could be described this way.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> You know what else was happening in July? Meghan was filing a lawsuit against unnamed paparazzi for daring to fly a drone over Tyler Perry's house and take photos of Archie when they lived there. She kept herself very busy in July. So brave...





CarryOn2020 said:


> Wasn‘t it in August she chatted with Steinem?


You are both onto something! DM are you there?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wasn‘t it in August she chatted with Steinem?



Yes, it is also when she started getting involved with the election. 

Amazing how they were able to keep this all quiet from the gossip media. Imagine, famous people like Meghan and Harry rushing to an LA hospital during Covid times and absolutely none of the hundreds of paparazzi or gossip rags caught wind of it.  None of the dozens of hospital employees who would’ve known about it called TMZ. It is unprecedented (yes, I am dripping with sarcasm).


----------



## doni

What I don’t get about this is the supposed  stigma and shame carried by miscarriage. Is that an American thing? I have never seen stigma attached to it and I am puzzled by the idea of someone (I guess the mother?) feeling shame about exactly what?


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not convinced. Which is obviously a horrible thing to say.



I think part of that comes from how artificial her words read. Like, even when talking about heartbreak, she still makes herself sound like a high schooler who believes they're about to become the next Bronte or Austin. There's a strange kind of perfected artificiality going on in her writing. And I think we're picking up on that, and because it's such a massive juxtaposition to what pain sounds like and feels like...there's this weird cognitive dissonance going on. 

Do people feel such heartbreak? Yes, absolutely. Do people write eloquently about difficult emotions? Yes, absolutely. But the key is that it's authentic to who they are. This just comes off as too....crafted?....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> What I don’t get about this is the supposed  stigma and shame carried by miscarriage. Is that an American thing? I have never seen stigma attached to it and I am puzzled by the idea of someone (I guess the mother?) feeling shame about exactly what?



No, there isn’t a stigma here.  It’s just her attempt to make herself seem unique and even more of a victim in the press. In other words, MM business as usual.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t think there is a stigma about miscarriages, I can’t imagine anyone blaming a woman for having one, but I do feel like I understand much more now than I did a few years ago about how lengthy and traumatic the actual process can be. One woman I follow on Instagram talked about it pretty openly, and the whole thing went on for almost 2 weeks and she ended up having to have a DNC. She said she had no idea that it would be like that.

Obviously this depends on how far along the pregnancy is and why it miscarries, like someone said some are as simple as an unexpected and difficult period. Still sad of course.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I also recently had a friend lose her baby at 26 weeks, now THAT was completely heartbreaking.


----------



## lalame

doni said:


> What I don’t get about this is the supposed  stigma and shame carried by miscarriage. Is that an American thing? I have never seen stigma attached to it and I am puzzled by the idea of someone (I guess the mother?) feeling shame about exactly what?



I think there's a stigma, but it's not so much that people blame mothers... the general perception (IMO) is that a miscarriage is a "bad," "irregular" thing that happens to few people. No stigma would mean it's treated like more of a normal, common thing. This could be a generational/age thing but as someone in her early 30s I definitely thought it was a rare thing that only happens to older women... it was very much "that thing we never talk about" among my friends so I never knew how common it really was. It's become much more openly discussed lately, which IMO helps women like myself normalize it and prepare ourselves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Again, she has no income worries, no housing worries, no transportation worries, no food worries, and she has plenty of bathrooms, plenty of help, by all accounts a loving husband, a loving mother and even father, plenty of the stuff most of us struggle to obtain.  It’s a pandemic. It’s a holiday.  Posting that opinion now is simply bad form.  What about Harry?  A few weeks ago he was talking about doing things “quietly”.  He must feel awful now.  Has she been volunteering? Posting this in the NYT,  oh dear, ffs.









						Prince Harry Quietly Volunteers at Non-Profit in Los Angeles
					

The Duke of Sussex helped the Compton Veterans for the Operation Nourish initiative.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## lalame

I'm conflicted about the MM thing because I actually really respect and value when people share personal, real experiences with the world - miscarriages, divorces, heartbreak, death, etc. I usually find it helpful if I can relate or if I can't, I find it educational. But the way MM did it was very off... like it was obviously a personal topic, but the way she wrote about it was impersonal - overdramatized, and made into basically a kick off for another big lecture about the world. It was just odd.


----------



## Chanbal

doni said:


> What I don’t get about this is the supposed  stigma and shame carried by miscarriage. *Is that an American thing?* I have never seen stigma attached to it and I am puzzled by the idea of someone (I guess the mother?) feeling shame about exactly what?


Not really! This is to justify using the feminist and advocate labels. After donating 5 dollars during mass, she will add philanthropist.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Zara and Sophie handled it all so much more elegantly.  This seems such a clumsy attempt to gain sympathy, lecture us that we do not know what her life is like, and gain more sympathy. As someone said earlier, she is on Angelina’s path. It won’t work. Too many of us have had a very difficult year. We know they have almost unimaginable wealth, a huge McMansion, plenty of cars, nannies, cooks, lots of lawyers and advisors.  She will be just fine, tragic as this is.  The real concern is Harry.
> 
> Does she even mention him in this piece?


His knuckles, she needed something to cry on....


----------



## bisousx

No, it’s not a stigma. Nor is it taboo to talk about it, at least among my circles. My friends (early to late 30s) post online about their experiences, and talk openly about it.

I’m really trying to refrain from commenting about this falling on the ground and immediately humming a lullaby business...


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> What I don’t get about this is the supposed  stigma and shame carried by miscarriage. Is that an American thing? I have never seen stigma attached to it and I am puzzled by the idea of someone (I guess the mother?



I’m American and I have to say that I’ve never heard of it being a stigma and/or shame associated with it.


----------



## HesitantShopper

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t think there is a stigma about miscarriages, I can’t imagine anyone blaming a woman for having one,



Definitely happens, we have come in general a long way not only about the causes, but how common it is, i wouldn't say there is no stigma but i think we have improved as a whole for support and knowledge at least compared to when i dealt with it myself decades ago. 

I also think it depends somewhat on who you are around, what their knowledge is on them and even just personal beliefs. When my oldest daughter experienced one a a couple years ago, i was able to look at it from several perspectives and did find her doctor(who happens to be mine as well) quite supportive and informed.


----------



## HesitantShopper

lanasyogamama said:


> I also recently had a friend lose her baby at 26 weeks, now THAT was completely heartbreaking.



So sad.


----------



## HesitantShopper

lalame said:


> I think there's a stigma, but it's not so much that people blame mothers... the general perception (IMO) is that a miscarriage is a "bad," "irregular" thing that happens to few people. No stigma would mean it's treated like more of a normal, common thing. *This could be a generational/age thing but as someone in her early 30s I definitely thought it was a rare thing that only happens to older women... it was very much "that thing we never talk about" among my friends so I never knew how common it really was.* It's become much more openly discussed lately, which IMO helps women like myself normalize it and prepare ourselves.



I think that line of thought is quite common, funny enough both myself and my daughter were in ours 20's when we lost our babies and both were second children. The best thing i ever did for myself was read a book on the subject back when i experienced my loss it wasn't spoken about nor much was openly told to you. The book reassured me in ways that truly helped me move forward, in a time when information was difficult to find and misinformation was everywhere.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I’m really trying to refrain from commenting about this falling on the ground and immediately humming a lullaby business...



More phoniness. It reminds me  of when Courtney Stodden faked her pregnancy/miscarriage a few years ago. Meghan would hate that comparison but there you have it. Courtney walked around LA carrying a baby doll as if it was a baby. She was photographed and written about and got lots of attention (for her). Only months later she admitted that she made the whole thing up and got Doug to go along with it. So it cannot be said there is no precedent for such outrageous behavior. 









						Heartbroken Courtney Stodden cradles 'reborn baby' during coffee run
					

On Thursday, the 21-year-old showed she's doing her best to bounce back, as she stepped out in Los Angeles affectionately cradling her new 'reborn baby' doll.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

What Is Purple Prose? Writing 101: Definition, Tips, and Examples
					

Everything you ever wanted to know about purple prose — plus 4 actionable tips on how to keep it out of your writing for good.




					blog.reedsy.com
				




*What is purple prose?*
Purple prose is overly embellished language that serves little meaningful purpose in a piece. It’s characterized by strings of multisyllabic words, run-on sentences, and blocks of unyielding text. Universally discouraged by all manner of writing experts, purple prose slows the pace, muddles the content, and can lose the reader entirely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Well, Meghan now has 100% of the media plus Chrissy Teigen in her corner. I shall await Chrissy coming here to call me a piece of s***. Well played, Meghan.






						Chrissy Teigen Shreds ‘Piece Of S**t’ Twitter Troll Who Criticized Meghan Markle’s Essay On Her Miscarriage – ET Canada
					

Chrissy Teigen is standing up for the Duchess of Sussex. On Wednesday, The New York Times published Meghan Markle's essay revealing she suffered a miscarriage in July, writing of the "almost unbearable grief, experienced by many but talked about by few." While fans expressed their sympathy and...



					etcanada.com


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan now has 100% of the media plus Chrissy Teigen in her corner. I shall await Chrissy coming here to call me a piece of s***. Well played, Meghan.
> 
> https://etcanada.com/news/717906/ch...-meghan-markles-essay-on-her-miscarriage/amp/



You and me both. Meghan has travelled from huge admiration and fandom to bottom of the barrel disgust. And she has only herself to blame. She has become a pity dump. When she stepped in it, instead of admitting "bad move", she twists a pity story "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK".  The latest cemetery debacle jumped the shark. The ONLY pity card to play was the miscarriage. Especially when Netflix could have come calling to break the contract. What else could she say?? Since Meghan claimed to have gone to a hospital her story would be so easy to prove or disprove. You really think the Media would have any balls to check? Or even Netflix? Even if Netflix proved she was lying, the backlash they'd get for exposing Poopsie Doopsie as a liar wouldn't be worth the amount of the M&H contract. To admit you'd even check would get you criticized and probably FIRED for attempting to check. It's easier to let Ms. Word Salad blather on about nothing and have to pay her to insert her s*** into your publication. Gotta give it to her. M landed the world's most famous prince, ruined her image, and has played her pity hand into a royal flush.


----------



## bag-mania

It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Harry says about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I have a feeling there will be more news. This was the warm-up game. Let’s just wait and see.  Still more concerned about Harry than MM.

Purple prose, flowery language, word salad — all ridiculous choices for the topic. ‘Wet knuckles‘ sounds risqué, no? 

@bag-mania  A reborn baby? Mercy, I missed that one. Surprising how real the baby looks.

@HesitantShopper  yes, I believe it is generational. It was not that long ago that women could be something other than an assistant or flight attendant (aka, secretary and stewardess). Certainly, women’s issues were only discussed in the small family circle. Phil Donahue then Oprah opened those conversations. Add menopause to the list of forbidden topics.


----------



## lulilu

I can't believe people are falling all over themselves sympathizing with her crap.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I can't believe people are falling all over themselves sympathizing with her crap.



People like to believe what they are told. It’s so much easier than thinking for themselves. And if it’s inspirational it must be true, right?

Somewhere I bet Samantha is banging her head against the wall.


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> What I don’t get about this is the supposed  stigma and shame carried by miscarriage. Is that an American thing? I have never seen stigma attached to it and I am puzzled by the idea of someone (I guess the mother?) feeling shame about exactly what?


I don't think there's a stigma.  I didn't tell anyone at the time because I'm private about things.


lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t think there is a stigma about miscarriages, I can’t imagine anyone blaming a woman for having one, but I do feel like I understand much more now than I did a few years ago about how lengthy and traumatic the actual process can be. One woman I follow on Instagram talked about it pretty openly, and the whole thing went on for almost 2 weeks and she ended up having to have a DNC. She said she had no idea that it would be like that.


I had one, I thought every woman who miscarries has to have a D&C.  It cleans out the uterine lining.


lanasyogamama said:


> I also recently had a friend lose her baby at 26 weeks, now THAT was completely heartbreaking.


Now that is tragic! Not Meg who might have missed one period.


----------



## chowlover2

lulilu said:


> I can't believe people are falling all over themselves sympathizing with her crap.


We all saw this coming when she pushed back her trial for 9 months. Was that all the way back in July? I feel as if it was more recent.

Truthfully, I think I am over MM & JCMH. I only pop in here once and awhile, they are just over exposed. They need to go away.


----------



## doni

lalame said:


> I think there's a stigma, but it's not so much that people blame mothers... the general perception (IMO) is that a miscarriage is a "bad," "irregular" thing that happens to few people. No stigma would mean it's treated like more of a normal, common thing. This could be a generational/age thing but as someone in her early 30s I definitely thought it was a rare thing that only happens to older women... it was very much "that thing we never talk about" among my friends so I never knew how common it really was. It's become much more openly discussed lately, which IMO helps women like myself normalize it and prepare ourselves.


Ok. In Europe we are having babies later and later and having early miscarriages is almost a given thing... I had one, my sister had three, many of my friends... Not to talk about those having assisted conception where it is even more frequent. It is never nice. I think it is harder if it is the first or if you are having difficulties to conceive as it can be very frustrating. Also in the past without the very early tests we have now, I guess many miscarriages went unoticed.

It is not a thing you share with everybody simply because pregnancies tend not to be shared until a number of weeks have passed (precisely because of the risk of miscarriage). I think this is because it is in the nature of pregnancy to want to be good news. Sometimes you simply do not want people to know you’re trying for a baby to avoid intromission. You would typically share with your family and close ones.

My bf and my sister in law lost their babys during the sixth/seventh month of pregnancy and that is a horror.

I just fail to see what is political about this.


----------



## Chagall

It’s hard to believe anything MM says is completely unembellished and not exaggerated. No one at that hospital said anything? Ex-royals being admitted to hospital is a big story. Surely it would have leaked somewhere.


----------



## 1LV

eunaddict said:


> I think part of that comes from how artificial her words read. Like, even when talking about heartbreak, she still makes herself sound like a high schooler who believes they're about to become the next Bronte or Austin. There's a strange kind of perfected artificiality going on in her writing. And I think we're picking up on that, and because it's such a massive juxtaposition to what pain sounds like and feels like...there's this weird cognitive dissonance going on.
> 
> Do people feel such heartbreak? Yes, absolutely. Do people write eloquently about difficult emotions? Yes, absolutely. But the key is that it's authentic to who they are. This just comes off as too....crafted?....


----------



## Sharont2305

How far along would she have had to have been to be admitted to hospital? I've had one and I was about 9 weeks along and wasn't admitted. I know every experience is different, just curious.


----------



## Genie27

eunaddict said:


> I think part of that comes from how artificial her words read. Like, even when talking about heartbreak, she still makes herself sound like a high schooler who believes they're about to become the next Bronte or Austin. There's a strange kind of perfected artificiality going on in her writing. And I think we're picking up on that, and because it's such a massive juxtaposition to what pain sounds like and feels like...there's this weird cognitive dissonance going on.
> 
> Do people feel such heartbreak? Yes, absolutely. Do people write eloquently about difficult emotions? Yes, absolutely. But the key is that it's authentic to who they are. This just comes off as too....crafted?....


I wondered if that stilted overly dramatic flowery prose comes from having only read too many hallmark movie scripts? 

Makes me think that’s all she’s read, other than The Economist.


----------



## drifter

Honestly, the article feels very typical of her.  I had friends who had miscarriages and they were open about it and didn't feel any need to hide it from the world or play the victim.  I don't see any stigma or shame related to this where I am (not America).  btw, "the writer is a feminist".......sigh.....enough already......and dredging up the South Africa "I'm not ok" incident again....what is this, a MM's greatest hits article?!  And "we are at odds over whether science is real"?  Please don't include us in your "we", MM!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I think it’s less about stigma and more about guilt...even though its irrational women often worry they did something wrong (was it that glass of wine? did I work out too hard?) or feel betrayed by their own bodies. MMs piece missed the mark (ha no pun intended) but I am glad others are sharing their experiences so women know they’re not alone. It also helps friends and family understand so they can offer compassion and support.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I think it’s less about stigma and more about guilt...even though its irrational women often worry they did something wrong (was it that glass of wine? did I work out too hard?) or feel betrayed by their own bodies. MMs piece missed the mark (ha no pun intended) but I am glad others are sharing their experiences so women know they’re not alone. It also helps friends and family understand so they can offer compassion and support.


Exactly.  No one recalls hearing or reading about women feeling guilt after miscarriage, wondering if something they did caused it?  That used to be a very, very common thing.


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> It’s hard to believe anything MM says is completely unembellished and not exaggerated. No one at that hospital said anything? Ex-royals being admitted to hospital is a big story. Surely it would have leaked somewhere.


It's hard to believe but it's possible. People don't want to lose their jobs because of news leaks. Major hospitals in California have now tough regulations on patient privacy.


----------



## Aimee3

They were photographed coming out of a building that housed a fertility clinic among other businesses, so I am surprised there was not one photo of them leaving this hospital.  Not surprised no one from hospital called the paps though.  I went for a Covid test at a hospital and they wouldn’t even tell me the results!  Insisted they would only tell my doctor due to HIPA.  It was ridiculous!  (Luckily negative)


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> People like to believe what they are told. It’s so much easier than thinking for themselves. And if it’s inspirational it must be true, right?
> 
> Somewhere I bet Samantha is banging her head against the wall.


"Are you OK?" Did MM ask Samantha if she was OK? Samantha is wheelchair-bound because of multiple sclerosis. Did MM ask her father if he was OK? Thomas has a serious heart condition. Did MM ask her brother if he was OK?...

Happy Thanksgiving to all!


----------



## Tootsie17

Everything I've read about Meghan makes me think she is a drama queen.  It's hard for me to have compassion for her because she just manages to make everything about her. If she had a miscarriage, then I do feel badly for she and Harry.  However, the way M described having the miscarriage in the NYT article was a little over the top and makes me question her motive for releasing the news now.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tootsie17 said:


> Everything I've read about Meghan makes me think she is a drama queen.  It's hard for me to have compassion for her because she just manages to make everything about her. If she had a miscarriage, then I do feel badly for she and Harry.  However, the way M described having the miscarriage in the NYT article was a little over the top and makes me question her motive for releasing the news now.


Drama Queen is the only Queen she'll ever be.


----------



## mshermes

If she did not have a miscarriage then she has reached an all time low IMO. Very calculated decision that she thought had no downside whatsoever. She opened herself up to elicit sympathy and now has a new venue to personally support.

If she did have a miscarriage then her life is nothing more than a stage and she is the self-serving narcissist that I thought she was.

Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> "Are you OK?" Did MM ask Samantha if she was OK? Samantha is wheelchair-bound because of multiple sclerosis. Did MM ask her father if he was OK? Thomas has a serious heart condition. Did MM ask her brother if he was OK?...
> 
> Happy Thanksgiving to all!



Happy Thanksgiving to you and all.  So grateful for all of you each and every day. Now, it’s time to eat, drink and be merry.


----------



## rose60610

M&H complain about all the paparazzi, including helicopters flying over their house. They weren't living in their current house yet. For nobody to report them going into or coming out of the hospital is very hard to believe. As someone said before, the timing of it all begs speculation. I'm 85-90% convinced it's a lie for sympathy and cover for stupid actions. If this is the path she's on, she's sure to come out with more stories to make us feel sorry for her. Stay tuned for feeling rejected by the mean cold "family she never had" because they didn't bend over backwards in pity. If this is exposed as a lie, they will never recover. But stranger things have happened.


----------



## Tootsie17

I've been reading the comments from people in different social media accounts, and I just have to say that there are some intelligent people in the world with excellent memory.  Some said if you remember the scene in the movie _Steel Magnolias_, Julia Roberts collapses to the floor in pain while playing with her child. Julia sings a lullaby to keep herself and the child calm. Strange coincidence to M?  Also, someone said that if Meghan had gone to the hospital in California, Harry would not have been allowed to be with her due to strict covid restrictions.  So how was she able to hold his hand or kiss his knuckles if he wasn't supposed to be in her hospital room?  Did the hospital staff break the rules for H and M since they are a duke and duchess? Maybe allowances were made like the photos I saw of John and Chrissie in the hospital. Hmm...still I wonder wherein lies the truth?


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> I've been reading the comments from people in different social media accounts, and I just have to say that there are some intelligent people in the world with excellent memory.  Some said if you remember the scene in the movie _Steel Magnolias_, Julia Roberts collapses to the floor in pain while playing with her child. Julia sings a lullaby to keep herself and the child calm. Strange coincidence to M?  Also, someone said that if Meghan had gone to the hospital in California, Harry would not have been allowed to be with her due to strict covid restrictions.  So how was she able to hold his hand or kiss his knuckles if he wasn't supposed to be in her hospital room?  Did the hospital staff break the rules for H and M since they are a duke and duchess? Maybe allowances were made like the photos I saw of John and Chrissie in the hospital. Hmm...still I wonder wherein lies the truth?


is that business of not being allowed in the room just for covid patients?  would not apply to others?  as someone else said, how far along would she have had to be to be in a hospital?  

even if this is all true I don't see why we all need to know about it

what I noticed about her "story" was in addition to showing us all how "woke" she is and reminding us how no one asked how she was back when, she painted a rosy picture of her very normal home life....getting up in the morning, having breakfast, looking in on her baby......not a rich, entitled woman - a mom, just like other moms.  so sweet.  and then the lullabye....well that is beyond a normal mom - she is a "movie" mom


----------



## LittleStar88

Tootsie17 said:


> I've been reading the comments from people in different social media accounts, and I just have to say that there are some intelligent people in the world with excellent memory.  Some said if you remember the scene in the movie _Steel Magnolias_, Julia Roberts collapses to the floor in pain while playing with her child. Julia sings a lullaby to keep herself and the child calm. Strange coincidence to M?  Also, someone said that if Meghan had gone to the hospital in California, Harry would not have been allowed to be with her due to strict covid restrictions.  So how was she able to hold his hand or kiss his knuckles if he wasn't supposed to be in her hospital room?  Did the hospital staff break the rules for H and M since they are a duke and duchess? Maybe allowances were made like the photos I saw of John and Chrissie in the hospital. Hmm...still I wonder wherein lies the truth?



Wow. Did she really inspire her theatrics after the movie?

True about the hospital restrictions. Unless the person is your caretaker because you are way Too feeble, you go alone... Even into a room in ER. And this early in a pregnancy would have been little more than a heavy period, not like what Chrissy went through (in which case they would let one person in), so no need to have someone there to speak for you as you are completely alert.

Ive been to the hospital recently for more severe procedures than a first trimester miscarriage and during less restrictive COVID guidelines in California than now, and I had to go it alone and DH had to pick me up outside. He was not allowed into the hospital at all. They wheeled me out in a wheelchair to the car.

I don’t see them making an exception in this particular case.

So I am leaning towards calling bull$4it on her story.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Wow. Did she really inspire her theatrics after the movie?
> 
> True about the hospital restrictions. Unless the person is your caretaker because you are way Too feeble, you go alone... Even into a room in ER. And this early in a pregnancy would have been little more than a heavy period, not like what Chrissy went through (in which case they would let one person in), so no need to have someone there to speak for you as you are completely alert.
> 
> Ive been to the hospital recently for more severe procedures than a first trimester miscarriage and during less restrictive COVID guidelines in California than now, and I had to go it alone and DH had to pick me up outside. He was not allowed into the hospital at all. They wheeled me out in a wheelchair to the car.
> 
> I don’t see them making an exception in this particular case.
> 
> So I am leaning towards calling bull$4it on her story.


oh no....that would make you a racist


----------



## papertiger

Tootsie17 said:


> I've been reading the comments from people in different social media accounts, and I just have to say that there are some intelligent people in the world with excellent memory.  Some said if you remember the scene in the movie _Steel Magnolias_, Julia Roberts collapses to the floor in pain while playing with her child. Julia sings a lullaby to keep herself and the child calm. Strange coincidence to M?  Also, someone said that if Meghan had gone to the hospital in California, Harry would not have been allowed to be with her due to strict covid restrictions.  So how was she able to hold his hand or kiss his knuckles if he wasn't supposed to be in her hospital room?  Did the hospital staff break the rules for H and M since they are a duke and duchess? Maybe allowances were made like the photos I saw of John and Chrissie in the hospital. Hmm...still I wonder wherein lies the truth?



What MM lacks in originality she more than makes up with cheek


----------



## lalame

doni said:


> Ok. In Europe we are having babies later and later and having early miscarriages is almost a given thing... I had one, my sister had three, many of my friends... Not to talk about those having assisted conception where it is even more frequent. It is never nice. I think it is harder if it is the first or if you are having difficulties to conceive as it can be very frustrating. Also in the past without the very early tests we have now, I guess many miscarriages went unoticed.
> 
> It is not a thing you share with everybody simply because pregnancies tend not to be shared until a number of weeks have passed (precisely because of the risk of miscarriage). I think this is because it is in the nature of pregnancy to want to be good news. Sometimes you simply do not want people to know you’re trying for a baby to avoid intromission. You would typically share with your family and close ones.
> 
> My bf and my sister in law lost their babys during the sixth/seventh month of pregnancy and that is a horror.
> 
> I just fail to see what is political about this.



It's not political... that's why it's odd that she goes off into a tangient. But with regard to attitudes about this stuff, like most things I think it's cultural differences. My mother was brought up in an asian country to believe that her miscarriages meant she was cursed with lifelong misfortune and she believed it was due to things she did in her life, eg not being pious enough. It's a big world out there, lots of cultural and generational differences.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

mshermes said:


> If she did not have a miscarriage then she has reached an all time low IMO. Very calculated decision that she thought had no downside whatsoever. She opened herself up to elicit sympathy and now has a new venue to personally support.
> 
> If she did have a miscarriage then her life is nothing more than a stage and she is the self-serving narcissist that I thought she was.
> 
> Happy Thanksgiving!



I didn't read the article but I can't believe Harry would go along with a fake miscarriage. Maybe she told HIM she was pregnant when she wasn't?


----------



## Allisonfaye

doni said:


> Ok. In Europe we are having babies later and later and having early miscarriages is almost a given thing... I had one, my sister had three, many of my friends... Not to talk about those having assisted conception where it is even more frequent. It is never nice. I think it is harder if it is the first or if you are having difficulties to conceive as it can be very frustrating. *Also in the past without the very early tests we have now, I guess many miscarriages went unoticed.*
> 
> It is not a thing you share with everybody simply because pregnancies tend not to be shared until a number of weeks have passed (precisely because of the risk of miscarriage). I think this is because it is in the nature of pregnancy to want to be good news. Sometimes you simply do not want people to know you’re trying for a baby to avoid intromission. You would typically share with your family and close ones.
> 
> My bf and my sister in law lost their babys during the sixth/seventh month of pregnancy and that is a horror.
> 
> I just fail to see what is political about this.



Agree with this. I took a genetics class in college and learned that about 1 in 3 or 4 pregnancies results in m/c because of genetic issues. It's natures way of correcting itself. In earlier days, women would have a heavier than normal period and not even realize they were pregnant. The EPT might be good but overall, it might be bad.


----------



## lalame

LittleStar88 said:


> Wow. Did she really inspire her theatrics after the movie?
> 
> True about the hospital restrictions. Unless the person is your caretaker because you are way Too feeble, you go alone... Even into a room in ER. And this early in a pregnancy would have been little more than a heavy period, not like what Chrissy went through (in which case they would let one person in), so no need to have someone there to speak for you as you are completely alert.
> 
> Ive been to the hospital recently for more severe procedures than a first trimester miscarriage and during less restrictive COVID guidelines in California than now, and I had to go it alone and DH had to pick me up outside. He was not allowed into the hospital at all. They wheeled me out in a wheelchair to the car.
> 
> I don’t see them making an exception in this particular case.
> 
> So I am leaning towards calling bull$4it on her story.



I totally call BS on the lullaby stuff. Definitely sounds exaggerated at best.

About the hospital stuff, I wondered that too... isn't it much more likely she just had doctors called to the home? But you know, so hard to say as people with that level of money and connections don't really have to follow the rules us little people do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

doni said:


> Ok. In Europe we are having babies later and later and having early miscarriages is almost a given thing... I had one, my sister had three, many of my friends... Not to talk about those having assisted conception where it is even more frequent. It is never nice. I think it is harder if it is the first or if you are having difficulties to conceive as it can be very frustrating. Also in the past without the very early tests we have now, I guess many miscarriages went unoticed.
> 
> It is not a thing you share with everybody simply because pregnancies tend not to be shared until a number of weeks have passed (precisely because of the risk of miscarriage). I think this is because it is in the nature of pregnancy to want to be good news. Sometimes you simply do not want people to know you’re trying for a baby to avoid intromission. You would typically share with your family and close ones.
> 
> My bf and my sister in law lost their babys during the sixth/seventh month of pregnancy and that is a horror.
> 
> I just fail to see what is political about this.



She covered several topics in her op-ed {which the NYT supposedly frowns upon}. She covered the miscarriage, COVID, BLM and the South Africa OK?? tour.  The miscarriage is a ploy for sympathy because, ya kno, the Cambridges had an outpouring of sympathy for Lupo.  The rest of her drivel was the usual ‘lecture’ stuff.  The last two sentences reflect a lot of arrogance — “Are we ok? We will be.”

We??? Puhleeeze.  Will be?? The self-help gurus tell us to live in the present, not the future. If we will be, then we need to be now. She needs to read the book “I’m OK, you’re OK”.  It talks about the different OK’s and what they indicate about the person. The  “I’m ok, you’re not ok” person, the “I’m not ok, you’re ok person”, and the “I’m not ok, you’re not ok” person.  Hoping all are ok 

Still concerned about Harry who must put up with her nonsense.
ETA:  now that I have seen these ‘reborn babies’, I wonder if Archie is real.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Harry says about it.


Yes, heaven forbid they decide to add the miscarriage to their tale of woe (re: Diana's death) ..


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> It’s hard to believe anything MM says is completely unembellished and not exaggerated. No one at that hospital said anything? Ex-royals being admitted to hospital is a big story. Surely it would have leaked somewhere.


If she indeed went to a Hospital, it would have likely been one in Santa Barbara and they do tend to be more "quiet" up in that part of the world.  Plus, with her propensity for lawsuits, I doubt anyone would want to lose their shirt talking publicly about her being treated.


----------



## Tootsie17

lalame said:


> I totally call BS on the lullaby stuff. Definitely sounds exaggerated at best.
> 
> About the hospital stuff, I wondered that too... isn't it much more likely she just had doctors called to the home? But you know, so hard to say as people with that level of money and connections don't really have to follow the rules us little people do.


Good point about doctors being called to the home. I didn't read the Meghan article, but I thought a tv journalist who had said Meghan stated she was in the hospital.  Not sure on this fact or not.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> I didn't read the article but I can't believe Harry would go along with a fake miscarriage. *Maybe she told HIM she was pregnant when she wasn't?*



That would go along with my Meghan is a soap opera queen theory. How many times have we seen the villainess in a show lie to a man about a pregnancy and then lie about a miscarriage to cover up for the lack of said pregnancy?  That was a standard plot line for soaps in the 70s and 80s.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> Good point about doctors being called to the home. I didn't read the Meghan article, but I thought a tv journalist who had said Meghan stated she was in the hospital.  Not sure on this fact or not.



Meghan did say in her article that she was in the hospital with Harry holding her hand. I believe she was looking at the ceiling wondering how they could go on from there or some such nonsense 

I don’t blame anyone for wanting to give her the benefit of the doubt but I just can’t.  She hasn’t been honest about anything else she’s done, why believe she would be honest about this?


----------



## rose60610

Is there anything that can happen to Meghan that she won't try to capitalize on? She is beginning to remind me of those parents, usually mothers you read about, that intentionally hurt or cause illness to their own children for the sympathy. Archie look out.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Is there anything that can happen to Meghan that she won't try to capitalize on? She is beginning to remind me of those parents, usually mothers you read about, that intentionally hurt or cause illness to their own children for the sympathy. Archie look out.


munchausen by proxy....let's hope she's not that bad


----------



## purseinsanity

Tootsie17 said:


> Good point about doctors being called to the home. I didn't read the Meghan article, but I thought a tv journalist who had said Meghan stated she was in the hospital.  Not sure on this fact or not.


I think she described “white walls”, insinuating a hospital?


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Is there anything that can happen to Meghan that she won't try to capitalize on? She is beginning to remind me of those parents, usually mothers you read about, that intentionally hurt or cause illness to their own children for the sympathy. Archie look out.


Munchausen’s By Proxy


----------



## CeeJay

Genie27 said:


> I wondered if that stilted overly dramatic flowery prose comes from having only read too many hallmark movie scripts?
> 
> Makes me think that’s all she’s read, other than The Economist.


HA .. no I think Hallmark would do even better than that!  I just think she's a major-league DRAMA Queen (and I did not say a good actress by any means)!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I love her political activism.  Remind me what she has done again...Oh right...nothing.  She just has a big mouth.





Tootsie17 said:


> Everything I've read about Meghan makes me think she is a drama queen.  It's hard for me to have compassion for her because she just manages to make everything about her. If she had a miscarriage, then I do feel badly for she and Harry.  However, the way M described having the miscarriage in the NYT article was a little over the top and makes me question her motive for releasing the news now.





Sharont2305 said:


> Drama Queen is the only Queen she'll ever be.


HA .. oops, just saw these .. you two beat me to it!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> I've been reading the comments from people in different social media accounts, and I just have to say that there are some intelligent people in the world with excellent memory.  Some said if you remember the scene in the movie _Steel Magnolias_, Julia Roberts collapses to the floor in pain while playing with her child. Julia sings a lullaby to keep herself and the child calm.



OMFG she didn't.


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG she didn't.


Not sure what would be worse---mimicking Julia Roberts in Steel Magnolias or lying about doing that.


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> I've been reading the comments from people in different social media accounts, and I just have to say that there are some intelligent people in the world with excellent memory.  Some said if you remember the scene in the movie _Steel Magnolias_, Julia Roberts collapses to the floor in pain while playing with her child. Julia sings a lullaby to keep herself and the child calm. Strange coincidence to M?  Also, someone said that if Meghan had gone to the hospital in California, Harry would not have been allowed to be with her due to strict covid restrictions.  So how was she able to hold his hand or kiss his knuckles if he wasn't supposed to be in her hospital room?  Did the hospital staff break the rules for H and M since they are a duke and duchess? Maybe allowances were made like the photos I saw of John and Chrissie in the hospital. Hmm...still I wonder wherein lies the truth?


Hmmmmmm .. interesting that folks noted the similarities in the movie to what Meghan wrote!! .. could it be yet another plagiarism by MM, I certainly wouldn't be surprised if that was the case! 

Having just gotten out of the hospital, when I was in Admitting, I expressed sadness that the poor women having babies (there were quite a few in the waiting room!) couldn't have their husbands in the delivery room with them.  I was told that, in fact, that is the only time they let a non-patient in (unless a scheduled C-section).  

The couple of times I had to bring my husband to the ER, they would still NOT let me in due to COVID, regardless of the type of emergency (which I totally hate, but it is what it is).  That being said, yes .. interesting point about Meghan's comment in regards to Harry being in the room with her to begin with!  In the case of John & Chrissie, in that case .. yes, they would let the husband in.  A friend of mine just had twins and had a difficult delivery, as such they let her husband in.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Not sure what would be worse---mimicking Julia Roberts in Steel Magnolias or lying about doing that.



She has been called out for plagiarizing before in some of her speeches but plagiarizing a miscarriage from a chick flick is a new low.


----------



## bag-mania

This is her description of being in the hospital. It doesn’t sound like they were wearing masks, even with all that clammy knuckle kissing going on. Wouldn’t masks have been required for both husband and wife under the circumstances? 

Hours later, I lay in a hospital bed, holding my husband’s hand. I felt the clamminess of his palm and kissed his knuckles, wet from both our tears. Staring at the cold white walls, my eyes glazed over. I tried to imagine how we’d heal.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> This is her description of being in the hospital. It doesn’t sound like they were wearing masks, even with all that clammy knuckle kissing going on. Wouldn’t masks have been required for both husband and wife under the circumstances?
> 
> Hours later, I lay in a hospital bed, holding my husband’s hand. I felt the clamminess of his palm and kissed his knuckles, wet from both our tears. Staring at the cold white walls, my eyes glazed over. I tried to imagine how we’d heal.



Sounds like a bad Danielle Steele novel....


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Sounds like a bad Danielle Steele novel....


it really does


----------



## bag-mania

Apparently Doria was the only one who got the invite for Thanksgiving. Meghan had to get in that they were having vegetables from her garden. 

A source close to the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com, "They are going to have a quiet dinner at home and are looking forward to celebrating their first American Thanksgiving in the States as a family." The source continues, "They plan to enjoy a home-cooked meal with traditional Thanksgiving dishes, including recipes made with fresh vegetables from their garden."


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Doria was the only one who got the invite for Thanksgiving. Meghan had to get in that they were having vegetables from her garden.
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com, "They are going to have a quiet dinner at home and are looking forward to celebrating their first American Thanksgiving in the States as a family." The source continues, "They plan to enjoy a home-cooked meal with traditional Thanksgiving dishes, including recipes made with fresh vegetables from their garden."



I grow vegetables. That's another fib IMO, I'm thinking it's compulsive.

They bought the house in August.

Unless they were there from early Spring, June at the latest (or the Russian 'oligarch' had a vegetable patch previously) there would be no vegetables now.

Maybe she took some Planet Organic veg out of the fridge, buried it in the garden and dug it up again. Coz otherwise, August, even in Cali is not long enough, and wasn't it baking hot then anyway?.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Doria was the only one who got the invite for Thanksgiving. Meghan had to get in that they were having vegetables from her garden.
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com, "They are going to have a quiet dinner at home and are looking forward to celebrating their first American Thanksgiving in the States as a family." The source continues, "They plan to enjoy a home-cooked meal with traditional Thanksgiving dishes, including recipes made with fresh vegetables from their garden."


Could someone please have a word with the source (a close one no less) that we simply don't give a rat's a55 about what these people did for thanksgiving!


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> It's hard to believe but it's possible. People don't want to lose their jobs because of news leaks. Major hospitals in California have now tough regulations on patient privacy.


I don’t know, things have a way of getting out. Someone who worked at the hospital tells a friend, who in turn tell someone etc etc and the press hears about it. Not saying that would have happened but it sure is possible.


----------



## drifter

hey, since all these incidents feel like a soap opera/drama/ to most of us, wonder what's next?  So far, she's battled racism, stuffy in-laws, a cold, beautiful and higher-ranked sister-in-law, been neglected, fled from the clutches of her in-laws, signed a Netflix deal, championed various causes, been a political activist and feminist, broken by a miscarriage.  Let's see what's coming next, going into organic farming, becoming a tiktok star, err, what's hot now, posing for pictures to upstage Jennifer Lopez, consequently being body-shamed, transforming into a shape advocate???


----------



## papertiger

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?



Yes


----------



## chicinthecity777

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?


You are pretty much on your own there. How exactly you want Harry to become the King?


----------



## mshermes

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?


Probably but, hey, go for it. Never gonna happen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

drifter said:


> hey, since all these incidents feel like a soap opera/drama/ to most of us, wonder what's next?  So far, she's battled racism, stuffy in-laws, a cold, beautiful and higher-ranked sister-in-law, been neglected, fled from the clutches of her in-laws, signed a Netflix deal, championed various causes, been a political activist and feminist, broken by a miscarriage.


Wow awesome summary
in the NYT op-ed she was listed as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, mother, feminist and advocate

I still have not figured out for whom she advocates (other than the obvious ...)


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Wow awesome summary
> in the NYT op-ed she was listed as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, mother, feminist and advocate
> 
> I still have not figured out for whom she advocates (other than the obvious ...)



"in the NYT op-ed she was listed as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" (because the World needs to know that as many time as possible) "mother" (because she is, don't forget to the seventh in line to the throne) "feminist" (because she's a woman) "and advocate" (because it's 2020)


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> You are pretty much on your own there. How exactly you want Harry to become the King?



I'm presuming, to ensure the end of the British monarchy.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Well, Meghan now has 100% of the media plus Chrissy Teigen in her corner. I shall await Chrissy coming here to call me a piece of s***. Well played, Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Shreds ‘Piece Of S**t’ Twitter Troll Who Criticized Meghan Markle’s Essay On Her Miscarriage – ET Canada
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen is standing up for the Duchess of Sussex. On Wednesday, The New York Times published Meghan Markle's essay revealing she suffered a miscarriage in July, writing of the "almost unbearable grief, experienced by many but talked about by few." While fans expressed their sympathy and...
> 
> 
> 
> etcanada.com


While I like Chrissy and felt bad about her miscarriage, she is also on another level with regards to fame, money, privilege and the general world even if she came from "nothing" so her being in MM's corner is what she will do. If she didn't rip some twitter troll it would look bad--no matter what US weekly says--celebs are not like us.

Losing a child is horrible but the issue here is the privacy couple suddenly writing about it in a word-salad article 4 months later, soon after cemetery-gate.

Chrissy--you too will be markled eventually so save your energy for your family and stay safe.


----------



## Tootsie17

papertiger said:


> Yes


Ditto!


----------



## kemilia

Chagall said:


> It’s hard to believe anything MM says is completely unembellished and not exaggerated. No one at that hospital said anything? Ex-royals being admitted to hospital is a big story. Surely it would have leaked somewhere.


Even with HIPAA there would have been some leak.


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> Even with HIPAA there would have been some leak.



I don't know, do all Americans know or care who they are?


----------



## Chanbal

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?


Probably not, you and MM seem to share the same puzzling wish.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?


Yes. Do you realize if that occurs, Meghan will be the next Lucrezia Borgia because she will have to destroy HM, Charles, William, George, Charlotte and Louis. But go ahead and have your little dream.


----------



## lulilu

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?





papertiger said:


> Yes



1000% yes


----------



## Aimee3

On the subject of miscarriages, I was curious so googled.  It said usually any miscarriage that’s from a pregnancy less than 10-12 weeks along, there is no hospital, doctor, or procedure involved.  So does this mean if she was telling the truth that she was more than 3 months pregnant?  Didn’t they announce the first pregnancy sooner than 3 months, at 2 months, at Eugenies wedding?


----------



## Chanbal

Of course they are! Having MM & H (and probably Omid) as advisors, Nflix we will show a version of FF.  
*Netflix is 'considering extending The Crown to show Prince William and Prince Harry as adults', royal expert claims - as fans rally around Duchess of Cornwall after she faced barrage of hate over her portrayal in the show*

While it was originally stated the series would stop before Prince William, 38, and Prince Harry, 36, became adults, Omid explained: 'I have heard rumblings that there is talk within Netflix about the possibility of whether the show can be extended.'

MM and Nflix are testing the waters


----------



## Pautinka

marietouchet said:


> Wow awesome summary
> in the NYT op-ed she was listed as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, mother, feminist and advocate
> 
> I still have not figured out for whom she advocates (other than the obvious ...)


I just presumed they had actually meant avocado. It makes as much sense.


----------



## LittleStar88

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?



He already is. King of BS and they sit on their thrones of lies.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Wow awesome summary
> in the NYT op-ed she was listed as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, mother, feminist and advocate
> 
> *I still have not figured out for whom she advocates (other than the obvious ...)*



Stick to the obvious and you will be 100% correct!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> He already is. King of BS and they sit on their thrones of lies.


I was going to say that in their minds, they are the King and Queen anyway, so job done! LOL!


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I grow vegetables. That's another fib IMO, I'm thinking it's compulsive.
> 
> They bought the house in August.
> 
> Unless they were there from early Spring, June at the latest (or the Russian 'oligarch' had a vegetable patch previously) there would be no vegetables now.
> 
> Maybe she took some Planet Organic veg out of the fridge, buried it in the garden and dug it up again. Coz otherwise, August, even in Cali is not long enough, and wasn't it baking hot then anyway?.



IF it is true, my guess is there was an existing garden on the property already being tended to by a gardener. Either they kept the gardener or found their own. Meghan is certainly not out there doing it herself. 

Remember she brought flowers grown in  “their” garden to a children’s event back in late summer. It was very brave of Meghan to bring her personal photographer to take publicity shots of her among all those small, cute children for her Vanity Fair spread so soon after her traumatic loss. Did I mention how brave and inspirational Meghan is? Because she is! I read the fawning editorials yesterday telling me so.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> IF it is true, my guess is there was an existing garden on the property already being tended to by a gardener. Either they kept the gardener or found their own. Meghan is certainly not out there doing it herself.
> 
> Remember she brought flowers grown in  “their” garden to a children’s event back in late summer. It was very brave of Meghan to bring her personal photographer to take publicity shots of her among all those small, cute children for her Vanity Fair spread so soon after her traumatic loss. Did I mention how brave and inspirational Meghan is? Because she is! I read the fawning editorials yesterday telling me so.


Stunning and brave! LOL!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I read the fawning editorials yesterday telling me so.



The fawning is done to put her on the highest possible pedestal, so her fall will be once and for all beyond repair. I don’t believe the powers-that-be like H&M at all. They know so much more about these two charlatans than we do. Harry himself said it in an interview - they build the person up so they can knock them down. Just wait, celebrity is a tough and cruel master.


----------



## rose60610

Who talks about "how to heal" when you're in the throes of a world of hurt? Makes NO sense. Unless you're looking to make a buck off the supposed "misery". 

The more I wonder about M's NYT article the day before Thanksgiving, the more I'm compelled to think it has something to do with  saving the Netflix offer. She's such a whack job that she's forced to spew her tale of woe. That NOOOOOO journalist has taken upon his/herself to prove MM went to any hospital last July. NONE. NONE. NONE. NONE. NONE. NONE. She and Harry were crying together in  her hospital room? When others had to die alone because their immediate family members were not permitted in hospitals due to Covid?

Even if you proved Meghan was lying, you'd get fired for daring to check. 

Her own homegrown vegetables for Thanksgiving? Oh sure.


----------



## Chloe302225

I expect more news on the Sussex front as Kate is gaining great publicity and praise for Early Years survey release. Members of Parliament and the public seem to be onboard with the results and attention brought to this subject.

.... *new sob story releases in 1,2,3*


----------



## rose60610

Harry? King? They'd have to go back to England. Meghan says the British media are mean to her. The anti-monarchy types might like Harry to be King as their best chance to end the monarchy. Though it is ironic M&H welcomed having one of the most over the top royal weddings from an institution they feel ought to be ashamed of itself.


----------



## bag-mania

The day after Thanksgiving is always a slow news day here in the US. Everyone is still feeling a little bit bloated (and hungover) from overindulgence. Even Meghan’s Publicity machine and her loyal source are not using their A-Team today. This is the best they could come up with.


----------



## bag-mania

drifter said:


> hey, since all these incidents feel like a soap opera/drama/ to most of us, *wonder what's next?  *So far, she's battled racism, stuffy in-laws, a cold, beautiful and higher-ranked sister-in-law, been neglected, fled from the clutches of her in-laws, signed a Netflix deal, championed various causes, been a political activist and feminist, broken by a miscarriage.  Let's see what's coming next, going into organic farming, becoming a tiktok star, err, what's hot now, posing for pictures to upstage Jennifer Lopez, consequently being body-shamed, transforming into a shape advocate???



Okay, I’ll take a shot at this game. She will save this scheme for when she is truly desperate, and I mean desperate for positive media attention. I think she will pull a SERIOUS HEALTH SCARE. Whether it’s a cancer scare or some obscure, unknown illness we have never heard of, Harry and Meghan will be afraid she has it and it will cause lots of drama and trips to the doctor. We will find out weeks or months later that miraculously Meghan is well again, possibly due to consuming the organic vegetables in her very own garden. But it will be close and scary, folks! Through it all Meghan will continue bravely doing her good work and always, ALWAYS, thinking of others before herself. The End.

I should write this story up on a fanfic site before somebody (Meghan) steals my idea.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> The day after Thanksgiving is always a slow news day here in the US. Everyone is still feeling a little bit bloated (and hungover) from overindulgence. Even Meghan’s Publicity machine and her loyal source are not using their A-Team today. This is the best they could come up with.
> 
> View attachment 4915542



You're kidding . Why decorate at all? The sugars will be lined up to see the decorations, and I thought they wanted privacy. Despite plastering a skeptical intimate sob story in the NYT. Well.  Let's see HOW excited they are after crews decorate their house. That's a lot of crocheted Santa cozies to cover the Kleenex boxes in 19 bathrooms. I wonder if the main Christmas tree will be topped with a King's Crown. Will they have to outdo the decorations at Sandringham? Will we be treated to side by side comparisons? How many medals will Harry be wearing on his suit?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I’ll take a shot at this game. She will save this scheme for when she is truly desperate, and I mean desperate for positive media attention. I think she will pull a SERIOUS HEALTH SCARE. Whether it’s a cancer scare or some obscure, unknown illness we have never heard of, Harry and Meghan will be afraid she has it and it will cause lots of drama and trips to the doctor. We will find out weeks or months later that miraculously Meghan is well again, possibly due to consuming the organic vegetables in her very own garden. But it will be close and scary, folks! Through it all Meghan will continue bravely doing her good work and always, ALWAYS, thinking of others before herself. The End.
> 
> I should write this story up on a fanfic site before somebody steals my idea.


wonder what susan lucci thinks about all this?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder what susan lucci thinks about all this?



I think of Meghan as being like a poor man’s Erica Kane. After being nominated 19 times without winning, Susan Lucci finally got her Emmy award.  That’s something I don’t think Meghan will ever have. She’s not that convincing an actress.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think of Meghan as being like a poor man’s Erica Kane. After being nominated 19 times without winning, Susan Lucci finally got her Emmy award.  That’s something I don’t think Meghan will ever have. She’s not that convincing an actress.


not to us here but she has a lot of people sympathizing with her.....I saw some article (didn't open it) onine this morning where a woman was dredging up her own miscarriage feelings after reading what Meghan said.....apparently there is no shortage of people who are willing to believe she got up, made her own breakfast, cradled Arhie while falling to the floor and singing a lullabye.....funny such a wonderful and special person has no relationships with her family (except allegedly doria) and has cut her husand off from his


----------



## Jktgal

Chagall said:


> I don’t know, things have a way of getting out. Someone who worked at the hospital tells a friend, who in turn tell someone etc etc and the press hears about it. Not saying that would have happened but it sure is possible.


Even a prisoner exchange between Australia, Thailand and Iran was leaked. Someone saw a plane depart, a plane arrive, a strange route, no stream of passengers, pics of a man on wheelchair without legs get out.... etc. I find it hard to believe these two divas not recognised given covid measures that must have been in place since Cali is a covid hotspot.

Update: OMG the comment section of this video, did y'all have a gathering over there without inviting me? Lol


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> IF it is true, my guess is there was an existing garden on the property already being tended to by a gardener. Either they kept the gardener or found their own. Meghan is certainly not out there doing it herself.
> 
> Remember she brought flowers grown in  “their” garden to a children’s event back in late summer. It was very brave of Meghan to bring her personal photographer to take publicity shots of her among all those small, cute children for her Vanity Fair spread so soon after her traumatic loss. Did I mention how brave and inspirational Meghan is? Because she is! I read the fawning editorials yesterday telling me so.



I just have a very hard time believing a Russian oligarch created a vegetable garden (gardener or no gardener) when he hadn't even lived in the house 'forever' Russian millionaires are not noted for their interest in growing onions, especially growing them for staff. 

From all the years of lies, you'd have to show me time-lapse evidence 

One minute it's rentable as a film set, with parking space for a multitude, next minute it's a cosy home from home, with cabbage patch kids on pink unicorns.


I'd stretch my belief to a herb pot on a kitchen window sill. That's still stretching it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?


Umm, yes.


----------



## redney

Such a stark difference between Kate's recent posts on 5 Big Ideas vs Meghan's self-centered desperation. MM, try as you may, you'll never stack up and only make yourself a fool trying.


----------



## Aimee3

From my scant knowledge of vegetable gardens, that’s something you actually have to plant every year. It’s not something you plant once and they just “come up” every year like clock work.  Maybe MM got her vegetables confused with the fruit trees lol???


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I just have a very hard time believing a Russian oligarch created a vegetable garden (gardener or no gardener) when he hadn't even lived in the house 'forever' Russian millionaires are not noted for their interest in growing onions, especially growing them for staff.
> 
> From all the years of lies, you'd have to show me time-lapse evidence
> 
> One minute it's rentable as a film set, with parking space for a multitude, next minute it's a cosy home from home, with cabbage patch kids on pink unicorns.
> 
> 
> I'd stretch my belief to a herb pot on a kitchen window sill. That's still stretching it.



I am fully open to the possibility that the whole garden story is fabricated. However, I never underestimate how much money rich people will spend on landscaping. The mansion is on a 7 acre plot of land. Plenty of room for a little garden or even a large one.  Back when they bought it beautiful rose gardens were mentioned, no specific word about vegetables though.

From Variety:

Dated listings note that the property additionally offers a “tea house,” a “children’s cottage,” and exceptionally beautiful manicured grounds that boast tiered rose gardens, century-old olive trees, and tall Italian cypress trees that likely cost a small fortune to maintain. A full-size tennis court, lap-lane swimming pool, and a notably elaborate built-in children’s playset are among the numerous other outdoor amenities.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The day after Thanksgiving is always a slow news day here in the US. Everyone is still feeling a little bit bloated (and hungover) from overindulgence. Even Meghan’s Publicity machine and her loyal source are not using their A-Team today. This is the best they could come up with.
> 
> View attachment 4915542



Ate too much last night and the above together with the potential extended Nflix deal are making me feel   

MM is so desperate to make lots of money that we may also read about something drastic like putting "her grandmother up for auction" on ebay.

granny on ebay


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> wonder what susan lucci thinks about all this?


How DARE you!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I am fully open to the possibility that the whole garden story is fabricated. However, I never underestimate how much money rich people will spend on landscaping. The mansion is on a 7 acre plot of land. Plenty of room for a little garden or even a large one.  Back when they bought it beautiful rose gardens were mentioned, no specific word about vegetables though.
> 
> From Variety:
> 
> Dated listings note that the property additionally offers a “tea house,” a “children’s cottage,” and exceptionally beautiful manicured grounds that boast tiered rose gardens, century-old olive trees, and tall Italian cypress trees that likely cost a small fortune to maintain. A full-size tennis court, lap-lane swimming pool, and a notably elaborate built-in children’s playset are among the numerous other outdoor amenities.


I'm with @papertiger on the garden thing....she didn't have enough time....but it sounds so good


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> not to us here but she has a lot of people sympathizing with her.....I saw some article (didn't open it) onine this morning where a woman was dredging up her own miscarriage feelings after reading what Meghan said.....apparently there is no shortage of people who are willing to believe she got up, made her own breakfast, cradled Arhie while falling to the floor and singing a lullabye.....funny such a wonderful and special person has no relationships with her family (except allegedly doria) and has cut her husand off from his



And isn’t that the biggest crime here? That she triggered and dredged up horrible feelings in who knows how many women who have actually had miscarriages. On the day before one of the biggest family holidays in the US., people are already desperate to see their relatives, but can’t because of Covid. Nobody needed this s***.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And isn’t that the biggest crime here? That she triggered horrible feelings in who knows how many women who have actually had miscarriages the day before one of the biggest family holidays in the US. People are already desperate to see their relatives, but can’t because of Covid. Nobody needed this s***.


oh come on......she is such an example of grace...doncha know?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh come one......she is such an example of grace...doncha know?



Well, thank goodness she spent 90% of her article lecturing us about current events and social issues. Her arm must be tired from spending so much time polishing her halo.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I grow vegetables. That's another fib IMO, I'm thinking it's compulsive.
> 
> They bought the house in August.
> 
> Unless they were there from early Spring, June at the latest (or the Russian 'oligarch' had a vegetable patch previously) there would be no vegetables now.
> 
> Maybe she took some Planet Organic veg out of the fridge, buried it in the garden and dug it up again. Coz otherwise, August, even in Cali is not long enough, and wasn't it baking hot then anyway?.


Thank you!!! .. yes, major side-eye from me on that "vegetables from their garden" .. puhleeze!  The Duchess maintaining and then actually harvesting vegetables .. HERSELF?!?!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Ate too much last night and the above together with the potential extended Nflix deal are making me feel
> 
> MM is so desperate to make lots of money that we may also read about something drastic like putting "her grandmother up for auction" on ebay.
> 
> granny on ebay



You mean her grandmother was stolen and sold on Ebay,

MM was:

'...heartbroken beyond repair. I was crying myself to sleep every night, inconsolable with fathomless grief. My gentle, sweet husband tried to console me, but alas, no words, no motion could soothe my furrowed brow. In efforts to distract myself a little, I ventured over to the nursery, newly decorated with vegetable-based-dye paint. Staring down at my infant first born, an innocent, a prince among princes, I felt wretched that my family would be bereft of their matriarch for ever and ever. As I'd noted when studying to do the the voiceover for Disneynature the Elephant, the great-grandmother knows all the watering holes. What will the future bring now? If only they'd excepted Paypal...'

Edited: Upon return, I thought it not flowery enough to reflect the true style of an icon Duchess, a mother and a warrior feminist.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Thank you!!! .. yes, major side-eye from me on that "vegetables from their garden" .. puhleeze!  The Duchess maintaining and then actually harvesting vegetables .. HERSELF?!?!


of course....just like her "friend" Michelle


----------



## CeeJay

drifter said:


> hey, since all these incidents feel like a soap opera/drama/ to most of us, wonder what's next?  So far, she's battled racism, stuffy in-laws, a cold, beautiful and higher-ranked sister-in-law, been neglected, fled from the clutches of her in-laws, signed a Netflix deal, championed various causes, been a political activist and feminist, broken by a miscarriage.  Let's see what's coming next, going into organic farming, becoming a tiktok star, err, what's hot now, posing for pictures to upstage Jennifer Lopez, consequently being body-shamed, transforming into a shape advocate???


As others have said (and there was photographic evidence), Meghan wants to be like Angelina Jolie.  Plus, you know .. with her degree in International Studies, wouldn't she be thrilled if she was made a UN Ambassador for some humanitarian cause .. BUT, said cause would not have to be too gritty because we all know that she would not get her hands/feet wet in something like that because, well .. it would be WORK and after all, she's a Duchess .. and they don't do "stinky" work, remember?!?!!?!?!


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> Harry? King? They'd have to go back to England. Meghan says the British media are mean to her. The anti-monarchy types might like Harry to be King as their best chance to end the monarchy. Though it is ironic M&H welcomed having one of the most over the top royal weddings from an institution they feel ought to be ashamed of itself.



They can just have King Harry do his duties via Zoom!



bag-mania said:


> Well, thank goodness she spent 90% of her article lecturing us about current events and social issues. Her arm must be tired from spending so much time polishing her halo.



as well as patting herself on the back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

We live in such a world the MM's Thanksgiving deserves larger print than the US troops's Thanksgiving. A phony lady that didn't help anybody but herself. I wonder what happens if she spends all H's money with the PR-teams hired to make her look good, rich and famous.


----------



## CeeJay

Amy121 said:


> Am I the only one who still wants Prince Harry to become the King?


Huh? .. why?? .. that would be like a repeat of George III, after all .. Hazza is about as sharp as a spoon!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> We live in such a world the MM's Thanksgiving deserves larger print than the US troops's Thanksgiving. A phony lady that didn't help anybody but herself. I wonder what happens if she spends all H's money with the PR-teams hired to make her look good, rich and famous.
> 
> View attachment 4915685


ridiculous....wonder how long the media is going to give her a free ride on the duchess/princess thing.  what has she accomplished?  nabbed a prince.  period.
she wants to be like Angie or Oprah or Michelle?  but they have actually worked and accomplished things.  and given to the less fortunate.  she wants the spoils w/o doing the work.  Oh, I guess having a misscarriage was an accomplishment?  or sharing her heartache with the mere mortals of the world?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Actually, it is quite brilliant of Harry to do these ‘quiet’ celebrations for American holidays. It shows he is still 100% British.  Also, how easy is it to say Doria was there? No one actually knows where she is or has seen her in months. Such an odd crowd.

Meanwhile W&K do actual work and receive smashing reviews!


----------



## naomiDelour

I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.

if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?

On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.

Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....


----------



## redney

It's always so interesting to see a very first post made on a particular thread in the celebrity section of an online Purse forum...


----------



## naomiDelour

redney said:


> It's always so interesting to see a very first post made on a particular thread in the celebrity section of an online Purse forum...



so it’s a crime?
I came across this thread as I was exploring the forum. I literally made an account an hour ago. I’m using PF to get an idea of what type of bags I want to purchase next as I learnt from a google search on PF that Burberry has had a decline in quality.

Get a grip. Probably the same way you look for what’s not there in Megan is the same way you’re over analysing my first post. lol.


----------



## redney

naomiDelour said:


> so it’s a crime?
> I came across this thread as I was exploring the forum. I literally made an account an hour ago. I’m using PF to get an idea of what type of bags I want to purchase next as I learnt from a google search on PF that Burberry has had a decline in quality.
> 
> Get a grip. Probably the same way you look for what’s not there in Megan is the same way you’re over analysing my first post. lol.



Gosh, didn't mean to trigger you. Interesting how a Burberry quality search landed one onto reading and commenting on a very lengthy celebrity thread instead of the intended Burberry quality musings here, for instance: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/burberry-poor-quality-question.1014050/

Feel free to carry on here, though you're likely not to change any minds. Have a pleasant evening.


----------



## bag-mania

naomiDelour said:


> I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.
> 
> if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?
> 
> On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.
> 
> Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....


----------



## naomiDelour

redney said:


> Gosh, didn't mean to trigger you. Interesting how a Burberry quality search landed one onto reading and commenting on a very lengthy celebrity thread instead of the intended Burberry quality musings here, for instance: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/burberry-poor-quality-question.1014050/
> 
> Feel free to carry on here, though you're likely not to change any minds. Have a pleasant evening.


thanks love! 
Have fun over analysing everything. Have a great weekend


----------



## redney

naomiDelour said:


> thanks love!
> Have fun over analysing everything. Have a great weekend


Not over analyzing anything. Been here long enough to easily recognize when a new member makes a beeline for a celebrity thread to boldly defend the subject being discussed. Cheers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

naomiDelour said:


> I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.
> 
> if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?
> 
> On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.
> 
> Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....



Perhaps before accusing us of such a strong word as hate, you should take the time to read the last 100 pages or so. It’s all well documented. She’s a fraud, knows it and says it (see the link below).

FYI: it is really bad form and against TPF rules to attack other posters.


----------



## naomiDelour

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps before accusing us of such a strong word as hate, you should take the time to read the last 100 pages or so. It’s all well documented. She’s a fraud, knows it and says it (see the link below).
> 
> FYI: it is really bad form and against TPF rules to attack other posters.


 But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.


----------



## DeMonica

1LV said:


> I am truly sorry for MM and JCMH, and for anyone who suffers a miscarriage.  I can’t imagine the devastation, nor do I want to try.  I hope she isn’t so calculating as to milk this for all she can, but seeing the bit about “are you ok” and the timing of the news release sure makes me wonder.


My thoughts exactly.  I've been through it several times. It's a terrible feeling to go through a miscarriage and the aftermath. Yet, maybe it's the way she writes, it sounds like she'd try to capitalize on her pain. If someone wants to read a good piece on miscarriage, I'd recommend Melissa Rauch's essay in Glamour.


----------



## bellecate

naomiDelour said:


> I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.
> 
> if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?
> 
> On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.
> 
> Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....



I have never seen one post here where someone has said they hate MM. What I have read about are the lies she tells, the sense of entitlement she shows, her narcissistic personality. Spending the taxpayers money on a wedding when they knew they wouldn't be staying in England, her continual 'pity me' parties. She has shown me she is a fake, wanna be feminist, pulling out that card only when it gets her something. The same for her being a WOC. Used her father's heritage when it suited her and her mother's when she felt it would up her image.  
So hate, no. Disgust for her using people and causes for her own benefit, you betcha.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## naomiDelour

bellecate said:


> I have never seen one post here where someone has said they hate MM. What I have read about are the lies she tells, the sense of entitlement she shows, her narcissistic personality. Spending the taxpayers money on a wedding when they knew they wouldn't be staying in England, her continual 'pity me' parties. She has shown me she is a fake, wanna be feminist, pulling out that card only when it gets her something. The same for her being a WOC. Used her father's heritage when it suited her and her mother's when she felt it would up her image.
> So hate, no. Disgust for her using people and causes for her own benefit, you betcha.


Now this is the kind of answer I was looking for. You laid out your points. Do I disagree with some? Yes. For example from our understanding she fled the UK due to the media harassing her. If you’re a Brit then you know the press in the UK are down right terrible. When William cheated, it was swept under the rug. When Prince ped0 was confirmed as a ped0, that was quickly swept under the carpet and all of a sudden, a rush of negative press was released about MM. I think holding a ped0 accountable should be more of a priority than a “narcissist” b-list celeb. But hey, just just my logic.
Honestly nobody here knows her personally so to judge somebody you don’t know is not great. How many times have we met somebody, disliked them and in the end they turned into a friend or even best friend.
Anyway, thanks for sharing and being mature with your response. You didn’t rush to call me a troll or throw other outrageous comments at me, I appreciate that. You have a good evening! ☺


----------



## rose60610

Meghan started out great. I think everybody was rooting for her, including me. I was glued to the TV watching her wedding and loved it. Harry didn't look scruffy that day. She started to spiral into self pity and tried framing herself as a young naive girl who had no idea whatsoever what she was getting into. Even though she was well into 30's, had been married before, and lived with Harry prior to the wedding and relished being a royal in the spotlight. The press turned on her a little, then she doubled down on the self pity. In Africa of all places. It was like watching somebody who won the world's biggest lottery and then complaining about all the luxuries of wealth. Fast forward to the cemetery disaster using dead soldiers as props. This was the sort of event they begged out of doing for the royal family. They made sure they were followed by a camera crew, Harry hauled out his military medals. One can pay respects quietly without turning it into a global "Looky-us-we're-so-pretty!". Massive PR fail. These people sue everyone they can for privacy invasion. Yet they hurl themselves into the spotlight any chance they get, including dragging a camera crew into a cemetery. They got the mega Netflix deal, yet seem desperate to stay relevant. I predict that sooner or later, Saturday Night Live is going to start doing skits on them.

Lots of celebrities get bad press. I don't see anybody defending the Kardashians. People slam Angelina Jolie all the time and I actually kinda like her. There's lot of miserable people in this forum. Go to the relationships threads--oy vey! My favorites are the 18 to 20 year olds who just can't decide which shade of blue Chanel bag to get, and it's a huge monumental dilemma for them. Such sorrow.


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


> 1000% yes



THIS!!!

 Every time I see the gracious Duchess of Cambridge eloquently speaking about an issue like the Study she undertook regarding the critical first 5 years of children's lives, a Study by the way that garnered half a million responses providing information for the work the Royal Foundation will be doing as an outcome, I say a silent thank you William is the Heir and DimWit is the distant Spare. Thus saving the world from the possibility of a vacuous queen MeMeMe, narcissistic in the extreme with her nauseous prattling that generates nothing but noise.


----------



## DeMonica

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh


I must admit that I have a problem with visualizing that scene. I mean if you have your toddler in your hand, you wouldn't just collapse from a sharp cramp, even if it's very strong, because you can hurt your child.  Singing a lullaby on the floor would be the last thing on your mind - on my mind at least. I'd rather call for help immediately and try to get to a hospital as soon as possible. Every miscarriage is different, I had to learn it the hard way, but the scene she painted in that essay just doesn't feel realistic.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Imo, MM never really made it big as an actress. So she's living through the drama she tries to create IRL. Only the script can only pass as bad soap opera as the writer has no real talent, just as bad as her acting! It's really quite delusional to say the least.

As for Harry, all I can say is his exes definitely had lucky escapes!


----------



## scarlet555

[


naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.



As strange as it may seem, not everyone wants to live in the media/ and scrutiny of the world, and that is exactly what would come with marrying ‘Prince Harry’ of all princes.  He is well known for his antics and his whole family is followed by the media-almost brutally.  This is a life that ‘I’ particularly would not want.  Love is love, and even if love lasts forever, it doesn’t make anything last-that’s an old saying I believe.  It’s not like there is a line of princes asking me for marriage anyway, but it’s not a story book, and the reality is, its title comes with duty/job That I personally find not to my taste.  I’d rather marry a man that treats me like a queen, than marry an actual prince who spends his youth experimenting with Nazi costumes, and Vegas antics and acting like a spoiled brat.


----------



## 1LV

scarlet555 said:


> [
> 
> 
> As strange as it may seem, not everyone wants to live in the media/ and scrutiny of the world, and that is exactly what would come with marrying ‘Prince Harry’ of all princes.  He is well known for his antics and his whole family is followed by the media-almost brutally.  This is a life that ‘I’ particularly would not want.  Love is love, and even if love lasts forever, it doesn’t make anything last-that’s an old saying I believe.  It’s not like there is a line of princes asking me for marriage anyway, but it’s not a story book, and the reality is, its title comes with duty/job That I personally find not to my taste.  I’d rather marry a man that treats me like a queen, than marry an actual prince who spends his youth experimenting with Nazi costumes, and Vegas antics and acting like a spoiled brat.


Everybody can’t be bought, right?


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> [As strange as it may seem, not everyone wants to live in the media/ and scrutiny of the world, and that is exactly what would come with marrying ‘Prince Harry’ of all princes.  He is well known for his antics and his whole family is followed by the media-almost brutally.  This is a life that ‘I’ particularly would not want.  Love is love, and even if love lasts forever, it doesn’t make anything last-that’s an old saying I believe.  It’s not like there is a line of princes asking me for marriage anyway, but it’s not a story book, and the reality is, its title comes with duty/job That I personally find not to my taste.*  I’d rather marry a man that treats me (and all women) like a queen, than marry an actual prince who spends his youth experimenting with Nazi costumes, and Vegas antics and acting like a spoiled brat.*



THIS is the message mothers need to teach their daughters.
All of it, especially the bold. Some females think marrying a prince is the ‘be all and end all’. Where did they receive this message?  The guy yells at the Palace staff! He uses profanity to a 90 yr old woman!  Look at his behaviors. He is not a great catch. I would expect a divorced woman pushing 40 to know this.  So, no, she cannot expect any sympathy for her life.  Diana made herself into a joke with her pity party. No one respects that.

Are you ok?   FFS, it’s a pandemic. No one is ok. 

@1LV @scarlet555   Well Said , thank you.


----------



## bag-mania

Wow, Meghan actually did appear on a soap opera. Here, in less than three minutes, you can watch the entirety of her brief scenes playing a nurse on General Hospital back in 2001. Not so coincidentally her father was working as a lighting designer for the show at the time. Don’t blink or you might miss her in the background and at the end when she gets to say her one line.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Wow, Meghan actually did appear on a soap opera. Here, in less than three minutes, you can watch the entirety of her brief scenes playing a nurse on General Hospital back in 2001. Not so coincidentally her father was working as a lighting designer for the show at the time. Don’t blink or you might miss her in the background and *at the end when she gets to say her one line.*




Oh for Heaven's sake, there was 2 minutes 46 seconds of this torture. So I fast forwarded to M's part. I'll cut her slack on this, she was very young, the script was painful on a good day, but I was sooo looking forward to her saying "No one asks me if I'm OK". Now THAT would have made my day. Her role was to play the nervous overburdened staffer and recite the horribly written script for her. And she did it with all the pathetic desperation I fully anticipated. She lived up to my expectations. I marvel at how she spun a 180 out of that, the Nervous Nelly dolt turned Calculating Demanding Duchess. How amusing that she patterns her real life and word salad utterances after General Hospital.  Can someone please break the news to her that General Hospital was a work of fiction? It was not based on, not even loosely, any real life story.


----------



## Chanbal

@bag-mania @rose60610 Her participation was very weak. She probably got the role with her father's help.

At one point, Samantha wanted to write a book about her, The Diary Of Princess Pushy. I hope she does.


----------



## lalame

naomiDelour said:


> I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.
> 
> if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?
> 
> On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.
> 
> Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....



You're looking at the wrong things. None of the things you've pointed out is wrong - no one dislikes her because she is self made, married a member of the royal family, had her social status improved since marrying, etc. The dislike comes from the things said and done in between, particularly since Brexit... and it's gotten worse since moving to the US. Specifically... making a big to-do about wanting a quiet life yet stirring up constant press, speaking engagements, etc. Not to mention the nauseating hypocrisy of constantly harping on about equality, sustainability, etc. while going of their way to keep their titles and continue making money off their privilege as royals. It's like the Kardashians meets Mother Theresa... oh brother!


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## threadbender

I am sure this was pointed out but, I missed it. Wasn't this their 2nd Thanksgiving here? I thought they were in the US last year for it.


----------



## Lodpah

naomiDelour said:


> I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.
> 
> if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?
> 
> On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.
> 
> Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....



I'm taking the time out to respond to you while am on vacation and being totally destroyed at the Bellagio. That I hate! So I'm surviving on my rapidly disappearing bankroll and trying not to do the walk of shame to the ATM whilst I wish I was thriving, instead of just surviving.

___________________
I think it’s strange that people hate MM. what exactly has she done to make you people hate her so much? It doesn’t make sense. Meg is self made and from a young age, she’s been speaking out about social issues and was heavily involved with the UN.

Hate is a strong word. I don't believe anyone hates MM. Describing some one you don't like is not hate. It's simply dislike.  That word is overused. I hate spiders and creepy things. What she has done is scammed people, i.e., 50 million of British taxpayer monies just to bolt. Alienated her entire family (some of course I'm sure is legit); created drama within the British Monarchy, usurping others' special days, throwing people under the bus, lying, lying and can't keep her stories straight. Uses people like wipes, uses them and tosses them out. A narcissist with amoral tendencies.  So fake in her humanitarian roles.

if you had the opportunity to marry a member of the royal family I’m sure you would so why all the hate? Besides, I don’t know them personally but it looks like they are very much in love. Harry is a handsome man, why is it impossible to believe she genuinely loves him?

Hmmm . . . I think JCMH had two girlfriends who did not want to be royals.  And no, some people like privacy and simple things in life, like having great bags, living their lives normal and again it's not hate. Hate is such an overused word, it's dislike.  

On the other hand, Kate is praised even though you could argue her getting with William (who has cheated on her multiple times) was out of raising her social status too.

Kate is not perfect, she's been through the fire the first few years she was married. Where are the facts on him cheating? There's a world of difference between the two: one is a scammer and the other is the future wife of a King. 

If you are not useful to MM, you are dirt under her feet as evidenced by the people she makes disappear from her life. 

If you a person in public and trying to be perceived as "humanitarian" you'd better be a woman of substance. People can spot a fake from far off. People are not stupid you know.  




Honestly if MM looked like Kate, I’m sure the GP would love her....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


>



The video makes very good points.  If MM faked a miscarriage, she is a very sick (and dangerous) person.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> I am sure this was pointed out but, I missed it. Wasn't this their 2nd Thanksgiving here? I thought they were in the US last year for it.



Believe it or not they’ve only been in the US since around March. I know it seems like it’s been a lot longer. They were living in Canada a year ago.


----------



## threadbender

bag-mania said:


> Believe it or not they’ve only been in the US since around March. I know it seems like it’s been a lot longer. They were living in Canada a year ago.


I could have sworn they came to CA to have it with Doria.


----------



## threadbender

threadbender said:


> I could have sworn they came to CA to have it with Doria.


I saw this from last year



bag-mania said:


> Ooooo! Daily Mail slipped this little nugget in there. I wonder if it’s true Meghan and Harry are coming to LA.
> 
> “It is understood they will fly to Los Angeles next month to spend the Thanksgiving holiday with Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland.“


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Believe it or not they’ve only been in the US since around March. I know it seems like it’s been a lot longer. They were living in Canada a year ago.


Yes and Canada was absolutely delighted to see those freeloaders leave.


----------



## chicinthecity777

threadbender said:


> I saw this from last year


Thank you for your 2nd quote! I went back and read a bit after that. Back then I wasn't paying any attention to H&M. Quite a few people supported them back then. How things have turned!


----------



## duna

I don't read (positive) articles about her because they make me sick   , but I don't believe for a split second that she had a miscarriage last July, we would have known about it loooong ago!


----------



## Jktgal

naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.


Never mind propose, plenty of ladies didn't even want to be his girlfriend. You know nothing.


----------



## maryg1

naomiDelour said:


> There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.


For a woman that keeps describing her as a feminist, it’s very wrong to elevate her status through her marriage rather than through her job.


----------



## drifter

naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.


I'd say no.  Perhaps I consider my financial and social status good enough.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> I have never seen one post here where someone has said they hate MM. What I have read about are the lies she tells, the sense of entitlement she shows, her narcissistic personality. Spending the taxpayers money on a wedding when they knew they wouldn't be staying in England, her continual 'pity me' parties. She has shown me she is a fake, wanna be feminist, pulling out that card only when it gets her something. The same for her being a WOC. Used her father's heritage when it suited her and her mother's when she felt it would up her image.
> So hate, no. Disgust for her using people and causes for her own benefit, you betcha.


Can I like this a million times?


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> Imo, MM never really made it big as an actress. So she's living through the drama she tries to create IRL. Only the script can only pass as bad soap opera as the writer has no real talent, just as bad as her acting! It's really quite delusional to say the least.
> 
> As for Harry, all I can say is his exes definitely had lucky escapes!


Tbh, we have no idea how Harry would have been like had he married one of the others.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> I saw this from last year



Thanks! What is funny is I posted that bit from DM but obviously didn’t remember it.


----------



## Chanbal

MM's PR should stop imposing similarities between MM and Diana (queen of hearts) or MM and Angelina (A-list actress). They are not on the same level and it only makes people upset! She has been behaving more like a queen of hypocrisy and a Z-list actress. I wonder what H thinks about this, is he OK?


----------



## doni

[


naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.


There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating their status/finances through marriage. But it having been this way since the dawn of time doesn’t seem in my mind a good supporting argument...

Personally I also do not find anything wrong with a man elevating their status/finances through marriage. That has also happened since the dawn of time.

I was educated by my mother to be a doctor, not marry one. And she was adamant (if I ever was stupid enough to marry ) I should only ever live in a house that I have paid for. I have enough experiences to know that I don’t choose a partner on that basis and Harry is not my type. Plus I find the idea of being in the public eye a horrendous nightmare. So it is an easy no. But that’s just me. We are all different.

What I do resent about Meghan is  how, like in that article, she takes things that are perfectly acceptable but not exactly feminist (such as having a platform exclusively on the basis of whom you have married, ditto the title) and then somehow transforms them into feminist credentials. As a feminist, I find it kind of cultural appropriation...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pautinka

doni said:


> [
> 
> There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating their status/finances through marriage. But it having been this way since the dawn of time doesn’t seem in my mind a good supporting argument...
> 
> Personally I also do not find anything wrong with a man elevating their status/finances through marriage. That has also happened since the dawn of time.
> 
> I was educated by my mother to be a doctor, not marry one. And she was adamant (if I ever was stupid enough to marry ) I should only ever live in a house that I have paid for. I have enough experiences to know that I don’t choose a partner on that basis and Harry is not my type. Plus I find the idea of being in the public eye a horrendous nightmare. So it is an easy no. But that’s just me. We are all different.
> 
> What I do resent about Meghan is  how, like in that article, she takes things that are perfectly acceptable but not exactly feminist (such as having a platform exclusively on the basis of whom you have married, ditto the title) and then somehow transforms them into feminist credentials. As a feminist, I find it kind of cultural appropriation...


Agree with all of this except the "stupid enough to marry" part. For some of us it works! 100 per cent with you on the cultural appropriation part though.


----------



## zen1965

maryg1 said:


> For a woman that keeps describing her as a feminist, it’s very wrong to elevate her status through her marriage rather than through her job.


If I could, I would give this 1,000 likes.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania @rose60610 Her participation was very weak. She probably got the role with her father's help.
> 
> At one point, Samantha wanted to write a book about her, The Diary Of Princess Pushy. I hope she does.


is this for real?


----------



## Chagall

naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.


If women want to ‘elevate their financial and social status’ as you say, don’t you think that there are thousand of better candidates than Harry? He has a history, among his shining moments, of dressing up as a Nazi and galavanting around without the benefit of clothes. Nowadays women want to make it on their own, and are very capable of doing so. That mode of thinking is pretty outdated.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> If women want to ‘elevate their financial and social status’ as you say, don’t you think that there are thousand of better candidates than Harry? He has a history, among his shining moments, of dressing up as a Nazi and galavanting around without the benefit of clothes. Nowadays women want to make it on their own, and are very capable of doing so. That mode of thinking is pretty outdated.


well you have to admit she elevated her level of fame times millions when she nabbed him.....like him or not, he was a prince in the most famous royal family in the western world.....but that wasn't quite good enough


----------



## CeeJay

naomiDelour said:


> Now this is the kind of answer I was looking for. You laid out your points. Do I disagree with some? Yes. For example from our understanding she fled the UK due to the media harassing her. If you’re a Brit then you know the press in the UK are down right terrible. When William cheated, it was swept under the rug. When Prince ped0 was confirmed as a ped0, that was quickly swept under the carpet and all of a sudden, a rush of negative press was released about MM. I think holding a ped0 accountable should be more of a priority than a “narcissist” b-list celeb. But hey, just just my logic.
> Honestly *nobody here knows her personally so to judge somebody you don’t know is not great*. How many times have we met somebody, disliked them and in the end they turned into a friend or even best friend.
> Anyway, thanks for sharing and being mature with your response. You didn’t rush to call me a troll or throw other outrageous comments at me, I appreciate that. You have a good evening! ☺


While I do not know her "personally", I have very good friends who do (_their son was her counterpart in her Senior Year high school play_).  They have told me plenty about her, and alas .. it is not positive.  Sadly, her father spoiled her rotten to the point that she expected others to do her bidding, and if they didn't, they got "markled".  In addition, she was very ambitious (_nothing really wrong with that_), but to the point of using people, and then once she got what she wanted, she just cast them aside (_examples:  her father, her ex-husband and many others_).  As another poster noted, it's not that we HATE her per se, we dislike her insincerity, her fabrications, and how she uses people (_including Harry_) .. if you take a critical view of her, you'll see it pretty clearly.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Apologies if this was posted before. 
The article is dated May 19, 2018. It seems Harry had a roving eye, while dating some of his past gfs. Some found the press intrusion too much to bear and I wonder if this was simply a diplomatic way of ending a relationship with the man child.

*A Look Back at Prince Harry's Former Girlfriends *
*Harry's ex gfs*


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this was posted before.
> The article is dated May 19, 2018. It seems Harry had a roving eye, while dating some of his past gfs. Some found the press intrusion too much to bear and I wonder if this was simply a diplomatic way of ending a relationship with the man child.
> 
> *A Look Back at Prince Harry's Former Girlfriends *
> *Harry's ex gfs*


seems none of these women were interested in becoming H's wife....so much for the poster from yesterday suggesting anyone who doesn't like Meghan is just jealous


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> seems none of these women were interested in becoming H's wife....so much for the poster from yesterday suggesting anyone who doesn't like Meghan is just jealous



I‘ve noticed that most of MM stans feel that Harry is quite the catch and anyone would jump at the chance to marry him. After all these years of Gloria Steinem et al breaking down barriers for the younger women, it seems so sad they would believe this nonsense. IMO they are saying they have little self-worth or self-confidence. With MM’s connections and expensive education, it seems she would understand this basic point. No matter what she does, she is only identified by her marriage - such an uninspired, defeated and un-woke message. Maybe more mothers will realize the need to convey the right message to their daughters - _right_ as in the one that leads to happiness, the message that no one needs to ask if you’re ok because your joy is bubbling over and your ability to handle the difficulties of life are clear to all.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’ll be so annoyed if “The Crown” does a season with the MM story from her perspective.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> well you have to admit she elevated her level of fame times millions when she nabbed him.....like him or not, he was a prince in the most famous royal family in the western world.....but that wasn't quite good enough


If I were her I would rather be known as a ‘C’ class actress than someone who has managed to make herself look like a fool, and who has alienated so many people worldwide.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> If I were her I would rather be known as a ‘C’ class actress than someone who has managed to make herself look like a fool, and who has alienated so many people worldwide.


but we know she doesn't see herself that way....she sees herself (I think) as a Very Important person, one who can teach all of us lesser beings


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but we know she doesn't see herself that way....she sees herself (I think) as a Very Important person, one who can teach all of us lesser beings



She also thinks the general public are all idiots who are easily manipulated and believe whatever lies she says. 

In too many cases she appears to be correct on that.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She also thinks the general public are all idiots who are easily manipulated and believe whatever lies she says.
> 
> In too many cases she appears to be correct on that.


from what I see (and admittedly I don't know her), she is nothing if not Smug and full of herself


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> but we know she doesn't see herself that way....she sees herself (I think) as a Very Important person, one who can teach all of us lesser beings


Haha you are probably right, she certainly sees herself that way. Fortunately an awful  lot of us lesser beings can see right through her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

For all her attempts at thinking she is "empowering" young women, where would SHE be without Harry? She'd be making a good living on the Z list but she wouldn't be on anyone's radar. Nobody would care what she would have to say about anything. If Harry were still single I think there'd be all kinds of women throwing themselves at him and/or mothers wanting their daughters to meet him. And that's OK. As long as they realized they'd be put under the microscope. Meghan realized that and loved it. She filled the role well. She smiled a lot. She appeared gracious. After she got the ring on her finger they begged out of royal duties. People can be forgiven for believing their marriage was one big scam. Her graciousness turned into pity parties, the "family she never had" was kicked to the curb, and they committed one PR disaster after another.  I can imagine the Brits are glad to be rid of her. Harry is still a novelty here. In time the sugars will be fewer and move onto less pathetic celebrities. The precious buttercups who write for People and Harper are forced to treat her as though she walks on water, since their paychecks depend on it. If the Netflix deal doesn't pan out, they're in trouble. With Christmas coming up, I wonder how she'll try to destroy another holiday.


----------



## bag-mania

I can’t express enough how much the American media has been an accessory in her self-promotion.  I’m not talking about the entertainment rags being fed stories by her PR people. I’m talking about our so-called respected news media similarly writing gushing pieces of tripe attempting to put her on a pedestal. Obviously she fits the narrative they like, but it’s a shame they are so easily bamboozled. They could’ve found someone more honest who would be worthy to be their feminist, activist symbol.


----------



## Chanbal

doni said:


> [
> 
> There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating their status/finances through marriage. But it having been this way since the dawn of time doesn’t seem in my mind a good supporting argument...
> 
> Personally I also do not find anything wrong with a man elevating their status/finances through marriage. That has also happened since the dawn of time.
> 
> I was educated by my mother to be a doctor, not marry one. And she was adamant (if I ever was stupid enough to marry ) I should only ever live in a house that I have paid for. I have enough experiences to know that I don’t choose a partner on that basis and Harry is not my type. Plus I find the idea of being in the public eye a horrendous nightmare. So it is an easy no. But that’s just me. We are all different.
> 
> What I do resent about Meghan is  how, like in that article, she takes things that are perfectly acceptable but not exactly feminist (such as having a platform exclusively on the basis of whom you have married, ditto the title) and then somehow transforms them into feminist credentials. As a feminist, I find it kind of cultural appropriation...


Didn't know that I had a sister, but it looks like we share the same mother. My mother was a big supporter of independent women, and education was a priority. I was raised to pay for my own expenses, and not to be dependent on others (including husband). I was fortunate that my parents offered my first (small) house, but they made sure I was never spoiled. They wouldn't tolerate that. 

Returning to our subject, I would be totally embarrassed to use a royal title acquired via husband in a country without monarchy. When I think about the many women that sacrificed and risked so much fighting for women's rights, it infuriates me to see MM calling herself feminist.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> is this for real?


Yes, just browse the title.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I can’t express enough how much the American media has been an accessory in her self-promotion.  I’m not talking about the entertainment rags being fed stories by her PR people. I’m talking about our so-called respected news media similarly writing gushing pieces of tripe attempting to put her on a pedestal. Obviously she fits the narrative they like, but it’s a shame they are so easily bamboozled. They could’ve found someone more honest who would be worthy to be their feminist, activist symbol.



It is surprising how frequently H&M get plastered in the mags.  I am guessing she has connections through SoHo house and her sorority.  David Foster has a long list of sycophants. You are correct - clearly, there are people in powerful positions doing her bidding.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I’ll be so annoyed if “The Crown” does a season with the MM story from her perspective.


And dangerous as it can be difficult for many people to distinguish between reality and fantasy.


----------



## bisousx

Re: Whether all women would jump at the chance to be with Harry

Jmho: I don’t think secure, complete women consciously seek out fixer-upper,  eternal-victim type of personalities nor would they encourage their daughters to do so.

Back when Harry was touted as the world’s most eligible bachelor, sure, I would’ve taken him out for a spin - why not  But fast forward to today, so much is known about his personality and emotional issues that I don’t know anyone who would want to date a broken person even if he’s famous and wealthy. Of course, there will always be women who will fall in love with prisoners or attach themselves to murderers or cult leaders - it happens.

But waiving around Harry’s social status like it’s a prize for all women is so absurd, I can’t even feel insulted.


----------



## bisbee

Funny...the only places I see much of anything about M and H are in the tabloids and on this forum.


----------



## V0N1B2

rose60610 said:


> With Christmas coming up, I wonder how she'll try to destroy another holiday.


I assume Archie will be diagnosed with a debilitating disease. Perhaps something rare and incurable. She can write another op-ed about how she was baking flaxseed vegan muffins for her toddler Arkay, when the onset of symptoms began. His airway became restricted, he had trouble breathing and was having convulsive expulsions of air. She knew there wasn't much time. Meghan rushed over to him, with batter dripped Le Creuset spoon still in hand, clutching her Jen Meyer single strand peridot necklace with the other hand. Her J. Crew chambray shirt floating in the sweet Jo Malone vanilla scented air... Harry came running from his wing of the house one of the 16 bathrooms his well-appointed study to find Meghan cradling Baby Arkay in her arms rushing him to the calm, soothing, yet gender-neutral Benjamin Moore Gray Owl #2137-60 coloured nursery. After a call to the best pediatrician Charles' money can buy, they find out that with some symptomatic therapy and the round-the-clock care by his two nannies loving parents, Arkay will battle through this infectious viral nasopharyngitis. Putting on a brave front in the face of adversity, Meghan and Harry will pull through it all and she will recount - during a healing yoga session on her reversible 5mm Lululemon yoga mat - how her loving sixth-in-line to the throne husband cried himself to sleep and wanted to trade places with his son if it meant Arkay could make it through this life threatening virus and lead a normal life again. 
Thank Dog they were able to save him.
Tears y'all, real tears.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bisbee said:


> Funny...the only places I see much of anything about M and H are in the tabloids and on this forum.


New York Times is not a tabloid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> Re: Whether all women would jump at the chance to be with Harry
> 
> Jmho: I don’t think secure, complete women consciously seek out fixer-upper,  eternal-victim type of personalities *nor would they encourage their daughters to do so.*
> 
> Back when Harry was touted as the world’s most eligible bachelor, sure, I would’ve taken him out for a spin - why not  But fast forward to today, so much is known about his personality and emotional issues that I don’t know anyone who would want to date a broken person even if he’s famous and wealthy. Of course, there will always be women who will fall in love with prisoners or attach themselves to murderers or cult leaders - it happens.
> 
> But waiving around Harry’s social status like it’s a prize for all women is so absurd, I can’t even feel insulted.



Completely agree.  Thinking a little bit more about the “chance at Harry” issue - does the bold part suggest anything about Doria and MM’s relationship? Or because the daughter is on a second marriage and well past 30, is the mother excused from the discussion?  IMHO this is the topic MM should address. It does get to the heart of the issue which could resolve much of the stans’ rage. Diana, Sarah, and other royal married-ins have said they were not prepared for certain parts of the role, so they chose to exit. Wonder why they weren’t ready. Princess Grace‘s unhappiness was well-known and documented. If MM could step up, tell the world her thinking, admit some uncomfortable truths without blaming the royal institution,  she would be much more respected.

ETA: same for Harry - take responsibility and watch the world’s opinion change.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I assume Archie will be diagnosed with a debilitating disease. Perhaps something rare and incurable. She can write another op-ed about how she was baking flaxseed vegan muffins for her toddler Arkay, when the onset of symptoms began. His airway became restricted, he had trouble breathing and was having convulsive expulsions of air. She knew there wasn't much time. Meghan rushed over to him, with batter dripped Le Creuset spoon still in hand, clutching her Jen Meyer single strand peridot necklace with the other hand. Her J. Crew chambray shirt floating in the sweet Jo Malone vanilla scented air... Harry came running from his wing of the house one of the 16 bathrooms his well-appointed study to find Meghan cradling Baby Arkay in her arms rushing him to the calm, soothing, yet gender-neutral Benjamin Moore Gray Owl #2137-60 coloured nursery. After a call to the best pediatrician Charles' money can buy, they find out that with some symptomatic therapy and the round-the-clock care by his two nannies loving parents, Arkay will battle through this infectious viral nasopharyngitis. Putting on a brave front in the face of adversity, Meghan and Harry will pull through it all and she will recount - during a healing yoga session on her reversible 5mm Lululemon yoga mat - how her loving sixth-in-line to the throne husband cried himself to sleep and wanted to trade places with his son if it meant Arkay could make it through this life threatening virus and lead a normal life again.
> Thank Dog they were able to save him.
> Tears y'all, real tears.


hilarious
maybe you should apply for a job writing for H&M


----------



## Chanbal

bisbee said:


> Funny...the only places I see much of anything about M and H are in the tabloids and on this forum.


Thanks to this forum we have a better picture of MM&H. It's dangerous to browse Yahoo after a meal, you risk


----------



## gracekelly

naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.



It would help if the woman was on the same intellectual wave length.  Both shallow and grasping.   I could never be married to someone with whom I couldn't have a conversation.  His money and social status are very nice, but that doesn't make a marriage.  True many women would say yes.  To each her own.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> hilarious
> maybe you should apply for a job writing for H&M


Haha, I don't think MM would want members of this sub-forum in her PR-team.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I am a total cynic, but does anyone believe that she felt a sharp pain and dropped to the floor with the baby in her arms and sang a lullaby to soothe each of them while she lay there?  smdh



You are not alone.  She does have a tendency to over dramatize.  I wonder if the nanny cam in Archie's room caught this so we can watch on the reality, oh I mean documentary.


----------



## Chagall

V0N1B2 said:


> I assume Archie will be diagnosed with a debilitating disease. Perhaps something rare and incurable. She can write another op-ed about how she was baking flaxseed vegan muffins for her toddler Arkay, when the onset of symptoms began. His airway became restricted, he had trouble breathing and was having convulsive expulsions of air. She knew there wasn't much time. Meghan rushed over to him, with batter dripped Le Creuset spoon still in hand, clutching her Jen Meyer single strand peridot necklace with the other hand. Her J. Crew chambray shirt floating in the sweet Jo Malone vanilla scented air... Harry came running from his wing of the house one of the 16 bathrooms his well-appointed study to find Meghan cradling Baby Arkay in her arms rushing him to the calm, soothing, yet gender-neutral Benjamin Moore Gray Owl #2137-60 coloured nursery. After a call to the best pediatrician Charles' money can buy, they find out that with some symptomatic therapy and the round-the-clock care by his two nannies loving parents, Arkay will battle through this infectious viral nasopharyngitis. Putting on a brave front in the face of adversity, Meghan and Harry will pull through it all and she will recount - during a healing yoga session on her reversible 5mm Lululemon yoga mat - how her loving sixth-in-line to the throne husband cried himself to sleep and wanted to trade places with his son if it meant Arkay could make it through this life threatening virus and lead a normal life again.
> Thank Dog they were able to save him.
> Tears y'all, real tears.


So so funny.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> New York Times is not a tabloid.


Maybe not, but MM's letter just turned it into a tabloid for me.


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> Re: Whether all women would jump at the chance to be with Harry
> 
> Jmho: I don’t think secure, complete women consciously seek out fixer-upper,  eternal-victim type of personalities nor would they encourage their daughters to do so.
> 
> Back when Harry was touted as the world’s most eligible bachelor, sure, I would’ve taken him out for a spin - why not  But fast forward to today, so much is known about his personality and emotional issues that I don’t know anyone who would want to date a broken person even if he’s famous and wealthy. Of course, there will always be women who will fall in love with prisoners or attach themselves to murderers or cult leaders - it happens.
> 
> But waiving around Harry’s social status like it’s a prize for all women is so absurd, I can’t even feel insulted.



I could not. That British Public School boy  (equivalent to US private school boy?) sense of superiority compounded with Royal entitlement. A lifetime of missing his nanny, army stories (eyes glazing over) and having to (re)explain how to use a supermarket and tie shoelaces, no thank you.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I could not. That British Public School boy  (equivalent to US private school boy?) sense of superiority compounded with Royal entitlement. A lifetime of missing his nanny, army stories (eyes glazing over) and having to (re)explain how to use a supermarket and tie shoelaces, no thank you.


Agreed! I wouldn't want to deal with a man child!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe not, but MM's letter just turned it into a tabloid for me.


I know! It's not a good move on NYT part but that's most of the main stream media outlets these days!


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I could not. That British Public School boy  (equivalent to US private school boy?) sense of superiority compounded with Royal entitlement. A lifetime of missing his nanny, army stories (eyes glazing over) and having to (re)explain how to use a supermarket and tie shoelaces, no thank you.


Plus I can imagine his responses to your comments about art and music.  Blank stares.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> is this for real?


Absolutely. I remember that. There was a discussion about the title, since, the moniker has been taken already by Princess Michael of Kent - another one the BRF must be very proud of.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe not, but MM's letter just turned it into a tabloid for me.


It's not a tabloid...yet...  My DH's tag line for it is _all the news that's fit to print and a hellofa lot that isn't._


----------



## gracekelly

DeMonica said:


> Absolutely. I remember that. There was a discussion about the title, since, the moniker has been taken already by Princess Michael of Kent - another one the BRF must be very proud of.


Princess Michael was accused of plagiarizing portions of a book by Rosamond Bernier.  So actually they have a lot in common, though Princess Michael has actually made some money by going out there and working her schtick.


----------



## DeMonica

bisousx said:


> Re: Whether all women would jump at the chance to be with Harry
> 
> Jmho: I don’t think secure, complete women consciously seek out fixer-upper,  eternal-victim type of personalities nor would they encourage their daughters to do so.
> 
> Back when Harry was touted as the world’s most eligible bachelor, sure, I would’ve taken him out for a spin - why not  But fast forward to today, so much is known about his personality and emotional issues that I don’t know anyone who would want to date a broken person even if he’s famous and wealthy. Of course, there will always be women who will fall in love with prisoners or attach themselves to murderers or cult leaders - it happens.
> 
> But waiving around Harry’s social status like it’s a prize for all women is so absurd, I can’t even feel insulted.


I think the Harry who used be the world's most eligible bachelor was a happy-go-lucky, who was quite popular among his peers and the general public despite of his occasional antics, respected as a soldier and for his charity work, who also seemed to be very tight with his older brother. Obviously, he  wasn't a genius (See his school records) and had a baggage, but the true depth of his issues came to light after MM entering in his life. Now he seems to be the shadow of the man he used to be and the man he had a chance to become. Sad.
Of course, he's a grown man and (should be) capable to make his own decisions about his future, but I have a feeling that he hasn't dreamt in his worst nightmare that his marriage would lead him that far away from the things he seemed to like (eg. his position in the army) or alienate him from his family.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I know! It's not a good move on NYT part but that's most of the main stream media outlets these days!


The “mainstream media” is not much better than tabloid publications any more.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Princess Michael was accused of plagiarizing portions of a book by Rosamond Bernier.  So actually they have a lot in common, though Princess Michael has actually made some money by going out there and working her schtick.


She also had a title by birth and not by marrying Prince Michael. There's another thing in common: it is their endearing personalities.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DeMonica said:


> I think the Harry who used be the world's most eligible bachelor was a happy-go-lucky, who was quite popular among his peers and the general public despite of his occasional antics, respected as a soldier and for his charity work, who also seemed to be very tight with his older brother. Obviously, he  wasn't a genius (See his school records) and had a baggage, *but the true depth of his issues came to light after MM entering in his life.* Now he seems to be the shadow of the man he used to be and the man he had a chance to become. Sad.
> Of course, he's a grown man and (should be) capable to make his own decisions about his future, but I have a feeling that he hasn't dreamt in his worst nightmare that his marriage would lead him that far away from the things he seemed to like (eg. his position in the army) or alienate him from his family.


None of these issues came to light, before MM, because he always had courtiers looking out for his welfare. I'm surprised he didn't have someone to wipe his nose and butt for him. Left unsupervised, Harry created headlines, as in Nazi uniform, naked pool party, barroom brawls, etc. Once he fell under MM's spell and left the courtiers behind, it became evident how little intelligence, common sense or moral fortitude he actually possessed.


----------



## gracekelly

DeMonica said:


> She also had a title by birth and not by marrying Prince Michael. There's another thing in common: it is their endearing personalities.


What was she a Baroness?  I know The Queen's joke that she was too grand for the Windsors lol!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> She also had a title by birth and not by marrying Prince Michael. There's another thing in common: it is their endearing personalities.



I found a third thing they have in common: Prince Michael gave up his spot in the succession line for her. Even though I feel that is somehow a smaller price to pay than keeping your spot but having your whole life uprooted by your greedy wife.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> The “mainstream media” is not much better than tabloid publications any more.



They are one and the same these days. The focus is on infotainment, a little bit of information packaged in an entertaining shell.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> None of these issues came to light, before MM, because he always had courtiers looking out for his welfare. I'm surprised he didn't have someone to wipe his nose and butt for him. Left unsupervised, Harry created headlines, as in Nazi uniform, naked pool party, barroom brawls, etc. Once he fell under MM's spell and left the courtiers behind, it became evident how little intelligence, common sense or moral fortitude he actually possessed.



Actually, his issues were well known, especially during the Army service. He did have his minders when he was in Las Vegas, but they did not interfere. William and others were in attendance at the Nazi shirt party. Plenty of photos of Harry stumbling out of the drunken parties. Numerous girls left him. The low grades at school. In an interview after leaving the Army, pre-MM, he said he wanted out of the royal shows. It’s all there, nothing was really hidden.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020
Did you miss the part of my post starting at "Left unsupervised he created headlines..." There were people at the costume party, but no one helped him choose that costume. He had security guards in the bars for protection, but the courtiers weren't there to stop him. Ditto for the naked parties.
ETA: His faults seemed magnified after his marriage.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found a third thing they have in common: *Prince Michael gave up his spot in the succession line for her.* Even though I feel that is somehow a smaller price to pay than keeping your spot but having your whole life uprooted by your greedy wife.


He had no choice as he had converted to Catholicism and that is also the reason he never received a Dukedom.


----------



## bag-mania

Look who’s back, Omid Scobie writing a supportive article for Harpers Bazaar. Again with the term “stigma.” They got their notes together.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> @CarryOn2020
> Did you miss the part of my post starting at "Left unsupervised he created headlines..." There were people at the costume party, but no one helped him choose that costume. He had security guards in the bars for protection, but the courtiers weren't there to stop him. Ditto for the naked parties.
> ETA: His faults seemed magnified after his marriage.


_None of these issues came to light, before MM, because he always had courtiers looking out for his welfare_

Yes, I read your entire post as well as the other poster. Apologies if I misunderstood your point. Even though Harry _had_ the courtiers/guards/minders, his bad-boy, immature behaviors were well known and well documented then as well as now. He is too entitled to listen to his courtiers, now or then. To me, the only shocking thing is that he is still allowed to take money from Charles.

ETA: here’s an article from 2016:








						'P***d' Prince smokes, drinks and strips fellow guest in two-day wedding bender
					

PRINCE Harry partied at his cousin’s wedding by stripping one of his pals naked. He enjoyed a two-day bender as George McCorquodale, Princess Diana’s nephew, tied the knot. The night before the wed…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




Another article that chronicles the ‘bad boy’  behavior:








						How Prince Harry went from Nazi dress-ups to model royal
					

Prince Harry has come a long way since his bad boy days to emerge as arguably Britain’s most loved royal.




					www.sbs.com.au
				




And another article - bad boy behavior well known and documented:








						Let's Not Forget Price Harry's Wildest Moments
					

Prince Harry looks like he is putting his wild playboy days behind him with his engagement to actress Meghan Markle.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M should take note.  
Kudos to Sean Lennon for speaking truth to Hwood:
_Wonder Woman star Gal Gadot made the world cringe when she led a legion of A-listers in a rendition of John Lennon's Imagine earlier in the year. 

So I wonder who Lennon's son Sean had in mind when he complained: 'I think the average person is sick of hearing celebrities tell us what to think or do. 

When these videos come out where a bunch of Hollywood actors are like, 'You gotta care about this', most people are like, 'Oh my God, shut up!' '








						TALK OF THE TOWN: Wedding bells at last for model India Hicks
					

TALK OF THE TOWN: They've been together for nearly 25 years and have four children - and now former model India Hicks and partner David Flint Wood have at last decided to make it official.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Lodpah

naomiDelour said:


> Now this is the kind of answer I was looking for. You laid out your points. Do I disagree with some? Yes. For example from our understanding she fled the UK due to the media harassing her. If you’re a Brit then you know the press in the UK are down right terrible. When William cheated, it was swept under the rug. When Prince ped0 was confirmed as a ped0, that was quickly swept under the carpet and all of a sudden, a rush of negative press was released about MM. I think holding a ped0 accountable should be more of a priority than a “narcissist” b-list celeb. But hey, just just my logic.
> Honestly nobody here knows her personally so to judge somebody you don’t know is not great. How many times have we met somebody, disliked them and in the end they turned into a friend or even best friend.
> Anyway, thanks for sharing and being mature with your response. You didn’t rush to call me a troll or throw other outrageous comments at me, I appreciate that. You have a good evening! ☺


You don’t know her personally either. I glean my information from her actions as evidenced by her actions.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Look who’s back, Omid Scobie writing a supportive article for Harpers Bazaar. Again with the term “stigma.” They got their notes together.
> 
> View attachment 4916703


   

As expected, Omid continues to promote MM. I wonder where is MA these days.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> As expected, Omid continues to promote MM. I wonder where is MA these days.


Keeping a low profile hanging out with Doria.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Look who’s back, Omid Scobie writing a supportive article for Harpers Bazaar. Again with the term “stigma.” They got their notes together.
> 
> View attachment 4916703


bagmania- since Finding Freedom bombed and he did not achieve immortality, and he kind of muddled things up with "did she talk to me or didn't she" in writing it, he's probably been teetering on the edge of Markledom. Plus there is adoration competition with the new PR flacks. Will MM like them best? I think he's using this to get his name out in the media again.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Some non-sycophantic comment in the British media following Meghan's article in the NYT :

_*Can we stop all the woe-is-me over our wombs? We’re women, not victims*_

CAMILLA LONG The Sunday Times November 29

"Everywhere I look, it is the same: women falling to the ground, clutching their bodies in misery. Periods aren’t minor monthly annoyances — they’re torrential, life-altering horrors. Pregnancies aren’t simply a bit of a ballache — they’re prisons of shrieking woe. As for the menopause, well, let’s just say I think we left Kansas the minute Nottingham police installed crying rooms at police headquarters, where menopausal women could “cry or talk with a colleague” before returning “to the workspace”. Don’t normal women just go to the local café?

You look at these fainting Victorian consumptive dolls and think: are crying rooms really what feminists died for? In public life, in private conversation, at work, at home, online and off, I’ve noticed a whole generation of women is slowly being taught to treat the fact that they were born female as some kind of devastating and life-limiting event.

On Thursday, for example, it was reported that a teacher of an Oxford sixth form had to remind her pupils that periods were no more than an “inconvenience” and “all part of being a woman”. “Any female student asking to be sent home ‘ill’ or phoning in ‘ill’ who has a period will not find this is a suitable excuse,” she said, quite reasonably.

Of course she was crucified: there is one sin in this non-brave new world, and that is not showing enough “compassion” or “sympathy” to people who believe themselves victims. By emailing the boys as well as the girls, said a pupil, the teacher was “just making boys think it isn’t bad and they shouldn’t be sympathetic”. But who believes periods ruin your life — genuinely? This isn’t feminism 2020, it is feminism 1853.

You find this princessy poor-me language creeping into nearly every corner of female experience. Even in court documents for the many celeb trials this year we are invited to view women, especially pregnant women and “young mothers”, as hand-flapping, vulnerable, wet, passive vessels who are owed the sympathy of the court simply for being female. Rebekah Vardy was “seven months pregnant”, said her barrister, when Colleen Rooney accused her of leaking stories. Never mind the fact that Vardy looks as if she could kung-fu her way out of any labour ward in a cape and goggles — we had to accept that, as a pregnant woman, she was automatically a victim.

Often it is rich, bored, kept women who promote this idea of female passivity and surrender, as it works well on social media. In her submissions to the court in her privacy trial, the Duchess of Sussex encouraged the judge to protect the anonymity of her five friends on the grounds they were “young mothers”. In Meghan’s world, using one’s status “as a mother” or even simply a woman is a legitimate way of seeking control over anything — it is possible she believes this is feminist, but it isn’t and never will be, any more than having your period means you must deprive yourself of learning.

And so in further womb news on Wednesday we learnt that the duchess miscarried five months ago while she was changing her son’s nappy. My general view on miscarriage is: do write about it, don’t write about it, whatever feels right. But I think we can probably say we’ve got past the point where any article is purely “awareness-raising”, after what happened to the model Chrissy Teigen. Her story was stinging in its honesty — she made no attempt to disguise the minute-by-minute horror of losing a child at 22 weeks.

Meghan’s story felt strangely glossy and idealised by contrast. It united frankly unbelievable little-wifey descriptions of her life in her mansion with digressions on the pandemic and the killing of George Floyd by police. The guiding notion was that women are inevitably “silently suffering” — mute, helpless, weak basket cases who cry on the street and need rescuing with the words, “Are you OK?” You just think: is this for real?

“I felt a sharp cramp. I dropped to the floor with him in my arms ... I knew, as I clutched my firstborn child, I was losing my second.” As one commenter put it: this reads like a novel.

What would an Oxford schoolgirl think while reading this? She might admire Meghan for sharing her feelings. She might wonder whether a duchess really picked up “rogue” crayons or “missing” socks, as the piece claimed. She might also question whether one woman’s private experiences can really be equated to the horror of global riots and a deadly plague. Is being a woman really that awful?"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> He had no choice as he had converted to Catholicism and that is also the reason he never received a Dukedom.



Hu? He did not convert, he just married a Catholic which was enough. Their children are not Catholic (which they would be if he converted) and kept their spot. Then there would be choices, e.g. not marrying her, but it seemed worth it to him I guess  Last but not least, he did not "receive" a dukedom because his older brother is the Duke of Kent. The Queen doesn't hand out dukedoms left and right, some of them are actually inherited


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> On Thursday, for example, it was reported that a teacher of an Oxford sixth form had to remind her pupils that periods were no more than an “inconvenience” and “all part of being a woman”. “Any female student asking to be sent home ‘ill’ or phoning in ‘ill’ who has a period will not find this is a suitable excuse,” she said, quite reasonably.



Obviously a normal period is no lifeshattering event, but there are enough women who have excruciatingly painful periods and telling them to suck it up is just not my cup of tea, sorry. Just like pregnancy per se is not an illness (so no, no need to announce on your cousin's wedding just because you go on an overseas trip the next day and "extra arrangements have to be made" - as if normal people even had noticed the schedule was off), but some people like Kate with her over the top morning sickness end up in a hospital bed, and rightfully so.



> And so in further womb news on Wednesday we learnt that the duchess miscarried five months ago while she was changing her son’s nappy. My general view on miscarriage is: do write about it, don’t write about it, whatever feels right. But I think we can probably say we’ve got past the point where any article is purely “awareness-raising”, after what happened to the model Chrissy Teigen. Her story was stinging in its honesty — she made no attempt to disguise the minute-by-minute horror of losing a child at 22 weeks.
> 
> Meghan’s story felt strangely glossy and idealised by contrast. It united frankly unbelievable little-wifey descriptions of her life in her mansion with digressions on the pandemic and the killing of George Floyd by police. The guiding notion was that women are inevitably “silently suffering” — mute, helpless, weak basket cases who cry on the street and need rescuing with the words, “Are you OK?” You just think: is this for real?
> 
> “I felt a sharp cramp. I dropped to the floor with him in my arms ... I knew, as I clutched my firstborn child, I was losing my second.” As one commenter put it: this reads like a novel.



This I can agree with. Also, I've read it all now: I went to the NYT Twitter to read comments, and the stans where there, claiming the British press "wanted something to happen to her while she was carrying Archie". WTFFF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

When we are finally free of the world pandemic there will be movies made of it I am sure. I hope MM dosen’t wangle a part for herself playing the woke Duchess who held the whole world together with her clever insight, great wisdom and incredible  bravery.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Doll.  No words.
I can’t even gif this. There isn’t a gif worthy of this masterpiece. 
I bow to your greatness, and no, it’s not the first time.






V0N1B2 said:


> I assume Archie will be diagnosed with a debilitating disease. Perhaps something rare and incurable. She can write another op-ed about how she was baking flaxseed vegan muffins for her toddler Arkay, when the onset of symptoms began. His airway became restricted, he had trouble breathing and was having convulsive expulsions of air. She knew there wasn't much time. Meghan rushed over to him, with batter dripped Le Creuset spoon still in hand, clutching her Jen Meyer single strand peridot necklace with the other hand. Her J. Crew chambray shirt floating in the sweet Jo Malone vanilla scented air... Harry came running from his wing of the house one of the 16 bathrooms his well-appointed study to find Meghan cradling Baby Arkay in her arms rushing him to the calm, soothing, yet gender-neutral Benjamin Moore Gray Owl #2137-60 coloured nursery. After a call to the best pediatrician Charles' money can buy, they find out that with some symptomatic therapy and the round-the-clock care by his two nannies loving parents, Arkay will battle through this infectious viral nasopharyngitis. Putting on a brave front in the face of adversity, Meghan and Harry will pull through it all and she will recount - during a healing yoga session on her reversible 5mm Lululemon yoga mat - how her loving sixth-in-line to the throne husband cried himself to sleep and wanted to trade places with his son if it meant Arkay could make it through this life threatening virus and lead a normal life again.
> Thank Dog they were able to save him.
> Tears y'all, real tears.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? He did not convert, he just married a Catholic which was enough. Their children are not Catholic (which they would be if he converted) and kept their spot. Then there would be choices, e.g. not marrying her, but it seemed worth it to him I guess  Last but not least, he did not "receive" a dukedom because his older brother is the Duke of Kent. The Queen doesn't hand out dukedoms left and right, some of them are actually inherited


I apologize. I read it quite some time ago and should have checked the sources much better.


----------



## Chanbal

Glad that the UK Government is trying to reduce the damage, but it will not be enough imo. The BRF should minimize their ties with Nfilx. In other words, remove the duchess/duke titles from the new Nflix hires. 

*UK Government Calls On Netflix To Add Disclaimer To ‘The Crown’ Making Clear It’s Fictionalized
UK-Nflix*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Glad that the UK Government is trying to reduce the damage, but it will not be enough imo. The BRF should minimize their ties with Nfilx. In other words, remove the duchess/duke titles from the new Nflix hires.
> 
> *UK Government Calls On Netflix To Add Disclaimer To ‘The Crown’ Making Clear It’s Fictionalized
> UK-Nflix*



Good move on UK Gov, I do hope they are successful. It will be an continual uphill battle. Many people do not understand the word “fiction”, especially when they hear Diana in her own voice saying it is true. Charles admitting the affair does not help at all. This is indeed a good lesson for all parents -- do not go public with your grievances against your spouse. It only leads to disaster.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Glad that the UK Government is trying to reduce the damage, but it will not be enough imo. The BRF should minimize their ties with Nfilx. In other words, remove the duchess/duke titles from the new Nflix hires.
> 
> *UK Government Calls On Netflix To Add Disclaimer To ‘The Crown’ Making Clear It’s Fictionalized
> UK-Nflix*



You know it is a shame they have to explain to people that movies, TV shows, and books about real people are all heavily fictionalized. When they are watching that TV scene of two people, do they believe somebody was hiding behind a curtain writing down exactly what was said in case one day it might be needed for a show? Everything has been exaggerated and outright fabricated for entertainment purposes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> You know it is a shame they have to explain to people that movies, TV shows, and books about real people are all heavily fictionalized. *When they are watching that TV scene of two people, do they believe somebody was hiding behind a curtain writing down exactly what was said in case one day it might be needed for a show? *Everything has been exaggerated and outright fabricated for entertainment purposes.


If it is MM hiding behind the curtain, then one can be sure it will be exaggerated a 1000 fold. I believe very little of what I've seen or see on TV.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

.


----------



## bag-mania

Anyone buying this one?


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> When we are finally free of the world pandemic there will be movies made of it I am sure. *I hope MM dosen’t wangle a part for herself *playing the woke Duchess who held the whole world together with her clever insight, great wisdom and incredible  bravery.



Well we know from her two episodes on General Hospital 20 years ago that she can play a frazzled nameless nurse in the background supremely well. Her performance reminded me of this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Anyone buying this one?



Oh, my!  Watch closely. We see a huge backflip. This is how the narrative that the BRF did not support H&M changes. Perhaps it will change so much that the BRF and the UK people will welcome H&M back.  Maybe even they will play the Big Bad Nflix card. BBN stressed H&M causing health issues?  No, they wouldn’t do that, would they?

ETA: Now I understand why they had to use the NYT - they need a huge microphone.  Wow, they really are playing us.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Anyone buying this one?
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917117


no, I think he is estranged from his family


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, my!  Watch closely. We see a huge backflip. This is how the narrative that the BRF did not support H&M changes. Perhaps it will change so much that the BRF and the UK people will welcome H&M back.  Maybe even they will play the Big Bad Nflix card. BBN stressed H&M causing health issues?  No, they wouldn’t do that, would they?
> 
> ETA: Now I understand why they had to use the NYT - they need a huge microphone.  Wow, they really are playing us.


wouldn't it be something if they went back to GB and performed their duties - subservient to the future king and queen consort....they could still get plenty of publicity, spreads in VF, Bazaar, etc.


----------



## eunaddict

naomiDelour said:


> But ladies, fraud or not, if bloody Prince Harry proposed to you, are you telling me that you would say no? Be honest with yourselves. There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating her financial and social status. It has been this way from the dawn of time.



Oh, speak for yourself  . It's "_been this way from the dawn of time_" because women have only very recently won things like the right to vote, the right to education and the right to own their own bodies (and even then, this isn't the standard of the world).

I know plenty of women who see men as a way up the social ladder and I know plenty of women who are STILL teaching their daughters the same. Thank GOD, I had parents (especially my dad) who raised me with a "Instead of dreaming of marrying a doctor, go BE the doctor" mentality - replace doctor with whatever career/position as required.

I'll be elevating my financial and social status on my own, thanks. Everything a man gives in marriage can be taken away, to depend on that being there is stupidity, but what I earned is mine. And I like being able to depend on me (with some parental guidance while I find my footing as an adult). And for the record, like most independent women, my dreams of being a princess ended when I was 10.

There are very few things that really rile me up, and this mentality is one of them.


----------



## Chanbal

Straight-Laced said:


> Some non-sycophantic comment in the British media following Meghan's article in the NYT :
> 
> _*Can we stop all the woe-is-me over our wombs? We’re women, not victims*_
> 
> CAMILLA LONG The Sunday Times November 29
> 
> "Everywhere I look, it is the same: women falling to the ground, clutching their bodies in misery. Periods aren’t minor monthly annoyances — they’re torrential, life-altering horrors. Pregnancies aren’t simply a bit of a ballache — they’re prisons of shrieking woe. As for the menopause, well, let’s just say I think we left Kansas the minute Nottingham police installed crying rooms at police headquarters, where menopausal women could “cry or talk with a colleague” before returning “to the workspace”. Don’t normal women just go to the local café?
> 
> You look at these fainting Victorian consumptive dolls and think: are crying rooms really what feminists died for? In public life, in private conversation, at work, at home, online and off, I’ve noticed a whole generation of women is slowly being taught to treat the fact that they were born female as some kind of devastating and life-limiting event.
> 
> On Thursday, for example, it was reported that a teacher of an Oxford sixth form had to remind her pupils that periods were no more than an “inconvenience” and “all part of being a woman”. “Any female student asking to be sent home ‘ill’ or phoning in ‘ill’ who has a period will not find this is a suitable excuse,” she said, quite reasonably.
> 
> Of course she was crucified: there is one sin in this non-brave new world, and that is not showing enough “compassion” or “sympathy” to people who believe themselves victims. By emailing the boys as well as the girls, said a pupil, the teacher was “just making boys think it isn’t bad and they shouldn’t be sympathetic”. But who believes periods ruin your life — genuinely? This isn’t feminism 2020, it is feminism 1853.
> 
> You find this princessy poor-me language creeping into nearly every corner of female experience. Even in court documents for the many celeb trials this year we are invited to view women, especially pregnant women and “young mothers”, as hand-flapping, vulnerable, wet, passive vessels who are owed the sympathy of the court simply for being female. Rebekah Vardy was “seven months pregnant”, said her barrister, when Colleen Rooney accused her of leaking stories. Never mind the fact that Vardy looks as if she could kung-fu her way out of any labour ward in a cape and goggles — we had to accept that, as a pregnant woman, she was automatically a victim.
> 
> Often it is rich, bored, kept women who promote this idea of female passivity and surrender, as it works well on social media. In her submissions to the court in her privacy trial, the Duchess of Sussex encouraged the judge to protect the anonymity of her five friends on the grounds they were “young mothers”. In Meghan’s world, using one’s status “as a mother” or even simply a woman is a legitimate way of seeking control over anything — it is possible she believes this is feminist, but it isn’t and never will be, any more than having your period means you must deprive yourself of learning.
> 
> And so in further womb news on Wednesday we learnt that the duchess miscarried five months ago while she was changing her son’s nappy. My general view on miscarriage is: do write about it, don’t write about it, whatever feels right. But I think we can probably say we’ve got past the point where any article is purely “awareness-raising”, after what happened to the model Chrissy Teigen. Her story was stinging in its honesty — she made no attempt to disguise the minute-by-minute horror of losing a child at 22 weeks.
> 
> Meghan’s story felt strangely glossy and idealised by contrast. It united frankly unbelievable little-wifey descriptions of her life in her mansion with digressions on the pandemic and the killing of George Floyd by police. The guiding notion was that women are inevitably “silently suffering” — mute, helpless, weak basket cases who cry on the street and need rescuing with the words, “Are you OK?” You just think: is this for real?
> 
> “I felt a sharp cramp. I dropped to the floor with him in my arms ... I knew, as I clutched my firstborn child, I was losing my second.” As one commenter put it: this reads like a novel.
> 
> What would an Oxford schoolgirl think while reading this? She might admire Meghan for sharing her feelings. She might wonder whether a duchess really picked up “rogue” crayons or “missing” socks, as the piece claimed. She might also question whether one woman’s private experiences can really be equated to the horror of global riots and a deadly plague. Is being a woman really that awful?"


We need more pieces like this one by Long.


bag-mania said:


> Anyone buying this one?
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917117


Of course not. This is just another way of MM showing that the royal family deeply cares about them. She keeps her PR-teams very busy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

This! MM, the hypocrite, is trying to appear deeply connected to the RF to keep her titles alive.



bag-mania said:


> Anyone buying this one?





Chanbal said:


> Of course not. This is just another way of MM showing that the royal family deeply cares about them. She keeps her PR-teams very busy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> This! MM, the hypocrite, is trying to appear deeply connected to the RF to keep her titles alive.



And her money stream $$$$


----------



## CarryOn2020

This won’t make MM happy -









						William and Kate 'setting an example' to Harry and Meghan
					

KATE MIDDLETON, 38, and Prince William, also 38, are the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They have been together since university when they met in their halls of residence. They married in 2011.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This won’t make MM happy -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate 'setting an example' to Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON, 38, and Prince William, also 38, are the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They have been together since university when they met in their halls of residence. They married in 2011.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917187


love will & kate but this article?  they don't proofread what they publish?

After their wedding, Britons watched with bated breath as they announced their first, second, and then shirt children.


----------



## 1LV

eunaddict said:


> Oh, speak for yourself  . It's "_been this way from the dawn of time_" because women have only very recently won things like the right to vote, the right to education and the right to own their own bodies (and even then, this isn't the standard of the world).
> 
> I know plenty of women who see men as a way up the social ladder and I know plenty of women who are STILL teaching their daughters the same. Thank GOD, I had parents (especially my dad) who raised me with a "Instead of dreaming of marrying a doctor, go BE the doctor" mentality - replace doctor with whatever career/position as required.
> 
> I'll be elevating my financial and social status on my own, thanks. Everything a man gives in marriage can be taken away, to depend on that being there is stupidity, but what I earned is mine. And I like being able to depend on me (with some parental guidance while I find my footing as an adult). And for the record, like most independent women, my dreams of being a princess ended when I was 10.
> 
> There are very few things that really rile me up, and this mentality is one of them.


Amen!


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> love will & kate but this article?  they don't proofread what they publish?
> 
> After their wedding, Britons watched with bated breath as they announced their first, second, and then shirt children.



  Proofread? Nevah!  It is the Express. Expectations couldn’t be lower. Just stay with the photos and headlines.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This won’t make MM happy -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate 'setting an example' to Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON, 38, and Prince William, also 38, are the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They have been together since university when they met in their halls of residence. They married in 2011.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917187


This is precisely what is irking the Harkles. They want to be thought of as a power couple.   I’d say they have blown the fuse/breaker box and that is not going to happen. Woe is me stories, pity parties, charity work for 5 whole minutes documented by a pap, are not the way to go. If they can’t do anything without bringing their own film crew,  whining about perceived insults and crying about it they have a big problem. When something real happens it will pass over the heads of the public like a greased roller. One true thing will be outweighed by all the untrue things.  Who wants to take the time to separate truth from fiction ? Frankly people have so much to think about with the pandemic, job security, and a change of government in  the US, who really cares what is going on with these two?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Anyone buying this one?
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917117


NO!

Marie Claire is a magazine with a target audience of 21 to 34 year old young women, according to what I read on a profile website about the magazine. 

This is an article to feed the gullible stans. 

From the writer Kayleigh Roberts web site, "If you’re here because you read my work and hated it—I’m sorry for offending you/bumming you out/writing something about Meghan Markle that came across as negative. None of those things are ever my intention (especially the Meghan Markle part!), I promise."


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> NO!
> 
> Marie Claire is a magazine with a target audience of 21 to 34 year old young women, according to what I read on a profile website about the magazine.
> 
> This is an article to feed the gullible stans.


it's really a shame IMO that apparently so many young girls (of color?) see her as a role model.  surely there are better ones out there who have worked (not networked) for what they have.  Her "friend" Serena comes to mind.  She has worked hard, not married a prince to become rich and famous.


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Actually, his issues were well known, especially during the Army service. He did have his minders when he was in Las Vegas, but they did not interfere. William and others were in attendance at the Nazi shirt party. Plenty of photos of Harry stumbling out of the drunken parties. Numerous girls left him. The low grades at school. In an interview after leaving the Army, pre-MM, he said he wanted out of the royal shows. It’s all there, nothing was really hidden.


The Nazi costume was stupid and there's no excuse for that. The drunkenness part, well, it's pretty common among young people of his age in the UK - and elsewhere, too. I remember when some of those naked pics emerged fellow soldiers took  naked pics of themselves in support of Harry. So in my opinion, he would get a get out of the jail free card for the last two. Personally I'm not sure if he really wanted to leave the Army that much,  but that's me.
However, I don't think  it was well known then that he had had that many years of psychotherapy. He went from silly, but likeable with good intention (eg. Invictus) to a frail victim,  remote controlled by his new love in rocket speed after MM entered the scene.


----------



## CeeJay

doni said:


> [
> 
> There is nothing wrong with a woman elevating their status/finances through marriage. But it having been this way since the dawn of time doesn’t seem in my mind a good supporting argument...
> 
> Personally I also do not find anything wrong with a man elevating their status/finances through marriage. That has also happened since the dawn of time.
> 
> I was educated by my mother to be a doctor, not marry one. And she was adamant (if I ever was stupid enough to marry ) I should only ever live in a house that I have paid for. I have enough experiences to know that I don’t choose a partner on that basis and Harry is not my type. Plus I find the idea of being in the public eye a horrendous nightmare. So it is an easy no. But that’s just me. We are all different.
> 
> What I do resent about Meghan is  how, like in that article, she takes things that are perfectly acceptable but not exactly feminist (such as having a platform exclusively on the basis of whom you have married, ditto the title) and then somehow transforms them into feminist credentials. As a feminist, I find it kind of cultural appropriation...


Very similar to my upbringing .. (although very different from my 2 older sisters but they were quite a bit older than me - so kind of a different era) .. but they made it very clear that 


CarryOn2020 said:


> I‘ve noticed that most of MM stans feel that Harry is quite the catch and anyone would jump at the chance to marry him. After all these years of Gloria Steinem et al breaking down barriers for the younger women, it seems so sad they would believe this nonsense. IMO they are saying they have little self-worth or self-confidence. With MM’s connections and expensive education, it seems she would understand this basic point. No matter what she does, she is only identified by her marriage - such an uninspired, defeated and un-woke message. Maybe more mothers will realize the need to convey the right message to their daughters - _right_ as in the one that leads to happiness, the message that no one needs to ask if you’re ok because your joy is bubbling over and your ability to handle the difficulties of life are clear to all.


To me, it's all about *$$$$$* and the possibility of immense *FAME* for her, that's it ..


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, my!  Watch closely. We see a huge backflip. This is how the narrative that the BRF did not support H&M changes. Perhaps it will change so much that the BRF and the UK people will welcome H&M back.  Maybe even they will play the Big Bad Nflix card. BBN stressed H&M causing health issues?  No, they wouldn’t do that, would they?
> 
> ETA: Now I understand why they had to use the NYT - they need a huge microphone.  Wow, they really are playing us.


Interesting the story of the miscarriage was told now, not later via a NETFLIX video
There must be some immediate (external) need to curry support eg all time low popularity, or perhaps just a wrinkle from the new PR team


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This is precisely what is irking the Harkles. They want to be thought of as a power couple.   I’d say they have blown the fuse/breaker box and that is not going to happen. Woe is me stories, pity parties, charity work for 5 whole minutes documented by a pap, are not the way to go. If they can’t do anything without bringing their own film crew,  whining about perceived insults and crying about it they have a big problem. When something real happens it will pass over the heads of the public like a greased roller. One true thing will be outweighed by all the untrue things.  Who wants to take the time to separate truth from fiction ? Frankly people have so much to think about with the pandemic, job security, and a change of government in  the US, who really cares what is going on with these two?



"Power couple" is a label to be earned, and not to be imposed. MM&H will never be a power couple. They are not respected. It's only hypocrisy coming from them.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Interesting the story of the miscarriage was told now, not later via a NETFLIX video
> There must be some immediate (external) need to curry support eg all time low popularity, or perhaps just a wrinkle from the new PR team


The photo-op at the cemetery was a grave mistake, and MM was in desperate need of a diversion.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Wouldn't it be great to hear from a rogue courtier, someone quite high at the palace, who would be brave enough to tell us the truth about the grifters. It couldn't be too soon for me... I'm patiently waiting with bated breath...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Chanbal said:


> The photo-op at the cemetery was a* grave mistake*, and MM was in desperate need of a diversion.


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> If I were her I would rather be known as a ‘C’ class actress than someone who has managed to make herself look like a fool, and who has alienated so many people worldwide.


She WOULD NEVER allow herself to be classified as anything but an A+ actress, the narcissist in her wouldn't permit it!  To be honest, I wonder how she even got the job on Suits .. "casting couch" maybe (since there have been rumors about being her being a "Yacht Girl" in the past in addition to 'supposedly' blowing Harry's socks off with her sex techniques ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> She WOULD NEVER allow herself to be classified as anything but an A+ actress, the narcissist in her wouldn't permit it!  To be honest, I wonder how she even got the job on Suits .. "casting couch" maybe (since there have been rumors about being her being a "Yacht Girl" in the past in addition to 'supposedly' blowing Harry's socks off with her sex techniques ..



She is friends with the actor who played her husband, Mike.  IIRC, he got her the role.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF‘s reaction to Nflix The Crown, the cemetery, the NYT piece - oh yeah, something big is about to happen.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> For all her attempts at thinking she is "empowering" young women, where would SHE be without Harry? She'd be making a good living on the Z list but she wouldn't be on anyone's radar. Nobody would care what she would have to say about anything. If Harry were still single I think there'd be all kinds of women throwing themselves at him and/or mothers wanting their daughters to meet him. And that's OK. As long as they realized they'd be put under the microscope. Meghan realized that and loved it. She filled the role well. She smiled a lot. She appeared gracious. After she got the ring on her finger they begged out of royal duties. People can be forgiven for believing their marriage was one big scam. Her graciousness turned into pity parties, the "family she never had" was kicked to the curb, and they committed one PR disaster after another.  I can imagine the Brits are glad to be rid of her. Harry is still a novelty here. In time the sugars will be fewer and move onto less pathetic celebrities. The precious buttercups who write for People and Harper are forced to treat her as though she walks on water, since their paychecks depend on it. If the Netflix deal doesn't pan out, they're in trouble. With Christmas coming up, I wonder how she'll try to destroy another holiday.


*EXACTLY*, unfortunately, these young women don't have the experience/knowledge to see that she's only where she is (_and 'lecturing'_) because of Harry (_likely it wouldn't have happened if she continued to be the Z-class actress that she was_).  Also, let us not forget that *SHE* has been the one calling the players of these various seminars .. in order to get on the Agenda to speak; in many cases, they *DID* *NOT* ask her!  

Give me a woman who has truly made it in the world based on her own merits, not her husband's!  While I'm not particularly a fan of Oprah (_heard too many stories about her 'behind-the-scenes' behavior_) .. I have to give it to her, she made her way in the world on her own accord .. and there are quite a few others who have done the same.  Meghan?? .. puhleeze, she just spouts something that she's plagiarized!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *EXACTLY*, unfortunately, these young women don't have the experience/knowledge to see that she's only where she is (_and 'lecturing'_) because of Harry (_likely it wouldn't have happened if she continued to be the Z-class actress that she was_).  Also, let us not forget that *SHE* has been the one calling the players of these various seminars .. in order to get on the Agenda to speak; in many cases, they *DID* *NOT* ask her!
> 
> Give me a woman who has truly made it in the world based on her own merits, not her husband's!  While I'm not particularly a fan of Oprah (_heard too many stories about her 'behind-the-scenes' behavior_) .. I have to give it to her, she made her way in the world on her own accord .. and there are quite a few others who have done the same.  Meghan?? .. puhleeze, she just spouts something that she's plagiarized!


right
Oprah grew up poor, was molested as a kid.  you have to give her credit for coming up the hard way....she didn't have daddy sending her to private school, telling her she was the most special princess in the world, etc.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> She WOULD NEVER allow herself to be classified as anything but an A+ actress, the narcissist in her wouldn't permit it!  To be honest, I wonder how she even got the job on Suits .. "casting couch" maybe (since there have been rumors about being her being a "Yacht Girl" in the past in addition to 'supposedly' blowing Harry's socks off with her sex techniques ..


There's a Brit on Quora who actually said she was a yacht girl and was on the boat with her. He's ex military. I can't verify the veracity of what he said but looking at his profile with his name and pic on there, I'm wondering why it has not been deleted if untrue.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lookie here — a trifecta!   QE channeling both MM & Diana.


----------



## bisbee

chicinthecity777 said:


> New York Times is not a tabloid.


I know that...I get it delivered.  I was talking about discussions about them, not an opinion piece by MM.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Anyone buying this one?
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917117



I thought Prince William did a recent press release words to the effect "we just learned Meghan suffered a miscarriage earlier this summer".  As in they learned about it from the newspaper. So how could Harry have "leaned" on William and Charles at the time?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lookie here — a trifecta!   QE channeling both MM & Diana.
> 
> View attachment 4917445



Seeing those photos together they look like they’re attending a Red Hat Society event.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I thought Prince William did a recent press release words to the effect "we just learned Meghan suffered a miscarriage earlier this summer".  As in they learned about it from the newspaper. So how could Harry have "leaned" on William and Charles at the time?



It is just terrible and mean of William not to cover up for Meghan’s lies. Does he not know that she is a national treasure?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I think there may have been a misunderstanding...someone shared what they thought was an instagram post from W & K but was actually a fan page, I don't believe there has been anything official from the royal family at all other than from the palace saying it was "a deeply personal matter which we would not comment on".


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Seeing those photos together they look like they’re attending a Red Hat Society event.



Of the three, QE looks the best, so poised and happy.  I’d like a double of whatever she’s having.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It is just terrible and mean of William not cover up for Meghan’s lies. Does he not know that she is a national treasure?


The duchess gets comments from (non)fans in several countries, so 'world treasure' is also appropriate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The duchess gets comments from (non)fans in several countries, so 'world treasure' is also appropriate.



She does inspire strong feelings. The majority of people don’t follow her though. I wonder what percentage of the public know about the lawsuits, the cemetery photo ops, the miscarriage creative writing assignments, the frequent lectures on societal ills, and everything else. If we knew I bet  we would be surprised by how low it actually was.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bisbee said:


> I know that...I get it delivered.  I was talking about discussions about them, not an opinion piece by MM.


Good for you!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> She does inspire strong feelings. The majority of people don’t follow her though. I wonder what percentage of the public know about the lawsuits, the cemetery photo ops, the miscarriage creative writing assignments, the frequent lectures on societal ills, and everything else. If we knew I bet  we would be surprised by how low it actually was.


My SO doesn't read anything about them. I tell him a thing or 2 about them once every full moon and he just rolls his eyes and says things like "who cares!". Last time I told him about the cemeteryGate and he said "ok, they were ill advised to do that"! But my point is who advised them about it? The reality is probably they thought about it themselves and went ahead with it despite those around them told them not to!


----------



## Straight-Laced

marietouchet said:


> Interesting the story of the miscarriage was told now, not later via a NETFLIX video
> There must be some immediate (external) need to curry support eg all time low popularity, or perhaps just a wrinkle from the new PR team


In terms of timing I think it was the death of Lupo the dog. Lupo was kind of like Kate’s firstborn and Meghan had to go one better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> In terms of timing I think it was the death of Lupo the dog. Lupo was kind of like Kate’s firstborn and Meghan had to go one better.



I'd be surprised if the NYT's editorial calendar moved as fast, though.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Interesting the story of the miscarriage was told now, not later via a NETFLIX video
> There must be some immediate (external) need to curry support eg all time low popularity, or perhaps just a wrinkle from the new PR team


Actually, after thinking ... maybe I have come up with a reason for divulging now

The miscarriage was surely the CONFIDENTIAL reason for delaying the trial, I can see the judge respecting that , but the DM would argued that such a reason could not be secret forever, ie until JCMH can turn it into a NETFIX video, and 

So, I suspect the judge gave JCMH a reasonable amount of time for making an official communique, sooner rather than later, and BEFORE the summary judgment is heard in January.


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lookie here — a trifecta!   QE channeling both MM & Diana.
> 
> View attachment 4917445



The are BOTH objectively beautiful women, but that color combination... I didn't understand it on Princess Di and I didn't understand it on MM. Like genuinely, MM has the ability to pull outfits together but I remember seeing that and wondering who dressed her in the dark.


----------



## marietouchet

eunaddict said:


> The are BOTH objectively beautiful women, but that color combination... I didn't understand it on Princess Di and I didn't understand it on MM. Like genuinely, MM has the ability to pull outfits together but I remember seeing that and wondering who dressed her in the dark.


There was a reason for the Diana-look - she was travelling and wore the colors of her host nation

Diana was SUPER THEME-Y in her outfits for work occasions, they seem a bit costume-like now but she got noticed, and was a huge hit

As to the Queen, it is a color block dress rather than a floral, she wears solid color coats and the dress underneath is usually floral but never seen.  It bet this one was chosen due to not having a print - better for the camera

In the UK, MM wore a lot of dark jewel tones - dark green, wine, brown, navy - hot colors have never been her thing so yes, she was emulating her late mother in law deliberately. MM was pregnant at the time so perhaps wanted to deflect commentary ??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Actually, after thinking ... maybe I have come up with a reason for divulging now
> 
> The miscarriage was surely the CONFIDENTIAL reason for delaying the trial, I can see the judge respecting that , but the DM would argued that such a reason could not be secret forever, ie until JCMH can turn it into a NETFIX video, and
> 
> So, I suspect the judge gave JCMH a reasonable amount of time for making an official communique, sooner rather than later, and BEFORE the summary judgment is heard in January.



How on earth can a judge force you to make an announcement on a private tragedy?


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> My SO doesn't read anything about them. I tell him a thing or 2 about them once every full moon and he just rolls his eyes and says things like "who cares!". Last time I told him about the cemeteryGate and he said "ok, they were ill advised to do that"! But my point is who advised them about it? The reality is probably they thought about it themselves and went ahead with it despite those around them told them not to!



People who don't follow them cannot understand the, um, passion? zeal? that the Harry and Meghan situation inspires. I tried to explain it to my sister when she made the unfortunate mistake of mentioning to me in a text that she liked them. After I pointed out the numerous instances of lies and hypocrisy all she could come back with was "why do you care?" The best I could come up with is I don't like to see frauds pull the wool over the eyes of everyone and profit from it. Apparently to some people that doesn't matter.


----------



## bag-mania

Straight-Laced said:


> In terms of timing I think it was the death of Lupo the dog. Lupo was kind of like Kate’s firstborn and Meghan had to go one better.



I think it was a bigger plan than that. For all the piggyback articles her _NYT_ piece spawned in other publications, the miscarriage wasn't really the focal point of the article. Her main point was trying (again) to make "are you ok?" a thing. She spends most of it running down a laundry list of the year's terrible events: Covid-19, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, society's polarization (oh, the irony!). All of it leading back to her catchphrase ARE YOU OK?

Getting printed in the _New York Times_ was an incredible coup for her. It gives her credibility she has not had up to this point. She must be reveling in her own self-importance. It won't last of course. The article came out on a holiday when everyone in the US was busy and I doubt the _Times _ has as many readers as it would on a normal day. For the _Times _it was a win-win.


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How on earth can a judge force you to make an announcement on a private tragedy?




Lol, Judges, especially in the commonwealth have significant powers. 

However, IF this is what happened (I’m not convinced), the Judge likely said, (in response to a request from her lawyers) I’m willing to restrict public access to this information for a finite period of time so you can release the information as you see fit.  Which isn’t at all dramatic.


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> Actually, after thinking ... maybe I have come up with a reason for divulging now
> 
> *The miscarriage was surely the CONFIDENTIAL reason for delaying the trial, *I can see the judge respecting that , but the DM would argued that such a reason could not be secret forever, ie until JCMH can turn it into a NETFIX video, and
> 
> So, I suspect the judge gave JCMH a reasonable amount of time for making an official communique, sooner rather than later, and BEFORE the summary judgment is heard in January.


The timing doesn't add up. She was supposed to have lost the baby in July and the application for delaying the case was submitted in Oct. The delay requested was from Jan until next Oct. I know a miscarriage is a tragedy but to delay a case by more than 1 year? Is that really reasonable?


----------



## youngster

chicinthecity777 said:


> The timing doesn't add up. She was supposed to have lost the baby in July and the application for delaying the case was submitted in Oct. The delay requested was from Jan until next Oct. I know a miscarriage is a tragedy but to delay a case by more than 1 year? Is that really reasonable?



I could see her telling the judge that she suffered a miscarriage over the summer, is trying to conceive again, possibly even disclosing that she is undergoing fertility treatments, and can't leave the U.S.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> I could see her telling the judge that she suffered a miscarriage over the summer, is trying to conceive again, possibly even disclosing that she is undergoing fertility treatments, and can't leave the U.S.


Well good luck to her! She's already admitted "perjury" by denying and then admitting that she/they provided details to "Finding Freebies" author.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> The are BOTH objectively beautiful women, but that color combination... I didn't understand it on Princess Di and I didn't understand it on MM. Like genuinely, MM has the ability to pull outfits together but I remember seeing that and wondering who dressed her in the dark.


doncha know about the red hat society?








						5 Reasons Why The Red Hat Society Is Worth Joining | Inside your IRA
					

The best investment you’ll ever make is the legacy you’ll build through steadfast relationships. The Red Hat Society is for every woman in the world. Bring out the Queen in you and be part of a great legacy of strong, independent, and empowered women!




					www.insideyourira.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hmm!


----------



## A1aGypsy

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950



Oh man.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950



She can’t help herself from stealing the work of other people. The plagiarism queen! I still doubt the pregnancy/miscarriage happened at all. But IF it did happen, how sad that she cannot find her own words to describe the feelings she wants us to believe she has.


----------



## lulilu

--


lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950



Does she have an original thought in her head???


----------



## 1LV

lulilu said:


> --
> 
> 
> Does she have an original thought in her head???


I’ll say it again, if she did it died of loneliness.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> --
> 
> 
> Does she have an original thought in her head???



No, every move she makes is carefully calculated to make her look like the most wonderful, sympathetic, inspirational woman in the world. It is a mask for herself she has created in her mind. For some it is working. 

Apparently she doesn’t consider that other women may read books. Maybe most of her fans don’t.


----------



## rose60610

Maybe for Christmas we'll be treated to a M&H's essay about life since moving to CA. But somebody please stop her before she says: "We got a great Netflix deal, and I had a miscarriage, it was the best of times and the worst of times".


----------



## Chanbal

*Buckingham Palace has been criticized for its response to Meghan Markle's miscarriage essay*

Russell Myers, royal editor at the Daily Mirror, said Buckingham Palace declined to comment when he contacted them about the duchess' op-ed.

"I think this is a huge, huge missed opportunity for the royal family ... they should have made a public statement to say, this is a really brave and honest thing to do, because just on the very basis that it would have mended some of the cracks in the relationship that we've been talking about for months and months," Myers said during a recent appearance on talkRadio.

Myers also said that if the palace had opted to comment, it would have provided a bigger conversation about the topic, rather than "just be Meghan out on her own."

poor abandoned MM


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950


could this be coincidence?  there have been many lawsuits for plagarism in songs....George Harrison got sued for My Sweet Lord (which he didn't intentionally plagarize but he did lose the lawsuit I think).  If Meghan did steal this, I hope she gets sued....give her a taste of her own meds


----------



## Aimee3

Stefanie Tong should sue for plagiarism!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> could this be coincidence?  there have been many lawsuits for plagarism in songs....George Harrison got sued for My Sweet Lord (which he didn't intentionally plagarize but he did lose the lawsuit I think).  If Meghan did steal this, I hope she gets sued....give her a taste of her own meds



I’m sure the plagiarism was unintentional. She likely read the book to get a feel for how women who had a miscarriage are supposed to feel. Then she forgot where she got the idea from and didn’t know it was anything that would be discovered.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *Buckingham Palace has been criticized for its response to Meghan Markle's miscarriage essay*
> 
> Russell Myers, royal editor at the Daily Mirror, said Buckingham Palace declined to comment when he contacted them about the duchess' op-ed.
> 
> "I think this is a huge, huge missed opportunity for the royal family ... they should have made a public statement to say, this is a really brave and honest thing to do, because just on the very basis that it would have mended some of the cracks in the relationship that we've been talking about for months and months," Myers said during a recent appearance on talkRadio.
> 
> Myers also said that if the palace had opted to comment, it would have provided a bigger conversation about the topic, rather than "just be Meghan out on her own."
> 
> poor abandoned MM
> 
> View attachment 4917976



I assume this Russell Myers is a frequent critic of the royal family. He sounds like someone with an ax to grind.


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950


Another new low.


----------



## Tootsie17

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950


Omg!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Don’t hold your breath waiting to see if the New York Times will mention the plagiarism. I already know they won’t. They got the encouraging narrative they liked, no need to follow it up with anything like facts.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I assume this Russell Myers is a frequent critic of the royal family. He sounds like someone with an ax to grind.


I wouldn't be very surprised if someone from MM's new PR-team knows him


----------



## rose60610

So was The Palace supposed to react with some kind of global outpouring of grief? As though Meghan was the absolute first in the RF to have a (supposed) miscarriage?  Was QEII supposed to beg them to come back? Is the world supposed to stop rotating in orbit when something happens to Duchess Meghan of Woke? M&H ditched the RF, the RF didn't throw them out. I sympathize with people who've had a loss. And they usually got a job they have to show up at the next day. M&H were multi million dollar house shopping. And searching for more events to crash. If anyone expected The Palace to "do more", then why wasn't this major "news" announced when it actually supposedly happened? If The Palace is supposed to comment on everything, it can't be a one way street. M&H are damned lucky The Palace didn't publicly condemn their desperate idiotic foray into the cemetery where they used dead soldiers as props in an attempt to raise their image.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4917950


Wow, this is truly unbelievable! 
Should MM file a lawsuit against the ghostwriter?


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> So was The Palace supposed to react with some kind of global outpouring of grief? As though Meghan was the absolute first in the RF to have a (supposed) miscarriage?  Was QEII supposed to beg them to come back? Is the world supposed to stop rotating in orbit when something happens to Duchess Meghan of Woke? M&H ditched the RF, the RF didn't throw them out. I sympathize with people who've had a loss. And they usually got a job they have to show up at the next day. M&H were multi million dollar house shopping. And searching for more events to crash. If anyone expected The Palace to "do more", then why wasn't this major "news" announced when it actually supposedly happened? If The Palace is supposed to comment on everything, it can't be a one way street. M&H are damned lucky The Palace didn't publicly condemn their desperate idiotic foray into the cemetery where they used dead soldiers as props in an attempt to raise their image.



This is what they and their PR team hoped for, I'm sure, because it would have drawn more attention if the Palace had commented and extended the story beyond its 15 minutes. It also would have reminded everybody that _Harry is 6th in line_, just in case we forgot.  I imagine the Palace didn't comment because they are no longer senior royals, they are respecting their privacy, and they don't want to set a precedent of commenting about everything those two do, or don't do.  You are either a senior royal, on the official payroll and official duty roster, or you aren't.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> *Buckingham Palace has been criticized for its response to Meghan Markle's miscarriage essay*
> 
> Russell Myers, royal editor at the Daily Mirror, said Buckingham Palace declined to comment when he contacted them about the duchess' op-ed.
> 
> "I think this is a huge, huge missed opportunity for the royal family ... they should have made a public statement to say, this is a really brave and honest thing to do, because just on the very basis that it would have mended some of the cracks in the relationship that we've been talking about for months and months," Myers said during a recent appearance on talkRadio.
> 
> Myers also said that if the palace had opted to comment, it would have provided a bigger conversation about the topic, rather than "just be Meghan out on her own."
> 
> poor abandoned MM
> 
> View attachment 4917976


 Mr Myers needs to study a little history: Meghan is not the first Royal to have experienced this so his criticism they did not praise her for a "really brave and honest thing to do" is really petty. Zara Tindall suffered two miscarriages, and Sophie, Countess of Wessex, collapsed, was flown by helicopter, and had an emergency three hour surgery, as the result of an ectopic pregnancy. At the time Edward spoke with the press outside the hospital about their experience. Mention this as it refutes another of MEMEME's bits of word salad, it was not a stigma to do so. Nor was it when Zara talked about her experiences. Major difference, however, that Zara and Edward focused on the topic and did not digress into a long list of poor me/us grievances related to other topics as Meghan managed to do in the NYT.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Mr Myers needs to study a little history: Meghan is not the first Royal to have experienced this so his criticism they did not praise her for a "really brave and honest thing to do" is really petty. Zara Tindall suffered two miscarriages, and Sophie, Countess of Wessex, collapsed, was flown by helicopter, and had an emergency three hour surgery, as the result of an ectopic pregnancy. At the time Edward spoke with the press outside the hospital about their experience. Mention this as it refutes another of MEMEME's bits of word salad, it was not a stigma to do so. Nor was it when Zara talked about her experiences. Major difference, however, that Zara and Edward focused on the topic and did not digress into a long list of poor me/us grievances related to other topics as Meghan managed to do in the NYT.


I agree with you, and I don't know why Meyers praised MM. I wonder if her PR-team pulled some strings... PR-teams are being paid to make MM look good, and should have plenty of connections.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Completely agree.  Thinking a little bit more about the “chance at Harry” issue - does the bold part suggest anything about Doria and MM’s relationship? Or because the daughter is on a second marriage and well past 30, is the mother excused from the discussion?  IMHO this is the topic MM should address. It does get to the heart of the issue which could resolve much of the stans’ rage. Diana, Sarah, and other royal married-ins have said they were not prepared for certain parts of the role, so they chose to exit. Wonder why they weren’t ready. Princess Grace‘s unhappiness was well-known and documented. If MM could step up, tell the world her thinking, admit some uncomfortable truths without blaming the royal institution,  she would be much more respected.
> 
> ETA: same for Harry - take responsibility and watch the world’s opinion change.


Can't remember where I read it, but there was a blurb written by a former friend (_quelle surprise_) .. where she simply stated that Meghan was *DETERMINED* to marry Harry, and when her friend said to her "_do you really know what you are getting into?_", Meghan told her to bugger off!  She stated that Meghan pressured Harry to get that ring on her finger, and I think we can all see how persuasive she can be.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but there was a blurb written by a former friend (_quelle surprise_) .. where she simply stated that Meghan was *DETERMINED* to marry Harry, and when her friend said to her "_do you really know what you are getting into?_", Meghan told her to bugger off!  She stated that Meghan pressured Harry to get that ring on her finger, and I think we can all see how persuasive she can be.


and she has the witchcraft too


----------



## Sharont2305

With Sophie, it was news because it was literally life or death for her, it hadn't been officially announced she was pregnant. 
Re Zara, a pregnancy announcement had already happened and she lost her baby, I believe, at 18 weeks. She had to give birth to it. 
There was no need for Meghan to announce her miscarriage 5 months after, I can't see the reasoning behind it. 
Is she trying to emulate her late mother in law who had a miscarriage between William and Harry?


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> With Sophie, it was news because it was literally life or death for her, it hadn't been officially announced she was pregnant.
> Re Zara, a pregnancy announcement had already happened and she lost her baby, I believe, at 18 weeks. She had to give birth to it.
> There was no need for Meghan to announce her miscarriage 5 months after, I can't see the reasoning behind it.
> Is she trying to emulate her late mother in law who had a miscarriage between William and Harry?



From the way this is coming together, she is emulating everyone and everything if it means getting attention. 

A miscarriage is an untouchable subject that will *only* get her sympathy - no way will it be criticized, even if it sounds fishy and is dressed in the imagery and prose of others. You can't prove or disprove a miscarriage early in the first trimester and no one is going to ask her to show the receipts.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> From the way this is coming together, she is emulating everyone and everything if it means getting attention.
> 
> A miscarriage is an untouchable subject that will *only* get her sympathy - no way will it be criticized, even if it sounds fishy and is dressed in the imagery and prose of others. You can't prove or disprove a miscarriage early in the first trimester and no one is going to ask her to show the receipts.


In America, hospital receipts.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> The timing doesn't add up. She was supposed to have lost the baby in July and the application for delaying the case was submitted in Oct. The delay requested was from Jan until next Oct. I know a miscarriage is a tragedy but to delay a case by more than 1 year? Is that really reasonable?



She obviously doesn't expect to pay for the delay.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> could this be coincidence?  there have been many lawsuits for plagarism in songs....George Harrison got sued for My Sweet Lord (which he didn't intentionally plagarize but he did lose the lawsuit I think).  If Meghan did steal this, I hope she gets sued....give her a taste of her own meds



Yup, fined for 'subconscious plagiarism' of copying 'He's so Fine'  by Ronnie Mack by the Chiffons. 

The complainant has to prove the alleged infringer could have experienced (in this case listened to) the original and the 2 versions are analysed side by side (excessive of 3 notes (four note rule)). In those days (1970) it was actually much harder. With global SM now, much easier.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure the plagiarism was unintentional. She likely read the book to get a feel for how women who had a miscarriage are supposed to feel. Then she forgot where she got the idea from and didn’t know it was anything that would be discovered.



Although unintentional would just mean subconscious (in the eyes of the law). 

MM's work clearly plagiarises. She should submit all future work by Turnitin to avoid. One day someone will take her on big time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> This is what they and their PR team hoped for, I'm sure, because it would have drawn more attention if the Palace had commented and extended the story beyond its 15 minutes. It also would have reminded everybody that _Harry is 6th in line_, just in case we forgot.  I imagine the Palace didn't comment because they are no longer senior royals, they are respecting their privacy, and they don't want to set a precedent of commenting about everything those two do, or don't do.  You are either a senior royal, on the official payroll and official duty roster, or you aren't.



BF do not comment as policy and principle. Not politics nor personal. That's how they stay where they are.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Although unintentional would just mean subconscious (in the eyes of the law).
> 
> MM's work clearly plagiarises. She should submit all future work by Turnitin to avoid. One day someone will take her on big time.



I’m surprised it hasn’t happened already. If you Google Meghan Markle and plagiarism you’ll see some things going back years. The media here is either afraid to criticize her or invested in her success, or both.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> In America, hospital receipts.



Those were direct billed to Charles  I could make period jokes but not gonna.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I assume this Russell Myers is a frequent critic of the royal family. He sounds like someone with an ax to grind.


He writes for the Daily Mirror which is a far left anti-monarchy and woke central tabloids, a very bad combination! Much smaller reader base than the DM!  I don't read it but occasionally their articles gets quoted on my timeline on twitter. Here are some samples of recent stores: 1) a woman celebrated her 1st wedding anniversary of marrying a tree; 2) a 20s something guy complained about a shop who he applied for a job has turned him down because he thinks he's a big baby and needs to wear diapers therefore needs multiple breaks throughout the working day to change his diapers. You get the picture... I think supporting the super woke Duchess is like a no brained for them!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Look who’s back, Omid Scobie writing a supportive article for Harpers Bazaar. Again with the term “stigma.” They got their notes together.
> 
> View attachment 4916703


UGH .. in addition to Meghan and Harry, I so wish that this *parasitic*, *obsequious*, *sycophant* GOES AWAY as well!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but there was a blurb written by a former friend (_quelle surprise_) .. where she simply stated that Meghan was *DETERMINED* to marry Harry, and when her friend said to her "_do you really know what you are getting into?_", Meghan told her to bugger off!  She stated that Meghan pressured Harry to get that ring on her finger, and I think we can all see how persuasive she can be.


I recall to have read this. It was someone in London that MM used for connections prior to H.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> So was The Palace supposed to react with some kind of global outpouring of grief? As though Meghan was the absolute first in the RF to have a (supposed) miscarriage?  Was QEII supposed to beg them to come back? Is the world supposed to stop rotating in orbit when something happens to Duchess Meghan of Woke? M&H ditched the RF, the RF didn't throw them out. I sympathize with people who've had a loss. And they usually got a job they have to show up at the next day. M&H were multi million dollar house shopping. And searching for more events to crash. If anyone expected The Palace to "do more", then why wasn't this major "news" announced when it actually supposedly happened? If The Palace is supposed to comment on everything, it can't be a one way street. M&H are damned lucky The Palace didn't publicly condemn their desperate idiotic foray into the cemetery where they used dead soldiers as props in an attempt to raise their image.


It seems wherever she goes, whatever she does is drama. I mean yes we all have dramas but dang, she creates drama. How sick in the head is she?


----------



## CeeJay

eunaddict said:


> Oh, speak for yourself  . It's "_been this way from the dawn of time_" because women have only very recently won things like the right to vote, the right to education and the right to own their own bodies (and even then, this isn't the standard of the world).
> 
> I know plenty of women who see men as a way up the social ladder and I know plenty of women who are STILL teaching their daughters the same. Thank GOD, I had parents (especially my dad) who raised me with a "Instead of dreaming of marrying a doctor, go BE the doctor" mentality - replace doctor with whatever career/position as required.
> 
> I'll be elevating my financial and social status on my own, thanks. Everything a man gives in marriage can be taken away, to depend on that being there is stupidity, but what I earned is mine. And I like being able to depend on me (with some parental guidance while I find my footing as an adult). And for the record, like most independent women, my dreams of being a princess ended when I was 10.
> 
> There are very few things that really rile me up, and this mentality is one of them.


I can't even say how much I LOVE this; this is exactly how I was raised .. my Dad especially taught me to be independent and not depend on a man for my success and wealth!


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> The timing doesn't add up. She was supposed to have lost the baby in July and the application for delaying the case was submitted in Oct. The delay requested was from Jan until next Oct. I know a miscarriage is a tragedy but to delay a case by more than 1 year? Is that really reasonable?


You are great!!! .. yes, if you do the 'investigative' research, it seems as though this is constantly a theme with these two!  If they are going to lie, then make sure you have all your facts (or lies) straight; they are just setting themselves up for someone to truly call them out .. can't wait!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m surprised it hasn’t happened already. *If you Google Meghan Markle and plagiarism *you’ll see some things going back years. The media here is either afraid to criticize her or invested in her success, or both.


I did and it's 
She was even accused of copying her Vogue cover. 
COVERS FOR VOGUE


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> So was The Palace supposed to react with some kind of global outpouring of grief? As though Meghan was the absolute first in the RF to have a (supposed) miscarriage?  Was QEII supposed to beg them to come back? Is the world supposed to stop rotating in orbit when something happens to Duchess Meghan of Woke? M&H ditched the RF, the RF didn't throw them out. I sympathize with people who've had a loss. And they usually got a job they have to show up at the next day. M&H were multi million dollar house shopping. And searching for more events to crash. If anyone expected The Palace to "do more", then why wasn't this major "news" announced when it actually supposedly happened? If The Palace is supposed to comment on everything, it can't be a one way street. M&H are damned lucky The Palace didn't publicly condemn their desperate idiotic foray into the cemetery where they used dead soldiers as props in an attempt to raise their image.


If I recall, Zara (Phillips) Tindal had 2 miscarriages .. I don't recall the Palace making commentary on that!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> BF do not comment as policy and principle. Not politics nor personal. That's how they stay where they are.





Sharont2305 said:


> With Sophie, it was news because it was literally life or death for her, it hadn't been officially announced she was pregnant.
> Re Zara, a pregnancy announcement had already happened and she lost her baby, I believe, at 18 weeks. She had to give birth to it.
> There was no need for Meghan to announce her miscarriage 5 months after, I can't see the reasoning behind it.
> Is she trying to emulate her late mother in law who had a miscarriage between William and Harry?


and how artful of her to somehow weave the death of george floyd and all the other troubles of the world into her story....she is something else


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did not know it had been confirmed that Diana had a miscarriage.  To my knowledge, she never spoke about it, it doesn’t appear in any of the books or documentaries about her.  Interesting.


----------



## drifter

Sharont2305 said:


> With Sophie, it was news because it was literally life or death for her, it hadn't been officially announced she was pregnant.
> Re Zara, a pregnancy announcement had already happened and she lost her baby, I believe, at 18 weeks. She had to give birth to it.
> There was no need for Meghan to announce her miscarriage 5 months after, I can't see the reasoning behind it.
> Is she trying to emulate her late mother in law who had a miscarriage between William and Harry?


I remember Sophie's miscarriage because she almost died.  It was reported by all the major news agencies.  I think she had a ectopic pregnancy.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did not know it had been confirmed that Diana had a miscarriage.  To my knowledge, she never spoke about it, it doesn’t appear in any of the books or documentaries about her.  Interesting.


She miscarried a week after her pregnancy was announced apparently.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> She obviously doesn't expect to pay for the delay.


Yes, this trial is hugely expensive - millions not just to MM but to the taxpayer - the lawyers will be paid to scuttle around for another year, unless a summary judgment is upheld.
Harry has not got that much money ...


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure the plagiarism was unintentional. She likely read the book to get a feel for how women who had a miscarriage are supposed to feel. Then she forgot where she got the idea from and didn’t know it was anything that would be discovered.


lets look on the positive side, maybe the new PR team was bought in to reduce any look of of plagiarism
So, far, I would say the new team is batting 0


----------



## marietouchet

A1aGypsy said:


> Lol, Judges, especially in the commonwealth have significant powers.
> 
> However, IF this is what happened (I’m not convinced), the Judge likely said, (in response to a request from her lawyers) I’m willing to restrict public access to this information for a finite period of time so you can release the information as you see fit.  Which isn’t at all dramatic.


And MM was not told how much, if anything, she had to reveal, just that a gag order was issued and the DM could not ay anything for a known period of time about the reasons for the delay, but , once the gag order had expired they were free to stir the pot 
So, MM chose to tell her version first


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> I did and it's
> She was even accused of copying her Vogue cover.
> COVERS FOR VOGUE



How is it that she is never called to task for this cr*p?  That she continues to use other people's words and ideas -- almost identically -- and gets accolades is proof to me that karma doesn't exist.  smdh


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Yes, this trial is hugely expensive - millions not just to MM but to the taxpayer - the lawyers will be paid to scuttle around for another year, unless a summary judgment is upheld.
> Harry has not got that much money ...


I would have long forgotten about the MM - father letter  had it not been for the court case  - the letter was 2.5 years ago ???

Nothing more is substantially known about the MM - Tom relationship (than was known 2 -3 years ago) but we know all sort of stuff about how she divulges to Omid and the fab five (the friends that divulged to People)

It is the court case that is making us dwell on it interminably


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> lets look on the positive side, maybe the new PR team was bought in to reduce any look of of plagiarism
> So, far, I would say the new team is batting 0



The new team obviously doesn’t know her yet. It didn’t occur to them to ask her “did you lift any of this from someone else’s work?” before working out a deal with NYT.


----------



## Chanbal

Dear fellow raindrops, H is back to teach us all on how to beat climate change by traveling in private jets and living in 16 (or 19)-toilet mansions. This is rather confusing, please apply yourself and learn. 

*'What if every single one of us was a raindrop?': Prince Harry asks 'what's the point of bringing children into the world if it's on fire' but says we can beat climate change by 'relieving the parched ground'* 

Prince Harry has urged people to be more 'like raindrops' in the fight against climate change, in an impassioned speech to mark the launch of a new Netflix-style platform for environmental and conservation documentaries.

Peppering his speech with both woke and whimsical references, the Duke of Sussex, 36, who currently resides in a $15million mansion in California said: 'Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground. What if every single one of us was a raindrop, and if every single one of us cared?

'At the end of the day, nature is our life source... But you can't uplift, educate and inspire unless there is a form of action that follows.'

Harry reflected on the 'universally tough year' that everyone has experienced, adding that he has found solace in nature, which he believes is the 'most healing part of life'.

'Someone said to me right at the start of the pandemic, "It's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour",' he observed.

He also joked dancing on camera is 'his idea of hell' because 'everyone laughs at him' while reminiscing about his and Meghan Markle's royal tour of South Africa last year. 

Harry, who is head of the conservation group Africa Parks, also spoke of his love for the continent, recalling how it afforded him a sense of 'escapism and space' when he visited aged 12, shortly after the death of his mother, Princess Diana. 

'I don't know what it is, but there's something in the air that ends up running in your blood, and no matter what experience you have it just pulls you back,' he said.

'The sense of escapism and space that this continent of Africa afforded me is something that I will be eternally grateful for.' 

Lessons from Harry


----------



## bag-mania

Oh Harry! I see you've had Meghan write your material for you. I can't imagine a grown man writing so flowery, like a 13-year-old girl.
_'At the end of the day, nature is our life source... But you can't uplift, educate and inspire unless there is a form of action that follows.'_

Harry, just come right out and admit that the "someone" was Meghan. Everyone knows you are cloistered away in your mansion and you aren't talking to anyone else.
_'Someone said to me right at the start of the pandemic, "It's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour",' he observed._


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H could perhaps learn from Lady Vestey's children (low profile), but elegance and education are not MM's strong points! (H just follows MM direction) 

*Prince Harry sends his condolences on the 'sudden' death of his godmother Lady Celia Vestey, 71, who was a friend of the Queen and married to one of Britain's richest men - telling her three children they are 'in his thoughts'*

The Duke of Sussex has sent his condolences to Lady Vestey's three children, William, 37, Arthur, 35, and Mary, 28, it was announced today.

Unlike some society figures, William, Arthur and Mary prefer to keep a low profile and are rarely seen out on the town.

Lady Vestey RIP


----------



## zen1965

Living in a mansion with umpteenth bathrooms and manicured gardens in dry Southern California, JCMH has no business whatsoever lecturing anybody on climate-change appropriate behaviour. Stupid hypocrite.


----------



## csshopper

If JCMH's new flacks are monitoring us, please take note and tell the NitWit his hypocrisy has hit a new low and his evidently "new" "whimsical identity" is a BOMB. While he pontificates, the sprinklers and drips systems on his massive property are probably dumping thousands of gallons of water to keep it green for him to enjoy. Yet he professes to prefer the parched lands of Africa. As to Africa, the amount of water sitting in the tanks of all the toilets in his house on the hill would be nirvana to the people scratching, literally, to find water in parts of that Continent. 

It doesn't take you dancing on camera to make people laugh at you, all you have to do is show up in front of one, open your mouth to spew forth your preaching and platitudes. The unfortunate thing is, they often are worthy causes or ideals that are trivialized by your approach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, he now wants us to be a raindrop???  
What kind of raindrop, buttercup?  Hail? Sleet? Drizzle? Snow grains? Ice Crystals?  
Someone should educate this pre-K Disney lover what raindrops really are. 



			NWS JetStream - Types of Precipitation
		








						Does rain ever fall as pure water? | BBC Science Focus Magazine
					

Dirty raindrops keep fallin' on my head.



					www.sciencefocus.com
				



*Does rain ever fall as pure water?*​
No. Water is an excellent solvent and rain always contains dissolved gases from the atmosphere.
Even in a remote, pollution-free region, rainwater will still be slightly acidic because carbon dioxide in the air reacts with water to form carbonic acid.
Rainwater isn’t even pure when the raindrop forms, because each drop precipitates around a speck of dust, or an airborne bacterium.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he now wants us to be a raindrop???
> What kind of raindrop, buttercup?  Hail? Sleet? Drizzle? Snow grains? Ice Crystals?
> Someone should educate this pre-K Disney lover what raindrops really are.
> 
> 
> 
> NWS JetStream - Types of Precipitation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does rain ever fall as pure water? | BBC Science Focus Magazine
> 
> 
> Dirty raindrops keep fallin' on my head.
> 
> 
> 
> www.sciencefocus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Does rain ever fall as pure water?*​
> No. Water is an excellent solvent and rain always contains dissolved gases from the atmosphere.
> Even in a remote, pollution-free region, rainwater will still be slightly acidic because carbon dioxide in the air reacts with water to form carbonic acid.
> Rainwater isn’t even pure when the raindrop forms, because each drop precipitates around a speck of dust, or an airborne bacterium.


I don’t like the silly raindrop metaphor ... not a woke metaphor .. more wet or damp, maybe moldy to me
Not loving the new or team - I must try to give them a chance


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I don’t like the silly raindrop metaphor ... not a woke metaphor .. more wet or damp, maybe moldy to me
> Not loving the new or team - I must try to give them a chance



I feel old. Is this nonsense supposed to be what younger people want to hear today? Touchy-feely run-on sentences that mean absolutely nothing. It's like the reverse of the old saying "actions speak louder than words." It doesn't matter what you do as long as you are saying the correct words (with lots of emotion and emphasis).


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh Harry! I see you've had Meghan write your material for you. I can't imagine a grown man writing so flowery, like a 13-year-old girl.
> _'At the end of the day, nature is our life source... But you can't uplift, educate and inspire unless there is a form of action that follows.'_
> 
> Harry, just come right out and admit that the "someone" was Meghan. Everyone knows you are cloistered away in your mansion and you aren't talking to anyone else.
> _'Someone said to me right at the start of the pandemic, "It's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour",' he observed._


and in his case, what is the the "form of action that follows"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> If JCMH's new flacks are monitoring us, please take note and tell the NitWit his hypocrisy has hit a new low and his evidently "new" "whimsical identity" is a BOMB. While he pontificates, the sprinklers and drips systems on his massive property are probably dumping thousands of gallons of water to keep it green for him to enjoy. Yet he professes to prefer the parched lands of Africa. As to Africa, the amount of water sitting in the tanks of all the toilets in his house on the hill would be nirvana to the people scratching, literally, to find water in parts of that Continent.
> 
> It doesn't take you dancing on camera to make people laugh at you, all you have to do is show up in front of one, open your mouth to spew forth your preaching and platitudes. The unfortunate thing is, they often are worthy causes or ideals that are trivialized by your approach.


This! The new PR flacks are as tone deaf as MM and JCMH!


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> This! The new PR flacks are as tone deaf as MM and JCMH!


well, of course.  they picked them.  do you think they would hire someone who would disagree with them?


----------



## kemilia

How many raindrops did it take to fill up their swimming pool and toilet tanks?

The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> How many raindrops did it take to fill up their swimming pool and toilet tanks?
> 
> The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.


yes, if they want to been seen as serious and standing behind what they say, how about going and living in a modest home in Africa?  without expensive security staff.  will never happen of course


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I feel old. Is this nonsense supposed to be what younger people want to hear today? Touchy-feely run-on sentences that mean absolutely nothing. It's like the reverse of the old saying "actions speak louder than words." It doesn't matter what you do as long as you are saying the correct words (with lots of emotion and emphasis).



Yes, the more descriptively vague words you add the more it tricks the reader into thinking you know what you are talking about. Or great when you need to write a college paper with a minimum word count but you have minimum knowledge of the subject.


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> How many raindrops did it take to fill up their swimming pool and toilet tanks?
> 
> The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.



They fill their pools and toilets with the hot, salty tears they weep from no one asking how they are doing.


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> yes, if they want to been seen as serious and standing behind what they say, how about going and living in a modest home in Africa?  without expensive security staff.  will never happen of course



The bar is not nearly as high.
Let’s start with having only 7 bathrooms for 3 people instead of 14, and creating a climate-friendly garden. There are beautiful cacti and succulent gardens in LA that require probably 1% of the water theirs does. But do as I say, not as I do, as always with these two hypocrites.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana called her stepmother Acid Raine.









						Princess Diana’s stepmother left in grave with NO headstone
					

PRINCESS DIANA’s stepmother, who gained the unsavoury nickname ‘Acid Raine’ from her step-children, has been left in a grave with no formal headstone, it has been revealed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> The bar is not nearly as high.
> Let’s start with having only 7 bathrooms for 3 people instead of 14, and creating a climate-friendly garden. There are beautiful cacti and succulent gardens in LA that require probably 1% of the water theirs does. But do as I say, not as I do, as always with these two hypocrites.


you're more generous than I.  I think three bedrooms and one or two baths like normal people would suffice.  of course that is not worthy of their magnificence


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana called her stepmother Acid Raine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana’s stepmother left in grave with NO headstone
> 
> 
> PRINCESS DIANA’s stepmother, who gained the unsavoury nickname ‘Acid Raine’ from her step-children, has been left in a grave with no formal headstone, it has been revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



It's kind of ridiculous for the publication to try to tie this woman to Diana or any of her siblings. They were her step-children. Putting Diana's name in any article title means automatic clickbait. Raine had her own blood children. If none of them thought it was important to buy a headstone for their mother's grave in four years, well, I'm afraid that doesn't speak well for the lady in question.


----------



## mshermes

I’m not sure but I think he drank her Kool-Aid.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I don’t like the silly raindrop metaphor ... not a woke metaphor .. more wet or damp, maybe moldy to me
> Not loving the new or team - I must try to give them a chance


It’s just soggy and weepy.


----------



## CeeJay

Oh boy .. are we now going to see PAP (_their hired PAPs of course_) shots of Harry (_Meghan close by in some new haute-couture one-of-a-kind designer frock_) hugging a tree .. perhaps a *CACTUS *(_since they don't require that much water_)?  UFB these two ..


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> I’m not sure but I think he drank her Kool-Aid.



I think he's had his blood replaced with her Kool-Aid. He never used to talk like that, did he? It's like he has some creepy kind of Meghan Lovebomb Stockholm Syndrome thing going on.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> MM&H could perhaps learn from Lady Vestey's children (low profile), but elegance and education are not MM's strong points! (H just follows MM direction)
> 
> *Prince Harry sends his condolences on the 'sudden' death of his godmother Lady Celia Vestey, 71, who was a friend of the Queen and married to one of Britain's richest men - telling her three children they are 'in his thoughts'*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has sent his condolences to Lady Vestey's three children, William, 37, Arthur, 35, and Mary, 28, it was announced today.
> 
> Unlike some society figures, William, Arthur and Mary prefer to keep a low profile and are rarely seen out on the town.
> 
> Lady Vestey RIP



Hmmm.  Prince Harry's godmother dies, who was also a good friend to QEII. Soooooo, is he going to lay a wreath somewhere in her honor? Send flowers? Since she was a good friend to QEII, will he be gushing with sympathy to his grandmother? I mean, there are M&H stans who are critical of The Palace for not wallowing in pity for Meghan. Considering how flowery his language has become recently, telling Lady Celia's three children they are "in his thoughts" is rather curt. I wonder if godchild Harry is in her will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I feel old. Is this nonsense supposed to be what younger people want to hear today? *Touchy-feely run-on sentences that mean absolutely nothing.* It's like the reverse of the old saying "actions speak louder than words." It doesn't matter what you do as long as you are saying the correct words (with lots of emotion and emphasis).



It's in keeping with a large segment of society. Touchy-feely, and whoever can scream the loudest wins. Action through guilt trips. Debates? Dialogs? Heck no. The new woke way is to guilt people into doing or believing whatever, and call them names if they don't comply. And don't you dare point out hypocrisy or look for proof, especially if the wokers are media pets. People are offended at being called "snowflakes", but I guess being asked to become "raindrops" is endearing? Another thing, climate change isn't just fires. It's also floods, etc. So isn't being a "raindrop" contributing to flooding? Or is it when you're born into obscene wealth, global fame and astronomical privilege you get to choose your favorite natural disasters? Oh wait, fires affect Cah-lee-PHO-nee-yah, as in, Montecito. So to hell with other people's miseries.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I feel old. Is this nonsense supposed to be what younger people want to hear today? Touchy-feely run-on sentences that mean absolutely nothing. It's like the reverse of the old saying "actions speak louder than words." It doesn't matter what you do as long as you are saying the correct words (with lots of emotion and emphasis).



Younger? Or you mean mid-30s?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Younger? Or you mean mid-30s?



At least up to mid-30s if the women writing for these web sites who are singing her praises are any indication. Not too surprisingly, I don't think she has many guy fans.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> It's in keeping with a large segment of society. Touchy-feely, and whoever can scream the loudest wins. Action through guilt trips. Debates? Dialogs? Heck no. The new woke way is to guilt people into doing or believing whatever, and call them names if they don't comply. And don't you dare point out hypocrisy or look for proof, especially if the wokers are media pets. People are offended at being called "snowflakes", but I guess being asked to become "raindrops" is endearing? Another thing, climate change isn't just fires. It's also floods, etc. So isn't being a "raindrop" contributing to flooding? Or is it when you're born into obscene wealth, global fame and astronomical privilege you get to choose your favorite natural disasters? Oh wait, fires affect Cah-lee-PHO-nee-yah, as in, Montecito. So to hell with other people's miseries.



"What if each one of us was a raindrop?" [Insert a photo of Harry among the flowers and rainbows here]

I bet all of the men he served with in Afghanistan are wondering what the hell happened to him.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> "What if each one of us was a raindrop?" [Insert a photo of Harry among the flowers and rainbows here]
> 
> I bet all of the men he served with in Afghanistan are wondering what the hell happened to him.



Drugged


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nflix may want them to update Singing in the Rain. They already have the press release photo:


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nflix may want them to update Singing in the Rain. They already have the press release photo:
> 
> View attachment 4918836


And their sequel could be called “$hitting In Our Nest”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nflix may want them to update Singing in the Rain. They already have the press release photo:
> 
> View attachment 4918836



If I didn't dislike her so strongly this would be a stunning picture.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lighting makes such a difference :


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lighting makes such a difference :
> 
> View attachment 4918865



Although Meghan looks perfect, with her laser gaze of love directed right on Harry. It's amazing he didn't burst into flames from the sheer intensity.


----------



## marietouchet

i was making pesto sauce .. got a great source of bail and pesto makes a go-to lunch - since I cook 21 meals a week since there is no business travel ... CEO  DH and I expect nice lunches   ...
I froze the pesto in washable glass jars - no PLASTIC !!!!!!!!
IMHO, this is MY opinion, please dont disillusion me (ie that the carbon foot print of producing ONE ziploc is less than that of washing one glass jar) ... I was thinking I was making  a difference in climate control but in the end I dont know, must research .... 

@CeeJay   are they still rationing water in CA ? for the CASA de JCMH , surely not .... ???? 

Last trip to CA - airport sprinklers were hard at work in Sacramento - during drought ......


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> Dear fellow raindrops, H is back to teach us all on how to beat climate change by traveling in private jets and living in 16 (or 19)-toilet mansions. This is rather confusing, please apply yourself and learn.
> 
> *'What if every single one of us was a raindrop?': Prince Harry asks 'what's the point of bringing children into the world if it's on fire' but says we can beat climate change by 'relieving the parched ground'*
> 
> Prince Harry has urged people to be more 'like raindrops' in the fight against climate change, in an impassioned speech to mark the launch of a new Netflix-style platform for environmental and conservation documentaries.
> 
> Peppering his speech with both woke and whimsical references, the Duke of Sussex, 36, who currently resides in a $15million mansion in California said: 'Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground. What if every single one of us was a raindrop, and if every single one of us cared?
> 
> 'At the end of the day, nature is our life source... But you can't uplift, educate and inspire unless there is a form of action that follows.'
> 
> Harry reflected on the 'universally tough year' that everyone has experienced, adding that he has found solace in nature, which he believes is the 'most healing part of life'.
> 
> 'Someone said to me right at the start of the pandemic, "It's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour",' he observed.
> 
> He also joked dancing on camera is 'his idea of hell' because 'everyone laughs at him' while reminiscing about his and Meghan Markle's royal tour of South Africa last year.
> 
> Harry, who is head of the conservation group Africa Parks, also spoke of his love for the continent, recalling how it afforded him a sense of 'escapism and space' when he visited aged 12, shortly after the death of his mother, Princess Diana.
> 
> 'I don't know what it is, but there's something in the air that ends up running in your blood, and no matter what experience you have it just pulls you back,' he said.
> 
> 'The sense of escapism and space that this continent of Africa afforded me is something that I will be eternally grateful for.'
> 
> Lessons from Harry


We used to be snowflakes, now we are raindrops. So poetic and so fake sounding from someone who lives in a 16-bathroom mansion with well sprinkled lawns size of a football field. Maybe the those sprinkles were his inspiration, because those must be on constantly to keep his lawn so green all the time. 
I wonder what keeps him from moving to Africa if he wants it so bad. Oooops, I know. There's definitely less chance for pap strolls  in the middle of the wilderness and someone wouldn't like that at all.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

*Breaking News*.
Netflix memo to our loyal viewers:

You will be ecstatic to learn that Duchess Meghan will star in our new fall program, The Mother Thinks She Knows Best. During each episode, the Duchess will babble about explore one of the many crises plaguing our planet today. Her misunderstanding of the major issues will astound each and everyone. The Duchess will delight in keeping us misinformed with a well-mixed word salad her words of wisdom. It is our hope that real scientists Meghan will have resolved most issues by the end of the series so that they she can be nominated for a Nobel Prize.

The story is loosely based on the 1950-1960 series, Father Knows Best. If you recall, the omniscient father, solved all the family problems while the wife was obviously too dumb to think for herself very dutiful. In this new program, the husband is too dumb to think for himself very dutiful.

Further information to follow at a later date.

Viewer Comments:
'We Don’t Have No 16 Bathrooms' said: “If the Father and the Mother were/are so smart, why did they marry such a$$es.”
'I Don’t Pee In The Woods' said: “I’m cancelling my subscription.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Although Meghan looks perfect, with her laser gaze of love directed right on Harry. It's amazing he didn't burst into flames from the sheer intensity.



I am not sure how people can still claim they are so madly in love...I find it so very obvious she is love bombing him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> i was making pesto sauce .. got a great source of bail and pesto makes a go-to lunch - since I cook 21 meals a week since there is no business travel ... CEO  DH and I expect nice lunches   ...



You reminded me that I've wanted to make red "pesto" (it's dairy free) for ages. Maybe I'll get around to it this week.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> *Breaking News*.
> Netflix memo to our loyal viewers:
> 
> You will be ecstatic to learn that Duchess Meghan will star in our new fall program, The Mother Thinks She Knows Best. During each episode, the Duchess will babble about explore one of the many crises plaguing our planet today. Her misunderstanding of the major issues will astound each and everyone. The Duchess will delight in keeping us misinformed with a well-mixed word salad her words of wisdom. It is our hope that real scientists Meghan will have resolved most issues by the end of the series so that they she can be nominated for a Nobel Prize.
> 
> The story is loosely based on the 1950-1960 series, Father Knows Best. If you recall, the omniscient father, solved all the family problems while the wife was obviously too dumb to think for herself very dutiful. In this new program, the husband is too dumb to think for himself very dutiful.
> 
> Further information to follow at a later date.
> 
> Viewer Comments:
> 'We Don’t Have No 16 Bathrooms' said: “If the Father and the Mother were/are so smart, why did they marry such a$$es.”
> 'I Don’t Pee In The Woods' said: “I’m cancelling my subscription.”


FATHER KNOWS BEST  !  and she vacumed in pearls ..


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not sure how people can still claim they are so madly in love..*.I find it so very obvious she is love bombing him.*



Yep, just as it is equally obvious it works on him, the dumb sap. She has convinced him he doesn't need to be close to anyone but her. Oh, Archie can be around as a cute accessory, like the dogs, but nobody else!

It must take a lot of energy to keep that up.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Oh Harry! I see you've had Meghan write your material for you. I can't imagine a grown man writing so flowery, like a 13-year-old girl.
> _'At the end of the day, nature is our life source... But you can't uplift, educate and inspire unless there is a form of action that follows.'_
> 
> Harry, just come right out and admit that the "someone" was Meghan. Everyone knows you are cloistered away in your mansion and you aren't talking to anyone else.
> _'Someone said to me right at the start of the pandemic, "It's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour",' he observed._



His form of action comes in the shape of private jets. And a gargantuan mansion. 

I mean what exactly do those things inspire? Mother Nature shouldn't just send him to his room, Mother Nature needs to take away his allowance and his Xbox for a year.


----------



## csshopper

DeMonica said:


> We used to be snowflakes, now we are raindrops. So poetic and so fake sounding from someone who lives in a 16-bathroom mansion with well sprinkled lawns size of a football field. Maybe the those sprinkles were his inspiration, because those must be on constantly to keep his lawn so green all the time.
> I wonder what keeps him from moving to Africa if he wants it so bad. Oooops, I know. There's definitely less chance for pap strolls  in the middle of the wilderness and someone wouldn't like that at all.



He has conveniently forgotten this, widely reported in print and online including in Marie Claire and other stans publications:
*Queen Elizabeth Had Planned for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Move to South Africa, According to New Book*
Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers suggests that the British monarch wanted them to have their own "Malta moment."

It would have been in lieu of them moving to the US.Seems maybe it was not MM's choice, cue the "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets," so they did not accept and now the "victim" is whining yet again.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> i was making pesto sauce .. got a great source of bail and pesto makes a go-to lunch - since I cook 21 meals a week since there is no business travel ... CEO  DH and I expect nice lunches   ...
> I froze the pesto in washable glass jars - no PLASTIC !!!!!!!!
> IMHO, this is MY opinion, please dont disillusion me (ie that the carbon foot print of producing ONE ziploc is less than that of washing one glass jar) ... I was thinking I was making  a difference in climate control but in the end I dont know, must research ....
> 
> @CeeJay   are they still rationing water in CA ? for the CASA de JCMH , surely not .... ????
> 
> Last trip to CA - airport sprinklers were hard at work in Sacramento - during drought ......


The Government here in CA lackluster to beat the band, so while there has been no retraction to the water rationing, many people (in their minds) don’t feel that they to ration anymore. Many town parks, etc. use recycled water (especially in Beverly Hills) and I know they do as well in my town .. not sure about where they are. Sadly, I now understand why many other neighboring States are not happy with the influx of Californians moving in .. many seem to have a major “entitle-itis” problem as in “I’ll tell YOU what you must do, but I’m EXEMPT”. Uggh ..


----------



## Lodpah

Raindrops are falling on my head
And just like the guy whose feet are too big for his bed
Nothing seems to fit
Those raindrops are falling on my head, they keep falling
So I just did me some talking to the sun
And I said I didn't like the way he got things done
Sleeping on the job
Those raindrops are falling on my head, they keep falling
But there's one thing I know
The blues they send to meet me
Won't defeat me, it won't be long
Till happiness steps up to greet me
Raindrops keep falling on my head
But that doesn't mean my eyes will soon be turning red
Crying's not for me
'Cause I'm never gonna stop the rain by complaining
Because I'm…

BJ Thomas song


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> He has conveniently forgotten this, widely reported in print and online including in Marie Claire and other stans publications:
> *Queen Elizabeth Had Planned for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Move to South Africa, According to New Book*
> Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers suggests that the British monarch wanted them to have their own "Malta moment."
> 
> It would have been in lieu of them moving to the US.Seems maybe it was not MM's choice, cue the "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets," so they did not accept and now the "victim" is whining yet again.


Oh I’m sure Meghan lied her a$$ off, telling Harry how MUCH she loved Africa .. bla, bla, bla. So, it doesn’t surprise me to see that QEII might have done that, but how much do we want to bet that once Meghan got there, seeing all the issues and poverty (and then her infamous “are you OK” tripe), that there was NO WAY she would have lived there!  Way too much work to do and she soooooo wanted to be in the Hollywood environs.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> i was making pesto sauce .. got a great source of bail and pesto makes a go-to lunch - since I cook 21 meals a week since there is no business travel ... CEO  DH and I expect nice lunches   ...
> I froze the pesto in washable glass jars - no PLASTIC !!!!!!!!
> IMHO, this is MY opinion, please dont disillusion me (ie that the carbon foot print of producing ONE ziploc is less than that of washing one glass jar) ... I was thinking I was making  a difference in climate control but in the end I dont know, must research ....
> 
> @CeeJay   are they still rationing water in CA ? for the CASA de JCMH , surely not .... ????
> 
> Last trip to CA - airport sprinklers were hard at work in Sacramento - during drought ......



I'm waiting for Meghan to read your pesto journey and plagiarize it. Though the way she'd end it is to say she doesn't use any plastic for anything and freezes everything in glass jars, saving the Earth for all humanity. When we know full well that when Meghan wants pesto, she sends servants to the gourmet store (in a gas guzzler vehicle), even if they must call the store owner at 1 AM to open the door.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> i was making pesto sauce .. got a great source of bail and pesto makes a go-to lunch - since I cook 21 meals a week since there is no business travel ... CEO  DH and I expect nice lunches   ...
> I froze the pesto in washable glass jars - no PLASTIC !!!!!!!!
> IMHO, this is MY opinion, please dont disillusion me (ie that the carbon foot print of producing ONE ziploc is less than that of washing one glass jar) ... I was thinking I was making  a difference in climate control but in the end I dont know, must research ....
> 
> @CeeJay   are they still rationing water in CA ? for the CASA de JCMH , surely not .... ????
> 
> Last trip to CA - airport sprinklers were hard at work in Sacramento - during drought ......


I save my glass Bonne Maman  jam jars. I make my own vinaigrette dressing and put it in the jar in the fridge.  I also keep good quality plastic containers that come with take out items or from the grocery store.  I use them for leftovers and when I make soups.  I usually make enough soup so that I can put some in the freezer for another meal.  I am saving my raindrops so I can fill my swimming pool when the water level is low.  Every bit helps.   

I love that you made the pesto and stored in glass jar in the freezer.  Does it discolor?  I still have a ton of basil growing and I would like to use it up before it really gets cold here.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> MM&H could perhaps learn from Lady Vestey's children (low profile), but elegance and education are not MM's strong points! (H just follows MM direction)
> 
> *Prince Harry sends his condolences on the 'sudden' death of his godmother Lady Celia Vestey, 71, who was a friend of the Queen and married to one of Britain's richest men - telling her three children they are 'in his thoughts'*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has sent his condolences to Lady Vestey's three children, William, 37, Arthur, 35, and Mary, 28, it was announced today.
> 
> Unlike some society figures, William, Arthur and Mary prefer to keep a low profile and are rarely seen out on the town.
> 
> Lady Vestey RIP


this warrants an announcement?  can they do anything w/o looking for credit?


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the enthusiastic feedback for today's lesson on raindrops by Dr. Harry Markle 

*Rate my Professor







*


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this warrants an announcement?  can they do anything w/o looking for credit?


They didn't advertise their birthday wishes for Charles. I wonder why...


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> He has conveniently forgotten this, widely reported in print and online including in Marie Claire and other stans publications:
> *Queen Elizabeth Had Planned for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Move to South Africa, According to New Book*
> Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers suggests that the British monarch wanted them to have their own "Malta moment."
> 
> It would have been in lieu of them moving to the US.Seems maybe it was not MM's choice, cue the "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets," so they did not accept and now the "victim" is whining yet again.



It is so simple. H&M want dual courts. If they had gone to SA, perhaps QE would have set them up.  Doubtful but more likely to happen than here in the US.  Didn’t Diana want to stay married but never see Charles? She could be queen, he could be king, and we could all be raindrops? I could be wrong.

No way would MM live in SA.  Never.  That was always a lie. Harry probably does like it there. Still, for all his talk he has taken no action to live there, even tho Diana’s brother did or does live there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

There's no use in grumbling
When the raindrops come tumbling
Remember, you're the one
Who can fill the world with sunshine
Snow White from 1937


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Drugged


she put a spell on him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not sure how people can still claim they are so madly in love...I find it so very obvious she is love bombing him.


oh come on....she fell in a love with a guy who just happened to be a prince


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> oh come on....she fell in a love with a guy who just happened to be a prince


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Oh I’m sure Meghan lied her a$$ off, telling Harry how MUCH she loved Africa .. bla, bla, bla. So, it doesn’t surprise me to see that QEII might have done that, but how much do we want to bet that once Meghan got there, seeing all the issues and poverty (and then her infamous “are you OK” tripe), that there was NO WAY she would have lived there!  Way too much work to do and she soooooo wanted to be in the Hollywood environs.



Are we forgetting about Hollywood’s wokeness? A queen of (phony) woke needs a kingdom.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> oh come on....she fell in a love with a guy who just happened to be a prince





gracekelly said:


> View attachment 4918981



 Harry is looking good!


----------



## eunaddict

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 4918981



Okay, fine. I did, as a child, consider Prince Adam a worthy marriage prospect. If only for that library of his.


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> Okay, fine. I did, as a child, consider *Prince Adam* a worthy marriage prospect. If only for that library of his.
> 
> View attachment 4918988



He has a name? I don’t remember that. It is better than thinking Belle called him Beast forever.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He has a name? I don’t remember that. It is better than thinking Belle called him Beast forever.



I thought the same. A name?  Never knew that. I loved that library, too.  
Thank you @eunaddict for teaching us the important facts.

@Chanbal  phony woke


----------



## Lodpah

Wow I watched the Crown. Harry and his his traitorous wife sold their souls and their family for money. Wicked is all I can say.


----------



## drifter

I misread the part of the raindrop article headline as "relieved on parched ground" and thought it was about MM relieving herself on the parched ground of Africa.


----------



## bisbee

Lodpah said:


> Wow I watched the Crown. Harry and his his traitorous wife sold their souls and their family for money. Wicked is all I can say.


What?


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> Wow I watched the Crown. Harry and his his traitorous wife sold their souls and their family for money. Wicked is all I can say.



Is the 5th series of the Crown already out? I just finished watching the 4th, which ends around 1990, so no JCMH and MM.


----------



## DeMonica

csshopper said:


> He has conveniently forgotten this, widely reported in print and online including in Marie Claire and other stans publications:
> *Queen Elizabeth Had Planned for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Move to South Africa, According to New Book*
> Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers suggests that the British monarch wanted them to have their own "Malta moment."
> 
> It would have been in lieu of them moving to the US.Seems maybe it was not MM's choice, cue the "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets," so they did not accept and now the "victim" is whining yet again.


Missing that wonderful chance to do charity work....that's just sad. Mental picture: MM in a designer frock ambushing children in those shanty towns of Cape Town asking them if they were ok. Probably SA can survive without them.


----------



## bag-mania

They are photo op activists. They want to show up somewhere perfectly safe and nice, get pretty pictures taken of themselves looking concerned, and then go back to the luxurious mansion to await their next opportunity. They are only posers.

I know not everyone here liked Diana, but I think most can agree she went where she could make a difference. She went to hospitals to visit AIDS patients back when people didn't fully understand how it was transmitted and fear was rampant. She toured land mine fields and brought international attention to that cause. She went the extra mile beyond doing her duty for the royal family. Her son and his wife? Not so much.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> They are photo op activists. They want to show up somewhere perfectly safe and nice, get pretty pictures taken of themselves looking concerned, and then go back to the luxurious mansion to await their next opportunity. They are only posers.
> 
> I know not everyone here liked Diana, but I think most can agree she went where she could make a difference. She went to hospitals to visit AIDS patients back when people didn't fully understand how it was transmitted and fear was rampant. She toured land mine fields and brought international attention to that cause. She went the extra mile beyond doing her duty for the royal family. Her son and his wife? Not so much.


Wasn't there some controversy about the photos he took on one of his trips to Africa? The animals were drugged and in one, he (supposedly) cropped one picture so as not to show the rope around the elephant's leg?


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Missing that wonderful chance to do charity work....that's just sad. Mental picture: MM in a designer frock ambushing children in those shanty towns of Cape Town asking them if they were ok. Probably SA can survive without them.


and don't forget the children asking her if she's ok


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

drifter said:


> I misread the part of the raindrop article headline as "relieved on parched ground" and thought it was about MM relieving herself on the parched ground of Africa.


His next line may be, "What if we all peed in the woods".  That could quench some parched earth.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn't there some controversy about the photos he took on one of his trips to Africa? The animals were drugged and in one, he (supposedly) cropped one picture so as not to show the rope around the elephant's leg?



I wasn't aware of the incident and had to look it up, but you are correct. The original photo from Kensington Palace back in 2016 showed the rope and it was mentioned that the elephants had been tranquilized to move them to a different area. When the photo was reposted on SussexRoyal Instagram in 2019 the rope had been cropped out of the story and the drug was not mentioned. I guess it was supposed to make Harry look like more of an adventurer.


----------



## Lodpah

bisbee said:


> What?


I watched the 4th season. What I meant is Harry allowing his family to be portrayed in a negative light.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I watched the 4th season. What I meant is Harry allowing his family to be portrayed in a negative light.


I guess the only family that matters now is Meghan and Archie


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I save my glass Bonne Maman  jam jars. I make my own vinaigrette dressing and put it in the jar in the fridge.  I also keep good quality plastic containers that come with take out items or from the grocery store.  I use them for leftovers and when I make soups.  I usually make enough soup so that I can put some in the freezer for another meal.  I am saving my raindrops so I can fill my swimming pool when the water level is low.  Every bit helps.
> 
> I love that you made the pesto and stored in glass jar in the freezer.  Does it discolor?  I still have a ton of basil growing and I would like to use it up before it really gets cold here.


I freeze the pesto in sealed mason jar - with canning type seal, no discoloration or other change ...
I buy peeled garlic in bulk, freeze it, then keep a bit defrosted in fridge, it turns translucent due to freezing and yellows a bit BUT the defrosted cloves are tender and SUPER EASY to put through garlic press, and I use BUCKETS of garlic for pesto
I do keto pesto "pasta" - riced cauliflower not spaghetti , comes in little freezer bags, 5 min in microwave, then mix in defrosted pesto - the hot cauliflower will heat the pesto
So, 5 min for homemade lunch without carbs
Enough off topic...

MM: if you are reading this, pls ask if you intend using my recipe on your blog .... lol


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> His next line may be, "What if we all peed in the woods".  That could quench some parched earth.


purseinsanity-
This is rates more than an emoji linked to comments, because only one at a time can be given, but I can insert multiples here:
  LOVE your comment, almost spit coffee on the computer screen when I burst out laughing.  

In a way it will be disappointing if the Grifters ever get really "woke", realize they are mostly the butt of jokes and disappear. Each day when I click on here I wonder "What hypocritical, tone deaf, dumb arse thing have the Earl and Countess of DUMBarton* done today"? 

* Interesting that Harry is only the third Royal to hold this title bestowed on him by the Queen when he wed. There was an Earl of Dumbarton in 1675 and one in 1749 so it had been vacant for a VERY long time. Ironic she resurrected it for him......


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wasn't aware of the incident and had to look it up, but you are correct. The original photo from Kensington Palace back in 2016 showed the rope and it was mentioned that the elephants had been tranquilized to move them to a different area. When the photo was reposted on SussexRoyal Instagram in 2019 the rope had been cropped out of the story and the drug was not mentioned. I guess it was supposed to make Harry look like more of an adventurer.
> 
> View attachment 4919516



Bottom picture-  Restraint of the Elephant - not 'woke' for SussexRoyal!


----------



## threadbender

I know I read somewhere that the raindrops statement seems to be plagarised, as well. Now, I need to see if I can find it.

ETA Nope, maybe I dreamed it.
ETA I found it! Trying to add it to the post. Argh!
Trying this way. I did a screen shot but it keeps saying error.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Bottom picture-  Restraint of the Elephant - not 'woke' for SussexRoyal!



The thing is the original photo told the real story which was much better. An elephant conservation group was moving a herd to a place where they would be safe from poachers. It would be incredibly irresponsible to show Harry walking up and touching a wild bull elephant that wasn't tranquilized and tethered. But I guess whoever was doing SussexRoyal decided Harry should look like a modern day Tarzan, friend to all animals. Hmm, wonder who was responsible for their Instagram content in early 2019.


----------



## bag-mania

threadbender said:


> I know I read somewhere that the raindrops statement seems to be plagarised, as well. Now, I need to see if I can find it.
> 
> ETA Nope, maybe I dreamed it.
> ETA I found it! Trying to add it to the post. Argh!
> Trying this way. I did a screen shot but it keeps saying error.




I bet Meghan had this in her collection of quotes to repurpose as her own and decided to throw Harry a bone and use it for him.


----------



## marietouchet

threadbender said:


> I know I read somewhere that the raindrops statement seems to be plagarised, as well. Now, I need to see if I can find it.
> 
> ETA Nope, maybe I dreamed it.
> ETA I found it! Trying to add it to the post. Argh!
> Trying this way. I did a screen shot but it keeps saying error.



Awesome sleuthing ! Bravo

PS where do they get such dreadful plagiarizing writers ?
Doesn't anyone remember the story - current First Lady got bashed for a speech that borrowed heavily from a speech by the previous First Lady  - that did not happen again ...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The thing is the original photo told the real story which was much better. An elephant conservation group was moving a herd to a place where they would be safe from poachers. It would be incredibly irresponsible to show Harry walking up and touching a wild bull elephant that wasn't tranquilized and tethered. But I guess whoever was doing SussexRoyal decided Harry should look like a modern day Tarzan, friend to all animals. Hmm, wonder who was responsible for their Instagram content in early 2019.


Harry, the modern Tarzan and the Elephant! I see your point, impressive and very inspiring. 




Whoever was doing The Sussex Royal was likely the same person that did The Tig, those defunct websites seem to have so much in common. 

"The Sussex Royal website was made by Article, a Toronto-based development and design company. It's the same firm Meghan used to create The Tig... It is thought the Sussexes worked on the website..."


----------



## threadbender

marietouchet said:


> Awesome sleuthing ! Bravo
> 
> PS where do they get such dreadful plagiarizing writers ?
> Doesn't anyone remember the story - current First Lady got bashed for a speech that borrowed heavily from a speech by the previous First Lady  - that did not happen again ...


I didn't find it, just saw the tweet!


----------



## TC1

I'm sure Megs had the big game trophy hunting pics of Harry's life scrubbed when she cropped that pic. Earth Day indeed..


----------



## csshopper

threadbender said:


> I didn't find it, just saw the tweet!


It happened in 2016, if someone wants to read about it, Search the two First Lady's names plus the word "plagiarism". Pages of hits from both print and video sources come up.

Not posting direct links in respect for our wise "no politics" policy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn't there some controversy about the photos he took on one of his trips to Africa? The animals were drugged and in one, he (supposedly) cropped one picture so as not to show the rope around the elephant's leg?



I really, truly hope this is not true. If so, I am officially disgusted. Antics and media manipulation is one thing, but abuse and harm to animals is a special kind of cruel that I just can't tolerate.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I really, truly hope this is not true. If so, I am officially disgusted. Antics and media manipulation is one thing, but abuse and harm to animals is a special kind of cruel that I just can't tolerate.



It wasn't bad. If you look at the photos they were trying to save the elephants by taking them to a park where they would be safe from those who would kill them for ivory. The disgusting part is Harry didn't show anyone else in his Instagram post three years later. It looked like he was strolling in the savannah petting a wild elephant. Deceptive.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> It wasn't bad. If you look at the photos they were trying to save the elephants by taking them to a park where they would be safe from those who would kill them for ivory. The disgusting part is Harry didn't show anyone else in his Instagram post three years later. It looked like he was strolling in the savannah petting a wild elephant. Deceptive.



Ah, I see. So as usual just manipulating the situation to make him look a certain way.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It wasn't bad. If you look at the photos they were trying to save the elephants by taking them to a park where they would be safe from those who would kill them for ivory. The disgusting part is Harry didn't show anyone else in his Instagram post three years later. It looked like he was strolling in the savannah petting a wild elephant. *Deceptive*.


Deceptive as everything they do.


----------



## threadbender

csshopper said:


> It happened in 2016, if someone wants to read about it, Search the two First Lady's names plus the word "plagiarism". Pages of hits from both print and video sources come up.
> 
> Not posting direct links in respect for our wise "no politics" policy.


I was referring to Harry


----------



## csshopper

threadbender said:


> I was referring to Harry


Sorry, threadbender, I misunderstood.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> purseinsanity-
> This is rates more than an emoji linked to comments, because only one at a time can be given, but I can insert multiples here:
> LOVE your comment, almost spit coffee on the computer screen when I burst out laughing.
> 
> In a way it will be disappointing if the Grifters ever get really "woke", realize they are mostly the butt of jokes and disappear. Each day when I click on here I wonder "What hypocritical, tone deaf, dumb arse thing have the Earl and Countess of DUMBarton* done today"?
> 
> * Interesting that Harry is only the third Royal to hold this title bestowed on him by the Queen when he wed. There was an Earl of Dumbarton in 1675 and one in 1749 so it had been vacant for a VERY long time. Ironic she resurrected it for him......


I aim to please


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> purseinsanity-
> This is rates more than an emoji linked to comments, because only one at a time can be given, but I can insert multiples here:
> LOVE your comment, almost spit coffee on the computer screen when I burst out laughing.
> 
> In a way it will be disappointing if the Grifters ever get really "woke", realize they are mostly the butt of jokes and disappear. Each day when I click on here I wonder "What hypocritical, tone deaf, dumb arse thing have the Earl and Countess of DUMBarton* done today"?
> 
> * Interesting that Harry is only the third Royal to hold this title bestowed on him by the Queen when he wed. There was an Earl of Dumbarton in 1675 and one in 1749 so it had been vacant for a VERY long time. Ironic she resurrected it for him......



It's a very beautiful place nevertheless less.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It's a very beautiful place nevertheless less.


I find it such a shame that JCMH have done little (nothing? a visit ?) for Sussex or Scotland (Dumbarton).  I would be ashamed to use the titles. 
In my romantic way, I think, if I were ever the Duchess of Sussex, I would rush down to find out about the place, go to every museum/vantage point, every door would be open - such a divine luxury... and I would allow only selfies - no staff photogs , hoping to publicize the region in a nice way. I would be doing Sussex and Dumbarton videos ....

PS FYI titles used to be and still are (but to a more limited degree) associated with a city/county/region,  Sussex is on the south coast, and Dumbarton was the capital of the ancient kingdom of Strathclyde (within Scotland). These are real places, and have real inhabitants that used to be the vassals of the earl or count, etc How cool is that? Old school, but one can work the romantic angle , I think, for the benefit of the region - a variant on the do good for others thing


----------



## bag-mania

It's clear that for H&M the titles are merely a way to boost their status. Like everything else about those two, it is only empty words.


----------



## lanasyogamama

MM couldn’t find either place on a map.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> The Government here in CA lackluster to beat the band, so while there has been no retraction to the water rationing, many people (in their minds) don’t feel that they to ration anymore. Many town parks, etc. use recycled water (especially in Beverly Hills) and I know they do as well in my town .. not sure about where they are. Sadly, I now understand why many other neighboring States are not happy with the influx of Californians moving in .. many seem to have a major “entitle-itis” problem as in “I’ll tell YOU what you must do, but I’m EXEMPT”. Uggh ..


and the CA people drive the property values up big time, which might be ok for people who own a home and play to stay put but for those who want to buy......not so great


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> MM couldn’t find either place on a map.





lanasyogamama said:


> MM couldn’t find either place on a map.


I wonder how the people in Sussex and Dumbarton feel about her never becoming a British citizen, as she said she would do? For that reason alone I think the title should be stripped. Know the title is based on marriage, but still seems wrong for her to have it, she sure as heck hasn’t earned it. Taken a heck of a lot from the British people, however......


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> I find it such a shame that JCMH have done little (nothing? a visit ?) for Sussex or Scotland (Dumbarton).  I would be ashamed to use the titles.
> In my romantic way, I think, if I were ever the Duchess of Sussex, I would rush down to find out about the place, go to every museum/vantage point, every door would be open - such a divine luxury... and I would allow only selfies - no staff photogs , hoping to publicize the region in a nice way. I would be doing Sussex and Dumbarton videos ....
> 
> PS FYI titles used to be and still are (but to a more limited degree) associated with a city/county/region,  Sussex is on the south coast, and Dumbarton was the capital of the ancient kingdom of Strathclyde (within Scotland). These are real places, and have real inhabitants that used to be the vassals of the earl or count, etc How cool is that? Old school, but one can work the romantic angle , I think, for the benefit of the region - a variant on the do good for others thing


I 100% agree with you!!  I would study up on the area and definitely would visit; I think they did visit Sussex but what? .. a 1/2 hour visit or something like that?  Let's face it, these 2 grifters-supreme could have cared less about the areas themselves, but they sure do like those titles (well - I should say Meghan sure does, Harry's always had 'Prince').  Did the folks of Sussex put together a petition of sorts to rid them of the titles?  To me, it's shameful that they exploit those titles, but I sure don't think Meghan for one feels shame, do narcissists feel that? .. I think not .. I'm sure she feels that she's entitled to it!


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> I wonder how the people in Sussex and Dumbarton feel about her never becoming a British citizen, as she said she would do? For that reason alone I think the title should be stripped. Know the title is based on marriage, but still seems wrong for her to have it, she sure as heck hasn’t earned it. Taken a heck of a lot from the British people, however......


I give her a pass on citizenship, I think there is a legal requirement that it can’t be obtained until 3 years after marriage and WOW it has not been 3 years yet 
But I do think that Archie should be a proud UK citizen, we don’t really know his nationality do we ? Although yes he likely is a dual citizen ... a bet hedging move
Be proud of ones heritage , on both sides


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> MM couldn’t find either place on a map.



Do you think she could find Tristan da Cunha or Pitcairn Island on the map? These are still British territories and QE could do us a favor and send them there in exchange of titles, tons of titles... 



csshopper said:


> I wonder how the people in Sussex and Dumbarton feel about her never becoming a British citizen, as she said she would do? For that reason alone I think the title should be stripped. Know the title is based on marriage, but still seems wrong for her to have it, she sure as heck hasn’t earned it. Taken a heck of a lot from the British people, however......



The people of Sussex and Dumbarton are likely feeling very lucky with the lack of visits from MM&H.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I 100% agree with you!!  I would study up on the area and definitely would visit; I think they did visit Sussex but what? .. a 1/2 hour visit or something like that?  Let's face it, these 2 grifters-supreme could have cared less about the areas themselves, but they sure do like those titles (well - I should say Meghan sure does, Harry's always had 'Prince').  Did the folks of Sussex put together a petition of sorts to rid them of the titles?  To me, it's shameful that they exploit those titles, but I sure don't think Meghan for one feels shame, do narcissists feel that? .. I think not .. I'm sure she feels that she's entitled to it!











						Petition: Remove the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

A debate in Parliament to consider utilising the Titles and Deprivation Act 1917 to strip the Sussex Dukedom from the couple due to the immense damage their behaviour since their marriage in 2018 and their abandonment of the Royal Family has done to the reputation of the Monarchy.




					petition.parliament.uk
				



Rejected!  

*Why was this petition rejected?*
_It’s about honours or appointments.

We can't publish petitions about honours and appointments, including asking for people to be given or have titles removed. In any case, the use of Royal titles are a matter for Her Majesty the Queen and not the Government or Parliament. 

You might be interested to know that the Titles Deprevation Act 1917 was specifically for use during the First World War and for those who have "during the present war, borne arms against His Majesty or His Allies, or who have adhered to His Majesty’s enemies" and not for a general removal of titles._


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> and the CA people drive the property values up big time, which might be ok for people who own a home and play to stay put but for those who want to buy......not so great


Yup, the great divide between the 'HAVE' and 'HAVE NOTs' is deepening here by the day.  I believe CA has the highest # of people leaving the state than any other; no surprise given everything going on here (in addition to housing prices, the fires, the homeless situation, etc. - don't need to beat the drum anymore on that)!!  For those that have a big trust fund, or getting funded by a rich parent, then .. yeah, for sure .. go ahead and buy that 16+ bathroom property (still can't understand why anyone would want that .. what? .. you have to go pee/poop that often that you wouldn't make it to the next room in time?!?!)!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Petition: Remove the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> A debate in Parliament to consider utilising the Titles and Deprivation Act 1917 to strip the Sussex Dukedom from the couple due to the immense damage their behaviour since their marriage in 2018 and their abandonment of the Royal Family has done to the reputation of the Monarchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> petition.parliament.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rejected!
> 
> *Why was this petition rejected?*
> _It’s about honours or appointments.
> 
> We can't publish petitions about honours and appointments, including asking for people to be given or have titles removed. In any case, the use of Royal titles are a matter for Her Majesty the Queen and not the Government or Parliament.
> 
> You might be interested to know that the Titles Deprevation Act 1917 was specifically for use during the First World War and for those who have "during the present war, borne arms against His Majesty or His Allies, or who have adhered to His Majesty’s enemies" and not for a general removal of titles._


Whoever started this petition should redirect it to Her Majesty the Queen ASAP! If QE starts getting requests from her people to remove titles, her decision will be a lot easier imo.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yup, the great divide between the 'HAVE' and 'HAVE NOTs' is deepening here by the day.  I believe CA has the highest # of people leaving the state than any other; no surprise given everything going on here (in addition to housing prices, the fires, the homeless situation, etc. - don't need to beat the drum anymore on that)!!  For those that have a big trust fund, or getting funded by a rich parent, then .. yeah, for sure .. go ahead and buy that 16+ bathroom property (still can't understand why anyone would want that .. what? .. you have to go pee/poop that often that you wouldn't make it to the next room in time?!?!)!


I've heard from a lot of people who want to leave CA event though they have decent income and own a home.  they don't like the high taxes and things like the high cost of permits if you're building or improving your home.

Of course the other side of that argument is if you can afford to own a home in CA your equity will only increase in time (hopefully)

as far as the 16 bathrooms - of course they don't have to clean them and I guess it's a status thing.  ironic since they preach awareness of the environment, etc.  so much waste to have two adults and an infant taking up that much space....not to mention the grounds and the pool


----------



## Lodpah

Who needs a comedy show? We’ve got these two . . . !


----------



## Lodpah

In the military we have a term for people who are . . . we call them ate the F$(; up. These two qualify as experts ate the F; up.


----------



## Tootsie17

CeeJay said:


> Yup, the great divide between the 'HAVE' and 'HAVE NOTs' is deepening here by the day.  I believe CA has the highest # of people leaving the state than any other; no surprise given everything going on here (in addition to housing prices, the fires, the homeless situation, etc. - don't need to beat the drum anymore on that)!!  For those that have a big trust fund, or getting funded by a rich parent, then .. yeah, for sure .. go ahead and buy that 16+ bathroom property (still can't understand why anyone would want that .. what? .. you have to go pee/poop that often that you wouldn't make it to the next room in time?!?!)!


Well, she is full of you know what. I'm sure it's never ending. LOL!


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> Well, she is full of you know what. I'm sure it's never ending. LOL!



Those toilets must be clogged all the time then.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I've heard from a lot of people who want to leave CA event though they have decent income and own a home.  they don't like the high taxes and things like the high cost of permits if you're building or improving your home.
> 
> Of course the other side of that argument is if you can afford to own a home in CA your equity will only increase in time (hopefully)
> 
> as far as the 16 bathrooms - of course they don't have to clean them and I guess it's a status thing.  ironic since they preach awareness of the environment, etc.  so much waste to have two adults and an infant taking up that much space....not to mention the grounds and the pool



I own two homes in CA and would 100% leave (but have family holding me here for now). Property taxes in CA are painful and we see little to nothing for them (compared to outside of CA). It wouldn't be so bad to pay so much if we were seeing the benefit of improved roads and infrastructure, teachers not having to pay for things they should not have to pay for out of their own small salary, etc...

Permits are a headache so better to pay someoe to do it who knows what they are doing, and then your home gets reassessed depending on what is being done (which means higher taxes).

Cost of living in general is just plain expensive compared to outside of CA. Maintaining just a modest home is costly, so when I think about the cost to keep their 16 bathroom estate looking so lush and green I just cringe at the amount of water being wasted by these two "environmental activists". Their heating/electricity bill must be huge. Homes this big are such a waste on two adults and a baby, and only scream out their wealth. 

Just like everything with these two, they say one thing and do something else completely opposite.


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> I own two homes in CA and would 100% leave (but have family holding me here for now). Property taxes in CA are painful and we see little to nothing for them (compared to outside of CA). It wouldn't be so bad to pay so much if we were seeing the benefit of improved roads and infrastructure, teachers not having to pay for things they should not have to pay for out of their own small salary, etc...
> 
> Permits are a headache so better to pay someoe to do it who knows what they are doing, and then your home gets reassessed depending on what is being done (which means higher taxes).
> 
> Cost of living in general is just plain expensive compared to outside of CA. Maintaining just a modest home is costly, so when I think about the cost to keep their 16 bathroom estate looking so lush and green I just cringe at the amount of water being wasted by these two "environmental activists". Their heating/electricity bill must be huge. Homes this big are such a waste on two adults and a baby, and only scream out their wealth.
> 
> Just like everything with these two, they say one thing and do something else completely opposite.


What’s your water bill and electric bills look like, for a simple 4 bedroom home?


----------



## bisousx

LittleStar88 said:


> I own two homes in CA and would 100% leave (but have family holding me here for now). Property taxes in CA are painful and we see little to nothing for them (compared to outside of CA). It wouldn't be so bad to pay so much if we were seeing the benefit of improved roads and infrastructure, teachers not having to pay for things they should not have to pay for out of their own small salary, etc...
> 
> Permits are a headache so better to pay someoe to do it who knows what they are doing, and then your home gets reassessed depending on what is being done (which means higher taxes).
> 
> Cost of living in general is just plain expensive compared to outside of CA. Maintaining just a modest home is costly, so when I think about the cost to keep their 16 bathroom estate looking so lush and green I just cringe at the amount of water being wasted by these two "environmental activists". Their heating/electricity bill must be huge. Homes this big are such a waste on two adults and a baby, and only scream out their wealth.
> 
> Just like everything with these two, they say one thing and do something else completely opposite.



Leaving this state is on the table for my husband and I. I really thought my formerly safe, beautiful county would be immune to the homeless and drug addict problems of *other parts of CA* but in the last few years, those problems have trickled over and is now very much here affecting our lives now.  It really makes me sad.


----------



## bisousx

Lodpah said:


> What’s your water bill and electric bills look like, for a simple 4 bedroom home?



$200/ month in winter and $400-500/month in summer time over in SoCal for a 2000 sf home.. with mostly Energy Star appliances.


----------



## LittleStar88

Ther


Lodpah said:


> What’s your water bill and electric bills look like, for a simple 4 bedroom home?



Just two of us. Electricity is about $200 a month. Water is now rolled into our property taxes so I have no idea. But we are really neurotic about electricity and water usage.

Ive had friends and neighbors report electricity bill of $300-$400 and water as high as that as well. They have families and kids and such, so might need to factor that in.


----------



## LittleStar88

bisousx said:


> Leaving this state is on the table for my husband and I. I really thought my formerly safe, beautiful county would be immune to the homeless and drug addict problems of *other parts of CA* but in the last few years, those problems have trickled over and is now very much here affecting our lives now.  It really makes me sad.



Same. Crime is everywhere, even the “nice neighborhoods”. Homeless are everywhere. Police won’t bother coming for anything these days and we have basically been told we are on our own so just invest in security cameras. Even if you have a clear image of someone committing a crime on your property, don’t expect that person to be caught. Most non-violent criminals are catch and release.

On topic, I’m sure H and M don’t have to worry about such plebeian problems in their 16 toilet mansion paid for by dad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Same. Crime is everywhere, even the “nice neighborhoods”. Homeless are everywhere. Police won’t bother coming for anything these days and we have basically been told we are on our own so just invest in security cameras. Even if you have a clear image of someone committing a crime on your property, don’t expect that person to be caught. Most non-violent criminals are catch and release.
> 
> On topic, I’m sure H and M don’t have to worry about such plebeian problems in their 16 toilet mansion paid for by dad.


and with their private security


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> Same. Crime is everywhere, even the “nice neighborhoods”. Homeless are everywhere. Police won’t bother coming for anything these days and we have basically been told we are on our own so just invest in security cameras. Even if you have a clear image of someone committing a crime on your property, don’t expect that person to be caught. Most non-violent criminals are catch and release.
> 
> On topic, I’m sure H and M don’t have to worry about such plebeian problems in their 16 toilet mansion paid for by dad.



That’s so sad, I had no idea it was that widespread.


----------



## redney

Californians have been fleeing California for years, that's nothing new. Ask Oregonians, Nevadans, Arizonans, Seattleites, Austinites.    More fled after Prop 30 hit high income folks hard in around 2012/2013. But at the same time, up until the pandemic earlier this year, people were also flooding into California for many reasons too. Prop 13 limits property taxes if you've owned your house for awhile, but reassessed at sale, so buying in a high RE market pushes up property taxes.


----------



## duna

csshopper said:


> I wonder how the people in Sussex and Dumbarton feel about her never becoming a British citizen, as she said she would do? For that reason alone I think the title should be stripped. Know the title is based on marriage, but still seems wrong for her to have it, she sure as heck hasn’t earned it. Taken a heck of a lot from the British people, however......



Having grown up between Sussex and London, my personal opinion is that they should be stripped of their Dukedom ASAP. Sussex is a gorgeous county and, as far as I know, they only went once to Worthing ( about 20 miles from my grandparents' home) and that was that!

As for Dumbarton, I have no idea whether they ever went there....I doubt it.


----------



## carmen56

The thing with removing her Duchess title, apparently, would mean that she would then be known as Princess Henry of Wales.  Personally I like that even less than Duchess.  She's not my idea of a princess at all!


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> The thing with removing her Duchess title, apparently, would mean that she would then be known as Princess Henry of Wales.  Personally I like that even less than Duchess.  She's not my idea of a princess at all!



True, if it must be one or the other, let her stay a duchess. I don't think any of us could bear a PRINCESS Meghan.


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> I find it such a shame that JCMH have done little (nothing? a visit ?) for Sussex or Scotland (Dumbarton).  I would be ashamed to use the titles.
> In my romantic way, I think, if I were ever the Duchess of Sussex, I would rush down to find out about the place, go to every museum/vantage point, every door would be open - such a divine luxury... and I would allow only selfies - no staff photogs , hoping to publicize the region in a nice way. I would be doing Sussex and Dumbarton videos ....
> 
> PS FYI titles used to be and still are (but to a more limited degree) associated with a city/county/region,  Sussex is on the south coast, and Dumbarton was the capital of the ancient kingdom of Strathclyde (within Scotland). These are real places, and have real inhabitants that used to be the vassals of the earl or count, etc How cool is that? Old school, but one can work the romantic angle , I think, for the benefit of the region - a variant on the do good for others thing



My late grandmother was Dumbarton born and bred she would hate this vile woman to carry that title and come anywhere near the place - MM just needs to just stay away!!!!!


----------



## RueMonge

LittleStar88 said:


> Same. Crime is everywhere, even the “nice neighborhoods”. Homeless are everywhere. Police won’t bother coming for anything these days and we have basically been told we are on our own so just invest in security cameras. Even if you have a clear image of someone committing a crime on your property, don’t expect that person to be caught. Most non-violent criminals are catch and release.
> 
> On topic, I’m sure H and M don’t have to worry about such plebeian problems in their 16 toilet mansion paid for by dad.


I don’t see it that bad where I am, a small suburb east of Los Angeles and Pasadena. We have homeless, but we coexist. We have some crime, but it doesn’t touch most residents. Nothing like the huge homes in H&M’s area or Brentwood for example, but we are next to a very prosperous gated horse town. Maybe we’re just too far from the action downtown LA to have much action.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry together with the news on the last COVID numbers are putting me in a terrible mood today.

*'Everything is impossible at the beginning, you just have to try': Prince Harry promotes educational site for Netflix Paralympics documentary - after signing $150m deal with streaming giant*
The Duke of Sussex has spoken about the power of the human spirit in a promotional video for a new educational site for a Netflix documentary.

During the short video, the Duke said: 'Rising Phoenix is a film with a message that has never been more important to us: the power of the human spirit, to break down barriers and push us beyond what is often thought impossible. I believe there is so much to learn from this story.'

Prince Harry goes on to talk about the significance of sport, saying: 'That's why I'm so excited about this education site, which has lessons and reading materials for everybody to learn more. This film demonstrates our human ability rather than our disability.'

Earlier this year, Prince Harry and Meghan announced they had signed a mega-watt deal to provide exclusive content to Netflix's 190 million subscribers worldwide which experts said could be worth $150 million.

The couple founded a yet-to-be-named production company which will make documentaries, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming, according to The New York Times.

In a statement, the Sussexes said: 'Our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope. As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us.'

They added that Netflix's 'unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.'

Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie also claimed the couple have big plans for the next few years, and are basing their working model on the Ob***s.

Hypocrisy continues...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Harry together with the news on the last COVID numbers are putting me in a terrible mood.
> 
> *'Everything is impossible at the beginning, you just have to try': Prince Harry promotes educational site for Netflix Paralympics documentary - after signing $150m deal with streaming giant*
> The Duke of Sussex has spoken about the power of the human spirit in a promotional video for a new educational site for a Netflix documentary.
> 
> During the short video, the Duke said: 'Rising Phoenix is a film with a message that has never been more important to us: the power of the human spirit, to break down barriers and push us beyond what is often thought impossible. I believe there is so much to learn from this story.'
> 
> Prince Harry goes on to talk about the significance of sport, saying: 'That's why I'm so excited about this education site, which has lessons and reading materials for everybody to learn more. This film demonstrates our human ability rather than our disability.'
> 
> Earlier this year, Prince Harry and Meghan announced they had signed a mega-watt deal to provide exclusive content to Netflix's 190 million subscribers worldwide which experts said could be worth $150 million.
> 
> The couple founded a yet-to-be-named production company which will make documentaries, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming, according to The New York Times.
> 
> In a statement, the Sussexes said: 'Our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope. As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us.'
> 
> They added that Netflix's 'unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.'
> 
> Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie also claimed the couple have big plans for the next few years, and are basing their working model on the Obamas.
> 
> Hypocrisy continues...


I think the success or failure of this Netflix deal will have a big impact on them.  Seems to me more people are interested in watching Netflix for entertainment than for "education" or "learning to be woke"
Please don't mention them in the same sentence as Michelle and Barak (thought ***** would be deted; guess it hasn't been caught yet)


----------



## Chanbal

carmen56 said:


> The thing with removing her Duchess title, apparently, would mean that she would then be known as Princess Henry of Wales.  Personally I like that even less than Duchess.  She's not my idea of a princess at all!





bag-mania said:


> True, if it must be one or the other, let her stay a duchess. I don't think any of us could bear a PRINCESS Meghan.



Removing her duchess title would be a strong message from QE, and MM would hate to be exposed that way.
Let her call herself Princess Henry of Wales, it would look really good with her so called feminist label.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Removing her duchess title would be a strong message from QE, and MM would hate to be exposed that way.
> Let her call herself Princess Henry of Wales, it would look really good with her so called feminist label.



Now, you know the US media doesn't care about actual titles, they would call her "Princess Meghan" no matter what. 

If the Queen removed the title she would be roundly bashed. Look at the criticism the family has received about not showing enough compassion for a miscarriage they didn't know about.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I think the success or failure of this Netflix deal will have a big impact on them.  Seems to me more people are interested in watching Netflix for entertainment than for "education" or "learning to be woke"
> Please don't mention them in the same sentence as Michelle and Barak (thought ***** would be deted; guess it hasn't been caught yet)



It was 'copy and paste' from the DM article, I was surprised that it didn't show as '****'. In any event, what type of educational program can one expect from MM&H? So far I only saw 'woke' hypocrisy coming from them. If they really want to teach us about wokeness, they should practice what they preach!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Now, you know the US media doesn't care about actual titles, they would call her "Princess Meghan" no matter what.
> 
> If the Queen removed the title she would be roundly bashed. Look at the criticism the family has received about not showing enough compassion for a miscarriage they didn't know about.



It's tough when dealing with professional victims. Journalists have a critical role in our society, but the US media needs to change its approach. These are some crazy times we are living in!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Now, you know the US media doesn't care about actual titles, they would call her "Princess Meghan" no matter what.
> 
> If the Queen removed the title she would be roundly bashed. Look at the criticism the family has received about not showing enough compassion for a miscarriage they didn't know about.


I think there are two big factors with the US media - one, they are hanging on to the glamorous big love story of the American biracial actress and the Prince falling in love.
Two:  BLM.  She is benefiting from being the child of a WOC (ironically)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Now, you know the US media doesn't care about actual titles, they would call her "Princess Meghan" no matter what.
> 
> If the Queen removed the title she would be roundly bashed. Look at the criticism the family has received about not showing enough compassion for a miscarriage they didn't know about.


apart from one article from the Daily Mirror wet blanket writer, i haven't seen any other criticism published by UK media regarding this.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> apart from one article from the Daily Mirror wet blanket writer, i haven't seen any other criticism published by UK media regarding this.



I seem to remember other publications had picked up his comments. Could be wrong. Fortunately the news cycles are so short these days the miscarriage story is almost out of the picture already.


----------



## CeeJay

carmen56 said:


> The thing with removing her Duchess title, apparently, would mean that she would then be known as Princess Henry of Wales.  Personally I like that even less than Duchess.  She's not my idea of a princess at all!


Same here!!! .. anything BUT a Princess at all!  I wish that the American Media would STOP pushing that dayum title on every document news blip, etc. - but, I also understand that they are trying to get that click or article read, but it just peeves me to no end since we Yanks DO NOT recognize titles!  Let me just say this, if .. ever (and Meghan better hope that never happens) I get to be in her "presence" .. you better believe that I will NOTIFY everyone around to STOP referring to her as "Duchess" and (if need be) remind all of those around about a 'certain' war that we fought to eliminate the monarchy from our country!  So, if you see a news article about a 'certain American' .. making a fuss .. HA HA HA!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I seem to remember other publications had picked up his comments. Could be wrong. Fortunately the news cycles are so short these days the miscarriage story is almost out of the picture already.


And thank F for that!  let's see them find next bandwagon quickly!


----------



## V0N1B2

LittleStar88 said:


> I own two homes in CA and would 100% leave (but have family holding me here for now). Property taxes in CA are painful and we see little to nothing for them (compared to outside of CA). It wouldn't be so bad to pay so much if we were seeing the benefit of improved roads and infrastructure, teachers not having to pay for things they should not have to pay for out of their own small salary, etc...
> 
> Permits are a headache so better to pay someoe to do it who knows what they are doing, and then your home gets reassessed depending on what is being done (which means higher taxes).
> 
> Cost of living in general is just plain expensive compared to outside of CA. Maintaining just a modest home is costly, so when I think about the cost to keep their 16 bathroom estate looking so lush and green I just cringe at the amount of water being wasted by these two "environmental activists". Their heating/electricity bill must be huge. Homes this big are such a waste on two adults and a baby, and only scream out their wealth.
> 
> Just like everything with these two, they say one thing and do something else completely opposite.





bisousx said:


> Leaving this state is on the table for my husband and I. I really thought my formerly safe, beautiful county would be immune to the homeless and drug addict problems of *other parts of CA* but in the last few years, those problems have trickled over and is now very much here affecting our lives now.  It really makes me sad.


Why don't you guys just get your husband's family to buy you a mansion in the Santa Barbara area? That's what all the self-made feminists are doing now.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Same here!!! .. anything BUT a Princess at all!  I wish that the American Media would STOP pushing that dayum title on every document news blip, etc. - but, I also understand that they are trying to get that click or article read, but it just peeves me to no end since we Yanks DO NOT recognize titles!  Let me just say this, if .. ever (and Meghan better hope that never happens) I get to be in her "presence" .. you better believe that I will NOTIFY everyone around to STOP referring to her as "Duchess" and (if need be) remind all of those around about a 'certain' war that we fought to eliminate the monarchy from our country!  So, if you see a news article about a 'certain American' .. making a fuss .. HA HA HA!!!


what kills me - and I'm sure I'm repeating myself - is she wants to be this "woke" POC telling all of us what to think and do, telling us to vote, preaching about the enironment, glad to be back in the US.......and Still Be The Duchess.....
if you're so Woke, voluntarily give that title up


----------



## CarryOn2020

I say let the media use whatever title they wish. It will be one more example of their sloppy reporting/journalism. IMO we are close to a tipping point with H&M’s nonsense. Covid has shown us that quality matters in all areas of life. The pendulum is almost ready to swing.

“I genuinely feel that post-lockdown there will be ... a desire to ‘dress up’.”
- Sweatpants out? Savile Row tailors predict end of the lockdown look, The Guardian
Raising the bar!


----------



## bag-mania

Oh dear, everyone, try to get your gag reflex under control before you read it. This one is a doozy. Of course they are sooooo important that the tree lot had to make sure there weren't rabble around. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!*

*The couple are preparing to celebrate their first Christmas stateside with their son Archie*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are getting into the festive spirit!

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were seen buying a Christmas tree to decorate their new Montecito home on Tuesday, PEOPLE confirms.

During their low-key trip to the unnamed tree barn, the couple seemed to go mostly undetected except for one little boy who mistakenly approached Harry, thinking he worked there.

“Meghan and Prince Harry came into my work today and we sold them their Christmas Tree,” said Twitter user @imaJaaaaaames.

“We had our lot empty when they got there - their agent promoted them a good time to come instead of us shutting it down. There was one family in there and their stoked little son ran through trees up to Harry and asked if he worked here not knowing who that is,” the worker explained.

The couple, along with their 19-month old son Archie, is planning to spend the holidays in the U.S. for the first time in their new Montecito, California, home. Last year, the family of three spent the festive season at a rented home on Vancouver Island in Canada with Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland. Harry visited the nearby town of Sidney-by-the-Sea to buy table decorations, just days before Christmas.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were spotted Christmas tree shopping at a tree barn in California




					people.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Your bill sir, £349bn. Service not included
					

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Doesn't sound much when you say it quickly, does it? £394 billion. Three hundred and ninety-four billion. Three hundred and ninety-four billion. Three hundred and ninety-four.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The transformation of Harry Markle from cold-blooded killer, piloting a helicopter gunship against the Taliban, to full-blown snowflake has been hilarious.

He’s gone from prancing around buck-naked in Las Vegas to embracing all manner of hippy-dippy New Age wokery.

Following his move to California, he sounds as if he’s been brainwashed by this year’s version of the Manson Family.

In an extraordinary outburst, Harry’s urging people to ‘be more like raindrops’ in the fight against climate change.







+4


Harry's gone from prancing around buck-naked in Las Vegas to embracing all manner of hippy-dippy New Age wokery





Nurse! A Hollywood career now beckons, thanks to a multi-million-dollar deal with Netflix. Perhaps he could start by starring alongside his wife in a remake of Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid.

In the original, Paul Newman squires Katharine Ross round a farmyard on a pushbike.

In the remake, it’d be Meghan steering and pedalling while Harry hangs on to the handlebars for dear life, as the aptly named B.J. Thomas sings: Raindrops keep falling on my head!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oh dear, everyone, try to get your gag reflex under control before you read it. This one is a doozy. Of course they are sooooo important that the tree lot had to make sure there weren't rabble around.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!*
> 
> *The couple are preparing to celebrate their first Christmas stateside with their son Archie*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are getting into the festive spirit!
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were seen buying a Christmas tree to decorate their new Montecito home on Tuesday, PEOPLE confirms.
> 
> During their low-key trip to the unnamed tree barn, the couple seemed to go mostly undetected except for one little boy who mistakenly approached Harry, thinking he worked there.
> 
> “Meghan and Prince Harry came into my work today and we sold them their Christmas Tree,” said Twitter user @imaJaaaaaames.
> 
> “We had our lot empty when they got there - their agent promoted them a good time to come instead of us shutting it down. There was one family in there and their stoked little son ran through trees up to Harry and asked if he worked here not knowing who that is,” the worker explained.
> 
> The couple, along with their 19-month old son Archie, is planning to spend the holidays in the U.S. for the first time in their new Montecito, California, home. Last year, the family of three spent the festive season at a rented home on Vancouver Island in Canada with Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland. Harry visited the nearby town of Sidney-by-the-Sea to buy table decorations, just days before Christmas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were spotted Christmas tree shopping at a tree barn in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


@bag-mania thanks for posting this, so people don't be curious and click on it...

I am in such a terrible mood today with our new COVID records, and this article is so ridiculous that made me laugh. My mood today:  

Please keep posting, this thread is being a lifesaver!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Always enjoyed Howard Stern’s interviews where he sent a reporter to events. The reporter asked the celebrities “are you famous”, “are  you somebody?”  Celebs just seethed through gritted teeth.

what happened to the Twitter user?  His account is empty???? Oooohnoooo!



bag-mania said:


> Oh dear, everyone, try to get your gag reflex under control before you read it. This one is a doozy. Of course they are sooooo important that the tree lot had to make sure there weren't rabble around.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!*


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always enjoyed Howard Stern’s interviews where he sent a reporter to events. The reporter asked the celebrities “are you famous”, “are  you somebody?”  Celebs just seethed through gritted teeth.
> 
> *what happened to the Twitter user?  His account is empty???? Oooohnoooo!*



He or she didn't mention the name of their business. Why wouldn't they want to get a plug for where they work? And no photos? Why it's almost as though it never happened!


----------



## LittleStar88

RueMonge said:


> I don’t see it that bad where I am, a small suburb east of Los Angeles and Pasadena. We have homeless, but we coexist. We have some crime, but it doesn’t touch most residents. Nothing like the huge homes in H&M’s area or Brentwood for example, but we are next to a very prosperous gated horse town. Maybe we’re just too far from the action downtown LA to have much action.



I am in the Bay Area (south bay, "nice" neighborhood). Homeless go into the grocery stores and openly steal whatever they want and employees and security can only stand by and watch and let it happen. You have to pay attention in store parking lots to watch for homeless as they will come up to you or your car and ask for money. Homeless encampments are everywhere - even in areas where they were never seen before. Most of these are people who do not want to help to get back on track for a number of reasons.

Ring and Nextdoor notifications for homes being broken into - even while people are home (one woman was murdered in her home in our neighborhood by a released criminal). The worst we personally have had so far is one of our vehicles was broken into and some things taken. And we have very visible cameras all around the perimeter of the house. It makes no difference.

In one of the most upscale areas near me, the neighborhoods were being specifically targeted because it was well known that the police don't patrol the area and people have nice things there - so criminals were having a field day and all police could say was sorry - just do a neighborhood watch because we don't have the resources to come out there... That didn't help at all.

I get that there are people who have found themselves in a bad way and are struggling, and I feel very bad for those who are homeless (even if by their own choice), but I also don't feel it is ok for anyone to steal from others.

H&M are very, very fortunate to live where they do and have the lifestyle they do. Blissfully unaware of the real struggles of the people they preach to.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania  they wouldn’t lie about tree shopping, would they?  Shocking!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh dear, everyone, try to get your gag reflex under control before you read it. This one is a doozy. Of course they are sooooo important that the tree lot had to make sure there weren't rabble around.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!*
> 
> *The couple are preparing to celebrate their first Christmas stateside with their son Archie*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are getting into the festive spirit!
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were seen buying a Christmas tree to decorate their new Montecito home on Tuesday, PEOPLE confirms.
> 
> During their low-key trip to the unnamed tree barn, the couple seemed to go mostly undetected except for one little boy who mistakenly approached Harry, thinking he worked there.
> 
> “Meghan and Prince Harry came into my work today and we sold them their Christmas Tree,” said Twitter user @imaJaaaaaames.
> 
> “We had our lot empty when they got there - their agent promoted them a good time to come instead of us shutting it down. There was one family in there and their stoked little son ran through trees up to Harry and asked if he worked here not knowing who that is,” the worker explained.
> 
> The couple, along with their 19-month old son Archie, is planning to spend the holidays in the U.S. for the first time in their new Montecito, California, home. Last year, the family of three spent the festive season at a rented home on Vancouver Island in Canada with Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland. Harry visited the nearby town of Sidney-by-the-Sea to buy table decorations, just days before Christmas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Go Christmas Tree Shopping — and Harry Has a Funny Mix-Up!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were spotted Christmas tree shopping at a tree barn in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


we need a yucky face


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RueMonge

LittleStar88 said:


> I am in the Bay Area (south bay, "nice" neighborhood). Homeless go into the grocery stores and openly steal whatever they want and employees and security can only stand by and watch and let it happen. You have to pay attention in store parking lots to watch for homeless as they will come up to you or your car and ask for money. Homeless encampments are everywhere - even in areas where they were never seen before. Most of these are people who do not want to help to get back on track for a number of reasons.
> 
> Ring and Nextdoor notifications for homes being broken into - even while people are home (one woman was murdered in her home in our neighborhood by a released criminal). The worst we personally have had so far is one of our vehicles was broken into and some things taken. And we have very visible cameras all around the perimeter of the house. It makes no difference.
> 
> In one of the most upscale areas near me, the neighborhoods were being specifically targeted because it was well known that the police don't patrol the area and people have nice things there - so criminals were having a field day and all police could say was sorry - just do a neighborhood watch because we don't have the resources to come out there... That didn't help at all.
> 
> I get that there are people who have found themselves in a bad way and are struggling, and I feel very bad for those who are homeless (even if by their own choice), but I also don't feel it is ok for anyone to steal from others.
> 
> H&M are very, very fortunate to live where they do and have the lifestyle they do. Blissfully unaware of the real struggles of the people they preach to.


Wow, I’m surprised that a store will not do anything. I love your city, but it makes me feel cold just thinking about being homeless up there. 

H&M definitely live in a privilege bubble.


----------



## bisousx

LittleStar88 said:


> I am in the Bay Area (south bay, "nice" neighborhood). Homeless go into the grocery stores and openly steal whatever they want and employees and security can only stand by and watch and let it happen. You have to pay attention in store parking lots to watch for homeless as they will come up to you or your car and ask for money. Homeless encampments are everywhere - even in areas where they were never seen before. *Most of these are people who do not want to help to get back on track for a number of reasons.*
> 
> Ring and Nextdoor notifications for homes being broken into - even while people are home (one woman was murdered in her home in our neighborhood by a released criminal). The worst we personally have had so far is one of our vehicles was broken into and some things taken. And we have very visible cameras all around the perimeter of the house. It makes no difference.
> 
> In one of the most upscale areas near me, the neighborhoods were being specifically targeted because it was well known that the police don't patrol the area and people have nice things there - so criminals were having a field day and all police could say was sorry - just do a neighborhood watch because we don't have the resources to come out there... That didn't help at all.
> 
> I get that there are people who have found themselves in a bad way and are struggling, and I feel very bad for those who are homeless (even if by their own choice), but I also don't feel it is ok for anyone to steal from others.
> 
> H&M are very, very fortunate to live where they do and have the lifestyle they do. Blissfully unaware of the real struggles of the people they preach to.



Which various reasons do you speak of - could it be the free needles from the SF local govt normalizing heroin use or is it the “safe snort” care packages given away by local non-profits?

If it’s any consolation for us losing our safe neighborhoods to this foolishness, I feel it’s only a matter of time before this trickles into Montecito.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmmmm. What will the pregnant Eugenia do?
So, that’s Christmas and New Years ruined.  What happened to being quiet???

_The insider explained: 'Global travel has been made very complicated by the coronavirus pandemic and at the moment the duke has no plans to travel back to the UK, certainly not before Christmas.' _
[we know, oh how we know].

_Instead, the couple will travel to the UK with their son Archie in the period between Christmas and the New Year. _
[Archie who???]

_Sources said they plan to spend two weeks isolating in Frogmore Cottage before Meghan's High Court case begins on January 11._
[whaaaaa?  Frogmore? Must be a mistake.]

_Prince Harry and Meghan spent last Christmas in Canada, a first for the couple, who, up until that point, had celebrated the holiday at the Queen's Sandringham estate every year since their 2017 engagement.  _
[really? MM went there???]

_Harry had always spent Christmas at the Queen's Norfolk home, barring 2012 when he was serving in Afghanistan._
[of course he did]
_The news comes after another source claimed Prince Harry and Meghan planned on spending Christmas in the US with musician David Foster. _
[ the real dad...swoon]








						Prince Harry is mistaken for a Christmas tree SALESMAN by a little boy
					

The funny mixup occurred on Tuesday when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were reportedly out looking for a tree for their mansion in Montecito, California.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmmmm. What will the pregnant Eugenia do?
> So, that’s Christmas and New Years ruined.  What happened to being quiet???
> 
> _The insider explained: 'Global travel has been made very complicated by the coronavirus pandemic and at the moment the duke has no plans to travel back to the UK, certainly not before Christmas.' _
> [we know, oh how we know].
> 
> _Instead, the couple will travel to the UK with their son Archie in the period between Christmas and the New Year. _
> [Archie who???]
> 
> _Sources said they plan to spend two weeks isolating in Frogmore Cottage before Meghan's High Court case begins on January 11._
> [whaaaaa?  Frogmore? Must be a mistake.]
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan spent last Christmas in Canada, a first for the couple, who, up until that point, had celebrated the holiday at the Queen's Sandringham estate every year since their 2017 engagement.  _
> [really? MM went there???]
> 
> _Harry had always spent Christmas at the Queen's Norfolk home, barring 2012 when he was serving in Afghanistan._
> [of course he did]
> _The news comes after another source claimed Prince Harry and Meghan planned on spending Christmas in the US with musician David Foster. _
> [ the real dad...swoon]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is mistaken for a Christmas tree SALESMAN by a little boy
> 
> 
> The funny mixup occurred on Tuesday when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were reportedly out looking for a tree for their mansion in Montecito, California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The title of the article: *Blending in! Prince Harry is 'mistaken for a Christmas tree SALESMAN... *It looks like he has been selling his family since he married MM.


----------



## bag-mania

"Meghan sounds very kind and Harry sounded and acted like a chill lad honestly."

I'm calling BS. You are never going to find an American selling trees in a mall parking lot who is going to refer to Harry as a "chill lad" or any kind of lad for that matter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I am in the Bay Area (south bay, "nice" neighborhood). Homeless go into the grocery stores and openly steal whatever they want and employees and security can only stand by and watch and let it happen. You have to pay attention in store parking lots to watch for homeless as they will come up to you or your car and ask for money. Homeless encampments are everywhere - even in areas where they were never seen before. Most of these are people who do not want to help to get back on track for a number of reasons.



I mean, can you really blame them though. Being homeless is such a terrible situation to be in. Mental illness is a beast, substance abuse is an illness too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The insider explained: 'Global travel has been made very complicated by the coronavirus pandemic and at the moment the duke has no plans to travel back to the UK, certainly not before Christmas.' _
> [we know, oh how we know].
> 
> _Instead, the couple will travel to the UK with their son Archie in the period between Christmas and the New Year. _
> [Archie who???]



It's been a long week, so maybe I'm dull here, but what will change between December 23rd and December 27th?

_



			Sources said they plan to spend two weeks isolating in Frogmore Cottage before Meghan's High Court case begins on January 11.
		
Click to expand...

_


> [whaaaaa?  Frogmore? Must be a mistake.]



I thought that was delayed?

_



			Prince Harry and Meghan spent last Christmas in Canada, a first for the couple, who, up until that point, had celebrated the holiday at the Queen's Sandringham estate every year since their 2017 engagement.
		
Click to expand...

_


> [really? MM went there???]



Oh you bet she did. In 2017 she couldn't believe her luck that she had schemed her way into the most famous family of the world. In 2018 she needed a display for her pregnant belly.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, can you really blame them though. Being homeless is such a terrible situation to be in. Mental illness is a beast, substance abuse is an illness too.



I don't blame them but it isn't justified. I work my butt off and pay a $hite ton of money in taxes to not be victimized. There's too much money in the Bay Area for this to be such a widespread, out of control issue. 

Some people have homeless living on the other side of sound walls opposite their yards, with feces and campfires and trash and vermin literally viewable outside of their bedroom windows. It is really not ok.

This is why people are leaving the Bay Area, and California in general. We pay so much but nothing is done to help those who desperately need it, and protect those who need to be protected from them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@QueenofWrapDress   I thought the Jan 11 date was delayed, too.  This is why we are questioning the article’s validity. Never underestimate H&M’s ability for telling lies.  Wishing they would stoppppp it.

 Yes, she was there. Omg. Thank you for the reminder which gave us these gems:



ETA: Nothing says Merry Christmas like a black coat, black dress and black boots.


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 For a brief second, I thought that you were describing their infamous trip to the cemetery in LA.

Some people invest in education, hard work, stock market, real estate... MM invests strongly in PR agencies.

I wonder if kids should follow her example and instead of looking into 'College Rankings', they should start looking into 'PR Agency Rankings'. Instead of scientists, MDs, engineers, lawyers... (too much work), we will increase the numbers of idiots with a great image! It will be a lot more profitable, they can have zillions of toilets and Nflix deals, fly in private jets...


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been a long week, so maybe I'm dull here, but what will change between December 23rd and December 27th?
> 
> 
> 
> I thought that was delayed?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh you bet she did. In 2017 she couldn't believe her luck that she had schemed her way into the most famous family of the world. In 2018 she needed a display for her pregnant belly.


If she put as much effort into perfecting her acting skills as she has into scheming to marry H and becoming famous, she could have been a very good actress.


----------



## sdkitty

Tootsie17 said:


> If she put as much effort into perfecting her acting skills as she has into scheming to marry H and becoming famous, she could have been a very good actress.


I think we're gonna have to agree to disagree on this one - her talent is networking and BS, not acting so much IMO


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> The title of the article: *Blending in! Prince Harry is 'mistaken for a Christmas tree SALESMAN... *It looks like he has been selling his family since he married MM.


He must have had that sloppy green t-shirt on, and with his Ginger hair, the little boy probably thought “oh wow - a DIFFERENT type of tree”!


----------



## Gourmetgal

carmen56 said:


> The thing with removing her Duchess title, apparently, would mean that she would then be known as Princess Henry of Wales.  Personally I like that even less than Duchess.  She's not my idea of a princess at all!


Isn’t Princess or Duchess just a title?  Is there a job description or something?  Just stumbled upon this thread and am dumbfounded that an old money, celebrity couple can generate so much attention.  They’re just people.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> He must have had that sloppy green t-shirt on, and with his Ginger hair, the little boy probably thought “oh wow - a DIFFERENT type of tree”!



The little boy probably saw Harry taking his tree to the car. An understandable mistake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gourmetgal said:


> Isn’t Princess or Duchess just a title?  Is there a job description or something?  Just stumbled upon this thread and am dumbfounded that an old money, celebrity couple can generate so much attention.  They’re just people.



It is possible you can have your opinion and I can have mine. We do not need to agree, right?  By definition, aren’t celebrities supposed to attract attention? The more, the better?


----------



## Gourmetgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is possible you can have your opinion and I can have mine. We do not need to agree, right?  By definition, aren’t celebrities supposed to attract attention? The more, the better?


Yeah, I just don’t get why.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gourmetgal said:


> Yeah, I just don’t get why.



Usually, they seek attention because they are selling products/movies/etc.
Usually, the more clicks/looks/photos they get, the more money they are paid. They do what they do because they get $$$$.


----------



## bag-mania

Gourmetgal said:


> Yeah, I just don’t get why.



I’m afraid there’s no definitive answer as to why. It just is. We’re sitting back and watching the crazy train wreck.    You’re welcome to come along for the ride.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> The little boy probably saw Harry taking his tree to the car. An understandable mistake.
> 
> View attachment 4921688


PRICELESS ..


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Removing her duchess title would be a strong message from QE, and MM would hate to be exposed that way.
> Let her call herself Princess Henry of Wales, it would look really good with her so called feminist label.


No chance, even though she technically is, I don't want my country associated with her, thank you very much


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> "Meghan sounds very kind and Harry sounded and acted like a chill lad honestly."
> 
> I'm calling BS. You are never going to find an American selling trees in a mall parking lot who is going to refer to Harry as a "chill lad" or any kind of lad for that matter.



Exactly.  I call bullsh1t.

And there is no way they are returning to England after Christmas or quarentining at Frogmore.  So annoying when publications dredge up old news for click bait.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been a long week, so maybe I'm dull here, but what will change between December 23rd and December 27th


Travel restrictions are going to be eased here within the UK between those dates. I haven't looked into it too much as I'm not travelling.


----------



## bisbee

Gourmetgal said:


> Yeah, I just don’t get why.


In my opinion, the attention paid to this couple far, FAR exceeds what their actions would generate.  But...that obviously is not the opinion of the posters on this thread.


----------



## Aimee3

Sharont2305 said:


> Travel restrictions are going to be eased here within the UK between those dates. I haven't looked into it too much as I'm not travelling.


M&H would travel privately anyway.  No way they’d travel commercial. After all, * their * carbon footprints don’t count.


----------



## Sharont2305

Aimee3 said:


> M&H would travel privately anyway.  No way they’d travel commercial. After all, * their * carbon footprints don’t count.


I'm talking within the UK, you can only travel to different areas within those dates


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Harry together with the news on the last COVID numbers are putting me in a terrible mood today.
> 
> *'Everything is impossible at the beginning, you just have to try': Prince Harry promotes educational site for Netflix Paralympics documentary - after signing $150m deal with streaming giant*
> The Duke of Sussex has spoken about the power of the human spirit in a promotional video for a new educational site for a Netflix documentary.
> 
> During the short video, the Duke said: 'Rising Phoenix is a film with a message that has never been more important to us: the power of the human spirit, to break down barriers and push us beyond what is often thought impossible. I believe there is so much to learn from this story.'
> 
> Prince Harry goes on to talk about the significance of sport, saying: 'That's why I'm so excited about this education site, which has lessons and reading materials for everybody to learn more. This film demonstrates our human ability rather than our disability.'
> 
> Earlier this year, Prince Harry and Meghan announced they had signed a mega-watt deal to provide exclusive content to Netflix's 190 million subscribers worldwide which experts said could be worth $150 million.
> 
> The couple founded a yet-to-be-named production company which will make documentaries, feature films, scripted shows and children's programming, according to The New York Times.
> 
> In a statement, the Sussexes said: 'Our focus will be on creating content that informs but also gives hope. As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us.'
> 
> They added that Netflix's 'unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.'
> 
> Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie also claimed the couple have big plans for the next few years, and are basing their working model on the Ob***s.
> 
> Hypocrisy continues...




The repeated and dogged attempts of MM and H to cast themselves as some sort of mini-me Obamas makes me gag!!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> No chance, even though she technically is, I don't want my country associated with her, thank you very much


@Sharont2305  I apologize to the people of Wales for that thought. This is a tough situation and Her Majesty The Queen may need help from this forum to come up with a creative solution.


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> The repeated and dogged attempts of MM and H to cast themselves as some sort of mini-me Obamas makes me gag!!


Are you sure you meant to say 'mini-me'? Is there a 'maxi-me'?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Travel restrictions are going to be eased here within the UK between those dates. I haven't looked into it too much as I'm not travelling.


I believe it's only between the home nations, not overseas.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure you meant to say 'mini-me'? Is there a 'maxi-me'?




LOL - you got me there!  Probably should have said cheap imitations!


----------



## purseinsanity

RueMonge said:


> Wow, I’m surprised that a store will not do anything. I love your city, but it makes me feel cold just thinking about being homeless up there.
> 
> H&M definitely live in a privilege bubble.


It's a California law.  Anything stolen under $1000 ($950?) won't be prosecuted.  Our local ATT store has no cell phone models for display under $1000, because people came in and stole them and the employees could do nothing about it.  They can call the police, but due to the law, they can't do anything about it.  My friend that works at Saks said homeless or thieves will come in, steal things up to that amount, then blatantly sell it for half price on the doorsteps of the store!  And you wonder why there's a mass exodus of people leaving the "wonderful" state of CA.


----------



## Luvbolide

Maybe I missed something, but why is there talk of MM and H going to the UK for a January 11 trial date?  Didn’t they get a several month continuance based on some top-secret reason?

And why do these publications keep referring to MM having joined the Christmas celebration at Sandringham “every year since their 2017 engagement” like it is a multi-year event?!?!  She went precisely twice - BFD!!  Hardly makes her an integral part of the event!


----------



## Gourmetgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Usually, they seek attention because they are selling products/movies/etc.
> Usually, the more clicks/looks/photos they get, the more money they are paid. They do what they do because they get $$$$.


I guess I was looking at it from the other side of the equation...why are _we_ so enthralled?


----------



## Gourmetgal

purseinsanity said:


> It's a California law.  Anything stolen under $1000 ($950?) won't be prosecuted.  Our local ATT store has no cell phone models for display under $1000, because people came in and stole them and the employees could do nothing about it.  They can call the police, but due to the law, they can't do anything about it.  My friend that works at Saks said homeless or thieves will come in, steal things up to that amount, then blatantly sell it for half price on the doorsteps of the store!  And you wonder why there's a mass exodus of people leaving the "wonderful" state of CA.


I believe that law is slated for change.  It was clearly a mistake and has to be adjusted...could take years, though!  Also, it’s mostly straight up criminals doing most of the shop-lifting, not just the homeless.


----------



## sdkitty

Gourmetgal said:


> I guess I was looking at it from the other side of the equation...why are _we_ so enthralled?


Americans don't have a royal family and have always liked watched the British royals IMO.  maybe counter intuitive since we fought for democracy but I think it's the trappings that fascinate us


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> It's a California law.  Something like anything stolen under $1000 ($950?) won't be prosecuted.  Our local ATT store has no cell phone models for display under $1000, because people came in and stole them and the employees could do nothing about it.  They can call the police, but due to the law, they can't do anything about it.  My friend that works at Saks said homeless will come in, steal things up to that amount, then blatantly sell it for half price on the doorsteps of the store!  And you wonder why there's a mass exodus of people leaving the "wonderful" state of CA.


California used to be a great state. It has been deteriorating a lot for the last several years, and I can't blame people for wanting to move elsewhere. Homeless encampments are everywhere, and the state leadership does nothing to address this apart of increasing taxes.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm talking within the UK, you can only travel to different areas within those dates


Yeah the UK Regulations , bubbles, zones , dates and all are meticulous complex and mystifying
California Regulations are a bit along those lines , but maybe the term bubble is un American 
In Missouri we are just told stay home but you can buy groceries or go to doctor if you have a mask, simple


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H's employer led to "shut down the comments" on Camilla & Charles's Twitter page:

*Why Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Charles's Twitter Account Restricted Comments*
The palace confirmed that they restricted comments after some recent replies broke the Royal Household's social media guidelines, which do not permit the posting of abusive comments.

Some reports say the negative comments were aimed at Camilla in response to the fourth season of _The Crown_, now airing on Netflix, which focuses largely on the early stages of Prince Charles and the late Princess Diana's romance. Throughout the show, Charles and Camilla continue to have a relationship despite being married to different people. The two eventually married in 2005.

The BRF and the Markles's employer


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> @Sharont2305  I apologize to the people of Wales for that thought. This is a tough situation and Her Majesty The Queen may need help from this forum to come up with a creative solution.


Yeah, lol, divorce!


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> I believe it's only between the home nations, not overseas.


Its so confusing, England has a tier system, Scotland has something else, as has Northern Ireland. We don't in Wales yet. All I know is no travel, before or after those dates


----------



## CobaltBlu

Please no politics etc.  
I know the kids have been kind of quiet lately but we need to remember to make this all about Meghan and JCMH.  
I am 100% sure if she were here she would tell you the same thing.  






Thanks


----------



## Vintage Leather

Gourmetgal said:


> I guess I was looking at it from the other side of the equation...why are _we_ so enthralled?


Personally, I’m stressed out, my usual avenues of expression are more limited, and the Markles are so stupid they’re funny. 
They’ve become the new Kardashians


----------



## bag-mania

Vintage Leather said:


> Personally, I’m stressed out, my usual avenues of expression are more limited, and the Markles are so stupid they’re funny.
> They’ve become the new Kardashians



They are even better than the Kardashians. The Kardashians never took themselves so seriously.


----------



## Tootsie17

CobaltBlu said:


> Please no politics etc.
> I know the kids have been kind of quiet lately but we need to remember to make this all about Meghan and JCMH.
> I am 100% sure if she were here she would tell you the same thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks


Too funny and spot on!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> They are even better than the Kardashians. The Kardashians never took themselves so seriously.


And the Kardashians, hate them or love them, worked hard and earned their own money.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> And the Kardashians, hate them or love them, worked hard and earned their own money.



And they took an existing idea, reality TV, and ran with it. They added their own original spin.  There’s nothing Meghan and Harry are doing that hasn’t been done before and better by others.


----------



## mshermes

A little levity....I happened upon this ad one day and thought ..... if the Markles see this, they are going to be sued. It made me chuckle.....


----------



## CobaltBlu

Please stay on topic. 
We can talk about homelessness next time Meg and JCMH make a run for it. 

pointless gif:


----------



## Jktgal

purseinsanity said:


> It's a California law. Anything stolen under $1000 ($950?) won't be prosecuted. Our local ATT store has no cell phone models for display under $1000, because people came in and stole them and the employees could do nothing about it. They can call the police, but due to the law, they can't do anything about it. My friend that works at Saks said homeless or thieves will come in, steal things up to that amount, then blatantly sell it for half price on the doorsteps of the store! And you wonder why there's a mass exodus of people leaving the "wonderful" state of CA.



And the fires! Can't believe I am saying this but even if given a 16bathroom mansion I don't want to move to CA lol. I'd sell it and move to .... Wellington.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gourmetgal said:


> I guess I was looking at it from the other side of the equation...why are _we_ so enthralled?



Without us, they would have no clicks. We _are _free to click where we want


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooooouch.  Article is about Diana’s hair, but they commented on MM’s hair  








						Why Did Princess Diana’s Hair Look Like That?
					

Her feathery mushroom cut both defined and defied ’80s glamour.




					www.thecut.com
				



_See Thatcher’s steely resolve (brought to you by loads of hair spray) or Meghan Markle’s messy bun — an early sign of the messiness to come._

Expect more jokes about this:








						Prince Harry Mistaken for Normie Christmas Tree Worker
					

Welcome to the real world, buddy.




					www.thecut.com


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> They are even better than the Kardashians. The Kardashians never took themselves so seriously.


At least the Kardashians were up front about who they are and that they are doing it for money and fame. The Markles not so much, pretending to be something other than what they are. Hypocrites  and fools. Something to keep us entertained through these tough times.


----------



## viciel

I know the bar has been set to a new low when I find myself admiring the Kardashians because they pale in narcissism compared to H&M. The K tribe has earned their hardworking and productive badge of honor.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CobaltBlu said:


> pointless gif:


This reminds of a weathercock.
Definition: 
1. A vane often in the figure of a cock mounted so as to turn freely with the wind and show its direction 
2. A person or thing that changes readily or often!


----------



## purseinsanity

Gourmetgal said:


> I believe that law is slated for change.  It was clearly a mistake and has to be adjusted...could take years, though!  Also, it’s mostly straight up criminals doing most of the shop-lifting, not just the homeless.


I hope so.  Absolutely zero common sense behind whatever idiot came up with that one!  In today's day of entitlement, it's completely out of control.  Speaking of entitlement, back to MM and JCMH


----------



## purseinsanity

Must be a slow day for the stories, even for MM.  Not a peep about her going outside with a "Look at Me!" mask or anything.  So refreshing!


----------



## Chloe302225

purseinsanity said:


> Must be a slow day for the stories, even for MM.  Not a peep about her going outside with a "Look at Me!" mask or anything.  So refreshing!




The Cambriges are going on tour on the Royal Train starting Sunday across England, Scotland and Wales, so brace yourself.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Must be a slow day for the stories, even for MM.  Not a peep about her going outside with a "Look at Me!" mask or anything.  So refreshing!



If they had any new ideas I’m sure they would be acting on them. How do you top “I had a miscarriage five months ago but I’m letting you know now that we will all be OK” and “what if we were raindrops?” They are in very real danger of overplaying their hand.


----------



## Chanbal

*Cambridges hop on **Royal Train** with single beds ... as they begin three-day tour of Britain to thank frontline pandemic workers*

We anticipate that the Sussexes will do the same in California and hop on a West Covered Wagon Train. The duchess will be driving! A hog-killin' time!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

“Let’s go, rrrroar”


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> “Let’s go, rrrroar”
> View attachment 4922394


This is the exact clip that started my irritation with these two.  She looks like she's overacting and Harry looks like the doofus he is.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> This is the exact clip that started my irritation with these two.  She looks like she's overacting and Harry looks like the doofus he is.


Looking at it more than once is vomit inducing.


----------



## bag-mania

Look out Meghan! Your old friend Ellen just bought a bigger, more expensive house in your neighborhood than you have. (It really is a slow time for H&M news.)


*Ellen DeGeneres, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be neighbors in California*
Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi will be neighbors with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry after snapping up Dennis Miller’s beautiful Montecito estate for a cool $49 million, according to a report.

The deal makes the compound one of the priciest ever sold in the area, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Comedian and political commentator Miller and his wife, Carolyn Espley-Miller, a former model, have lived on the estate since 2006.

The property features three plots which are a combined four acres, and includes a South African Cape Dutch-style main building, a barn and a large lily pond.

DeGeneres and de Rossi are longtime property owners in the ritzy neighborhood, having just sold a different home for $33.3 million.









						Ellen DeGeneres, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to be neighbors in California
					

Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi snapped up Dennis Miller’s beautiful Montecito estate for a cool $49M.




					pagesix.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> “Let’s go, rrrroar”
> View attachment 4922394



What did she even say there? I want to puke just watching the gif, I can't watch the interview.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s from the outtakes portion of their interview. Microphones were off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from the outtakes portion of their interview. Microphones were off.




Ah, the part where she was being oh so cute and natural *coughs*


----------



## CarryOn2020

“Natural and cute”, indeed. Guessing that’s the nicest way to describe them back then.
 As I watched the old interview, I noticed how little they’ve changed. He seems so casual, disinterested and she overacts. This tells me they won’t get much better at their events/videos. We’re doomed.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from the outtakes portion of their interview. Microphones were off.



LOL
I take back what I said....maybe she can act


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> “Natural and cute”, indeed. Guessing that’s the nicest way to describe them back then.
> As I watched the old interview, I noticed how little they’ve changed. He seems so casual, disinterested and she overacts. This tells me they won’t get much better at their events/videos. We’re doomed.


as I and others here have said, annoying as they are, they do provide some distraction from the more serious things going on all around us.....so - part of me wants them to go away but they give us something to talk about.  I wouldn't mind talking about how they lose all their legal battles


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> I take back what I said....*maybe she can act*


I hope you're being sarcastic. IMO, it comes across as bad acting. She sounds like a giggling teenager talking about some screen idol.  
Wish we could get a puke icon added to the LIKES because the outtakes deserve a big puke icon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> as I and others here have said, annoying as they are, they do provide some distraction from the more serious things going on all around us.....so - part of me wants them to go away but they give us something to talk about.  I wouldn't mind talking about how they lose all their legal battles



Exactly!  It isn’t often we see a couple who has not improved with time. Usually we are given the high-gloss versions of royalty. Harry began with this unpolished, unrefined air about him and has not changed. The immaturity is startling.

*maybe she can overact*
She only knows how to do exaggerated expressions. Z lister always.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I hope you're being sarcastic. IMO, it comes across as bad acting. She sounds like a giggling teenager talking about some screen idol.
> Wish we could get a puke icon added to the LIKES because the outtakes deserve a big puke icon.


well, it's acting....not saying it's excellent acting.....apparently it worked on "H"


----------



## Luvbolide

She seems insanely phony to me - ugh...even when she was on Suits she struck me as ridiculously phony.  Couldn’t tell if she thought that was “acting” or whether it is her natural state.  Can’t imagine living around that 24/7.

Poor Archie - what a pair!


----------



## V0N1B2

Did she ever let go of his hand once during the entire interview? When she jestured with the left hand, the right one was there grabbing onto him, and when she jestured with her right hand, the left one immediately took its place. 
But then again, has there ever been a time when they've been filmed or photographed together when she hasn't been holding onto him for dear life? 
Always staring up at him like she's making sure he says the right things...
It's creepy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Did she ever let go of his hand once during the entire interview? When she jestured with the left hand, the right one was there grabbing onto him, and when she jestured with her right hand, the left one immediately took its place.
> But then again, has there ever been a time when they've been filmed or photographed together when she hasn't been holding onto him for dear life?
> Always staring up at him like she's making sure he says the right things...
> It's creepy.


she's trying to look like she's in love but really she is controlling him with her hands


----------



## gracekelly

Harry puppet


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry puppet
> 
> View attachment 4923073


really to me she is making him look like a fool - a low IQ person.....sad

edit - or maybe he just is a weak, not very smart guy


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> really to me she is making him look like a fool - a low IQ person.....sad
> 
> edit - or maybe he just is a weak, not very smart guy


It's been said he's not the brightest bulb....


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from the outtakes portion of their interview. Microphones were off.



We know now this was all BS.  The engagement story was made up and at one point the interviewer asked if they've met each other's families.  It's interesting how they avoided discussing meeting her family at all.  She went on and on about meeting his.  At one point she also mentioned how she's been on TV for six years, then later increased it to seven.  She's the type who probably knows EXACTLY to the minute how long she's been on any screen.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Did she ever let go of his hand once during the entire interview? When she jestured with the left hand, the right one was there grabbing onto him, and when she jestured with her right hand, the left one immediately took its place.
> But then again, has there ever been a time when they've been filmed or photographed together when she hasn't been holding onto him for dear life?
> Always staring up at him like she's making sure he says the right things...
> It's creepy.


It was a slow night for me last night LOL, so I was trying to find the conversation that was apparently an outtake with the mics off.  Anyway, for comparison, I then watched a little of the interview of William and Kate after they got engaged, and they both seemed a little shy, she isn't clinging to him for dear life and there's no sense of phoniness.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> really to me she is making him look like a fool - a low IQ person.....sad
> 
> edit - or maybe he just is a weak, not very smart guy


From what I've read, he had much difficulty in school. Some posters were saying that the teachers were either writing the exams for him or giving him the answers so he could pass.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> From what I've read, he had much difficulty in school. Some posters were saying that the teachers were either writing the exams for him or giving him the answers so he could pass.


guess it's a good thing he was the "spare"


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> We know now this was all BS.  The engagement story was made up and at one point the interviewer asked if they've met each other's families.  It's interesting how they avoided discussing meeting her family at all.  She went on and on about meeting his.  At one point she also mentioned how she's been on TV for six years, then later increased it to seven.  She's the type who probably knows EXACTLY to the minute how long she's been on any screen.



I think the real story about how they met was on the tawdry side, and it was more than meeting him at the bar of Soho House with a bunch of friends.  When two people can't get their story straight it means that it is a work of fiction and one of them isn't bright enough to remember the "official" version as laid out by one of them.  I think we know which one writes the fiction and which one isn't bright.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Maggie Muggins said:


> From what I've read, he had much difficulty in school. Some posters were saying that the teachers were either writing the exams for him or giving him the answers so he could pass.


Yes, rumour has it that he had a lot of helps in school and later in the military. He's infamous for being thick here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If they would just own their nonsense, no one would care. We have seen through the ‘princess myth’, so we know it’s all fake. Just be honest. The tawdry stuff is far more interesting - ahem.


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> Which various reasons do you speak of - could it be the free needles from the SF local govt normalizing heroin use or is it the “safe snort” care packages given away by local non-profits?
> 
> If it’s any consolation for us losing our safe neighborhoods to this foolishness, I feel it’s only a matter of time before this trickles into Montecito.


.. at some point it will, I saw it happen in Pasadena and no matter how much the residences may biatch, there's not a heck of a lot that the Police can & will do.  Even in Beverly Hills, where the Police Department used to yield a heavy hand .. not anymore!  Just the other day, a big gathering on Rodeo Drive (yet again).  The weather out here is extremely conducive to allowing people to live outside, and some (sadly) .. it's not their choice, others? .. yeah, they are just druggies and or have mental health issues but do not want to seek treatment.  I've been out here since 2013, and honestly .. I cannot believe how it's escalated so quickly.  I feel sorry for many of the folks that work in places like Trader Joes (who have been the BEST during this pandemic), and they get robbed continuously .. and how do these folks get the guns? hmmmm???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Ready for a little humour?


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> From what I've read, he had much difficulty in school. Some posters were saying that the teachers were either writing the exams for him or giving him the answers so he could pass.


The same was heard about his time in the Military.  Many magz like to report "Helicopter Pilot", but he was NEVER the pilot as he could not pass the exams (heard he took them 3 times and flunked badly each time).  Those photos where it "appears" that he is piloting the Helicopter are STAGED, STAGED and STAGED .. not truthful at all!


----------



## Lodpah

I watched an Amy Winehouse documentary and it was really good. The psychiatrist opined that Amy and her husband were two people who both fed off on each other. Amy was ok confident in the beginning and although she probably had underlying mental health problems her husband  swooped in with his strong personality and basically love bombed Amy. Destroyed Amy as Amy also was devastated by her parents’ divorce.

Amy- Harry
Fielder -Meghan

Meghan apparently stalked Harry and went in for the kill. I don’t think it’s going to end up well for Harry in the long run.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ready for a little humour?
> 
> View attachment 4923187


Thanks, one of those days. Needed that!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> really to me she is making him look like a fool - a low IQ person.....sad
> 
> edit - or maybe he just is a weak, not very smart guy



It’s both. He is a weak fool.  I wonder if she was surprised at how easy it was to manipulate him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

To my eye, she looks desperate and trying much too hard to make it all look genuine, as if she fits in, kinda like a groupie. He looks unimpressed with her, kinda like he would be ok to walk away. They look like they are pretending, saying what they think we want to hear (you tell this story, I will tell that one, etc). This was pre-wedding when the love vibe should be evident to all. If I did not know, I would never have guessed they were about to be married. As usual, everything with them is so awkward, including this:

Graphic wallpaper at SoHo house


----------



## CarryOn2020

Still trying to steal W&K’s thunder:









						Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Still trying to steal W&K’s thunder:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The more they try, the more pathetic they appear.


----------



## csshopper

Another JCMH and MM ploy to gain press and not really do anything to earn it.

 P A T H E T I C


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> Thanks, one of those days. Needed that!


You're most welcome. Laughter always lightens the load.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




This should be good.  What is the award or reward?  One vegan chicken?  A pat on the head by Harry?  


*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will launch their own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs to honour significant contributions in the couple's favourite fields*

*Meghan and Harry will award individuals, charities and companies with honours*
*Those who champion the Duke and Duchess's favourite causes will be awarded*
*Fields include: 'Charitable service, education, science and youth empowerment'*
*The awards scheme will be run by Duke and Duchess's Archewell foundation *


----------



## bag-mania

Love it! The Sun is taking the ludicrously pretentious idea of them giving out an award and running with it. Here is what they believe the award will look like.   

*We’ve mocked up a snowflake medal to show how firms, charities and individuals might be rewarded


*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This should be good.  What is the award or reward?  One vegan chicken?  A pat on the head by Harry?
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will launch their own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs to honour significant contributions in the couple's favourite fields*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry will award individuals, charities and companies with honours*
> *Those who champion the Duke and Duchess's favourite causes will be awarded*
> *Fields include: 'Charitable service, education, science and youth empowerment'*
> *The awards scheme will be run by Duke and Duchess's Archewell foundation *


*Scheme*:
1. A systematic plan of action: "Did you carry out your scheme of writing a        series...
2. *A secret or devious plan; a plot: a scheme to defraud investors*.
3. An orderly plan or arrangement of related parts: an irrigation scheme with     dams, reservoirs,...
4. A chart, diagram, or outline of a system or object.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Love it! The Sun is taking the ludicrously pretentious idea of them giving out an award and running with it. Here is what they believe the award will look like.
> 
> *We’ve mocked up a snowflake medal to show how firms, charities and individuals might be rewarded
> 
> View attachment 4923318
> *


How appropriate, it will melt away to nothing, just like everything else they’ve done.


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> Still trying to steal W&K’s thunder:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This really takes the cake.  Just NO.  Can we be done with the hubris and pretentiousness yet?


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> How appropriate, it will melt away to nothing, just like everything else they’ve done.



Nothing will come of it. Meghan and Harry are too cheap to pay for awards out of their own pockets and they have been unsuccessful in finding corporate sponsors for their various charities. I suppose Meghan could use her wonderful calligraphy skills to make a certificate for the winners.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Nothing will come of it. Meghan and Harry are too cheap to pay for awards out of their own pockets and they have been unsuccessful in finding corporate sponsors for their various charities. I suppose Meghan could use her wonderful calligraphy skills to make a certificate for the winners.


Exactly.  Too cheap.  An awardee wouldn't even get a gift certificate at In N' Out Burger.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The award will be a raindrop.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

They had to put their hat in the awards ring. The Queen, Charles and now William have awards; they couldn't possibly be left out of the action.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The award will be a raindrop.
> View attachment 4923341


This would be a cute award, but I think they will prefer customized medals with their faces and respective names&titles. Very cheap


----------



## Chloe302225

For two who just had to get away from their Royal oppressors, that they posted a ransom note in the middle of the night and left; they do seem very keen on modelling themselves on their one time overlords.


----------



## Chanbal

This is beyond pathetic. I hope they have a good health insurance plan because they need treatment. I browsed the comments, and some people are starting to be rightfully concerned with Archie.


----------



## Lodpah

Yikes, I’m getting embarrassed for them. It’s so pathetic like they’re grasping at anything to stay relevant. What the heck is wrong with Harry? He chose a plastic Faberge egg trinket over a real Faberge egg? Harry! Wake up! You two are memes now.


----------



## marietouchet

Last night, youtube suggested another Murky Meg video on the glimmer twins , desperate for amusement due to rotator cuff pain, I watched it
Oh My Gosh ...
The alliterative one  was  alledgedly sent down (to use posh words...lol) from Northwestern (for two years) for Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority pledge hazing that allegedly involved injuries due to super glue
I will leave it to you sleuths to find the details for yourselves, I have given you plenty of keywords...  It is a great story, if untrue, then someone is a very gifted creative writer ....

No idea if this story is true, to me, the fact that the story is out is a measure of how far the mighty have fallen and the value of the protection afforded by the BRF with respect to the press. This story did not come out two years ago... it is getting traction now that they are left to their own devices


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


> For two who just had to get away from their Royal oppressors, that they posted a ransom note in the middle of the night and left; they do seem very keen on modelling themselves on their one time overlords.


I think maybe they are realizing what they gave up.  but will never admit it.  wonder if she still thinks she can be a big movie star.  Will see what happens with Netflix but it doesn't sound like their stuff will be super entertaining.  so except for the stans, will people watch?


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> They had to put their hat in the awards ring. The Queen, Charles and now William have awards; *they couldn't possibly be left out of the action.*



They absolutely cannot bear for the other royals to do something good that they aren't doing. Too bad for them that #MeToo was already being used for something else. It would have been a perfect catchphrase for the two attention-loving copycats.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This should be good.  What is the award or reward?  One vegan chicken?  A pat on the head by Harry?
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will launch their own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs to honour significant contributions in the couple's favourite fields*
> 
> *Meghan and Harry will award individuals, charities and companies with honours*
> *Those who champion the Duke and Duchess's favourite causes will be awarded*
> *Fields include: 'Charitable service, education, science and youth empowerment'*
> *The awards scheme will be run by Duke and Duchess's Archewell foundation *




It wasn't too long ago that Harry was complaining to Greta about giving out awards...









						Prince Harry's swipe at 'giving out awards' exposed
					

PRINCE HARRY took a swipe at "giving out prizes" as a way to tackle the climate crisis during a notorious prank call recorded just a few months before Prince William launched his ambitious Earthshot Prize.




					www.express.co.uk
				




*"And small steps or giving out prizes doesn't make any difference these days. ..."*


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> It wasn't too long ago that Harry was complaining to Greta about giving out awards...
> 
> *"And small steps or giving out prizes doesn't make any difference these days. ..."*



Fake Greta. 

Obviously the world has changed so much in the past several months that they have done a 180° on prizes. Prizes are good!! Besides we cannot expect them to remember all the nonsense they spouted before when they have all new nonsense to say. Now where are the cameras?


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> It wasn't too long ago that Harry was complaining to Greta about giving out awards...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's swipe at 'giving out awards' exposed
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY took a swipe at "giving out prizes" as a way to tackle the climate crisis during a notorious prank call recorded just a few months before Prince William launched his ambitious Earthshot Prize.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"And small steps or giving out prizes doesn't make any difference these days. ..."*


So much greed and jealousy, this is getting rather sad. After criticizing 'giving out prices' Harry added, "I think what you need to do is make real big changes that actually shock people, and it's that shock factor that wakes people up." I can assure, H&MM have shocked me, big time!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Too bad for them that *#MeToo *was already being used for something else. It would have been a perfect catchphrase for the two attention-loving copycats.


They could probably use #MeMore.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> So much greed and jealousy, this is getting rather sad. After criticizing 'giving out prices' Harry added, "I think what you need to do is make real big changes that actually shock people, and it's that shock factor that wakes people up." I can assure, H&MM have shocked me, big time!


the jelousy is beyond.....really despicable
I am really starting to believe she put some sort of spell on him.  You would think having been in the spotlight all his life, he would want privacy.  but no - he seems to seek the attention at every turn.  and be jealous of his brother.  the whole thing is crazy and sad.  In my never to be humble opinion, he should get a divorce from this viper and go back in the army (if they would have him)


----------



## lulilu

marietouchet said:


> Last night, youtube suggested another Murky Meg video on the glimmer twins , desperate for amusement due to rotator cuff pain, I watched it
> Oh My Gosh ...
> The alliterative one  was  alledgedly sent down (to use posh words...lol) from Northwestern (for two years) for Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority pledge hazing that allegedly involved injuries due to super glue
> I will leave it to you sleuths to find the details for yourselves, I have given you plenty of keywords...  It is a great story, if untrue, then someone is a very gifted creative writer ....
> 
> No idea if this story is true, to me, the fact that the story is out is a measure of how far the mighty have fallen and the value of the protection afforded by the BRF with respect to the press. This story did not come out two years ago... it is getting traction now that they bare left to their own devices



As much as I dislike MM, I cannot believe something this awful is true.


----------



## Annawakes

I can’t imagine anybody who would want to get an award from them.  I hope they keep going though.  It’s enormously entertaining.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> As much as I dislike MM, I cannot believe something this awful is true.


Nor do I ... but the fact that the story circulates is my point


----------



## marietouchet

This is hilarious .... 

Another example of how the media/press/influencers have turned on the glimmer twins

PIERS MORGAN: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's 'Wokie' awards
https://mol.im/a/9026767


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Last night, youtube suggested another Murky Meg video on the glimmer twins , desperate for amusement due to rotator cuff pain, I watched it
> Oh My Gosh ...
> The alliterative one  was  alledgedly sent down (to use posh words...lol) from Northwestern (for two years) for Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority pledge hazing that allegedly involved injuries due to super glue
> I will leave it to you sleuths to find the details for yourselves, I have given you plenty of keywords...  It is a great story, if untrue, then someone is a very gifted creative writer ....
> 
> No idea if this story is true, to me, the fact that the story is out is a measure of how far the mighty have fallen and the value of the protection afforded by the BRF with respect to the press. This story did not come out two years ago... it is getting traction now that they are left to their own devices





lulilu said:


> As much as I dislike MM, I cannot believe something this awful is true.


Is "Meghan's Shocking Sorority Haze Uncovered?" the video you both are talking about? For the sake of the alleged injured girls, I really hope it is false. It's very shocking.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the jelousy is beyond.....really despicable
> I am really starting to believe she put some sort of spell on him.  You would think having been in the spotlight all his life, he would want privacy.  but no - he seems to seek the attention at every turn.  and be jealous of his brother.  the whole think is crazy and sad.  In my never to be humble opinion, he should get a divorce from this viper and go back in the army (if they would have him)



It's a form of mind control. It goes back to the love bombing when she first isolated him away from everyone he knew. Maybe she convinced him he was unappreciated and being held back by his family. Maybe she persuaded him his friends only liked him because he was the prince. Most importantly, she made him believe that SHE, and she alone, was the only person who truly understands and loves him. There is probably lots more we cannot even imagine. I don't feel sorry for him. He bought into it and he has been an active, willing participant. They are the kind of codependent couple that will always be focused on themselves.


----------



## CeeJay

Annawakes said:


> I can’t imagine anybody who would want to get an award from them.  I hope they keep going though.  It’s enormously entertaining.


I think, this is Meghan’s way of “awarding” her friends (  - like she has any) .. you know like - Oprah, Amal, Michelle O., .. in her attempt to meet them and then declare that they are such “good friends”!  I just wonder who in their right mind would show up now, given what these two have put forth the last few months. Anyone with half a brain would stay way away from this MESS!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Just read this in an article: " The most recent incident is the latest in a long line of moments that indicate that Meghan Markle might never be able to truly fit into the royal family. However, the biggest detail that might’ve spelt doom for her since the very beginning was the fact that she’s American."

Um, don't think so, one can't blame actions, behaviours, attitudes, qualities, faults, etc. on a particular nationality. Those factors are part of an individual's moral constitution regardless of nationality. IMO MM is just plain amoral.


----------



## csshopper

Speculating there is much head banging in Montecito today. The Cambridges, well groomed, elegant, empathetic, engaged and _sincerely focused on others _at a level JCMH and MM are too narcissistic to ever achieve, are front page with their Royal Train Whistle Stop Thank You tour. I particularly loved the "Rent a Reindeer" treat they arranged for the schoolchildren. 

The real kicker comes at the end trip when they gather for a "rare photo op" as it was described in the Daily Mail featuring the Queen,  Charles, Camilla, William and Kate. Prince Phillip will not be in it (wonder about his health?). Meanwhile back in California, and seemingly falling further away, scruffy Harry and his Keeper are generating further mockery, using their son of course, for more attention to their "private lives" by proclaiming themselves equal to the Queen. Not even close and another


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Speculating there is much head banging in Montecito today. The Cambridges, well groomed, elegant, empathetic, engaged and _sincerely focused on others _at a level JCMH and MM are too narcissistic to ever achieve, are front page with their Royal Train Whistle Stop Thank You tour. I particularly loved the "Rent a Reindeer" treat they arranged for the schoolchildren.
> 
> The real kicker comes at the end trip when they gather for a "rare photo op" as it was described in the Daily Mail featuring the Queen,  Charles, Camilla, William and Kate. Prince Phillip will not be in it (wonder about his health?). Meanwhile back in California, and seemingly falling further away, scruffy Harry and his Keeper are generating further mockery, using their son of course, for more attention to their "private lives" by proclaiming themselves equal to the Queen. Not even close and another


I bet we'll see pictures of Archie by the end of this week.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Is "Meghan's Shocking Sorority Haze Uncovered?" the video you both are talking about? For the sake of the alleged injured girls, I really hope it is false. It's very shocking.


Agree shocking which is why I omitted details here

Assuming the story is FAKE NEWS, boy , somebody really hates the alliterative one to concoct such a nasty story that goes way beyond sarcasm and irony


----------



## marietouchet

kipp said:


> This really takes the cake.  Just NO.  Can we be done with the hubris and pretentiousness yet?


More fake news - like sorority story  ? Tatler was also reporting the awards story and their link is no longer functioning 
One point , comparing awards by JCMH to the queen’s honors , no , not at all the same ... 
IMHO award = certificate and maybe money, most awards are not well known, so it is really the money .... 
The queen’s honors are medals and titles eg Sir, Dame, OBE, CBE etc , typically for a lifetime of service , no money involved but huge recognition 

I am aghast at this story ... if true ... this is so demeaning to the queens honors system and to the people honored by the system


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Speculating there is much head banging in Montecito today. The Cambridges, well groomed, elegant, empathetic, engaged and _sincerely focused on others _at a level JCMH and MM are too narcissistic to ever achieve, are front page with their Royal Train Whistle Stop Thank You tour. I particularly loved the "Rent a Reindeer" treat they arranged for the schoolchildren.
> 
> The real kicker comes at the end trip when they gather for a "rare photo op" as it was described in the Daily Mail featuring the Queen,  Charles, Camilla, William and Kate. Prince Phillip will not be in it (wonder about his health?). Meanwhile back in California, and seemingly falling further away, scruffy Harry and his Keeper are generating further mockery, using their son of course, for more attention to their "private lives" by proclaiming themselves equal to the Queen. Not even close and another


As @gracekelly would say ... they are plumb out of crockery to throw in Montecito ...


----------



## papertiger

V0N1B2 said:


> Did she ever let go of his hand once during the entire interview? When she jestured with the left hand, the right one was there grabbing onto him, and when she jestured with her right hand, the left one immediately took its place.
> But then again, has there ever been a time when they've been filmed or photographed together when she hasn't been holding onto him for dear life?
> Always staring up at him like she's making sure he says the right things...
> It's creepy.



I used to think it was insecurity, but now I think it's calculated. It's in case the camera shot is on him (only). This way some part of her will always remain in shot and she can't be edited out later. The media often use random shots that fit a story that has nothing to do with when it was taken. She's making sure she's always a part of 'the show' (IMHO).


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I used to think it was insecurity, but now I think it's calculated. It's in case the camera shot is on him (only). This way some part of her will always remain in shot and she can't be edited out later. The media often use random shots that fit a story that has nothing to do with when it was taken. She's making sure she's always a part of 'the show' (IMHO).



Insecure people can be the most calculating and manipulative.  But knowing Meghan is a narcissist, I think she has always had too much self-esteem.  I think she acts out of frustration that the rest of the world doesn’t see her as being as wonderful as she believes she is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMHO:

— RE: KKG story. If it were true, those girls and their parents would have talked before now. A story like that can crush a school, so NW needs to step up, so does KKG.  All those ladies have a lot to lose. 

— RE: awards. This sounds like something Harry would think of. It is spiteful, immature and condescending to his family. Many people have refused to accept QE’s award, so Harry must know people will push back on this.  MM surely knows Oprah would never support this kind of thing, doesn’t she?

— RE: engagement interview.  Clearly she wanted the marriage more than he did and she knew that.  She really was holding on for dear life. At that time, many people were not certain the wedding would even take place.  Compare engagement to the backyard zoom where MM sat in the middle and H clutched the edge.  Yes, things have changed.

— RE: the American.  It’s about Wallis. It’s about the Revolutionary War.  To the BRF, we are those pesky colonists. It is also about the Great Reset.   I think but could be wrong the reset involves the USA participating.  We will all be one [happy] world, at least economically.

By now, H&M must realize how desperate they seem ... unless the BRF wants 2 royal houses. It could be their grand plan. Time will tell.

@Chanbal  Sending speedy recovery wishes to you!


----------



## youngster

So, am I understanding this correctly . . . in order to be eligible for one of their awards, you have to make a donation to their foundation?  So, they are basically selling the "award"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

The JCMH awards story is officially fake news
Interesting timing for that ie  during the Cambridge train tour


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> So, am I understanding this correctly . . . in order to be eligible for one of their awards, you have to make a donation to their foundation?  So, they are basically selling the "award"?


That's how I read it! So who would pay to be awarded by these 2 grifters??? Most ridiculous scam yet?


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> The JCMH awards story is officially fake news


It sounds like one of those feelers. They put something out to see how the public would react. If negative then come out and deny it was real.

Think about it. If it was made up story without them being behind it, wouldn't they be suing someone already?


----------



## redney

So when will MM and JCMH announce their Amtrak trip across the US?


----------



## lanasyogamama

redney said:


> So when will MM and JCMH announce their Amtrak trip across the US?


Comment of the day!


----------



## chicinthecity777

redney said:


> So when will MM and JCMH announce their Amtrak trip across the US?


Given how original those 2 are, my prediction is very soon!


----------



## Lodpah

MM is setting up a monarch in the US. Lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lodpah    MM wants to be Queen of Hearts - _This is the Card of beauty, magnetism, affection and idealism. *Queen of Hearts* represents the much-loved mother, the sweetheart, the indispensable sister, the adored daughter.   _

Or course, those in the know remember Juice Newton:
_Playing with the Queen of Hearts
Knowing it ain't really smart
The Joker ain't the only fool
Who'll do anything for you_


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Lodpah    MM wants to be Queen of Hearts - _This is the Card of beauty, magnetism, affection and idealism. *Queen of Hearts* represents the much-loved mother, the sweetheart, the indispensable sister, the adored daughter.  _
> 
> Or course, those in the know remember Juice Newton:
> _Playing with the Queen of Hearts
> Knowing it ain't really smart
> The Joker ain't the only fool
> Who'll do anything for you_



I haven't heard that song in foreverrrrr!


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> It sounds like one of those feelers. They put something out to see how the public would react. If negative then come out and deny it was real.
> 
> Think about it. If it was made up story without them being behind it, wouldn't they be suing someone already?



I don't think Piers would write an article about the awards without some sort of evidence. They probably realized the awards would be another 'grave mistake', and are now retrieving it. 

@*youngster *They are so desperate to make money and it looks like everything is for sale with them.


----------



## Lodpah

chicinthecity777 said:


> Given how original those 2 are, my prediction is very soon!


Amtrak! She will want to be escorted by the 7th Cavalry Regiment and the tune Garry Owen blasting.

I added the Garry Owen tune since she tends to want to destroy the Queen.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Lodpah    MM wants to be Queen of Hearts - _This is the Card of beauty, magnetism, affection and idealism. *Queen of Hearts* represents the much-loved mother, the sweetheart, the indispensable sister, the adored daughter.  _
> 
> Or course, those in the know remember Juice Newton:
> _Playing with the Queen of Hearts
> Knowing it ain't really smart
> The Joker ain't the only fool
> Who'll do anything for you_


That song is now constantly playing in my head.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh, Vanity Fair, I remember back when you were a respected publication. Now you are a f****** joke. Such a shame.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I read the VF denial. The word “intended” bothers me.  I can hear H&M now : we had no intention to rival the UK, blah blah.
  Rrrrright.     Oh, they intended, definitely.  Can’t wait for them to float the next idea. Piers, stay ready.


_But according to Archewell’s press secretary, Toya Holness, Meghan and Harry have no plans to use Archewell in that manner. “We look forward to sharing more about Archewell’s work in the weeks ahead, but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false,” she told Vanity Fair in a statement.
The Sun also claimed that Meghan and Harry have run into issues while trademarking Archewell, though their final trademark application was recently resubmitted. Holness disputes that characterization. “Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the US Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false,” she said._









						No, Meghan and Harry Won’t Be Knighting Anyone Through Their New Charity
					

Despite a tabloid claim that the couple is planning on giving out “woke honours,” Archewell isn’t trying to compete with the queen when it comes to awards.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read the VF denial. The word “intended” bothers me.  I can hear H&M now : we had no intention to rival the UK, blah blah.
> Rrrrright.     Oh, they intended, definitely.  Can’t wait for them to float the next idea. Piers, stay ready.
> 
> 
> _But according to Archewell’s press secretary, Toya Holness, Meghan and Harry have no plans to use Archewell in that manner. “We look forward to sharing more about Archewell’s work in the weeks ahead, but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false,” she told Vanity Fair in a statement.
> The Sun also claimed that Meghan and Harry have run into issues while trademarking Archewell, though their final trademark application was recently resubmitted. Holness disputes that characterization. “Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the US Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false,” she said._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, Meghan and Harry Won’t Be Knighting Anyone Through Their New Charity
> 
> 
> Despite a tabloid claim that the couple is planning on giving out “woke honours,” Archewell isn’t trying to compete with the queen when it comes to awards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



I googled Toya Holness since I suspect she will be our new Omid Scobie. It didn’t disappoint. She has a social media presence on all platforms. Her title is “Press Secretary, Office of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.” She’s definitely got her work cut out for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read the VF denial. The word “intended” bothers me.  I can hear H&M now : we had no intention to rival the UK, blah blah.
> Rrrrright.     Oh, they intended, definitely.  Can’t wait for them to float the next idea. Piers, stay ready.
> 
> 
> _But according to Archewell’s press secretary, Toya Holness, Meghan and Harry have no plans to use Archewell in that manner. “We look forward to sharing more about Archewell’s work in the weeks ahead, but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false,” she told Vanity Fair in a statement.
> The Sun also claimed that Meghan and Harry have run into issues while trademarking Archewell, though their final trademark application was recently resubmitted. Holness disputes that characterization. “Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the US Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false,” she said._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, Meghan and Harry Won’t Be Knighting Anyone Through Their New Charity
> 
> 
> Despite a tabloid claim that the couple is planning on giving out “woke honours,” Archewell isn’t trying to compete with the queen when it comes to awards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



Replace the word anyone with anymore: "No, Meghan and Harry Won’t Be Knighting" Anymore... It's obvious that MM&H changed their minds about giving awards after checking feedback.

Their PR-teams get everything published on Vanity Fair very fast, great connections.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, one more lawsuit! This one seems to relate to the Duke in his twenties, they are really desperate.

*Prince Harry launches new libel action against Mail on Sunday*

The Duke is suing The Sun and Daily Mirror for alleged phone-hacking, claiming his voicemails had been illegally intercepted. 

The claim is believed to relate to activity dating back to the 2000s when the Duke was in his early twenties.

In July, it emerged that the couple were suing paparazzi for invasion of privacy after drones were allegedly used to take pictures of their son, Archie, at the house where they were staying in Los Angeles. 
In a 10-page legal complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, the Sussexes said they were victims of harassment that had "crossed a red line for any parent". 

The Duchess is also suing picture agency Splash News over claims her privacy was breached when she was “papped” on a walk with then eight-month-old Archie and her dogs in woods in Vancouver in January.

The High Court in London heard in September that the Duchess claims that both her privacy and her son’s was invaded during the incident and data protection laws were broken when the images were sold on to British newspapers. 

The duke & duchess and their lawsuits


----------



## csshopper

My guess, JCMH, MM, and/or their flacks probably monitor the comments that follow articles about them in the Daily Mail. Although the Mail is not responsible for the content of the comments, it does supply the platform. Increasingly the comments on their behaviors have become more mocking and scathing. Comments are international in source. 

They may view this as a retaliatory move to try and damage the Mail, but to me it's like shooting spit wads at a steel vault. Pointless. 20 year old voicemails????  

This behavior will not enhance their standing with the BRF. William is engaged in highly visible work on behalf of the Monarchy and Harry sits in Montecito sucking his thumb and whining yet again.


----------



## drifter

marietouchet said:


> Last night, youtube suggested another Murky Meg video on the glimmer twins , desperate for amusement due to rotator cuff pain, I watched it
> Oh My Gosh ...
> The alliterative one  was  alledgedly sent down (to use posh words...lol) from Northwestern (for two years) for Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority pledge hazing that allegedly involved injuries due to super glue
> I will leave it to you sleuths to find the details for yourselves, I have given you plenty of keywords...  It is a great story, if untrue, then someone is a very gifted creative writer ....
> 
> No idea if this story is true, to me, the fact that the story is out is a measure of how far the mighty have fallen and the value of the protection afforded by the BRF with respect to the press. This story did not come out two years ago... it is getting traction now that they are left to their own devices


 that's terrifying if it's true! but it's consistent with some of the scary, dark expressions we've seen when she thinks nobody is watching.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Piers would write an article about the awards without some sort of evidence. They probably realized the awards would be another 'grave mistake', and are now retrieving it.
> 
> @*youngster *They are so desperate to make money and it looks like everything is for sale with them.


The idea that JCMH would try to replicate the Queens honors - quite a SHOCKING story , it was covered by TATLER , so the satory made its way to the mainstream media and Piers

But, the story of the Archewell awards emulating the Queens honors is FAKE news - it is left open whether JCMH do awards BUT NOT in the spirit of the Queens honors.  JCMH did a press release disavowing the awards story .  And to the credit of JCMH, they did not create the FAKE NEWS 



The Piers story - DM - is REAL NEWS - he was really making fun of their supposed awards and in year of WOKE - he is paid to be sarcastic and humorous.  This was probably motivated by the horror of thinking they were going to compete with the Queen - which they are not

So, Piers lept on the FAKE NEWS and made fun of JCMH just at the start of the Cambridge train trip, awkward timing that ...


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> The idea that JCMH would try to replicate the Queens honors - quite a SHOCKING story , it was covered by TATLER , so the satory made its way to the mainstream media and Piers
> 
> But, the story of the Archewell awards emulating the Queens honors is FAKE news - it is left open whether JCMH do awards BUT NOT in the spirit of the Queens honors.  JCMH did a press release disavowing the awards story .  And to the credit of JCMH, they did not create the FAKE NEWS
> 
> 
> 
> The Piers story - DM - is REAL NEWS - he was really making fun of their supposed awards and in year of WOKE - he is paid to be sarcastic and humorous.  This was probably motivated by the horror of thinking they were going to compete with the Queen - which they are not
> 
> So, Piers lept on the FAKE NEWS and made fun of JCMH just at the start of the Cambridge train trip, awkward timing that ...



Thank you for the clarification. 

Maybe the take away for JCMH and MM and their press team should be that, based on their behaviors, the fake news was taken at face value. They have demonstrated so much disrespect for the Monarchy, this just seemed a more blatant jibe than usual, but certainly something they are capable of doing.

A real indication of how they are so negatively perceived.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The idea that JCMH would try to replicate the Queens honors - quite a SHOCKING story , it was covered by TATLER , so the satory made its way to the mainstream media and Piers
> 
> But, the story of the Archewell awards emulating the Queens honors is FAKE news - it is left open whether JCMH do awards BUT NOT in the spirit of the Queens honors.  JCMH did a press release disavowing the awards story .  And to the credit of JCMH, they did not create the FAKE NEWS
> 
> 
> 
> The Piers story - DM - is REAL NEWS - he was really making fun of their supposed awards and in year of WOKE - he is paid to be sarcastic and humorous.  This was probably motivated by the horror of thinking they were going to compete with the Queen - which they are not
> 
> So, Piers lept on the FAKE NEWS and made fun of JCMH just at the start of the Cambridge train trip, awkward timing that ...



I believe they are (or were) considering to give awards through their foundation. They are testing ideas to attract donors, they are desperate for money, tons of money. 

I never believed they would be imitating the queen's awards, this was likely a joke from people with very good sense of humor. Their idea of giving awards is so ridiculous that this type of jokes is expected.


----------



## bisousx

marietouchet said:


> Last night, youtube suggested another Murky Meg video on the glimmer twins , desperate for amusement due to rotator cuff pain, I watched it
> Oh My Gosh ...
> The alliterative one  was  alledgedly sent down (to use posh words...lol) from Northwestern (for two years) for Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority pledge hazing that allegedly involved injuries due to super glue
> I will leave it to you sleuths to find the details for yourselves, I have given you plenty of keywords...  It is a great story, if untrue, then someone is a very gifted creative writer ....
> 
> No idea if this story is true, to me, the fact that the story is out is a measure of how far the mighty have fallen and the value of the protection afforded by the BRF with respect to the press. This story did not come out two years ago... it is getting traction now that they are left to their own devices



Fascinating story  I wonder if it was true, why didn’t any Northwestern alumni spill the beans?

On the other hand, the narrator makes good food for thought - why hasn’t Kappa Kappa Gamma sang praises about one of their sisters marrying royalty and doing good with public charity work?

During the period of time where Meghan was propped up in the media and still in good standing with the world, it would’ve made sense for Northwestern and her sorority to be extremely proud of her. So why have they been quiet?

Also, a quick poke around the net...

KKP hasn’t learned their lesson about hazing: https://dailynorthwestern.com/2019/...placed-on-probation-by-national-headquarters/

Northwestern is no stranger to hazing scandals either. A sorority pledge’s mother sued after her daughter committed suicide over alleged hazing.


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Fascinating story  I wonder if it was true, why didn’t any Northwestern alumni spill the beans?
> 
> On the other hand, the narrator makes good food for thought - why hasn’t Kappa Kappa Gamma sang praises about one of their sisters marrying royalty and doing good with public charity work?
> 
> During the period of time where Meghan was propped up in the media and still in good standing with the world, it would’ve made sense for Northwestern and her sorority to be extremely proud of her. So why have they been quiet?
> 
> Also, a quick poke around the net...
> 
> KKP hasn’t learned their lesson about hazing: https://dailynorthwestern.com/2019/...placed-on-probation-by-national-headquarters/
> 
> Northwestern is no stranger to hazing scandals either. A sorority pledge’s mother sued after her daughter committed suicide over alleged hazing.


There is an article published in the sorority magazine about "20 to 25 ladies holding the best spot at Windsor" during MM&H's weeding, but these are very young Kappas that got together in the UK to have fun. The article is mostly about them, there is virtually nothing about MM (apart that it was her wedding). There are no comments about MM's time at KKP or from 'sisters' that were at the sorority with her. I have to agree, this sounds a bit weird. 



			https://wiki.kkg.org/images/c/cf/THE_KEY_VOL_135_NO_2_SUMMER_2018.pdf


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> There is an article published in the sorority magazine about "20 to 25 ladies holding the best spot at Windsor" during MM&H's weeding, but these are very young Kappas that got together in the UK to have fun. The article is mostly about them, there is virtually nothing about MM (apart that it was her wedding). There are no comments about MM's time at KKP or from 'sisters' that were at the sorority with her. I have to agree, this sounds a bit weird.
> 
> 
> 
> https://wiki.kkg.org/images/c/cf/THE_KEY_VOL_135_NO_2_SUMMER_2018.pdf



Ah, I stand corrected then with this magazine article since the sorority did make official acknowledgement of MM.


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Ah, I stand corrected then with this magazine article since the sorority did make official acknowledgement of MM.


It reads like a tourist attraction, rather impersonal imo.


----------



## Chanbal

One more today!  It looks like they need a victory against Mail on Sunday ASAP, since MM letter lawsuit is looking like a lost case and an embarrassment.

*Prince Harry is reportedly suing British newspaper the Mail on Sunday over a 'false and defamatory' story about his relationship with the marines*

The Duke of Sussex is reportedly suing the publisher of British newspaper the Mail on Sunday over a story which claims he has ceased contact with the marines since giving up royal military appointments in March. 

Representatives for the Duke of Sussex declined to comment on the record about the lawsuit. However, a spokesperson for the duke previously confirmed to Insider that a legal warning had been sent on his behalf.

"He might have been made to give up his titles, but he has not given up on the military, far from it," a friend of the duke's, who spoke anonymously, previously told Vanity Fair royal correspondent Katie Nicholl. 

"To say he has not been in touch with the Marines is not the case," an aide for the duke told Nicholl.

Legal representatives for Harry told the Mail on Sunday that its story was "false and defamatory" at the time of its publication, according to Vanity Fair. 

One more lawsuit


----------



## purseinsanity

I can't with these two.  Instead of suing every publication that doesn't grovel at their feet, maybe Harry should take his thumb out of his mouth (whoever posted that cracked me up!) and the other out of his a$$, stop coming up with moronic ideas with his conniving wife, and actually do some real volunteer work and do good for the community that they preach about, but don't actually ever do unless their paid pap is documenting every move.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh, Vanity Fair, I remember back when you were a respected publication. Now you are a f****** joke. Such a shame.
> 
> View attachment 4924180


it's the new editor I think
everything is about BLM.  So Meghan is benefiting from that IMO


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> One more today!  It looks like they need a victory against Mail on Sunday ASAP, since MM letter lawsuit is looking like a lost case and an embarrassment.
> 
> *Prince Harry is reportedly suing British newspaper the Mail on Sunday over a 'false and defamatory' story about his relationship with the marines*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is reportedly suing the publisher of British newspaper the Mail on Sunday over a story which claims he has ceased contact with the marines since giving up royal military appointments in March.
> 
> Representatives for the Duke of Sussex declined to comment on the record about the lawsuit. However, a spokesperson for the duke previously confirmed to Insider that a legal warning had been sent on his behalf.
> 
> "He might have been made to give up his titles, but he has not given up on the military, far from it," a friend of the duke's, who spoke anonymously, previously told Vanity Fair royal correspondent Katie Nicholl.
> 
> "To say he has not been in touch with the Marines is not the case," an aide for the duke told Nicholl.
> 
> Legal representatives for Harry told the Mail on Sunday that its story was "false and defamatory" at the time of its publication, according to Vanity Fair.
> 
> One more lawsuit


they are sue-happy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> I can't with these two.  Instead of suing every publication that doesn't grovel at their feet, maybe Harry should take his thumb out of his mouth (whoever posted that cracked me up!) and the other out of his a$$, stop coming up with moronic ideas with his conniving wife, and actually do some real volunteer work and do good for the community that they preach about, but don't actually ever do unless their paid pap is documenting every move.


And that is precisely why I don’t believe any credible producer will want to work with her. Vexatious litigants these two.

She could always do porn as she’s still considered an ‘ingenue’ in her little corner of the world.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I lost track, didn't some article say Harry was suing DM for potential phone voice mail hacking somewhat 20 years ago? So he's suing for another article too? What?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Ok I re-read the other article. It was against different media outlets. How many outlets they haven't sued?


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Ok I re-read the other article. It was against different media outlets. How many outlets they haven't sued?


wonder if filing lawsuits makes them feel powerful/important


----------



## Chanbal

Alternating between PR Agencies and Law Firms, life goes on as usual!


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> wonder if filing lawsuits makes them feel powerful/important


The more law suit they file, the more they looks like brats!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder if filing lawsuits makes them feel powerful/important



It’s a way for them to portray themselves as being persecuted victims. Everyone is telling lies about us! We are taking a stand and fighting back! Too bad for them they haven’t won one of these yet.  It hasn’t stopped them from trying.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Still trying to steal W&K’s thunder:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry will launch own awards rivaling the Queen's gongs
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will award individuals, charities and companies they feel champion their favourite causes. The awards will run alongside the Queen's own gongs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


W&K are the Birkin.  MM&JCMH are the knock off.  Birkin “inspired”, if you will.  No matter what they do they will never be the real deal.


----------



## csshopper

bisousx said:


> Fascinating story  I wonder if it was true, why didn’t any Northwestern alumni spill the beans?
> 
> On the other hand, the narrator makes good food for thought - why hasn’t Kappa Kappa Gamma sang praises about one of their sisters marrying royalty and doing good with public charity work?
> 
> During the period of time where Meghan was propped up in the media and still in good standing with the world, it would’ve made sense for Northwestern and her sorority to be extremely proud of her. So why have they been quiet?
> 
> Also, a quick poke around the net...
> 
> KKP hasn’t learned their lesson about hazing: https://dailynorthwestern.com/2019/...placed-on-probation-by-national-headquarters/
> 
> Northwestern is no stranger to hazing scandals either. A sorority pledge’s mother sued after her daughter committed suicide over alleged hazing.


"A poke around the net.." found this: "But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported."


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Amtrak! She will want to be escorted by the 7th Cavalry Regiment and the tune Garry Owen blasting.
> 
> I added the Garry Owen tune since she tends to want to destroy the Queen.


Having consulted to Amtrak during my days in Washington DC, I can tell you that the 'Grifters-Supreme' would NEVER set foot on a regular train, they aren't "fancy" enough!  Also, other than maybe in the Southwest (beautiful views), unlike the European trains, Amtrak built many of their tracks in the 'less favorable' parts of town .. so what "views" would they have??  Can't see this ever happening.  

On another front .. I wonder how much mortgage they are paying per month on that ghastly 16+ bathroom place?  That's got to be seriously cutting into Harry's funds; just wondering .. how much do we think that they will stay there (or will they have to because they don't want to admit that they can't really afford it)!!!


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> Having consulted to Amtrak during my days in Washington DC, I can tell you that the 'Grifters-Supreme' would NEVER set foot on a regular train, they aren't "fancy" enough!  Also, other than maybe in the Southwest (beautiful views), unlike the European trains, Amtrak built many of their tracks in the 'less favorable' parts of town .. so what "views" would they have??  Can't see this ever happening.
> 
> On another front .. I wonder how much mortgage they are paying per month on that ghastly 16+ bathroom place?  That's got to be seriously cutting into Harry's funds; just wondering .. how much do we think that they will stay there (or will they have to because they don't want to admit that they can't really afford it)!!!



Perhaps they bought thinking they could flip their 'forever' home as their exalted presence of living there would allow them to up the price by many million.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> "A poke around the net.." found this: "But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported."



You inspired me to ‘poke around the internet 
Here’s what I have found so far:  








						Meghan Markle recalled as dignified, charitable during her Northwestern days
					

Meghan Markle, who is set to marry Prince Harry on May 19, graduated from Northwestern University in 2003.




					www.chicagotribune.com
				




This gives me pause:
_Back at Northwestern, it's unclear where Markle lived as a sophomore. She lived down the hall from Graham in the multistory Kappa Kappa Gamma house their junior year._


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, on this side of the pond


----------



## bisousx

1LV said:


> W&K are the Birkin.  MM&JCMH are the knock off.  Birkin “inspired”, if you will.  No matter what they do they will never be the real deal.



How does that meme go? The Cambridges are the front of the Christmas tree. The Harkles are the back of it.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Wow, one more lawsuit! This one seems to relate to the Duke in his twenties, they are really desperate.
> 
> *Prince Harry launches new libel action against Mail on Sunday*
> 
> The Duke is suing The Sun and Daily Mirror for alleged phone-hacking, claiming his voicemails had been illegally intercepted.
> 
> The claim is believed to relate to activity dating back to the 2000s when the Duke was in his early twenties.
> 
> In July, it emerged that the couple were suing paparazzi for invasion of privacy after drones were allegedly used to take pictures of their son, Archie, at the house where they were staying in Los Angeles.
> In a 10-page legal complaint filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, the Sussexes said they were victims of harassment that had "crossed a red line for any parent".
> 
> The Duchess is also suing picture agency Splash News over claims her privacy was breached when she was “papped” on a walk with then eight-month-old Archie and her dogs in woods in Vancouver in January.
> 
> The High Court in London heard in September that the Duchess claims that both her privacy and her son’s was invaded during the incident and data protection laws were broken when the images were sold on to British newspapers.
> 
> The duke & duchess and their lawsuits


WHAT?? .. this was years ago; Sienna Miller also sued (and won) and others also sued (and I believe they won) .. but isn't there a "time limit" (sorry - forgot the legal term) for filing something like this? ..  OR .. is this a re-hash of a story from many years ago, but again .. clickbait?!!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennalovesbags

redney said:


> So when will MM and JCMH announce their Amtrak trip across the US?


haha! But in reality, this is sort of my dream (if our trains were more like those in Europe)


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> "A poke around the net.." found this: "But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported."


Odd that NW didn't say anything about one of their famous alumni. Very odd. 

Another odd thing is approx a month before the big wedding she was seen at O'Hare Intl airport (with security, of course) supposedly going into Chicago to complete her visa application (maybe something to do with becoming a UK citizen). Like, why would she come all the way to Chicago for a visa application? I don't know anything about visas so maybe someone can explain--why Chicago? Did she still claim Illinois as her residency state maybe? She hadn't lived here since her NW days (I don't think).


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Odd that NW didn't say anything about one of their famous alumni. Very odd.
> 
> Another odd thing is approx a month before the big wedding she was seen at O'Hare Intl airport (with security, of course) supposedly going into Chicago to complete her visa application (maybe something to do with becoming a UK citizen). Like, why would she come all the way to Chicago for a visa application? I don't know anything about visas so maybe someone can explain--why Chicago? Did she still claim Illinois as her residency state maybe? She hadn't lived here since her NW days (I don't think).



What could they say about her? "One of our alumni married well! Hooray!" Marrying a prince isn't why most women go to college. She hasn't done anything else of note.

As to the visa, supposedly she paid for "premium processing" but I doubt she needed to be in Chicago to get it.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Having consulted to Amtrak during my days in Washington DC, I can tell you that the 'Grifters-Supreme' would NEVER set foot on a regular train, they aren't "fancy" enough!  Also, other than maybe in the Southwest (beautiful views), unlike the European trains, Amtrak built many of their tracks in the 'less favorable' parts of town .. so what "views" would they have??  Can't see this ever happening.
> 
> On another front .. I wonder how much mortgage they are paying per month on that ghastly 16+ bathroom place?  That's got to be seriously cutting into Harry's funds; just wondering .. how much do we think that they will stay there (or will they have to because they don't want to admit that they can't really afford it)!!!



This is why I have suggested a Covered Wagon Train for their trip, it can be customized to meet their luxury demands. It will not have a restroom, but it appears they find it romantic (that soulmate thing in the woods).


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> You inspired me to ‘poke around the internet
> Here’s what I have found so far:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle recalled as dignified, charitable during her Northwestern days
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, who is set to marry Prince Harry on May 19, graduated from Northwestern University in 2003.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chicagotribune.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This gives me pause:
> _Back at Northwestern, it's unclear where Markle lived as a sophomore. She lived down the hall from Graham in the multistory Kappa Kappa Gamma house their junior year._


"Markle graduated weeks later, but her portrait wasn't featured in the Northwestern yearbook with the rest of the Class of 2003." Why?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> "Markle graduated weeks later, but her portrait wasn't featured in the Northwestern yearbook with the rest of the Class of 2003." Why?



This is why there have been so many rumors. Many unanswered questions = many tabloid headlines.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> "A poke around the net.." found this: "But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported."


In addition to not having her portrait in the yearbook, KKG voted against holding any celebration to mark her wedding ceremony.  The glue/records sealed story is starting to... so many whys 

KKG voted against holding a celebration


----------



## bag-mania

Even if there was something shady in her past from her college days, I doubt we'll ever hear of it. It's hard enough to find out answers to questions about her from the last 10 years.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> You inspired me to ‘poke around the internet
> Here’s what I have found so far:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle recalled as dignified, charitable during her Northwestern days
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, who is set to marry Prince Harry on May 19, graduated from Northwestern University in 2003.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chicagotribune.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This gives me pause:
> _Back at Northwestern, it's unclear where Markle lived as a sophomore. She lived down the hall from Graham in the multistory Kappa Kappa Gamma house their junior year._



Another piece of the puzzle: _Speaking to Vogue in 2013, Markle told the magazine how at the age of 20, and reportedly short of credits to complete her junior year, *she successfully applied for an internship at the US embassy in Buenos Aires 'for a few months'.*_

From another source:_ Mike Markle, from Florida, is the older brother of Meghan's dad, Thomas.
The octogenarian has criticised his niece - whom he labels a "prima donna" with a "chip on her shoulder".
He told Woman Magazine that he first helped the Duchess of Sussex on her way to becoming a stateswoman when she was just 20 years old.
*Former diplomat Mike secured her an internship as a junior press officer in the American embassy in Argentina *when she was considering a career in international relations.
But now he fears Meghan has turned her back on her American family._

Additional quote from Uncle Mike:
_He added that he had helped her out at a time when others hadn't. 
‘I’ve probably done more for her than most,’ he said. ‘I personally talked to the ambassador in Argentina for her. I helped her out and I didn’t ask for anything in return._


----------



## CarryOn2020

So what was happening her sophomore year?  Where she lived is unknown.  She ends up short on credits for her junior year.  Does a 2/3 month stint in Argentina and all is well?  Still graduates from NW?   I just watched the episode of Red Table Talk with Olivia Jade. At least she admits she was privileged.   If MM’s situation does not scream privilege, what does?   Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.  

I wasn’t really paying that much attention to H&M before the wedding, so I missed these articles and this part of the story.  This stuff takes the lying and manipulation to an entirely new level. Why did the BRF allow this wedding?


----------



## A1aGypsy

Shouldn’t Uncles help out nieces without asking for anything in return? Isn’t that pretty much part of the job? Her whole family sounds looney.


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> Shouldn’t Uncles help out nieces without asking for anything in return? Isn’t that pretty much part of the job? Her whole family sounds looney.



Could be. However, I think that quote is out of context. It was part of an interview from one of the British tabloids where was expressing his feelings about how he and everyone else in the family had been cut off by Meghan once she got engaged to Harry.


----------



## Chagall

A1aGypsy said:


> Shouldn’t Uncles help out nieces without asking for anything in return? Isn’t that pretty much part of the job? Her whole family sounds looney.


Family often help out other family members without expecting to be repaid, true, but they don’t expect the person to turn their back on them, dump them, in return.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why wasn’t he invited to the wedding?  Does he have kids, her cousins?  Why weren’t they invited?
So many questions. Since she and her super, uber, highly professional, expert PR team do not answer all these questions, the answers must be sordid , uh, private.

From the Sun article referenced above,
_Despite suffering from Parkinson's Disease and a frail heart, Mike told the paper he "absolutely" would have travelled to England to walk his niece down the aisle when Thomas announced he himself wasn't fit to make the trip.
He said: "I thought I would [get an invitation], but anyhow, I didn't hear from her."_


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> Shouldn’t Uncles help out nieces without asking for anything in return? Isn’t that pretty much part of the job? Her whole family sounds looney.


maybe so but I don't understand why he wasn't invited to the wedding


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why wasn’t he invited to the wedding?  Does he have kids, her cousins?  Why weren’t they invited?
> So many questions. Since she and her super, uber, highly professional, expert PR team do not answer all these questions, the answers must be sordid , uh, private.
> 
> From the Sun article referenced above,
> _Despite suffering from Parkinson's Disease and a frail heart, Mike told the paper he "absolutely" would have travelled to England to walk his niece down the aisle when Thomas announced he himself wasn't fit to make the trip.
> He said: "I thought I would [get an invitation], but anyhow, I didn't hear from her."_


I don't get it
the uncle is apparently some sort of professional
why wasn't he "good enough" to be invited teo the wedding?
you don't have to be super close to a relative to invite them to a huge wedding
Her mom being the only one from her family there was very odd IMO

 I guess he helped her when she needed it and now he is of no use to her


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> the uncle is apparently some sort of professional
> *why wasn't he "good enough"* to be invited teo the wedding?
> you don't have to be super close to a relative to invite them to a huge wedding
> Her mom being the only one from her family there was very odd IMO
> 
> I guess he helped her when she needed it and now he is of no use to her



Heck, the friggin' British Royal Family wasn't good enough for Meghan when all was said and done. What chance did the Markles have?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> the uncle is apparently some sort of professional
> why wasn't he "good enough" to be invited teo the wedding?
> you don't have to be super close to a relative to invite them to a huge wedding
> Her mom being the only one from her family there was very odd IMO
> 
> I guess he helped her when she needed it and now he is of no use to her



Maybe her mom [at Oprah’s encouragement?] wanted the spotlight for herself?  To this day, I do not understand how anyone gained anything from the mom sitting alone and from Charles walking MM down the aisle. Such an inauspicious beginning.  So awkward.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe her mom [at Oprah’s encouragement?] wanted the spotlight for herself?  To this day, I do not understand how anyone gained anything from the mom sitting alone and from Charles walking MM down the aisle. Such an inauspicious beginning.  So awkward.


yes, awkward indeed
I don't see what the mother would have to gain from that


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn, Like you, I didn't pay attention to much at the time, was naively pleased Harry seemed to have found someone. Rereading things now, knowing what we have observed and learned about her in the past 2 years, this would be a red flag.

From May 2018, Chicago Tribune newspaper:

_The Tribune reached out to more than 140 of Markle's sorority sisters, from her class and two classes before and after her, to get more insight into her college life. Most of the women did not respond to the request for comment. Some of those who politely declined to be interviewed offered that Markle "always seemed lovely," "was always very kind," "is a delightful person," "is a lovely person" and "is a truly wonderful person._


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> CarryOn, Like you, I didn't pay attention to much at the time, was naively pleased Harry seemed to have found someone. Rereading things now, knowing what we have observed and learned about her in the past 2 years, this would be a red flag.
> 
> From May 2018, Chicago Tribune newspaper:
> 
> _The Tribune reached out to more than 140 of Markle's sorority sisters, from her class and two classes before and after her, to get more insight into her college life. Most of the women did not respond to the request for comment. Some of those who politely declined to be interviewed offered that Markle "always seemed lovely," "was always very kind," "is a delightful person," "is a lovely person" and "is a truly wonderful person._


Well that speaks volumes right there.  Nobody wants to say anything that will snap back at them later, but these were all nonspecific comments.  I could go back right this minute and make personal comments about girls in my dorms and I could find something specifically nice to say about all of them.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Well that speaks volumes right there.  Nobody wants to say anything that will snap back at them later, but these were all nonspecific comments.  I could go back right this minute and make personal comments about girls in my dorms and I could find something specifically nice to say about all of them.


but if she was such a succesful networker later in life, wouldn't she have behaved that way in college?  wanted to be in with the popular girls?  therefore, wouldn't those women have something positive to say about her?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> the uncle is apparently some sort of professional
> why wasn't he "good enough" to be invited teo the wedding?
> you don't have to be super close to a relative to invite them to a huge wedding
> Her mom being the only one from her family there was very odd IMO
> 
> I guess he helped her when she needed it and now he is of no use to her



She preferred to invite her A-list best 'friends' that barely knew her prior to wedding. 

Unless he is wealthy, a retired uncle in his 80s is no longer of use...


----------



## bag-mania

She has two uncles on her father’s side and I think two uncles on her mother’s side.  She doesn’t have anything to do with any of them or her cousins. The chances of them all being toxic people is highly unlikely. It’s not them, it’s HER.


----------



## Lodpah

A1aGypsy said:


> Shouldn’t Uncles help out nieces without asking for anything in return? Isn’t that pretty much part of the job? Her whole family sounds looney.


I agree with you but a wedding invitation for family is really not asking for anything.

Heck if someone did something for me, I send them flowers, candy something small to thank them. It’s just a courtesy thing.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> the uncle is apparently some sort of professional
> why wasn't he "good enough" to be invited teo the wedding?
> you don't have to be super close to a relative to invite them to a huge wedding
> Her mom being the only one from her family there was very odd IMO
> 
> I guess he helped her when she needed it and now he is of no use to her


Inviting family members might have been dangerous for her in that one of the might have spoken of her past without knowing her 'new history'. Some of 'her' spotlight might have gone on one of the family for a few minutes. Can't imagine she would have tolerated that. Also any she invited she might have then needed to spend time staying in touch with, and we all know she is much to busy doing important things. All the time. But maybe it's just she then couldn't have played her victim card which she so enjoys. IMHO of course.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Inviting family members might have been dangerous for her in that one of the might have spoken of her past without knowing her 'new history'. Some of 'her' spotlight might have gone on one of the family for a few minutes. Can't imagine she would have tolerated that. Also any she invited she might have then needed to spend time staying in touch with, and we all know she is much to busy doing important things. All the time. But maybe it's just she then couldn't have played her victim card which she so enjoys. IMHO of course.


who knows what her reasons were?
It seems odd to me.  But (and again I don't know her) she seems like an empty shell of a person to me.  I don't know if this is true and if it is I don't know how much of it has to do with her upbringing and how much is just the personality she was born with.  I haven't really seen much in the way of info or photos that shows a close relationship with Doria.  Poor Archie.


----------



## bag-mania

The British royal family doesn't often respond to salacious tabloid stories about them, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry included. But the couple, who stepped down from their senior royal family roles last spring, made a rare statement yesterday after The Sun and Daily Mail (notably, the two tabloids the couple are suing) alleged that they were planning to create their own "woke" awards ceremony that would "compete" with the Queen's honors list.

The Queen does a birthday honors list each year that awards achievements to people across the UK; she can grant people knighthood or other various titles including MBEs (Member Of The Most Excellent Order Of The British Empire), OBEs (Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) and CBEs (Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire). You can read more about the various honors the Queen can give at the royals' site here.

The Sun claimed the couple "filed papers" in the U.S., stating they want to celebrate "charitable service, education, science, literature, racial justice, gender equity, environmental stewardship, youth empowerment, health and mental health" through their new Archewell non-profit.

The couple did not let those false reports stand long. A press secretary for Archewell released a statement to media outlets, stating, "We look forward to sharing more about Archewell's work in the weeks ahead but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false. Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the U.S. Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false."

Meghan and Harry have not formally launched Archewell yet, in part due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. But they launched its site in October. A source told ELLE.com at the time that "while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Report They're Planning to 'Compete' With Queen's Ceremony
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex hardly ever respond to tabloid stories like this.




					www.elle.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4924878
> 
> The British royal family doesn't often respond to salacious tabloid stories about them, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry included. But the couple, who stepped down from their senior royal family roles last spring, made a rare statement yesterday after The Sun and Daily Mail (notably, the two tabloids the couple are suing) alleged that they were planning to create their own "woke" awards ceremony that would "compete" with the Queen's honors list.
> 
> The Queen does a birthday honors list each year that awards achievements to people across the UK; she can grant people knighthood or other various titles including MBEs (Member Of The Most Excellent Order Of The British Empire), OBEs (Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) and CBEs (Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire). You can read more about the various honors the Queen can give at the royals' site here.
> 
> The Sun claimed the couple "filed papers" in the U.S., stating they want to celebrate "charitable service, education, science, literature, racial justice, gender equity, environmental stewardship, youth empowerment, health and mental health" through their new Archewell non-profit.
> 
> The couple did not let those false reports stand long. A press secretary for Archewell released a statement to media outlets, stating, "We look forward to sharing more about Archewell's work in the weeks ahead but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false. Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the U.S. Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false."
> 
> Meghan and Harry have not formally launched Archewell yet, in part due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. But they launched its site in October. A source told ELLE.com at the time that "while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Report They're Planning to 'Compete' With Queen's Ceremony
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex hardly ever respond to tabloid stories like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


rare statement?  these two can't stop seeking attention


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> rare statement?  these two can't stop seeking attention



Attention and lawsuits. I read that the latest is their sixth lawsuit in a year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like Elle is late to the party with yesterday’s news.

Since the denial statement uses “intended”, I believed yesterday and still do today they did indeed intend to rival QE and W&K. They are desperate for money, thought they could get numerous ‘sponsors’, siphon cash off the top.  Must be consulting Uncle Andy’s playbook.




bag-mania said:


> The British royal family doesn't often respond to salacious tabloid stories about them, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry included. But the couple, who stepped down from their senior royal family roles last spring, made a rare statement yesterday after The Sun and Daily Mail (notably, the two tabloids the couple are suing) alleged that they were planning to create their own "woke" awards ceremony that would "compete" with the Queen's honors list.
> 
> The Queen does a birthday honors list each year that awards achievements to people across the UK; she can grant people knighthood or other various titles including MBEs (Member Of The Most Excellent Order Of The British Empire), OBEs (Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) and CBEs (Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire). You can read more about the various honors the Queen can give at the royals' site here.
> 
> The Sun claimed the couple "filed papers" in the U.S., stating they want to celebrate "charitable service, education, science, literature, racial justice, gender equity, environmental stewardship, youth empowerment, health and mental health" through their new Archewell non-profit.
> 
> The couple did not let those false reports stand long. A press secretary for Archewell released a statement to media outlets, stating, "We look forward to sharing more about Archewell's work in the weeks ahead but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false. Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the U.S. Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false."
> 
> Meghan and Harry have not formally launched Archewell yet, in part due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. But they launched its site in October. A source told ELLE.com at the time that "while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Report They're Planning to 'Compete' With Queen's Ceremony
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex hardly ever respond to tabloid stories like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Inviting family members might have been dangerous for her in that one of the might have spoken of her past without knowing her 'new history'. Some of 'her' spotlight might have gone on one of the family for a few minutes. Can't imagine she would have tolerated that. Also any she invited she might have then needed to spend time staying in touch with, and we all know she is much to busy doing important things. All the time. But maybe it's just she then couldn't have played her victim card which she so enjoys. IMHO of course.



I do understand that way of thinking. Still, is it better to have people wondering 2-3 years on what the problem was/is? It was, after all, a _royal_ wedding to the heir’s last son. That is huge. Seems selfish to exclude family.    Unless, [deep breath, clutch pearls] H&M planned to leave.

ETA:  Clearly, Doria needed some relatives around her. Invite the uncles, cousins to sit with Doria. Why make her sit alone? Why have Charles walk her down the aisle — get a family member to do it?  Maybe even her ex-husband


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 4924878
> 
> The British royal family doesn't often respond to salacious tabloid stories about them, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry included. But the couple, who stepped down from their senior royal family roles last spring, made a rare statement yesterday after The Sun and Daily Mail (notably, the two tabloids the couple are suing) alleged that they were planning to create their own "woke" awards ceremony that would "compete" with the Queen's honors list.
> 
> The Queen does a birthday honors list each year that awards achievements to people across the UK; she can grant people knighthood or other various titles including MBEs (Member Of The Most Excellent Order Of The British Empire), OBEs (Officer of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) and CBEs (Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire). You can read more about the various honors the Queen can give at the royals' site here.
> 
> The Sun claimed the couple "filed papers" in the U.S., stating they want to celebrate "charitable service, education, science, literature, racial justice, gender equity, environmental stewardship, youth empowerment, health and mental health" through their new Archewell non-profit.
> 
> The couple did not let those false reports stand long. A press secretary for Archewell released a statement to media outlets, stating, "We look forward to sharing more about Archewell's work in the weeks ahead but any suggestion that it is intended to rival the UK honours list is false. Furthermore, the trademark application has followed the normal course of business for the U.S. Trademark process and any suggestion otherwise is also false."
> 
> Meghan and Harry have not formally launched Archewell yet, in part due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. But they launched its site in October. A source told ELLE.com at the time that "while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Report They're Planning to 'Compete' With Queen's Ceremony
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex hardly ever respond to tabloid stories like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



It looks like their awards have been spoiled. I wonder what they will do next, a donor recognition wall? 



sdkitty said:


> rare statement?  these two can't stop seeking attention



Why would they bother to make this 'rare statement' if the award story was entirely fictional


----------



## bag-mania

This quote from the Elle article is amusing. Even H&M’s own publicists don’t know what Archewell is. They try to describe it in exciting but very vague terms. All I get from it is Archewell is a whole lot of NOTHING.    

"while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> but if she was such a succesful networker later in life, wouldn't she have behaved that way in college?  wanted to be in with the popular girls?  therefore, wouldn't those women have something positive to say about her?


If in fact the glue story has any substance, she was responsible for the sorority being put on Probation. That's a big deal to them and affects all the members, the alumni, and possibly the ability to recruit. These women probably figured they better be quiet and might even have been given a "suggested" response if asked about MM. National KKG would not want the publicity and those comments reek of a "party line". To be balanced, however,  there are also positive stories about some of her KKG sister relationships, one was involved in the NYC shower, one is supposedly an Archie Godparent.

Something happened, we may never know what, sort of like the intrigue of Archie's birth, godparents etc etc. Her time in Argentina, followed, I read, by some time in Madrid, was not part of her Northwestern program. She/family initiated it. From multiple reports her Dad favored, spoiled, indulged her. He went to his brother Mike, family looks out for family, she got out of the country for a period of time. It's all supposition, but the cunning and conniving of the past few years as her behavior is public is what makes is suspicious.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> This quote from the Elle article is amusing. Even H&M’s own publicists don’t know what Archewell is. They try to describe it in exciting but very vague terms. All I get from it is Archewell is a whole lot of NOTHING.
> 
> "while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”



haha, a whole lot of nothing that is going to grow and grow

I wonder if they got a 'salary' advance from Nflix; they need a lot of money to pay for lawyers, publicists, mortgage, security... I don't think H has all that money.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Something happened, we may never know what, sort of like the intrigue of Archie's birth, godparents etc etc. *Her time in Argentina, followed, I read, by some time in Madrid, was not part of her Northwestern program.* She/family initiated it. From multiple reports her Dad favored, spoiled, indulged her. He went to his brother Mike, family looks out for family, she got out of the country for a period of time. It's all supposition, but the cunning and conniving of the past few years as her behavior is public is what makes is suspicious.



I wonder if the trips to Argentina and Spain had to do with being suspended from Northwestern (the glue incident). I recall to have read that her application for an internship was late (not planned) and the uncle had to intervene by calling the consul.

This would explain why she is not featured in the Northwestern yearbook in 2003, she would have graduated at a later date.


----------



## gracekelly

*Kappa Kappa Gamma* ("Kappas") are *known for* being rich girls. Their reputation varies from campus to campus but they are universally considered top-tier. ... They have a reputation for behaving like daddy's little princess but their top-tier reputation is intact across the country.Jun 6, 2016https://owlcation.com/academia/sororities-reputations


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Kappa Kappa Gamma* ("Kappas") are *known for* being rich girls. Their reputation varies from campus to campus but they are universally considered top-tier. ... They have a reputation for behaving like daddy's little princess but *their top-tier reputation is intact across the country*.Jun 6, 2016https://owlcation.com/academia/sororities-reputations



I don't think Thomas M or MM (prior to Harry) would be considered rich, and the "top-tier reputation" of KKG doesn't seem too intact. The NU Chapter of Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority was placed on probation not long ago. The UPitt Chapter of KKG was also recently suspended because of alcohol and hazing violations...
Purdue - Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority on university probation due to hazing in 2001. It's a long list.


----------



## csshopper

Bisousx shared  a link in Post 41622 to an article from 2019 about the KKG chapter at Northwestern being put on probation for a year for what sounds like hazing infractions to the sorority Code. Some slippage from “top tier” there.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Thomas M or MM (prior to Harry) would be considered rich, and the "top-tier reputation" of KKG doesn't seem too intact. The NU Chapter of Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority was placed on probation not long ago. The UPitt Chapter of KKG was also recently suspended because of alcohol and hazing violations...
> Purdue - Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority on university probation due to hazing in 2001. It's a long list.


This description is dated 2016. I think she talked the talk and word saladed her way in and let’s be real, the sorority looked woke for inviting her to join.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Bisousx shared  a link in Post 41622 to an article from 2019 about the KKG chapter at Northwestern being put on probation for a year for what sounds like hazing infractions to the sorority Code. Some slippage from “top tier” there.


Many fraternities and sororities have been called on the carpet for hazing. It’s a problem that has been around a long time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> *Kappa Kappa Gamma* ("Kappas") are *known for* being rich girls. Their reputation varies from campus to campus but they are universally considered top-tier. ... They have a reputation for behaving like daddy's little princess but their top-tier reputation is intact across the country.Jun 6, 2016https://owlcation.com/academia/sororities-reputations



So how did MM join? She grew up comfortably middle class, not super rich.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So how did MM join? She grew up comfortably middle class, not super rich.


She's a social climber and an "actress." KKG and others like the "popular" type too.
It's very telling her sisters have only generic things to say about her now.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I thought the friends who were with her at the infamous Wimbledon match were from Northwestern?









						Who are the friends Meghan Markle turned up to Wimbledon with?
					

Lindsay Roth and Genevieve Hillis go way back with Meghan.




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				












						The Royal wedding guest list in full
					

Oprah Winfrey, Serena Williams, George Clooney and his wife Amal were among a host of celebrity guests gathered at the royal wedding to watch Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Zara and Mike Tindall are expecting another baby. 
Meghan, where are you?


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> I agree with you but a wedding invitation for family is really not asking for anything.
> 
> Heck if someone did something for me, I send them flowers, candy something small to thank them. It’s just a courtesy thing.


This Uncle didn't just put in a good word with some local business so his niece could work the front counter for the a summer job or something, this was a job at an American Embassy in Argentina--a pretty big deal for a 20-yr old (or any age), imo. 

I would definitely make sure this man (Uncle) got an invite to my wedding, one of the biggest weddings of the decade, at the very least. It's not like she and JCMH were counting how many people they could *afford* to invite like most couples.

She Markles everyone eventually. Unreal.


----------



## djuna1




----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This description is dated 2016. I think she talked the talk and word saladed her way in and let’s be real, the sorority looked woke for inviting her to join.


They not only invited her to join, but they made her the recruitment chairwoman at some point. There are plenty of hazing incidents mentioned online linked to KKG prior to 2016 (Pudue, Ohio State...), and probably some never made the news.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Zara and Mike Tindall are expecting another baby.
> *Meghan, where are you?*


At a fertility clinic taking double or triple doses of fertility drugs? 

But, congrats to Zara and Mike.


----------



## Chanbal

Dr. Harry is back today to talk about mental fitness:

*'There should be no difference in how we treat mental and physical fitness': Prince Harry praises mandatory mental training for the military as 'an amazing step forward'*

'There should be no difference between how we view our physical fitness and mental fitness and training both will help our service men and women excel, as well as being best prepared for what they may face, in any situation.'

Harry continued: 'Over the years it has been an honour to work alongside the service chiefs and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) on projects such as HeadFIT, and I am delighted to see such a significant step to protect and strengthen the potential and resilience of our military.

one more lecture from Dr. H

His lectures seem to have always international repercussions, and his students are already starting to submit their feedback. *Rate my Professor:


*


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> *Kappa Kappa Gamma* ("Kappas") are *known for* being rich girls. Their reputation varies from campus to campus but they are universally considered top-tier. ... They have a reputation for behaving like daddy's little princess but their top-tier reputation is intact across the country.Jun 6, 2016https://owlcation.com/academia/sororities-reputations


she was daddy's little princess but not rich.....great networking?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Dr. Harry is back today to talk about mental fitness:
> 
> *'There should be no difference in how we treat mental and physical fitness': Prince Harry praises mandatory mental training for the military as 'an amazing step forward'*
> 
> 'There should be no difference between how we view our physical fitness and mental fitness and training both will help our service men and women excel, as well as being best prepared for what they may face, in any situation.'
> 
> Harry continued: 'Over the years it has been an honour to work alongside the service chiefs and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) on projects such as HeadFIT, and I am delighted to see such a significant step to protect and strengthen the potential and resilience of our military.
> 
> one more lecture from Dr. H
> 
> His lectures seem to have always international repercussions, and his students are already starting to submit their feedback. *Rate my Professor:
> 
> View attachment 4925236
> *


those comments are right on point


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she was daddy's little princess but not rich.....great networking?



Daddy wasn't rich but it sounds like he spoiled her enough where she could pass herself off as being from a wealthier family than she was. She learned to lie and hide her backstory at a young age.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Dr. Harry is back today to talk about mental fitness:
> 
> *'There should be no difference in how we treat mental and physical fitness': Prince Harry praises mandatory mental training for the military as 'an amazing step forward'*
> 
> 'There should be no difference between how we view our physical fitness and mental fitness and training both will help our service men and women excel, as well as being best prepared for what they may face, in any situation.'
> 
> Harry continued: 'Over the years it has been an honour to work alongside the service chiefs and the Ministry of Defence (MoD) on projects such as HeadFIT, and I am delighted to see such a significant step to protect and strengthen the potential and resilience of our military.
> 
> one more lecture from Dr. H
> 
> His lectures seem to have always international repercussions, and his students are already starting to submit their feedback. *Rate my Professor:*


We have enough word salad from JCMH and MM. It's about time they pull their finger out and actually DO something! And no PR photo ops don't count!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> We have enough word salad from JCMH and MM. It's about time they pull their finger out and actually DO something! And no PR photo ops don't count!


I guess maybe they are doing something in relation to the netflix series?  but what would that be?  neither has experience in film production.  Is this just a show with their name on it?


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I guess maybe they are doing something in relation to the netflix series?  but what would that be?  neither has experience in film production.  Is this just a show with their name on it?


So far I haven't seen anything they have done which wasn't self-promoting and self-serving! SMH!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Daddy wasn't rich but it sounds like he spoiled her enough where she could pass herself off as being from a wealthier family than she was. She learned to lie and hide her backstory at a young age.


Plus she filled a need to have a person of color in the sorority.  Meghan went to high school with girls similar to  those in the sorority. I don’t think she had a trouble fitting in.   She had some LA glamour that she was able to play up courtesy of her father being in the TV industry.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> rare statement?  these two can't stop seeking attention


I think the denial was required since competing with the Queen raised so many hackles , it was horrendous fake news that somehow got a lot of traction in mainstream media - I was impressed at the latter


----------



## gracekelly

Another crate of dishes smashed this morning at Castle Montecito. The only way to counteract the Tindall baby news on short notice is  to say the dog died.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I think the denial was required since competing with the Queen raised so many hackles , it was horrendous fake news that somehow got a lot of traction in mainstream media - I was impressed at the latter


People took this as a personal insult to QEll. If Prince Charles was King, there would be talk, but not the public outcry that this has engendered.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> This quote from the Elle article is amusing. Even H&M’s own publicists don’t know what Archewell is. They try to describe it in exciting but very vague terms. All I get from it is Archewell is a whole lot of NOTHING.
> 
> "while Archewell hasn’t already had a formal launch, it is still already all of their work—the structure, the events, the research they’re doing, the people that they’re meeting. All of the effort they are putting in is within that umbrella. *Over time, it is going to grow and grow.”*



Is anyone else getting a mental picture of two dung beetles with H&M's faces rolling their ball of dung (aka bulls**t) and watching it grow bigger and bigger?


----------



## bisousx

gracekelly said:


> Plus she filled a need to have a person of color in the sorority.  Meghan went to high school with girls similar to  those in the sorority. I don’t think she had a trouble fitting in.   She had some LA glamour that she was able to play up courtesy of her father being in the TV industry.



Plus, this was back before social media was what it is today. There wouldn’t have been a way for anyone to verify Meghan’s background aside from the way she dressed, spoke and her mannerisms. Especially if her dad doled out what little money he had to pay for her tuition and expenses, perhaps spring break vacations and clothes to keep up with the Joneses.

MM was obviously ashamed of her parents for being low/middle class... a sad realization which lead Thomas Markle to stage photos prior to the big wedding and get busted by the paparazzi. He wanted to improve his own image. I wonder what made him feel he wasn’t good enough? 

I know some LA women in their 30s now who still routinely trash their parents in conversation for not being upper class and giving them a better start in life (it makes me sick ). These personalities aren’t a stretch of the imagination.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> but if she was such a succesful networker later in life, wouldn't she have behaved that way in college?  wanted to be in with the popular girls?  therefore, wouldn't those women have something positive to say about her?


I suspect, similar to her high school days, she found 'certain' people who could "help" her and that was who she "worked on" (_*network* possibilities_) .. but, remember .. if they were of value, once their value was no longer needed .. *POOF*, off they went to Markledom.  As such, I truly doubt that anyone really knew her that well that they could speak of particular incidents, etc. - given that she doesn't have many friends, I doubt she made many "real" friends there!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> Is anyone else getting a mental picture of two dung beetles with H&M's faces rolling their ball of dung (aka bullsh**t) and watching it grow bigger and bigger?


And if they can change to whirligig beetles, they run around in circles, and when afraid, they quickly disappear under water, only to resurface and carry on with their frenzy.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> *Kappa Kappa Gamma* ("Kappas") are *known for* being rich girls. Their reputation varies from campus to campus but they are universally considered top-tier. ... They have a reputation for behaving like daddy's little princess but their top-tier reputation is intact across the country.Jun 6, 2016https://owlcation.com/academia/sororities-reputations


Well, well, well .. certainly the reputation of being "daddy's little princess" would fit to a 'T', given what I was told by my friends that knew the Markles during Meghan's high school days.  Their comments were "spoiled rotten, over-indulged, bratty, had to have HER way, etc." .. so, she would fit into that club perfectly.  What I find ironic, however, is the "rich girls" .. *HMMMMMM* .. if that is the case, then she sure as heck can't cry the 'poverty' BS that she tries to put out there .. and again, given what my friends told me, her father (at the time of her high school years) was making a LOT of $$$$ as the Lighting Director of a very well known long-standing sitcom at that time!  So, a lot of his $$$ was put into Meghan .. yes, her Plastic Surgery, fixing her teeth, etc., so while maybe not "rich" from the perspective of 'coming from money' .. she was given whatever SHE demanded!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> This description is dated 2016. I think she talked the talk and word saladed her way in and let’s be real, the sorority looked woke for inviting her to join.


Hmmmmm .. not so sure about the 'woke' part; I can just see her NOT playing the WOC card here, just like she admitted to doing on certain casting interviews.


----------



## marietouchet

Another educational Youtube video - why do people dislike Prince Charles so much ? I had forgotten his early peccadilloes eg cherry brandy, not so perfect military career ... 

 

It is the Diana story that eclipses everything else in his life - and yes, he has the bad luck that it has been made into a must watch TV out NOW .... 

I skimmed the video and thought ... wow ... Buck House is full of fixers to manage the image ... 

To me, that is what JCMH never realized ... yes, he and MM were the golden couple but ONLY because of all the behind the scenes fixing that has gone on since time immemorial


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Another educational Youtube video - why do people dislike Prince Charles so much ? I had forgotten his early peccadilloes eg cherry brandy, not so perfect military career ...
> 
> 
> 
> It is the Diana story that eclipses everything else in his life - and yes, he has the bad luck that it has been made into a must watch TV out NOW ....
> 
> I skimmed the video and thought ... wow ... Buck House is full of fixers to manage the image ...
> 
> To me, that is what JCMH never realized ... yes, he and MM were the golden couple but ONLY because of all the behind the scenes fixing that has gone on since time immemorial



IMO their mistake was to think they could retain the royal status as private citizens.....more likely they will be like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor IMO....or they will split up.  she will be the rich american divorcee and he will be  - IDK - ex-prince?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Another educational Youtube video - why do people dislike Prince Charles so much ? I had forgotten his early peccadilloes eg cherry brandy, not so perfect military career ...
> 
> 
> 
> It is the Diana story that eclipses everything else in his life - and yes, he has the bad luck that it has been made into a must watch TV out NOW ....
> 
> I skimmed the video and thought ... wow ... Buck House is full of fixers to manage the image ...
> 
> To me, that is what JCMH never realized ... yes, he and MM were the golden couple but ONLY because of all the behind the scenes fixing that has gone on since time immemorial




Those of us old enough remember what young Charles was like and he was far from being an impressive man. They have done a superb job reinventing his image and scrubbing his reputation clean over the last 20 or so years. I can't feel sorry for him that a TV show brought back bad memories they would rather have left in the past. Details in the show are exaggerated for dramatic purposes but the foundation of the story should basically be true. I don't watch it, so I can't say.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I remember the younger Charles. The rumors reached a fever pitch. He was told to marry...anyone.  Interesting to note he did at 21 yr of age visit Wallis and his uncle. He was repulsed by their lifestyle. So, in The Crown when he whines about his future, it comes off as insincere. Just as with Harry, he could abdicate, step out of the line up and live whatever life he wants.  The constant fuming over his birthright seems way too immature and petty. Royals are not victims.









						Why Prince Charles was 'relieved to escape tragic Edward VIII'
					

PRINCE CHARLES once wrote in his diary that visiting his great-uncle, the exiled former King Edward VIII, for the first time was “tragic”, and that he was “relieved to escape after 45 minutes”, according to resurfaced reports.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I remember the younger Charles. The rumors reached a fever pitch. He was told to marry...anyone.  Interesting to note he did at 21 yr of age visit Wallis and his uncle. He was repulsed by their lifestyle. So, in The Crown when he whines about his future, it comes off as insincere. Just as with Harry, he could abdicate, step out of the line up and live whatever life he wants.  The constant fuming over his birthright seems way too immature and petty. Royals are not victims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Charles was 'relieved to escape tragic Edward VIII'
> 
> 
> PRINCE CHARLES once wrote in his diary that visiting his great-uncle, the exiled former King Edward VIII, for the first time was “tragic”, and that he was “relieved to escape after 45 minutes”, according to resurfaced reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I'm dating myself here but I remember young Charles as not very attractive


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm dating myself her but I remember young Charles as not very attractive



Not a good looker to be sure. Caricatures always had him as a scrawny wretch with jug-handle ears.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> I suspect, similar to her high school days, she found 'certain' people who could "help" her and that was who she "worked on" (_*network* possibilities_) .. but, remember .. if they were of value, once their value was no longer needed .. *POOF*, off they went to *Markledom*.  As such, I truly doubt that anyone really knew her that well that they could speak of particular incidents, etc. - given that she doesn't have many friends, I doubt she made many "real" friends there!



Markledom love it!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I remember the younger Charles. The rumors reached a fever pitch. He was told to marry...anyone.  Interesting to note he did at 21 yr of age visit Wallis and his uncle. He was repulsed by their lifestyle. So, in The Crown when he whines about his future, it comes off as insincere. Just as with Harry, he could abdicate, step out of the line up and live whatever life he wants.  The constant fuming over his birthright seems way too immature and petty. Royals are not victims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Charles was 'relieved to escape tragic Edward VIII'
> 
> 
> PRINCE CHARLES once wrote in his diary that visiting his great-uncle, the exiled former King Edward VIII, for the first time was “tragic”, and that he was “relieved to escape after 45 minutes”, according to resurfaced reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I think Charles was disappointed after realizing that Edward was different from the person he had idealized. I recall to have seen a video of him and Wallis, and Edward looked miserable. Charles probably fantasize a 'love story' and may have found something very different.    

This statement is quite interesting: "To remove the potential threat to his brother and successor, King George VI, Edward and Mrs Simpson moved to France and were rarely permitted to return to the UK." I wonder if QE is thinking about this possibility.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

I think Charles was testing the waters to see if abdicating with Camilla was something he would want to do. He discovered, as H&M currently are,  life in exile is no picnic. This is why the ancient Romans used it as a form of punishment. It is indeed harsh, especially for the would-be king.  Please correct me if needed, aren’t most of Harry’s zoom calls are to the UK?


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> One more today!  It looks like they need a victory against Mail on Sunday ASAP, since MM letter lawsuit is looking like a lost case and an embarrassment.
> 
> *Prince Harry is reportedly suing British newspaper the Mail on Sunday over a 'false and defamatory' story about his relationship with the marines*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is reportedly suing the publisher of British newspaper the Mail on Sunday over a story which claims he has ceased contact with the marines since giving up royal military appointments in March.
> 
> Representatives for the Duke of Sussex declined to comment on the record about the lawsuit. However, a spokesperson for the duke previously confirmed to Insider that a legal warning had been sent on his behalf.
> 
> "He might have been made to give up his titles, but he has not given up on the military, far from it," a friend of the duke's, who spoke anonymously, previously told Vanity Fair royal correspondent Katie Nicholl.
> 
> "To say he has not been in touch with the Marines is not the case," an aide for the duke told Nicholl.
> 
> Legal representatives for Harry told the Mail on Sunday that its story was "false and defamatory" at the time of its publication, according to Vanity Fair.
> 
> One more lawsuit




Poor dumb Harry - two words, Harry — Johnny Depp.  Before firing off lawsuits at every publication in the U.K. and/or the U.S. talk to decent lawyers who can explain what evidence is likely to come in and what the downsides of a suit are.  You moron.


----------



## Lodpah

Dang, MM is perpetrating the reality of Yankee Doodle again upon the Americans. History buffs know what I’m talking about.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems like the 10th or 12th lawsuit from these two jerks. And people wonder why H&M are so unpopular.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Dang, MM is perpetrating the reality of Yankee Doodle again upon the Americans. History buffs know what I’m talking about.



This?








						Meghan Markle REVEAL: School friend reveals Meghan has THIS talent
					

MEGHAN Markle’s school pal has revealed the pregnant Duchess of Sussex has another impressive talent - and she isn’t referring to the royal’s top acting skills.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Or this?  [oh my!]








						That Diss Song Known as ‘Yankee Doodle’ (Published 2017)
					

The patriotic tune started off as an insult — until Americans appropriated it.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> This?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle REVEAL: School friend reveals Meghan has THIS talent
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle’s school pal has revealed the pregnant Duchess of Sussex has another impressive talent - and she isn’t referring to the royal’s top acting skills.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Way back during the war with the Brits they made fun of the Yankees this the song! Many different versions but the original is kinda humiliating lol.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Way back during the war with the Brits they made fun of the Yankees this the song! Many different versions but the original is kinda humiliating lol.



So, we shouldn’t expect to see ole Harry visiting any Revolutionary War sites. HaHa!
The NYT article explains it, too:

_What American soldiers had done would later become known as reappropriation. It is the act of embracing a name, a term, an idea — or a song — that was intended as derogatory. At minimum, the hug neutralizes the mockery. At most, it disarms an opponent of a weapon.

_


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> I'm dating myself here but I remember young Charles as not very attractive


Ummm, not just "young Charles"


----------



## jennalovesbags

bag-mania said:


> She has two uncles on her father’s side and I think two uncles on her mother’s side.  She doesn’t have anything to do with any of them or her cousins. The chances of them all being toxic people is highly unlikely. It’s not them, it’s HER.



I have a huge extended family, but I haven't seen them in 15-20 years. It's unlikely I would invite them to any future wedding. They are not toxic and are perfectly nice people, but we aren't close. It's my parents, my grandfather, and me. While I think that there are plenty of things that she's done publicly we can address, it's too tricky, IMO to understand private family dynamics.


----------



## jennalovesbags

csshopper said:


> Bisousx shared  a link in Post 41622 to an article from 2019 about the KKG chapter at Northwestern being put on probation for a year for what sounds like hazing infractions to the sorority Code. Some slippage from “top tier” there.


I work in higher ed. Most chapters are on probation at some point. Not justifying it at all, but it's not news.


----------



## sdkitty

jennalovesbags said:


> I have a huge extended family, but I haven't seen them in 15-20 years. It's unlikely I would invite them to any future wedding. They are not toxic and are perfectly nice people, but we aren't close. It's my parents, my grandfather, and me. While I think that there are plenty of things that she's done publicly we can address, it's too tricky, IMO to understand private family dynamics.


even if you were having a huge wedding and had no one from your family coming?


----------



## jennalovesbags

sdkitty said:


> I'm dating myself here but I remember young Charles as not very attractive


Agreed. He's sort of grown into himself I think.


----------



## jennalovesbags

sdkitty said:


> even if you were having a huge wedding and had no one from your family coming?


Well, it's sort of a mute point for me personally. I'm a big fan of family is who you make it, whether or not they are related. I was closer to them when I was young. Anyway, it is likely that she's using people and then dropping them, but hard to know.


----------



## bag-mania

I love that the tabloids do a story about how their cookies are on deep discount. Why would anybody want to see their faces on a tin of cookies?


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I love that the tabloids do a story about how their cookies are on deep discount. Why would anybody want to see their faces on a tin of cookies?
> 
> View attachment 4925745
> 
> View attachment 4925750


Very appropo. You go from high end to the sale bin. Yup! That’s the way it’s done Shifty!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Very appropo. You go from high end to the sale bin. Yup! That’s the way it’s done Shifty!


maybe they need to sue TK Maxx for damaging their image


----------



## Sol Ryan

Why would Walkers do one for them this year? Its not like its the year they got married? They aren’t senior Royals? I’m not in the UK, did they do them for anyone else? I usually just get the Scotty Dogs.... although the Nessie package is cute this year. 


Apparently we got a different image in the US...









						Walkers Assorted Shortbread Harry And Meghan Tin
					

Presented in a keepsake tin commemorating the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, these buttery shortbread cookies are shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom. This limited-edition tin makes a perfect gift for Walkers shortbread aficionados. Crafted with an...




					www.worldmarket.com
				




There’ s a Queen tin and a tin for the Cambridges.









						Walkers Assorted Shortbread Queen Elizabeth Tin
					

Presented in a keepsake tin featuring Her Majesty, the Queen, this assortment includes 14 popular shortbread shapes from the legendary Walkers bakery, the essence of Scottish tradition and taste. Great for get-togethers and everyday snacking, these cookies are delicious with coffee, tea or a...




					www.worldmarket.com
				












						Walkers Assorted Shortbread William And Kate Tin
					

Presented in a keepsake tin featuring their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, these buttery cookies from Walkers are the essence of tradition the United Kingdom. Shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom, these limited-edition treats make a perfect gift...




					www.worldmarket.com
				




A laugh, but the Queen and the Cambridges are sold out where I live... Meghan and Harry are still available to pick up in store lol...


----------



## csshopper

Sol Ryan said:


> Why would Walkers do one for them this year? Its not like its the year they got married? They aren’t senior Royals? I’m not in the UK, did they do them for anyone else? I usually just get the Scotty Dogs.... although the Nessie package is cute this year.
> 
> 
> Apparently we got a different image in the US...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Harry And Meghan Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin commemorating the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, these buttery shortbread cookies are shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom. This limited-edition tin makes a perfect gift for Walkers shortbread aficionados. Crafted with an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There’ s a Queen tin and a tin for the Cambridges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Queen Elizabeth Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring Her Majesty, the Queen, this assortment includes 14 popular shortbread shapes from the legendary Walkers bakery, the essence of Scottish tradition and taste. Great for get-togethers and everyday snacking, these cookies are delicious with coffee, tea or a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread William And Kate Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, these buttery cookies from Walkers are the essence of tradition the United Kingdom. Shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom, these limited-edition treats make a perfect gift...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A laugh, but the Queen and the Cambridges are sold out where I live... Meghan and Harry are still available to pick up in store lol...


These sure help a diet, lost my appetite and I  normally love Walkers.


----------



## marietouchet

It dawned on me ... 
The Queen gives puddings (fruitcakes) as Christmas presents to her staff - remember the video last year of George, William, Charles and QEII stirring the pot ? with Harry omitted ? 
Well, I bet the special issue biscuits were commissioned by the glimmer twins for use as gifts to their vast staff , like slices of royal wedding cake, you will want to collect the bikkies


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> These sure help a diet, lost my appetite and I  normally love Walkers.



Haha! I was thinking the opposite.... Hmmmm, cheap biscuits! I can overlook the discounted Duchess on the box.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Why would Walkers do one for them this year? Its not like its the year they got married? They aren’t senior Royals? I’m not in the UK, did they do them for anyone else? I usually just get the Scotty Dogs.... although the Nessie package is cute this year.
> 
> 
> Apparently we got a different image in the US...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Harry And Meghan Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin commemorating the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, these buttery shortbread cookies are shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom. This limited-edition tin makes a perfect gift for Walkers shortbread aficionados. Crafted with an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There’ s a Queen tin and a tin for the Cambridges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Queen Elizabeth Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring Her Majesty, the Queen, this assortment includes 14 popular shortbread shapes from the legendary Walkers bakery, the essence of Scottish tradition and taste. Great for get-togethers and everyday snacking, these cookies are delicious with coffee, tea or a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread William And Kate Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, these buttery cookies from Walkers are the essence of tradition the United Kingdom. Shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom, these limited-edition treats make a perfect gift...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A laugh, but the Queen and the Cambridges are sold out where I live... Meghan and Harry are still available to pick up in store lol...



I think the tins had already been planned and produced last year before Megxit was announced. The photo is from when Harry and Meghan presented a trophy to the winner of a stakes race at the Royal Ascot horse races back in 2018. I didn't include the article but the expiration date for the cookies is February 2021 but they might have a shelf life of a year or more.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I love that the tabloids do a story about how their cookies are on deep discount. Why would anybody want to see their faces on a tin of cookies?
> 
> View attachment 4925745
> 
> View attachment 4925750





Sol Ryan said:


> Why would Walkers do one for them this year? Its not like its the year they got married? They aren’t senior Royals? I’m not in the UK, did they do them for anyone else? I usually just get the Scotty Dogs.... although the Nessie package is cute this year.
> 
> 
> Apparently we got a different image in the US...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Harry And Meghan Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin commemorating the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, these buttery shortbread cookies are shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom. This limited-edition tin makes a perfect gift for Walkers shortbread aficionados. Crafted with an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There’ s a Queen tin and a tin for the Cambridges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Queen Elizabeth Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring Her Majesty, the Queen, this assortment includes 14 popular shortbread shapes from the legendary Walkers bakery, the essence of Scottish tradition and taste. Great for get-togethers and everyday snacking, these cookies are delicious with coffee, tea or a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread William And Kate Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, these buttery cookies from Walkers are the essence of tradition the United Kingdom. Shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom, these limited-edition treats make a perfect gift...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A laugh, but the Queen and the Cambridges are sold out where I live... Meghan and Harry are still available to pick up in store lol...


It looks like MM&H are a lot more appreciated in the US than in the UK, Cost Plus is selling their cookies for $14.39. Our members here must be delighted to add them to their Christmas lists. They surpassed QE.



I wonder if the higher price is because this is the last opportunity (year) that a tin with the duchess and husband's faces on it can be acquired worldwide. It can become a rare collectible.


----------



## Sharont2305

Queen agrees 'New Firm' plan for 8 senior royals - without Harry or Meghan
					

EXCLUSIVE: The 'New Firm' of eight senior royals, which is backed by the Queen and will be deployed next year, is notably without Prince Harry, his wife Meghan Markle and Prince Andrew




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Good.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Queen agrees 'New Firm' plan for 8 senior royals - without Harry or Meghan
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The 'New Firm' of eight senior royals, which is backed by the Queen and will be deployed next year, is notably without Prince Harry, his wife Meghan Markle and Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good.


I imagine this might invoke mixed feelings for H&M.  On the one hand they may not like the image of being excluded (even though they did it to themselves).
On the other hand, if they were part of the firm they would always be secondary to Will & Kate.
Good


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I imagine this might invoke mixed feelings for H&M.  On the one hand they may not like the image of being excluded (even though they did it to themselves).
> On the other hand, if they were part of the firm they would always be secondary to Will & Kate.
> Good


They did a huge mistake imo. It would have been a lot better to be secondary to Will & Kate than to be what they are now. A pathetic couple preaching about what they don't know or do to support their pompous lifestyle.


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> *Inviting family members might have been dangerous for her in that one of the might have spoken of her past without knowing her 'new history'*. Some of 'her' spotlight might have gone on one of the family for a few minutes. Can't imagine she would have tolerated that. Also any she invited she might have then needed to spend time staying in touch with, and we all know she is much to busy doing important things. All the time. But maybe it's just she then couldn't have played her victim card which she so enjoys. IMHO of course.



I think the bolded sums up why her family isn’t part of her life.


----------



## bag-mania

They wanted to live the rich Hollywood celebrity lifestyle and be admired for doing nothing more than repeating inspirational platitudes every now and then. Seems to me they are living their dream.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!

*Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate


Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.

Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm. 

Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.

These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.

Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.

And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.

But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.

Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.

Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.

And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.

But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.

Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".










						Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
					

Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate




					www.womanandhome.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!
> 
> *Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
> Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
> In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
> The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.
> 
> Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm.
> 
> Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.
> 
> These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.
> 
> Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.
> 
> And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.
> 
> But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.
> 
> Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.
> 
> And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.
> 
> But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.
> 
> Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com


yeah, right
must have been written by a stan


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? *It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. *She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!
> 
> *Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
> Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
> In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
> The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.
> 
> Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm.
> 
> Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.
> 
> These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.
> 
> Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.
> 
> And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.
> 
> But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.
> 
> Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.
> 
> And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.
> 
> But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.
> 
> Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com


Surprise! Sounds like an uneducated and uninformed person supporting MM. MM&H don't generally impress the best of the best with their little schemes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!
> 
> *Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
> Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
> In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
> The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.
> 
> Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm.
> 
> Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.
> 
> These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.
> 
> Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.
> 
> And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.
> 
> But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.
> 
> Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.
> 
> And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.
> 
> But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.
> 
> Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com



Who paid for the 'huge study'? I would bet on the duchess! I wonder until when H's money will last.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Worth noting Woman & Home published by IPC media which is now owned by TIME.  Never trust the grifters.
Cough, cough, cough 









						TI Media - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				






bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!
> 
> *Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
> Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
> In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
> The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.
> 
> Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm.
> 
> Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.
> 
> These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.
> 
> Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.
> 
> And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.
> 
> But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.
> 
> Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.
> 
> And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.
> 
> But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.
> 
> Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com


----------



## bag-mania

Here's one who is not a Meghan fan. 

*Meghan and Harry latest – ‘Cowardly’ couple avoided ‘awkward’ reunion with The Queen, expert claims*
MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry avoided an "awkward" reunion with The Queen by not returning to the UK this year, an expert has claimed.

Royal biographer Angela Levin accused the couple of being "cowards" while speaking to talkRADIO's Mike Graham.

Acknowledging how the coronavirus crisis means "people are far away from one another", host Mike Graham said: "There doesn’t seem to be any urgency from California, from Harry and Meghan, to come back and see Prince Philip, who is not getting any younger.

"The Queen is also racking up the years."

In response, the biographer said: "I think they’re cowards, I think they don’t want to do that because they will feel awkward.

“The conversation will be awkward and I think they’re just cowards staying away – there’s no reason why they couldn’t come."

What's more, the expert also claimed that the Prince "looks terrified" when he speaks and fears a "telling off from Meghan".










						'Cowardly' Meghan & Harry avoided 'awkward’ reunion with Queen, expert claims
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry avoided an “awkward” reunion with The Queen by not returning to the UK this year, an expert has claimed. Royal biographer Angela Levin accused the couple …




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> Why would Walkers do one for them this year? Its not like its the year they got married? They aren’t senior Royals? I’m not in the UK, did they do them for anyone else? I usually just get the Scotty Dogs.... although the Nessie package is cute this year.
> 
> 
> Apparently we got a different image in the US...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Harry And Meghan Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin commemorating the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, these buttery shortbread cookies are shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom. This limited-edition tin makes a perfect gift for Walkers shortbread aficionados. Crafted with an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There’ s a Queen tin and a tin for the Cambridges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread Queen Elizabeth Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring Her Majesty, the Queen, this assortment includes 14 popular shortbread shapes from the legendary Walkers bakery, the essence of Scottish tradition and taste. Great for get-togethers and everyday snacking, these cookies are delicious with coffee, tea or a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Walkers Assorted Shortbread William And Kate Tin
> 
> 
> Presented in a keepsake tin featuring their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, these buttery cookies from Walkers are the essence of tradition the United Kingdom. Shaped like the Union Jack, the famous flag of the United Kingdom, these limited-edition treats make a perfect gift...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldmarket.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A laugh, but the Queen and the Cambridges are sold out where I live... Meghan and Harry are still available to pick up in store lol...


Oh, the irony .. Walkers, a VERY Scottish brand .. even dares to put the BRF on ANY Tin of their wares?  According to my Scotts colleagues (especially those from the Highlands), I cannot imagine them buying these tins .. given their "love" (sic) of the Brits!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> It looks like MM&H are a lot more appreciated in the US than in the UK, Cost Plus is selling their cookies for $14.39. Our members here must be delighted to add them to their Christmas lists. They surpassed QE.
> 
> View attachment 4926116
> 
> I wonder if the higher price is because this is the last opportunity (year) that a tin with the duchess and husband's faces on it can be acquired worldwide. It can become a rare collectible.


$14.39?? .. even $1.39 would be too much for these jokers!  I used to love Walkers, but after being in Edinburgh and Glasgow and having the "real deal" shortbread biscuits?!?! .. OMG, Walkers just doesn't cut it anymore!


----------



## bag-mania

*How did we not know about this?* (From 2019)
Back when she was 14, Meghan copyrighted a quote about freckles that her dad used to say to her when she was little. Proof that from a young age Meghan was always trying to work an angle and take credit for other people's ideas, even a silly offhand saying from her father. There is also the possibility it was plagiarized from a song which is also easy to believe. _What could she have possibly hoped to get out of it?_ 

*Meghan Markle ‘copyrighted a whimsical quote her dad Thomas Markle said about her freckles aged 14’*

MEGHAN Markle is believed to have had a whimsical quote from her dad about her freckles copyrighted back in 1995.

The former Suits actress, 37, then going by her first name Rachel, appears to have applied for copyright on the phrase “a face without freckles is night without stars”, according to the United States Copyright Office.

The listing, registered on January 18, 1996, also states her full name, Rachel Meghan Markle, and her year of birth, 1981. The Duchess of Sussex would have been just 14 at the time.

While another Meghan Markle may have applied for the copyright, a search found no other Rachel Meghan Markles were born in 1981.

There is one other Meghan Markle but she has a different middle name.

The quote reportedly comes from Meghan’s now estranged father Thomas Markle who used to say it to his daughter when she was younger.

There was speculation as to whether Meghan had taken the quotation from the Pala Joy Waltar song, A Sky With No Blue.

The lyrics include the lines “a girl without freckles is like a night without stars.”

However, according to US copyright law, the lyrics could have been created independently and therefore there was no plagiarism.

In order to copyright a phrase, the claimant must prove that their work is original before paying a fee (between £175 to £315) to have it trademarked.

The Duchess of Sussex has previously spoken out about her love of her freckles admitting that it was a “pet peeve” when they were airbrushed out of her photos.

In an interview with Allure magazine, she said: "To this day, my pet peeve is when my skin tone is changed and my freckles are airbrushed out of a photo shoot."

Her inspirational approach to her skin encouraged a social media movement following the royal wedding with women sharing selfies with the hashtags #freckleslikemeghan, #frecklesfordays and #frecklegang.

And now Meghan’s freckles are something to be desired, with faux-freckles among the most requested treatments that women want.




According to Dr Sam Khani, an aesthetic doctor at London Premier Laser Clinics, her freckled skin is what women are after.

He told Fabulous Digital earlier this year: “"There has been a surge in demand for treatments to imitate the royal-mum-to-be, and we have seen increasing requests from women of all skin types for £200 semi-permanent ‘faux-freckle’ make-up.”

Kensington Palace has been contacted for comment.









						Meghan ‘copyrighted a kooky quote her dad Thomas said about her freckles aged 14’
					

MEGHAN Markle is believed to have had a whimsical quote from her dad about her freckles copyrighted back in 1995. The former Suits actress, 37, then going by her first name Rachel, appears to have …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## A1aGypsy

So, this is how it is done folks. Take about a breath of fresh air (even more impressive given who her mil is):









						Sophie Winkleman Opens Up About Going from Acting to Royal Life: 'Prince William's Been Heaven'
					

Sophie Winkleman talks about life in the royal family, her relationship with Meghan Markle and more




					people.com


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> *How did we not know about this?* (From 2019)
> Back when she was 14, Meghan copyrighted a quote about freckles that her dad used to say to her when she was little. Proof that from a young age Meghan was always trying to work an angle and take credit for other people's ideas, even a silly offhand saying from her father. There is also the possibility it was plagiarized from a song which is also easy to believe. _What could she have possibly hoped to get out of it?_
> 
> *Meghan Markle ‘copyrighted a whimsical quote her dad Thomas Markle said about her freckles aged 14’*
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is believed to have had a whimsical quote from her dad about her freckles copyrighted back in 1995.
> 
> The former Suits actress, 37, then going by her first name Rachel, appears to have applied for copyright on the phrase “a face without freckles is night without stars”, according to the United States Copyright Office.
> 
> The listing, registered on January 18, 1996, also states her full name, Rachel Meghan Markle, and her year of birth, 1981. The Duchess of Sussex would have been just 14 at the time.
> 
> While another Meghan Markle may have applied for the copyright, a search found no other Rachel Meghan Markles were born in 1981.
> 
> There is one other Meghan Markle but she has a different middle name.
> 
> The quote reportedly comes from Meghan’s now estranged father Thomas Markle who used to say it to his daughter when she was younger.
> 
> There was speculation as to whether Meghan had taken the quotation from the Pala Joy Waltar song, A Sky With No Blue.
> 
> The lyrics include the lines “a girl without freckles is like a night without stars.”
> 
> However, according to US copyright law, the lyrics could have been created independently and therefore there was no plagiarism.
> 
> In order to copyright a phrase, the claimant must prove that their work is original before paying a fee (between £175 to £315) to have it trademarked.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has previously spoken out about her love of her freckles admitting that it was a “pet peeve” when they were airbrushed out of her photos.
> 
> In an interview with Allure magazine, she said: "To this day, my pet peeve is when my skin tone is changed and my freckles are airbrushed out of a photo shoot."
> 
> Her inspirational approach to her skin encouraged a social media movement following the royal wedding with women sharing selfies with the hashtags #freckleslikemeghan, #frecklesfordays and #frecklegang.
> 
> And now Meghan’s freckles are something to be desired, with faux-freckles among the most requested treatments that women want.
> 
> View attachment 4926383
> View attachment 4926384
> 
> According to Dr Sam Khani, an aesthetic doctor at London Premier Laser Clinics, her freckled skin is what women are after.
> 
> He told Fabulous Digital earlier this year: “"There has been a surge in demand for treatments to imitate the royal-mum-to-be, and we have seen increasing requests from women of all skin types for £200 semi-permanent ‘faux-freckle’ make-up.”
> 
> Kensington Palace has been contacted for comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan ‘copyrighted a kooky quote her dad Thomas said about her freckles aged 14’
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is believed to have had a whimsical quote from her dad about her freckles copyrighted back in 1995. The former Suits actress, 37, then going by her first name Rachel, appears to have …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Hmmm FAKE NEWS ??? 
MM was born in 1981 per Wiki - 39 years old, although some think her older than that ....
She would have been 14 at the time of the 1995 copyrighting ??? 

I am too lazy to actually go check the copyright, but this story is a hoot !


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Oh, the irony .. Walkers, a VERY Scottish brand .. even dares to put the BRF on ANY Tin of their wares?  According to my Scotts colleagues (especially those from the Highlands), I cannot imagine them buying these tins .. given their "love" (sic) of the Brits!


You mean English not Brits @CeeJay  lol


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm FAKE NEWS ???
> MM was born in 1981 per Wiki - 39 years old, although some think her older than that ....
> She would have been 14 at the time of the 1995 copyrighting ???
> 
> I am too lazy to actually go check the copyright, but this story is a hoot !



It says she copyrighted it in January 1996 and she would have been 14. But who knows? If you google the quote and her name she has used it quite a bit. A number of her interviews from 2017 had it, including this one from _Vogue_.









						Meghan Markle Wants You to Leave Her Freckles Alone
					

The actress speaks out on embracing her multiracial background and celebrating her skin tone.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Worth noting *Woman & Home published by IPC media which is now owned by TIME.*  Never trust the grifters.
> Cough, cough, cough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TI Media - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> $14.39?? .. even $1.39 would be too much for these jokers!  I used to love Walkers, but after being in Edinburgh and Glasgow and having the "real deal" shortbread biscuits?!?! .. OMG, Walkers just doesn't cut it anymore!


You're very generous. I'm waiting for them to be at 99c, I have a difficult colleague that could get a box.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!
> 
> *Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
> Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
> In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
> The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.
> 
> Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm.
> 
> Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.
> 
> These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.
> 
> Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.
> 
> And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.
> 
> But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.
> 
> Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.
> 
> And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.
> 
> But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.
> 
> Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com



A search of the web for OnBuynow, the source of this; says they are a selling platform set up to rival Amazon. I'm having a hard time connecting this description of what they do to an analysis of Meghan's supposed popularity. 

*What is OnBuy?*
We're an Online Marketplace
We launched in November 2016 and are now the fastest-growing marketplace in the world. How, you ask?
We saw what other major marketplaces offered and thought we could improve on this - so we did! We created a fairer, more transparent marketplace that puts its buyers and sellers first. By doing this, we can offer you all the same advantages as the leading marketplaces but in a new way that benefits everyone.
As we aim to be fair and transparent, we don't compete with our sellers by selling anything ourselves and we never will. We're here to connect buyers like you with thousands of professional business sellers (and vice versa) to bring you a simple, secure shopping experience.
Since launching in 2016, we've welcomed sellers of all sizes on board, from household names to smaller independent retailers. By making a fairer platform for sellers, they work with us to offer you a wider product range than other marketplaces. With our competitive fees, they can price better too - all so we can bring you the best products, prices and service possible.


----------



## Lodpah

Someone on Quora asked a question about  how someone’s eyes are a window to the soul. So a Quoran  compiled a whole bunch of pictures of Meghan’s eyes in public. Horror of horrors! People were so creeped out the comments. It’s pretty much the bride of Chucky look.


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> A search of the web for OnBuynow, the source of this; says they are a selling platform set up to rival Amazon. I'm having a hard time connecting this description of what they do to an analysis of Meghan's supposed popularity.
> 
> *What is OnBuy?*
> We're an Online Marketplace
> We launched in November 2016 and are now the fastest-growing marketplace in the world. How, you ask?
> We saw what other major marketplaces offered and thought we could improve on this - so we did! We created a fairer, more transparent marketplace that puts its buyers and sellers first. By doing this, we can offer you all the same advantages as the leading marketplaces but in a new way that benefits everyone.
> As we aim to be fair and transparent, we don't compete with our sellers by selling anything ourselves and we never will. We're here to connect buyers like you with thousands of professional business sellers (and vice versa) to bring you a simple, secure shopping experience.
> Since launching in 2016, we've welcomed sellers of all sizes on board, from household names to smaller independent retailers. By making a fairer platform for sellers, they work with us to offer you a wider product range than other marketplaces. With our competitive fees, they can price better too - all so we can bring you the best products, prices and service possible.



Won't last. I don't even understand the point of this description. WHY is it better? HOW exactly does it benefit the consumer? WHAT exactly is it offering that folks can't get elsewhere?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

CeeJay said:


> Oh, the irony .. Walkers, a VERY Scottish brand .. even dares to put the BRF on ANY Tin of their wares?  According to my Scotts colleagues (especially those from the Highlands), I cannot imagine them buying these tins .. given their "love" (sic) of the Brits!



huh? I mean they’ve made them for years. I’ve atleast seen the Queen and Kate and Wills ones before.

Pretty sure its just marketing...


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Won't last. I don't even understand the point of this description. WHY is it better? HOW exactly does it benefit the consumer? WHAT exactly is it offering that folks can't get elsewhere?



Agreed. There's something strange about it. If you have to tell potential customers several times in just a few lines about how fair and secure you are but you provide no details, maybe you really are not those things.


----------



## bisousx

Lodpah said:


> Someone on Quora asked a question about  how someone’s eyes are a window to the soul. So a Quoran  compiled a whole bunch of pictures of Meghan’s eyes in public. Horror of horrors! People were so creeped out the comments. It’s pretty much the bride of Chucky look.



One of the comments:

_Not sure a window to what are those eyes, but I would avoid definitely that place, as probably most people would._

oh Meghan. What a beautiful woman. But I would not want to be at the receiving end of her creepy gaze. 

_









_


----------



## bag-mania

The thing about a shark, it's got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes. When it comes at you it doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites you, and those black eyes roll over white. 
—Quint, _Jaws_ 1975


----------



## CarryOn2020

Scary stuff!  Wonder if she has had lasik or some other eye surgery. Creepy, definitely creepy.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Scary stuff!  Wonder if she has had lasik or some other eye surgery. Creepy, definitely creepy.



But wait, there’s more. Why hasn’t her PR team instructed her to look less evil?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. There's something strange about it. If you have to tell potential customers several times in just a few lines about how fair and secure you are but you provide no details, maybe you really are not those things.



The customer wants to know how it benefits them, they do not care about you talking about how great you are. What's the bottom line?


----------



## bisousx

I’m on a roll here. Does anyone find this care bear stare from one spouse endearing? Genuinely curious.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I’m on a roll here. Does anyone find this care bear stare from one spouse endearing? Genuinely curious.
> 
> View attachment 4926576
> View attachment 4926577
> View attachment 4926578
> View attachment 4926579
> View attachment 4926580



Endearing? No. Fascinating, definitely. We are witnessing the Meghan Love Bomb hitting its target repeatedly.


----------



## LittleStar88

Looks like she went to the Tyra Banks School Of Smizing


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> Looks like she went to the Tyra Banks School Of Smizing


Actually, her eyes aren't smiling most of the time, but weirdly staring at Harry and, that creepy smile makes her eyes appear dead. Indeed, JCMH may have gotten the booby prize. Scary!


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> The thing about a shark, it's got lifeless eyes, black eyes, like a doll's eyes. When it comes at you it doesn't seem to be livin'... until he bites you, and those black eyes roll over white.
> —Quint, _Jaws_ 1975
> 
> View attachment 4926540


Yep! Fun fact! They clean the ocean, meaning they eat the dead and alive and other things. They’re always circling their prey. It’s just a matter of time before JCMH is shark bait. Well he’s shark bait she just has not moved in for the kill.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I'm not familiar with _Woman and Home_, is that a UK publication? It is horribly written, full of typos (were instead of we're). The author is claiming Meghan is the most popular royal worldwide. She credits a study of online searches as proving that point. What she doesn't take into account is online searching doesn't necessarily mean the person is liked or popular. Some people do searches for people they don't like. My searches alone must have boosted Meghan's "popularity." My apologies!
> 
> *Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study*
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal after a huge study reveals the Duchess beat off Duchess Catherine for the top spot.
> Despite quitting the Royal family and the UK earlier this year with husband Prince Harry, Meghan has climbed to the top of the royal popularity ladder thanks to the huge interest surrounding the actress.
> In other royal news, The sign Prince Harry and Meghan will choose friends over family this Christmas.
> The Duchess of Sussex has topped the popularity chart of a huge study into who is the most popular out of all the British Royals.
> 
> Were all obsessed with Netflix drama The Crown, due to it being based on the royal family and this latest research shows just how much we love the firm.
> 
> Data sourced from across the globe, via YouGov rankings, Google search volumes, Instagram and the Royal calendar, carried out by OnBuy.com has been at the centre of the findings.
> 
> These searches were normalised and weighted to establish a popularity score percentage for each of the British Royals - with Meghan coming out top with 14.5%.
> 
> Close behind Meghan is Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge who only just missed out on the top spot by 0.1% -even though she came out on top with Instagram popularity searches. Kate is known to share treasured family snaps from her home in Kensington Palace, and they always get the hits when she shares them on her Kensington Royal Instagram account.
> 
> And Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II is third place with a score of 14.3%.
> 
> But when it comes to the least popular royal, the Duke of York, took this position with just 1.2% popularity.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has come at a time when there is even fewer public appearances as she, Harry and son Archie, one, carve a new life for themselves in Santa Barbara in the United States.
> 
> Meghan recently spoke out about her shock miscarriage and shared details to 'shine a light' on the grieving process.
> 
> And when it comes to the battle of the brothers, it's Prince Harry (14.2%) who has pipped William, Duke of Cambridge (13.8%) to the post - landing fourth most popular royal.
> 
> But some of the royals scandals to hit in recent months has led the Royal Family to have a low popularity score of just 8%.
> 
> Surprisingly the late Princess Diana hasn't been included in the research but no doubt she would have been among the top ranking in terms of popularity, after being dubbed "the People's Princess".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal worldwide, according to huge study
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is the most popular royal - beating the Queen and Kate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com


I think our thread here probably contributes a lot to the "number of mentions" .  I would hardly correlate her to being "popular" in a good way with us though!


----------



## Tootsie17

bisousx said:


> But wait, there’s more. Why hasn’t her PR team instructed her to look less evil?
> 
> View attachment 4926562
> View attachment 4926563
> View attachment 4926564
> View attachment 4926565
> View attachment 4926566


I believe the evil stare is the norm for her.  She has to REALLY practice the kind and empathetic caring eyes stare.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I could be wrong, is her blush in the right place on her cheeks?  Seems like she is putting below her cheek bones. Maybe that explains the weird looks, no, it‘s her eyes. Help me, I am caught in the MM vortex eeeeek.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> One of the comments:
> 
> _Not sure a window to what are those eyes, but I would avoid definitely that place, as probably most people would._
> 
> oh Meghan. What a beautiful woman. But I would not want to be at the receiving end of her creepy gaze.
> 
> _
> View attachment 4926518
> View attachment 4926519
> View attachment 4926520
> View attachment 4926521
> View attachment 4926522
> View attachment 4926523
> View attachment 4926524
> View attachment 4926525
> View attachment 4926526
> _



I think she makes these gazes on purpose to appear as if she's a doe eyed ingenue.  Except it has the opposite effect and makes her look either like a shark or a creepy doll that comes to life to kill you in the middle of the night.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> I’m on a roll here. *Does anyone find this care bear stare from one spouse endearing?* Genuinely curious.



Um, no.  Maybe I'm a cold hearted beeyotch, but the few pictures that show me gazing adoringly at my husband are from our wedding.    We've been married 20 years though, so faking it to make it at this point wouldn't work anyway!


----------



## CarryOn2020

In most of the photos, he isn’t even looking at her.  Maybe another photo will show him staring adorably and lovingly at her.
I just can’t find any.  Not like the ones from the Chels days.




ETA: The laughs, the smiles, the hugs, all genuine - we can be certain they had fun, so much more than H&M do.


----------



## csshopper

Poor Archie looking at this all the time.
After about 3 pictures I shivered.


----------



## Lodpah

So with all their going to do this and do that. When exactly are they going to start doing? I mean we’ve been reading for what a couple of years of their planned initiatives but all we get is wilted word and hands flaying about and mouths moving.

They’re such fakes and somebrought up a good point that awards thing they talked about was a slap to the Queen because it’s not a UK honors but the Queen’s award. Meghan really, really hates the BRF and that whatever she married has the backbone of the invertebrate group.

The reason I’m clapping back at what they say is because they take away from real people who actually do something and the fact that they don’t see the sufferings of so many but instead they actually mock the ‘mock’ the little people with their fakery.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lodpah  just read on another site that perhaps the miscarriage blast in the NYT was an H&M attempt to steal Zara’s thunder. Only it backfired because Zara and Mike did not announce their pregnancy until yesterday.  As sick as it sounds, it does answer the questions about the timing and the choice of NYT.  Sick sick sick.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Lodpah  just read on another site that perhaps the miscarriage blast in the NYT was an H&M attempt to steal Zara’s thunder. Only it backfired because Zara and Mike did not announce their pregnancy until yesterday.  As sick as it sounds, it does answer the questions about the timing and the choice of NYT.  Sick sick sick.


I agree. I read that too. She’s really sick in the head and I mean that kindly.


----------



## purseinsanity

They say that eyes are the window to your soul.  The reason hers look dead and shark like is because she has no soul!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Scary stuff!  Wonder if she has had lasik or some other eye surgery. Creepy, definitely creepy.



I've had LASIK and I can assure you I don't usually stare at people like a lunatic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> I believe the evil stare is the norm for her.  She has to REALLY practice the kind and empathetic caring eyes stare.



I am surprised nobody has posted pictures of her staring at Kate like she was fantasizing about ramming a knife into her back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Poor Archie looking at this all the time.
> After about 3 pictures I shivered.



I honestly doubt she spends much time with him unless it's to visit Desmond Tutu.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Lodpah  just read on another site that perhaps the miscarriage blast in the NYT was an H&M attempt to steal Zara’s thunder. Only it backfired because Zara and Mike did not announce their pregnancy until yesterday.  As sick as it sounds, it does answer the questions about the timing and the choice of NYT.  Sick sick sick.


I'm wondering if Zara at some point actually phoned Harry to let him know she was pregnant. Same with Princess Eugenie, did she?


----------



## Lodpah

I was just cruising and saw this. It's kinda wild but WE are not the only ones who have picked up of the delusional wanderers:


Since Meghan and Harry are unlikely to attend church services on Christmas Day, what will they do for publicity that day?
One of them will be rushed to hospital with a sudden mystery illness, one hour before The Queen’s traditional Christmas Day speech, scheduled for broadcast to the nation at 3pm GMT. Actually it may have to be a bit earlier, to coincide with the Royal Family attending the Christmas morning church service. That would then allow the medical team in LA to release a bulletin live from the hospital steps five minutes before The Queen’s speech. If it’s Harry on the gurney there will be footage of a distraught Meghan holding his hand as he’s rushed in. If it’s Meghan on the gurney the photographers will be too busy focusing on her to photograph Harry; other than his hand, being soothed by a selfless Meghan.
Speculation will be rife at suggestions that the sudden mystery illness took hold shortly after eating some festive handmade biscuits, believed to have been sent by The Duchess of Cambridge. That rumour will go viral. After 500 million clicks Project Meghan will release statements rushing to defend The Cambridges, and distancing themselves from such dreadful and unfounded allegations about their revered close friend.
Whoever it is who is chosen to be ill will be admitted to a private ward for two or three nights as the world waits with baited breath and prays for their safe deliverance. Which will happen once Christmas is over.
A tearful Meghan will break down during a live podcast as she thanks the world. Late on New Years Eve.


----------



## Lodpah

This is from Quora, the Markle posts. Just happened to come up while surfing but they are funny as heck. Their link is above. The comments are hilarious - Meghan will have a carbon-neutral immaculate conception. Where do they come up with this? I seriously think the below is so funnyyyyyyy   

SECRET POWERS (Post-royalty): Secret powers are obviously SECRET, so we can only surmise at the answer. We are surmising that the Countess can singlehandedly generate so much work and headaches for her PR firm Sunshine Sachs that Sunshine Sachs needs its own PR firm to repair its reputation.

With every positive development, she manages to somehow snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CeeJay said:


> Oh, the irony .. Walkers, a VERY Scottish brand .. even dares to put the BRF on ANY Tin of their wares?  According to my Scotts colleagues (especially those from the Highlands), I cannot imagine them buying these tins .. given their "love" (sic) of the Brits!


Your Scotts colleagues sound like anti-English racists.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've had LASIK and I can assure you I don't usually stare at people like a lunatic.


Truly lol!  Loved this.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm FAKE NEWS ???
> MM was born in 1981 per Wiki - 39 years old, although some think her older than that ....
> She would have been 14 at the time of the 1995 copyrighting ???
> 
> I am too lazy to actually go check the copyright, but this story is a hoot !


LOL
The freckle news is very amusing ... we should give out awards for these stories  and of course, for the excellent op-eds herein ... like journalism awards - pseudo Pulitizers, no that is not glam enough , We can do one up on the Nobels !!!
But, I am at loss for a name ... need help here all I can come up with is a Meggie award , help please 
And we need to copyright our work... sue for plagiarism if required, heck half of youtube must follow TPF ... 
LOL


----------



## Annawakes

I remember that picture she was staring daggers in Kate’s back while they were doing a walkabout.  That was super creepy.


----------



## 1LV

Annawakes said:


> I remember that picture she was staring daggers in Kate’s back while they were doing a walkabout.  That was super creepy.


Right!  If a picture paints a thousand words...


----------



## Chanbal

Another surprise video appearance from Harry:*Prince Harry leaves children stunned as he surprises previous winners of the WellChild Awards in a **video call** and praises their 'bravery' and 'optimism*
People are very intrigued with those solo appearances, so am I! The comments are as usual very revealing of their popularity.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Yep! Fun fact! They clean the ocean, meaning they eat the dead and alive and other things. They’re always circling their prey. *It’s just a matter of time before JCMH is shark bait. *Well he’s shark bait she just has not moved in for the kill.



Shark bait is also called chum and we know Harry and Meghan are each other's best chums. (I'll see myself out.)


----------



## bisousx

I couldn’t find that one. The others are just as creepy with a smidge less of malice. 

If I had to list the types of persons I do NOT want to brush with, among the top of this list are the seething, quiet ones who develop a fixation on you. Nope, no thank you, please take me off your radar. Nothing to see here.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> I couldn’t find that one. The others are just as creepy with a smidge less of malice.
> 
> If I had to list the types of persons I do NOT want to brush with, among the top of this list are the seething, quiet ones who develop a fixation on you. Nope, no thank you, please take me off your radar. Nothing to see here.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4927263
> View attachment 4927264
> View attachment 4927265
> View attachment 4927266
> View attachment 4927267
> View attachment 4927268


the bottom pic is the worst - M looking smug and H scowling


----------



## LittleStar88

bisousx said:


> I couldn’t find that one. The others are just as creepy with a smidge less of malice.
> 
> If I had to list the types of persons I do NOT want to brush with, among the top of this list are the seething, quiet ones who develop a fixation on you. Nope, no thank you, please take me off your radar. Nothing to see here.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4927263
> View attachment 4927264
> View attachment 4927265
> View attachment 4927266
> View attachment 4927267
> View attachment 4927268



Haha looks like MM wants to push her down a flight of stairs there...


----------



## purseinsanity

I thought this was hysterical.  The way they've positioned MM is very telling  Turns out they're actors in wax masks, but childish me still finds it funny!









						Berlin's Madame Tussauds Unveils 'Live' Wax Statues of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, And They're Creepy!
					

These 'live' waxworks are the stuff of nightmares because Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look far from cute.



					life.shared.com


----------



## 1LV

The pics posted by bisousx seem to emphasize what Kate has that MM will never be able to buy - class. Has absolutely nothing to do with how many bathrooms you have in your house.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

1LV said:


> The pics posted by bisousx seem to emphasize what Kate has that MM will never be able to buy - class. *Has absolutely nothing to do with how many bathrooms you have in your house.*


In a way, it does. Kate never puts out all the crap MM does, so yes, 16 bathrooms are indeed necessary.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> You mean English not Brits @CeeJay  lol


Dagnabbit .. I did it again! .. YES, you are SO RIGHT .. they hate the English!!!  I’ll get it right someday (hopefully)!


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> huh? I mean they’ve made them for years. I’ve atleast seen the Queen and Kate and Wills ones before.
> 
> Pretty sure its just marketing...


Of course it is, but I could say with 100% accuracy, that I would NEVER see any one of those tins in either our Edinburgh or Glasgow offices, and if someone did bring one in?!?! .. he/she would be given a ton of sh!te!!!


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> In a way, it does. Kate never puts out all the crap MM does, so yes, 16 bathrooms are indeed necessary.


It is the holidays, lets give the alliterative one a break ... I am sure that Anmer House has a nice number of lavatories too - for an older house -  it surely has amenities , but the "bathrooms"  are not likely American style with copper tub, separate marble shower/sauna , toilets, sinks and bidets en suite everywhere , a lavatory does not a bathroom make ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I thought this was hysterical.  The way they've positioned MM is very telling  Turns out they're actors in wax masks, but childish me still finds it funny!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berlin's Madame Tussauds Unveils 'Live' Wax Statues of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, And They're Creepy!
> 
> 
> These 'live' waxworks are the stuff of nightmares because Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look far from cute.
> 
> 
> 
> life.shared.com



I don't know why they are being criticized. Almost all of the poses pictured we have seen the real couple do at some time. Sure, they exaggerated the pregnant belly photos, but only a little. Meghan wasn't wearing Christmas garb when she had her belly cradling photos taken.


----------



## CeeJay

I just happened to see this article in the NYT .. appropriately named:  
*How ‘The Talented Mr. Ripley’ Foretold Our Era of Grifting*

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/12/...tion=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

which has a picture in it .. that, whoa .. to me, well .. kinda looks like Harry .. and given their propensity to GRIFT big-time ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe it’s just my eyes (!), it looks like her nose grows larger in the second photo. Almost as it that is a ‘tell’, smiling but really seething.



bisousx said:


> I couldn’t find that one. The others are just as creepy with a smidge less of malice.
> 
> If I had to list the types of persons I do NOT want to brush with, among the top of this list are the seething, quiet ones who develop a fixation on you. Nope, no thank you, please take me off your radar. Nothing to see here.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4927265
> View attachment 4927266


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Heggie.  Recipients awarded the coveted raindrop and 80s poster:










						Rain Drop Award - Trophy Award Co.
					

NEW! An art glass piece ideal for an individual who embodies confidence and depth. A simple blue drop with a black optic crystal base to create the perfect balance.    Size Option Large     Base Price $130.00     Dimensions 9-1/4" x 4-1/4" x 3"      Discounts on 8 or more applied in cart. All...




					trophyawardco.com
				















						Attitude Raindrop Recognition Award Program
					

Successories Monthly Recognition Program includes all engraving, administration costs and monthly name plates. Program includes framed print, framed Recognition




					www.successories.com
				








marietouchet said:


> LOL
> The freckle news is very amusing ... we should give out awards for these stories  and of course, for the excellent op-eds herein ... like journalism awards - pseudo Pulitizers, no that is not glam enough , We can do one up on the Nobels !!!
> But, I am at loss for a name ... need help here all I can come up with is a Meggie award , help please
> And we need to copyright our work... sue for plagiarism if required, heck half of youtube must follow TPF ...
> LOL


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> Dagnabbit .. I did it again! .. YES, you are SO RIGHT .. they hate the English!!!  I’ll get it right someday (hopefully)!


You will, don't worry, I'll be here to correct you ha ha


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love that article — so true in today’s world of super fakes.
The pretenders are everywhere. 



CeeJay said:


> I just happened to see this article in the NYT .. appropriately named:
> *How ‘The Talented Mr. Ripley’ Foretold Our Era of Grifting*
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/12/...tion=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
> 
> which has a picture in it .. that, whoa .. to me, well .. kinda looks like Harry .. and given their propensity to GRIFT big-time ..
> View attachment 4927434


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I know I posted the really gruesome pics, but that was months ago. I had them from a Twitter account whose name I can't remember to save my life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've had LASIK and I can assure you I don't usually stare at people like a lunatic.



Your eyes are beautiful because they reflect your beautiful soul


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Call me crazy (and, I know most of you will), but I think she genuinely loves him.  Meghan has beautiful eyes, and they're expressive.  It's her words that make me cringe.


----------



## bag-mania

Cavalier Girl said:


> Call me crazy (and, I know most of you will), but I think she genuinely loves him.  Meghan has beautiful eyes, and they're expressive.  It's her words that make me cringe.



I won't call you crazy but I don't trust her love gazes and I certainly don't believe those 1000 megawatt smiles. She always knows right where the camera is and plays to it because God forbid she take a bad picture. I don't think any of us knows what the real Meghan is like because we've only ever seen Meghan the actress.


----------



## 1LV

Cavalier Girl said:


> Call me crazy (and, I know most of you will), but I think she genuinely loves him.  Meghan has beautiful eyes, and they're expressive.  It's her words that make me cringe.


I wouldn’t say you’re crazy.  Let’s say optimistic.  And you know what?  For Archie’s sake I hope you’re right.


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> These sure help a diet, lost my appetite and I  normally love Walkers.




I love Walkers, too.  But you are right about losing one’s appetite!  Hmmmm...maybe I should get that tin so I won’t eat as many!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ah, is it _him_ or the idea of him? The prince thing? Diana touches on that topic in her Bashir interview:



			https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/diana/panorama.html
		


BASHIR: It's been suggested in some newspapers that you were left largely to cope with your new status on your own. Do you feel that was your experience?
DIANA: Yes I do, on reflection. But then here was a situation which hadn't ever happened before in history, in the sense that the media were everywhere, and here was a fairy story that everybody wanted to work.
And so it was, it was isolating, but it was also a situation where you couldn't indulge in feeling sorry for yourself: you had to either sink or swim. And you had to learn that very fast.




bag-mania said:


> I don't think any of us knows what the real Meghan is like because we've only ever seen Meghan the actress.



So true!


----------



## bag-mania

Gag. If _Vanity Fair_ was Pinocchio it's nose would be a mile long. Soooo many lies and butt kissing. If anyone still has a subscription to this rag, cancel it now.

DO NOT READ THIS if you are getting ready to eat a meal. You will lose your appetite. 

*After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021*
According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.

It’s been a universally tough year for everybody,” *Prince Harry* said recently, neatly summing up the global mood. But Harry’s comments also seemed deeply personal in the wake of what’s been a particularly tough and challenging year for the Sussexes— one a friend of the couple has appropriately described as a rollercoaster.

From two international moves to a high-profile tabloid to a devastating miscarriage this summer, 2020 is one the Sussexes will likely look back on with mixed emotions. For all the highs—watching their much-loved son *Archie* turn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary, moving into their dream home in California, and signing a lucrative multi-million dollar deal with Netflix—there have been some challenging and deeply testing moments too

“It’s been a big year for sure and one that has been a rollercoaster,” said a friend of the couple’s. “2020 has seen them leave the royal family, leave Britain and move to LA to their dream home where they are finally able to lay down new roots.”

No one knew on January 8, when Harry and Meghan first announced they were stepping down as senior royals, what a turbulent year would follow. But their bombshell statement, posted on their brand-new Sussex Royal website, set the tone for months of hand-wringing among royal watchers, and the royal themselves. Some royal historians and commentators have claimed Harry and Meghan’s departure, and the historic fallout between Harry and *Prince William* was the closest the House of Windsor had come to a constitutional crisis since the death of Princess Diana.

Stories of rifts and family feuds continued to dominate the headlines for much of 2020, and Harry and Meghan’s side of the story was relayed in intimate detail in the biography _Finding Freedom__,_ published in July by authors *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand*. The book claimed to lift the lid on why the couple really quit the most famous family in the world, opening up old wounds and—in a dramatic twist—going on to be used against Meghan in her high profile court case against the _Mail on Sunday_, which the Duchess is suing for breach of privacy and copyright.

“Every step of the way there have been unexpected challenges,” said Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors. “They have had to go up against a lot—the press, their legal battles and even the institution of the monarchy—but they’ve remained positive and it’s the support they give each other and their focus on what’s important that gets them through.”

In late November Meghan wrote an op-ed for the _New York Times_ revealing a heartbreak that had previously been private— a miscarriage that happened in July. “This year has brought so many of us to our breaking points,” she wrote in the piece. “So, this Thanksgiving, 'let us commit to asking others, ‘Are you OK?’”

“I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “The tragedy of losing a baby is something that takes people time to move forward from but they are doing that together.”






Meghan and Harry at the Mountbatten Music Festival in London in early March, one of their final public appearances of the year. FROM GETTY IMAGES. 

Though the launch of their charitable foundation Archewell has been delayed, they have stayed engaged with their various charities, and made a handful of public appearances supporting Los Angeles-area charities, including the gang intervention program Homeboy Industries. “The pandemic has affected their plans but it hasn’t changed things as dramatically as one might think,” Scobie said. “I was told that the best part of the year was going to be a listening period for them and a chance to get to know key players in the philanthropic sphere in the US, research social issues and to then make smart decisions for what will be their life long legacy.”

But like so many other people, the Sussexes have also been frustrated by their inability to connect with others face-to-face. “Covid has had an impact on their work—it has meant that they haven’t been able to be on the ground the way they planned to be,” confirmed a friend. “They value being able to connect with people in person. That’s why they’ve done various bits of volunteering, some of which were public while some have remained private.”

The couple, who left the royal family partly to become financially independent, were also forced to figure out how to earn an income. They signed with the prestigious Harry Walker speaking agency in LA in June, but thanks to the pandemic there were no bookings. But they pivoted successfully to their multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, which enabled them to repay the Sovereign Grant the millions of pounds spent on refurnishing their Windsor home in which they lived for less than a year.

Harry and Meghan made a point of being more visible in Los Angeles throughout the summer and fall, with Meghan speaking out about the murder of George Floyd in a video address to her alma mater, and both of them speaking up about the importance of voting in a video for the _Time 100._ The recognition of the American election ruffled feathers in the media and at the palace, with Harry revealing publicly for the first time that he had never been able to vote in Britain, and Meghan urging Americans to exercise their ********ic right. It was clear, however, that the Sussexes were finding their feet, and using their newfound freedom to speak out about the issues they care about.

It is a theme we will see more of in 2021, according to those close to them. “We will see more of them and in a different way to how we saw them as working royals,” said a source. “It will be more in line with who they are and the way they want to operate from now on.”

Harry and Meghan recently recruited a new PR team on the west coast, and are expected to be making more detailed announcements regarding their charity Archewell in the near future. “I think they are very excited about what’s to come,” added the friend. “There’s so much people didn’t expect them to be able to do, but they are seeing out the year in their new home with Archie with a very significant deal with Netflix under their belts. They actually feel excited about the potential and standing on their own two feet.”

While there have been fleeting moments of homesickness for Harry, not least when *Prince Charles* and William were diagnosed with Covid earlier in the year, those close to them say there is little he misses about England. “There are certain things he misses, but nothing so much that he regrets moving,” said the friend. “He’s found a kindred spirit in Meghan, they are creating a new life. That’s so very exciting for them both.”

Much to the relief of the royal family, Harry’s relationship with William is said to be “much better than it was.” The brothers are in regular contact, and the Sussexes have sent Christmas gifts to the Cambridge family. “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas,” said the friend.

Meanwhile Harry and Meghan will be enjoying a quiet Christmas in their new home with Meghan’s mother *Doria Ragland*. Meghan is overseeing the menu and will be cooking on the day.

“I think they’re excited and optimistic about 2021 when everything will come to realization,” Scobie said. “We’ll see the fruits of their labour— Archewell, Netflix. I think it’s the year we will get to see what their legacy will be.”

After a long year of planning, setting down new roots, and adapting to their new post-royal reality, Meghan and Harry are likely to emerge in a major way in the new year. Sobie continued, “There has been a lot of talk about what they’re working on, but 2021 is when they actually get to start showing us.”








						After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021
					

According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Gag. If _Vanity Fair_ was Pinocchio it's nose would be a mile long. Soooo many lies and butt kissing. If anyone still has a subscription to this rag, cancel it now.
> 
> DO NOT READ THIS if you are getting ready to eat a meal. You will lose your appetite.
> 
> *After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021*
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> It’s been a universally tough year for everybody,” *Prince Harry* said recently, neatly summing up the global mood. But Harry’s comments also seemed deeply personal in the wake of what’s been a particularly tough and challenging year for the Sussexes— one a friend of the couple has appropriately described as a rollercoaster.
> 
> From two international moves to a high-profile tabloid to a devastating miscarriage this summer, 2020 is one the Sussexes will likely look back on with mixed emotions. For all the highs—watching their much-loved son *Archie* turn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary, moving into their dream home in California, and signing a lucrative multi-million dollar deal with Netflix—there have been some challenging and deeply testing moments too
> 
> “It’s been a big year for sure and one that has been a rollercoaster,” said a friend of the couple’s. “2020 has seen them leave the royal family, leave Britain and move to LA to their dream home where they are finally able to lay down new roots.”
> 
> No one knew on January 8, when Harry and Meghan first announced they were stepping down as senior royals, what a turbulent year would follow. But their bombshell statement, posted on their brand-new Sussex Royal website, set the tone for months of hand-wringing among royal watchers, and the royal themselves. Some royal historians and commentators have claimed Harry and Meghan’s departure, and the historic fallout between Harry and *Prince William* was the closest the House of Windsor had come to a constitutional crisis since the death of Princess Diana.
> 
> Stories of rifts and family feuds continued to dominate the headlines for much of 2020, and Harry and Meghan’s side of the story was relayed in intimate detail in the biography _Finding Freedom__,_ published in July by authors *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand*. The book claimed to lift the lid on why the couple really quit the most famous family in the world, opening up old wounds and—in a dramatic twist—going on to be used against Meghan in her high profile court case against the _Mail on Sunday_, which the Duchess is suing for breach of privacy and copyright.
> 
> “Every step of the way there have been unexpected challenges,” said Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors. “They have had to go up against a lot—the press, their legal battles and even the institution of the monarchy—but they’ve remained positive and it’s the support they give each other and their focus on what’s important that gets them through.”
> 
> In late November Meghan wrote an op-ed for the _New York Times_ revealing a heartbreak that had previously been private— a miscarriage that happened in July. “This year has brought so many of us to our breaking points,” she wrote in the piece. “So, this Thanksgiving, 'let us commit to asking others, ‘Are you OK?’”
> 
> “I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “The tragedy of losing a baby is something that takes people time to move forward from but they are doing that together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry at the Mountbatten Music Festival in London in early March, one of their final public appearances of the year. FROM GETTY IMAGES.
> 
> Though the launch of their charitable foundation Archewell has been delayed, they have stayed engaged with their various charities, and made a handful of public appearances supporting Los Angeles-area charities, including the gang intervention program Homeboy Industries. “The pandemic has affected their plans but it hasn’t changed things as dramatically as one might think,” Scobie said. “I was told that the best part of the year was going to be a listening period for them and a chance to get to know key players in the philanthropic sphere in the US, research social issues and to then make smart decisions for what will be their life long legacy.”
> 
> But like so many other people, the Sussexes have also been frustrated by their inability to connect with others face-to-face. “Covid has had an impact on their work—it has meant that they haven’t been able to be on the ground the way they planned to be,” confirmed a friend. “They value being able to connect with people in person. That’s why they’ve done various bits of volunteering, some of which were public while some have remained private.”
> 
> The couple, who left the royal family partly to become financially independent, were also forced to figure out how to earn an income. They signed with the prestigious Harry Walker speaking agency in LA in June, but thanks to the pandemic there were no bookings. But they pivoted successfully to their multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, which enabled them to repay the Sovereign Grant the millions of pounds spent on refurnishing their Windsor home in which they lived for less than a year.
> 
> Harry and Meghan made a point of being more visible in Los Angeles throughout the summer and fall, with Meghan speaking out about the murder of George Floyd in a video address to her alma mater, and both of them speaking up about the importance of voting in a video for the _Time 100._ The recognition of the American election ruffled feathers in the media and at the palace, with Harry revealing publicly for the first time that he had never been able to vote in Britain, and Meghan urging Americans to exercise their ********ic right. It was clear, however, that the Sussexes were finding their feet, and using their newfound freedom to speak out about the issues they care about.
> 
> It is a theme we will see more of in 2021, according to those close to them. “We will see more of them and in a different way to how we saw them as working royals,” said a source. “It will be more in line with who they are and the way they want to operate from now on.”
> 
> Harry and Meghan recently recruited a new PR team on the west coast, and are expected to be making more detailed announcements regarding their charity Archewell in the near future. “I think they are very excited about what’s to come,” added the friend. “There’s so much people didn’t expect them to be able to do, but they are seeing out the year in their new home with Archie with a very significant deal with Netflix under their belts. They actually feel excited about the potential and standing on their own two feet.”
> 
> While there have been fleeting moments of homesickness for Harry, not least when *Prince Charles* and William were diagnosed with Covid earlier in the year, those close to them say there is little he misses about England. “There are certain things he misses, but nothing so much that he regrets moving,” said the friend. “He’s found a kindred spirit in Meghan, they are creating a new life. That’s so very exciting for them both.”
> 
> Much to the relief of the royal family, Harry’s relationship with William is said to be “much better than it was.” The brothers are in regular contact, and the Sussexes have sent Christmas gifts to the Cambridge family. “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas,” said the friend.
> 
> Meanwhile Harry and Meghan will be enjoying a quiet Christmas in their new home with Meghan’s mother *Doria Ragland*. Meghan is overseeing the menu and will be cooking on the day.
> 
> “I think they’re excited and optimistic about 2021 when everything will come to realization,” Scobie said. “We’ll see the fruits of their labour— Archewell, Netflix. I think it’s the year we will get to see what their legacy will be.”
> 
> After a long year of planning, setting down new roots, and adapting to their new post-royal reality, Meghan and Harry are likely to emerge in a major way in the new year. Sobie continued, “There has been a lot of talk about what they’re working on, but 2021 is when they actually get to start showing us.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021
> 
> 
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



What I find most hard to believe about this article is that they have any 'friends'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have no words.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> What I find most hard to believe about this article is that they have any 'friends'.



They use that word because it sounds nicer than "hangers-on." (Waving at Scobie!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

So happy to hear they are ready _to finally start building their post-royal legacy._
Someone needs to put $100 in the Big Lie Jar.   Waving at you, H&M  

Gawd, “post-Royal legacy”.   In the real estate world, it is known as  the retiree’s “encore career”.  LOL


----------



## csshopper

More like they need to abandon their current post royal “legacy“ and start over. They are the butt of jokes, can’t sell magazines with their pictures on the cover, or  biscuits in the sale bin. So lacking in credibility even a miscarriage is Questioned.

Most recently some brilliant work by the Real royals has demonstrated they are not anywhere near accomplishing anything meaningful, and they have nothing to contribute compared to the Royal 8 in the photo op the other day.

How ironic to be lumped together in a sub set with Andrew.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_








						Prince Andrew's alibi falls apart: Hole in 'Pizza Express' excuse
					

Prince Andrew's Pizza Express 'alibi' is in tatters following a bombshell Daily Mail investigation. We can reveal astonishing details about the day he is alleged to have slept with accuser Virginia Roberts.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
just going to leave this here


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Gag. If _Vanity Fair_ was Pinocchio it's nose would be a mile long. Soooo many lies and butt kissing. If anyone still has a subscription to this rag, cancel it now.
> 
> DO NOT READ THIS if you are getting ready to eat a meal. You will lose your appetite.
> 
> *After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021*
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> It’s been a universally tough year for everybody,” *Prince Harry* said recently, neatly summing up the global mood. But Harry’s comments also seemed deeply personal in the wake of what’s been a particularly tough and challenging year for the Sussexes— one a friend of the couple has appropriately described as a rollercoaster.
> 
> From two international moves to a high-profile tabloid to a devastating miscarriage this summer, 2020 is one the Sussexes will likely look back on with mixed emotions. For all the highs—watching their much-loved son *Archie* turn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary, moving into their dream home in California, and signing a lucrative multi-million dollar deal with Netflix—there have been some challenging and deeply testing moments too
> 
> “It’s been a big year for sure and one that has been a rollercoaster,” said a friend of the couple’s. “2020 has seen them leave the royal family, leave Britain and move to LA to their dream home where they are finally able to lay down new roots.”
> 
> No one knew on January 8, when Harry and Meghan first announced they were stepping down as senior royals, what a turbulent year would follow. But their bombshell statement, posted on their brand-new Sussex Royal website, set the tone for months of hand-wringing among royal watchers, and the royal themselves. Some royal historians and commentators have claimed Harry and Meghan’s departure, and the historic fallout between Harry and *Prince William* was the closest the House of Windsor had come to a constitutional crisis since the death of Princess Diana.
> 
> Stories of rifts and family feuds continued to dominate the headlines for much of 2020, and Harry and Meghan’s side of the story was relayed in intimate detail in the biography _Finding Freedom__,_ published in July by authors *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand*. The book claimed to lift the lid on why the couple really quit the most famous family in the world, opening up old wounds and—in a dramatic twist—going on to be used against Meghan in her high profile court case against the _Mail on Sunday_, which the Duchess is suing for breach of privacy and copyright.
> 
> “Every step of the way there have been unexpected challenges,” said Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors. “They have had to go up against a lot—the press, their legal battles and even the institution of the monarchy—but they’ve remained positive and it’s the support they give each other and their focus on what’s important that gets them through.”
> 
> In late November Meghan wrote an op-ed for the _New York Times_ revealing a heartbreak that had previously been private— a miscarriage that happened in July. “This year has brought so many of us to our breaking points,” she wrote in the piece. “So, this Thanksgiving, 'let us commit to asking others, ‘Are you OK?’”
> 
> “I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “The tragedy of losing a baby is something that takes people time to move forward from but they are doing that together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry at the Mountbatten Music Festival in London in early March, one of their final public appearances of the year. FROM GETTY IMAGES.
> 
> Though the launch of their charitable foundation Archewell has been delayed, they have stayed engaged with their various charities, and made a handful of public appearances supporting Los Angeles-area charities, including the gang intervention program Homeboy Industries. “The pandemic has affected their plans but it hasn’t changed things as dramatically as one might think,” Scobie said. “I was told that the best part of the year was going to be a listening period for them and a chance to get to know key players in the philanthropic sphere in the US, research social issues and to then make smart decisions for what will be their life long legacy.”
> 
> But like so many other people, the Sussexes have also been frustrated by their inability to connect with others face-to-face. “Covid has had an impact on their work—it has meant that they haven’t been able to be on the ground the way they planned to be,” confirmed a friend. “They value being able to connect with people in person. That’s why they’ve done various bits of volunteering, some of which were public while some have remained private.”
> 
> The couple, who left the royal family partly to become financially independent, were also forced to figure out how to earn an income. They signed with the prestigious Harry Walker speaking agency in LA in June, but thanks to the pandemic there were no bookings. But they pivoted successfully to their multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, which enabled them to repay the Sovereign Grant the millions of pounds spent on refurnishing their Windsor home in which they lived for less than a year.
> 
> Harry and Meghan made a point of being more visible in Los Angeles throughout the summer and fall, with Meghan speaking out about the murder of George Floyd in a video address to her alma mater, and both of them speaking up about the importance of voting in a video for the _Time 100._ The recognition of the American election ruffled feathers in the media and at the palace, with Harry revealing publicly for the first time that he had never been able to vote in Britain, and Meghan urging Americans to exercise their ********ic right. It was clear, however, that the Sussexes were finding their feet, and using their newfound freedom to speak out about the issues they care about.
> 
> It is a theme we will see more of in 2021, according to those close to them. “We will see more of them and in a different way to how we saw them as working royals,” said a source. “It will be more in line with who they are and the way they want to operate from now on.”
> 
> Harry and Meghan recently recruited a new PR team on the west coast, and are expected to be making more detailed announcements regarding their charity Archewell in the near future. “I think they are very excited about what’s to come,” added the friend. “There’s so much people didn’t expect them to be able to do, but they are seeing out the year in their new home with Archie with a very significant deal with Netflix under their belts. They actually feel excited about the potential and standing on their own two feet.”
> 
> While there have been fleeting moments of homesickness for Harry, not least when *Prince Charles* and William were diagnosed with Covid earlier in the year, those close to them say there is little he misses about England. “There are certain things he misses, but nothing so much that he regrets moving,” said the friend. “He’s found a kindred spirit in Meghan, they are creating a new life. That’s so very exciting for them both.”
> 
> Much to the relief of the royal family, Harry’s relationship with William is said to be “much better than it was.” The brothers are in regular contact, and the Sussexes have sent Christmas gifts to the Cambridge family. “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas,” said the friend.
> 
> Meanwhile Harry and Meghan will be enjoying a quiet Christmas in their new home with Meghan’s mother *Doria Ragland*. Meghan is overseeing the menu and will be cooking on the day.
> 
> “I think they’re excited and optimistic about 2021 when everything will come to realization,” Scobie said. “We’ll see the fruits of their labour— Archewell, Netflix. I think it’s the year we will get to see what their legacy will be.”
> 
> After a long year of planning, setting down new roots, and adapting to their new post-royal reality, Meghan and Harry are likely to emerge in a major way in the new year. Sobie continued, “There has been a lot of talk about what they’re working on, but 2021 is when they actually get to start showing us.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021
> 
> 
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com




"Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors."  

“I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “

The 2 sentences above made me .  Scobie and MM deserve each other.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why does VF use him?  They must be desperate for clicks.


ETA:  I missed this article in 2018 about the woman in orange at the wedding.  It’s a bit gross in retrospect.  Seems MM’s closest BFFs really are the Hwood crowd. 








						The mysterious woman in orange at the royal wedding has been unmasked
					

The woman dubbed “best dressed at the royal wedding” has finally come forward.




					www.vogue.com.au
				




Speaking to _ITV_, Gavankar went on to describe how good a friend Markle actually is, saying the pair were texting the night before her wedding. Yes, she was texting a future royal bride just hours before she was meant to be wed. 

"We were texting last night, which is crazy,” she said on the way into the ceremony. “If it were me I would not have any space for anything other than this. But it's pretty usual. It's not surprising. Meghan has so much space in her heart for all of the people that she loves.”


----------



## sdkitty

Cavalier Girl said:


> Call me crazy (and, I know most of you will), but I think she genuinely loves him.  Meghan has beautiful eyes, and they're expressive.  It's her words that make me cringe.


I won't call you crazy and I will admit I'm biased but she doesn't strike me as capable of loving anyone but herself


----------



## Annawakes

_For all the highs—watching their much-loved son Archieturn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary...._

celebrating their own birthdays is a high?  Everyone celebrates their own birthday.  They’re really grasping there, trying to make their miserable lives sound positive.


----------



## CeeJay

Cavalier Girl said:


> Call me crazy (and, I know most of you will), but I think she genuinely loves him.  Meghan has beautiful eyes, and they're expressive.  It's her words that make me cringe.


Honestly, I don’t think she is capable of being truly in love with someone. She has spent her life scheming and markle-ing everyone who has been able to give her a step up. She got the ultimate score with Harry, but she is really only “in love” with herself and how she is perceived.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Gag. If _Vanity Fair_ was Pinocchio it's nose would be a mile long. Soooo many lies and butt kissing. If anyone still has a subscription to this rag, cancel it now.
> 
> DO NOT READ THIS if you are getting ready to eat a meal. You will lose your appetite.
> 
> *After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021*
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> It’s been a universally tough year for everybody,” *Prince Harry* said recently, neatly summing up the global mood. But Harry’s comments also seemed deeply personal in the wake of what’s been a particularly tough and challenging year for the Sussexes— one a friend of the couple has appropriately described as a rollercoaster.
> 
> From two international moves to a high-profile tabloid to a devastating miscarriage this summer, 2020 is one the Sussexes will likely look back on with mixed emotions. For all the highs—watching their much-loved son *Archie* turn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary, moving into their dream home in California, and signing a lucrative multi-million dollar deal with Netflix—there have been some challenging and deeply testing moments too
> 
> “It’s been a big year for sure and one that has been a rollercoaster,” said a friend of the couple’s. “2020 has seen them leave the royal family, leave Britain and move to LA to their dream home where they are finally able to lay down new roots.”
> 
> No one knew on January 8, when Harry and Meghan first announced they were stepping down as senior royals, what a turbulent year would follow. But their bombshell statement, posted on their brand-new Sussex Royal website, set the tone for months of hand-wringing among royal watchers, and the royal themselves. Some royal historians and commentators have claimed Harry and Meghan’s departure, and the historic fallout between Harry and *Prince William* was the closest the House of Windsor had come to a constitutional crisis since the death of Princess Diana.
> 
> Stories of rifts and family feuds continued to dominate the headlines for much of 2020, and Harry and Meghan’s side of the story was relayed in intimate detail in the biography _Finding Freedom__,_ published in July by authors *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand*. The book claimed to lift the lid on why the couple really quit the most famous family in the world, opening up old wounds and—in a dramatic twist—going on to be used against Meghan in her high profile court case against the _Mail on Sunday_, which the Duchess is suing for breach of privacy and copyright.
> 
> “Every step of the way there have been unexpected challenges,” said Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors. “They have had to go up against a lot—the press, their legal battles and even the institution of the monarchy—but they’ve remained positive and it’s the support they give each other and their focus on what’s important that gets them through.”
> 
> In late November Meghan wrote an op-ed for the _New York Times_ revealing a heartbreak that had previously been private— a miscarriage that happened in July. “This year has brought so many of us to our breaking points,” she wrote in the piece. “So, this Thanksgiving, 'let us commit to asking others, ‘Are you OK?’”
> 
> “I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “The tragedy of losing a baby is something that takes people time to move forward from but they are doing that together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry at the Mountbatten Music Festival in London in early March, one of their final public appearances of the year. FROM GETTY IMAGES.
> 
> Though the launch of their charitable foundation Archewell has been delayed, they have stayed engaged with their various charities, and made a handful of public appearances supporting Los Angeles-area charities, including the gang intervention program Homeboy Industries. “The pandemic has affected their plans but it hasn’t changed things as dramatically as one might think,” Scobie said. “I was told that the best part of the year was going to be a listening period for them and a chance to get to know key players in the philanthropic sphere in the US, research social issues and to then make smart decisions for what will be their life long legacy.”
> 
> But like so many other people, the Sussexes have also been frustrated by their inability to connect with others face-to-face. “Covid has had an impact on their work—it has meant that they haven’t been able to be on the ground the way they planned to be,” confirmed a friend. “They value being able to connect with people in person. That’s why they’ve done various bits of volunteering, some of which were public while some have remained private.”
> 
> The couple, who left the royal family partly to become financially independent, were also forced to figure out how to earn an income. They signed with the prestigious Harry Walker speaking agency in LA in June, but thanks to the pandemic there were no bookings. But they pivoted successfully to their multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, which enabled them to repay the Sovereign Grant the millions of pounds spent on refurnishing their Windsor home in which they lived for less than a year.
> 
> Harry and Meghan made a point of being more visible in Los Angeles throughout the summer and fall, with Meghan speaking out about the murder of George Floyd in a video address to her alma mater, and both of them speaking up about the importance of voting in a video for the _Time 100._ The recognition of the American election ruffled feathers in the media and at the palace, with Harry revealing publicly for the first time that he had never been able to vote in Britain, and Meghan urging Americans to exercise their ********ic right. It was clear, however, that the Sussexes were finding their feet, and using their newfound freedom to speak out about the issues they care about.
> 
> It is a theme we will see more of in 2021, according to those close to them. “We will see more of them and in a different way to how we saw them as working royals,” said a source. “It will be more in line with who they are and the way they want to operate from now on.”
> 
> Harry and Meghan recently recruited a new PR team on the west coast, and are expected to be making more detailed announcements regarding their charity Archewell in the near future. “I think they are very excited about what’s to come,” added the friend. “There’s so much people didn’t expect them to be able to do, but they are seeing out the year in their new home with Archie with a very significant deal with Netflix under their belts. They actually feel excited about the potential and standing on their own two feet.”
> 
> While there have been fleeting moments of homesickness for Harry, not least when *Prince Charles* and William were diagnosed with Covid earlier in the year, those close to them say there is little he misses about England. “There are certain things he misses, but nothing so much that he regrets moving,” said the friend. “He’s found a kindred spirit in Meghan, they are creating a new life. That’s so very exciting for them both.”
> 
> Much to the relief of the royal family, Harry’s relationship with William is said to be “much better than it was.” The brothers are in regular contact, and the Sussexes have sent Christmas gifts to the Cambridge family. “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas,” said the friend.
> 
> Meanwhile Harry and Meghan will be enjoying a quiet Christmas in their new home with Meghan’s mother *Doria Ragland*. Meghan is overseeing the menu and will be cooking on the day.
> 
> “I think they’re excited and optimistic about 2021 when everything will come to realization,” Scobie said. “We’ll see the fruits of their labour— Archewell, Netflix. I think it’s the year we will get to see what their legacy will be.”
> 
> After a long year of planning, setting down new roots, and adapting to their new post-royal reality, Meghan and Harry are likely to emerge in a major way in the new year. Sobie continued, “There has been a lot of talk about what they’re working on, but 2021 is when they actually get to start showing us.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021
> 
> 
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Oh, I see it’s the “FRIENDS” again!  What the F would they know about H&M’s “relationship” with the BRF and what will happen in 2021!  *Not buying this one bit!  *


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> "Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors."
> 
> “I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “
> 
> The 2 sentences above made me .  Scobie and MM deserve each other.


In addition to kissing her a$$, does he wipe it too?!?  Never mind, I answered my own question!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Gag. If _Vanity Fair_ was Pinocchio it's nose would be a mile long. Soooo many lies and butt kissing. If anyone still has a subscription to this rag, cancel it now.
> 
> DO NOT READ THIS if you are getting ready to eat a meal. You will lose your appetite.
> 
> *After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021*
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> It’s been a universally tough year for everybody,” *Prince Harry* said recently, neatly summing up the global mood. But Harry’s comments also seemed deeply personal in the wake of what’s been a particularly tough and challenging year for the Sussexes— one a friend of the couple has appropriately described as a rollercoaster.
> 
> From two international moves to a high-profile tabloid to a devastating miscarriage this summer, 2020 is one the Sussexes will likely look back on with mixed emotions. For all the highs—watching their much-loved son *Archie* turn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary, moving into their dream home in California, and signing a lucrative multi-million dollar deal with Netflix—there have been some challenging and deeply testing moments too
> 
> “It’s been a big year for sure and one that has been a rollercoaster,” said a friend of the couple’s. “2020 has seen them leave the royal family, leave Britain and move to LA to their dream home where they are finally able to lay down new roots.”
> 
> No one knew on January 8, when Harry and Meghan first announced they were stepping down as senior royals, what a turbulent year would follow. But their bombshell statement, posted on their brand-new Sussex Royal website, set the tone for months of hand-wringing among royal watchers, and the royal themselves. Some royal historians and commentators have claimed Harry and Meghan’s departure, and the historic fallout between Harry and *Prince William* was the closest the House of Windsor had come to a constitutional crisis since the death of Princess Diana.
> 
> Stories of rifts and family feuds continued to dominate the headlines for much of 2020, and Harry and Meghan’s side of the story was relayed in intimate detail in the biography _Finding Freedom__,_ published in July by authors *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand*. The book claimed to lift the lid on why the couple really quit the most famous family in the world, opening up old wounds and—in a dramatic twist—going on to be used against Meghan in her high profile court case against the _Mail on Sunday_, which the Duchess is suing for breach of privacy and copyright.
> 
> “Every step of the way there have been unexpected challenges,” said Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors. “They have had to go up against a lot—the press, their legal battles and even the institution of the monarchy—but they’ve remained positive and it’s the support they give each other and their focus on what’s important that gets them through.”
> 
> In late November Meghan wrote an op-ed for the _New York Times_ revealing a heartbreak that had previously been private— a miscarriage that happened in July. “This year has brought so many of us to our breaking points,” she wrote in the piece. “So, this Thanksgiving, 'let us commit to asking others, ‘Are you OK?’”
> 
> “I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “The tragedy of losing a baby is something that takes people time to move forward from but they are doing that together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry at the Mountbatten Music Festival in London in early March, one of their final public appearances of the year. FROM GETTY IMAGES.
> 
> Though the launch of their charitable foundation Archewell has been delayed, they have stayed engaged with their various charities, and made a handful of public appearances supporting Los Angeles-area charities, including the gang intervention program Homeboy Industries. “The pandemic has affected their plans but it hasn’t changed things as dramatically as one might think,” Scobie said. “I was told that the best part of the year was going to be a listening period for them and a chance to get to know key players in the philanthropic sphere in the US, research social issues and to then make smart decisions for what will be their life long legacy.”
> 
> But like so many other people, the Sussexes have also been frustrated by their inability to connect with others face-to-face. “Covid has had an impact on their work—it has meant that they haven’t been able to be on the ground the way they planned to be,” confirmed a friend. “They value being able to connect with people in person. That’s why they’ve done various bits of volunteering, some of which were public while some have remained private.”
> 
> The couple, who left the royal family partly to become financially independent, were also forced to figure out how to earn an income. They signed with the prestigious Harry Walker speaking agency in LA in June, but thanks to the pandemic there were no bookings. But they pivoted successfully to their multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, which enabled them to repay the Sovereign Grant the millions of pounds spent on refurnishing their Windsor home in which they lived for less than a year.
> 
> Harry and Meghan made a point of being more visible in Los Angeles throughout the summer and fall, with Meghan speaking out about the murder of George Floyd in a video address to her alma mater, and both of them speaking up about the importance of voting in a video for the _Time 100._ The recognition of the American election ruffled feathers in the media and at the palace, with Harry revealing publicly for the first time that he had never been able to vote in Britain, and Meghan urging Americans to exercise their ********ic right. It was clear, however, that the Sussexes were finding their feet, and using their newfound freedom to speak out about the issues they care about.
> 
> It is a theme we will see more of in 2021, according to those close to them. “We will see more of them and in a different way to how we saw them as working royals,” said a source. “It will be more in line with who they are and the way they want to operate from now on.”
> 
> Harry and Meghan recently recruited a new PR team on the west coast, and are expected to be making more detailed announcements regarding their charity Archewell in the near future. “I think they are very excited about what’s to come,” added the friend. “There’s so much people didn’t expect them to be able to do, but they are seeing out the year in their new home with Archie with a very significant deal with Netflix under their belts. They actually feel excited about the potential and standing on their own two feet.”
> 
> While there have been fleeting moments of homesickness for Harry, not least when *Prince Charles* and William were diagnosed with Covid earlier in the year, those close to them say there is little he misses about England. “There are certain things he misses, but nothing so much that he regrets moving,” said the friend. “He’s found a kindred spirit in Meghan, they are creating a new life. That’s so very exciting for them both.”
> 
> Much to the relief of the royal family, Harry’s relationship with William is said to be “much better than it was.” The brothers are in regular contact, and the Sussexes have sent Christmas gifts to the Cambridge family. “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas,” said the friend.
> 
> Meanwhile Harry and Meghan will be enjoying a quiet Christmas in their new home with Meghan’s mother *Doria Ragland*. Meghan is overseeing the menu and will be cooking on the day.
> 
> “I think they’re excited and optimistic about 2021 when everything will come to realization,” Scobie said. “We’ll see the fruits of their labour— Archewell, Netflix. I think it’s the year we will get to see what their legacy will be.”
> 
> After a long year of planning, setting down new roots, and adapting to their new post-royal reality, Meghan and Harry are likely to emerge in a major way in the new year. Sobie continued, “There has been a lot of talk about what they’re working on, but 2021 is when they actually get to start showing us.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021
> 
> 
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com




Oof, it’s so obvious she wrote all those quotes


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Oof, it’s so obvious she wrote all those quotes


They think they if they keep bombarding us with this crap that it will be believed.


----------



## Chanbal

Does this mean that MM&H are going to spend some time at Frogmore? They had their belongings  removed from the house not long ago... very weird   

*Pregnant Princess Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank 'QUIT Frogmore Cottage just six weeks after Harry and Meghan loaned it to them to start their own family'*

Pregnant Princess Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank have mysteriously quit Frogmore Cottage just six weeks after Harry and Meghan loaned it to them 'to start their own family'. 

Eugenie, 30, and her husband Jack Brooksbank, 34, moved into the five-bedroom home in Windsor in November after a direct arrangement with the Sussexes.

Now, just six weeks later, they have quit the Grade-II listed house and moved back to Kensington Palace, according to The Sun. 

A source said Harry and Meghan will retain Frogmore Cottage as their home in Britain, and suggested when visiting the UK they will share it with Eugenie and Mr Brooksbank.

However, Princess Eugenie has packed up and moved back to London after only six weeks in the cottage and was spotted shopping in Kensington, west London, ten days ago.

The unsolved mystery of Frogmore


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sounds about right. 

Duchess ‘only stayed a royal for as long as was necessary for her desired life’ says insider

"MEGHAN Markle “only stayed in the royal family as long as was necessary to secure the life she desired” a royal commentator has claimed.


Speaking to the Express Howard Hodgson claimed that the Duchess of Sussex’s two-year stint as a working royal had been deliberately short.



He said: “(Meghan) was very determined, had been advancing her career, was a minor star before she met a royal prince, married a royal prince, stayed as long as is decent in the country she didn’t want to be in doing jobs she didn’t want to do.


“Then there was a short trip to Canada, which was only very short because it was then going to get her back to exactly where she wanted — where she now is, and doing what she wants to do.


“Harry is just being dragged along and will probably, if he’s not very careful, end up with the senselessly sad life that was that of the Duke of Windsor.”"


----------



## Aimee3

I’m more curious why Eugénie suddenly moved out of Frogmore!  Is it haunted?


----------



## Annawakes

Eugenia probably didn’t want to have to share frog more with them, if it’s true they were going to visit.  Why put up with them?  Might as well move out and go back to KP.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Eugenia probably didn’t want to have to share frog more with them, if it’s true they were going to visit.  Why put up with them?  Might as well move out and go back to KP.



Could be the were only there while Covid restrictions were in-place. They were severely constricting life in London and the SE. Follows the timeline.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I’m more curious why Eugénie suddenly moved out of Frogmore!  Is it haunted?



Maybe she couldn’t take the media reporting that Harry and Meghan were letting her stay there, as if she were some  poor relation who needed help.  I don’t think it was reported like that in the UK but if she read some of the US nonsense…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if Eugenie’s move has more to do with Andrew?   Perhaps H&M are on their way back? 
Perhaps the media had the first move wrong?  We will never know the truth, will we?


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Does this mean that MM&H are going to spend some time at Frogmore? They had their belongings  removed from the house not long ago... very weird
> 
> *Pregnant Princess Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank 'QUIT Frogmore Cottage just six weeks after Harry and Meghan loaned it to them to start their own family'*
> 
> Pregnant Princess Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank have mysteriously quit Frogmore Cottage just six weeks after Harry and Meghan loaned it to them 'to start their own family'.
> 
> Eugenie, 30, and her husband Jack Brooksbank, 34, moved into the five-bedroom home in Windsor in November after a direct arrangement with the Sussexes.
> 
> Now, just six weeks later, they have quit the Grade-II listed house and moved back to Kensington Palace, according to The Sun.
> 
> A source said Harry and Meghan will retain Frogmore Cottage as their home in Britain, and suggested when visiting the UK they will share it with Eugenie and Mr Brooksbank.
> 
> However, Princess Eugenie has packed up and moved back to London after only six weeks in the cottage and was spotted shopping in Kensington, west London, ten days ago.
> 
> The unsolved mystery of Frogmore


Hmmmm .. so, could it be that this *LIE* (_like so many others_) in fact, never occurred??? .. so, H&M *never "loaned" out* Frogmore and/or *never "gave it" to* Princess Eugenie and her husband???  *How could that be?*  ...


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sounds about right.
> 
> Duchess ‘only stayed a royal for as long as was necessary for her desired life’ says insider
> 
> "MEGHAN Markle “only stayed in the royal family as long as was necessary to secure the life she desired” a royal commentator has claimed.
> 
> 
> Speaking to the Express Howard Hodgson claimed that the Duchess of Sussex’s two-year stint as a working royal had been deliberately short.
> 
> 
> 
> He said: “(Meghan) was very determined, had been advancing her career, was a minor star before she met a royal prince, married a royal prince, stayed as long as is decent in the country she didn’t want to be in doing jobs she didn’t want to do.
> 
> 
> “Then there was a short trip to Canada, which was only very short because it was then going to get her back to exactly where she wanted — where she now is, and doing what she wants to do.
> 
> 
> “Harry is just being dragged along and will probably, if he’s not very careful, end up with the senselessly sad life that was that of the Duke of Windsor.”"


Well, *FINALLY* someone got it RIGHT!!! .. this is *SPOT-ON*!


----------



## Aimee3

One of the comments in the DM said maybe Eugénie stayed at Frogmore while there were renovations being done for a nursery at her London home.  That sounds probable.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sure Scoooobie will be , and our ears will be filled with 

MEGHAN AND HARRY PHOTO IN THE RUNNING FOR BRITISH PHOTOGRAPHY AWARD

A photo of one of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's last royal outings is in the running for the 2021 British Photography Award.

After entries were collected from 5,354 photographers professional and amateur alike, competition was tough.

The competition accepts a broad range of photos from varying disciplines all over the world.

With the prize money being a donation to a charity of their choice, the entries captured this year in all its highs and lows.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> the entries *captured this year in all its highs and lows.*
> View attachment 4928054



It certainly captured the *raindrops*!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Gag. If _Vanity Fair_ was Pinocchio it's nose would be a mile long. Soooo many lies and butt kissing. If anyone still has a subscription to this rag, cancel it now.
> 
> DO NOT READ THIS if you are getting ready to eat a meal. You will lose your appetite.
> 
> *After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021*
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> It’s been a universally tough year for everybody,” *Prince Harry* said recently, neatly summing up the global mood. But Harry’s comments also seemed deeply personal in the wake of what’s been a particularly tough and challenging year for the Sussexes— one a friend of the couple has appropriately described as a rollercoaster.
> 
> From two international moves to a high-profile tabloid to a devastating miscarriage this summer, 2020 is one the Sussexes will likely look back on with mixed emotions. For all the highs—watching their much-loved son *Archie* turn one, celebrating their own birthdays and second wedding anniversary, moving into their dream home in California, and signing a lucrative multi-million dollar deal with Netflix—there have been some challenging and deeply testing moments too
> 
> “It’s been a big year for sure and one that has been a rollercoaster,” said a friend of the couple’s. “2020 has seen them leave the royal family, leave Britain and move to LA to their dream home where they are finally able to lay down new roots.”
> 
> No one knew on January 8, when Harry and Meghan first announced they were stepping down as senior royals, what a turbulent year would follow. But their bombshell statement, posted on their brand-new Sussex Royal website, set the tone for months of hand-wringing among royal watchers, and the royal themselves. Some royal historians and commentators have claimed Harry and Meghan’s departure, and the historic fallout between Harry and *Prince William* was the closest the House of Windsor had come to a constitutional crisis since the death of Princess Diana.
> 
> Stories of rifts and family feuds continued to dominate the headlines for much of 2020, and Harry and Meghan’s side of the story was relayed in intimate detail in the biography _Finding Freedom__,_ published in July by authors *Omid Scobie* and *Carolyn Durand*. The book claimed to lift the lid on why the couple really quit the most famous family in the world, opening up old wounds and—in a dramatic twist—going on to be used against Meghan in her high profile court case against the _Mail on Sunday_, which the Duchess is suing for breach of privacy and copyright.
> 
> “Every step of the way there have been unexpected challenges,” said Scobie, who provided a witness statement for Meghan’s legal team to confirm that she and Harry did not work directly with the authors. “They have had to go up against a lot—the press, their legal battles and even the institution of the monarchy—but they’ve remained positive and it’s the support they give each other and their focus on what’s important that gets them through.”
> 
> In late November Meghan wrote an op-ed for the _New York Times_ revealing a heartbreak that had previously been private— a miscarriage that happened in July. “This year has brought so many of us to our breaking points,” she wrote in the piece. “So, this Thanksgiving, 'let us commit to asking others, ‘Are you OK?’”
> 
> “I think being so open about what happened to them is their way of getting through the experience and hopefully helping others,” Scobie said. “The tragedy of losing a baby is something that takes people time to move forward from but they are doing that together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry at the Mountbatten Music Festival in London in early March, one of their final public appearances of the year. FROM GETTY IMAGES.
> 
> Though the launch of their charitable foundation Archewell has been delayed, they have stayed engaged with their various charities, and made a handful of public appearances supporting Los Angeles-area charities, including the gang intervention program Homeboy Industries. “The pandemic has affected their plans but it hasn’t changed things as dramatically as one might think,” Scobie said. “I was told that the best part of the year was going to be a listening period for them and a chance to get to know key players in the philanthropic sphere in the US, research social issues and to then make smart decisions for what will be their life long legacy.”
> 
> But like so many other people, the Sussexes have also been frustrated by their inability to connect with others face-to-face. “Covid has had an impact on their work—it has meant that they haven’t been able to be on the ground the way they planned to be,” confirmed a friend. “They value being able to connect with people in person. That’s why they’ve done various bits of volunteering, some of which were public while some have remained private.”
> 
> The couple, who left the royal family partly to become financially independent, were also forced to figure out how to earn an income. They signed with the prestigious Harry Walker speaking agency in LA in June, but thanks to the pandemic there were no bookings. But they pivoted successfully to their multi-million dollar deal with Netflix, which enabled them to repay the Sovereign Grant the millions of pounds spent on refurnishing their Windsor home in which they lived for less than a year.
> 
> Harry and Meghan made a point of being more visible in Los Angeles throughout the summer and fall, with Meghan speaking out about the murder of George Floyd in a video address to her alma mater, and both of them speaking up about the importance of voting in a video for the _Time 100._ The recognition of the American election ruffled feathers in the media and at the palace, with Harry revealing publicly for the first time that he had never been able to vote in Britain, and Meghan urging Americans to exercise their ********ic right. It was clear, however, that the Sussexes were finding their feet, and using their newfound freedom to speak out about the issues they care about.
> 
> It is a theme we will see more of in 2021, according to those close to them. “We will see more of them and in a different way to how we saw them as working royals,” said a source. “It will be more in line with who they are and the way they want to operate from now on.”
> 
> Harry and Meghan recently recruited a new PR team on the west coast, and are expected to be making more detailed announcements regarding their charity Archewell in the near future. “I think they are very excited about what’s to come,” added the friend. “There’s so much people didn’t expect them to be able to do, but they are seeing out the year in their new home with Archie with a very significant deal with Netflix under their belts. They actually feel excited about the potential and standing on their own two feet.”
> 
> While there have been fleeting moments of homesickness for Harry, not least when *Prince Charles* and William were diagnosed with Covid earlier in the year, those close to them say there is little he misses about England. “There are certain things he misses, but nothing so much that he regrets moving,” said the friend. “He’s found a kindred spirit in Meghan, they are creating a new life. That’s so very exciting for them both.”
> 
> Much to the relief of the royal family, Harry’s relationship with William is said to be “much better than it was.” The brothers are in regular contact, and the Sussexes have sent Christmas gifts to the Cambridge family. “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas,” said the friend.
> 
> Meanwhile Harry and Meghan will be enjoying a quiet Christmas in their new home with Meghan’s mother *Doria Ragland*. Meghan is overseeing the menu and will be cooking on the day.
> 
> “I think they’re excited and optimistic about 2021 when everything will come to realization,” Scobie said. “We’ll see the fruits of their labour— Archewell, Netflix. I think it’s the year we will get to see what their legacy will be.”
> 
> After a long year of planning, setting down new roots, and adapting to their new post-royal reality, Meghan and Harry are likely to emerge in a major way in the new year. Sobie continued, “There has been a lot of talk about what they’re working on, but 2021 is when they actually get to start showing us.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a Rollercoaster Year, Harry and Meghan Are On “Much Better” Terms With the Royal Family—And “Optimistic” About 2021
> 
> 
> According to friends, the Sussexes are ready to finally start building their post-royal legacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



I just hope they're OK.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> In addition to kissing her a$$, does he wipe it too?!?  Never mind, I answered my own question!!


I can imagine all the toilet paper holders in all 16 bathrooms.  He's got a lot of supplies to wipe it.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> I’m more curious why Eugénie suddenly moved out of Frogmore!  Is it haunted?


MM probably marked her territory in it by peeing in the corners of each room, thus endearing her to Harry evermore.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew's alibi falls apart: Hole in 'Pizza Express' excuse
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew's Pizza Express 'alibi' is in tatters following a bombshell Daily Mail investigation. We can reveal astonishing details about the day he is alleged to have slept with accuser Virginia Roberts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> just going to leave this here


And the DM reports Eugenie has moved out of Frogmore Cottage 

I never bought the story that E was there to stay permanently . It is the Queen's house and QEII might have allowed her to stay for a bit due to the pregnancy and all the complicated bubble system, currently in the UK. 
Perhaps someone at Kensington had COVID, and E wanted to avoid them for a bit ... 

OK, so, we still don't really know what is happening with FC long term


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> And the DM reports Eugenie has moved out of Frogmore Cottage
> 
> I never bought the story that E was there to stay permanently . It is the Queen's house and QEII might have allowed her to stay for a bit due to the pregnancy and all the complicated bubble system, currently in the UK.
> Perhaps someone at Kensington had COVID, and E wanted to avoid them for a bit ...
> 
> OK, so, we still don't really know what is happening with FC long term


if people move in and out so fast, I guess it's furnished ...they just bring their personal belongings?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> It certainly captured the *raindrops*!


*HA    !!! .. GOOD one!!!!!*  Maybe we should send the picture to Harry with the title "Raindrops"!!!


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> if people move in and out so fast, I guess it's furnished ...they just bring their personal belongings?


It will be listed on Airbnb next year


----------



## Sharont2305

If Meghan and Harry think they're having it tough they need to look at Harry's great grandmothers life. I'm watching another documentary about her, it's fascinating. Poor woman.


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Eugenia probably didn’t want to have to share frog more with them, if it’s true they were going to visit.  Why put up with them?  Might as well move out and go back to KP.


Then why have the rush of statements from the Harkles that they are lending it to her etc and will charge rent? I don't think we would have seen all this response for a short stay by Eugenie unless it was a deliberate tweak of the Harkles.  Either way, it looks like the Harkles have been pushed out of Frog Cot for good if the removal men were taking away their things.   I think the cottage is having some work done plus the Brooksbanks are spending the holidays with Bea and the parents.  We'll see if they go back after the first of the year.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> If Meghan and Harry think they're having it tough they need to look at Harry's great grandmothers life. I'm watching another documentary about her, it's fascinating. Poor woman.


Queen Mary?  Tough lady!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Queen Mary?  Tough lady!



I think it's Philip's mother, Princess Alice. Queen Mary would be Charles' great-grandmother.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I just hope they're OK.



 If they aren’t, you’d better believe we’ll hear about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> If Meghan and Harry think they're having it tough they need to look at Harry's great grandmothers life. I'm watching another documentary about her, it's fascinating. Poor woman.



They don't even have to look that far, Philip's childhood was harsh as well...his father off with one of his side pieces, not providing for his wife and five children, and after Alice was hospitalized this father of the year didn't want to take on Philip so he lived with different relatives before he went to boarding school.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Queen Mary?  Tough lady!


Princess Alice, Philips mother


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They don't even have to look that far, Philip's childhood was harsh as well...his father off with one of his side pieces, not providing for his wife and five children, and after Alice was hospitalized this father of the year didn't want to take on Philip so he lived with different relatives before he went to boarding school.


That's who I'm talking about, Princess Alice.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Then why have the rush of statements from the Harkles that they are lending it to her etc and will charge rent? I don't think we would have seen all this response for a short stay by Eugenie unless it was a deliberate tweak of the Harkles.  Either way, it looks like the Harkles have been pushed out of Frog Cot for good if the removal men were taking away their things.   I think the cottage is having some work done plus the Brooksbanks are spending the holidays with Bea and the parents.  We'll see if they go back after the first of the year.



If it is true that the Harkles's belongings were removed in the “dead of night” from Frogmore, I wouldn't be surprised if Eugenie was there just to help 'pushing' MM&H out...  Mission accomplished, back to London! Case closed!


----------



## Mendocino

Yad Vashem, The World Holocaust Remembrance Center, has honored her as one of The Righteous Among the Nations for having helped hide a Jewish family from the Nazis during WWll.  Such a brave lady. You can read about her here:
Yad Vashem's Biography of Princess Alice


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They don't even have to look that far, Philip's childhood was harsh as well...his father off with one of his side pieces, not providing for his wife and five children, and after Alice was hospitalized this father of the year didn't want to take on Philip so he lived with different relatives before he went to boarding school.



Lord Mountbatten was Princess Alice's brother. Mountbatten took over the father role when not at Gordonstoun


----------



## eunaddict

Chanbal said:


> Does this mean that MM&H are going to spend some time at Frogmore? They had their belongings  removed from the house not long ago... very weird
> 
> The unsolved mystery of Frogmore



Probably difficult "landlords". 

Or E and J are moving back to London for Christmas. Or it's a reno thing.

I still have my money on difficult "landlords", can't imagine it'd be any fun fielding middle of the night emails and whatsapp messages from someone trying to dictate how they can and cannot use the cottage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Mendocino said:


> Yad Vashem, The World Holocaust Remembrance Center, has honored her as one of The Righteous Among the Nations for having helped hide a Jewish family from the Nazis during WWll.  Such a brave lady. You can read about her here:
> Yad Vashem's Biography of Princess Alice


Yes, and I believe she is actually buried in Israel!


----------



## bag-mania

This article claimed that it was something they all worked out without informing the Queen or Charles. Not sure why that would make any difference or why she would have to move out. 

The original decision for Eugenie and Jack to move into Frogmore Cottage as they prepared for the birth of their first child was reportedly made without consulting the Queen, according to a November report from the Sun on Sunday.

"Senior royals were initially blindsided by the idea for Harry and Meg to let Eugenie and Jack move in," a royal source told the Sun at the time. "Obviously the Queen was told after the couples had spoken about the plan. But it is very much a deal done between Harry, Meghan, Eugenie and Jack. There is a close bond between them."


----------



## CarryOn2020

A done deal that came undone — The Undoing


----------



## rose60610

I find it difficult to believe that Eugenie moved into Frogmore without the Queen's knowledge. Or was this a typical M&H maneuver in the sense that since they "paid off" the renovations they then have every right to farm out Frogmore to anybody and everybody who needs a place to stay either long term or by the day? Moving out in six weeks? Where did they live before and why was that place unsuitable?  There's no shortage of Crown properties. I wouldn't put it past Meghan to have offered Frogmore as a seemingly gracious gesture only to "change her mind" about wanting it back, "Oopsie! You've got to go! I might return if I feel like it. I'm being nice about throwing you out now instead of five days before your baby is due". There's something weird going on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We will never know the truth. Eugenia has too much dignity to talk. Who would ever believe H&M if they decided to talk? 



rose60610 said:


> I find it difficult to believe that Eugenie moved into Frogmore without the Queen's knowledge. Or was this a typical M&H maneuver in the sense that since they "paid off" the renovations they then have every right to farm out Frogmore to anybody and everybody who needs a place to stay either long term or by the day? Moving out in six weeks? Where did they live before and why was that place unsuitable?  There's no shortage of Crown properties. I wouldn't put it past Meghan to have offered Frogmore as a seemingly gracious gesture only to "change her mind" about wanting it back, "Oopsie! You've got to go! I might return if I feel like it. I'm being nice about throwing you out now instead of five days before your baby is due". There's something weird going on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> I find it difficult to believe that Eugenie moved into Frogmore without the Queen's knowledge.



This, or that they share a close bond. MM has done everything in her power to destroy Harry's close relationships, and I doubt Eugenie has forgotten what the drama queen did on her wedding day.


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> A done deal that came undone — The Undoing



Side note: Hugh Grant coming apart at the seams in that car scene is the absolute BEST acting I have seen from him. So long mopey, love struck rom com star, hello walking DSM.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I find it difficult to believe that Eugenie moved into Frogmore without the Queen's knowledge. Or was this a typical M&H maneuver in the sense that since they "paid off" the renovations they then have every right to farm out Frogmore to anybody and everybody who needs a place to stay either long term or by the day? Moving out in six weeks? Where did they live before and why was that place unsuitable?  There's no shortage of Crown properties. I wouldn't put it past Meghan to have offered Frogmore as a seemingly gracious gesture only to "change her mind" about wanting it back, "Oopsie! You've got to go! I might return if I feel like it. I'm being nice about throwing you out now instead of five days before your baby is due". There's something weird going on.


Agree fishy, there was no NY Times op Ed about Frogmore Cottage, unconfirmed story


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> Side note: Hugh Grant coming apart at the seams in that car scene is the absolute BEST acting I have seen from him. So long mopey, love struck rom com star, hello walking DSM.


in spite of the fact that jon stewart said hugh grant was the worst guest ever on the daily show, I find him very amusing and charming. (must have had a bad day when he went there)

 I saw something online recently where he was talking about how he would look at people's comments (on twitter I think) about him in the undoing and then regret it ....people saying he looked 100 years old, etc.


----------



## RueMonge

Mendocino said:


> Yad Vashem, The World Holocaust Remembrance Center, has honored her as one of The Righteous Among the Nations for having helped hide a Jewish family from the Nazis during WWll.  Such a brave lady. You can read about her here:
> Yad Vashem's Biography of Princess Alice


Thank you, she is fascinating.

I think the only reason I come to this thread is for other bits of information about the royal family, not the fools in the title of the thread.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

RueMonge said:


> Thank you, she is fascinating.
> 
> I think the only reason I come to this thread is for other bits of information about the royal family, not the fools in the title of the thread.


Same here. RF Bios I've read seem such a long time ago. This is like a refresher course by very knowledgeable posters.


----------



## Mendocino

RueMonge said:


> Thank you, she is fascinating.
> 
> I think the only reason I come to this thread is for other bits of information about the royal family, not the fools in the title of the thread.


You're welcome! I would love to see a limited series based on her life.


----------



## Mendocino

Maggie Muggins said:


> Same here. RF Bios I've read seem such a long time ago. This is like a refresher course by very knowledgeable posters.


I learned something from reading that bio. I did not know that she was deaf.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mendocino said:


> I learned something from reading that bio. I did not know that she was deaf.


Something else I never knew was that she provided Philip with the diamonds from one of her tiaras to be made into The Queens engagement ring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Something else I never knew was that she provided Philip with the diamonds from one of her tiaras to be made into The Queens engagement ring.



And her wedding present, that stunning diamong bracelet (which Philip designed).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(that is Kate wearing it, but the Queen has worn it regularly throughout her marriage which I think is so romantic)


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Then why have the rush of statements from the Harkles that they are lending it to her etc and will charge rent? I don't think we would have seen all this response for a short stay by Eugenie unless it was a deliberate tweak of the Harkles.  Either way, it looks like the Harkles have been pushed out of Frog Cot for good if the removal men were taking away their things.   I think the cottage is having some work done plus the Brooksbanks are spending the holidays with Bea and the parents.  We'll see if they go back after the first of the year.


*THANK YOU .. exactly!!!!*  I think it was a deliberate move on the Harkles side .. again, "news story" and "gee - look at how wonderful we are" .. well NOT EXACTLY!  I also think that they have been permanently moved out of Frog Cottage, but we all know .. they WOULD NEVER admit something like that and the BRF isn't going to publicly comment on it either!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> This article claimed that it was something they all worked out without informing the Queen or Charles. Not sure why that would make any difference or why she would have to move out.
> 
> The original decision for Eugenie and Jack to move into Frogmore Cottage as they prepared for the birth of their first child was reportedly made without consulting the Queen, according to a November report from the Sun on Sunday.
> 
> "Senior royals were initially blindsided by the idea for Harry and Meg to let Eugenie and Jack move in," a royal source told the Sun at the time. "Obviously the Queen was told after the couples had spoken about the plan. But it is very much a deal done between Harry, Meghan, Eugenie and Jack. *There is a close bond between them*."


I have a real hard time believing this given what Meghan did at their wedding (and supposedly Harry being pissed off at Meghan for doing so)!


----------



## lulilu

CeeJay said:


> I have a real hard time believing this given what Meghan did at their wedding (and supposedly Harry being pissed off at Meghan for doing so)!


M's intentions were clear from the moment she arrived at the wedding with only the top button of her coat fastened, as if she was too pregnant to close it.  Another example of sticking out her stomach to show off.  And she was what, several weeks pregnant with her first baby?  I was shocked when I saw that as her intent/antic was clear -- take attention away from the bride.

Did Harry see what she was doing with that outfit/pose?  He should have stopped her.


----------



## LPR200

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why does VF use him?  They must be desperate for clicks.
> 
> 
> ETA:  I missed this article in 2018 about the woman in orange at the wedding.  It’s a bit gross in retrospect.  Seems MM’s closest BFFs really are the Hwood crowd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The mysterious woman in orange at the royal wedding has been unmasked
> 
> 
> The woman dubbed “best dressed at the royal wedding” has finally come forward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking to _ITV_, Gavankar went on to describe how good a friend Markle actually is, saying the pair were texting the night before her wedding. Yes, she was texting a future royal bride just hours before she was meant to be wed.
> 
> "We were texting last night, which is crazy,” she said on the way into the ceremony. “If it were me I would not have any space for anything other than this. But it's pretty usual. It's not surprising. Meghan has so much space in her heart for all of the people that she loves.”


It also says she was in a Star Wars movie...she was in a SW video game!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Fascinating details!  Thank you 










						The Edinburgh Wedding Bracelet
					

Hulton Archive/Getty Images In honor of the Duke of Edinburgh's 98th birthday, which he celebrated privately yesterday, we've got a look at one of the jewels he introduced into the royal vaults: the Edinburgh Wedding




					www.thecourtjeweller.com
				



The diamonds are huge with lots of sparkle and shine.

Alice in the tiara that became a bracelet and a ring:


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> M's intentions were clear from the moment she arrived at the wedding with only the top button of her coat fastened, as if she was too pregnant to close it.  Another example of sticking out her stomach to show off.  And she was what, several weeks pregnant with her first baby?  I was shocked when I saw that as her intent/antic was clear -- take attention away from the bride.
> 
> Did Harry see what she was doing with that outfit/pose?  He should have stopped her.



Wonder if this is where the fake bump stories began?  Hmmmm.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if this is where the fake bump stories began?  Hmmmm.


Fake bump stories came from two issues - the incessant cradling of stomach which focused our interest , and on a foreign trip — Australia, I think - it was said the bump size fluctuated a lot daily 
I do remember wondering about her decision to make the trip while pregnant , remember Zika ? She was supposed to wear long sleeved outfits, but all I saw was sleeveless ....


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Fake bump stories came from two issues - *the incessant cradling of stomach which focused our interest* , and on a foreign trip — Australia, I think - it was said the bump size fluctuated a lot daily
> I do remember wondering about her decision to make the trip while pregnant , remember Zika ? She was supposed to wear long sleeved outfits, but all I saw was sleeveless ....


Have you noticed how some pregnant women hold their handbag with both hands, tucked in just below the abdomen to show off their pregnancy. Makes it look so contrived sometimes.


----------



## gracekelly

I think that if I was going to come up with a devious plot, it would consist of a little passion play written by the Crown Estate to remove Harry and involve Eugenie  as the excuse for the removal of the Sussex belongings from the cottage.  Somehow, I don't think they have to stoop to that level to get the job done.  If they wanted them out for non-residence and loss of place as senior Royals they would just pack up their stuff and send it on.  They didn't need some soap opera of Eugenie moving in to achieve that.  So unless I will be proven very wrong, I still think she will be back there after the holidays are over.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I think that if I was going to come up with a devious plot, it would consist of a little passion play written by the Crown Estate to remove Harry and involve Eugenie  as the excuse for the removal of the Sussex belongings from the cottage.  Somehow, I don't think they have to stoop to that level to get the job done.  If they wanted them out for non-residence and loss of place as senior Royals they would just pack up their stuff and send it on.  They didn't need some soap opera of Eugenie moving in to achieve that.  So unless I will be proven very wrong, I still think she will be back there after the holidays are over.



Many explanations for Eug going to KP - gas leak, water tank broke, closer to her docs, anything. We will never know.

Not sure why DM put this on front page, but here we are — another desperate grab for attention or a sincere thank you?









						Meghan Markle praises 'quiet heroes' feeding the hungry amid pandemic
					

The Duchess of Sussex praised key workers and volunteers, while sitting on a bench apparently in the grounds of the £11million ($14million) California mansion she shares with Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (that is Kate wearing it, but the Queen has worn it regularly throughout her marriage which I think is so romantic)
> 
> View attachment 4929217


That looks very Art Deco to me.  Now I'm curious and would like to see what the Queen's engagement ring looks like.


----------



## Chanbal

Any guesses??? Here are a few possibilities: 1) Walkers Tin with MM&H's picture on it (they are on sale), 2) A guide to wokeness by MM ...

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly on Better Terms with the Royal Family*
According to _Vanity Fair_'s royal correspondent Katie Nicholl, the couple has already sent gifts back to the Cambridge family and royal insiders are confident Harry will call his brother on Christmas.
Harry and Will's relationship is "much better than it was," adding “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas."

Another article about nothing


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Any guesses??? Here are a few possibilities: 1) Walkers Tin with MM&H's picture on it (they are on sale), 2) A guide to wokeness by MM ...
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly on Better Terms with the Royal Family*
> According to _Vanity Fair_'s royal correspondent Katie Nicholl, the couple has already sent gifts back to the Cambridge family and royal insiders are confident Harry will call his brother on Christmas.
> Harry and Will's relationship is "much better than it was," adding “I have no doubt they will be video calling each other over Christmas."
> 
> Another article about nothing


Oh, I'm sure the Cambridge's are just waiting with baited breath to see (ZOOM) and hear from them ..


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many explanations for Eug going to KP - gas leak, water tank broke, closer to her docs, anything. We will never know.
> 
> Not sure why DM put this on front page, but here we are — another desperate grab for attention or a sincere thank you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises 'quiet heroes' feeding the hungry amid pandemic
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex praised key workers and volunteers, while sitting on a bench apparently in the grounds of the £11million ($14million) California mansion she shares with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This woman is ridiculous. Who does she think she is? Will&Kate thanked pandemic workers in a 3-day tour, so she had to do something on those lines.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many explanations for Eug going to KP - gas leak, water tank broke, closer to her docs, anything. We will never know.
> 
> Not sure why DM put this on front page, but here we are — another desperate grab for attention or a sincere thank you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises 'quiet heroes' feeding the hungry amid pandemic
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex praised key workers and volunteers, while sitting on a bench apparently in the grounds of the £11million ($14million) California mansion she shares with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I didn't watch this and don't know who else was on but why Meghan?  guess she is trying to portray herself as a professional "do-gooder"

but I'm sure she has a much more important term to describe what she is

edit - just watched a few minutes of this while I was brushing my teeth.  anderson was teasing her appearance, saying we will be hearing from the duchess of sussex.  she likes that title


----------



## caramelize126

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many explanations for Eug going to KP - gas leak, water tank broke, closer to her docs, anything. We will never know.
> 
> Not sure why DM put this on front page, but here we are — another desperate grab for attention or a sincere thank you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises 'quiet heroes' feeding the hungry amid pandemic
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex praised key workers and volunteers, while sitting on a bench apparently in the grounds of the £11million ($14million) California mansion she shares with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Whoever she went to overfilled her face. Its so puffy and her eyes look so small...


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch this and don't know who else was on but why Meghan?  guess she is trying to portray herself as a professional "do-gooder"
> 
> but I'm sure she has a much more important term to describe what she is


She wants to be recognized as philanthropist, activist, feminist, and duchess. All this without giving any donations to really help causes. This lady only spends money on herself, publicists, and lawyers. The video costs nothing and gives her free publicity.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> And she was what, several weeks pregnant with her first baby?  I was shocked when I saw that as her intent/antic was clear -- take attention away from the bride.
> 
> Did Harry see what she was doing with that outfit/pose?  He should have stopped her.



Yes, she was only about eight weeks pregnant at the time of that wedding. It was enough for her to show off and steal attention from the bride.


----------



## Chanbal

How can one make a surprise TV appearance?  Her PR machine is pulling all the strings to make this *** look relevant.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> How can one make a surprise TV appearance?  Her PR machine is pulling all the strings to make this *** look relevant.
> 
> View attachment 4929407



Certainly I've nothing against thanking health care workers or anyone who reports to work. This pandemic has been going on now for HOW long?  Why does M feel compelled to thank people now? Did she not think of this before? Or why is it she couldn't wait a couple of weeks at least as to not encroach on Kate and William's trip?  Oh well. At least M is wearing a decent looking blouse and if she's wearing ripped jeans we don't see them here. When M utters her "appreciation" for health care workers so soon after K&W's trip tour it REEKS of desperation for attention.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> How can one make a surprise TV appearance?  Her PR machine is pulling all the strings to make this *** look relevant.
> 
> View attachment 4929407



The lips look puffed up. The flowers in the background look fake or out of season. Pinks do look good on her, but nothing says ‘festive.’ It all screams trying too hard.

ETA: this video was part of the CNN show.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember it is always about staging.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Certainly I've nothing against thanking health care workers or anyone who reports to work. This pandemic has been going on now for HOW long?  Why does M feel compelled to thank people now? Did she not think of this before? Or why is it she couldn't wait a couple of weeks at least as to not encroach on Kate and William's trip?  Oh well. At least M is wearing a decent looking blouse and if she's wearing ripped jeans we don't see them here. When M utters her "appreciation" for health care workers so soon after K&W's trip tour it REEKS of desperation for attention.


We are all very thankful for the dedication and huge sacrifices that healthcare workers have been doing during covid pandemic, but MM video is not about them. This was just another photo (video)-op.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> We are all very thankful for the dedication and huge sacrifices that healthcare workers have been doing during covid pandemic, but MM video is not about them. This was just another photo (video)-op.


Even worse she was making it sound as if she was part of the work and had actively participated.   Fraud.


----------



## bag-mania

She did what she always does, comes in at the end and leeches off of the hard work and planning of other people to steal the media attention. I’m sure she contacted CNN and said she wanted to help and of course they found a spot for her because she is a famous name and she says things they support.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She did what she always does, comes in at the end and leeches off of the hard work and planning of other people to steal the media attention. I’m sure she contacted CNN and said she wanted to help and of course they found a spot for her because she is a famous name and she says things they support.


Sunday is a slow news day.  This little routine of surprises is pretty old. It’s Harry’s name that is famous and that’s what  got her on the program.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Sunday is a slow news day.  This little routine of surprises is pretty old. It’s Harry’s name that is famous and that’s what  got her on the program.



I wish more people were smart enough to understand that. Unfortunately, I don’t think they are.  I’ve seen too many comments in various articles that indicate that in the US anyway people just peruse the headlines and  believe what is said about her being a humanitarian and wonderful person.


----------



## csshopper

TEDIOUS. more of the same, tagging onto what others have already done and better. In spite of what looks like an attempt to portray a softer Meghan, make up, clothing, setting, still the same old Meghan craving attention, having done nothing to earn it.


----------



## gracekelly

If they put any more filters on the camera the haze will look like a fog


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh my.....


----------



## Sharont2305

Mendocino said:


> That looks very Art Deco to me.  Now I'm curious and would like to see what the Queen's engagement ring looks like.


Here you go.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh my.....




Is she getting paid by MM or the latte company?


----------



## Aimee3

caramelize126 said:


> Whoever she went to overfilled her face. Its so puffy and her eyes look so small...


My first thought was that her face looked “pregnant”.  Didn’t her face fill out a lot when she was pregnant with Archie?  I didn’t bother to watch but someone said only the top part of her was shown so we can’t see what’s doing below the blouse.  I wouldn’t put it past her to recently reveal a miscarriage that happened 5 months ago for sympathy and yet say nothing about a pregnancy now.


----------



## djfmn

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is she getting paid by MM or the latte company?


MM has invested in this all female latte company. This is to get visibility (soft marketing by gifting product to the right people) and make money!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this Oprah throwing shade?  A compliment paired with a slight?

'Wish I had @clevrblends sooner cause I would've added it to my Favorite Things list. #HappyHolidays.'








						Meghan Markle gifts Oprah Winfrey hamper full of coffee for Christmas
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has invested in her first startup business, Clevr Blends, according to Fortune. The royal's close friend Oprah Winfrey showed off a box of the products online today




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure why DM put this on front page, but here we are — another desperate grab for attention or a sincere thank you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises 'quiet heroes' feeding the hungry amid pandemic
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex praised key workers and volunteers, while sitting on a bench apparently in the grounds of the £11million ($14million) California mansion she shares with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The comments are many times more fun than the articles, here are some for the records:


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this Oprah throwing shade?  A compliment paired with a slight?
> 
> 'Wish I had @clevrblends sooner cause I would've added it to my Favorite Things list. #HappyHolidays.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gifts Oprah Winfrey hamper full of coffee for Christmas
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has invested in her first startup business, Clevr Blends, according to Fortune. The royal's close friend Oprah Winfrey showed off a box of the products online today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Oprah just gave MM free advertisement. She is testing the waters before proceeding with more public help to her 'friend M'. I wish I had emojis like these to 'like' this article:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oprah just gave MM free advertisement. She is testing the waters before proceeding with more public help to her 'friend M'. I wish I had emojis like these to 'like' this article:



Definitely free advertisement as well as letting us know that she received the order too late. The real advertising is in her ‘Favorite things’ list.  One more epic fail for H&M.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A start-up investor???  Nah, a mercher, grifter, and wellness poser.








						Exclusive: Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex makes her debut as a startup investor
					

The Duchess of Sussex is backing Clevr Blends, a female-founded instant latte startup.




					fortune.com
				




ETA:  thought we had finished with the jr hi way of (mis)spelling. clever, not too clevrrrrrr.

ETA2:  I had to look — ugh, another gimmicky product.  I thought in a pandemic we would see less of this nonsense.  








						Clevr Blends
					





					clevr.refersion.com


----------



## Sharont2305

Notice Oprah referred to M as neighbour, not friend.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Gawd, that video.  Literally who does she think she is????


----------



## mshermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh my.....



What a pathetic looking basket and the finished drink looks like.....well something I would not put to my lips willingly.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Fake bump stories came from two issues - the incessant cradling of stomach which focused our interest , and on a foreign trip — Australia, I think - it was said the bump size fluctuated a lot daily
> I do remember wondering about her decision to make the trip while pregnant , remember Zika ? She was supposed to wear long sleeved outfits, but all I saw was sleeveless ....


More on fake bump ...   Yes bump size was variable on that trip
But  remember the birth which was done in so much secrecy ... and the secret christening which irked so many people
The fake bump story really got legs after the Christening which irked so many

To mention an idiosyncracy of the British nobility... adopted children cannot inherit titles - eg Christopher , Baron Haden Guest whose adopted son will not inherit - that goes back to Middle ages when only a blood relative could inherit
I have no idea what the legal status is for children conceived via surrogate, IVF etc etc . It would probably be different on a case by case basis.  You would have to go back to the exact  Letters Patent that established a specific title - hundreds of years ago, in Middle English and look at exact wording ...

I have always thought it odd that Archie - son of a Duke - never used a title eg Viscount Blah Blah like James son of Prince Edward.
Archie is different from Peter Philips whose father was untitled.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Here you go.


That is not Meghan's ring, hers was modified to have an eternity band studded with diamonds and the stones are squarer


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> That is not Meghan's ring, hers was modified to have an eternity band studded with diamonds and the stones are squarer


I know, the poster was referring to the Queen's engagement ring as I said Princess Alice gave Philip diamonds from her tiara to fashion into an e ring for the Queen


----------



## CarryOn2020

Before clevr, it was hippy zippy elixir bar. 

_The sun casts its last golden rays over the desert, illuminating the kind of scene that made me first fall in love with festivals. Hundreds of ecstatic bodies make a sea of multicolored movement, swirling around one another, kicking up dust that embraces them in the fading light. The beat drops, and the crowd seems to experience a kind of collective joy uncommon in the “outside world.” The night is young, and sunrise will see the same endless revelry.

I take a slow, appreciative sip from the warm cup in my hands. It’s the end of my shift at our vegan food truck, and I’m powering up for the next 10 hours of dancing. My potion is a clumsy concoction of every superfood we had lying around: organic cacao, maca, rhodiola, ashwagandha, and ginseng—ingredients that a few years ago would have sounded more like they belonged in a science lab than in my mug._









						The Awakening of an Elixir Goddess | Spirituality & Health
					

Spirituality & Health Magazine provides inspiration for conscious living, healthy diet and lifestyle, social action, spiritual wisdom, and sustainability.




					spiritualityhealth.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Looks like recycled urine in a cup.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh my.....



I didn't realize Oprah had to stoop to name dropping brands.  Isn't she still a billionaire?  What's next?  Flat tummy tea?


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Gawd, that video.  Literally who does she think she is????


I couldn't even watch.


----------



## Chanbal

Her expression in the photo below goes well with some views that her NYT article was fiction. But what's even more troubling is that the title gives the impression that she will be making more TV appearances...


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I couldn't even watch.


Some magazines call it a 'moving speech', but it looks more like a 'vomit inducer'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Her expression in the photo below goes well with some views that her NYT article was fiction. But *what's even more troubling is that the title gives the impression that she will be making more TV appearances..*.



Christmas Day.  She’ll make a huge announcement (divorce? preggers? new start-up?).  Anything to get attention.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Some magazines call it a 'moving speech', but it looks more like a 'vomit inducer'.



On another site, some are comparing the blouse to Medea’s.  Even Mrs. Doubtfire.  LOL.
This was taped appearance, right?  Must be afraid to speak spontaneously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I have always thought it odd that Archie - son of a Duke - never used a title eg Viscount Blah Blah like James son of Prince Edward.
> Archie is different from Peter Philips whose father was untitled.



That said, giving the heirs one of their fathers' lesser titles is just courtesy. They will only have an actual title and become peers once their father dies (of course, James and Louise are also the Queen's grandchildren, just referring to "son of a duke"...that means really nothing unless the boy becomes a duke himself). I think that was just another way to be special and generate attention for their wokeness. As if Master Archie, 7th in line would ever be just a private citizen, and they know it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> On another site, some are comparing the blouse to Medea’s.  Even *Mrs. Doubtfire*.  LOL.
> This was taped appearance, right?  Must be afraid to speak spontaneously.


I know now why the all thing looked familiar to me.


Loved Robin Williams.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this Oprah throwing shade?  A compliment paired with a slight?
> 
> 'Wish I had @clevrblends sooner cause I would've added it to my Favorite Things list. #HappyHolidays.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gifts Oprah Winfrey hamper full of coffee for Christmas
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has invested in her first startup business, Clevr Blends, according to Fortune. The royal's close friend Oprah Winfrey showed off a box of the products online today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



No, Oprah is too media-savvy to say anything that could be perceived as snarky. That isn’t her brand. She’s not Wendy Williams.  

She’s giving Meghan a plug.  It doesn’t cost Oprah anything to be nice and maybe it’ll help the women who really created the thing.


----------



## LittleStar88

Hmmmmm..... Similar blouse.


----------



## mshermes

Well....time is running out this year so I imagine you know who has got something monument up her sleeve like....
The only thing left for her to do before year end in order to garnish all of the accolades she so duly deserves, as I see it, is to adopt twins whose parents passed away saving them in a fire set because they had ebola in the family. One twin had Ebola but is doing better now and the other one is HIV positive. Their dog was saved, is severely burned,  but must remain with the twins as a therapy dog.  I’m sure it will be a seamless entry into the US from Chunga-Changa.


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> Well....time is running out this year so I imagine you know who has got something monument up her sleeve like....
> The only thing left for her to do before year end in order to garnish all of the accolades she so duly deserves, as I see it, is to adopt twins whose parents passed away saving them in a fire set because they had ebola in the family. One twin had Ebola but is doing better now and the other one is HIV positive. Their dog was saved, is severely burned,  but must remain with the twins as a therapy dog.  I’m sure it will be a seamless entry into the US from Chunga-Changa.



 
My prediction isn’t quite as creative. I’m thinking some time early next year we will find out that she’s already pregnant and several months along, but of course because of the miscarriage she just couldn’t make the announcement too early. 

I am still skeptical of the whole miscarriage story. It could have been fabricated to provide an excuse for them to hire a surrogate to carry a baby for them where she couldn’t be criticized.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I think she’s pregnant now!  There must be a reason she’s been camera shy from the waist down.  If Eugénie is due in January, then they’ll announce her pregnancy the day that baby is born.  Always have to steal the limelight.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> On another site, some are comparing the blouse to Medea’s.  Even Mrs. Doubtfire.  LOL.
> This was taped appearance, right?  Must be afraid to speak spontaneously.


When Melanie wore a similar style blouse, she was inundated with criticisms that it is a pussy cat bow blouse
I noticed MM did not do a bow at all


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, giving the heirs one of their fathers' lesser titles is just courtesy. They will only have an actual title and become peers once their father dies (of course, James and Louise are also the Queen's grandchildren, just referring to "son of a duke"...that means really nothing unless the boy becomes a duke himself). I think that was just another way to be special and generate attention for their wokeness. As if Master Archie, 7th in line would ever be just a private citizen, and they know it.


Yes, those courtesy titles are complicated ... 
reminds me of The son of Elon with that creative name A 1 X 12  ... I probably got the spelling wrong, my bad 
We could christen Master Archie as A7 ...


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Her expression in the photo below goes well with some views that her NYT article was fiction. But what's even more troubling is that the title gives the impression that she will be making more TV appearances...
> View attachment 4929645


Interesting, her new makeup choices do not highlight the freckles or her mole


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> My first thought was that her face looked “pregnant”.  Didn’t her face fill out a lot when she was pregnant with Archie?  I didn’t bother to watch but someone said only the top part of her was shown so we can’t see what’s doing below the blouse.  I wouldn’t put it past her to recently reveal a miscarriage that happened 5 months ago for sympathy and yet say nothing about a pregnancy now.



Right. I looked back at pictures of Eugenie's wedding and Meghan's coat buttoned only on top, when she was barely 48 hours into her pregnancy. If she were pregnant now she couldn't keep her mouth shut, that's why I don't believe she was pregnant after Archie, either. Her face looks like a WAY over inflated balloon. Common celebrity mistake--overdoing the cosmetic procedures. Maybe she's doing that for attention, too. Oh wait, maybe it's another strategy to sue somebody.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> Hmmmmm..... Similar blouse.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4929704
> View attachment 4929705



I would have bet money she’d be all about the laid back California style, like when she first got to Canada and picked her friend up at the airport. But she’s changed her mind about 15 times about her focus in this country so what do I know?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> No, Oprah is too media-savvy to say anything that could be perceived as snarky. That isn’t her brand. She’s not Wendy Williams.
> 
> She’s giving Meghan a plug.  It doesn’t cost Oprah anything to be nice and maybe it’ll help the women who really created the thing.


I couldn't read the whole thing.....Oprah is her close friend?  business friend maybe.
How many times were they going to refer to her as The Duchess?


----------



## Mendocino

Sharont2305 said:


> Here you go.


Thank you, Sharon! 

Both the bracelet and the ring have withstood the test time very well.  Phillip has a very good eye for design.


----------



## Sterntalerli

lanasyogamama said:


> I would have bet money she’d be all about the laid back California style, like when she first got to Canada and picked her friend up at the airport. But she’s changed her mind about 15 times about her focus in this country so what do I know?


what exactly did she wear picking up her friend? or did I misunderstand sth? thanks for clarifying


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sterntalerli said:


> what exactly did she wear picking up her friend? or did I misunderstand sth? thanks for clarifying



Her Cali cool girl clothes. She even drove herself to the airport! Shocking.








						Meghan Markle drives herself to Canadian airport  to pick up a pal
					

The Duchess of Sussex was spotted in photos obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com parked outside Victoria International Airport in a Land Rover Discovery on Thursday afternoon.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> No, Oprah is too media-savvy to say anything that could be perceived as snarky. That isn’t her brand. She’s not Wendy Williams.
> 
> She’s giving Meghan a plug.  It doesn’t cost Oprah anything to be nice and maybe it’ll help the women who really created the thing.



I still think Oprah is letting the clevr folks know she can only do so much when merchandise arrives *late* ... from the ‘neighbor’ ... *after* she’s made her fave things list.  IG doesn’t allow advertising so Oprah had to claim it was a gift.  Also, the clevr company ‘team’ doesn’t look too diverse.  And quelle horrible the co-founder is a guy. Eeeeeeek.

ETA: Oprah had to get the makeup on, film the story, make that powered stuff, drink it, etc.  And the powered stuff arrived late! Damn it. Personally, I wouldn’t do it — unless I had invested in the company.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> My prediction isn’t quite as creative. I’m thinking some time early next year we will find out that she’s already pregnant and several months along, but of course because of the miscarriage she just couldn’t make the announcement too early.
> 
> *I am still skeptical of the whole miscarriage story*. It could have been fabricated to provide an excuse for them to hire a surrogate to carry a baby for them where she couldn’t be criticized.


Same here .. but, I still think that she won't get pregnant again (I don't think she was too happy being pregnant as she is all about her appearance and has been for MANY years).  I still think that they will either have a surrogate and/or .. what I really think is that they will adopt a child who has a "story" (some poor child in Africa, etc.) .. so that they can both milk the hell out of that kid, just like their son Archie.  I hope I am wrong because IMO .. poor Archie is going to need a whole heck of a lot of psychological help as he ages having parents like that .. and so would the 2nd child!  Uggh ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Same here .. but, I *still think that she won't get pregnant again* (I don't think she was too happy being pregnant as she is all about her appearance and has been for MANY years).  I still think that they will either have a surrogate and/or .. what I really think is that they will adopt a child who has a "story" (some poor child in Africa, etc.) .. so that they can both milk the hell out of that kid, just like their son Archie.  I hope I am wrong because IMO .. poor Archie is going to need a whole heck of a lot of psychological help as he ages having parents like that .. and so would the 2nd child!  Uggh ..



Trevor found out:








						Meghan Markle made her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract'
					

Meghan Markle penned an informal agreement that she made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign that stipulated he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if she had a baby.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trevor found out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle made her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle penned an informal agreement that she made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign that stipulated he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if she had a baby.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



maybe I’ve been in California for too long, but this pregnancy contract sounds completely reasonable to me lol

So many of my gfs pop out a kid and then find out their partner expects them to do all the parenting on top of working a full or part time job, cooking and cleaning etc. even in 2020. The pressure on a woman to look good, take care of the entire family, make money and keep up the household is insane.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trevor found out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle made her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle penned an informal agreement that she made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign that stipulated he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if she had a baby.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


much as I love to bash her this sounds like BS to me....where would they get the info?  ex husband doesnt talk about her I thought


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bisousx said:


> maybe I’ve been in California for too long, but this pregnancy contract sounds completely reasonable to me lol
> 
> So many of my gfs pop out a kid and then find out their partner expects them to do all the parenting on top of working a full or part time job, cooking and cleaning etc. even in 2020. The pressure on a woman to look good, take care of the entire family, make money and keep up the household is insane.


WOW .. I guess being from back  East, I can't see this happening there.  NOW .. that being said, I 100% agree with you that the demands on Women to be not only the parent, clean the house (keeping up the household) and then work either full-time or part-time is INSANE, but I see it over and over again.  Instead of buying the "usual" baby gifts, my gift to the 'family' (and I do say that in my card, etc.) .. is to gift the woman with help in the form of either a housekeeper and/or a nanny (for a certain amount of time).  However, in many cases, I also see many of my friends "employ" their mother or MIL to help out .. at least in the first few months.  It really slays me that in the US, we still have this nonsense .. when in many European and Scandanavian countries, both the Mom and Dad get around 12-13 months (full pay) off to take care of the newborn and their families!  It's really something that needs to change here in the US .. period!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I guess being from back  East, I can't see this happening there.  NOW .. that being said, I 100% agree with you that the demands on Women to be not only the parent, clean the house (keeping up the household) and then work either full-time or part-time is INSANE, but I see it over and over again.  Instead of buying the "usual" baby gifts, my gift to the 'family' (and I do say that in my card, etc.) .. is to gift the woman with help in the form of either a housekeeper and/or a nanny (for a certain amount of time).  However, in many cases, I also see many of my friends "employ" their mother or MIL to help out .. at least in the first few months.  It really slays me that in the US, we still have this nonsense .. when in many European and Scandanavian countries, both the Mom and Dad get around 12-13 months (full pay) off to take care of the newborn and their families!  It's really something that needs to change here in the US .. period!


well these days I think it's fair to assume Meghan doesn't have to clean all those bathrooms and I wonder how much time she spends with her child.  bet they have multiple nannies


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> well these days I think it's fair to assume Meghan doesn't have to clean all those bathrooms and I wonder how much time she spends with her child.  bet they have multiple nannies


For sure .. I really wonder how much time she spends with her own child; as we have all seen, she only cares about HERSELF!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> For sure .. I really wonder how much time she spends with her own child; as we have all seen, she only cares about HERSELF!


hope little guy has nice nannies...and maybe H plays with him


----------



## lulu212121

LittleStar88 said:


> Hmmmmm..... Similar blouse.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4929704
> View attachment 4929705


Meghan is sooooo creepy.


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t believe she gave this company a penny. It was all done as an exchange. She merches for them and they get to show her off as celeb interested in the company. I expect this product to flop. Too expensive. Yes they will sell it at Whole Foods and possibly Trader Joe’s, but it is too costly for mainstream markets.   She Markled another victim of greed


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Same here .. but, I still think that she won't get pregnant again (I don't think she was too happy being pregnant as she is all about her appearance and has been for MANY years).  I still think that they will either have a surrogate and/or .. what I really think is that they will adopt a child who has a "story" (some poor child in Africa, etc.) .. so that they can both milk the hell out of that kid, just like their son Archie.  I hope I am wrong because IMO .. poor Archie is going to need a whole heck of a lot of psychological help as he ages having parents like that .. and so would the 2nd child!  Uggh ..



True, she never wanted a child for herself, but having at least one baby was necessary for her scheme personal image of being a prince's wife. 

I could see her following the Angelina path of adopting a child or two from impoverished countries to enhance her sainthood/humanitarian credentials. With the nannies she wouldn't need to do any work.

Still, part of me believes she cannot bear any competition for attention, even from her own offspring. So it's also possible the miscarriage story was put out there because she wants to put a stop to pregnancy rumors. It would be cruelly insensitive for the press to keep hammering "is she pregnant?" when she has supposedly lost one, wouldn't it?


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Interesting, her new makeup choices do not highlight the freckles or her mole


In all fairness , neither Cindy Crawford nor Madonna highlights their moles anymore (removed in the case of Madonna?)


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her Cali cool girl clothes. She even drove herself to the airport! Shocking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle drives herself to Canadian airport  to pick up a pal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was spotted in photos obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com parked outside Victoria International Airport in a Land Rover Discovery on Thursday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4929802
> View attachment 4929803


Her drive to the airport would have been about 3 miles on country roads with no traffic. Such an achievement!


----------



## scarlet555

being pregnant is her


bisousx said:


> maybe I’ve been in California for too long, but this pregnancy contract sounds completely reasonable to me lol
> 
> So many of my gfs pop out a kid and then find out their partner expects them to do all the parenting on top of working a full or part time job, cooking and cleaning etc. even in 2020. The pressure on a woman to look good, take care of the entire family, make money and keep up the household is insane.



I was a bit surprise to read the headlines, but I think it looks worse on paper than what it's meant to be.  However since it's from the DRAMA queen, it looks ten times worse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She could be an ambassador. I think this is the new way to market start-ups. Wonder if their funding requires this sort of thing. All sorts of different rules now.


----------



## marietouchet

bisousx said:


> maybe I’ve been in California for too long, but this pregnancy contract sounds completely reasonable to me lol
> 
> So many of my gfs pop out a kid and then find out their partner expects them to do all the parenting on top of working a full or part time job, cooking and cleaning etc. even in 2020. The pressure on a woman to look good, take care of the entire family, make money and keep up the household is insane.


Interesting the photos in there from early part of pregnancy, I did not notice at the time, but her clothes fit very badly for the NZ- Australia trip, and the bump cradling drew attention to the tailoring deficiencies
The short/sleeveless looks , what happened to the long sleeves for zika ?


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> More on fake bump ...   Yes bump size was variable on that trip
> But  remember the birth which was done in so much secrecy ... and the secret christening which irked so many people
> The fake bump story really got legs after the Christening which irked so many
> 
> To mention an idiosyncracy of the British nobility... adopted children cannot inherit titles - eg Christopher , Baron Haden Guest whose adopted son will not inherit - that goes back to Middle ages when only a blood relative could inherit
> I have no idea what the legal status is for children conceived via surrogate, IVF etc etc . It would probably be different on a case by case basis.  You would have to go back to the exact  Letters Patent that established a specific title - hundreds of years ago, in Middle English and look at exact wording ...
> 
> I have always thought it odd that Archie - son of a Duke - never used a title eg Viscount Blah Blah like James son of Prince Edward.
> Archie is different from Peter Philips whose father was untitled.



That goes for illegitimate children too.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> True, she never wanted a child for herself, but having at least one baby was necessary for her scheme personal image of being a prince's wife.
> 
> I could see her following the Angelina path of adopting a child or two from impoverished countries to enhance her sainthood/humanitarian credentials. With the nannies she wouldn't need to do any work.
> 
> Still, part of me believes she cannot bear any competition for attention, even from her own offspring. So it's also possible the miscarriage story was put out there because she wants to put a stop to pregnancy rumors. It would be cruelly insensitive for the press to keep hammering "is she pregnant?" when she has supposedly lost one, wouldn't it?


Seriously hope there is not another child on the way for this pair, in every instance where she has been pictured with Archie, her body language indicated extreme discomfort. He could have been a sack of dog food being unloaded after a shopping trip. In the brief video posted eons ago where she was attempting to read to him, when he acted like a normal child and wiggled and then appeared to try and say dada, her mask slipped, quickly recovered, but the script was not going her way and she was not pleased. 

Mental health is a critical issue and, in spite of all their pronouncements and preaching, they appear to be raising a child in an environment that will not lead to a happy well adjusted life. Maybe Harry makes up for it behind the scenes, but just the lost opportunities for Archie to interact with the Cambridge and Tindall and Phillips children is, IMHO, heartbreaking.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Christmas Day.  She’ll make a huge announcement (divorce? preggers? new start-up?).  Anything to get attention.



The Queen makes an annual speech at 3pm to all the UK. 

H&M think they have a global court. They are beyond hope. 

Some commentators have refused to talk or write anymore about the couple as they think the are mentally ill to a disorder level. 

I am sadly thinking they may have a point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pippa announced today she is pregnant. 
Cambridge‘s logged a highly successful tour which ended with a memorable QE, Prince Philip, etc. photo.
Zara announced her pregnancy.
Those Cute Cambridge children walked the red carpet, making many people around the world happy.
Kate continues to look great, fresh new makeup, beautifully coifed hair, and a genuine smile.  

Now, we find out MM’s lifelong dream of being a brand ambassador has come true with Clevr.   Rrrrrright.


----------



## V0N1B2

bisousx said:


> maybe I’ve been in California for too long, but this pregnancy contract sounds completely reasonable to me lol
> 
> So many of my gfs pop out a kid and then find out their partner expects them to do all the parenting on top of working a full or part time job, cooking and cleaning etc. even in 2020. The pressure on a woman to look good, take care of the entire family, make money and keep up the household is insane.


I agree.  The story makes it sound like she would only have a baby _for him _if he would agree to those conditions.  It doesn't come off like someone who really wanted to be a mother, IMO.  I would think that if being a mother was important, things like getting your body back wouldn't be as important as nurturing your little one. 
But hey, I don't have any friends that were ever hell-bent on being mommies, so what do I know?


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> She did what she always does, comes in at the end and leeches off of the hard work and planning of other people to steal the media attention. I’m sure she contacted CNN and said she wanted to help and of course they found a spot for her because she is a famous name and she says things they support.


100%


----------



## CarryOn2020

Royal fury over the merching. The crown emoji did it. Ouch!

_Today Oprah, one of the world's richest women, uploaded a video on her personal Instagram page boasting to her 19.2million followers how she’d received a gift from "my neighbour M". 

The clue was followed by a crown emoji - a nod to her pal’s royal connections.
...
Advertising rules in the United States differ from those in the UK, where posts from celebrities advertising products for money are usually followed by the captions #AD or #Spon to denote an advert or sponsored post.

It is not implied that Ms Winfrey - one of the world’s most powerful people in business - broke any rules, nor it is believed she was paid for the post.

However, palace sources said the post was not being viewed favourably and the use of the crown emoji had been noted._









						Meghan Markle sparks royal fury by enlisting Oprah Winfrey to flog vegan coffee
					

EXCLUSIVE Palace insiders revealed there were "more than a few raised eyebrows" today after it emerged Meghan has ploughed money into the firm Clevr Blends - a startup that makes instant oat-milk lattes




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Richard Palmer weighs in:


----------



## Lodpah

Too bad she put her name to this. I won’t be buying. Seriously she’s delusional and the company picked the wrong ambassador to represent. It will be trendy for a moment and then no more.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The comments are fun to read. Seems like H&M have ‘jumped the shark’.


----------



## gracekelly

Hmmm, looks like a man owns this company.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> True, she never wanted a child for herself, but having at least one baby was necessary for her scheme personal image of being a prince's wife.
> 
> I could see her following the Angelina path of adopting a child or two from impoverished countries to enhance her sainthood/humanitarian credentials. With the nannies she wouldn't need to do any work.
> 
> Still, part of me believes she cannot bear any competition for attention, even from her own offspring. So it's also possible the miscarriage story was put out there because she wants to put a stop to pregnancy rumors. It would be cruelly insensitive for the press to keep hammering "is she pregnant?" when she has supposedly lost one, wouldn't it?


yes, I think Angelina is a role model for her....she would love to be the big movie star that angie is (which won't happen).  she would also like to emulate angie in her world travel/helping children, etc.  so adopting a child from a third world country could be something she would see as good for her image.  I wouldn't be surprised if M is knocking on Unicef's door asking for a role/offering her services


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, Roger and Hannah seem to go back to 2017, maybe earlier but I have found a source yet.
Both of them try to give off the healthy, suntanned, so chill vibe.










						The Awakening of an Elixir Goddess | Spirituality & Health
					

Spirituality & Health Magazine provides inspiration for conscious living, healthy diet and lifestyle, social action, spiritual wisdom, and sustainability.




					spiritualityhealth.com
				




_The Hippy Zippy Elixir Bar is run by Hannah Mendoza and Roger Coppola and is based in Santa Barbara, California. They bring their bar to events and festivals on the West Coast. Reach them at hello@drinkhippyzippy.com, or through Facebook @Hippy Zippy Elixir Bar._

ETA: Roger wouldn’t be part of the famous Francis/Sofia Coppola family, would he?


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, Roger and Hannah seem to go back to 2017, maybe earlier but I have found a source yet.
> Both of them try to give off the healthy, suntanned, so chill vibe.
> View attachment 4929970
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Awakening of an Elixir Goddess | Spirituality & Health
> 
> 
> Spirituality & Health Magazine provides inspiration for conscious living, healthy diet and lifestyle, social action, spiritual wisdom, and sustainability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spiritualityhealth.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Hippy Zippy Elixir Bar is run by Hannah Mendoza and Roger Coppola and is based in Santa Barbara, California. They bring their bar to events and festivals on the West Coast. Reach them at hello@drinkhippyzippy.com, or through Facebook @Hippy Zippy Elixir Bar._
> 
> *ETA: Roger wouldn’t be part of the famous Francis/Sofia Coppola family, would he?*



My first thought when I saw the name.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her Cali cool girl clothes. She even drove herself to the airport! Shocking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle drives herself to Canadian airport  to pick up a pal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was spotted in photos obtained exclusively by DailyMail.com parked outside Victoria International Airport in a Land Rover Discovery on Thursday afternoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4929802
> View attachment 4929803


The article is dated Jan 2020, when she lived in Vancouver and looked like a Cali girl


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The article is dated Jan 2020, when she lived in Vancouver and looked like a Cali girl



Yes, I was responding to @Sterntalerli’s question — when did she pick up her friend at the Canada airport. The media wrote articles how independent she was, free of the restrictive BRF dress code and oppressive rules.


----------



## LittleStar88

This was in my IG feed today


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> The article is dated Jan 2020, when she lived in Vancouver and looked like a Cali girl



They lived on Vancouver Island in North Saanich which is a 2hour ferry ride and 30 minute drive once off the ferry.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I was responding to @Sterntalerli’s question — when did she pick up her friend at the Canada airport. The media wrote articles how independent she was, free of the restrictive BRF dress code and oppressive rules.



That was before she decided she was “Powerful Leader Duchess MM”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> This was in my IG feed today
> 
> 
> View attachment 4930008


Wow does he look unhappy!


----------



## justwatchin

LittleStar88 said:


> This was in my IG feed today
> 
> 
> View attachment 4930008


Well that face says it all... I assume his favorite hobby was being allowed to speak?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> This was in my IG feed today
> 
> 
> View attachment 4930008


hunting or drinking beer?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments are fun to read. Seems like H&M have ‘jumped the shark’.
> 
> View attachment 4929934


I so enjoy your posts, especially because your tag line at the bottom never ever fails to crack me up. _"I was such a fraud..."_


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Wow does he look unhappy!


He looks like a constipated Madame Tussaud wax dummy.


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle sparks royal fury by enlisting Oprah Winfrey to flog vegan coffee
					

EXCLUSIVE Palace insiders revealed there were "more than a few raised eyebrows" today after it emerged Meghan has ploughed money into the firm Clevr Blends - a startup that makes instant oat-milk lattes




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




I wish the BRF would flog MM!


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> hunting or drinking beer?


if it's hunting, this time I'm with Meghan


----------



## CarryOn2020

@sdkitty  The way The Crown showed the hunting, I agree.  Brutal, barbaric, and boorish. Sad.









						Prince Harry's hunting trip to Bavaria as Meghan Markle films Suits
					

The 32-year-old royal joined pals at a shooting party at Oettingen Castle in Bavaria, while Meghan Markle, 35, was still in Toronto, where she films American legal drama Suits.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: Article from 2016.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> hunting or drinking beer?



.


----------



## rose60610

"favourite hobby"?  Visiting and talking with his own family members? Inhaling and exhaling on his own? Expressing his own thoughts? Not thinking of everyone as raindrops? Being able to leave the house without an agenda?


----------



## eunaddict

Aimee3 said:


> I think she’s pregnant now!  *There must be a reason she’s been camera shy from the waist down.  *



And why she has been afk in the world outside of Zoom, no one has seen her in public (or at arranged photoshoots of charitable works) since that Remembrance day mess.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> He looks like a constipated Madame Tussaud wax dummy.


Lol!  He needs a really BIG laxative to blast him into reality.


----------



## Chanbal

Plenty of advertisement from Oprah on MM's investment. 
I wonder if she also sent the oat milk lattes to the Cambridges for Christmas.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Lol!  He needs a really BIG laxative to blast him into reality.


The best way to get quick relief is to insert a suppository rectally.


----------



## Lodpah

Not to derail the fabulous Word Salateer but I wonder what JCMH and her talk about. I mean she went from marrying a USC grad, obviously smart and talented to a man child who barely got through school. It must be epic conversations they have and to mention his wife obviously has a great career. Well done Mr. Trevor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

Lodpah said:


> Not to derail the fabulous Word Salateer but I wonder what JCMH and her talk about. I mean she went from marrying a USC grad, obviously smart and talented to a man child who barely got through school. It must be epic conversations they have and to mention his wife obviously has a great career. Well done Mr. Trevor.


The only topic I can think they discuss is- how bad the world and man child’s family is and how hard Meghan is trying to help everyone to get better (with no real action steps obviously, just gibberish).


----------



## Annawakes

Yes, I agree, I’m fairly certain she is pregnant now too.  Her face and her frame both look fuller.


----------



## Sharont2305

Annawakes said:


> Yes, I agree, I’m fairly certain she is pregnant now too.  Her face and her frame both look fuller.


Christmas day announcement no doubt, the day when the Queen's speech this year of all years will probably be one of her most important ones.


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> Christmas day announcement no doubt, the day when the Queen's speech this year of all years will probably be one of her most important ones.


Her gift to us peasants.


----------



## Annawakes

Sharont2305 said:


> Christmas day announcement no doubt, the day when the Queen's speech this year of all years will probably be one of her most important ones.


No doubt!


----------



## Chanbal

Sorry @sdkitty but this is copy & paste!

This pathetic couple is everywhere! It's not enough to be dealing with a lethal virus, but we have to put up with this ***. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sign with Spotify: Couple will follow in the footsteps of the Ob###s with exclusive podcast deal that 'uplifts audiences around the world' as couple build on their £100m Netflix contract*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed an exclusive podcast deal with Spotify, following in the footsteps of the Ob###s to add to their £100million agreement with Netflix.

The couple will produce and host their own shows, starting with a holiday special that will be released this month.

The couple's newly formed Archewell Audio will produce programming that 'uplifts and entertains audiences around the world' and features 'diverse perspectives and voices,' the Swedish firm said today.

Financial terms of the deal have not been disclosed.


Their first show will be a ‘holiday special’ this month will ‘feature stories of hope and compassion from inspirational guests in celebration of the new year.’

Harry and Meghan both mimic church bells before saying: 'We can't wait to share it with you and will be out later this month'.

Meghan says: 'We're talking to some amazing people who will share their memories that have helped shaped this year. As we know this has been a difficult one for everyone'.

Touching on the pandemic Harry says: 'So many people have suffered so much pain this year, experiencing loss and a huge amount of uncertainty but it feels worth mentioning that 2020 has connected us in ways we could never have imagined. Through endless acts of compassion and kindness'.

Plugging the podcast Harry says: 'So here's what you need to do, tap follow right now. Go ahead, go on. Tap, follow and that way you won't miss out and you'll be able to hear new shows on Archewell Audio as soon as they drop'.

Finishing the trailer Meghan says: 'We're so excited. So follow and listen for free only on Spotify. We'll meet you back here soon'.

Harry signs off with an American-sounding 'happy holidays' while Meghan ends with a British 'cheers'.

the spread of the ....


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @sdkitty but this is copy & paste!
> 
> This pathetic couple is everywhere! It's not enough to be dealing with a lethal virus, but we have to put up with this ***.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sign with Spotify: Couple will follow in the footsteps of the Ob###s with exclusive podcast deal that 'uplifts audiences around the world' as couple build on their £100m Netflix contract*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed an exclusive podcast deal with Spotify, following in the footsteps of the Ob###s to add to their £100million agreement with Netflix.
> 
> The couple will produce and host their own shows, starting with a holiday special that will be released this month.
> 
> The couple's newly formed Archewell Audio will produce programming that 'uplifts and entertains audiences around the world' and features 'diverse perspectives and voices,' the Swedish firm said today.
> 
> Financial terms of the deal have not been disclosed.
> 
> 
> Their first show will be a ‘holiday special’ this month will ‘feature stories of hope and compassion from inspirational guests in celebration of the new year.’
> 
> Harry and Meghan both mimic church bells before saying: 'We can't wait to share it with you and will be out later this month'.
> 
> Meghan says: 'We're talking to some amazing people who will share their memories that have helped shaped this year. As we know this has been a difficult one for everyone'.
> 
> Touching on the pandemic Harry says: 'So many people have suffered so much pain this year, experiencing loss and a huge amount of uncertainty but it feels worth mentioning that 2020 has connected us in ways we could never have imagined. Through endless acts of compassion and kindness'.
> 
> Plugging the podcast Harry says: 'So here's what you need to do, tap follow right now. Go ahead, go on. Tap, follow and that way you won't miss out and you'll be able to hear new shows on Archewell Audio as soon as they drop'.
> 
> Finishing the trailer Meghan says: 'We're so excited. So follow and listen for free only on Spotify. We'll meet you back here soon'.
> 
> Harry signs off with an American-sounding 'happy holidays' while Meghan ends with a British 'cheers'.
> 
> the spread of the ....


Where’s the  button when you need it.


----------



## kemilia

These 2 are living in some dream world (Uplifting Videos!). This comes across as so very desperate to be "some bodies" and get paid for it. Yet they left the most "some bodies" Family/Firm in the world (and no doubt he's regretting it--he looks awful all the time now).


----------



## 1LV

Say what you will, but she has let nothing stand in her way to get what she wanted.  Friends, family, the truth.  Nothing.

ETA. Please don’t confuse what I said with personal admiration for her.  Far from it.


----------



## bag-mania

They have resorted to doing podcasts now?! That is the realm of every Average Joe who has something to say. I cannot wait for them to invite their listeners to pay a few dollars every month to their Patreon account to get extra special content that their free podcast doesn't have. 

Good luck trying to stand out in that universe. They would need to be interesting and original and they are neither.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hate that some of my Spotify and Netflix dollars go to them.


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> Say what you will, but she has let nothing stand in her way to get what she wanted.  Friends, family, the truth.  Nothing.
> 
> ETA. Please don’t confuse what I said with personal admiration for her.  Far from it.


You are unfortunately right! MM is someone who takes advantage of everybody or everything for her own profit. She is ruthless and the bigger she becomes, the more difficult to stop. She wouldn't be able to achieve all this without being connected to the BRF. QE and the rest of the family should distance from her and remove her undeserved titles.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @sdkitty but this is copy & paste!
> 
> This pathetic couple is everywhere! It's not enough to be dealing with a lethal virus, but we have to put up with this ***.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sign with Spotify: Couple will follow in the footsteps of the Ob###s with exclusive podcast deal that 'uplifts audiences around the world' as couple build on their £100m Netflix contract*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed an exclusive podcast deal with Spotify, following in the footsteps of the Ob###s to add to their £100million agreement with Netflix.
> 
> The couple will produce and host their own shows, starting with a holiday special that will be released this month.
> 
> The couple's newly formed Archewell Audio will produce programming that 'uplifts and entertains audiences around the world' and features 'diverse perspectives and voices,' the Swedish firm said today.
> 
> Financial terms of the deal have not been disclosed.
> 
> 
> Their first show will be a ‘holiday special’ this month will ‘feature stories of hope and compassion from inspirational guests in celebration of the new year.’
> 
> Harry and Meghan both mimic church bells before saying: 'We can't wait to share it with you and will be out later this month'.
> 
> Meghan says: 'We're talking to some amazing people who will share their memories that have helped shaped this year. As we know this has been a difficult one for everyone'.
> 
> Touching on the pandemic Harry says: 'So many people have suffered so much pain this year, experiencing loss and a huge amount of uncertainty but it feels worth mentioning that 2020 has connected us in ways we could never have imagined. Through endless acts of compassion and kindness'.
> 
> Plugging the podcast Harry says: 'So here's what you need to do, tap follow right now. Go ahead, go on. Tap, follow and that way you won't miss out and you'll be able to hear new shows on Archewell Audio as soon as they drop'.
> 
> Finishing the trailer Meghan says: 'We're so excited. So follow and listen for free only on Spotify. We'll meet you back here soon'.
> 
> Harry signs off with an American-sounding 'happy holidays' while Meghan ends with a British 'cheers'.
> 
> the spread of the ....


Ugh, I was just thinking about getting Spotify too.  No way now!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @sdkitty but this is copy & paste!
> 
> This pathetic couple is everywhere! It's not enough to be dealing with a lethal virus, but we have to put up with this ***.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sign with Spotify: Couple will follow in the footsteps of the Ob###s with exclusive podcast deal that 'uplifts audiences around the world' as couple build on their £100m Netflix contract*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have signed an exclusive podcast deal with Spotify, following in the footsteps of the Ob###s to add to their £100million agreement with Netflix.
> 
> The couple will produce and host their own shows, starting with a holiday special that will be released this month.
> 
> The couple's newly formed Archewell Audio will produce programming that 'uplifts and entertains audiences around the world' and features 'diverse perspectives and voices,' the Swedish firm said today.
> 
> Financial terms of the deal have not been disclosed.
> 
> 
> Their first show will be a ‘holiday special’ this month will ‘feature stories of hope and compassion from inspirational guests in celebration of the new year.’
> 
> Harry and Meghan both mimic church bells before saying: 'We can't wait to share it with you and will be out later this month'.
> 
> Meghan says: 'We're talking to some amazing people who will share their memories that have helped shaped this year. As we know this has been a difficult one for everyone'.
> 
> Touching on the pandemic Harry says: 'So many people have suffered so much pain this year, experiencing loss and a huge amount of uncertainty but it feels worth mentioning that 2020 has connected us in ways we could never have imagined. Through endless acts of compassion and kindness'.
> 
> Plugging the podcast Harry says: 'So here's what you need to do, tap follow right now. Go ahead, go on. Tap, follow and that way you won't miss out and you'll be able to hear new shows on Archewell Audio as soon as they drop'.
> 
> Finishing the trailer Meghan says: 'We're so excited. So follow and listen for free only on Spotify. We'll meet you back here soon'.
> 
> Harry signs off with an American-sounding 'happy holidays' while Meghan ends with a British 'cheers'.
> 
> the spread of the ....


we need them to "uplift" us....no thank you


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Ugh, I was just thinking about getting Spotify too.  No way now!


we have the free version....so we get the music (with some commercials) and don't pay


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

_*Go on, tap, go on, follow....go ahead, GO. ON!!!!!!!!!!!  You need to be educated!!!!!  We have so much to teach you!!!!!*_

hehe.  I can just hear her chanting that.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Say what you will, but she has let nothing stand in her way to get what she wanted.  Friends, family, the truth.  Nothing.
> 
> ETA. Please don’t confuse what I said with personal admiration for her.  Far from it.



Oh, she is a perfect example of single-minded determination and ambition to claw her way to the top. There are certainly plenty of people like her out there. You see it in the workplace all the time. And it's the same kind of situation. Half of the people can see through the ruse and know exactly what is being done, while the other half are completely fooled. 

It's rare to be able to witness something like this on an international scale.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> You are unfortunately right! MM is someone who takes advantage of everybody or everything for her own profit. She is ruthless and the bigger she becomes, the more difficult to stop. She wouldn't be able to achieve all this without being connected to the BRF. QE and the rest of the family should distance from her and remove her undeserved titles.



Agreed. And I find it amusing that despite all what M has "achieved" her PR moves are often disastrous. Only her ardent sugars think she's great and probably gaze lovingly at their Duchess of Sussex figurines displayed with framed prints of unicorns and kittens. As far as I'm concerned, anyone with working brain cells consider her a spoiled self-important laughingstock at this point.


----------



## Chanbal

Archewell audio, what is this?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. And I find it amusing that despite all what M has "achieved" her PR moves are often disastrous. Only her ardent sugars think she's great and probably gaze lovingly at their Duchess of Sussex figurines displayed with framed prints of unicorns and kittens. As far as I'm concerned, anyone with working brain cells consider her a spoiled self-important laughingstock at this point.


when I stop hearing (and reading) everyone is US media calling her Duchess, I'll be convinced her "fakeness" has been exposed and believed


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Archewell audio, what is this?
> 
> View attachment 4930341



Probably the name of their podcast.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oh, she is a perfect example of single-minded determination and ambition to claw her way to the top. There are certainly plenty of people like her out there. You see it in the workplace all the time. And it's the same kind of situation. Half of the people can see through the ruse and know exactly what is being done, while the other half are completely fooled.
> 
> *It's rare to be able to witness something like this on an international scale.*



Could we view this as MM uniting the world? It may finally justify a nomination for that much wished Nobel peace prize! 

What this couple has been doing is shocking and ridiculous, humor is a saving grace.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *Could we view this as MM uniting the world?* It may finally justify a nomination for that much wished Nobel peace prize!
> 
> What this couple has been doing is shocking and ridiculous, humor is a saving grace.



I think we've seen that MM is as divisive a figure as anybody outside of politics. We can only hope she stays out of politics.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meg, your ship be sinkin’.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Archewell audio, what is this?
> 
> View attachment 4930341



To explain further, they are likely starting up their own podcast station for Spotify. Archewell Audio could be their show's and their station's name. That way they can collect advertising $$$ and try to get other podcasters to put their shows on their station because they will need 24/7 content and they won't want to do all that work themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Could we view this as MM uniting the world? It may finally justify a nomination for that much wished Nobel peace prize!
> 
> What this couple has been doing is shocking and ridiculous, humor is a saving grace.


These two are making the D&D of Windsor look good   At least they stuck to their vapid lives once King George told his brother that there was only room for one King in the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> To explain further, they are likely starting up their own podcast station for Spotify. Archewell Audio could be their show's and their station's name. That way they can collect advertising $$$ and try to get other podcasters to put their shows on their station because they will need 24/7 content and they won't want to do all that work themselves.


Work?  Surely you jest!


----------



## Tootsie17

kemilia said:


> These 2 are living in some dream world (Uplifting Videos!). This comes across as so very desperate to be "some bodies" and get paid for it. Yet they left the most "some bodies" Family/Firm in the world (and no doubt he's regretting it--he looks awful all the time now).


You are 100% correct! Every time I think about them saying they wanted privacy, I roll my eyes and laugh.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Work?  Surely you jest!



I expect one hour a week or a two-hour show twice a month from them. 

It takes time, planning, and effort to do a good podcast. I'm assuming they will want to interview guests and discuss topics and not just yammer on about whatever pops in their heads because they are in love with their own voices.

Never fear. I'm sure they have already found some poor schmos to do the hard work for them so they can sit back and take the credit.


----------



## gracekelly

Tootsie17 said:


> You are 100% correct! Every time I think about them saying they wanted privacy, I roll my eyes and laugh.


Interestingly, you. aren’t the only one and mainstream media has been saying the same.    It just makes them look more foolish.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Oh, she is a perfect example of single-minded determination and ambition to claw her way to the top. There are certainly plenty of people like her out there. You see it in the workplace all the time. And it's the same kind of situation. Half of the people can see through the ruse and know exactly what is being done, while the other half are completely fooled.
> 
> It's rare to be able to witness something like this on an international scale.



And what's really rare is to see someone screw up so bad after they've climbed the rungs on the ladder. Comments I read on other sites include remarks about Harry's gonads being in Meghan's purse, Meghan's fakeness, their hypocrisy about demanding privacy yet desperate for media coverage, etc. The Palace must be reeling about Harry's fall from grace. He's ranking right up there with Andrew's destroyed reputation. It's pretty bad when you become so emasculated that you have the respect level of a perverted criminal.


----------



## CobaltBlu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Before clevr, it was hippy zippy elixir bar.
> 
> _The sun casts its last golden rays over the desert, illuminating the kind of scene that made me first fall in love with festivals. Hundreds of ecstatic bodies make a sea of multicolored movement, swirling around one another, kicking up dust that embraces them in the fading light. The beat drops, and the crowd seems to experience a kind of collective joy uncommon in the “outside world.” The night is young, and sunrise will see the same endless revelry.
> 
> I take a slow, appreciative sip from the warm cup in my hands. It’s the end of my shift at our vegan food truck, and I’m powering up for the next 10 hours of dancing. My potion is a clumsy concoction of every superfood we had lying around: organic cacao, maca, rhodiola, ashwagandha, and ginseng—ingredients that a few years ago would have sounded more like they belonged in a science lab than in my mug._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Awakening of an Elixir Goddess | Spirituality & Health
> 
> 
> Spirituality & Health Magazine provides inspiration for conscious living, healthy diet and lifestyle, social action, spiritual wisdom, and sustainability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spiritualityhealth.com



OK, that broke my brain a little.  That was the most ridiculous dreck I have read in quite a while. 

Also, Meghan's face does not look pregnant to me, unless she has edema or something. It looks like she filled in her nasolabial folds and everything else and didnt have the good sense to wait for it to settle before being on camera. She is a mess, she was quite attractive when this all started, she really rocked the freckles and had a pretty authentic face. Now her face matches the rest of her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> I expect one hour a week or a two-hour show twice a month from them.
> 
> It takes time, planning, and effort to do a good podcast. I'm assuming they will want to interview guests and discuss topics and not just yammer on about whatever pops in their heads because they are in love with their own voices.
> 
> Never fear. I'm sure they have already found some poor schmos to do the hard work for them so they can sit back and take the credit.



I agree, podcasting is something that sounds easy, but it’s hard to do well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A podcast?  Sure, let them do it. Their zoom chats were unsuccessful, so sure, let them spout off all their _brilliant_ (not) ideas. LOL.  Undoubtedly in order to get listeners, they will need to resort to some trash-talk.  Wonder who they will pick on ??? Hmmmm.


@lanasyogamama  You are so correct. If podcasts were easy, all these wealthy, unemployable folks would be successful with it.  From this pandemic, we have learned that quality matters.  H&M have repeatedly proven weak in so many areas. This will be one more.

ETA:  Take at look at W&K’s Instagram story.  *This* is quality.
W&K instagam

ETA2:  new name for H&M : The Not-so-great Pretenders


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> A podcast?  Sure, let them do it. Their zoom chats were unsuccessful, so sure, let them spout off all their _brilliant_ (not) ideas. LOL.  Undoubtedly in order to get listeners, they will need to resort to some trash-talk.  Wonder who they will pick on ??? Hmmmm.
> 
> 
> @lanasyogamama  You are so correct. If podcasts were easy, all these wealthy, unemployable folks would be successful with it.  From this pandemic, we have learned that quality matters.  H&M have repeatedly proven weak in so many areas. This will be one more.
> 
> ETA:  Take at look at W&K’s Instagram story.  *This* is quality.
> W&K instagam
> 
> ETA2:  new name for H&M : The Not-so-great Pretenders


The difference between what the Harkles do and what the Cambs do is loving hands at home vs professional production.  The Cambs have a well oiled machine behind them and the Harkles have per diem help.


----------



## TC1

I just read a meme that said "men who won't go to therapy start podcasts" and then "women who start podcasts do so because they're not able to join OnlyFans"   Spot on


----------



## csshopper

January 18, 2020 from the Official Statement from Buckingham Palace:

     While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, *the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty," the statement continued.

*So it took less than a year to degrade themselves and kick ethics to the curb. Their association to the Pervert Prince is not by accident. Harry should be ashamed of himself. Crawled into bed with a rapacious, conniving, narcissistic beech and evidently can't/will not get out. Hawking themselves to the highest bidder like a couple of snake oil salesmen, just as Andrew did.

 Strange definition of "Freedom", but I guess they've found what they wanted, in a very "private" way, of course.

Edited to add this quote from the Daily Mail, and reported elsewhere, in January which may be relevant: 

"Stoic and with an unwavering loyalty towards her daughter and son-in-law, Doria Ragland has emerged as a 'silent but steely' influence behind the couple's decision to seek financial independence in North America.

The woman who instilled in her daughter from a young age the motto 'don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing – has become close to Prince Harry."


----------



## Chanbal

The article mentions they have not done biographies yet, doesn't Finding Freedom count as MM's biography (or autobiography)?*






"How Harry and Meghan have emulated B###ck and Michelle Ob###'s post-White House money-making deals 
SPOTIFY
NETFLIX
PRIVATE SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS"

Complete text at the end of article*

Here are some of the delightful comments from all corners of the world:


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I don’t believe she gave this company a penny. It was all done as an exchange. She merches for them and they get to show her off as celeb interested in the company. I expect this product to flop. Too expensive. Yes they will sell it at Whole Foods and possibly Trader Joe’s, but it is too costly for mainstream markets.   She Markled another victim of greed


When I read about this (ahem) "product" and its CEO this morning .. well, fancy my crunchy-granola-moolah .. seriously?!?!?!  While I think eating/drinking right is a good thing, I think this gal has been eating more than a few of those "not-regular" mushrooms!! .. and @gracekelly , I can't agree with you enough .. seriously??? .. at that price?? .. for a bunch of sawdust??  Uh - no, I'll pass and have my regular morning Capuccino thank you!!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, the millennials are excited about the pod from what I’m seeing online.  

Can you imagine Harry doing a paid ad?? Wild.


----------



## rose60610

At Meghan and Harry's wedding, when Harry placed the ring on Meghan's finger, it became the loudest KA-CHING heard around the world. Meghan married a cash register.


----------



## Melocoton

I rarely post these days.  Instead I just read and laugh.  But a podcast of these two birdbrains trying to make us feel good struck me as particularly offensive and I needed to post!
Spend less time thanking us for our efforts like we're silly humans who need praise.  All I see are many empty sentences and pretty lipstick with these two.  Where's the substance?!  Why don't they put their money where their mouth is?  Perhaps spend time (more than a staged photo op) and resources with organizations who benefit those in need?


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, the millennials are excited about the pod from what I’m seeing online.
> 
> Can you imagine Harry doing a paid ad?? Wild.




Millennials are excited about M&H? Well, they also ate Tide pods detergent. Sounds about right.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Millennials are excited about M&H? Well, they also ate Tide pods detergent. Sounds about right.


Probably sniffed glue too.


----------



## Mendocino

CarryOn2020 said:


> A podcast?  Sure, let them do it. Their zoom chats were unsuccessful, so sure, let them spout off all their _brilliant_ (not) ideas. LOL.  Undoubtedly in order to get listeners, they will need to resort to some trash-talk.  Wonder who they will pick on ??? Hmmmm.
> 
> 
> @lanasyogamama  You are so correct. If podcasts were easy, all these wealthy, unemployable folks would be successful with it.  From this pandemic, we have learned that quality matters.  H&M have repeatedly proven weak in so many areas. This will be one more.
> 
> ETA:  Take at look at W&K’s Instagram story.  *This* is quality.
> W&K instagam
> 
> ETA2:  new name for H&M : The Not-so-great Pretenders


Will and Kate's video is so well done! I teared up at the look on the children's faces.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The difference between what the Harkles do and what the Cambs do is loving hands at home vs professional production.  The Cambs have a well oiled machine behind them and the Harkles have per diem help.



Kinda like the difference between fast fashion and Hermes.  All have their place and their audiences.  Still. Quality matters.



CeeJay said:


> When I read about this (ahem) "product" and its CEO this morning .. well, fancy my crunchy-granola-moolah .. seriously?!?!?!  While I think eating/drinking right is a good thing, I think this gal has been eating more than a few of those "not-regular" mushrooms!! .. and @gracekelly , I can't agree with you enough .. seriously??? .. at that price?? .. for a bunch of sawdust??  Uh - no, I'll pass and have my regular morning Capuccino thank you!!!!



Uh, some of us remember the mushroom era from the 60s/70s/80s/90s/00s, etc.  Odd that every generation thinks they have discovered the ‘new healthy high’. So much egotistical thinking even in a pandemic. Mushrooms and teas come with all kinds of warnings and cautions, the latest being the former head of Zappos. We all need to be so careful what we allow into our worlds.

@csshopper  excellent quotes and excellent comparison to the Pervert Prince. IMO H&M are flaunting his white privilege. Sad that Barack and Michelle want to be associated with the H&M mushroom crowd.  It ain’t cool and it ain’t smart, puff puff, sip sip.

Quality matters.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, the millennials are excited about the pod from what I’m seeing online.
> 
> Can you imagine Harry doing a paid ad?? Wild.



Did they say what they were excited about? I'd love to hear what they believe H&M can bring to their lives.


----------



## carmen56

Can’t wait to read Piers Morgan’s take on the Spotify thing!


----------



## bag-mania

Here we go... This is painful to read. Harry and Meghan are "citizens of the world" now! I haven't had any respect for CNN for several years but their calling Harry and Meghan's little effort a media empire shows just how totally detached from reality CNN has become. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media empire expands with Spotify podcast deal*
New York (CNN Business)Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are podcasters now.
Spotify (SPOT) announced on Tuesday an exclusive partnership with Archewell Audio, a new, audio-first production company founded by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

The deal allows the couple to grow their streaming and media footprint. It's their latest investment since they announced in January that they were stepping back from their roles as senior members of the British royal family and becoming "financially independent." In September, Harry and Meghan signed a multi-year production deal with Netflix. Meghan also narrated the documentary "Elephants" on Disney+.

For Spotify, a music streaming app that is also building a podcast empire with major acquisitions and exclusive content from big names, the deal cements its reputation as a destination for prestige audio content. Kim Kardashian West signed an exclusive deal with Spotify in June. Michelle ***** debuted "The Michelle ***** Podcast" on Spotify in July. "The Joe Rogan Experience," one of the most popular podcasts in the world, is now exclusive to Spotify.

This partnership brings exclusive content from two more high profile celebrities to serve and grow Spotify's global audience of 320 million monthly active users. The company said in a press release Tuesday that the two "will host and produce podcasts that build community through shared experience, narratives, and values."

Archewell Audio's multi-year partnership with Spotify includes numerous programs, some hosted and others produced by the Duke and Duchess. A holiday special hosted by them will be released later this month. Their first series will debut next year. All projects will be available exclusively on Spotify.

"What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are."

Dawn Ostroff, chief content and advertising business officer for Spotify, told CNN Business last year that the company was planning to offer more exclusives as a way to lure customers from the other podcast platforms.

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex may live in California but the power of their voices rests in their status as citizens of the world," Ostroff said in a statement on Tuesday. "That they are embracing the extraordinary capacity of podcasts on Spotify while also seeking to elevate underrepresented voices is a testament to their appreciation for the potential of audio storytelling."









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media empire expands with Spotify podcast deal
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are becoming podcasters. Spotify announced an exclusive partnership with Archewell Audio, an audio-first production company by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, on Tuesday.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Piers will be looking forward to their trashing the BRF. 
Heard yesterday CNN is up for sale, cheap. Maybe H&M can cut themselves a deal.


----------



## bag-mania

Anyone want to listen to their holiday special and report back here?


----------



## Sol Ryan

rose60610 said:


> Millennials are excited about M&H? Well, they also ate Tide pods detergent. Sounds about right.





csshopper said:


> Probably sniffed glue too.




As a millennial, I have never eaten a tide pod... and am definitely no longer excited about H&M.

Sniffing glue now... do you mean rubber cement? Because in kindergarten that stuff was high end... jk


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Anyone want to listen to their holiday special and report back here?



*That* is a huge ask, love. We are in a pandemic. The sky is falling. I’m on the edge already. More ear poison may push me over. Eeeek. 


ETA:  I will find a transcript.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm, looks like a man owns this company.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4929959


HA HA HA .. leave it to you to find this .. good sleuthing @gracekelly !!!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> *That* is a huge ask, love. We are in a pandemic. The sky is falling. I’m on the edge already. More ear poison may push me over. Eeeek.
> 
> 
> ETA:  I will find a transcript.



The best way to look at it is their new station will provide us with subject matter to discuss here for many months to come. We can take those Harkle lemons and make lemonade.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The best way to look at it is their new station will provide us with subject matter to discuss here for many months to come. We can take those Harkle lemons and make lemonade.



As long as the lemonade has real sugar, I will drink it.
No shrooms, no powerful adaptogens, no oat milk, no coconut cream, just simple lemons, water and sugar, with more sugar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe they will win a Poddy.








						Watch Saturday Night Live Highlight: The Poddys - NBC.com
					

Watch Saturday Night Live highlight 'The Poddys' on NBC.com




					www.nbc.com


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> "What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, *because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories*, *we are reminded of how interconnected we all are."*



I hate to burst Meghan's bubble, but the more I hear her stories the LESS connected I am to her. And since Meghan is such a staunch feminist, shouldn't she be furious that she's still called a "Duchess", a title bestowed only because of a man?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> To explain further, they are likely starting up their own podcast station for Spotify. Archewell Audio could be their show's and their station's name. That way they can collect advertising $$$ and try to get other podcasters to put their shows on their station because they will need 24/7 content and *they won't want to do all that work themselves*.


Or any of it.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Millennials are excited about M&H? Well, they also ate Tide pods detergent. Sounds about right.


Oh my god, too funny (& true)!  I can’t like this enough!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> A podcast?  Sure, let them do it. Their zoom chats were unsuccessful, so sure, let them spout off all their _brilliant_ (not) ideas. LOL.  Undoubtedly in order to get listeners, they will need to resort to some trash-talk.  Wonder who they will pick on ??? Hmmmm.
> 
> 
> @lanasyogamama  You are so correct. If podcasts were easy, all these wealthy, unemployable folks would be successful with it.  From this pandemic, we have learned that quality matters.  H&M have repeatedly proven weak in so many areas. This will be one more.
> 
> ETA:  Take at look at W&K’s Instagram story.  *This* is quality.
> W&K instagam
> 
> ETA2:  new name for H&M : The Not-so-great Pretenders


I'm taking bets on who they'll plagiarize first!!  Any takers??


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Millennials are excited about M&H? Well, they also ate Tide pods detergent. Sounds about right.


Can you imagine Harry doing a Tide commercial?   

"Meg told me the best way to remove pee stains from clothing after a camping trip is Tide!  Cheerio!"


----------



## CeeJay

mia55 said:


> The only topic I can think they discuss is- how bad the world and man child’s family is and how hard Meghan is trying to help everyone to get better (with no real action steps obviously, just gibberish).


Likely, the only topic they discuss is .. [wait for it] .. HER, HER, HER!!!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Or any of it.



Oh, they will want to do some of it. Meghan has been champing at the bit all year to get her voice heard. Thanks to Covid-19 she wasn't able to go at it full force until now. With the podcast they won't have to focus on one charitable subject for Archewell. They can discuss a new topic each week and then take "contributions" for it. It is such a diabolical idea it just might work.


----------



## bellecate

*"What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are." *

Read this part to my DH, then asked him what they were saying. His reply, "don't listen to us we have nothing to say"


----------



## bellecate

double post, oops


----------



## Luvbolide

bellecate said:


> *"What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are." *
> 
> Read this part to my DH, then asked him what they were saying. His reply, "don't listen to us we have nothing to say"




Her enthusiasm for podcasting may diminish when she realizes that listeners won’t be able to gaze upon her in awe.  Or at all.

Love the reference to a “media empire” which at this point exists solely of paper.  We shall see...


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> *"What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are." *
> 
> Read this part to my DH, then asked him what they were saying. His reply, "don't listen to us we have nothing to say"



They can record anywhere And they do not have to look at each other
And we do not have to look at them
 

Win win.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Anyone want to listen to their holiday special and report back here?


I'm dental phobic but I'd rather have a root canal.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe they will win a Poddy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch Saturday Night Live Highlight: The Poddys - NBC.com
> 
> 
> Watch Saturday Night Live highlight 'The Poddys' on NBC.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbc.com


Poddy or potty? They have a thing for toilets. We know they need them!


----------



## lanasyogamama

bellecate said:


> *"What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are." *
> 
> Read this part to my DH, then asked him what they were saying. His reply, "don't listen to us we have nothing to say"



Connect without distraction?! That’s not how I listen to podcasts. They’re kind of background noise for me while I work, clean, cook.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> I'm dental phobic but I'd rather have a root canal.


People like the Harkles make me sometimes wish to pack (tons of books) and move to a far away beach without internet access.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The world is poking fun at H&M.  When will they learn?








						Twitter users poke fun at trailer for Harry and Meghan's new podcast
					

The couple will produce and host their own shows as part of the newly formed Archewell Audio - starting with a 'holiday special' that 'uplifts audiences around the world'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lulilu

I hate to say it, but every day they are announcing some new deal -- just like they wanted, it seems.  blech

As much as i dislike them, and would rather chew glass than see or hear from them (I never watch their little appearances; can't stand the sound or sight of them), they are getting companies to enter these deals.  Someone must think they are gonna make money.


----------



## Lodpah

lulilu said:


> I hate to say it, but every day they are announcing some new deal -- just like they wanted, it seems.  blech
> 
> As much as i dislike them, and would rather chew glass than see or hear from them (I never watch their little appearances; can't stand the sound or sight of them), they are getting companies to enter these deals.  Someone must think they are gonna make money.


Well with all the PRs they have on board, they ARE REALLY DESPERATE. The thing is once most people get the vaccine, I imagine most will want to get back to normal, vacations, meeting up with families, concerts, traveling, meeting up with families, rinse, repeat. They definitely will not hold the interest of anyone (well maybe a few) and that's it.

The stars in quarantine or staying at home will make noise, start being out there so I can't imagine any interest in them at all. PODCASTS? I think we only need to hear half of what they say and then it's done. 

I'm literally laughing at the fact that they are going to do podcasts to uplift people. To Megladon: BEECH! Not your kind of uplifting! If you ain't uplifting, what makes you think you can uplift me? Lol. What are they smoking in those 19 millions of bathrooms they got? 

The PR firms are definitely making good money from these two Vanitors.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

LOL


----------



## CarryOn2020

Vanitors, indeed!

Surely the Christmas pod will be about the importance of family.  Ya kno, positive relationships with parents, brothers, sisters, cousins. 
Right?   Maybe they should stick to the shroom tea.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I hate to say it, but every day they are announcing some new deal -- just like they wanted, it seems.  blech
> 
> As much as i dislike them, and would rather chew glass than see or hear from them (I never watch their little appearances; can't stand the sound or sight of them), they are getting companies to enter these deals.  Someone must think they are gonna make money.



They are doing better than they could have hoped.  Something has changed. With the _New York Times_ piece last month and the CNN appearance last week as well as the glowing article, we may need to accept that they have become darlings of the mainstream media in the US.  That isn’t the work of a PR agency.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They are doing better than they could have hoped.  Something has changed. With the _New York Times_ piece last month and the CNN appearance last week as well as the glowing article, we may need to accept that they have become darlings of the mainstream media in the US.  That isn’t the work of a PR agency.


They are doing a lot better than expected, but I see here the work and connections of their PR agencies (and perhaps also Oprah's connections). Where is M. Anderson living these days?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> They are doing a lot better than expected, but I see here the work and connections of their PR agencies (and perhaps also Oprah's connections). Where is M. Anderson living these days?



In theory H&M (or their agencies) shouldn’t be able to buy or schmooze their way into favor with the news media the way they did with the entertainment press. Of course I suppose anything is possible these days.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Here we go... This is painful to read. Harry and Meghan are "citizens of the world" now! I haven't had any respect for CNN for several years but their calling Harry and Meghan's little effort a media empire shows just how totally detached from reality CNN has become.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media empire expands with Spotify podcast deal*
> New York (CNN Business)Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are podcasters now.
> Spotify (SPOT) announced on Tuesday an exclusive partnership with Archewell Audio, a new, audio-first production company founded by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> The deal allows the couple to grow their streaming and media footprint. It's their latest investment since they announced in January that they were stepping back from their roles as senior members of the British royal family and becoming "financially independent." In September, Harry and Meghan signed a multi-year production deal with Netflix. Meghan also narrated the documentary "Elephants" on Disney+.
> 
> For Spotify, a music streaming app that is also building a podcast empire with major acquisitions and exclusive content from big names, the deal cements its reputation as a destination for prestige audio content. Kim Kardashian West signed an exclusive deal with Spotify in June. Michelle ***** debuted "The Michelle ***** Podcast" on Spotify in July. "The Joe Rogan Experience," one of the most popular podcasts in the world, is now exclusive to Spotify.
> 
> This partnership brings exclusive content from two more high profile celebrities to serve and grow Spotify's global audience of 320 million monthly active users. The company said in a press release Tuesday that the two "will host and produce podcasts that build community through shared experience, narratives, and values."
> 
> Archewell Audio's multi-year partnership with Spotify includes numerous programs, some hosted and others produced by the Duke and Duchess. A holiday special hosted by them will be released later this month. Their first series will debut next year. All projects will be available exclusively on Spotify.
> 
> "What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are."
> 
> Dawn Ostroff, chief content and advertising business officer for Spotify, told CNN Business last year that the company was planning to offer more exclusives as a way to lure customers from the other podcast platforms.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex may live in California but the power of their voices rests in their status as citizens of the world," Ostroff said in a statement on Tuesday. "That they are embracing the extraordinary capacity of podcasts on Spotify while also seeking to elevate underrepresented voices is a testament to their appreciation for the potential of audio storytelling."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media empire expands with Spotify podcast deal
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are becoming podcasters. Spotify announced an exclusive partnership with Archewell Audio, an audio-first production company by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com




I tried so hard not to gag reading CNN's rendition of Palace Sucking. What they fail to realize is that M&H claim to distance themselves from what CNN considers the shameless suck-worthy Buckingham prize. They must have a budget dedicated to replacing pants that wear out at the knees sucking favor at the BRF's many estates and the power the BRF who LIKE being part of the BRF yield. CNN's reputation has definitely gone down the toilet so no wonder they curry favor of the two losers who bought a house with no less than, what, 18 of them?  "Citizens of the World"???  Oh my!! Sounds so, so, so, um, so LOFTY! Aren't we ALL citizens of SOMEWHERE on Earth? So aren't we ALL "Citizens of the World"? I tell ya, if you're an unemployed English major (imagine that), apply at CNN. They could use somebody who can string two sentences together without making readers/viewers yak in the gutter.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> In theory H&M (or their agencies) shouldn’t be able to buy or schmooze their way into favor with the news media the way they did with the entertainment press. Of course I suppose anything is possible these days.



You just need to know somebody that knows somebody... Good agencies have good contacts in many places. 

MM&H are disliked in Europe, they wouldn't be able to do there what they are doing here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> In theory H&M (or their agencies) shouldn’t be able to buy or schmooze their way into favor with the news media the way they did with the entertainment press. Of course I suppose anything is possible these days.



Although I don’t see them as that popular, it doesn’t surprise me at all that CNN would rush in to defend them. CNN, soon to be shuttered, is desperate. Don’t let the headlines of the $$$$ scare you. They won’t see much of that money. Companies are going out of business daily. Long term health for most of their companies is not good.

Remember he has used white privilege to the max, eventually the quid-pro-quo’s will be revealed, just like uncle Andy did/does. She used her A list Hwood connections as well as other popular causes - people are noticing the lack of diversity in the shroom tea company. The pandemic has caused lots of pain in Hwood (listen to Tom Cruise’s rant). Oprah has probably lost a few million which at their level means jobs (see article below). A listers like to be seen helping others just so their name is in the news which explains MM’s so-called support. Their lack of talent and skill is still visible to all. Once Hwood is back up and running, H&M‘s thrill ride will end.  Patience.










						Hearst to cut 59 staffers at Oprah Magazine
					

The first crack in Hearst Magazines’ no-layoff policy during COVID-19 opened up last week when it revealed plans to cut 59 staffers at O, the Oprah Magazine, which is pulling the plug on its …




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I don’t see them as that popular, it doesn’t surprise me at all. Don’t let the headlines of the $$$$ scare you. They won’t see much of that money. Companies are going out of business daily. Long term health for most of their companies is not good.
> 
> Remember he has used white privilege to the max, eventually the quid-pro-quo’s will be revealed, just like uncle Andy did/does. She used her A list Hwood connections as well as other popular causes - people are noticing the lack of diversity in the shroom tea company. The pandemic has caused lots of pain in Hwood (listen to Tom Cruise’s rant). Oprah has probably lost a few million which at their level means jobs (see article below). A listers like to be seen helping others just so their name is in the news which explains MM’s so-called support. Their lack of talent and skill is still visible to all. Once Hwood is back up and running, H&M‘s thrill ride will end.  Patience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hearst to cut 59 staffers at Oprah Magazine
> 
> 
> The first crack in Hearst Magazines’ no-layoff policy during COVID-19 opened up last week when it revealed plans to cut 59 staffers at O, the Oprah Magazine, which is pulling the plug on its …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I would say that both are using entitlement to the max. With companies going out of business and layoffs, seeing these two, without talent or work, making millionaire deals is


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I would say that both are using entitlement to the max. With companies going out of business and layoffs, seeing these two, without talent or work, making millionaire deals is



And with the BRF privilege, land, palaces, jewels, cars, blah blah.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I don’t see them as that popular, it doesn’t surprise me at all that CNN would rush in to defend them. CNN, soon to be shuttered, is desperate. Don’t let the headlines of the $$$$ scare you. They won’t see much of that money. Companies are going out of business daily. Long term health for most of their companies is not good.the time of day had she m
> 
> Remember he has used white privilege to the max, eventually the quid-pro-quo’s will be revealed, just like uncle Andy did/does. She used her A list Hwood connections as well as other popular causes - people are noticing the lack of diversity in the shroom tea company. The pandemic has caused lots of pain in Hwood (listen to Tom Cruise’s rant). Oprah has probably lost a few million which at their level means jobs (see article below). A listers like to be seen helping others just so their name is in the news which explains MM’s so-called support. Their lack of talent and skill is still visible to all. Once Hwood is back up and running, H&M‘s thrill ride will end.  Patience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hearst to cut 59 staffers at Oprah Magazine
> 
> 
> The first crack in Hearst Magazines’ no-layoff policy during COVID-19 opened up last week when it revealed plans to cut 59 staffers at O, the Oprah Magazine, which is pulling the plug on its …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



LOVE your post. Especially the "he used white privilege to the max" and then we consider *WHO *latched herself onto that? And then attempts to leverage his (no, not HIS, only his ancestry) horrible colonialist history to the modern day suffering of minorities? I MEAN IT'S SOOOOOOO HORRIBLE THAT SHE MARRIED INTO IT.  HulLOW?????  My goodness, Meghan is so holier-than-thou as to NEVER do anything for simply money, right???? RIGHT????  And her "Hollywood connections" would not give her the time of day had she not married this horrific WHITE man whose family profited greatly from their colonial past (eat s*** CNN and other media). As they lounge and scheme in their precious Montecito mansion how to take advantage of their sugars and desperate media suck-ups, they must be laughing their tushes off.  Since Harry's gonads are in Meghan's handbag, he must be thinking he's brilliant for making some mega dough (see Grandma, I don't need your $, only Dad's (who has your money)) from the same Hollywood hypocrites that love him only for having been born into such a racist colonialist family. Just think. These people breed. And we're already getting reports that Archie ALREADY had a British accent! Egads. Like that's news. But I digress. M&H are so pathetic they think their podcasts can elevate them from their disaster visit to a cemetery where they used dead soldiers in an attempt to upstage Harry's family. Initially I had hopes and happiness for Meghan when I was glued to the TV watching their wedding. Now? Not so much.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> LOVE your post. Especially the "he used white privilege to the max" and then we consider *WHO *latched herself onto that? And then attempts to leverage his (no, not HIS, only his ancestry) horrible colonialist history to the modern day suffering of minorities? I MEAN IT'S SOOOOOOO HORRIBLE THAT SHE MARRIED INTO IT.  HulLOW?????  My goodness, Meghan is so holier-than-thou as to NEVER do anything for simply money, right???? RIGHT????  And her "Hollywood connections" would not give her the time of day had she not married this horrific WHITE man whose family profited greatly from their colonial past (eat s*** CNN and other media). As they lounge and scheme in their precious Montecito mansion how to take advantage of their sugars and desperate media suck-ups, they must be laughing their tushes off.  Since Harry's gonads are in Meghan's handbag, he must be thinking he's brilliant for making some mega dough (see Grandma, I don't need your $, only Dad's (who has your money)) from the same Hollywood hypocrites that love him only for having been born into such a racist colonialist family. Just think. These people breed. And we're already getting reports that Archie ALREADY had a British accent! Egads. Like that's news. But I digress. M&H are so pathetic they think their podcasts can elevate them from their disaster visit to a cemetery where they used dead soldiers in an attempt to upstage Harry's family. Initially I had hopes and happiness for Meghan when I was glued to the TV watching their wedding. Now? Not so much.


That cemetery visit was their Hanoi Jane moment. They can’t recover from that. People, especially who have familea killed in action, or vets, will never forget.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Anyone want to listen to their holiday special and report back here?



I'll be ill that day


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> They can record anywhere And they do not have to look at each other
> And we do not have to look at them
> 
> 
> Win win.



We don't have to listen to them either 

The winner takes it all


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lodpah  Hanoi Jane, indeed.  H&M’s photo op has caused almost as much fury, almost.

@rose60610  Let them laugh. What goes around comes around


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> I hate to say it, but every day they are announcing some new deal -- just like they wanted, it seems.  blech
> 
> As much as i dislike them, and would rather chew glass than see or hear from them (I never watch their little appearances; can't stand the sound or sight of them), they are getting companies to enter these deals.  Someone must think they are gonna make money.



Deal figures quoted are usually calculated on possible earnings and not advances. If they don't bring in cold hard cash they are gone and with little return for themselves in terms of money or future invites.


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> Ugh, I was just thinking about getting Spotify too.  No way now!



I don't even know what Spotify is.....and I don't think I want to know either!


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> Here we go... This is painful to read. Harry and Meghan are "citizens of the world" now! I haven't had any respect for CNN for several years but their calling Harry and Meghan's little effort a media empire shows just how totally detached from reality CNN has become.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media empire expands with Spotify podcast deal*
> New York (CNN Business)Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are podcasters now.
> Spotify (SPOT) announced on Tuesday an exclusive partnership with Archewell Audio, a new, audio-first production company founded by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> The deal allows the couple to grow their streaming and media footprint. It's their latest investment since they announced in January that they were stepping back from their roles as senior members of the British royal family and becoming "financially independent." In September, Harry and Meghan signed a multi-year production deal with Netflix. Meghan also narrated the documentary "Elephants" on Disney+.
> 
> For Spotify, a music streaming app that is also building a podcast empire with major acquisitions and exclusive content from big names, the deal cements its reputation as a destination for prestige audio content. Kim Kardashian West signed an exclusive deal with Spotify in June. Michelle ***** debuted "The Michelle ***** Podcast" on Spotify in July. "The Joe Rogan Experience," one of the most popular podcasts in the world, is now exclusive to Spotify.
> 
> This partnership brings exclusive content from two more high profile celebrities to serve and grow Spotify's global audience of 320 million monthly active users. The company said in a press release Tuesday that the two "will host and produce podcasts that build community through shared experience, narratives, and values."
> 
> Archewell Audio's multi-year partnership with Spotify includes numerous programs, some hosted and others produced by the Duke and Duchess. A holiday special hosted by them will be released later this month. Their first series will debut next year. All projects will be available exclusively on Spotify.
> 
> "What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are."
> 
> Dawn Ostroff, chief content and advertising business officer for Spotify, told CNN Business last year that the company was planning to offer more exclusives as a way to lure customers from the other podcast platforms.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex may live in California but the power of their voices rests in their status as citizens of the world," Ostroff said in a statement on Tuesday. "That they are embracing the extraordinary capacity of podcasts on Spotify while also seeking to elevate underrepresented voices is a testament to their appreciation for the potential of audio storytelling."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media empire expands with Spotify podcast deal
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are becoming podcasters. Spotify announced an exclusive partnership with Archewell Audio, an audio-first production company by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


I like how financially independent is in quotes. CNN believes that just like we do


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Their lack of talent and skill is still visible to all. Once Hwood is back up and running, H&M‘s thrill ride will end.  Patience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hearst to cut 59 staffers at Oprah Magazine
> 
> 
> The first crack in Hearst Magazines’ no-layoff policy during COVID-19 opened up last week when it revealed plans to cut 59 staffers at O, the Oprah Magazine, which is pulling the plug on its …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



I so hope you are right. I don't usually waste energy on wishing people ill, but with her, I want karma to kick her in the face instead of delivering surprise presents.


----------



## MrsSlocomb

It seems the doctor that supports the coffee is ant-vaxx. How low can they go?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'll be ill that day


Not taking one for the team, are we ?? lol 
Me neither


----------



## marietouchet

I have high hopes for the Spotify deal 
Michelle O has a deal like that, and I rarely hear about her since it is a subscription Svc that I do not have ..
I hope the JCMH deal helps the glimmer twins recede into a private world of their stans, I am tired of their being on the front page of real newspapers


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> I have high hopes for the Spotify deal
> Michelle O has a deal like that, and I rarely hear about her since it is a subscription Svc that I do not have ..
> I hope the JCMH deal helps the glimmer twins recede into a private world of their stans, I am tired of their being 9n the front page of real newspapers



Actually the podcasts are free, only the music part is paid if you want to play what you want and avoid ads.

That said, all their deals require them to produce content people will consume - they may have gotten an advance of some kind, but if they produce content with the depth and quality we’ve seen from them so far, their time in the limelight will be very short indeed. It’s hard to produce good content even for very savvy creatives; for two grifters who have the intelligence of a peanut, well...


----------



## marietouchet

tiktok said:


> Actually the podcasts are free, only the music part is paid if you want to play what you want and avoid ads.
> 
> That said, all their deals require them to produce content people will consume - they may have gotten an advance of some kind, but if they produce content with the depth and quality we’ve seen from them so far, their time in the limelight will be very short indeed. It’s hard to produce good content even for very savvy creatives; for two grifters who have the intelligence of a peanut, well...


Did you have to burst my bubble ? Lol
I want them to vanish from MY sight, they can quietly do whatever, as long as it does not clog up my real news feeds


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> Actually the podcasts are free, only the music part is paid if you want to play what you want and avoid ads.
> 
> That said, *all their deals require them to produce content people will consume* - they may have gotten an advance of some kind, but if they produce content with the depth and quality we’ve seen from them so far, their time in the limelight will be very short indeed. It’s hard to produce good content even for very savvy creatives; for two grifters who have the intelligence of a peanut, well...



That is where it will trip them up. Nobody goes to Spotify or Netflix to be nagged and told what they should be doing to make the world a better place. They go to those sources for entertainment, usually shallow entertainment TBH. I expect a big fuss to be made about their first few podcasts because everything they do gets inflated out of proportion in the media. How many weeks/months will it take before they exhaust their list of buzz topics that incite chatter among their sheep fans?


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> January 18, 2020 from the Official Statement from Buckingham Palace:
> 
> While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, *the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty," the statement continued.
> 
> *So it took less than a year to degrade themselves and kick ethics to the curb. Their association to the Pervert Prince is not by accident. Harry should be ashamed of himself. Crawled into bed with a rapacious, conniving, narcissistic beech and evidently can't/will not get out. Hawking themselves to the highest bidder like a couple of snake oil salesmen, just as Andrew did.
> 
> Strange definition of "Freedom", but I guess they've found what they wanted, in a very "private" way, of course.
> 
> Edited to add this quote from the Daily Mail, and reported elsewhere, in January which may be relevant:
> 
> "Stoic and with an unwavering loyalty towards her daughter and son-in-law, Doria Ragland has emerged as a 'silent but steely' influence behind the couple's decision to seek financial independence in North America.
> 
> The woman who instilled in her daughter from a young age the motto 'don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing – has become close to Prince Harry."


first time I've heard anything like this about Doria....I'll take it with a grain of salt.  but someone did raise this self-centered woman.  could be that it's not all her dad's fault.


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> I don't even know what Spotify is.....and I don't think I want to know either!


It's a (music and more I guess?) streaming app my kids were telling me to get, LOL.  Only reason I know, otherwise I'd never heard of it either.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> In theory H&M (or their agencies) shouldn’t be able to buy or schmooze their way into favor with the news media the way they did with the entertainment press. Of course I suppose anything is possible these days.


As far as I'm concerned, the "news" media is no better than gossip sites, at least in the US, these days.


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> As far as I'm concerned, the "news" media is no better than gossip sites, at least in the US, these days.


I'm hoping it will get better in the new year with a new head guy. Fingers crossed.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> As far as I'm concerned, the "news" media is no better than gossip sites, at least in the US, these days.



You are preaching to the choir there. They are ALL as biased as hell and do whatever they can to pump up their favorites while suppressing those they don't like. However, they used to at least try to give the illusion of impartiality and truth-seeking. They don't even bother with that anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> That is where it will trip them up. Nobody goes to Spotify or Netflix to be nagged and told what they should be doing to make the world a better place. They go to those sources for entertainment, usually shallow entertainment TBH. I expect a big fuss to be made about their first few podcasts because everything they do gets inflated out of proportion in the media. How many weeks/months will it take before they exhaust their list of buzz topics that incite chatter among their sheep fans?


You are 100% correct. Their stans won't be listening long to JCMH crying about his dead mother or her word salad. How long before she turns to fashion/makeup advice to keep them listening? Maybe podcasts about various "procedures" to look young forever!

Except for her constant fussing about her hair, I've been ok with her looks--she is attractive. But the latest pic with her wearing that awful pink blouse--she looks bad, totally bloated and puffy (imo). I'm kinda hoping it's due to pregnancy and not a pile of botox and fillers and peels. Could explain why JCMH was permitted to do videos without her--her face was settling. But I am leaning toward the pregnancy angle--no full body shots recently.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> You are 100% correct. Their stans won't be listening long to JCMH crying about his dead mother or her word salad. How long before she turns to fashion/makeup advice to keep them listening? Maybe podcasts about various "procedures" to look young forever!
> 
> Except for her constant fussing about her hair, I've been ok with her looks--she is attractive. But the latest pic with her wearing that awful pink blouse--she looks bad, totally bloated and puffy (imo). I'm kinda hoping it's due to pregnancy and not a pile of botox and fillers and peels. Could explain why JCMH was permitted to do videos without her--her face was settling. But I am leaning toward the pregnancy angle--no full body shots recently.


IDK.....I think she wants to be taken seriously....will be preaching about social issues, not admitting to having stuff done to her face


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> You are 100% correct. Their stans won't be listening long to JCMH crying about his dead mother or her word salad. How long before she turns to fashion/makeup advice to keep them listening? Maybe podcasts about various "procedures" to look young forever!
> 
> Except for her constant fussing about her hair, I've been ok with her looks--she is attractive. But the latest pic with her wearing that awful pink blouse--she looks bad, totally bloated and puffy (imo). I'm kinda hoping it's due to pregnancy and not a pile of botox and fillers and peels. Could explain why JCMH was permitted to do videos without her--her face was settling. But I am leaning toward the pregnancy angle--no full body shots recently.



Many of the people who have a favorable view of them think Meghan was treated unfairly by the BRF, had mean things written about her, and is otherwise a wonderful person. They either never heard or else don't believe all of the shady issues about her we discuss here. Feeling sorry for someone doesn't mean they want to listen to an hour a week of whatever Meghan and Harry think is relevant. Curiosity will get them listeners for a while. Meghan loses interest in her projects quickly. If she is still doing a regular podcast by next summer it will be a miracle.

I have no problem with her looks. I'm hoping there isn't a baby but that's for the kid's sake.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> first time I've heard anything like this about Doria....I'll take it with a grain of salt.  but someone did raise this self-centered woman.  could be that it's not all her dad's fault.


@sdkitty dad seems to be a kind man. He may have spoiled his daughter, but I don't think he is responsible for someone who's heartless.

@csshopper on "the motto 'don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing", I wonder how Doria's Loving Kindness Senior Care Company in Beverly Hills is doing these days.









						Meghan Markle's yoga-teaching mother Doria Ragland, 64, takes over as boss of elderly care homes firm - NewsBreak
					

Doria Ragland, the Duchess of Sussex's mother, has been appointed the boss of a care company for the elderly. The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. Meghan Markle's lawyer Rick Genow, who...




					www.newsbreak.com
				








__





						Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
					

The capacity to care is the thing which gives life it's deepest significance. - Pablo Casals About Us We Advocate and Coordinate Life Care Needs for Your Loved Ones. The elderly population is growing and will soon be the largest population in need of supportive services. With chronic illnes ...




					www.lovingkindnessseniorcare.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty dad seems to be a kind man. He may have spoiled his daughter, but I don't think he is responsible for someone who's heartless.
> 
> @csshopper on "the motto 'don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing", I wonder how Doria's Loving Kindness Senior Care Company in Beverly Hills is doing these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's yoga-teaching mother Doria Ragland, 64, takes over as boss of elderly care homes firm - NewsBreak
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland, the Duchess of Sussex's mother, has been appointed the boss of a care company for the elderly. The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. Meghan Markle's lawyer Rick Genow, who...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsbreak.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
> 
> 
> The capacity to care is the thing which gives life it's deepest significance. - Pablo Casals About Us We Advocate and Coordinate Life Care Needs for Your Loved Ones. The elderly population is growing and will soon be the largest population in need of supportive services. With chronic illnes ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lovingkindnessseniorcare.com


so Doria (a social worker) is CEO and CFO.  sounds like a money-making venture, not anything else.  but hopefully the stuff about Buddhism, kindness, etc. has some basis.  I'll bet it's not cheap for the elderly to get care there.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty dad seems to be a kind man. He may have spoiled his daughter, but I don't think he is responsible for someone who's heartless.
> 
> @csshopper on "the motto 'don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing", I wonder how Doria's Loving Kindness Senior Care Company in Beverly Hills is doing these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's yoga-teaching mother Doria Ragland, 64, takes over as boss of elderly care homes firm - NewsBreak
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland, the Duchess of Sussex's mother, has been appointed the boss of a care company for the elderly. The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. Meghan Markle's lawyer Rick Genow, who...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsbreak.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
> 
> 
> The capacity to care is the thing which gives life it's deepest significance. - Pablo Casals About Us We Advocate and Coordinate Life Care Needs for Your Loved Ones. The elderly population is growing and will soon be the largest population in need of supportive services. With chronic illnes ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lovingkindnessseniorcare.com


re the dad - IDK - can spoiling a girl - telling her she is a princess and better than anyone else - turn her into an egotistical narcissist?  I've said before we don't know if this personality of hers was taught or if some of it she was just born with.  could be a combo of mom/dad/nature


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so Doria (a social worker) is CEO and CFO.  sounds like a money-making venture, not anything else.  but *hopefully the stuff about Buddhism, kindness, etc. has some basis*.  *I'll bet it's not cheap for the elderly to get care there.*


The basis may follow the motto "don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing" @csshopper


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so Doria (a social worker) is CEO and CFO.  sounds like a money-making venture, not anything else.  but hopefully the stuff about Buddhism, kindness, etc. has some basis.  I'll bet it's not cheap for the elderly to get care there.



What I like about Doria is she keeps her mouth shut. I have no reason to believe she is doing anything untoward and that's because we don't know anything about her. If she is making money by providing quality care to seniors I have no objection. The patients know the rates going in and I expect for anyone entering a Beverly Hills facility money isn't an issue as it would be in other places.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> re the dad - IDK - can spoiling a girl - telling her she is a princess and better than anyone else - turn her into an egotistical narcissist?  I've said before we don't know if this personality of hers was taught or if some of it she was just born with.  could be a combo of mom/dad/nature


Are you sure that he told her that she is "better than anyone else"? I can see the 'princess' as some parents seem to apply that term to their daughters, but 'better than anyone else' is hard to digest.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> What I like about Doria is she keeps her mouth shut. I have no reason to believe she is doing anything untoward and that's because we don't know anything about her. If she is making money by providing quality care to seniors I have no objection. The patients know the rates going in and I expect for anyone entering a Beverly Hills facility money likely isn't an issue as it would be in other areas.


sure
I don't know how she is qualified to be CEO and CFO....you'd think with her background she would need a qualified CFO.  But maybe she has a person doing the numbers with a lesser title like controller of VP of finance.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure that he told her that she is "better than anyone else"? I can see the 'princess' as some parents seem to apply that term to their daughters, but 'better than anyone else' is hard to digest.


I'll defer to @CeeJay on this one. not sure she can answer this specific question but she seems to have some inside info on how M was raised


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> You are preaching to the choir there. They are ALL as biased as hell and do whatever they can to pump up their favorites while suppressing those they don't like. However, they used to at least try to give the illusion of impartiality and truth-seeking. They don't even bother with that anymore.


Yep.  I don't even watch for the past several years.  I was never into Facebook or Twitter, and I don't even do much IG any more.  This thread is refreshing!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *What I like about Doria is she keeps her mouth shut.* I have no reason to believe she is doing anything untoward and that's because we don't know anything about her. If she is making money by providing quality care to seniors I have no objection. The patients know the rates going in and I expect for anyone entering a Beverly Hills facility money isn't an issue as it would be in other places.


Doria seems to be a very reserved woman. Good for her!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure that he told her that she is "better than anyone else"? I can see the 'princess' as some parents seem to apply that term to their daughters, but 'better than anyone else' is hard to digest.


I praise my daughter when she deserves it, but I also discipline her when needed.  I, probably like most parents, think the best of my children, and internally think that they're "the best", but I certainly don't tell them that they're better than anyone else.

Regardless of what her parents told her, I think MM thinks very highly of herself, and thinks she is above others.  She cries wolf when it's convenient, and leeches off whatever she thinks will give her the upper hand.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  I don't even watch for the past several years.  I was never into Facebook or Twitter, and I don't even do much IG any more.  This thread is refreshing!


Same here


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> sure
> I don't know how she is qualified to be CEO and CFO....you'd think with her background she would need a qualified CFO.  But maybe she has a person doing the numbers with a lesser title like controller of VP of finance.



There may be more to Doria than we know or it could be there are people who handle all the day-to-day operations and she is a figure head.


----------



## bisbee

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I don’t see them as that popular, it doesn’t surprise me at all that CNN would rush in to defend them. CNN, soon to be shuttered, is desperate. Don’t let the headlines of the $$$$ scare you. They won’t see much of that money. Companies are going out of business daily. Long term health for most of their companies is not good.
> 
> Remember he has used white privilege to the max, eventually the quid-pro-quo’s will be revealed, just like uncle Andy did/does. She used her A list Hwood connections as well as other popular causes - people are noticing the lack of diversity in the shroom tea company. The pandemic has caused lots of pain in Hwood (listen to Tom Cruise’s rant). Oprah has probably lost a few million which at their level means jobs (see article below). A listers like to be seen helping others just so their name is in the news which explains MM’s so-called support. Their lack of talent and skill is still visible to all. Once Hwood is back up and running, H&M‘s thrill ride will end.  Patience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hearst to cut 59 staffers at Oprah Magazine
> 
> 
> The first crack in Hearst Magazines’ no-layoff policy during COVID-19 opened up last week when it revealed plans to cut 59 staffers at O, the Oprah Magazine, which is pulling the plug on its …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Ummm...CNN is NOT going out of business.  That is fake.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> There may be more to Doria than we know or it could be there are people who handle all the day-to-day operations and she is a figure head.


that's probably more like it....she may go to meetings and set the tone but I doubt she has the skils or experience the run the operation.
then again, people can learn and she has a masters degree so she's no dummy


----------



## Chanbal

More entertainment coming up:

*'My husband and I': Meghan is copying Queen's rhetorical style to make herself sound 'presidential' in their Spotify podcast trailer while Prince Harry sounds 'less confident', behavior expert claims*
Meghan Markle is copying the Queen’s rhetorical style to make herself sound ‘presidential’ in their Spotify podcast trailer, a behaviour expert has claimed. 

Their trailer opens with the duke, 36, saying to his wife: 'Ladies first' before Meghan says: 'No you say it first because I think it sounds really nice with your accent'. 

Judi said: 'Meghan’s response to Prince Harry’s attempt at some old-fashioned charm (when he says “Ladies first”) is to show what might be a clue about some of her persuasion and motivation techniques with her husband.

'To get him to go first she uses flattery rather than active assertiveness, telling him that "It sounds really nice in your accent" is a passive "nudge" technique that can often prove successful in a relationship. 

'The flattery and the flirtatious tone clearly resonates with Harry, who does what Meghan wants but with a purr in his voice to show he loves the compliment.' 

'He fluffs a line slightly and his "Hi guys, I’m Harry" suggests a playful attempt to lower his status and appeal to a younger audience.' 

'In contrast, Meghan uses power-raising verbal techniques while adding a soft, warm, caring vocal tone to infuse her messages with the kind of warmth and kindness she is promoting,' added Judi. 

'Her opening sentence is strikingly similar to the kind of intros that Michelle Ob###a does for her podcast trailers. Michell will stress her passion for conversations that dig deep and Meghan tells us how she and "my husband always talk about our passion for meeting people". 

'This is a partly-presidential tone, setting out their credentials by suggesting they meet people regularly on a global scale.' 

The body language and behaviour expert isn't the only one to have noticed Meghan's new 'regal tone', with royal author Angela Levin echoing a similar conclusion earlier in the week.

Angela said: '[Meghan] does try to be very regal despite the fact that she wanted to get out of the Royal Family. She's very regal, she talks down to us, she's slightly patronising.'

Regal & Presidential


----------



## bag-mania

Every word and inflection will be put under the microscope. I doubt Meghan is prepared for the scrutiny.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Uh, some of us remember the mushroom era from the 60s/70s/80s/90s/00s, etc.  Odd that every generation thinks they have discovered the ‘new healthy high’. So much egotistical thinking even in a pandemic. Mushrooms and teas come with all kinds of warnings and cautions, the latest being the former head of Zappos. We all need to be so careful what we allow into our worlds.


I had a neighbor who was very much into psychedelic mushrooms (_etc. - a lot of other stuff too_).  It was somewhat comical to me when he would tell us about a planned 'foraging' trip .. it was almost like he was saying "_hey - look at me, I'm foraging for my own 'food' (translation = drugs), saving the planet, blah, blah, blah_!"   Sadly, the mushrooms were the start of a major drug addiction problem for him and along with depression, he ended up having to spend a fair amount of time in a rehab facility.  In addition, his family (_especially his parents_) were just not there for him (_he was a 'surprise' baby and his older brothers were 20+ years older_)!   Many of his childhood friends (myself included) tried to help him out as much as we could, but ultimately after getting out of the rehab facility, he decided to leave this Earth in his early 20's.  It was SO SAD!


----------



## sdkitty

bisbee said:


> Ummm...CNN is NOT going out of business.  That is fake.


I don't have a problem with Oprah but from my limited attempting at reading it, I found O magazine pretty boring


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> The basis may follow the motto "don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing" @csshopper


Harry should have listened to his grandpa - don’t bring sand to the beach!!


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I don't have a problem with Oprah but from my limited attempting at reading it, I found O magazine pretty boring


My hubby seriously asked - why is she on every cover? Lol


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> *"What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction," The Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a joint statement. "With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other's stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are." *
> 
> Read this part to my DH, then asked him what they were saying. His reply, "don't listen to us we have nothing to say"


*What DRIVEL* .. especially the "_*hear each other's stories*_", since when is Meghan going to LISTEN?!?!?!  She can't stand to have anyone else talk since she has the constant need to pontificate!


----------



## Chanbal

The comments for the Regal & Presidential article are from all corners of the world, illustrating the international (bad) reputation of this couple. Here are just a few, and the one about a certain Senate seat is rather disturbing.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> I'm literally laughing at the fact that they are going to do podcasts to uplift people. To *Megladon*: BEECH! Not your kind of uplifting! If you ain't uplifting, what makes you think you can uplift me? Lol. What are they smoking in those 19 millions of bathrooms they got?


The BEST nickname evah!!!!!! .. love it!!!!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> More entertainment coming up:
> 
> *'My husband and I': Meghan is copying Queen's rhetorical style to make herself sound 'presidential' in their Spotify podcast trailer while Prince Harry sounds 'less confident', behavior expert claims*
> Meghan Markle is copying the Queen’s rhetorical style to make herself sound ‘presidential’ in their Spotify podcast trailer, a behaviour expert has claimed.
> 
> Their trailer opens with the duke, 36, saying to his wife: 'Ladies first' before Meghan says: 'No you say it first because I think it sounds really nice with your accent'.
> 
> Judi said: 'Meghan’s response to Prince Harry’s attempt at some old-fashioned charm (when he says “Ladies first”) is to show what might be a clue about some of her persuasion and motivation techniques with her husband.
> 
> 'To get him to go first she uses flattery rather than active assertiveness, telling him that "It sounds really nice in your accent" is a passive "nudge" technique that can often prove successful in a relationship.
> 
> 'The flattery and the flirtatious tone clearly resonates with Harry, who does what Meghan wants but with a purr in his voice to show he loves the compliment.'
> 
> 'He fluffs a line slightly and his "Hi guys, I’m Harry" suggests a playful attempt to lower his status and appeal to a younger audience.'
> 
> 'In contrast, Meghan uses power-raising verbal techniques while adding a soft, warm, caring vocal tone to infuse her messages with the kind of warmth and kindness she is promoting,' added Judi.
> 
> 'Her opening sentence is strikingly similar to the kind of intros that Michelle Ob###a does for her podcast trailers. Michell will stress her passion for conversations that dig deep and Meghan tells us how she and "my husband always talk about our passion for meeting people".
> 
> 'This is a partly-presidential tone, setting out their credentials by suggesting they meet people regularly on a global scale.'
> 
> The body language and behaviour expert isn't the only one to have noticed Meghan's new 'regal tone', with royal author Angela Levin echoing a similar conclusion earlier in the week.
> 
> Angela said: '[Meghan] does try to be very regal despite the fact that she wanted to get out of the Royal Family. She's very regal, she talks down to us, *she's slightly patronising*.'
> 
> Regal & Presidential



Slightly?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Many of the people who have a favorable view of them think Meghan was treated unfairly by the BRF, had mean things written about her, and is otherwise a wonderful person. They either never heard or else don't believe all of the shady issues about her we discuss here. Feeling sorry for someone doesn't mean they want to listen to an hour a week of whatever Meghan and Harry think is relevant. Curiosity will get them listeners for a while. Meghan loses interest in her projects quickly. If she is still doing a regular podcast by next summer it will be a miracle.
> 
> I have no problem with her looks. I'm hoping there isn't a baby but that's for the kid's sake.


IDK how many followers she has but if young women or whoever her target audience is want a WOC role model there are plenty to choose from.  She hasn't cornered the market on that.  Preaching about the environment?  There are plenty of people to do that too.  So what have they got that's special?  Oh, they're royal - not really.  Didn't want the structure of that.
I don't really see a path to huge success but that's just my opinion.


----------



## Chanbal

Canadian fellow members this is for you:




Hubby came in #2
Randy Andy #6


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Canadian fellow members this is for you:
> View attachment 4931460
> 
> View attachment 4931461
> 
> Hubby came in #2
> Randy Andy #6


ridiculous....I say its rigged.  who participated in whatever vote or survey?  or did People just declare it as fact with no evidence?


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any guesses for MM and hubby's 2020 Christmas Card Photo :




Maybe something like this:


or


----------



## CarryOn2020

— CNN is part of AT&T, Warner Media which is laying off people.  This article is from Oct.  Seems like new layoffs were reported in Nov.








						HBO owner WarnerMedia reportedly planning thousands of job cuts
					

WarnerMedia, the entertainment division of AT&T, is readying to slash thousands of jobs to help reduce costs by as much as 20 percent, according to a new report Thursday. The division, which in…




					nypost.com
				




— Gotta speak up for the young people. Whatever survey/poll is being touted as proof of popularity [even unpopularity], none of it is reliable. Look at the numbers of viewers/listeners. Numbers and dollars are down everywhere. It’s why Tom Cruise yelled at his crew, it is why Tyler Perry is being so careful with his studio now.  Covid has messed up the economy.  Numbers of viewers show what people are willing to pay for. While many of the young may _seem_ easily duped, most are intelligent, wise beyond their years, and won’t get fooled.  They see through the hypocrisy. They know what the game is, how it is played and who will win. In whatever way MM’s parents raised her, she thought it was ok to lie for an acting job (see my signature). Not casting blame or judgements, just stating facts. She is a nearly 40 yr old woman. We know she was never an A list actress. Harry, on the other hand, we witnessed many parts of his upbringing, saw his privileged lifestyle, learned way too much about his parents, and now are watching the results of it.  Both H&M attended some of the best schools and still seem so unrefined. Just my opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Are there any guesses for MM and hubby's 2020 Christmas Card Photo :
> 
> View attachment 4931462



They won’t issue one because (a) they are no longer royals and (b) they want privacy. 

Notice the background in this photo. It looks like just like MM’s latest stunt.  Wow, copying Charles now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*' company backed by Duchess of ...*
www.telegraph.co.uk › news › 2020/12/15 › amp

Hannah Mendoza is believed to have been privately educated and her family owns a seven-bedroom holiday home in Cornwall.


====
This could be an interesting twist, but the article is behind a paywall.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> *' company backed by Duchess of ...*
> www.telegraph.co.uk › news › 2020/12/15 › amp
> 
> Hannah Mendoza is believed to have been privately educated and her family owns a seven-bedroom holiday home in Cornwall.
> View attachment 4931484
> 
> ====
> This could be an interesting twist, but the article is behind a paywall.


yes, it's getting harder to read anything online w/o paying


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *' company backed by Duchess of ...*
> www.telegraph.co.uk › news › 2020/12/15 › amp
> 
> Hannah Mendoza is believed to have been privately educated and her family owns a seven-bedroom holiday home in Cornwall.
> View attachment 4931484
> 
> ====
> This could be an interesting twist, but the article is behind a paywall.


The founder is the 'daughter of a wealthy man', so this explains the duchess's interest on the $28 lattes! Case solved, well done @CarryOn2020


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> More entertainment coming up:
> 
> *'My husband and I': Meghan is copying Queen's rhetorical style to make herself sound 'presidential' in their Spotify podcast trailer while Prince Harry sounds 'less confident', behavior expert claims*
> Meghan Markle is copying the Queen’s rhetorical style to make herself sound ‘presidential’ in their Spotify podcast trailer, a behaviour expert has claimed.
> 
> Their trailer opens with the duke, 36, saying to his wife: 'Ladies first' before Meghan says: 'No you say it first because I think it sounds really nice with your accent'.
> 
> Judi said: 'Meghan’s response to Prince Harry’s attempt at some old-fashioned charm (when he says “Ladies first”) is to show what might be a clue about some of her persuasion and motivation techniques with her husband.
> 
> 'To get him to go first she uses flattery rather than active assertiveness, telling him that "It sounds really nice in your accent" is a passive "nudge" technique that can often prove successful in a relationship.
> 
> 'The flattery and the flirtatious tone clearly resonates with Harry, who does what Meghan wants but with a purr in his voice to show he loves the compliment.'
> 
> 'He fluffs a line slightly and his "Hi guys, I’m Harry" suggests a playful attempt to lower his status and appeal to a younger audience.'
> 
> 'In contrast, Meghan uses power-raising verbal techniques while adding a soft, warm, caring vocal tone to infuse her messages with the kind of warmth and kindness she is promoting,' added Judi.
> 
> 'Her opening sentence is strikingly similar to the kind of intros that Michelle Ob###a does for her podcast trailers. Michell will stress her passion for conversations that dig deep and Meghan tells us how she and "my husband always talk about our passion for meeting people".
> 
> 'This is a partly-presidential tone, setting out their credentials by suggesting they meet people regularly on a global scale.'
> 
> The body language and behaviour expert isn't the only one to have noticed Meghan's new 'regal tone', with royal author Angela Levin echoing a similar conclusion earlier in the week.
> 
> Angela said: '[Meghan] does try to be very regal despite the fact that she wanted to get out of the Royal Family. She's very regal, she talks down to us, she's slightly patronising.'
> 
> Regal & Presidential


Gag me with a spoon.


----------



## purseinsanity

The idea of Harry's gonads in MM's purse is hysterical.  I wonder if they're next to the tampons they share?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> ridiculous....I say its rigged.  who participated in whatever vote or survey?  or did People just declare it as fact with no evidence?


This is likely organized by one of her PR agencies. First they spent the entire year releasing several daily news about the couple, which generated tons of clicks. Based on those clicks, they write the most ridiculous text praising the duchess's popularity. Unfortunately, our curiosity (and COVID-19) is responsible for many of those clicks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A throwback for Thursday: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2018/12/meghan-markle-reads-poem-at-christmas-carol-service

_The Henry van Straubenzee Memorial Fund was named after one of *Prince Harry’s* friends, who died in a car crash in 2002.

In honor of his wife’s work for the equality of girls and women, Harry spoke at the service about how the memorial fund has helped girls in schools.

“As my wife said many years ago when working on menstrual health and health education, this is not about periods but potential,” he said. His reference of “many years ago” might have been a bit off, seeing as Meghan said these words in a Time article on International Women’s Day in March 2017._

MM participated, too : 
_The duchess read “Our Deepest Fear,” by Marianne Williamson, which touches on the power of one’s own “light” and ability to make change. She added that the poem shares the same mission of the memorial fund, which works to help children at schools in Uganda: “it sums up [the] spirit of what the Henry van Straubenzee Fund does to empower young children.”_


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> A throwback for Thursday: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2018/12/meghan-markle-reads-poem-at-christmas-carol-service
> 
> _The Henry van Straubenzee Memorial Fund was named after one of *Prince Harry’s* friends, who died in a car crash in 2002.
> 
> In honor of his wife’s work for the equality of girls and women, Harry spoke at the service about how the memorial fund has helped girls in schools.
> 
> “As my wife said many years ago when working on menstrual health and health education, this is not about periods but potential,” he said. His reference of “many years ago” might have been a bit off, seeing as Meghan said these words in a Time article on International Women’s Day in March 2017._
> 
> MM participated, too :
> _The duchess read “Our Deepest Fear,” by Marianne Williamson, which touches on the power of one’s own “light” and ability to make change. She added that the poem shares the same mission of the memorial fund, which works to help children at schools in Uganda: “it sums up [the] spirit of what the Henry van Straubenzee Fund does to empower young children.”_


Please, make it stop!!!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> A throwback for Thursday: https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2018/12/meghan-markle-reads-poem-at-christmas-carol-service
> 
> _The Henry van Straubenzee Memorial Fund was named after one of *Prince Harry’s* friends, who died in a car crash in 2002.
> 
> In honor of his wife’s work for the equality of girls and women, Harry spoke at the service about how the memorial fund has helped girls in schools.
> 
> “As my wife said many years ago when working on menstrual health and health education, this is not about periods but potential,” he said. His reference of “many years ago” might have been a bit off, seeing as Meghan said these words in a Time article on International Women’s Day in March 2017._
> 
> MM participated, too :
> _The duchess read “Our Deepest Fear,” by Marianne Williamson, which touches on the power of one’s own “light” and ability to make change. She added that the poem shares the same mission of the memorial fund, which works to help children at schools in Uganda: “it sums up [the] spirit of what the Henry van Straubenzee Fund does to empower young children.”_



I don't want to give them one more click, is this an article from 2018?



purseinsanity said:


> Please, make it stop!!!


Let me add a few more:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't want to give them one more click, is this an article from 2018?
> 
> 
> Let me add a few more:



_At the annual Christmas carol service at St. Luke’s, the duchess read “Our Deepest Fear.”
BY HILARY WEAVER
DECEMBER 5, 2018_

Yes, 2018,Vanity Fair. Boy wonder and his beloved go to a dear friend’s annual Christmas memorial service that is attended by many well-dressed elites. She reads a poem by best bud, Marianne. He talks about MM’s work concerning that “special time” for women. Granted, it is indeed a serious topic for women everywhere, is a memorial service for a male the best place to mention this?  Time and place for everything.  Perhaps a podcast?

Now, shall we discuss how he was raised?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _At the annual Christmas carol service at St. Luke’s, the duchess read “Our Deepest Fear.”
> BY HILARY WEAVER
> DECEMBER 5, 2018_
> 
> Yes, 2018,Vanity Fair. Boy wonder and his beloved go to a dear friend’s annual Christmas memorial service that is attended by many well-dressed elites. She reads a poem by best bud, Marianne. He talks about MM’s work concerning that “special time” for women. Granted, it is indeed a serious topic for women everywhere, is a memorial service for a male the best place to mention this?  Time and place for everything.  Perhaps a podcast?
> 
> Now, shall we discuss how he was raised?


Ridiculous.  Talking about MM's menses is not the right place for many occasions, especially a memorial!  WTF.  They can't even attend a memorial without somehow inserting themselves into it?  Why am I surprised?  These are the same dolts that went to a cemetery as a photo op.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Ridiculous.  Talking about MM's menses is not the right place for many occasions, especially a memorial!  WTF.  They can't even attend a memorial without somehow inserting themselves into it?  Why am I surprised?  These are the same dolts that went to a cemetery as a photo op.



And that is my point in posting the story. Many of us either did not know or forgot this happened in 2018.  There were and still are valid reasons for the criticism of H&M. We cannot be dismissed as merely haters.  They behaved very much like shock-jocks, say anything to pull someone’s chain.  It is unrefined, immature behavior.  Time and place for everything. A Christmas choral memorial service for dear friend is not the time, not the place. All  that private education and neither one can read the room.


----------



## bag-mania

If H&M become multi-billionaires I will officially lose all hope for sanity in this bizarre world.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be "the $10 billion royal couple"—with their multi-year Netflix and Spotify deals dwarfed by investments, experts say.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make podcasts for Spotify through production company Archewell Audio.

That contract has been estimated at between $35 million and $75 million, while a multi-year deal to produce shows for Netflix is thought to be worth up to $150 million.

However, Meghan also invested this week with Clevr Blends, which makes instant oat-milk lattes at $28 for a bag containing 14 servings.

Professor Johnathan Shalit, founder of U.K.-based InterTalent Rights Group, told _Newsweek_ the key to their soaring net worth will lie in those kind of investments.

He said: "My guess is they'll be the $10 billion royal couple. I'll tell you why, the way you become multi-billionaires is you get involved before the shares explode.

"Lots of startups and companies are going to want Meghan and Harry attached to their product so that in turn will create other investors and other shareholders.

"So they're like a shop window for investors. Meghan's going to be a door opener creating opportunities for her partners to get more money.

"Once you get shares and equity and startup companies explode, you can end up being worth billions if you get in at the right time.

"When I say $10 billion dollars I mean that as a trajectory. It could be ten years."

Shalit said the Spotify deal would bring in $25 million a year, netting them $75 million in the first three years alone.

He said it was valuable to the company because it would draw new listeners onto the platform, where the streaming service would be able to use its algorithms to market other content.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could become the "$10 billion royal couple" with a soaring net worth—and the real money lies beyond Netflix and Spotify, experts tell Newsweek.




					www.google.com


----------



## Chanbal

*How can Spotify give Meghan and Harry millions when it pays singers £200? Sandie Shaw blasts streaming service for handing out a fortune to former royals for podcast while paying only small amount in royalties to musicians*
Sixties star Sandie Shaw led an attack by British musicians on Spotify last night over its lucrative podcast deal with Harry and Meghan

Research shows most artists receive just £200 a year from services that stream their songs.

But Professor Jonathan Shalit, chairman of talent agency InterTalent, has estimated the Sussexes’ deal with the digital music giant as being worth £18million over several years

A survey found Spotify pays eight in ten artists whose music it streams an average of around £17 a month.

unethical!


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Just Officially Split From The Queen's Legal Team*

_In the latest development in Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal exit, the couple have cut ties from Harbottle & Lewis, the law firm that represents the Queen.

The Sussexes also replaced Harbottle & Lewis at their non-profit, Archewell, which will now be represented by "rival firm" Fieldfisher._

_Daily Mail_ columnist Richard Eden revealed Friday that the Sussexes have filed official documents to cut ties with the Queen's longtime legal team at Harbottle & Lewis. According to Eden, the move came as a surprise to insiders because Harry has been personally represented by Harbottle since he was a teen and even asked senior partner Gerrard Tyrrell to become a director of the Sussex Royal charity.

Royal insiders say this development is a big hint that Harry and Meghan won't rejoin the ranks of working royals when they review their first year post-split with the Queen next year.

Markled law firm


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *If H&M become multi-billionaires I will officially lose all hope for sanity in this bizarre world.
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be "the $10 billion royal couple"—with their multi-year Netflix and Spotify deals dwarfed by investments, experts say.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make podcasts for Spotify through production company Archewell Audio.
> 
> That contract has been estimated at between $35 million and $75 million, while a multi-year deal to produce shows for Netflix is thought to be worth up to $150 million.
> 
> However, Meghan also invested this week with Clevr Blends, which makes instant oat-milk lattes at $28 for a bag containing 14 servings.
> 
> Professor Johnathan Shalit, founder of U.K.-based InterTalent Rights Group, told _Newsweek_ the key to their soaring net worth will lie in those kind of investments.
> 
> He said: "My guess is they'll be the $10 billion royal couple. I'll tell you why, the way you become multi-billionaires is you get involved before the shares explode.
> 
> "Lots of startups and companies are going to want Meghan and Harry attached to their product so that in turn will create other investors and other shareholders.
> 
> "So they're like a shop window for investors. Meghan's going to be a door opener creating opportunities for her partners to get more money.
> 
> "Once you get shares and equity and startup companies explode, you can end up being worth billions if you get in at the right time.
> 
> "When I say $10 billion dollars I mean that as a trajectory. It could be ten years."
> 
> Shalit said the Spotify deal would bring in $25 million a year, netting them $75 million in the first three years alone.
> 
> He said it was valuable to the company because it would draw new listeners onto the platform, where the streaming service would be able to use its algorithms to market other content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could become the "$10 billion royal couple" with a soaring net worth—and the real money lies beyond Netflix and Spotify, experts tell Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


You are not alone. Time to pack and move to a nice  without internet access.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If H&M become multi-billionaires I will officially lose all hope for sanity in this bizarre world.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be "the $10 billion royal couple"—with their multi-year Netflix and Spotify deals dwarfed by investments, experts say.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make podcasts for Spotify through production company Archewell Audio.
> 
> That contract has been estimated at between $35 million and $75 million, while a multi-year deal to produce shows for Netflix is thought to be worth up to $150 million.
> 
> However, Meghan also invested this week with Clevr Blends, which makes instant oat-milk lattes at $28 for a bag containing 14 servings.
> 
> Professor Johnathan Shalit, founder of U.K.-based InterTalent Rights Group, told _Newsweek_ the key to their soaring net worth will lie in those kind of investments.
> 
> He said: "My guess is they'll be the $10 billion royal couple. I'll tell you why, the way you become multi-billionaires is you get involved before the shares explode.
> 
> "Lots of startups and companies are going to want Meghan and Harry attached to their product so that in turn will create other investors and other shareholders.
> 
> "So they're like a shop window for investors. Meghan's going to be a door opener creating opportunities for her partners to get more money.
> 
> "Once you get shares and equity and startup companies explode, you can end up being worth billions if you get in at the right time.
> 
> "When I say $10 billion dollars I mean that as a trajectory. It could be ten years."
> 
> Shalit said the Spotify deal would bring in $25 million a year, netting them $75 million in the first three years alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could become the "$10 billion royal couple" with a soaring net worth—and the real money lies beyond Netflix and Spotify, experts tell Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I would think most people go to spotify for music.  but what do I know?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I would think most people go to spotify for music.  but what do I know?



The executives at Netflix and Spotify must be morons. They obviously believe the PR hype and think H&M are going to be the next hottest thing and they want a piece of it.

We’ll see what they come up with. I assume they are hiring crews of experienced people who can develop something good for them. I think they are at least smart enough to know they can’t do it themselves.


----------



## Chanbal

They release a ton of news about this woman on Yahoo, and then they count clicks. We are all observing the rise of a ****


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I would think most people go to spotify for music.  but what do I know?



From 2019 — it’s about $$$$$








						Spotify’s grand plan for podcasts is taking shape
					

The podcast future is forming.




					www.theverge.com
				



This much is clear: Spotify knows podcasts can generate ad revenue — podcasts are estimated to bring in $659 million in revenue by 2020 — and it’s willing to invest in exclusive content to make sure that people listen on its platform. Still, the team has a lot of work to do to bring podcasts to the masses and make Spotify the default listening app. Here’s where the company is starting.


From 2020: still about $$$ — anyone want to start one???








						Spotify's catalog tops a million podcasts, consumption increased by 'triple digits' over last year
					

Spotify’s podcast business is booming despite — or perhaps, because of — the COVID-19 pandemic. The company says it has now grown its podcast catalog to more than a million shows, up from the 700,000-plus podcasts it was reporting just this March. Podcaster listeners are also “more engaged...




					techcrunch.com
				



Spotify’s  podcast business is booming despite — or perhaps, because of — the COVID-19 pandemic. The company says it has now grown its podcast catalog to more than a million shows, up from the 700,000-plus podcasts it was reporting just this March. Podcaster listeners are also “more engaged overall” and “listen to more music,” the company noted, which may have helped boost Spotify’s overall listener and subscriber increases in the first quarter. In addition, podcast consumption was up by “triple digits” in Q1 2020 compared with the same quarter last year, Spotify said.


----------



## rose60610

Lovely. M&H have to satisfy the Netflix contract. By not screwing up. Now we're talking about M&H here. For them, screwing up is a way of life. I don't do Spotify, whatever the hell that is, and somebody gave them a "three year projection" on it? Technology changes very quickly. Will Spotify even be around in three years? Or will it morph into something else like most things? Not to say M&H won't morph along with it. But they're hitting the 40's age range. They act like they want to hang with 12-22 year olds. Presumably because that's the easiest age range to impress and force feed stupid juice to. Notice Archie is nowhere to be seen. Archie would remind the 12- 22 year olds that M&H aren't their cool kid peers. The most fitting product for them to hawk is their own brand of butt wipes. Heaven knows they have enough toilets to use in the commercials. And Meghan could appear in a commercial using her own brand of butt wipes to pee in the woods. Thanks to JCMH we know she's gifted at that.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Lovely. M&H have to satisfy the Netflix contract. By not screwing up. Now we're talking about M&H here. For them, screwing up is a way of life. I don't do Spotify, whatever the hell that is, and somebody gave them a "three year projection" on it? Technology changes very quickly. Will Spotify even be around in three years? Or will it morph into something else like most things? Not to say M&H won't morph along with it. But they're hitting the 40's age range. They act like they want to hang with 12-22 year olds. Presumably because that's the easiest age range to impress and force feed stupid juice to. Notice Archie is nowhere to be seen. Archie would remind the 12- 22 year olds that M&H aren't their cool kid peers. The most fitting product for them to hawk is their own brand of butt wipes. Heaven knows they have enough toilets to use in the commercials. And Meghan could appear in a commercial using her own brand of butt wipes to pee in the woods. Thanks to JCMH we know she's gifted at that.


They will likely satisfy the contracts by hiring people to do the work for them for a few bucks.


----------



## rose60610

There's a lot of interesting podcasts out there. M&H have stiff podcast competition. You can only rehash fabricated PTSD over your dead mother for so long. They likely will hire people who supposedly know what they're doing for their projects. Watch for fights over payments. M&H will demand all the credit as they pay their staff peanuts. It should be honor enough to work for the world famous M&H and not want much of a salary. And topics covered will include income disparities! Hypocrisy rules!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Lovely. M&H have to satisfy the Netflix contract. By not screwing up. Now we're talking about M&H here. For them, screwing up is a way of life. I don't do Spotify, whatever the hell that is, and somebody gave them a "three year projection" on it? Technology changes very quickly. Will Spotify even be around in three years? Or will it morph into something else like most things? Not to say M&H won't morph along with it. But they're hitting the 40's age range. They act like they want to hang with 12-22 year olds. Presumably because that's the easiest age range to impress and force feed stupid juice to. Notice Archie is nowhere to be seen. Archie would remind the 12- 22 year olds that M&H aren't their cool kid peers. The most fitting product for them to hawk is their own brand of butt wipes. Heaven knows they have enough toilets to use in the commercials. And Meghan could appear in a commercial using her own brand of butt wipes to pee in the woods. Thanks to JCMH we know she's gifted at that.


It's amusing how many of us (myself included) don't know or barely heard of Spotify until recently, yet my teens not only know of it, but have been using it for months.  Never underestimate the power of the child consumer.  TikTok stars are making millions by basically being mini Kardashians and are dimwits I've never heard of, but teenage girls are emulating to be like them!  God help us all if MM and JCMH become the $10 Billion couple.  I say we all pool our money and buy an island bubble, where no fake news channels, and no mention of MM and JCMH is allowed!


----------



## Lodpah

This is all hype. Think about it. They flit from one thing to another. Their projects won’t bring in that much money. I predict it will fall flat. They have no substance, they’re not credible and it’s their PR that’s pushing them hard. That’s how we know it’s desperation. Utter desperation to push them on the masses. Competition is stiff.


----------



## drifter

bag-mania said:


> If H&M become multi-billionaires I will officially lose all hope for sanity in this bizarre world.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be "the $10 billion royal couple"—with their multi-year Netflix and Spotify deals dwarfed by investments, experts say.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will make podcasts for Spotify through production company Archewell Audio.
> 
> That contract has been estimated at between $35 million and $75 million, while a multi-year deal to produce shows for Netflix is thought to be worth up to $150 million.
> 
> However, Meghan also invested this week with Clevr Blends, which makes instant oat-milk lattes at $28 for a bag containing 14 servings.
> 
> Professor Johnathan Shalit, founder of U.K.-based InterTalent Rights Group, told _Newsweek_ the key to their soaring net worth will lie in those kind of investments.
> 
> He said: "My guess is they'll be the $10 billion royal couple. I'll tell you why, the way you become multi-billionaires is you get involved before the shares explode.
> 
> "Lots of startups and companies are going to want Meghan and Harry attached to their product so that in turn will create other investors and other shareholders.
> 
> "So they're like a shop window for investors. Meghan's going to be a door opener creating opportunities for her partners to get more money.
> 
> "Once you get shares and equity and startup companies explode, you can end up being worth billions if you get in at the right time.
> 
> "When I say $10 billion dollars I mean that as a trajectory. It could be ten years."
> 
> Shalit said the Spotify deal would bring in $25 million a year, netting them $75 million in the first three years alone.
> 
> He said it was valuable to the company because it would draw new listeners onto the platform, where the streaming service would be able to use its algorithms to market other content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Net Worth Soars, Could Hit $10 Billion
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could become the "$10 billion royal couple" with a soaring net worth—and the real money lies beyond Netflix and Spotify, experts tell Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


This is such rubbish!  Especially after the first 3 words of this quote:   "They're for sale and they're very likable people. They're appealing. You want them on your top table." 
I mean they're not even the founders or major shareholders of those startups.  Those startups have to first survive multiple hurdles before an IPO which hopefully, would net the shareholders money!  This makes me so mad.  Like, what, they're going to be billionaires (and not just a measly single digit billionaire, mind you) just because they're former royals and they're woke and keep shoving drivel down everyone's throats?  It's demeaning to other billionaires who worked so hard.  
By the way, based on my limited knowledge, I doubt that any startup that could make billionaires in 10 years would be pitching to people like them.  Please do enlighten me if any of you are familiar, I'd love to know more.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

rose60610 said:


> Millennials are excited about M&H? Well, they also ate Tide pods detergent. Sounds about right.



Considering Millennials are now squarely in their mid 20s to 40s (with full time jobs and mortgages )...that was Gen Z. In fact, they're known as the tide pod generation.






						Urban Dictionary: tide pod generation
					

refers to Generation Z born between 1996-2010, following millennials. Gen Z has been raised on internet, social media and tide pods. Eating tide pods as babies and later creating a youtube challenge eating them as teenagers. Tide Pod Gen Z has also created a youtube "fire challenge" of pouring...




					www.urbandictionary.com
				




Source: Am a millennial, and we get a lot of crap dumped on us that wasn't us at all. Like, it ain't us on Tiktok either.


----

As for Spotify, it's been around since 2006. Not hearing about it doesn't mean it's not well-utilized, doesn't mean it isn't actually a well-known product - in fact it has something like 250+ million users. Attendings at my hospital use it for gym and for music while they operate and they're in their 40-60s. I'm gonna guess Spotify will be around for quite some time, just like Apple Music.

But, also anyone can start a podcast.


----------



## papertiger

drifter said:


> This is such rubbish!  Especially after the first 3 words of this quote:   "They're for sale and they're very likable people. They're appealing. You want them on your top table."
> I mean they're not even the founders or major shareholders of those startups.  Those startups have to first survive multiple hurdles before an IPO which hopefully, would net the shareholders money!  This makes me so mad.  Like, what, they're going to be billionaires (and not just a measly single digit billionaire, mind you) just because they're former royals and they're woke and keep shoving drivel down everyone's throats?  It's demeaning to other billionaires who worked so hard.
> By the way, based on my limited knowledge, I doubt that any startup that could make billionaires in 10 years would be pitching to people like them.  Please do enlighten me if any of you are familiar, I'd love to know more.



I know people in debt that work very hard.

Work, or the lack of it, unfortunately does not correlate. Money doesn't usually come to those most deserving, add a couple of 00s for being born Royal.

H&M are con-artists, scammers, schemers and chancers. By profession, their podcasts or TV broadcasts are Medicine Shows for the 21C. All it takes is some PR hot-air, fancy labels, and plenty of "raindrops".


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> *I know people in debt that work very hard.*
> 
> Work, or the lack of it, unfortunately does not correlate. Money doesn't usually come to those most deserving, add a couple of 00s for being born Royal.
> 
> H&M are con-artists, scammers, schemers and chancers. By profession, their podcasts or TV broadcasts are Medicine Shows for the 21C. All it takes is some PR hot-air, fancy labels, and plenty of "raindrops".


Agree, and I applaud the hard work 
I am thinking of all those in COVID financial hot water during the holidays


----------



## rose60610

eunaddict said:


> Considering Millennials are now squarely in their mid 20s to 40s (with full time jobs and mortgages )...that was Gen Z. In fact, they're known as the tide pod generation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: tide pod generation
> 
> 
> refers to Generation Z born between 1996-2010, following millennials. Gen Z has been raised on internet, social media and tide pods. Eating tide pods as babies and later creating a youtube challenge eating them as teenagers. Tide Pod Gen Z has also created a youtube "fire challenge" of pouring...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.urbandictionary.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: Am a millennial, and we get a lot of crap dumped on us that wasn't us at all. Like, it ain't us on Tiktok either.
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> As for Spotify, it's been around since 2006. Not hearing about it doesn't mean it's not well-utilized, doesn't mean it isn't actually a well-known product - in fact it has something like 250+ million users. Attendings at my hospital use it for gym and for music while they operate and they're in their 40-60s. I'm gonna guess Spotify will be around for quite some time, just like Apple Music.
> 
> But, also anyone can start a podcast.



Apologies for mislabeling millennials as Tide pod eaters . And yes, Spotify has been around for a while and is very successful with millions of users. As well as Tiktok, etc. People who invested, especially early on, in the FAANG stocks (and other such companies that are heavy tech users and sellers) have made tons of money, and I congratulate them for it. I'd like to think that millennials are busy enough with work and home balance that they guard their time against M&H intrusions and instead watch reruns of Lassie (kidding ). Technology is a great thing. Especially when you invest in the successful ventures .


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> Lovely. M&H have to satisfy the Netflix contract. By not screwing up. Now we're talking about M&H here. For them, screwing up is a way of life. I don't do Spotify, whatever the hell that is, and somebody gave them a "three year projection" on it? Technology changes very quickly. Will Spotify even be around in three years? Or will it morph into something else like most things? Not to say M&H won't morph along with it. But they're hitting the 40's age range. They act like they want to hang with 12-22 year olds. Presumably because that's the easiest age range to impress and force feed stupid juice to. Notice Archie is nowhere to be seen. Archie would remind the 12- 22 year olds that M&H aren't their cool kid peers. The most fitting product for them to hawk is their own brand of butt wipes. Heaven knows they have enough toilets to use in the commercials. And Meghan could appear in a commercial using her own brand of butt wipes to pee in the woods. Thanks to JCMH we know she's gifted at that.



I know several who use Spotify, but for music. And also because they had been using since before apple music. 

I don't believe that the Spotify subscribers is a built-in audience for H&M. Only those who have an interest in them or what they have to say. And honestly I don't think what they have to say will attract so many to justify these amounts they are being paid. Look at folks like Howard Stern and Joe Rogan - they have a huge following because what they say is interesting and provocative. 

H&M just regurgitate whatever the flavor of the moment is. And they are too safe. Nothing edgy to get people's attention.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I try to listen to small independent podcasters since they are the ones that grew the market. Dax Shepard and Conan don’t need the advertising dollars.


----------



## purseinsanity

drifter said:


> This is such rubbish!  Especially after the first 3 words of this quote:   *"They're for sale* and they're very likable people. They're appealing. You want them on your top table."
> I mean they're not even the founders or major shareholders of those startups.  Those startups have to first survive multiple hurdles before an IPO which hopefully, would net the shareholders money!  This makes me so mad.  Like, what, they're going to be billionaires (and not just a measly single digit billionaire, mind you) just because they're former royals and they're woke and keep shoving drivel down everyone's throats?  It's demeaning to other billionaires who worked so hard.
> By the way, based on my limited knowledge, I doubt that any startup that could make billionaires in 10 years would be pitching to people like them.  Please do enlighten me if any of you are familiar, I'd love to know more.


This part is true.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I know people in debt that work very hard.
> Work, or the lack of it, unfortunately does not correlate. Money doesn't usually come to those most deserving, add a couple of 00s for being born Royal.
> *H&M are con-artists, scammers, schemers and chancers. *By profession, their podcasts or TV broadcasts are Medicine Shows for the 21C. All it takes is some PR hot-air, fancy labels, and plenty of "raindrops".




Dear Editor, This is a correction notice for the article **** by ***, The _Duchess of *** published in the NYT on***. _The designation of the writer should read as follows: By ***, The _Duchess of ***_. The writer is a con-artist, scammer, schemer and chancer.

On a serious note, this couple is doing a tremendous disservice to young generations. The way they are making millions and millions of dollars is shocking and giving the wrong message to kids. Why do we have to work and study hard? Kids are presently coming out of colleges with low paying jobs (or without jobs). Millions of households have lost their income during this pandemic. Thousands of people are dying daily because of COVID. We are optimistic (need to be) about vaccines, but we don't even know for how long their protection will last. Young generations are facing major challenges and need to be very strong. Kids need positive role models to motivate them in the right direction and not charlatans to mislead them. This makes me very  and .


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2019 — it’s about $$$$$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify’s grand plan for podcasts is taking shape
> 
> 
> The podcast future is forming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theverge.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This much is clear: Spotify knows podcasts can generate ad revenue — podcasts are estimated to bring in $659 million in revenue by 2020 — and it’s willing to invest in exclusive content to make sure that people listen on its platform. Still, the team has a lot of work to do to bring podcasts to the masses and make Spotify the default listening app. Here’s where the company is starting.
> 
> 
> From 2020: still about $$$ — anyone want to start one???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify's catalog tops a million podcasts, consumption increased by 'triple digits' over last year
> 
> 
> Spotify’s podcast business is booming despite — or perhaps, because of — the COVID-19 pandemic. The company says it has now grown its podcast catalog to more than a million shows, up from the 700,000-plus podcasts it was reporting just this March. Podcaster listeners are also “more engaged...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> techcrunch.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify’s  podcast business is booming despite — or perhaps, because of — the COVID-19 pandemic. The company says it has now grown its podcast catalog to more than a million shows, up from the 700,000-plus podcasts it was reporting just this March. Podcaster listeners are also “more engaged overall” and “listen to more music,” the company noted, which may have helped boost Spotify’s overall listener and subscriber increases in the first quarter. In addition, podcast consumption was up by “triple digits” in Q1 2020 compared with the same quarter last year, Spotify said.


maybe I'm old or out of touch but I've never listed to a podcast.  I'm interested but my listening tends to be for short intervals.  If I'm in the car it's usually for ten to 30 minutes at a time.  In the house I tend to listen to music or talk for similar length of time.  
In any case, if I wanted to listen to someone talk it would not me H&M....and I wouldn't want to promote or contribute to anything they do


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm old or out of touch but I've never listed to a podcast.  I'm interested but my listening tends to be for short intervals.  If I'm in the car it's usually for ten to 30 minutes at a time.  In the house I tend to listen to music or talk for similar length of time.
> In any case, if I wanted to listen to someone talk it would not me H&M....and I wouldn't want to promote or contribute to anything they do



I just use these platforms for music, myself. When I was commuting I listened to podcasts on the drive home from work. I don't know a lot of people who are hardcore podcast listeners, outside of maybe following a specific podcast. I know they are popular to some extent but so popular that H&M can get paid so much for their parroting? *shrug*


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I just use these platforms for music, myself. When I was commuting I listened to podcasts on the drive home from work. I don't know a lot of people who are hardcore podcast listeners, outside of maybe following a specific podcast. I know they are popular to some extent but so popular that H&M can get paid so much for their parroting? *shrug*


I do listen to talk radio (and I have the spotify app) so I would probably enjoy some of the podcasts....on my to-do list....but not H&M


----------



## CobaltBlu

I actually love Spotify!  And I am old!!! I have used it for a few years now.  I have the premium/family plan which means I can download songs and play them wherever, and have family members on it. Also what I love is that I can make my own dorky playlists and share them if I want to (Happy Anniversary Mister, here is a "mix tape"). Without premium you are tethered to wifi, which is no big deal.  Its so easy to make a workout list (hahaha, my most unused playlist). I made a whole list just to help me learn Spanish. My daughter sends me links to her playlists so I am not totally out of touch and can be aware of artists like Lizzo and Kaleo and songs like Old Town Road . (I'M SO OLD!!!)

I love this aspect and am always hearing new music thanks to DD -- Spotify's suggestions for me are now completely all over the map. Its great. 

I think its the best music platform to be honest. 
Today I am listening to the soundtrack from "Forever Plaid." The platform has pretty much everything. 

Back to topic: Would I listen to H&M?  Well, to continue to be honest, I would have a hard time listening to them if they walked into my house and started talking to me in person. So probably I will not listen to them on Spotify.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm old or out of touch but I've never listed to a podcast.  I'm interested but my listening tends to be for short intervals.  If I'm in the car it's usually for ten to 30 minutes at a time.  In the house I tend to listen to music or talk for similar length of time.
> In any case, if I wanted to listen to someone talk it would not me H&M....and I wouldn't want to promote or contribute to anything they do



I only started listening to podcasts in the last two years. There are podcasts for every subject under the sun these days. It is trial and error to find the ones you really connect with since there are thousands of choices. When you find someone who genuinely enjoys doing their podcast, you really do look forward to listening to them. I tend to listen when I am walking my dog and especially at bedtime. I set up my phone to the podcast and fall asleep to it. If I learn something before I nod off, all the better. The key to listening at bedtime is finding someone with a good voice, nobody too shrill or loud. I don't listen to anything political or newsy, I get enough of that during the day and I don't need anything getting me stirred up while I'm trying to sleep.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I only started listening to podcasts in the last two years. There are podcasts for every subject under the sun these days. It is trial and error to find the ones you really connect with since there are thousands of choices. When you find someone who genuinely enjoys doing their podcast, you really do look forward to listening to them. I tend to listen when I am walking my dog and especially at bedtime. I set up my phone to the podcast and fall asleep to it. If I learn something before I nod off, all the better. The key to listening at bedtime is finding someone with a good voice, nobody too shrill or loud. I don't listen to anything political or newsy, I get enough of that during the day and I don't need anything getting me stirred up while I'm trying to sleep.


do you use ear pods in bed?  I'd have to as DH is sleeping next to me.  I know what you mean about news related shows or podcasts these days.  I used to like charlie rose for getting me sleepy.  he was replaced on PBS by Christianne Amanpour.  I watch her sometimes but the topics often (almost always) tend to be disturbing....not the best at bed time.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> do you use ear pods in bed?  I'd have to as DH is sleeping next to me.  I know what you mean about news related shows or podcasts these days.  I used to like charlie rose for getting me sleepy.  he was replaced on PBS by Christianne Amanpour.  I watch her sometimes but the topics often (almost always) tend to be disturbing....not the best at bed time.



DH doesn't usually mind me having something on as long as I keep it low. On the occasions when he doesn't want to hear I found some earbuds that are actually fairly comfortable. Most podcasts only last about an hour or two so it's not like you'll fall asleep and then wake up in the middle of the night and they're still going.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I do listen to talk radio (and I have the spotify app) so I would probably enjoy some of the podcasts....on my to-do list....but not H&M



I grew up with talk radio on constantly in the house. I think that’s why I love podcasts so much!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Also, the podcast market is extremely flooded right now, every joe blow has a podcast, as well as every out of work actor since so many things were shut down in the last year. Obviously they have a leg up with the Spotify deal because they are advertising on the platform which has so many users, but that’s still no guarantee of long-term listeners.


----------



## Lodpah

Don’t you have to be Facebook, YouTube kind of start up to make that kind of money? Even the biggest A-List stars don’t have that much. Heck it took OW a long time to make that money. I doubt Netflix and Spotify are even worth that much. Of course I don’t know their net worth.

They’re fishing. Hoping companies will start running to them. The only thing they’ll catch is bait to hook the fish.


----------



## LittleStar88

Lodpah said:


> Don’t you have to be Facebook, YouTube kind of start up to make that kind of money? Even the biggest A-List stars don’t have that much. Heck it took OW a long time to make that money. I doubt Netflix and Spotify are even worth that much. Of course I don’t know their net worth.
> 
> They’re fishing. Hoping companies will start running to them. The only thing they’ll catch is bait to hook the fish.



Is it possible they are being compensated with shares of stock in these companies + attached to performance metrics, and not actual cash money check up front?


----------



## zinacef

Watch out Oprah —- maybe in a year or two, Archewell Network.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Also, the podcast market is extremely flooded right now, every joe blow has a podcast, as well as every out of work actor since so many things were shut down in the last year. Obviously they have a leg up with the Spotify deal because they are advertising on the platform which has so many users, but that’s still no guarantee of long-term listeners.



That ticks me off. Thousands of people have their own original podcasts and they had to work hard to gain listeners through word of mouth. Here comes Harry and Meghan who don't know squat and haven't made the slightest personal effort. They are going to be handed the enormous advantage of having Spotify advertising and promoting them constantly. It is in Spotify's best interest to do this since they have invested so heavily in them.


----------



## CeeJay

MrsSlocomb said:


> It seems the doctor that supports the coffee is ant-vaxx. How low can they go?






tiktok said:


> Actually the podcasts are free, only the music part is paid if you want to play what you want and avoid ads.
> 
> That said, all their deals require them to produce content people will consume - they may have gotten an advance of some kind, but if they produce content with the depth and quality we’ve seen from them so far, their time in the limelight will be very short indeed. It’s hard to produce good content even for very savvy creatives; for two grifters who have the intelligence of a peanut, well...


Peanut??! .. that's being generous, I would say more like an *amoeba *(you know - single cell)!!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I only started listening to podcasts in the last two years. There are podcasts for every subject under the sun these days. It is trial and error to find the ones you really connect with since there are thousands of choices. When you find someone who genuinely enjoys doing their podcast, you really do look forward to listening to them. I tend to listen when I am walking my dog and especially at bedtime. I set up my phone to the podcast and fall asleep to it. If I learn something before I nod off, all the better. The key to listening at bedtime is finding someone with a good voice, nobody too shrill or loud. I don't listen to anything political or newsy, I get enough of that during the day and I don't need anything getting me stirred up while I'm trying to sleep.



I already see a Spotify advertisement coming up: Soon the entire world will fall asleep to the soothing voice of the duchess.  

I love listen to music on Spotify during long car trips. I sincerely can't imagine what MM&H can say of interest. They are so phony and pretentious, they are only capable of milking their connections to the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Peanut??! .. that's being generous, I would say more like an *amoeba *(you know - single cell)!!!


no reason to offend the amoeba!!!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> You are preaching to the choir there. They are ALL as biased as hell and do whatever they can to pump up their favorites while suppressing those they don't like. However, they used to at least try to give the illusion of impartiality and truth-seeking. They don't even bother with that anymore.


Amen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is the competition. Does anyone listen to these?








						The Best Podcasts of 2020
					

It’s been a strange and harrowing year, and the podcasts have mostly followed suit.




					www.vulture.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the competition. Does anyone listen to these?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Podcasts of 2020
> 
> 
> It’s been a strange and harrowing year, and the podcasts have mostly followed suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vulture.com



I listened to “You’re Wrong About” and “My Year in Mensa”, both great!

Man, now you’re making me think of the opening they say in “You’re Wrong About” every week. They mentioned that they have a Patreon, but then say if you don’t want to join or can’t, that is totally cool and they love you just as much. NOT GREEDY.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I listened to “You’re Wrong About” and “My Year in Mensa”, both great!
> 
> Man, now you’re making me think of the opening they say in “You’re Wrong About” every week. They mentioned that they have a Patreon, but then say if you don’t want to join or can’t, that is totally cool and they love you just as much. NOT GREEDY.



Thank you. Good to have a recommendation before taking the plunge


----------



## jennalovesbags

Home Cooking is the very best.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the competition. Does anyone listen to these?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Podcasts of 2020
> 
> 
> It’s been a strange and harrowing year, and the podcasts have mostly followed suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vulture.com



I think the only one I would be interested in is this one:


*6. You’re Wrong About (Independent)    * 

_You’re Wrong About_ is a sneaky phenomenon. It’s a show that you keep around as a sort of secret, only to look up not long after to hear everybody else positively humming about it. Hosted by Michael Hobbes and Sarah Marshall, _You’re Wrong About_ can be broadly sorted within the well-populated “let’s take a well known thing and challenge your perspective on it” genre of podcast, but what makes it stand out is its distinct combination of fluid chemistry and a fiercely empathetic point of view. Whether it’s the 2000 election, the saga of Princess Diana, or the D.C. sniper, each subject is tackled by Marshall and Hobbes with remarkable thoughtfulness and a sharp eye on the critical structures that harm us. _You’re Wrong About_ has been around since 2018, but it’s become a thing over the past year and deservedly so: It’s the kind of podcast that people who love podcasts can’t get enough of.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Seriously, pick a topic you are interested in and I bet you can find someone who is so into the subject they have a podcast devoted to it. Some of my favorites are obscure ones where I enjoy the enthusiasm of the people doing it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the only one I would be interested in is this one:
> 
> 
> *6. You’re Wrong About (Independent)    *
> 
> _You’re Wrong About_ is a sneaky phenomenon. It’s a show that you keep around as a sort of secret, only to look up not long after to hear everybody else positively humming about it. Hosted by Michael Hobbes and Sarah Marshall, _You’re Wrong About_ can be broadly sorted within the well-populated “let’s take a well known thing and challenge your perspective on it” genre of podcast, but what makes it stand out is its distinct combination of fluid chemistry and a fiercely empathetic point of view. Whether it’s the 2000 election, the saga of Princess Diana, or the D.C. sniper, each subject is tackled by Marshall and Hobbes with remarkable thoughtfulness and a sharp eye on the critical structures that harm us. _You’re Wrong About_ has been around since 2018, but it’s become a thing over the past year and deservedly so: It’s the kind of podcast that people who love podcasts can’t get enough of.



The Diana series is great.


----------



## rose60610

I enjoy learning about podcasts others recommend. There's a thread about books and movies, perhaps it can include podcast recommendations or somebody could start a thread devoted to podcasts.  I like listening to Jocko Willink, retired Navy Seal and author. You wouldn't hear him complain or seek pity if he married into the BRF .


----------



## csshopper

There's hope, asked my 16 year old granddaughter if she was going to check them out on Spotify. Response with a somewhat bewildered look: "No, why would I be interested in anything they have to say?"


----------



## V0N1B2

rose60610 said:


> I enjoy learning about podcasts others recommend. There's a thread about books and movies, perhaps it can include podcast recommendations or somebody could start a thread devoted to podcasts.  I like listening to Jocko Willink, retired Navy Seal and author. You wouldn't hear him complain or seek pity if he married into the BRF .


The podcast thread from the old Books & Music sub forum was absorbed into the General Discussion forum. 
It’s here: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/podcasts-what-are-you-listening-to-suggestions.907814/ 

I wonder if the daft duo have ever listened to these podcasts....
Fake Heiress
Who the Hell is Hamish?
Pretend-a true crime documentary podcast


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I enjoy learning about podcasts others recommend. There's a thread about books and movies, perhaps it can include podcast recommendations or somebody could start a thread devoted to podcasts.  I like listening to Jocko Willink, retired Navy Seal and author. You wouldn't hear him complain or seek pity if he married into the BRF .



I am a very visual learner.  Listening usually takes up too much mental energy, especially if it’s someone spouting off repetitive nonsense or word salads.   I appreciate the recommendations.  Thank you @V0N1B2 

Tell me, I forget. Show me, I remember. Involve me, I understand.





						Tell Me and I Forget; Teach Me and I May Remember; Involve Me and I Learn – Quote Investigator
					






					quoteinvestigator.com


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> first time I've heard anything like this about Doria....I'll take it with a grain of salt.  but someone did raise this self-centered woman.  could be that it's not all her dad's fault.


Yeah, gotta agree with you here .. while I think that Doria always wanted to be "on her own" (business-wise), she couldn't do it financially until she got (ahem) 'backing' from the Bank of Hazza.  She was, for many years, a Social Worker and apparently a Yoga teacher, but I don't believe either provided tons of $$$ whereas, Thomas's job did provide a good income stream, hence the reason why he could 'fund' Meghan's various PS, schooling, etc.


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> That ticks me off. Thousands of people have their own original podcasts and they had to work hard to gain listeners through word of mouth. Here comes Harry and Meghan who don't know squat and haven't made the slightest personal effort. They are going to be handed the enormous advantage of having Spotify advertising and promoting them constantly. It is in Spotify's best interest to do this since they have invested so heavily in them.



That's the reality everywhere these days - look at kids of various celebrities who all become models and actors nowadays. None of them earned it, and in many cases it's unlikely they would have been able to do it on their own if they were just some unknown climbing their way up. How many of them are truly beautiful / talented? A tiny fraction. C'est la vie...



CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the competition. Does anyone listen to these?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Podcasts of 2020
> 
> 
> It’s been a strange and harrowing year, and the podcasts have mostly followed suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vulture.com



I don't listen to any of these but I'm an avid podcast listener and there are tons of amazing podcasts on every subject under the sun. There are some heavyweights like Tim Ferris that are good, but I actually find that some of the best ones are outside the top 10 or top 100 lists. It all depends on your personal interests and preferences. But the content has to be consistently good or people stop listening. If H&M produce the preachy, hypocritical content they've shared so far, even people who give them the benefit of the doubt will lose interest very quickly. 

Spotify is mostly trying to buy its way to a larger market share - but I doubt they pay that much upfront, they're not idiots. The contract has to be tied to long-term performance.


----------



## marietouchet

Go People magazine ! A great story, alerting us to how hard working people are hurting this year , a women with wonderful accomplishments as treasured crafts-person 

Somehow this story resonates with me (much more than the drivel from .... )









						Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's Wedding Gown Maker Struggling to Feed Family
					

Chloe Savage has been pushed to the edge of homelessness during the pandemic




					people.com


----------



## drifter

So far MM and JCMH's "worth" has not been measured objectively in terms of statistics.  It will be very easy for Spotify or Netflix to monitor the success of their content in real-time. The 2 may be in for a shock (Imagine:  "H!!! It can't be!  Everyone should be listening to our podcast!!!  It must be the BRF who jammed the network/paid the listeners off not to listen!!").  This will be really interesting!


----------



## bag-mania

They are probably busily perusing as many successful podcasts as they can to see what works and what ideas they can steal.


----------



## Chanbal

*JAN MOIR *is back:

*Why Harry and Meg are the new Smashie and Nicey (shame it's not all for charidee)*

They left the utter torment of royal life behind them, upsetting the Queen and falling out with Prince William in the process.

They moved across an entire continent to find freedom, which we read about in a liberty-locating book called Finding Freedom (£20) based on their freedom-finding expedition.

They spent months in different but lavishly appointed mansions before settling down in their own £11 million Californian enclave, complete with log fire in the master bedroom. And all for what? To make a podcast.

I know, I know. They have done so much more than that, including a Netflix deal and delivering gluten-free sandwiches in downtown LA. But what the world really doesn’t need right now is another podcast from another couple of thrusters convinced of their own delightfulness — although when has modesty ever stopped the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from doing exactly as they please? ‘Hi guys! I’m Harry.’ ‘And I’m Meghan,’ they burble after some godforsaken cheesy bantz to introduce their new Archewell Audio enterprise.

Harry and Meghan have reportedly been paid millions by Spotify to regularly air their bien pensees to a breathless world. This must be hugely irritating for the recording stars who, on average, receive just £200 a year from music streaming services such as Spotify for regularly playing their songs.

Harry promises that Archewell Audio will ‘bring forward different perspectives and voices to find our common ground’.

I can think of some common ground that Mr Bachman, Mr Turner and Mr Overdrive — as Smashie and Nicey would say —might have with the couple right now, specifically about how much Spotify is paying them versus how much it’s paying the Sussexes.

But hold it right there. I don’t always want to sound like a great aunt screeching with horror and clutching my cultured pearls every time Harry and Meghan try something new. And Christmas is almost upon us, so please bear with me while I try to be positive instead. A podcast, you say? How marvellous! It is certainly something that will appeal to the Sussexes’ younger fan base, who still find the couple relatable and interesting, despite everything. And it is important to acknowledge that people cannot complain about the Sussexes taking money from the Sovereign Grant then continue to complain when they try to make money of their own. Or can they?

My problem — that was a short amnesty — is that very little Harry and Meghan do could be described as proper work or honest effort, something dependent on talent or skill. It’s all just preachy pie in the sententious sky.

Nothing is real. Everything is an opportunity to trade in on the royal connections they once found so onerous — but now realise that without them they would be nothing. Companies such as Spotify and Netflix would certainly not be recruiting the couple for roles they are neither experienced enough nor qualified for — and furthermore, haven’t earned the moral authority to undertake. Whoops! There I go again.

But it’s not just me. Will those who disagree with these views — or indeed anyone five years down the line — really want to tune in regularly to listen to the Sussexes and hear their latest freshly baked views? These empty words from privileged kids which, under closer examination, are almost entirely meaningless.

For example, Meghan says: ‘One of the things my husband and I have always talked about is my passion for meeting people and hearing their stories.’ A passion for meeting people? Very nice I am sure, even though it doesn’t seem to include her own father.

Anyway, what with this and the vegan superlatte coffee company investment made by Meghan —which her good friend Oprah then plugged online to her 19 million followers — we are entering new Sussex territory.

From now on, it will become increasingly hard to match up their ‘we were bullied out of the Royal Family’ rhetoric with the launching of these highly professional operations which ultimately profit from their royal fame and titles.

‘But we literally are the world’s most caring celebrities, so tune in to our humongously megatastic holiday special coming soon,’ said the couple. Meghan and Harry or Smashie and Nicey? Already it is hard to tell.

It seems unfair to compare royal couples, but sometimes it’s unavoidable.

Take the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s recent low-key tour of the UK, which found them shivering on railway station platforms and being sneered at by Nicola Sturgeon for making the effort to visit Scotland. 

They made a little podcast, too — but theirs was about raising £400,000 to buy toys for poor children at Christmas. Something real. Something that helped, something constructive — instead of that vapid, self-aggrandising nonsense pumped out from California.

Please click here-it's a long article!


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, gotta agree with you here .. while I think that Doria always wanted to be "on her own" (business-wise), she couldn't do it financially until she got (ahem) 'backing' from the Bank of Hazza.  She was, for many years, a Social Worker and apparently a Yoga teacher, but I don't believe either provided tons of $$$ whereas, Thomas's job did provide a good income stream, hence the reason why he could 'fund' Meghan's various PS, schooling, etc.


I also had read that Thomas had won the lottery about about $1 million, and poured a lot of it into MM's private schools and college.  
Thanks Daddy!  MM still shows her appreciation now.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't want to click on this type of cheesy articles. I believe this is the same lawsuit they won a couple of months ago, but here are today's headlines: I bet they are trying to collect clicks.


----------



## chicinthecity777

No, they have not won a court case! The case was settled. It got a small mention on BBC online. 

*The Duchess of Sussex has settled a legal claim against a news agency that photographed her and her son, Archie, the High Court has heard.*
Splash News and Picture Agency - which is in administration - has agreed not to take photos of her, Prince Harry or Archie, should it resume trading.









						Meghan settles case over Archie photos with Splash UK agency
					

The Duchess of Sussex took legal action against a news agency that photographed her and her son.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, they have not won a court case! The case was settled. It got a small mention on BBC online.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex has settled a legal claim against a news agency that photographed her and her son, Archie, the High Court has heard.*
> Splash News and Picture Agency - which is in administration - has agreed not to take photos of her, Prince Harry or Archie, should it resume trading.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan settles case over Archie photos with Splash UK agency
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex took legal action against a news agency that photographed her and her son.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


Now if everyone else would stop taking their pictures!

(She couldn’t handle not being in the spotlight)


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> *Now if everyone else would stop taking their pictures!*
> 
> (She couldn’t handle not being in the spotlight)



It wouldn't help. They keep regurgitating the old photos every few months. Think of how many times we have seen old images being used to illustrate a new article. The green dress alone has made dozens of appearances.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It wouldn't help. They keep regurgitating the old photos every few months. Think of how many times we have seen old images being used to illustrate a new article. The green dress alone has made dozens of appearances.


So, so true.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, they have not won a court case! The case was settled. It got a small mention on BBC online.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex has settled a legal claim against a news agency that photographed her and her son, Archie, the High Court has heard.*
> Splash News and Picture Agency - which is in administration - has agreed not to take photos of her, Prince Harry or Archie, should it resume trading.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan settles case over Archie photos with Splash UK agency
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex took legal action against a news agency that photographed her and her son.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


Thanks for clarifying. The new headlines, which I still don't want to click, are more informative. They don't want to be photographed by an UK agency, but they walk around with a private photographer to make sure the world doesn't miss any of their 'good deeds'. Their hypocrisy is


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure that he told her that she is "better than anyone else"? I can see the 'princess' as some parents seem to apply that term to their daughters, but 'better than anyone else' is hard to digest.


I totally believe that he likely said that; I know that a former colleague (whose Dad was a producer on another very well-known TV series) told her constantly that she was "better than anyone else" and not to "take any crap" from 'minions'!!!  I think part of that comes from being in a business that is highly competitive and where (let's face it), most of these folks who provide the 'behind-the-scenes' work are mistreated and basically told they aren't worth it!  A Producer friend of ours (works on Music-related documentaries) has told us about the crap they take on a constant basis; from the 'stars', from the investors, you name it .. honestly, I could never work in that business!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I totally believe that he likely said that; I know that a former colleague (whose Dad was a producer on another very well-known TV series) told her constantly that she was "better than anyone else" and not to "take any crap" from 'minions'!!!  I think part of that comes from being in a business that is highly competitive and where (let's face it), most of these folks who provide the 'behind-the-scenes' work are mistreated and basically told they aren't worth it!  A Producer friend of ours (works on Music-related documentaries) has told us about the crap they take on a constant basis; from the 'stars', from the investors, you name it .. honestly, I could never work in that business!



He might have done it to boost her confidence, but it was a mistake imo.

In any event, she is old enough to be responsible for her ruthless, phony, and greedy attitude. It looks like she found the right match in H. @papertiger con-artists is a great description.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> 'In contrast, Meghan uses power-raising verbal techniques while adding a soft, warm, caring vocal tone to infuse her messages with the kind of warmth and kindness she is promoting,' added Judi.
> 
> 'Her opening sentence is strikingly similar to the kind of intros that Michelle Ob###a does for her podcast trailers. Michell will stress her passion for conversations that dig deep and Meghan tells us how she and "*my husband always talk about our passion for meeting people".  Yes, but .. let's remember, her only 'passion' for meeting people is IF SAID Person can do something for HER "*
> 
> The body language and behaviour expert isn't the only one to have noticed Meghan's new 'regal tone', with royal author Angela Levin echoing a similar conclusion earlier in the week.  Angela said: '*[Meghan] does try to be very regal despite the fact that she wanted to get out of the Royal Family. She's very regal, she talks down to us, she's slightly patronising*.'  *YES, for sure .. her 'regal' notion is that her sh!t smells like Roses whereas everyone else's (including 'HER HUSBAND') well, smells like sh1t .. and as far as 'slightly patronizing' - HA, more like VERY patronizing (and this was exhibited from many years ago - according to my friends who said she pulled this crap in High School)!!!*
> 
> Regal & Presidential


----------



## duna

Gosh, these last few pages have been "double dutch" (is this term still used??) to me!! Spotify, podcast, millennials (I thought they were those born around 2000?), generation Z.....I have no clue what all this means! I'll have to ask my grandchildren if they know this stuff, but not living in an English speaking country, maybe they don't either I have to say that I watch very little television (it's all rubbish) and during lockdown I have been reading mostly, I have caught up on many books that I hadn't the time to read before and to me it's the best way to get away from it all!!


----------



## maryg1

duna said:


> Gosh, these last few pages have been "double dutch" (is this term still used??) to me!! Spotify, podcast, millennials (I thought they were those born around 2000?), generation Z.....I have no clue what all this means! I'll have to ask my grandchildren if they know this stuff, but not living in an English speaking country, maybe they don't either I have to say that I watch very little television (it's all rubbish) and during lockdown I have been reading mostly, I have caught up on many books that I hadn't the time to read before and to me it's the best way to get away from it all!!


Spotify is used a lot here in Italy too...hubby does it, I prefer Apple Music because the frequent ads on Spotify make me nervous!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for clarifying. The new headlines, which I still don't want to click, are more informative. They don't want to be photographed by an UK agency, but they walk around with a private photographer to make sure the world doesn't miss any of their 'good deeds'. Their hypocrisy is
> 
> View attachment 4933049


The private photographer insures they have  total control over the pictures so they can make money and also control how they look.  Photoshop them to death so he has hair and she looks thin.


----------



## rose60610

We were told that Meghan "was excited" about decorating their house for Christmas this year. So....where are all the photos of these wonderful decorations? We know they got a Christmas tree because some little kid supposedly asked Harry if he worked at the tree farm. Did M's PR flunkies tell her to shut up instead of showing off her 19 bathroom house because everybody else has to be hunkered down due to Covid and her 20 foot high nutcrackers wouldn't be appropriate?  That wouldn't stop Meghan. I wonder if The Queen will include a picture of them on her desk during her annual Christmas broadcast. Last year she didn't have their picture, "oopsie" .  Will Harry get some new gray polo shirts? And maybe a hairbrush? Meghan could use a knife sharpener since she loves giving people the shiv, including the BRF.


----------



## duna

maryg1 said:


> Spotify is used a lot here in Italy too...hubby does it, I prefer Apple Music because the frequent ads on Spotify make me nervous!
> [/QUOTE
> 
> LOL, I had non idea we have it too! Grazie Mary!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> and her 20 foot high nutcrackers wouldn't be appropriate?



“Nutcracker” could be our code name for her. Harry will never be the happy-go-lucky guy he used to be again.


----------



## sdkitty

maryg1 said:


> Spotify is used a lot here in Italy too...hubby does it, I prefer Apple Music because the frequent ads on Spotify make me nervous!


we have free version of spotify with ads...was thinking of getting the pay version but not sure if we would lose our playlist from the free version.  I have an issue with not being able to call anyone with problems or questions.  so for now, using the free one


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> We were told that Meghan "was excited" about decorating their house for Christmas this year. So....where are all the photos of these wonderful decorations? We know they got a Christmas tree because some little kid supposedly asked Harry if he worked at the tree farm. Did M's PR flunkies tell her to shut up instead of showing off her 19 bathroom house because everybody else has to be hunkered down due to Covid and her 20 foot high nutcrackers wouldn't be appropriate?  That wouldn't stop Meghan. I wonder if The Queen will include a picture of them on her desk during her annual Christmas broadcast. Last year she didn't have their picture, "oopsie" .  Will Harry get some new gray polo shirts? And maybe a hairbrush? Meghan could use a knife sharpener since she loves giving people the shiv, including the BRF.



As soon as she finds a buyer, the photos will be posted — always about the $$$$
“Don’t give away the cow for free”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> I know several who use Spotify, but for music. And also because they had been using since before apple music.
> 
> I don't believe that the Spotify subscribers is a built-in audience for H&M. Only those who have an interest in them or what they have to say. And honestly I don't think what they have to say will attract so many to justify these amounts they are being paid. Look at folks like Howard Stern and Joe Rogan - they have a huge following because what they say is interesting and provocative.
> 
> H&M just regurgitate whatever the flavor of the moment is. And they are too safe. Nothing edgy to get people's attention.


100% agree .. while certain folks may not like Stern & Rogan, their topics and (yes) provocative shows bring in listeners.  Who the HELL (especially right now) is going to want to listen to these 2 'grifters' who are supposedly going to tell us "what we need to do to make ourselves better" .. blah, blah, blah!  Seriously?? .. I don't need to hear that crap, especially from 2 people who have had pretty much everything handed to them on a single platter!  Give me someone who has truly broken their a$$ "making it" .. and then I may just listen.  I just shake my head each time I hear this "inspirational" BS coming from these mouths - HA, GO-THE-F-AWAY and be "private" like you said you SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO desired!


----------



## redney

I use Spotify, paid version. Love the music options and no ads. I seek out specific podcasts on it, and MM and JCMH's is not on my list.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree .. while certain folks may not like Stern & Rogan, their topics and (yes) provocative shows bring in listeners.  Who the HELL (especially right now) is going to want to listen to these 2 'grifters' who are supposedly going to tell us "what we need to do to make ourselves better" .. blah, blah, blah!  Seriously?? .. I don't need to hear that crap, especially from 2 people who have had pretty much everything handed to them on a single platter!  Give me someone who has truly broken their a$$ "making it" .. and then I may just listen.  I just shake my head each time I hear this "inspirational" BS coming from these mouths - HA, GO-THE-F-AWAY and be "private" like you said you SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO desired!


agree....howard stern come from working class family and while he may be overpaid now, he did work for his position.  and he has grown from shock jock to very good interviewer
H&M are just spouting what they think is politically correct....we don't need them to point out the obvious about climate change, BLM, etc

I'd like them to get on a small boat and sail across the ocean like greta thunburg


----------



## Chanbal

The text below is at the end of an article about Randy Andy.   Skippy postponing the baptism of his child to have H as a godparent sounds stupid imo.




Skippy at the end of the article.


----------



## djuna1




----------



## bag-mania

Let’s hope Archewell gives money to the charity and their “partnership” isn’t just them doing a podcast telling everyone else to give them money.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another day, another barage of grifter bs.  How many times must we hear what they are “_going to do”?  _A-listers, people who care,  tell us *after* they have done something, not before.  I don’t believe any of it. They are not trustworthy.  Talk is cheap.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Let’s hope Archewell gives money to the charity and their “partnership” isn’t just them doing a podcast telling everyone else to give them money.


MM&H likely hope Archewell receives money from...


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The text below is at the end of an article about Randy Andy.   Skippy postponing the baptism of his child to have H as a godparent sounds stupid imo.
> 
> View attachment 4934363
> 
> 
> Skippy at the end of the article.


IMHO christening postponement is more of a pragmatic acceptance of the current COVID state of affairs in the UK, new strain of disease, Tier 4 lockdown , travel not permitted to/from Netherlands, Belgium, Italy ... the holdup is not JCMH


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> IMHO christening postponement is more of a pragmatic acceptance of the current COVID state of affairs in the UK, new strain of disease, Tier 4 lockdown , travel not permitted to/from Netherlands, Belgium, Italy ... the holdup is not JCMH


I also believe that, it wouldn't make any sense to invite MM&H after what they did to Skippy & wife.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I also believe that, it wouldn't make any sense to invite MM&H after what they did to Skippy & wife.


yes, but maybe they want the status of having a royal (or sorta royal) godfather


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> yes, but maybe they want the status of having a royal (or sorta royal) godfather



Wait, hasn’t Harry dropped his Royal status?  The palace tells us that he is not a working royal, no longer uses HRH title, etc.  Based on all we know about Harry, is he really a positive choice for a godfather?

ETA: I question the article‘s conclusions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

from Aug, 2020 (seems eons ago)
Rumours of Inskip and Harry’s disagreements over Meghan first came to light some time ago. At the time of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s first wedding anniversary in 2019, _Tatler_’s David Jenkins wrote of ‘Tom “Skippy” Inskip, the ultra-loyal, tight-lipped Harry pal, who, it’s said, advised Harry not to marry Meghan and has paid the price: banishment.’









						The Duke of Sussex’s childhood friend had reservations about Meghan
					

The claim is made in the new biography of the couple, Finding Freedom, which will be published on Tuesday




					www.tatler.com
				




ETA:  in Feb, 2020, things were very different!








						TALK OF THE TOWN: Chums snub Harry over Meghan the 'hijacker'
					

TALK OF THE TOWN: Tom 'Skippy' Inskip has rejected the chance of asking Prince Harry to be his firstborn child's godfather because of the impact of Meghan on their friendship.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> from Aug, 2020 (seems eons ago)
> Rumours of Inskip and Harry’s disagreements over Meghan first came to light some time ago. At the time of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s first wedding anniversary in 2019, _Tatler_’s David Jenkins wrote of ‘Tom “Skippy” Inskip, the ultra-loyal, tight-lipped Harry pal, who, it’s said, advised Harry not to marry Meghan and has paid the price: banishment.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s childhood friend had reservations about Meghan
> 
> 
> The claim is made in the new biography of the couple, Finding Freedom, which will be published on Tuesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  in Feb, 2020, things were very different!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TALK OF THE TOWN: Chums snub Harry over Meghan the 'hijacker'
> 
> 
> TALK OF THE TOWN: Tom 'Skippy' Inskip has rejected the chance of asking Prince Harry to be his firstborn child's godfather because of the impact of Meghan on their friendship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


of course Harry cannot be friends with someone who doesn't totally approve of or agree with Meghan


----------



## sdkitty

I got sucked into some ABC show about Diana - her life and death - nothing new there; guess there is still enough interest in her to do a new show.  couldn't help but think when they got to the end and talked about how old she would be now and that she'd be a grandmother - what would she think of H&M?
We will never know.  I think she would have been totally supportive of the marriage.  and maybe since she had problems with "the firm" she would have been supportive of them leaving.  or maybe should wouldn't have wanted her son to give up his royal status.

I think she would be proud of Will & Kate and those adorable kids of theirs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I got sucked into some ABC show about Diana - her life and death - nothing new there; guess there is still enough interest in her to do a new show.  couldn't help but think when they got to the end and talked about how old she would be now and that she'd be a grandmother - what would she think of H&M?
> We will never know.  I think she would have been totally supportive of the marriage.  and maybe since she had problems with "the firm" she would have been supportive of them leaving.  or maybe should wouldn't have wanted her son to give up his royal status.
> 
> I think she would be proud of Will & Kate and those adorable kids of theirs.


I don't think H would have married MM if Diana were to be alive. Diana would be older and wiser. She would easily spot the phoniness of MM, and Harry would probably listen to her.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> yes, but maybe they want the status of having a royal (or sorta royal) godfather





CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, hasn’t Harry dropped his Royal status?  The palace tells us that he is not a working royal, no longer uses HRH title, etc.  Based on all we know about Harry, is he really a positive choice for a godfather?
> 
> ETA: I question the article‘s conclusions.


Harry's royal status doesn't seem to have much value in the UK these days. Unfortunately, it is still overvalued by some in the US.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Harry's royal status doesn't seem to have much value in the UK these days. Unfortunately, it is still overvalued by some in the US.



Overvalued, indeed!  Surely, the downward shift will begin soon.  
Interesting to note the headline of the Bloomberg Pursuits tweet said   ”Meghan Markle and Prince Harry“.   No duchess???  is this a signal? Wishful thinking?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Overvalued, indeed!  Surely, the downward shift will begin soon.
> Interesting to note the headline of the Bloomberg Pursuits tweet said   ”Meghan Markle and Prince Harry“.   No duchess???  is this a signal? Wishful thinking?


I wish all media would address her that way....instead of Duchess


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> do you use ear pods in bed?  I'd have to as DH is sleeping next to me.  I know what you mean about news related shows or podcasts these days.  I used to like charlie rose for getting me sleepy.  he was replaced on PBS by Christianne Amanpour.  I watch her sometimes but the topics often (almost always) tend to be disturbing....not the best at bed time.


I used to LOVE Charlie Rose, so maaaaaaaaan .. was I ever disappointed when all the news about his behaviors came forward .. WOW!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Is it possible they are being compensated with shares of stock in these companies + attached to performance metrics, and not actual cash money check up front?


Yes, ABSOLUTELY .. could be a graduating scale of percentage (e.g. - 15% yields $n.nn - etc.) and STOCK (could also be a percentage).  The Financial Services company that I worked for, each layer of promotion came with a sliding scale of stock options (the salary was the sh!tty part because oftentimes, we got anywhere from $0 to $3000 which doesn't translate to much on a weekly basis).  The stock options were performance based, but .. they could also give you 'deferred' stock, which means that they have to wait anywhere from 5 (minimum) to 10 (maximum) years before they can 'cash' it in .. and as we have all seen, the stock market is not a sure thing (can be good or bad).


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Let’s hope Archewell gives money to the charity and their “partnership” isn’t just them doing a podcast telling everyone else to give them money.


That's exactly what it is going to be.  All these partnerships are not about the Harkles giving money.  The charity thinks it will get something out of being associated with "high profile" people. Boy, are they in for a surprise!  They are luck if it doesn't result in the charity getting Markled!

They are also in danger of spreading themselves too thin so no charity benefits anything.


----------



## gracekelly

A sampling of the comments in the Daily Mail about their association with this charity.









						Meghan and Harry announce first donation from Archewell to Jose Andres
					

Meghan and Harry have announced that their first donation from the Archewell foundation will go to the World Central Kitchen, run by the chef Jose Andres to help people with food.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




comments below have not been moderated.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631593347



entermycommentplease, Somewhere, Heard Island And McDonald Islands, moments ago
I reckon the taxation department needs to keep a close eye on where all this money comes from and goes to.
ReplyNew Comment



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631593019



Overdue, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom, moments ago
The army of PR gurus, publicists, press agents and the rest employed by Meghan and Harry will be working 24/7 in 2021 to repair the damage. Expect many "donations" to charities and PR stunts in the coming months. Brace yourselves.
ReplyNew Comment



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592957



entermycommentplease, Somewhere, Heard Island And McDonald Islands, moments ago
Why are they telling everyone? Do they want a pat of the back for taking other people's money and donating it?
ReplyNew Comment
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Archewell-Chef-Jose-Andress-foundation.html#

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592681



Morningread2, Everywhere, United States, moments ago
Whoever's responsible for proofreading the headlines needs to be fired.
ReplyNew Comment



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592657



PJane, Hobart, Australia, moments ago
Why publicise this alleged act of philanthropy? It defeats the whole rationale about giving to others less fortunate. Thus, it comes across as an act of grandiosity- self entitlement and privilege! Bill and Melinda Gates they are not! More like millionaire hypocrisy!
ReplyNew Comment



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592575



JoGT, Philadelphia NYC, United States, moments ago
They need to ditch Sunshine Sachs.
ReplyNew Comment
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Archewell-Chef-Jose-Andress-foundation.html#


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> That's exactly what it is going to be.  All these partnerships are not about the Harkles giving money.  The charity thinks it will get something out of being associated with "high profile" people. Boy, are they in for a surprise!  They are luck if it doesn't result in the charity getting Markled!
> 
> They are also in danger of spreading themselves too thin so no charity benefits anything.



There isn’t any charity they care enough about to want to align themselves with permanently. By going the “charity of the month” route they will guarantee themselves media placement constantly. As has already been proven, the US media will give them a pass  on not actually doing anything  as long as they are saying the proper PC feel-good messages.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am a very *visual learner*.  Listening usually takes up too much mental energy, especially if it’s someone spouting off repetitive nonsense or word salads.   I appreciate the recommendations.  Thank you @V0N1B2


*SAME HERE *.. verbal 'stuff' is just background noise to me (_probably from YEARS of having to tune out my mother and her - either ranting or whining_).  I need visual stimulation, *BUT *.. it also depends .. if I saw these 2, the channel would be changed IMMEDIATELY!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> A sampling of the comments in the Daily Mail about their association with this charity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry announce first donation from Archewell to Jose Andres
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have announced that their first donation from the Archewell foundation will go to the World Central Kitchen, run by the chef Jose Andres to help people with food.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> comments below have not been moderated.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631593347
> 
> 
> 
> entermycommentplease, Somewhere, Heard Island And McDonald Islands, moments ago
> I reckon the taxation department needs to keep a close eye on where all this money comes from and goes to.
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631593019
> 
> 
> 
> Overdue, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom, moments ago
> The army of PR gurus, publicists, press agents and the rest employed by Meghan and Harry will be working 24/7 in 2021 to repair the damage. Expect many "donations" to charities and PR stunts in the coming months. Brace yourselves.
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592957
> 
> 
> 
> entermycommentplease, Somewhere, Heard Island And McDonald Islands, moments ago
> Why are they telling everyone? Do they want a pat of the back for taking other people's money and donating it?
> ReplyNew Comment
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Archewell-Chef-Jose-Andress-foundation.html#
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592681
> 
> 
> 
> Morningread2, Everywhere, United States, moments ago
> Whoever's responsible for proofreading the headlines needs to be fired.
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592657
> 
> 
> 
> PJane, Hobart, Australia, moments ago
> Why publicise this alleged act of philanthropy? It defeats the whole rationale about giving to others less fortunate. Thus, it comes across as an act of grandiosity- self entitlement and privilege! Bill and Melinda Gates they are not! More like millionaire hypocrisy!
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592575
> 
> 
> 
> JoGT, Philadelphia NYC, United States, moments ago
> They need to ditch Sunshine Sachs.
> ReplyNew Comment
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Archewell-Chef-Jose-Andress-foundation.html#



*"It was not stated how much was being given..." *Will we ever know the amount of such donation? The comments show how MM&H's 'good deeds' are perceived:


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *"It was not stated how much was being given..." *Will we ever know the amount of such donation? The comments show how MM&H's 'good deeds' are perceived:
> 
> View attachment 4934465
> 
> View attachment 4934464
> 
> View attachment 4934463
> 
> View attachment 4934466
> 
> View attachment 4934467


we aren't the only ones who are on to them


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Overvalued, indeed!  Surely, the downward shift will begin soon.
> Interesting to note the headline of the Bloomberg Pursuits tweet said   ”Meghan Markle and Prince Harry“.   No duchess???  is this a signal? Wishful thinking?





sdkitty said:


> I wish all media would address her that way....instead of Duchess



She already got plenty of visibility, and the need of using 'duchess' decreased.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> She already got plenty of visibility, and the need of using 'duchess' decreased.


Oh but I'll bet she loves that title


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> She already got plenty of visibility, and the need of using 'duchess' decreased.



It's just a search engine thing. The media are looking for clicks. People know them as MM and PC and the algorithms prove it, no one can remember which county they're D&D of, so the media keep using their pre-marriage names people actually search under.

If you want to know which articles MM or her PR have written, it's easy, they will always use the 'Duchess'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *"It was not stated how much was being given..." *Will we ever know the amount of such donation? The comments show how MM&H's 'good deeds' are perceived:



Are we certain it was $$$$, not old clothes?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't think H would have married MM if Diana were to be alive. Diana would be older and wiser. She would easily spot the phoniness of MM, and Harry would probably listen to her.


sadly we will never know


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we certain it was $$$$, not old clothes?


Good point! I hope it's not Harry's grey shirt, it shows too many signs of wear. The green dress (beloved by many) or a piece of Doria's "handmade jewelry" (from her Santa Monica College classes) are also possibilities. I doubt that she would donate any item from Diana's jewelry to be auctioned.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I'm a huge fan of Jose Andres and his work through WCK, I hope this brings him funds or additional donors or whatever else he needs.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> sadly we will never know


Yes, sadly we can only guess. Harry could possibly have turned into a different person if his mother hadn't died.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we certain it was $$$$, not old clothes?


when she did her "sayonara to zara" party, did she give the clothes to her friends or sell them?  I always thought that seemed kinda patronizing
never mind - googled it - guess she gave them to her less fortunate - soon to be markled- friends


----------



## Lodpah

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm a huge fan of Jose Andres and his work through WCK, I hope this brings him funds or additional donors or whatever else he needs.


He may do good work and I applaud him for that but to have anything associated withers two I’ll pass on any donations. I’ll give locally.


----------



## sdkitty

fawning article from Yahoo/She Knows:








						Rare Photo of Meghan Markle at a High School Dance Surfaces — And It's a Far Cry From Her Royal Life Now
					

OK, we're not ashamed to admit that we have a bit of a royal obsession with Meghan Markle. She's the embodiment of class, beauty, and strength. However, long before she fell in love with Prince Harry and forever made her mark on the royal family, she was a regular gal who grew up in Los […]




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> He may do good work and I applaud him for that but to have anything associated withers two I’ll pass on any donations. I’ll give locally.


I plan to do the same. There are unfortunately so many causes in need of donations that it's not difficult to skip whatever is associate with MM&H.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> fawning article from Yahoo/She Knows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rare Photo of Meghan Markle at a High School Dance Surfaces — And It's a Far Cry From Her Royal Life Now
> 
> 
> OK, we're not ashamed to admit that we have a bit of a royal obsession with Meghan Markle. She's the embodiment of class, beauty, and strength. However, long before she fell in love with Prince Harry and forever made her mark on the royal family, she was a regular gal who grew up in Los […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


The writer needs eyeglasses imo. 



"We’ve always known the Duchess of Sussex has always been beautiful but this photo proves it. You could have told us that this photo was taken yesterday and we would have believed you, no questions asked."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The writer needs eyeglasses imo.
> 
> View attachment 4934615
> 
> "We’ve always known the Duchess of Sussex has always been beautiful but this photo proves it. You could have told us that this photo was taken yesterday and we would have believed you, no questions asked."
> 
> 
> well when it starts out like this - you know where they're going


 She’s the embodiment of class, beauty, and strength.

a fan


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> when she did her "sayonara to zara" party, did she give the clothes to her friends or sell them?  I always thought that seemed kinda patronizing
> never mind - googled it - guess she gave them to her less fortunate - soon to be markled- friends


Great friend! There are a few articles about that. Here is one of them:
*Meghan Markle threw 'Sayonara Zara' party to 'give away her cheap clothes to guests' when she got famous and wealthy enough to buy designer gear*
'She's not a person you can actually be friends with. She's the type of person who is best friends with her stylist.'
The magazine also claimed the Duchess threw a 'Sayonara Zara' party when she started to make it in Hollywood - giving away all her cheaper clothes to guests.
She was said to have kept her closet neat and stored her Betsey Johnson shoes in their original boxes in tissue paper until she wanted to wear them. 
At the party, Meghan is said to have given revellers the old and inexpensive items in her closet to make room for newer and pricier options she could then afford as a better-known actress. 

Closet Purge


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> She’s the embodiment of class, beauty, and strength.
> 
> a fan


Haha, you took the words right out of my mouth!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Great friend! There are a few articles about that. Here is one of them:
> *Meghan Markle threw 'Sayonara Zara' party to 'give away her cheap clothes to guests' when she got famous and wealthy enough to buy designer gear*
> 'She's not a person you can actually be friends with. She's the type of person who is best friends with her stylist.'
> The magazine also claimed the Duchess threw a 'Sayonara Zara' party when she started to make it in Hollywood - giving away all her cheaper clothes to guests.
> She was said to have kept her closet neat and stored her Betsey Johnson shoes in their original boxes in tissue paper until she wanted to wear them.
> At the party, Meghan is said to have given revellers the old and inexpensive items in her closet to make room for newer and pricier options she could then afford as a better-known actress.
> 
> Closet Purge


I guess maybe some would say she was being generous but to me it seems pretty crass


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I guess maybe some would say she was being generous but to me it seems pretty crass


I didn't know about her 'Sayonara Zara' party. Dumping unwanted old items on friends is not generosity, it's selfishness and entitlement imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## creme fraiche

I’m so bored of these 2 and I was giving my eyeballs a respite as I was afraid they would permanently be rolled upward if I continued reading any of their 10 planted PR pieces a day.  However, their latest fauxmanitarian making money from appearing to do good really could not be ignored.  If Mackenzie Scott can quietly give away nearly $7 billion *quietly*, these two should be able to do the same with their unstated likely nominal, if any amount.  Billionaire brand indeed - based on what precisely? Word salad aka b***s*** and fake concern?


----------



## Straight-Laced

British commentator Giles Coren with some podcasting tips ... 


*My tips for Harry? Talk fast and be vile to Megs
As a marital podcast expert (though paid about £18m less) my advice to him is to make sure his wife gets sloshed first*
GILES COREN  18 December  The Times​

My wife and I were delighted to read this week that their former Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have decided to do a podcast. Weren’t we, dear?

“Eh, what?”

I said we were really pleased Harry and Meghan have signed a deal with Spotify, worth a reported £18 million, to do a regular podcast in which they wibble on about random things that interest them and expect people to listen. As presenters of a highly successful husband-and-wife podcast ourselves, we welcome them to the fold and celebrate the chance to share a genre platform with their esteemed Californian Wokenesses. Don’t we, darling?

“Sorry, luv. I had my ear things in while I was doing the washing up. Did you say something about Harry and Meghan and the podcast deal? You’re not still steaming about that, are you? You’ll have to let it go. You can’t spend the rest of your life storming round the house slamming doors and shouting, ‘eighteen million? EIGHTEEN MILLION?’”

I’m sorry, readers. I don’t know what she’s talking about.

“All week you’ve been ranting about it. Hurling pots and pans around the kitchen, yelling about what a pair of entitled morons they are and how it’s just not fair that we’ve put nearly two years into literally creating the genre of the husband and wife podcast, recently passing the one million downloads milestone, and all in return for just a few quid tacked on to your old Times contract, while these entitled, cloth-tongued halfwits with no journalistic experience at all are scoring megabucks for ripping us off.”

Again, I apologise for this foul misrepresentation of my true feelings about the thrilling news that the duke and duchess are to welcome us into their home for a podcast that will surely one day sit alongside the celebrated “Giles Coren Has No Idea” podcast, as a landmark of marital teamwork in the field of on-demand audio. I listened to the trailer they put out on Spotify this week and thought it was absolutely charming.

“You put a stuffed ginger cat on your head and balled up loo roll in your cheeks and marched round the house shouting, ‘Look at me, everybody, I’m Prince Harry, the celebrated podcaster!”

She’s been at the cooking sherry.


“And then you were mincing around on tiptoes with tennis balls for boobs, saying, ‘I’m Princess Meghan’ in a high-pitched LA accent, and going, ‘one of the things my husband and I have always talked about is our passion for meeting people and hearing their stories . . . because we’re NOSEY *******S WITH NO STORIES OF OUR OWN!!!’”

Esther, please.

“And then you collapsed on the floor and started crying.”

It’s not true, I assure you.

“That’s when I had that idea for a column for you, where you give them some advice from a more experienced podcasting married couple, including a list of dos and don’ts for broadcasting with your husband or wife.”

It wasn’t her idea, it was bloody my idea. Just so you know. But anyway . . .

DON’T just read a script, it will never sound natural. In the trailer, you’re both clearly reading. You eggs. People aren’t tuning in to hear what someone else has written for you. They’re tuning in to hear a real conversation. I have no idea why they would want to hear a real conversation. But they do.

DON’T waste time preparing stuff. People aren’t tuning in to hear what you’ve prepped, they’re tuning in to hear what comes naturally. Again, I have no idea why. People are idiots. Especially people who listen to podcasts. But it’s great because it means you don’t have to do any work. And work, as you two know full well, is for losers.

DON’T bother with celebrity interviews. Most podcasts are just celebrity interviews in one form or another but it’s such a lot of hassle to arrange, and celebrities are so annoying and demanding, and you can get just as many downloads from simply moaning on to your wife in the kitchen, so why bother?

DO talk much too fast. It really irritates old people. And when they complain, tell them to listen back at half speed and get double value — this will annoy them even more as they won’t know how to.

DO be vile to each other*.* People love that. When you’re really fed up with your partner’s nagging or laziness or bad driving or crapness at loading the dishwasher or apparent total lack of interest in sex, then chuck it at her, I mean him or her, in the podcast. People will think you’re kidding but you’ll both know you mean it, and she won’t be able shut you down because she won’t want listeners to know that you’re not joking.

DO have a drink before you record, it’ll loosen you up nicely.

DON’T have a second drink before you record. It’ll make you come over as pissed and mad.

DO insist she has a second drink before you record. It’ll make her come over as pissed and mad.

DON’T worry if everything you say feels boring and irrelevant. All podcasts are boring and irrelevant. They’re meant to be.

DON’T get all depressed when you listen back and it’s rubbish and it makes you feel like you’re only doing a podcast because everyone else is doing a podcast. Everyone feels like that because everyone is only doing a podcast because everyone else is doing a podcast.

DON’T worry that you won’t know how to do it because you’ve never listened to a podcast yourself. Nobody has ever listened to a podcast apart from their own. That’s why everyone has to do their own podcast.

Right, done.

“Did I hear you say you’ve finished the column, Giles?”

Yup.

“And you did a proper job? Said nice things about the Sussexes and offered them constructive advice and didn’t just dash off a listicle about how you hate podcasts?”

Yup.

“Well done. And, of course, you made very clear that the main thing with a marital podcast is to present a veneer of domestic harmony with just a hint of snark but without ever letting people see into the actual horrific truth of your marriage?”

Oh yeah. Absolutely. No hint of the horrific truth.

“Marvellous. I can’t wait to read it.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Looking at her highschool pic, her plastic surgeon really did fabulous work (as in, everything looked natural while right now i feel she's smootly sailing into Kardashian plastic territory). I will go to hell for this, but she should give daddy a call and thank him for funding her new face because I feel her old one would not have landed her the Suits gig nor a prince.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, she has always done the loose hair look?  Don't remember this as being a 90s look. Odd, then and just sloppy now.

Oh really?? 
_








						Harry & Meg 'plan to publish official family Xmas photo' despite royal exit
					

HARRY and Meghan plan to publish an official family Christmas photograph despite stepping down as working royals, it has been claimed. The Sussexes are set to reveal their annual snap and release a…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_


----------



## drifter

Chanbal said:


> The writer needs eyeglasses imo.
> 
> View attachment 4934615
> 
> "We’ve always known the Duchess of Sussex has always been beautiful but this photo proves it. You could have told us that this photo was taken yesterday and we would have believed you, no questions asked."


Actually, I would believe that this photo was taken yesterday but not because she looks young now......for some reason, she looks mature in this photo, almost like she's posing with her much younger stepson!


----------



## 1LV

drifter said:


> Actually, I would believe that this photo was taken yesterday but not because she looks young now......for some reason, she looks mature in this photo, almost like she's posing with her much younger stepson!


Plus, she looked as phony then as she does now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh really??
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg 'plan to publish official family Xmas photo' despite royal exit
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan plan to publish an official family Christmas photograph despite stepping down as working royals, it has been claimed. The Sussexes are set to reveal their annual snap and release a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



What a surprise.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a surprise.


official? OK.  Think their jealousy of Will and Kate is showing?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a surprise.


They quit being royals yet they still want to be royals!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> They quit being royals yet they still want to be royals!


hey, she's a Duchess - just one who can wear short dresses


----------



## Chanbal

drifter said:


> Actually, I would believe that this photo was taken yesterday but not because she looks young now......for some reason, she looks mature in this photo, almost like *she's posing with her much younger stepson!*


Who was perhaps not woke ($$$$) enough for her???


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> They quit being royals yet they still want to be royals!



We knew this back in January when the announcement was made. They want to be treated like top-tier royals (especially the celebrity and respect part) none of that spare business. Is it too early to hope all of the early 2021 Hollywood awards shows are cancelled so their highnesses don’t wrangle special invitations?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I’m over Hollywood as well, so that would not bother me one bit!
> 
> If the current world situation has shown me anything, it’s how useless celebrities, athletes, the news, etc, really is.  Life goes on just fine without all their opinions and existence!


----------



## CarryOn2020

And in the current world situation, it becomes increasingly clear which celebs/royals/politicians seek the spotlight to feed their massive egos and which ones really are patient, kind, caring, and not seeking self-glorification.


----------



## Chanbal

djuna1 said:


>





gracekelly said:


> A sampling of the comments in the Daily Mail about their association with this charity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry announce first donation from Archewell to Jose Andres
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have announced that their first donation from the Archewell foundation will go to the World Central Kitchen, run by the chef Jose Andres to help people with food.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> comments below have not been moderated.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631593347
> 
> 
> 
> entermycommentplease, Somewhere, Heard Island And McDonald Islands, moments ago
> I reckon the taxation department needs to keep a close eye on where all this money comes from and goes to.
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631593019
> 
> 
> 
> Overdue, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom, moments ago
> The army of PR gurus, publicists, press agents and the rest employed by Meghan and Harry will be working 24/7 in 2021 to repair the damage. Expect many "donations" to charities and PR stunts in the coming months. Brace yourselves.
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592957
> 
> 
> 
> entermycommentplease, Somewhere, Heard Island And McDonald Islands, moments ago
> Why are they telling everyone? Do they want a pat of the back for taking other people's money and donating it?
> ReplyNew Comment
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Archewell-Chef-Jose-Andress-foundation.html#
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592681
> 
> 
> 
> Morningread2, Everywhere, United States, moments ago
> Whoever's responsible for proofreading the headlines needs to be fired.
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592657
> 
> 
> 
> PJane, Hobart, Australia, moments ago
> Why publicise this alleged act of philanthropy? It defeats the whole rationale about giving to others less fortunate. Thus, it comes across as an act of grandiosity- self entitlement and privilege! Bill and Melinda Gates they are not! More like millionaire hypocrisy!
> ReplyNew Comment
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9073005&commentId=631592575
> 
> 
> 
> JoGT, Philadelphia NYC, United States, moments ago
> They need to ditch Sunshine Sachs.
> ReplyNew Comment
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Archewell-Chef-Jose-Andress-foundation.html#



Jose Andres, who? 


@CarryOn2020 Are the above the old clothes to fund the community centers?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

double post


----------



## CarryOn2020

Grifters.



			Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
		

*The Duke and Duchess would not comment on the amount of money they’re contributing to the effort. *The cost of each center will vary depending on the location, but Nate Mook, CEO of World Central Kitchen, estimated that each set-up would require an initial investment of at least $50,000 to get up and running.

The couple confirmed that they will work with Andrés to bring additional partners to build more Community Relief Centers around the world. They said that they don’t have immediate plans to visit the centers due to coronavirus restrictions, but plan to in the future.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Grifters.
> 
> 
> 
> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
> 
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess would not comment on the amount of money they’re contributing to the effort. *The cost of each center will vary depending on the location, but Nate Mook, CEO of World Central Kitchen, estimated that each set-up would require an initial investment of at least $50,000 to get up and running.
> 
> The couple confirmed that they will work with Andrés to bring additional partners to build more Community Relief Centers around the world. They said that they don’t have immediate plans to visit the centers due to coronavirus restrictions, but plan to in the future.


MM&H likely gave only a very modest contribution (Sayonara Zara type), but will take credit for the entire work. Andres, the founder will be soon ignored and forgotten.


----------



## CobaltBlu

sdkitty said:


> we have free version of spotify with ads...was thinking of getting the pay version but not sure if we would lose our playlist from the free version.  I have an issue with not being able to call anyone with problems or questions.  so for now, using the free one



it all just transfers when you upgrade.  And you can download and listen anywhere.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> MM&H likely gave only a very modest contribution, but will take the credit for the entire work. Andres, the founder will be soon ignored and forgotten.


They made a token contribution at best and I am voting for none. They are convincing these people that their name will bring in money. Poor deluded people!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They made a token contribution at best and I am voting for none. They are convincing these people that their name will bring in money. Poor deluded people!


50K/center is not much money, particularly for someone who spent >1 million dollar on clothes in ~1year. They could easily sponsor a few centers, but they are deceivers and you are likely right.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> And in the current world situation, it becomes increasingly clear which celebs/royals/politicians seek the spotlight to feed their massive egos and which ones really are patient, kind, caring, and not seeking self-glorification.



It is only obvious to us because we are paying attention. To many (perhaps most) it isn't so clear because they are only hearing the good, paid-for messages being placed by the PR people. You have to make a point of looking for the negative stuff. It's out there but it's not overwhelming the newsfeed like the positive articles. When you are repeatedly told by several different media sources how wonderful and caring someone is, chances are you will believe it must be true.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> The writer needs eyeglasses imo.
> 
> View attachment 4934615
> 
> "We’ve always known the Duchess of Sussex has always been beautiful but this photo proves it. You could have told us that this photo was taken yesterday and we would have believed you, no questions asked."


Well, this is interesting .. looks like she had her Boob Job when she was in High School!  Not surprised, again .. Thomas spoiled her rotten and a big part of that was the Plastic Surgery to make her look more "Hollywood"!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4934761
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at her highschool pic, her plastic surgeon really did fabulous work (as in, everything looked natural while right now i feel she's smootly sailing into Kardashian plastic territory). I will go to hell for this, but she should give daddy a call and thank him for funding her new face because I feel her old one would not have landed her the Suits gig nor a prince.


Now, if you look at her Nose now (see comparison picture below), you can clearly see that she had *more work* done after High School as her Nose is much thinner now.  So, in addition to the Nose Job she had in High School (my friends that knew the family back then said that the first Nose Job was in the summer after her Junior Year - going into her Senior year).  Looking at her High School picture re: some 'dance' at her school, it also appears that she had her boobs done at that time as well!  

So @QueenofWrapDress , you are NOT alone in your opinion re: her father!  She should be SO thanking him for all the $$$$$ he spent on her (and remember - he also paid her Northwestern tuition)!!!  She is a very entitled, spoiled biatch!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Jose Andres, who?
> View attachment 4934976
> 
> @CarryOn2020 Are the above the old clothes to fund the community centers?


He is the Spanish Chef who created the "molecular gastronomy" movement (whooop-de-dooo)!  He owns/operates a number of fancy restaurants throughout the World.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> He is the Spanish Chef who created the "molecular gastronomy" movement (whooop-de-dooo)!  He owns/operates a number of fancy restaurants throughout the World.


Thanks, I know that he is relatively famous. What I meant with 'Andres, who?' is that he will be soon forgotten. The duchess and husband will take the entire credit for the Community Relief Centers.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Now, if you look at her Nose now (see comparison picture below), you can clearly see that she had *more work* done after High School as her Nose is much thinner now.  So, in addition to the Nose Job she had in High School (my friends that knew the family back then said that the first Nose Job was in the summer after her Junior Year - going into her Senior year).  Looking at her High School picture re: some 'dance' at her school, it also appears that she had her boobs done at that time as well!
> 
> So @QueenofWrapDress , you are NOT alone in your opinion re: her father!  She should be SO thanking him for all the $$$$$ he spent on her (and remember - he also paid her Northwestern tuition)!!!  She is a very entitled, spoiled biatch!
> 
> 
> View attachment 4935130


Wow, this is hard work! Wonderfull plastic surgeon(s)!!!


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> fawning article from Yahoo/She Knows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rare Photo of Meghan Markle at a High School Dance Surfaces — And It's a Far Cry From Her Royal Life Now
> 
> 
> OK, we're not ashamed to admit that we have a bit of a royal obsession with Meghan Markle. She's the embodiment of class, beauty, and strength. However, long before she fell in love with Prince Harry and forever made her mark on the royal family, she was a regular gal who grew up in Los […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


I admit it, I’m old and old fashioned in viewpoint at times, but even in the late 90’s a high school girl wearing a big boob baring dress slit almost to her az at a school dance is inappropriate.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> it all just transfers when you upgrade.  And you can download and listen anywhere.


thank you


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Now, if you look at her Nose now (see comparison picture below), you can clearly see that she had *more work* done after High School as her Nose is much thinner now.  So, in addition to the Nose Job she had in High School (my friends that knew the family back then said that the first Nose Job was in the summer after her Junior Year - going into her Senior year).  Looking at her High School picture re: some 'dance' at her school, it also appears that she had her boobs done at that time as well!
> 
> So @QueenofWrapDress , you are NOT alone in your opinion re: her father!  She should be SO thanking him for all the $$$$$ he spent on her (and remember - he also paid her Northwestern tuition)!!!  She is a very entitled, spoiled biatch!
> 
> 
> View attachment 4935130


nose looks more refined... also brows look thicker.  usually brows get thinner with age.  could be makeup


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CeeJay said:


> He is the Spanish Chef who created the "molecular gastronomy" movement (whooop-de-dooo)!  He owns/operates a number of fancy restaurants throughout the World.



He founded World Central Kitchen which has provided millions of meals for families and seniors and helped to keep small local restaurants open during covid. My friend would have lost her business without him. Before 2020 WCK responded to international emergencies and supported underserved communities.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> nose looks more refined... also brows look thicker.  usually brows get thinner with age.  could be makeup


Nose #1 would have been fine for your average person, but for the camera it needs to be more refined.  There are dozens of actresses who were told to do this for that reason.  Her father, as a lighting director, knew all about lighting and angles to make people look better.  He was probably totally on board with NJ#2


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> nose looks more refined... also brows look thicker.  usually brows get thinner with age.  could be makeup


y'all forgot - bunion removal - that one hurt !!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m guessing she had liposuction, too.  Sure, it may have been baby fat, but she was very thin in Suits. 
Not sure someone can get that thin from yoga.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oprah,,,again:


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah,,,again:
> View attachment 4935301



I assume this was written by one of her minions. Let’s hope Oprah doesn’t handle her magazine’s social media personally.


----------



## Sol Ryan

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> He founded World Central Kitchen which has provided millions of meals for families and seniors and helped to keep small local restaurants open during covid. My friend would have lost her business without him. Before 2020 WCK responded to international emergencies and supported underserved communities.



He seems like one of the few good ones out there... I think he’s just willing to take help from anyone who’s willing to give it. He has a large operation that he’s trying to run. I really hope he isn’t secretly nefarious.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Snapped out and about on Sunday —









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry step out in Beverly Hills
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported hats and face masks.




					pagesix.com
				




ETA:  I_ think _ it is H&M, but could be wrong. Her legs look too large to be MM’s and he looks very thin. Strange.


----------



## zinacef

CarryOn2020 said:


> Snapped out and about on Sunday —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry step out in Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported hats and face masks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Is it just me or does she look pregnant?  Eugenie  has a pregnant picture taken on way to work in London seems very timely indeed.


----------



## sdkitty

zinacef said:


> Is it just me or does she look pregnant?  Eugenie  has a pregnant picture taken on way to work in London seems very timely indeed.


hard to tell...does she usually wear loose tops like that? if not, then I'd say maybe she is pregnant


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps she wants to look pregnant. Ya kno, so they can stay on everyone‘s radar, steal headlines as needed 
Why is she wearing a heavy coat and he is in a thin shirt?
Should they be walking outside? Thought Cali had shut down orders.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Snapped out and about on Sunday —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry step out in Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported hats and face masks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  I_ think _ it is H&M, but could be wrong. Her legs look too large to be MM’s and he looks very thin. Strange.



Was it a last minute Christmas shop photo-op? She was not dressed for California weather, I wonder if they meant Beverly, MA. She is either pregnant or pretending to be pregnant.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah,,,again:
> View attachment 4935301


Oprah has been behind their apparent success in the US imo. Wait for more...


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps she wants to look pregnant. Ya kno, so they can stay on everyone‘s radar, steal headlines as needed
> Why is she wearing a heavy coat and he is in a thin shirt?
> Should they be walking outside? Thought Cali had shut down orders.


I'm in So Cal.....I go walking every day.  stores are open (limited capacity).  Restaurants and bars closed.  We've never been shut down to the point you can't go outside.  I never get closer than six feet from anyone when I walk.  Most of the time it's much more than six feet, or I don't see anyone.


----------



## bag-mania

zinacef said:


> Is it just me or does she look pregnant?  Eugenie  has a pregnant picture taken on way to work in London seems very timely indeed.





sdkitty said:


> hard to tell...does she usually wear loose tops like that? if not, then I'd say maybe she is pregnant





CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps she wants to look pregnant. Ya kno, so they can stay on everyone‘s radar, steal headlines as needed
> Why is she wearing a heavy coat and he is in a thin shirt?
> Should they be walking outside? Thought Cali had shut down orders.





Chanbal said:


> Was it a last minute Christmas shop photo-op? She was not dressed for California weather, I wonder if they meant Beverly, MA. She is either pregnant or pretending to be pregnant.



Now ladies, let’s remember who we’re talking about here.  She was wearing a coat completely out of place for the weather conditions and you are thinking pregnancy? My first thought is she was being paid by J Crew to wear it. 

If you’ll notice, it was the only item of clothing identified by name and with the convenient shopping link provided in the Page Six article:

“Dressed in jeans and a gray long-sleeved T-shirt and sneakers, Harry, 36, kept close to Meghan, 39, *who bundled up in a brown $375 **J.Crew coat*, a black top, jeans and knee-high boots.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Now ladies, let’s remember who we’re talking about here.  She was wearing a coat completely out of place for the weather conditions and you are thinking pregnancy? *My first thought is she was being paid by J Crew to wear it.*
> 
> If you’ll notice, it was the only item of clothing identified by name and with the convenient shopping link provided in the Page Six article:
> 
> “Dressed in jeans and a gray long-sleeved T-shirt and sneakers, Harry, 36, kept close to Meghan, 39, *who bundled up in a brown $375 **J.Crew coat*, a black top, jeans and knee-high boots.”



Wouldn't J Crew be below her standards post-Sayonara Zara? If she is being paid to wear that jacket, she is doing a terrible job. She looks awkward in it.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Wouldn't J Crew be below her standards post-Sayonara Zara? If she is being paid to wear that jacket, she is doing a terrible job. She looks awkward in it.



You would think with all the multi-million dollar contracts  we’ve been told about that a humble clothing deal wouldn’t interest her. But I guess a buck is a buck and she doesn’t have the millions yet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He looks so awkward, wonder if it is even her?
@Chanbal  I thought the same. The coat is a poor fit in the arms (too short) and it doesn’t look like it would zip.  Maybe they sent her a sample size?

ETA: the way he looks at her seems awkward, unsure. The way she carries her phone doesn’t really seem like an MM thing. With a hat, coat and mask, almost any female could play her role.


----------



## Lodpah

I read an interesting comment. Billions indeed. Next thing we will read from her 12,000 strong PR team is she signed a 10 trillion dollar deal with one of those services delivering healthy meals. She will surpass Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos in wealth. Forget Oprah, she’s not that wealthy.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I'm in So Cal.....I go walking every day.  stores are open (limited capacity).  Restaurants and bars closed.  We've never been shut down to the point you can't go outside.  I never get closer than six feet from anyone when I walk.  Most of the time it's much more than six feet, or I don't see anyone.


She’s walking out and about because she’s channeling Nicky Hilton ROTHSCHILD who had a similar walk about in the city. She even copies her messy hair style bun.

Megladon is not a dummy. She knows what to do.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Wouldn't J Crew be below her standards post-Sayonara Zara? If she is being paid to wear that jacket, she is doing a terrible job. She looks awkward in it.


I think she looks awkward in much of her clothing.  She should hire a top stylist.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> She’s walking out and about because she’s channeling Nicky Hilton ROTHSCHILD who had a similar walk about in the city. She even copies her messy hair style bun.
> 
> Megladon is not a dummy. She knows what to do.



Nicky walked boldly, smiling and looking happy to be seen.  This looks like someone shuffling in the shadows and bushes.  Harry is taking huge strides to maneuver around all the shrubs.  Awkward.

ETA:  World Central Kitchen is represented by Sunshine Sachs. Shocking, I know.  Doubt that any $$$ changed hands. 


			https://www.linkedin.com/in/caroline-head-189000aa


----------



## rugchomp

Meghan is this, Meghan is that.. I don't know. She looks happy to me.


----------



## Lodpah

rugchomp said:


> Meghan is this, Meghan is that.. I don't know. She looks happy to me.


Of course she's happy . . . . she's deliriously happy . . . no one is saying she ain't.


----------



## byzina

CarryOn2020 said:


> Snapped out and about on Sunday —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry step out in Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sported hats and face masks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  I_ think _ it is H&M, but could be wrong. Her legs look too large to be MM’s and he looks very thin. Strange.



Is it that cold in LA? Harry doesn't even wear a scarf while Meghan is dressed as if she were somewhere in Lapland. Looks so weird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

To my eye, neither one looks all that thrilled to be there. True to form, it looks like she spilled something on the front of her sweater.  
Near the third snap on her left, I could be wrong.


----------



## zinacef

bag-mania said:


> Now ladies, let’s remember who we’re talking about here.  She was wearing a coat completely out of place for the weather conditions and you are thinking pregnancy? My first thought is she was being paid by J Crew to wear it.
> 
> If you’ll notice, it was the only item of clothing identified by name and with the convenient shopping link provided in the Page Six article:
> 
> “Dressed in jeans and a gray long-sleeved T-shirt and sneakers, Harry, 36, kept close to Meghan, 39, *who bundled up in a brown $375 **J.Crew coat*, a black top, jeans and knee-high boots.”


keep on marching, keep on marching!  They actually look like they belong to a 2:different time zone—- shes heading to Toronto and the other just wants to be by himself in their non-rented mansion


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry looks bitter, as usual


----------



## zinacef

Lodpah said:


> I read an interesting comment. Billions indeed. Next thing we will read from her 12,000 strong PR team is she signed a 10 trillion dollar deal with one of those services delivering healthy meals. She will surpass Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos in wealth. Forget Oprah, she’s not that wealthy.


Oprah is now employed as part of her PR team—- Instagram division.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait...did they walk around and NOT hold hands? The earth stopped moving for a moment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Yesterday was the Winter Solstice, and I forgot to wish all Happy Holidays ! I celebrate the Druidic holidays lol 

Thank you for the year of chuckles, priceless, I truly mean that - plus you bring up interesting topics I dont know, and I scurry off to find out 

Like everyone, I see things in my way, but am always thankful for knowing others ideas, and sometimes I even change as a result - well, no too much, I am a crochety old bat LOL 

Thanks you to the entire team here, and the forum ! XXXXooooo


----------



## marietouchet

byzina said:


> Is it that cold in LA? Harry doesn't even wear a scarf while Meghan is dressed as if she were somewhere in Lapland. Looks so weird.


OOOOH he has a new blue shirt ! Go Harry !


----------



## bag-mania

It makes a huge difference when it's not her own photographer snapping away and she didn't get to handpick which photos were sent to the press. She covered herself up as much as she could because she didn't want the paps to get good shots of her to sell. (Only she can do that!)

She forgot that the paps have been doing this a long time and they will get recognizable shots of her whether she wants it or not. Harry looks grumpy and I can't imagine why. If he didn't like paps then he shouldn't have moved there.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It makes a huge difference when it's not her own photographer snapping away and she didn't get to handpick which photos were sent to the press. She covered herself up as much as she could because she didn't want the paps to get good shots of her to sell. (Only she can do that!)
> 
> She forgot that the paps have been doing this a long time and they will get recognizable shots of her whether she wants it or not. Harry looks grumpy and I can't imagine why. If he didn't like paps then he shouldn't have moved there.


Walking on Rodeo dressed the way she was, it's to call attention. SoCal weather this December has been mostly sunny and warm (H's attire was weather appropriate). I believe @Lodpah mentioned that MM was copying Nicky Hilton, I would assume she looked at Nicky's pictures in NYC.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I obsessed on a Balenciaga Moto jacket for years until I found it because of a Nicky Hilton pap shot.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Walking on Rodeo dressed the way she was, it's to call attention. SoCal weather this December has been mostly sunny and warm (H's attire was weather appropriate). I believe @Lodpah mentioned that MM was copying Nicky Hilton, I would assume she looked at Nicky's pictures in NYC.



I see it completely opposite. Meghan loves to have pictures taken on her terms and she HATES having bad photos. She isn't going to deliberately set up a situation where she will look as bad as in these pics. Why wasn't she doing her usual locking eyes with the camera? She wouldn't suddenly change her MO. She knew there could be paps around, but she wasn't about to give them anything.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Yesterday was the Winter Solstice, and I forgot to wish all Happy Holidays ! I celebrate the Druidic holidays lol
> 
> Thank you for the year of chuckles, priceless, I truly mean that - plus you bring up interesting topics I dont know, and I scurry off to find out
> 
> Like everyone, I see things in my way, but am always thankful for knowing others ideas, and sometimes I even change as a result - well, no too much, I am a crochety old bat LOL
> 
> Thanks you to the entire team here, and the forum ! XXXXooooo



I read somewhere that stories of con-artists have always fascinated people.

This sub-forum/thread helps to take our minds off some painful events of 2020. The team here has a wonderful sense of humor. As they say, laughter has many health benefits. So let's keep up the good work! Cheers!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that stories of con-artists have always fascinated people.
> 
> This sub-forum/thread helps to take our minds off some painful events of 2020. The team here has a wonderful sense of humor. As they say, laughter has many health benefits. So let's keep up the good work! Cheers!


yes, as I've said before, as annoying as they are, they do give us something to talk about


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I see it completely opposite. Meghan loves to have pictures taken on her terms and she HATES having bad photos. She isn't going to deliberately set up a situation where she will look as bad as in these pics. Why wasn't she doing her usual locking eyes with the camera? She wouldn't suddenly change her MO. She knew there could be paps around, *but she wasn't about to give them anything.*


She doesn't have much to give imo. The lack of kindness written all over her face, makes her very unattractive. Doesn't she have a lighter jacket? I think she is pretending to be hiding a pregnancy.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> She doesn't have much to give imo. The lack of kindness written all over her face, makes her very unattractive. Doesn't she have a lighter jacket? I think she is pretending to be hiding a pregnancy.


that could be


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take a bow, citizens of Markle-land!  You are simply the best, especially in a pandemic. With heartfelt thanks and love, I wish you all a very happy holiday.  

[Tick Tock. Any word on when their Christmas photo will be published?]


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> She doesn't have much to give imo. The lack of kindness written all over her face, makes her very unattractive. Doesn't she have a lighter jacket? *I think she is pretending to be hiding a pregnancy.*



I like that she provides so much to speculate about. It has been a rough year for many of us but Meghan keeps on going with her plan for world domination super duper popularity as if Covid-19 never happened.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a bow, citizens of Markle-land!  You are simply the best, especially in a pandemic. With heartfelt thanks and love, I wish you all a very happy holiday.
> 
> [Tick Tock. Any word on when their Christmas photo will be published?]


happy holidays to you too


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> yes, as I've said before, as annoying as they are, they do give us something to talk about


Yes, and feel certain it will continue without interruption into 2021. 

Happy holidays, thoroughly enjoy all your posts and look forward to checking in each day to see what awaits . The wit, the humor, the insights, the knowledge shared here always delights.


----------



## Lodpah

An article today, I don’t want to link here, states a “rare” outing of Meghan.  Sightings of her are as rare as sand on the beach.

Let’s see what these two usurpers do to gain attention and overthrow the Queen’s Christmas message. If they do that they are done professionally. I predict humorously that these two memes will be proclaimed the King and Queen of the world and that they have found a cure for all diseases in the world and that they will be planning to implement the vaccines to all. The operative word here is planning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Grifters.
> 
> 
> 
> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
> 
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess would not comment on the amount of money they’re contributing to the effort. *The cost of each center will vary depending on the location, but Nate Mook, CEO of World Central Kitchen, estimated that each set-up would require an initial investment of at least $50,000 to get up and running.
> 
> The couple confirmed that they will work with Andrés to bring additional partners to build more Community Relief Centers around the world. They said that they don’t have immediate plans to visit the centers due to coronavirus restrictions, but plan to in the future.


Gee, I wonder if Harry will call up Bob Igor (former CEO of Disney) to ask him to "contribute", after all .. he seemed to have the cajones to ask Bob for a voice-over job for Me-Again!!!


----------



## CeeJay

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> He founded World Central Kitchen which has provided millions of meals for families and seniors and helped to keep small local restaurants open during covid. My friend would have lost her business without him. Before 2020 WCK responded to international emergencies and supported underserved communities.


I didn't say that I don't like him, I applaud him for what he has done with the World Central Kitchen.  I just find the whole concept of "molecular gastronomy" a little pretentious but that is my opinion.  I do hope that H&M don't take advantage of him, take the credit and then 'markle' him .. but then again .. their history ..


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> Gee, I wonder if Harry will call up Bob Igor (former CEO of Disney) to ask him to "contribute", after all .. he seemed to have the cajones to ask Bob for a voice-over job for Me-Again!!!


When old money and new money collide and old money’s schlong has been castrated and put in new money’s purse for round the clock lock down, there’s nothing holding them back from anything. I mean anything.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Gee, I wonder if Harry will call up Bob Igor (former CEO of Disney) to ask him to "contribute", after all .. he seemed to have the cajones to ask Bob for a voice-over job for Me-Again!!!


I think that with their new thing being the charity of the week, many of their friends will be screening their calls so they can hold on to their money lol!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I didn't say that I don't like him, I applaud him for what he has done with the World Central Kitchen.  I just find the whole concept of "*molecular gastronomy" *a little pretentious but that is my opinion.  I do hope that H&M don't take advantage of him, take the credit and then 'markle' him .. but then again .. their history ..



That and foam.  I never understood foam.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think that with their new thing being the charity of the week, *many of their friends will be screening their calls* so they can hold on to their money lol!



What friends?


----------



## rose60610

After putting up with both the pandemic AND Meghan for many months at the same time, I feel invincible. What doesn't kill you...


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> What friends?


Oh you know, the friends from the wedding that they never knew prior to the actual wedding.  The Clooneys?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> yes, as I've said before, as annoying as they are, they do give us something to talk about


You bet! It's a lot easier to talk about MM&H than about the uncertainties of Covid-19.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> What friends?



The friends Meghan feels she's an equal to or better than only because she married Harry. Had that not happened nobody would give her the time of day. I hope Harry is OK with being a dope patsy. Having grown up in castles and palaces and every whim catered to, it's not like his lifestyle actually improved with Meghan. Hers, on the other hand, went beyond her wildest dreams. Kudos to her for taking a world famous prince and exposing him as an easy mark sucker chump.


----------



## V0N1B2

The Bloomberg article didn't state anything about money or a donation.
When you get past Meg's word salad and buzzwords like shared humanity and working tirelessly, and read the words on paper as they're written, it states they are working to bring additional partners to build these centres. As in, lending their ROYAL NAME and ROYAL STATUS to fundraise for Andrés.  They're just finding people to donate that first $50K.
Like when you host a fundraiser and get a popular NHL player from your hometown team to be the emcee or sign his jersey for the winner of that particular item. It get bodies in the seats. (yeah, I'm Canadian, so what?  )

"The Duke and Duchess would not comment on the amount of money they’re contributing to the effort. The cost of each center will vary depending on the location, but Nate Mook, CEO of World Central Kitchen, estimated that each set-up would require an initial investment of at least $50,000 to get up and running.

The couple confirmed that they will work with Andrés to bring additional partners to build more Community Relief Centers around the world. They said that they don’t have immediate plans to visit the centers due to coronavirus restrictions, but plan to in the future."


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a bow, citizens of Markle-land!  You are simply the best, especially in a pandemic. With heartfelt thanks and love, I wish you all a very happy holiday.
> 
> [Tick Tock. Any word on when their Christmas photo will be published?]



Happy Holidays @CarryOn2020 Thank you for all the great articles, very educational!

Until the 2020 Christmas photo is released, here are a couple from the net:


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> The Bloomberg article didn't state anything about money or a donation.
> When you get past Meg's word salad and buzzwords like shared humanity and working tirelessly, and read the words on paper as they're written, it states they are working to bring additional partners to build these centres. As in, lending their ROYAL NAME and ROYAL STATUS to fundraise for Andrés.  They're just finding people to donate that first $50K.
> Like when you host a fundraiser and get a popular NHL player from your hometown team to be the emcee or sign his jersey for the winner of that particular item. It get bodies in the seats. (yeah, I'm Canadian, so what?  )
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess would not comment on the amount of money they’re contributing to the effort. The cost of each center will vary depending on the location, but Nate Mook, CEO of World Central Kitchen, estimated that each set-up would require an initial investment of at least $50,000 to get up and running.
> 
> The couple confirmed that they will work with Andrés to bring additional partners to build more Community Relief Centers around the world. They said that they don’t have immediate plans to visit the centers due to coronavirus restrictions, but plan to in the future."



Some of us have estimated a contribution from MM& H in the amount of $00,000/Community Relief Center.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I like that she provides so much to speculate about.* It has been a rough year for many of us but Meghan keeps on going with her plan for world domination super duper popularity as if Covid-19 never happened.


How can they be making all those multi-million dollar deals in <1 year without giving anything useful in return? I would like to speculate about, but it's above my understanding.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Some of us have estimated a contribution from MM& H in the amount of $00,000/Community Relief Center.


Dayum!
That's a loooootta zeroes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> The Bloomberg article didn't state anything about money or a donation.
> When you get past Meg's word salad and buzzwords like shared humanity and working tirelessly, and read the words on paper as they're written, it states they are working to bring additional partners to build these centres. As in, lending their ROYAL NAME and ROYAL STATUS to fundraise for Andrés.  They're just finding people to donate that first $50K.
> Like when you host a fundraiser and get a popular NHL player from your hometown team to be the emcee or sign his jersey for the winner of that particular item. It get bodies in the seats. (yeah, I'm Canadian, so what?  )
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess would not comment on the amount of money they’re contributing to the effort. The cost of each center will vary depending on the location, but Nate Mook, CEO of World Central Kitchen, estimated that each set-up would require an initial investment of at least $50,000 to get up and running.
> 
> The couple confirmed that they will work with Andrés to bring additional partners to build more Community Relief Centers around the world. They said that they don’t have immediate plans to visit the centers due to coronavirus restrictions, but plan to in the future."



I find this amusing because in the world of charitable giving, it is give to my charity and I will give to yours.  Buy a table at my fund raiser and I will buy a table at yours.  You get the picture Harry and Meg?  The only way that any charity that the Harkles lend their name to is going to get a dime, is if SS leans on another client to do so.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You bet! It's a lot easier to talk about MM&H than about the uncertainties of Covid-19.


and some other things too


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gotta love Will, priceless!
	

		
			
		

		
	












						See the Adorable Photos of Prince Harry Starring in a Holiday Play as a Child
					

Two words: red tights.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Must be tiresome being H’s older brother:


----------



## bag-mania

Back in April Dolly Parton gave $1 million to Vanderbilt University Medical Center to help with COVID-19 vaccine development. The result was the Moderna vaccine which could end up saving millions. Now that’s some real philanthropy.

Everything Harry and Meghan  have done so far is a great big nothing.


----------



## bag-mania

Page Six has a full advertisement for the coat Meghan wore masquerading as an article. Must everything that passes between celebrities and the press be a money-making racket? 

*Meghan Markle’s J.Crew coat is a winter essential*
She may now be an LA lady, but Meghan Markle’s still dressing for the winter chill.

On Sunday, the Duchess of Sussex, 39, stepped out with husband Prince Harry in Beverly Hills, bundled up in one of J.Crew’s most classic coat styles: the “Chateau” parka ($375).

The bestselling outerwear staple is made from the brand’s exclusive (and very warm) Italian stadium-cloth wool, and features a removable faux fur trim on the hood, a zip closure and button-front pockets.

It also comes in no fewer than nine different shades, and while Markle’s walnut brown shade is selling fast, there are currently plenty of color and size combos left in stock.









						Meghan Markle’s J.Crew coat is a winter essential
					

And comes in no fewer than nine different colors.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bag-mania

For fans of the pregnancy theory, they were seen going  into a building with medical offices (although it was Sunday). 

*SEE, WE CAN BLEND IN FINE IN BEV HILLS!!!*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their posh Montecito estate for even posher Bev Hills, and they went pretty much unnoticed.

Harry was super casual and Meghan was all bundled up ... a little weird, since it's been in the 70's lately.

They entered a building with lots of medical offices and medical spas, but beyond that we don't know what suite if any they hit up.

They have increasingly ventured out in public. They've already connected with neighbors in Montecito, many of them famous like David Foster and Katharine McPhee. The foursome dined out recently.









						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Stroll Around Beverly Hills
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their posh Montecito estate for even posher Bev Hills, and they went pretty much unnoticed.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their posh Montecito estate for *even posher Bev Hills, and they went pretty much unnoticed.
> Harry was super casual and Meghan was all bundled up ... a little weird, since it's been in the 70's lately.*



Ouch, burned by TMZ!  Methinks somebody isn’t at all fond of H&M. 




ETA:  guessing this means we will not be given a Christmas photo, unless it is of a flower. Certainly it will not be one of the kid.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I find this amusing because in the world of charitable giving, it is give to my charity and I will give to yours.  Buy a table at my fund raiser and I will buy a table at yours.  You get the picture Harry and Meg?  The only way that any charity that the Harkles lend their name to is going to get a dime, is if SS leans on another client to do so.


The Harkles are delighted to participate as seat fillers at any upcoming fundraising event, just please make sure you don't get a table in the back of the room. The duchess has still several dates open in 2021.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch, burned by TMZ!  Methinks somebody isn’t at all fond of H&M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  guessing this means we will not be given a Christmas photo, unless it is of a flower. Certainly it will not be one of the kid.



TMZ has been supportive of them so far, but they will call out even celebrities they like when they do something weird.

I’ll be surprised if we see Archie in the Christmas photo. He is the invisible child. They didn’t bother to take him along when they went Christmas tree shopping and little kids love that sort of thing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> TMZ has been supportive of them so far, but they will call out even celebrities they like when they do something weird.
> 
> I’ll be surprised if we see Archie in the Christmas photo. He is the invisible child. They didn’t bother to take him along when they went Christmas tree shopping and little kids love that sort of thing.



Maybe TMZ’s check from the Harkles bounced ... again.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Some of us have estimated a contribution from MM& H in the amount of $00,000/Community Relief Center.



I think you may have underestimated their generosity there and left out a 0


----------



## csshopper

In today’s Daily Mail the Queen’s former Press Secretary calls out MM  and JCMH for their persistent “drip feeding” to the media since leaving the RF,  in spite of claiming to want privacy. Perfect description, they are as annoying as a leaky faucet. Nothing substantive ever comes of their dribbles.


----------



## rose60610

Nowhere have I read that any celebrity or wealthy donor has contributed anything to any cause M&H have endorsed. 
All M&H have to offer is their ability to sponge off the fame of the BRF (which they kicked to the curb), spew meaningless phrases and keep reminding us that "the work continues". What work? Signing mega contracts with companies that are going to find out audiences are turned off by ungrateful, self-pitying opportunistic free loaders that have nothing to offer?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> In today’s Daily Mail the Queen’s former Press Secretary calls out MM  and JCMH for their persistent “drip feeding” to the media since leaving the RF,  in spite of claiming to want privacy. Perfect description, they are as annoying as a leaky faucet. Nothing substantive ever comes of their dribbles.



Okaaay, they will be so mad at the DM that there is no way we will get a Christmas photo now, but absolutely it needed to be said. “Drip feeding” matches the raindrop talk.  Her dirty sweater was just the beginning of the press finally stating the obvious. Wonder if Jcrew regrets the ill-fitting coat.









						Prince Harry: 'What if every single one of us was a raindrop?' | ITV News
					

The Duke of Sussex spoke about his passion for conservation as he supported the launch of a new Netflix-style streaming service called WaterBear. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> In today’s Daily Mail the Queen’s former Press Secretary calls out MM  and JCMH for their persistent “drip feeding” to the media since leaving the RF,  in spite of claiming to want privacy. Perfect description, they are as annoying as a leaky faucet. Nothing substantive ever comes of their dribbles.



This should be posted here:

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'drip feeding' content to the media is 'extraordinary' after they stepped back as senior royals for more privacy, Queen's former press secretary says*
The Queen's former press secretary Dickie Arbiter said he found it 'extraordinary' that the Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, have made various appearances - despite stepping back as royals in March for more privacy.

Speaking to True Royalty TV's Royal Beat, the commentator and royal expert said: 'I find it extraordinary that two people who left basically because they felt press intrusion and yet in the past 12 months we've had nothing but drip-feeding the press about things that they're doing.'

The comments come after it was revealed that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, who are currently living in their $14 million mansion in California with their 18-month-old son Archie, have signed a lucrative podcast deal with Spotify worth up to £30million.

The Mirror reported the Sussexes would be paid £30million - other sources put it closer to £20million.

The Sussexes' agreement comes just months after the royals agreed a £100million partnership with Netflix and days after Meghan invested in a $28-per-pack oat-milk 'superlatte' business later promoted for free by her LA neighbour Oprah Winfrey.

Recipients of the Hypocrisy Award


----------



## CarryOn2020

This could hurt!  



Spoiler: Ut oh, a wealth tax



California’s Legislature is considering a wealth tax on residents, part-year residents, and any person who spends more than 60 days inside the state’s borders in a single year. Even those who move out of state would continue to be subject to the tax for a decade—a provision that calls to mind the Eagles’ famous “Hotel California” lyric: “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”

The California Constitution probably allows a statewide wealth tax on residents, but any effort to create a tax capable of reaching across state borders is likely to run afoul of the U.S. Constitution. Taxing someone who spends only 60 days in the state in any single year—and extending that tax over an ensuing decade—would be something new under the sun.
Each year this tax net would gather up a new crop of taxpayers for the next decade. The range of people it proposes to ensnare is staggering: every student attending college in California, anyone having a major medical procedure at a California hospital and needing an extended in-state recovery period, and those who spend two months in California away from New York or London winters. Under California tax law, there is no distinction between a nonresident from Minnesota and a nonresident from Dubai.
Assembly Bill 2088 proposes calculating the wealth tax based on current world-wide net worth each Dec. 31. For part-year and temporary residents, the tax would be proportionate based on their number of days in California. The annual tax would be on current net worth and therefore would include wealth earned, inherited or obtained through gifts or estates long before and long after leaving the state.
The proposed wealth tax would fall on a star high-school or college athlete who grows up in California but becomes a wealthy professional in another state after graduation. It would grab a scientist who develops a drug to cure cancer years after leaving California. A grandchild who spent a single summer surfing in Southern California would be subject to the tax. It would include anyone returning home to a foreign country after 60 days in California.
Imagine the child of a Saudi prince being asked to pay a California wealth tax during college and for nine years after graduation.
The authors of the bill estimate the wealth tax will provide Sacramento $7.5 billion in additional revenue every year. Another proposal—to increase the top state income-tax rate to 16.8%—would annually raise another $6.8 billion. Today, California’s wealthiest 1% pay approximately 46% of total state income taxes. Adding the wealth tax to individual taxes and including those taxpayers who have abandoned California, the combination of the two proposals would have 1% of the state’s population paying about 53% of individual taxes.
California has enough financial woes for an entire large nation. Most are of its own making, including unfulfillable public pension promises and a vast social safety net beyond the capacity of California’s workers to fund. So the Legislature looks to the wealthiest Californians to fill funding gaps without considering the constitutionality of the proposals and the ability of people and companies to pick up and leave the state, which news reports suggest they are doing in large numbers. The very act of collecting the financial information necessary to calculate the A.B. 2088 wealth tax would be an invasion of privacy.
Proponents argue that the wealth tax is “only” 0.4% on net worth over $30 million, and the percentage of net worth taxed would decline each year during the 10-year “tail” should a taxpayer leave the state. While the rate appears negligible and the $30 million base seems high, it is a slippery slope. In California, tax rates rarely get lower. The state’s top income-tax rate was 9.3% in 2003. Soon it could be 16.8%. Why 0.4% instead of 1%, 2% or 10%? Why not a $10 million base?
Even at 0.4%, there are eye-popping new levels of actual tax. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg would face a first-year tax of approximately $400 million. If he moved out of state immediately, his total wealth tax over the subsequent decade would be another $2 billion. If he remained in California, the wealth tax would extract $4 billion over that decade.
If Bill Gates spent 60 days a year in his Palm Desert home, for each day in California his wealth tax would be more than $1 million. While the tax would diminish each year if he stayed out of the state, he would continue to be subject to a tax on his world-wide net worth for another decade.
The cost of compliance by taxpayers and the cost of enforcement by the state would be monumental. For most taxpayers, the cost of compliance would far exceed the amount of the tax. A resident with a net worth of $31 million would be subject to a wealth tax of $4,000. The cost of an annual appraisal of each of that taxpayer’s assets could easily exceed $100,000. The state would have to hire auditors to chase people all over the world.
As of this moment, there are no police roadblocks on the freeways trying to keep moving trucks from leaving California. If A.B. 2088 becomes law, the state may need to consider placing some.
_Mr. Adler is associate professor of accounting at Chapman University._


----------



## Chanbal

Sorry @sdkitty, copy & paste again. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'emulating the Ob###s' successful business model and will move on to books next' - but they WON'T do a tell-all on the Firm, claims royal expert*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'emulating the Ob###s' successful business model and will move on to creating a book next' - but it won't be a tell-all on the royal family, according to a royal expert.

Speaking to 9Honey, royal commentator Katie Nicholl said having a publishing deal is likely to be the next step for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they recently announced their Archewell Audio podcast with Spotify, which followed a deal with Netflix.

She said it’s likely Meghan will move in to creating self-help books soon, which the mother-of-one’s a fan of.

However, Ms Nicholl said Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, are unlikely to reveal anything about their time in the Firm after stepping back from their royal duties and moving to the US with their son Archie.

‘It's important to remember they are still bound by that pledge to the royal family, to uphold the values of the monarchy, to remain respectful of the monarchy whether or not they are working members of the institution,' the royal author said.

The Ob###s and the Sussexes have known each other for many years and Ms Nicholl suggests it’s likely there’s been ‘some mentoring and possible guidance along the way’.

More crap here


----------



## sdkitty

I was just thinking Harry was only 12 when his mother died.  There is a pretty big difference in development between 12 and 15 - Will's age at the time.  Then they went to Charles.  I'm sure Charles tried but he didn't have much parenting himself so there is no way he could have replaced Diana IMO.  Not totally giving Harry a pass but could be that his emotional development was stunted at age 12.  Then comes miss manipulative and he was an easy mark.
Just my speculation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I was just thinking Harry was only 12 when his mother died.  There is a pretty big difference in development between 12 and 15 - Will's age at the time.  Then they went to Charles.  I'm sure Charles tried but he didn't have much parenting himself so there is no way he could have replaced Diana IMO.  Not totally giving Harry a pass but could be that his emotional development was stunted at age 12.  Then comes miss manipulative and he was an easy mark.
> Just my speculation.



I agree there is a big difference between 12 & 15. Something to consider — Harry left for boarding school at age 8.









						Will Prince George go to boarding school?
					

His father Prince William was sent away to school at the age of eight, but will the Cambridges follow family tradition or choose something more informal for their eldest son?




					www.standard.co.uk
				



_Typically, members of the Royal Family are sent off to boarding school at the age of 8 - Prince George’s father Prince William and his uncle Prince Harry were both sent away at 8 to Ludgrove School in Berkshire._


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This could hurt!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ut oh, a wealth tax
> 
> 
> 
> California’s Legislature is considering a wealth tax on residents, part-year residents, and any person who spends more than 60 days inside the state’s borders in a single year. Even those who move out of state would continue to be subject to the tax for a decade—a provision that calls to mind the Eagles’ famous “Hotel California” lyric: “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”
> 
> The California Constitution probably allows a statewide wealth tax on residents, but any effort to create a tax capable of reaching across state borders is likely to run afoul of the U.S. Constitution. Taxing someone who spends only 60 days in the state in any single year—and extending that tax over an ensuing decade—would be something new under the sun.
> Each year this tax net would gather up a new crop of taxpayers for the next decade. The range of people it proposes to ensnare is staggering: every student attending college in California, anyone having a major medical procedure at a California hospital and needing an extended in-state recovery period, and those who spend two months in California away from New York or London winters. Under California tax law, there is no distinction between a nonresident from Minnesota and a nonresident from Dubai.
> Assembly Bill 2088 proposes calculating the wealth tax based on current world-wide net worth each Dec. 31. For part-year and temporary residents, the tax would be proportionate based on their number of days in California. The annual tax would be on current net worth and therefore would include wealth earned, inherited or obtained through gifts or estates long before and long after leaving the state.
> The proposed wealth tax would fall on a star high-school or college athlete who grows up in California but becomes a wealthy professional in another state after graduation. It would grab a scientist who develops a drug to cure cancer years after leaving California. A grandchild who spent a single summer surfing in Southern California would be subject to the tax. It would include anyone returning home to a foreign country after 60 days in California.
> Imagine the child of a Saudi prince being asked to pay a California wealth tax during college and for nine years after graduation.
> The authors of the bill estimate the wealth tax will provide Sacramento $7.5 billion in additional revenue every year. Another proposal—to increase the top state income-tax rate to 16.8%—would annually raise another $6.8 billion. Today, California’s wealthiest 1% pay approximately 46% of total state income taxes. Adding the wealth tax to individual taxes and including those taxpayers who have abandoned California, the combination of the two proposals would have 1% of the state’s population paying about 53% of individual taxes.
> California has enough financial woes for an entire large nation. Most are of its own making, including unfulfillable public pension promises and a vast social safety net beyond the capacity of California’s workers to fund. So the Legislature looks to the wealthiest Californians to fill funding gaps without considering the constitutionality of the proposals and the ability of people and companies to pick up and leave the state, which news reports suggest they are doing in large numbers. The very act of collecting the financial information necessary to calculate the A.B. 2088 wealth tax would be an invasion of privacy.
> Proponents argue that the wealth tax is “only” 0.4% on net worth over $30 million, and the percentage of net worth taxed would decline each year during the 10-year “tail” should a taxpayer leave the state. While the rate appears negligible and the $30 million base seems high, it is a slippery slope. In California, tax rates rarely get lower. The state’s top income-tax rate was 9.3% in 2003. Soon it could be 16.8%. Why 0.4% instead of 1%, 2% or 10%? Why not a $10 million base?
> Even at 0.4%, there are eye-popping new levels of actual tax. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg would face a first-year tax of approximately $400 million. If he moved out of state immediately, his total wealth tax over the subsequent decade would be another $2 billion. If he remained in California, the wealth tax would extract $4 billion over that decade.
> If Bill Gates spent 60 days a year in his Palm Desert home, for each day in California his wealth tax would be more than $1 million. While the tax would diminish each year if he stayed out of the state, he would continue to be subject to a tax on his world-wide net worth for another decade.
> The cost of compliance by taxpayers and the cost of enforcement by the state would be monumental. For most taxpayers, the cost of compliance would far exceed the amount of the tax. A resident with a net worth of $31 million would be subject to a wealth tax of $4,000. The cost of an annual appraisal of each of that taxpayer’s assets could easily exceed $100,000. The state would have to hire auditors to chase people all over the world.
> As of this moment, there are no police roadblocks on the freeways trying to keep moving trucks from leaving California. If A.B. 2088 becomes law, the state may need to consider placing some.
> _Mr. Adler is associate professor of accounting at Chapman University._



Taxes keep increasing and quality of life decreasing. One of these days only the homeless that don't file tax returns can live in California. And the Harkles, of course!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I was just thinking Harry was only 12 when his mother died.  There is a pretty big difference in development between 12 and 15 - Will's age at the time.  Then they went to Charles.  I'm sure Charles tried but he didn't have much parenting himself so there is no way he could have replaced Diana IMO.  Not totally giving Harry a pass but could be that his emotional development was stunted at age 12.  Then comes miss manipulative and he was an easy mark.
> Just my speculation.


I think you made a very good point. It may also explain why he seems to be so easily manipulated.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree there is a big difference between 12 & 15. Something to consider — Harry left for boarding school at age 8.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince George go to boarding school?
> 
> 
> His father Prince William was sent away to school at the age of eight, but will the Cambridges follow family tradition or choose something more informal for their eldest son?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Typically, members of the Royal Family are sent off to boarding school at the age of 8 - Prince George’s father Prince William and his uncle Prince Harry were both sent away at 8 to Ludgrove School in Berkshire._


I don't think George will be sent to a boarding school. Boarding schools are not as popular now as they were a few decades ago imo. Though, they can be a really fun experience.


----------



## bag-mania

I think Harry was born kind of gullible, naive, and a follower. There isn't much he could do if it was his true nature.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @sdkitty, copy & paste again.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'emulating the Ob###s' successful business model and will move on to books next' - but they WON'T do a tell-all on the Firm, claims royal expert*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'emulating the Ob###s' successful business model and will move on to creating a book next' - but it won't be a tell-all on the royal family, according to a royal expert.
> 
> Speaking to 9Honey, royal commentator Katie Nicholl said having a publishing deal is likely to be the next step for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they recently announced their Archewell Audio podcast with Spotify, which followed a deal with Netflix.
> 
> She said it’s likely Meghan will move in to creating self-help books soon, which the mother-of-one’s a fan of.
> 
> However, Ms Nicholl said Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, are unlikely to reveal anything about their time in the Firm after stepping back from their royal duties and moving to the US with their son Archie.
> 
> ‘It's important to remember they are still bound by that pledge to the royal family, to uphold the values of the monarchy, to remain respectful of the monarchy whether or not they are working members of the institution,' the royal author said.
> 
> The Ob###s and the Sussexes have known each other for many years and Ms Nicholl suggests it’s likely there’s been ‘some mentoring and possible guidance along the way’.
> 
> More crap here


what BS


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMHO, I don’t believe Harry is that easily manipulated. He has a strong (spoiled) personality and was raised with royal entitlement. He and Will were taught and trained to look for false friends. Absolutely losing one’s mother at 12 is very difficult. He isn’t the only person to have lost his mother at that age. He had a huge support system, not quite the same as having his mother, but it isn’t as if he was left unattended as some children are.  I read an article somewhere that counted the number of days Diana actually spent with the boys. It really wasn’t that much. I’ll look for the link.

As much as Harry serves MM’s purpose, *she serves his purpose*. After his military service, he wanted out of the royal responsibilities. I doubt the BRF would have let him leave on his own accord. They needed him to be part of a family unit so his departure would look natural and not that he was ill suited for the role. He knows he can leave MM at any time without much blame coming at him.  He has been away from home since 8 years old. This USA stuff is just one more adventure for him. I don’t have the impression he is in it for the long haul.

ETA: @Chanbal although the boarding school article is about George, it explains the age that William and Harry were sent away - 8.  I am still looking for the article about the number of days Diana saw the boys.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> what BS


Agree, but Nicholl may be onto something. I would be shocked, but not surprised with self-help books by MM.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Agree, but Nicholl may be onto something. I would be shocked, but not surprised with self-help books by MM.


that's fine but the part about the two of them having been close with Michelle and Barak for years.....I call BS on that


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is an account of that last summer — I had forgotten Gianni Versace was killed just a few months before her death. 








						Diana had to send William and Harry back from 'worst holiday ever' after tragedy
					

Having been granted permission by the Queen to take Prince Harry and William to the south of France, Diana sent them back to Prince Charles while she grieved




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is an account of that last summer — I* had forgotten Gianni Versace was killed just a few months before her death.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana had to send William and Harry back from 'worst holiday ever' after tragedy
> 
> 
> Having been granted permission by the Queen to take Prince Harry and William to the south of France, Diana sent them back to Prince Charles while she grieved
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



It was even less than that. Only six weeks separated their deaths.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, the Christmas card has Archie in it after all. And the dogs. Make of it what you will.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Glad I didn't waste my time waiting for that Christmas card. Weeks ago, I 
subscribed to Brit Box and really enjoyed dramas and mysteries unrelated to the grifters. Still read most of the comments from the last 10 to 20 pages because they are the best part of the thread. Thanks for the entertainment.

Here’s a couple of books to add to your Holiday book list.   

‘Lost in the Wilderness’ is the story of a famous couple that sniffed their own pee trail back to civilization after getting lost in the southern California wilderness.

‘The Pea Brain’ records the results of a brain scan performed on MM, who had asked the scientific community to preserve an image of her perfect brain. After maximum magnification, they discovered that the Pea Brain is divided into five lobes as follows.
1) Inflated Ego: Lobe emits recurring waves decoded as, “I am the best.”
2) Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire: Lobe requires further study as it is in a constant state of flux and changes its parameters at will, with conflicting results.
3) Greed: Shaped like a dollar sign, this lobe emits a pulsating sequence deciphered as, “I love, love, love money.”
4) Jealousy and Envy: Lobe is covered with a green membrane and a superimposed image of William and Catherine riddled with dart holes.
5) Word Salad: This lobe’s impulses compels the subject to speak, write and think in word salad phraseology.
Warning: close proximity or prolonged exposure to The Pea Brain’s emissions is dangerous in that it causes one to emulate the host and, therefore, the scientists beg your forgiveness for their babbling and prattling.

May your Holiday(s) be happy, merry and gay!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, the Christmas card has Archie in it after all. And the dogs. Make of it what you will.
> 
> View attachment 4936725


Were they were so afraid that someone would republish a real picture that used a caricature instead? Sad!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, the Christmas card has Archie in it after all. And the dogs. Make of it what you will.
> 
> View attachment 4936725


This is an ugly Christmas card, but it shows that Archie finally got a pair pants. 

@bag-mania Wow, you got the card before DM. Great work!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Glad I didn't waste my time waiting for that Christmas card. Weeks ago, I
> subscribed to Brit Box and really enjoyed dramas and mysteries unrelated to the grifters. Still read most of the comments from the last 10 to 20 pages because they are the best part of the thread. Thanks for the entertainment.
> 
> Here’s a couple of books to add to your Holiday book list.
> 
> ‘Lost in the Wilderness’ is the story of a famous couple that sniffed their own pee trail back to civilization after getting lost in the southern California wilderness.
> 
> ‘The Pea Brain’ records the results of a brain scan performed on MM, who had asked the scientific community to preserve an image of her perfect brain. After maximum magnification, they discovered that the Pea Brain is divided into five lobes as follows.
> 1) Inflated Ego: Lobe emits recurring waves decoded as, “I am the best.”
> 2) Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire: Lobe requires further study as it is in a constant state of flux and changes its parameters at will, with conflicting results.
> 3) Greed: Shaped like a dollar sign, this lobe emits a pulsating sequence deciphered as, “I love, love, love money.”
> 4) Jealousy and Envy: Lobe is covered with a green membrane and a superimposed image of William and Catherine riddled with dart holes.
> 5) Word Salad: This lobe’s impulses compels the subject to speak, write and think in word salad phraseology.
> Warning: close proximity or prolonged exposure to The Pea Brain’s emissions is dangerous in that it causes one to emulate the host and, therefore, the scientists beg your forgiveness for their babbling and prattling.
> 
> May your Holiday(s) be happy, merry and gay!


I really enjoy BritBox, the mysteries are great. 
Happy Holidays to you as well.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Were they were so afraid that someone would republish a real picture that used a caricature instead? Sad!



Spot on!  This could have been any child borrowed from a Mommy and Me class.  I think they went to an art class at SBarb HS and asked someone to draw a picture for them.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This should be posted here:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'drip feeding' content to the media is 'extraordinary' after they stepped back as senior royals for more privacy, Queen's former press secretary says*
> The Queen's former press secretary Dickie Arbiter said he found it 'extraordinary' that the Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, have made various appearances - despite stepping back as royals in March for more privacy.
> 
> Speaking to True Royalty TV's Royal Beat, the commentator and royal expert said: 'I find it extraordinary that two people who left basically because they felt press intrusion and yet in the past 12 months we've had nothing but drip-feeding the press about things that they're doing.'
> 
> The comments come after it was revealed that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, who are currently living in their $14 million mansion in California with their 18-month-old son Archie, have signed a lucrative podcast deal with Spotify worth up to £30million.
> 
> The Mirror reported the Sussexes would be paid £30million - other sources put it closer to £20million.
> 
> The Sussexes' agreement comes just months after the royals agreed a £100million partnership with Netflix and days after Meghan invested in a $28-per-pack oat-milk 'superlatte' business later promoted for free by her LA neighbour Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Recipients of the Hypocrisy Award


As per usual, he NAILED it .. but we all know that those 2 dullards will be whining "_oh - see, the BRF is sooooooo mean to us again_"!  Whatever hope I originally had for Hap-Hazza is long gone; he is a pathetic codpiece in Meghan's panties!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Spot on!  This could have been any child borrowed from a Mommy and Me class.  I think they went to an art class at SBarb HS and asked someone to draw a picture for them.


The conversion of a photo to cartoon can be done online free of charge. It's within their price range.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That card is flat out stupid.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CobaltBlu re your post #42036 
Agree, it is difficult to believe she is pregnant. Here's a bigger photo where we can see her waist. If she is pregnant, shouldn't we see a bulge, even a small bulge?  If one believes she is pregnant, then it means the fetus has already descended and the head is possibly engaged in the birth canal??? Any OBS expert on this thread please comment. Thanks.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, the Christmas card has Archie in it after all. And the dogs. Make of it what you will.
> 
> View attachment 4936725



Looks like one of those cheapo 'assorted' pack of cards bought in a box of 100 in Poundland.

IPhone snap with paint filter function and saturation on max. So random


----------



## lanasyogamama

I read in one of the recent articles that the prediction that Spotify is paying them $100 million is based on what Joe Rogan negotiated. There is absolutely no way they would get the same, Joe Rogan is proven podcast gold mine, so many “dudes” listen to him 3+ hours a day.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania Wow, you got the card before DM. Great work!



What can I say? Since I can’t travel for Christmas because of Covid, I might as well make myself useful here.


----------



## csshopper

Y A W N - a card befitting the subjects, cardboard without animation and feeling, disconnected,  and once again celebrating selves, "see how wonderful we are giving $"


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is this their new house?  Shaking my head, another amateur attempt to be oh so “d i f f e r e n t”.  snore.
Reality does not match the hype.









						5 Best iPhone Apps That Turn Photos Into Drawings & Sketches
					

Discover the 5 best iPhone apps that turn photos into drawings. This photo sketch app comparison will help you choose the right app for you.




					iphonephotographyschool.com
				




ETA:  shameful the way they push the Doria narrative. Nothing they say can be trusted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I saw José Andrés on the news tonight. Fortunately for him they showed all the good work he and his charity are doing with nary a mention of Harry and Meghan to taint it.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this a report for their Tax Accountant or a holiday card message?

*From Montecito with love! Harry and Meghan release their first Christmas card since relocating to America and show off 19-month old Archie's shock of red hair*

*In the card Meghan writes:* 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities with you in mind.

'From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.'

A spokesperson for the couple said: 'The original photo of the family was taken at their home earlier this month by The Duchess's mother.

Money doesn't buy elegance


----------



## TC1

Lord that card is ugly


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is this their new house?  Shaking my head, another amateur attempt to be oh so “d i f f e r e n t”.  snore.
> Reality does not match the hype.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5 Best iPhone Apps That Turn Photos Into Drawings & Sketches
> 
> 
> Discover the 5 best iPhone apps that turn photos into drawings. This photo sketch app comparison will help you choose the right app for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iphonephotographyschool.com



I wasn’t going to subject everyone to the propaganda but since you asked… 

From _People_:

“The original photo of the family was taken at their home earlier this month by The Duchess’s mother," a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said. "The small Christmas tree, including the homemade ornaments and other decorations, were selected by Archie, and the tree will be replanted after the holidays.”

The card offers a glimpse of Meghan and Harry's backyard — and Archie's special playhouse!


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> @CobaltBlu re your post #42036
> Agree, it is difficult to believe she is pregnant. Here's a bigger photo where we can see her waist. If she is pregnant, shouldn't we see a bulge, even a small bulge?  If one believes she is pregnant, then it means the fetus has already descended and the head is possibly engaged in the birth canal??? Any OBS expert on this thread please comment. Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4936776


It could be lodged in one of her bunions.


----------



## bag-mania

As a comparison, here is the Christmas card for the royal family of Monaco. They chose the traditional route, even made the kids dress up.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> As a comparison, here is the Christmas card for the royal family of Monaco. They chose the traditional route, even made the kids dress up.
> 
> View attachment 4936828



I would have rolled my eyes if they went this formal, but that filter or blur thing they used is just ridiculous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I would have rolled my eyes if they went this formal, but that filter or blur thing they used is just ridiculous.



It takes me back to the 80s, MySpace times.  Fun!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> As a comparison, here is the Christmas card for the royal family of Monaco. They chose the traditional route, even made the kids dress up.
> 
> View attachment 4936828


Interesting photo that ... taken when Charlene had hair, photo undated  - early Dec ?, likely before her 16  Dec appearance with one side of her head shaved , like bald on one side , 
of course, there has been a news report - in last week or so - that Albert is due in court about yet another illegitimate child 
Sorry I don’t have a photo of shaved hair, maybe there is one on the royalty thread

Ps found it 





						Style - Royalty Fashion Thread
					

Hey friends!  Quick and obvious reminder... all posts here should be about the fashion worn by royals, their gossip/news thread is in the celebrity forum.  Please stay on topic, thank you!! :tender:




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

Am I the only one who thinks "Archie" in that painting of a card looks much older than 19 months old???
Read this thread. People's reactions are interesting! I am not supporting or endorsing the view expressed in it.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I would have rolled my eyes if they went this formal, but that filter or blur thing they used is just ridiculous.



They wanted it to look like a sweet, gentle watercolor painting. Very classy, don’t you know.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks "Archie" in that painting of a card looks much older than 19 months old???
> Read this thread. People's reactions are interesting! I am not supporting or endorsing the view expressed in it.



My two cents worth on card ... hmmm ... they sure are stingy with Archie info ... started with birth, christening ... theme here ?
Ok, I get it .. silly me ... they cherish their privacy


----------



## bag-mania

I’ll just leave this here. Thanks Twitter!


----------



## marietouchet

Deleted my duplicate post , see below


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> They wanted it to look like a sweet, gentle watercolor painting. Very classy, don’t you know.


They must be fans of the vorticism school 









						BLAST: Wyndham Lewis and Vorticism, 100 years on | Apollo Magazine
					

100 years ago, British artist Wyndham Lewis broke with the Omega Workshops and Roger Fry to form the Vorticism movement and the modernist publication, BLAST




					www.apollo-magazine.com
				












						Vorticism - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




The Zs on the doors and the red bows


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

I think this is a very calculated move on their part demonstrating their shamelessness in using their son. A traditional card would have most likely generated oh's and ah's as he is probably a cute little boy like his father at that age. The really curious would have clicked on it, others would have shrugged on just another family portrait of some royals and moved on. Instead we have this production which seems to be generating an "OMG have you seen the Sussexes weird Christmas card this year? It is so _________(fill in your own adjective)"  so people click to see what the talk is about. Click, Click, see how popular we are, how much people love us, how impressed they are by our philanthropy yada yada  yada and more false celebrity is claimed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hey MM & JCMH, this is what a loving mother reading to her child really looks like. 




lovehgss1 said:


> HGD Stephanie with Prince Charles.
> 
> Fashion ID: Charles’ sweater by Ralph Lauren
> 
> wort.lu
> 
> 
> View attachment 4936813
> View attachment 4936826
> View attachment 4936827


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Is this a report for their Tax Accountant or a holiday card message?
> 
> *From Montecito with love! Harry and Meghan release their first Christmas card since relocating to America and show off 19-month old Archie's shock of red hair*
> 
> *In the card Meghan writes:* 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities with you in mind.
> 
> 'From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.'
> 
> A spokesperson for the couple said: 'The original photo of the family was taken at their home earlier this month by The Duchess's mother.
> 
> Money doesn't buy elegance


I’m not trying to be rude, but is that even English? That sounds so awkward... where’s grammerly? I mean I typo all over the place online and chat speak on bulletin boards, but my professional written work is perfect. Also, I’m not an acclaimed calligrapher that takes 20 min to sign a guest book...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> _In the card Meghan writes: 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities with you in mind._



What does that mean? You who? “We, as a family” - what else would they be? A corporation?
So awkward, so pretentious.

ETA:  I am of the opinion since they are not official, working royals, we do not need a drip-feed of their faux-royal world. If this cheap W&K imitation is all they offer to a pandemic-stressed world, then they should really stay out of the media. This photo smacks of privilege and entitlement. Not a pretty sight for these times.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @sdkitty, copy & paste again.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'emulating the Ob###s' successful business model and will move on to books next' - but they WON'T do a tell-all on the Firm, claims royal expert*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'emulating the Ob###s' successful business model and will move on to creating a book next' - but it won't be a tell-all on the royal family, according to a royal expert.
> 
> Speaking to 9Honey, royal commentator Katie Nicholl said having a publishing deal is likely to be the next step for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after they recently announced their Archewell Audio podcast with Spotify, which followed a deal with Netflix.
> 
> She said it’s likely Meghan will move in to creating self-help books soon, which the mother-of-one’s a fan of.
> 
> However, Ms Nicholl said Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, are unlikely to reveal anything about their time in the Firm after stepping back from their royal duties and moving to the US with their son Archie.
> 
> ‘It's important to remember they are still bound by that pledge to the royal family, to uphold the values of the monarchy, to remain respectful of the monarchy whether or not they are working members of the institution,' the royal author said.
> 
> The Ob###s and the Sussexes have known each other for many years and Ms Nicholl suggests it’s likely there’s been ‘some mentoring and possible guidance along the way’.
> 
> More crap here


Yes, they are so comparable to michelle and barak...let's see. First couple in addition to being ***** and FLOTUS were both attorneys before that.  He was president of the Harvard Law Review. 

Second couple - he was born royal, poor student, only real accomplishement was serving in the military.  She was a D-list actress, boat girl and blogger.

Yes they should follow the first couple's  model since they are so similar.


----------



## rose60610

Weird card. I suppose it's a way to avoid the reminder they bought an energy sucking mega mansion and to keep people guessing-is she or isn't she pregnant again?  Guy is a well traveled dog. From Canada to England where he broke two legs and now CA? I hope Guy is OK. Not many people ask if Guy is OK and I want to stay off that crap list. That poor dog broke two legs and IS deserving of some sympathy. 

Many people enjoy being offended at "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays". Since Meghan is soooooo WOKE and hyper-politically correct, I'm surprised she agreed to "Merry Christmas" on the card. Could it be that Harry preferred "Merry Christmas" so Meghan actually handed him his balls back momentarily and agreed? Well, it IS Christmas and maybe she decided to give into to one of his allotted quota concessions. 2020 is almost over, then Harry starts over again with three decisions he's allowed to make for 2021. Use them wisely, Harry!


----------



## CobaltBlu

What a mess.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@rose60610  in the UK, isn’t Happy Christmas more frequently used?

@HarkleSparkleFriends. was the original photo ‘doctored’?  The sole of MM’s boot stands out as odd, exceptionally clean. Also, does right foot on ‘the kid who never be seen’ look strange to you? At first, it looks like part of the dog’s tail, but that can’t be right, can it?


----------



## bag-mania

Let us take a moment to look at what was written inside the card. It was sent to the Mayhew organization, one of Meghan‘s patronages. It is a nice charity that helps dogs and cats. What is with the English spelling “organisation” instead of the American “organization”? Did Harry write it? And why, oh, why did they use their Christmas card as an opportunity to toot their own horn and list everyone they gave a donation to?  (That’s a rhetorical question, I know the answer.)

“This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities with you in mind. From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.”









						Warm Christmas wishes and a generous gift from our Patron - Mayhew
					






					themayhew.org


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @rose60610
> was the *original photo* ‘doctored’?  The sole of MM’s boot stands out as odd, exceptionally clean. Also, does right foot on ‘the kid who never be seen’ look strange to you? At first, it looks like part of the dog’s tail, but that can’t be right, can it?


I don't think there is an original photo because MM isn't wearing a green cape, staring at the camera, and smirking!!!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Yes, they are so comparable to michelle and barak...let's see. First couple in addition to being ***** and FLOTUS were both attorneys before that.  He was president of the Harvard Law Review.
> Second couple - he was born royal, poor student, only real accomplishement was serving in the military.  She was a *Z-list* D-list actress, boat girl and blogger.
> 
> Yes they should follow the first couple's  model since they are so similar.


Sorry @sdkitty but I had to do a small correction before @CeeJay reads it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What does that mean? You who? “We, as a family” - what else would they be? A corporation?
> So awkward, so pretentious.
> 
> ETA:  I am of the opinion since they are not official, working royals, we do not need a drip-feed of their faux-royal world. If this cheap W&K imitation is all they offer to a pandemic-stressed world, then they should really stay out of the media. This photo smacks of privilege and entitlement. Not a pretty sight for these times.


"In the card Meghan writes: 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities *with you in mind." *It feels creepy!


----------



## wilding

bag-mania said:


> As a comparison, here is the Christmas card for the royal family of Monaco. They chose the traditional route, even made the kids dress up.
> 
> View attachment 4936828


Phew, had to do a double take. It looked like the little (I don't know her name sorry!) was sporting a bowl cut for a bit there 

With the Markles being so secretive of Archie makes me wonder if they'll home school him. Will we finally see him emerge as an adult? I'm in a foul mood sorry.


----------



## bag-mania

wilding said:


> Phew, had to do a double take. It looked like the little (I don't know her name sorry!) was sporting a bowl cut for a bit there



 Fortunately for her it’s just little girl bangs.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Let us take a moment to look at what was written inside the card. It was sent to the Mayhew organization, one of Meghan‘s patronages. It is a nice charity that helps dogs and cats. What is with the English spelling “organisation” instead of the American “organization”? Did Harry write it? And why, oh, why did they use their Christmas card as an opportunity to toot their own horn and list everyone they gave a donation to?  (That’s a rhetorical question, I know the answer.)
> 
> “This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities with you in mind. From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Warm Christmas wishes and a generous gift from our Patron - Mayhew
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> themayhew.org



I am going to get roasted for this but...the writing reminds me of the (in) famous and very pretentious letter that Patsy Ramsey sent to friends and family for Xmas 1996
And nope, I am not wishing any ill on either Meghan, Harry or Archie just pointing the pretentiousness 
Meghan and H (the “h” is silent in Spanish so it suits him) need to tone it down w the holier that thou attitude 
I’ll see myself out


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She must have felt generous that day seeing she allowed Harry to handle Archie instead of presenting herself als angelic mother.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> "In the card Meghan writes: 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities *with you in mind." *It feels creepy!



I don’t understand this sentence. The whole structure is so awkward, I thought she went to college?

'From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.'


----------



## Sharont2305

rose60610 said:


> Weird card. I suppose it's a way to avoid the reminder they bought an energy sucking mega mansion and to keep people guessing-is she or isn't she pregnant again?  Guy is a well traveled dog. From Canada to England where he broke two legs and now CA? I hope Guy is OK. Not many people ask if Guy is OK and I want to stay off that crap list. That poor dog broke two legs and IS deserving of some sympathy.
> 
> Many people enjoy being offended at "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays". Since Meghan is soooooo WOKE and hyper-politically correct, I'm surprised she agreed to "Merry Christmas" on the card. Could it be that Harry preferred "Merry Christmas" so Meghan actually handed him his balls back momentarily and agreed? Well, it IS Christmas and maybe she decided to give into to one of his allotted quota concessions. 2020 is almost over, then Harry starts over again with three decisions he's allowed to make for 2021. Use them wisely, Harry!


Merry or Happy Christmas is what we say in the UK. It's the traditional way. 
To us Holiday means vacation to Americans so Happy Holidays makes no sense.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> "In the card Meghan writes: 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities *with you in mind." *It feels creepy!



This means 'we're not giving anyone presents this year' (in case the Clooneys et al are waiting with baited breath for theirs).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t understand this sentence. The whole structure is so awkward, I thought she went to college?
> 
> 'From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, *we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.*'



Why, thank you. The HarkleSparkleFanClub appreciates you honoring these folks on our behalf.
WTH does any of that mean?

@pukasonqo Please stay awhile. The silent H is perfection! Thank you for that tidbit   There is definitely  a high level of pretentious creepiness in the H&M message. If the BRF suspected anything too weird, they would step in, at least I hope so.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Merry or Happy Christmas is what we say in the UK. It's the traditional way.
> To us Holiday means vacation to Americans so Happy Holidays makes no sense.


Happy holidays is the U.S. way of respecting people from different religions as not everyone celebrates Christmas. And MM is so Woke she should know that! But the Duchess is so British you know!


----------



## duna

pukasonqo said:


> I am going to get roasted for this but...the writing reminds me of the (in) famous and very pretentious letter that Patsy Ramsey sent to friends and family for Xmas 1996
> And nope, I am not wishing any ill on either Meghan, Harry or Archie just pointing the pretentiousness
> Meghan and H (the “h” is silent in Spanish so it suits him) need to tone it down w the holier that thou attitude
> I’ll see myself out



I don't know who Patsy Ramsey is nor what was in her letter, but I agree with you nonetheless


----------



## chicinthecity777

We Told You About Money Baby - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] Are you disappointed that a photo of the baby is the one Christmas gift you are not going to find underneath the tree this year? Are you surprised that you haven’t seen the baby much in the past year? You shouldn’t be. Your friends at Blind Gossip told you point blank over the […]




					blindgossip.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> We Told You About Money Baby - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] Are you disappointed that a photo of the baby is the one Christmas gift you are not going to find underneath the tree this year? Are you surprised that you haven’t seen the baby much in the past year? You shouldn’t be. Your friends at Blind Gossip told you point blank over the […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



They may indeed want mega-bucks for the photos, but they need to remember it is the *baby* photos that sell.  As the lil one gets older - and this one is 18 months or so - they lose that baby cuteness. Unless they want their kid to be a child model which is a very tough world to be in.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe they announce that they made donations to charity in their Christmas card.  WE ALL DONATED TO CHARITY, especially this year!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies for the cranky questions, these no visiting Covid holidays are miserable, but we will get through this. Onward to 2021!

What exactly did they donate?
Their 2019 Christmas card [aka, the departing card] said "Wishing You a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year From Our Family to Yours."  That was it.  No word salad to feast on.  About 2 weeks later (Jan 8), they announce they are leaving. Pfffft.









						The Sussex's First Family Christmas Card Just Leaked and It's Adorable
					

ARCHIE!




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we go:

Archie's VERY plush playhouse! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle splashed out on a '$7,000' custom 'mini English country cottage' complete with split stable doors and a thatched roof echoing one the Queen enjoyed as a little girl

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle released a Christmas card showing the family in their garden in California
Couple are seen playing with 19-month-old son in front of a custom playhouse in style of an English cottage 
House boasts split stable doors and a thatched roof and is thought to cost up to $7,000, toy specialists claim
Bears a striking similarity to the lavish Wendy house in the grounds of Windsor Castle the Queen enjoyed  
Playhouse!



I don’t really see a resemblance.


----------



## rose60610

wilding said:


> Phew, had to do a double take. It looked like the little (I don't know her name sorry!) was sporting a bowl cut for a bit there
> 
> With the Markles being so secretive of Archie makes me wonder if they'll home school him. Will we finally see him emerge as an adult? I'm in a foul mood sorry.



If Archie will be home schooled, then I can only hope Meghan has nothing to do with the instruction. After all, despite having gone to Northwestern and majoring in international relations, she didn't realize the United Kingdom was part of a Commonwealth. So one couldn't criticize her for marrying into a family with a colonial past, remember that one? But before she uttered those remarks she slammed its colonial past. Somebody please save Archie from his two-faced mother.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> If Archie will be home schooled, then I can only hope Meghan has nothing to do with the instruction. After all, despite having gone to Northwestern and majoring in international relations, she didn't realize the United Kingdom was part of a Commonwealth. So one couldn't criticize her for marrying into a family with a colonial past, remember that one? But before she uttered those remarks she slammed its colonial past. Somebody please save Archie from his two-faced mother.



Many parents have found homeschooling to be a terrible experience for their child as well as for themselves. Undoubtedly he will have the best tutors and enriching experiences Harry’s Charles’ money can buy.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many parents have found homeschooling to be *a terrible experience for their child* as well as for themselves. Undoubtedly he will have the best tutors and enriching experiences Harry’s Charles’ money can buy.



Exactly..... and what about friends, will he have to grow up without a single friend?? I hope not!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Frankly it looks like H is in a dog house, M is of course in front and in charge and Archie is caught in the middle

in the immortal words of Charles Dicken’s character, Scrooge, the whole card is one big “Bah Humbug!”


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> This means 'we're not giving anyone presents this year' (in case the Clooneys et al are waiting with baited breath for theirs).



Yes, of course the Clooneys, the Beckhams... (in lieu of a gift)! I was convinced that she had sent them lattes. So when I read the message, I thought MM was writing to her Tax Accountant to keep track of some potential tax-deductible donations. Silly me


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies for the cranky questions, these no visiting Covid holidays are miserable, but we will get through this. Onward to 2021!
> 
> What exactly did they donate
> Their 2019 Christmas card [aka, the departing card] said "Wishing You a Very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year From Our Family to Yours."  That was it.  No word salad to feast on.  About 2 weeks later (Jan 8), they announce they are leaving. Pfffft.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussex's First Family Christmas Card Just Leaked and It's Adorable
> 
> 
> ARCHIE!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



I sincerely hope we will get through this, seeing the numbers of infected people and hospitalizations increasing is pretty scary.

We will never know what MM&H exactly donated, but a good guess is that they donated nothing.

Wishing you all a Very Merry Christmas (or Happy Holidays)!!!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go:
> 
> Archie's VERY plush playhouse! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle splashed out on a '$7,000' custom 'mini English country cottage' complete with split stable doors and a thatched roof echoing one the Queen enjoyed as a little girl
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle released a Christmas card showing the family in their garden in California
> Couple are seen playing with 19-month-old son in front of a custom playhouse in style of an English cottage
> House boasts split stable doors and a thatched roof and is thought to cost up to $7,000, toy specialists claim
> Bears a striking similarity to the lavish Wendy house in the grounds of Windsor Castle the Queen enjoyed
> Playhouse!
> 
> View attachment 4937070
> 
> I don’t really see a resemblance.


Oprah's or Charles's gift to Archie??? It doesn't look like MM would spend 7K on a playhouse...


----------



## bisousx

Meghan Markle inserting herself with Kim Kardashian is reminiscent of Kim Kardashian inserting herself with Beyonce circa 2012. She’s learned well.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> I think this is a very calculated move on their part demonstrating their shamelessness in using their son. A traditional card would have most likely generated oh's and ah's as he is probably a cute little boy like his father at that age. The really curious would have clicked on it, others would have shrugged on just another family portrait of some royals and moved on. Instead we have this production which seems to be generating an "OMG have you seen the Sussexes weird Christmas card this year? It is so _________(fill in your own adjective)"  so people click to see what the talk is about. Click, Click, see how popular we are, how much people love us, how impressed they are by our philanthropy yada yada  yada and more false celebrity is claimed.


Your point is well taken ...
My personal petty thoughts on the card ... what are they hiding ? If they wanted everyone to stop guessing , texting etc then they would have a normal photo ...
Again I am being Uber petty ...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why, thank you. The HarkleSparkleFanClub appreciates you honoring these folks on our behalf.
> WTH does any of that mean?
> 
> @pukasonqo Please stay awhile. The silent H is perfection! Thank you for that tidbit   There is definitely  a high level of pretentious creepiness in the H&M message. If the BRF suspected anything too weird, they would step in, at least I hope so.


Ooooh a U in honoured ... showing our UK roots are we ?


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Meghan Markle inserting herself with Kim Kardashian is reminiscent of Kim Kardashian inserting herself with Beyonce circa 2012. She’s learned well.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4937185


Did Kim receive a basket of lattes from MM?


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Did Kim receive a basket of lattes from MM?



not unless she paid for them


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Your point is well taken ...
> My personal petty thoughts on the card ... what are they hiding ? If they wanted everyone to stop guessing , texting etc then they would have a normal photo ...
> Again I am being Uber petty ...



Marietoucet, yes I also wonder what are they hiding? Does he bear some resemblance to Marcus Anderson? Having never seen a real picture of Archie we have no way of knowing if he really is a "ginger" like JCMH. Of course, that seems far fetched, but their extreme efforts to not share any photos does seem ludicrous, unless it is yet another attempt to garner attention and keep the stans breathlessly waiting for a reveal.

Related to the picture, it appears they have bungled it yet again by releasing the self promoting message of their donations to charities vs pictures of a $7000, playhouse/dog house, an amount that would be much appreciated by any of those charities I'm sure. And, as a Californian who had to evacuate her home for 5 days a few months ago due to one of the major fires, I resent the lush green lawns in the landscaping of even this small plot since it means thousands of gallons of water have been poured into it. Intellectually I know there is no direct link to their Eden like environment and the parched earth elsewhere, but emotionally I am offended by yet again  their  cluelessly hypocritical life style in general.


----------



## gracekelly

Is this the real Archie?  Photo leaked on twitter.




Jan 2020


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Did Kim receive a basket of lattes from MM?


Kim receives like $200k ($500k ?? cannot remember obscene number) for a social media post, she got the basket in some sort of business deal in exchange for her doing a post, she does not even hawk her sisters' stuff for free - it is all tit for tat


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> What does that mean? You who? “We, as a family” - what else would they be? A corporation?
> So awkward, so pretentious.
> 
> ETA:  I am of the opinion since they are not official, working royals, we do not need a drip-feed of their faux-royal world. If this cheap W&K imitation is all they offer to a pandemic-stressed world, then they should really stay out of the media. This photo smacks of privilege and entitlement. Not a pretty sight for these times.


Privilege is 100% correct .. they obviously do not watch the news or pick up any newspapers, because if they did, they would clearly see that their "neighbors" to the North (San Francisco) and South (Los Angeles) are not doing that great .. certainly not enjoying 18+ bathroom mansions in addition to beautifully sculptured lawns, complete with a "play" house for Archie which includes nice, decorated Fir Trees!!!  Get this H&M, you dumb-a$$es .. you know how many homeless people would give their last dime to be able to STAY in that "little" playhouse????  With so many with no roof over their head, no walls around them, dealing with those Santa Ana winds (and yes - the Fire warnings) and let's not even talk about hardly anything to eat .. and you post this type of card?????  I'm speechless ..


----------



## KellyObsessed

It's possible that they don't want to shop out their child to the highest bidder for photos, and are just protecting him from the prying eyes of the world.
They are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and even if they appear to be seeking fame and fortune, at least they're not subjecting their child to be the front-page feature on every magazine and tabloid.
Even if people are desperate to see what colour hair Archie has, they are not entitled to know.     Harry may actually be the one shielding his son from being photographed.   He had no choice as a child, as his parents were future King and Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

They walk a fine line with Archie. Too much of him and it looks like they’re using him. Too little and it looks like they are holding back because they want somebody to pay them for photos. It really shouldn’t be that difficult. They could just take him with them when they go out, the way normal parents would. It doesn’t have to be a special photo op event and they don’t need to be doing anything in particular. Just show that they like to take their kid with them when they’re going about their business and that Archie isn’t a total afterthought.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

KellyObsessed said:


> It's possible that they don't want to shop out their child to the highest bidder for photos, and are just protecting him from the prying eyes of the world.
> They are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and even if they appear to be seeking fame and fortune, at least they're not subjecting their child to be the front-page feature on every magazine and tabloid.
> Even if people are desperate to see what colour hair Archie has, they are not entitled to know.     Harry may actually be the one shielding his son from being photographed.   He had no choice as a child, as his parents were future King and Queen.


I don’t send photos to Facebook of any family members , I get it ...
but the card as photoshopped is goofy/awkward ...
I am a photoshop aficionado, always looking for new techniques, and IMHO the photoshopping was not good, the Zs on the doors were awful, but that’s me ... they need someone else to photoshop the next one


----------



## Kansashalo

KellyObsessed said:


> It's possible that they don't want to shop out their child to the highest bidder for photos, and are just protecting him from the prying eyes of the world.
> They are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and even if they appear to be seeking fame and fortune, at least they're not subjecting their child to be the front-page feature on every magazine and tabloid.
> Even if people are desperate to see what colour hair Archie has, they are not entitled to know.   *  Harry may actually be the one shielding his son from being photographed.*   He had no choice as a child, as his parents were future King and Queen.



THIS! Especially the bolded part!!

Plus, folks photoshop and do all kinds of things to photos for the clicks or the "leaks.  

I like their card this year - very Norman Rockwell-esque.   Given the 2020 that America has had, I love the casualness of it all.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh, here we go.  



Prince Harry and Meghan Markleare reportedly ready to try again to have a sibling for their son, Archie Harrison. 

According to OK magazine, the Sussexes are ready to try to become parents again after Meghan's pregnancy loss over the summer. A source told the magazine that, after the publication of Meghan's essay about her miscarriage in the New York Times, she and Harry "were quite overwhelmed by the outpouring of compassion. The sheer scale of messages, electronic and handwritten, was nothing short of astounding." 

The source says that the public response to the essay "validated their decision to go public a thousand times over" and brought Harry and Meghan closer than ever. 

"Harry has been an absolute rock for Meghan, and vice versa," the royal insider added. "They’ve come out of it stronger than ever. They’re determined to put this behind them and try for another baby at the earliest opportunity. But more than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates." 

We're just happy to hear that Harry and Meghan are healingafter their loss.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly "Determined" to Try for Another Baby ASAP
					

"More than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> Oh, here we go.
> 
> View attachment 4937453
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markleare reportedly ready to try again to have a sibling for their son, Archie Harrison.
> 
> According to OK magazine, the Sussexes are ready to try to become parents again after Meghan's pregnancy loss over the summer. A source told the magazine that, after the publication of Meghan's essay about her miscarriage in the New York Times, she and Harry "were quite overwhelmed by the outpouring of compassion. The sheer scale of messages, electronic and handwritten, was nothing short of astounding."
> 
> The source says that the public response to the essay "validated their decision to go public a thousand times over" and brought Harry and Meghan closer than ever.
> 
> "Harry has been an absolute rock for Meghan, and vice versa," the royal insider added. "They’ve come out of it stronger than ever. They’re determined to put this behind them and try for another baby at the earliest opportunity. But more than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."
> 
> We're just happy to hear that Harry and Meghan are healingafter their loss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly "Determined" to Try for Another Baby ASAP
> 
> 
> "More than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Must be a slow news day if this is all they've got. Yawn.


----------



## zinacef

redney said:


> Must be a slow news day if this is all they've got. Yawn.


Yes indeed!  Merry Christmas everyone!


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> Oh, here we go.
> 
> View attachment 4937453
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markleare reportedly ready to try again to have a sibling for their son, Archie Harrison.
> 
> According to OK magazine, the Sussexes are ready to try to become parents again after Meghan's pregnancy loss over the summer. A source told the magazine that, after the publication of Meghan's essay about her miscarriage in the New York Times, she and Harry "were quite overwhelmed by the outpouring of compassion. The sheer scale of messages, electronic and handwritten, was nothing short of astounding."
> 
> The source says that the public response to the essay "validated their decision to go public a thousand times over" and brought Harry and Meghan closer than ever.
> 
> "Harry has been an absolute rock for Meghan, and vice versa," the royal insider added. "They’ve come out of it stronger than ever. They’re determined to put this behind them and try for another baby at the earliest opportunity. But more than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."
> 
> We're just happy to hear that Harry and Meghan are healingafter their loss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly "Determined" to Try for Another Baby ASAP
> 
> 
> "More than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


So much for the privacy they wanted!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania  more drip-feeding???  So, if they don’t get the ‘likes’, they won’t have another child.  Screams narcissism to me!

It does not matter one iota to me whether I see a photo of this child or any royal child. If the parents want to stage a pretentious photo op, that is on them, not us. No one here asked for a photo. If they don’t want the child’s image out there, why send out a card? They can acknowledge their charities without putting their image on a card — a tree would work just as well.

They sent the cards to their charities because clearly they do indeed want this half-in/half-out non-working royal nonsense. They *do *want the attention [and $$$]. Again, remember, no one asked for this card. Because these parents made a choice to show their child and themselves in a $7,ooo playhouse located on their 16 bathroom mansion‘s backyard during a global pandemic and one of the worst economic downturns the world has seen, that is on them, not us. It is the same with any celebrity — if they put it out there, people will comment. Some will like what they do and some won’t. Either way, it’s all good. Cheers. Merry Christmas.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the Henry van Straubanzee memorial  
2018 - MM did read a Marianne Williamson poem and Harry talked about educating girls in Africa on menstruation. Yeah, at a Christmas choral concert memorial.
2019 - they skipped it because they were on leave from royal duties, unclear if any donations were made
2020 - they live in Cali now, they send a card and a brief mention of their deep, caring love for this memorial.

Enough, just enough.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania  more drip-feeding???  So, if they don’t get the ‘likes’, they won’t have another child.  Screams narcissism to me!
> 
> It does not matter one iota to me whether I see a photo of this child or any royal child. If the parents want to stage a pretentious photo op, that is on them, not us. No one here asked for a photo. If they don’t want the child’s image out there, why send out a card? They can acknowledge their charities without putting their image on a card — a tree would work just as well.
> 
> They sent the cards to their charities because clearly they do indeed want this half-in/half-out non-working royal nonsense. They *do *want the attention [and $$$]. Again, remember, no one asked for this card. Because these parents made a choice to show their child and themselves in a $7,ooo playhouse located on their 16 bathroom mansion‘s backyard during a global pandemic and one of the worst economic downturns the world has seen, that is on them, not us. It is the same with any celebrity — if they put it out there, people will comment. Some will like what they do and some won’t. Either way, it’s all good. Cheers. Merry Christmas.



It was written poorly, wasn’t it? Tying their “trying again” with all the positive feedback she got from her NYT piece  makes it sound like they will breed by popular demand.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan Markle's brother-in-law is charged with domestic violence after 'hitting her sister' Samantha in the face during a late-night bust-up*
Wheelchair-bound Samantha, 56, told police that Phillips, who works in storage unit clearance, had hit her in the face during a fight.

According to the report, Phillips had become angry after being asked to help her off the toilet late at night and then slapped her ‘on the right side of her face in the ear area’ during the ensuing row.



This is sad!


----------



## chicinthecity777

The whole Christmas card thing is beyond pathetic! Make a family Christmas card by all means but why did they "release" it? The BRF release Christmas card as a Royal tradition. They quit being royalty, now why pretend to be royals in the U.S. and "release" a British wording Christmas card? For whom? Nobody here gives a rat's ass about it! Who else in the U.S. release their Christmas card? Did 0bamas release a Christmas card? 

Stop pretending to be royals! FFS!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Merry Christmas to those who celebrate!


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Privilege is 100% correct .. they obviously do not watch the news or pick up any newspapers, because if they did, they would clearly see that their "neighbors" to the North (San Francisco) and South (Los Angeles) are not doing that great .. certainly not enjoying 18+ bathroom mansions in addition to beautifully sculptured lawns, complete with a "play" house for Archie which includes nice, decorated Fir Trees!!!  Get this H&M, you dumb-a$$es .. you know how many homeless people would give their last dime to be able to STAY in that "little" playhouse????  With so many with no roof over their head, no walls around them, dealing with those Santa Ana winds (and yes - the Fire warnings) and let's not even talk about hardly anything to eat .. and you post this type of card?????  I'm speechless ..


A-freakin’-men.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who else in the U.S. release their Christmas card? Did 0bamas release a Christmas card?
> 
> Stop pretending to be royals! FFS!



Yes, the 0bamas release a Christmas card each year as I suppose most presidents past and present do. It shows where H&M see their status.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Just one solitary photo of her husband so *no one* can have a hissy fit.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Just one solitary photo of her husband so *no one* can have a hissy fit.




and signifying she didn't appreciate the background 'noise' about the issue.

She's also wearing royal purple, LOUD and c l e a r, signifying she doesn't intend to step down or aside


----------



## papertiger

KellyObsessed said:


> It's possible that they don't want to shop out their child to the highest bidder for photos, and are just protecting him from the prying eyes of the world.
> They are damned if they do and damned if they don't, and even if they appear to be seeking fame and fortune, at least they're not subjecting their child to be the front-page feature on every magazine and tabloid.
> Even if people are desperate to see what colour hair Archie has, they are not entitled to know.     Harry may actually be the one shielding his son from being photographed.   He had no choice as a child, as his parents were future King and Queen.





bag-mania said:


> They walk a fine line with Archie. Too much of him and it looks like they’re using him. Too little and it looks like they are holding back because they want somebody to pay them for photos. It really shouldn’t be that difficult. They could just take him with them when they go out, the way normal parents would. It doesn’t have to be a special photo op event and they don’t need to be doing anything in particular. Just show that they like to take their kid with them when they’re going about their business and that Archie isn’t a total afterthought.



I for one, are very happy about not peddling out Archie. 

However, they did name their charity 'thing' after him so they get to constantly get to reiterate associations with his name with good works (I see the irony of using the word 'works' here).



bag-mania said:


> Oh, here we go.
> 
> View attachment 4937453
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markleare reportedly ready to try again to have a sibling for their son, Archie Harrison.
> 
> According to OK magazine, the Sussexes are ready to try to become parents again after Meghan's pregnancy loss over the summer. A source told the magazine that, after the publication of Meghan's essay about her miscarriage in the New York Times, she and Harry "were quite overwhelmed by the outpouring of compassion. The sheer scale of messages, electronic and handwritten, was nothing short of astounding."
> 
> The source says that the public response to the essay "validated their decision to go public a thousand times over" and brought Harry and Meghan closer than ever.
> 
> "Harry has been an absolute rock for Meghan, and vice versa," the royal insider added. "They’ve come out of it stronger than ever. They’re determined to put this behind them and try for another baby at the earliest opportunity. But more than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."
> 
> We're just happy to hear that Harry and Meghan are healingafter their loss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly "Determined" to Try for Another Baby ASAP
> 
> 
> "More than anything else, it’s really underlined how they belong together as soulmates."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Lowest common denominator. 

No pics of Archie (good) but _then,_ build-up announcement of non-news reminders of their breeding challenges (at one with the people who should be pitied) and the need for Royal duty/familial responsibility. Are only-children so terrible? 

Harry's speech on over-population and a dig at the Cambridges (an extra beyond the heir and the spare) long forgotten. Globally, Harry could let the second child thing go since his brother has taken care of numbers, and we're all "raindrops" together in this thing he calls globe.


----------



## csshopper

Someday


bag-mania said:


> Yes, the 0bamas release a Christmas card each year as I suppose most presidents past and present do. It shows where H&M see their status.


For members not in the US, bag mania is right, US Presidents do usually release a card. One year the Obamas card was a picture of their dog in the snow outside the White House. 

The HUGE difference is that US Presidential Greetings are simply stated in celebration of the season and DO NOT include word salads about their self perceived narcissistic wonderfulness and how they spend their money. Nor do they presume to act on behalf of all of us.

Only publicity hungry "drippy" Grifters like the Sussexes' stoop to that low level. The BRF must be cringing.  JCMH may be a Prince by birth, but has no "class", nor does his sanctimonious spouse.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Sharont2305 said:


> Just one solitary photo of her husband so *no one* can have a hissy fit.



The California royals are noticably absent from the video, I guess their California food delivery sketch ended up on the editing room floor.


----------



## CarryOn2020

California royals, indeed.  Thank you, @CobaltBlu. It feels good to laugh at this H&M nonsense.

@Sharont2305  pretty sure I see Will and George in the reflection   Prepare for Cali royals hissy fit.

QE is clearly the adult in the room. Such a refreshingly positive message for this important day. She looks healthy and sounds strong. She well understands what and who is important. Thinking Philip has been a positive influence.


----------



## Annawakes

This part gets me the most in its stupidity:
_“we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us”_

just say We!! You don’t say “on behalf of”, if you’re referring to yourself.  So weird and dumb.

I don’t have a problem with the cartoony card. They could do whatever they want with the picture. It’s what they wrote in it that’s so laughable.


----------



## csshopper

Harry should take a tutorial from his indomitable Grandmother, she is a pro on line:  Looking straight into the camera, no eye darts, ear pulls, knuckles rubs, clearly communicating without patronizing or preaching, and with immaculate grooming.

Not only were they appropriately missing from the videos as non working royals, at one point early on she phrased ".. _all across the_ _Commonwealth my family and I have been inspired..." _ If H and M were watching maybe H had to remind her California is not included.


----------



## CeeJay

Annawakes said:


> This part gets me the most in its stupidity:
> _“we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us”_
> 
> just say We!! You don’t say “on behalf of”, if you’re referring to yourself.  So weird and dumb.
> 
> I don’t have a problem with the cartoony card. They could do whatever they want with the picture. It’s what they wrote in it that’s so laughable.


Goes to show us all “how educated” these two are ..


----------



## kipp

Annawakes said:


> This part gets me the most in its stupidity:
> _“we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us”_
> 
> just say We!! You don’t say “on behalf of”, if you’re referring to yourself.  So weird and dumb.
> 
> I don’t have a problem with the cartoony card. They could do whatever they want with the picture. It’s what they wrote in it that’s so laughable.


Yes---the writing is incredibly pretentious.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Harry should take a tutorial from his indomitable Grandmother, she is a pro on line:  Looking straight into the camera, no eye darts, ear pulls, knuckles rubs, clearly communicating without patronizing or preaching, and with immaculate grooming.
> 
> Not only were they appropriately missing from the videos as non working royals, at one point early on she phrased ".. _all across the_ _Commonwealth my family and I have been inspired..." _ If H and M were watching maybe H had to remind her California is not included.


But remember, she later admitted that she didn’t know that much about “the Commonwealth” .. and this from someone who (supposedly) graduated with a degree in International Studies. Northwestern should be embarrassed..


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s an article about Harry’s ex Cressida’s wedding. I wonder if Meghan is annoyed that _People_ would have such an article. She might believe she owns that publication.  



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Kansashalo

chicinthecity777 said:


> The whole Christmas card thing is beyond pathetic! Make a family Christmas card by all means but why did they "release" it? The BRF release Christmas card as a Royal tradition. They quit being royalty, now why pretend to be royals in the U.S. and "release" a British wording Christmas card? For whom? Nobody here gives a rat's ass about it! Who else in the U.S. release their Christmas card? Did 0bamas release a Christmas card?
> 
> Stop pretending to be royals! FFS!



In the US, yes....many famous people "release" a holiday/Christmas card.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> So much for the privacy they wanted!


Perhaps they will notify everyone as to which are the best days for conception.  Post a calendar with the days circled in red


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps they will notify everyone as to which are the best days for conception.  Post a calendar with the days circled in red


I was thinking something similar... LOL!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Here’s an article about Harry’s ex Cressida’s wedding. I wonder if Meghan is annoyed that _People_ would have such an article. She might believe she owns that publication.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice



Cressida’s wedding story was published in the Dm last week, too.  It is a delightful story that shows what weddings should be about - intimate and special, no drunken dramas.  Her dress looks far better than any of the zillion dollar gowns. Impressive at every step.  No wonder she and Eug are friends.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps they will notify everyone as to which are the best days for conception.  Post a calendar with the days circled in red


Or whether or not it is better to get pregnant before or after peeing in the woods.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> This part gets me the most in its stupidity:
> _“we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us”_
> 
> just say We!! You don’t say “on behalf of”, if you’re referring to yourself.  So weird and dumb.
> 
> I don’t have a problem with the cartoony card. They could do whatever they want with the picture. It’s what they wrote in it that’s so laughable.



Now, that I read this statement again, it occurs to me she meant the work the charity does so we do not need to.  Ya kno, they feed the poor so we don’t have to. Surely she didn’t mean that, did she?  Eeek. Ick.


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Just one solitary photo of her husband so *no one* can have a hissy fit.



I love that she has the picture of Philip on her desk. ❤️


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Just one solitary photo of her husband so *no one* can have a hissy fit.




I must admit I thought that was such a cute and personal touch. I hope she wouldn't let the tantrum throwing nutjobs dictate her table arrangements.


----------



## CarryOn2020

FYI: 
TPF blocks certain words with *****.  Based on the post’s message, I am guessing the ***** refer to p. O. T. U. S.
The poster was commenting on the Daily Mail’s article that compared H&M to Michelle and her husband (his name gets ******).  TPF does have several threads about racism.  This is simply a gossip thread. That’s all.  Wishing you and all well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What is an A list actress?
This list includes the top female actors who have had starring roles in the last few years, both in film and TV (like Homeland star / Emmy award winner Claire Danes) and should give you a good idea of the top 100 actresses who are in the business these days.









						The Best Actresses Working Today
					

Here is the place to rank the best actresses working today. This list includes many of the greatest actresses in film history, but more importantly, focuses on modern female movie stars and TV actresses. Today, Hollywood features a new crop of popular and respected young actresses who command...




					www.ranker.com
				




Quora covers this topic, too:









						What determines whether a celebrity is on the the A-List, B-List, C-List or D-List?
					

Answer (1 of 14): In addition to the criteria already mentioned, I also pose that someone's social relevance is a big factor. Some of this has to do with the aforementined financial success and marketability, but it also has to do with how necessary they are to the public.  For example, Lisa Lamp...




					www.quora.com


----------



## letgoandletgod

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is an A list actress?
> This list includes the top female actors who have had starring roles in the last few years, both in film and TV (like Homeland star / Emmy award winner Claire Danes) and should give you a good idea of the top 100 actresses who are in the business these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Actresses Working Today
> 
> 
> Here is the place to rank the best actresses working today. This list includes many of the greatest actresses in film history, but more importantly, focuses on modern female movie stars and TV actresses. Today, Hollywood features a new crop of popular and respected young actresses who command...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ranker.com











						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry make it to 'Time's 100 most influential people' list
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are all set to be named in the coveted  'Time's 100 most influential people' list. The list will air on broadcast TV  for the first time ever this...




					www.google.co.uk
				




That “D list” nobody is one of the most influential people. Beautiful and has a loving husband and child. God bless her and god bless you all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle’s Career Through the Years: 21 Appearances in Film, TV and Commercials
					

From commercials to culinary judging to ‘Suits’ and everything in between, see how she got her start as an actress before her engagement to Prince Harry.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

I must confess I don't like Harry. I must be a gingerist! One can't possibly dislike someone other than because of their physical appearance after all! yawn!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

letgoandletgod said:


> The same post is also calling an African American woman a D list nobody.



Well, she ain't no Oscar winner, that's for sure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

letgoandletgod said:


> That “D list” nobody is one of the most influential people. Beautiful and has a loving husband and child. God bless her and god bless you all.



And she achieved that through what? Her own hard work? No, she just married the most eligible bachelor of the world and used his name wisely. Are you saying Oprah, the Clooneys and Beckhams would have attended her first wedding if invited just for her sparkling personality?


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> I must confess I don't like Harry. I must be a gingerist! One can't possibly dislike someone other than because of their physical appearance after all! yawn!



Yep, put me in the ‘Harry dislike‘ crowd. He is a boorish bore. When he stops trolling his brother, stops the pretentious lectures, stops spending other people’s money, stops whining about his entitled & privileged life, stops this half-in,half-out nonsense, stops being a man-child, maybe I will reconsider. Of all the celebs who are desperate for adulation and attention, he is one of the worst.

Gotta give applause to the A listers who have shown calm and dignity during the pandemic. They have shown what genuine style and character are all about. No negative noise from them.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Goes to show us all “how educated” these two are ..


She does Northwestern University no favors each time she writes something or opens her word-salad mouth.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh, looky what I missed.  Serves me right for not checking in the day after Christmas. When someone is always looking for racism that is all they will ever see.

I dislike Harry and Meghan because they are hypocrites who pretend to be philanthropists and social justice warriors. In truth they have accomplished nothing beyond speaking some nice-sounding words to try to get as much media attention for themselves as humanly possible. I guess that’s enough to pass for wonderful people  in the snowflake era.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Sykes from the school of Omid Scobie is providing the Year in Review for the Power Couple:




In the book _Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which came out in August, it was revealed that the couple gave the Queen’s office just 10 minutes notice they were publishing their plans. They understandably felt they had to get their side of the story out to the public to thwart the monarchy’s spinners from controlling the narrative around their plans to leave frontline royal duties.

On Jan. 13, Harry sat down with his father and grandmother at the so-called Sandringham Summit. Afterwards the Queen, in a public statement, made clear that she wanted the situation resolved in “days.”

Resolution implies compromise but there was none of that; *the queen showed her ruthless streak and rejected out of hand Harry and Meghan’s aspirations *to continue having reduced formal public royal roles whilst being free to earn their own money.

Harry and Meghan’s plan, as outlined on that initial website, was quickly kicked into touch.

They got their independence but the price was total. *They got nothing of what they wanted*; they were ordered not to use their HRH titles, they were stripped of all their royal appointments and associations, Harry was removed from his military roles and they were told they would have to pay for their own security. *The Queen even ordered them not to use the word “royal” to describe themselves as they went out for hire.*

Immediately, *Meghan was cast by xenophobic, racist and sexist elements in the British media and establishment as the cause of the trouble.* The affair was termed “Megxit” and lazy comparisons were made between Meghan and another American woman whom the establishment failed to silence, Wallis Simpson.

Over the course of this year, *it has emerged that it was Harry who drove forward the project to leave royal life. Meghan, if she did anything, simply gave Harry the courage to act on his convictions.*

On Monday March 9 Meghan and Harry made their very last appearance as fully fledged members of the
royal family at the Commonwealth service in London.

Any hope that this would be an occasion of healing, or that either side would use the event to build bridges with the other was crushed when Harry and Meghan were not included in the procession in the official program.

In the event, William and Kate opted to skip the procession as well to avoid humiliating Meghan and Harry. Unfortunately, this dignified front could not be kept up, and *in a childish display of royal pettiness, Kate and William ignored and cold-shouldered Meghan and Harry as they attempted to make small talk while seated in the pews before the service.*

With cases spiking around the world, thousands dying and millions losing their jobs, *Harry and Meghan wisely decided discretion was the better part of valor, and suspended plans to launch their new Archewell foundation.*

A few weeks earlier, just hours before Canada and America had closed their borders on March 18, a *private jet had lifted Harry, Meghan and Archie into the skies above British Columbia *and made its way south to Los Angeles, where Harry and family set up home for the next few months in a mansion owned by her contact, Tyler Perry.

The mansion was, on paper, spectacular and luxurious but the reality was that *Meghan and Harry had a miserable time living there because a public hiking trail ran adjacent to the home from where paparazzi photographers launched dozens and dozens of drone sorties on the family. *Intrusive photographs were taken and shopped around the world, although the pointless cruelty of the photographers’ activities was exposed by the fact that none of the illegally-obtained pictures were purchased.

In early July, the family moved to Montecito, where Meghan miscarried the baby. It was not until the day before Thanksgiving that *Meghan revealed her miscarriage in a moving and powerful op-ed for the New York Times.

Despite this personal tragedy Meghan and Harry continued to brightly advocate for a number of community causes,* and also engaged in some high-profile public appearances distributing food to communities hard-hit by the pandemic.

*Noble as much of this work was,* the pandemic blew Harry and Meghan’s commercial plans out of the water.

*The royals would do well to roll out the red carpet for Harry, Meghan and Archie*—and put the disaster of 2020 behind them.

Roll Out the Red Carpet An impartial analysis of "All the Drama"  The focus is mostly on Harry's family, didn't read anything about the duchess's family (ex: sick father).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *They got nothing of what they wanted*



There is much of the article I dispute, but the quote is most offensive. They have Charles’ money, they have several charities/patronages  in the UK and the US, they still use the Duke/Duchess titles, they merch off those titles, they voice their political thoughts, etc.  Is Harry a US citizen?  Is he paying US taxes? Is she? Are they public or private people?  With their daily drip-feedings, it seems they are more public than ever. They did indeed get the half-in, half-out nonsense.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Tom Sykes from the school of Omid Scobie is providing the Year in Review for the Power Couple:
> 
> View attachment 4938330
> 
> 
> In the book _Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which came out in August, it was revealed that the couple gave the Queen’s office just 10 minutes notice they were publishing their plans. They understandably felt they had to get their side of the story out to the public to thwart the monarchy’s spinners from controlling the narrative around their plans to leave frontline royal duties.
> 
> On Jan. 13, Harry sat down with his father and grandmother at the so-called Sandringham Summit. Afterwards the Queen, in a public statement, made clear that she wanted the situation resolved in “days.”
> 
> Resolution implies compromise but there was none of that; *the queen showed her ruthless streak and rejected out of hand Harry and Meghan’s aspirations *to continue having reduced formal public royal roles whilst being free to earn their own money.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s plan, as outlined on that initial website, was quickly kicked into touch.
> 
> They got their independence but the price was total. *They got nothing of what they wanted*; they were ordered not to use their HRH titles, they were stripped of all their royal appointments and associations, Harry was removed from his military roles and they were told they would have to pay for their own security. *The Queen even ordered them not to use the word “royal” to describe themselves as they went out for hire.*
> 
> Immediately, *Meghan was cast by xenophobic, racist and sexist elements in the British media and establishment as the cause of the trouble.* The affair was termed “Megxit” and lazy comparisons were made between Meghan and another American woman whom the establishment failed to silence, Wallis Simpson.
> 
> Over the course of this year, *it has emerged that it was Harry who drove forward the project to leave royal life. Meghan, if she did anything, simply gave Harry the courage to act on his convictions.*
> 
> On Monday March 9 Meghan and Harry made their very last appearance as fully fledged members of the
> royal family at the Commonwealth service in London.
> 
> Any hope that this would be an occasion of healing, or that either side would use the event to build bridges with the other was crushed when Harry and Meghan were not included in the procession in the official program.
> 
> In the event, William and Kate opted to skip the procession as well to avoid humiliating Meghan and Harry. Unfortunately, this dignified front could not be kept up, and *in a childish display of royal pettiness, Kate and William ignored and cold-shouldered Meghan and Harry as they attempted to make small talk while seated in the pews before the service.*
> 
> With cases spiking around the world, thousands dying and millions losing their jobs, *Harry and Meghan wisely decided discretion was the better part of valor, and suspended plans to launch their new Archewell foundation.*
> 
> A few weeks earlier, just hours before Canada and America had closed their borders on March 18, a *private jet had lifted Harry, Meghan and Archie into the skies above British Columbia *and made its way south to Los Angeles, where Harry and family set up home for the next few months in a mansion owned by her contact, Tyler Perry.
> 
> The mansion was, on paper, spectacular and luxurious but the reality was that *Meghan and Harry had a miserable time living there because a public hiking trail ran adjacent to the home from where paparazzi photographers launched dozens and dozens of drone sorties on the family. *Intrusive photographs were taken and shopped around the world, although the pointless cruelty of the photographers’ activities was exposed by the fact that none of the illegally-obtained pictures were purchased.
> 
> In early July, the family moved to Montecito, where Meghan miscarried the baby. It was not until the day before Thanksgiving that *Meghan revealed her miscarriage in a moving and powerful op-ed for the New York Times.
> 
> Despite this personal tragedy Meghan and Harry continued to brightly advocate for a number of community causes,* and also engaged in some high-profile public appearances distributing food to communities hard-hit by the pandemic.
> 
> *Noble as much of this work was,* the pandemic blew Harry and Meghan’s commercial plans out of the water.
> 
> *The royals would do well to roll out the red carpet for Harry, Meghan and Archie*—and put the disaster of 2020 behind them.
> 
> Roll Out the Red Carpet An impartial analysis of "All the Drama"  The focus is mostly on Harry's family, didn't read anything about the duchess's family (ex: sick father).


I thought Disneyland was closed, but he's stuck in Fantasyland.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan failed. Trying to usurp the Queen with her lame ass Christmas card. The Queen made a wonderful speech. That card was insensitive and frankly juvenile. Truong so hard to be regal but at the same time trying to come across as relatable is like oil and water.

I predict those two Phoenix will not be rising but crashing back to the ground.


letgoandletgod said:


> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry make it to 'Time's 100 most influential people' list
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are all set to be named in the coveted  'Time's 100 most influential people' list. The list will air on broadcast TV  for the first time ever this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That “D list” nobody is one of the most influential people. Beautiful and has a loving husband and child. God bless her and god bless you all.


----------



## Lodpah

letgoandletgod said:


> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry make it to 'Time's 100 most influential people' list
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are all set to be named in the coveted  'Time's 100 most influential people' list. The list will air on broadcast TV  for the first time ever this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That “D list” nobody is one of the most influential people. Beautiful and has a loving husband and child. God bless her and god bless you all.


what has she influenced? Loving? In what way? Abandoning her father and family and her husband’s family? Talk is cheap. I can say I’m doing this and that but if no action then it’s talk. You can admire her all you want but you can’t bring everyone to your side. Dahling, just because she’s African American or even if she’s green, purple or white, to other people, she’s vile, a climber who steps on people in her way up but she will eventually meet them in her way down.


I know dogs who have more character in their paws than this woman who is a “feminist” and supposedly cares about ‘humanity.” GTFOif you think people are judging her on her race it’s her character. She’s not a woman of substance.

Don’t judge us on racism which you seem to be doing.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is much of the article I dispute, but the quote is most offensive. They have Charles’ money, they have several charities/patronages  in the UK and the US, they still use the Duke/Duchess titles, they merch off those titles, they voice their political thoughts, etc.  Is Harry a US citizen?  Is he paying US taxes? Is she? Are they public or private people?  With their daily drip-feedings, it seems they are more public than ever. They did indeed get the half-in, half-out nonsense.


"They got nothing of what they wanted", in other words 'it's never enough for the duchess and her husband!'


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Tom Sykes from the school of Omid Scobie is providing the Year in Review for the Power Couple:
> 
> View attachment 4938330
> 
> 
> In the book _Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which came out in August, it was revealed that the couple gave the Queen’s office just 10 minutes notice they were publishing their plans. They understandably felt they had to get their side of the story out to the public to thwart the monarchy’s spinners from controlling the narrative around their plans to leave frontline royal duties.
> 
> On Jan. 13, Harry sat down with his father and grandmother at the so-called Sandringham Summit. Afterwards the Queen, in a public statement, made clear that she wanted the situation resolved in “days.”
> 
> Resolution implies compromise but there was none of that; *the queen showed her ruthless streak and rejected out of hand Harry and Meghan’s aspirations *to continue having reduced formal public royal roles whilst being free to earn their own money.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s plan, as outlined on that initial website, was quickly kicked into touch.
> 
> They got their independence but the price was total. *They got nothing of what they wanted*; they were ordered not to use their HRH titles, they were stripped of all their royal appointments and associations, Harry was removed from his military roles and they were told they would have to pay for their own security. *The Queen even ordered them not to use the word “royal” to describe themselves as they went out for hire.*
> 
> Immediately, *Meghan was cast by xenophobic, racist and sexist elements in the British media and establishment as the cause of the trouble.* The affair was termed “Megxit” and lazy comparisons were made between Meghan and another American woman whom the establishment failed to silence, Wallis Simpson.
> 
> Over the course of this year, *it has emerged that it was Harry who drove forward the project to leave royal life. Meghan, if she did anything, simply gave Harry the courage to act on his convictions.*
> 
> On Monday March 9 Meghan and Harry made their very last appearance as fully fledged members of the
> royal family at the Commonwealth service in London.
> 
> Any hope that this would be an occasion of healing, or that either side would use the event to build bridges with the other was crushed when Harry and Meghan were not included in the procession in the official program.
> 
> In the event, William and Kate opted to skip the procession as well to avoid humiliating Meghan and Harry. Unfortunately, this dignified front could not be kept up, and *in a childish display of royal pettiness, Kate and William ignored and cold-shouldered Meghan and Harry as they attempted to make small talk while seated in the pews before the service.*
> 
> With cases spiking around the world, thousands dying and millions losing their jobs, *Harry and Meghan wisely decided discretion was the better part of valor, and suspended plans to launch their new Archewell foundation.*
> 
> A few weeks earlier, just hours before Canada and America had closed their borders on March 18, a *private jet had lifted Harry, Meghan and Archie into the skies above British Columbia *and made its way south to Los Angeles, where Harry and family set up home for the next few months in a mansion owned by her contact, Tyler Perry.
> 
> The mansion was, on paper, spectacular and luxurious but the reality was that *Meghan and Harry had a miserable time living there because a public hiking trail ran adjacent to the home from where paparazzi photographers launched dozens and dozens of drone sorties on the family. *Intrusive photographs were taken and shopped around the world, although the pointless cruelty of the photographers’ activities was exposed by the fact that none of the illegally-obtained pictures were purchased.
> 
> In early July, the family moved to Montecito, where Meghan miscarried the baby. It was not until the day before Thanksgiving that *Meghan revealed her miscarriage in a moving and powerful op-ed for the New York Times.
> 
> Despite this personal tragedy Meghan and Harry continued to brightly advocate for a number of community causes,* and also engaged in some high-profile public appearances distributing food to communities hard-hit by the pandemic.
> 
> *Noble as much of this work was,* the pandemic blew Harry and Meghan’s commercial plans out of the water.
> 
> *The royals would do well to roll out the red carpet for Harry, Meghan and Archie*—and put the disaster of 2020 behind them.
> 
> Roll Out the Red Carpet An impartial analysis of "All the Drama"  The focus is mostly on Harry's family, didn't read anything about the duchess's family (ex: sick father).



.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is an A list actress?
> This list includes the top female actors who have had starring roles in the last few years, both in film and TV (like Homeland star / Emmy award winner Claire Danes) and should give you a good idea of the top 100 actresses who are in the business these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Actresses Working Today
> 
> 
> Here is the place to rank the best actresses working today. This list includes many of the greatest actresses in film history, but more importantly, focuses on modern female movie stars and TV actresses. Today, Hollywood features a new crop of popular and respected young actresses who command...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ranker.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quora covers this topic, too:
> 
> https://www.quora.com/[B]What-deter...on-the-the-A-List-B-List-C-List-or-D-List[/B]


 Well, I guess I'm going to have to send Quora a message that they missed a level .. *Z-List*!!!


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> She does Northwestern University no favors each time she writes something or opens her word-salad mouth.


Indeed, which makes me wonder about her "attendance" at some of these classes; we know she sure as heck was in attendance for those sorority parties!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Tom Sykes from the school of Omid Scobie is providing the Year in Review for the Power Couple:
> 
> View attachment 4938330
> 
> 
> In the book _Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which came out in August, it was revealed that the couple gave the Queen’s office just 10 minutes notice they were publishing their plans. They understandably felt they had to get their side of the story out to the public to thwart the monarchy’s spinners from controlling the narrative around their plans to leave frontline royal duties.
> 
> On Jan. 13, Harry sat down with his father and grandmother at the so-called Sandringham Summit. Afterwards the Queen, in a public statement, made clear that she wanted the situation resolved in “days.”
> 
> Resolution implies compromise but there was none of that; *the queen showed her ruthless streak and rejected out of hand Harry and Meghan’s aspirations *to continue having reduced formal public royal roles whilst being free to earn their own money.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s plan, as outlined on that initial website, was quickly kicked into touch.
> 
> They got their independence but the price was total. *They got nothing of what they wanted*; they were ordered not to use their HRH titles, they were stripped of all their royal appointments and associations, Harry was removed from his military roles and they were told they would have to pay for their own security. *The Queen even ordered them not to use the word “royal” to describe themselves as they went out for hire.*
> 
> Immediately, *Meghan was cast by xenophobic, racist and sexist elements in the British media and establishment as the cause of the trouble.* The affair was termed “Megxit” and lazy comparisons were made between Meghan and another American woman whom the establishment failed to silence, Wallis Simpson.
> 
> Over the course of this year, *it has emerged that it was Harry who drove forward the project to leave royal life. Meghan, if she did anything, simply gave Harry the courage to act on his convictions.*
> 
> On Monday March 9 Meghan and Harry made their very last appearance as fully fledged members of the
> royal family at the Commonwealth service in London.
> 
> Any hope that this would be an occasion of healing, or that either side would use the event to build bridges with the other was crushed when Harry and Meghan were not included in the procession in the official program.
> 
> In the event, William and Kate opted to skip the procession as well to avoid humiliating Meghan and Harry. Unfortunately, this dignified front could not be kept up, and *in a childish display of royal pettiness, Kate and William ignored and cold-shouldered Meghan and Harry as they attempted to make small talk while seated in the pews before the service.*
> 
> With cases spiking around the world, thousands dying and millions losing their jobs, *Harry and Meghan wisely decided discretion was the better part of valor, and suspended plans to launch their new Archewell foundation.*
> 
> A few weeks earlier, just hours before Canada and America had closed their borders on March 18, a *private jet had lifted Harry, Meghan and Archie into the skies above British Columbia *and made its way south to Los Angeles, where Harry and family set up home for the next few months in a mansion owned by her contact, Tyler Perry.
> 
> The mansion was, on paper, spectacular and luxurious but the reality was that *Meghan and Harry had a miserable time living there because a public hiking trail ran adjacent to the home from where paparazzi photographers launched dozens and dozens of drone sorties on the family. *Intrusive photographs were taken and shopped around the world, although the pointless cruelty of the photographers’ activities was exposed by the fact that none of the illegally-obtained pictures were purchased.
> 
> In early July, the family moved to Montecito, where Meghan miscarried the baby. It was not until the day before Thanksgiving that *Meghan revealed her miscarriage in a moving and powerful op-ed for the New York Times.
> 
> Despite this personal tragedy Meghan and Harry continued to brightly advocate for a number of community causes,* and also engaged in some high-profile public appearances distributing food to communities hard-hit by the pandemic.
> 
> *Noble as much of this work was,* the pandemic blew Harry and Meghan’s commercial plans out of the water.
> 
> *The royals would do well to roll out the red carpet for Harry, Meghan and Archie*—and put the disaster of 2020 behind them.
> 
> Roll Out the Red Carpet An impartial analysis of "All the Drama"  The focus is mostly on Harry's family, didn't read anything about the duchess's family (ex: sick father).


I can't even on this .. if I had the energy (_which I don't - thank you fractured femur_), I would take each one of these and eviscerate them .. what utter crap and falsehoods!


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well my my!!!  I leave for a day and mayhem ensues...!!! Flying Chanclas everywhere!!

We obviously need to stay on the topic of JCMH and MM, but I do wanna say that sometimes when there is a big sweep of posts, particularly when they are quoting other posts, it is easier from a moderation standpoint for us busy hardworking mods to just put "drama" in the reasons box, this gives us  a quick way to see what happened and we can get the cleanup done quickly. 

I did not read all the posts but I myself have often had to delete a perfectly delicious retort because it was part of a melee, throwing out the baby with the bathwater so to speak, and of course such repartee does actually prolong the anguish, also so to speak. 

In any event, I hope you all had a jolly good holiday and lets all buckle up and see what these crazy California royals are up to next.

And....Since many folks leave their decorations up till after New Years, I leave you with this...




Pip Pip


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> I can't even on this .. if I had the energy (_which I don't - thank you fractured femur_), I would take each one of these and eviscerate them .. what utter crap and falsehoods!


Well get well soon!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This could hurt!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ut oh, a wealth tax
> 
> 
> 
> California’s Legislature is considering a wealth tax on residents, part-year residents, and any person who spends more than 60 days inside the state’s borders in a single year. Even those who move out of state would continue to be subject to the tax for a decade—a provision that calls to mind the Eagles’ famous “Hotel California” lyric: “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”
> 
> The California Constitution probably allows a statewide wealth tax on residents, but any effort to create a tax capable of reaching across state borders is likely to run afoul of the U.S. Constitution. Taxing someone who spends only 60 days in the state in any single year—and extending that tax over an ensuing decade—would be something new under the sun.
> Each year this tax net would gather up a new crop of taxpayers for the next decade. The range of people it proposes to ensnare is staggering: every student attending college in California, anyone having a major medical procedure at a California hospital and needing an extended in-state recovery period, and those who spend two months in California away from New York or London winters. Under California tax law, there is no distinction between a nonresident from Minnesota and a nonresident from Dubai.
> Assembly Bill 2088 proposes calculating the wealth tax based on current world-wide net worth each Dec. 31. For part-year and temporary residents, the tax would be proportionate based on their number of days in California. The annual tax would be on current net worth and therefore would include wealth earned, inherited or obtained through gifts or estates long before and long after leaving the state.
> The proposed wealth tax would fall on a star high-school or college athlete who grows up in California but becomes a wealthy professional in another state after graduation. It would grab a scientist who develops a drug to cure cancer years after leaving California. A grandchild who spent a single summer surfing in Southern California would be subject to the tax. It would include anyone returning home to a foreign country after 60 days in California.
> Imagine the child of a Saudi prince being asked to pay a California wealth tax during college and for nine years after graduation.
> The authors of the bill estimate the wealth tax will provide Sacramento $7.5 billion in additional revenue every year. Another proposal—to increase the top state income-tax rate to 16.8%—would annually raise another $6.8 billion. Today, California’s wealthiest 1% pay approximately 46% of total state income taxes. Adding the wealth tax to individual taxes and including those taxpayers who have abandoned California, the combination of the two proposals would have 1% of the state’s population paying about 53% of individual taxes.
> California has enough financial woes for an entire large nation. Most are of its own making, including unfulfillable public pension promises and a vast social safety net beyond the capacity of California’s workers to fund. So the Legislature looks to the wealthiest Californians to fill funding gaps without considering the constitutionality of the proposals and the ability of people and companies to pick up and leave the state, which news reports suggest they are doing in large numbers. The very act of collecting the financial information necessary to calculate the A.B. 2088 wealth tax would be an invasion of privacy.
> Proponents argue that the wealth tax is “only” 0.4% on net worth over $30 million, and the percentage of net worth taxed would decline each year during the 10-year “tail” should a taxpayer leave the state. While the rate appears negligible and the $30 million base seems high, it is a slippery slope. In California, tax rates rarely get lower. The state’s top income-tax rate was 9.3% in 2003. Soon it could be 16.8%. Why 0.4% instead of 1%, 2% or 10%? Why not a $10 million base?
> Even at 0.4%, there are eye-popping new levels of actual tax. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg would face a first-year tax of approximately $400 million. If he moved out of state immediately, his total wealth tax over the subsequent decade would be another $2 billion. If he remained in California, the wealth tax would extract $4 billion over that decade.
> If Bill Gates spent 60 days a year in his Palm Desert home, for each day in California his wealth tax would be more than $1 million. While the tax would diminish each year if he stayed out of the state, he would continue to be subject to a tax on his world-wide net worth for another decade.
> The cost of compliance by taxpayers and the cost of enforcement by the state would be monumental. For most taxpayers, the cost of compliance would far exceed the amount of the tax. A resident with a net worth of $31 million would be subject to a wealth tax of $4,000. The cost of an annual appraisal of each of that taxpayer’s assets could easily exceed $100,000. The state would have to hire auditors to chase people all over the world.
> As of this moment, there are no police roadblocks on the freeways trying to keep moving trucks from leaving California. If A.B. 2088 becomes law, the state may need to consider placing some.
> _Mr. Adler is associate professor of accounting at Chapman University._


All California will accomplish in doing something like this is having no one in their right mind every want to live, work, learn, or have medical care in California.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is this a report for their Tax Accountant or a holiday card message?
> 
> *From Montecito with love! Harry and Meghan release their first Christmas card since relocating to America and show off 19-month old Archie's shock of red hair*
> 
> *In the card Meghan writes:* 'This year we, as a family, have made donations to several charities with you in mind.
> 
> 'From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.'
> 
> A spokesperson for the couple said: 'The original photo of the family was taken at their home earlier this month by The Duchess's mother.
> 
> Money doesn't buy elegance


Again, it can't just be "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays", it's "we did THIS, we did THAT" aren't we SO GREAT!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Weird card. I suppose it's a way to avoid the reminder they bought an energy sucking mega mansion and to keep people guessing-is she or isn't she pregnant again?  Guy is a well traveled dog. From Canada to England where he broke two legs and now CA? I hope Guy is OK. Not many people ask if Guy is OK and I want to stay off that crap list. That poor dog broke two legs and IS deserving of some sympathy.
> 
> Many people enjoy being offended at "Merry Christmas" instead of "Happy Holidays". Since Meghan is soooooo WOKE and hyper-politically correct, I'm surprised she agreed to "Merry Christmas" on the card. Could it be that Harry preferred "Merry Christmas" so Meghan actually handed him his balls back momentarily and agreed? Well, it IS Christmas and maybe she decided to give into to one of his allotted quota concessions. 2020 is almost over, then Harry starts over again with three decisions he's allowed to make for 2021. Use them wisely, Harry!


Harry probably would've preferred "Happy Christmas"


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t understand this sentence. The whole structure is so awkward, I thought she went to college?
> 
> 'From a local California organisation that helps families transition out of homelessness, to two of our U.K. patronages: one that supports animal and community welfare, and the other, a memorial fund for a cherished friend that helps to educate children and fight poverty in Uganda, we have honoured their work on behalf of all of us.'


Feels like a run on.


----------



## CobaltBlu

purseinsanity said:


> Feels like a run on.



That's because it absolutely is.  I have been saying they need an editor even before the "a well is where you go to dig deep" mess.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Year end review coming. All aboard. Karma bus leaving in 5, 4, 3, 2,,,,


----------



## bag-mania

Holiday weekends are slow in the news. Here is an article about them buying 100 wool hats to donate in Archie’s name in New Zealand. (This is the same company that gave Archie the Pom-pom hat last year that got them lots of sales.) 

Wool hats, isn’t it summer in New Zealand? I guess they are getting started really early.

*Harry and Meghan's generous gift to New Zealand kids charity Make Give Live*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have reached out to support a local Kiwi business for kids in need.

The royal couple got in touch with Kiwi knitwear social enterprise Make Give Live, and
bought 100 handmade woollen hats on behalf of their young son Archie.

Make Give Live founder Claire Conza says the letter from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex that arrived a few days before Christmas was a "wonderful gift for the organisation."

"As Make Give Live operates on a buy one, give one model, this will allow the group to make an extra 200 hats to distribute to families in need next winter through the various charities it supports," said Conza.

It's not the first time this year that the royal couple have supported Make Give Live.

On New Year's day they shared a photo of baby Archie wearing a Make Give Live Cocobear hat in Canada with their 10 million followers, which Conza says inspired thousands of orders from around the world.

"Demand for the hats have continued throughout the year and the sales have created an opportunity to support even more Kiwis through a tough 2020," says Conza.

"I recently posted a message on social media asking how we could get a card to them sharing how grateful we were to Harry and Meghan for shining a light on the work we do."

"This year we have donated over 3500 hats to people in need."

She did send a Christmas card to the Sussex family but the letter from the Duke and Duchess suggests Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern may have played a part in ensuring the message got to the couple.

"It said Jacinda Ardern had let them know we were trying to get in touch and that Archie continues to wear our beanies as they have one in every size."









						Harry and Meghan's generous gift to Kiwi kids in need
					

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was reportedly behind the touching gesture.




					www.nzherald.co.nz


----------



## marietouchet

My New Years resolutions
- regarding jcmh , work on getting them out of my news feeds , where is the ignore button ?
- for the rest -  dust off my teapot and bone China cups and stop using tea bags / sachets since I figure we will be locked down fir a while longer


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Holiday weekends are slow in the news. Here is an article about them buying 100 wool hats to donate in Archie’s name in New Zealand. (This is the same company that gave Archie the Pom-pom hat last year that got them lots of sales.)
> 
> Wool hats, isn’t it summer in New Zealand? I guess they are getting started really early.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan's generous gift to New Zealand kids charity Make Give Live*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have reached out to support a local Kiwi business for kids in need.
> 
> The royal couple got in touch with Kiwi knitwear social enterprise Make Give Live, and
> bought 100 handmade woollen hats on behalf of their young son Archie.
> 
> Make Give Live founder Claire Conza says the letter from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex that arrived a few days before Christmas was a "wonderful gift for the organisation."
> 
> "As Make Give Live operates on a buy one, give one model, this will allow the group to make an extra 200 hats to distribute to families in need next winter through the various charities it supports," said Conza.
> 
> It's not the first time this year that the royal couple have supported Make Give Live.
> 
> On New Year's day they shared a photo of baby Archie wearing a Make Give Live Cocobear hat in Canada with their 10 million followers, which Conza says inspired thousands of orders from around the world.
> 
> "Demand for the hats have continued throughout the year and the sales have created an opportunity to support even more Kiwis through a tough 2020," says Conza.
> 
> "I recently posted a message on social media asking how we could get a card to them sharing how grateful we were to Harry and Meghan for shining a light on the work we do."
> 
> "This year we have donated over 3500 hats to people in need."
> 
> She did send a Christmas card to the Sussex family but the letter from the Duke and Duchess suggests Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern may have played a part in ensuring the message got to the couple.
> 
> "It said Jacinda Ardern had let them know we were trying to get in touch and that Archie continues to wear our beanies as they have one in every size."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's generous gift to Kiwi kids in need
> 
> 
> Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was reportedly behind the touching gesture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nzherald.co.nz



The hats are cute and the idea behind Make Give Live seems cool, but they still need to donate a lot more hats to match Piers's gift. 









						Piers Morgan loses £15,000 on quiz show... but donates cash to charity
					

The Good Morning Britain host, 55, appeared on the celebrity Boxing Day special of the hit show alongside his longtime rival Jeremy Clarkson.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

*Harry and Meghan 'want a 12-month extension to Megixt deal that would see them keep their royal patronages beyond March 31 deadline' and could head back to the UK to seal it in person*

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want a 12-month extension to the Megxit deal that would see them keep their royal patronages and head back to the UK to seal the deal in person. 

The couple, who stepped back as senior royals in January, are hoping to agree a more permanent deal to ensure they can continue to be non-working royals while keeping their patronages. 

The move comes as the couple secured commercial gigs with Netflix and Spotify in recent months - a factor which will be looked over meticulously by royal aides as their 12-month review date looms.

The Sun on Sunday reports that the couples lucrative £100m Netflix and £30m Spotify deals will be assessed to make sure they are in-keeping with 'the values of Her Majesty'.

As part of the negotiations, they will speak to senior royals on video call ahead of Prince Harry, who may be joined by wife Meghan, returning to the UK to speak face-to-face with aides and family.

It has been claimed the couple would like to return in time for the Queen's 95th and Duke of Edinburgh's 100th birthdays.

Morton also claims that Harry regretted the way in which they announced they were stepping down from their role - sharing the news on social media - but that he does not regret his overall decision. 

However, sources last night described the latest Megxit extension reports as ‘rubbish’.

One said: ‘This review period was inserted in case Harry and Meghan wished to return as working royal, but they have made it clear they want to live an independent life.’

We need our titles to get more deals.


----------



## bag-mania

They are talking to Andrew Morton now? Since when has he been speaking on their behalf? He must be working on a book about them.

Royal biographer Andrew Morton claimed that, if coronavirus restrictions allow, they would like to return to Britain for the Queen’s 95th birthday on April 21, the Duke of Edinburgh’s 100th birthday in June and the unveiling of a statue of Princess Diana on July 1, on what would have been her 60th birthday.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> We need our titles to get more deals.



Come on, QE.  Give that extension request a hard no!
Keep going forward in the Karma bus! Never back up, luv, never surrender.
 
Just drop the pedal and goooo, go, come on now, go. We’re going ridin in the Karma bus. Oh no, we can't stop now
 So, jump right in, ain’t no sin.
We got lots of time.  We can't quit 'til we get to the other side,  We’re going ridin in the Karma bus. Oh no, we can't stop now
City traffic's movin' way too slow
Drop the pedal and go, go come on now, go
We're going riding in the Karma bus
Oh no, we can't stop now
We're going riding in the Karma bus
[Really feel like I am damning myself with this parody. My sincerest apologies to the Queen of Soul, the one and only Aretha Franklin]


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just in case you’ve misplaced this lil recipe for your New Year’s Eve  tipple.  Simply said, to make spiced almond milk, we need 1 quart of almond milk and some bourbon   Top level genius right there, dear ones.









						How to make Meghan Markle’s favourite festive cocktail
					

Duchess revealed the recipe for her favourite Christmas drink in an interview




					www.independent.co.uk
				



_Here’s how to make the cocktail, as per the duchess’ instructions:
*Ingredients:*_

_4 cups of unsweetened almond milk. You can make your own by blending raw almonds with milk and then straining the mixture._
_1 tsp of cinnamon._
_1 tsp of cardamom._
_1 tsp of powdered ginger._
_1/2 tsp of clove._
_Six to eight dried dates that have been soaked in water._
_Bourbon._
_Cinnamon sticks for garnish._


----------



## bag-mania

What Morton is claiming sounds like BS. They’ve already made it clear they have no intention of going back and becoming working royals again. Maybe they are trying to work the angle that they can use their big Netflix and Spotify contracts to do more good for the family than by merely visiting their little patronages. Funny how they just couldn’t make it to England for their court date and it had to be moved until next fall but they supposedly want to come back three times before that for other events.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> What Morton is claiming sounds like BS. They’ve already made it clear they have no intention of going back and becoming working royals again. Maybe they are trying to work the angle that they can use their big Netflix and Spotify contracts to do more good for the family than by merely visiting their little patronages. Funny how they just couldn’t make it to England for their court date and it had to be moved until next fall but they supposedly want to come back three times before that for other events.



These narcissists miss the pap walks with the fancy clothes, the screaming fans, the chauffeurs, the security, and the $$$$.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> These narcissists miss the pap walks with the fancy clothes, the screaming fans, the chauffeurs, the security, and the $$$$.



She _might_ allow him to go back next summer for the Diana tribute. She won’t go herself though. Assuming Covid is under control by then, she will be too busy trying to insinuate herself into the world of Hollywood’s elite.


----------



## gracekelly

I am just confused and color me go smacked!  Why should they need an extension when they have signed multimillion dollar deals?  Don’t they have the financial success that they hoped for?  Don't they have their forever home where they can raise their son?  Why the need to extend the evaluation?  Unless...unless...oh no....please don’t tell me...none of this is true!  There are no multimillions in the bank, they don’t  own the mansion with 16 bathrooms, the chicken in the pot isn’t vegan, and that wasn’t really Archie in the Christmas card painting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does this mean paps? Photos? But but but their privacy? What about their privacy? 
Can they monetise the photos?  Will the photos be posted on social media? 
Will people [gasp] critique the photos? the clothes that Charles will need to buy?



Oh, I see - 3 visits strategically lined up throughout the year.  Yeah, the tax man cometh. How clevr of them to stagger the visits. How long before we are told they have diplomatic immunity. Hmmmm. I see you H&M.

Seriously, I really do not want to be subjected to sweaty arm pits, messy hair, wrinkly & stained shirts, overpriced cars, surly glances at W&K, ad nauseam. The pandemic has changed everything. Be gone, H&M.


----------



## Stansy

Three intercontinental flights in one year? That‘s a huge carbon footprint. Just sayin‘ ...


----------



## Chagall

So if someone is a POC they cannot be criticized in and way. It is impossible for them to do any wrong? Seems to me that that in itself is one of the worst forms of racisism!


----------



## needlv

On Instagram - William and Kate subtly throwing shade at H&M - check out the line about “Merry Christmas”.  Wasn’t that written on H&M’s Christmas card???


----------



## Chanbal

There are several comments on the '12-month extension' DM article, but the ones below summarize how the UK and the rest of the world feel about them.


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> The hats are cute and the idea behind Make Give Live seems cool, but they still need to donate a lot more hats to match Piers's gift.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan loses £15,000 on quiz show... but donates cash to charity
> 
> 
> The Good Morning Britain host, 55, appeared on the celebrity Boxing Day special of the hit show alongside his longtime rival Jeremy Clarkson.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I thought 100 hats was such a small donation.  They are so much less generous than almost every other celebrity.


----------



## marietouchet

Regarding JCMH coming to town for events next year ... QEII bday in April, Trooping the Color, Philip bday, Diana Garden

QEII has two Bdays - she was born in April but the June Trooping the Color is her officially celebrated bday, better weather in the summer.

Read somewhere that QEII has canceled her April bday in 2021 and will only celebrate the one in Jun 2021.  That made sense to me in light of COVID. Charles, William et al will not be expected to join her bubble in April ...

Philip's bday is 10 Jun

The garden will open in July 

So, JCMH can go to all FOUR events  ONE trip... ca Jun - Jul 2021 ... not as much family time as you might think


----------



## Chanbal

lulilu said:


> I thought 100 hats was such a small donation.  They are so much less generous than almost every other celebrity.


Of course it is a very small donation (likely a tiny fraction of what they pay/month to Sunshine Sachs and to other PR agencies). Though, a donation of 100 hats generates more publicity than a cash donation of $500-$1,000.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Of course it is a very small donation (likely a tiny fraction of what they pay/month to Sunshine Sachs and to other PR agencies). Though, a donation of 100 hats generates more publicity than a cash donation of $500-$1,000.


This is true but quite frankly, anyone with more than a couple of brain cells would know that while nice because it shines a light on a worthy cause, a 100 hat donation is tiny, especially in relation to a lifestyle that includes living in a multimillion dollar mansion etc. IMO it makes them look stingy as well as even more desperate for 'favorable' publicity.  They are very predictable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Archie Beanie is $49.00.  








						Cocobear
					

This cute little hat always has been one of our bestsellers for a reason, even before Archie wore it!  ❤️ Hand crafted with love in the softest 100% Merino wool. It’s warm, cosy, stylish and will keep those little ears toasty all winter long. Perfect as a gift or treat you own little one to a...



					makegivelive.co.nz
				



_For every hat that we sell we donate another one to someone in need in New Zealand._

Archie Beanie is $49.00.  [49 x 100 = ??? maybe H&M thought we could not multiply?]


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Archie Beanie is $49.00.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cocobear
> 
> 
> This cute little hat always has been one of our bestsellers for a reason, even before Archie wore it!  ❤️ Hand crafted with love in the softest 100% Merino wool. It’s warm, cosy, stylish and will keep those little ears toasty all winter long. Perfect as a gift or treat you own little one to a...
> 
> 
> 
> makegivelive.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _For every hat that we sell we donate another one to someone in need in New Zealand._
> 
> Archie Beanie is $49.00.  [49 x 100 = ??? maybe H&M thought we could not multiply?]



Seriously? 

Actual cost to produce per hat? Around $2.99. 2 for one $5 max (one to buyer, one to charity). Leaving $44 profit.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Actual cost to produce per hat? Around $2.99. 2 for one $5 max (one to buyer, one to charity). Leaving $44 profit.



I would guess it’s a little more than that if they are actually made in New Zealand and not China. But your point is still true, there’s a good bit of profit there. Then again I don’t know how long a business model based on “buy one, donate one Pom-Pom beanies for babies” will last. They might be lucky to get a few years out of it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Archie Beanie is $49.00.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cocobear
> 
> 
> This cute little hat always has been one of our bestsellers for a reason, even before Archie wore it!  ❤️ Hand crafted with love in the softest 100% Merino wool. It’s warm, cosy, stylish and will keep those little ears toasty all winter long. Perfect as a gift or treat you own little one to a...
> 
> 
> 
> makegivelive.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*For every hat that we sell we donate another one to someone in need in New Zealand.*_
> 
> Archie Beanie is $49.00.  [49 x 100 = ??? maybe H&M thought we could not multiply?]


The purchase of hats in bulk is likely a lot cheaper. Also, to donate 100 hats, one only needs to buy 50... 
50 X 10 (max)=500 dollars


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Actual cost to produce per hat? Around $2.99. 2 for one $5 max (one to buyer, one to charity). Leaving $44 profit.


And how much did Archie's quaint cottage playhouse cost? Something like double the hats?


----------



## Chanbal

kemilia said:


> And how much did Archie's quaint cottage playhouse cost? Something like double the hats?


Some of the cottages are really cute, and if they can afford to but one for their son, why not?



What is shocking to me is paying very costly PR agencies to promote their phony image... It's all about them  and their multi-million dollar deals. The donation of hats was just another photo-op type activity imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *Harry and Meghan 'want a 12-month extension to Megixt deal that would see them keep their royal patronages beyond March 31 deadline' and could head back to the UK to seal it in person*
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want a 12-month extension to the Megxit deal that would see them keep their royal patronages and head back to the UK to seal the deal in person.
> 
> The couple, who stepped back as senior royals in January, are hoping to agree a more permanent deal to ensure they can continue to be non-working royals while keeping their patronages.
> 
> The move comes as the couple secured commercial gigs with Netflix and Spotify in recent months - a factor which will be looked over meticulously by royal aides as their 12-month review date looms.
> 
> The Sun on Sunday reports that the couples lucrative £100m Netflix and £30m Spotify deals will be assessed to make sure they are in-keeping with 'the values of Her Majesty'.
> 
> As part of the negotiations, they will speak to senior royals on video call ahead of Prince Harry, who may be joined by wife Meghan, returning to the UK to speak face-to-face with aides and family.
> 
> It has been claimed the couple would like to return in time for the Queen's 95th and Duke of Edinburgh's 100th birthdays.
> 
> Morton also claims that Harry regretted the way in which they announced they were stepping down from their role - sharing the news on social media - but that he does not regret his overall decision.
> 
> However, sources last night described the latest Megxit extension reports as ‘rubbish’.
> 
> One said: ‘This review period was inserted in case Harry and Meghan wished to return as working royal, but they have made it clear they want to live an independent life.’
> 
> We need our titles to get more deals.


Now *WAIT A DOGGONE* minute .. based on the Tom Sykes missive https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34238957 .. why would they want to have an extension .. since the BRF and British people treated them so, so horribly?!?!?  Oh yeah .. c'mon dullards, like anyone with *a LOT more brain-cells than these two wouldn't know why!!!! *


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I would guess it’s a little more than that if they are actually made in New Zealand and not China. But your point is still true, there’s a good bit of profit there. Then again I don’t know how long a business model based on “buy one, donate one Pom-Pom beanies for babies” will last. They might be lucky to get a few years out of it.



The term 'woollen' or 'knit' doesn't denote wool but I am pleased to see they 100% NZ wool. 

Clare Conza says Make Give Live gives one hat to charity er every hat sold. So what does does Meg- 'elbow-in'-han,  'no show without Punch' Harry or or Archie-do-well got to do with anything? Coz Archie wore one in a photo, or H&M bought 100 in the sale for Christmas (2 for 1 = 100) ? 









						Madison Sale
					

How cool is your little monkey? Definitely cool enough to get away with wearing this gorgeous little number. Madison is an uber funky, super slouchy, cosy beanie that will keep your little one toasty warm all winter long. This fabulous hat is handmade with love in 100% NZ wool and will...




					makegivelive.co.nz
				




Seriously, I like hats but most kids in need, need more than a wooly hat, especially in their (NZ) Summer.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Now *WAIT A DOGGONE* minute .. based on the Tom Sykes missive https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34238957 .. why would they want to have an extension .. since the BRF and British people treated them so, so horribly?!?!?  Oh yeah .. c'mon dullards, like anyone with *a LOT more brain-cells than these two wouldn't know why!!!! *


Hmmmm they issued another manifesto a year ago... demanding all sorts of stuff .. this seems like another list of demands ... 

They want to keep their charity patronages (why ? UK charities , not US ? Whatever happened to their role for Commonwealth  ? ). Surely they want the financial stipend to continue for a year and to keep title, but that is not mentioned 
In return, they offer a trip to the UK


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> And how much did Archie's quaint cottage playhouse cost? Something like double the hats?



I don't begrudge Archie all his toys TBH. He has enough on his plate with these two as parents.

TMI: My mother was very charitable. She'd round-up gifted toys for birthdays, leaving me with one and taking the rest down to the children's hospital. Another time my sister and I had to 'share' a giant Goldilocks teddy bear because Auntie B and Uncle D had given us one each - so one was straight down to the local E&R.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmmm they issued another manifesto a year ago... demanding all sorts of stuff .. this seems like another list of demands ...
> 
> They want to keep their charity patronages (why ? UK charities , not US ? Whatever happened to their role for Commonwealth  ? ). Surely they want the financial stipend to continue for a year and to keep title, but that is not mentioned
> In return, they offer a trip to the UK



Hats to the Commonwealth, dire shortage of hats


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Some of the cottages are really cute, and if they can afford to but one for their son, why not?
> View attachment 4939160
> 
> 
> What is shocking to me is paying very costly PR agencies to promote their phony image... It's all about them  and their multi-million dollar deals. The donation of hats was just another photo-op type activity imo.



Paying their PR will come out of expenses or company tax. I wouldn't be surprised if the play cottage was a gift.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Hmmmm they issued another manifesto a year ago... demanding all sorts of stuff .. this seems like another list of demands ...
> 
> *They want to keep their charity patronages* (why ? UK charities , not US ? Whatever happened to their role for Commonwealth  ? ). Surely they want the financial stipend to continue for a year and to keep title, but that is not mentioned
> In return, they offer a trip to the UK


See .. honestly (_and this coming from a US citizen_), *why would ANY of the UK charities even want their patronage anymore*?  After everything they have done, if it was me? .. I would say "no thank you"!  I get that a visit would likely be funded by either the patronage or the British people, but again .. who wants that now?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ok, DM says they bought 100 hats. Did they pay the $49 posted on the website or did they get a discount?  Every single thing they do and announce requires enormous scrutiny, investigating and verifying. They twist words in order to obfuscate their meaning.

*They purchased 100 hats from Make Give Live in one-year-old son Archie's name*
*Works on a buy one, give one model so 200 hats can be given to families in need*









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle donate to New Zealand social enterprise
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who spent Christmas in their new home in the Santa Barbara neighbourhood of Montecito with their son Archie, one, bought 100 hats from Make Give Live.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




RE: extension  — Since we cannot take anything they say at face value, they must have a hidden agenda with the extension ‘request’. I am guessing a tax benefit.

RE: Archie toys — of course, they will lavish the kid with expensive toys and travel. That is the idea of royalty. But. They will show us videos of him in inexpensive clothing so they can continue the pretense of frugality.  There is the issue with H&M.  They pretend their privilege and entitlement do not exist. 

ETA:  MGL overwhelmed in Jan, 2020 - https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/...-orders-after-archie-wears-their-hat#comments
_A person involved with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's tour to New Zealand last year approached Make Give Live for a hat to gift to the royal couple while the Duchess of Sussex was pregnant with Archie. _


----------



## gracekelly

You folks are tough customers!  It takes a lot to make you happy. How do you all expect a donation to exceed $500 when they have such ginormous PR bills to pay?! They have priorities, people!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are royal patronage’s worth it?








						As Prince Andrew's 200 charities seek a new patron should they find a replacement royal?
					

Having a royal lend their name in patronage to a charity may have some benefits but it can also have its drawbacks.




					theconversation.com


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Merry or Happy Christmas is what we say in the UK. It's the traditional way.
> To us Holiday means vacation to Americans so Happy Holidays makes no sense.


the happy holidays started in order not to offend people who may be of a different faith.  a lot of people are unhappy with the "happy holidays".  I do both - merry christmas or happy holidays, esp with strangers.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Meghan Markle inserting herself with Kim Kardashian is reminiscent of Kim Kardashian inserting herself with Beyonce circa 2012. She’s learned well.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4937185


I know these people are influencers but does that mean their followers will pay too much for coffee?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> the happy holidays started in order not to offend people who may be of a different faith.  a lot of people are unhappy with the "happy holidays".  I do both - merry christmas or happy holidays, esp with strangers.



I can say happy holidays without having my feelings hurt if that's what the other person prefers, I just find it utterly silly to be offended by warm wishes just because it's the wrong holiday. I've been invited, gifted food and wished well for e.g. Muslim holidays (I'm catholic), Buddhist holidays or Persian New Year's and I found it very kind instead of going "Uh, not my festive occasion". People generally don't want to convert you, they just want to share the love.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> The term 'woollen' or 'knit' doesn't denote Seriously, I like hats but most kids in need, need more than a wooly hat, especially in their (NZ) Summer.



I thought maybe it got really cold there but that may not be true. I know little about New Zealand so I looked up to see what their temperatures are like in winter. It can get very cold in the very far southern mountainous regions, but it looks like most of the country where populations exist have  temperate weather year round. Maybe we have an NZ member here who could confirm that? 

It seems like the hat company is using the Bombas business model. They donate a pair of socks to a shelter for every pair they sell. (The socks are overpriced but it makes people feel good about themselves when they buy them.) That model makes more sense to me because you can understand homeless people really needing socks. A cute wool hat with pom-poms does not seem like a critical need.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can say happy holidays without having my feelings hurt if that's what the other person prefers, I just find it utterly silly to be offended by warm wishes just because it's the wrong holiday. I've been invited, gifted food and wished well for e.g. Muslim holidays (I'm catholic), Buddhist holidays or Persian New Year's and I found it very kind instead of going "Uh, not my festive occasion". People generally don't want to convert you, they just want to share the love.



That’s the way I feel about it too. If someone wishes me a “happy” or “merry” anything I return the good wishes.

Life is too damn short to be uptight.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can say happy holidays without having my feelings hurt if that's what the other person prefers, I just find it utterly silly to be offended by warm wishes just because it's the wrong holiday. I've been invited, gifted food and wished well for e.g. Muslim holidays (I'm catholic), Buddhist holidays or Persian New Year's and I found it very kind instead of going "Uh, not my festive occasion". People generally don't want to convert you, they just want to share the love.


*THIS .. 100+++ times!!!*  Same here, when living/working in Washington DC, working with people from so many different cultures, religions, etc. - I was always interested in the differences (_I was raised Roman Catholic - but I'm agnostic_), and I think because of that, they always invited me to their various celebratory occasions and I cherished that!  Sadly, and especially in certain parts of the US, there is such xenophobia that they simply do not want to know anything about something that is different .. and to me, that is really sad because the lack of knowledge is what oftentimes incites hatred because they simply don't understand.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I know these people are influencers but does that mean their followers will pay too much for coffee?


IMO .. if they do, they are pretty darn STUPID!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is an A list actress?
> This list includes the top female actors who have had starring roles in the last few years, both in film and TV (like Homeland star / Emmy award winner Claire Danes) and should give you a good idea of the top 100 actresses who are in the business these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Actresses Working Today
> 
> 
> Here is the place to rank the best actresses working today. This list includes many of the greatest actresses in film history, but more importantly, focuses on modern female movie stars and TV actresses. Today, Hollywood features a new crop of popular and respected young actresses who command...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ranker.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quora covers this topic, too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What determines whether a celebrity is on the the A-List, B-List, C-List or D-List?
> 
> 
> Answer (1 of 14): In addition to the criteria already mentioned, I also pose that someone's social relevance is a big factor. Some of this has to do with the aforementined financial success and marketability, but it also has to do with how necessary they are to the public.  For example, Lisa Lamp...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.quora.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


I've never seen Suits so I can't say whether Meghan qualified as D list....thinking maybe @CeeJay is right - she was Z list.  but since she landed the prize prince she does have the name and face recognition of an A-lister - just not the talent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I've never seen Suits so I can't say whether Meghan qualified as D list....thinking maybe @CeeJay is right - she was Z list.  but since she landed the prize prince she does have the name and face recognition of an A-lister - just not the talent.



I think we don't give her enough credit. She fooled a whole nation plus the most famous family of the world, if only for a bit, that does take some level of acting skills.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can say happy holidays without having my feelings hurt if that's what the other person prefers, I just find it utterly silly to be offended by warm wishes just because it's the wrong holiday. I've been invited, gifted food and wished well for e.g. Muslim holidays (I'm catholic), Buddhist holidays or Persian New Year's and I found it very kind instead of going "Uh, not my festive occasion". People generally don't want to convert you, they just want to share the love.



We are given strict, STRICT instructions to say Happy Holidays because we have multi-faiths and many internationals. So every year I officially write Happy Holidays, and all my multi-faith peeps write Merry Christmas and Happy New Year in return


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think we don't give her enough credit. She fooled a whole nation plus the most famous family of the world, if only for a bit, that does take some level of acting skills.



Diana did that at Balmoral when she took the RF's famous 'test' pretending she was a born country girl who liked nothing more than hunting, fishing, getting cold and muddy. Once married she turned 180.

The RF would do everything not to let JCMH drown. However, the RF has to think about their own survival and what H&M seem to be hell-bent on doing with every stunt and post is embarrassing the BRF, trying as hard as possible to make them look old-fashioned, uptight, and rude. The people of the UK absolutely hate both of them atm.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I've never seen Suits so I can't say whether Meghan qualified as D list....thinking maybe @CeeJay is right - she was Z list.  but since she landed the prize prince she does have the name and face recognition of an A-lister - just not the talent.



She does not and did not qualify as a A-lister because she does not and did not meet the criteria. Never starred in multiple movies or tv series. She had small roles with minimal lines.  Politicians, athletes, and even criminals have name and face recognition.

Look back at this thread when she and Harry started seeing each other. She did not fool everyone, only those who wanted to believe in the fairy tale. I doubt she fooled QE and Philip. My guess is Charles was just happy H had chosen a female. I think the credit goes to Markus Anderson.

RE: happy holidays — interesting historical info








						The War of Words behind ‘Happy Holidays’
					

Seasonal greetings have never been so controversial.




					www.history.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> We are given strict, STRICT instructions to say Happy Holidays because we have multi-faiths and many internationals. So every year I officially write Happy Holidays, and all my multi-faith peeps write Merry Christmas and Happy New Year in return


I have a multi-faith team and I always say "have a great festival season" and they always come back to say Merry/Happy Christmas to me on Christmas day, including Muslim, Hindu, Sikh as well as Christian colleges. And I am not even religious (my SO is from a Catholic family)! Nobody gets offended! "Happy Holidays" is not a big thing in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Diana did that at Balmoral when she took the RF's famous 'test' pretending she was a born country girl who liked nothing more than hunting, fishing, getting cold and muddy. Once married she turned 180.



Can't blame her haha. I am a country girl through and through as in I'd rather live in the middle of nowhere than in a city, I've been horseriding since my pre-teens, but I'd never kill anything and can do without splattering around in the dirt.



> The RF would do everything not to let JCMH drown.



And I kind of understand that. Have I said before they completely spoiled him into the manchild he is now and that they should show a firm hand? Absolutely, but he's their close family member and I would do the same I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is Charles was just happy H had chosen a female.



OMG


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF did let Andrew drown, several times. They let H falter several times, too.  I agree that if the BRF feels protocol is not followed or that the monarchy is threatened, they would let the errant family member go, gently but most assuredly gone, albeit with plenty of money.  As the spare, H may have accepted that long ago, but MM certainly wasn’t aware of it.  Her stans did not and continue not to understand how monarchy works.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> As the spare, H may have accepted that long ago, but MM certainly wasn’t aware of it.  Her stans did not and continue not to understand how monarchy works.



I do think Morton was right when he stated she wasn't aware of what she was getting into, but in a completely different way than he meant it. This is not poor victim Megs who was crushed by the evil machinery that's the BRF. She knew exactly what would be expected of her. I think where her imagination failed her is that in true narcisstic manner she couldn't quite grasp that she would not be able to manipulate them they way she thought she could and do however she pleased, and I feel she still hasn't fully understood that her perceived position of power is due to one thing: her royal hostage, oops sorry, HUSBAND.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> We are given strict, STRICT instructions to say Happy Holidays because we have multi-faiths and many internationals. So every year I officially write Happy Holidays, and all my multi-faith peeps write Merry Christmas and Happy New Year in return


Like you, when working in Washington DC, we had to go through "cultural training" .. and as such, similar to you, we were told to use "Happy Holidays" as opposed to the "Merry Christmas".


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think Morton was right when he stated she wasn't aware of what she was getting into, but in a completely different way than he meant it. This is not poor victim Megs who was crushed by the evil machinery that's the BRF. She knew exactly what would be expected of her. I think where her imagination failed her is that in true narcisstic manner she couldn't quite grasp that she would not be able to manipulate them they way she thought she could and do however she pleased, and I feel she still hasn't fully understood that her perceived position of power is due to one thing: her royal hostage, oops sorry, HUSBAND.


I completely agree.  100%.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think Morton was right when he stated she wasn't aware of what she was getting into, but in a completely different way than he meant it. This is not poor victim Megs who was crushed by the evil machinery that's the BRF. She knew exactly what would be expected of her. I think where her imagination failed her is that in true narcisstic manner she couldn't quite grasp that she would not be able to manipulate them they way she thought she could and do however she pleased, and I feel she still hasn't fully understood that her perceived position of power is due to one thing: her royal hostage, oops sorry, HUSBAND.



100% this.
Some stans really believed she would become the Queen of England, that H was next in line to be King, etc.  Surely she knew that would never happen. Surely her all-knowing, wise mother knew that would never happen. Surely Oprah, her father, etc. knew.

ETA: oh, the lies the “powers - that - be“ want us commoners to believe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

The hat donation is weird. My SO couldn't care less about H&M and he always gives them the benefit of the doubt when I tell him PR stories of H&M's. I told him about the 100-hat donation. He was like "what?" He thinks it's quite pathetic to release to the press that you donated that much (little) to a charity.


----------



## Canturi lover

TALK OF THE TOWN: Meghan Markle 'plans to pen her first novel'


https://mol.im/a/9089383


----------



## kipp

Canturi lover said:


> TALK OF THE TOWN: Meghan Markle 'plans to pen her first novel'
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9089383


Good grief!
I can see it now---a Netflix series along with Spotify podcasts about writing a novel.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Canturi lover said:


> TALK OF THE TOWN: Meghan Markle 'plans to pen her first novel'
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9089383


I saw this on Twitter! Didn't she already write a book called Finding _Freebies_???


----------



## chicinthecity777

More word salad galore! Yummy!


----------



## Annawakes

Like she’s really going to write it herself.  It will be ghost written, or, more likely, plagiarized.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hate that she will get a big book deal, while somebody who has been working at writing their whole life can’t.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think we don't give her enough credit. She fooled a whole nation plus the most famous family of the world, if only for a bit, that does take some level of acting skills.


I beg to differ as there are enough photos to prove that MM didn't or couldn't fool HM.


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny - this is how stories get started, (they seek copyright protection for their foundation ... )


Help ! Jcmh needs protection from their foundation


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Diana did that at Balmoral when she took the RF's famous 'test' pretending she was a born country girl who liked nothing more than hunting, fishing, getting cold and muddy. Once married she turned 180.



I can understand that. I remember when I was young feigning interest in a boyfriend’s hobbies! To a young mind it’s a way to fit in and share something that was important to the person you like. Of course, if the other person doesn’t reciprocate and show interest in what you like it can fall apart quickly. You get tired of making the effort when it is never returned.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> *Harry and Meghan 'want a 12-month extension to Megixt deal that would see them keep their royal patronages beyond March 31 deadline' and could head back to the UK to seal it in person*
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle want a 12-month extension to the Megxit deal that would see them keep their royal patronages and head back to the UK to seal the deal in person.
> 
> The couple, who stepped back as senior royals in January, are hoping to agree a more permanent deal to ensure they can continue to be non-working royals while keeping their patronages.
> 
> The move comes as the couple secured commercial gigs with Netflix and Spotify in recent months - a factor which will be looked over meticulously by royal aides as their 12-month review date looms.
> 
> The Sun on Sunday reports that the couples lucrative £100m Netflix and £30m Spotify deals will be assessed to make sure they are in-keeping with 'the values of Her Majesty'.
> 
> As part of the negotiations, they will speak to senior royals on video call ahead of Prince Harry, who may be joined by wife Meghan, returning to the UK to speak face-to-face with aides and family.
> 
> It has been claimed the couple would like to return in time for the Queen's 95th and Duke of Edinburgh's 100th birthdays.
> 
> Morton also claims that Harry regretted the way in which they announced they were stepping down from their role - sharing the news on social media - but that he does not regret his overall decision.
> 
> However, sources last night described the latest Megxit extension reports as ‘rubbish’.
> 
> One said: ‘This review period was inserted in case Harry and Meghan wished to return as working royal, but they have made it clear they want to live an independent life.’
> 
> We need our titles to get more deals.


This is an outrage. The BRF better see right through this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Too funny - this is how stories get started, (they seek copyright protection for their foundation ... )
> Help ! Jcmh needs protection from their foundation



They may well end up with violations themselves. This kind of stuff is never as simple as it seems. If it were, we’d all do it.  Hope they have a lawyer to preview their poddies. 









						Podcast Copyright 101
					

Don’t be fooled by the “don’t worry, you own your content” lingo some vendors like to tout.




					blog.simplecast.com


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can say happy holidays without having my feelings hurt if that's what the other person prefers, I just find it utterly silly to be offended by warm wishes just because it's the wrong holiday. I've been invited, gifted food and wished well for e.g. Muslim holidays (I'm catholic), Buddhist holidays or Persian New Year's and I found it very kind instead of going "Uh, not my festive occasion". People generally don't want to convert you, they just want to share the love.


Same here.  People are so easily offended.  I hope they're all being asked if "they're okay" after being hugely offended by the "Merry Christmas" wish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wishing us all a better 2021.  We have been strengthened, saddened and humbled by the year that was. As Dave Barry says, something unforeseen could happen such that we need to extend the year by a month, perhaps called Pandember.  

We are so close to ending this nightmare. Let’s kick its cranky a$$ outta here!  Celebrate and ring in the good! [masked, socially distanced, hand sanitized, of course].


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Too funny - this is how stories get started, (they seek copyright protection for their foundation ... )
> 
> 
> Help ! Jcmh needs protection from their foundation
> 
> View attachment 4939415



At this point, their 'entertainment empire' is theoretical, a bit like their talent, work-ethic, generosity, authenticity, wokeness, innovation, creativity and intelligence. 

I'm amazed that 'gender equality' will be considered as her title only exists through his/him. A Duchess is also below a Duke, a (non-royal) Princess below a (born) Prince . Looking forward to J.C.M.H's renunciation of his dukedom, princely status and HRH as a way of levelling the playing field.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> They may well end up with violations themselves. This kind of stuff is never as simple as it seems. If it were, we’d all do it.  Hope they have a lawyer to preview their poddies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Podcast Copyright 101
> 
> 
> Don’t be fooled by the “don’t worry, you own your content” lingo some vendors like to tout.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blog.simplecast.com



This is from one of the most well-know plagiarisers of all time.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> At this point, their 'entertainment empire' is theoretical, a bit like their talent, work-ethic, generosity, authenticity, wokeness, innovation, creativity and intelligence.
> 
> I'm amazed that 'gender equality' will be considered as her title only exists through his/him*. A Duchess is also below a Duke*, a (non-royal) Princess below a (born) Prince . Looking forward to J.C.M.H's renunciation of his dukedom, princely status and HRH as a way of levelling the playing field.


That is one of the things that Meghan expected Harry could just fix for her - precedence.

Early videos show that he lets her go first, eg holds the door American style while MM blasts through.  Heck, even *Doria got to go before Harry at the Grenfell Tower cookbook event.*

But, court events are choreographed and there is an immutable order. Letting one's mother in law go first is sweet, but there are lots of people who EARN their honors (the Queen's lists twice a year), typically later in life. Having Doria or Meghan go first does not send the right message when QEII is trying to reward the service of some.

Meghan never handled the who-goes-first thing well. There was the whole pout thing at West Abbey - green dress - when she was not part of the procession. Either you buy in to the ceremony and protocol or you dont, but, you cant have it both ways.

Gender inequality ... 
Hmmm that is also part of the titles system, you buy it  or you dont


----------



## viciel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think we don't give her enough credit. She fooled a whole nation plus the most famous family of the world, if only for a bit, that does take some level of acting skills.


I'm not sure if it's her acting skills that convinced the firm - rather that they saw it coming but couldn't stop the train given how dumb and what a cry baby Harry was/is/going to be - clearly he hadn't learned anything from any of his lessons as a royal and managed to be self-centered 'til the end. I mean it's not like she's the first person who thinks they're grand enough to change the map, so they just took it in stride. But of course, when you give a mouse a cookie.... and Sparkle's no exception. Sparkle's short-sighted, the firm is always playing the long game.


----------



## viciel

marietouchet said:


> Too funny - this is how stories get started, (they seek copyright protection for their foundation ... )
> 
> 
> Help ! Jcmh needs protection from their foundation
> 
> View attachment 4939415


O M G, has anyone actually heard her speak? heard him speak? Who would want to listen to those two?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Early videos show that he lets her go first, eg holds the door American style while MM blasts through.  Heck, even *Doria got to go before Harry at the Grenfell Tower cookbook event. *




Oh, some of the the very earliest videos - I think Charles' party right after the wedding, but could be that I'm mixing up outfits in my memory - shows him wanting to step out and her chasing after him and touching his back to make him step aside so she could go first. That was one of many WTF moments for me.


----------



## sdkitty

viciel said:


> I'm not sure if it's her acting skills that convinced the firm - rather that they saw it coming but couldn't stop the train given how dumb and what a cry baby Harry was/is/going to be - clearly he hadn't learned anything from any of his lessons as a royal and managed to be self-centered 'til the end. I mean it's not like she's the first person who thinks they're grand enough to change the map, so they just took it in stride. But of course, when you give a mouse a cookie.... and Sparkle's no exception. Sparkle's short-sighted, the firm is always playing the long game.


I think they may or may not have thought she was good for Harry.  But they weren't going to stand in his way.  The queen learned a lesson when the people didn't like her reaction to Diana's death.  She couldn't afford to have a tantrum from Harry.
I'll bet Phillip wasn't thrilled with the choice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Meghan never handled the who-goes-first thing well. There was the whole pout thing at West Abbey - green dress - when she was not part of the procession. Either you buy in to the ceremony and protocol or you dont, but, you cant have it both ways.



Remember when they had an event with Wills and pregnant Kate? Meghan was supposed to speak last (I wonder why that was...maybe because she was both lowest in rank AND the most junior family member?) and was overheard throwing a fit and spouting "Don't I have a voice?" What exactly makes that woman think she is the most important person in the room wherever she goes and has to always come first? It is not an insult to simply wait for your freaking turn.


----------



## Annawakes

She was already crying victim when she pouted and said “Don’t I have a voice?”


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Remember when they had an event with Wills and pregnant Kate? Meghan was supposed to speak last (I wonder why that was...maybe because she was both lowest in rank AND the most junior family member?) and was overheard throwing a fit and spouting "Don't I have a voice?" What exactly makes that woman think she is the most important person in the room wherever she goes and has to always come first? It is not an insult to simply wait for your freaking turn.


and esp being new to that Very Prominent family - what an ego


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Remember when they had an event with Wills and pregnant Kate? Meghan was supposed to speak last (I wonder why that was...maybe because she was both lowest in rank AND the most junior family member?) and was overheard throwing a fit and spouting "Don't I have a voice?" What exactly makes that woman think she is the most important person in the room wherever she goes and has to always come first? It is not an insult to simply wait for your freaking turn.


Yes, and this was before they got married!


----------



## lulilu

[QUOTE="bag-mania, post: 34240665, member: 49675"
It seems like the hat company is using the Bombas business model. They donate a pair of socks to a shelter for every pair they sell. (The socks are overpriced but it makes people feel good about themselves when they buy them.) That model makes more sense to me because you can understand homeless people really needing socks. A cute wool hat with pom-poms does not seem like a critical need.
[/QUOTE]

Toms shoes did this long ago as well.  As a loyal Bombas customer, while I like their donation policy and am well aware I am paying a high price for it, their customer service and quality are outstanding.  Makes the price well worth it.  

I think the hat publicity is so obnoxious because the amount donated pales in comparison to the charity of many people -- people who don't publicize their donations.  And is a transparent publicity ploy, for themselves and not the company.


----------



## Chanbal

Smart man!

*Prince Philip 'doesn't want a fuss' made of his 100th birthday next year and will have 'nothing to do with any celebration', palace aide claims*
Insiders have now revealed they are expecting a 'short shrift' as they prepare the planning for celebrations of the Duke's 100th birthday on June 10.

They said the subject of planning would 'have to be raised' in the New Year, adding: 'The one person you can guarantee will not want anything to do with it, is the Duke.'

Insiders added that, depending on the coronavirus restrictions, the Royal Family might choose to celebrate privately in some way.

No Party, MM don't come!


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> [QUOTE="bag-mania, post: 34240665, member: 49675"
> It seems like the hat company is using the Bombas business model. They donate a pair of socks to a shelter for every pair they sell. (The socks are overpriced but it makes people feel good about themselves when they buy them.) That model makes more sense to me because you can understand homeless people really needing socks. A cute wool hat with pom-poms does not seem like a critical need.



Toms shoes did this long ago as well.  As a loyal Bombas customer, while I like their donation policy and am well aware I am paying a high price for it, their customer service and quality are outstanding.  Makes the price well worth it. 

I think the hat publicity is so obnoxious because the amount donated pales in comparison to the charity of many people -- people who don't publicize their donations.  And is a transparent publicity ploy, for themselves and not the company.
[/QUOTE]
they are just obnoxious all the way around


----------



## CarryOn2020

One Look Is Worth a Thousand Words











						Meghan asked ‘Don’t I have a voice?’ at event with Kate & Wills, report claims
					

MEGHAN Markle ‘icily’ asked ‘don’t I have a voice’ while at an event with Prince William and Kate Middleton, it’s been claimed.  The mum-of-one reportedly muttered under her breath while atten…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That muttering under her breath seems to be her thing...she's been filmed countless times talking to herself. She IS a weird one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> One Look Is Worth a Thousand Words
> 
> View attachment 4939887
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan asked ‘Don’t I have a voice?’ at event with Kate & Wills, report claims
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle ‘icily’ asked ‘don’t I have a voice’ while at an event with Prince William and Kate Middleton, it’s been claimed.  The mum-of-one reportedly muttered under her breath while atten…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


She is a *narcissist SUPREME* who simply thinks she is the *MOST IMPORTANT PERSON AROUND*!  Sadly, no one ever really got it into her head at an early age that she is not so great, and I think (_my opinion_) to a certain degree, the narcissism was somewhat inherited.  Now that the two of them are "on their own", she's simply not going to shut the F up unless she has to (_lawsuit_), and if that happened, you better believe that one of her minions (Obie-one-Sca-doobie) would put some BS in the media about how victimized she is.  Sadly (_and I wish this was not true_), I think she is going to continue to drib-drab the media continuously for some time .. UGGH!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I was just listening to a podcast where Kate Sommerville was interviewed. They asked about MM and she said she was very sweet and she used to go to her salon all the time, but as soon as she got engaged to the prince they never saw her again.  It kind of seemed like she was leaving something unsaid.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> I was just listening to a podcast where Kate Sommerville was interviewed. They asked about MM and she said she was very sweet and she used to go to her salon all the time, but as soon as she got engaged to the prince they never saw her again.  It kind of seemed like she was leaving something unsaid.


Oh, another '*markled*' person .. quelle surprise .. *NOT*!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> She is a *narcissist SUPREME* who simply thinks she is the *MOST IMPORTANT PERSON AROUND*!  Sadly, no one ever really got it into her head at an early age that she is not so great, and I think (_my opinion_) to a certain degree, the narcissism was somewhat inherited.  Now that the two of them are "on their own", she's simply not going to shut the F up unless she has to (_lawsuit_), and if that happened, you better believe that one of her minions (Obie-one-Sca-doobie) would put some BS in the media about how victimized she is.  Sadly (_and I wish this was not true_), I think she is going to continue to drib-drab the media continuously for some time .. UGGH!


I think (and again - I don't know her) she is probably a person who will never be satisfied....just too full of herself and too ambitious (not in a good way).  most of the world thought she was in such a good place at the time of the wedding - then she (and H) were not happy.  I don't buy it that the whole reason was the wicked media.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Oh, another '*markled*' person .. quelle surprise .. *NOT*!



I mean, not that I want to state anything that could be interpreted as being on Meghan's side, but at the time of her engagement she was already living in the UK, so I don't see how she could possibly have frequented a LA salon (that said, how did she frequent it while filming Suits...wasn't she so rarely in LA she had to get divorced? *zips lips*)


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, not that I want to state anything that could be interpreted as being on Meghan's side, but at the time of her engagement she was already living in the UK, so I don't see how she could possibly have frequented a LA salon (that said, how did she frequent it while filming Suits...wasn't she so rarely in LA she had to get divorced? *zips lips*)


You are absolutely right, it's unlikely that she would have flown down to LA just for a hair appointment!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I stopped my  subscription to VF...


I don't like VF as much with the new editor but I think it still has  interesting articles.  I was reading one about AOC that I found interesting.  Now if you hate her you probably wouldn't like it as it was pretty positive about her but still for me, I'm not a big fan and I liked it.  There is still a lot more to read in there than in something like People or In Style


----------



## lanasyogamama

Kate Sommerville’s salon is for skin treatments, not hair.  But you’re right, she definitely sounded ghosted.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Good, bad or ugly, the more opinions , the merrier. H&M are perfectly flawed human beings [just like all of us].  Nothing special or different about them. Sometimes they do good things , sometimes not so much. It’s all on the table for discussion. 

Have only read the headline — wonder if we will hear more from them this week 








						Two Palace aides who lost jobs in March are back on Sussexes' payroll
					

EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have boosted their rapidly expanding stable of staff by rehiring two palace aides who lost their jobs when the royal couple left the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Good, bad or ugly, the more opinions , the merrier. H&M are perfectly flawed human beings [just like all of us].  Nothing special or different about them. Sometimes they do good things , sometimes not so much. It’s all on the table for discussion.
> 
> Have only read the headline — wonder if we will hear more from them this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two Palace aides who lost jobs in March are back on Sussexes' payroll
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have boosted their rapidly expanding stable of staff by rehiring two palace aides who lost their jobs when the royal couple left the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Now, it can be revealed, they have employed ex-palace staff Clara Loughran and Beth Herlihy on a freelance basis to work on charity projects in the UK. ...Their appointment is in addition to the couple’s UK PR chief, James Holt."

"With a string of new employees in the US as well, including a head of communications, a press secretary and a chief of staff, industry experts say the bill for their couple’s team so far could easily top £1million a year."

It looks like that in addition to the US, they want to fundraise in the UK. Their UK PR chief will be working hard to improve their images there. They want more multi-million dollar/pound deals...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> "Now, it can be revealed, they have employed ex-palace staff Clara Loughran and Beth Herlihy on a freelance basis to work on charity projects in the UK. ...Their appointment is in addition to the couple’s UK PR chief, James Holt."
> 
> "With a string of new employees in the US as well, including a head of communications, a press secretary and a chief of staff, industry experts say the bill for their couple’s team so far could easily top £1million a year."
> 
> It looks like that in addition to the US, they want to fundraise in the UK. Their UK PR chief will be working hard to improve their images there. They want more multi-million dollar/pound deals...


well aren't they important


----------



## CarryOn2020

“A string of new employees”

So, is this the 3rd or 4th wave of ‘new’ employees?  
How many “PR chiefs” do they need?   Guessing some bad news is on the horizon.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> “A string of new employees”
> 
> So, is this the 3rd or 4th wave of ‘new’ employees?
> How many “PR chiefs” do they need?   Guessing some bad news is on the horizon.


don't you get it?  these people are on the level of Michelle and Barak


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well aren't they important


Very important. Seeing MM&H making all these millions of dollars so fast is making me dizzy. I wonder if "the higher they rise, the harder they fall" will apply to them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Very important. Seeing MM&H making all these millions of dollars so fast is making me dizzy. I wonder if "the higher they rise, the harder they fall" will apply to them.



Yes, absolutely, it does! You know who is driving that Karma bus. Sure, it may take awhile and it may be a wild ride, but just hold on. Perhaps this is some kind of ‘battle’ between Oprah and the BRF and H&M are just pawns in the game. Time will tell. Nevertheless, they continue to squander $$$$.  Taxes will be interesting.

ETA: has Gayle gone quiet on them? Thought she was one of their champions, but haven’t heard anything since ... can’t remember.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> “A string of new employees”
> 
> So, is this the 3rd or 4th wave of ‘new’ employees?
> How many “PR chiefs” do they need?   Guessing some bad news is on the horizon.


Yes, and I feel sorry for our UK members. I hope QE & Will do the right thing before MM&H do more damage to the monarchy. 



sdkitty said:


> don't you get it?  these people are on the level of Michelle and Barak


I think they are trying to achieve Bezos's level.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you missed these: 

- Just wait until 2020 turns 21 & starts drinking
- I don’t need to know the entire plot for 2021. I just need to know if I should buy sweatpants and skincare or purses and shoes.



After the year H&M have had, I’d recommend lots of smudging and praying. 
[Smudging is a way to energetically cleanse a space to invite positive energy.]


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed these:
> 
> - Just wait until 2020 turns 21 & starts drinking
> - I don’t need to know the entire plot for 2021. I just need to know if I should buy sweatpants and skincare or purses and shoes.
> View attachment 4940124
> 
> 
> After the year H&M have had, I’d recommend lots of smudging and praying.
> [Smudging is a way to energetically cleanse a space to invite positive energy.]



I want to be done with this pandemic, and I don't want to buy more sweatpants.


----------



## bag-mania

“couple's hiring spree”

 I think we must assume from this that they came into a windfall of cash from somewhere. Whether Netflix fronted a substantial sum or Charles did, the cash is really flowing right now.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> “couple's hiring spree”
> 
> I think we must assume from this that they came into a windfall of cash from somewhere. Whether Netflix fronted a substantial sum or Charles did, the cash is really flowing right now.


Archwhatever probably got a big cash donation. I believe they are hiring through their foundation.


----------



## csshopper

Wish we could turn a faucet handle and turn the dripping off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are we certain these ‘employees’ get real dollars?  These are people who were ‘let go’ earlier this year, the pandemic has made for a very tight job market, so is this just another PR move to prop up the grifters?  Makes them look flush with cash, as if they are serious movers and shakers.  I’m not really buying it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> “couple's hiring spree”
> 
> I think we must assume from this that they came into a windfall of cash from somewhere. Whether Netflix fronted a substantial sum or Charles did, the cash is really flowing right now.


how fortunate for her that the guy she fell in love with just happened to be a prince.....and now they are apparently monetizing that


----------



## gracekelly

Two Palace aides who lost jobs in March are back on Sussexes' payroll
					

EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have boosted their rapidly expanding stable of staff by rehiring two palace aides who lost their jobs when the royal couple left the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




From the article:


Recently they formed Herlihy Loughran, which describes itself as an ‘advisory partnership’ that links ‘influential people’ and organisations to good causes.

Harry and Meghan are among their first clients, sources confirmed. They have been employed in addition to their existing UK PR chief Mr Holt, pictured inset.

I am going to translate this.  These two women have created a little business for themselves.  They advise people where to donate their money.  The Harkles aren't paying them a centime. The Herlihy Loughan company will use the Harkles as their poster children to entice other people to utilize their services.  Now I have no idea how these two women are going to be paid by their clients. I suspect it is a finder's fee from the charity as opposed to their charging their clients for the introduction.  In effect, they are wranglers who gather up people with money and determine which charity  is the best fit for them and their interests.    So if I love dogs, they will place me with a dog charity.  You get the picture.  Of course you are going to ask yourself why you need to go to a third party.  Well, if you want to be patted on the back in a big way and get lots of publicity from the charity with regards to your generous donation, you have the third party negotiate your deal.  Sounds cold?  Welcome to the real world.   So about those little hats that Archie donated to the kids in New Zealand.....I'd say the Harkles got their money's worth for a measly $500 donation.


----------



## Jayne1

Do they have anything to show for all the hard work and money they are getting?


----------



## bag-mania

Harry and Meghan leaving the royal family was the first thing on the list in USAToday’s “Things we forgot happened in 2020.” 



			Redirect Notice


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan leaving the royal family was the first thing on the list in USAToday’s “Things we forgot happened in 2020.”
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice



Could they be the ones that jinxed 2020 for all of us ???? 
They need lots of smudging!

ETA:  should we take a poll to find out how many agree H&M jinxed 2020?  If 80% say yes, will that bring in some positivity?


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan leaving the royal family was the first thing on the list in USAToday’s “Things we forgot happened in 2020.”
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


Surely, surely this was said tongue in cheek!  (Hard eye roll)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How could anyone forget anything about them seeing they won't shut up for even a hot minute.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> don't you get it?  these people are on the level of Michelle and Barak



I know what B&M do. I know what their training was for, professions, credentials, their earned appointments, and what they do. 

But what is that H&M do? He was born and and she got married. Besides playing Monopoly with others' money and put the 'World to right' yacking away from their $14M mountain perch like spoilt teenagers hyped-up on organic Bancha tea, wacky-backy and Oreos what is it that they DO?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> I know what B&M do. I know what their training was for, professions, credentials, their earned appointments, and what they do.
> 
> But what is that H&M do? He was born and and she got married. Besides playing Monopoly with others' money and put the 'World to right' yacking away from their $14M mountain perch like spoilt teenagers hyped-up on organic Bancha tea, wacky-backy and Oreos what is it that they DO?


Don’t forget they ooze entitlement from every pore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> But what is that H&M do? He was born and and she got married.



Bwahaha...this is the perfect summary.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Good, bad or ugly, the more opinions , the merrier. H&M are perfectly flawed human beings [just like all of us].  Nothing special or different about them. Sometimes they do good things , sometimes not so much. It’s all on the table for discussion.
> 
> Have only read the headline — wonder if we will hear more from them this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two Palace aides who lost jobs in March are back on Sussexes' payroll
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have boosted their rapidly expanding stable of staff by rehiring two palace aides who lost their jobs when the royal couple left the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The UK charity timing coincides with new Megxit negotiations ...  I know, I know these ladies are supposed to work on UK charities ... but remember JCMH wants to keep their UK charities as part of MEGXIT MACH 2

Why sudden interest in UK charities after a year ? JCMH may need the prestige of the royal charities as part of Netflix/Spotify deals - their halos have been much tarnished this year plus it helps justify the stipend from Charles


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Archwhatever probably got a big cash donation. I believe they are hiring through their foundation.


The two rehires are consultants only not full time employees, cheaper


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I know what B&M do. I know what their training was for, professions, credentials, their earned appointments, and what they do.
> 
> But what is that H&M do? He was born and and she got married. Besides playing Monopoly with others' money and put the 'World to right' yacking away from their $14M mountain perch like spoilt teenagers hyped-up on organic Bancha tea, wacky-backy and Oreos what is it that they DO?


Reminds me of a funny story from the book Barbarians at the Gates, about the US tobacco industry mergers and acquisitions
One of the major tobacco companies owned General Foods, makers of Oreos, during a negotiation the tobacco CEO is trying to justify the huge sale numbers of Oreos & valuation of General Foods in the portfolio
His line is "Oreos are just an excuse to print money"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Very important. Seeing MM&H making all these millions of dollars so fast is making me dizzy. I wonder if "the higher they rise, the harder they fall" will apply to them.


Here's to hoping!
(I never wished ill on anyone, but I swear, these two make my blood boil!)


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Wish we could turn a faucet handle and turn the dripping off.


Where's a plumber when you need one!!?


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Do they have anything to show for all the hard work and money they are getting?


Rhetorical question?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could they be the ones that jinxed 2020 for all of us ????
> They need lots of smudging!
> *
> ETA:  should we take a poll to find out how many agree H&M jinxed 2020?*  If 80% say yes, will that bring in some positivity?



*NOOOOO*!!!  That'll only make the next headline claim they're the most popular couple on tPF!!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I know what B&M do. I know what their training was for, professions, credentials, their earned appointments, and what they do.
> 
> But what is that H&M do? He was born and and she got married. Besides playing Monopoly with others' money and put the 'World to right' yacking away from their $14M mountain perch like spoilt teenagers hyped-up on organic Bancha tea, wacky-backy and Oreos what is it that they DO?


you know I was being sarcastic, right?


----------



## Chanbal

From the preachers MM&H's new church, not to be missed: 
'Money Love always wins'  

*Archie's first podcast! Meghan and Harry feature their one-year-old son in first Spotify podcast and coax him into wishing listeners a happy new year - as they begin '£30m' franchise by interviewing Elton John, James Corden and quoting Martin Luther King*

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle today released their first Spotify podcast, which ends with their son Archie giggling as he wishes listeners a 'Happy New Year' before his parents declare: 'Love always wins'.

The Sussexes also called on famous friends including Sir Elton John, Tyler Perry, Brené Brown, Deepak Chopra, Stacey Abrams and James Corden to reflect on 2020 in the Archewell Audio debut show.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's first podcast as part of the £30million ($40million) deal with the streaming giant is a 'holiday special' that ends with their 19-month-old son Archie giggling at the end as he wishes people a 'fun' 2021.  

Meghan also quotes her idol Martin Luther King as she tells listeners that: 'Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that'. And in an apparent nod to the stormy 2020 the couple have had after quitting as frontline royals and moving to LA via Vancouver, the Duchess says: 'I'll say no matter what life throws at you guys, trust us when we say, love wins.'

Experts have called the couple's Spotify tie-up as another big step towards building what experts believe could become a $1billion business empire in the US after a super-deal with Netflix to make documentaries about their pet projects.

Harry and Meghan began their show by paying tribute to healthcare and frontline workers for their 'sacrifices' and remembered those who have lived through 'uncertainty and unthinkable loss' during the coronavirus pandemic.

It's a long text, more here


----------



## bag-mania

Oh my! We've got so much to look forward to next year. They will continue to keep us busy.

Where do we begin? The pretension? The self-aggrandizing? The celebrity guest of the week? It's a veritable candy store of choices.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sure members here will provide a lot better info, but until then, here it is from DM:


----------



## TC1

^^ this reads like a SNL sketch


----------



## bag-mania

Did they finish it by sitting in a circle, holding hands, and singing "kumbaya?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> ^^ this reads like a SNL sketch


you're right


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oh my! We've got so much to look forward to next year. They will continue to keep us busy.
> 
> Where do we begin? The pretension? The self-aggrandizing? The celebrity guest of the week? It's a veritable candy store of choices.
> 
> View attachment 4940637


By inviting big names like Elton John, they will assure an audience. With so many Americans who have lost their jobs because of covid, it feels almost criminal the way these two make so much money in such a short period of time.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> By inviting big names like Elton John, they will assure an audience. With so many Americans who have lost their jobs because of covid, it feels almost criminal the way these two make so much money in such a short period of time.


Stacy Abrams?  I'll bet Meghan never thought growing up that having a WOC as her mother would pay off so big


----------



## zinacef

TC1 said:


> ^^ this reads like a SNL sketch


Now , I can’t get the classic SNL  sketch on NPR Delicious Dish ”Sweddy Balls” with Anna Gasteyer and Molly Shannon out of my head..  One of my favorite years of SNL. I want that generation to do this Spotify sketch.  Crowd source anyone?  Sponsored by the Tpf  group!


----------



## zinacef

zinacef said:


> Now , I can’t get the classic SNL  sketch on NPR Delicious Dish ”Sweddy Balls” with Anna Gasteyer and Molly Shannon out of my head..  One of my favorite years of SNL. I want that generation to do this Spotify sketch.  Crowd source anyone?  Sponsored by the Tpf  group!


sorry!  Any millions earned will Not go to them,  we are not paying them, it’s for our meet up planned for when COVID is over ,  wouldn’t it be so much fun?  and of course for the lawyers We have to pay as they do have a pretty active legal dept in Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

zinacef said:


> Now , I can’t get the classic SNL  sketch on NPR Delicious Dish ”Sweddy Balls” with Anna Gasteyer and Molly Shannon out of my head..  One of my favorite years of SNL. I want that generation to do this Spotify sketch.  Crowd source anyone?  Sponsored by the Tpf  group!



I thought of that sketch when I read the transcript too, to the point where I said "Good times" in my head!


----------



## Jayne1

It's just another podcast.  Everyone seems to have one.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> By inviting big names like Elton John, they will assure an audience. With so many Americans who have lost their jobs because of covid, it feels almost criminal the way these two make so much money in such a short period of time.



I don't know about that. When was the last time an Elton John interview drew lots of audience? There was a fairly successful movie about him recently but even that didn't cause a super spike in interest in him. Their podcast will get lots of media coverage for the first few episodes, then it will gradually trickle away.


----------



## zinacef

bag-mania said:


> I thought of that sketch when I read the transcript too, to the point where I said "Good times" in my head!


” Good times” to you, too!


----------



## Chloe302225

I think my eyes just dropped out of my head from rolling them so hard.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't know about that. When was the last time an Elton John interview drew lots of audience? There was a fairly successful movie about him recently but even that didn't cause a super spike in interest in him. Their podcast will get lots of media coverage for the first few episodes, then it will gradually trickle away.


wonder who is their target audience?  women 18-35?  don't think they would necessarily be fans of Elton.  Liberals?  dont' think they have anything real to contribute to the conversation on current events or politics.  guess we'll see


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder who is their target audience?  women 18-35?  don't think they would necessarily be fans of Elton.  Liberals?  dont' think they have anything real to contribute to the conversation on current events or politics.  guess we'll see



They are attempting to create a business successful enough to pay for their elitist lifestyle based solely on good intentions. That wouldn't be a possibility for most people but they live in la-la land where people like what they like and believe what they are told.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are attempting to create a business successful enough to pay for their elitist lifestyle based solely on good intentions. That wouldn't be a possibility for most people but they live in la-la land where people like what they like and believe what they are told.


they may live in la la land but I'm pretty sure spotify will be able to measure their success.....I don't do podcasts but wonder who is going to go out of their way to listen to these two


----------



## rose60610

Of course H&M have only famous people in their podcasts. They themselves are known only because of the BRF, so it makes sense to rif off others' fame too. It's the only strategy they know. Identity politics, victimhood, how hard some wealthy and famous people got it (boo hoo hoo). How much echo chamber pathetic blather can anyone take?


----------



## Sharont2305

I've just listened to the end of it to hear Archie say Happy New Year. Cute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennalovesbags

I listen to a lot podcasts of all sorts. There are a few I listen to of this style, and I generally only listen if I like the guest. I sort of don't care who the host is.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I don't know about that. When was the last time an Elton John interview drew lots of audience? There was a fairly successful movie about him recently but even that didn't cause a super spike in interest in him. Their podcast will get lots of media coverage for the first few episodes, then it will gradually trickle away.


I can't speak for others but EJ definitely would not draw any interest from me or anybody I know. He's pretty much out of UK media apart from the occasional association with H&M recently. I can't imagine what people would be interested in hearing about talks between these people. 

I would be very surprised if many UK charities would want to be associated with H&M. There is a real danger that being associated with them could have adverse impact on the donation levels!


----------



## jennalovesbags

Sharont2305 said:


> I've just listened to the end of it to hear Archie say Happy New Year. Cute.


He's (apparently) growing up in America, and it's going to be so disorienting to me that he won't sound English.


----------



## Annawakes

How much you wanna bet they trot Archie out at the end of “every” podcast to say something cute?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I love podcasts, and use Spotify to listen to them, but I am very deliberately not going to download this one.


----------



## csshopper

drip, drip ,drip


----------



## chicinthecity777

Annawakes said:


> How much you wanna bet they trot Archie out at the end of “every” podcast to say something cute?


So they did find a way to monetise Archie!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I've just listened to the end of it to hear Archie say Happy New Year. Cute.



I'm sure it sounds cute, young children's voices are always cute imo. I have no intention of listening to MM&H, I don't want to give them more clicks.



bag-mania said:


> They are attempting to create a business successful enough to pay for their elitist lifestyle based solely on good intentions. That wouldn't be a possibility for most people but they live in la-la land where people like what they like and believe what they are told.



Many people in Los Angeles are suffering from covid, lost their businesses, and are going through a very tough time. They are not aware of what MM&H are doing. Charities need money and not their names associated to them. It makes me sick when people take advantage of others.


----------



## chicinthecity777

All kids are cute, all kids' voices are cute. I have zero special interest in Archie.


----------



## rose60610

We don't need parasitic hypocrites to tell us that the pandemic is hard on people. And most people didn't go through a year in where they got almost 200 million in entertainment contracts and bought a mansion with 19 bathrooms. Or bought an $8,000 "cottage" playhouse. And yet M&H think we could benefit by listening to their inane comments? I'd like to see just one person with guts to ask them where they think they'd be if not for the BRF. If their idea of a hero is somebody who travels via private jet, has several homes and entertains for a living, or somebody who demands we feel guilty about ourselves, they're delusional. I'm happy for people who've made a lot of money, especially self made people. I'm DONE with people who play the victim card. Plenty of people bust their a$$es off at jobs they hate hoping to cover the monthly bills, make sacrifices, care for vulnerable family members and really have lives they could complain about. But they don't. I'm also done with people who feel sorry for Meghan just because she said the Media were mean to her. Oh effing boo hoo. Most of the Media worship them. Others get drawn and quartered in the press and nobody comes to their rescue.  Sorry Dearie, your victim card has been revoked. It takes an impressive level of self-pity to complain right after marrying into the BRF with all the trappings and luxuries handed to her on a silver platter.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they may live in la la land but I'm pretty sure spotify will be able to measure their success.....I don't do podcasts but wonder who is going to go out of their way to listen to these two



Every member of the media who wants to write about them will listen. The fans who believe their PR hype will listen, at least to start. Even people who want to make fun of them will listen for awhile. I expect their first few months to get good numbers due to the sheer novelty of it.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> We don't need parasitic hypocrites to tell us that the pandemic is hard on people. And most people didn't go through a year in where they got almost 200 million in entertainment contracts and bought a mansion with 19 bathrooms. *Or bought an $8,000 "cottage" playhouse. *And yet M&H think we could benefit by listening to their inane comments? I'd like to see just one person with guts to ask them where they think they'd be if not for the BRF. If their idea of a hero is somebody who travels via private jet, has several homes and entertains for a living, or somebody who demands we feel guilty about ourselves, they're delusional. I'm happy for people who've made a lot of money, especially self made people. I'm DONE with people who play the victim card. Plenty of people bust their a$$es off at jobs they hate hoping to cover the monthly bills, make sacrifices, care for vulnerable family members and really have lives they could complain about. But they don't. I'm also done with people who feel sorry for Meghan just because she said the Media were mean to her. Oh effing boo hoo. Most of the Media worship them. Others get drawn and quartered in the press and nobody comes to their rescue.  Sorry Dearie, your victim card has been revoked. It takes an impressive level of self-pity to complain right after marrying into the BRF with all the trappings and luxuries handed to her on a silver platter.



To be fair, and I resent being fair to them, the "children's cottage" came with the property when they bought it. I remember it being on the long list of amenities. I don't know why it is being described as if it was new for the Christmas card.


----------



## Lodpah

I listen to podcasts, Vlogs, etc., for intelligent conversation not junior high level conversations and to people with knowledge and interesting topics.

What Rose6061 said is on point.

I feel they are mocking people now with their actions and in your face showing off their wealth. They truly are despicable and vile and I don’t think their “endeavors” will last.Pride comes before a fall and their pride and lust for money and fame is on full display. The only reason they are in the media all the time is because their millions of PR paid people shove them in front.

When a 600 dollar stimulus is being expected by so many just to survive it kinda brings into perspective how utterly evil their intentions are and their lack of empathy for real people.

I really hope the Queen cuts them off. They want that extension because they need the cachet of the BRF.


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> ^^ this reads like a SNL sketch


I swear, as I read that, I was thinking I'd rather watch the SNL Schwety Balls skit a million times than listen to their BS!


----------



## bellecate

It really irks me when people that don’t have a clue spout off offensive word salad drivel. In particular 
M- “And from us, I will say, no matter what life throws at you guys, trust us when we say, love wins.”
  H- “Love always wins.”
For so many millions love does not win. Loved ones die, go hungry, leave and these two entitled condescending clowns have shown they are not trustworthy. 
Rant done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

LOL, as I read this article, I obviously thought of what a fraud MM also is.  Apparently the writers also agreed:  









						It’s not just her name, Hilaria Baldwin’s entire life is a fake
					

How you say . . . scam artist? Hilaria Baldwin, the epically thirsty, self-identified Spanish wife of actor Alec, has been outed as a basic white woman from Massachusetts, real name Hillary Hayward…




					nypost.com
				




"As was her alleged other grift, using that great line — one reportedly deployed by Yoko Ono, Heather Mills *and Meghan Markle when they each met their world-famous husbands* — asking Alec,* “So what do you do?”*


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, as I read this article, I obviously thought of what a fraud MM also is.  Apparently the writers also agreed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s not just her name, Hilaria Baldwin’s entire life is a fake
> 
> 
> How you say . . . scam artist? Hilaria Baldwin, the epically thirsty, self-identified Spanish wife of actor Alec, has been outed as a basic white woman from Massachusetts, real name Hillary Hayward…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "As was her alleged other grift, using that great line — one reportedly deployed by Yoko Ono, Heather Mills *and Meghan Markle when they each met their world-famous husbands* — asking Alec,* “So what do you do?”*



Please put this in the Alec Baldwin thread too.  He has been having another of his famous temper tantrums and is calling people names on social media because they dared call her out. He is such an angry, scummy (albeit occasionally funny) man.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, as I read this article, I obviously thought of what a fraud MM also is.  Apparently the writers also agreed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s not just her name, Hilaria Baldwin’s entire life is a fake
> 
> 
> How you say . . . scam artist? Hilaria Baldwin, the epically thirsty, self-identified Spanish wife of actor Alec, has been outed as a basic white woman from Massachusetts, real name Hillary Hayward…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "As was her alleged other grift, using that great line — one reportedly deployed by Yoko Ono, Heather Mills *and Meghan Markle when they each met their world-famous husbands* — asking Alec,* “So what do you do?”*



I believe Maureen Callahan is the only journalist in the US that had courage to write about MM&H in a more realistic manner and this was over 4 months ago.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> From the preachers MM&H's new church, not to be missed:
> 'Money Love always wins'
> 
> *Archie's first podcast! Meghan and Harry feature their one-year-old son in first Spotify podcast and coax him into wishing listeners a happy new year - as they begin '£30m' franchise by interviewing Elton John, James Corden and quoting Martin Luther King*
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle today released their first Spotify podcast, which ends with their son Archie giggling as he wishes listeners a 'Happy New Year' before his parents declare: 'Love always wins'.
> 
> The Sussexes also called on famous friends including Sir Elton John, Tyler Perry, Brené Brown, Deepak Chopra, Stacey Abrams and James Corden to reflect on 2020 in the Archewell Audio debut show.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's first podcast as part of the £30million ($40million) deal with the streaming giant is a 'holiday special' that ends with their 19-month-old son Archie giggling at the end as he wishes people a 'fun' 2021.
> 
> Meghan also quotes her idol Martin Luther King as she tells listeners that: 'Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that'. And in an apparent nod to the stormy 2020 the couple have had after quitting as frontline royals and moving to LA via Vancouver, the Duchess says: 'I'll say no matter what life throws at you guys, trust us when we say, love wins.'
> 
> Experts have called the couple's Spotify tie-up as another big step towards building what experts believe could become a $1billion business empire in the US after a super-deal with Netflix to make documentaries about their pet projects.
> 
> Harry and Meghan began their show by paying tribute to healthcare and frontline workers for their 'sacrifices' and remembered those who have lived through 'uncertainty and unthinkable loss' during the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> It's a long text, more here



Knew it. Child labour and using their baby to carry favour. Colour me disgusted. 

As someone already said, 'just when you think they can't sink lower...'


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I don't know about that. When was the last time an Elton John interview drew lots of audience? There was a fairly successful movie about him recently but even that didn't cause a super spike in interest in him. Their podcast will get lots of media coverage for the first few episodes, then it will gradually trickle away.



True. Compared to the Bohemian Rhapsody, peanuts.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Please put this in the Alec Baldwin thread too.  He has been having another of his famous temper tantrums and is calling people names on social media because they dared call her out. He is such an angry, scummy (albeit occasionally funny) man.


I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> It really irks me when people that don’t have a clue spout off offensive word salad drivel. In particular
> M- *“And from us, I will say, no matter what life throws at you guys, trust us when we say, love wins.”*
> H- “Love always wins.”
> For so many millions love does not win. Loved ones die, go hungry, leave and these two entitled condescending clowns have shown they are not trustworthy.
> Rant done.


Is MM talking about the love for her father that supported her, perhaps at the expense of brother and sister...? The love for that uncle that helped her with an important internship, Trevity Trev Trev (or whatever she called her former spouse) who was very useful in her career... We saw how love won them seats at her wedding ceremony.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And all the 19-month year old children  everywhere groaned! 




Chanbal said:


> From the preachers MM&H's new church, not to be missed:
> 'Money Love always wins'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle today released their first Spotify podcast, which ends with their son Archie giggling as he wishes


----------



## TC1

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, as I read this article, I obviously thought of what a fraud MM also is.  Apparently the writers also agreed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s not just her name, Hilaria Baldwin’s entire life is a fake
> 
> 
> How you say . . . scam artist? Hilaria Baldwin, the epically thirsty, self-identified Spanish wife of actor Alec, has been outed as a basic white woman from Massachusetts, real name Hillary Hayward…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "As was her alleged other grift, using that great line — one reportedly deployed by Yoko Ono, Heather Mills *and Meghan Markle when they each met their world-famous husbands* — asking Alec,* “So what do you do?”*


I'm so in love with Hilary getting called out for this nonsense. E-Lah-ria my ass


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?



He had a thing for Selma Hayek. She rejected him, so Hillary redid herself [hello Hilaria] and went on the hunt.  In other words, he got played.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?



I met her and her husband. She seemed nice but her husband? He was rude.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I believe Maureen Callahan is the only journalist in the US that had courage to write about MM&H in a more realistic manner and this was over 4 months ago.
> 
> View attachment 4940844



That's such a good read.


----------



## bisbee

sdkitty said:


> I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?


I have never liked her...it is ridiculous that she posts pictures and videos of her 5 children CONSTANTLY...why does she think we want to see her children?  And she makes it look like she has no help...everything is done by her.  She is always up during the night with said children, while finding time often to pose in her underwear...so we can “see” how she does her exercises.  Why someone would put on a fake accent is beyond me...smacks of an emotional problem.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the NYPost article: 
_But her grift is pretty freaking great, proving what we all know about the evils of social media: The more people shove an ostensible truth down your throat, the more likely it’s a total lie._

Seems appropriate for H&M, so many lies.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I met her and her husband. She seemed nice but her husband? He was rude.


like him or not, he does have talent.....talent that is the kind that brings fame and $.  she is a yoga instructor.  nothing wrong with that but she is very thirsty from what little I know of her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bubablu

CarryOn2020 said:


> He had a thing for Selma Hayek. She rejected him, so Hillary redid herself [hello Hilaria] and went on the hunt.  In other words, he got played.


And good for her, she married Pinault!


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> And good for her, she married Pinault!


she is beautiful and has talent


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> like him or not, he does have talent.....talent that is the kind that brings fame and $.  she is a yoga instructor.  nothing wrong with that but she is very thirsty from what little I know of her


Oh, she's thirsty alright. I read the journalists' entire post on her IG (it's pinned in her highlights) she even posted the paid ad she did while at the hospital waiting for her D&C.


----------



## bubablu

sdkitty said:


> she is beautiful and has talent


I liked "Beatriz at dinner" a lot. Imagine Meghan there, lol.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> like him or not, he does have talent.....talent that is the kind that brings fame and $.  she is a yoga instructor.  nothing wrong with that but she is very thirsty from what little I know of her



I agree, he does have talent. His persona is based on anger and put-downs, though. IMO, people don’t want to see that level of verbal abuse anymore. Notice how Tom Cruise‘s tantrum did not go over well.  We all want a little kinder now. Rage issues seem entitled, spoiled. “Karen’s” are being sued. So, H&M’s ‘poor little me‘ routine does not work. No one can feel sorry for these privileged brats.  We all understand the grift. Definitely a down vote.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree, he does have talent. His persona is based on anger and put-downs, though. IMO, people don’t want to see that level of verbal abuse anymore. Notice how Tom Cruise‘s tantrum did not go over well.  We all want a little kinder now. Rage issues seem entitled, spoiled. “Karen’s” are being sued. So, H&M’s ‘poor little me‘ routine does not work. No one can feel sorry for these privileged brats.  We all understand the grift. Definitely a down vote.


I agree about H&M....as far as Alec goes, he is from Long Island like me so maybe I'm a bit more forgiving of his hard edges....the wife is too thirsty though


----------



## CarryOn2020

They are trying soooo hard to rehabilitate their image. 









						Prince Harry 'drops Queen's RP accent for Estuary English' in podcast
					

Harry and Meghan have entered 'a whole new world of branding as a double act' according to British behaviour expert Judi James, who likened them to TV pairing Holly and Phil.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Please put this in the Alec Baldwin thread too.  He has been having another of his famous temper tantrums and is calling people names on social media because they dared call her out. He is such an angry, scummy (albeit occasionally funny) man.


I love how people posting the truth are "trolls", and all Alec can respond to some of them is "F you".  Uh, ok.  Another "Woke" celebrity that can't handle their own truth.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisbee said:


> I have never liked her...it is ridiculous that she posts pictures and videos of her 5 children CONSTANTLY...why does she think we want to see her children?  And she makes it look like she has no help...everything is done by her.  She is always up during the night with said children, while finding time often to pose in her underwear...so we can “see” how she does her exercises.  Why someone would put on a fake accent is beyond me...smacks of an emotional problem.


I found her constant presence EVERYWHERE annoying.  Every damn miscarriage was used for publicity.  I felt like her posing in lingerie postpartum EVERY SINGLE TIME was almost shaming those of us not married to celebrities and without any actual help for not bouncing back into shape 2 days after delivery.  Now this?  She's pathetic.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Please put this in the Alec Baldwin thread too.  He has been having another of his famous temper tantrums and is calling people names on social media because they dared call her out. He is such an angry, scummy (albeit occasionally funny) man.


Done!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?



Alec has been dead to me ever since his daughter came out with that voicemail many years ago where he called her a rude little pig. Once I find out a celebrity is a horrible person in real life that’s all I see every time he appears.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just now heard the end of the poddy.
Sure, kids voices are cute. Sure, kids mimic their parents. All that is well and good,,,until they monetise it. Shameless and cheap. Notice W&K never stooped that low. In fact, no other royal that I know of has. The idea is to let the kid speak spontaneously, not just parrot the parents.  Ick.  Isn’t 19months old enough to put his own sentences together?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just now heard the end of the poddy.
> Sure, kids voices are cute. Sure, kids mimic their parents. All that is well and good,,,until they monetise it. Shameless and cheap. Notice W&K never stooped that low. In fact, no other royal that I know of has. The idea is to let the kid speak spontaneously, not just parrot the parents.  Ick.  Isn’t 19months old enough to put his own sentences together?


I refuse to take one for the team and ACTUALLY listen to the podcast ....
BUT it has been reported that Archie has an American accent ....


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> I refuse to take one for the team and ACTUALLY listen to the podcast ....
> BUT it has been reported that Archie has an American accent ....


makes sense I guess....doesn't matter a bit to me
He's cute I guess in a regular baby way....Will and Kate's little girl is adorable.  will see what this one looks like (and acts like) as he grows


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I refuse to take one for the team and ACTUALLY listen to the podcast ....
> BUT it has been reported that Archie has an American accent ....



The DM has the clip of the last few seconds. Too soon to identify an accent.  As for H, technology can do so much with voices, who knows if these are their authentic voices.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

The DM is on fire today!
_
'Someone pass the sick bucket!': Harry and Meghan turn stomachs with 'dull and preachy' new Archewell podcast as the couple declare 'love always wins!' and end the show by playing 'This Little Light of Mine' as their son Archie giggles_









						Harry and Meghan divide opinion with their new Archewell podcast
					

Meghan quotes her idol , the American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, as she tells the audience that: 'Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The DM is on fire today!
> 
> _'*Someone pass the sick bucket!': Harry and Meghan turn stomachs with 'dull and preachy' new Archewell podcast as the couple declare 'love always wins!' and end the show by playing 'This Little Light of Mine' as their son Archie giggles*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan divide opinion with their new Archewell podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan quotes her idol , the American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, as she tells the audience that: 'Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is a great article. I particularly liked this comment:

Simon Oakden tweeted: 'I hope others will join me in respecting the wishes of these people and decide not to invade their privacy by listening to it.'


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is a great article. I particularly liked this comment:
> 
> Simon Oakden tweeted: 'I hope others will join me in respecting the wishes of these people and decide not to invade their privacy by listening to it.'


LOL!  I think MM and JCMH need to realize that the only thing they are king and queen of is Hypocrisy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the NYPost article:
> _But her grift is pretty freaking great, proving what we all know about the evils of social media: The more people shove an ostensible truth down your throat, the more likely it’s a total lie._
> 
> Seems appropriate for H&M, so many lies.



You mean like "OMG we're so in love we can't keep our hands off each other even though we're no horny teenagers but nearing 40"?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is the DM throwing more shade — Lena Tindall is 2, she does not need coaching. Prince Louis did not need coaching when he talked to Attenborough.  Kids grow and change at their own rates, so comparisons are not fair. Still. Don’t hate me. Just saying, the kid had one line, 3 words.









						Adorable moment Mia and Lena Tindall crash dad Mike's rugby podcast
					

The England rugby star, 42, posed with his wife, 39, who is the Queen's eldest granddaughter, at their Gatcombe Estate home in Gloucester for a selfie which he shared to Instagram.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?



Are there any instances where "Hilaria" blamed racism toward herself on anything? After all, she purports to be a "WOC". Did Alec believe her or just go along with it? I don't put anything past him, either. Pretty pathetic when you co-opt other people's genuine struggles to put on an act. Did she think she could be another Sofia Vergara, promoting the bimbo image complete with six inch cleavage and profound stupidity--laughing all the way to the bank in our nice little oh-so-woke world? Did any of her life's friends wonder when and where she picked up an accent? Or did she ban them the way Meghan threw her own family under the bus--except for the one family member she finds useful? And Alec never wondered why anybody from her past was never in the picture? Better yet, did "Hilaria" ever sue anybody for "discrimination"? And now Alec is going after those who criticize his fraud wife? LOL. Precious. Just precious.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Check out the Alec Baldwin thread on the Celebrity Forum > Celebrity New and Gossip page.  It’s all covered there. Short answer to your questions - she was after $$$$, he went along it, her family went along it, they all benefitted from it. According to Alec, we are the ones with the problem. Sounds just like H&M, no?  They are right, we are wrong to criticize, we should bow down to their wisdom. Give them $$$$. 



rose60610 said:


> Are there any instances where "Hilaria" blamed racism toward herself on anything? After all, she purports to be a "WOC". Did Alec believe her or just go along with it? I don't put anything past him, either. Pretty pathetic when you co-opt other people's genuine struggles to put on an act. Did she think she could be another Sofia Vergara, promoting the bimbo image complete with six inch cleavage and profound stupidity--laughing all the way to the bank in our nice little oh-so-woke world? Did any of her life's friends wonder when and where she picked up an accent? Or did she ban them the way Meghan threw her own family under the bus--except for the one family member she finds useful? And Alec never wondered why anybody from her past was never in the picture? Better yet, did "Hilaria" ever sue anybody for "discrimination"? And now Alec is going after those who criticize his fraud wife? LOL. Precious. Just precious.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Are there any instances where "Hilaria" blamed racism toward herself on anything? After all, she purports to be a "WOC". Did Alec believe her or just go along with it? I don't put anything past him, either. Pretty pathetic when you co-opt other people's genuine struggles to put on an act. Did she think she could be another Sofia Vergara, promoting the bimbo image complete with six inch cleavage and profound stupidity--laughing all the way to the bank in our nice little oh-so-woke world? Did any of her life's friends wonder when and where she picked up an accent? Or did she ban them the way Meghan threw her own family under the bus--except for the one family member she finds useful? And Alec never wondered why anybody from her past was never in the picture? Better yet, did "Hilaria" ever sue anybody for "discrimination"? And now Alec is going after those who criticize his fraud wife? LOL. Precious. Just precious.


Spanish would not be a WOC.  They are European, not Latino.....as for the rest of it IDK - does she have large breasts like sofia?


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> I do like Alec on SNL....as for the wife, she strikes me as fame hungry.  what is the benefit of being Spanish?  she thought that was more exotic than plain ole American?



I had no idea this woman existed until last night and holy, her existence is so offensive. Judging by the comments defending her in news articles, I feel like this is a new norm. At least Rachel Dolezal dedicated her adult life to the AA community. This Hilaria chick is picking an “exotic but still safely” European heritage to seem more interesting than she really is, and sad that there are people ok with it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s a big story because Alec is known for his vicious attacks on regular people as well as his own daughter. He himself has indicated an interest in politics, thus the need for a ‘happy family’ image. Seems like it began with Amy Schumer, but I cannot explain the timing of this. Other than, it is our last full moon of a hellish year, a most auspicious time. There are, of course, parallels to the H&M story. The lies [she did not know anything about the RF] the merching, the shameless attacks on both families, etc.




bisousx said:


> I had no idea this woman existed until last night and holy, her existence is so offensive. Judging by the comments defending her in news articles, I feel like this is a new norm. At least Rachel Dolezal dedicated her adult life to the AA community. This Hilaria chick is picking an “exotic but still safely” European heritage to seem more interesting than she really is, and sad that there are people ok with it.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You mean like "OMG we're so in love we can't keep our hands off each other even though we're no horny teenagers but nearing 40"?


Oh, come on now!  They're "young parents" remember?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bag-mania said:


> Alec has been dead to me ever since his daughter came out with that voicemail many years ago where he called her a rude little pig. Once I find out a celebrity is a horrible person in real life that’s all I see every time he appears.





CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s a big story because Alec is known for his vicious attacks on regular people as well as his own daughter.



And now that daughter is defending her stepmother...yet another twist I did not have on my 2020 bingo card!


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> Spanish would not be a WOC.  They are European, not Latino.....as for the rest of it IDK - does she have large breasts like sofia?



 I thought the same, Spaniards are Caucasian European. However, People Magazine and many others consider Penelope Cruz a WOC also. And she's from Spain. Call me confused. I always thought the Kardashians were POC, but others don't. And certainly nobody ever went after the Kardashian critics out there while the K's are roasted day in and day out. Not to say their antics aren't brow raising or even real gross sometimes, but nobody ever seems to defend them. I think they're a little nuts, but I do find it noteworthy that they've never complained to my knowledge about all the negativity they get, but instead, consider themselves "blessed" as Kris K put it. When you put yourself out there for the fame and $, you get it from all angles. That comes with the territory. Meghan and Harry can't seem to understand why some people find them irritating or hypocritical. The Kardashian's appear gracious and classy (maybe "classy" isn't the word...) compared to M&H. The K's are able to laugh at themselves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spot on!  I was never a fan of the Kardashians, perhaps I owe them an apology. By golly, they have shown a certain amount of restraint and dignity [pains me to say it]  throughout their ordeals. They owned their behavior from the beginning. They were in it for the $$$ and freely admitted it. Others should take note. Charlatans are not welcome in the spotlight. 




rose60610 said:


> I thought the same, Spaniards are Caucasian European. However, People Magazine and many others consider Penelope Cruz a WOC also. And she's from Spain. Call me confused. I always thought the Kardashians were POC, but others don't. And certainly nobody ever went after the Kardashian critics out there while the K's are roasted day in and day out. Not to say their antics aren't brow raising or even real gross sometimes, but nobody ever seems to defend them. I think they're a little nuts, but I do find it noteworthy that they've never complained to my knowledge about all the negativity they get, but instead, consider themselves "blessed" as Kris K put it. When you put yourself out there for the fame and $, you get it from all angles. That comes with the territory. Meghan and Harry can't seem to understand why some people find them irritating or hypocritical. The Kardashian's appear gracious and classy (maybe "classy" isn't the word...) compared to M&H. The K's are able to laugh at themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I thought the same, Spaniards are Caucasian European. However, People Magazine and many others consider Penelope Cruz a WOC also. And she's from Spain. Call me confused. I always thought the Kardashians were POC, but others don't. And certainly nobody ever went after the Kardashian critics out there while the K's are roasted day in and day out. Not to say their antics aren't brow raising or even real gross sometimes, but nobody ever seems to defend them. I think they're a little nuts, but I do find it noteworthy that they've never complained to my knowledge about all the negativity they get, but instead, consider themselves "blessed" as Kris K put it. When you put yourself out there for the fame and $, you get it from all angles. That comes with the territory. Meghan and Harry can't seem to understand why some people find them irritating or hypocritical. The Kardashian's appear gracious and classy (maybe "classy" isn't the word...) compared to M&H. The K's are able to laugh at themselves.


I don't know how a national magazine could say a Spanish person is a POC.  That is just wrong.  As far as the Kardashians, the dad was Armenian so that would be middle eastern I think.  Mom is white, isn't she?  IDK if some people would consider Armenian people to be non-white.
But the difference between the Kardashians and the Markles, I think, is the K's know they are a social media family.  The M's think they are royalty - just w/o having to perform the royal duties.  No, I don't see Meghan laughing at herself    She is much too important.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how a national magazine could say a Spanish person is a POC.  That is just wrong.  As far as the Kardashians, the dad was Armenian so that would be middle eastern I think.  Mom is white, isn't she?  IDK if some people would consider Armenian people to be non-white.
> But the difference between the Kardashians and the Markles, I think, is the K's know they are a social media family.  The M's think they are royalty - just w/o having to perform the royal duties.  No, I don't see Meghan laughing at herself    She is much too important.



Much to the dismay of all people involved,  I feel like the defintions change quickly in order to suit a particular agenda. This is why the real issues get lost and forgotten. Actually, it’s an old strategy used to change conversations. So easy to lose focus of the facts in all the noise.

ETA - an aside. Applause and thanks to the TPF team for the fireworks display in the corner. Well done!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Much to the dismay of all people involved,  *I feel like the defintions change quickly in order to suit a particular agenda. This is why the real issues get lost and forgotten. *Actually, it’s an old strategy used to change conversations. So easy to lose focus of the facts in all the noise.
> 
> ETA - an aside. Applause and thanks to the TPF team for the fireworks display in the corner. Well done!


ITA.  I would think most people of Northern European descent are NOT "POC", but darker skinned ones now try to pass as if they are.  MM pretended to be white when it was convenient, and now plays up her black heritage when it's convenient.  She's both and she should own it.  I am a "POC", my husband is white.  My children are mixed, but look Caucasian and people don't believe they're my children.  I think technically they are considered to be POC even though they're as white as can be!  Then again, they don't go around spouting out about their racial background unless other people bring it up.


----------



## Annawakes

It’s just really pretentious of them to say “Trust Us, love always wins.”

Why do they think *anyone* would trust them???? I mean, do they really think people will hear that and say, _Gosh, it’s been hard, but I really trust the Markles.  So I’m going to keep my chin up and believe that love always wins_. _Because they said so. _ Really????? Do they really think people are that dumb?

I’m continually astounded.  And entertained.  And sorry for Archie, being trotted out for the clicks.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m posting this here cause the reporter says that it’s the celebrities or their PR people are the ones who actually send them info.









						The Instagram Detective Calling Out Hilaria Baldwin and Other Celebs
					

Tracie Egan Morrissey on how she pulled apart the dubious story of Alec Baldwin’s wife growing up in Spain.




					nymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I’m posting this here cause the reporter says that it’s the celebrities or their PR people are the ones who actually send them info.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Instagram Detective Calling Out Hilaria Baldwin and Other Celebs
> 
> 
> Tracie Egan Morrissey on how she pulled apart the dubious story of Alec Baldwin’s wife growing up in Spain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nymag.com



Excellent article. Thank you.
 Finally, “ the celebrity veil “ is being lifted.  Hwood has lied/misrepresented/deceived so many for so long. It is about time we enter a new decade with truth.  The ‘trust us’ line is usually code for scr$@ you [just google it]. Odd that H&M would use it. Baldwin’s ‘consider the source’ line has irony written all over it. Agree, shameful the _private_ couple are merching their kid.  I don’t recall which poster said it first, they were right - these two are about the $$$. At least, W&K do not need to hide behind a screen.


----------



## madamelizaking

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how a national magazine could say a Spanish person is a POC.  That is just wrong.  As far as the Kardashians, the dad was Armenian so that would be middle eastern I think.  Mom is white, isn't she?  IDK if some people would consider Armenian people to be non-white.
> But the difference between the Kardashians and the Markles, I think, is the K's know they are a social media family.  The M's think they are royalty - just w/o having to perform the royal duties.  No, I don't see Meghan laughing at herself    She is much too important.


Armenians are Caucasian as they’re literally from the Caucasus region. I’m half Armenian And half Lebanese, that’s the only reason why I know this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> At least, W&K do not need to hide behind a screen.



Also I think they've found a really good balance for their kids. They are aware they can't hide a future king from the world, but they've worked out a system that spares the children being haunted and having cameras shoved into their faces at every occasion. 

Plus, I still don't believe H & M are acting with Archie's best interest at heart. I can see Harry genuinely wanting to protect his little one, but for Meghan, this is all one big power trip that also generates attention.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I'm sure members here will provide a lot better info, but until then, here it is from DM:
> View attachment 4940639
> 
> View attachment 4940638
> 
> View attachment 4940635
> 
> View attachment 4940632
> View attachment 4940631
> 
> View attachment 4940630



I just cannot read this, I don't want to puke first thing in the morning......


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The DM is on fire today!
> 
> _'Someone pass the sick bucket!': Harry and Meghan turn stomachs with 'dull and preachy' new Archewell podcast as the couple declare 'love always wins!' and end the show by playing 'This Little Light of Mine' as their son Archie giggles_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan divide opinion with their new Archewell podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan quotes her idol , the American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, as she tells the audience that: 'Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I know which side of the divide I'm on


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> The DM is on fire today!
> 
> _'Someone pass the sick bucket!': Harry and Meghan turn stomachs with 'dull and preachy' new Archewell podcast as the couple declare 'love always wins!' and end the show by playing 'This Little Light of Mine' as their son Archie giggles_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan divide opinion with their new Archewell podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan quotes her idol , the American civil rights leader Martin Luther King, as she tells the audience that: 'Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



LOL, I hadn't read this before I posted the above


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, come on now!  They're "young parents" remember?



Kinda funny when you consider Megs pregnancy would have been medically classed as Geriatric


----------



## chicinthecity777

madamelizaking said:


> *Armenian’s are Caucasian* as they’re literally from the Caucasus region. I’m half Armenian And half Lebanese, that’s the only reason why I know this.


This!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sums it up!


----------



## zinacef

papertiger said:


> Kinda funny when you consider Megs pregnancy would have been medically classed as Geriatric


you are right, I was 30 when i had my second child and my diagnosis was advanced maternal age—- on the chart. I saw it and my friends who are nurses told me about it. Imagine that.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how a national magazine could say a Spanish person is a POC.  That is just wrong.  As far as the Kardashians, the dad was Armenian so that would be middle eastern I think.  Mom is white, isn't she?  IDK if some people would consider Armenian people to be non-white.
> But the difference between the Kardashians and the Markles, I think, is the K's know they are a social media family.  The M's think they are royalty - just w/o having to perform the royal duties.  No, I don't see Meghan laughing at herself    She is much too important.



It's complicated because the reality of POC would vary depending on the demography, not on geography of any given place, but the term itself is US-centric and has come to mean darker-skinned. Armenia is in the South Caucasian mountains, not in ME but in Asia.  Armenia was one of the first Christian nations. A lot of people from that region moved around to bordering countries in Europe/ME/Asia since the region often changed hands under empires/regimes that persecuted or constrained religion/ethnicities. 

The term Caucasian has come to mean White in the US and now beyond, but native Caucasians are from Asia and people from Asia could call themselves/be called POC in the West. Some Armenians have been roasted for even being mistaken for POC like (Rita Sahatçiu Ora) even though she never has described herself as such and comes from an immigrant family. I wonder how real Caucasians feel about having their ethnicity appropriated and eradicated at the same time? 

M has been ridiculed for describing herself in the past as Caucasian and now a POC, but then, since she is both, and since the terms are to do with self-determinism, heritage and identity, she has a right to.  'Passing' women have been despised by different communities, including in a sexist way when the ol' 'voodoo' or magic is ascribed and thought to be for playing on whichever 'race' brings advantage/acceptance. The pressure to have different features to those born with, particularly if denying an inherited 'type' associated with people less advantaged is also understandable, not that, that's exclusive to issues of race. 

We all wish M would like herself, and stop trying to play a political game that's most likely really a personal one. If you _accept_ you're a duchess, if you _expect_ to live in a palace (or 'palace') have a team of staff at your beck and call, you are privileged - you cannot also _constantly_ evoke pity and sympathy. You have deliberately shielded yourself in a golden cage, the very purist form of privilege (and some would say prison). Had M enjoyed the new life she married into or just 'given it a good go' I think this thread would be a very different thread. 

It's the hypocrisy of _both _H&M that stick in the throat. In a different age, we know they'd be tilting a quizzical head, perusing their latest manicure and coyly asking "let them eat cake" rather than emoting all over the place and trying so very desperately to prove one can live in a golden bubble, constantly demanding more gold to make the bars thicker and be on the path of holy wo/man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sums it up!




This. A 100 times. And if the kid doesn't get "enough" clicks, will M&H sue the tech company that provides the platform for their podcast or whatever media vehicle was used?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Kinda funny when you consider Megs pregnancy would have been medically classed as Geriatric



She hates when the subject of age comes up. Had she lived in Hollywood in the pre-internet era she would have been one of those actresses to shave 10 years off of her age.

I'm still skeptical about the miscarriage story, but _if_ it was true I wonder if the clandestine Sunday visit to an LA office building in a winter coat was a special appointment at a fertility clinic.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Kinda funny when you consider Megs pregnancy would have been medically classed as *Geriatric*


Oh my, would that make her an OLD DUTCHESS??? Perhaps that's the reason she is so abrasive.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> She hates when the subject of age comes up. Had she lived in Hollywood in the pre-internet era she would have been one of those actresses to shave 10 years off of her age.
> 
> I'm still skeptical about the miscarriage story, but _if_ it was true I wonder if the clandestine Sunday visit to an LA office building in a winter coat was a special appointment at a fertility clinic.


The winter coat really called attention to her.  They might have blended in to the general population if she wore something normal for California weather.  It’s almost as if she wore a bikini in the middle of a snowstorm.
I doubt the coat covered a current pregnancy IF they were going to a fertility clinic.  Once you are actually pregnant, you start seeing an ob/gyn and would have no reason to go back to the fertility clinic once they know the treatment was successful.  Certainly you wouldn’t immediately look pregnant either.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> *We all wish M would like herself*, and stop trying to play a political game that's most likely really a personal one. If you _accept_ you're a duchess, if you _expect_ to live in a palace (or 'palace') have a team of staff at your beck and call, you are privileged - you cannot also _constantly_ evoke pity and sympathy. You have deliberately shielded yourself in a golden cage, the very purist form of privilege (and some would say prison). Had M enjoyed the new life she married into or just 'given it a good go' I think this thread would be a very different thread.
> 
> It's the hypocrisy of _both _H&M that stick in the throat. In a different age, we know they'd be tilting a quizzical head, perusing their latest manicure and coyly asking "let them eat cake" rather than emoting all over the place and trying so very desperately to prove one can live in a golden bubble, constantly demanding more gold to make the bars thicker and be on the path of holy wo/man



The problem is Meghan likes herself too much. She wants it all and she wants it now. It must be frustrating as hell to her when she isn't on the cover of every magazine and she doesn't have famous people clamoring to be her friend. I don't think she'll ever reach the top, although I must admit she has gone much higher than we could have anticipated so who knows? 

As delusional as those two are they will never see their hypocrisy.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> The winter coat really called attention to her.  They might have blended in to the general population if she wore something normal for California weather.  It’s almost as if she wore a bikini in the middle of a snowstorm.
> I doubt the coat covered a current pregnancy IF they were going to a fertility clinic.  Once you are actually pregnant, you start seeing an ob/gyn and would have no reason to go back to the fertility clinic once they know the treatment was successful.  Certainly you wouldn’t immediately look pregnant either.



I think wearing the coat was to get people guessing about "is she or isn't she?" and likely to fulfill a promotion agreement with J. Crew. Plus she didn't want the paps getting any clear shots of her so she was trying to cover herself up. If she had brought her own photographer along I'm sure she would have worn a bright, summery dress.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The problem is Meghan likes herself too much. She wants it all and she wants it now. It must be frustrating as hell to her when she isn't on the cover of every magazine and she doesn't have famous people clamoring to be her friend. I don't think she'll ever reach the top, although I must admit she has gone much higher than we could have anticipated so who knows?
> 
> As delusional as those two are they will never see their hypocrisy.


likes herself and takes herself very seriously.....some how this D-list (or Z-list) actress has gotten the idea she is a leader of the people, a social activist, a role model....for whom? how did she jump from suitcase girl to yacht girl to supporting actress on basic cable series to this icon?  nabbing a prince makes you a leader of the people?  I wonder how her mind works.
She could have been a royal, photographed all the time, fawned over - but she would have maybe had to be secondary to Kate.  Maybe that was the real problem.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This made me laugh


----------



## bisousx

lanasyogamama said:


> This made me laugh
> 
> View attachment 4941559
> View attachment 4941559



They forgot poor Jessica!


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> likes herself and takes herself very seriously.....some how this D-list (or Z-list) actress has gotten the idea she is a leader of the people, a social activist, a role model....for whom? how did she jump from suitcase girl to yacht girl to supporting actress on basic cable series to this icon?  nabbing a prince makes you a leader of the people?  I wonder how her mind works.
> She could have been a royal, photographed all the time, fawned over - but she would have maybe had to be secondary to Kate.  Maybe that was the real problem.



Excellent summary. Once she landed Harry, she could claim anything she wanted and most of the media are too gutless to challenge her. Perhaps M finally realized she couldn't knock Kate out of the line so the next best thing is to be self anointed "leader of the people".


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haaaaa, wonder if they wish they had waited to ‘launch’ that podcast?

@rose60610 “most of the media are too gutless to challenge her”.  Perfectly sums up why we are in the mess we are in. The media continues to fail to do its job. At least, we have social media. Perhaps this is why the celebs hate it — they can’t get away with the lies.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, wonder if they wish they had waited to ‘launch’ that podcast?
> 
> @rose60610 “most of the media are too gutless to challenge her”.  Perfectly sums up why we are in the mess we are in. The media continues to fail to do its job. At least, we have social media. Perhaps this is why the celebs hate it — they can’t get away with the lies.



Right. The media conglomerates hate social media for the same reason. They have less control over narratives. But social media can be and is often a double edged sword. Discerning people can form their own opinions taking into account both/all sides of any story and still leave room for further fact gathering and willing to change their minds accordingly. Others who operate under instant gratification just believe everything they see. Others who are so bent on just one train of thought read only what they want to see and discount what they don't find comfortable to accept. I don't find any media source or person as a be-all and end-all. Since I have a soft spot for animals, I do credit social media for spreading awareness for organizations that help animals (provided they're not scams).


----------



## justwatchin

Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

justwatchin said:


> Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast



How intrusive.


----------



## bellecate

justwatchin said:


> Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast


Not getting enough listeners themselves, Spotify has to try and get them some.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

justwatchin said:


> Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast


Me too.  I just saw the headline and didn't even open the email---just deleted it. 
Hopefully they will get the message...


----------



## zinacef

Their new podcast is actually posted on  “the other” thread here in Tpf. I listened to few seconds, reminds me of  SNL Delicious Dish, like really trying to have ”that podcast” voice. Whatever wins!


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast



Is there an option to reply and tell them you don't like them and don't care about what they have to say?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some say Archie’s laugh sounds like it was edited in. They wouldn’t do _that_, would they?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some say Archie’s laugh sounds like it was edited in. They wouldn’t do _that_, would they?


Since the entire podcast was scripted and the the furthest thing from spontaneous, I could see the entire tape being edited so it sounded better.  I don't think that sounded like a child.


----------



## V0N1B2

zinacef said:


> Their new... like really trying to have ”that podcast” voice. *Whatever* *wins!*


Love wins, doll.
Remember: Love Always Wins!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Since the entire podcast was scripted and the the furthest thing from spontaneous, I could see the entire tape being edited so it sounded better.  I don't think that sounded like a child.


Probably the only spontaneous thing MM has ever done is pee in the woods, unless she had some knowledge it would turn H on, and then it would have been a scripted, edited event.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sums it up!



To Tourre Bakahai


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> This made me laugh
> 
> View attachment 4941559
> View attachment 4941559


I SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO love this; I really wish that this could be (somehow) posted on their website with that exact quote!  In her "leader" quest, she has played, stepped on, used and then markled so many people .. but I'm sure, in her sick "world", that's just perfectly fine because .. well .. she is #1!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> It's complicated because the reality of POC would vary depending on the demography, not on geography of any given place, but the term itself is US-centric and has come to mean darker-skinned. Armenia is in the South Caucasian mountains, not in ME but in Asia.  Armenia was one of the first Christian nations. A lot of people from that region moved around to bordering countries in Europe/ME/Asia since the region often changed hands under empires/regimes that persecuted or constrained religion/ethnicities.
> 
> The term Caucasian has come to mean White in the US and now beyond, but native Caucasians are from Asia and people from Asia could call themselves/be called POC in the West. Some Armenians have been roasted for even being mistaken for POC like (Rita Sahatçiu Ora) even though she never has described herself as such and comes from an immigrant family. I wonder how real Caucasians feel about having their ethnicity appropriated and eradicated at the same time?
> 
> M has been ridiculed for describing herself in the past as Caucasian and now a POC, but then, since she is both, and since the terms are to do with self-determinism, heritage and identity, she has a right to.  'Passing' women have been despised by different communities, including in a sexist way when the ol' 'voodoo' or magic is ascribed and thought to be for playing on whichever 'race' brings advantage/acceptance. The pressure to have different features to those born with, particularly if denying an inherited 'type' associated with people less advantaged is also understandable, not that, that's exclusive to issues of race.
> 
> We all wish M would like herself, and stop trying to play a political game that's most likely really a personal one. If you _accept_ you're a duchess, if you _expect_ to live in a palace (or 'palace') have a team of staff at your beck and call, you are privileged - you cannot also _constantly_ evoke pity and sympathy. You have deliberately shielded yourself in a golden cage, the very purist form of privilege (and some would say prison). Had M enjoyed the new life she married into or just 'given it a good go' I think this thread would be a very different thread.
> 
> It's the hypocrisy of _both _H&M that stick in the throat. In a different age, we know they'd be tilting a quizzical head, perusing their latest manicure and coyly asking "let them eat cake" rather than emoting all over the place and trying so very desperately to prove one can live in a golden bubble, constantly demanding more gold to make the bars thicker and be on the path of holy wo/man.
> 
> View attachment 4941311


Wouldn't be a lot simpler to describe skin color as it's done with eye color? We humans like to complicate things.


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast


ha....I got in my car today and turned on sporify...to my surprise instead of going to what I was playing last, I got the H&M podcast on my screen.  I've never played a podcast.  I pressed the arrow and listed to the whole thing.  Pretty boring.  basically H&M hosting a bunch of people talking about how hard 2020 was.....


----------



## purseinsanity

zinacef said:


> Their new podcast is actually posted on  “the other” thread here in Tpf. I listened to few seconds, reminds me of  SNL Delicious Dish, like really trying to have ”that podcast” voice. *Whatever wins!*


It's love.  "Love always wins", remember?  The profound advice of MM and JCMH.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> Love wins, doll.
> Remember: Love Always Wins!



From Wikipedia - they need to update.  
*Love Wins* may refer to:

_Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived_, 2011 book by pastor Rob Bell
_Love Wins: The Lovers and Lawyers Who Fought the Landmark Case for Marriage Equality_, 2016 book by Debbie Cenziper
"Love Wins" (song), a 2018 song by Carrie Underwood from _Cry Pretty_
"Love Wins", a 2016 song by Michael McArthur
"Love Wins", a 2012 song by Kari Jobe  with Jason Crabb on Love Is Stronger
_Love Wins, Love Always Wins by H&M, on their podcast which [in order to avoid the “awkward dance”] is only audio clips of other famous people_


Avoid the Awkward Dance:
_But this isn’t your average interview podcast, mostly because Harry and Meghan don’t actually do any interviewing. Instead, they’ve asked their guests to record audio diaries to mull over what 2020 means to them. “We were curious to hear what they’d reflect on when they had a moment to themselves,” says Harry. “Without navigating the sometimes *awkward dance *of a video chat, meaning no one having to say: ‘You’re on mute’ over and over again, which is probably one of the defining phrases of 2020.” (Checking the relatable box there, Harry.)








						Harry and Meghan try interviews without the interviewing – Archewell Audio podcast review
					

Elton John and Deepak Chopra feature in this debut episode Holiday Special as the Sussexes sit back and let the celebs talk to each other




					www.theguardian.com
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She hates when the subject of age comes up. Had she lived in Hollywood in the pre-internet era she would have been one of those actresses to shave 10 years off of her age.
> 
> I'm still skeptical about the miscarriage story, but _if_ it was true I wonder if the clandestine Sunday visit to an LA office building in a winter coat was a special appointment at a fertility clinic.



I like the idea of shaving 10 years off my age, New Year's Resolution!

I'm with you on the miscarriage story, something doesn't smell right.


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> Spotify sent me an email today letting me know about these grifters new podcast


seems like spotify is giving them a big push


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> seems like spotify is giving them a big push



They need the listeners to pay the bills.  Isn’t there an ‘unsubscribe’ option?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> ha....I got in my car today and turned on sporify...to my surprise instead of going to what I was playing last, I got the H&M podcast on my screen.  I've never played a podcast.  I pressed the arrow and listed to the whole thing.  Pretty boring.  basically H&M hosting a bunch of people talking about how hard 2020 was.....


Wow Spotify is making sure people listen to it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Wow Spotify is making sure people listen to it.



Still, it is not in the top 10. 
Surely, marketing blasts were included in the Spotify contract.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Wow Spotify is making sure people listen to it.


yes....but I won't do it again...curiousity got me the one time
I like listening to talk radio....I like to hear something I can learn from or a book or movie review.  An indepth interview with a celeb from terri gross.  but this was just a bunch of platitudes  from people who could be interesting but just weren't in this format.  I noticed they had H talking a lot.  maybe someone decided his voice was more distinctive than hers.


----------



## marietouchet

zinacef said:


> Their new podcast is actually posted on  “the other” thread here in Tpf. I listened to few seconds, reminds me of  SNL Delicious Dish, like really trying to have ”that podcast” voice. Whatever wins!


A favor please, can you please remind me where to find the other thread, just curious, thanks


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Is there an option to reply and tell them you don't like them and don't care about what they have to say?


doubt it but I'm gonna check that out


----------



## zinacef

marietouchet said:


> A favor please, can you please remind me where to find the other thread, just curious, thanks


Celebrity Style Threads —- it‘s a little different


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Probably the only spontaneous thing MM has ever done is pee in the woods, unless she had some knowledge it would turn H on, and *then it would have been a scripted, edited event.*


You nailed it. But first, she more than likely conducted surveys, consultations and evaluations amongst her best friends (Jessica, J. Mulroney, Jess, JM, Ms. Ben Mulroney) and also prepared graphs and tables. Then, in her very best penmanship, she wrote a treatise titled, The Philosophy of Peeing in the Woods, in elaborate word salad sentences under the following subtitles:  Peeing in the Woods with Royalty. Gracefully squatting in the Woods. Love of Peeing in the Woods Always Wins.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Love wins, doll.
> Remember: Love Always Wins!


Just saw your post LOL!


----------



## Jktgal

Love for the greenback$ because demontrably not love for friends and especially not love for family...

Between Markle$ and Eelaria I gotta wonder at the audience that eat this stuff. Talk about dumbing way down.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seems like spotify is giving them a big push





Chanbal said:


> Wow Spotify is making sure people listen to it.



Spotify has a lot invested in making sure they are a success. So much invested that they helped H&M make their first podcast. I saw this in an article about it. Imagine starting out a new podcast and having a big corporation do most of the work for you. 

“Archewell Audio is their production banner and teamed with Spotify-owned Gimlet Media to produce the special.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Spotify has a lot invested in making sure they are a success. So much invested that they helped H&M make their first podcast. I saw this in an article about it. Imagine starting out a new podcast and having a big corporation do most of the work for you.
> 
> “Archewell Audio is their production banner and teamed with Spotify-owned Gimlet Media to produce the special.”



As several have said, it is almost all clips of other famous people. So, a series of lectures. No spontaneous interacting, no thinking on one’s feet, no clever repartee, just rehearsed, rehashed, pablum.   Not for me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll leave this here and tiptoe out, quietly, very quietly:










						Prince Harry and Meghan's £30m podcast ranks lowly
					

The show, a holiday special featuring Sir Elton John, charted in 17th place below a podcast designed to send people to sleep with whale noises, called Deep Sleep Sounds.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ha....I got in my car today and turned on sporify...to my surprise *instead of going to what I was playing last, I got the H&M podcast on my screen.  I've never played a podcast. * I pressed the arrow and listed to the whole thing.  Pretty boring.  basically H&M hosting a bunch of people talking about how hard 2020 was.....



Yuck. That is really invasive. Spotify must be desperate to be able to post good numbers for them. Why so many big companies want to hitch their wagon to these two is a mystery. From JP Morgan giving them $1 million at the beginning of the year to Netflix opening up their coffers to Spotify forcing them on listeners, Harry and Meghan were the answer to a question nobody asked.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My guess .. they thought BRF means easy $$$, lots of connections, palace parties.
They forgot who was in charge and driving the Karma bus.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yuck. That is really invasive. Spotify must be desperate to be able to post good numbers for them. Why so many big companies want to hitch their wagon to these two is a mystery. From JP Morgan giving them $1 million at the beginning of the year to Netflix opening up their coffers to Spotify forcing them on listeners, Harry and Meghan were the answer to a question nobody asked.


I tried to find a way to tell Spotify I didn't like it but didn't find anything


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave this here and tiptoe out, quietly, very quietly:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's £30m podcast ranks lowly
> 
> 
> The show, a holiday special featuring Sir Elton John, charted in 17th place below a podcast designed to send people to sleep with whale noises, called Deep Sleep Sounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



No one wants to hear a bunch of wealthy, out-of-touch famous folk blabbering about how hard 2020 was. We all lived through it, most suffering much more than this group of blow-hards, and all now looking forward. Sounds like this podcast was a bunch of self-serving drivel.

How hypocritical of them to bait listeners with Archie.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> No one wants to hear a bunch of wealthy, out-of-touch famous folk blabbering about how hard 2020 was. We all lived through it, most suffering much more than this group of blow-hards, and all now looking forward. Sounds like this podcast was a bunch of self-serving drivel.
> 
> How hypocritical of them to bait listeners with Archie.


I don't mind hearing Tyler Perry talk about how he had food for 5,000 people and it wasn't enough.  but I wouldn't really call it informative or entertaining.  they had some good people on but just not that interesting.


----------



## chaneljewel

The U.S. news media have been blabbering about H and M the past few days.  I find it ridiculous that they think these two can tell people how to feel during this past year.  They know absolutely nothing about suffering!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I tried to find a way to tell Spotify I didn't like it but didn't find anything


Keep trying, please!  Would this be of any help?










						Idea Exchange Guidelines: What do I need to know before submitting?
					

This is part of a series of articles outlining how the Idea Exchange works:  Idea Exchange Guidelines: What do I need to know before submitting? Idea Exchange Guidelines: How can I submit an idea? What happens next? Idea Exchange Guidelines: Why was my idea closed? Idea Exchange Guidelines: How...




					community.spotify.com


----------



## Kaka_bobo

I opened my Spotify app and dab smack in the middle was the ad for their podcast. "A 2020 Holiday Special" they call it...hah... nothing special about these 2 or their message.

Tried to find a way to hide it or "not interested" or Do not show like IG has.....no luck though


----------



## Stansy

„love always wins“ is just so cynical given that due to Covid-19 and the lockdowns everywhere the numbers of domestic violence and child abuse are on an all-time-high. I just can‘t with these two.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Saw this on Twitter! Gave me a good chuckle! They can't even sue DM for it because it was true at the time of the publication!


----------



## carmen56

How does anyone know it’s actually Archie on the podcast?  It could be some random kid they hauled in off the street!


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> How does anyone know it’s actually Archie on the podcast?  It could be some random kid they hauled in off the street!



or free sound library - even "some random kid" would expect $5.  They're far too mean to pay a professional - or expenses for an amateur.


----------



## zen1965

I may be old and cynical, but to me it is all meaningless dribble. 
And I fail to grasp how Ms. Markle could be considered a feminist icon. In the sense of "leading by example" I see nothing in her life that is particularly role-model worthy or has furthered the cause of women in general. 
As to Mr. Markle, I never quite understood his appeal. Ultimately, I guess I most appreciate wit and intellect in a man. Qualities he has not displayed thus far to the public.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> makes sense I guess....doesn't matter a bit to me
> He's cute I guess in a regular baby way....Will and Kate's little girl is adorable.  will see what this one looks like (and acts like) as he grows


Later I read the voice was heavily edited, the words spliced together ... All babies are cute, Archie too but most dont appear on podcasts


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Saw this on Twitter! Gave me a good chuckle! They can't even sue DM for it because it was true at the time of the publication!
> 
> View attachment 4942283


My morning chuckle thank you


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if they are recording it at the studio or at their home. If its at a studio it would be unlikely that Arche would be around


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if they are recording it at the studio or at their home. If its at a studio it would be unlikely that Arche would be around


One of the rooms or the entire guest house, is designated as a studio, so they can deduct part of the home costs as business expenses, they needed 18 bathrooms so the video staff could go to the loo
Even before COVID and ZOOM, serious podcast/video/music stars all have home studios, laptop and you are ready to rock


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

You guys know I love this lady.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Saw this on Twitter! Gave me a good chuckle! They can't even sue DM for it because it was true at the time of the publication!
> 
> View attachment 4942283



Here is the DM article:

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's first 'holiday special' episode of their £30m Archewell Audio climbs up UK Spotify podcast chart to seventh place - after beginning at 17th (below deep sleep sounds of whale noises)*

The programme, a Christmas special featuring Sir Elton John, initially charted in 17th place - below a podcast designed to send people to sleep with whale noises, called Deep Sleep Sounds - after being released on Tuesday afternoon.

However the episode slowly climbed through the ranks reaching 7th place today in the UK Spotify podcast charts, and 26 in the US.

The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, called on a number of their famous friends to appear during the first episode, which feature a range of prominent British and American artists, activists and musicians.
PR guru James Henderson said that calling on their friends had been a wise move for the Royal couple.

He added that their inclusion of their 19-month-old son Archie's voice during the podcast - in which they encouraged him to say Happy New Year - seemed not to fit with their continued plea for privacy.

Corden was a guest at Harry and Meghan's wedding and was asked by the duke to perform at the couple's evening celebration.

Other guests include ******** activist Stacey Abrams, tennis star Naomi Osaka, American filmmaker and actor Tyler Perry, wellness icon Deepak Chopra and teenage activist Christina Adane from London, who campaigns on food issues.

Experts have called the couple's Spotify tie-up as another big step towards building what experts believe could become a $1billion business empire in the US after a super-deal with Netflix to make documentaries about their pet projects.

But the podcast received a mixed response on social media yesterday. While some praised the podcast, *one Twitter user commented, 'Pass me the sick bucket'. *He (the one Twitter) is not alone.   

The complete article is here

I'm with the commentator below on this issue:


----------



## bag-mania

Wait! I could be falling asleep to a podcast of whale sounds?!! 

That is by far the most significant piece of news in that article.


----------



## Chanbal

One more article to end this terrible year of 2020:

*'I am my mother's son': Harry uses a photo of Diana and vows to 'unleash the power of compassion' with Meghan on new website for foundation that reveals partnerships with Stanford 'centre for altruism research' and 'humane technology' charity*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex today set out their goal to 'build a better world' in a open letter on the updated website of their non-profit organisation Archewell, saying they wanted to 'unleash the power of compassion'.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle used two photographs on the new homepage of Archewell.com - one of Harry as a boy with his mother, the late Princess Diana, and one of Meghan as a girl with her mother, Doria Ragland.

The couple said in a joint statement on the website: 'I am my mother's son. And I am our son's mother.' However there was no mention or photo of Harry's father Prince Charles or Meghan's estranged father Thomas Markle.

In a joint statement, called a 'letter for 2021' which overlays the pictures, the couple say: *'I am my mother's son. And I am our son's mother. Together we bring you Archewell. We believe in the best of humanity.*

The royal couple also announced partnerships between their foundation and several tech and research-focused groups. They wrote: 'At Archewell, we unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.

'*We do this through our non-profit work within Archewell Foundation 501(c)(3),* in addition to creative activations through the business verticals of audio and production.'

The complete fundraising article is here (Trying to benefit from Diana's popularity???)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Chanbal re article
 I have no words, but I have a heaping bucketful of...


----------



## rose60610

"The power of compassion"? Let me guess. If you disagree with them you're going to get lambasted and excoriated. Compassion! 

And they're "driving systemic cultural change"? Through compassion? How much "compassion" does Meghan have for her own family? It's fitting that this vomit inducing announcement came out in 2020.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Wait! I could be falling asleep to a podcast of whale sounds?!!
> 
> That is by far the most significant piece of news in that article.



You don't have to pay whales . But I wonder whose recording of whale sounds they stole. It'd be great if they got sued by National Geographic.


----------



## bag-mania

Stansy said:


> „love always wins“ is just so cynical given that due to Covid-19 and the lockdowns everywhere the numbers of domestic violence and child abuse are on an all-time-high. I just can‘t with these two.



I'll go a step further and say "love always wins" comes off as being dismissive and borderline cruel. Many people have lost someone they loved this year, from Covid or other causes. Love wasn't enough to "win" for them. 

So no, you two simpletons, love doesn't always win! But you just sit up in your ivory tower and keep spooning out those empty platitudes to the masses who don't care about you.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Chanbal re article
> I have no words, but I have a heaping bucketful of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4942450



Further down on the fundraising article are pictures of their Archwhatever site. One of the pictures shows logos of some universities, I wonder if this is legal.  Usually universities have very strict policies on using their name.


----------



## bisousx

Archewell’s mission is one giant nothing burger.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> You don't have to pay whales . But I wonder whose recording of whale sounds they stole. It'd be great if they got sued by National Geographic.



Harry and Meghan don't have the whale sounds. Their podcast would be more interesting if they did. The article said the whale podcast got better ratings than them.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is the DM article:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's first 'holiday special' episode of their £30m Archewell Audio climbs up UK Spotify podcast chart to seventh place - after beginning at 17th (below deep sleep sounds of whale noises)*
> 
> The programme, a Christmas special featuring Sir Elton John, initially charted in 17th place - below a podcast designed to send people to sleep with whale noises, called Deep Sleep Sounds - after being released on Tuesday afternoon.
> 
> However the episode slowly climbed through the ranks reaching 7th place today in the UK Spotify podcast charts, and 26 in the US.
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, called on a number of their famous friends to appear during the first episode, which feature a range of prominent British and American artists, activists and musicians.
> PR guru James Henderson said that calling on their friends had been a wise move for the Royal couple.
> 
> He added that their inclusion of their 19-month-old son Archie's voice during the podcast - in which they encouraged him to say Happy New Year - seemed not to fit with their continued plea for privacy.
> 
> Corden was a guest at Harry and Meghan's wedding and was asked by the duke to perform at the couple's evening celebration.
> 
> Other guests include ******** activist Stacey Abrams, tennis star Naomi Osaka, American filmmaker and actor Tyler Perry, wellness icon Deepak Chopra and teenage activist Christina Adane from London, who campaigns on food issues.
> 
> Experts have called the couple's Spotify tie-up as another big step towards building what experts believe could become a $1billion business empire in the US after a super-deal with Netflix to make documentaries about their pet projects.
> 
> But the podcast received a mixed response on social media yesterday. While some praised the podcast, *one Twitter user commented, 'Pass me the sick bucket'. *He (the one Twitter) is not alone.
> 
> The complete article is here
> 
> I'm with the commentator below on this issue:
> 
> 
> View attachment 4942430


considering the way spotify forced it on us, it should have been number 1


----------



## csshopper

Re: Archwell,  When all else fails market your Mother. Blatantly using Diana for profit. There is no going back for this grubby twit. Meghan has succeeded in complete corruption. H Y P O C R I S Y at the most glaring level. It is mind boggling.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> considering the way spotify forced it on us, it should have been number 1


Spotify giving MM&H millions of dollars (when they pay the artists virtually nothing), and then 'forcing' the podcast on people to increase ratings is disgusting.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Further down on the fundraising article are pictures of their Archwhatever site. One of the pictures shows logos of some universities, I wonder if this is legal.  Usually universities have very strict policies on using their name.
> View attachment 4942461
> 
> View attachment 4942460


I saw that, but I don't know if it is legal to use the logos while the  universities are connected to their foundation(s). I hope the legal experts on this thread can provide an answer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> considering the way spotify forced it on us, it should have been number 1



I bet that had the unintended effect of turning off more listeners than it gained. Company executives have big egos so I won't hold my breath waiting for them to admit they made a mistake. They will probably keep helping H&M along and trying to make them a success.


----------



## carmen56

What the hell are ‘business verticals?’  I wish these two would just shove off into obscurity.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan don't have the whale sounds. Their podcast would be more interesting if they did. The article said the whale podcast got better ratings than them.



Oh. Thanks for the correction!  Since whales travel in pods, it's quite clever they get their own PODcast.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

carmen56 said:


> What the hell are ‘business verticals?’  I wish these two would just shove off into obscurity.


Definition found on the internet:
Business verticals are *narrow markets* whose specific needs make them especially likely to want your offerings. Vertical markets are customer niches that help a business focus its products and its advertising. Catering to a vertical market is advantageous to a business because of this simplicity and clarity.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I bet that had the unintended effect of turning off more listeners than it gained. Company executives have big egos so I won't hold my breath waiting for them to admit they made a mistake. They will probably keep helping H&M along and trying to make them a success.


they can help but doesn't it have to be interesting to get people to listen?  I was driving and it was just kinda boring.....first they had all their guests go through the horrors of 2020; then everyone had to talk about their hopes for 2021.  then some guy (a poet?) said he wasn't yet egaged but would be by the time the podcast aired.  H&M both said they hoped she would say yes and they kinda giggled.  So sweet!  Love always wins


----------



## CobaltBlu

This makes no sense What.So.Ever. 
Please get them an editor. Please. 

"creative activations through the business verticals of audio and production"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have a suggestion how to achieve that. READ THE ROOM AND GO AWAY.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a suggestion how to achieve that. READ THE ROOM AND GO AWAY.
> 
> View attachment 4942509


oh please


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CobaltBlu said:


> This makes no sense What.So.Ever.
> Please get them an editor. Please.
> 
> "creative activations through the business verticals of audio and production"


Ah, but they are not clever and unintelligent and can't surpass no one everyone.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> This makes no sense What.So.Ever.
> Please get them an editor. Please.
> 
> "creative activations through the business verticals of audio and production"



It's the kind of gobbledygook stupid people use to try to sound intelligent.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a suggestion how to achieve that. READ THE ROOM AND GO AWAY.
> 
> View attachment 4942509


why are they always preaching at us?  WTF do they think they are? Oh, the Duke and Duchess....the podcast ended referring to them that way


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Further down on the fundraising article are pictures of their Archwhatever site. One of the pictures shows logos of some universities, I wonder if this is legal.  Usually universities have very strict policies on using their name.
> View attachment 4942461
> 
> View attachment 4942460


Remember- about a year ago - before they got house - JCMH made a field trip to Stanford


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a suggestion how to achieve that. READ THE ROOM AND GO AWAY.
> 
> View attachment 4942509


What drivel! If they want to make my world a better place they could cease the constant hypocrisy and never make another public statement. Privacy is your friend.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> What drivel! If they want to make my world a better place they could cease the constant hypocrisy and never make another public statement. Privacy is your friend.


the arrogance is just staggering


----------



## lanasyogamama

What’s wrong with Dads?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> What’s wrong with Dads?



Exactly. But we all know the answer. Meghan threw hers under the bus and ran over him several times. Harry's is still alive but it's all about turning his dead mother into a cash register. COMPASSION people! Remember, love always wins! Ka-CHING!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a suggestion how to achieve that. READ THE ROOM AND GO AWAY.
> 
> View attachment 4942509


haha, not sure why Dr. Evil came to mind.


----------



## jennalovesbags

marietouchet said:


> One of the rooms or the entire guest house, is designated as a studio, so they can deduct part of the home costs as business expenses, they needed 18 bathrooms so the video staff could go to the loo
> Even before COVID and ZOOM, serious podcast/video/music stars all have home studios, laptop and you are ready to rock


That's what I was thinking too.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Remember- about a year ago - before they got house - JCMH made a field trip to Stanford


Field trips and collaborations are all fine. However, their fundraising website gives the impression of an official affiliation with certain universities. It doesn't smell good.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> why are they always preaching at us?  WTF do they think they are? Oh, the Duke and Duchess....the podcast ended referring to them that way



They remind me of know-it-all teenagers who think they have the answers to ALL of the world's problems and they want to make sure they tell us every one!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I bet that had the unintended effect of turning off more listeners than it gained. Company executives have big egos so I won't hold my breath waiting for them to admit they made a mistake. *They will probably keep helping H&M along and trying to make them a success.*


You are unfortunately right. Spotify invested a ton of money on them, and will do everything for them to succeed. One must be very stupid to screw up this type of deal.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> You are unfortunately right. Spotify invested a ton of money on them, and will do everything for them to succeed. *One must be very stupid to screw up this type of deal.*



Spotify is giving them everything they need to have a successful podcast, even having Gimlet Media handle it for them. From their web page: "_Gimlet_ is the award-winning narrative podcasting company that aims to help listeners better understand the world and each other." The only thing that will cause them to fail is when everyone loses interest in them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> why are they always preaching at us?  WTF do they think they are? Oh, the Duke and Duchess....the podcast ended referring to them that way



Not only that, why are they always tooting their own horn? Have you ever heard Kate and Wills or heaven forbid the Queen blabbering on how they have been driving systemic change? Some people put in the actual work, and others achieve nothing but are celebrating themselves like there's no tomorrow.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not only that, *why are they always tooting their own horn? *Have you ever heard Kate and Wills or heaven forbid the Queen blabbering on how they have been driving systemic change? Some people put in the actual work, and others achieve nothing but are celebrating themselves like there's no tomorrow.



Because it is absolutely vital to them her to get accolades for whatever little thing they did. She never gets tired of hearing how wonderful and generous she is. What is the point of doing something nice if you aren't going to get credit for it?


----------



## CeeJay

carmen56 said:


> What the hell are ‘business verticals?’  I wish these two would just shove off into obscurity.


Typically, it refers to 'vertical silos' .. in other words, in large Corporations, you oftentimes have multiple groups that *are supposed to* work together to develop/maintain "the product" (_whatever that may be_) .. *BUT *.. because of egotistical dumbasses (_the silo 'heads'_), don't *really* want to work together .. they want *all the credit* for said product and many times will purposely not provide 100% of the information/data as they believe that "*their*" information/data is power!  Can't even say how many times I have had to work with these types of people .. and interestingly enough, Harry & Meghan fit that description to a 'T'!


----------



## csshopper

The responses on the Daily Mail website to Archwell are blistering, mostly to do with using Diana and the treatment of other family. Interesting how the recognition of their stupendous hypocrisy is international in scope

Too many to quote, but this one caught my eye, it's one of the mildest in tone, but I had forgotten the narcissistic declaration early on of only working with noteworthy directors. Guess M got so bored waiting for a phone that did not ring with casting calls begging her to act, she had to fill the time grifting. And, there has been no follow up work from Disney..... One and done, as they say.

 From the DM: _  LOL.. she thought she was going to be the toast of Hollywood. Even proclaiming she would only work with top directors. Instead she's flogging coffee and attempting a podcast. You couldn't make this up!_


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Exactly. But we all know the answer. Meghan threw hers under the bus and ran over him several times. Harry's is still alive but it's all about turning his dead mother into a cash register. COMPASSION people! Remember, love always wins! Ka-CHING!


Yes, 2021 is fixing to be the year of Diana , there will be the garden inauguration in July

Hmmm will this bring William and Harry closer ?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Further down on the fundraising article are pictures of their Archwhatever site. One of the pictures shows logos of some universities, I wonder if this is legal.  Usually universities have very strict policies on using their name.
> View attachment 4942461
> 
> View attachment 4942460


On all the collaborations, see sites, note the use of the future tense, nothing has yet been done but the verbiage has been done in a way to make it sound like it is already very substantial
In reply to @Chanbal who suggested the whole thing does not bode well


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Spotify is giving them everything they need to have a successful podcast, even having Gimlet Media handle it for them. From their web page: "_Gimlet_ is the award-winning narrative podcasting company that aims to help listeners better understand the world and each other." *The only thing that will cause them to fail is when everyone loses interest in them.*


I'm already there, no interest on them. If they go to live a private life and stop cluttering the news with so much hypocrisy, I'll completely forget about them and their 16 or 19-toilet mansion.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy 2021 to all!!!! I wish that 2021 will be the year we defeat COVID-19 and we will all be able to resume our normal lives.



	

		
			
		

		
	
 Let's hope QE does the right thing on the upcoming 2021 review!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

well, I have something to thank them and spotify for.  thanks to spotify pushing their podcast on me yesterday, today I searched their podcasts and found something really interesting to listen to.  So I don't know if Spotify planned on that result but now they have a podcast listener


----------



## gelbergirl

Archewell?  Is this after little Archie??  They should stop hassling that kid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

— Love wins is a total ripoff of Vergil’s omnia vincit amor [love conquers all].  Seems like they should give the old Roman credit.

— RE: joint statement
Not entirely clear what their point is. Is this what happens when the next King tells ya to bugger off?  If so, long live the King. Harry is playing with fire here. Likely he will get burned. We the public have clearly shown our lack of interest in H’s daily, desperate drip-feed of ‘poor-me’.  He is an entitled, privileged, spoiled brat...pushing 40. QE, let’s get the Karma bus warmed up.
_Harry and Meghan said in a joint statement on the website: 'I am my mother's son. And I am our son's mother.'  _[Anyone know what this means?????]
_








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle vow to 'unleash power of compassion'
					

In a joint statement on the homepage of the updated Archewell website, Harry and Meghan say: 'I am my mother's son. And I am our son's mother. Together we bring you Archewell.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




—_ this may have an impact, too:








						Oprah sells majority of OWN for $36 million to Discovery
					

Discovery Plus launches next month, and the content of OWN is expected to be part of the new streaming service.  On Tuesday, Oprah Winfrey sold most of her Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) shares to Discovery Inc. for more than $36 million in stock.  According to Bloomberg, the deal increases...




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Harry and Meghan said in a joint statement on the website: 'I am my mother's son. And I am our son's mother.'  _[Anyone know what this means?????]



Hu? Does anyone proofread their sh*t?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Happy 2021 guys! Remember love always wins!


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Does anyone proofread their sh*t?


Certainly, MM vetoes any editing suggestions by others.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Happy New Year Everyone. Let's hope it is 2021% better than 2020. 



	

		
			
		

		
	
A reminder of the worst of 2020, MM, JCMH and the Pandemic, not necessarily in that order.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, I have something to thank them and spotify for.  thanks to spotify pushing their podcast on me yesterday, today I searched their podcasts and found something really interesting to listen to.  So I don't know if Spotify planned on that result but now they have a podcast listener



Welcome to the wonderful world of podcasts. You have officially taken your first step down the rabbit hole.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happy New Year to all.  A toast to you, cheers to shining your glorious light on these trying times!
Let’s celebrate!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Harry and Meghan said in a joint statement on the website: 'I am my mother's son. And I am our son's mother.' _[Anyone know what this means?????]



Sounds to me like they're saying the rest the family can fork off.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Cavalier Girl said:


> Sounds to me like they're saying the rest the family can fork off.


Their family probably wants them to Fork off too


----------



## wilding

Can facebook pimp them out any further in my suggested for you? Maybe I should be reporting for harassment, not spam


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh, interesting, hu?



He must pump a multiple of what he gives the 2nd in line and his three kids (of which one is #3) into these two idiots.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some say Archie’s laugh sounds like it was edited in. They wouldn’t do _that_, would they?


Of course not!  They are nothing but genuine, sincere people!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Since the entire podcast was scripted and the the furthest thing from spontaneous, I could see the entire tape being edited so it sounded better.  I don't think that sounded like a child.


Thank you for your bravery in listening!  I couldn't even read the whole transcript before vomiting a little in my mouth


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Wouldn't be a lot simpler to describe skin color as it's done with eye color? *We humans like to complicate things.*


Hopefully, some day, we can actually just describe people as people, instead of resorting to their ethnic backgrounds, especially given all the interracial marriages nowadays.  It's getting so darn confusing!  
For example, I'd just describe MM as an a$$hole, not as black or white or biracial


----------



## purseinsanity

Happy New Year everyone!  I  would like to thank all of you for making 2020 that much brighter.  We may not always agree (although here, I find it very refreshing that we almost always do! ), but everyone is treated with respect.  I could always come here for a laugh and all of your insight is much appreciated.  Hope 2021 leads to better things for us all!


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully, some day, we can actually just describe people as people, instead of resorting to their ethnic backgrounds, especially given all the interracial marriages nowadays.  It's getting so darn confusing!
> For example, I'd just describe MM as an a$$hole, not as black or white or biracial


I so agree with you on all of this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am spending New Year's in bed eating leftover dessert, reading, browsing the net, and I keep finding these gems. Can we say "Ouch"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Happy New Year everyone!  I  would like to thank all of you for making 2020 that much brighter.  We may not always agree (although here, I find it very refreshing that we almost always do! ), but everyone is treated with respect.  I could always come here for a laugh and all of your insight is much appreciated.  Hope 2021 leads to better things for us all!


 I second all of this!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave this here and tiptoe out, quietly, very quietly:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's £30m podcast ranks lowly
> 
> 
> The show, a holiday special featuring Sir Elton John, charted in 17th place below a podcast designed to send people to sleep with whale noises, called Deep Sleep Sounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Harry seems to have taken a play out of Eeelaaahhria Baldwin's playbook.  He's lived here for less than a year, and is already picking up American English and dropping his Queen's English!


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Saw this on Twitter! Gave me a good chuckle! They can't even sue DM for it because it was true at the time of the publication!
> 
> View attachment 4942283


Whale noises are more soothing than the grating voices of these idiots.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy New Year my fellow TPF members. I've been absent since last year and I've missed you all.  

Will and Kate might want to join us here, it's therapeutic. Let's send them an invention. 

*Prince William 'will be unhappy' Harry is 'exploiting Princess Diana's iconic status' on new Archewell website that is face of multi-million pound Spotify and Netflix venture, says royal expert*
He told MailOnline today: 'I think William will be slightly worried if Harry uses Diana for any of his charitable or commercial ventures without consulting him, and I don't think he would be happy if Harry appears to be exploiting his mother's iconic status.

'It's also very significant that Harry called himself his "mother's son" but has made no mention of Prince Charles. William is very much following now in his father's footsteps with his environmental and conservation work. 

'And although Harry has praised his father in the past, it seems odd not to mention him more and work in conjunction with him, rather than separately.'

Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana.

More here!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more article to end this terrible year of 2020:
> 
> *'I am my mother's son': Harry uses a photo of Diana and vows to 'unleash the power of compassion' with Meghan on new website for foundation that reveals partnerships with Stanford 'centre for altruism research' and 'humane technology' charity*


LOLOL.  I just pictured Harry in a superhero like tights suit, with a giant Union Jack on the front, crossed out with red marker, a giant MM on his cape, "Unleashing the power of compassion".


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> This makes no sense What.So.Ever.
> Please get them an editor. Please.
> 
> "creative activations through the business verticals of audio and production"


More word salad.  They think if they use big words, they sound more intelligent.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a suggestion how to achieve that. READ THE ROOM AND GO AWAY.
> 
> View attachment 4942509


May I suggest the first step they should take to "Build a Better World" is to STFU and go live in the privacy they claim to crave?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana.
> 
> More here!



Dear Mr Dampier, 

Meghan is not close to her mother, she is just her token relative because not talking to any other family member you have is a bad enough look, can you imagine the backlash if she markled her mother too?

Hope that helps, 

QoW


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Happy New Year my fellow TPF members. I've been absent since last year and I've missed you all.
> 
> Will and Kate might want to join us here, it's therapeutic. Let's send them an invention.
> 
> *Prince William 'will be unhappy' Harry is 'exploiting Princess Diana's iconic status' on new Archewell website that is face of multi-million pound Spotify and Netflix venture, says royal expert*
> He told MailOnline today: 'I think William will be slightly worried if Harry uses Diana for any of his charitable or commercial ventures without consulting him, and I don't think he would be happy if Harry appears to be exploiting his mother's iconic status.
> 
> 'It's also very significant that Harry called himself his "mother's son" but has made no mention of Prince Charles. William is very much following now in his father's footsteps with his environmental and conservation work.
> 
> 'And although Harry has praised his father in the past, it seems odd not to mention him more and work in conjunction with him, rather than separately.'
> 
> Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana.
> 
> More here!


I call BS on Meghan being so close to her mother.  She chose to live with her father from whatever age - 13?  Her mother is nice and quiet now so they can use her and claim they're close.  Doesn't mean they really are.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Happy New Year my fellow TPF members. I've been absent since last year and I've missed you all.
> 
> Will and Kate might want to join us here, it's therapeutic. Let's send them an invention.
> 
> *Prince William 'will be unhappy' Harry is 'exploiting Princess Diana's iconic status' on new Archewell website that is face of multi-million pound Spotify and Netflix venture, says royal expert*
> Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana.



The real reason is that he can try to exploit Diana for personal gain, not so much with Charles.


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> I so agree with you on all of this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

“Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana”

Or maybe it’s _monkey see, monkey do._


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I second all of this!


----------



## marietouchet

Doria ... hhmmmm ... has been MIA, if she wants her privacy, she has managed to get it , no more paparazzi shots of her, no news ...
Dont know how she did it .. but privacy is possible .. Good for her, very classy lady !

JCMH have been reported  papped on dog walks, in BH, dining out ... xmas tree buying ...


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully, some day, we can actually just describe people as people, instead of resorting to their ethnic backgrounds, especially given all the interracial marriages nowadays.  It's getting so darn confusing!
> For example, I'd just describe MM as an a$$hole, not as black or white or biracial


This is what I meant. Color of eyes or skin, height... are only physically characteristics that can be useful to describe a person on IDs, passports...  I never understood why we humans complicate things that should be simple. What distinguishes people are their moral differences, and yes I agree with the description of "MM as an a$$hole".


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I call BS on Meghan being so close to her mother.  She chose to live with her father from whatever age - 13?  Her mother is nice and quiet now so they can use her and claim they're close.  Doesn't mean they really are.



I believe the reason she chooses to say she is close to her mother is to exploit that part of her heritage.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dear Mr Dampier,
> 
> Meghan is not close to her mother, she is just her token relative because not talking to any other family member you have is a bad enough look, can you imagine the backlash if she markled her mother too?
> 
> Hope that helps,
> 
> QoW





sdkitty said:


> I call BS on Meghan being so close to her mother.  She chose to live with her father from whatever age - 13?  Her mother is nice and quiet now so they can use her and claim they're close.  Doesn't mean they really are.


Father was used in the past, and now she is using her mother. The difference is that her mother might (or not) be benefiting from the current situation, and father is apparently being mistreated. Only time will tell if mother will also be markled.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Father was used in the past, and now she is using her mother. The difference is that her mother might (or not) be benefiting from the current situation, and father is apparently being mistreated. Only time will tell if mother will also be markled.


I'm pretty sure Doria didn't buy that business and pay the Beverly Hills attorney to set it up with her own money.  Teaching yoga doesn't pay that well.  So yes, she seems to be benefitting from the situation.


----------



## csshopper

Stupid sod is too thick in the head to realize that by basing his "Foundation" on his relationship with his mother he has just announced and confirmed to the world that he has no gravitas on his own, no merits or any accomplishments to contribute, and only through her might he have any microcosm of credibility. Invictus Games was a meaningful endeavor, capable of positive impact on the lives of the wounded warriors, and appeared to be well run and widely supported. It could have been part of a positive legacy for him. Oops, along comes M, no military connection so she's not going to have the spotlight, and it gets Markled to the extent it probably felt to some of the Invictus people like they had stepped on a land mine. They got dissed and dumped unceremoniously and JCMH slunk off to Canada and the USA to make his millions, his "mates" be damned.

The Daily Mail has recorded 10K comments so far and the posts continue. Worldwide the Grifters are being bashed for their monstrous hypocrisy and called out for the blatant disrespect of their fathers, who, in both cases, have  generously supported them during many stages of their lives. And for Charles not just his money, but his magnanimous gesture for Meghan as he walked her down the aisle at her wedding and graciously made sure to be inclusive with Doria. 

It's to the point some are commenting on the darker troubled side of Diana and speculating there is real mental illness as an issue with Harry, manipulated and inflamed by MM. He is being painted as a puppet and a fool, having lashed out through the years at the media treatment of his Mum, and now he and M are using her for profit themselves. 

Part of me had to laugh reading the DM Comments, they mirror all we have said, analyzed, dissected here, almost like people might have been reading over our shoulders. tpf members rock!

Looking forward to spending 2021 with you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

HNY, all 

If 2021 is the year of the Mother, bring it on.  Harry will soon find out how many people have moved on from Diana, so maybe he ought to let her rest in peace and get some therapy. If MM is vying for Mother of the Year,,,, well, they should expect a lot of pushback.  That will be a tough, tough sell. Regardless, I am here for it. Cheers.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Stupid sod is too thick in the head to realize that by basing his "Foundation" on his relationship with his mother he has just announced and confirmed to the world that he has no gravitas on his own, no merits or any accomplishments to contribute, and only through her might he have any microcosm of credibility. Invictus Games was a meaningful endeavor, capable of positive impact on the lives of the wounded warriors, and appeared to be well run and widely supported. It could have been part of a positive legacy for him. Oops, along comes M, no military connection so she's not going to have the spotlight, and it gets Markled to the extent it probably felt to some of the Invictus people like they had stepped on a land mine. They got dissed and dumped unceremoniously and JCMH slunk off to Canada and the USA to make his millions, his "mates" be damned.
> 
> The Daily Mail has recorded 10K comments so far and the posts continue. Worldwide the Grifters are being bashed for their monstrous hypocrisy and called out for the blatant disrespect of their fathers, who, in both cases, have  generously supported them during many stages of their lives. And for Charles not just his money, but his magnanimous gesture for Meghan as he walked her down the aisle at her wedding and graciously made sure to be inclusive with Doria.
> 
> It's to the point some are commenting on the darker troubled side of Diana and speculating there is real mental illness as an issue with Harry, manipulated and inflamed by MM. He is being painted as a puppet and a fool, having lashed out through the years at the media treatment of his Mum, and now he and M are using her for profit themselves.
> 
> Part of me had to laugh reading the DM Comments, they mirror all we have said, analyzed, dissected here, almost like people might have been reading over our shoulders. tpf members rock!
> 
> Looking forward to spending 2021 with you!


Agree,  the legend of Diana has taken a beating this  year with the kerfuffle over the famous BBC interview, the story being she was conned into doing it, not a positive story

Diana is a unique thing - she died tragically at age 37 , at the peak of her good looks, she had shaken some of the dowdy royal fashion and was becoming a very stylish woman

She was FROZEN (for lack of a better word) in our minds as this paragon of beauty who could do no wrong until all the kerfuffle came up and her halo got tarnished ... let her rest a bit 

Elton John got it right, years ago when he stopped singing the song he did at the funeral, classy that ....

I hope the garden opening in July will not be a free-for-all of bad behaviour 

PS if you were not aware of the HUGE IMPACT of the kerfuffle .... Charles and Camilla (especially) have taken very low profiles recently, they were forced into turning off comments on web sites, social media because THAT INTERVIEW reminded everyone of their affair during the marriage


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Before I comment further on this subject, please correct me if I’m wrong. From what I’ve read, Diana suffered from bulimia before she met Charles, whereas in Morton’s book she blames Charles. Thanks in advance.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Happy New Year my fellow TPF members. I've been absent since last year and I've missed you all.
> 
> Will and Kate might want to join us here, it's therapeutic. Let's send them an invention.
> 
> *Prince William 'will be unhappy' Harry is 'exploiting Princess Diana's iconic status' on new Archewell website that is face of multi-million pound Spotify and Netflix venture, says royal expert*
> He told MailOnline today: 'I think William will be slightly worried if Harry uses Diana for any of his charitable or commercial ventures without consulting him, and I don't think he would be happy if Harry appears to be exploiting his mother's iconic status.
> 
> 'It's also very significant that Harry called himself his "mother's son" but has made no mention of Prince Charles. William is very much following now in his father's footsteps with his environmental and conservation work.
> 
> 'And although Harry has praised his father in the past, it seems odd not to mention him more and work in conjunction with him, rather than separately.'
> 
> Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana.
> 
> More here!


Happy New Year to all!

I think that at this point, William is just rolling his eyeballs and muttering “typical” to himself when he sees or is told of these Diana associations that Harry makes. He has to be used to it and passed being upset and more likely he is expecting this.   He is also taking note of Harry‘s behavior towards the hand that feeds him, i.e. , The Bank of Dad, and there will be no The Bank of William when the time comes.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Before I comment further on this subject, please correct me if I’m wrong. From what I’ve read, Diana suffered from bulimia before she met Charles, whereas in Morton’s book she blames Charles. Thanks in advance.



I never heard that she was bulimic until she was with Charles. The tabloids were absolutely brutal about any extra weight she had and Charles himself made insensitive comments about her weight that didn’t help.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I call BS on Meghan being so close to her mother.  She chose to live with her father from whatever age - 13?  Her mother is nice and quiet now so they can use her and claim they're close.  Doesn't mean they really are.


I agree with this. I thought her mother played her role beautifully at the wedding, but that’s all it was a role.  She was very dignified, and didn’t appear to be thrown off by the pomp and glamour and did just great.  When it ended, she went back to her normal life. I suspect her attitude was that she played her part, and what came after with the Harkles was their sh*t to deal with.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I never heard that she was bulimic until she was with Charles. The tabloids were absolutely brutal about any extra weight she had and Charles himself made insensitive comments about her weight that didn’t help.


Yes. That was my understanding as well. She was probably terrified at the role she was expected to play, saw the pictures and realized that she was expected to be slim like a Hollywood actress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Whale noises are more soothing than the grating voices of these idiots.



Chainsaws and bunches of jackhammers on concrete are preferable to listen to over the heaps of stupidity they yap and screech. Seems they trot out Diana when they're pressured to juice the numbers. Compassion! Creative activations! Business verticals! Wha? And.....it's drag out Diana time! All those camera lights and the pain they inflicted. AND THE $$$$$ all those terrible cameras create for the present day Sussex grifters. I'm waiting for them to break off some chips from her tombstone memorial and wear them in necklaces. Maybe that's what they mean by a "creative activation".


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Chainsaws and bunches of jackhammers on concrete are preferable to listen to over the heaps of stupidity they yap and screech. Seems they trot out Diana when they're pressured to juice the numbers. Compassion! Creative activations! Business verticals! Wha? And.....it's drag out Diana time! All those camera lights and the pain they inflicted. AND THE $$$$$ all those terrible cameras create for the present day Sussex grifters. I'm waiting for them to break off some chips from her tombstone memorial and wear them in necklaces. Maybe that's what they mean by a "creative activation".


Dragging out Diana was what People Magazine did routinely when they need a boost. Putting her in the cover meant $$$


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Happy New Year to all!
> 
> I think that at this point, William is just rolling his eyeballs and muttering “typical” to himself when he sees or is told of these Diana associations that Harry makes. He has to be used to it and passed being upset and more likely he is expecting this.   He is also taking note of Harry‘s behavior towards the hand that feeds him, i.e. , The Bank of Dad, and there will be no The Bank of William when the time comes.



It must be particularly hard for William because it always seemed that the brothers had a very close relationship until Meghan showed up. Not that she can be blamed entirely since it should take more than one person’s efforts to turn him against his entire family and everyone he ever knew. Guess Harry was always the envious little brother.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It must be particularly hard for William because it always seemed that the brothers had a very close relationship until Meghan showed up. Not that she can be blamed entirely since it should take more than one person’s efforts to turn him against his entire family and everyone he ever knew. Guess Harry was *always the envious little brother*.


He has certainly proven to be a little man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Agree,  the legend of Diana has taken a beating this  year with the kerfuffle over the famous BBC interview, the story being she was conned into doing it, not a positive story
> 
> Diana is a unique thing - she died tragically at age 37 , at the peak of her good looks, she had shaken some of the dowdy royal fashion and was becoming a very stylish woman
> 
> She was FROZEN (for lack of a better word) in our minds as this paragon of beauty who could do no wrong until all the kerfuffle came up and her halo got tarnished ... let her rest a bit
> 
> Elton John got it right, years ago when he stopped singing the song he did at the funeral, classy that ....
> 
> I hope the garden opening in July will not be a free-for-all of bad behaviour
> 
> PS if you were not aware of the HUGE IMPACT of the kerfuffle .... Charles and Camilla (especially) have taken very low profiles recently, they were forced into turning off comments on web sites, social media because THAT INTERVIEW reminded everyone of their affair during the marriage



I could be wrong, but I thought the low profiles for C&C were due to the recent season of The Crown as much as that interview. Diana claimed the unhappy marriage brought on the bulimia, but I wonder if she struggled in childhood, too. Her behavior issues are well documented — she had the unhappy childhood which must have affected her adult relationships, too.  As many have said, she was no saint. The myth of Diana has overtaken the reality, IMO.  We were sold the myth of happy couple, happy kids, blah blah, which totally misrepresented reality.  Of course, Hwood has sold the myth for decades, it seems only recently that royal families have been exposed. Princess Grace and her kids were some of the first.


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong, but I thought the low profiles for C&C were due to the recent season of The Crown as much as that interview. Diana claimed the unhappy marriage brought on the bulimia, but I wonder if she struggled in childhood, too. Her behavior issues are well documented — she had the unhappy childhood which must have affected her adult relationships, too.  As many have said, she was no saint. The myth of Diana has overtaken the reality, IMO.  We were sold the myth of happy couple, happy kids, blah blah, which totally misrepresented reality.  Of course, Hwood has sold the myth for decades, it seems only recently that royal families have been exposed. Princess Grace and her kids were some of the first.



You’re right about The Crown.  I don’t watch it, but apparently there are scenes and instances depicted with regard to C and C before and during the marriage of Charles and Diana that never happened.  You might call it artistic licence, but to me it smacks of sensationalism.  As a result of what has been depicted on screen, Charles and particularly Camilla have been pilloried by people thinking that The Crown version is true, and comments have been suspended on various social media platforms.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I heard she did struggle with bulimia as a teen.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong, but I thought the low profiles for C&C were due to the recent season of The Crown as much as that interview. Diana claimed the unhappy marriage brought on the bulimia, but I wonder if she struggled in childhood, too. Her behavior issues are well documented — she had the unhappy childhood which must have affected her adult relationships, too.  As many have said, she was no saint. The myth of Diana has overtaken the reality, IMO.  We were sold the myth of happy couple, happy kids, blah blah, which totally misrepresented reality.  Of course, Hwood has sold the myth for decades, it seems only recently that royal families have been exposed. Princess Grace and her kids were some of the first.


Brings to mind the Myth of Camelot as well.  A lot went on with Jack and Jackie Kennedy that's only come out in recent years.  They were hardly the perfect, mythical beings they're made out to be.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I heard she did struggle with bulimia as a teen.



Do you remember where you heard that? Because I don’t remember that possibility ever mentioned until several years after her death when various books came out about her. I am skeptical of the authenticity of those books.  As we saw from Omid Scobie’s efforts, writing a biography does not mean you are writing the truth. 

People with bulimia generally try to hide it from those around them. In that sense we may never know for sure if she had it earlier. And on the other hand, it’s unlikely anybody from her teen years would know either unless she was treated for it, which she wasn’t.


----------



## CobaltBlu

This article touches on Diana's sister's anorexia and her (Diana's) struggles with bulimia in the 70s; in 1997 she told other patients at Roehampton Priory that she struggled as a teen.  

From _Diana: Finally the Complete Story_








						Princess Diana Called Her Bulimia a "Symptom" of Her Unhappy Marriage
					

The Crown depicts the start of her decade-long struggle with bulimia.




					www.oprahmag.com
				




This makes sense, though no doubt the marriage gave it new life....




Maggie Muggins said:


> Before I comment further on this subject, please correct me if I’m wrong. From what I’ve read, Diana suffered from bulimia before she met Charles, whereas in Morton’s book she blames Charles. Thanks in advance.





bag-mania said:


> I never heard that she was bulimic until she was with Charles. The tabloids were absolutely brutal about any extra weight she had and Charles himself made insensitive comments about her weight that didn’t help.





gracekelly said:


> Yes. That was my understanding as well. She was probably terrified at the role she was expected to play, saw the pictures and realized that she was expected to be slim like a Hollywood actress.





CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong, but I thought the low profiles for C&C were due to the recent season of The Crown as much as that interview. Diana claimed the unhappy marriage brought on the bulimia, but I wonder if she struggled in childhood, too. Her behavior issues are well documented — she had the unhappy childhood which must have affected her adult relationships, too.  As many have said, she was no saint. The myth of Diana has overtaken the reality, IMO.  We were sold the myth of happy couple, happy kids, blah blah, which totally misrepresented reality.  Of course, Hwood has sold the myth for decades, it seems only recently that royal families have been exposed. Princess Grace and her kids were some of the first.





lanasyogamama said:


> I heard she did struggle with bulimia as a teen.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Brings to mind the Myth of Camelot as well.  A lot went on with Jack and Jackie Kennedy that's only come out in recent years.  They were hardly the perfect, mythical beings they're made out to be.



True. If Jack had lived, I wonder if they would’ve stayed married their entire lives. Given the time period they lived I expect they would have.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> This article touches on Diana's sister's anorexia and her (Diana's) struggles with bulimia in the 70s; in 1997 she told other patients at Roehampton Priory that she struggled as a teen.
> 
> From _Diana: Finally the Complete Story_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana Called Her Bulimia a "Symptom" of Her Unhappy Marriage
> 
> 
> The Crown depicts the start of her decade-long struggle with bulimia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This makes sense, though no doubt the marriage gave it new life....



That was an interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I didn’t know there were multiple suicide attempts or about Charles’ cufflinks.

On their honeymoon, Charles wore cufflinks that Camilla had given him, which had intertwined "C's," and spoke to her on the phone regularly.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> Harry seems to have taken a play out of Eeelaaahhria Baldwin's playbook.  He's lived here for less than a year, and is already picking up American English and dropping his Queen's English!


Don't you know that he now identifies as American?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> That was an interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I didn’t know there were multiple suicide attempts or about Charles’ cufflinks.
> 
> On their honeymoon, Charles wore cufflinks that Camilla had given him, which had intertwined "C's," and spoke to her on the phone regularly.



Yesss, the eating disorder, the suicide attempts, the cutting, etc. — this is why many never bought the ‘Saint Diana’ myth. She was very disturbed. Her younger brother has struggled with alcohol issues. Even though the Spencers were aristocrats, they have not escaped issues that affect all of us. 

Perhaps this is why William and Harry focus on mental health topics.  When H says he is his mother’s son, is he really telling us he himself has issues? Perhaps this is why he was such a party boy?  More honesty from H&M would make their efforts so much more authentic.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yesss, the eating disorder, the suicide attempts, the cutting, etc. — this is why many never bought the ‘Saint Diana’ myth. She was very disturbed. Her younger brother has struggled with alcohol issues. Even though the Spencers were aristocrats, they have not escaped issues that affect all of us.
> 
> Perhaps this is why William and Harry focus on mental health topics.  When H says he is his mother’s son, is he really telling us he himself has issues? Perhaps this is why he was such a party boy?  More honesty from H&M would make their efforts so much more authentic.


and her mother left the family.  I think for a young child, having a mother abandon them is one of the most damaging things that can happen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

*How Queen personally intervened to stop Harry laying a wreath at the Cenotaph: The monarch took 'two seconds' to decide to refuse grandson from ceremony - as any return to royal life for Sussexes is declared 'dead in the water*
In what was seen as a flagrant publicity stunt, the couple had chosen to release the pictures after Harry had been refused permission for a wreath to be laid at the Cenotaph on his behalf that day, alongside those of other members of his family.

The story around at the time — and it was not publicly corrected because the royals felt strongly it was disrespectful to turn the nation's act of remembrance into a family row — was that Palace officials had made the decision without discussing it with his grandmother.

But, today, I can reveal it was the Queen alone who was behind the refusal — and that it took her 'all of two seconds' to make up her mind.

Cheers to QE


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Happy New Year my fellow TPF members. I've been absent since last year and I've missed you all.
> 
> Will and Kate might want to join us here, it's therapeutic. Let's send them an invention.
> 
> *Prince William 'will be unhappy' Harry is 'exploiting Princess Diana's iconic status' on new Archewell website that is face of multi-million pound Spotify and Netflix venture, says royal expert*
> He told MailOnline today: 'I think William will be slightly worried if Harry uses Diana for any of his charitable or commercial ventures without consulting him, and I don't think he would be happy if Harry appears to be exploiting his mother's iconic status.
> 
> 'It's also very significant that Harry called himself his "mother's son" but has made no mention of Prince Charles. William is very much following now in his father's footsteps with his environmental and conservation work.
> 
> 'And although Harry has praised his father in the past, it seems odd not to mention him more and work in conjunction with him, rather than separately.'
> 
> Mr Dampier added: 'I suspect that part of the reason for the emphasis on mothers is that *Meghan is so close to her mother and of course is estranged from her father*, so perhaps Harry is thinking of her when he concentrates only on Diana.
> 
> More here!


*BS*, *BS*, *BS* .. while I don't know Doria, she seems like a lady who '_does her own thing_' and doesn't make waves .. *AND IMO THAT IS WHY* Meghan is so "CLOSE" to her!!!  I find it very odd that during Meghan's earlier life, she was attached to Thomas's hip, he was the one who she lived with, he was the one who attended all her HS plays (_and oftentimes, did the lighting_), he was the one who paid for all her PS, he was the one who paid for her University education .. and where was Doria? .. ah, the great mystery!  According to my friends who knew the Markles during Meghan's HS years, they NEVER met Doria at Meghan's plays, Doria's name was not even mentioned .. don't you think that if Doria was so close to Meghan, that my friends would have met her -or- at least SEEN her at Meghan's plays????  

To me, Doria played a big part in Meghan's "master plan" .. to exploit her WOC narrative, and more importantly .. Doria was not going to speak up or out of tune with Meghan's narrative!  Doria's is no dummy, I think she knows full well that keeping her mouth shut, staying out of the press (_remember, there was some 'press' in regards to Oprah having Doria sit down and talk with Oprah - hmmmm, that never happened_!) will ensure that she won't get 'markled' .. because as we have seen, even formerly close relatives will get 'markled'. 

In regards to the latest .. the *EXPLOITATION *of Diana, honestly .. (_and I'm not usually the type who is lost for words_), I really have no words for this .. I find it *SO UTTERLY DISGUSTING beyond belief*!  

Other than that .. HAPPY NEW YEAR all of my TPF friends; I sincerely hope that 2021 is a year where we see less hatred (_except for H&M -   _) and more kindness!


----------



## melissatrv

These idiots don't even know what they are talking about.  Let's throw business verticals into the word salad.  

The Queen needs to strip these 2 morons of not only their HRH status but their Duke and Duchess titles and pronto.   




Maggie Muggins said:


> Definition found on the internet:
> Business verticals are *narrow markets* whose specific needs make them especially likely to want your offerings. Vertical markets are customer niches that help a business focus its products and its advertising. Catering to a vertical market is advantageous to a business because of this simplicity and clarity.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Do you remember where you heard that? Because I don’t remember that possibility ever mentioned until several years after her death when various books came out about her. I am skeptical of the authenticity of those books.  As we saw from Omid Scobie’s efforts, writing a biography does not mean you are writing the truth.
> 
> People with bulimia generally try to hide it from those around them. In that sense we may never know for sure if she had it earlier. And on the other hand, it’s unlikely anybody from her teen years would know either unless she was treated for it, which she wasn’t.


It was on the podcast “You’re Wrong About”. They did a great deep dive on Diana.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is what I meant. Color of eyes or skin, height... are only physically characteristics that can be useful to describe a person on IDs, passports...  I never understood why we humans complicate things that should be simple. What distinguishes people are their moral differences, and yes I agree with the description of "MM was a *Z-List Actress*, duped (_or did she?_) JCMH, used then markled individuals and is a *MEGA-LEAGUE* a$$hole".


.. and I 3rd this with some edits ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

-narrow markets = silos = bubbles = H&M‘s lifestyle. Their bubble world serves their own interests which is why they merch the cr@p they merch. They don’t actually buy that stuff themselves. It all their freebies. Those bird nests are exhibit A. Yes, Oprah and Gayle, we so see you.

-Doria — after all the awkwardness [the wedding, the cookbook promo, the scrubbed internet, the Oprah-Marianne connection, etc.], let’s hope this year is indeed the year of MM’s mother. Instead of _telling_ us how dignified, how refined, how elegant she is, _show_ us & let us decide.  Based on the video below, she seems very shy, nervous and uncomfortable. Sure, that is understandable because few people seek the spotlight. So why does MM insist on pushing her forward?  Hmmmm.

Here is the cookbook promo:


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> .. and I 3rd this with some edits ..


Great edits, and I just realized the need of another one: physical physically characteristics


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Before I comment further on this subject, please correct me if I’m wrong. From what I’ve read, Diana suffered from bulimia before she met Charles, whereas in Morton’s book she blames Charles. Thanks in advance.


Recently reread the Morton book .... 

The bulimia started AFTER the engagement was announced.. the book does not blame Charles, the pressure on D at the time was mind boggling , there was always 35 photogs outside her flat ... WOW ! 

I do remember another anecdote in the book, cannot remember exact timing. ... Camilla complained to Charles that 3 photogs were after her ... and SILLY Charles told D what a hard time Camilla was having a hard time from press boo boo ... only an idiot would share that ... 

So bulimia started AFTER engagement, Morton does not blame Charles for it, but you can come to your own conclusion ..

One of Diana’s sisters, not sure if it was the  one that had earlier dated Charles... anyway the sister had earlier suffered from bulimia too , no idea what the cause was or how long it went on ... but bulimia ran in the Spencer family.. that has confused journalists ... and they may not have had dates right, but Morton book is explicit , bulimia was AFTER engagement


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> -narrow markets = silos = bubbles = H&M‘s lifestyle. Their bubble world serves their own interests which is why they merch the cr@p they merch. They don’t actually buy that stuff themselves. It all their freebies. Those bird nests are exhibit A. Yes, Oprah and Gayle, we so see you.
> 
> -Doria — after all the awkwardness [the wedding, the cookbook promo, the scrubbed internet, the Oprah-Marianne connection, etc.], let’s hope this year is indeed the year of MM’s mother. Instead of _telling_ us how dignified, how refined, how elegant she is, _show_ us & let us decide.  Based on the video below, she seems very shy, nervous and uncomfortable. Sure, that is understandable because few people seek the spotlight. So why does MM insist on pushing her forward?  Hmmmm.
> 
> Here is the cookbook promo:



Interesting day that, when Harry let Meghan and her mom go first, or M demanded to go first with mom , depending on your interpretation 

Everyone they went to visit would have been coached about precedence and seen the gaffe that M and D went first, the onlookers were gobsmacked at what happened


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Interesting day that, when Harry let Meghan and her mom go first, or M demanded to go first with mom , depending on your interpretation
> 
> Everyone they went to visit would have been coached about precedence and seen the gaffe that M and D went first, the onlookers were gobsmacked at what happened



It was a graceless entrance choreographed by MM. D’s body language, especially when MM was lecturing/bragging/thanking the crowd about all they MM had done, reveals how uncomfortable she is. D & H look very uninterested with MM’s bs. It’s just odd that MM pushes D forward.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yesss, the eating disorder, the suicide attempts, the cutting, etc. — this is why many never bought the ‘Saint Diana’ myth. She was very disturbed. Her younger brother has struggled with alcohol issues. Even though the Spencers were aristocrats, they have not escaped issues that affect all of us.
> 
> Perhaps this is why William and Harry focus on mental health topics.  When H says he is his mother’s son, is he really telling us he himself has issues? Perhaps this is why he was such a party boy?  More honesty from H&M would make their efforts so much more authentic.



Any popular celebrity who dies young and tragically is immediately put on a pedestal, that is just the way of our culture. They are glorified beyond who they really were for the first several years. After that comes the backlash to that post-death popularity. Biographies with lots of dirt from supposed “sources” and a multitude of criticisms are written by authors eager to make a buck. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

She wasn’t perfect but despite her flaws, I always felt bad for Diana. She had nobody in her corner in that family. The isolation she felt had to have been horrible and it doesn’t seem like she found much happiness in her life. I remember how much she loved her boys however. I bet she would be very sad if she knew they were estranged today.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> True. If Jack had lived, I wonder if they would’ve stayed married their entire lives. Given the time period they lived I expect they would have.


I think so too.  I think she craved the status and admiration of being a president's wife.  I think her mother had taught her and her sister to marry high up.  Politicians wives still stay even today, I think for the same reason.  Often they're more intelligent than their husbands!  I don't get it.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Any popular celebrity who dies young and tragically is immediately put on a pedestal, that is just the way of our culture. They are glorified beyond who they really were for the first several years. After that comes the backlash to that post-death popularity. Biographies with lots of dirt from supposed “sources” and a multitude of criticisms are written by authors eager to make a buck. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
> 
> She wasn’t perfect but despite her flaws, I always felt bad for Diana. She had nobody in her corner in that family. The isolation she felt had to have been horrible and it doesn’t seem like she found much happiness in her life. I remember how much she loved her boys however. I bet she would be very sad if she knew they were estranged today.


I loved her as a child because I had no idea about the truth or drama behind it all.  I agree with you...I think her loneliness was palpable even in pictures and it shows that no amount of money or status brings happiness.  I wonder if they boys would be estranged if she'd lived?


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone else believe that Harry’s accent has changed?  This behavior analyst seems to think so.









						Prince Harry 'drops Queen's RP accent for Estuary English' in podcast
					

Harry and Meghan have entered 'a whole new world of branding as a double act' according to British behaviour expert Judi James, who likened them to TV pairing Holly and Phil.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> True. If Jack had lived, I wonder if they would’ve stayed married their entire lives. Given the time period they lived I expect they would have.



Agree, sad, but true — plenty of studies to show divorced women lose status and income. Jackie knew the facts. Diana regretted her divorce. It’s a tough decision. It’s going to be awhile before this changes. 









						Women Have Less Secure Retirement, Following Lives Filled With Discrimination And Risks
					

Women face a vastly more insecure retirement than men. They have fewer opportunities to save for retirement during their careers. They earn lower wages in part because of discrimination, structural barriers and more economic risks, especially from divorce and caregiving, during their working lives.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chowlover2

I always wondered why Diana was on Kanga's side of her affair with Charles. It happened early on in their marriage while he was still seeing Camilla. It has never made much sense to me. Diana even wore some of Kanga's clothing line. Not to mention she was much prettier than Camilla. ( IMO )


----------



## bag-mania

chowlover2 said:


> I always wondered why Diana was on Kanga's side of her affair with Charles. It happened early on in their marriage while he was still seeing Camilla. It has never made much sense to me. Diana even wore some of Kanga's clothing line. Not to mention she was much prettier than Camilla. ( IMO )



Both women shared a mutual hatred for Camilla. You know the old proverb “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” I don’t think Diana considered her to be the threat to her marriage that Camilla obviously was.

I have sympathy for Kanga.  She came to a horrible end as well. She survived cancer and an addiction to painkillers, only to be critically injured falling from a window (some say she was pushed, some say she jumped.) Then her husband divorced her and she gets a mental health detention because she claimed someone was trying to kill her. Later that year she mysteriously dies from blood poisoning, only a few months after Diana’s death.

Being involved with Charles is not good for a woman’s mental or physical health.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> It was a graceless entrance choreographed by MM. D’s body language, especially when MM was lecturing/bragging/thanking the crowd about all they MM had done, reveals how uncomfortable she is. D & H look very uninterested with MM’s bs. It’s just odd that MM pushes D forward.


----------



## csshopper

carryon,
I think MM wants Doria with her for the times she wants to emphasize being a WOC. They both shamelessly use their mothers IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I wonder if they boys would be estranged if she'd lived?



I feel had she lived Harry would not have been such easy prey.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel had she lived Harry would not have been such easy prey.


Exactly my thoughts too.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Any popular celebrity who dies young and tragically is immediately put on a pedestal, that is just the way of our culture. They are glorified beyond who they really were for the first several years. After that comes the backlash to that post-death popularity. Biographies with lots of dirt from supposed “sources” and a multitude of criticisms are written by authors eager to make a buck. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
> 
> She wasn’t perfect but despite her flaws, I always felt bad for Diana. She had nobody in her corner in that family. The isolation she felt had to have been horrible and it doesn’t seem like she found much happiness in her life. I remember how much she loved her boys however. I bet she would be very sad if she knew they were estranged today.


i like your expression - PUT ON A PEDESTAL - better than mine - FROZEN - which, LOL, I actually read somewhere, and OMG plagiarized ... 
Must go do a good deed as penance


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone else believe that Harry’s accent has changed?  This behavior analyst seems to think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'drops Queen's RP accent for Estuary English' in podcast
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have entered 'a whole new world of branding as a double act' according to British behaviour expert Judi James, who likened them to TV pairing Holly and Phil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



There is a term for it - cultural acclimatization, I think,  one picks up the local accent and customs by osmosis , not an intentional or deliberate process for some ... just second nature - not an affectation ... but he may have been coached

Not everyone can hear the differences, and/or make the vocal muscle changes though, some are super sensitive to the aural changes, and can easily mimic them,  not all


----------



## lanasyogamama

The only accent impersonation o can do is Martha Stewart.


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means!
*Prince Harry's Apple TV mental health documentary with Oprah Winfrey stalls after facing several delays - despite being in the making for more than two years*
The multi-part documentary series, which the pair worked on for 'several months' last year during a number of 'secret meetings in London', will focus on both mental illness and mental wellness, and aims to inspire viewers to have an honest conversation about the challenges they face.

In April last year, the Duke of Sussex announced a partnership with Oprah Winfrey as co-creators and executive producers of the mental health documentary series for Apple.

At the time, a post from the Duke and Duchess' Sussex Royal Instagram page in 2019 said: 'We are excited to announce The Duke of Sussex and Oprah Winfrey are partners, co-creators and executive producers on their forthcoming mental health series launching on Apple in 2020.'

The news comes weeks after the Duchess cannily using her connections by gifting Oprah a bundle of coffee from a company she invested in to plug to her 19 million followers on Instagram.

One of the sponsors-Oprah 

Maybe this explains:


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means!
> *Prince Harry's Apple TV mental health documentary with Oprah Winfrey stalls after facing several delays - despite being in the making for more than two years*
> The multi-part documentary series, which the pair worked on for 'several months' last year during a number of 'secret meetings in London', will focus on both mental illness and mental wellness, and aims to inspire viewers to have an honest conversation about the challenges they face.
> 
> In April last year, the Duke of Sussex announced a partnership with Oprah Winfrey as co-creators and executive producers of the mental health documentary series for Apple.
> 
> At the time, a post from the Duke and Duchess' Sussex Royal Instagram page in 2019 said: 'We are excited to announce The Duke of Sussex and Oprah Winfrey are partners, co-creators and executive producers on their forthcoming mental health series launching on Apple in 2020.'
> 
> The news comes weeks after the Duchess cannily using her connections by gifting Oprah a bundle of coffee from a company she invested in to plug to her 19 million followers on Instagram.
> 
> One of the sponsors-Oprah
> 
> Maybe this explains:
> View attachment 4944519
> 
> View attachment 4944520



The rational part of me knows that projects like this get canceled all the time for any number of reasons. The part of me that posts here assumes  it’s typical Meghan and Harry, it was all talk and they never had a coherent plan.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> carryon,
> I think MM wants Doria with her for the times she wants to emphasize being a WOC. They both shamelessly use their mothers IMO.


The difference is that Doria is giving her consent and probably benefiting from the situation. Diana's memory should be preserved and she should be able to rest in peace.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> i like your expression - PUT ON A PEDESTAL - better than mine - FROZEN - which, LOL, I actually read somewhere, and OMG plagiarized ...
> Must go do a good deed as penance


You're not doing anything the best known plagiarizer, MM, wouldn't do!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel had she lived Harry would not have been such easy prey.



Yes, Diana would have made the effort to always stay in touch even when the boys were grown. Charles never gave the impression of being a particularly engaged or involved father though I know he loves his sons. It’s hard to gauge how much personal guidance (if any) he gave them.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *BS*, *BS*, *BS* .. while I don't know Doria, she seems like a lady who '_does her own thing_' and doesn't make waves .. *AND IMO THAT IS WHY* Meghan is so "CLOSE" to her!!!  I find it very odd that during Meghan's earlier life, she was attached to Thomas's hip, he was the one who she lived with, he was the one who attended all her HS plays (_and oftentimes, did the lighting_), he was the one who paid for all her PS, he was the one who paid for her University education .. and where was Doria? .. ah, the great mystery!  According to my friends who knew the Markles during Meghan's HS years, they NEVER met Doria at Meghan's plays, Doria's name was not even mentioned .. don't you think that if Doria was so close to Meghan, that my friends would have met her -or- at least SEEN her at Meghan's plays????
> 
> To me, Doria played a big part in Meghan's "master plan" .. to exploit her WOC narrative, and more importantly .. Doria was not going to speak up or out of tune with Meghan's narrative!  Doria's is no dummy, I think she knows full well that keeping her mouth shut, staying out of the press (_remember, there was some 'press' in regards to Oprah having Doria sit down and talk with Oprah - hmmmm, that never happened_!) will ensure that she won't get 'markled' .. because as we have seen, even formerly close relatives will get 'markled'.
> 
> In regards to the latest .. the *EXPLOITATION *of Diana, honestly .. (_and I'm not usually the type who is lost for words_), I really have no words for this .. I find it *SO UTTERLY DISGUSTING beyond belief*!
> 
> Other than that .. HAPPY NEW YEAR all of my TPF friends; I sincerely hope that 2021 is a year where we see less hatred (_except for H&M -   _) and more kindness!


Happy new year to you Ceejay


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

purseinsanity said:


> I loved her as a child because I had no idea about the truth or drama behind it all.  I agree with you...I think her loneliness was palpable even in pictures and it shows that no amount of money or status brings happiness.  I wonder if they boys would be estranged if she'd lived?



Don't slam me, but IMHO Diana was a master manipulator of how she was photographed.  She often used her body language and facial expressions to sway public opinion re her unhappy marriage.  IMHO she posed unhappiness way more when she knew she was being photographed, e.g. the Taj Mahal solo photo, the sad faces, etc.  I don't doubt she was unhappy with her marriage; but her "victim" photos don't reveal her various affairs etc.  Both parties were extremely unhappy and sought solice elsewhere.




bag-mania said:


> Yes, Diana would have made the effort to always stay in touch even when the boys were grown. Charles never gave the impression of being a particularly engaged or involved father though I know he loves his sons. It’s hard to gauge how much personal guidance (if any) he gave them.



IDK how involved his was while Diana was alive, but I think it's clear that Charles made great efforts as a father after she died.  In reality, the boys were at boarding school and Diana took many trips without them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone else believe that Harry’s accent has changed?  This behavior analyst seems to think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'drops Queen's RP accent for Estuary English' in podcast
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have entered 'a whole new world of branding as a double act' according to British behaviour expert Judi James, who likened them to TV pairing Holly and Phil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I really don't give a f....


----------



## rose60610

I can't believe Harry is "losing" his accent. If he is, it's probably in rebellion. I thought Meghan loved Brits (especially world famous wealthy prince ones), and if Harry is losing the accent she can't be liking it. Or is it another instance of playing the reporters for publicity?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, sad, but true — plenty of studies to show divorced women lose status and income. Jackie knew the facts. Diana regretted her divorce. It’s a tough decision. It’s going to be awhile before this changes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Women Have Less Secure Retirement, Following Lives Filled With Discrimination And Risks
> 
> 
> Women face a vastly more insecure retirement than men. They have fewer opportunities to save for retirement during their careers. They earn lower wages in part because of discrimination, structural barriers and more economic risks, especially from divorce and caregiving, during their working lives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



Despite so many amazing achievements and huge sacrifices, women have still a long way to go...
Current example, COVID vaccines use a mRNA technology developed years ago by Katalin Kariko, a bright and hard working woman who had a very difficult career, which included lack of funding and demotion.

This is why I get really upset with people (leeches) like MM calling themselves feminists. Women like MM only delay progress imo.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I can't believe Harry is "losing" his accent. If he is, it's probably in rebellion. I thought Meghan loved Brits (especially world famous wealthy prince ones), and if Harry is losing the accent she can't be liking it. Or is it another instance of playing the reporters for publicity?


He's not seeing that many people but his wife and the servants are probably all American so I could see him being influenced that way.  But that's different than adopting another type of english accent, isn't it?


----------



## bisousx

rose60610 said:


> I can't believe Harry is "losing" his accent. If he is, it's probably in rebellion. I thought Meghan loved Brits (especially world famous wealthy prince ones), and if Harry is losing the accent she can't be liking it. Or is it another instance of playing the reporters for publicity?



Maybe Harry took a page from Hilaria Baldwin - adopt new accent to celebrate the start of new identity. Then host podcast about nothing, hawk coffee products with celebrity endorsements (use the code HARRY10 at checkout!)... the best is yet to come.


----------



## rose60610

Harry has been in the country, what, five minutes? And he's already "losing" his accent? Give me a break. My husband's aunt came over from Italy over 60 years ago and you can still can barely understand her. Though she must have made herself understood well enough to have purchased the most beautiful wardrobe and jewels you've ever seen.


----------



## pukasonqo

bisousx said:


> Maybe Harry took a page from Hilaria Baldwin - adopt new accent to celebrate the start of new identity. Then host podcast about nothing, hawk coffee products with celebrity endorsements (use the code HARRY10 at checkout!)... the best is yet to come.


 Spare us the yoga poses on the stove!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The difference is that Doria is giving her consent and probably benefiting from the situation. Diana's memory should be preserved and she should be able to rest in peace.



This. This is entering body snatcher territory and leaves such a bad aftertaste (as well as bringing in Archie in what should have been a harmless enough undertaking - had the Cambridges done the same it would have been cute and natural, with these two everything comes across as them having an agenda and wanting to make a profit).


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> Don't slam me, but IMHO Diana was a master manipulator of how she was photographed.  She often used her body language and facial expressions to sway public opinion re her unhappy marriage.  IMHO she posed unhappiness way more when she knew she was being photographed, e.g. the Taj Mahal solo photo, the sad faces, etc.  I don't doubt she was unhappy with her marriage; but her "victim" photos don't reveal her various affairs etc.  Both parties were extremely unhappy and sought solice elsewhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IDK how involved his was while Diana was alive, but I think it's clear that Charles made great efforts as a father after she died.  In reality, the boys were at boarding school and Diana took many trips without them.



Are you saying she should have pretended she was really happy when she was photographed to make her marriage look better than it was for the royal family’s sake?    They did nothing to help her. She learned how to use the media out of necessity. She didn’t start out that way. I can’t blame her for having affairs either. It would have been stupid for her to stay faithful when Charles had been cheating almost from the start.  I think she craved affection from somebody. There was so much resentment on both sides in that marriage.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Harry has been in the country, what, five minutes? And he's already "losing" his accent? Give me a break. My husband's aunt came over from Italy over 60 years ago and you can still can barely understand her. Though she must have made herself understood well enough to have purchased the most beautiful wardrobe and jewels you've ever seen.



Maybe Meghan has been his voice coach. With her extensive acting experience I’m sure she has been preparing him for his podcast debut.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Are you saying she should have pretended she was really happy when she was photographed to make her marriage look better than it was for the royal family’s sake?    They did nothing to help her. She learned how to use the media out of necessity. She didn’t start out that way. I can’t blame her for having affairs either. It would have been stupid for her to stay faithful when Charles had been cheating almost from the start.  I think she craved affection from somebody. There was so much resentment on both sides in that marriage.




I didn't say I thought she should pretend to be happy.  Or be faithful.  I just said she posed for the cameras.  I think that we were often seeing an act.  She wanted people to sympathize with her as a innocent victim and Charles as a monster.  I think they were two very unhappy people, equally finding happiness with others.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I didn't say I thought she should pretend to be happy.  Or be faithful.  I just said she posed for the cameras.  I think that we were often seeing an act.  She wanted people to sympathize with her as a innocent victim and Charles as a monster.  I think they were two very unhappy people, equally finding happiness with others.



Oh, okay. Well, I have no way of knowing whether she was playing up the misery for sympathy or not. But I believe she was genuinely unhappy for much of the marriage, though certainly not for the entire time. They were very different people and I suppose the relationship was always doomed.

I am more sympathetic to Diana than some here, likely because I cannot imagine being married to someone like Charles.


----------



## gracekelly

My sympathy with Diana is that I think she was hornswoggled into the marriage for the most part and fell for the "I'll be a Princess..."  She was just part of other people's agendas.
I do agree with @lulilu that she knew how to play to the camera.  Fast learner from the early pictures.  At the Bashir interview, she piled on the mascara and the eyeliner and had that downcast look down pat, especially when she said "three in the marriage.  Certainly the Taj Mahal picture was a classic in the "poor me category."


----------



## bag-mania

Ooooo, while we strayed a bit off topic, let’s see what Samantha has been up to, shall we?  



THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister.

Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday.

The 330-page tome promises to tell the “hidden truths about her family, as a royal fairy plummets from the tea towels”.

It also says “things are not always as they seem” and “truth is stranger than fiction”.

Samantha, 56, is the eldest daughter of Thomas Markle, 76. She has been a vocal critic of Meghan, once calling her “a shallow social climber” with “a soft spot for gingers”.

Meghan, 39, has slammed the claims as “absurd” and said her half-sister hardly knows her.

The memoir has been in the pipeline for four years and Meghan was said to have been “in tears” when she first heard her half-sister was writing it.

One insider said: “The book may never be on sale in Britain because of our tighter libel laws but it will be all over the internet.”

Samantha, a former model and actress, has not spoken to Meghan for years and has accused her of abandoning Thomas.

The Duchess will face him in the High Court after one of her letters to him was published in the press.

It comes five months after the book Finding Freedom was released — which both Meghan and hubby Prince Harry, 36, deny involvement with.









						Meghan Markle's sister Samantha set to reveal all in bombshell memoir
					

THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister. Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday. The …



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

For some reason it doesn’t look like Amazon is carrying this book but it is available on Barnes and Noble. 






						BN No Results Page
					






					m.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Ooooo, while we strayed a bit off topic, let’s see what Samantha has been up to, shall we?
> 
> View attachment 4944925
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister.
> 
> Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday.
> 
> The 330-page tome promises to tell the “hidden truths about her family, as a royal fairy plummets from the tea towels”.
> 
> It also says “things are not always as they seem” and “truth is stranger than fiction”.
> 
> Samantha, 56, is the eldest daughter of Thomas Markle, 76. She has been a vocal critic of Meghan, once calling her “a shallow social climber” with “a soft spot for gingers”.
> 
> Meghan, 39, has slammed the claims as “absurd” and said her half-sister hardly knows her.
> 
> The memoir has been in the pipeline for four years and Meghan was said to have been “in tears” when she first heard her half-sister was writing it.
> 
> One insider said: “The book may never be on sale in Britain because of our tighter libel laws but it will be all over the internet.”
> 
> Samantha, a former model and actress, has not spoken to Meghan for years and has accused her of abandoning Thomas.
> 
> The Duchess will face him in the High Court after one of her letters to him was published in the press.
> 
> It comes five months after the book Finding Freedom was released — which both Meghan and hubby Prince Harry, 36, deny involvement with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister Samantha set to reveal all in bombshell memoir
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister. Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday. The …
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



This book was sitting on ice for years and the rumor was because of possible libel issues.  I want to know what she left out so she could get it published or.....what was in there that the publishers was afraid of and it came out anyway by another source so now it could be published.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ooooo, while we strayed a bit off topic, let’s see what Samantha has been up to, shall we?
> 
> View attachment 4944925
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister.
> 
> Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday.
> 
> The 330-page tome promises to tell the “hidden truths about her family, as a royal fairy plummets from the tea towels”.
> 
> It also says “things are not always as they seem” and “truth is stranger than fiction”.
> 
> Samantha, 56, is the eldest daughter of Thomas Markle, 76. She has been a vocal critic of Meghan, once calling her “a shallow social climber” with “a soft spot for gingers”.
> 
> Meghan, 39, has slammed the claims as “absurd” and said her half-sister hardly knows her.
> 
> The memoir has been in the pipeline for four years and Meghan was said to have been “in tears” when she first heard her half-sister was writing it.
> 
> One insider said: “The book may never be on sale in Britain because of our tighter libel laws but it will be all over the internet.”
> 
> Samantha, a former model and actress, has not spoken to Meghan for years and has accused her of abandoning Thomas.
> 
> The Duchess will face him in the High Court after one of her letters to him was published in the press.
> 
> It comes five months after the book Finding Freedom was released — which both Meghan and hubby Prince Harry, 36, deny involvement with.l
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister Samantha set to reveal all in bombshell memoir
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister. Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday. The …
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


love the title....I doubt M was in tears....I think more likely throwing a tantrum and calling the lawyers


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Ooooo, while we strayed a bit off topic, let’s see what Samantha has been up to, shall we?
> 
> View attachment 4944925
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister.
> 
> Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday.
> 
> The 330-page tome promises to tell the “hidden truths about her family, as a royal fairy plummets from the tea towels”.
> 
> It also says “things are not always as they seem” and “truth is stranger than fiction”.
> 
> Samantha, 56, is the eldest daughter of Thomas Markle, 76. She has been a vocal critic of Meghan, once calling her “a shallow social climber” with “a soft spot for gingers”.
> 
> Meghan, 39, has slammed the claims as “absurd” and said her half-sister hardly knows her.
> 
> The memoir has been in the pipeline for four years and Meghan was said to have been “in tears” when she first heard her half-sister was writing it.
> 
> One insider said: “The book may never be on sale in Britain because of our tighter libel laws but it will be all over the internet.”
> 
> Samantha, a former model and actress, has not spoken to Meghan for years and has accused her of abandoning Thomas.
> 
> The Duchess will face him in the High Court after one of her letters to him was published in the press.
> 
> It comes five months after the book Finding Freedom was released — which both Meghan and hubby Prince Harry, 36, deny involvement with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister Samantha set to reveal all in bombshell memoir
> 
> 
> THE Duchess of Sussex is set to be rocked by a bombshell memoir penned by her outspoken sister. Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday. The …
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



A lot of these books are of the sour grapes variety. As much as I'm not a huge fan of M, Samantha stands to make a good buck off the book and it'll be interesting to see what comes of it. I'm glad it's been in the works "four years" so it'll include the move, etc.  M&H moved very fast so the publisher was probably holding off until they lived in one place for more than a few weeks, or the book would have been quite outdated by its release date. Me-gain can't be too surprised by this. Especially since she markled the whole family and threw them under the bus. I can't imagine The Palace even commenting on it and I hope the BRF totally ignores it. M probably expects the Crown to come running to her defense , and by doing nothing it'd be like hanging her out to dry .  I'll wait for the highlights to come out on social media (or here).  M's sugar's will defend her, others won't. Most won't care one way or the other.

On a different note, DH gave me the book "The Other Side of the Coin" by Angela Kelly, the Queen's main dresser. It's very interesting and you can tell there was a lot of vetting, but still. I'm surprised she was allowed to tell about the time when the Queen's jeweler inadvertently kicked one of her corgi's. There's briefest mention of Meghan in it, focusing on the outfit QEII wore to the wedding. 

Come on, Samantha, don't disappoint.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> A lot of these books are of the sour grapes variety. As much as I'm not a huge fan of M, Samantha stands to make a good buck off the book and it'll be interesting to see what comes of it. I'm glad it's been in the works "four years" so it'll include the move, etc.  M&H moved very fast so the publisher was probably holding off until they lived in one place for more than a few weeks, or the book would have been quite outdated by its release date. Me-gain can't be too surprised by this. Especially since she markled the whole family and threw them under the bus. I can't imagine The Palace even commenting on it and I hope the BRF totally ignores it. M probably expects the Crown to come running to her defense , and by doing nothing it'd be like hanging her out to dry .  I'll wait for the highlights to come out on social media (or here).  M's sugar's will defend her, others won't. Most won't care one way or the other.
> 
> On a different note, DH gave me the book "The Other Side of the Coin" by Angela Kelly, the Queen's main dresser. It's very interesting and you can tell there was a lot of vetting, but still. I'm surprised she was allowed to tell about the time when the Queen's jeweler inadvertently kicked one of her corgi's. There's briefest mention of Meghan in it, focusing on the outfit QEII wore to the wedding.
> 
> Come on, Samantha, don't disappoint.


I'll bet her hero husband will have something to say ....you know - protecting his wife


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> A lot of these books are of the sour grapes variety. As much as I'm not a huge fan of M, Samantha stands to make a good buck off the book and it'll be interesting to see what comes of it. I'm glad it's been in the works "four years" so it'll include the move, etc.  M&H moved very fast so the publisher was probably holding off until they lived in one place for more than a few weeks, or the book would have been quite outdated by its release date. Me-gain can't be too surprised by this. Especially since she markled the whole family and threw them under the bus. I can't imagine The Palace even commenting on it and I hope the BRF totally ignores it. M probably expects the Crown to come running to her defense , and by doing nothing it'd be like hanging her out to dry .  I'll wait for the highlights to come out on social media (or here).  M's sugar's will defend her, others won't. Most won't care one way or the other.
> 
> On a different note, DH gave me the book "The Other Side of the Coin" by Angela Kelly, the Queen's main dresser. It's very interesting and you can tell there was a lot of vetting, but still. I'm surprised she was allowed to tell about the time when the Queen's jeweler inadvertently kicked one of her corgi's. There's briefest mention of Meghan in it, focusing on the outfit QEII wore to the wedding.
> 
> Come on, Samantha, don't disappoint.



I wonder if they preemptively threatened Amazon with a lawsuit and that’s why it isn’t listed there.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if they preemptively threatened Amazon with a lawsuit and that’s why it isn’t listed there.


could be since retaining attorneys seems to be one of their favorite things to do


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> could be since retaining attorneys seems to be one of their favorite things to do



It’s probably a badly written book but I’m still interested in what she has to say. It’s about 330 pages and that is only “Part 1.”  Makes you wonder how much more Samantha could possibly have in reserve.


----------



## csshopper

I wonder if Attorney fees are part of their monthly budget?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> For some reason it doesn’t look like Amazon is carrying this book but it is available on Barnes and Noble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BN No Results Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> m.barnesandnoble.com


Interesting, I bet that MM's PR teams & lawyers will be making it difficult to sell the book in certain platforms.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> I wonder if Attorney fees are part of their monthly budget?


they would have to be IMO


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It’s probably a badly written book but I’m still interested in what she has to say. It’s about 330 pages and that is only “Part 1.”  Makes you wonder how much more Samantha could possibly have in reserve.


It may not be a badly written book, I heard Samantha talking about her sister and she was very articulate. I wonder if DM will be publishing parts of it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Both women shared a mutual hatred for Camilla. You know the old proverb “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” I don’t think Diana considered her to be the threat to her marriage that Camilla obviously was.
> 
> I have sympathy for Kanga.  She came to a horrible end as well. She survived cancer and an addiction to painkillers, only to be critically injured falling from a window (some say she was pushed, some say she jumped.) Then her husband divorced her and she gets a mental health detention because she claimed someone was trying to kill her. Later that year she mysteriously dies from blood poisoning, only a few months after Diana’s death.
> 
> Being involved with Charles is not good for a woman’s mental or physical health.


wow, I'm not familiar with her


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> carryon,
> I think MM wants Doria with her for the times she wants to emphasize being a WOC. They both shamelessly use their mothers IMO.


I wonder if that is the same reason Doria didn't appear at her recitals.....at that time she didn't see having a WOC as a mom as an advantage?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, Diana would have made the effort to always stay in touch even when the boys were grown. Charles never gave the impression of being a particularly engaged or involved father though I know he loves his sons. It’s hard to gauge how much personal guidance (if any) he gave them.


from what I can see Diana was a much warmer and more natural mother.  I think Charles probably tried very hard to step up after her death


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> For some reason it doesn’t look like Amazon is carrying this book but it is available on Barnes and Noble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BN No Results Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> m.barnesandnoble.com


I typed the title of the book and Amazon, and got this:


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wow, I'm not familiar with her



Her real name was Dale Tryon  and Charles described her as “the only woman who ever understood me.” Take that, manufactured story of Camilla being the one and only woman Charles truly loved.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> If typed the title of the book and Amazon, and got this:
> View attachment 4944978


could that be because it's not out yet?


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if they preemptively threatened Amazon with a lawsuit and that’s why it isn’t listed there.


How can they do that? They now have the ability to suppress books?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> from what I can see Diana was a much warmer and more natural mother.  I think Charles probably tried very hard to step up after her death



Yes, I think she would have preferred that the boys not be sent away to boarding school but that decision was out of her hands.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> could that be because it's not out yet?



Amazon usually provides a pre-order option for books that aren’t out yet. This book isn’t there at all.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, I think she would have preferred that the boys not be sent away to boarding school but that decision was out of her hands.


is is showing up available anywhere?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> How can they do that? They now have the ability to suppress books?



It is only a guess. If H&M are crying libel before the book comes out, Amazon might have held off to avoid the drama and lawsuit. 

I wonder if the press will be equally hands off.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> could that be because it's not out yet?


It could be, but MM's autobiography (aka Finding Freedom) was available for purchase before its release. I'll keep looking, I would like to read the book.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> is is showing up available anywhere?



Barnes and Noble will have it although it looks like it has an old thumbnail image for the cover.  Here’s the link. 





						BN No Results Page
					






					m.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is only a guess. If H&M are crying libel before the book comes out, Amazon might have held off to avoid the drama and lawsuit.
> 
> I wonder if the press will be equally hands off.


that seems ridiculous to me....Amazon could well afford to defend a lawsuit....and on what grounds?  Meghan doesn't like it?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Barnes and Noble will have it although it looks like it has an old thumbnail image for the cover.  Here’s the link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BN No Results Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> m.barnesandnoble.com


normal paperback doesn't cost that much does it?


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, it shows already as Best Seller on Barnes and Noble. It's time to sponsor B&N


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Wow, it shows as Best Seller on Barnes and Noble. It's time to sponsor B&N
> View attachment 4945008


title cracks me up


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> normal paperback doesn't cost that much does it?



Trade paperbacks can. They are a larger format. It looks like this one is 9”x 6”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

I am no legal expert. Can you sue a book distributor/retailer for libel? I'd imagine if they want to sue someone, it would be the author/publisher? 

Besides, they already said Finding Freebies was under creative license in their other law suit document, i don't see how they can then argue Samantha's book isn't.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> Don't slam me, but IMHO Diana was a master manipulator of how she was photographed.  She often used her body language and facial expressions to sway public opinion re her unhappy marriage.  IMHO she posed unhappiness way more when she knew she was being photographed, e.g. the Taj Mahal solo photo, the sad faces, etc.  I don't doubt she was unhappy with her marriage; but her "victim" photos don't reveal her various affairs etc.  Both parties were extremely unhappy and sought solice elsewhere.


I'd never slam you!    ITA.  She was an expert at playing the victim.  Harry and MM probably took some pointers from her!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> title cracks me up


I hope Samantha was not afraid to publish all the information that supports the title. She was apparently being harassed because of her comments about MM.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Despite so many amazing achievements and huge sacrifices, women have still a long way to go...
> Current example, COVID vaccines use a mRNA technology developed years ago by Katalin Kariko, a bright and hard working woman who had a very difficult career, which included lack of funding and demotion.
> 
> This is why I get really upset with people (leeches) like MM calling themselves feminists. Women like MM only delay progress imo.


ITA.  To this day, my blood boils when I hear "Watson and Crick discovered DNA" when in reality they stole Rosalind Franklin's data.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It may not be a badly written book, I heard Samantha talking about her sister and she was very articulate. I wonder if DM will be publishing parts of it.


Plus, I'm sure she had a ghostwriter help her.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I hope Samantha was not afraid to publish all the information that supports the title. She was apparently being harassed because of her comments about MM.



my attention span is too short for the whole interview but she seems pretty articulate here and looks better than what I recall of her from the past


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  To this day, it my blood boils when I hear "Watson and Crick discovered DNA" when in reality they stole Rosalind Franklin's data.


Haha, we share the same . She died of cancer most likely because of her exposure to radiation when trying to get the DNA images and Watson got the Nobel ...


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Plus, I'm sure she had a ghostwriter help her.


I wonder if she has the funds for that. She is not married to a rich prince.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Haha, we share the same . She died of cancer most likely because of her exposure to radiation when trying to get the DNA images and Watson got the Nobel ...


Yep!  I always loved history, but with the current state of journalism and the fact that more investigation shows how many people credited with discovering/inventing things really stole their work (Edison and Tesla!) makes me wonder how much of it is BS.  I don't know what to believe any more.  Very sad.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if she has the funds for that. She is not married to a rich prince.


She's not, but maybe they get a percentage of the profits?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She's not, but maybe they get a percentage of the profits?


That could be. I hope she has a good lawyer too.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Harry has been in the country, what, five minutes? And he's already "losing" his accent? Give me a break. My husband's aunt came over from Italy over 60 years ago and you can still can barely understand her. Though she must have made herself understood well enough to have purchased the most beautiful wardrobe and jewels you've ever seen.


everyone is different....I knew two Italian sisters years ago.  When they came to the US, older sister was maybe 13, younger one 11, something like that.  Older sister had a definite Italian accent.  Younger one talked like an American.  It's not like the age difference was that huge.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> That could be. I hope she has a good lawyer too.


hope so....her dad isn't in a positon to help her


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> hope so....her dad isn't in a positon to help her


Yep, it looks like he spent all the lottery money with MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Oh, okay. Well, I have no way of knowing whether she was playing up the misery for sympathy or not. But I believe she was genuinely unhappy for much of the marriage, though certainly not for the entire time. They were very different people and I suppose the relationship was always doomed.
> 
> I am more sympathetic to Diana than some here, likely because I cannot imagine being married to someone like Charles.



I cannot imagine any 21st century female choosing the BRF and its lifestyle ever. Diana was an aristocrat, knew and lived the rules, and did indeed play the public for ‘sympathy’ — much as Harry is doing now. She knew how to dominate the headlines. In other words, plenty of evidence suggests she was a privileged, entitled Drama Queen, just as Harry is a privileged, entitled Drama King. Neither one needs nor deserves my sympathy. 

Since I was duped all those years ago by the Diana-myth, too, I learned not to believe the royal pr. There is always a hidden agenda involved. So, when a divorced, world-ly, nearly 40 yr old female chooses to marry that lifestyle, I suspect a hidden agenda. When a mid-30 yr old, former soldier/party-prince chooses an older, American divorcee — my spidey-senses go hmmmmm.  On paper it does not make lots of sense - unless the next King is working on a Great Reset.    Perhaps all the puzzle pieces will fit after all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I cannot imagine any 21st century female choosing the BRF and its lifestyle ever. Diana was an aristocrat, knew and lived the rules, and did indeed play the public for ‘sympathy’ — much as Harry is doing now. She knew how to dominate the headlines. In other words, plenty of evidence suggests she was a privileged, entitled Drama Queen, just as Harry is a privileged, entitled Drama King. Neither one needs nor deserves my sympathy.
> 
> Since I was duped all those years ago by the Diana-myth, too, I learned not to believe the royal pr. There is always a hidden agenda involved. So, when a divorced, world-ly, nearly 40 yr old female chooses to marry that lifestyle, I suspect a hidden agenda. When a mid-30 yr old, former soldier/party-prince chooses an older, American divorcee — my spidey-senses go hmmmmm.  On paper it does not make lots of sense - unless the next King is working on a Great Reset.    Perhaps all the puzzle pieces will fit after all.


I could see where a mediocre cable TV show supporting actress would find it appealing to become a royal.  She immediately became a household name.  What a dream for an ambitious social climber.  But I guess she didn't really understand all that came with it.  Or, as many here think, she never planned to truly live the life.  But she is now living a Much higher standard of life and Everyone knows who she is.  The Duchess!


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> I wonder if Attorney fees are part of their monthly budget?



They'd have to be



Chanbal said:


> Interesting, I bet that MM's PR teams & lawyers will be making it difficult to sell the book in certain platforms.



Don't believe they'd have that kind of influence


[/QUOTE]


Chanbal said:


> I wonder if she has the funds for that. She is not married to a rich prince.



Book advance? Samantha holds some juicy cards.


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> How can they do that? They now have the ability to suppress books?



Please don't let the answer be that Bezos is carrying a torch for her or is even an acquaintance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I could see where a mediocre cable TV show supporting actress would find it appealing to become a royal.  She immediately became a household name.  What a dream for an ambitious social climber.  But I guess she didn't really understand all that came with it.  Or, as many here think, she never planned to truly live the life.  But she is now living a Much higher standard of life and Everyone knows who she is.  The Duchess!



Wonder if she really believes she has a much higher standard of life? Different, yes. IMO it’s the trade-offs. Sure, everyone knows her name, but only in terms of her husband. Sure, she lives in a pricey enclave, but it requires mega-dollars to maintain which means she is still chasing jobs which require that she must maintain a certain ‘look’ in her fashion as well as in her home. In other words, she is still living up to someone else’s expectations. Her life is not her own — it all depends on _him_. He could leave any time. Her current work does not reflect that her skills have improved much at all.  Since it is doubtful that H has the cash-flow she thought he had, she has increased the demands made on her without a cash benefit. Unless she is banking some cash in a private fund, she stands to lose lots. Diana and Sarah did.


----------



## 1LV

Whether or not she and Harry remain married, whether or not she ever or never works again Archie is her guarantee that *her *idea of the good life is secured.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if she really believes she has a much higher standard of life? Different, yes. IMO it’s the trade-offs. Sure, everyone knows her name, but only in terms of her husband. Sure, she lives in a pricey enclave, but it requires mega-dollars to maintain which means she is still chasing jobs which require that she must maintain a certain ‘look’ in her fashion as well as in her home. In other words, she is still living up to someone else’s expectations. Her life is not her own — it all depends on _him_. He could leave any time. Her current work does not reflect that her skills have improved much at all.  Since it is doubtful that H has the cash-flow she thought he had, she has increased the demands made on her without a cash benefit. Unless she is banking some cash in a private fund, she stands to lose lots. Diana and Sarah did.


you're looking it at objectively....she sees it (IMO) as "I Am The Duchess".....and I do think living in a 16 bath home with acreage and a playhouse bigger than some people's homes is quite a leap from the way she grew up and the way she was able to live as a working cable actress.  Is she happy?  Probably not.  But she is feeling pretty important I think.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As long as they merch Archie well, they should be fine.
MerchArchWell


----------



## bag-mania

Their mental health show is supposed to air in the spring now. Maybe. Kind of.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## viciel

bag-mania said:


> Their mental health show is supposed to air in the spring now. Maybe. Kind of.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


 
The poster child for narcissistic personality disorder is doing a mental health show, yup.


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> Whether or not she and Harry remain married, whether or not she ever or never works again Archie is her guarantee that *her *idea of the good life is secured.


Unfortunately you are right, Archie is a guaranty of good life for MM.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> everyone is different....I knew two Italian sisters years ago.  When they came to the US, older sister was maybe 13, younger one 11, something like that.  Older sister had a definite Italian accent.  Younger one talked like an American.  It's not like the age difference was that huge.


My niece and nephew, both born here in Wales moved to Yorkshire at the ages of 8 and 11 respectively, the next time we saw them about 6 months later his accent was exactly the same and hers was slightly changing. Now, he's 40 and has a slight Yorkshire accent and when hes in our company for a while, a few words slip in with our particular Welsh accent. She is 37 and has the broadest Yorkshire accent I've heard, broader than her husband was born and bred there.


----------



## bag-mania

*Biographer slams Prince Harry for following Meghan Markle’s ‘woke’ ways*

Prince Harry’s biographer has accused the royal of “meekly” following wife Meghan Markle’s “woke” ways — tossing his “life as an action man to become an airy-fairy do-gooder.”

Angelia Levin said in an op-ed for the Sunday Telegraph that while Markle “has blossomed back in her native” California, Harry “has become a shadow of the prince I once knew.”

“Of course, he would not be the first man to be besotted with a beautiful woman with a different agenda that he then meekly adopts as his own,” Levin wrote, insisting Harry “seems to accept being second to Meghan.”

The most obvious sign of change is how the prince is “changing his accent to fit” the “the ‘woke’ West Coast life” he has “seemingly taken to,” wrote Levin, who spent months following him for her 2018 book, “Harry: A Biography of a Prince.”

“Phrases such as ‘twenny twenny’ and ‘I wanna’ suggest his ‘Californication’ is well under way,” she wrote of a West Coast twang slipping into Harry’s accent during the recent debut of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s podcast.

“He and the Duchess also repeat, several times, a favourite phrase of theirs: ‘Love wins,'” she wrote.

“I don’t think many senior members of the Royal family have felt much of that love over the past 12 months,” she wrote of their year in exile after Megxit.

Levin wrote that she was particularly disappointed that the prince — who previously “excelled at giving people hope and strength” — has just “tucked his family away in a multi-million-dollar mansion in California” during the COVID-19 CRISIS, “making himself look out of touch.”

“The couple’s endless announcements about clinching one money-raising deal after another … could be seen as insensitive at a time when hundreds of thousands of livelihoods were lost,” she wrote.

Levin ended her op-ed by noting that Harry is reportedly keen to get a 12-month extension on the final cutoff date for Megxit.

“He may miss his family and all the privileges that entails,” she wrote, also saying he may be “keen to reconnect with the charities he once supported” as well as regain his honorary military titles.

“Or perhaps he just realises that royalty is forever, but celebrity is not,” she wrote.

Reps for the Sussexes did not immediately reply to requests for comment.









						Biographer slams Prince Harry for following Meghan Markle’s ‘woke’ ways
					

Prince Harry’s biographer has accused the royal of “meekly” following wife Meghan Markle’s “woke” ways — tossing his “life as an action man to become…




					pagesix.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Welcome to the wonderful world of podcasts. You have officially taken your first step down the rabbit hole.


so far I've listened to several episodes of Fresh Air....so nice to pick which episodes and at what time to listen....will have to branch out to other podcasts


----------



## Chanbal

Samantha's upcoming book got an article in DM, nothing new there, but she seems to be good with words:

"She has previously branded her a 'shallow social climber', blamed Meghan for freezing out their father and other members of the family, called her 'inhumane' and 'the Duchess of Nonsense'." 









						Meghan Markle's sister Samantha will finally release bombshell memoir
					

Meghan Markle's half-sister Samantha, 56, is to release her tell-all memoir  after years of touting her dysfunctional relationship with the Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Samantha's upcoming book got an article in DM, nothing new there, but she seems to be good with words:
> 
> "She has previously branded her a 'shallow social climber', blamed Meghan for freezing out their father and other members of the family, called her 'inhumane' and 'the Duchess of Nonsense'."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister Samantha will finally release bombshell memoir
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's half-sister Samantha, 56, is to release her tell-all memoir  after years of touting her dysfunctional relationship with the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think people initially thought Samantha was a jealous older sister trying to capitalize on her sister's fame.  I think the more we learn about MM, there's probably a lot of truth to what Samantha has to say!  The BRF probably wishes they'd paid more attention, instead of dismissing her in her wheelchair at the gate!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I think people initially thought Samantha was a jealous older sister trying to capitalize on her sister's fame.  I think the more we learn about MM, there's probably a lot of truth to what Samantha has to say!  The BRF probably wishes they'd paid more attention, instead of dismissing her in her wheelchair at the gate!


and how fitting that now someone else can make money off of Meghan    Hope the book does well


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Their mental health show is supposed to air in the spring now. Maybe. Kind of.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


 Is H going to discuss his mental problems with a psychiatrist during his documentary? With so many professionals with the knowledge needed to discuss mental health, having H or MM leading this show is ridiculous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wow, anyone thinking we are hateful towards Princess Pushy should never set foot on Quora. That said, there are some very detail oriented people over there who put together stuff that is interesting to say the least.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so far I've listened to several episodes of Fresh Air....so nice to pick which episodes and at what time to listen....will have to branch out to other podcasts



Enjoy! There are so many cool podcasts out there. No matter what your interests are there is someone doing a podcast about it.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think people initially thought Samantha was a jealous older sister trying to capitalize on her sister's fame.  I think the more we learn about MM, there's probably a lot of truth to what Samantha has to say!  The BRF probably wishes they'd paid more attention, instead of dismissing her in her wheelchair at the gate!


I also think there is a lot of truth in what Samantha says. I wouldn't be surprised if we will learn that father spent all his money and attention on MM at the expense of the other kids. The BRF, particularly QE and Will may have believed in some of Samantha's comments but had their hands tied. Harry was determined to marry and she was rather 'untouchable' at that time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Is H going to discuss his mental problems with a psychiatrist during his documentary? With so many professionals with the knowledge needed to discuss mental health, having H or MM leading this show is ridiculous.



Surely Marianne Williamson will participate. Her message was/is all about Love.  Oprah may want in on this, too. What about Doria?  Maybe they will simply put together messages from these powerful people, perhaps use a recording of Diana’s lectures, keep it easy so they have less work to do.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely Marianne Williamson will participate. Her message was/is all about Love.  Oprah may want in on this, too. What about Doria?  Maybe they will simply put together messages from these powerful people, perhaps use a recording of Diana’s lectures, keep it easy so they have less work to do.


a bunch of little bits like their first broadcast?  not interesting


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Samantha's upcoming book got an article in DM, nothing new there, but she seems to be good with words:
> 
> "She has previously branded her a 'shallow social climber', blamed Meghan for freezing out their father and other members of the family, called her 'inhumane' and 'the Duchess of Nonsense'."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister Samantha will finally release bombshell memoir
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's half-sister Samantha, 56, is to release her tell-all memoir  after years of touting her dysfunctional relationship with the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



In the graduation photo, whose hand is on Samantha’s right shoulder?


----------



## bag-mania

I think Samantha was careful to try to avoid libel issues. She says it is not a tell-all. She wrote the book to be a memoir of _her_ life, but it just happens to feature the time leading up to the royal wedding and her perspective on it. We'll find out what, if any, juicy pieces she included.

*MARKLE HER WORDS* 
*Meghan Markle’s sister Samantha says bombshell memoir will make Duchess ‘uncomfortable’ but Royals will ‘like it’*

Samantha Markle’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1, is out in the US on Friday.

Samantha Markle, Meghan's older sister, told The Sun on Sunday her book out this week is not a tell-all memoir on Meghan, but will make her sibling feel uncomfortable.

The Royal Family will not "be unhappy" with the 330-page book, she added.

Samantha, 56, said: "There is something in it for everyone. It has been an interesting journey.


"It deals with my life and my perspective on several issues in the road as they intersect with this royal event in history.

"There was an awful lot going on as this royal fairytale fell off the tea towels.

"How that affects us as people and how the world reacted and what it really meant to us as a family.

"There was a lot going on behind closed doors that the world didn't know."


*BEHIND CLOSED DOORS*
She added that it has always been her goal to tell the truth, and to out the shocking and inspiring ways in which they live their life.

Samantha continued: "This has never been a slamming tell-all story.

"Whatever the reader is looking for there is something for everyone and I hope the world will love it.

"I think the Royal Family will like it and will enjoy it and nothing they should be uncomfortable with. I hope they find it warm, funny, honest and heartfelt.

"I wrote it respectfully knowing they would see it and not concerned there is anything they will be unhappy about.

"I don't know how to get hold of Meghan and I never got a copy of Finding Freedom from her in the mail.

"People with nothing to hide have nothing to fear. The truth is the truth. One's comfort level is wherever the truth is a priority or not for the individual.

"Meghan will be in there."

Samantha then went on to say that she didn't know if her sister Meghan would be comfortable with the memoir.

*MARKLE HER WORDS*
She added: "I don't know if she (Meghan) will be comfortable with it. Some things she will and some things she won't.

"It's fair and balanced. Naturally, some things she will like and some things she won't.

"Truth is stranger than fiction and I have predicated myself on the truth.

"It was never meant to be a slamming tell-all and be frivolous and meaningless."

Samantha, 56, is the eldest daughter of Thomas Markle, 76. She has been a vocal critic of Meghan, once calling her “a shallow social climber” with “a soft spot for gingers”.

Meghan, 39, has slammed the claims as “absurd” and said her half-sister hardly knows her.









						Meghan's sister says bombshell memoir will make Duchess 'uncomfortable'
					

MEGHAN Markle’s sister Samantha has said her bombshell memoir will make the Duchess “uncomfortable” but that the Royal Family will “like it.” Samantha Markle’s book, T…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> Father was used in the past, and now she is using her mother. The difference is that her mother might (or not) be benefiting from the current situation, and father is apparently being mistreated. Only time will tell if mother will also be markled.


I think it’s quite possible that Doria has also been quietly Markled. This could be part of the reason we don’t hear about her much anymore.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I think it’s quite possible that Doria has also been quietly Markled. This could be part of the reason we don’t hear about her much anymore.


who knows?  
she got a business out of it anyway


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> so far I've listened to several episodes of Fresh Air....so nice to pick which episodes and at what time to listen....will have to branch out to other podcasts


fresh Air - yes !


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> fresh Air - yes !


Terry Gross is just the best, isn't she?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is H going to discuss his mental problems with a psychiatrist during his documentary? With so many professionals with the knowledge needed to discuss mental health, having H or MM leading this show is ridiculous.


Well, they do think of themselves as experts in everything.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Well, they do think of themselves as experts in everything.


they just have so much to teach us lesser individuals


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I also think there is a lot of truth in what Samantha says. *I wouldn't be surprised if we will learn that father spent all his money and attention on MM at the expense of the other kids.* The BRF, particularly QE and Will may have believed in some of Samantha's comments but had their hands tied. Harry was determined to marry and she was rather 'untouchable' at that time.


ITA with you.  Now he's probably realizing the mistake of his actions, as the other kids are perhaps there for him more in his time of need, whereas the "golden child" is off living her best life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some info from Wikipedia — 17 year age difference between the sisters

_Markle married student and secretary Roslyn Loveless in 1964; they had met the year before at an on-campus party at the University of Chicago. They have two children, Samantha(born 1964) and Thomas Markle Jr. (born 1966). Markle and Loveless divorced in 1975.[

He married Doria Ragland at the Self-Realization Fellowship Temple of Paramahansa Yogananda in Hollywood, Los Angeles, on December 23, 1979 by Brother Bhaktananda. The Markles had a daughter together in 1981, Rachel Meghan Markle (known by her middle name), who later became the Duchess of Sussex. Thomas and Doria Markle's marriage ended in divorce in 1987 or 1988.

Markle won $750,000 in the California State Lottery in 1990 and spent all the money. In 2016, he filed for bankruptcy over a debt of $30,000. He lives in Rosarito, Mexico._

Old DM article about MM’s family, from 2018 — 
	

		
			
		

		
	











						Meghan Markle's family have turned the wedding into a colourful affair
					

The extended Markle family have never been far from controversy in recent months as they do their best to steal the spotlight off the royal bride-to-be ahead of the wedding in Windsor this Saturday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

I have to admit that when Samantha first started in about Meghah, and especially when she literally showed up at the palace gate,  I wrote her off as being a nut job.  What she had to say could all have been true, but it was the way in which it was delivered that ruined it for her.  Now, with tincture of time, and seeing how the Sussex have behaved and treated people, her accusations hold much more merit.  I will be interested to see if she has anything new to add.  It will be a bit disappointing if this is just a rehash of everything that has been said and written before by others. I think it might include more vindication regarding her father.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> ITA with you.  Now he's probably realizing the mistake of his actions, as the other kids are perhaps there for him more in his time of need, whereas the "golden child" is off living her best life.



That is fairly common, isn't it? The man making more effort with children from his second marriage than from the first. I think it is because he is older by then and finally settling down to the role of father.

I'm sure Alec Baldwin's kids with Hillary are getting much more "dad time" than Ireland did.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some info from Wikipedia — 17 year age difference between the sisters
> 
> _Markle married student and secretary Roslyn Loveless in 1964; they had met the year before at an on-campus party at the University of Chicago. They have two children, Samantha(born 1964) and Thomas Markle Jr. (born 1966). Markle and Loveless divorced in 1975.[
> 
> He married Doria Ragland at the Self-Realization Fellowship Temple of Paramahansa Yogananda in Hollywood, Los Angeles, on December 23, 1979 by Brother Bhaktananda. The Markles had a daughter together in 1981, Rachel Meghan Markle (known by her middle name), who later became the Duchess of Sussex. Thomas and Doria Markle's marriage ended in divorce in 1987 or 1988.
> 
> Markle won $750,000 in the California State Lottery in 1990 and spent all the money. In 2016, he filed for bankruptcy over a debt of $30,000. He lives in Rosarito, Mexico._



Filed bankruptcy over $30k??  That isn't that much and a debt like that could be structured.  He must have wanted to just leave the country and start over with a clean slate.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I have to admit that when Samantha first started in about Meghah, and especially when she literally showed up at the palace gate,  I wrote her off as being a nut job.  What she had to say could all have been true, but it was the way in which it was delivered that ruined it for her.  Now, with tincture of time, and seeing how the Sussex have behaved and treated people, her accusations hold much more merit.  I will be interested to see if she has anything new to add.  It will be a bit disappointing if this is just a rehash of everything that has been said and written before by others. I think it might include more vindication regarding her father.



I agree with you. And it's possible Samantha could be a nutjob but that doesn't mean she isn't telling the truth!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Filed bankruptcy over $30k??  That isn't that much and a debt like that could be structured.  He must have wanted to just leave the country and start over with a clean slate.


I think some people declare bankrupty to get out of paying their debts....they don't want to restructure


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some info from Wikipedia — 17 year age difference between the sisters
> 
> _Markle married student and secretary Roslyn Loveless in 1964; they had met the year before at an on-campus party at the University of Chicago. They have two children, Samantha(born 1964) and Thomas Markle Jr. (born 1966). Markle and Loveless divorced in 1975.[
> 
> He married Doria Ragland at the Self-Realization Fellowship Temple of Paramahansa Yogananda in Hollywood, Los Angeles, on December 23, 1979 by Brother Bhaktananda. The Markles had a daughter together in 1981, Rachel Meghan Markle (known by her middle name), who later became the Duchess of Sussex. Thomas and Doria Markle's marriage ended in divorce in 1987 or 1988.
> 
> Markle won $750,000 in the California State Lottery in 1990 and spent all the money. In 2016, he filed for bankruptcy over a debt of $30,000. He lives in Rosarito, Mexico._
> 
> Old DM article about MM’s family, from 2018 —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4945948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's family have turned the wedding into a colourful affair
> 
> 
> The extended Markle family have never been far from controversy in recent months as they do their best to steal the spotlight off the royal bride-to-be ahead of the wedding in Windsor this Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Is anyone thinking what I am thinking ??? 
Remember how Jerry Hall married Mick Jagger in some offbeat Balinese ceremony
When they split up, the courts failed to recognize it as a legal union


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is fairly common, isn't it? The man making more effort with children from his second marriage than from the first. I think it is because he is older by then and finally settling down to the role of father.
> 
> I'm sure Alec Baldwin's kids with Hillary are getting much more "dad time" than Ireland did.


agree about Baldwin....as I posted yesterday I was watching him on his talk show maybe a couple of years ago, going on and on about his little kids....you would never have known he had a grown daughter - never mentioned her


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Biographer slams Prince Harry for following Meghan Markle’s ‘woke’ ways*
> 
> Prince Harry’s biographer has accused the royal of “meekly” following wife Meghan Markle’s “woke” ways — tossing his “life as an action man to become an airy-fairy do-gooder.”
> 
> Angelia Levin said in an op-ed for the Sunday Telegraph that while Markle “has blossomed back in her native” California, Harry “has become a shadow of the prince I once knew.”
> 
> “Of course, he would not be the first man to be besotted with a beautiful woman with a different agenda that he then meekly adopts as his own,” Levin wrote, insisting Harry “seems to accept being second to Meghan.”
> 
> The most obvious sign of change is how the prince is “changing his accent to fit” the “the ‘woke’ West Coast life” he has “seemingly taken to,” wrote Levin, who spent months following him for her 2018 book, “Harry: A Biography of a Prince.”
> 
> “Phrases such as ‘twenny twenny’ and ‘I wanna’ suggest his ‘Californication’ is well under way,” she wrote of a West Coast twang slipping into Harry’s accent during the recent debut of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s podcast.
> 
> “He and the Duchess also repeat, several times, a favourite phrase of theirs: ‘Love wins,'” she wrote.
> 
> “I don’t think many senior members of the Royal family have felt much of that love over the past 12 months,” she wrote of their year in exile after Megxit.
> 
> Levin wrote that she was particularly disappointed that the prince — who previously “excelled at giving people hope and strength” — has just “tucked his family away in a multi-million-dollar mansion in California” during the COVID-19 CRISIS, “making himself look out of touch.”
> 
> “The couple’s endless announcements about clinching one money-raising deal after another … could be seen as insensitive at a time when hundreds of thousands of livelihoods were lost,” she wrote.
> 
> Levin ended her op-ed by noting that Harry is reportedly keen to get a 12-month extension on the final cutoff date for Megxit.
> 
> “He may miss his family and all the privileges that entails,” she wrote, also saying he may be “keen to reconnect with the charities he once supported” as well as regain his honorary military titles.
> 
> “Or perhaps he just realises that royalty is forever, but celebrity is not,” she wrote.
> 
> Reps for the Sussexes did not immediately reply to requests for comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biographer slams Prince Harry for following Meghan Markle’s ‘woke’ ways
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s biographer has accused the royal of “meekly” following wife Meghan Markle’s “woke” ways — tossing his “life as an action man to become…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


TMZ carried this too....maybe US media (some of them) are getting tired of fawning over H&M


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Is anyone thinking what I am thinking ???
> Remember how Jerry Hall married Mick Jagger in some offbeat Balinese ceremony
> When they split up, the courts failed to recognize it as a legal union



I think the ceremony was legal for the Markles.   When I read about Jerry and Mick and the description of the ceremony, I knew immediately that it wasn't legal.   He is a very shrewd man and he didn't want a legal marriage with anyone because of his assets.  When she sued for divorce, I recall laughing because I knew they weren't legally married and she was calling his bluff in a way.  He still outfoxed her.    He has always been supportive of all his children, but he wasn't going to give up a dime to a woman in marriage if he could help it.  He lost a bundle to Bianca and that wasn't going to happen again.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> agree about Baldwin....as I posted yesterday I was watching him on his talk show maybe a couple of years ago, going on and on about his little kids....you would never have known he had a grown daughter - never mentioned her


I hope his current kids grow up with more direction than his grown daughter.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I hope his current kids grow up with more direction than his grown daughter.


I wouldn't be too optimistic with their mom posing on top of the stove, pretending to be someone she's not, and dad having something of a temper....Ireland may have been better off being raised by her mom


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't be too optimistic with their mom posing on top of the stove, pretending to be someone she's not, and dad having something of a temper....Ireland may have been better off being raised by her mom


We'll give it more time and see if the five kids end up in rehab and taking their clothes off for tabloid photos.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> We'll give it more time and see if the five kids end up in rehab and taking their clothes off for tabloid photos.



I see a future of drug/alcohol addiction for them. They will inherit a lot of money and have no motivation to do anything beyond self-indulgence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> TMZ carried this too....maybe US media (some of them) are getting tired of fawning over H&M


You might be right, and it would be great. 




According to royal correspondent Rebecca English, at least two other members of the royal family reached out to Meghan after the emotional interview, but their attempts to offer support were not well-received.

"William was also deeply hurt by suggestions from the Sussex camp that he, and particularly his wife, had cold-shouldered Meghan," English wrote in a new column for the _Daily Mail_. _"_In fact, I have been told that Kate—and the Countess of Wessex—both repeatedly 'reached out' to the Duchess, particularly after she voiced her unhappiness on a television documentary. But they were rebuffed."

Marie Claire


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You might be right, and it would be great.
> 
> View attachment 4945986
> 
> 
> According to royal correspondent Rebecca English, at least two other members of the royal family reached out to Meghan after the emotional interview, but their attempts to offer support were not well-received.
> 
> "William was also deeply hurt by suggestions from the Sussex camp that he, and particularly his wife, had cold-shouldered Meghan," English wrote in a new column for the _Daily Mail_. _"_In fact, I have been told that Kate—and the Countess of Wessex—both repeatedly 'reached out' to the Duchess, particularly after she voiced her unhappiness on a television documentary. But they were rebuffed."
> 
> Marie Claire


the arrogance


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> the arrogance


I have no sympathy for MM or H, their arrogance leaves me speechless.

@CeeJay con-artists is a great designation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> You might be right, and it would be great.
> 
> According to royal correspondent Rebecca English, at least two other members of the royal family reached out to Meghan after the emotional interview, but their attempts to offer support were not well-received.
> 
> "William was also deeply hurt by suggestions from the Sussex camp that he, and particularly his wife, had cold-shouldered Meghan," English wrote in a new column for the _Daily Mail_. _"_In fact, I have been told that Kate—and the Countess of Wessex—both repeatedly 'reached out' to the Duchess, particularly after she voiced her unhappiness on a television documentary. But they were rebuffed."
> 
> Marie Claire



Even if untrue, in the Battle Royale or Royal Battle, the win goes to Kate and Sofie. 
Congrats, ladies.  

H&M, particularly Harry, should have known fighting in public was a huge mistake.


----------



## marietouchet

FYI , compare and contrast 
Technically Charlotte Casiraghi has never been a royal ....
She has worked for Gucci etc
She  graduated from the Sorbonne with a degree in philosophy (sic)

she will be the new face of Chanel, but interestingly, she will also host philosophy / literature seminars  - her thing - at Chanel

She will also host discussion of feminist figures in literature as part of Chanel job

She has been doing this in Monaco for a while but also works as a movie producer with/ for husband 

Interesting job for a non senior royal

Ps photo from latest issue Point de Vue, a French aristo magazine , somewhat like Tatler


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _"_In fact, I have been told that Kate—and the Countess of Wessex—both repeatedly 'reached out' to the Duchess, particularly after she voiced her unhappiness on a television documentary. But they were rebuffed."
> 
> Marie Claire



Why am I not surprised. Of course "They tried" doesn't go as nicely with the victim narrative.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> You might be right, and it would be great.
> 
> View attachment 4945986
> 
> 
> According to royal correspondent Rebecca English, at least two other members of the royal family reached out to Meghan after the emotional interview, but their attempts to offer support were not well-received.
> 
> "William was also deeply hurt by suggestions from the Sussex camp that he, and particularly his wife, had cold-shouldered Meghan," English wrote in a new column for the _Daily Mail_. _"_In fact, I have been told that Kate—and the Countess of Wessex—both repeatedly 'reached out' to the Duchess, particularly after she voiced her unhappiness on a television documentary. But they were rebuffed."
> 
> Marie Claire


I absolutely believe the story of the reach out, that is exactly what QEII / PC would have told them to do, and surely the ladies had to report back about their efforts, they reached out.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why am I not surprised. Of course "They tried" doesn't go as nicely with the victim narrative.





marietouchet said:


> I absolutely believe the story of the reach out, that is exactly what QEII / PC would have told them to do, and surely the ladies had to report back about their efforts, they reached out.



QE and Philip didn't deserve to be victims of con-artists almost at the end of their lives. I hope they will have the courage and support to do the right thing, which is allowing MM&H to live a private and financially independent life (no titles or funds from UK).


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I see a future of drug/alcohol addiction for them. They will inherit a lot of money and have no motivation to do anything beyond self-indulgence.


Honestly, even if AB works until he is 90, he is not going to have much to leave lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> QE and Philip didn't deserve to be victims of con-artists almost at the end of their lives. I hope they will have the courage and support to do the right thing, which is allowing MM&H to live a private and financially independent life (no titles or funds from UK).


They claim that if you live long enough, you see just about everything.  I wonder if they have ever had anything close to this touch them previously.  I think the closest for TQ is when her uncle gave up the throne for the woman who had to take him after all that fuss lol!


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't be too optimistic with their mom posing on top of the stove, pretending to be someone she's not, and dad having something of a temper....Ireland may have been better off being raised by her mom


What ever happened to Kim Bassinger anyway?


----------



## Chanbal

MM's stans are already starting to comment on Samantha's book on Yahoo! 








						Meghan Markle's Half-Sister, Samantha Markle, Is Releasing a Tell-All Memoir Next Week
					

"Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction," apparently.




					www.yahoo.com
				






The book was not released yet and it has already reviews on B&N. 





						BN No Results Page
					






					www.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## bag-mania

^ Amazon has a function where you can’t leave a review until after the release date and it shows which reviews are from verified buyers. Barnes and Noble’s site needs to catch up in that regard.


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> wow, I'm not familiar with her


I saw a short film about her someplace, I forget where, it was a while ago. She was from Australia and very pretty. Was a clothing designer, Diana wore some of her designs.


----------



## chowlover2

sdkitty said:


> wow, I'm not familiar with her


The film is Prince Charles Other Mistress and it is on Amazon Prime.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> We'll give it more time and see if the five kids end up in rehab and taking their clothes off for tabloid photos.


And for having fake accents


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kanga’s story is much sadder than Diana’s, yet we do not hear her kids talking about it.  Harry is just too full of himself.  Some day it will all backfire.


----------



## Chanbal

I was reading comments for the DM article on Samantha's book and came across the one below, who is Joseph Goldman-Guiliano?


----------



## CarryOn2020

That poster describes the rumor perfectly. JG-G is why people say H is her 3rd marriage. Rumor is he attended NW with her and is now a lawyer. No one knows any more than that — all rumors.  It is one of those extremely odd things about MM.


----------



## drifter

genuine question:  how does one annul a 2-year long marriage?
P.S. a google search yields some interesting results.  Saving for when I'm free to binge-read


----------



## CarryOn2020

drifter said:


> genuine question:  how does one annul a 2-year long marriage?
> P.S. a google search yields some interesting results.  Saving for when I'm free to binge-read



Exactly. This is why I don’t trust the rumor.  Of course, I could be wrong, but until I see the evidence, I doubt it is true.  It seems that MM did indeed have some questionable stuff in her history, as does H.  Nevertheless,  the important stuff is now. Mercy, H&M have already done a long list of questionable stuff which gives us plenty to focus on.


----------



## purseinsanity

"*Oh, what a tangled web we weave*, when first *we* practice to deceive!" (Sir Walter Scott, 1808, Marmion: A Tale of Flodden Field)

LOL, interesting that "Marmion" means "brat".


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> That poster describes the rumor perfectly. JG-G is why people say H is her 3rd marriage. Rumor is he attended NW with her and is now a lawyer. No one knows any more than that — all rumors.  It is one of those extremely odd things about MM.





drifter said:


> genuine question:  how does one annul a 2-year long marriage?
> P.S. a google search yields some interesting results.  Saving for when I'm free to binge-read


Thanks, I knew that someone here would have some information. I don't recall to have heard his name before. From what I understood most info about MM (prior to H) was removed from the net. I particularly don't care if she has a thousand ex-husbands, but deceitful behaviors combined with preachy lectures are annoying..."Love wins"!


----------



## CobaltBlu

Chanbal said:


> Thanks, I knew that someone here would have some information. I don't recall to have heard his name before. From what I understood most info about MM (prior to H) was removed from the net. I particularly don't care if she has a thousand ex-husbands, but deceitful behaviors combined with preachy lectures are annoying..."Love wins"!
> 
> View attachment 4946623



Thats an excellent assumption, and probably true, but it would be amusing to know for sure.....!  
Most probably they signed stuff, tho... (I am assuming, LOL ,<----see what I did there?)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly. This is why I don’t trust the rumor.  Of course, I could be wrong, but until I see the evidence, I doubt it is true.  It seems that MM did indeed have some questionable stuff in her history, as does H.  Nevertheless,  the important stuff is now. Mercy, H&M have already done a long list of questionable stuff which gives us plenty to focus on.



The marriage, if it happened, would have been before Meghan was a celebrity (even as a cable actress). There wouldn't be information to be found on the net. The marriage of two unknowns wouldn't have been written about.

Rumors come from somewhere and it wouldn't be the strangest thing we've heard about her.


----------



## lulilu

drifter said:


> genuine question:  how does one annul a 2-year long marriage?
> P.S. a google search yields some interesting results.  Saving for when I'm free to binge-read



My son's first marriage was annulled after over two years.  She was Catholic and her dad a big donor.  I think he pulled strings so she'd be free to marry again in the church.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> What ever happened to Kim Bassinger anyway?
> working on animal activist is the most recent info I found....she looks like she's had work done on her face.  still beautiful though


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> My son's first marriage was annulled after over two years.  She was Catholic and her dad a big donor.  I think he pulled strings so she'd be free to marry again in the church.


yes, it seems like annullment can be arranged outside the rules


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> My son's first marriage was annulled after over two years.  She was Catholic and her dad a big donor.  I think he pulled strings so she'd be free to marry again in the church.


I was going to say the same thing.  If I recall correctly, one of the Kennedys wanted his marriage annulled after more than 10 years and several kids so that he could marry in the church again.  His wife fought it tooth and nail.  I can't remember if he succeeded or not.


----------



## bag-mania

When you have enough money you can make almost anything happen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

In the past, it was seriously difficult to obtain an annulment in the Catholic church. You needed specific grounds and evidence and jump through numerous hoops. Some accepted reasons for an annulment:  the couple are blood relatives, the mental or legal capacity to marry of one of the parties was impaired or non-existent,  the marriage was never consummated, one party committed fraud by misrepresenting themselves to an extreme degree, etc.  Henry VIII tried to annul his first marriage to Catherine of Aragon and look how that went lol.  Catherine fought the annulment tooth and nail and claimed her marriage to Henry's older brother had never been consummated so there were no legitimate grounds for annulment. Her daughter with Henry VIII, later Queen Mary I, would have been (and then later was) declared illegitimate as a result.

It's a lot easier to get an annulment now, though it still takes time.  Lots of celebrities have done it so they can remarry in the Catholic Church.  Frank Sinatra famously divorced his first wife with whom he had 3 children and got an annulment.  Crazy.  Horrible thing to do to the children.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The rational part of me knows that projects like this get canceled all the time for any number of reasons. The part of me that posts here assumes  it’s typical Meghan and Harry, it was all talk and they never had a coherent plan.



Because they avoid the four letter word at all costs: w**k


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> yes, it seems like annullment can be arranged outside the rules


Princess Caroline of Monaco got an annulment. Money & power can work wonders, it seems.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Princess Caroline of Monaco got an annulment. Money & power can work wonders, it seems.


of course
look at OJ Simpson


----------



## LittleStar88

Regarding annulment... Does that also remove the marriage license from public record so that there is no history whatsover of the event?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I cannot imagine any 21st century female choosing the BRF and its lifestyle ever. Diana was an aristocrat, knew and lived the rules, and did indeed play the public for ‘sympathy’ — much as Harry is doing now. She knew how to dominate the headlines. In other words, plenty of evidence suggests she was a privileged, entitled Drama Queen, just as Harry is a privileged, entitled Drama King. Neither one needs nor deserves my sympathy.
> 
> Since I was duped all those years ago by the Diana-myth, too, I learned not to believe the royal pr. There is always a hidden agenda involved. So, when a divorced, world-ly, nearly 40 yr old female chooses to marry that lifestyle, I suspect a hidden agenda. When a mid-30 yr old, former soldier/party-prince chooses an older, American divorcee — my spidey-senses go hmmmmm.  On paper it does not make lots of sense - unless the next King is working on a Great Reset.    Perhaps all the puzzle pieces will fit after all.



I don't know if any of you have been keeping up with the Diana/BBC Panorama/Martin Bashir interview. It all points to her being a very real victim of being duped by the journalist broadcast 20 Nov 1995.  It played into her paranoia and destroyed the livelihoods/lives of some ordinary people just doing their jobs. That interview is thought to have literally started the ball rolling down the 'no turning back now' divorce route. 

Transcript: 



			http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/diana/panorama.html
		


If H never wanted anything to do with the media again could understand. That he wants to be part of the business is actually the shocker.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Regarding annulment... Does that also remove the marriage license from public record so that there is no history whatsover of the event?


I thought anullment was more of a religious thing - so Catholics could remarry in the church.  but maybe it's also legal


----------



## lalame

Annulment is definitely a legal thing. I believe it's as if you were never married in the first place... there's probably a record of different licenses/petitions you've filed in the county/state that remain but for all intents and purposes I believe you can consider it like it never happened. I don't know how someone gets an annulment after a long marriage, though... I've only heard of it used in cut and dry cases like someone was coerced/under the influence, turned out to be related, etc. Basically factors that, had they been known at time of marriage, would have disqualified you from getting married.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I thought anullment was more of a religious thing - so Catholics could remarry in the church.  but maybe it's also legal


The annulments are separate. You have to obtain each.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> The annulments are separate. You have to obtain each.


A couple of years after my divorce, my ex sent me paperwork to fill out so that he could get an annulment. 

I thought "fine, if this makes him happy--ok". I started filling it out and then it got into questions/factoids that were kinda creepy and made me look like a sh*t and I decided "nope, this is not me, not gonna do this, sorry." So I told let him know "sorry, but nope." 

What I didn't ask him about was his marriage #1 (I was #2) that produced 4 children (we had no kids). How did he get that one annulled?


----------



## CeeJay

drifter said:


> genuine question:  how does one annul a 2-year long marriage?
> P.S. a google search yields some interesting results.  Saving for when I'm free to binge-read


The same way one annuls a marriage of over 20 years, and with 2 kids from said "annulled" marriage .. saw it happen to a lady who paid the Church quite handsomely and THAT was the reason for me to quit the church and have never gone back!


----------



## jennlt

kemilia said:


> A couple of years after my divorce, my ex sent me paperwork to fill out so that he could get an annulment.
> 
> I thought "fine, if this makes him happy--ok". I started filling it out and then it got into questions/factoids that were kinda creepy and made me look like a sh*t and I decided "nope, this is not me, not gonna do this, sorry." So I told let him know "sorry, but nope."
> 
> What I didn't ask him about was his marriage #1 (I was #2) that produced 4 children (we had no kids). How did he get that one annulled?





CeeJay said:


> The same way one annuls a marriage of over 20 years, and with 2 kids from said "annulled" marriage .. saw it happen to a lady who paid the Church quite handsomely and THAT was the reason for me to quit the church and have never gone back!


Yes, my mother didn't have any crisis of conscience when she decided to seek an annulment for a 20-year marriage that produced three children. And it's not even close to the worst thing she's done to me lol.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Thanks, I knew that someone here would have some information. I don't recall to have heard his name before. From what I understood most info about MM (prior to H) was removed from the net. I particularly don't care if she has a thousand ex-husbands, but deceitful behaviors combined with preachy lectures are annoying..."Love wins"!
> 
> View attachment 4946623


Hmmmmmmm .. he was going to be an *Entertainment Lawyer??? *.. oh, that would have been a RIPE picking for MM - seriously? 

He would be making good $$$ (_although many forget that paying off that Law Degree loan isn't cheap_)! 
He would have (_potential_) access to Celebrities .. or EVEN Studios / Directors! 
With above, she could parlay that into a .. *what?* .. a *STARRING* role (_working with an A+ Director of course_)?!?!?!  
More importantly, she could also find her *next 'victim' *- you know, a richer and more important man and .. oh yeah, she likes "gingers" .. well better watch out Ron Howard!!!


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Yes, my mother didn't have any crisis of conscience when she decided to seek an annulment for a 20-year marriage that produced three children. And it's not even close to the worst thing she's done to me lol.


kinda makes the children illegitmate....sorry your mother did this.  why?


----------



## lulilu

papertiger said:


> I don't know if any of you have been keeping up with the Diana/BBC Panorama/Martin Bashir interview. It all points to her being a very real victim of being duped by the journalist broadcast 20 Nov 1995.  It played into her paranoia and destroyed the livelihoods/lives of some ordinary people just doing their jobs. That interview is thought to have literally started the ball rolling down the 'no turning back now' divorce route.
> 
> Transcript:
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/diana/panorama.html
> 
> 
> 
> If H never wanted anything to do with the media again could understand. That he wants to be part of the business is actually the shocker.



I can't remember where, but a few weeks ago when this was a hot topic, I read that Diana said she would have done the interview anyway, despite Bashir's lies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmmmm .. he was going to be an *Entertainment Lawyer??? *.. oh, that would have been a RIPE picking for MM - seriously?
> 
> He would be making good $$$ (_although many forget that paying off that Law Degree loan isn't cheap_)!
> He would have (_potential_) access to Celebrities .. or EVEN Studios / Directors!
> With above, she could parlay that into a .. *what?* .. a *STARRING* role (_working with an A+ Director of course_)?!?!?!
> More importantly, she could also find her *next 'victim' *- you know, a richer and more important man and .. oh yeah, she likes "gingers" .. well better watch out Ron Howard!!!


well, she's always been ambitious, right Ceejay?  even in HS


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> Annulment is definitely a legal thing. I believe it's as if you were never married in the first place... there's probably a record of different licenses/petitions you've filed in the county/state that remain but for all intents and purposes I believe you can consider it like it never happened. I don't know how someone gets an annulment after a long marriage, though... I've only heard of it used in cut and dry cases like someone was coerced/under the influence, turned out to be related, etc. Basically factors that, had they been known at time of marriage, would have disqualified you from getting married.



Yes, but if you go down to look at public records in your county offices, does an annulment make the original marriage certificate/paperwork found in public records go away/disappear? Technically you can just go down and look at these documents in public records. Does annulment  prompt the records department to remove the original marriage filing? Or is it still there? If Meghan was married to lawyer dude (marriage #1), then there would be some record unless it was a confidential filing (was allowed in some states for a while, not sure if it still is).

I know annulment in the eyes of the church has nothing to do with that paperwork being removed - different entities.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> kinda makes the children illegitmate....sorry your mother did this.  why?



She wanted to marry her third husband and she has never let a little thing like the well being or happiness of her children take precedence over her own happiness.

The point I meant to make was that I grew up with two narcissists/perpetual victims for parents and my heart hurts for Archie if he has to endure that type of childhood.

My victimization of her began when I was born a few days before Christmas. My mother's favorite holiday is Christmas and she resents that I ruined her enjoyment of it by being thoughtless enough to be born at that time of year. Every Christmas during my childhood I had to hear how much nicer the holidays would be if she didn't have to deal with my birthday and I should have been born in June. Now she spends the winters in Florida and always makes sure she flies down there before my birthday. This is an obviously mild example of what life is like with narcissistic parents but it is rather damaging to a child's sense of self worth to be constantly criticized or resented for things out of one's control. Narcissists never let little things like facts (biological or otherwise) get in the way of their victimhood lol

If Archie has to live with a parent or parents who are never satisfied, I do worry that his childhood will not be the happy, carefree one that every child deserves.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> I can't remember where, but a few weeks ago when this was a hot topic, I read that Diana said she would have done the interview anyway, despite Bashir's lies.



She never got to know all the lies and fraudulent things he actually did to convince her, these only came to light much later.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> kinda makes the children illegitmate....sorry your mother did this.  why?


The family that I knew, the girl was in my class and her brother was 2 years younger (strict Irish Catholic family).  Well, every week, that mother would march in with her kids (who would always be looking down - never at anyone) and you bet - right up to that first pew .. she NEVER thought she was at fault or in the wrong (her husband - a very prominent pediatrician in the town ended up having to move because she killed his career).  I saw what it did to her kids, my friend who had always been bubbly, funny and a nice girl .. gained a ton of weight and (of course) her mother berated her for that.  The son lived with the mother for a few more years, but his sophomore year had had enough and went to live with his Dad, the best thing that he ever did.  Sadly, the daughter (my friend) got so screwed up by her Mother .. but finally had the sense of mind to "divorce" her mother in her early 30's (after 2 failed marriages herself).  She and I reconnected after many years and we both talk about our "families" and how they can do a number on you, but at some point, it is up to you to rid yourself of that negativity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not the biggest Diana fan, I saw a lot of traits in her I see in my own histrionic, narcisstic, always the victim mother, but there is no doubt she was wronged by a lot of people taking advantage of a naive child, and that includes her family of origin, her husband, the BRF. What Bashir did was just sh*tty and unethical as well.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> The family that I knew, the girl was in my class and her brother was 2 years younger (strict Irish Catholic family).  Well, every week, that mother would march in with her kids (who would always be looking down - never at anyone) and you bet - right up to that first pew .. she NEVER thought she was at fault or in the wrong (her husband - a very prominent pediatrician in the town ended up having to move because she killed his career).  I saw what it did to her kids, my friend who had always been bubbly, funny and a nice girl .. gained a ton of weight and (of course) her mother berated her for that.  The son lived with the mother for a few more years, but his sophomore year had had enough and went to live with his Dad, the best thing that he ever did.  Sadly, the daughter (my friend) got so screwed up by her Mother .. but finally had the sense of mind to "divorce" her mother in her early 30's (after 2 failed marriages herself).  She and I reconnected after many years and we both talk about our "families" and how they can do a number on you, but at some point, it is up to you to rid yourself of that negativity.


so this mom was religious?  but not kind?


CeeJay said:


> The family that I knew, the girl was in my class and her brother was 2 years younger (strict Irish Catholic family).  Well, every week, that mother would march in with her kids (who would always be looking down - never at anyone) and you bet - right up to that first pew .. she NEVER thought she was at fault or in the wrong (her husband - a very prominent pediatrician in the town ended up having to move because she killed his career).  I saw what it did to her kids, my friend who had always been bubbly, funny and a nice girl .. gained a ton of weight and (of course) her mother berated her for that.  The son lived with the mother for a few more years, but his sophomore year had had enough and went to live with his Dad, the best thing that he ever did.  Sadly, the daughter (my friend) got so screwed up by her Mother .. but finally had the sense of mind to "divorce" her mother in her early 30's (after 2 failed marriages herself).  She and I reconnected after many years and we both talk about our "families" and how they can do a number on you, but at some point, it is up to you to rid yourself of that negativity.


so the mom was "religious" but unkind.  there're plenty of that in the world.  too bad for the ex husband and kids


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> Yes, my mother didn't have any crisis of conscience when she decided to seek an annulment for a 20-year marriage that produced three children. And it's not even close to the worst thing she's done to me lol.


I'm so sorry to hear that.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, but if you go down to look at public records in your county offices, does an annulment make the original marriage certificate/paperwork found in public records go away/disappear? Technically you can just go down and look at these documents in public records. Does annulment  prompt the records department to remove the original marriage filing? Or is it still there? If Meghan was married to lawyer dude (marriage #1), then there would be some record unless it was a confidential filing (was allowed in some states for a while, not sure if it still is).
> 
> I know annulment in the eyes of the church has nothing to do with that paperwork being removed - different entities.



The public record of the marriage would still exist after an annulment. However, I suspect there are lawyers who know what to do and the record could be purged. For a price.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> She wanted to marry her third husband and she has never let a little thing like the well being or happiness of her children take precedence over her own happiness.
> 
> The point I meant to make was that I grew up with two narcissists/perpetual victims for parents and my heart hurts for Archie if he has to endure that type of childhood.
> 
> My victimization of her began when I was born a few days before Christmas. My mother's favorite holiday is Christmas and she resents that I ruined her enjoyment of it by being thoughtless enough to be born at that time of year. Every Christmas during my childhood I had to hear how much nicer the holidays would be if she didn't have to deal with my birthday and I should have been born in June. Now she spends the winters in Florida and always makes sure she flies down there before my birthday. This is an obviously mild example of what life is like with narcissistic parents but it is rather damaging to a child's sense of self worth to be constantly criticized or resented for things out of one's control. Narcissists never let little things like facts (biological or otherwise) get in the way of their victimhood lol
> 
> If Archie has to live with a parent or parents who are never satisfied, I do worry that his childhood will not be the happy, carefree one that every child deserves.


I can't even begin to imagine having parents like that.  So much unnecessary hurt.  I'm truly sorry for your pain!  People that are all about themselves shouldn't even have children.  I feel like many do just to get more attention.


----------



## jennlt

CeeJay said:


> The family that I knew, the girl was in my class and her brother was 2 years younger (strict Irish Catholic family).  Well, every week, that mother would march in with her kids (who would always be looking down - never at anyone) and you bet - right up to that first pew .. she NEVER thought she was at fault or in the wrong (her husband - a very prominent pediatrician in the town ended up having to move because she killed his career).  I saw what it did to her kids, my friend who had always been bubbly, funny and a nice girl .. gained a ton of weight and (of course) her mother berated her for that.  The son lived with the mother for a few more years, but his sophomore year had had enough and went to live with his Dad, the best thing that he ever did.  Sadly, the daughter (my friend) got so screwed up by her Mother .. but finally had the sense of mind to "divorce" her mother in her early 30's (after 2 failed marriages herself).  She and I reconnected after many years and we both talk about our "families" and how they can do a number on you, but at some point, it is up to you to rid yourself of that negativity.



Agreed! I have a good life now and a wonderful, loving, supportive husband. I'm grateful every day for what I have now because I know what it's like to not have it.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> I can't remember where, but a few weeks ago when this was a hot topic, I read that Diana said she would have done the interview anyway, despite Bashir's lies.



I think you mean the supposed letter in evidence that she was supposed to have said she wasn't shown any docs. Sounds like a 'unofficial' waiver to me, and probably a contrivance that Bashir asked her to write for such an eventuality. It's not unusual thing. 

From Tatler:

"Now, a letter written by Diana, Princes of Wales, is expected to become an important piece of evidence during an inquiry into how the BBC secured its 1995 _Panorama_ interview with her. The letter reportedly emerged after a BBC staff member took it home as a memento. The contents of the letter have not been published but are expected to ‘praise’ Martin Bashir, the interviewer, who has been accused of obtaining Diana’s cooperation by deception. According to the _Times_, the letter is believed to thank Bashir for his conduct before and after the interview and states that she was never shown and (sic) documents to persuade her to take part in the interview."

This pretty much sums up the whole story and is now part of an ongoing inquiry: 









						Martin Bashir will not face criminal investigation over Princess Diana’s Panorama interview
					

The Metropolitan Police said correspondence alleging unlawful activity had been ‘carefully assessed’




					www.tatler.com
				




The story is not just what happened then. It's the cover-up (at the time and now) and the continual support of deceptive practices by an employee of a public institution. Just the language of attempting to gaslight by referring to the time frame as problematical to source info or less important than some thing that happened last week is shocking in a BBC 'apology'  "We are happy to repeat that apology. *And while this was a quarter of a century ago*, we absolutely will investigate, robustly and fairly, substantive new information." Don't mention the date, no excuses, just get on with it. 

The interview changed history. It was huge. This story is huge. It's HUGE.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> so this mom was religious?  but not kind?
> 
> so the mom was "religious" but unkind.  there're plenty of that in the world.  too bad for the ex husband and kids


She didn't have a religious bone in her body, she was our town's version of "The Duchess" in that she thought her sh!t didn't stink and when the ex-husband left her, she was going to MAKE HIM PAY by attempting to publicly humiliate him and be the "victim" in the Church.  I remember my parents (no Saints themselves) being thoroughly disgusted by her behavior; I remember the ex-husband as being a super nice man and an excellent physician.  Unfortunately, according to my friend, her mother bashed him on a daily (multiple times per day) basis, such that the kids didn't know what to really believe .. of course, much later, they realized what type of mother she was (and yes - absolutely narcissistic)!


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I can't even begin to imagine having parents like that.  So much unnecessary hurt.  I'm truly sorry for your pain!  People that are all about themselves shouldn't even have children.  I feel like many do just to get more attention.



Thank you. It took many years to work through the pain and it still occasionally rears it's ugly head. My mother actually told me she never wanted children but it was expected of her so she did. I'm not sure if having children got her more attention. She has also told me since I was a child that my father never wanted me and since he never tried to have a relationship with me nor bothered to pay child support after they divorced, I guess she was/is right. She went back to work when I was five and I was home alone to get myself dressed and then walk to kindergarten and back home on my own (luckily, it was NOT uphill both ways lol), so I became fairly self-sufficient very young. This was decades ago and obviously wouldn't be acceptable these days. 

Hopefully, Archie has loving nannies to give him some sense of normalcy and structure and I'm sure he won't be left alone to fend for himself.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Thank you. It took many years to work through the pain and it still occasionally rears it's ugly head. My mother actually told me she never wanted children but it was expected of her so she did. I'm not sure if having children got her more attention. She has also told me since I was a child that my father never wanted me and since he never tried to have a relationship with me nor bothered to pay child support after they divorced, I guess she was/is right. She went back to work when I was five and I was home alone to get myself dressed and then walk to kindergarten and back home on my own (luckily, it was NOT uphill both ways lol), so I became fairly self-sufficient very young. This was decades ago and obviously wouldn't be acceptable these days.
> 
> Hopefully, Archie has loving nannies to give him some sense of normalcy and structure and I'm sure he won't be left alone to fend for himself.


wow, you had some big challenges.  glad your life now is good


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> She wanted to marry her third husband and she has never let a little thing like the well being or happiness of her children take precedence over her own happiness.
> 
> The point I meant to make was that I grew up with two narcissists/perpetual victims for parents and my heart hurts for Archie if he has to endure that type of childhood.
> 
> My victimization of her began when I was born a few days before Christmas. My mother's favorite holiday is Christmas and she resents that I ruined her enjoyment of it by being thoughtless enough to be born at that time of year. Every Christmas during my childhood I had to hear how much nicer the holidays would be if she didn't have to deal with my birthday and I should have been born in June. Now she spends the winters in Florida and always makes sure she flies down there before my birthday. This is an obviously mild example of what life is like with narcissistic parents but it is rather damaging to a child's sense of self worth to be constantly criticized or resented for things out of one's control. Narcissists never let little things like facts (biological or otherwise) get in the way of their victimhood lol
> 
> If Archie has to live with a parent or parents who are never satisfied, I do worry that his childhood will not be the happy, carefree one that every child deserves.



I'm very sorry that you had to put up with such an unfair situation. Be happy and enjoy your life. 
I feel sorry for Archie, but I hope Harry will be an OK father.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I can't even begin to imagine having parents like that.  So much unnecessary hurt.  I'm truly sorry for your pain!  People that are all about themselves shouldn't even have children.  I feel like many do just to get more attention.


I was going to say precisely the same, but then I thought that narcissists can have wonderful children that we all enjoy meeting. It's complicated!


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> wow, you had some big challenges.  glad your life now is good



Thanks. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Honestly, I thought life was like this for everyone until I was old enough to realize I drew the short straw. Determination to build a better life and a university scholarship were my saving graces.


----------



## melissatrv

I bet Bezo's girlfriend knows Meghan from her Hollywood days and that is why they are not carrying it



rose60610 said:


> Please don't let the answer be that Bezos is carrying a torch for her or is even an acquaintance.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Thanks. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Honestly, I thought life was like this for everyone until I was old enough to realize I drew the short straw. Determination to build a better life and a university scholarship were my saving graces.


good for you
taking care of yourself at five isn't OK
some people come out of difficulty stronger and some don't
Thankfully you did


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> I bet Bezo's girlfriend knows Meghan from her Hollywood days and that is why they are not carrying it


he's gonna give up income?  he didn't get to be the richest man in the world that way


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> I'm very sorry that you had to put up with such an unfair situation. Be happy and enjoy your life.
> I feel sorry for Archie, but I hope Harry will be an OK father.


Thank you, life is pretty wonderful now. I remember when I bought my first luxury bag and my mother saw it. Always being the victim she said, 'What did I do in my life that I can't afford a bag like that?' and I said drolly, 'Do you want a list?'


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Thank you, life is pretty wonderful now. I remember when I bought my first luxury bag and my mother saw it. Always being the victim she said, 'What did I do in my life that I can't afford a bag like that?' and I said drolly, 'Do you want a list?'


she's lucky you even talk to her


----------



## CarryOn2020

Please correct me if needed,  I thought her brother has admitted his role in this ordeal. He encouraged her to do the interview, claimed he had seen the bank receipts, essentially he fed her paranoia. An excerpt from the Tatler article shows he played an integral role in Diana doing the interview. If true, how sad.

For me, as an American, the interview opened my eyes to Diana’s ‘other’ side. I stopped believing the glossy, perfectly coifed, smartly dressed photos and looked at reality. Until Diana, I never paid much attention to the BRF.  Diana became the media money-maker and duped millions into believing the BRF pr.  Once she exposed her ‘other‘ side, I grew wiser, started reading the history books and realized she fed the myth as much as the media did.  Such a shameful ruse they all played.  Now, H is trying to pull off similar stuff, only he lacks Diana’s beauty and charisma. Most of us see what H is trying to do and are not willing to get fooled again. Charles can take his ‘great reset’ and &**&^%€.

To sum up my rant, I appreciate Bashir for showing us Diana’s other side.  A good wake-up call.

_It was only recently that Earl Spencer learnt that BBC executives had covered up the deceit used by Bashir to obtain the interview with his sister, Princess Diana. He tweeted on 6 November: ‘Many people are, quite understandably, asking why I’ve waited till now to come forward with the truth about how the @BBCPanorama with my sister came about. While I knew that Martin Bashir used fake bank statements and other dishonesty to get my sister to do the interview what I only found out 2 weeks ago, thanks to journalist Andy Webb’s persistent use of the Freedom of Information Act, is that the BBC also knew. Not only knew about it, but that they covered it up.’

Earl Spencer, 56, has called for an independent inquiry into the alleged deceit and demanded that Tim Davie apologise because he believes he was tricked into introducing Bashir, now the corporation’s religion editor, to his sister. While Tim Davie apologised in a letter he initially declined to open an investigation into the allegations that further underhand methods were deployed by Bashir. On 3 November, Earl Spencer hit back against the decision by going public with his anger and a devastating letter seen by the Daily Mail. In the letter, he accused the BBC of a ‘whitewash’ over faked bank statement and expressed his outrage at the institution’s ‘sheer dishonesty’ and accused Martin Bashir of ‘yellow journalism’ (an American term for badly researched, sensationalist or scandal-mongering news employed to increase sales)._






papertiger said:


> I think you mean the supposed letter in evidence that she was supposed to have said she wasn't shown any docs. Sounds like a 'unofficial' waiver to me, and probably a contrivance that Bashir asked her to write for such an eventuality. It's not unusual thing.
> 
> From Tatler:
> 
> "Now, a letter written by Diana, Princes of Wales, is expected to become an important piece of evidence during an inquiry into how the BBC secured its 1995 _Panorama_ interview with her. The letter reportedly emerged after a BBC staff member took it home as a memento. The contents of the letter have not been published but are expected to ‘praise’ Martin Bashir, the interviewer, who has been accused of obtaining Diana’s cooperation by deception. According to the _Times_, the letter is believed to thank Bashir for his conduct before and after the interview and states that she was never shown and (sic) documents to persuade her to take part in the interview."
> 
> This pretty much sums up the whole story and is now part of an ongoing inquiry:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Bashir will not face criminal investigation over Princess Diana’s Panorama interview
> 
> 
> The Metropolitan Police said correspondence alleging unlawful activity had been ‘carefully assessed’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story is not just what happened then. It's the cover-up (at the time and now) and the continual support of deceptive practices by an employee of a public institution. Just the language of attempting to gaslight by referring to the time frame as problematical to source info or less important than some thing that happened last week is shocking in a BBC 'apology'  "We are happy to repeat that apology. *And while this was a quarter of a century ago*, we absolutely will investigate, robustly and fairly, substantive new information." Don't mention the date, no excuses, just get on with it.
> 
> The interview changed history. It was huge. This story is huge. It's HUGE.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> she's lucky you even talk to her



We had quite a few rough years until I managed to forgive her. It probably wouldn't have taken so long if she had ever apologized but she isn't capable of that. That's the nature of the narcissistic beast.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> We had quite a few rough years until I managed to forgive her. It probably wouldn't have taken so long if she had ever apologized but she isn't capable of that. That's the nature of the narcissistic beast.


any siblings?


----------



## CarryOn2020

All parents need to realize the role they play in their children’s mental health. We wouldn’t have the mess we have if we had better parents. Parents are the problem and parents are the solution.  Oprah’s talk show was excellent in raising awareness of this unspoken truth.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> any siblings?


I'm going completely OT but yes, two siblings who are several years older. Well, one now. My older brother passed away a couple of years ago. He was not able to overcome our childhood trauma and the years of unrelenting stress and depression culminated in a stroke.


----------



## jennlt

Has anyone managed to find any juicy excerpts from Samantha's new book? I must admit I'm extremely curious to hear her point of view!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please correct me if needed,  I thought her brother has admitted his role in this ordeal. He encouraged her to do the interview, claimed he had seen the bank receipts, essentially he fed her paranoia. An excerpt from the Tatler article shows he played an integral role in Diana doing the interview. If true, how sad.
> 
> For me, as an American, the interview opened my eyes to Diana’s ‘other’ side. I stopped believing the glossy, perfectly coifed, smartly dressed photos and looked at reality. Until Diana, I never paid much attention to the BRF.  Diana became the media money-maker and duped millions into believing the BRF pr.  Once she exposed her ‘other‘ side, I grew wiser, started reading the history books and realized she fed the myth as much as the media did.  Such a shameful ruse they all played.  Now, H is trying to pull off similar stuff, only he lacks Diana’s beauty and charisma. Most of us see what H is trying to do and are not willing to get fooled again. Charles can take his ‘great reset’ and &**&^%€.
> 
> To sum up my rant, I appreciate Bashir for showing us Diana’s other side.  A good wake-up call.
> 
> _It was only recently that Earl Spencer learnt that BBC executives had covered up the deceit used by Bashir to obtain the interview with his sister, Princess Diana. He tweeted on 6 November: ‘Many people are, quite understandably, asking why I’ve waited till now to come forward with the truth about how the @BBCPanorama with my sister came about. While I knew that Martin Bashir used fake bank statements and other dishonesty to get my sister to do the interview what I only found out 2 weeks ago, thanks to journalist Andy Webb’s persistent use of the Freedom of Information Act, is that the BBC also knew. Not only knew about it, but that they covered it up.’
> 
> Earl Spencer, 56, has called for an independent inquiry into the alleged deceit and demanded that Tim Davie apologise because he believes he was tricked into introducing Bashir, now the corporation’s religion editor, to his sister. While Tim Davie apologised in a letter he initially declined to open an investigation into the allegations that further underhand methods were deployed by Bashir. On 3 November, Earl Spencer hit back against the decision by going public with his anger and a devastating letter seen by the Daily Mail. In the letter, he accused the BBC of a ‘whitewash’ over faked bank statement and expressed his outrage at the institution’s ‘sheer dishonesty’ and accused Martin Bashir of ‘yellow journalism’ (an American term for badly researched, sensationalist or scandal-mongering news employed to increase sales)._


I don't understand.  If her own brother knew the receipts were fake, yet encouraged her to do the interview, WTF cares if the BBC knew or not?  He was close to Diana and he KNEW they were fake.  Now it's the BBC's fault how?  Isn't the Earl also to blame?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> All parents need to realize the role they play in their children’s mental health. We wouldn’t have the mess we have if we had better parents. Parents are the problem and parents are the solution.  Oprah’s talk show was excellent in raising awareness of this unspoken truth.


As I've gotten older, I've come to realize how profoundly adverse childhood events can really shape us as adults, sometimes we never recover.  It also has made me realize that I was blessed to have the two parents that I did.  Even with little money, I always felt loved and valued.  I never thought others had such awful parents as a child.  I was lucky.


----------



## Jktgal

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, but if you go down to look at public records in your county offices, does an annulment make the original marriage certificate/paperwork found in public records go away/disappear? Technically you can just go down and look at these documents in public records. Does annulment  prompt the records department to remove the original marriage filing? Or is it still there? If Meghan was married to lawyer dude (marriage #1), then there would be some record unless it was a confidential filing (was allowed in some states for a while, not sure if it still is).
> 
> I know annulment in the eyes of the church has nothing to do with that paperwork being removed - different entities.


I think if anyone has enough money, anything can be done incl removal of public record.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand.  If her own brother knew the receipts were fake, yet encouraged her to do the interview, WTF cares if the BBC knew or not?  He was close to Diana and he KNEW they were fake.  Now it's the BBC's fault how?  Isn't the Earl also to blame?



My thoughts exactly. He is the real story in this drama. So many unanswered questions with him. How much was he paid?  We aren’t as stupid as he thinks. Harry would do well to realize this. William, too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That story about the interview deceit is so confusing to me.


----------



## viciel

purseinsanity said:


> I was going to say the same thing.  If I recall correctly, one of the Kennedys wanted his marriage annulled after more than 10 years and several kids so that he could marry in the church again.  His wife fought it tooth and nail.  I can't remember if he succeeded or not.


If he's a Kennedy he likely succeeded. But then again, Karma always has her say at the end of the day for that clan.


----------



## viciel

kemilia said:


> A couple of years after my divorce, my ex sent me paperwork to fill out so that he could get an annulment.
> 
> I thought "fine, if this makes him happy--ok". I started filling it out and then it got into questions/factoids that were kinda creepy and made me look like a sh*t and I decided "nope, this is not me, not gonna do this, sorry." So I told let him know "sorry, but nope."
> 
> What I didn't ask him about was his marriage #1 (I was #2) that produced 4 children (we had no kids). How did he get that one annulled?


My understanding is that one lie, one single non-truth may be the cause for annulment. If your pocket is deep enough anything could be bought.


----------



## gracekelly

I have always given Earl Spencer the side-eye.  He has sold off property from the estate lands and pieces of art.  He is always looking for a buck.  You could say that about many of the noble landowning families as the death duties are very steep, but there is something about him that is different.


----------



## viciel

gracekelly said:


> We'll give it more time and see if the five kids end up in rehab and taking their clothes off for tabloid photos.


Just in time to land a reality tv show Kardashian style. Hilary (we should all just start to call her that) is aiming to be the next Kris Jenner. Folks, remember I said it here first!  LOL. Btw with a middle name like Lynn....what was she thinking she could fool people forever?!?!?


----------



## Tootsie17

jennlt said:


> Thanks. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Honestly, I thought life was like this for everyone until I was old enough to realize I drew the short straw. Determination to build a better life and a university scholarship were my saving graces.


Kudos to you for marrying someone who is loving and supportive. Continue to live a great life because you deserve it.


----------



## viciel

bag-mania said:


> That is fairly common, isn't it? The man making more effort with children from his second marriage than from the first. I think it is because he is older by then and finally settling down to the role of father.
> 
> I'm sure Alec Baldwin's kids with Hillary are getting much more "dad time" than Ireland did.


I see it often too but I'm not convinced it's due to their becoming more mature or more settled. I think Thomas Markle, like Alec Baldwin, many others like them, are just as narcissistic and incapable of empathy for anyone but themselves. They all just happened to have been played by ssomeone even more cunning than they were/are. Some scandals or another expose them and they desperately trying to claw back at something, anything. NPD is deeply rooted and they don't change and there are more of them than we realize.


----------



## viciel

jennlt said:


> She wanted to marry her third husband and she has never let a little thing like the well being or happiness of her children take precedence over her own happiness.
> 
> The point I meant to make was that I grew up with two narcissists/perpetual victims for parents and my heart hurts for Archie if he has to endure that type of childhood.
> 
> My victimization of her began when I was born a few days before Christmas. My mother's favorite holiday is Christmas and she resents that I ruined her enjoyment of it by being thoughtless enough to be born at that time of year. Every Christmas during my childhood I had to hear how much nicer the holidays would be if she didn't have to deal with my birthday and I should have been born in June. Now she spends the winters in Florida and always makes sure she flies down there before my birthday. This is an obviously mild example of what life is like with narcissistic parents but it is rather damaging to a child's sense of self worth to be constantly criticized or resented for things out of one's control. Narcissists never let little things like facts (biological or otherwise) get in the way of their victimhood lol
> 
> If Archie has to live with a parent or parents who are never satisfied, I do worry that his childhood will not be the happy, carefree one that every child deserves.


I'm sorry you had/have to deal with this. But as you said what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Truly. I imagine in her mind this person feels she has done nothing short of a spectacular job as a mother and that she would take every last drop of credit for anything positive coming out of your life and somehow manage to blame everything and everyone else for anything negative in your or her life. NPDs will never change but at least you are an adult now and sees her for what she is.


----------



## rose60610

Excerpt from _Tatler:_

"A memoir by Meghan Markle’s estranged half-sister Samantha will be published in the US on 17 January, the _Telegraph_ reports. The 330-page book by 56-year-old Ms Markle will reportedly describe her dysfunctional relationship with the Duchess of Sussex and is entitled _*The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1*_.

*The book, published by Barnes and Noble*, promises to expose the ‘hidden truths’ about the family. The Barnes and Noble website has a brief synopsis: ‘Amidst a firestorm of fake news and media mayhem, Samantha Markle shares the truth about her life and family against all odds and ultimatums, as a royal fairytale plummets from the tea towels. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction.’ " 
and 

"Samantha Markle announced plans last year for a second book which will be called _In the Shadows of the Duchess_."

I guess this is why Amazon doesn't have it.


----------



## chaneljewel

A Return to Royal Life for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Is "Dead in the Water," Royal Sources Say
					

The Queen wouldn't allow it now because of "the choices they have made."




					www.goodhousekeeping.com
				




Interesting article.


----------



## rose60610

chaneljewel said:


> A Return to Royal Life for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Is "Dead in the Water," Royal Sources Say
> 
> 
> The Queen wouldn't allow it now because of "the choices they have made."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodhousekeeping.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting article.



 .  Plus, I've wondered why M&H even wanted an extension if they have all this $$$ coming in from Netflix and Spotify. Doesn't make sense. Only if they were scared they might fail and wanted granny's safety net. They're damn near 40. Pretty pathetic.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> .  Plus, I've wondered why M&H even wanted an extension if they have all this $$$ coming in from Netflix and Spotify. Doesn't make sense. Only if they were scared they might fail and wanted granny's safety net. They're damn near 40. Pretty pathetic.



They want it both ways.  They want to make all that money for themselves but they need that connection to the royal family to keep them interesting enough to do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> Has anyone managed to find any juicy excerpts from Samantha's new book? I must admit I'm extremely curious to hear her point of view!


Not yet, but I wonder if we should mail a copy to QE. “The book may never be on sale in Britain...", according to the Sun.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> .  Plus, I've wondered why M&H even wanted an extension if they have all this $$$ coming in from Netflix and Spotify. Doesn't make sense. Only if they were scared they might fail and wanted granny's safety net. They're damn near 40. Pretty pathetic.


Never enough for the duchess...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Never enough for the duchess...



Never enough, fear of failure, and the taxman cometh

Add in that both parents in the past have filed for bankruptcy — the dad in 2016, the mom in 2002.  MM’s gotta merch.
Article from 2107:  https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyl...mily-prince-harry/CN5AW3CQYGEITSF5EAGI4NLH74/


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please correct me if needed,  I thought her brother has admitted his role in this ordeal. He encouraged her to do the interview, claimed he had seen the bank receipts, essentially he fed her paranoia. An excerpt from the Tatler article shows he played an integral role in Diana doing the interview. If true, how sad.
> 
> For me, as an American, the interview opened my eyes to Diana’s ‘other’ side. I stopped believing the glossy, perfectly coifed, smartly dressed photos and looked at reality. Until Diana, I never paid much attention to the BRF.  Diana became the media money-maker and duped millions into believing the BRF pr.  Once she exposed her ‘other‘ side, I grew wiser, started reading the history books and realized she fed the myth as much as the media did.  Such a shameful ruse they all played.  Now, H is trying to pull off similar stuff, only he lacks Diana’s beauty and charisma. Most of us see what H is trying to do and are not willing to get fooled again. Charles can take his ‘great reset’ and &**&^%€.
> 
> To sum up my rant, I appreciate Bashir for showing us Diana’s other side.  A good wake-up call.
> 
> _It was only recently that Earl Spencer learnt that BBC executives had covered up the deceit used by Bashir to obtain the interview with his sister, Princess Diana. He tweeted on 6 November: ‘Many people are, quite understandably, asking why I’ve waited till now to come forward with the truth about how the @BBCPanorama with my sister came about. While I knew that Martin Bashir used fake bank statements and other dishonesty to get my sister to do the interview what I only found out 2 weeks ago, thanks to journalist Andy Webb’s persistent use of the Freedom of Information Act, is that the BBC also knew. Not only knew about it, but that they covered it up.’
> 
> Earl Spencer, 56, has called for an independent inquiry into the alleged deceit and demanded that Tim Davie apologise because he believes he was tricked into introducing Bashir, now the corporation’s religion editor, to his sister. While Tim Davie apologised in a letter he initially declined to open an investigation into the allegations that further underhand methods were deployed by Bashir. On 3 November, Earl Spencer hit back against the decision by going public with his anger and a devastating letter seen by the Daily Mail. In the letter, he accused the BBC of a ‘whitewash’ over faked bank statement and expressed his outrage at the institution’s ‘sheer dishonesty’ and accused Martin Bashir of ‘yellow journalism’ (an American term for badly researched, sensationalist or scandal-mongering news employed to increase sales)._



I certainly think the Earl feels guilty about playing his part in the situation. He played his part. He's may not be the nicest man either as his first wife will attest to, she also suffered with eating disorders throughout their married life. He may also feel guilty about distancing his sister during the '90s, during and after the divorce, he didn't want the media circus around him that he felt was attached to her. He wants it both ways. _Now_ he wants to act the protective brother.


----------



## jennlt

Tootsie17 said:


> Kudos to you for marrying someone who is loving and supportive. Continue to live a great life because you deserve it.





viciel said:


> I'm sorry you had/have to deal with this. But as you said what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Truly. I imagine in her mind this person feels she has done nothing short of a spectacular job as a mother and that she would take every last drop of credit for anything positive coming out of your life and somehow manage to blame everything and everyone else for anything negative in your or her life. NPDs will never change but at least you are an adult now and sees her for what she is.



Thanks to both of you and everyone for all the support; it is much appreciated! @viciel, it is impressive how "on the money" you are in your description of her personality. Luckily, I realized early on that my circumstances were not my fault and that made it possible for me to break the cycle and build a more normal life.

@Tootsie17 , I am incredibly grateful to have a man who makes me laugh and is my best friend. I probably don't deserve him but don't tell him I said that!

Cheers to all of you!


----------



## Chanbal

Are US journalists starting to report less favorable news? 


*Kayleigh Roberts
Mon, January 4, 2021, 6:49 AM PST*

_A former palace servant shared inside details about how Meghan adjusted to royal life during her time at Kensington Palace and claimed that an incident in while she yelled at a member of Kate's staff was the tipping point that kicked off discussions of the Sussexes relocating to Windsor._

"Kate is actually one of the nicest royals, and she hasn't let life in her extremely grand apartment at Kensington go to her head—or at least not too much," one palace insider said. "She is nice to her staff, in the main, and she was very warm towards Meghan when she arrived."

According to the source, Meghan struggled with jealousy about her and Harry's position relative to that of Kate and her husband, Prince William, who is directly in line to inherit the throne.

"I think she has found that difficult to deal with," the insider continued. "And although Harry loved their cottage in the grounds, Meghan was conscious that it was tiny in comparison to the vast apartment complex where Kate and William live."

"Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff—that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace," the former servant explained. "Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers."

More here!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

youngster said:


> In the past, it was seriously difficult to obtain an annulment in the Catholic church. You needed specific grounds and evidence and jump through numerous hoops. Some accepted reasons for an annulment:  the couple are blood relatives, the mental or legal capacity to marry of one of the parties was impaired or non-existent,  the marriage was never consummated, one party committed fraud by misrepresenting themselves to an extreme degree, etc.  Henry VIII tried to annul his first marriage to Catherine of Aragon and look how that went lol.  Catherine fought the annulment tooth and nail and claimed her marriage to Henry's older brother had never been consummated so there were no legitimate grounds for annulment. Her daughter with Henry VIII, later Queen Mary I, would have been (and then later was) declared illegitimate as a result.
> 
> It's a lot easier to get an annulment now, though it still takes time.  Lots of celebrities have done it so they can remarry in the Catholic Church.  Frank Sinatra famously divorced his first wife with whom he had 3 children and got an annulment.  Crazy.  *Horrible thing to do to the children*.


I'm not a religious person, but here's what I have learned. I know ordinary people who have had annulments post divorces and the children are never "annulled" as all the provisions of the divorce decree still stand. The divorced parent is still responsible for all aspects of the child's support. Some people fail to adhere to the decree, but that happens in civil divorces too.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Are US journalists starting to report less favorable news?
> View attachment 4947815
> 
> *Kayleigh Roberts
> Mon, January 4, 2021, 6:49 AM PST*
> 
> _A former palace servant shared inside details about how Meghan adjusted to royal life during her time at Kensington Palace and claimed that an incident in while she yelled at a member of Kate's staff was the tipping point that kicked off discussions of the Sussexes relocating to Windsor._
> 
> "Kate is actually one of the nicest royals, and she hasn't let life in her extremely grand apartment at Kensington go to her head—or at least not too much," one palace insider said. "She is nice to her staff, in the main, and she was very warm towards Meghan when she arrived."
> 
> According to the source, Meghan struggled with jealousy about her and Harry's position relative to that of Kate and her husband, Prince William, who is directly in line to inherit the throne.
> 
> "I think she has found that difficult to deal with," the insider continued. "And although Harry loved their cottage in the grounds, Meghan was conscious that it was tiny in comparison to the vast apartment complex where Kate and William live."
> 
> "Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff—that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace," the former servant explained. "Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers."
> 
> More here!


bring it on 
of course this is racist BS


----------



## lanasyogamama

Super old news, interesting that they’re publishing it now.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Super old news, interesting that they’re publishing it now.



A lot of these sites use them for clickbait. They don't care what the story says, if it's about Meghan and Harry people will open it.


----------



## youngster

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm not a religious person, but here's what I have learned. I know ordinary people who have had annulments post divorces and the children are never "annulled" as all the provisions of the divorce decree still stand. The divorced parent is still responsible for all aspects of the child's support. Some people fail to adhere to the decree, but that happens in civil divorces too.


 
Oh, yes, I realize that children aren't erased and they are still considered legitimate and entitled to all the usual legal protections. I guess I should have stated that in the past, annulments were used to de-legitimize children which I think is an awful thing to do.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Are US journalists starting to report less favorable news?
> View attachment 4947815
> 
> *Kayleigh Roberts
> Mon, January 4, 2021, 6:49 AM PST*
> 
> _A former palace servant shared inside details about how Meghan adjusted to royal life during her time at Kensington Palace and claimed that an incident in while she yelled at a member of Kate's staff was the tipping point that kicked off discussions of the Sussexes relocating to Windsor._
> 
> "Kate is actually one of the nicest royals, and she hasn't let life in her extremely grand apartment at Kensington go to her head—or at least not too much," one palace insider said. "She is nice to her staff, in the main, and she was very warm towards Meghan when she arrived."
> 
> According to the source, Meghan struggled with jealousy about her and Harry's position relative to that of Kate and her husband, Prince William, who is directly in line to inherit the throne.
> 
> "I think she has found that difficult to deal with," the insider continued. "And although Harry loved their cottage in the grounds, Meghan was conscious that it was tiny in comparison to the vast apartment complex where Kate and William live."
> 
> "Kate was horrified when Meghan shouted at a member of Kate's staff—that was definitely the beginning of discussions about leaving Kensington Palace," the former servant explained. "Like many people not used to dealing with servants, Meghan overdoes the imperiousness; so on the one hand she wants to be like Diana, a people's princess, and on the other she wants people to stand to attention when she clicks her fingers."
> 
> More here!


While this may be old, the "imperious" nature of the subject - MM is not "new" news by any means!  Just talk to folks who knew her back when and, in addition (even though a Z-list actress on a Cable show) .. she had her "moments" on the set too.  So, am I surprised that this would happen? .. HECK NO!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Super old news, interesting that they’re publishing it now.





bag-mania said:


> A lot of these sites use them for clickbait. They don't care what the story says, if it's about Meghan and Harry people will open it.


Agree, this is old news, particularly for us here at TPF, but still interesting. News releases in the US about the duchess have been mostly ridiculous and likely conveyed by her PR-teams. So an article published here describing that "Meghan struggled with jealousy..." and "Meghan overdoes the imperiousness..." is a big change imo.

Here are more headlines:


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, did Harry not explain the monarchy to her? Why would she think H is next in line? Did he pretend that he was?  Hmmmm.

IMO it is helpful to review the old articles. So much was published in such a short period of time that I know I missed lots of the important details.  MM‘s jealousy of W&K reveals lots about H&M’s relationship. 



Chanbal said:


> Are US journalists starting to report less favorable news?
> 
> 
> *According to the source, Meghan struggled with jealousy about her and Harry's position relative to that of Kate and her husband, Prince William, who is directly in line to inherit the throne.
> 
> "I think she has found that difficult to deal with," the insider continued. "And although Harry loved their cottage in the grounds, Meghan was conscious that it was tiny in comparison to the vast apartment complex where Kate and William live."*
> 
> More here!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *So, did Harry not explain the monarchy to her? Why would she think H is next in line?* Did he pretend that he was?  Hmmmm.
> 
> IMO it is helpful to review the old articles. So much was published in such a short period of time that I know I missed lots of the important details.  MM‘s jealousy of W&K reveals lots about H&M’s relationship.


I'm sure he did, but this was likely part of her attempts to modernize the monarchy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Enjoy this Aussie article. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s disastrous start to 2021*
*With legal woes and their controversial podcast debut, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have started 2021 badly – and things are about to get worse.*

Imagine if we could get our hands on a time machine and could travel back to exactly one year ago today: Buy loo paper in bulk, we would cry, and invest in stock in tracksuit makers!

Also, as by the end of 2020 we’d add, Oprah will be spruiking a vegan latte brand backed by Meghan Duchess of Sussex and Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor’s first public words will be broadcast as part of a $52 million deal with Spotify.

Old us would think we’d gone mad and gotten into the cooking sherry far too early in the morning. It would have seemed just too preposterous and simply too wild to even consider for a moment that two frontline members of the house of Windsor would trade in their lofty positions to move to California to become “content creators” living down the road from Ellen.

But that was 2020: An extraordinary year of extraordinary events interspersed with us all stockpiling pasta.

As 2021 slowly grinds into gear, the Sussexes are firmly ensconced in their $20 million Montecito mansion, their new brand Archewell is up and running and they have inked a rumoured $180 million plus in headline-grabbing deals. The future should be bright, if not sparkling – vegan lattes for everyone!

But as this year begins, the picture is far more complex and not necessarily quite so rosy for the royal duo who have maintained their innate capacity to make waves.

First, came the debut of Archewell Audio, their podcasting endeavour, in late December. Their first episode featured a clutch of celebrities including Elton John and James Corden however the true star of the 33-minute outing was none other than their 18-month-old son Archie who uttered his first public words.

Adorable? Absolutely. Controversial? Hugely.

Since the little boy’s birth in 2019, Harry and Meghan have fiercely guarded the bub’s privacy, only allowing strictly controlled media access to their first child. Since moving to North America, the couple has twice gone to court to take legal action to protect him from the intrusive long lenses of the paparazzi.

Which is why their decision to broadcast his first words via a commercial venture is so contentious. Cries of hypocrisy went up on social media; if they are so vigilant when it comes to their son’s privacy, why share even a smidgen of him with the world? Or, as perennially savage Sussex critic Piers Morgan so bluntly put it, “They use him to flog their podcast”.

Nor did their inaugural outing set the podcast world on fire, managing to only hit the seventh spot on the Spotify charts in the US after its launch despite an avalanche of publicity. At the time of writing it is ranking at number 10 in the states and fifth in Australia.

Given that Meghan is one of the most famous women in the world – if not the most famous woman – right now, and the opportunity to listen to the world’s most famous couple banter is truly tantalising, one would have thought their first podcast would make much more of a splash.

Next up, we come to the unveiling of Archewell, the couple’s long ballyhooed charitable entity. In late December, the website was unveiled, an amateurish, arty exercise in black and white and which offered up “A letter for 2021” which began “I am my mother’s son. And I am our son’s mother” set against images of a young Harry with Diana and a young Meghan with her mother Doria Ragland.

The sentiment was touching and clearly genuine however the execution, like many things Sussex-related, has only ended up ruffling feathers. Where in all of this was Harry’s father Prince Charles? Where was the touching ode to his parenting and support?

Likewise, the prominent use of an image of their late mother also raised eyebrows with royal biographer Phil Dampier telling the _Daily Mail_: “I think William will be slightly worried if Harry uses Diana for any of his charitable or commercial ventures without consulting him, and I don’t think he would be happy if Harry appears to be exploiting his mother’s iconic status.”

So what of Archewell? Denied the chance to use the “Sussex Royal” moniker as part of their Megxit deal with the Queen, news of this new name and brand was first revealed in February last year and now the world has gotten its first proper look at what nitty gritty of the endeavour.

As their website explains it, there are three arms to the brand: Archewell Foundation, Archewell Audio and Archewell Productions. What is interesting about this is that the Foundation arm is clearly identified as a “non-profit” while the Audio and Productions wings are the bodies attached to their megabucks Spotify and Netflix deals.

While there is every chance that Harry and Meghan intend to invest vast swathes of the revenue from their huge business deals into the philanthropic side of Archewell (which would make sense given they have repeatedly made donations over the last year to non-profit organisations close to their hearts) it is curious they have not adopted more of a church and state division between their charitable and commercial projects.

The wisdom of cobbling together their ambitious (and exciting) do-goodery and their money-making endeavours under the same umbrella brand remains to be proven.

Then we get to Sussex courtroom drama part 674. On Monday, UK time, a judge in London will decide whether to grant Meghan her request for a summary judgment in her lawsuit against the _Daily Mail_ for allegedly breaching her privacy. If her application is successful, it would stave off a courtroom showdown and a ruling would be made on the case soon.

If her legal request is denied, it raises the possibility of Meghan facing off against her estranged father Thomas Markle in an Old Bailey courtroom in October or November this year. The emotional and financial costs could be significant and a drawn out family saga on full, messy public display would not be a thrilling prospect for anyone involved. A senior royal source has told the Times “A trial would be traumatic for Meghan and Harry, it will expose palace operations, members of staff would be dragged into it on the witness stands … it would be deeply uncomfortable for the institution.”

Lastly, this week marks the first anniversary of Megxit. The coming days are likely to see a deluge of post-mortems and think pieces and it seems unlikely that Fleet Street will be particularly gentle towards the duo.

However, if there is one thing 2020 has taught us about the Sussexes is that they are not only resilient but tenacious and single minded in their pursuit of what they think is right. Similarly, are no two public figures more naturally adept at defying odds, expectations, convention and established wisdom.

So, if we had that handy time machine, I wonder where things would stand on this day in 2022 … Are Harry and Meghan working with SpaceX to colonise Mars? Is the duchess planning a tilt at the White House? Does Archie have his own line of vegan playdoh?

If we have learnt one thing from the wild, wild ride that was 2020, when it comes to the Sussexes, anything is possible.









						Meghan and Harry’s terrible start to 2021
					

Imagine if we could get our hands on a time machine and could travel back to exactly one year ago today: Buy loo paper in bulk, we would cry, and invest in stock in tracksuit makers!




					www.news.com.au


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Enjoy this Aussie article.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s disastrous start to 2021*
> *With legal woes and their controversial podcast debut, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have started 2021 badly – and things are about to get worse.*
> 
> Imagine if we could get our hands on a time machine and could travel back to exactly one year ago today: Buy loo paper in bulk, we would cry, and invest in stock in tracksuit makers!
> 
> Also, as by the end of 2020 we’d add, Oprah will be spruiking a vegan latte brand backed by Meghan Duchess of Sussex and Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor’s first public words will be broadcast as part of a $52 million deal with Spotify.
> 
> Old us would think we’d gone mad and gotten into the cooking sherry far too early in the morning. It would have seemed just too preposterous and simply too wild to even consider for a moment that two frontline members of the house of Windsor would trade in their lofty positions to move to California to become “content creators” living down the road from Ellen.
> 
> But that was 2020: An extraordinary year of extraordinary events interspersed with us all stockpiling pasta.
> 
> As 2021 slowly grinds into gear, the Sussexes are firmly ensconced in their $20 million Montecito mansion, their new brand Archewell is up and running and they have inked a rumoured $180 million plus in headline-grabbing deals. The future should be bright, if not sparkling – vegan lattes for everyone!
> 
> But as this year begins, the picture is far more complex and not necessarily quite so rosy for the royal duo who have maintained their innate capacity to make waves.
> 
> First, came the debut of Archewell Audio, their podcasting endeavour, in late December. Their first episode featured a clutch of celebrities including Elton John and James Corden however the true star of the 33-minute outing was none other than their 18-month-old son Archie who uttered his first public words.
> 
> Adorable? Absolutely. Controversial? Hugely.
> 
> Since the little boy’s birth in 2019, Harry and Meghan have fiercely guarded the bub’s privacy, only allowing strictly controlled media access to their first child. Since moving to North America, the couple has twice gone to court to take legal action to protect him from the intrusive long lenses of the paparazzi.
> 
> Which is why their decision to broadcast his first words via a commercial venture is so contentious. Cries of hypocrisy went up on social media; if they are so vigilant when it comes to their son’s privacy, why share even a smidgen of him with the world? Or, as perennially savage Sussex critic Piers Morgan so bluntly put it, “They use him to flog their podcast”.
> 
> Nor did their inaugural outing set the podcast world on fire, managing to only hit the seventh spot on the Spotify charts in the US after its launch despite an avalanche of publicity. At the time of writing it is ranking at number 10 in the states and fifth in Australia.
> 
> Given that Meghan is one of the most famous women in the world – if not the most famous woman – right now, and the opportunity to listen to the world’s most famous couple banter is truly tantalising, one would have thought their first podcast would make much more of a splash.
> 
> Next up, we come to the unveiling of Archewell, the couple’s long ballyhooed charitable entity. In late December, the website was unveiled, an amateurish, arty exercise in black and white and which offered up “A letter for 2021” which began “I am my mother’s son. And I am our son’s mother” set against images of a young Harry with Diana and a young Meghan with her mother Doria Ragland.
> 
> The sentiment was touching and clearly genuine however the execution, like many things Sussex-related, has only ended up ruffling feathers. Where in all of this was Harry’s father Prince Charles? Where was the touching ode to his parenting and support?
> 
> Likewise, the prominent use of an image of their late mother also raised eyebrows with royal biographer Phil Dampier telling the _Daily Mail_: “I think William will be slightly worried if Harry uses Diana for any of his charitable or commercial ventures without consulting him, and I don’t think he would be happy if Harry appears to be exploiting his mother’s iconic status.”
> 
> So what of Archewell? Denied the chance to use the “Sussex Royal” moniker as part of their Megxit deal with the Queen, news of this new name and brand was first revealed in February last year and now the world has gotten its first proper look at what nitty gritty of the endeavour.
> 
> As their website explains it, there are three arms to the brand: Archewell Foundation, Archewell Audio and Archewell Productions. What is interesting about this is that the Foundation arm is clearly identified as a “non-profit” while the Audio and Productions wings are the bodies attached to their megabucks Spotify and Netflix deals.
> 
> While there is every chance that Harry and Meghan intend to invest vast swathes of the revenue from their huge business deals into the philanthropic side of Archewell (which would make sense given they have repeatedly made donations over the last year to non-profit organisations close to their hearts) it is curious they have not adopted more of a church and state division between their charitable and commercial projects.
> 
> The wisdom of cobbling together their ambitious (and exciting) do-goodery and their money-making endeavours under the same umbrella brand remains to be proven.
> 
> Then we get to Sussex courtroom drama part 674. On Monday, UK time, a judge in London will decide whether to grant Meghan her request for a summary judgment in her lawsuit against the _Daily Mail_ for allegedly breaching her privacy. If her application is successful, it would stave off a courtroom showdown and a ruling would be made on the case soon.
> 
> If her legal request is denied, it raises the possibility of Meghan facing off against her estranged father Thomas Markle in an Old Bailey courtroom in October or November this year. The emotional and financial costs could be significant and a drawn out family saga on full, messy public display would not be a thrilling prospect for anyone involved. A senior royal source has told the Times “A trial would be traumatic for Meghan and Harry, it will expose palace operations, members of staff would be dragged into it on the witness stands … it would be deeply uncomfortable for the institution.”
> 
> Lastly, this week marks the first anniversary of Megxit. The coming days are likely to see a deluge of post-mortems and think pieces and it seems unlikely that Fleet Street will be particularly gentle towards the duo.
> 
> However, if there is one thing 2020 has taught us about the Sussexes is that they are not only resilient but tenacious and single minded in their pursuit of what they think is right. Similarly, are no two public figures more naturally adept at defying odds, expectations, convention and established wisdom.
> 
> So, if we had that handy time machine, I wonder where things would stand on this day in 2022 … Are Harry and Meghan working with SpaceX to colonise Mars? Is the duchess planning a tilt at the White House? Does Archie have his own line of vegan playdoh?
> 
> If we have learnt one thing from the wild, wild ride that was 2020, when it comes to the Sussexes, anything is possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s terrible start to 2021
> 
> 
> Imagine if we could get our hands on a time machine and could travel back to exactly one year ago today: Buy loo paper in bulk, we would cry, and invest in stock in tracksuit makers!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


Interesting article, thanks! Here are my 2 cents:

* “A trial ... will expose palace operations, members of staff would be dragged into it on the witness stands … it would be deeply uncomfortable for the institution*.” This will likely help MM to get the requested summary judgment. It's possible that the judge might agree with a summary judgment to avoid an uncomfortable situation for the monarchy.

"*Are Harry and Meghan working with SpaceX to colonise Mars?*" I would feel sorry for Elon, but it's a great idea. MM&H, the Queen and King of Mars living there (forever) in a 1000-toilet mansion. I like it!


----------



## Lodpah

Someone pointed out on another site that if you submit content to their foundation online they own it. I do t know too many people who are smart enough to do that. Read the fine print.

Also MM is so vindictive she is I believe punishing the BRF for whatever slight she perceived was directed to her.

Foundation vs. Charitable sites. Draw your own conclusion. She’s so vile and despicable and his manhood so far gone he needs to check it once in a while to see if it’s still hanging.


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> Someone pointed out on another site that if you submit content to their foundation online they own it. I do t know too many people who are smart enough to do that. Read the fine print.
> 
> Also MM is so vindictive she is I believe punishing the BRF for whatever slight she perceived was directed to her.
> 
> Foundation vs. Charitable sites. Draw your own conclusion. She’s so vile and despicable and his manhood so far gone he needs to check it once in a while to see if it’s still hanging.



So did somebody submit the stuff MM has plagiarized to their foundation? Maybe if you submit your own original content they own it. You see that wording in some contests, etc, that submissions become the property of bla bla bla. She needs more content she can pass off as her own.


----------



## Jktgal

Isn't she a self-professed millionaire by 2016? But she can't bail her dad $30-40k? And now peddle$ love?

Anyway, Harry is starting to look like the Samantha in the family. $amantha writes a book, peddles her sister. Harry does a podcast and peddle$ his dead mother.


----------



## Jktgal

Chanbal said:


> Agree, this is old news, particularly for us here at TPF, but still interesting. News releases in the US about the duchess have been mostly ridiculous and likely conveyed by her PR-teams. So an article published here describing that "Meghan struggled with jealousy..." and "Meghan overdoes the imperiousness..." is a big change imo.
> 
> Here are more headlines:
> View attachment 4948159
> 
> View attachment 4948164



For those who haven't been paying attention, it puts the 16 loo in perspective - something to match Kensington Palace. Plus that farewell dre$$ colour. But for us with the Spidey tingle on this thread..... yawn.


----------



## bellecate

Lodpah said:


> Someone pointed out on another site that if you submit content to their foundation online they own it. I do t know too many people who are smart enough to do that. Read the fine print.
> 
> Also MM is so vindictive she is I believe punishing the BRF for whatever slight she perceived was directed to her.
> 
> Foundation vs. Charitable sites. Draw your own conclusion. She’s so vile and despicable and his manhood so far gone he needs to check it once in a while to see if it’s still hanging.



I actually read the whole thing, if I understand it correctly it is theirs in perpetuity. They may use it whenever, however in what ever format they want. Any names you mention they may use and they may give, sell whatever to anybody or thing they wish.  Images, videos' ....theirs.  'm thinking you also no longer have the right to use it yourself anywhere else.


----------



## bag-mania

Why would anyone submit their own material to Archewell? I cannot imagine a situation where that would seem like a good idea.


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> I actually read the whole thing, if I understand it correctly it is theirs in perpetuity. They may use it whenever, however in what ever format they want. Any names you mention they may use and they may give, sell whatever to anybody or thing they wish.  Images, videos' ....theirs.  'm thinking you also no longer have the right to use it yourself anywhere else.


Bad deal! I wish those musicians who are complaining about Spotify would say something. The grifters should be paid half a penny for every one who streams their content.


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t think any of us believed they would come back for the review.

*UP IN THE HEIR* *Prince Harry scraps returning to the UK for 12-month Megxit review with the Queen amid Covid chaos*
PRINCE Harry has scrapped a planned face-to-face meeting with the Queen for the 12-month review of Megxit, it has been claimed.

When Harry and Meghan Markle stepped down as working royals last year, it was on the condition that Harry would meet with his grandma at a later date to discuss how the arrangement was working.

A 12-month review was due for March 31 this year.

But the prince has been forced to cancel the plans as a terrifying mutant covid strain ravages the UK - with a ban on non-essential travel imposed. 

Royal sources told The MirrorHarry is yet to re-arrange with his gran, but is expected to do so in the coming weeks. 

The paper reports the couple had wanted an "extension" on the interim period before they officially leave. 

Prince Harry especially is keen to keep up with his military patronages - some of which could be at risk if he quits.

And while they have stepped down as senior working royals and are now making their own money, the pair are still expected to uphold the values of Her Majesty.

But senior advisors are reportedly concerned over the speed at which they have been signing megabucks deals with the likes of Netflix, Spotify and the Harry Walker Agency.

Eyebrows were also raised after Oprah Winfrey advertised a vegan coffee brand on her Instagram page that Meghan had invested in.

Courtiers are taking a “renewed in-depth look at the couple’s business deals," reports The Mirror.

But perhaps the Covid cancellation will leave some royals breathing a sigh of releif - as The Sun exclusively revealed Harry, Meghan, William and Kate face a "very awkward" encounter when the 'Frosty Four' reunite.

We also revealed the Prince was in line for a ticking off from his grandma on his return to the UK after a source told The Sun: "There are all sorts of issues to speak about — not only his political statements but also his visa situation in the US."

However, they also added: "Even though he would have to isolate for two weeks, the estate is large enough for talks in a socially distanced way.”

The Royal Family has a packed diary of big events in the coming year that the Sussexes would look rude to miss - not least the unveiling of a statue of Princess Diana that Wills and Harry commissioned together.

The group could now be reunited at a number of events in 2021, including the Queen’s 95th birthday, Prince Philip’s 100th and the unveiling of Princess Diana’s statue.









						Harry scraps UK return for Megxit review with Queen amid Covid chaos
					

PRINCE Harry has scrapped a planned face-to-face meeting with the Queen for the 12-month review of Megxit, it has been claimed. When Harry and Meghan Markle stepped down as working royals last year…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

I think TikTok has a very similar user agreement. Maybe that's where they got the idea?

I had a doctor who wanted all his patients to sign a form allowing him to take any information he had about you and do whatever he wanted with it - including selling it to as many buyers as he could find and solely for his financial gain. I left without signing and found a new doctor. I wonder how many people just blindly signed that form without reading it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, maybe the drama is over?




Richard Palmer
@RoyalReporter
Reporters have different takes on this  but FWIW my understanding is there’s little to discuss in the Megxit review due at the end of March.  Harry and Meghan seem happy with their new life and are now financially independent.

2:44 AM · Jan 6, 2021·Twitter for iPhone
https://mobile.twitter.com/RoyalReporter/status/1346739306338127872/retweets/with_comments
Harry is clearly unhappy about losing his military patronages but there’s no sign of any change on that. His military patronages are expected to be given to other members of the family later in 2021. *Announcements are likely to be dribbled out rather than made on March 31.*


----------



## mia55

bag-mania said:


> Why would anyone submit their own material to Archewell? I cannot imagine a situation where that would seem like a good idea.



I think they’re planning to sell emails and that statement refers to it. How the mighty has fallen


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think any of us believed they would come back for the review.
> 
> *UP IN THE HEIR* *Prince Harry scraps returning to the UK for 12-month Megxit review with the Queen amid Covid chaos*
> PRINCE Harry has scrapped a planned face-to-face meeting with the Queen for the 12-month review of Megxit, it has been claimed.
> 
> When Harry and Meghan Markle stepped down as working royals last year, it was on the condition that Harry would meet with his grandma at a later date to discuss how the arrangement was working.
> 
> A 12-month review was due for March 31 this year.
> 
> But the prince has been forced to cancel the plans as a terrifying mutant covid strain ravages the UK - with a ban on non-essential travel imposed.
> 
> Royal sources told The MirrorHarry is yet to re-arrange with his gran, but is expected to do so in the coming weeks.
> 
> The paper reports the couple had wanted an "extension" on the interim period before they officially leave.
> 
> Prince Harry especially is keen to keep up with his military patronages - some of which could be at risk if he quits.
> 
> And while they have stepped down as senior working royals and are now making their own money, the pair are still expected to uphold the values of Her Majesty.
> 
> But senior advisors are reportedly concerned over the speed at which they have been signing megabucks deals with the likes of Netflix, Spotify and the Harry Walker Agency.
> 
> Eyebrows were also raised after Oprah Winfrey advertised a vegan coffee brand on her Instagram page that Meghan had invested in.
> 
> Courtiers are taking a “renewed in-depth look at the couple’s business deals," reports The Mirror.
> 
> But perhaps the Covid cancellation will leave some royals breathing a sigh of releif - as The Sun exclusively revealed Harry, Meghan, William and Kate face a "very awkward" encounter when the 'Frosty Four' reunite.
> 
> We also revealed the Prince was in line for a ticking off from his grandma on his return to the UK after a source told The Sun: "There are all sorts of issues to speak about — not only his political statements but also his visa situation in the US."
> 
> However, they also added: "Even though he would have to isolate for two weeks, the estate is large enough for talks in a socially distanced way.”
> 
> The Royal Family has a packed diary of big events in the coming year that the Sussexes would look rude to miss - not least the unveiling of a statue of Princess Diana that Wills and Harry commissioned together.
> 
> The group could now be reunited at a number of events in 2021, including the Queen’s 95th birthday, Prince Philip’s 100th and the unveiling of Princess Diana’s statue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry scraps UK return for Megxit review with Queen amid Covid chaos
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has scrapped a planned face-to-face meeting with the Queen for the 12-month review of Megxit, it has been claimed. When Harry and Meghan Markle stepped down as working royals last year…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


What’s wrong with Harry and the Queen having the discussion on zoom, just like everyone else in the world.  No reason to postpone it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Isn't is interesting how Mrs. Important who usually talks over her husband is staying out of these negotiations entirely? She knows she f*cked up and is too coward to face them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't is interesting how Mrs. Important who usually talks over her husband is staying out of these negotiations entirely? She knows she f*cked up and is too coward to face them.



She knows they despise her for the havoc she caused. She can’t face anyone who doesn’t like her.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like MM's PR-machine is back in control of the US news and the cheesy headlines returned to Yahoo!  I don't want to click on them...


Adding one more:


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> What’s wrong with Harry and the Queen having the discussion on zoom, just like everyone else in the world.  No reason to postpone it.



Right. We've known about Covid for how long now?? Even if there wasn't another strain Covid out there, he wouldn't go back anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H wanted to run away from the suffocating royal life where poor MM was forced to live in a small cottage (with < 16 toilets), but as exemplary citizens MM&H want to retain medals, perks & honors:

"It's understood the couple want to increase the amount of time before a deal relinquishing their position becomes permanent. The veteran of two Afghanistan tours is keen on retaining all military appointments, while Ms Markle, 39 remains a royal patron of the National Theatre."









						Prince Harry will not meet Queen for Megxit talks due to Covid
					

Prince Harry has been forced to delay a meeting with the Queen to discuss the so-called 'Megxit deal,' due to the coronavirus travel ban. The Duke of Sussex stepped down as a senior royal last January.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The Palace may want to hire this fellow commentator from Denmark:


----------



## Chanbal

*PIERS Morgan has called on the Queen to strip Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their royal titles after "using" their son Archie on a podcast.*

The couple - who Piers dubbed "Ginge and Cringe" - famously fled to Hollywood to seek "privacy" for their one-year-old last year.


Since getting out of royal duties back in Britain, Prince Harry and Meghan have landed a number of lucrative deals for their future, including a £100million Netflix win and a £30million Spotify podcast of their own.

Highlighting their hypocrisy, Piers ranted on Good Morning Britain: "They quit the country for privacy and they've hardly shut up since. They particularly wanted to protect their little boy who is the star of their new podcast. It is all complete hogwash."

"After all that saying 'we had to leave the country to protect his privacy. but now the moment we've signed a big-money deal we're going to use him to flog our podcast'."

Remove Titles


----------



## Chanbal

On the Trial:
*HARRY TO MEET DAD-IN-LAW FOR THE FIRST TIME?*

If Mr Justice Warby doesn't accept Meghan Markle's lawyer’s request for a summary judgement in her privacy case, Prince Harry could end up meeting his father-in-law, Thomas, for the first time – in a courtroom.

The prospect of a trial has sent shockwaves, as palace royal aides may be expected to give evidence.

It is believed several staff who worked for Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, are already preparing for when they are grilled in court.

Some fear the worst and are concerned it would be embarrassing for the royal family, according to the Sunday Times.

A senior royal source told the paper: “It will expose palace operations, members of staff would be dragged into it on the witness stands … it would be deeply uncomfortable for the institution.”

*MEGHAN MARKLE'S COURT CASE TO GO AHEAD*

Meghan Markle's privacy court case will go ahead, despite the national Covid lockdown.

The Daily Express's royal correspondent, Richard Palmer, tweeted today: "Mr Justice Warby will hear Meghan’s application for summary judgment in her case against The Mail on Sunday in a remote hearing on January 19 and 20 now.

"It had been set to start on January 11."


----------



## Chanbal

Is The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1 by Samantha Markle from Barnes & Noble out of stock?









						BN No Results Page
					






					www.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel had she lived Harry would not have been such easy prey.


I don’t think Harry was easy prey. I saw a video (don’t ask me to find it) where JCMH marched up to a person pointing his finger in their face and rudely and loudly told them off for trying to give his precious wife flowers. Harry is a jerk. Birds of a feather flock together I am afraid.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I don’t think Harry was easy prey. I saw a video (don’t ask me to find it) where JCMH marched up to a person pointing his finger in their face and rudely and loudly told them off for trying to give his precious wife flowers. Harry is a jerk. Birds of a feather flock together I am afraid.


I still think he's a man-boy


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Is The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1 by Samantha Markle from Barnes & Noble out of stock?
> 
> View attachment 4948887
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BN No Results Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.barnesandnoble.com



More likely B&N has been threatened with a lawsuit and had to postpone or cancel the release. Sorry Samantha, the world may not be "allowed" to hear your point of view. Your rich, famous sister has way more resources than you do. You've been shut down!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> More likely B&N has been threatened with a lawsuit and had to postpone or cancel the release. Sorry Samantha, the world may not be "allowed" to hear your point of view. Your rich, famous sister has way more resources than you do.


this is ridiculous.....stifling freedom of speech with threat of a lawsuit....I hope not
How many unauthorized bios have there been over the years?  they were published even though the subject may not have like it....and they were sold


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I still think he's a man-boy


Yes he is that for sure but that dosen’t give him the right to act in such an arrogant rude entitled way. Pre teens know better. Being young will not necessarily make you nasty. There is no excuse for this jerks behaviour I’m afraid.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> this is ridiculous.....stifling freedom of speech with threat of a lawsuit....I hope not
> How many unauthorized bios have there been over the years?  they were published even though the subject may not have like it....and they were sold



I can't think of any other reason it would be suddenly pulled only a few days from release. Even the most horribly-written, self-published books can be sold on Amazon and I would think B&N would be the same, so the issue certainly isn't about quality.

These two apparently wield an enormous amount of power these days. We don't understand it, but unless someone can think of a better reason, it must be so.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Yes he is that for sure but that dosen’t give him the right to act in such an arrogant rude entitled way. Pre teens know better. Being young will not necessarily make you nasty. There is no excuse for this jerks behaviour I’m afraid.


no excuse but to me it seems like he is this immature man who now thinks "I'm a man; I have a Wife" and is acting accordingly (in his dimwitted mind)


----------



## bag-mania

Omid Scobie has been going around telling the media that Meghan isn't worried about the book. Now we know why.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think any of us believed they would come back for the review.
> 
> *UP IN THE HEIR* *Prince Harry scraps returning to the UK for 12-month Megxit review with the Queen amid Covid chaos*
> PRINCE Harry has scrapped a planned face-to-face meeting with the Queen for the 12-month review of Megxit, it has been claimed.
> 
> When Harry and Meghan Markle stepped down as working royals last year, it was on the condition that Harry would meet with his grandma at a later date to discuss how the arrangement was working.
> 
> A 12-month review was due for March 31 this year.
> 
> But the prince has been forced to cancel the plans as a terrifying mutant covid strain ravages the UK - with a ban on non-essential travel imposed.
> 
> Royal sources told The MirrorHarry is yet to re-arrange with his gran, but is expected to do so in the coming weeks.
> 
> The paper reports the couple had wanted an "extension" on the interim period before they officially leave.
> 
> Prince Harry especially is keen to keep up with his military patronages - some of which could be at risk if he quits.
> 
> And while they have stepped down as senior working royals and are now making their own money, the pair are still expected to uphold the values of Her Majesty.
> 
> But senior advisors are reportedly concerned over the speed at which they have been signing megabucks deals with the likes of Netflix, Spotify and the Harry Walker Agency.
> 
> Eyebrows were also raised after Oprah Winfrey advertised a vegan coffee brand on her Instagram page that Meghan had invested in.
> 
> Courtiers are taking a “renewed in-depth look at the couple’s business deals," reports The Mirror.
> 
> But perhaps the Covid cancellation will leave some royals breathing a sigh of releif - as The Sun exclusively revealed Harry, Meghan, William and Kate face a "very awkward" encounter when the 'Frosty Four' reunite.
> 
> We also revealed the Prince was in line for a ticking off from his grandma on his return to the UK after a source told The Sun: "There are all sorts of issues to speak about — not only his political statements but also his visa situation in the US."
> 
> However, they also added: "Even though he would have to isolate for two weeks, the estate is large enough for talks in a socially distanced way.”
> 
> The Royal Family has a packed diary of big events in the coming year that the Sussexes would look rude to miss - not least the unveiling of a statue of Princess Diana that Wills and Harry commissioned together.
> 
> The group could now be reunited at a number of events in 2021, including the Queen’s 95th birthday, Prince Philip’s 100th and the unveiling of Princess Diana’s statue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry scraps UK return for Megxit review with Queen amid Covid chaos
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has scrapped a planned face-to-face meeting with the Queen for the 12-month review of Megxit, it has been claimed. When Harry and Meghan Markle stepped down as working royals last year…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


LOL, I love how "COVID" is always the excuse given.  Puh-leeze.  Grow a pair Harry, and just say the real reason is because you're a wuss who can't face his family.  We here at tPF already know!


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I think TikTok has a very similar user agreement. Maybe that's where they got the idea?
> 
> I had a doctor who wanted all his patients to sign a form allowing him to take any information he had about you and do whatever he wanted with it - including selling it to as many buyers as he could find and solely for his financial gain. I left without signing and found a new doctor. I wonder how many people just blindly signed that form without reading it?


Crazy.  I just had a dentist's appointment last week, where again, "because of COVID", they wanted me to sign things electronically on a tiny signing pad without even seeing anything on paper or the screen!  I left.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Omid Scobie has been going around telling the media that Meghan isn't worried about the book. Now we know why.


all I can say is I hope you're wrong....how can they stifle American private enterprise?


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> What’s wrong with Harry and the Queen having the discussion on zoom, just like everyone else in the world.  No reason to postpone it.


Instead of a "ticking off" from granny, I wish she'd tell them to "F off".


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> More likely B&N has been threatened with a lawsuit and had to postpone or cancel the release. Sorry Samantha, the world may not be "allowed" to hear your point of view. Your rich, famous sister has way more resources than you do. You've been shut down!


I thought about that, and I'm afraid you might be right.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> all I can say is I hope you're wrong....*how can they stifle American private enterprise?*



With threats. I hope I'm wrong too. It will be interesting to see how the UK media spins this. I doubt the American press will bother to address it at all.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this is ridiculous.....stifling freedom of speech with threat of a lawsuit....I hope not
> How many unauthorized bios have there been over the years?  they were published even though the subject may not have like it....and they were sold





sdkitty said:


> all I can say is I hope you're wrong....how can they stifle American private enterprise?


I'm afraid that MM&H's millions of dollars and lawyers might be working very hard. Going against freedom of speech is probably OK for MM's wokeness. I sincerely hope that the book is out of stock because it is sold out and not blocked, but @bag-mania might be unfortunately right.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I'm afraid that MM&H's millions of dollars and lawyers might be working very hard. Going against freedom of speech is probably OK for MM's wokeness. I sincerely hope that the book is out of stock because it is sold out and not blocked, but @bag-mania might be unfortunately right.



If it was out of stock the listing would still be up on the site and would still allow you to buy an electronic copy. It has been wiped from the site as if it never existed. And perhaps it never will.


----------



## Chanbal

According to Newsweek, "Samantha Markle's memoir, _The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1_, is due to be released on Sunday, January 17, two days before a crunch court hearing." I wonder if this was the reason why the hearing for the summary judgment was moved from January 19 to January 11 (in case MM's lawyers wouldn't succeed to block the release of the book).


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> If it was out of stock the listing would still be up on the site and would still allow you to buy an electronic copy. It has been wiped from the site as if it never existed. And perhaps it never will.


I know, I noticed that. I just wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to this situation. If MM and/or her lawyers (with their many millions of dollars) succeeded to block her sister's right to publish a book,  it's shocking to say the least.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I know, I noticed that. I just wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to this situation. If MM and/or her lawyers (with their many millions of dollars) succeeded to block her sister's right to publish a book,  it's shocking to say the least.



And quite possibly illegal. I’m sure we’ll soon have some lawyer-approved fiction about why the book has been pulled/delayed. Can’t wait to hear what it is.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, maybe the drama is over?
> 
> 
> 
> Richard Palmer
> @RoyalReporter
> Reporters have different takes on this  but FWIW my understanding is there’s little to discuss in the Megxit review due at the end of March.  Harry and Meghan seem happy with their new life and are now financially independent.
> 
> 2:44 AM · Jan 6, 2021·Twitter for iPhone
> 
> Harry is clearly unhappy about losing his military patronages but there’s no sign of any change on that. His military patronages are expected to be given to other members of the family later in 2021. *Announcements are likely to be dribbled out rather than made on March 31.*




A post in  the Comments section of the Daily Mail really puts the issue in perspective:
 "Does he really expect to retain his honorary military appointments. Can you really imagine The Captain General of Her Majesty's Royal Corps of Marines living in California??"


----------



## sdkitty

seems to be something out there saying the timing of the release of the book could influence the court case...wonder if they got a court to rule the book should be delayed?  but wouldn't the Big Litigators want this to be out there in the news?


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> A post in  the Comments section of the Daily Mail really puts the issue in perspective:
> "Does he really expect to retain his honorary military appointments. Can you really imagine The Captain General of Her Majesty's Royal Corps of Marines living in California??"


This is a common sense comment, and it will fly over Harry’s head. His answer could be that he is still a British citizen, so why not?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> seems to be something out there saying the timing of the release of the book could influence the court case...wonder if they got a court to rule the book should be delayed?  but wouldn't the Big Litigators want this to be out there in the news?


It isn’t being released in the UK, so what difference would it make to the case?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seems to be something out there saying the timing of the release of the book could influence the court case...wonder if they got a court to rule the book should be delayed?  but wouldn't the Big Litigators want this to be out there in the news?



Sounds like BS. If that was truly the reason the book's release date could have been moved back a few weeks/months. They didn't need to make it completely disappear.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> It isn’t being released in the UK, so what difference would it make to the case?



I suppose they could make the case that the UK media would be reporting every sordid detail. It's not like they couldn't easily get a copy of one from the US.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> seems to be something out there saying the timing of the release of the book could influence the court case...wonder if they got a court to rule the book should be delayed?  but wouldn't the Big Litigators want this to be out there in the news?





bag-mania said:


> Sounds like BS. If that was truly the reason the book's release date could have been moved back a few weeks/months. They didn't need to make it completely disappear.



The hearing was recently moved from January 19 to 11, so before the release of the book on January 17. I wonder if the lawyers have been working on two fronts: 1) changing the date of the hearing and 2) stopping the book release. They may have succeeded on both approaches.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The hearing was recently moved from January 19 to 11, so before the release of the book on January 17. I wonder if the lawyers have been working on two fronts: 1) changing the date of the hearing and 2) stopping the book release. They may have succeeded on both approaches.



I called Barnes and Noble Customer Service a few  minutes ago to inquire about the book since "I had seen it on the website a few days ago and now that I was interested in purchasing it, it seems to have disappeared." Agent, went through lists on her end and said "yes" it is not currently available, but you can continue to check the website in the future."....whatever that means????

I thought it was curious to begin with, Barnes and Nobel is a book seller, I didn't think they also published, yet they have been listed as such. A little research and it turns out Samantha's book would have been a "self published" book through B&N. The "how-to" is all spelled out on line. Costs $399. to self publish books you want to sell in B&N stores, don't know if this is the current price.

The back story will probably come out eventually......


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I called Barnes and Noble Customer Service a few  minutes ago to inquire about the book since "I had seen it on the website a few days ago and now that I was interested in purchasing it, it seems to have disappeared." Agent, went through lists on her end and said "yes" it is not currently available, but you can continue to check the website in the future."....whatever that means????
> 
> I thought it was curious to begin with, Barnes and Nobel is a book seller, I didn't think they also published, yet they have been listed as such. A little research and it turns out Samantha's book would have been a "self published" book through B&N. The "how-to" is all spelled out on line. Costs $399. to self publish books you want to sell in B&N stores, don't know if this is the current price.
> 
> The back story will probably come out eventually......



Thanks for making that call. We now know it is self-published. So here's more conjecture. Maybe H&M sent their lawyers directly to Samantha and they are in negotiations to pay her off to NOT release the book. OR, they sent their lawyers to threaten her with, you guessed it, LAWSUITS!


----------



## chkpfbeliever

I've a feeling that eventually they will be heading for a divorce.  Just inevitable.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Thanks for making that call. We now know it is self-published. So here's more conjecture. Maybe H&M sent their lawyers directly to Samantha and they are in negotiations to pay her off to NOT release the book. OR, they sent their lawyers to threaten her with, you guessed it, LAWSUITS!


we don't know for sure what's going on but I'd like to tell H&M it seems they are behaving in a way that could be considered similar to the people in our society they most despise.....Not Woke IMO


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> we don't know for sure what's going on but I'd like to tell H&M it seems they are behaving in a way that could be considered similar to the people in our society they most despise.....Not Woke IMO



They are the Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy!


----------



## Jktgal

What I imagine their podcast is like if based on past word salads...


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *PIERS Morgan has called on the Queen to strip Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their royal titles after "using" their son Archie on a podcast.*
> 
> The couple - who Piers dubbed "*Ginge and Cringe*" - famously fled to Hollywood to seek "privacy" for their one-year-old last year.
> 
> HA HA HA .. gotta give it to Piers sometimes, this one made me have a GOOD chuckle!!!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> we don't know for sure what's going on but I'd like to tell H&M it seems they are behaving in a way that could be considered similar to the people in our society they most despise.....Not Woke IMO


They only despise people that don't give what they want, woke hypocrisy!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> More likely B&N has been threatened with a lawsuit and had to postpone or cancel the release. Sorry Samantha, the world may not be "allowed" to hear your point of view. Your rich, famous sister has way more resources than you do. You've been shut down!


Yeah, I'm not sure they can 'legally' do this (legal pundits - please correct if I'm wrong) .. it's like putting a ki-bash on one of the US Constitutions' major amendments "freedom of speech"!!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

@CeeJay Yes, Ginge and Cringe are perfect for H and MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jktgal said:


> What I imagine their podcast is like if based on past word salads...




So true, so funny, you’ve made my day! Thank you


----------



## rose60610

With the limited publicity Samantha's book has gotten, there is a sizable demand for it. Other self-published authors whose books have taken off were later approached by publishers to buy it and distribute it through their channels. My guess Samantha will be approached the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chkpfbeliever

purseinsanity said:


> Instead of a "ticking off" from granny, I wish she'd tell them to "F off".


You nailed it !!


----------



## chkpfbeliever

bag-mania said:


> They want it both ways.  They want to make all that money for themselves but they need that connection to the royal family to keep them interesting enough to do it.


You nailed it !! That's what they want to do, so selfish !!


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, I'm not sure they can 'legally' do this (legal pundits - please correct if I'm wrong) .. it's like putting a ki-bash on one of the US Constitutions' major amendments "freedom of speech"!!!!!


I hope you're right, but it certainly doesn't seem to be stopping all the current censorship FB and the likes are doing!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I hope you're right, but it certainly doesn't seem to be stopping all the current censorship FB and the likes are doing!



Methinks _legal_ has left the room and moved to Florida. TechGods are in control.


----------



## bag-mania

Ick! Look out when you are in the supermarket this week, they are on the cover of _People_. I am posting the atrocious text for it solely so H&M don't get additional hits from members here wanting to read the drivel. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Changed the Royal Family Forever: 'They Don’t Regret Their Move'*

*"Meghan and Harry took a huge leap of faith to embark on their new life," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE in this week's cover story*

One year ago, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry announced their decision to step away from royal duty — a departure that would change the royal family forever.

"Meghan and Harry took a huge leap of faith to embark on their new life," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE in this week's cover story.

It was a leap that would reshape not just the royal family but the monarchy too.



Harry, 36, who long felt marginalized by the role of "spare" in the line of succession—an issue that has plagued generations of royal siblings, including Queen Elizabeth’s sister, Princess Margaret — "finally found a solution," says royal historian Robert Lacey, "which is essentially to get out and start a new life. To stay in the royal system is to go along with subservience to those more senior than you. He has asserted his own identity."

This "progressive new role," as the couple described it in their previous statement outlining the change — including earning their own income — offered a fresh start. "It was always their dream to be financially independent and pay their own way," says the source close to the couple. With that dream finally realized, "The year started out with a lot of excitement and anticipation," says a source close to the prince. "Harry was finally doing what he’d wanted to do for years, and to have Meghan and [19-month-old son] Archie with him was all he could have asked for."

But as the world would soon learn, nothing about 2020 went according to the plan. The couple’s scheduled launch of their charitable Archewell Foundation and their intention to "balance" their time between the U.S. and the U.K. would soon be disrupted by the unforeseen chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic.

When the pandemic hit just as the details of the so-called "Sandringham Summit" agreement took effect in March, it soon became clear that much of the compromise the couple had hoped to attain was not to be. But if they didn’t leave the U.K. with everything they wanted, they did walk away with the biggest prize: The freedom to set their own course.

"Despite everything that has been going on this year, they don’t regret their move to the U.S.," says an insider. "They love that they are able to focus on projects and causes that are important to them."








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Changed the Royal Family Forever: 'They Don't Regret Their Move'
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry changed the royal family when they announced their departure from senior royal duty in January 2020. They "don't regret their move," a source tells PEOPLE




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So full of it. The monarchy has existed for hundreds of years, two selfimportant wannabes aren't going to change that.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I can't think of any other reason it would be suddenly pulled only a few days from release. Even the most horribly-written, self-published books can be sold on Amazon and I would think B&N would be the same, so the issue certainly isn't about quality.
> 
> These two apparently wield an enormous amount of power these days. We don't understand it, but unless someone can think of a better reason, it must be so.





sdkitty said:


> all I can say is I hope you're wrong....how can they stifle American private enterprise?


The book is back for sale, I wonder if @csshopper's phone call to B&N helped. It doesn't show the "best seller" label anymore. Weird day, today!







						BN No Results Page
					






					www.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## Kaka_bobo

bag-mania said:


> Ick! Look out when you are in the supermarket this week, they are on the cover of _People_. I am posting the atrocious text for it solely so H&M don't get additional hits from members here wanting to read the drivel.



Yuck, they didn't change SH*T.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ick! Look out when you are in the supermarket this week, they are on the cover of _People_. I am posting the atrocious text for it solely so H&M don't get additional hits from members here wanting to read the drivel.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Changed the Royal Family Forever: 'They Don’t Regret Their Move'*
> 
> *"Meghan and Harry took a huge leap of faith to embark on their new life," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE in this week's cover story*
> 
> One year ago, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry announced their decision to step away from royal duty — a departure that would change the royal family forever.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry took a huge leap of faith to embark on their new life," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE in this week's cover story.
> 
> It was a leap that would reshape not just the royal family but the monarchy too.
> 
> View attachment 4949139
> 
> Harry, 36, who long felt marginalized by the role of "spare" in the line of succession—an issue that has plagued generations of royal siblings, including Queen Elizabeth’s sister, Princess Margaret — "finally found a solution," says royal historian Robert Lacey, "which is essentially to get out and start a new life. To stay in the royal system is to go along with subservience to those more senior than you. He has asserted his own identity."
> 
> This "progressive new role," as the couple described it in their previous statement outlining the change — including earning their own income — offered a fresh start. "It was always their dream to be financially independent and pay their own way," says the source close to the couple. With that dream finally realized, "The year started out with a lot of excitement and anticipation," says a source close to the prince. "Harry was finally doing what he’d wanted to do for years, and to have Meghan and [19-month-old son] Archie with him was all he could have asked for."
> 
> But as the world would soon learn, nothing about 2020 went according to the plan. The couple’s scheduled launch of their charitable Archewell Foundation and their intention to "balance" their time between the U.S. and the U.K. would soon be disrupted by the unforeseen chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic.
> 
> When the pandemic hit just as the details of the so-called "Sandringham Summit" agreement took effect in March, it soon became clear that much of the compromise the couple had hoped to attain was not to be. But if they didn’t leave the U.K. with everything they wanted, they did walk away with the biggest prize: The freedom to set their own course.
> 
> "Despite everything that has been going on this year, they don’t regret their move to the U.S.," says an insider. "They love that they are able to focus on projects and causes that are important to them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Changed the Royal Family Forever: 'They Don't Regret Their Move'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry changed the royal family when they announced their departure from senior royal duty in January 2020. They "don't regret their move," a source tells PEOPLE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Thanks a lot for posting the entire text to spare us from clicking on one more release (trash) from MM's PR-teams.  
The emojis for the article:


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I still think he's a man-boy


I think you’re being generous.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> I think you’re being generous.


OK - I can be meaner - how about low IQ, whipped man-boy?


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> OK - I can be meaner - how about low IQ, whipped man-boy?


I like it.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The book is back for sale, I wonder if @csshopper's phone call to B&N helped. It doesn't show the "best seller" label anymore. Weird day, today!
> View attachment 4949136
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BN No Results Page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.barnesandnoble.com



Hmm, it looks like the release date was pushed back by several days and the size of the book is a bit smaller. Hope she didn’t lose all her pre-orders from whatever they did.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Harry, 36, who long felt marginalized by the role of "spare" in the line of succession—an issue that has plagued generations of royal siblings, including Queen Elizabeth’s sister, Princess Margaret — "finally found a solution," says royal historian Robert Lacey, "which is essentially to get out and start a new life. To stay in the royal system is to go along with subservience to those more senior than you.



Oh, waaaaaah, waaaaaah, waaaaaah .. weenie-Harry felt marginalized????  WOW - to me, that speaks volumes to his own level of self-importance, but .. okay Harry, now that you found "said solution" .. you need to *MAN-UP* and take yourself out of the line of succession, after all .. if you have "everything" now (_$$$, wife and baby_) .. why still stay there?  The fact that you egotistical-weenie-boy and your narcissist-diva (_but still a *Z-List* actress_) wife still want those titles though? .. hmmmm, don't think for a minute that we don't see through your *HYPOCRISY* .. *Harry = X lister*;* Meghan = Z-lister*!


----------



## gracekelly

These  two didn't change a thing. That is kneepads kneeling  at the feet of Sunshine Sachs. Despicable.  

 Harry felt marginalized? I'd say unrealistic and overentitled.   It took him all these decades to realize that he wasn't going to be King?  Wow!  He had 20 years to work on himself and his future.  He suddenly woke up at 35 and decided it was time to leave his room in the family castle?  They gave him a career in the military on a silver platter and he could have stuck with that if he had applied himself in even an offhanded way.  All it took was an actress who wanted more fame and more fortune to make him realize that he could leave and monetize his name by disgracing himself?  That says a lot about him.  He was  ripe for picking.  

Yesterday a writer in the Express said that Harry's moving to California was a _pointless exercise in self-exile.  _That sums it up.  He is separated from his family, and is now trying to cling to everything he has thrown away, because without his royal connections, he has no value to the people and businesses that bought him. Meghan is even willing to drop her last name in an effort to appear more royal as royals never use last names.  My goodness!  How she has changed her tune!  Nobody wants Meghan Markle, they want the Duchess of Sussex.  Better hang on to that title by hook or by crook.









						Meghan and Harry’s step down from royal life branded as ‘self-exile'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's move to Los Angeles after stepping down as senior members of the Royal Family has been branded a "pointless exercise in self-exile" by an expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, it looks like the release date was pushed back by several days and the size of the book is a bit smaller. Hope she didn’t lose all her pre-orders from whatever they did.


Good point! I wonder if information has been removed from it. The fact that MM and Omid are saying not to be worried with the upcoming memoir makes you think.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m so glad my People magazine subscription ran out before this issue.


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'*

Prince Harry's lawyers say a U.K. tabloid "caused huge damage to his reputation," harming his ability to help veterans and leaving them "susceptible to suicide," _Newsweek_ can reveal.

The Duke of Sussex is suing _The_ _Mail on Sunday_ for libelafter the newspaper accused him of turning his back on the Royal Marines in an October 15 article.

Harry was a captain-general until he stepped back from royal duties for a new life in America with Meghan Markleat the end of March.

However, _The Mail on Sunday_claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email" with the Royal Marines since.

Prince Harry's lawyers say the "barely researched and one-sided article," caused forces personnel to doubt his commitment.

Their filing goes as far as claiming the military community will be "more susceptible to suicide" because of the impact on his own ability to promote mental health services.

The newspaper is the same one wife Meghan Markle is suing for privacy and breach of copyright over a letter she sent her father.

The court filing, seen by _Newsweek_, reads: "[Prince Harry's] sincere ambition is to continue to help current and former military personnel by using his reputation and the platform he has as a result of his military service.

"This role substantially depends upon [Prince Harry] using his reputation to help such causes by attracting public support for them.

"The publication of the allegations complained of will seriously hamper his ability to do so and therefore have an adverse effect upon the people he is seeking to help.

"[Prince Harry] has, in particular, used his reputation to support and encourage current and former military personnel to seek help for mental health problems.

"The publications complained of will diminish [Prince Harry's] credibility in the eyes of such personnel and therefore make them less likely to seek the help being offered.

"[Prince Harry] reasonably fears that this will in turn have devastating effects upon such individuals, including leaving them more susceptible to suicide."

Prince Harry's lawyers claim he was not given an opportunity to comment on the allegations after his representatives were contacted less than three hours before the article was posted online.

_The Mail on Sunday_ is one of a series of newspapers that Meghan and Prince Harry have banned their representatives from communicating with.

The Mail Online website ran its article just after midnight, putting the request for comment later than 9 p.m.

The court filing says it is not known whether at the time the email was sent the story "had in fact already been published in those editions of the _Mail on Sunday_ which had gone to print."

Harry's lawyers wrote: "[Prince Harry] has been personally affronted and caused huge damage to his reputation by reason of the publication of the words complained of."

They add: "Even on [Prince Harry's] current knowledge of the relevant chronology, it is obvious that he was not given any or any effective opportunity to respond at all to, and to defend himself against, the very serious allegations which [the Mail on Sunday] proceeded to publish about him.

This was manifestly unjust and in breach of the most basic of journalistic standards.

"It showed a complete disregard for [Prince Harry's] reputation, for his version of events and therefore for fairness and for the truth."

The court filing says the allegations were presented as being "highly credible" as they quoted "informed sources" which could "only mean senior officers of the Royal
Marines."

The story included reaction from Major General Julian Thompson, describing him as "one of Britain's most celebrated military commanders."

It also said Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff of the British Army, had written a letter to Harry that went unanswered.









						Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'
					

Prince Harry's lawyers claim a newspaper article accusing him of turning his back on the Royal Marines left military personnel "more susceptible to suicide," Newsweek can reveal.




					www.google.com


----------



## bag-mania

I cannot believe the arrogance of this latest lawsuit. I don’t think there are any soldiers who are considering Harry’s status in their mental health treatment.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'*
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say a U.K. tabloid "caused huge damage to his reputation," harming his ability to help veterans and leaving them "susceptible to suicide," _Newsweek_ can reveal.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is suing _The_ _Mail on Sunday_ for libelafter the newspaper accused him of turning his back on the Royal Marines in an October 15 article.
> 
> Harry was a captain-general until he stepped back from royal duties for a new life in America with Meghan Markleat the end of March.
> 
> However, _The Mail on Sunday_claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email" with the Royal Marines since.
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say the "barely researched and one-sided article," caused forces personnel to doubt his commitment.
> 
> Their filing goes as far as claiming the military community will be "more susceptible to suicide" because of the impact on his own ability to promote mental health services.
> 
> The newspaper is the same one wife Meghan Markle is suing for privacy and breach of copyright over a letter she sent her father.
> 
> The court filing, seen by _Newsweek_, reads: "[Prince Harry's] sincere ambition is to continue to help current and former military personnel by using his reputation and the platform he has as a result of his military service.
> 
> "This role substantially depends upon [Prince Harry] using his reputation to help such causes by attracting public support for them.
> 
> "The publication of the allegations complained of will seriously hamper his ability to do so and therefore have an adverse effect upon the people he is seeking to help.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] has, in particular, used his reputation to support and encourage current and former military personnel to seek help for mental health problems.
> 
> "The publications complained of will diminish [Prince Harry's] credibility in the eyes of such personnel and therefore make them less likely to seek the help being offered.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] reasonably fears that this will in turn have devastating effects upon such individuals, including leaving them more susceptible to suicide."
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim he was not given an opportunity to comment on the allegations after his representatives were contacted less than three hours before the article was posted online.
> 
> _The Mail on Sunday_ is one of a series of newspapers that Meghan and Prince Harry have banned their representatives from communicating with.
> 
> The Mail Online website ran its article just after midnight, putting the request for comment later than 9 p.m.
> 
> The court filing says it is not known whether at the time the email was sent the story "had in fact already been published in those editions of the _Mail on Sunday_ which had gone to print."
> 
> Harry's lawyers wrote: "[Prince Harry] has been personally affronted and caused huge damage to his reputation by reason of the publication of the words complained of."
> 
> They add: "Even on [Prince Harry's] current knowledge of the relevant chronology, it is obvious that he was not given any or any effective opportunity to respond at all to, and to defend himself against, the very serious allegations which [the Mail on Sunday] proceeded to publish about him.
> 
> This was manifestly unjust and in breach of the most basic of journalistic standards.
> 
> "It showed a complete disregard for [Prince Harry's] reputation, for his version of events and therefore for fairness and for the truth."
> 
> The court filing says the allegations were presented as being "highly credible" as they quoted "informed sources" which could "only mean senior officers of the Royal
> Marines."
> 
> The story included reaction from Major General Julian Thompson, describing him as "one of Britain's most celebrated military commanders."
> 
> It also said Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff of the British Army, had written a letter to Harry that went unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim a newspaper article accusing him of turning his back on the Royal Marines left military personnel "more susceptible to suicide," Newsweek can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



He sure thinks highly of himself doesn’t he?


----------



## kipp

Sol Ryan said:


> He sure thinks highly of himself doesn’t he?


Wonder where he got that notion!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Sol Ryan He sure thinks highly of himself doesn’t he?
@kipp Wonder where he got that notion!

It could be bravado, a cover for low self-esteem. Harry is a capricious and out of control man-child and so different from his apparently well-adjusted brother, William. What happened?
Here's what I've garnered from previous posters and bios. Diana once said that she threw herself down the stairs while four months pregnant with William (b. June 21, 1982) then, she changed her mind to say that she only faked it. Altering her story sure seemed a better fit for a pregnant mother. Either way, William turned out OK.
So how did Diana cope with her insecurities while pregnant with Harry (b. Sept 15, 1984) since the Wales’ marriage hadn’t improved and possibly had worsened? The situation could have escalated to the point where she was binge eating and binge purging as this brings comfort to a bulimic person? Bulimia can cause mild to severe physical and mental damage to the fetus. It would account for Harry’s apparent mental and emotional problems such as low intelligence, low self-esteem, volatility, jealousy, depression, etc.; problems that were later exacerbated by Diana’s early demise and his heavy drinking. I’m not a doctor, but something is definitely wrong with Harry.

ETA "and his heavy drinking"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just wait.  
When we think they can’t get any worse, expect more “hold my beer” moments.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Yeah H&M changed the royal family all right, they made it a lot better by leaving it!    

That's how they changed something that they are no longer part of! They quit being royals, remember? Pathetic article!


----------



## bag-mania

He’s a spoiled brat who was raised as an entitled prince. He never wanted all the responsibility his brother will inherit, but he wants the same status and respect. I don’t think what he is doing is due to mental illness. He and Meghan bring out the worst in each other. They have been feeding  each other’s victimhood and escalating it to almost unbelievable heights.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'*
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say a U.K. tabloid "caused huge damage to his reputation," harming his ability to help veterans and leaving them "susceptible to suicide," _Newsweek_ can reveal.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is suing _The_ _Mail on Sunday_ for libelafter the newspaper accused him of turning his back on the Royal Marines in an October 15 article.
> 
> Harry was a captain-general until he stepped back from royal duties for a new life in America with Meghan Markleat the end of March.
> 
> However, _The Mail on Sunday_claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email" with the Royal Marines since.
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say the "barely researched and one-sided article," caused forces personnel to doubt his commitment.
> 
> Their filing goes as far as claiming the military community will be "more susceptible to suicide" because of the impact on his own ability to promote mental health services.
> 
> The newspaper is the same one wife Meghan Markle is suing for privacy and breach of copyright over a letter she sent her father.
> 
> The court filing, seen by _Newsweek_, reads: "[Prince Harry's] sincere ambition is to continue to help current and former military personnel by using his reputation and the platform he has as a result of his military service.
> 
> "This role substantially depends upon [Prince Harry] using his reputation to help such causes by attracting public support for them.
> 
> "The publication of the allegations complained of will seriously hamper his ability to do so and therefore have an adverse effect upon the people he is seeking to help.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] has, in particular, used his reputation to support and encourage current and former military personnel to seek help for mental health problems.
> 
> "The publications complained of will diminish [Prince Harry's] credibility in the eyes of such personnel and therefore make them less likely to seek the help being offered.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] reasonably fears that this will in turn have devastating effects upon such individuals, including leaving them more susceptible to suicide."
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim he was not given an opportunity to comment on the allegations after his representatives were contacted less than three hours before the article was posted online.
> 
> _The Mail on Sunday_ is one of a series of newspapers that Meghan and Prince Harry have banned their representatives from communicating with.
> 
> The Mail Online website ran its article just after midnight, putting the request for comment later than 9 p.m.
> 
> The court filing says it is not known whether at the time the email was sent the story "had in fact already been published in those editions of the _Mail on Sunday_ which had gone to print."
> 
> Harry's lawyers wrote: "[Prince Harry] has been personally affronted and caused huge damage to his reputation by reason of the publication of the words complained of."
> 
> They add: "Even on [Prince Harry's] current knowledge of the relevant chronology, it is obvious that he was not given any or any effective opportunity to respond at all to, and to defend himself against, the very serious allegations which [the Mail on Sunday] proceeded to publish about him.
> 
> This was manifestly unjust and in breach of the most basic of journalistic standards.
> 
> "It showed a complete disregard for [Prince Harry's] reputation, for his version of events and therefore for fairness and for the truth."
> 
> The court filing says the allegations were presented as being "highly credible" as they quoted "informed sources" which could "only mean senior officers of the Royal
> Marines."
> 
> The story included reaction from Major General Julian Thompson, describing him as "one of Britain's most celebrated military commanders."
> 
> It also said Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff of the British Army, had written a letter to Harry that went unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim a newspaper article accusing him of turning his back on the Royal Marines left military personnel "more susceptible to suicide," Newsweek can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Wait a minute. Harry left THEM to go abroad. Did he tell Meghan  "If I leave, Marines will commit suicide"? If he's SOOOO concerned about them, why can't he continue to "offer services" as a NON royal? What changes--other than royal status to suck off more $$ from the Crown? If he's so great and they look up to him so much, why would being a formal royal make any difference? 

Harry should have thought about that impact before being henpecked into coming to CA. At the same time I could see Meghan saying "you don't owe them anything so who cares what happens to them?"  I'm convinced Harry didn't care until he saw (OK, Meghan saw) an opportunity to sue over something.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> He’s a spoiled brat who was raised as an entitled prince. He never wanted all the responsibility his brother will inherit, but he wants the same status and respect. I don’t think what he is doing is due to mental illness. He and Meghan bring out the worst in each other. They have been feeding  each other’s victimhood and escalating it to almost unbelievable heights.


Yes, but there still could be underlying causes for his erratic behaviour.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I cannot believe the arrogance of this latest lawsuit. I don’t think there are any soldiers who are considering Harry’s status in their mental health treatment.



They must be _seriously_ desperate to concoct such an angle, I mean, _p l e a s e . _

Do they really think soldiers are thinking "Gee whizz, if only Harry was still around, I wouldn't feel nearly as bad"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I cannot believe the arrogance of this latest lawsuit. I don’t think there are any soldiers who are considering Harry’s status in their mental health treatment.



Also, we all saw him strutting around with his wife in her sausage skin dress (sorry not sorry...you had a baby, fine, just buy a dress in your current size then) at the Lion King while elsewhere his veterans were waiting, so really Harry, just stuff it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Nothing more for H&M to be victims than having their £130m package paid by the average hard working people paying Netflix subscriptions, right? 

*Netflix raises UK prices to cover cost of content*









						Netflix raises UK prices to cover cost of content
					

The streaming giant is criticised for "unfortunate" timing during the new lockdowns.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Sol Ryan said:


> He sure thinks highly of himself doesn’t he?


This story is about a week old, I think
I have read the follow up, not widely reported - will try to find link - the newspaper,  DM I think - apologized and made a donation to the Marines
The story died with a whimper not a bang

Ps found it 

Yes about 10 days old , the paper issued a bland carefully worded retraction/apology/correction, I would call it a non-apology apology more of a better choice of words than a statement that we done wrong

But yes JCMH was ticked off









						Prince Harry accepts apology, libel damages from tabloid in latest legal victory over media
					

Harry and Meghan's legal effort to press the media to apologize for and correct stories the couple considers inaccurate has scored some victories.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, but there still could be underlying causes for his erratic behaviour.


I think there are real underlying mental issues with Harry in addition to being a spoiled brat.  Mental illness obviously ran on his mother's side.  It wouldn't surprise me at all.  He's certainly a narcissist IMO LOL, but I'm not a psychiatrist.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Ick! Look out when you are in the supermarket this week, they are on the cover of _People_. I am posting the atrocious text for it solely so H&M don't get additional hits from members here wanting to read the drivel.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Changed the Royal Family Forever: 'They Don’t Regret Their Move'*
> 
> *"Meghan and Harry took a huge leap of faith to embark on their new life," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE in this week's cover story*
> 
> One year ago, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry announced their decision to step away from royal duty — a departure that would change the royal family forever.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry took a huge leap of faith to embark on their new life," a source close to the couple tells PEOPLE in this week's cover story.
> 
> It was a leap that would reshape not just the royal family but the monarchy too.
> 
> View attachment 4949139
> 
> Harry, 36, who long felt marginalized by the role of "spare" in the line of succession—an issue that has plagued generations of royal siblings, including Queen Elizabeth’s sister, Princess Margaret — "finally found a solution," says royal historian Robert Lacey, "which is essentially to get out and start a new life. To stay in the royal system is to go along with subservience to those more senior than you. He has asserted his own identity."
> 
> This "progressive new role," as the couple described it in their previous statement outlining the change — including earning their own income — offered a fresh start. "It was always their dream to be financially independent and pay their own way," says the source close to the couple. With that dream finally realized, "The year started out with a lot of excitement and anticipation," says a source close to the prince. "Harry was finally doing what he’d wanted to do for years, and to have Meghan and [19-month-old son] Archie with him was all he could have asked for."
> 
> But as the world would soon learn, nothing about 2020 went according to the plan. The couple’s scheduled launch of their charitable Archewell Foundation and their intention to "balance" their time between the U.S. and the U.K. would soon be disrupted by the unforeseen chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic.
> 
> When the pandemic hit just as the details of the so-called "Sandringham Summit" agreement took effect in March, it soon became clear that much of the compromise the couple had hoped to attain was not to be. But if they didn’t leave the U.K. with everything they wanted, they did walk away with the biggest prize: The freedom to set their own course.
> 
> "Despite everything that has been going on this year, they don’t regret their move to the U.S.," says an insider. "They love that they are able to focus on projects and causes that are important to them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Changed the Royal Family Forever: 'They Don't Regret Their Move'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry changed the royal family when they announced their departure from senior royal duty in January 2020. They "don't regret their move," a source tells PEOPLE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



In order to protect the Sussexes' need for privacy, as we are standing in line we should all reverse the current copy of People magazine so the backside, not their picture, is visible on the racks at the check out counters of the stores we patronize. 

It would be such a thoughtful gesture in response to their pleas over the years.


----------



## Chanbal

I know, you all need these emojis:  

*Royal family on edge as Meghan and Harry book Finding Freedom to become TV show*
Meghan and Prince Harry's blossoming romance and struggles with palace aides and royals alike have been the focus of a biography, Finding Freedom, by royal correspondents Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie. The book, which claimed to go "beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan’s life together" was released in August and has quickly become a bestseller.

Now one of its authors, Mr Scobie, is understood to be in talks with Hollywood executives to develop a scripted TV drama inspired by the book, the Evening Standard has reported.

"Personally, I’m not a huge fan of these stories entering the big or small screen until a bit more time passes."

Express.co.uk has contacted Mr Scobie for comment.

Shortly before Finding Freedom was released, a spokesman for the Sussexes made it clear the couple had not been interviewed for this book.

He said: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to Finding Freedom.

Where is the puke bucket?


----------



## Chanbal

To lift your spirits:

*Meghan and Harry humiliated as biography Finding Freedom is being sold for 99p online*

"This book is based on the authors' own experiences as members of the royal press corps and their own independent reporting."

Over on Ebay’s website, the biography appears to be dropping in price as well with a number of sellers giving the book away for less than £10.

One seller has put a copy of the book on Ebay at £0.99 but is yet to receive any offers.

Another online seller has put the biography up for £4.50 and has also received zero bids so far.

The low prices and lack of bids suggest interest in the book is falling online.

99p still high!


----------



## bag-mania

I'll believe that piece of crap book will be a TV show when I see it. What could it possibly be about? They got married, cranked out a baby within a year, then promptly left the family and England in less than two years. They would be hard pressed to get two hours of entertainment out of it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh Harry, just have a seat.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> To lift your spirits:
> 
> *Meghan and Harry humiliated as biography Finding Freedom is being sold for 99p online*
> 
> "This book is based on the authors' own experiences as members of the royal press corps and their own independent reporting."
> 
> Over on Ebay’s website, the biography appears to be dropping in price as well with a number of sellers giving the book away for less than £10.
> 
> One seller has put a copy of the book on Ebay at £0.99 but is yet to receive any offers.
> 
> Another online seller has put the biography up for £4.50 and has also received zero bids so far.
> 
> 
> 
> 99p still high!


Chanbal,  thanks for the intel!  

You are so right! _"The low prices and lack of bids suggest interest in the book is falling online."_
The hardback is listed at #10,200 in sales on Amazon. (May explain why Scoobie is  trying to peddle a TV script since he didn't write the blockbuster he anticipated.)

 In comparison Michele O's book, published two plus years ago in November 2018, is still selling at a rate to make it #36 on the Amazon list. Anytime I read an item that Ginge and Whinge have tried to link themselves to MO and BO I laugh at the absurdity.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'll believe that piece of crap book will be a TV show when I see it. What could it possibly be about? They got married, cranked out a baby within a year, then promptly left the family and England in less than two years. They would be hard pressed to get two hours of entertainment out of it.



After seeing the deals they have made, I don't know what to believe anymore. I never saw anyone making multi-million dollar deals in such a short amount of time without talent or significant work. They are just cashing on a name and it is not "Markle". 

_ *Meghan drops **Markle** from name as Duchess could adopt Prince Harry's Windsor surname*_
_Meghan Markle may no longer be using her father's family surname after she wasn't listed as such on Archewell Audio. The royal is simply named as 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex' on Spotify. _

MM and Omid (and Harry, no reason to leave him out of this) are people that I would prefer to have never heard about. Unfortunately, their publicists make a point in having ridiculous news releases about them almost every day.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I know, you all need these emojis:
> 
> *Royal family on edge as Meghan and Harry book Finding Freedom to become TV show*
> Meghan and Prince Harry's blossoming romance and struggles with palace aides and royals alike have been the focus of a biography, Finding Freedom, by royal correspondents Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie. The book, which claimed to go "beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan’s life together" was released in August and has quickly become a bestseller.
> 
> Now one of its authors, Mr Scobie, is understood to be in talks with Hollywood executives to develop a scripted TV drama inspired by the book, the Evening Standard has reported.
> 
> "Personally, I’m not a huge fan of these stories entering the big or small screen until a bit more time passes."
> 
> Express.co.uk has contacted Mr Scobie for comment.
> 
> Shortly before Finding Freedom was released, a spokesman for the Sussexes made it clear the couple had not been interviewed for this book.
> 
> He said: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to Finding Freedom.
> 
> Where is the puke bucket?


Why did Scobie break with all the other royal journalists a year ago, to become OVERLY PARTIAL to JCMH? His job was to show a modicum of ostensible fairness, and he tossed that aside in favor of a career as a writer of a dud

OK, he did not know sales would be bad BUT we know he spoke to JCMH, and Scobie was probably betting on the come (a gambling metaphor - hoping for a favorable outcome) and JCMH must have dangled the possibility of a movie in front of him  a year ago, he gave up his job for them

Just looked it up - he has 56k followers on Twitter , nothing ...


----------



## rose60610

No doubt the TV show will feature Meghan as a heroine who triumphs over media cruelty, racism, and horrible treatment by the BRF. She will be cast as the ultimate victim who only wanted to do good charitable works but finally couldn't take all the abuse, having to flee in the dark of night to America, land of the free, to escape her nightmarish life where she was merely "existing". Now, through SO MUCH hard work, she has succeeded truly on her own, a SELF MADE person, despite all the misery she suffered as a Royal. And if she can do it, anybody can! But you have to WORK HARD! Harry gets a partial mention where he loses his accent. There, I just summarized about four seasons worth. Season five will feature Archie on his paper route (Meghan wants to make Archie realize that money doesn't grow on trees) as he delivers papers to ten of his multi millionaire/billionaire neighbors who tip him $1,000,000 through the Archwell Foundation at Christmas.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'*
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say a U.K. tabloid "caused huge damage to his reputation," harming his ability to help veterans and leaving them "susceptible to suicide," _Newsweek_ can reveal.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is suing _The_ _Mail on Sunday_ for libelafter the newspaper accused him of turning his back on the Royal Marines in an October 15 article.
> 
> Harry was a captain-general until he stepped back from royal duties for a new life in America with Meghan Markleat the end of March.
> 
> However, _The Mail on Sunday_claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email" with the Royal Marines since.
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say the "barely researched and one-sided article," caused forces personnel to doubt his commitment.
> 
> Their filing goes as far as claiming the military community will be "more susceptible to suicide" because of the impact on his own ability to promote mental health services.
> 
> The newspaper is the same one wife Meghan Markle is suing for privacy and breach of copyright over a letter she sent her father.
> 
> The court filing, seen by _Newsweek_, reads: "[Prince Harry's] sincere ambition is to continue to help current and former military personnel by using his reputation and the platform he has as a result of his military service.
> 
> "This role substantially depends upon [Prince Harry] using his reputation to help such causes by attracting public support for them.
> 
> "The publication of the allegations complained of will seriously hamper his ability to do so and therefore have an adverse effect upon the people he is seeking to help.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] has, in particular, used his reputation to support and encourage current and former military personnel to seek help for mental health problems.
> 
> "The publications complained of will diminish [Prince Harry's] credibility in the eyes of such personnel and therefore make them less likely to seek the help being offered.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] reasonably fears that this will in turn have devastating effects upon such individuals, including leaving them more susceptible to suicide."
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim he was not given an opportunity to comment on the allegations after his representatives were contacted less than three hours before the article was posted online.
> 
> _The Mail on Sunday_ is one of a series of newspapers that Meghan and Prince Harry have banned their representatives from communicating with.
> 
> The Mail Online website ran its article just after midnight, putting the request for comment later than 9 p.m.
> 
> The court filing says it is not known whether at the time the email was sent the story "had in fact already been published in those editions of the _Mail on Sunday_ which had gone to print."
> 
> Harry's lawyers wrote: "[Prince Harry] has been personally affronted and caused huge damage to his reputation by reason of the publication of the words complained of."
> 
> They add: "Even on [Prince Harry's] current knowledge of the relevant chronology, it is obvious that he was not given any or any effective opportunity to respond at all to, and to defend himself against, the very serious allegations which [the Mail on Sunday] proceeded to publish about him.
> 
> This was manifestly unjust and in breach of the most basic of journalistic standards.
> 
> "It showed a complete disregard for [Prince Harry's] reputation, for his version of events and therefore for fairness and for the truth."
> 
> The court filing says the allegations were presented as being "highly credible" as they quoted "informed sources" which could "only mean senior officers of the Royal
> Marines."
> 
> The story included reaction from Major General Julian Thompson, describing him as "one of Britain's most celebrated military commanders."
> 
> It also said Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff of the British Army, had written a letter to Harry that went unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim a newspaper article accusing him of turning his back on the Royal Marines left military personnel "more susceptible to suicide," Newsweek can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


oh another lawsuit....this is their main occupation I think


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I'll believe that piece of crap book will be a TV show when I see it. What could it possibly be about? They got married, cranked out a baby within a year, then promptly left the family and England in less than two years. They would be hard pressed to get two hours of entertainment out of it.



But the romantic pee scenes in the woods!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Meghan Markle may no longer be using her father's family surname after she wasn't listed as such on Archewell Audio. The royal is simply named as 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex' on Spotify. _



Ah, such a feminist move. Can they really not see their ridiculousness?


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> I know, you all need these emojis:
> 
> *Royal family on edge as Meghan and Harry book Finding Freedom to become TV show*
> Meghan and Prince Harry's blossoming romance and struggles with palace aides and royals alike have been the focus of a biography, Finding Freedom, by royal correspondents Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie. The book, which claimed to go "beyond the headlines to reveal unknown details of Harry and Meghan’s life together" was released in August and has quickly become a bestseller.
> 
> Now one of its authors, Mr Scobie, is understood to be in talks with Hollywood executives to develop a scripted TV drama inspired by the book, the Evening Standard has reported.
> 
> "Personally, I’m not a huge fan of these stories entering the big or small screen until a bit more time passes."
> 
> Express.co.uk has contacted Mr Scobie for comment.
> 
> Shortly before Finding Freedom was released, a spokesman for the Sussexes made it clear the couple had not been interviewed for this book.
> 
> He said: "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not interviewed and did not contribute to Finding Freedom.
> 
> Where is the puke bucket?


Is FF really a bestseller????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, such a feminist move. Can they really not see their ridiculousness?



What is worse is the US media and the entertainment industry steadfastly refuse to see them for the overprivileged phonies they are. Those industries are determined to help them along in their quest for global conquest pop culture fame. As long as they say those nice feel-good words that make good sound bites, they get the gratitude of a generous press. It doesn't matter if they ever get around to doing what they say they are going to do.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'*
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say a U.K. tabloid "caused huge damage to his reputation," harming his ability to help veterans and leaving them "susceptible to suicide," _Newsweek_ can reveal.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is suing _The_ _Mail on Sunday_ for libelafter the newspaper accused him of turning his back on the Royal Marines in an October 15 article.
> 
> Harry was a captain-general until he stepped back from royal duties for a new life in America with Meghan Markleat the end of March.
> 
> However, _The Mail on Sunday_claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email" with the Royal Marines since.
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers say the "barely researched and one-sided article," caused forces personnel to doubt his commitment.
> 
> Their filing goes as far as claiming the military community will be "more susceptible to suicide" because of the impact on his own ability to promote mental health services.
> 
> The newspaper is the same one wife Meghan Markle is suing for privacy and breach of copyright over a letter she sent her father.
> 
> The court filing, seen by _Newsweek_, reads: "[Prince Harry's] sincere ambition is to continue to help current and former military personnel by using his reputation and the platform he has as a result of his military service.
> 
> "This role substantially depends upon [Prince Harry] using his reputation to help such causes by attracting public support for them.
> 
> "The publication of the allegations complained of will seriously hamper his ability to do so and therefore have an adverse effect upon the people he is seeking to help.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] has, in particular, used his reputation to support and encourage current and former military personnel to seek help for mental health problems.
> 
> "The publications complained of will diminish [Prince Harry's] credibility in the eyes of such personnel and therefore make them less likely to seek the help being offered.
> 
> "[Prince Harry] reasonably fears that this will in turn have devastating effects upon such individuals, including leaving them more susceptible to suicide."
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim he was not given an opportunity to comment on the allegations after his representatives were contacted less than three hours before the article was posted online.
> 
> _The Mail on Sunday_ is one of a series of newspapers that Meghan and Prince Harry have banned their representatives from communicating with.
> 
> The Mail Online website ran its article just after midnight, putting the request for comment later than 9 p.m.
> 
> The court filing says it is not known whether at the time the email was sent the story "had in fact already been published in those editions of the _Mail on Sunday_ which had gone to print."
> 
> Harry's lawyers wrote: "[Prince Harry] has been personally affronted and caused huge damage to his reputation by reason of the publication of the words complained of."
> 
> They add: "Even on [Prince Harry's] current knowledge of the relevant chronology, it is obvious that he was not given any or any effective opportunity to respond at all to, and to defend himself against, the very serious allegations which [the Mail on Sunday] proceeded to publish about him.
> 
> This was manifestly unjust and in breach of the most basic of journalistic standards.
> 
> "It showed a complete disregard for [Prince Harry's] reputation, for his version of events and therefore for fairness and for the truth."
> 
> The court filing says the allegations were presented as being "highly credible" as they quoted "informed sources" which could "only mean senior officers of the Royal
> Marines."
> 
> The story included reaction from Major General Julian Thompson, describing him as "one of Britain's most celebrated military commanders."
> 
> It also said Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff of the British Army, had written a letter to Harry that went unanswered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Newspaper Claims Left Marines 'Susceptible to Suicide'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's lawyers claim a newspaper article accusing him of turning his back on the Royal Marines left military personnel "more susceptible to suicide," Newsweek can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



During his last Senior Royal engagement as Captain General of the Marines in which he wore his Dress Reds, Megain wore that red caped dress. I thought at the time there was talk about how this was disrespectful to the troops as the wives/partners were not to wear red. Odd thing, when I went to check that out I can find nothing on line about it except glowing reports about how stunning   she looked in it. Anyone else remember that controversy or has my memory gone wonky?


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Sol Ryan He sure thinks highly of himself doesn’t he?
> @kipp Wonder where he got that notion!
> 
> It could be bravado, a cover for low self-esteem. Harry is a capricious and out of control man-child and so different from his apparently well-adjusted brother, William. What happened?
> Here's what I've garnered from previous posters and bios. Diana once said that she threw herself down the stairs while four months pregnant with William (b. June 21, 1982) then, she changed her mind to say that she only faked it. Altering her story sure seemed a better fit for a pregnant mother. Either way, William turned out OK.
> So how did Diana cope with her insecurities while pregnant with Harry (b. Sept 15, 1984) since the Wales’ marriage hadn’t improved and possibly had worsened? The situation could have escalated to the point where she was binge eating and binge purging as this brings comfort to a bulimic person? Bulimia can cause mild to severe physical and mental damage to the fetus. It would account for Harry’s apparent mental and emotional problems such as low intelligence, low self-esteem, volatility, jealousy, depression, etc.; problems that were later exacerbated by Diana’s early demise and his heavy drinking. I’m not a doctor, but something is definitely wrong with Harry.
> 
> ETA "and his heavy drinking"


Can't remember where I read it, and it was some time ago .. before the 'rift' between William & Harry, but Diana had said that "_William is more pragmatic like his father, it's Harry that I worry about because he's very sensitive_" .. well, there you go!  Seriously, it just boggles my mind that he's filled with such jealousy (and now hatred - thank you Meghan) for his brother and sister-in-law!  "Weenie-Boy", you are over 35-years old and you knew your "position" from what age? .. *GET OVER IT AND YOURSELF*!!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> During his last Senior Royal engagement as Captain General of the Marines in which he wore his Dress Reds, Megain wore that red caped dress. I thought at the time there was talk about how this was disrespectful to the troops as the wives/partners were not to wear red. Odd thing, when I went to check that out I can find nothing on line about it except glowing reports about how stunning   she looked in it. Anyone else remember that controversy or has my memory gone wonky?



I don't remember that in particular but it doesn't mean your memory is wrong. I wonder if we Googled other embarrassing or critical stories about them whether we would discover some have been scrubbed from the web. With enough money you can do many things.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> During his last Senior Royal engagement as Captain General of the Marines in which he wore his Dress Reds, Megain wore that red caped dress. I thought at the time there was talk about how this was disrespectful to the troops as the wives/partners were not to wear red. Odd thing, when I went to check that out I can find nothing on line about it except glowing reports about how stunning   she looked in it. Anyone else remember that controversy or has my memory gone wonky?



No, I remember that too, it was definitely talked about.

I vividly remember someone (on here?) saying with her wearing red and the inappropriate PDA they were surprised she wasn't trying to pin his medals to her chest.


----------



## gracekelly

The only person who committed suicide was Harry. He killed his royal and military connections by running away. Of course he will always be part of the family, but he will never be treated the same.  The military usually shoots deserters after a court martial. Lucky for him the execution will be figurative rather than literal.


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> During his last Senior Royal engagement as Captain General of the Marines in which he wore his Dress Reds, Megain wore that red caped dress. I thought at the time there was talk about how this was disrespectful to the troops as the wives/partners were not to wear red. Odd thing, when I went to check that out I can find nothing on line about it except glowing reports about how stunning   she looked in it. Anyone else remember that controversy or has my memory gone wonky?


NOPE .. I remember that as well, that the wives were not supposed to wear Red, but you know "Ms. Special" had to do it!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> What is worse is the US media and the entertainment industry steadfastly refuse to see them for the overprivileged phonies they are. Those industries are determined to help them along in their quest for global conquest pop culture fame. As long as they say those nice feel-good words that make good sound bites, they get the gratitude of a generous press. It doesn't matter if they ever get around to doing what they say they are going to do.



Right. Meghan is an attractive American who married into the BRF, it's like the Princess Grace of Monaco story all over again, and we all know how much Hollywood likes remakes (Superman #267 anyone?) and the Media go into overdrive for clickbait stories. Except we all know Meghan is no Grace Kelly, but since no one can do a makeover like Hollywood, she's close enough to recreate Cinderella and Grace Kelly rolled into one. Academy Award Winner Princess Grace performed her royal duties and stayed out of Hollywood despite Alfred Hitchcock's attempts to draw her back in. Cinderella married her Prince and STFU, stopped bothering us, and left us with a happy ending. But nooooooo, Meghan has to stage some kind of action hero comeback, like "SEE, I married into the horrible abusive BRF from which I barely escaped, and made it on my OWN", and some Media are eating it up like she's a POW turned broadcast mogul. I'm glad this thread exists for the public to get the straight dope on these dopes.


----------



## plastic-fish

papertiger said:


> I think you mean the supposed letter in evidence that she was supposed to have said she wasn't shown any docs. Sounds like a 'unofficial' waiver to me, and probably a contrivance that Bashir asked her to write for such an eventuality. It's not unusual thing.
> 
> From Tatler:
> 
> "Now, a letter written by Diana, Princes of Wales, is expected to become an important piece of evidence during an inquiry into how the BBC secured its 1995 _Panorama_ interview with her. The letter reportedly emerged after a BBC staff member took it home as a memento. The contents of the letter have not been published but are expected to ‘praise’ Martin Bashir, the interviewer, who has been accused of obtaining Diana’s cooperation by deception. According to the _Times_, the letter is believed to thank Bashir for his conduct before and after the interview and states that she was never shown and (sic) documents to persuade her to take part in the interview."
> 
> This pretty much sums up the whole story and is now part of an ongoing inquiry:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Bashir will not face criminal investigation over Princess Diana’s Panorama interview
> 
> 
> The Metropolitan Police said correspondence alleging unlawful activity had been ‘carefully assessed’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story is not just what happened then. It's the cover-up (at the time and now) and the continual support of deceptive practices by an employee of a public institution. Just the language of attempting to gaslight by referring to the time frame as problematical to source info or less important than some thing that happened last week is shocking in a BBC 'apology'  "We are happy to repeat that apology. *And while this was a quarter of a century ago*, we absolutely will investigate, robustly and fairly, substantive new information." Don't mention the date, no excuses, just get on with it.
> 
> The interview changed history. It was huge. This story is huge. It's HUGE.


Wow...  The truth should be told, horrible deception...


----------



## V0N1B2

@bellecate i remember reading about the red dress controversy as well.  I think it was a more in-depth discussion on other forums though, like LSA.
Here are some posts from this thread back in March.


gracekelly said:


> I finally figured that out.  This was his patronage given to him by Prince Philip.  I would have hoped that they would be silent in light of the fact that he blew off the charity concert of this patronage so they could go to the Disney premiere and beg Bob Iger for a job.
> 
> @Straight-Laced Totally agree with your post.  I think she showed what a hypocrite she was regarding the archaic family as she certainly enjoyed the prestige  and the curtsies given to her.  I do believe that she may not have known all the intricacies of protocol, but that's on her and Harry and rush job wedding and no  preparation.    The problem was that reality of  royal life didn't match up to her imagined royal life and that is what her disappointment stems from.  She thought she would get a tiara with her morning tea in bed.
> 
> I have never understood how she could not cope and exhibit proper behavior at any event. (No wonder she was not a success in the acting world if she could not adapt to situations and new people, which are all requirements of getting an acting job.) The pushing and shoving of her (willing) husband and outright rudeness should have been dealt with immediately.  Perhaps it was, and she was so angered by it, she resolved not to change her behavior in any way and speed up the plans for an exit.  At any rate, she hasn't changed that a bit and is still doing it.  Her behavior at Royal Albert Hall was, according to those who are familiar with military protocol, inappropriate.  The companions of the military are not supposed to wear red, which she did.  The companions are not supposed to hold hands, hold onto or lean on the uniform wearing person.  She did all of the above.  All it did was look very awkward and he looked like a child dressed up in his father's uniform (which actually was the case) and it didn't fit him very well either.





floatinglili said:


> I’m surprised there hasnt been a large backlash against the draped-in-red dress. As one wag commenter wrote, “I’m surprised she didn’t pin Harry’s medals to her chest”.
> Major faux pas, deliberately done and very rude.
> How and why did Harry go along with that choice of gown?
> It seems she loves to deride the historic traditions even as she revels in them. All the better to monetise them, I suppose.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> NOPE .. I remember that as well, t*hat the wives were not supposed to *


Yes, I remember it as well. Also remember the vid where she made the mistake of sitting down while everyone still stood. To cover her faux pas, she kept patting JCMH's back and the seat trying to get him to sit as well.   

ETA The end to a perfect night.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> No doubt the TV show will feature Meghan as a heroine who triumphs over media cruelty, racism, and horrible treatment by the BRF. She will be cast as the ultimate victim who only wanted to do good charitable works but finally couldn't take all the abuse, having to flee in the dark of night to America, land of the free, to escape her nightmarish life where she was merely "existing". Now, through SO MUCH hard work, she has succeeded truly on her own, a SELF MADE person, despite all the misery she suffered as a Royal. And if she can do it, anybody can! But you have to WORK HARD! Harry gets a partial mention where he loses his accent. There, I just summarized about four seasons worth. Season five will feature Archie on his paper route (Meghan wants to make Archie realize that money doesn't grow on trees) as he delivers papers to ten of his multi millionaire/billionaire neighbors who tip him $1,000,000 through the Archwell Foundation at Christmas.


You're starting to sound like Piers.  I LOVE it!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> After seeing the deals they have made, I don't know what to believe anymore. I never saw anyone making multi-million dollar deals in such a short amount of time without talent or significant work. They are just cashing on a name and it is not "Markle".
> 
> _ *Meghan drops **Markle** from name as Duchess could adopt Prince Harry's Windsor surname*_
> _Meghan Markle may no longer be using her father's family surname after she wasn't listed as such on Archewell Audio. The royal is simply named as 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex' on Spotify. _
> 
> MM and Omid (and Harry, no reason to leave him out of this) are people that I would prefer to have never heard about. Unfortunately, their publicists make a point in having ridiculous news releases about them almost every day.


Why is this news?  A woman gets married, and OH MY GOD, takes her husband's last name!   Truly earth shattering. 
I'm really waiting to hear that Harry now goes by Harry Markle.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> What is worse is the US media and the entertainment industry steadfastly refuse to see them for the overprivileged phonies they are. Those industries are determined to help them along in their quest for global conquest pop culture fame. As long as they say those nice feel-good words that make good sound bites, they get the gratitude of a generous press. It doesn't matter if they ever get around to doing what they say they are going to do.


That's because the US media tends to treat most over priviledged celebrities as untouchable gods.  If COVID has shown anything, it's that these celebrities are utterly useless in anything except for their talent.  Look at Alec Baldwin.  His wife is a total farce but they've already dropped that story.  Celebrities are mostly wind bags whose opinions I really don't give a $hit about.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, and it was some time ago .. before the 'rift' between William & Harry, but Diana had said that "_William is more pragmatic like his father, it's Harry that I worry about because he's very sensitive_" .. well, there you go!  Seriously, it just boggles my mind that he's filled with such jealousy (and now hatred - thank you Meghan) for his brother and sister-in-law!  "Weenie-Boy", you are over 35-years old and you knew your "position" from what age? .. *GET OVER IT AND YOURSELF*!!!!!


Maybe she meant to say, "It's Harry that I worry about because he's got issues, quite a lot of them!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> That's because the US media tends to treat most over priviledged celebrities as untouchable gods.  If COVID has shown anything, it's that these celebrities are utterly useless in anything except for their talent.  Look at Alec Baldwin.  His wife is a total farce but they've already dropped that story.  Celebrities are mostly wind bags whose opinions I really don't give a $hit about.



Yes, they are already rehabbing the Baldwins. I saw an article yesterday where Alec was celebrating his wife's birthday, saying she is the love of his life, blah, blah blah. Who cares?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I remember it as well. Also remember the vid where she made the mistake of sitting down while everyone still stood. To cover her faux pas, she kept patting JCMH's back and the seat trying to get him to sit as well.
> 
> ETA The end to a perfect night.
> View attachment 4950106



I find it so scary when her megawatt face slips to reveal the ugly.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it so scary when her megawatt face slips to reveal the ugly.


I couldn't find this pic on the internet, but then remembered that I posted last March. Wonder who scrubs the internet for those losers.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Why did Scobie break with all the other royal journalists a year ago, to become OVERLY PARTIAL to JCMH? His job was to show a modicum of ostensible fairness, and he tossed that aside in favor of a career as a writer of a dud
> 
> OK, he did not know sales would be bad BUT we know he spoke to JCMH, and Scobie was probably betting on the come (a gambling metaphor - hoping for a favorable outcome) and JCMH must have dangled the possibility of a movie in front of him  a year ago, he gave up his job for them
> 
> Just looked it up - he has 56k followers on Twitter , nothing ...



Isn't Omid a good friend of MA? So he is likely working for 'The New Firm', the one with the headquarters in California.


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> Is FF really a bestseller????


It looks like.  Sorry only Ginge on the picture, took Cringe out to avoid indigestion.


----------



## bag-mania

I haven't heard anything about Markus Anderson in a long time. Has he exhausted his usefulness and been markled?


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> It looks like.  Sorry only Ginge on the picture, took Cringe out to avoid indigestion.
> View attachment 4950162


There is probably a way to get on that bestseller list by paying someone off.  Everything has its price.


----------



## bag-mania

Samantha's book must have a lot of preorders. It says "bestseller" on the page and has a sales rank of 24.









						The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1 (Special Edition): A Memoire|Paperback
					

Amidst a firestorm of fake news and media mayhem, Samantha Markle shares the truth about her life and family against all odds and ultimatums, as a royal fairy tale plummets from the tea towels. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction.




					www.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Why is this news?  A woman gets married, and OH MY GOD, takes her husband's last name!   Truly earth shattering.
> I'm really waiting to hear that Harry now goes by Harry Markle.


well of course she would drop Markle....first of all she loves being the Duchess - w/o doing the duties.  secondly she doesn't like her family and third I'll be she knows "Markled" is now a verb


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> After seeing the deals they have made, I don't know what to believe anymore. I never saw anyone making multi-million dollar deals in such a short amount of time without talent or significant work. They are just cashing on a name and it is not "Markle".
> 
> _ *Meghan drops **Markle** from name as Duchess could adopt Prince Harry's Windsor surname*_
> _Meghan Markle may no longer be using her father's family surname after she wasn't listed as such on Archewell Audio. The royal is simply named as 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex' on Spotify. _
> 
> MM and Omid (and Harry, no reason to leave him out of this) are people that I would prefer to have never heard about. Unfortunately, their publicists make a point in having ridiculous news releases about them almost every day.


Imagine their PR bills lol


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Why is this news?  A woman gets married, and OH MY GOD, takes her husband's last name!   Truly earth shattering.
> I'm really waiting to hear that Harry now goes by Harry Markle.


The journalist may have found it a little too conventional for such a hardcore feminist.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> That's because the US media tends to treat most over priviledged celebrities as untouchable gods.  If COVID has shown anything, it's that these celebrities are utterly useless in anything except for their talent.  Look at Alec Baldwin.  His wife is a total farce but they've already dropped that story.  Celebrities are mostly wind bags whose opinions I really don't give a $hit about.


Interesting comment by my young daughter. She said more people are following insta people and influencers and tik tokers due to the fact they are “real” people. It makes sense. She said people don’t give a whip about celebrities anymore.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Yes, they are already rehabbing the Baldwins. I saw an article yesterday where Alec was celebrating his wife's birthday, saying she is the love of his life, blah, blah blah. Who cares?



Of course Hilaria is the love of his life because she'd cost too much to divorce. Plus the child support X 5.  Alec and Harry might as well hang out together--they're both dupes. Oops. I just gave Alec an idea. H&M need an experienced showbiz person with connections and Alec needs a crapload of income so he can afford to get rid of Hilaria and pay support. Since they're all losers, they'd probably do well together.


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> NOPE .. I remember that as well, that the wives were not supposed to wear Red, but you know "Ms. Special" had to do it!


I think wearing the red dress was one of many petty moves she made to prove a point - you’re not the boss of me, and your traditions be damned.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I haven't heard anything about Markus Anderson in a long time. Has he exhausted his usefulness and been markled?


He may be too valuable with his many connections to be markled. I wonder if he is working as a Private Secretary ... It's a prestigious job in a monarchy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> Samantha's book must have a lot of preorders. It says "bestseller" on the page and has a sales rank of 24.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1 (Special Edition): A Memoire|Paperback
> 
> 
> Amidst a firestorm of fake news and media mayhem, Samantha Markle shares the truth about her life and family against all odds and ultimatums, as a royal fairy tale plummets from the tea towels. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.barnesandnoble.com


I kinda want to buy Samantha’s book!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Samantha's book must have a lot of preorders. It says "bestseller" on the page and has a sales rank of 24.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Diary Of Princess Pushy's Sister Part 1 (Special Edition): A Memoire|Paperback
> 
> 
> Amidst a firestorm of fake news and media mayhem, Samantha Markle shares the truth about her life and family against all odds and ultimatums, as a royal fairy tale plummets from the tea towels. Sometimes the truth really is stranger than fiction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.barnesandnoble.com



Many of us are making Samantha a rich woman.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I kinda want to buy Samantha’s book!



I sort of want to too. 
It would be best to go into it with zero expectations if we buy it. I can't imagine it's going to be that good, but even if it's just a lot of snarky vitriol I'm sure it will still have it's own charm.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I sort of want to too.
> It would be best to go into it with zero expectations if we buy it. I can't imagine it's going to be that good, but even if it's just a lot of snarky vitriol I'm sure it will still have it's own charm.


I’ll buy just to “help” her out.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I sort of want to too.
> It would be best to go into it with zero expectations if we buy it. I can't imagine it's going to be that good, but even if it's just a lot of snarky vitriol I'm sure it will still have it's own charm.


Agree, zero expectations. I wouldn't surprised if she was contacted at some point by MM's lawyers. Samantha might be afraid (or still has hopes of a reconciliation) to publish some details. We should be able to know soon.


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle’s Dad Thomas Is ‘Very Pleased’ With Samantha’s Upcoming Book
					

Meghan Markle’s dad, Thomas Markle, is ‘very pleased’ with his daughter Samantha Markle’s upcoming book, ‘The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister’ — exclusive




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Agree, zero expectations. I wouldn't surprised if she was contacted at some point by MM's lawyers. Samantha might be afraid (or still has hopes of a reconciliation) to publish some details. We should be able to know soon.



Watch it be 19 chapters of Samantha's life and then the last two chapters are where all the good dirt is.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Yes, they are already rehabbing the Baldwins.* I saw an article yesterday where Alec was celebrating his wife's birthday, saying she is the love of his life, blah, blah blah. Who cares?



I wouldn't be surprised if this type of image rehabilitation is being done by a well paid PR-agency like Sunshine Sachs and its connections. 

By the way, I just recently learned about Hillary/Hilaria, and the situation is totally hilarious imo. I wonder if we have now more crazy people or if I was too busy pre-covid to notice them.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if this type of image rehabilitation is being done by a well paid PR-agency like Sunshine Sachs and its connections.
> 
> By the way, I just recently learned about Hillary/Hilaria, and the situation is totally hilarious imo. I wonder if we have now more crazy people or if I was too busy pre-covid to notice them.


at lot has to do with the internet.....we get info so fast....and see people's reactions immediately


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> I’ll buy just to “help” her out.


I probably will also, Lodpah, kind of out of guilt. 

When she first showed up on line I thought she was a jealous whack job and felt sorry for Meghan having to deal with family while getting prepped to be a royal. TIMES HAVE CHANGED. Turns out Samantha spoke truths based on personal experience and any good thoughts I had for Meghan ended at the altar because she had already started revealing her rotten core.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The NYT bestseller list can definitely be bought, and they’ve been known to keep books off of it that don’t align to their values.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> I’ll buy just to “help” her out.


Yep, I think she could use some help. People suffering from multiple sclerosis need extra support. So even if the book is not a masterpiece, it's not a big deal imo.


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> I probably will also, Lodpah, kind of out of guilt.
> 
> When she first showed up on line I thought she was a jealous whack job and felt sorry for Meghan having to deal with family while getting prepped to be a royal. TIMES HAVE CHANGED. Turns out Samantha spoke truths based on personal experience and any good thoughts I had for Meghan ended at the altar because she had already started revealing her rotten core.



Add me to the list as well for a variety of reasons.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she meant to say, "It's Harry that I worry about because he's got issues, quite a lot of them!"



Diana had an eating disorder and other issues, her middle sister had an eating disorder, her brother has alcohol issues. I haven’t heard of any issues for the oldest sister, but it wouldn’t surprise me.




Annawakes said:


> There is probably a way to get on that bestseller list by paying someone off.  Everything has its price.



That is exactly what that list represents. People who paid to be on it. Take note of those names.








						Here's How You Buy Your Way Onto The New York Times Bestsellers List
					

An endorsement from Oprah Winfrey. A film deal from Steven Spielberg. A debut at the top of The New York Times bestsellers list. These are the things every author craves most, and while the first two require the favor of a benevolent God, the third can be had by anyone with the ability to write...




					www.forbes.com
				



_ResultSource, a San Diego-based marketing consultancy, specializes in getting books onto bestseller lists, according to The Wall Street Journal. For clients willing to pay enough, it will even guarantee a No. 1 spot. It does this by taking bulk sales and breaking them up into more organic-looking individual purchases, defeating safeguards that are supposed to make it impossible to "buy" bestseller status._


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> When she first showed up on line I thought she was a jealous whack job and felt sorry for Meghan having to deal with family while getting prepped to be a royal. TIMES HAVE CHANGED. Turns out Samantha spoke truths based on personal experience and any good thoughts I had for Meghan ended at the altar because she had already started revealing her rotten core.



I think we all thought Samantha was a whack job, as well as the father and the brother. That was the way the story was spun to us in the press. It was always poor lil Meghan, look at her crazy family. How nice that she is away from all that.

Samantha was smart to make this book her memoir. She cannot be sued for self-publishing her own story. And if that story happens to contain anecdotes about her spoiled, demanding little half-sister sprinkled throughout, well, what can she do? It was part of her life. It would be wrong to leave it out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana had an eating disorder and other issues, her middle sister had an eating disorder, her brother has alcohol issues. I haven’t heard of any issues for the oldest sister, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly what that list represents. People who paid to be on it. Take note of those names.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's How You Buy Your Way Onto The New York Times Bestsellers List
> 
> 
> An endorsement from Oprah Winfrey. A film deal from Steven Spielberg. A debut at the top of The New York Times bestsellers list. These are the things every author craves most, and while the first two require the favor of a benevolent God, the third can be had by anyone with the ability to write...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _ResultSource, a San Diego-based marketing consultancy, specializes in getting books onto bestseller lists, according to The Wall Street Journal. For clients willing to pay enough, it will even guarantee a No. 1 spot. It does this by taking bulk sales and breaking them up into more organic-looking individual purchases, defeating safeguards that are supposed to make it impossible to "buy" bestseller status._


So pathetic.  Nothing is sacred any more.  Maybe I'm just totally jaded with the world right now


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I think we all thought Samantha was a whack job, as well as the father and the brother. That was the way the story was spun to us in the press. It was always poor lil Meghan, look at her crazy family. How nice that she is away from all that.
> 
> Samantha was smart to make this book her memoir. She cannot be sued for self-publishing her own story. And if that story happens to contain anecdotes about her spoiled, demanding little half-sister sprinkled throughout, well, what can she do? It was part of her life. It would be wrong to leave it out.


It's funny looking back at Harry's comment about how the BRF was "the family MM never had" or something to that effect.  This pi$$ed off her real family, and I can't blame them.  Didn't take her long to tear apart the BRF either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> It's funny looking back at Harry's comment about how the BRF was "the family MM never had" or something to that effect.  This pi$$ed off her real family, and I can't blame them.  Didn't take her long to tear apart the BRF either.



I have said it before, but him saying this was the moment I knew what she'd been feeding him and I saw right through her.


----------



## Chanbal

Good news for UK members!

*Meghan Markle officially misses her chance to become a Brit after Megxit derailed the mandatory three year requirement of living in UK before applying for citizenship *

The Duchess of Sussex had fully intended to become a Brit after marrying Prince Harry in May 2018 in a spectacular wedding at Windsor Castle.

She was required to live in the UK for a minimum of three years before applying for citizenship and legally qualifying for a British passport.

Under strict Home Office rules the Duchess, who first moved to London on November 21, 2017, could have begun her citizenship application three years later on November 21, 2020.

In 2017 Meghan's royal handlers were adamant that she apply for citizenship and adhere to normal processing time, rather than being fast tracked by the Home Office. (Umm , smart people)

No Brit passport!

I feel the pain of this fellow commentator:


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> It's funny looking back at Harry's comment about how the BRF was "the family MM never had" or something to that effect.  This pi$$ed off her real family, and I can't blame them.  Didn't take her long to tear apart the BRF either.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have said it before, but him saying this was the moment I knew what she'd been feeding him and I saw right through her.


Can you imagine the burden of this type of comments on the Markle family? A father that helped MM a lot, a sister and brother that were likely snubbed ... This family was living a private life and suddenly was forced to be in the limelight, and a very bad one. On top, they didn't get wedding invitations and were not profiting (like MM) from all that attention. They must have felt terrible.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Can you imagine the burden of this type of comments on the Markle family? A father that helped MM a lot, a sister and brother that were likely snubbed ... This family was living a private life and suddenly was forced to be in the limelight, and a very bad one. On top, they didn't get wedding invitations and were not profiting (like MM) from all that attention. They must have felt terrible.



I'm sure they are bitter about it. Thomas has finally learned that he can't trust the media. He was very careful in his wording about Samantha's book. He said only two things: "I’m just very pleased that she’s accomplished this book" and “Let’s let her talk to you about the book.” He said absolutely nothing about the book itself. Maybe he hasn't even read it. But what are the headlines today? Meghan Markle’s Father Thomas Markle Is ‘Very Pleased’ With Daughter Samantha’s Upcoming Book and Meghan Markle's Dad Excited For Daughter Samantha's Tell-All Book: I'm 'Very Pleased'

Those headlines make it sound like he is commenting on the content of the book, which he clearly was not from his statement.


----------



## lalame

I think Samantha is just awful. Even if everything she says are truths, the way she paints them is obviously to maximize insult and drama. I'm a very flawed person who has made mistakes in life... if one of my family members put out a book and goes on TV as often as possible to talk allllllll about my faults for money, I mean I would be livid. I don't think this has anything to do with whether Meghan is also awful. They're both awful, not mutually exclusive here. They're not on some morality see-saw where one goes up when the other goes down lol.


----------



## lalame

I saw this headline and remembered the convo the other day about annulments... apparently you can even get a religious annulment after getting a legal divorce and 7 years of marriage!

Story: Gwen Stefani gets annulment from Gavin Rossdale


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I think Samantha is just awful. Even if everything she says are truths, the way she paints them is obviously to maximize insult and drama. I'm a very flawed person who has made mistakes in life... if one of my family members put out a book and goes on TV as often as possible to talk allllllll about my faults for money, I mean I would be livid. I don't think this has anything to do with whether Meghan is also awful. They're both awful, not mutually exclusive here. They're not on some morality see-saw where one goes up when the other goes down lol.



Eh, I don't care whether Samantha is a horrible person or not. Her little self-published book is like a minuscule grain of sand compared to Harry and Meghan's royal juggernaut of self-promotion and media glorification. The book will stir up a little dust and then be quickly forgotten since Samantha doesn't have any money or power backing her up. If saying her piece on a small scale means that much to her I don't mind reading it.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Eh, I don't care whether Samantha is a horrible person or not. Her little self-published book is like a minuscule grain of sand compared to Harry and Meghan's royal juggernaut of self-promotion and media glorification. The book will stir up a little dust and then be quickly forgotten since Samantha doesn't have any money or power backing her up. If saying her piece on a small scale means that much to her I don't mind reading it.



Of course Harry and Meghan have a much bigger platform to do well, everything, so there is really no comparing them to someone like Samantha. I think she'll be remembered as a very embarrassing character in this whole Megxit mess, which on its own has been a huge embarrassment to the family. I have second hand embarrassment for all involved whenever I see another headline about this family... because you know it's going to be either extremely salacious, provocative, or at best "who cares?".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lalame said:


> I saw this headline and remembered the convo the other day about annulments... apparently you can even get a religious annulment after getting a legal divorce and 7 years of marriage!
> Story: Gwen Stefani gets annulment from Gavin Rossdale


Each individual must still abide by the terms of the legal divorce decree and accept all responsibilities toward their children.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I saw this headline and remembered the convo the other day about annulments... apparently you can even get a religious annulment after getting a legal divorce and 7 years of marriage!
> 
> Story: Gwen Stefani gets annulment from Gavin Rossdale


I recall their wedding. The new Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral had just opened inLA and they were married there. I am presuming she wants another marriage in the C Church.

Whether Samantha is right or wrong to delve into her family history is a moot point now. She’s done it and probably feels she has every right to monetize it given how she believes her half sister has disrespected their father and her family.  All the Markles appear to be consumed by a lust for fame and fortune so I can only include it is in their blood. The Ragland side doesn’t appear to have this need.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> I recall their wedding. The new Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral had just opened inLA and they were married there. I am presuming she wants another marriage in the C Church.
> 
> Whether Samantha is right or wrong to delve into her family history is a moot point now. She’s done it and probably feels she has every right to monetize it given how she believes her half sister has disrespected their father and her family.  All the Markles appear to be consumed by a lust for fame and fortune so I can only include it is in their blood. The Ragland side doesn’t appear to have this need.



Agree, I think it's a monster feeding itself at this point. Just when you think one side is ready to STFU, the other side does something to keep it alive. I truly hope M+H can at least refrain from feeding it any further by not making any statements or leaking any info in response. When I think of this whole debacle and who comes out looking somewhat dignified, it's probably just Trevor, Doria, her side of the family, and maybe even the uncle with the internship. Everyone else is ready to join Dancing with the Stars over this!


----------



## lalame

Frankly I wish M+H would just STFU period at this point so don't think I'm just picking on Samantha. But I will say, now that I'm watching the Crown, I'm looking forward to the dramatization.... ideally AFTER M+H are no longer a daily news item here in the US.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Frankly I wish M+H would just STFU period at this point so don't think I'm just picking on Samantha. But I will say, now that I'm watching the Crown, I'm looking forward to the dramatization.... ideally AFTER M+H are no longer a daily news item here in the US.


Lol!  If they shut up, our fun will end.  As Scarlet O’Hara said, “tomorrow is another day!”  So let’s see what they do tomorrow on Kate’s birthday.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Frankly I wish M+H would just STFU period at this point so don't think I'm just picking on Samantha. But I will say, *now that I'm watching the Crown, I'm looking forward to the dramatization*.... ideally AFTER M+H are no longer a daily news item here in the US.



I'm not sure. Now that Meghan and Harry are contractually in bed with Netflix, don't you think there is a good chance it will be written with 100% sympathy towards them. Will Netflix allow anything critical to be shown of their multimillion dollar babies?


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I'm not sure. Now that Meghan and Harry are contractually in bed with Netflix, don't you think there is a good chance it will be written with 100% sympathy towards them. Will Netflix allow anything critical to be shown of their multimillion dollar babies?



Hmm I don't know, frankly I think they portray everyone in a bad light in the Crown except for the Queen (and maybe Philip now)... so I have to believe it'd be the same. By that time anyway who knows whether M+H will even be involved with Netflix anymore. Hard for me to imagine their show would be so popular it lasts several years. Netflix does have several titles up now that are critical of the royal family or Diana. I just watched that one "The Royal House of Windsor" and was quite shocked at how anti-Diana those episodes were. It had people after people talking about how Diana was troubled, awful fits, vindictive, etc and nothing really about Charles and what he's done.


----------



## purseinsanity

Just pertaining to our earlier annulment discussion (I think Gwen was married for several years and has children...):









						Gwen Stefani, Gavin Rossdale’s Annulment Granted by Catholic Church
					

Gwen Stefani has been granted an annulment from ex-husband Gavin Rossdale ahead of her marriage to Blake Shelton — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Hmm I don't know, frankly I think they portray everyone in a bad light in the Crown except for the Queen (and maybe Philip now)... so I have to believe it'd be the same. By that time anyway who knows whether M+H will even be involved with Netflix anymore. Hard for me to imagine their show would be so popular it lasts several years. Netflix does have several titles up now that are critical of the royal family or Diana. I just watched that one "The Royal House of Windsor" and was quite shocked at how anti-Diana those episodes were. It had people after people talking about how Diana was troubled, awful fits, vindictive, etc and nothing really about Charles and what he's done.



True, it will be two seasons before they get to Harry and Meghan, unless they bump it up earlier to take advantage of interest in them. As for them soft pedaling around Charles, the living get to reinvent themselves and the dead cannot sue for defamation.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I saw this headline and remembered the convo the other day about annulments... apparently you can even get a religious annulment after getting a legal divorce and 7 years of marriage!
> 
> Story: Gwen Stefani gets annulment from Gavin Rossdale


Oh, I just saw your post!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Duchess of Sussex had fully intended to become a Brit after marrying Prince Harry in May 2018 in a spectacular wedding at Windsor Castle.



As if.


----------



## Chanbal

In MM&H's minds the duke/duchess titles make up for the need to earn their stripes. 

*Meghan's ex-PR consultant slams Sussexes' celebrity brand - 'They are clutching at straws'*

A LEADING public relations expert, who worked with Meghan Markle in London, has criticised the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's recent actions, claiming they have rushed into their mega-million deals and "are clutching at straws".

However, he warned Meghan and Harry against rushing into too many deals.
Mr Ede explained: "I feel like Meghan and Harry at the moment are almost clutching at straws at what their brand is. Is it the politics, is it women's rights?

"You have to remember that two years ago Meghan was a Hollywood actress in a B-soap, and Harry was a member of the Royal Family, who do great things.

"But he's not a political activist and she's not a human rights activist.

"So, I believe to get authenticity you have to earn your stripes, so hopefully they're going to be doing that before they do too much more."

clutching at straws


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> In MM&H's minds the duke/duchess titles make up for the need to earn their stripes.
> 
> *Meghan's ex-PR consultant slams Sussexes' celebrity brand - 'They are clutching at straws'*
> 
> A LEADING public relations expert, who worked with Meghan Markle in London, has criticised the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's recent actions, claiming they have rushed into their mega-million deals and "are clutching at straws".
> 
> However, he warned Meghan and Harry against rushing into too many deals.
> Mr Ede explained: "I feel like Meghan and Harry at the moment are almost clutching at straws at what their brand is. Is it the politics, is it women's rights?
> 
> "You have to remember that two years ago Meghan was a Hollywood actress in a B-soap, and Harry was a member of the Royal Family, who do great things.
> 
> "But he's not a political activist and she's not a human rights activist.
> 
> "So, I believe to get authenticity you have to earn your stripes, so hopefully they're going to be doing that before they do too much more."
> 
> clutching at straws



Wow that's a pretty direct statement from a previous advisor/vendor. Is that real?? Seems too ballsy for someone to come out and just say publicly. Of course he is right there, except I enjoyed Suits so I take issue with that point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> In MM&H's minds the duke/duchess titles make up for the need to earn their stripes.
> 
> *Meghan's ex-PR consultant slams Sussexes' celebrity brand - 'They are clutching at straws'*
> 
> A LEADING public relations expert, who worked with Meghan Markle in London, has criticised the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's recent actions, claiming they have rushed into their mega-million deals and "are clutching at straws".
> 
> However, he warned Meghan and Harry against rushing into too many deals.
> Mr Ede explained: "I feel like Meghan and Harry at the moment are almost clutching at straws at what their brand is. Is it the politics, is it women's rights?
> 
> "You have to remember that two years ago Meghan was a Hollywood actress in a B-soap, and Harry was a member of the Royal Family, who do great things.
> 
> "But he's not a political activist and she's not a human rights activist.
> 
> "So, I believe to get authenticity you have to earn your stripes, so hopefully they're going to be doing that before they do too much more."
> 
> clutching at straws



Oh wow I love that person for telling it how it is. Also it is rather telling that they would even speak out, isn't it.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow I love that person for telling it how it is. Also it is rather telling that they would even speak out, isn't it.


LOL, I guess they didn't have to sign an NDA.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Wow that's a pretty direct statement from a previous advisor/vendor. Is that real?? Seems too ballsy for someone to come out and just say publicly. Of course he is right there, except I enjoyed Suits so I take issue with that point.


I suppose it's real. Without the connection to the royal family her participation in Suits would not bring her the attention or the multi-million dollar deals imo.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow I love that person for telling it how it is. Also it is rather telling that they would even speak out, isn't it.


Yes! He was very polite and careful with his words, but he was clear about their lack of authenticity.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow I love that person for telling it how it is. Also it is rather telling that they would even speak out, isn't it.


He's not afraid of getting fired lololol!  Actually, he isn't saying anything that hasn't been said on any board that watches the Harkles, but it is nice to see it in writing in a publication.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I saw this headline and remembered the convo the other day about annulments... apparently you can even get a religious annulment after getting a legal divorce and 7 years of marriage!
> 
> Story: Gwen Stefani gets annulment from Gavin Rossdale



I don’t know about the Church of England, in case you missed this article from 2015 — 
“Pope Francis said he wants to simplify the procedure”









						Some high-profile people have obtained annulments
					

Sen. Kennedy's annulment and blessing of his second marriage raised questions, criticism.



					www.usatoday.com
				






Spoiler: The full article



The issue of annulments, now in the news after Pope Francis said he wants to simplify the procedure, has bubbled up before amid a swirl of questions including this one: Are they just for the rich and famous or can anyone get one?

One of the most high-profile people to have received an annulment from the Catholic Church was Sen. Edward Kennedy. The Massachusetts ******** received the annulment from his first wife, Joan, in the 1990s after he reportedly admitted that he wasn't being honest when he vowed he would be faithful. The couple, who married in 1958, divorced in 1983.

Annulments: What you need to know

The annulment didn't become public knowledge until Kennedy took Communion at the funeral of his mother, Rose Kennedy, in 1995, according to Kennedy biographer Adam Clymer.

News that Kennedy's second marriage to Victoria Reggie in a civil ceremony in 1992 was blessed by the church set off another ripple of questions and criticism about whether annulments were for the privileged or easily obtained by anyone, even people at odds with their Catholic faith, as some viewed Kennedy.

Kennedy's nephew, Joseph Kennedy II, had his marriage to Sheila Rauch Kennedy annulled after their divorce in 1991. He argued that he was mentally unable to enter into marriage at the time. In a remarkable turnabout, Rauch-Kennedy sought and won an appeal in 2007 from the Vatican that invalidated the annulment of the 12-year marriage.

The celebrity match of Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise also put annulments in the news when the 10-year union between the actors dissolved in 2001. Experts said Kidman didn't need an annulment because in the eyes of the Catholic Church her marriage to Cruise, a well-known Scientologist, didn't happen. The wedding was performed in the Church of Scientology and wasn't recognized by the Catholic faith.

An annulment is a ruling that a marriage is not valid because certain conditions are not being met, such as free choice, psychological maturity and willingness to have children. The ruling is based on a finding that the marriage contract was fundamentally flawed from the start and invalid in the eyes of the church. On Tuesday, Pope Francis announced a more streamlined procedure for speeding up the process.



ETA:  found this from 2017: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42141868


----------



## Lodpah

Caption this:

Eyes: Cold and calculating
Nose: Flaring
Mouth: Derision
This is the true MM.


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Caption this:
> 
> Eyes: Cold and calculating
> Nose: Flaring
> Mouth: Derision
> This is the true MM.
> 
> View attachment 4951988


And then she said, 

“I TOLD YOU TO (insert command) Harry, SO JUST DO IT N-O-W!”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I saw this headline and remembered the convo the other day about annulments... apparently you can even get a religious annulment after getting a legal divorce and 7 years of marriage!
> 
> Story: Gwen Stefani gets annulment from Gavin Rossdale


Oh please.  First I will say I find Gwen annoying.  but on what grounds did the church grant her an annulment?  and she wants to have a big wedding.  what a surprise.  a second wedding for both and she has two kids (who are getting pretty big).  will she wear a veil over her face?  sorry maybe I'm old but all these people having second or third marriages and walking down the aisle like virgins .....come on


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure they are bitter about it. Thomas has finally learned that he can't trust the media. He was very careful in his wording about Samantha's book. He said only two things: "I’m just very pleased that she’s accomplished this book" and “Let’s let her talk to you about the book.” He said absolutely nothing about the book itself. Maybe he hasn't even read it. But what are the headlines today? Meghan Markle’s Father Thomas Markle Is ‘Very Pleased’ With Daughter Samantha’s Upcoming Book and Meghan Markle's Dad Excited For Daughter Samantha's Tell-All Book: I'm 'Very Pleased'
> 
> Those headlines make it sound like he is commenting on the content of the book, which he clearly was not from his statement.


It looks like those simple comments (underlined) may have earned him a very unfavorable headline. Here is a screenshot of today's news releases on Yahoo. I don't click on them.


Sorry @sdkitty et al. they keep reusing pictures of that green  dress (under Yahoo Style )


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Oh please.  First I will say I find Gwen annoying.  but on what grounds did the church grant her an annulment?  and she wants to have a big wedding.  what a surprise.  a second wedding for both and she has two kids (who are getting pretty big).  will she wear a veil over her face?  sorry maybe I'm old but all these people having second or third marriages and walking down the aisle like virgins .....come on



So, the rumor is MM had an annulment. National Enquirer says it was after Trevor. Other unconfirmed tabs say it was when she was in college. It’s all unconfirmed and speculative. Wonder if Samantha will address this issue?   Wonder how children of annulments feel?


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like SM's book is generating more interest than MM's book.

*Prince Harry and Meghan humiliated as Samantha's book gets more support 'I'd read that'*

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle's saw the book discussing their departure from the Royal Family sidelined as broadcaster Jeremy Vine admitted he would rather read a book by the Duchess' half-sister, Samantha Markle.


Mr Huntley confirmed the "explosive" biography about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's departure from the Royal Family had seen prices collapse since it was first published in the summer.

She continued: "So Harry and Meghan’s explosive book, the one with all the insights into the Royal Family, Finding Freedom?

"It started off being sold for £20 and now you can purchase it for 99p.

"You can actually get change for £1 when you buy it.

"So clearly our interest in the couple is waning and our interest in this book is non-existent."

The CEO of the anti-monarchist group Republic claimed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are desperate to stay in the spotlight despite choosing to walk away from the Royal Family when he spoke to Express.co.uk.

Graham Smith stated that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will struggle to keep people interested in them as their "claim to fame" of being in the Royal Family begins to wane.

Mr Smith said: "I think Meghan and Harry are very clearly desperate to stay in the spotlight.
"They want to do it on their own terms, in their own way.

"The problem is that their only claim to fame is having been royals.

"Because they walked away from that the interest in them is going to wane over the next few years.

"They are going to struggle to keep people interested because they really don’t have anything to offer."

their only claim to fame is having been royals Wow!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It looks like those simple comments (underlined) may have earned him a very unfavorable headline. Here is a screenshot of today's news releases on Yahoo. I don't click on them.
> View attachment 4952083
> 
> Sorry @sdkitty et al. they keep reusing pictures of that green  dress (under Yahoo Style )



No surprises there. That SheKnows is a hooray for everything about women organization. Naturally Meghan’s father must be demonized. The woman who wrote the article hasn’t read the book but she’s sure it’s full of lies.


----------



## 1LV

Yahoo News and their contributors are about as credible as those “I was abducted by martians” rags in the grocery store checkout lin.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Yahoo News and their contributors are about as credible as those “I was abducted by martians” rags in the grocery store checkout lin.



I’d say they are even less credible. I’d welcome a good old-fashioned Martian story after reading dozens of clickbait lovenotes about celebrities written by obsessed fan girls with poor grammar.


----------



## Sharont2305

Now that the news has come out that The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh have had their Covid vaccination today, I'm eagerly awaiting photographs of Meggie having hers.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I’d say they are even less credible. I’d welcome a good old-fashioned Martian story after reading dozens of clickbait lovenotes about celebrities written by obsessed fan girls with poor grammar.


LOL!  Is National Enquirer still around?  I may look into a subscription for that, since they seem to be more credible!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> *Caption this:*
> 
> View attachment 4951988



*"Harry, if you're going to pee in the woods, you don't do it that way, you idiot!"*


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!  Is National Enquirer still around?  I may look into a subscription for that, since they seem to be more credible!



The National Enquirer is still around. With the rise of the internet in the 90s the heyday for the tabloids ended. The one I miss is the Weekly World News. By far they had the most entertaining, bizarre headlines in the supermarket checkout line. My favorites were the ones about Bat Boy. Much more enjoyable to read about than the whiny complaints from H&M.


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> Caption this:
> 
> Eyes: Cold and calculating
> Nose: Flaring
> Mouth: Derision
> This is the true MM.
> 
> View attachment 4951988


Hold my beer.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> The issue of annulments, now in the news after Pope Francis said he wants to simplify the procedure, has bubbled up before amid a swirl of questions including this one: Are they just for the rich and famous or can anyone get one?



At this point, might as well just make it like a visa application... do you have $XXXM+ in assets, are you people who can give the church publicity, OK PASS - please pay $XM fee and marriage is annulled!

Seems like a waste of money to me for people as famous as Gwen. Everyone already knows what happened. But who am I to deny the church its revenue streams.


----------



## Chanbal

*Kate Middleton pays tribute to 'all those working on the frontline' on her 39th birthday as she gets congratulations from The Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla...but Harry and Meghan are yet to wish her will*

Kate Middleton thanked public for 'kind wishes' on a very 'different' birthday
The Queen led tributes as The Duchess of Cambridge turned 39 today  
Prince Charles and Camilla also shared photo of royal and sent their well-wishes 
Duke and Duchess of Cambridge likely to have remained at Anmer Hall in Norfolk after England was plunged into Lockdown 3
Mother-of-three likely to enjoy low-key family celebrations at country residence 

Nice pictures


----------



## Sol Ryan

Here we go... not clicking to give them the views...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Kate Middleton pays tribute to 'all those working on the frontline' on her 39th birthday as she gets congratulations from The Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla...but Harry and Meghan are yet to wish her will*
> 
> Kate Middleton thanked public for 'kind wishes' on a very 'different' birthday
> The Queen led tributes as The Duchess of Cambridge turned 39 today
> Prince Charles and Camilla also shared photo of royal and sent their well-wishes
> Duke and Duchess of Cambridge likely to have remained at Anmer Hall in Norfolk after England was plunged into Lockdown 3
> Mother-of-three likely to enjoy low-key family celebrations at country residence
> 
> Nice pictures


No shock there.  Neither MM or JCMH has matured past their juvenile teenager mentality, where everything is about "Me me MEEEE!"


----------



## rose60610

Would Meghan say "Happy birthday 'Kate' "? or use DUCHESS of Cambridge, signed DUCHESS of Sussex?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Would Meghan say "Happy birthday 'Kate' "? or use DUCHESS of Cambridge, signed DUCHESS of Sussex?


I bet on 'Happy birthday Catherine ' signed 'Meghan, Duchess of Sussex'


----------



## bag-mania

We will see clickbait in a few days about how Meghan sent Kate a clever birthday gift that she just loved.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> We will see clickbait in a few days about how Meghan sent Kate a clever birthday gift that she just loved.


Oh yes because we get daily reports about how they keep in such close touch. Actually Kate has a pole that is long enough to reach from KP/Anmer Hall all the way to Montecito.


----------



## Chloe302225

Talking about clickbait, I have already seen articles talking about Will and Kate visiting Montecito in the near future. Apparently the visit is eagerly anticipated on both sides as the supposed rift has been healed.


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


> Talking about clickbait, I have already seen articles talking about Will and Kate visiting Montecito in the near future. Apparently the visit is eagerly anticipated on both sides as the supposed rift has been healed.


what?  I didn't think they were on speaking terms


----------



## bag-mania

They made an announcement saying that they are quitting all social media. They couldn’t just disappear quietly of course, it must be an ANNOUNCEMENT!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> Oh please.  First I will say I find Gwen annoying.  but on what grounds did the church grant her an annulment?  and she wants to have a big wedding.  what a surprise.  a second wedding for both and she has two kids (who are getting pretty big).  will she wear a veil over her face?  sorry maybe I'm old but all these people having second or third marriages and walking down the aisle like virgins .....come on


Completely agree. 

Just the fact that she probably paid big bucks to get that annulment when it was a perfectly legitimate marriage with no fraud that produced two  children... well if the Kennedys can get their marriages annulled, why can't she. Robert Kennedy Jr got one after having children with his wife.  But I think it was overturned eventually.

Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise got one too, didn't they?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They made an announcement saying that they are quitting all social media. They couldn’t just disappear quietly of course, it must be an ANNOUNCEMENT!
> 
> View attachment 4952414


Here is the much anticipated DM article on the subject. Is this an excuse for not sending Happy B-day to Kate? Great timing! 

*Harry and Meghan ‘quit social media for good’: Couple will not use sites to promote their Archewell Foundation and will not return to personal accounts due 'to haters', source claims*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will never return to social media after claiming to have dealt with an 'almost unsurvivable' amount of abuse, a source has claimed.

Harry and Meghan stopped posting to their Sussex Royal Instagram and Twitter accounts last year, while hinting that they could quit the sites.

And now a source close to them has told the Sunday Times they will not use social networks to promote their new Archewell Foundation and have no plans to return in a personal capacity.

The couple have frequently spoken out about the abuse they recieve online, despite continuing to use online media to promote their 'progressive' new roles in the US - including most-recently via a podcast on Spotify.

many many fans


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> They made an announcement saying that they are quitting all social media. They couldn’t just disappear quietly of course, it must be an ANNOUNCEMENT!
> 
> View attachment 4952414



The sure a getting a lot of snark from public figures recently.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Harry and Meghan ‘quit social media for good’: Couple will not use sites to promote their Archewell Foundation and will not return to personal accounts due 'to haters', source claims*




Is that the beginning of the end? I'd be very surprised if a foundation or any business really that relies on interaction would do very well without social media. Of course, grown-ups would just let their staff handle business instead of reading all the "hateful" comments and getting butthurt over them. Also, "never" is a long time for someone who drinks up attention like someone who shall not be named does.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. Also I would like to mention again - just in case someone forgets - how Meghan publicly said (and had Oprah repeat it) that she doesn't read anything written about her. So how would she even know she is being "abused"?

(I bet her narcisstic self just can't deal with well deserved backlash and the actual cruel abuse is only a small percentage like anyone in the public eye would receive, because there will always be nutjobs out there)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments: " If Archie ever gets married, there's a high likelihood his mother will be one of those who shows up to his wedding in a long ivory dress and tiara to try and upstage her daughter in law." I don't even think it's pulled out of thin air.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sure a getting a lot of snark from public figures recently.


about time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Yay they quit social media time for a new bag! Hmmmm . . . what should I get? Lol


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that the beginning of the end? I'd be very surprised if a foundation or any business really that relies on interaction would do very well without social media. Of course, grown-ups would just let their staff handle business instead of reading all the "hateful" comments and getting butthurt over them. Also, "never" is a long time for someone who drinks up attention like someone who shall not be named does.


MM&H appeared out of the blue and started preaching everybody, behaving like royalty in a country without monarchy, making zillions of dollar deals left, right, and center... At a time when many people are sick, dying, losing jobs and businesses. So it is possible that a lot of people started to be fed up with them and used social media to express it.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m waiting to see when their next podcast comes out. Many podcasters do them every week or two, if not more.  I don’t expect them to do it more than once a month for all the millions Spotify is forking over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Yay they quit social media time for a new bag! Hmmmm . . . what should I get? Lol



What's the budget?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's the budget?


Not sure. I was a bad girl last year with 5 or 6 bags


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. Also I would like to mention again - just in case someone forgets - how Meghan publicly said (and had Oprah repeat it) that she doesn't read anything written about her. So how would she even know she is being "abused"?
> 
> (I bet her narcisstic self just can't deal with well deserved backlash and the actual cruel abuse is only a small percentage like anyone in the public eye would receive, because there will always be nutjobs out there)


I bet she knows of this site Dahlings! The thing is this site has women who are all accomplished, physicians, lawyers, executives, CEOs, etc. . . and not too taken in by her faux vomit inducing word salad.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I bet she knows of this site Dahlings! The thing is this site has women who are all accomplished, physicians, lawyers, executives, CEOs, etc. . . and not too taken in by her faux vomit inducing word salad.


well, we used to have some who loved her on this thread but they left.  the fashion thread still has some fans


----------



## rose60610

Is a podcast social media? If so, does that mean M&H are re-negging their Spotify offer? No? Or will they beg for bucks on their podcasts?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Here is the much anticipated DM article on the subject. Is this an excuse for not sending Happy B-day to Kate? Great timing!
> 
> *Harry and Meghan ‘quit social media for good’: Couple will not use sites to promote their Archewell Foundation and will not return to personal accounts due 'to haters', source claims*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex *will never return* to social media after claiming to have dealt with an 'almost unsurvivable' amount of abuse, a source has claimed.
> many many fans


Never say never , although this is one "promise" I wish they'd keep!


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if Cringe got one too, but Ginge may not age well.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Never say never , although this is one "promise" I wish they'd keep!


I'm sure they will keep it! The same way they did with living a private life ...









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'will be seen more' in 2021
					

The public will 'see more of the Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, in 2021' and 'in a way which is more in line with who they are' than working royal roles, sources told Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> well, we used to have some who loved her on this thread but they left.  the fashion thread still has some fans


Not that I ever go into that thread, but it just amazes me that she has a "fashion" thread because .. IMO, she has 'taste' in her a$$ (as in NONE)!!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Is a podcast social media? If so, does that mean M&H are re-negging their Spotify offer? No? Or will they beg for bucks on their podcasts?



No, a podcast isn’t social media, more like radio that everyone can do. Many podcasters ask their listeners for donations, but those are people with little money who are doing everything themselves. Nobody who is being paid millions by Spotify should ask listeners for squat.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. Also I would like to mention again - just in case someone forgets - how Meghan publicly said (and had Oprah repeat it) that she doesn't read anything written about her. So how would she even know she is being "abused"?


and .. *BOOM *.. yup, I sooooooooooooooooooo remember her saying that she didn't read anything written about her, yet .. boo-hoo-hoo *"Ginge-&-Cringe"* *must* because their incessant WHINING about the 'mean' things said about them .. waaaaah, waaaaah, waaaaah! 

These two DIM-WITS .. any other folks who would see/read those types of comments might think "hmmmm - okay, what am I doing wrong .." but not these *Narcissistic-Nellies*!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Not that I ever go into that thread, but it just amazes me that she has a "fashion" thread because .. IMO, she has 'taste' in her a$$ (as in NONE)!!


LOL
yes, the green cape outfit is one of the worst I've seen. and she seems to have a propensity for wearing ill-fitting clothes.

 since they've been here in the US with covid, she hasn't really had a chance to dress up even if she did have taste


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, we used to have some who loved her on this thread but they left.  the fashion thread still has some fans


I finally checked that thread, I wonder if MM posts there.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> No, a podcast isn’t social media, more like radio that everyone can do. Many podcasters ask their listeners for donations, but those are people with little money who are doing everything themselves. Nobody who is being paid millions by Spotify should ask listeners for squat.



Thanks for teaching me another thing about the 21st century.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> well, we used to have some who loved her on this thread but they left.  the fashion thread still has some fans





CeeJay said:


> Not that I ever go into that thread, but it just amazes me that she has a "fashion" thread because .. IMO, she has 'taste' in her a$$ (as in NONE)!!



I pop into that thread sometimes and comment when I like something she wears - I often do like what she wears. One doesn't exactly need to be the best dresser or the most interesting person to have a fashion or gossip thread! Just people interested enough to follow.


----------



## gracekelly

I hear the sound of dishes being broken at Casa Monstercito.  They thought that there would be a huge outcry to their decree about declining to participate in social media, and guess what?  Nobody cares!  Nobody pleading with them to reconsider.  Twitter and Instagram haven't sent emissaries to ask them "pretty please" to set up accounts.   Life is cruel.  The harsh reality is setting in.  If they thought that this would surpass the  notice of Kate's birthday, they sure were wrong.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> They made an announcement saying that they are quitting all social media. They couldn’t just disappear quietly of course, it must be an ANNOUNCEMENT!
> 
> View attachment 4952414



Bottega Veneta did it first! 

These two have never had an original thought in their lives.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Bottega Veneta did it first!
> 
> These two have never had an original thought in their lives.


Let's not tell them and that way, they can continue looking silly when they act like all their ideas are originals.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I finally checked that thread, I wonder if MM posts there.


I wonder what her screen name would be here?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I hear the sound of dishes being broken at Casa Monstercito.  They thought that there would be a huge outcry to their decree about declining to participate in social media, and guess what?  Nobody cares!  Nobody pleading with them to reconsider.  Twitter and Instagram haven't sent emissaries to ask them "pretty please" to set up accounts.   Life is cruel.  The harsh reality is setting in.  If they thought that this would surpass the  notice of Kate's birthday, they sure were wrong.


I think Twitter, Instagram et al, are currently too busy redefining freedom of speech


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I wonder what her screen name would be here?



Pick one

legsformiles
compassionwithaction
lovewins
theduchess
princesspeg
16bathrooms


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I pop into that thread sometimes and comment when I like something she wears - I often do like what she wears. One doesn't exactly need to be the best dresser or the most interesting person to have a fashion or gossip thread! Just people interested enough to follow.



It's not even that I think she has such horrible taste in general, but she is really the Queen of Illfitting. Just...why. You spent a million bucks on 9 months worth of clothes, but can't make sure it's your size and we can't see the outline of your underwear?


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> I pop into that thread sometimes and comment when I like something she wears - I often do like what she wears. One doesn't exactly need to be the best dresser or the most interesting person to have a fashion or gossip thread! Just people interested enough to follow.



Right. Some of the things she has worn were pretty, but the fit was often off. How she manages a poor fit time after time is odd considering the tailors she must have had. I just can't believe how much she's screwed up after marrying Harry, but I gotta hand it to her, she's making a good buck now, or at least it seems like it. But now the announcement (on Kate's birthday) about "the hate" she gets on social media? There she goes again! Take a happy occasion (future queen consort's birthday) and turn it into yet another "POOR ME" pity grab. So she marries into the BRF, riches galore, it's not good enough so of course she ditches them, and now bickers about "hate" on social media. Poor baby! She found a couple hundred million this Covid shutdown year and we're supposed to feel sorry for her? She's so pathetic I can't take it.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I wonder what her screen name would be here?


 
Queen   Oops, I forgot all caps.  *QUEEN*


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's not even that I think she has such horrible taste in general, but she is really the Queen of Illfitting. Just...why. You spent a million bucks on 9 months worth of clothes, but can't make sure it's your size and we can't see the outline of your underwear?



You're right about that but I just like looking at the clothes... It's not an endorsement of how SHE wears them necessarily, if that makes sense. Like I loved that green dress! It didn't fit well on her... but that's not the dress's fault.  On the flip side with Kate, I have NEVER seen something look ill-fitted on her and with that body, she'll look good in anything. But I don't love some of her fashion choices. It's still fun to follow their outfits and such.


----------



## Chloe302225

I think Kate's destined to forever have some big MM & PH  announcement on or close to her birthday. Last year it was Megsit and this year the social media withdrawal. I definitely think this becomes a tradition for the future because we all know no-one else can have any attention for themselves even when it's their own birthday.


----------



## eunaddict

gracekelly said:


> I hear the sound of dishes being broken at Casa Monstercito.  They thought that there would be a huge outcry to their decree about declining to participate in social media, and guess what?  Nobody cares!  Nobody pleading with them to reconsider.



In addition, UK is tired of their news while the USA is busy with what went down at the Capitol in the last couple of days; plus apparently a bunch of supporters of a certain person are threatening to leave social media in droves as well. So, I'd say everyone (social media moguls and companies included) are very much otherwise occupied to pay attention to a tantrum.

Also, seriously, given what has happened so recently, is this really the right time to toss your toys out of the pram, again?



purseinsanity said:


> I think Twitter, Instagram et al, are currently too busy redefining freedom of speech


Also, as an FYI. None of the social media companies are redefining freedom of speech, freedom of speech is between you and the government (1st Amendment references Congress) not you and private entities. This is such a commonly misunderstood concept. Companies can and will suspend, terminate your account at will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's not even that I think she has such horrible taste in general, but she is really the Queen of Illfitting. Just...why. You spent a million bucks on 9 months worth of clothes, but can't make sure it's your size and we can't see the outline of your underwear?



And when she has pretty outfits, that fit her well AND she actually looks pretty amazing in (I genuinely like this outfit and the earthy tones)...somehow, a fashion faux pas still happens. It's like the Gods of Fashion have a personal vendetta.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Pick one
> 
> legsformiles
> compassionwithaction
> lovewins
> theduchess
> princesspeg
> 16bathrooms


princess-and-the-pee


----------



## lalame

eunaddict said:


> And when she has pretty outfits, that fit her well AND she actually looks pretty amazing in (I genuinely like this outfit and the earthy tones)...somehow, a fashion faux pas still happens. It's like the Gods of Fashion have a personal vendetta.
> 
> View attachment 4952678



I totally agree, I like a lot of her outfits but something always goes wrong... if not bad tailoring, it's a poor choice for the moment. Like that outfit above... to me that's not TERRIBLE but obviously very embarrassing and she really should've known better. Any person should know... tight top + light color + long day = sweaty mess. I really liked that one Reformation dress too but awful for the occasion and didn't flatter her body at all.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I hear the sound of dishes being broken at Casa Monstercito.  They thought that there would be a huge outcry to their decree about declining to participate in social media, and guess what?  Nobody cares!  Nobody pleading with them to reconsider.  Twitter and Instagram haven't sent emissaries to ask them "pretty please" to set up accounts.   Life is cruel.  The harsh reality is setting in.  If they thought that this would surpass the  notice of Kate's birthday, they sure were wrong.


as I've said  before those of us in the US have a lot bigger things to worry about than those two....they just provide a bit of distraction for us


----------



## gracekelly

When the Hollywood studio system was at its peak, the control over the actors was frightening.  They couldn't leave the house without full make-up and/or being dressed nicely.  When it was a big event, the studio sent the make-up people and wardrobe people.  Pretty similar to what people do today with stylists etc, but back then you had no choice and you wore what they told you to wear.  When MM was on the show, there was a wardrobe staff to pick out the clothes for the actors  and see that they were fitted correctly.  I never understood how she didn't understand the importance of fit after going through that process on a TV show.  I have read so many articles by fashion stylists who give their tips and what is in their bag of tricks to make things work and fit.  How did MM totally miss any of this?  Was she walking around in a fog?  I don't buy that she wasn't interested in the way she looked.  I think she is very interested as she can't stop fooling around with her face. How can she view pictures of herself and not see the ill fitting clothing? All she has to do is look at old photos from the TV show, and see how much better she looks with clothing that goes with her body type and that fits.  Harry grew up with bespoke clothing and one would think that after going through that process himself, he would at least say something to his wife about how something looks.  Thinking that you know more than anyone else can land you in a skirt that clings, and a top that show perspiration stains because the fabric doesn't breathe.  Not taking the advice of the Queen's dresser will have you standing in the wind with your hair flying all around, which would not have happened it you had worn a hat as you were told to do.  Doing a little research about your husband's military patronage traditions would have instructed you not to wear a red dress.  Did you think that you were being clever by doing that and would stand out more?  All it did was further insult a military group that you husband had already insulted by not going to their benefit concert, and instead went to beg for a job for you and cause embarrassment.


----------



## bag-mania

*Creepy life-size custom cake of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle divides the internet*

People often spare no expense when it comes to an extravagant cake for a special occasion, but one unusual request has left many scratching their heads.

A mega royal fan asked for a life-size Prince Harry and Meghan Markle cake, with baker Lara Mason sharing the end result online.

The absurd cake order came just ahead of the Megxit anniversary, with yesterday marking one whole year since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced they were stepping down as senior members of the royal family.



In a clip she shared on TikTok, Lara – who makes “insane” cakes – re-enacted a phone conversion she had with the mystery person who made the unusual order.

Admitting it “was NOT” easy”, she took on the challenge and produced an incredible edible display which mimics a recognisable snap taken of the couple from their engagement announcement in 2017.

The life-size cake even features Harry’s famous red hair and Meghan’s loose brunette waves – and shares an uncanny resemblance to the actual couple.

While we can certainly give credit where it’s due, and praise Lara for her incredible work, some reckon it’s a little “creepy”.

Posting in the comments section on TikTok, one person questioned: “Under what circumstance would anyone need this?”

To which one fan wrote: “Why WOULDN’T you need this?”
Even royal commentator and author of Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie, spotted the video and shared it on Twitter where people were quick to comment on the “creepiness” of the sweet treat.

One person wrote: “I can app the amount of effort went into the process of making these cakes, but I cannot shake of a feeling of them being creepy as hell.”

While another asked: “Who would want to eat a piece of someone as cake. I just couldn’t do it, no matter the person. It’s pretty cool, and very talented. But it’s like art, no eating or touching, just admire it.”

And a third added: “Omid, this is horrifying and I’m holding you accountable for the nightmares moving forwards.”

Who the mad royalist is still remains a mystery, and so too does the reason behind the lavish cake – but perhaps it’s to mark the upcoming anniversary.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## lanasyogamama

So they’ll just keep leaking things on other people and businesses social media accounts? Greeeeat


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, MM has the ‘fashion’ thing down — she is on point with the current trends for clothes, shoes, makeup, etc. She stumbles on the style issue. Kate, on the hand, excels on the style issue. She _knows_ what looks good on her. MM wears the latest trends, possibly because she does not know who she really is. 

After being raised by one of the best dressed women ever and wearing some of the finest bespoke clothing on the planet, Harry ought to know better. He looks sloppy, unkempt and lazy. Compare Harry to Will just in the clothing. The differences are startling. Perhaps Harry should hire a dresser for the family. Just look at the kids. They, too, show the difference. Dressing well shows respect for the patrons and the audience. H&M continually demonstrate their lack of respect. 



			https://www.masterclass.com/articles/key-differences-between-fashion-and-style#what-is-the-difference-between-style-and-fashion
		


Timeless vs. trendy: Style is timeless, while fashion is timely. Someone who is fashionable closely follows the latest fashion trends and wears designer clothing. Someone who is stylish may or may not follow fashion trends, but they always stay true to their own aesthetic. Personal style is about developing a sense of self, rather than simply absorbing trends.


----------



## chaneljewel

bag-mania said:


> *Creepy life-size custom cake of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle divides the internet*
> 
> People often spare no expense when it comes to an extravagant cake for a special occasion, but one unusual request has left many scratching their heads.
> 
> A mega royal fan asked for a life-size Prince Harry and Meghan Markle cake, with baker Lara Mason sharing the end result online.
> 
> The absurd cake order came just ahead of the Megxit anniversary, with yesterday marking one whole year since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced they were stepping down as senior members of the royal family.
> View attachment 4952771
> 
> 
> In a clip she shared on TikTok, Lara – who makes “insane” cakes – re-enacted a phone conversion she had with the mystery person who made the unusual order.
> 
> Admitting it “was NOT” easy”, she took on the challenge and produced an incredible edible display which mimics a recognisable snap taken of the couple from their engagement announcement in 2017.
> 
> The life-size cake even features Harry’s famous red hair and Meghan’s loose brunette waves – and shares an uncanny resemblance to the actual couple.
> 
> While we can certainly give credit where it’s due, and praise Lara for her incredible work, some reckon it’s a little “creepy”.
> 
> Posting in the comments section on TikTok, one person questioned: “Under what circumstance would anyone need this?”
> 
> To which one fan wrote: “Why WOULDN’T you need this?”
> Even royal commentator and author of Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie, spotted the video and shared it on Twitter where people were quick to comment on the “creepiness” of the sweet treat.
> 
> One person wrote: “I can app the amount of effort went into the process of making these cakes, but I cannot shake of a feeling of them being creepy as hell.”
> 
> While another asked: “Who would want to eat a piece of someone as cake. I just couldn’t do it, no matter the person. It’s pretty cool, and very talented. But it’s like art, no eating or touching, just admire it.”
> 
> And a third added: “Omid, this is horrifying and I’m holding you accountable for the nightmares moving forwards.”
> 
> Who the mad royalist is still remains a mystery, and so too does the reason behind the lavish cake – but perhaps it’s to mark the upcoming anniversary.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


This IS creepy!


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, this disaster happened because she was determined to wear this outfit, regardless of the weather [probably so she could merch it]. Also, she has little to no understanding of how the UK heats its buildings.  

It is possible she was very nervous at this event held at the embassy.
_This morning the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced they were stepping back as "senior" members of the royal family and will split their time between the United Kingdom and North America._








						Meghan Markle Is Copping It From Trolls Over Her Noticeable Sweat Patches
					

Meghan Markle has received criticism online for having visible sweat patches under her armpits during her first official event for 2020. “Did she forget her antiperspirant???” asked another. “Not a good look,” someone Tweeted.




					www.womenshealth.com.au
				







eunaddict said:


> And when she has pretty outfits, that fit her well AND she actually looks pretty amazing in (I genuinely like this outfit and the earthy tones)...somehow, a fashion faux pas still happens. It's like the Gods of Fashion have a personal vendetta.
> 
> View attachment 4952678


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> When the Hollywood studio system was at its peak, the control over the actors was frightening.  They couldn't leave the house without full make-up and/or being dressed nicely.  When it was a big event, the studio sent the make-up people and wardrobe people.  Pretty similar to what people do today with stylists etc, but back then you had no choice and you wore what they told you to wear.  When MM was on the show, there was a wardrobe staff to pick out the clothes for the actors  and see that they were fitted correctly.  I never understood how she didn't understand the importance of fit after going through that process on a TV show.  I have read so many articles by fashion stylists who give their tips and what is in their bag of tricks to make things work and fit.  How did MM totally miss any of this?  Was she walking around in a fog?  I don't buy that she wasn't interested in the way she looked.  I think she is very interested as she can't stop fooling around with her face. How can she view pictures of herself and not see the ill fitting clothing? All she has to do is look at old photos from the TV show, and see how much better she looks with clothing that goes with her body type and that fits.  Harry grew up with bespoke clothing and one would think that after going through that process himself, he would at least say something to his wife about how something looks.  Thinking that you know more than anyone else can land you in a skirt that clings, and a top that show perspiration stains because the fabric doesn't breathe.  Not taking the advice of the Queen's dresser will have you standing in the wind with your hair flying all around, which would not have happened it you had worn a hat as you were told to do.  Doing a little research about your husband's military patronage traditions would have instructed you not to wear a red dress.  Did you think that you were being clever by doing that and would stand out more?  All it did was further insult a military group that you husband had already insulted by not going to their benefit concert, and instead went to beg for a job for you and cause embarrassment.



I would think Meghan had a stylist in the UK too, no? Do you think all these outfits were her choice? It seems like a tale of 2 Meghans... the outfits are either very classy (2 that come to mind are below) or sloppy.





Upon reflection, I think M looks best in simple cuts and styles for dresses. I don't think her body is suited to complicated cuts.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I would think Meghan had a stylist in the UK too, no? Do you think all these outfits were her choice? It seems like a tale of 2 Meghans... the outfits are either very classy (2 that come to mind are below) or sloppy.
> 
> View attachment 4952791
> View attachment 4952792
> 
> 
> Upon reflection, I think M looks best in simple cuts and styles for dresses. I don't think her body is suited to complicated cuts.


Her stylist was Jessica as far as I know.  I never thought that JM was a real stylist.  All she did was get her some clothes and that isn't quite the same thing.  On the whole, I didn't like her fashion choices.  One or two times she wore something that really worked for her, the rest of the time it was a total fail.  She has never figured out what works for her body type and keeps making the same mistakes.  The  pictures in your post are about the best she has looked.


----------



## Annawakes

I liked those Givenchy clothes she was wearing in the very beginning before they got married.  I think it was then.  Real sharp and architectural looking.  Then it all went downhill.


----------



## Annawakes

Annawakes said:


> I liked those Givenchy clothes she was wearing in the very beginning before they got married.  I think it was then.  Real sharp and architectural looking.  Then it all went downhill.


Never mind I just did a search and it was really only the white dress with the wraparound shoulders I liked.  Just that one.  Everything else was a bit of a mess.  Like that big white unbuttoned shirt and black skirt....


----------



## gracekelly

I never understood why she didn't use a British designer for her wedding dress, or at least an American one.  Using one from a French design house was totally wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you @gracekelly for the JM info.  I didn’t realize that is who MM used. Mercy. Just some awful choices, probably freebies JM had received. Sadly, now that JM’s gone, MM isn’t doing much better.  On her, the boat neck doesn’t always look — the gray dress on the green hornet = no. These look good:











						The Hollywood actor inspiring Meghan Markle’s royal wardrobe
					

The Hollywood actor inspiring Meghan Markle’s royal wardrobe




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> I think Twitter, Instagram et al, are currently too busy redefining freedom of speech



Just FYI the first amendment refers specifically and only to government regulation of speech...

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”









						U.S. Constitution - First Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
					

The original text of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.




					constitution.congress.gov


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just FYI the first amendment refers specifically and only to government regulation of speech...
> 
> “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Constitution - First Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
> 
> 
> The original text of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> constitution.congress.gov



That’s all well and good...for Congress and us. Private companies are quite different. Just as TPF has Terms of Service rules, so do they.
While this Wikipedia page needs an update, it provides some insight.





						Twitter suspensions - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




ETA:  why exactly did H&M quit social media? Were they planning to violate the TOS? Seems like they would applaud this suspension stuff.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> That’s all well and good...for Congress and us. Private companies are quite different. Just as TPF has Terms of Service rules, so do they.
> While this Wikipedia page needs an update, it provides some insight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter suspensions - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  why exactly did H&M quit social media? Were they planning to violate the TOS? Seems like they would applaud this suspension stuff.



Exactly, freedom of speech does not apply to Twitter, Instagram, TPF or any other private businesses.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Exactly, freedom of speech does not apply to Twitter, Instagram, TPF or any other private businesses.



Just to add, I really appreciate sites like TPF that do have TOS rules and monitors who keep the site pleasant and polite. There are numerous sites about Royals that, IMO, are just revolting. Now especially the world needs more pleasant and polite places. Thank you, TPF and posters.


----------



## Sina08

I don’t exactly remember why and how I ended up in this thread. Since it took me quite some time to catch up, I simply forgot along the way. But Ladies, I’ve got to hand it to you all, you made all the time spent at home so much more fun! Thanks for that 


One question though regarding H&M quitting social media. What social media platform were they using that they are now quitting?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Drip drip...








						Queen will return to London for Trooping the Colour in June
					

According to The Sunday Times, palace aides say Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are expected to attend the official event despite quitting as senior royals because it's a 'family occasion'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







Sina08 said:


> One question though regarding H&M quitting social media. What social media platform were they using that they are now quitting?



I think but could be wrong, they mostly have twitters for their foundation. They will continue their website where people can send in ideas, buy stuff, etc.








						Harry and Meghan quit social media for good
					

Harry and Meghan had more than 10 million Instagram followers on their SussexRoyal account, but stopped posting to it in March last year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> And when she has pretty outfits, that fit her well AND she actually looks pretty amazing in (I genuinely like this outfit and the earthy tones)...somehow, a fashion faux pas still happens. It's like the Gods of Fashion have a personal vendetta.
> 
> View attachment 4952678



I'll admit I loved that outfit, the colours, the different textures. Still can't get over her smug grin when she knew very well she'd ignite a bomb directed at the BRF just hours later. Gross. She doesn't look like someone relieved to step out of a hard situation, she looks delighted wrecking havoc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The silk-satin skirt/dress paired with a sweater was spot on for Fall, 2019 [feels like eons ago].  It is such a gorgeous, relaxed but elegant vibe.  I understand why she tucked in the sweater, IMO, the outfit looks better with the sweater out. I hope this look comes back.
MM’s shoes,


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Creepy life-size custom cake of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle divides the internet*
> 
> People often spare no expense when it comes to an extravagant cake for a special occasion, but one unusual request has left many scratching their heads.
> 
> A mega royal fan asked for a life-size Prince Harry and Meghan Markle cake, with baker Lara Mason sharing the end result online.
> 
> The absurd cake order came just ahead of the Megxit anniversary, with yesterday marking one whole year since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced they were stepping down as senior members of the royal family.
> View attachment 4952771
> 
> 
> In a clip she shared on TikTok, Lara – who makes “insane” cakes – re-enacted a phone conversion she had with the mystery person who made the unusual order.
> 
> Admitting it “was NOT” easy”, she took on the challenge and produced an incredible edible display which mimics a recognisable snap taken of the couple from their engagement announcement in 2017.
> 
> The life-size cake even features Harry’s famous red hair and Meghan’s loose brunette waves – and shares an uncanny resemblance to the actual couple.
> 
> While we can certainly give credit where it’s due, and praise Lara for her incredible work, some reckon it’s a little “creepy”.
> 
> Posting in the comments section on TikTok, one person questioned: “Under what circumstance would anyone need this?”
> 
> To which one fan wrote: “Why WOULDN’T you need this?”
> Even royal commentator and author of Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie, spotted the video and shared it on Twitter where people were quick to comment on the “creepiness” of the sweet treat.
> 
> One person wrote: “I can app the amount of effort went into the process of making these cakes, but I cannot shake of a feeling of them being creepy as hell.”
> 
> While another asked: “Who would want to eat a piece of someone as cake. I just couldn’t do it, no matter the person. It’s pretty cool, and very talented. But it’s like art, no eating or touching, just admire it.”
> 
> And a third added: “Omid, this is horrifying and I’m holding you accountable for the nightmares moving forwards.”
> 
> Who the mad royalist is still remains a mystery, and so too does the reason behind the lavish cake – but perhaps it’s to mark the upcoming anniversary.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


LOL....meghans legs are too fat here


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> LOL....meghans legs are too fat here



OMG LOL that cake is both amazing craftsmanship and super creepy!


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> Not sure. I was a bad girl last year with 5 or 6 bags


My kind of bad girl!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *Creepy life-size custom cake of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle divides the internet*
> 
> People often spare no expense when it comes to an extravagant cake for a special occasion, but one unusual request has left many scratching their heads.
> 
> A mega royal fan asked for a life-size Prince Harry and Meghan Markle cake, with baker Lara Mason sharing the end result online.
> 
> The absurd cake order came just ahead of the Megxit anniversary, with yesterday marking one whole year since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced they were stepping down as senior members of the royal family.
> View attachment 4952771
> 
> 
> In a clip she shared on TikTok, Lara – who makes “insane” cakes – re-enacted a phone conversion she had with the mystery person who made the unusual order.
> 
> Admitting it “was NOT” easy”, she took on the challenge and produced an incredible edible display which mimics a recognisable snap taken of the couple from their engagement announcement in 2017.
> 
> The life-size cake even features Harry’s famous red hair and Meghan’s loose brunette waves – and shares an uncanny resemblance to the actual couple.
> 
> While we can certainly give credit where it’s due, and praise Lara for her incredible work, some reckon it’s a little “creepy”.
> 
> Posting in the comments section on TikTok, one person questioned: “Under what circumstance would anyone need this?”
> 
> To which one fan wrote: “Why WOULDN’T you need this?”
> Even royal commentator and author of Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie, spotted the video and shared it on Twitter where people were quick to comment on the “creepiness” of the sweet treat.
> 
> One person wrote: “I can app the amount of effort went into the process of making these cakes, but I cannot shake of a feeling of them being creepy as hell.”
> 
> While another asked: “Who would want to eat a piece of someone as cake. I just couldn’t do it, no matter the person. It’s pretty cool, and very talented. But it’s like art, no eating or touching, just admire it.”
> 
> And a third added: “Omid, this is horrifying and I’m holding you accountable for the nightmares moving forwards.”
> 
> Who the mad royalist is still remains a mystery, and so too does the reason behind the lavish cake – but perhaps it’s to mark the upcoming anniversary.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


I find that super creepy.  Yes, it shows the baker’s talent, but the “mega Royal fan” sounds more like an obsessed stalker  What part would he/she eat first?!?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like at first she was focused on making sure her clothes were super pricey, like the engagement dress. Then she somewhat tried to fit in, the classy looks above, but then when the tides started to turn she made a point of wearing black and neutrals, unlike the RF, and just generally not giving an eff.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like at first she was focused on making sure her clothes were super pricey, like the engagement dress. Then she somewhat tried to fit in, the classy looks above, but then when the tides started to turn she made a point of wearing black and neutrals, unlike the RF, and just generally not giving an eff.


hmm
I can't imagine her not giving an eff about her image


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Not sure if Cringe got one too, but Ginge may not age well.
> View attachment 4952497


Interesting. Would be more realistic of an Older Harry if a picture of the current sullen faced, scruffy, hang dog Harry had been the basis of the aging.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> I find that super creepy.  Yes, it shows the baker’s talent, but the “mega Royal fan” sounds more like an obsessed stalker  What part would he/she eat first?!?


It's really creepy!


----------



## bisousx

purseinsanity said:


> I find that super creepy.  Yes, it shows the baker’s talent, but the “mega Royal fan” sounds more like an obsessed stalker  What part would he/she eat first?!?



Thank you for my first real and much needed laugh of the day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the cake  who would want this much cake? this much sugar? It must serve 200 people, right?  So much excess, smh.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> hmm
> I can't imagine her not giving an eff about her image


I guess it’s more about her not giving an eff about dressing like a royal.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the cake  who would want this *much* cake? this *much* sugar? It must serve 200 people, right?  So *much* excess, smh.


So much 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 inducing cake.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Interesting. Would be more realistic of an Older Harry if a picture of the current sullen faced, scruffy, hang dog Harry had been the basis of the aging.


I feel like JCMH will become an alcoholic and get a horribly ruddy. bloated complexion.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> Thank you for my first real and much needed laugh of the day.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> So much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4953108
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inducing cake.


You know, I wouldn't be surprised it MM commissioned it!   ANYTHING to stay "relevant" and on some website somewhere  She's a huge fan of herself, after all, LOL!


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just FYI the first amendment refers specifically and only to government regulation of speech...
> 
> “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Constitution - First Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
> 
> 
> The original text of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> constitution.congress.gov


Yes, I know.  I was just trying to be funny, hence the "smart a$$ smug grin" emoji (at least that's what I call it!)


----------



## redney

About the cake, thinking it's a lot of structural "fill" - like wires, dowels, shaping material (i.e. molded sheets of rice krispie treats) with a cake portion in 1-2 sections only. I watch too many Food Network cake competition shows, LOL


----------



## Cavalier Girl

purseinsanity said:


> You know, I wouldn't be surprised it MM commissioned it!   ANYTHING to stay "relevant" and on some website somewhere  She's a huge fan of herself, after all, LOL!



That was my first thought.  Kind of a way for Nutmeg to say to her detractors, "Let them eat cake."  We already know how much she enjoys borrowing the words of others.


----------



## CarryOn2020

You Have To See How This Life Size Harry And Meghan Cake Is Made
					

The detail is incredible.




					www.delish.com
				




The cake was made in 2018. The link above has a video showing exactly how it was made, how much sugar, etc.
It feeds 500 people.

She made one for lil George:








						Prince George creation 'a piece of cake' for NI baker Lara Mason
					

Amateur baker Lara Mason licks the competition with a life-size cake fit for a future king.



					www.bbc.com
				






Maggie Muggins said:


> So much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4953108
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inducing cake.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> You Have To See How This Life Size Harry And Meghan Cake Is Made
> 
> 
> The detail is incredible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The cake was made in 2018. The link above has a video showing exactly how it was made, how much sugar, etc.
> It feeds 500 people.
> 
> She made one for lil George:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince George creation 'a piece of cake' for NI baker Lara Mason
> 
> 
> Amateur baker Lara Mason licks the competition with a life-size cake fit for a future king.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



Wow. The cake is that old?! I swear I saw three new articles about it yesterday. I think it was because Omid Scobie posted the photo on his social media recently. The old article tells the truth, nobody commissioned the cake and the artist did it on her own for display. Yet here the new story is, re-packaged as if there is some sort of Meghan and Harry super fan out there who would pay a ton of money to have a life-size cake of their heroes.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> LOL....meghans legs are too fat here



You need a really sturdy, secure base to hold up that many empty calories.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Interesting the "news" item about JCMH and Meeghan leaving social media coincides with Kate's birthday. The light bulb went on as I read an item about the RF greetings to her on their social media accounts. If you don't have a social media account it's an excuse to not send wishes to your sister-in-law? Maybe they sent something privately, maybe not, since it would not generate any publicity.

Lacking their own accounts, they use their flack ScoobieDoo, to resurrect and repackage an old story about a creepy cake, just in case anyone missed is the first time, as I did, knowing it would get traction on line. Further distraction. Stupid Scoobie, however, doesn't realize there are astute people out there like our tpf CarryOn2020 , capable of outing him.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Interesting the "news" item about JCMH and Meeghan leaving social media coincides with Kate's birthday. The light bulb went on as I read an item about the RF greetings to her on their social media accounts. If you don't a social media account it's an excuse to not send wishes to your sister-in-law? Maybe they sent something privately, maybe not since it would not generate any publicity.
> 
> Lacking their own accounts, they use their flack ScoobieDoo, to resurrect and repackage an old story about a creepy cake, just in case anyone missed is the first time, as I did, knowing it would get traction on line. Further distraction. Stupid Scoobie, however, doesn't realize there are astute people out there like our tpf CarryOn2020 , capable of outing him.


Wow 2018!  They are so thirsty for publicity that is positive.  What a sad couple. Scobie is so used.  He has really turned into a rent a boy for them.  His book is selling for 99cents now.  Hard to get rich on that lol!


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Interesting the "news" item about JCMH and Meeghan leaving social media coincides with Kate's birthday. The light bulb went on as I read an item about the RF greetings to her on their social media accounts. If you don't a social media account it's an excuse to not send wishes to your sister-in-law? Maybe they sent something privately, maybe not since it would not generate any publicity.
> 
> Lacking their own accounts, they use their flack ScoobieDoo, to resurrect and repackage an old story about a creepy cake, just in case anyone missed is the first time, as I did, knowing it would get traction on line. Further distraction. Stupid Scoobie, however, doesn't realize there are astute people out there like our tpf CarryOn2020 , capable of outing him.


Hmmm ... 
There have been a lot of OLD stories circulating madly  in the last week - OLD NEWS ? Maybe I have it wrong ... but didnt they give up social media months ago?

An example ; a few days ago a story circulated with a photo of HARRY wearing a COVID detecting ring ... that was the title .. the text said the ring could detect his temperature ..

The photo was about 2.5 years old - maybe from engagement time ? Harry started wearing a  BIG FAT UGLY WIDE BLACK fitness ring - does the kind of measurements that an electronic watch does ...  The story then was that he was told by the allitertive one to lose a few before the wedding, so, he got a fitness ring 

The ring was in the photos long before COVID, I have not noticed if H is still wearing the the ring in his recent videos ... 

Juist a good example of how the digital media does not do a good job at tracking WHEN things started


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the cake  *who would want this much cake?* this much sugar? It must serve 200 people, right?  So much excess, smh.


Omid?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Omid?


Too bad the cake is probably stale by now, they could have invited Oprah over for a slice of themselves to enjoy with a cup of  Mache Latte oat milk coffee.


----------



## Chanbal

As long as money keeps coming in... No further comments!


According to one expert, however, Harry and Meghan have found a way around their problem.

According to the National Enquirer, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly been forced to look for ways to offset a huge tax bill.

One way they’re doing this is by splurging on work-related items in a bid to liquidate some cash.

A source told the publication: “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have.”

Despite the alleged tax dilemma, there’s no doubt Harry and Meghan have fulfilled their wish of gaining financial freedom.

Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.

“They couldn’t give a damn about all the haters who still scoff at their success.”

More money than they know what to do with!


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> As long as money keeps coming in... No further comments!
> View attachment 4953716
> 
> According to one expert, however, Harry and Meghan have found a way around their problem.
> 
> According to the National Enquirer, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly been forced to look for ways to offset a huge tax bill.
> 
> One way they’re doing this is by splurging on work-related items in a bid to liquidate some cash.
> 
> A source told the publication: “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have.”
> 
> Despite the alleged tax dilemma, there’s no doubt Harry and Meghan have fulfilled their wish of gaining financial freedom.
> 
> Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.
> 
> “They couldn’t give a damn about all the haters who still scoff at their success.”
> 
> More money than they know what to do with!



Meantime there are people losing their jobs and going into debt because of the pandemic
And before I get told I can only judge them if I am actually doing something myself: I have designated charities I contribute to
And in no way I have the $$$ this two have
And what success? He ran away from his duties and so far we have only had a lot of words and no real action


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> Meantime there are people losing their jobs and going into debt because of the pandemic
> And before I get told I can only judge them if I am actually doing something myself: I have designated charities I contribute to
> And in no way I have the $$$ this two have
> And what success? He ran away from his duties and so far we have only had a lot of words and no real action


It's shocking that in the middle of this crisis, these two are making a ton of money by doing almost nothing. I also have charities I contribute to and last year I have added COVID related ones. There are plenty of charities in need of cash, but their forte seems to be receiving cash.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> As long as money keeps coming in... No further comments!
> View attachment 4953716
> 
> According to one expert, however, Harry and Meghan have found a way around their problem.
> 
> According to the National Enquirer, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly been forced to look for ways to offset a huge tax bill.
> 
> One way they’re doing this is by splurging on work-related items in a bid to liquidate some cash.
> 
> A source told the publication: “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have.”
> 
> Despite the alleged tax dilemma, there’s no doubt Harry and Meghan have fulfilled their wish of gaining financial freedom.
> 
> Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.
> 
> “They couldn’t give a damn about all the haters who still scoff at their success.”
> 
> More money than they know what to do with!



How is this even a story... aren't we all trying to do what we can to lower our tax bills? Californians know it's no joke here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Harry’s covid detector ring. I have not seen the photos, is it the same one the NBA bought for its players?
Here’s a review of the covid detector ring, seems kinda like the Cracker Jack Secret Decoder ring:  https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/skeptical-cardiologist/87651

RE: lower tax bills. Interesting they do not want to donate *actual ca$h *to a church or charity, one of the quickest ways to lower the bill. Instead they want to use their “business” to thwart the IRS.  A reminder, both MM’s parents declared bankruptcy and MM has had IRS trouble in the past.  I think I see a pattern.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> How is this even a story... aren't we all trying to do what we can to lower our tax bills? Californians know it's no joke here!



I don't think that the majority of Californians share their problem.  

“Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have."


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Harry’s covid detector ring. I have not seen the photos, is it the same one the NBA bought for its players?
> Here’s a review of the covid detector ring, seems kinda like the Cracker Jack Secret Decoder ring:  https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/skeptical-cardiologist/87651
> 
> RE: lower tax bills. Interesting they do not want to donate *actual ca$h *to a church or charity, one of the quickest ways to lower the bill. Instead they want to use their “business” to thwart the IRS.  A reminder, both MM’s parents declared bankruptcy and MM has had IRS trouble in the past.  I think I see a pattern.


When one donates cash, one writes a check, receives an acknowledgment letter from the charity and is virtually done with it. It usually doesn't involve 'charity-related' expenses (ex: security, photo-ops... ) that can potentially be tax deductible. Also, it generates a lot more headlines when one donates 100 hats instead of $500.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I don't think that the majority of Californians share their problem.
> 
> “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have."


I was being facetious but I think this is a very real consideration for business owners of all levels - to maximize spending or savings based on their taxes each year. Of course most aren't on the scale of millions and millions.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Harry’s covid detector ring. I have not seen the photos, is it the same one the NBA bought for its players?
> Here’s a review of the covid detector ring, seems kinda like the Cracker Jack Secret Decoder ring:  https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/skeptical-cardiologist/87651
> 
> RE: lower tax bills. Interesting they do not want to donate *actual ca$h *to a church or charity, one of the quickest ways to lower the bill. Instead they want to use their “business” to thwart the IRS.  A reminder, both MM’s parents declared bankruptcy and MM has had IRS trouble in the past.  I think I see a pattern.



This seems to be a major thing for celebrities. If you think about it I guess it makes sense... you're limited in how much you can deduct based on charity donations but there isn't really a limit to how much you can deduct in business expenses (beyond $0 taxes of course)... I don't have these problems since I'm a Joe Schmoe employee but I hear that advice all the time - set up a business and deduct as much as possible as business expenses.


----------



## lalame

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like at first she was focused on making sure her clothes were super pricey, like the engagement dress. Then she somewhat tried to fit in, the classy looks above, but then when the tides started to turn she made a point of wearing black and neutrals, unlike the RF, and *just generally not giving an eff.*



Perfect way to put it...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

This makes my blood boil. Those taxes they want to dodge help fund things like our schools. And if they want to live here in California they can darn well pay their share. They certainly don’t seem to have worked to earn it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.



LMAO. Sure they did. I hope they sent a thank you note to the BRF.

P.S. Also do we believe they have all that money? Who would hand them 100 millions for one podcast so far?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This sort of article shows how the tide is changing on H&M. They appear uglier and more gross than ever.
Tone-deaf, out-of-touch, the “don‘t hate me because I’m rich” does not work these days. Just the idea that QE wants them to participate in the June Trooping ceremony — it says they have not left the BRF and still support that shining example of privilege.

Still, I don’t really believe they have ‘so much money’. I do believe they may be shocked at the property taxes for the 16-bathroom place. I do believe they are desperate for new, monetising ideas. Doubt QE or Charles want to pay for their Cali life.   Most royals are cheap, accustomed to getting almost everything for free, land-rich but rarely have cash.


----------



## Grande Latte

CarryOn2020 said:


> This sort of article shows how the tide is changing on H&M. They appear uglier and more gross than ever.
> 
> Still, I don’t really believe they have ‘so much money’. I do believe they may be shocked at the property taxes for the 16-bathroom place. I do believe they are desperate for new, monetising ideas. Doubt QE or Charles want to pay for their Cali life.   Most royals are cheap, accustomed to getting almost everything for free, land-rich but rarely have cash.



Totally agree, usually wealthy people are incredibly cheap, especially those in privilege for centuries. H&M aren't getting what they hoped they would, hence pimping themselves out every chance they get. If they have $$$ down pat, they wouldn't bother with needless business ventures.

I give this marriage another 3 years at most. By that point, Harry would be just be another ginger in LA, wait I take that back- "another bald guy in LA". And Meghan would have found another prey.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> As long as money keeps coming in... No further comments!
> View attachment 4953716
> 
> According to one expert, however, Harry and Meghan have found a way around their problem.
> 
> According to the National Enquirer, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly been forced to look for ways to offset a huge tax bill.
> 
> One way they’re doing this is by splurging on work-related items in a bid to liquidate some cash.
> 
> A source told the publication: “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have.”
> 
> Despite the alleged tax dilemma, there’s no doubt Harry and Meghan have fulfilled their wish of gaining financial freedom.
> 
> Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.
> 
> “They couldn’t give a damn about all the haters who still scoff at their success.”
> 
> More money than they know what to do with!


Whoever in their PR army came up with this should be fired! Do they really think this is positive headline for them? How about paying the bloody taxes like normal people do? Most people do some tax planning but nobody makes it a national press headline! Bloody beyond sutipd this is!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Whoever in their PR army came up with this should be fired!



Yeah, now that I think of it...who thought this was a good look?


----------



## Aimee3

chicinthecity777 said:


> Whoever in their PR army came up with this should be fired! Do they really think this is positive headline for them? How about paying the bloody taxes like normal people do? Most people do some tax planning but nobody makes it a national press headline! Bloody beyond sutipd this is!


And also probably tipping off the IRS who might be more inclined now to look over these alleged business expense deductions!


----------



## kipp

Have no idea, but can they deduct PR, lawyer, and lawsuit costs as business expenses?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> *This makes my blood boil.* Those taxes they want to dodge help fund things like our schools. And if they want to live here in California they can darn well pay their share. They certainly don’t seem to have worked to earn it.


And all this under the label of philanthropists.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> LMAO. Sure they did. I hope they sent a thank you note to the BRF.
> 
> P.S. Also do we believe they have all that money? Who would hand them 100 millions for one podcast so far?


They should certainly send that thank you note, their connection to the BRF seems to be their only credential.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Harry’s covid detector ring. I have not seen the photos, is it the same one the NBA bought for its players?
> Here’s a review of the covid detector ring, seems kinda like the Cracker Jack Secret Decoder ring:  https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/skeptical-cardiologist/87651
> 
> RE: lower tax bills. Interesting they do not want to donate *actual ca$h *to a church or charity, one of the quickest ways to lower the bill. Instead they want to use their “business” to thwart the IRS.  A reminder, both MM’s parents declared bankruptcy and MM has had IRS trouble in the past.  I think I see a pattern.


The ring that I saw some two years ago was a wide black band, you notice it due to the dark color 
It looks like an Oura ring , one of many brands of fitness rings
But, it could be simply a dark tone high fashion ring, made of titanium maybe, I am into using those cheap rings for my scarves since I like to wear more than one at a time, in a shade to EXACTLY match my scarf, so, I have bazillions of them , they come in anodized colors - dark rainbow , very flash 
I could not discern which type he had, but I assumed it was the expensive Oura style, not the cheap fashion titanium

Again the story, 2 years ago, was that she told him to lose a few


----------



## marietouchet

kipp said:


> Have no idea, but can they deduct PR, lawyer, and lawsuit costs as business expenses?


Diff answer for each of those categories, in brief, they may be able to .... we do not have all the info to know for sure ...

Ex they would have to argue the lawyer costs were business related, eg if we don’t sue then our business brand is destroyed ...
But lawyer expenses to incorporate Doria have nothing to with their business, unless they are investors, and we don’t know ...

Also, there are lots of lawyers, some work for MM personally - not H, some support their charity work, some suppOrt their money making efforts ... it is fuzzy to me where the charity thing starts and money making ends 

It is a good idea to have lawyers wear one hat only eg charity or business, not both but mixing it all together is not illegal just complicated and these are people paid huge sums per hour to keep track of a possible legal plate of spaghetti, simple is cheaper


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> This makes my blood boil. Those taxes they want to dodge help fund things like our schools. And if they want to live here in California they can darn well pay their share. They certainly don’t seem to have worked to earn it.


when you look at it that way, it's not very woke, is it?


----------



## kipp

marietouchet said:


> Diff answer for each of those categories, in brief, they may be able to .... we do not have all the info to know for sure ...
> 
> Ex they would have to argue the lawyer costs were business related, eg if we don’t sue then our business brand is destroyed ...
> But lawyer expenses to incorporate Doria have nothing to with their business, unless they are investors, and we don’t know ...
> 
> Also, there are lots of lawyers, some work for MM personally - not H, some support their charity work, some suppOrt their money making efforts ... it is fuzzy to me where the charity thing starts and money making ends
> 
> It is a good idea to have lawyers wear one hat only eg charity or business, not both but mixing it all together is not illegal just complicated and these are people paid huge sums per hour to keep track of a possible legal plate of spaghetti, simple is cheaper


Thank you---they seem to have so many PR and legal expenses it seemed that this was another way for them to take advantage of them.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> As long as money keeps coming in... No further comments!
> View attachment 4953716
> 
> According to one expert, however, Harry and Meghan have found a way around their problem.
> 
> According to the National Enquirer, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly been forced to look for ways to offset a huge tax bill.
> 
> One way they’re doing this is by splurging on work-related items in a bid to liquidate some cash.
> 
> A source told the publication: “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have.”
> 
> Despite the alleged tax dilemma, there’s no doubt Harry and Meghan have fulfilled their wish of gaining financial freedom.
> 
> Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.
> 
> “They couldn’t give a damn about all the haters who still scoff at their success.”
> 
> More money than they know what to do with!


I don't recognize this source?  where is she getting the info?  and if they have more money than they know what to do with, why are they allegedly trying to get an extension on their ties with the RF?  If this is legit and gets a lot of attention it makes them look really bad IMO.  The duke and duchess of woke looking to cheat on their taxes?  deprive the poor people they are preaching to of things like funding for schools?  This is not the way of the people they seem to want to emulate.  There are wealthy people who are happy to pay their fair share.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

One excellent way for them to off-set their upcoming "huge tax bill" is by making legitimate, cash charitable contributions which they can deduct. Of course, that means they would actually have to give money away and I doubt that sits well with either of them.


----------



## lalame

kipp said:


> Have no idea, but can they deduct PR, lawyer, and lawsuit costs as business expenses?



I would be very very very surprised if they were not deducting those. The lengths celebrities go to to deduct expenses: I read the Kardashians lease all their cars because they can then deduct them as business expenses (also common for realtors).


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't recognize this source?  where is she getting the info?  and if they have more money than they know what to do with, why are they allegedly trying to get an extension on their ties with the RF?  If this is legit and gets a lot of attention it makes them look really bad IMO.  The duke and duchess of woke looking to cheat on their taxes?  deprive the poor people they are preaching to of things like funding for schools?  This is not the way of the people they seem to want to emulate.  There are wealthy people who are happy to pay their fair share.


The link for the full article is at the end of the post, I have no more info. Without their ties to the BRF, they wouldn't be able to make those zillions of dollars, so this might be why they want to get an extension. The duke and duchess of woke may want more money & 'job security'. All this hypocrisy is shocking imo.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> An example ; a few days ago a story circulated with a photo of HARRY wearing a COVID detecting ring ... that was the title .. the text said the ring could detect his temperature ..
> 
> The photo was about 2.5 years old - maybe from engagement time ? Harry started wearing a  BIG FAT UGLY WIDE BLACK fitness ring - does the kind of measurements that an electronic watch does ...  The story then was that he was told by the allitertive one to lose a few before the wedding, so, he got a fitness ring
> 
> The ring was in the photos long before COVID, I have not noticed if H is still wearing the the ring in his recent videos ...



Harry was wearing an Oura ring for awhile which does monitor your daily activity and sleep. You are supposed to keep it on 24/7.  My DH has one and loves it (though it is rather ugly lol).  Since last spring, he's participated in studies being done by Oura in connection with a couple of major universities on whether the ring can detect the earliest signs of covid before people begin to demonstrate symptoms. Oura accesses data from DH's ring and he answers a daily survey from them about any symptoms and whether he's had a covid test.  He's been doing this daily for months. They've also sent him antibody test kits at various points over the last 7 or 8 months and he's getting another specialized blood test kit in the next few weeks.  It's been a really interesting process and a small way of helping out during the pandemic.  I haven't noticed if JCMH has been wearing his Oura ring but apparently participating and helping out with their studies is too much trouble for him.

ETA:  I also think he stopped wearing the ring because it was very noticeable, was great publicity for Oura, and they likely refused to pay him for wearing it.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Harry was wearing an Oura ring for awhile which does monitor your daily activity and sleep. You are supposed to keep it on 24/7.  My DH has one and loves it (though it is rather ugly lol).  Since last spring, he's participated in studies being done by Oura in connection with a couple of major universities on whether the ring can detect the earliest signs of covid before people begin to demonstrate symptoms. Oura accesses data from DH's ring and he answers a daily survey from them about any symptoms and whether he's had a covid test.  He's been doing this daily for months. They've also sent him antibody test kits at various points over the last 7 or 8 months and he's getting another specialized blood test kit in the next few weeks.  It's been a really interesting process and a small way of helping out during the pandemic.  I haven't noticed if JCMH has been wearing his Oura ring but apparently participating and helping out with their studies is too much trouble for him.
> 
> ETA:  I also think he stopped wearing the ring because it was very noticeable, was great publicity for Oura, and they likely refused to pay him for wearing it.



"Of the 33 participants residing in the US, 11 lived in the state of California", so JCMH could still have been one of study volunteers.   If not, he may have missed a great tax opportunity. I would think that all the expenses incurred with his participation on the study would likely be tax deductible.









						Feasibility of continuous fever monitoring using wearable devices - Scientific Reports
					

Elevated core temperature constitutes an important biomarker for COVID-19 infection; however, no standards currently exist to monitor fever using wearable peripheral temperature sensors. Evidence that sensors could be used to develop fever monitoring capabilities would enable large-scale...




					www.nature.com


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> "Of the 33 participants residing in the US, 11 lived in the state of California", so JCMH could still have been one of study volunteers.   If not, he may have missed a great tax opportunity. I would think that all the expenses incurred with his participation on the study would likely be tax deductible.



I think the Oura ring study has 65,000+ participants.  That was the number that I heard last summer and I think they possibly have many more participants now.  I think that link you posted is to another study that uses the Oura perhaps?

Maybe it is the same study. Here is what I found on Oura's blog:








						UCSF TemPredict Study
					

With the backdrop of COVID-19, the TemPredict study at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) is testing whether physiological data collected by the Oura Ring, combined with responses to daily symptom surveys, can predict illness symptoms. The study aims to build an algorithm to...




					blog.ouraring.com


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I don't recognize this source?  where is she getting the info?  and if they have more money than they know what to do with, why are they allegedly trying to get an extension on their ties with the RF?  If this is legit and gets a lot of attention it makes them look really bad IMO.  The duke and duchess of woke looking to cheat on their taxes?  deprive the poor people they are preaching to of things like funding for schools?  This is not the way of the people they seem to want to emulate.  There are wealthy people who are happy to pay their fair share.


An example ...

I own a business, if I buy a new CAD router (Computer Aided Design tool used in my business), then I can get new business - by having a new technology tool, some customers require the tool , it is an investment piece (will last years) and the initial cost and depreciation will reduce my tax bill in FUTURE years ie after purchase

The rules for all of that are complicated and change YEARLY (yes that is correct ...) so expensive accounting advice is required - the tax reduction comes at a cost ...

Nothing illegal about that, actually it is good solid business practice to help business grow and that is why the tax laws may have been enacted in the first place , to stimulate business, and CREATE JOBS , if you think these laws are simply making business owners rich, you are wrong - I am very proud to have created jobs  by buying new equipment

That said, you cannot go out on a shopping spree in 2021 to reduce your 2020 tax bill - too late for that ... Dec 31 2020 is past


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> As long as money keeps coming in... No further comments!
> View attachment 4953716
> 
> According to one expert, however, Harry and Meghan have found a way around their problem.
> 
> According to the National Enquirer, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly been forced to look for ways to offset a huge tax bill.
> 
> *One way they’re doing this is by splurging on work-related items in a bid to liquidate some cash.*
> 
> A source told the publication: “Meghan and Harry have more money than they know what to do with right now, which they both agree is a problem to have.”
> 
> Despite the alleged tax dilemma, there’s no doubt Harry and Meghan have fulfilled their wish of gaining financial freedom.
> 
> Another source said: “Meghan and Harry are proud to have achieved all this success by themselves.
> 
> “They couldn’t give a damn about all the haters who still scoff at their success.”



And they wonder where their "online hate" comes from? Well, when you're this clueless there's little hope for you. Whatever happened to paying "your fair share"?  Or you know, making woke charitable donations? At this point in their clueless lives, they should just buy a big *ss fuel sucking plane to jet them to all their important meetings for their Netflix projects. I mean, they're sooooo important they can't risk flying with the plebes, right? Or why can't they do a slimy quid pro quo with somebody else's foundation--they donate to theirs, that recipient donates to Archwell? Or, they could just STFU and have these discussions with their tax attorneys and no one needs to know. Meghan must have found out the hard way that all the time she spends in whining rehearsals about all the abuse she suffers isn't a tax deductible expense. If it were, her tax bill would be zero.


----------



## marietouchet

On the subject of OLD NEWS ... 
the DM is AGAIN reporting that Eugenie and Jack have left Frogmore Cottage - that was weeks ago... 

They must be desperate for something to fill the columns ??


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> An example ...
> 
> I own a business, if I buy a new CAD router (Computer Aided Design tool used in my business), then I can get new business - by having a new technology tool, some customers require the tool , it is an investment piece (will last years) and the initial cost and depreciation will reduce my tax bill in FUTURE years ie after purchase
> 
> The rules for all of that are complicated and change YEARLY (yes that is correct ...) so expensive accounting advice is required - the tax reduction comes at a cost ...
> 
> Nothing illegal about that, actually it is good solid business practice to help business grow and that is why the tax laws may have been enacted in the first place , to stimulate business, and CREATE JOBS , if you think these laws are simply making business owners rich, you are wrong - I am very proud to have created jobs  by buying new equipment
> 
> That said, you cannot go out on a shopping spree in 2021 to reduce your 2020 tax bill - too late for that ... Dec 31 2020 is past



I agree, I think the article is putting an odd spin on it. Is it cheating taxes to put money in a 401K? Write off your healthcare expenses? Businesses have the same rights to deduct their expenses. Some do take advantage of it but they're just doing what the tax code allows them to do. :/ I'm sure these guys have highly-paid tax attorneys who do this stuff for them... and the position "You should pay these taxes you don't need to pay because you can afford to" is NAGL for a tax professional.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I agree, I think the article is putting an odd spin on it. Is it cheating taxes to put money in a 401K? Write off your healthcare expenses? Businesses have the same rights to deduct their expenses. Some do take advantage of it but they're just doing what the tax code allows them to do. :/ I'm sure these guys have highly-paid tax attorneys who do this stuff for them... and the position "You should pay these taxes you don't need to pay because you can afford to" is NAGL for a tax professional.


Your examples are better than mine ... YES


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> On the subject of OLD NEWS ...
> the DM is AGAIN reporting that Eugenie and Jack have left Frogmore Cottage - that was weeks ago...
> 
> They must be desperate for something to fill the columns ??



Yep, it seems that MM&H had a quiet weekend. I think the article  you mentioned is about Eugenie and Jack living with her parents in Windsor. Though, it is still not clear why they would live for a few weeks at Frogmore...









						Eugenie and Jack have 'moved back in with Prince Andrew and Fergie'
					

Speaking on HeirPod Omid Scobie said Eugenie, 30 andJack Brooksbank, 34,  have moved  into the Royal Lodge in Windsor with Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> And also probably tipping off the IRS who might be more inclined now to look over these alleged business expense deductions!


Yup .. I was always told to be very careful with the "business" expenses .. the more that you had and the higher dollar amount(s) just provides the IRS with that "red flag" for audit!  I'm sure the IRS would just love to look at their "books" (and not Omid's - HA)!!!


----------



## csshopper

The timing and topic of their supposedly huge wealth and subsequent tax issues seems “off”. Having come to expect sneaky motives from them based on past experiences, maybe it’s in anticipation of not getting any extension from the RF, and having put this out, they can say, “don’t really need you anyway.”  In Your Face.

I’m more interested in Harry’s resident status. Can we send him back?


----------



## AB Negative

sdkitty said:


> I don't recognize this source?  where is she getting the info?  and if they have more money than they know what to do with, why are they allegedly trying to get an extension on their ties with the RF?  If this is legit and gets a lot of attention it makes them look really bad IMO.  The duke and duchess of woke looking to cheat on their taxes?  deprive the poor people they are preaching to of things like funding for schools?  This is not the way of the people they seem to want to emulate.  There are wealthy people who are happy to pay their fair share.


When I lived in California the schools were paid for with property taxes, not income taxes.  Write-offs don't help with those.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

What do you have to do to qualify to be a “royal insider” giving our opinions to the press? Would we qualify? 

I am asking because whichever one is spreading the story that William and Kate are going to come to California to visit Harry and Meghan to mend fences should be fired. The stories these experts spread should at least be plausible on some level and not total fantasy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, it’s a low-level pr strategy to force W&K to accept. They try to make it look like H&M are reaching out, being nice to invite W&K. When W&K say no, they look like they are being difficult and unfriendly.  Cheap way to operate, even if true. That sort of announcement should come from W&K, not leaked by Omid, the fake insider. Shame on H&M.




bag-mania said:


> What do you have to do to qualify to be a “royal insider” giving our opinions to the press? Would we qualify?
> 
> I am asking because whichever one is spreading the story that William and Kate are going to come to California to visit Harry and Meghan to mend fences should be fired. The stories these experts spread should at least be plausible on some level and not total fantasy.


----------



## csshopper

AB Negative said:


> When I lived in California the schools were paid for with property taxes, not income taxes.  Write-offs don't help with those.


Property taxes do contribute, but from the ed100.org web site, Currently, "Less than a quarter of the funding for public schools in California comes from property taxes, which are also collected to support other local government functions. Most of the money for K-12 education does not come from property taxes. The big source of revenue for schools is state income taxes, especially taxes on the state's wealthiest earners." The schools also get Lottery Funds.


----------



## bag-mania

Samantha’s book has been pushed back again. Now it is supposed to come out Feb. 1st.  I wonder what the hold up is and whether it will be released.


----------



## rose60610

If M&H want to get together with W&K, then why don't M&H be the ones to travel? Inviting somebody to your house who lives 5400 miles away is pretty damned lame. And why publicly invite W&K with Covid still a huge issue? You can't schedule a trip like that. What about W&K's kids? Do they come too and the security detail, nanny, assistants, etc?  This supposed invite reeks of contempt for W&K. Another fail for M&H. Why don't they just invite QE and Philip? Philip might be leaning on 100 but he could still give them a verbal kick in the teeth, something they truly deserve.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Samantha’s book has been pushed back again. Now it is supposed to come out Feb. 1st.  I wonder what the hold up is and whether it will be released.


When B&N put the book back for sale a few days ago, you noticed that its size had been reduced. At that time, we suspected that some information may have been removed from the book. Well the censorship seems to continue.  The book has now less pages: 328 pages on 01/06 vs 284 pages on 01/11. Better sales rank though!


----------



## Chanbal

The description of the author seems to be different. I don't recall MM to be mentioned on 'About the Author'. Sister of "the first modern American duchess" and a reduction of >40 pages, something doesn't smell right.


----------



## marietouchet

In general, US mags eg People Town and Country etc have had a recent slew of gushy make-nice articles clearly timed to coincide with
book publication , 1 yr review , need to get back to the UK (Harry is overdue surely) for and summary judgment in trial over letter to MM dad


----------



## lulilu

When are they going to stop with the stories about all the hardships, pain and suffering that leaving Britain has caused them?  It really makes them look mentally unstable IMHO.  

Also, I read the other day that in their "private farewell" meeting with staff, MM is quoted as telling them "it didn't have to be like this."  Infuriating.


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> When are they going to stop with the stories about all the hardships, pain and suffering that leaving Britain has caused them?  It really makes them look mentally unstable IMHO.
> 
> Also, I read the other day that in their "private farewell" meeting with staff, MM is quoted as telling them "it didn't have to be like this."  Infuriating.


You reminded me ... i had plum forgot ... yesterday's story from Omid ... sob sob sob ... their nanny went back to the UK

Hmmm how did she get in ? I thought even H could not get in ??? she was probably on a private jet ....


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> The timing and topic of their supposedly huge wealth and subsequent tax issues seems “off”. Having come to expect sneaky motives from them based on past experiences, maybe it’s in anticipation of not getting any extension from the RF, and having put this out, they can say, “don’t really need you anyway.”  In Your Face.
> 
> I’m more interested in Harry’s resident status. Can we send him back?


Yup there are two diametrically opposite  sets of stories circulating ... big financial deals = they are rich ... tax issues = they are poor ... 

All we know for sure is the timing coincides with court case, book, review etc so personally I conclude their PR machine is hard at work


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made 'financially-motivated' decision to quit social media to 'safeguard their content' after £100million Netflix and Spotify deals, rather than a taking principled stand, royal expert claims*

However, royal editor Russell Myers today claimed on Lorraine that the choice is more 'to do with money' than taking a principled stand. 

He said that while the couple have criticised social media in the past, they have signed 'big money deals' and wont want to give content away 'for free'. 

Russell said: 'This big new charity launch will not have a social media presence and they aren't going to have a personal one. 

'Now I think this is probably to do with their big deals with Netflix and Spotify. They have signed big money deals with those corporate giants and obviously they want to safeguard their content. They don't want to give it away for free.

A nonbeliever


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> When B&N put the book back for sale a few days ago, you noticed that its size had been reduced. At that time, we suspected that some information may have been removed from the book. Well the censorship seems to continue.  The book has now less pages: 328 pages on 01/06 vs 284 pages on 01/11. Better sales rank though!
> 
> View attachment 4954779
> 
> 
> View attachment 4954780



I am hoping it is something more innocuous. Like maybe the book got the attention of someone at Barnes & Noble who figured out they might have a sleeper hit on their hands and offered to have an editor go over the manuscript and clean up any obvious mistakes. Or more likely, someone may have wanted a lawyer to inspect it for potential lawsuit fodder.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I am hoping it is something more innocuous. Like maybe the book got the attention of someone at Barnes & Noble who figured out they might have a sleeper hit on their hands and offered to have an editor go over the manuscript and clean up any obvious mistakes. Or more likely, someone may have wanted a lawyer to inspect it for potential lawsuit fodder.



The pages changes may also have to do with changes in formatting. They might. Have made the actual book bigger or changed the font/spacing. Some self-published books look awful.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> The pages changes may also have to do with changes in formatting. They might. Have made the actual book bigger or changed the font/spacing. *Some self-published books look awful.*



True, but before it was trade paperback size and now it is the more standard mass-market size. If anything I would think that would add pages. I guess it doesn't matter, we'll never know what was taken out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle made 'financially-motivated' decision to quit social media to 'safeguard their content' after £100million Netflix and Spotify deals, rather than a taking principled stand, royal expert claims*
> 
> However, royal editor Russell Myers today claimed on Lorraine that the choice is more 'to do with money' than taking a principled stand.
> 
> He said that while the couple have criticised social media in the past, they have signed 'big money deals' and wont want to give content away 'for free'.
> 
> Russell said: 'This big new charity launch will not have a social media presence and they aren't going to have a personal one.
> 
> 'Now I think this is probably to do with their big deals with Netflix and Spotify. They have signed big money deals with those corporate giants and obviously they want to safeguard their content. They don't want to give it away for free.
> 
> A nonbeliever


Did they ever really QUIT Social Media VOLUNTARILY ? Or did they fail to re-up ?? A conscious act or a failure to get going ??

They had various old accounts - the TIG , SUSSEX ROYAL etc which were shut down gradually due to BRF pressure, eg they lost their 10 M followers on SR last year, when they closed SR due to not being able to use the word ROYAL anymore, 

I dont know the name of their video/podcast production  companies, probably not ARCHEWELL - charitable foundation, not for profit ?

They have an issue as to what moniker to use ... how long will Sussex last ... Mountbatten Windsor is too long and has no Meghan in it ,it is a tricky thing for them to pick the right avatar


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> The pages changes may also have to do with changes in formatting. They might. Have made the actual book bigger or changed the font/spacing. Some self-published books look awful.


I wonder why she had to self-publish


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: a nonbeliever.  I am skeptical that they’ve left completely. IIRC, giving up her social media acct was a huge sacrifice for her, supposedly. Part of finding her freedom was opening these closed acts.  Doubtful she will give them up again. Doesn‘t Harry use his for his gaming activities?  Unlikely he gives up anything.  They are so desperate for headlines that they jump on any current story.

RE: self-publishing.  Pros: faster and less expensive way to publish, she gets to keep most of the profits, controls the content (?)





						Self-Publishing - 7 Benefits - Morris Publishing
					

Self-publishing allows for complete control over creation, rights, & profits from your book. Explore the many benefits Morris Publishing has to offer vs. traditional and print-on-demand publishers.




					www.morrispublishing.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: a nonbeliever.  I am skeptical that they’ve left completely. IIRC, giving up her social media acct was a huge sacrifice for her, supposedly. Part of finding her freedom was opening these closed acts.  Doubtful she will give them up again. Doesn‘t Harry use his for his gaming activities?  Unlikely he gives up anything.  They are so desperate for headlines that they jump on any current story.
> 
> RE: self-publishing.  Pros: faster and less expensive way to publish, she gets to keep most of the profits, controls the content (?)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Self-Publishing - 7 Benefits - Morris Publishing
> 
> 
> Self-publishing allows for complete control over creation, rights, & profits from your book. Explore the many benefits Morris Publishing has to offer vs. traditional and print-on-demand publishers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.morrispublishing.com


maybe I'm wrong but when I think of self publish I think they can't get a publisher....something for new writers/amateurs


----------



## rose60610

You have to wonder if they "quit" social media because they say too much stupid stuff and are making the Netflix/Spotify gods angry. By constantly complaining about their "difficulties" and "hardships" as members of the BRF they alienate people. Look at everything that was given to Meghan on a silver platter. So she gets some shade thrown at her in the press, friggin' boo hoo. So what does she do? Beyatch that she's "only existing" and dumps the BRF, they did not dump her.  And now, after 200 million in deals? Another "boo-hoo social media is so mean".  If this woman lead any of our lives she'd implode. Early on, I was rooting for her. Now? I'm convinced she either has a psychosis or really thinks playing the victim card is a terrific money making strategy. And she's supposed to be some kind of idol for young women? She's teaching women to whip out the victim card and milk it to death. Nauseating.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The silk-satin skirt/dress paired with a sweater was spot on for Fall, 2019 [feels like eons ago].  It is such a gorgeous, relaxed but elegant vibe.  I understand why she tucked in the sweater, IMO, the outfit looks better with the sweater out. I hope this look comes back.
> MM’s shoes,
> 
> View attachment 4952962
> View attachment 4952958



It's a very '90s look along with slip dresses (which has been a trend for a while)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm wrong but when I think of self publish I think they can't get a publisher....something for new writers/amateurs



That is what it often means, but lately I have noticed a trend where some accomplished authors are selling self-published work on Amazon. It can happen when a writer has an idea for a book which doesn't fit with what their publisher usually does, a change in genre for example, so they do it themselves. If they have a large following on social media their fans will hear about the new work and buy without the need for a publisher. It cuts out the middle man and the authors make more money. It also means the authors need to handle getting their books edited, finding cover art, proofreading, etc., themselves.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The description of the author seems to be different. I don't recall MM to be mentioned on 'About the Author'. Sister of "the first modern American duchess" and a reduction of >40 pages, something doesn't smell right.
> View attachment 4954782



Not the first modern American Duchess, postmodern maybe


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm wrong but when I think of self publish I think they can't get a publisher....something for new writers/amateurs



Or just didn't (bother/know how to) shop around to agents/publishers. Plus, I guess if she's already written she wasn't looking for an advance, just turnaround. Of course, she could take a hit if there are any contentious legal points/passages as she will be solely responsible. 

MM and JCMH are so litigious, maybe publishers didn't want to touch it, although I seriously doubt that.


----------



## bag-mania

Barnes & Noble should lock the reviews for books that aren't out yet. There were a bunch yesterday that they deleted but that hasn't stopped people from continuing to post them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IIRC, giving up her social media acct was a huge sacrifice for her, supposedly.



Yeah I think that was the one concession she ever made re: BRF.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Or just didn't (bother/know how to) shop around to agents/publishers. Plus, I guess if she's already written she wasn't looking for an advance, just turnaround. Of course, she could take a hit if there are any contentious legal points/passages as she will be solely responsible.
> 
> MM and JCMH are so litigious, maybe publishers didn't want to touch it, although I seriously doubt that.


I have self published treatises on  some 16th century French letters - RIVETING subject  that I knew would be bestselling LOL - a positive experience that prompted me to get it written and get to the finish line , no excuses

But no one was banging on my door  ... whereas I have to believe a magazine or publisher approached Samantha years ago...


----------



## csshopper

This is almost unbelievable, except it's the Grifters and their mouthpiece as source so.....Victimization is alive and well in 2021 for the Sussexes. From the an article Scoobie wrote for "Grazia" magazine and now reprinted in the Daily Mail.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit after the couple's nanny moved back to the UK and the pandemic left them feeling 'alone,' the authors of Finding Freedom have claimed.  

Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, who co-wrote the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell biography, alleged that moving to LA brought difficult changes for the couple who stepped back as senior royals in March last year. 

‘To be at the point they are at now, HAVING SET UP AN EMPIRE (caps are my emphasis) and a charity in just over nine months, shows just how hard they have worked to make this transition a success,’ said Omid Scobie, writing in Grazia. 'But it’s taken a lot of work to get here. The journey has been painful.’ 

The authors went on to say the move has also been challenging for Meghan, 39, who has juggled motherhood with moving house four times. 

A friend of the duchess told Durand: 'It's just been a lot. Their nanny moved back to the UK when they moved to LA because of the pandemic and restrictions left them feeling quite alone. Each move made them feel more displaced.' 

So now, MEMEMEMEMeghan is an "Empress", take that Queen Elizabeth. Hope the Franchise Tax Board here in California takes careful note of this come April when taxes are due. How much $$ do you have to have to be an Empress?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handing your only child to your housekeeper and nanny is not juggling motherhood, but what do I know. Right now, there are people out there working full time while the kids are home from day care / school due to a freaking pandemic, give me a break you spoiled whiner.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> whereas I have to believe a magazine or publisher approached Samantha years ago...



Remember the average person (including those working for publishing houses) doesn't follow Harry and Meghan like we do. They only know Samantha and the other Markles from when they were universally vilified by the media early on. Add to that all the positive press H&M spent all last year buying. I can absolutely see where companies would turn up their noses at even entertaining the prospect of printing a negative book about the Duchess Do-gooder by her demonized sister.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> This is almost unbelievable, except it's the Grifters and their mouthpiece as source so.....Victimization is alive and well in 2021 for the Sussexes. From the an article Scoobie wrote for "Grazia" magazine and now reprinted in the Daily Mail.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit after the couple's nanny moved back to the UK and the pandemic left them feeling 'alone,' the authors of Finding Freedom have claimed.
> 
> Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, who co-wrote the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell biography, alleged that moving to LA brought difficult changes for the couple who stepped back as senior royals in March last year.
> 
> ‘To be at the point they are at now, HAVING SET UP AN EMPIRE (caps are my emphasis) and a charity in just over nine months, shows just how hard they have worked to make this transition a success,’ said Omid Scobie, writing in Grazia. 'But it’s taken a lot of work to get here. The journey has been painful.’
> 
> The authors went on to say the move has also been challenging for Meghan, 39, who has juggled motherhood with moving house four times.
> 
> A friend of the duchess told Durand: 'It's just been a lot. Their nanny moved back to the UK when they moved to LA because of the pandemic and restrictions left them feeling quite alone. Each move made them feel more displaced.'
> 
> So now, MEMEMEMEMeghan is an "Empress", take that Queen Elizabeth. Hope the Franchise Tax Board here in California takes careful note of this come April when taxes are due.  nHow much $$ do you have to have to be an Empress?


who hasn't had a tough year?  really? they have the nerve complain living in a mansion?  this is just plain tone deaf and I hope it comes back to bite them big time


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I sometimes think she made up this elaborate escape plan not to really stay in the US permanently - albeit I'm sure part of the plan was to spend a big chunk of her time rubbing shoulders with real celebrities, but going back and having the lowly masses wave to you while you float around in a carriage is nice too for a change - and be on her own completely but more so to bully the BRF into giving in to her every wish, because let's face it: free money plus free residence plus free security plus prestige plus doing what you want is way better than doing what you want but having to grow up and be really on you own without all the goodies you have been getting used to way too quickly.

Unfortunately that masterplan backfired because they were like "Don't let the door hit you on the way out".


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says*

Has California brought out a new side of Prince Harry?

During a recent virtual visit to “The Late Late Show with James Corden,” Montecito resident Rob Lowe said he believes he spotted the Duke of Sussex, 36, driving around their shared neighborhood with a brand-new ponytail.

“He lives about a mile from me. He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster,” Lowe, 56, told Corden.

“I may have a scoop,” he went on. “It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he was wearing a ponytail. It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long, and his hair was pulled back tightly by what I could only assume was a ponytail.”

Giggling in disbelief, Corden questioned whether the man Lowe saw was actually Harry, to which the actor responded, “It was him, because — I have to say — I followed him to the house to see if the car went in.”

Harry and wife Meghan Markle paid $14,650,000 for the 18,000-square-foot home, which features rose gardens, century-old olive trees, a tennis court, a tea house, a children’s cottage and a pool.









						Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says
					

“It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I am hoping it is something more innocuous. Like maybe the book got the attention of someone at Barnes & Noble who figured out they might have a sleeper hit on their hands and offered to have an editor go over the manuscript and clean up any obvious mistakes. Or more likely, someone may have wanted a lawyer to inspect it for potential lawsuit fodder.





Sol Ryan said:


> The pages changes may also have to do with changes in formatting. They might. Have made the actual book bigger or changed the font/spacing. Some self-published books look awful.





bag-mania said:


> True, but before it was trade paperback size and now it is the more standard mass-market size. If anything I would think that would add pages. I guess it doesn't matter, we'll never know what was taken out.


Love your optimism! If a lawyer is inspecting the book, I hope he/she works for SM and not for MM. It looks like almost 15% of the book is already gone.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sometimes think she made up this elaborate escape plan not to really stay in the US permanently - albeit I'm sure part of the plan was to spend a big chunk of her time rubbing shoulders with real celebrities, but going back and having the lowly masses wave to you while you float around in a carriage is nice too for a change - and be on her own completely but more so to bully the BRF into giving in to her every wish, because let's face it: free money plus free residence plus free security plus prestige plus doing what you want is way better than doing what you want but having to grow up and be really on you own without all the goodies you have been getting used to way too quickly.
> 
> Unfortunately that masterplan backfired because they were like "Don't let the door hit you on the way out".



That was exactly the plan. Remember they wanted a half in/ half out deal according to their original ransom note. It is why they are clinging so hard to their patronages; they wanted to be able to come back and do the fun stuff and then go off to do whatever their like.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says*
> 
> Has California brought out a new side of Prince Harry?
> 
> During a recent virtual visit to “The Late Late Show with James Corden,” Montecito resident Rob Lowe said he believes he spotted the Duke of Sussex, 36, driving around their shared neighborhood with a brand-new ponytail.
> 
> “He lives about a mile from me. He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster,” Lowe, 56, told Corden.
> 
> “I may have a scoop,” he went on. “It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he was wearing a ponytail. It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long, and his hair was pulled back tightly by what I could only assume was a ponytail.”
> 
> Giggling in disbelief, Corden questioned whether the man Lowe saw was actually Harry, to which the actor responded, “It was him, because — I have to say — I followed him to the house to see if the car went in.”
> 
> Harry and wife Meghan Markle paid $14,650,000 for the 18,000-square-foot home, which features rose gardens, century-old olive trees, a tennis court, a tea house, a children’s cottage and a pool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says
> 
> 
> “It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


The vision of Ginge with a ponytail is hilarious. Hair extensions? They are very popular in Hollywood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The vision of Ginge with a ponytail is hilarious. Hair extensions? They are very popular in Hollywood.



Did he take care of that bald spot? Not digging the combination.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The vision of Ginge with a ponytail is hilarious. Hair extensions? They are very popular in Hollywood.



I love how the Hollywood celebrities who live around them consider them a novelty. The idea of Rob Lowe following Harry's car to see if it was really him is hilarious. His comment was both funny and rather sad: "He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster."


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he take care of that bald spot? Not digging the combination.



This will be Harry after a few years of living in isolation.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he take care of that bald spot? Not digging the combination.


Maybe it was hair extensions ? Transplant ?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he take care of that bald spot? Not digging the combination.





bag-mania said:


> I love how the Hollywood celebrities who live around them consider them a novelty. The idea of Rob Lowe following Harry's car to see if it was really him is hilarious. His comment was both funny and rather sad: "He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster."


The all situation is hilarious. DM published also about the ponytail, and some of the comments are a lot of fun, here is one:


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says*
> 
> Has California brought out a new side of Prince Harry?
> 
> During a recent virtual visit to “The Late Late Show with James Corden,” Montecito resident Rob Lowe said he believes he spotted the Duke of Sussex, 36, driving around their shared neighborhood with a brand-new ponytail.
> 
> “He lives about a mile from me. He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster,” Lowe, 56, told Corden.
> 
> “I may have a scoop,” he went on. “It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he was wearing a ponytail. It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long, and his hair was pulled back tightly by what I could only assume was a ponytail.”
> 
> Giggling in disbelief, Corden questioned whether the man Lowe saw was actually Harry, to which the actor responded, “It was him, because — I have to say — I followed him to the house to see if the car went in.”
> 
> Harry and wife Meghan Markle paid $14,650,000 for the 18,000-square-foot home, which features rose gardens, century-old olive trees, a tennis court, a tea house, a children’s cottage and a pool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says
> 
> 
> “It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Honestly, I don't even want to imagine how he looks in a pony tail. Just no.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Maybe it was hair extensions ? Transplant ?



I think someone commented awhile back that he had gotten the transplant/plugs.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> This is almost unbelievable, except it's the Grifters and their mouthpiece as source so.....Victimization is alive and well in 2021 for the Sussexes. From the an article Scoobie wrote for "Grazia" magazine and now reprinted in the Daily Mail.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit after the couple's nanny moved back to the UK and the pandemic left them feeling 'alone,' the authors of Finding Freedom have claimed.
> 
> Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, who co-wrote the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell biography, alleged that moving to LA brought difficult changes for the couple who stepped back as senior royals in March last year.
> 
> ‘To be at the point they are at now, HAVING SET UP AN EMPIRE (caps are my emphasis) and a charity in just over nine months, shows just how hard they have worked to make this transition a success,’ said Omid Scobie, writing in Grazia. 'But it’s taken a lot of work to get here. The journey has been painful.’
> 
> The authors went on to say the move has also been challenging for Meghan, 39, who has juggled motherhood with moving house four times.
> 
> A friend of the duchess told Durand: 'It's just been a lot. Their nanny moved back to the UK when they moved to LA because of the pandemic and restrictions left them feeling quite alone. Each move made them feel more displaced.'
> 
> So now, MEMEMEMEMeghan is an "Empress", take that Queen Elizabeth. Hope the Franchise Tax Board here in California takes careful note of this come April when taxes are due. How much $$ do you have to have to be an Empress?


This should offend every living human being affected by the pandemic and struggling. They have no shame. They are really making fun of people who are suffering economically. Remember, the clients feed the articles to their PR. Those two have cold blood and I'm not sure it's not red.  Just pure evil and mocking people.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Honestly, I don't even want to imagine how he looks in a pony tail. Just no.


The Sun is already working on it.  



Sun's vision


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sorry @Lodpah, but creativity is high today around Harry's ponytail:


----------



## csshopper

Maybe the bald spot has increased in size due to hair loss from anxiety because of their "difficult year" and Harry is trying to grow enough new ginger for a "comb over."


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says*
> 
> Has California brought out a new side of Prince Harry?
> 
> During a recent virtual visit to “The Late Late Show with James Corden,” Montecito resident Rob Lowe said he believes he spotted the Duke of Sussex, 36, driving around their shared neighborhood with a brand-new ponytail.
> 
> “He lives about a mile from me. He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster,” Lowe, 56, told Corden.
> 
> “I may have a scoop,” he went on. “It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he was wearing a ponytail. It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long, and his hair was pulled back tightly by what I could only assume was a ponytail.”
> 
> Giggling in disbelief, Corden questioned whether the man Lowe saw was actually Harry, to which the actor responded, “It was him, because — I have to say — I followed him to the house to see if the car went in.”
> 
> Harry and wife Meghan Markle paid $14,650,000 for the 18,000-square-foot home, which features rose gardens, century-old olive trees, a tennis court, a tea house, a children’s cottage and a pool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says
> 
> 
> “It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Lol at Harry being compared to the Lochness monster!  That’s priceless!!!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Maybe the bald spot has increased in size due to hair loss from anxiety because of their "difficult year" and Harry is trying to grow enough new ginger for a "comb over."


I don't know what goes through Ginge's mind, but thanks to his ponytail story I had a much needed laugh today. Most of the other stories are terrifying. So thanks Ginge!


----------



## mdcx

Omg, the ponytail pics made my day!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> This is almost unbelievable, except it's the Grifters and their mouthpiece as source so.....Victimization is alive and well in 2021 for the Sussexes. From the an article Scoobie wrote for "Grazia" magazine and now reprinted in the Daily Mail.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit*
> Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie, who co-wrote the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell biography, alleged that moving to LA brought difficult changes for the couple who stepped back as senior royals in March last year.



I read this, but could barely concentrate on anything but "Omid" which I kept thinking rhymes with "Covid", both dangerous diseases, which seem to linger around and won't go the hell away!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The ponytail images are hilarious. Is this another PR strategy to keep people talking about H&M?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ponytail images are hilarious. Is this another PR strategy to keep people talking about H&M?


I don't know, but the images don't favor Ginge imo. I wonder if the ponytail was Cringe's idea.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't know, but the images don't favor Ginge imo. I wonder if the ponytail was Cringe's idea.



I’m guessing PR strategy. Keeps everyone Chatting about H&M, sure in a comical way, but that feeds his ego. Also, it gives Rob Lowe and James Corden a boost. Lowe said he “thought” he saw the tail = plausible deniability.









						Does Prince Harry Have A Ponytail? An Investigation
					

The actor claimed he had a “scoop” about the British royal on 'The Late Late Show with James Corden,' but the talk show host was skeptical.




					www.huffingtonpost.com.au
				



“It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he’s wearing a ponytail,” Lowe told Corden. “I’m just saying. It looked to me ― as a casual observer ― that his hair had grown very long and was pulled back very tightly by what I can only assume was a ponytail.”


----------



## rose60610

Is this another planted story to get them in the news, you know, no more social media for them. Rob "thinks" it was Harry? We're going to get reports of 'Harry sightings", like Loch Ness.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m guessing PR strategy. Keeps everyone Chatting about H&M, sure in a comical way, but that feeds his ego. Also, it gives Rob Lowe and James Corden a boost. Lowe said he “thought” he saw the tail = plausible deniability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does Prince Harry Have A Ponytail? An Investigation
> 
> 
> The actor claimed he had a “scoop” about the British royal on 'The Late Late Show with James Corden,' but the talk show host was skeptical.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffingtonpost.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he’s wearing a ponytail,” Lowe told Corden. “I’m just saying. It looked to me ― as a casual observer ― that his hair had grown very long and was pulled back very tightly by what I can only assume was a ponytail.”


It's very possible! Though, the idea of wearing a ponytail may have been on Ginge's mind for quite some time. Ginge checking Cringe's ponytail.


----------



## eunaddict

Someone is definitely trying to mend fences y'all.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-reconnected-holiday-royal-expert-claims.html

Royal expert Katie Nicholl told Entertainment Tonight the families enjoyed 'phone and video calls' over Christmas and New Year where they presented gifts to each other, saying: 'Fast forward to today, the relationship is much better than it was. For a start, they are on talking terms, and not only on talking terms, they do speak relatively regularly. They were very much in touch over the holidays.'


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Is this another planted story to get them in the news, you know, no more social media for them. Rob "thinks" it was Harry? We're going to get reports of 'Harry sightings", like Loch Ness.



IMO, yes, another cheap trick at a time when we have more serious issues to focus on. No, it isn’t cute. No, it isn’t funny. I thought Rob Lowe was above such stunts. Oh wait, didn’t he have a scandal years ago?   Desperation is really tiresome.

from the HuffPo article: 
_The verdict? Most likely false.

Considering the duke was still sporting shorter hair during a Beverly Hills shopping trip on December 20, we’re going to side with Corden on this one. _

RE: Will & H. As long as H does what Will wants, all will be well


----------



## CarryOn2020

And another thing (yeah, I’m ranting a bit, apologies):

This sort of cheap, junior-high stunt does make it easy to dislike H&M.  Disappointing Rob Lowe participated. James Corden, it’s expected.


----------



## bag-mania

Not everything that mentions them is a PR stunt. Rob Lowe and James Corden have nothing to gain by telling that story. Rob was clearly having a bit of fun about it and I doubt Meghan would approve 1) of the Loch Ness monster comparison, and 2) that she was not mentioned at all. I am attaching the interview so you can see for yourselves. They talk about Harry right at the beginning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

I so LOOOVE this meme, it's becoming truer by the day! Page 1316 post 19,730.

" Dear Harry and Meghan, 

When You Fall, 
I'll Be There.

          - Floor"


----------



## drifter

I hope the ponytail news is true!  Would be quite hilarious for a change.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says*
> 
> Has California brought out a new side of Prince Harry?
> 
> During a recent virtual visit to “The Late Late Show with James Corden,” Montecito resident Rob Lowe said he believes he spotted the Duke of Sussex, 36, driving around their shared neighborhood with a brand-new ponytail.
> 
> “He lives about a mile from me. He’s been very reclusive; seeing him in the neighborhood is like seeing the Loch Ness Monster,” Lowe, 56, told Corden.
> 
> “I may have a scoop,” he went on. “It was very, very quick — don’t totally quote me on it — but it looked like he was wearing a ponytail. It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long, and his hair was pulled back tightly by what I could only assume was a ponytail.”
> 
> Giggling in disbelief, Corden questioned whether the man Lowe saw was actually Harry, to which the actor responded, “It was him, because — I have to say — I followed him to the house to see if the car went in.”
> 
> Harry and wife Meghan Markle paid $14,650,000 for the 18,000-square-foot home, which features rose gardens, century-old olive trees, a tennis court, a tea house, a children’s cottage and a pool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may have a ponytail now, Rob Lowe says
> 
> 
> “It looked to me, as a casual observer, that his hair had grown very long.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Ok, so from the back, Harry now looks like the horse's ass he really is.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ok, so from the back, Harry now looks like the horse's ass he really is.



I wonder if Meghan braids it for him. Seriously though, I can't express enough how much I want this story to be true. My fear is he will get a haircut before they make their next big appearance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I just cannot take this story seriously. For whatever reason, Rob Lowe is poking fun at Harry.  RL is a well known prankster, loves a good joke, loves the setup.  Check out his Instagram - funny stuff, sorta.









						Rob Lowe’s Sons Keep Trolling Him On Instagram, And It’s Hilarious (19 Pics)
					

So u have time to instagram but not text me back, hmmmm




					www.boredpanda.com


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> I think someone commented awhile back that he had gotten the transplant/plugs.


I've commented a few times about this. Perhaps those plugs are now paying dividends and he doesn't want to cut it, would rather try for the top knot


----------



## lulilu

So they've gotten everything they wanted -- a beautiful house in CA, big money deals, separation from the beasts of TRF who drove them out, yet they are still in pain, suffering?  wtf?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just cannot take this story seriously. For whatever reason, Rob Lowe is poking fun at Harry.  RL is a well known prankster, loves a good joke, loves the setup.  Check out his Instagram - funny stuff, sorta.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rob Lowe’s Sons Keep Trolling Him On Instagram, And It’s Hilarious (19 Pics)
> 
> 
> So u have time to instagram but not text me back, hmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.boredpanda.com


Hmmm ... agree - bogus story, RL is poking fun at ... 

But thinking of how low members of the BRF (JCMH) have sunk that they are lampooned like this ... wow this is novel for the BRF - it is all good clean fun but novel nonetheless 

And these days.. poking fun / humor is such a touchy subject due to Political Correctness standards - I dont know how comedians make a living anymore


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since H is no longer a ‘working royal’, he can be joked about, right?









						Not heard the one about the Queen: why don't comedians criticise the monarchy?
					

It’s the job of standups to hold institutions to account – laugh by laugh – so why aren’t more of them laying bare the anachronistic daftness of the royal family?




					www.theguardian.com
				




_I get that these are difficult times, from which many prefer to flee into a comforting fantasy world of palaces, ermine-lined robes and astronomic subsidy. And woe betide those who offend such a vision – witness the cancellation, announced last week, of David Baddiel’s Radio 4 show Don’t Make Me Laugh. The show’s apparent offence was to air an item, on her birthday, proposing – incontrovertibly enough – that “the Queen must have had sex at least four times”. Cue 100-plus complaints._

ETA: Spitting Image 








						Royal Family’s blunt verdict of Spitting Image laid bare
					

ROYAL FAMILY members have been mocked by Spitting Image once again after it returned to our screens through BritBox  but the satirical show first made enemies covering current affairs in the Eighties.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

In the US comedians wouldn't bother taking shots at the monarchy because, well, they aren't relevant here. They aren't on anyone's radar unless there is a scandal or, in Rob Lowe's case, they live up the street. Even though he was poking fun, he wasn't disrespectful. James Corden was even a bit defensive about the idea of a ponytail. Is sticking up for the royals deeply ingrained in England?


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan’s Half-Sister: My Book Will Have ‘the Good, the Bad and the Ugly’
					

Meghan Markle’s half-sister, Samantha Markle, promised she ‘would not put garbage into the universe’ ahead of her book’s release — exclusive interview




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

With or without ponytail, it's all about money for MM&H. 

*Meghan Markle 'will not return to UK' as expert claims she 'hated' being in Royal Family*

Ms Levin told Palace Confidential on MailPlus: "I don't think Meghan will come back.

"She obviously hated it within the Royal Family and was preparing the leave even before the wedding.

"I think she wouldn't want to come back.

"She didn't like the UK it was too small for her.

"She likes to talk on a global platform and I think we're very unlikley until we see her again.

"What will be interesting is how long Harry will be allowed to be away.

"How along she will allow him to be away."

"They weren't happy with how they were being treated but they also wanted to go and make billions and billions of dollars it would seem to create a different platform for themselves on Netflix and Spotify.

"They just wanted to create a whole new sphere in what it meant to be a royal.

"I think Harry is going to come back to the UK and try and negotiate a bit of a better deal for him and Meghan because they've not really got off the ground due to coronavirus."

MM&H want billions of dollars and a better deal with the BRF


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> With or without ponytail, it's all about money for MM&H.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'will not return to UK' as expert claims she 'hated' being in Royal Family*
> 
> Ms Levin told Palace Confidential on MailPlus: "I don't think Meghan will come back.
> 
> "She obviously hated it within the Royal Family and was preparing the leave even before the wedding.
> 
> "I think she wouldn't want to come back.
> 
> "She didn't like the UK it was too small for her.
> 
> "She likes to talk on a global platform and I think we're very unlikley until we see her again.
> 
> "What will be interesting is how long Harry will be allowed to be away.
> 
> "How along she will allow him to be away."
> 
> "They weren't happy with how they were being treated but they also wanted to go and make billions and billions of dollars it would seem to create a different platform for themselves on Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> "They just wanted to create a whole new sphere in what it meant to be a royal.
> 
> "I think Harry is going to come back to the UK and try and negotiate a bit of a better deal for him and Meghan because they've not really got off the ground due to coronavirus."
> 
> MM&H want billions of dollars and a better deal with the BRF


"How long she'll allow him to be away"?  Harry the Henpecked Husband 

Granny, can you PLEASE tell them to F off?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> With or without ponytail, it's all about money for MM&H.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'will not return to UK' as expert claims she 'hated' being in Royal Family*
> 
> Ms Levin told Palace Confidential on MailPlus: "I don't think Meghan will come back.
> 
> "She obviously hated it within the Royal Family and was preparing the leave even before the wedding.
> 
> "I think she wouldn't want to come back.
> 
> "She didn't like the UK it was too small for her.
> 
> "She likes to talk on a global platform and I think we're very unlikley until we see her again.
> 
> "What will be interesting is how long Harry will be allowed to be away.
> 
> "How along she will allow him to be away."
> 
> "They weren't happy with how they were being treated but they also wanted to go and make billions and billions of dollars it would seem to create a different platform for themselves on Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> "They just wanted to create a whole new sphere in what it meant to be a royal.
> 
> "I think Harry is going to come back to the UK and try and negotiate a bit of a better deal for him and Meghan because they've not really got off the ground due to coronavirus."
> 
> MM&H want billions of dollars and a better deal with the BRF


So she hated being in the RF but she surely loves her title given by the said family!


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> With or without ponytail, it's all about money for MM&H.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'will not return to UK' as expert claims she 'hated' being in Royal Family*
> 
> Ms Levin told Palace Confidential on MailPlus: "I don't think Meghan will come back.
> 
> "She obviously hated it within the Royal Family and was preparing the leave even before the wedding.
> 
> "I think she wouldn't want to come back.
> 
> "She didn't like the UK it was too small for her.
> 
> "She likes to talk on a global platform and I think we're very unlikley until we see her again.
> 
> "What will be interesting is how long Harry will be allowed to be away.
> 
> "How along she will allow him to be away."
> 
> "They weren't happy with how they were being treated but they also wanted to go and make billions and billions of dollars it would seem to create a different platform for themselves on Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> "They just wanted to create a whole new sphere in what it meant to be a royal.
> 
> *"I think Harry is going to come back to the UK and try and negotiate a bit of a better deal for him and Meghan because they've not really got off the ground due to coronavirus."*
> 
> MM&H want billions of dollars and a better deal with the BRF



I wonder if H&M weren’t actually paid by Netflix and Spotify the millions of $ that were reported.. by any standards, they appear to be doing very well so what’s this comment all about?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

It's that particular royal biographer's opinion, which means she doesn't have any inside info. It's like if someone asked us those questions and we were "important" enough to quote.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> This is almost unbelievable, except it's the Grifters and their mouthpiece as source so.....Victimization is alive and well in 2021 for the Sussexes. From the an article Scoobie wrote for "Grazia" magazine and now reprinted in the Daily Mail.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have had a 'painful' year since Megxit*
> *The journey has been painful*.’


*Oh BOO-F'ING-HOO, seriously???? * Try doing that when you have only 1 means of income since one of the parties lost their job due to Covid, bills just keep on rolling in (_and you need to keep the heat on and electricity_), you don't have any folks to help out with the chores (_and even though having hip replacement surgery - guess who still does a fair amount of the work_????) .. I could go on, but this one just *FROSTED MY COOKIES*!!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The vision of Ginge with a ponytail is hilarious. Hair extensions? They are very popular in Hollywood.


and rob lowe following him home is funny


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> "How long she'll allow him to be away"?  Harry the Henpecked Husband
> 
> Granny, can you PLEASE tell them to F off?



It's interesting to see the way Harry is being perceived.  



chicinthecity777 said:


> So she hated being in the RF but she surely loves her title given by the said family!



It's all about money and titles. 



bisousx said:


> I wonder if H&M weren’t actually paid by Netflix and Spotify the millions of $ that were reported.. by any standards, they appear to be doing very well so what’s this comment all about?



One word: greed!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> and rob lowe following him home is funny


Lowe made my day yesterday. I believe he reads (non-US) news stories about this couple.


----------



## bag-mania

Headline from Elle magazine.  In the article a “source” says that Harry and Meghan sent Kate several birthday gifts and a card. I say bulls**t.  They want credit for being so generous. I’m guessing IF they sent anything it was one of those gimmicky machines they gave Oprah.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Headline from Elle magazine.  In the article a “source” says that Harry and Meghan sent Kate several birthday gifts and a card. I say bulls**t.  They want credit for being so generous. I’m guessing IF they sent anything it was one of those gimmicky machines they gave Oprah.
> 
> View attachment 4956675


I'm sorry @bag-mania but couldn't find the right emoji  'to like' the above.
 I'm sure Kate has a special place (like the one below) to store all the lovely gifts from MM.


----------



## mdcx

All Meghan wants from the BRF is her title. If/when that is 100% secured, she will dispense with any show at relationship building imo.


----------



## Chanbal

We are living in very awkward times, and here are today's yahoo headlines. I'm not sure if I should or !


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> The vision of Ginge with a ponytail is hilarious. Hair extensions? They are very popular in Hollywood.


Uggh .. and see this way too much out here, the bald top but then the ponytail - YUCK !!!


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> *Oh BOO-F'ING-HOO, seriously???? * Try doing that when you have only 1 means of income since one of the parties lost their job due to Covid, bills just keep on rolling in (_and you need to keep the heat on and electricity_), you don't have any folks to help out with the chores (_and even though having hip replacement surgery - guess who still does a fair amount of the work_????) .. I could go on, but this one just *FROSTED MY COOKIES*!!!!!



4053 respondents to a Poll on the Express site shows 88% do not want the Grifters back in the UK for Trooping of the Color.
Guess we aren’t the only ones weary of their petulance and whining.


----------



## lulilu

Which is it?  They are happier than ever, or they have suffered tremendous pain all year?


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan’s Half-Sister: My Book Will Have ‘the Good, the Bad and the Ugly’
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s half-sister, Samantha Markle, promised she ‘would not put garbage into the universe’ ahead of her book’s release — exclusive interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


She’s got 2 masters degrees, Samantha is not a dummy.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> Which is it?  They are happier than ever, or they have suffered tremendous pain all year?



It’s both. In addition to being  narcissistic, they are also bipolar.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> She’s got 2 masters degrees, Samantha is not a dummy.



I am kind of rooting for Samantha. While it would be much healthier for her to let go of her bitterness, she seems to need to do this. I doubt the media will start being kind to her now but at least she will have had her say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Headline from Elle magazine.  In the article a “source” says that Harry and Meghan sent Kate several birthday gifts and a card. I say bulls**t.  They want credit for being so generous. I’m guessing IF they sent anything it was one of those gimmicky machines they gave Oprah.
> 
> View attachment 4956675


I agree.  It is just another pronouncement from the Sussex camp that they know the Cambridges will not respond to.  This is the Sussex standard operating procedure.  They used this many times before like when they said they couldn't make it for Christmas or to Balmoral.  The Queen wasn't going to respond by saying "you weren't invited" so they get away with this nonsense.  

Regarding her planning to leave before the wedding.  I don't believe that completely.  Putting out information like this actually makes Meghan look extremely foolish.  You don't proclaim that this is the family you never had, wrap your arms around that title, and say you are going to become a British citizen if you were gone before you even got there.  Of course she wanted to return to California, but all that happened much more quickly than originally planned.  The juggernaut to return was hastened by the response to her South Africa moaning, criticism as to how Archie's birth and the announcement of it were handled, and her lack of making a meaningful attempt to learn the royal ways and fit in.  It was essentially a cut and run as in the fight or flight response.  She fled and dragged him with her.  The fact that their departure was not completely thought through is pretty telling.  Harry is just waking up to that now with the realization that he will never get back his patronages and military associations.  He will never be trusted again and even if he were to recant and return, he would find himself in the back benches and not up there with the senior family members.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> *Oh BOO-F'ING-HOO, seriously???? * Try doing that when you have only 1 means of income since one of the parties lost their job due to Covid, bills just keep on rolling in (_and you need to keep the heat on and electricity_), you don't have any folks to help out with the chores (_and even though having hip replacement surgery - guess who still does a fair amount of the work_????) .. I could go on, but this one just *FROSTED MY COOKIES*!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 4956645


Nice cookies.


----------



## eunaddict

lulilu said:


> Which is it?  They are happier than ever, or they have suffered tremendous pain all year?




Schrodinger's Meghan. She is both happier than ever and in tremendous pain, but you won't know which it is until you open the box up and ask her "are you okay?".


----------



## Chanbal

Ginge & Cringe Not Wanted in the UK











						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry told NOT to return to UK
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry should not return to the UK for the Queen's birthday celebrations later this year, an Express.co.uk poll has found.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I agree.  It is just another pronouncement from the Sussex camp that they know the Cambridges will not respond to.  This is the Sussex standard operating procedure.  They used this many times before like when they said they couldn't make it for Christmas or to Balmoral.  The Queen wasn't going to respond by saying "you weren't invited" so they get away with this nonsense.
> 
> Regarding her planning to leave before the wedding.  I don't believe that completely.  Putting out information like this actually makes Meghan look extremely foolish.  You don't proclaim that this is the family you never had, wrap your arms around that title, and say you are going to become a British citizen if you were gone before you even got there.  Of course she wanted to return to California, but all that happened much more quickly than originally planned.  The juggernaut to return was hastened by the response to her South Africa moaning, criticism as to how Archie's birth and the announcement of it were handled, and her lack of making a meaningful attempt to learn the royal ways and fit in.  It was essentially a cut and run as in the fight or flight response.  She fled and dragged him with her.  The fact that their departure was not completely thought through is pretty telling.  Harry is just waking up to that now with the realization that he will never get back his patronages and military associations.  He will never be trusted again and even if he were to recant and return, he would find himself in the back benches and not up there with the senior family members.



All I know is what the articles have said. Here’s my best guess:
-He wanted out of the BRF after his army service ended. He never liked being second to Will, etc. Supposedly, he wanted to live in Africa.
-Once it sunk in that she would never be Q, would always walk behind W&K, wouldn't be embraced fully by the palace staff, understood how difficult those tours really are, understood how many rules there are,  she agreed with H that they should leave. Although an actress, prior to H, she controlled the public’s access to her. She most likely worked a few months at a time, then vacationed. Lots of down time.  That is a very different lifestyle than working day in-day out, constantly in the public eye. When she said she did not understand what royal life would be like, she most likely meant she missed her extensive down-time. Probably didn’t realize how much scheduling was needed just to go shopping. 

He strikes me as someone who is very picky, uptight and easily offended, probably a constant critic. Very much opposite to the California-healthy, fun in the sun, laid-back life. Wonder if she thinks it was all worth it. Wallis, Diana, Sarah, etc. did not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is everyone else's TPF looking funky, or is it my wonky internet again?


----------



## CarryOn2020

My screen looks the same.


----------



## Annawakes

I’ll say something nice for a change.  Re: the poll where 88% said they didn’t want them coming back to UK for the Q’s bday.  I feel sorry for H on this.  I feel it’s like, an adult child wants to strike out on his own.....so he moves far away....but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t still love his grandmother and want to see her again for a special birthday.

then again.  Perhaps I don’t feel sorry for him.  The way they orchestrated their departure was just disgusting. Petulantly childlike, definitely.  He should have seen this coming, the way he allowed things to transpire the way they did.  I guess he didn’t think far enough ahead to realize the actions he took would come to this - people getting angry about him seeing his grandmother on her special day.

oh but but I just forgot. They don’t read anything about themselves. So if they want to go back to the UK, nothing should stop them - even 88% “no” votes.

it’s really interesting how they’ve boxed themselves into a corner.  If they go, people are mad.  If they don’t go, people are mad (because it just confirms their callousness and self absorption).  I’m sure their PR machine will spin some story about covid.  And how they’re “devastated” they can’t go.  Yes, that’s it.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I agree.  It is just another pronouncement from the Sussex camp that they know the Cambridges will not respond to.  This is the Sussex standard operating procedure.  They used this many times before like when they said they couldn't make it for Christmas or to Balmoral.  The Queen wasn't going to respond by saying "you weren't invited" so they get away with this nonsense.
> 
> Regarding her planning to leave before the wedding.  I don't believe that completely.  Putting out information like this actually makes Meghan look extremely foolish.  You don't proclaim that this is the family you never had, wrap your arms around that title, and say you are going to become a British citizen if you were gone before you even got there.  Of course she wanted to return to California, but all that happened much more quickly than originally planned.  The juggernaut to return was hastened by the response to her South Africa moaning, criticism as to how Archie's birth and the announcement of it were handled, and her lack of making a meaningful attempt to learn the royal ways and fit in.  It was essentially a cut and run as in the fight or flight response.  She fled and dragged him with her.  The fact that their departure was not completely thought through is pretty telling.  Harry is just waking up to that now with the realization that he will never get back his patronages and military associations.  He will never be trusted again and even if he were to recant and return, he would find himself in the back benches and not up there with the senior family members.


Been thinking about the lack of JCMH social media presence ...

One thing that is good about SM is that you know whether or not the blurb came from the celebrity directly, the source is known (SM now has blue flags for the authentic account )

But, the JCMH current approach is (possibly) to dictate an article to People, Cosmo, Town and Country  etc.. But the blurb is published without saying THIS CAME directly from JCMH, it is always A SOURCE SAYS but in the end, I am never sure about the provenance of the info

I dont know whether to believe the recent stuff about Kate's bday, reconciliations, trips or not - to me, it is just noise, and mix this in with the OLD NEWS - that is recirculated later purporting to be NEW NEWS ... 

The BRF/QEII rarely tweets/ talks to the press but you always know when they do the source is cited - no ambiguity as to whether the info is authentic


----------



## 1LV

I don’t doubt one bit that Kate was “taken aback” if she received a gift from H&M.  Imagine getting a gift from someone you know for a fact doesn’t like you or anything you represent.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I’ll say something nice for a change.  Re: the poll where 88% said they didn’t want them coming back to UK for the Q’s bday.  I feel sorry for H on this.  I feel it’s like, an adult child wants to strike out on his own.....so he moves far away....but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t still love his grandmother and want to see her again for a special birthday.
> 
> then again.  Perhaps I don’t feel sorry for him.  The way they orchestrated their departure was just disgusting. Petulantly childlike, definitely.  He should have seen this coming, the way he allowed things to transpire the way they did.  I guess he didn’t think far enough ahead to realize the actions he took would come to this - people getting angry about him seeing his grandmother on her special day.
> 
> oh but but I just forgot. They don’t read anything about themselves. So if they want to go back to the UK, nothing should stop them - even 88% “no” votes.
> 
> it’s really interesting how they’ve boxed themselves into a corner.  If they go, people are mad.  If they don’t go, people are mad (because it just confirms their callousness and self absorption).  I’m sure their PR machine will spin some story about covid.  And how they’re “devastated” they can’t go.  Yes, that’s it.



Yeah, don't bother feeling sorry for him. The BRF is as much a job as it is a family. An analogy would be he quit his place of employment but he still wants to come back a year later because he knows his old company's party is spectacular and they might be giving out bonuses. 

Harry could quietly go visit his grandmother or any of the others if he really wanted to do it enough. He doesn't need to wait for the pomp and ceremony of the Queen's celebration.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, don't bother feeling sorry for him. The BRF is as much a job as it is a family. An analogy would be he quit his place of employment but he still wants to come back a year later because he knows his old company's party is spectacular and they might be giving out bonuses.
> 
> Harry could quietly go visit his grandmother or any of the others if he really wanted to do it enough. He doesn't need to wait for the pomp and ceremony of the Queen's celebration.


Exactly! He just wants to show his face at an official event, nothing to do with his love for his grandmother! Shameful! I am pretty sure he could zoom QEII daily if he really cared!


----------



## Annawakes

Very very good points.  I hadn’t thought of that.  He could!  Still be in touch with TQ if he really wanted.  Who knows, maybe he is.  No telling whether TQ has got the time or patience to actually answer his zoom calls though


----------



## Maggie Muggins

1LV said:


> I don’t doubt one bit that Kate was “taken aback” if she received a gift from H&M.  *Imagine getting a gift from someone you know for a fact doesn’t like you or anything you represent.*


First, I would look for a suit of armour and a gas mask and then, call the bomb squad. On second thought, I would skedaddle out of there and call the bomb squad.


----------



## chicinthecity777

1LV said:


> I don’t doubt one bit that Kate was “taken aback” if she received a gift from H&M.  Imagine getting a gift from someone you know for a fact doesn’t like you or anything you represent.


I hope Kate told MM that "under no circumstances her xxx was enough!" if MM did actually send a gift.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

Jayne1 said:


> Completely agree.
> 
> Just the fact that she probably paid big bucks to get that annulment when it was a perfectly legitimate marriage with no fraud that produced two  children... well if the Kennedys can get their marriages annulled, why can't she. Robert Kennedy Jr got one after having children with his wife.  But I think it was overturned eventually.
> 
> Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise got one too, didn't they?


Nicole and Tom weren't married in the Roman Catholic Church. The Church does not recognize their ceremony, ergo there was no requirement for an annulment prior to her marrying Keith Urban in a Catholic ceremony.


----------



## Chanbal

My 2 cents: MM wanted to use the glamour of being a royal and have a jet-set life. She was not expecting a 'NO' to her offer of becoming a part-time royal. This is obviously why she wants an extension on the 1 year review. I don't think H knew what he wanted, he just followed MM guidance imo. He likely wants to stay close to Archie and this is not giving him many options.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Very very good points.  I hadn’t thought of that.  He could!  Still be in touch with TQ if he really wanted.  *Who knows, maybe he is.  *No telling whether TQ has got the time or patience to actually answer his zoom calls though



If he was in touch with the Queen we would be hearing about it nonstop on every web site his publicists could contact.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> The vision of Ginge with a ponytail is hilarious. Hair extensions? They are very popular in Hollywood.


.. and then, if he decides to go the route of the "hipster" .. a 'man bun' will be upcoming!!!


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: MM wanted to use the glamour of being a royal and have a jet-set life. She was not expecting a 'NO' to her offer of becoming a part-time royal. This is obviously why she wants an extension on the 1 year review. I don't think H knew what he wanted, he just followed MM guidance imo. He likely wants to stay close to Archie and this is not giving him many options.



Agreed, but in addition, M wanted to merch all she could and was probably flabbergasted when she learned it wasn't allowed as part of the BRF. She wanted 100% of her version of the upside and zero of the downside. We've seen over and over, with M everything is an all or nothing proposition. If you don't concede 100% to her wishes, then you're the horrible one. She couldn't be a part timer Royal and full timer Mercher so she split. She got 97% favorable press and went into meltdown over anything that didn't fawn over her. Neither Canada nor L.A. was good enough so it's the 18 bathroom house in Montecito. She gets about 200 million in contracts in a Covid year and once again whines about negative comments in social media. If Harry hasn't learned already, M is too high maintenance and never satisfied. Either he dumps this drama queen or might as well be put on a choke chain and whipped like an abused animal. The world is looking at him like he's a prisoner. Let's see if he blinks in code "rescue me" the next time he's on video talking to us raindrops. Somebody said a while ago, Harry has Stockholm Syndrome. He is wondering how to save Archie knowing full well Meghan would go nuclear and make the Media take sides. And the perpetual whiner is an expert as casting herself as the ultimate victim.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Somebody said a while ago, Harry has Stockholm Syndrome. He is wondering how to save Archie knowing full well Meghan would go nuclear and make the Media take sides. And the perpetual whiner is an expert as casting herself as the ultimate victim.



I agree with everything you said except for this part. I don't think Harry wants to go back. Even if he did, he is too stubborn and proud to admit he made a mistake. He likes that he doesn't have to answer to his grandmother and father. He likes that he doesn't have to attend to any responsibilities. If it wasn't for Covid they would be finagling invitations to red carpet events and exclusive celebrity parties. He would like those kind of diversions. I think it's the quarantining that is depressing him most.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I agree with everything you said except for this part. I don't think Harry wants to go back. Even if he did, he is too stubborn and proud to admit he made a mistake. He likes that he doesn't have to answer to his grandmother and father. He likes that he doesn't have to attend to any responsibilities. If it wasn't for Covid they would be finagling invitations to red carpet events and exclusive celebrity parties. He would like those kind of diversions. I think it's the quarantining that is depressing him most.


Agree with you too. If the tone of Rob Lowe's "interaction" with him the other day is any indication, he's not on the list of people local celebrities are most anxious to interact with for any diversion. Rob wasn't mean, but it seemed clear he was not impressed by his new neighbor and the jocular tone was definitely not the bowing to royalty Hangdog Harry is used to. Harry doesn't have much to offer them as a Non Working Royal, they don't "need" him and I bet the bigger stars in the universe have Meghan figured out and do not want to be "used" for publicity. They will not be ignored obviously, but wonder if they will ever achieve the status they assumed they are entitled to?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Agree with you too. If the tone of Rob Lowe's "interaction" with him the other day is any indication, he's not on the list of people local celebrities are most anxious to interact with for any diversion. Rob wasn't mean, but it seemed clear he was not impressed by his new neighbor and the jocular tone was definitely not the bowing to royalty Hangdog Harry is used to. Harry doesn't have much to offer them as a Non Working Royal, they don't "need" him and I bet the bigger stars in the universe have Meghan figured out and do not want to be "used" for publicity. They will not be ignored obviously, but wonder if they will ever achieve the status they assumed they are entitled to?


They would be ignored if not for Oprah and PR-agencies that keep promoting them via connections. They are not interesting people that would be fun to meet in person. It must be a bore for an intelligent person to talk with them at parties or other social event.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Agree with you too. If the tone of Rob Lowe's "interaction" with him the other day is any indication, he's not on the list of people local celebrities are most anxious to interact with for any diversion. Rob wasn't mean, but it seemed clear he was not impressed by his new neighbor and the jocular tone was definitely not the bowing to royalty Hangdog Harry is used to. Harry doesn't have much to offer them as a Non Working Royal, they don't "need" him and I bet the bigger stars in the universe have Meghan figured out and do not want to be "used" for publicity. They will not be ignored obviously, but wonder if they will ever achieve the status they assumed they are entitled to?



If their publicists are worth their pay, they should convince them to invite Rob to be a guest on their podcast. It would show that they can laugh at themselves and they don't take themselves too seriously.

Buuut that would require them to do something that does not come naturally to them, improvise. Rob Lowe is impulsive and cannot be trusted to stay on script.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> If their publicists are worth their pay, they should convince them to invite Rob to be a guest on their podcast. It would show that they can laugh at themselves and they don't take themselves too seriously.
> 
> Buuut that would require them to do something that does not come naturally to them, improvise. Rob Lowe is impulsive and cannot be trusted to stay on script.


Giving them a good idea they might steal?


----------



## CeeJay

JUST saw this; haven’t really had time to read it but certainly the title caught my attention!!
https://www.thenews.com.pk/amp/7741...ince-harry-issued-warnings-ahead-of-uk-return


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> JUST saw this; haven’t really had time to read it but certainly the title caught my attention!!
> https://www.thenews.com.pk/amp/7741...ince-harry-issued-warnings-ahead-of-uk-return



Phil Dampier's comments are perfect, "they should volunteer to renounce... their ducal titles, so they face no further criticism of cashing in." However, I'm afraid the duchess would rather renounce to her husband than to her title.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> JUST saw this; haven’t really had time to read it but certainly the title caught my attention!!
> https://www.thenews.com.pk/amp/7741...ince-harry-issued-warnings-ahead-of-uk-return


They wouldn't give up without fighting, teeth gnashing, raging, crying, hair pulling and begging. If they should lose, being a spiteful lot, they would call themselves, Harry & Meghan, former Duke & Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> They wouldn't give up without fighting, teeth gnashing, raging, crying, hair pulling and begging. If they should lose, being a spiteful lot, they would call themselves, Harry & Meghan, former Duke & Duchess of Sussex.



The Grifters formally known as The Sussexes


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Agreed, but in addition, M wanted to merch all she could and was probably flabbergasted when she learned it wasn't allowed as part of the BRF. _She wanted 100% of her version of the upside and zero of the downside._ We've seen over and over, with M everything is an all or nothing proposition. If you don't concede 100% to her wishes, then you're the horrible one. She couldn't be a part timer Royal and full timer Mercher so she split. She got 97% favorable press and went into meltdown over anything that didn't fawn over her. Neither Canada nor L.A. was good enough so it's the 18 bathroom house in Montecito. She gets about 200 million in contracts in a Covid year and once again whines about negative comments in social media. If Harry hasn't learned already, M is too high maintenance and never satisfied. Either he dumps this drama queen or might as well be put on a choke chain and whipped like an abused animal. The world is looking at him like he's a prisoner. Let's see if he blinks in code "rescue me" the next time he's on video talking to us raindrops. Somebody said a while ago, Harry has Stockholm Syndrome. He is wondering how to save Archie knowing full well Meghan would go nuclear and make the Media take sides. And the perpetual whiner is an expert as casting herself as the ultimate victim.



*She wanted 100% of her version of the upside and zero of the downside.  *Bingo!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

eunaddict said:


> Schrodinger's Meghan. She is both happier than ever and in tremendous pain, but you won't know which it is until you open the box up and ask her "are you okay?".


And today, the DM says she has a tummy ache about Samantha's book

PS recent analyses of the NETFLIX deal conclude they got a pittance up front - maybe $1M - they will pitch/produce stuff, if NETFLIX likes and buys then their LATER take could be up  to $100M, the big bucks are  NOT NOW
Basically, the upfront money might have paid for a  modest video studio


----------



## Chanbal

News release: the duchess 'won't act bothered in public.'

*Meghan Markle feels 'sick to her stomach' about half-sister Samantha's upcoming bombshell memoir 'The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister' - but 'won't act bothered in public', source tells In Touch*
Insiders told In Touch the Duchess of Sussex, 39, who is currently living in her $14 million Santa Barbara mansion with Prince Harry, 36, and one-year-old Archie, is upset about the book but 'won't act bothered in public.'

To worry or not to worry


----------



## Chanbal

Is this real? This so called 'royal expert' works for Vanity Fair, one of MM's magazines.

*Megxit review is CANCELLED: Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are satisfied new arrangement is working and there's 'no need' to revisit one year on, royal expert claims*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's scheduled 12-month review following their split from the royal family has been cancelled, according to one royal expert.  

Speaking to True Royalty TV's Royal Beat, Vanity Fair correspondent Katie Nicholl said that while the Duke, 36, and the Duchess of Sussex, 39, are being observed closely about the commercial deals they're making, nothing they have done so far suggests the planned one-year review needs to go ahead.

Nicholl told the online broadcaster: 'My understanding from the Sussexes camp is that there has been communication with the Queen, Prince Charles and with William as well. The general feeling is that this [current situation] is working.'  

She added: 'This isn’t to say that people are not watching closely what these deals are, what the couple are doing and what these projects are going to be. 

But there is not this need to have this review one year on.' 

However, the Queen is still yet to confirm whether Prince Harry should keep his military title, Nicholl said.

'The one thing that is outstanding is the issue of his [Prince Harry’s] military title and I am told that it will be the Queen that ultimately makes that decision.'

No review and keep titles???


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Nicholl told the online broadcaster: 'My understanding from the Sussexes camp is that there has been communication with the Queen, Prince Charles and with William as well. The general feeling is that this [current situation] is working.'



That is the key point. It is from the Sussexes camp. Of course Meghan and Harry are going to say everything is fine as is. If nothing happens we know it is true. Royalty doesn't usually bend to popular demand, they do what they want. I can see the Queen not wanting to do anything that would prompt them to play the victim card yet again. Sometimes doing nothing is the safe bet.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That is the key point. It is from the Sussexes camp. Of course Meghan and Harry are going to say everything is fine as is. If nothing happens we know it is true. Royalty doesn't usually bend to popular demand, they do what they want. I can see the Queen not wanting to do anything that would prompt them to play the victim card yet again. Sometimes doing nothing is the safe bet.


When I read that the royal expert works for Vanity Fair, I immediately thought that she was conveying MM's message. In any event, “to do nothing is often the best course of action..." (The Crown), so they may continue cashing in on the titles. Let's wait and see.


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> Is this real? This so called 'royal expert' works for Vanity Fair, one of MM's magazines.
> 
> *Megxit review is CANCELLED: Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are satisfied new arrangement is working and there's 'no need' to revisit one year on, royal expert claims*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's scheduled 12-month review following their split from the royal family has been cancelled, according to one royal expert.
> 
> Speaking to True Royalty TV's Royal Beat, Vanity Fair correspondent Katie Nicholl said that while the Duke, 36, and the Duchess of Sussex, 39, are being observed closely about the commercial deals they're making, nothing they have done so far suggests the planned one-year review needs to go ahead.
> 
> Nicholl told the online broadcaster: 'My understanding from the Sussexes camp is that there has been communication with the Queen, Prince Charles and with William as well. The general feeling is that this [current situation] is working.'
> 
> She added: 'This isn’t to say that people are not watching closely what these deals are, what the couple are doing and what these projects are going to be.
> 
> But there is not this need to have this review one year on.'
> 
> However, the Queen is still yet to confirm whether Prince Harry should keep his military title, Nicholl said.
> 
> 'The one thing that is outstanding is the issue of his [Prince Harry’s] military title and I am told that it will be the Queen that ultimately makes that decision.'
> 
> No review and keep titles???



I don’t believe a word of this, or that HMQ is deaf to public opinion regarding The Grifters, especially the subject of their titles.  They must be removed as soon as possible.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is the key point. It is from the Sussexes camp. Of course Meghan and Harry are going to say everything is fine as is. If nothing happens we know it is true. Royalty doesn't usually bend to popular demand, they do what they want. I can see the Queen not wanting to do anything that would prompt them to play the victim card yet again. Sometimes doing nothing is the safe bet.


the queen is the furthest thing from impulsive....she won't do anything hasty


----------



## Maggie Muggins

carmen56 said:


> I don’t believe a word of this, or that HMQ is deaf to public opinion regarding The Grifters, especially the subject of their titles.  They must be removed as soon as possible.


You nailed it. The grifters constantly lie as in sending presents to Kate because they know that no one at BP will respond or deny their fabricated stories.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't even have the energy to be snarky today, I started and deleted several posts. Let's just say I'm sure the Sussexes' behaviour is working for exactly two people.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even have the energy to be snarky today, I started and deleted several posts. Let's just say I'm sure the Sussexes' behaviour is working for exactly two people.


Please get lots of rest and feel better soon because I value your opinion as I'm sure the other posters do as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aw thank you, I've just had very little sleep for the whole week and was completely ready for the weekend.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@QueenofWrapDress 
You're most welcome. Sleep the whole weekend if you like. Just get better. 

ETA poster's name


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw thank you, I've just had very little sleep for the whole week and was completely ready for the weekend.


hope you feel better..speak of which, haven't seen @Sharont2305 lately....hope she's ok


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even have the energy to be snarky today, I started and deleted several posts. Let's just say I'm sure the Sussexes' behaviour is working for exactly two people.


Hope you feel better soon. MM& H deserve some 'snarky' comments...


----------



## Chanbal

It's Friday, we need some entertainment!

*Prince William 'will have a problem with Harry trying to take ownership of Diana's legacy', claims royal biographer - after the Duke of Sussex used his late mother's image to promote Archewell foundation*

Speaking to True Royalty TV's Royal Beat, Duncan Larcombe said that the Duke of Sussex, 36, and the Duchess of Sussex, 39, should not expect to be able to use the legacy of the late Princess of Wales for their own projects - some of which they're set to earn millions from, without royal approval.

He also suggested that should the Sussexes continue charity work in areas once close to Diana's heart, that could also jar with Prince William and the rest of the royal family.   

He said: 'Harry doing mental health, Harry doing conservation, these are the issues that William and Kate want to do - that’s where I predict tensions. Heads Together was also Kate’s Idea.' 

Larcombe suggested that because Prince Harry will potentially earn money by using Diana's name, it could negate the charitable benefit, saying: 'Because there is money involved, it isn’t a charitable thing.'   

It isn't charity!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

With the daily drip feed from H&M, it absolutely is exhausting commenting on how outrageous each and every story is.  We must take care of ourselves first and foremost. Please know that I support and enjoy all of your reactions.

@Chanbal  Larcombe‘s comment is so true — it isn’t charitable at all. H&M will indeed monetise Diana as much as possible. W&K should be ready to take swift action. Unless QE wants her staff analysing H&M’s each and every transaction, she needs to decide on the titles asap and re-define the rules.

Have H&M sent out another podcast? Maybe they are too traumatised by the awful reception the first one had. Nah, that would require a conscious. They must be on vacation (really a staycation).


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Have H&M sent out another podcast? Maybe they are too traumatised by the awful reception the first one had. Nah, that would require a conscious. They must be on vacation (really a staycation).



There has only been one so far. They may be discovering just how hard it is to come up with a good, interesting podcast. I bet they are scrambling to hire someone to research and write it for them so they can just read a script when it is time to record it. Spotify is not going to get any return on their investment if they only record one every month or two.


----------



## gracekelly

So everything is good?  No more review?  Copacetic?  Giving up the Bank of Dad check because of their great success?  Great.  Now we can see the real life they have created. Meghan you don't need that title, even thoughyou lost your fingernails trying to hold on to it and are left with bloody stubs at the tips of your fingers because.......


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress: Sending you Take care of yourself!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> With the daily drip feed from H&M, it absolutely is exhausting commenting on how outrageous each and every story is.  We must take care of ourselves first and foremost. Please know that I support and enjoy all of your reactions.
> 
> @Chanbal  Larcombe‘s comment is so true — it isn’t charitable at all. H&M will indeed monetise Diana as much as possible. W&K should be ready to take swift action. Unless QE wants her staff analysing H&M’s each and every transaction, she needs to decide on the titles asap and re-define the rules.
> 
> Have H&M sent out another podcast? Maybe they are too traumatised by the awful reception the first one had. Nah, that would require a conscious. They must be on vacation (really a staycation).


So sweet of you to worry how I am !


----------



## csshopper

When I first read the headline about no Review I thought WTH? Then I thought, wow, what a put down. The Country is struggling with Brexit, has been slammed by COVID like the rest of the world, and the winter weather has been brutal. Far down on the list are the Sussexes. Message: We are managing just fine without you. No need to spend precious time with you now, far more important matters need attention.

It could also be a strategic move on the part of the RF. Objecting to Netflix and Spotify without having any real product to react to, at this point in time, would look petty to many. If, however, whatever they do produce besides the cringe worthy first podcast, is counter to the interest of the Crown, then there is a definite reason to take action on the Sussexes and no specific timeline is required for that. "We had an agreement, what you have just aired (Netflix? Spotify? both?) violates that agreement so x, y, z will now happen."

I do hope the Queen takes the military away from him. Can't imagine the troops wanting an American based Commander.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I do hope the Queen takes the military away from him. Can't imagine the troops wanting an American based Commander.



Or one that ditches them to go meet Beyoncé.


----------



## bag-mania

Has anyone posted Samantha's comments about her book yet? If not, here they are.

*Meghan Markle’s Half-Sister Samantha Markle Says Her Book Will Feature ‘the Good, the Bad and the Ugly’*
“Contrary to troll gossip and aggregate news rumors, my book has never been designed to attack my sister,” the author, 56, exclusively tells _Us Weekly_. “It’s relatable. There’s a lot to learn — the good, the bad and the ugly. I’ve been very forthcoming that I was never writing a hardbound tabloid. I said that two years ago, but nobody wanted to believe it.”

Samantha, who admits she is worried about “possible leaks” before the February 1 publication date, hopes that people read her book with an open mind.

“Reviews will be out there in advance, and people will read it subjectively anyway and screw it in terms of whatever they are looking for. That’s just the nature of people,” she tells _Us_. “I was a psych major and I really am a counselor with two master’s degrees, so in terms of the psychology of individuals and groups, I understand what people will make up, but in many ways I feel that there is something for everyone in it.”

The Florida resident promises that she did not write the book “to put garbage into the universe, because there’s already enough of that,” but instead describes it as a page-turner.

“It’s not at all boring,” she says. “I’ve already had a couple of people say that it’s a good read, and they are credible, so I will put their reviews on the back cover of the book. … People have to read it to see for themselves because everything they’ve heard is hearsay, and there’s only one way to find out.”










						Meghan’s Half-Sister: My Book Will Have ‘the Good, the Bad and the Ugly’
					

Meghan Markle’s half-sister, Samantha Markle, promised she ‘would not put garbage into the universe’ ahead of her book’s release — exclusive interview




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

The messages via friends and acquaintances continue... 

*Harry's 'heartbreak' over Megxit: Duke is distraught over 'painful' royal rift that has left 'hurt feelings on all sides' after the couple moved to America, their ITV friend Tom Bradby says*
Prince Harry is ‘heartbroken’ over his rift with the Royal Family, a close friend has claimed.

Tom Bradby said the past year had been ‘painful’ and there were still ‘a lot of hurt feelings on all sides’.

But the ITV news anchor insisted Harry and Meghan were ‘pretty happy’ with their new life pursuing lucrative careers in the United States.

Asked whether he thinks Harry and Meghan seem any happier in California, Bradby said reports that the prince was missing his old life were untrue.

But he confirmed that ‘Megxit’ had been a trying and deeply emotional experience for all involved.

‘I think they are feeling better, yes. I mean there has been a huge amount that has happened over the last year that I can’t talk about and I don’t want to talk about and an awful lot of what has been said is kind of not accurate and not right,’ he said.

‘So are they unhappy? No, I think they are content, the things they are doing they are quite excited by.

‘I think he is heartbroken by the situation with his family, you don’t necessarily need to have knowledge to know that, but I think it is true.’
Bradby responds: ‘The whole thing has just been incredibly painful, that is obvious to everyone. It is painful all round, painful for everyone, difficult to manage.

‘Effectively they have just decided to completely leave the Royal Family, that has never been done. You could go back to the Duke of Windsor, but that was in very different circumstances.

‘It’s never been done voluntarily before and no one still is absolutely clear how it is going to work.

‘There are still a lot of hurt feelings on all sides and it’s very difficult. And I agree with you, I think the public desperately wants them to be OK and everyone to be happy and clearly that hasn’t been the situation over the past year. It is not a very easy or comfortable situation.’

A royal source expressed surprise at Bradby’s comments last night, saying: ‘Surely it would have been better, if this is what Harry feels, that he had said this to his family rather than a journalist.’

Begging for sympathy? 

It looks like we have a highly rated comment from a concerned neighbor:


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The messages via friends and acquaintances continue...
> 
> *Harry's 'heartbreak' over Megxit: Duke is distraught over 'painful' royal rift that has left 'hurt feelings on all sides' after the couple moved to America, their ITV friend Tom Bradby says*
> Prince Harry is ‘heartbroken’ over his rift with the Royal Family, a close friend has claimed.
> 
> Tom Bradby said the past year had been ‘painful’ and there were still ‘a lot of hurt feelings on all sides’.
> 
> But the ITV news anchor insisted Harry and Meghan were ‘pretty happy’ with their new life pursuing lucrative careers in the United States.
> 
> Asked whether he thinks Harry and Meghan seem any happier in California, Bradby said reports that the prince was missing his old life were untrue.
> 
> But he confirmed that ‘Megxit’ had been a trying and deeply emotional experience for all involved.
> 
> ‘I think they are feeling better, yes. I mean there has been a huge amount that has happened over the last year that I can’t talk about and I don’t want to talk about and an awful lot of what has been said is kind of not accurate and not right,’ he said.
> 
> ‘So are they unhappy? No, I think they are content, the things they are doing they are quite excited by.
> 
> ‘I think he is heartbroken by the situation with his family, you don’t necessarily need to have knowledge to know that, but I think it is true.’
> Bradby responds: ‘The whole thing has just been incredibly painful, that is obvious to everyone. It is painful all round, painful for everyone, difficult to manage.
> 
> ‘Effectively they have just decided to completely leave the Royal Family, that has never been done. You could go back to the Duke of Windsor, but that was in very different circumstances.
> 
> ‘It’s never been done voluntarily before and no one still is absolutely clear how it is going to work.
> 
> ‘There are still a lot of hurt feelings on all sides and it’s very difficult. And I agree with you, I think the public desperately wants them to be OK and everyone to be happy and clearly that hasn’t been the situation over the past year. It is not a very easy or comfortable situation.’
> 
> *A royal source expressed surprise at Bradby’s comments last night, saying: ‘Surely it would have been better, if this is what Harry feels, that he had said this to his family rather than a journalist.’*
> 
> Begging for sympathy?



No kidding!  Why doesn't Tom just come out and say what everyone is thinking, which is that this exit was not thought though in the slightest.  Surely it has occurred even to him. 

The Duke of Windsor was told to leave after he made his decision, and i am beginning to think that perhaps the Sussex were told something along the same lines, i.e. if you don't want to be part of what we do, if your wife is that unhappy and thinks we are all cold and unfeeling and we really don't want her monetizing your title and position,  if  performing royal duties and representing The Queen is so difficult.  perhaps you should make a new start and see how that goes. Try Canada or Afrika.   Just be advised that this means you give up your patronages, you no longer represent The Queen in an official capacity and you need to make your own living in a way that does not compromise or embarrass The Queen and the family.  It seems to me that part of this is what Harry wanted, but he didn't realize what it all really meant. He wanted to exit, so they gave him the exit, but not the way he envisioned .No half in and half out.   No using the titles/HRH.  Hindsight is great isn't it Harry?  Try thinking for yourself for a change.  I realize that it isn't easy since you had the grey men thinking for you before and now you have your wife thinking for you.  Life is tough.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> No kidding!  Why doesn't Tom just come out and say what everyone is thinking, which is that this exit was not thought though in the slightest.  Surely it has occurred even to him.
> 
> The Duke of Windsor was told to leave after he made his decision, and i am beginning to think that perhaps the Sussex were told something along the same lines, i.e. if you don't want to be part of what we do, if your wife is that unhappy and thinks we are all cold and unfeeling and we really don't want her monetizing your title and position,  if  performing royal duties and representing The Queen is so difficult.  perhaps you should make a new start and see how that goes. Try Canada or Afrika.   Just be advised that this means you give up your patronages, you no longer represent The Queen in an official capacity and you need to make your own living in a way that does not compromise or embarrass The Queen and the family.  It seems to me that part of this is what Harry wanted, but he didn't realize what it all really meant. He wanted to exit, so they gave him the exit, but not the way he envisioned .No half in and half out.   No using the titles/HRH.  Hindsight is great isn't it Harry?  Try thinking for yourself for a change.  I realize that it isn't easy since you had the grey men thinking for you before and now you have your wife thinking for you.  Life is tough.
> 
> View attachment 4959026


They didn't anticipate the Queen's position ‘Either you are in, or you are out.’ They miscalculated their bargaining power. I don't think they would ever volunteer to give up allowances, titles,... They seem to want even more; otherwise, why would they want an opportunity to negotiate a better deal?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> A royal source expressed surprise at Bradby’s comments last night, saying: ‘Surely it would have been better, if this is what Harry feels, that he had said this to his family rather than a journalist.’



I have to agree with this particular source. Getting his journalist buddy to agree to be interviewed to whine on his behalf so he didn’t have to be interviewed whining himself is Harry playing the public relations game. He has learned so much about such things this year.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I have to agree with this particular source. Getting his journalist buddy to agree to be interviewed to whine on his behalf so he didn’t have to be interviewed whining himself is Harry playing the public relations game. He has learned so much about such things this year.


The journalist buddy may not have helped much. MM&H's intentions are obvious to many people, they want to keep their titles and get more goods from the BRF.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m surprised they haven’t done another episode yet.  I bet they’ll use the events at the Capital as an excuse.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised they haven’t done another episode yet.  I bet they’ll use the events at the Capital as an excuse.


If it's in the news, MM and JCMH will do everything they can to insert themselves into it.  I'm waiting for a pic of MM "in the Capitol" trying to protect AOC.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> So sweet of you to worry how I am !



My spidey senses are way off today (this week, this year). I sincerely do hope you are ok.
After re-reading my post, I sincerely do apologize. I was seriously sleep-deprived (conscious, argh!) Upon reflection, I can see how it could be taken as sarcasm, but that was not my intent. My intent was to support @QueenofWrapDress need for rest. I know we are all successful adults and can manage our time wisely. Still, I also know how easy it is to get caught up in the H&M swirl. As much as they do provide a distraction from the pandemic and the other noise in the world (ahem) they also take up lots of mental energy. So many articles of the privileged brats every.single.day. So much of it is a bunch of lies. I do feel a strong need to comment on that. Keeping up with them consumes almost as much of my time as trying to find a place with vaccines. Yes, at times, it all gets too much. Happily, we adapt to this new normal, keep the faith and life goes on. Hugs to all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They miscalculated their bargaining power.



This this this.


----------



## creme fraiche

I completely agree on the oversaturation comment.  These 2 are so predictable and, frankly, boringly obvious.  I can’t even muster the interest to hate read the obviously planted articles.  Their PR articles in the DM, much like the daily Kardashian and (bafflingly) Kimberly Garner ones, are simply wallpaper background now.

The only thing I wonder about is the sheer cash they are burning through - the lawyers, staff, housing costs, pr costs are estimated to be astronomical.  No matter what the numbers are which are bandied about about contracts obtained, surely the amounts they are spending are unsustainable long term?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They miscalculated their bargaining power.



I honestly think they thought the BRF were so desperate to keep them in the firm they would have agreed to the most outrageous demands. Turns out, not so much because they swiftly put their personal feelings aside to protect their brand. Also, while I'm sure they are heartbroken over how things turned out with Harry they are probably not losing sleep over not having a relationship with Meghan.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Meant to quote @csshopper but it doesn't show up. 

No worries! It's media's attention grabing headlines. There were some disruption yes but nothing like some media would led you believe. There was a story that British lorry drivers had their ham sandwich confisticated at Dutch border. Apparently meat and dairy products cannot be moved without permit. I'd think the same applies to the other way around.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised they haven’t done another episode yet.  I bet they’ll use the events at the Capital as an excuse.


I was thinking the same, I can't cope with my days without word salad from H&M. They are the only shining hope this world has. 

On a separate note, I only had a free version of Spotify. I went to delete it from my phone a few days ago, as I wasn't using it and was doing a cleaning up of my phone apps, it has somehow uninstalled itself! Weird!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG people...Denmark has its very own Meghan! Apparently Princess Marie, wife to the spare Joachim, is deadly jealous of Crown Princess Mary (who a) outranks her b) is very popular with the Danish people c) gets the patronages and engagements Marie not so secretly wants. At this point the brothers are said to barely speak...sounds familiar?) and has been trying to kick up a fuss for a while.

But it seems that Queen Margrethe is not quite as patient as Queen Elizabeth and nibbed it in the bud: she quickly sent the troublemakers to Paris to a made-up position for Joachim (where he earns 40000 bucks a months, not quite as generous as the money the Sussexes waste), never publicly talks about Marie but is not shy to rave about Mary (and petty me is loving it only because I'm so tired of the jerks getting their way just because everyone else is too polite to retaliate).

Oh, and also Mary (Australian) learned Danish in lightning speed and made herself right at home in Denmark while Marie (French) isn't quite as interested to do the same.

Source: my daily newspaper, which doesn't usually run celebrity gossip, yet they dedicated half a page to the article.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Hey fans and friends of Archewell....

Just a friendly reminder, no politics.  We do give some leeway in this thread because we surely MUST talk about the royal family and some royal-adjacent Parliament/British opinion news concerning Meghan and JCMH Nice Pants.  

But generally, we need to keep the topic on the world-changing work of California's newest taxpayers. 

Thank you!



Cheers!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Interesting!
Came across this on twatter.

*Thomas Markle 'to make documentary about his life and raising daughter Meghan'*









						Thomas Markle 'to make documentary about his life and raising daughter Meghan'
					

Meghan Markle's dad Thomas, 76, says the new documentary will feature previously unseen home video footage of his daughter and will focus on her childhood and her pursuit of an acting career



					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting!
> Came across this on twatter.
> 
> *Thomas Markle 'to make documentary about his life and raising daughter Meghan'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle 'to make documentary about his life and raising daughter Meghan'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's dad Thomas, 76, says the new documentary will feature previously unseen home video footage of his daughter and will focus on her childhood and her pursuit of an acting career
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



As much as I dislike Meghan (and secretly want to read Samantha's book) I wish the Markles would just shut up, too. I would not be thrilled if my father made a documentary with childhood videos.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Seriously how hard is it to just be quiet and do your life and not go screeching around every corner at high speed looking for attention. The whole family needs to just calm down and clean their closets or get another hobby.  

Not you Doria, you seem OK. But all the rest of you Markles, please just stop already.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Hey fans and friends of Archewell....
> 
> Just a friendly reminder, no politics.  We do give some leeway in this thread because we surely MUST talk about the royal family and some royal-adjacent Parliament/British opinion news concerning Meghan and JCMH Nice Pants.
> 
> But generally, we need to keep the topic on the world-changing work of California's newest taxpayers.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers!



if there are any friends of archewell here, they're being very quiet these days


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Seriously how hard is it to just be quiet and do your life and not go screeching around every corner at high speed looking for attention. The whole family needs to just calm down and clean their closets or get another hobby.
> 
> Not you Doria, you seem OK. But all the rest of you Markles, please just stop already.


right, but she shows them no mercy, no gratitude or forgiveness to the man who raised her, put her through private school, paid for PS, etc.  So - even thought it may be tacky of him, I have no sympathy for her


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting!
> Came across this on twatter.
> 
> *Thomas Markle 'to make documentary about his life and raising daughter Meghan'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle 'to make documentary about his life and raising daughter Meghan'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's dad Thomas, 76, says the new documentary will feature previously unseen home video footage of his daughter and will focus on her childhood and her pursuit of an acting career
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk





QueenofWrapDress said:


> As much as I dislike Meghan (and secretly want to read Samantha's book) I wish the Markles would just shut up, too. I would not be thrilled if my father made a documentary with childhood videos.



I would also prefer they would shut up, particularly MM. However, I believe that TM will be kind to MM in the documentary. He seems (or seemed) blind to his daughter major flaws.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> right, but she shows them no mercy, no gratitude or forgiveness to the man who raised her, put her through private school, paid for PS, etc.  So - even thought it may be tacky of him, I have no sympathy for her



Oh absolutely. It's just that saying nothing would be the dignified thing to do.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I would also prefer they would shut up, particularly MM. However, I believe that TM will be kind to MM in the documentary. He seems (or seemed) blind to his daughter major flaws.



True that, he seemed to be completely smitten with her during her childhood and teen years.


----------



## LittleStar88

I think dad is just after a cash grab. Why not? He’s at the sunset of his life. Her sister also sees the money making opportunity And could probably use a little extra money.

Honestly, I don’t blame them. MM has kind of asked for this to happen.


----------



## bellecate

Just saw this,
*Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’ as Meghan awaits new book*
*PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.*
By BRIAN MCGLEENON








						Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’
					

PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## carmen56

bellecate said:


> Just saw this,
> *Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’ as Meghan awaits new book*
> *PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.*
> By BRIAN MCGLEENON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



How does he know what’s in the book?  Has Harry had an advance copy?  I doubt it.


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> How does he know what’s in the book?  Has Harry had an advance copy?  I doubt it.


he doesn't have to read it to know it's all lies....Meegan told him so


----------



## chicinthecity777

carmen56 said:


> How does he know what’s in the book?  Has Harry had an advance copy?  I doubt it.


I think Omid gave him the inside scoop, you know, who already claimed MM was not worried about the book. They all got an advanced copy or have a crystal ball!


----------



## chicinthecity777

And all those cashing in on family, Harry has to be the master! How much has he milked his mother? SMH!


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Just saw this,
> *Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’ as Meghan awaits new book*
> *PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.*
> By BRIAN MCGLEENON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Yeah right!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I think dad is just after a cash grab. Why not? He’s at the sunset of his life. Her sister also sees the money making opportunity And could probably use a little extra money.
> 
> Honestly, I don’t blame them. MM has kind of asked for this to happen.



You know what, I think y'all are right. Had she not treated all of them like sh*t they might have been more tightlipped and in case of the dad had she been a bit more generous with him (if you spend one. Million. Dollars. On a wardrobe for nine months, I'm sure you can send your dad 5000 a month to make his life comfortable. Geez, he's living in Mexico, he could probably live very comfortably off half of that).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Just saw this,
> *Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’ as Meghan awaits new book*
> *PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.*
> By BRIAN MCGLEENON
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘doesn’t believe a word out of Samantha’s mouth’
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY "doesn't believe a word" of the content in a new book to be published written by Meghan Markle's half-sister, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Aww of course he doesn't. The narcissist has been feeding him sh*t about her family from the day they met. Remember, the family she never had?


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know what, I think y'all are right. Had she not treated all of them like sh*t they might have been more tightlipped and in case of the dad had she been a bit more generous with him (if you spend one. Million. Dollars. On a wardrobe for nine months, I'm sure you can send your dad 5000 a month to make his life comfortable. Geez, he's living in Mexico, he could probably live very comfortably off half of that).


I think when MM landed a Prince, the Dad expected that he would be looked after.  Instead she “marked him”, didn’t allow him to walk her down the aisle and wrote a self-serving letter which MM leaked for publicity.  So if someone goes to her Dad and Samantha offering $$ for tell-all books, videos etc - they have no loyalty to her and can do as they please!


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> I think dad is just after a cash grab. Why not? He’s at the sunset of his life. Her sister also sees the money making opportunity And could probably use a little extra money.
> 
> Honestly, I don’t blame them. MM has kind of asked for this to happen.


I approve this 100%. She’s making bux so should they. It’s capitalism lol.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I agree with everything you said except for this part. I don't think Harry wants to go back. Even if he did, he is too stubborn and proud to admit he made a mistake. He likes that he doesn't have to answer to his grandmother and father. He likes that he doesn't have to attend to any responsibilities. If it wasn't for Covid they would be finagling invitations to red carpet events and exclusive celebrity parties. He would like those kind of diversions. I think it's the quarantining that is depressing him most.



That's very likely. Let's say that's the case. Then how pathetic can a 30 something military trained guy get? He relies on his love interest snake to weasel his way out of the BRF? But of course not before the 50 million dollar wedding and numerous public events where thousands of little kids wasted their time tying up beautiful posies to give to their ungrateful "Can't wait to get the hell out of this country, yank Dope Prince by his leash to give me notoriety so I can rake in the big bucks back home and rub it into Hollywood faces after I crank out the prerequisite progeny" scheming scammer. Harry is a yellow bellied invertebrate.


----------



## bellecate

needlv said:


> I think when MM landed a Prince, the Dad expected that he would be looked after.  Instead she “marked him”, didn’t allow him to walk her down the aisle and wrote a self-serving letter which MM leaked for publicity.  So if someone goes to her Dad and Samantha offering $$ for tell-all books, videos etc - they have no loyalty to her and can do as they please!



I don't know that he expected to have her look after him. I think if she hadn't thrown him under the bus over the whole 'have the pap's take his picture getting ready to go to the wedding' maybe he would have continued living his private life. I personally don't find what he did so egregious. Not being used to being in the spotlight like her, he might have thought there was nothing wrong in it. My 2 cents.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG people...Denmark has its very own Meghan! Apparently Princess Marie, wife to the spare Joachim, is deadly jealous of Crown Princess Mary (who a) outranks her b) is very popular with the Danish people c) gets the patronages and engagements Marie not so secretly wants. At this point the brothers are said to barely speak...sounds familiar?) and has been trying to kick up a fuss for a while.
> 
> But it seems that Queen Margrethe is not quite as patient as Queen Elizabeth and nibbed it in the bud: she quickly sent the troublemakers to Paris to a made-up position for Joachim (where he earns 40000 bucks a months, not quite as generous as the money the Sussexes waste), never publicly talks about Marie but is not shy to rave about Mary (and petty me is loving it only because I'm so tired of the jerks getting their way just because everyone else is too polite to retaliate).
> 
> Oh, and also Mary (Australian) learned Danish in lightning speed and made herself right at home in Denmark while Marie (French) isn't quite as interested to do the same.
> 
> Source: my daily newspaper, which doesn't usually run celebrity gossip, yet they dedicated half a page to the article.


How could we have survived this pandemic without our daily doses of drama from the spares and their spouses. 
Synopsis: Once upon a time, when CP Frederik was younger, he had a tendency to stutter during impromptu speeches or Q&A from reporters and seemed more interested in anything other than being a crown prince. His younger brother Joachim, was tall, slim, affable, assertive, but with no real substance. He was such a crowd pleaser that folks started suggesting that he should bypass Frederik in the line of succession, even though they knew it would never happen. Well, Frederik studied, matured, married, had children, and settled down to his duties. Then, the Danish people realized that Joachim was just another jerk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Did Harry ever actually meet Samantha?  He never met her father either, right, nor anyone from the Markle side of the family?  I find the whole thing awfully strange.  Money wasn’t an issue so it could have easily been arranged.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aww of course he doesn't. The narcissist has been feeding him sh*t about her family from the day they met. Remember, the family she never had?


I think Harry meant to say: 'My wife told me that I don't believe a word that comes out of Samantha’s mouth'


----------



## Chanbal

*Harry and Meghan's brand 'faces failure' - Diana's ex-chief of staff in Megxit warning*
THE Harry and Meghan "brand" will fail unless the former royal lives a life of sacrifice and service, Diana's former chief of staff, Patrick Jephson, has warned.

He said: “Harry and Meghan have an evolving brand issue. “One could argue that, at its best, membership of the Royal Family gives you access to the most extraordinary and powerful brand in the world.
“To voluntarily divest yourselves of all those advantages in pursuit of something else is very daring – and we don’t even know what that something else is.

“But if it departs very much from that great tradition of personal sacrifice and public service that defines the monarchy brand then I don’t believe it will succeed.”

Prince Harry vowed to “lead a life of service” barely 24 hours after Buckingham Palace announced last January that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were to give up their HRH titles and no longer formally represent the 94-year-old monarch.

But Harry and Meghan are also reported to have made more than £200million since they left the UK by what critics say amounts to trading on their royal links.

This includes a £122million deal with Netflix to produce documentaries, feature films and programmes for children, plus a £30million podcast deal with Spotify.

Mr Jephson was talking during a virtual conference on promoting and protecting personal brands, which was organised by a US-based public affairs agency.

"life of sacrifice and service" in a 16-toilet mansion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From Sarah Vine:
_I’m sure Bradby means well. He wants the public to see the humans at the heart of this drama. But at a time when people are losing their lives and their livelihoods, I’m afraid Meghan and Harry’s ‘struggle’ seems at best irrelevant, at worst narcissistic. Don’t get me wrong: I am not one of those people who thinks that lucky people have no right to be unhappy. I have been extremely lucky in my life and I’m no stranger to the black dog.
But it is important to maintain perspective, and right now neither Harry nor Meghan – nor those close to them – are seeing this.
If Bradby really wants to help them, he needs to tell them this. He is a highly effective journalist and perfectly capable of speaking truth to power. The only possible explanation for why he doesn’t is that he is scared of being cut loose. It’s true that Harry can be very petulant when he doesn’t hear what he wants to hear. 
But, as the Queen herself put it so wisely, you can’t have it both ways. Either you’re a Prince of the realm, bathed in privilege but also bound by certain conventions, or you’re just an ordinary citizen subject to the vicissitudes of everyday life.
Similarly, either you’re Tom Bradby, respected broadcaster, impartial reporter, or you’re just another Scobie, a woke Boswell but without the balls or the wit._









						SARAH VINE: What TV's Tom has got to tell Harry and Meghan
					

SARAH VINE: When celebrity couples announce they're taking a break from social media, it usually means they're either heading for rehab or the divorce courts.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Nobody cares



*SARAH VINE: What TV’s Tom has got to tell Harry and Meghan*
By SARAH VINE FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 17:42 EST, 16 January 2021 | UPDATED: 19:16 EST, 16 January 2021

When celebrity couples announce they’re taking a break from social media, it usually means they’re either heading for rehab or the divorce courts.
So it was a relief to see that no sooner had the Duke and Duchess of Sussex taken tearful leave of their millions of Instagram followers they were back, broadcasting loud and clear via an alternative outlet: ITV’s Tom Bradby.
Bradby, you may remember, is the Royal interviewer who fed Meghan the line about no one ever asking her if she is OK, thus giving her the perfect opportunity to unleash the full force of those Bambi eyes.






+3


Already they have secured lucrative deals with Spotify and Netflix, invested in some super-duper new health drink that’s endorsed by all the right people – and taken possession of a luxury home in the Californian hills
Tom Bradby claims Prince Harry is 'heartbroken' over Royal Family rift


Having known Harry since he was a young man, and been a guest at the Sussexes’ wedding, Bradby has a knack for asking all the right questions – and as a consequence has been hand-picked by the couple as one of their trusted representatives on Earth.




Along with a few others – including Omid Scobie, co-author of that 300-page glorified press release, Finding Freedom – Bradby has privileged access.
And this evening on ITV, presumably to mark the anniversary of ‘Megxit’, he ‘opens up’ about how the pair are feeling now that they’ve left behind the dreary shores of Blighty for life in La La Land.
By most people’s standards, it’s been a huge success.





Bradby, you may remember, is the Royal interviewer who fed Meghan the line about no one ever asking her if she is OK, thus giving her the perfect opportunity to unleash the full force of those Bambi eyes
Already they have secured lucrative deals with Spotify and Netflix, invested in some super-duper new health drink that’s endorsed by all the right people – and taken possession of a luxury home in the Californian hills.
No more shaking hands in the drizzle with the wife of the under-gardener at Windsor for Meghan. She is now back where she belongs – surrounded by proper queens – the likes of Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey and Elton John – not some white-haired old biddy in a padded riding gilet.
And Harry is where he wants to be, by his beloved’s side and unencumbered by Royal duty and tedious questions from the British press (not to mention his own brother). He has even, according to his new neighbour, Rob Lowe, grown a ponytail.
In theory, then, all good. Except, of course, it’s not. This is Harry and Meghan, remember. More drama than the season finale of RuPaul’s Drag Race.
It turns out that far from being delighted to have finally made a new start, poor Harry is ‘heartbroken’ at the situation with his family back home.
‘I think they wrestle with their position in life,’ Bradby gushes. ‘I think they all do.’
I’m sure Bradby means well. He wants the public to see the humans at the heart of this drama. But at a time when people are losing their lives and their livelihoods, I’m afraid Meghan and Harry’s ‘struggle’ seems at best irrelevant, at worst narcissistic. Don’t get me wrong: I am not one of those people who thinks that lucky people have no right to be unhappy. I have been extremely lucky in my life and I’m no stranger to the black dog.
But it is important to maintain perspective, and right now neither Harry nor Meghan – nor those close to them – are seeing this.
If Bradby really wants to help them, he needs to tell them this. He is a highly effective journalist and perfectly capable of speaking truth to power. The only possible explanation for why he doesn’t is that he is scared of being cut loose. It’s true that Harry can be very petulant when he doesn’t hear what he wants to hear.
But, as the Queen herself put it so wisely, you can’t have it both ways. Either you’re a Prince of the realm, bathed in privilege but also bound by certain conventions, or you’re just an ordinary citizen subject to the vicissitudes of everyday life.
Similarly, either you’re Tom Bradby, respected broadcaster, impartial reporter, or you’re just another Scobie, a woke Boswell but without the balls or the wit.
I know which I’d rather be.
.



ETA: one of the comments:
_Disgruntled dinosaur, Cardiff, United Kingdom, about 6 hours ago

How lucky for them that no-one else is "Wrestling with their positions in life" at present, so can give them the boundless sympathy that their harrowing circumstances deserve! Totally unbelievable!!!!!_


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> From Sarah Vine:
> _I’m sure Bradby means well. He wants the public to see the humans at the heart of this drama. But at a time when people are losing their lives and their livelihoods, I’m afraid Meghan and Harry’s ‘struggle’ seems at best irrelevant, at worst narcissistic. Don’t get me wrong: I am not one of those people who thinks that lucky people have no right to be unhappy. I have been extremely lucky in my life and I’m no stranger to the black dog.
> But it is important to maintain perspective, and right now neither Harry nor Meghan – nor those close to them – are seeing this.
> If Bradby really wants to help them, he needs to tell them this. He is a highly effective journalist and perfectly capable of speaking truth to power. The only possible explanation for why he doesn’t is that he is scared of being cut loose. It’s true that Harry can be very petulant when he doesn’t hear what he wants to hear.
> But, as the Queen herself put it so wisely, you can’t have it both ways. Either you’re a Prince of the realm, bathed in privilege but also bound by certain conventions, or you’re just an ordinary citizen subject to the vicissitudes of everyday life.
> Similarly, either you’re Tom Bradby, respected broadcaster, impartial reporter, or you’re just another Scobie, a woke Boswell but without the balls or the wit._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: What TV's Tom has got to tell Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: When celebrity couples announce they're taking a break from social media, it usually means they're either heading for rehab or the divorce courts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Nobody cares
> 
> 
> 
> *SARAH VINE: What TV’s Tom has got to tell Harry and Meghan*
> By SARAH VINE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> 
> PUBLISHED: 17:42 EST, 16 January 2021 | UPDATED: 19:16 EST, 16 January 2021
> 
> When celebrity couples announce they’re taking a break from social media, it usually means they’re either heading for rehab or the divorce courts.
> So it was a relief to see that no sooner had the Duke and Duchess of Sussex taken tearful leave of their millions of Instagram followers they were back, broadcasting loud and clear via an alternative outlet: ITV’s Tom Bradby.
> Bradby, you may remember, is the Royal interviewer who fed Meghan the line about no one ever asking her if she is OK, thus giving her the perfect opportunity to unleash the full force of those Bambi eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +3
> 
> 
> Already they have secured lucrative deals with Spotify and Netflix, invested in some super-duper new health drink that’s endorsed by all the right people – and taken possession of a luxury home in the Californian hills
> Tom Bradby claims Prince Harry is 'heartbroken' over Royal Family rift
> 
> 
> Having known Harry since he was a young man, and been a guest at the Sussexes’ wedding, Bradby has a knack for asking all the right questions – and as a consequence has been hand-picked by the couple as one of their trusted representatives on Earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Along with a few others – including Omid Scobie, co-author of that 300-page glorified press release, Finding Freedom – Bradby has privileged access.
> And this evening on ITV, presumably to mark the anniversary of ‘Megxit’, he ‘opens up’ about how the pair are feeling now that they’ve left behind the dreary shores of Blighty for life in La La Land.
> By most people’s standards, it’s been a huge success.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bradby, you may remember, is the Royal interviewer who fed Meghan the line about no one ever asking her if she is OK, thus giving her the perfect opportunity to unleash the full force of those Bambi eyes
> Already they have secured lucrative deals with Spotify and Netflix, invested in some super-duper new health drink that’s endorsed by all the right people – and taken possession of a luxury home in the Californian hills.
> No more shaking hands in the drizzle with the wife of the under-gardener at Windsor for Meghan. She is now back where she belongs – surrounded by proper queens – the likes of Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey and Elton John – not some white-haired old biddy in a padded riding gilet.
> And Harry is where he wants to be, by his beloved’s side and unencumbered by Royal duty and tedious questions from the British press (not to mention his own brother). He has even, according to his new neighbour, Rob Lowe, grown a ponytail.
> In theory, then, all good. Except, of course, it’s not. This is Harry and Meghan, remember. More drama than the season finale of RuPaul’s Drag Race.
> It turns out that far from being delighted to have finally made a new start, poor Harry is ‘heartbroken’ at the situation with his family back home.
> ‘I think they wrestle with their position in life,’ Bradby gushes. ‘I think they all do.’
> I’m sure Bradby means well. He wants the public to see the humans at the heart of this drama. But at a time when people are losing their lives and their livelihoods, I’m afraid Meghan and Harry’s ‘struggle’ seems at best irrelevant, at worst narcissistic. Don’t get me wrong: I am not one of those people who thinks that lucky people have no right to be unhappy. I have been extremely lucky in my life and I’m no stranger to the black dog.
> But it is important to maintain perspective, and right now neither Harry nor Meghan – nor those close to them – are seeing this.
> If Bradby really wants to help them, he needs to tell them this. He is a highly effective journalist and perfectly capable of speaking truth to power. The only possible explanation for why he doesn’t is that he is scared of being cut loose. It’s true that Harry can be very petulant when he doesn’t hear what he wants to hear.
> But, as the Queen herself put it so wisely, you can’t have it both ways. Either you’re a Prince of the realm, bathed in privilege but also bound by certain conventions, or you’re just an ordinary citizen subject to the vicissitudes of everyday life.
> Similarly, either you’re Tom Bradby, respected broadcaster, impartial reporter, or you’re just another but without the balls or the wit.
> I know which I’d rather be.
> .



Is Sarah Vine an active member of this thread? Harry, a "petulant when he doesn’t hear what he wants to hear." "Scobie, a woke Boswell" and "co-author of that 300-page glorified press release". "Meghan and Harry’s ‘struggle’ seems at best irrelevant, at worst narcissistic." She was inspired, great article!


----------



## Lodpah

Deleted.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is this real? This so called 'royal expert' works for Vanity Fair, one of MM's magazines.
> 
> *Megxit review is CANCELLED: Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are satisfied new arrangement is working and there's 'no need' to revisit one year on, royal expert claims*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's scheduled 12-month review following their split from the royal family has been cancelled, according to one royal expert.
> 
> Speaking to True Royalty TV's Royal Beat, Vanity Fair correspondent Katie Nicholl said that while the Duke, 36, and the Duchess of Sussex, 39, are being observed closely about the commercial deals they're making, nothing they have done so far suggests the planned one-year review needs to go ahead.
> 
> Nicholl told the online broadcaster: 'My understanding from the Sussexes camp is that there has been communication with the Queen, Prince Charles and with William as well. The general feeling is that this [current situation] is working.'
> 
> She added: 'This isn’t to say that people are not watching closely what these deals are, what the couple are doing and what these projects are going to be.
> 
> But there is not this need to have this review one year on.'
> 
> However, the Queen is still yet to confirm whether Prince Harry should keep his military title, Nicholl said.
> 
> 'The one thing that is outstanding is the issue of his [Prince Harry’s] military title and I am told that it will be the Queen that ultimately makes that decision.'
> 
> No review and keep titles???



This says to me that we (BRF) won't have you back so there's no point is discussing,_ not _all is fine as it is.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is Sarah Vine an active member of this thread? Harry, a "petulant when he doesn’t hear what he wants to hear." "Scobie, a woke Boswell" and "co-author of that 300-page glorified press release". "Meghan and Harry’s ‘struggle’ seems at best irrelevant, at worst narcissistic." She was inspired, great article!



"This is Harry and Meghan, remember. More drama than the season finale of RuPaul’s Drag Race."

Yup, so true, but without the wit, glamour and commitment.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I have to agree with this particular source. Getting his journalist buddy to agree to be interviewed to whine on his behalf so he didn’t have to be interviewed whining himself is Harry playing the public relations game. He has learned so much about such things this year.



I think the general public have also learned so much over the last year. 

'Quitting' SM and then getting others to run PR on your behalf is clearly just advertorial. Harry and Co will have to be a bit more sophisticated than that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe H&M wanted to travel to the UK so they could get the vaccine faster. Ya kno, cut in line?  Knowing what we know about the .1%’ers, they probably have already gotten it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know what, I think y'all are right. Had she not treated all of them like sh*t they might have been more tightlipped and in case of the dad had she been a bit more generous with him (if you spend one. Million. Dollars. On a wardrobe for nine months, I'm sure you can send your dad 5000 a month to make his life comfortable. Geez, he's living in Mexico, he   p robably live very comfortably off half of that).


less than half.....a friend of ours bought a nice (modest but newer) home on the beach for some tiny amount.  something like $25K - you don't own the land but lease it for life.  Of course her dad may have some medical expenses that would bring the cost up but still...


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know what, I think y'all are right. Had she not treated all of them like sh*t they might have been more tightlipped and in case of the dad had she been a bit more generous with him (if you spend one. Million. Dollars. On a wardrobe for nine months, I'm sure you can send your dad 5000 a month to make his life comfortable. Geez, he's living in Mexico, he could probably live very comfortably off half of that).





sdkitty said:


> less than half.....a friend of ours bought a nice (modest but newer) home on the beach for some tiny amount.  something like $25K - you don't own the land but lease it for life.  Of course her dad may have some medical expenses that would bring the cost up but still...


I don't know TM, but he was probably not even looking from an allowance from MM. One thing that I found really shocking was that MM didn't even care to ask TM if the loan that he took out "to help pay for Meghan's education" had been repaid. According to court documents, "she says she's unaware if the loan has been repaid". With all that money she was spending on her, she didn't bother to ask if her father was still repaying a loan taken for her education. 









						Meghan Markle Denies Her Father's Claim That She Never Helped Him Financially
					

Meghan set the record straight in new court documents.




					www.marieclaire.com
				











						Meghan's dad says he 'only got modest gifts' from Duchess
					

MEGHAN MARKLE’s father has claimed he paid tens of thousands on his daughter, but only received “modest” gifts when she finally landed a big TV role, according to court documents.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I don't know TM, but he was probably not even looking from an allowance from MM. One thing that I found really shocking was that MM didn't even care to ask TM if the loan that he took out "to help pay for Meghan's education" had been repaid. According to court documents, "she says she's unaware if the loan has been repaid". With all that money she was spending on her, she didn't bother to ask if her father was still repaying a loan taken for her education.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Denies Her Father's Claim That She Never Helped Him Financially
> 
> 
> Meghan set the record straight in new court documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's dad says he 'only got modest gifts' from Duchess
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE’s father has claimed he paid tens of thousands on his daughter, but only received “modest” gifts when she finally landed a big TV role, according to court documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Hmmm    ... the college thing ...  FYI Northwestern is an expensive private (ie big tuition and fees) college , she did not receive a full grant/ scholarship and in those days, like 20 years ago... the 4 years would have cost about $100k, she could have gone to a California UC or state school for much less, she chose an out of state expensive education, not sure why, as CA schools have pretty good reputations in the entertainment industry.. (think USC bribe scandal - every celeb spawn tries to get into USC/UCLA to study show biz)

It is a gray area - should US parents have to pay the entire lot ($100k), or should the children pay their own way , it is a huge expense, I know families (at about the same socio economic levels) where the parents pay outright and those where the kids rack up debt, it depends on a lot of stuff - what other financial crises arise at college time, how many kids are there to put thru college etc 
SUMMARY there are lots of accepted ways to split college expenses ... 

*BUT BUT BUT ...  This was 20 years ago !!!!!!
They are still fussing about this ??? Get over it ... Let go !

The whole Markle saga is a boatload about a family that has not gotten over stuff that happened eons ago ...  I take no side in this, all I see is the need to move on ... *


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> *BUT BUT BUT ...  This was 20 years ago !!!!!!
> They are still fussing about this ??? Get over it ... Let go !
> 
> The whole Markle saga is a boatload about a family that has not gotten over stuff that happened eons ago ...  I take no side in this, all I see is the need to move on ... *



I don’t think college tuition is at the root of it. By all accounts Meghan and her father were still on excellent terms when she married Trevor back in 2011. She was also still on great terms with her childhood best friend Ninaki Priddy. It seems about the time Meghan was on Suits and decided to ditch Trevor, she began cutting away all of the other important people from her early life. It is understandable that those people would be resentful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did you know Lady Colin Campbell has a Youtube channel?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm    ... the college thing ...  FYI Northwestern is an expensive private (ie big tuition and fees) college , she did not receive a full grant/ scholarship and in those days, like 20 years ago... the 4 years would have cost about $100k, she could have gone to a California UC or state school for much less, she chose an out of state expensive education, not sure why, as CA schools have pretty good reputations in the entertainment industry.. (think USC bribe scandal - every celeb spawn tries to get into USC/UCLA to study show biz)
> 
> It is a gray area - should US parents have to pay the entire lot ($100k), or should the children pay their own way , it is a huge expense, I know families (at about the same socio economic levels) where the parents pay outright and those where the kids rack up debt, it depends on a lot of stuff - what other financial crises arise at college time, how many kids are there to put thru college etc
> SUMMARY there are lots of accepted ways to split college expenses ...
> 
> *BUT BUT BUT ...  This was 20 years ago !!!!!!
> They are still fussing about this ??? Get over it ... Let go !
> 
> The whole Markle saga is a boatload about a family that has not gotten over stuff that happened eons ago ...  I take no side in this, all I see is the need to move on ... *


Yes, Northwestern is an expensive private school and she could have studied for a lot less at the University of California (major tuition reduction for California residents), both UCLA and UC Berkeley are prestigious schools rated within the top colleges in the US.
However, the issue with the student loan was brought up in court documents (her lawsuit against Associated Newspapers) in response to MM's apparently false claims that she had put herself through college. This is still an ongoing process. 









						Meghan Markle 'LIED about putting herself through college'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been accused of lying on who truly paid for her university fees by her half-brother, Thomas Markle Jr.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did you know Lady Colin Campbell has a Youtube channel?


I had no idea. I'll check, it must be fun. Thanks!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think college tuition is at the root of it. By all accounts Meghan and her father were still on excellent terms when she married Trevor back in 2011. She was also still on great terms with her childhood best friend Ninaki Priddy. It seems about the time Meghan was on Suits and decided to ditch Trevor, she began cutting away all of the other important people from her early life. It is understandable that those people would be resentful.


I agree. I read somewhere that TM paid also for her weeding back in 2011.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The more time that goes by the more I think these projected earnings that are reported over and over are baloney. I think the Netflix number was based on the Obamas, and I think the Spotify number was based on Rogan. The Harkles don’t seem to have the creativity or work ethic to do with either of those parties are doing in their respective fields, so there is no way I see them bringing in the same numbers of viewers/listeners.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> The more time that goes by the more I think these projected earnings that are reported over and over our baloney. I think the Netflix number was based on the Obamas, and I think the Spotify number was based on Rogan. The Harkles don’t seem to have the creativity or work ethic to do with either of those parties are doing in their respective fields, so there is no way I see them bringing in the same numbers of viewers/listeners.



I hope you are right. That they were handed such lucrative contracts over hundreds of more talented, deserving people solely because of the royal connections is the definition of privilege.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> The more time that goes by the more I think these projected earnings that are reported over and over are baloney. I think the Netflix number was based on the Obamas, and I think the Spotify number was based on Rogan. The Harkles don’t seem to have the creativity or work ethic to do with either of those parties are doing in their respective fields, so there is no way I see them bringing in the same numbers of viewers/listeners.


It is baloney.  At most they received a few hundred thousand at signing for Netflix.  Everything about them is hyperbole.  They think that throwing around big numbers makes them important and looking successful.  Until they actually produce something, they are poseurs.  Don't hold your breath for anything great.


----------



## bag-mania

If that is true they may have overplayed their hand by releasing the potential contract amount. Those big names like Oprah that they want to attract to their projects are going to think "they don't need my help, they are doing fine." Hell, many big stars don't have that much money thrown at them upfront as is being reportedly given to Harry and Meghan.


----------



## Chanbal

Hope some of our TPF members had a chance to apply! 
*Meghan Markle court case: Duchess showdown to be streamed live to public, judge rules*
MEGHAN MARKLE'S court case against the publishers of the Daily Mail will be open to the public next week, with people allowed to request access to the court's live stream.

In order to ensure this continues, the court has said members of the public can apply to watch the virtual proceedings.

Mr Justice Warby said: “I have no doubt that the summary judgment application will be of considerable interest. It is more than merely procedural.

“Moreover, the issues on that application are of legal interest as well of general interest to members of the public.”



showdown-live


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Yes, Northwestern is an expensive private school and she could have studied for a lot less at the University of California (major tuition reduction for California residents), both UCLA and UC Berkeley are prestigious schools rated within the top colleges in the US.
> However, the issue with the student loan was brought up in court documents (her lawsuit against Associated Newspapers) in response to MM's apparently false claims that she had put herself through college. This is still an ongoing process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'LIED about putting herself through college'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has been accused of lying on who truly paid for her university fees by her half-brother, Thomas Markle Jr.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Good point the college tuition CAME UP in the court docs ... wonder which side brought it up ...


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that are bored on a Sunday afternoon, there a new POLL going on:



			Reach PLC · Login
		










						POLL: Do you think Harry and Meghan will ever want to return as royals
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry stood down as senior members of the Royal Family last year and as part of the terms of their split, the couple were told they could no longer use their HRH titles. But do you think the Sussexes should keep their royal titles? And should they retain their...




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hope some of our TPF members from the UK have applied:
> *Meghan Markle court case: Duchess showdown to be streamed live to public, judge rules*
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S court case against the publishers of the Daily Mail will be open to the public next week, with people allowed to request access to the court's live stream.
> 
> In order to ensure this continues, the court has said members of the public can apply to watch the virtual proceedings.
> 
> Mr Justice Warby said: “I have no doubt that the summary judgment application will be of considerable interest. It is more than merely procedural.
> 
> “Moreover, the issues on that application are of legal interest as well of general interest to members of the public.”
> 
> 
> 
> showdown-live



Oh wow. Seems she misjudged once again. How embarrassing.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. Seems she misjudged once again. How embarrassing.


Justice Warby has been promoted to another position so after this, he is done with their trial.  I am wondering if he decided to allow the live stream because he is going to unload on all of them, i.e. Meghan and her attorneys.  He can have his say about what a sh*t show this turned into, dismiss the case, and walk away.  If he doesn't dismiss it, he can still walk away after venting his opinion of the proceedings and not have to deal with any of them again.  Lucky Justice Warby!

RE the misjudging...jokes on her as she missed her chance to emote via live streaming.  Of course it could have been the most embarrassing moments of her entire life for all the world to see.  Too bad!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Good point the college tuition CAME UP in the court docs ... wonder which side brought it up ...


I would think that TM brought it up in response to comments like the ones that MM put herself through college and the royals were the family MM never had. He must have been very upset as he paid for her education, 1st or 2nd wedding (the 1st was annulled?)...and he was likely a very supportive father.


----------



## Chanbal

While TM's documentary might be interesting to watch, I hope we will have a chance to be doing better things by the time it's released. Until covid is defeated, more from the Markles:

_Mr Markle, 76, said the film would feature previously unseen home videos and photographs of Meghan.

 ‘It begins with my life, my family, my love of theatre and television and how I got there. 

'Then my life with Meghan, growing up, her school days until she went off to college, and when her career began.

‘We had a good life together, up through her first marriage and her move to Canada. Then a new story begins. It’s kind of like “What happened to my baby girl?”.’

He accused the couple of saying ‘trashy things’ about him and said he believed his relationship with Meghan was damaged beyond repair.

In the film, Thomas Markle: My Story, he said he was embarrassed and disappointed by Meghan and Harry’s decision to step back from their duties as senior royals._
_
He said they had an ‘obligation’ to represent the Royal Family and said their new freedom to make commercial deals to earn money risked jeopardising the reputation of the royals._









						Thomas Markle's new film with 'unseen videos and photos' of Meghan
					

Thomas Markle, 76 is to make a documentary about his life, with unseen home videos and photos of The Duchess of Sussex, 39. He has not seen Meghan since her wedding to Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> While TM's documentary might be interesting to watch, I hope we will have a chance to be doing better things by the time it's released. Until covid is defeated, more from the Markles:
> 
> _Mr Markle, 76, said the film would feature previously unseen home videos and photographs of Meghan.
> 
> ‘It begins with my life, my family, my love of theatre and television and how I got there.
> 
> 'Then my life with Meghan, growing up, her school days until she went off to college, and when her career began.
> 
> ‘We had a good life together, up through her first marriage and her move to Canada. Then a new story begins. It’s kind of like “What happened to my baby girl?”.’
> 
> He accused the couple of saying ‘trashy things’ about him and said he believed his relationship with Meghan was damaged beyond repair.
> 
> In the film, Thomas Markle: My Story, he said he was embarrassed and disappointed by Meghan and Harry’s decision to step back from their duties as senior royals._
> 
> _*He said they had an ‘obligation’ to represent the Royal Family and said their new freedom to make commercial deals to earn money risked jeopardising the reputation of the royals.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle's new film with 'unseen videos and photos' of Meghan
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle, 76 is to make a documentary about his life, with unseen home videos and photos of The Duchess of Sussex, 39. He has not seen Meghan since her wedding to Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



_*He said they had an ‘obligation’ to represent the Royal Family and said their new freedom to make commercial deals to earn money risked jeopardising the reputation of the royals.*_

He certainly understood the score, which is more than Meghan and Harry did or they just chose to ignore it.  The man knows he is at the end of his life and he wants to set people straight as to his life with his family and his daughter.  What a shame that he has to do this in the first place.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> _*He said they had an ‘obligation’ to represent the Royal Family and said their new freedom to make commercial deals to earn money risked jeopardising the reputation of the royals.*_
> 
> He certainly understood the score, which is more than Meghan and Harry did or they just chose to ignore it.  The man knows he is at the end of his life and he wants to set people straight as to his life with his family and his daughter.  What a shame that he has to do this in the first place.


TM is right, what MM&H did could have damaged the BRF. It certainly interfered with his right to enjoy a peaceful retirement.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Hope some of our TPF members had a chance to apply!
> *Meghan Markle court case: Duchess showdown to be streamed live to public, judge rules*
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S court case against the publishers of the Daily Mail will be open to the public next week, with people allowed to request access to the court's live stream.
> 
> In order to ensure this continues, the court has said members of the public can apply to watch the virtual proceedings.
> 
> Mr Justice Warby said: “I have no doubt that the summary judgment application will be of considerable interest. It is more than merely procedural.
> 
> “Moreover, the issues on that application are of legal interest as well of general interest to members of the public.”
> 
> 
> 
> showdown-live


Hopefully she'll have to put some of her "exemplary acting skills" on display.  Where's the popcorn?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully she'll have to put some of her "exemplary acting skills" on display.  Where's the popcorn?



Oh, I don’t expect her to be participating, unfortunately. She’ll leave it all to the lawyers. I’m sure they are paying them enough.


----------



## rose60610

i just forced myself to go through a 52 minute or whatever Youtube of M&H's meeting each other and bla bla pre-wedding relationship. I heard Meghan speak more than three words for the first time. UGGGGHH!  She had the worst little girl-trying-to-sound-grown-up voice I've ever heard. Meghan is irritating to listen to. BUT, when addressing a large audience she somehow found a more adult voice that wasn't as nauseating to listen to. There were all these British "journalists" weighing in stating that Meghan was such a huge asset to the BRF and brought them into modern times.  Obviously that was before the "we want to be independent" garbage. I can't believe this kind of coverage.  Whoever looks up to MM must have a very challenging life, and I hope MM's admirers realize that their struggles are better confronted by themselves and not with MM's empty puppy-dog eyed fake empathy.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully she'll have to put some of her "exemplary acting skills" on display.  Where's the popcorn?





bag-mania said:


> Oh, I don’t expect her to be participating, unfortunately. She’ll leave it all to the lawyers. I’m sure they are paying them enough.


MM was quiet in the last days, and I thought that she was busy rehearsing her lines. Lawyers, oh no!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM was quiet in the last days, and I thought that she was busy rehearsing her lines. Lawyers, oh no!



Have you heard that she is going to be part of it? I had assumed she wasn’t because it will be hard and she won’t want to subject herself to the judgement of others. 

Believe me I’ll be delighted to hear the play-by-play of her testimony should she be brave enough to do it herself. Bring it on!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Have you heard that she is going to be part of it? I had assumed she wasn’t because it will be hard and she won’t want to subject herself to the judgement of others.
> 
> Believe me I’ll be delighted to hear the play-by-play of her testimony should she be brave enough to do it herself. Bring it on!


Didn't hear anything apart that her case will be heard on January 19. "Summary judgments are awarded if the court believes one side in a case has an overwhelming prospect of success." I don't think she has such prospect. It looks like her bid to win is "hapless and hopeless".









						Meghan Markle's Bid to Stop Grilling on Private Life Hopeless, Lawyers Say
					

Meghan Markle's attempt to avoid a media circus around her private life by winning her high-stakes tabloid privacy case without a trial "will fail," lawyers tell Newsweek.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Hope some of our TPF members had a chance to apply!
> *Meghan Markle court case: Duchess showdown to be streamed live to public, judge rules*
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S court case against the publishers of the Daily Mail will be open to the public next week, with people allowed to request access to the court's live stream.
> 
> In order to ensure this continues, the court has said members of the public can apply to watch the virtual proceedings.
> 
> Mr Justice Warby said: “I have no doubt that the summary judgment application will be of considerable interest. It is more than merely procedural.
> 
> “Moreover, the issues on that application are of legal interest as well of general interest to members of the public.”
> 
> 
> 
> showdown-live


Unfortunately the deadline to apply has passed.

*But just to clarify, this is the not the actual case trial, this is for the hearing for the judge to decide whether the case will get a summary judgement or not. If a summary judgement is granted, there will not be a trial later in the year. If it is denied, the trial is set later this year and I think public will be able to apply to hear about it as well. There will just be both sides' barristers at this hearing. The Duchess will not be present in any case this time around.*


----------



## chicinthecity777

Further more, if the summary judgement is denied, the judge is likely to order MM to pay for DM's legal fees in relation to this hearing. It would be interesting to see how this goes.


----------



## bag-mania

I’d love to know how much money they have blown in legal action over the past few years.

I wonder if Charles is still funding them in any way. I remember something late last year that said he wasn’t but I don’t think I believe it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’d love to know how much money they have blown in legal action over the past few years.
> 
> I wonder if Charles is still funding them in any way. I remember something late last year that said he wasn’t but I don’t think I believe it.



I posted a Tweet from someone saying their own website indicated Charles was still funding them, but I haven't bothered to check.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> *I’d love to know how much money they have blown in legal action over the past few years*.
> 
> I wonder if Charles is still funding them in any way. I remember something late last year that said he wasn’t but I don’t think I believe it.


And how that compares to their charitable contributions.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> And how that compares to their charitable contributions.



What charitable contributions? You mean the pom-pom baby hats?


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> And how that compares to their charitable contributions.


haha, is this the joke of the day?


----------



## chicinthecity777

1LV said:


> And how that compares to their charitable contributions.


Their charitable contributions are huge, you know, towards themselves!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Unfortunately the deadline to apply has passed.
> 
> *But just to clarify, this is the not the actual case trial, this is for the hearing for the judge to decide whether the case will get a summary judgement or not. If a summary judgement is granted, there will not be a trial later in the year. If it is denied, the trial is set later this year and I think public will be able to apply to hear about it as well. There will just be both sides' barristers at this hearing. The Duchess will not be present in any case this time around.*


Airline companies are having some sales, and I miss spending some time in London.


----------



## marietouchet

re the court case ..  I will be interested to see what the judge has to say about the legal prinicple - who owns the famous letter ...  who has the rights to divulge ???

I thought that a letter became the property of the person that got it  - recipient. Diana's letters are sold and published by the recipients all the time ...

Does a letter remain letter the intellectual property (IP) of the writer? For how long ? There is usually a statute of limitations ...

What about a letter that is in the hands of a third party ? Think of all the letters written by famous people eg T S Eliot that are in the hands of libraries .. does his estate have any claim to the IP? for how long ? He never wanted his letters published when he was alive ...


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Airline companies are having some sales, and I miss spending some time in London.


If the pandemic is over by then, and the court restores back to be in person, you can queue outside the court house in the morning to see if you can get in. I'd imagine a case like that would be very popular among public.


----------



## chicinthecity777

marietouchet said:


> re the court case ..  I will be interested to see what the judge has to say about the legal prinicple - who owns the famous letter ...  who has the rights to divulge ???
> 
> I thought that a letter became the property of the person that got it  - recipient. Diana's letters are sold and published by the recipients all the time ...
> 
> Does a letter remain letter the intellectual property (IP) of the writer? For how long ? There is usually a statute of limitations ...
> 
> What about a letter that is in the hands of a third party ? Think of all the letters written by famous people eg T S Eliot that are in the hands of libraries .. does his estate have any claim to the IP? for how long ? He never wanted his letters published when he was alive ...


IP time limitation is 70 years after the death of the owner of that IP. But I don't think this is the centre of the case. The letter is not of any commercial nature and there is no royalty paying out of it. The argument will be more likely around privacy law.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> IP time limitation is 70 years after the death of the owner of that IP. But I don't think this is the centre of the case. The letter is not of any commercial nature and there is no royalty paying out of it. The argument will be more likely around privacy law.


She shared segments of the letter (via friends of course), the letter's recipient, her father should have the right to do the same. His privacy was affected first by MM's actions imo.


----------



## rose60610

I think when things "get back to normal", after everybody gets their Covid vaccinations, people are going to be jubilant to be traveling or simply be out and about, visiting friends and family, shopping, going to numerous events--movies, concerts, sports,  etc, like crazy. M&H are going to be lost in the shuffle and won't be able to suck the oxygen out of rooms. Nobody is going to listen to them when there's so much to catch up on. Who's going to listen to a Poor-Me-Whine-Fest when you can choose dozens of other activities or see people who are entertaining?  They'll be laughing stock when people realize all they do is feel sorry for themselves and beg for pity even after getting mega millions.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> She shared segments of the letter (via friends of course), the letter's recipient, her father should have the right to do the same. His privacy was affected first by MM's actions imo.


Yes that's what the DM argument is based on the info I read so far.

The beauty of the suit is for each element MM alleged, if it's ruled against her, she's highly likely to be ordered to pay the other side's legal expenses incurred due to that particular element of the suit. So even if she wins the privacy element, if she loses the IP element, she may still need to pay a chunk of money. I think the IP breach allegation is very frivolous but I am no expert and let's see if the judge would agree with me! LOL!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> What charitable contributions? You mean the pom-pom baby hats?


Now, now @bag-mania You are forgetting the sandwiches, pencils, and pen notes. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pen note thanking veterans for their service as they donate lunch to group of LA volunteers in honour of Martin Luther King Jr day*
The note from the Duke and Duchess, which was dated 16th January, read: 




Press release: the virtuous woman


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes that's what the DM argument is based on the info I read so far.
> 
> The beauty of the suit is for each element MM alleged, if it's ruled against her, she's highly likely to be ordered to pay the other side's legal expenses incurred due to that particular element of the suit. So even if she wins the privacy element, if she loses the IP element, she may still need to pay a chunk of money. I think the IP breach allegation is very frivolous but I am no expert and let's see if the judge would agree with me! LOL!


I hope Charles is putting funds aside. I don't see money going from Montecito to the UK... It would be in the wrong direction for the duchess.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Now, now @bag-mania You are forgetting the sandwiches, pencils, and pen notes.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pen note thanking veterans for their service as they donate lunch to group of LA volunteers in honour of Martin Luther King Jr day*
> The note from the Duke and Duchess, which was dated 16th January, read:
> 
> View attachment 4961723
> 
> 
> Press release: the virtuous woman


"We are so proud of"... who are H&M and why would anybody want H&M to be proud of them? They really do think they are royalty, aren't they? so delusional!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I hope Charles is putting funds aside. I don't see money going from the Montecito to the UK... It would be in the wrong direction for the duchess.


My SO's previous business associate had too much money and too big ego and was involved in several High Court civil suits. They were not as high profile as this (but he did hire the "best" barrister) and one of the suit cost him £3m+. Those suits are not cheap!


----------



## lanasyogamama

chicinthecity777 said:


> "We are so proud of"... who are H&M and why would anybody want H&M to be proud of them? They really do think they are royalty, aren't they? so delusional!


The “proud of” wording was odd to me too, like it kind of takes credit for what the people have been able to achieve.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> The “proud of” wording was odd to me too, like it kind of takes credit for what the people have been able to achieve.


Exactly! "We are so proud of what you did so we don't have to do it ourselves!"


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> "We are so proud of"... who are H&M and why would anybody want H&M to be proud of them? They really do think they are royalty, aren't they? so delusional!


I also noticed that. Their condescending attitude is unbelievable to say the least. This was just one more PR event for them as everything they do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They are trying to copy W&K. They usually say ’we are so thankful’. H&M haven’t learned that T word yet. 
Wonder how much they dribbled out this time?
Lunch boxes approximately cost $15, add a drink, maybe a dessert - total cost $20? $25?  about 25 people? Sad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are trying to copy W&K. They usually say ’we are so thankful’. H&M haven’t learned that T word yet.
> Wonder how much they dribbled out this time?
> Lunch boxes approximately cost $15, add a drink, maybe a dessert - total cost $20? $25?  about 25 people? Sad.


Thankful and sorry aren’t in their vocab.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are trying to copy W&K. They usually say ’we are so thankful’. H&M haven’t learned that T word yet.
> Wonder how much they dribbled out this time?
> Lunch boxes approximately cost $15, add a drink, maybe a dessert - total cost $20? $25?  about 25 people? Sad.


When W&K say 'we are so thankful', they are representing QE. When MM&H say 'we are so proud of', they are representing their 'commercial deals'.


----------



## rose60610

You donate lunch to a few people (as they said, "small token") and need to publicize it in a press release? Why not a substantial cash donation to the organization? Lunch? Really? And a press release? Wow. When Netflix & Spotify offer me about 180 million on top of all my royal trappings, I'm going to buy the best pizza you've ever seen and donate it to a local Scout Troop. I'm so gosh darned proud of them. And everybody is going to know about it. Or I won't do it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> When W&K say 'we are so thankful', they are representing QE. When MM&H say 'we are so proud of', they are representing their 'commercial deals'.


Exactly this! They still think they are some sort of royalty after quitting being royals. SMH!


----------



## kemilia

On a slightly different note--there are commercials running on US TV (HGTV network is where I've seen them) about programs that will/are on a new platform--Discovery Plus (seems a lot of what I watch is going to be on this channel and I hope I don't have to pay more) and Prince William is featured talking about environmental things (a very short promo thing). I had to pause and yell "THAT'S PRINCE WILLIAM ON US TV!"  and the next words out of my mouth were "I HOPE THE GRIFTERS ARE SEEING THIS!!"

By doing the right thing William is getting exactly what those 2 want but cannot get.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> You donate lunch to a few people (as they said, "small token") and need to publicize it in a press release? Why not a substantial cash donation to the organization? Lunch? Really? And a press release? Wow. When Netflix & Spotify offer me about 180 million on top of all my royal trappings, I'm going to buy the best pizza you've ever seen and donate it to a local Scout Troop. I'm so gosh darned proud of them. And everybody is going to know about it. Or I won't do it.



They are counting on the fact that 99% of the people who come across this article will only see the headline and won’t open it.  They get credit for their “philanthropy” without people knowing the details.


----------



## Chloe302225

kemilia said:


> On a slightly different note--there are commercials running on US TV (HGTV network is where I've seen them) about programs that will/are on a new platform--Discovery Plus (seems a lot of what I watch is going to be on this channel and I hope I don't have to pay more) and Prince William is featured talking about environmental things (a very short promo thing). I had to pause and yell "THAT'S PRINCE WILLIAM ON US TV!"  and the next words out of my mouth were "I HOPE THE GRIFTERS ARE SEEING THIS!!"
> 
> By doing the right thing William is getting exactly what those 2 want but cannot get.




I saw this same commercial too. I was looking at my phone and did a double take because I was surprised at hearing his voice.


----------



## bellecate

In reading on the Harry Markled site it is mentioned that during season 2-3 on Suits it was speculated that Megain was pregnant. Bloated stomach, cropped shots and brief appearances.  This was the first time I had heard this mentioned. Anyone else ever heard about it?


----------



## Chanbal

Taking a small break, and I'm going to use it to Poor couple, so much pain and suffering.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> "We are so proud of"... who are H&M and why would anybody want H&M to be proud of them? They really do think they are royalty, aren't they? so delusional!


They're so arrogant and full of themselves.  Windbags.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Chanbal said:


> Taking a small break, and I'm going to use it to Poor couple, so much pain and suffering.
> View attachment 4962060



All this heartbreak kind of makes me almost forget about the miscarriage, which Omid did not list either in his list of trials and tribulations.....


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> All this heartbreak kind of makes me almost forget about the miscarriage, which Omid did not list either in his list of trials and tribulations.....



Even Scobie doesn’t believe it happened.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are trying to copy W&K. They usually say ’we are so thankful’. H&M haven’t learned that T word yet.
> Wonder how much they dribbled out this time?
> Lunch boxes approximately cost $15, add a drink, maybe a dessert - total cost $20? $25?  about 25 people? Sad.


Good guess @CarryOn2020 20 meals purchased from Homeboy Industries. The duchess made sure meals, note, and photographer were all delivered on time. Good work Sunshine S!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I would be embarrassed to call that a donation if I were them. But eh, they have shown over and over again they kind of lack self-awareness.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Good guess @CarryOn2020 20 meals purchased from Homeboy Industries. The duchess made sure meals, note, and photographer were all delivered on time. Good work Sunshine S!
> 
> View attachment 4962377


They have got to be taking the p1ss! The note wasn't even signed! Anybody could have printed it off! This is beyond pathetic!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sums it up nicely!


----------



## chicinthecity777

I follow someone on Twitter who is currently on the virtual court listening in!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Apparently the hearing will last for 2 days so we won't know the outcome yet...


----------



## chicinthecity777

Hahaha!


----------



## rose60610

So H&M are involved in ANOTHER court proceeding (where else would they be--besides preening in front of graves or whining)? Do they think that donating 20 lunches in paper bags will surely sway the judge in their favor? They probably do, they're important, you know. If they lose, M will probably think that if only she put more cookies in the lunches she'd have won.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Good guess @CarryOn2020 20 meals purchased from Homeboy Industries. The duchess made sure meals, note, and photographer were all delivered on time. Good work Sunshine S!
> 
> View attachment 4962377


My mother taught me something never give a gift whose value is obvious eg price tag on, an amount of money - - because the gift then sets a value on your friendship/present 
That is a reason  (most) celebrities dont make cash donations or gifts, volunteering for a bit is less subject to gossip
Ex no one has ever heard of the value of a donation by Angelina Jolie but we all know she does lectures, speeches, volunteers

Ps after thinking a bit ... the photog and PR team (to disseminate the photos ) cost more than the lunches ... not a good look


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> All this heartbreak kind of makes me almost forget about the miscarriage, which Omid did not list either in his list of trials and tribulations.....


hope she didn't make that up....that would be awful - and would seem like bad kharma


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Good guess @CarryOn2020 20 meals purchased from Homeboy Industries. The duchess made sure meals, note, and photographer were all delivered on time. Good work Sunshine S!
> 
> View attachment 4962377


almost free publicity...couple hundred dollars for lunch


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sums it up nicely!




"You cannot set up a branch of the Royal Family in L.A." was my favourite. So simple, so spot on.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> almost free publicity...couple hundred dollars for lunch



If one doesn't account for the Sunshine S's bill, it was a bargain!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> If one doesn't account for the Sunshine S's bill, it was a bargain!


Again, the PR person came up with this idea should be fired! It's bad bad publicity!


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> They have got to be taking the p1ss! The note wasn't even signed! Anybody could have printed it off! This is beyond pathetic!


 They must take everyone for idiots to not see what they are doing.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> All this heartbreak kind of makes me almost forget about the miscarriage, which Omid did not list either in his list of trials and tribulations.....


I think MM and JCMH forgot about it too.    To be a good liar, you have to have a phenomenal memory.


----------



## bag-mania

Don't want to do any work but want people to think you are wonderful? Just piggyback on to the hard work of others. You can steal the attention away under the guise of helping! All it takes is making some insignificant gesture and then sit back and watch the media gush over your generosity.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> My mother taught me something never give a gift whose value is obvious eg price tag on, an amount of money - - because the gift then sets a value on your friendship/present
> That is a reason  (most) celebrities dont make cash donations or gifts, volunteering for a bit is less subject to gossip
> Ex no one has ever heard of the value of a donation by Angelina Jolie but we all know she does lectures, speeches, volunteers


Angelina J and several other celebrities make substantial cash donations to charities. Many people make cash donation to charities without the advertisement. Cash donations are very helpful. MM&H prefer to donate sandwiches or hats, since it is a lot cheaper for them. Can you imagine donating $200 dollars with a 'pen note' as pompous as the one they sent...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Angelina J and several other celebrities make substantial cash donations to charities. Many people make cash donation to charities without the advertisement. Cash donations are very helpful. MM&H prefer to donate sandwiches or hats, since it is a lot cheaper for them. Can you imagine donating $200 dollars with a 'pen note' as pompous as the one they sent...



The thing is the truly generous celebrities often get credit eventually when someone discovers what they did. That might happen months or years later. They don't feel the need to make a donation and then announce "Look what I did! Aren't I special" because they don't do it for the attention.

Meghan and Harry do it for the accolades and they are desperately trying to get their scam charity off the ground.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Angelina J and several other celebrities make substantial cash donations to charities. Many people make cash donation to charities without the advertisement. Cash donations are very helpful. MM&H prefer to donate sandwiches or hats, since it is a lot cheaper for them. Can you imagine donating $200 dollars with a 'pen note' as pompous as the one they sent...


oh come on - don't you think it was important for those people to be appreciated by the Duke and Duchess - in the US, where we don't have royalty?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Good guess @CarryOn2020 20 meals purchased from Homeboy Industries. The duchess made sure meals, note, and photographer were all delivered on time. Good work Sunshine S!
> 
> View attachment 4962377


Not much of a letterhead on that note!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Please delete


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> oh come on - don't you think it was important for those people to be appreciated by the Duke and Duchess - in the US, where we don't have royalty?


Good sarcasm, but I need a puke icon for the mere thought of ever appreciating their importance.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good sarcasm, but I need a puke icon for the mere thought of ever appreciating their importance.


agree
sorry I keep repeating myself but they have two things going for them - first and most important, he is/was royal.  secondly, she was a victim of racist remarks at the right time in history.  they are using these things to the max but I wonder how long they can remain intereresting.  who really cares about their podcast and their small gestures of "charity" or whatever they call it?  time will tell

when you think about it, the only racism she has suffered from (as far as we know) has been some snarky comments from the british tabloids and others.  compare that to what POC have gone through in the past.  I was watching a documentary on PBC about black women performers back in the day.  they made movies with the beautiful Lena Horne where she was only singing (not speaking) so the various distributors could cut her out if they wanted to.  that's just one example.  we all know the stories of the performers in the 60's who could sing and dance in clubs but couldn't use the hotels or restrooms or restaurants in the south.  so what Meghan has suffered is nothing compared to this but she gets the "benefits" of being a WOC


----------



## Maggie Muggins

How's the court case going? 
Does the prisoner remind you of anyone???


----------



## bag-mania

*Duchess of Sussex's father says a letter she wrote 'criticised' him*
*A letter written by the Duchess of Sussex to her father "signalled the end" of their relationship, Thomas Markle has told the High Court.*

He said in a statement that instead of a reconciliation attempt, the letter was a "criticism" of him.

Meghan is suing the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online over articles that reproduced parts of the private handwritten letter.

Her lawyers claim this was a "plain and serious invasion" of her privacy.

Meghan, 39, sent the letter, which her lawyers described as "intrinsically private, personal and sensitive", to her father in August 2018, following her marriage to Prince Harry in May that year. The couple are now living in the US with their son Archie.

She is seeking damages for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act over five articles, published in February 2019, which included extracts from the "private and confidential" letter to her father.

*'Set the record straight'*
Mr Markle said in a witness statement provided to the hearing, which started on Tuesday, that he had to "defend himself" against an article in People magazine. It carried an interview with a "longtime friend" of his daughter, who suggested Meghan sent the letter to repair her relationship with her father - something he claimed was false.

The People article, he claimed, made him appear "dishonest, exploitative, publicity-seeking, uncaring and cold-hearted".

He said he had "never intended to talk publicly about Meg's letter" until he read the People magazine piece which, he claimed, suggested he was "to blame for the end of the relationship".

"The content of that article caused me to change my mind," he said. "It was only by publishing the text of the letter that I could properly set the record straight and show that what People magazine had published was false and unfair."

He said he had repeatedly tried to get in touch with Meghan after her wedding to Prince Harry, which he did not attend, adding: "I couldn't find a way of getting her to talk to me."

Mr Markle said his daughter did not ask how he was in the letter, adding: "It showed no concern about the fact I had suffered a heart attack and asked no questions about my health.

"It actually signalled the end of our relationship, not a reconciliation."

In the remote hearing, Meghan's lawyers told the court the letter was written in sorrow rather than anger and was an attempt to get her father to stop talking to the press.

Meghan's lawyers also pointed out the articles themselves had emphasised the private nature of the correspondence - and dismissed any argument that it was in the public interest for the newspaper to reproduce the letter, saying the public interest was at the "very end of the bottom end of the scale".

They are asking for summary judgement - in effect, a dismissal of Associated Newspapers Limited's defence before a full trial takes place. Meghan's lawyers argue ANL has "no prospect" of defending the privacy and copyright claims being brought against them.

Justin Rushbrooke, representing the duchess, has described the handwritten letter as "a heartfelt plea from an anguished daughter to her father", sent to Mr Markle at his Mexico home via "the claimant's accountant... to minimise the risk of interception".

He said the "contents and character of the letter were intrinsically private, personal and sensitive in nature" and that Meghan "had a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the contents of the letter".

The effect of publishing the letter was "self-evidently likely to be devastating for the claimant", said Mr Rushbrooke.

The barrister argued that, even if ANL was justified in publishing parts of the letter, "on any view the defendant published far more by way of extracts from the letter than could have been justified in the public interest".

*'Expectation of privacy'*
The newspaper group's barrister Antony White said that Meghan's status as a member of the royal family was relevant to the case.

In response to that point, Mr Rushbrooke said: "Yes, she is in some senses a public figure, but that does not reduce her expectation of privacy in relation to information of this kind."

But Mr White also argued "there is a very real question as to whether the claimant will be able to establish that she had a reasonable - or any - expectation of privacy".

In written submissions he said "she must, at the very least, have appreciated that her father might choose to disclose it" and pointed out that the Kensington Palace communications team had been shown the letter before it was sent.

"No truly private letter from daughter to father would require any input from the Kensington Palace communications team," said Mr White.

The full trial of the duchess's claim had been due to be heard at the High Court this month, but last year the case was adjourned until autumn 2021.

This interim remote hearing - to consider the request for summary judgement - is due to last two days. Mr Justice Warby, who is hearing the case, is expected to reserve his judgement to a later date.









						Duchess of Sussex claims privacy and copyright breached by paper group
					

The Duchess of Sussex is suing the Mail on Sunday over the publication of her letter to her father.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She set him up big time. Such a snake.


----------



## marietouchet

Curious, I went to the DM site and noted two interesting tidbits 

1. Samantha's book has been slated for publication since at least 2019 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...t-tears-learning-sister-writing-book-her.html 
Its publication has been pushed back for the last two years. 

2. The DM still has online excerpts of the letter








						News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
					

All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



Today's edition has only one tiny bit in Meghan's handwriting - the intro, the rest of the excerpts are now typewritten . I seem to remember there were more handwritten photocopies in a previous edition. 
So, the letter is still there but the original photostats are gone.


----------



## marietouchet

The summary of the court case today seems to boil down to lots of people knew of the private  letter - two friends*, the Kensington Place staff had reviewed it * (!), and it was delivered to Mexico by Meghan's accountant (!)

Thomas offered the letter for publication because he felt the People article (the friends were the sources) painted him in a very bad light 

IMHO, in some sense, Thomas should have sued People for defamation but he does not appear to have the interest or finances to bring a suit (lawsuits are for rich folks)


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Duchess of Sussex's father says a letter she wrote 'criticised' him*
> *A letter written by the Duchess of Sussex to her father "signalled the end" of their relationship, Thomas Markle has told the High Court.*
> 
> He said in a statement that instead of a reconciliation attempt, the letter was a "criticism" of him.
> 
> Meghan is suing the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online over articles that reproduced parts of the private handwritten letter.
> 
> Her lawyers claim this was a "plain and serious invasion" of her privacy.
> 
> Meghan, 39, sent the letter, which her lawyers described as "intrinsically private, personal and sensitive", to her father in August 2018, following her marriage to Prince Harry in May that year. The couple are now living in the US with their son Archie.
> 
> She is seeking damages for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act over five articles, published in February 2019, which included extracts from the "private and confidential" letter to her father.
> 
> *'Set the record straight'*
> Mr Markle said in a witness statement provided to the hearing, which started on Tuesday, that he had to "defend himself" against an article in People magazine. It carried an interview with a "longtime friend" of his daughter, who suggested Meghan sent the letter to repair her relationship with her father - something he claimed was false.
> 
> The People article, he claimed, made him appear "dishonest, exploitative, publicity-seeking, uncaring and cold-hearted".
> 
> He said he had "never intended to talk publicly about Meg's letter" until he read the People magazine piece which, he claimed, suggested he was "to blame for the end of the relationship".
> 
> "The content of that article caused me to change my mind," he said. "It was only by publishing the text of the letter that I could properly set the record straight and show that what People magazine had published was false and unfair."
> 
> He said he had repeatedly tried to get in touch with Meghan after her wedding to Prince Harry, which he did not attend, adding: "I couldn't find a way of getting her to talk to me."
> 
> Mr Markle said his daughter did not ask how he was in the letter, adding: "It showed no concern about the fact I had suffered a heart attack and asked no questions about my health.
> 
> "It actually signalled the end of our relationship, not a reconciliation."
> 
> In the remote hearing, Meghan's lawyers told the court the letter was written in sorrow rather than anger and was an attempt to get her father to stop talking to the press.
> 
> Meghan's lawyers also pointed out the articles themselves had emphasised the private nature of the correspondence - and dismissed any argument that it was in the public interest for the newspaper to reproduce the letter, saying the public interest was at the "very end of the bottom end of the scale".
> 
> They are asking for summary judgement - in effect, a dismissal of Associated Newspapers Limited's defence before a full trial takes place. Meghan's lawyers argue ANL has "no prospect" of defending the privacy and copyright claims being brought against them.
> 
> Justin Rushbrooke, representing the duchess, has described the handwritten letter as "a heartfelt plea from an anguished daughter to her father", sent to Mr Markle at his Mexico home via "the claimant's accountant... to minimise the risk of interception".
> 
> He said the "contents and character of the letter were intrinsically private, personal and sensitive in nature" and that Meghan "had a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the contents of the letter".
> 
> The effect of publishing the letter was "self-evidently likely to be devastating for the claimant", said Mr Rushbrooke.
> 
> The barrister argued that, even if ANL was justified in publishing parts of the letter, "on any view the defendant published far more by way of extracts from the letter than could have been justified in the public interest".
> 
> *'Expectation of privacy'*
> The newspaper group's barrister Antony White said that Meghan's status as a member of the royal family was relevant to the case.
> 
> In response to that point, Mr Rushbrooke said: "Yes, she is in some senses a public figure, but that does not reduce her expectation of privacy in relation to information of this kind."
> 
> But Mr White also argued "there is a very real question as to whether the claimant will be able to establish that she had a reasonable - or any - expectation of privacy".
> 
> In written submissions he said "she must, at the very least, have appreciated that her father might choose to disclose it" and pointed out that the Kensington Palace communications team had been shown the letter before it was sent.
> 
> "No truly private letter from daughter to father would require any input from the Kensington Palace communications team," said Mr White.
> 
> The full trial of the duchess's claim had been due to be heard at the High Court this month, but last year the case was adjourned until autumn 2021.
> 
> This interim remote hearing - to consider the request for summary judgement - is due to last two days. Mr Justice Warby, who is hearing the case, is expected to reserve his judgement to a later date.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex claims privacy and copyright breached by paper group
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is suing the Mail on Sunday over the publication of her letter to her father.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



These 2 sentences from TM say a lot: "I couldn't find a way of getting her to talk to me."
"It showed no concern about the fact I had suffered a heart attack and asked no questions about my health." Her father had heart surgery, but that was irrelevant. MM doesn't deserve to win the Summary Judgment, and I hope the judge sees that.


----------



## Chanbal

This is one of the sentences of the infamous and 'sweet' letter: _“Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband” _Shouldn't QE use the same words to ask MM to stop exploiting the duchess title?









						Meghan's lawyers: The 'triple barrelled invasion' on privacy | ITV News
					

The Duchess of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers Limited. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> How's the court case going?
> Does the prisoner remind you of anyone???
> 
> View attachment 4963042


As a huge Game of Thrones fan, any time I see the word "Confess", I think of Septa Unella, telling Cersi to confess and screaming "Shame", as she walked in front of her through the crowds.  I could totally picture MM in that scene instead of Cersi.  A "Queen" shamed to no end


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is one of the sentences of the infamous and 'sweet' letter: _“Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband” _Shouldn't QE use the same words to ask MM to stop exploiting the duchess title?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's lawyers: The 'triple barrelled invasion' on privacy | ITV News
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers Limited. | ITV National News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.itv.com


Awesome Cliff Notes version of the letter , your one sentence says it all


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I had forgotten this key detail ... the palace did not know ahead of time about the People article, where the letter first came up

Why WAS the Palace kept in the dark over Meghan's media fightback?
https://mol.im/a/6680617


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I had forgotten this key detail ... the palace did not know ahead of time about the People article, where the letter first came up
> 
> Why WAS the Palace kept in the dark over Meghan's media fightback?
> https://mol.im/a/6680617


That always seems to be their MO.  They didn't tell the Palace of their plan to announce they were "stepping back" until minutes before they did then either.


----------



## LittleStar88

From Dlisted


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article on father's motivations. 
*








						Meghan Markle's Father Thomas Makes Bombshell Claims About That Leaked Letter
					

Thomas Markle addressed the U.K. High Court as part of Meghan Markle's privacy case against The Daily Mail. Read what her estranged father had to say about the infamous letter.




					www.yahoo.com
				



*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh yes, that pathological lying. Why can't Harry see it when I figured it out months ago from things she has publicly said herself? Because girlfriend can't even keep her lies straight.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Now we know why!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I doubt it was guilt though, they probably just thought throwing the lowly underlings a bone would keep them happy enough.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I doubt it was guilt though, they probably just thought throwing the lowly underlings a bone would keep them happy enough.


Agreed! "Guilty" is not a concept they understand!


----------



## chicinthecity777

More dirty deeds from H&M. Read the thread a bit to get more info. SS was supposed to be working for their charity at the time, not their personal PR company. ETA - read 16.6. If this is true then how can she sue DM for printing the letter?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These people are unreal in their insincerity.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Agreed! "Guilty" is not a concept they understand!



Self-absorption and self-preservation are the concepts they live by. The Covid rates in LA have skyrocketed since they did their little photo ops over the summer. Plus they don’t need to do sweet little charity visits to get attention anymore, they have Netflix and Spotify!  

They post a message about their food donation and they get as much goodwill and credit as if they had actually showed up.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> That always seems to be their MO.  They didn't tell the Palace of their plan to announce they were "stepping back" until minutes before they did then either.


Of course, the Palace, had they come in in to vet the People interview, would have caught the bit about the letter

There is a leitmotif here, the BRF gets in trouble when they go off script, or worse, collaborate with the press, or think they can manipulate the press to their advantage


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> From Dlisted
> 
> View attachment 4963425


I couldn't agree more with the comment below, I always thought that the letter was written for public display.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Self-absorption and self-preservation are the concepts they live by. *The Covid rates in LA have skyrocketed since they did their little photo ops over the summer. Plus they don’t need to do sweet little charity visits to get attention anymore, they have Netflix and Spotify! *
> 
> They post a message about their food donation and they get as much goodwill and credit as if they had actually showed up.


Great comment. By combining Homeboy Industries (to provide lunch boxes) and Veterans (to receive lunch boxes) the duchess killed two birds with one stone. And all this for a few dollars, a 'pen note', and likely one phone call! How practical!


----------



## lulilu

marietouchet said:


> That is a reason  (most) *celebrities dont make cash donations or gifts*, volunteering for a bit is less subject to gossip
> Ex no one has ever heard of the value of a donation by Angelina Jolie but we all know she does lectures, speeches, volunteers





Chanbal said:


> *Angelina J and several other celebrities make substantial cash donations to charities. Many people make cash donation to charities without the advertisement.* Cash donations are very helpful. MM&H prefer to donate sandwiches or hats, since it is a lot cheaper for them. Can you imagine donating $200 dollars with a 'pen note' as pompous as the one they sent...



Of course celebrities and other well-known people make substantial cash donations to charities.  To think otherwise is incredible.  As Chanbal said, they don't need to have their PR people advertise it.  Some have given millions and billions to charities.  The ex-wife of Amazon's founder has given $4Billion dollars to charity so far, from her divorce settlement.  She didn't issue a press release about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Requires full investigation:

*Former aides of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dubbed the 'Palace Four' may have evidence which could 'shed some light' on Meghan's letter to her estranged father, High Court hears*

Four former aides of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may have evidence which could 'shed some light' on Meghan's letter to her estranged father, the High Court was told today.
On the second day of the hearing today, the publisher's barrister Antony White QC told the court that a letter from lawyers representing the so-called 'Palace Four' said they would be able to 'shed some light' on the drafting of Meghan's letter to her father.

The letter was sent to the parties on behalf of Jason Knauf - formerly communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, whom the newspaper claims was involved in the wording of Meghan's letter - and Christian Jones, their former deputy communications secretary.

The other two members of the so-called 'Palace Four' are Samantha Cohen, formerly the Sussexes' private secretary, and Sara Latham, their former director of communications.
In the letter sent on their behalf, their lawyers said: 'None of our clients welcomes his or her potential involvement in this litigation, which has arisen purely as a result of the performance of his or her duties in their respective jobs at the material time.

'This is particularly the case given the sensitivity of, and therefore discretion required in, their particular roles in the Royal Household.'

It added: 'Nor does any of our clients wish to take sides in the dispute between your respective clients. Our clients are all strictly neutral.

'They have no interest in assisting either party to the proceedings. Their only interest is in ensuring a level playing field, insofar as any evidence they may be able to give is concerned.'
..........
Mr White told Mr Justice Warby: 'The letter was sent by the Claimant (Meghan) with a view to being read by third parties or the public.'

He added: 'The writing of the letter to be used as part of a media strategy, the extent to which she caused or permitted information about it to be passed to the authors (of Finding Freedom) and People magazine, cannot be brushed aside and requires full investigation at trial.'

The all thing here!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> He added: 'The writing of the letter to be used as part of a media strategy, the extent to which she caused or permitted information about it to be passed to the authors (of Finding Freedom) and People magazine, cannot be brushed aside and requires full investigation at trial.'
> 
> The all thing here!



I'm glad she is being called out. Everything Meghan does is a media strategy, including marrying Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was following a happy event on another forum and one of the posters said they thought they saw Meghan there. I hope it's not true, I can't stand these people getting any more recognition when ugly truths about them come out by the minute.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I'm glad she is being called out. Everything Meghan does is a media strategy, including marrying Harry.



Indeed. Too bad the poor idiot is unable to see it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Four former aides of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may have evidence which could 'shed some light' on Meghan's letter to her estranged father, the High Court was told today.



It's unusual for them to speak out, isn't it? Seems the Sussexes are not worth it for them to smear their names, or am I interpreting this completely wrong?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'm glad she is being called out. Everything Meghan does is a media strategy, including marrying Harry.


This is getting real interesting:

*"The “Palace Four” will reveal whether the Duchess of Sussex gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom, indirectly or otherwise, they have confirmed.*

The four, who were among the Duchess’s closest and most senior aides, insisted they would remain “strictly neutral” and had no interest in helping either side in her legal action against the Mail on Sunday.

In a letter lodged with the High Court on their behalf, Samantha Cohen, her former private secretary, Christian Jones, former deputy communications secretary, Jason Knauf, former Kensington Palace communications secretary and Sara Latham, former communications director, *said they would also provide evidence about the creation of the letter Meghan sent to her father, as well as the draft, and whether she anticipated that it might be made public.*"









						'Palace Four' to reveal whether Meghan Markle gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom
					

The “Palace Four” will reveal whether the Duchess of Sussex gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom, indirectly or otherwise, they have confirmed. The four, who were among the Duchess’s closest and most senior royal aides, insisted they would remain “strictly neutral” and had...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Indeed. Too bad the poor idiot is unable to see it.



I've given up feeling sorry for him. He is her accomplice at this point.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> Of course celebrities and other well-known people make substantial cash donations to charities.  To think otherwise is incredible.  As Chanbal said, they don't need to have their PR people advertise it.  Some have given millions and billions to charities.  The ex-wife of Amazon's founder has given $4Billion dollars to charity so far, from her divorce settlement.  She didn't issue a press release about it.


I respect those who do things under the radar and it's discovered months later by happenstance (supposedly).  It's not because they have a new movie coming out, or trying to garner free publicity, like these two wannabes are obviously doing.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was following a happy event on another forum and one of the posters said they thought they saw Meghan there. I hope it's not true, I can't stand these people getting any more recognition when ugly truths about them come out by the minute.


Isn't the duchess lucky? She is having her court hearing when a large population is seeing the transition of power in the US. So all this dirt that she generated may go unseen by many.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *"The “Palace Four” will reveal whether the Duchess of Sussex gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom, indirectly or otherwise, they have confirmed.*



I'd like to say Meghan is toast but somehow the jerks of the world always make their way out unscathed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is getting real interesting:
> 
> *"The “Palace Four” will reveal whether the Duchess of Sussex gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom, indirectly or otherwise, they have confirmed.*
> 
> The four, who were among the Duchess’s closest and most senior aides, insisted they would remain “strictly neutral” and had no interest in helping either side in her legal action against the Mail on Sunday.
> 
> In a letter lodged with the High Court on their behalf, Samantha Cohen, her former private secretary, Christian Jones, former deputy communications secretary, Jason Knauf, former Kensington Palace communications secretary and Sara Latham, former communications director, *said they would also provide evidence about the creation of the letter Meghan sent to her father, as well as the draft, and whether she anticipated that it might be made public.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Palace Four' to reveal whether Meghan Markle gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom
> 
> 
> The “Palace Four” will reveal whether the Duchess of Sussex gave private information to the authors of Finding Freedom, indirectly or otherwise, they have confirmed. The four, who were among the Duchess’s closest and most senior royal aides, insisted they would remain “strictly neutral” and had...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Now if I was writing a genuine letter of concern to my own father, who raised me, spoiled me and treated me like the wannabe princess I was, I don't think I'd need a "draft" to be proofread by four people before sending!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Now if I was writing a genuine letter of concern to my own father, who raised me, spoiled me and treated me like the wannabe princess I was, I don't think I'd need a "draft" to be proofread by four people before sending!



It makes me wonder just what horrible lies she told them about her father to make them on board with helping her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How much time did MM spend on this letter?  Did it consume her daily thoughts and energy? How much time and energy did the Palace 4 spend on it?  Seems like H&M spend a considerable amount of time on silly stuff. A personal letter to one’s father should not require this much time and energy, IMO.


----------



## marietouchet

This is just an infuriating story of a dysfunctional family that cannot communicate with one another - I could not get ahold of you, and you wont take my calls ... people being childish ...
Infuriated that court time is taken up with this family feud ... they are no longer royals ... and someone should dismiss the suit as rubbish ...
Good lord half the planet saw the PRIVATE  letter prior to sending ... 

Reminds me of the Paramount / Bashir interview which aired a bit too much dirty laundry and caused the Queen to react and order the Charles/Diana divorce 

Enough is enough 

Just my opinion


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd like to say Meghan is toast but somehow the jerks of the world always make their way out unscathed.



So true, but Meghan's Teflon coating is getting a little bit scratched up and bad stuff is starting to stick to her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> From Dlisted
> 
> View attachment 4963425



ITA that the letter was written "for the record". There's nothing sweetly daughter-like about it IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

look at this article about celebs who donate.....and in every case, this is not their main occupation or claim to fame.....H&M don't really have a "job"....oh, the podcast...anyhow








						The 25 most charitable celebrities who have changed people's lives
					

Whether they're donating millions to charity, or advocating for marginalized people's rights, these celebrities embody the spirit of generosity.




					www.insider.com


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Requires full investigation:
> 
> *Former aides of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dubbed the 'Palace Four' may have evidence which could 'shed some light' on Meghan's letter to her estranged father, High Court hears*
> 
> Four former aides of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex may have evidence which could 'shed some light' on Meghan's letter to her estranged father, the High Court was told today.
> On the second day of the hearing today, the publisher's barrister Antony White QC told the court that a letter from lawyers representing the so-called 'Palace Four' said they would be able to 'shed some light' on the drafting of Meghan's letter to her father.
> 
> The letter was sent to the parties on behalf of Jason Knauf - formerly communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, whom the newspaper claims was involved in the wording of Meghan's letter - and Christian Jones, their former deputy communications secretary.
> 
> The other two members of the so-called 'Palace Four' are Samantha Cohen, formerly the Sussexes' private secretary, and Sara Latham, their former director of communications.
> In the letter sent on their behalf, their lawyers said: 'None of our clients welcomes his or her potential involvement in this litigation, which has arisen purely as a result of the performance of his or her duties in their respective jobs at the material time.
> 
> 'This is particularly the case given the sensitivity of, and therefore discretion required in, their particular roles in the Royal Household.'
> 
> It added: 'Nor does any of our clients wish to take sides in the dispute between your respective clients. Our clients are all strictly neutral.
> 
> 'They have no interest in assisting either party to the proceedings. Their only interest is in ensuring a level playing field, insofar as any evidence they may be able to give is concerned.'
> ..........
> Mr White told Mr Justice Warby: 'The letter was sent by the Claimant (Meghan) with a view to being read by third parties or the public.'
> 
> He added: 'The writing of the letter to be used as part of a media strategy, the extent to which she caused or permitted information about it to be passed to the authors (of Finding Freedom) and People magazine, cannot be brushed aside and requires full investigation at trial.'
> 
> The all thing here!



First rule of effective strategy is not to make it look apparent. MM is actually quite crap at all this, even when her resources could buy the best advantage.


----------



## gracekelly

I think MOS is going to get their trial. If she has any brains, she will settle this because they are going to show her as being a foolish woman who made a big mistake by lying. Once she involved people at KP in drafting this letter, it was all over and there was no way that it wouldn’t come out that she had help writing it.Who owns the copyright?  Meg plus these four?  The Crown since the four were Crown employees? I would love to know what the four helpers thought of her for even wanting to write a letter like that.  How can Justice Warby end the case in her favor when the defense has people, who were not afraid to be named, ready to tell the truth. The five friends who are not anxious to be named, did not want to step forward, but if there is a trial they will be called.   Settle now Meg.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> How much time did MM spend on this letter?  Did it consume her daily thoughts and energy? How much time and energy did the Palace 4 spend on it?  Seems like H&M spend a considerable amount of time on silly stuff. *A personal letter to one’s father should not require this much time and energy, IMO.*


Unless it's being written to be published for the world to see. She wants to make sure she comes out as the perpetual victim she always is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All of this brouhaha, when her father only wanted a simple phone call. 
Unbelievable.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> All of this brouhaha, when her father only wanted a simple phone call.
> Unbelievable.


I cannot believe I am saying this ... but in defense of the alliterative one ...    Gasps all around LOL 

He also complained of the salutation  used in the letter - it began Daddy, not Dear Daddy .... My mother did that to me at one time ... petty  isnt it ? 

Go be petty in private please ... no more brouhaha ... we all know you guys dont communicate anymore, sad

And on this day when many hope for unity, and we have all have been lectured at (who by ? hint hint ...) that the world needs better communication with less rancor and mud slinging ...  oh golly please, this is such an opportunity for both sides to practice


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I cannot believe I am saying this ... but in defense of the alliterative one ...    Gasps all around LOL
> 
> He also complained of the salutation  used in the letter - it began Daddy, not Dear Daddy .... My mother did that to me at one time ... petty  isnt it ?
> 
> Go be petty in private please ... no more brouhaha ... we all know you guys dont communicate anymore, sad
> 
> And on this day when many hope for unity, and we have all have been lectured at (who by ? hint hint ...) that the world needs better communication with less rancor and mud slinging ...  oh golly please, this is such an opportunity for both sides to practice



I understand your point. Petty seems to run in the family, even Harry is known for pettiness.
Still, as a parent, I understand why a father would want, dare expect, a phone call from his youngest child. Seems easy enough to do, no? Perhaps, not.  I do not understand the thinking of people like this — I called my parents, wish I still could.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I understand your point. Petty seems to run in the family, even Harry is known for pettiness.
> Still, as a parent, I understand why a father would want, dare expect, a phone call from his youngest child. Seems easy enough to do, no? Perhaps, not.  I do not understand the thinking of people like this — I called my parents, wish I still could.


Her father seemed to have been a caring person, he must be very hurt. He was not fooled by her letter, he likely understood that he was being used as a scapegoat. This lady is bad news!


----------



## csshopper

bellecate said:


> Unless it's being written to be published for the world to see. She wants to make sure she comes out as the perpetual victim she always is.


Seems she approached this like scripting a scene in Suits, don't we read about writers gathering around a table and working out plot lines and dialog pre production? Sounds like the Palace 4 maybe? Pretty cold and impersonal way to handle a communication to one's Daddy.  Also, there was less "word salad" to this letter, at least in the bits released for publication, which suggests she had "help".


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Unless it's being written to be published for the world to see. She wants to make sure she comes out as the perpetual victim she always is.


I wonder if her lawyers were able to negotiated the date of this court appointment (to coincide with a major US event), so the 'wash of dirty linen' would be less noticeable.


----------



## Chanbal

Press release likely by Sunshine S! Here is the full text, so you don't have to click on it. I'll add also the emojis. 




*Meghan's lawyer: no trial needed in privacy case*
Tue, January 19, 2021, 6:00 AM


Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex's, privacy case might be over before a trial has even started. According to the British royal's lawyers a London judge should rule in her favor because the publication has no prospect of winning. The wife of Queen Elizabeth's grandson Prince Harry, is suing Associated Newspapers. Its Mail on Sunday printed extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas Markle in August 2018. She says the publication of the letter was a misuse of private information and breached her copyright. Meghan is seeking aggravated damages. The paper has argued the duchess was willing for other private matters to become public if it suited her interests. They say it was justified in publishing parts of the letter in response to interviews her anonymous friends had given to the U.S. magazine People. At a two-day hearing starting at London's High Court, Meghan's lawyers said judge Mark Warby should give a summary judgement in favor of the former U.S. actress. They said the decision to publish the letter was an assault on quote "her private life, her family life and her correspondence." Describing the paper's defence as "lacking in clarity." The trial was due to start last week but was delayed until late 2021 because of a "confidential" reason.

News from the duchess's camp


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Press release likely by Sunshine S! Here is the full text, so you don't have to click on it. I'll add also the emojis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan's lawyer: no trial needed in privacy case*
> Tue, January 19, 2021, 6:00 AM
> 
> 
> Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex's, privacy case might be over before a trial has even started. According to the British royal's lawyers a London judge should rule in her favor because the publication has no prospect of winning. The wife of Queen Elizabeth's grandson Prince Harry, is suing Associated Newspapers. Its Mail on Sunday printed extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas Markle in August 2018. She says the publication of the letter was a misuse of private information and breached her copyright. Meghan is seeking aggravated damages. The paper has argued the duchess was willing for other private matters to become public if it suited her interests. They say it was justified in publishing parts of the letter in response to interviews her anonymous friends had given to the U.S. magazine People. At a two-day hearing starting at London's High Court, Meghan's lawyers said judge Mark Warby should give a summary judgement in favor of the former U.S. actress. They said the decision to publish the letter was an assault on quote "her private life, her family life and her correspondence." Describing the paper's defence as "lacking in clarity." The trial was due to start last week but was delayed until late 2021 because of a "confidential" reason.
> 
> News from the duchess's camp


lol!  Notice how the press release doesn't mention the Palace Four.  When those four people start to spill the tea, there will be plenty of clarity.  Justice Warby won't be giving his decision until February.  I am sure he wants to give them time to settle this out of court, plus this were made more interesting with the new information about letter writing assistants in the employ of The Crown.  Maybe The Crown owns the copyright to the letter?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Press release likely by Sunshine S! Here is the full text, so you don't have to click on it. I'll add also the emojis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan's lawyer: no trial needed in privacy case*
> Tue, January 19, 2021, 6:00 AM
> 
> 
> Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex's, privacy case might be over before a trial has even started. According to the British royal's lawyers a London judge should rule in her favor because the publication has no prospect of winning. The wife of Queen Elizabeth's grandson Prince Harry, is suing Associated Newspapers. Its Mail on Sunday printed extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas Markle in August 2018. She says the publication of the letter was a misuse of private information and breached her copyright. Meghan is seeking aggravated damages. The paper has argued the duchess was willing for other private matters to become public if it suited her interests. They say it was justified in publishing parts of the letter in response to interviews her anonymous friends had given to the U.S. magazine People. At a two-day hearing starting at London's High Court, Meghan's lawyers said judge Mark Warby should give a summary judgement in favor of the former U.S. actress. They said the decision to publish the letter was an assault on quote "her private life, her family life and her correspondence." Describing the paper's defence as "lacking in clarity." The trial was due to start last week but was delayed until late 2021 because of a "confidential" reason.
> 
> News from the duchess's camp


Interesting how this was dated 6 am Tuesday Jan 19, ie before the court presentations ... written before the fact ... not after


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> lol!  Notice how the press release doesn't mention the Palace Four.  When those four people start to spill the tea, there will be plenty of clarity.  Justice Warby won't be giving his decision until February.  I am sure he wants to give them time to settle this out of court, plus this were made more interesting with the new information about letter writing assistants in the employ of The Crown.  Maybe The Crown owns the copyright to the letter?


The Palace Four are to be ignored in all press releases coming from MM (until a chance to twist the facts). She hopes that everything will be forgotten by the time Justice Warby gives his decision. If they settled this out of court, MM will likely imply (via friends) that she received an apology...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

She wants more than an apology.  She started this because she wants money.  She's not going to get any.


----------



## bag-mania

This article has the names of the four aides. I wonder if the BRF told them not to take sides.

*Meghan letter: Royal aides 'won't take sides', High Court told*
Four royal aides say they do not wish to "take sides" over a letter from the Duchess of Sussex to her father, the High Court has been told.

In a letter lawyers for the four said they believed their clients could "shed some light" on the letter's drafting but the four were "strictly neutral".

Meghan is suing the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online publisher over articles that reproduced parts of the letter.

She claims her privacy and copyright were breached by the newspaper group.

Her lawyers are asking for summary judgement - a dismissal of Associated Newspapers' (ANL) defence instead of a trial.

The five articles, published in February 2019, were a "triple-barrelled invasion" of the duchess's privacy, correspondence and family, the lawyers claim.

She is seeking damages from the newspaper group for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act over the articles.

ANL claims Meghan wrote her letter "with a view to it being disclosed publicly at some future point" in order to "defend her against charges of being an uncaring or unloving daughter", which she denies.
On the second day of the hearing on Wednesday, ANL's barrister Antony White QC told the court that a letter from the so-called "palace four" showed that "further oral evidence and documentary evidence is likely to be available at trial which would shed light on certain key factual issues in this case".

He said it was "likely" there was also further evidence about whether Meghan "directly or indirectly provided private information" to the authors of an unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom.

The four aides are: Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Christian Jones, their former deputy communications secretary, Samantha Cohen, formerly the Sussexes' private secretary, and Sara Latham, their ex-director of communications.

'Strictly neutral'

"None of our clients welcomes his or her potential involvement in this litigation, which has arisen purely as a result of the performance of his or her duties in their respective jobs at the material time," their lawyers said in a letter sent on their behalf.

"Nor does any of our clients wish to take sides in the dispute between your respective clients. Our clients are all strictly neutral.

"They have no interest in assisting either party to the proceedings. Their only interest is in ensuring a level playing field, insofar as any evidence they may be able to give is concerned."

Their letter said that their lawyers' "preliminary view is that one or more of our clients would be in a position to shed some light" on "the creation of the letter and the electronic draft".

It also said they may be able to shed light on "whether or not the claimant anticipated that the letter might come into in the public domain" and whether or not the duchess "directly or indirectly provided private information, generally and in relation to the letter specifically, to the authors of Finding Freedom".

But Justin Rushbrooke QC, representing the duchess, said the letter from the four "contains no information at all that supports the defendant's case on alleged co-authorship (of Meghan's letter), and no indication that evidence will be forthcoming that will support the defendant's case should the matter proceed to trial".

Meghan, 39, sent a handwritten letter to her father in August 2018, following her marriage to Prince Harry in May that year, which Mr Markle did not attend. The couple are now living in the US with their son Archie.

The full trial of the duchess's claim had been due to be heard at the High Court this month, but last year the case was adjourned until autumn 2021.

At the conclusion of the hearing on Wednesday afternoon, Mr Justice Warby reserved his judgement, which he said he would deliver "as soon as possible".



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Interesting how this was dated 6 am Tuesday Jan 19, ie before the court presentations ... written before the fact ... not after


It made Yahoo 'front page' today. They want to give the impression that this case is a done deal in favor of the poor victim/duchess, and hope people will forget about it. Unless she wins, and we will be reminded of that every other second.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> She wants more than an apology.  She started this because she wants money.  She's not going to get any.


Oh yes, she wants money, a lot of money. However, she may have already understood that her Netflix and Spotify deals were a lot easier to get.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh yes, she wants money, a lot of money. However, she may have already understood that her Netflix and Spotify deals were a lot easier to get.



I don't believe that those deals are all that great.  I think they are living beyond their means.  Give it a little time and they might land in bankruptcy court.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> This article has the names of the four aides. I wonder if the BRF told them not to take sides.
> 
> *Meghan letter: Royal aides 'won't take sides', High Court told*
> Four royal aides say they do not wish to "take sides" over a letter from the Duchess of Sussex to her father, the High Court has been told.
> 
> In a letter lawyers for the four said they believed their clients could "shed some light" on the letter's drafting but the four were "strictly neutral".
> 
> Meghan is suing the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online publisher over articles that reproduced parts of the letter.
> 
> She claims her privacy and copyright were breached by the newspaper group.
> 
> Her lawyers are asking for summary judgement - a dismissal of Associated Newspapers' (ANL) defence instead of a trial.
> 
> The five articles, published in February 2019, were a "triple-barrelled invasion" of the duchess's privacy, correspondence and family, the lawyers claim.
> 
> She is seeking damages from the newspaper group for alleged misuse of private information, copyright infringement and breach of the Data Protection Act over the articles.
> 
> ANL claims Meghan wrote her letter "with a view to it being disclosed publicly at some future point" in order to "defend her against charges of being an uncaring or unloving daughter", which she denies.
> On the second day of the hearing on Wednesday, ANL's barrister Antony White QC told the court that a letter from the so-called "palace four" showed that "further oral evidence and documentary evidence is likely to be available at trial which would shed light on certain key factual issues in this case".
> 
> He said it was "likely" there was also further evidence about whether Meghan "directly or indirectly provided private information" to the authors of an unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom.
> 
> The four aides are: Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Christian Jones, their former deputy communications secretary, Samantha Cohen, formerly the Sussexes' private secretary, and Sara Latham, their ex-director of communications.
> 
> 'Strictly neutral'
> 
> "None of our clients welcomes his or her potential involvement in this litigation, which has arisen purely as a result of the performance of his or her duties in their respective jobs at the material time," their lawyers said in a letter sent on their behalf.
> 
> "Nor does any of our clients wish to take sides in the dispute between your respective clients. Our clients are all strictly neutral.
> 
> "They have no interest in assisting either party to the proceedings. Their only interest is in ensuring a level playing field, insofar as any evidence they may be able to give is concerned."
> 
> Their letter said that their lawyers' "preliminary view is that one or more of our clients would be in a position to shed some light" on "the creation of the letter and the electronic draft".
> 
> It also said they may be able to shed light on "whether or not the claimant anticipated that the letter might come into in the public domain" and whether or not the duchess "directly or indirectly provided private information, generally and in relation to the letter specifically, to the authors of Finding Freedom".
> 
> But Justin Rushbrooke QC, representing the duchess, said the letter from the four "contains no information at all that supports the defendant's case on alleged co-authorship (of Meghan's letter), and no indication that evidence will be forthcoming that will support the defendant's case should the matter proceed to trial".
> 
> Meghan, 39, sent a handwritten letter to her father in August 2018, following her marriage to Prince Harry in May that year, which Mr Markle did not attend. The couple are now living in the US with their son Archie.
> 
> The full trial of the duchess's claim had been due to be heard at the High Court this month, but last year the case was adjourned until autumn 2021.
> 
> At the conclusion of the hearing on Wednesday afternoon, Mr Justice Warby reserved his judgement, which he said he would deliver "as soon as possible".
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice



They can be perfect witnesses by just telling the truth.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> All of this brouhaha, when her father only wanted a simple phone call.
> Unbelievable.


Apparently that was too steep a cost for cheapskate MM to pay.  I've always heard the BRF is cheap, but this takes the cake!


----------



## lanasyogamama

The Duke and Duchess of frivolous lawsuits


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that those deals are all that great.  I think they are living beyond their means.  Give it a little time and they might land in bankruptcy court.


Lawyers and PR bills must be huge, not to mentioned a 9 million dollar mortgage and other house expenses. I don't think she will be able to afford another 1 million dollars on clothes so soon.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> The Duke and Duchess of frivolous lawsuits


Frivolous lawsuits, hypocrisy, greed... It looks like she will not be short on titles after all.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> I think MOS is going to get their trial. If she has any brains, she will settle this because they are going to show her as being a foolish woman who made a big mistake by lying. Once she involved people at KP in drafting this letter, it was all over and there was no way that it wouldn’t come out that she had help writing it.Who owns the copyright?  Meg plus these four?  The Crown since the four were Crown employees? I would love to know what the four helpers thought of her for even wanting to write a letter like that.  How can Justice Warby end the case in her favor when the defense has people, who were not afraid to be named, ready to tell the truth. The five friends who are not anxious to be named, did not want to step forward, but if there is a trial they will be called.   Settle now Meg.


If they settle they should pay the defendants, lots of money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that those deals are all that great.  I think they are living beyond their means.  Give it a little time and they might land in bankruptcy court.



The BRF will never let that happen and they know that.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if her lawyers were able to negotiated the date of this court appointment (to coincide with a major US event), so the 'wash of dirty linen' would be less noticeable.


Highly unlikely. The court dates are set by the court months in advance. You have to have a very good reason to change that. We are involved in a case right now and we had our first hearing first week of Jan. Our original barrister wasn't available on that date so we had to find an alternative. Turned out that our alternative was great and we won at that hearing so the court ordered the other side to pay our fees. So all is not lost!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Press release likely by Sunshine S! Here is the full text, so you don't have to click on it. I'll add also the emojis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan's lawyer: no trial needed in privacy case*
> Tue, January 19, 2021, 6:00 AM
> 
> 
> Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex's, privacy case might be over before a trial has even started. According to the British royal's lawyers a London judge should rule in her favor because the publication has no prospect of winning. The wife of Queen Elizabeth's grandson Prince Harry, is suing Associated Newspapers. Its Mail on Sunday printed extracts of a handwritten letter she sent to her estranged father Thomas Markle in August 2018. She says the publication of the letter was a misuse of private information and breached her copyright. Meghan is seeking aggravated damages. The paper has argued the duchess was willing for other private matters to become public if it suited her interests. They say it was justified in publishing parts of the letter in response to interviews her anonymous friends had given to the U.S. magazine People. At a two-day hearing starting at London's High Court, Meghan's lawyers said judge Mark Warby should give a summary judgement in favor of the former U.S. actress. They said the decision to publish the letter was an assault on quote "her private life, her family life and her correspondence." Describing the paper's defence as "lacking in clarity." The trial was due to start last week but was delayed until late 2021 because of a "confidential" reason.
> 
> News from the duchess's camp


Such unbiased headline!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Such unbiased headline!



If I was the judge I'd be like "I decide if a trial is needed"...just like the Queen said "Meghan is wearing the tiara she's given by me." The nerve.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> lol!  Notice how the press release doesn't mention the Palace Four.  When those four people start to spill the tea, there will be plenty of clarity.  Justice Warby won't be giving his decision until February.  I am sure he wants to give them time to settle this out of court, plus this were made more interesting with the new information about letter writing assistants in the employ of The Crown.  Maybe The Crown owns the copyright to the letter?


Agree, the Four are the most interesting twist to the story 
3 of 4 are still employed by the palaces, and they had a joint lawyer , paid by their employer?

In their shoes,  I would not want the stress, inconvenience and cost of being called to testify, no matter my opinion on this father - daughter squabble , they will have to walk a line, their testimony will have to be rehearsed, vetted, nit picked by all 3 sides - MOS, MM and crown


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Highly unlikely. The court dates are set by the court months in advance. You have to have a very good reason to change that. We are involved in a case right now and we had our first hearing first week of Jan. Our original barrister wasn't available on that date so we had to find an alternative. Turned out that our alternative was great and we won at that hearing so the court ordered the other side to pay our fees. So all is not lost!


I agree, highly unlikely. However, it is still an interesting 'coincidence', particularly with expensive  lawyers that know well how to work with availabilities...


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Such unbiased headline!


Very fair from MM's point of view.   
I can't even imagine the news releases if MM would win the requested summary judgment. Let's not think about that possibility for the sake of our stomachs.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The BRF will never let that happen and they know that.


You are unfortunately right, MM&H will continue taking advantage of everything.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Agree, the Four are the most interesting twist to the story
> 3 of 4 are still employed by the palaces, and they had a joint lawyer , paid by their employer?
> 
> In their shoes,  I would not want the stress, inconvenience and cost of being called to testify, no matter my opinion on this father - daughter squabble , they will have to walk a line, their testimony will have to be rehearsed, vetted, nit picked by all 3 sides - MOS, MM and crown


Why do I think that they had to be assured that they would have legal coverage before doing this?  Could she sue them personally for slander? Defamation?  Why should they being paying for legal fees?  It’s similar to the five friends not wanting to be called because they would incur 
legal costs.


----------



## Chanbal

Mods: this post has nothing to do with politics, but feel free to remove it...

Talking about taking advantage of everything, look at today's headlines:



This is a ridiculous story, below is the DM article on the subject.









						Photo of Prince Harry at President Joe Biden's inauguration
					

Eagle-eyed royal fans were left delighted yesterday after a photo of the Duke of Sussex, 36, was spotted hanging in the background at President Joe *****'s inauguration ceremony.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree, the Four are the most interesting twist to the story
> *3 of 4 are still employed by the palaces*, and they had a joint lawyer , paid by their employer?
> 
> In their shoes,  I would not want the stress, inconvenience and cost of being called to testify, no matter my opinion on this father - daughter squabble , they will have to walk a line, their testimony will have to be rehearsed, vetted, nit picked by all 3 sides - MOS, MM and crown



2 of the 4 are still employed by them. This week Christian Jones quit his job as William's private secretary to be a partner in a private equity group. I'm sure none of them are happy about being sucked into this case.


----------



## zen1965

They do anything for a headline. Embarrassing.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 4964997


*HA HA HA .. I love it!!! * The Bernie meme's are hilarious; the funniest one I've seen so far is one where he is sitting by a Lamprodotto truck in Florence!!!  Too funny ..


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh. There is no escaping them. Apparently there was an old photo of Harry with the new president at a wreath laying at Arlington National Cemetery from many years ago in the background yesterday. How much do you want to bet they sent it there to be displayed? 

I won't post that photo but instead there is this one that shows the personality of the real Harry. He and the Bidens were at the Invictus games in 2017. You can tell how thrilled Harry was to be with them then.




https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-surprise-appearance-joe-*****-inauguration-day/


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. There is no escaping them. Apparently there was an old photo of Harry with the new president at a wreath laying at Arlington National Cemetery from many years ago in the background yesterday. How much do you want to bet they sent it there to be displayed?
> 
> I won't post that photo but instead there is this one that shows the personality of the real Harry. He and the Bidens were at the Invictus games in 2017. You can tell how thrilled Harry was to be with them then.
> 
> View attachment 4965228
> 
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-surprise-appearance-joe-*****-inauguration-day/


There are several news stories about this circulating today. MM's PR-agency has been very busy taking advantage of the current situation. MM makes all other opportunists look like amateurs.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> There are several news stories about this circulating today. MM's PR-agency has been very busy taking advantage of the current situation. MM makes all other opportunists look like amateurs.
> 
> View attachment 4965250


they are like parasites...nothing of their own to offer


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> There are several news stories about this circulating today. MM's PR-agency has been very busy taking advantage of the current situation. MM makes all other opportunists look like amateurs.
> 
> View attachment 4965250



I’m just happy they didn’t manage to weasel an invitation to be there themselves. I guess a photo was the best compromise they could negotiate.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I’m just happy they didn’t manage to weasel an invitation to be there themselves. I guess a photo was the best compromise they could negotiate.


I'd bet money they are working on making a connection for a photo op or more....but really, who needs them?  if they're not royal, who are they?  just a couple of opportunists


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'd bet money they are working on making a connection for a photo op or more....but really, who needs them?  if they're not royal, who are they?  just a couple of opportunists



There are so many big-name, talented celebrities that will be ahead of them. H&M have nothing to offer, they aren’t even entertaining.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. There is no escaping them. Apparently there was an old photo of Harry with the new president at a wreath laying at Arlington National Cemetery from many years ago in the background yesterday. How much do you want to bet they sent it there to be displayed?
> 
> I won't post that photo but instead there is this one that shows the personality of the real Harry. He and the Bidens were at the Invictus games in 2017. You can tell how thrilled Harry was to be with them then.
> 
> View attachment 4965228
> 
> 
> https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-surprise-appearance-joe-*****-inauguration-day/


He always comes across as a petulant brat who's bored in every scenario he's pictured in.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> He always comes across as a petulant brat who's bored in every scenario he's pictured in.


I was thinking pouty.....same thing I guess.....doubt Meghan will put up with him pouting on her


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> There are several news stories about this circulating today. MM's PR-agency has been very busy taking advantage of the current situation. MM makes all other opportunists look like amateurs.
> 
> View attachment 4965250


"Close ties" to his family??  Oh for the love of God.  These two are nothing but vultures, circling and making desperate attempts to pick up any little possible morsel, even if it's just a mirage.


----------



## gracekelly

They were supposed to be at the inauguration, but Archie had a cold. *snark snark*


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> There are several news stories about this circulating today. MM's PR-agency has been very busy taking advantage of the current situation. MM makes all other opportunists look like amateurs.
> 
> View attachment 4965250


They are also doing it to get the attention away from how the case against the MOS is looking and it isn't good.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They were supposed to be at the inauguration, but Archie had a cold. *snark snark*


yeah, right....like they would miss that opportunity


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yeah, right....like they would miss that opportunity


She could have reworn the green horrible dress from the farewell tour.  She would have given JB and MO a good laugh with that outfit.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She could have reworn the green horrible dress from the farewell tour.  She would have given JB and MO a good laugh with that outfit.


that horrid outfit has been so overexposed I doubt she could ever wear it again....do you think she likes it?  I guess so if they used in on the book (?)


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m just happy they didn’t manage to weasel an invitation to be there themselves. I guess a photo was the best compromise they could negotiate.


haha, some photos and titles circulating on the internet are giving the impression that they were almost honored guests there. I wonder what the one below means with '2 royal moments'.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that horrid outfit has been so overexposed I doubt she could ever wear it again....do you think she likes it?  I guess so if they used in on the book (?)



How she thought that was elegant is beyond me.  I don't know which was worse, the dress or the fit of the dress as both were terrible.



Chanbal said:


> haha, some photos and titles circulating on the internet are giving the impression that they were almost honored guests there. I wonder what the one below means with '2 royal moments'.
> View attachment 4965290



Looks like the sugars are going with fake news.  It's really all click bait.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> "Close ties" to his family??  Oh for the love of God.  These two are nothing but vultures, circling and making desperate attempts to pick up any little possible morsel, even if it's just a mirage.


The more I know about MM, the more I feel sorry for her siblings. She must have used all her father's resources.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> How she thought that was elegant is beyond me.  I don't know which was worse, the dress or the fit of the dress as both were terrible.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like the sugars are going with fake news.  It's really all click bait.


I just hope they run out of money to pay Sunshine S, so we will have a break from all those fake news stories.


----------



## theamericanchinadoll

Any definitive news on Sam’s book being scrubbed by various places?


----------



## Lake Effect

bag-mania said:


> That is fairly common, isn't it? The man making more effort with children from his second marriage than from the first. I think it is because he is older by then and finally settling down to the role of father.
> 
> I'm sure Alec Baldwin's kids with Hillary are getting much more "dad time" than Ireland did.


I realize this isn't the AB thread; somehow I don't see Ireland getting worked up over missing any additional time with AB.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lake Effect said:


> I realize this isn't the AB thread; somehow I don't see Ireland getting worked up over missing any additional time with AB.



They appear to be on much better terms these days than when she was young. It was a very ugly custody battle between her parents.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> There are several news stories about this circulating today. MM's PR-agency has been very busy taking advantage of the current situation. MM makes all other opportunists look like amateurs.
> 
> View attachment 4965250


I can "reveal" I once stood in the same long line waiting to use a Women's Restroom as Dr. *****, so does that give me "close ties to the family?"   These two become more pathetic every week in their never ending its-getting-embarassing attempt to be relevant.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you for explaining @MaggieMullins.  So yet again, even though most of us are welcoming to others' perspectives, and treat them with respect even though we may disagree, these random people will dip in out of nowhere, disagree with us, and resort to the over used "you are racist" diatribe.  Give me a F'ing break.  I'm a female immigrant, a WOC, and have dealt with racism most of my life.  I, and I'm sure MANY of us here, have overcome our individual challenges to not just survive, but thrive.  But these other "enlightened" people who are over zealous fans of MM come in and accuse us of every low life quality you can be, simply because we don't agree with MM and her grifting way of life.  I am not jealous of her or actually anyone else.  I worry about my own life and my family.  This is an escape, and I'm sure MM couldn't care less about my opinion of her.  I am happy with my life and am free to have my opinion without being accused of vile character traits.  It's time for some dippers into our forum to grow up and realize the whole world doesn't have to agree with them, and just because they don't, they're not suddenly "wrong", "evil", or "jealous".


Great post! This is a very civilized thread, what makes it fun to come here. Members here are polite, friendly, and use common sense imo. It makes me sad when I see people coming here on an attack and divisive mode, it reminds me of the many problems we still have to face to make this a better world. It is true that we criticize MM&H, but they make a point of being in the news every single day. I heard/saw somewhere else that at some point, MM requested her PR agency to release 3 positive news about her per day, please!!!


----------



## Jktgal

Awwww another visit from a woke one. How exciting. 

Haven't been here a while but wondered if the latest Meggie Markle's been shared. I don't find it as hilarious as her previous ones but still entertaining...


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> I can "reveal" I once stood in the same long line waiting to use a Women's Restroom as Dr. *****, so does that give me "close ties to the family?"   These two become more pathetic every week in their never ending its-getting-embarassing attempt to be relevant.


The answer to your question is: it depends! Was this Dr.*** rich, famous, and with important contacts/connections? If your answer to this question is 'yes', then you can assume that your brief use of restroom gave you "close ties to the family". I hope my answer was helpful.


----------



## Jktgal

...which makes me check on Harry Hewitt and he also has a slot wheee! The comments on both are hilarious.



Edit! He has another one! Wow can't remember the last time my quarantine Friday night was as exciting...



And another! Wow it's like Xmas...


----------



## bag-mania

theamericanchinadoll said:


> You are offended by QAnon conspiracy thats understandable but gossip is how these conspiracies starts.  I’ve seen so many conspiracy theories on MM and her relationship with the BRF.  Not that people were doing things so differently before MM. BRF has always served as the Kardashian reality show for all of the UK, predating reality TV.
> 
> I appreciate your candor and the Judge Judy quote.  Samantha Markle, let see, she lives in a tiny town called Ocala 1 hour north of Orlando. I don’t usually travel in that direction except I adopted my pug puppy from a rescue in Ocala. Part of the adoption contract was that I bring our pug back once she is old enough to get spayed and so I did. This procedure took an entire day so I spent my time hanging out in Ocala with some friends at a restaurant.  There we ran into Samantha Markle. She was sitting in a corner with her friends chatting loudly and was very rude to someone on her cell phone. This was a few years ago when MM first came out with Harry. My friend goes...”do you know what that is? ...That is Samantha Markle” This same friend lived in Ocala for a long time says most people dislike the kind of publicity she brings.
> 
> People dislike that kind of trashy celebrity attention Sam attracts.  My friend grew up in Orlando and moved to Ocala quite some time ago.  Ocala is the kind of small town with your one road main street and everyone knows eachother because it is so small. Ocala is the kind of town where JC Penny is still the primary department store. Not there there is anything wrong with it but I’ve always felt out of place the few times I’m there passing through. Ocala is essentially a homogenous retirement community.  I doubt many people in a small conservative town like Ocala likes MM but no one likes the media whore like Sam Markle.
> 
> My thoughts on MM? I like her effortless modern style with clean lines. I’ve enjoyed her performance as Rachel Zane on Suits. Let’s see what else? She's not afraid to be herself and stay true to what makes her who she is. I can't imagine how hard it must be to stay so composed and graceful with everything that goes on around her and in the press, but she manages to do it all with such a presence! MM has been an advocate for women’s equality since prior to Harry and made no pretense about her liberal values. She had an independent career before Harry.  MM is literally the only second person with a college degree to have married into the royal family (Kate Middleton) being the other. And I love Kate but they’ve been pitched against each other by the press. Are there things to dislike about MM? Yes. But I try to focus on the facts than buy into prejudices because I’ve been in MM‘s shoes with my ex’s horrifying mother-in-laws. I get why so many people dislike her after leaving the royal family. Sometimes you are used as a scapegoat. It is easy to believe the outsider is the manipulator when the crack began before you were in the picture and the severity is greater than any outsider can know. I’m not so quick to believe anyone is that successful at manipulation and rather it is a convenient narrative that is easy to believe. I doubt Harry is as foolish as people like to believe.
> 
> ETA: With my EX, eventually I broke up with him because of his family’s meddling in our lives. It was too much crazy that I chose to leave. Years after that, he emailed me out of the blue explaining what he didn’t tell me. He understood why I left and he was no longer on speaking terms with his mom after we broke up.  He said he had wanted to cut her out of his life years ago feared what it meant to him financially so never got around to it. It was certainly nice to get that closure. My ex’s mom’s lies and rumors had real consequences on my social and professional life.  So when I look at MM, I try not to indulge in that.



Thank you for your reply. Some people like small town life. I can't say whether Samantha is a nice person or not. She has two Master's degrees so she isn't a dummy. I will say observing her having a loud phone call isn't the same as actually meeting her. Everybody sounds obnoxious if they are talking on the phone in a restaurant.

As for Meghan, many of us here believe she is phony as hell. The composed, grace you mention looks fabricated and contrived to us. We think she created an image to achieve her goal rather than there being anything at all natural about it. It seems she picks up on whatever social issue is currently in the news to get media attention, but then quickly drops it in favor of something else once it is out of the news cycle. That is only a difference of opinion. I could _almost_ believe Meghan just had a bad relationship with everyone in her family except Doria, but then she marries Harry and what happens? Suddenly HE no longer gets along with his own family with whom he'd always had a good relationship. What are the chances? What was the commonality? Are we expected to believe all the members of both families are horrible people and only Meghan and Harry are decent? The goody-goody image being sold in the press conflicts with what is happening.

No one is here to change anyone's mind. I do appreciate your point of view. I like her dogs. That's all I've got.


----------



## bisousx

I personally think Samantha and the Markle clan are kinda trashy. But that doesn’t mean Sam doesn’t deserve to write her own book, tell her side of the story or try to make money from it - especially when Meghan already wrote her own tell-all with the help of writers. Isn’t it elitist to shut down Samantha’s voice because she’s not rich and beautiful like Meghan?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The answer to your question is: it depends! Was this Dr.*** rich, famous, and with important contacts/connections? If your answer to this question is 'yes', then you can assume that your brief use of restroom gave you "close ties to the family". I hope my answer was helpful.


"Yes". Move over Meghan.   And "yes" Chanbal, your posts are helpful, enlightening and enjoyable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sounds like somebody is unhinged!









						Harry says he and Meg got 'the mothership of harassment'
					

Harry was interviewed by Fast Company for an article published on Friday which is in a lengthy Q&A format.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"'It wouldn’t have even begun had our story just been told truthfully.'"

Oh, you mean like making up a whole new story regarding your engagement, putting out a press release Meghan was in labour when in fact Archie had been born already or insisting you didn't collaborate with Finding Freedom only to be forced by a judge to admit you in fact did? Besides all the other lies Meghan has been caught fabricating (lunch with Michelle, anyone? Mentioned in a piece Meghan herself penned?).

Is this guy on drugs?


----------



## marietouchet

What does this mean ? I am not disagreeing just trying to understand .... 

'I was really surprised to witness how my story had been told one way, my wife’s story had been told one way, and then our union sparked something that made the telling of that story very different.
'That false narrative became the mothership for all of the harassment you’re referring to.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I’m just happy they didn’t manage to weasel an invitation to be there themselves. I guess a photo was the best compromise they could negotiate.



And as a result, since H&M have zero shame, I suggest they send life sized cardboard cutouts of themselves to all the events and parties they don't get invited to. Pictures will be taken and put into the paper and magazines just to make others believe they were invited and attended. At this point, they'd might as well. Oh--and put functional pockets on the cardboard cutouts for actual guests to place checks to the Archewell Foundation. Put a scanner with a loud buzzer on them to reject checks of five figures or less. When the buzzer goes off, the guests get shamed and forced to write fatter checks. M&H owe me for this brilliant idea. I want a 20% cut. I'll take 15% for seven figures, 12% for eight. Hey, I'm only existing, not thriving myself you know.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like somebody is unhinged!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry says he and Meg got 'the mothership of harassment'
> 
> 
> Harry was interviewed by Fast Company for an article published on Friday which is in a lengthy Q&A format.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It takes several years of hard work for a person to become an expert in a certain field, but H&MM became experts on everything in <1 year. 
I'm stuck with one of his sentences: 'There has to be accountability to collective wellbeing, not just financial incentive." If he cares about 'collective wellbeing', shouldn't he stop polluting the news with useless stories about him and his wife? Why did they hire a PR agency to keep them on news platforms daily? Why is he talking about 'financial incentive'? Aren't they cashing in on the UK titles? Greedy parasites!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It takes several years of hard work for a person to become an expert in a certain field, but H&MM became experts on everything in <1 year.
> I'm stuck with one of his sentences: 'There has to be accountability to collective wellbeing, not just financial incentive." If he cares about 'collective wellbeing', shouldn't he stop polluting the news with useless stories about him and his wife? Why did they hire a PR agency to keep them on news platforms daily? Why is he talking about 'financial incentive'? Aren't they cashing in on the UK titles? Greedy parasites!



I’m thinking the “mothership of harassment“ is about to land


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> And as a result, since H&M have zero shame, I suggest they send life sized cardboard cutouts of themselves to all the events and parties they don't get invited to. Pictures will be taken and put into the paper and magazines just to make others believe they were invited and attended. At this point, they'd might as well. Oh--and put functional pockets on the cardboard cutouts for actual guests to place checks to the Archewell Foundation. Put a scanner with a loud buzzer on them to reject checks of five figures or less. When the buzzer goes off, the guests get shamed and forced to write fatter checks. M&H owe me for this brilliant idea. I want a 20% cut. I'll take 15% for seven figures, 12% for eight. Hey, I'm only existing, not thriving myself you know.


I am your witness , @rose60610 , you have the copyright on this brain storm


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m thinking the “mothership of harassment“ is about to land


I sat on the sidelines on that space oddity  til now ... you know the meaning of the word mothership, I think others confuse the words motherload and mothership
Cue David Bowie , ground control to Major Tom ...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m thinking the “mothership of harassment“ is about to land


Who do they think they are? How can these 2 idiots get on one's nerves?


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> It takes several years of hard work for a person to become an expert in a certain field, but H&MM became experts on everything in <1 year.
> I'm stuck with one of his sentences: 'There has to be accountability to collective wellbeing, *not just financial incentive.*" If he cares about 'collective wellbeing', shouldn't he stop polluting the news with useless stories about him and his wife? Why did they hire a PR agency to keep them on news platforms daily? Why is he talking about 'financial incentive'? Aren't they cashing in on the UK titles? Greedy parasites!



Ummm.....isn't that why they insert themselves into everything so they're not forgotten about ($$$)? Of course, he does say "not JUST financial incentive", so he is insinuating that financial incentive is all well and good. And cashing in on titles is OK since they'd rationalize that Burger King and Prince Spaghetti do it all the time.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "'It wouldn’t have even begun had our story just been told truthfully.'"
> 
> Oh, you mean like making up a whole new story regarding your engagement, putting out a press release Meghan was in labour when in fact Archie had been born already or insisting you didn't collaborate with Finding Freedom only to be forced by a judge to admit you in fact did? Besides all the other lies Meghan has been caught fabricating (lunch with Michelle, anyone? Mentioned in a piece Meghan herself penned?).
> 
> Is this guy on drugs?


See, the problem with people like Meghan is that they *lie SO MUCH* that after a while, they believe their lies.  If someone had the guts to write down each lie with the correlating TRUTH, that would be pretty funny .. but you know, whoever would have the AUDACITY to do such a thing would be called racist or something to that effect.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> And as a result, since H&M have zero shame, I suggest they send life sized cardboard cutouts of themselves to all the events and parties they don't get invited to. Pictures will be taken and put into the paper and magazines just to make others believe they were invited and attended. At this point, they'd might as well. Oh--and put functional pockets on the cardboard cutouts for actual guests to place checks to the Archewell Foundation. Put a scanner with a loud buzzer on them to reject checks of five figures or less. When the buzzer goes off, the guests get shamed and forced to write fatter checks. M&H owe me for this brilliant idea. I want a 20% cut. I'll take 15% for seven figures, 12% for eight. Hey, I'm only existing, not thriving myself you know.


*OH NO* .. you might have just given them an idea .. YIKES!!!


----------



## Allisonfaye

It's all about the IG clicks which translates into $$. They certainly aren't the only ones doing it. It's not a good thing in any way.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> What does this mean ? I am not disagreeing just trying to understand ....
> 
> 'I was really surprised to witness how my story had been told one way, my wife’s story had been told one way, and then our union sparked something that made the telling of that story very different.
> 'That false narrative became the mothership for all of the harassment you’re referring to.



It means he's been eating too much word salad and he forgot how to talk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I sat on the sidelines on that space oddity  til now ... you know the meaning of the word mothership, I think others confuse the words motherload and mothership
> Cue David Bowie , ground control to Major Tom ...



In all my years, I have never heard anyone ‘confuse’ _mothership_ with _motherload.  _If that is what he was doing, wow just wow.






						motherload | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University
					






					brians.wsu.edu
				



*motherload*
Although you may dig a load of ore out of a mother lode, the spelling “motherload” is a mistake which is probably influenced by people thinking it means something like “the mother of all loads.” A “lode” was originally a stream of water, but by analogy it became a vein of metal ore. Miners of precious metals dream of finding a really rich vein, which they refer to as a “mother lode,” most often spelled as two words, though you also commonly see it spelled as one.

This may hep, too:









						motherload – a common mistake or slang word?
					

I am a bit unsure about how the word "motherload" should be seen – as a common mistake or slang word or both. I've encountered the word the first time in a recent Guardian article, but to my surpri...




					english.stackexchange.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> In all my years, I have never heard anyone ‘confuse’ _mothership_ with _motherload.  _If that is what he was doing, wow just wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> motherload | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> brians.wsu.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *motherload*
> Although you may dig a load of ore out of a mother lode, the spelling “motherload” is a mistake which is probably influenced by people thinking it means something like “the mother of all loads.” A “lode” was originally a stream of water, but by analogy it became a vein of metal ore. Miners of precious metals dream of finding a really rich vein, which they refer to as a “mother lode,” most often spelled as two words, though you also commonly see it spelled as one.



Finding a motherlode of ore is a good thing. So it wouldn't make sense if that is what he meant. Maybe he wants the mothership to come and take him away.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Finding a motherlode of ore is a good thing. So it wouldn't make sense if that is what he meant. Maybe he wants *the mothership to come and take him away*.


I vote on the mothership, the one that could take him to Saturn (farthest planet from Earth). Oops, take the wife as well!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I vote on the mothership, the one that will take him to Saturn (farthest planet from Earth).



Saturn is made of gas. Harry has to have a solid place to stand. They can drop him off on Mars, that is far enough away.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Saturn is made of gas. Harry has to have a solid place to stand. They can drop him off on Mars, that is far enough away.


OK, if you think it will be *faster*, Mars it is! 
The 3 press releases on Yahoo today!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> OK, if you think it will be *faster*, Mars it is!
> The 3 press releases on Yahoo today!
> View attachment 4966496
> 
> View attachment 4966498
> 
> View attachment 4966499


This would be my favourite headline any day of the week: "All misinformation and lies about H&MM come from H&MM and their PR teams." Hope somebody has the balls nerve to do it someday, any day.
As an aside, if we were to punish them each time they lie, they would be in a constant state of punishment so yes, send them to Mars for eternity. Please!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> This would be my favourite headline any day of the week: "All misinformation and lies about H&MM come from H&MM and their PR teams." Hope somebody has the balls nerve to do it someday, any day.
> As an aside, if we were to punish them each time they lie, they would be in a constant state of punishment so yes, send them to Mars for eternity. Please!


Maybe a journalist in the UK will use your title, but I doubt it will happen in the US soon. Here is an article about MM's PR agency. 


The Agency


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I just watched the show about poverty in GB and it's heart breaking. So FCUK Harry and MM. You two don't deserve an ounce of the money you both self entitled morons that one was born into and the other climbed her way up to. You spout off about not thriving, yada yada, self proclaimed victims and what not. I don't hate anyone but I totally despise these two. Telling people what to do, what t say, how to feel. I mean they make a mockery out of everything is pure and light.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That is heartbreaking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG.


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG.
> 
> View attachment 4966975



It’s not a lie...


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG.
> 
> View attachment 4966975


#truth!


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I just watched the show about poverty in GB and it's heart breaking. So FCUK Harry and MM. You two don't deserve an ounce of the money you both self entitled morons that one was born into and the other climbed her way up to. You spout off about not thriving, yada yada, self proclaimed victims and what not. I don't hate anyone but I totally despise these two. Telling people what to do, what t say, how to feel. I mean they make a mockery out of everything is pure and light.




Surprise, surprise, not available in the UK:

"Video unavailable
The uploader has not made this video available in your country."


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG.
> 
> View attachment 4966975





chicinthecity777 said:


> #truth!



#ditto


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> In all my years, I have never heard anyone ‘confuse’ _mothership_ with _motherload.  _If that is what he was doing, wow just wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> motherload | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> brians.wsu.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *motherload*
> Although you may dig a load of ore out of a mother lode, the spelling “motherload” is a mistake which is probably influenced by people thinking it means something like “the mother of all loads.” A “lode” was originally a stream of water, but by analogy it became a vein of metal ore. Miners of precious metals dream of finding a really rich vein, which they refer to as a “mother lode,” most often spelled as two words, though you also commonly see it spelled as one.
> 
> This may hep, too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> motherload – a common mistake or slang word?
> 
> 
> I am a bit unsure about how the word "motherload" should be seen – as a common mistake or slang word or both. I've encountered the word the first time in a recent Guardian article, but to my surpri...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> english.stackexchange.com


Yes thank you ... should be motherlode ... the source of ore/stuff
I was obsessed by the concept of a load of rubbish, and my spelling went astray
I was oblivious to the metaphor of a ship of harassment ... 
I shall listen to David Bowie ten times as penance for my word salad sins


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Maybe a journalist in the UK will use your title, but I doubt it will happen in the US soon. Here is an article about MM's PR agency.
> View attachment 4966609
> 
> The Agency


Re above attachment: View attachment 4966609 
I realiaze that every accused criminal, predator, felon, etc. has the inalienable right to an attorney, however I don’t believe they have an inalienable right to a PR agency to defend their public image. So. Mr. Darkness Sunshine and his PR Agency could have declined to represent a predator like Harvey Weinstein and grifters like H&MM, but it seems money can buy anything. PROFITS! PROFITS! PROFITS! KACHING! KACHING! KACHING!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG.
> 
> View attachment 4966975


The author of that statement was inspired! MM gave hope to lazy women, hard work can compensate for lack of talent. MM gave hope to women out there that delay women's progress. This is sad!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Re above attachment: View attachment 4966609
> I realiaze that every accused criminal, predator, felon, etc. has the inalienable right to an attorney, however I don’t believe they have an inalienable right to a PR agency to defend their public image. So. Mr. Darkness Sunshine and his PR Agency could have declined to represent a predator like Harvey Weinstein and grifters like H&MM, but it seems money can buy anything. PROFITS! PROFITS! PROFITS! KACHING! KACHING! KACHING!


The likes of HW, MM&H... are the ones that can pay his high fees. People like MM&H instead of working, pay the agency's fees to make them important celebrities, make a lot of money by throwing up word salads, and giving little to charitable causes. I don't think photo-ops, hats, pencils and sandwiches can be considered significant donations when compared to what they spend in PR-agencies and lawyers to make them look relevant.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The likes of HW, MM&H... are the ones that can pay his high fees. People like MM&H instead of working, pay the agency's fees to make them important celebrities, make a lot of money by throwing up word salads, and giving little to charitable causes. I don't think photo-ops, hats, pencils and sandwiches can be considered significant donations when compared to what they spend in *PR-agencies* and lawyers to make them look relevant.


Apologies if my post wasn't clear. I would like to see the big PR agencies decline such clients as HW, H&MM and their ilk on a matter of principles, but it will never happen because they can't resist the large sums money involved.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent point, @Maggie Muggins
So. If PR agencies (a private company) can profit off their clients, then why shouldn’t big tech profit?  Harry‘s position seems to be they should not profit, they should care about our mental health - at their expense. IMHO and maybe I am missing something,  H is showing his entitled privilege from living in a family that lives off the public.  Perhaps if he understood how the public makes its money (4 letter word, rhymes with twerk/twerp), he would stop his nonsense. Perhaps if he understood the definition of business vs. public service, then he would stop. Alternatively, if the public stopped funding Harry, then he may have a better understanding of how the world works. Or perhaps big tech can cut his service, then we would not be distracted by his “mothership of harassment.”

ETA:  maybe he is just realizing that he has sold himself to big tech, and it is beginning to cramp his lifestyle.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Surprise, surprise, not available in the UK:
> 
> "Video unavailable
> The uploader has not made this video available in your country."


Wow! It was on last night. Hmmm . . . try just putting in Kelly sisters . . . I don’t think they have that much reach or their people are on this site monitoring stuff.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> And as a result, since H&M have zero shame, I suggest they send life sized cardboard cutouts of themselves to all the events and parties they don't get invited to. Pictures will be taken and put into the paper and magazines just to make others believe they were invited and attended. At this point, they'd might as well. Oh--and put functional pockets on the cardboard cutouts for actual guests to place checks to the Archewell Foundation. Put a scanner with a loud buzzer on them to reject checks of five figures or less. When the buzzer goes off, the guests get shamed and forced to write fatter checks. M&H owe me for this brilliant idea. I want a 20% cut. I'll take 15% for seven figures, 12% for eight. Hey, I'm only existing, not thriving myself you know.


Trees deserve to be saved for important things. We don’t need any more pollution from these two pollutants or polluters. Just saying but I think it’s hilarious they found a way to insert themselves into events lol. I really can’t with these two. They’re like the joke of the century.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Screenshots of top rated comments on DM article about Harry's interview. Maybe the U.S. public are starting to see for what he really is!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Nailed it!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Screenshots of top rated comments on DM article about Harry's interview. Maybe the U.S. public are starting to see for what he really is!
> View attachment 4967313
> View attachment 4967314


ha...I like the irrelevant comment....these two have a problem IMO.  they can't maintain the high level of interest w/o being royal and she can't get any big acting jobs.....maybe I'm wrong and the netflix/spotify stuff will work for them


----------



## CarryOn2020

_He wrote his first Fast Company article back in August 2020 and was allegedly inspired to do this Q&A (presumably by email) following the January 6, 2021 riots at the Capitol Building in Washington DC_


He felt this way in Aug??? Wow.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _He wrote his first Fast Company article back in August 2020 and was allegedly inspired to do this Q&A (presumably by email) following the January 6, 2021 riots at the Capitol Building in Washington DC_
> 
> 
> He felt this way in Aug??? Wow.



oh gawd.....do we need to know what he thinks?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Post deleted.  Too tired to think of a clever remark.  Maybe H&M are winning. eeek.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Post deleted.  Too tired to think of a clever remark.  Maybe H&M are winning. eeek.


well they have a lot more at steak than you do


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "'It wouldn’t have even begun had our story just been told truthfully.'"
> 
> Oh, you mean like making up a whole new story regarding your engagement, putting out a press release Meghan was in labour when in fact Archie had been born already or insisting you didn't collaborate with Finding Freedom only to be forced by a judge to admit you in fact did? Besides all the other lies Meghan has been caught fabricating (lunch with Michelle, anyone? Mentioned in a piece Meghan herself penned?).
> 
> Is this guy on drugs?


_Is this guy on drugs?_  If not, maybe he should be.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if my post wasn't clear. I would like to see the big PR agencies decline such clients as HW, H&MM and their ilk on a matter of principles, but it will never happen because they can't resist the large sums money involved.



And...to think that he is whining that the tabloids are to blame.  They have the PR people put out stories everyday to the tabloids.  You want things to get better Harry?  Have SS stop sending the stories out on the two of you. Duh!  I too read that they wanted three positive stories per day.  That is ridiculous.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> And...to think that he is whining that the tabloids are to blame.  They have the PR people put out stories everyday to the tabloids.  You want things to get better Harry?  Have SS stop sending the stories out on the two of you. Duh!  I too read that they wanted three positive stories per day.  That is ridiculous.


They’re experts at gaslighting.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Screenshots of top rated comments on DM article about Harry's interview. Maybe the U.S. public are starting to see for what he really is!
> View attachment 4967313
> View attachment 4967314


They are all good, but can't stop laughing with this one. Poor people indeed!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG.
> 
> View attachment 4966975


*BINGO .. 100+++++++!!!  *This is the ONLY reason (_IMO_) that people would continue to 'like' her!  Sad, because when I first found out about her and Harry, I was happy and really hoped that (_somehow_) they would bring new life to the BRF .. what a disappointment .. *and that pertains to BOTH of them*!!!  Have to agree about despising them now!!


----------



## scarlet555

chicinthecity777 said:


> Screenshots of top rated comments on DM article about Harry's interview. Maybe the U.S. public are starting to see for what he really is!
> View attachment 4967313
> View attachment 4967314



I was starting to wonder if it wasn’t just the tpf crew dropping comments on other websites, is the world seeing through these two crazies YET?!!


----------



## CeeJay

So .. here's what I don't get .. their Netflix and Spotify deals .. ummmmm, are they not considered "social media"???  Sorry, but I'm not really up on all the social media platforms, but things like Netflix and Spotify (I don't subscribe to either) .. aren't they typically done via your phone or network device???


----------



## zen1965

papertiger said:


> Surprise, surprise, not available in the UK:
> 
> "Video unavailable
> The uploader has not made this video available in your country."



The documentary  goes back to 2001. So I would not necessarily regard it as an up-to-date look at poverty in UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> So .. here's what I don't get .. their Netflix and Spotify deals .. ummmmm, are they not considered "social media"???  Sorry, but I'm not really up on all the social media platforms, but things like Netflix and Spotify (I don't subscribe to either) .. aren't they typically done via your phone or network device???



I wouldn’t consider Spotify and Netflix to be social media because they are not interactive. You pay a subscription and you watch shows or listen to podcasts/music.

YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. all invite interaction with the consumer. They are free to anyone and you can post comments on what you see/hear (within reason). Maybe my understanding of the definition of social media isn’t correct but that’s how I think of it. The last thing Harry and Meghan want is random members of the public being able to post comments about them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What is social media?  Great question. The answer seems to be it is all encompassing. Almost all companies now use social media to advertise. So, where do we draw the line?




			https://www.fastcompany.com/90309308/by-any-memes-necessary-inside-netflixs-winning-social-media-strategy
		




			https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_medi
		

_Some of the most popular social media websites, with over 100 million registered users, include Facebook (and its associated Facebook Messenger), TikTok, WeChat, Instagram, QZone, Weibo, Twitter, Tumblr, Baidu Tieba, and LinkedIn. Depending on interpretation, other popular platforms that are sometimes referred to as social media services include YouTube, QQ, Quora, Telegram, WhatsApp, LINE, Snapchat, Pinterest, Viber, Reddit, Discord, VK, Microsoft Teams, and more. Wikis are examples of collaborative content creation._


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn’t consider Spotify and Netflix to be social media because they are not interactive. You pay a subscription and you watch shows or listen to podcasts/music.
> 
> YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. all invite interaction with the consumer. They are free to anyone and you can post comments on what you see/hear (within reason). Maybe my understanding of the definition of social media isn’t correct but that’s how I think of it. The last thing Harry and Meghan want is random members of the public being able to post comments about them.


Gotcha .. but, in theory .. people can still comment on their Netflix and/or Spotify "programs".  They are so deluded to think that they can (in essence) 'cleanse' social media platforms in regards to any negative comments about them .. and HECK, they bring it all on themselves that they have those negative comments being made!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They are all good, but can't stop laughing with this one. Poor people indeed!
> 
> View attachment 4967512


We have been looking at the same picture of them in the tabloids forever!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is social media?  Great question. The answer seems to be it is all encompassing. Almost all companies now use social media to advertise. So, where do we draw the line?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.fastcompany.com/90309308/by-any-memes-necessary-inside-netflixs-winning-social-media-strategy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_medi
> 
> 
> _Some of the most popular social media websites, with over 100 million registered users, include Facebook (and its associated Facebook Messenger), TikTok, WeChat, Instagram, QZone, Weibo, Twitter, Tumblr, Baidu Tieba, and LinkedIn. Depending on interpretation, other popular platforms that are sometimes referred to as social media services include YouTube, QQ, Quora, Telegram, WhatsApp, LINE, Snapchat, Pinterest, Viber, Reddit, Discord, VK, Microsoft Teams, and more. Wikis are examples of collaborative content creation._


YES  ! wikis are not on JCMH’s social media hitlist ... please tell me this is so ... I would rather die than lose wikis

And I of course, assume that tabloids are in the social media stratosphere ....


----------



## Lodpah

zen1965 said:


> The documentary  goes back to 2001. So I would not necessarily regard it as an up-to-date look at poverty in UK.


I know but poverty is still rampant there like in the US. My point was optics on those two.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> YES  ! wikis are not on JCMH’s social media hitlist ... please tell me this is so ... I would rather die than lose wikis
> 
> And I of course, assume that tabloids are in the social media stratosphere ....



Was Harry complaining about the SocMedia platforms themselves? 
Or the businesses, including tabloids, who allow negative comments on their SocMedia accounts? 
I could be wrong, of course, it seems like his real issue is with the businesses.  His ‘hitlist’ must be miles long.


----------



## purseinsanity

Harry has a problem with anything Meghan tells him to have a problem with.  I wonder if the bloke has any thoughts in his head at all?  I picture him staring off lost into space most of the time, since he no longer has palace assistants to guide him in every aspect of his day.  He seems like the kind who only showers when MM yells at him to.


----------



## bag-mania

It’s been nearly a month since their one and only podcast dropped. Guess they’re still trying to figure out what it should be about. Hope they can take time out of their busy schedule of doing nothing to work on it. Someone probably had to tell them they couldn’t make a whole series out of “Love Wins.”


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> It’s been nearly a month since their one and only podcast dropped. Guess they’re still trying to figure out what it should be about. Hope they can take time out of their busy schedule of doing nothing to work on it. Someone probably had to tell them they couldn’t make a whole series out of “Love Wins.”


Maybe they will discuss how tabloids have ruined their lives. They can  have some other celeb guests on to discuss this as well.  I think all the people who appear in the DM side bar on a daily basis should be asked to participate like the Kardashians, Elizabeth Hurley, Chrissy T., Christy Brinkley etc.  All those thirsty types who have had their lives ruined, especially all the women in the bikini shots.   I hope the Harkles don't forget to mention that they have been feeding all the tabloids a steady stream of stories for the past two years.


----------



## drifter

I just tried to read the interview with Fast Company.  I think my IQ has decreased after reading it.  JCMH, you are clueless about tech and how the real world works and your writing is painful to read.  So really, please let your words be few, lest they entrap you.


----------



## bag-mania

We’ve heard from Harry but Meghan has been MIA lately. I’m not complaining about her absence, just wondering what she is up to and whether it has to do with the lawsuit.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Harry has a problem with anything Meghan tells him to have a problem with. * I wonder if the bloke has any thoughts in his head at all? * I picture him staring off lost into space most of the time, since he no longer has palace assistants to guide him in every aspect of his day.  He seems like the kind who only showers when MM yells at him to.


Wonder no more. Look... we can now understand that look of consternation on his face.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> We’ve heard from Harry but Meghan has been MIA lately. I’m not complaining about her absence, just wondering what she is up to and whether it has to do with the lawsuit.


 
Meghan might just pop up suddenly and start saying she's pregnant and have bad morning sickness


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Wonder no more. Look... we can now understand that look of consternation on his face.
> 
> View attachment 4967768



His brow is furrowed in deep thought and it looks like his hair plugs are coming in nicely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Meghan might just pop up suddenly and start saying she's pregnant and have bad morning sickness



That thought occurred to me as well. I also wondered if she was staying out of sight while a surrogate secretly carries a baby for them, but that might be a little too much out there.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> His brow is furrowed in *deep thought* and it looks like his hair plugs are coming in nicely.


He's probably thinking about the empty space in his head, wishing he could rent it out to someone with a brain because Megs said, "We have to make money, lots of money."


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> We have been looking at the same picture of them in the tabloids forever!


I'm to the point that if I catch a glimpse of the green dress when scrolling, I zip right past it, am SO sick of seeing it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Murky Meg went to the court hearing so we didn't have to. I haven't watched the video yet.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn’t consider Spotify and Netflix to be social media because they are not interactive. You pay a subscription and you watch shows or listen to podcasts/music.
> 
> YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. all invite interaction with the consumer. They are free to anyone and you can post comments on what you see/hear (within reason). Maybe my understanding of the definition of social media isn’t correct but that’s how I think of it. The last thing Harry and Meghan want is random members of the public being able to post comments about them.


What H&M really mean is for the public to use social media only to say good things about them. Don't be all so negative, their feelings were hurt, poor things!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Maggie Muggins said:


> Wonder no more. Look... we can now understand that look of consternation on his face.
> 
> View attachment 4967768


Pity! If only brain cells can be so easily transplanted for him!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> He's probably thinking about the empty space in his head, wishing he could rent it out to someone with a brain because Megs said, "We have to make money, lots of money."


He could use the empty space on his (fore)head to do an advertisement perhaps?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> That thought occurred to me as well. I also wondered if she was staying out of sight while a surrogate secretly carries a baby for them, but that might be a little too much out there.



Surrogate? Meghan would miss all that hand cradling her belly action. But now that she kicked the BRF to the curb she doesn't have a royal package belly show to put on anymore. She's nothing if not calculating. Could Child #2 provide more Meal Ticket leverage than Archie? Could they make a Netflix series: Archie Sibling in the Oven? They'd turn the kid into a payoff somehow before it was even born. Well, she could be out in public every chance she got to make sure there'd be lots of paparazzi photos she could sue over, hmmmm.....


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> And...to think that he is whining that the tabloids are to blame.  They have the PR people put out stories everyday to the tabloids.  You want things to get better Harry?  Have SS stop sending the stories out on the two of you. Duh!  I too read that they wanted three positive stories per day.  That is ridiculous.


MM and her PR-agency must have very little consideration for the intelligence of their fans/readers. Here is one  of their 'positive' stories:


----------



## zen1965

^^^


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> MM and her PR-agency must have very little consideration for the intelligence of their fans/readers. Here is one  of their 'positive' stories:
> View attachment 4968098


what BS
if they or their PR people are behind this, what a thing to do to a "friend" 
Of course Jill is so nice she will probably forgive it (if she hears about it)


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> We’ve heard from Harry but Meghan has been MIA lately. I’m not complaining about her absence, just wondering what she is up to and whether it has to do with the lawsuit.


is it possible someone decided he was more popular and has the royal ties?


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> MM and her PR-agency must have very little consideration for the intelligence of their fans/readers. Here is one  of their 'positive' stories:
> View attachment 4968098



Doesn’t remotely resemble MM’s wedding look.  This item smacks of desperation on the Harkles part.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> *It’s been nearly a month since their one and only podcast dropped. Guess they’re still trying to figure out what it should be about*. Hope they can take time out of their busy schedule of doing nothing to work on it. Someone probably had to tell them they couldn’t make a whole series out of “Love Wins.”


They’re building anticipation, doncha know.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> MM and her PR-agency must have very little consideration for the intelligence of their fans/readers. Here is one  of their 'positive' stories:
> View attachment 4968098



You've gotta be kidding me. Well, since I eat with silverware and all world leaders eat with silverware, I think they got that idea from me. If Jill starts to whine and puts on a pity demonstration about being in the WH with numerous servants and assistants and her every whim catered to, then we could see M having influenced her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> is it possible someone decided he was more popular and has the royal ties?



Perhaps, if that “someone” decided she needed to put her own need for attention aside and act strategically. Harry doesn’t make these decisions by himself.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

rose60610 said:


> You've gotta be kidding me. Well, since I eat with silverware and all world leaders eat with silverware, I think they got that idea from me. If Jill starts to whine and puts on a pity demonstration about being in the WH with numerous servants and assistants and her every whim catered to, then we could see M having influenced her.



 I think we're done with that for awhile...


----------



## CarryOn2020

When the Archie stunt in the podcast backfired, maybe she woke up, read this forum and decided to go off grid for an extended time?
Now that H has received negative feedback for the FastCompany ‘mothership of harassment’ article, maybe he will join her?

Maybe she knows the lawsuit is lost?


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> They’re building anticipation, doncha know.



They are giving everyone enough time to forget about them and then they’ll come back to disappoint with a dull meaningless show.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> It’s been nearly a month since their one and only podcast dropped. Guess they’re still trying to figure out what it should be about. Hope they can take time out of their busy schedule of doing nothing to work on it. Someone probably had to tell them they couldn’t make a whole series out of “Love Wins.”


I hope Spotify realises H&M are not good value for their money! Spotify better be paying real artists proper money instead. After all, Harry couldn't understand how the platforms just took profits but didn't want any responsibility!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I hope Spotify realises H&M are not good value for their money! Spotify better be paying real artists proper money instead. After all, Harry couldn't understand how the platforms just took profits but didn't want any responsibility!


they've only done one episode....IDK how often other podcasts are done?  it's been about a month since the first one (not that I intend to get sucked into another one)


----------



## kipp

Next thing you know, they will be on the "Masterclass" series on how to become grifters or perhaps a how-to for writing/speaking in word salad.


----------



## redney

Spotify is moving on. Just signed Ava DuVernay a few days ago. But, the investment community is questioning its podcasting moves. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/15/spotifys-big-bet-on-podcasts-is-failing-citi-says.html
*****
*Spotify’s big bet on podcasts is failing, Citi says*

Spotify’s multimillion-dollar bet on podcasting may not be working out, Citi analysts wrote in a note to clients Friday.

*“The cadence of Premium gross additions (through 3Q20) and app download data (through 4Q20) do not show any material benefit from recent podcast investments (that began in 2019),” the analysts wrote. The firm downgraded the stock to sell from neutral.*

Spotify’s stock was down more than 6.5% in the afternoon.

Spotify kicked off its venture into podcasting in early 2019, after acquiring podcast companies Gimlet Media, Anchor and Parcast. Since then, the company has bought sports and entertainment news company The Ringer, as well as Megaphone, which will bolster its ad tech business. It also spent what’s likely millions gaining the exclusive rights to stream celebrity podcasts, including those from Joe Rogan, Kim Kardashian West, Michelle *****, and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

The idea was that by bringing exclusive content to the app, the company could strengthen its advertising business as well as bring in Premium subscribers. Investors seemed to like the message, sending the stock up 31.76% in 2019 and 110.4% in 2020.

But now analysts are looking for the company to show the investments were worth it.

“To date, we have not seen a material positive inflection in app downloads or Premium subscriptions,” the Citi analysts wrote.

“If we were to see a material positive inflection in app downloads or Premium subs (from higher gross adds or materially lower churn), we would alter our view,” they added. “But, our fear is that if podcasting doesn’t provide a way for Spotify to shift away from music label dependence, the Street may reassess the underlying value of the business. And, that would be bad for Spotify’s multiple and equity value.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> I hope Spotify realises H&M are not good value for their money! Spotify better be paying real artists proper money instead. After all, Harry couldn't understand how the platforms just took profits but didn't want any responsibility!



How dare a for-profit business expect to make money from a contract with royals?!!! Humph. Don’t they know who H is? Don’t they know who is mother was? So outrageous! Send in the clowns, there must be clowns. More pottery being thrown at the 16 bathroom palace Mc-mansion.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they've only done one episode....*IDK how often other podcasts are done? * it's bee about a month since the first one (not that I intend to get sucked into another one)



It depends. Some ambitious people do two podcasts a week. Others do it once a week or once every two weeks.     Those who only do it once a month or less usually have other jobs that tie up their time.  I’m guessing the “holiday special” was merely a teaser episode and they haven’t really developed a plan for what their podcast will be yet. Or more realistically, the people they hired to create the podcast haven’t finished developing it.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Regarding the wedding veil being copied by Jill ***** for her inaugural evening dress, and its possible homage to MM, I believe that the Queen had Commonwealth flowers embroidered  on her gown when she was crowned.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan is trying the mysterious”where is she” tactic. The thing is it works on true certified celebrities but her, it’s more like “yay!”


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It depends. Some ambitious people do two podcasts a week. Others do it once a week or once every two weeks.     Those who only do it once a month or less usually have other jobs that tie up their time.  I’m guessing the “holiday special” was merely a teaser episode and they haven’t really developed a plan for what their podcast will be yet. Or more realistically, the people they hired to create the podcast haven’t finished developing it.


I anticipate that MM&H's next podcast will be released in April to coincide with the Queen's Easter message. It is not very royal to release podcasts every week or month.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> It’s been nearly a month since their one and only podcast dropped. Guess they’re still trying to figure out what it should be about. Hope they can take time out of their busy schedule of doing nothing to work on it. Someone probably had to tell them they couldn’t make a whole series out of “Love Wins.”


So far it’s been all press releases, but no action. They did one podcast interviewing famous people who have been interviewed hundreds of times before with nothing new to say… and that’s it.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> what BS
> if they or their PR people are behind this, what a thing to do to a "friend"
> Of course Jill is so nice she will probably forgive it (if she hears about it)


In defense of the PR agency, to come up with 3 positive stories a day about this couple is a major accomplishment for any agency. And today they have excelled, 3 additional stories:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

carmen56 said:


> Doesn’t remotely resemble MM’s wedding look.  This item smacks of desperation on the Harkles part.


You ladies are very demanding. The flowers that are booming now in my garden appear to channel the duchess's veil.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> When the Archie stunt in the podcast backfired, maybe she woke up, read this forum and decided to go off grid for an extended time?
> Now that H has received negative feedback for the FastCompany ‘mothership of harassment’ article, maybe he will join her?
> 
> Maybe she knows the lawsuit is lost?


Oh come on now!  You're giving MM way too much credit!


----------



## kipp

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Regarding the wedding veil being copied by Jill ***** for her inaugural evening dress, and its possible homage to MM, I believe that the Queen had Commonwealth flowers embroidered  on her gown when she was crowned.


Not only this but whenever Royals visit other Commonwealth countries, they usually have something worn that pays homage to that country---like the Maple Leaf brooch worn in Canada.  This concept is not a new idea and certainly did not originate with MM.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kipp said:


> Not only this but whenever Royals visit other Commonwealth countries, they usually have something worn that pays homage to that country---like the Maple Leaf brooch worn in Canada.  This concept is not a new idea and certainly did not originate with MM.


This. Plus, HM's coronation gown had an embroidered emblem of each commonwealth country.  HM's Coronation Gown
Beautiful gown


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> In defense of the PR agency, to come up with 3 positive stories a day about this couple is a major accomplishment for any agency. And today they have excelled, 3 additional stories:
> View attachment 4968366


That should read_ Meghan Markle Turned Prince Harry into a Bitter Man_.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> That should read_ Meghan Markle Turned Prince Harry into a Bitter Man_.


 SOOOOO TRUE!!! Best comment ever


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> This. Plus, HM's coronation gown had an embroidered emblem of each commonwealth country.  HM's Coronation Gown
> Beautiful gown



So many of her evening gowns as a young woman were nothing but stunning. I also loved the dress the let Beatrice borrow (not crazy about the sleeves she added, but the original).


----------



## lanasyogamama

For what it’s worth, I try to listen to mostly small podcasters.  I feel like they built the industry, and deserve the ad dollars more.


----------



## rose60610

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I think we're done with that for awhile...



I think it'll only be the beginning


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> For what it’s worth, I try to listen to mostly small podcasters.  I feel like they built the industry, and deserve the ad dollars more.



Absolutely. It is the small podcasters who are passionate about their subject and do their research and try to create the best product they can. For them it is a labor of love because they make little money and are often dependent on donations from their listeners to cover their expenses. I much prefer listening to a podcast that doesn't have the polished effect that comes when a professional agency handles the production. A sincere podcaster who presents a good episode has a spontaneous kind of charm that no celebrity broadcast can match.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Absolutely. It is the small podcasters who are passionate about their subject and do their research and try to create the best product they can. For them it is a labor of love because they make little money and are often dependent on donations from their listeners to cover their expenses. I much prefer listening to a podcast that doesn't have the polished effect that comes when a professional agency handles the production. A sincere podcaster who presents a good episode has a spontaneous kind of charm that no celebrity broadcast can match.


I also like the access to the podcasters. If I have a question or a comment, and share it with the podcaster, getting a response is really nice! Certainly wouldn’t get a response from the Harkles!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I also like the access to the podcasters. If I have a question or a comment, and share it with the podcaster, getting a response is really nice! *Certainly wouldn’t get a response from the Harkles!*



Oh, we'd get a response, it would be a cease and desist letter from their lawyers.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> MM and her PR-agency must have very little consideration for the intelligence of their fans/readers. Here is one  of their 'positive' stories:
> View attachment 4968098


To even INSINUATE this is DISGUSTING!!!!!  Jill and company made sure to make use of US Designers; Meghan (who should have done the same) did not .. but their PR Agency should really be called out BIG-TIME for this!


----------



## Chanbal

I'm starting to feel sorry for their PR-agency, they must be burned out at this point. It's not easy to come up with positive stories about MM&H. One minute they complain about vile attacks online, the next they hint at retuning to social media.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> To even INSINUATE this is DISGUSTING!!!!!  Jill and company made sure to make use of US Designers; Meghan (who should have done the same) did not .. but their PR Agency should really be called out BIG-TIME for this!


I wouldn't be surprised if they will release a story about Bernie's mittens being inspired on Harry's socks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Came across this video on "Funding Freedom and Finding Freebies", fun and entertaining. Thanks @QueenofWrapDress


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't even watched it yet, I put everything on "To Watch Later" and then forget. I probably have 1000 videos in there.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't even watched it yet, I put everything on "To Watch Later" and then forget. I probably have 1000 videos in there.


I watched a few of Lady C's videos and she seems to have very balanced views on MM&H. She is very polite, knowledgeable about the subject, and the videos are pleasant to watch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I watched a few of Lady C's videos and she seems to have very balanced views on MM&H. She is very polite, knowledgeable about the subject, and the videos are pleasant to watch.



Just my guess, many people in the UK understood exactly who H&M were long before the US did.


----------



## sdkitty

A lot of you have probably seen these larry king interviews with meghan (before harry).  in the second video she seems like she would have been perfect for the role of his wife.  too bad she didn't want to do what was required.  interestingly she tells the ivory soap story and says at age 11, she went home and told her father - not her mom.








						Meghan Markle's interview with Larry King from before she was royal has resurfaced after the TV host's death
					

King got Markle to open up about leaving the entertainment industry in the 2013 interview, five years before she became a member of the royal family.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## rose60610

So Meghan withdraws from social media due to "mean comments" and then puts out word that Jill "was influenced" by her "idea" of including flowers from every member of the Commonwealth in her veil (when M would later claim she didn't know about the Commonwealth)? That's a bridge too far. Isn't that kind of like trolling? To desperately insert yourself SOMEHOW ("I know! I'll use my wedding dress to do it--it was a time when people actually liked me") into a news story claiming you influenced a brand new FLOTUS?  Why doesn't Meghan just send a fruit basket to the White House with Sharpie written messages? I'm sure everyone would be bowled over with* "YOU'RE SPECIAL", "YOU'RE IMPORTANT", "BELIEVE", "RAINDROP POWER" *written on bananas. I'm sure they'd go great with oat milk lattes. She should send a few cases of those, too. She won't forget the invoice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> A lot of you have probably seen these larry king interviews with meghan (before harry).  in the second video she seems like she would have been perfect for the role of his wife.  too bad she didn't want to do what was required.  interestingly she tells the ivory soap story and says at age 11, she went home and told her father - not her mom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's interview with Larry King from before she was royal has resurfaced after the TV host's death
> 
> 
> King got Markle to open up about leaving the entertainment industry in the 2013 interview, five years before she became a member of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Thanks for posting this interview. Although I have seen it before, I rewatched it today. My goodness, MM is so very nervous, fidgety, and uncomfortable. Her voice pops and cracks throughout, her dress does nothing for her figure, and her answers to Larry’s questions are shallow. She does the same exaggerated movements she did in the engagement interview.  It reveals a lot about Harry that this is the best he could do. 

ETA: just watched the 2nd interview from 2016.  She is a bit more polished in that one but still sounds shrill with trite answers, the eye glare is more noticeable in this interview. Nothing of substance, kinda like listening to a 5th grader give a book report. Odd, just odd.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is Charles’ tribute to Robert Burns. Social media at its finest, no?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks for posting this interview. Although I have seen it before, I rewatched it today. My goodness, MM is so very nervous, fidgety, and uncomfortable. Her voice pops and cracks throughout, her dress does nothing for her figure, and her answers to Larry’s questions are shallow. She does the same exaggerated movements she did in the engagement interview.  It reveals a lot about Harry that this is the best he could do.
> 
> ETA: just watched the 2nd interview from 2016.  She is a bit more polished in that one but still sounds shrill with trite answers, the eye glare is more noticeable in this interview. Nothing of substance, kinda like listening to a 5th grader give a book report. Odd, just odd.


Am I the only one who is even *SHOCKED* by the fact that Larry King would interview this Z-list actress (although A+++-list grifter)???  Why was she even on???


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Am I the only one who is even *SHOCKED* by the fact that Larry King would interview this Z-list actress (although A+++-list grifter)???  Why was she even on???



It's not as prestigious as you think. She never appeared on the widely-seen _Larry King Live_. By 2013 Larry had been gone from CNN for awhile. He never wanted to retire though so he started a web series for Hulu called _Larry King Now_. It naturally had a considerably smaller audience. That is the show Meghan appeared on. Even so, she must have had hired publicists working on her behalf even back then.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow. Apparently a Quora user wrote to Clarence House after the cemetary stunt to let them know how disgusted people were, and received back the typical "Thanks for writing in" note. Then another Quora user noted that it was signed by Charles' head of correspondence who doesn't usually do the mundane tasks. Of course I have no clue if maybe she signs off a big stack of letters each morning or if that really means it struck a chord with them.


https://www.quora.com/q/themarkles?__ni__=0&__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=16728304198&__tiids__=19351777


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is Charles’ tribute to Robert Burns. Social media at its finest, no?



.. ah yes, the Robert Burns parties in Scotland .. the ONLY time I saw my Scots colleagues actually eat Haggis, as they were all pretty sloshed with all the Whisky they had drunk!  Yes, had a lot of fun (although I was asked MANY times "where is your clan tartan?") .. but no way did I try that haggis!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. Apparently a Quora user wrote to Clarence House after the cemetary stunt to let them know how disgusted people were, and received back the typical "Thanks for writing in" note. Then another Quora user noted that it was signed by Charles' head of correspondence who doesn't usually do the mundane tasks. Of course I have no clue if maybe she signs off a big stack of letters each morning or if that really means it struck a chord with them.
> 
> 
> https://www.quora.com/q/themarkles?__ni__=0&__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=16728304198&__tiids__=19351777


That Quora site? .. they are a LOT meaner than us here .. they REALLY don't like either of them!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> A lot of you have probably seen these larry king interviews with meghan (before harry).  in the second video she seems like she would have been perfect for the role of his wife.  too bad she didn't want to do what was required.  interestingly she tells the ivory soap story and says at age 11, she went home and told her father - not her mom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's interview with Larry King from before she was royal has resurfaced after the TV host's death
> 
> 
> King got Markle to open up about leaving the entertainment industry in the 2013 interview, five years before she became a member of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


I'm surprised she didn't put out a statement about how close she was to Larry King and how much she'll miss him!   
Missed opportunity, Meghan, missed opportunity!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> That Quora site? .. they are a LOT meaner than us here .. they REALLY don't like either of them!



Even though there is one guy, Brit, ex-military, who really writes very informative, well thought out responses and seems so have a generally good knowledge of the situation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised she didn't put out a statement about how close she was to Larry King and how much she'll miss him!
> Missed opportunity, Meghan, missed opportunity!



Just you wait.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> A lot of you have probably seen these larry king interviews with meghan (before harry).  in the second video she seems like she would have been perfect for the role of his wife.  too bad she didn't want to do what was required.  interestingly she tells the ivory soap story and says at age 11, she went home and told her father - not her mom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's interview with Larry King from before she was royal has resurfaced after the TV host's death
> 
> 
> King got Markle to open up about leaving the entertainment industry in the 2013 interview, five years before she became a member of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


For that interview and time in her life, she developed the creaky voice which was, and is, so popular among young people but she dropped it for her new role... smart move. Because vocal fry is annoying to listen to.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to feel sorry for their PR-agency, they must be burned out at this point. It's not easy to come up with positive stories about MM&H. One minute they complain about vile attacks online, the next they hint at retuning to social media.
> 
> 
> View attachment 4969625
> 
> 
> View attachment 4969820


I apologize for my awkward misspelling, I do a few of those when tired.  I wonder if MM is late on payments to her PR-agency, they seem to be recycling stories. Today, they moved from the vile online attacks in the UK to the painful year in the US.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks for posting this interview. Although I have seen it before, I rewatched it today. My goodness, MM is so very nervous, fidgety, and uncomfortable. Her voice pops and cracks throughout, her dress does nothing for her figure, and her answers to Larry’s questions are shallow. She does the same exaggerated movements she did in the engagement interview.  It reveals a lot about Harry that this is the best he could do.
> 
> ETA: just watched the 2nd interview from 2016.  She is a bit more polished in that one but still sounds shrill with trite answers, the eye glare is more noticeable in this interview. Nothing of substance, kinda like listening to a 5th grader give a book report. Odd, just odd.


Was she trying to flirt with Larry K? It's a terrible video imo.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just my guess, many people in the UK understood exactly who H&M were long before the US did.


Not only in the UK, MM is not highly regarded in several other countries. The headlines about MM&H in Europe are not as sweet as the ones in the US. Unless, they stop paying their PR-agency, we should expect many more stories about their roles as victims or as superheroes.


----------



## bisousx

rose60610 said:


> So Meghan withdraws from social media due to "mean comments" and then puts out word that Jill "was influenced" by her "idea" of including flowers from every member of the Commonwealth in her veil (when M would later claim she didn't know about the Commonwealth)? That's a bridge too far. Isn't that kind of like trolling? To desperately insert yourself SOMEHOW ("I know! I'll use my wedding dress to do it--it was a time when people actually liked me") into a news story claiming you influenced a brand new FLOTUS?  Why doesn't Meghan just send a fruit basket to the White House with Sharpie written messages? I'm sure everyone would be bowled over with* "YOU'RE SPECIAL", "YOU'RE IMPORTANT", "BELIEVE", "RAINDROP POWER" *written on bananas. I'm sure they'd go great with oat milk lattes. She should send a few cases of those, too. She won't forget the invoice.




Raindrop power  I’m dead


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Was she trying to flirt with Larry K*? It's a terrible video imo.


Wouldn't surprise me in the least


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 4970518


It's been "painful" because their nanny left?  Jeez, I've never had a nanny and actually had more than a full time job in addition to child rearing, and my job didn't solely consist of ridiculous photo ops or word salad.  Maybe that makes my life "painful, stabbing blasts of torture throughout the past 20 years".


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm obviously not in the know but who is this "my best friend Lindsay"? Does she even exist or did she get Markled?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lindsay Roth?
Article is from 2019.

_Lindsay Roth, one of Meghan's best friends from her days at Northwestern University, revealed on Instagram this week that she is pregnant with her second child.

The 37-year-old TV producer married Englishman Gavin Jordan in 2016, with Meghan, 38, serving as maid of honor — so baby Archie and Lindsay's upcoming arrival are sure to have some playdates in their future._









						Meghan Markle's best friend from college is pregnant
					

Lindsay, 37, revealed on Instagram that she and her English husband Gavin Jordan are expecting baby number two. The couple married in 2016 and already have a 20-month-old son.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






This article is from 2016.
_The bride, 34, who will continue to use her name professionally, has been an executive producer of “The Real Girl’s Kitchen” on the Cooking Channel, and a producer for “Larry King Now” on Hulu. She is also the executive producer of a project for Guinness World Records appearing on Facebook Live, and the author of “What Pretty Girls Are Made Of,” a novel. She graduated cum laude from Northwestern._









						Lindsay Roth, Gavin Jordan (Published 2016)
					

The couple were introduced by mutual friends through email in 2014.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dp


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The bride, 34, who will continue to use her name professionally, has been an executive producer of “The Real Girl’s Kitchen” on the Cooking Channel, *and a producer for “Larry King Now” on Hulu. *She is also the executive producer of a project for Guinness World Records appearing on Facebook Live, and the author of “What Pretty Girls Are Made Of,” a novel. She graduated cum laude from Northwestern._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lindsay Roth, Gavin Jordan (Published 2016)
> 
> 
> The couple were introduced by mutual friends through email in 2014.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Well, this explains how Meghan got a guest spot with Larry King. Her bestie was a producer for him.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Well, this explains how Meghan got a guest spot with Larry King. Her bestie was a producer for him.


Excellent observation! Today, for the first time since I joined this thread, I didn't see MM&H on the news when browsing the headlines. I know it is still early, but I wonder if their payment to Sunshine S is late.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Excellent observation! Today, for the first time since I joined this thread, I didn't see MM&H on the news when browsing the headlines. I know it is still early, but I wonder if their payment to Sunshine S is late.



It also proves our theory that Meghan doesn't keep any friends unless they can do something for her. This Lindsay got her an interview with Larry King. Maybe she's done other things for her. She is likely one of the five "young mothers" whose identities need to be protected in her lawsuit against the tabloids.

Sunshine Sachs has done a good job of milking everything they can out of them. But how many more articles can they devote to talking about Meghan's wedding dress when it is coming up on three years? Harry and Meghan have to actually DO SOMETHING worthy of promoting.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It also proves our theory that Meghan doesn't keep any friends unless they can do something for her. This Lindsay got her an interview with Larry King. Maybe she's done other things for her. She is likely one of the five "young mothers" whose identities need to be protected in her lawsuit against the tabloids.
> 
> Sunshine Sachs has done a good job of milking everything they can out of them. But how many more articles can they devote to talking about Meghan's wedding dress when it is coming up on three years? Harry and Meghan have to actually DO SOMETHING worthy of promoting.


a divorce or going back to the RF would be the biggest news


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised she didn't put out a statement about how close she was to Larry King and how much she'll miss him!
> Missed opportunity, Meghan, missed opportunity!


It’s coming!  If the devil works hard, Kris Jenner works harder but her PR is the hardest—- ruthless in search of opportunity. It’s gonna be on the second installment of their podcast. Got to talk about somebody who’s an icon.


----------



## sdkitty

zinacef said:


> It’s coming!  If the devil works hard, Kris Jenner works harder but her PR is the hardest—- ruthless in search of opportunity. It’s gonna be on the second installment of their podcast. Got to talk about somebody who’s an icon.


Not to speak ill of the dead but while Larry King is being praised very highly now, he was somewhat less than perfect in his personal life - many marriages - divorced (I think or separated) from current (or last) wife......may not be someone she wants to "back"


----------



## zinacef

sdkitty said:


> Not to speak ill of the dead but while Larry King is being praised very highly now, he was somewhat less than perfect in his personal life - many marriages - divorced (I think or separated) from current (or last) wife......may not be someone she wants to "back"


very true—- must have a lot money—- 7 marriages. Busy busy man, indeed.


----------



## bellecate

From my little local newspaper (The Peninsula Review) this morning I see this. 
Of all the parents in Canada why use this idiots  picture!!! She’s not Canadian. 
*Canadian Paediatric Society says raising a reader starts from birth*
In this undated image made from a video taken by the Duke of Sussex and posted on @SaveChildrenUK by the Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, shows the Duchess of Sussex reading the book “Duck! Rabbit!” to their son Archie who celebrates his first birthday on Wednesday May 6, 2020. The Canadian Paediatric Society is reminding families that the process of raising a reader starts from birth. (Duke of Sussex/@SaveChildrenUK)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Not to speak ill of the dead but while Larry King is being praised very highly now, he was somewhat less than perfect in his personal life - many marriages - divorced (I think or separated) from current (or last) wife......may not be someone she wants to "back"



I don't know anything about how he was personally. I felt bad for him because two of his children died last summer, one from cancer and the other from a heart attack. He was a workaholic and he had a habit of marrying any woman who took his fancy, from his high school sweetheart on up, one of his wives he married twice. I found this quote.

"You know the funny thing," King said, "I think in my life I have loved three people - married all three."
"The other marriages I wasn’t in love. It was the thing to do.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> From my little local newspaper (The Peninsula Review) this morning I see this.
> Of all the parents in Canada why use this idiots  picture!!! She’s not Canadian.
> *Canadian Paediatric Society says raising a reader starts from birth*
> In this undated image made from a video taken by the Duke of Sussex and posted on @SaveChildrenUK by the Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, shows the Duchess of Sussex reading the book “Duck! Rabbit!” to their son Archie who celebrates his first birthday on Wednesday May 6, 2020. The Canadian Paediatric Society is reminding families that the process of raising a reader starts from birth. (Duke of Sussex/@SaveChildrenUK)
> View attachment 4971457


To use her as the epitome of motherhood is an insult to those of us that actually mother our children without being in "pain" over the lack of a nanny.


----------



## CobaltBlu

purseinsanity said:


> To use her as the epitome of motherhood is an insult to those of us that actually mother our children without being in "pain" over the lack of a nanny.



Here here.
Also my grandson is 8 months old and is reading this set.


*Hair toss, *checks nails, *sashays away


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> To use her as the epitome of motherhood is an insult to those of us that actually mother our children without being in "pain" over the lack of a nanny.


I think the modern issue is how much screen time ... there are awesome online books ... 

And when you are out, and the child is misbehaving ... handing the child a book on your phone works wonders ... a 1 year old might know how to swipe pages on a phone 

But the rule of less than 2 hrs of screen time per day has gone out with the bathwater, in these days of covid and remote schooling. 

I have no clue what is better for the planet - electronic or heavy hard copy books (from a non sustainable forest ???) but i always have kiddie books on my phone if not in my bag giving me shoulder bursitis LOL


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I think the modern issue is how much screen time ... there are awesome online books ...
> 
> And when you are out, and the child is misbehaving ... handing the child a book on your phone works wonders ... a 1 year old might know how to swipe pages on a phone
> 
> But the rule of less than 2 hrs of screen time per day has gone out with the bathwater, in these days of covid and remote schooling.
> 
> I have no clue what is better for the planet - electronic or heavy hard copy books (from a non sustainable forest ???) but i always have kiddie books on my phone if not in my bag giving me shoulder bursitis LOL


I wasn't referring to the screen time issue at all; I think MM annoys me so much that I don't need to see a picture of her being a mother in any capacity, since IMO, Archie is more of a prop to her than anything.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She probably thinks we’re all dying for a picture of Arkey.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Well, this explains how Meghan got a guest spot with Larry King. Her bestie was a producer for him.



Hole in one explanation


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> I wasn't referring to the screen time issue at all; I think MM annoys me so much that I don't need to see a picture of her being a mother in any capacity, since IMO, Archie is more of a prop to her than anything.


Sorry , I tagged the wrong post to reply to


----------



## rose60610

Archie is a prop and one of the world's most famous meal tickets. And already has more brains than his woe-is-me-mother. Maybe Meghan thought she could always ship him off to a toddler boarding school but didn't realize there aren't any. Now she's stuck with having to whine about nannies instead.


----------



## chicinthecity777

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle accused of posing 'significant threat' to free speech*



			https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1389384/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-latest-royal-news-Duke-Duchess-of-Sussex-free-speech-video-vn/amp?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle accused of posing 'significant threat' to free speech*
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1389384/Prince-Harry-Meghan-Markle-latest-royal-news-Duke-Duchess-of-Sussex-free-speech-video-vn/amp?__twitter_impression=true



I just read this article. Thanks for posting. I encourage others to read the whole thing, it isn't that long. Since H&M aren't that bright, I wonder if their involvement is simply another way to get clicks to suck up to Netflix as damage control for some of their stupid antics (like cemetery photoshoots). Or to endear themselves to other anti free speech activists. Watch for blowback and more complaining from H&M about how "some comments can be so mean, poor us". If the Queen doesn't strip their titles over this, she won't ever. It isn't surprising H&M want to censor what they disagree with. They love their sanitized safe space bubble. It isn't enough to be part of the endless luxuries of the BRF only to throw it under the bus and complain about how hard their life is. I make this request: Raindrops unite--don't fall for this garbage. If successful, it's only the tip of the iceberg. Here are some excerpts: 

*PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle's partnership with an LA research centre has come under fire from a free-speech advocate.*

Ms Webb said: "For all of these large corporations and a Prince and his wife to be using their position to censor people they disagree with on the basis of an ideology which is disputed and should not be accepted as if it is somehow politically neutral.

"That goes beyond winding up normal people.

"I think that this is a serious crisis of free speech and it poses a significant threat."

Last week the general secretary of the Free Speech Union, Toby Young, also criticised the move made by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
Mr Young said: "The people the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are funding are hard-left political activists who want to censor anyone who challenges their woke agenda.

"Under the guise of protecting people from ‘hate speech’, they want to cleanse the internet of people they disagree with.

"Does Prince Harry know who he’s gone into business with?"

He added: "As a member of the Royal Family, Harry should be standing up for fundamental British values, such as the right to free speech, not aligning himself with people who want to take that right away from people they disagree with."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> I just read this article. Thanks for posting. I encourage others to read the whole thing, it isn't that long. Since H&M aren't that bright, I wonder if their involvement is simply another way to get clicks to suck up to Netflix as damage control for some of their stupid antics (like cemetery photoshoots). Or to endear themselves to other anti free speech activists. Watch for blowback and more complaining from H&M about how "some comments can be so mean, poor us". If the Queen doesn't strip their titles over this, she won't ever. It isn't surprising H&M want to censor what they disagree with. They love their sanitized safe space bubble. It isn't enough to be part of the endless luxuries of the BRF only to throw it under the bus and complain about how hard their life is. I make this request: Raindrops unite--don't fall for this garbage. If successful, it's only the tip of the iceberg. Here are some excerpts:
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle's partnership with an LA research centre has come under fire from a free-speech advocate.*
> 
> Ms Webb said: "For all of these large corporations and a Prince and his wife to be using their position to censor people they disagree with on the basis of an ideology which is disputed and should not be accepted as if it is somehow politically neutral.
> 
> "That goes beyond winding up normal people.
> 
> "I think that this is a serious crisis of free speech and it poses a significant threat."
> 
> Last week the general secretary of the Free Speech Union, Toby Young, also criticised the move made by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> Mr Young said: "The people the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are funding are hard-left political activists who want to censor anyone who challenges their woke agenda.
> 
> "Under the guise of protecting people from ‘hate speech’, they want to cleanse the internet of people they disagree with.
> 
> "Does Prince Harry know who he’s gone into business with?"
> 
> He added: "As a member of the Royal Family, Harry should be standing up for fundamental British values, such as the right to free speech, not aligning himself with people who want to take that right away from people they disagree with."


In the meanwhile, their Twater fan group SussexSquad continues to troll and even send death threats to anybody who dares to criticise H&M on Twitter. MM personally sent "thank you" notes to the woman who operates that account (for some donation which I can't remember the details of). Their hypocrisy knows no bounds!


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> In the meanwhile, their tweeter fan group SussexSquad continues to troll and even send death threats to anybody who dares to criticise H&M on Twitter. MM personally sent "thank you" notes to the woman who operates that account (for some donation which I can't remember the details of0. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds!



Meanwhile M&H purposely continue to do things that of course will provoke comment. And then complain about critics. Isn't this classic behavior of those who thrive on being victims?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Meanwhile M&H purposely continue to do things that of course will provoke comment. And then complain about critics. Isn't this classic behavior of those who thrive on being victims?


they really need to go back to the RF.....they're getting boring.  I don't see how they can sustain their lavish lifestyle unless Charles keeps paying


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> I just read this article. Thanks for posting. I encourage others to read the whole thing, it isn't that long. Since H&M aren't that bright, I wonder if their involvement is simply another way to get clicks to suck up to Netflix as damage control for some of their stupid antics (like cemetery photoshoots). Or to endear themselves to other anti free speech activists. Watch for blowback and more complaining from H&M about how "some comments can be so mean, poor us". If the Queen doesn't strip their titles over this, she won't ever. It isn't surprising H&M want to censor what they disagree with. They love their sanitized safe space bubble. It isn't enough to be part of the endless luxuries of the BRF only to throw it under the bus and complain about how hard their life is. I make this request: Raindrops unite--don't fall for this garbage. If successful, it's only the tip of the iceberg. Here are some excerpts:
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle's partnership with an LA research centre has come under fire from a free-speech advocate.*
> 
> Ms Webb said: "For all of these large corporations and a Prince and his wife to be using their position to censor people they disagree with on the basis of an ideology which is disputed and should not be accepted as if it is somehow politically neutral.
> 
> "That goes beyond winding up normal people.
> 
> "I think that this is a serious crisis of free speech and it poses a significant threat."
> 
> Last week the general secretary of the Free Speech Union, Toby Young, also criticised the move made by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> Mr Young said: "The people the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are funding are hard-left political activists who want to censor anyone who challenges their woke agenda.
> 
> "Under the guise of protecting people from ‘hate speech’, they want to cleanse the internet of people they disagree with.
> 
> "Does Prince Harry know who he’s gone into business with?"
> 
> He added: "As a member of the Royal Family, Harry should be standing up for fundamental British values, such as the right to free speech, not aligning himself with people who want to take that right away from people they disagree with."





chicinthecity777 said:


> In the meanwhile, their Twater fan group SussexSquad continues to troll and even send death threats to anybody who dares to criticise H&M on Twitter. MM personally sent "thank you" notes to the woman who operates that account (for some donation which I can't remember the details of). Their hypocrisy knows no bounds!


I don't think MM&H care to have a particular ideology, they go with the source of money and platform that makes them very rich and look relevant imo. However, any agenda that goes against free speech is very dangerous and it must never be overlooked. Just the word "censorship" is enough to make me feel  and  . I agree, their hypocrisy and greed know no bounds.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> they really need to go back to the RF.....they're getting boring.  *I don't see how they can sustain their lavish lifestyle unless Charles keeps paying*


Cashing in on titles to promote certain agendas might be a big source of income to support lavish lifestyles. I also think that they need to go back to the RF, but the RF may disagree...


----------



## bag-mania

I don't see how they could go back now, assuming they wanted to, which they don't.

They have burned bridges. Even if the family decided all was forgiven, the staff would never fully trust them. Not convinced the British people would trust them either. They are too flaky and flighty.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't see how they could go back now, assuming they wanted to, which they don't.
> 
> They have burned bridges. Even if the family decided all was forgiven, the staff would never fully trust them. Not convinced the British people would trust them either. They are too flaky and flighty.


probably right....I think H could go back w/o her....blood is thicker than water they say


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> probably right....I think H could go back w/o her....blood is thicker than water they say



Ah yes, the parable of the prodigal son! He could come back but I expect he'd have to agree to some ground rules first. They would have to keep him on a short leash since he is so impulsive and lacks good judgment.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ah yes, the parable of the prodigal son! He could come back but I expect he'd have to agree to some ground rules first. They would have to keep him on a short leash since he is so impulsive and lacks good judgment.


maybe he could be like Andy...just keep his head down


----------



## Chanbal

They may not succeed in censoring this one: 



Meghan Markle will not be able to "escape" her court case going to trial this year, a royal commentator has claimed. The Duchess of Sussex is currently suing Associated Newspapers and the Mail on Sunday over five articles published that included contents of a private letter she sent to her father in 2018 without her permission. Former Royal Editor of The Sun, Charlie Rae, and talkRADIO host Kevin O'Sullivan discussed the royal's bid for a summary judgement, which would allow the verdict to be decided on the facts of the case without going to full trial.

Mr O'Sullivan explained: "Her lawyers were in High Court recently essentially arguing that it's an open and shut case and doesn't need to go to court.

"I suspect that if the judge decided to award this case to Meghan then the Mail on Sunday would immediately appeal very, very angrily. He knows that.

"So her contention that she had her privacy invaded by the Mail on Sunday has to be heard in court, doesn't it?

"It cannot be summarily closed down in the manner that she would like."
Mr Rae agreed: "I cannot see how on earth she can escape a full court case.

"By the way, it could happen in October if it were to go forward.

"The judge has said that he is hoping to have a decision on this particular issue within about two weeks.

"So we don't have that long to wait really."

all article here!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe he could be like Andy...just keep his head down



Andy might be smarter than Harry. There, I said it.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> They may not succeed in censoring this one:
> View attachment 4972428
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will not be able to "escape" her court case going to trial this year, a royal commentator has claimed. The Duchess of Sussex is currently suing Associated Newspapers and the Mail on Sunday over five articles published that included contents of a private letter she sent to her father in 2018 without her permission. Former Royal Editor of The Sun, Charlie Rae, and talkRADIO host Kevin O'Sullivan discussed the royal's bid for a summary judgement, which would allow the verdict to be decided on the facts of the case without going to full trial.
> 
> Mr O'Sullivan explained: "Her lawyers were in High Court recently essentially arguing that it's an open and shut case and doesn't need to go to court.
> 
> "I suspect that if the judge decided to award this case to Meghan then the Mail on Sunday would immediately appeal very, very angrily. He knows that.
> 
> "So her contention that she had her privacy invaded by the Mail on Sunday has to be heard in court, doesn't it?
> 
> "It cannot be summarily closed down in the manner that she would like."
> Mr Rae agreed: "I cannot see how on earth she can escape a full court case.
> 
> "By the way, it could happen in October if it were to go forward.
> 
> "The judge has said that he is hoping to have a decision on this particular issue within about two weeks.
> 
> "So we don't have that long to wait really."
> 
> all article here!


This should be interesting ..


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Two questions for the knowledgeable on this forum:
I thought one had to be a British citizen to hold a royal title and Duchess was granted early as a courtesy anticipating citizenship.  Is that incorrect?  If so, her title and benefits should be removed. 
Secondly, doesn’t Harry need to return to keep his current Visa legal? I have not read that countries are permitting extensions due to COVID.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Andy might be smarter than Harry. There, I said it.



He certainly understood which side of the pond his bread is buttered on. 
[mixing all kinds of metaphors here ]


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Two questions for the knowledgeable on this forum:
> I thought one had to be a British citizen to hold a royal title and Duchess was granted early as a courtesy anticipating citizenship.  Is that incorrect?  If so, her title and benefits should be removed.
> Secondly, doesn’t Harry need to return to keep his current Visa legal? I have not read that countries are permitting extensions due to COVID.



Just my un-informed two cents,  the rich are different and the royals are even more different from the rich. The plebeian rules just do not apply to this elite of the elites crowd. Andrew and many others have taught us that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Two questions for the knowledgeable on this forum:
> I thought one had to be a British citizen to hold a royal title and Duchess was granted early as a courtesy anticipating citizenship.  Is that incorrect?  If so, her title and benefits should be removed.
> Secondly, doesn’t Harry need to return to keep his current Visa legal? I have not read that countries are permitting extensions due to COVID.



My guess is they know removing the title would cause such a big stink that it isn't worth it. Think about it, the media here in the US, as well as in other countries, still supports the narrative that they left because they were victims of racism from the British media and BRF. Taking away the titles would appear spiteful and feed into that narrative. Nobody needs to give Meghan another platform to appear slighted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They may not succeed in censoring this one:
> View attachment 4972428
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will not be able to "escape" her court case going to trial this year, a royal commentator has claimed. The Duchess of Sussex is currently suing Associated Newspapers and the Mail on Sunday over five articles published that included contents of a private letter she sent to her father in 2018 without her permission. Former Royal Editor of The Sun, Charlie Rae, and talkRADIO host Kevin O'Sullivan discussed the royal's bid for a summary judgement, which would allow the verdict to be decided on the facts of the case without going to full trial.
> 
> Mr O'Sullivan explained: "Her lawyers were in High Court recently essentially arguing that it's an open and shut case and doesn't need to go to court.
> 
> "I suspect that if the judge decided to award this case to Meghan then the Mail on Sunday would immediately appeal very, very angrily. He knows that.
> 
> "So her contention that she had her privacy invaded by the Mail on Sunday has to be heard in court, doesn't it?
> 
> "It cannot be summarily closed down in the manner that she would like."
> Mr Rae agreed: "I cannot see how on earth she can escape a full court case.
> 
> "By the way, it could happen in October if it were to go forward.
> 
> "The judge has said that he is hoping to have a decision on this particular issue within about two weeks.
> 
> "So we don't have that long to wait really."
> 
> all article here!



Hear hear! A mediocre actress turned duchess is not above the law? How surprising (to her).


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> My guess is they know removing the title would cause such a big stink that it isn't worth it. Think about it, the media here in the US, as well as in other countries, still supports the narrative that they left because they were victims of racism from the British media and BRF. Taking away the titles would appear spiteful and feed into that narrative. Nobody needs to give Meghan another platform to appear slighted.



H&MM might be privately encouraged to avoid using the duke and duchess titles. In the meantime, the duchess's last press release is all about informing that she rescued dogs and has gone through a lot in 2020.

"_Meghan Markle's rescue dogs have been a big 'support' during Covid and her 'personal trials and tribulations' in 2020, the CEO of her patronage Mayhew has revealed_."  

Well, it looks like SS got the check. 

Today's Press Release


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> H&MM might be privately encouraged to avoid using the duke and duchess titles. In the meantime, the duchess's last press release is all about informing that she rescued dogs and has gone through a lot in 2020.
> 
> "_Meghan Markle's rescue dogs have been a big 'support' during Covid and her 'personal trials and tribulations' in 2020, the CEO of her patronage Mayhew has revealed_."
> 
> Well, it looks like SS got the check.
> 
> Today's Press Release



They really are scraping the bottom of the barrel. They basically built an article around saying Meghan loves her dogs, whoop-di-doo!

It does make me wonder what she's been up to lately. It's been a month since she was last spotted wearing that winter coat and boots on a 70 degree day. Since MM news in the media has been slow this week, I'm going to make up a new pregnancy rumor. I suspect we'll hear soon that not only is Meghan pregnant but we have not seen her because she is currently on bed rest due to her previous miscarriage (the one I don't believe happened). And yes, a fertility clinic will be involved.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> They really are scraping the bottom of the barrel. They basically built an article around saying *Meghan loves her dogs*, whoop-di-doo!
> 
> It does make me wonder what she's been up to lately. It's been a month since she was last spotted wearing that winter coat and boots on a 70 degree day. Since MM news in the media has been slow this week, I'm going to make up a new pregnancy rumor. I suspect we'll hear soon that not only is Meghan pregnant but we have not seen her because she is currently on bed rest due to her previous miscarriage (the one I don't believe happened). And yes, a fertility clinic will be involved.


.. and yet, nothing about the *love FOR HER CHILD*?? (_oh wait .. make that 2 of them at that_)!!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Andy might be smarter than Harry. There, I said it.



  That's what I call a real *LOW *bar.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> That's what I call a real *LOW *bar.



Who knows? There may be a competition for status even among the spares. 

Harry's shenanigans have provided a media distraction from Andy's Epstein troubles. Andy should send him a fruit basket and a thank you note.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Who knows? There may be a competition for status even among the spares.
> 
> Harry's shenanigans have provided a media distraction from Andy's Epstein troubles. Andy should send him a fruit basket and a thank you note.



Good point. Since we're talking about dim bulbs here, maybe Andy already sent him a hooker as gratitude. Or will have one waiting when Harry returns for a visit.


----------



## gracekelly

Andy is going to keep his mouth taped shut and stay out of sight so he won't give the media any fodder.  The Sussex, on the other hand, appear  to be doing  the opposite.  Harry is out there because Meg isn't except for lame stories with stock photos.  I don't think that pregnancy is the total answer to that.  She could sit on a sofa and be seen from the shoulder up if necessary. Either this has to do with work on her face again, or the lawsuit and she is finally listening to her attorneys and keeping a low profile.  Media outlets are banding together to write unflattering stories about both of them.  At best, she is being called confused for her continual tweaking of her story regarding the authorship and privacy of the letter.  He is being called out for aligning himself with left wing groups that want to heavily censor comments that are not construed as being in line with their platform.  Either way, it isn't a flattering look for either of them.  Not trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I find it interesting at how the media outlets are essentially taking the side of ANL in this, especially with the new info regarding the Palace Four.  I think they want to make the point that before you start suing, you better have all your ducks in a row and keep them in good order.


----------



## csshopper

Two brief responses to the puppy therapy article in the Daily Mail. One from the US and one from Portugal. The scope of international revulsion of  MM and JCMH seems to be widening. Since one poster references Sunshine Sachs bet it gets a click from someone in the S&S firm who monitors such things.

Note to Sunshine Sachs and their hordes of other costly PR people.. even press releases using animals and children don't make Markle likeable.
ReplyNew Comment

0

2
Click to rate

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/reportAbuseInComment.html?articleId=9196421&commentId=648997979



Liz 06, Lisbon, Portugal, 11 minutes ago
We don't want to know. We don't care about them. We don't believe in anything coming from them. Anything from this pair is repulsive. Thanks DMail for these last days without mentioning them...Please, keep going.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> They really are scraping the bottom of the barrel. They basically built an article around saying Meghan loves her dogs, whoop-di-doo!
> 
> It does make me wonder what she's been up to lately. It's been a month since she was last spotted wearing that winter coat and boots on a 70 degree day. Since MM news in the media has been slow this week, I'm going to make up a new pregnancy rumor. I suspect we'll hear soon that not only is Meghan pregnant but we have not seen her because she is currently on bed rest due to her previous miscarriage (the one I don't believe happened). And yes, a fertility clinic will be involved.


Do you think M would use a surrogate? If she did, would she get less money in a divorce settlement?


----------



## Aimee3

Tootsie17 said:


> Do you think M would use a surrogate? If she did, would she get less money in a divorce settlement?


Depends whose egg they use...the surrogates or Meghan’s I’d imagine.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> Do you think M would use a surrogate? If she did, would she get less money in a divorce settlement?



I would guess it would be the same either way. Whether she had a baby herself or paid to have it brought into the world, it would still be hers and Harry’s. 

If they really want another child I could see them going the surrogate route. I think they would try fertility treatments first though.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle Accused of 'Confusing and Tortuous' Account in Lawsuit*

Meghan Markle faces claims she provided a "confusing and tortuous" account in her tabloid lawsuit, with lawyers accusing her of "inconsistencies.

The Duchess of Sussex is suing the _Mail on Sunday_ for privacy and copyright infringement over the publication of a letter she sent her father accusing him of breaking her heart "into a million pieces."

However, the newspaper claims she intended the letter to be made public as part of a media strategy to get her side of the story out.

Last week, Meghan's lawyers asked the High Court, in London, to award her victory without the need for a trial and is awaiting the judge's decision.

During a two-day hearing, Judge Mark Warby heard the _Mail on Sunday_'s lawyers claim the duchess contradicted herself and that it could damage her case if "she had made untruthful or misleading statements."

A court filing by the newspaper complains about the "confusion which bedevils" her claims and suggests she is "not at all clear."

The _Mail on Sunday_'s lawyers claim she made a "significant amendment" to her copyright claim in October.

Meghan's original handwritten note, which begged her father to "please stop" speaking to the media, had been written in her well-honed calligraphy.

However, she then submitted an "electronic draft" version which they say was not part of her original claim and which she says she copied out by hand to create the letter.

The newspaper says she claims to be the sole author but conceded in a November court filing she had feedback from Jason Knauf, then press secretary at Kensington Palace.

The _Mail on Sunday_'s court filing reads: "[Meghan] indicated that Mr Knauf was involved in the drafting process, referring to 'feedback on the draft' which he provided, although [Meghan] states that Mr Knauf's comments 'were in the form of 'general ideas' as opposed to actual wording.'"

Meghan's updated court filing also said Knauf was told about the letter so he could inform "more senior people in the Royal households, all of whom had to be kept apprised of any public-facing issues."

And the document revealed her original decision to write the letter was taken "with the advice" of "two members of the Royal Family."

The newspapers' lawyers wrote that "the confusing and tortuous account of the genesis of the letter and her subsequent communications about its existence and contents cannot serve as the evidential basis for" awarding her victory without a trial.

Meghan's lawyers wrote: "The Electronic Draft/the Letter is an original literary work in which copyright subsists and is owned by [Meghan]."

*Who She Told About the Letter*
The _Mail on Sunday_ claim Meghan permitted a confidante described in court as "Friend A" to tell _People_magazine about the letter through an anonymous interview.

They say she initially described "having discussed with Friend A that she was writing a letter to her father at the time of penning it" and having "discussed the existence of the Letter (but not the contents)."

The court filing reads: "Later in the same document, she contradicted this by saying of the letter that she 'discussed some of its contents' with Friend A, and later still that she 'discussed the contents of the letter with her husband, her mother, Friends A and C, the [Kensington Palace] Communications Team and her solicitor'."

Meghan's lawyers also said she "did not know that the contents of the Letter would or might be revealed or referred to by any media outlet or to any person for the purposes of publication in any medium. [Meghan] would not have consented to this."

*The Authors of Finding Freedom*
The newspaper has also accused Meghan of co-operating with the authors of biography _Finding Freedom_, so that they would include details of the letter in the book.

However, Meghan's lawyers described the argument as "utterly fantastical" and "bound to fail." They claim she "did not provide a copy of the letter or its contents, or a description of its contents, to the authors, whether directly or indirectly, and whether for publication or otherwise; nor did she cause or permit the Letter or its contents, or a description of its contents, to be disclosed to the authors for publication."

The newspaper claims "she pleaded an apparently contradictory case" by saying she "was concerned that her father's narrative in the media that she had abandoned him and had not even tried to contact him (which was false) would be repeated."

Her court filing reads: "Accordingly, she indicated to a person whom she knew had already been approached by the authors that the true position as above (which that person and several others who knew [Meghan] already knew) could be communicated to the authors to prevent any further misrepresentation."

Meghan's lawyers described the issue as "extremely limited and legally irrelevant."

The newspaper also points to a disagreement over whether Prince Harry has met co-author Carolyn Durand.

The _Mail on Sunday_'s court filing reads: "[Meghan] denied speaking to or communicating with the authors 'for the purposes of the Book,' and denied that she had met [co-author] Carolyn Durand, and averred that her husband 'does not recall ever speaking to Ms Durand.'"

In a witness statement, Scobie said Harry has "in fact spoken to her on various occasions over the years, including in London and Florida in 2016 related to interviews for the Invictus Games (including producing the Duke's interview with First Lady Michelle *****), twice in 2012 for interviews produced in Brazil and during celebrations for the Queen's Jubilee, and in 2009 for an interview during his visit to New York."

*'A heartfelt plea from an anguished daughter to her father'*
Lawyers for the duchess dispute the newspaper's claims and say its argument, even if proved true, would not take away her right to privacy over the letter.

Meghan's court filing reads: "Every citizen, whatever their profile or position, has the right under English law to respect for their private and family life, their home and their correspondence.

"[The Mail on Sunday's] decision to publish, without [Meghan's] consent or even prior knowledge, very substantial extracts from her letter to her father to its millions of readers worldwide was a plain and serious invasion of her rights of privacy in that letter."

It adds: "It is a heartfelt plea from an anguished daughter to her father (the word 'pain' or 'painful' appears no fewer than five times), begging him to stop talking to the press.

"It is as good an example as one could find of a letter that any person of ordinary sensibilities would not want to be disclosed to third parties, let alone in a mass media publication, in a sensational context and to serve the commercial purposes of the newspaper."









						Meghan Markle Accused of 'Confusing and Tortuous' Account in Lawsuit
					

Meghan Markle has been accused of "inconsistencies" in her court claims by the tabloid she is suing for privacy and copyright infringement.




					www.google.com


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Andy might be smarter than Harry. There, I said it.


I agree.  Andy is most likely more of a perv, (who knows what Harry does that we don't know about?), but I don't think there are many in that family that AREN'T smarter than Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry Is ‘Following’ Princess Diana’s Footsteps in Wanting to Become a U.S. Citizen*
Afuture American? Prince Harry may become a U.S. citizen like Princess Diana always wanted to, a royal expert revealed on Thursday, January 28’s episode of the Royally Obsessed podcast.

Now that Prince Harry, 36, and his wife Meghan Markle, 39, are already living in America, royal expert Rachel Bowie suggests that it may only be a matter of time before the Duke of Sussex tries to become a United States citizen. The couple, who moved to Montecito, California in 2020 with their son Archie, have been increasingly putting down roots in America. While this doesn’t necessarily come as a surprise for Los-Angeles native Meghan Markle, Bowie notes that Prince Harry has become “very invested in American culture, politics, and values.”

Even so, Bowie’s cohost Roberta Fiorito admitted that while the idea of citizenship is “interesting” for Prince Harry, it could be a “stretch.” She noted, “For a long time the US has had a very strong relationship with the UK so I feel like he has grown up watching that.” This relationship could be the nudge he needs to consider citizenship—but there’s another unexpected influence having to do with his mother, Princess Diana, that may inspire him even more.

“Princess Diana talked about moving to New York for so long,” Bowie explained. “She really wanted to be living in the United States and get away from it all. So I would not be surprised, as he is following in Diana’s footsteps more than we thought.”

Speculation about Princess Diana’s plans to move to the United States and become a citizen have circulated for some time now. In November 2019, the Princess of Wales’ former butler, Paul Burrell, revealed that she planned to take her sons Prince Harry and Prince William with her to America one day.

Referring to Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, Burrell explained, “They’re not the first royals who have decided to leave the country or to have another home in another country.” According to Burrell, “Diana was also deciding to spend some of her time in America.









						Prince Harry Is ‘Following’ Princess Diana’s Footsteps in Wanting to Become a U.S. Citizen
					

She reportedly had plans to move to America, too.




					stylecaster.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> And the document revealed her original decision to write the letter was taken "with the advice" of "two members of the Royal Family."



As if. They don't strike me as drama mongers.




> The court filing reads: "Later in the same document, she contradicted this by saying of the letter that she 'discussed some of its contents' with Friend A, and later still that she 'discussed the contents of the letter with her husband, her mother, Friends A and C, the [Kensington Palace] Communications Team and her solicitor'."



I mean, I always run my personal correspondence by several friends, my PR team and my lawyer before sending them out. Don't you?


----------



## Jktgal

"During a two-day hearing, Judge Mark Warby heard the _Mail on Sunday_'s lawyers claim the duchess contradicted herself and that it could damage her case if "she had made untruthful or misleading statements."

A court filing by the newspaper complains about the "confusion which bedevils" her claims and suggests she is "not at all clear." 

A salad bar of word salads lol.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Andy is going to keep his mouth taped shut and stay out of sight so he won't give the media any fodder.  The Sussex, on the other hand, appear  to be doing  the opposite.  Harry is out there because Meg isn't except for lame stories with stock photos.  I don't think that pregnancy is the total answer to that.  She could sit on a sofa and be seen from the shoulder up if necessary. Either this has to do with work on her face again, or the lawsuit and she is finally listening to her attorneys and keeping a low profile.  Media outlets are banding together to write unflattering stories about both of them.  At best, she is being called confused for her continual tweaking of her story regarding the authorship and privacy of the letter.  He is being called out for aligning himself with left wing groups that want to heavily censor comments that are not construed as being in line with their platform.  Either way, it isn't a flattering look for either of them.  Not trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I find it interesting at how the media outlets are essentially taking the side of ANL in this, especially with the new info regarding the Palace Four.  I think they want to make the point that before you start suing, you better have all your ducks in a row and keep them in good order.



So true. Whichever way the media lean, they are all on their own side in the end, media law hates new privacy precedents. Own goal MM.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry Is ‘Following’ Princess Diana’s Footsteps in Wanting to Become a U.S. Citizen*
> Afuture American? Prince Harry may become a U.S. citizen like Princess Diana always wanted to, a royal expert revealed on Thursday, January 28’s episode of the Royally Obsessed podcast.
> 
> Now that Prince Harry, 36, and his wife Meghan Markle, 39, are already living in America, royal expert Rachel Bowie suggests that it may only be a matter of time before the Duke of Sussex tries to become a United States citizen. The couple, who moved to Montecito, California in 2020 with their son Archie, have been increasingly putting down roots in America. While this doesn’t necessarily come as a surprise for Los-Angeles native Meghan Markle, Bowie notes that Prince Harry has become “very invested in American culture, politics, and values.”
> 
> Even so, Bowie’s cohost Roberta Fiorito admitted that while the idea of citizenship is “interesting” for Prince Harry, it could be a “stretch.” She noted, “For a long time the US has had a very strong relationship with the UK so I feel like he has grown up watching that.” This relationship could be the nudge he needs to consider citizenship—but there’s another unexpected influence having to do with his mother, Princess Diana, that may inspire him even more.
> 
> “Princess Diana talked about moving to New York for so long,” Bowie explained. “She really wanted to be living in the United States and get away from it all. So I would not be surprised, as he is following in Diana’s footsteps more than we thought.”
> 
> Speculation about Princess Diana’s plans to move to the United States and become a citizen have circulated for some time now. In November 2019, the Princess of Wales’ former butler, Paul Burrell, revealed that she planned to take her sons Prince Harry and Prince William with her to America one day.
> 
> Referring to Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, Burrell explained, “They’re not the first royals who have decided to leave the country or to have another home in another country.” According to Burrell, “Diana was also deciding to spend some of her time in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Is ‘Following’ Princess Diana’s Footsteps in Wanting to Become a U.S. Citizen
> 
> 
> She reportedly had plans to move to America, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stylecaster.com



OK, well he can leave his titles behind (in the UK) then


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> OK, well he can leave his titles behind (in the UK) then


Could he pass the citizenship test?


----------



## marietouchet

I did not know ... I thought they all had Twitter accounts ie The old SussexRoyal social media accounts were very out of the norm

“The Royal Family Twitter account usually shares news and information about the Queen, but it also features the work of the Wessexes, Princess Anne and other royals who don't have their own personal social media account and often operate behind the scenes.”










						Queen issues rare message of support to Duchess Birgitte
					

QUEEN ELIZABETH II has shown her support to the work carried out behind the scenes by her cousin's wife, the Duchess of Gloucester, in a rare public message dedicated to her - with the Megxit showdown now just weeks away.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Do we know who Enty is? Some kind of Royals podcaster? I fell down the rabbit hole of who started the rumour of Wills and Rose (we all know who) and why (these people claim it was a state dinner where Harry was set next to rose while M was left to fend for her own at Nottingham Cottage) and ended up at a transcript of one of Enty's podcasts, and man, there's some dirt. Some if it sounds a bit out there, but other things are completely believeable.

https://nuttyflavor88.blogspot.com/2020/02/entys-latest-podcast-about-meghan-with.html



> So let's fast-forward to the engagement. At this point, she's still knee deep into it the press, but on the downlow. And knowing who she's around, the pressure is on her to leak locations that she and other Royals will be at.
> 
> The press sense blood, and they have this arrangement, and they can't quite seem to wriggle out of this arrangement, because of the fear that she will lose Harry. And Harry can't find out that she's talking to the press because there are rules about these things, and she doesn't want to jeopardize the wedding. It's a Catch-22 pickle.
> 
> She's made all these secret backchannel deals with the press, but she has to keep honoring them, for fear that they will spill and then she won't get married to Harry.
> 
> It's a fairytale for her, because here's a woman who just a year before was begging for face time with the reporters who are now banging down her door.





> It's also at [the time of the wedding] that things are getting harder for her. Getting things to the press is requiring the use of her personal assistant and leaking stories is complicated. So it's right about now that the suspicions start to arise and as the stories go out, they're thinking that maybe she is the rat. Even Harry.
> 
> So she does something crafty, it kind of shows how gullible he was, she plays the blame game, but not before feeding the vultures another story, about Kate and Charlotte and the dress fitting. She's sure to throw in that she's so difficult that she made Kate cry, she's throwing out a lot of minor Bridezillas to throw people off the scent that she is the mole. But Kate and anyone who knows her knows the story is ridiculous because she doesn't burst into tears anywhere in public.





> Meghan at this point [after the wedding] is screwing people over, she's getting rid of assistants before they know too much, the Meghan is difficult to work for stories are out there. Her staff turns over because she doesn't want them talking to her husband or the Queen.
> 
> At Kensington there's only one way in and one way out and she's living with Kate and William and it's kind of like Melrose Place, so Meghan's having trouble leaking her stories. [...]
> 
> Kate is kind of being a pain to Meghan. Meghan is being held to the same standards and getting called out right and left. And she's kind of getting a little upset at the British press, not engaging, and then they start coming for her, because it all goes back to this arrangement that she made.
> 
> There's lots of issues. Meghan wanted to be the belle of the ball, and she hated it when anyone got more attention, especially Kate.





> The source talks about the Giles Coren thing, the reporter and TV presenter. He tells her he'll run a story about her from 5 years ago about Giles' wife wanting to get a selfie with her. Meghan claimed to remember the incident, but both of them the selfie story is a lie. Meghan was obscure 5 years ago and no one wanted her picture.
> 
> Now Meghan is shaking in her boots, because who knows what he would tell if he told the real story of what she was doing at a party 5 years ago. But Meghan is getting smarter, so in their drunken state she promises him a bigger story that will shake everything up by throwing someone under the bus, her husband's family. Rose Hanbury.
> 
> Why did Meghan pick that friend of all the friends? That is the one who William was cheating on Kate with. So she spills the whole story, very detailed story, to this Giles Coren guy, and he buys it hook line and sinker.
> 
> She's off the hook with him, and she adds a ton more validity by telling him he cannot leak the story until she tells him. Soon, she promises. Otherwise everyone will know it is from her, because it is true and the Royals are a family and confide in her. She says the affair is still going on.
> 
> Now, my source says the affair didn't really happen. And that's just another thing where I just don't know enough. She just picked Rose Hanbury out because of some slight. Or a random person like that.



Ok, I'll stop spamming, go read for yourself. Enty's source says at some point Archie didn't get a title - which they sold as their choice - because Meghan was p*ssed the Cambridge kids are princes and a princess and the Queen didn't want to grant that to Archie. And you know what, that just sounds like her, both the "But I deserve it" attitude and the petty response.


----------



## V0N1B2

Eep!


----------



## Chanbal

Good morning (afternoon or evening) ladies (and gents)! This article belongs here:   


The couple announced their engagement on November 28, 2017, and conducted a sit down interview to tell the world their exciting news.
Reflecting on the special moment, a political insider claims the interview showed Meghan would “eat Harry for breakfast” and compared watching the couple to an episode of the Netflix drama The Crown.
In an entry in her book on the same day, titled Diary of an MP's Wife - Inside and Outside Power, Sasha Swire, wife of Hugo Swire, described how she felt.
She wrote: “Prince Harry has announced his engagement to actress Meghan Markle. Times are a-changing. Even the monarchy has gone celebrity-obsessed.
“The interview with them was like watching an episode of The Crown. I came away humming, 'there will be trouble ahead'. She is eating the redhead for breakfast; almost elbowing him out of shot.
“He is clearly not as clever as she is. At one point he becomes agitated, as if he is thinking she is trying to steal the limelight: 'I think that question was directed at me!’”
The revelation comes as a banned documentary featuring the Queen and senior members of the Royal Family mysteriously resurfaced online more than 50 years after it was created.

Redhead for breakfast!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As if. They don't strike me as drama mongers.



This one may have a ring of truth to it or at least its a lie that has been out there awhile. Wasn't there was a story months ago that pegged Charles and Camilla as the ones who gave her advice?




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I always run my personal correspondence by several friends, my PR team and my lawyer before sending them out. Don't you?



This is why I have sympathy for Thomas. There was apparently an entire team of people working behind the scenes helping Meghan by trying to control Thomas and paint him as a money-grubbing buffoon. Why did Meghan feel it was necessary to bring in so many people to deal with her dad? I think she wanted to appear as the helpless victim again, needing the assistance and protection of her new family (and friends, and staff).


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> OK, well he can leave his titles behind (in the UK) then





gracekelly said:


> Could he pass the citizenship test?


Eventually, with practice and several tutors, he will pass it with flying colors. The problem is that we will be stuck with him. I'm sorry @papertiger, but my emojis are a little different than yours:


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do we know who Enty is? Some kind of Royals podcaster? I fell down the rabbit hole of who started the rumour of Wills and Rose (we all know who) and why (these people claim it was a state dinner where Harry was set next to rose while M was left to fend for her own at Nottingham Cottage) and ended up at a transcript of one of Enty's podcasts, and man, there's some dirt. Some if it sounds a bit out there, but other things are completely believeable.
> 
> https://nuttyflavor88.blogspot.com/2020/02/entys-latest-podcast-about-meghan-with.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I'll stop spamming, go read for yourself. Enty's source says at some point Archie didn't get a title - which they sold as their choice - because Meghan was p*ssed the Cambridge kids are princes and a princess and the Queen didn't want to grant that to Archie. And you know what, that just sounds like her, both the "But I deserve it" attitude and the petty response.


Reminds me of Diana who went behind the back of the BRF to do the Morton book and Bashir interview


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Good morning (afternoon or evening) ladies (and gents)! This article belongs here:
> View attachment 4973541
> 
> The couple announced their engagement on November 28, 2017, and conducted a sit down interview to tell the world their exciting news.
> Reflecting on the special moment, a political insider claims the interview showed Meghan would “eat Harry for breakfast” and compared watching the couple to an episode of the Netflix drama The Crown.
> In an entry in her book on the same day, titled Diary of an MP's Wife - Inside and Outside Power, Sasha Swire, wife of Hugo Swire, described how she felt.
> She wrote: “Prince Harry has announced his engagement to actress Meghan Markle. Times are a-changing. Even the monarchy has gone celebrity-obsessed.
> “The interview with them was like watching an episode of The Crown. I came away humming, 'there will be trouble ahead'. She is eating the redhead for breakfast; almost elbowing him out of shot.
> “He is clearly not as clever as she is. At one point he becomes agitated, as if he is thinking she is trying to steal the limelight: 'I think that question was directed at me!’”
> The revelation comes as a banned documentary featuring the Queen and senior members of the Royal Family mysteriously resurfaced online more than 50 years after it was created.
> 
> Redhead for breakfast!


The 1970s banned documentary is quite interesting  & is on youtube 

There is nothing in there that is scandalous ... Family BBQ where QEII tells Charles to put more vinegar in the salad dressing ...

But the documentary got on the Queen's Index of Forbidden Books and TV Shows because it dispelled a lot of the mystery around the BRF ... ie they have vinaigrette dressing on salads .. 

How times have changed ...


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Eventually, with practice and several tutors, he will pass it with flying colors. The problem is that we will be stuck with him. I'm sorry @papertiger, but my emojis are a little different than yours:



They didn't stay in my little corner of Canada so I'm going with these emojis.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Eventually, with practice and several tutors, he will pass it with flying colors. The problem is that we will be stuck with him. I'm sorry @papertiger, but my emojis are a little different than yours:


Chanbal - you get the BEST EMOJI award .   pink handkerchiefs for gallons of tears ... awesome


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, I'll stop spamming, go read for yourself. Enty's source says at some point Archie didn't get a title - which they sold as their choice - *because Meghan was p*ssed the Cambridge kids are princes and a princess and the Queen didn't want to grant that to Archie. *And you know what, that just sounds like her, both the "But I deserve it" attitude and the petty response.


This makes a lot of sense. Archie is entitled to be the Earl of Dumbarton, which apparently was refused by MM&H. It is well possible that MM&H were furious with QE for not making an exception (as she did with Will's kids) and give Archie the prince title at birth, this explains why they refused the Earl title. Well, he will have to wait for Charles to become king...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Could he pass the citizenship test?


Only if a doppelgänger with more than Harry's single brain cell writes it.


----------



## marietouchet

Ohhhhhhhh  I am slowly coming to grips (LOL) with the ominous portent that the US might be stuck with JCMH


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This makes a lot of sense. Archie is entitled to be the Earl of Dumbarton, which apparently was refused by MM&H. It is well possible that MM&H were furious with QE for not making an exception (as she did with Will's kids) and give Archie the prince title at birth, this explains why they refused the Earl title. Well, he will have to wait for Charles to become king...


Zara and Peter have done fine without titles - they have done the perilous navigation around the BRF with grace


----------



## CarryOn2020

LOL....I thought this was saying she is like Armie Hammer.  I need to read more carefully. 



Chanbal said:


> Good morning (afternoon or evening) ladies (and gents)! This article belongs here:
> View attachment 4973541
> 
> The couple announced their engagement on November 28, 2017, and conducted a sit down interview to tell the world their exciting news.
> Reflecting on the special moment, a political insider claims the interview showed Meghan would “eat Harry for breakfast” and compared watching the couple to an episode of the Netflix drama The Crown.
> In an entry in her book on the same day, titled Diary of an MP's Wife - Inside and Outside Power, Sasha Swire, wife of Hugo Swire, described how she felt.
> She wrote: “Prince Harry has announced his engagement to actress Meghan Markle. Times are a-changing. Even the monarchy has gone celebrity-obsessed.
> “The interview with them was like watching an episode of The Crown. I came away humming, 'there will be trouble ahead'. She is eating the redhead for breakfast; almost elbowing him out of shot.
> “He is clearly not as clever as she is. At one point he becomes agitated, as if he is thinking she is trying to steal the limelight: 'I think that question was directed at me!’”
> The revelation comes as a banned documentary featuring the Queen and senior members of the Royal Family mysteriously resurfaced online more than 50 years after it was created.
> 
> Redhead for breakfast!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This makes a lot of sense. Archie is entitled to be the Earl of Dumbarton, which apparently was refused by MM&H. It is well possible that MM&H were furious with QE for not making an exception (as she did with Will's kids) and give Archie the prince title at birth, this explains why they refused the Earl title. Well, he will have to wait for Charles to become king...


I’m not convinced that Charles will bestow that title  on him. It would  be in keeping with the slimmed down family. Totally agree that she pitched a fit and didn’t care for the name Dumbarton as well. It sounds  a bit too much like dumb person, right Harry?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Good morning (afternoon or evening) ladies (and gents)! This article belongs here:
> View attachment 4973541
> 
> The couple announced their engagement on November 28, 2017, and conducted a sit down interview to tell the world their exciting news.
> Reflecting on the special moment, a political insider claims the interview showed Meghan would “eat Harry for breakfast” and compared watching the couple to an episode of the Netflix drama The Crown.
> In an entry in her book on the same day, titled Diary of an MP's Wife - Inside and Outside Power, Sasha Swire, wife of Hugo Swire, described how she felt.
> She wrote: “Prince Harry has announced his engagement to actress Meghan Markle. Times are a-changing. Even the monarchy has gone celebrity-obsessed.
> “The interview with them was like watching an episode of The Crown. I came away humming, 'there will be trouble ahead'. She is eating the redhead for breakfast; almost elbowing him out of shot.
> “He is clearly not as clever as she is. At one point he becomes agitated, as if he is thinking she is trying to steal the limelight: 'I think that question was directed at me!’”
> The revelation comes as a banned documentary featuring the Queen and senior members of the Royal Family mysteriously resurfaced online more than 50 years after it was created.
> 
> Redhead for breakfast!



Do you  want that redhead with fries Meg?


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> LOL....I thought this was saying she is like Armie Hammer.  I need to read more carefully.



If you mean that Meghan is also a classic psychopath like Armie, I would agree. The careful studying and execution of mimicking Diana, the mask of facial movements caught slipping on camera, endless strategizing and penchant to use, step on then coldly dump anyone (including family)  for personal gain... I don’t mean to label her out of cattiness. I think she’s the real deal 1% of the population that fits into the category. Let’s not forget the South Africa tears when she complained about not being asked about.. this is what she thinks sad people look like


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do we know who Enty is? Some kind of Royals podcaster? I fell down the rabbit hole of who started the rumour of Wills and Rose (we all know who) and why (these people claim it was a state dinner where Harry was set next to rose while M was left to fend for her own at Nottingham Cottage) and ended up at a transcript of one of Enty's podcasts, and man, there's some dirt. Some if it sounds a bit out there, but other things are completely believeable.
> 
> https://nuttyflavor88.blogspot.com/2020/02/entys-latest-podcast-about-meghan-with.html


Enty is the person behind the gossip site Crazy Days and Nights https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> “The interview with them was like watching an episode of The Crown. I came away humming, 'there will be trouble ahead'. She is eating the redhead for breakfast; almost elbowing him out of shot.



I read that earlier and thought "Jup." Though I never made it through the interview because her PDA and cute shtick was just too much.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> Ohhhhhhhh  I am slowly coming to grips (LOL) with the ominous portent that the US might be stuck with JCMH



If H doesn't ditch Meghan, then we are stuck with him regardless. You have to wonder, is it M who is telling H to get U.S. citizenship? Wouldn't he have to renounce British citizenship then? Well, we all know that Meghan INFLUENCED Jill B's dress decision so obviously the White House owes citizenship to Harry whenever he wants it. I mean, a FLOTUS really depends on the advice of a hapless spoiled Z lister gold digger, right? And Harry is "already losing his accent" (remember that one?). Next thing you know he'll be hanging out with the muscle heads on Venice Beach, flexing his biceps, counting his carbs and ordering avocado smoothies. 

And as soon as Harry becomes a U.S. citizen, watch him and Meghan split so he'll have lost his royal family, Archie, and his country while still being obligated to support his Dutch Ass of Sussex (but only after Netflix and Spotify pay up). The Ultimate Stupid Dupe.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> LOL....I thought this was saying she is like Armie Hammer.  I need to read more carefully.



She devoured his soul. Doesn't that count? Of course she doesn't have a fetish about it, it's all business for her.


----------



## Aimee3

rose60610 said:


> If H doesn't ditch Meghan, then we are stuck with him regardless. You have to wonder, is it M who is telling H to get U.S. citizenship? Wouldn't he have to renounce British citizenship then? Well, we all know that Meghan INFLUENCED Jill B's dress decision so obviously the White House owes citizenship to Harry whenever he wants it. I mean, a FLOTUS really depends on the advice of a hapless spoiled Z lister gold digger, right? And Harry is "already losing his accent" (remember that one?). Next thing you know he'll be hanging out with the muscle heads on Venice Beach, flexing his biceps, counting his carbs and ordering avocado smoothies.
> 
> And as soon as Harry becomes a U.S. citizen, watch him and Meghan split so he'll have lost his royal family, Archie, and his country while still being obligated to support his Dutch Ass of Sussex (but only after Netflix and Spotify pay up). The Ultimate Stupid Dupe.


Dutch Ass...priceless!!!


----------



## csshopper

More fun stuff to look forward to:  "_People_ _Presents: Harry and Meghan's American Dream"_  a TV Special airing March 30 @ 9PM. And the magazine is publishing a new Quarterly magazine "_People Royals_" with "reporters in London and LA." Dan Wakeford, the current editor of _People,_ writes in his column in the latest issue about how he first became what is basically "besotted" (my word, not his) starting at age 6 with Charles and Diana's marriage. Wakeford proudly points out she appeared on a _People _cover 58 times, "more than any other person." (Note to Meghan: Try as you might I doubt you will never be able to match this, Diana was much younger, not a middle aged woman, when she first appeared.) 

There will be a second TV special on April 29, "_People Presents: William and Kate's Royal Anniversary."  _

Kate is featured on the cover for the initial "_Royals" _magazine and is captioned "_Kate the Great: How the Future Queen is Defining Herself."_ MM is certain to feel victimized by not being featured.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> If H doesn't ditch Meghan, then we are stuck with him regardless. You have to wonder, is it M who is telling H to get U.S. citizenship? *Wouldn't he have to renounce British citizenship then?* Well, we all know that Meghan INFLUENCED Jill B's dress decision so obviously the White House owes citizenship to Harry whenever he wants it. I mean, a FLOTUS really depends on the advice of a hapless spoiled Z lister gold digger, right? And Harry is "already losing his accent" (remember that one?). Next thing you know he'll be hanging out with the muscle heads on Venice Beach, flexing his biceps, counting his carbs and ordering avocado smoothies.
> 
> And as soon as Harry becomes a U.S. citizen, watch him and Meghan split so he'll have lost his royal family, Archie, and his country while still being obligated to support his Dutch Ass of Sussex (but only after Netflix and Spotify pay up). The Ultimate Stupid Dupe.



I imagine he would be going for dual citizenship. Thus maintaining his ability to keep his Royal titles.


----------



## Lodpah

But is Harry smarter than a fifth grader? He seems pretty dumb to me.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> If H doesn't ditch Meghan, then we are stuck with him regardless. You have to wonder, is it M who is telling H to get U.S. citizenship? Wouldn't he have to renounce British citizenship then? Well, we all know that Meghan INFLUENCED Jill B's dress decision so obviously the White House owes citizenship to Harry whenever he wants it. I mean, a FLOTUS really depends on the advice of a hapless spoiled Z lister gold digger, right? And Harry is "already losing his accent" (remember that one?). Next thing you know he'll be hanging out with the muscle heads on Venice Beach, flexing his biceps, counting his carbs and ordering avocado smoothies.
> 
> And as soon as Harry becomes a U.S. citizen, watch him and Meghan split so he'll have lost his royal family, Archie, and his country while still being obligated to support his Dutch Ass of Sussex (but only after Netflix and Spotify pay up). The Ultimate Stupid Dupe.


I think this whole notion of Harry seeking American citizenship is just (yet again) another ploy by their PR twerps to get 'news' out about the 2 of them.  Since the US does not recognize titles (especially the UK titles since we fought a war against them), in essence .. he would have to relinquish his title (and then what happens to the Dutch Asses title???).  So, just thinking about the Dutch Ass, I HIGHLY doubt that she would WANT him to seek US citizenship .. there's really nothing in it for HER .. and we all know it's really all about HER!!!


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> If you mean that Meghan is also a classic psychopath like Armie, I would agree. The careful studying and execution of mimicking Diana, the mask of facial movements caught slipping on camera, endless strategizing and penchant to use, step on then coldly dump anyone (including family)  for personal gain... I don’t mean to label her out of cattiness. I think she’s the real deal 1% of the population that fits into the category. Let’s not forget the South Africa tears when she complained about not being asked about.. this is what she thinks sad people look like


I think she's manipulative, may be a narcissist.  but psychopath may be stretching it.


----------



## CeeJay

I can't even say how *SHOCKED* I am at this "news" story .. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9203329/Meghan-Markle-stay-home-Prince-Harry-visits-UK.html


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I’m not convinced that Charles will bestow that title  on him. It would  be in keeping with the slimmed down family. Totally agree that she pitched a fit and didn’t care for the name Dumbarton as well. It sounds  a bit too much like dumb person, right Harry?


It looks like that "unless there is a royal law change", Archie "will automatically become a Prince when Prince Charles is king". Of course, Charles may change the current law, but I doubt that MM&H would be happy with such change. While she might have been pissed at the Dumbarton title, she loves titles...









						Prince Charles may make law to free Archie Harrison from 'burden'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry chose not to give their son Archie Harrison a royal title but he will automatically become a Prince when Prince Charles is king. According to book Finding Freedom, the future king could create a law that would save Archie from taking a title.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> It looks like that "unless there is a royal law change", Archie "will automatically become a Prince when Prince Charles is king". Of course, Charles may change the current law, but I doubt that MM&H would be happy with such change. While she might have been pissed at the Dumbarton title, she loves titles...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles may make law to free Archie Harrison from 'burden'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry chose not to give their son Archie Harrison a royal title but he will automatically become a Prince when Prince Charles is king. According to book Finding Freedom, the future king could create a law that would save Archie from taking a title.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Huh? .. I'm wicked confused now!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I’m not convinced that Charles will bestow that title  on him. It would  be in keeping with the slimmed down family. Totally agree that she pitched a fit and didn’t care for the name Dumbarton as well. It sounds  a bit too much like dumb person, right Harry?



If they actually bothered to go there they'd find that Dumbarton is a beautiful place and the capital of the ancient Kingdom of Strathclyde.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> Dutch Ass...priceless!!!



Although I wouldn't want to insult people from Holland


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Huh? .. I'm wicked confused now!



'fraid so. They made the BIG gesture they wanted no titles when they knew full well that Archie would be a Prince when Charles becomes King anyway.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: title for A = more hypocrisy, they knew he would get one automatically
Old article - https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/08/archie-prince-title-royal-rules
_This week, the Daily Express spoke to a source about one way that Archie’s royal heritage might come to affect him even if Harry and Meghan shield him from it. Iain MacMarthanne, a doctoral student studying the British monarchy, told the tabloid that Archie is likely to be subject to the Succession to the Crown Act of 2013 because he’ll be sixth in line to the throne as soon as Prince Charles is king. Before the act, the monarch had to grant her consent whenever anyone in the line of succession planned to marry. Since the act went into effect, only the first six in line are required to seek permission. The tabloid also noted that Archie will automatically become a prince as soon as Charles ascends the throne, likely referring to an order called a letters patent put into place by King George V in 1917._

RE: Harry’s summer vacation = more drama, always drama. Will she or won’t she - who cares?  This will generate more headlines for them, especially whether or not she is preggy, using a surrotate, having a facelift, etc.  Just more drama.

RE: Harry’s citizenship = still more drama. They must keep the focus on themselves.

ETA: guessing she knows she has lost the court case.


----------



## pukasonqo

marietouchet said:


> Ohhhhhhhh  I am slowly coming to grips (LOL) with the ominous portent that the US might be stuck with JCMH


 
Yup, luckily for us Australia and NZ got away w not having them seeking refuge here, yay to the Antipodes!!


----------



## jcnc

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Two questions for the knowledgeable on this forum:
> I thought one had to be a British citizen to hold a royal title and Duchess was granted early as a courtesy anticipating citizenship.  Is that incorrect?  If so, her title and benefits should be removed.
> Secondly, doesn’t Harry need to return to keep his current Visa legal? I have not read that countries are permitting extensions due to COVID.


No clue about title requirements but as far as Harry’s status, I assume he got a permanent residence ( green card) based on marriage to us citizen. I know many in my circle who went that route and it was a short time to get that.. if that's the case then he won’t have to leave US. But then again, if he is US resident, he will be taxed heavily on global income..


----------



## bag-mania

Prince Hypocrite is at it again with another lecture for the little people. He’s getting almost as good at dishing out the word salad as his wife.   

*Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*
"Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better," the Duke of Sussex said Friday.

LONDON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry has urged the travel industry to “reset and reimagine” its future after the crisis caused by COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on creating a more sustainable model which does less damage to the environment and local communities.
Travel firms and airlines have been badly hit by the pandemic, which has put a stop of much of the global tourism business, while those who rely on visitors have also suffered.
Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, said the travel, said the”acute hardship” of communities in tourist destinations had shown the importance of travel, but had also highlighted the need to reduce its detrimental impact.
“We know that to not travel again is not an option,” the prince, 36, said in a foreword to the annual report of Travalyst, an initiative he launched in 2019 with the objective of making the travel industry more sustainable.

“Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. Travel and tourism are no exception. As the industry re-emerges from crisis, there is an urgent need to reset and reimagine.”
Harry, like his father, the heir-to-the-throne PrinceCharles, is a vocal champion of environmental causes, said it had been clear before the pandemic the industry had not done enough to tackle issues such as climate change and pollution.
The prince has previously come under fire himself for advocating more environmentally-aware travel while using private jets. But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips.

Travalyst, an independent non-profit body which is backed by some major tourism industry companies including Booking.com,TripAdvisor, and Visa, said the industry needed universal transparency on its sustainability efforts, and to champion the success of local communities, destinations and operators.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> LOL....I thought this was saying she is like Armie Hammer.  I need to read more carefully.


Off topic, but I just read about the Armie Hammer drama.  Extremely disturbing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bag-mania   the 2 buzzwords of 2021 = “reset and reimagine”. Be sure to add in “shine a light”, “sustainability”, blah blah and ya got a million dollar speech.  How about we reset the whole idea of royals? They pay us instead of taking our tax dollars?  Why does the reset mean that we the people will pay more? 

ETA:  Maybe if he stopped spewing his garbage at us, the environment would improve tremulously. 
_But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips._


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do we know who Enty is? Some kind of Royals podcaster? I fell down the rabbit hole of who started the rumour of Wills and Rose (we all know who) and why (these people claim it was a state dinner where Harry was set next to rose while M was left to fend for her own at Nottingham Cottage) and ended up at a transcript of one of Enty's podcasts, and man, there's some dirt. Some if it sounds a bit out there, but other things are completely believeable.
> 
> https://nuttyflavor88.blogspot.com/2020/02/entys-latest-podcast-about-meghan-with.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I'll stop spamming, go read for yourself. Enty's source says at some point Archie didn't get a title - which they sold as their choice - because Meghan was p*ssed the Cambridge kids are princes and a princess and the Queen didn't want to grant that to Archie. And you know what, that just sounds like her, both the "But I deserve it" attitude and the petty response.


I used to be a big Enty fan. He would publish a lot of blind items, and many of them would prove true later, but that was many years ago and it all kind of went off the rails at some point. I do believe he has been on to  MMs nonsense for a long time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m in the aerospace industry.  We don’t need Harry’s opinion.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania   the 2 buzzwords of 2021 = “reset and reimagine”. Be sure to add in “shine a light”, “sustainability”, blah blah and ya got a million dollar speech.  How about we reset the whole idea of royals? They pay us instead of taking our tax dollars?  Why does the reset mean that we the people will pay more?
> 
> ETA:  Maybe if he stopped spewing his garbage at us, the environment would improve tremulously.
> _But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips._



Isn’t he stealing the idea from his father? Charles was the biggest proponent of “The Great Reset” last summer.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Prince Hypocrite is at it again with another lecture for the little people. He’s getting almost as good at dishing out the word salad as his wife.
> 
> *Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*
> "Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better," the Duke of Sussex said Friday.
> 
> LONDON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry has urged the travel industry to “reset and reimagine” its future after the crisis caused by COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on creating a more sustainable model which does less damage to the environment and local communities.
> Travel firms and airlines have been badly hit by the pandemic, which has put a stop of much of the global tourism business, while those who rely on visitors have also suffered.
> Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, said the travel, said the”acute hardship” of communities in tourist destinations had shown the importance of travel, but had also highlighted the need to reduce its detrimental impact.
> “We know that to not travel again is not an option,” the prince, 36, said in a foreword to the annual report of Travalyst, an initiative he launched in 2019 with the objective of making the travel industry more sustainable.
> 
> “Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. Travel and tourism are no exception. As the industry re-emerges from crisis, there is an urgent need to reset and reimagine.”
> Harry, like his father, the heir-to-the-throne PrinceCharles, is a vocal champion of environmental causes, said it had been clear before the pandemic the industry had not done enough to tackle issues such as climate change and pollution.
> The prince has previously come under fire himself for advocating more environmentally-aware travel while using private jets. But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips.
> 
> Travalyst, an independent non-profit body which is backed by some major tourism industry companies including Booking.com,TripAdvisor, and Visa, said the industry needed universal transparency on its sustainability efforts, and to champion the success of local communities, destinations and operators.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


*I read this earlier today and the thought that popped into my head was his ramblings are like the epiphany one gets after quantities of leafy substances are smoked.*


----------



## Sophisticatted

Did Wallis Simpson ever become a citizen?  I read somewhere that the fact that the Windsor’s titles remained for life means that they won’t be revoked from Meg and Harry.


----------



## rose60610

jcnc said:


> No clue about title requirements but as far as Harry’s status, I assume he got a permanent residence ( green card) based on marriage to us citizen. I know many in my circle who went that route and it was a short time to get that.. if that's the case then he won’t have to leave US. But then again, if he is US resident, he will be taxed heavily on global income..



My American niece (when working in Paris for 15 years) married a very highly accomplished Frenchman with a masters degree but he wouldn't have been able to get a U.S. Green Card for ten years even after they married. Now, over ten years later, they are in CA, with his newly acquired Green Card, working for an American company making beaucoup bucks. So you can imagine the ire of those trying to get U.S. citizenship legally after years of going through proper channels and spending tens of thousands to do so at the thought of granting amnesty to those illegally here. If Harry gets citizenship "soon", it'd be an extremely bitter pill to many.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jcnc said:


> No clue about title requirements but as far as Harry’s status, I assume he got a permanent residence ( green card) based on marriage to us citizen. I know many in my circle who went that route and it was a short time to get that.. if that's the case then he won’t have to leave US. But then again, if he is US resident, he will be taxed heavily on global income..



Prior to COVID-19, a CR-1/IR-1 spousal visa would take at least 1.5 years (sometimes longer) covering a long wait, adjudication and visa interview for the foreign spouse before a spousal visa is issued. 

And with Harry and Meghan only married for less than 2 years when they moved to the US, either his spousal visa was expedited or there was some other kinda special arrangement that we don't know about or he's purely on ESTA. 

When a couple is married for 2 years or less, the foreign spouse will enter on a CR-1 spousal visa. Upon entry, the foreign spouse will receive a 2-year conditional green card. 

90 days prior to the expiration date of the 2-year green card, the foreign spouse have to file something called I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence with USCIS. This is another 1 to 2 years wait depending on the service center that's responsible in processing the foreign spouse's I-751 case file, which may or may not result in an interview and then the issuance of a 10-year green card.

If Harry is following the same immigration process as regular folks such as myself, he can file N-400 Naturalization after being a permanent resident for 3 years through an ongoing marriage and living with the same US citizen spouse in the US. Otherwise, he can also choose to apply for citizenship after being a green card holder for 5 years, which means he doesn't need to worry about proving a bonafide marriage (a requirement for filing under the 3-year rule).

On the other hand, if he came to the US with an ESTA, truly he can only be in the US for a maximum of 6 months. However, Meghan can file I-130 Petition For Alien Relative for Harry while Harry files I-485 Adjustment of Status to adjust from an ESTA to become a permanent resident, concurrently.

Immigration is exhausting and I can't wait to be done with the process


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t think he will give up his British citizenship.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wish they would take away their patronages.


----------



## drifter

time to "reimagine" the travel industry?   so preachy!  Sometimes, I wonder if their PR are secretly working undercover for QEII.  I'd totally love it if they were but I don't think so.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Prince Hypocrite is at it again with another lecture for the little people. He’s getting almost as good at dishing out the word salad as his wife.
> 
> *Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*
> "Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better," the Duke of Sussex said Friday.
> 
> LONDON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry has urged the travel industry to “reset and reimagine” its future after the crisis caused by COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on creating a more sustainable model which does less damage to the environment and local communities.
> Travel firms and airlines have been badly hit by the pandemic, which has put a stop of much of the global tourism business, while those who rely on visitors have also suffered.
> Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, said the travel, said the”acute hardship” of communities in tourist destinations had shown the importance of travel, but had also highlighted the need to reduce its detrimental impact.
> “We know that to not travel again is not an option,” the prince, 36, said in a foreword to the annual report of Travalyst, an initiative he launched in 2019 with the objective of making the travel industry more sustainable.
> 
> “Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. Travel and tourism are no exception. As the industry re-emerges from crisis, there is an urgent need to reset and reimagine.”
> Harry, like his father, the heir-to-the-throne PrinceCharles, is a vocal champion of environmental causes, said it had been clear before the pandemic the industry had not done enough to tackle issues such as climate change and pollution.
> The prince has previously come under fire himself for advocating more environmentally-aware travel while using private jets. But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips.
> 
> Travalyst, an independent non-profit body which is backed by some major tourism industry companies including Booking.com,TripAdvisor, and Visa, said the industry needed universal transparency on its sustainability efforts, and to champion the success of local communities, destinations and operators.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


It's amazing how much knowledge Harry has, he knows about everything. I wonder how the US was able to survive all these years without him. Harry, the savior!


----------



## csshopper

drifter said:


> time to "reimagine" the travel industry?   so preachy!  Sometimes, I wonder if their PR are secretly working undercover for QEII.  I'd totally love it if they were but I don't think so.


You are so right, "preachy". The "reimagine" is pompous and an insult to the travel industry. If he would get out of his ivory tower and learn about the real world he would know the travel industry has been working diligently for over a year now to "reimagine" so that at least some travel can be taken in the safest conditions possible for people who must work/fly during a world wide pandemic.


----------



## Lodpah

So dumb and dumber are now telling the travel industry what to do. Travel industry spends millions or even billions of dollars over the years hiring highly knowledgeable, highly credentialed consultants with years of education and experience to guide them. Ok, what’s next? NO! Let’s not go there. I wish they’d shut up and just waved their hands and smile and do hand shaking . . . I mean that’s his expertise and her expertise is acting which is fakery.


----------



## bagshopr

Dear Harry and Meghan,
No one cares what you say about travel. Or anything else.
Please go away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s cut to the chase. Harry got into a partnership with Booking.com, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor, Visa and Trip.com to create “Travalyst.”  It is supposedly a nonprofit but you can bet Harry is making money from it. 

I think someone had to remind Harry that he has been neglecting his own nonprofit, hence his nagging, repetitive lecture to do better.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Does Travelyst have employees or a website or anything?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Prince Hypocrite is at it again with another lecture for the little people. He’s getting almost as good at dishing out the word salad as his wife.
> 
> *Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*
> "Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better," the Duke of Sussex said Friday.
> 
> LONDON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry has urged the travel industry to “reset and reimagine” its future after the crisis caused by COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on creating a more sustainable model which does less damage to the environment and local communities.
> Travel firms and airlines have been badly hit by the pandemic, which has put a stop of much of the global tourism business, while those who rely on visitors have also suffered.
> Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, said the travel, said the”acute hardship” of communities in tourist destinations had shown the importance of travel, but had also highlighted the need to reduce its detrimental impact.
> “We know that to not travel again is not an option,” the prince, 36, said in a foreword to the annual report of Travalyst, an initiative he launched in 2019 with the objective of making the travel industry more sustainable.
> 
> “Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. Travel and tourism are no exception. As the industry re-emerges from crisis, there is an urgent need to reset and reimagine.”
> Harry, like his father, the heir-to-the-throne PrinceCharles, is a vocal champion of environmental causes, said it had been clear before the pandemic the industry had not done enough to tackle issues such as climate change and pollution.
> The prince has previously come under fire himself for advocating more environmentally-aware travel while using private jets. But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips.
> 
> Travalyst, an independent non-profit body which is backed by some major tourism industry companies including Booking.com,TripAdvisor, and Visa, said the industry needed universal transparency on its sustainability efforts, and to champion the success of local communities, destinations and operators.
> 
> .


preaching again....having heard his voice fairly recently on that podcast, I can just hear him.  we less aware people and companies have so much to learn from him
I wonder what "action" he took to offset the use of private jets.....maybe they recycle their plastic bottles, or don't use plastic bottles.  it would take a lot of bottles to offset use of the jets


----------



## Aimee3

lanasyogamama said:


> Does Travelyst have employees or a website or anything?


This is what came up when I googled it:
“While still official members of the Royal Family, Prince Harry and Meghan led their *charity*, SussexRoyal. ... All assets were moved from Sussex Royal to *Travalyst*. A Newsweek source said: "*Travalyst* is now operating as an independent *non-profit* based in the UK, and all assets from SussexRoyal will transfer over.Jul 21, 2020”


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> This is what came up when I googled it:
> “While still official members of the Royal Family, Prince Harry and Meghan led their *charity*, SussexRoyal. ... All assets were moved from Sussex Royal to *Travalyst*. A Newsweek source said: "*Travalyst* is now operating as an independent *non-profit* based in the UK, and all assets from SussexRoyal will transfer over.Jul 21, 2020”


All of the assets are moved to Travalyst?  we need an accountant to weigh in here.  so many questions.  they could be drawing a large salary from the non-profit I think.  Of course even if they were paid $500K each as executives, that wouldn't be enough for their lavish lifestyle.
  based in UK but they would still have to pay US income tax?


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> Prince Hypocrite is at it again with another lecture for the little people. He’s getting almost as good at dishing out the word salad as his wife.
> 
> *Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*
> "Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better," the Duke of Sussex said Friday.
> 
> LONDON, Jan 29 (Reuters) -* Britain’s Prince Harry has urged the travel industry to “reset and reimagine” its future after the crisis caused by COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on creating a more sustainable model which does less damage to the environment and local communities.*
> Travel firms and airlines have been badly hit by the pandemic, which has put a stop of much of the global tourism business, while those who rely on visitors have also suffered.
> Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, said the travel, said the”acute hardship” of communities in tourist destinations had shown the importance of travel, but had also highlighted the need to reduce its detrimental impact.
> “We know that to not travel again is not an option,” the prince, 36, said in a foreword to the annual report of Travalyst, an initiative he launched in 2019 with the objective of making the travel industry more sustainable.
> 
> “Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. Travel and tourism are no exception. As the industry re-emerges from crisis, there is an urgent need to reset and reimagine.”
> Harry, like his father, the heir-to-the-throne PrinceCharles, is a vocal champion of environmental causes, said it had been clear before the pandemic the industry had not done enough to tackle issues such as climate change and pollution.
> The prince has previously come under fire himself for advocating more environmentally-aware travel while using private jets. But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips.
> 
> Travalyst, an independent non-profit body which is backed by some major tourism industry companies including Booking.com,TripAdvisor, and Visa, said the industry needed universal transparency on its sustainability efforts, and to champion the success of local communities, destinations and operators.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice




This said by someone who travels on private jets


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Let’s cut to the chase. Harry got into a partnership with Booking.com, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor, Visa and Trip.com to create “Travalyst.”  *It is supposedly a nonprofit but you can bet Harry is making money from it.*
> 
> I think someone had to remind Harry that he has been neglecting his own nonprofit, hence his nagging, repetitive lecture to do better.


The concept that "nonprofits do not exist to make money", is dated, gone... H is giving a new meaning to nonprofits, he is making a difference! Advocating for the environment while traveling in private jets, I'm impressed!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> This said by someone who travels on private jets


didn't you get the part where he's making up for it in other ways?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> didn't you get the part where he's making up for it in other ways?



I see that many of us are confused and impressed by H and his amazing initiatives. Well, we are not alone:




The scheme was set up in partnership with Booking.com, Ctrip, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor and Visa with the intention to “change the impact of travel, for good”.

Like Archewell, it champions a message of “change” and “action” to help establish a better world.

Yet, it’s not entirely clear how such ambitious goals could be achieved.

Journalist Helen Coffey pulled apart some of the early press releases describing the new initiative, and she asked where the “tangible, concrete details” were, as only the who and the why were explained.

She wrote: “How are Prince Harry and several multi-million pound companies going to change travel ‘for good’? “What is it they’re going to do, exactly? “When and in fact where are these projects going to materialise?”

She concluded: “It’s not easy to write a well-crafted press release of impressive length [1,100 words] without really saying much, but somehow they managed it.”

Travalyst has described its purpose as a “partnership” which “will initially explore and promote solutions that help drive sustainable practices and consumer choices in areas including; supporting local people, protecting wildlife, tackling climate change and environmental damage and alleviating overtourism”.

Ms Coffey noted: “So many words, so little information.”

Crucially, part of the press release read: “Further details of new initiatives launched by the Travalyst partnership will be announced in due course.”

Ms Coffey claimed this translated as “we haven’t actually got any initiatives yet”.

She continued: “Prince Harry’s name, coupled with the increasingly popular buzzwords of ‘sustainable tourism’, ‘conservation’, ‘climate change’ and ‘overtourism’ ensured Travalyst got maximum exposure across print and broadcast media — all without having to state a single concrete detail. Impressive.”

an awful lot like greenwashing dressed up as do-gooding


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It's amazing how much knowledge Harry has, he knows about everything. I wonder how the US was able to survive all these years without him. Harry, the savior!


Don't you know?!?! He has learned from the best of the best! He has been her understudy for such a long long time now... almost 5 years. You can get a great degree in just 5 years such as in Word Salad, BS, Acting...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I see that many of us are confused and impressed by H and his amazing initiatives. Well, we are not alone:
> 
> View attachment 4974720
> 
> 
> The scheme was set up in partnership with Booking.com, Ctrip, Skyscanner, TripAdvisor and Visa with the intention to “change the impact of travel, for good”.
> 
> Like Archewell, it champions a message of “change” and “action” to help establish a better world.
> 
> Yet, it’s not entirely clear how such ambitious goals could be achieved.
> 
> Journalist Helen Coffey pulled apart some of the early press releases describing the new initiative, and she asked where the “tangible, concrete details” were, as only the who and the why were explained.
> 
> She wrote: “How are Prince Harry and several multi-million pound companies going to change travel ‘for good’? “What is it they’re going to do, exactly? “When and in fact where are these projects going to materialise?”
> 
> She concluded: “It’s not easy to write a well-crafted press release of impressive length [1,100 words] without really saying much, but somehow they managed it.”
> 
> Travalyst has described its purpose as a “partnership” which “will initially explore and promote solutions that help drive sustainable practices and consumer choices in areas including; supporting local people, protecting wildlife, tackling climate change and environmental damage and alleviating overtourism”.
> 
> Ms Coffey noted: “So many words, so little information.”
> 
> Crucially, part of the press release read: “Further details of new initiatives launched by the Travalyst partnership will be announced in due course.”
> 
> Ms Coffey claimed this translated as “we haven’t actually got any initiatives yet”.
> 
> She continued: “Prince Harry’s name, coupled with the increasingly popular buzzwords of ‘sustainable tourism’, ‘conservation’, ‘climate change’ and ‘overtourism’ ensured Travalyst got maximum exposure across print and broadcast media — all without having to state a single concrete detail. Impressive.”
> 
> an awful lot like greenwashing dressed up as do-gooding


seems like BS to me
I can't think of anyone else whose sole "job" is spouting out info to tell everyone what to do and supposedly doing good works.  there are other wealthy people who have foundations and do a lot of good.  but they have other "jobs"/businesses.  these two are just in the business of preaching to the masses.  He was a prince but now who is he? who needs them?  when are they going to make some major monetary contribution to something?


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Don't you know?!?! He has learned from the best of the best! He has been her understudy for such a long long time now... almost 5 years. You can get a great degree in just 5 years such as in Word Salad, BS, Acting...


Oh, I see. He has already been an applied disciple of MM for almost 5 years. Oh wow, that explains a lot! Thanks!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> seems like BS to me
> I can't think of anyone else whose sole "job" is spouting out info to tell everyone what to do and supposedly doing good works.  there are other wealthy people who have foundations and do a lot of good.  but they have other "jobs"/businesses.  these two are just in the business of preaching to the masses.  He was a prince but now who is he? who needs them?  when are they going to make some major monetary contribution to something?


Instead of having other jobs like most people, MM&H are fully invested in telling everyone what to do. Preaching to the masses can be highly profitable, and this seems to be their way of making a difference.
Their contributions are not supposed to be monetary, they are instead photo-ops, word salads... and once in a while pencils and hats, which are needed for photo-ops. This is not an easy concept to grasp, but I think I'm getting it now.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> My American niece (when working in Paris for 15 years) married a very highly accomplished Frenchman with a masters degree but he wouldn't have been able to get a U.S. Green Card for ten years even after they married. Now, over ten years later, they are in CA, with his newly acquired Green Card, working for an American company making beaucoup bucks. So you can imagine the ire of those trying to get U.S. citizenship legally after years of going through proper channels and spending tens of thousands to do so at the thought of granting amnesty to those illegally here. If Harry gets citizenship "soon", it'd be an extremely bitter pill to many.


What does Harry need amnesty from?  The big, bad BRF?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Prince Hypocrite is at it again with another lecture for the little people. He’s getting almost as good at dishing out the word salad as his wife.
> 
> *Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*
> "Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better," the Duke of Sussex said Friday.
> 
> LONDON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - Britain’s Prince Harry has urged the travel industry to “reset and reimagine” its future after the crisis caused by COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on creating a more sustainable model which does less damage to the environment and local communities.
> Travel firms and airlines have been badly hit by the pandemic, which has put a stop of much of the global tourism business, while those who rely on visitors have also suffered.
> Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, said the travel, said the”acute hardship” of communities in tourist destinations had shown the importance of travel, but had also highlighted the need to reduce its detrimental impact.
> “We know that to not travel again is not an option,” the prince, 36, said in a foreword to the annual report of Travalyst, an initiative he launched in 2019 with the objective of making the travel industry more sustainable.
> 
> “Right before us, there is an opportunity to do things differently, to do things better. Travel and tourism are no exception. As the industry re-emerges from crisis, there is an urgent need to reset and reimagine.”
> Harry, like his father, the heir-to-the-throne PrinceCharles, is a vocal champion of environmental causes, said it had been clear before the pandemic the industry had not done enough to tackle issues such as climate change and pollution.
> The prince has previously come under fire himself for advocating more environmentally-aware travel while using private jets. But he says he only rarely does not use commercial aircraft, and took action to offset the carbon dioxide emissions caused by his trips.
> 
> Travalyst, an independent non-profit body which is backed by some major tourism industry companies including Booking.com,TripAdvisor, and Visa, said the industry needed universal transparency on its sustainability efforts, and to champion the success of local communities, destinations and operators.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


...says Harry as he's about to board his private jet to "protect" his family from those damn, prying reporters!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Does Travelyst have employees or a website or anything?




It sure does. Here you go. 









						Travalyst - Sustainable Tourism
					

Led by Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, Travalyst is a global initiative with the ambition to change the impact of travel, for good.




					travalyst.org


----------



## Chanbal

How kind of MM for allowing H to shine! 


Conservative commentator Darren Grimes, making reference to his use of private planes, tweeted: "The bloke is a privileged prat."

Another wrote: "Private jets, unfriendly fuel chugging cars, huge mansion to keep warm and cool & 16 bathrooms for the three of them. Grounds to keep watered etc. Give us a break lol."

privileged prat


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I think she's manipulative, may be a narcissist.  but psychopath may be stretching it.



Psychopath doesn't equal mass murderer or something, though. They say successful lawyers and surgeons often have psychopathic traits because it helps them be better at their job.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Psychopath doesn't equal mass murderer or something, though. They say successful lawyers and surgeons often have psychopathic traits because it helps them be better at their job.


I'm no expert but I think sociopath is someone with no empathy - makes them able sometimes to be murderers.  psychopath I think is much more serious than something like bipolar

in this article they talk about people with psychopathis traits vs people whe are psychopaths








						Could Someone I Know Be a Psychopath?
					

The term “psychopath” is used to describe someone who is callous, unemotional, and morally depraved.




					www.verywellmind.com
				



.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry Says It's Time To 'Reimagine' Travel Industry*



Like taking a private plane three times in 10 days? Of course he had to protect his uber famous wife while #2 and 3 in line took a budget airline (together with the future queen and #4 and 5) to Scotland.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> It's amazing how much knowledge Harry has, he knows about everything. I wonder how the US was able to survive all these years without him. Harry, the savior!


 You were not surviving but just existing


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Ms Coffey noted: “So many words, so little information.”



That is probably their motto seeing it rings true for so many of their "projects".


----------



## rose60610

Here's a cut/paste from Travalyst: 

"Led by The Duke of Sussex, Travalyst is a bold global initiative founded by Booking.com, Skyscanner, Trip.com Group, Tripadvisor and Visa, with the ambition to change the impact of travel, for good.

We believe in the power and importance of travel and that we also have a shared responsibility to our planet and to each other.

*That’s why we’re coming together as a catalyst for change.*

We want to be the driving force that paves a new way to travel, helping everyone explore our world in a way that protects both people and places, and secures a positive future for destinations and local communities for generations to come."


Let me guess, their ultimate goal is to allow travel for only those people who agree that "free speech" is a horrible concept. The only people who'd get to travel are Harry and Meghan's activist sugars who think they're just wonderful role models. Critics of H&M will be ordered to stay home, shut up, be deprogrammed and brainwashed on how to "think and communicate the CORRECT way". Like, if you have a private jet, by all means--fly everywhere, it's fine if you pretend to feel guilty about it or criticize others for doing it. Likewise, living in a safe gated mansion with servants and groundskeepers--criticize those who live in small homes in non-upscale neighborhoods for using plastic bags and straws. And if you save your money to buy a plane ticket to see family members, it'd better be "sustainable travel". Apparently, if you fly several thousand miles to Africa on a private jet with a huge entourage of PR people and servants, it's fine to gripe about how hard your life is and expect a pity party. And then wonder why people say "mean things" and must be shut down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Here's a cut/paste from Travalyst:
> 
> "Led by The Duke of Sussex, Travalyst is a bold global initiative founded by Booking.com, Skyscanner, Trip.com Group, Tripadvisor and Visa, with the ambition to change the impact of travel, for good.
> 
> We believe in the power and importance of travel and that we also have a shared responsibility to our planet and to each other.
> 
> *That’s why we’re coming together as a catalyst for change.*
> 
> We want to be the driving force that paves a new way to travel, helping everyone explore our world in a way that protects both people and places, and secures a positive future for destinations and local communities for generations to come."
> 
> 
> Let me guess, their ultimate goal is to allow travel for only those people who agree that "free speech" is a horrible concept. The only people who'd get to travel are Harry and Meghan's activist sugars who think they're just wonderful role models. Critics of H&M will be ordered to stay home, shut up, be deprogrammed and brainwashed on how to "think and communicate the CORRECT way". Like, if you have a private jet, by all means--fly everywhere, it's fine if you pretend to feel guilty about it or criticize others for doing it. Likewise, living in a safe gated mansion with servants and groundskeepers--criticize those who live in small homes in non-upscale neighborhoods for using plastic bags and straws. And if you save your money to buy a plane ticket to see family members, it'd better be "sustainable travel". Apparently, if you fly several thousand miles to Africa on a private jet with a huge entourage of PR people and servants, it's fine to gripe about how hard your life is and expect a pity party. And then wonder why people say "mean things" and must be shut down.



With these goals, they will eliminate/turn off so many paying customers - because *nothing* they say sounds like *fun* which is why customers pay* Travaly$t, the cataly$t.  *


----------



## jcnc

EverSoElusive said:


> Prior to COVID-19, a CR-1/IR-1 spousal visa would take at least 1.5 years (sometimes longer) covering a long wait, adjudication and visa interview for the foreign spouse before a spousal visa is issued.
> 
> And with Harry and Meghan only married for less than 2 years when they moved to the US, either his spousal visa was expedited or there was some other kinda special arrangement that we don't know about or he's purely on ESTA.
> 
> When a couple is married for 2 years or less, the foreign spouse will enter on a CR-1 spousal visa. Upon entry, the foreign spouse will receive a 2-year conditional green card.
> 
> 90 days prior to the expiration date of the 2-year green card, the foreign spouse have to file something called I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence with USCIS. This is another 1 to 2 years wait depending on the service center that's responsible in processing the foreign spouse's I-751 case file, which may or may not result in an interview and then the issuance of a 10-year green card.
> 
> If Harry is following the same immigration process as regular folks such as myself, he can file N-400 Naturalization after being a permanent resident for 3 years through an ongoing marriage and living with the same US citizen spouse in the US. Otherwise, he can also choose to apply for citizenship after being a green card holder for 5 years, which means he doesn't need to worry about proving a bonafide marriage (a requirement for filing under the 3-year rule).
> 
> On the other hand, if he came to the US with an ESTA, truly he can only be in the US for a maximum of 6 months. However, Meghan can file I-130 Petition For Alien Relative for Harry while Harry files I-485 Adjustment of Status to adjust from an ESTA to become a permanent resident, concurrently.
> 
> Immigration is exhausting and I can't wait to be done with the process



Wow! Thats a complicated process , I don’t know how my 2 frnds got theirs in 3-6 months.. good luck to you  !

I remember the visa issues. I did a masters nd phd from US and then worked there. my application was through employer and that was a crazy complicated process too. after 10 years  “in the waiting” with no end in sight i moved to Canada and couldn’t be happier. I sometimes miss US though. Will maybe visit again when we r done with COVID.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry is speechifying about how we MUST travel!    Really?  You  won’t be able to go anywhere without proof of vaccination, negative Covid test and possible quarantine requirements. You will have a total of two days before you have to turn around and go home.  Last time I checked, i wasn’t  my civic world duty to travel, and it certainly isn’t to put money into his pocket.  I won’t be buying my Travalyst sleeping bag, tent, canteen, portable commode or parka anytime soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A quick google found these eco-friendly alternatives to Travely$t, the cataly$t — number 5 names other travel companies. I had no idea who else was selling this eco-friendly travel idea, so I needed to educate myself. 









						8 Easy Ways To Travel Eco-Friendly - FlyGRN Blog
					

Love travelling? Here are 8 easy ways to travel eco-friendly without feeling guilty about your (carbon) footprint.




					flygrn.com
				




Always remember, if H&M are doing it, someone else has already thought of it 
We, too, can offset our carbon emissions - plant a tree.

Disclaimer:  I am not promoting this company nor do I receive any money from anyone nor am I involved financially/personally. Options are what make our world wonderful.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> Harry is speechifying about how we MUST travel!    Really?  You  won’t be able to go anywhere without proof of vaccination, negative Covid test and possible quarantine requirements. You will have a total of two days before you have to turn around and go home.  Last time I checked, i wasn’t  my civic world duty to travel, and it certainly isn’t to put money into his pocket.  I won’t be buying my Travalyst sleeping bag, tent, canteen, portable commode or parka anytime soon.



Remember... Harry wants to stop Over tourism... so really he’s saying you can’t travel... you can only go places he says it’s okay to go when he says it’s okay to go...


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> All of the assets are moved to Travalyst?  we need an accountant to weigh in here.  so many questions.  they could be drawing a large salary from the non-profit I think.  Of course even if they were paid $500K each as executives, that wouldn't be enough for their lavish lifestyle.
> based in UK but they would still have to pay US income tax?


I see some problems down the road for them on this. I read an article that what they did might not be kosher as when people donate they expect it to be used as such so yeah, I think it’s gonna blow up in their face, i. e., misappropriation of charity monies.


----------



## Aminamina

These two are just like gangrene to the Royal Institution. What happens if gangrene is left untreated?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Aminamina said:


> These two are just like gangrene to the Royal Institution. What happens if gangrene is left untreated?


It oftentimes has to be amputated  -OR-  if not, you die from the infection.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I see some problems down the road for them on this. I read an article that what they did might not be kosher as when people donate they expect it to be used as such so yeah, I think it’s gonna blow up in their face, i. e., misappropriation of charity monies.


there's a difference between a non-profit and a charity....are they running a non-profit, taking a big salary and hoping everyone thinks its a charity?


----------



## rose60610

My idea of eco friendly is drinking champagne from a crystal flute vs water from a plastic bottle. I don't need eco lectures from two hypocrite dullards who spend millions they didn't earn to maintain their wasteful lifestyle while shaming normal people who bust their humps to pay their bills.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> My idea of eco friendly is drinking champagne from a crystal flute vs water from a plastic bottle. I don't need eco lectures from two hypocrite dullards who spend millions they didn't earn to maintain their wasteful lifestyle while shaming normal people who bust their humps to pay their bills.


right.... I wonder how they water their garden?  possibly they have a well....


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> It oftentimes has to be amputated  -OR-  if not, you die from the infection.


Not to mention the truly foul odor.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> right.... I wonder how they water their garden?  possibly they have a well....


I envision MM scurrying around peeing all over the place.


----------



## Chanbal

jcnc said:


> Wow! Thats a complicated process , I don’t know how my 2 frnds got theirs in 3-6 months.. good luck to you  !
> 
> I remember the visa issues. I did a masters nd phd from US and then worked there. my application was through employer and that was a crazy complicated process too. after 10 years  “in the waiting” with no end in sight i moved to Canada and couldn’t be happier. I sometimes miss US though. Will maybe visit again when we r done with COVID.


Let's try not to worry too much. Harry can claim national interest, US can't afford to lose him.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Let's try not to worry too much. Harry can claim national interest, US can't afford to lose him.


well yes.  we need him and his wife to tell us how to behave, etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG 

I was looking at Meghan trying to figure out how anyone did ever pay that woman for an acting gig because she can't even fake the so-in-love-gaze convincingly when I noticed Charlotte. Charlotte is all of us hahaha.

(also, what did Charles say that Harry was apparently unhappy about?)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Please stop


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG
> 
> I was looking at Meghan trying to figure out how anyone did ever pay that woman for an acting gig because she can't even fake the so-in-love-gaze convincingly when I noticed Charlotte. Charlotte is all of us hahaha.
> 
> (also, what did Charles say that Harry was apparently unhappy about?)
> 
> View attachment 4975103


that charlotte is so cute!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This woman and her ego.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> I see some problems down the road for them on this. I read an article that what they did might not be kosher as when people donate they expect it to be used as such so yeah, I think it’s gonna blow up in their face, i. e., misappropriation of charity monies.


Yes, theoretically one can't just move donations from one cause to another without donor's consent. If the authorities get wind of this, their charity could be investigated. It raised an eye brow or two when W&K transferred some money from their charity to one of H&M's, for reason I can't remember the details of.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman and her ego.


I used to like H but now they both just seem so smug to me


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> My idea of eco friendly is drinking champagne from a crystal flute vs water from a plastic bottle. I don't need eco lectures from two hypocrite dullards who spend millions they didn't earn to maintain their wasteful lifestyle while shaming normal people who bust their humps to pay their bills.


H&M's ideal of eco friendly travel is how to avoid single used plastic on private jets! It's so laughable!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes, theoretically one can't just move donations from one cause to another without donor's consent. If the authorities get wind of this, their charity could be investigated. It raised an eye brow or two when W&K transferred some money from their charity to one of H&M's, for reason I can't remember the details of.



That's when they parted ways. They had had a charity together and wanted some of that moola.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Please stop
> 
> View attachment 4975104


she is using diana as an excuse to aggrandize herself?  not sure if this is true or what the source is but if true, it is patently ridiculous


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It looks like that "unless there is a royal law change", Archie "will automatically become a Prince when Prince Charles is king". Of course, Charles may change the current law, but I doubt that MM&H would be happy with such change. While she might have been pissed at the Dumbarton title, she loves titles...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles may make law to free Archie Harrison from 'burden'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry chose not to give their son Archie Harrison a royal title but he will automatically become a Prince when Prince Charles is king. According to book Finding Freedom, the future king could create a law that would save Archie from taking a title.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


To nitpick ... Charles cannot make / unmake a law ....
What is the vehicle for declaring grandsons of the king to be princes ? 
Is it a law ie passed by Parlement? I don’t think so, Peter Philips is not one ... (yes, Anne turned that down, but she would not have been offered the choice had it been a law )
I believe it to be customary, as established by the monarch with the blessing of the PM and maybe cabinet. Customs can easily be changed by the monarch 
I think it is like knighting someone eg Sir Elton, done at queen’s discretion but of course she consults with everyone ahead of time

Can’t remember when it was done ... but all grandchildren of the monarch used to automatically be HRHs and Prince/Princess , all the cousins of QEII are styled that way .. but the system was changed during the reign of QEII, and can be changed again


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> (yes, Anne turned that down, but she would not have been offered the choice had it been a law )



Anne is just a daughter, though. She's in the succession line only after her brothers' offspring even though she is the second oldest. If there is a law it was probably made with male offspring in mind.


----------



## Luvbolide

lanasyogamama said:


> Please stop
> 
> View attachment 4975104




WTF - I thought that they were supposed to stop using “royal”.  Nod to Diana - what a crock.  Insert pic of Charlotte here!!


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> Did Wallis Simpson ever become a citizen?  I read somewhere that the fact that the Windsor’s titles remained for life means that they won’t be revoked from Meg and Harry.


The monarch can revoke titles, it has been done, usually for important stuff like treason

That said, in this woke cancel culture, a savvy monarch will consult courtiers and public opinion 

There are US residents who have UK titles eg Chris Guest , husband of Jamie Curtis is a baron, don’t know his citizenship, but he has lived in California for donkey’s years , he does not use the title, but once went to the opening of Parliament and sat in the upper house, as a one time thing, when he received the title, Jamie got to wear a tiara


----------



## EverSoElusive

jcnc said:


> Wow! Thats a complicated process , I don’t know how my 2 frnds got theirs in 3-6 months.. good luck to you  !
> 
> I remember the visa issues. I did a masters nd phd from US and then worked there. my application was through employer and that was a crazy complicated process too. after 10 years  “in the waiting” with no end in sight i moved to Canada and couldn’t be happier. I sometimes miss US though. Will maybe visit again when we r done with COVID.



Thank you!  The process is very long and costly (in general for most people). If it wasn't for my husband being American and us wanting to be in the same place instead of dating long distance forever, I would not want to go through the process. 

As for your friends' getting approved quickly, that's truly a story of the past. I wish it was still the case. USCIS processing times have grown exponentially longer with understaffing and increasing number of applications in the recent years. Despite the longer processing times, they still feel the need to increase fees without even hiring more staff to adjudicate applications. 

But now I'm really curious as to what's Harry's immigration status in the US and if he's undergoing the same immigration process 

Please do come visit the US when COVID-19 is no longer a threat to humanity!


----------



## marietouchet

Wiki agrees with my limited knowledge of the topic lol

1. The monarch issues letters patent about styles, titles, honors, dignities etc cf infra. 

2. Letters patent are not laws per se, they are more like royal decrees , only Parliament makes laws

3. QEII changed stuff in 2012, she can do it again 

4. Per the 2012 Letters Patent, all those niceties were given only to the children of William, long before JCMH. 

5. QEII would have had to do more Letters Patent to give the niceties to Archie.  It was never an automatic thing. It is said that JCMH turned down an offer ... but we don’t know for sure ... 
There are lots of ways this may have gone down with the end result that no new LPs were written 

6. I do not know if there are extant LPs that automatically grant the stuff to the grand children of the monarch , according to which A would be a shoo-in when C is king.
It does not matter, C could write new ones 

From wiki ...

On 31 December 2012, letters patent were issued to extend a title and a style borne by members of the royal family to additional persons to be born, and this Notice appeared in the London Gazette:[5]

The QUEEN has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 31 December 2012 to declare that all the children of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of Royal Highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour.









						British royal family - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG
> 
> I was looking at Meghan trying to figure out how anyone did ever pay that woman for an acting gig because she can't even fake the so-in-love-gaze convincingly when I noticed Charlotte. Charlotte is all of us hahaha.
> *
> (also, what did Charles say that Harry was apparently unhappy about?)*
> 
> View attachment 4975103


"How are you today, son?"


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Please stop
> 
> View attachment 4975104


HTF is that a "nod to Princess Diana".  It's a nod to her own damn ego.  Can't these idiot "journalists" come up with anything better?


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Please stop
> 
> View attachment 4975104


I get it... Rachel Meghan HRH the Duchess of Sussex is not correct since she was not born royal , in the same way that Marie Christine , Princess of Kent is also incorrect 
Duchess of S or Pss Henry are the correct appellations


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, this name change thing happened in June, 2019???? Why is the press making a ‘thing’ out of it now? Am I missing something?
H&M need serious help.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this name change thing happened in June, 2019???? Why is the press making a ‘thing’ out of it now? Am I missing something?
> H&M need serious help.


I think this is coming from Meg's PR people as a way to remind everyone that she is a DUCHESS!  It is to negate all the talk about titles being removed.    By showing her name like that on a birth certificate, she is stating that she is royalty, or at least she thinks she is.  I think that it is ludicrous because the name of a mother is supposed to be on a birth certificate and not a title.  She has made things difficult for her son in the future.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG
> 
> I was looking at Meghan trying to figure out how anyone did ever pay that woman for an acting gig because she can't even fake the so-in-love-gaze convincingly when I noticed Charlotte. Charlotte is all of us hahaha.
> 
> (also, what did Charles say that Harry was apparently unhappy about?)
> 
> View attachment 4975103



RE: Charlotte-my true sentiments everyday about these two idiots...


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan Malarky. This guy is brutal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Please stop
> 
> View attachment 4975104



1. How is that possible?
2. How is that a nod to Diana, Princess of Wales?
3. Sounds like she's fearing that they. will take that title off her.


----------



## Suncatcher

I just read that the Sunday Times reported that Queen will be hosting the US President and other world leaders along with Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge in a “soft power” reception before the G7 summit.  MM reading this can’t feel good to be excluded from such an important event - this is as powerful as powerful events go.  MM can stick to shilling oat milk latte.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> I get it... Rachel Meghan HRH the Duchess of Sussex is not correct since she was not born royal , in the same way that Marie Christine , Princess of Kent is also incorrect
> Duchess of S or Pss Henry are the correct appellations


Murky Meg had Twitter post according to which birth certificate can be changed only if it is wrong, I think the above justification qualifies
If we found out now, I think it is because no one noticed til now or it was too embarrassing to report when she was BRF and press gave her a pass then (for using an inflated style)
As to the interpretation that the change is a snub to W&K... it would be amusing to see how Kate was referenced on the birth certs  of her children, maybe she did not commit the faux pas ?


----------



## sdkitty

Suncatcher said:


> I just read that the Sunday Times reported that Queen will be hosting the US President and other world leaders along with Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge in a “soft power” reception before the G7 summit.  MM reading this can’t feel good to be excluded from such an important event - this is as powerful as powerful events go.  MM can stick to shilling oat milk latte.


Kate will be there and Meghan will not?  Well, they voluntarily left the RF so must live with it


----------



## lanasyogamama

If it was not filled out correctly, I’m 100% sure it’s because Meghan refused to listen to what the standard practice was, and filled it out in the middle of the night, because she knew best.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> Kate will be there and Meghan will not?  Well, the voluntarily left the RF so must live with it


Exactly! This is what happens when you quit the BRF and invade your own privacy in LA!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly! This is what happens when you quit the BRF and invade your own privacy in LA!


bet they're scrambling around trying to get an invite to the white house - since H is such a great buddy of the FLOTUS


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> bet they're scrambling around trying to get an invite to the white house - since H is such a great buddy of the FLOTUS



The thing is he does know them. You can find several photos like this with Prince Harry and the Bidens as well as with former President *****. It was from the 2017 Invictus games. But that was before he and Meghan were engaged and she was not there with him.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The thing is he does know them. You can find several photos like this with Prince Harry and the Bidens as well as with former President *****. It was from the 2017 Invictus games. But that was before he and Meghan were engaged and she was not there with him.
> 
> View attachment 4975673


maybe they will hit the president or FL up for a job


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe they will hit the president or FL up for a job



They aren’t keeping up with the work they promised to do now.  I mean seriously, how many months does it take to develop a podcast? It’s not a TV show or film which needs dozens of employees to create. 

Meghan has been far too quiet lately.  I expect when we finally hear something it will be BIG, whether that is a new baby or a new project, something is brewing.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty, 
Yes, I'm sure they think we "need" them since they know soooo much about everything.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How W&K filled out the birth certificates:









						How Prince Louis's Birth Certificate Compares to Prince George and Princess Charlotte’s
					

There's one major difference between his and his siblings




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




How Archie’s was(?) different:








						How Baby Archie's Birth Certificate Compares to Those of His Royal Cousins
					

See how it stacks up to Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis's documents.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> sdkitty,
> Yes, I'm sure they think we "need" them since they know soooo much about everything.


I don't disagree with a lot of what they say.  I just don't need them to tell me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Suncatcher said:


> I just read that the Sunday Times reported that Queen will be hosting the US President and other world leaders along with Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge in a “soft power” reception before the G7 summit.  MM reading this can’t feel good to be excluded from such an important event - this is as powerful as powerful events go.  MM can stick to shilling oat milk latte.



Thing is they probably wouldn't have been asked to attend even before Megxit...which is what p*ssed them off (at least one of them, because with the other one, I still think he knew the drill) to begin with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> How Archie’s was(?) different:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Baby Archie's Birth Certificate Compares to Those of His Royal Cousins
> 
> 
> See how it stacks up to Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis's documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Hu? Are we sure this is in fact Archie's birth cerfiticate? In the Cambridge kids' ones, the informant - William - signed it. In this, not only does it say "Harry" instead of "Henry" which is weird for a formal document, it is also not signed but typed in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> My idea of eco friendly is drinking champagne from a crystal flute vs water from a plastic bottle. I don't need eco lectures from two hypocrite dullards who spend millions they didn't earn to maintain their wasteful lifestyle while shaming normal people who bust their humps to pay their bills.


Amen!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Are we sure this is in fact Archie's birth cerfiticate? In the Cambridge kids' ones, the informant - William - signed it. In this, not only does it say "Harry" instead of "Henry" which is weird for a formal document, it is also not signed but typed in.



See, this is how the deceitful grifters create their drama. They will do anything to keep their names in the news. 
Silly, ridiculous, and so not private.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The stans are stirring up drama over on the Kensington Royal account. William postet a message about fighting racism in sports, and of course the sugars are there crying how he never spoke up when his sister-in-law and his nephew were victims of the most horrible racial abuse.

Maybe I missed something, but I don't think Archie has been much of a target besides this one looney radio moderator who swiftly felt consequences, and most backlash Meghan experienced was not "racial abuse" but barely criticism of her sh*tty attitude and actions. Of course, for some people it's abuse the Queen didn't hand over her crown.

I still maintain that the abuse Kate and her family suffered as well as her being haunted by the media to the point they were clogging the street in front of her workplace makes Meghan's experience pale in comparison. She's just not the type to whine and complain in public but handles adversity a bit more gracefully.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thing is they probably wouldn't have been asked to attend even before Megxit...which is what p*ssed them off (at least one of them, because with the other one, I still think he knew the drill) to begin with.


I seem to remember two faux pas concerning diplomatic shindigs 
1. Meghan was not at several receptions for the previous pres of US (OK, I get it ... he is not to her taste but QEII was not in love with all her invitees, but she did it anyway, it is her job ), she was pregnant but still, but still she shoulda been there 
2. It was at a diplomatic reception that MM and JCMH were asked to step aside - not being senior royals, they tried and failed to go first

Oooohhhh - tomorrow is February, and maybe the judge will be done soon, cant wait


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The stans are stirring up drama over on the Kensington Royal account. William postet a message about fighting racism in sports, and of course the sugars are there crying how he never spoke up when his sister-in-law and his nephew were victims of the most horrible racial abuse.
> 
> Maybe I missed something, but I don't think Archie has been much of a target besides this one looney radio moderator who swiftly felt consequences, and most backlash Meghan experienced was not "racial abuse" but barely criticism of her sh*tty attitude and actions. Of course, for some people it's abuse the Queen didn't hand over her crown.
> 
> I still maintain that the abuse Kate and her family suffered as well as her being haunted by the media to the point they were clogging the street in front of her workplace makes Meghan's experience pale in comparison. She's just not the type to whine and complain in public but handles adversity a bit more gracefully.


Agree, I will go further and say A was never the target of anyone, for any reason

His parents made decisions - eg private Christening - the public expected the standard photo ops after hospital etc.  Was the public uproar due to simply going against precedent ?  or due to something else ?  

Unpopular choice, by his PARENTS - THEY were criticized not A

IMHO, the UK taxpayers who supported the Sussexes at the time, had a right to expect an adherence to photo ops conventions

And yes the Middletons also to put up with the press... agree on that point too


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> sdkitty,
> Yes, I'm sure they think we "need" them since they know soooo much about everything.


Reflecting on the general subject of how to be a know-it-all and correct someone's behaviour ...

I have not personally had a lot of success telling people they are doing it wrong

What works better for me, is to lead by example, then quietly ask "what do you think about doing it his way?"

Now, I am thinking of the advantages (LOL) of the abrasive approach, I too am learning from their example , I need to consult more experts in the field of getting others to do it MY way


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> How W&K filled out the birth certificates:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Louis's Birth Certificate Compares to Prince George and Princess Charlotte’s
> 
> 
> There's one major difference between his and his siblings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Archie’s was(?) different:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Baby Archie's Birth Certificate Compares to Those of His Royal Cousins
> 
> 
> See how it stacks up to Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis's documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Great sleuthing ...GO TEAM !

I did notice a few details

The form changed after Charlotte

IMHO, the form does not really work for the royals  AT ALL, it asks for surname , and no where do I see Mountbatten-Windsor on C, L or A's certificates

OK, I know the royals dont like to use M-W, but the form asks for a SURNAME and I am being nit-picky


----------



## marietouchet

We asked ... they answered ... did not know that Bazaar now covers birth certs ... they have really expanded their focus from fashion alone 

Duchess Meghan Didn't Change Her Name on Archie's Birth Certificate - Harper's Bazaar










						Duchess Meghan Didn't Change Her Name on Archie's Birth Certificate — Harper's Bazaar
					

A spokesperson for the duchess calls out the reports as "clickbait."




					apple.news


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I used to like H but now they both just seem so smug to me


*THIS .. 100% +++++*   I honestly cannot stand either of them, yet .. I'm looking at this thread every day (okay - blaming it on the pandemic)!!


----------



## CeeJay

Suncatcher said:


> I just read that the Sunday Times reported that Queen will be hosting the US President and other world leaders along with Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge in a “soft power” reception before the G7 summit.  MM reading this can’t feel good to be excluded from such an important event - this is as powerful as powerful events go.  MM can stick to shilling oat milk latte.


Makes perfect sense .. since *THEY* stepped down from being "*Senior Royals*", then no invite should be forthcoming!  Besides, I really doubt that she will *EVER* step on UK soil again .. *SHE* has really burned a LOT of bridges!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> We asked ... they answered ... did not know that Bazaar now covers birth certs ... they have really expanded their focus from fashion alone
> 
> Duchess Meghan Didn't Change Her Name on Archie's Birth Certificate - Harper's Bazaar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan Didn't Change Her Name on Archie's Birth Certificate — Harper's Bazaar
> 
> 
> A spokesperson for the duchess calls out the reports as "clickbait."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



The certificate was, in fact, changed.  It all happened in June, 2019. Then, 6-7 months later, they left the UK.  Pfffft.

_"The change of name on public documents in 2019 was dictated by The Palace, as confirmed by documents from senior Palace officials," a spokesperson for Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex explained in a statement to BAZAAR.com. "This was not requested by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex nor by The Duke of Sussex."

ETA:  wonder if William threw a fit about the original document - it does look like H&M copied W&K’s kids’ certificates.  
LOL, how silly this is._


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The stans are stirring up drama over on the Kensington Royal account. William postet a message about fighting racism in sports, and of course the sugars are there crying how he never spoke up when his sister-in-law and his nephew were victims of the most horrible racial abuse.
> 
> Maybe I missed something, but I don't think Archie has been much of a target besides this one looney radio moderator who swiftly felt consequences, and most backlash Meghan experienced was not "racial abuse" but barely criticism of her sh*tty attitude and actions. Of course, for some people it's abuse the Queen didn't hand over her crown.
> 
> I still maintain that the abuse Kate and her family suffered as well as her being haunted by the media to the point they were clogging the street in front of her workplace makes Meghan's experience pale in comparison. She's just not the type to whine and complain in public but handles adversity a bit more gracefully.


I saw this as well. Fans, MM or PR-agency are playing the race/victim card again! It's her personality that is disliked, not her appearance. 


The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spoke out in support of football star Marcus Rashford MBE, after the Manchester United player was subject to racial abuse online. But Meghan Markle fans have questioned the couple's motives, as they claimed Kate and William did not call out racism when the Duchess of Sussex was the target.

Fans or MM?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The certificate was, in fact, changed.  It all happened in June, 2019. Then, 6-7 months later, they left the UK.  Pfffft.
> 
> _"The change of name on public documents in 2019 was dictated by The Palace, as confirmed by documents from senior Palace officials," a spokesperson for Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex explained in a statement to BAZAAR.com. "This was not requested by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex nor by The Duke of Sussex."
> 
> ETA:  wonder if William threw a fit about the original document - it does look like H&M copied W&K’s kids’ certificates.
> LOL, how silly this is._


This is just one more story to keep MM on the news. It is the same with H's trip to the UK. One day the duchess goes, the next doesn't... The PR-agency seems to be very resourceful, but it is not easy to come up with positive stories about MM&H every single day.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hmm, she didn’t like the press on this one.








						Meghan Markle says Palace is behind decision to change Archie’s birth certificate
					

Meghan Markle is setting the record straight in regard to changes made to son Archie’s birth certificate. In a statement Sunday to Page Six, a spokesperson for the Duchess of Sussex, 39, said…




					pagesix.com


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is just one more story to keep MM on the news. It is the same with H's trip to the UK. One day the duchess goes, the next doesn't... The PR-agency seems to be very resourceful, but it is not easy to come up with positive stories about MM&H every single day.


Note how the erratum for the news story appeared during the weekend, their pr team works overtime !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This may explain their need to use the victim card, public sympathy to improve image. I wonder if they are working on a new article for the NYT.   



The Duke and Duchess of Sussex left the UK to seek financial freedom away from the Royal Family last year. They have rarely spoken about their transition as they built a new life with their son Archie in California. Media reports from sources and friends of the couple have given a glimpse into their luxurious new life, including the biography Finding Freedom which involved interviews with people close to the couple. But royal expert Daniela Elser said the couple may not build a positive new image for themselves in the US if their sources talk too much about their extravagant life during the ongoing covid pandemic.

She wrote in the New Zealand Herald: "This week the UK passed the grim and horrifying milestone of more than 100,000 lives lost to the pandemic while in the US, 425,000 of people have been killed by the virus. "Meanwhile, unemployment and food scarcity have skyrocketed.
"Against this backdrop, their complaints of having to move between various mansions, three of which are in the $20 million price range, hardly qualifies as a hardship worthy of an outpouring of sympathy, especially when the concerned party has a spiffy, luxurious country house of their own back in Windsor.
"Just because they wanted out as frontline members of the royal family didn't mean they had to beetle off to North America."

"A friend of the Duchess said: "It's just been a lot.
"Their nanny moved back to the UK when they moved to LA because of the pandemic and restrictions left them feeling quite alone.
"Each move made them feel more displaced."

Ms Elser said this probably did not gain public sympathy as most do not have the luxury of facing challenges with the pandemic while living in a mansion with nannies. She said: "Oy vey. Feel that? That was the collective sympathy which readers of the piece might have felt for the royal couple evaporating.
"Let me pause here and stress the fact that it is not Harry and Meghan themselves saying this and therefore we must take these quotes with a Polish salt mine worth of the stuff.

"But, that does not change the fact that these quotes do not help the Sussex cause or image a jot.

Image & Foundation


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I saw this as well. Fans, MM or PR-agency are playing the race/victim card again! It's her personality that is disliked, not her appearance.
> View attachment 4976009
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge spoke out in support of football star Marcus Rashford MBE, after the Manchester United player was subject to racial abuse online. But Meghan Markle fans have questioned the couple's motives, as they claimed Kate and William did not call out racism when the Duchess of Sussex was the target.
> 
> Fans or MM?



Well, well, well. This presumes that Ms. Meghan Markle wouldn't have faced so much criticism had she been 100% white. So......complaining about "not living, only existing" and "not many people have asked me if I'm OK" (in Africa), pleading ignorance of the British Commonwealth after all member flowers were embroidered into her wedding veil (and after she majored in Int'l Relations at NWU), begging for a perpetual pity party everywhere she goes, splitting off from the RF as though Kate or Camilla never took a multi-year beating from the press, ill-tailored clothes by the dozens, exploiting dead soldiers in cemetery photoshoots---and that's just for starters--- would have just been totally overlooked had she been 100% white?  Really?  Aaaaaahh, *NOPE. *How many decks of Victim Cards does Meghan get to play? She is a kick in the face to those who do face racism. It was Meghan who wanted to split from the RF, not the other way around--after getting her 50 million wedding, a home on the Windsor grounds, private jet travel, bla bla bla--then lands in the U.S., gets 180MM+ from Netflix/Spotify, a 14 million mansion and STILL complains??? And believes she's an example for empowering women???  She is a walking, whining JOKE.


----------



## needlv

I don’t understand the reasoning behind the birth certificate stories.  There were rumours of a surrogate being used and/or hiding the real birth  date - so why cause controversy and get people gossiping about the birth of Archie again?   It’s not flattering to either MM or H...


----------



## Grande Latte

CeeJay said:


> Makes perfect sense .. since *THEY* stepped down from being "*Senior Royals*", then no invite should be forthcoming!  Besides, I really doubt that she will *EVER* step on UK soil again .. *SHE* has really burned a LOT of bridges!



Totally agree. What were they expecting?


----------



## marietouchet

Excellent point, why bring up the name nonsense now ?  Someone has an agenda...  someone has really thrown down the gauntlet, and Omid's reply was not without rancor 

Omid came to the rescue yesterday, same words as in the Bazaar article, the terms eg clickbait come directly from the source. So, the text in lack is not his.

Note how he chose the appellation Duchess Meghan which is not quite correct for a royal, and Omid would know that, he too chose language that would annoy Buck House, he knew better, he is fanning the flames


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, Meghan’s “spokesperson” seems bitter.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> How many decks of Victim Cards does Meghan get to play?


This political correctness thing is so complicated  .... as an example that has been in the recent headlines, and is not gossip, but national news

Last week, SF decided to remove Washington's name from their EMPTY schools.  No comment.
I woke yesterday to find out February  is Black History Month , OK  GOOD
Today I woke to a notification that Presidents Day is coming (during BHM) - it used to be called Washington's birthday

Can I celebrate Valentine's Day?  I really like that pagan holiday !

PS I was thinking Cupid/itty bitty Greco Roman god when I said pagan, I should have noticed the holiday name references St Valentine a Christian saint, So, probably Feb 14 is no longer OK ...  I shall go eat a bag of Valentines conversation  hearts, go into food coma, as penance for my lack of sensitivity

PPS new notification , tomorrow is GROUND HOG  day OH DEAR (True story) PETA has complained that the use of animal types eg hog is demeaning to the the pigs (similarly use of the term chicken to refer to a coward , one should say coward  etc etc). Is the term wood chuck OK ?


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, Meghan’s “spokesperson” seems bitter.


I was shocked at the language in press release, deliberately inflammatory, gloves are now off


----------



## chicinthecity777

needlv said:


> I don’t understand the reasoning behind the birth certificate stories.  There were rumours of a surrogate being used and/or hiding the real birth  date - so why cause controversy and get people gossiping about the birth of Archie again?   It’s not flattering to either MM or H...


Rumours are rife on Twatter that Achie was born via a surrogate. And there is some ancient rules within the British Monarchy that if the child has not passed by the wife's body then he cannot ever be given a royal title, be called a Prince or be in line for the throne. I don't know how reliable are these rumours.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Excellent point, why bring up the name nonsense now ?  Someone has an agenda...  someone has really thrown down the gauntlet, and Omid's reply was not without rancor
> 
> Omid came to the rescue yesterday, same words as in the Bazaar article, the terms eg clickbait come directly from the source. So, the text in lack is not his.
> 
> Note how he chose the appellation Duchess Meghan which is not quite correct for a royal, and Omid would know that, he too chose language that would annoy Buck House, he knew better, he is fanning the flames
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4976403



Why would they order that, though? The whole thing does not make sense from any angle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Rumours are rife on Twatter that Achie was born via a surrogate.



Yeah, I don't know. I cannot explain the weird belly incidents (hugely pregnant one day, barely visible the other, or that the bump seemed to have vanished for a night out in NYC), but we have all seen how puffy her face was after giving birth. I just don't know how you believably could fake postpartum swelling or who would even be meticulous enough to think about that.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they order that, though? The whole thing does not make sense from any angle.


My guess, things have escalated and they are not thinking clearly, it is personal now ... and language has gotten rude

I think there is a lot going on behind the scenes that has them rattled - the court case, press seems evenly divided on trip to the UK this summer - it is a snub to the Queen if they dont go, but will the UK welcome them? They may not have received an invite for the summer reception with US president ,  rumors that Netlfix and Spotify are not going well etc etc 

Has anything gone their way recently?


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Rumours are rife on Twatter that Achie was born via a surrogate. And there is some ancient rules within the British Monarchy that if the child has not passed by the wife's body then he cannot ever be given a royal title, be called a Prince or be in line for the throne. I don't know how reliable are these rumours.


That is the story that some would claim is discrimination against A


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry to be unclear, I meant why would Buckingham Palace order that her name be removed when we know from Kate's example that no, this is not the way it's normally done. I can't think of a sensible reason right now.


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> Rumours are rife on Twatter that Achie was born via a surrogate. And there is some ancient rules within the British Monarchy that if the child has not passed by the wife's body then he cannot ever be given a royal title, be called a Prince or be in line for the throne. I don't know how reliable are these rumours.



Meghan *isn't a good enough actress* to have pretended to be pregnant. All that belly cradling, the face bloat, the weight that stayed on after Archie, no way was there a surrogate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> This political correctness thing is so complicated  .... as an example that has been in the recent headlines, and is not gossip, but national news
> 
> Last week, SF decided to remove Washington's name from their EMPTY schools.  No comment.
> I woke yesterday to find out February  is Black History Month , OK  GOOD
> Today I woke to a notification that Presidents Day is coming (during BHM) - it used to be called Washington's birthday
> 
> Can I celebrate Valentine's Day?  I really that pagan holiday !
> 
> PS I was thinking Cupid/itty bitty Greco Roman god when I said pagan, I should have noticed the holiday name references St Valentine a Christian saint, So, probably Feb 14 is history too...  I shall go eat a bag of Valentines conversation  hearts, go into food coma, as penance for my lack of sensitivity



I think the real reason behind most of the BS political "correctness" is to fulfill an ultimate goal of justifying revisionist history. Instead of confronting history dead on--warts and all--it has to be candy coated to placate the Woke Warriors. It's easier to brainwash young kids by starting out with George Washington=Horrible Person instead of explaining/teaching the horrors of slavery and how it came to be in the U.S. and ramifications of present day turmoil. Surely tearing apart Washington, Lincoln etc will heal everything. 
My current favorite "political correctness" BS is the removal of certain people (and not just who you think) from Twitter, etc when ISIS can still recruit online.  The world is quite eff'd up, and chaos is truly encouraged, promoted and applauded.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I don’t understand the reasoning behind the birth certificate stories.  There were rumours of a surrogate being used and/or hiding the real birth  date - so why cause controversy and get people gossiping about the birth of Archie again?   It’s not flattering to either MM or H...


Murky Meg is providing an explanation, which includes MM's obsession with princess Diana.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know. I cannot explain the weird belly incidents (hugely pregnant one day, barely visible the other, or that the bump seemed to have vanished for a night out in NYC), but we have all seen how puffy her face was after giving birth. I just don't know how you believably could fake postpartum swelling or who would even be meticulous enough to think about that.


I have no opinion on the surrogate story, apart that it sounds very awkward. However, women that want to breastfeed without giving birth often take lactation hormones, which can cause face swelling, gaining weight ...


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry to be unclear, I meant why would Buckingham Palace order that her name be removed when we know from Kate's example that no, this is not the way it's normally done. I can't think of a sensible reason right now.


The order to modify the birth certificate likely came from the Buckingham Palace to fulfill MM&H's request. It goes well with MM's apparent obsession with Diana.


----------



## rose60610

When all else fails--rehab your loser image by re-hashing past events and remind everyone that "THAT'S HOW PRINCESS DIANA DID IT", and by the way, PTSD only set in when there was a buck to be made by forcing those tears in front of paying audiences.


----------



## lulilu

rose60610 said:


> Meghan *isn't a good enough actress* to have pretended to be pregnant. All that belly cradling, the face bloat, the weight that stayed on after Archie, no way was there a surrogate.



I often wondered if she wore a fake belly or padding to make herself look more pregnant than she was.  Early first pregnancies don't usually result in a big belly very early on.  But we've seen photos of her with various sized bellies.  She's an actress.  She knows about prosthetics?  Maybe she was just dying for the attention a big belly causes?

One reason I wondered was the infamous pose/outfit she wore to Eugenie (Bea?)'s wedding.  She had only the top button of a fairly loose coat buttoned and seemed to stick out her belly when she was what, two months pregnant at most?


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> I think the real reason behind most of the BS political "correctness" is to fulfill an ultimate goal of justifying revisionist history. Instead of confronting history dead on--warts and all--it has to be candy coated to placate the Woke Warriors. It's easier to brainwash young kids by starting out with George Washington=Horrible Person instead of explaining/teaching the horrors of slavery and how it came to be in the U.S. and ramifications of present day turmoil. Surely tearing apart Washington, Lincoln etc will heal everything.
> My current favorite "political correctness" BS is the removal of certain people (and not just who you think) from Twitter, etc when ISIS can still recruit online.  The world is quite eff'd up, and chaos is truly encouraged, promoted and applauded.


ITA!  Those who refuse to learn history are doomed to repeat it.  Sweeping things under the rug is not the way to go.  There are plenty of lessons to be learned.  I find it ridiculous to go back in time and hold people from centuries ago accountable for today's standards.  I wonder what people in the future would think of the world right now?  Probably that we are a bunch of F'ing idiots.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Murky Meg is providing an explanation, which *includes MM's obsession with princess Diana.*



Oh, but I thought she didn't know anything about the BRF before meeting Harry, and even asked her BFF who set up the date, "Is he a good person?"


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I often wondered if she wore a fake belly or padding to make herself look more pregnant than she was.  Early first pregnancies don't usually result in a big belly very early on.  But we've seen photos of her with various sized bellies.  She's an actress.  She knows about prosthetics?  Maybe she was just dying for the attention a big belly causes?
> 
> One reason I wondered was the infamous pose/outfit she wore to Eugenie (Bea?)'s wedding.  She had only the top button of a fairly loose coat buttoned and seemed to stick out her belly when she was what, two months pregnant at most?


My thoughts too.  As an actress, I'm sure she's come across plenty of make up artists that can make faces look puffier.  Honestly, I don't care if she had a surrogate or not.  I'd rather not think about whether something other than BS and urine in the woods came out of her.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> PPS new notification tomorrow is GROUND HOG  day OH DEAR (True story) PETA has complained that the use of animal types eg hog is demeaning to the the pigs (similarly use of the term chicken to refer to a coward , one should say coward  etc etc). *Is the term wood chuck OK ?*



They prefer the term weather squirrel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> This political correctness thing is so complicated  .... as an example that has been in the recent headlines, and is not gossip, but national news
> 
> Last week, SF decided to remove Washington's name from their EMPTY schools.  No comment.
> I woke yesterday to find out February  is Black History Month , OK  GOOD
> Today I woke to a notification that Presidents Day is coming (during BHM) - it used to be called Washington's birthday
> 
> Can I celebrate Valentine's Day?  I really that pagan holiday !
> 
> PS I was thinking Cupid/itty bitty Greco Roman god when I said pagan, I should have noticed the holiday name references St Valentine a Christian saint, So, probably Feb 14 is no longer OK ...  I shall go eat a bag of Valentines conversation  hearts, go into food coma, as penance for my lack of sensitivity
> 
> PPS new notification tomorrow is GROUND HOG  day OH DEAR (True story) PETA has complained that the use of animal types eg hog is demeaning to the the pigs (similarly use of the term chicken to refer to a coward , one should say coward  etc etc). Is the term wood chuck OK ?



Google Lupercalia.  All your questions will be answered, not cancelled


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry accepts damages from Mail publishers over 'baseless' article*

*The Duke of Sussex has accepted an apology and "substantial damages" from the publishers of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online over claims he "turned his back" on the Royal Marines.*

Two articles alleged Prince Harry had not been in touch with the Marines after stepping down as a senior royal.

In a statement to the High Court, a lawyer for Harry called the allegation "baseless, false and defamatory".

He will donate the damages to the Invictus Games Foundation, she said.

Harry sued Associated Newspapers for libel over two "almost identical" articles published in the newspaper and online last October.

They claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email since his last appearance as an honorary Marine" in March.

The prince's lawyer told the court that Harry had in fact made "repeated and concerted efforts" to support the Royal Marines and other parts of the armed services - even though he had been forced to step back from his ceremonial roles.

*'Personal attack'*
In a short statement at the remote hearing on Monday, the duke's lawyer Jenny Afia said Associated Newspapers had accepted the allegations were false, "albeit after considerable damage was already done".

She said Harry was "proud to have served in the British armed forces for 10 years in Her Majesty's name" and "has maintained active links with those forces ever since and will continue to do so in the future".

"The duke's commitment to the men and women who have put their lives on the line, to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country, and to military families, is steadfast and unquestionable," said Ms Afia.

"For this reason, the baseless, false and defamatory stories published in the Mail on Sunday and on the website Mail Online constituted not only a personal attack upon the Duke's character but also wrongly brought into question his service to this country."
Ms Afia added that Harry was donating his damages to the Invictus Games Foundation "so he could feel something good had come out of the situation".

*Mail apology*
On 27 December, the Mail On Sunday printed an apology, accepting the duke had been in touch with the Royal Marines, and said it had made a donation to the Invictus Games Foundation, which runs the competition for wounded, injured or sick servicemen and women set up by Harry in 2014.

But Ms Afia criticised the apology, saying it "used wording which significantly underplayed the seriousness of the accusations made against him". She also said the Mail on Sunday offered to directly donate the duke's damages, but Harry wanted to do it himself.

In a separate statement after the hearing, a spokesman for Harry said his commitment to the military community was "unquestionable".

Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, formally stepped down as senior members of the Royal Family at the end of March last year.

Prince Harry has long had an uneasy relationship with the media, having grown up aware of the impact the intense media interest had on the life of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.

In 2016, the prince accused the media of subjecting Meghan - then his girlfriend - to a "wave of abuse and harassment".
The couple have filed several lawsuits against newspapers, and last year told the UK's tabloid press they were ending all co-operation with them.

This lawsuit is separate to the case brought by Meghan against the publishers of the Mail Online and Mail on Sunday over articles that reproduced parts of a private handwritten letter to her father. That case is still ongoing.









						Prince Harry accepts damages from Mail publishers over 'baseless' article
					

Two articles claiming he snubbed the Royal Marines were "false and defamatory", the duke's lawyer says.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> When all else fails--*rehab your loser image by re-hashing past events and remind everyone that "THAT'S HOW PRINCESS DIANA DID IT"*, and by the way, PTSD only set in when there was a buck to be made by forcing those tears in front of paying audiences.



*Well said!*
It’s stuff like this that makes them more un-likeable than ever. Anything to keep their names in the news.
All of this birth-stuff has been reported on, commented on, video-ed on, ad nauseam. Why now?  Guessing they’ve lost their court cases.    Her court case may be lost.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry accepts damages from Mail publishers over 'baseless' article*
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex has accepted an apology and "substantial damages" from the publishers of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online over claims he "turned his back" on the Royal Marines.*
> 
> Two articles alleged Prince Harry had not been in touch with the Marines after stepping down as a senior royal.
> 
> In a statement to the High Court, a lawyer for Harry called the allegation "baseless, false and defamatory".
> 
> He will donate the damages to the Invictus Games Foundation, she said.
> 
> Harry sued Associated Newspapers for libel over two "almost identical" articles published in the newspaper and online last October.
> 
> They claimed he had "not been in touch by phone, letter nor email since his last appearance as an honorary Marine" in March.
> 
> The prince's lawyer told the court that Harry had in fact made "repeated and concerted efforts" to support the Royal Marines and other parts of the armed services - even though he had been forced to step back from his ceremonial roles.
> 
> *'Personal attack'*
> In a short statement at the remote hearing on Monday, the duke's lawyer Jenny Afia said Associated Newspapers had accepted the allegations were false, "albeit after considerable damage was already done".
> 
> She said Harry was "proud to have served in the British armed forces for 10 years in Her Majesty's name" and "has maintained active links with those forces ever since and will continue to do so in the future".
> 
> "The duke's commitment to the men and women who have put their lives on the line, to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country, and to military families, is steadfast and unquestionable," said Ms Afia.
> 
> "For this reason, the baseless, false and defamatory stories published in the Mail on Sunday and on the website Mail Online constituted not only a personal attack upon the Duke's character but also wrongly brought into question his service to this country."
> Ms Afia added that Harry was donating his damages to the Invictus Games Foundation "so he could feel something good had come out of the situation".
> 
> *Mail apology*
> On 27 December, the Mail On Sunday printed an apology, accepting the duke had been in touch with the Royal Marines, and said it had made a donation to the Invictus Games Foundation, which runs the competition for wounded, injured or sick servicemen and women set up by Harry in 2014.
> 
> But Ms Afia criticised the apology, saying it "used wording which significantly underplayed the seriousness of the accusations made against him". She also said the Mail on Sunday offered to directly donate the duke's damages, but Harry wanted to do it himself.
> 
> In a separate statement after the hearing, a spokesman for Harry said his commitment to the military community was "unquestionable".
> 
> Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, formally stepped down as senior members of the Royal Family at the end of March last year.
> 
> Prince Harry has long had an uneasy relationship with the media, having grown up aware of the impact the intense media interest had on the life of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> In 2016, the prince accused the media of subjecting Meghan - then his girlfriend - to a "wave of abuse and harassment".
> The couple have filed several lawsuits against newspapers, and last year told the UK's tabloid press they were ending all co-operation with them.
> 
> This lawsuit is separate to the case brought by Meghan against the publishers of the Mail Online and Mail on Sunday over articles that reproduced parts of a private handwritten letter to her father. That case is still ongoing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accepts damages from Mail publishers over 'baseless' article
> 
> 
> Two articles claiming he snubbed the Royal Marines were "false and defamatory", the duke's lawyer says.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


what?  apology wasn't good enough and he wants to make the donation himself rather than having it made on his behalf?  why?  does he want to keep some of the money?
or is he just never satisfied?  pouty little man boy


----------



## chicinthecity777

Oops!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Oops!



ha....this is what they call a substantial donation? while living in their mansion


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> ha....this is what they call a substantial donation? while living in their mansion


No this is for the legal fees, not the compensation.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> No this is for the legal fees, not the compensation.


oh ok
so what is the substantial donation?


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Oops!



First thing that came up on Google ...

"All punitive *damages* are *taxable* whether received in relation to a physical or non-physical injury or sickness. ..."

So he gets money and turns over to Invictus, he looks good being able to take credit for a donation to Invictus at the cost of having to pay taxes on the damages - not sure if 2500 is the substantial damages amount.. reimbursement for lawyer fees ? No, this would not cover the $400-$1000/hr lawyers

The taxes would exceed the amount he might be able to deduct for the donation ... in case you were wondering ... it costs him out of pocket for the optics of the deal

And of course, he is out lawyer and PR fees , and this has taken up his time ... ooooh and accountant fees to pay the taxes, and get the deduction


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> First thing that came up on Google ...
> 
> "All punitive *damages* are *taxable* whether received in relation to a physical or non-physical injury or sickness. ..."
> 
> S he gets money and turns over to Invictus, he looks good being able to take credit for the donation to Invictus at the cost of having to pay taxes on the damages
> 
> The taxes would exceed the amount he might be able to deduct for the donation ... in case you were wondering ... it costs him out of pocket for the optics of the deal
> 
> And of course, he is out lawyer and PR fees , and this has taken up his time ...


I would think if they donated on his behalf he'd still be getting credit?


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> oh ok
> so what is the substantial donation?


I don't think it was announced.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> PPS new notification tomorrow is GROUND HOG day OH DEAR (True story) PETA has complained that the use of animal types eg hog is demeaning to the the pigs (similarly use of the term chicken to refer to a coward , one should say coward etc etc). Is the term wood chuck OK ?



Not surprising, ugh. Last I knew animals didn't speak English and typically people don't engage pigs/hogs in conversation. A "hog" is a pig that weighs more than 120 pounds, so the definition has a purpose. Did the dodo bird become extinct due to people making fun of it name? And now we can't describe somebody as a chicken? I know people who are snakes or eat like horses.  Are "Playboy Bunnies" going to be stripped from the history books--sorry not sorry. Are cars and sports teams going to be prevented from using animals as brands--Mustang, Viper, Shelby Cobra, Bronco, Jaguars, Eagles, Cubs, Bears, Seahawks, etc? Are these demands for all countries or just the U.S. where the Chronically-Offended-Thought-Police have gained some ground? I'd like to think we're the only idiots this applies to and other countries still have the balls to tell the Chronically-Offended-Thought-Police to go to Hell. Now, back to our thread topic of our favorite two dumb-as-rocks celebrities, my apologies to rocks.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know. I cannot explain the weird belly incidents (hugely pregnant one day, barely visible the other, or that the bump seemed to have vanished for a night out in NYC), but we have all seen how puffy her face was after giving birth.* I just don't know how you believably could fake postpartum swelling or who would even be meticulous enough to think about that.*


It could be from plastic surgery since she had the time while on maternity leave. Just imagine MM talking to her PS surgeon, "Gimme that special glow all the commoner mothers get after their baby is born."


----------



## rose60610

lulilu said:


> I often wondered if she wore a fake belly or padding to make herself look more pregnant than she was.  Early first pregnancies don't usually result in a big belly very early on.  But we've seen photos of her with various sized bellies.  She's an actress.  She knows about prosthetics?  Maybe she was just dying for the attention a big belly causes?
> 
> One reason I wondered was the infamous pose/outfit she wore to Eugenie (Bea?)'s wedding.  She had only the top button of a fairly loose coat buttoned and seemed to stick out her belly when she was what, two months pregnant at most?



So true. I remember that outfit at the wedding. Ridiculous. It's like it was either that or a wear a big white dress to somebody's else's wedding--anything to steal attention.


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


> I often wondered if she wore a fake belly or padding to make herself look more pregnant than she was.  Early first pregnancies don't usually result in a big belly very early on.  But we've seen photos of her with various sized bellies.  She's an actress.  She knows about prosthetics?  Maybe she was just dying for the attention a big belly causes?
> 
> One reason I wondered was the infamous pose/outfit she wore to Eugenie (Bea?)'s wedding.  She had only the top button of a fairly loose coat buttoned and seemed to stick out her belly when she was what, two months pregnant at most?



I think she and Harry deliberately set out to upstage the wedding by announcing the pregnancy as they did, and by padding her belly it made it appear they "had" to do it then and not wait. Rubbish, of course, but just one of many examples of their duplicity and hypocrisy. 

One other birth article related comment, this posted by a British citizen on the Daily Mail, gives MM a title I had not seen before "duchess of disneyland" : "_She was no, is not and never will be Royal. She is just Chancer Meghan, duchess of disneyland." _

Based on the increasing reactions to them, maybe there is a justifiable fear they might hear some hearty boos from crowds if they both return to Britain next summer. If just Harry attends they can make certain his public outings keep him surrounded by Royal Family as protection from verbal assault. Or they can send him off to keep Andrew the Perv company in a "time out" room. Will be interesting to see what unfolds, if they are desperate for good press an Archie sighting as part of his extended family will have cameras clicking. Very  risky to their family relationships for the disruption and diversion of focus in the celebrations, but with these two, self interest may be most important. It would, of course, be touted as an opportunity for the very aged great grandparents to see Archie and how "unselfish" of them to all make the long trip.....on a commercial airliner??????


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> One reason I wondered was the infamous pose/outfit she wore to Eugenie (Bea?)'s wedding.  She had only the top button of a fairly loose coat buttoned and seemed to stick out her belly when she was what, two months pregnant at most?



But if she hadn't dressed as suspiciously as possible, people would have been focussed on the bride and not on her!

Seriously, at this point my disdain for her wasn't quite as strong as it is today, but I saw the footage and thought "She's trying to get people to wonder if she's pregnant".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> _ She is just Chancer Meghan, duchess of disneyland._



Haha I like that.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> First thing that came up on Google ...
> 
> "All punitive *damages* are *taxable* whether received in relation to a physical or non-physical injury or sickness. ..."
> 
> So he gets money and turns over to Invictus, he looks good being able to take credit for a donation to Invictus at the cost of having to pay taxes on the damages - not sure if 2500 is the substantial damages amount.. reimbursement for lawyer fees ? No, this would not cover the $400-$1000/hr lawyers
> 
> The taxes would exceed the amount he might be able to deduct for the donation ... in case you were wondering ... it costs him out of pocket for the optics of the deal
> 
> And of course, he is out lawyer and PR fees , and this has taken up his time ... ooooh and accountant fees to pay the taxes, and get the deduction



Calculated the amount on a currency converter and 2500 BPS is currently equivalent to $3,418. 52.  Nice slap down from the Judge as he would obviously know the amount would not begin to cover expenses in either Pounds or Dollars. The lack of deference to the petulant child, no-longer-working-royal continues.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But if she hadn't dressed as suspiciously as possible, people would have been focussed on the bride and not on her!
> 
> Seriously, at this point my disdain for her wasn't quite as strong as it is today, but I saw the footage and thought "She's trying to get people to wonder if she's pregnant".


A corset would have been good that day ... 

That day, Beatrice blabbed that she wearing one - so she looked sleeker while Mum Sarah omitted one and she complained having to suck her tummy in


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know. I cannot explain the weird belly incidents (hugely pregnant one day, barely visible the other, or that the bump seemed to have vanished for a night out in NYC), but we have all seen how puffy her face was after giving birth. I just don't know how you believably could fake postpartum swelling or who would even be meticulous enough to think about that.


Botox or work on her face? MM is so smart she thinks ahead.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry accepts damages from Mail publishers over 'baseless' article
					

Two articles claiming he snubbed the Royal Marines were "false and defamatory", the duke's lawyer says.



					www.bbc.com
				



So, the apology isn’t good enough.  More smarmy behavior from the petulant party prince.

ETA:  Since his commitment is not transparent for all to see and understand, maybe just maybe, he should step aside. For the good of the organization, right?


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Meghan *isn't a good enough actress* to have pretended to be pregnant. All that belly cradling, the face bloat, the weight that stayed on after Archie, no way was there a surrogate.


Funny, I thought she wasn't a good enough actress to successfully get away with pretending to be pregnant which is why she kept grabbing her moon bump and overdoing the whole thing.  I didn't buy into it!

Also, her face never had that glowing fullness that's so common with pregnant women. No big boobs filling with milk, either. Not until after with induced lactation, if you believe she did that.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Funny, I thought she wasn't a good enough actress to successfully get away with pretending to be pregnant which is why she kept grabbing her moon bump and overdoing the whole thing.  I didn't buy into it!
> 
> Also, her face never had that glowing fullness that's so common with pregnant women. No big boobs filling with milk, either. Not until after with induced lactation, if you believe she did that.



Ha ha! I never saw anyone cradle their bump like she did either and she definitely overdid it. Who knows what she wanted her makeup people and stylists to do other than make her clothes fit terribly. She IS a weird narcissist and demands pity wherever she goes. I put nothing past her, including lying to anybody then screaming "I'm a victim!" when called on it. Her acting job of gazing lovingly at Harry is nauseating. She's gazing at the wealth/fame/prestige his family represents and her stupendous luck at reeling in a royal idiot.


----------



## bag-mania

Here we go. Pointing fingers about something that cannot possibly matter to anyone.

*Meghan Markle ‘baffled’ Palace with name-change remarks*
Meghan Markle left Buckingham Palace officials “baffled” by her statement saying they forced her to change her name on baby Archie’s birth certificate, Page Six is told.

Shortly after her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, Markle — who was born Rachel Meghan Markle — had her name officially changed to Meghan, HRH The Duchess of Sussex, we have confirmed.

This name is now believed to be on her passport and all official documents, as officially required by the Garter King of Arms and Senior Herald in England.

The Queen was the one to gift the Sussexes their titles upon their marriage.

But following Archie’s birth at London’s private Portland Hospital on May 6, 2019, his mom’s name was registered as “Rachel Meghan, Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex.” This was later amended to “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex” that June.

After the story hit the headlines in recent days, Sussex reps released a statement Sunday saying, “The change of name on public documents in 2019 was dictated by The Palace, as confirmed by documents from senior Palace officials. This was not requested by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex nor by The Duke of Sussex.”

It claimed the story was an attempt to whip up a “calculated family ‘snub,'” adding, “There’s a lot going on in the world; let’s focus on that rather than creating clickbait.”

However, a well-placed source told us, “This is totally baffling. The Palace did not dictate anything, this amendment was made by staff within their former office at Kensington Palace and higher-ups at Buckingham Palace were always kept in the loop.”

Another source confirmed the Palace had nothing to do with it, adding, “The birth certificate was changed by the former Office of The Duke and Duchess to ensure consistency in the name and title of The Duchess of Sussex with other private documents.”

The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.

The couple stepped down from their “senior” royal duties last year, and have been living on their own with Archie at a multimillion-dollar estate in Montecito, Calif.

Reps had no comment.









						Meghan Markle ‘baffled’ Palace with name-change remarks
					

Meghan Markle said the Palace forced her to change her name on baby Archie’s birth certificate.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bag-mania

“The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.”

I don’t believe for one second that Meghan‘s former staff changed the birth certificate without Harry or Meghan or both telling them to do it. Way to blame the help.


----------



## Chanbal

The drama continues... 




The birth certificate was changed within a month of Archie being born in 2019, with some insiders previously claiming the alteration was a gesture to remember Harry's mother Diana, whose preferred name was Her Royal Highness the Princess of Wales. But in a statement, a spokesman for Meghan argued the "change of name on the public documents was dictated by the Palace", adding it was "offensive" to claim the ex-actress wanted to be "nameless" on her son's birth certificate.

This row caused a furious backlash from those opposed to Meghan and Harry's move to quit senior Royal Family duties last year in order to lead a "financially independent" life.

Critics argue the couple should relinquish all their titles, and in the aftermath of their exit from the Firm, calls for them to do so began.

Graham Smith, the chief executive officer of Republic - a group advocating the replacement of the monarchy, demanded the Sussexes sever all ties to the Royal Family.
Speaking on 2020's Amazon Prime documentary Harry & Meghan: The Next Step, Mr Smith said: "If they want to live privately, then they have to renounce their titles, abandon all claims to public funding and go and do their own thing.

"Had they done that, I'd be standing here cheering them on, saying, 'Well done'.

"But they have not done that, they still want to cling on to the purse strings of the British taxpayer and they still want to have that status that we have given them."

Royal author Katie Nicholl also questioned their decision, and how it could garner major question marks over the very future of the monarchy itself.

She added: "This has opened up a Pandora's box, and there are so many more wider issues at stake.

Pandora's box


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Here we go. Pointing fingers about something that cannot possibly matter to anyone.
> 
> *Meghan Markle ‘baffled’ Palace with name-change remarks*
> Meghan Markle left Buckingham Palace officials “baffled” by her statement saying they forced her to change her name on baby Archie’s birth certificate, Page Six is told.
> 
> Shortly after her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, Markle — who was born Rachel Meghan Markle — had her name officially changed to Meghan, HRH The Duchess of Sussex, we have confirmed.
> 
> This name is now believed to be on her passport and all official documents, as officially required by the Garter King of Arms and Senior Herald in England.
> 
> The Queen was the one to gift the Sussexes their titles upon their marriage.
> 
> But following Archie’s birth at London’s private Portland Hospital on May 6, 2019, his mom’s name was registered as “Rachel Meghan, Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex.” This was later amended to “Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex” that June.
> 
> After the story hit the headlines in recent days, Sussex reps released a statement Sunday saying, “The change of name on public documents in 2019 was dictated by The Palace, as confirmed by documents from senior Palace officials. This was not requested by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex nor by The Duke of Sussex.”
> 
> It claimed the story was an attempt to whip up a “calculated family ‘snub,'” adding, “There’s a lot going on in the world; let’s focus on that rather than creating clickbait.”
> 
> However, a well-placed source told us, “This is totally baffling. The Palace did not dictate anything, this amendment was made by staff within their former office at Kensington Palace and higher-ups at Buckingham Palace were always kept in the loop.”
> 
> Another source confirmed the Palace had nothing to do with it, adding, “The birth certificate was changed by the former Office of The Duke and Duchess to ensure consistency in the name and title of The Duchess of Sussex with other private documents.”
> 
> The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.
> 
> The couple stepped down from their “senior” royal duties last year, and have been living on their own with Archie at a multimillion-dollar estate in Montecito, Calif.
> 
> Reps had no comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘baffled’ Palace with name-change remarks
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle said the Palace forced her to change her name on baby Archie’s birth certificate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


It's always someone else's fault.  

I find it funny they talk about "clickbait".  I'm starting to really think they are members here.    Probably one of the trolls that pops in now and then to gush about MM and to allege how we all don't like her simply because of her race.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> However, a well-placed source told us, “This is totally baffling. The Palace did not dictate anything, this amendment was made by staff within their former office at Kensington Palace and higher-ups at Buckingham Palace were always kept in the loop.”
> 
> Another source confirmed the Palace had nothing to do with it, adding, *“The birth certificate was changed by the former Office of The Duke and Duchess to ensure consistency in the name and title of The Duchess of Sussex with other private documents.”*
> 
> The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘baffled’ Palace with name-change remarks
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle said the Palace forced her to change her name on baby Archie’s birth certificate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



It looks like MM had her former staff from the  office at Kensington Palace working on changing her name on her "other private documents" prior to changing it on Archie's birth certificate. It is obvious that the Buckingham Palace was kept in the loop, but the name changes were directed by MM. How could she travel without the duchess title on her passport?


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> “The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.”
> 
> I don’t believe for one second that Meghan‘s former staff changed the birth certificate without Harry or Meghan or both telling them to do it. Way to blame the help.


I don't think that's even legally possible! More lies!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is such a s$it show! How can H&M be so stupid? And to add this pompous lecture by Omid.  Ick!
Fairly certain now that MM will not travel to the UK this summer and for Harry, it is looking very iffy. 
Who would want to talk to him now?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan's royal staff removed name from Archie's birth cert NOT Buckingham Palace
					

MEGHAN’S name was removed from Archie’s birth certificate by members of her own royal staff – NOT Buckingham Palace. Aides at Team Sussex rewrote the document and replaced &#…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				






It is understood the statement was issued by Harry and Meghan's LA-based PR team.

A royal source said: "It was not dictated by Buckingham Palace."

It is not suggested that Harry and Meghan have sought to mislead the public.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is such a s$it show! How can H&M be so stupid? And to add this pompous lecture by Omid.  Ick!
> Fairly certain now that MM will not travel to the UK this summer and for Harry, it is looking very iffy.
> Who would want to talk to him now?


If she goes to the UK, she might be 'convinced' to renounce her 'well earned' title, so better to stay in California.  Omid has been called MM's minister of propaganda for a reason.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan's royal staff removed name from Archie's birth cert NOT Buckingham Palace
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S name was removed from Archie’s birth certificate by members of her own royal staff – NOT Buckingham Palace. Aides at Team Sussex rewrote the document and replaced &#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4976972
> 
> It is understood the statement was issued by Harry and Meghan's LA-based PR team.
> 
> A royal source said: "It was not dictated by Buckingham Palace."
> 
> It is not suggested that Harry and Meghan have sought to mislead the public.



H requested a change to include 'prince' in addition to 'duke' on Archie's birth certificate. So duke was not enough for Just Call Me Harry! The usual hypocrisy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting compare and contrast kind of article on Harry’s non senior Royal first cousin Zara

Mike Tindall admits he 'worries about money' ahead of third child









						Mike Tindall admits he 'worries about money' ahead of third child
					

Speaking to The Times from his home on Princess Anne's Gatcombe Estate, Mike told how Zara has found this 'low-key' pregnancy 'a lot easier than normal' due to the Covid restrictions.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

Another good compare and contrast article about other famous philanthropists

Ok, full disclosure, it goes and on, in a lot of techno detail, what else do you expect from Bill Gates ? 

Definitely, a follow the science approach to philanthropy 



The year global health went local | Bill Gates









						The year global health went local
					

How to turn the lessons of this pandemic into a more equal future for all.




					www.gatesnotes.com


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan very definitely was part of this name change.  This could not have been done without her knowledge.  She had to provide documentation.  She is so caught up in a web of lies.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting title that Newsweek chose to illustrate Harry's big victory  




Prince Harry has been slammed by a judge for "unduly tendentious" criticisms of a tabloid he sued for libel—and has been ordered to pay some costs, _Newsweek_ can reveal.

maybe not such a big victory after all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> “The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.”
> 
> I don’t believe for one second that Meghan‘s former staff changed the birth certificate without Harry or Meghan or both telling them to do it. Way to blame the help.



Jup. Nobody can go ahead and change your child's birth certificate without you authorizing them. Before the stans show up asking why Harry isn't slammed: because he was too stupid to give his full name and titles to begin with, while Duchess Disney tried to make herself grander than she is, as usual.

Also I feel they need to learn to tread carefully, palace officials apparently have had it with the stiff upper lip and "Don't complain, don't explain".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Interesting compare and contrast kind of article on Harry’s non senior Royal first cousin Zara
> 
> Mike Tindall admits he 'worries about money' ahead of third child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Tindall admits he 'worries about money' ahead of third child
> 
> 
> Speaking to The Times from his home on Princess Anne's Gatcombe Estate, Mike told how Zara has found this 'low-key' pregnancy 'a lot easier than normal' due to the Covid restrictions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im



I mean, that's a bit silly too, isn't it. And I usually like the Tindalls and their no-nonsense approach.


----------



## Grande Latte

I don't know about the birth certificate edit.... Didn't know anyone can edit it. WTH?


----------



## chicinthecity777

So which is which?

And Scobie just happened to be at the back of the car Harry was driving! How else would he know so much details without H&M's co-operation?


----------



## Grande Latte

Check out this article. Date of birth, date of birth registration, and date of name change. It's all over the map. This story is too odd. I don't even want to speculate.

And while I'm not crazy about Meghan, but what mother would remove her own name from the birth certificate and just put down title? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Meghans-claim-officials-dictated-change.html


----------



## chicinthecity777

Good thread to read:


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## CarryOn2020

What a week - and it is only Tuesday:
- Harry ‘won‘ his case, but still must pay £32,500 or £35,000 in court costs, otherwise known as a Pyrrhic victory.
- Harry most likely will lose his military patronages 
- Invictus 2021 cancelled. 2022 looking ok, for now
- Seems MM’s team has messed up (misled?) on the birth cert story, making herself look worse than ever. Question is why bring this up now?  Is this H&M’s revenge for removing his patronage’s?

Richard Palmer’s Twitter [@royalreporter]  shows how the tide has turned on H&M.
@chicinthecity777 ...great minds thinking alike this am


----------



## lanasyogamama

When does MM lose her patronages?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Love the sarcasm!

*Buckingham Palace DENIES Meghan's claim that royal officials 'dictated' her name change on Archie's birth certificate - hinting details were 'lost in translation' by her US-based PR team*









						Buckingham Palace denies Meghan's claim officials dictated name change
					

'Rachel Meghan' was taken off the document to leave just 'Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Sussex' with royal protocol blamed by the LA-based couple's US PR team.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Grande Latte said:


> Check out this article. Date of birth, date of birth registration, and date of name change. It's all over the map. This story is too odd. I don't even want to speculate.
> 
> And while I'm not crazy about Meghan, but what mother would remove her own name from the birth certificate and just put down title?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Meghans-claim-officials-dictated-change.html


Great work in finding this !
Awesome chronology of the events

And ohhhh my gosh BP has formally denied the JCMH version of the name change , WOW ! They never say anything .... the earth is moving , and not in a good way , tectonic shift alert !

Prediction , no one will go to Europe this year, the real draw was Invictus, not the Diana garden opening, H would not have had family at Invictus, but the garden shindig will be full of relatives


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> So which is which?
> 
> And Scobie just happened to be at the back of the car Harry was driving! How else would he know so much details without H&M's co-operation?




As Archie was born May 6th I'll go with the 2nd narrative being the correct one. But also, two authors and a book editor couldn't keep their facts and dates straight? Poor job.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


>




Ouch.


----------



## marietouchet

Am feeling terribly sad for JCMH .. am I nuts  ????? 

This started with a family squabble , Tom and MM, and has gotten out of hand 

Sad that another family is so dysfunctional, I wish that on no one, I was hoping that time would heal

Ok, I am a sentimental old bat, a reconciliation was never in the cards but I can also hope for world peace right ?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As Archie was born May 6th I'll go with the 2nd narrative being the correct one. But also, two authors and a book editor couldn't keep their facts and dates straight? Poor job.


That's the point, right? Who checked the facts etc? Again it shows what a poor book it is!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Am feeling terribly sad for JCMH .. am I nuts  ?????



I am too, even though at times I feel he made his bed, now he needs to lie in it. But it struck me when I read the article on the Tindalls earlier where it said "Zara keeps it low during pregnancy but still tends to her horses." I have a horse myself. Harry was an avid polo player. A horse is not just a work-out tool. He really left behind everything for this woman that is as manipulative as it gets and who will discard of him the second he is of no use to her any longer. He has damaged maybe irreparably his relationships to his close friends he grew up with, his own brother, etc.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Another good compare and contrast article about other famous philanthropists
> 
> Ok, full disclosure, it goes and on, in a lot of techno detail, what else do you expect from Bill Gates ?
> 
> Definitely, a follow the science approach to philanthropy
> 
> 
> 
> The year global health went local | Bill Gates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The year global health went local
> 
> 
> How to turn the lessons of this pandemic into a more equal future for all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gatesnotes.com


real philanthropists using their own money


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am too, even though at times I feel he made his bed, now he needs to lie in it. But it struck me when I read the article on the Tindalls earlier where it said "Zara keeps it low during pregnancy but still tends to her horses." I have a horse myself. Harry was an avid polo player. A horse is not just a work-out tool. He really left behind everything for this woman that is as manipulative as it gets and who will discard of him the second he is of no use to her any longer. He has damaged maybe irreparably his relationships to his close friends he grew up with, his own brother, etc.


I could see Diana moving to NY.  Trading one cosmopolitan city for another.  Harry moving to So Cal seems more like a fish out of water.  I guess he could probably have horses on his property but where would he ride them?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Iirc, Diana tried the Hamptons, didn’t like it. She seemed like the type of person who required 100% devotion and attention  24/7.  We Americans just aren‘t _that_ interested in anyone.  Wallis and Ed found out, Sarah found out, Bea and Eug found out, Diana found out and now Harry is finding out.  H&M have dragged out the pity party for a year — and they continue to sue. Enough.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Am feeling terribly sad for JCMH .. am I nuts  ?????
> 
> This started with a family squabble , Tom and MM, and has gotten out of hand
> 
> Sad that another family is so dysfunctional, I wish that on no one, I was hoping that time would heal
> 
> Ok, I am a sentimental old bat, a reconciliation was never in the cards but I can also hope for world peace right ?



Harry has used up the sympathetic feelings I used to have for him. It has gone so far beyond the thing between Tom and Meghan. I'm convinced if it hadn't been that squabble it would have quickly been something else. The choices Harry has made shows where his loyalties lie and they are not with his family any longer. He is 100% on the Meghan train.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Why hasn't he lost it already??  He's in the US and hasn't done anything for them as far as I can tell.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In good times, I have a difficult time tolerating anyone with bad manners. With a pandemic running amuck, my tolerance is less than zero. H&M’s lawsuits, pity parties, sanctimonious & self-aggrandizing lectures are beyond bad manners. We’ve said it before - he is and continues to be a terrible reflection on the BRF.  The sooner QE removes those patronages, the better.

ETA: @purseinsanity My guess is QE wanted to stay true to her word. She gave them 1 year.  Time’s up.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> So which is which?
> 
> And Scobie just happened to be at the back of the car Harry was driving! How else would he know so much details without H&M's co-operation?



This is so laughable.  If Omid was not actually given all the facts and cooperation, as MM and JCMH claim, he certainly has a very vivid imagination!  He should start writing romance novels, with all the superfluous adjectives her gives.  He could use JCMH and MM as his cover models.  I'm picturing Harry with flowing red hair with his balding top, like a weird mullet.    Jamie Fraser he is not.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc, Diana tried the Hamptons, didn’t like it. She seemed like the type of person who required 100% devotion and attention  24/7.  We Americans just aren‘t _that_ interested in anyone.  Wallis and Ed found out, Sarah found out, Bea and Eug found out, Diana found out and now Harry is finding out.  H&M have dragged out the pity party for a year — and they continue to sue. Enough.


True.  We have very short attention spans


----------



## Chanbal

Grande Latte said:


> Check out this article. Date of birth, date of birth registration, and date of name change. It's all over the map. This story is too odd. I don't even want to speculate.
> 
> And while I'm not crazy about Meghan, but what mother would remove her own name from the birth certificate and just put down title?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-Meghans-claim-officials-dictated-change.html


My 2 cents: 
Per MM's request, staff updated her name in all documents to 'Meghan, HRH the Duchess of Sussex', and someone made an error on Archie's birth certificate and instead of removing only 'Racheal' from it, they removed 'Racheal Meghan'. This type of mistakes happen. 

Buckingham had nothing to do with name changes, and MM&H know it, but they were counting with the palace usual silence.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am too, even though at times I feel he made his bed, now he needs to lie in it. But it struck me when I read the article on the Tindalls earlier where it said "Zara keeps it low during pregnancy but still tends to her horses." I have a horse myself. Harry was an avid polo player. A horse is not just a work-out tool. He really left behind everything for this woman that is as manipulative as it gets and who will discard of him the second he is of no use to her any longer. He has damaged maybe irreparably his relationships to his close friends he grew up with, his own brother, etc.


Well, it's not like MM held a gun to his head (Or did she??  LOL).  He's such a dolt he allowed it and continues to go along.  I have no sympathy for a whiny, bratty, spoiled, preachy, know it all, victim playing man child.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Why hasn't he lost it already??  He's in the US and hasn't done anything for them as far as I can tell.


I think they still have good will here from the media but they aren't doing anything interesting.
They got the mileage out of her being a victim of racism in GB
They got the attention for being royals but they left the RF - still trying to be royal by using the titles.
I personally don't think having another baby will cause that much interest
She doesn't have enough acting talent to get the roles she thinks are worthy of her.
So - that leaves the netflix and spotify stuff.  Will see if people are interested.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just compare W&K to H&M.  They both support similar causes and make zoom calls.  H&M come off as staged, scripted and sour. W&K seem sincere, genuine and happy. W&K aren’t just talk, they actually do follow through, take action and impact change. H&M just send out boring, snore-worthy lectures.


----------



## 1LV

I’m sure several of you caught this (People.com), and wondered if he had the Harkles in mind.  Archie was the first thing I thought of when I read the blurb.

*Justin Timberlake Wants Sons to 'Be Kids for as Long as Possible' Without Being 'Weirdly Private'*


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Why hasn't he lost it already??  He's in the US and hasn't done anything for them as far as I can tell.



I think for the same reason Charles is likely still quietly funding them to some degree. It is to pacify them and prevent them from acting out in a way that could be destructive to the royal family.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am too, even though at times I feel he made his bed, now he needs to lie in it. But it struck me when I read the article on the Tindalls earlier where it said "Zara keeps it low during pregnancy but still tends to her horses." I have a horse myself. Harry was an avid polo player. A horse is not just a work-out tool. He really left behind everything for this woman that is as manipulative as it gets and who will discard of him the second he is of no use to her any longer. He has damaged maybe irreparably his relationships to his close friends he grew up with, his own brother, etc.


Well, he had some interests, but he seemed happy to let them all go and follow Meg. Maybe he was just keeping himself busy with all his free time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It's hard to hold people's attention.  Remember the shenanigans Kim K used to have to pull to stay in the limelight?


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Harry has used up the sympathetic feelings I used to have for him. It has gone so far beyond the thing between Tom and Meghan. I'm convinced if it hadn't been that squabble it would have quickly been something else. The choices Harry has made shows where his loyalties lie and they are not with his family any longer. He is 100% on the Meghan train.


I agree with you, they have used up patience esp when you take into account all of the advantages (money) that they started with and squandered
Any sympathy I may still have for them derives from my innate desire that all dysfunctional families get it together,  which is a bit of a liability (for me) rather than an eternal asset of goodwill


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just compare W&K to H&M.  They both support similar causes and make zoom calls.  H&M come off as staged, scripted and sour. W&K seem sincere, genuine and happy. W&K aren’t just talk, they actually do follow through, take action and impact change. H&M just send out boring, snore-worthy lectures.


I may be wrong, but this is what it looks like: W&K support their causes without being interested in profiting from them. MM&H are eager to profit directly or indirectly from the causes they support.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I think they still have good will here from the media but they aren't doing anything interesting.
> They got the mileage out of her being a victim of racism in GB
> They got the attention for being royals but they left the RF - still trying to be royal by using the titles.
> I personally don't think having another baby will cause that much interest
> She doesn't have enough acting talent to get the roles she thinks are worthy of her.
> So - that leaves the netflix and spotify stuff.  Will see if people are interested.


Thanks for the perspective from Wales, much appreciated !

I keep reading the Times and they are observing radio silence on JCMH 

The French press eg the royal magazines -  is also quiet, I think more because JCMH is no longer a topic of interest -they dont sell magazines anymore, rather than a UK-style respect to avoid airing all this dirty laundry 

There seems to be only a few very polarized sources of JCMH info 

1. the DM/MOS which has all claws out 
2. the officially sanctioned JCMH sources eg OS, Harpers Bazaar, People ie the places to whom the JCMH staff leaks their version of the story, nothing is ever directly attributed to MM or H
3. All the gossipy places eg Twitter, youtube, here - where we discuss

All the usually balanced  hard news sources seem to have dried up about them


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't know if you guys remember Sir Captain Tom Moore who died today. He raised £32m+ for our NHS during the pandemic. Within minutes of his death being announced, H&M's fan group Sussex Squard posted these. I know this is not them personally, but they never came out and tell Sussex Squard to stop the online hate! What exactly is their excuses?


----------



## bag-mania

Love this headline! I think _People_ may have meant to say "Disappointed", but instead they say "Disappointing Video Announcement," which is exactly what we feel whenever they make an announcement these days. Everything they do is disappointing. 

*Prince Harry Makes Disappointing Video Announcement as His Invictus Games Have Been Canceled Again*

"To the key workers on the frontlines in the battle against the pandemic, we are with you," the Duke of Sussex said in the video

Prince Harry has announced that his Invictus Games have been postponed once again due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
The annual competition was set to take place in the Netherlands last spring but was postponed due to the virus and due to take place this year from May 29 to June 5. They will now kick off in the Hague, Netherlands, in Spring 2022.

The Duke of Sussex, who started the Paralympic-style event for wounded and veteran servicemen and women in 2014, made the announcement in a video alongside some of his friends from around the world, including Invictus Games veterans JJ Chalmers, Dave Henson, former US captain Will Reynolds and David Wiseman.

"To the key workers on the frontlines in the battle against the pandemic, we are with you," Harry and his friends say in the video. "And when the world is ready, we will compete with all we have, with all we are."

Harry also signed a joint message along with Sir Keith Mills, chair of the Invictus Games Foundation, and Mark de Kruif, chair of the games in the Netherlands, that read, "We are Invictus: from the communities that host and cherish the Games, and the competitors who display unshakeable resilience and commitment as they prepare for and participate in the Games, to the families and network of supporters who support these men and women on their journey to competition."

Read more:
https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-announces-invictus-games-canceled-until-2022/


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I may be wrong, but this is what it looks like: W&K support their causes without being interested in profiting from them. *MM&H are eager to profit directly *or indirectly from the causes they support.



Spot on, Chanbal. 
W and H grew up with similar privileges, similar experiences, the same grandmother and grandfather.  W shows courtesy and respect to his grandparents while H fusses and fumes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Well, it's not like MM held a gun to his head (Or did she??  LOL).  He's such a dolt he allowed it and continues to go along.  I have no sympathy for a whiny, bratty, spoiled, preachy, know it all, victim playing man child.



I know, I know. You're completely right, he's a grown man. But having witnessed what a narcissist can do to seemingly normal people I still have regrets for him.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I may be wrong, but this is what it looks like: W&K support their causes without being interested in profiting from them. MM&H are eager to profit directly or indirectly from the causes they support.


YES, agree.
JCMH takes up topics related to their OWN struggles. Eg MM and H dislike the press, so, the glimmer  twins take on the topic of limiting internet speech. JCMH has been critiqued for the carbon footprint of their private jets, so, they take on the travel industry
Invictus was the one topic where H seemed interested out of compassion not gain, but it has evaporated for another year.

W came out against racism in football AKA soccer, well, I dont  see that this issue has touched him personally


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know if you guys remember Sir Captain Tom Moore who died today. He raised £32m+ for our NHS during the pandemic. Within minutes of his death being announced, H&M's fan group Sussex Squard posted these. I know this is not them personally, but they never came out and tell Sussex Squard to stop the online hate! What exactly is their excuses?




====
May Sir Captain Tom Moore rest in blessed peace.
[those comments are disgusting]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Double post!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know if you guys remember Sir Captain Tom Moore who died today. He raised £32m+ for our NHS during the pandemic. Within minutes of his death being announced, H&M's fan group Sussex Squard posted these. I know this is not them personally, but they never came out and tell Sussex Squard to stop the online hate! What exactly is their excuses?




What...I read he had fallen sick, but had somehow missed he passed away. Aw  And yes, those a*sholes can go stuff it, I am sure his family is heartbroken even though he was literally 100 years old. WTF? Also, wishing death on the Queen and Philip? What exactly is wrong with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know, I know. You're completely right, he's a grown man. But having witnessed what a narcissist can do to seemingly normal people I still have regrets for him.



If Harry wasn’t a middle-aged, military-trained British royal with plenty of privileged resources and minders surrounding him, I would agree. Out of a deep-seated hatred of his place in the line-up, he chose this path.  No sympathy for him or her.

ETA: he wasn’t a young guy when he married her. He had plenty of miles on him and had traveled the world. He well understood the score.  My sympathy goes to those of us who never knew what hit us.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> W came out against racism in football AKA soccer, well, I dont  see that this issue has touched him personally



No good deed goes unpunished. Since several Meghan & Harry stans write for US publications, William gets criticism because EVERY story has to be about Meghan. Check this out from the stan at ELLE magazine.


*Prince William Condemns Racism In Soccer, And Fans Wonder Why Meghan Markle Didn't Get The Same Defense*

For years, Meghan Markle has endured racist attacks from the British tabloids, in part contributing to her and Prince Harry's decision to step back from their senior royal family roles last year. Prince William, Kate Middleton, and the rest of the royal family never publicly condemned the tabloid treatment of Meghan once she married into the family. But now, William is ready to condemn racist abuse wholly...in English football (soccer in the U.S.).

The Duke of Cambridge, who is president of the Football Association, released a series of strongly worded tweets on the matter this Sunday. He wrote: "Racist abuse—whether on the pitch, in the stands, or on social media—is despicable and it must stop now. We all have a responsibility to create an environment where such abuse is not tolerated, and those who choose to spread hate and division are held accountable for their actions. That responsibility extends to the platforms where so much of this activity now takes place. I commend all those players, supporters, clubs and organizations who continue to call out and condemn this abuse in the strongest terms. - W"

Many royal watchers responded with confusion: Why didn't Meghan get this kind of defense?

"Hello from the USA! This threw me completely off guard as I never heard this strong stance against racism when it came to the Duchess of Sussex. Wow," one user wrote.

Author Kristen Meinzer commented, "I do wish you and your family were this vocally antiracist when the target of the racism was the Duchess of Sussex." And British boxer Ashley Theophane added, "Shame you didn’t have the same energy when Meghan was getting abuse." Dozens more commenters sent that kind of message to William. The Prince and his social media team have not responded to the criticism.


Blah, blah, blah, more in that vein if you choose to read it.








						Prince William Condemns Racism in Soccer, Leaving Fans to Wonder Why Meghan Markle Didn't Get the Same Defense
					

"I do wish you and your family were this vocally antiracist when the target of the racism was the Duchess of Sussex."




					www.elle.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> No good deed goes unpunished. Since several Meghan & Harry stans write for US publications, William gets criticism because EVERY story has to be about Meghan. Check this out from the stan at ELLE magazine.
> 
> 
> *Prince William Condemns Racism In Soccer, And Fans Wonder Why Meghan Markle Didn't Get The Same Defense*
> 
> For years, Meghan Markle has endured racist attacks from the British tabloids, in part contributing to her and Prince Harry's decision to step back from their senior royal family roles last year. Prince William, Kate Middleton, and the rest of the royal family never publicly condemned the tabloid treatment of Meghan once she married into the family. But now, William is ready to condemn racist abuse wholly...in English football (soccer in the U.S.).
> 
> The Duke of Cambridge, who is president of the Football Association, released a series of strongly worded tweets on the matter this Sunday. He wrote: "Racist abuse—whether on the pitch, in the stands, or on social media—is despicable and it must stop now. We all have a responsibility to create an environment where such abuse is not tolerated, and those who choose to spread hate and division are held accountable for their actions. That responsibility extends to the platforms where so much of this activity now takes place. I commend all those players, supporters, clubs and organizations who continue to call out and condemn this abuse in the strongest terms. - W"
> 
> Many royal watchers responded with confusion: Why didn't Meghan get this kind of defense?
> 
> "Hello from the USA! This threw me completely off guard as I never heard this strong stance against racism when it came to the Duchess of Sussex. Wow," one user wrote.
> 
> Author Kristen Meinzer commented, "I do wish you and your family were this vocally antiracist when the target of the racism was the Duchess of Sussex." And British boxer Ashley Theophane added, "Shame you didn’t have the same energy when Meghan was getting abuse." Dozens more commenters sent that kind of message to William. The Prince and his social media team have not responded to the criticism.
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, more in that vein if you choose to read it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William Condemns Racism in Soccer, Leaving Fans to Wonder Why Meghan Markle Didn't Get the Same Defense
> 
> 
> "I do wish you and your family were this vocally antiracist when the target of the racism was the Duchess of Sussex."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



Huge difference between a member of the royal family living in a highly guarded palace with a multi-million dollar clothing budget, etc. AND football fans, even the players.

Why don’t her ‘stans’ understand that the rules for Royals, especially the British royals, are different?  
FFS.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> ====
> May Sir Captain Tom Moore rest in blessed peace.
> [those comments are disgusting]


The posts you copied are beyond the pale.  This gentleman was a national hero.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> No good deed goes unpunished. Since several Meghan & Harry stans write for US publications, William gets criticism because EVERY story has to be about Meghan. Check this out from the stan at ELLE magazine.
> 
> 
> *Prince William Condemns Racism In Soccer, And Fans Wonder Why Meghan Markle Didn't Get The Same Defense*
> 
> For years, Meghan Markle has endured racist attacks from the British tabloids, in part contributing to her and Prince Harry's decision to step back from their senior royal family roles last year. Prince William, Kate Middleton, and the rest of the royal family never publicly condemned the tabloid treatment of Meghan once she married into the family. But now, William is ready to condemn racist abuse wholly...in English football (soccer in the U.S.).
> 
> The Duke of Cambridge, who is president of the Football Association, released a series of strongly worded tweets on the matter this Sunday. He wrote: "Racist abuse—whether on the pitch, in the stands, or on social media—is despicable and it must stop now. We all have a responsibility to create an environment where such abuse is not tolerated, and those who choose to spread hate and division are held accountable for their actions. That responsibility extends to the platforms where so much of this activity now takes place. I commend all those players, supporters, clubs and organizations who continue to call out and condemn this abuse in the strongest terms. - W"
> 
> Many royal watchers responded with confusion: Why didn't Meghan get this kind of defense?
> 
> "Hello from the USA! This threw me completely off guard as I never heard this strong stance against racism when it came to the Duchess of Sussex. Wow," one user wrote.
> 
> Author Kristen Meinzer commented, "I do wish you and your family were this vocally antiracist when the target of the racism was the Duchess of Sussex." And British boxer Ashley Theophane added, "Shame you didn’t have the same energy when Meghan was getting abuse." Dozens more commenters sent that kind of message to William. The Prince and his social media team have not responded to the criticism.
> 
> 
> Blah, blah, blah, more in that vein if you choose to read it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William Condemns Racism in Soccer, Leaving Fans to Wonder Why Meghan Markle Didn't Get the Same Defense
> 
> 
> "I do wish you and your family were this vocally antiracist when the target of the racism was the Duchess of Sussex."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



MM didn't get the same defense because she was/is a victim of her own personality, and not a victim of racism. I believe Will or Charles would have come to her defense if she was a victim of racist attacks.

It looks like MM's PR-agency is working a lot these days. Yesterday I saw several headlines praising the 'huge' victory of Harry against the tabloid...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> MM didn't get the same defense *because she was/is a victim of her own personality,* and not a victim of racism.



You said it best.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, with all their ressources...why weren't Harry and Meghan launching and anti-racism campaign if they genuinely thought Meghan was a victim of "nearly unsurvivable [racist] abuse"? Oh, maybe it wasn't that important, and it wouldn't be as glamorous as rubbing shoulders with Beyoncé, hu?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, with all their ressources...why weren't Harry and Meghan launching and anti-racism campaign if they genuinely thought Meghan was a victim of "nearly unsurvivable [racist] abuse"? Oh, maybe it wasn't that important, and it wouldn't be as glamorous as rubbing shoulders with Beyoncé, hu?


I think at the time before she left, anti-racism wasn't so fashionable then, you know, not a bandwagon could be eaily jumped on quickly and a quick buck being made of it! To fight racism then would mean actually doing some work!


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What...I read he had fallen sick, but had somehow missed he passed away. Aw  And yes, those a*sholes can go stuff it, I am sure his family is heartbroken even though he was literally 100 years old. WTF? Also, wishing death on the Queen and Philip? What exactly is wrong with them.


He passed away today. He wasn't vaccinated against covid because he was being treated for pneumonia for the last few weeks.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Love this headline! I think _People_ may have meant to say "Disappointed", but instead they say "Disappointing Video Announcement," which is exactly what we feel whenever they make an announcement these days. Everything they do is disappointing.
> 
> *Prince Harry Makes Disappointing Video Announcement as His Invictus Games Have Been Canceled Again*
> 
> "To the key workers on the frontlines in the battle against the pandemic, we are with you," the Duke of Sussex said in the video
> 
> Prince Harry has announced that his Invictus Games have been postponed once again due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
> The annual competition was set to take place in the Netherlands last spring but was postponed due to the virus and due to take place this year from May 29 to June 5. They will now kick off in the Hague, Netherlands, in Spring 2022.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who started the Paralympic-style event for wounded and veteran servicemen and women in 2014, made the announcement in a video alongside some of his friends from around the world, including Invictus Games veterans JJ Chalmers, Dave Henson, former US captain Will Reynolds and David Wiseman.
> 
> "To the key workers on the frontlines in the battle against the pandemic, we are with you," Harry and his friends say in the video. "And when the world is ready, we will compete with all we have, with all we are."
> 
> Harry also signed a joint message along with Sir Keith Mills, chair of the Invictus Games Foundation, and Mark de Kruif, chair of the games in the Netherlands, that read, "We are Invictus: from the communities that host and cherish the Games, and the competitors who display unshakeable resilience and commitment as they prepare for and participate in the Games, to the families and network of supporters who support these men and women on their journey to competition."
> 
> Read more:
> https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-announces-invictus-games-canceled-until-2022/


LOL I read the headline the same way!!  His announcement was disappointing, as have been all of his "performances".


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know, I know. You're completely right, he's a grown man. But having witnessed what a narcissist can do to seemingly normal people I still have regrets for him.


You are a good woman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The posts you copied are beyond the pale.  This gentleman was a national hero.



Just to be clear, @chicinthecity777  posted the original comments.
Completely agree Sir Captain Tom Moore was a gentleman, national hero and one of the finest human beings who walked this planet.
God bless.


----------



## bag-mania

Holy crap, somehow we've forgotten about Samantha! Her book came out yesterday. Gather 'round folks! 

*WORLD EXCLUSIVE: ROYALS TO BE ROCKED – MEGHAN MARKLE DIVORCED AFTER AFFAIR WITH SUITS COSTAR, CLAIMS SISTER*

*Meghan Markle* and first husband *Trevor Engelson* may have parted ways after the actress had an affair with one of her _Suits_ costars, claims her sister *Samantha Markle*.

_TheRoyalObserver.com_ has obtained a copy of Samantha's new memoir _The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir_, in which she writes: "We heard through the grapevine that Meg was involved with someone on the show."

Samantha writes that she was devastated, especially for their grandmother who was a big fan of Trevor, a film producer. "I was in shock because I thought they had a marriage that defied all odds in Hollywood," writes Samantha.

It seems that Meghan, 39, may not have been the only one stepping out, however, as Samantha claims Trevor was also in the throes of a new relationship - with Megan's best friend. "It takes two to tango," she notes.

"We didn't really talk about her marital problems and I wish that we could have because I had been through it and felt I could be an experienced source of comfort, and maybe advice," writes Samantha.

"I thought they had a marriage that defied all odds in Hollywood."

The Duchess of Sussex and Engleson got married in 2011 in Ocho Rios, Jamaica after a seven-year long courtship. But the relationship didn't last much longer – they split in 2013, citing "irreconcilable differences."

The controversial 328-page book, _The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir,_ is expected to be released later this week.









						WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Royals To Be Rocked – Meghan Markle Divorces After Affair With Suits Costar, Claims Sister
					

Meghan Markle's marriage to Trevor Engleson fell apart after affair, her sister alleges in scathing new book.




					www.theroyalobserver.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> He passed away today. He wasn't vaccinated against covid because he was being treated for pneumonia for the last few weeks.


Death on the Queen .... 





QueenofWrapDress said:


> What...I read he had fallen sick, but had somehow missed he passed away. Aw  And yes, those a*sholes can go stuff it, I am sure his family is heartbroken even though he was literally 100 years old. WTF? Also, wishing death on the Queen and Philip? What exactly is wrong with them.


What are these silly stans doing ?
I vaguely get the flow of events . BP ie the Queen denies order to change birth cert ...  QEII has kind words at the death of the captain ... so, QEII and The Captain  are now the enemy ? 
Angry words are not the answer ... deplorable


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap, somehow we've forgotten about Samantha! Her book came out yesterday. Gather 'round folks!
> 
> *WORLD EXCLUSIVE: ROYALS TO BE ROCKED – MEGHAN MARKLE DIVORCED AFTER AFFAIR WITH SUITS COSTAR, CLAIMS SISTER*
> 
> *Meghan Markle* and first husband *Trevor Engelson* may have parted ways after the actress had an affair with one of her _Suits_ costars, claims her sister *Samantha Markle*.
> 
> _TheRoyalObserver.com_ has obtained a copy of Samantha's new memoir _The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir_, in which she writes: "We heard through the grapevine that Meg was involved with someone on the show."
> 
> Samantha writes that she was devastated, especially for their grandmother who was a big fan of Trevor, a film producer. "I was in shock because I thought they had a marriage that defied all odds in Hollywood," writes Samantha.
> 
> It seems that Meghan, 39, may not have been the only one stepping out, however, as Samantha claims Trevor was also in the throes of a new relationship - with Megan's best friend. "It takes two to tango," she notes.
> 
> "We didn't really talk about her marital problems and I wish that we could have because I had been through it and felt I could be an experienced source of comfort, and maybe advice," writes Samantha.
> 
> "I thought they had a marriage that defied all odds in Hollywood."
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex and Engleson got married in 2011 in Ocho Rios, Jamaica after a seven-year long courtship. But the relationship didn't last much longer – they split in 2013, citing "irreconcilable differences."
> 
> The controversial 328-page book, _The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir,_ is expected to be released later this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WORLD EXCLUSIVE: Royals To Be Rocked – Meghan Markle Divorces After Affair With Suits Costar, Claims Sister
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's marriage to Trevor Engleson fell apart after affair, her sister alleges in scathing new book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theroyalobserver.com


royals to be rocked? OK


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just to be clear, @chicinthecity777  posted the original comments.
> Completely Sir Captain Tom Moore was a gentleman, national hero and one of the finest human beings who walked this planet.
> God bless.


Ps I used the term gentleman in the US sense, a general term of profound respect, not an indication of this social rank

Thank you for giving credit to @chicinthecity777  for the posts, I failed to do so correctly


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> royals to be rocked? OK



I doubt anything about Meghan would surprise the royals at this point.


----------



## marietouchet

Detailed well written account of the EXACT nature of the 2500 “substantial damages” , whole thing was much more complicated than previously reported, H complained about the original settlement , I did not know that ...

First Times article on H for a long time, I do appreciate the clarity they have brought to the topic that got pretty garbled by the internet, real journalism  is good 


Harry wins damages over claim he shunned Marines after US move 






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> You are a good woman.



It is ok to say it. I know I am a hard a$$ about these two. For all kinds of reasons, I cannot be sympathetic to entitled people of the highest privilege, especially those with horrible manners.  Respectful, sure, they have the pedigree and the position.
Sympathetic, nah, not me.



ETA: through the years, QE, Prince Philip and others have shown people of all ages and incomes the highest respect. They take the time to talk to us commoners in the same way they talk to kings.  According to Rudyard Kipling and many of us, this is the true measure of a person.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Detailed well written account of the EXACT nature of the 2500 “substantial damages” , whole thing was much complicated than previously reported, H complained about the original settlement , I did not know that ...
> 
> First Times article on H for a long time, I do appreciate the clarity they have brought to the topic that got pretty garbled by the internet, real journalism  is good
> 
> 
> Harry wins damages over claim he shunned Marines after US move
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


“_Although the defendant had, when making its settlement proposal, offered to directly donate the duke’s damages, the duke wanted to bequest any damages received to Invictus Games Foundation himself ._..”

H wouldn't risk missing out on a chance to get credit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It seems that Meghan, 39, may not have been the only one stepping out, however, as Samantha claims Trevor was also in the throes of a new relationship - with Megan's best friend. "It takes two to tango," she notes.



I mean, if that is true I can even somehow understand mailing back the rings without a word. Which otherwise is an extremely sh*tty way to end a marriage. It just is unlike her to not milk it to cement her victimhood, especially as she's gotten flak for how the marriage ended.


----------



## Chanbal

JCMH may have a tantrum...

*Prince Harry determined to keep military titles despite moving abroad*

The Duke of Sussex is determined to keep his honorary military titles and wants to spend more time in the UK, The Telegraph understands.

He will fight to keep the three patronages he was forced to give up pending a one-year review of "Megxit", having made clear in his recent libel action against the Mail on Sunday that he considers his military links pivotal to his reputation and his future.









						Prince Harry determined to keep military titles despite moving abroad
					

The Duke of Sussex is determined to keep his honorary military titles and wants to spend more time in the UK, The Telegraph understands. He will fight to keep the three patronages he was forced to give up pending a one-year review of "Megxit", having made clear in his recent libel action against...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> JCMH may have a tantrum...
> 
> *Prince Harry determined to keep military titles despite moving abroad*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is determined to keep his honorary military titles and wants to spend more time in the UK, The Telegraph understands.
> 
> He will fight to keep the three patronages he was forced to give up pending a one-year review of "Megxit", having made clear in his recent libel action against the Mail on Sunday that he considers his military links pivotal to his reputation and his future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry determined to keep military titles despite moving abroad
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is determined to keep his honorary military titles and wants to spend more time in the UK, The Telegraph understands. He will fight to keep the three patronages he was forced to give up pending a one-year review of "Megxit", having made clear in his recent libel action against...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


guess he should have stayed in the RF....he wants to have his cake and eat it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> guess he should have stayed in the RF....he wants to have his cake and eat it



I don't even get the fuss...no military patronages, more time to go to Disney premieres. Yes, I am still kind of bitter about that one on the veterans' behalf, that was such a sh*tty move.


----------



## rose60610

Sir Captain Tom Moore, an unknown gentleman until he started his fundraiser at age 99 by walking laps in his courtyard, showed us more class, dignity, generosity, kindness, humor and humility in just a few days than MeGain and JCMH will ever be able to do in their entire lifetimes. When the Queen knighted him I thought it was great and not in small part due to his advanced age. Wise move. He provided one of the most positive and uplifting stories to come out as a result of the miserable pandemic while M&H continued their constant whiny woe-is-us sniveling. People who print mean comments about his death probably idolize losers who in turn wouldn't care if they lived or died. This world needs more Captain Moore's and less self-pitying multimillionaires.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> JCMH may have a tantrum...
> 
> *Prince Harry determined to keep military titles despite moving abroad*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is determined to keep his honorary military titles and wants to spend more time in the UK, The Telegraph understands.
> 
> He will fight to keep the three patronages he was forced to give up pending a one-year review of "Megxit", having made clear in his recent libel action against the Mail on Sunday that he considers his military links pivotal to his reputation and his future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry determined to keep military titles despite moving abroad
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is determined to keep his honorary military titles and wants to spend more time in the UK, The Telegraph understands. He will fight to keep the three patronages he was forced to give up pending a one-year review of "Megxit", having made clear in his recent libel action against...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Harry is  "determined to keep" and "will fight"? Hilarious. It isn't his call. And if the titles and patronages mean THAT much to him, he shouldn't have stepped down to chase rainbows and raindrops with Meghan. You know, I wouldn't mind some honorary military titles and some patronages in Britain while living here in the U.S. How does he think he can pull it off? As for as his reputation--too late for that . His "future" is all about *$$$$$$$$$$ *with Ms. "I Wasn't Aware of the Commonwealth".


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> guess he should have stayed in the RF....he wants to have his cake and eat it


He's like Humpty Dumpty who sat on the wall  and all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put Humpty together again.  Harry is toast.  He can stamp his foot and moan and yell all he wants.  His patronages are not only gone, I don't think they even want him at this point.  He is a deserter and you know what happens to those guys.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan still has her patronages too. I feel sorry for those groups who have to rely on these two idiots to remember them and bother to literally “phone it in” once or twice a year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I think it is appropriate to use here "God Save the Queen"   




As reported by the Daily Express royal correspondent Richard Palmer, Prince Charles believed at first a solution could be found along the lines of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's statement.

Mr Palmer wrote: "When the Sussexes first announced their intention to quit and seek to make their own money, Prince Charles thought it possible for them to continue half in and half out of the Firm.

"But in the end the Queen decided it was impossible for the Sussexes to earn money commercially and represent the monarchy officially."

QE vs Charles


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He's like Humpty Dumpty who sat on the wall  and all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put Humpty together again.  Harry is toast.  He can stamp his foot and moan and yell all he wants.  His patronages are not only gone, I don't think they even want him at this point.  He is a deserter and you know what happens to those guys.


he has gone from being this fun "spare" to being this angry man-boy who likes to sue people all the time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, Harry sounds so bitter and whiny in those last two articles.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, Harry sounds so bitter and whiny in those last two articles.


it seems that is Harry now


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> it seems that is Harry now


I guess he has nobody to hide that from the public anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> He is a deserter and you know what happens to those guys.



Careful, they might sue you.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Careful, they might sue you.


 but but "love always wins"!


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think after Prince Andrew, very few things can "rock" the BRF!

Harry wants to "fight" for his military appointments? Like someone already said, he wants to have his cake and eat it! Well it doesn't work that way. It's not up to him! Why would British Military wants to be represented by someone who live in LA in a 16-bathroom mansion who works for Netflix and Spotify by producing reality TV shows and word salad Podcast? And how exactly he was supposed to be on the ground in the UK and working with them? By frequent private jet trips? The military want someone the complete opposite of Harry, they want someone who is caring, compassionate, loyal, sense of responsibility and duty, proud and strong, none of which is Harry. SMH!


----------



## mia55

The way they’re clinging to all the titles, patronage’s etc I wouldn’t be surprised if we came to know that they were kicked out of the family than voluntarily leaving. They probably asked more coverage than future king and queen and were shown the door.


----------



## Chanbal

The several commentators on today's story covered a lot, so nothing to add. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recycle photo from rain-soaked Dubbo on 2018 Australia tour for thank you note to fans who sent 'kind words' and 'thoughtful messages' at Christmas*
The back of the envelope featured the couple's usual monogram, while printed on the reverse of the image was the thank you message sent on behalf of the royal couple.
Alongside an image of the thank you note, GertsReplied wrote: 'The Sussexes 2020 Christmas Reply arrived today! (And yes, their mail is still be handled by the Correspondence Section at Clarence House).'










From a fan in the US that thinks the RF needs them.


A very intriguing one asking when the photo was taken.  I don't recall to have read about these very awkward events before.  



Today's Press Release


----------



## Grande Latte

Wow. Check out these pics. Harry doesn’t look too good in CA.
https://www.quora.com/Is-Prince-Har...hu-Nguyen-535?ch=10&share=7a3f0cfc&srid=5xXuL


----------



## chicinthecity777

Grande Latte said:


> Wow. Check out these pics. Harry doesn’t look too good in CA.
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Prince-Har...hu-Nguyen-535?ch=10&share=7a3f0cfc&srid=5xXuL


It's hard to look good when you are held hostage!


----------



## Chanbal

Grande Latte said:


> Wow. Check out these pics. Harry doesn’t look too good in CA.
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Prince-Har...hu-Nguyen-535?ch=10&share=7a3f0cfc&srid=5xXuL


This must be why they are recycling pictures on their Thank You notes.


----------



## Aimee3

Grande Latte said:


> Wow. Check out these pics. Harry doesn’t look too good in CA.
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Prince-Har...hu-Nguyen-535?ch=10&share=7a3f0cfc&srid=5xXuL


These photos remind me of that movie “weekend at Bernie’s” where 2 guys try to pass off dead Bernie, as still being alive


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> A very intriguing one asking when the photo was taken.  I don't recall to have read about these very awkward events before.
> View attachment 4978548
> 
> 
> Today's Press Release



I vaguely remembered that but couldn't recount where I'd read it. Google at first didn't help, but voilà, from Quora: 



> In a new book out by Lady Campbell it is alledged that Markle threw a cup of hot tea at someone - after a payment of £250,000 it was hushed up - apparently - if it is true I for one would want to know who paid the money and why she was not charged for assault - if it is not true then Markle can sue lady Campbell for libel.
> 
> *Edit* Just read the book - hilarious, laugh out loud funny, filled with wtf what were these people thinking moments and classically *****y all at the same time.



I haven't read the book but apparently it's in there, and that makes the silence a bit deafening, no? Those people sued over someone saying they had a copper bathtub at Frogmore Cottage, why would they let it go that Lady CC basically said Meghan assaulted staff? (I'm undecided on this one. The temper tantrums are well documented, but being physicall abusive to random strangers is a whole new level)

ETA: the incident was at Admiralty House in Sydney / Australia. At the time there were also rumours they were fighting nonstop while lodging there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Grande Latte said:


> Wow. Check out these pics. Harry doesn’t look too good in CA.
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Prince-Har...hu-Nguyen-535?ch=10&share=7a3f0cfc&srid=5xXuL



He looks like he's been drinking or heavily medicated.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Love the sarcasm!
> 
> *Buckingham Palace DENIES Meghan's claim that royal officials 'dictated' her name change on Archie's birth certificate - hinting details were 'lost in translation' by her US-based PR team*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace denies Meghan's claim officials dictated name change
> 
> 
> 'Rachel Meghan' was taken off the document to leave just 'Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Sussex' with royal protocol blamed by the LA-based couple's US PR team.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Lost in translation?

I can understand my US (and Canadian) cousins perfectly. 

They must mean English to word salad?


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's hard to look good when you are held hostage!


I think he's got a case of Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## bag-mania

Grande Latte said:


> Wow. Check out these pics. Harry doesn’t look too good in CA.
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Prince-Har...hu-Nguyen-535?ch=10&share=7a3f0cfc&srid=5xXuL



He does not look well. That said Harry doesn't seem to be a man who cares much about his appearance. I assume he always had staff choosing his clothes for him up until he married. We can tell Meghan makes an effort with her makeup and hair but Harry shows up as is. In half of those photos it looks like Meghan just woke him up from a nap.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We know Harry drank excessively, possibly still does. We know he smoked cigarettes, possibly still does. We know he loves In/Out food.  We know he suffers from hair loss. This combination can wreak havoc on one’s skin.  The sun will not be a friend for him, either.  Just look at Diana’s brother who has not aged well at all.  Without her makeup, Diana was known to have skin issues, namely rosacea. Charles has well documented issues with rosacea. I would not expect real photos of Harry to look good. Photoshop will be required.









						Princess Diana - Beauticate
					

We look at Princess Diana's beauty secrets and the charitable causes she championed.




					www.beauticate.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@bag-mania 
 In half of those photos it looks like Meghan just woke him up from a nap.

Does she also tuck wittle Harry in his wittle crib, in a fresh diaper/nappy and with a clean pacifier/soother for his wittle nap.


----------



## Chanbal

More on Samantha's book: 

Samantha describes setting up the staged paparazzi shots for Thomas Markle before the royal wedding, which would lead to a rift between Meghan and her father.

She claims it was to paint her father in an 'honest light' and not for money.

Samantha writes: 'I got a call from someone offering to connect me with a photographer friend by the name of Jeff [Rayner], who promised to discreetly take photographs of my father, putting him in an honest light.

'I received no money for the deal per my request, and the goal for my father was not money, because he had been turning down $50,000 interviews. It was just allowing the Royals and the world to see him in his proper light, because he was so horribly labeled and photographed. It was like watching vultures feast.

'The photographer said, 'Don't worry, I will take good care of your dad, and nobody will even see'.'

Samantha claims she asked the photographer to be 'discreet' and stay a safe distance from Thomas.

In her memoir she writes: 'When I saw some of the photographs, I was delighted, until I saw an article that said he 'staged photographs'.

'I nearly choked, when I saw photographs of the photographer walking three feet behind my father. I was guaranteed it would be discreet.

'I sent an email to the photographer, letting him know that I was horribly upset by what had occurred, and he said that he would arrange 'something' with my father that would make him happy, and that he would 'fix the situation.' The damage was done, and the thought of 'fixing it' was tragicomedy at best'.









						Meghan's sibling Samantha releases 'Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister'
					

Samantha's autobiography, titled 'The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One', is expected to heavily criticise Meghan for shunning her American relatives.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh man. This family needs to stop meddling.


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone here buy Samantha's book? I had been planning to but then time got away from me and I never ordered it. Now it looks like the paperback is out of stock. Since it is self-published I assume she couldn't afford to print very many upfront. There is a hard cover version available but I'm not paying $28 for Samantha's musings. I was on the fence at paying $18 for the paperback.

Is anyone else a little bit surprised at how the press is mostly ignoring the book?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone here buy Samantha's book? I had been planning to but then time got away from me and I never ordered it. Now it looks like the paperback is out of stock. Since it is self-published I assume she couldn't afford to print very many upfront. There is a hard cover version available but I'm not paying $28 for Samantha's musings. I was on the fence at paying $18 for the paperback.
> 
> Is anyone else a little bit surprised at how the press is mostly ignoring the book?



Did not and will not buy ppk or hard cover.
Until the salacious tidbits are ‘leaked’, no one cares. Sounds like it is re-telling of what we already know. 
We get it - the media is mean, yada yada yada.  The pandemic has shifted everyone’s interest. H&M offer nothing of value.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> “The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.”
> 
> I don’t believe for one second that Meghan‘s former staff changed the birth certificate without Harry or Meghan or both telling them to do it. Way to blame the help.


*SAME HERE* .. seriously, why would any one of them do something like this "on their own"?????  Given the reputation of Meghan berating the staff, if someone were to have actually done this??? .. I think we all know they would be out-the-door pretty quickly!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> *SAME HERE* .. seriously, why would any one of them do something like this "on their own"?????  Given the reputation of Meghan berating the staff, if someone were to have actually done this??? .. I think we all know they would be out-the-door pretty quickly!



What gets me is so many US media outlets reported her statement as if it were fact. I understand that nobody cares enough about them to assign journalists to actually investigate whether it is the truth but I remember back when "sources" were actual people with names. Why say "source" or "representative" instead of saying the name of the publicist giving the information?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> “The Sussexes, however, did not request the change, we are told. It is believed to have been carried out by their former staff.”
> 
> I don’t believe for one second that Meghan‘s former staff changed the birth certificate without Harry or Meghan or both telling them to do it. Way to blame the help.



Right. If the Palace says they didn't change or order it changed, there are only two other people who could. Blaming the help? As if the help even knew what would be on the birth certificate or would take it upon themselves to "set the record straight". And if it was done 19 or how ever many days later, why is it even brought up now? Flat out doesn't make any sense. When Archie is of legal age, I'd like to see him change HIS name to spite his dolt parents, to something like "Bart" or "Chuck".


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just read on a somewhat reliable gossip group that MM is pregnant


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone here buy Samantha's book? I had been planning to but then time got away from me and I never ordered it. Now it looks like the paperback is out of stock. Since it is self-published I assume she couldn't afford to print very many upfront. There is a hard cover version available but I'm not paying $28 for Samantha's musings. I was on the fence at paying $18 for the paperback.
> 
> Is anyone else a little bit surprised at how the press is mostly ignoring the book?


Haha, I also tried to get the paperback, but I'm glad I didn't succeed. The tabloids will likely publish the interesting parts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I just read on a somewhat reliable gossip group that MM is pregnant



Wouldn't surprise me a bit. I mentioned a few days ago that I thought it was likely she was trying to get pregnant or else hired a surrogate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Wouldn't surprise me a bit. I mentioned a few days ago that I thought it was likely she was trying to get pregnant or else hired a surrogate.



Why though. She doesn't seem especially good with the child she has. Maybe a way to keep Harry quiet for a bit longer?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though. She doesn't seem especially good with the child she has. Maybe a way to keep Harry quiet for a bit longer?



It's not like she ever has to take care of the baby herself. They had nannies for Archie. The new baby will have nannies too. Most of the positive attention she has ever received has been from 1) marrying a prince, and 2) having his baby.

I don't see Meghan as the kind of mother who will be driving her kids to school or soccer practice. But she does want to hold on to Harry. What better way to keep a firm grip on him than by having his kids? If this story is true she will be 40 when the baby is born. She is almost out of time.

Meghan pregnancy rumors pop up every few months. It will be interesting to see if this one amounts to anything.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did not and will not buy ppk or hard cover.
> Until the salacious tidbits are ‘leaked’, no one cares. Sounds like it is re-telling of what we already know.
> We get it - the media is mean, yada yada yada.  The pandemic has shifted everyone’s interest. H&M offer nothing of value.


One of the reasons I considered buying the book was to support Samantha, she is in a wheelchair and could use the extra funds to get additional help/equipment. It is shocking that MM didn't mind spending ~1 million dollars in clothes in <1 year, and didn't care to help her sister.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Meghan very definitely was part of this name change.  This could not have been done without her knowledge.  She had to provide documentation.  *She is so caught up in a web of lies*.


.. but *THAT* is her life story, and as I've said before (_and sadly, seen too numerous times_), when these 'type' of folks lie continuously .. they start to believe their lies as TRUTH.  I would love to see someone truly point out her lies, but we all know that would translate to that person/entity being racist.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It's not like she ever has to take care of the baby herself. They had nannies for Archie. The new baby will have nannies too. Most of the positive attention she has ever received has been from 1) marrying a prince, and 2) having his baby.
> 
> I don't see Meghan as the kind of mother who will be driving her kids to school or soccer practice. But she does want to hold on to Harry. What better way to keep a firm grip on him than by having his kids? If this story is true she will be 40 when the baby is born. She is almost out of time.
> 
> Meghan pregnancy rumors pop up every few months. It will be interesting to see if this one amounts to anything.


Very possible! Many people are having babies in their 40s, and a 2nd kid would make her position more solid with the BRF (double alimony/child support). It would also agree with her apparent obsession of Diana.


----------



## rose60610

If she's pregnant again she'd have to be a few months along if you believe her Thanksgiving article about the miscarriage. Why would someone as famous as she is give hints to get gossip rags talking about an early stage pregnancy after a miscarriage? Of course she thrives on attention so anything is possible. If she's totally washed up as an actress and Netflix/Spotify don't pan out like they said, she's going to need more meal tickets to milk the Crown. Twins, anyone? Then she can get two birth certificates to screw around with.


----------



## csshopper

If true, she must be so relieved to have a convenient excuse to not travel to the family events with Harry. If they can't keep a nanny to care for one, how will they ever find one to care for two?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> One of the reasons I considered buying the book was to support Samantha, she is in a wheelchair and could use the extra funds to get additional help/equipment. It is shocking that MM didn't mind spending ~1 million dollars in clothes in <1 year, and didn't care to help her sister.


And I remember her trip to the US Open to see her friend Serena play, MM took the trip in a fit of pique to get out of the UK, there was some kerfuffle at the time..
OK, but MM saw Serena play at Wimbledon just two months earlier - where MM made a stink about no one sittig gnear her or taking snaps
And MM did not travel light to the US Open - took Met security personnel and Archie & nanny went to yoga class in NY


I am more OK with the clothes - supposedly needed for the job  (???) than for the $$$$$$  boondoggle done for the wrong reasons and where she was clearly not being open( that is a euphemism lol) about the reason for the trip  (lie?)


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I just read on a somewhat reliable gossip group that MM is pregnant


Conception (via IUI or petri dish or whatever) must have just happened, because if she is, you know she will milk it for the entire 40 weeks!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The year in review is coming up.
- pregnancy could be used to mess with the BRF’s decisions. It would be an amateur move in the manipulative game,  but that’s what H&M are - amateurs. They have already announced she and Arch are staying in Cali. Sure, she wants to be Diana 2.o, but her body doesn’t bounce back like a 22 year old body does. A surrogate seems likely.  The timing of this preg rumor is suspicious.  Again, no one really cares because we all know how ‘weirdly private’ H&M are — or aren’t depending on the grift.  
- I don’t know anything about the finances of any of these people, so my money will stay with me and go to people/causes I know.  The salacious stuff will leak, rest assured.


----------



## bag-mania

Having a baby would be such a convenient excuse to get out of so many things, visiting his family this summer, going to court when her lawsuit comes up in the fall, and working on her podcast and Netflix projects. Yes, I know women with babies work hard. But this is Meghan, she needs to be coddled.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> And I remember her trip to the US Open to see her friend Serena play, MM took the trip in a fit of pique to get out of the UK, there was some kerfuffle at the time..
> OK, but MM saw Serena play at Wimbledon just two months earlier - where MM made a stink about no one sittig gnear her or taking snaps
> *And MM did not travel light to the US Open - took Met security personnel and Archie & nanny went to yoga class in NY*
> 
> 
> I am more OK with the clothes - supposedly needed for the job  (???) than for the $$$$$$  boondoggle done for the wrong reasons and where she was clearly not being open( that is a euphemism lol) about the reason for the trip  (lie?)


I believe that is what she had in mind with megxit, travel in style between both countries surrounded by servants. I don't know any job that justifies a budget of 1 million dollars/year for clothes. I don't think QE spends anything near that figure.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I believe that is what she had in mind with megxit, travel in style between both countries surrounded by servants. I don't know any job that justifies a budget of 1 million dollars/year for clothes. I don't think QE spends anything near that figure.
> [/QUOTE
> Yep.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The year in review is coming up.
> - pregnancy could be used to mess with the BRF’s decisions. It would be an amateur move in the manipulative game,  but that’s what H&M are - amateurs. They have already announced she and Arch are staying in Cali. Sure, she wants to be Diana 2.o, but her body doesn’t bounce back like a 22 year old body does. A surrogate seems likely.  The timing of this preg rumor is suspicious.  Again, no one really cares because we all know how ‘weirdly private’ H&M are — or aren’t depending on the grift.
> - I don’t know anything about the finances of any of these people, so my money will stay with me and go to people/causes I know.  The salacious stuff will leak, rest assured.


You are a very wise person. I saw an article about Samantha being mistreated when trying to get help with her wheelchair, and it almost broke my heart, but you are absolutely right.

I also think MM is trying to get baby #2, in vitro fertilization, surrogate... whatever it takes to improve her image and security.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Having a baby would be such a convenient excuse to get out of so many things,* visiting his family this summer, going to court when her lawsuit comes up in the fall, and working on her podcast and Netflix projects. Yes, I know women with babies work hard. But this is Meghan, she needs to be coddled.


Including a harsh review. How cruel can one be by trying to remove perks/titles from a pregnant woman?


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though. She doesn't seem especially good with the child she has. Maybe a way to keep Harry quiet for a bit longer?


*KA-CHING*, *$$$*, *MONEY* .. if she has two and they do split, she will get more $$$ for those 18 (at least) years!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I don't know any job that justifies a budget of 1 million dollars/year for clothes. I don't think QE spends anything near that figure.



Neither does Kate. But Kate, the freaking future queen, is not too famous to go to parent events for her kids' school at the local pub or take #5 in line out of the car in a traffic jam to watch ships on the Thames while Duchess Disney is too much of a celebrity to attend playgroups in a very affluent neighbourhood because people just cannot deal with her fame.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Including a harsh review. How cruel can one be by trying to remove perks/titles from a pregnant woman?



Or a young mother.


----------



## bag-mania

Remember about 18 months ago Harry was interviewed with Jane Goodall and he said then that they would have two children maximum. Of course he was talking about overpopulation and getting preachy about it but I think two kids was always the plan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> You are a very wise person. I saw an article about Samantha being mistreated when trying to get help with her wheelchair, and it almost broke my heart, but you are absolutely right.
> 
> I also think MM is trying to get baby #2, in vitro fertilization, surrogate... whatever it takes to improve her image and security.



Thank you. I saw that article, too.  You are so right, it was heartbreaking. 
I simply do not trust H&M or anyone connected to them. They all give off the grifter vibe. I know they have serious struggles, and I am sympathetic to that, just not enough to fund her book. I do hope they all get the help, assistance and support they need, especially during this pandemic. I hope that for everyone on this planet, too.


----------



## Chanbal

I believe more from the book, intriguing sentence in blue:

Samantha says that when Meghan was a baby she knew her as 'flower' and adored her, writing that she was 'bi-racial, beautiful, and was both the color of a peach, and a rose'.

Samantha writes that the future princess' nickname for her was 'Dat Duk' and until Ragland and Thomas Sr. divorced they lived in one house and were a happy family.

But the sisterly bond began to fray when Meghan grew older and became 'snippy' and what Samantha called the 'Pushy Princess of Vista del Mar'.

She writes: 'I always thought that my sister would become more like my father, but it seemed that with each passing day, she was becoming more like her mother.'

Samantha admits she now struggles with her disdain towards Meghan in her adulthood, comparing the feeling of being torn to being tortured on a medieval rack.

Released in the US via American bookselling giant Barnes and Noble, the book contains chapters called Queen Would be Appalled and Looking For Mr Right The Wrong Way.









						Meghan's sibling Samantha releases 'Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister'
					

Samantha's autobiography, titled 'The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One', is expected to heavily criticise Meghan for shunning her American relatives.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

OMG. People, Harpers Bazaar, Cosmopolitan, and Marie Claire magazines all have articles today about Harry and Meghan having the “cutest, sweetest thank you notes.” Seriously, what person in their right mind would read about something so frivolous and pointless? The copy printed on a cereal box has more substance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> OMG. People, Harpers Bazaar, Cosmopolitan, and Marie Claire magazines all have articles today about Harry and Meghan having the “cutest, sweetest thank you notes.” Seriously, what person in their right mind would read about something so frivolous and pointless? The copy printed on a cereal box has more substance.



Well, they _are_ using a photo from the Australia tour.  While it is technically never too late to say thank you, in the Royal world, waiting until Feb to thank someone for Christmas wishes seems way too long, especially when they seemingly have not been working. IMO


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> But the sisterly bond began to fray when Meghan grew older and became 'snippy' and what Samantha called the 'Pushy Princess of Vista del Mar'.
> 
> She writes: 'I always thought that my sister would become more like my father, but it seemed that with each passing day, she was becoming more like her mother.'



I’m thinking she has been coached extensively by Oprah and Marianne Williamson. Harry has been coached by his “ real father, David Foster”.

ETA: Of course, Samantha would know better than I


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, they _are_ using a photo from the Australia tour.  While it is technically never too late to say thank you, in the Royal world, waiting until Feb to thank someone for Christmas wishes seems way too long, especially when they seemingly have not been working. IMO



Right, would it have killed them to tell one of their personal assistants to get the thank you notes in the mail by the first week of January? It’s not like we’re naive enough to believe they made out all the notes personally.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ahhh, more info on this card:


Spoiler: Thank you card









						Gert's Royal Replies
					






					gertsroyalreplies.blogspot.com
				



*Tuesday, February 2, 2021*
*Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan - Christmas Reply (2020)*

A lovely reply arrived today from the UK. I had written to Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan in December to wish them a Merry Christmas. As I hadn't seen any replies from them since Christmas last year, I wasn't excepting anything in reply. This was a very lovely surprise. 
With the Sussexes stepping down as working royals last year there was a big question on how their mail is going to be handled. The Correspondence Section at Clarence House said last year that they are still handling the Sussexes mail as it was always done. And this reply is pretty much the same as the replies from before the Sussexes stepped down. 
The front of the envelope is the usual. It features the postmark from the Court Post Office at Buckingham Palace. The Post Office is run by the Royal Mail. All incoming/outgoing mail for one of the London Royal offices/residences is processed through this post office. For incoming mail, the Royal Mail will run additional security checks, before sorting the mail and delivering it to each office. The Royal Mail collects outgoing mail from each office, with frank it with this postmark, and sort it before sending it on to its next stop. 
The PPI (Printed Postage Impression) number in the red box is W4047, which is the Sovereign Grants account. So we know the cost of postage is being charged to the Sovereign Grant.



The back of the envelope features the couple's monogram. It is the same one they have always used, a combined M/H under the coronet of the child of the Prince of Wales. (William & Kate use this same Coronet on their monograms & coat of arms. The coronets you see on other royal's mail are slightly different. E.g. The York Princesses use the coronet of the child of the son of the monarch.)




Inside is the typical photo card we see from Clarence House. The front of the card features a photo of the couple in Dubbo, Australia. This is the same photo they used on their reply for their 2018 pregnancy announcement. (Although this card has a glossy finish.) It is very common for Clarence House to reuse photos. And now that the couple has stepped down, I expect we will see this more often for them as reusing photos will save time and money. 




The back of the card has a typed message.  The message is different than what we've seen in the past. It is in some ways more personal, as it is worded as if it is from the Sussexes, not written on their behalf. (This is the 2nd year their Christmas reply has neglected to mention Archie.) The message is sort of generic, which will allow Clarence House to use this card for multiple occasions/years. 




The message says: 



> _Thank you for your thoughtful message. We appreciate your kind words and the time you have taken to write to us on this special occasion. _





> _Sending you our warmest wishes. _





> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex._


After months of not seeing any replies from Clarence House from the Sussexes, it is nice to see replies again. I think this also signals that Clarence House will continue to handle the Sussexes mail for the foreseeable future, as the Sussexes have yet to hire staff to take on that duty. It will be interesting to hear if the Sussexes are reimbursing Clarence House and the Sovereign Grant for this service.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Neither does Kate. But Kate, the freaking future queen, is not too famous to go to parent events for her kids' school at the local pub or take #5 in line out of the car in a traffic jam to watch ships on the Thames while Duchess Disney is too much of a celebrity to attend playgroups in a very affluent neighbourhood because people just cannot deal with her fame.


And, she recycles her clothes and has actually worn outfits more than once!  (The horror!!  )


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, more info on this card:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Thank you card
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gert's Royal Replies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gertsroyalreplies.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Tuesday, February 2, 2021*
> *Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan - Christmas Reply (2020)*
> 
> A lovely reply arrived today from the UK. I had written to Prince Harry & Duchess Meghan in December to wish them a Merry Christmas. As I hadn't seen any replies from them since Christmas last year, I wasn't excepting anything in reply. This was a very lovely surprise.
> With the Sussexes stepping down as working royals last year there was a big question on how their mail is going to be handled. The Correspondence Section at Clarence House said last year that they are still handling the Sussexes mail as it was always done. And this reply is pretty much the same as the replies from before the Sussexes stepped down.
> The front of the envelope is the usual. It features the postmark from the Court Post Office at Buckingham Palace. The Post Office is run by the Royal Mail. All incoming/outgoing mail for one of the London Royal offices/residences is processed through this post office. For incoming mail, the Royal Mail will run additional security checks, before sorting the mail and delivering it to each office. The Royal Mail collects outgoing mail from each office, with frank it with this postmark, and sort it before sending it on to its next stop.
> The PPI (Printed Postage Impression) number in the red box is W4047, which is the Sovereign Grants account. So we know the cost of postage is being charged to the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> 
> 
> The back of the envelope features the couple's monogram. It is the same one they have always used, a combined M/H under the coronet of the child of the Prince of Wales. (William & Kate use this same Coronet on their monograms & coat of arms. The coronets you see on other royal's mail are slightly different. E.g. The York Princesses use the coronet of the child of the son of the monarch.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside is the typical photo card we see from Clarence House. The front of the card features a photo of the couple in Dubbo, Australia. This is the same photo they used on their reply for their 2018 pregnancy announcement. (Although this card has a glossy finish.) It is very common for Clarence House to reuse photos. And now that the couple has stepped down, I expect we will see this more often for them as reusing photos will save time and money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The back of the card has a typed message.  The message is different than what we've seen in the past. It is in some ways more personal, as it is worded as if it is from the Sussexes, not written on their behalf. (This is the 2nd year their Christmas reply has neglected to mention Archie.) The message is sort of generic, which will allow Clarence House to use this card for multiple occasions/years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The message says:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After months of not seeing any replies from Clarence House from the Sussexes, it is nice to see replies again. I think this also signals that Clarence House will continue to handle the Sussexes mail for the foreseeable future, as the Sussexes have yet to hire staff to take on that duty. It will be interesting to hear if the Sussexes are reimbursing Clarence House and the Sovereign Grant for this service.



Oh wow. I have extremely low expectations when it comes to them, but even I figured they took responsibility for their own fan mail once they moved away. If the BRF is still sending their thank you notes for them we must assume they’re also doing a lot more.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m thinking she has been coached extensively by Oprah and Marianne Williamson. Harry has been coached by his “ real father, David Foster”.
> 
> ETA: Of course, Samantha would know better than I


Oh, yes! Oprah...Foster, plenty of 'parents' to guide the young couple. Samantha's intriguing words about MM "becoming more like her mother" reminded me of a certain advice...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone here buy Samantha's book? I had been planning to but then time got away from me and I never ordered it. Now it looks like the paperback is out of stock. Since it is self-published I assume she couldn't afford to print very many upfront. There is a hard cover version available but I'm not paying $28 for Samantha's musings. I was on the fence at paying $18 for the paperback.
> 
> Is anyone else a little bit surprised at how the press is mostly ignoring the book?


It is now on Amazon:





						The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One: Markle, Samantha: 9781736313411: Amazon.com: Books
					

The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One [Markle, Samantha] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One



					www.amazon.com


----------



## viciel

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone here buy Samantha's book? I had been planning to but then time got away from me and I never ordered it. Now it looks like the paperback is out of stock. Since it is self-published I assume she couldn't afford to print very many upfront. There is a hard cover version available but I'm not paying $28 for Samantha's musings. I was on the fence at paying $18 for the paperback.
> 
> Is anyone else a little bit surprised at how the press is mostly ignoring the book?


I'm waiting for my local library to stock it.


----------



## viciel

Harry had mentioned seeing a therapist in UK to deal with his issues stemming from the death of Di. I wonder if he's seeing any therapist now and if so is he able to have his sessions in complete isolation with total privacy. Because it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that MM is a narcissist, any trained therapist (psychologist, psychiatrist, licensed counselor, licensed social worker, etc.) would be able to tell and might have already told him that he's with a NPD. Although, of course you can't help people who doesn't want the help or heed the advice. Just wondering.


----------



## gracekelly

All of this latest stuff is just a daily dribble to keep their names in the news in a positive way because realistically every else is very negative. Popcorn is ready for Justice Warby. Wish he would hurry up.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Conception (via IUI or petri dish or whatever) must have just happened, because if she is, you know she will milk it for the entire 40 weeks!



...and beyond.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> Conception (via IUI or petri dish or whatever) must have just happened, because if she is, you know she will milk it for the entire 40 weeks!


I tend to agree because there is no way she isn't going to milk the pregnancy to keep her in the news, like the last one!


----------



## kemilia

Aimee3 said:


> These photos remind me of that movie “weekend at Bernie’s” where 2 guys try to pass off dead Bernie, as still being alive


Loved that movie! Harry needs sunglasses!


----------



## marietouchet

All this chat about Archie and another child ... hmmm I prefer to do like Michelle O and when they go high, go low ... just me ... 
ok, I have made comments about the birth cert, my bad .... but I am reassessing the topic of kids


----------



## marietouchet

On another matter ...  the military titles are toast .... my opinion ... just a matter of time

It does not do to wear a UK military uniform in the US, and H did not at the graveyard ...

The titles might have been OK had they relocated to the Commonwealth or even to the UK countryside , which they did not

No one wants a US resident to be head of the UK Marines, that is preposterous

And hmmm attendance at the summer Trooping the Color brings up the uniform issue, all the BRF members that have them wear them, even Anne
So that would be a very delicate thing


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> OMG. People, Harpers Bazaar, Cosmopolitan, and Marie Claire magazines all have articles today about Harry and Meghan having the “cutest, sweetest thank you notes.” Seriously, what person in their right mind would read about something so frivolous and pointless? The copy printed on a cereal box has more substance.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> It is now on Amazon:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One: Markle, Samantha: 9781736313411: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One [Markle, Samantha] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


Wow, I didn’t realize the title said “part 1”!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> On another matter ...  the military titles are toast .... my opinion ... just a matter of time
> 
> It does no do to wear a UK military uniform in the US, and H did not at the graveyard ...
> 
> The titles might have been OK had they relocated to the Commonwealth or even to the UK countryside , which they did not
> 
> *No one wants a US resident to be head of the UK Marines, that is preposterous*
> 
> And hmmm attendance at the summer Trooping the Color brings up the uniform issue, all the BRF members that have them wear them, even Anne
> So that would be a very delicate thing



Good point. 

They really are the most _ridiculous_ pair of want it all, know-it-all nobodies. They know nothing!


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Harry. He turned his back on his family to live in a 16-bathroom mansion and become a preacher in the US, and now some mean people want to take away some of his toys. Harry, please look around, be a little more humble and realize that the only titles with some value are the ones we earn with our work, and not the ones given to us because we were born in a certain family. You look physically healthy, have a house, a son..., enjoy and do something positive with your life.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, I didn’t realize the title said “part 1”!


Yes, it looks like she has more to say.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers puts it well... 

*PIERS MORGAN: The Queen must tell Prince Harry he's not getting his military titles back - he was a brave soldier, but that doesn't mean he can be an absentee armchair general from 5000 miles away in his Californian mansion*

I've seen more cheerful funeral directors than haunted Harry in his endless grim-faced hostage videos preaching 'equality' from his Californian mansion.

Of course, I have my own theory about his constant testiness but let's not trigger the lunatic Meghan Markle fanbase into another slathering lather of abusive rage (it always amuses me when I hear Meghan moaning about social media abuse given that her supporters are comfortably the most vicious and vile trolls in cyberspace history).

Instead, let's focus on the specific cause of Harry's current anger which is the impending loss of his military titles.

When Harry and Meghan abruptly quit Royal duty last January, he was forced to give up being Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Bury St Edmunds, and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command for a year pending a Buckingham Palace review of 'Megxit' which comes up next month.

As that deadline approaches, Harry's 'friends' have been busy briefing the media that he is 'determined' to hang onto the titles.

But the Queen is said to be equally determined that her grandson shouldn't have them restored, believing it's impossible to be a 'half-in, half-out' royal.

And, as always, Her Majesty is absolutely right.

I don't doubt for one moment that Harry cares passionately about the armed forces.

He was a good soldier himself, rising to the rank of Captain and serving two tours of Afghanistan during a 10-year military career.

(My brother-in-law taught Harry and Prince William at the Sandhurst Military Academy and was very impressed by both of them.)

Harry also deserves great credit for creating the brilliant Invictus Games for wounded veterans.

But none of this justifies him being allowed to retain honorary military titles he was given through his royal status when he still performed royal duties.

...

And even if Harry did promise to fly endlessly back and forth across the Atlantic to fulfil all his military duties, vastly ramping up the size of his carbon footprint in the process, why should the Queen allow it?

The bottom line is that once again, Harry wants to have to his royal cake and eat it.

He knows that his earning power in America is built almost exclusively off the back of him being a Prince and he and Meghan being the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

He also knows that being able to add the words 'Captain-General', 'Air-Commandant' and 'Commodore-in-Chief' to his business card will make him even more commercially appealing in a country that worships the military.

....
Frankly, if I were the Queen, I would go further and tell Harry in the 12-month review that he and Meghan can't be Duke and Duchess of Sussex anymore either.

It's outrageous that the pair of them swan around America selling themselves off their titles to the highest bidder - and makes an absolute mockery of their endless whining about how they had to flee the Royal Family and Britain to find 'freedom'.

If you want freedom, my little pony-tailed latte-slurping lentil-munchers, then call yourselves simple Henry and Meghan Windsor and see how many dollars fly into your booming bank accounts then.

No, they wanted freedom from boring royal duty but the right to keep their royal titles without doing any of the work to merit them.

Piers's entire article here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

double post


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You are a very wise person. I saw an article about Samantha being mistreated when trying to get help with her wheelchair, and it almost broke my heart, but you are absolutely right.
> 
> I also think MM is trying to get baby #2, in vitro fertilization, surrogate... whatever it takes to improve her image and security.


I don't think a second baby is going to get that much interest.  Unless eventually as the kids grow they are adorable like will and kates kids


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't think a second baby is going to get that much interest.  Unless eventually as the kids grow they are adorable like will and kates kids



But they can't show them without more backlash about the ridiculous way in which they shielded Archie's privacy and their inconsistency.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


>


I find the praise for the cards to be ridiculous for different reasons

In certain circles, thank you cards are the norm, - one is expected to do so  - not an EXTRAORDINARY thing to do , so, extolling the virtues of normal social behaviour is silly

And ... the cards were sent out by Clarence House ie Prince Charles, not by the glimmer twins - they were not postmarked from the US


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't think a second baby is going to get that much interest.  Unless eventually as the kids grow they are adorable like will and kates kids


As @bag-mania mentioned, it will give them a great excuse to get out of several things, and likely extra security ($$$$) in case of a divorce. Keep in mind that 'love always wins', and nothing like having baby in a wonderful prince/princess  story.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Good point.
> 
> They really are the most _ridiculous_ pair of want it all, know-it-all nobodies. They know nothing!


It just dawned on me yesterday, some of their demands made sense (kinda sorta) when they were in Canada A YEAR AGO (Commonwealth) 

But THINGS HAVE CHANGED - outside of the Commonwealth, the demands are silly, the titles dont make sense in the US nor do the military appointments 

Honestly, there are no boxes on US forms for all the folderol of the UK names HRH Prince Henry Albert ... Reginald ... Mortimer ... Mountbatten-Windsor Duke of Sussex - it does not fit on US forms !!! They need to streamline and use last names (surnames) ...

I applaud interest in UK animal shelters but seriously not from a distance of 6000 miles (or whatever the distance from Battersea to Montecito)


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> And ... the cards were sent out by Clarence House ie Prince Charles, not by the glimmer twins - they were not postmarked from the US


They can't afford the stamps.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It is now on Amazon:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One: Markle, Samantha: 9781736313411: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One [Markle, Samantha] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister: A Memoir, Part One
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com



Ah, Amazon and their inefficient review system. The book currently has 12 "reviews" and not one of them is from a verified purchaser of Samantha's book. Right now it is almost evenly divided between people who don't like Meghan and like to hear that Samantha is dishing on her and the Meghan stans who are trying to convince people not to buy it.


----------



## bag-mania

viciel said:


> I'm waiting for my local library to stock it.



It is self-published so it probably won't be purchased by your local library system unless someone requests it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Ah, Amazon and their inefficient review system. The book currently has 12 "reviews" and not one of them is from a verified purchaser of Samantha's book. Right now it is almost evenly divided between people who don't like Meghan and like to hear that Samantha is dishing on her and the Meghan stans who are trying to convince people not to buy it.


It now has 20 reviews and is shown as the no. 1 best seller on Amazon in Royalty Biographies.
I did read the 1-star reviews and had a good chuckle. This one is a real gem:
" Amelies Gnome
_1.0 out of 5 stars_ Hard pass
Reviewed in the United States on February 1, 2021

With the title misspelled how bad could it be? Uh, real real bad. This book has little about Meghan Markle and everything to do with Samantha Markle. Tell all? Tells nothing which is what she knows about Meghan. Most people thought she had the dirt. There is no dirt, only what Scam flings on Twitter. Sad old old woman."

How dare Samantha wrote a book with a title of "The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister" is a book about the said sister! LOL!


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> I've seen more cheerful funeral directors than haunted Harry in his endless grim-faced hostage videos preaching 'equality' from his Californian mansion.


Haunted Harry.    I'm dying


----------



## CarryOn2020

Re: baby #2, aka ‘the spare’
As Harry well knows, the 2nd child is *always* overshadowed by the first child. Always.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I believe that is what she had in mind with megxit, travel in style between both countries surrounded by servants. I don't know any job that justifies a budget of 1 million dollars/year for clothes. I don't think QE spends anything near that figure.


Last night, the HB and I were watching a documentary about Princess Margaret, and *ALL* I could think of during various parts, was .. *A-HA, THIS is what Meghan wanted* .. get the benefits of being a member of the BRF (_$$$ and being 'bowed' to_) .. BUT, living the life of (_really_) a high-life celebrity .. a place in Mustique (_for example_) just hang out, beautiful clothes, people waiting on you hand-and-foot, going to all the fancy parties, etc. -- *BUT*, one of the truly interesting things that many of the commentators said was that "*Princess Margaret PAID THE PRICE for her behavior and the media HOUNDED her and said very unfavorable things about her*" .. but did she sue everyone??? .. *NO*!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> But the sisterly bond began to fray when Meghan grew older and became 'snippy' and what Samantha called the 'Pushy Princess of Vista del Mar'.
> 
> She writes: 'I always thought that my sister would become more like my father, but it seemed that with each passing day, she was becoming more like her mother.'


*Hmmmmm* .. well this is intriguing - two things: 

"_Pushy Princess of Vista del Mar_" - I wonder if Samantha was using that are only because it is a very high-priced area -OR- in fact, Meghan lived there at one point??????? 
"_She was becoming more like her mother_" - this one is *VERY*, *VERY* interesting .. sooooooo, Doria is a lot different than what we've seen?  *Ohhhh*, we need to find out more about this ..


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Last night, the HB and I were watching a documentary about Princess Margaret, and *ALL* I could think of during various parts, was .. *A-HA, THIS is what Meghan wanted* .. get the benefits of being a member of the BRF (_$$$ and being 'bowed' to_) .. BUT, living the life of (_really_) a high-life celebrity .. a place in Mustique (_for example_) just hang out, beautiful clothes, people waiting on you hand-and-foot, going to all the fancy parties, etc. -- *BUT*, one of the truly interesting things that many of the commentators said was that "*Princess Margaret PAID THE PRICE for her behavior and the media HOUNDED her and said very unfavorable things about her*" .. but did she sue everyone??? .. *NO*!



Times have certainly changed. If Margaret was going through it today she might well follow a similar path to the Sussexes. In the snowflake era nobody is ever expected to have to suck it up when things don't go exactly as planned. Now there is almost pride in being presented as a victim and complaining to the press is the norm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Times have certainly changed. If Margaret was going through it today she might well follow a similar path to the Sussexes. In the snowflake era nobody is ever expected to have to suck it up when things don't go exactly as planned. Now there is almost pride in being presented as a victim and complaining to the press is the norm.



Possibly.
Margaret, while a bit rebellious, had her mother there. I’m guessing the Queen Mother, even Phillip, would not have permitted Margaret to spin too far out of control.  QM well understood how disastrous the abdication was to all concerned. Charles seemingly supports H&M’s exit. Maybe because their exit works in his favor with his Great Reset.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly.
> Margaret, while a bit rebellious, had her mother there. I’m guessing the Queen Mother, even Phillip, would not have permitted Margaret to spin too far out of control.  QM well understood how disastrous the abdication was to all concerned. Charles seemingly supports H&M’s exit. Maybe because their exit works in his favor with his Great Reset.


I also wonder if Charles was tired of Harry's behavior and was 'on-to' Meghan, such that he just wanted to be rid of them?!?!?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly.
> Margaret, while a bit rebellious, had her mother there. I’m guessing the Queen Mother, even Phillip, would not have permitted Margaret to spin too far out of control.  QM well understood how disastrous the abdication was to all concerned. Charles seemingly supports H&M’s exit. Maybe because their exit works in his favor with his Great Reset.


Margaret had no income outside of what her mother and sister gave her, the leash was rather short, and her taste was expensive

Diana left Harry enough money to get into trouble with, Margaret never had that leeway


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Margaret had no income outside of what her mother and sister gave her, the leash was rather short, and her taste was expensive
> 
> Diana left Harry enough money to get into trouble with, Margaret never had that leeway



Excellent point!  Thank you, @marietouchet


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> *Hmmmmm* .. well this is intriguing - two things:
> 
> "_Pushy Princess of Vista del Mar_" - I wonder if Samantha was using that are only because it is a very high-priced area -OR- in fact, Meghan lived there at one point???????
> "_She was becoming more like her mother_" - this one is *VERY*, *VERY* interesting .. sooooooo, Doria is a lot different than what we've seen?  *Ohhhh*, we need to find out more about this ..


 Excellent analysis @CeeJay


----------



## bag-mania

Snippet from the Vanity Fair article about Samantha’s book. Since VF is firmly a pro-Meghan publication I am only copying in the tiny part of it that we would be interested in.   

Meghan last saw her Florida-based half-sister in 2008, but that has not stopped Samantha from giving interviews about Meghan and making judgements about her new life as a royal. The book, _The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister: Part 1,_ is out now from Central Park South Publishing, a small press founded in 2020. 

Given the snippets of the book reported thus far, it’s just as well that Meghan has no plans to read it. With allegations that Meghan is “controlling” and that she has behaved disrespectfully towards the Queen and the Royal Family, it wouldn’t make for comfortable reading. In the book Samantha claims that she collaborated with a paparazzi to stage pictures that would portray her father, *Thomas Markle*, in a more honest light. When those photos of him in Mexico were revealed to be staged, they set off a media storm that led to Thomas pulling out of Meghan’s wedding to *Prince Harry.* 

Writing about Meghan’s relationship with her father, Samantha alleges that Meghan was “mean” on the phone to her father as soon as Harry left the room. In one passage, Samantha recalls how her father sounded upset when she had called to check in with him in the lead up to the wedding. “I said, ‘Dad, what’s going on, what’s wrong?” she writes. “He said, ‘This is really weird, she’s not the same. When Harry is in the room, she is very sweet and a different person, but when he steps out of the room, she is mean and controlling.’”









						Meghan Markle Is Not Worried About Samantha Markle’s Book, and Might Be Ready to Write a Book Of Her Own
					

Sources close to the Duchess of Sussex say her half-sister’s supposed tell-all has “barely registered on her radar.”




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Snippet from the Vanity Fair article about Samantha’s book. Since VF is firmly a pro-Meghan publication I am only copying in the tiny part of it that we would be interested in.
> 
> Meghan last saw her Florida-based half-sister in 2008, but that has not stopped Samantha from giving interviews about Meghan and making judgements about her new life as a royal. The book, _The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister: Part 1,_ is out now from Central Park South Publishing, a small press founded in 2020.
> 
> Given the snippets of the book reported thus far, it’s just as well that Meghan has no plans to read it. With allegations that Meghan is “controlling” and that she has behaved disrespectfully towards the Queen and the Royal Family, it wouldn’t make for comfortable reading. In the book Samantha claims that she collaborated with a paparazzi to stage pictures that would portray her father, *Thomas Markle*, in a more honest light. When those photos of him in Mexico were revealed to be staged, they set off a media storm that led to Thomas pulling out of Meghan’s wedding to *Prince Harry.*
> 
> Writing about Meghan’s relationship with her father, Samantha alleges that Meghan was “mean” on the phone to her father as soon as Harry left the room. In one passage, Samantha recalls how her father sounded upset when she had called to check in with him in the lead up to the wedding. “I said, ‘Dad, what’s going on, what’s wrong?” she writes. “He said, ‘This is really weird, she’s not the same. When Harry is in the room, she is very sweet and a different person, but when he steps out of the room, she is mean and controlling.’”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Not Worried About Samantha Markle’s Book, and Might Be Ready to Write a Book Of Her Own
> 
> 
> Sources close to the Duchess of Sussex say her half-sister’s supposed tell-all has “barely registered on her radar.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



Thanks for posting this as I don't want to click on VF, since it became part of MM's PR machine. 

“_He said, ‘This is really weird, she’s not the same. When Harry is in the room, she is very sweet and a different person, but when he steps out of the room, she is mean and controlling."_ This sentence describes the type of people I dislike!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this as I don't want to click on VF, since it became part of MM's PR machine.
> 
> “_He said, ‘This is really weird, she’s not the same. When Harry is in the room, she is very sweet and a different person, but when he steps out of the room, she is mean and controlling."_ This sentence describes the type of people I dislike!



That is the type of person that everybody dislikes. I have no trouble believing she was a different person depending on whether Harry was around her or not. I bet Harry has seen the real Meghan by now, however, and he is still with her.

I didn’t post the rest of the article because they started going on about some nonsense about how Meghan was thinking of writing her own book. Because Vanity Fair cannot bear anyone being remotely critical of Meghan without rushing to her defense and saying how she could could do it better!


----------



## viciel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly.
> Margaret, while a bit rebellious, had her mother there. I’m guessing the Queen Mother, even Phillip, would not have permitted Margaret to spin too far out of control.  QM well understood how disastrous the abdication was to all concerned. Charles seemingly supports H&M’s exit. Maybe because their exit works in his favor with his Great Reset.


Agreed! Margaret's idea of "For Queen and Country" is seemingly different than Sparkle's (For Queen Meghan and Country of One")


----------



## viciel

bag-mania said:


> It is self-published so it probably won't be purchased by your local library system unless someone requests it.


I was being facetious But then again, for all topics involving her majesty Meghan Markle one of course shall expect the library to make an exception


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That is the type of person that everybody dislikes. I have no trouble believing she was a different person depending on whether Harry was around her or not. I bet Harry has seen the real Meghan by now, however, and he is still with her.
> 
> I didn’t post the rest of the article because they started going on about some nonsense about how Meghan was thinking of writing her own book. Because Vanity Fair cannot bear anyone being remotely critical of Meghan without rushing to her defense and saying how she could could do it better!



 If H saw the real MM, he seems to be OK with it. He is not the fun/kind person he used to be. It's like the wrong side of his personality is getting stronger every day. 

We already have Funding Freedom by MM & Scobie, a second book? MM's PR-agency must have very strong connections with VF, whatever they write, VF publishes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Writing about Meghan’s relationship with her father, Samantha alleges that Meghan was “mean” on the phone to her father as soon as Harry left the room. In one passage, Samantha recalls how her father sounded upset when she had called to check in with him in the lead up to the wedding. “I said, ‘Dad, what’s going on, what’s wrong?” she writes. “He said, ‘This is really weird, she’s not the same. When Harry is in the room, she is very sweet and a different person, but when he steps out of the room, she is mean and controlling.’”



Why doesn't that surprise me one bit.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> We already have Funding Freedom by MM & Scobie, a second book?


Exactly! She's going to write another book to correct _Finding Freebies_?    Just how stupid is VF and MM's PR writing team?


----------



## Chanbal

While we wait for Justice Warby's decision, year review... here is one more great article by *Jan Moir *asking Harry to do the right thing:**

*Prince Harry can't turn his back on Britain but keep the baubles of a Disney princeling*

Time to consult ye olde crystal ball, shuffle the tarot cards, dig out my trusty drivel diviner to see what 2021 holds for Harry and Meghan and — uh oh!

The Sussexes are just over a year into their great finding freedom caper but if events of recent days are anything to go by, we have barely moved on from the petty hurts and status grievances first aired at the Sandringham Summit back in January 2020.

Misunderstandings about names on birth certificates or the lack thereof; the continued use of military titles deserved or undeserved; the implications of the word ‘royal’ itself; the old ways versus the new freewheeling style? Border skirmishes over the hastily staked out parameters of the new Sussex badlands seem to continue without respite.

Harry and Meghan wanted a new life and by God, everyone now knows exactly why and understands precisely how they were wronged and undermined at every fraught step of the way.

Many even sympathise with their plight; these headstrong possessors of razor-edged, first-class egos thrust into second-class roles by dint of protocol and that annoyingly immutable line of succession.

We all understand there can be no greater purgatory than being a member of a family where you feel you no longer belong. So Harry burned his bridges and Meghan torched her collection of garden-party hats and off they went in smoky collusion, united by their mutual loathing of restrictive royal conventions.

Except, of course, when those conventions suit them and can be used to monetise and facilitate their new careers in America. In which case unfurl that damned bunting, crack open the honorifics, dust off the medals and the tiaras and let’s get this party started.

After all this time, it is this conflict of royal interest that is still, still, still the problem.

Prince Harry is ready to ‘fight’ with Palace courtiers in a bid to hang onto his military positions, which include ceremonial and social roles across all three Services: Captain General of the Royal Marines; Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Bury St Edmunds; and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.

One understands why he doesn’t want to let go of this triumvirate of grand titles. I mean, what is the point of it all, unless he can wear his dashing dress uniform and medals to impress orb-eyed Americans; unless he can turn up like a real, live Disney prince at gala charity events on both sides of the Atlantic, with his glowing Cinderella at his side.

The Sussexes will be a dynamite draw: she is the homecoming queen, he her prized king, dazzling in his braids and gilt buttons, even if many of their simpler, Hollywood fans think that epaulettes are best when breadcrumbed and fried in butter, served with a nice salad on the side.

Yes, our Prince is a proud Army veteran with ten years’ service and two tours of Afghanistan to his credit. No one can take that away from him. Yet the truth is Harry wouldn’t be Captain General of the Trumpton Home Guard were it not for his royal status. He just about might still be Commodore-in-Chief of Small Ships, but only the ones that bob up and down in baby Archie’s bath, next to the rubber duckies.

You’re either in or you are out, the Queen has decreed. But the Sussexes continue to want the best of both worlds despite these strictures.

Harry and Meghan were once so desperate to flee the horrors of royal life they didn’t even have the decency to alert the Queen to their escape plan. Yet they have never been so desperate that they desired to give up being a duke and a duchess.

If they really wanted to carve out a progressive new role for themselves, surely the encumbrance of these ancient royal titles would have been the first thing to be ditched, in favour of the sunny, Californian, linked-not-ranked meritocracy that they claim to love and admire so much.

Instead, the duke and duchess still want to take comfort and shelter in those golden ribbons of privilege that tie them fast to their celebrity status. They want to pitch their tent on the sunlit uplands of freedom, but with the guy ropes still firmly affixed to the Buckingham Palace lawns.

And it is not going to work. That much is clear. It is not fair to the Army, Navy and Air Force bodies that the Prince represents.
They need certainty; they need to make plans, they need to book personnel for ceremonial duties. Most of all, they need a working member of the Royal Family at their disposal, and Harry may be many things, but he is no longer that.

It is not fair on the Queen, who has done her best to be accommodating, while protecting the House of Windsor. And it is not fair on many millions of good-hearted Britons, who don’t like to see our country maligned or misrepresented as an unwelcoming, racist backwater and who so often find themselves on the wrong end of another of the couple’s pious lectures — because like it or not, in ways both big and small, Harry still represents us.

Now that his future lies in Hollywood by his own design, Prince Harry might do well to listen to the blunt but wise words of Dirty Harry, the hero cop played by Clint Eastwood in the hit series of films: a man’s got to know his limitations.

So make my day, Harry — do the right thing.


----------



## marietouchet

Sam has not talked to MM since 2008 so any info after 2008 is presumably 2nd hand via Thomas, fair enough

Omid surely mostly went through the staff (eg the lady at KP staff who fact checked the book, PR staff, lawyers etc ) , that is no better than 3rd hand info

I don’t think Omid had tape recordings like Morton did, the Morton tapes that Diana made came out about the time FF was being written, I bet the tapes made H wince, so, there are no tapes, and of course, there is a general denial that O talked directly to MM and H

my bet is that O did talk to the glimmer twins but that was not the main source of info


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Somewhere along the line either Meghan thought (I know, it's a stretch) or somebody fed her the idea that if she landed Harry it'd be like taking over the U.S. Treasury Department Bureau of Engraving and Printing where she could churn out as much money as she wanted. All she'd have to do is scoop up all royal titles she could, crank out Meal Ticket, tearfully complain that royal life is horrifying, kick the RF to the curb and abscond with her gingered lackey to the Land of Milk All The Honey You Can. But that darned pandemic had to overshadow their grandiose dreams of lucre creation where they were only able to slobber up a lousy 180 million between Netflix and Spotify.  They risk losing their titles and therefore have to resort to whipping out and playing all the victim cards they can twist to describe themselves. Vanity Fair and other rags are doing their best to paint her as a hapless victim lucky to escape with her life and the clothes on her back. It's uncertain if Netflix/Spotify really are going to shell out as much as initially reported, maybe, maybe not, who knows, maybe even more? Their abode of many toilets requires tons of upkeep and staff. For them to still want to cling to all the royal trappings they claimed they wanted to dump begs one to wonder if 94 year old Granny was nothing more than their Plan B safety net. I think QEII knows she'd been played. If she cuts M&H off completely, titles and all, everyone knows all the victim cards will come out and the NYT and Vanity Fairs of the world will attempt M&H's rescue. Despite that, I think there'd be enough backlash to combat all royal flushes of victim cards, and M&H would be forced to grow up once and for all.


----------



## bag-mania

*How Meghan Markle's Father Revealed Royal Romance to Her Sister: 'She's Dating a Prince'*

Meghan Markle's half-sister found out about Prince Harry shortly before the royal relationship became public—after their father kept it secret for six months, she claims.

Samantha Grant was first told her sister was dating a descendant of Queen Elizabeth II during a telephone call in 2016.

Thomas Markle asked her "are you sitting down?" before revealing Meghan—then an actress on _Suits_—was "dating a prince."

In memoir _The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister_, Samantha Markle describes taking the call after she "got in the door from the grocery store."

The book states: "I answered it, and to my surprise, it was my dad. He was excited, but in a cautious voice he asked, 'Are you sitting down?'

"I said, 'Well yeah of course I'm sitting down, I'm in a wheelchair.' My dad's favorite thing to say was always, 'Cut to the chase.'

"So I said, 'OK Dad, cut to the chase. What's up?' I could hear the reluctance in his voice, and then he said contently, 'Well I got a call from Meg. She's dating a prince,' he said.

"I said, 'Well OK so, what else did she say? Is he nice? I thought [Meghan's ex-husband] Trevor [Engelson] was Prince Charming. Who is this prince?'

"I was thinking he might be from some obscure country, who is far removed, and has six names.

"My dad replied, 'Well, he's British. It's Prince Harry.' I said, 'Dad, what exactly did
she say?' 'Not a whole lot, she just said, Daddy, I met a prince'."

Prince Harry—who has four given names, Henry Charles Albert David—began dating Meghan in 2016 and their relationship was revealed in U.K. newspaper the _Sunday Express_ in late October.

Samantha Markle writes that her father called her shortly before the first story appeared, and said he had known about the prince for six months but not told anyone.

The book states: "My dad said, 'Just avoid the media, and someone will be calling us to brief us on how to deal with it.'

"I said 'OK, that sounds reasonable, but when?' He had no idea, and I didn't really think anything of it.

"I thought most likely they would stop dating, and nobody would call us, so why worry about it."

She added: "Over the next couple of hours, my phone started ringing off the wall, but it wasn't the media calling me, it was friends and acquaintances, coming out of the woodwork, and calling to let me know that they read in the tabloids that my sister was dating Prince Harry.

"I thought 'Wow, word travels fast!' It was odd to me that tabloid readers knew what was going on, before we did.

"It turned out that my dad knew for about six months but was keeping it a secret."

She describes giving her first interview over the phone to a "soft-spoken British journalist," giving rise to a front-page story in _The Sun_ with the headline "Princess Pushy."

The story quoted Samantha Markle saying "the Queen would be appalled," though she claims it was her boyfriend who said that line in the background of the call.

Media interviews by Samantha and other Markle family members became a sticking point between Meghan and her father.

The Duchess of Sussex sent Thomas Markle a letter in August 2018, three months after the royal wedding, pleading with him to stop talking to the media.

Quoted in a recent court filing, it read: "I pleaded you to stop reading the tabloids.

"On daily basis you fixated and clicked on the lies they were writing about me, especially those manufactured by your other daughter, who I barely know."

It adds: "You watched me silently suffer at the hand of her vicious lies, I crumbled inside."









						How Meghan Markle's Father Revealed Royal Romance to Her Sister
					

Meghan Markle's sister thought Prince Harry "might be from some obscure country" and have "six names" when her father first revealed the royal relationship.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Somewhere along the line either Meghan thought (I know, it's a stretch) or somebody fed her the idea that if she landed Harry it'd be like taking over the U.S. Treasury Department Bureau of Engraving and Printing where she could churn out as much money as she wanted. All she'd have to do is scoop up all royal titles she could, crank out Meal Ticket, tearfully complain that royal life is horrifying, kick the RF to the curb and abscond with her gingered lackey to the Land of Milk All The Honey You Can. But that darned pandemic had to overshadow their grandiose dreams of lucre creation where they were only able to slobber up a lousy 180 million between Netflix and Spotify.  They risk losing their titles and therefore have to resort to whipping out and playing all the victim cards they can twist to describe themselves. Vanity Fair and other rags are doing their best to paint her as a hapless victim lucky to escape with her life and the clothes on her back. It's uncertain if Netflix/Spotify really are going to shell out as much as initially reported, maybe, maybe not, who knows, maybe even more? Their abode of many toilets requires tons of upkeep and staff. For them to still want to cling to all the royal trappings they claimed they wanted to dump begs one to wonder if 94 year old Granny was nothing more than their Plan B safety net. I think QEII knows she'd been played. If she cuts M&H off completely, titles and all, everyone knows all the victim cards will come out and the NYT and Vanity Fairs of the world will attempt M&H's rescue. Despite that, I think there'd be enough backlash to combat all royal flushes of victim cards, and M&H would be forced to grow up once and for all.


Oh yes, these two with their big egos are not making QE's life easy, but I trust she will do the right thing. I believe that her country (and most of the rest of the world) would support her.  

Regarding 'their abode of many toilets', the duke and duchess can always convert it to an Airbnb where tourists and locals can experience royal life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> "I said, 'Well OK so, what else did she say? *Is he nice? *I thought [Meghan's ex-husband] Trevor [Engelson] was Prince Charming. Who is this prince?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle's Father Revealed Royal Romance to Her Sister
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister thought Prince Harry "might be from some obscure country" and have "six names" when her father first revealed the royal relationship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Geeee, both people ask if Harry is nice?  Co-inky-dink? 



			https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/27/meghan-on-harry-i-didnt-know-much-about-him-
		

*i-just-asked-is-he-nice*


----------



## TC1

And here I'd heard she didn't know ANYTHING about the Royal family *shrug*


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Thank you to Chanbal for posting the article by Jan Moir which is clear, precise and rational.

One hopes that the Queen and her advisors understand the futility of continuing to enable H and MM. One can love a child and make them welcome yet know when it is time to tighten the purse. In this case, the traditions, honor and integrity of a monarchy are devalued and diminished. They insult the Queen and the British people with their greed and sense of entitlement. As an American, I find them vacuous, uninspiring and without merit. I wish they would slink away and stop announcing every burp and epiphany. I can only imagine how the British feel. I do hope that Jan Moir’s comments are read by those advising the Queen. Stop the madness.


----------



## csshopper

Note to MM: you can run, but you can't hide. Too much is forever a click away on the Net.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> If H saw the real MM, he seems to be OK with it. He is not the fun/kind person he used to be. It's like the wrong side of his personality is getting stronger every day.
> 
> We already have Funding Freedom by MM & Scobie, a second book? MM's PR-agency must have very strong connections with VF, whatever they write, VF publishes.


Actually I think if he leaves her he might have to pay back the 50 million dollars for the wedding?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Yes, our Prince is a proud Army veteran with ten years’ service and two tours of Afghanistan to his credit. No one can take that away from him. Yet the truth is Harry wouldn’t be Captain General of the *Trumpton Home Guard* were it not for his royal status. He just about might still be Commodore-in-Chief of Small Ships, but only the ones that bob up and down in baby Archie’s bath, next to the rubber duckies.



Slightly obscure British cultural reference for tPF's global audience (my dad loved Trumpton!):


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> Note to MM: you can run, but you can't hide. Too much is forever a click away on the Net.



Yep!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take it all with a huge grain of alt, new poll results — in order,
1= William, 2= QE, 3= Kate, 4= Anne, 5= Philip, 6= Zara, 7= Charles, 8= Harry, 9= Camilla, 10= Sophie, 11= MM








						The most popular royalty in the UK | Politics | YouGov Ratings
					

The most popular royalty in the UK according to YouGov Ratings. Popularity is based on millions of responses from the British public and YouGov's innovative survey methodology.




					yougov.co.uk
				





Prince Harry
Prince Harry is the 8th most popular royalty and the 4th most famous.
WHAT GREAT BRITAIN THINKS OF PRINCE HARRY

Ratings *41*%POSITIVE OPINION
*32*%NEGATIVE OPINION

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex
Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is the 11th most popular royalty and the 5th most famous.
WHAT GREAT BRITAIN THINKS OF MEGHAN, DUCHESS OF SUSSEX

Ratings *32*%POSITIVE OPINION
*40*%NEGATIVE OPINION


----------



## bag-mania

Samantha’s book is #1 in “Royalty Biographies” on Amazon. Not too shabby.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Is this true?

I might have lost the last shred of respect I had for James C.... 









						Prince Harry decries 'these isolated times' in English Rugby speech
					

Prince Harry described life under coronavirus as 'these isolated times' tonight as he marked 150 years of England Rugby from his home in California




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Thick as a brick, a red brick, as usual, can't see the irony is speaking out about Rugby and being their Patron while the video that is the source of his comments relentlessly  celebrates the team aspect and coming together. Meanwhile Harry is on the other side of the world, and by his choice or the coercion of his wife, is not part of the RF "team" which made his Patronage possible.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Is this true?
> 
> I might have lost the last shred of respect I had for James C....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry decries 'these isolated times' in English Rugby speech
> 
> 
> Prince Harry described life under coronavirus as 'these isolated times' tonight as he marked 150 years of England Rugby from his home in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yep, it’s sweep week/month, Super Bowl is Sunday, CBS needs viewers.  Shameless attempt to make H relevant. Face looks puffy, bald spot continues to grow, definitely not aging well.  Privacy? So not private. 









						Prince Harry hangs with James Corden and camera crew on double-decker
					

The 36-year-old member of the British royal family was seen hanging out with fellow Brit James Corden on the top of a double-decker bus in Hollywood on Friday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Comment from DM on the Harry bus tour article - spot on!


----------



## lulilu

Corden and wife attended the wedding.  I would say I thought they are friends, but they invited all sorts of celebrities they didn't know.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lulilu said:


> Corden and wife attended the wedding.  I would say I thought they are friends, but they invited all sorts of celebrities they didn't know.


Mutual fame whorery


----------



## Chanbal

lulilu said:


> Corden and wife attended the wedding.  I would say I thought they are friends, but they invited all sorts of celebrities they didn't know.



It's more than time to cash in on the rest of the guests. Oprah has been doing a lot, but they need to give an opportunity to others. Clooney, where are you? Did you send them a Flowbee?

I wonder if the weeding guest list was organized with the help of SS, they put together a well-rounded and very useful list.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Comment from DM on the Harry bus tour article - spot on!
> View attachment 4981509


You people don't understand, all these appearances are being dictated by the palace. You will see! All this will be addressed in Funding Freedom Part 2. Keep an eye on Amazon, and don't forget to also order plenty of Kleenex boxes.... So much pain and suffering!


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Is this true?
> 
> I might have lost the last shred of respect I had for James C....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry decries 'these isolated times' in English Rugby speech
> 
> 
> Prince Harry described life under coronavirus as 'these isolated times' tonight as he marked 150 years of England Rugby from his home in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4981423



Wonder if Corden will film them at their mansion with Meghan pouring him tea.   

Seriously if Meghan doesn’t appear at the beginning or end of this show we’ll know she’s pregnant. There’s no way in hell she would miss the opportunity to be on screen otherwise.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Actually I think if he leaves her he might have to pay back the 50 million dollars for the wedding?



I doubt it. What makes you think that?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I doubt it. What makes you think that?


Can you imagine the lawsuits THAT would cause?!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, it’s sweep week/month, Super Bowl is Sunday, CBS needs viewers.  Shameless attempt to make H relevant. Face looks puffy, bald spot continues to grow, definitely not aging well.  Privacy? So not private.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hangs with James Corden and camera crew on double-decker
> 
> 
> The 36-year-old member of the British royal family was seen hanging out with fellow Brit James Corden on the top of a double-decker bus in Hollywood on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think they are becoming more irrelevant every day.  And she is probably smart enough to realize it (unless her head to so big she can't see reality).  So?  what to do?  I don't think a baby will get all that much attention.  I see divorce or going back to the family as best options - maybe divorce and H goes back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I think they are becoming more irrelevant every day.  And she is probably smart enough to realize it (unless her head to so big she can't see reality).  So?  what to do?  I don't think a baby will get all that much attention.  I see divorce or *going back to the family as best options -* maybe divorce and H goes back.



Agree.  This lil H&M folly has caused enough consternation. Charles and the rest of the BRF crowd need to realize we strongly dislike their meddling in our business. Diana who? QE was right — in order to be believed, the BRF needs to be seen. The H&M merching is just insulting to many of us. Rumor is Bob Iger wants to be the US British ambassador. Hmmm.


----------



## Allisonfaye

duna said:


> This said by someone who travels on private jets



Lots of that kind of hypocrisy going on these days.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> seems like BS to me
> I can't think of anyone else whose sole "job" is spouting out info to tell everyone what to do and supposedly doing good works.  there are other wealthy people who have foundations and do a lot of good.  but they have other "jobs"/businesses.  these two are just in the business of preaching to the masses.  He was a prince but now who is he? who needs them?  when are they going to make some major monetary contribution to something?



I don't know. More and more I am deciding most wealthy people's 'foundations' are just a tax dodge. They live the high life taking high salaries and giving high salaries to family and friends on the backs of taxpayers.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> All of the assets are moved to Travalyst?  we need an accountant to weigh in here.  so many questions.  they could be drawing a large salary from the non-profit I think.  Of course even if they were paid $500K each as executives, that wouldn't be enough for their lavish lifestyle.
> based in UK but they would still have to pay US income tax?



I am guessing they can pass through the expenses to the non profit.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> Here's a cut/paste from Travalyst:
> 
> "Led by The Duke of Sussex, Travalyst is a bold global initiative founded by Booking.com, Skyscanner, Trip.com Group, Tripadvisor and Visa, with the ambition to change the impact of travel, for good.
> 
> We believe in the power and importance of travel and that we also have a shared responsibility to our planet and to each other.
> 
> *That’s why we’re coming together as a catalyst for change.*
> 
> We want to be the driving force that paves a new way to travel, helping everyone explore our world in a way that protects both people and places, and secures a positive future for destinations and local communities for generations to come."
> 
> 
> Let me guess, their ultimate goal is to allow travel for only those people who agree that "free speech" is a horrible concept. The only people who'd get to travel are Harry and Meghan's activist sugars who think they're just wonderful role models. Critics of H&M will be ordered to stay home, shut up, be deprogrammed and brainwashed on how to "think and communicate the CORRECT way". Like, if you have a private jet, by all means--fly everywhere, it's fine if you pretend to feel guilty about it or criticize others for doing it. Likewise, living in a safe gated mansion with servants and groundskeepers--criticize those who live in small homes in non-upscale neighborhoods for using plastic bags and straws. And if you save your money to buy a plane ticket to see family members, it'd better be "sustainable travel". Apparently, if you fly several thousand miles to Africa on a private jet with a huge entourage of PR people and servants, it's fine to gripe about how hard your life is and expect a pity party. And then wonder why people say "mean things" and must be shut down.



POST OF THE DAY!!


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't know. More and more I am deciding most wealthy people's 'foundations' are just a tax dodge. They live the high life taking high salaries and giving high salaries to family and friends on the backs of taxpayers.


A famous US family *******en, charged a lot of expenses eg staff, travel to foundation
ps hint On name , the wife ran for us prez


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

More on the James Corden adventures.

*Prince Harry Makes Rare Public Appearance Filming With James Corden in Los Angeles*
On Friday, Feb. 5, Prince Harry was spotted filming with James Corden in Los Angeles. The two were photographed on top of an open-air double decker bus, operated by a popular sightseeing tour company, with a small camera crew, leaving a studio lot containing the sound stage where the host shoots _The Late Late Show With James Corden_.

According to _People_, Harry, 36, and James, 42, filmed for _Carpool Karaoke_, the series' popular recurring musical segment. E! News confirmed that the two were accompanied by a police escort and by the Duke of Sussex's private security team and followed proper COVID protocols.

Harry appeared to be in great spirits, smiling as he sat on the bus with James, a longtime friend who attended his and wife Meghan Markle's 2018 royal wedding and even emceed the reception.

This marked a rare public appearance for the duke, who has been spending most of his time during the coronavirus pandemic in Montecito, Calif. located 90 miles northwest of Los Angeles, along with Meghan, 39, and their 21-month-old son Archie Harrison. The family moved to the California town, home of fellow celebs such as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, last year following the couple's official exit from their roles as senior members of the United Kingdom's royal family.

Meghan, a former _Suits_ actress and Los Angeles native, and Archie did not join Harry and James during their filming. 






						Prince Harry Makes Rare Public Appearance Filming With James Corden - E! Online
					






					www.eonline.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, it’s sweep week/month, Super Bowl is Sunday, CBS needs viewers.  Shameless attempt to make H relevant. Face looks puffy, bald spot continues to grow, definitely not aging well.  Privacy? So not private.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hangs with James Corden and camera crew on double-decker
> 
> 
> The 36-year-old member of the British royal family was seen hanging out with fellow Brit James Corden on the top of a double-decker bus in Hollywood on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


His bald spot is starting to look like the monks' haircuts on Vikings!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@purseinsanity  Exactly what I thought!  We’ll see how the US media handles this. Anyone else would be mocked.  With all his lawsuits, he may get an (undeserved) pass.

Harry “sings” here” —





Spoiler: William does it better :)


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> @purseinsanity  Exactly what I thought!  We’ll see how the US media handles this. Anyone else would be mocked.  With all his lawsuits, he may get an (undeserved) pass.
> 
> Harry “sings” here” —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: William does it better :smile:



On celebrities singing talents ...
chelsea handler has youtube video where she writes song with diplo , hilarious but amazingly informative as to the transmutations that are electronically possible in the studio , nothing is real anymore
search youtube for Chelsea diplo


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> @purseinsanity  Exactly what I thought!  We’ll see how the US media handles this. Anyone else would be mocked.  With all his lawsuits, he may get an (undeserved) pass.
> 
> Harry “sings” here” —
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: William does it better :smile:



William (and Kate) do everything better


----------



## CarryOn2020

Buh-bye, H&M








						Meghan and Harry had secret 'introductory meeting' with Gov. Newsom
					

The Sussexes took part in a virtual hour-long meeting with the ********ic governor on October 19, according to a memo obtained by The Sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

“At the time, the presidential election was just two weeks away and Newsom was facing mounting calls to line up a woman of color to replace then-California Senator ************* if she was elected vice president.”

Maybe Meghan was volunteering to take her place.


----------



## bag-mania

Another appearance with Harry by himself. This is his third solo job in a month. Yup, Meghan is definitely knocked up. There can be no doubt.

*Prince Harry Suits Up for a Solo Appearance to Celebrate 150 Years of England Rugby*
The duke looked smart while speaking from his Montecito home.
In honor of the 150th anniversary of England Rugby, Prince Harrymade a solo video appearance while wearing a sleek navy suit jacket and open white shirt.

In the short video clip, Harry said, "Rugby union has brought joy to millions of people with teams full of great characters and special players. In these isolated times, the sheer passion and enjoyment that sport offers can bring great comfort to many."

He continued, "As proud patron of the Rugby Football Union, I join millions of supporters across the entire world in celebrating 150 years of England Rugby."

The Duke of Sussex recorded the message from his home in Montecito, giving fans a glimpse inside the house he shares with Duchess Meghan, and their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor. 

Earlier this week, Prince Harry was also featured in a new Invictus Games video shared on social media. The video's caption revealed on Instagram, "Marking the announcement that the Invictus Games The Hague 2020 have once again been postponed due to the Coronavirus Pandemic, the Invictus Games Foundation Patron, The Duke of Sussex, joins past and present competitors in a rallying call for the future Games, a message of resilience, and tells international healthcare workers that 'we're with you.'"









						Prince Harry Suits Up for a Solo Appearance to Celebrate 150 Years of England Rugby
					

The duke looked smart while speaking from his Montecito home.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## viciel

bag-mania said:


> Another appearance with Harry by himself. This is his third solo job in a month. Yup, Meghan is definitely knocked up. There can be no doubt.
> 
> *Prince Harry Suits Up for a Solo Appearance to Celebrate 150 Years of England Rugby*
> The duke looked smart while speaking from his Montecito home.
> In honor of the 150th anniversary of England Rugby, Prince Harrymade a solo video appearance while wearing a sleek navy suit jacket and open white shirt.
> 
> In the short video clip, Harry said, "Rugby union has brought joy to millions of people with teams full of great characters and special players. In these isolated times, the sheer passion and enjoyment that sport offers can bring great comfort to many."
> 
> He continued, "As proud patron of the Rugby Football Union, I join millions of supporters across the entire world in celebrating 150 years of England Rugby."
> 
> The Duke of Sussex recorded the message from his home in Montecito, giving fans a glimpse inside the house he shares with Duchess Meghan, and their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> Earlier this week, Prince Harry was also featured in a new Invictus Games video shared on social media. The video's caption revealed on Instagram, "Marking the announcement that the Invictus Games The Hague 2020 have once again been postponed due to the Coronavirus Pandemic, the Invictus Games Foundation Patron, The Duke of Sussex, joins past and present competitors in a rallying call for the future Games, a message of resilience, and tells international healthcare workers that 'we're with you.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Suits Up for a Solo Appearance to Celebrate 150 Years of England Rugby
> 
> 
> The duke looked smart while speaking from his Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



I've been to rugby matches, these are games of men, not babies so why Harry is involved at all puzzles me. I means, he's a few steps behind being a man at this point.


----------



## bag-mania

viciel said:


> I've been to rugby matches, these are games of men, not babies so why Harry is involved at all puzzles me. I means, he's a few steps behind being a man at this point.



All I can guess is maybe this is connected to one of his patronages. I have to keep reminding myself that some people still like Harry.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> “At the time, the presidential election was just two weeks away and Newsom was facing mounting calls to line up a woman of color to replace then-California Senator ************* if she was elected vice president.”
> 
> Maybe Meghan was volunteering to take her place.


My thoughts exactly.  If she had become senator through no merit except being a WOC when it's convenient, it's another reason I can't wait to move out of the God forsaken state.


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/politics/alex-padilla-******-california-senate.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very scary feeling there for a minute.  Whew.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/politics/alex-padilla-******-california-senate.html


LOL, sorry, I should have said "If she had become Senator..."

I still want to move out of state.  Just sharing airspace with this useless couple is making me feel ill.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> On celebrities singing talents ...
> chelsea handler has youtube video where she writes song with diplo , hilarious but amazingly informative as to the transmutations that are electronically possible in the studio , nothing is real anymore
> search youtube for Chelsea diplo


If you can't sing live, you can't sing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Compare and contrast time ... others have had difficulties navigating their way into high British society but they hung in there 


Duchess of Rutland was left 'sobbing' when moving into Belvoir Castle









						Duchess of Rutland was left 'sobbing' when moving into Belvoir Castle
					

Speaking on her new podcast Duchess, mother-of-five Emma Manners, 57, revealed how life change when she moved to Belvoir Castle in 1992 after marrying  the 11th Duke of Rutland.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> If you can't sing live, you can't sing.


no one really sings anymore ... it all goes through the mixing board ...

I know another book that Talks to all the effects laid on real time during concerts, eg roadies sometimes do the guitar effects not the guitarist, and the singer voice is amplified, distorted, effected ad nauseum by those at the boards

if you have any interest in the more technical part of what goes on behind the scenes for rock n roll, Roadie by Matt McGinn is a great book , emphasis is on equipment rather than sex and dope , he is the Coldplay guitarist tech


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> More on the James Corden adventures.
> 
> *Prince Harry Makes Rare Public Appearance Filming With James Corden in Los Angeles*
> On Friday, Feb. 5, Prince Harry was spotted filming with James Corden in Los Angeles. The two were photographed on top of an open-air double decker bus, operated by a popular sightseeing tour company, with a small camera crew, leaving a studio lot containing the sound stage where the host shoots _The Late Late Show With James Corden_.
> 
> According to _People_, Harry, 36, and James, 42, filmed for _Carpool Karaoke_, the series' popular recurring musical segment. E! News confirmed that the two were accompanied by a police escort and by the Duke of Sussex's private security team and followed proper COVID protocols.
> 
> Harry appeared to be in great spirits, smiling as he sat on the bus with James, a longtime friend who attended his and wife Meghan Markle's 2018 royal wedding and even emceed the reception.
> 
> This marked a rare public appearance for the duke, who has been spending most of his time during the coronavirus pandemic in Montecito, Calif. located 90 miles northwest of Los Angeles, along with Meghan, 39, and their 21-month-old son Archie Harrison. The family moved to the California town, home of fellow celebs such as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, last year following the couple's official exit from their roles as senior members of the United Kingdom's royal family.
> 
> Meghan, a former _Suits_ actress and Los Angeles native, and Archie did not join Harry and James during their filming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Makes Rare Public Appearance Filming With James Corden - E! Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com



The title of this article is incorrect, H's appearance is not, unfortunately, 'rare'! While Cringe seems to be spending time in an 'image' retreat, Ginger has been all over the place.


----------



## Chanbal

Does Ginger look 'smart'?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Does Ginger look 'smart'?
> 
> View attachment 4982550



Hey now, he bothered to put on a suit jacket. That’s about as smart as he’s going to look in his current “work one day every other month” lifestyle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Does Ginger look 'smart'?
> 
> View attachment 4982550



Maybe SNL needs to do a skit about it, or his ‘dad’ should tell him:
No one ever looks smart with a bird’s nest sitting on his head.  

Interesting that he wants to look credible [royal?] _now_. Has the palace sent a memo?  If so, surely they advised him to wear a tie.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, sorry, I should have said "If she had become Senator..."
> 
> I still want to move out of state.  Just sharing airspace with this useless couple is making me feel ill.



Someone should ask the governor why he set aside an hour of his time to have an appointment with them. They were certainly pushing some agenda to get the meeting. They probably offered him their valuable advice and he had to politely listen and then pretend to take it under consideration and thank them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Compare and contrast time ... others have had difficulties navigating their way into high British society but they hung in there
> 
> 
> Duchess of Rutland was left 'sobbing' when moving into Belvoir Castle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Rutland was left 'sobbing' when moving into Belvoir Castle
> 
> 
> Speaking on her new podcast Duchess, mother-of-five Emma Manners, 57, revealed how life change when she moved to Belvoir Castle in 1992 after marrying  the 11th Duke of Rutland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im



I read the article, and she even had reasons to sob, not a temper tantrum because she thought people didn't bow down deep enough, figuratively speaking.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Someone should ask the governor why he set aside an hour of his time to have an appointment with them. They were certainly pushing some agenda to get the meeting. They probably offered him their valuable advice and he had to politely listen and then pretend to take it under consideration and thank them.


rumor has it, the governor was searching for a WOC to replace ****** ie there was a very small pool he was considering, if you believe the story ... 

he probably turned to powerful WOC in the state for advice eg Oprah who in turn ....

the post went to a Hispanic/Latino gentleman


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The title of this article is incorrect, H's appearance is not, unfortunately, 'rare'! While Cringe seems to be spending time in an 'image' retreat, Ginger has been all over the place.


Meghan was not on the bus with H and Corden ... discuss ...

we have not seen anything but her face for how long ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Admittedly I have not looked too closely, I have not seen anything that says MM was in serious consideration for the position. Maybe she was, maybe not. With so many qualified and respected  candidates, she had 0 chance.









						Gavin Newsom pressured to pick ‘woman of color’ to fill Kamala Harris’ Senate seat
					

Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing a mounting pressure campaign to fill Vice President-elect *************’ vacated Senate seat with a “woman of color” — as a Hispanic male front-r…




					nypost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Come on now, people. That's just one of the filler pieces to make her look important. Nobody was considering Duchess Disney as a senator.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Come on now, people. That's just one of the filler pieces to make her look important. Nobody was considering Duchess Disney as a senator.


This!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Check out Omid Scobie’s tweets — taking some swipes at QE and her money. So tacky. 


Speaking of tacky, no way I would get in that clown car.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Admittedly I have not looked too closely, I have not seen anything that says MM was in serious consideration for the position. Maybe she was, maybe not. With so many qualified and respected  candidates, she had 0 chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gavin Newsom pressured to pick ‘woman of color’ to fill Kamala Harris’ Senate seat
> 
> 
> Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing a mounting pressure campaign to fill Vice President-elect *************’ vacated Senate seat with a “woman of color” — as a Hispanic male front-r…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I know what you are all thinking "MT, you silly person, he was not SERIOUSLY considering HER for the job ". I would agree with that.

But, he needed to have records showing that he exhausted the subject of WOMEN before moving on and interviewing MEN. 

That is an industry standard technique, pad the HR records to show how much you considered alternatives before doing what you wanted in the first place


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I have no huge opinions on US domestic politics anyway besides the obvious things, but from what I read the guy he picked is the first Latino senator representing California, which is a step forward too even if he is a man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I know what you are all thinking "MT, you silly person, he was not SERIOUSLY considering HER for the job ". I would agree with that.
> 
> But, he needed to have records showing that he exhausted the subject of WOMEN before moving on and interviewing MEN.
> 
> *That is an industry standard technique, pad the HR records to show how much you considered alternatives before doing what you wanted in the first place*



Not silly at all. The bold part, especially, is astute, explains exactly how things get done.  I agree, he was covering his back-side. Maybe he even wanted some of the Royal gold dust to fall his way.  The funny part of the story is that, after meeting the grifters, he gave them a hard pass.  Most royals wouldn’t subject themselves to that level of rejection, would they?  The question is - would he have taken a meeting with just her?  I doubt it.

ETA:  because covid is messing with my sense of time, some perspective:
2018:



2021:



Boom.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Check out Omid Scobie’s tweets — taking some swipes at QE and her money. So tacky.



Those people definitely do not follow their close friend Michelle's motto "When they go low, we go high"...what does Scobie think disrespecting the Queen will get him?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2021:
> View attachment 4982813
> 
> 
> Boom.



Oh wow, that's bad. When he got married it was just a little less hair, not a full on bald spot.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not silly at all. The bold part, especially, is astute, explains exactly how things get done.  I agree, he was covering his back-side. Maybe he even wanted some of the Royal gold dust to fall his way.  The funny part of the story is that, after meeting the grifters, he gave them a hard pass.  Most royals wouldn’t subject themselves to that level of rejection, would they?  The question is - would he have taken a meeting with just her?  I doubt it.
> 
> ETA:  because covid is messing with my sense of time, some perspective:
> 2018:
> View attachment 4982812
> 
> 
> 2021:
> View attachment 4982813
> 
> 
> Boom.


Wow I take it all back JCMH and MM.  you really have had a rough couple years!!


----------



## bag-mania

I’m not going to diss Harry for hair loss, that’s genetic and out of his control. There is so much annoying about him that is in his control to criticize him about.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree.  This lil H&M folly has caused enough consternation. Charles and the rest of the BRF crowd need to realize we strongly dislike their meddling in our business. Diana who? QE was right — in order to be believed, the BRF needs to be seen. The H&M merching is just insulting to many of us. *Rumor is Bob Iger wants to be the US British ambassador*. Hmmm.


That is considered "the BEST" Ambassadorial assignment (and I can tell you that their parties are pretty epic - I was very lucky to be able to attend one way back in the day).  However, all that .. I'm not so sure that he will get the assignment because it really does require someone who knows the diplomatic core and principles.  Sad to see the assignments going to people who really don't know what the job is all about .. it used to be pretty hard to get into the Diplomatic core; you had to have the appropriate education and (in general) had to do a fair amount of internship.  I had a neighbor who was in the diplomatic core ..


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Someone should ask the governor why he set aside an hour of his time to have an appointment with them. They were certainly pushing some agenda to get the meeting. They probably offered him their valuable advice and he had to politely listen and then pretend to take it under consideration and thank them.


Well, considering that there is an outstanding (and many signatures) recall being declared on Newsom .. well then, what 'advice' can he give them and/or vice-versa???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’m not going to diss Harry for hair loss, that’s genetic and out of his control. There is so much annoying about him that is in his control to criticize him about.



I'm not critizising him, I was honestly shocked because my first thought was that stress furthers hairloss. It obviously does run in the family seeing his father, brother, uncle.


----------



## Chanbal

I took one for the team and purchased Samantha's book. Until a better review is provided, here is mine for the members of this thread:

The book could benefit from an editorial review, but it reads well. A large part of the book is about the Markle’s family, its humble beginnings, and Samantha’s difficulties with multiple sclerosis. It looks like some information has been removed from the book, particularly around the time MM would be attending Northwestern university (??). However, she makes a point that their father paid for all MM’s very costly education from pre-school to the end of college. In college, MM didn’t qualify for scholarships/financial aid grants due to the amount of money her father was making at that time. He paid also a “hefty fee” for her internship in Argentina where MM stayed “in the most amazing penthouse” (MM description). Samantha never heard MM express gratitude to Dad or uncle Mike who helped MM get the internship.

Samantha explains that the father raised the 3 kids almost as a single father, and that MM benefited from being born at a time when father was making a lot of money. Father adored MM and “was putting everything in place for her,” so she could have a nice career after college. He actively participated in all MM’s education, including giving her the idea of writing the ‘famous’ letters to Gloria Allred and Hillary C.

There were comments and attitudes from MM when growing up that should have raised red flags about MM’s character, but Samantha dismissed them and gave the benefit of the doubt. It looks like Samantha was a part of MM’s life at the time of her marriage to Trevor, but she couldn’t attend the weeding due to the difficulties of being in wheelchair and the sand (beach wedding). However, all family loved Trevor, he was a very nice person. Dad was very happy and proud of MM, “he poured so much of his heart and soul into Meghan”. Tom was always a wonderful and supportive father to MM.

When the father was retired, and supporting grandma Markle in an expensive nursing home, Samantha called MM and asked if she could pay back a "little bit" of her tuition money (father had spent over 1 million dollars with MM's education). At that time, MM was making a “fair amount of money”, traveling and having fun, so she could perhaps help a little. Samantha’s suggestion was not well received, and MM’s response was “there are too many cooks in the kitchen”. Father never asked MM for anything.

She talks also a little about Tom and Doria’s marriage and divorce. How she felt that Doria’s attitude made her (and brother) feel excluded from the family. Doria never helped Samantha with suggestions to deal with her disability, despite having some knowledge from working with the elderly. In the book, Doria’s motto was “if people can’t do more for you, than you can do for yourself, then you don’t need them”, which is in line with her published mantra, “don’t give away the milk for free Flower” (Flower was MM's nickname). MM seems to share the same motto/mantra. 

According to Samantha, MM is “not a humanitarian, and not princess Diana”. She seems to believe that MM never wanted to have her father attending the weeding in the UK. It's possible that MM 'fabricated' some facts about her family, and couldn’t risk having her father contradict them. Father learned about MM&H’s relationship 6 months before it hit the tabloids, but he kept it a secret from everyone. He was very happy for MM. When he asked for details about the wedding, MM’s answer was always “lay low” and he was kept in the dark. When dad didn't follow one of MM's unreasonable demands related to her siblings, MM "abruptly" said "then I have nothing more to say. We have nothing more to talk about."

Paparazzi and tabloids portrayed the family in a terrible light and made a lot of money with it. It was an embarrassment for both Markle and Ragland families not to have received weeding invitations. Samantha thought that Doria's family was very nice and shouldn't have been excluded from the wedding. While Samantha wrote the book to convey the truth about her family, she doesn’t deny that money can help a lot with her bills and disability.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I took one for the team and purchased Samantha's book. Until a better review is provided, here is mine for the members of this thread:



Wow, thank you!



> In the book, Doria’s motto was “if people can’t do more for you, than you can do for yourself, then you don’t need them”, which is in line with her published mantra, “don’t give away the milk for free Flower” (Flower was MM's nickname). MM seems to share the same motto/mantra.



Wow, if that's true that doesn't reflect well on her character at all.



> According to Samantha, MM is “not a humanitarian, and not princess Diana”. She seems to believe that MM never wanted to have her father attending the weeding in the UK. *It's possible that MM 'fabricated' some facts about her family, and couldn’t risk having her father contradict them.*



That was my guess from the beginning.



> Father learned about MM&H’s relationship 6 months before it hit the tabloids, but he kept it a secret from everyone. He was very happy for MM.



And apparently she announced it with "I have met a prince". "I have met a prince", not "I have met someone who is kind". Oh well.



> When he asked for details about the wedding, MM’s answer was always “lay low” and he was kept in the dark. When dad didn't follow one of MM's unreasonable demands related to her siblings, MM "abruptly" said "then I have nothing more to say. We have nothing more to talk about."



You know, so far everything you typed out for us seems to be absolutely in line with what we've learned about Meghan's character and attitude.



> Paparazzi and tabloids portrayed the family in a terrible light and made a lot of money with it. It was an embarrassment for both Markle and Ragland families not to have received weeding invitations. Samantha thought that Doria's family was very nice and shouldn't have been excluded from the wedding. While Samantha wrote the book to convey the truth about her family, she doesn’t deny that money can help a lot with her bills and disability.



I mean, Meghan herself is leeching off another family. If Samantha can make the connection into cash, at this point I say "Go ahead". If Meghan hadn't treated her whole family like sh*t and fed them to the lions that is the yellow press, maybe they'd have been more tightlipped.


----------



## bisousx

I wonder why Doria was so noticeably absent?


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, it’s sweep week/month, Super Bowl is Sunday, CBS needs viewers.  Shameless attempt to make H relevant. Face looks puffy, bald spot continues to grow, definitely not aging well.  Privacy? So not private.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hangs with James Corden and camera crew on double-decker
> 
> 
> The 36-year-old member of the British royal family was seen hanging out with fellow Brit James Corden on the top of a double-decker bus in Hollywood on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Is that a bump or big zit on his forehead? He's not looking good.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Hey now, he bothered to put on a suit jacket. That’s about as smart as he’s going to look in his current “work one day every other month” lifestyle.


Those prints over his head are hysterical!


----------



## kemilia

marietouchet said:


> Meghan was not on the bus with H and Corden ... discuss ...
> 
> we have not seen anything but her face for how long ?


Yes, something's up ...

She generally doesn't let JCMH do things on his own.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I’m not going to diss Harry for hair loss, that’s genetic and out of his control. There is so much annoying about him that is in his control to criticize him about.





bag-mania said:


> I’m not going to diss Harry for hair loss, that’s genetic and out of his control. There is so much annoying about him that is in his control to criticize him about.


But he really ragged on William's hair loss a few years back, something you might do in private but not so that it hits the papers. Karma, Harry, Karma.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> My thoughts exactly.  If she had become senator through no merit except being a WOC when it's convenient, it's another reason I can't wait to move out of the God forsaken state.


but she didn't ....governor was probably being polite by taking their meeting


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Someone should ask the governor why he set aside an hour of his time to have an appointment with them. They were certainly pushing some agenda to get the meeting. They probably offered him their valuable advice and he had to politely listen and then pretend to take it under consideration and thank them.


and I'll bet they tried to get some sort of "job" from him


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Come on now, people. That's just one of the filler pieces to make her look important. Nobody was considering Duchess Disney as a senator.


let's face it....she was pretty much a nobody before landing H


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I took one for the team and purchased Samantha's book. Until a better review is provided, here is mine for the members of this thread:
> 
> The book could benefit from an editorial review, but it reads well. A large part of the book is about the Markle’s family, its humble beginnings, and Samantha’s difficulties with multiple sclerosis. It looks like some information has been removed from the book, particularly around the time MM would be attending Northwestern university (??). However, she makes a point that their father paid for all MM’s very costly education from pre-school to the end of college. In college, MM didn’t qualify for scholarships/financial aid grants due to the amount of money her father was making at that time. He paid also a “hefty fee” for her internship in Argentina where MM stayed “in the most amazing penthouse” (MM description). Samantha never heard MM express gratitude to Dad or uncle Mike who helped MM get the internship.
> 
> Samantha explains that the father raised the 3 kids almost as a single father, and that MM benefited from being born at a time when father was making a lot of money. Father adored MM and “was putting everything in place for her,” so she could have a nice career after college. He actively participated in all MM’s education, including giving her the idea of writing the ‘famous’ letters to Gloria Allred and Hillary C.
> 
> There were comments and attitudes from MM when growing up that should have raised red flags about MM’s character, but Samantha dismissed them and gave the benefit of the doubt. It looks like Samantha was a part of MM’s life at the time of her marriage to Trevor, but she couldn’t attend the weeding due to the difficulties of being in wheelchair and the sand (beach wedding). However, all family loved Trevor, he was a very nice person. Dad was very happy and proud of MM, “he poured so much of his heart and soul into Meghan”. Tom was always a wonderful and supportive father to MM.
> 
> When the father was retired, and supporting grandma Markle in an expensive nursing home, Samantha called MM and asked if she could pay back a "little bit" of her tuition money (father had spent over 1 million dollars with MM's education). At that time, MM was making a “fair amount of money”, traveling and having fun, so she could perhaps help a little. Samantha’s suggestion was not well received, and MM’s response was “there are too many cooks in the kitchen”. Father never asked MM for anything.
> 
> She talks also a little about Tom and Doria’s marriage and divorce. How she felt that Doria’s attitude made her (and brother) feel excluded from the family. Doria never helped Samantha with suggestions to deal with her disability, despite having some knowledge from working with the elderly. In the book, Doria’s motto was “if people can’t do more for you, than you can do for yourself, then you don’t need them”, which is in line with her published mantra, “don’t give away the milk for free Flower” (Flower was MM's nickname). MM seems to share the same motto/mantra.
> 
> According to Samantha, MM is “not a humanitarian, and not princess Diana”. She seems to believe that MM never wanted to have her father attending the weeding in the UK. It's possible that MM 'fabricated' some facts about her family, and couldn’t risk having her father contradict them. Father learned about MM&H’s relationship 6 months before it hit the tabloids, but he kept it a secret from everyone. He was very happy for MM. When he asked for details about the wedding, MM’s answer was always “lay low” and he was kept in the dark. When dad didn't follow one of MM's unreasonable demands related to her siblings, MM "abruptly" said "then I have nothing more to say. We have nothing more to talk about."
> 
> Paparazzi and tabloids portrayed the family in a terrible light and made a lot of money with it. It was an embarrassment for both Markle and Ragland families not to have received weeding invitations. Samantha thought that Doria's family was very nice and shouldn't have been excluded from the wedding. While Samantha wrote the book to convey the truth about her family, she doesn’t deny that money can help a lot with her bills and disability.


.. and *BOOM*, I remember when I posted about Meghan's time in High School (_since my friends knew Thomas and Meghan at that time_), and indicated that .. Doria was non-existent and I was called a LIAR!! .. and HMMMMM .. this confirms what my friends told me that they never met Doria during that time and that they NEVER recall seeing/meeting her at Meghan's plays!!!   Thomas pretty much took sole care of her during this time, and look at how she repays him for everything he's done for her .. *DISGUSTING* IMO!  In some respects, I wish they had met her because my friends would be 100% totally honest about their opinion and while (_initially_) they were somewhat reluctant to talk badly of Meghan, that has changed and I have to say .. WOW, Meghan the worst kind of people-user there is.


----------



## Allisonfaye

marietouchet said:


> A famous US family *******en, charged a lot of expenses eg staff, travel to foundation
> ps hint On name , the wife ran for us prez



Yep. I hear you. Probably most people don't even realize having a foundation is a tax dodge. I only know because I once consulted an accountant to ask if I was missing any legal way to reduce my taxes. He said you can put as much money as you want into a foundation and designate where the money goes, which is when I figured it out. But I never did it because whatever flaws I may have, I don't cheat on taxes.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wow, thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, if that's true that doesn't reflect well on her character at all.
> 
> 
> 
> That was my guess from the beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> And apparently she announced it with "I have met a prince". "I have met a prince", not "I have met someone who is kind". Oh well.
> 
> 
> 
> You know, so far everything you typed out for us seems to be absolutely in line with what we've learned about Meghan's character and attitude.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, Meghan herself is leeching off another family. If Samantha can make the connection into cash, at this point I say "Go ahead". If Meghan hadn't treated her whole family like sh*t and fed them to the lions that is the yellow press, maybe they'd have been more tightlipped.


You are welcome! By the way, I meant 'wedding invitations', and not 'weeding invitations'. Weed was  apparently given out at her other wedding ceremony.  

Yes, what I read is in line with what we have learned about MM. MM seems to be a very selfish person without empathy. As H said, "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets." After reading the book, I can see how disturbing MM's letter was, particularly when she writes "Your other daughter, who I barely know'". I believe that letter was written to be public, and her father understood that well. He is very hurt, according to Samantha.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow, @Chanbal  — You are my hero! Thank you for all of that. Golly, what a story these people have. The father-daughters dynamic is disturbing on many levels, especially when one daughter has m-s.

On another site, some are discussing how Doria and MM interact in public. Some say it does not have the feel of a mother-daughter relationship, not really friends either. They appear to be distant which is consistent with @CeeJay’s observations. Some think MM is paying her for these appearances.  Interesting speculation.

ETA:_  In the book, Doria’s motto was “if people can’t do more for you, than you can do for yourself, then you don’t need them”,_
Always transactional relationships. Exactly what MM is criticized for.

@kemilia — Harry has had that bump for many years now. No idea what it is.

@bag-mania — Yes, under normal circumstances, I avoid commenting on other people’s hair. I do not need the negative karma.  Harry is different. He puts himself out there as the know-all and be-all about so many topics, usually dressed in wrinkles with slumpy posture. This just invites criticism, chiefly because we all know he has access to mega-$$$$, private jets, high-end cars, etc. No excuse to be sloppy. Make an effort. Respect us just as he wants us to respect him.  At this point, the petulant man-child routine is tiresome. True, he cannot do anything about the genetics, but he most certainly can do lots about the way he _styles_ his hair.  This Friar Tuck style looks silly on him [no disrespect to FT].  Notice I have not even mentioned the lawsuits. No respect for that.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Yep. I hear you. Probably most people don't even realize having a foundation is a tax dodge. I only know because I once consulted an accountant to ask if I was missing any legal way to reduce my taxes. He said you can put as much money as you want into a foundation and designate where the money goes, which is when I figured it out. But I never did it because whatever flaws I may have, I don't cheat on taxes.


I have to say there are foundations that are genuinely set up to do good.  I worked for a family foundation and it was actively managed - not a tax dodge.  I'm sure there are many that are though.
And a non-profit is different from a charity.  I'm no tax expert but I worked for a non-profit (medical group).  The doctors got paid plenty.  Executives also.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, he cannot do anything about the genetics, but he most certainly can do lots about the way he _styles_ his hair.  This Friar Tuck style looks silly on him [no disrespect to FT].  Notice I have not even mentioned the lawsuits. No respect for that.



Knowing some men who are “follicley-challenged” there’s not much they can do to improve the look as they are losing their hair.  They can either do the Friar Tuck, the comb-over, or they go and get a hairpiece and will be made fun of for that.  I guess they can also shave their head completely but there are few men who want to give up what little they have any sooner than they have to.

Of course they can also pay to have the implants but those are painful and a lot of men aren’t that vain about their hair.

At least we know for sure that Rob Lowe was joking with the ponytail tale. That story might be what inspired James Corden to call Harry. It was only about a month ago.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Knowing some men who are “follicley-challenged” there’s not much they can do to improve the look as they are losing their hair.  They can either do the Friar Tuck, the comb-over, or they go and get a hairpiece and will be made fun of for that.  I guess they can also shave their head completely but there are few men who want to give up what little they have any sooner than they have to.
> 
> Of course they can also pay to have the implants but those are painful and a lot of men aren’t that vain about their hair.
> 
> At least we know for sure that Rob Lowe was joking with the ponytail tale. That story might be what inspired James Corden to call Harry. It was only about a month ago.


I think some men look great with the shaved head


----------



## CarryOn2020

One thing I’ve learned from Covid = Never underestimate the power of neatly trimmed hair.  Scraggly hair on men looks awful. 
Seems like James Corden would have a stylist in his crew.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think some men look great with the shaved head



Some look great. Others look like Mr. Clean.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems that Harry is taking notes from Charles.








						Has Prince Harry turned to CAVIAR omega 3 pills to cure his baldness?
					

EXCLUSIVE: Harry, 32, has started getting deliveries of omega-3 supplements made with caviar oil, which are said to promote hair growth. It comes after he started showing signs of hair loss.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  Mr. Clean looks ... beautifully clean 

ETA2: easiest thing is to do is ... wear a hat.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> .. and *BOOM*, I remember when I posted about Meghan's time in High School (_since my friends knew Thomas and Meghan at that time_), and indicated that .. Doria was non-existent and I was called a LIAR!! .. and HMMMMM .. this confirms what my friends told me that they never met Doria during that time and that they NEVER recall seeing/meeting her at Meghan's plays!!!   Thomas pretty much took sole care of her during this time, and look at how she repays him for everything he's done for her .. *DISGUSTING* IMO!  In some respects, I wish they had met her because my friends would be 100% totally honest about their opinion and while (_initially_) they were somewhat reluctant to talk badly of Meghan, that has changed and I have to say .. WOW, Meghan the worst kind of people-user there is.


Empathy may not have been Doria's strong point (like MM). When she was married to Tom, Doria informed Samantha in a "pompous tone" that she had started a new company named "Three Cherubs", and the name represented Doria, MM, and Tom. Samantha wished that Doria had named her company "Five Cherubs", since Samantha and her brother were also part of the family. They were MM's brother and sister. I give Doria the benefit of the doubt because she was very young when she married Tom, and may not have known how to deal with her stepchildren.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, @Chanbal  — You are my hero! Thank you for all of that. Golly, what a story these people have. The father-daughters dynamic is disturbing on many levels, especially when one daughter has m-s.
> 
> On another site, some are discussing how Doria and MM interact in public. Some say it does not have the feel of a mother-daughter relationship, not really friends either. They appear to be distant which is consistent with @CeeJay’s observations. Some think MM is paying her for these appearances.  Interesting speculation.
> 
> ETA:_  In the book, Doria’s motto was “if people can’t do more for you, than you can do for yourself, then you don’t need them”,_
> Always transactional relationships. Exactly what MM is criticized for.
> 
> @kemilia — Harry has had that bump for many years now. No idea what it is.
> 
> @bag-mania — Yes, under normal circumstances, I avoid commenting on other people’s hair. I do not need the negative karma.  Harry is different. He puts himself out there as the know-all and be-all about so many topics, usually dressed in wrinkles with slumpy posture. This just invites criticism, chiefly because we all know he has access to mega-$$$$, private jets, high-end cars, etc. No excuse to be sloppy. Make an effort. Respect us just as he wants us to respect him.  At this point, the petulant man-child routine is tiresome. True, he cannot do anything about the genetics, but he most certainly can do lots about the way he _styles_ his hair.  This Friar Tuck style looks silly on him [no disrespect to FT].  Notice I have not even mentioned the lawsuits. No respect for that.


You are welcome. Samantha is not perfect and she makes a point in showing that. It looks like she supported herself through college despite her limitations, and she loves her father. I'll be happy if she gets extra money to pay for her disability equipment.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems that Harry is taking notes from Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has Prince Harry turned to CAVIAR omega 3 pills to cure his baldness?
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Harry, 32, has started getting deliveries of omega-3 supplements made with caviar oil, which are said to promote hair growth. It comes after he started showing signs of hair loss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  Mr. Clean looks ... beautifully clean
> 
> ETA2: easiest thing is to do is ... wear a hat.


Well, it looks like the caviar pills are not working.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  Mr. Clean looks ... beautifully clean
> 
> ETA2:* easiest thing is to do is ... wear a hat.*



That's why he's fighting to keep his military patronages; he wants to wear the hats to cover the bald spot!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I have to say there are foundations that are genuinely set up to do good.  I worked for a family foundation and it was actively managed - not a tax dodge.  I'm sure there are many that are though.
> And a non-profit is different from a charity.  I'm no tax expert but I worked for a non-profit (medical group).  The doctors got paid plenty.  Executives also.


People that use non-profits to profit are making many of us skeptical about foundations and charities, and this is not good. Archewhatever has opened my eyes and I plan to do a lot more research before donating funds.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought he had gotten a hair transplant?


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I’m not going to diss Harry for hair loss, that’s genetic and out of his control. There is so much annoying about him that is in his control to criticize him about.


The choice of hair stylist is his to make
but I give him a lot of slack in the year of lockdown,  there is always YouTube for ideas, Kate is doing her kids hair and that rocks


----------



## bag-mania

Note to Meghan’s PR team: if you are going to continue to push Meghan on us as a fashion symbol at least find an outfit she looks as good in as the person you imply she inspired. This is what People and other magazines are putting out there. Rebel looks so much better in the dress.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was my guess from the beginning.


MM's memories that she recently shared about the 1992 riots in LA may have been fantasy. Samantha writes in her book that their father was very protective of MM and took her to spend 5 days in Palm Springs during that time. I wish I had marked the book page to provide more details. 

I wonder what stories MM told H that the last thing she wanted was for him to meet members of the Markle and Ragland families.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Note to Meghan’s PR team: if you are going to continue to push Meghan on us as a fashion symbol at least find an outfit she looks as good in as the person you imply she inspired. This is what People and other magazines are putting out there. Rebel looks so much better in the dress.
> 
> View attachment 4983134
> View attachment 4983135


Not a fan of MM, but she looks great here imo. I wonder if she started already to regret turning her back to the BRF. She could have had a wonderful life in the UK.


----------



## csshopper

I remember reading in an excerpt from an interview her father did at one point where he mentioned being disappointed that Meghan seemed to move on from the loving philosophy with which he raised her to support people and be kind to them, to basing her dealings with people on  Doria's influence to only go after what's good for herself. Now Samantha has reinforced that and as we have all discussed, the Duchess of Disneyland, has mastered Markling.


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> Not a fan of MM, but she looks great here imo. I wonder if she started already to regret turning her back to the BRF. She could have had a wonderful life in the UK.



I think Rebel Wilson looks fabulous in the dress, she has the womanly figure to carry it off.  MM just looks ill fitted and wrinkled, with fabric to spare.


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> I think Rebel Wilson looks fabulous in the dress, she has the womanly figure to carry it off.  MM just looks ill fitted and wrinkled, with fabric to spare.



Exactly, Meghan is a beautiful woman but she doesn’t wear clothes well IMO. There’s almost always something a little off about the fit or the way clothes hang on her. You don’t always notice it until a magazine gives us a side-by-side comparison like that. Rebel is looking great these days and the dress only enhances it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That’s one of the nicer dresses she wore, but she looks uncomfortable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder how MM’s red dress looked in person?  Usually clothes look better in a photo. Hmmm.


----------



## Chanbal

MM's minister of propaganda must be desperate to provide news about his boss. Why can't Archie go to the UK? Is that because he doesn't want to stay away from MM?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> MM's minister of propaganda must be desperate to provide news about his boss. Why can't Archie go to the UK? Is that because he doesn't want to stay away from MM?
> 
> View attachment 4983611



I read this in the morning and just rolled my eyes! So no women has ever flown across the Atlantic with a toddler before! 

I still don't believe she's actually pregnant herself. There is no way she's not going to milk it if this is the kind of desperate headlines her PR team is churning out.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM's minister of propaganda must be desperate to provide news about his boss. Why can't Archie go to the UK? Is that because he doesn't want to stay away from MM?
> 
> View attachment 4983611



It’s hard to come up with good, plausible lies. But if you’re a faithful toady like Omid you want your heroine to know you are making the effort for her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On “another” site, rumors are this is how Hollywood actresses use their surrogates. The actress stays out of the limelight for 9 months, then shows up with a baby. No announcement, no photos, just new baby. Based on all the speculation during the first pregnancy, it is understandable that MM would not want to announce it.  Missing the trip tells us she has no intention of moving back, ever. So, open marriage?


----------



## csshopper

So instead of meeting his great grandmother in person he will continue to see her only on a Zoom screen....they look evermore ridiculous by the week. And to claim it’s for Archie leaves me disgusted with them for their shallowness.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> On “another” site, rumors are this is how Hollywood actresses use their surrogates. The actress stays out of the limelight for 9 months, then shows up with a baby. No announcement, no photos, just new baby. Based on all the speculation during the first pregnancy, it is understandable that MM would not want to announce it.  Missing the trip tells us she has no intention of moving back, ever. So, open marriage?



That’s how I see it playing out if there is a surrogate. They could suddenly appear this summer with a baby and say they kept it out of the press because “privacy.”

It’s also possible she had IVF and is keeping quiet until the pregnancy is safely past the first trimester. That would be sensible.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> On “another” site, rumors are this is how Hollywood actresses use their surrogates. The actress stays out of the limelight for 9 months, then shows up with a baby. No announcement, no photos, just new baby. Based on all the speculation during the first pregnancy, it is understandable that MM would not want to announce it.  Missing the trip tells us she has no intention of moving back, ever. So, open marriage?


You might be right on the surrogate, she is certainly 'working' behind the scenes... If she is following the mantra on S's book, it will not be an open marriage yet imo. H can still do a lot for her, so he may need to be kept on a short leash.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That’s how I see it playing out if there is a surrogate. They could suddenly appear this summer with a baby and say they kept it out of the press because “privacy.”
> 
> It’s also possible she had IVF and is keeping quiet until the pregnancy is safely past the first trimester. That would be sensible.


yawn


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> So instead of meeting his great grandmother in person he will continue to see her only on a Zoom screen....they look evermore ridiculous by the week. And to claim it’s for Archie leaves me disgusted with them for their shallowness.


One could think that Archie prefers zoom to in person meetings. If this is the case, I'm sure the palace could arrange plenty of zoom meetings for him in the UK. 

What is a concern is MM&H's apparent intention of blocking freedom of speech, and of interfering in politics. Why were they granted a 1 hour long meeting with the Governor of California? California is going through a crisis, why would the Governor waste time with two people that use duke/duchess titles as their credentials?


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> That’s how I see it playing out if there is a surrogate. They could suddenly appear this summer with a baby and say they kept it out of the press because “privacy.”
> 
> It’s also possible she had IVF and is keeping quiet until the pregnancy is safely past the first trimester. That would be sensible.


Sensible and MM, when has she ever done anything sensible. She proudly waved the flag of her supposed miscarriage in the summer. I doubt she’d give up the opportunity if there was a possibility of another one. Victimhood is her calling.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> One could think that Archie prefers zoom to in person meetings. If this is the case, I'm sure the palace could arrange plenty of zoom meetings for him in the UK.
> 
> What is a concern is MM&H's apparent intention of blocking freedom of speech, and of interfering in politics. Why were they granted a 1 hour long meeting with the Governor of California? California is going through a crisis, why would the Governor waste time with two people that use duke/duchess titles as their credentials?


I think they are more interested in using their political opinions to gain attention than anything else.   that's what it's all about - attention.  and they are getting less interesting by the day


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I have to say there are foundations that are genuinely set up to do good.  I worked for a family foundation and it was actively managed - not a tax dodge.  I'm sure there are many that are though.
> And a non-profit is different from a charity.  I'm no tax expert but I worked for a non-profit (medical group).  The doctors got paid plenty.  Executives also.



It looks like MM&H are still explaining some of their funds. 




On Monday Mr Smith tweeted: “I’ve reported Sussex Royal and the Royal Foundation to the Charity Commission for inappropriate use of funds, lack of independence and conflict of interest.”

In his letter to the Charity Commission Mr Smith wrote: "These two charities appear to be in breach of guidelines regarding the proper use of charitable funds and may be failing in their duty to act independently and solely in the interests of their objectives."

"The Royal Foundation gave a grant of £145,000 to Sussex Royal and £144,901 to a non-charitable organisation (Travalyst)."

He added: “In both instances it appears the only rationale for the decision was the personal relationship between two patrons, the Duke of Sussex and the Duke of Cambridge."

The letter concluded: "...the main objective of the grants appears to be supporting a patron’s brother rather than the Royal Foundation’s objectives (in the first instance) and supporting a trustee's own pet project (in the second instance)."

"I would ask that you investigate both charities for inappropriate use of charitable funds, conflicts of interest and lack of independence."

Campaigners reported Sussex Royal to the Charity Commission following an exclusive by Express.co.uk.


People are still asking about their foundation/charity


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Sensible and MM, when has she ever done anything sensible. She proudly waved the flag of her supposed miscarriage in the summer. I doubt she’d give up the opportunity if there was a possibility of another one. Victimhood is her calling.



Okay, you got me there but hear me out. She did wait a whole four months before announcing her miscarriage to the world to get maximum attention at Thanksgiving via the New York Times. So she is capable of keeping quiet for a while if she thinks waiting will get her attention on a bigger scale.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Okay, you got me there but hear me out. She did wait a whole four months before announcing her miscarriage to the world to get maximum attention at Thanksgiving via the New York Times. So she is capable of keeping quiet for a while if she thinks waiting will get her attention on a bigger scale.


but to me - just my opinion - the big thing that got her all the world's attention was becoming a "princess"
She gave that up.  So how to stay relevant?  She's crafty but she only has so much in the way of real knowledge and skills
Even if she got a "job" as Unicef ambassador like angie, that would bring credibility but not really long lasting attention


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Okay, you got me there but hear me out. She did wait a whole four months before announcing her miscarriage to the world to get maximum attention at Thanksgiving via the New York Times. So she is capable of keeping quiet for a while if she thinks waiting will get her attention on a bigger scale.





sdkitty said:


> but to me - just my opinion - the big thing that got her all the world's attention was becoming a "princess"
> She gave that up.  So how to stay relevant?  She's crafty but she only has so much in the way of real knowledge and skills
> Even if she got a "job" as Unicef ambassador like angie, that would bring credibility but not really long lasting attention



It works to her advantage to 'lay low' until Justice Warby makes his decision public.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but to me - just my opinion - the big thing that got her all the world's attention was becoming a "princess"
> She gave that up.  So how to stay relevant?  She's crafty but she only has so much in the way of real knowledge and skills
> Even if she got a "job" as Unicef ambassador like angie, that would bring credibility but not really long lasting attention



She thinks she’s smarter than those around her and with that puppet she is married to and her strategically-placed lapdogs in the media, she may be right. We haven’t heard a peep out of her since the podcast in December and we haven’t seen her publicly since that photo two months ago with her in the long winter coat on a warm day. If she isn’t “hiding” a pregnancy she certainly wants the speculation of one. It goes totally against her needy nature to step back and allow Harry to have all the publicity to himself the way it’s been lately. Something’s up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It works to her advantage to 'lay low' until Justice Warby makes his decision public.



He already has the facts he is considering. It’s too late to influence him now. I don’t know how much the case means to her anymore. Even if she loses she still has a number of media outlets in her pocket. And Netflix. And Spotify.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> One could think that Archie prefers zoom to in person meetings. If this is the case, I'm sure the palace could arrange plenty of zoom meetings for him in the UK.
> 
> What is a concern is MM&H's apparent intention of blocking freedom of speech, and of interfering in politics. Why were they granted a 1 hour long meeting with the Governor of California? California is going through a crisis, why would the Governor waste time with two people that use duke/duchess titles as their credentials?


The only thing that I've got, is that he (like Harry) .. is not the brightest bulb in the room!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

At this point I'd like to know what people see in her. The obvious character flaws aside she has no spectacular talent, she doesn't do anything remarkable, she dresses poorly, and from what I've seen of her in videos she absolutely does not have that big personality to fill a room instantly at all. She is not a great hostess that we know of, so what is it that she still has an army of crazy stans and a good part of the media fawning over her?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this point I'd like to know what people see in her. The obvious character flaws aside she has no spectacular talent, she doesn't do anything remarkable, she dresses poorly, and from what I've seen of her in videos she absolutely does not have that big personality to fill a room instantly at all. She is not a great hostess that we know of, so what is it that she still has an army of crazy stans and a good part of the media fawning over her?


She is a POC who married a western Prince. That's enough for some people.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> She is a POC who married a western Prince. That's enough for some people.


exactly


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> He already has the facts he is considering. It’s too late to influence him now. I don’t know how much the case means to her anymore. Even if she loses she still has a number of media outlets in her pocket. And Netflix. And Spotify.


I believe that he has already made his decision but, if she loses, she may not want to be on the spotlight when he delivers it. I agree, she has already a lot in her pocket, but she seems to be very vain.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> The only thing that I've got, is that he (like Harry) .. is not the brightest bulb in the room!


Quoting @sdkitty, exactly!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He already has the facts he is considering. It’s too late to influence him now. I don’t know how much the case means to her anymore. Even if she loses she still has a number of media outlets in her pocket. And Netflix. And Spotify.



That said, have we heard something on either front lately? One podcast every few months won't be worth millions to Spotify.


----------



## Chloe302225

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise online poetry class
					

Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, joined a free poetry class organized by US-based group Get Lit Poetry, which works with young people across the country, from their California home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




She is back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise online poetry class
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, joined a free poetry class organized by US-based group Get Lit Poetry, which works with young people across the country, from their California home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is back.



Y'all summoned the Kraken by asking about her whereabouts!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise online poetry class
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, joined a free poetry class organized by US-based group Get Lit Poetry, which works with young people across the country, from their California home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is back.



And their victims couldn't even ask for their money back


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise online poetry class
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, joined a free poetry class organized by US-based group Get Lit Poetry, which works with young people across the country, from their California home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is back.



Oh, of course! And it is so predictable and typical Meghan! Neither of them gave a rat’s ass about poetry until now. But currently Amanda Gorman is all the rage and is who everyone has been talking about for the past few weeks.  Suddenly Meghan and Harry are now advocates for poetry, and not just any poetry, but poetry for Black History Month.

Welcome back, Meghan. You will never change!


----------



## zen1965

I would like to ask H to name three poets.
And I am rather sure to know his answer. #silence 

ps: my top 4 are Hart Crane, Ezra Pound, Sylvia Plath, and Heinrich Heine.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Oh, of course! And it is so predictable and typical Meghan! Neither of them gave a rat’s ass about poetry until now. But currently Amanda Gorman is all the rage and is who everyone has been talking about for the past few weeks.  Suddenly Meghan and Harry are now advocates for poetry, and not just any poetry, but poetry for Black History Month.
> 
> Welcome back, Meghan. You will never change!


.. and *BA-ZINGA*, that's where she must have been .. hounding their "staff" for all those poetry lines that .. you know, are her favorite!  HA - as though SHE would know any poetry written by Black poets, she's only a WOC-wC!!! [a Woman of Color when convenient]!


----------



## bagshopr

Roses are red
Violets are blue
I married a prince
So I'm better than you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

From the Daily Mail article: Another routine publicity grab by the world's greatest Grifters:

"_The posts were all shared at around the same time on Monday afternoon - with the official Get Lit account leading the publicity charge in what appears to have been a carefully-timed release that was no doubt coordinated with Harry and Meghan's team of aides.

While Meghan was praised for helping to inspire the students in the poetry class, it is possible that they also helped to kickstart her own personal writing projects - after it was reported last week that she has some 'very serious book deals on the table'.

According to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl, the Duchess is considering writing a book and has been approached with 'lucrative offers from respectable publishing houses.'

Since stepping down as a senior member of the royal family alongside the Duke,_* the Duchess has secured lucrative deals including a contract with Spotify worth up to $40 million and a partnership with Netflix believed to be worth upwards of $100 million."*

Look who is credited with doing all the work. Put a Title in front of her name and watch her go. Harry you are a Eunuch, "a man who has been castrated to serve a specific social function."

My name is Meghan
Gonna grab all I can!

Scammed my man
Prince fell for my plan!

Oh, how I sparkled
He'll never guess he could be Markled!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise online poetry class
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, joined a free poetry class organized by US-based group Get Lit Poetry, which works with young people across the country, from their California home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is back.



She is back all right. 

Like a bad rash.  Or herpes.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> _According to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl, the Duchess is considering writing a book and has been approached with 'lucrative offers from respectable publishing houses.'_


Loved your poetry @csshopper  .. but to the above, are they out of their bloody minds???  

Look, I get it that they all probably think that they are going to get 'dirt' on the BRF, but truly .. what could she really write that they wouldn't be able to kibash and pretty darn quickly????  How long was she actually a "Senior Royal"?? .. and she has that much to say??? .. unless again, she thinks that she can talk trash about them and get away with it?  I just never see it happening that the BRF would *allow *her to get away with anything like that and let's say her plan is to 'trash' them, do we really think that "her friends" (_Oprah, Gayle, Amal, etc_.) -- would even want to associate with her anymore??? .. I don't think so.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She is back all right.
> 
> Like a bad rash.  Or herpes.



The King and Queen of surprise appearances! We should have anticipated this, they couldn't miss a photo-Op event during Black History Month. 

Cringe is now a WOC  (she used to be Caucasian before marrying Ginge), and it shouldn't take long for Ginge to become also a WOC. He is already a proud proud feminist. And of course, poetry is obviously within their countless skills. So it all makes sense.


----------



## csshopper

The next posts may feature them on a tennis court since friend Serena Williams has won her first match of the Australian Open.


----------



## rose60610

M's latest ambush was to hang with teen agers? She knew they wouldn't say "I thought you wanted all this privacy and stuff, so why are you here?". It's pretty pathetic when you target a group that's young and likely to fawn all over you.

Meghan's Poem:

I snagged a prince 
And made the world wince
When I said "No one asks me if I'm OK"
I dress like crap 
My husband's a sap
But my plan is well underway.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm watching one of the Lady CC videos and OMG she can roast someone in the most calm voice and polite terms.

"She has a propensity for wearing evening wear during daytime. Only vulgarians do. Someone who is very unsophisticated like Meghan wouldn't know the difference [between day wear and evening wear], and she never cared to learn."


----------



## Chanbal

@bagshopr @csshopper @rose60610 your poems are great!!! You should email them to Get Lit, so the kids can read them to the duke and duchess on their next surprise appearance. 

These 2 comments are spot on:


----------



## Chanbal

zen1965 said:


> I would like to ask H to name three poets.
> And I am rather sure to know his answer. #silence
> 
> ps: my top 4 are Hart Crane, Ezra Pound, Sylvia Plath, and Heinrich Heine.


Of course H knows the name of three poets, come on! I would bet that his answer would be Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Head spinning now! I vote to put that Kracken back in the closet.  DoS!!!!!

Gosh, the hair:


from the DM: 
_Both the Duke and Duchess dressed casually for the occasion, with Harry wearing a white polo shirt and a leather necklace, while Meghan is seen modeling a pale blue button down, with her long brunette hair left in loose waves around her shoulders.  

The image also showed that the couple logged on to the Zoom call under the username 'DoS', which likely stands for either the Duke or Duchess of Sussex; Harry and Meghan have maintained the use of their royal titles since stepping down as senior members of the royal family in January last year, and often use them when they are taking part in public engagements._


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Head spinning now! I vote to put that Kracken back in the closet.  DoS!!!!!
> 
> Gosh, the hair:
> View attachment 4984257
> 
> from the DM:
> _Both the Duke and Duchess dressed casually for the occasion, with Harry wearing a white polo shirt and a leather necklace, while Meghan is seen modeling a pale blue button down, with her long brunette hair left in loose waves around her shoulders.
> 
> The image also showed that the couple logged on to the Zoom call under the username 'DoS', which likely stands for either the Duke or Duchess of Sussex; Harry and Meghan have maintained the use of their royal titles since stepping down as senior members of the royal family in January last year, and often use them when they are taking part in public engagements._


LOLOL.  DoS also stands for "Denial of Service".  How appropriate!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL.  DoS also stands for "Denial of Service".  How appropriate!


A few more possibilities, I'm trying to decide between Dozing Off Soon and Dreaded Orange Spots.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I obviously haven't read the book, but Lady CC mentioned that Scobie says in Finding Freedom that from the very beginning Harry had been under Meghan's spell. Seeing that there are a lot of people who believe she did some kind of voodoo to her willing victim that's a weird way of putting it, isn't it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I obviously haven't read the book, but Lady CC mentioned that Scobie says in Finding Freedom that from the very beginning Harry had been under Meghan's spell. Seeing that there are a lot of people who believe she did some kind of voodoo to her willing victim that's a weird way of putting it, isn't it.



Whether he knows it or not, whether he intends to or not, he is contributing to her ‘exotic’ narrative which she has complained about. 
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...ism-what-her-saga-says-black-britons-n1132181


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And one last interesting point: Lady CC claims after just a few dates the news broke in the US press that they were dating, that she had met the BRF and they all loved her, with info that must have been provided by Meghan because otherwise it would not have been attainable. Back than she wasn't on my radar nor did I follow Harry's love life at all, so I have no recollection of how the story broke. Anyway, Lady CC says that kind of cemented her as Harry's girlfriend and made him feel obligated to treat her more seriously than he otherwise might have. Geez, was he seriously that easily cornered?

Then again, I doubt he'd ever dated someone who'd go ahead and create facts by leaking to the press like this (also, anyone remember that interview she gave to what was it...Vogue or HP, where she spoke about their relationship and I thought that was so...unlike the BRF handling things?).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> A few more possibilities, I'm trying to decide between Dozing Off Soon and Dreaded Orange Spots.
> 
> View attachment 4984305


"Daughter of Satan" sounds perfect!  Although, why insult poor Thomas.


----------



## jennlt

bagshopr said:


> Roses are red
> Violets are blue
> I married a prince
> So I'm better than you


Oh, I have some poetry lines, too!

I tried "link not rank"
But that went down the tank
Because, let's be frank
I've made plenty of bank

Now my causes don't last
They become part of my past
I love and leave 'em so fast
Once I have the cash stashed

I don't have to toil
Because I'm a royal
I deserve all the spoils
With no need to be loyal

I must have that title
For me it is vital
My plans are not idle
To Bob Iger I sidle!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and *BA-ZINGA*, that's where she must have been .. hounding their "staff" for all those poetry lines that .. you know, are her favorite!  HA - as though SHE would know any poetry written by Black poets, she's only a WOC-wC!!! [a Woman of Color when convenient]!


exactly
and it's a lot more convenient these days than it was when she was growing up and starting out in show-biz


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm watching one of the Lady CC videos and OMG she can roast someone in the most calm voice and polite terms.
> 
> "She has a propensity for wearing evening wear during daytime. Only vulgarians do. Someone who is very unsophisticated like Meghan wouldn't know the difference [between day wear and evening wear], and she never cared to learn."


I did wonder why she wore a ball gown for the engagement pic.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise online poetry class
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, joined a free poetry class organized by US-based group Get Lit Poetry, which works with young people across the country, from their California home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is back.



Riding on the coattails of Amanda Gorman?


----------



## bag-mania

Warning: if you have a sensitive gag reflex, skip this article. It is People’s obsequious take on the poetry group story. It’s shameful how they used these nice, well-meaning people to get themselves in the news.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise a Virtual Poetry Class: 'It Was Pretty Surreal'*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared some of their favorite lines of poetry

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are talking poetry!

The couple made a surprise appearance in honor of Black History Month on Saturday, joining a virtual poetry class with Get Lit, an organization that promotes literacy and empowers young people through poetry.

"Guess who surprised our poetry class this weekend?! It was the best weekend EVER!" the organization captioned a screenshot of the duo joining their Zoom call — with some shocked reactions from other participants. "Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, were magic and kind and interested in poetry!"

Get Lit said that Meghan shared some of her favorite lines of poems and dubbed the it "most epic experience in Get Lit history!!!"

Teacher Mason Granger shared on Instagram why Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, joined the class.

"The root of them deciding to come is because at some point in their lives, they were moved by a poem," he said. "And whoever wrote that poem at some point thought to themselves, 'Does this even matter? Is anyone even listening?' And they shared it anyway."

He continued, "Fast forward ripple ripple ripple and these kids get a surprise 45 minute chat with the Prince Harry and Meghan. It was pretty surreal."

Granger said that the kids were able to share poems and ask Meghan and Harry questions. He even commented that the couple took the time to "actually read and learned the kids bios I'd sent earlier."

Get Lit was founded in 2006 after Diane Luby Lane and the curriculum has expanded to over 100 schools throughout California as well as being sold to schools around the world.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I did wonder why she wore a ball gown for the engagement pic.



Article from 2018 —
_Alexi Lubormirski, the acclaimed photographer behind the portraits, was "very shocked with the reaction" to the dress, he told Entertainment Tonight at The Daily Front Row Fashion Awards on Sunday. 

But the process of how Meghan chose that dress was very simple. "To be honest, we tried on a couple of different things and that was just one that she felt comfortable in, so we weren’t really thinking, ‘Is it nude?’ or anything. We just thought, 'Feel comfortable and let’s make some nice pictures,'" he recalled.

So there you have it. Meghan wasn't trying to raise eyebrows; she was just being comfortable. (We, too, would like to feel comfortable in couture.)








						This Is Why Meghan Markle Wore a Sheer Dress in Her Engagement Photos with Prince Harry
					

The reason is quite simple.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



_


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from 2018 —
> _Alexi Lubormirski, the acclaimed photographer behind the portraits, was "very shocked with the reaction" to the dress, he told Entertainment Tonight at The Daily Front Row Fashion Awards on Sunday.
> 
> But the process of how Meghan chose that dress was very simple. "To be honest, we tried on a couple of different things and that was just one that she felt comfortable in, so we weren’t really thinking, ‘Is it nude?’ or anything. We just thought, 'Feel comfortable and let’s make some nice pictures,'" he recalled.
> 
> So there you have it. Meghan wasn't trying to raise eyebrows; she was just being comfortable. (We, too, would like to feel comfortable in couture.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This Is Why Meghan Markle Wore a Sheer Dress in Her Engagement Photos with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The reason is quite simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


LOL, I swear your tagline cracks me up every time!  But we should change it from "I was such a fraud" to "I am such a fraud".


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from 2018 —
> _Alexi Lubormirski, the acclaimed photographer behind the portraits, was "very shocked with the reaction" to the dress, he told Entertainment Tonight at The Daily Front Row Fashion Awards on Sunday.
> 
> But the process of how Meghan chose that dress was very simple. "To be honest, we tried on a couple of different things and that was just one that she felt comfortable in, so we weren’t really thinking, ‘Is it nude?’ or anything. We just thought, 'Feel comfortable and let’s make some nice pictures,'" he recalled.
> 
> So there you have it. Meghan wasn't trying to raise eyebrows; she was just being comfortable. (We, too, would like to feel comfortable in couture.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This Is Why Meghan Markle Wore a Sheer Dress in Her Engagement Photos with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The reason is quite simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Riiiiiiiiight, the dress cost $75,000 and it just "felt comfortable".  Of course it did, because she found a patsy to pay for it so she could look like a dope who wore a gorgeous evening gown in the daytime. Lady CC nailed it. On the other hand, it did actually fit. But I thought she wore J Crew sometimes because it was comfortable. Or did she get comfortable kickbacks? 

I hope Meghan and JCMH get roasted for their latest desperate pitch for attention in the teenager Virtual Poetry class. It'd be poetic justice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from 2018 —
> _Alexi Lubormirski, the acclaimed photographer behind the portraits, was "very shocked with the reaction" to the dress, he told Entertainment Tonight at The Daily Front Row Fashion Awards on Sunday.
> 
> But the process of how Meghan chose that dress was very simple. "To be honest, we tried on a couple of different things and that was just one that she felt comfortable in, so we weren’t really thinking, ‘Is it nude?’ or anything. We just thought, 'Feel comfortable and let’s make some nice pictures,'" he recalled.
> 
> So there you have it. Meghan wasn't trying to raise eyebrows; she was just being comfortable. (We, too, would like to feel comfortable in couture.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This Is Why Meghan Markle Wore a Sheer Dress in Her Engagement Photos with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The reason is quite simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



It didn't even dawn to me that it was evening wear for a day occasion back then (I didn't necessarily think it was too revealing, though), but it struck me how the future queen of England chose a 300 bucks dress that was available online for her announcement (just as the born princess Beatrice did later for her pics which were taken by her sister) and a cozy sweater for her engagement pictures, but the divorced TV actress pranced around in a couture gown for more than 20000.


----------



## Grande Latte

Let's presume for a minute, Hewitt is actually Harry's biological father. And let's presume the Royal Family already knows from day one and decided not to wreak havoc on the monarchy. What power would Meghan hold, if Harry told his beloved wife? Hence we see a broken man, manipulated by a narcissist.

In my humble opinion, it's time the Royal Family lets Harry go for good, and for self preservation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, not buying that for a multitute of reaons. I do think it's entirely possible she has dirt on him, I just don't think this particular rumor holds any truth.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Oh, of course! And it is so predictable and typical Meghan! Neither of them gave a rat’s ass about poetry until now. But currently Amanda Gorman is all the rage and is who everyone has been talking about for the past few weeks.  Suddenly Meghan and Harry are now advocates for poetry, and not just any poetry, but poetry for Black History Month.
> 
> Welcome back, Meghan. You will never change!


100% across the board.


----------



## bag-mania

Grande Latte said:


> Let's presume for a minute, Hewitt is actually Harry's biological father. And let's presume the Royal Family already knows from day one and decided not to wreak havoc on the monarchy. What power would Meghan hold, if Harry told his beloved wife? Hence we see a broken man, manipulated by a narcissist.
> 
> In my humble opinion, it's time the Royal Family lets Harry go for good, and for self preservation.
> 
> View attachment 4984536



That would admittedly make for a huge bombshell but it cannot be true. The timing just doesn't work. By all accounts Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until two years after Harry was born. The red hair and some facial features throw people off. I think both boys take after their mother's side of the family as far as their looks. (They get their hairline from dad.) If you remember the photo from Diana's funeral procession of the boys with Charles and Earl Spencer, you would see they look more like the Spencers.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whether he knows it or not, whether he intends to or not, he is contributing to her ‘exotic’ narrative which she has complained about.
> https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/...ism-what-her-saga-says-black-britons-n1132181


If MM would really care for the kids in this article, she would stop exploiting the race card. She is misleading these kids. She had a great opportunity to fight against racism and other types of discrimination as part of the BRF, but she was too greedy for that. She preferred to use the BRF to become a celebrity (paying for a costly PR-agency) and make tons of money. She doesn't even care about her own family, so...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And one last interesting point: Lady CC claims after just a few dates the news broke in the US press that they were dating, that she had met the BRF and they all loved her, with info that must have been provided by Meghan because otherwise it would not have been attainable. Back than she wasn't on my radar nor did I follow Harry's love life at all, so I have no recollection of how the story broke. Anyway, Lady CC says that kind of cemented her as Harry's girlfriend and made him feel obligated to treat her more seriously than he otherwise might have. Geez, was he seriously that easily cornered?
> 
> Then again, I doubt he'd ever dated someone who'd go ahead and create facts by leaking to the press like this (also, anyone remember that interview she gave to what was it...Vogue or HP, where she spoke about their relationship and I thought that was so...unlike the BRF handling things?).


Not surprised. Money well spent on Sunshine S. and other PR agencies, she succeeded!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> "Daughter of Satan" sounds perfect!  Although, why insult poor Thomas.


Agree, poor Thomas. He worked all is life, paid for MM's very costly education, his own mother's nursing home... and he can't even have a peaceful retirement. She is very cruel!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from 2018 —
> _Alexi Lubormirski, the acclaimed photographer behind the portraits, was "very shocked with the reaction" to the dress, he told Entertainment Tonight at The Daily Front Row Fashion Awards on Sunday.
> 
> But the process of how Meghan chose that dress was very simple. "To be honest, we tried on a couple of different things and that was just one that she felt comfortable in, so we weren’t really thinking, ‘Is it nude?’ or anything. We just thought, 'Feel comfortable and let’s make some nice pictures,'" he recalled.
> 
> So there you have it. Meghan wasn't trying to raise eyebrows; she was just being comfortable. (We, too, would like to feel comfortable in couture.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This Is Why Meghan Markle Wore a Sheer Dress in Her Engagement Photos with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The reason is quite simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


And MM could only be comfortable in a 75K dress!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, if nudity was really a problem with that dress...come on now, a celebrity photographer doesn't know that's one thing to look out for if you marry into the BRF? I hate it when people insult my intelligence by playing dumb.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seeing that I fell down a Quora hole where lots of people claimed the intense love story where Harry fell for the chancer right away was as fabricated as everything else I thought this was fitting.


----------



## Chloe302225

On a happier note Eugenie had a baby boy today; also be prepared for some news from MM+H to upstage this. You know they are going to for round two on taking Eugenie's spotlight, first her wedding.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> On a happier note Eugenie had a baby boy today; also be prepared for some news from MM+H to upstage this. You know they are going to for round two on taking Eugenie's spotlight, first her wedding.....




Awww. Did they announce a name?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I obviously haven't read the book, but Lady CC mentioned that Scobie says in Finding Freedom that from the very beginning Harry had been under Meghan's spell. Seeing that there are a lot of people who believe she did some kind of voodoo to her willing victim that's a weird way of putting it, isn't it.


if you refuse to spend the money on the book itself ...
there are ways to get around that problem ie not willing to BUY junky, gossipy books
i subscribe to scribd app - digital library that includes the CC and Morton books , I do not remember about Omid’s
my excuse is that they have a GREAT selection of artsy books eg on real serious authors , better selection of artsy stuff than Amazon eg all the volumes of the Ned rorem letters
so, I was able to read Morton guilt free


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's so smart, thank you!


----------



## melissatrv

It was a very pretty dress but did not fit the occasion.  And that wedding gown, don't even get me started on that colossal fail.  



lanasyogamama said:


> I did wonder why she wore a ball gown for the engagement pic.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Awww. Did they announce a name?


Not yet, I think to honour her grandfather who will be 100 this year, Philip would be nice as a middle name.


----------



## Mendocino

sdkitty said:


> I think some men look great with the shaved head


John Travolta looks so much better with his head shaved.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Awww. Did they announce a name?



Not as yet, names usually come a few days later.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Mendocino said:


> John Travolta looks so much better with his head shaved.


It took him soooooo long to accept it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC has completely sucked me in, though I still think she's kind of a nutjob too...but she seems to be well connected in society. So speaking of Eugenie, she says they never lived at Frogmore like we all had figured and it was all a fabricated story by a certain PR machine.

Also, she's much more gracious than me...when asked by one of her viewers if she could say three nice things about Meghan she said she could come up with way more nice things about her as her gifts are not her problem but her character


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> That would admittedly make for a huge bombshell but it cannot be true. The timing just doesn't work. By all accounts Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until two years after Harry was born. The red hair and some facial features throw people off. I think both boys take after their mother's side of the family as far as their looks. (They get their hairline from dad.) If you remember the photo from Diana's funeral procession of the boys with Charles and Earl Spencer, you would see they look more like the Spencers.


When the line of succession was changed, I thought it odd. H was pushed down the line behind Charlotte and any other of William's future female children.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> When the line of succession was changed, I thought it odd. H was pushed down the line behind Charlotte and any other of William's future female children.



I don't think that's how it works. Harry as the heir's brother would not automatically have become king had William only had daughters - he would always have been behind any of William's kids. It was *her* brothers who would have been favoured over her before. The York princesses - both female - are in line before Anne because their parent that makes them eligible is male.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> A few more possibilities, I'm trying to decide between Dozing Off Soon and Dreaded Orange Spots.
> 
> View attachment 4984305


.. and to add to @Chanbal's list - *Duplicitous Oily Self-Righteous*  -or-  *Sanctimonious* for the last word!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> .. and to add to @Chanbal's list - *Duplicitous Oily Self-Righteous*  -or-  *Sanctimonious* for the last word!



Dumb Oafs Scamper


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think that's how it works. Harry as the heir's brother would not automatically have become king had William only had daughters - he would always have been behind any of William's kids. It was *her* brothers who would have been favoured over her before. The York princesses - both female - are in line before Anne because their parent that makes them eligible is male.


Yes, had the line of succession not been changed, Louis would have jumped ahead of Charlotte, just like Andrew and Edward did with Anne.


----------



## csshopper

Curious what you all think about this pronoun choice of "her" instead of "their," particularly in this sentence where "their" would be expected. The second time in two days I've noticed this in Daily Mail articles.

        "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently living in *her* $14million mansion in California having stepped back from *her *royal duties last year..."

Deliberate? or just poor Editing (IMO)? 

From an article where her stans went into "meltdown" over her return to her Suits' days look of casual shirt and long hair.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Curious what you all think about this pronoun choice of "her" instead of "their," particularly in this sentence where "their" would be expected. The second time in two days I've noticed this in Daily Mail articles.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently living in *her* $14million mansion in California having stepped back from *her *royal duties last year..."
> 
> Deliberate? or just poor Editing (IMO)?
> 
> From an article where her stans went into "meltdown" over her return to her Suits' days look of casual shirt and long hair.



 I would guess this is DM's not-so-subtle way of saying Meghan wears the pants in the family


----------



## Sol Ryan

csshopper said:


> Curious what you all think about this pronoun choice of "her" instead of "their," particularly in this sentence where "their" would be expected. The second time in two days I've noticed this in Daily Mail articles.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently living in *her* $14million mansion in California having stepped back from *her *royal duties last year..."
> 
> Deliberate? or just poor Editing (IMO)?
> 
> From an article where her stans went into "meltdown" over her return to her Suits' days look of casual shirt and long hair.



I have to look, but I think the house is under one of her companies’ name... it’s her house unless something has changed... they aren’t wrong









						Prince Harry's Santa Barbara house ‘listed in Meghan Markle’s name’
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle recently moved in to a stunning mansion in Santa Barbara - and real estate experts claim the property's tax records "match limited liability companies previously created by the Duchess of Sussex".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I have to look, but I think the house is under one of her companies’ name... it’s her house unless something has changed... they aren’t wrong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's Santa Barbara house ‘listed in Meghan Markle’s name’
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle recently moved in to a stunning mansion in Santa Barbara - and real estate experts claim the property's tax records "match limited liability companies previously created by the Duchess of Sussex".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Their lawyers probably figured out some kind of tax break where it is advantageous to have it in her name. Maybe because he isn't a US citizen? Who knows, maybe Meghan got a special first time home buyer interest rate on the $14 million mansion.


----------



## Chanbal

Who are these people?  It looks like MM and her Minister of Propaganda want to destroy the BRF, and
her complacent husband is complicit! People in the UK should keep writing to QE/Palace and request H to be removed from the line of succession before it's too late. 




Royal commentator Omid Scobie, who co-authored a book about the Sussexes, said: "Fascinating @guardian investigation revealing how the Queen lobbied the British Government to change a draft law to conceal her private wealth from the public.

"We often hear how royals are not supposed to meddle in parliament but this tells a different story."

weeds!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Their lawyers *probably figured out some kind of tax break where it is advantageous to have it in her name. Maybe because he isn't a US citizen? Who knows, maybe Meghan got a special first time home buyer interest rate on the $14 million mansion.


Did you mean to say 'her lawyers'?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Did you mean to say 'her lawyers'?



Hey, I don't work for the Mail. I assume Harry is the one paying them. She's not fronting anything with her own cash.


----------



## marietouchet

H&M have privately sent congrats to Eugenie .... how do we know that ? Duhhhh
to quote Cream “SUNSHINE of your love ..... “ 
insert Eric Clapton solo here lol


----------



## CeeJay

Sol Ryan said:


> I have to look, but I think the house is under one of her companies’ name... it’s her house unless something has changed... they aren’t wrong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's Santa Barbara house ‘listed in Meghan Markle’s name’
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle recently moved in to a stunning mansion in Santa Barbara - and real estate experts claim the property's tax records "match limited liability companies previously created by the Duchess of Sussex".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Yes, you are correct .. remember reading that!  Good 'ole cheap Hazza, but then again .. there would likely have been NO WAY that he would have his name on any housing here in the US!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Their lawyers probably figured out some kind of tax break where it is advantageous to have it in her name. Maybe because he isn't a US citizen? Who knows, maybe Meghan got a special first time home buyer interest rate on the $14 million mansion.



Or she convinced him it was beneficial (to her, in a divorce).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hey, I don't work for the Mail. I assume Harry is the one paying them. She's not fronting anything with her own cash.


I also think that Harry (or Charles) is footing the bill, MM's cash is most likely (safely) growing in the bank. Though, whoever put that mansion in her name was certainly working for her.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or she convinced him it was beneficial (to her, in a divorce).


See .. this is where it gets interesting here in California though; we are a 'community property' state and as such, the "property" (assets) should be split 50%/50%.  Now, that's not to say that these type of folks don't have their ways of hiding assets and/or the assets are not evenly split .. but that would be a very messy affair!


----------



## csshopper

thank you to all who replied to my question about ownership of the mansion. I learned some things, as I often do during our discussions. Meghan seems to come out ahead on the real estate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You too, Huffpost.

Princess Eugenie Shares a Glimpse of Her Son With Jack Brooksbank on Instagram

In short, she copied Meghan, possibly after having consulted with her, but in the 15 hours since the baby has been born she has not faced the same backlash as poor Meghan over her decision to not show the baby's face  (that's the closest resemblance to an eyeroll I could find).


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the house — saw a rumor that the house was, possibly is, one of Oprah’s.  Supposedly, Oprah owns several in Montecito.  Not too much of a stretch for me to believe Oprah would work a quid-pro-quo with H&M.

RE: E&J’s baby — unbelievable, these people are serious joy-stealers.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> See .. this is where it gets interesting here in California though; we are a 'community property' state and as such, the "property" (assets) should be split 50%/50%.  Now, that's not to say that these type of folks don't have their ways of hiding assets and/or the assets are not evenly split .. but that would be a very messy affair!



So was that why Meghan was so hot to get Harry to move to CA? She loved England until she got the ring on her finger. Then it was--put a choke chain on Harry and drag him to the land of celebrity worship aaaaaaaaaand....community property. Hmm.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> So was that why Meghan was so hot to get Harry to move to CA? She loved England until she got the ring on her finger. Then it was--put a choke chain on Harry and drag him to the land of celebrity worship aaaaaaaaaand....community property. Hmm.


If H doesn't have a good prenup in place, he will be allowed to keep his grey shirt.


----------



## gracekelly

Maybe Meg will send Eugenie some of Archie's old baby clothes.  hahahahahaha!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I think, but could be wrong, Harry’s funds/palaces/cars/jewels?/etc. are all protected. 
Whatever was the BRF’s, it will stay the BRF’s.  Remember Diana and Sarah got very little in their divorces. Anyone after money is better off marrying a wealthy guy, not a Royal.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Maybe Meg will send Eugenie some of Archie's old baby clothes.  hahahahahaha!



If she does we will read about Meghan’s renowned generosity within five minutes in at least 10 US publications. In the comments there will be several stans sharing such insightful observations as “YAAASSS MY QUEEN!!”


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think, but could be wrong, Harry’s funds/palaces/cars/jewels?/etc. are all protected.
> Whatever was the BRF’s, it will stay the BRF’s.  Remember Diana and Sarah got very little in their divorces. *Anyone after money is better off marrying a wealthy guy, not a Royal.*



Now that I know that ,  I'll stop trying to go after Charles  .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uhm, Diana got more than 20 millions in her divorce settlement, got to keep most of her jewelry (even the pieces on loan; the Queen asked only back for the Lover's Knot Tiara), her three-story Kensington palace apartment, her security and access to the private jets of the BRF for travel as well as her office being funded by the firm. Not too shabby I'd say. The biggest blow was losing the HRH status because that effectively meant she had to curtsy to everyone else in the BRF, even her own sons. I find it interesting that apparently the Queen wanted to let her have it but Charles - you know, the guy who cheated on her from like day 1 - insisted it was removed from her. You'd think he'd have felt enough remorse to not be a total jerk about things, hu?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think, but could be wrong, Harry’s funds/palaces/cars/jewels?/etc. are all protected.
> Whatever was the BRF’s, it will stay the BRF’s.  Remember Diana and Sarah got very little in their divorces. Anyone after money is better off marrying a wealthy guy, not a Royal.


As *QueenofWrapDress *said above -- Diana made a fortune from her divorce. Sarah, on the other hand, only got a few million, which she spent lavishly and got herself into debt, but that's another story.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> As *QueenofWrapDress *said above -- Diana made a fortune from her divorce. Sarah, on the other hand, only got a few million, which she spent lavishly and got herself into debt, but that's another story.











						Who Had the Higher Net Worth Before Marrying Prince Charles: Princess Diana or Camilla Parker Bowles?
					

Find out how much Princess Diana and Camilla Parker Bowles were worth before they married the future king.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



Diana started the marriage with a fortune, her own inheritance.  Sure, the divorce sounds like a lot, but she was never truly ‘free’ of her first husband and his drama. It was always going to be _his_ palace apartment, _his_ jewels, his stuff. His presence was always going to loom over her. Could she have really left?  Sarah still has to live in a wing of Andrew’s palace. Sure, she says it‘s all ‘happy times’ but I wonder.  No way would I want my ex lurking about, even if ‘super friendly’.  For a non-Royal, the Royal path to riches is fraught with peril. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sure, the divorce sounds like a lot, but she was never truly ‘free’ of her first husband and his drama. It was always going to be _his_ palace apartment, _his_ jewels, his stuff. His presence was always going to loom over her. Could she have really left?  Sarah still has to live in a wing of Andrew’s palace. Sure, she says it‘s all ‘happy times’ but I wonder.  No way would I want my ex lurking about, even if ‘super friendly’.  For a non-Royal, the Royal path to riches is fraught with peril. Just my 2 cents.



Yeah, but you didn't say the money came with strings, you said she made peanuts from the divorce. Also her brother being worth 100 millions says really nothing about Diana's inheritance as the lion's share of their father's property would have gone to his heir (but also, wasn't he still alive at the time of her wedding).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uhm, Diana got more than 20 millions in her divorce settlement, got to keep most of her jewelry (even the pieces on loan; the Queen asked only back for the Lover's Knot Tiara), her three-story Kensington palace apartment, her security and access to the private jets of the BRF for travel as well as her office being funded by the firm. Not too shabby I'd say. The biggest blow was losing the HRH status because that effectively meant she had to curtsy to everyone else in the BRF, even her own sons. I find it interesting that apparently the Queen wanted to let her have it but Charles - you know, the guy who cheated on her from like day 1 - insisted it was removed from her. You'd think he'd have felt enough remorse to not be a total jerk about things, hu?



The jewelry Diana kept was her personal collection everything that belonged to the BRF went back to them. It is why you can see Kate borrow pieces that she wore but still belong and as currently in the possession of the Queen.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> As *QueenofWrapDress *said above -- Diana made a fortune from her divorce. Sarah, on the other hand, only got a few million, which she spent lavishly and got herself into debt, but that's another story.


Sarah only got a few millions, I'm starting to feel sorry for her. Seriously, I never understood how she got herself into debt. It looks like she received a lump sum settlement of £3 million, and a 'pension' of £15,000/ year after the divorce. With Randy Andy's contacts, I believe she could have easily gotten a job.

Like Fergie, MM married a spare. This is probably why the 16-toilet mansion is already in her name. She may have understood that divorce settlements are not big for the wives of spares. £3 million would barely cover one year budget... 

Wiki on Fergie


----------



## RueMonge

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think, but could be wrong, Harry’s funds/palaces/cars/jewels?/etc. are all protected.
> Whatever was the BRF’s, it will stay the BRF’s.


I think in terms of California community property laws, you are right. It’s assets acquired after the marriage that are shared. It can be more complicated if you don‘t draw a clear line financially between before and after the marriage. 
I learned that the hard way.


----------



## bag-mania

I don't know what the hell "PureWow" is but they sure do adore H&M. While we are here wondering why Harry has been looking so bad, they are gushing about how much better H&M look since moving to California.  Personally, I thought Meghan looked more like Joanna Gaines than herself in the poetry video appearance.

*Why Do Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Look Different in Latest Appearance? We Have Answers*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just made a rare virtual appearance, and fans can’t seem to get over how “genuinely happy” they look for a change.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently surprised a group of students representing Get Lit, a poetry organization that aims to increase literacy among children. The company shared a screenshot from the event on its official Instagram account, which prompted royal aficionados to flood the comments section with words of support for the couple (who look happier than ever).

One person wrote, “I don’t know if it’s the California effect…but Harry and Meghan look so good and glowing every time they show up.” Another added, “Meghan looks genuinely happy and Harry looks relaxed and unstressed. So good to see!” Others put it simply, writing, “They are glowing. Both looking amazing and happy.”

We can’t deny that we agree with the comments. Not only are Prince Harry and Markle contagiously happy, but they’re also starting to look like a normal couple. (Based on what they went through with their resignation as senior royals, that’s saying a lot.)









						Why Do Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Look Different in Latest Appearance? We Have Answers
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just made a rare virtual appearance, and fans can't seem to get over how 'genuinely happy' they look. Find out more here.




					www.purewow.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> While we are here wondering why Harry has been looking so bad, they are gushing about how much better H&M look since moving to California.



He looks like he is heavily drinking or medicated in most appearances, and I'm not saying this to mock him because if true that would be really sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Still having way too much fun with my new hobby. When asked why Meghan didn't just find someone whose lifestyle aligned with what she wanted instead of marrying and completely uprooting Harry:

"Because that was the best game in town and she needed a plate for all it's worth. Had she had a choice between Jeff Bezos and Harry Wales, I can tell you something: Lauren Sanchez wouldn't be anywhere near Jeff Bezos today."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Sarah only got a few millions, I'm starting to feel sorry for her.



Seriously   I'll take their crumbs and live happily ever after.



> Seriously, I never understood how she got herself into debt. It looks like she received a lump sum settlement of £3 million, and a 'pension' of £15,000/ year after the divorce.



Plus didn't she keep the girls? There must have been child support, and probably more than a measly 15000 pounds a year (that said, that sum sounds completely...wrong to begin with).


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Sarah only got a few millions, I'm starting to feel sorry for her. Seriously, I never understood how she got herself into debt. It looks like she received a lump sum settlement of £3 million, and a 'pension' of £15,000/ year after the divorce.
> 
> Wiki on Fergie


A £15K a year? I am sorry but that's probably a lie (wiki page says *she* said she got £15k a year, we have no way of verifying that). One cannot live on £15k a year. £15k a month more like it.


----------



## gracekelly

Sarah lived beyond her means on many levels.  She liked to travel and the places she went to were always 5*.  We may not like her taste in clothing, but there again, it was all expensive and she had many social events to attend.  When these ladies wear a hat, you are looking at 2-3K Philip Treacy custom made creations.  It all adds up.  Plus I am sure that she wanted a nice home with a good address.  Diana saved a lot of money by being allowed to live at KP.  She also did it so that Harry and Will would have a home there.  Aside from living costs, I think that Sarah was also investing unwisely.


----------



## Jayne1

Sarah didn't have to live on Palace grounds, but apparently wanted to and it was rent free.

She and Andy always seemed to have some sort of understanding between them. Sometimes they were close and sometimes they were involved with others.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Plus didn't she keep the girls? There must have been child support, and probably more than a measly 15000 pounds a year (that said, that sum sounds completely...wrong to begin with).


True, but no matter what she got in child support, Andy probably paid for clothes, schooling, travels, whatever princesses need or want.

Not having to worry about rent or her children's expenses, she really could have lived comfortably.


----------



## bag-mania

Andy isn't much better with money than Fergie. They were both sued just last year for defaulting on a loan for a Swiss ski chalet they bought years ago. She's a spendaholic for sure, but I still feel bad for her. It's obvious she spends money to feel better and we all know what happens when retail therapy goes out of control.

I'm attaching this clip from a TV show where Sarah got some real talk from Suze Orman. These two women have totally opposite personalities and you can really tell that Sarah was in emotional pain. Even her dog looked like he was willing to abandon her in favor of Suze at the end.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Sarah only got a few millions, I'm starting to feel sorry for her. Seriously, I never understood how she got herself into debt. It looks like she received a lump sum settlement of £3 million, and a 'pension' of £15,000/ year after the divorce.
> 
> Wiki on Fergie


A £15K a year? I am sorry but that's probably a lie (wiki page says *she* said she got £15k a year, we have no way of verifying that). One cannot live on £15k a year. £15k a month more like it.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> A £15K a year? I am sorry but that's probably a lie (wiki page says *she* said she got £15k a year, we have no way of verifying that). One cannot live on £15k a year. £15k a month more like it.


Only Sarah knows if it is £15K a month or a year. She probably didn't know how to negotiate her allowance. MM is no Fergie, she will try to get all tiaras.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uhm, Diana got more than 20 millions in her divorce settlement, got to keep most of her jewelry (even the pieces on loan; the Queen asked only back for the Lover's Knot Tiara), her three-story Kensington palace apartment, her security and access to the private jets of the BRF for travel as well as her office being funded by the firm. Not too shabby I'd say. The biggest blow was losing the HRH status because that effectively meant she had to curtsy to everyone else in the BRF, even her own sons. I find it interesting that apparently the Queen wanted to let her have it but Charles - you know, the guy who cheated on her from like day 1 - insisted it was removed from her. You'd think he'd have felt enough remorse to not be a total jerk about things, hu?


Can't remember where I read it, but apparently, Charles is quite the vindictive man.   Now, that being said, obviously with Harry being his son, I don't think he would pull a vindictive stunt on him, but .. Meghan?!!?! .. yeah, I could kind of see that (and honestly, I wish he would put her in her place)!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Can't remember where I read it, but apparently, Charles is quite the vindictive man.   Now, that being said, obviously with Harry being his son, I don't think he would pull a vindictive stunt on him, but .. Meghan?!!?! .. yeah, I could kind of see that (and honestly, I wish he would put her in her place)!!!



I think all of the royal family are sitting on their hands doing nothing because they don't want to alienate Harry any more than he already is. They hope he will wise up but I don't believe he ever will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

While not in the same category as BRF wealth, MM came into the marriage with her own millions and network of powerful people. Just having Oprah’s advice would be very helpful. If [big if] there is a divorce, doubtful MM will become a billionaire.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember Diana and Sarah got very little in their divorces.



Yes, by BRF and many billionaire standards, they got very little.  As aristocrats prior to marriage, they had access to plenty of wealthier men. Women need to weigh their options carefully.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Only Sarah knows if it is £15K a month or a year. She probably didn't know how to negotiate her allowance. MM is no Fergie, she will try to get all tiaras.


Sarah is an idiot for sure. She went broke very quickly! MM is way more cunning than Fergie! 

On another note, MM's case summary judgment ruling is due tomorrow at 4pm apparently. Would be interesting to hear the verdict.


----------



## Luvbolide

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sarah is an idiot for sure. She went broke very quickly! MM is way more cunning than Fergie!
> 
> On another note, MM's case summary judgment ruling is due tomorrow at 4pm apparently. Would be interesting to hear the verdict.




Oh good - can’t wait to see the order.  I don’t know the first thing about U.K. civil procedure, but if it is anything like the rules re: MSJ in the US, I think MM is going to get knocked down.  Bizarre for her, as a plaintiff, to have made such a motion to begin with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Meghan Markle clearly and deliberately used Archie's gestation period as a means of gaining a lot of attention for herself."

I'm dying.

"Her conduct throughout was not regularly royal, in fact it wasn't even regularly ladylike. Whether she did it mischievously, unintentionally or calculatingly to create a controvery - because I do believe actually that Meghan is a fame junkie and that she's an attention seeker. That baby's gestation period was the most wonderful time for her to keep herself in the forefront of everyone's attention."


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Meghan Markle clearly and deliberately used Archie's gestation period as a means of gaining a lot of attention for herself."
> 
> I'm dying.
> 
> "Her conduct throughout was not regularly royal, in fact it wasn't even regularly ladylike. Whether she did it mischievously, unintentionally or calculatingly to create a controvery - because I do believe actually that Meghan is a fame junkie and that she's an attention seeker. That baby's gestation period was the most wonderful time for her to keep herself in the forefront of everyone's attention."




Ouch!  “Not even regularly ladylike”!!!!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC largely blames Meghan's ridiculous behaviour for the surrogate rumours, and I think she has a point. Had she laid down low and not acted like a complete lunatic - from the belly rubbing, the inappropriate clothing to lying about the birth - for 40 weeks nobody would have batted an eyelash.

But also, that point about the attention - I used to think she wouldn't have another baby as she obviously is not very maternal and she wouldn't need another child to reinforce her status (both as the mother of Harry's children and financially). But all that narcisstic supply that pregnancy provided, I can totally see her wanting to experience that again.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also, that point about the attention - I used to think she wouldn't have another baby as she obviously is not very maternal and she wouldn't need another child to reinforce her status (both as the mother of Harry's children and financially). But all that narcisstic supply that pregnancy provided, I can totally see her wanting to experience that again.


100% agree .. didn't think she would want another, but it would definitely fill that narcissistic "need" that she SOOOOOOOOO has!  However, I don't think she "enjoyed" being pregnant per se (as she has always been a stickler since her teen days in regards to being thin), so I still haven't ruled out the surrogate option.  That could also (somewhat) be the cause for her taking more of a back-seat as of late.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Article from July, 2020:








						Lady Colin Campbell, Author of the Other Harry and Meghan Book, Swears It’s Not a Takedown
					

After making her name nearly three decades ago with a gossip-driven portrait of Princess Diana, the longtime royal antagonist is back with a deeply subjective book about Harry and Meghan.




					www.vanityfair.com
				






Spoiler: Lady Colin



On a recent afternoon in July, Lady Colin Campbell was drinking champagne with Princess Olga Romanoff at the latter’s 14th-century mansion in Kent. I had been working on a profile of Campbell—the acid-penned British aristocrat and reality star who, after writing an unflattering best seller on Princess Diana and speculating publicly about the queen’s sex life, has of late turned her caustic prose on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. I called Leo—an Austro–Hungarian prince who had been earning his quarantine keep at Campbell’s 18th-century Sussex country house, Castle Goring, by working as her assistant—expecting to be connected to Romanoff for a supplementary phone interview. Instead, perhaps by miscommunication, perhaps by an optics flourish on Campbell’s behalf, I was Skyped into the two women’s palatial post-lunch conversation: Campbell in her trademark pearls, and Romanoff in a blue puffer vest underneath grand oil portraits depicting her grand relatives.
But life for these titled women was not as grand as it appeared, they lamented. Anyone who watched _Downton Abbey_ knows how hard it was for the Crawley family to maintain their stately home last century. A century, and a century-worth of repairs later, has brought other kinds of difficulties. “We work bloody hard to keep the roofs over our vast houses and the leaks out, so we do what we have to do. And in my case, I am a tour guide in my own house,” Romanoff said, referencing the paid tours she leads. “And Lady C has weddings and all sorts of things in hers.”
The mansions? The portraits? Those all look pretty but, explained Campbell, “It’s the remnants of a bygone age, and you can’t not be dutiful. That’s what keeps these leaking ships afloat.”

There are rumors online that Romanoff was once considered a potential wife for Prince Charles.When I asked, Romanoff rolled her eyes. “Mother always had lots of hopes for me, none of which came true,” she said. “Mother had delusions that you should marry, at the very least, a duke with a large estate. I don’t know. I decided that wasn’t the life for me. In retrospect, I probably was a fool, but, hey, I’ve got lovely children, lovely grandchildren, and mother had to come to terms with the fact that I wasn’t going to marry either Prince Charles or a duke.”

“Look at us sitting here now,” said Campbell, “two old crones instead of being super rich.”

I ask whether Romanoff daydreams about winning the lottery. “Oh God, yes,” she sighed.


The conflict between upper-crust decorum and contemporary reality is something of an industry for Campbell, whose best seller, 1992’s _Diana in Private,_ served up gossip on Princess Diana’s eating disorder and affair with James Hewitt. The author is a polarizing figure who has been called many things over the years: “an amusing dinner partner” by Tina Brown. “TV gold” by those who saw her eviscerate her costars on the 2015 season of _I’m a Celebrity…Get Me Out of Here!_ (She said she ventured into the reality-TV Thunderdome to afford a costly renovation on her home, what she calls “whoring for Goring.”) “Out of touch,” by multiple Twitter users who saw her publicly commenting on Prince Andrew after his disastrous BBC _Newsnight_ interview. (More on that later.) “A crushing snob and a complete fake,” by her ex-husband Lord Colin Campbell, whom she married in 1974. Though the marriage lasted less than a year, 45 years ago, Campbell retains her ex-husband’s name, title, and aristocratic credibility.

“I find it infuriating she continues to call herself Lady Colin Campbell,” Lord Campbell said in 2015, adding that, when he met Prince Charles, he took it upon himself to apologize for his ex-wife’s book about Diana. “She has proven to be a constant embarrassment including when she wrote that ghastly book about Prince Charles and Princess Diana.” Lady Campbell, when asked for comment on this remark, responded, “I’m delighted if he’s infuriated,” before launching into a 10-minute monologue laced with allegations and mention of myriad lawsuits. The marriage may be stale but the wounds are fresh.

“I don’t dine out on being his ex-wife,” she said. “He dines out on being my ex-husband.”

Earlier this summer, surprising Meghan Markle and Prince Harry headlines started rippling across the internet: claims that Meghan has political ambitions and was the “driving force” behind the pair’s decision to step down as full-time royals. This season marks something of a news-cycle cyclone on the couple, who will see the release of a much-anticipated biography of their relationship, _Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family,_ by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, next month. But these stories were being generated by another source altogether. Nearly 30 years after her Diana book, Campbell had turned her focus to the late princess’s son and daughter-in-law for a new biography, _Meghan and Harry: The Real Story._

Relying on sources including royals, past and present courtiers, aristocrats, and mutual, well-connected friends, Campbell’s book presents Meghan as an opportunist who jettisoned British traditions, friends, and relatives that didn’t suit her. The book, out this week in the U.S., is just as critical of Harry—claiming that royal insiders called him “pathetic” and “pussy-whipped,” and characterizing him as a hopelessly passive party to Meghan’s ambition and forceful character. (_The Real Story_’s publisher confirmed to _Vanity Fair_ that neither Meghan nor Harry responded to Campbell’s claims.)

If _Finding Freedom_ is about the making of a modern royal family, Campbell’s book could be read as the outrage in response to the making of a modern royal family. _The Real Story_ is steeped in a more traditional, royalist perspective, and catalogues what her sources consider the couple’s micro and macro aggressions against the crown—including claims of the couple’s mistreatment of palace staff members, petulant demands, acts of self-defeat and self-interest, and scene-stealing ploys, such as announcing their split from the monarchy the night before Kate Middleton’s birthday and Harry apparently pitching his wife’s voice-over skills to Disney executives at London’s _Lion King_ premiere. The amount of criticism that Campbell and her sources direct specifically at Meghan will render _The Real Story_ undeniably problematic for many readers, but Campbell maintains that she was just reporting the inner circle observations. Even if those observations are not fair or accurate, the book carries meta weight—potentially representing the opinions that helped drive the couple out of the U.K.

Campbell claims that she, her social circle, and the palace had initially rooted for Harry and Meghan to succeed. She considers Meghan smart, attractive, modern, and charming. And the author, who was born into a wealthy family in Jamaica and still speaks with a Jamaican accent, thought that a princess with a biracial background would modernize the monarchy. “I know the tremendous amount of hope that was vested in Meghan to be a great success,” she told me this month. “She was a beacon of hope.”

But after the couple’s 2018 wedding, Campbell says she began hearing reports of Meghan and Harry’s behind-the-scenes behavior—which coincided with the tabloids’ increasingly negative coverage of the couple, and specifically Meghan. The abundance and audacity of these reports, and eventually the couple’s decision to break from the monarchy, seemingly turned Campbell against the couple.

Campbell is more the aristocratic gossip and “grain of salt” type of biographer than the literary kind—which suits since gossip is the origin of Campbell’s new book. She said that she was entertaining a prince, among other friends, last summer at Goring. The conversation turned to Meghan and Harry—and the guests were appalled by what they heard.


“One of [the friends] actually suggested that maybe I could write something to try to rein her in,” said Campbell, referring to Meghan. “They had failed to rein her in at the palace, and they were really concerned with what the outcome would be.”

Campbell does not believe that such criticism of Meghan was rooted in racism—in spite of the tabloid stories that Prince Harry found so appalling that he released an unprecedented statement in 2016 decrying the coverage of his future wife. In her book, Campbell goes so far as to say that Meghan’s race is the one factor that likely _prevented_ “behind-the-scenes manoeuvres to break up the relationship before it could lead to marriage.… It was the single most important aspect of her identity that overrode all the reservations created by her dominating personality, political inclinations, and past conduct which had generated such mixed reports. As [a] prince told me, ‘Had Meghan not been a woman of colour, they would never have allowed the marriage. It was the only thing that was unreservedly in her favour.’”

Campbell writes that she understands Meghan and Harry interpret “negative stories” about Meghan as being racist or snobbish. “But this seemed unlikely for several reasons,” she writes, explaining that she spoke to many of the originators of said stories. “Firstly, most of the people who were spreading these stories were not racist or snobbish. Many of them were frankly concerned with the way Meghan and Harry had been conducting themselves. They wanted them to behave in a less aggressive, assertive, and demanding manner.… They wanted Harry and Meghan to conduct themselves the way [Prince] William and Catherine did.”

Campbell does not believe that the bulk of the public is racist either—if that were the case, the author argues, the couple wouldn’t have attained the popularity they did in the lead-up to their wedding. Additionally, she contends in the book, racists in the U.K. are so “few and far between to be of no consequence…though their existence would confuse the American press into thinking that Meghan was a victim of racism in Britain when nothing could have been further from the truth.”

Such privileged denials of structural racism in the United Kingdom have come into question as of late. British journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown—who took part in this year’s Vice TV special _Meghan Markle: Escaping the Crown_—says such views are exactly what makes racism so dangerous in the U.K. “This is such a racist country,” Alibhai-Brown previously told _Vanity Fair._ “In America racism is not qualitatively better, but at least nobody denies that there’s racism. In some ways it is more difficult for those of us people of color who live here, because it is insidious and hidden, and people don’t want to talk about it or accept it.”

Journalist Aatish Taseer struck a similar chord when he wrote for _Vanity Fair_ about his experience dating Gabriella Windsor, the daughter of Prince and Princess Michael of Kent, as the son of an Indian journalist and Pakistani businessman. “British racism is more casual than its American coeval but more insidious, because its animating prejudice is class,” wrote Taseer—adding that Princess Michael of Kent named her black sheep Serena and Venus. “The British are perfectly happy to deal with people of color who know their place; it is the ‘uppity wog,’ or ‘Paki,’ who arouses in them an animal hatred.”

Though Campbell agrees in the book that Princess Michael of Kent is “universally deplored in royal circles,” the author argues that the Moretto Veneziano “blackamoor” brooch she was photographed wearing before an event attended by Meghan was not racist because it depicted a Moorish Venetian prince—and not a “Sub-Saharan black slave.” She advised me, “Google ‘Moretto Veneziano’ and you will see that they are symbols of racial inclusivity that have been a feature of Venetian life for the last 700 years from the days when Venice and the Moors ended two of the great trading states. So people need to actually, before they jump on their bandwagon, get their facts straight.”

Campbell insists that, of the two royal biographies out this summer, hers is actually the more flattering publication. “Both books cover a lot of the same terrain, but I am impartial while Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand are mouthpieces for Harry and Meghan, pleading how disadvantaged and underprivileged and abused they have been despite all the evidence to the contrary,” said Campbell. (Harry and Meghan have denied being interviewed for Scobie and Durand’s book, but the couple allegedly facilitated access to their friends.


Campbell—who has also written a memoir, a book about her mother (_Daughter of Narcissus: A Family's Struggle to Survive Their Mother's Narcissistic Personality Disorder_), a novel from the perspective of her late dog, and a book about Queen Elizabeth II containing lurid, unsubstantiated claims about the monarch’s sex life—said, “In fact, I never had a book that was as easy to write.”

It’s her sense of duty, Campbell says, that keeps her working for Goring’s upkeep. The fact that Meghan does not seem to share this same sensibility—in spite of her being American, from a different generation, and entirely different socioeconomic background—is what seems to most irk Campbell.

“Being a royal, on a daily basis, much of it is very unglamorous. I mean, [Princess Margaret’s lady-in-waiting] Anne Glenconner put it very well. She said Meghan thought that she was going to be able to drive around in a golden carriage, and it was all going to be very glamorous and there wouldn’t be any hard work. But most of it is hard work. It’s boring work, as well. You are a guest of honor at something, you have to work the room. You have to give everybody what is their due.… Maybe it’s your job, but it’s a peak moment in their lives, and you have to honor that.”


Campbell does not believe that Meghan and Harry are driven by philanthropic ambitions, she said, because, “There is no better platform to do humanitarian work than being a member of a reigning royal family. It’s a no-brainer. So to say, ‘I had the best, and I’ve thrown it away.’ I'm sorry. To me, it was extremely disappointing.”

Though she has written with unflattering gusto when it comes to Charles, Diana, the queen, the queen mother, and now Harry and Meghan, Lady Campbell seemed uncharacteristically supportive of one royal family member when she appeared on ITV’s _Good Morning Britain_ last November. The segment ran shortly after Prince Andrew’s disastrous appearance on _Newsnight_—where he spoke, rather unapologetically, about his association with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

“You all seem to have forgotten, that Jeffrey Epstein, the offense with which he was charged, and for which he was imprisoned, was soliciting prostitution from minors—that is not the same thing as pedophilia,” said Campbell.

In our conversation, though, Campbell claimed that she was not, in fact, defending Prince Andrew. Instead, she said she was “ambushed” by the hosts and cut off before she could finish her point: that Epstein, in her opinion, was not a pedophile but a “hebephile”—clarifying that a hebephile is attracted to earlier pubescent individuals whereas pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent individuals. Campbell said she “had a huge row” with ITV after the segment. “I would not have taken part in that program had I known the course it was going to take.” Had Campbell had a wider audience at the time, there might have been calls for her to be “cancelled.” But the only apparent repercussion, aside from appalled tweets from viewers, was that the Tetbury Town Council pulled her from lighting the local Christmas trees that holiday season.

Campbell said she is not friends with Prince Andrew, whom she describes as “not exactly very bright,” though they do have some friends in common. She thinks that the royal should have “expressed some regrets for his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein once he discovered what Jeffrey Epstein was all about.” Campbell maintained that the more controversial royal story in Britain, however, is Meghan and Harry’s departure from the U.K., and now, what she sees as a self-serving narrative that the duo have spun for themselves with _Finding Freedom._

“I do know that the palace and the royal family feel completely betrayed and abused—that they feel that they have been attacked very, very unfairly,” said Campbell, revealing that she had even heard the word “traitor” bandied about by a source or two. She does not believe that there is any hope that Harry will mend his fractured relationship with Prince William “while Meghan is around. She has been the driving force in the division.” She also said that, according to her sources, Buckingham Palace has begun putting plans in place should Prince Harry decide that he wants to return to the U.K. “with or without Meghan.”

Campbell said that this delicate dynamic is being taken into consideration by the Palace in its plans. “The Royal Family is hopeful that Harry will return, with or without Meghan. They would prefer Harry to return with Meghan. If you read the book, you will know that there are concerns about Harry’s tremendous emotional attachment to Meghan and the consequences thereof if this should fail at any point. There is a human interest part to all of this as well. I mean, it’s easier for people who don’t know any of the people involved just to disregard them as cutout figures in a newspaper. But they’re not. They are all living, breathing human beings. The family is concerned.”

Still, she maintains that her book about Harry and Meghan is not meant to be a takedown. In fact, she claims she wishes it to be instructional: “I’m basically saying, ‘Get your act together and behave in a responsible manner, and don’t be so greedy.’”


But what about Campbell’s own monetary motivations? This is the woman who coined the phrase “whoring for Goring,” after all.

“Everybody who works wants to be rewarded,” said Campbell. “But I would have written it even if there had been no financial reward. I also hoped when I started writing it, that this really would be a shot across their bow and that they would realize that they were better off within the royal family.”


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from July, 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Colin Campbell, Author of the Other Harry and Meghan Book, Swears It’s Not a Takedown
> 
> 
> After making her name nearly three decades ago with a gossip-driven portrait of Princess Diana, the longtime royal antagonist is back with a deeply subjective book about Harry and Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Lady Colin
> 
> 
> 
> On a recent afternoon in July, Lady Colin Campbell was drinking champagne with Princess Olga Romanoff at the latter’s 14th-century mansion in Kent. I had been working on a profile of Campbell—the acid-penned British aristocrat and reality star who, after writing an unflattering best seller on Princess Diana and speculating publicly about the queen’s sex life, has of late turned her caustic prose on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. I called Leo—an Austro–Hungarian prince who had been earning his quarantine keep at Campbell’s 18th-century Sussex country house, Castle Goring, by working as her assistant—expecting to be connected to Romanoff for a supplementary phone interview. Instead, perhaps by miscommunication, perhaps by an optics flourish on Campbell’s behalf, I was Skyped into the two women’s palatial post-lunch conversation: Campbell in her trademark pearls, and Romanoff in a blue puffer vest underneath grand oil portraits depicting her grand relatives.
> But life for these titled women was not as grand as it appeared, they lamented. Anyone who watched _Downton Abbey_ knows how hard it was for the Crawley family to maintain their stately home last century. A century, and a century-worth of repairs later, has brought other kinds of difficulties. “We work bloody hard to keep the roofs over our vast houses and the leaks out, so we do what we have to do. And in my case, I am a tour guide in my own house,” Romanoff said, referencing the paid tours she leads. “And Lady C has weddings and all sorts of things in hers.”
> The mansions? The portraits? Those all look pretty but, explained Campbell, “It’s the remnants of a bygone age, and you can’t not be dutiful. That’s what keeps these leaking ships afloat.”
> 
> There are rumors online that Romanoff was once considered a potential wife for Prince Charles.When I asked, Romanoff rolled her eyes. “Mother always had lots of hopes for me, none of which came true,” she said. “Mother had delusions that you should marry, at the very least, a duke with a large estate. I don’t know. I decided that wasn’t the life for me. In retrospect, I probably was a fool, but, hey, I’ve got lovely children, lovely grandchildren, and mother had to come to terms with the fact that I wasn’t going to marry either Prince Charles or a duke.”
> 
> “Look at us sitting here now,” said Campbell, “two old crones instead of being super rich.”
> 
> I ask whether Romanoff daydreams about winning the lottery. “Oh God, yes,” she sighed.
> 
> 
> The conflict between upper-crust decorum and contemporary reality is something of an industry for Campbell, whose best seller, 1992’s _Diana in Private,_ served up gossip on Princess Diana’s eating disorder and affair with James Hewitt. The author is a polarizing figure who has been called many things over the years: “an amusing dinner partner” by Tina Brown. “TV gold” by those who saw her eviscerate her costars on the 2015 season of _I’m a Celebrity…Get Me Out of Here!_ (She said she ventured into the reality-TV Thunderdome to afford a costly renovation on her home, what she calls “whoring for Goring.”) “Out of touch,” by multiple Twitter users who saw her publicly commenting on Prince Andrew after his disastrous BBC _Newsnight_ interview. (More on that later.) “A crushing snob and a complete fake,” by her ex-husband Lord Colin Campbell, whom she married in 1974. Though the marriage lasted less than a year, 45 years ago, Campbell retains her ex-husband’s name, title, and aristocratic credibility.
> 
> “I find it infuriating she continues to call herself Lady Colin Campbell,” Lord Campbell said in 2015, adding that, when he met Prince Charles, he took it upon himself to apologize for his ex-wife’s book about Diana. “She has proven to be a constant embarrassment including when she wrote that ghastly book about Prince Charles and Princess Diana.” Lady Campbell, when asked for comment on this remark, responded, “I’m delighted if he’s infuriated,” before launching into a 10-minute monologue laced with allegations and mention of myriad lawsuits. The marriage may be stale but the wounds are fresh.
> 
> “I don’t dine out on being his ex-wife,” she said. “He dines out on being my ex-husband.”
> 
> Earlier this summer, surprising Meghan Markle and Prince Harry headlines started rippling across the internet: claims that Meghan has political ambitions and was the “driving force” behind the pair’s decision to step down as full-time royals. This season marks something of a news-cycle cyclone on the couple, who will see the release of a much-anticipated biography of their relationship, _Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family,_ by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, next month. But these stories were being generated by another source altogether. Nearly 30 years after her Diana book, Campbell had turned her focus to the late princess’s son and daughter-in-law for a new biography, _Meghan and Harry: The Real Story._
> 
> Relying on sources including royals, past and present courtiers, aristocrats, and mutual, well-connected friends, Campbell’s book presents Meghan as an opportunist who jettisoned British traditions, friends, and relatives that didn’t suit her. The book, out this week in the U.S., is just as critical of Harry—claiming that royal insiders called him “pathetic” and “pussy-whipped,” and characterizing him as a hopelessly passive party to Meghan’s ambition and forceful character. (_The Real Story_’s publisher confirmed to _Vanity Fair_ that neither Meghan nor Harry responded to Campbell’s claims.)
> 
> If _Finding Freedom_ is about the making of a modern royal family, Campbell’s book could be read as the outrage in response to the making of a modern royal family. _The Real Story_ is steeped in a more traditional, royalist perspective, and catalogues what her sources consider the couple’s micro and macro aggressions against the crown—including claims of the couple’s mistreatment of palace staff members, petulant demands, acts of self-defeat and self-interest, and scene-stealing ploys, such as announcing their split from the monarchy the night before Kate Middleton’s birthday and Harry apparently pitching his wife’s voice-over skills to Disney executives at London’s _Lion King_ premiere. The amount of criticism that Campbell and her sources direct specifically at Meghan will render _The Real Story_ undeniably problematic for many readers, but Campbell maintains that she was just reporting the inner circle observations. Even if those observations are not fair or accurate, the book carries meta weight—potentially representing the opinions that helped drive the couple out of the U.K.
> 
> Campbell claims that she, her social circle, and the palace had initially rooted for Harry and Meghan to succeed. She considers Meghan smart, attractive, modern, and charming. And the author, who was born into a wealthy family in Jamaica and still speaks with a Jamaican accent, thought that a princess with a biracial background would modernize the monarchy. “I know the tremendous amount of hope that was vested in Meghan to be a great success,” she told me this month. “She was a beacon of hope.”
> 
> But after the couple’s 2018 wedding, Campbell says she began hearing reports of Meghan and Harry’s behind-the-scenes behavior—which coincided with the tabloids’ increasingly negative coverage of the couple, and specifically Meghan. The abundance and audacity of these reports, and eventually the couple’s decision to break from the monarchy, seemingly turned Campbell against the couple.
> 
> Campbell is more the aristocratic gossip and “grain of salt” type of biographer than the literary kind—which suits since gossip is the origin of Campbell’s new book. She said that she was entertaining a prince, among other friends, last summer at Goring. The conversation turned to Meghan and Harry—and the guests were appalled by what they heard.
> 
> 
> “One of [the friends] actually suggested that maybe I could write something to try to rein her in,” said Campbell, referring to Meghan. “They had failed to rein her in at the palace, and they were really concerned with what the outcome would be.”
> 
> Campbell does not believe that such criticism of Meghan was rooted in racism—in spite of the tabloid stories that Prince Harry found so appalling that he released an unprecedented statement in 2016 decrying the coverage of his future wife. In her book, Campbell goes so far as to say that Meghan’s race is the one factor that likely _prevented_ “behind-the-scenes manoeuvres to break up the relationship before it could lead to marriage.… It was the single most important aspect of her identity that overrode all the reservations created by her dominating personality, political inclinations, and past conduct which had generated such mixed reports. As [a] prince told me, ‘Had Meghan not been a woman of colour, they would never have allowed the marriage. It was the only thing that was unreservedly in her favour.’”
> 
> Campbell writes that she understands Meghan and Harry interpret “negative stories” about Meghan as being racist or snobbish. “But this seemed unlikely for several reasons,” she writes, explaining that she spoke to many of the originators of said stories. “Firstly, most of the people who were spreading these stories were not racist or snobbish. Many of them were frankly concerned with the way Meghan and Harry had been conducting themselves. They wanted them to behave in a less aggressive, assertive, and demanding manner.… They wanted Harry and Meghan to conduct themselves the way [Prince] William and Catherine did.”
> 
> Campbell does not believe that the bulk of the public is racist either—if that were the case, the author argues, the couple wouldn’t have attained the popularity they did in the lead-up to their wedding. Additionally, she contends in the book, racists in the U.K. are so “few and far between to be of no consequence…though their existence would confuse the American press into thinking that Meghan was a victim of racism in Britain when nothing could have been further from the truth.”
> 
> Such privileged denials of structural racism in the United Kingdom have come into question as of late. British journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown—who took part in this year’s Vice TV special _Meghan Markle: Escaping the Crown_—says such views are exactly what makes racism so dangerous in the U.K. “This is such a racist country,” Alibhai-Brown previously told _Vanity Fair._ “In America racism is not qualitatively better, but at least nobody denies that there’s racism. In some ways it is more difficult for those of us people of color who live here, because it is insidious and hidden, and people don’t want to talk about it or accept it.”
> 
> Journalist Aatish Taseer struck a similar chord when he wrote for _Vanity Fair_ about his experience dating Gabriella Windsor, the daughter of Prince and Princess Michael of Kent, as the son of an Indian journalist and Pakistani businessman. “British racism is more casual than its American coeval but more insidious, because its animating prejudice is class,” wrote Taseer—adding that Princess Michael of Kent named her black sheep Serena and Venus. “The British are perfectly happy to deal with people of color who know their place; it is the ‘uppity wog,’ or ‘Paki,’ who arouses in them an animal hatred.”
> 
> Though Campbell agrees in the book that Princess Michael of Kent is “universally deplored in royal circles,” the author argues that the Moretto Veneziano “blackamoor” brooch she was photographed wearing before an event attended by Meghan was not racist because it depicted a Moorish Venetian prince—and not a “Sub-Saharan black slave.” She advised me, “Google ‘Moretto Veneziano’ and you will see that they are symbols of racial inclusivity that have been a feature of Venetian life for the last 700 years from the days when Venice and the Moors ended two of the great trading states. So people need to actually, before they jump on their bandwagon, get their facts straight.”
> 
> Campbell insists that, of the two royal biographies out this summer, hers is actually the more flattering publication. “Both books cover a lot of the same terrain, but I am impartial while Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand are mouthpieces for Harry and Meghan, pleading how disadvantaged and underprivileged and abused they have been despite all the evidence to the contrary,” said Campbell. (Harry and Meghan have denied being interviewed for Scobie and Durand’s book, but the couple allegedly facilitated access to their friends.
> 
> 
> Campbell—who has also written a memoir, a book about her mother (_Daughter of Narcissus: A Family's Struggle to Survive Their Mother's Narcissistic Personality Disorder_), a novel from the perspective of her late dog, and a book about Queen Elizabeth II containing lurid, unsubstantiated claims about the monarch’s sex life—said, “In fact, I never had a book that was as easy to write.”
> 
> It’s her sense of duty, Campbell says, that keeps her working for Goring’s upkeep. The fact that Meghan does not seem to share this same sensibility—in spite of her being American, from a different generation, and entirely different socioeconomic background—is what seems to most irk Campbell.
> 
> “Being a royal, on a daily basis, much of it is very unglamorous. I mean, [Princess Margaret’s lady-in-waiting] Anne Glenconner put it very well. She said Meghan thought that she was going to be able to drive around in a golden carriage, and it was all going to be very glamorous and there wouldn’t be any hard work. But most of it is hard work. It’s boring work, as well. You are a guest of honor at something, you have to work the room. You have to give everybody what is their due.… Maybe it’s your job, but it’s a peak moment in their lives, and you have to honor that.”
> 
> 
> Campbell does not believe that Meghan and Harry are driven by philanthropic ambitions, she said, because, “There is no better platform to do humanitarian work than being a member of a reigning royal family. It’s a no-brainer. So to say, ‘I had the best, and I’ve thrown it away.’ I'm sorry. To me, it was extremely disappointing.”
> 
> Though she has written with unflattering gusto when it comes to Charles, Diana, the queen, the queen mother, and now Harry and Meghan, Lady Campbell seemed uncharacteristically supportive of one royal family member when she appeared on ITV’s _Good Morning Britain_ last November. The segment ran shortly after Prince Andrew’s disastrous appearance on _Newsnight_—where he spoke, rather unapologetically, about his association with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
> 
> “You all seem to have forgotten, that Jeffrey Epstein, the offense with which he was charged, and for which he was imprisoned, was soliciting prostitution from minors—that is not the same thing as pedophilia,” said Campbell.
> 
> In our conversation, though, Campbell claimed that she was not, in fact, defending Prince Andrew. Instead, she said she was “ambushed” by the hosts and cut off before she could finish her point: that Epstein, in her opinion, was not a pedophile but a “hebephile”—clarifying that a hebephile is attracted to earlier pubescent individuals whereas pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent individuals. Campbell said she “had a huge row” with ITV after the segment. “I would not have taken part in that program had I known the course it was going to take.” Had Campbell had a wider audience at the time, there might have been calls for her to be “cancelled.” But the only apparent repercussion, aside from appalled tweets from viewers, was that the Tetbury Town Council pulled her from lighting the local Christmas trees that holiday season.
> 
> Campbell said she is not friends with Prince Andrew, whom she describes as “not exactly very bright,” though they do have some friends in common. She thinks that the royal should have “expressed some regrets for his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein once he discovered what Jeffrey Epstein was all about.” Campbell maintained that the more controversial royal story in Britain, however, is Meghan and Harry’s departure from the U.K., and now, what she sees as a self-serving narrative that the duo have spun for themselves with _Finding Freedom._
> 
> “I do know that the palace and the royal family feel completely betrayed and abused—that they feel that they have been attacked very, very unfairly,” said Campbell, revealing that she had even heard the word “traitor” bandied about by a source or two. She does not believe that there is any hope that Harry will mend his fractured relationship with Prince William “while Meghan is around. She has been the driving force in the division.” She also said that, according to her sources, Buckingham Palace has begun putting plans in place should Prince Harry decide that he wants to return to the U.K. “with or without Meghan.”
> 
> Campbell said that this delicate dynamic is being taken into consideration by the Palace in its plans. “The Royal Family is hopeful that Harry will return, with or without Meghan. They would prefer Harry to return with Meghan. If you read the book, you will know that there are concerns about Harry’s tremendous emotional attachment to Meghan and the consequences thereof if this should fail at any point. There is a human interest part to all of this as well. I mean, it’s easier for people who don’t know any of the people involved just to disregard them as cutout figures in a newspaper. But they’re not. They are all living, breathing human beings. The family is concerned.”
> 
> Still, she maintains that her book about Harry and Meghan is not meant to be a takedown. In fact, she claims she wishes it to be instructional: “I’m basically saying, ‘Get your act together and behave in a responsible manner, and don’t be so greedy.’”
> 
> 
> But what about Campbell’s own monetary motivations? This is the woman who coined the phrase “whoring for Goring,” after all.
> 
> “Everybody who works wants to be rewarded,” said Campbell. “But I would have written it even if there had been no financial reward. I also hoped when I started writing it, that this really would be a shot across their bow and that they would realize that they were better off within the royal family.”


Isn't Vanity Fair part of MM's PR machine? It seems that SS had some articles published to discredit Lady C at about the time her book was being released. This is probably one of those articles. SS is known for using "bare-knuckle tactics."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Isn't Vanity Fair part of MM's PR machine? It seems that SS had some articles published to discredit Lady C at about the time her book was being released. This is probably one of those articles. SS is known for using "bare-knuckle tactics."



Sure, the article gives the impression that LCC is a bitter woman of a certain age whose life didn’t work out the way she planned. She wrote an unflattering book about Diana, speculated on QE’s sex life{?}, and now this book on H&M. She says it wasn‘t racism that caused the exit, it was the boring job of being a royal. MM, she says, wasn’t prepared for how extremely boring the job can be, is very controlling and manipulative. She says H&M are greedy and should realize they are better off in the Royal family rather than outside of it.  After a year away, I’m not sure H&M would agree. Maybe H, definitely not MM.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC largely blames Meghan's ridiculous behaviour for the surrogate rumours, and I think she has a point. Had she laid down low and not acted like a complete lunatic - from the belly rubbing, the inappropriate clothing to lying about the birth - for 40 weeks nobody would have batted an eyelash.
> 
> But also, that point about the attention - I used to think she wouldn't have another baby as she obviously is not very maternal and she wouldn't need another child to reinforce her status (both as the mother of Harry's children and financially). But all that narcisstic supply that pregnancy provided, I can totally see her wanting to experience that again.



Agreed. Meghan would get a huge amount of attention if she were pregnant again. Which would supersede any maternal instincts. But we'd know that the Archie sibling to be is simply another avenue of a bigger meal ticket. Meghan makes herself so embarrassingly  apparent that anyone would presume that Meghan's children = BRF ANCHOR to MEGA BANK ACCOUNT.  Come on. M's interactions with kids were ok, no reporter ever said her eyes lit up with kids. M needs attention like air. If another child on the way ensure's Meghan's contact contact with news sources then of course Meghan needs rumors at the very least.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> M's interactions with kids were ok, no reporter ever said her eyes lit up with kids.



Haha...remember that footage of a little girl, certainly below the age of 5, trying to desperately get Meghan's attention, even going so far as to touch her hair? Meghan ignored her completely, didn't react at all and just stared into the air...until Harry said something to her. Then the megawatt smile came on and she talked to the kid like it was the center of her world to her. She is so very weird and obvious.


----------



## creme fraiche

CarryOn2020 said:


> While not in the same category as BRF wealth, MM came into the marriage with her own millions and network of powerful people. Just having Oprah’s advice would be very helpful. If [big if] there is a divorce, doubtful MM will become a billionaire.



Was she really though?  It is bandied about that MM was a millionaire prior to marrying Harry, but I doubt this.  This “millionaire” status was assumed based on her net salary for Suits in her last years and does not account for her (high) expenses and the fact that that salary only would not apply to her starting salary.  Like anything relating to this woman, a high degree of scepticism is required.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

creme fraiche said:


> Was she really though?  It is bandied about that MM was a millionaire prior to marrying Harry, but I doubt this.  This “millionaire” status was assumed based on her net salary for Suits in her last years and does not account for her (high) expenses and the fact that that salary only would not apply to her starting salary.  Like anything relating to this woman, a high degree of scepticism is required.



I can believe she had a few millions (<5), but the powerful connections? She was a nobody in Hollywood, and in Canada her chef beau was the bigger celebrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

creme fraiche said:


> Was she really though?  It is bandied about that MM was a millionaire prior to marrying Harry, but I doubt this.  This “millionaire” status was assumed based on her net salary for Suits in her last years and does not account for her (high) expenses and the fact that that salary only would not apply to her starting salary.  Like anything relating to this woman, a high degree of scepticism is required.



Agree about the need for skepticism with H&M.  Remember, Trevor was/is wealthy. Markus Anderson was/is wealthy. Her good friend, Lindsay Roth has money. Jessica Mulroney has money. True, not billionaire status and not mega-millions status, still she was never desperate. She had enough money and connections to live her life her way. Bravo to that.

If [big if] she exits the marriage, she will leave with only a few million more than when she started. IMO, a royal marriage seems like a lot of effort for a small-ish return. Of course, to discuss these sums of money feels gross, especially during a pandemic.


----------



## Chanbal

Wishing you all a great day! Here are today's news:  



Are W&K moving H to 7 in line? MM will not like that.



Interesting how they refer to MM, the UK's duchess... I read somewhere that even if she would win, which would be very unfair, the DM would appeal.


----------



## Chanbal

creme fraiche said:


> Was she really though?  It is bandied about that MM was a millionaire prior to marrying Harry, but I doubt this.  This “millionaire” status was assumed based on her net salary for Suits in her last years and does not account for her (high) expenses and the fact that that salary only would not apply to her starting salary.  Like anything relating to this woman, a high degree of scepticism is required.



MM being a millionaire was one of the many news stories about her released by her PR-agency.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM being a millionaire was one of the many news stories about her released by her PR-agency.



Meghan needed to make it look like she was extremely wealthy and independent. She didn't want to be accused of marrying Harry for money after all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She won!


----------



## bag-mania

Oh wow. We'll be hearing about this for weeks/months to come. Maybe it will be the topic of a podcast.


----------



## Luvbolide

She only won half!  The copyright claim is going to trial.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M will certainly feel emboldened now! Prepare for many more lectures 

Richard Palmer:
Meghan said her legal victory was a “*comprehensive win*” on privacy that showed “you cannot take somebody’s privacy and exploit it in a privacy case”.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Luvbolide said:


> She only won half!  The copyright claim is going to trial.


Yes. It also means the Palace 4 will likely need to testify.


----------



## rose60610

The win is a Catch-22 for Meghan.  Winning a lawsuit over privacy, some of her followers may stop following her out of fear of being sued=Meghan getting less attention. On the other hand, she knows how to compensate.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think this is a win win for her. This is bad for freedom of speech. Now publications will only want to print praise for her, in fear of being sued again. But they want censorship all along anyways! Disappointing but well life goes on. She is so insignificant to my life apart from providing light entertainment when I am bored.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Curious what you all think about this pronoun choice of "her" instead of "their," particularly in this sentence where "their" would be expected. The second time in two days I've noticed this in Daily Mail articles.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently living in *her* $14million mansion in California having stepped back from *her *royal duties last year..."
> 
> Deliberate? or just poor Editing (IMO)?
> 
> From an article where her stans went into "meltdown" over her return to her Suits' days look of casual shirt and long hair.


I think it's deliberate LOL.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think this is a win win for her. This is bad for freedom of speech. Now publications will only want to print praise for her, in fear of being sued again. But they want censorship all along anyways! Disappointing but well life goes on. She is so insignificant to my life apart from providing light entertainment when I am bored.



As you all know I am spending my sleeping nights binging gossip Youtube videos, and there were several saying some British magazines had refrained from reporting anything unpleasant even before the lawsuit because behind the scenes our special butterflies had been massively intimidating them. And it p*sses me off that two mediocre bullies even have success with their attitude.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Sarah only got a few millions, I'm starting to feel sorry for her. Seriously, I never understood how she got herself into debt. It looks like she received a lump sum settlement of £3 million, and a 'pension' of £15,000/ year after the divorce. With Randy Andy's contacts, I believe she could have easily gotten a job.
> 
> Like Fergie, MM married a spare. This is probably why the 16-toilet mansion is already in her name. She may have understood that divorce settlements are not big for the wives of spares. *£3 million would barely cover one year budget...*
> Wiki on Fergie


Or her clothing budget


----------



## purseinsanity

As always, People gives a biased, pro MM point of view:









						Meghan Markle Wins Privacy Case Against U.K. Tabloid: 'We All Deserve Justice and Truth'
					

Meghan Markle has won her High Court privacy claim against the publishers of the Mail on Sunday and Mail Online over their publication of a "personal and private" handwritten letter to her father, Thomas Markle.




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think this is a win win for her. This is bad for freedom of speech. Now publications will only want to print praise for her, in fear of being sued again. But they want censorship all along anyways! Disappointing but well life goes on. She is so insignificant to my life apart from providing light entertainment when I am bored.



Yes, this is absolutely a win for her, especially in her mind.

  As I understand it, the court agreed that the newspaper violated MM’s privacy when it printed the letter she wrote to her father. The author of a personal letter has an expectation of privacy. That’s all, correct?  If so, it really isn’t as much of a win as some may think unless the newspaper planned to print other letters. All the papers need to do is get the author’s permission, then there wouldn’t be an issue. If Thomas had written the letter, perhaps even an ‘open’ letter, and had the newspaper print it, all would have been fine.

The case is not about free speech as we in the USA know it but rather publishing someone’s private letters. Apparently, the recipient cannot pass on private letters to a newspaper — in the UK. Ok, good to know. Would be interesting to know how many times the BRF has sued a UK publication and won. My guess is many times.

_








						U.K. Tabloid Invaded Meghan’s Privacy, Judge Says
					

The Duchess of Sussex sued after The Mail on Sunday published extracts of a letter she had written to her estranged father in 2018.




					www.nytimes.com
				



The litigation has not been without setbacks for Meghan. Last May, Justice Warby struck out several elements of her case, ruling that The Mail would not be judged on whether it had acted dishonestly; had stirred up conflict between Meghan and her father; or had published offensive and intrusive articles about her.

Instead, he said, the case would hinge purely on whether the publication of the letter violated Meghan’s privacy._

ETA:  all this does is make Thomas look worse which, IMO, makes MM look like a bully . Especially since she thanks her ‘mom’ for supporting her during the case. Perhaps the Doria-Thomas divorce has some lingering issues. Hmmm.

ETA2:  Perhaps MM knew the letter, written by her, would be protected. This is why she _wrote_ it rather than call, email or text it. Golly, surely no one in the BRF would advise her to put her thoughts in writing, would they?  They would know the laws, wouldn’t they?  It is possible this could look like a terrible set-up of her father. Gasp!  Samantha, where are you?


----------



## rose60610

She may have won her lawsuit but it makes the public even more jaded against her. She is known for demanding pity and bringing lawsuits. She claims to want privacy but interjects herself anywhere she can no matter how irrelevant she is in the situation. Regardless how much she sues and wins, the public sees her as a spoiled whiny brat and Harry as a wimp who needs Meghan's permission to inhale and exhale. I'm so sick of them painting themselves as the ultimate victims. Losers!


----------



## bag-mania

She is going to milk this for all it's worth. You can tell from her comments she already sees herself as a crusader for justice. 

_"But for today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won. We now know, and hope it creates legal precedent, that you cannot take somebody's privacy and exploit it in a privacy case, as the defendant has blatantly done over the past two years. 

"I share this victory with each of you—because we all deserve justice and truth, and we all deserve better. 

"I particularly want to thank my husband, mom, and legal team, and especially Jenny Afia for her unrelenting support throughout this process."_


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> She is going to milk this for all it's worth. You can tell from her comments she already sees herself as a crusader for justice.
> 
> _"But for today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won. We now know, and hope it creates legal precedent, that you cannot take somebody's privacy and exploit it in a privacy case, as the defendant has blatantly done over the past two years.
> 
> "I share this victory with each of you—because we all deserve justice and truth, and we all deserve better.
> 
> "I particularly want to thank my husband, mom, and legal team, and especially Jenny Afia for her unrelenting support throughout this process."_



So much for the quiet, dignified Doria. This makes her appear a bit hostile and vindictive, IMO.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> She may have won her lawsuit but it makes the public even more jaded against her. She is known for demanding pity and bringing lawsuits. She claims to want privacy but interjects herself anywhere she can no matter how irrelevant she is in the situation. Regardless how much she sues and wins, the public sees her as a spoiled whiny brat and Harry as a wimp who needs Meghan's permission to inhale and exhale. I'm so sick of them painting themselves as the ultimate victims. Losers!



Not just her, the BRF too.
 Harry, once again, wants the BRF to look awful. He will continue to disparage them every day.  
Good grief, QE & Charles, end this charade.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not just her, the BRF too.
> Harry, once again, wants the BRF to look awful. He will continue to disparage them every day.
> Good grief, QE & Charles, end this charade.



I'm not convinced of that. Remember supposedly two members of the family helped her write the letter, as well as members of the staff. They are probably happy that doesn't have to be brought up in court.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I'm not convinced of that. Remember supposedly two members of the family helped her write the letter, as well as members of the staff. They are probably happy that doesn't have to be brought up in court.



It will leak out.  Whoever advised her knew exactly what they were doing. Did they really want to set up the BRF or her?
All I know for certain is pride goeth before the fall. Her statement (?) today shows how puffed up with pride she is.  The fall will come.

All of this happened pre-wedding, right?  Yep, she had pi$$ed off plenty of people from Day 1.


----------



## CeeJay

creme fraiche said:


> Was she really though?  It is bandied about that MM was a millionaire prior to marrying Harry, but I doubt this.  This “millionaire” status was assumed based on her net salary for Suits in her last years and does not account for her (high) expenses and the fact that that salary only would not apply to her starting salary.  Like anything relating to this woman, a high degree of scepticism is required.


I don't, nor will I ever believe that she was a millionaire!!!  If I recall, one of her 'markled' British friends even commented on the fact that Meghan said she wanted to meet a RICH British man, so $$$$$ was definitely on her agenda!  Also, didn't she tell folks that she had to pay for her expensive college education???  Toronto is not a cheap town, and if I recall .. she had to live large in a very nice part of town and it was a rental.  Lastly, I recall that she had wanted to keep the clothing from suits, but they said 'NO' .. hence the reason for her "Zara Party" .. where she kept all the expensive stuff ('natch), but gave out the other pieces.  She doesn't strike me as the type of person who likes to pay for herself; let others do that .. but, alas .. she married a cheapskate (although Harry did say "whatever she wants, she gets").


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She is going to milk this for all it's worth. You can tell from her comments she already sees herself as a crusader for justice.
> 
> _"But for today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won. We now know, and hope it creates legal precedent, that you cannot take somebody's privacy and exploit it in a privacy case, as the defendant has blatantly done over the past two years.
> 
> "I share this victory with each of you—because we all deserve justice and truth, and we all deserve better.
> 
> "I particularly want to thank my husband, mom, and legal team, and especially Jenny Afia for her unrelenting support throughout this process."_


----------



## rose60610

Sure she's going to milk the win for all it's worth. And more. But the more she does the more annoyed she's going to make the public. She's a nobody who landed Harry and took the BRF for a ride. It's like hitting the lottery and complaining of the hardship. Who can listen to that and not gag? If one wasn't annoyed with her before, they will be soon. If she had a shred of decency, she'd donate the damages. But no publication will have the balls to ask her if she's going to and we know she won't.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> It will leak out.  Whoever advised her knew exactly what they were doing. Did they really want to set up the BRF or her?
> All I know for certain is pride goeth before the fall. Her statement (?) today shows how puffed up with pride she is.  *The fall will come.*
> 
> All of this happened pre-wedding, right?  Yep, she had pi$$ed off plenty of people from Day 1.



I'm not convinced a fall will come. Meghan seems to be one of those people capable of skating off unscathed no matter what. Karma doesn't always happen. Now, I don't believe she will ever be truly satisfied in life but surely that's a small price to pay for all she has gained over the past five years.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I believe the Suits money is right. The show ran 6-7 years. Most likely, she banked her money, let Trevor pay for most of her expenses, such as housing, transportation, some clothing, etc.  Let’s hope the show doesn’t go to reruns. She will get paid for those, too.  The more I read, the more I believe she really thought Harry would be king as silly as that sounds. If she really believed that canard, then she probably did think he was cash-richer than he actually is. 

So looking forward to the James Cordon double-decker karaoke.


----------



## Chanbal

The moral of today's story: if one is a bad character and has tons of money to pay costly PR Agencies & lawyers, he/she can get away with almost anything. Very disappointing! 

_"Thomas Markle makes the allegation that she created an attack through PR and her friends.
'If that’s right it means rich and powerful people who can afford PR and representation will be able to curate their reputations without the media being able to expose that."

DM article on the subject!_


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I'm not convinced a fall will come. Meghan seems to be one of those people capable of skating off unscathed no matter what. Karma doesn't always happen. Now, I don't believe she will ever be truly satisfied in life but surely that's a small price to pay for all she has gained over the past five years.


I think for M to have to live a life where she is not thriving or truly satisfied will be very frustrating for her.  I also believe the aging process will frighten her and more surgeries will be in her future.  Instead of taking a big bite out of H&M, Karma is nibbling every day.
I feel this train wreck is taking the scenic route instead of a fast burn.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M:  always willing to throw family, staff and any ‘friend’ under the bus.  Knauf, an American, will be next. 

from Nov., 2020:








						The Duchess of Sussex draws senior royals into privacy battle
					

Inside Meghan Markle’s legal case against Associated Newspapers




					www.tatler.com
				



_As reported by the Times, a document from her lawyer released yesterday, 18 November, states: ‘In accordance *with the advice that she had received from the two members of the Royal Family*, the [duchess] decided (in about the first week of August 2018) to write a private letter to her father in an attempt to get him to stop talking to the press.’ She reportedly informed *Mr Knauf*, who was responsible for informing more senior people in the royal households and had spoken with her father before the wedding. Meghan reportedly claims she spent hours writing the letter on her iPhone over several weeks before sharing it with Harry and Mr Knauf.
...
The legal response by Meghan’s lawyer, Jenny Afia, said Mr Knauf was required by ‘palace protocol’ to inform more senior aides in the royal households that Meghan was going to write to her father. ‘The genesis of, reasons for and intended use of the letter was the complete opposite of a ‘media strategy’,’ the response says, as reported in the Times. ‘It was a private letter written and sent by the [duchess] to her father, on the advice of senior members of the Royal Family, in an attempt to protect her family, including her new family members, from further media intrusion.’_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> So much for the quiet, dignified Doria. This makes her appear a bit hostile and vindictive, IMO.


I think in many respects (_and as Samantha wrote in her book_), Meghan is a lot more like her mother than her father!  Thomas was the GIVE, GIVE, GIVE (which is what my friends told me) .. whereas Doria seems to be the TAKE, TAKE, TAKE and then discard.  Thinking about her comment to Meghan "_don't give the milk away for free_ ..", well - that sounds like someone who is all about what's good *FOR THEM* as opposed to caring and sharing.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> I think for M to have to live a life where she is not thriving or truly satisfied will be very frustrating for her.  I also believe the aging process will frighten her and more surgeries will be in her future.  Instead of taking a big bite out of H&M, Karma is nibbling every day.
> I feel this train wreck is taking the scenic route instead of a fast burn.



You may be right. I think if things do go south it's Harry who is going to suffer for it, not Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> I think for M to have to live a life where she is not thriving or truly satisfied will be very frustrating for her.  I also believe the aging process will frighten her and more surgeries will be in her future.  Instead of taking a big bite out of H&M, Karma is nibbling every day.
> I feel this train wreck is taking the scenic route instead of a fast burn.



I'm sure you are right, but that's so...unsatisfactory. Like, girlfriend has everything one could ask for and more than most people will ever have in their lifetime, completely undeserved, yet she's throwing herself daily pity parties. For this type of personality I'd love the universe to give them reasons to complain about.


----------



## Lodpah

Someone called it on them piggybacking. Of course it’s poetry. Can they get any more blatant?


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s how CBS News reported the case this evening. Meghan Markle wins her lawsuit against the Daily Mail for publishing a private letter she sent her father after he skipped her wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

Skipped her wedding!  Well, that is one take on it.  She didn't want him there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh no, I don’t wish anyone ill will.  Let them have every single thing they want, all of it. Then, they will understand. The ancients, the Bible, Shakespeare and many other writers have addressed these issues. H&M are not on a path to happiness.

While searching on “the American PR guru, Jason Knauf“ (apparently, this is how he is known), I came across this which I had not heard:








						The shocking reason why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry got married so fast
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry exchanged their vows in 2018 after only a few months of dating each other.The news about the couple's engagement came as a major surprise to everyone that was not...




					www.thenews.com.pk
				



_However, the actual reason why Meghan and Harry walked down the aisle so fast is the latter's  citizenship.

Prince Harry's communication secretary  Jason Knauf revealed to the BBC Meghan was denied any special favours when it came to applying for UK citizenship. 

The entire process required Meghan to obtain a visa to stay in the country before she could apply for citizenship.

Moreover, it also required for the couple to get married within six months to be eligible for visa maintainence.  _


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Here’s how CBS News reported the case this evening. Meghan Markle wins her lawsuit against the Daily Mail for publishing a private letter she sent her father after he skipped her wedding.



Whose letter is it anyway?  The writer? The receiver?  Such a waste of time. The paper could have been clever about it. They could have sent sent someone to ‘interview’ Thomas, then he could read from it, right?  Again, the BRF daily loses its PR war.  H&M are closer to dismantling the whole system which is most likely what they want.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> She is going to milk this for all it's worth. You can tell from her comments she already sees herself as a crusader for justice.
> 
> _"But for today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won. We now know, and hope it creates legal precedent, that you cannot take somebody's privacy and exploit it in a privacy case, as the defendant has blatantly done over the past two years.
> 
> "I share this victory with each of you—because we all deserve justice and truth, and we all deserve better.
> 
> *"I particularly want to thank my husband, mom, and legal team, and especially Jenny Afia for her unrelenting support throughout this process."*_



The underlined portion is reminiscent of an award acceptance speech.  Maybe she realized she will never get that Oscar moment so took a line from her ready to use speech.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s hope the show doesn’t go to reruns. She will get paid for those, too.



It will simply due to the fact that she's in it. Sorry to say it.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Skipped her wedding!  Well, that is one take on it.  She didn't want him there.



I couldn’t believe my ears. Talk about oversimplification.


----------



## V0N1B2

I never believed that $5M net worth BS. Her accumulated salary for the 7-8 seasons she was on the show was no doubt  correct. She was reportedly in 108 episodes and made $50k per episode (so it’s been said). She would have had an agent to pay, a publicist, rent, clothing, transportation costs, SAG and/or ACTRA (whatever is the US equivalent) dues, medical insurance, social security contributions, maybe accountant/financial planner fees, and let’s not forget the tax man. Canada Revenue Service gets their 23% one way or another. All those flights back home to LA, vacations to Malta and Greece with her besties...
That $650K/yr gets eaten up pretty quick.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure you are right, but that's so...unsatisfactory. Like, girlfriend has everything one could ask for and more than most people will ever have in their lifetime, completely undeserved, yet she's throwing herself daily pity parties. For this type of personality I'd love the universe to give them reasons to complain about.



She has almost everything one could ask for except for someone asking if she's okay. And now, no one will be asking for fear of being sued for invading her privacy.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M:  always willing to throw family, staff and any ‘friend’ under the bus.  Knauf, an American, will be next.
> 
> from Nov., 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex draws senior royals into privacy battle
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s legal case against Associated Newspapers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _As reported by the Times, a document from her lawyer released yesterday, 18 November, states: ‘In accordance *with the advice that she had received from the two members of the Royal Family*, the [duchess] decided (in about the first week of August 2018) to write a private letter to her father in an attempt to get him to stop talking to the press.’ She reportedly informed *Mr Knauf*, who was responsible for informing more senior people in the royal households and had spoken with her father before the wedding. Meghan reportedly claims she spent hours writing the letter on her iPhone over several weeks before sharing it with Harry and Mr Knauf.
> ...
> The legal response by Meghan’s lawyer, Jenny Afia, said Mr Knauf was required by ‘palace protocol’ to inform more senior aides in the royal households that Meghan was going to write to her father. ‘The genesis of, reasons for and intended use of the letter was the complete opposite of a ‘media strategy’,’ the response says, as reported in the Times. ‘It was a private letter written and sent by the [duchess] to her father, on the advice of senior members of the Royal Family, in an attempt to protect her family, including her new family members, from further media intrusion.’_


It seems beyond weird to me that if she really wanted her father to stop speaking to the press, she’d pick up the damn phone and talk to him immediately...a normal person wouldn’t waste time writing And rewriting a letter over several weeks and then mailing it snail mail.  It makes no sense to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> It seems beyond weird to me that if she really wanted her father to stop speaking to the press, she’d pick up the damn phone and talk to him immediately...a normal person wouldn’t waste time writing And rewriting a letter over several weeks and then mailing it snail mail.  It makes no sense to me.



Unless, perhaps, she _wanted_ to sever the ties. Possibly at Harry’s urging. Possibly Doria‘s.  As a divorced woman pushing 40, it could make sense on some level. Remember, H&M were already planning an exit at that point. So, they invent a story where Harry and Charles get to play the hero. Doria gets to upstage the show. IMO, it was/is all false. Doubtful we will know the truth for a few more years. Until then, we do know that H&M are manipulative and deceptive. Surely QE realizes they are making a mockery of her reign.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> She has almost everything one could ask for except for someone asking if she's okay. And now, no one will be asking for fear of being sued for invading her privacy.



I bet she has Harry asking her every day. Because if Meghan ain’t “okay” there’s no way Harry is going to have a good day. The guy is trained.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> It seems beyond weird to me that if she really wanted her father to stop speaking to the press, she’d pick up the damn phone and talk to him immediately...a normal person wouldn’t waste time writing And rewriting a letter over several weeks and then mailing it snail mail.  It makes no sense to me.



It makes no sense to everybody. This is what I understood from what I read:
She kept her father in the dark about the wedding and put him under a lot of stress. She didn't want him at the wedding, he could unintentionally expose some of her lies. The letter to her father was part of the farce that she put together for H and the BRF, she was pretending to be a victim of her own family. I sincerely feel sorry for her father. In contrast to the other siblings, she was born at a time when he was making a lot of money, and she selfishly used it all. She was well trained about not giving away the milk for free.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Here’s how *CBS News* reported the case this evening. Meghan Markle wins her lawsuit against the Daily Mail for publishing a private letter she sent her father *after he skipped her wedding.*



What we used to think of as responsible news outlets do this crap all the time. They can make a great person sound terrible and vv. It's all about the narrative.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> I'm not convinced a fall will come. Meghan seems to be one of those people capable of skating off unscathed no matter what. Karma doesn't always happen. Now, I don't believe she will ever be truly satisfied in life but surely that's a small price to pay for all she has gained over the past five years.



I don't believe in karma either.  I wish it existed.  Why do good things happen to bad people?  

She is a truly despicable woman.  And I believe, as someone posted, that she figured out Harry and he is totally under her control.  It was sad to read that one big reason BRF wants them to stay together is because Harry is so enthralled with her -- if she dumps him, he could crumble.  Terrible but may be true.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> What we used to think of as responsible news outlets do this crap all the time. They can make a great person sound terrible and vv. It's all about the narrative.



Yes. And when we see how the news media chooses to report  a story where we know the pertinent facts, it should be a red flag for everyone that they do the same thing with other stories.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, Harry is enthralled with Harry.  This is a guy who threw stink bombs at a wedding reception. He was in his late 20s, old enough to know how to behave.  He is not a victim. In interviews, MM does not seem very alluring, captivating or interesting. These lawsuits make them seem petty, spiteful and dull. As many have said, if they want privacy, then go away. 
Buh-bye. We will be fine without them.


----------



## rose60610

The main reason people "care" about Harry is mainly due to popular Princess Diana being his mother. Her tragic death at a young age made her kids all the more special, especially William who will eventually be king.  If Harry were 'just another royal' nobody would recognize him. The way Harry capitalizes on his mother's death is morbid. His "problems" with flashbulbs and PTSD seemed to start when he began getting paid for speeches. The spare heir was seized by opportunist Meghan who encourages him to milk and leverage Diana's death into Netflix/Spotify deals. Seems Diana is worth more dead than alive. M&H must be so proud of themselves.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> What we used to think of as responsible news outlets do this crap all the time. They can make a great person sound terrible and vv. It's all about the narrative.


Yep.  I think COVID times have shown us how much media can manipulate things to their own narrative, whatever that may be.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> The main reason people "care" about Harry is mainly due to popular Princess Diana being his mother. Her tragic death at a young age made her kids all the more special, especially William who will eventually be king.  If Harry were 'just another royal' nobody would recognize him. The way Harry capitalizes on his mother's death is morbid. *His "problems" with flashbulbs and PTSD seemed to start when he began getting paid for speeches*. The spare heir was seized by opportunist Meghan who encourages him to milk and leverage Diana's death into Netflix/Spotify deals. Seems Diana is worth more dead than alive. M&H must be so proud of themselves.


I feel like his PTSD about the media actually *stopped* when he started getting paid ridiculous amounts of money to really do nothing. Getting photographed by paparazzi for only their benefit seemed to be irking him, especially after MM showed up. Now, he's suddenly okay lecturing us ad nauseam and giving us all of his profound wisdom on every topic you could possibly think of, even "carpool karaoke".


----------



## CarryOn2020

For me, their ‘pity party‘ is not enjoyable by any measure. Even Oprah didn’t appear to like that tea.  As every great hostess knows, if the drinks are awful and the food is just meh, then it’s time to leave. That party does not get better.  Bullying a 70+ yr old man, using the BRF when it suits them, trying to out-do W&K with these daft zooms, this is snore-city. The only reason Harry is tolerated is out of respect for the BRF.  It is nothing to do with him or her.

ETA:  surely by now, all celebs know that if they do not want something published, they shouldn’t put it in writing.  She coldly and calculatingly set her dad up. Why?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

CarryOn2020 said:


> She coldly and calculatingly set her dad up.  Why?



That's the thing I can never forgive her for.  As to why, I honestly believe she just didn't think he was a good optic for her perceived image of herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cavalier Girl said:


> That's the thing I can never forgive her for.  As to why, I honestly believe she just didn't think he was a good optic for her perceived image of herself.



Jup. If she had managed to find an old European nobelman willing to adopt her she'd probably gone through with it (a bit tongue in cheek, but you know what I mean).


----------



## Jktgal

Aimee3 said:


> ...a normal person wouldn’t waste time writing And rewriting a letter over several weeks and then mailing it snail mail.  It makes no sense to me.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> What we used to think of as responsible news outlets do this crap all the time. They can make a great person sound terrible and vv. It's all about the narrative.


It’s actually kind of scary when you realize you’re taking news from “reputable“ outlets with a grain of salt anymore.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Click on it and read the whole thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

bag-mania said:


> That would admittedly make for a huge bombshell but it cannot be true. The timing just doesn't work. By all accounts Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until two years after Harry was born. The red hair and some facial features throw people off. I think both boys take after their mother's side of the family as far as their looks. (They get their hairline from dad.) If you remember the photo from Diana's funeral procession of the boys with Charles and Earl Spencer, you would see they look more like the Spencers.


I would say Harry looks a lot like young Prince Philip. There are some pictures of him with beard and he reminded me of Harry immediately


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Click on it and read the whole thing.




That is brilliant haha.


----------



## Chanbal

As anticipated, MM's PR machine is non-stop releasing multiple news headlines... wait for many more from VF, People... 





"_For some reason you choose to continue fabricating these stories, manufacturing this fictitious narrative, and entrenching yourself deeper into this web you’ve spun. The only thing that helps me sleep at night is the faith and knowing that a lie can’t live forever.

Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband, and please stop taking the bait from the press_."

Let's see if MM is right about lies not living forever. Thomas could probably take her or People magazine to court for defamation, he was accused of fabricating stories and lying in a letter that was read by palace staff, MM's friends, partially published by People in a very unflattering article... I can't imagine his pain after so much dedication and work to raise his daughter the best he could, and then be publicly humiliated. 

The infamous letter


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Let's see if MM is right about lies not living forever. Thomas could probably take her or People magazine to court for defamation, he was accused of fabricating stories and lying in a letter that was read by palace staff, MM's friends, partially published by People in a very unflattering article... I can't imagine his pain after so much dedication and work to raise his daughter the best he could, and then be publicly humiliated.
> 
> The infamous letter



I'd be surprised if it was worth it to him to try to fight it. Thomas has limited funds and he's older and in poor health. He is no match for the litigious duo who have already proven they can con and/or defeat those with far more resources than he could ever hope to have. They put one over on the BRF for heaven's sake! What chance does a poor guy like Thomas have?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> As anticipated, MM's PR machine is non-stop releasing multiple news headlines... wait for many more from VF, People...
> 
> "_For some reason you choose to continue fabricating these stories, manufacturing this fictitious narrative, and entrenching yourself deeper into this web you’ve spun. The only thing that helps me sleep at night is the faith and knowing that a lie can’t live forever.
> 
> Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband, and please stop taking the bait from the press_."
> 
> Let's see if MM is right about lies not living forever. Thomas could probably take her or People magazine to court for defamation, he was accused of fabricating stories and lying in a letter that was read by palace staff, MM's friends, partially published by People in a very unflattering article... I can't imagine his pain after so much dedication and work to raise his daughter the best he could, and then be publicly humiliated.
> 
> The infamous letter



That letter!
Clearly it was written to serve as a record for a court case. Some of the language sounds like her, most of it sounds like the pompous and paranoid Harry — “puppeteered”, yeah, that’s pure Harry. They used Thomas to set up the newspaper. Now, thanks to the lawsuit the entire letter is public knowledge. We can all see H&M‘s motives as well as the smarmy way they deal with people, especially a loved one.  Shame on the BRF, Netflix, Spotify, Disney for promoting these entitled brats.  Pi$$ off,  H&M.


----------



## Sharont2305

maryg1 said:


> I would say Harry looks a lot like young Prince Philip. There are some pictures of him with beard and he reminded me of Harry immediately


Totally agree, also one picture of Philip as a young boy is the image of Harry about the same age. 
On another note, how refreshing....


----------



## CarryOn2020

“The infamous letter” was written before the wedding.
The palace knew of the letter before the wedding.
QE gave H&M titles before the wedding.
How dare H&M lecture any of us.


----------



## zen1965

maryg1 said:


> I would say Harry looks a lot like young Prince Philip. There are some pictures of him with beard and he reminded me of Harry immediately



For once I do not agree with you. #flower
In younger age Philip was rather handsome in a Germanic kind of way. Beady-eyed Harry never did it for me.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> As anticipated, MM's PR machine is non-stop releasing multiple news headlines... wait for many more from VF, People...
> 
> _Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, *please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband*, and please stop taking the bait from the press_."
> 
> Let's see if MM is right about lies not living forever. Thomas could probably take her or People magazine to court for defamation, he was accused of fabricating stories and lying in a letter that was read by palace staff, MM's friends, partially published by People in a very unflattering article... I can't imagine his pain after so much dedication and work to raise his daughter the best he could, and then be publicly humiliated.


Methinks the only one exploiting her relationship with JCMH is MM!


----------



## Mendocino

maryg1 said:


> I would say Harry looks a lot like young Prince Philip. There are some pictures of him with beard and he reminded me of Harry immediately


----------



## LizzieBennett

Sharont2305 said:


> Totally agree, also one picture of Philip as a young boy is the image of Harry about the same age.
> On another note, how refreshing....



She looks so happy!


----------



## Mendocino

Mendocino said:


> View attachment 4988218


This is from 1957.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> "_For some reason you choose to continue fabricating these stories, manufacturing this fictitious narrative, and entrenching yourself deeper into this web you’ve spun. The only thing that helps me sleep at night is the faith and knowing that a lie can’t live forever._"



I just can't with the f*cking drama. The only thing that helps her sleep at night? WTFFF. Also, what helped her sleep at night was probably counting pounds instead of sheep *ka-ching*

I'm not reading the full letter, it will just make me irrationally angry with how this woman treats her elderly father, yet somehow is painted as the heroic victim and survivor of abuse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just can't with the f*cking drama. The only thing that helps her sleep at night? WTFFF. Also, what helped her sleep at night was probably counting pounds instead of sheep *ka-ching*
> 
> I'm not reading the full letter, it will just make me irrationally angry with how this woman treats her elderly father, yet somehow is painted as the heroic victim and survivor of abuse.



I feel conflicted about the reading of the letter. I wish I had not read it, but I am glad I did.  I now have a much better understanding of the entire situation. Imagine receiving this letter, then watching the world fawn all over Harry, watching Charles walk his own daughter down the long aisle, and, horror of all horrors, watching his ex-wife sit alone in the pew. As if he the father was dead? How could Doria do that to Thomas? Why would she participate in this fraud? What were those conversations about?  Definitely a f*cking drama.  Did Charles really believe he could use MM to set up a BRf court in the US? Is that what he and Harry are playing at?  Good gawd, the stupidity and audacity of it all.  If Thomas had not shared the letter, we would never have known the depth of the deception. Guessing that is what H&M were counting on.

Thank you @Chanbal for posting it.  I’m smarter for reading it.


----------



## bag-mania

When I read this article I think it makes Harry sound like an @sshole who is totally lacking in social skills and appropriate behavior. But according to the "LOL!" _US_ magazine put over its headline, this is actually supposed to be a fun story about how chill Harry is. 

*Foo Fighters Drummer Taylor Hawkins Recalls Being Playfully Slapped by Prince Harry*
Royally funny! Foo Fighters members *Dave Grohl* and *Taylor Hawkins* appeared on “The Howard Stern Show” on Friday, February 12, where they shared a hilarious encounter with *Prince Harry*.

The band’s frontman, 52, recalled getting a visit from the Duke of Sussex, 36, after hurting his leg while touring with the Foo Fighters in Europe in 2015, noting how “chill” Harry was.

“He brought me this thing to hold my iPad so I could just watch movies and s–t. It was great. He was cool,” Dave added. “He smacked Taylor in the face one time.”

Hawkins, 48, for his part, said “It pissed me off, actually,” before explaining how and why it happened. The Texas native assured listeners it was all in good fun.

“He walked in and goes, ‘How are you doing?’ I said, ‘I can’t wake up. I’m so tired,’” the drummer recalled. “He just goes bam and I went, ‘You motherf—ker.’ He was like, ‘Are you awake now?’”

The musician added, “I mean, I got slapped in the face by the prince. That’s OK, really, when you think about it.”

Hawkins previously talked about the slap in question during an interview with _BBC News_ in 2017. He revealed that it happened before the 2014 Invictus Games. “I was a little like, ‘What was that?’ It was great, it was funny. I wore that slap with pride,” he said at the time.

Prince Harry has a good relationship with the musical duo. When Grohl underwent surgery in London in 2015, the royal was among the first visitors he received, he revealed to _BBC News_. “He’s the sweetest. I owe you a text, Harry,” Grohl said at the time.

Grohl also said Harry arrived without an entourage. During his visit, he met the Foo Fighters lead singer’s daughters Violet, 14, Harper, 11, and Ophelia, 6.

The Ohio native recalled, “It’s funny, our nanny was there and she came into the room with the kids and I said, ‘This is Harry,’ and it took her five or six minutes before she realized it was the prince of England.”









						Foo Fighters' Taylor Hawkins Recalls Hilarious Prince Harry Slap
					

Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins said Prince Harry playfully slapped him in the face in 2017 — more details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He...just walked in, slapped someone across the face, and everyone thought that was hilarious? What is going on in this world???


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Someone should start a "Go Fund Me" for Thomas.  I'd contribute.  Wonder how that optic would play out for MM while she smugly sits in "her" new mansion?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He...just walked in, slapped someone across the face, and everyone thought that was hilarious? *What is going on in this world???*



Loss of simple civility.  It's a me, me, me world.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thomas has been right all along:









						Meghan Markle's Father Shares His Thoughts About Her Letter in Court Documents
					

Thomas Markle wrote in a witness statement that he wanted parts of the letter published to "defend" himself after reading an article in People magazine.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_Mr. Markle wrote that he was “shocked” by what an article in People magazine, which had anonymously quoted Meghan’s friends, said about him. He claimed it “misrepresented the tone and content of the letter Meg had written me in August 2018.” He went on to claim that the letter was “a criticism;” it "didn't say she loved me;" and it "showed no concern about the fact I had suffered a heart attack." He wrote: “It actually signalled the end of our relationship, not a reconciliation.” 
“Until I read the article in People magazine I had never intended to talk publicly about Meg's letter to me,” Mr. Markle wrote. “The content of that article caused me to change my mind. It was only by publishing the text of the letter that I could properly set the record straight and show that what People magazine had published was false and unfair...I had to defend myself against that attack.”

ETA:  _So wish these ‘students’ on the zoom calls would ask H&M the tough questions rather than fawn all over them.  It’s time for the kids to stand up to the nonsense. Demand a fee.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He...just walked in, slapped someone across the face, and everyone thought that was hilarious? *What is going on in this world???*



There is a deeply ingrained mindset that everyone is supposed to be deferential to royalty, even Americans who don't usually care about such things. If is was someone else who slapped him Hawkins probably would have punched his face.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He...just walked in, slapped someone across the face, and everyone thought that was hilarious? What is going on in this world???


Yes, absolutely hysterical!  

SUCH UTTER BULL $**T!  So it is okay for a prince to slap someone?  Are we living in the Medieval times??


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Skipped her wedding!  Well, that is one take on it.  *She didn't want him there*.


*100%+++++ agree with you on that!!! *


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> When I read this article I think it makes Harry sound like an @sshole who is totally lacking in social skills and appropriate behavior. But according to the "LOL!" _US_ magazine put over its headline, this is actually supposed to be a fun story about how chill Harry is.
> 
> *Foo Fighters Drummer Taylor Hawkins Recalls Being Playfully Slapped by Prince Harry*
> Royally funny! Foo Fighters members *Dave Grohl* and *Taylor Hawkins* appeared on “The Howard Stern Show” on Friday, February 12, where they shared a hilarious encounter with *Prince Harry*.
> 
> The band’s frontman, 52, recalled getting a visit from the Duke of Sussex, 36, after hurting his leg while touring with the Foo Fighters in Europe in 2015, noting how “chill” Harry was.
> 
> “He brought me this thing to hold my iPad so I could just watch movies and s–t. It was great. He was cool,” Dave added. “He smacked Taylor in the face one time.”
> 
> Hawkins, 48, for his part, said “It pissed me off, actually,” before explaining how and why it happened. The Texas native assured listeners it was all in good fun.
> 
> “He walked in and goes, ‘How are you doing?’ I said, ‘I can’t wake up. I’m so tired,’” the drummer recalled. “He just goes bam and I went, ‘You motherf—ker.’ He was like, ‘Are you awake now?’”
> 
> The musician added, “I mean, I got slapped in the face by the prince. That’s OK, really, when you think about it.”
> 
> Hawkins previously talked about the slap in question during an interview with _BBC News_ in 2017. He revealed that it happened before the 2014 Invictus Games. “I was a little like, ‘What was that?’ It was great, it was funny. I wore that slap with pride,” he said at the time.
> 
> Prince Harry has a good relationship with the musical duo. When Grohl underwent surgery in London in 2015, the royal was among the first visitors he received, he revealed to _BBC News_. “He’s the sweetest. I owe you a text, Harry,” Grohl said at the time.
> 
> Grohl also said Harry arrived without an entourage. During his visit, he met the Foo Fighters lead singer’s daughters Violet, 14, Harper, 11, and Ophelia, 6.
> 
> The Ohio native recalled, “It’s funny, our nanny was there and she came into the room with the kids and I said, ‘This is Harry,’ and it took her five or six minutes before she realized it was the prince of England.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foo Fighters' Taylor Hawkins Recalls Hilarious Prince Harry Slap
> 
> 
> Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins said Prince Harry playfully slapped him in the face in 2017 — more details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



Somebody said this before but I'll say it again. *It's a good thing William was born first.* 

You can definitely tell who was successfully groomed for the role. Had Harry been "groomed" I don't think much of it would have sunk in. He'd still be an idiot.


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> I never believed that $5M net worth BS. Her accumulated salary for the 7-8 seasons she was on the show was no doubt  correct. She was reportedly in 108 episodes and made $50k per episode (so it’s been said). She would have had an agent to pay, a publicist, rent, clothing, transportation costs, SAG and/or ACTRA (whatever is the US equivalent) dues, medical insurance, social security contributions, maybe accountant/financial planner fees, and let’s not forget the tax man. Canada Revenue Service gets their 23% one way or another. All those flights back home to LA, vacations to Malta and Greece with her besties...
> That $650K/yr gets eaten up pretty quick.


*$50k* per episode for a *Z-class* "actress" (_and I use that term lightly_) .. WOW, how stupid were they?!?!?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'd be surprised if it was worth it to him to try to fight it. Thomas has limited funds and he's older and in poor health. He is no match for the litigious duo who have already proven they can con and/or defeat those with far more resources than he could ever hope to have. They put one over on the BRF for heaven's sake! What chance does a poor guy like Thomas have?


His chance is probably very small and he may not want to go against MM. He most likely loves his daughter, despite her bad attitude towards him.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> When I read this article I think it makes Harry sound like an @sshole who is totally lacking in social skills and appropriate behavior. But according to the "LOL!" _US_ magazine put over its headline, this is actually supposed to be a fun story about how chill Harry is.
> 
> *Foo Fighters Drummer Taylor Hawkins Recalls Being Playfully Slapped by Prince Harry*
> Royally funny! Foo Fighters members *Dave Grohl* and *Taylor Hawkins* appeared on “The Howard Stern Show” on Friday, February 12, where they shared a hilarious encounter with *Prince Harry*.
> 
> The band’s frontman, 52, recalled getting a visit from the Duke of Sussex, 36, after hurting his leg while touring with the Foo Fighters in Europe in 2015, noting how “chill” Harry was.
> 
> “He brought me this thing to hold my iPad so I could just watch movies and s–t. It was great. He was cool,” Dave added. “He smacked Taylor in the face one time.”
> 
> Hawkins, 48, for his part, said “It pissed me off, actually,” before explaining how and why it happened. The Texas native assured listeners it was all in good fun.
> 
> “He walked in and goes, ‘How are you doing?’ I said, ‘I can’t wake up. I’m so tired,’” the drummer recalled. “He just goes bam and I went, ‘You motherf—ker.’ He was like, ‘Are you awake now?’”
> 
> The musician added, “I mean, I got slapped in the face by the prince. That’s OK, really, when you think about it.”
> 
> Hawkins previously talked about the slap in question during an interview with _BBC News_ in 2017. He revealed that it happened before the 2014 Invictus Games. “I was a little like, ‘What was that?’ It was great, it was funny. I wore that slap with pride,” he said at the time.
> 
> Prince Harry has a good relationship with the musical duo. When Grohl underwent surgery in London in 2015, the royal was among the first visitors he received, he revealed to _BBC News_. “He’s the sweetest. I owe you a text, Harry,” Grohl said at the time.
> 
> Grohl also said Harry arrived without an entourage. During his visit, he met the Foo Fighters lead singer’s daughters Violet, 14, Harper, 11, and Ophelia, 6.
> 
> The Ohio native recalled, “It’s funny, our nanny was there and she came into the room with the kids and I said, ‘This is Harry,’ and it took her five or six minutes before she realized it was the prince of England.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Foo Fighters' Taylor Hawkins Recalls Hilarious Prince Harry Slap
> 
> 
> Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins said Prince Harry playfully slapped him in the face in 2017 — more details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


*WHAT?!?! .. JCMH slaps the guy???* .. WTF???  I don't think that is funny ONE-BIT, I would be pissed as hell!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> _ETA:  _So wish these ‘students’ on the zoom calls would ask H&M the tough questions rather than fawn all over them.  It’s time for the kids to stand up to the nonsense. Demand a fee.


.. but that is exactly the reason WHY they pick young folks .. because they aren't old enough to put the pressure on these 2 boneheads!


----------



## csshopper

We know what went on with her Father's family, but one thing I have never understood about Meghan/Doria is their lack of inclusion of Doria's family in any narrative, or making any effort to bring them into the picture. Why was Doria the only family member at the wedding? The information available on line doesn't seem to have any skeleton's in the closet. As an example,

Back in 2019 the Daily Mail printed what was described as an "exclusive interview" with Meghan's Uncle Joseph Johnson (Doria's half brother), then 70, who talked lovingly at length about Meghan and her Mother. This photo was included in the article, there were others. Mr. Johnson said he has a "treasure trove" of family photos and also spoke about Doria's half sister who lives in LA near her. (I don't think I've ever read a word about her elsewhere) He was articulate, thoughtful, and "wistful" that Meghan's new life means he is unlikely to spend holidays with his much loved niece again." At one point he said flat out he was "proud of how Meghan is handling the attention that comes with being royal...". Unlike his niece's approach to life, he was not playing any "victim card" or having a "pity party." In fact, he concluded, after a long discussion about family, by saying "I think Meghan is going to be just fine, whatever she decides to do and however she decides to handle it. Her and Harry, I think they'll be great. I think they will be just fine."

I remember reading this in 2019 and thinking he sounded like a nice man and wondered, "why was he not invited to the wedding?" And further, why did Doria not advocate for some family representation? There may be some huge back story, who knows, but certainly no one on Doria's side seems to have taken to the press as Samantha and Thomas Markle did. As evidenced by her Uncle Joseph, Meghan was loved and a participant in an inclusive family. Until, it seems, they became a liability?

That was almost 2 years ago and given what we have learned about Meghan since then, I cynically speculate the Ragland relatives might not have been deemed grand enough to fit her narrative. In spite of her desire to capitalize on her mixed race heritage, it is only at her convenience and on her terms. Coupled with the treatment of her father, sarcastically, I think Meghan practices her brand of "equality", white or black, if relationships don't benefit her, people are Markled. That may be what keeps her mother tethered. I have come to think Doria was hypocritically complicit in an early version of the "poor me" syndrome of Meghan's world and willfully, hurtfully reinforced the garbage put forth by Harry that the RF was "the one Meghan never had."

Meghan may have gotten a court decision on privacy in her favor, but at the great cost of publicly revealing how utterly ruthlessly mean to the core she is.

*Meghan Markle's uncle shares old family Thanksgiving photos ...*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hares-rare-photos-previous-Thanksgivings.html - 575k - Cached - Similar pages






Caption: "Smiling broadly as she helps her uncle and cousins set the table for Thanksgiving dinner, Meghan Markle looks every inch the happy American teenager preparing to celebrate the holiday season." Doria is at the top of the table. Not identified, but if the lady is the wheelchair is Doria and Joseph's mother, Meghan's grandmother,  she is a retired nurse.


----------



## bag-mania

How are young people supposed to know any better when the media puts them up on pedestals as shining examples of the best of humanity? Honestly, if I hadn't made the effort to look at the less than flattering details that are being purposely ignored in 90% of the stories about them, I'd think they were wonderful too.


----------



## bag-mania

Interesting article about Prince Phillip. Somehow I don't think either of them would appreciate the comparison in the headline.









						‘Like Meghan, Prince Philip struggled to fit in with the Royal family at first’
					

As the Duke of Edinburgh approaches his 100th birthday, a new biography offers a fascinating glimpse into his life




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Meghan may have gotten a court decision on privacy in her favor, but at the great cost of publicly revealing how utterly ruthlessly mean to the core she is.



Yet it doesn't seem to change public opinion of her. I don't get it at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Interesting article about Prince Phillip. Somehow I don't think either of them would appreciate the comparison in the headline.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Like Meghan, Prince Philip struggled to fit in with the Royal family at first’
> 
> 
> As the Duke of Edinburgh approaches his 100th birthday, a new biography offers a fascinating glimpse into his life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk



Yeah. Philip is a man of duty to the core.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just can't with the f*cking drama. The only thing that helps her sleep at night? WTFFF. Also, what helped her sleep at night was probably counting pounds instead of sheep *ka-ching*
> 
> I'm not reading the full letter, it will just make me irrationally angry with how this woman treats her elderly father, yet somehow is painted as the heroic victim and survivor of abuse.


She is paying very costly PR agencies to show that she is "the heroic victim and survivor of abuse". Her father doesn't have that kind of money... Her character is very easy to spot. She new that her father took a loan to pay for her college education, and she disclosed in court papers that she didn't know if the loan had been paid. If my father had taken a loan to pay for my education, the first think I would have checked, after starting making money, is if that loan had been paid. Also, if the father was short in funds to pay tuition, why didn't she choose a less expensive and comparably prestigious university?

My advice to JCMH: you were very generous in putting the 16-toilet mansion in MM's name, but keep in mind that after spending all your money, you might be discarded. So start looking for real estate in Rosarito/Mexico near your father-in-law, life is a lot cheaper there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

After reading the letter, the phrase that came to mind is ‘hoist by their own petard’.

Clearly they thought the court decision was a huge victory for themselves. By including the letter, the judge showed us exactly the kind of people H&M are. In time, word of the letter will leak out. In time, reasoned, thoughtful analysis will prevail. Most of us focused only on the decision. Notably, Omid did not post the letter, just MM’s long-winded word salad. I am grateful the letter was posted here.  @Chanbal

Definitely an eye-opener into H&M. Pair the letter with the slap and, wowzee, what terrible examples these 2 are.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> We know what went on with her Father's family, but one thing I have never understood about Meghan/Doria is their lack of inclusion of Doria's family in any narrative, or making any effort to bring them into the picture. Why was Doria the only family member at the wedding? The information available on line doesn't seem to have any skeleton's in the closet. As an example,
> 
> Back in 2019 the Daily Mail printed what was described as an "exclusive interview" with Meghan's Uncle Joseph Johnson (Doria's half brother), then 70, who talked lovingly at length about Meghan and her Mother. This photo was included in the article, there were others. Mr. Johnson said he has a "treasure trove" of family photos and also spoke about Doria's half sister who lives in LA near her. (I don't think I've ever read a word about her elsewhere) He was articulate, thoughtful, and "wistful" that Meghan's new life means he is unlikely to spend holidays with his much loved niece again." At one point he said flat out he was "proud of how Meghan is handling the attention that comes with being royal...". Unlike his niece's approach to life, he was not playing any "victim card" or having a "pity party." In fact, he concluded, after a long discussion about family, by saying "I think Meghan is going to be just fine, whatever she decides to do and however she decides to handle it. Her and Harry, I think they'll be great. I think they will be just fine."
> 
> I remember reading this in 2019 and thinking he sounded like a nice man and wondered, "why was he not invited to the wedding?" And further, why did Doria not advocate for some family representation? There may be some huge back story, who knows, but certainly no one on Doria's side seems to have taken to the press as Samantha and Thomas Markle did. As evidenced by her Uncle Joseph, Meghan was loved and a participant in an inclusive family. Until, it seems, they became a liability?
> 
> That was almost 2 years ago and given what we have learned about Meghan since then, I cynically speculate the Ragland relatives might not have been deemed grand enough to fit her narrative. In spite of her desire to capitalize on her mixed race heritage, it is only at her convenience and on her terms. Coupled with the treatment of her father, sarcastically, I think Meghan practices her brand of "equality", white or black, if relationships don't benefit her, people are Markled. That may be what keeps her mother tethered. I have come to think Doria was hypocritically complicit in an early version of the "poor me" syndrome of Meghan's world and willfully, hurtfully reinforced the garbage put forth by Harry that the RF was "the one Meghan never had."
> 
> Meghan may have gotten a court decision on privacy in her favor, but at the great cost of publicly revealing how utterly ruthlessly mean to the core she is.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's uncle shares old family Thanksgiving photos ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hares-rare-photos-previous-Thanksgivings.html - 575k - Cached - Similar pages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption: "Smiling broadly as she helps her uncle and cousins set the table for Thanksgiving dinner, Meghan Markle looks every inch the happy American teenager preparing to celebrate the holiday season." Doria is at the top of the table. Not identified, but if the lady is the wheelchair is Doria and Joseph's mother, Meghan's grandmother,  she is a retired nurse.



One could think that the Ragland relatives were not at the weeding because MM doesn't need them. Like the Markle relatives, they don't have the resources to further help MM. According to Samantha's book, Doria’s motto is “if people can’t do more for you, than you can do for yourself, then you don’t need them”. From what I read, she has very nice relatives from both Ragland and Markle families, but none of them are mega rich or influential...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Interesting article about Prince Phillip. Somehow I don't think either of them would appreciate the comparison in the headline.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Like Meghan, Prince Philip struggled to fit in with the Royal family at first’
> 
> 
> As the Duke of Edinburgh approaches his 100th birthday, a new biography offers a fascinating glimpse into his life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


I think Philip would be displeased, but MM would approve the headline. This is one more headline supporting that her life was very difficult in the UK.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> We know what went on with her Father's family, but one thing I have never understood about Meghan/Doria is their lack of inclusion of Doria's family in any narrative, or making any effort to bring them into the picture. Why was Doria the only family member at the wedding? The information available on line doesn't seem to have any skeleton's in the closet. As an example,
> 
> Back in 2019 the Daily Mail printed what was described as an "exclusive interview" with Meghan's Uncle Joseph Johnson (Doria's half brother), then 70, who talked lovingly at length about Meghan and her Mother. This photo was included in the article, there were others. Mr. Johnson said he has a "treasure trove" of family photos and also spoke about Doria's half sister who lives in LA near her. (I don't think I've ever read a word about her elsewhere) He was articulate, thoughtful, and "wistful" that Meghan's new life means he is unlikely to spend holidays with his much loved niece again." At one point he said flat out he was "proud of how Meghan is handling the attention that comes with being royal...". Unlike his niece's approach to life, he was not playing any "victim card" or having a "pity party." In fact, he concluded, after a long discussion about family, by saying "I think Meghan is going to be just fine, whatever she decides to do and however she decides to handle it. Her and Harry, I think they'll be great. I think they will be just fine."
> 
> I remember reading this in 2019 and thinking he sounded like a nice man and wondered, "why was he not invited to the wedding?" And further, why did Doria not advocate for some family representation? There may be some huge back story, who knows, but certainly no one on Doria's side seems to have taken to the press as Samantha and Thomas Markle did. As evidenced by her Uncle Joseph, Meghan was loved and a participant in an inclusive family. Until, it seems, they became a liability?
> 
> That was almost 2 years ago and given what we have learned about Meghan since then, I cynically speculate the Ragland relatives might not have been deemed grand enough to fit her narrative. In spite of her desire to capitalize on her mixed race heritage, it is only at her convenience and on her terms. Coupled with the treatment of her father, sarcastically, I think Meghan practices her brand of "equality", white or black, if relationships don't benefit her, people are Markled. That may be what keeps her mother tethered. I have come to think Doria was hypocritically complicit in an early version of the "poor me" syndrome of Meghan's world and willfully, hurtfully reinforced the garbage put forth by Harry that the RF was "the one Meghan never had."
> 
> Meghan may have gotten a court decision on privacy in her favor, but at the great cost of publicly revealing how utterly ruthlessly mean to the core she is.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's uncle shares old family Thanksgiving photos ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hares-rare-photos-previous-Thanksgivings.html - 575k - Cached - Similar pages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caption: "Smiling broadly as she helps her uncle and cousins set the table for Thanksgiving dinner, Meghan Markle looks every inch the happy American teenager preparing to celebrate the holiday season." Doria is at the top of the table. Not identified, but if the lady is the wheelchair is Doria and Joseph's mother, Meghan's grandmother,  she is a retired nurse.


Very interesting.  I was about to write my thoughts on Samantha's comment that MM is much like Doria, and "doesn't give the milk away for free".  I'm wondering if Doria is much like MM in the sense that she also cuts ties with family members that are not useful to her?  She's not vocal like MM and an attention whore, but MM must have learned her conniving ways from someone?  Doria may actually be the better actor in the family!


----------



## Sina08

Chanbal said:


> As anticipated, MM's PR machine is non-stop releasing multiple news headlines... wait for many more from VF, People...
> View attachment 4988044
> 
> View attachment 4988045
> 
> 
> "_For some reason you choose to continue fabricating these stories, manufacturing this fictitious narrative, and entrenching yourself deeper into this web you’ve spun. The only thing that helps me sleep at night is the faith and knowing that a lie can’t live forever.
> 
> Please stop lying, please stop creating so much pain, please stop exploiting my relationship with my husband, and please stop taking the bait from the press_."
> 
> Let's see if MM is right about lies not living forever. Thomas could probably take her or People magazine to court for defamation, he was accused of fabricating stories and lying in a letter that was read by palace staff, MM's friends, partially published by People in a very unflattering article... I can't imagine his pain after so much dedication and work to raise his daughter the best he could, and then be publicly humiliated.
> 
> The infamous letter


 
What is this? It’s definitely not a letter written to her father. If MM thought of this ingenious plan she really can’t be that smart. I’m truly shocked as to how transparent she is. Seems to me that this would be something a 15 year old would come up and maybe get away with. But an almost 40 year old woman?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Very interesting.  I was about to write my thoughts on Samantha's comment that MM is much like Doria, and "doesn't give the milk away for free".  I'm wondering if Doria is much like MM in the sense that she also cuts ties with family members that are not useful to her?  She's not vocal like MM and an attention whore, but MM must have learned her conniving ways from someone?  Doria may actually be the better actor in the family!



Does this mean we should’ve been using the term Raglanding instead of Markling to describe the act of cutting someone off?


----------



## drifter

If they were so charitable and noble, they could swallow their pride and use all the money, time and effort they spent suing everyone and on PR on actual charitable deeds.  Even if they didn't, at least they wouldn't be wasting money and managing their cashflow more responsibly.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> His chance is probably very small and he may not want to go against MM. He most likely loves his daughter, despite her bad attitude towards him.


I'm sure he loves his daughter; that's what makes this so sad.  It takes A LOT for most parents to not love their children, no matter what.  How many murderers have their mothers still visiting them in prison?  Parenthood is such a one way street.  Most "good" parents try to give their all to their kids, as far as time, energy, and whatever they can afford to do.  Thomas went above and beyond.  I think he's realizing he made a bad investment.  Most parents don't usually expect anything in return, but she's not even cordial to him.  She's a junk bond.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure he loves his daughter; that's what makes this so sad.  It takes A LOT for most parents to not love their children, no matter what.  How many murderers have their mothers still visiting them in prison?  Parenthood is such a one way street.  Most "good" parents try to give their all to their kids, as far as time, energy, and whatever they can afford to do.  Thomas went above and beyond.  I think he's realizing he made a bad investment.  Most parents don't usually expect anything in return, but she's not even cordial to him.  *She's a junk bond.*



Now that's a great line


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure he loves his daughter; that's what makes this so sad.  It takes A LOT for most parents to not love their children, no matter what.  How many murderers have their mothers still visiting them in prison?  Parenthood is such a one way street.  Most "good" parents try to give their all to their kids, as far as time, energy, and whatever they can afford to do.  Thomas went above and beyond.  I think he's realizing he made a bad investment.  Most parents don't usually expect anything in return, but she's not even cordial to him.  She's a junk bond.


You are right, parents love their kids no matter what. I don't think her father expected anything in return apart of her love. Thomas has been described as a kind person that doesn't enjoy the spotlight. She put him under so much stress, that he had a heart attack. She didn't bother to visit him, talk to his cardiologist, and make sure he was getting the best care possible. Instead she writes a letter calling him a liar... This woman is bad news!


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure he loves his daughter; that's what makes this so sad.  It takes A LOT for most parents to not love their children, no matter what.  How many murderers have their mothers still visiting them in prison?  Parenthood is such a one way street.  Most "good" parents try to give their all to their kids, as far as time, energy, and whatever they can afford to do.  Thomas went above and beyond.  I think he's realizing he made a bad investment.  Most parents don't usually expect anything in return, but she's not even cordial to him.  She's a junk bond.


purseinsanity, you nailed it. “a junk bond”.......a liability that pays no dividend. The Title should go.


----------



## Jktgal

Cavalier Girl said:


> Someone should start a "Go Fund Me" for Thomas.  I'd contribute.  Wonder how that optic would play out for MM while she smugly sits in "her" new mansion?



A gofundme for Thomas Markle would really stir things up. I'd definitely contribute. He needs professional PR. Maybe the thread should reach out to him. A purseforum version of gamestop-style disrupting...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> I think in many respects (_and as Samantha wrote in her book_), Meghan is a lot more like her mother than her father!  Thomas was the GIVE, GIVE, GIVE (which is what my friends told me) .. whereas Doria seems to be the TAKE, TAKE, TAKE and then discard.  Thinking about her comment to Meghan "_don't give the milk away for free_ ..", well - that sounds like someone who is all about what's good *FOR THEM* as opposed to caring and sharing.


CeeJay, yes! this was published a year ago in January 2020 and it sounds like both mother and daughter figured out (maybe together?) how to manipulate the dolt and JCMH now views her as a trusted adviser. 


*Doria Ragland played a vital role in Megxit, say friends


Amid the turmoil of **Prince Harry** and **Meghan Markle**'s dramatic exit from Britain and the **Royal Family**, she has been an oasis of calm. 


Stoic and with an unwavering loyalty towards her daughter and son-in-law, Doria Ragland has emerged as a 'silent but steely' influence behind the couple's decision to seek financial independence in North America.


The woman who instilled in her daughter from a young age the motto 'don't give the milk away for free' – or don't do anything for nothing – has become close to Prince Harry.


'Harry in particular turns to her for advice,' said a former confidante of 63-year-old Doria. 'She is like the Queen – she never complains and never explains.


'She's laid-back, and people see her nose ring and dreadlocks which are cool – but make no mistake, she has a core of steel. Underestimate her at your peril.


'Meghan has always trusted her completely but she has become a rock to Harry who, of course, lost his own mother so young.


'Doria has a great warmth. She's a brilliant cook and is very motherly, but she isn't someone who seeks attention, and for Harry her discretion and silence mean the world.'*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> *'Doria has a great warmth. She's a brilliant cook and is very motherly, but she isn't someone who seeks attention, and for Harry her discretion and silence mean the world.'*



So motherly she left her only child with her ex-husband and wasn't seen for years for reasons only known to her? Alright.


----------



## bag-mania

Did Doria come to Meghan’s first wedding with Trevor? Was she invited? I remember there were a couple articles around the time of her wedding with Harry claiming that Thomas didn’t come to Meghan’s first wedding but that turned out to be lies since photos exist of him there. It was a 4-day tropical destination wedding (of course it was, it was for Meghan!) so maybe Doria couldn’t afford to come.  Anyway I couldn’t find photos of Doria there but I did find this photo from Doria and Thomas’ wedding. Check out the DM’s incredibly snobby caption.


----------



## rose60610

Cavalier Girl said:


> Someone should start a "Go Fund Me" for Thomas.  I'd contribute.  Wonder how that optic would play out for MM while she smugly sits in "her" new mansion?



I question if a "Go Fund Me" were set up, and contributions made, then Thomas Markle dies with money still in that account--would a portion of that money end up with Meghan via inheritance? If Thomas Markle wrote Meghan out of the will, (which likely wouldn't happen), leave it to Meghan to sue his estate (which likely would happen). 
Let's say $100,000 in contributions were made, and Thomas spent $20,000 and then dies, it wouldn't be fair to refund the contributions unless they were prorated from monies already spent. 
While I've heard of "Go Fund Me", IDK what the fine print says in terms of death of a recipient or excess contributions over an amount needed for XYZ if a limit were stated. Say one "needed" $1,000, maybe there's a cutoff where excess contributions aren't accepted, like when tickets to a concert sell out. But we all know there'd be NO cap on a Markle account. 
Seems to me Thomas' health is very fragile. I'd be hesitant to contribute knowing that there'd be a good chance some of the money would end up with Meghan.


----------



## bisousx

rose60610 said:


> I question if a "Go Fund Me" were set up, and contributions made, then Thomas Markle dies with money still in that account--would a portion of that money end up with Meghan via inheritance? If Thomas Markle wrote Meghan out of the will, (which likely wouldn't happen), leave it to Meghan to sue his estate (which likely would happen).
> Let's say $100,000 in contributions were made, and Thomas spent $20,000 and then dies, it wouldn't be fair to refund the contributions unless they were prorated from monies already spent.
> While I've heard of "Go Fund Me", IDK what the fine print says in terms of death of a recipient or excess contributions over an amount needed for XYZ if a limit were stated. Say one "needed" $1,000, maybe there's a cutoff where excess contributions aren't accepted, like when tickets to a concert sell out. But we all know there'd be NO cap on a Markle account.
> Seems to me Thomas' health is very fragile. I'd be hesitant to contribute knowing that there'd be a good chance some of the money would end up with Meghan.



I would hope his other children are smart enough to push Thomas into creating a trust and cut Meghan out of it. But parents often have a hard time doing such things when it comes to their offspring.


----------



## Jktgal

rose60610 said:


> Seems to me Thomas' health is very fragile. I'd be hesitant to contribute knowing that there'd be a good chance some of the money would end up with Meghan.



The gofundme don't need to go to Thomas. A group could start a gofundme to pay a PR firm to work for Thomas. If Thomas dies, the PR can still do work until the fund is exhausted. I don't even think Thomas' need to be involved. It would be the PR firm sending info from 'friends of Thomas Markle' to respond to 'people close to the duchess'.


----------



## zen1965

Wow - Meghan looks very much like Doria judging from the wedding pic. I never noted that before.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So motherly she left her only child with her ex-husband and wasn't seen for years for reasons only known to her? Alright.



Come to think of it - the world and even we here (that includes me) have criticized the Markles for having a loose mouth and talking too much. Yet Thomas not only kept it a secret for months that Meghan was dating "a prince" instead of selling the story or even telling other family members, he also has never said a bad word about Doria when he raised Meghan as a single parent while she was riding into the sunset or doing whatever (which we don't know as neither of them has said) but is now regularly praised by the press while he is the butt of jokes and worse. Something (someONE) triggered him big time.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Did Doria come to Meghan’s first wedding with Trevor? Was she invited? I remember there were a couple articles around the time of her wedding with Harry claiming that Thomas didn’t come to Meghan’s first wedding but that turned out to be lies since photos exist of him there. It was a 4-day tropical destination wedding (of course it was, it was for Meghan!) so maybe Doria couldn’t afford to come.  Anyway I couldn’t find photos of Doria there but I did find this photo from Doria and Thomas’ wedding. Check out the DM’s incredibly snobby caption.
> 
> View attachment 4988920


Yes, she did.

Friends and family flocked to the cruise ship port of Ocho Rios on September 10 2011 to watch Meghan and Trevor tie the knot at the Jamaica Inn, seven years after they started dating.






Meghan with her mum Doria, taken just hours before her first wedding ceremony
*Royal wedding announcements*
Rather than spending hours primping and preening before the ceremony, Meghan was in an itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny yellow polka-dot bikini posing on the beach with her beloved mum Doria Radlan.

This was in the Mirror, evidently the editor was out on a tea break and missed the error in Doria's name.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is too funny!


----------



## csshopper

Various news venues and definitely her stans have blasted her father as not attending her wedding to Trevor and I can't find any article or statement from either Meghan or Doria to set the record straight. They both seem to have hung him out to dry., but as bag-mania said he WAS present. This was posted on line:

"Mr Markle denied reports that he was not a guest at Meghan’s wedding to Trevor Engelson in 2011, revealing that he walked his daughter down the aisle. Meghan’s estranged father said he was “sick and tired” of reports that he did not attend the wedding.
In an interview with the Mail on Sunday, the 74-year-old shared a picture taken with his daughter on the day.
Mr Markle said: “The picture was taken when I walked into her bungalow just moments before the ceremony was due to start.
“I was so proud and overcome with emotion to see my baby in a white gown, looking so beautiful.
“We took the picture and then Doria and I both walked her down the aisle.”

Mr Markle described how his daughter took charge of wedding planning.

The former award-winning lighting director said: “*Meghan planned everything down to the tiniest detail. She took control of everything.*

“I was given a white shirt to wear, as were all the male guests. *She micro-managed everything*.

“Trevor is Jewish and his father, who is a rabbi, conducted the service. But it was not a traditional Jewish ceremony. *Meghan read vows she’d written herself.*”   (My Note: Maybe they celebrated the divorce????)

And the 74-year-old admitted he kept out of the wedding pictures so that younger guests could take centre stage.

Mr Markle said: “There are no pictures out there of me at the wedding because it was on the beach and everyone else was in their 30s and I was in my 60s.”

Of course it's not unusual for a bride to take charge of her wedding details, but his words spoken in 2018 and in a loving tone are interesting given what we know of her now. I think Harry never saw it coming and he's been steamrollered. 

Thomas Markle sounds like a decent Dad wanting to do the right thing for "my baby" which makes the treatment of him surrounding her next wedding all the more nasty.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Various news venues and definitely her stans have blasted her father as not attending her wedding to Trevor and I can't find any article or statement from either Meghan or Doria to set the record straight. They both seem to have hung him out to dry., but as bag-mania said he WAS present. This was posted on line:
> 
> "Mr Markle denied reports that he was not a guest at Meghan’s wedding to Trevor Engelson in 2011, revealing that he walked his daughter down the aisle. Meghan’s estranged father said he was “sick and tired” of reports that he did not attend the wedding.
> In an interview with the Mail on Sunday, the 74-year-old shared a picture taken with his daughter on the day.
> Mr Markle said: “The picture was taken when I walked into her bungalow just moments before the ceremony was due to start.
> “I was so proud and overcome with emotion to see my baby in a white gown, looking so beautiful.
> “We took the picture and then Doria and I both walked her down the aisle.”
> 
> Mr Markle described how his daughter took charge of wedding planning.
> 
> The former award-winning lighting director said: “*Meghan planned everything down to the tiniest detail. She took control of everything.*
> 
> “I was given a white shirt to wear, as were all the male guests. *She micro-managed everything*.
> 
> “Trevor is Jewish and his father, who is a rabbi, conducted the service. But it was not a traditional Jewish ceremony. *Meghan read vows she’d written herself.*”   (My Note: Maybe they celebrated the divorce????)
> 
> And the 74-year-old admitted he kept out of the wedding pictures so that younger guests could take centre stage.
> 
> Mr Markle said: “There are no pictures out there of me at the wedding because it was on the beach and everyone else was in their 30s and I was in my 60s.”
> 
> Of course it's not unusual for a bride to take charge of her wedding details, but his words spoken in 2018 and in a loving tone are interesting given what we know of her now. I think Harry never saw it coming and he's been steamrollered.
> 
> Thomas Markle sounds like a decent Dad wanting to do the right thing for "my baby" which makes the treatment of him surrounding her next wedding all the more nasty.



Article includes photo:








						Meghan’s father Thomas Markle reveals her sweet cards
					

Thomas Markle has shared the touching notes and letters sent to him by his daughter Meghan but admits that they now remind him of the wall between him and the Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article includes photo:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s father Thomas Markle reveals her sweet cards
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle has shared the touching notes and letters sent to him by his daughter Meghan but admits that they now remind him of the wall between him and the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thanks for posting this. Honestly, I hurt for this man. We are of the same generation and after all these years I would be absolutely devastated if my relationship with either of my children is what he is enduring now.


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm watching one of the Lady CC videos and OMG she can roast someone in the most calm voice and polite terms.
> 
> "She has a propensity for wearing evening wear during daytime. Only vulgarians do. Someone who is very unsophisticated like Meghan wouldn't know the difference [between day wear and evening wear], and she never cared to learn."


Hahaha  love her and her vids! Do you have a link by chance of the one you mentioned?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@Katel here you go:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So motherly she left her only child with her ex-husband and wasn't seen for years for reasons only known to her? Alright.



She probably exerted her motherly love by advising MM to stay near the 'pot of gold' when growing up. Thomas had a very good salary at that time...


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Katel here you go:




Oh TU - she is a hoot!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Various news venues and definitely her stans have blasted her father as not attending her wedding to Trevor and I can't find any article or statement from either Meghan or Doria to set the record straight. They both seem to have hung him out to dry., but as bag-mania said he WAS present. This was posted on line:
> 
> "Mr Markle denied reports that he was not a guest at Meghan’s wedding to Trevor Engelson in 2011, revealing that he walked his daughter down the aisle. Meghan’s estranged father said he was “sick and tired” of reports that he did not attend the wedding.
> In an interview with the Mail on Sunday, the 74-year-old shared a picture taken with his daughter on the day.
> Mr Markle said: “The picture was taken when I walked into her bungalow just moments before the ceremony was due to start.
> “I was so proud and overcome with emotion to see my baby in a white gown, looking so beautiful.
> “We took the picture and then Doria and I both walked her down the aisle.”
> 
> Mr Markle described how his daughter took charge of wedding planning.
> 
> The former award-winning lighting director said: “*Meghan planned everything down to the tiniest detail. She took control of everything.*
> 
> “I was given a white shirt to wear, as were all the male guests. *She micro-managed everything*.
> 
> “Trevor is Jewish and his father, who is a rabbi, conducted the service. But it was not a traditional Jewish ceremony. *Meghan read vows she’d written herself.*”   (My Note: Maybe they celebrated the divorce????)
> 
> And the 74-year-old admitted he kept out of the wedding pictures so that younger guests could take centre stage.
> 
> Mr Markle said: “There are no pictures out there of me at the wedding because it was on the beach and everyone else was in their 30s and I was in my 60s.”
> 
> Of course it's not unusual for a bride to take charge of her wedding details, but his words spoken in 2018 and in a loving tone are interesting given what we know of her now. I think Harry never saw it coming and he's been steamrollered.
> 
> Thomas Markle sounds like a decent Dad wanting to do the right thing for "my baby" which makes the treatment of him surrounding her next wedding all the more nasty.


Yes, he was at her wedding with Trevor. According to Samantha's book, he was the one taking the pictures. Samantha was the one that couldn't attend due to the difficulty of a beach weeding for someone on a wheelchair.


----------



## bag-mania

Gotta love the press, they are predictable. Every story about any of the royals these days must really be about Harry and Meghan. Today’s news: Princess Eugenie and family are back at Frogmore. Though you’d barely know she was the topic.

*Princess Eugenie Brings Newborn Son Home to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Frogmore Cottage*
*Princess Eugenie* and* Jack Brooksbank*’s newborn son has a lot in common with his cousin Archie.

The princess, 30, gave birth to their baby boy on Tuesday, February 9, in London’s Portland Hospital, the same hospital where *Meghan Markle* welcomed her and* Prince Harry*’s son, now 21 months. The couple then moved their little one into Frogmore Cottage, the onetime home of the _Suits_ alum, 39, and the former military pilot, 36, on Friday, February 12.

Markle and Harry, who have since moved to the United States, finished renovating the five separate staff quarters into a 10-bedroom home in April 2019 ahead of Archie’s arrival. Not only is the property close to Royal Lodge where *Sarah Ferguson* and *Prince Andrew* live, but *Queen Elizabeth II* and *Prince Philip* are a short walk away as well.









						Princess Eugenie Brings Son Home to Harry and Meghan's Frogmore Cottage
					

Princess Eugenie and her husband, Jack Brooksbank, left the hospital with their baby boy on Friday, February 12 — read more




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## duna

Katel said:


> Oh TU - she is a hoot!



I didn't know that Lady C was a man, I Googled her and read that she was born in Jamaica and due to a malformation she was registered as a boy named George William Ziadie. I would never have guessed....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I didn't know that Lady C was a man, I Googled her and read that she was born in Jamaica and due to a malformation she was registered as a boy named George William Ziadie. I would never have guessed....



Well, that's kind of an insensitive way of wording it. She was never a man, what happened to her is what happened to a lot of children who were affected by disorders of sex development.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Interesting theory: apparently, people close to the BRF say that the firm was well aware MM wasn't the daughter-in-law of their dreams, but being mixed race played in her favour because they didn't want to face the scandal of being called out for racisms. The sources claim had she been the typical blue-eyed blonde that wedding would have never happened because they had nipped it in the bud much more aggressively than they felt they could with MM. If true, I wonder if they don't think at this point the backlash would have been worth it.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, that's kind of an insensitive way of wording it. She was never a man, what happened to her is what happened to a lot of children who were affected by disorders of sex development.



Yes Ok, she was *officially* a boy/man until her operation.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Eugenie is being inspired by the gurus, MM&H. It seems true that she moved into Frog Cot with baby Postage or Stamp  and is not interested in a royal title for him.  

The New Tenants!


----------



## Chanbal

Long history? I wonder if the duchess ever met the B****s. From one of the several magazines that are part of their PR machine/SS:


I don't click on this type of articles and I refuse subscribing to these magazines.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the B****s ever met the duchess. From one of the several magazines that are part of their PR machine/SS:
> View attachment 4990403
> 
> I don't click on this type of articles and I refuse subscribing to these magazines.


relationship?  I hadn't heard they had ever met ******


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Long history? I wonder if the duchess ever met the B****s. From one of the several magazines that are part of their PR machine/SS:
> View attachment 4990403
> 
> I don't click on this type of articles and I refuse subscribing to these magazines.



No photos? Did not happen.
Yes, Harry clung to Jill and Michele. Very fawning. Many photos and videos.
I still believe Charles pushed Harry on the US even back then, possibly because Charles realized how divisive younger brothers can be. Or maybe he thought H could expand the monarchy to the US. Looking back at those events with H and the politicians makes the attention seem very deliberate, not random. Ok, taking off my tin foil hat now.

Happy Valentine’s Day, all!  You are the best


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> relationship?  I hadn't heard they had ever met ******


These types of headlines are released by MM's PR machine as part of her desire to look relevant in politics imo. She will not rest until she gets a lot of money and power. Unless she runs out of money to pay for PR, she might get what she wants. However, approaches like this can result in having mediocre people in leadership positions, which is very dangerous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I would like for her to run so we the people can show our strong dislike and vote against her. Also, she and he would have to relinquish those titles.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty,  

It’s just a matter of time until JCMH and MM stage one of their video shoots with books about the President and VP strategically placed for inclusion in screen shots.
To them it would qualify as having a close “relationship”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> No photos? Did not happen.
> Yes, Harry clung to Jill and Michele. Very fawning. Many photos and videos.
> I still believe Charles pushed Harry on the US even back then, possibly because Charles realized how divisive younger brothers can be. Or maybe he thought H could expand the monarchy to the US. Looking back at those events with H and the politicians makes the attention seem very deliberate, not random. Ok, taking off my tin foil hat now.
> 
> Happy Valentine’s Day, all!  You are the best


I didn't click on the article, but I don't think they will be able to show photos of MM with the B****s yet. However, I wouldn't be surprised if H and SS, through its many connections, will help her getting that much desired photo(s) soon.

Happy Valentine's Day to you all as well!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I would like for her to run so we the people can show our strong dislike and vote against her. Also, she and he would have to relinquish those titles.


I don't know if she would be willing to do the work it would take to get elected to public office


----------



## Cavalier Girl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article includes photo:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s father Thomas Markle reveals her sweet cards
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle has shared the touching notes and letters sent to him by his daughter Meghan but admits that they now remind him of the wall between him and the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Meghan has carried her bad behavior to the extreme, but I've seen this kind of thing first hand.  When you become no longer useful to some people (relatives or not), they have no qualms about throwing you to the wolves.  While you're useful, they heap on love and praise, but when the tide changes, beware of the possibly all that love and adoration will disappear.

If I were Thomas, I'd think about having a fire on the beach with all those "loving" cards and letters, and set about forgetting I had a daughter who became a duchess, just as she's done with him.


----------



## rose60610

So how long before M&H claim to be besties with current U.S. Cabinet Secretaries? And Gates, Bezos, Musk, other famous billionaires? If they don't get invited to the White House soon, they'll forced to slither onto other famous types and attempt to sponge off their notoriety. And why aren't they EVER hanging out with any of their American wedding guests besides Oprah (for her product plugging abilities)? Any word on their Netflix projects?


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Yes, she did.
> 
> Friends and family flocked to the cruise ship port of Ocho Rios on September 10 2011 to watch Meghan and Trevor tie the knot at the Jamaica Inn, seven years after they started dating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan with her mum Doria, taken just hours before her first wedding ceremony
> *Royal wedding announcements*
> Rather than spending hours primping and preening before the ceremony, Meghan was in an itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny yellow polka-dot bikini posing on the beach with her beloved mum Doria Radlan.
> 
> This was in the Mirror, evidently the editor was out on a tea break and missed the error in Doria's name.


Pre-bad extensions.


----------



## marietouchet

Curious article, don’t know what to make of this, see last paragraph 

Shock of Meghan witnesses at being denied their day in court 






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Curious article, don’t know what to make of this, see last paragraph
> 
> Shock of Meghan witnesses at being denied their day in court
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


Not surprised! 
"_There will be relief in some royal circles that a potentially embarrassing and exposing event has been avoided._.."


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce They Are Expecting Baby No. 2 - Archie Will Be a Big Brother!
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have announced the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant with their second child




					people.com
				




Shocking, they announce this literally within a week of Eugenie giving birth.

Can't let the poor girl have even a minute to shine.

Her bump looks huge.  If she really had a miscarriage last year, she must've gotten pregnant practically instantly.


----------



## ChanelFan29

Baby #2, gotta lock H down for more cash so she will be set when the divorce happens!


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> How are young people supposed to know any better when the media puts them up on pedestals as shining examples of the best of humanity? Honestly, if I hadn't made the effort to look at the less than flattering details that are being purposely ignored in 90% of the stories about them, I'd think they were wonderful too.



It's called propaganda and it's real.


----------



## mshermes

Baby pic looks like the end of Notting Hill with Julia Roberts pregnant. First thing I thought of when I saw it. Second thing I thought is probably more BS. Third thing....I wish he would have washed his feet. Of course, they announce it on Valentine's Day.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce They Are Expecting Baby No. 2 - Archie Will Be a Big Brother!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have announced the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant with their second child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shocking, they announce this literally within a week of Eugenie giving birth.
> 
> Can't let the poor girl have even a minute to shine.
> 
> Her bump looks huge.  If she really had a miscarriage last year, she must've gotten pregnant practically instantly.


No class


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce They Are Expecting Baby No. 2 - Archie Will Be a Big Brother!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have announced the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant with their second child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shocking, they announce this literally within a week of Eugenie giving birth.
> 
> Can't let the poor girl have even a minute to shine.
> 
> Her bump looks huge.  If she really had a miscarriage last year, she must've gotten pregnant practically instantly.



Often you look very pregnant early on with number 2. I was 3 months pregnant with #2 and I was standing with my little girl at a Macy's candy counter. Some woman came up and commented to my daughter about having a sibling. lol


----------



## PussInPearls

Big, dirty man toes in the foreground and a woman seemingly giving birth in the background.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just watching BBC News, not even main headline news, looks like it's 5th or 6th on the list.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

PussInPearls said:


> Big, dirty man toes in the foreground and a woman seemingly giving birth in the background.


They probably had 100s of shots taken and this is the one they select?


----------



## ilovemydog

Congratulations to Meghan and Harry. I wish her a healthy and happy pregnancy


----------



## rose60610

Eegads.  And it's Valentine's Day too! Eugenie who?  Two birds with one stone! The photo is LAME and so cloyingly contrived. Harry's feet, ugh. Well, since they've been getting non-invited to the White House and Meghan didn't replace K***** as senator, they had to do something. Don't tell me their Netflix will be a documentary of "The American Royal Pregnancy".


----------



## bag-princess

Sharont2305 said:


> Just watching BBC News, not even main headline news, looks like it's 5th or 6th on the list.






Sharont2305 said:


> No class



do you guys ever get tired with these comments?? such venom.  that's the lack of class.


----------



## ilovemydog

bag-princess said:


> do you guys ever get tired with these comments?? such venom.  that's the lack of class.


I'm disappointed with the vitriol in this thread so now that I know how grown adults are acting In this thread I will just exit stage left


----------



## lulilu

bag-princess said:


> do you guys ever get tired with these comments?? such venom.  that's the lack of class.





ilovemydog said:


> I'm disappointed with the vitriol in this thread so now that I know how grown adults are acting In this thread I will just exit stage left


It's a gossip thread.


----------



## Chagall

They have just announced they are expecting their second child.


----------



## maryg1

zen1965 said:


> For once I do not agree with you. #flower
> In younger age Philip was rather handsome in a Germanic kind of way. Beady-eyed Harry never did it for me.


I do agree instead with you! PP was quite attractive, I can see why QE fell in love.


----------



## rose60610

It explains the parka shot in December when everyone else was in shirt sleeves and their animation Christmas card.


----------



## ilovemydog

lulilu said:


> It's a gossip thread.


I've been on other gossip forums where people don't behave like this


----------



## Aimee3

So now she’ll have an excuse why she can’t/won’t go back for the trooping of the color and all the other activities.  Or maybe it’s just a pillow


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> So how long before M&H claim to be besties with current U.S. Cabinet Secretaries? And Gates, Bezos, Musk, other famous billionaires? If they don't get invited to the White House soon, they'll forced to slither onto other famous types and attempt to sponge off their notoriety. And why aren't they EVER hanging out with any of their American wedding guests besides Oprah (for her product plugging abilities)? Any word on their Netflix projects?


cause the wedding guests were acquaintences at best?


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce They Are Expecting Baby No. 2 - Archie Will Be a Big Brother!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have announced the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant with their second child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shocking, they announce this literally within a week of Eugenie giving birth.
> 
> Can't let the poor girl have even a minute to shine.
> 
> Her bump looks huge.  If she really had a miscarriage last year, she must've gotten pregnant practically instantly.



Coming from a colder climate I'm curious, is it really warm enough to be outside in such summer wear? She did have on a coat and touque last photo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Eugenie is being inspired by the gurus, MM&H. It seems true that she moved into Frog Cot with baby Postage or Stamp  and is not interested in a royal title for him.
> 
> The New Tenants!



I honestly doubt she would be offered one. Her husband isn't titled.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce They Are Expecting Baby No. 2 - Archie Will Be a Big Brother!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have announced the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant with their second child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shocking, they announce this literally within a week of Eugenie giving birth.
> 
> Can't let the poor girl have even a minute to shine.
> 
> Her bump looks huge.  If she really had a miscarriage last year, she must've gotten pregnant practically instantly.



I bet they were sitting on that press release until it was confirmed Eugenie had given birth.

Also, two observations: 

1. Karma is not a thing, or why else would it reward someone like Meghan with whatever her rotten little heart desires.

2. Harry is a very willing hostage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

I think this is the elite gossip thread. One never sees venomous statements here like.....gee, I hope this kid isn't cross-eyed.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-princess said:


> do you guys ever get tired with these comments?? such venom.  that's the lack of class.


I see no venom.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-princess said:


> do you guys ever get tired with these comments?? such venom.  that's the lack of class.


well we would probably say H&M show a lack of class...the way they treat people (like their families) to start with


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear me, has someone said something unkind about the grifters?
The ones who treat one parent like a pariah and another one like a saint, but tell us love is always the answer?
The ones who wear evening couture during the day?
The ones who lecture us about global warming while they fly in private jets, drive expensive gas guzzlers, yacht around the Mediterranean?
The ones who live lavishly in a 16 bathroom McMansion?

What would Freud say about a son announcing his wife’s pregnancy just like his mother announced her pregnancy with him?????
That is some kind of *creeeeepy*!










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry say they are expecting a second child
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently residing in California, are expecting a baby later this year, spokesperson for the couple has confirmed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



It also comes on the 37th anniversary of when Harry's mother, Princess Diana, announced that she was pregnant with him on Valentine's Day in 1984.


----------



## marietouchet

Sad the pregnancy announcement was made before E and J announced the baby name, it could have waited 
it would have been so gracious to let the baby steal the stage for a few weeks

on another subject ...

sick in bed listening to audiobooks , mysteries, one published in 1910 made me look up the word vitriol ( a weapon in the murder mystery)
In 1910, the word was a euphemism for sulfuric acid, one did not say sulfuric acid in polite society , learn something every day


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I bet they were sitting on that press release until it was confirmed Eugenie had given birth.
> 
> Also, two observations:
> 
> 1. Karma is not a thing, or why else would it reward someone like Meghan with whatever her rotten little heart desires.
> 
> 2. *Harry is a very willing hostage*.



When I read to DH that "Harry is a very willing hostage", he said, "Harry is no hostage. He's just effed up."  OK, so he's effed up, which in my book turned him into a willing hostage too.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> It also comes on the 37th anniversary of when Harry's mother, Princess Diana, announced that she was pregnant with him on Valentine's Day in 1984.



Another creepy premeditated move!  And another opportunity to milk a Diana moment for attention and pity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course, based on the angle of the photographer, the feet look oddly huge, but his nose. Is it my imagination or has it grown?


----------



## gracekelly

Wonder if they will ask Charles for more money.  Every reason not to go to UK now, even for him as he doesn't want to leave her alone in CA.  That comment from the Queen...wishing them well...that equates to adios muchachos, vaya con dios and have a nice life and don't call us, we'll call you if we remember.  Or as my DH says "is never too soon?"


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, based on the angle of the photographer, the feet look oddly huge, but his nose. Is it my imagination or has it grown?


It's called the Pinocchio Syndrome.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Coming from a colder climate I'm curious, is it really warm enough to be outside in such summer wear? She did have on a coat and touque last photo.


Yes.  If you hit a really nice day, and we do have them in Jan and Feb you can do this.  They are back in the hills and it is warmer there too.


----------



## zinacef

Eugenie in Frogcot today —- “ not again”


----------



## csshopper

Guessing they waited until she completed her first trimester to announce it, poor Eugenie and Jack barely had time to get their baby tucked in at Frogmore. 

When I clicked on the picture, inadvertently enlarged it, ewww, his foot looks caked with grime. But, at least he changed his grungy polo shirt.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Sad the pregnancy announcement was made before E and J announced the baby name, it could have waited
> it would have been so gracious to let the baby steal the stage for a few weeks
> 
> on another subject ...
> 
> sick in bed listening to audiobooks , mysteries, one published in 1910 made me look up the word vitriol ( a weapon in the murder mystery)
> In 1910, the word was a euphemism for sulfuric acid, one did not say sulfuric acid in polite society , learn something every day



Get well soon, MT, we miss you! Thank You for the word origin info - I love those details.  
H&M want to be just like Diana, so the announcement had to be today. So creepy.









						The Origins of Vitrol
					

Sulphuric acid, which has the traditional name, “oil of vitriol.” It is a nasty, corrosive liquid, making “vitriolic” an apt term for virulent language. At first it may seem odd that the term “vitriol” derives from the Latin meaning glass, since glass is an inert material. But there is a...



					www.mcgill.ca


----------



## Kansashalo

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce They Are Expecting Baby No. 2 - Archie Will Be a Big Brother!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have announced the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant with their second child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Congrats to them on baby #2


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

I do not call this coincidence.....


----------



## Jayne1

mshermes said:


> Baby pic looks like the end of Notting Hill with Julia Roberts pregnant. First thing I thought of when I saw it. Second thing I thought is probably more BS. Third thing....I wish he would have washed his feet. Of course, they announce it on Valentine's Day.


That's what I thought - though not as nice as the movie shot.

So, do we think she really is carrying this time?  Last time, I would bet money it was just a pillow she was holding up.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear me, has someone said something unkind about the grifters?
> The ones who treat one parent like a pariah and another one like a saint, but tell us love is always the answer?
> The ones who wear evening couture during the day?
> The ones who lecture us about global warming while they fly in private jets, drive expensive gas guzzlers, yacht around the Mediterranean?
> The ones who live lavishly in a 16 bathroom McMansion?
> 
> What would Freud say about a son announcing his wife’s pregnancy just like his mother announced her pregnancy with him?????
> That is some kind of *creeeeepy*!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry say they are expecting a second child
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently residing in California, are expecting a baby later this year, spokesperson for the couple has confirmed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It also comes on the 37th anniversary of when Harry's mother, Princess Diana, announced that she was pregnant with him on Valentine's Day in 1984.



how did Diana announce it?  Verbally or thru a spokesperson?


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> how did Diana announce it?  Verbally or thru a spokesperson?


Buckingham Palace would have announced it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I thought - though not as nice as the movie shot.
> 
> So, do we think she really is carrying this time?  Last time, I would bet money it was just a pillow she was holding up.



Right now, I vote for surrogate.

Diana did not need to stage a photograph — she knew how to stage candid shots.  H&M need to stage all photos because, ya kno, they are *private. *They must hire private photographers so that the image can be manipulated 1000x. Also, their candid shots never look good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Buckingham Palace would have announced it



as a real *royal* would. It is called manners, decorum, proper behavior.
This staged s$it looks ridiculous, IMO. It is a grotesque display of wealth during a pandemic.  Grotesque, nouveau riche.
They should be ridiculed so that this s$it stops.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should be ridiculed so that this s$it stops.



Yeah, but just as with the miscarriage, people are cautious to say anything negative because in normal circumstances with a normal couple that would be just miserable.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear me, has someone said something unkind about the grifters?
> The ones who treat one parent like a pariah and another one like a saint, but tell us love is always the answer?
> The ones who wear evening couture during the day?
> The ones who lecture us about global warming while they fly in private jets, drive expensive gas guzzlers, yacht around the Mediterranean?
> The ones who live lavishly in a 16 bathroom McMansion?
> 
> What would Freud say about a son announcing his wife’s pregnancy just like his mother announced her pregnancy with him?????
> That is some kind of *creeeeepy*!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry say they are expecting a second child
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are currently residing in California, are expecting a baby later this year, spokesperson for the couple has confirmed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It also comes on the 37th anniversary of when Harry's mother, Princess Diana, announced that she was pregnant with him on Valentine's Day in 1984.


Oh geez....I finally caught up with you and saw this pregnancy announcement.....tacky? creepy?  using diana again....uugh


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but just as with the miscarriage, people are cautious to say anything negative because in normal circumstances with a normal couple that would be just miserable.



Gasp, normal? What is that?  No way that Diana’s ‘real’ son could ever be _normal. _This is the ‘woke’ H&M, after all.

ETA: On a positive note, what first caught my eye was that beautiful tree. Perhaps we could get more info on it? It looks to be quite old and fits with the ‘adding more branches’ theme. Kudos to the photographer.


----------



## csshopper

mshermes said:


> I do not call this coincidence.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4990854
> View attachment 4990855


 Consistency, as with plagiarism, No one ever accused them of originality....


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Sad the pregnancy announcement was made before E and J announced the baby name, it could have waited
> it would have been so gracious to let the baby steal the stage for a few weeks
> 
> on another subject ...
> 
> sick in bed listening to audiobooks , mysteries, one published in 1910 made me look up the word vitriol ( a weapon in the murder mystery)
> In 1910, the word was a euphemism for sulfuric acid, one did not say sulfuric acid in polite society , learn something every day



I read somewhere that E&J were thinking about Stamp (or Postage?) as a possible name for their baby. 

I suggest you getting BritBox, plenty of good mysteries there. Feel better soon!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> as a real *royal* would. It is called manners, decorum, proper behavior.
> This staged s$it looks ridiculous, IMO. It is a grotesque display of wealth during a pandemic.  Grotesque, nouveau riche.
> They should be ridiculed so that this s$it stops.


Totally agree, I read online that Scoobie Do made the announcement on his account “theHeirPod.” Tacky.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Wonder if they will ask Charles for more money.  Every reason not to go to UK now, even for him as he doesn't want to leave her alone in CA.  That comment from the Queen...wishing them well...that equates to adios muchachos, vaya con dios and have a nice life and don't call us, we'll call you if we remember.  Or as my DH says "is never too soon?"


No need to wonder, they will send the tiara requests soon. You are right with the 'adios bambinos' from the queen, but have you ever try to remove weeds from your garden?


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Sad the pregnancy announcement was made before E and J announced the baby name, it could have waited
> it would have been so gracious to let the baby steal the stage for a few weeks
> 
> on another subject ...
> 
> sick in bed listening to audiobooks , mysteries, one published in 1910 made me look up the word vitriol ( a weapon in the murder mystery)
> In 1910, the word was a euphemism for sulfuric acid, one did not say sulfuric acid in polite society , learn something every day


And you, Marietouchet, teach me something new each day too!  I always look forward to reading your posts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Having fun, but they could be right about the due date -


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Having fun, but they could be right about the due date -




When I read the announcement I thought this time around they probably asked for a girl, too (as in, apparently in the US you can ask for gender with IVF...in Germany, that's not legal).


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What stuns me most is that they MUST think we're all idiots. Like, oh we were just lying in the grass in an expensive custom dress thriving and all and our close friend happened to snap a picture, so here we are.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Very interesting.  I was about to write my thoughts on Samantha's comment that MM is much like Doria, and "doesn't give the milk away for free".  I'm wondering if Doria is much like MM in the sense that she also cuts ties with family members that are not useful to her?  She's not vocal like MM and an attention whore, but MM must have learned her conniving ways from someone?  Doria may actually be the better actor in the family!


My understanding is that at one point (_around Meghan's high school years_), Doria picked up and left LA to take a job out-of-state (_not sure where, but my recollection is that it was somewhere in the Midwest_) .. that said job paid more; however .. I believe it was also around this time that Doria filed for bankruptcy.  Doria's move would certainly explain the reason why she was not around for Meghan's high school years (_and the plays/theatre/dance, etc_.), hence the reason why my friends do not recall ever meeting her and/or seeing her attend any of the plays that Meghan was in.  Not that I think Doria did a bad thing, but Thomas was the source ($$$) for Meghan's high school extracurricular activities, in addition to paying for all her plastic surgery (_and yes - according to my friends, she had the first of her nose jobs while still in high school_).  

Bottom line, *IMO *.. there were a few reasons why Doria was the only attendee at the wedding: 

*Doria* - was the representation of Meghan's mixed-race heritage; as many have noted, it appears that Meghan uses that card when it is convenient to show/make a comment on racism.  In addition, while Doria may know some particulars about Meghan's "_life before Harry_", she was not going to spill the beans .. had Meghan been a 'yacht girl'?, had Meghan cheated on Trevor (_with the Toronto Chef_) prior to their divorce?, etc.  
*Samantha* - IMO, there was no way in hell that Meghan was going to invite the person who likely knows a fair amount of 'dirt' on her "_life before Harry_" and given the right circumstances (_yes - money_) might just talk about it. I can't say that I justify Samantha's behavior, but gotta say that quite a bit of what she has said .. well, let's just say that we are seeing more of the 'true' Meghan and it's not so pretty IMO!
*Thomas* - feel sorry for him, and yes .. he did some stupid things before the wedding, but I truly don't think it was malicious in nature.  I think he really loved Meghan and when the issue with the letter and some unsavory things were said about him, he felt he had to defend himself (_boy - do I understand that; a HUGE pet peeve of mine is when people say things about me that are untrue or try to blame me for something that THEY did .. you bet I'm going to defend myself_)!!!  Bottom line, I think that Meghan felt the same about him as Samantha .. they had dirt that could potentially be very different than the "picture" that Meghan wanted to portray to both the BRF and the British people. 
*Rest of her "family" *(_and I use the term 'family' very  lightly here_) - IMO, I think that Meghan thought that she had 'climbed' to a much higher "rank" than her family and as such having them there would be a 'reminder' of the narrative that she was so trying to erase
To some degree, I'm still (_somewhat_) scratching my head as to why they let Harry marry Meghan given all the '*red flags*' that she likely had flying all around her, but I guess they also knew that if they tried to stop him (_given his childish and impetuous nature_) they were more concerned about what he would say/do if they had said 'NO WAY'.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that come here and complain about this thread, please be assured that I intend to stop posting here as soon as these two imbeciles stop paying their PR Agency. Please!!!!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Carryon-
Thank you! You made my day!  I would probably not have seen this otherwise. What fun to see the tabloid press, that they disdain in public, but pander to in private do a front page call out on their copy cat way of life.

The irony is, Meghan as a Z list actress, would never have made the cut to "star" in the movie version.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that E&J were thinking about Stamp (or Postage?) as a possible name for their baby.
> 
> I suggest you getting BritBox, plenty of good mysteries there. Feel better soon!


Into audiobooks for now ... great British narrators , the English accent is a must have 
did a few Agatha Christies , enjoyed them a lot but 100 year old books are not in tune with our woke cancel culture


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting theory: apparently, people close to the BRF say that the firm was well aware MM wasn't the daughter-in-law of their dreams, but being mixed race played in her favour because they didn't want to face the scandal of being called out for racisms. The sources claim had she been the typical blue-eyed blonde that wedding would have never happened because they had nipped it in the bud much more aggressively than they felt they could with MM. If true, I wonder if they don't think at this point the backlash would have been worth it.



@CeeJay


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny such serendipity such timing !!! Babies galore !!!!

went to my online mags, look at the latest publication that came up while I was rummaging for National Geographic !


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> To some degree, I'm still (_somewhat_) scratching my head as to why they let Harry marry Meghan given all the '*red flags*' that she likely had flying all around her, but I guess they also knew that if they tried to stop him (_given his childish and impetuous nature_) they were more concerned about what he would say/do if they had said 'NO WAY'.


There are opinions that the BRF didn't stop H to marry MM because they were afraid of being called racists. If MM had presented herself as Caucasian, as she did in the past, the wedding would likely never happened. They wouldn't have allowed H marry a Caucasian with such character...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that come here and complain about this thread, please be assured that I intend to stop posting here as soon as these two imbeciles stop paying their PR Agency. Please!!!!
> View attachment 4990940
> 
> View attachment 4990946
> 
> View attachment 4990947



Right there with ya.
I will stop when the BRF removes titles and money from the grifters _or they willingly surrender the titles_. Also, when *private *actually means private - they say they want privacy, then post the most intimate of details. 

The world does not need more charlatans, more grifters, more false flags.  When the media and the complainers face the facts about these two entitled liars, then ok, I will stand down.

What kind of 40 yr old couple stages a pregnancy announcement?  Perhaps desperate, attention-a$$holes?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remote photography, the new thang — 

_from the DM: It's unclear where the photo was taken but Harriman indicated that he took it remotely via an iPad. 









						Photographer Captures Unique Portraits Remotely All Over the World by Using FaceTime
					

Who says that during the self distancing period you cannot meet and photograph others from the comfort of your own home? Who says you need your camera at all? We humans are known for our ability to adapt to challenging situations and changes. Whatever life throws at us, we will find a way to see...




					fstoppers.com
				



_


----------



## sdkitty

What is with the black and white photo ?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> What is with the black and white photo ?



You know they always do that.  It is sooooo aaaarrrrrtttyyyy.


----------



## Lake Effect

sdkitty said:


> What is with the black and white photo ?


I kind of like it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

MM’s parents divorced, Meghan lived with her dad.  Nobody remembers seeing Doria around. When did she reappear?


----------



## bag-mania

Think of the months of belly cradling photos we have ahead of us. On a humorous note you know they aren’t going to do anything now that she’s pregnant.

Here’s what’s going on in the minds of the executives at Spotify: “We fronted them all that money and gave them a production crew and it’s been two months! When are they going to produce a second episode of their podcast?”

And from the executives from Netflix: “Two months? They took money from us eight months ago and they haven’t shown us anything yet!”


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You too, Huffpost.
> 
> Princess Eugenie Shares a Glimpse of Her Son With Jack Brooksbank on Instagram
> 
> In short, she copied Meghan, possibly after having consulted with her, but in the 15 hours since the baby has been born she has not faced the same backlash as poor Meghan over her decision to not show the baby's face  (that's the closest resemblance to an eyeroll I could find).


Questions: Isn't there a huge difference between the two situations?  Since Archie is in the succession line and will become a prince when Charles is king and be part of the RF with all the trappings, shouldn't H&MM have posed for pictures? All other RF parents in a similar circumstance, posed for pictures with their newborn. However, isn't Eugenie's son a commoner and will always be a commoner and a private citizen? Thanks.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Think of the months of belly cradling photos we have ahead of us. On a humorous note you know they aren’t going to do anything now that she’s pregnant.
> 
> Here’s what’s going on in the minds of the executives at Spotify: “We fronted them all that money and gave them a production crew and it’s been two months! When are they going to produce a second episode of their podcast?”
> 
> And from the executives from Netflix: “Two months? They took money from us eight months ago and they haven’t shown us anything yet!”



I am willing to bet they will document her pregnancy and all of her hard work along the way, then monetize it on Netflix. And she can do some kind of working mom podcast on Spotify. She sees dollar signs in every opportunity, why not heavily control the material and do the same with this?

I don’t like the photo. Looks like she is... Giving birth, practicing Lamaze, or waiting for her gyn exam in the outdoors. Weird body positioning. And Harry’s feet. No one wants to see a man‘s foot. Makes me think of stinky foot odor.


----------



## needlv

Lake Effect said:


> I kind of like it.



i don’t mind it either .... except for Harry’s feet.  But for a Royal announcement it isnt appropriate.  It’s more celebrity than royalty.


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> I am willing to bet they will document her pregnancy and all of her hard work along the way, then monetize it on Netflix. And she can do some kind of working mom podcast on Spotify. She sees dollar signs in every opportunity, why not heavily control the material and do the same with this?
> 
> I don’t like the photo. Looks like she is... Giving birth, practicing Lamaze, or waiting for her gyn exam in the outdoors. Weird body positioning. And Harry’s feet. No one wants to see a man‘s foot. Makes me think of stinky foot odor.



Agreed. I was thinking the same myself. It's kinda like "wow, we got this mega Netflix deal, we CAN'T screw it up. What do we do? (cloud bubble--EVERYONE knows we're clueless and cheap, we don't want to pay somebody who knows what THEY'RE doing for millions because we want to keep as much of the 150 million of the contract to ourselves!) Hair-REEEEEE, I've got to get knocked up! And FAST! The Netflix doc will be about us,  I mean MEEE, and, once again Harry, I'm the one wearing pants, pimping the contracts, and doing what it takes to get publicity. We have to SUE for privacy and thrust ourselves in front of every camera. Jeez, does NO ONE appreciate my hard work? Cranking out another kid in time for another pathetic Diana reference AND turning it into a Netflix doc? Hello?? I'm, like, a GENIUS! Just like Kris Jenner did to Bruce! Bruce was a nobody with an Olympic Gold Decathlon medal when she morphed him back into a household name.) Bruce becoming Kaitlyn resulted in divorce, but more importantly, promoted the K brand. 

Meghan is nothing but an opportunist. No matter what she thinks she must do, fabricate, pander to, beg for, whatever. Pathetic!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

PussInPearls said:


> Big, dirty man toes in the foreground and *a woman seemingly giving birth in the background.*


Or a woman hiding the watermelon that she brought along for the picnic after the photoshoot?!?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> You know they always do that.  It is sooooo aaaarrrrrtttyyyy.


so who does this big announcement with arty picture when they get pregnant?  does anyone else do this?  why is this big news?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so who does this big announcement with arty picture when they get pregnant?  does anyone else do this?  why is this big news?



Khloe Kardashian used an artsy black and white photo of her pregnant belly when she made her pregnancy announcement. Now that wouldn’t have required as much planning and staging as Meghan and Harry’s photo, but it’s the most similar celebrity pregnancy announcement I can remember. So yeah, a Kardashian.

I wonder how many shots the photographer had to take to get just the right amount of adoration as they gazed into each other’s eyes.


----------



## Lodpah

ilovemydog said:


> I've been on other gossip forums where people don't behave like this


Then feel free to express your love and admiration just as others express their opinions on calling out the hypocrisy of MM and JCHM. Don’t tell me how to feel or what to say cause I ain’t gonna lie.


----------



## ilovemydog

Lodpah said:


> Then feel free to express your love and admiration just as others express their opinions on calling out the hypocrisy of MM and JCHM. Don’t tell me how to feel or what to say cause I ain’t gonna lie.


I didn't tell you how to feel, hence why I walked away from this thread and you're quoting me several hours later


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Khloe Kardashian used an artsy black and white photo of her pregnant belly when she made her pregnancy announcement. Now that wouldn’t have required as much planning and staging as Meghan and Harry’s photo, but it’s the most similar celebrity pregnancy announcement I can remember. So yeah, a Kardashian.
> 
> I wonder how many shots the photographer had to take to get just the right amount of adoration as they gazed into each other’s eyes.


It was a piece of cake for the photographer, Ginge and Cringe live in permanent adoration. B&W fotos seem to be the new thing in Hollywood now, DM published a few today...


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> so who does this big announcement with arty picture when they get pregnant?  does anyone else do this?  why is this big news?


My dear Kitty, people who crave their privacy and who sue to achieve it, always announce and publish pictures in black and white. It’s a well know fact!  This is why Justice Warby awarded Meg the summary judgement. He knew deep down in his heart of hearts the Meg was so private that even though she needed the help of the BP PR dept to formulate her press release, oops! I mean letter, concerning g her father,  she would never want it  to be published in a tabloid. She really wanted her father to send it to the NYTimes for the Op Ed page, but that didn’t work out.  In fact, that may be the real cause of her distress and the reason for the lawsuit.


ETA. A really private person would never  collaborate with two authors on a book about herself, would she?   Nah...she would write it herself and then claim it was a work of fiction. Makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## Lodpah

ilovemydog said:


> I didn't tell you how to feel, hence why I walked away from this thread and you're quoting me several hours later


Technically you are . . . cause what I feel I say . . . just saying. This is a gossip thread no one will berate you or say anything nasty for if you say anything admirable and gush about those two.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh, they weren’t actually looking at each other. She is doing an odd stretch on the sofa while he is looking at, well, best not to say.
Using the newly - perfected ‘remote photography’ techniques, the photo is layered. A trusted assistant with an iPhone photographs highly-coveted outdoor spots, especially trees with multiple branches [hint hint], sends these to photographer. Then each person is photographed in various positions with happy looks, photos are sent to photographer who touches up the rough edges and, voila, baby announcement is complete. He adds the dirt on the feet for that ‘authentic‘ touch. Of course, kid #1 is never seen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, they weren’t actually looking at each other. She is doing an odd stretch on the sofa while he is looking at, well, best not to say.
> Using the newly - perfected ‘remote photography’ techniques, the photo is layered. A trusted assistant with an iPhone photographs highly-coveted outdoor spots, especially trees with multiple branches [hint hint], sends these to photographer. Then each person is photographed in various positions with happy looks, photos are sent to photographer who touches up the rough edges and, voila, baby announcement is complete. He adds the dirt on the feet for that ‘authentic‘ touch. Of course, kid #1 is never seen.


These staged photos makes one want to puke. See, she has to spend an insane amount of money to keep her popular is what I think. I remember long ago when Paris Hilton wanted to be a household name so she started courting the pap. The difference between the two is that one was honest about her intentions and the other . . . grifted herself into the fold and is such a fraud (her words), not mine.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> My understanding is that at one point (_around Meghan's high school years_), Doria picked up and left LA to take a job out-of-state (_not sure where, but my recollection is that it was somewhere in the Midwest_) .. that said job paid more; however .. I believe it was also around this time that Doria filed for bankruptcy.  Doria's move would certainly explain the reason why she was not around for Meghan's high school years (_and the plays/theatre/dance, etc_.), hence the reason why my friends do not recall ever meeting her and/or seeing her attend any of the plays that Meghan was in.  Not that I think Doria did a bad thing, but Thomas was the source ($$$) for Meghan's high school extracurricular activities, in addition to paying for all her plastic surgery (_and yes - according to my friends, she had the first of her nose jobs while still in high school_).
> 
> Bottom line, *IMO *.. there were a few reasons why Doria was the only attendee at the wedding:
> 
> *Doria* - was the representation of Meghan's mixed-race heritage; as many have noted, it appears that Meghan uses that card when it is convenient to show/make a comment on racism.  In addition, while Doria may know some particulars about Meghan's "_life before Harry_", she was not going to spill the beans .. had Meghan been a 'yacht girl'?, had Meghan cheated on Trevor (_with the Toronto Chef_) prior to their divorce?, etc.
> *Samantha* - IMO, there was no way in hell that Meghan was going to invite the person who likely knows a fair amount of 'dirt' on her "_life before Harry_" and given the right circumstances (_yes - money_) might just talk about it. I can't say that I justify Samantha's behavior, but gotta say that quite a bit of what she has said .. well, let's just say that we are seeing more of the 'true' Meghan and it's not so pretty IMO!
> *Thomas* - feel sorry for him, and yes .. he did some stupid things before the wedding, but I truly don't think it was malicious in nature.  I think he really loved Meghan and when the issue with the letter and some unsavory things were said about him, he felt he had to defend himself (_boy - do I understand that; a HUGE pet peeve of mine is when people say things about me that are untrue or try to blame me for something that THEY did .. you bet I'm going to defend myself_)!!!  Bottom line, I think that Meghan felt the same about him as Samantha .. they had dirt that could potentially be very different than the "picture" that Meghan wanted to portray to both the BRF and the British people.
> *Rest of her "family" *(_and I use the term 'family' very  lightly here_) - IMO, I think that Meghan thought that she had 'climbed' to a much higher "rank" than her family and as such having them there would be a 'reminder' of the narrative that she was so trying to erase
> To some degree, I'm still (_somewhat_) scratching my head as to why they let Harry marry Meghan given all the '*red flags*' that she likely had flying all around her, but I guess they also knew that if they tried to stop him (_given his childish and impetuous nature_) they were more concerned about what he would say/do if they had said 'NO WAY'.


There's still that thing going around the internet about Doria being imprisoned for fraud or something like that about her travel agency. Have you heard that? I mean, I'm sure everything negative was scrubbed off the internet but not sure how true that rumor was.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> There's still that thing going around the internet about Doria being imprisoned for fraud or something like that about her travel agency. Have you heard that? I mean, I'm sure everything negative was scrubbed off the internet but not sure how true that rumor was.


That rumor has been around for a while. There is no proof of that. i Think she owed back taxes and Thomas helped her out with that.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> Questions: Isn't there a huge difference between the two situations?  Since Archie is in the succession line and will become a prince when Charles is king and be part of the RF with all the trappings, shouldn't H&MM have posed for pictures? All other RF parents in a similar circumstance, posed for pictures with their newborn. However, isn't Eugenie's son a commoner and will always be a commoner and a private citizen? Thanks.


Archie is so far down the line to be irrelevant - he is the equivalent of Princess Margaret’s children who no one  ever hears about - we can but hope these two and their offspring slip into the same obscurity


----------



## Jktgal

ilovemydog said:


> I've been on other gossip forums where people don't behave like this


Must be a very boring gossip forum...


----------



## chicinthecity777

Daily Mirror nailed it! The photo they imitated were at top right. Is there anything these 2 came up with are not copied? 

Nobody will be sued for copy right infringement for publishing their photo this time! So that's a relief!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Questions: Isn't there a huge difference between the two situations?  Since Archie is in the succession line and will become a prince when Charles is king and be part of the RF with all the trappings, shouldn't H&MM have posed for pictures? All other RF parents in a similar circumstance, posed for pictures with their newborn. However, isn't Eugenie's son a commoner and will always be a commoner and a private citizen? Thanks.



Yeah, but since when was the fawning press interested in getting their facts straight? Also the article refers to the Sussexes hiding Archie until his christening, which was months out (as compared to the aforementioned 15 hours), so why they are blind to their own ridiculousness is beyond me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Judging from the new picture Harry really does seem to love her...he's not a good enough actor to fake it. What does he see in her I wonder? The sh*t she has pulled and how she treats the people around her would be enough for most people to be disgusted.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When I read the announcement I thought this time around they probably asked for a girl, too (as in, apparently in the US you can ask for gender with IVF...in Germany, that's not legal).


Is it a known fact that she had IVF or speculation? At her age it becomes more difficult to conceive ‘naturally’ but it is not impossible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Is it a known fact that she had IVF or speculation? At her age it becomes more difficult to conceive ‘naturally’ but it is not impossible.



Pure speculation, fueled by the pics of them coming out of the fertility clinic building. Also, for a control freak like her that would take out a lot of uncertainty as they'd test the embryo for genetic defects before implanting. But no, not confirmed at all.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pure speculation, fueled by the pics of them coming out of the fertility clinic building. Also, for a control freak like her that would take out a lot of uncertainty as they'd test the embryo for genetic defects before implanting. But no, not confirmed at all.





Chagall said:


> Is it a known fact that she had IVF or speculation? At her age it becomes more difficult to conceive ‘naturally’ but it is not impossible.


I don't believe you can choose gender in any way , not via IVF?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Now we know why they kept the "pregnancy" so secretive, they were planning this big announcement on Valentine's day, apparently just like Diana did years ago. For a proud WOC, activist and feminist, she sure tries very hard to emulate the life of a very privileged white woman! Why is that?

Harry said last year that it was not very eco-friendly to have more kids and they were happy with what they had, what changed?


----------



## Lake Effect

needlv said:


> i don’t mind it either .... except for Harry’s feet.  But for a Royal announcement it isnt appropriate.  It’s more celebrity than royalty.


His feet are funny. 
Diana highlighted the blurred line between celebrity and royalty. It is well known she manipulated the press when she desired. He’s her son. It’s his legacy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't believe you can choose gender in any way , not via IVF?



If you are wondering if that's possible with the procedure, it sure is. If you are wondering about the legal trappings, I was just watching a NYC based doctor's fertility story and she said her NYC based fertility specialist let her choose the sex. That's the info I was going off of as I don't know US regulations.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you are wondering if that's possible with the procedure, it sure is. If you are wondering about the legal trappings, I was just watching a NYC based doctor's fertility story and she said her NYC based fertility specialist let her choose the sex. That's the info I was going off as I don't know US regulations.


Not that it is certain this has anything to do with the glimmer twins ... 
all of the genetic testing currently done, with or without iVF, is under a lot of scrutiny these days , terribly controversial, is it ethical to take action if there is any issue ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Not that it is certain this has anything to do with the glimmer twins ...
> all of the genetic testing currently done, with or without iVF, is under a lot of scrutiny these days , terribly controversial, is it ethical to take action if there is any issue ?



Like what kind of action are you thinking of?


----------



## coldbrewcoffeekate

It’s reportedly a boy, congrats to them.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't believe you can choose gender in any way , not via IVF?



I don't think so, my daughter in law had IVF , the baby is due in a couple of weeks, and she and my son didn't choose gender, I don't think one can with the pre implant tests.

P.S: I hadn't read @QueenofWrapDress 's post before I posted, so maybe it is possible..... I don't know here in Italy what pre implant tests they do.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like what kind of action are you thinking of?


Trying to be gracious and politic and avoid a very sensitive topic ... I am sure you can figure it out 

and again, in no way, do I imply this has anything to do with H&M

i am just struck by how controversial the testing has become


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you are wondering if that's possible with the procedure, it sure is. If you are wondering about the legal trappings, I was just watching a NYC based doctor's fertility story and she said her NYC based fertility specialist let her choose the sex. That's the info I was going off of as I don't know US regulations.


I did a little research, they are selecting genders by selecting embryos. I shall refrain from commenting the legality or morality of such practice.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> i don’t mind it either .... except for Harry’s feet.  But for a Royal announcement it isnt appropriate.  It’s more celebrity than royalty.


they are not royal.....and what celeb does a big announcement when they get pregnant?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Khloe Kardashian used an artsy black and white photo of her pregnant belly when she made her pregnancy announcement. Now that wouldn’t have required as much planning and staging as Meghan and Harry’s photo, but it’s the most similar celebrity pregnancy announcement I can remember. So yeah, a Kardashian.
> 
> I wonder how many shots the photographer had to take to get just the right amount of adoration as they gazed into each other’s eyes.


so the answer to my question is "a reality star"....guess that is what they aspire to be - whether or not they admit it


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Daily Mirror nailed it! The photo they imitated were at top right. Is there anything these 2 came up with are not copied?
> 
> Nobody will be sued for copy right infringement for publishing their photo this time! So that's a relief!




Of course Daily Mirror nailed it, that scene with Hugh Grant and Julia Roberts came immediately into my mind. 

The reason why Harry is not holding a book like Hugh is because the photographer attempted to give a touch of reality to the photo. I wonder if the photographer considered giving him a playstation or a xbox controller to hold.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's...not very flattering. You'd think if Harry had been popular with his army peers they'd step forward and defend him, but alas, not only has there been radio silence, these comments are not that glowing.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The reason why Harry is not holding a book like Hugh is because the photographer attempted to give a touch of reality to the photo. I wonder if the photographer considered giving him a playstation or a xbox controller to hold.



 He is not holding a book because the world must only see that Harry’s attention is always on Meghan. ALWAYS ON MEGHAN! No distractions! She is his hopes, his dreams, his everything! #LoveAlwaysWins


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's...not very flattering. You'd think if Harry had been popular with his army peers they'd step forward and defend him, but alas, not only has there been radio silence, these comments are not that glowing.



even if they did like him back then, they may not like him so much now


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Daily Mirror nailed it! The photo they imitated were at top right. Is there anything these 2 came up with are not copied?
> 
> Nobody will be sued for copy right infringement for publishing their photo this time! So that's a relief!



cringing


----------



## lulilu

Maggie Muggins said:


> Questions: Isn't there a huge difference between the two situations?  Since Archie is in the succession line and will become a prince when Charles is king and be part of the RF with all the trappings, shouldn't H&MM have posed for pictures? All other RF parents in a similar circumstance, posed for pictures with their newborn. However, isn't Eugenie's son a commoner and will always be a commoner and a private citizen? Thanks.


I have read that Eugenie is keeping a low profile (perhaps why there is no posed photos) to keep the attention off of her father.

As far as photoshop on that photo -- did anyone notice that Harry has hair in it?  In the photos of him with James Cordon, he is very bald.

To me, it also looks as if she is not lying flat on the ground, but arching her back to extend her tummy.


----------



## lulilu

sdkitty said:


> even if they did like him back then, they may not like him so much now



I remember reading a number of articles way back that were not complimentary of H in the service.  He made racist remarks to/about is fellow servicemen, and it was thought that his presence brought more danger to his troop because he could be a target (putting them all at risk), I read he did not do well on the tests he took, and people hated his bodyguards' presence.

I always wondered how he became such a "beloved" member of the military, given the opinions of the men who served with him.


----------



## sdkitty

ilovemydog said:


> I didn't tell you how to feel, hence why I walked away from this thread and you're quoting me several hours later


well apparently you can't stay away....so pls post your opinions - livens things up


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It was a piece of cake for the photographer, Ginge and Cringe live in permanent adoration. B&W fotos seem to be the new thing in Hollywood now, DM published a few today...
> View attachment 4991218


do we have a yuck emoji?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> He is not holding a book because the world must only see that Harry’s attention is always on Meghan. ALWAYS ON MEGHAN! No distractions! She is his hopes, his dreams, his everything! #LoveAlwaysWins


And H reads MM's mind like an open book! 

I wonder who are his tutors for reading and comprehension? MA, mother-in-law, or a professional sent by the Agency???


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you are wondering if that's possible with the procedure, it sure is. If you are wondering about the legal trappings, I was just watching a NYC based doctor's fertility story and she said her NYC based fertility specialist let her choose the sex. That's the info I was going off of as I don't know US regulations.


If she had IVF for whatever the reason (be it fertility issues or wanting to avoid any genetic issues that either of them could pass along to their offspring) however many embryos are viable after testing, ( some could have defects, some could just not survive) the doctor would know how many are boys and how many are girls.  This doctor could ask which one would they prefer to use first.  Not every embryo implanted will “take”.  I’m surprised MM didn’t try for twins as that would in her eyes ***** Kate!  But perhaps they only had 2 viable embryos, and if the first in July didn’t “take” this is all they had left.


----------



## LittleStar88

Aimee3 said:


> If she had IVF for whatever the reason (be it fertility issues or wanting to avoid any genetic issues that either of them could pass along to their offspring) however many embryos are viable after testing, ( some could have defects, some could just not survive) the doctor would know how many are boys and how many are girls.  This doctor could ask which one would they prefer to use first.  Not every embryo implanted will “take”.  I’m surprised MM didn’t try for twins as that would in her eyes ***** Kate!  But perhaps they only had 2 viable embryos, and if the first in July didn’t “take” this is all they had left.



They will implant multiple embryos hoping for at least one attachment, that’s standard procedure for IVF. It’s possible more than one could attach, resulting in twins/triplets. They can favor one gender over another. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was via IVF she requested female and they name the baby Diana.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> They will implant multiple embryos hoping for at least one attachment, that’s standard procedure for IVF. It’s possible more than one could attach, resulting in twins/triplets. They can favor one gender over another. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was via IVF she requested female and they name the baby Diana.


yes, naming a child Diana would be just like them


----------



## Chanbal

*PIERS MORGAN *explains the photo and more. 

*Meghan and Harry's intimate baby bump photo proves they don't want privacy, they just want to control the media and use it to promote themselves when it suits them*

However, accompanying it was a photograph of Meghan lying in Harry's lap under a tree in the Californian sunshine, with her Hobbit-like bare-footed husband grinning broadly as he cradled her bump.

Like everything they do, this picture had been very carefully choreographed.

They hired an old friend to capture the 'spontaneous' intimate moment - Misan Harriman, a Nigerian-born British photographer who a few months ago became British Vogue's first black male cover photographer in the magazine's 104-year history.

He took the black-and-white picture remotely with an iPad from his home in London and told Vogue: 'With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn't need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates. When you see people who have the connection that they have, it's like reading the pages of a book.'

So true… if your library's stacked with Barbara Cartland swoon-busters!

The date of the photo's release was very deliberate too: Princess Diana and Prince Charles had also chosen Valentine's Day to reveal they were having Harry, 37 years ago in 1984.

*But it was the fact this photo was given to everyone in the media, via the Press Association, that raised my eyebrows in disbelief.*

Ten months ago, Meghan and Harry declared they would now have a 'zero engagement' policy with four British newspapers in one of their many furious tirades against the press whenever they are criticised for doing stuff like preaching about the environment as they use Elton John's private jet like a taxi service.

In a furious rant, she raged: 'For these outlets, it's a game. For me and so many others, it's real life, real relationships and very real sadness. The damage they have done and continue to do runs deep.'

I personally think the case should have gone to a trial where Thomas Markle, the father Meghan has disowned, could have had his say on the matter, and we could have also got to the bottom of exactly who may have helped Meghan write the letter, or who she may have revealed its contents to.

But the judge didn't agree, so Meghan got to have yet another whack at the press.

Which makes it even more baffling as to why, just a few days later, she would then want an incredibly revealing private photo of her and Harry and their unborn child to appear on the front page of the Mail and the front pages of all the other papers she claims to hate.

Or rather, it's not baffling at all.

For this is yet another example of Meghan and Harry's brazen hypocrisy, and further evidence that they don't have any real desire for privacy.

They just want the right to use the media to promote themselves when it suits them, and trash and ban them when it doesn't.

In fact, it's quite clear that the pair of them crave attention and publicity like ravenous jackals gorging on the carcass of a freshly slain gazelle.

Since they quit Britain and royal duty 13 months ago, barely a week has gone by without a new grainy self-promoting Zoom chat, statement or interview being released from their Santa Barbara mansion, or announcements about their latest lucrative multi-million-dollar commercial deals with the likes of Netflix or Spotify, or leaked details of power-broker meetings with top politicians like California's governor Gavin Newsom.

They know all this publicity is key to their success and bank balance, and they depend on the media they profess to loathe to deliver it.

In this regard, they're no different to reality TV celebrities like the Kardashians who don't actually do anything for a living other than sell their 'brand' to the highest bidder.

It's a self-promotional hustle and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have proven to as effective at it as Kim and her sisters.

*I just find it contemptible that they continue to exploit their royal titles in such a ruthless greedy way without doing any of the hard graft that other royals back home in the UK have to do to earn their keep.*

As I've said many times, they want to have their royal cake and eat it, and they shouldn't be allowed to trade off their royal connections like this.

As for privacy, do they even know what it means?

One of the numerous reasons they attracted criticism in the UK before quitting was their weird refusal to share details of their son Archie's birth with the British public who'd just paid millions for the refurbishment of their new home.

They briefed that this was to safeguard his privacy.

I'm thrilled for Meghan and Harry that they're having another baby.

But not as thrilled as they will be feeling about their very private photo adorning the front page of every paper that they banned for intruding into their privacy.

As I write this, I know their diehard fans – including many of the most horribly abusive people on social media - will already be screaming 'LEAVE THEM ALONE!' at me.

But the one thing Meghan and Harry want least is to be left alone.

*They could have refused to let the papers they despise have their baby bump photo.

But they wanted it splashed all over their sworn enemy's front pages because it will boost the Sussex brand and earn them even more money.*

This decision made them look like the perfect expectant parents.

It also made them look like a right royal pair of shameless hypocrites.   

The complete article on brazen hypocrisy here!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *PIERS MORGAN *explains the photo and more.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry's intimate baby bump photo proves they don't want privacy, they just want to control the media and use it to promote themselves when it suits them*
> 
> However, accompanying it was a photograph of Meghan lying in Harry's lap under a tree in the Californian sunshine, with her Hobbit-like bare-footed husband grinning broadly as he cradled her bump.
> 
> Like everything they do, this picture had been very carefully choreographed.
> 
> They hired an old friend to capture the 'spontaneous' intimate moment - Misan Harriman, a Nigerian-born British photographer who a few months ago became British Vogue's first black male cover photographer in the magazine's 104-year history.
> 
> He took the black-and-white picture remotely with an iPad from his home in London and told Vogue: 'With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn't need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates. When you see people who have the connection that they have, it's like reading the pages of a book.'
> 
> So true… if your library's stacked with Barbara Cartland swoon-busters!
> 
> The date of the photo's release was very deliberate too: Princess Diana and Prince Charles had also chosen Valentine's Day to reveal they were having Harry, 37 years ago in 1984.
> 
> *But it was the fact this photo was given to everyone in the media, via the Press Association, that raised my eyebrows in disbelief.*
> 
> Ten months ago, Meghan and Harry declared they would now have a 'zero engagement' policy with four British newspapers in one of their many furious tirades against the press whenever they are criticised for doing stuff like preaching about the environment as they use Elton John's private jet like a taxi service.
> 
> In a furious rant, she raged: 'For these outlets, it's a game. For me and so many others, it's real life, real relationships and very real sadness. The damage they have done and continue to do runs deep.'
> 
> I personally think the case should have gone to a trial where Thomas Markle, the father Meghan has disowned, could have had his say on the matter, and we could have also got to the bottom of exactly who may have helped Meghan write the letter, or who she may have revealed its contents to.
> 
> But the judge didn't agree, so Meghan got to have yet another whack at the press.
> 
> Which makes it even more baffling as to why, just a few days later, she would then want an incredibly revealing private photo of her and Harry and their unborn child to appear on the front page of the Mail and the front pages of all the other papers she claims to hate.
> 
> Or rather, it's not baffling at all.
> 
> For this is yet another example of Meghan and Harry's brazen hypocrisy, and further evidence that they don't have any real desire for privacy.
> 
> They just want the right to use the media to promote themselves when it suits them, and trash and ban them when it doesn't.
> 
> In fact, it's quite clear that the pair of them crave attention and publicity like ravenous jackals gorging on the carcass of a freshly slain gazelle.
> 
> Since they quit Britain and royal duty 13 months ago, barely a week has gone by without a new grainy self-promoting Zoom chat, statement or interview being released from their Santa Barbara mansion, or announcements about their latest lucrative multi-million-dollar commercial deals with the likes of Netflix or Spotify, or leaked details of power-broker meetings with top politicians like California's governor Gavin Newsom.
> 
> They know all this publicity is key to their success and bank balance, and they depend on the media they profess to loathe to deliver it.
> 
> In this regard, they're no different to reality TV celebrities like the Kardashians who don't actually do anything for a living other than sell their 'brand' to the highest bidder.
> 
> It's a self-promotional hustle and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have proven to as effective at it as Kim and her sisters.
> 
> *I just find it contemptible that they continue to exploit their royal titles in such a ruthless greedy way without doing any of the hard graft that other royals back home in the UK have to do to earn their keep.*
> 
> As I've said many times, they want to have their royal cake and eat it, and they shouldn't be allowed to trade off their royal connections like this.
> 
> As for privacy, do they even know what it means?
> 
> One of the numerous reasons they attracted criticism in the UK before quitting was their weird refusal to share details of their son Archie's birth with the British public who'd just paid millions for the refurbishment of their new home.
> 
> They briefed that this was to safeguard his privacy.
> 
> I'm thrilled for Meghan and Harry that they're having another baby.
> 
> But not as thrilled as they will be feeling about their very private photo adorning the front page of every paper that they banned for intruding into their privacy.
> 
> As I write this, I know their diehard fans – including many of the most horribly abusive people on social media - will already be screaming 'LEAVE THEM ALONE!' at me.
> 
> But the one thing Meghan and Harry want least is to be left alone.
> 
> *They could have refused to let the papers they despise have their baby bump photo.
> 
> But they wanted it splashed all over their sworn enemy's front pages because it will boost the Sussex brand and earn them even more money.*
> 
> This decision made them look like the perfect expectant parents.
> 
> It also made them look like a right royal pair of shameless hypocrites.
> 
> The complete article on brazen hypocrisy here!


perfect


----------



## bellecate

Of course she has, after all privacy is soooooo important to her.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Piers annoys me so much but he has been pretty spot-on with these two. 

Another question I have for you all....  I read somewhere (here??) that Meghan's education cost $1 million dollars.  Can someone break this down for me?


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Of course she has, after all privacy is soooooo important to her.
> View attachment 4991478


so everyone can again hear about the racism that caused their departure


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well conversations with Dr. Drew and Dr. Phil cannot be far behind. 




bellecate said:


> Of course she has, after all privacy is soooooo important to her.
> View attachment 4991478


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Well conversations with Dr. Drew and Dr. Phil cannot be far behind.


I guess dredging up the racism angle could increase support from her "base" of stans


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Sad the pregnancy announcement was made before E and J announced the baby name, it could have waited
> it would have been so gracious to let the baby steal the stage for a few weeks
> 
> on another subject ...
> 
> sick in bed listening to audiobooks , mysteries, one published in 1910 made me look up the word vitriol ( a weapon in the murder mystery)
> In 1910, the word was a euphemism for sulfuric acid, one did not say sulfuric acid in polite society , learn something every day


Get well soon!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's...not very flattering. You'd think if Harry had been popular with his army peers they'd step forward and defend him, but alas, not only has there been radio silence, these comments are not that glowing.



I don’t think the lads from his Afghanistan days have much interest in a “raindrop” these days.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't believe you can choose gender in any way , not via IVF?


You can.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Well conversations with Dr. Drew and Dr. Phil cannot be far behind.



Those interviews would be with Harry. He's the one worried about mental health. Meghan couldn't participate with Harry on those because Dr. Phil would call her out by asking why she was keeping a death grip on Harry's arm.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I remember reading a number of articles way back that were not complimentary of H in the service.  He made racist remarks to/about is fellow servicemen, and it was thought that his presence brought more danger to his troop because he could be a target (putting them all at risk), I read he did not do well on the tests he took, and people hated his bodyguards' presence.
> *
> I always wondered how he became such a "beloved" member of the military, given the opinions of the men who served with him.*


I believe more PR!  I read the same things.  Smoke and mirrors.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> do we have a yuck emoji?


Yes!  We do:


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> If she had IVF for whatever the reason (be it fertility issues or wanting to avoid any genetic issues that either of them could pass along to their offspring) however many embryos are viable after testing, ( some could have defects, some could just not survive) the doctor would know how many are boys and how many are girls.  This doctor could ask which one would they prefer to use first.  Not every embryo implanted will “take”.  *I’m surprised MM didn’t try for twins as that would in her eyes ***** Kate*!  But perhaps they only had 2 viable embryos, and if the first in July didn’t “take” this is all they had left.


Wait for it.....


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Wait for it.....


It will be an “accidental” pregnancy since Harry said in an interview with Jane Goodall they would only have 2 children, to protect the environment, and neither Harry or Meghan ever tell a lie......


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> It will be an “accidental” pregnancy since Harry said in an interview with Jane Goodall they would only have 2 children, to protect the environment, and neither Harry or Meghan ever tell a lie......


since they are soo in love, surely an accidental pregnancy would be an easy thing to happen


----------



## lanasyogamama

March 7, mark your calendar! Or don’t!


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> March 7, mark your calendar! Or don’t!


The Martin Bashir and Princess Diana interview immediately comes to mind. This one has the potential to do as much lasting damage. Seems obvious since it is billed as "no holds barred" it will not be a puff piece and favorable to the Monarchy. 

If these two egotistical, narcissistic, loathsome people had any integrity, they might consider whatever they commit to saying will be around f o r e v e r and will someday be seen by Archie and the second unfortunate child yet to be born. 

Harry and Meghan are, without any doubt, the *world's biggest HYPOCRITES.*

And I have lost all respect for Oprah.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> *PIERS MORGAN *explains the photo and more.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry's intimate baby bump photo proves they don't want privacy, they just want to control the media and use it to promote themselves when it suits them*
> 
> However, accompanying it was a photograph of Meghan lying in Harry's lap under a tree in the Californian sunshine, with her Hobbit-like bare-footed husband grinning broadly as he cradled her bump.
> 
> Like everything they do, this picture had been very carefully choreographed.
> 
> They hired an old friend to capture the 'spontaneous' intimate moment - Misan Harriman, a Nigerian-born British photographer who a few months ago became British Vogue's first black male cover photographer in the magazine's 104-year history.
> 
> He took the black-and-white picture remotely with an iPad from his home in London and told Vogue: 'With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn't need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates. When you see people who have the connection that they have, it's like reading the pages of a book.'
> 
> So true… if your library's stacked with Barbara Cartland swoon-busters!
> 
> The date of the photo's release was very deliberate too: Princess Diana and Prince Charles had also chosen Valentine's Day to reveal they were having Harry, 37 years ago in 1984.
> 
> *But it was the fact this photo was given to everyone in the media, via the Press Association, that raised my eyebrows in disbelief.*
> 
> Ten months ago, Meghan and Harry declared they would now have a 'zero engagement' policy with four British newspapers in one of their many furious tirades against the press whenever they are criticised for doing stuff like preaching about the environment as they use Elton John's private jet like a taxi service.
> 
> In a furious rant, she raged: 'For these outlets, it's a game. For me and so many others, it's real life, real relationships and very real sadness. The damage they have done and continue to do runs deep.'
> 
> I personally think the case should have gone to a trial where Thomas Markle, the father Meghan has disowned, could have had his say on the matter, and we could have also got to the bottom of exactly who may have helped Meghan write the letter, or who she may have revealed its contents to.
> 
> But the judge didn't agree, so Meghan got to have yet another whack at the press.
> 
> Which makes it even more baffling as to why, just a few days later, she would then want an incredibly revealing private photo of her and Harry and their unborn child to appear on the front page of the Mail and the front pages of all the other papers she claims to hate.
> 
> Or rather, it's not baffling at all.
> 
> For this is yet another example of Meghan and Harry's brazen hypocrisy, and further evidence that they don't have any real desire for privacy.
> 
> They just want the right to use the media to promote themselves when it suits them, and trash and ban them when it doesn't.
> 
> In fact, it's quite clear that the pair of them crave attention and publicity like ravenous jackals gorging on the carcass of a freshly slain gazelle.
> 
> Since they quit Britain and royal duty 13 months ago, barely a week has gone by without a new grainy self-promoting Zoom chat, statement or interview being released from their Santa Barbara mansion, or announcements about their latest lucrative multi-million-dollar commercial deals with the likes of Netflix or Spotify, or leaked details of power-broker meetings with top politicians like California's governor Gavin Newsom.
> 
> They know all this publicity is key to their success and bank balance, and they depend on the media they profess to loathe to deliver it.
> 
> In this regard, they're no different to reality TV celebrities like the Kardashians who don't actually do anything for a living other than sell their 'brand' to the highest bidder.
> 
> It's a self-promotional hustle and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have proven to as effective at it as Kim and her sisters.
> 
> *I just find it contemptible that they continue to exploit their royal titles in such a ruthless greedy way without doing any of the hard graft that other royals back home in the UK have to do to earn their keep.*
> 
> As I've said many times, they want to have their royal cake and eat it, and they shouldn't be allowed to trade off their royal connections like this.
> 
> As for privacy, do they even know what it means?
> 
> One of the numerous reasons they attracted criticism in the UK before quitting was their weird refusal to share details of their son Archie's birth with the British public who'd just paid millions for the refurbishment of their new home.
> 
> They briefed that this was to safeguard his privacy.
> 
> I'm thrilled for Meghan and Harry that they're having another baby.
> 
> But not as thrilled as they will be feeling about their very private photo adorning the front page of every paper that they banned for intruding into their privacy.
> 
> As I write this, I know their diehard fans – including many of the most horribly abusive people on social media - will already be screaming 'LEAVE THEM ALONE!' at me.
> 
> But the one thing Meghan and Harry want least is to be left alone.
> 
> *They could have refused to let the papers they despise have their baby bump photo.
> 
> But they wanted it splashed all over their sworn enemy's front pages because it will boost the Sussex brand and earn them even more money.*
> 
> This decision made them look like the perfect expectant parents.
> 
> It also made them look like a right royal pair of shameless hypocrites.
> 
> The complete article on brazen hypocrisy here!


Maybe history will repeat itself by the time Diana gave birth to Harry that marriage was dead in the water lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

HuffPost says it will be an interview with both of them. Seriously BRF, stop that trainwreck now. 

https://www.huffp.st/ORXucYy


----------



## Chloe302225

Interesting this interview is taking place around the time their review is scheduled.... what a coincidence?!

Also as I said before, I knew they couldn't let Eugenie have her time to shine.


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Piers annoys me so much but he has been pretty spot-on with these two.
> 
> Another question I have for you all....  I read somewhere (here??) that Meghan's education cost $1 million dollars.  Can someone break this down for me?


1M seems high even for a private school tuition at the time, that might have come to 1/4 M at the time for 4 years

but it does seem that she had all the expensive extras , sorority (thus wardrobe) trips overseas (education related but $$$$$), no claims she worked during college , airfare back and forth Chicago to California but still ... the 1m number is too high 

It is reported Tom spent his $750k lottery money (not sure if that is an accurate number ) on her around that time, so I think someone in the inaccurate press has rounded up his expenses to the nice round number of 1M


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> The Martin Bashir and Princess Diana interview immediately comes to mind. This one has the potential to do as much lasting damage. Seems obvious since it is billed as "no holds barred" it will not be a puff piece and favorable to the Monarchy.
> 
> If these two egotistical, narcissistic, loathsome people had any integrity, they might consider whatever they commit to saying will be around f o r e v e r and will someday be seen by Archie and the second unfortunate child yet to be born.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are, without any doubt, the *world's biggest HYPOCRITES.*
> 
> And I have lost all respect for Oprah.



You got it. The interview will be _no holds barred_ about anyone except them, the royal family, the British media, etc. It will be a puff piece of publicity for Meghan and Harry. They will not be asked any uncomfortable-to-answer questions about their personal behavior. A big fuss will be made about the upcoming birth, the "win" against the tabloids, the Netflix/Spotify contracts, Archewell, and of course we will be told how deliriously happy they are.

When was the last time Oprah did one of these network celebrity interviews? Seems like it's been years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He took the black-and-white picture remotely with an iPad from his home in London and told Vogue: 'With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn't need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates. When you see people who have the connection that they have, it's like reading the pages of a book.'



I just threw up a little.


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> Piers annoys me so much but he has been pretty spot-on with these two.
> 
> Another question I have for you all....  I read somewhere (here??) that Meghan's education cost $1 million dollars.  Can someone break this down for me?


I saw this figure in Samantha's book, but it should be relatively accurate. She when to private schools all the way from preschool to college. She started at "The Little Red School House", a school attended by many celebrity's kids in LA, and ended at Northwestern University, a costly private college in Chicago. Extracurricular activities.... it all adds up!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> You got it. The interview will be _no holds barred_ about anyone except them, the royal family, the British media, etc. It will be a puff piece of publicity for Meghan and Harry. They will not be asked any uncomfortable-to-answer questions about their personal behavior. A big fuss will be made about the upcoming birth, the "win" against the tabloids, the Netflix/Spotify contracts, Archewell, and of course we will be told how deliriously happy they are.
> 
> When was the last time Oprah did one of these network celebrity interviews? Seems like it's been years.


If barbara walters was still around she could make them cry


----------



## Tootsie17

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. I was thinking the same myself. It's kinda like "wow, we got this mega Netflix deal, we CAN'T screw it up. What do we do? (cloud bubble--EVERYONE knows we're clueless and cheap, we don't want to pay somebody who knows what THEY'RE doing for millions because we want to keep as much of the 150 million of the contract to ourselves!) Hair-REEEEEE, I've got to get knocked up! And FAST! The Netflix doc will be about us,  I mean MEEE, and, once again Harry, I'm the one wearing pants, pimping the contracts, and doing what it takes to get publicity. We have to SUE for privacy and thrust ourselves in front of every camera. Jeez, does NO ONE appreciate my hard work? Cranking out another kid in time for another pathetic Diana reference AND turning it into a Netflix doc? Hello?? I'm, like, a GENIUS! Just like Kris Jenner did to Bruce! Bruce was a nobody with an Olympic Gold Decathlon medal when she morphed him back into a household name.) Bruce becoming Kaitlyn resulted in divorce, but more importantly, promoted the K brand.
> 
> Meghan is nothing but an opportunist. No matter what she thinks she must do, fabricate, pander to, beg for, whatever. Pathetic!





rose60610 said:


> Agreed. I was thinking the same myself. It's kinda like "wow, we got this mega Netflix deal, we CAN'T screw it up. What do we do? (cloud bubble--EVERYONE knows we're clueless and cheap, we don't want to pay somebody who knows what THEY'RE doing for millions because we want to keep as much of the 150 million of the contract to ourselves!) Hair-REEEEEE, I've got to get knocked up! And FAST! The Netflix doc will be about us,  I mean MEEE, and, once again Harry, I'm the one wearing pants, pimping the contracts, and doing what it takes to get publicity. We have to SUE for privacy and thrust ourselves in front of every camera. Jeez, does NO ONE appreciate my hard work? Cranking out another kid in time for another pathetic Diana reference AND turning it into a Netflix doc? Hello?? I'm, like, a GENIUS! Just like Kris Jenner did to Bruce! Bruce was a nobody with an Olympic Gold Decathlon medal when she morphed him back into a household name.) Bruce becoming Kaitlyn resulted in divorce, but more importantly, promoted the K brand.
> 
> Meghan is nothing but an opportunist. No matter what she thinks she must do, fabricate, pander to, beg for, whatever. Pathetic!


Love this!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I saw this figure in Samantha's book, but it should be relatively accurate. She when to private schools all the way from preschool to college. She started at "The Little Red School House", a school attended by many celebrity's kids in LA, and ended at Northwestern University, a costly private college in Chicago. Extracurricular activities.... it all adds up!



And it all paid out, she married a prince!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And it all paid out, she married a prince!


very old school when you think about it....didn't girls in the 50's go to college to find a husband?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> very old school when you think about it....didn't girls in the 50's go to college to find a husband?



It was called Mrs degree!


----------



## Aimee3

LittleStar88 said:


> They will implant multiple embryos hoping for at least one attachment, that’s standard procedure for IVF. It’s possible more than one could attach, resulting in twins/triplets. They can favor one gender over another. Wouldn’t surprise me if it was via IVF she requested female and they name the baby Diana.


They don’t implant multiples any more routinely (at least where I am) because if a lot of the embryos implant, then they may have to abort some of them.  Most women would prefer to not have twins or multiples if they can help it.  
i read somewhere today H & M said it’s a boy.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If barbara walters was still around she could make them cry



True. Sadly, Barbara hasn't been well for awhile, she has dementia I believe. 

As we saw from the 2019 interview Meghan tears up if everyone isn't asking if she is okay, so I'm sure Oprah will ask during the interview. I definitely won't be watching that night.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> They don’t implant multiples any more routinely (at least where I am) because if a lot of the embryos implant, then they may have to abort some of them.  Most women would prefer to not have twins or multiples if they can help it.
> i read somewhere today H & M said it’s a boy.



Jup, from what I've heard (I am not planning any fertility treatments, so I don't even know how I end up with all the random info haha) they will do two if the mom-to-be insists, but would rather not.


----------



## marietouchet

This is great ! Such a deep metaphor for how we communicate anymore, from tumblr

and yes the snow is so deep here the dogs won’t go out , this is an issue of galactic proportions


----------



## Monoi

This is a lot of press for people that want privacy. The Diana reference turned me off, why cant they be original and stop trying so hard.


----------



## Sharont2305

This


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> very old school when you think about it....didn't girls in the 50's go to college to find a husband?


Well, there are rumors circulating that she found a husband in college, but the marriage was annulled at the request of Joe Giuliano's family.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> This


They are still a duke and a duchess of the UK... H is still in line to the throne. They are cashing in on titles given to them by QE. The argument that they are no "longer working members" of the BRF is not enough. The BRF needs to act and fix this ridiculous situation for the people in the UK and in the US imo.


----------



## TimeToShop

Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement. 

1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.

2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.

3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.


----------



## Chanbal

TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.


Welcome to this fun thread. All your points are good and possible imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.


Welcome! Hope you come along with us.  

I had never thought about the cultural implications of feet, let alone them being dirty.

And your observation about a surrogate being able to stay with them is spot on! Again, hadn't thought about that.


----------



## LittleStar88

Aimee3 said:


> They don’t implant multiples any more routinely (at least where I am) because if a lot of the embryos implant, then they may have to abort some of them.  Most women would prefer to not have twins or multiples if they can help it.
> i read somewhere today H & M said it’s a boy.



When I had IVF, they did three. There was the option to implant four if I had four viable embryos. None of my three took and it was a big wasted effort. This was about 9 years ago in California and I was the same age as MM is now.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> They are still a duke and a duchess of the UK... H is still in line to the throne. They are cashing in on titles given to them by QE. The argument that they are no "longer working members" of the BRF is not enough. The BRF needs to act and fix this ridiculous situation for the people in the UK and in the US imo.


Totally agree with you, they are no longer, in my eyes Duke and Duchess of a part of my country. Those titles must be taken off them.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Chanbal said:


> I saw this figure in Samantha's book, but it should be relatively accurate. She when to private schools all the way from preschool to college. She started at "The Little Red School House", a school attended by many celebrity's kids in LA, and ended at Northwestern University, a costly private college in Chicago. Extracurricular activities.... it all adds up!



Yes, I guess if you start at the beginning.  I looked and Immaculate Heart is under 20K a year for High School, Little Red Schoolhouse is 22K; Northwestern is about 75K basic per year if you live in a dorm. So up to college even using these 22K numbers its just under 300K for up to grade 12, plus another 300K for college (in 2021 numbers)  Wow, the duchess racked up a LOT of extras!!  

Why did I do all this hard work/math?  I am ON HOLD listening to musak !!  
Why oh why cannot I be a duchess and pay someone to do all my adulting for me?? why???? 



sdkitty said:


> very old school when you think about it....didn't girls in the 50's go to college to find a husband?



They were doing in in the 70s too...


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> This is great ! Such a deep metaphor for how we communicate anymore, from tumblr
> 
> and yes the snow is so deep here the dogs won’t go out , this is an issue of galactic proportions
> View attachment 4991602


Hope you are safely tucked inside,  hunkered down and most importantly, feeling better! 
Great post, thanks!


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes, I guess if you start at the beginning.  I looked and Immaculate Heart is under 20K a year for High School, Little Red Schoolhouse is 22K; Northwestern is about 75K basic per year if you live in a dorm. So up to college even using these 22K numbers its just under 300K for up to grade 12, plus another 300K for college (in 2021 numbers)  Wow, the duchess racked up a LOT of extras!!
> 
> Why did I do all this hard work/math?  I am ON HOLD listening to musak !!
> Why oh why cannot I be a duchess and pay someone to do all my adulting for me?? why????
> 
> 
> 
> They were doing in in the 70s too...


Yes absolutely, 1m makes sense if you count from the beginning, I was thinking the number applied only to the four college years ....  my bad 

“pay someone to do all my adulting “ ROTFL , thank you for that ...


----------



## marietouchet

TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.


I am thinking of the mess involved in setting up that shot for a REMOTE photographer ... is that a new thing in the year of ZOOM ? A honest question ...

Posed shots like that don’t happen without serious numbers of flunkies to hold shoes, arrange clothes, check lighting, deploy bug spray, take remote instruction to move camera .. remote coordination, iron the Carolina Herrera dress ... wow

ps that shot was organized like military maneuvers, totally same styling league as work by Grace Coddington


----------



## TimeToShop

marietouchet said:


> I am thinking of the mess involved in setting up that shot for a REMOTE photographer ... is that a new thing in the year of ZOOM ? A honest question ...
> 
> Posed shots like that don’t happen without serious numbers of flunkies to hold shoes, arrange clothes, check lighting, deploy bug spray, take remote instruction to move camera .. remote coordination ... wow




It sounds like so much work to do it that way. Maybe that’s why his feet are filthy, he was running back and forth to adjust the iPad.


----------



## TimeToShop

Chanbal said:


> Welcome to this fun thread. All your points are good and possible imo.



Thank you. I look forward to chiming in with my 2 cents.


----------



## TimeToShop

csshopper said:


> Welcome! Hope you come along with us.
> 
> I had never thought about the cultural implications of feet, let alone them being dirty.
> 
> And your observation about a surrogate being able to stay with them is spot on! Again, hadn't thought about that.



Thank you. I appreciate the warm welcome!


----------



## Aimee3

TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.





TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.



Ah but those are “Royal” feet and don’t need to follow rules and regulations most of us would.  The usual do as I say, not as I do etc


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Right there with ya.
> I will stop when the BRF removes titles and money from the grifters _or they willingly surrender the titles_. Also, when *private *actually means private - they say they want privacy, then post the most intimate of details.
> 
> The world does not need more charlatans, more grifters, more false flags.  When the media and the complainers face the facts about these two entitled liars, then ok, I will stand down.
> 
> What kind of 40 yr old couple stages a pregnancy announcement?  Perhaps desperate, attention-a$$holes?


.. well, and since they are in the US now and the trend seems to be to have a "Gender-reveal" party, I wonder if they will have one with fireworks, etc.?? -- thereby setting up a massive fire??  Meghan should know better of course, but Harry? .. nope!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.


Welcome and great post too. 

Definitely YES to #3. Do you all remember the commotion about her wearing a fake bump during her previous pregnancy? Remember the pictures when her baby bump kept shifting position and almost slid down to her thighs?


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes, I guess if you start at the beginning.  I looked and Immaculate Heart is under 20K a year for High School, Little Red Schoolhouse is 22K; Northwestern is about 75K basic per year if you live in a dorm. So up to college even using these 22K numbers its just under 300K for up to grade 12, plus another 300K for college (in 2021 numbers)  Wow, the duchess racked up a LOT of extras!!
> 
> Why did I do all this hard work/math?  I am ON HOLD listening to musak !!
> Why oh why cannot I be a duchess and pay someone to do all my adulting for me?? why????
> 
> 
> 
> They were doing in in the 70s too...


When one adds several other fees in addition to tuition, books, trips, internships... (fashion?)...  Most private schools in the US expect annual donations. The education of a kid can get pretty expensive. Her siblings went the public education route, one of them used to babysit MM, and the duchess didn't even care to mail a wedding invitation. Wow!


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> They will implant multiple embryos hoping for at least one attachment, that’s standard procedure for IVF. It’s possible more than one could attach, resulting in twins/triplets. They can favor one gender over another. *Wouldn’t surprise me if it was via IVF she requested female and they name the baby Diana.*



I don't think Meghan would request a girl. The last thing a narcissist wants is competition for attention/affection, particularly from their own offspring. A cute little moppet could easily become Daddy's girl and vie for Harry's heart. That cannot be allowed to happen! No, boys are easier. If she had any say in it I bet she would choose a boy. It would be following her Diana game plan. Two boys, no more no less.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

bellecate said:


> Of course she has, after all privacy is soooooo important to her.
> View attachment 4991478


*SHAME on Oprah* if, in fact, she is doing this .. yet another reason for me to really dislike Oprah.


----------



## TimeToShop

Maggie Muggins said:


> Welcome and great post too.
> 
> Definitely YES to #3. Do you all remember the commotion about her wearing a fake bump during her previous pregnancy? Remember the pictures when her baby bump kept shifting position and almost slid down to her thighs?



Thank you.

Yes. It was comically annoying. You’d think she could afford the best fake bump apparatus out there.

It will be interesting to see if she parades around town with her hands all over her belly or lays low so she doesn’t have to bother with it.

If she is truly pregnant I wish her a healthy one. I just have trouble believing that she may be. She’s no spring chicken and the body has a harder time bouncing back. Yes I’m old enough to be her mother so I’m not picking on her. She just seems too vain and unmaternal to go through a pregnancy. Unless that’s the only way she can secure that future divorce $$$$.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> March 7, mark your calendar! Or don’t!


Oh man .. they have to *RUIN *my birthday?!?!?!  If, in fact, this is going to be "_no holds barred_" .. I guess they truly don't care about what they say about the BRF, but .. what will the Queen and Charles think?  It's time to take the titles away and Chuckie? .. stop giving your bratty bonehead $$$$ - basta cosi!


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> Welcome and great post too.
> 
> Definitely YES to #3. Do you all remember the commotion about her wearing a fake bump during her previous pregnancy? Remember the pictures when her baby bump kept shifting position and almost slid down to her thighs?


----------



## TimeToShop

CeeJay said:


> Oh man .. they have to *RUIN *my birthday?!?!?!  If, in fact, this is going to be "_no holds barred_" .. I guess they truly don't care about what they say about the BRF, but .. what will the Queen and Charles think?  It's time to take the titles away and Chuckie? .. stop giving your bratty bonehead $$$$ - basta cosi!



Don’t you wish you could do the interview if it’s truly “no holds barred”?

Oy the questions you could ask...what really happened in the sorority? How many husbands have you had? How could you treat your father so poorly? What was with the ill fitting wedding dress? What was with that green monstrosity? Were you/are you really pregnant? What was the deal with Archie’s birth? What happened at Inskip’s wedding? So many things!


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the BRF was informed about baby #2 10 minutes before to the news release (like they did with megxit).


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just threw up a little.


I vomited up my whole lunch.


----------



## purseinsanity

Monoi said:


> This is a lot of press for people that want privacy. The Diana reference turned me off, *why cant they be original and stop trying so hard.*


Because they simply don't know how.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the BRF was informed about baby #2 10 minutes before to the news release (like they did with megxit).
> 
> View attachment 4991817


Anything from William and Kate?  Because you know, if they don't, they're such MEANIES!!


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> Hi - long time reader - first time poster. I have a few observations about their announcement.
> 
> 1. In some religions/cultures it’s offensive to show the soles of your feet. You would think someone would have pointed that out to them. Maybe she missed that day in her International Studies program.
> 
> 2. I know every woman’s body shows pregnancy in different ways. However her boobs look pretty small for as far along as she seems to be. I know mine were large with my second child and then just deflated, but that’s a different thread.
> 
> 3. Do you think they took the picture remotely so no one could tell it’s a fake bump? They have enough rooms for a surrogate to live with them.


Her belly looks enormous to me, especially given that at the Remembrance Day "event" at the cemetery, she wasn't showing at all and were milking their miscarriage.  People thin and in shape like MM usually don't explode this quickly even with a second pregnancy, unless she has rectal diastasis or ...


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I am thinking of the mess involved in setting up that shot for a REMOTE photographer ... is that a new thing in the year of ZOOM ? A honest question ...
> 
> Posed shots like that don’t happen without serious numbers of flunkies to hold shoes, arrange clothes, check lighting, deploy bug spray, take remote instruction to move camera .. remote coordination ... wow


I find it humorous that they try to make this photo look like an impromptu love fest in a garden (a la Hindi movie, LOL) where the picture was taken at a spontaneous moment from a drone when you know darn well it was staged down to the last little detail.


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> Thank you. I look forward to chiming in with my 2 cents.


Where have you been this whole time!!?  Welcome!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Welcome and great post too.
> 
> Definitely YES to #3. Do you all remember the commotion about her wearing a fake bump during her previous pregnancy? Remember the pictures when her baby bump kept shifting position and almost slid down to her thighs?


Stop being so mean!  Did you ever think of how hurtful it was to carry her belly at mid thigh?  Did you ever think to ask her if she was okay?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I don't think Meghan would request a girl. The last thing a narcissist wants is competition for attention/affection, particularly from their own offspring. A cute little moppet could easily become Daddy's girl and vie for Harry's heart. That cannot be allowed to happen! No, boys are easier. If she had any say in it I bet she would choose a boy. It would be following her Diana game plan. Two boys, no more no less.


Spot on!!


----------



## CeeJay

TimeToShop said:


> Don’t you wish you could do the interview if it’s truly “no holds barred”?
> 
> Oy the questions you could ask...what really happened in the sorority? How many husbands have you had? How could you treat your father so poorly? What was with the ill fitting wedding dress? What was with that green monstrosity? Were you/are you really pregnant? What was the deal with Archie’s birth? What happened at Inskip’s wedding? So many things!


*HA* - I would be the *LAST* person in the world that they would want to be interviewed by!!?!?!?!?!   Remember, I know things about her from her High School days, and the comments from that time are not favorable either!  

I would relish the "_no holds barred_" rule .. because when tasked to ask the 'tough' questions, I *DO NOT* hold back one bit!  Harry would likely be like a former boss of mine who would move into the corner of the room and then start twitching!  She always called me 'argumentative' - uh, NO .. there were times when I needed to know more about the Client, the Project, the 'intent' .. she was in the WRONG position and should have never been put into a Professional Services Manager role (_the infamous "if you can't stand the heat in the kitchen .." always came to mind with her_)!!  

Meanwhile, Meghan wouldn't be able to pull her word-salad sh!t on me either; I'm well-versed in dealing with people like that (_thank you Orit Gadiesh - Chairman of Bain & Company_).  On a particular project for a very well-known International Financial Services company, I had a Project colleague who would use that BS in meetings with Senior Management.  He was a Divisional Comptroller, so it was imperative that we all knew the financials.  Well, you see .. and as we have seen, people like Meghan tell lies like flies on sh!t .. BUT .. they oftentimes forget the lies that they have told.  Well, with this guy .. I would nail his a$$ at every meeting .. the date, time, meeting content, emails, etc. -- and that would shut him down!  He actually "attempted" to have me removed from all the meetings that he attended; uh - NOPE, Senior Management would purposely send me the meeting invite because they knew that *I would GET THE TRUTH*!  

Unfortunately, we all know that Oprah is not going to ask any "hard" questions.  She will do her pathetic fawning over them and, of course, they will be playing the "SUPER VICTIM" card(s).  No way am I going to watch this program; it would make me physically ill.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Her belly looks enormous to me, especially given that at the Remembrance Day "event" at the cemetery, she wasn't showing at all and were milking their miscarriage.  People thin and in shape like MM usually don't explode this quickly even with a second pregnancy, unless she has rectal diastasis or ...


When did Meghan (supposedly) have the miscarriage?  I thought it was November-2020, so for her to be this far along? .. just doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The reason why Harry is not holding a book like Hugh is because the photographer attempted to give a touch of reality to the photo. I wonder if the photographer considered giving him a playstation or a xbox controller to hold.



Or a beer.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> When did Meghan (supposedly) have the miscarriage?  I thought it was November-2020, so for her to be this far along? .. just doesn't make sense to me.


I believe it was July.  I don't believe it was a true miscarriage.  More like a failed embryo implantation and she got her period.  She looks about 5 months to me or at least the pillow does *snark*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Stop being so mean!  Did you ever think of how hurtful it was to carry her belly at mid thigh?  *Did you ever think to ask her if she was okay*?


Nah, not really... I was too busy laughing my head off... but now that you mention it, I could send her an email saying I'm sorry and ask her if she's okay... Nah, scratch that, it's still too funny.


----------



## Chanbal

More details on the upcoming interview with Oprah. Milking Diana continues...  




The Palace also suggested the Queen was not informed about the interview before it was announced.

A statement read: “The Duke and Duchess are no longer working members of the Royal Family and therefore any decisions they take with regard to media commitments are matters for them.

“As non-working members of the Royal Family they are under no obligation to inform the Royal Household of such plans.”

US broadcaster CBS has said the interview will be conducted in two parts, with Meghan going solo, before being joined by her husband.

The Duchess will open up on topics including "stepping into life as a royal, marriage, motherhood...to how she is handling life under intense public pressure".

Harry will then join the interview to discuss their future plans and life in the US.

The show will be called Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special – and the broadcaster says it will be a “wide-ranging interview”.

In a statement, CBS said: "Winfrey will speak with Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, in a wide-ranging interview, covering everything from stepping into life as a royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure.

"Later, the two are joined by Prince Harry as they speak about their move to the United States and their future hopes and dreams for their expanding family."

Meghan and Harry’s discussion with Oprah is set to draw comparisons to Princess Diana’s BBC panorama interview in 1995, which sent shockwaves around the world.

Divisions within the royal household are expected rehashed – such as the breakdown of Harry’s relationship with his older brother Prince William.


Interview of Ginge & Cringe


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> More details on the upcoming interview with Oprah. Milking Diana continues...
> 
> View attachment 4991947
> 
> 
> The Palace also suggested the Queen was not informed about the interview before it was announced.
> 
> A statement read: “The Duke and Duchess are no longer working members of the Royal Family and therefore any decisions they take with regard to media commitments are matters for them.
> 
> “As non-working members of the Royal Family they are under no obligation to inform the Royal Household of such plans.”
> 
> US broadcaster CBS has said the interview will be conducted in two parts, with Meghan going solo, before being joined by her husband.
> 
> The Duchess will open up on topics including "stepping into life as a royal, marriage, motherhood...to how she is handling life under intense public pressure".
> 
> Harry will then join the interview to discuss their future plans and life in the US.
> 
> The show will be called Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special – and the broadcaster says it will be a “wide-ranging interview”.
> 
> In a statement, CBS said: "Winfrey will speak with Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, in a wide-ranging interview, covering everything from stepping into life as a royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure.
> 
> "Later, the two are joined by Prince Harry as they speak about their move to the United States and their future hopes and dreams for their expanding family."
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s discussion with Oprah is set to draw comparisons to Princess Diana’s BBC panorama interview in 1995, which sent shockwaves around the world.
> 
> Divisions within the royal household are expected rehashed – such as the breakdown of Harry’s relationship with his older brother Prince William.
> 
> 
> Interview of Ginge & Cringe
> View attachment 4991946


Why would they start informing the Queen about anything now?  If they are non working members, then strip them of their titles!  They can be Prince and Princess Henry and that's it!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I believe it was July.  I don't believe it was a true miscarriage.  *More like a failed embryo implantation* and she got her period.  She looks about 5 months to me or at least the pillow does *snark*



Yes, the above makes total sense.

It looks like BBC announced that baby #2 is due in September.


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan and Harry 'overshadow' Eugenie for second time
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have overshadowed Princess Eugenie for the second time with their announcement that the Duchess of Sussex is pregnant, according to royal watchers.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Yes, the above makes total sense.
> 
> It looks like BBC announced that baby #2 is due in September.
> View attachment 4991970


LOLOL!  She's due in September??  As in 7 months from now?  And she's showing THAT much while lying down?  MM is a magician!


----------



## bag-mania

For your viewing pleasure,  here is Oprah’s BFF Gayle King’s CBS news segment about the birth announcement. So help me, Meghan and Harry are saying it is a “happy coincidence” that the announcement was made on Valentine’s Day, the same day that Diana made her announcement. They obviously  believe people are really stupid.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Anything from William and Kate?  Because you know, if they don't, they're such MEANIES!!


I guess they're just such MEANIES.


----------



## justwatchin

bellecate said:


> View attachment 4991753
> View attachment 4991754


Well that explains the constant belly cradling


----------



## justwatchin

chicinthecity777 said:


> Now we know why they kept the "pregnancy" so secretive, they were planning this big announcement on Valentine's day, apparently just like Diana did years ago. For a proud WOC, activist and feminist, she sure tries very hard to emulate the life of a very privileged white woman! Why is that?
> 
> Harry said last year that it was not very eco-friendly to have more kids and they were happy with what they had, what changed?


He must have said that when she wasn’t around to control the conversation. I think most of us could have guessed she was going to get a second child to increase her future revenue.
I’m also predicting that despite their constant “desire for privacy”  there will be a PEOPLE magazine cover....for the right amount of money


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Why would they start informing the Queen about anything now?  If they are non working members, then strip them of their titles! * They can be Prince and Princess Henry and that's it!*


Meghan would probably like that, knowing that the media would call her Princess Meghan even though it is incorrect. Instead, I'd prefer something like Lady or Countess (City, Town, County, etc.) and without the HRH.

ET fix last sentence


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL!  She's due in September??  As in 7 months from now?  And she's showing THAT much while lying down?  MM is a magician!


Well, the poster above brought up the possibility of an elephant. I was thinking about the possibility of carrying triplets, so they would beat W&K.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> Her belly looks enormous to me, especially given that at the Remembrance Day "event" at the cemetery, she wasn't showing at all and were milking their miscarriage.  People thin and in shape like MM usually don't explode this quickly even with a second pregnancy, unless she has rectal diastasis or ...


Ha ha, the smaller pillow bump was in the wash so she had to use this one!


----------



## TimeToShop

purseinsanity said:


> Her belly looks enormous to me, especially given that at the Remembrance Day "event" at the cemetery, she wasn't showing at all and were milking their miscarriage.  People thin and in shape like MM usually don't explode this quickly even with a second pregnancy, unless she has rectal diastasis or ...



It does look suspiciously large. She says she had her miscarriage in July. I’ve had 2. After both my doctor told me to take 3 months to heal body and soul before trying again. You’d think she be told something similar. That would put her not too far along. So, yes - it seems rather large. Maybe it is multiples and she’s just waiting to drop that bit of news.

Also, if you’re that big are you really lying on your back on the ground?


----------



## gelbergirl

Archie is one day going to be sitting with a therapist and realize HE'S been Markle'ed


----------



## TimeToShop

bellecate said:


> View attachment 4991753
> View attachment 4991754



I love this picture. She looks like, “Oh cr*p. I just have to make it to the car.”  He looks like, “Wait, wtf is that? Is she having the baby now?”


----------



## TimeToShop

purseinsanity said:


> Where have you been this whole time!!?  Welcome!



Thank you. I tend to be shy until something sets me off. In this case it was that ridiculous hippie dippy announcement. No disrespect to hippies.


----------



## TimeToShop

CeeJay said:


> *HA* - I would be the *LAST* person in the world that they would want to be interviewed by!!?!?!?!?!   Remember, I know things about her from her High School days, and the comments from that time are not favorable either!
> 
> I would relish the "_no holds barred_" rule .. because when tasked to ask the 'tough' questions, I *DO NOT* hold back one bit!  Harry would likely be like a former boss of mine who would move into the corner of the room and then start twitching!  She always called me 'argumentative' - uh, NO .. there were times when I needed to know more about the Client, the Project, the 'intent' .. she was in the WRONG position and should have never been put into a Professional Services Manager role (_the infamous "if you can't stand the heat in the kitchen .." always came to mind with her_)!!
> 
> Meanwhile, Meghan wouldn't be able to pull her word-salad sh!t on me either; I'm well-versed in dealing with people like that (_thank you Orit Gadiesh - Chairman of Bain & Company_).  On a particular project for a very well-known International Financial Services company, I had a Project colleague who would use that BS in meetings with Senior Management.  He was a Divisional Comptroller, so it was imperative that we all knew the financials.  Well, you see .. and as we have seen, people like Meghan tell lies like flies on sh!t .. BUT .. they oftentimes forget the lies that they have told.  Well, with this guy .. I would nail his a$$ at every meeting .. the date, time, meeting content, emails, etc. -- and that would shut him down!  He actually "attempted" to have me removed from all the meetings that he attended; uh - NOPE, Senior Management would purposely send me the meeting invite because they knew that *I would GET THE TRUTH*!
> 
> Unfortunately, we all know that Oprah is not going to ask any "hard" questions.  She will do her pathetic fawning over them and, of course, they will be playing the "SUPER VICTIM" card(s).  No way am I going to watch this program; it would make me physically ill.



Hee hee. That’s why I thought you would be great at it. You would pull no punches.

Sadly it’ll no doubt be a puff, woe is me, piece.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Ha ha, the smaller pillow bump was in the wash so she had to use this one!


The pregnancy bumps are sold on Amazon by size. I wonder if some people buy only the bigger sizes to save money.


----------



## marietouchet

It is not yet throwback Thursday ... but I can’t help myself and pass up a Rainbow colored graphic that speaks volumes


Royal Wedding seating plan reveals Meghan Markle's celeb pals on one side and Prince Harry's aristocrat family on the other










						Wedding seating plan shows aristocrats on Harry's side and stars on Meghan's
					

THE Royal Wedding seating plan sheds a revealing light on the very different backgrounds of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. It shows Harry’s side crammed with aristocracy, while Meghan’s guests inc…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> Hee hee. That’s why I thought you would be great at it. You would pull no punches.
> 
> Sadly it’ll no doubt be a puff, woe is me, piece.


Too bad it won't be Barbara Walters.  She could've asked MM what kind of tree she'd be.  Although maybe she already answered that by staging their pregnancy pose was in front of _that_ tree.  That tree is MM.


----------



## bag-mania

The dress she is wearing while lying in the grass is a custom-made Carolina Herrera. The reason I know this is because no less than 10 publications felt this earthshaking news was worthy of writing an article about.  Apparently this dress has “special meaning” because she had it made when she was pregnant with Archie. It’s supposedly a tribute to Archie because she decided to wear it again.


----------



## rose60610

I fear we're in for a play by play every step of the way of her pregnancy, pillow or otherwise. And/or they will do a Netflix doc on it, starting when she first found out and how hard she worked to keep it secret until Valentine's, then every detail thereafter. You know, privacy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> The dress she is wearing while lying in the grass in is a custom-made Carolina Herrera. The reason I know this is because no less than 10 publications felt this earthshaking news was worthy of writing an article about.  Apparently this dress has “special meaning” because she had it made when she was pregnant with Archie. It’s supposedly a tribute to Archie because she decided to wear it again.


@bag-mania  I love your posts so please don't take this personally, but I think this news item is puke-inducing and I wish the moderators would add a puke icon to the LIKE BUTTON.


----------



## rose60610

That's a great puke icon! I'll second your motion to add a puke icon.


----------



## Chloe302225

I think they need to be careful with this interview, it will be airing during a pandemic. If they go out there and become the band leader of the world's largest small violin orchestra that will not go over well when most of the world is suffering so much.


----------



## rose60610

Chloe302225 said:


> I think they need to be careful with this interview, it will be airing during a pandemic. If they go out there and become the band leader if the world's largest small violin orchestra than will not go over well when most of the world is suffering so much.



I'll bet some will turn the interview into a drinking game, down a shot for every mention of Diana. Surefire way to get toasted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> @bag-mania  I love your posts so please don't take this personally, but I think this news item is puke-inducing and I wish the moderators would add a puke icon to the LIKE BUTTON.
> View attachment 4992113



Isn’t Mr. About-to-Hurl emoji close enough?


----------



## gracekelly

Color me incredulous that these two are worthy of a TV interview.  They are not.  One would think that he was his Uncle  David who walked away from being King and an actual throne.  All these two walked away from was opening a dairy in West Anglia  and living in former servants' quarters that looked like a renovated post office.  And that is precisely why she wanted out. My answer to that is that she should have thought about it before putting the ring on her finger.  Wouldn't it be cool if Oprah asked her that exact question.  Love to hear the answer. I guess if you pay the PR people enough money, they can shove you into the media to whine at how unfair life is.  We will be treated to every cramp and sanitary napkin that she used during her "miscarriage."  I don't know whether to order a case of popcorn or tissues.


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


> I think they need to be careful with this interview, it will be airing during a pandemic. If they go out there and become the band leader of the world's largest small violin orchestra that will not go over well when most of the world is suffering so much.


It would be extremely helpful if the number of bathrooms was mentioned repeatedly and the cost of the property.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t Mr. About-to-Hurl emoji close enough?


Oh he's gorgeous and self-evident, but I would like him  or a similar icon to join "LIKE, LOVE, Haha, Wow, Sad, Angry" on the LIKE BUTTON because some news items "Make us puke a little in our mouths."


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The dress she is wearing while lying in the grass is a custom-made Carolina Herrera. The reason I know this is because no less than 10 publications felt this earthshaking news was worthy of writing an article about.  Apparently this dress has “special meaning” because she had it made when she was pregnant with Archie. It’s supposedly a tribute to Archie because she decided to wear it again.



Does anyone recall her wearing this dress before?  I don't.  Wes Gordon, the creative director of Carolina H.....never heard of him.  I never saw his clothing at Saks.  This guy is a sap who was word saladed into a merch agreement and/or free clothing.  He'll learn.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> I'll bet some will turn the interview into a drinking game, down a shot for every mention of Diana. Surefire way to get toasted.


That is an AWESOME idea, but the thought of watching a whole interview with these two idiots is already giving me a hangover.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Color me incredulous that these two are worthy of a TV interview.  They are not.  One would think that he was his Uncle  David who walked away from being King and an actual throne.  *All these two walked away from was opening a dairy in West Anglia*  and living in former servants' quarters that looked like a renovated post office.  And that is precisely why she wanted out. My answer to that is that she should have thought about it before putting the ring on her finger.  Wouldn't it be cool if Oprah asked her that exact question.  Love to hear the answer. I guess if you pay the PR people enough money, they can shove you into the media to whine at how unfair life is.  We will be treated to every cramp and sanitary napkin that she used during her "miscarriage."  I don't know whether to order a case of popcorn or tissues.


LOL!

I'm catching up on The Crown and it's interesting how they portray Margaret as the number two who wanted to be Queen, thought she'd be better at it, and was always resentful and jealous of her sister.  History repeats itself.  I guess Andrew found dubious means in which to entertain himself, since Charles still isn't King and likely won't be for too long.  Harry is acting just as spoiled and petulant as Margaret and having temper tantrums to keep attention on himself and his fame hungry wife.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!
> 
> I'm catching up on The Crown and it's interesting how they portray Margaret as the number two who wanted to be Queen, thought she'd be better at it, and was always resentful and jealous of her sister.  History repeats itself.  I guess Andrew found dubious means in which to entertain himself, since Charles still isn't King and likely won't be for too long.  Harry is acting just as spoiled and petulant as Margaret and having temper tantrums to keep attention on himself and his fame hungry wife.


The other sad thing about Margaret, which would have made her later life better, was that she was not allowed to pursue the art classes that she wanted to take.  She was never encouraged to further her education in any way.  Her frustration devolved into booze and bad choices later in life which was unfortunate, however, she did have very nice and successful children.


----------



## Chloe302225

gracekelly said:


> Does anyone recall her wearing this dress before?  I don't.  Wes Gordon, the creative director of Carolina H.....never heard of him.  I never saw his clothing at Saks.  This guy is a sap who was word saladed into a merch agreement and/or free clothing.  He'll learn.



Wes has actually been doing a great job at CH these past few years and before that he has/has his own brand that did/does sell at Saks.


----------



## Chanbal

The drama continues... They are set to lose the royal patronages, and the royal titles???  

*Royal sources say there is now 'no way back to official duties' for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as the couple agree to 90-minute tell-all Oprah TV special*
Harry and Meghan are set to lose all their remaining royal patronages, the Daily Mail can reveal today.

The revelation follows an announcement that the couple have recorded a 'tell-all' TV special with Oprah Winfrey.

It is understood the Queen is to ask them to relinquish their links with any organisations passed down through the Royal Family.

Meghan would have to step down as patron of the National Theatre, unless she can negotiate another position with them. When she was handed the role in 2019, it was seen as a major gesture of support and affection because the Queen had been patron of the London institution for 45 years.

One grey area is expected to be the couple's links with the Commonwealth, but sources suggested that these are likely to go as well.

It was confirmed last night that Meghan, 39, had agreed to a 'wide-ranging' interview with Miss Winfrey, who is one of the most powerful women in US showbusiness. It is believed the programme has already been recorded.

The two women are friends and near neighbours in California, with Miss Winfrey attending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding in 2018 and plugging a range of vegan lattes that Meghan has helped finance.

One source described the interview as 'one of the most inevitable and, sadly, predictable consequences' of the 'Megxit' saga.

Harry will also feature in the 90-minute show. It will air next month on CBS and the couple will discuss their move to the United States. It will be the first time the pair have spoken publicly about their bombshell decision to leave Britain and step down from their working roles in the Royal Family.

A royal source said that as the couple were no longer working royals, any decisions taken with regard to 'media commitments are matters for them'. They were 'under no obligation' to inform the Royal Household of their plans. The interview was announced by CBS in a press release.

While there was no angry reaction from the palace – it has taken great pains not to get into a public slanging match with the Sussexes – the coldness of the response was evident. The decision to strip the couple of their last remaining royal titles is not being done as a reaction to the interview.

It is being perceived that the televised chat was agreed because the couple could 'see the direction of travel' of future royal roles.

Just days ago friends of the prince signalled his determination to fight in particular for his military titles: Captain General of the Royal Marines, Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Bury St Edmunds, and Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.

But it seems as if that battle, at least, has been lost.

The father of one will be allowed to keep anything that is a private patronage – and he still has several, such the Invictus Games and WellChild. Meghan holds two personal patronages, the Mayhew animal charity and Smart Works.

One source told the Mail that it was hoped that the interview with Miss Winfrey would provide the couple with the chance to 'get whatever it is they want to say off their chests and move on'.

Another added: 'The interview has clearly come about because there is an understanding [with Harry and Meghan] that all remaining formal links with organisations will cease to exist.'

*So much for privacy! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle set to tell all to Oprah in 'wide-ranging' and 'intimate' prime time TV interview that will cover 'everything' from their royal exit to marriage and pregnancy*

The complete article is here!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!
> 
> I'm catching up on The Crown and it's interesting how they portray Margaret as the number two who wanted to be Queen, thought she'd be better at it, and was always resentful and jealous of her sister.  History repeats itself.  I guess Andrew found dubious means in which to entertain himself, since Charles still isn't King and likely won't be for too long.  Harry is acting just as spoiled and petulant as Margaret and having temper tantrums to keep attention on himself and his fame hungry wife.


“The crown always finds its way to the right head,” it's an interesting sentence. Margaret, Andrew or Harry would be awful monarchs.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> I think they need to be careful with this interview, it will be airing during a pandemic. If they go out there and become the band leader of the world's largest small violin orchestra that will not go over well when most of the world is suffering so much.



It looks like the interview has already been recorded. I wonder how much Oprah or CBS paid for that interview.


----------



## kkfiregirl

I thought this comparison of MM to Undine Spragg was pretty accurate, but the writer got a lot of flak for it in the comments. 









						How Can We Read Edith Wharton Today? (Published 2021)
					

Published in 1913, “The Custom of the Country” follows the social rise of Undine Spragg, a fictional character who, in many ways, feels very modern.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Luvbolide

Their announcement photo is ridiculously contrived - it is not even their first kid, much less the first kid born.  The kid, like Archie, is not realistically in line for the throne, so how about  a simple, adult announcement?  Now let's have silence until the baby is born, at which time a photo of baby with Archie would be cute.  No need for a play-by-play until the delivery.  

It will be nice for Archie to have a sibling as he will not know any of his cousins growing up.


----------



## mshermes

There are simply some things that defy explanation, IMO, with her first pregnancy. It must be exhausting to be her and have to plot and plan every single move you make. It takes a certain kind of person to do that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

I live in a part of California served by the major television network stations in San Francisco. During tonight’s broadcast the chirpy presenter was telling us how wonderful it will be to have the ”first Royal California baby.”  As if we were some 
d—- Colony.  Then we learned “one of the most influential women in broadcasting, Oprah“ was going to be doing an in depth interview as a major Special with Meghan and Harry On March 7.

As someone brilliantly posted recently, they are spreading like a bad rash.

i vote for Maggie’s replacement hurl emoji, the little green face we currently have is too refined for them.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Or a woman hiding the watermelon that she brought along for the picnic after the photoshoot?!?



That's quite mean, but I can't stop laughing. 

At this point they are just tragic comedy figures anyway.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> so who does this big announcement with arty picture when they get pregnant?  does anyone else do this?  why is this big news?



I think I may do it.

Impromptu, spontaneous, and titled 'Silhouette by Moonlight'.

It will be on a beach with the shadow of a sailboat behind, the stars and the moon's rays gently outlining my 'miracle', my beloved's hand cast to the fore...

...you won't even detect the light metre and spotlight.

Doesn't _everyone_ announce their pregnancy this way?


----------



## eunaddict

CeeJay said:


> *SHAME on Oprah* if, in fact, she is doing this .. yet another reason for me to really dislike Oprah.



I'm assuming this interview is payment for that coffee beans ad Oprah did ages ago.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Thinking of the Oprah interview...I really feel now is time to leak the nude pics or any other dirt they might have on MM. The BRF's approach of not complaining, not explaining and wanting to take the higher road with these two will backfire oh so much. They will be on national TV making up the most ridiculous lies, and it will damage the BRF massively because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if it's the truth or not. They won't come out and dissect the dreadful pair's nonsense, so they really have no other chance than to be quicker than them.


----------



## eunaddict

And I might lose some money on this, but I'm betting it's twins.

Remember that horrible comment about Will and Kate's kiddos and the whole "TWO, maximum" comment Harry made to tie in with how much his private-jet-setting butt lOvEsSssSSSSsss the environment?

Well, if you have twins....you can match the number of kiddos your older sibling has with none of the blame - can't control the number of babies per pregnancy can you?


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> *PIERS MORGAN *explains the photo and more.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry's intimate baby bump photo proves they don't want privacy, they just want to control the media and use it to promote themselves when it suits them*
> 
> However, accompanying it was a photograph of Meghan lying in Harry's lap under a tree in the Californian sunshine, with her Hobbit-like bare-footed husband grinning broadly as he cradled her bump.
> 
> Like everything they do, this picture had been very carefully choreographed.
> 
> They hired an old friend to capture the 'spontaneous' intimate moment - Misan Harriman, a Nigerian-born British photographer who a few months ago became British Vogue's first black male cover photographer in the magazine's 104-year history.
> 
> He took the black-and-white picture remotely with an iPad from his home in London and told Vogue: 'With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn't need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates. When you see people who have the connection that they have, it's like reading the pages of a book.'
> 
> So true… if your library's stacked with Barbara Cartland swoon-busters!
> 
> The date of the photo's release was very deliberate too: Princess Diana and Prince Charles had also chosen Valentine's Day to reveal they were having Harry, 37 years ago in 1984.
> 
> *But it was the fact this photo was given to everyone in the media, via the Press Association, that raised my eyebrows in disbelief.*
> 
> Ten months ago, Meghan and Harry declared they would now have a 'zero engagement' policy with four British newspapers in one of their many furious tirades against the press whenever they are criticised for doing stuff like preaching about the environment as they use Elton John's private jet like a taxi service.
> 
> In a furious rant, she raged: 'For these outlets, it's a game. For me and so many others, it's real life, real relationships and very real sadness. The damage they have done and continue to do runs deep.'
> 
> I personally think the case should have gone to a trial where Thomas Markle, the father Meghan has disowned, could have had his say on the matter, and we could have also got to the bottom of exactly who may have helped Meghan write the letter, or who she may have revealed its contents to.
> 
> But the judge didn't agree, so Meghan got to have yet another whack at the press.
> 
> Which makes it even more baffling as to why, just a few days later, she would then want an incredibly revealing private photo of her and Harry and their unborn child to appear on the front page of the Mail and the front pages of all the other papers she claims to hate.
> 
> Or rather, it's not baffling at all.
> 
> For this is yet another example of Meghan and Harry's brazen hypocrisy, and further evidence that they don't have any real desire for privacy.
> 
> They just want the right to use the media to promote themselves when it suits them, and trash and ban them when it doesn't.
> 
> In fact, it's quite clear that the pair of them crave attention and publicity like ravenous jackals gorging on the carcass of a freshly slain gazelle.
> 
> Since they quit Britain and royal duty 13 months ago, barely a week has gone by without a new grainy self-promoting Zoom chat, statement or interview being released from their Santa Barbara mansion, or announcements about their latest lucrative multi-million-dollar commercial deals with the likes of Netflix or Spotify, or leaked details of power-broker meetings with top politicians like California's governor Gavin Newsom.
> 
> They know all this publicity is key to their success and bank balance, and they depend on the media they profess to loathe to deliver it.
> 
> In this regard, they're no different to reality TV celebrities like the Kardashians who don't actually do anything for a living other than sell their 'brand' to the highest bidder.
> 
> It's a self-promotional hustle and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have proven to as effective at it as Kim and her sisters.
> 
> *I just find it contemptible that they continue to exploit their royal titles in such a ruthless greedy way without doing any of the hard graft that other royals back home in the UK have to do to earn their keep.*
> 
> As I've said many times, they want to have their royal cake and eat it, and they shouldn't be allowed to trade off their royal connections like this.
> 
> As for privacy, do they even know what it means?
> 
> One of the numerous reasons they attracted criticism in the UK before quitting was their weird refusal to share details of their son Archie's birth with the British public who'd just paid millions for the refurbishment of their new home.
> 
> They briefed that this was to safeguard his privacy.
> 
> I'm thrilled for Meghan and Harry that they're having another baby.
> 
> But not as thrilled as they will be feeling about their very private photo adorning the front page of every paper that they banned for intruding into their privacy.
> 
> As I write this, I know their diehard fans – including many of the most horribly abusive people on social media - will already be screaming 'LEAVE THEM ALONE!' at me.
> 
> But the one thing Meghan and Harry want least is to be left alone.
> 
> *They could have refused to let the papers they despise have their baby bump photo.
> 
> But they wanted it splashed all over their sworn enemy's front pages because it will boost the Sussex brand and earn them even more money.*
> 
> This decision made them look like the perfect expectant parents.
> 
> It also made them look like a right royal pair of shameless hypocrites.
> 
> The complete article on brazen hypocrisy here!



Amen to this!


----------



## Jktgal

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes, I guess if you start at the beginning.  I looked and Immaculate Heart is under 20K a year for High School, Little Red Schoolhouse is 22K; Northwestern is about 75K basic per year if you live in a dorm. So up to college even using these 22K numbers its just under 300K for up to grade 12, plus another 300K for college (in 2021 numbers)



Indeed and I found it so stingy that she made a production of gifting him $2k (it was in one of those interviews with Thomas).


----------



## duna

Aimee3 said:


> They don’t implant multiples any more routinely (at least where I am) because if a lot of the embryos implant, then they may have to abort some of them.  Most women would prefer to not have twins or multiples if they can help it.
> i read somewhere today H & M said it’s a boy.



They don't here either, my son and DIL had a first attempt which didn't work out and after several months they tried again but always with only one embryo at a time.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> very old school when you think about it....didn't girls in the 50's go to college to find a husband?


But but don't ya know she's a feminist???


----------



## chicinthecity777

A TV interview is tacky as hell! Just as Harry's carpool karaoke recording, tacky! How would any serious organisation in the UK such as the army, wants to be associated with this tacky couple?


----------



## Chagall

With a million dollar education and all the opportunities that would have afforded her you would have thought she would have put it to better use. Become a doctor or lawyer or woman’s rights activist. Instead she chooses to act in a third rate TV show and marry a sleezy prince. She didn’t need an education of any kind to do those things. What a waste of her fathers money she has turned out to be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> With a million dollar education and all the opportunities that would have afforded her you would have thought she would have put it to better use. Become a doctor or lawyer or *woman’s rights activist*. Instead she chooses to act in a third rate TV show and marry a sleezy prince. She didn’t need an education of any kind to do those things. What a waste of her fathers money she has turned out to be.



Now let's not be unfair here, she was a woman's rights activist at age 11!


----------



## Grande Latte

mshermes said:


> There are simply some things that defy explanation, IMO, with her first pregnancy. It must be exhausting to be her and have to plot and plan every single move you make. It takes a certain kind of person to do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4992232
> View attachment 4992233
> View attachment 4992235



Yeah, I've seen a lot of photographs like these which is why I really think she used a surrogate. Some photos just defy gravity or are plain weird.....


----------



## drifter

Oh dear friends, I have had so much to catch up on!  I immediately thought of this thread when I saw the pregnancy news.  Would be lovely to have a vitriolic viewing party for MM and JCMH's historic interview with Oprah.  
What do they have against Eugenie, though???  There must be something behind all that VITRIOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

drifter said:


> What do they have against Eugenie, though???  There must be something behind all that VITRIOL



By all accounts, Eugenie and Harry were super close...that's not something Meghan could tolerate. So she swiftly set out to drive a wedge between them, and Harry the spineless eunuch just followed along. Also, I'm sure given the chance she'd do the same to Beatrice, but she was smart enough to keep them out of the loop with her wedding plans and is not pregnant yet.

But also, if it's true they are now lodging at Frogmore (royal sources have denied the claim, though) - I bet you money that was not the Sussexes' generous loan but the Queen redistributing stuff, which probably didn't spark joy.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Daily Star is on a roll!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Daily Star is on a roll!
> View attachment 4992386



I never thought I'd celebrate a member of the yellow press, but here we are haha. Brilliant.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bellecate said:


> View attachment 4991753
> View attachment 4991754


That would explain all the cradling. To make sure it's still in place.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> The pregnancy bumps are sold on Amazon by size. I wonder if some people buy only the bigger sizes to save money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4992083



Makes one ask the question: WHAT is the market for this item?


----------



## rose60610

Excerpt from Chicago Tribune:

“Winfrey will speak with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, in a wide-ranging interview, covering everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work *to how she is handling life under intense public pressure,*” according to CBS. “Later, the two are joined by Prince Harry as they speak about their move to the United States and their future hopes and dreams for their expanding family.”

Intense public pressure? Oh the poor dear! You mean getting almost 200 million in Netflix/Spotify deals and living in a luxurious mansion with 500 bathrooms? (Dabbing my tears)--how does she do it? What a woke feminist hero! Who just happened to marry a white privileged prince. Never mind that. Somebody please contact Kimberly-Clark to ship semi-loads of Kleenex to the interview. I'm sure all the camera, lighting and stage crews will be sobbing uncontrollably hearing about all the suffering Meghan is going through in order to teach us raindrops the true meaning of sacrifice, hard work, and never complaining about her luxurious life motherhood with a staff of maids, nannies and security. Oh the poor thing! Since she values privacy SO MUCH, it must have been HARD to agree to this interview.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> By all accounts, Eugenie and Harry were super close...that's not something Meghan could tolerate. So she swiftly set out to drive a wedge between them, and Harry the spineless eunuch just followed along. Also, I'm sure given the chance she'd do the same to Beatrice, but she was smart enough to keep them out of the loop with her wedding plans and is not pregnant yet.
> 
> But also, if it's true they are now lodging at Frogmore (royal sources have denied the claim, though) - I bet you money that was not the Sussexes' generous loan but the Queen redistributing stuff, which probably didn't spark joy.


Let's not forget the wedding-tiara-gate when MM apparently asked to borrow the same tiara, that Eugenie had already asked for her own wedding, so MM was given a resounding NO. Then, HM told a petulant MM that she will get the tiara that HM chooses to lend her as they were HM's tiaras after all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's not forget the wedding-tiara-gate when MM apparently asked to borrow the same tiara, that Eugenie had already asked for her own wedding, so MM was given a resounding NO. Then, HM told a petulant MM that she will get the tiara that HM chooses to lend her as they were HM's tiaras after all.



Yeah...after Eugenie had already been forced to postpone her wedding so #6 in line could have his first. Did we hear her complain? Were there rumours she kicked up a fuss behind closed doors? No, because for some reason everyone but #6 and his appendix knows their place in the firm and accepts it graciously.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I live in a part of California served by the major television network stations in San Francisco. During tonight’s broadcast the chirpy presenter was telling us how wonderful it will be to have the ”first Royal California baby.”  As if we were some
> d—- Colony.  Then we learned “one of the most influential women in broadcasting, Oprah“ was going to be doing an in depth interview as a major Special with Meghan and Harry On March 7.
> 
> As someone brilliantly posted recently, they are spreading like a bad rash.
> 
> i vote for Maggie’s replacement hurl emoji, the little green face we currently have is too refined for them.



It has been apparent since Megxit that the US media is fully invested in a happy narrative for Harry and Meghan. They came here to escape the oppressive forces of the Royal Family and the mean tabloids and that's all there is to it! Everything about them is rainbows, flowers, and unicorns are far as the press here is concerned and don't expect to hear anything otherwise from them.


----------



## Jktgal

Chagall said:


> With a million dollar education and all the opportunities that would have afforded her you would have thought she would have put it to better use.



She has more in common with Kate Middleton than the average woman anywhere in the world, incl the average woman in USA (much less the average black woman).


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> With a million dollar education and all the opportunities that would have afforded her you would have thought she would have put it to better use. Become a doctor or lawyer or woman’s rights activist. Instead she chooses to act in a third rate TV show and marry a sleezy prince. She didn’t need an education of any kind to do those things. What a waste of her fathers money she has turned out to be.



Except what she truly wanted was worldwide fame and she got it. She needed the expensive education to marry up the way she has. An ordinary actress with a community college education would never have been allowed in Harry's orbit.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> I am thinking of the mess involved in setting up that shot for a REMOTE photographer ... is that a new thing in the year of ZOOM ? A honest question ...
> 
> Posed shots like that don’t happen without serious numbers of flunkies to hold shoes, arrange clothes, check lighting, deploy bug spray, take remote instruction to move camera .. remote coordination, iron the Carolina Herrera dress ... wow
> 
> ps that shot was organized like military maneuvers, totally same styling league as work by Grace Coddington


I forgot to mention a key detail .... the stylist covered  her bunions with the dress, nice touch, good stylist


----------



## Chanbal

Grande Latte said:


> Yeah, I've seen a lot of photographs like these which is why I really think she used a surrogate. Some photos just defy gravity or are plain weird.....


I never bought into the surrogate approach, because it's so fake to use a fake a belly if someone else is having your baby. There is nothing wrong to use a surrogate when mothers can't carry their own babies, and I thought that the BRF wouldn't allow them to fake such approach. However, looking at the picture for baby #2, I'm starting to believe that a fake belly is a real possibility. The size of the belly when lying down looks questionable to me.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I never bought into the surrogate approach, because it's so fake to use a fake a belly if someone else is having your baby. There is nothing wrong to use a surrogate when mothers can't carry their own babies, and I thought that the BRF wouldn't allow them to fake such approach. However, looking at the picture for baby #2, I'm starting to believe that a fake belly is a real possibility. *The size of the belly when lying down looks questionable to me.*


....

....Especially if she's due in September......Unless she's expecting twins or triplets!


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> I live in a part of California served by the major television network stations in San Francisco. During tonight’s broadcast the chirpy presenter was telling us how wonderful it will be to have the ”first Royal California baby.”  As if we were some
> d—- Colony.  Then we learned “one of the most influential women in broadcasting, Oprah“ was going to be doing an in depth interview as a major Special with Meghan and Harry On March 7.
> 
> As someone brilliantly posted recently, they are spreading like a bad rash.
> 
> i vote for Maggie’s replacement hurl emoji, the little green face we currently have is too refined for them.


I know...the worship seems to be continuing.  I saw gayle king gushing about how they were so obviously in love in the B/W photo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It has been apparent *since Megxit that the US media is fully invested in a happy narrative for Harry and Meghan*. They came here to escape the oppressive forces of the Royal Family and the mean tabloids and that's all there is to it! Everything about them is rainbows, flowers, and unicorns are far as the press here is concerned and don't expect to hear anything otherwise from them.


She is paying for that via Sunshine S.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Excerpt from Chicago Tribune:
> 
> “Winfrey will speak with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, in a wide-ranging interview, covering everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work *to how she is handling life under intense public pressure,*” according to CBS. “Later, the two are joined by Prince Harry as they speak about their move to the United States and their future hopes and dreams for their expanding family.”
> 
> Intense public pressure? Oh the poor dear! You mean getting almost 200 million in Netflix/Spotify deals and living in a luxurious mansion with 500 bathrooms? (Dabbing my tears)--how does she do it? What a woke feminist hero! Who just happened to marry a white privileged prince. Never mind that. Somebody please contact Kimberly-Clark to ship semi-loads of Kleenex to the interview. I'm sure all the camera, lighting and stage crews will be sobbing uncontrollably hearing about all the suffering Meghan is going through in order to teach us raindrops the true meaning of sacrifice, hard work, and never complaining about her luxurious life motherhood with a staff of maids, nannies and security. Oh the poor thing! Since she values privacy SO MUCH, it must have been HARD to agree to this interview.


seems like they are burning  bridges...if so, then let's go.....the RF should cut them off....no money/no titles


----------



## Chanbal

Breaking news: In contrast to Clooney, Oprah was already an old friend of MM before the wedding. They had met once prior to the occasion.  









						How Oprah met Meghan just ONCE before royal wedding
					

Meghan Markle met Oprah Winfrey only once in Kensington Palace before inviting her to her fairytale royal wedding to Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> It has been apparent since Megxit that the US media is fully invested in a happy narrative for Harry and Meghan. They came here to escape the oppressive forces of the Royal Family and the mean tabloids and that's all there is to it! Everything about them is rainbows, flowers, and unicorns are far as the press here is concerned and don't expect to hear anything otherwise from them.



This kind of favorable coverage for the right (as in correct) thinking people is not new in the US.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> She is paying for that via Sunshine S.



The PR agencies certainly did their part but they don't account for all of it. Sunshine Sachs did not buy Oprah. Sunshine Sachs did not arrange a several month stay for them in one of Tyler Perry's houses. No, the minute racism came into the narrative, they became off limits for any negative reporting here.


----------



## rose60610

Another     thing I read: "Meghan and Harry Break Their Silence in an Interview with Oprah".

Break their silence?  SINCE WHEN?  Meghan never shuts up!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The PR agencies certainly did their part but they don't account for all of it. Sunshine Sachs did not buy Oprah. Sunshine Sachs did not arrange a several month stay for them in one of Tyler Perry's houses. No, the minute racism came into the narrative, they became off limits for any negative reporting here.


The PR agencies make sure that her news stories are continuously being released, but Oprah is the one helping them with the megxit transition and being established in CA. I believe that both SS and Oprah have been critical in helping them to cash in on the royal titles.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The PR agencies make sure that her news stories are continuously being released, but Oprah is the one helping them with the megxit transition and being established in CA. I believe that both SS and Oprah have been critical in helping them to cash in on the royal titles.



Who knows? Oprah might even be helping them with their Netflix contract. She has the respect in the industry and the access to get great material for them to use for their shows.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Who knows? Oprah might even be helping them with their Netflix contract. She has the respect in the industry and the access to get great material for them to use for their shows.


I believe that. The megxit wouldn't have happened so soon without a 'godmother' (madrina) helping them in the US imo.


----------



## CobaltBlu

rose60610 said:


> Another     thing I read: "Meghan and Harry Break Their Silence in an Interview with Oprah".
> 
> Break their silence?  SINCE WHEN?  Meghan never shuts up!



So true, they literally wrote a book, even though they say the had nothing to do with it ...  And she was yammering away with Gloria just a few months ago.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Another     thing I read: "Meghan and Harry Break Their Silence in an Interview with Oprah".
> *
> Break their silence?  SINCE WHEN?  Meghan never shuts up!*


As my father would say, she has oral diarrhea.


----------



## Chagall

duna said:


> ....
> 
> ....Especially if she's due in September......Unless she's expecting twins or triplets!


That is about seven months from now. Then she is only two months pregnant in that photo. No way. Most people hardly show at all at two months, especially when lying down. I’d bet on triplets for sure.


----------



## marietouchet

The Times is not explicit , it suggests the interview will only be shown in the US on 07 March, does not mention an airing in the U.K. hmmmm

it will of course be on YouTube lickety split

table at bottom has interesting synopsis of the failure or success of previous BRF interviews

Harry and Meghan to tell Oprah why they quit royal life





__





						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chagall said:


> That is about seven months from now. Then she is only two months pregnant in that photo. No way. Most people hardly show at all at two months, especially when lying down. I’d bet on triplets for sure.


Most people don't even announce their pregnancy until past 12 weeks mark, that's approx 3 months into. Something doesn't add up!


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> That is about seven months from now. Then she is only two months pregnant in that photo. No way. Most people hardly show at all at two months, especially when lying down. I’d bet on triplets for sure.






chicinthecity777 said:


> Most people don't even announce their pregnancy until past 12 weeks mark, that's approx 3 months into. Something doesn't add up!



We should not trust what is being reported in the press. I can almost guarantee she is farther along than that. Remember her court date was postponed until fall 2021 for "confidential reasons" back in late October. She probably got the court delay due to her pregnancy. That would also mean she was already pregnant again when she wrote her _heartbreaking_ miscarriage article for the _New York Times _in late November. As always with them, things are not as they appear.

I assume it will be a summer baby. Maybe July. That is Diana's birth month after all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Except what she truly wanted was worldwide fame and she got it. She needed the expensive education to marry up the way she has. An ordinary actress with a community college education would never have been allowed in Harry's orbit.


Yes she wanted fame. As far as the Royals are concerned they are not particularly well educated or intelligent IMO. I doubt it was her education that hooked Harry. When it came to TRF influencing JCMH I doubt that he would have listened. Will asked him to ‘slow down’ with her and their relationship never recovered.


----------



## Chanbal

If you have some time to spare, here is 'a not to miss' review of Samantha's book.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> We should not trust what is being reported in the press. I can almost guarantee she is farther along than that. Remember her court date was postponed until fall 2021 for "confidential reasons" back in late October. She probably got the court delay due to her pregnancy. That would also mean she was already pregnant again when she wrote her _heartbreaking_ miscarriage article for the _New York Times _in late November. As always with them, things are not as they appear.
> 
> I assume it will be a summer baby. Maybe July. That is Diana's birth month after all.


She'll probably have a scheduled C section to make sure it's born on Phillip's 100th birthday or on Diana's whatever birthday in July.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> *We should not trust what is being reported in the press. *I can almost guarantee she is farther along than that. Remember her court date was postponed until fall 2021 for "confidential reasons" back in late October. She probably got the court delay due to her pregnancy. That would also mean she was already pregnant again when she wrote her _heartbreaking_ miscarriage article for the _New York Times _in late November. As always with them, things are not as they appear.
> 
> I assume it will be a summer baby. Maybe July. That is Diana's birth month after all.


That's true! By the time the baby is born, nobody would have remembered what was reported on Valentine's day.   
The baby will also be planned to be born on a remarkable day for sure, she's so special, you know!


----------



## rose60610

Right. Meghan lives for fame and would have married any multi-celled organism with lots of fame. She hit the fame jackpot with JCMH. Problem is, her interpretation of "fame" is to attempt to make people feel sorry for her despite being accepted into the BRF of all families. She hits us over the head with all the "Boo hoo, poor ME" crap while suing for privacy every time she turns around. She's so private she tells the world about her supposed miscarriage? And gets her nauseatingly weird pregnancy photo published around the world? Somehow marrying Harry makes her an expert on everything and "friends" with the most high profile people. Nobody in the U.S. has the courage to tell her to STFU for fear of losing their job. And she's taking advantage of that benefit all the way to the bank. So far she's been able to afford being so stupid, smug and annoying. Child #2 was conceived with a job to do--make Mama sympathetic to the ignorance-is-bliss masses. Poor kid. Already the kid isn't "good enough", he/she has to be doctored up with extra padding to promote her bump. Unless the kid weighs 45 pounds at birth, or Meghan is the next Octomom, she had a prop under her dress.


----------



## bag-mania

It will be interesting to see where they are in a year's time. I expect the US press will continue propping them up, particularly if they provide sound bites about various acts of do-goodery they wish to do. Although it gets more difficult if they don't actually start producing something worthy of the newsfeed. Does having another baby buy them a whole year of continued attention and good will? Will Archewell actually give money to a charity this year instead of just talking about what they intend to do some obscure day in the future?


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> She'll probably have a scheduled C section to make sure it's born on Phillip's 100th birthday or on Diana's whatever birthday in July.





chicinthecity777 said:


> That's true! By the time the baby is born, nobody would have remembered what was reported on Valentine's day.
> The baby will also be planned to be born on a remarkable day for sure, she's so special, you know!



Agreed. Let's say she's having twins. Phillip's BD is June 10, Diana's July 1. Any bets if they're a boy and girl the names will be "Phillip" and "Diana"?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Right. Meghan lives for fame and would have married any multi-celled organism with lots of fame. She hit the fame jackpot with JCMH. Problem is, her interpretation of "fame" is to attempt to make people feel sorry for her despite being accepted into the BRF of all families. She hits us over the head with all the "Boo hoo, poor ME" crap while suing for privacy every time she turns around. She's so private she tells the world about her supposed miscarriage? And gets her nauseatingly weird pregnancy photo published around the world? Somehow marrying Harry makes her an expert on everything and "friends" with the most high profile people. Nobody in the U.S. has the courage to tell her to STFU for fear of losing their job. And she's taking advantage of that benefit all the way to the bank. So far she's been able to afford being so stupid, smug and annoying. Child #2 was conceived with a job to do--make Mama sympathetic to the ignorance-is-bliss masses. Poor kid. Already the kid isn't "good enough", he/she has to be doctored up with extra padding to promote her bump. Unless the kid weighs 45 pounds at birth, or Meghan is the next Octomom, she had a prop under her dress.


I am actually in agreement with them on most things.  but as I've said before, I don't need them to tell me what to think, do or vote for.
She hit the jackpot with harry and she is taking advantage of being a WOC at the right time IMO, multiplying her jackpot.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. Let's say she's having twins. Phillip's BD is June 10, Diana's July 1. Any bets if they're a boy and girl the names will be "Phillip" and "Diana"?



I doubt she's a fan of Philip though. He sees right through her bullsh*t and doesn't mince words.


----------



## CeeJay

TimeToShop said:


> Hee hee. That’s why I thought you would be great at it. You would pull no punches.
> 
> Sadly it’ll no doubt be a puff, woe is me, piece.


Yes, too bad I don't live in Montecito because I've had 'run-ins' with various 'reality celebs' when they have misbehaved and you better believe I told them as such!  Of course, they pull the "don't you know who I am" .. HA, like I could care a 'F' about that!!!!  NO - you misbehave and treat people like crap just because you are on the TV .. oh hell NO, you are going to get a tongue-lashing (and since I have a much more extensive vocabulary than most of these folks - I purposely use words that I know that they are not going to understand and they squirm because they are not going to say "what does that mean"??) ... yeah, bring-it-on!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I am actually in agreement with them on most things.  but as I've said before, I don't need them to tell me what to think, do or vote for.



Yeah I mean, their problem is their nauseating personalities and the fact they are the biggest hypocrites the world has ever seen. Nobody would disagree that bullying is wrong or that the environment needs us to step up - though one could argue we are not agreeing with *them* per se as they are also the world's biggest copycats who have not brought anything original to the table, once.




> She hit the jackpot with harry and she is taking advantage of being a WOC at the right time IMO, multiplying her jackpot.



She's the very definition of opportunist.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Yes, too bad I don't live in Montecito because I've had 'run-ins' with various 'reality celebs' when they have misbehaved and you better believe I told them as such!  Of course, they pull the "don't you know who I am" .. HA, like I could care a 'F' about that!!!!  NO - you misbehave and treat people like crap just because you are on the TV .. oh hell NO, you are going to get a tongue-lashing (and since I have a much more extensive vocabulary than most of these folks - I purposely use words that I know that they are not going to understand and they squirm because they are not going to say "what does that mean"??) ... yeah, bring-it-on!



You're my spirit animal. Can't you take a day trip?


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I doubt she's a fan of Philip though. He sees right through her bullsh*t and doesn't mince words.



That is very true.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry ‘upset’ as Queen agrees he and Meghan must lose royal patronages
					

The Duke of Sussex is said to be “upset” after the Queen agreed that he should lose his royal patronages and honorary military appointments.An announcement is expected in the next few weeks confirming that he is to be stripped of a range of official positions, including his cherished role as Captain




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




Harry is ‘upset’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry ‘upset’ as Queen agrees he and Meghan must lose royal patronages
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is said to be “upset” after the Queen agreed that he should lose his royal patronages and honorary military appointments.An announcement is expected in the next few weeks confirming that he is to be stripped of a range of official positions, including his cherished role as Captain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry is ‘upset’



It's probably the very first time in his entire coddled life he has to face consequences for bad behaviour.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's probably the very first time in his entire coddled life he has to face consequences for bad behaviour.



Well, there was that costume party incident. And the drunken bender he went on in Las Vegas probably got him a reprimand. Even this isn't really a consequence since he and Meghan had all but abandoned their patronages. They believed that a couple phone calls and some media placement was good enough to get credit for work they were supposed to be doing. In the meantime all of their focus has been on their personal endeavors.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Well, there was that costume party incident. And the drunken bender he went on in Las Vegas probably got him a reprimand. Even this isn't really a consequence since he and Meghan had all but abandoned their patronages. They believed that a couple phone calls and some media placement was good enough to get credit for work they were supposed to be doing. In the meantime all of their focus has been on their personal endeavors.


Focus is a dangerous word to use with them! One episode of a podcast? A Netflix deal with no word of upcoming programming?


----------



## bisbee

Luvbolide said:


> Their announcement photo is ridiculously contrived - it is not even their first kid, much less the first kid born.  The kid, like Archie, is not realistically in line for the throne, so how about  a simple, adult announcement?  Now let's have silence until the baby is born, at which time a photo of baby with Archie would be cute.  No need for a play-by-play until the delivery.
> 
> It will be nice for Archie to have a sibling as he will not know any of his cousins growing up.





CeeJay said:


> Yes, too bad I don't live in Montecito because I've had 'run-ins' with various 'reality celebs' when they have misbehaved and you better believe I told them as such!  Of course, they pull the "don't you know who I am" .. HA, like I could care a 'F' about that!!!!  NO - you misbehave and treat people like crap just because you are on the TV .. oh hell NO, you are going to get a tongue-lashing (and since I have a much more extensive vocabulary than most of these folks - I purposely use words that I know that they are not going to understand and they squirm because they are not going to say "what does that mean"??) ... yeah, bring-it-on!


Wow...I’m sure the “reality celebs” run in the opposite direction when they see you coming!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Focus is a dangerous word to use with them! One episode of a podcast? A Netflix deal with no word of upcoming programming?



Now I didn't say their focus was ever on WORK, heaven forbid! 

Their main focus has been on getting positive press coverage for themselves placed every day. Then their next focus has been on having another baby, because everybody just loves when famous people have babies.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> I live in a part of California served by the major television network stations in San Francisco. During tonight’s broadcast the chirpy presenter was telling us how wonderful it will be to have the ”first Royal California baby.”  As if we were some
> d—- Colony.  Then we learned “one of the most influential women in broadcasting, Oprah“ was going to be doing an in depth interview as a major Special with Meghan and Harry On March 7.
> 
> As someone brilliantly posted recently, they are spreading like a bad rash.
> 
> i vote for Maggie’s replacement hurl emoji, the little green face we currently have is too refined for them.


*WHAT???* .. *that's effin' ridiculous*!!!!  Good thing it wasn't said in the LA area because I would have, *FOR SURE*, called them out on that .. for cripes sake, do these people not remember the revolutionary war .. to get us (_Americans_) out from underneath the British Monarchy????  Maybe it's just me and the fact that I'm from New England originally, and constantly heard my father talk about his relatives who died in the Revolutionary War .. sheesh!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> If you have some time to spare, here is 'a not to miss' review of Samantha's book.



Believe it or not, I watched this entire thing.  I though she did a great job and it certainly answered many questions for me.  I did get a kick out of learning that Doria took off to spend time in Humboldt Country and the neighbors in Woodland Hills were alarmed at her smoking pot in the back yard. I will say that it sheds more light on Doria and her effect on how  Meghan turned out as an adult.  Interesting to learn that Meg spent more time living with Thomas than Doria.  Also confirms @CeeJay and her reports of bad behavior at the high school plays when things didn't go her way.  Thomas was a professional, and if he promised to do the lighting, then he was going to do it!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *WHAT???* .. *that's effin' ridiculous*!!!!  Good thing it wasn't said in the LA area because I would have, *FOR SURE*, called them out on that .. for cripes sake, do these people not remember the revolutionary war .. to get us (_Americans_) out from underneath the British Monarchy????  Maybe it's just me and the fact that I'm from New England originally, and constantly heard my father talk about his relatives who died in the Revolutionary War .. sheesh!


I can assure  you that if the baby is a girl, they will be calling her Princess.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I can assure  you that if the baby is a girl, they will be calling her Princess.


I think they'll call her Queen


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> With a million dollar education and all the opportunities that would have afforded her you would have thought she would have put it to better use. Become a doctor or lawyer or woman’s rights activist. Instead she chooses to act in a third rate TV show and marry a sleezy prince. She didn’t need an education of any kind to do those things. What a waste of her fathers money she has turned out to be.


She *ALWAYS* wanted to be in show BIZ, that was demonstrated at an early age.  From what I understand, she would go on set to "visit" her father and was impressed with how the stars of the shows were treated (_in other words, fawned over .. personally, I find that sickening_!).  When she was in the play with my friend's son, she pestered his parents (_my friends_) to "_meet someone famous in the music business_" (_since they are in the Music BIZ_).  My friends constantly said 'NO' because a big part of their business is to keep quiet about who they support and work with.  Well, she would get all pissy and the minute the play was over, their son was markled (_and sadly, I guess he started really liking Meghan_).  So, it's the "treatment"? that was special to her??? .. well then, it speaks volumes to the assumption that she must have had re: joining the BRF.  She must have thought that she was going to be treated like a big-time Celebrity, but .. just like the Queen does, there is a lot of civil duties that must be performed.  Yes, I agree .. her father wasted a sh!t-load of $$$ on her!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

@CeeJay Lady C says that when Samantha had a bit part in the TV series Matlock, Meghan went ballistic with jealousy.


----------



## Tootsie17

Chagall said:


> With a million dollar education and all the opportunities that would have afforded her you would have thought she would have put it to better use. Become a doctor or lawyer or woman’s rights activist. Instead she chooses to act in a third rate TV show and marry a sleezy prince. She didn’t need an education of any kind to do those things. What a waste of her fathers money she has turned out to be.





rose60610 said:


> Excerpt from Chicago Tribune:
> 
> “Winfrey will speak with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, in a wide-ranging interview, covering everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work *to how she is handling life under intense public pressure,*” according to CBS. “Later, the two are joined by Prince Harry as they speak about their move to the United States and their future hopes and dreams for their expanding family.”
> 
> Intense public pressure? Oh the poor dear! You mean getting almost 200 million in Netflix/Spotify deals and living in a luxurious mansion with 500 bathrooms? (Dabbing my tears)--how does she do it? What a woke feminist hero! Who just happened to marry a white privileged prince. Never mind that. Somebody please contact Kimberly-Clark to ship semi-loads of Kleenex to the interview. I'm sure all the camera, lighting and stage crews will be sobbing uncontrollably hearing about all the suffering Meghan is going through in order to teach us raindrops the true meaning of sacrifice, hard work, and never complaining about her luxurious life motherhood with a staff of maids, nannies and security. Oh the poor thing! Since she values privacy SO MUCH, it must have been HARD to agree to this interview.


I believe this interview could possibly expose M's narcist behavior, for those that tune in to watch. I bet M feels like she's gotten everything she always wanted.  Her PR team will try to get to her be humble. Yet, due to her ego and her it's all about me, me, me mantra, she won't be able to stop herself from sticking her foot in her mouth, at least once.  She has told so many lies, she can't keep them straight. Any one who has followed H & M's story, and is not a stan, will be able to see through their bs.  What will be interesting is to see if Oprah will fall for her pity party or will ask them both tough questions.  I can't believe Oprah hasn't herself questioned some of their odd behavior or heard about a few of their issues we have discussed here. M, though sly, is not the sharpest tool in the shed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> Any one who has followed H & M's story, and is not a stan, will be able to see through their bs.



Yeah, but I feel most people haven't watched all that closely. I remember an Emmy award winning journalist (!) who is not exactly known for fawning over celebrities on her social media cheering her on for leaving the abusive BRF and making it on her own. When I politely chimed in saying that wasn't exactly the story she was like "Oh really...I'll have to read up on this".


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Right. Meghan lives for fame and would have married any multi-celled organism with lots of fame. She hit the fame jackpot with JCMH. Problem is, her interpretation of "fame" is to attempt to make people feel sorry for her despite being accepted into the BRF of all families. She hits us over the head with all the "Boo hoo, poor ME" crap while suing for privacy every time she turns around. She's so private she tells the world about her supposed miscarriage? And gets her nauseatingly weird pregnancy photo published around the world? Somehow marrying Harry makes her an expert on everything and "friends" with the most high profile people. Nobody in the U.S. has the courage to tell her to STFU for fear of losing their job. And she's taking advantage of that benefit all the way to the bank. So far she's been able to afford being so stupid, smug and annoying. Child #2 was conceived with a job to do--make Mama sympathetic to the ignorance-is-bliss masses. Poor kid. Already the kid isn't "good enough", he/she has to be doctored up with extra padding to promote her bump. Unless the kid weighs 45 pounds at birth, or Meghan is the next Octomom, she had a prop under her dress.


I *DO* .. and I'm not going to lose my job .. because I'm unemployed at the moment!!! Yeah, let her talk to me .. HEE HEE HEE!


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry ‘upset’ as Queen agrees he and Meghan must lose royal patronages
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is said to be “upset” after the Queen agreed that he should lose his royal patronages and honorary military appointments.An announcement is expected in the next few weeks confirming that he is to be stripped of a range of official positions, including his cherished role as Captain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry is ‘upset’


Lol. Harry the man-child is upset.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> @CeeJay Lady C says that when Samantha had a bit part in the TV series Matlock, *Meghan went ballistic with jealousy.*


There's nothing I find more disgusting than people who aren't happy for their own family!

As I get older, I've realized a couple things: 

1. If you constantly compare yourself to other people, you will NEVER be happy
2. If you're always striving to have the most (money, power, position, etc.), you will NEVER be happy because there will ALWAYS be someone who has more (unless you're Bezos or something).
3. Greed is NOT good
4. I really can't stand MM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Now I didn't say their focus was ever on WORK, heaven forbid!
> 
> Their main focus has been on getting positive press coverage for themselves placed every day. Then their next focus has been on having another baby, because everybody just loves when famous people have babies.


You are right, they are exceptionally focused on that!


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chagall said:


> That is about seven months from now. Then she is only two months pregnant in that photo. No way. Most people hardly show at all at two months, especially when lying down. I’d bet on triplets for sure.



I still say you show way earlier in a second pregnancy. That said, she DOES look big for delivering in Sept.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Now I didn't say their focus was ever on WORK, heaven forbid!
> 
> Their main focus has been on getting positive press coverage for themselves placed every day. Then their next focus has been on having another baby, because everybody just loves when famous people have babies.


Work is for commoners, and they are above that. Their main focus is, above all, money, tons of money. The more the merrier. Money is power, buys fame...


----------



## lanasyogamama

No idea how valid this is...









						CBS Vs. Netflix! Oprah's Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Primetime Interview Could Cost The Couple $100 Million: Source
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's big sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey isn't going over well with some at Netflix, the company that paid the former royal couple over $100 million, insiders dish to OK!.




					okmagazine.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> I still say you show way earlier in a second pregnancy. That said, she DOES look big for delivering in Sept.


Yes, most women show sooner in their second pregnancy, but if she's due in September, she may be 2-3 months along at best.  That does NOT look like an early pregnancy.  I don't know WTF she'd doing, but she can't assume we are all idiots with math.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry ‘upset’ as Queen agrees he and Meghan must lose royal patronages
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is said to be “upset” after the Queen agreed that he should lose his royal patronages and honorary military appointments.An announcement is expected in the next few weeks confirming that he is to be stripped of a range of official positions, including his cherished role as Captain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry is ‘upset’


Poor Harry, granny wants to take some toys from him. Granny should 'convince' him to also renounce his titles.


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> *I believe this interview could possibly expose M's narcist behavior*, for those that tune in to watch. I bet M feels like she's gotten everything she always wanted.  Her PR team will try to get to her be humble. Yet, due to her ego and her it's all about me, me, me mantra, she won't be able to stop herself from sticking her foot in her mouth, at least once.  She has told so many lies, she can't keep them straight. Any one who has followed H & M's story, and is not a stan, will be able to see through their bs.  What will be interesting is to see if Oprah will fall for her pity party or will ask them both tough questions.  I can't believe Oprah hasn't herself questioned some of their odd behavior or heard about a few of their issues we have discussed here. M, though sly, is not the sharpest tool in the shed.



I wish that was the case, but it won't be. It isn't going to be a live interview, anything that isn't favorable will be edited out. Oprah has decided to take them under her wing and help them.

Here's how I see the interview:
There won't be any difficult questions for Meghan. There will be plenty of opportunities for her to show big, sad eyes and talk about how unfairly she was treated. Then she will be given a chance to speak triumphantly about winning her court case. She will talk about all the plans they have for Archewell (maybe encourage donations). Then, if there's time, Harry will be allowed to come out for the last 15 minutes to say how delighted he is that he will be a dad again. There will be lots of hand holding and gazing lovingly into each other's eyes. Then Oprah will thank them profusely and wish them all the best. The End.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> The other sad thing about Margaret, which would have made her later life better, was that she was not allowed to pursue the art classes that she wanted to take.  She was never encouraged to further her education in any way.  Her frustration devolved into booze and bad choices later in life which was unfortunate, however, she did have very nice and successful children.


Plus Margaret took drugs and refused to give up smoking even after having part of her lung removed for cancer. A favourite tidbit was that she would stub out her cigarettes in her food at dinner parties.  That, and no one could leave the party, or any event, before her.

Meg must be thrilled she doesn't have to manage that moon bump in front of the cameras and press this time around. I think it's impossible to not have a slip-up, no matter how good the prosthetics are.


----------



## gracekelly

Royal Tea
@UKRoyalTea
·
6h

To put a few pieces together - CBS was invited to the reveal of Archie, James Corden is on CBS, and now this interview is on CBS. Gayle and CBS This Morning will tease the interview all week with clips from it, plus James' Harry/bus Carpool Karaoke. Well played team CBS.


My thoughts:  
CBS has played the long game.  They sent Oprah to meet Meghan prior to the wedding and a last minute wedding invite was the result.  All that has happened recently falls into place.  They will never allow a hard interview as they like to keep the royal connections.  There are many things and interviews coming up in the next few years with the royals and they want to send their real journalists to cover them and get the interviews.  Dissing the family at this point will achieve nothing for CBS.  Editing is everything Meg, you should know that.


----------



## Lounorada

bellecate said:


> Of course she has, after all privacy is soooooo important to her.
> View attachment 4991478





lanasyogamama said:


> March 7, mark your calendar! Or don’t!








You would think an 'intimate conversation' would be... _private_. Not filmed for US television that will be shared all over the world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm watching the Lady CC review video of Samantha's book, and I am at the point where she retells how Samantha a) thought she'd heard Doria in the background when Meghan iced her out before the wedding and b) that Doria had been setting up Meghan since she was a little girl, whatever that means. 

Now if true, still waters run deep seems to have some truth to it. Also I wonder, how did this absent mother suddenly become Meghan's confidant? 

This family dynamic is getting weirder and weirder.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wish that was the case, but it won't be.* It isn't going to be a live interview, anything that isn't favorable will be edited out. Oprah has decided to take them under her wing and help them.*
> 
> Here's how I see the interview:
> There won't be any difficult questions for Meghan. There will be plenty of opportunities for her to show big, sad eyes and talk about how unfairly she was treated. Then she will be given a chance to speak triumphantly about winning her court case. She will talk about all the plans they have for Archewell (maybe encourage donations). Then, if there's time, Harry will be allowed to come out for the last 15 minutes to say how delighted he is that he will be a dad again. There will be lots of hand holding and gazing lovingly into each other's eyes. Then Oprah will thank them profusely and wish them all the best. The End.


Absolutely, this is a meticulously planned interview to help MM&H to get whatever they need, including from the BRF. Some believe that the interview has already been recorded.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm watching the Lady CC review video of Samantha's book, and I am at the point where she retells how Samantha a) thought she'd heard Doria in the background when Meghan iced her out before the wedding and b) that Doria had been setting up Meghan since she was a little girl, whatever that means.
> 
> Now if true, still waters run deep seems to have some truth to it. Also I wonder, how did this absent mother suddenly become Meghan's confidant?
> 
> This family dynamic is getting weirder and weirder.


It is for her to turn on the father who raised her and paid for her education and then stick with the mother who took off at times to do her own thing.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> @CeeJay Lady C says that when Samantha had a bit part in the TV series Matlock, Meghan went ballistic with jealousy.


Quelle surprise .. *NOT*!!!  She is the epitome of a fame-whore!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hear, hear. So Samantha claims that while still in highschool Thomas was doing the light for one of their plays as usual. When Meghan fell out with someone on the play she stormed off and expected Thomas to follow suit. When he refused - probably because he was an adult and not a 40yo woman who never grew out of her teenage temper tantrums - she refused to speak to him for an extended period of time. And you know what, I don't think Samantha is lying. What an awful human being this Meghan is, and I'm just horrified how many people refuse to acknowledge this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It is for her to turn on the father who raised her and paid for her education and then stick with the mother who took off at times to do her own thing.


The father has now very limited resources, he became irrelevant. Also, he seems to be a decent person, so he wouldn't play her twisted game. The mother is still a key piece in that game.


----------



## 1LV

Not long ago I asked when did Doria reappear in Meghan’s life.  The question should have been where in life was Meghan when Doria came back into the picture?  That’s what I’d like to know.


----------



## sdkitty

I may be off on this but I don't think a second baby is as exciting as the first esp since we've seen little of Archie and he isn't exceptionally cute.  Now Will & Kates kids are adorable.  maybe I'm biased but that little girl is the cutest and kate takes such good pics of them.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hear, hear. So Samantha claims that while still in highschool Thomas was doing the light for one of their plays as usual. When Meghan fell out with someone on the play she stormed off and expected Thomas to follow suit. When he refused - probably because he was an adult and not a 40yo woman who never grew out of her teenage temper tantrums - she refused to speak to him for an extended period of time. And you know what, I don't think Samantha is lying. What an awful human being this Meghan is, and I'm just horrified how many people refuse to acknowledge this.


MM demanded him to stop helping with the play.


----------



## gracekelly

↑


> *'Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and why I'm absolutely sick of hearing about them'*


----------



## mshermes

I became increasingly more curious about why there is such a large market for pregnancy bumps. In doing my research, I came upon a few pics that really hit home.  I now have some serious doubts about her first pregnancy....and her second.


----------



## CeeJay

bisbee said:


> Wow...I’m sure the “reality celebs” run in the opposite direction when they see you coming!


I'm actually a very polite person by nature; my parents were strict about saying "_please_", "_thank you_", "_you're welcome_", etc.  I am constantly amazed at how these words seem to have been lost in the younger generation (_not saying all - but many_), and the assumption that you are just going to hold the door for them, etc.  However, whenever I see people acting like they are better than others (_a big pet peeve is when they yell at the cashier because they "don't like the price" - huh???_) and then throw a fit.  The worst is when they attempt to 'jump the queue'; well - you simply *DO NOT* attempt to do that in Boston!!!!!  Bad behavior, IMO .. should not be tolerated, especially when they have their children with them and then start with the F-bombs .. seriously? .. then you wonder why your kids misbehave when they get older???  

Harry, in particular, seems as though he would for sure expect to be treated differently, after all .. he's a Prince!!! .. well, not in this country!  I'm still shocked by the fact that he went up to the guy (_was it - Dave Grohl from the Foo Fighters?_) on the Howard Stern show and slapped him .. WHOA, seriously?!?!  If he *EVER* tried that sh!t with me, he would get a *swift kick in the family jewels*!!!


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> I became increasingly more curious about why there is such a large market for pregnancy bumps. In doing my research, I came upon a few pics that really hit home.  I now have some serious doubts about her first pregnancy....and her second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4993024
> View attachment 4993025
> View attachment 4993026



I love the pictures with the red coat.  The inflatable/deflatable baby bump.  Maybe the bump went out for a Starbucks?


----------



## gracekelly

OK! Magazine USA
@OKMagazine
·
4h







Exclusive: #Netflix is *not* happy that #CBS is airing #PrinceHarry & #MeghanMarkle's big sit-down interview with #OprahWinfrey, and it could cost them.


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> Not long ago I asked when did Doria reappear in Meghan’s life.  The question should have been where in life was Meghan when Doria came back into the picture?  That’s what I’d like to know.


With the exception of a certain period in which Doria may have been unavailable (there are a couple of theories about that period), she was a regular presence in MM's life. As a minor MM lived always with Thomas, but she would spend a few days with Doria once in awhile.


----------



## Lodpah

mshermes said:


> I became increasingly more curious about why there is such a large market for pregnancy bumps. In doing my research, I came upon a few pics that really hit home.  I now have some serious doubts about her first pregnancy....and her second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4993024
> View attachment 4993025
> View attachment 4993026


Why would a person. want to use one of these? I mean, yeah, I can see for plays, movies, etc. but for any other reason it’s kinda creepy.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> OK! Magazine USA
> @OKMagazine
> ·
> 4h
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exclusive: #Netflix is *not* happy that #CBS is airing #PrinceHarry & #MeghanMarkle's big sit-down interview with #OprahWinfrey, and it could cost them.


Here is the link:








						CBS Vs. Netflix! Oprah's Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Primetime Interview Could Cost The Couple $100 Million: Source
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's big sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey isn't going over well with some at Netflix, the company that paid the former royal couple over $100 million, insiders dish to OK!.




					okmagazine.com


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I love the pictures with the red coat.  The inflatable/deflatable baby bump.  Maybe the bump went out for a Starbucks?


Well, since she was in England, maybe tea and crumpets?


----------



## gracekelly

OK Magazine
By:Ashley Joy Parker
Feb. 16 2021, Published 1:40 p.m. ET

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's big sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey airing as a _CBS Primetime Special _isn’t going over well with some at Netflix, the company that paid the former royal couple over $100 million, insiders dish to _OK!_.

No one knows what’s going on inside Netflix with regard to Meghan and Harry. The couple reached a major multi-year, multi-million deal, and their first TV project is going to air on CBS. None of this makes any sense,” a source tells _OK!._

*“Harry and Meghan have produced precisely nothing since singing the $100 million deal," the insider notes. "They were supposed to develop documentaries, feature films, scripted television shows and children’s series, but the real crown jewels, so to speak, was getting access to these two talking about the most famous family in the world, which is going to CBS!”*


The upcoming _Oprah With Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special,_ airing on CBS on March 7 at 8 p.m. ET/PT, will be a sit-down interview with the couple covering a “wide-range” of topics.

“Meghan wants to be interviewed alone at first. Just her and Oprah, then Harry will join them toward the end,” the _OK!_ source spills. “Make no mistake, this is the Meghan Markle interview. Meghan one-on-one with Oprah. Harry will be rolled out after Meghan has got whatever she wants to get off her chest.”


*Viewers can also expect to see an appearance from baby Archie, who will turn 2 years old this May, according to the insider.*

“The biggest question is nothing Oprah is going to ask, but rather, will this CBS special cost Harry and Meghan their $100 million deal with Netflix?” asks a top TV source. “No one, not even princes, are paid $100 million to do nothing. And certainly not to be betrayed."

Additionally, _The Royal Observer_ reports that some are concerned that Meghan and Harry are giving the biggest interview of their lives to a competitor.


The news of the highly-anticipated Oprah interview followed an even bigger announcement from the royal couple. On Sunday, February 14, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex revealed they were expecting their second child.

The exciting announcement came paired with a black-and-white photo of the happily married couple canoodling in the park. The 39-year-old mom-of-two-to-be, donning a flowy sleeveless dress by Carolina Herrera, is laying in the grass with her head in her husband’s lap. The smiling Duke of Sussex is cradling his wife’s head, and the Duchess' small (but obvious) bump is on full display.

On Twitter, the photographer of their pregnancy announcement, *Misan Harriman*, wrote, “Meg, I was there at your wedding to witness this love story begin, and my friend, I am honoured to capture it grow. Congratulations to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on this joyous news!”

It was likely no coincidence that the couple, who now reside in Montecito, Calif., shared their happy news on Valentine’s Day. The romantic holiday day marked 37 years to the day that Princess Diana announced that she was expecting her second son, Harry.


The joyous announcement comes after the couple shared the news that the former _Suits_actress suffered a miscarriage last July. In a candid and heartbreaking op-ed for _The New York Times_ in November 2020, the mother wrote about the “unbearable grief” she and her husband endured.

A source previously told _OK!_ that the couple wanted to "try for another baby at the earliest opportunity."

The response to Markle’s essay "validated their decision to go public a thousand times over," the insider spilled in December, and helped the couple grow closer. Added the source, "Harry has been an absolute rock for Meghan, and vice versa."


----------



## CeeJay

Tootsie17 said:


> I believe this interview could possibly expose M's narcist behavior, for those that tune in to watch. I bet M feels like she's gotten everything she always wanted.  Her PR team will try to get to her be humble. Yet, due to her ego and her it's all about me, me, me mantra, she won't be able to stop herself from sticking her foot in her mouth, at least once.  She has told so many lies, she can't keep them straight. Any one who has followed H & M's story, and is not a stan, will be able to see through their bs.  What will be interesting is to see if Oprah will fall for her pity party or will ask them both tough questions.  I can't believe Oprah hasn't herself questioned some of their odd behavior or heard about a few of their issues we have discussed here. M, though sly, is not the sharpest tool in the shed.


Sadly, I think Oprah will fawn to the two of them .. however, she can FORGET ever getting any interviews and/or invitations with the rest of the BRF.  Remember, Charles is supposed to be a very vindictive person and even though Oprah is a very rich person, who knows? .. Oprah wants to interview a friend, other relative, etc. of the BRF??? .. Charles just may make a phone call to make it difficult for Oprah (okay - kinda hoping)!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Well, since she was in England, maybe tea and crumpets?


Fish and chips


----------



## purseinsanity

mshermes said:


> I became increasingly more curious about why there is such a large market for pregnancy bumps. In doing my research, I came upon a few pics that really hit home.  I now have some serious doubts about her first pregnancy....and her second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4993024
> View attachment 4993025
> View attachment 4993026


And it's remarkable how thin she is everywhere else, and how her clavicles still jut out.  I know it is possible; my SIL is 5'9" and was all of 118 lbs before she was pregnant, and you couldn't even tell she was preggo from behind, but even her face looked much fuller during pregnancy.  MM looks the same as any other day, except for the large, migrating protrusion under her breasts (or knees, depending on the time).


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Fish and chips


YES!!! 

Actually, no...fish isn't vegan.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Why would a person. want to use one of these? I mean, yeah, I can see for plays, movies, etc. but for any other reason it’s kinda creepy.


Well, if you need to fake a pregnancy to ensure your future child support, it might come in handy...


----------



## Chanbal

Big day today...

*Prince Harry 'must be removed from succession' to stop 'constitutional crisis'*

Prince Harry needs to be removed from the Royal Family's line of succession to avoid a future "constitutional crisis", according to Evening Standard Royal Editor Robert Jobson

Prince Harry's position in the Royal Family's line of succession leaves the monarchy just a "breath away" from a constitutional crisis, according to a royal commentator.

Appearing on BBC Breakfast via a video link, Evening Standard Royal Editor Robert Jobson said Prince Harry ought to be removed from the line of succession as it's clear he's "not coming back" after moving to the US with his wife Meghan Markle and son Archie.

Prince Harry is then sixth in the line of succession, but Mr Jobson said this could be problematic in the future, especially if he ends up acting as a reagent to one of his brother's children.

Mr Jobson told viewers: "I think it's time the Royal Family woke up to the situation that they (Meghan and Harry) are not coming back.

"They need to be taken out of the line of succession.

"I also think that you've got to remember that, in this Covid pandemic, that we're only a couple of breaths away from a constitutional crisis.

"We have a very old Queen, both the Prince of Wales and Prince William have suffered with Covid."

Hammering down on some of the potential problems, he added: "What would we have? Prince Harry as regent to Prince George?

"There are bigger issues here than personalities.

"What is the position in terms of the constitutional monarchy?
"It's not about personalities, it's a much more serious situation than that."

Well said Mr. Jobson


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hear, hear. So Samantha claims that while still in highschool Thomas was doing the light for one of their plays as usual. When Meghan fell out with someone on the play she stormed off and expected Thomas to follow suit. When he refused - probably because he was an adult and not a 40yo woman who never grew out of her teenage temper tantrums - she refused to speak to him for an extended period of time. And you know what, I don't think Samantha is lying. What an awful human being this Meghan is, and I'm just horrified how many people refuse to acknowledge this.


Oh boy .. I may get in trouble for this, but I know about this 'story'.  According to my friends (their son saw it first-hand), yes .. there was an altercation between she and her (prior - she was markled) good friend, in that they were both in the running for the lead part.  Well, there was some gossip that the Theatre Director preferred the other girl and that is when Meghan went ballistic.  She actually asked her father to do a Tonya Harding on her competitor such that the girl would not be able to 'perform' the lead part.  Yes, of course, Thomas refused .. he wasn't about to hurt someone else's daughter and according to my friends, he actually talked to them about it .. re: how do I deal with this (as they have 2 daughters themselves).  Obviously, they told him "you need to get control of Meghan and discipline her .. maybe make her give up this spot" to which Thomas replied "oh - there is no way I can do that, you know Meghan" -- well, there you go.  As I've stated before, this 'behavior' started fairly early in Meghan's life ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

3 days of no power, temps in the teens, I have lots of catching up to do, this page is the first one I have read. This page by itself, *this page, *has put a smile of my face and warmed my heart! It is why I  this site!  The humor, the wit,  the insight — Y’all are doing a service to all of us who suffer. Thank you. Your kindness and posts are way above par.  Thank you.


— Yes, agree about the bump. Either she purposefully wanted to toy with the media or she used a surrogate. Since she is hollywood, I vote for the surrogate.

— Doria - I was hoping Sam would give us more insight into this person and her role in MM’s life. The 3 cherub quote, the lone wedding attendee, the cookbook launch, etc. She goes to the Trevor wedding, Thomas is there, but she can’t go to a Royal wedding with him? Odd, just odd.

— Oprah - she salivated for a Diana interview who politely refused. She will use H&M for every cent they are worth. No question in my mind she set all this up from day 1. Not sure she and Gayle are so fascinated by the royals, I do recall O desperately tried to make Sarah ‘happen’ over here. Maybe it’s because she and Doria are members of Marianne’s church?  So much interesting speculation - thank you, all.

Sarah and Oprah on Prince William’s wedding








						Sarah Ferguson tells Oprah Winfrey: 'Diana and I both weren't there'
					

In interview Duchess suggested that there was no one to blame but herself for her lack of an invitation




					www.theguardian.com
				




Full fat mousse!!








						Princess Diana tricked Oprah Winfrey
					

The late princess, who died in a car crash in Paris, France in 1997, met with the talk show host for lunch many years ago and "pulled a fast one"




					www.thespec.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comments on Doria (I haven't made up my mind yet completely, but something is...off):



> [...M]y mind went back to the wedding & the look on Doria’s face. As I watched, at first I thought, “Ahh, that’s nice, her little girl is marrying a prince, every mother’s wish & her face reflects that” but then I got a bit of an uncomfortable feeling as though that look was not so much as peaceful, loving, hopeful & settled .. it was more of that satisfied look of the “cat that ate the canary”, the one where her & her daughter’s “extraordinary intellect & prowess”  won them the prize.





> “cat that ate the canary”,  EXACTLY!  & my reaction to it took me by surprise!  In hind site, it's clear she was in on the Con.





> Penelope, when I saw Doria at the wedding I could literally  hear her thoughts as Meghan came in. She tried to mask her true feelings but in her face you recognized the expression that said: I can't believe this!!!! I hit the jackpot!!!!





> During the wedding ceremony you'll see Doria give a knowing "con-artist" smirk before turning her head away, like she knew something we didn't. I didn't know what it meant but I was taken aback nonetheless.  Probably the only time I witnessed any expression from Doria. Very telling.



Also I didn't watch the whole ceremony so I never paid attention to her...I was too busy watching Meghan's face slip for a moment.

Also:



> FYI, Humbolt is a small city in Humbolt county, one of the 3 counties in northern CA known as the “green or emerald triangle”. Back in the day when it was not legal, Humbolt, Trinity, and Mendocino counties produced most of the weed. An individual making trips to Humbolt typically went to acquire a couple of pounds of merchandise to transport south for sale. To this day it is the backbone of the local economy.





> Doria would make frequent trips to Humboldt, then come home and it was party, party, party. Samantha is using LA-speak for: Doria was dealing drugs. Was she popped for it? If so, that would help explain her lengthy stay in prison.





> Interesting that Sam mentioned it because she knew that the community would come forward and fill in the probable "whys" without the need to accuse her stepmother of illicit activities.


 
I don't even have a problem with recreational smoking or what you want to call it (this coming from a person who doesn't drink or smoke even cigarettes), but this is...interesting to say the least.



> I’ll just leave this here:  Mobsters use the phrase “went away to college” to refer to a prison stint.



(regarding a quote from the book that sounds a bit weird a first where Samantha was repeating several times she hadn't seen Doria in a while and wondered if she "went away...somewhere")

Just leaving this here as I'm calling it a night:



> This is very interesting in so far as it shows that MM's behavior is a long standing pattern rather than something that happened as a result of alleged "bad treatment by the BRF and UK people". This is her MO and when she came up against the BRF it was a bar too high and she knew it and ran away. She could fool H but she couldn't fool the rest of them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I may be off on this but I don't think a second baby is as exciting as the first esp since we've seen little of Archie and he isn't exceptionally cute.  Now Will & Kates kids are adorable.  maybe I'm biased but that little girl is the cutest and kate takes such good pics of them.



To be fair, Archie is younger than them (so hasn't developed as much of a personality yet) plus his parents do an exceptional job at presenting him in an awful way. Can you imagine Kate showing any of her kids half naked with a full diaper trying to get away from her? I also wonder if he has any contact to other children as well or if they are keeping him around other adults only all the time.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> OK Magazine
> By:Ashley Joy Parker
> Feb. 16 2021, Published 1:40 p.m. ET
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's big sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey airing as a _CBS Primetime Special _isn’t going over well with some at Netflix, the company that paid the former royal couple over $100 million, insiders dish to _OK!_.
> 
> No one knows what’s going on inside Netflix with regard to Meghan and Harry. The couple reached a major multi-year, multi-million deal, and their first TV project is going to air on CBS. None of this makes any sense,” a source tells _OK!._
> 
> *“Harry and Meghan have produced precisely nothing since singing the $100 million deal," the insider notes. "They were supposed to develop documentaries, feature films, scripted television shows and children’s series, but the real crown jewels, so to speak, was getting access to these two talking about the most famous family in the world, which is going to CBS!”*
> 
> 
> The upcoming _Oprah With Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special,_ airing on CBS on March 7 at 8 p.m. ET/PT, will be a sit-down interview with the couple covering a “wide-range” of topics.
> 
> “Meghan wants to be interviewed alone at first. Just her and Oprah, then Harry will join them toward the end,” the _OK!_ source spills. “Make no mistake, this is the Meghan Markle interview. Meghan one-on-one with Oprah. Harry will be rolled out after Meghan has got whatever she wants to get off her chest.”
> 
> 
> *Viewers can also expect to see an appearance from baby Archie, who will turn 2 years old this May, according to the insider.*
> 
> “The biggest question is nothing Oprah is going to ask, but rather, will this CBS special cost Harry and Meghan their $100 million deal with Netflix?” asks a top TV source. “No one, not even princes, are paid $100 million to do nothing. And certainly not to be betrayed."
> 
> Additionally, _The Royal Observer_ reports that some are concerned that Meghan and Harry are giving the biggest interview of their lives to a competitor.
> 
> 
> The news of the highly-anticipated Oprah interview followed an even bigger announcement from the royal couple. On Sunday, February 14, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex revealed they were expecting their second child.
> 
> The exciting announcement came paired with a black-and-white photo of the happily married couple canoodling in the park. The 39-year-old mom-of-two-to-be, donning a flowy sleeveless dress by Carolina Herrera, is laying in the grass with her head in her husband’s lap. The smiling Duke of Sussex is cradling his wife’s head, and the Duchess' small (but obvious) bump is on full display.
> 
> On Twitter, the photographer of their pregnancy announcement, *Misan Harriman*, wrote, “Meg, I was there at your wedding to witness this love story begin, and my friend, I am honoured to capture it grow. Congratulations to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on this joyous news!”
> 
> It was likely no coincidence that the couple, who now reside in Montecito, Calif., shared their happy news on Valentine’s Day. The romantic holiday day marked 37 years to the day that Princess Diana announced that she was expecting her second son, Harry.
> 
> 
> The joyous announcement comes after the couple shared the news that the former _Suits_actress suffered a miscarriage last July. In a candid and heartbreaking op-ed for _The New York Times_ in November 2020, the mother wrote about the “unbearable grief” she and her husband endured.
> 
> A source previously told _OK!_ that the couple wanted to "try for another baby at the earliest opportunity."
> 
> The response to Markle’s essay "validated their decision to go public a thousand times over," the insider spilled in December, and helped the couple grow closer. Added the source, "Harry has been an absolute rock for Meghan, and vice versa."


Netflix shouldn't worry, the interview with Oprah is just an aperitif to stimulate the appetite. They still have the videos that MM recorded behind-the-scenes as they stepped away from royal life. MM&H will continue cashing in on titles and on the BRF...









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'touted Netflix behind-scenes videos'
					

The couple are believed to have told bosses at the US streaming firm about the homemade material before they signed a deal earlier this month said to be worth 100million dollars, insiders said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Sadly, I think Oprah will fawn to the two of them .. however, she can FORGET ever getting any interviews and/or invitations with the rest of the BRF.  Remember, Charles is supposed to be a very vindictive person and even though Oprah is a very rich person, who knows? .. Oprah wants to interview a friend, other relative, etc. of the BRF??? .. Charles just may make a phone call to make it difficult for Oprah (okay - kinda hoping)!!


Hmm have not decided my prediction of how Oprah will navigate the interview , puff piece, go for jugular ?

I am mulling over what I consider to be CRUCIAL clues  in my decision

1.interview is not on Oprah’s channel, she does it for CBS - home of Corden and Gayle King , Oprah has recently Been quiet at OWN, well except for promoting vegan lattes. why did Oprah concede that ?

2. CBS is paying both Oprah and The glimmer twins for this one , it is a 3 way split, less for the GTs than if a staff CBS interviewer were used ....
they must REALLY have wanted Oprah to concede The big bucks

so, I guess I have argued myself into a corner, it will be a puff piece , I am following the money , see item 2


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Why would a person. want to use one of these? I mean, yeah, I can see for plays, movies, etc. but for any other reason it’s kinda creepy.



Trinny Woodall wore one for doing one of her Insta lives on pregnancy fashion


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> Why would a person. want to use one of these? I mean, yeah, I can see for plays, movies, etc. but for any other reason it’s kinda creepy.



I could see someone using it to model maternity clothes if they’re not pregnant, but that’s about it.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, Archie is younger than them (so hasn't developed as much of a personality yet) plus his parents do an exceptional job at presenting him in an awful way. Can you imagine Kate showing any of her kids half naked with a full diaper trying to get away from her? I also wonder if he has any contact to other children as well or if they are keeping him around other adults only all the time.



True, but Prince George was so cute when he was Archie’s age.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hammering down on some of the potential problems, he added: "What would we have? Prince Harry as regent to Prince George?
> 
> "There are bigger issues here than personalities.
> 
> "What is the position in terms of the constitutional monarchy?
> "It's not about personalities, it's a much more serious situation than that."
> 
> Well said Mr. Jobson



I vote for the Princess Royal. As I understand it the next adult in line is not necessarily the one who needs to be regent for a minor monarch. Or so I hope.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Oh boy .. I may get in trouble for this, but I know about this 'story'.  According to my friends (their son saw it first-hand), yes .. there was an altercation between she and her (prior - she was markled) good friend, in that they were both in the running for the lead part.  Well, there was some gossip that the Theatre Director preferred the other girl and that is when Meghan went ballistic.  She actually asked her father to do a Tonya Harding on her competitor such that the girl would not be able to 'perform' the lead part.  Yes, of course, Thomas refused .. he wasn't about to hurt someone else's daughter and according to my friends, he actually talked to them about it .. re: how do I deal with this (as they have 2 daughters themselves).  Obviously, they told him "you need to get control of Meghan and discipline her .. maybe make her give up this spot" to which Thomas replied "oh - there is no way I can do that, you know Meghan" -- well, there you go.  As I've stated before, this 'behavior' started fairly early in Meghan's life ..



That makes me kind of trust both Samantha and Lady CC more because apparently a very elaborate story they both conveyed is true after all. But also, that little bit of extra information...this woman is starting to scare me. WTFFFF.


----------



## DebbieAnn

*Diana's 60th birthday would be July 1, so it would be perfect to have a baby on that date!  Gag me now*


----------



## mshermes

Lodpah said:


> Why would a person. want to use one of these? I mean, yeah, I can see for plays, movies, etc. but for any other reason it’s kinda creepy.


The company mentions the various uses such as medical training, television, film and theatre, advertising and photography AND surrogacy and adoption....bingo!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Well, if you need to fake a pregnancy to ensure your future child support, it might come in handy...



Some say it helps the woman feel like a mother because the fake one is as awkward to carry as the real one can be. In our high schools, the home economics classes have the high school girls wear one. They also have the fake babies that cry, take a bottle, all the ‘real’ experiences.  Hwood women use them to fake the paps. Understandable that so many are skeptical.


----------



## mshermes

purseinsanity said:


> And it's remarkable how thin she is everywhere else, and how her clavicles still jut out.  I know it is possible; my SIL is 5'9" and was all of 118 lbs before she was pregnant, and you couldn't even tell she was preggo from behind, but even her face looked much fuller during pregnancy.  MM looks the same as any other day, except for the large, migrating protrusion under her breasts (or knees, depending on the time).


What I found a bit curious in her latest preggo pic is how her thighs look like they belong on a sumo wrestler?


----------



## csshopper

mshermes said:


> I became increasingly more curious about why there is such a large market for pregnancy bumps. In doing my research, I came upon a few pics that really hit home.  I now have some serious doubts about her first pregnancy....and her second.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4993024
> View attachment 4993025
> View attachment 4993026


Oh my gosh:  who let the air out???


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Hmm have not decided my prediction of how Oprah will navigate the interview , puff piece, go for jugular ?
> 
> I am mulling over what I consider to be CRUCIAL clues  in my decision
> 
> 1.interview is not on Oprah’s channel, she does it for CBS - home of Corden and Gayle King , Oprah has recently Been quiet at OWN, well except for promoting vegan lattes. why did Oprah concede that ?
> 
> 2. CBS is paying both Oprah and The glimmer twins for this one , it is a 3 way split, less for the GTs than if a staff CBS interviewer were used ....
> they must REALLY have wanted Oprah to concede The big bucks
> 
> so, I guess I have argued myself into a corner, it will a puff piece , I am following the money , see item 2



Oprah is having some financial troubles with her OWN network. Not sure which channel it is on - maybe Discover? - but she had to sell most of her holdings. Last summer, iirc.

Found the article - 








						Oprah Winfrey Just Sold Most Of Her Stake In Her OWN Cable Network
					

The billionaire is getting Discovery stock worth about $36.5 million as part of a deal that values her network at $180 million.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> I could see someone using it to model maternity clothes if they’re not pregnant, but that’s about it.


Or if you're an actor on a show pretending to be pregnant.  Or an actor pretending to be pregnant for the biggest role of your life.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Hmm have not decided my prediction of how Oprah will navigate the interview , puff piece, go for jugular ?
> 
> I am mulling over what I consider to be CRUCIAL clues  in my decision
> 
> 1.interview is not on Oprah’s channel, she does it for CBS - home of Corden and Gayle King , Oprah has recently Been quiet at OWN, well except for promoting vegan lattes. why did Oprah concede that ?
> 
> 2. CBS is paying both Oprah and The glimmer twins for this one , it is a 3 way split, less for the GTs than if a staff CBS interviewer were used ....
> they must REALLY have wanted Oprah to concede The big bucks
> 
> so, I guess I have argued myself into a corner, it will a puff piece , I am following the money , see item 2


I think Oprah will give them a platform to brag about their "good works" and complain again about racism.  we will see the big doe eyes again


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Well, there was that costume party incident. And the drunken bender he went on in Las Vegas probably got him a reprimand. Even this isn't really a consequence since he and Meghan had all but abandoned their patronages. They believed that a couple phone calls and some media placement was good enough to get credit for work they were supposed to be doing. In the meantime all of their focus has been on their personal endeavors.



He will slam the BRF [who raised him] at every opportunity. He still believes we Americans are soooo in love with the BRF and their entitled ways. He still believes that we Americans will fall all over ourselves for anything Diana. So many politicians have fed that bs to the media who has fed it to us. They don’t get it. Harry still doesn’t get it. We have moved on. There has been a pandemic.

Life goes forward.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, most women show sooner in their second pregnancy, but if she's due in September, she may be 2-3 months along at best.  That does NOT look like an early pregnancy.  I don't know WTF she'd doing, but she can't assume we are all idiots with math.



I was showing at that point with my second. But not THAT much.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I think Oprah will give them a platform to brag about their good works and complain again about racism.  we will see the big doe eyes again



This promo show will be very similar to the engagement interview and the Gloria Steinem one. Fawning, lacking substance, promoting H&M.  Yawn,


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Royal Tea
> @UKRoyalTea
> ·
> 6h
> 
> To put a few pieces together - CBS was invited to the reveal of Archie, James Corden is on CBS, and now this interview is on CBS. Gayle and CBS This Morning will tease the interview all week with clips from it, plus James' Harry/bus Carpool Karaoke. Well played team CBS.
> 
> 
> My thoughts:
> CBS has played the long game.  They sent Oprah to meet Meghan prior to the wedding and a last minute wedding invite was the result.  All that has happened recently falls into place.  They will never allow a hard interview as they like to keep the royal connections.  There are many things and interviews coming up in the next few years with the royals and they want to send their real journalists to cover them and get the interviews.  Dissing the family at this point will achieve nothing for CBS.  Editing is everything Meg, you should know that.



ViaCom owns CBS and Discovery, right? Also, Oprah’s network is OWNed by Discovery.
Connections are everywhere with hidden agendas.

Oprah *needs* to be relevant right now. Sure, she has billions, but she has expenses. Losing millions here, millions there, suddenly she is no longer the mogul she fancies herself to be.  Politically, she cannot be seen as a has-been. Ever since Charlie Rose scandalized the network, CBS has had difficulty. These are tough times.









						CBS wants to get bigger, so it's thinking about a variety of mergers and buyouts
					

CBS wants to get bigger, and while a merger with Viacom may be the company's first step, Discovery is open to a deal down the road, sources say.




					www.cnbc.com
				




Oprah is having some financial troubles with her OWN network. Not sure which channel it is on - maybe Discovery? - but she had to sell most of her holdings. Last summer, iirc.

Found the article -
*Oprah Winfrey Just Sold Most Of Her Stake In Her OWN Cable Network*
The billionaire is getting Discovery stock worth about $36.5 million as part of a deal that values her network at $180 million.




www.forbes.com


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Sadly, I think Oprah will fawn to the two of them .. however, she can FORGET ever getting any interviews and/or invitations with the rest of the BRF.  Remember, Charles is supposed to be a very vindictive person and even though Oprah is a very rich person, who knows? .. Oprah wants to interview a friend, other relative, etc. of the BRF??? .. Charles just may make a phone call to make it difficult for Oprah (okay - kinda hoping)!!



I don’t think Oprah cares about getting interviews with anyone else in the royal family. She has been semi-retired for awhile. I can’t remember her last celebrity interview so it’s kind of a big deal that she’s making time for this one.  There are people who wouldn’t watch Meghan and Harry who might watch the interview because they are Oprah fans and haven’t seen her in a long time. 

She will make a big fuss and be very sympathetic. It appears she is personally invested in helping them become successful in the US.  (She’ll get a big paycheck too and that never hurts.)


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I wish that was the case, but it won't be. It isn't going to be a live interview, anything that isn't favorable will be edited out. Oprah has decided to take them under her wing and help them.
> 
> Here's how I see the interview:
> There won't be any difficult questions for Meghan. There will be plenty of opportunities for her to show big, sad eyes and talk about how unfairly she was treated. Then she will be given a chance to speak triumphantly about winning her court case. She will talk about all the plans they have for Archewell (maybe encourage donations). Then, if there's time, Harry will be allowed to come out for the last 15 minutes to say how delighted he is that he will be a dad again. There will be lots of hand holding and gazing lovingly into each other's eyes. Then Oprah will thank them profusely and wish them all the best. The End.


Unfortunately, I bet you are right.  However, a girl can dream.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> YES!!!
> 
> Actually, no...fish isn't vegan.


Whaddya mean?  Vegan fish, just like the vegan chicken she likes to make for Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Whaddya mean?  Vegan fish, just like the vegan chicken she likes to make for Harry.



Along with the Bill Gates ‘burgers’.


----------



## bag-mania

According to a royal source who talked to Us Weekly, the baby is due at the end of spring. That bump may be real  if she became pregnant in September.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> He will slam the BRF [who raised him] at every opportunity. He still believes we Americans are soooo in love with the BRF and their entitled ways. He still believes that we Americans will fall all over ourselves for anything Diana. So many politicians have fed that bs to the media who has fed it to us. They don’t get it. Harry still doesn’t get it. We have moved on. There has been a pandemic.
> 
> Life goes forward.


Diana had a genuine empathy for people as well as charisma or "star power"......these two aren't in her league IMO.....a z-list actress and her whiny baby husband


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

It looks like this interview is going to be the audio version of Funding Freedom. 

*Eamonn Holmes slams Meghan and Harry as he brands their Oprah interview an 'advert'*

Branding their move as no more than an "advert", Eamonn suggested this is a marketing tactic because Oprah, 67, "is a mate".

"Well, it's not an interview really, is it? It's an ad, really. I mean, Oprah's a mate, Oprah was at her wedding," he told royal correspondent Camilla Tominey and Nick Ferrari.

"Meghan's mum stayed with Oprah at her home as a house guest. So it's not an interview as such," he added.

Camilla agreed with the notion, adding: "Well, I don't think she's going to be throwing really difficult questions at Meghan and admittedly it's going to be hugely sympathetic because, as you say, they're friends.

"Though interestingly, it's been pointed out that they'd only met once before Oprah turned up at the royal wedding in Windsor castle in May 2018."

"But yes, I think it's going to be a soft soap kind of an interview," Camilla added.

*Piers's Twitter:* "Take away all their titles, Your Majesty," he wrote. "The British people are totally behind you against these shameless grifters."


----------



## Chanbal

He may need a large supply of 

*Meghan Markle's dad 'hopes to see his grandkids one day' after falling out with Duchess*

In the interview, which was conducted remotely as he spoke from his home in Rosarito, Mexico, he revealed he fears he's close to death.

Thomas Markle said: "I wish Meghan and Harry a successful, healthy birth and I hope some day I get to see my grandchildren.

“They’re all royal grandchildren.”

The 71-year-old spoke to CBS TV's Inside Edition for the first time since the couple announced Meghan is pregnant.

His appearance on the show comes as Meghan, 39, won a High Court privacy case against a British newspaper last week.

Regarding the win, Thomas said: “I am disappointed about this decision from the judge.

“I don’t know how you can judge a case without getting testimony from witnesses," reports The Sun.

He lives 250 miles away from the couple ...However, he has still not met 21-month-old Archie or Harry, 36.


----------



## chaneljewel

I don’t care for Oprah and definitely don’t like the H and MM drama, so won’t watch a second of the interview.  These two are so needy and pathetic in their desire to act like victims.  Victims of what?   Both were given opportunities beyond the average person but it was never enough.  I’m sick of their “poor pitiful me” attitudes.  Float out to sea to some remote island so we don’t have to listen to your whining any longer.  There’s more to care about in this world than how “terrible” you’ve been treated.


----------



## Diamondbirdie

With regards to the line of succession, I think this is the first time we’ve had “an heir and a spare” and another beyond that, so the likelihood of needing Harry is remote! Even if Charles and William both died there would be plenty of other people available to take a role. And I really don’t know why we persist with this, when Eugenie’s baby was born last week there were lots of articles about where the kid was in line (10th or 11th, maybe?). Who cares??? These are far enough away to be ordinary people imho. Although Eugenie was quoted as saying she didn’t want her baby to have a title and she wanted him to have a normal life. Brought up at Kensington Palace, tho . Aye, right, as we say in these parts.

I don’t get M and H releasing the photo of the baby announcement day. They want privacy, we are told. They must then assume, surely, that we will give them that. Very dishonest to still try to be in the public domain like that.


----------



## RAINDANCE

*Meghan’s talk-show move undermines the very monarchy that made her*
The last thing the Queen needs is another explosive TV interview with family members – especially when they left their royal duties behind
ALLISON PEARSON16 February 2021 • 7:12pm
	

	
	
		
		

		
			









Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah will be aired in March and last 90 minutes CREDIT: Chris Jackson/Getty Images

Say what you like about Prince Charles, he’s never shown us his bunions. The heir to the throne must, perforce, cut a more dignified figure than his younger son and for that we must be grateful.
Prince Harry put his foot in it (both of them actually, without socks or shoes) in a romantic black and white photograph which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released to announce they are expecting their second child. (The pregnancy explains why Meghan succeeded in getting a postponement of her recent successful privacy trial against the Mail on Sunday for “confidential reasons”.)
The baby – judging by the size of that bump he or she will be born not long after big brother Archie’s second birthday in May – will be eighth in line to the throne. This pregnancy is a blessing coming after Meghan’s miscarriage last year and everyone will wish the young family well.

As is so often the case with the Sussexes, though, there is something contrived about the communication. The picture shows Meghan, head in a beaming Harry’s lap, lying in the dappled shade of a tree. It is one of those artfully artless shots that celebrities post on Instagram to show how authentically natural they are while, out of shot, you just know the poor stylist, hairdresser and make-up artist are sweating buckets to make sure everything looks perfect.
It’s almost as if each detail of the portrait were selected to make a point. “See how grounded we are! We lie on the grass! We disdain footwear! We are free spirits not uptight, stuffy Royals like, to take a completely random example, William and Kate!”
Misan Harriman, who recently became British Vogue’s first black cover photographer, somehow snapped the “spontaneous” moment in LA remotely with an iPad from London. “With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn’t need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates,” said Harriman. Spoken totally spontaneously, I’m sure, and in no way prompted by breathless, sub-_Bridgerton _prose signed off by the Duchess and her PR team.


> Meg, I was there at your wedding to witness this love story begin, and my friend, I am honoured to capture it grow. Congratulations to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on this joyous news!#remoteshoot #shotonipad #shotbymisan pic.twitter.com/3iSYjydVj9
> — Misan Harriman (@misanharriman) February 14, 2021


Although such prompts have been known to happen. _Finding Freedom_, a doting, unauthorised biography of the couple published last year, reported events and dialogue which many believe could only have been known to the two people present at the time.
We will never unlock the mystery of that remarkable act of ventriloquism. Nor will we find out whether Meghan’s strange, scolding, self-exculpating letter to her father, Thomas Markle (published in the _Mail on Sunday_), was written with a bigger audience in mind. The judge ruled in the Duchess’s favour before any court proceedings began. Pity. It would have been interesting to hear from the man who raised Meghan, who paid for her private education; the darling daddy to whom she was seemingly devoted until he naively cooperated with a reporter before the Royal wedding. Or maybe she thought he would look bad in the photographs? Either way, he was hastily written out of the fairytale by his calligrapher daughter. 
*By now, even the most ardent Royalist – no, actually, let’s make that especially the most ardent Royalist – may find themselves deeply irritated by a couple who left the UK to escape the attention of the ghastly, prying media, but who seem perfectly happy to invade their own privacy when it suits.* And please don’t get me started on the allegations that Meghan’s treatment at the hands of the British media was cruel, even “racist”. A billion column inches raved about what a “breath of fresh air” she was and delighted in the happiness she brought our favourite cheeky prince. Any change in tone was caused by the Sussexes and their sensitivity to criticism, no matter how well deserved. The Duke and Duchess’s not entirely convincing ambivalence about being in the public eye was superbly summed up in a _Daily Star _headline: “Publicity-shy woman tells 7.67 billion people; I’m pregnant.”

It was the best of British irony. California-born Meghan would never get the joke. Harry’s old mates in the regiment would. So would the Prince, unless he has drunk too deep of wheatgrass shots and chai lattes. That’s what we all fear, isn’t it?
As if that wasn’t quite enough “unwanted” media attention to be going on with, now we learn Meghan and Harry are planning to do “wide-ranging” and “intimate” TV interview with Oprah Winfrey. The “tell-all” 90-minute special, to air on CBS on March 7, will focus on the Duchess of Sussex who will discuss “everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood and philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure”. *The public pressure that would surely be quite simple to escape by staying home with Archie and maybe not risk embarrassing the Royal family in front of 40 million Americans.*
It has been reported that Prince Harry will join the show later. Will it be a non-speaking appearance? Or will he be given cue cards? Rule nothing out. *The awkward fact is that Meghan’s sole claim to global fame, the reason why a former cable TV actress commands such a high-profile interview at all, arises from her husband, and hence from the Crown. *
After the devastation caused by Prince Andrew’s _Newsnight _appearance, I would say the very last thing the Queen needs right now is another explosive TV interview featuring close family members. *How very unkind to Harry’s Granny, who celebrates her 95th birthday in April.* *It’s one thing for the “spare” to leave the country and carve out a happier life for himself out of the shadow of his brother, the heir. **Quite another to leverage your status to moan about the vast privilege of being Royal.*
Do Meghan and Harry care? I doubt it.
The UK, and its people, who gave them such a rapturous, heartfelt reception at their wedding in May 2018, are increasingly irrelevant to their ambitions. That pregnancy announcement photograph was targeted at a US audience. With good reason. No American would quip, as one cynical Brit did, that the baby’s middle name should be “Netflix”.
Nonetheless, the Oprah interview could turn out to be the final straw. Until now, the Windsors have treated Harry with kid gloves, leaving the door open for him to resume Royal duties if things went wrong. Yesterday, Palace sources suggested the Sussexes are set to lose their last Royal patronages, a mark of displeasure if it’s true. How much longer can they hang onto their Royal titles if they use them to become talk-show-circuit celebs, undermining the monarchy that made them?
Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer Royals who wear socks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Spot on. And I have to admit I enjoyed the little digs throughout.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> With the exception of a certain period in which Doria may have been unavailable (there are a couple of theories about that period), she was a regular presence in MM's life. As a minor MM lived always with Thomas, but she would spend a few days with Doria once in awhile.


Thanks.  I didn’t know.  I had been under the impression Doria was an absent parent until fairly recently.  Glad I was wrong.


----------



## kkfiregirl

M was a working royal for a short time, HOW could she possibly have so much to say? I can’t think of anything new she could reveal.


----------



## sdkitty

chaneljewel said:


> I don’t care for Oprah and definitely don’t like the H and MM drama, so won’t watch a second of the interview.  These two are so needy and pathetic in their desire to act like victims.  Victims of what?   Both were given opportunities beyond the average person but it was never enough.  I’m sick of their “poor pitiful me” attitudes.  Float out to sea to some remote island so we don’t have to listen to your whining any longer.  There’s more to care about in this world than how “terrible” you’ve been treated.


WAY beyond the average person


----------



## Jktgal

Diamondbirdie said:


> Even if Charles and William both died there would be plenty of other people available to take a role.


Well, whole families have died e.g. in a plane crash.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> M was a working royal for a short time, HOW could she possibly have so much to say? I can’t think of anything new she could reveal.



She will rehash what she has said before and then say how wonderful things are today. Maybe she and Oprah will take a slow walk around the pretty gardens of her mansion. She will then plug her various business endeavors, Archewell, Netflix, etc. Hoping another sucker executive will see it and think that Meghan must be relevant and offer them a contract for something.

She likely has wormed family secrets out of Harry by now. But they will save those in case they need to pressure Charles for more money.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think it will be a huge word salad about how furiously happy they are and how freely they can express what’s so very important to them (this week).


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> ViaCom owns CBS and Discovery, right? Also, Oprah’s network is OWNed by Discovery.
> Connections are everywhere with hidden agendas.
> 
> Oprah *needs* to be relevant right now. Sure, she has billions, but she has expenses. Losing millions here, millions there, suddenly she is no longer the mogul she fancies herself to be.  Politically, she cannot be seen as a has-been. Ever since Charlie Rose scandalized the network, CBS has had difficulty. These are tough times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS wants to get bigger, so it's thinking about a variety of mergers and buyouts
> 
> 
> CBS wants to get bigger, and while a merger with Viacom may be the company's first step, Discovery is open to a deal down the road, sources say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah is having some financial troubles with her OWN network. Not sure which channel it is on - maybe Discovery? - but she had to sell most of her holdings. Last summer, iirc.
> 
> Found the article -
> *Oprah Winfrey Just Sold Most Of Her Stake In Her OWN Cable Network*
> The billionaire is getting Discovery stock worth about $36.5 million as part of a deal that values her network at $180 million.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


Even if she loses millions, she still has millions to spare doesn't she and how much does one person need. Her houses must be paid off in full.

Anyway, with the mighty O, I always thought she needed the attention and adoration.  It must be hard to give up when it was part of her life for so long.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I think it will be a huge word salad about *how furiously happy they are* and how freely they can express what’s so very important to them (this week).



"Furiously happy" 
That is the perfect term for the over-the-top kinetic enthusiasm she has when she really gets going.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Whaddya mean?  Vegan fish, just like the vegan chicken she likes to make for Harry.


I stand corrected


----------



## purseinsanity

Jktgal said:


> Well, whole families have died e.g. in a plane crash.


From what I've read, the direct heirs in line of succession purposely do NOT travel together to avoid any issue that could arise.


----------



## marietouchet

1. Marie Claire says the baby is due late spring about May-ish, surely no trip to UK around that time
2. The Times has story today that patronages are definitely toast, no word on dukedom or Commonwealth appointments, Marines and Natl Theatre will be no more, that is a reliable source, H is upset ...
no one wants them as patrons
3. Wish I could remember the source ... Jack Brooksbank’s job is sending out jokey PR releases with his exact “title” ie Euro Director of Casamigos Tequila or something like that, E and J are taking things in stride and with humor, thumbs up
4. another story is that Oprah is still writing her questions per Gayle ie interview not recorded yet so it might discuss the loss of patronages And upset, see item 2
5. BP knew of the pregnancy, but not of the interview, something to factor into the yearly review
BP press releases have become icy and curt about M and H, on interview and pregnancy etc
6. order of battle for interview ie M first then M and H, no solo time for H, is bizarre ... who is the blood royal here ?


Does anyone else feel this silly sturm and drang is moving at a fast clip ?

Gee, we know nothing new about Andrew

I become a fount of knowledge when sick in bed LOL


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> From what I've read, the direct heirs in line of succession purposely do NOT travel together to avoid any issue that could arise.


That used to be the case when Charles was young, but W and K now seem to take the train with their whole brood

imho, if there was a catastrophe, Boris et al might be compelled to write a new law


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> 1. Marie Claire says the baby is due late spring about May-ish, surely no trip to UK around that time
> 2. The Times has story today that patronages are definitely toast, no word on dukedom or Commonwealth appointments, Marines and Natl Theatre will be no more, that is a reliable source, H is upset ...
> no one wants them as patrons
> 3. Wish I could remember the source ... Jack Brooksbank’s job is sending out jokey PR releases with his exact “title” ie Euro Director of Casamigos Tequila or something like that, E and J are taking things in stride and with humor, thumbs up
> 4. another story is that Oprah is still writing her questions per Gayle ie interview not recorded yet so it might discuss the loss of patronages And upset, see item 2
> 5. BP knew of the pregnancy, but not of the interview, something to factor into the yearly review
> BP press releases have become icy and curt about M and H, on interview and pregnancy etc
> 
> Does anyone else feel this silly storm and drang is moving at a fast clip ?
> 
> Gee, we know nothing new about Andrew
> 
> I become a fount of knowledge when sick in bed LOL


I bet she ties her legs together so baby arrives on the same day as The Trooping of the Colour.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> She will rehash what she has said before and then say how wonderful things are today.



So cringe. I can’t watch it, I already have second hand embarrassment for her.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> So cringe. I can’t watch it, I already have second hand embarrassment for her.



LOL. I won't watch it either but I'm sure many others will. People who love her and hate her will want to see it for different reasons. CBS is putting it on a Sunday night, it will get a ratings boost from having a lead in by _60 Minutes_.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this right — QE distinguishes between private and public patronages ???


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> That used to be the case when Charles was young, but W and K now seem to take the train with their whole brood
> 
> imho, if there was a catastrophe, Boris et al might be compelled to write a new law


Anne would do nicely.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I bet she ties her legs together so baby arrives on the same day as The Trooping of the Colour.


They were evasive about the first birth. They can say what they like about the second. She’s about to give birth, she just gave birth... maybe the surrogate already did. lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yeah, right.


_"Doria was able to spend time with Oprah when she needed to get away from her house without worrying that she would use their friendship to get an interview," the reporters wrote. "A senior palace aide had an honest conversation with Oprah before the wedding, where she assured them that 'that's not what any of this is about.'"_









						How Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Found an "Unlikely Ally" in Oprah
					

"Meghan will always be so grateful to Oprah for being someone her mother can turn to," according to Finding Freedom, a new biography on the Sussexes.




					www.oprahmag.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> LOL. I won't watch it either but I'm sure many others will. People who love her and hate her will want to see it for different reasons. CBS is putting it on a Sunday night, it will get a ratings boost from having a lead in by _60 Minutes_.


I doubt I'll watch but we will get clips (Meghan's doe eyes I expect)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And people eat up that sh*t. That's what stuns me the most. (referring to CarryOn's Oprah post)


----------



## csshopper

I think the program is a "quid pro quo" for two women who both crave fame. Oprah probably doesn't need the money, but she has different circumstances now and may miss the spotlight she used to inhabit, still a force in the industry, but not as visible. Her monthly magazine, on which except for one issue SHE was on the cover, no longer is published, and her daily television show is off the air. Her "Book Club" made books best sellers and her annual "Oprah's Favorites" for Christmas were boosts for products on a huge scale. May still be to a certain extent. The few times I read the magazine under the dryer in the beauty shop many of the articles sounded "preachy" but better written than MM's word salad. Meghan would like to be that caliber of influencer. MM and Harry are objects of interest for the time being and supposedly Oprah has been courting them for 3 years, including using Doria and setting up potential productions on mental health with Harry. 90 minutes of prime time on a Sunday night is a plus. Both ladies will get something out of it, Harry is a tag along even if he doesn't get it. I'll read the summaries, could not stomach watching the whiny woman for 90 minutes.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yeah, right.
> 
> 
> _"Doria was able to spend time with Oprah when she needed to get away from her house without worrying that she would use their friendship to get an interview," the reporters wrote. "A senior palace aide had an honest conversation with Oprah before the wedding, where she assured them that 'that's not what any of this is about.'"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Found an "Unlikely Ally" in Oprah
> 
> 
> "Meghan will always be so grateful to Oprah for being someone her mother can turn to," according to Finding Freedom, a new biography on the Sussexes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahmag.com


yeah, I'm sure oprah is just hangin around the house and keeping the door open for doria....not....I have a feeling she's a pretty busy person.  maybe she met with doria once


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> I think the program is a "quid pro quo" for two women who both crave fame. Oprah probably doesn't need the money, but she has different circumstances now and may miss the spotlight she used to inhabit, still a force in the industry, but not as visible. Her monthly magazine, on which except for one issue SHE was on the cover, no longer is published, and her daily television show is off the air. Her "Book Club" made books best sellers and her annual "Oprah's Favorites" for Christmas were boosts for products on a huge scale. May still be to a certain extent. The few times I read the magazine under the dryer in the beauty shop many of the articles sounded "preachy" but better written than MM's word salad. Meghan would like to be that caliber of influencer. MM and Harry are objects of interest for the time being and supposedly Oprah has been courting them for 3 years, including using Doria and setting up potential productions on mental health with Harry. 90 minutes of prime time on a Sunday night is a plus. Both ladies will get something out of it, Harry is a tag along even if he doesn't get it. I'll read the summaries, could not stomach watching the whiny woman for 90 minutes.


I wasn't aware the O magazine was done.  I suspect that's a disappointment.  but as far a O being in the public eye, I think she is still a force to reckon with if she wants to be


----------



## Chanbal

RAINDANCE said:


> *Meghan’s talk-show move undermines the very monarchy that made her*
> The last thing the Queen needs is another explosive TV interview with family members – especially when they left their royal duties behind
> ALLISON PEARSON16 February 2021 • 7:12pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah will be aired in March and last 90 minutes CREDIT: Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> 
> Say what you like about Prince Charles, he’s never shown us his bunions. The heir to the throne must, perforce, cut a more dignified figure than his younger son and for that we must be grateful.
> Prince Harry put his foot in it (both of them actually, without socks or shoes) in a romantic black and white photograph which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released to announce they are expecting their second child. (The pregnancy explains why Meghan succeeded in getting a postponement of her recent successful privacy trial against the Mail on Sunday for “confidential reasons”.)
> The baby – judging by the size of that bump he or she will be born not long after big brother Archie’s second birthday in May – will be eighth in line to the throne. This pregnancy is a blessing coming after Meghan’s miscarriage last year and everyone will wish the young family well.
> 
> As is so often the case with the Sussexes, though, there is something contrived about the communication. The picture shows Meghan, head in a beaming Harry’s lap, lying in the dappled shade of a tree. It is one of those artfully artless shots that celebrities post on Instagram to show how authentically natural they are while, out of shot, you just know the poor stylist, hairdresser and make-up artist are sweating buckets to make sure everything looks perfect.
> It’s almost as if each detail of the portrait were selected to make a point. “See how grounded we are! We lie on the grass! We disdain footwear! We are free spirits not uptight, stuffy Royals like, to take a completely random example, William and Kate!”
> Misan Harriman, who recently became British Vogue’s first black cover photographer, somehow snapped the “spontaneous” moment in LA remotely with an iPad from London. “With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn’t need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates,” said Harriman. Spoken totally spontaneously, I’m sure, and in no way prompted by breathless, sub-_Bridgerton _prose signed off by the Duchess and her PR team.
> 
> Although such prompts have been known to happen. _Finding Freedom_, a doting, unauthorised biography of the couple published last year, reported events and dialogue which many believe could only have been known to the two people present at the time.
> We will never unlock the mystery of that remarkable act of ventriloquism. Nor will we find out whether Meghan’s strange, scolding, self-exculpating letter to her father, Thomas Markle (published in the _Mail on Sunday_), was written with a bigger audience in mind. The judge ruled in the Duchess’s favour before any court proceedings began. Pity. It would have been interesting to hear from the man who raised Meghan, who paid for her private education; the darling daddy to whom she was seemingly devoted until he naively cooperated with a reporter before the Royal wedding. Or maybe she thought he would look bad in the photographs? Either way, he was hastily written out of the fairytale by his calligrapher daughter.
> *By now, even the most ardent Royalist – no, actually, let’s make that especially the most ardent Royalist – may find themselves deeply irritated by a couple who left the UK to escape the attention of the ghastly, prying media, but who seem perfectly happy to invade their own privacy when it suits.* And please don’t get me started on the allegations that Meghan’s treatment at the hands of the British media was cruel, even “racist”. A billion column inches raved about what a “breath of fresh air” she was and delighted in the happiness she brought our favourite cheeky prince. Any change in tone was caused by the Sussexes and their sensitivity to criticism, no matter how well deserved. The Duke and Duchess’s not entirely convincing ambivalence about being in the public eye was superbly summed up in a _Daily Star _headline: “Publicity-shy woman tells 7.67 billion people; I’m pregnant.”
> 
> It was the best of British irony. California-born Meghan would never get the joke. Harry’s old mates in the regiment would. So would the Prince, unless he has drunk too deep of wheatgrass shots and chai lattes. That’s what we all fear, isn’t it?
> As if that wasn’t quite enough “unwanted” media attention to be going on with, now we learn Meghan and Harry are planning to do “wide-ranging” and “intimate” TV interview with Oprah Winfrey. The “tell-all” 90-minute special, to air on CBS on March 7, will focus on the Duchess of Sussex who will discuss “everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood and philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure”. *The public pressure that would surely be quite simple to escape by staying home with Archie and maybe not risk embarrassing the Royal family in front of 40 million Americans.*
> It has been reported that Prince Harry will join the show later. Will it be a non-speaking appearance? Or will he be given cue cards? Rule nothing out. *The awkward fact is that Meghan’s sole claim to global fame, the reason why a former cable TV actress commands such a high-profile interview at all, arises from her husband, and hence from the Crown. *
> After the devastation caused by Prince Andrew’s _Newsnight _appearance, I would say the very last thing the Queen needs right now is another explosive TV interview featuring close family members. *How very unkind to Harry’s Granny, who celebrates her 95th birthday in April.* *It’s one thing for the “spare” to leave the country and carve out a happier life for himself out of the shadow of his brother, the heir. **Quite another to leverage your status to moan about the vast privilege of being Royal.*
> Do Meghan and Harry care? I doubt it.
> The UK, and its people, who gave them such a rapturous, heartfelt reception at their wedding in May 2018, are increasingly irrelevant to their ambitions. That pregnancy announcement photograph was targeted at a US audience. With good reason. No American would quip, as one cynical Brit did, that the baby’s middle name should be “Netflix”.
> Nonetheless, the Oprah interview could turn out to be the final straw. Until now, the Windsors have treated Harry with kid gloves, leaving the door open for him to resume Royal duties if things went wrong. Yesterday, Palace sources suggested the Sussexes are set to lose their last Royal patronages, a mark of displeasure if it’s true. How much longer can they hang onto their Royal titles if they use them to become talk-show-circuit celebs, undermining the monarchy that made them?
> Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer Royals who wear socks.



Great article, thanks for posting it. Without the monarchy, MM would continue to be a mediocre and virtually unknown actress. Se should have in mind the old say, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Great article, thanks for posting it. Without the monarchy, MM would continue to be a mediocre and virtually unknown actress. Se should have in mind the old say, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you."


she's too arrogant for that


----------



## Chagall

Can’t stand Oprah nor JCMH and MM so won’t be watching. I am surprised, though, that Oprah can’t see through these two mega phonies. As I said, I don’t like her much, but I thought she was fairly astute.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She will rehash what she has said before and then say how wonderful things are today. Maybe she and Oprah will take a slow walk around the pretty gardens of her mansion. She will then plug her various business endeavors, Archewell, Netflix, etc. Hoping another sucker executive will see it and think that Meghan must be relevant and offer them a contract for something.
> 
> She likely has wormed family secrets out of Harry by now. But they will save those in case they need to pressure Charles for more money.


My 2 cents on the interview: it will be like an aperitif to stimulate the appetite for Netflix/Spotify, etc. MM will give away very little milk... It will be an audio version of Funding Freedom, and she will grab this opportunity to explain some of the things in book that received major criticisms, like the tiara demands. She was gracious and not demanding... She already explained the "are you OK?", but she will bring it again together with the miscarriage that she said to have suffered. The megxit will be explained by being a victim of racism and, sadly, the BRF didn't do enough to protect her from the tabloids. She will not complain much about the BRF, because that will not bring her more money at this time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I wasn't aware the O magazine was done.  I suspect that's a disappointment.  but as far a O being in the public eye, I think she is still a force to reckon with if she wants to be



She has lost popularity points for many reasons — MeToo, Gayle and Lisa King, her age, her wealth, some expensive failures with her network, politics, etc.  Notice who she vacations with?  It’s all about who ya know and $$$$!

“Bob, Willow, Gayle, Oprah, Diane, Dasha, DVF. A great week in Sicily,” wrote Geffen for an Instagram snap of the stars.








						Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King Take an A-List Vacation on David Geffen's $590 Million Dollar Yacht
					

Music titan David Geffen had a star-studded party on his yacht last week, which saw A-List names like Oprah Winfrey, Gayle King and Diane Sawyer




					people.com
				






Spoiler: MeToo












						Pressured by Simmons Over Exposé, Oprah Winfrey Faced a Big Decision (Published 2020)
					

Ms. Winfrey acknowledged that Russell Simmons pushed her to abandon a documentary about his accusers, but said her own concerns led her to pull support.




					www.nytimes.com
				









Spoiler: Gayle












						Oprah's No Good, Very Bad Few Months
					

After decades of raising questions about our national baggage, Oprah has recently become the center of controversy herself.




					www.buzzfeednews.com
				







ETA:  this is a missed opportunity for all concerned. All 3 would have gained huge points if they had allowed a younger person (WOC) to do the interview. MM‘s interview with Steinem helped no one. Gayle and Oprah are in my age range - old. No one wants to hear from them. Sure, they can be supportive in the background, but it is time to let the young ones have the spotlight.  We all need to know when it is time to pass the torch. IMO, they have stayed too long.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I wasn't aware the O magazine was done.  I suspect that's a disappointment.  but as far a O being in the public eye, I think she is still a force to reckon with if she wants to be


I should have clarified my statement about the magazine, the print edition ended with the December 2020 issue, so no more Oprah at the check stand each  month, but there will be probably 4 digital issues a year starting this year.


----------



## madamelizaking

Great article and to the point. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...RYS-Meghan-royal-duties-didnt-understand.html


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this right — QE distinguishes between private and public patronages ???



H is expected to lose the three honorary Forces titles and MM is set to lose her National Theatre role.

"_One grey area is expected to be the couple's links with the Commonwealth. Meghan is patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities, while Harry is president of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust and the duchess vice-president. Sources suggested that these are likely to go as well. 

The couple are expected to keep their private patronages. These include Harry's roles as patron of the Invictus Games Foundation and Sentebale, a mental health charity. Meghan is patron of women's employment initiative Smart Works and the animal charity Mayhew_."    










						Harry 'upset' after Queen 'agrees he should be stripped of patronages
					

Prince Harry would still be allowed to wear his military medals, including his Operational Service Medal for Afghanistan, but could be prevented from wearing his uniforms.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Redirect Notice


----------



## Lodpah

Waiting for these two horrible human beings to upstage Prince Philip’s hospitalization. Get well soon Sir!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this right — QE distinguishes between private and public patronages ???



Yes that is correct, key patronages are passed down in the family eg National Theatre went from QEII to M, a huge coup for M

The Times reports daily on what the BRF does each day for its official patronages, H and M have not been mentioned in that register for the last year, the Gloucesters and Kents get mentions, no one mentions anyone going to a village fete - those are personal appearances, call them personal patronages if you wish


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I bet she ties her legs together so baby arrives on the same day as The Trooping of the Colour.


Not required , lol, they can just report the news timed to make the biggest splash , they did that for Archie


----------



## CeeJay

HA - in some respects (_and at least to me_), Harry coming on *AFTER* Meghan says a lot .. *WIMPY-WIMPY-WIMPY-HAZZA*!  How much you want to bet that he will whine about the loss of the patronages .. and then Meghan will start talking and talking and talking yet again because she simply cannot stand taking the backseat!  No way am I watching these pathetic hypocrites and I suspect that their whining will not go well with many, especially with what is going on today. 

I've been also thinking about their titles .. I do think that the Queen should remove them, after all .. we Americans do not recognize the titles (_the articles that say that we Americans just LOVE the BRF is aggravating as hell to me - NOT TRUE_)!  Yes, we all know that their stans will say "racism" .. but you know what?? .. I think the Queen should simply say "_they now live in America and in respect to America, the titles had to be removed_ .." * Basta Cosi* (done)!!

Don't mind my HORRIBLE artwork on the *sanctimonious Meghan and the WIMPY JCMH!! 

*


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if Meghan’s doe eyes are going to be less effective with all the filler she has been using lately.


----------



## Chanbal

madamelizaking said:


> Great article and to the point. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...RYS-Meghan-royal-duties-didnt-understand.html


This is a brilliant article. Humphrys's questions for MM are all pertinent, but I doubt Oprah will ask any of them. What MM&H promised or gave to Neflix is still a big mystery. As he said, "_I'm sure you will both agree that a ruthlessly competitive outfit like Netflix doesn't pay out millions to just anybody because they enjoy meeting people — even if they have a 'passion' for it_."


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jayne1 said:


> Even if she loses millions, she still has millions to spare doesn't she and how much does one person need. Her houses must be paid off in full.
> 
> Anyway, with the mighty O, I always thought she needed the attention and adoration.  It must be hard to give up when it was part of her life for so long.



One thing I noticed is how every time she interviewed a celeb, they spent the first 10 minutes gushing over her. It must have been required.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> she's too arrogant for that


In my book, she is a bad character.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I didn't read the NYT article, but OMG the comments.

"Now it will come out what the BRF did to that woman." Like what...spoil her rotten?

Also "what they did to Archie in 2019". What did they do to him? I seriously have no clue what they are referring to.


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this right — QE distinguishes between private and public patronages ???




The BRF have no control over patronages that belong to charities that for the lack of better words are private business. Patronages that were passed down directly from the Queen like the Royal Theatre, Military patronages and Commonwealth related work are something in their control but charities like Smartworjs and Mayhew are private and can choose who they want.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Redirect Notice


I saw the news about Philip's hospitalization this morning. This is a men that dedicated all his life to serve the monarchy and the country. I believe that all this drama created by MM&H, which is making QE's life very difficult, is also affecting his health.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

I swear comments under US media about these two losers are the only place you'd find anyone still blindly rooting for them. 

I was curious and looked at the Chinese hashtag for MM and JCMH on Instagram, and basically 99% of the commentors under the few media posts about them see right through them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The interview will be full of woke catch-phrases, self-importance, blame-the-entitled-royals, etc.  In other words, another lecture on how we the people are stupid and they the wealthy are the smart ones. 

Most certainly, it will not include a discussion of family loyalty (gasp), responsible behavior (?!), or anything we the people care about.  Truly, we the people are on our own in this milieu. Even the French are publicly rejecting American ideas. H&M are too little, too late









						Will American Ideas Tear France Apart? Some of Its Leaders Think So (Published 2021)
					

Politicians and prominent intellectuals say social theories from the United States on race, gender and post-colonialism are a threat to French identity and the French republic.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Yes that is correct, key patronages are passed down in the family eg National Theatre went from QEII to M, a huge coup for M
> 
> The Times reports daily on what the BRF does each day for its official patronages, H and M have not been mentioned in that register for the last year, the Gloucesters and Kents get mentions, no one mentions anyone going to a village fete - those are personal appearances, call them personal patronages if you wish


An example of the official patronage work for today 
Court Circular 






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

Jayne1 said:


> They were evasive about the first birth. They can say what they like about the second. She’s about to give birth, she just gave birth... maybe the surrogate already did. lol


Right? I wouldn’t be surprised if she goes into labour during the Oprah interview. First the BBC states she’s due in September, then today I read she’s due just after Archie™️ birthday in May. Other reports say the end of Spring (which IIRC, was the wording used when asked about the due date of her first). For her to give birth at that time, she would have gotten pregnant in what... late August? So when her op-ed piece in the NYT was published on Thanksgiving, she was already two, two-and-a-half months pregnant? Maybe three?
I also read it is reportedly a boy. Or maybe a girl. Could be twins. One of each? Who knows. Whatever is the most in favour right now. 
I still think it’s being kept under wraps to coincide with Diana’s July 1st Birthday but imma say she’s probably 5-6 months pregnant. 
I’ll be watching Stanley Tucci’s series on another network that night, so I’m sorry I’ll miss Oprah’s “you get an oat milk latte! and you get an oat milk latte! and you get an oat milk latte!...”

PS: Is it still Black History Month? *crickets* (unless you wanna count piggybacking on Amanda Gorman)


----------



## bisbee

V0N1B2 said:


> PS: Is it still Black History Month? *crickets* (unless you wanna count piggybacking on Amanda Gorman)



February is Black History Month.  Today is February 17th.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> Right? I wouldn’t be surprised if she goes into labour during the Oprah interview. First the BBC states she’s due in September, then today I read she’s due just after Archie™️ birthday in May. Other reports say the end of Spring (which IIRC, was the wording used when asked about the due date of her first). For her to give birth at that time, she would have gotten pregnant in what... late August? So when her op-ed piece in the NYT was published on Thanksgiving, she was already two, two-and-a-half months pregnant? Maybe three?
> I also read it is reportedly a boy. Or maybe a girl. Could be twins. One of each? Who knows. Whatever is the most in favour right now.
> I still think it’s being kept under wraps to coincide with Diana’s July 1st Birthday but imma say she’s probably 5-6 months pregnant.
> I’ll be watching Stanley Tucci’s series on another network that night, so I’m sorry I’ll miss Oprah’s “you get an oat milk latte! and you get an oat milk latte! and you get an oat milk latte!...”
> 
> PS: Is it still Black History Month? *crickets* (unless you wanna count piggybacking on Amanda Gorman)



DH and I love _Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy_! We're ready for a post-Covid trip to Italy after seeing all the amazing scenery and food.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if Meghan’s doe eyes are going to be less effective with all the filler she has been using lately.


OMGosh!  We get to see what she really looks like?  It all depends upon how the CBS camera and lighting guys do their set ups.  Or is this being done in Oprah's studio?  Or another Zoom?


----------



## bag-mania

What happened to Harry being on James Corden’s Carpool Karaoke? Did that air and nobody noticed?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> What happened to Harry being on James Corden’s Carpool Karaoke? Did that air and nobody noticed?



Saving it for the media blitz for “the” interview!

With H&M, the actual birth date does not matter. Beebee will be born when it can capture the most headlines and $$$.

ETA: The pre-promo photos were just a tease for this week [possibly], but then Mother Nature stepped in and changed everything. 









						How to Watch Prince Harry's Appearance on The Late Late Show With James Corden
					

Harry opened up about fatherhood, and why he felt he had to step back from his royal role.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_No word yet on when the segment might run, but we'll be sure to update this post as soon as we know more._


----------



## Chanbal

I just saw Paris new engagement ring on DM.  I wonder if she keeps all of her several $2M engagement rings.   MM needs a ring like that to go with the 16-toilet mansion that is already in her name. This is Hollywood H, you need to give her more bling.


----------



## TimeToShop

Do you suppose M is busy planning her baby shower? That nursery ain’t gonna outfit itself. Maybe she’s hoping Oprah will come through with a big gift!


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> OMGosh!  We get to see what she really looks like?  It all depends upon how the CBS camera and lighting guys do their set ups.  Or is this being done in Oprah's studio?  Or another Zoom?


Oprah has fabulous lighting.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> OMGosh!  We get to see what she really looks like?  It all depends upon how the CBS camera and lighting guys do their set ups.  Or is this being done in Oprah's studio?  Or another Zoom?


You mean the almost 40 year old ingenue? The one that can’t really relate to real women of substance because you know . . . most women can see through her?


----------



## redney

bisbee said:


> February is Black History Month.  Today is February 17th.


Think V0N was referencing the fact that MM seems to have "forgotten" it's Black History Month.


----------



## rose60610

I'm tempted to watch the show to confirm how many of my predictions were accurate.

1. M will at the very least hint that the BRF is racist but she doesn't want to hurt them. They just probably didn't know better. M believes that this is taking the high road and shows humility.
2. O will express sympathy and state that all the money and luxuries in the world cannot compensate for all the pain and brutal treatment the BRF gave her. O will state that she can't understand how M tolerated such a hellish existence. 
3. O will state how gorgeous her wedding was and what a treat it was to be there. That it was nice of Charles to walk her down the aisle but failed to protect her from the awful media.
4. M will cast herself as the ultimate victim, not understanding how people can be mean despite her giving all her energy and sacrificing her privacy to serve the people of England.
5. M will admit that, yes, the BRF was generous to her, but they basically threw her to the wolves.
6. I predict M will play the victim card nine times .
7. They will gush about being neighbors !!!!
8. M will wear something form fitting that shows off a massive bump to constantly insinuate that you can't criticize a pregnant woman.
9. Harry will appear, and it'll be 50/50 if he's wearing shoes.


----------



## csshopper

jennlt said:


> DH and I love _Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy_! We're ready for a post-Covid trip to Italy after seeing all the amazing scenery and food.


No brainer at my house: Tucci 1 - Oprah 0. Italy was one of my late husband’s and mine most fun, favorite trips. Already hooked on seeing it again via Stanley Tucci.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> No brainer at my house: Tucci 1 - Oprah 0. Italy was one of my late husband’s and mine most fun, favorite trips. Already hooked on seeing it again via Stanley Tucci.


Sunday night is movie night for us, so Oprah 0 as well. Italy is so beautiful, I can't wait to be able to travel again.


----------



## Chagall

We have to remember that Oprah came from very humble beginnings. I suppose she views interviewing royalty, even the exiled ones, as a feather in her cap. I would have a lot more respect for her if she had been able to resist the temptation.


----------



## rose60610

Chagall said:


> We have to remember that Oprah came from very humble beginnings. I suppose she views interviewing royalty, even the exiled ones, as a feather in her cap. I would have a lot more respect for her if she had been able to resist the temptation.



True. I'll give it to Oprah that she is a completely self made billionaire, took risks, and I applaud her for that. I've heard she could be mean and made unreasonable demands on her staff when her talk show was on TV, and there was the incident at Hermes in Paris where she claimed she was discriminated against for not being able to enter, when the truth was, the store was closed. Had she phoned ahead and explained she wanted to shop after it closed (like some celebrities or private wealthy people do) I don't think it'd been a problem. But drama always wins the day. That said, I'll credit her for making a ton of money through her own work, not by marrying a prince and having the world kiss your rear end as a result.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> OMGosh!  We get to see what she really looks like?  It all depends upon how the CBS camera and lighting guys do their set ups.  Or is this being done in Oprah's studio?  Or another Zoom?


Unfortunately, Oprah knows how to get lighting done ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> True. I'll give it to Oprah that she is a completely self made billionaire, took risks, and I applaud her for that. I've heard she could be mean and made unreasonable demands on her staff when her talk show was on TV, and there was the incident at Hermes in Paris where she claimed she was discriminated against for not being able to enter, when the truth was, the store was closed. Had she phoned ahead and explained she wanted to shop after it closed (like some celebrities or private wealthy people do) I don't think it'd been a problem. But drama always wins the day. That said, I'll credit her for making a ton of money through her own work, not by marrying a prince and having the world kiss your rear end as a result.



Oprah definitely had appeal and something to offer. She was witty but I think what made also her appealing was her coming from nothing to achieve what she did. But somewhere along the line, her head got too big. I never got to watch her show because I worked from the time I was 16-40 and then I had my first daughter. I would catch bits of her show now and then so I was excited when I was put on bedrest that I could watch it every day for the first time ever. But it was shortly after her 50th birthday and she talked about her party constantly. Literally every day. I was so put off by how narcissistic she was, I stopped watching her show.

I watch old episodes of Johnny Carson sometimes and one thing about him was that he didn't get a big head. If a guest started complimenting him, he quickly shut them down and said thank you and moved on. He hated it when they did that.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I'm tempted to watch the show to confirm how many of my predictions were accurate.
> 
> 1. M will at the very least hint that the BRF is racist but she doesn't want to hurt them. They just probably didn't know better. M believes that this is taking the high road and shows humility.
> 2. O will express sympathy and state that all the money and luxuries in the world cannot compensate for all the pain and brutal treatment the BRF gave her. O will state that she can't understand how M tolerated such a hellish existence.
> 3. O will state how gorgeous her wedding was and what a treat it was to be there. That it was nice of Charles to walk her down the aisle but failed to protect her from the awful media.
> 4. M will cast herself as the ultimate victim, not understanding how people can be mean despite her giving all her energy and sacrificing her privacy to serve the people of England.
> 5. M will admit that, yes, the BRF was generous to her, but they basically threw her to the wolves.
> 6. I predict M will play the victim card nine times .
> 7. They will gush about being neighbors !!!!
> 8. M will wear something form fitting that shows off a massive bump to constantly insinuate that you can't criticize a pregnant woman.
> 9. Harry will appear, and it'll be 50/50 if he's wearing shoes.


Who volunteers to keep an “office” pool for the predictions ? I’m in for $10 , the cost of a ticket to go to a movie matinee

love love love the emojis , the pool needs to have a best emoji category please


----------



## marietouchet

In morning news feed ... 

Remember People magazine which had been co-opted by the evil dark side ...

Nice low key story , E is doing well after C section due to her scoliosis, nice ... has People gone over to the light ?


----------



## lulilu

rose60610 said:


> True. I'll give it to Oprah that she is a completely self made billionaire, took risks, and I applaud her for that. I've heard she could be mean and made unreasonable demands on her staff when her talk show was on TV, and th*ere was the incident at Hermes in Paris where she claimed she was discriminated against for not being able to enter, when the truth was, the store was closed. Had she phoned ahead and explained she wanted to shop after it closed (like some celebrities or private wealthy people do) I don't think it'd been a problem. * thBut drama always wins the day. That said, I'll credit her for making a ton of money through her own work, not by marrying a prince and having the world kiss your rear end as a result.



The store was closed and they were in the middle of preparing for a big event at the store.  Not conducive to having customers in.


----------



## 1LV

Oprah has just as much to gain from this interview as MM hopes to.


----------



## bag-mania

It's a given that Oprah will provide them with a list of questions ahead of time so they can orchestrate and rehearse their responses. It isn't a gotcha investigative news piece, it's 100% pure entertainment. Nothing will be left to chance.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Oprah definitely had appeal and something to offer. She was witty but I think what made also her appealing was her coming from nothing to achieve what she did. But somewhere along the line, her head got too big. I never got to watch her show because I worked from the time I was 16-40 and then I had my first daughter. I would catch bits of her show now and then so I was excited when I was put on bedrest that I could watch it every day for the first time ever. But it was shortly after her 50th birthday and she talked about her party constantly. Literally every day. I was so put off by how narcissistic she was, I stopped watching her show.
> 
> I watch old episodes of Johnny Carson sometimes and one thing about him was that he didn't get a big head. If a guest started complimenting him, he quickly shut them down and said thank you and moved on. He hated it when they did that.


Johnny was great but I heard that he and Letterman both could be pretty cold when the camera wasn't running....no one is perfect.  I'm in the minority here I guess but I still like Oprah.  As you said she is truly self-made - worked hard for her success, dreamed big and made it happen.  
Too bad she has jumped on M's bandwagon.  I think Meghan is benefitting from her mother's background when she herself has mostly lived the life of a white woman.  Hope this doesn't offend anyone - just my opinion.


----------



## Chanbal

H's new boss, Netflix is hurting several of his family members, including grandpa Philip. Though, H without need (he has plenty of family money) sold his soul to Netflix. He is making his family unnecessarily nervous with his interview with Oprah. MM&H are selling his family name to make tons of money and a cheap celebrity status. To me MM&H are already the winners of the Award of the Century for Greed and Hypocrisy. They should share their prize with Oprah and whoever is helping them to damage the BRF. 









						Prince Philip 'extremely upset' by 'cruel' The Crown scene that 'twisted truth'
					

The Duke of Edinburgh Prince Philip's sister Princess Cecilie tragically died in a plane crash when he was just a young boy - he is said to have been upset at the scene in Netflix show The Crown




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It's a given that Oprah will provide them with a list of questions ahead of time so they can orchestrate and rehearse their responses. It isn't a gotcha investigative news piece, it's 100% pure entertainment. *Nothing will be left to chance.*


MM never leaves anything to chance. We already understood how meticulously planned was the hunting for H in the UK .


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It's a given that Oprah will provide them with a list of questions ahead of time so they can orchestrate and rehearse their responses. It isn't a gotcha investigative news piece, it's 100% pure entertainment. Nothing will be left to chance.


it's a platform for them to sell themselves...she isn't going to surprise them
Oh, and Harry can say again that he loves his family even though they are on different paths.  What can M say about her dad?  that he should not have shared her letter?  that she doesn't forgive him or care that he is in poor health?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Have you seen the beautiful pictures Stephanie of Luxembourg in the purse fashion thread? I find it difficult to understand how Stephanie, wife of #1 and mother of #2 in the Luxembourg line of succession can be so freely photographed, while the wife of #6 in the line of British succession won't allow herself or her son, who is #7 in the line of succession, to be photographed without monetary rewards. 

Edited because I had difficulty uploading pic.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Have you seen the beautiful pictures of HGD Stephanie of Luxembourg in the purse fashion thread? I find it difficult to understand how Stephanie, wife of #1 and mother of #2 in the Luxembourg line of succession can be so freely photographed, while the wife of #6 in the line of British succession won't allow herself or her son, who is #7 in the line of succession, to be photographed without monetary rewards.


it seems it's all about the fame (and money).  I can't begin to understand Meghan as I'm a person who doesn't really seek attention.  It seems to me that Harry was her ticket to bigger fame that she could have dreamed of achieving as an actress and that was what she craved.  would be interesting if Oprah questioned her about that but it will never happen


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Have you seen the beautiful pictures of HGD Stephanie of Luxembourg in the purse fashion thread? I find it difficult to understand how Stephanie, wife of #1 and mother of #2 in the Luxembourg line of succession can be so freely photographed, while the wife of #6 in the line of British succession won't allow herself or her son, who is #7 in the line of succession, to be photographed without monetary rewards.



Do you even go here. She's IMPORTANT and FAMOUS and a CELEBRITY. She had to take a private jet four times in ten days to protect herself and her son, yet for some reason #2, 3, 4 and 5 in line along with the future queen could catch a budget flight to Scotland.

Said future queen is also somehow not too famous to attend parent stuff for her kids' school and was able to take #5 out of the car to show him ships on the Thames when she was stuck in traffic, all without someone dying.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Maggie Muggins said:


> Have you seen the beautiful pictures Stephanie of Luxembourg in the purse fashion thread? I find it difficult to understand how Stephanie, wife of #1 and mother of #2 in the Luxembourg line of succession can be so freely photographed, while the wife of #6 in the line of British succession won't allow herself or her son, who is #7 in the line of succession, to be photographed without monetary rewards.
> 
> Edited because I had difficulty uploading pic.


To be fair, the demand for MM's photos isn't so high so...


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> Johnny was great but I heard that he and Letterman both could be pretty cold when the camera wasn't running....no one is perfect.  I'm in the minority here I guess but I still like Oprah.  As you said she is truly self-made - worked hard for her success, dreamed big and made it happen.
> Too bad she has jumped on M's bandwagon.  I think Meghan is benefitting from her mother's background when she herself has mostly lived the life of a white woman.  Hope this doesn't offend anyone - just my opinion.



I have heard similar things about Johnny but he was apparently painfully shy believe it or not but came alive when the cameras were rolling. I think the meanness was that he was a mean drunk. I think he cleaned up the last years of his life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I sometimes wonder what Chelsea thinks...does she feel sad for Harry or is she just happy she stayed out of the mess.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@QueenofWrapDress  I posted an article a while back about Harry's exes, but I can't remember if this is it: Harry's Exes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That Crown crew should be ashamed of themselves. Artistic liberties whatever, making up a story how a teenager is somehow responsible for the death of his sister and her whole family is beyond cruel and sh*tty.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> View attachment 4994695
> 
> Have you seen the beautiful pictures Stephanie of Luxembourg in the purse fashion thread? I find it difficult to understand how Stephanie, wife of #1 and mother of #2 in the Luxembourg line of succession can be so freely photographed, while the wife of #6 in the line of British succession won't allow herself or her son, who is #7 in the line of succession, to be photographed without monetary rewards.
> 
> Edited because I had difficulty uploading pic.


Wow that baby is adorable.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> View attachment 4994695
> cu
> Have you seen the beautiful pictures Stephanie of Luxembourg in the purse fashion thread? I find it difficult to understand how Stephanie, wife of #1 and mother of #2 in the Luxembourg line of succession can be so freely photographed, while the wife of #6 in the line of British succession won't allow herself or her son, who is #7 in the line of succession, to be photographed without monetary rewards.
> 
> Edited because I had difficulty uploading pic.


cute baby


----------



## lanasyogamama

Allisonfaye said:


> I have heard similar things about Johnny but he was apparently painfully shy believe it or not but came alive when the cameras were rolling. I think the meanness was that he was a mean drunk. I think he cleaned up the last years of his life.


Dave has expressed regret for how he treated people over the years as well. Busy Phillips has a podcast and one of the cohosts was Dave’s assistant for years and has really good things to say about him which to me means a lot.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Oprah definitely had appeal and something to offer. She was witty but I think what made also her appealing was her coming from nothing to achieve what she did. But somewhere along the line, her head got too big. I never got to watch her show because I worked from the time I was 16-40 and then I had my first daughter. I would catch bits of her show now and then so I was excited when I was put on bedrest that I could watch it every day for the first time ever. But it was shortly after her 50th birthday and she talked about her party constantly. Literally every day. I was so put off by how narcissistic she was, I stopped watching her show.



As someone who grew up in the Baltimore area where Oprah spent her early years learning her craft, I can assure you she did not start out being that good. She was an anchor on the noon news broadcast and she regularly made mistakes, particularly the first few years. It was only after she became a cohost on a local talk show that she really blossomed. That talk show format was her medium.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Do you even go here*. She's IMPORTANT and FAMOUS and a CELEBRITY. She had to take a private jet four times in ten days to protect herself and her son, yet for some reason #2, 3, 4 and 5 in line along with the future queen could catch a budget flight to Scotland.
> 
> Said future queen is also somehow not too famous to attend parent stuff for her kids' school and was able to take #5 out of the car to show him ships on the Thames when she was stuck in traffic, all without someone dying.



I was being sarcastic/facetious and I should have used Mr Rolleyes  for better effect.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Dave has expressed regret for how he treated people over the years as well. Busy Phillips has a podcast and one of the cohosts was Dave’s assistant for years and has really good things to say about him which to me means a lot.



As much as I enjoyed watching Letterman back in the day, you could always tell he was an @sshole underneath. And the older he got, the crankier he became. The man is barely recognizable anymore. With his big Santa beard he looks like he should be auditioning for ZZ Top.

Off topic, but Dave is facing some criticism these days for his treatment of Lindsay Lohan on his show.








						David Letterman's 2013 interview with Lindsay Lohan stirs backlash as fans rediscover video
					

Letterman is getting heat for the interview, during which he repeatedly asked her about rehab, despite her objection.




					ew.com


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> I was being sarcastic/facetious and I should have used Mr Rolleyes  for better effect.


@QueenofWrapDress was joking, too, I'm sure!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> H's new boss, Netflix is hurting several of his family members, including grandpa Philip. Though, H without need (he has plenty of family money) sold his soul to Netflix. He is making his family unnecessarily nervous with his interview with Oprah. MM&H are selling his family name to make tons of money and a cheap celebrity status. To me MM&H are already the winners of the Award of the Century for Greed and Hypocrisy. They should share their prize with Oprah and whoever is helping them to damage the BRF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip 'extremely upset' by 'cruel' The Crown scene that 'twisted truth'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Edinburgh Prince Philip's sister Princess Cecilie tragically died in a plane crash when he was just a young boy - he is said to have been upset at the scene in Netflix show The Crown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


The glimmer twins are - gasp ! - morphing from royals to reality stars !

that said, most reality stars have strict rules about involving non-participating family members, ex remember the Ozzie and Sharon show where one daughter declined to participate ... she is never discussed anywhere ... private 

BUT H&M have NOT YET extricated themselves from the BRF, and the BRF is getting dragged into the mess, badly done 

If H&M want to be reality stars, cool, their decision ... but they should have WAITED for the decree nisi (final judgment AKA review) of their divorce from the BRF , H&M has been publicly playing out the divorce on the internet, in People, using Omid ...


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> As much as I enjoyed watching Letterman back in the day, you could always tell he was an @sshole underneath. And the older he got, the crankier he became. The man is barely recognizable anymore. With his big Santa beard he looks like he should be auditioning for ZZ Top.
> 
> Off topic, but Dave is facing some criticism these days for his treatment of Lindsay Lohan on his show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Letterman's 2013 interview with Lindsay Lohan stirs backlash as fans rediscover video
> 
> 
> Letterman is getting heat for the interview, during which he repeatedly asked her about rehab, despite her objection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com


That was so hard to watch, especially when he didn’t even stop as she was tearing up.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> That was so hard to watch, especially when he didn’t even stop as she was tearing up.



I know. I used to love to watch him in the 80s and 90s because he was funny, but many times the funniest people are also the most cruel.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> *BUT H&M have NOT YET extricated themselves from the BRF, and the BRF is getting dragged into the mess, badly done*
> 
> If H&M want to be reality stars, cool, their decision ... but they should have WAITED for the decree nisi (final judgment AKA review) of their divorce from the BRF , H&M has been publicly playing out the divorce on the internet, in People, using Omid ...



There is a certain segment of the US media who would love to see H&M's shenanigans bring down the BRF. It would be a monumental story.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> As someone who grew up in the Baltimore area where Oprah spent her early years learning her craft, I can assure you she did not start out being that good. She was an anchor on the noon news broadcast and she regularly made mistakes, particularly the first few years. It was only after she became a cohost on a local talk show that she really blossomed. That talk show format was her medium.


and she really looked much more attractive later in life


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> There is a certain segment of the US media who would love to see H&M's shenanigans bring down the BRF. It would be a monumental story.



Just a guess, many of those people would love to gain financially from the BRF failing. 
Those same people would love to command (!) the respect QE and Prince Philip do.

Always best to know what the replacement will be — before tearing it down.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I was being sarcastic/facetious and I should have used Mr Rolleyes  for better effect.



I know, I was trying to be funny (which regularly goes wrong ).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The glimmer twins are - gasp ! - morphing from royals to reality stars !



Can someone tell me where glimmer twins originated? It always makes me think of some extravagant Las Vegas show haha.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> As much as I enjoyed watching Letterman back in the day, you could always tell he was an @sshole underneath. And the older he got, the crankier he became. The man is barely recognizable anymore. With his big Santa beard he looks like he should be auditioning for ZZ Top.
> 
> Off topic, but Dave is facing some criticism these days for his treatment of Lindsay Lohan on his show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Letterman's 2013 interview with Lindsay Lohan stirs backlash as fans rediscover video
> 
> 
> Letterman is getting heat for the interview, during which he repeatedly asked her about rehab, despite her objection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com



IMO, Dave’s behavior says more about CBS than Dave himself. CBS promoted him, tolerated him, etc.  They should take responsibility. Remember, this is the network of Charlie Rose.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It's a given that Oprah will provide them with a list of questions ahead of time so they can orchestrate and rehearse their responses. It isn't a gotcha investigative news piece, it's 100% pure entertainment. Nothing will be left to chance.



Just rewatch the Sarah Ferguson interviews. It will be that x 1000. O desperately tried to make Sarah ‘happen’ here.
It did not work then.  It won’t work now.  Royals are fun to watch from afar, but up close? Not so much. The further they get from the palace the less they shine.

_
Jagger and Richards adopted the nickname "*The Glimmer Twins*" after a vacation cruise they took to Brazil in December 1968/January 1969 with their then-girlfriends, Marianne Faithfull and Anita Pallenberg. An older English couple on the ship kept asking Richards and Jagger who they were. When they refused to reveal their identities, the woman reportedly kept asking, "just give us a glimmer" (as in "give us a hint about who you are"), which amused Jagger and Richards.








						Jagger–Richards - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## RueMonge

sdkitty said:


> and she really looked much more attractive later in life


Yes, I think she was more attractive as she became more self confident.


----------



## sdkitty

RueMonge said:


> Yes, I think she was more attractive as she became more self confident.


and got better hair and makeup


----------



## CeeJay

TimeToShop said:


> Do you suppose M is busy planning her baby shower? That nursery ain’t gonna outfit itself. Maybe she’s hoping Oprah will come through with a big gift!


I was *thoroughly disgusted* with that Baby Shower .. yeah, take a private plane (_after all your talk about the environment_), stay at one of the most expensive hotels in NYC .. in the 'executive suite' (or whatever) .. cost-a-plenty, and then get a plethora of gifts from people you *BARELY* knew (_Gayle King, etc._)!  I have to say, I give kudos to Reese Witherspoon who .. was invited to the wedding but declined because (as she said) - "_I've never even met her, why would I go_?".


----------



## Lodpah

Mystery solved as to why the interview is set on that particular date. Apparently some sleuth in the internet said it’s before C-day?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I was *thoroughly disgusted* with that Baby Shower .. yeah, take a private plane (_after all your talk about the environment_), stay at one of the most expensive hotels in NYC .. in the 'executive suite' (or whatever) .. cost-a-plenty, and then get a plethora of gifts from people you *BARELY* knew (_Gayle King, etc._)!  I have to say, I give kudos to Reese Witherspoon who .. was invited to the wedding but declined because (as she said) - "_I've never even met her, why would I go_?".


exactly
in regard to gayle, I like her but I don't like the fawning over H&M


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> There is a certain segment of the US media who would love to see H&M's shenanigans bring down the BRF. It would be a monumental story.


I know I am a dreamer but somehow hoping for someone to fail is not my thing , yuck !


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just rewatch the Sarah Ferguson interviews. It will be that x 1000. O desperately tried to make Sarah ‘happen’ here.
> It did not work then.  It won’t work now.  Royals are fun to watch from afar, but up close? Not so much. The further they get from the palace the less they shine.
> 
> 
> _Jagger and Richards adopted the nickname "*The Glimmer Twins*" after a vacation cruise they took to Brazil in December 1968/January 1969 with their then-girlfriends, Marianne Faithfull and Anita Pallenberg. An older English couple on the ship kept asking Richards and Jagger who they were. When they refused to reveal their identities, the woman reportedly kept asking, "just give us a glimmer" (as in "give us a hint about who you are"), which amused Jagger and Richards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jagger–Richards - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



LOVE "tuning in" here each day, you all brighten the universe with the conversations and the fun facts we gather in the process!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone tell me where glimmer twins originated? It always makes me think of some extravagant Las Vegas show haha.


It was also used (_way back in the day_) for Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, so don't know why folks are using it for JCMH + MM?!?!?


----------



## TimeToShop

CeeJay said:


> I was *thoroughly disgusted* with that Baby Shower .. yeah, take a private plane (_after all your talk about the environment_), stay at one of the most expensive hotels in NYC .. in the 'executive suite' (or whatever) .. cost-a-plenty, and then get a plethora of gifts from people you *BARELY* knew (_Gayle King, etc._)!  I have to say, I give kudos to Reese Witherspoon who .. was invited to the wedding but declined because (as she said) - "_I've never even met her, why would I go_?".



Grifters gonna grift.

Perhaps she’ll use the interview to push her next “investment “.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> It was also used (_way back in the day_) for Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, so don't know why folks are using it for JCMH + MM?!?!?


Kind of an obscure metaphor of mine
Jagger and Richards were money grubbing tax exiles for years ... LONG  before Mick became Sir Mick
Personally I think of MM as a shimmering little star or raindrop, so IMHO glimmer suits
Of course the allusion to Las Vegas is pretty good too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TimeToShop

Do you think M was worried things may not go her way at the review so she came up with the idea of the interview? Who better to tell her tale of woe to than Oprah? She knows that will draw ratings.

M can use her acting skills  to tell how horribly she was treated. How they had to flee in the night. How she is now having to, gasp, work.

You know Oprah won’t follow up with, ya you left but you bounced from mansion to mansion until you ended up in your own. Nor will she ask what work she’s done besides that podcast. Nor will she ask M that if she wanted privacy why do we all now know what H’s feet look like. 

M figures she can garner all kinds of sympathy and outrage so there will be no way the Queen can cut them loose.


----------



## gelbergirl

will Oprah slip Harry a note offering to help him and Archie escape?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> There is a certain segment of the US media who would love to see H&M's shenanigans bring down the BRF. It would be a monumental story.


Funny, I've been telling hubby this since the Diana days. Are we just psychic or do we have our finger on the pulse of the world?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Jagger and Richards were notorious for misbehaving ...



Sure, but Jagger and Richards misbehaved in a cool rocker way, not like these two lame, entitled, judgmental attention-addicts. They offer nothing but empty promises via sound bites. Apparently their fans don't care that they are all fluff and no substance.


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> will Oprah slip Harry a note offering to help him and Archie escape?



Oh, hell no! Oprah is 100% TEAM MEGHAN.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Funny, I've been telling hubby this since the Diana days. Are we just psychic or do we have our finger on the pulse of the world?



I don't think we're psychic, just realists.   

Disruption and chaos is good for the news business. Very good.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Sure, but Jagger and Richards misbehaved in a cool rocker way, not like these two lame, entitled, judgmental attention-addicts. They offer nothing but empty promises via sound bites. Apparently their fans don't care that they are all fluff and no substance.


Agree, your point is well taken 
And J & R produced some iconic work - not idle by any means
My bad, my allusion was demeaning to J&R


----------



## Katel

Has this been covered regarding surrogacy? 

“Why did the BRF remove Meghan’s Christian name from Archie’s birth certificate?”  “An heir to the throne must be born from the body of its lawfully married parents” and “the circumstances around Archie’s entrance into the world need to be investigated and be made public knowledge, because the public have a right to know - because H&M are not private citizens.”  Lady C. YouTube below (paraphrased) 

She does take a while to get there (she’s very careful legally), starting around the ~38,39 minute point.


hmmmm...


----------



## bag-mania

TimeToShop said:


> *Do you think M was worried things may not go her way at the review so she came up with the idea of the interview? *Who better to tell her tale of woe to than Oprah? She knows that will draw ratings.
> 
> M can use her acting skills  to tell how horribly she was treated. How they had to flee in the night. How she is now having to, gasp, work.
> 
> You know Oprah won’t follow up with, ya you left but you bounced from mansion to mansion until you ended up in your own. Nor will she ask what work she’s done besides that podcast. Nor will she ask M that if she wanted privacy why do we all now know what H’s feet look like.
> 
> M figures she can garner all kinds of sympathy and outrage so there will be no way the Queen can cut them loose.



No, Meghan is not that worried about the review. Harry might be, but not her. This "one year since finding freedom" interview has likely been a plan for months. Don't be surprised if Oprah collaborates with them on other projects down the road when things are more settled. In show business, it's one hand washes the other for mutual benefit.

Oprah is not going to bring up their hopping from mansion to mansion. Many assumed at the time that it was her intervention that secured them a stay at Tyler Perry's house.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Kind of an obscure metaphor of mine
> Jagger and Richards were money grubbing tax exiles for years ... LONG  before Mick became Sir Mick
> Personally I think of MM as a shimmering little star or raindrop, so IMHO glimmer suits
> Of course the allusion to Las Vegas is pretty good too


*Mick Jagger .. ABSOLUTELY 100%*!  Keith Richards?!?! .. well, let me tell you a story from a friend who used to be a studio Guitar player who worked with some major guitarists in his day.  Unfortunately, one of the other studio musicians had cancer but simply could not pay for the necessary treatment.  So, my friend and others reached out to the various musicians that they had worked with .. Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, and others.  While Eddie Van Halen did send some $$$ (_but certainly not that significant given his wealth_), the person that really surprised them was Keith Richards who (_during a recording session for his solo album - which I loved_!) .. took off his Platinum Rolex watch and said "_*here - sell this and let me know how much more you need*_" .. *what*?!?!  My friend said that of all the guitarists he had worked with, by far .. Keith was the most generous and actually thanked them when they would help, was open to learning new riffs, etc. - that was certainly *NOT *the case with Eric Clapton and to this day, my friend really dislikes Eric because of how he treated the various studio musicians!  Sad because I used to love Eric Clapton's music, but nowadays, I listen to it with a 'different Ear'.


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> Do you think M was worried things may not go her way at the review so she came up with the idea of the interview? Who better to tell her tale of woe to than Oprah? She knows that will draw ratings.
> 
> M can use her acting skills  to tell how horribly she was treated. How they had to flee in the night. How she is now having to, gasp, work.
> 
> You know Oprah won’t follow up with, ya you left but you bounced from mansion to mansion until you ended up in your own. Nor will she ask what work she’s done besides that podcast. Nor will she ask M that if she wanted privacy why do we all now know what H’s feet look like.
> 
> M figures she can garner all kinds of sympathy and outrage so there will be no way the Queen can cut them loose.


and Harry can say how he was protecting his wife


----------



## CeeJay

TimeToShop said:


> *M can use her acting skills*


*What acting skills?!?!?!?! *


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *Mick Jagger .. ABSOLUTELY 100%*!  Keith Richards?!?! .. well, let me tell you a story from a friend who used to be a studio Guitar player who worked with some major guitarists in his day.  Unfortunately, one of the other studio musicians had cancer but simply could not pay for the necessary treatment.  So, my friend and others reached out to the various musicians that they had worked with .. Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, and others.  While Eddie Van Halen did send some $$$ (_but certainly not that significant given his wealth_), the person that really surprised them was Keith Richards who (_during a recording session for his solo album - which I loved_!) .. took off his Platinum Rolex watch and said "_*here - sell this and let me know how much more you need*_" .. *what*?!?!  My friend said that of all the guitarists he had worked with, by far .. Keith was the most generous and actually thanked them when they would help, was open to learning new riffs, etc. - that was certainly *NOT *the case with Eric Clapton and to this day, my friend really dislikes Eric because of how he treated the various studio musicians!  Sad because I used to love Eric Clapton's music, but nowadays, I listen to it with a 'different Ear'.


that's a good story about Keith....I was impressed when he put together a band - himself, eric clapton, etc. - for Chuck Berry, who had always toured without a band and just played with the house bands.  Did you see that documentary?  Chuck didn't really act that grateful but it warmed my heart anyway.  Keith (and mick) showed a lot of respect for the origins of their music.  they also visited muscle shoals (both these events were shown in docmentaries on PBS)


----------



## 1LV

I see the interview and the recent shenanigans leading up to it as _You can’t fire me, I quit _(to save face).


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> As much as I enjoyed watching Letterman back in the day, you could always tell he was an @sshole underneath. And the older he got, the crankier he became. The man is barely recognizable anymore. With his big Santa beard he looks like he should be auditioning for ZZ Top.
> 
> Off topic, but Dave is facing some criticism these days for his treatment of Lindsay Lohan on his show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Letterman's 2013 interview with Lindsay Lohan stirs backlash as fans rediscover video
> 
> 
> Letterman is getting heat for the interview, during which he repeatedly asked her about rehab, despite her objection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com



Don't forget when he had an affair with the intern.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Don't forget when he had an affair with the intern.


I think dave had quite a few sexual "relationships" with people at work.  but he did own up to it and apparently has worked on his marriage since then


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> and she really looked much more attractive later in life





Better glam squad. It was always interesting to see what she wore on Carson. This was my personal favorite. My favorite are the boots. I am sure this outfit wasn't cheap either. She definitely liked/likes expensive clothes...not that there's anything wrong with that if you are footing the bill.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CeeJay said:


> *Mick Jagger .. ABSOLUTELY 100%*!  Keith Richards?!?! .. well, let me tell you a story from a friend who used to be a studio Guitar player who worked with some major guitarists in his day.  Unfortunately, one of the other studio musicians had cancer but simply could not pay for the necessary treatment.  So, my friend and others reached out to the various musicians that they had worked with .. Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, and others.  While Eddie Van Halen did send some $$$ (_but certainly not that significant given his wealth_), the person that really surprised them was Keith Richards who (_during a recording session for his solo album - which I loved_!) .. took off his Platinum Rolex watch and said "_*here - sell this and let me know how much more you need*_" .. *what*?!?!  My friend said that of all the guitarists he had worked with, by far .. Keith was the most generous and actually thanked them when they would help, was open to learning new riffs, etc. - that was certainly *NOT *the case with Eric Clapton and to this day, my friend really dislikes Eric because of how he treated the various studio musicians!  Sad because I used to love Eric Clapton's music, but nowadays, I listen to it with a 'different Ear'.



Kind of how I am with Michael Jackson. After seeing Leaving Neverland, I can never enjoy his songs again.


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny not to share from twitter


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> that's a good story about Keith....I was impressed when he put together a band - himself, eric clapton, etc. - for Chuck Berry, who had always toured without a band and just played with the house bands.  Did you see that documentary?  Chuck didn't really act that grateful but it warmed my heart anyway.  Keith (and mick) showed a lot of respect for the origins of their music.  they also visited muscle shoals (both these events were shown in docmentaries on PBS)


No, I didn't see it .. but not surprised.  From what I understand, Keith was more of the driving force than most realized .. Mick could get lazy whereas Keith always wanted to learn.  Keith spent a fair amount of time in Jamaica and played with the local musicians .. why? .. because he wanted to learn more about Reggae.  My friend was very impressed with him, especially since he was so open to new things and my friend, being primarily a Jazz guitarist, showed him a few techniques and Keith just loved it!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *No, Meghan is not that worried about the review.* Harry might be, but not her. This "one year since finding freedom" interview has likely been a plan for months. Don't be surprised if Oprah collaborates with them on other projects down the road when things are more settled. In show business, it's one hand washes the other for mutual benefit.
> 
> Oprah is not going to bring up their hopping from mansion to mansion. Many assumed at the time that it was her intervention that secured them a stay at Tyler Perry's house.


MM knows that her much beloved duchess tile is safe. She played well the race card, and the BRF won't risk removing her single credential. H's money is also secured with 2 kids, and friends like Oprah. So you are right, there isn't much to worry about for MM. H is likely upset because he can't use his highly decorated military suits and titles, but he will get over it. Quoting MM's plagiarized 'complacent is complicit', H's complacency towards MM's dubious games against his family says a lot...


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Don't forget when he had an affair with the intern.





sdkitty said:


> I think dave had quite a few sexual "relationships" with people at work.  but he did own up to it and apparently has worked on his marriage since then



Yes! And he didn't care when they would find out about each other. This how messy it got.

From _People_ in 2017:
“Most _Late Show_staffers said they had no idea that he was having an affair with Birkitt,” writes Zinoman. “Some suspected as much, and a few said they knew what Letterman was doing. There had been rumors among some on staff about Letterman’s flirtations for years.”

Adding to the drama, when Letterman’s ex-girlfriend and former head writer, Merrill Markoe heard of the affair, her “mind reeled.” She told Zinoman that Letterman had once asked her to write lines for Birkitt. *To summarize: Letterman wanted his ex-girlfriend to write lines for his lover, while he was married to Regina Lasko (the woman with whom he’d cheated on Markoe with).*

On her blog, Markoe joked: “As you can imagine this is a very emotional moment for me because Dave promised me many times that I was the only woman he would ever cheat on.”

Facing criticism from all sides (in a 2015 _NYT_ interview, Letterman reflected on the affair and said that CBS “had good reason to fire” him), the host was in turmoil.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> MM knows that her much beloved duchess tile is safe. She played well the race card, and the BRF won't risk removing her single credential. H's money is also secured with 2 kids, and friends like Oprah. So you are right, there isn't much to worry about for MM. H is likely upset because he can't use his highly decorated military suits and titles, but he will get over it. Quoting MM's plagiarized 'complacent is complicit', H's complacency towards MM's dubious games against his family says a lot...


I see H as a fish out of water in CA though


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> and Harry can say how he was protecting his wife



This seriously seems to give him purpose. Kind of sad if you think of it. He could have gone on to do great things with his life given the massive amount of privilege he has had since birth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC is back.



Also, her son has the worst style ever, but I love how he asks at the beginning of each video "How are you today, mum?"


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I see H as a fish out of water in CA though


I stopped feeling sorry for him. For a person used to the London life, living in Montecito must be driving him crazy.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC is back.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, her son has the worst style ever, but I love how he asks at the beginning of each video "How are you today, mum?"



Those 2 kids were very lucky to have her as mother. She is fun and very likable.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I stopped feeling sorry for him. For a person used to the London life, living in Montecito must be driving him crazy.


not really feeling sorry for him - just sayin


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Mystery solved as to why the interview is set on that particular date. Apparently some sleuth in the internet said it’s before C-day?


For the surrogate?


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> For the surrogate?


Commonwealth Day


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I stopped feeling sorry for him. For a person used to the London life, living in Montecito must be driving him crazy.



why? I can’t think of a place more perfect for him. It’s what he’s always wanted.

I think people give Harry way too much credit... he liked naked billiards in Vegas... Montecito is probably boring...


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> why? I can’t think of a place more perfect for him. It’s what he’s always wanted.
> 
> I think people give Harry way too much credit... he liked naked billiards in Vegas... Montecito is probably boring...


Oh but with that Wife of his, who could want for anything more?


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> Commonwealth Day


haha, I thought that she meant C-section.


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> Oh but with that Wife of his, who could want for anything more?



She’s fine with a Nazi dressing fool for a husband. That tells us all we need to know.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Sol Ryan said:


> She’s fine with a Nazi dressing fool for a husband. That tells us all we need to know.



Man... I’ve been being good and not responding to them... lol


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> She’s fine with a Nazi dressing fool for a husband. That tells us all we need to know.


as long as he has the big title which she can use for fame and fortune.....wonder if she has to pretent to really be in love at this point (I mean for him, not the cameras)


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> why? I can’t think of a place more perfect for him. It’s what he’s always wanted.
> 
> I think people give Harry way too much credit... he liked naked billiards in Vegas... Montecito is probably boring...


Yep, for someone used to live in a big city like London, living in Montecito must be super boring.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> not really feeling sorry for him - just sayin


I don't think living in Montecito will help with his mental health.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't think living in Montecito will help with his mental health.


who knows?  maybe being a dad is keeping him entertained


----------



## CarryOn2020

Welcome back, @Sol Ryan — don’t worry, these 2 do such outrageous stuff that comments are indeed required.

@Chanbal  I doubt he is even there.  
He could hop a private jet to anywhere and we would never know because, ya kno, he demands privacy. Paps have moved on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Fun times


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Mystery solved as to why the interview is set on that particular date. Apparently some sleuth in the internet said it’s before C-day?


Looking up the 08 Mar 2021 Commonwealth day, I , of course, stumbled on last year‘s photos of the great tailoring on the green dress in the Abbey

Great sleuthing , you rock @Lodpah 

does anyone else think that 07 Mar 2021 will be payback? Ie for the 2020 ceremony - icy glares, stares, cold shoulders for H and M and humiliation when not allowed to join the formal procession


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> as long as he has the big title which she can use for fame and fortune.....wonder if she has to pretent to really be in love at this point (I mean for him, not the cameras)


Big title, big money, and big connections... Oprah wouldn't look at MM if she didn't have that UK title.

When you have some time watch the video below towards the end, it may clarify the 'in love' part without the cameras. If true, it is rather shocking.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal  I doubt he is even there.
> He could hop a private jet to anywhere and we would never know because, ya kno, he demands privacy. Paps have moved on.


Good point, assuming that he still has some control on the money to hire a private jet.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I stopped feeling sorry for him. For a person used to the London life, living in Montecito must be driving him crazy.



No way, he’s living his best life!

Think of it. No more important family with high expectations for him. No staff telling him where he must be each day for his schedule. No more being the spare, living in his father’s and brother’s shadows.

He lives in a beautiful home in a gorgeous, temperate environment. He has a wife to make all of the important decisions for him so he doesn’t have to think hard. He has big companies handing him million dollar contracts for work he has never done and has no clue how to fulfill. He got to have sex a lot because Meghan wanted another baby. The list goes on and on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Big title, big money, and big connections... Oprah wouldn't look at MM if she didn't have that UK title.
> 
> When you have some time watch the video below towards the end, it may clarify the 'in love' part without the cameras. If true, it is rather shocking.




Really interesting tidbits in that video. Thank you for posting. 
Is the press ignoring them because of fear of lawsuits?  It’s understandable, but, still, it seems odd. The rumors could very well be true. The Doria-living-there story seemed a stretch to me. These 2 have misled/lied/manipulated so many times that nothing they say is credible. Once they lose credibility, it’s game over. So sad that O ends her career with these 2.  Desperate times, I guess.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Big title, big money, and big connections... Oprah wouldn't look at MM if she didn't have that UK title.
> 
> When you have some time watch the video below towards the end, it may clarify the 'in love' part without the cameras. If true, it is rather shocking.



Thanks.  This was quite interesting.  Just meshes with stories about her not really being a nice person.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Those 2 kids were very lucky to have her as mother. She is fun and very likable.


Yes, as I told another poster, I always wrote her off as a bit of a crank and an attention seeker, but her boys adore her and she appears to have been a good mother.  I have to admit I have to steel myself to listen to her as her speech pattern is rather off putting for me.  She has been giving some very interesting reports and I think she really did do thorough research on the subject at hand.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m surprised that Oprah thinks that people in the US will be interested in hearing about H&M’s hard life of privilege right now. So many people in the US are still struggling... Seems so poorly-timed. These two know nothing about hardships and struggles.

Being picked on by the media is almost expected when you’re in the public eye. It’s the trade-off for mansions and private jets and multi-million dollar contracts. And most of the ire they’ve received is from their own hypocrisy, coattail-riding, and not being genuine.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> No way, he’s living his best life!
> 
> Think of it. No more important family with high expectations for him. No staff telling him where he must be each day for his schedule. No more being the spare, living in his father’s and brother’s shadows.
> 
> He lives in a beautiful home in a gorgeous, temperate environment. He has a wife to make all of the important decisions for him so he doesn’t have to think hard. He has big companies handing him million dollar contracts for work he has never done and has no clue how to fulfill. He got to have sex a lot because Meghan wanted another baby. The list goes on and on.



You raised some good points, but I still think that Montecito is too idyllic for someone used to live in a big city. London is a lot of fun, and as a spare he had plenty of time to enjoy the city. He must be terribly bored in the 16-toilet mansion. And, baby #2 is likely an IVF baby.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really interesting tidbits in that video. Thank you for posting.
> Is the press ignoring them because of fear of lawsuits?  It’s understandable, but, still, it seems odd. The rumors could very well be true. The Doria-living-there story seemed a stretch to me. These 2 have misled/lied/manipulated so many times that nothing they say is credible. Once they lose credibility, it’s game over. So sad that O ends her career with these 2.  Desperate times, I guess.


I believe people are afraid to lose their jobs, MM&H are very litigious. While they will have money to pay SS and other agencies, we will continue being exposed to their very phony and controlled news. Too bad that Oprah is supporting egocentric people like MM and H, she could end her career on a much better note.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Thanks.  This was quite interesting.  Just meshes with stories about her not really being a nice person.


You are welcome. MM is certainly not a nice person. I hope the Firm will be able to deal with her.


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry 'self-isolating': Duke readies for UK return amid Prince Philip health fears*
*PRINCE Harry is reportedly self-isolating at his mansion in California in case his grandfather Prince Philip's condition goes downhill and he has to rush back to the UK.*

The Mirror cited a source as saying Harry has made arrangements to fly by private jet if necessary.

The source said: “Harry is of course concerned for his grandfather’s welfare and is being kept regularly informed on his condition.

“He has chosen to stay in case he is required to return to the UK at short notice.”

It comes as America could be added to the "red list" of countries where passengers are forced to quarantine in the Government's hotels.

But members of the Royal Family have a special dispensation to travel, meaning Harry would not have to do this.

Self-isolating in Montecito


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry 'self-isolating':*



Oooooh, so *that* is what they call it. Sure, we get it.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, so *that* is what they call it. Sure, we get it.


Hasn’t he been self isolating all along and living in the laundry room?   I know I read that someplace lololol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Sharont2305

Just released, now take the titles off them


----------



## CarryOn2020

Proving once again, they do not know when to be quiet:

_A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said: 'As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to the organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal.'








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT be returning as working royals
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed to The Queen that they will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family, Buckingham Palace said today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
Harry’s 99 year old grandfather, Prince Phillip,  remains in hospital.


----------



## Sharont2305

The organisations which will revert to the Queen: 
The Royal Marines,
RAF Honington,
Royal Navy Small Ships and Diving.
The Queen's Commonwealth Trust,
The Rugby Football Union,
The Rugby Football League,
The Royal National Theatre
The Association of Commonwealth Universities.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How long before these groups drop them?

_The couple are, however, expected to retain their private patronages, such as for the Invictus Games, WellChild and Sentebale (Harry); and the Mayhew animal rescue charity and Smart Works (Meghan)._








						Harry and Meghan to lose remaining royal roles at close of Megxit review period
					

Following the news of the couple’s upcoming Oprah interview, the Queen has reportedly agreed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should relinquish their royal patronages




					www.tatler.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

How typical of our Queen- so dignified -  she must be devastated at the betrayal by her grandson -particularly when her beloved 99yr old husband is alone in hospital but the announcement is just to the point,  not blaming and not looking for sympathy - I just wish they would take their titles as well now and remove him from the succession and royal family completely - as far as I’m concerned she was never a Royal anyway due to her behaviour abs attitude and I never want to hear anything else about her ever again  —USA you are welcome to her good luck


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said: 'As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to the organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT be returning as working royals
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed to The Queen that they will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family, Buckingham Palace said today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Harry’s 99 year old grandfather, Prince Phillip,  remains in hospital.



Honestly, at this point I wonder if this delusion has a matching diagnosis.

Also I wonder if the Queen had to force herself to describe Meghan as a beloved family member. I'd be very surprised to learn anyone in this family has even a smidge of benevolence towards her anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> The organisations which will revert to the Queen:
> The Royal Marines,
> RAF Honington,
> Royal Navy Small Ships and Diving.
> The Queen's Commonwealth Trust,
> The Rugby Football Union,
> The Rugby Football League,
> The Royal National Theatre
> The Association of Commonwealth Universities.



Ah, those dutiful two.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, at this point I wonder if this delusion has a matching diagnosis.
> 
> Also I wonder* if the Queen had to force herself to describe Meghan as a beloved family member.* I'd be very surprised to learn anyone in this family has even a smidge of benevolence towards her anymore.



It's called "class".  Something which is totally foreign to ME-gain. Even if the Palace has knives out for them, it's in their interest to feign fondness for them. There are plenty of Crown supporting foot soldiers to protect the castle . QEII at age 94 has a thicker skin than most people and considering what she has been through in her life, tossing a bone to a spoiled, self-absorbed gold digger to pacify M's sugars is a non event for her.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, those dutiful two.



Ah, yes. No wonder they were so exhausted and couldn't take it any more .


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Just released, now take the titles off them


My prediction - Sussex stays (although I hate to predict this)

H&M will become just more of the royal mob - like Lord Frederick Windsor - son of Prince Michael - LFW also has an actress wife  & they live in CA - LFW has a style (not sure what is the proper term for Lord, not a title properly) and Harry remains the son of Charles, so H keeps Sussex

So, H&M will get invites to royal weddings (wont be any for long time though) and will go into rotation for invites for Trooping & Xmas at Sandringham - the whole royal mob is not invited in the same year to those events which might get slimmed down post COVID

H is supposedly isolating in case he has to go to the UK due to his grandfather ...


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do they ever stop patting themselves on the back?


----------



## rose60610

Is H isolating in case he has to go to the UK, or is it an excuse not appear in Oprah's interview after he may have been read the riot act by the family that gave him everything? Including titles.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Is H isolating in case he has to go to the UK, or is it an excuse not appear in Oprah's interview after he may have been read the riot act by the family that gave him everything? Including titles.



For all we know the Oprah interview may already have taken place and is in the process of being edited. Not sure I believe the story that Harry is isolating anyway. He is clearly not someone who thinks ahead and anticipates what could happen to him.

It would be ridiculous to have the interview without at least an appearance by him.  How many viewers are going to watch 90 minutes of Meghan talking about herself without at least some payoff of seeing a glimpse of Harry at the end?


----------



## drifter

Well, I'm hoping for some phenomenal good news that would hog headlines everywhere on the day the interview airs!  Hahah!  Oprah's interview with these 2 insufferable people would get less attention.  Imagine MM's fury!!  On a more serious note, it would be really bad optics if Prince Philip happened to pass away when the interview aired and if those 2 were all "oh nobody asked if we were ok".


----------



## lanasyogamama

lanasyogamama said:


> Do they ever stop patting themselves on the back?


Quoting myself here.  I’m having a deja vu moment, I think I’ve posted the exact same thing before.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

*Harry and Meghan will not return to royal duties, Buckingham Palace says *
*CBC article*
Most of the comments are unfavourable towards the grifters. Here are a some examples.
1.  "There is not much to like about these two self-important opportunists.  He, of course, is the pinnacle of silver spoon, doing nothing to deserve a lifetime of wealth, privilege, fame, adulation, and meaningless titles. She is a perfect match, a gold digger with a track record of using people for her own advancement with no apparent redeemable qualities or talents.  Now they have both turned this charade into hundreds of millions of $$$ with Netflix and Spotify by selling out the Crown.  They should just do the world a favor and just go away for good..."

2. "In stories of similar newsworthiness, my dog had the runs this morning."

3. "What are they going to chat with Oprah about?...will they compare their ankle bracelets?"

*CBC article*


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, at this point I wonder if this delusion has a matching diagnosis.
> 
> Also I wonder if the Queen had to force herself to describe Meghan as a beloved family member. I'd be very surprised to learn anyone in this family has even a smidge of benevolence towards her anymore.


British stiff upper lip and breeding - would love to be a fly on the wall and hear what they truly think of her lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone from the internets trying to help out Oprah:



> Not a fan of Oprah or the markles but I would love it if Oprah pulled the rug out from under them and fired off unscripted hard hitting questions as they realise an interview was all she greased them up for..
> 
> I’d like to see:
> 
> 
> _Meghan, from the very beginning we have seen you leave a trail of broken relationships and people stating you used them as leverage only to discard them. How do you respond to that?
> 
> People have noticed a pattern throughout your marriage that you tend to coincide your own media posts and PR with other events in the royal household. Why is that?
> 
> Harry, some would say that you’re not the only son of Diana and your tendency to bring up her memory to deflect criticism and evoke sympathy could be seen an exploitation. How do you respond?
> 
> Meghan, your father raised you for the majority of your childhood and you were the apple of his eye. We’ve seen how much he doted on you for such a significant time of your life. Can anything he has done truly justify your actions towards him?
> 
> Meghan, you’ve made a few statements in various speeches which have proven to be lies such as you working to pay for your own education. Your father has the bank statements to prove it. What do you say?_



They should hire her *g* Also "Some would say you're not the only son of Diana"...LOL.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Just released, now take the titles off them


well, Harry may still be "much loved" but I doubt they love Meghan


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

his grandfather is 99 and ill...when would he decide it's urgent enough to visit?.....does he think granny is going to call him when Philip is almost dead and he's gonna get there in a couple of hours?  or is he just saying he's planning to go with no intention of doing so?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> well, Harry may still be "much loved" but I doubt they love Meghan



Yeah. If that was my brother I'd still love him and be sad we never spoke through the anger I'd ultimately feel at the betrayal, but the woman who turned him into this horrible version of himself? I'd poke needles in her voodoo doll at night.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Omid is over there on Twitter being his usual ridiculous self. I really wonder what he hopes to get out of licking the soles of her shoes.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> well, Harry may still be "much loved" but I doubt they love Meghan


I would imagine loving MM would be like hugging a porcupine. Based on what we’ve seen you’re bound to get hurt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mulling over their statement...are they doing their own PR again? Because I just cannot see a PR agency worth their salt putting out this petty, petulant statement. They should just have kept it short and sweet "Thanks for the support, we're exited for our new endeavors bla bla". Instead you read the butthurt and the defiance from every word which doesn't make them look good at all. It also makes it very clear to me they chose nothing of this, the Queen finally put her foot down.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> his grandfather is 99 and ill...*when would he decide it's urgent enough to visit?*.....does he think granny is going to call him when Philip is almost dead and he's gonna get there in a couple of hours?  or is he just saying he's planning to go with no intention of doing so?



When Meghan tells him he can visit and not one minute before. He can't leave now! She is WITH CHILD! 

Do you realize how much hand-holding and constant asking if she is okay that requires?


----------



## Chanbal

*Queen urged to 'put foot down' and axe Prince Harry from Royal Family line of succession*


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, at this point I wonder if this delusion has a matching diagnosis.
> 
> Also I wonder if the Queen had to force herself to describe Meghan as a beloved family member. I'd be very surprised to learn anyone in this family has even a smidge of benevolence towards her anymore.



I thought about that. It must be very painful for QE to include MM as a 'beloved family member'. I wish the Firm would be able to 'convince' them to renounce the remaining titles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mulling over their statement...are they doing their own PR again? Because I just cannot see a PR agency worth their salt putting out this petty, petulant statement. They should just have kept it short and sweet "Thanks for the support, we're exited for our new endeavors bla bla". Instead you read the butthurt and the defiance from every word which doesn't make them look good at all. It also makes it very clear to me they chose nothing of this, the Queen finally put her foot down.


I agree, I can’t see how that was possibly written by a professional writer.


----------



## Aimee3

elvisfan4life said:


> British stiff upper lip and breeding - would love to be a fly on the wall and hear what they truly think of her lol


Oh I think we all know what they really think of her...same as most of us on this thread!


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry 'self-isolating': Duke readies for UK return amid Prince Philip health fears*
> *PRINCE Harry is reportedly self-isolating at his mansion in California in case his grandfather Prince Philip's condition goes downhill and he has to rush back to the UK.*
> 
> The Mirror cited a source as saying Harry has made arrangements to fly by private jet if necessary.
> 
> The source said: “Harry is of course concerned for his grandfather’s welfare and is being kept regularly informed on his condition.
> 
> “He has chosen to stay in case he is required to return to the UK at short notice.”
> 
> It comes as America could be added to the "red list" of countries where passengers are forced to quarantine in the Government's hotels.
> 
> But members of the Royal Family have a special dispensation to travel, meaning Harry would not have to do this.
> 
> Self-isolating in Montecito


No need to isolate because I’m betting Harry and the wife have already been vaccinated as I would bet many people of means/celebrity have been able to “jump the line”.


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> Just released, now take the titles off them


Wonderful! Does this also mean that Prince Charles can put his wallet away too?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Omid is over there on Twitter being his usual ridiculous self. I really wonder what he hopes to get out of licking the soles of her shoes.


Did not know ... Omid works with/for Harper’s and ABC (assume he freelances ie works each part time?) he must not be pleased the interview will be at CBS


----------



## chicinthecity777

There is increased pressure in the UK to have Harry removed from line of succession and their titles to be stripped. But to do that, it will need UK Parliament to set a motion. Since the Parliament has more pressing issues to deal with such as a pandemic, I doubt anybody would bother with these 2 for the moment. But I think the time would eventually come.


----------



## Chanbal

The Duke & Duchess statement: 

“_As evidenced by their work over the past year, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal._”

I'm sorry if it was already posted here, but it deserves to be highlighted imo.   They should enter a monastery ASAP.  









						Prince Harry: Subtle clue Duke behind Sussex statement on title loss
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are officially not returning to the Royal Family, a Buckingham Palace announced today  but the couple's response appears it could have been drafted by the Duke himself.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## duna

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The article is irrelevant, but the title is hilarious. 




The irrelevant article


----------



## lulilu

What could possibly be said between Oprah and M that would take 90 minutes?  I am sure it will be chock full of photos and clips of the wedding and others showing how happy and devoted to one another they are.  Barf.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> The Duke & Duchess statement:
> 
> “_*As evidenced by their work over the past year,* The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal._”


  Sorry but I had to laugh at the bold part! They are officially parody themselves!


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry but I had to laugh at the bold part! They are officially parody themselves!


I don't know if they are referring to the sandwiches and hats donations or to their multi-million dollars contracts gotten at the expense of the UK titles. Everything is laughable imo. "We can all live a life of service", I wonder if they are converting the 16-toilet mansion into a monastery.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I don't know if they are referring to the sandwiches and hats donations or to their multi-million dollars contracts gotten at the expense of the UK titles. Everything is laughable imo. "We can all live a life of service", I wonder if they are converting the 16-toilet mansion into a monastery.


You forgot the Spotify podcast and the carpool karaoke! They worked so hard you know!


----------



## Chloe302225

What work in the UK specifically have they done in the past year? I'm sure I didn't miss it because the PR machine would not let us forget it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chloe302225 said:


> What work in the UK specifically have they done in the past year? I'm sure I didn't miss it because the PR machine would not let us forget it.


Zero!


----------



## kemilia

chicinthecity777 said:


> You forgot the Spotify podcast and the carpool karaoke! They worked so hard you know!


And also tromping over gravesites--he did wear his medals--so maybe he counted that as work.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lulilu said:


> What could possibly be said between Oprah and M that would take 90 minutes?  I am sure it will be chock full of photos and clips of the wedding and others showing how happy and devoted to one another they are.  Barf.



Part of it will be the obligatory walk around their gorgeous estate where she will tell us how she loves to sit in her garden or some such BS.


----------



## CarryOn2020

No mention of Archie????













						What do the statements mean after Harry and Meghan stepped down?
					

The two statements issued by Buckingham Palace and Harry and Meghan three minutes apart laid bare the 'deep divisions' between the Sussexes and the rest of Royal Family, royal experts said today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And people eat up that sh*t. That's what stuns me the most. (referring to CarryOn's Oprah post)


Many people will believe anything


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> No brainer at my house: Tucci 1 - Oprah 0. Italy was one of my late husband’s and mine most fun, favorite trips. Already hooked on seeing it again via Stanley Tucci.


How do I not know about this show?!!?  I love Italy!!  Thanks everyone for bringing it up!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Oprah definitely had appeal and something to offer. She was witty but I think what made also her appealing was her coming from nothing to achieve what she did. But somewhere along the line, her head got too big. I never got to watch her show because I worked from the time I was 16-40 and then I had my first daughter. I would catch bits of her show now and then so I was excited when I was put on bedrest that I could watch it every day for the first time ever. But it was shortly after her 50th birthday and she talked about her party constantly. Literally every day. I was so put off by how narcissistic she was, I stopped watching her show.
> 
> I watch old episodes of Johnny Carson sometimes and one thing about him was that he didn't get a big head. If a guest started complimenting him, he quickly shut them down and said thank you and moved on. He hated it when they did that.


As a kid, I loved Oprah!  As I got older, I started realizing her interviews consisted of asking a question, then going on and on  about her own answers to the questions she asked her guests. My dad always said she was a blowhard LOL.  I came to agree with him!


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> The store was closed and they were in the middle of preparing for a big event at the store.  Not conducive to having customers in.


I wish the Hermes chairman had never gone on her show to grovel at her feet.  They’re big enough where her BS accusations wouldn’t have made a dent in their revenue.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a guess, many of those people would love to gain financially from the BRF failing.
> Those same people would love to command (!) the respect QE and Prince Philip do.
> 
> Always best to know what the replacement will be — before tearing it down.


“The devil you know is better than the devil you don’t!”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> As a kid, I loved Oprah!  As I got older, I started realizing her interviews consisted of asking a question, then going on and on  about her own answers to the questions she asked her guests. My dad always said *she was a blowhard* LOL.  I came to agree with him!


My sentiments exactly! I watched a few episodes until I realized that I didn't need her to tell me how to or not to interact with others and what books to read.


----------



## csshopper

A friend who is on Facebook just sent this to me, says it was posted this morning. She's a Brit by birth and is aghast.... it's soooo awful for so many reasons, hardly know what to say....


----------



## marietouchet

even the Meghano-phile People has harshly analysed the H&M statement as being “push back“ against QEII
wow


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> A friend who is on Facebook just sent this to me, says it was posted this morning. She's a Brit by birth and is aghast.... it's soooo awful for so many reasons, hardly know what to say....
> View attachment 4995870


The idea of posting a caricature because she is so afraid someone will repost their photo without remunerating them is disgusting. Don't forget the hand under the maybe-fake baby bump, in case we missed it.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> The Duke & Duchess statement:
> 
> “_As evidenced by their work over the past year, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal._”
> 
> I'm sorry if it was already posted here, but it deserves to be highlighted imo.   They should enter a monastery ASAP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: Subtle clue Duke behind Sussex statement on title loss
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are officially not returning to the Royal Family, a Buckingham Palace announced today  but the couple's response appears it could have been drafted by the Duke himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



The only life of service they lead is of service to themselves


----------



## Handbag1234

As a Brit I really think now they have withdrawn from royal family and been paid a load by Netflix they should pay back the cost of their wedding. They were planning this all along I suspect


----------



## elvisfan4life

Handbag1234 said:


> As a Brit I really think now they have withdrawn from royal family and been paid a load by Netflix they should pay back the cost of their wedding. They were planning this all along I suspect


As a Brit I just want them to stay over there and our press to start ignoring them - this thread should be returned Ginge and Cringe


----------



## 1LV

Good riddance to bad rubbish.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I wish the Hermes chairman had never gone on her show to grovel at her feet.  They’re big enough where her BS accusations wouldn’t have made a dent in their revenue.


He didn't grovel, if I remember correctly.  He never apologized which was why she had him on in the first place. 

He was understanding of her feelings and explained the situation but never apologized.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Latest poll - 95% of Brits want Harry removed from the line of succession


----------



## TimeToShop

As the kids today say, ‘Yasss Queen!’  I’m old so hoped I used it correctly.

Good on the Queen for doing it now. If she had waited until after that poo show of an interview she would have come off as petty. 

I do bet that M will state, at some point in the interview, that they just had to leave for sake of their little family because as you know....family is everything!


----------



## Jayne1

Remember the advance hoopla and excitement when Oprah got the big interview by visiting Michael Jackson at his home during the height of his scandal? 

What a fan girl, she never asked the difficult questions and never followed up on his comments and just toured the house and grounds. She seemed afraid of him.

Don't expect O to ask Meg any hard hitting questions, she never does with anyone that she doesn't feel is far beneath her.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Omid is over there on Twitter being his usual ridiculous self. I really wonder what he hopes to get out of licking the soles of her shoes.


He is such a pompous azzz, I think he has probably seen enough Markled people he is determined to maintain his meal ticket at all costs, integrity and decency be damned. "TheHeirPod" title is so presumptuous. He claims to have a special relationship with Meghan because he is also bi racial, Dad is a Scot and Mom is Iranian. And like Meghan he "edits" the facts, records show he is 39, but in published articles he claims to be 33.

Totally irrelevant to the topic, but it made me laugh, when I clicked on a web site to check his bio a huge portrait picture of him appeared and scrolling underneath was an ad for ear wax cleaning products.


----------



## CeeJay

elvisfan4life said:


> How typical of our Queen- so dignified -  she must be devastated at the betrayal by her grandson -particularly when her beloved 99yr old husband is alone in hospital but the announcement is just to the point,  not blaming and not looking for sympathy - I just wish they would take their titles as well now and remove him from the succession and royal family completely - as far as I’m concerned she was never a Royal anyway due to her behaviour abs attitude and I never want to hear anything else about her ever again  —*USA you are welcome to her good luck*


But WE do not want either of them!!!!!  I say send them to *Trista da Cunha* .. the most remote island in the southern Atlantic Ocean since the Island is a constituent part of the *British Overseas territory*!!!!  Put them on a ship and buh-bye .. 

.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> But WE do not want either of them!!!!!  I say send them to *Trista da Cunha* .. the most remote island in the southern Atlantic Ocean since the Island is a constituent part of the *British Overseas territory*!!!!  Put them on a ship and buh-bye ..
> 
> .



There's always Chunga-Changa


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> It's called "class".  Something which is totally foreign to ME-gain. Even if the Palace has knives out for them, it's in their interest to feign fondness for them. There are plenty of Crown supporting foot soldiers to protect the castle . QEII at age 94 has a thicker skin than most people and considering what she has been through in her life, tossing a bone to a spoiled, self-absorbed gold digger to pacify M's sugars is a non event for her.


The Queen may have been a young girl when it happened the first time with her uncle, but she saw a family member throw it all away and both times, a woman was involved. She probably never expected to see this happen again during her reign. I think in both cases, the men thought they could have it both ways.  Stay on the scene, be HRH'ed, show up in dress uniforms and play soldier for a parade  and for David, a say  in state policy.    QE II's father set his brother straight from the start about all of that:  there can be only one King of England.  With that,  the D/D Windsor's journey to a shallow life commenced.   I suspect that The Queen shares her mother's feeling that abrogation of duty is  completely unacceptable.  There was never a chance that the patronages would be kept.  Taking away the titles would just bring more attention to them and allowing them to be kept, has just made the titles more meaningless in the broader picture.  The HRH is permanently on hold and that won't change.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Omid is over there on Twitter being his usual ridiculous self. I really wonder what he hopes to get out of licking the soles of her shoes.


You are being much too kind .. I would say that he is licking HER ass!!!  Yuck ..


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> When Meghan tells him he can visit and not one minute before. He can't leave now! She is WITH CHILD!
> 
> Do you realize how much hand-holding and constant asking if she is okay that requires?


This is the typical MO.  Make it look like they were invited, or want to be at some event and then pull back with an excuse as to why they can't attend.    They seem to think that doing this makes them look better.  It really doesn't because they have done this do many times, that the people are on to this schtick.  

Their push back press release was along the lines of the manifesto.  It was giving the Queen et al the middle finger.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They will soon find out exactly how much we don’t want them. So will Netflix, Spotify, and OW who, IMO, has really let her supporters down.

There is a YouTube video about the non-Royal dukes of England. The current group of 24? are the last ones. The video gives some insight into their lifestyle and thoughts on the title of Duke.  It is an old-ish video posted in 2017.


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> But WE do not want either of them!!!!!  I say send them to *Trista da Cunha* .. the most remote island in the southern Atlantic Ocean since the Island is a constituent part of the *British Overseas territory*!!!!  Put them on a ship and buh-bye ..
> 
> .


TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!!!!!   
As an American I am embarrassed to share citizenship with that woman, who exemplifies everything and more, attached to the catch phrase "Ugly American" and I am outraged some dimwitted twit with a title thinks he can come here and present himself as some kind of messiah preaching to us on how to live our lives. Like you CeeJay my ancestry goes back to the days of the Revolution and, as much as I love my British friends, we settled the issue of sovereignty with the Treaty of Paris in 1783. Of course, no one has ever accused Henry of being a student, so he may have missed that.

I was looking at headlines before coming here to catch up. Meghan will probably be distressed that she might be upstaged a bit due to the announcement of the Kim-Kanye divorce announcement.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> What could possibly be said between Oprah and M that would take 90 minutes?  I am sure it will be chock full of photos and clips of the wedding and others showing how happy and devoted to one another they are.  Barf.


I agree.  I think we will get an entire replay of the wedding.  Lots of footage of Oprah walking in and sitting in the stalls too. Plus the celebs who attended.  Then a replay of the christening and perhaps the big reveal of the godparents?  Could we be that lucky?  The Smart Works and Vogue cover, begging for a job at the Disney premiere  will also be included. Plus the Africa tour and finding out if she is OK.   So in essence, it will be a replay of _This Was Your Life, Meghan Markle _during your time with the Royal Family.  Maybe a nanosecond of Archie.    Whew!  Forget about her being OK !  Am I OK after writing all of this?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> The idea of posting a caricature because she is so afraid someone will repost their photo without remunerating them is disgusting. Don't forget the hand under the maybe-fake baby bump, in case we missed it.
> View attachment 4995890


She indeed be pregnant, but in that Feb 14th photo, I think she was wearing a pad.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *Queen urged to 'put foot down' and axe Prince Harry from Royal Family line of succession*
> 
> 
> I thought about that. It must be very painful for QE to include MM as a 'beloved family member'. I wish the Firm would be able to 'convince' them to renounce the remaining titles.


They will *NEVER renounce their titles*, that is truly .. the *ONLY *thing that they have left; remember .. that's really how they are marketing themselves .. "_Royals_".  I really wish that QEII would take the titles away and take him out of the line of succession, but we all know that she would then be accused of being racist when in fact, I think that she has every right to do so .. she can simply say "_*they left the Royal Family and now live in America and America does not recognize the British Monarchy titles*_".  However, if I recall, didn't someone say that in order for the Queen to take those titles away, she would have to include parliament?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> A friend who is on Facebook just sent this to me, says it was posted this morning. She's a Brit by birth and is aghast.... it's soooo awful for so many reasons, hardly know what to say....
> View attachment 4995870


Was this posted by H on Facebook? Is he on Facebook? This is such a ridiculous image.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> They will *NEVER renounce their titles*, that is truly .. the *ONLY *thing that they have left; remember .. that's really how they are marketing themselves .. "_Royals_".  I really wish that QEII would take the titles away and take him out of the line of succession, but we all know that she would then be accused of being racist when in fact, I think that she has every right to do so .. she can simply say "_*they left the Royal Family and now live in America and America does not recognize the British Monarchy titles*_".  However, if I recall, didn't someone say that in order for the Queen to take those titles away, she would have to include parliament?



The long game is that leaving the titles, will make them more meaningless because they will cease to be a factor in generating income for them. The Sussex will look foolish if they continue to insist on being called Duke and Duchess.   Look how many titled royals without a country are running around the planet.  The only ones who use them in work are the ones who want to sell you something expensive like antiques, jewelry or similar. and it is for snob appeal.  If Harry falls to that level, then he will be slightly above  the Russian emigres in Paris after the Russian Revolution who used their military uniforms to get a job as a doorman at the Plaza Athenee.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> The long game is that leaving the titles, will make them more meaningless because they will cease to be a factor in generating income for them. The Sussex will look foolish if they continue to insist on being called Duke and Duchess.   Look how many titled royals without a country are running around the planet.  The only ones who use them in work are the ones who want to sell you something expensive like antiques, jewelry or similar. and it is for snob appeal.  If Harry falls to that level, then he will be slightly above  the Russian emigres in Paris after the Russian Revolution who used their military uniforms to get a job as a doorman at the Plaza Athenee.



 She's enough of a narcissist to resort to using "Meghan, former Duchess of Sussex", and would not, of course, realize how ludicrous she would look because she is so special, in her own mind.


----------



## bag-mania

From the MEghan worshipping world of Omid Scobie. Apparently he is clutching his pearls on their behalf because the Palace put up a birthday message for Andrew today.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> They will *NEVER renounce their titles*, that is truly .. the *ONLY *thing that they have left; remember .. that's really how they are marketing themselves .. "_Royals_".  I really wish that QEII would take the titles away and take him out of the line of succession, but we all know that she would then be accused of being racist when in fact, I think that she has every right to do so .. she can simply say "_*they left the Royal Family and now live in America and America does not recognize the British Monarchy titles*_".  However, if I recall, didn't someone say that in order for the Queen to take those titles away, she would have to include parliament?



 I need clarification on his position.  He is still HRH, right? He is still son of the next King and a brother to a future king.  So, while they have no Royal patronages and considered non-working royals (?), all that is left is HRH, right?  

He cannot wear his military uniforms, but he can wear the medals, right?


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> As a kid, I loved Oprah!  As I got older, I started realizing her interviews consisted of asking a question, then going on and on  about her own answers to the questions she asked her guests. My dad always said she was a blowhard LOL.  I came to agree with him!


Same here .. I used to like her but then she became rather 'preachy' and yes .. it became all about '*HER*'!  More importantly, had a dear friend who was on staff for her Magazine (_as a photographer_).  Now, mind you, my friend went to Parsons (_not necessarily an easy place to get into - for Photography_) and worked with some of the major photographers in NYC (_and other major magazines_), but as she was adjusting her camera, she accidentally hit the 'shoot' button and as a result, a very unflattering picture of Oprah was taken.  No way was my friend even going to submit it, it was a mistake .. but Oprah saw it and then *SCREAMED* at my friend, had a fit, took the camera and smashed it down on a table (_thereby breaking a very expensive Leica_) .. and then *FIRED *her on the spot!!!  My friend told me that she didn't so much care about the camera, but having Oprah say really nasty things about her to the entire staff (_when most was not even true_) .. was unbearable.  Oprah then proceeded to make it very hard for my friend to find any other photography work for other magazines since Oprah "_got the word out how horrible she was_".  Needless to say, my friend had to leave the business and leave NYC and has never gone back .. how '*nice*' is that????


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Was this posted by H on Facebook? Is he on Facebook? This is such a ridiculous image.


Chanbal, I'm not certain if he posted or someone else on their behalf. I have never been on Facebook so not sure how the posting of pictures works. There is a Facebook account for Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex with 239,165 "likes".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> From the MEghan worshipping world of Omid Scobie. Apparently he is clutching his pearls on their behalf because the Palace put up a birthday message for Andrew today.
> 
> View attachment 4996064



Andrew played the long game. Did as he was told = stay out of the picture. Made his family behave, especially Sarah.

H&M merched, upstaged the senior royals, did the very thing that royals dislike = call attention to themselves in a glitzy, cheap way.


----------



## Chagall

csshopper said:


> TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!!!!!
> As an American I am embarrassed to share citizenship with that woman, who exemplifies everything and more, attached to the catch phrase "Ugly American" and I am outraged some dimwitted twit with a title thinks he can come here and present himself as some kind of messiah preaching to us on how to live our lives. Like you CeeJay my ancestry goes back to the days of the Revolution and, as much as I love my British friends, we settled the issue of sovereignty with the Treaty of Paris in 1783. Of course, no one has ever accused Henry of being a student, so he may have missed that.
> 
> I was looking at headlines before coming here to catch up. Meghan will probably be distressed that she might be upstaged a bit due to the announcement of the Kim-Kanye divorce announcement.


I know how you must feel about having those two in the US. I’m still feeling the immense relief that came about when they ‘markled’ Canada in favour of the States.


----------



## sdkitty

"pushing back" on the queen....helluva nerve....the arrogance is stunning
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Push Back on Queen's Statement | PEOPLE.com


----------



## Lodpah

She does not have  the “it” factor. He’s a bumbling idiot and they’re both manipulative people. Without the titles there is absolutely no interest in them I would opine.

They spend so much money on their PR that if there really was an interest in MM the magazines that matter would have her on their covers.
I call BS on any major interest in them.

I believe they will be stripped of their titles. The Queen don’t play.


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> Chanbal, I'm not certain if he posted or someone else on their behalf. I have never been on Facebook so not sure how the posting of pictures works. There is a Facebook account for Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex with 239,165 "likes".


I looked at the account just now and it says it is a fan page for fans to leave messages, but that he knows nothing about the page, never goes on it or reads the messages to him.


----------



## bag-mania

What goes up must come down. I don't know how long it will take, but they aren't going to have people fawning over them forever. Even the most inattentive person will eventually figure out that H&M don't actually DO anything. It might take awhile since some of their fans are acting as if they think Harry and Meghan were kicked out rather than that they just quit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> From the MEghan worshipping world of Omid Scobie. Apparently he is clutching his pearls on their behalf because the Palace put up a birthday message for Andrew today.
> 
> View attachment 4996064



So did the Sussexes. Also Andrew, while still a gross individual, got the memo to sit back and shut up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Same here .. I used to like her but then she became rather 'preachy' and yes .. it became all about '*HER*'!  More importantly, had a dear friend who was on staff for her Magazine (_as a photographer_).  Now, mind you, my friend went to Parsons (_not necessarily an easy place to get into - for Photography_) and worked with some of the major photographers in NYC (_and other major magazines_), but as she was adjusting her camera, she accidentally hit the 'shoot' button and as a result, a very unflattering picture of Oprah was taken.  No way was my friend even going to submit it, it was a mistake .. but Oprah saw it and then *SCREAMED* at my friend, had a fit, took the camera and smashed it down on a table (_thereby breaking a very expensive Leica_) .. and then *FIRED *her on the spot!!!  My friend told me that she didn't so much care about the camera, but having Oprah say really nasty things about her to the entire staff (_when most was not even true_) .. was unbearable.  Oprah then proceeded to make it very hard for my friend to find any other photography work for other magazines since Oprah "_got the word out how horrible she was_".  Needless to say, my friend had to leave the business and leave NYC and has never gone back .. how '*nice*' is that????



WTF? I somehow get a feeling M and O might be soulmates.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So did the Sussexes. Also Andrew, while still a gross individual, got the memo to sit back and shut up.



Scobie was pointing out that Andrew still has numerous titles that have not been taken away. But like you said he is far in the background keeping his mouth shut these days. That is something Scobie conveniently doesn't acknowledge.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wallis and Ed — same story. 
Many fingers seem to be pointing at the O interview as the ‘last straw’.  Sad way to end a career, O.









						The true story of what happened between the Queen and the Sussexes | ITV News
					

Despite quitting their roles as senior working royals in March 2020, the Sussexes wanted to maintain their connections to the charities they have worked with. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com
				



_And so this week, the Palace went into final negotiations with the Duke of Sussex, and yes the statement did just say "the Duke".

But the news, revealed first by ITV on Monday, that Harry and Meghan had done a deal with Oprah Winfrey for a big sit down interview on US primetime TV, did not help matters.

The Sussexes had planned to have the "divorce" settlement signed and sealed before announcing the Oprah news.

And given Buckingham Palace were not told about Oprah in advance, the opposing sides had to complete negotiations this week in a more tense atmosphere than they'd both anticipated._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, because the People article had one of the million handholding pics. How come the last few paparazzi pics were without the silly handholding? I had thought for a while before they left she was probably doing it to p*ss people off as it was sooo obnoxious I can't believe a nearly 40 yo woman would behave like this in public because she was oh so in love.


----------



## csshopper

Chagall said:


> I know how you must feel about having those two in the US. I’m still feeling the immense relief that came about when they ‘markled’ Canada in favour of the States.


I am envious, but understand your pride in your beautiful country not be sullied!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Scobie was pointing out that Andrew still has numerous titles that have not been taken away. But like you said he is far in the background keeping his mouth shut these days. That is something Scobie conveniently doesn't acknowledge.



Yeah, that is probably because he didn't desert his country and duties. I really don't want to stand here and have anything positive to say about a sexual predator, but I completely don't understand why Scobie fails to see the part the Sussexes played in their downgrade. What did he expect?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Sussexes had planned to have the "divorce" settlement signed and sealed before announcing the Oprah news._



Too bad someone did their homework and leaked it. They really don't learn, do they? In this case, that they are really not as smart as they think.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!!!!!
> As an American I am embarrassed to share citizenship with that woman, who exemplifies everything and more, attached to the catch phrase "Ugly American" and I am outraged some dimwitted twit with a title thinks he can come here and present himself as some kind of messiah preaching to us on how to live our lives. Like you CeeJay my ancestry goes back to the days of the Revolution and, as much as I love my British friends, we settled the issue of sovereignty with the Treaty of Paris in 1783. Of course, no one has ever accused Henry of being a student, so he may have missed that.
> 
> I was looking at headlines before coming here to catch up. *Meghan will probably be distressed that she might be upstaged a bit due to the announcement of the Kim-Kanye divorce announcement.*


I just saw that .. HA!!!!  Perfect timing Kim ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, because the People article had one of the million handholding pics. How come the last few paparazzi pics were without the silly handholding? I had thought for a while before they left she was probably doing it to p*ss people off as *it was sooo obnoxious I can't believe a nearly 40 yo woman would behave like this in public because she was oh so in love.*



The photos of the hand holding and loving gazes have become part of the Meghan and Harry brand.  From the moment their engagement was announced, they have been hard selling this story of being so _IN LOVE_. Some people (women, TBH) lap up that lovey-dovey nonsense and they got lots of fans out of it. I'm not saying they _aren't_ in love, only that they are gearing the optics of their photo shoots to please their fan base.


----------



## Yanca

So Glad I found this  chat thread. I can't stand the hypocrisy  of H & M. If you truly wanted to have a privacy and private life, then why all the hoopla and non stop PR releases, Omid Scobid non stop posting about them, and he is supposed to be a journalist, but he is not objective and seemed to be  more of  their spokeperson than a royal reporter .  They quit but threw a fit when they can't use the word " Royal" and now saying Service is Universal, if they still want to volunteer and be involved that is well and good, but I agree that is  different with what the BRF called Life of Public Service. They should just be honest and say we want to make money, she seems so insincere, so fake, always preaching about kindness but is estranged to her family, ghosted her friends ( from what I read anyway). Always getting their digs at Royal Family but don't want to give up the Duke and Duchess Title.


----------



## bag-mania

Yanca said:


> So Glad I found this  chat thread. I can't stand the hypocrisy  of H & M. If you truly wanted to have a privacy and private life, then why all the hoopla and non stop PR releases, Omid Scobid non stop posting about them, and he is supposed to be a journalist, but he is not objective and seemed to be  more of  their spokeperson than a royal reporter .  They quit but threw a fit when they can't use the word " Royal" and now saying Service is Universal, if they still want to volunteer and be involved that is well and good, but I agree that is  different with what the BRF called Life of Public Service. They should just be honest and say we want to make money, she seems so insincere, so fake, always preaching about kindness but is estranged to her family, ghosted her friends ( from what I read anyway). Always getting their digs at Royal Family but don't want to give up the Duke and Duchess Title.



Welcome to the thread, Yanca. You are going to feel right at home here.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Andrew played the long game. Did as he was told = stay out of the picture. Made his family behave, especially Sarah.
> 
> H&M merched, upstaged the senior royals, did the very thing that royals dislike = call attention to themselves in a glitzy, cheap way.


Exactly, and the Queen gave his daughter a great wedding.


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> I need clarification on his position.  He is still HRH, right? He is still son of the next King and a brother to a future king.  So, while they have no Royal patronages and considered non-working royals (?), all that is left is HRH, right?
> 
> He cannot wear his military uniforms, but he can wear the medals, right?



They are both still HRH but have not been allowed to use them for the past year. The HRH is one of the most significant parts of the title, it denotes reigning royals from those who come from a country who abolished their monarchy.

Harry will keeping all medals earned from when he served in the military, all those associated with his honorary role will most likely be taken away also. Can't wear medals associated with a honorary post you no longer hold.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> The long game is that leaving the titles, will make them more meaningless because they will cease to be a factor in generating income for them. The Sussex will look foolish if they continue to insist on being called Duke and Duchess.   Look how many titled royals without a country are running around the planet.  The only ones who use them in work are the ones who want to sell you something expensive like antiques, jewelry or similar. and it is for snob appeal.  If Harry falls to that level, then he will be slightly above  the Russian emigres in Paris after the Russian Revolution who used their military uniforms to get a job as a doorman at the Plaza Athenee.


Oh, I *100% agree with you* but sadly, since they both seem to be 'okay' using them *TO *generate income, then I don't see them being embarrassed with continuing to use them.  As a matter of fact, I think it would just slay Meghan if she could no longer use her "Douche-Ass" title, she seems to relish it to the hilt.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Yanca said:


> So Glad I found this  chat thread. I can't stand the hypocrisy  of H & M. If you truly wanted to have a privacy and private life, then why all the hoopla and non stop PR releases, Omid Scobid non stop posting about them, and he is supposed to be a journalist, but he is not objective and seemed to be  more of  their spokeperson than a royal reporter .  They quit but threw a fit when they can't use the word " Royal" and now saying Service is Universal, if they still want to volunteer and be involved that is well and good, but I agree that is  different with what the BRF called Life of Public Service. They should just be honest and say we want to make money, she seems so insincere, so fake, always preaching about kindness but is estranged to her family, ghosted her friends ( from what I read anyway). Always getting their digs at Royal Family but don't want to give up the Duke and Duchess Title.


Yippee! One more discerning poster on board!


----------



## gracekelly

I would like to bestow this medal upon Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex for outstanding work in turning his life into a cartoon.

The Mickey Mouse and Walt Disney Medal of Freedon


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I *100% agree with you* but sadly, since they both seem to be 'okay' using them *TO *generate income, then I don't see them being embarrassed with continuing to use them.  As a matter of fact, I think it would just slay Meghan if she could no longer use her "Douche-Ass" title, she seems to relish it to the hilt.


Yes, and they can call themselves The Duke and Duchess or Prince and Princess as much as they like, but we know the truth, they are:


*ALL HAT AND NO CATTLE!*


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is how these fractious family matters end:









						Ernst August Snr, Prince of Hanover, is set to sue his 'ungrateful' son over a castle
					

Ernst Snr is a distant cousin of Queen Elizabeth II and is the estranged husband of Princess Caroline of Monaco




					inews.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I need clarification on his position.  He is still HRH, right? He is still son of the next King and a brother to a future king.  So, while they have no Royal patronages and considered non-working royals (?), all that is left is HRH, right?
> 
> He cannot wear his military uniforms, but he can wear the medals, right?


According to the People article that @sdkitty just posted, no .. neither can use the HRH.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is how these fractious family matters end:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ernst August Snr, Prince of Hanover, is set to sue his 'ungrateful' son over a castle
> 
> 
> Ernst Snr is a distant cousin of Queen Elizabeth II and is the estranged husband of Princess Caroline of Monaco
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk


This guy is an absolute pig. He cheated on his wife with Caroline of Monaco, who got pregnant. He then divorced his wife to marry Caroline, who bore a girl, who thankfully turned out so much better than her father. EA was known as a wild partier with terrible manners and attitude and also known to urinate on sidewalks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> This guy is an absolute pig. He cheated on his wife with Caroline of Monaco, who got pregnant. He then divorced his wife to marry Caroline, who bore a girl, who thankfully turned out so much better than her father. EA was known as a wild partier with terrible manners and attitude and also known to urinate on sidewalks.



I didn't know that she she was pregnant at the wedding (though his first wife divorced him due to infidelity with a woman not named in 1997...wedding to Caroline was in 1999. Had to google that). While googling I learned that he is related to the Queen, Philip and the former queen of Spain  These royals and their incestuous ways. But yes, he has the most unflattering nicknames in the German press as he has no problem to get drunk in public and be physically violent.


----------



## needlv

I think Prince Harry is showing his entitlement in the response back to the Queen.  But that sense of entitlement comes from Prince Charles.

I will preface this story by saying I don’t watch the netflix series so have no idea what they added in for drama.

This is a first hand story of someone working behind the scenes in PR for one event whilst they were visiting Australia.

She said Prince Charles was a horrible person.  When I asked for more details she said she was organising PR, arranging all the people that were to shake PC and Diana’s hands etc.  When PC and Diana arrived and got out of the car there was a huge surge by the press photographers trying to get a photo of Diana.  Some of the photographers asked Prince Charles to step out of the way so they could photograph Diana’s dress.  Prince Charles got extremely angry - and turned to my work colleague and angrily said “I AM THE PRINCE, NOT HER!”  Then he was angry and sullen for the event and was apparently awful to Diana the whole night.  in her words his treatment of Diana was ”so awful” and my work colleague was so shocked at Prince Charles’ behaviour.

I don’t have any sympathy for Charles...  he may have softened in his older years but he was a total ass in his earlier years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I think Prince Harry is showing his entitlement in the response back to the Queen.  But that sense of entitlement comes from Prince Charles.



At least Charles knows better than to disrespect the Queen in public.



> One of the photographers asked Prince Charles to step out of the way so they could photograph Diana’s dress.  Prince Charles got extremely angry - and turned to my work colleague and angrily said “I AM THE PRINCE, NOT HER!”  Then he was angry and sullen for the event and was apparently awful to Diana the whole night.  in her words his treatment of Diana was ”so awful” and my work colleague was so shocked at Prince Charles’ behaviour.



WTF, what a fragile little ego. Also I am really not the biggest Diana fan there is but that is just horrible and one has to wonder...if he acted like this in public in front of a whole press corps, how did he treat her behind closed doors? Poor woman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> The Queen may have been a young girl when it happened the first time with her uncle, but she saw a family member throw it all away and both times, a woman was involved. She probably never expected to see this happen again during her reign. I think in both cases, the men thought they could have it both ways.  Stay on the scene, be HRH'ed, show up in dress uniforms and play soldier for a parade  and for David, a say  in state policy.    QE II's father set his brother straight from the start about all of that:  there can be only one King of England.  With that,  the D/D Windsor's journey to a shallow life commenced.   I suspect that The Queen shares her mother's feeling that abrogation of duty is  completely unacceptable.  There was never a chance that the patronages would be kept.  Taking away the titles would just bring more attention to them and allowing them to be kept, has just made the titles more meaningless in the broader picture.  The HRH is permanently on hold and that won't change.


He should be removed from the line of succession. As someone else said, Charles and Will had covid not long ago and unfortunate things can happen. H and the Mrs are very very litigious and greedy, I could see them fighting to have H as Regent.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> She said Prince Charles was a horrible person.  When I asked for more details she said she was organising PR, arranging all the people that were to shake PC and Diana’s hands etc.  When PC and Diana arrived and got out of the car there was a huge surge by the press photographers trying to get a photo of Diana.  Some of the photographers asked Prince Charles to step out of the way so they could photograph Diana’s dress.  Prince Charles got extremely angry - and turned to my work colleague and angrily said “I AM THE PRINCE, NOT HER!”  Then he was angry and sullen for the event and was apparently awful to Diana the whole night.  in her words his treatment of Diana was ”so awful” and my work colleague was so shocked at Prince Charles’ behaviour.
> 
> I don’t have any sympathy for Charles...  he may have softened in his older years but he was a total ass in his earlier years.



Charles was an arrogant @ss as a young man. Maybe he still is, I don't know. They have done an excellent job of cleaning up his reputation over the years. I never feel sorry for him.


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> I would like to bestow this medal upon Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex for outstanding work in turning his life into a cartoon.
> 
> The Mickey Mouse and Walt Disney Medal of Freedon
> 
> View attachment 4996134



Is Harry the mouse or the man?


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> The photos of the hand holding and loving gazes have become part of the Meghan and Harry brand.  From the moment their engagement was announced, they have been hard selling this story of being so _IN LOVE_. Some people (women, TBH) lap up that lovey-dovey nonsense and they got lots of fans out of it. I'm not saying they _aren't_ in love, only that they are gearing the optics of their photo shoots to please their fan base.


We know from the past some people who post lovey-dovey pics on social media - things are not exactly like that in the background. Remember that Watts dude? So many I can’t even begin to recite. It’s fictitious really. Life is not a raindrop. Raindrops fall and splat.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Chanbal, I'm not certain if he posted or someone else on their behalf. I have never been on Facebook so not sure how the posting of pictures works. There is a Facebook account for Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex with 239,165 "likes".


Thanks, I'm also not very familiar with Facebook. He may have a PR person posting there, but he seems to be the owner of the account. In any event, the picture is ridiculous.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't know that she she was pregnant at the wedding (though his first wife divorced him due to infidelity with a woman not named in 1997...wedding to Caroline was in 1999. Had to google that). While googling I learned that he is related to the Queen, Philip and the former queen of Spain  These royals and their incestuous ways. But yes, he has the most unflattering nicknames in the German press as he has no problem to get drunk in public and be physically violent.


Ok, I got the cart before the horse so to speak. Caroline had an affair with Ernst August while he was married to her best friend, Chantal Hochuli. Chantal divorced Ernst August. He continued the affair with Caroline and after she got pregnant, they married.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Certainly QE knew the risks, but she did it anyway. Taking away the patronages could cause H to weird out. 
He has done it before [hello,Vegas!].  As many have said, he does not look all that well or seem particularly stable. Neither does she.

Charles, Ernst, several others have the negative reputations - as do H&M.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> "pushing back" on the queen....helluva nerve....the arrogance is stunning
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Push Back on Queen's Statement | PEOPLE.com


This is very disrespectful. It looks like People magazine is relieved that JCMH and wifey can keep the duke and duchess titles. Until they will be able to pay SS, we will have to put up with this type of brainless news.

"_Although Prince Harry and Meghan, 39, no longer use their coveted His/Her Royal Highness titles, they will retain them — along with their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles._"


----------



## bag-mania

Not everything _People _ writes is from their publicists but they sure aren’t doing H&M any favors with that “pushing back” wording. It implies they have something to push back with. They have no leverage in a battle with the Queen so they ended up just sounding like  petulant whiners.


----------



## csshopper

It's not been stated, but implied in several timelines of events that it's not a coincidence Prince Phillip's admittance to the hospital came after the Queen told him about her decision. His upset with Harry has been previously noted and he will have seen right through Meghan a long time ago. A spike in high blood pressure for a man his age, for example,  would call for monitoring, although nothing specific has been identified about his condition. Harry needs a stiff talking to from Prince Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_A source told the Mail: ‘They are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Your Royal Highnesses, although they won’t be using the latter. That was agreed last January and nothing has changed.’

Of the duke, they said: ‘He was born Prince Harry and will always be Prince Harry, while the [Sussex title] was a wedding gift._









						The Queen 'has no plans' to strip Harry and Meghan of royal titles
					

The couple will remain His and Her Royal Highness but will not be permitted to use them on a day-to-day basis as they are no longer working members of the royal family, Palace sources confirm.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: okaaaay
_Of the pressure on Harry to relinquish all of his titles, the source said: ‘He would rightly argue that he will always be portrayed as a royal and a prince, even if he worked as a landscape gardener in LA. He will never escape [the titles]. So why change?’_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> He should be removed from the line of succession. As someone else said, Charles and Will had covid not long ago and unfortunate things can happen. H and the Mrs are very very litigious and greedy, I could see them fighting to have H as Regent.


Remember, HM issued a decree called Letters Patent to bypass Princess Margaret and name Prince Philip as "possible regent" for then minor child, Prince Charles in the event of her demise. King Charles or King William could issue similar Letters Patent to name a "possible regent" for Prince George without Harry's or anyone else's interference. Letters Patent are generally  approved by Parliament.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would really love if she at least lost the duchess title.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hmm. This is interesting


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Remember, HM issued a decree called Letters Patent to bypass Princess Margaret and name Prince Philip as "possible regent" for then minor child, Prince Charles in the event of her demise. King Charles or King William could issue similar Letters Patent to name a "possible regent" for Prince George without Harry's or anyone else's interference. Letters Patent are generally  approved by Parliament.


If possible, QE and Will should discuss that and have such letter in place. I would think the Firm would want to take care of this soon. Having H as regent would be terrible for little George. H is petulant and MM brought out the worst in him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, H as regent would be huge mistake. Highly unlikely it would ever happen.  

My question — where is Charles in all of this?  That guy is showing absolutely zero leadership.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> Hmm. This is interesting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4996228


Is somebody reading this thread?! I distinctly remember posting this info about Prince and Princess Henry a few pages back. Also stated that it would be a bad idea because the US media would then call her, Princess Meghan even though it is incorrect. However MM would certainly enjoy being called a Princess MM and probably would never correct anyone.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> It's not been stated, but implied in several timelines of events that it's not a coincidence Prince Phillip's admittance to the hospital came after the Queen told him about her decision. His upset with Harry has been previously noted and he will have seen right through Meghan a long time ago. A spike in high blood pressure for a man his age, for example,  would call for monitoring, although nothing specific has been identified about his condition. Harry needs a stiff talking to from Prince Charles.



I bet hearing about the interview with Oprah didn’t help. I’m sure they’re wondering what Harry and Meghan will be complaining about this time.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, H as regent would be huge mistake. Highly unlikely it would ever happen.
> 
> My question — where is Charles in all of this?  That guy is showing absolutely zero leadership.


Only the Monarch can issue Letters Patent and Charles is probably respecting HM's decision. As far as I can tell, Harry has his head too far up MM's a-r-s-e to hear anyone else.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> The only life of service they lead is of service to themselves


Self service


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I bet hearing about the interview with Oprah didn’t help. I’m sure they’re wondering what Harry and Meghan will be complaining about this time.



DM, Chris Ship, Richard Palmer, etc. say the OW interview was the tipping point. The concern is it will be like Diana’s Bashir(sp?) interview Apologies for the repetition, this is such a sad way for OW to end her career.  In her effort to be hip, cool, relevant, influential, whatever, she looks desperate.  Similar thing happened with Sarah. Once the ratings tanked, OW gave it up.  Gayle, James, and OW do not understand viewers are not interested in H&M. Wish they would stop trying so hard to make them ‘happen’.

Yes, IMO, Charles should comment. He has funded this excursion of his youngest kid. In doing so, he appears to approve of this nonsense. With his parents’ health at stake and every other ‘palace’ source commenting, he at least ought to express his support for QE or H, whoever he is choosing. Otherwise, he looks weaker and weaker.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020  Royals express their support of HM by doing their duties and keeping their mouths shut unless otherwise instructed by HM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> @CarryOn2020  Royals express their support of HM by doing their duties and keeping their mouths shut unless otherwise instructed by HM.



Never complain, never explain. 
Still, his silence is deafening.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yay Anne!









						Princess Anne 'to take over' and succeed Prince Harry
					

The Princess Royal has now emerged as the 'least controversial choice' for the role, which was previously held by her father, the Duke of Edinburgh.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yay Anne!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Anne 'to take over' and succeed Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The Princess Royal has now emerged as the 'least controversial choice' for the role, which was previously held by her father, the Duke of Edinburgh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Great decision! She will be the first female as Captain General of the Royal Marines, and Philip will be happy.


----------



## Chanbal

This belongs here:


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, H as regent would be huge mistake. Highly unlikely it would ever happen.
> 
> My question — where is Charles in all of this?  That guy is showing absolutely zero leadership.



But this really is not his place to comment; atleast not publicly. This is still HMs show, only 1 voice should be heard and only 1 person standing at the forefront. While HM is still capable she needs to be seen as the only 1 in charge, as she is the one in charge. This situation doesn't have much space publicly for Charles' to comment unless he is stating something on behalf of HM.


----------



## Chanbal

Today was a day of many broken dishes at the mansion of the 16-toilets. 



It's ridiculous how the news are being covered in the US.


----------



## kkfiregirl

The nerve of MM to “correct” the Queen, but then desperately cling to “the duchess of Sussex”. I guess she didn’t learn about irony at her fancy schools.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I don’t like the daily mail, but I did appreciate this quote:

'And they didn't think that there is a difference between charity and philanthropy and commitment to public duty. There is a world of difference: one is playing at it and one is doing it day after day, come rain or shine’









						Queen at breaking point: The worst may lie ahead, writes RICHARD KAY
					

RICHARD KAY:  Evening shadows were falling across the Long Walk at Windsor Castle when the call came through.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

If there were something worse than the blackamoor brooch episode and the "kate didn't take me shopping" we would have heard by now. Given episodes with Diana and Fergie I doubt BRF were not careful around her. I think the interview will be more compassionate kindness love marketing with a little anti racisms, kids etc. The usual word salad bar.


----------



## csshopper

Interesting the Sussex’s statement was issued by “ Meghan and Harry”.

Harry is the Royal, the Queen is his Grandmother as well as being the Monarch, yet Meghan has put herself first and the emasculated wimp evidently has rolled over once again.

Their response was issued almost immediately after the Queen’s making clear they couldn’t wait to get their snark out. Meghan must be flamed. She underestimated the Queen and did not realize for the Queen, duty is all. Or, that she, Meghan is in the end expendable as a Royal whose patronages can be reclaimed and redistributed by the Queen. As can Harry’s. He’s lost much more, so Meghan has him where she wants him, totally dependent on her.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t like the daily mail, but I did appreciate this quote:
> 
> 'And they didn't think that there is a difference between charity and philanthropy and commitment to public duty. There is a world of difference: one is playing at it and one is doing it day after day, come rain or shine’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen at breaking point: The worst may lie ahead, writes RICHARD KAY
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY:  Evening shadows were falling across the Long Walk at Windsor Castle when the call came through.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I started paying more attention to DM only recently, but it has some good articles. The 2 sentences before the one you mentioned say a lot about MM&H:

"_Last night aides spoke of their shock at the tone of the couple's response, viewing it as a rebuke to the Queen, even an insult.

'They didn't think to let the Queen have the last word,' says one insider. 'They didn't think that with Prince Philip in hospital, she might have enough on her plate._"

For the ones in the UK, it looks like the Palace looks at polls' results at yougov, so vote!








						The most popular royalty in the UK | Politics | YouGov Ratings
					

The most popular royalty in the UK according to YouGov Ratings. Popularity is based on millions of responses from the British public and YouGov's innovative survey methodology.




					yougov.co.uk


----------



## elvisfan4life

kkfiregirl said:


> The nerve of MM to “correct” the Queen, but then desperately cling to “the duchess of Sussex”. I guess she didn’t learn about irony at her fancy schools.


Well she learnt zero manners so unlikely to have learnt anything except how to hustle


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ok, I got the cart before the horse so to speak. Caroline had an affair with Ernst August while he was married to her best friend, Chantal Hochuli. Chantal divorced Ernst August. He continued the affair with Caroline and after she got pregnant, they married.



Ew, that makes her not look very good either :/


----------



## papertiger

RueMonge said:


> Yes, I think she was more attractive as she became more self confident.



A good lesson for us all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This belongs here:
> View attachment 4996324



And for some reason I feel they won't be any nicer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Interesting the Sussex’s statement was issued by “ Meghan and Harry”.
> 
> Harry is the Royal, the Queen is his Grandmother as well as being the Monarch, yet Meghan has put herself first and the emasculated wimp evidently has rolled over once again.



Never forget how the day after the wedding she stopped him right in his tracks so she could go first.



> Their response was issued almost immediately after the Queen’s making clear they couldn’t wait to get their snark out. Meghan must be flamed. She underestimated the Queen and did not realize for the Queen, duty is all. Or, that she, Meghan is in the end expendable as a Royal whose patronages can be reclaimed and redistributed by the Queen. As can Harry’s. He’s lost much more, so Meghan has him where she wants him, totally dependent on her.



I know we've decided Harry made his own bed etc., but...I still think she is a textbook abuser and that makes me read this with a lot of discomfort.


----------



## RAINDANCE

From The Telegarph this morning  - ie. the grown-ups opinion!
*Prince Harry and Meghan don't seem to understand what public service actually is*
The royals have tried to hold a national conversation – but the Sussexes seem to have largely been in conversation with themselves

ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR19 February 2021 • 5:49pm






Prince Harry and Meghan will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family CREDIT: Frank Augstein/ AP

Confirmation that Harry and Meghan will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family will have come as a shock to no one who has followed events since they dropped their "Megxit" bombshell on Jan 8, 2020. 
Back then, the couple announced that they wanted to "carve out a progressive new role within this institution" to become "financially independent" while continuing to support the Queen.
They were to balance their time between the UK and "North America" in a bid to honour their commitment to "the Queen, the Commonwealth and our patronages".
Yet within seconds of the unprecedented post appearing on Instagram, *anyone with even the most elementary understanding of the way the monarchy has functioned for the past 1,000 years knew that Harry and Meghan were never going to be able to have their cake and eat it.*
This was pointed out clearly to the Sussexes at the Sandringham summit, where the Queen – supported by the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge – told Harry in no uncertain terms (Meghan had already left the UK by that point) that they were either in or out. They couldn't be in between.

Leaving the door ajar for a return to royal duties should their grand plan fail, the Queen agreed to a 12-month review period as a safety net. For it was never going to be possible for them to have the best of both worlds.

As Friday's Buckingham Palace statement succinctly put it: "In stepping away from the work of the Royal Family, it is not possible to continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service."
*Part of the problem is that the Sussexes do not seem to understand what public service actually is*. As a California-born former actress, Meghan can arguably be forgiven for this – *but it somewhat beggars belief that Harry, a blood-born prince who grew up in the Firm, agreed to respond to the statement* with the line: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."
Not only is it deeply disrespectful to engage in this sort of last word freakery with the Queen, but I also do not think the 94-year-old monarch, who has devoted her whole life to duty, needs to be lectured on service by anyone, not least when her 99-year-old husband remains in hospital.
Of course all royal engagements are self-promotional to a certain extent, but there is a big difference between acts that serve others and self-serving acts.
*In recent months, as the world has tried to get to grips with the coronavirus pandemic, there has been a growing sense that while the Royals have attempted to point the spotlight at the work of others, the Sussexes have increasingly tried to shine it on themselves.* 
The royals have tried to hold a national conversation – exemplified by the Queen's "We'll Meet Again" speech – while, over in their £11 million Santa Barbara mansion, Harry and Meghan appear to have largely been in conversation with themselves. 

As with their desire for a have cake and eat it royal role, they have insisted upon having both unprecedented privacy and maximum publicity. And while they have endlessly carped about the media, the Windsors have continued to keep calm and carry on.
So while it is undoubtedly highly commendable that Harry and Meghan want to continue with their charity work, *philanthropy is not, and never has been, the same as public service.*
Similarly, it should be remembered that Archewell, their fundraising arm, is a non-profit organisation and not a charity like, for instance, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's Royal Foundation or Prince Charles' Prince's Trust. *This is an important distinction that few have made, since charities are subject to far more stringent rules on how money is spent than non-profits. *
The other elephant that has remained in the room since the couple left for the US is the role that money appears to have played in their decision-making. 
They are perfectly entitled, as they have done, to seek financial independence – and it has already proved a highly successful strategy, with megabucks deals with the likes of Netflix, Spotify and now, presumably, Oprah, in the bag.
But why have they spent the last 12 months desperately trying to disguise the fact they have swapped duty for dollars?
Last year, they made a big point about keeping up their Commonwealth ties by spending some time in Canada. Yet anyone with any knowledge of how the Duchess continued to keep on her retinue of US advisers – even after she married Harry in May 2018 – knew that when the couple said "North America" what they actually meant was Los Angeles, the city of dreams. Vancouver Island was only ever a convenient staging post. 




The royals can now focus solely on their familial relationship with Harry and Meghan rather than their business dealings CREDIT: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images Europe
Yes, there might have been too much press intrusion, and the scrutiny must have sometimes been too much to bear. *But they had the perfect platform for all their aims and ambitions. *
If there is any silver lining to the dark cloud that has been hanging over the monarchy since "Megxit", it is that the royals can now focus solely on their familial relationship with Harry and Meghan rather than their business dealings. 
There is a genuine sense of sadness on both sides and among the public that it has come to this. We will all fondly remember talk of the "Fab Four" heralding the dawn of a new era for the House of Windsor. But it was not to be.
They may no longer be working royals, but as HM put it with uncharacteristically emotional candour on Friday: "The Duke and Duchess remain much loved members of the family." 
As Harry and Meghan prepare to welcome a new baby into the fold, let us all hope that family proves to be the tie that binds.


----------



## Diamondbirdie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know we've decided Harry made his own bed etc., but...I still think she is a textbook abuser and that makes me read this with a lot of discomfort.



Harry is a bit dim, I fear and really hasn’t thought this through. He’ll end up being ditched by MM at some point, then where will he be?? No job, no skills, unable to go back to the UK to doing the only thing he WAS able to do ie be a Royal, plus the kids will probably used as bargaining tools. He will be a Duke of Windsor character, for sure. And Prince Charles and probably William will be paying out for this forever. No wonder they’re all p***ed off.


----------



## maryg1

CeeJay said:


> *Mick Jagger .. ABSOLUTELY 100%*!  Keith Richards?!?! .. well, let me tell you a story from a friend who used to be a studio Guitar player who worked with some major guitarists in his day.  Unfortunately, one of the other studio musicians had cancer but simply could not pay for the necessary treatment.  So, my friend and others reached out to the various musicians that they had worked with .. Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, and others.  While Eddie Van Halen did send some $$$ (_but certainly not that significant given his wealth_), the person that really surprised them was Keith Richards who (_during a recording session for his solo album - which I loved_!) .. took off his Platinum Rolex watch and said "_*here - sell this and let me know how much more you need*_" .. *what*?!?!  My friend said that of all the guitarists he had worked with, by far .. Keith was the most generous and actually thanked them when they would help, was open to learning new riffs, etc. - that was certainly *NOT *the case with Eric Clapton and to this day, my friend really dislikes Eric because of how he treated the various studio musicians!  Sad because I used to love Eric Clapton's music, but nowadays, I listen to it with a 'different Ear'.


That doesn’t surprise me. Clapton is an excellent musician, but so full of himself and not in a good way.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Not much in the article but I just love the title photo!


----------



## chicinthecity777

They must be pissed off that they couldn't prolong the mileage of their baby announcements due to the Kardashian divorce announcement and then the Megxit finalisation! 

Bit confused about the FB photo though. I thought they announced that they quit social media for good?


----------



## Sharont2305

In other news.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> In other news.....




Haha, I just came here to post this! Love the name and the nod to Philip.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Nice to know the meaning behind the names, I was hoping Philip might be in there somewhere. I know it's OT for this thread but there are ways of doing things and not be secretive


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Nice to know the meaning behind the names, I was hoping Philip might be in there somewhere. I know it's OT for this thread but there are ways of doing things and not be secretive



You can take the girl from the farm, but you can't take the farm from the girl. I can't stop thinking about this quote from the article posted earlier:



> As a California-born former actress, Meghan can arguably be forgiven for this – *but it somewhat beggars belief that Harry, a blood-born prince who grew up in the Firm, agreed to respond to the statement* with the line: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."



What makes him go along with her sh*t...is it delayed puberty or what? No normal adult behaves like this.


----------



## mshermes

My version of Meg’s life.....she thought she was a Princess. Woke up and realized she was a mere mortal, was saved by her ginger and then realized it was the wrong ginger! Felt the need for a little humor.....


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU!!!!!
> As an American I am embarrassed to share citizenship with that woman, who exemplifies everything and more, attached to the catch phrase "Ugly American" and I am outraged some dimwitted twit with a title thinks he can come here and present himself as some kind of messiah preaching to us on how to live our lives. Like you CeeJay my ancestry goes back to the days of the Revolution and, as much as I love my British friends, we settled the issue of sovereignty with the Treaty of Paris in 1783. Of course, no one has ever accused Henry of being a student, so he may have missed that.
> 
> I was looking at headlines before coming here to catch up. Meghan will probably be distressed that she might be upstaged a bit due to the announcement of the Kim-Kanye divorce announcement.


oh dear....upstaged by a reality tv star?  The Duchess?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The photos of the hand holding and loving gazes have become part of the Meghan and Harry brand.  From the moment their engagement was announced, they have been hard selling this story of being so _IN LOVE_. Some people (women, TBH) lap up that lovey-dovey nonsense and they got lots of fans out of it. I'm not saying they _aren't_ in love, only that they are gearing the optics of their photo shoots to please their fan base.


I obviously don't know them.  they may be in love.  but him being such a bumbling adolescent and her being such an arrogant control freak, I doubt it.  I think she probably has to summon her acting skills to keep him in line.


----------



## rose60610

RAINDANCE said:


> the line: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."
> Not only is it deeply disrespectful to engage in this sort of last word freakery with the Queen, but I also do not think the 94-year-old monarch, who has devoted her whole life to duty, needs to be lectured on service by anyone, not least when her 99-year-old husband remains in hospital.



Right. "Service is universal". They're telling the Queen? They're so far out of her league they're an embarrassment. They'd be NOTHING without her. To think that "service" to H&M includes staging a photo-op in a cemetery puts the icing on the disaster cake. 



RAINDANCE said:


> But why have they spent the last 12 months desperately trying to disguise the fact they have swapped duty for dollars?
> Last year, they made a big point about keeping up their Commonwealth ties by spending some time in Canada. Yet anyone with any knowledge of how the Duchess continued to keep on her retinue of US advisers – even after she married Harry in May 2018 – knew that when the couple said "North America" what they actually meant was Los Angeles, the city of dreams. Vancouver Island was only ever a convenient staging post.



H&M are doing their best to pimp the monarchy into their own piggy bank, nothing is off limits, including dredging up Diana when convenient, playing the victim and racism cards, suing for privacy while at the same time slobbering in front of any camera they can get, lecturing us on politics while they suck off the fame of the BRF, and crying about hard THEIR life has been. All during while the world has been dealing with Covid. But no, apparently, everything is about THEM. Since they say "service is universal", why don't they do the biggest service of all? By STFU.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> In other news.....



they look like very ordinary people here (not saying that's bad or good)


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> they look like very ordinary people here (not saying that's bad or good)


I totally agree, a normal mum and dad with their brand new baby, and the photo taken by their midwife. Lovely.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> I totally agree, a normal mum and dad with their brand new baby, and the photo taken by their midwife. Lovely.


No weird concealment either!


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H are sending their 'Omids' to 'retract' their response to QE. Worried? They keep stressing about their "love for philanthropy." What philanthropy? It is disgusting how people can be so fake. 

*Harry and Meghan's friend claims 'service is universal' parting shot at the Queen was 'taken out of context' and says Megxit will allow the pair to do more charity work*

But Dean Stott, who has been friends with Harry for 12 years since they served in the army together, said the line should be 'taken in context' of the couple's charity work - which they will be able to do more of post-Megxit.

Mr Stott, who is originally from Aberdeen but now lives in California where he sees the couple, was asked whether the statement about 'service' being 'universal' was a push back at the palace on Radio 4's Today Programme.

He said there are 'so many positives we can take' from the couple no longer being working royals.

These include Harry and Meghan being able to pursue their 'love for philanthropy' without the 'protocol and red tape' that comes with the Firm.

'We've seen it in some of the work that they've done already. And I'm very excited about what their Archewell foundation is going to be getting involved with.'

...
Also interviewed this morning was royal biographer Robert Lacey who called Harry and Meghan stepping down as working family members 'a great positive step forward'.

He also said it was the 'beginning of us seeing William and Harry getting back together again'. 

When asked about the 'rift' between Sussexes and palace officials, Mr Lacey said: 'Well Diana used to talk about the suits didn’t she? 

'It’s certainly true that great animosity developed between the suits and Meghan in the brief time that she spent in the Palace.

'She brought in her American advisers, they didn’t like it. 

'The private secretaries concerned have made no secret off the record of their unhappiness about Meghan. 

'But lets not dwell on the negatives. This is a great positive step forward. 

'Prince Charles has always been a great believer in Meghan. I think now this is the beginning of us seeing William and Harry getting back together again.' 

Omids and lies


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Taken out of the context of their own statement? Sure. Maybe finetune your copy then next time. 

WTFFF.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> MM&H are sending their 'Omids' to 'retract' their response to QE. Worried? They keep stressing about their "love for philanthropy." What philanthropy? It is disgusting how people can be so fake.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan's friend claims 'service is universal' parting shot at the Queen was 'taken out of context' and says Megxit will allow the pair to do more charity work*
> 
> But Dean Stott, who has been friends with Harry for 12 years since they served in the army together, said the line should be 'taken in context' of the couple's charity work - which they will be able to do more of post-Megxit.
> 
> Mr Stott, who is originally from Aberdeen but now lives in California where he sees the couple, was asked whether the statement about 'service' being 'universal' was a push back at the palace on Radio 4's Today Programme.
> 
> He said there are 'so many positives we can take' from the couple no longer being working royals.
> 
> These include Harry and Meghan being able to pursue their 'love for philanthropy' without the 'protocol and red tape' that comes with the Firm.
> 
> 'We've seen it in some of the work that they've done already. And I'm very excited about what their Archewell foundation is going to be getting involved with.'
> 
> ...
> Also interviewed this morning was royal biographer Robert Lacey who called Harry and Meghan stepping down as working family members 'a great positive step forward'.
> 
> He also said it was the 'beginning of us seeing William and Harry getting back together again'.
> 
> When asked about the 'rift' between Sussexes and palace officials, Mr Lacey said: 'Well Diana used to talk about the suits didn’t she?
> 
> 'It’s certainly true that great animosity developed between the suits and Meghan in the brief time that she spent in the Palace.
> 
> 'She brought in her American advisers, they didn’t like it.
> 
> 'The private secretaries concerned have made no secret off the record of their unhappiness about Meghan.
> 
> 'But lets not dwell on the negatives. This is a great positive step forward.
> 
> 'Prince Charles has always been a great believer in Meghan. I think now this is the beginning of us seeing William and Harry getting back together again.'
> 
> Omids and lies




What is this Lacey dude on?


----------



## Aimee3

They’ve had archewell foundation for what, a year already?  Can anyone name one thing that it’s actually done so far?  I can’t.  So now they’ll have more time to devote to more nothings???  Such BS!


----------



## Carmenbella

sdkitty said:


> agree.....I think she identifies as a WOC when it's convenient - like when there is a person of color (like Oprah) who can help her.  I notice (if I'm not mistaken) that all of her husbands and boyfriends have been white men.  Hope I'm not offending anyone here and would like to hear from any WOC on this thread if you care to comment.


Well she is both.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> MM&H are sending their 'Omids' to 'retract' their response to QE. Worried? They keep stressing about their "love for philanthropy." What philanthropy? It is disgusting how people can be so fake.
> ========
> These include Harry and Meghan being able to pursue their 'love for philanthropy' without the 'protocol and red tape' that comes with the Firm.



They still don’t get it.  Or maybe they need a dictionary.
As QE said, there is a difference between philanthropy and public service.  QE is the real deal, H&M are all talk, little action. Their dim, daft, ignorant PR needs to learn some lessons. Perhaps Doria, Gayle and Oprah can advise them?

“You work for the monarchy VS. the monarchy works for you.“ 
The difference is huge.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> What is this Lacey dude on?



Meghan’s payroll.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Taken out of the context of their own statement? Sure. Maybe finetune your copy then next time.
> 
> WTFFF.


Their response to QE may have been finetuned, I bet the earliest versions had the power to explode an entire 16-toilet mansion.


----------



## marietouchet

Oooh the interview ... Maybe already in the can, supposedly, but O will be under pressure from the network to cover recent events with an addendum

The format - Meghan first then H joins - will be odd, M has not yet a accomplished much, only vague future stuff can be discussed, and the issue of being uncomfortable in the UK is best discussed with H there in the context of his family 

The first half will be total puff, shot before Friday’s dueling announcements


----------



## marthastoo

sdkitty said:


> agree.....I think she identifies as a WOC when it's convenient - like when there is a person of color (like Oprah) who can help her.  I notice (if I'm not mistaken) that all of her husbands and boyfriends have been white men.  Hope I'm not offending anyone here and would like to hear from any WOC on this thread if you care to comment.


I see this post is from May, but since someone else just quoted it, I will as well.  Moreover, I have seen this sentiment repeated on this thread unchecked.

I am a POC married to a white man.  The notion that I cease to be a POC when I chose a romantic partner who is not is offensive.  I could go on, but since this post will be ignored in the echo chamber of vitriol, I'll end there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> From The Telegarph this morning  - ie. the grown-ups opinion!
> *Prince Harry and Meghan don't seem to understand what public service actually is*
> The royals have tried to hold a national conversation – but the Sussexes seem to have largely been in conversation with themselves
> 
> ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR19 February 2021 • 5:49pm
> 
> —As Friday's Buckingham Palace statement succinctly put it: "In stepping away from the work of the Royal Family, it is not possible to continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service."
> 
> *—Part of the problem is that the Sussexes do not seem to understand what public service actually is*. As a California-born former actress, Meghan can arguably be forgiven for this – *but it somewhat beggars belief that Harry, a blood-born prince who grew up in the Firm, agreed to respond to the statement* with the line: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."
> 
> —So while it is undoubtedly highly commendable that Harry and Meghan want to continue with their charity work, *philanthropy is not, and never has been, the same as public service.*
> 
> —Similarly, it should be remembered that Archewell, their fundraising arm, is a non-profit organisation and not a charity like, for instance, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's Royal Foundation or Prince Charles' Prince's Trust. *This is an important distinction that few have made, since charities are subject to far more stringent rules on how money is spent than non-profits. *
> 
> —The other elephant that has remained in the room since the couple left for the US is the role that money appears to have played in their decision-making. They are perfectly entitled, as they have done, to seek financial independence – and it has already proved a highly successful strategy, with megabucks deals with the likes of Netflix, Spotify and now, presumably, Oprah, in the bag.
> >>>But why have they spent the last 12 months desperately trying to disguise the fact they have swapped duty for dollars?<<<



Again, this ignorance of public service IS the heart of the problem.
Surprised Doria has not provided more astute advice to H&M. Gayle? Oprah? Tyler? Foster?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I obviously don't know them.  they may be in love.  but him being such a bumbling adolescent and her being such an arrogant control freak, I doubt it.  I think she probably has to summon her acting skills to keep him in line.


Someone used the expression "Bambi eyes" when referring to the geriatric mother gazing at her prince.


----------



## bag-mania

RAINDANCE said:


> From The Telegarph this morning  - ie. the grown-ups opinion!
> *Prince Harry and Meghan don't seem to understand what public service actually is*
> The royals have tried to hold a national conversation – but the Sussexes seem to have largely been in conversation with themselves
> 
> ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR19 February 2021 • 5:49pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family CREDIT: Frank Augstein/ AP
> 
> Confirmation that Harry and Meghan will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family will have come as a shock to no one who has followed events since they dropped their "Megxit" bombshell on Jan 8, 2020.
> Back then, the couple announced that they wanted to "carve out a progressive new role within this institution" to become "financially independent" while continuing to support the Queen.
> They were to balance their time between the UK and "North America" in a bid to honour their commitment to "the Queen, the Commonwealth and our patronages".
> Yet within seconds of the unprecedented post appearing on Instagram, *anyone with even the most elementary understanding of the way the monarchy has functioned for the past 1,000 years knew that Harry and Meghan were never going to be able to have their cake and eat it.*
> This was pointed out clearly to the Sussexes at the Sandringham summit, where the Queen – supported by the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge – told Harry in no uncertain terms (Meghan had already left the UK by that point) that they were either in or out. They couldn't be in between.
> 
> Leaving the door ajar for a return to royal duties should their grand plan fail, the Queen agreed to a 12-month review period as a safety net. For it was never going to be possible for them to have the best of both worlds.
> 
> As Friday's Buckingham Palace statement succinctly put it: "In stepping away from the work of the Royal Family, it is not possible to continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service."
> *Part of the problem is that the Sussexes do not seem to understand what public service actually is*. As a California-born former actress, Meghan can arguably be forgiven for this – *but it somewhat beggars belief that Harry, a blood-born prince who grew up in the Firm, agreed to respond to the statement* with the line: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."
> Not only is it deeply disrespectful to engage in this sort of last word freakery with the Queen, but I also do not think the 94-year-old monarch, who has devoted her whole life to duty, needs to be lectured on service by anyone, not least when her 99-year-old husband remains in hospital.
> Of course all royal engagements are self-promotional to a certain extent, but there is a big difference between acts that serve others and self-serving acts.
> *In recent months, as the world has tried to get to grips with the coronavirus pandemic, there has been a growing sense that while the Royals have attempted to point the spotlight at the work of others, the Sussexes have increasingly tried to shine it on themselves.*
> The royals have tried to hold a national conversation – exemplified by the Queen's "We'll Meet Again" speech – while, over in their £11 million Santa Barbara mansion, Harry and Meghan appear to have largely been in conversation with themselves.
> 
> As with their desire for a have cake and eat it royal role, they have insisted upon having both unprecedented privacy and maximum publicity. And while they have endlessly carped about the media, the Windsors have continued to keep calm and carry on.
> So while it is undoubtedly highly commendable that Harry and Meghan want to continue with their charity work, *philanthropy is not, and never has been, the same as public service.*
> Similarly, it should be remembered that Archewell, their fundraising arm, is a non-profit organisation and not a charity like, for instance, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's Royal Foundation or Prince Charles' Prince's Trust. *This is an important distinction that few have made, since charities are subject to far more stringent rules on how money is spent than non-profits. *
> The other elephant that has remained in the room since the couple left for the US is the role that money appears to have played in their decision-making.
> They are perfectly entitled, as they have done, to seek financial independence – and it has already proved a highly successful strategy, with megabucks deals with the likes of Netflix, Spotify and now, presumably, Oprah, in the bag.
> But why have they spent the last 12 months desperately trying to disguise the fact they have swapped duty for dollars?
> Last year, they made a big point about keeping up their Commonwealth ties by spending some time in Canada. Yet anyone with any knowledge of how the Duchess continued to keep on her retinue of US advisers – even after she married Harry in May 2018 – knew that when the couple said "North America" what they actually meant was Los Angeles, the city of dreams. Vancouver Island was only ever a convenient staging post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The royals can now focus solely on their familial relationship with Harry and Meghan rather than their business dealings CREDIT: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images Europe
> Yes, there might have been too much press intrusion, and the scrutiny must have sometimes been too much to bear. *But they had the perfect platform for all their aims and ambitions. *
> If there is any silver lining to the dark cloud that has been hanging over the monarchy since "Megxit", it is that the royals can now focus solely on their familial relationship with Harry and Meghan rather than their business dealings.
> There is a genuine sense of sadness on both sides and among the public that it has come to this. We will all fondly remember talk of the "Fab Four" heralding the dawn of a new era for the House of Windsor. But it was not to be.
> They may no longer be working royals, but as HM put it with uncharacteristically emotional candour on Friday: "The Duke and Duchess remain much loved members of the family."
> As Harry and Meghan prepare to welcome a new baby into the fold, let us all hope that family proves to be the tie that binds.



This article is great.  I especially like this quote.

“Of course all royal engagements are self-promotional to a certain extent, but there is a big difference between acts that serve others and self-serving acts.”

That bothers me most about them. They absolutely refuse to commit to helping any particular charities beyond staging a single publicity photo op or Zoom call, which really only helps H&M in their quest to appear like Mother Teresa without actually doing a damn thing.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> They must be pissed off that they couldn't prolong the mileage of their baby announcements due to the Kardashian divorce announcement and then the Megxit finalisation!
> 
> Bit confused about the FB photo though. I thought they announced that they quit social media for good?


I’ve never loved Kim more!


----------



## Chanbal

marthastoo said:


> I see this post is from May, but since someone else just quoted it, I will as well.  Moreover, I have seen this sentiment repeated on this thread unchecked.
> 
> I am a POC married to a white man.  The notion that I cease to be a POC when I chose a romantic partner who is not is offensive.  I could go on, but since this post will be ignored in the echo chamber of vitriol, I'll end there.


I usually do not reply to posts that use words like "vitriol", but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that you may have missed posts with evidence that MM used to identify herself as Caucasian on her CV some years ago. Indeed, many of us initially thought that she was Caucasian. It has nothing to do with ceasing to be a WOC when marrying a partner who is not. If you do a google search, you may still find that information.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Out of context is the saddest excuse I’ve heard in a long time! It’s one paragraph!!!


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Out of context is the saddest excuse I’ve heard in a long time! It’s one paragraph!!!



Right. Many things are, indeed, taken out of context. But not this one. When responding to the Queen I'd suggest proofreading and a revision here and there to avoid any chance of "out of context". Was "Very few people have asked me if I'm OK" or "I didn't know about the Commonwealth" taken out of context? Remember the hissy fit when Meghan left The National Dorfman's Theatre in London with her hands clearly splayed on her thighs to show she wasn't wearing her rings? This was right when M&H announced they wanted to step down from royal duties. The Queen put the kabash on the publicity of this event. Was that taken out of context?  Poor Meghan! So many things are taken out of context. Victimvictimvictimvictim. I'd like to see Netflix tell H&M, "if you thought that was a contract for paying you $150 million, you must have taken that out of context".


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> they look like very ordinary people here (not saying that's bad or good)



"Looking ordinary"--who does that these days???? Oh, that's right, people with no ax to grind, no agendas to hide, no camera crew to berate and spend hours staging. Just people who get along, appear grateful for what they have and blissfully happy over their baby. I love the casual clothes for chilly weather and the baby also bundled up for the chill. I can see August Philip on a pony, playing in the snow, and catching frogs. Like an ordinary kid. We might even see a friendly photo of him without the photographer being sued.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I usually do not reply to posts that use words like "vitriol", but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that you may have missed posts with evidence that MM used to identify herself as Caucasian on her CV some years ago. Indeed, many of us initially thought that she was Caucasian. It has nothing to do with ceasing to be a WOC when marrying a partner who is not. If you do a google search, you may still find that information.


right - it seems to be she did her best to identify as white or ambiguous until it was her advantage being a WOC.  Now it's a badge of honor and has made her a lot of new "friends"....one can be and identify as a WOC and marry a white man - no issue there


----------



## marietouchet

marthastoo said:


> I see this post is from May, but since someone else just quoted it, I will as well.  Moreover, I have seen this sentiment repeated on this thread unchecked.
> 
> I am a POC married to a white man.  The notion that I cease to be a POC when I chose a romantic partner who is not is offensive.  I could go on, but since this post will be ignored in the echo chamber of vitriol, I'll end there.


Glad you shared , thumbs up


----------



## Chanbal

A nice summary of the last events. 


Analyse this. Last Friday, Meghan won a huge privacy lawsuit against a UK newspaper. Fair enough. Two days later on Valentine’s Day she posted a surprise photo of herself, her Prince and her new bump in a rustic setting worthy of Marie Antoinette. It only lacked a couple of sheep. Awww – how nice. She’s pregnant again. A happy ending. Perhaps the photo was a bit too artfully posed, a little too reminiscent of the final shot of Hugh Grant and Julia Roberts in Notting Hill, but still let’s not forget this is La La Land, and Meghan was an actress. Barefoot Harry looked happy, if a bit of a spare part.

Then, the very next day, it’s announced they are about to give a “tell-all” interview to the American queen of the confessional, Oprah Winfrey.

Meghan will go first, telling Oprah why she left the UK, the pressures of living in the public eye, and her hopes for the future.

Harry’s up next, no doubt to avoid embarrassing questions about why he left his family in the lurch. He’ll probably just say he’s having an awfully nice time. And Meghan has said Oprah can ask whatever she likes.
So, the couple who left the UK because they wanted privacy will talk, but only on their terms. They will talk, but not to us.  
Not to the British public who loved Harry, worried about him, were thrilled when he married Meghan, so chuffed when he had his little son. He has totally rejected us.

And if that sounds childish, it’s because our relationship with the Royal Family really is rooted in a sense of childlike comfort.

We dream that the Queen comes to visit us for tea. We see her as a security blanket, a symbol of maternal reassurance. Harry’s California antics reduce royalty to ridicule.

It makes us realise he’s just a silly, spoiled Prince who thinks he can have it all.

As he discovered yesterday, he can’t. You’re not a Prince without a country, just a rich playboy with a Netflix contract. If he ever comes back home, I fear he’s in for a nasty shock.

A rich playboy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting view! 



And not because of Meghan, who was a two bit actress in a Netflix soap opera at the time. But because, even back then, Oprah, always alert to the main chance, had her beady eye on the Big Interview. She wasn't Meghan and Harry's friend back in 2018, having met them just once before the wedding, and I suspect she isn't now. But everything she's done to help them, e.g. get their first home in LA, introduce them to all the right people, will have been done with a view to the big prize. And now she's got it.

This interview will be a world first, which will make her many more millions, a few of which will undoubtedly be thrown into Meghan and Harry's gold-plated begging bowl.

But anyone who believes Oprah will be content with the couple soppily rambling on about their love story and their good works are as green as they are cabbage-looking. She wants never-before-heard dirt on the House of Windsor.

Yes, it'll be wrapped up in concern and caring and there'll be lots of references to "mental health". But make no mistake, Oprah wants a scoop that's going to create headlines around the world.

Which is why what Meghan and Harry are doing is so despicable. They are betraying the Queen and the Royal Family, which they claim they had to flee a continent to escape, and making money on their backs.

This is a couple forever screaming about having their privacy invaded - yet they're happy to invade and compromise the Royal Family's privacy.

Without her marriage to Harry, Meghan would, at 39, be an ageing actress appearing in the odd B-list romcom. But she knows her marriage and her royal associations are her ticket to vast wealth, so all her protestations about being desperate for privacy are disingenuous tosh. She's cashing in on her biggest asset.

And what really stinks is that this pair know the Royal Family won't sue. The Windsors' motto is "Never complain, never explain". 

So whatever whingeing, self-pitying, damaging drivel they come out with in this interview they know it won't be challenged. Which is exactly how they like it.

The Daily Star newspaper had it dead right this week with the headline: "Publicity-shy woman tells 7.87 billon people I'm pregnant." Then the following day: "Publicity shy couple tell all to Oprah."

And that's the problem, isn't it? Harry and Meghan are blind to the mind-boggling hypocrisy in what they demand for themselves - and what they do to others.

Everything they do now is at odds with their insistence that they want a private life because their multi-million-dollar income depends on the total opposite. And their only value to those paying them the big bucks is their royal association.

It's why they clung limpet-like to their honorary roles - which the Queen yesterday took away - while heaping manure on the family and institution that provided them. 

Even now they see themselves as perpetual victims - of the Royal Family, of the British Press, of the British people (who Harry thinks are racists) - when the truth is, they're unseeing hypocrites who view every contradictory thing they do through the prism of their own victimhood.

People who don't seek publicity can justifiably ask for privacy. Meghan and Harry, who crave international publicity like a drug addict craves crack, cannot!

Perpetual victims!


----------



## BETH LAVERN

bag-mania said:


> Meghan’s payroll.


Robert Lacey is on the Netflix payroll, as he is an advisor for "The Crown".


----------



## TC1

Interesting that they need to immediately say something THEY said was taken out of context..when they're constantly suing publications for things also printed as misleading or "out of context"


----------



## Yanca

It's sickening when you read Omid Scoobie and all their mouthpieces, spouting one sided biased reporting how they are wrong and unfaily treated,    Their supporters are saying other royals are earning a living, but the  Princesses and the minor royals jobs are normal jobs, not limelight inviting  jobs not multi million dollars contracts  in conflict of interest to their Royal roles and patronages. They don't get that the reactions of what they so called their "haters", the people are angry  and disgusted  not because they have chosen to severe their  royal ties, but  the hypocrisy that they still want to be Royals but on their terms, in another country to boot.  If you want to be  linked not ranked ( her words) then trade in your name as Mr and Mrs Windsor, We understand Prince Harry will always be Prince Harry, but they seemed to relish the Duke and Duchess that and this on all their announcement, correspondence. Crying they want to be  private but releasing a cringey so hollywood pregnancy photo announcement,  if she did crave privacy and hated that she was forced to reveal details with Archie's birth, etc  now was her chance to have kept it all low key,  she could have done it ala Jessica Biel and just announced  after she has given birth, but of course she had to do it and steal the thunder of Princess eugenie, it might be coincidence but she does have history of releasing photos, secret visits, etc whenever the Royal family has events. What was the purpose of the Oprah Interview? they don't have any cause or charity that they need to shed a light on or promote. She is promoting herself and being a victim just because she did not get her way, I am all for progress  and all that but did she really expect a thousand years of tradition will change just because she wills it? How would you feel if a newcomer go to your house and tell you how to do things and change things right away?  For me it was the hyspocrisy the tone deafness and the rudeness of how she treats the so calls the instituition,  if not for them nobody will have given her the platform that she has now, the reality is she was a lifestyle blogger, influencer and a a cable actress in a  show that not many people heard about before  her marrying Prince Harry. Their statement reflects how she is, ungrateful and rude, not even a thank you to the Queen.


----------



## rose60610

In Oprah's interview, the moment Meghan badmouths the BRF she's going to lose some of her sugars and induce nausea in the rest of us. The way she tries to pass herself off as some kind of "Gee, I never knew what I was getting into" pathetic ingenue is done to death and fools no one capable of independent thought. Let's see how much belly cradling she does this time around and how many times she attempts to channel or use dead Diana for her benefit or to score pity points.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jayne1 said:


> Remember the advance hoopla and excitement when Oprah got the big interview by visiting Michael Jackson at his home during the height of his scandal?
> 
> What a fan girl, she never asked the difficult questions and never followed up on his comments and just toured the house and grounds. She seemed afraid of him.
> 
> Don't expect O to ask Meg any hard hitting questions, she never does with anyone that she doesn't feel is far beneath her.



Doesn't she pretty much think EVERYONE is beneath her?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> In Oprah's interview, the moment Meghan badmouths the BRF she's going to lose some of her sugars and induce nausea in the rest of us.



You think? They hoped the Queen would die a few days back. I bet they'd celebrate every sh*tty move of hers because that will teach them and how dare the racist BRF treat the Empress of Exaggeration like they did (even if they in fact overindulged her and made way more concessions than for other royal brides, but what are facts anyway).


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *Mick Jagger .. ABSOLUTELY 100%*!  Keith Richards?!?! .. well, let me tell you a story from a friend who used to be a studio Guitar player who worked with some major guitarists in his day.  Unfortunately, one of the other studio musicians had cancer but simply could not pay for the necessary treatment.  So, my friend and others reached out to the various musicians that they had worked with .. Eric Clapton, Jimmy Page, Eddie Van Halen, and others.  While Eddie Van Halen did send some $$$ (_but certainly not that significant given his wealth_), the person that really surprised them was Keith Richards who (_during a recording session for his solo album - which I loved_!) .. took off his Platinum Rolex watch and said "_*here - sell this and let me know how much more you need*_" .. *what*?!?!  My friend said that of all the guitarists he had worked with, by far .. Keith was the most generous and actually thanked them when they would help, was open to learning new riffs, etc. - that was certainly *NOT *the case with Eric Clapton and to this day, my friend really dislikes Eric because of how he treated the various studio musicians!  Sad because I used to love Eric Clapton's music, but nowadays, I listen to it with a 'different Ear'.


I don't know where this fits into the KR timeline, but his wife, Patty Hanson had bladder cancer and a radical cystectomy with neobladder created. Actually they removed everything in a pelvic exenteration  That is a very big procedure.   She had also been treated for breast cancer prior to that.  If there was anyone who could be sympathetic to the musician's plight, it would be Keith.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Charles was an arrogant @ss as a young man. Maybe he still is, I don't know. They have done an excellent job of cleaning up his reputation over the years. I never feel sorry for him.



Who can forget when he dreamed of being Camilla's tampon?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Part 2 of the book review. So many more lies exposed (which the attentive bystander can partly find out themselves, no need to just trust Samantha's word for it), over the most mundane things. This Meghan chick is not right in the head, but I really want to know how she manages to hide that from people she's in close contact with.


----------



## Carmenbella

How is she playing a card if sh


CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. not so sure about the 'woke' part; I can just see her NOT playing the WOC card here, just like she admitted to doing on certain casting interviews.


How is she playing the card if she is both?


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> "Looking ordinary"--who does that these days???? Oh, that's right, people with no ax to grind, no agendas to hide, no camera crew to berate and spend hours staging. Just people who get along, appear grateful for what they have and blissfully happy over their baby. I love the casual clothes for chilly weather and the baby also bundled up for the chill. I can see August Philip on a pony, playing in the snow, and catching frogs. Like an ordinary kid. We might even see a friendly photo of him without the photographer being sued.


He will soon have a little play mate when Zara has her third child a normal little child unlike the poor little thing that will be used as a prop over in glitzy land


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You think? They hoped the Queen would die a few days back. I bet they'd celebrate every sh*tty move of hers because that will teach them and how dare the racist BRF treat the Empress of Exaggeration like they did (even if they in fact overindulged her and made way more concessions than for other royal brides, but what are facts anyway).


From what I read, they expected to be done with the megxit negotiations prior to the announcement of the Oprah interview. Very sneaky and calculated...

The racist remarks are highly offensive and unsupported imo. QE passed on MM some of the queen's favorite patronages like the National Theatre. Charles was highly supportive of his daughter in law.


----------



## Chanbal

QE has to put up with all this while her husband is in the hospital. It's very cruel. I wish her strength and peace to deal with her petulant grandson and his greedy wife. Hopefully, Philip recovers and they can celebrate his birthday together.  




The Queen has faced repeated calls to reconsider the line of succession to the throne in the wake of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step away from royal life for good. Royal commentators have questioned how Harry's departure would reconcile with his duty as Regent to Prince George in the eventuality of the young royal succeeding Prince Charles and Prince William while underage. Under the Regency Acts 1937, the eldest male in the line of succession would be required to act as Regent to the new king or queen in the event of them taking the throne before turning 18.

The Duke of Sussex would be first in line for the position as the first adult in the line of succession after his older brother, the Duke of Cambridge.

The Acts also require the potential Regent to be a resident of the UK, which could put Prince Harry's position further into jeopardy as he and the Duchess of Sussex have confirmed they plan to split their time between England and the US.

Prince Andrew would be the next in line for the role but his forced retirement from public duty has also sparked questions about the appropriateness of keeping the Duke of York in the pecking order.

Jeremy Vine contributor Dr Sarah Jarvis suggested earlier this week that the retroactive application of the Succession to the Crown Act on Princess Anne could help resolve the impasse.


During a discussion on rewarding the Princess Royal for her commitment to the Royal Family and her constant hard work, Dr Jarvis argued Anne would be a great role model for Prince George.

She said: "The point here is although you're quite right she is highly unlikely ever to become Queen.

"If anything were to happen to Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge, she would then be Regent.

"Wouldn't she be an amazing role model as a regent for George?"

Calls to remove H from the succession line


Mr Dampier tweeted: "If #PrinceHarry wants to walk away from royal duties is there or should there be a mechanism for taking him and his children out of the line of succession? Sixth is still pretty high."

Royal author Robert Jobson insisted Harry should be taken out of the line of succession.

Mr Jobson said it gives the "wrong message" that Harry - who has quit royal duties for a new life in America - is above Princess Anne and Prince Edward.

More calls to remove H


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> *In Oprah's interview, the moment Meghan badmouths the BRF she's going to lose some of her sugars* and induce nausea in the rest of us. The way she tries to pass herself off as some kind of "Gee, I never knew what I was getting into" pathetic ingenue is done to death and fools no one capable of independent thought. Let's see how much belly cradling she does this time around and how many times she attempts to channel or use dead Diana for her benefit or to score pity points.



I hope you are right but I’m skeptical. Those who are their loyal fans believe the BRF has been horrible to them and their favorite couple can do no wrong. Fandoms don’t operate by using logic or reevaluating when new information comes out. If their fans have ignored all of Harry and Meghan’s lies and hypocrisy so far I don’t see what difference insulting the BRF would make to them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Another good title for the already recorded interview: 

*Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*

Speaking about the Oprah interview which was filmed in California, the source close the couple told the Times: 'Having an institutional voice within the royal family wasn't enough [for Meghan]. This interview will be the loudest way she'll get her voice back.'

'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'

TV companies are already locked in an international bidding war for the rights to the programme, which will see Meghan talk about marriage and motherhood, having recently announced her second pregnancy, as well as her handling of life under the most intense of spotlights.

She is highlighted as the star of the show, with CBS, the American network broadcasting the special in the States, billing Harry as something of a support act.

The all voice is here!


----------



## bag-mania

Get her voice back? You mean  all this time she’s been holding back?!

I find it hard to believe Meghan has ever had an unvoiced thought. She has been forcing her voice into the world from the moment she got married, whether anyone wants to hear it or not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*



Isn't it ironic that nobody cared to hear that voice for well over 30 years though.


----------



## Handbag1234

Chanbal said:


> Great decision! She will be the first female as Captain General of the Royal Marines, and Philip will be happy.


Love Princess Anne.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Another good title for the already recorded interview:
> 
> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*
> 
> Speaking about the Oprah interview which was filmed in California, the source close the couple told the Times: 'Having an institutional voice within the royal family wasn't enough [for Meghan]. This interview will be the loudest way she'll get her voice back.'
> 
> 'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'
> 
> TV companies are already locked in an international bidding war for the rights to the programme, which will see Meghan talk about marriage and motherhood, having recently announced her second pregnancy, as well as her handling of life under the most intense of spotlights.
> 
> She is highlighted as the star of the show, with CBS, the American network broadcasting the special in the States, billing Harry as something of a support act.
> 
> The all voice is here!



This isn't the first time I've been confused. If privacy is SOOOOOOO important to Meghan, then why does she care SO much about having a voice? For M to claim she "lost her voice" with the BRF translates into somebody had to intervene before she sucked all the oxygen out of the room and suffocated everybody. She never shuts up! So she was told to stop social media. So what? She just stopped it again herself recently. Which lasted all of two minutes before plastering her photos all over the place again. If this interview is "the loudest" way she "can get her voice back", then are we mere mortals given the right to be LOUD with feedback? Oh wait, her street only runs ONE way. We're supposed to idolize her and put her on a pedestal. Because she's suffered SO much!

I love the line "when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.' "

Oh right. It pained her so much because the very least she had to gain was to become a member of the BRF with all the trappings of luxury one could ever imagine. And it'd be a tragedy to lose her version of independence as a result.

Well I guess she did since she kicked them all to the curb so she could feed us a sob story with Oprah about all the horrors she's gone through. Harry will appear on the interview when Meghan yanks and hauls on his choke chain, dislocates both his shoulders, and orders him to heal. He'll then recite the script Meghan gave him and get a pat on the head if he performs correctly.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it ironic that nobody cared to hear that voice for well over 30 years though.


And we would be so thankful if she would be willing to keep her voice to herself for another ~30 years.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ve said it before and will continue to say it — what H&M, CBS, OW and her sidekick Gayle have done is *shameful*.  CBS needs to pull the damn interview now and stop this noise. OW pulled her Russell Simmons film for her selfish reasons. She can stop this mess, too.

Does anyone know someone at CBS who can shut this down?  It is time!

The face says it all — no words necessary:











						Prince Charles visits his father Prince Philip in hospital
					

Prince Charles arrived at the back of the London hospital where Philip, the 99-year-old husband of Queen Elizabeth, has been since Tuesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> This isn't the first time I've been confused. If privacy is SOOOOOOO important to Meghan, then why does she care SO much about having a voice? For M to claim she "lost her voice" with the BRF translates into somebody had to intervene before she sucked all he oxygen out of the room and suffocated everybody. She never shuts up! So she was told to stop social media. So what? She just stopped it again herself recently. Which lasted all of two minutes before plastering her photos all over the place again. If this interview is "the loudest" way she "can get her voice back", then are we mere mortals given the right to be LOUD with feedback? Oh wait, her street only runs ONE way. We're supposed to idolize her and put her on a pedestal. Because she's suffered SO much!
> 
> I love the line "when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.' "
> 
> Oh right. It pained her so much because the very least she had to gain was to become a member of the BRF with all the trappings of luxury one could ever imagine. And it'd be a tragedy to lose her version of independence as a result.
> 
> Well I guess she did since she kicked them all to the curb so she could feed us a sob story with Oprah about all the horrors she's gone through. Harry will appear on the interview when Meghan yanks and hauls on his choke chain, dislocates both his shoulders, and orders him to heal. He'll then recite the script Meghan gave him and get a pat on the head if he performs correctly.


All can be explained by a narcissist that is a master in hypocrisy!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Another good title for the already recorded interview:
> 
> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*
> 
> Speaking about the Oprah interview which was filmed in California, the source close the couple told the Times: 'Having an institutional voice within the royal family wasn't enough [for Meghan]. This interview will be the loudest way she'll get her voice back.'
> 
> 'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'
> 
> TV companies are already locked in an international bidding war for the rights to the programme, which will see Meghan talk about marriage and motherhood, having recently announced her second pregnancy, as well as her handling of life under the most intense of spotlights.
> 
> She is highlighted as the star of the show, with CBS, the American network broadcasting the special in the States, billing Harry as something of a support act.
> 
> The all voice is here!


Get her voice back?  What laryngitis does she have?  She won’t shut up!


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> Doesn't she pretty much think EVERYONE is beneath her?



Yes she does. However, in her frenzied pursuit of worldwide fame, she worked extremely hard to get underneath Harry. Gotta hand it to her, it worked! The end always justifies the means, right? This is the kind of figure that Meghan's sugars adore and hold in high esteem.   I'll admit, she latched onto a winning combination--a prince who is globally famous AND an imbecilic dope. That's how you become a feminist leader don't cha know?


----------



## marietouchet

As best as I can make it , subject deserves an in depth study, week events 

Sun pregnancy announced
Mon Oprah announces. BP said to be blindsided
Tues interview taped. My guess: O waited as long as possible to announce since arrival of news crew would not go unnoticed in Montecito
Fri Patronages removed, BP and HMM make dueling announcements of divorce, consensus: HMM announcement was a large (rude) push back 
Sat Charles in tears after visit to Philip under ‘extraordinary’ circumstances clause of UK lockdown rules
Sun O wondering how to edit the show and what to retape


----------



## marietouchet

In a weird way, I do kind of understand how HMM feel badly treated with respect to Andrew, I figure there is lot more that is not publicly known 

Andrew no longer doing duties pending outcome of Epstein mess, no crime proven yet, just bad judgment, he keeps all his patronages in the interim, no public statements from A, no public disagreements with QEII, embarrassing interview but was probably OK’d by BP

H moves away, is possibly zooming into patronages during the year of COVID, patronages removed, lots of awkward news from CA - eg graveyard visit and much more, tell all interview to come 

MM whining about laryngitis , no voice ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> In a weird way, I do kind of understand how HMM feel badly treated with respect to Andrew, I figure there is lot more that is not publicly known
> 
> Andrew no longer doing duties pending outcome of Epstein mess, no crime proven yet, just bad judgment, he keeps all his patronages in the interim, no public statements from A, no public disagreements with QEII, embarrassing interview but was probably OK’d by BP
> 
> H moves away, is possibly zooming into patronages during the year of COVID, patronages removed, lots of awkward news from CA - eg graveyard visit and much more, tell all interview to come
> 
> MM whining about laryngitis , no voice ...



The “but but... Andrew is worse” justification for *H&M’s shameful behavior* reflects their immature thinking.  

No one is making excuses for Andrew. As of today, he has not been charged with a crime, has not been convicted of a crime and has not renounced his family. If Andrew renounces his family, then, sure, his patronages will be reassigned. He is, in fact, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The baying mob and the media, of course, have alreday tried and convicted him. Happily, we are a nation of laws. The truth will prevail.

The greedy grifters did a very stupid thing by complaining about serving others. No, they do not need to merch off of the eco-disadvantaged. It is *shameful*.  Their lawsuits, their paltry donations and their pathetic zooms insult our intelligence. With each appearance, H&M show us who they really are. OW, Gayle, too.  We see them. Right now, they look really ugly.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

The ladies on this forum are astute, sophisticated and reasonable. I find opinions fair and responses informative and witty. Judgments are made on behavior and choice of language. Thus, I believe the forum is a microcosm of the public opinion of the spare and his supposed albatross.  It will be an embarrassment that an American network becomes Meghan’s tool.  I agree with many that Oprah is an opportunist but in this case she and the network would be doing a kindness to the Queen if they canceled this broadcast. Indirectly, it would be a service to H and M.  They would be saved from themselves. He is too stupid and weak to control his wife. She is beyond evil.

My biggest confusion relates to the latest claim that poor Meg lost her voice when they were dating and it is just too too much to be silenced any longer. Excuse me. Was she an innocent unworldly ingenue? Was she so young that she could not understand the constraints of royal life? I thought she had all these professional advisors. I thought she was giving up her career for love. I thought she had some intelligence. I presumed she was shrewd enough to understand her obligations to the Crown.

I must agree with those of the opinion that this was well planned by a master manipulator and her weakling spouse. It is a tragedy for the royals and a travesty that any legitimate public forum gives them a platform.  They do no good. They shed no light.  They are not news. Let them slink away and good riddance.


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Another good title for the already recorded interview:
> 
> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*
> 
> Speaking about the Oprah interview which was filmed in California, the source close the couple told the Times: 'Having an institutional voice within the royal family wasn't enough [for Meghan]. This interview will be the loudest way she'll get her voice back.'
> 
> 'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'
> 
> TV companies are already locked in an international bidding war for the rights to the programme, which will see Meghan talk about marriage and motherhood, having recently announced her second pregnancy, as well as her handling of life under the most intense of spotlights.
> 
> She is highlighted as the star of the show, with CBS, the American network broadcasting the special in the States, billing Harry as something of a support act.
> 
> The all voice is here!


What??  Before she dated/married H was she influential in any way? Was she even in the news? What am I missing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

A little bit of more information on the last events:

_A senior production source at CBS last night confirmed that, while several hours of interviews with Harry, 36, and his wife, 39, are already in the can – mostly shot at their £11 million mansion in Montecito – Oprah is preparing further questions for them based on last week’s dramatic events.

The senior CBS source said: “Fans can expect a real first with some charming footage of Archie that was filmed at the family home recently. We’ve only seen glimpses of him so far, so viewers are going to be delighted.”

The couple are already planning for the arrival of Archie’s sibling by having a guest room at their Montecito mansion permanently ready for her 64-year-old mother Doria Ragland.

As well as baby-sitting Archie and helping reorganise his nursery for the new arrival, the former yoga instructor is also reportedly continuing to help her son-in-law Harry with workout sessions.

According to friends and confidantes, Harry “adores Doria” and even calls her ‘Mom’ with a mock American accent. One of those confidantes said yesterday: “He and Meghan view her mother as an important part of the glue that holds them all together._


https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...frey-us-politics-vice-president-******-harris


----------



## CarryOn2020

justwatchin said:


> What??  Before she dated/married H was she influential in any way? Was she even in the news? What am I missing?



Nothing, you are missing nothing. MM’s influence was always through the men she associated with. She was a divorced, nearly 40 year old woman with a private school education. Her entire adult life has been spent with a man, either as a gf or a wife. Her father got her gigs in the early days, Trevor made Suits possible, the chef showed her how to cook, then along comes H. With his connections, she hit the jackpot, merched it the way her mother taught her and raked in millions. Guessing she nor H ever read Faust.  This is why few of us believe her feminist claims - why Gloria embarrassed herself to interview MM is a mystery. Maybe GS needed the $$$.  H‘s deep-seated hatred of his family caused him make choices that have led to this debacle. OW, Gayle, and CBS have their own choices to blame.

The smart move is for CBS to cancel this show. Yes, OW can cancel it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> A little bit of more information on the last events:
> 
> _A senior production source at CBS last night confirmed that, while several hours of interviews with Harry, 36, and his wife, 39, are already in the can – mostly shot at their £11 million mansion in Montecito – Oprah is preparing further questions for them based on last week’s dramatic events.
> 
> The senior CBS source said: “Fans can expect a real first with some charming footage of Archie that was filmed at the family home recently. We’ve only seen glimpses of him so far, so viewers are going to be delighted.”
> 
> The couple are already planning for the arrival of Archie’s sibling by having a guest room at their Montecito mansion permanently ready for her 64-year-old mother Doria Ragland.
> 
> As well as baby-sitting Archie and helping reorganise his nursery for the new arrival, the former yoga instructor is also reportedly continuing to help her son-in-law Harry with workout sessions.
> 
> According to friends and confidantes, Harry “adores Doria” and even calls her ‘Mom’ with a mock American accent. One of those confidantes said yesterday: “He and Meghan view her mother as an important part of the glue that holds them all together._
> 
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...frey-us-politics-vice-president-******-harris



Thought super-woman Doria was already living there?  Ooops, another lie?    
*Shameful, just shameful.*


----------



## Chanbal

What petulant H is doing to his family is .

_The Duke of Cambridge has been 'shocked and saddened' at his brother's behaviour towards the monarch the sources told the Sunday Times, after his brother and Meghan were stripped of their royal patronages and Her Majesty suggested a 'life of public service' is not compatible with the couple's lucrative new career in America.

As Prince Charles made a 200-mile round trip to be by poorly Prince Philip's hospital bedside yesterday, it was also claimed that billionaire chat show host Oprah Winfrey spent two days with the Sussexes last week filming their prime-time interview.

She flew into California on her £50million private jet and was with the couple hours before they released their statement. Sources claimed to The Sun that the chat show host's 'intimate' access gave her a 'real insight' into the rift with the Royal family and believes her interview to be broadcast on 7 March will be 'pure gold'

William, 38, has struggled to accept the concept of Megxit and now feels there is added pressure on him with Harry turning his back on the UK.

The Times sources described William believed the Sussexes statement was 'petulant and insulting to the Queen'. While other sources said: 'Don't disrespect your granny, Harry.' and 'You don't answer the Queen back — it's just not done.'

One royal source told the Times: 'Once [William] he got over the anger of how things happened, he was left with the absence of his brother.









						William's fury at Meghan and Harry's 'insulting' parting shot
					

Harry and Meghan were stripped of their royal patronages as Her Majesty suggested a 'life of public service' is not compatible with the couple's lucrative new career in America.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thought super-woman Doria was already living there?  Ooops, another lie?
> *Shameful, just shameful.*


She is working out with H probably on a regular basis, so she is likely a constant presence there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What petulant H is doing to his family is .
> 
> _The Duke of Cambridge has been 'shocked and saddened' at his brother's behaviour towards the monarch the sources told the Sunday Times, after his brother and Meghan were stripped of their royal patronages and Her Majesty suggested a 'life of public service' is not compatible with the couple's lucrative new career in America.
> 
> As Prince Charles made a 200-mile round trip to be by poorly Prince Philip's hospital bedside yesterday, it was also claimed that billionaire chat show host Oprah Winfrey spent two days with the Sussexes last week filming their prime-time interview._
> 
> _*She flew into California on her £50million private jet and was with the couple hours before they released their statement. Sources claimed to The Sun that the chat show host's 'intimate' access gave her a 'real insight' into the rift with the Royal family and believes her interview to be broadcast on 7 March will be 'pure gold'*_
> 
> _William, 38, has struggled to accept the concept of Megxit and now feels there is added pressure on him with Harry turning his back on the UK.
> 
> The Times sources described William believed the Sussexes statement was 'petulant and insulting to the Queen'. While other sources said: 'Don't disrespect your granny, Harry.' and 'You don't answer the Queen back — it's just not done.'
> 
> One royal source told the Times: 'Once [William] he got over the anger of how things happened, he was left with the absence of his brother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William's fury at Meghan and Harry's 'insulting' parting shot
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan were stripped of their royal patronages as Her Majesty suggested a 'life of public service' is not compatible with the couple's lucrative new career in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



OMG!  This is toxic. Does everyone hear what I hear?  OW’s career going down the drain.  How stupid are these people? 
H working out?  Sure, tell us some more lies.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Another good title for the already recorded interview:
> 
> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*
> 
> Speaking about the Oprah interview which was filmed in California, the source close the couple told the Times: 'Having an institutional voice within the royal family wasn't enough [for Meghan]. This interview will be the loudest way she'll get her voice back.'
> 
> 'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'
> 
> TV companies are already locked in an international bidding war for the rights to the programme, which will see Meghan talk about marriage and motherhood, having recently announced her second pregnancy, as well as her handling of life under the most intense of spotlights.
> 
> She is highlighted as the star of the show, with CBS, the American network broadcasting the special in the States, billing Harry as something of a support act.
> 
> The all voice is here!



But really no one knew who she was until she started dating Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM:
_A source told the Sun: 'The pair are clearly very close to Oprah and the fact she's been with them at such an intense time has given her a unique insight into the rift with the royals.

'The drama of last week means that Oprah's tell-all show will be *pure gold. It's time to hide behind the sofa for the other royals.'*_


Shameful, just shameful. Shame  on CBS. Boycott has begun!


----------



## Kaka_bobo

No way in hell would I be watching that interview. Hope the rating bombs.

And if it is ever uploaded to YouTube, I would gladly give it a dislike to show my disgust.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I would not be surprised at all if Harry inherited nada from QEII and PP.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Gimmethebag said:


> I would not be surprised at all if Harry inherited nada from QEII and PP.



Good, exactly what he and his wife deserves...NADA


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gimmethebag said:


> I would not be surprised at all if Harry inherited nada from QEII and PP.



William can administer it, as necessary.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _A source told the Sun: 'The pair are clearly very close to Oprah and the fact she's been with them at such an intense time has given her a unique insight into the rift with the royals.
> 
> 'The drama of last week means that Oprah's tell-all show will be *pure gold. It's time to hide behind the sofa for the other royals.'*_
> 
> 
> Shameful, just shameful. Shame  on CBS. Boycott has begun!


And, OW "flew into California on her £50million private jet". I wonder if the 'sustainable' travel arrangements were organized by the eco-friendly H's Travalyst.


----------



## Chanbal

Gimmethebag said:


> I would not be surprised at all if Harry inherited nada from QEII and PP.


They already got an early inheritance. The titles given by QE are a big (and only) source of income for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DP


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is getting more and more revealing.  This confirms that MM&H were planing to announce the interview only after the megxit negotiations. A nice couple of traitors.  




Her Majesty was 'blindsided' last week when it emerged that the Duchess of Sussex and her husband had agreed to talk to the American chat show host.

She learned of it only when US TV network CBS hurriedly issued a statement on Monday after a producer working for Ms Winfrey mistakenly alerted ITV to the project.

Her Majesty was 'blindsided'!


----------



## Chanbal

Another interesting title: 




Go for it Will!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> She learned of it only when US TV network CBS hurriedly issued a statement on Monday *after a producer working for Ms Winfrey mistakenly alerted ITV to the project*.



Now there’s a producer who is going to be out of a job next week.

In other news, Eugenie and her husband have named their baby August Philip Hawke. Nice  of them to use Philip’s name.


----------



## Chanbal

Weekend reading!!! We are still waiting for articles by Jan Moir and Piers Morgan. 

*SARAH VINE: How laughable for Harry and Meghan to lecture the Queen on duty. She wrote the book*

Around this time last year, as the pandemic was tightening its grip on humanity, Harry and Meghan took to Instagram, as is their wont, to bestow their wisdom upon the world.

‘How we approach each other and our communities with empathy and kindness is indisputably important right now,’ they wrote. ‘Over the coming weeks, this will be our guiding principle.’

Noble sentiments indeed. Except, as the actions of these two have demonstrated over the course of the past year and, in particular, the last few days, it’s one thing to preach, quite another to practice. 

These are two people who never seem to tire of reminding us how warm and caring they are – but whose actions sadly tell a very different story.

Their response last week to the Queen’s statement about their future as members of the Royal Family is a classic example. Empathy and kindness? Not exactly.

The message from Buckingham Palace was, insofar as these things ever can be, heartfelt, expressing deep affection for the couple, as well as regret at their decision to walk away. ‘The Duke and Duchess remain much loved members of the Royal Family,’ it concluded rather forlornly.

One imagines that the importance of family and loved ones is at the forefront of the Queen’s mind at the moment, what with Prince Philip being in hospital.

And anyone reading that statement could not fail to sense the emotion between the lines. Anyone, it seems, except for the famously compassionate and empathetic Harry and Meghan.

Issuing their riposte – at 4.30am Los Angeles time – it didn’t even occur to them to express any empathy whatsoever for the Monarch’s situation. Wish her and the Duke of Edinburgh well? Thank her for her patience and understanding? Apologise, maybe, for causing such upheaval and heartache?

Don’t be absurd. Instead, we got the usual teenage pout, hair-flick, slammed bedroom door. ‘As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world,’ they said, adding – with a petulant flourish – ‘We can all live a life of service. Service is universal.’

In other words, talk to the hand, old lady, because the face ain’t listening. Such insensitivity and rudeness is astonishing enough on its own. But what really beggars belief is the level of their own delusion.

‘Duty and service to the UK.’ Their words, not mine. And yet last time I looked, Harry and Meghan were living in a 16-bathroom mansion in sun-drenched California, about as far away as possible from freezing cold, Covid-riven Blighty. The only service that matters there is whether the pool guy turns up on time.

Most people in their situation might be just a tiny bit bashful about this. But, in common with other self-obsessed celebrities, the stark contrast of their lavish lifestyle with the grim fortunes of the average peasant back home doesn’t seem to trouble them in the slightest. 

Indeed, if anything, we’re supposed to be grateful to them for ‘sharing’, for allowing us to stain their window pane with our greasy proletariat noses.

Hence, presumably, their decision to announce Meghan’s pregnancy via a vanity photoshoot in the garden of said mansion.

As let-them-eat-cake moments go, it makes Marie Antoinette look like a rank amateur. The arrival of baby No 2 is, of course, extremely happy news. It will be lovely for Archie to have a sibling, and after Meghan’s miscarriage last year, it must be a great relief for both of them. But a simply worded statement would have sufficed.

Except it wouldn’t have, because nothing is ever enough for Harry and Meghan. Not the adoration of the British public, who delighted in Harry’s happiness and welcomed Meghan as a breath of fresh air. 

Not the help and advice of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, or the wise counsel of Prince Charles and the Queen herself. Not the lavish, no-expense-spared wedding, or cosy Frogmore Cottage, or the choice of jewels and tiaras or the hoops we all jumped through in an attempt to avoid incurring their displeasure.

Few newlyweds starting out in life enjoy even a fraction of the privilege afforded to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. And yet, for whatever reason, none of it was ever good enough.

As to duty, some of what little was expected of them – for example introducing baby Archie to the world – appeared to be conducted with such churlish disgruntlement that it hardly seemed worth it.

The idea that they should preach to the Queen – the Queen, of all people, a woman who has dedicated her entire life to duty and service, often to the detriment of her own personal happiness, a woman who has seen off 14 Prime Ministers – is, when you stop to think about it, extraordinary.

When it comes to duty to one’s country, Elizabeth II wrote the book. Duty is being there when times are bad. It’s making tough decisions that no one thanks you for. It’s biting your tongue when you want to scream. It’s being charming to people you can’t stand.

But perhaps more than anything else it’s putting all personal ambition to one side in favour of doing what’s required, for the greater good.

In other words, the exact opposite of what Harry and Meghan have done.

The idea that jumping on the occasional Zoom call, spouting empty platitudes to galleries of carefully vetted star-struck onlookers or issuing lofty statements to social media constitutes ‘duty and service’ is, quite honestly, laughable.

Eighteen months, they lasted. The Queen has been at it for 68 years. How dare they lecture her about duty.

But what makes the whole thing even more galling is that the very institution Harry and Meghan so clearly despise, the very principles that they have so summarily rejected, is the only reason anyone gives two hoots about them in the first place. Were it not for his Royal birthright, Harry would be lucky to hold down a job as a second-rate estate agent in Fulham. In those circumstances, would Meghan have even taken a second look at him?

Everything they have – from the fawning acolytes to the lucrative contracts with Netflix and Spotify – they owe to their association with the Royal Family and the Queen.

Would they be sitting in Celebrity Valley in California, rubbing shoulders with the likes of Beyoncé and Oprah, people who have got to the top on the back of sheer hard work and dedication, if they hadn’t piggy-backed on generations of privilege? No. Harry would just be another balding ex-Serviceman and Meghan an actress in a little-known legal drama.

‘We can all live a life of service.’ We certainly can. And many do.

No one in this country has the slightest scintilla of doubt in whose service the Queen and Prince Philip have given their lives: the British people. When they go, it will feel as if the Earth has tilted off its axis.

But Harry and Meghan? Once the glamour of royalty fades, once they’ve sold all their secrets to the highest bidder, they’ll just be another pair of celebrities desperate for attention, just two more bugs on the windscreen of history. And I, for one, really won’t miss them.


They will not be missed!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Now there’s a producer who is going to be out of a job next week.
> 
> In other news, Eugenie and her husband have named their baby August Philip Hawke. Nice  of them to use Philip’s name.



I read OW’s show was seeking copyright permission from ITV - ya kno, for the Bradby video, _Are you ok?  _ITV reporters saw the request, did what reporters do - reported it. 
Hoist by their _own_ petard!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Weekend reading!!! We are still waiting for articles by Jan Moir and Piers Morgan.
> 
> *SARAH VINE: How laughable for Harry and Meghan to lecture the Queen on duty. She wrote the book*
> 
> Around this time last year, as the pandemic was tightening its grip on humanity, Harry and Meghan took to Instagram, as is their wont, to bestow their wisdom upon the world.
> 
> ‘How we approach each other and our communities with empathy and kindness is indisputably important right now,’ they wrote. ‘Over the coming weeks, this will be our guiding principle.’
> 
> Noble sentiments indeed. Except, as the actions of these two have demonstrated over the course of the past year and, in particular, the last few days, it’s one thing to preach, quite another to practice.
> 
> These are two people who never seem to tire of reminding us how warm and caring they are – but whose actions sadly tell a very different story.
> 
> Their response last week to the Queen’s statement about their future as members of the Royal Family is a classic example. Empathy and kindness? Not exactly.
> 
> The message from Buckingham Palace was, insofar as these things ever can be, heartfelt, expressing deep affection for the couple, as well as regret at their decision to walk away. ‘The Duke and Duchess remain much loved members of the Royal Family,’ it concluded rather forlornly.
> 
> One imagines that the importance of family and loved ones is at the forefront of the Queen’s mind at the moment, what with Prince Philip being in hospital.
> 
> And anyone reading that statement could not fail to sense the emotion between the lines. Anyone, it seems, except for the famously compassionate and empathetic Harry and Meghan.
> 
> Issuing their riposte – at 4.30am Los Angeles time – it didn’t even occur to them to express any empathy whatsoever for the Monarch’s situation. Wish her and the Duke of Edinburgh well? Thank her for her patience and understanding? Apologise, maybe, for causing such upheaval and heartache?
> 
> Don’t be absurd. Instead, we got the usual teenage pout, hair-flick, slammed bedroom door. ‘As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world,’ they said, adding – with a petulant flourish – ‘We can all live a life of service. Service is universal.’
> 
> In other words, talk to the hand, old lady, because the face ain’t listening. Such insensitivity and rudeness is astonishing enough on its own. But what really beggars belief is the level of their own delusion.
> 
> ‘Duty and service to the UK.’ Their words, not mine. And yet last time I looked, Harry and Meghan were living in a 16-bathroom mansion in sun-drenched California, about as far away as possible from freezing cold, Covid-riven Blighty. The only service that matters there is whether the pool guy turns up on time.
> 
> Most people in their situation might be just a tiny bit bashful about this. But, in common with other self-obsessed celebrities, the stark contrast of their lavish lifestyle with the grim fortunes of the average peasant back home doesn’t seem to trouble them in the slightest.
> 
> Indeed, if anything, we’re supposed to be grateful to them for ‘sharing’, for allowing us to stain their window pane with our greasy proletariat noses.
> 
> Hence, presumably, their decision to announce Meghan’s pregnancy via a vanity photoshoot in the garden of said mansion.
> 
> As let-them-eat-cake moments go, it makes Marie Antoinette look like a rank amateur. The arrival of baby No 2 is, of course, extremely happy news. It will be lovely for Archie to have a sibling, and after Meghan’s miscarriage last year, it must be a great relief for both of them. But a simply worded statement would have sufficed.
> 
> Except it wouldn’t have, because nothing is ever enough for Harry and Meghan. Not the adoration of the British public, who delighted in Harry’s happiness and welcomed Meghan as a breath of fresh air.
> 
> Not the help and advice of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, or the wise counsel of Prince Charles and the Queen herself. Not the lavish, no-expense-spared wedding, or cosy Frogmore Cottage, or the choice of jewels and tiaras or the hoops we all jumped through in an attempt to avoid incurring their displeasure.
> 
> Few newlyweds starting out in life enjoy even a fraction of the privilege afforded to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. And yet, for whatever reason, none of it was ever good enough.
> 
> As to duty, some of what little was expected of them – for example introducing baby Archie to the world – appeared to be conducted with such churlish disgruntlement that it hardly seemed worth it.
> 
> The idea that they should preach to the Queen – the Queen, of all people, a woman who has dedicated her entire life to duty and service, often to the detriment of her own personal happiness, a woman who has seen off 14 Prime Ministers – is, when you stop to think about it, extraordinary.
> 
> When it comes to duty to one’s country, Elizabeth II wrote the book. Duty is being there when times are bad. It’s making tough decisions that no one thanks you for. It’s biting your tongue when you want to scream. It’s being charming to people you can’t stand.
> 
> But perhaps more than anything else it’s putting all personal ambition to one side in favour of doing what’s required, for the greater good.
> 
> In other words, the exact opposite of what Harry and Meghan have done.
> 
> The idea that jumping on the occasional Zoom call, spouting empty platitudes to galleries of carefully vetted star-struck onlookers or issuing lofty statements to social media constitutes ‘duty and service’ is, quite honestly, laughable.
> 
> Eighteen months, they lasted. The Queen has been at it for 68 years. How dare they lecture her about duty.
> 
> But what makes the whole thing even more galling is that the very institution Harry and Meghan so clearly despise, the very principles that they have so summarily rejected, is the only reason anyone gives two hoots about them in the first place. Were it not for his Royal birthright, Harry would be lucky to hold down a job as a second-rate estate agent in Fulham. In those circumstances, would Meghan have even taken a second look at him?
> 
> Everything they have – from the fawning acolytes to the lucrative contracts with Netflix and Spotify – they owe to their association with the Royal Family and the Queen.
> 
> Would they be sitting in Celebrity Valley in California, rubbing shoulders with the likes of Beyoncé and Oprah, people who have got to the top on the back of sheer hard work and dedication, if they hadn’t piggy-backed on generations of privilege? No. Harry would just be another balding ex-Serviceman and Meghan an actress in a little-known legal drama.
> 
> ‘We can all live a life of service.’ We certainly can. And many do.
> 
> No one in this country has the slightest scintilla of doubt in whose service the Queen and Prince Philip have given their lives: the British people. When they go, it will feel as if the Earth has tilted off its axis.
> 
> But Harry and Meghan? Once the glamour of royalty fades, once they’ve sold all their secrets to the highest bidder, they’ll just be another pair of celebrities desperate for attention, just two more bugs on the windscreen of history. And I, for one, really won’t miss them.
> 
> 
> They will not be missed!



Perfect!
I’ve read that OW was with them when they received QE’s message. Speculation is she herself assisted in crafting that hateful message. Good grief, what has happened to OW?  Too much weight watchers? Hubris?   

ETA: Dementia? She is 67.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perfect!
> I’ve read that OW was with them when they received QE’s message. Speculation is she herself assisted in crafting that hateful message. Good grief, what has happened to OW?  Too much weight watchers? Hubris?



The thought that Oprah was involved in writing it doesn’t ring true to me. Maybe because it sounds too much like the earlier missives from Meghan we’ve heard over the past two years.

At this point we must acknowledge that Harry appears to be onboard with bringing down his family. He isn’t locked away in a room while it is being done behind his back, he is fully participating. The question is, why?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Now there’s a producer who is going to be out of a job next week.
> 
> In other news, Eugenie and her husband have named their baby August Philip Hawke. Nice  of them to use Philip’s name.


I wonder if the producer was instructed by Ms Winfrey to mistakenly alerted ITV. More drama leads to  bigger audience.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perfect!
> I’ve read that OW was with them when they received QE’s message. Speculation is she herself assisted in crafting that hateful message. Good grief, what has happened to OW?  Too much weight watchers? Hubris?
> 
> ETA: Dementia? She is 67.


Isn't OW an interested party in the megxit? March 7 may clarify a little more her participation.


----------



## rose60610

In Meghan and Harry's defense, telling the Queen--head of a thousand year monarchy-- to basically "SHOVE IT" and spouting off their petty grievances such as "we're splitting off to suck off Crown fame and get rich ourselves by whoring out every mention of Diana and whining about how horribly we've been treated" is THE NEW WOKE WAY!  Come now, Thread Posters, we did not have front seats to witness Meghan's suffering after her 50 million dollar wedding and all the other seemingly nice experiences that must have been hell for her. I hate to think that I'm not WOKE enough and I am sooooo ashamed that I don't hate myself sufficiently to want to trade places with the canonized Saint Meghan. Ms. Markle, self anointed mentor of young women, teaches us to whine, sob and complain your way to the top. And who are WE to judge?? It's worked for her!! What a role model!  I can't wait until everyone screams "I AM A VICTIM AND I WON'T SHUT UP UNTIL I GET TO WHINE HOW EVERYONE OWES ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!  I'M A VICTIM VICTIM VICTIM!!

I fear this day might actually be coming.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The thought that Oprah was involved in writing it doesn’t ring true to me. Maybe because it sounds too much like the earlier missives from Meghan we’ve heard over the past two years.
> 
> At this point we must acknowledge that Harry appears to be onboard with bringing down his family. He isn’t locked away in a room while it is being done behind his back, he is fully participating. The question is, why?



MM's message to the queen was a huge mistake, and it's possible that she felt empowered by Oprah to write is.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM's message to the queen was a huge mistake, and it's possible that she felt empowered by Oprah to write is.



Since when has she needed anyone else’s input to feel empowered? She’s had no shortage of that all along.

I’d like to think Oprah is too smart to let herself be personally sucked into all the drama. She wants to produce a top-rated show, she’s not looking to become part of the story.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Since when has she needed anyone else’s input to feel empowered? She’s had no shortage of that all along.
> 
> I’d like to think Oprah is too smart to let herself be personally sucked into all the drama. She wants to produce a top-rated show, she’s not looking to become part of the story.


People like MM are often cowards. Megxit wouldn't have happened if she didn't have heavy supporters working with her behind the scenes. MA, SS, and Oprah are all valid possibilities.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> MM's message to the queen was a huge mistake, and it's possible that she felt empowered by Oprah to write is.



*Shameful, just shameful.  *O was at their house hours before the rude tweet was sent. Discussions had been back-and-forth while O was there filming her interview. Such a s$it-show, from beginning to end.  









						Meghan believes Oprah chat is 'loudest way she'll get her voice back'
					

With tensions already strained, the revelation of the interview with Oprah Winfrey sent matters into free fall and was deemed to be the final straw.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recorded their tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey on Wednesday and Thursday - just hours before the couple issued a parting shot after being stripped of roles and patronages by the Queen, it has been revealed


ETA: _where was Doria?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Shameful, just shameful.  *O was at their house hours before the rude tweet was sent. Discussions had been back-and-forth while O was there filming her interview. Such a s$it-show, from beginning to end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan believes Oprah chat is 'loudest way she'll get her voice back'
> 
> 
> With tensions already strained, the revelation of the interview with Oprah Winfrey sent matters into free fall and was deemed to be the final straw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recorded their tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey on Wednesday and Thursday - just hours before the couple issued a parting shot after being stripped of roles and patronages by the Queen, it has been revealed
> 
> 
> ETA: _where was Doria?


Either MM&H are making several millions of dollars with this interview or they just have Oprah as a godmother figure. It's possible that they have both Oprah's support and the zillions of dollars on this. Oprah is a very clever lady who knows what to ask. The interview will likely be very revealing of Oprah's potential participation in this. 

Doria was probably babysitting Archie or sleeping. I don't think Doria would support the response to QE. She looks smarter than that.

It's all about money:

_The interview with Oprah Winfrey will 'make or break' the fortunes of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in the US, experts predict. A producer who has worked with Ms Winfrey in the past said: 'This is make or break for them.

'Most Americans have no idea what they stand for and what they actually do.

'Of course, we know Harry is Princess Diana's son but ask your average guy in the street and they likely have no clue about them beyond that.'

He said it was significant that Meghan, who last week announced that she is pregnant with the couple's second child, intends to speak to Ms Winfrey on her own before Harry joins her later in front of the cameras. 

'It seems Meghan wants to state her case and present her narrative about how she was received in Britain and what caused Megxit,' the producer added. 

'She needs regular Americans to understand what she's about, like her and then want to click on her Netflix projects or Spotify podcasts._

'_The fact they've been given the time slot after 60 Minutes, which consistently wins the ratings war on Sunday nights, should give them a huge audience going in._









						Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah is 'make or break' in the US
					

The 90-minute programme, which will air immediately after CBS's flagship 60 Minutes show on March 7, is the couple's chance 'to woo and win over Americans'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Why would Oprah fly in on her private jet to interview them when she lives in the same town?

According to the DM article below, BP's statement was released at 12:01pm UK time on Friday, putting that at 4:01am Friday US Pacific time. Scobie's tweet was 3 minutes later at 4:04am US Pacific time. Don't think Oprah was there filming at the time, but someone was anticipating the announcement to put together a bowl of snippy word salad! 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT be returning as working royals
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed to The Queen that they will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family, Buckingham Palace said today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> *Why would Oprah fly in on her private jet to interview them when she lives in the same town?*
> 
> BP's statement was released around 12:00pm UK time on Friday, putting that at around 4:00am Friday US Pacific time. Scobie's tweet was a few minutes later at 4:04am US Pacific time. Don't think Oprah was there filming at the time, but someone was anticipating the announcement to put together a bowl of snippy word salad!


Oprah has several residences. House Maui?  
I found the answer for you: "_The chat show host prepared for the interview at her home in Hawaii before flying into California, where she also owns a second property in Montecito a short drive from the couple, on her £50million private jet._"

Wow, it's impressive how Scobie gets things fast from Mr and Mrs. Markle Windsor









						Oprah Winfrey House: Photos of Her Many Mansions
					

With homes around the world, one would think Oprah Winfrey house was perfection. Well, not quite big enough. We have a map of her massive expansion!




					www.velvetropes.com
				












						Oprah spent interviewed Meghan and Harry hours before parting shot
					

The chat show host prepared for the interview at her home in Hawaii before flying into California, where she also owns a property a short drive from the couple, on her £50million private jet.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




DM has several articles on the drama today. I believe they are still digesting Justice Warby's decision. I can't blame them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perfect!
> I’ve read that OW was with them when they received QE’s message. Speculation is she herself assisted in crafting that hateful message. Good grief, what has happened to OW?  *Too much* weight watchers? Hubris?
> 
> ETA: Dementia? She is 67.


Too much success can cause an inflated ego and a feeling of superiority. Then, sitting on that high pedestal, she probably feels she has the right to chastise royalty especially after mingling with them at the wedding.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m a praying woman and just prayed that no weapon formed against the Queen prosper. That all the fiery darts of evil against the Queen backfire and that she’s protected and that she gains wisdom and discernment in handling this. God save the Queen. I simply adore her.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Since when has she needed anyone else’s input to feel empowered? She’s had no shortage of that all along.
> 
> I’d like to think Oprah is too smart to let herself be personally sucked into all the drama. She wants to produce a top-rated show, she’s not looking to become part of the story.


An opinion from a stan on the 'make or break' interview:  Is that you Omid?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> An opinion from a stan on the 'make or break' interview:  Is that you Omid?
> View attachment 4997474


What in the hell is LA royalty?!?! This person is a complete idiot.


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> What in the hell is LA royalty?!?! This person is a complete idiot.



They've obviously never been to LA 

rotflmfao at _LA ROYALTY _


----------



## viciel

This is what people with NPD do, they will bait you over and over again, to lure you into a war of words. The Firm needs to NOT engage. Set boundaries by not engaging. It will make them more angry and they will keep coming at you with more baiting and attacks, just ignore these people let them put on their circus show and the palace should go about their business. I would not take Harry back even if he and MM end up divorcing and he realizes his mistakes. A lifetime of teachings about duty clearly hasn't done anything for him, this one is a lost cause.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> MM's message to the queen was a huge mistake, and it's possible that she felt empowered by Oprah to write is.


Or by Doria, who Harry adores.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> QE has to put up with all this while her husband is in the hospital. It's very cruel. I wish her strength and peace to deal with her petulant grandson and his greedy wife. Hopefully, Philip recovers and they can celebrate his birthday together.
> 
> View attachment 4997178
> 
> 
> The Queen has faced repeated calls to reconsider the line of succession to the throne in the wake of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to step away from royal life for good. Royal commentators have questioned how Harry's departure would reconcile with his duty as Regent to Prince George in the eventuality of the young royal succeeding Prince Charles and Prince William while underage. Under the Regency Acts 1937, the eldest male in the line of succession would be required to act as Regent to the new king or queen in the event of them taking the throne before turning 18.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex would be first in line for the position as the first adult in the line of succession after his older brother, the Duke of Cambridge.
> 
> The Acts also require the potential Regent to be a resident of the UK, which could put Prince Harry's position further into jeopardy as he and the Duchess of Sussex have confirmed they plan to split their time between England and the US.
> 
> Prince Andrew would be the next in line for the role but his forced retirement from public duty has also sparked questions about the appropriateness of keeping the Duke of York in the pecking order.
> 
> Jeremy Vine contributor Dr Sarah Jarvis suggested earlier this week that the retroactive application of the Succession to the Crown Act on Princess Anne could help resolve the impasse.
> 
> 
> During a discussion on rewarding the Princess Royal for her commitment to the Royal Family and her constant hard work, Dr Jarvis argued Anne would be a great role model for Prince George.
> 
> She said: "The point here is although you're quite right she is highly unlikely ever to become Queen.
> 
> "If anything were to happen to Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge, she would then be Regent.
> 
> "Wouldn't she be an amazing role model as a regent for George?"
> 
> Calls to remove H from the succession line
> 
> 
> Mr Dampier tweeted: "If #PrinceHarry wants to walk away from royal duties is there or should there be a mechanism for taking him and his children out of the line of succession? Sixth is still pretty high."
> 
> Royal author Robert Jobson insisted Harry should be taken out of the line of succession.
> 
> Mr Jobson said it gives the "wrong message" that Harry - who has quit royal duties for a new life in America - is above Princess Anne and Prince Edward.
> 
> More calls to remove H


 Prince Edward is the youngest of the queens children and quietly without fuss he and his wife Sophie have stepped up in the last 5 years taking over as chief support to the Queen since Phillip retired from public life - before covid they regularly visited the Queen most afternoons - their children are the queens favourite grandchildren and she goes riding with Edward and Sophie regularly - I suspect they can easily take over the regent role as Anne is now in her 70s


----------



## elvisfan4life

The best way to help them sink  into luxurious obscurity is to boycott anything they appear on - no doubt it will appear in the UK as we have a lot of trashy reality TV but I have never watched any and don’t intend to start now - Harry is such a disgrace - his grandfather is in perilous Ill health but if he were able I truly believe he would disown him


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> What in the hell is LA royalty?!?! This person is a complete idiot.



I wonder if they meant _Hollywood _royalty.  Which is an even bigger thigh slapper. 
The only person who I can think of being LA royalty was Kobe
Besides, they don't even _live _in or even near LA. Montecito is two counties away. 
Whatever............the person truly IS a complete idiot


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _The senior CBS source said: “Fans can expect a real first with some charming footage of Archie that was filmed at the family home recently. We’ve only seen glimpses of him so far, so viewers are going to be delighted.”_



I just lost any little scrap of respect I may have had left for these two. We weren't buying their weird hide and seek with Archie was to protect him from the evil world anyway, but they have just given us proof he was their cash cow all along. I didn't think better of Meghan anyway, but traumatized Harry? Disgusting.

_



			The couple are already planning for the arrival of Archie’s sibling by having a guest room at their Montecito mansion permanently ready for her 64-year-old mother Doria Ragland.
		
Click to expand...

_
Yeah, whatever.

_



			According to friends and confidantes, Harry “adores Doria” and even calls her ‘Mom’ with a mock American accent. One of those confidantes said yesterday: “He and Meghan view her mother as an important part of the glue that holds them all together.
		
Click to expand...

_
The woman who left her only child with her ex-husband and never bothered to include her stepchildren, sure. She doesn't strike me as the family oriented type but what do I know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> She is working out with H probably on a regular basis, so she is likely a constant presence there.



A former military guy and professional polo player now does Yoga as his main work-out?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Her Majesty was 'blindsided' last week when it emerged that the Duchess of Sussex and her husband had agreed to talk to the American chat show host.
> 
> She learned of it only when US TV network CBS hurriedly issued a statement on Monday after a producer working for Ms Winfrey mistakenly alerted ITV to the project.



The slyness of these two has no limits. Or maybe the slyness of one and the weakness of the other, who knows. But also, I read somewhere it was actually a reputable journalist who kind of leaked it or rather forced them to make the statement...I can't find his name because it's buried somewhere. 

But also it is very satisfactory to me that not all of their evil plans seem to be smooth sailing lately.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

If, by any chance, Catherine is pregnant, maybe March 7th would be a nice day to announce it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> If, by any chance, Catherine is pregnant, maybe March 7th would be a nice day to announce it?



If only. They are way too classy to join the petty party.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> In Meghan and Harry's defense, telling the Queen--head of a thousand year monarchy-- to basically "SHOVE IT" and spouting off their petty grievances such as "we're splitting off to suck off Crown fame and get rich ourselves by whoring out every mention of Diana and whining about how horribly we've been treated" is THE NEW WOKE WAY!  Come now, Thread Posters, we did not have front seats to witness Meghan's suffering after her 50 million dollar wedding and all the other seemingly nice experiences that must have been hell for her. I hate to think that I'm not WOKE enough and I am sooooo ashamed that I don't hate myself sufficiently to want to trade places with the canonized Saint Meghan. Ms. Markle, self anointed mentor of young women, teaches us to whine, sob and complain your way to the top. And who are WE to judge?? It's worked for her!! What a role model!  I can't wait until everyone screams *"I AM A VICTIM AND I WON'T SHUT UP UNTIL I GET TO WHINE HOW EVERYONE OWES ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!  I'M A VICTIM VICTIM VICTIM!!
> 
> I fear this day might actually be coming. *


I fear wer’re there.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Yesterday I feared for Prince Phillip with Charles making the trip to visit - today I’m of the firm belief Phillip insisted Charles come to see him and carpeted him over his sons abysmal behaviour - thus the tears sadly Charles is not a very strong character and has let Harry get away with far too much - Phillip is made of sterner stuff


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


> I usually do not reply to posts that use words like "vitriol", but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that you may have missed posts with evidence that MM used to identify herself as Caucasian on her CV some years ago. Indeed, many of us initially thought that she was Caucasian. It has nothing to do with ceasing to be a WOC when marrying a partner who is not. If you do a google search, you may still find that information.



I was curious so I googled and I couldn't find any links to a resume identifying her as caucasian. It would be actually highly unusual to include so I am wondering what evidence there is? There was a "babe ranking" site that someone mistook for a CV and posted on Twitter. From what I can tell that's how this rumor started, unless you have other information it seems completely unfounded.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> Yesterday I feared for Prince Phillip with Charles making the trip to visit - today I’m of the firm belief Phillip insisted Charles come to see him and carpeted him over his sons abysmal behaviour - thus the tears sadly Charles is not a very strong character and has let Harry get away with far too much - Phillip is made of sterner stuff
> 
> View attachment 4997586


I wonder if Philip stay in the hospital is also to spare him from further aggravations related to the megxit drama. His health is fragile and it was likely deteriorating during the negotiations and demands. Philip dedicated his life to serve the monarchy and his country, and seeing all the damage that H & MM are doing was probably rapidly deteriorating his health.


----------



## marietouchet

Various reports on Oprah being at HMM house when the rude HMM announcement was drafted.  Is that true??

O MAY have been shown a draft (?) and nodded  in apparent agreement ...  But then I did not get the subtext on first reading either. 

It was not until the BP and HMM announcements were side by side, that I was able to see the seething  anger in the reply ...

My guess: O was blindsided, maybe she did not see the BP announcement, maybe she did not understand the subtext but SURELY O did not foresee the HUGE push back to the HMM announcement

There are reports that O has asked for a second sit down.

Perhaps O is under the bus - where she has lots of company - but O can take of herself, a strong person, she has navigated alligator swamps before

Golly this story is GOOPY


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Philip stay in the hospital is also to spare him from further aggravations related to the megxit drama. His health is fragile and it was likely deteriorating during the negotiations and demands. Philip dedicated his life to serve the monarchy and his country, and seeing all the damage that H & MM are doing was probably rapidly deteriorating his health.


 I’m hoping he is getting much needed rest and recuperation and that the issue is not life threatening


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve said it before and will continue to say it — what H&M, CBS, OW and her sidekick Gayle have done is *shameful*.  CBS needs to pull the damn interview now and stop this noise. OW pulled her Russell Simmons film for her selfish reasons. She can stop this mess, too.
> 
> Does anyone know someone at CBS who can shut this down?  It is time!
> 
> The face says it all — no words necessary:
> View attachment 4997199
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles visits his father Prince Philip in hospital
> 
> 
> Prince Charles arrived at the back of the London hospital where Philip, the 99-year-old husband of Queen Elizabeth, has been since Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think it's possible that in addition to thinking Meghan can get them ratings, they really do empathize with her and believe she and H are *"In Love"*
As has been said here multiple times, no one cared what she said or thought until she nabbed the prince.  Now she is apparently an iconic WOC - without doing anything to earn it.  Gayle and Oprah have worked their whole adult lives to get where they are.  Gayle was mainly known as Oprah's BFF until she got the CBS job a few years ago.  And having gotten that job she has shown herself to be a good reporter/TV personality.  So why are they worshiping Meghan?  They see her as a victim I think.  A victim living in a 16-bath mansion in beautiful Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> According to the DM article below, BP's statement was released at 12:01pm UK time on Friday, putting that at 4:01am Friday US Pacific time. Scobie's tweet was 3 minutes later at 4:04am US Pacific time. Don't think Oprah was there filming at the time, but someone was anticipating the announcement to put together a bowl of snippy word salad!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT be returning as working royals
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed to The Queen that they will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family, Buckingham Palace said today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I assume BP gave Harry and Meghan some notice before making the official announcement to the press, maybe a few hours/a day or so? Plenty of time for them to craft their retort, but not enough time to cool down and consider whether it was a smart move. 

They must have had their faithful lapdog Omid sitting by his computer and hitting refresh every few seconds so he would be ready to do his part and post their response as soon as the announcement was made.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Yes, Initial reports were that H&M "hit the roof" when they were sent the draft of the BP announcement. 
SO BP had the grace, manners and professionalism to let H&M know the text of their planned announcement in advance of its release.

Did we see such consideration and professional courtesy from H&M at any time since their January 4th 2020 Instagram announcement or any time since when they have "fired back" ? I wonder if Meghan would be so disrespectful to the office of the ***** ?


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> Yes, Initial reports were that H&M "hit the roof" when they were sent the draft of the BP announcement.
> SO BP had the grace, manners and professionalism to let H&M know the text of their planned announcement in advance of its release.
> 
> Did we see such consideration and professional courtesy from H&M at any time since their January 4th 2020 Instagram announcement or any time since when they have "fired back" ? I wonder if Meghan would be so disrespectful to the office of the ***** ?


office of what?


----------



## RAINDANCE

That was supposed to be the office of the President but I used the acronym so it was edited ! Not sure if this will be also ? But I think you get my point.


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> That was supposed to be the office of the President but I used the acronym so it was edited ! Not sure if this will be also ? But I think you get my point.


bottom line in all of this is who the F does she think she is?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Yesterday I feared for Prince Phillip with Charles making the trip to visit - today I’m of the firm belief Phillip insisted Charles come to see him and carpeted him over his sons abysmal behaviour - thus the tears sadly Charles is not a very strong character and has let Harry get away with far too much - Phillip is made of sterner stuff



Right! This morning I thought there were two options - Philip is dying, in which case I feel the palace wouldn't be continuously putting out "He's fine" messages but be quiet, OR he had a word or two to say about Harry (as I feel at this point he wouldn't even acknowledge Harry's showgirl) to Charles, in which case the palace is right, he'll be fine. Philip was a way stricter father than a sensitive child like Charles was able to deal with, so I don't think it's completely out there he could reduce him to tears even at his age. I know I continuously have to work during stuff with my own mother! Only time will tell.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

elvisfan4life said:


> Yesterday I feared for Prince Phillip with Charles making the trip to visit - today I’m of the firm belief Phillip insisted Charles come to see him and carpeted him over his sons abysmal behaviour - thus the tears sadly Charles is not a very strong character and has let Harry get away with far too much - Phillip is made of sterner stuff
> 
> View attachment 4997586



My thoughts exactly.  I hope Prince Philip tore Charles off a strip


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I was curious so I googled and I couldn't find any links to a resume identifying her as caucasian. It would be actually highly unusual to include so I am wondering what evidence there is? There was a "babe ranking" site that someone mistook for a CV and posted on Twitter. From what I can tell that's how this rumor started, unless you have other information it seems completely unfounded.
> 
> View attachment 4997643


You might be right and it is possible that she called herself white (or not) and pretended to be in an actor's union only for auditions (not CV). These issues have been brought up in previous posts of this thread and in other sites on the net (see below). Gossip or fact, who knows? I don't care how one identifies himself or herself, but I don't particularly like when one tries to take advantage of serious issues. One of the beauties of TPF is that color, age, gender, country...are irrelevant for us to connect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I have posted this article before, but for those who missed it and have questions/concerns about MM’s identity:

Essay from 2016, written by MM:









						Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
					

'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman




					www.elle.com
				



_It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress. There couldn't possibly be a more label-driven industry than acting, seeing as every audition comes with a character breakdown: 'Beautiful, sassy, Latina, 20s'; 'African American, urban, pretty, early 30s'; 'Caucasian, blonde, modern girl next door'. Every role has a label; every casting is for something specific. But perhaps it is through this craft that I found my voice.

Being '*ethnically ambiguous*', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster. Sadly, it didn't matter: I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job._



Spoiler: More than Other



*Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'*
*Suits star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman. Originally written in July 2015 published in ELLE Magazine in 2015.*
22/12/2016
'What are you?' A question I get asked every week of my life, often every day. 'Well,' I say, as I begin the verbal dance I know all too well. 'I'm an actress, a writer, the Editor-in-Chief of my lifestyle brand The Tig, a pretty good cook and a firm believer in handwritten notes.' A mouthful, yes, but one that I feel paints a pretty solid picture of who I am. But here's what happens: they smile and nod politely, maybe even chuckle, before getting to their point, 'Right, but what are you? Where are your parents from?' I knew it was coming, I always do. While I could say Pennsylvania and Ohio, and continue this proverbial two-step, I instead give them what they're after: 'My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I'm half black and half white.'






Unknown
To describe something as being black and white means it is clearly defined. Yet when your ethnicity is black and white, the dichotomy is not that clear. In fact, it creates a grey area. Being biracial paints a blurred line that is equal parts staggering and illuminating. When I was asked by ELLE to share my story, I'll be honest, I was scared. It's easy to talk about which make-up I prefer, my favourite scene I've filmed, the rigmarole of 'a day in the life' and how much green juice I consume before a requisite Pilates class. And while I have dipped my toes into this on thetig.com, sharing small vignettes of my experiences as a biracial woman, today I am choosing to be braver, to go a bit deeper, and to share a much larger picture of that with you.

It was the late Seventies when my parents met, my dad was a lighting director for a soap opera and my mom was a temp at the studio. I like to think he was drawn to her sweet eyes and her Afro, plus their shared love of antiques. Whatever it was, they married and had me. They moved into a house in The Valley in LA, to a neighbourhood that was leafy and affordable. What it was not, however, was diverse. And there was my mom, caramel in complexion with her light-skinned baby in tow, being asked where my mother was since they assumed she was the nanny.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
I was too young at the time to know what it was like for my parents, but I can tell you what it was like for me – how they crafted the world around me to make me feel like I wasn't different but special. When I was about seven, I had been fawning over a boxed set of Barbie dolls. It was called The Heart Family and included a mom doll, a dad doll, and two children. This perfect nuclear family was only sold in sets of white dolls or black dolls. I don't remember coveting one over the other, I just wanted one. On Christmas morning, swathed in glitter-flecked wrapping paper, there I found my Heart Family: a black mom doll, a white dad doll, and a child in each colour. My dad had taken the sets apart and customised my family.

Fast-forward to the seventh grade and my parents couldn't protect me as much as they could when I was younger. There was a mandatory census I had to complete in my English class – you had to check one of the boxes to indicate your ethnicity: white, black, Hispanic or Asian. There I was (my curly hair, my freckled face, my pale skin, my mixed race) looking down at these boxes, not wanting to mess up, but not knowing what to do. You could only choose one, but that would be to choose one parent over the other – and one half of myself over the other. My teacher told me to check the box for Caucasian. 'Because that's how you look, Meghan,' she said. I put down my pen. Not as an act of defiance, but rather a symptom of my confusion. I couldn't bring myself to do that, to picture the pit-in-her-belly sadness my mother would feel if she were to find out. So, I didn't tick a box. I left my identity blank – a question mark, an absolute incomplete – much like how I felt.





Unknown
When I went home that night, I told my dad what had happened. He said the words that have always stayed with me: 'If that happens again, you draw your own box.'

I never saw my father angry, but in that moment I could see the blotchiness of his skin crawling from pink to red. It made the green of his eyes pop and his brow was weighted at the thought of his daughter being prey to ignorance. Growing up in a homogeneous community in Pennsylvania, the concept of marrying an African-American woman was not on the cards for my dad. But he saw beyond what was put in front of him in that small-sized (and, perhaps, small-minded) town, and he wanted me to see beyond that census placed in front of me. He wanted me to find my own truth.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
And I tried. Navigating closed-mindedness to the tune of a dorm mate I met my first week at university who asked if my parents were still together. 'You said your mom is black and your dad is white, right?' she said. I smiled meekly, waiting for what could possibly come out of her pursed lips next. 'And they're divorced?' I nodded. 'Oh, well that makes sense.' To this day, I still don't fully understand what she meant by that, but I understood the implication. And I drew back: I was scared to open this Pandora's box of discrimination, so I sat stifled, swallowing my voice.

I was home in LA on a college break when my mom was called the 'N' word. We were leaving a concert and she wasn't pulling out of a parking space quickly enough for another driver. My skin rushed with heat as I looked to my mom. Her eyes welling with hateful tears, I could only breathe out a whisper of words, so hushed they were barely audible: 'It's OK, Mommy.' I was trying to temper the rage-filled air permeating our small silver Volvo. Los Angeles had been plagued with the racially charged Rodney King and Reginald Denny cases just years before, when riots had flooded our streets, filling the sky with ash that flaked down like apocalyptic snow; I shared my mom's heartache, but I wanted us to be safe. We drove home in deafening silence, her chocolate knuckles pale from gripping the wheel so tightly.

It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress. There couldn't possibly be a more label-driven industry than acting, seeing as every audition comes with a character breakdown: 'Beautiful, sassy, Latina, 20s'; 'African American, urban, pretty, early 30s'; 'Caucasian, blonde, modern girl next door'. Every role has a label; every casting is for something specific. But perhaps it is through this craft that I found my voice.

Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster. Sadly, it didn't matter: I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
This is precisely why Suits stole my heart. It's the Goldilocks of my acting career – where finally I was just right. The series was initially conceived as a dramedy about a NY law firm flanked by two partners, one of whom navigates this glitzy world with his fraudulent degree. Enter Rachel Zane, one of the female leads and the dream girl – beautiful and confident with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law. 'Dream girl' in Hollywood terms had always been that quintessential blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty – that was the face that launched a thousand ships, not the mixed one. But the show's producers weren't looking for someone mixed, nor someone white or black for that matter. They were simply looking for Rachel. In making a choice like that, the Suits producers helped shift the way pop culture defines beauty. The choices made in these rooms trickle into how viewers see the world, whether they're aware of it or not. Some households may never have had a black person in their house as a guest, or someone biracial. Well, now there are a lot of us on your TV and in your home with you. And with Suits, specifically, you have Rachel Zane. I couldn't be prouder of that.

At the end of season two, the producers went a step further and cast the role of Rachel's father as a dark-skinned African-American man, played by the brilliant Wendell Pierce. I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America. On the heels of the racial unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, the tensions that have long been percolating under the surface in the US have boiled over in the most deeply saddening way. And as a biracial woman, I watch in horror as both sides of a culture I define as my own become victims of spin in the media, perpetuating stereotypes and reminding us that the States has perhaps only placed bandages over the problems that have never healed at the root.





Unknown
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
I, on the other hand, have healed from the base. While my mixed heritage may have created a grey area surrounding my self-identification, keeping me with a foot on both sides of the fence, I have come to embrace that. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'

Just as black and white, when mixed, make grey, in many ways that's what it did to my self-identity: it created a murky area of who I was, a haze around howpeople connected with me. I was grey. And who wants to be this indifferent colour, devoid of depth and stuck in the middle? I certainly didn't. So you make a choice: continue living your life feeling muddled in this abyss of self-misunderstanding, or you find your identity independent of it. You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be. You cultivate your life with people who don't lead with ethnic descriptions such as, 'that black guy Tom', but rather friends who say: 'You know? Tom, who works at [blah blah] and dates [fill in the blank] girl.' You create the identity you want for yourself, just as my ancestors did when they were given their freedom. Because in 1865 (which is so shatteringly recent), when slavery was abolished in the United States, former slaves had to choose a name. A surname, to be exact.

Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own bo

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
This is precisely why Suits stole my heart. It's the Goldilocks of my acting career – where finally I was just right. The series was initially conceived as a dramedy about a NY law firm flanked by two partners, one of whom navigates this glitzy world with his fraudulent degree. Enter Rachel Zane, one of the female leads and the dream girl – beautiful and confident with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law. 'Dream girl' in Hollywood terms had always been that quintessential blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty – that was the face that launched a thousand ships, not the mixed one. But the show's producers weren't looking for someone mixed, nor someone white or black for that matter. They were simply looking for Rachel. In making a choice like that, the Suits producers helped shift the way pop culture defines beauty. The choices made in these rooms trickle into how viewers see the world, whether they're aware of it or not. Some households may never have had a black person in their house as a guest, or someone biracial. Well, now there are a lot of us on your TV and in your home with you. And with Suits, specifically, you have Rachel Zane. I couldn't be prouder of that.

At the end of season two, the producers went a step further and cast the role of Rachel's father as a dark-skinned African-American man, played by the brilliant Wendell Pierce. I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America. On the heels of the racial unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, the tensions that have long been percolating under the surface in the US have boiled over in the most deeply saddening way. And as a biracial woman, I watch in horror as both sides of a culture I define as my own become victims of spin in the media, perpetuating stereotypes and reminding us that the States has perhaps only placed bandages over the problems that have never healed at the root.





Unknown
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
I, on the other hand, have healed from the base. While my mixed heritage may have created a grey area surrounding my self-identification, keeping me with a foot on both sides of the fence, I have come to embrace that. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'

Just as black and white, when mixed, make grey, in many ways that's what it did to my self-identity: it created a murky area of who I was, a haze around howpeople connected with me. I was grey. And who wants to be this indifferent colour, devoid of depth and stuck in the middle? I certainly didn't. So you make a choice: continue living your life feeling muddled in this abyss of self-misunderstanding, or you find your identity independent of it. You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be. You cultivate your life with people who don't lead with ethnic descriptions such as, 'that black guy Tom', but rather friends who say: 'You know? Tom, who works at [blah blah] and dates [fill in the blank] girl.' You create the identity you want for yourself, just as my ancestors did when they were given their freedom. Because in 1865 (which is so shatteringly recent), when slavery was abolished in the United States, former slaves had to choose a name. A surname, to be exact.

Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own bo


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> I’m hoping he is getting much needed rest and recuperation and that the issue is not life threatening


Hear, hear!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> So why are they worshiping Meghan?  They see her as a victim I think.  A victim living in a 16-bath mansion in beautiful Montecito.



Maybe because having a WOC marry into the BRF was a matter of pride at the time. Remember back in 2018 a big deal was made over it in the press. Having the woman they were so proud of quit after less than two years doesn’t look good. The Meghan-as-a-victim narrative is much more palatable than saying she just couldn’t hack it and couldn’t adapt to such a different lifestyle from what she knew. The victim narrative encourages others to use their resources to help make her a success.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Yesterday I feared for Prince Phillip with Charles making the trip to visit - today I’m of the firm belief Phillip insisted Charles come to see him and carpeted him over his sons abysmal behaviour - thus the tears sadly Charles is not a very strong character and has let Harry get away with far too much - Phillip is made of sterner stuff
> 
> View attachment 4997586



Charles is caught between a father who expects him to be able to get his family in line and a son who doesn’t give a sh*t. It’s a no-win situation. 

I’ve never liked Charles so his discomfort doesn’t bother me much.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have posted this article before, but for those who missed it and have questions/concerns about MM’s identity:
> 
> Essay from 2016, written by MM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress. There couldn't possibly be a more label-driven industry than acting, seeing as every audition comes with a character breakdown: 'Beautiful, sassy, Latina, 20s'; 'African American, urban, pretty, early 30s'; 'Caucasian, blonde, modern girl next door'. Every role has a label; every casting is for something specific. But perhaps it is through this craft that I found my voice.
> 
> Being '*ethnically ambiguous*', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster. Sadly, it didn't matter: I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job._
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: More than Other
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'*
> *Suits star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman. Originally written in July 2015 published in ELLE Magazine in 2015.*
> 22/12/2016
> 'What are you?' A question I get asked every week of my life, often every day. 'Well,' I say, as I begin the verbal dance I know all too well. 'I'm an actress, a writer, the Editor-in-Chief of my lifestyle brand The Tig, a pretty good cook and a firm believer in handwritten notes.' A mouthful, yes, but one that I feel paints a pretty solid picture of who I am. But here's what happens: they smile and nod politely, maybe even chuckle, before getting to their point, 'Right, but what are you? Where are your parents from?' I knew it was coming, I always do. While I could say Pennsylvania and Ohio, and continue this proverbial two-step, I instead give them what they're after: 'My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I'm half black and half white.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> To describe something as being black and white means it is clearly defined. Yet when your ethnicity is black and white, the dichotomy is not that clear. In fact, it creates a grey area. Being biracial paints a blurred line that is equal parts staggering and illuminating. When I was asked by ELLE to share my story, I'll be honest, I was scared. It's easy to talk about which make-up I prefer, my favourite scene I've filmed, the rigmarole of 'a day in the life' and how much green juice I consume before a requisite Pilates class. And while I have dipped my toes into this on thetig.com, sharing small vignettes of my experiences as a biracial woman, today I am choosing to be braver, to go a bit deeper, and to share a much larger picture of that with you.
> 
> It was the late Seventies when my parents met, my dad was a lighting director for a soap opera and my mom was a temp at the studio. I like to think he was drawn to her sweet eyes and her Afro, plus their shared love of antiques. Whatever it was, they married and had me. They moved into a house in The Valley in LA, to a neighbourhood that was leafy and affordable. What it was not, however, was diverse. And there was my mom, caramel in complexion with her light-skinned baby in tow, being asked where my mother was since they assumed she was the nanny.
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> I was too young at the time to know what it was like for my parents, but I can tell you what it was like for me – how they crafted the world around me to make me feel like I wasn't different but special. When I was about seven, I had been fawning over a boxed set of Barbie dolls. It was called The Heart Family and included a mom doll, a dad doll, and two children. This perfect nuclear family was only sold in sets of white dolls or black dolls. I don't remember coveting one over the other, I just wanted one. On Christmas morning, swathed in glitter-flecked wrapping paper, there I found my Heart Family: a black mom doll, a white dad doll, and a child in each colour. My dad had taken the sets apart and customised my family.
> 
> Fast-forward to the seventh grade and my parents couldn't protect me as much as they could when I was younger. There was a mandatory census I had to complete in my English class – you had to check one of the boxes to indicate your ethnicity: white, black, Hispanic or Asian. There I was (my curly hair, my freckled face, my pale skin, my mixed race) looking down at these boxes, not wanting to mess up, but not knowing what to do. You could only choose one, but that would be to choose one parent over the other – and one half of myself over the other. My teacher told me to check the box for Caucasian. 'Because that's how you look, Meghan,' she said. I put down my pen. Not as an act of defiance, but rather a symptom of my confusion. I couldn't bring myself to do that, to picture the pit-in-her-belly sadness my mother would feel if she were to find out. So, I didn't tick a box. I left my identity blank – a question mark, an absolute incomplete – much like how I felt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> When I went home that night, I told my dad what had happened. He said the words that have always stayed with me: 'If that happens again, you draw your own box.'
> 
> I never saw my father angry, but in that moment I could see the blotchiness of his skin crawling from pink to red. It made the green of his eyes pop and his brow was weighted at the thought of his daughter being prey to ignorance. Growing up in a homogeneous community in Pennsylvania, the concept of marrying an African-American woman was not on the cards for my dad. But he saw beyond what was put in front of him in that small-sized (and, perhaps, small-minded) town, and he wanted me to see beyond that census placed in front of me. He wanted me to find my own truth.
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> And I tried. Navigating closed-mindedness to the tune of a dorm mate I met my first week at university who asked if my parents were still together. 'You said your mom is black and your dad is white, right?' she said. I smiled meekly, waiting for what could possibly come out of her pursed lips next. 'And they're divorced?' I nodded. 'Oh, well that makes sense.' To this day, I still don't fully understand what she meant by that, but I understood the implication. And I drew back: I was scared to open this Pandora's box of discrimination, so I sat stifled, swallowing my voice.
> 
> I was home in LA on a college break when my mom was called the 'N' word. We were leaving a concert and she wasn't pulling out of a parking space quickly enough for another driver. My skin rushed with heat as I looked to my mom. Her eyes welling with hateful tears, I could only breathe out a whisper of words, so hushed they were barely audible: 'It's OK, Mommy.' I was trying to temper the rage-filled air permeating our small silver Volvo. Los Angeles had been plagued with the racially charged Rodney King and Reginald Denny cases just years before, when riots had flooded our streets, filling the sky with ash that flaked down like apocalyptic snow; I shared my mom's heartache, but I wanted us to be safe. We drove home in deafening silence, her chocolate knuckles pale from gripping the wheel so tightly.
> 
> It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress. There couldn't possibly be a more label-driven industry than acting, seeing as every audition comes with a character breakdown: 'Beautiful, sassy, Latina, 20s'; 'African American, urban, pretty, early 30s'; 'Caucasian, blonde, modern girl next door'. Every role has a label; every casting is for something specific. But perhaps it is through this craft that I found my voice.
> 
> Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster. Sadly, it didn't matter: I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job.
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> This is precisely why Suits stole my heart. It's the Goldilocks of my acting career – where finally I was just right. The series was initially conceived as a dramedy about a NY law firm flanked by two partners, one of whom navigates this glitzy world with his fraudulent degree. Enter Rachel Zane, one of the female leads and the dream girl – beautiful and confident with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law. 'Dream girl' in Hollywood terms had always been that quintessential blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty – that was the face that launched a thousand ships, not the mixed one. But the show's producers weren't looking for someone mixed, nor someone white or black for that matter. They were simply looking for Rachel. In making a choice like that, the Suits producers helped shift the way pop culture defines beauty. The choices made in these rooms trickle into how viewers see the world, whether they're aware of it or not. Some households may never have had a black person in their house as a guest, or someone biracial. Well, now there are a lot of us on your TV and in your home with you. And with Suits, specifically, you have Rachel Zane. I couldn't be prouder of that.
> 
> At the end of season two, the producers went a step further and cast the role of Rachel's father as a dark-skinned African-American man, played by the brilliant Wendell Pierce. I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America. On the heels of the racial unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, the tensions that have long been percolating under the surface in the US have boiled over in the most deeply saddening way. And as a biracial woman, I watch in horror as both sides of a culture I define as my own become victims of spin in the media, perpetuating stereotypes and reminding us that the States has perhaps only placed bandages over the problems that have never healed at the root.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> I, on the other hand, have healed from the base. While my mixed heritage may have created a grey area surrounding my self-identification, keeping me with a foot on both sides of the fence, I have come to embrace that. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'
> 
> Just as black and white, when mixed, make grey, in many ways that's what it did to my self-identity: it created a murky area of who I was, a haze around howpeople connected with me. I was grey. And who wants to be this indifferent colour, devoid of depth and stuck in the middle? I certainly didn't. So you make a choice: continue living your life feeling muddled in this abyss of self-misunderstanding, or you find your identity independent of it. You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be. You cultivate your life with people who don't lead with ethnic descriptions such as, 'that black guy Tom', but rather friends who say: 'You know? Tom, who works at [blah blah] and dates [fill in the blank] girl.' You create the identity you want for yourself, just as my ancestors did when they were given their freedom. Because in 1865 (which is so shatteringly recent), when slavery was abolished in the United States, former slaves had to choose a name. A surname, to be exact.
> 
> Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own bo
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> This is precisely why Suits stole my heart. It's the Goldilocks of my acting career – where finally I was just right. The series was initially conceived as a dramedy about a NY law firm flanked by two partners, one of whom navigates this glitzy world with his fraudulent degree. Enter Rachel Zane, one of the female leads and the dream girl – beautiful and confident with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law. 'Dream girl' in Hollywood terms had always been that quintessential blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty – that was the face that launched a thousand ships, not the mixed one. But the show's producers weren't looking for someone mixed, nor someone white or black for that matter. They were simply looking for Rachel. In making a choice like that, the Suits producers helped shift the way pop culture defines beauty. The choices made in these rooms trickle into how viewers see the world, whether they're aware of it or not. Some households may never have had a black person in their house as a guest, or someone biracial. Well, now there are a lot of us on your TV and in your home with you. And with Suits, specifically, you have Rachel Zane. I couldn't be prouder of that.
> 
> At the end of season two, the producers went a step further and cast the role of Rachel's father as a dark-skinned African-American man, played by the brilliant Wendell Pierce. I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America. On the heels of the racial unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, the tensions that have long been percolating under the surface in the US have boiled over in the most deeply saddening way. And as a biracial woman, I watch in horror as both sides of a culture I define as my own become victims of spin in the media, perpetuating stereotypes and reminding us that the States has perhaps only placed bandages over the problems that have never healed at the root.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> I, on the other hand, have healed from the base. While my mixed heritage may have created a grey area surrounding my self-identification, keeping me with a foot on both sides of the fence, I have come to embrace that. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'
> 
> Just as black and white, when mixed, make grey, in many ways that's what it did to my self-identity: it created a murky area of who I was, a haze around howpeople connected with me. I was grey. And who wants to be this indifferent colour, devoid of depth and stuck in the middle? I certainly didn't. So you make a choice: continue living your life feeling muddled in this abyss of self-misunderstanding, or you find your identity independent of it. You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be. You cultivate your life with people who don't lead with ethnic descriptions such as, 'that black guy Tom', but rather friends who say: 'You know? Tom, who works at [blah blah] and dates [fill in the blank] girl.' You create the identity you want for yourself, just as my ancestors did when they were given their freedom. Because in 1865 (which is so shatteringly recent), when slavery was abolished in the United States, former slaves had to choose a name. A surname, to be exact.
> 
> Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own bo



Thanks for posting this article. This is a well written essay, and I can understand her dilemma. I agree with her on "_You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be._" 

One more piece of evidence on the kindness of her father: "_On Christmas morning, swathed in glitter-flecked wrapping paper, there I found my Heart Family: a black mom doll, a white dad doll, and a child in each colour. My dad had taken the sets apart and customised my family._"


----------



## Chanbal

We may get the answer to this question after May 7: 



Princess Diana's biographer Andrew Morton says Oprah Winfrey has been dreaming of bagging a 'fireside confessional' with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex since she watched them walk down the aisle at St George's Chapel in Windsor three years ago.  

Valid question!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> bottom line in all of this is who the F does she think she is?


Meghan, the self-made queen
This video (from MO article) was posted some time ago. MM pretends to be the queen at her BFF's birthday party. She began her career as a scene stealer and thinking she was better than everyone else at age 5.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have posted this article before, but for those who missed it and have questions/concerns about MM’s identity:
> 
> Essay from 2016, written by MM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress. There couldn't possibly be a more label-driven industry than acting, seeing as every audition comes with a character breakdown: 'Beautiful, sassy, Latina, 20s'; 'African American, urban, pretty, early 30s'; 'Caucasian, blonde, modern girl next door'. Every role has a label; every casting is for something specific. But perhaps it is through this craft that I found my voice.
> 
> Being '*ethnically ambiguous*', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster. Sadly, it didn't matter: I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job._
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: More than Other
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'*
> *Suits star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman. Originally written in July 2015 published in ELLE Magazine in 2015.*
> 22/12/2016
> 'What are you?' A question I get asked every week of my life, often every day. 'Well,' I say, as I begin the verbal dance I know all too well. 'I'm an actress, a writer, the Editor-in-Chief of my lifestyle brand The Tig, a pretty good cook and a firm believer in handwritten notes.' A mouthful, yes, but one that I feel paints a pretty solid picture of who I am. But here's what happens: they smile and nod politely, maybe even chuckle, before getting to their point, 'Right, but what are you? Where are your parents from?' I knew it was coming, I always do. While I could say Pennsylvania and Ohio, and continue this proverbial two-step, I instead give them what they're after: 'My dad is Caucasian and my mom is African American. I'm half black and half white.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> To describe something as being black and white means it is clearly defined. Yet when your ethnicity is black and white, the dichotomy is not that clear. In fact, it creates a grey area. Being biracial paints a blurred line that is equal parts staggering and illuminating. When I was asked by ELLE to share my story, I'll be honest, I was scared. It's easy to talk about which make-up I prefer, my favourite scene I've filmed, the rigmarole of 'a day in the life' and how much green juice I consume before a requisite Pilates class. And while I have dipped my toes into this on thetig.com, sharing small vignettes of my experiences as a biracial woman, today I am choosing to be braver, to go a bit deeper, and to share a much larger picture of that with you.
> 
> It was the late Seventies when my parents met, my dad was a lighting director for a soap opera and my mom was a temp at the studio. I like to think he was drawn to her sweet eyes and her Afro, plus their shared love of antiques. Whatever it was, they married and had me. They moved into a house in The Valley in LA, to a neighbourhood that was leafy and affordable. What it was not, however, was diverse. And there was my mom, caramel in complexion with her light-skinned baby in tow, being asked where my mother was since they assumed she was the nanny.
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> I was too young at the time to know what it was like for my parents, but I can tell you what it was like for me – how they crafted the world around me to make me feel like I wasn't different but special. When I was about seven, I had been fawning over a boxed set of Barbie dolls. It was called The Heart Family and included a mom doll, a dad doll, and two children. This perfect nuclear family was only sold in sets of white dolls or black dolls. I don't remember coveting one over the other, I just wanted one. On Christmas morning, swathed in glitter-flecked wrapping paper, there I found my Heart Family: a black mom doll, a white dad doll, and a child in each colour. My dad had taken the sets apart and customised my family.
> 
> Fast-forward to the seventh grade and my parents couldn't protect me as much as they could when I was younger. There was a mandatory census I had to complete in my English class – you had to check one of the boxes to indicate your ethnicity: white, black, Hispanic or Asian. There I was (my curly hair, my freckled face, my pale skin, my mixed race) looking down at these boxes, not wanting to mess up, but not knowing what to do. You could only choose one, but that would be to choose one parent over the other – and one half of myself over the other. My teacher told me to check the box for Caucasian. 'Because that's how you look, Meghan,' she said. I put down my pen. Not as an act of defiance, but rather a symptom of my confusion. I couldn't bring myself to do that, to picture the pit-in-her-belly sadness my mother would feel if she were to find out. So, I didn't tick a box. I left my identity blank – a question mark, an absolute incomplete – much like how I felt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> When I went home that night, I told my dad what had happened. He said the words that have always stayed with me: 'If that happens again, you draw your own box.'
> 
> I never saw my father angry, but in that moment I could see the blotchiness of his skin crawling from pink to red. It made the green of his eyes pop and his brow was weighted at the thought of his daughter being prey to ignorance. Growing up in a homogeneous community in Pennsylvania, the concept of marrying an African-American woman was not on the cards for my dad. But he saw beyond what was put in front of him in that small-sized (and, perhaps, small-minded) town, and he wanted me to see beyond that census placed in front of me. He wanted me to find my own truth.
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> And I tried. Navigating closed-mindedness to the tune of a dorm mate I met my first week at university who asked if my parents were still together. 'You said your mom is black and your dad is white, right?' she said. I smiled meekly, waiting for what could possibly come out of her pursed lips next. 'And they're divorced?' I nodded. 'Oh, well that makes sense.' To this day, I still don't fully understand what she meant by that, but I understood the implication. And I drew back: I was scared to open this Pandora's box of discrimination, so I sat stifled, swallowing my voice.
> 
> I was home in LA on a college break when my mom was called the 'N' word. We were leaving a concert and she wasn't pulling out of a parking space quickly enough for another driver. My skin rushed with heat as I looked to my mom. Her eyes welling with hateful tears, I could only breathe out a whisper of words, so hushed they were barely audible: 'It's OK, Mommy.' I was trying to temper the rage-filled air permeating our small silver Volvo. Los Angeles had been plagued with the racially charged Rodney King and Reginald Denny cases just years before, when riots had flooded our streets, filling the sky with ash that flaked down like apocalyptic snow; I shared my mom's heartache, but I wanted us to be safe. We drove home in deafening silence, her chocolate knuckles pale from gripping the wheel so tightly.
> 
> It's either ironic or apropos that in this world of not fitting in, and of harbouring my emotions so tightly under my ethnically nondescript (and not so thick) skin, that I would decide to become an actress. There couldn't possibly be a more label-driven industry than acting, seeing as every audition comes with a character breakdown: 'Beautiful, sassy, Latina, 20s'; 'African American, urban, pretty, early 30s'; 'Caucasian, blonde, modern girl next door'. Every role has a label; every casting is for something specific. But perhaps it is through this craft that I found my voice.
> 
> Being 'ethnically ambiguous', as I was pegged in the industry, meant I could audition for virtually any role. Morphing from Latina when I was dressed in red, to African American when in mustard yellow; my closet filled with fashionable frocks to make me look as racially varied as an Eighties Benetton poster. Sadly, it didn't matter: I wasn't black enough for the black roles and I wasn't white enough for the white ones, leaving me somewhere in the middle as the ethnic chameleon who couldn't book a job.
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> This is precisely why Suits stole my heart. It's the Goldilocks of my acting career – where finally I was just right. The series was initially conceived as a dramedy about a NY law firm flanked by two partners, one of whom navigates this glitzy world with his fraudulent degree. Enter Rachel Zane, one of the female leads and the dream girl – beautiful and confident with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law. 'Dream girl' in Hollywood terms had always been that quintessential blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty – that was the face that launched a thousand ships, not the mixed one. But the show's producers weren't looking for someone mixed, nor someone white or black for that matter. They were simply looking for Rachel. In making a choice like that, the Suits producers helped shift the way pop culture defines beauty. The choices made in these rooms trickle into how viewers see the world, whether they're aware of it or not. Some households may never have had a black person in their house as a guest, or someone biracial. Well, now there are a lot of us on your TV and in your home with you. And with Suits, specifically, you have Rachel Zane. I couldn't be prouder of that.
> 
> At the end of season two, the producers went a step further and cast the role of Rachel's father as a dark-skinned African-American man, played by the brilliant Wendell Pierce. I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America. On the heels of the racial unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, the tensions that have long been percolating under the surface in the US have boiled over in the most deeply saddening way. And as a biracial woman, I watch in horror as both sides of a culture I define as my own become victims of spin in the media, perpetuating stereotypes and reminding us that the States has perhaps only placed bandages over the problems that have never healed at the root.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> I, on the other hand, have healed from the base. While my mixed heritage may have created a grey area surrounding my self-identification, keeping me with a foot on both sides of the fence, I have come to embrace that. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'
> 
> Just as black and white, when mixed, make grey, in many ways that's what it did to my self-identity: it created a murky area of who I was, a haze around howpeople connected with me. I was grey. And who wants to be this indifferent colour, devoid of depth and stuck in the middle? I certainly didn't. So you make a choice: continue living your life feeling muddled in this abyss of self-misunderstanding, or you find your identity independent of it. You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be. You cultivate your life with people who don't lead with ethnic descriptions such as, 'that black guy Tom', but rather friends who say: 'You know? Tom, who works at [blah blah] and dates [fill in the blank] girl.' You create the identity you want for yourself, just as my ancestors did when they were given their freedom. Because in 1865 (which is so shatteringly recent), when slavery was abolished in the United States, former slaves had to choose a name. A surname, to be exact.
> 
> Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own bo
> 
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> This is precisely why Suits stole my heart. It's the Goldilocks of my acting career – where finally I was just right. The series was initially conceived as a dramedy about a NY law firm flanked by two partners, one of whom navigates this glitzy world with his fraudulent degree. Enter Rachel Zane, one of the female leads and the dream girl – beautiful and confident with an encyclopedic knowledge of the law. 'Dream girl' in Hollywood terms had always been that quintessential blonde-haired, blue-eyed beauty – that was the face that launched a thousand ships, not the mixed one. But the show's producers weren't looking for someone mixed, nor someone white or black for that matter. They were simply looking for Rachel. In making a choice like that, the Suits producers helped shift the way pop culture defines beauty. The choices made in these rooms trickle into how viewers see the world, whether they're aware of it or not. Some households may never have had a black person in their house as a guest, or someone biracial. Well, now there are a lot of us on your TV and in your home with you. And with Suits, specifically, you have Rachel Zane. I couldn't be prouder of that.
> 
> At the end of season two, the producers went a step further and cast the role of Rachel's father as a dark-skinned African-American man, played by the brilliant Wendell Pierce. I remember the tweets when that first episode of the Zane family aired, they ran the gamut from: 'Why would they make her dad black? She's not black' to 'Ew, she's black? I used to think she was hot.' The latter was blocked and reported. The reaction was unexpected, but speaks of the undercurrent of racism that is so prevalent, especially within America. On the heels of the racial unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore, the tensions that have long been percolating under the surface in the US have boiled over in the most deeply saddening way. And as a biracial woman, I watch in horror as both sides of a culture I define as my own become victims of spin in the media, perpetuating stereotypes and reminding us that the States has perhaps only placed bandages over the problems that have never healed at the root.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unknown
> Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
> I, on the other hand, have healed from the base. While my mixed heritage may have created a grey area surrounding my self-identification, keeping me with a foot on both sides of the fence, I have come to embrace that. To say who I am, to share where I'm from, to voice my pride in being a strong, confident mixed-race woman. That when asked to choose my ethnicity in a questionnaire as in my seventh grade class, or these days to check 'Other', I simply say: 'Sorry, world, this is not Lost and I am not one of The Others. I am enough exactly as I am.'
> 
> Just as black and white, when mixed, make grey, in many ways that's what it did to my self-identity: it created a murky area of who I was, a haze around howpeople connected with me. I was grey. And who wants to be this indifferent colour, devoid of depth and stuck in the middle? I certainly didn't. So you make a choice: continue living your life feeling muddled in this abyss of self-misunderstanding, or you find your identity independent of it. You push for colour-blind casting, you draw your own box. You introduce yourself as who you are, not what colour your parents happen to be. You cultivate your life with people who don't lead with ethnic descriptions such as, 'that black guy Tom', but rather friends who say: 'You know? Tom, who works at [blah blah] and dates [fill in the blank] girl.' You create the identity you want for yourself, just as my ancestors did when they were given their freedom. Because in 1865 (which is so shatteringly recent), when slavery  was abolished in the United States, former slaves had to choose a name. A surname, to be exact.
> 
> Perhaps the closest thing to connecting me to my ever-complex family tree, my longing to know where I come from, and the commonality that links me to my bloodline, is the choice that my great-great-great grandfather made to start anew. He chose the last name Wisdom. He drew his own bo


I was listening to an interview with Rashida Jones.  She kinda said the same thing about not being either white or black.  Now admittedly she had powerful show-biz parents so her life was different.  But she seems to have a good attitude - no complaints.  Was saying how lucky she is compared to how her father grew up and how her mother's ancestors lived.  And she seems to be happy to be a working actress - not looking to be super famous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I found this one when people predicted what the outcome of the Oprah interview would be, but it's actually a very well written analysis of Meghan's behaviour in general:



> You know, the thought occurred to me that Markle generally behaves as if the US cannot see into the UK and vice versa.  I remember being a bit perplexed that she was being portrayed as a big Hollywood actress in the UK, when she was nothing of the sort.  I would venture that a lot of Americans had not even heard of Suits, let alone Meghan Markle.  However, no one really cared enough to correct it, and if they had, they would have been eviscerated for trying to stick a pin in the feel good story of “an American breath of fresh air” (gag!!!) marrying Britain’s scamp prince.  I remember seeing her for the first time and thinking she was cute in a girl next door way and being happy for Harry.
> 
> But then...she spoke.  Arms waving, boring holes with her eyes into Harry’s skull, clutching his hand with her now famous Sussex claw double grip, and the shine went right off her.  If she had stayed quiet and maintained some mystery, she would have fared well.  PR would write the narrative for her, as they did for Harry for so long.
> 
> She couldn’t do that, though, she had to “use her voice” write on bananas, spend lavishly on ill-fitting clothing and rush home for “feed time”.  The more she put herself out there and the more she spoke, the more unlikeable she became, and when she realized no one was buying what she was selling, she packed up her toys and went home.
> 
> She is starting the same cycle here.  She could live a quiet, pleasant life here.  No one pays her much mind, even with the relentless PR coverage of all the very average things they do.  So I welcome her chat with Oprah, because the thing that makes Meghan unlikeable is Meghan herself and anything she claims WILL be looked into if she proclaims it on Oprah.  That is, if anyone even cares.
> 
> Oprah, while a force in her day, is on the downslope of her career and not relevant to the demographic Meghan is targeting.  Old people watch Oprah and CBS, not young people.  This is her last big push to be likeable and interesting and it is going to fall flat.
> 
> It is truly astounding how this very average nobody was handed the biggest platform she could have ever imagined and just blew it.  She could have done so much with it, or nothing at all and just lived a very comfortable life.  Megsy is never more self-destructive than she is when a camera is trained on her.  I expect nothing different this time. Archie isn’t going to save her either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> We may get the answer to this question after May 7:
> 
> View attachment 4997787
> 
> Princess Diana's biographer Andrew Morton says Oprah Winfrey has been dreaming of bagging a 'fireside confessional' with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex since she watched them walk down the aisle at St George's Chapel in Windsor three years ago.
> 
> Valid question!



Definitely a valid question — I’m thinking it goes back to Sarah. Oprah and Sarah chatted exclusively, probably maintained a friendship, supported each other, etc. Those talk show hosts were super-competitive for the big ‘get’ (desirable guest). Sawyer, Walters, Katie, Phil, Oprah and many more, all of them tripped over each other trying to grab _the_ interview. Then, Gayle got the CBS job so she had her own set of connections.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I was listening to an interview with Rashida Jones.  She kinda said the same thing about not being either white or black.  Now admittedly she had powerful show-biz parents so her life was different.  But she seems to have a good attitude - no complaints.  Was saying how lucky she is compared to how her father grew up and how her mother's ancestors lived.  And she seems to be happy to be a working actress - not looking to be super famous.



MM’s lack of success in the Hwood industry was never due to her ethnicity.
It was, is and will always be due to her lack of talent, lack of ‘it’ factor and willingness to sue. Producers and directors rarely like complainers unless they have plenty of talent and a high  ‘it’ factor. Really, who wants to be sued or gritched  at?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Ok. But....Wait, so by hiring her, Suits (sorta) changed the way pop culture sees beauty?  
I,  I just cant with this one.  

The essay was, er, readable but this part shined a klieg light on her narcism.


----------



## viciel

I must admit, I am not an Oprah fan. I don't dislike Oprah but I also don't think exceptionally highly of her either. I have always thought she's smart and savvy enough to keep smart and savvy people around her to give her good advice. I'm curious to see the direction of the interview but I won't watch it on its original air date just can't support it. Anyone with a mind, whether they like the Queen or not, recognizes her dedication and her sense of duty, the woman's at it longer than I have been alive!! How can anyone in good conscience do this to her? Oprah is almost 70 herself she must recognize a snake when she sees one and it's not like she needs any more accolade or money, why Oprah why?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM’s lack of success in the Hwood industry was never due to her ethnicity.
> It was, is and will always be due to her lack of talent, lack of ‘it’ factor and willingness to sue. Producers and directors rarely like complainers unless they have plenty of talent and ‘it’ factor. Really, who wants to be sued or gritched  at?



Agreed. As well as attitude. The meltdown at the National Dorfman Theatre with her ringless fingers on her thighs among her many cries of "poor me" demonstrated this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. As well as attitude. The meltdown at the National Dorfman Theatre with her ringless fingers on her thighs among her many cries of "poor me" demonstrated this.



I still wonder what that was about. I don't think it was directed at the Queen, I do think Harry wanted to take it a notch down because he realized what they had done and she basically blackmailed him into going ahead with the original plan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

viciel said:


> I must admit, I am not an Oprah fan. I don't dislike Oprah but I also don't think exceptionally highly of her either. I have always thought she's smart and savvy enough to keep smart and savvy people around her to give her good advice. I'm curious to see the direction of the interview but I won't watch it on its original air date just can't support it. Anyone with a mind, whether they like the Queen or not, recognizes her dedication and her sense of duty, the woman's at it longer than I have been alive!! How can anyone in good conscience do this to her? Oprah is almost 70 herself she must recognize a snake when she sees one and it's not like she needs any more accolade or money, why Oprah why?



My 2 cents — Oprah put in lots of effort to make her show successful. She had the talent, the drive, the knowledge, the all-important ‘it’ factor. Even with her entire fortune, there seems to be something missing. She is still aspiring for something — respect? intellectual depth?  I noticed it in her interview with Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley. She easily does the fashion, health and make-up chats with anyone, but she was clearly not on par with those two smart men. Her strengths are getting people to talk about their life story. MJ and CB weren’t really interested in doing that, so they cleverly shifted to their strengths. As those rare elite athletes do, they know how to dominate - space, time and conversation. Although H&M seem beneath her skill level, the interview will appear entertaining and glossy. It won’t be a hatchet job or a gotcha-style interview. I don’t believe it will achieve the ratings CBS wants, the credibility H&M want or the depth Oprah still craves (?). It seems desperate on so many levels. I’d cancel it.


----------



## sdkitty

viciel said:


> I must admit, I am not an Oprah fan. I don't dislike Oprah but I also don't think exceptionally highly of her either. I have always thought she's smart and savvy enough to keep smart and savvy people around her to give her good advice. I'm curious to see the direction of the interview but I won't watch it on its original air date just can't support it. Anyone with a mind, whether they like the Queen or not, recognizes her dedication and her sense of duty, the woman's at it longer than I have been alive!! How can anyone in good conscience do this to her? Oprah is almost 70 herself she must recognize a snake when she sees one and it's not like she needs any more accolade or money, why Oprah why?


I think in addition to being impressed by the Royal thing, they identify with her as a WOC


----------



## bag-mania

I may be in the minority, but I want the Oprah interview to be shown. I see it as a last ditch attempt at relevance, a way to portray themselves as appealing to those in the general public who neither like or dislike them. Unfortunately for them, we Americans get bored with our celebrities easily. 90 minutes of listening  Meghan’s “voice” may be more than enough for most viewers.

After this interview and the new baby in the spring/summer what is left for them to offer? 

The BRF should see the Oprah interview as ripping off the Band-Aid. It may hurt in the short term but in the long term it will be for the best.


----------



## marietouchet

the Times summary of the week in Markleland comes down to one thing , the disrespectful reply to the Queen (and country)

Of course, the Times takes the easy road and frames the upset in terms of William, not the Queen

PS Oprah left Montecito around the time of the announcements, got out of Dodge 


William ‘sad and shocked’ at his brother






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I may be in the minority, but I want the Oprah interview to be shown. I see it as a last ditch attempt at relevance, a way to portray themselves as appealing to those in the general public who neither like or dislike them. Unfortunately for them, we Americans get bored with our celebrities easily. 90 minutes of listening  Meghan’s “voice” may be more than enough for most viewers.
> 
> After this interview and the new baby in the spring/summer what is left for them to offer?
> 
> The BRF should see the Oprah interview as ripping off the Band-Aid. It may hurt in the short term but in the long term it will be for the best.


90 minutes?  I would think Oprah would be savvy enough to know this is a lot of time to fill up with M
I guess with commericals it will be more like a hour though


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


> You might be right and it is possible that she called herself white (or not) and pretended to be in an actor's union only for auditions (not CV). These issues have been brought up in previous posts of this thread and in other sites on the net (see below). Gossip or fact, who knows? I don't care how one identifies himself or herself, but I don't particularly like when one tries to take advantage of serious issues. One of the beauties of TPF is that color, age, gender, country...are irrelevant for us to connect.
> 
> View attachment 4997690



Yes I saw that page in the google search and if you read the comments you will see no one can find any links to the CV. It seems there is enough to criticize about their behavior without continuing to spread clearly incorrect information.

And there are members of tpf who feel these are not irrelevant so I hope we can make an effort to respect and welcome all opinions and backgrounds.


----------



## Chanbal

viciel said:


> I must admit, I am not an Oprah fan. I don't dislike Oprah but I also don't think exceptionally highly of her either. I have always thought she's smart and savvy enough to keep smart and savvy people around her to give her good advice. *I'm curious to see the direction of the interview but I won't watch it on its original air date just can't support it.* Anyone with a mind, whether they like the Queen or not, recognizes her dedication and her sense of duty, the woman's at it longer than I have been alive!! How can anyone in good conscience do this to her? *Oprah is almost 70 herself she must recognize a snake when she sees one and it's not like she needs any more accolade or money, why Oprah why?*


I also don't plan to watch it on March 7, I can't support it as well. If someone posts it on youtube, I may watch parts of it to satisfy my curiosity. I totally agree with your last sentence, why Oprah why? I'm sure she can see through MM, why is she doing this?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely a valid question — I’m thinking it goes back to Sarah. Oprah and Sarah chatted exclusively, probably maintained a friendship, supported each other, etc. Those talk show hosts were super-competitive for the big ‘get’ (desirable guest). Sawyer, Walters, Katie, Phil, Oprah and many more, all of them tripped over each other trying to grab _the_ interview. Then, Gayle got the CBS job so she had her own set of connections.


Did Oprah's interview help Sarah? Sarah doesn't seem to be a very ambitious person, but I might be wrong.


----------



## Chanbal

These positions are being filled quickly. 




The dad-of-two is patron of the National Youth Theatre and the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra.

During the late 1980s Edward, 56, worked as a production assistant for Lord Lloyd-Webber's theatre company.

The prince, who was 23 when his employment began, had shown a keen interest in the arts.

Theater


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> These positions are being filled quickly.
> 
> View attachment 4997973
> 
> 
> The dad-of-two is patron of the National Youth Theatre and the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra.
> 
> During the late 1980s Edward, 56, worked as a production assistant for Lord Lloyd-Webber's theatre company.
> 
> The prince, who was 23 when his employment began, had shown a keen interest in the arts.
> 
> Theater


Its not like she’s done much for these patronages. Better to give them to someone who actually cares about them.


----------



## csshopper

I hope Sophie Wessex picks up some also. She had her stumbles early on in joining the family if I remember, regarding her work, but has long since proved herself to be a gracious and unassuming lady. Would be nice to see more of her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Yes I saw that page in the google search and if you read the comments you will see no one can find any links to the CV. It seems there is enough to criticize about their behavior without continuing to spread clearly incorrect information.
> 
> And there are members of tpf who feel these are not irrelevant so I hope we can make an effort to respect and welcome all opinions and backgrounds.


The Internet data about MM has been scrubbed just before and after their engagement was announced. Her Wiki page was updated multiple times around that time. I have seen a copy of the CV in PDF format on Twitter but of course I have no way of knowing the authenticity of it, nor did I care enough to download a copy. All I am saying is the Internet is not what it seems these days. Google Internet data scrub service and you can see this is quite normal practice, especially for people who have things to hide.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Did Oprah's interview help Sarah? Sarah doesn't seem to be a very ambitious person, but I might be wrong.



It introduced her to the US, ostensibly so she could tell ‘her story’ but mostly so she could merch. Once that became obvious to even her most ardent fans, people tuned out. Oprah tried and tried to make it happen. We were just not interested.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Internet data about MM has been scrubbed just before and after their engagement was announced. Her Wiki page was updated multiple times around that time. I have seen a copy of the CV in PDF format on Twitter but of course I have no way of knowing the authenticity of it, nor did I care enough to download a copy. All I am saying is the Internet is not what it seems these days. Google Internet data scrub service and you can see this is quite normal practice, especially for people who have things to hide.



The real star of Suits for the females was Gina Torres. She radiated the presence, the posture, the speech, the knowledge of a real boss. Some people just have the know-how, some people take the time and effort to learn it.

ETA: Gina was married to Laurence Fishburne. No wonder she commanded the screen 
oh dear, the last photo — https://www.glamour.com/story/gina-torres-interview


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> It introduced her to the US, ostensibly so she could tell ‘her story’ but mostly so she could merch. Once that became obvious to even her most ardent fans, people tuned out. Oprah tried and tried to make it happen. We were just not interested.



Royals are a tough sell in the US. The only two exceptions I can think of are Grace Kelly and of course Diana. 
Good luck trying to make fetch happen with these two.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Grace and Wallis were Americans. Neither had a really happy royal life. Diana really was not here to merch (love this word), more to ’get away’. If Diana had lived here post-divorce, the interest would have dropped off.  Royals are best from afar. QE well understood this.


----------



## lalame

viciel said:


> I must admit, I am not an Oprah fan. I don't dislike Oprah but I also don't think exceptionally highly of her either. I have always thought she's smart and savvy enough to keep smart and savvy people around her to give her good advice. I'm curious to see the direction of the interview but I won't watch it on its original air date just can't support it. Anyone with a mind, whether they like the Queen or not, recognizes her dedication and her sense of duty, the woman's at it longer than I have been alive!! How can anyone in good conscience do this to her? Oprah is almost 70 herself she must recognize a snake when she sees one and it's not like she needs any more accolade or money, why Oprah why?



I never watched Oprah's show so I just respect her as a business woman who has achieved a lot of success. I think it's pretty simple why someone whose "thing" was interviewing people to want to interview MM + H. They're popular at the moment and they haven't really given an interview about their life since Megxit so it's a highly coveted interview to get. Do you think Gayle respected R Kelly when she interviewed him? Heck no. Do you think the woman who interviewed Prince Andrew respected him when she interviewed him? Heck no! These high-profile interviews are professional achievements to get, doesn't have anything to do with whether they support the person or not. 

And like you said, Oprah doesn't really need the money or accolade... it's probably just a fun or unique experience to her that probably will also benefit her foundation or other companies. Rich people don't really do "I don't need more money so I'll stop making it."


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> 90 minutes?  I would think Oprah would be savvy enough to know this is a lot of time to fill up with M
> I guess with commericals it will be more like a hour though



Yes, there will plenty of $$$ commercial time sold. Most other celebrity interviews would be only an hour.  It shows the clout Oprah still possesses that this one is being stretched out longer.  It’s going to require lots of editing though. They have to strike the right tone of seeming put upon and “voiceless” while not coming off as bitter and unsympathetic. Not an easy task for the production crew.


----------



## lalame

My prediction with the interview: lots of provocative and suggestive clips start coming out to promote it. But it'll end up being unremarkable and they'll spend 95% of the time talking about charity type of stuff. And everyone tuning in to watch for some tea is going to walk away disappointed that they got bamboozled again into watching it for anything juicy. But that's me assuming based on everything they've done so far.... if they actually do get candid and real about all this stuff that's been going on I might actually watch the clips.


----------



## rose60610

While it's unlikely Oprah will shock us with any kind of non-fluff question, if she WERE to ask anything remotely challenging, we know full well Meghan would recoil and say "I thought we were friends!", playing the victim card and shifting the topic. Of course Oprah doesn't want to incur any wrath from a pouting red-head either. I'd like to count the # of times Diana is mentioned, I'm going to guess 12.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> My prediction with the interview: lots of provocative and suggestive clips start coming out to promote it. But it'll end up being unremarkable and they'll spend 95% of the time talking about charity type of stuff. And everyone tuning in to watch for some tea is going to walk away disappointed that they got bamboozled again into watching it for anything juicy. But that's me assuming based on everything they've done so far.... if they actually do get candid and real about all this stuff that's been going on I might actually watch the clips.


I'm sure we will see clips....when does this air?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does anyone still watch talk shows? These celeb interviews are so last century. They have been mocked, copied and slammed dozens of times. Someone has done the greedy grifters a disservice by convincing them to do this. So many better and positive options.


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The real star of Suits for the females was Gina Torres. She radiated the presence, the posture, the speech, the knowledge of a real boss. Some people just have the know-how, some people take the time and effort to learn it.
> 
> ETA: Gina was married to Laurence Fishburne. No wonder she commanded the screen
> oh dear, the last photo — https://www.glamour.com/story/gina-torres-interview


Pretty tacky of Glamour continuing to try and dish about MM when the article is about Gina.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right! This morning I thought there were two options - Philip is dying, in which case I feel the palace wouldn't be continuously putting out "He's fine" messages but be quiet, OR he had a word or two to say about Harry (as I feel at this point he wouldn't even acknowledge Harry's showgirl) to Charles, in which case the palace is right, he'll be fine. Philip was a way stricter father than a sensitive child like Charles was able to deal with, so I don't think it's completely out there he could reduce him to tears even at his age. I know I continuously have to work during stuff with my own mother! Only time will tell.


Well any time someone his age falls ill I think they could potentially die.....so if his grandson cares, he could make a visit before its too late


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Royals are a tough sell in the US. The only two exceptions I can think of are Grace Kelly and of course Diana.
> Good luck trying to make fetch happen with these two.


Grace and Diana had a lot in common, they were both beautiful, kind, and had a tragic car accident. I believe royals are not easy to sell almost anywhere. They were part of my beach reading, I recall to read articles about them mostly during summer vacations and that's it. COVID and the large numbers of annoying news releases from MM's PR machine brought me to this thread. I learned so much here that I'm almost turning into a royal commentator.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*
> 
> *'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'*


.. "When they *FIRST* started dating .."  okay Meghan, if you felt SOOOOOO strongly about *losing your voice* (_which no one wants to hear_) and *loss of independence* .. then *WHY THE HELL DID YOU MARRY HIM*????   Ah yes, *KA-CHING*, *KA-CHING*, *KA-CHING* .. cry me a river - puhleeze.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _A source told the Sun: 'The pair are clearly very close to Oprah and the fact she's been with them at such an intense time has given her a unique insight into the rift with the royals.
> 
> 'The drama of last week means that Oprah's tell-all show will be *pure gold. It's time to hide behind the sofa for the other royals.'*_
> 
> 
> Shameful, just shameful. Shame  on CBS. Boycott has begun!


I'm not a Twitter user per se (I do have an account, but never use it) .. can that be used as a means to get this show canceled?  *#Cancel_Oprah* *#Cancel_H+M_Interview* *#Cancel_CBS* ???


----------



## viciel

CarryOn2020 said:


> It introduced her to the US, ostensibly so she could tell ‘her story’ but mostly so she could merch. Once that became obvious to even her most ardent fans, people tuned out. Oprah tried and tried to make it happen. We were just not interested.



Why does she think she needs an introduction at all? She never really left. She started out as an irrelevant non-descript D list actress and she's never stopped acting. It is not cute for a woman of almost 40 to play coy in front of the camera and speak with a babyish voice - I've noticed in some interviews she does this thing with the way she speaks and her facial expression like a wounded doe. Maybe she needed that when she's trying to play a twenty something role but she clearly never left the studio.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> While it's unlikely Oprah will shock us with any kind of non-fluff question, if she WERE to ask anything remotely challenging, we know full well Meghan would recoil and say "I thought we were friends!", playing the victim card and shifting the topic. Of course Oprah doesn't want to incur any wrath from a pouting red-head either. I'd like to count the # of times Diana is mentioned, I'm going to guess 12.


This is a recorded interview, and the editing will likely be reviewed and approved by all parties. It will be a sales pitch imo.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> What in the hell is LA royalty?!?! This person is a complete idiot.


HA!!! .. it's usually those *Z-list* actors/actresses who *THINK* they are "LA Royalty"!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is a recorded interview, and the editing will likely be reviewed and approved by all parties. It will be a sales pitch imo.


The show is now being re-edited and CBS wants to have additional footage with the Harkles since the news came out about the patronages being lifted AFTER the it was recorded.  Fat chance they will agree to that.


----------



## youngster

*When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice . . .*

What does this actually mean?
What "voice" did she have prior to dating Harry? 
She was a C list, oops, sorry @CeeJay, I mean *Z list *actress that was so far under the radar that her "voice" was of no interest to anyone but herself and her Dad and Mom and maybe some of the people who watched Suits and were fans. What a giant ego she has.


----------



## CarryOn2020

viciel said:


> Why does she think she needs an introduction at all? She never really left. She started out as an irrelevant non-descript D list actress and she's never stopped acting. It is not cute for a woman of almost 40 to play coy in front of the camera and speak with a babyish voice - I've noticed in some interviews she does this thing with the way she speaks and her facial expression like a wounded doe. Maybe she needed that when she's trying to play a twenty something role but she clearly never left the studio.



_She_ refers to Sarah, not MM.
Apologies for the confusion.



Chanbal said:


> Did Oprah's interview help Sarah? Sarah doesn't seem to be a very ambitious person, but I might be wrong.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> *When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice . . .*
> 
> What does this actually mean?
> What "voice" did she have prior to dating Harry?
> She was a C list, oops, sorry @CeeJay, I mean *Z list *actress that was so far under the radar that her "voice" was of no interest to anyone but herself and her Dad and Mom and maybe some of the people who watched Suits and were fans. What a giant ego she has.


Exactly! Hardly anybody knew who she was before she dated Harry. She didn't have a voice! She is much more famous now and it's because BRF gave her a voice! Ungrateful brat!


----------



## bellecate

One thing I'm sure about the Oprah interview is that whatever Megain wears it will be inappropriately expensive, name brand and ill fitting. Perhaps she'll even pull out her fav strapless bra to wear with it.


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> One thing I'm sure about the Oprah interview is that whatever Megain wears it will be inappropriately expensive, name brand and ill fitting. Perhaps she'll even pull out her fav strapless bra to wear with it.



And it will showcase that bump


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure we will see clips....when does this air?


*March 7th *.. alas, my birthday .. not that I would have watched anyhow, but kind of bummed as I don't need anymore bad karma!


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> One thing I'm sure about the Oprah interview is that whatever Megain wears it will be inappropriately expensive, name brand and ill fitting. Perhaps she'll even pull out her fav strapless bra to wear with it.


She will wear what Diana wore.


----------



## CeeJay

viciel said:


> Why does she think she needs an introduction at all? She never really left. She started out as an irrelevant non-descript D list *Z-LIST* actress and she's never stopped acting. It is not cute for a woman of almost 40 to play coy in front of the camera and speak with a babyish voice - I've noticed in some interviews she does this thing with the way she speaks and her facial expression like a wounded doe. Maybe she needed that when she's trying to play a twenty something role but she clearly never left the studio.


.. fixed that for you!!


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> *When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice . . .*
> 
> What does this actually mean?
> What "voice" did she have prior to dating Harry?
> She was a C list, oops, sorry @CeeJay, I mean *Z list *actress that was so far under the radar that her "voice" was of no interest to anyone but herself and her Dad and Mom and maybe some of the people who watched Suits and were fans. What a giant ego she has.


HA .. thank you so much @youngster !!!!


----------



## Aimee3

I’m one of the few (only?) people on this thread that actually watched Suits for years. Funny thing is that I thought the casting was really good except for Megan. She was so bland and forgettable in the role that I was really bored when she was on screen. All the other actors had strong personas and I always felt they could replace Megan with any actress but not any of the other characters’ actors.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CeeJay said:


> .. "When they *FIRST* started dating .."  okay Meghan, if you felt SOOOOOO strongly about *losing your voice* (_which no one wants to hear_) and *loss of independence* .. then *WHY THE HELL DID YOU MARRY HIM*????   Ah yes, *KA-CHING*, *KA-CHING*, *KA-CHING* .. cry me a river - puhleeze.


You say it so much better than I.   Whereas I might ramble, you are concise, precise and to the point (as always!)


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> I’m one of the few (only?) people on this thread that actually watched Suits for years. Funny thing is that I thought the casting was really good except for Megan. She was so bland and forgettable in the role that I was really bored when she was on screen. All the other actors had strong personas and I always felt they could replace Megan with any actress but not any of the other characters’ actors.



You and I both RE: watching Suits for years. When Meghan had to exit the show, I didn't feel like Suits was missing a real important or exciting character. The show thrived just fine without her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> Charles is caught between a father who expects him to be able to get his family in line and a son who doesn’t give a sh*t. It’s a no-win situation.
> 
> I’ve never liked Charles so his discomfort doesn’t bother me much.


I think Charles is reaping some of the consequences of his bad behavior when he was married to Diana.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm speechless! 


Undesirable guests!


----------



## justwatchin

rose60610 said:


> While it's unlikely Oprah will shock us with any kind of non-fluff question, if she WERE to ask anything remotely challenging, we know full well Meghan would recoil and say "I thought we were friends!", playing the victim card and shifting the topic. Of course Oprah doesn't want to incur any wrath from a pouting red-head either. I'd like to count the # of times Diana is mentioned, I'm going to guess 12.


Considering that the alleged reason or one of the reasons for leaving the UK, BRF, etc is the racism M said she experienced, I would think that Oprah as a Black woman would ask her about this. I’ve never watched Oprah interview anyone, so maybe she’s all about fluff stuff.


----------



## melissatrv

They need to go NOW.

I don't get all this dancing around by the Queen and company with "they will lose their royal patronages" etc.  Who cares?  They don't. They can start their own; they have said as much.   Hit them where it hurts, where the money is....strip them of their HRH and Duke and Duchess titles and be done with it already!!!   Let Harry keep the Prince title he was born with.  Megan will Princess Henry.  As feminist this will be a gut punch to her.  Honestly I have no idea why the palace keeps dancing around this while these two keep spitting in their faces.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless!
> View attachment 4998143
> 
> Undesirable guests!


Well, this isn't quite accurate though because Meghan has already said that she was not going to go back to the UK!  Harry being there? .. well, that just goes to show everyone that it's not just Meghan with the *GARGANTUAN EGO*!  To think that he would be so "welcomed" back?!?! .. WOW, no words is right!


----------



## scarlet555

Considering the british royal family supported the crazy Wallis couple for some odd reasons and I don’t know for how long, through treachery betrayal and what not, and both were buried in Frogmore after everything, I am not surprised they are supporting these two idiots.  But time to change it up, let go of their financial support already!


----------



## melissatrv

And if it doesn't, she will be sure to "cradle" it to death because that is so normal 



poopsie said:


> And it will showcase that bump


----------



## csshopper

Random thought: Eugenie, Jack, and baby August can now relax and settle in at Frogmore since the Sussex’s have decamped. At least the Queen will have a loyal grandchild on the grounds and one of her great grandchildren as well.


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless!
> View attachment 4998143
> 
> Undesirable guests!


Harry’s not going anywhere! Megan won’t let him go.  They’ll make a big fuss but he will save face by saying Megan’s pregnancy is too risky or on bed rest etc and he can’t go after all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Something will come up so H will stay in Cali. If [big if] he goes, he will be pushed to the back of the balcony. He will most definitely walk far behind W&K, no deference will be made to him. No wonder Charles had tears yesterday. How do you diplomatically tell your errant son to stay away?

Interview topics = racism in UK; racism in US; her privacy lawsuits; podcast topics; Netflix shows; her active roles in BLM, food charities, children’s education, healthcare, etc.; his role in supporting her roles; quick update on Archie; where to donate to their thriving foundation.

Suits = watched almost all of them - the legal cases were the real stars of the show; individually and together the Mike and Rachel story line were the weakest — not much development; Jessica was a legal phenom; Louis‘s character development was fun to watch.


----------



## melissatrv

Why, why, why?  This makes no f-ing sense to me. Anyone  have any ideas why they don't just strip their titles and end this debacle?  Harry is practically an American citizen at this point. 




Chanbal said:


> This is very disrespectful. It looks like People magazine is relieved that JCMH and wifey can keep the duke and duchess titles. Until they will be able to pay SS, we will have to put up with this type of brainless news.
> 
> "_Although Prince Harry and Meghan, 39, no longer use their coveted His/Her Royal Highness titles, they will retain them — along with their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles._"


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Well, this isn't quite accurate though because Meghan has already said that she was not going to go back to the UK!  Harry being there? .. well, that just goes to show everyone that it's not just Meghan with the *GARGANTUAN EGO*!  To think that he would be so "welcomed" back?!?! .. WOW, no words is right!


Harry wants to go, and MM can always change her mind. This may be one of those situations in which one hopes for the best, but prepares for the worst. So the organizers may be thinking ahead...


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless!
> View attachment 4998143
> 
> Undesirable guests!



There is no turmoil.  The only turmoil is the sound of Harry's intestinal tract gurgling and realizing how insignificant he has become. He is giving himself an excuse not to show up.  He expects to be treated the way he was in the past and that can't happen.  So petulant Harry will stay home.  If he thinks that saying these things about wanting to be there will change things, they won't change a thing anymore than his saying that he wanted to keep his patronages. We know how that turned out.

 I think the question is whether this will be turned into a family affair, in which case, in theory,  he has every right to be there as well as Zara and Peter Phillips and their children.   I don't think it will be as I think this is more a matter of State than family.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Something will come up so H will stay in Cali. If [big if] he goes, he will be pushed to the back of the balcony. He will most definitely walk far behind W&K, no deference will be made to him. No wonder Charles had tears yesterday. How do you diplomatically tell your errant son to stay away?
> 
> Interview topics = racism in UK; racism in US; her privacy lawsuits; podcast topics; Netflix shows; her active roles in BLM, food charities, children’s education, healthcare, etc.; his role in supporting her roles; quick update on Archie; where to donate to their thriving foundation.
> 
> Suits = watched almost all of them - the legal cases were the real stars of the show; individually and together the Mike and Rachel story line were the weakest — not much development; Jessica was a legal phenom; Louis‘s character development was fun to watch.


I loved watching Louis Litt, Donna and the newer character Gretchen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

melissatrv said:


> Why, why, why?  This makes no f-ing sense to me. Anyone  have any ideas why they don't just strip their titles and end this debacle?  Harry is practically an American citizen at this point.



One of the articles said it is more of a ‘why bother’ attitude. They are already personae non gratae, cannot use HRH, have no royal patronages. Taking away Diana’s HRH seemed vindictive to many people, so the BRF does not want a repeat.  He cannot wear uniforms, stand with W&K, et al on the balcony, will be at the back of the line. They have clearly signalled they are finished with him. Of course, they love him and he is always a member of the family [little f].


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

melissatrv said:


> Why, why, why?  This makes no f-ing sense to me. Anyone  have any ideas why they don't just strip their titles and end this debacle?  Harry is practically an American citizen at this point.



It will just bring more attention to them if they strip the titles.  i don't think Harry will be able to pass the citizenship test.  His Eton tutor is unavailable.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the articles said it is more of a ‘why bother’ attitude. They are already personae non gratae, cannot use HRH, have no royal patronages. Taking away Diana’s HRH seemed vindictive to many people, so the BRF does not a repeat.  He cannot wear uniforms, stand with W&K, et al on the balcony, will be at the back of the line. They have clearly signalled they are finished with him. Of course, they love him and he is always a member of the family [little f].



At this point, I would like to see a poll of the family to see who actually loves him and/or likes him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> At this point, I would like to see a poll of the family to see who actually loves him and/or likes him.



they _luv_ him, like in jr high. 
He won’t receive any lunch or dinner invites, brunch only after the others have been served.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I loved watching Louis Litt, Donna and the newer character Gretchen.



Donna’s character was so enjoyable in the first 2/3 seasons. Then the writers moved over to Mike and Rachael (snore) story. Iirc, last season with no Rachel and Mike, Donna came back strong. I missed Jessica after she left.


----------



## gracekelly

Polling the family:

The Queen:  Please speak to Angela Kelly, she knows the answer.
Prince Philip: The little sod can bugger off and take that actress with him!
Charles:  I have to love him as he is my son.  I don't have to like him.
WilliaM:   """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""brother. """"""""""""""""""""""""
Kate:       Not answering. She's busy.
Sophie:    Please!  I think you know the answer to both questions!
Edward:   Poor fellow is a lost soul.  Get back to me on this.
Andrew:   Who am I to throw stones?
George:    I don't know him, but he never does what Gan Gan tells him to do.
Charlotte:  He's not coming. His wife  gave mummy a knife.
Louis:        Can Archie come over and we can play?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## rose60610

If Prince Philip dies, Harry would have to return for the funeral. Whether Meghan goes with? The Crown would take the high road and pre-arrange photo ops with actors pretending to be glad to see them and groups of children giving M flowers. Leave it to Meghan to wear something red if she goes. She wouldn't mind snubbing Philip even in death or The Queen. She'd do her best to upstage everyone.


----------



## Chanbal

News from a couple of days ago, but still entertaining to end the dramatic weekend. 




*THE Harry formerly known as “Prince” is said to be a bit miffed. It appears to have come as a nasty surprise to him that he’s not going to get to keep his military titles.*

It’s a surprise, I think, only because Harry is a bit thick. When it comes to IQ, Harry makes Prince Andrew resemble Stephen Hawking. He’s, y’know, a bunch of diamonds short of the full Crown Jewels.
Harry lost the right to those honorary titles when he left the Royal Family. Now he’s lolling in his 16-bathroom mansion in California. With his very self-important missus, Meghan.

Given that he was performing no royal duties whatsoever and was not, any longer, a real prince, most people thought this was fair enough. But Harry would have wanted his titles.

Why? Because I reckon in his bid to rake in as much moolah as possible from the Sussexes’ ludicrous media career, any trappings of royalty help. In reality, the titles mean very little.

Harry is — for the time being — Captain General of the Royal Marines. But if the Marines were about to go on a mission they’d get more useful advice from a speak-your-weight machine than ol’ ginger nut.

He is also Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington. Pilots — you can now fly in safety! He won’t be in the control tower any time soon. But they mean a lot to Harry because, as I say, he needs purchasing power.

Without them he’s just a dim carrot-top with a hugely annoying wife. Who would care what he has to say about anything?

He has treated his family, especially his grandmother, abominably.

He gave the Queen next to no warning that he was going to up sticks to “Canada” (ie. Los Angeles). No warning he was effectively leaving the Royal Family.

*Overstated sense of his own worth*

Since then he and Meghan have simultaneously whined about horrible Press intrusion into their lives and how they wish to be left in peace — while signing whopping deals with TV companies to show their lives in full on Netflix.

And making asinine, cringe-worthy, statements via their blog site. Harry has not behaved with royal dignity. He has behaved like a boring YouTube influencer with an overstated sense of his own worth.

The latest news is that the gruesome twosome will be doing a 90-minute interview with another very self-regarding woman, Oprah Winfrey.

You can bet your bottom dollar that Meghan will do a bit of carping about the staid and conservative British Royal Family. More pain for the Queen. But Meghan is a woman in a very great hurry. Rumours are that she would like a political career — good luck, America!

The couple are well in with Hollywood’s liberal elite. They’re also about to have another baby, a sibling for young Archie. Good for them, we all wish them well. That’s a joyous event.

I have the horrible feeling that Harry and Meghan will be too busy blogging and doing interviews to change many nappies. But a retinue of nannies should sort that out.

And so Meghan and Harry can lecture us about “privilege” while the child- rearing is likely going on elsewhere. But that’s not the point. The real issue is that Harry is really no longer a member of the British Royal Family. That was his decision. And that means none of the perks should be available to him.

He does not represent any of us. He cannot have his cake and eat it.

inflated ego


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm glad the women's shelter received help but clearly this is just H&M's way of combating bad press from the last few days?


----------



## bag-mania

^You beat me to it. I was just about to post that one. Yep, the press was so bad this week they actually had to donate to look good.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the articles said it is more of a ‘why bother’ attitude. They are already personae non gratae, cannot use HRH, have no royal patronages. Taking away Diana’s HRH seemed vindictive to many people, so the BRF does not want a repeat.  He cannot wear uniforms, stand with W&K, et al on the balcony, will be at the back of the line. They have clearly signalled they are finished with him. Of course, they love him and he is always a member of the family [little f].


I still think the Queen should see that the titles are removed. Are they receiving any monies from the funds that support the royal family since he is still a HRH, Prince? I feel like that is why he's not cut off.

This whole OW thing has me wondering if this wasn't part of a plan from last year. Wasn't she rumored to be helping them get here from Canada by staying at Tyler Perry's place? Wasn't she suppose to have some mental health type show on Apple tv with Harry? Hmm....

Harry and Megan are such clowns at this point. There is no recovery for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Always good to change the channel:








						Half of all Brits don’t want to watch Oprah’s interview with Prince Harry, Meghan Markle
					

Maybe it’s a good thing there’s an entire continent between Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and the British people.




					pagesix.com
				



======
This is what the foundation is for. Collect money, then donate the money.

More details on what the donation is for — no amount given:









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle donate to Dallas women’s shelter damaged by winter storm
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle donated to a Dallas women’s shelter after a record-breaking winter storm in Texas left the organization with fallen ceilings...



					www.dallasnews.com
				



The organization thanked the couple in a tweet and said that the funds will support the replacement of the roof at its transitional housing facility and help meet their immediate needs.

The donations come at a critical time — according to most domestic violence organizations, there’s an increase in violent incidents when people are stuck inside for extended periods.

The shelter closed for the first time in 35 years after last week’s winter storm, which knocked out power throughout the state, including at Genesis’ emergency shelter and apartments.

Genesis CEO Jan Langbein said that as cold weather continued throughout the week, the pipes burst, flooding the organization’s onsite school. Furniture was left covered with insulation after ceilings had collapsed.

Clients were relocated to hotels, other shelters and to the homes of friends and family members.

Genesis said in a tweet Saturday that the shelter had reopened and that donations have poured in from all over the country.

To donate visit www.genesisshelter.org/donate. To give physical items to Genesis, see their Amazon Wish List here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, Oprah had only met MM once before wedding and had never met Doria.  Wow!









						Oprah courted Meghan Markle, Prince Harry for three years to land interview
					

The fact that Oprah would land the interview was long an “open secret in palace circles.”




					pagesix.com
				



Oprah Winfrey courted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry for three years to land her exclusive interview with the couple, it was reported Tuesday.

While the 67-year-old talk show queen was described as a “friend of the couple” when she was a guest at their May 2018 royal wedding, _*she had only met Markle once before then — while first trying to land an interview*_, according to the Times of London.

She continued to play the “long game” and acted as the Duchess of Sussex’s mentor, *even befriending her mother, Doria Ragland*, when they moved to Oprah’s upscale California neighborhood last year, the UK Times said.

Winfrey’s series about mental health for Apple TV with Harry was seen by many royal insiders as a “canny move” to “keep the couple happy,” the report said.

The fact that Oprah would land the interview was long an “open secret in palace circles” — with Page Six noting speculation about it in January last year.

But Monday’s formal announcement caught Buckingham Palace by surprise, with royal officials only learning about the finalized interview on Twitter, the report said.


----------



## Yanca

It's very good for the shelter that they got the much needed donation, but maybe it's the cynic or realist in me, but this has a feel of a  bit tinged of PR for them, like most of the things that they do, it does not seemed organic,  this must be  to counteract all  the backlash they had been getting  from their recent antics. They are really going to try and make their own version of Royal family here in the US. They will be relentless and non stop press release from their unofficial mouthpiece Omid,my gosh he is getting so annoying, he should stop calling himself Royal reporter and just put Megahn mouthpiece.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> ^You beat me to it. I was just about to post that one. Yep, the press was so bad this week they actually had to donate to look good.


They had to pay more for their Press Release today. A few sandwiches and hats wouldn't do this time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Gifts should be given in secret. Don’t shout it from the mountain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> I’m one of the few (only?) people on this thread that actually watched Suits for years. Funny thing is that I thought the casting was really good except for Megan. She was so bland and forgettable in the role that I was really bored when she was on screen. All the other actors had strong personas and I always felt they could replace Megan with any actress but not any of the other characters’ actors.



I never watched Suits, but I once late at night ended on Disney channel where they had one of these late 90s, early 2000s rom-com things going, and I watched for 15 mins or so after seeing MM in it. She was the sexy friend to the main character, and her acting was just cringeworthy. Back then I was still rather neutral towards her so I don't think it was my bias speaking. Of course at this point, she could deliver an Oscar-worthy performance and I'd hate it.

(that said, some wise woman on the internet wrote "I really feel her best acting is in her relationships...she reels them in and keeps them on the hook by portraying exactly what they want to see." Maybe we don't give her enough credit)


----------



## gelbergirl

Aimee3 said:


> I’m one of the few (only?) people on this thread that actually watched Suits for years. Funny thing is that I thought the casting was really good except for Megan. She was so bland and forgettable in the role that I was really bored when she was on screen. All the other actors had strong personas and I always felt they could replace Megan with any actress but not any of the other characters’ actors.





EverSoElusive said:


> You and I both RE: watching Suits for years. When Meghan had to exit the show, I didn't feel like Suits was missing a real important or exciting character. The show thrived just fine without her.



*Mods:*  Both Aimee3 and EverSoElusive deserve a special banner for their Suits knowledge.  They go way back and were woke a looong time ago on this actress.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Aimee3 said:


> I’m one of the few (only?) people on this thread that actually watched Suits for years. Funny thing is that I thought the casting was really good except for Megan. She was so bland and forgettable in the role that I was really bored when she was on screen. All the other actors had strong personas and I always felt they could replace Megan with any actress but not any of the other characters’ actors.


I also watched it and my favourite character was Jessica! She was strong, and had the best clothes!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Internet data about MM has been scrubbed just before and after their engagement was announced. Her Wiki page was updated multiple times around that time. I have seen a copy of the CV in PDF format on Twitter but of course I have no way of knowing the authenticity of it, nor did I care enough to download a copy. All I am saying is the Internet is not what it seems these days. Google Internet data scrub service and you can see this is quite normal practice, especially for people who have things to hide.



Actually that's just it...you do have a way of knowing. We all do. We can choose to share stories like people putting their racial identities on their resumes (which is bizarre and very unlikely) or we can agree to at least try not to dignify alternative facts, even in a frivolous gossip thread. But I’ll leave you to it because I understand this isn’t the time or place to despair the diminishing importance of truth


----------



## EverSoElusive

chicinthecity777 said:


> I also watched it and my favourite character was Jessica! She was strong, and had the best clothes!



Jessica commands respect. Love her character!! No doubt about her clothes, Donna's clothes too 

Another favorite character of mine is Gretchen. No airs and very normal.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If Philip dies, I think she will say that her doctor advised her not to fly. It’s probably for the best, she would be such a distraction.


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> If Philip dies, I think she will say that her doctor advised her not to fly. It’s probably for the best, she would be such a distraction.


Prince William has visited a local vaccination centre near his home this morning, he said his grandfather is doing OK. I'm sure it'll be leaked that Harry is in constant touch with Philip too.
I hope she doesn't come back with Harry when that time comes.


----------



## chicinthecity777

EverSoElusive said:


> Jessica commands respect. Love her character!! No doubt about her clothes, Donna's clothes too
> 
> Another favorite character of mine is Gretchen. No airs and very normal.


The clothes is half of the reason I watched that show! I know I am shallow!


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Actually that's just it...you do have a way of knowing. We all do. We can choose to share stories like people putting their racial identities on their resumes (which is bizarre and very unlikely) or we can agree to at least try not to dignify alternative facts, even in a frivolous gossip thread. But I’ll leave you to it because I understand this isn’t the time or place to despair the diminishing importance of truth


I have never said that her CV identifying as being Caucasian is genuine so i am not sure why you posted above directed at me. I said I had seen it but didn't know the validity of it nor did I download a copy of it. And I just pointed out the data on the Internet search results can easily be manipulated. So I don't understand your reply.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince William has visited a local vaccination centre near his home this morning, he said his grandfather is doing OK. I'm sure it'll be leaked that Harry is in constant touch with Philip too.
> I hope she doesn't come back with Harry when that time comes.


Pray for Prince Philip! Wish him a full speedy recovery!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I love QE!
Checkers vs. Chess

*The Queen beats Harry and Meghan to broadcast: Monarch and senior royals will address the nation on March 7 in special Commonwealth Day TV address hours BEFORE Sussexes' Oprah Winfrey CBS chat*

*CBS interview due for broadcast on March 7 may have to be re-shot and edited due to turmoil in royal family*
*Meghan is also expected to speak about her rift with her father Thomas and her half-sister Samantha *
*Commonwealth service the following day has been cancelled - Queen now giving TV message day before *
*Oprah's two days with Meghan and Harry did not touch on stripping of patronages or Prince Philip's illness *
*The Queen 'blindsided' by the Sussexes' interview with the US talk show host, which has already been filmed *
*It also emerged that Oprah was with the couple immediately before they responded to monarch's statement*









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Oprah interview may 'be re-shot'
					

Her Majesty was due to attend the annual Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey on March 8 - but this has been cancelled due to Covid-19.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

The Mirror is saying that MM's OW interview will include content about her family relationship, e.g. with her father and sister.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The Queen’s address earlier in the same day is amazing.


----------



## rose60610

H&M went to Texas? Where was Archie? These two connivers probably have a weather radar system setup to predict when huge storm disasters will occur so they can plan to make "surprise visits" in a lame attempt to look like they care about suffering people instead of promoting themselves. It's beyond obvious they only want to steal headlines and don't care about others. The headline should read "Disaster Area Ambushed by Publicity Seeking Disaster Couple".  You really think they'd have gone to Texas WITHOUT drawing attention to themselves?  It's only logical. The cemetery photo op didn't teach them anything, so it's only natural for them to crash disaster areas, shove their privacy-demandng faces in front of every camera, and ignorantly beaming "Looky US, we're HERE, in front of MORE cameras instead of helping behind the scenes!" So when is Meghan going to sue THOSE photographers for invasion of privacy?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Didn’t they just send money?









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry donate to women's shelter in Texas
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a donation to the Genesis Women's Shelter & Support in Texas that was impacted by Winter Storm Uri earlier this month.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The Queen beats Harry and Meghan to broadcast: Monarch and senior royals will address the nation on March 7 in special Commonwealth Day TV address hours BEFORE Sussexes' Oprah Winfrey CBS chat*



If I were the Sussexes I'd read the signs and proceed with caution, but as usual, they'll be too caught up in their own importance.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Now there is a headline on daily mail that the OW interview may need to be edited or rerecorded!


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Mirror is saying that MM's OW interview will include content about her family relationship, e.g. with her father and sister.



Dude. She’s going to talk about her situation with her dad to OW on national TV? She’s going to hella stress him out give her dad a heart attack.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 4998295
> 
> 
> I'm glad the women's shelter received help but clearly this is just H&M's way of combating bad press from the last few days?


Perhaps a personal donation of a considerable amount would have been more meaningful. I am never impressed when a personal donation is claimed but passed through a tax protected entity.  Unless it is Bill and Melinda Gates.  They do it right.


----------



## Aimee3

chicinthecity777 said:


> The clothes is half of the reason I watched that show! I know I am shallow!


Funny, but 90% of the women’s clothes the women wore in the office would be frowned upon in corporate law offices.  I’m from a family of around 10 lawyers so I’m well versed in what’s considered appropriate lol (I’m not a lawyer).  It often made me laugh to see some of the clothes, but liked them anyway.


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> Dude. She’s going to talk about her situation with her dad to OW on national TV? She’s going to hella stress him out give her dad a heart attack.


I don't know how accurate is Daily Mirror's reporting. But if she did talk about her and her Dad, what was the point of suing Daily Mail for privacy? She doesn't want privacy, she wants control!


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Dude. She’s going to talk about her situation with her dad to OW on national TV? She’s going to hella stress him out give her dad a heart attack.


I am so not into the kerfuffle with her father - it is SO UNEQUAL ... 

She has PR, lawyers, social media (if she wanted) , 5 famous friends who can speak on her behalf to th3e media.  Families have issues between themselves but BULLYING your family via UNEQUAL resources is not a fair fight 

The entire kerfuffle with the DM about THE LETTER was really about MM disliking that her father gave the letter to the DM, but he was not worth suing for disclosing the letter ... 

There is a famous English (AKA UK) proverb NOBLESSE OBLIGE - nobility obliges, ie behaviour standards are expected of the upper classes - eg BRF, fighting below the belt is not OK


----------



## chicinthecity777

Aimee3 said:


> Funny, but 90% of the women’s clothes the women wore in the office would be frowned upon in corporate law offices.  I’m from a family of around 10 lawyers so I’m well versed in what’s considered appropriate lol (I’m not a lawyer).  It often made me laugh to see some of the clothes, but liked them anyway.


I don't believe for a second women's clothes in Suits is actually what women in law offices wear, but I enjoy it never the less. It's just a cheesy TV show. I have a lawyer friend said to me that they got the law office attire right in Billions.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Perhaps a personal donation of a considerable amount would have been more meaningful. I am never impressed when a personal donation is claimed but passed through a tax protected entity.  Unless it is Bill and Melinda Gates.  They do it right.



I agree with you! But we know with these two, it's always a publicity or tax write-off


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> Funny, but *90% of the women’s clothes the women wore in the office would be frowned upon in corporate law offices*.  I’m from a family of around 10 lawyers so I’m well versed in what’s considered appropriate lol (I’m not a lawyer).  It often made me laugh to see some of the clothes, but liked them anyway.



This! Somehow my sister would think that's the norm and tries to dress this way and get mad if she was told it was inappropriate


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what the foundation is for. Collect money, then donate the money.


Collect money and likely donating only part of the collected money.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I love QE!
> Checkers vs. Chess
> 
> *The Queen beats Harry and Meghan to broadcast: Monarch and senior royals will address the nation on March 7 in special Commonwealth Day TV address hours BEFORE Sussexes' Oprah Winfrey CBS chat*
> 
> *CBS interview due for broadcast on March 7 may have to be re-shot and edited due to turmoil in royal family*
> *Meghan is also expected to speak about her rift with her father Thomas and her half-sister Samantha *
> *Commonwealth service the following day has been cancelled - Queen now giving TV message day before *
> *Oprah's two days with Meghan and Harry did not touch on stripping of patronages or Prince Philip's illness *
> *The Queen 'blindsided' by the Sussexes' interview with the US talk show host, which has already been filmed *
> *It also emerged that Oprah was with the couple immediately before they responded to monarch's statement*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Oprah interview may 'be re-shot'
> 
> 
> Her Majesty was due to attend the annual Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey on March 8 - but this has been cancelled due to Covid-19.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



haha, I was just about to post this. The BRF will present a united front, perfect! 

_"And in a show of unity with the monarch, Prince Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, Prince William and Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge, and Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, will also take part in the show hosted by Anita Rani, sharing their royal perspectives on the importance of Britain's Commonwealth links."_


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know how accurate is Daily Mirror's reporting. But if she did talk about her and her Dad, what was the point of suing Daily Mail for privacy? She doesn't want privacy, she wants control!





chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know how accurate is Daily Mirror's reporting. But if she did talk about her and her Dad, what was the point of suing Daily Mail for privacy? She doesn't want privacy, she wants control!


Agree

The DM suit was never about PRIVACY ... Heck she talked about the mess to 5 friends ...  it was about a family squabble, she hated that Tom gave out HER letter for publication ... it was about control , agree

But Tom is not worth suing but the DM is ... 

She went to her lawyers and told them to find grounds for suit, and there is quirk of UK law - the copyright stays with the writer(s) It is not like that in the US, so, Tom surely did not know. The DM would have known but judged publication worth the risk of suit. Arguably, the DM used Tom


----------



## marietouchet

Will someone please send more crockery, to Montecito? They are all out ...
@gracekelly pointed out that MM threw all of it at the wall months ago ...


----------



## marietouchet

I am dying to find out the legal terms of the Oprah interview, Is O allowed a reshoot? Can she decide not to go to air at all ?

O's lawyers will be working hard on this one - the interview is GOLD but O will weigh the possible downside carefully

Wonder if we will ever see the carpool karoke episode ? Corden maintains personal ties with the UK


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Whaddaya wanna make a bet that the oat milk latte company will have an ad during the interview?


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> Considering that the alleged reason or one of the reasons for leaving the UK, BRF, etc is the racism M said she experienced, I would think that Oprah as a Black woman would ask her about this. I’ve never watched Oprah interview anyone, so maybe she’s all about fluff stuff.


Oprah doesn't want to look fluffy but she also isn't going to attack M in any way and I'll bet M will know the questions in advance


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless!
> View attachment 4998143
> 
> Undesirable guests!


again wants to have his cake and eat it
is this from a reliable source?


----------



## Annawakes

Ooo.  I suspect MM is gonna try to get her interview moved so it’ll air before the Queen’s.


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> Why, why, why?  This makes no f-ing sense to me. Anyone  have any ideas why they don't just strip their titles and end this debacle?  Harry is practically an American citizen at this point.


blood is thicker than water?


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Dude. She’s going to talk about her situation with her dad to OW on national TV? *She’s going to hella stress him out give her dad a heart attack.*


Maybe that's the point?


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 4998295
> 
> 
> I'm glad the women's shelter received help but clearly this is just H&M's way of combating bad press from the last few days?


So this is their role? to show up at any significant event and get their photos taken?  who are they - the president and VP?
wonder how much money they gave.  money would be better then them showing up for a photo op.  I heard a couple of stories about private citizens - business owners - who were very generous to their neighbors.   this one couple (POC) were restaurant owners who gave away all their food and after that started handing out water.   now that was impressive.


----------



## LittleStar88

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe that's the point?



Bringing him up at all is seriously cold-hearted. He can’t be there to discuss his side. So wrong. She needs to leave the topic of her father a private matter.

If he does come up at all, I hope he sues. I’m sure there are plenty of lawyers who would take that one on contingency.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince William has visited a local vaccination centre near his home this morning, he said his grandfather is doing OK. I'm sure it'll be leaked that Harry is in constant touch with Philip too.
> I hope she doesn't come back with Harry when that time comes.



I totally agree with you. Hoping that "that time" will be as far away as possible. 

I was also thinking that besides the Queen's jubilee, there should be an unveiling of Diana's statue at Ken Palace, I think, on her 60th birthday on July 1st.... Will Harry go, since  his second baby should arrive around that time?? Also I wouldn't be at all surprised that, even if she's just given birth and would have to go back to the hated UK, Meghan will attend , since her idol Diana would be celebrated.... Time will tell!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Whaddaya wanna make a bet that the oat milk latte company will have an ad during the interview?



They won’t be able to afford it!  I am not saying buying the commercials for this interview will hit Super Bowl level cash but I bet they’ll be pricey. Little unknown companies need not apply.


----------



## sdkitty

Yanca said:


> It's very good for the shelter that they got the much needed donation, but maybe it's the cynic or realist in me, but this has a feel of a  bit tinged of PR for them, like most of the things that they do, it does not seemed organic,  this must be  to counteract all  the backlash they had been getting  from their recent antics. They are really going to try and make their own version of Royal family here in the US. They will be relentless and non stop press release from their unofficial mouthpiece Omid,my gosh he is getting so annoying, he should stop calling himself Royal reporter and just put Megahn mouthpiece.


yes it's good but it isn't clear if their donation would cover the whole cost of the roof or how large the roof is....considering who they are if they want to publicize a donation it should be Large IMO.....not tens of thousands but hundreds of thousands


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Didn’t they just send money?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry donate to women's shelter in Texas
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a donation to the Genesis Women's Shelter & Support in Texas that was impacted by Winter Storm Uri earlier this month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh ok
I still wonder if they are gonna being giving small grants - tens of thousands - and getting publicity for all of them


----------



## bag-mania

The donation to the women’s shelter is nice but it illustrates a flaw with their foundation. It appears they cherry pick who they want to help based on where the news is happening. They choose a single group, give a one time donation, and then forget about them. It’s the equivalent of an average citizen buying a homeless person a meal. It’s a wonderful gesture, it makes a difference in that moment, but it doesn’t actually change anything for anyone involved. Don’t most foundations choose one, or at most a few, cause(s) to support consistently with the goal of making a long term difference? 

I’m getting the impression that Harry and Meghan believe if they make a donation to a group, they will inspire others to donate and that’s what Archewell is about. Inspiration!  
Oh, and they get a press release about their generosity!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> again wants to have his cake and eat it
> is this from a reliable source?


Possibly, but I don't know. This was published in The Sun. I've provided the link for the entire article on the post, but there was not much more info on it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I am so not into the kerfuffle with her father - it is SO UNEQUAL ...



You really summed up in one word what I felt but couldn't quite grasp. It really is like beating up the frail kid two grades below you just because you can. Or even better, have your bulky friends do it because you yourself are not exactly an action hero either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> If he does come up at all, I hope he sues. I’m sure there are plenty of lawyers who would take that one on contingency.



I doubt he would even want that. The more I learn the more I think he really is not the drama queen MM painted him to be.


----------



## bag-mania

Supposedly Oprah spent anywhere between several hours and two days with them. She’s a savvy woman, she understands human nature, she must have a good gauge of what their true situation is. I wonder if she secretly wishes she could show that to the world instead of the fluffy “all we want is our privacy—we were treated horribly by everyone—watch our new Netflix series!” nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

Mr and Mrs Markle Windsor are now FREE to choose the baby's name. They also know if the baby is a boy or a girl, but they may be saving that information for another Press release.  




Disclosure: the above screenshot is from DM.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The donation to the women’s shelter is nice but it illustrates a flaw with their foundation. It appears they cherry pick who they want to help based on where the news is happening. They choose a single group, give a one time donation, and then forget about them. It’s the equivalent of an average citizen buying a homeless person a meal. It’s a wonderful gesture, it makes a difference in that moment, but it doesn’t actually change anything for anyone involved. Don’t most foundations choose one, or at most a few, cause(s) to support consistently with the goal of making a long term difference?
> 
> I’m getting the impression that Harry and Meghan believe if they make a donation to a group, they will inspire others to donate and that’s what Archewell is about. Inspiration!
> Oh, and they get a press release about their generosity!


the foundation I worked for donated grants via applications.  they would be for a specific program in a lot of cases.  In some cases it would be just for the general work of the organization.
  they might repeat a donation to the same organization but they would have to apply again (unless it was a multi-year grant)
in the case of the archewell donation to the women's shelter, the thing I read said the shelter tweeted about it?  do you suppose that is the only reason we are hearing about it?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> They won’t be able to afford it!  I am not saying buying the commercials for this interview will hit Super Bowl level cash but I bet they’ll be pricey. Little unknown companies need not apply.



Since we're dealing with snakes here, it wouldn't surprise me if calculations and projections were done to determine how much leverage a commercial could make for the oat milk latte stuff and if it'd be worth it for H&M (or the Archewell Foundation) to buy the ad. Surely all the sugars will be glued to the TV for this interview and are the ultimate target market for grossly overpriced beverages. There might even be a number of super spreader sugar parties.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> The donation to the women’s shelter is nice but it illustrates a flaw with their foundation. It appears they cherry pick who they want to help based on where the news is happening. They choose a single group, give a one time donation, and then forget about them. It’s the equivalent of an average citizen buying a homeless person a meal. It’s a wonderful gesture, it makes a difference in that moment, but it doesn’t actually change anything for anyone involved. Don’t most foundations choose one, or at most a few, cause(s) to support consistently with the goal of making a long term difference?
> 
> I’m getting the impression that Harry and Meghan believe if they make a donation to a group, they will inspire others to donate and that’s what Archewell is about. Inspiration!
> Oh, and they get a press release about their generosity!



That's not that unusual. Disasters are unique events that are totally appropriate to cherry pick support. I've never been to Louisiana but I donated for Hurricane Katrina. I hadn't been to Japan when I donated for the big earthquake years ago. Cherry picking is a very negative perspective on giving during a disaster. I'm sure they have long term charities they support too but nothing wrong with choosing an organization that needs something NOW, like in this case the shelter's literal roof!!


----------



## Yanca

sdkitty said:


> yes it's good but it isn't clear if their donation would cover the whole cost of the roof or how large the roof is....considering who they are if they want to publicize a donation it should be Large IMO.....not tens of thousands but hundreds of thousands



That is what I noticed when they are donating- there is no quoted amount, unlike the other celebrities like Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively, one milion for the food banks, Ciara and Russel Wilson, even the Kardashians are transparent with the amount when they give, )( what I read anyway)  with Harry and Megain, it's  very vague,  just all about announcements like partnering with the chef, the hats, the Box lunch meals they donated in MLK day. As hard as people just want to see the goodness of what they are doing, it really does not seem to come off as 100 percent genuine. This seemed    to just  attach themselves to the loudest issues right now,  they want to rub it in that they are doing something, be splashed in the news and be talked about.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> That's not that unusual. Disasters are unique events that are totally appropriate to cherry pick support. I've never been to Louisiana but I donated for Hurricane Katrina. I hadn't been to Japan when I donated for the big earthquake years ago. Cherry picking is a very negative perspective on giving during a disaster. I'm sure they have long term charities they support too but nothing wrong with choosing an organization that needs something NOW, like in this case the shelter's literal roof!!


right - but it doesn't sound like they are covering the whole cost of the roof to me


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Oprah spent anywhere between several hours and two days with them. She’s a savvy woman, she understands human nature, she must have a good gauge of what their true situation is. I wonder if she secretly wishes she could show that to the world instead of the fluffy “all we want is our privacy—we were treated horribly by everyone—watch our new Netflix series!” nonsense.



Yes, they agreed to a 'tell-all interview' with Oprah to demand privacy! And you summarized it very well, I just made a minor $35 million dollars change: 

“_all we want is our privacy—we were treated horribly by everyone—watch our new Netflix series!_”, and do not forget to download our Podcasts on Spotify.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Mr and Mrs Markle Windsor are now FREE to choose the baby's name. They also know if the baby is a boy or a girl, but they may be saving that information for another Press release.
> 
> View attachment 4998633
> 
> 
> Disclosure: the above screenshot is from DM.



Was "Archie" a traditional royal name? How do you say "Meal Ticket" in Latin?


----------



## zen1965

Chanbal said:


> Mr and Mrs Markle Windsor are now FREE to choose the baby's name. They also know if the baby is a boy or a girl, but they may be saving that information for another Press release.
> 
> View attachment 4998633
> 
> 
> Disclosure: the above screenshot is from DM.


Another rubbish non-story. Their firstborn does not have traditional royal names- why would their secondborn be obliged to have them?


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> That's not that unusual. Disasters are unique events that are totally appropriate to cherry pick support. I've never been to Louisiana but I donated for Hurricane Katrina. I hadn't been to Japan when I donated for the big earthquake years ago. Cherry picking is a very negative perspective on giving during a disaster. I'm sure they have long term charities they support too but nothing wrong with choosing an organization that needs something NOW, like in this case the shelter's literal roof!!


I've also been donating  to major disasters (in and out of state), many people do that. However, most people don't send their donations together with Press releases, even for very substantial donations. It looks like everything these very private people do is for publicity. 

@sdkitty they are contributing to the repair of the roof. So any guesses on the donated amount are valid imo.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> right - but it doesn't sound like they are covering the whole cost of the roof to me



That could be true... hard to say given the vague statement. But I'm just defending the premise of someone, anyone, for any amount, donating after a disaster. I believe it when they say they NEEDED that money asap. The destruction over there is terrible... my coworkers had entire home flooded, gusher in apt, cars iced inside garage, no water or heat for 2 days basically. Awful situation.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I've also been donating  to major disasters (in and out of state), many people do that. However, most people don't send their donations together with Press releases, even for very substantial donations. It looks like everything these very private people do is for publicity.
> 
> @sdkitty they are contributing to the repair of the roof. So any guesses on the donated amount are valid imo.



Did they put out a press release? I thought it was just the charity making a statement. I am okay with this, having worked at a charity myself once. Remember the charity like any other business is looking for press, attention, donations and having a celebrity donate gives them a chance to make it on the airwaves. We always asked if we could put out a statement about a celebrity donation - not to make the celebrity look good, but to get our name out.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Was "Archie" a traditional royal name? How do you say "Meal Ticket" in Latin?



I don't have an answer to the first question, but here is the answer to the second: "tessera prandium", but now I don't know if it is a boy's or a girl's name.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

rose60610 said:


> Whaddaya wanna make a bet that the oat milk latte company will have an ad during the interview?


I’m thinking maybe one from Moonbump....


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I don't have an answer to the first question, but here is the answer to the second:* "tessera prandium", but now I don't know if it is a boy's or a girl's name.*



It could work for either one. Are unisex names still popular?   The name must be trendy, that is critical.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, they agreed to a 'tell-all interview' with Oprah to demand privacy! And you summarized it very well, I just made a minor $35 million dollars change:
> 
> “_all we want is our privacy—we were treated horribly by everyone—watch our new Netflix series!_”, and do not forget to download our Podcasts on Spotify.


and don't forget to call me Duchess


----------



## sdkitty

how much you wanna bet Oprah starts out by addressing her as Duchess and then asks if she may call her Meghan?


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I don't have an answer to the first question, but here is the answer to the second: "tessera prandium", but now I don't know if it is a boy's or a girl's name.



Thanks Chanbal! 



bag-mania said:


> It could work for either one. Are unisex names still popular?   The name must be trendy, that is critical.



Trendy? OK. "Excitant Tessera Prandium" =  "Woke Meal Ticket"     (never mind that it's a literal translation, totally meaningless in Latin, and probably mangled syntax. You know, WORD SALAD!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> I don't have an answer to the first question, but here is the answer to the second: "tessera prandium", but now I don't know if it is a boy's or a girl's name.


Perhaps Theresa.   In honor of Mother Theresa so that she ( assuming gender selection) will  live a life of service and selflessness and do good works for those in need and continue the work of Archewell and Archie.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Was "Archie" a traditional royal name? How do you say "Meal Ticket" in Latin?


prandium et annonas ducatus

If  the shelter gets a few roof tiles  and nails they should consider themselves lucky. The quid pro quo is so obvious with all these donations. The recipient always posts a glowing thank you immediately, which of course is written by Meg so it is worded properly.

Was her baby bump pad not available for the new picture?  Out for a cleaning?


----------



## Yanca

These two are relentless in their bid to stay relevant, another drip drop non new annoucement of their apperance in Spotify stream event. Her clothes will be on her " mirror" to merch, and of course it was plastered " Duke and Duchess " The titles really have to go, her hypocrisy is too much. lol


----------



## Chloe302225

Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.


----------



## Chloe302225

I think Oprah will give them a few "hard hitting" questions if only to keep up the appearance of journalistic integrity otherwise she risks a ding to her reputation and future chances at other high profile exclusives.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the interview will be rescheduled.  CBS might think that the better part of valor will be to hear what  the Royals have to say in the program, not that they will reference the Sussex in any way, but they might get the message out of service and who counts.


----------



## lalame

Chloe302225 said:


> Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.




That's a beautiful dress though I must say. I love Oscar de la Renta clothing.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> how much you wanna bet Oprah starts out by addressing her as Duchess and then asks if she may call her Meghan?



I think you have a career in directing/writing! haha. Why does ANYONE still call her Duchess? Can the titles just die already? We're way beyond the transition point for stuff like that.


----------



## lulu212121

She looks more pregnant laying down than sitting?


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> Oprah doesn't want to look fluffy but she also isn't going to attack M in any way and I'll bet M will know the questions in advance


Agree but what may have seemed easing going Q and A last Thursday may now be a nightmare, possibly un-showable and requiring uncountable $$$$$$$$ of lawyers time to vet

CBS is still trying to sell the show to the UK and the BBC knows not to upstage QEII

IMHO, last week's events were the result of the Monday announcement of the interview (ie the interview is a sore spot for QEII). Maybe Megxit conditions included a no-interview clause before the year is up???

Wonder if O is feeling used by the Harkles ? How much did they disclose to O about their ability/freedom/permission (not sure of word) to do this before year-end review?

O needs to get out of the quagmire with some grace  ... and fewer lawyer bills


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


> Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.



If I want to look like a fruit bowl then I will go for the Carmen Miranda look


----------



## marietouchet

dp


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


> I think Oprah will give them a few "hard hitting" questions if only to keep up the appearance of journalistic integrity otherwise she risks a ding to her reputation and future chances at other high profile exclusives.


I’m going to go out on a limb here. Oprah didn’t engineer this interview. CBS set this up years ago by sending O to UK, in her capacity as special contributor to 60 Minutes, before the wedding to meet Meghan.  Meg, being smart saw this as an opportunity and then invited O to the wedding at the last minute. What other really high profile people  has O  ever interviewed outside of Hollywood?    CBS will control this.


----------



## Mendocino

EverSoElusive said:


> You and I both RE: watching Suits for years. When Meghan had to exit the show, I didn't feel like Suits was missing a real important or exciting character. The show thrived just fine without her.


Add me to the Suits fan club. Loved the writing and the characters. It took me a while to warm up to the actress who used to be on Grey's Anatomy, but I did and I thought her character was well-written.

I loved Wendall Pierce as Robert Zane and all the other characters as well. Thoroughly enjoyed the last two seasons post Megxit (the tv version).

Edited for spelling


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


> Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.



Interesting that it's even hard to see her bump sitting down, while lying down in that ridiculous picture she looked like she's about to pop!


----------



## csshopper

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Perhaps a personal donation of a considerable amount would have been more meaningful. I am never impressed when a personal donation is claimed but passed through a tax protected entity.  Unless it is Bill and Melinda Gates.  They do it right.


And the Gates give millions and millions and it often is a long time before we learn about it because they do so much of it quietly and have for years. Did see him on TV recently talking about climate issues and work/money they will be involved with and commend that, it needs publicity to maybe spur others.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> And the Gates give millions and millions and it often is a long time before we learn about it because they do so much of it quietly and have for years. Did see him on TV recently talking about climate issues and work/money they will be involved with and commend that, it *needs publicity to maybe spur others*.



Exactly. I think many big donors tend to keep their philanthropy private if it's just routine giving but they might publicize it for lesser known or less popular charities/causes or really urgent issues just for the extra attention it brings to the issue. Makes sense, right... different approaches for different scenarios.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Mr and Mrs Markle Windsor are now FREE to choose the baby's name. They also know if the baby is a boy or a girl, but they may be saving that information for another Press release.
> 
> View attachment 4998633
> 
> 
> Disclosure: the above screenshot is from DM.


They are SO PETTY. Name it “gingerbread”, who the h—- cares anymore. The RF might even feel some relief.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think you have a career in directing/writing! haha. Why does ANYONE still call her Duchess? Can the titles just die already? We're way beyond the transition point for stuff like that.


because she loves it?  because they are stans?  because it's such an accomplishment for a WOC to become a Duchess my napping a prince?


----------



## Jayne1

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Perhaps Theresa.   In honor of Mother Theresa so that she ( assuming gender selection) will  live a life of service and selflessness and do good works for those in need and continue the work of Archewell and Archie.


Mother Theresa was a horrible person  Google her and you'll see all the examples of her cruel actions. The Catholic church needed some good PR for a change and wrote a new story.


----------



## Allisonfaye

viciel said:


> I must admit, I am not an Oprah fan. I don't dislike Oprah but I also don't think exceptionally highly of her either. I have always thought she's smart and savvy enough to keep smart and savvy people around her to give her good advice. I'm curious to see the direction of the interview but I won't watch it on its original air date just can't support it. Anyone with a mind, whether they like the Queen or not, recognizes her dedication and her sense of duty, the woman's at it longer than I have been alive!! How can anyone in good conscience do this to her? Oprah is almost 70 herself she must recognize a snake when she sees one and it's not like she needs any more accolade or money, why Oprah why?



To show she is still relevant. Clearly it is no longer about money.


----------



## Jayne1

Chloe302225 said:


> I think Oprah will give them a few "hard hitting" questions if only to keep up the appearance of journalistic integrity otherwise she risks a ding to her reputation and future chances at other high profile exclusives.


O might give a hard hitting question, but will she follow up when Meg gives her pre-planned answer. Or will O just nod and go on to the next question without any probing.

Let's see if O can get a unique story.  I very much doubt it.  It will be a celebrity interviewing another celebrity.


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _A source told the Sun: 'The pair are clearly very close to Oprah and the fact she's been with them at such an intense time has given her a unique insight into the rift with the royals.
> 
> 'The drama of last week means that Oprah's tell-all show will be *pure gold. It's time to hide behind the sofa for the other royals.'*_
> 
> 
> Shameful, just shameful. Shame  on CBS. Boycott has begun!


Oprah should stay the ‘H’ out of it. Really, who does she think she is?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Mother Theresa was a horrible person  Google her and you'll see all the examples of her cruel actions. The Catholic church needed some good PR for a change and wrote a new story.


oh no


----------



## lanasyogamama

They did a 20 second video promoting the podcast. Wow, so hardworking.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kaka_bobo

sdkitty said:


> because she loves it?  because they are stans?  because it's such an accomplishment for a WOC to become a Duchess my napping a prince?



I dunno why media still makes it seem like she's the first ever WOC to marry into European Royalty 

I mean we have Princess Angela of Liechtenstein who is the FIRST woman of African descent to marry into European royalty. 

Then we have Alexandra Manley, the Countess of Frederiksborg, who was Prince Joachim of Denmark's first wife. She is of mixed Chinese-European ancestry. 

Funny enough, these two royal WOC's also married the spare like a certain duchess, but somehow have way more class in their pinky toe than that duchess will ever have.

If anyone wants a Royal WOC as a role model, it should be the them not Duchess of "Noone asks if I'm okay"


----------



## sdkitty

I think the Brits here will know who I'm talking about.  I read a VF article years ago about a British aristocrat and his wife who was a WOC.  They had a huge mansion and grounds which they opened (at least partially) to the public (for the upkeep I think).  They seemed lovely and there was no mention of her suffering from racism.  Of course, her husband would not be as high profile as H.
anyone know who I'm thinking about?


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> To show she is still relevant. Clearly it is no longer about money.



Yep, she’s doing it to show she can. Likely many tried to get this interview and she is the one who got it. Oprah isn’t a newswoman, she’s a famous talk show host. She’ll do it the way she always has, by lending a sympathetic ear and allowing her guest to express her “voice.”


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I think the Brits here will know who I'm talking about.  I read a VF article years ago about a British aristocrat and his wife who was a WOC.  They had a huge mansion and grounds which they opened (at least partially) to the public (for the upkeep I think).  They seemed lovely and there was no mention of her suffering from racism.  Of course, her husband would not be as high profile as H.
> anyone know who I'm thinking about?


Marchioness of Bath by any chance?


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.



   


gracekelly said:


> If I want to look like a fruit bowl then I will go for the Carmen Miranda look
> 
> View attachment 4998720


@gracekelly You read my mind. Here is the hair piece that is missing on the duchess's look a la Carmen Miranda:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meal ticket in Latin - Cibus (food) if a boy and Cena (dinner) if a girl
BoniCibi = good food.  BonaCena = good dinner

Oscar dress - lemons?? Is now the time to wear lemons? $3400? Is this another leftover from the first pregnancy? The jokes write themselves.  Charles should request a refund.

Did they just upstage OW? This is their first appearance since losing the patronages. MM’s face looks inflated; that hair, gasp. She clearly wants to hide her face. H looks so very glossy, puffed up, and still does not how to sit like a gentleman. They look so desperate, like me, like me, like me.  90 minutes of this and we’ll all need years of therapy.

If Oprah wants any kind of positive legacy, she needs to stop this s$it-show.


ETA: just wait for the talented A listers to return to the stage.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Sharont2305 said:


> Marchioness of Bath by any chance?
> View attachment 4998825


 Love her dress!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (that said, some wise woman on the internet wrote "*I really feel her best acting is in her relationships...she reels them in and keeps them on the hook by portraying exactly what they want to see*." Maybe we don't give her enough credit)


Couldn't agree with this more, after all .. this is what she has been doing (acting?) for a VERY long time.  Personally, I think her "acting" and her bedroom skills were the key ingredients in her reeling in the men .. IMO of course!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Marchioness of Bath by any chance?
> View attachment 4998825


yes, I think so....she is petite?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The people are speaking screaming!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Marchioness of Bath by any chance?
> View attachment 4998825


so they would not be royals but would be nobility (like Dianas family)?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> so they would not be royals but would be nobility (like Dianas family)?



She should have her own thread. Fascinating lady!





						Emma Thynn, Marchioness of Bath - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Mother Theresa was a horrible person  Google her and you'll see all the examples of her cruel actions. The Catholic church needed some good PR for a change and wrote a new story.


Wasn't she quoted as saying she'd take money from the devil to help the  needy?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Article from 2017:








						The Problem With Mother Teresa
					

This September, Mother Teresa will become Saint Teresa. This is unsurprising; she was beatified in 2003, which is sort of a one-way road to canonization. But it's the last thing we need. She was no saint.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> Wasn't she quoted as saying she'd take money from the devil to help the  needy?


Nah, she loved those who struggled with poverty, because it brought them closer to the Lord, like Christ on the cross, she was quoted as saying. She was famous for non-existent pain management for that reason, except when it was her turn to suffer from excruciating pain because she took them for herself at the end of her life.

Anyway, why wouldn't Harry want to give up his place in line?  He moved away, he's settled in the celebrity lifestyle and I doubt he would want to go back to a country he couldn't wait to get away from.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Kaka_bobo said:


> I dunno why media still makes it seem like she's the first ever WOC to marry into European Royalty
> 
> I mean we have Princess Angela of Liechtenstein who is the FIRST woman of African descent to marry into European royalty.
> 
> Then we have *Alexandra Manley, the Countess of Frederiksborg*, who was Prince Joachim of Denmark's first wife. She is of mixed Chinese-European ancestry.
> 
> Funny enough, these two royal WOC's also married the spare like a certain duchess, but somehow have way more class in their pinky toe than that duchess will ever have.
> 
> If anyone wants a Royal WOC as a role model, it should be the them not Duchess of "Noone asks if I'm okay"


Princess Angela of Liechtenstein is a class act, but  Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg is another story. She and Prince Joachim were involved in a messy divorce, both accused of cheating. She then married Martin Jorgensen, with whom she supposedly had the affair while married to Joachim. This marriage ended in divorce after she accused him of cheating.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m in the minority here... I like the lemon dress! But of course she has to go with something expensive Which is my only dig about it.


----------



## rose60610

Chloe302225 said:


> Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.




I don't mind the dress. I wouldn't buy it, but I still like it. Since it's a loose boxy fit, Meghan can't ruin the tailoring like she usually does. Somebody posted a photo of M in #45800, her bump looks like she ripped a cushion off a bar stool and rammed it underneath the dress. It's odd.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Jayne1 said:


> Mother Theresa was a horrible person  Google her and you'll see all the examples of her cruel actions. The Catholic church needed some good PR for a change and wrote a new story.


I obviously did not know this.  My head was wrapped around pictures of Diana with her and the presumption that it would fit MM’s narrative.    Thank you for the information. I learn something —again— from this thread.


----------



## Lodpah

Don’t know about you all but if my loved one was in the hospital past 4 days I’d be in that plane as quick as I can. Yet these two keep courting the press trying to be relevant. Are they that fame hungry and desperate?
I get it. Their greed is stupendous.

The Eagle eats the lion to pieces.

It’s absolutely magnificent how utterly greedy for fame and press these two are. I get it, they dint have real jobs so their minds are . . .they’re in desperate mental I’ll crises is what i believe.

Imagine having nothing relevant to offer so they go nuts trying to come up with things. They’re in gilded cages with my imagery of them putting their hands out between the cages to grab at something and they hold onto it for a bit then try again. It’s like like the Pavlov experiment. That’s why their attention span is so short and able to move on to the next cause.

I’m feeling so sorry for them in terms of their desperation and I hope they find peace in something so that they can thrive instead of just surviving at just grasping at anything to eat.


----------



## Jayne1

I read she could actually be pregnant this time, because it does take a few tries with IFV (at her age especially) and it was hard to believe she could get pregnant on the first try last time. But now, she's had years to get it to take.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I think the Brits here will know who I'm talking about.  I read a VF article years ago about a British aristocrat and his wife who was a WOC.  They had a huge mansion and grounds which they opened (at least partially) to the public (for the upkeep I think).  They seemed lovely and there was no mention of her suffering from racism.  Of course, her husband would not be as high profile as H.
> anyone know who I'm thinking about?


Current Marquess of Bath, his late elderly father was quite an eccentric, if you google you find mostly photos of the previous one with white hair

This is the new one with the Celtic name that I cannot spell or pronouce



			Ceawlin Thynn - Google Search


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jayne1 said:


> I read she could actually be pregnant this time, because it does take a few tries with IFV (at her age especially) and it was hard to believe she could get pregnant on the first try last time. But now, she's had years to get it to take.



I would agree but I got pregnant the very first attempt when I was 40. (2nd baby). I even took one for the team because my husband knocked me in the head (accidentally) with his elbow and I was pi$$ed at him but I was O'ing so I just said let's do it anyway.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> I don't mind the dress. I wouldn't buy it, but I still like it. Since it's a loose boxy fit, Meghan can't ruin the tailoring like she usually does. Somebody posted a photo of M in #45800, her bump looks like she ripped a cushion off a bar stool and rammed it underneath the dress. It's odd.


She does not do anything without a goal and in this case her mind is saying she’s being given lemons so she will make lemonade . . . in her mind. That’s what I think.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> I don't mind the dress. I wouldn't buy it, but I still like it. Since it's a loose boxy fit, Meghan can't ruin the tailoring like she usually does. Somebody posted a photo of M in #45800, her bump looks like she ripped a cushion off a bar stool and rammed it underneath the dress. It's odd.



I don't mind the dress either. IMO it would look so much better if she had put her hair up or pulled it back. The long messy hair and the dropped waist just drags everything down.


----------



## mshermes

lulu212121 said:


> She looks more pregnant laying down than sitting?


Exactly! She must have put the wrong month bump on.


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> Love her dress!


The dress by itself is pretty, but it is not a happy choice for MM imo. Not sure if it is her long hair, but something doesn't look right to me.


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> I totally agree with you. Hoping that "that time" will be as far away as possible.
> 
> I was also thinking that besides the Queen's jubilee, there should be an unveiling of Diana's statue at Ken Palace, I think, on her 60th birthday on July 1st.... Will Harry go, since  his second baby should arrive around that time?? Also I wouldn't be at all surprised that, even if she's just given birth and would have to go back to the hated UK, Meghan will attend , since her idol Diana would be celebrated.... Time will tell!


Nope .. given what a wimp she truly is (_remember - she left Harry behind to have to 'talk/deal' with QEII and others to talk about MegExit_), so I just do not think that she will ever set foot on UK soil again .. as she is hated more than liked.  Yes, my opinion, but when it gets hot in the kitchen, she leaves .. and quickly!  Definition of *WIMPY-WIMPY-WIMPY*!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> how much you wanna bet Oprah starts out by addressing her as Duchess and then asks if she may call her Meghan?


.. and if she does, I will FOR SURE write to her organization about it, since I have the 'inside' email address for her (_given that my friend worked for her_).  It would show Oprah's ignorance, that we do not recognize the titles of the BRF!  Now, with Harry, it is likely that she may say "_Prince Harr_y" because he is a blood Prince and many do it just as a "nice" thing to do.  If it was me, I would *NOT* call him Prince Harry (_quelle surprise, right_??!?!   ) .. it would be JCMH (_and if he protested?? .. I would remind him of the time that he said "just call me Harry"_)!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> I don't mind the dress. I wouldn't buy it, but I still like it. Since it's a loose boxy fit, Meghan can't ruin the tailoring like she usually does. Somebody posted a photo of M in #45800, her bump looks like she ripped a cushion off a bar stool and rammed it underneath the dress. It's odd.


What surprises me most about this picture is that MM isn't clutching JCMH's arm as if her life depended on it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Allisonfaye said:


> I would agree but I got pregnant the very first attempt when I was 40. (2nd baby). I even took one for the team because my husband knocked me in the head (accidentally) with his elbow and I was pi$$ed at him but I was O'ing so I just said let's do it anyway.



I didn’t read that as ovulating!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Nothing new here, just another confirmation that the couple was "a bit difficult..."



Channel 5's royal documentary: *'Prince Harry: The Troubled Prince'*, reflected on his life within the Royal Family and outside of it with Meghan Markle. Royal commentators Camilla Tominey and Angela Levin remarked on Meghan Markle's inability to fit into the Royal Family. *Ms Levin insisted the Duchess of Sussex had no sense of duty,* but this was understandable as she had never been a member of the Royal Family.

Ms Levin also reflected on Meghan and Harry's relationship as well as Meghan's fit in the Royal Family.

She said: "Prince Harry said '*what Meghan wants, Meghan gets*'.

"I think he defers to her a great deal, she is a very confident and articulate woman who has done very well for herself.

"But I think she has no sense of duty which is understandable because she has never been a member of the Royal Family.

"But Meghan won't be confined by protocol."

Ms Tominey noted that rumours that circulated about the pair following their wedding did not help their relationship with the press.

Ms Tominey said: "The wheels started to come off amid suggestions that the couple had been a bit difficult over the planning of the wedding.

*"Also that demands were being made that weren't quite in proportion with their place in the royal pecking order."*

No sense of duty


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the full story on the lemon dress event, MM&H aim at "inspire, challenge and educate." 




*PREGNANT Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were today seen for the first time since being stripped of their Royal titles as they appeared at an "inspiring" Spotify online event.*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex today gushed over sharing vulnerabilities as they promoted their new podcast series.

They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.

The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.

In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."

Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."

Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."

They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.

The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.

In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."

Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."

Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."

Pregnant Meghan, 39, stunned in a £2,478 Oscar de la Renta for the online video while sitting close to her husband on a couch.

Harry, 36, appeared to be dressed casually for the appearance, wearing a simple white collared shirt and trousers.

The full story about the lemons!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Here is the full story on the lemon dress event, MM&H aim at "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> View attachment 4998944
> 
> 
> *PREGNANT Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were today seen for the first time since being stripped of their Royal titles as they appeared at an "inspiring" Spotify online event.*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex today gushed over sharing vulnerabilities as they promoted their new podcast series.
> 
> They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.
> 
> The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.
> 
> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."
> 
> They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.
> 
> The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.
> 
> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."
> 
> Pregnant Meghan, 39, stunned in a £2,478 Oscar de la Renta for the online video while sitting close to her husband on a couch.
> 
> Harry, 36, appeared to be dressed casually for the appearance, wearing a simple white collared shirt and trousers.
> 
> The full story about the lemons!



Goodness that sounds like a downer....


----------



## poopsie

A listers? The only one I've ever heard of was the Beebs. 
But, then again I don't suppose I'm a member of their 'target' audience anyway.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sol Ryan said:


> Goodness that sounds like a downer....


Or another load of meaningless drivel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Unless they are serving lemonade, the message of lemons is not too positive. Easy to misconstrue — are they giving us lemons? 
[why can’t they get this stuff right?  other people do not have this much difficulty.]


----------



## Allisonfaye

I have a feeling that dress is really pretty in person. I have seen de la Renta stuff in person and it's breathtaking.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure *we can elevate voices *that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a *safe place*."



In other words, bla bla bla, fluff fluff fluff, nothing of substance, only whiny piss ants demanding pity would find this appealing.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Here is the full story on the lemon dress event, MM&H aim at "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> View attachment 4998944


*WHOA Momma* .. stop the Train, anyone else getting a major-league *Kim Kardashian "twin"* vibe with this picture????  She needs to layoff on the PS and Harry?!?! .. looks depressed and HORRIBLE!!!!  I think the removal of the patronages has affected him and not in a positive way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> I have a feeling that dress is really pretty in person. I have seen de la Renta stuff in person and it's breathtaking.



Are they giving us lemons?

This could be a design by his son who inherited the fashion house. OdlR was the designer of First Ladies, stars, all A list women.
Certainly it is a beautiful dress,  just wrong on the symbolism.
Off to make some lemonade 


ETA: different styles, different price points:
MM’s: A signature lemon motif adds a Botticelli-inspired quality to this glamorous 60s-inspired shift. A dramatic flounce hem adds the perfect finish.

Roundneck
Sleeveless
Flounce hem
Back zip
Silk/polyester/nylon
Dry clean
Made in Italy


----------



## rose60610

Lemons? symbolize "sourpuss"?  How fitting!


----------



## kkfiregirl

CeeJay said:


> *WHOA Momma* .. stop the Train, anyone else getting a major-league *Kim Kardashian "twin"* vibe with this picture????  She needs to layoff on the PS and Harry?!?! .. looks depressed and HORRIBLE!!!!  I think the removal of the patronages has affected him and not in a positive way.



I agree, Harry looks so sad and depressed - I feel a little bad for him. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't insist on releasing a video to the world where my husband looks visibly sad/upset.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I do not have one iota of pity for either of them. no. 
H&M could have easily listened to advice and changed their ending. These pity parties from 40 yr olds are shameful, just shameful.
They have made their choices.  Enjoy those 16 bathrooms.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Allisonfaye said:


> I would agree but I got pregnant the very first attempt when I was 40. (2nd baby). I even took one for the team because my husband knocked me in the head (accidentally) with his elbow and I was pi$$ed at him but I was O'ing so I just said let's do it anyway.



doll... This is amaze. You need to add a hair toss and nail check to this.



Chanbal said:


> The dress by itself is pretty, but it is not a happy choice for MM imo. Not sure if it is her long hair, but something doesn't look right to me.



It's the hair. This dress is meant to say something different. Fresh, flirty, whatever. Morticia would not wear this, and with those extensions Meghan should not either.  The dress is adorable and perfect for my imaginary garden party life, not couch-sitting with my depressed frumpy (clothing-budget-spent-all-on-me) husband.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I forgot to mention.... this thread....gives me life.


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> I agree, Harry looks so sad and depressed - I feel a little bad for him. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't insist on releasing a video to the world where my husband looks visibly sad/upset.


He is the one losing family, titles, and likely a lot of money. MM has no titles or family to lose in the UK (she is keeping the duchess title), and her assets and celebrity status have dramatically increased in CA. So he is sad, and she is only mad because the events of last weekend may make them look less valuable.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they giving us lemons?
> 
> This could be a design by his son who inherited the fashion house. OdlR was the designer of First Ladies, stars, all A list women.
> Certainly it is a beautiful dress,  just wrong on the symbolism.
> Off to make some lemonade
> 
> 
> ETA: different styles, different price points:
> MM’s: A signature lemon motif adds a Botticelli-inspired quality to this glamorous 60s-inspired shift. A dramatic flounce hem adds the perfect finish.
> 
> Roundneck
> Sleeveless
> Flounce hem
> Back zip
> Silk/polyester/nylon
> Dry clean
> Made in Italy
> 
> View attachment 4998999



She picked the prettiest style IMO.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Anyone know about this????









						The Prince’s Trust Officially Launches in USA - Prince’s Trust USA
					

The Prince’s Trust launches in the USA as Jessica Greer Morris is appointed its first Chief Executive Officer.Read More




					princestrust.us


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone know about this????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust Officially Launches in USA - Prince’s Trust USA
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust launches in the USA as Jessica Greer Morris is appointed its first Chief Executive Officer.Read More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> princestrust.us


This is Prince Charles's trust, not Harry .. just saying ..


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> I forgot to mention.... this thread....gives me life.


You are not alone, it's a lifesaver. Sometimes I forget that we are in the middle of a pandemic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> This is Prince Charles's trust, not Harry .. just saying ..



Thinking ahead — So will H&M run the US version and W&K the UK one? Ya kno, when Charles hands it over? 
The great reset has to begin somewhere.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they giving us lemons?
> 
> This could be a design by his son who inherited the fashion house. OdlR was the designer of First Ladies, stars, all A list women.
> Certainly it is a beautiful dress,  just wrong on the symbolism.
> Off to make some lemonade
> 
> 
> ETA: different styles, different price points:
> MM’s: A signature lemon motif adds a Botticelli-inspired quality to this glamorous 60s-inspired shift. A dramatic flounce hem adds the perfect finish.
> 
> Roundneck
> Sleeveless
> Flounce hem
> Back zip
> Silk/polyester/nylon
> Dry clean
> Made in Italy
> 
> View attachment 4998999


I would NEVER wear something like this, but then again .. I'm 5'10" (in stocking feet) and a large build (thankfully the pandemic has been good to me and I'm down to a weight that I have not seen in about 20 years - YEAH).  All I can think of when looking at this is:  Limoncello or the most wonderful Sorbetto Limoni at Davide's in Sorrento!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seriously, what is wrong with her face?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone know about this????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust Officially Launches in USA - Prince’s Trust USA
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust launches in the USA as Jessica Greer Morris is appointed its first Chief Executive Officer.Read More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> princestrust.us


I wonder if this is done to help H establish himself in the US. Charles's help???


----------



## Allisonfaye

kkfiregirl said:


> I agree, Harry looks so sad and depressed - I feel a little bad for him. Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't insist on releasing a video to the world where my husband looks visibly sad/upset.



She probably never even noticed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this is done to help H establish himself in the US. Charles's help???



Explains why Chas has been very quiet about the partronages. He will most likely reinstate those when he takes over.
We in the US are getting played by these people. I really wish the young people would wake up. H&M are not who the young ones  think they are.

ETA: Did Foster suggest Lionel?  Doria? Oprah? Interesting they are using really old people from the 80s. I say that as a really old person. There are so many better choices.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?



Well, that could explain why she is hiding behind all that hair...........


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thinking ahead — So will H&M run the US version and W&K the UK one? Ya kno, when Charles hands it over?
> The great reset has to begin somewhere.


Yes, that is what I thought. This is Charles's legacy that he plans to leave to H in the US imo.
It was released at the same time that they cut some of H's links with the UK. It's a way of establishing H here as an entitled prince, and at the same time allowing W to become a king far away from MM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Yes, that is what I thought. This is Charles's legacy that he plans to leave to H in the US imo.



I’d be surprised... he’d end up crying when Philip and the Queen ripped him a new one...

That might have been the original intent, but I don’t see it happening unless Harry has a real PR makeover again.

Wills would probably blow a gasket....


----------



## melissatrv

These two are so selfish and setting such a bad example for Archie and baby to be.  Look how they have both alienated their families?  It started with Meghan at the wedding fiasco and now the break from the royals.  In the end Doria will be the only one left standing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?


The hair is overpowering her thin frame... long face, short forehead, hair parted in the middle and too flat on top of the head and two huge horse tails with lots of curls from the shoulders down to almost her waist. It makes her look disproportionate.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this is done to help H establish himself in the US. Charles's help???


I'm hoping that Charles wants to show the two grifters how a charity really works.
The Prince's Trust


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I’d be surprised... he’d end up crying when Philip and the Queen ripped him a new one...
> 
> That might have been the original intent, but I don’t see it happening unless Harry has a real PR makeover again.
> 
> Wills would probably blow a gasket....


My 2 cents:
The BRF (including Philip) wants to give an opportunity to Will to do his work without the damaging input of MM&H. So they are likely finding ways to keep H&MM far away from the UK. This is likely taking a small loss for a bigger win. When Charles becomes king (or even before), he will likely pass the Prince's Trust to H. Charles knows H, and he knows about his limited capabilities. We can't forget that H is his son, and he wants to protect him. So H is out of the UK, but the BRF will get him a Disneyland kingdom only for him and his wife in the US. Poor us that have to put up with this petulant and unpleasant couple.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m in the minority here... I like the lemon dress! But of course she has to go with something expensive Which is my only dig about it.


The dress , embroidered lemons and leaves are TDF , gorgeous
BUT the fabric color is an unflattering dishwater blue grey that is thankfully hidden by the over abundant hair
in all fairness, I am not sure who would look good in that shade of blue grey , a warm beige would be nicer
However, the massive hair is good for drawing attention away from the fillers


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm hoping that Charles wants to show the two grifters how a charity really works.
> The Prince's Trust


Wish you were right, but I believe Charles is trying to protect his younger son with this. The timing is also very interesting.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone know about this????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust Officially Launches in USA - Prince’s Trust USA
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust launches in the USA as Jessica Greer Morris is appointed its first Chief Executive Officer.Read More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> princestrust.us


Interesting date of 18 Feb 2021 , Thursday last week, after the Oprah interview announcement but before the queen’s
Clearly this has been in the works for a while, 6-12 mos, but not clear this was planned pre- or post- Megxit
C may have a soft spot for H and setting things in motion for the future, when hopefully H‘s reputation is less tarnished
let’s not forget the brouhaha 25-30 years ago over the  affair with Camilla,  H got over that and C may feel he owes his son for the support, given his own imperfect past


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> The BRF (including Philip) wants to give an opportunity to Will to do his work without the damaging input of MM&H. So they are likely finding ways to keep H&MM far away from the UK. This is likely taking a small loss for a bigger win. When Charles becomes king (or even before), he will likely pass the Prince's Trust to H. Charles knows H, and he knows about his limited capabilities. We can't forget that H is his son, and he wants to protect him. So H is out of the UK, but the BRF will get him a Disneyland kingdom only for him and his wife in the US. Poor us that have to put up with this petulant and unpleasant couple.



Outstanding analysis! It all makes perfect sense. Disneyland kingdom is spot on! 
But Lionel????He is 71. Oprah, Gayle, Doria are 67-ish. Foster is 71.
Are they afraid of the youth?  We have many young people here who would do an outstanding job [if we must accept this].

ETA: Surely they won’t bring Elton over to sing to us


----------



## youngster

Seems very odd to me to establish a chapter of the Prince's Trust in the U.S., no?  Of course, I like effective charities that aim to help people in a significant way, and Prince Charles' Prince's Trust seems to be a good one aimed at helping vulnerable young people.  But, establishing a chapter in the U.S.? What does Harry know about growing up in the U.S.?  He's been here about 9 months. Perhaps a move to give JCMH something meaningful to do with an established charity that has a proven track record?


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> Interesting date of 18 Feb 2021 , Thursday last week, after the Oprah interview announcement but before the queen’s
> Clearly this has been in the works for a while, 6-12 mos, but not clear this was planned pre- or post- Megxit
> C may have a soft spot for H and setting things in motion for the future, when hopefully H‘s reputation is less tarnished
> let’s not forget the brouhaha 25-30 years ago over the  affair with Camilla,  H got over that and C may feel he owes his son for the support, given his own imperfect past



I wonder if that has to do with Harry’s timing of the announcement of the Oprah interview... try to usurp the Prince’s Trust announcement...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone know about this????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust Officially Launches in USA - Prince’s Trust USA
> 
> 
> The Prince’s Trust launches in the USA as Jessica Greer Morris is appointed its first Chief Executive Officer.Read More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> princestrust.us


Read the stuff at the link and at the portal to the main Prince’s Trust ...
I have known the PT only from their star studded benefit shows, not from their work
Wow this sounds right up MM’s woke alley , surprised that she ditched an opportunity to be involved with an organization with a mission statement closely aligned with what I know of her goals


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Read the stuff at the link and at the portal to the main Prince’s Trust ...
> I have known the PT only from their star studded benefit shows, not from their work
> Wow this sounds right up MM’s woke alley , surprised that she ditched an opportunity to be involved with an organization with a mission statement closely aligned with what I know of her goals



She would butt heads with W&K if she had stayed there. So, bring the show to the US because we don’t have enough charities helping the children, do we?  Wonder how our elites are taking this news? Kinda makes them all look pitiful, no?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Outstanding analysis! It all makes perfect sense. Disneyland kingdom is spot on!
> But Lionel????He is 71. Oprah, Gayle, Doria are 67-ish. Foster is 71.
> Are they afraid of the youth?  We have many young people here who would do an outstanding job [if we must accept this].
> 
> ETA: Surely they won’t bring Elton over to sing to us


Look at the countries the Prince's Trust supported in the past (see below). These are countries with traditional economic problems. North America is usually not included in this type of lists. US and potentially Canada (I don't know when it was established in Canada) are likely 'acquisitions' with H in mind. Otherwise, it would make more sense to establish this trust in, for example, Mexico or Brazil, which are big countries, but with smaller economies when compared to the US.



The old 'dudes' will be retired and replaced by H&MM soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Look at the countries the Prince's Trust supported in the past (see below). These are countries with traditional economic problems. North America is usually not included in this type of lists. US and Canada are likely recent 'acquisitions' with H in mind. Otherwise, it would make more sense to establish this trust in, for example, Mexico, which is a country with a smaller economy when compared to the US.
> 
> View attachment 4999081



No way MM would live in Mexico. She didn’t even want to live in Africa. Yeah, in one move Charles has irritated our elite charity folks. He is about to find out how unwelcome he is, along with his fussy son.

*We want the Cambridges.  We want the Cambridges.  We want the Cambridges.  We want the Cambridges.*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> No way MM would live in Mexico. She didn’t even want to live in Africa. Yeah, in one move Charles has irritated our elite charity folks. He is about to find out how unwelcome he is, along with his fussy son.
> 
> *We want the Cambridges.  We want the Cambridges.  We want the Cambridges.  We want the Cambridges.*



My reaction is probably extreme, but I think bringing the Pince's Trust  here is insulting and unnecessary.    We don't need it.  He should concentrate on his own country and those in the Commonwealth.


----------



## lulu212121

gracekelly said:


> My reaction is probably extreme, but I think bringing the Pince's Trust  here is insulting and unnecessary.    We don't need it.  He should concentrate on his own country and those in the Commonwealth.


My thoughts exactly! I feel this is really overstepping the US/UK boundaries. A charity ran on the behalf of the British monarchy doesn't sit well with me. Who are they focusing on with this. If this is a children's charity I really have a problem giving US children gifts on behalf of the Prince of the UK.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m surprised she isn’t gripping his hand


----------



## CobaltBlu

What the heck?  
PT in the US?  Why?


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I didn’t read that as ovulating!!!


LOL!  I didn't either!!   My first thought was Oh My, TMI, LOL!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulu212121 said:


> My thoughts exactly! I feel this is really overstepping the US/UK boundaries. A charity ran on the behalf of the British monarchy doesn't sit well with me. Who are they focusing on with this. If this is a children's charity I really have a problem giving US children gifts on behalf of the Prince of the UK.



Well said!
Who approved this?
Why is Lionel ok with it? Why is Oprah ok with it? Gayle? We know why Foster, MM & Doria are, why is everyone else?
Every Junior League-er, philanthropist, foundation worker, presidential library organizer ought to be screaming!
Forget about Harry, this is a hard slap in all of our faces.  Hard slap.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> I forgot to mention.... this thread....gives me life.


Me too!  Thank you to each and every person who contributes here whether they agree with the majority or not.  This thread picks me up every day and entertains me no end.  Thank you everyone!!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?


The Madame Taussand's wax dummy is starting to look more realistic than her real person.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Look at the countries the Prince's Trust supported in the past (see below). These are countries with traditional economic problems. North America is usually not included in this type of lists. US and potentially Canada (I don't know when it was established in Canada) are likely 'acquisitions' with H in mind. Otherwise, it would make more sense to establish this trust in, for example, Mexico or Brazil, which are big countries, but with smaller economies when compared to the US.
> 
> View attachment 4999081
> 
> The old 'dudes' will be retired and replaced by H&MM soon.



oh dear the mission statement does mention bringing the transformative philanthropic program , or words to that effect ..., to the US as well as fund raising in the US

Most of the countries on the list were part of the British Empire, and now are likely part of the Commonwealth. That makes sense for the focus of Prince Charles philanthropy.
Greece is an exception but Philip was born a Prince of Greece, and Philip’s mother personally did humanitarian work there (she did the nursing, not galas)
Jordan was  created after WWI by the Brits/French/ Lawrence of Arabia and there have been strong English monarchy ties to the Hashemite Kingdom since then.

I think the US falls more into the category of being a place where you can hold star studded galas


----------



## CobaltBlu

In her remarks, Jessica noted, “Our goal over the next year is twofold—to create a conduit for US citizens to support our work around the globe and to *bring the very same program transforming the lives of young people abroad to the United States*.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Most of the countries on the list were part of the British Empire, and now are likely part of the Commonwealth. That makes sense for the focus of Prince Charles philanthropy.
> Greece is an exception but Philip was born a Prince of Greece, and Philip’s mother personally did humanitarian work there (she did the nursing, not galas)
> Jordan was  created after WWI by the Brits/French/ Lawrence of Arabia and there have been strong English monarchy ties to the Hashemite Kingdom since then.
> I think the US falls more into the category of being a place where you can hold star studded galas, for which PC is famous, to make the money to fund the efforts in countries with economic problems.



You may be right.   Still, US citizens are not money pits, especially after/during a pandemic and the coldest winter in years.  These Brits need sell their BS elsewhere.  Maybe he is trying to fundraise for his pity-loving son.

   Icky vibes. Icky.
From 2019:








						Prince Charles makes cheeky Lionel Richie joke as 'Hello' singer is made a Prince's Trust ambassador
					

Prince Charles has named Lionel Richie singer a global ambassador for The Prince's Trust International, while meeting in Barbados.




					www.smoothradio.com
				



Prince Charles also couldn't help but making a play on Lionel's lyrics, saying: "It must have been you I was looking for."

Lionel replied: "Oh, did you say that? He did say that".

Sir Tom Jones was also in attendance at the special event, after organisers found out he was staying at the exclusive Coral Reef Club.

He said: "I had a week off and thought 'where should I go, where's the sunniest place? Barbados'." He told the prince: "Any time I can sing for you, as long as I'm available, I'll be there so I try and do as much as I can because he does wonderful work, the Prince's Trust is a fantastic thing to be associated with."


----------



## marietouchet

Maybe the PT announcement on Thursday was done to show that it is NOT headed by the Harkles ? At least today...


----------



## csshopper

Multiple ways to look at this:

    Charles has American grandchildren and he may be thinking of the world they will be growing into. We have many many climate issues, for example, in the USA. 

     It may be intended for Harry as a way to do something meaningful with his life. However, dragon lady is sure to take it over, so that could backfire.

     There used to be, not sure if it still goes on, a huge effort in the US to raise money to literally keep Venice afloat, so international causes are not unknown.

      I think there has been a shift in the way the world looks at us, and we may be seen as needing help, where before we were the country most apt to be doing the giving.

      Potentially keeps the Sussexes on this side of the Pond, out of the way of the Royals and with the Sussexes tanking popularity in the UK, may make it easier for the remaining group to function.


More diversion, they certainly are "entertaining". Who needs Netflix?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be sure to catch the philanthropic angle. QE made a strong point to H&M that philanthropy is not service.
Perhaps Chas made the long trip to _visit_ PP in the hospital to ‘complain’ about his mummy being mean to lil Harry. Chas left in tears.

Enough said.


----------



## Chloe302225

To just point out The Prince's Trust US branch was being floated around for a few years. I remember first hearing about it when Will and Kate visited the US on tour back in 2015/2016. It has also been fundraising in the US for much longer.

This venture may have something to do with Harry but it has been in the works for a lot longer than this debacle taking place now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Wait, someone talk me through this. Why on earth would Charles bring a charity to the US only to leave it for Harry to run later? When Megxit happened Harry made Charles look like an out-of-the-loop fool. Charles isn’t going to reward that. Bringing PT to the US has been in the works for awhile, well before Harry running away from home.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Wait, someone talk me through this. Why on earth would Charles bring a charity to the US only to leave it for Harry to run later? When Megxit happened Harry made Charles look like an out-of-the-loop fool. Charles isn’t going to reward that. Bringing PT to the US has been in the works for awhile, well before Harry running away from home.



exactly... I don’t think Harry is going to have anything to do with this... not unless he has a major personality change...

He wants to be a celebrity groupie and have safe spaces...


----------



## Chloe302225

Also unless he makes a division on the international arm which covers not only the US branch but all the others as well, Harry can't take over anything. As it stands right now it is all 1 charity that will most likely be inherited by William.

I also don't see what is so bad about wanting to provide the charity's resources in the US. The same issues that the charity is helping with outside the US are happening inside too.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> My reaction is probably extreme, but I think bringing the Pince's Trust  here is insulting and unnecessary.    We don't need it.  He should concentrate on his own country and those in the Commonwealth.


The Trust works in other countries outside of the Commonwealth, but it certainly doesn't make any sense to bring the Trust to the US. Unless, they brought it here to collect fat donations from us, and to pass it to his petulant son and his greedy wife.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Excellent comment and analysis of 'service V narcissism' from Brendan O'Neill, editor of Spiked online (UK)    









						Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
					

Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.




					www.spiked-online.com
				



*Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.*

"So Harry and Meghan are out. The Prince and Princess of Woke are formally splitting from the monarchy. The Soft Megxit of 2020 – when the painfully PC pair flounced off to North America with the intention of becoming ‘financially independent’ – has become a Hard Megxit. The queen has decreed that Harry and Meghan’s antics are incompatible with ‘the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service’ and therefore they have to hand back all their royal patronages. This is about as close to saying ‘bugger off’ as the famously restrained queen will ever get.

What’s this all about? What does Megxit tell us about the world, if anything? Listening to the Meghan-loving chattering classes you’d be forgiven for thinking the poor dear and her loving husband were driven out of this godforsaken country by racism. Naturally, these people wilfully overlook that the vast majority of Britons took Meghan to their hearts when she got hitched to Harry, and only tired of her when she started wagging her manicured fingers at us about everything from feminism to climate change. Your everyday Brit doesn’t take kindly to being talked down to by right-on aristocrats who then get on a private jet to wing it to Elton John’s swanky pad in the South of France or to some barefoot, ******** eco-gathering of the super-rich.

Others blame it all on the press. Our horrible, rapacious press, criticising Meghan day in, day out. They even cheer when Harry and Meghan launch legal cases against the media for saying rude or revealing things about them. It is testament to the middle classes’ turn against press freedom – which, let’s not forget, was won for us by people who dissed royalty, by the likes of the 18th-century prince-mocker John Wilkes – that they will cheerfully support two arrogant royals’ crusade against the papers. ‘Whatever you think of Harry and Meghan, their media critics are far worse’, says Marina Hyde at the _Guardian_. It’s not surprising that an aristocrat like Hyde would defend two aristocratic bores from the rabble that is the redtop press, but it’s pretty shocking the _Guardian_ won’t stand up for press freedom against the Sussexes’ constant barbs and suing.

All these narratives tell us more about the narrators than they do about the reality of Megxit. They confirm the snobbery of the woke set, who are more than happy to take the side of a privileged pair of virtue-signallers over what they view as the irredeemably prejudiced British masses. And they confirm the ongoing, increasingly irrational hostility of the posh against the ‘low-rent’ press, which is now blamed for every ill in society. Meghan’s sadness? Our dumbed-down culture? Sexism? Far-right activism? Blame it on the tabloids. It’s the _Sun_ wot did it.

​

The truth, as always, is more complex. What the great Harry and Meghan flounce really demonstrates is the incompatibility of the modern culture of narcissism with the old-world ideals of duty, loyalty and service. Meghan felt trapped in the royal family not because Princess Michael once wore a colonial-era brooch or because it is _so hard_ to spend your days chilling in palaces, but because royal life runs so counter to the shallower, selfie-era, virtue-advertising outlook that Meghan has come to embody over the past couple of years. Megxit is fundamentally a battle between the narcissism of the 21st century and the more stoic, giving culture of the past.


This is where the Windsors’ and the Sussexes’ spat over ‘service’ is interesting. The queen firmly insisted that Harry and Meghan’s ‘independent’ globe-trotting did not sit comfortably with a ‘life of public service’. In the passive-aggressive manner of a certain type of Californian, Meghan and Harry fired back that everyone can do some ‘service’. ‘We can all have a life of service. Service is universal’, they said.

They don’t know what service means. Here’s the difference: the Meghans of this world primarily serve themselves, always seeking new opportunities for self-expression, virtuous preening, ‘emotional growth’. The queen, in contrast, serves the crown. She has _negated_ the self. She suppresses her self-expression, her political views and her emotions, to the end of submitting to something bigger than herself: the crown, the monarchy, the constitution. Now, we can discuss whether the crown is good or bad – I’m a **********, so I’m not a fan. But it is clear that Meghan and Elizabeth II have unbridgeably different understandings of ‘service’. Meghan’s idea of service always involves her expressing herself and revealing herself and reminding us how virtuous she is; the queen’s idea of service is to _hide_ the self, to fold it into a larger, apparently more important project. The queen is about service, Meghan is about self-service.


This is clear from how Harry and Meghan talk about the monarchy as if it were some kind of hot-desking workspace where you might pick up a few new skills before ‘moving on’. Last year they said they wanted to ‘make a transition’ and ‘carve out a progressive new role within this institution’, as if they were media consultants and the monarchy a mere brand. They said they wanted to ‘continue to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen’, as if the queen were a fashion house and they were Jameela Jamil-style celebs providing it with a dash of BS ‘social change’. Again and again, they show that they have a very weak grip on the ideas of duty and loyalty, of _giving things up_ for a greater good.

The cult of narcissism is widespread today. We are encouraged to obsess over our bodies and our image, to work out exactly where we fit on the infinite list of made-up genders, to obsess over our mental wellbeing, to hide in a ‘safe space’ in order to protect our sacrosanct self-esteem from any form of insult or inquiry. And of course this all generates a very flimsy sense of self – not the robust selfhood of 19th-century liberalism, but the fragile, easily injured selfhood of the social-media era, in which we require constant validation and protection from rowdy speech or else we will feel ‘erased’.

So in inviting us to turn away from big, sacrifice-demanding national or social projects, and encouraging us instead to obsess over the self, the culture of narcissism represents the worst of both worlds. It diminishes the old idea that it can be good to devote oneself to something external, to something important, while also nurturing a warped form of individualism that is built on notions of fragility, fear of freedom, and psychic enslavement to the validation of officialdom and of others.

This is the culture Meghan and Harry now symbolise. Their idea of public service is a fleeting one, involving little more than occasionally giving talks at a women’s shelter or doing a Spotify chat with ‘social changers’. And their sense of self is both an obsessive and a fragile one – witness their focus on wellbeing and mental health and, in Meghan’s words, ‘sharing our pain’. The queen could not be more different. Her public service has been full-on, lifelong, unflinching; and her selfhood is of the confident, stoic variety. These are the moral and social clashes swirling around Megxit. I might be a **********, but in this spat I’m very much Team Queen."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chas has 2 sons in a verbal war with each other.  He knows the jealousy between the two will not heal any time soon — he has read plenty of Shakespeare and Greek tragedies.  #1 son will be king one day. #2 son has difficulty finding a job and has a most unpleasant personality. Chas wants #2 son to stay out of the UK so #1 son can rule peacefully.  Chas was hoping for Africa but #2’s wifey did not want that.  The charity can provide respectable ‘employment’ for #2 son and his wife. They can feel part of the UK, too.  Faux employment for the faux {Disney} king 

The US has numerous charities that serve the same function as Chas’.  Why would we want another one, especially with our dollars stretched thin?  Why is Chas shilling for pounds on our side of the pond?  Hmmmm.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?



She looks really creepy to me  Something about those eyes.


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> She looks really creepy to me  Something about those eyes.



If she isn't careful she is going to be creeping into Jocelyn Wildenstein territory.
Whatever happens, we'll be here for it


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> If she isn't careful she is going to be creeping into Jocelyn Wildenstein territory.
> Whatever happens, we'll be here for it



Very possible, she already is into Kim K territory.


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> If she isn't careful she is going to be creeping into Jocelyn Wildenstein territory.
> Whatever happens, we'll be here for it



She's slowly morphing already


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> If she isn't careful she is going to be creeping into Jocelyn Wildenstein territory.
> Whatever happens, we'll be here for it



Honestly, I thought the same thing! Wildenstein! And Meghan's face looks recently plumped up, smooth as a windshield--I thought it wasn't advised to get botox/fillers while pregnant, let alone if you're in a geriatric pregnancy. And maybe she doesn't have a death grip on Harry because she needs her hands free to keep the pillow bump from shifting in the unstructured lemon dress. Harry looks terrible, maybe he's lost because Meghan can't dig her nails into him to signal what he's supposed to do, like a rider gives a horse commands via leg pressures.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Honestly, I thought the same thing! Wildenstein! And Meghan's face looks recently plumped up, smooth as a windshield--I thought it wasn't advised to get botox/fillers while pregnant, let alone if you're in a geriatric pregnancy. And maybe she doesn't have a death grip on Harry because she needs her hands free to keep the pillow bump from shifting in the unstructured lemon dress. Harry looks terrible, maybe he's lost because Meghan can't dig her nails into him to signal what he's supposed to do, like a rider gives a horse commands via leg pressures.



To my eye, his face looks plumper. He kinda looks like he is checking the script as he looks down. Odd. In any case, it’s one more video where they do not get rave reviews, unlike W&K. They truly lack the _happiness_ gift. Perhaps they really don’t have anything of importance to say. 90 minutes?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Honestly, I thought the same thing! Wildenstein! And Meghan's face looks recently plumped up, smooth as a windshield--I thought it wasn't advised to get botox/fillers while pregnant, let alone if you're in a geriatric pregnancy. And maybe she doesn't have a death grip on Harry because she needs her hands free to keep the pillow bump from shifting in the unstructured lemon dress. Harry looks terrible, maybe he's lost because Meghan can't dig her nails into him to signal what he's supposed to do, like a rider gives a horse commands via leg pressures.


Could she be taking hormones to stimulate lactation? If the child is being born via surrogacy. 

For lovers of the green dress, here is a pic from the article bellow. A victorious face surrounded by grieving faces. Let's see who wins on March 7. 











						ROBERT HARDMAN: Prepare for a lesson in what duty looks like
					

ROBERT HARDMAN: We haven't had such a bumper day of royal binge-watching since, well, that glorious Saturday in 2018 when Harry and Meghan walked out in to the Windsor sunshine.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Very possible, she already is into Kim K territory.



The hair is definitely Stevie from Schitt’s Creek (my favorite show).


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?



Perhaps she read that people suspected she used a surrogate to deliver archie, since she never seemed to gain weight in her face, even when she was supposedly two days postpartum. 

She is reading all of the criticism and analyses and trying to “fix” all of her past mistakes with this faux pregnancy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

If she keeps messing with her face she will never be able to replicate that s#!t eating grin again


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> Could she be taking hormones to stimulate lactation? If the child is being born via surrogacy.



There’s no way she is going to breastfeed! She doesn’t want to have deflated breasts and she’s not maternal.


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> There’s no way she is going to breastfeed! *She doesn’t want to have deflated breasts* and she’s not maternal.



She could always have those puppies (over)re-inflated and go the Big Ang route
(I really liked Ang..... she owned her ish RIP)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Maybe the PT announcement on Thursday was done to show that it is NOT headed by the Harkles ? At least today...


Or to prevent H&MM from starting a foundation called PT by registering it in the USA as the grifters are known to steal and take credit for other people's ideas.


----------



## Chanbal

Straight-Laced said:


> Excellent comment and analysis of 'service V narcissism' from Brendan O'Neill, editor of Spiked online (UK)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
> Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.*
> 
> "So Harry and Meghan are out. The Prince and Princess of Woke are formally splitting from the monarchy. The Soft Megxit of 2020 – when the painfully PC pair flounced off to North America with the intention of becoming ‘financially independent’ – has become a Hard Megxit. The queen has decreed that Harry and Meghan’s antics are incompatible with ‘the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service’ and therefore they have to hand back all their royal patronages. This is about as close to saying ‘bugger off’ as the famously restrained queen will ever get.
> 
> What’s this all about? What does Megxit tell us about the world, if anything? Listening to the Meghan-loving chattering classes you’d be forgiven for thinking the poor dear and her loving husband were driven out of this godforsaken country by racism. Naturally, these people wilfully overlook that the vast majority of Britons took Meghan to their hearts when she got hitched to Harry, and only tired of her when she started wagging her manicured fingers at us about everything from feminism to climate change. Your everyday Brit doesn’t take kindly to being talked down to by right-on aristocrats who then get on a private jet to wing it to Elton John’s swanky pad in the South of France or to some barefoot, ******** eco-gathering of the super-rich.
> 
> Others blame it all on the press. Our horrible, rapacious press, criticising Meghan day in, day out. They even cheer when Harry and Meghan launch legal cases against the media for saying rude or revealing things about them. It is testament to the middle classes’ turn against press freedom – which, let’s not forget, was won for us by people who dissed royalty, by the likes of the 18th-century prince-mocker John Wilkes – that they will cheerfully support two arrogant royals’ crusade against the papers. ‘Whatever you think of Harry and Meghan, their media critics are far worse’, says Marina Hyde at the _Guardian_. It’s not surprising that an aristocrat like Hyde would defend two aristocratic bores from the rabble that is the redtop press, but it’s pretty shocking the _Guardian_ won’t stand up for press freedom against the Sussexes’ constant barbs and suing.
> 
> All these narratives tell us more about the narrators than they do about the reality of Megxit. They confirm the snobbery of the woke set, who are more than happy to take the side of a privileged pair of virtue-signallers over what they view as the irredeemably prejudiced British masses. And they confirm the ongoing, increasingly irrational hostility of the posh against the ‘low-rent’ press, which is now blamed for every ill in society. Meghan’s sadness? Our dumbed-down culture? Sexism? Far-right activism? Blame it on the tabloids. It’s the _Sun_ wot did it.
> 
> ​
> 
> The truth, as always, is more complex. What the great Harry and Meghan flounce really demonstrates is the incompatibility of the modern culture of narcissism with the old-world ideals of duty, loyalty and service. Meghan felt trapped in the royal family not because Princess Michael once wore a colonial-era brooch or because it is _so hard_ to spend your days chilling in palaces, but because royal life runs so counter to the shallower, selfie-era, virtue-advertising outlook that Meghan has come to embody over the past couple of years. Megxit is fundamentally a battle between the narcissism of the 21st century and the more stoic, giving culture of the past.
> 
> 
> This is where the Windsors’ and the Sussexes’ spat over ‘service’ is interesting. The queen firmly insisted that Harry and Meghan’s ‘independent’ globe-trotting did not sit comfortably with a ‘life of public service’. In the passive-aggressive manner of a certain type of Californian, Meghan and Harry fired back that everyone can do some ‘service’. ‘We can all have a life of service. Service is universal’, they said.
> 
> They don’t know what service means. Here’s the difference: the Meghans of this world primarily serve themselves, always seeking new opportunities for self-expression, virtuous preening, ‘emotional growth’. The queen, in contrast, serves the crown. She has _negated_ the self. She suppresses her self-expression, her political views and her emotions, to the end of submitting to something bigger than herself: the crown, the monarchy, the constitution. Now, we can discuss whether the crown is good or bad – I’m a **********, so I’m not a fan. But it is clear that Meghan and Elizabeth II have unbridgeably different understandings of ‘service’. Meghan’s idea of service always involves her expressing herself and revealing herself and reminding us how virtuous she is; the queen’s idea of service is to _hide_ the self, to fold it into a larger, apparently more important project. The queen is about service, Meghan is about self-service.
> 
> 
> This is clear from how Harry and Meghan talk about the monarchy as if it were some kind of hot-desking workspace where you might pick up a few new skills before ‘moving on’. Last year they said they wanted to ‘make a transition’ and ‘carve out a progressive new role within this institution’, as if they were media consultants and the monarchy a mere brand. They said they wanted to ‘continue to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen’, as if the queen were a fashion house and they were Jameela Jamil-style celebs providing it with a dash of BS ‘social change’. Again and again, they show that they have a very weak grip on the ideas of duty and loyalty, of _giving things up_ for a greater good.
> 
> The cult of narcissism is widespread today. We are encouraged to obsess over our bodies and our image, to work out exactly where we fit on the infinite list of made-up genders, to obsess over our mental wellbeing, to hide in a ‘safe space’ in order to protect our sacrosanct self-esteem from any form of insult or inquiry. And of course this all generates a very flimsy sense of self – not the robust selfhood of 19th-century liberalism, but the fragile, easily injured selfhood of the social-media era, in which we require constant validation and protection from rowdy speech or else we will feel ‘erased’.
> 
> So in inviting us to turn away from big, sacrifice-demanding national or social projects, and encouraging us instead to obsess over the self, the culture of narcissism represents the worst of both worlds. It diminishes the old idea that it can be good to devote oneself to something external, to something important, while also nurturing a warped form of individualism that is built on notions of fragility, fear of freedom, and psychic enslavement to the validation of officialdom and of others.
> 
> This is the culture Meghan and Harry now symbolise. Their idea of public service is a fleeting one, involving little more than occasionally giving talks at a women’s shelter or doing a Spotify chat with ‘social changers’. And their sense of self is both an obsessive and a fragile one – witness their focus on wellbeing and mental health and, in Meghan’s words, ‘sharing our pain’. The queen could not be more different. Her public service has been full-on, lifelong, unflinching; and her selfhood is of the confident, stoic variety. These are the moral and social clashes swirling around Megxit. I might be a **********, but in this spat I’m very much Team Queen."


This article has several great statements, but this sentence needs to be highlighted:
"_The queen is about service, Meghan is about self-service._"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 4999238



What exactly is she smiling at?  She looks like the biggest nutcase at the looney bin!


----------



## purseinsanity

Sigh.  Their daily shenanigans are utterly exhausting to me...and I don’t even know them personally (thank GOD!).  I can’t only imagine how exhausting it must be at 94 or 99 years old to deal with their horse crap, even if it is excreted from your own blood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For lovers of the green dress, here is a pic from the article bellow. A victorious face surrounded by grieving faces. Let's see who wins on March 7.
> 
> View attachment 4999238



This gets me every time. A whole family obviously in emotional turmoil, and the lone a*shole sitting there grinning her little face off.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> so they would not be royals but would be nobility (like Dianas family)?


Exactly


----------



## gelbergirl

Team Monarch <-------


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> If she keeps messing with her face she will never be able to replicate that s#!t eating grin again


Love it!


----------



## drifter

She looks scary to me, something about the super dark eye makeup, hair all over her face, creepy facial expressions (fillers or Botox).  To me, her styling is just lacking the long nails to morph into the witch on the cover of Roald Dahl's Witches.  She used to be so much prettier when she was in the BRF, before Megxit.  Harry looks like someone who doesn't use a comb.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

drifter said:


> She used to be so much prettier when she was in the BRF, before Megxit.



I am quite confused by her new style, because not only does it differ from her Duchess costume (I always thought she was just trying on her royal wardrobe for fit, the clothes often wore her) but it seems to be completely different from her pre-Harry style as well.


----------



## 1LV

Regarding the change in MM’s face -  I blew up like a balloon in the latter stage of my pregnancies.  Maybe that’s it for her.  Some women glow.  Obviously not so (for whatever reason) for the Megster and I.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Well, she finally broke me.  I had to unfollow Elizabeth Holmes after this. How can she seriously type this after all the “sources” MM uses daily to drop info?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> What exactly is she smiling at?  She looks like the biggest nutcase at the looney bin!


I don't risk guessing, I'm not a body language expert. If you would like learning about body language, the article below has a couple of examples. I'm stuck on the "Enthusiastic Gesture" and "Demure Pose", I would never have guessed those. Though, I did very well on the "Admiring Gaze".  











						'US style' Prince Harry while 'demure' Meghan Markle
					

In a clip released yesterday to promote their Spotify podcast, the Duke of Sussex, 36, took a 'more dominant role' while his wife Meghan Markle, 39, appeared 'demure', Judi James told FEMAIL




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I don't risk guessing, I'm not a body language expert. If you would like learning about body language, the article below has a couple of examples. I'm stuck on the "Enthusiastic Gesture" and "Demure Pose", I would never have guessed those. Though, I did very well on the "Admiring Gaze".
> 
> View attachment 4999516
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'US style' Prince Harry while 'demure' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> In a clip released yesterday to promote their Spotify podcast, the Duke of Sussex, 36, took a 'more dominant role' while his wife Meghan Markle, 39, appeared 'demure', Judi James told FEMAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That “admiring gaze” looks scary AF


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Maybe the PT announcement on Thursday was done to show that it is NOT headed by the Harkles ? At least today...


I am liking my idea more ... The PT announcement was made LAST WEEK when so much else was going on including Kim & Kanye

Normally, you would wait for a calm week, so your announcement gets some traction in the press

This story never made it to my news feed, I would NEVER had known if it were not for the TEAM WORK here !!!  Applause for all the sleuthing 

PS I would insert he applause emoji if had it , sorry


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> What exactly is she smiling at?  She looks like the biggest nutcase at the looney bin!


I wonder if she had one of those church giggle fits.....you know when you just want to laugh inappropriately....there was a scene like that at a funeral in Seinfeld


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Marchioness of Bath by any chance?
> View attachment 4998825


Beautiful inside and out and a true lady someone could learn a lot from her


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> I don't risk guessing, I'm not a body language expert. If you would like learning about body language, the article below has a couple of examples. I'm stuck on the "Enthusiastic Gesture" and "Demure Pose", I would never have guessed those. Though, I did very well on the "Admiring Gaze".
> 
> View attachment 4999516
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'US style' Prince Harry while 'demure' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> In a clip released yesterday to promote their Spotify podcast, the Duke of Sussex, 36, took a 'more dominant role' while his wife Meghan Markle, 39, appeared 'demure', Judi James told FEMAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


“Dominant alpha role?!” Ha ha  surely they must have meant to put that under M’s photo?


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> That “admiring gaze” looks scary AF



She is a control freak. Her eyes were boring into his head while she was transmitting "Do it exactly like we rehearsed. Now look up. Now look at me. Now lower your eyes but keep looking concerned. Good. Good."


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, she finally broke me.  I had to unfollow Elizabeth Holmes after this. How can she seriously type this after all the “sources” MM uses daily to drop info?
> 
> View attachment 4999494


Why doesn't she ask Harry "what would Diana make of all of this?", seeing as how HE'S the one that's turned his back on his family?  Or is she implying Diana would be thrilled at Harry trying to take down the BRF, seeing as how there was no love lost there?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I don't risk guessing, I'm not a body language expert. If you would like learning about body language, the article below has a couple of examples. I'm stuck on the "Enthusiastic Gesture" and "Demure Pose", I would never have guessed those. Though, I did very well on the "Admiring Gaze".
> 
> View attachment 4999516
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'US style' Prince Harry while 'demure' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> In a clip released yesterday to promote their Spotify podcast, the Duke of Sussex, 36, took a 'more dominant role' while his wife Meghan Markle, 39, appeared 'demure', Judi James told FEMAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don't know...that "admiring gaze" looks more like how my Malamute would stalk an unsuspecting bird or bunny!

And "Dominant Alpha Role"?  He's slumped over.    What body language "expert" came up with these LOL?


----------



## sdkitty

wow, Meghan is a saint for wearing a $2,000 dress twice








						Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Announcement Dress Conveyed a "Powerful Message" About Sustainability
					

The Carolina Herrera creative director explained that promoting sustainability was top of mind for the duchess.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know...that "admiring gaze" looks more like how my Malamute would stalk an unsuspecting bird or bunny!



I love malamutes. Your dog is adorable.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I love malamutes. Your dog is adorable.


Thank you!!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wow, Meghan is a saint for wearing a $2,000 dress twice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Announcement Dress Conveyed a "Powerful Message" About Sustainability
> 
> 
> The Carolina Herrera creative director explained that promoting sustainability was top of mind for the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



So ridiculous. Almost as bad as the one saying wearing it was a tribute to Archie. Who thinks up this crap?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> I don't risk guessing, I'm not a body language expert. If you would like learning about body language, the article below has a couple of examples. I'm stuck on the "Enthusiastic Gesture" and "Demure Pose", I would never have guessed those. Though, I did very well on the "Admiring Gaze".
> 
> View attachment 4999516
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'US style' Prince Harry while 'demure' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> In a clip released yesterday to promote their Spotify podcast, the Duke of Sussex, 36, took a 'more dominant role' while his wife Meghan Markle, 39, appeared 'demure', Judi James told FEMAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


First pic - Meghan, “you’re doing good, keep going”.
Second pic - Meghan, in exasperation, “well, you tried”


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So ridiculous. Almost as bad as the one saying wearing it was a tribute to Archie. Who thinks up this crap?


can you imagine?  we "regular" people who wear our clothing many times and pay much less for them, are supposed to be impressed by her wearing a dress twice?  this is just crazy.  who do they think they're kidding?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The US has numerous charities that serve the same function as Chas’.  Why would we want another one, especially with our dollars stretched thin?  Why is Chas shilling for pounds on our side of the pond?  Hmmmm.


I would think that Charles's Trust is reputable, but unfortunately, there are many charities, foundation... that are questionable. Articles like the on below about a church/foundation, apparently in the Montecito area, are making me very uncomfortable. We must check all these charities, foundations... before writing a check or using a cc, particularly now that our dollars are stretched so thin.  









						Katy Perry's preacher father Keith flashes a massive cross necklace
					

Keith and his wife Mary were revealed to have spent 96% of donations to their charity on expenses including 'retreats' at exclusive Marriott Hotels, flights, meals and cars, charity filings reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine?  we "regular" people who wear our clothing many times and pay much less for them, are supposed to be impressed by her wearing a dress twice?  this is just crazy.  who do they think they're kidding?



Hell, I've got a pair of ordinary sweatpants I've been wearing at least once a week since Covid started. Give me a friggin' Nobel Prize for conservation of resources. I'll show Meghan how it's done!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would think that Charles's Trust is reputable, but unfortunately, there are many charities, foundation... that are questionable. Articles like the on below about a church/foundation, apparently in the Montecito area, are making me very uncomfortable. We must check all these charities, foundations... before writing a check or using a cc, particularly now that our dollars are stretched so thin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katy Perry's preacher father Keith flashes a massive cross necklace
> 
> 
> Keith and his wife Mary were revealed to have spent 96% of donations to their charity on expenses including 'retreats' at exclusive Marriott Hotels, flights, meals and cars, charity filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


couple of grifters...if katy has any sense she would be embarassed to have them as parents


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> Hell, I've got a pair of ordinary sweatpants I've been wearing at least once a week since Covid started. Give me a friggin' Nobel Prize for conservation of resources. I'll show Meghan how it's done!



We will be walking to that podium together and splitting that cash. I am in a flannel shirt that has lost a button from overuse.  Once a week, you say? rookie!!!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hell, I've got a pair of ordinary sweatpants I've been wearing at least once a week since Covid started. Give me a friggin' Nobel Prize for conservation of resources. I'll show Meghan how it's done!


how about those of us who buy preowned bags?  I've even purchased some preloved clothing at the consignment store.....guess I'm a saint


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> wow, Meghan is a saint for wearing a $2,000 dress twice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Announcement Dress Conveyed a "Powerful Message" About Sustainability
> 
> 
> The Carolina Herrera creative director explained that promoting sustainability was top of mind for the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



It’s a custom dress. She is lying on the grass in it. _Any_ $20 dress would have accomplished the same effect.
The ego of these two. Gruesome twosome, indeed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The (fake) response made me laugh.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> how about those of us who buy preowned bags?  I've even purchased some preloved clothing at the consignment store.....guess I'm a saint



So much fiber ends up in landfills each year because most people cannot be bothered to take their old clothing to recycling centers. Yet here we are being told we should be impressed when someone famous wears an overpriced outfit twice. There is such a disconnect.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So much fiber ends up in landfills each year because most people cannot be bothered to take their old clothing to recycling centers. Yet we are being told we should be impressed when someone famous wears an overpriced outfit twice. There is such a disconnect.


I mostly donate my old clothing....if they can't sell it hopefully they will give it to someone in need.  Again, I guess I'm a saint


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s a custom dress. She is lying on the grass in it. _Any_ $20 dress would have accomplished the same effect.
> The ego of these two. Gruesome twosome, indeed.



She wanted to show the little people that even though she wears much more expensive clothes than they do, she is still soooo casual and down to earth. We should be grateful Meghan used that long dress to cover up her feet. We didn't need to see both of them lolling barefoot in the grass.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I mostly donate my old clothing....if they can't sell it hopefully they will give it to someone in need.  Again, I guess I'm a saint



Me too. For clothes that aren't good enough to donate, my local landfill has a dumpster-sized recycling bin specifically for fiber. I save up any worn out clothes, sheets, towels, etc. in a bag and every few months drive it out there.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Me too. For clothes that aren't good enough to donate, my local landfill has a dumpster-sized recycling bin specifically for fiber. I save up any worn out clothes, sheets, towels, etc. in a bag and every few months drive it out there.


you're good
for sheets and towels if I don't donate I sometimes use as rags....well, more the towels I guess but anyway I rarely throw any textiles away


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She wanted to show the little people that even though she wears much more expensive clothes than they do, she is still soooo casual and down to earth. We should be grateful Meghan used that long dress to cover up her feet. We didn't need to see both of them lolling barefoot in the grass.


ha...doesn't she have bunions?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ha...doesn't she have bunions?



Shhhh. Her feet are swollen from the pregnancy (like her face).


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Shhhh. Her feet are swollen from the pregnancy (like her face).


talk about her swollen face - I didn't take the time to look at the new video of her in the yellow dress and now with this thread being so busy I can't find it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> That “admiring gaze” looks scary AF


haha, now that you mention it looks more like a 'killing gaze'.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Hell, I've got a pair of ordinary sweatpants I've been wearing at least once a week since Covid started. Give me a friggin' Nobel Prize for conservation of resources. I'll show Meghan how it's done!





CobaltBlu said:


> We will be walking to that podium together and splitting that cash. I am in a flannel shirt that has lost a button from overuse.  Once a week, you say? rookie!!!





sdkitty said:


> how about those of us who buy preowned bags?  I've even purchased some preloved clothing at the consignment store.....guess I'm a saint



I make a motion that a monument on the National Mall be built and dedicated to your sustainability habits. Don't tell Meghan or she'll demand that it be built in her honor for having worn her lemon dress   custom made Herrera dress not once but TWICE. Wearing a couture dress more than once is THE NEW WOKE. (revision made from kind correction  )


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know...that "admiring gaze" looks more like how my Malamute would stalk an unsuspecting bird or bunny!
> 
> And "Dominant Alpha Role"?  He's slumped over.    What body language "expert" came up with these LOL?


I know, I was wrong, it's not an admiring gaze. Well it looks like we can't trust on the accuracy of this language expert. The "Dominant Alpha Role" made me think that she was possibly trying to encourage Harry, he looks like he needs a lot of help.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> haha, now that you mention it looks more like a 'killing gaze'.



Right? There's something that reminds me of Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction about it.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I have to laugh that the only demographic in the poll that believes Harry should not be removed from the line of succession are those aged 18–24. Not an age known for the best decision-making but certainly right there relating to Harry rebelling from his family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I make a motion that a monument on the National Mall be built and dedicated to your sustainability habits. Don't tell Meghan or she'll demand that it be built in her honor for having worn the lemon dress not once, but TWICE. Wearing a $3,490 dress more than once is THE NEW WOKE.



Isn’t the lemon dress new?
The Herrera was custom made during Archie’s pregnancy, right?
Maybe both are “old”?  I cannot keep up


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Right? There's something that reminds me of Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction about it.


Right on target!


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Me too. For clothes that aren't good enough to donate, my local landfill has a dumpster-sized recycling bin specifically for fiber. I save up any worn out clothes, sheets, towels, etc. in a bag and every few months drive it out there.


Another option, especially for towels is an animal shelter, have donated old blankets and towels for years.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> wow, Meghan is a saint for wearing a $2,000 dress twice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Announcement Dress Conveyed a "Powerful Message" About Sustainability
> 
> 
> The Carolina Herrera creative director explained that promoting sustainability was top of mind for the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I regret to have clicked on the article.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t the lemon dress new?
> The Herrera was custom made during Archie’s pregnancy, right?
> Maybe both are “old”?  I cannot keep up



I must have gotten confused which dress she wore TWICE. If the OdlR lemon is new, my bad. Correction made, thanks!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I would think that Charles's Trust is reputable, but unfortunately, there are many charities, foundation... that are questionable. Articles like the on below about a church/foundation, apparently in the Montecito area, are making me very uncomfortable. We must check all these charities, foundations... before writing a check or using a cc, particularly now that our dollars are stretched so thin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katy Perry's preacher father Keith flashes a massive cross necklace
> 
> 
> Keith and his wife Mary were revealed to have spent 96% of donations to their charity on expenses including 'retreats' at exclusive Marriott Hotels, flights, meals and cars, charity filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's always these "holier than thou" a-holes that are the most hypocritical, corrupt people ever.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I have to laugh that the only demographic in the poll that believes Harry should not be removed from the line of succession are those aged 18–24. Not an age known for the best decision-making but certainly right there relating to Harry rebelling from his family.



Let me guess. The 18-24 yr olds who voted that Harry not be removed from line of succession are people who've been given everything by their families, criticize some of their actions, want to move away from them, yet still sponge as much money from them as they can while whining about how hard their lives are.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is the full story on the lemon dress event, MM&H aim at "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> View attachment 4998944
> 
> 
> *PREGNANT Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were today seen for the first time since being stripped of their Royal titles as they appeared at an "inspiring" Spotify online event.*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex today gushed over sharing vulnerabilities as they promoted their new podcast series.
> 
> They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.
> 
> The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.
> 
> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."
> 
> They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.
> 
> The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.
> 
> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."
> 
> Pregnant Meghan, 39, stunned in a £2,478 Oscar de la Renta for the online video while sitting close to her husband on a couch.
> 
> Harry, 36, appeared to be dressed casually for the appearance, wearing a simple white collared shirt and trousers.
> 
> The full story about the lemons!


Meghan "stunned"?  of course
I don't know who the "A-listers" are (except for Beiber).  who is their target demographic?


----------



## purseinsanity

I read (unfortunately clicked on the link) as that dress being given to her 2 years ago and now worn.  Is that right?  WTF cares?  Kate re-wears her clothes constantly, and MM does it once and is now a saint?    Jeez, then I should be Mother Purseinsanity.  The writer should see how many "old" clothes I still have unworn in my closet.  I guess that somehow makes me Sustainable, instead of an idiot hoarder?


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I must have gotten confused which dress she wore TWICE. If the OdlR lemon is new, my bad. Correction made, thanks!



It could be both dresses are ‘old’ re-wears, so you are still correct. With MM’s clothes, one never knows due to the similar shapes, similar styles.

ETA:  or the dresses were purchased years ago and never worn.  Either way it was a mistake to emphasize the age and number of wears of the dresses. If old and never worn, a huge waste of money. If old and only worn once, huge waste of money.  It’s a lose-lose situation. 

The poll — the young are the disrupters. They don’t really care about the consequences. Yes, your assessment is spot on!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Here is the full story on the lemon dress event, MM&H aim at "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> View attachment 4998944
> 
> 
> *PREGNANT Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were today seen for the first time since being stripped of their Royal titles as they appeared at an "inspiring" Spotify online event.*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex today gushed over sharing vulnerabilities as they promoted their new podcast series.
> 
> They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.
> 
> The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.
> 
> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."
> 
> They appeared alongside other A-listers including Justin Bieber, J Balvin, Brené Brown and Blackpink to feature during today’s the #SpotifyStreamOn event.
> 
> The couple - who have signed multi-million pound deals with Spotify and Netflix - said they wanted to "elevate voices" that weren't being heard.
> 
> In the clip, the former actress said they wanted to use their Archewell Audio podcast to "drive powerful conversation" with Prince Harry adding they hoped to "inspire, challenge and educate."
> 
> Meghan then tells the camera: "We created Archewell Audio to make sure we can elevate voices that maybe aren't being heard."
> 
> Harry then adds: "The biggest part of this is creating a community where you can share and encourage everybody else to share their vulnerabilities in a safe place."
> 
> Pregnant Meghan, 39, stunned in a £2,478 Oscar de la Renta for the online video while sitting close to her husband on a couch.
> 
> Harry, 36, appeared to be dressed casually for the appearance, wearing a simple white collared shirt and trousers.
> 
> The full story about the lemons!


Interesting how the hacks (bad journos) seem to get it wrong a lot these days, they were stripped of patronages, not titles. The difference is huge


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> The (fake) response made me laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4999580


He looks like he's been drugged or hypnotized by the evil stare of the Wicked Witch of Montecito.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Interesting how the hacks (bad journos) seem to get it wrong a lot these days, they were stripped of patronages, not titles. The difference is huge


They were stripped of all honorary titles, but like you said, some journalists are too stupid to understand the difference.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Let me guess. The 18-24 yr olds who voted that Harry not be removed from line of succession are people who've been given everything by their families, criticize some of their actions, want to move away from them, yet still sponge as much money from them as they can while whining about how hard their lives are.



Not cool to gen Z: Harry, side parts, and smiley emojis.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this the Botticelli-inspired art that the dress represents?











						Oscar de la Renta Citrus Primavera Ruffle-Hem Shift Dress
					

Get free shipping and returns on Oscar de la Renta Citrus Primavera Ruffle-Hem Shift Dress at Saks Fifth Avenue. Browse luxury Oscar de la Renta Florals & Prints and other new arrivals.




					www.saksfifthavenue.com


----------



## Lodpah

Straight-Laced said:


> Excellent comment and analysis of 'service V narcissism' from Brendan O'Neill, editor of Spiked online (UK)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
> Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.*
> 
> "So Harry and Meghan are out. The Prince and Princess of Woke are formally splitting from the monarchy. The Soft Megxit of 2020 – when the painfully PC pair flounced off to North America with the intention of becoming ‘financially independent’ – has become a Hard Megxit. The queen has decreed that Harry and Meghan’s antics are incompatible with ‘the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service’ and therefore they have to hand back all their royal patronages. This is about as close to saying ‘bugger off’ as the famously restrained queen will ever get.
> 
> What’s this all about? What does Megxit tell us about the world, if anything? Listening to the Meghan-loving chattering classes you’d be forgiven for thinking the poor dear and her loving husband were driven out of this godforsaken country by racism. Naturally, these people wilfully overlook that the vast majority of Britons took Meghan to their hearts when she got hitched to Harry, and only tired of her when she started wagging her manicured fingers at us about everything from feminism to climate change. Your everyday Brit doesn’t take kindly to being talked down to by right-on aristocrats who then get on a private jet to wing it to Elton John’s swanky pad in the South of France or to some barefoot, ******** eco-gathering of the super-rich.
> 
> Others blame it all on the press. Our horrible, rapacious press, criticising Meghan day in, day out. They even cheer when Harry and Meghan launch legal cases against the media for saying rude or revealing things about them. It is testament to the middle classes’ turn against press freedom – which, let’s not forget, was won for us by people who dissed royalty, by the likes of the 18th-century prince-mocker John Wilkes – that they will cheerfully support two arrogant royals’ crusade against the papers. ‘Whatever you think of Harry and Meghan, their media critics are far worse’, says Marina Hyde at the _Guardian_. It’s not surprising that an aristocrat like Hyde would defend two aristocratic bores from the rabble that is the redtop press, but it’s pretty shocking the _Guardian_ won’t stand up for press freedom against the Sussexes’ constant barbs and suing.
> 
> All these narratives tell us more about the narrators than they do about the reality of Megxit. They confirm the snobbery of the woke set, who are more than happy to take the side of a privileged pair of virtue-signallers over what they view as the irredeemably prejudiced British masses. And they confirm the ongoing, increasingly irrational hostility of the posh against the ‘low-rent’ press, which is now blamed for every ill in society. Meghan’s sadness? Our dumbed-down culture? Sexism? Far-right activism? Blame it on the tabloids. It’s the _Sun_ wot did it.
> 
> ​
> 
> The truth, as always, is more complex. What the great Harry and Meghan flounce really demonstrates is the incompatibility of the modern culture of narcissism with the old-world ideals of duty, loyalty and service. Meghan felt trapped in the royal family not because Princess Michael once wore a colonial-era brooch or because it is _so hard_ to spend your days chilling in palaces, but because royal life runs so counter to the shallower, selfie-era, virtue-advertising outlook that Meghan has come to embody over the past couple of years. Megxit is fundamentally a battle between the narcissism of the 21st century and the more stoic, giving culture of the past.
> 
> 
> This is where the Windsors’ and the Sussexes’ spat over ‘service’ is interesting. The queen firmly insisted that Harry and Meghan’s ‘independent’ globe-trotting did not sit comfortably with a ‘life of public service’. In the passive-aggressive manner of a certain type of Californian, Meghan and Harry fired back that everyone can do some ‘service’. ‘We can all have a life of service. Service is universal’, they said.
> 
> They don’t know what service means. Here’s the difference: the Meghans of this world primarily serve themselves, always seeking new opportunities for self-expression, virtuous preening, ‘emotional growth’. The queen, in contrast, serves the crown. She has _negated_ the self. She suppresses her self-expression, her political views and her emotions, to the end of submitting to something bigger than herself: the crown, the monarchy, the constitution. Now, we can discuss whether the crown is good or bad – I’m a **********, so I’m not a fan. But it is clear that Meghan and Elizabeth II have unbridgeably different understandings of ‘service’. Meghan’s idea of service always involves her expressing herself and revealing herself and reminding us how virtuous she is; the queen’s idea of service is to _hide_ the self, to fold it into a larger, apparently more important project. The queen is about service, Meghan is about self-service.
> 
> 
> This is clear from how Harry and Meghan talk about the monarchy as if it were some kind of hot-desking workspace where you might pick up a few new skills before ‘moving on’. Last year they said they wanted to ‘make a transition’ and ‘carve out a progressive new role within this institution’, as if they were media consultants and the monarchy a mere brand. They said they wanted to ‘continue to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen’, as if the queen were a fashion house and they were Jameela Jamil-style celebs providing it with a dash of BS ‘social change’. Again and again, they show that they have a very weak grip on the ideas of duty and loyalty, of _giving things up_ for a greater good.
> 
> The cult of narcissism is widespread today. We are encouraged to obsess over our bodies and our image, to work out exactly where we fit on the infinite list of made-up genders, to obsess over our mental wellbeing, to hide in a ‘safe space’ in order to protect our sacrosanct self-esteem from any form of insult or inquiry. And of course this all generates a very flimsy sense of self – not the robust selfhood of 19th-century liberalism, but the fragile, easily injured selfhood of the social-media era, in which we require constant validation and protection from rowdy speech or else we will feel ‘erased’.
> 
> So in inviting us to turn away from big, sacrifice-demanding national or social projects, and encouraging us instead to obsess over the self, the culture of narcissism represents the worst of both worlds. It diminishes the old idea that it can be good to devote oneself to something external, to something important, while also nurturing a warped form of individualism that is built on notions of fragility, fear of freedom, and psychic enslavement to the validation of officialdom and of others.
> 
> This is the culture Meghan and Harry now symbolise. Their idea of public service is a fleeting one, involving little more than occasionally giving talks at a women’s shelter or doing a Spotify chat with ‘social changers’. And their sense of self is both an obsessive and a fragile one – witness their focus on wellbeing and mental health and, in Meghan’s words, ‘sharing our pain’. The queen could not be more different. Her public service has been full-on, lifelong, unflinching; and her selfhood is of the confident, stoic variety. These are the moral and social clashes swirling around Megxit. I might be a **********, but in this spat I’m very much Team Queen."


Wow! Very well written.


----------



## mia55

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know...that "admiring gaze" looks more like how my Malamute would stalk an unsuspecting bird or bunny!
> 
> And "Dominant Alpha Role"?  He's slumped over.    What body language "expert" came up with these LOL?



I luv Malamute, they’re amazing breed.I’m planning to get one for my Great Pyrenees.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Another option, especially for towels is an animal shelter, have donated old blankets and towels for years.


That's a fantastic idea, I'd never of thought of that.


----------



## purseinsanity

mia55 said:


> I luv Malamute, they’re amazing breed.I’m planning to get one for my Great Pyrenees.


Thank you!  We had three Malamutes and absolutely loved them!  We almost got a Great Pyrenees as well!  We like big dogs, LOL.  As I get older though, I just really want a teeny one to carry in my purse and with a lot less hair!


----------



## Allisonfaye

BOOM!!

...but because royal life runs so counter to the shallower, selfie-era, virtue-advertising outlook that Meghan has come to embody over the past couple of years....


----------



## nyshopaholic

Damage control? (This article was actually linked under the "news" section of the New York Post online today, but it's the Post so take it from where it comes: https://knewz.com/meghan-harry-oprah-tv/?utm_source=nypost)

*Meghan and Harry 'may need to re-shoot "intimate" Oprah tell-all interview' after nasty clash with the Queen*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry reportedly may have to re-shoot their crucial tell-all TV interview with Oprah Winfrey now that Queen Elizabeth II has stripped him of his honorary military titles and the two of them of their royal patronages, The Sun reports.

After Meghan and Harry announced early last week that they would be sitting down for a TV interview with Oprah to air on CBS on March 7, Buckingham Palace moved up its announcement regarding the couple’s status as members of the royal family.

Now, should the Oprah TV interview air with the footage that was shot of Meghan and Harry before the Palace’s announcement that the couple will no longer be considered working members of the royal family, some of it will be out of date.

“When the Duke and Duchess spoke, it was never envisaged they would have their patronages taken away,” an inside source said of the interview. 

“Now, however, other than their titles, they are to have no role in royal life – a point producers know was not discussed when Winfrey spoke to them,” the source continued about how Meghan and Harry’s TV interview with Oprah may need to be reshot, according to the Mirror.

“Neither the Sussexes nor the TV crew saw the fallout of their interview leading to this. Harry and Meghan thought they would retain their roles. But things have significantly changed for them since they eagerly sat for [Oprah] Winfrey and poured their hearts out.”

Harry had reportedly held out hope that his grandmother would allow him, as a proud military veteran, to retain his cherished honorary military titles. But the Queen laid down the law with both, forbidding them the “one foot in, one foot out” approach to royal life they had hoped for when they shocked the world by announcing Megxit 13 months ago.

The couple reportedly sat for the interview on Tuesday of last week. 

At the same time that Oprah was conducting her TV interview with Harry and Meghan, the duke’s ailing 99-year-old grandfather, Prince Philip, was lying in a hospital bed in the UK.

Reports have indicated that Harry has begun self-isolating in his and Meghan’s lavish $14 million mansion in Montecito, California, in case he has to fly back to see his family should Prince Philip’s condition worsen or if he should die.

Meghan and Harry reportedly decided to sit for the TV interview with Oprah, who is a friend and neighbor of theirs, because they wanted to have the last word on Megxit, Express reports.

Staffers at Buckingham Palace are reportedly gearing up for Meghan in particular to make embarrassing disclosures about how she was treated after marrying into the royal family in 2018.

“One only has to look at the previous instalments of the tell-all interview to know these things never end up with a wholly positive experience for any party,” a source told the Mirror about the risks Meghan and Harry are taking by sitting down with Oprah for a TV interview.

“Everyone will be watching with intense interest.”

The Times reports that the royal family has been warned to run for cover once the Meghan and Harry TV interview with Oprah airs.

Last week was quite the banner week for the couple, considering that they started it off by announcing that they are expecting their second child in the coming months.


----------



## Sol Ryan

nyshopaholic said:


> Damage control? (This article was actually linked under the "news" section of the New York Post online today, but it's the Post so take it from where it comes: https://knewz.com/meghan-harry-oprah-tv/?utm_source=nypost)
> 
> *Meghan and Harry 'may need to re-shoot "intimate" Oprah tell-all interview' after nasty clash with the Queen*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry reportedly may have to re-shoot their crucial tell-all TV interview with Oprah Winfrey now that Queen Elizabeth II has stripped him of his honorary military titles and the two of them of their royal patronages, The Sun reports.
> 
> After Meghan and Harry announced early last week that they would be sitting down for a TV interview with Oprah to air on CBS on March 7, Buckingham Palace moved up its announcement regarding the couple’s status as members of the royal family.
> 
> Now, should the Oprah TV interview air with the footage that was shot of Meghan and Harry before the Palace’s announcement that the couple will no longer be considered working members of the royal family, some of it will be out of date.
> 
> “When the Duke and Duchess spoke, it was never envisaged they would have their patronages taken away,” an inside source said of the interview.
> 
> “Now, however, other than their titles, they are to have no role in royal life – a point producers know was not discussed when Winfrey spoke to them,” the source continued about how Meghan and Harry’s TV interview with Oprah may need to be reshot, according to the Mirror.
> 
> “Neither the Sussexes nor the TV crew saw the fallout of their interview leading to this. Harry and Meghan thought they would retain their roles. But things have significantly changed for them since they eagerly sat for [Oprah] Winfrey and poured their hearts out.”
> 
> Harry had reportedly held out hope that his grandmother would allow him, as a proud military veteran, to retain his cherished honorary military titles. But the Queen laid down the law with both, forbidding them the “one foot in, one foot out” approach to royal life they had hoped for when they shocked the world by announcing Megxit 13 months ago.
> 
> The couple reportedly sat for the interview on Tuesday of last week.
> 
> At the same time that Oprah was conducting her TV interview with Harry and Meghan, the duke’s ailing 99-year-old grandfather, Prince Philip, was lying in a hospital bed in the UK.
> 
> Reports have indicated that Harry has begun self-isolating in his and Meghan’s lavish $14 million mansion in Montecito, California, in case he has to fly back to see his family should Prince Philip’s condition worsen or if he should die.
> 
> Meghan and Harry reportedly decided to sit for the TV interview with Oprah, who is a friend and neighbor of theirs, because they wanted to have the last word on Megxit, Express reports.
> 
> Staffers at Buckingham Palace are reportedly gearing up for Meghan in particular to make embarrassing disclosures about how she was treated after marrying into the royal family in 2018.
> 
> “One only has to look at the previous instalments of the tell-all interview to know these things never end up with a wholly positive experience for any party,” a source told the Mirror about the risks Meghan and Harry are taking by sitting down with Oprah for a TV interview.
> 
> “Everyone will be watching with intense interest.”
> 
> The Times reports that the royal family has been warned to run for cover once the Meghan and Harry TV interview with Oprah airs.
> 
> Last week was quite the banner week for the couple, considering that they started it off by announcing that they are expecting their second child in the coming months.



Kinda throws out the story that Harry was isolating unless his part was over zoom call... its always a play for sympathy with these two...


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> ha...doesn't she have bunions?


Well she did have bad ones but judging from the scars on her feet (saw this in a post somewhere) she had surgery to fix them.


----------



## gracekelly

This really makes me question the IQ levels of the folks involved with this program. Didn’t they do the research and pay attention?  The Queen said one year ago that they couldn’t be half in and half out. Pleading and hoping wasn’t going to help them keep the patronages and the Sussex knew it. Oprah should have known it.  She’s been around the block a few time and should have recognized the signs.   If she did, and let them blather on, shame on her.  The research team did nothing to show that they had researched their subjects, and if anything bought whatever word salad they were being served. Shame on them. This really rocks the credibility of their program content  across the board for me.  They should cancel the interview. Period.


----------



## purseinsanity

nyshopaholic said:


> Damage control? (This article was actually linked under the "news" section of the New York Post online today, but it's the Post so take it from where it comes: https://knewz.com/meghan-harry-oprah-tv/?utm_source=nypost)
> 
> *Meghan and Harry 'may need to re-shoot "intimate" Oprah tell-all interview' after nasty clash with the Queen*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry reportedly may have to re-shoot their crucial tell-all TV interview with Oprah Winfrey now that Queen Elizabeth II has stripped him of his honorary military titles and the two of them of their royal patronages, The Sun reports.
> 
> After Meghan and Harry announced early last week that they would be sitting down for a TV interview with Oprah to air on CBS on March 7, Buckingham Palace moved up its announcement regarding the couple’s status as members of the royal family.
> 
> Now, should the Oprah TV interview air with the footage that was shot of Meghan and Harry before the Palace’s announcement that the couple will no longer be considered working members of the royal family, some of it will be out of date.
> 
> “When the Duke and Duchess spoke, it was never envisaged they would have their patronages taken away,” an inside source said of the interview.
> 
> “Now, however, other than their titles, they are to have no role in royal life – a point producers know was not discussed when Winfrey spoke to them,” the source continued about how Meghan and Harry’s TV interview with Oprah may need to be reshot, according to the Mirror.
> 
> “Neither the Sussexes nor the TV crew saw the fallout of their interview leading to this. Harry and Meghan thought they would retain their roles. But things have significantly changed for them since they eagerly sat for [Oprah] Winfrey and poured their hearts out.”
> 
> Harry had reportedly held out hope that his grandmother would allow him, as a proud military veteran, to retain his cherished honorary military titles. But the Queen laid down the law with both, forbidding them the “one foot in, one foot out” approach to royal life they had hoped for when they shocked the world by announcing Megxit 13 months ago.
> 
> The couple reportedly sat for the interview on Tuesday of last week.
> 
> At the same time that Oprah was conducting her TV interview with Harry and Meghan, the duke’s ailing 99-year-old grandfather, Prince Philip, was lying in a hospital bed in the UK.
> 
> Reports have indicated that Harry has begun self-isolating in his and Meghan’s lavish $14 million mansion in Montecito, California, in case he has to fly back to see his family should Prince Philip’s condition worsen or if he should die.
> 
> Meghan and Harry reportedly decided to sit for the TV interview with Oprah, who is a friend and neighbor of theirs, because they wanted to have the last word on Megxit, Express reports.
> 
> Staffers at Buckingham Palace are reportedly gearing up for Meghan in particular to make embarrassing disclosures about how she was treated after marrying into the royal family in 2018.
> 
> “One only has to look at the previous instalments of the tell-all interview to know these things never end up with a wholly positive experience for any party,” a source told the Mirror about the risks Meghan and Harry are taking by sitting down with Oprah for a TV interview.
> 
> “Everyone will be watching with intense interest.”
> 
> The Times reports that the royal family has been warned to run for cover once the Meghan and Harry TV interview with Oprah airs.
> 
> Last week was quite the banner week for the couple, considering that they started it off by announcing that they are expecting their second child in the coming months.


Such BS.  What idiots to think they could have their cake and eat it too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

It's impossible to know what to believe anymore. "May need to re-shoot" is logical speculation by the press since things have changed in the days since it was recorded.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?


*WHOA* .. she is starting to look like that woman in NYC who had PS to look like a Cat .. Jocelyn Wildenstein


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> wow, Meghan is a saint for wearing a $2,000 dress twice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Announcement Dress Conveyed a "Powerful Message" About Sustainability
> 
> 
> The Carolina Herrera creative director explained that promoting sustainability was top of mind for the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



That is exactly what I said..."Now she's a hero for wearing a custom dress that cost a month's salary twice???"


----------



## TimeToShop

Re her face. There’s no way of knowing when that drivel was filmed. Perhaps it’s from hormones in preparation for IVF - if she really is pregnant. I’d say it could be pregnancy face, softening of the features, but her hands aren’t all over her belly like when she was “pregnant” with Archie. Or maybe just too much filler from a bad dr. 

Also, Harry is supposedly self-isolating just in case something happens to PP. Something has happened, he’s in the hospital. How could H not want to go see his grandfather? Especially since H is such a “beloved” member of the family. I’m sure H is just too chicken to go back and face the music.


----------



## TC1

Isolating and then.....flying private? *gasp* that would be the only way to see Phillip in person if things took a turn. Another do as we say not as we do scenario


----------



## bag-mania

TimeToShop said:


> Also, Harry is supposedly self-isolating just in case something happens to PP. Something has happened, he’s in the hospital. *How could H not want to go see his grandfather? *Especially since H is such a “beloved” member of the family. I’m sure H is just too chicken to go back and face the music.



Because he's a self-important, easily-led idiot whose wife convinced him he doesn't need his family. They are the enemy now, that much is obvious. Just like her family.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Such BS.  What idiots to think they could have their cake and eat it too.


 Idiots named :Meghan and Harry. You know, "cake" is what you eat after word salads.


----------



## TimeToShop

bag-mania said:


> Because he's a self-important, easily-led idiot whose wife convinced him he doesn't need his family. They are the enemy now, that much is obvious. Just like her family.



I know you’re right. Still, I was kinda hoping there was some small part of him that would do the right thing.


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> I know you’re right. Still, I was kinda hoping there was some small part of him that would do the right thing.


you'd think....but I think he is pretty weak and she is the dominant one


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> This really makes me question the IQ levels of the folks involved with this program. Didn’t they do the research and pay attention?  The Queen said one year ago that they couldn’t be half in and half out. Pleading and hoping wasn’t going to help them keep the patronages and the Sussex knew it. Oprah should have known it.  She’s been around the block a few time and should have recognized the signs.   If she did, and let them blather on, shame on her.  The research team did nothing to show that they had researched their subjects, and if anything bought whatever word salad they were being served. Shame on them. This really rocks the credibility of their program content  across the board for me.  They should cancel the interview. Period.


100% agree and well said!!!  I'm still (_somewhat_) shaking my head at why Oprah would put herself in this position, other than to think that it's going to be $$$ in her pocket and H&M's pockets.  What? .. does she want a new show on CBS (_since she pretty much sold off OWN_)?  Given Meghan's propensity to play the 'victim' card and Harry's .. well, who knows what the hell is going on with him, how do they think this is really going to go over?  Some articles have said it's a "*Make or Break*" .. to me, that's for *ALL* parties here!


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> you'd think....but I think he is pretty weak and she is the dominant one


All of the body language experts have weighed in on the lemon dress podcast, MM is seated behind H - allowing him to take the primary position, new assertive hand movements from H, and the citrus outfit mit curls is designed to show a fluffier side to her 

He is trying to take a more dominant role. The Harkles have been seriously tutored on body language

A bit too much so for me ... it seems a bit labored ...


----------



## rose60610

Wouldn't surprise me if Meghan demands that Harry stay with her instead of visiting Philip. Her reasoning would be that Harry wouldn't be inheriting any more than what he already has coming if he were to visit. And she doesn't want to risk any RF member trying to talk Harry into returning to the U.K. She's that cold. They have to realize that they are personae non gratae in the U.K. and neither wants to hear any boo's from the public as Harry sprints from a chauffeured car to any front door.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> All of the body language experts have weighed in on the lemon dress podcast, MM is seated behind H - allowing him to take the primary position, new assertive hand movements from H, and the citrus outfit mit curls is designed to show a fluffier side to her
> 
> He is trying to take a more dominant role. The Harkles have been seriously tutored on body language
> 
> A bit too much so for me ... it seems a bit labored ...


SMH....it's all show biz


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> All of the body language experts have weighed in on the lemon dress podcast, MM is seated behind H - allowing him to take the primary position, new assertive hand movements from H, and the citrus outfit mit curls is designed to show a fluffier side to her
> 
> *He is trying to take a more dominant role*. The Harkles have been seriously tutored on body language
> 
> A bit too much so for me ... it seems a bit labored ...



Well, maybe the OW reshoot will give him more air time then instead of treating him as an afterthought


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC on the statement of the palace saying Harry and Meghan are much loved members of the family:

"My information behind the scenes is that they are as much loved at this point as any 27yo, wishing to live to 90, who has nothing available except sand and / or strychnine to eat. And let me tell you, that's not a choice anybody who wants to live beyond 27, and certainly not tonight, is gonna want to have to make. [admittedly I'm confused, is she saying they are like the choice between the plague and cholera, just in a more British upperclass way? Haha]

I have been told that the royal family now feels like Meghan is even more dangerous and even more problematic than Diana was at her most troublesome. Now that tells you something!"

Also: "Of course, those of you who have been familiar with some of these other episodes will know that I have been making the point that there are all sorts of things that have been going on behind the scenes and there were certain things I couldn't comment upon and I would indicate certain things...well, one of the things is that everybody at the palace has been ripping out their hair for the better part of a year wondering what next Harry and Meghan are going to come up with. It has become painfully obvious to all concerned that [...]  this was going to end badly or if not badly certainly not agreeably. *However, my information is, that in the last few weeks, Harry has been pushing hell for leather for a resolution before the end of the agreed upon periond of transition, which was going to be the 31st of March. And there has been great perplexity at the palace as to why is Harry so eager to wrap up so early and under such duress. Why is he putting everybody under this strain?* Well, then they discovered that he and Meghan had cooked up the Oprah inverview."

Shame on you, Harry. Shame, shame, shame on you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> *Wouldn't surprise me if Meghan demands that Harry stay with her instead of visiting Philip.* Her reasoning would be that Harry wouldn't be inheriting any more than what he already has coming if he were to visit. And she doesn't want to risk any RF member trying to talk Harry into returning to the U.K. She's that cold. They have to realize that they are personae non gratae in the U.K. and neither wants to hear any boo's from the public as Harry sprints from a chauffeured car to any front door.



Well maybe that might be for the best...................for PHILIP


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I don't risk guessing, I'm not a body language expert. If you would like learning about body language, the article below has a couple of examples. I'm stuck on the "Enthusiastic Gesture" and "Demure Pose", I would never have guessed those. Though, I did very well on the "Admiring Gaze".
> 
> View attachment 4999516
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'US style' Prince Harry while 'demure' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> In a clip released yesterday to promote their Spotify podcast, the Duke of Sussex, 36, took a 'more dominant role' while his wife Meghan Markle, 39, appeared 'demure', Judi James told FEMAIL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




I think the ultimate insult to these two is the headline calling Harry’s posture ”T***p-like”... you know those two won’t be able to hanlde being compared to him.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> All of the body language experts have weighed in on the lemon dress podcast, MM is seated behind H - allowing him to take the primary position, new assertive hand movements from H, and the citrus outfit mit curls is designed to show a fluffier side to her
> 
> He is trying to take a more dominant role. The Harkles have been seriously tutored on body language
> 
> A bit too much so for me ... it seems a bit labored ...


LOL
Ironically I think he is trying to look more dominant because he was told to do that
I noticed on the podcst he talked quite a bit.  I thought maybe because someone on their team decided he is the royal and is liked better by the public


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Well maybe that might be for the best...................for PHILIP


yes, I don't think Philip necessarily possesses as much calm as his wife


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny not to share, we are getting all in a lather about medieval titles lol


----------



## marietouchet

Forgot to add ...


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have been told that the royal family now feels like Meghan is even more dangerous and even more problematic than Diana was at her most troublesome. Now that tells you something!"



of course she is.
Diana couldn't play the race card in a hyper-PC /cancel culture/ social media driven world
She also wasn't as litigious and didn't have the backing of her spouse
They should be just as wary of JCMH. He is as complicit as she is


----------



## 1LV

Sol Ryan said:


> I think the ultimate insult to these two is the headline calling Harry’s posture ”T***p-like”... you know those two won’t be able to hanlde being compare to him.


lol!  Totally agree.  I wonder if she ever thought about how much SHE has in common with T.


----------



## CobaltBlu

So, nobody on earth could have possibly imagined that these two would have their patronages taken away? Nobody?  This has been discussed For.Ever.   Oprah, and the Markles for that matter, would be well served to pop in here from time to time and get with the program.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *However, my information is, that in the last few weeks, Harry has been pushing hell for leather for a resolution before the end of the agreed upon periond of transition, which was going to be the 31st of March. And there has been great perplexity at the palace as to why is Harry so eager to wrap up so early and under such duress. Why is he putting everybody under this strain?* Well, then they discovered that he and Meghan had cooked up the Oprah inverview."


So what am I missing.  If the deadline has always been March 31, why not arrange for an O interview to be aired anytime in May, or after?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> So what am I missing.  If the deadline has always been March 31, why not arrange for an O interview to be aired anytime in May, or after?



I have no clue. My brain obviously doesn't work in their twisted ways. They will have their reasons, as of yet they are unknown to the public.


----------



## kemilia

CobaltBlu said:


> doll... This is amaze. You need to add a hair toss and nail check to this.
> 
> 
> 
> It's the hair. This dress is meant to say something different. Fresh, flirty, whatever. Morticia would not wear this, and with those extensions Meghan should not either.  The dress is adorable and perfect for my imaginary garden party life, not couch-sitting with my depressed frumpy (clothing-budget-spent-all-on-me) husband.


Morticia--yes! You hit it right on the nail. 

The extensions are absolutely dreadful but I imagine she thinks they make her look like a high school ingenue. And the comparison made earlier to KK--the trout pout is nearly here.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?


Has she had that one-stitch eye PS that a certain former First L*** may have had to create a tilt/cat eye? The lips are just blown up, awful.


----------



## CeeJay

CobaltBlu said:


> So, nobody on earth could have possibly imagined that these two would have their patronages taken away? Nobody?  This has been discussed For.Ever.   Oprah, and the Markles for that matter, would be well served to pop in here from time to time and get with the program.


I'm almost tempted to send her that article that noted that the Queen was about 'service' yet Markle is about 'self-service', but then again, would she even care at this point if she has been persuing them for the last few years re: interview.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> Ironically I think he is trying to look more dominant because he was told to do that
> I noticed on the podcst he talked quite a bit.  I thought maybe because someone on their team decided he is the royal and is liked better by the public


I would not like to be the PR guru who suggested she take a submissive stance, bet he/she had a lot of convincing to do


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> So what am I missing.  If the deadline has always been March 31, why not arrange for an O interview to be aired anytime in May, or after?



June 23 would be perfect. Sort of a mid-summer Festivus!


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> So what am I missing.  If the deadline has always been March 31, why not arrange for an O interview to be aired anytime in May, or after?


Network needs ratings now, not in May? Due date related ? bills due ? Taxes are due 15 Apr ...


----------



## Lodpah

I was gonna comment again but I think I'll head over to the Purse sections and get some inspiration for new bags or something.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no clue. My brain obviously doesn't work in their twisted ways. They will have their reasons, as of yet they are unknown to the public.



I think they wanted their interview to coincide with Commonwealth Day which I think is either the first or second Monday in March every year. It also was the last day they performed their Royal duties (green cape day). I guess the interview was set to be aired on the 1 year mark they chose to runaway like thieves in the night for dramatic effect.


----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> Has she had that one-stitch eye PS that a certain former First L*** may have had to create a tilt/cat eye? The lips are just blown up, awful.


That one-stitch cat eye, upsweep, whatever it is called, is everywhere, isn't it.  Suddenly everyone is looking like Joan Rivers, who was a visionary it seems, but who at the time realized?  lol


----------



## marietouchet

BBC says no 


Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Oprah Interview Sparks U.K. Bidding War - Variety










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview Sparks U.K. Bidding War; ITV and Discovery in Last Round (EXCLUSIVE)
					

UPDATE: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s first major interview since splitting with the British Royal Family has sparked a hot bidding war in the U.K. for rights to air the highly coveted sit…




					variety.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

Jayne1 said:


> So what am I missing.  If the deadline has always been March 31, why not arrange for an O interview to be aired anytime in May, or after?



The due date is probably 'late spring' so she needs to get the most publicity mileage out of each event


----------



## CeeJay

Chloe302225 said:


> I think they wanted their interview to coincide with Commonwealth Day which I think is either the first or second Monday in March every year. It also was the last day they performed their Royal duties (green cape day). I guess the interview was set to be aired on the 1 year mark they chose to runaway like thieves in the night for dramatic effect.


This makes sense to me, but .. wait .. I thought Meghan didn't know "_anything_" about the Commonwealth  *-OR- * is it that now that she married into the BRF, yes .. she wants to "compete" with that coverage?!?!  See, this is when I say Harry is complicit in this .. he knows PERFECTLY well when this event takes place so .. was it *HIS* idea or *HER *idea???  Personally, I think she is still driving the bus, but he is going along with it for sure! 

In regards to that fluff piece about "_body language_" .. *SERIOUSLY*????  What utter crap-oh-la!


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> BBC says no
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Oprah Interview Sparks U.K. Bidding War - Variety
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview Sparks U.K. Bidding War; ITV and Discovery in Last Round (EXCLUSIVE)
> 
> 
> UPDATE: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s first major interview since splitting with the British Royal Family has sparked a hot bidding war in the U.K. for rights to air the highly coveted sit…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com


Lol her PR is really trying hard. Optics, I tell you, it's optics. It's like someone offers an item and they proclaim loudly, ONLY ONE LEFT, COME GET IT BEFORE IT'S ALL GONE.  This just proves, in my opinion, there's absolutely very little interest in them due to their litigious nature and papers, although can be arch enemies, still protect their freedom of speech in journalism (well . . . at least for the credible ones).


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> So what am I missing.  If the deadline has always been March 31, why not arrange for an O interview to be aired anytime in May, or after?



It will be close to her due date and she doesn’t want to look fat on TV. 

Conversely, if there is a surrogate, she may be worried she wouldn’t look fat enough.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imagine those calls:

BBC - no, please no 
ITV - absolutely not 
Channel 4 - pass, hard pass 
Sky 1 - hell no 
QVC - doesn’t fit our programming/brand, thanks anyway 
LFC TV - who? what? Oh, no, never, nay.  
All the rest - straight to voicemail 
BBC - #%^*, why? This isn’t fair


----------



## Sol Ryan

I see ITV and Sky probably going for it...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imagine those calls:
> 
> BBC - no, please no
> ITV - absolutely not
> Channel 4 - pass, hard pass
> Sky 1 - hell no
> QVC - doesn’t fit our programming/brand, thanks anyway
> LFC TV - who? what? Oh, no, never, nay.
> All the rest - straight to voicemail
> BBC - #%^*, why? This isn’t fair


Posts like this help me get through the years of covid , merci

but am I worried I don’t get CBS, cut the cable yeas ago, sighhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## Sol Ryan

Think we’ll get to see the letter during the Oprah Interview?









						Queen 'sent Harry personal Megxit email - before she knew about Oprah interview'
					

The Queen sent Prince Harry an email outlining her thoughts on his royal exit and making clear she believed only full dedication was possible, according to reports




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Check out what they got placed in People. Does anyone believe the Rugby organization really wanted to keep Harry?

*Prince Harry's Patronage Was 'Completely Blindsided' by His Removal as Prince William Projected as Replacement*
"We were very keen to keep Prince Harry, he's been fantastic," a Rugby Football League source reportedly told the _Telegraph_

The Rugby Football League will be missing their beloved patron.

Buckingham Palace confirmed in a statement on Friday that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — who left full-time royal work in March 2020 — will officially not be returning to their royal roles. As part of stepping down, the couple will no longer keep their patronages (their royal involvement with numerous U.K. charities).

Trusts and patronages will now revert back to Queen Elizabeth, 94, who will then distribute them among other working royals.

Two of those patronages were the Rugby Football Union and the Rugby Football League, which may see Prince William stepping in the vacant role, according to a report from The _Telegraph.

"There will be a lot of disruption. The World Cup is in autumn and Prince Harry was expected to be front and center of that," a source from the Rugby Football League reportedly told the outlet, which also reported: "There have been rumors that he could have some role, that there could be some middle ground, but whether that is feasible I don't know."_

The Rugby Football League source added, "We were completely blindsided by the news to be honest. We were very keen to keep Prince Harry, he's been fantastic."

The World Cup is expected to take place in northern England.

"The Duke of Sussex was a high-profile figure who embraced the World Cup and we hope the next appointment will be a continuation of that," the Rugby Football League source told the outlet.

A spokesperson for the Rugby Football Union did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for comment.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> Posts like this help me get through the years of covid , merci
> 
> but am I worried I don’t get CBS, cut the cable yeas ago, sighhhhhhhhhhhh


I also dropped cable a couple of years ago. I expect I’ll be able to watch the highlights of it on YouTube shortly after.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> Think we’ll get to see the letter during the Oprah Interview?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen 'sent Harry personal Megxit email - before she knew about Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> The Queen sent Prince Harry an email outlining her thoughts on his royal exit and making clear she believed only full dedication was possible, according to reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Well if they share it, I think the Queen should sue for invasion of privacy!


----------



## csshopper

Chloe302225 said:


> To just point out The Prince's Trust US branch was being floated around for a few years. I remember first hearing about it when Will and Kate visited the US on tour back in 2015/2016. It has also been fundraising in the US for much longer.
> 
> This venture may have something to do with Harry but it has been in the works for a lot longer than this debacle taking place now.


Chloe, thanks for posting this information, once again, I learned something new. Seems it is coincidental to the Sussexes being here since Kate and William's trip was 10 years ago.


----------



## gracekelly

I have got this right?  The Queen writes Harry a letter explaining her decision and it is written before she even knew about the interview. BP find out about the interview and gets out the statement regarding the loss of patronages right after they find out about it.  Harry then slaps back with his statement.  The date on the letter is prior to the taping of the interview?  If they reshoot the interview, then why would they show it? It could just turn them into liars and that they had it in writing that they were going to loose the patronages.  In reality, they knew it all along since last Jan. 2020.


----------



## Chanbal

Summary for your convenience: MM's idol, Oprah is giving MM an opportunity to have a voice and to share with millions of people around the world that all the jewelry, clothing, palaces, and titles given to her by her in-laws was not enough and they let her down. 


_"A source told Heat World that the couple were able to "set the agenda" though Oprah, a daytime TV star Meghan idolised as a child, "pushed them" to make it a gripping piece of television.

The source claims the Sussexes aren't out to offend the royal or completely sever ties with the firm, but Meghan feels "let down" by her in-laws and sees the interview as a chance to “take control of her story”.

It is said the couple felt like they had nothing else to lose by sitting down with Oprah for an interview that will be watched by tens of millions of people around the world.

The source claimed: "Meghan will be addressing the highs and lows of her life as a royal, even though she knows this will upset a lot of people in the palace.

"And now their remaining royal affiliations have been removed, their attitude is ‘Why hold back?’ They feel strongly that it is time for them to speak up for themselves, and to put to rest so much of the speculation that’s out there."









						Meghan and Harry 'won't hold back' in Oprah interview 'that will upset royals'
					

Meghan Markle will address the "highs and lows" of royal life to "take control of her story", but she and Prince Harry won't be settling scores in a "brutal way" during their Oprah Winfrey interview, it is claimed




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_


----------



## DebbieAnn

*I have no interest in watching the "interview" either in real time or in snippets.

I have started reading The Crown In Crisis:  Countdown to Abdication.  I am seeing similarities between Harry & King Edward VIII.  Mainly the weakness of the two in regard to the women who have alienated Harry & Edward from their country & more importantly, their families.*


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> _The source claimed: "Meghan will be addressing the highs and lows of *her life as a royal*, even though she knows this will upset a lot of people in the palace._








Say what now?
She was in the Royal Family for what, 18 months?
Dayum, I waited almost that long once in a bathroom lineup at Lollapalooza in 1993


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Summary for your convenience: MM's idol, Oprah is giving MM an opportunity to have a voice and to share with millions of people around the world that all the jewelry, clothing, palaces, and titles given to her by her in-laws was not enough and they let her down.
> 
> 
> _"A source told Heat World that the couple were able to "set the agenda" though Oprah, a daytime TV star Meghan idolised as a child, "pushed them" to make it a gripping piece of television.
> 
> The source claims the Sussexes aren't out to offend the royal or completely sever ties with the firm, but Meghan feels "let down" by her in-laws and sees the interview as a chance to “take control of her story”.
> 
> It is said the couple felt like they had nothing else to lose by sitting down with Oprah for an interview that will be watched by tens of millions of people around the world.
> 
> The source claimed: "Meghan will be addressing the highs and lows of her life as a royal, even though she knows this will upset a lot of people in the palace.
> 
> "And now their remaining royal affiliations have been removed, their attitude is ‘Why hold back?’ They feel strongly that it is time for them to speak up for themselves, and to put to rest so much of the speculation that’s out there."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'won't hold back' in Oprah interview 'that will upset royals'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will address the "highs and lows" of royal life to "take control of her story", but she and Prince Harry won't be settling scores in a "brutal way" during their Oprah Winfrey interview, it is claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Key words:  let down  and take control of her story.  The highs and lows of royal life. Speak out for themselves.

OK the whine fest will be out in full force. Nobody asked if she was OK.   Taking control of her story means she has to have the last word as she always does.  It's all about her, per usual.  What about Harry taking control of his story?  Oh, he really hasn't got one because his story is whatever Meghan says it is.  The highs of royal life:  very expensive clothing, very expensive wedding with a nice tiara. a newly renovated home to live in and a train trip with The Queen.
Lows of royal Life:  Showing up and smiling when it isn't all about you and being a dressed up civil servant.  (why do you think they paid for all those expensive clothes that didn't fit?)
They want to speak out for themselves?  Can't wait!  I want to hear how they explain their entitlement and why they are such special snowflakes.

If she pinched his arm any tighter during that podcast she would have drawn blood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> _"There will be a lot of disruption. The World Cup is in autumn and Prince Harry was expected to be front and center of that," a source from the Rugby Football League reportedly told the outlet, which also reported: "There have been rumors that he could have some role, that there could be some middle ground, but whether that is feasible I don't know."_



Come on now. Harry will be busy worshipping the ground Meghan walks on, he wouldn't have time anyway to be front and center.



> A spokesperson for the Rugby Football Union did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for comment.



So the very outspoken Rugby Football Union couldn't be reached for comment. I guess the comments came from Montecito, just like when Meghan invented a PR person she couldn't afford years ago to act on her behalf, hu?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _It is said the couple felt like they had nothing else to lose by sitting down with Oprah for an interview that will be watched by tens of millions of people around the world._



The grifter has nothing to lose (that said...I still don't believe Netflix and Spotify have forked over a fortune, so maybe don't p*ss off Charles when he is still funding you?). Harry has already lost almost everything, but there are still a few things left. HE is paying the price, and he's too dull to see it.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Summary for your convenience: MM's idol, Oprah is giving MM an opportunity to have a voice and to share with millions of people around the world that all the jewelry, clothing, palaces, and titles given to her by her in-laws was not enough and they let her down.
> 
> 
> _"A source told Heat World that the couple were able to "set the agenda" though Oprah, a daytime TV star Meghan idolised as a child, "pushed them" to make it a gripping piece of television.
> 
> The source claims the Sussexes aren't out to offend the royal or completely sever ties with the firm, but Meghan feels "let down" by her in-laws and sees the interview as a chance to “take control of her story”.
> 
> It is said the couple felt like they had nothing else to lose by sitting down with Oprah for an interview that will be watched by tens of millions of people around the world.
> 
> The source claimed: "Meghan will be addressing the highs and lows of her life as a royal, even though she knows this will upset a lot of people in the palace.
> 
> "And now their remaining royal affiliations have been removed, their attitude is ‘Why hold back?’ They feel strongly that it is time for them to speak up for themselves, and to put to rest so much of the speculation that’s out there."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'won't hold back' in Oprah interview 'that will upset royals'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will address the "highs and lows" of royal life to "take control of her story", but she and Prince Harry won't be settling scores in a "brutal way" during their Oprah Winfrey interview, it is claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


"her life as a Royal" What? All 5 minutes of it?


----------



## Chagall

The queen should have planned her interview for a different day. She looks like she is competing with H/M and that could appear weak. She should completely ignore them, space her interview out by having it a week or so in advance or after. Having it on the same day cannot be a coincidence and gives them too much importance!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chagall said:


> The queen should have planned her interview for a different day. She looks like she is competing with H/M and that could appear weak. She should completely ignore them, space her interview out by having it a week or so in advance or after. Having it on the same day cannot be a coincidence and gives them too much importance!


No. You can't move Commonwealth day and it has nothing to do with H&M. It would have been planned well in advance.

It shows how MM is spiteful to do her interview on the same day.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> The queen should have planned her interview for a different day. She looks like she is competing with H/M and that could appear weak. She should completely ignore them, space her interview out by having it a week or so in advance or after. Having it on the same day cannot be a coincidence and gives them too much importance!


I don't think The Queen decided on that programme being shown on March 7th, the BBC probably did. Sunday evening is a prime time slot here for cultural programmes (Sir David Attenboroughs programmes are mainly Sunday evening viewing for example) Also, the Commonwealth programme will have been pencilled in for that evening weeks, if not months ago, prior to the news of the Megxit interview.  
The Queen's is not an interview either, it's a programme about the Commonwealth, in which several members of the Royal Family will be speaking about said Commonwealth.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think The Queen decided on that programme being shown on March 7th, the BBC probably did. Sunday evening is a prime time slot here for cultural programmes (Sir David Attenboroughs programmes are mainly Sunday evening viewing for example) Also, the Commonwealth programme will have been pencilled in for that evening weeks, if not months ago, prior to the news of the Megxit interview.
> The Queen's is not an interview either, it's a programme about the Commonwealth, in which several members of the Royal Family will be speaking about said Commonwealth.


Sounds like a great opportunity to get educated about the Commonwealth. The DoS should watch it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## periogirl28

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like a great opportunity to get educated about the Commonwealth. The DoS should watch it.



The TV might be broken due to flying plates.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> The queen should have planned her interview for a different day. She looks like she is competing with H/M and that could appear weak. She should completely ignore them, space her interview out by having it a week or so in advance or after. Having it on the same day cannot be a coincidence and gives them too much importance!



Actually it was reported their broadcasting date had been scheduled several weeks ago, which would be way before the Sussexes were forced to admit their plans. I do think the Queen changing plans so the imposters can have their day would send the wrong message. Also, it's Commonwealth Day. You don't have a Christmas broadcast a week before or after either.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think The Queen decided on that programme being shown on March 7th, the BBC probably did. Sunday evening is a prime time slot here for cultural programmes (Sir David Attenboroughs programmes are mainly Sunday evening viewing for example) Also, the Commonwealth programme will have been pencilled in for that evening weeks, if not months ago, prior to the news of the Megxit interview.
> The Queen's is not an interview either, it's a programme about the Commonwealth, in which several members of the Royal Family will be speaking about said Commonwealth.


So the queen had no choice and H/M were being spiteful? If that’s the case they are much worse than I thought!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree and well said!!!  I'm still (_somewhat_) shaking my head at why Oprah would put herself in this position, other than to think that it's going to be $$$ in her pocket and H&M's pockets.  What? .. does she want a new show on CBS (_since she pretty much sold off OWN_)?  Given Meghan's propensity to play the 'victim' card and Harry's .. well, who knows what the hell is going on with him, how do they think this is really going to go over?  Some articles have said it's a "*Make or Break*" .. to me, that's for *ALL* parties here!


Lack of full disclosure to O? The Harkles failed to fully disclose the alligators in the swamp? Or more likely, they said the alligators would be removed prior to the air date... 

We know that the Harkles did not tell BP about O., so, the converse is a reasonable idea. 
Well, maybe the Harkles were not candid about the year-end review to O. Everyone knows about the review, but NOT about its extent, I can see that BP would have had a NO interview clause in there. We know H was trying to get the review done prior to the show.


----------



## marietouchet

Chagall said:


> The queen should have planned her interview for a different day. She looks like she is competing with H/M and that could appear weak. She should completely ignore them, space her interview out by having it a week or so in advance or after. Having it on the same day cannot be a coincidence and gives them too much importance!



The CW day is always same day each year.  So, IMHO, QEII sent out the SAVE THE DATE memos about a year ago. The Harkles got the invite as CW dignitaries. 

Exact plans were up in the air due to lockdown & vaccines eg zoom, virtual, tiny church service, Harkles present in their CW roles?

Retraction of patronages - as part of year end review - forced the Queen to decide the EXACT plans for the previously reserved date. Yes, it did look a bit like a knee jerk reaction...


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't believe Netflix and Spotify have forked over a fortune, so maybe don't p*ss off Charles when he is still funding you?).


I still doubt the amount too!


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> The queen should have planned her interview for a different day. She looks like she is competing with H/M and that could appear weak. She should completely ignore them, space her interview out by having it a week or so in advance or after. Having it on the same day cannot be a coincidence and gives them too much importance!


This is the impression one gets when reading some of the headlines, but the Queen's annual Commonwealth message has been scheduled long time ago to be shown on March 7. MM&H may have scheduled their interview on purpose to coincide with the Commonwealth celebrations. H should know better how important is the 2nd week of March for the Queen.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Commonwealth Day was established in March in 1973. Its inconceivable that Harry did not know the significance of this date. It is a petty and spiteful choice by H&M. All through the discussions that have been reported in the press and official releases etc. the BRF have behaved with "good faith" and been blindsided by H&M every step of the way including their childish, snide and disrespectful responses.

And talk about killing the golden goose ! I believe The Queen was lining H&M up for a major role as future commonwealth heads. How to offend 53 countries with 2.4 billion people.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Key words:  let down  and take control of her story.  The highs and lows of royal life. Speak out for themselves.
> 
> OK the whine fest will be out in full force. Nobody asked if she was OK.   Taking control of her story means she has to have the last word as she always does.  It's all about her, per usual.  What about Harry taking control of his story?  Oh, he really hasn't got one because his story is whatever Meghan says it is.  The highs of royal life:  very expensive clothing, very expensive wedding with a nice tiara. a newly renovated home to live in and a train trip with The Queen.
> Lows of royal Life:  Showing up and smiling when it isn't all about you and being a dressed up civil servant.  (why do you think they paid for all those expensive clothes that didn't fit?)
> They want to speak out for themselves?  Can't wait!  I want to hear how they explain their entitlement and why they are such special snowflakes.
> 
> If she pinched his arm any tighter during that podcast she would have drawn blood.


For MM, everything is about self-service. The impression I get is that she is very greedy and controlling. QE gave her nice residences in the UK, tiaras, etc, but she realized that many of those perks are indeed owned by the Crown. So she moved to CA with all the wealth she could bring with her from the UK (I bet many negotiations are still going on) and she is anxiously trying to establish herself here before people realize that she has nothing to offer.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> So the queen had no choice and H/M were being spiteful? If that’s the case they are much worse than I thought!



Whoa. Let’s not give Harry and Meghan too much significance. The network chooses the time slot. H&M do not wield that kind of power in the industry or anywhere else. CBS would never have thought about  Commonwealth Day as the US is not a Commonwealth. It is a coincidence.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Actually it was reported their broadcasting date had been scheduled several weeks ago, which would be way before the Sussexes were forced to admit their plans. I do think the Queen changing plans so the imposters can have their day would send the wrong message. Also, it's Commonwealth Day. You don't have a Christmas broadcast a week before or after either.


I’m not a monarchist so don’t follow the in’s and out’s of their schedule. No the imposters should not have their day. Nor can we completely blame MM for any of their actions. These are Harry’s elderly grandparents. Royal or not, don’t really care, but this is despicable treatment of them on Harry’s part.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The grifter has nothing to lose (that said...I still don't believe Netflix and Spotify have forked over a fortune, so maybe don't p*ss off Charles when he is still funding you?). Harry has already lost almost everything, but there are still a few things left. HE is paying the price, and he's too dull to see it.


He is paying a big price for being stubborn and not following Will's advice of trying to know MM a little more (meet the rest of her family, in addition to Doria) before rushing into marrying her. He has now Archie and a second kid in the way, so he is virtually trapped in the situation he has created for himself. He keeps making mistake after mistake...


----------



## Yanca

It's so refreshing to see that more and more people are catching on their never ending antics and quest for Publicity and relevance.  The Oprah interview is not needed at all, what voice she is saying she lost that she needs to reclaim, the truth of the matter is, she was an aging actress in a cable show that not many people know, she was not even the main cast but in an ensamble. Her IG and blog site  were not well known, like other lifestyle blogs, she was given a much bigger platform by marrying Prince Harry,  if she really wanted to serve that was the perfect platform, politician comes and go but the Royal Family endures,  The Queen has had what 14 Prime Minister under her, how many US presidents has she hosted and met? endless Diginitaries and world leaders she has welcomed in Buckingham Palace. IF only Megan was not so self centered that she does not want to listen to the men in suits at the palace as she calls them, she wanted to be the big kahuna, and maybe all those adulations in the beggining got in to her head, and  perhaps too, the actress and social media influencer in her were thinking of the money she could have earned while doing the "public duties and appearances" and somehow convinced Harry  that they need not play second fiddle to William and Kate and that they could earn more. Their decision will be more accepted and them better liked it they had been honest, and transparent but No, they wanted the perks but not the responsibilities, even in their spotify commercial, it was contrived,  the titles were plastered again " Duke and Duchess of Sussex". Her actions is always to spite the BRF, they knew that  the commonwealth celebration is around that date and they purporsely did their big tell all interview on that date. I hope the ratings will tanked like their spotify show. Its all about smoke and mirrors with these two.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The only thing that makes me think they have some significant guaranteed income is that they were able to get the expensive house. Is mortgage info public?


----------



## bisousx

lanasyogamama said:


> The only thing that makes me think they have some significant guaranteed income is that they were able to get the expensive house. Is mortgage info public?



Yes, although it’s not easy to find. I have a software I use for finding properties and posted about their mortgage before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I believe that many of us share his opinion!



Fashion designer Roberto Devorik, who remained a friend of Diana all her adult life, has now claimed the late royal would have been angered over the recent fall-out because she wanted him to help shape a 'modern monarchy.'

He said Meghan and Diana wouldn't have got along 'in any way', telling Hola! magazine: 'I think Meghan is the boss... Harry is a boy who suffered a lot and believes that Meghan has the legacy of Diana. But he is very confused.'

Fashion impresario Roberto said Princess Diana had told him 'many times' that she 'wanted her children to be princes of a 'modern Crown' and said the royal would have been 'furious' with Prince Harry over Megxit.

Meanwhile he called the Queen's decision to strip the couple of their patronages 'logical'.
Declaring Prince Harry 'the Queen's favourite grandson', Roberto said Her Majesty had been forced to put 'Crown first', adding: 'For the Crown, what Harry has done is unforgivable.'

He explained: 'You cannot exile yourself and collect money from Netflix or Disney and also want to continue collecting from the State for your performances for the Crown.

'You cannot live in a mansion in Montecito, California, and sign millionaire commercial contracts , and also want to receive money from the public coffers or continue to represent the Crown.'

Diana's friend


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Has she had that one-stitch eye PS that a certain former First L*** may have had to create a tilt/cat eye? The lips are just blown up, awful.


I no good at assessing these things but looks like maybe she has had fillers?  why?  what FL? Nancy?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Check out what they got placed in People. Does anyone believe the Rugby organization really wanted to keep Harry?
> 
> *Prince Harry's Patronage Was 'Completely Blindsided' by His Removal as Prince William Projected as Replacement*
> "We were very keen to keep Prince Harry, he's been fantastic," a Rugby Football League source reportedly told the _Telegraph_
> 
> The Rugby Football League will be missing their beloved patron.
> 
> Buckingham Palace confirmed in a statement on Friday that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — who left full-time royal work in March 2020 — will officially not be returning to their royal roles. As part of stepping down, the couple will no longer keep their patronages (their royal involvement with numerous U.K. charities).
> 
> Trusts and patronages will now revert back to Queen Elizabeth, 94, who will then distribute them among other working royals.
> 
> Two of those patronages were the Rugby Football Union and the Rugby Football League, which may see Prince William stepping in the vacant role, according to a report from The _Telegraph.
> 
> "There will be a lot of disruption. The World Cup is in autumn and Prince Harry was expected to be front and center of that," a source from the Rugby Football League reportedly told the outlet, which also reported: "There have been rumors that he could have some role, that there could be some middle ground, but whether that is feasible I don't know."_
> 
> The Rugby Football League source added, "We were completely blindsided by the news to be honest. We were very keen to keep Prince Harry, he's been fantastic."
> 
> The World Cup is expected to take place in northern England.
> 
> "The Duke of Sussex was a high-profile figure who embraced the World Cup and we hope the next appointment will be a continuation of that," the Rugby Football League source told the outlet.
> 
> A spokesperson for the Rugby Football Union did not immediately respond to PEOPLE's request for comment.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


so a "source" said he was fantastic but the League had no comment for People....ok


----------



## Chanbal

I can see how infuriating this is for many artists! "_Spotify has been criticised over its reported £30million podcast deal with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex by an MP who said it 'sticks in the craw' of struggling artists_."









						Tory MP blasts Harry and Meghan's £30million Spotify podcast deal
					

Winchester MP and former junior health minister Steve Brine told  Mr Gutierrez their pay deal 'sticks in the craw of some of the artists who are driving Uber cars right now to pay the rent'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chloe302225

bag-mania said:


> Whoa. Let’s not give Harry and Meghan too much significance. The network chooses the time slot. H&M do not wield that kind of power in the industry or anywhere else. CBS would never have thought about  Commonwealth Day as the US is not a Commonwealth. It is a coincidence.



I think it has more to do with airing their interview around the 1 year mark of their official exit which was Commonwealth Day. A quick Google search would let you know it is an annual event.


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Yes, although it’s not easy to find. I have a software I use for finding properties and posted about their mortgage before.


Is it 9 million dollars? That is the figure I recall to have seen somewhere.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> The only thing that makes me think they have some significant guaranteed income is that they were able to get the expensive house. Is mortgage info public?



This is currently on line @ the Zillow web site. Zillow is a major real estate business, their data generally is adjusted to market conditions. The estimated monthly mortgage is stated here. Not knowing the amount of their downpayment, for example, this may not be exact, but at least gives an idea. Their property tax bill, a public record, is available on line via the Santa Barbara County Tax Assessor's Office web site. All you need to search is the address 765 Rockridge Rd, Montecito, CA.  New Property Tax rates are established upon purchase of the property, so what the Sussexes pay starting with their 2020 purchase would be different than previous years when it was under different ownership.

The listing for the house including all the pictures is still available on line by searching the address. It was referred to as "The Chateau" in Montecito.


9 bd 19 ba  18,671 sqft
*765 Rockbridge Rd, Montecito, CA 93108*
Sold: $14,650,000  Sold on 06/17/20  Zestimate®: $16,261,313

Est. refi payment: $61,683/mo


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> I think it has more to do with airing their interview around the 1 year mark of their official exit which was Commonwealth Day. A quick Google search would let you know it is an annual event.



They announced they were leaving in early January 2020. Supposedly they were to continue doing their royal duties until March 31, but we know they weren't doing much (if any) work from the time of the announcement. They had already been living in Canada since fall of 2019 so I don't see where Commonwealth Day factored in to any decisions.


----------



## Chanbal

A valid opinion about MM's claimed victory on the letter to her father.  The next trial date is March 2.  


The Duchess of Sussex has won her privacy case against Associated Newspapers for publishing extracts from a letter she wrote to her father Thomas Markle. However, *the judge said he would not give a summary judgement on the copyright claim and a trial date for that has been set for March 2.* In her statement on the ruling, Meghan claimed a “comprehensive win” on both issues, despite one being, as of yet, unresolved.

*Meghan also chose to use her statement to slate alleged “misinformation” spread about her in the media, when the case in question wasn't about accuracy at all, it was about privacy.*

Indeed, she has been vindicated on the privacy issue, but there is no court ruling backing up her claim of misinformation.









						Meghan Markle’s ‘uncalled for’ statement criticised  by royal experts
					

MEGHAN MARKLE's statement regarding her court case win has been criticised  by royal experts, who questioned whether it was the time or place for a "broadside against the media".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> This is currently on line @ the Zillow web site. Zillow is a major real estate business, their data generally is adjusted to market conditions. The estimated monthly mortgage is stated here. Not knowing the amount of their downpayment, for example, this may not be exact, but at least gives an idea. Their property tax bill, a public record, is available on line via the Santa Barbara County Tax Assessor's Office web site. All you need to search is the address 765 Rockridge Rd, Montecito, CA.  New Property Tax rates are established upon purchase of the property, so what the Sussexes pay starting with their 2020 purchase would be different than previous years when it was under different ownership.
> 
> The listing for the house including all the pictures is still available on line by searching the address. It was referred to as "The Chateau" in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 9 bd 19 ba  18,671 sqft
> *765 Rockbridge Rd, Montecito, CA 93108*
> Sold: $14,650,000  Sold on 06/17/20  Zestimate®: $16,261,313
> 
> Est. refi payment: $61,683/mo


I believe that’s based on the estimated price with 20% down, but the actual mortgage on the property.


----------



## Chloe302225

bag-mania said:


> They announced they were leaving in early January 2020. Supposedly they were to continue doing their royal duties until March 31, but we know they weren't doing much (if any) work from the time of the announcement. They had already been living in Canada since fall of 2019 so I don't see where Commonwealth Day factored in to any decisions.



The announcement was made in January but the day they performed their official last duties as royals was on Commonwealth Day. That day might be more memorable in the public's eyes as it was last time they were photographed with the rest of the family and Meghan wore her green outfit that was used as the stock photo for most articles written about them for the better part of last year.

As you pointed out they made their announcement in January the review was scheduled for March; maybe this MM+H's way of providing their own review.


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> The announcement was made in January but the day performed their official last duties as royals was on Commonwealth Day. That day might be more memorable in the public's eyes as it was last time they were photographed with the rest of the family and Meghan wore her green outfit that was used as the stock photo for most articles written about them for the better part of last year.



Now that's an outfit you would think was worn more than once for all the mileage they milked out of it. The lemon dress cannot hope to compete.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> so a "source" said he was fantastic but the League had no comment for People....ok


sdkitty
   In answer to your question, a resounding "NO!"
   Or, as my beloved British friend said "Bullocks!"

   You have a choice between the future King of England as your patron, or a whiner half a world away who will probably not plunk his a-- in a Rugby Stadium for years, if ever, because he abandoned all the mates;

    William is an avid Rugby fan, is already Patron of Welsh Rugby, but may be a complication (?) to hold both.

    The Cambridges as a family support Rugby and some of the most endearing pictures of Prince George were taken when the family attended a Rugby Match. Can't see Harry unwrapping Archie and going to a Stadium. Rugby will get far more good publicity with a Duke of Cambridge patronage, if it's possible.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> Is it 9 million dollars? That is the figure I recall to have seen somewhere.



At the time of purchase, the mortgage was around $9.5m but it appears they have paid down half of it since then.


----------



## Chloe302225

csshopper said:


> sdkitty
> In answer to your question, a resounding "NO!"
> Or, as my beloved British friend said "Bullocks!"
> 
> You have a choice between the future King of England as your patron, or a whiner half a world away who will probably not plunk his a-- in a Rugby Stadium for years, if ever, because he abandoned all the mates;
> 
> William is an avid Rugby fan, is already Patron of Welsh Rugby, but may be a complication (?) to hold both.
> 
> The Cambridges as a family support Rugby and some of the most endearing pictures of Prince George were taken when the family attended a Rugby Match. Can't see Harry unwrapping Archie and going to a Stadium. Rugby will get far more good publicity with a Duke of Cambridge patronage, if it's possible.



I don't think William will take this charity as he already has his own rugby association but Kate would be perfect. Then we can see Anne, William and Kate possibly do joint events for rugby in the future.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

lanasyogamama said:


> The only thing that makes me think they have some significant guaranteed income is that they were able to get the expensive house. Is mortgage info public?


I wondered how they could afford that huge house in such a desirable location. Is poor old Charles footing the bill in some way. I know he helps to support them but to what extent, and why?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Now that's an outfit you would think was worn more than once for all the mileage they milked out of it. The lemon dress cannot hope to compete.


I'm so sick of seeing that green cape outfit.....she might as well have worn it 50 times for all the times that horrid photo has been used


----------



## lanasyogamama

bisousx said:


> At the time of purchase, the mortgage was around $9.5m but it appears they have paid down half of it since then.


Hmm, so they’ve come up with $12M somehow.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I'm so sick of seeing that green cape outfit.....she might as well have worn it 50 times for all the times that horrid photo has been used


The no neck outfit.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chagall said:


> I wondered how they could afford that huge house in such a desirable location. Is poor old Charles footing the bill in some way. I know he helps to support them but to what extent, and why?



Doesn‘t Harry still have his money? I thought he had something like 35 million in trust... that would have easily covered the house...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm so sick of seeing that green cape outfit.....she might as well have worn it 50 times for all the times that horrid photo has been used



Meghan is the Queen of Green. It's the only queen title she will ever possess.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Doesn‘t Harry still have his money? I thought he had something like 35 million in trust... that would have easily covered the house...



He inherited around that much from his mother and if it was invested well it may have grown quite a bit in over 20 years.


----------



## Chagall

Sol Ryan said:


> Doesn‘t Harry still have his money? I thought he had something like 35 million in trust... that would have easily covered the house...


I can’t imagine that he would want to put it all into a house. What did MM contribute? Would the house be in both their names or god forbid in hers. If there is a split Harry could loose his shirt. Can’t remember if there was a pre-nup?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He inherited around that much from his mother and if it was invested well it may have grown quite a bit in over 20 years.


even so unless it grew a lot, their lifestyle is very expensive.....they would go through 35 mil pretty quickly


----------



## jennlt

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine that he would want to put it all into a house. What did MM contribute?


Isn't the house solely in her name? I think that's why the mortgage is being paid off so quickly.


----------



## Chagall

jennlt said:


> Isn't the house solely in her name? I think that's why the mortgage is being paid off so quickly.


Actually I edited my post after the above to say that.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I believe that many of us share his opinion!
> 
> View attachment 5000690
> 
> Fashion designer Roberto Devorik, who remained a friend of Diana all her adult life, has now claimed the late royal would have been angered over the recent fall-out because she wanted him to help shape a 'modern monarchy.'
> 
> He said Meghan and Diana wouldn't have got along 'in any way', telling Hola! magazine: 'I think Meghan is the boss... Harry is a boy who suffered a lot and believes that Meghan has the legacy of Diana. But he is very confused.'
> 
> Fashion impresario Roberto said Princess Diana had told him 'many times' that she 'wanted her children to be princes of a 'modern Crown' and said the royal would have been 'furious' with Prince Harry over Megxit.
> 
> Meanwhile he called the Queen's decision to strip the couple of their patronages 'logical'.
> Declaring Prince Harry 'the Queen's favourite grandson', Roberto said Her Majesty had been forced to put 'Crown first', adding: 'For the Crown, what Harry has done is unforgivable.'
> 
> He explained: 'You cannot exile yourself and collect money from Netflix or Disney and also want to continue collecting from the State for your performances for the Crown.
> 
> 'You cannot live in a mansion in Montecito, California, and sign millionaire commercial contracts , and also want to receive money from the public coffers or continue to represent the Crown.'
> 
> Diana's friend


And I think she would be heartbroken. Pre MM, Harry was a "mate" and people laughed _with _him and now they are laughing _at _him and his "raindrops."


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Isn't the house solely in her name? I think that's why the mortgage is being paid off so quickly.


so do we think they are making mortgage payments with their allowance from Charles?  or maybe they have gotten some money from Netflix or spotify.  I can't recall


----------



## csshopper

Mortgage + Property Taxes + Insurance + Water, Heating, Cooling, Trash + Landscaping and Pool upkeep + Staff + Meaghan’s Wardrobe, Hair Extensions etc

Big Bucks.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> so do we think they are making mortgage payments with their allowance from Charles?  or maybe they have gotten some money from Netflix or spotify.  I can't recall


I don't know where the money is coming from but it seems that paying off the mortgage is a very high priority. For one of them, at least.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> sdkitty
> In answer to your question, a resounding "NO!"
> Or, as my beloved British friend said "Bullocks!"
> 
> You have a choice between the future King of England as your patron, or a whiner half a world away who will probably not plunk his a-- in a Rugby Stadium for years, if ever, because he abandoned all the mates;
> 
> William is an avid Rugby fan, is already Patron of Welsh Rugby, but may be a complication (?) to hold both.
> 
> The Cambridges as a family support Rugby and some of the most endearing pictures of Prince George were taken when the family attended a Rugby Match. Can't see Harry unwrapping Archie and going to a Stadium. Rugby will get far more good publicity with a Duke of Cambridge patronage, if it's possible.


It was a football match those pictures of George were taken. 
And it bollocks, not bullocks, lol


----------



## V0N1B2

Dolls, dolls... I feel like we need a sticky - like those ones in the authenticate this threads.
I know it’s been a loooong year and it _feels_ like August was like 3 years ago, but if y’all read back you’ll remember that “Meghan’s home” was purchased with a trust or LLC or something in her company’s name.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> The announcement was made in January but the day they performed their official last duties as royals was on Commonwealth Day. That day might be more memorable in the public's eyes as it was last time they were photographed with the rest of the family and Meghan wore her green outfit that was used as the stock photo for most articles written about them for the better part of last year.
> 
> As you pointed out they made their announcement in January the review was scheduled for March; maybe this MM+H's way of providing their own review.


haha, I can't blame her if she refuses to wear that green outfit again. Commonwealth Day should be stuck in their minds, so they don't have any excuse for accepting to do their interview on the 2nd week of March imo. I would think CBS gave them some flexibility on the date.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine that he would want to put it all into a house. What did MM contribute? Would the house be in both their names or god forbid in hers. If there is a split Harry could loose his shirt. Can’t remember if there was a pre-nup?



I think Mm’s high end estimated worth pre-marriage was 5 million. Not bad at all, but even if they put in proportional shares, Harry is pretty much paying for the house.

I posted it in one of my earlier posts, but the house is in one of Meghan’s shell company names. It’s her house essentially.

***Edited to add: sorry for the crosspost lol


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> At the time of purchase, the mortgage was around $9.5m but it appears they have paid down half of it since then.


They paid an additional $4M is about 1 year, that is impressive. So their mortgage should be now about 20-25K/month, not bad! I wonder what was the source of those funds, H/UK or Neflix/Spotify. I believe we can exclude MM/Suits funds.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> Doesn‘t Harry still have his money? I thought he had something like 35 million in trust... that would have easily covered the house...


In one of Lady C's videos, she mentioned a figure over $40M. I can't remember the exact number. She was making a case that they he had plenty of money and there was no need for so much greed.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> In one of Lady C's videos, she mentioned a figure over $40M. I can't remember the exact number. She was making a case that they he had plenty of money and there was no need for so much greed.


well, yes, plenty of money but they are living at a very high level


----------



## Aimee3

csshopper said:


> Mortgage + Property Taxes + Insurance + Water, Heating, Cooling, Trash + Landscaping and Pool upkeep + Staff + Meaghan’s Wardrobe, Hair Extensions etc
> 
> Big Bucks.


Don’t forget the plastic surgery because her face doesn’t look at all like it did last year!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He said Meghan and Diana wouldn't have got along 'in any way', telling Hola! magazine: 'I think Meghan is the boss... Harry is a boy who suffered a lot and believes that Meghan has the legacy of Diana. But he is very confused.'



I have said it before, I'll say it again: I'm almost 100 % certain that had Diana lived Harry would not have fallen victim to Meghan.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Don’t forget the plastic surgery because her face doesn’t look at all like it did last year!



In vitro fertilization isn't cheap either. Though it might be a drop in the bucket compared to PS.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have said it before, I'll say it again: I'm almost 100 % certain that had Diana lived Harry would not have fallen victim to Meghan.


I think that too, absolutely


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> It was a football match those pictures of George were taken.
> And it bollocks, not bullocks, lol


Apologies Sharon.


Sharont2305 said:


> It was a football match those pictures of George were taken.
> And it bollocks, not bullocks, lol


 Oh my goodness, I made a real mess of that. When I told my friend, she had a good laugh.

If I had engaged my brain before my fingers on the keyboard, I would have remembered it was a football game.  
Once again, have learned something here, and the next time it's appropriate to use it , it will be_ bollocks _to Harry!

Thanks for setting it straight for me.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have said it before, I'll say it again: I'm almost 100 % certain that had Diana lived Harry would not have fallen victim to Meghan.



I don’t think you can say Harry has fallen victim to Meghan though. What evidence is there that Harry is in any way a good or nice person? Maybe if Diana had been alive he’d be different, but Harry is who he is.. a nazi dressing, naked billiard playing faux-woke fake environmentalist who thinks he’s better than everyone. Seems like it must be insufferable to be around him.

I think any good or nice Harry stories we’ve seen were just Will and Kate’s PR machine trying to help him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t think you can say Harry has fallen victim to Meghan though. What evidence is there that Harry is in any way a good or nice person? Maybe if Diana had been alive he’d be different, but Harry is who he is.. a nazi dressing, naked billiard playing faux-woke fake environmentalist who thinks he’s better than everyone. Seems like it must be insufferable to be around him.
> 
> I think any good or nice Harry stories we’ve seen were just Will and Kate’s PR machine trying to help him.



Besides his obvious character flaws - Lady CC says the ugly stories have been around the British upper class for years, and at this point I don't doubt any of it - I still think like a predator she sensed his mental instability and figured out within moments where the barely scabbed-over wounds were, then went to work. Whereas a better woman (both outfitted with a non-sh*tty character and better for him) would maybe have been able to bring out the more endearing parts of his personality.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Apologies Sharon.
> 
> Oh my goodness, I made a real mess of that. When I told my friend, she had a good laugh.
> 
> If I had engaged my brain before my fingers on the keyboard, I would have remembered it was a football game.
> Once again, have learned something here, and the next time it's appropriate to use it , it will be_ bollocks _to Harry!
> 
> Thanks for setting it straight for me.



Oh, I don't know. Bullock is a term for a castrated male bovine. What we would call a steer in the US.

If we are talking about Harry, isn't the term bullock appropriate?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Apologies Sharon.
> 
> Oh my goodness, I made a real mess of that. When I told my friend, she had a good laugh.
> 
> If I had engaged my brain before my fingers on the keyboard, I would have remembered it was a football game.
> Once again, have learned something here, and the next time it's appropriate to use it , it will be_ bollocks _to Harry!
> 
> Thanks for setting it straight for me.


LOL, you're welcome.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> At the time of purchase, the mortgage was around $9.5m but it appears they have paid down half of it since then.


That's amazing.  Thanks to Netflix?  Spotify?  Charles?  Charles?  Charles?


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Apologies Sharon.
> 
> Oh my goodness, I made a real mess of that. When I told my friend, she had a good laugh.
> 
> If I had engaged my brain before my fingers on the keyboard, I would have remembered it was a football game.
> Once again, have learned something here, and the next time it's appropriate to use it , it will be_ bollocks _to Harry!
> 
> Thanks for setting it straight for me.



We had an upscale department store chain on the west coast called Bullock's. I used to buy my sky high platform jute rope Sbicca sandals there in the 70's.  Their flagship Bullock's Wilshire was awesome. But I always wondered about the Bullock's/bollocks thing..........did they think people wouldn't notice?


----------



## Chagall

jennlt said:


> I don't know where the money is coming from but it seems that paying off the mortgage is a very high priority. For one of them, at least.


Well if that’s true it is probably the smartest thing I have seen them do so far.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides his obvious character flaws - Lady CC says the ugly stories have been around the British upper class for years, and at this point I don't doubt any of it - I still think like a predator she sensed his mental instability and figured out within moments where the barely scabbed-over wounds were, then went to work. Whereas a better woman (both outfitted with a non-sh*tty character and better for him) would maybe have been able to bring out the more endearing parts of his personality.



I’m not saying she’s not playing a game. I’m just saying Harry is too. How many women did Harry date that walked on him? Money doesn’t fix an awful personality. If she wants to marry him, bleed him dry and leave him, that’s on him.  (That said, i think she’ll stay unless something happens. There are plenty of marriages of convenience. Marrying for love is a really modern concept. The weird doe eyes have me convinced this isn’t real. Adults don’t look at each other like that, soon we’ll have annual vow renewals...) He’s an adult and needs to for once have to live with his decisions. It’s a shame Charles will probably bail him out.

She’s set for life. She’s got the fame she wants, but not for one second do I think they aren’t equal partners in their mess. They’re both getting what they want out of the marriage. Harry gets California and aggravating his family and Meghan gets fame and adulation. I don’t blame them for taking the deals if people are going to pay them. That’s Netflix and Spotify’s fault. I just hope the kids will be happy. Who cares about the adults? The kids are innocent.

Edited to add- ooh.., got on a tangent there..l sorry. Netflix annoys me....


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure whether Mr Gutierrez is a genius or is being fooled by MM&H. Time will tell! 




Meghan and Prince Harry's contract with audio streaming giant Spotify has been criticised by Steve Brine, Tory MP for Winchester. Mr Brine was one of the members of Parliament leading an inquiry into how Spotify, Apple and Amazon distribute revenue.

Attending the digital, culture, media and sport (DCMS) committee's latest session on the impact of streaming on Tuesday afternoon, Mr Brine voiced his views on the profitable deal between Spotify and the Sussexes.

Speaking to the platform's head of global affairs and chief legal officer, Horacio Gutierrez, Mr Brine said their pay deal “sticks in the craw of some of the artists who are driving Uber cars right now to pay the rent”.

Meghan and Prince Harry struck a deal with Spotify late last year.

*Their arrival on the platform with a considerably-sized deal was not welcomed by all artists on Spotify.*

Some musicians and songwriters complained that, while Meghan and Harry were able to strike a profitable deal, they receive royalties from streaming services so meagre they are struggling to make ends meet.

At the committee's inquiry, Mr Gutierrez did not go into detail about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's deal, only saying: “They’re not doing it for free.”

And he defended Spotify's decision to award Meghan and Harry a considerable deal, saying investing in podcasts benefited music consumption on the whole.

*Asked if the couple were regarded as “box office”, Mr Gutierrez replied: “Yes. In terms of the talent that goes into podcasts, yes.”*

The Spotify chief likened Meghan and Harry's presence on Spotify to major TV shows and productions on other streaming platforms.

He added: “Those high production shows that tend to be the tentpole that attract people into the service, and therefore benefit everyone.

“There is clear evidence that having podcast offerings on the service benefits music consumption, so on the whole there’s a virtuous cycle that occurs.”

Asked by Mr Brine whether Harry and Meghan were saving the music industry, Mr Gutierrez responded: “That seems a bit premature.

“They’re not the only act that we’ve signed, we’ve signed dozens of those and we’ll continue to do that.”

Mr Gutierrez also said podcasts have "a completely different set of economics" than other music side of the business, adding: “We don’t get to negotiate directly with artists the way we negotiate with podcasters or people who create podcasts so the structure of that market is very different.”

*He also said: “The product is valued based on how many users it can attract, how many streams it will attract, which in turn determines how many advertisers are willing to advertise on the podcast which determines the economic opportunity, there’s a market that’s emerging for talent in that regard.”*

Mr Brine vs. Mr Gutierrez


----------



## poopsie

Chagall said:


> I wondered how they could afford that huge house in such a desirable location. Is poor old Charles footing the bill in some way. I know he helps to support them but to what extent, and why?



Charles has always seemed like a weak person to me. Far easier to just throw money at the problem and let others deal with the ramifications of his second son's shortcomings.
What is the saying? If you can't be a good example, at least be a horrible warning.
Looks like in JCMH's case he failed at either option


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I don't know. Bullock is a term for a castrated male bovine. What we would call a steer in the US.
> 
> If we are talking about Harry, isn't the term bullock appropriate?


Bollocks (noun) is quite rude in the UK, not for polite company, it is a 4 letter word with 8 letters
Bullock is an animal, noun
Bollox is a verb used in the US, to mess up things, slang but not rude, derived from bollocks, not used a lot, used by Americans of UK extraction


----------



## carmen56

sdkitty said:


> I no good at assessing these things but looks like maybe she has had fillers?  why?  what FL? Nancy?



I’d say Melania, I always thought she had cat like eyes.


----------



## csshopper

Something to keep in mind, when in the future Meghan and Harry show up on Netflix. Whatever they do, there are sure to be claims that it's a huge success, or biggest ever etc. BUT, Netflix counts any show that is visited for *2 minutes *as having been watched. Don't even need to actually view it, just click on it. Envison a mass communication to all the stans to warm up their thumbs and start clicking to get the numbers into the stratosphere, when in fact, the show could be a real dud and no one is watching. Harry and Meghan could take turns and laugh all the way to the bank. This business model fits them to a T, minimum effort for the biggest payoff. Disgusting. 

The numbers in red reference the citations from research materials used by the author and are part of the published article cut and pasted here:

"Netflix has been called out by some media organizations and competitors for only rarely and selectively releasing its ratings and viewer numbers. A notable instance of this involves the film _Bird Box_. A week after its release, Netflix claimed that it had the biggest seven-day viewing record of any of its original films at over 45 million viewers, but did not provide data to validate it.[478] It also was not possible to accurately compare its week-long success to a major cultural event such as the Super Bowl or Academy Awards or to a blockbuster film run.[479] In June 2019, Netflix claimed that 30,869,863 accounts watched the Adam Sandler- and Jennifer Aniston-starring Netflix original film _Murder Mystery_, despite it being critically panned, making it the biggest "opening weekend" for a Netflix original film. If the film had been in theaters it would have made the equivalent of $556 million based on a $9 ticket price. Critics cast doubt that this number of people would have watched the film given that it would have made the film more popular than the finale of _Game of Thrones_.[480]

In the fourth quarter of 2019, Netflix changed the method it used to estimate viewers for a show. Before this, Netflix counted a viewer towards viewership if they watched 70% of the show; with the new change, a viewer need only watch two minutes of the show to count. Netflix started the two-minute metric indicated that the viewer chose to watch the show, and thus counted in its viewership. This also eliminated factors such as the length of the work, so that both short and long works would be treated equally. In a statement to shareholders, Netflix estimated this increased viewership by 35% on average.[481] This new metric was criticized as commentators felt two minutes was far too little of any show to engage a viewer, and instead the move by Netflix was to artificially increase viewership to put their numbers on par with television networks and movie ticket sales, such as trying to compare viewership of The Witcher with that of HBO's Game of Thrones.[482][483]"


----------



## carmen56

poopsie said:


> Charles has always seemed like a weak person to me. Far easier to just throw money at the problem and let others deal with the ramifications of his second son's shortcomings.
> What is the saying? If you can't be a good example, at least be a horrible warning.
> Looks like in JCMH's case he failed at either option





marietouchet said:


> Bollocks (noun) is quite rude in the UK, expression, not for polite company, it is a 4 letter word with 8 letters
> Bullock is an animal, noun
> Bollox is a verb used in the US, to mess up things, slang but not rude, derived from bollocks, not used a lot, used by Americans of UK extraction



Perhaps the word you’re looking for regarding Harry is ‘pillock,’ meaning idiot.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Sol Ryan said:


> Maybe if Diana had been alive he’d be different, but Harry is who he is.. a nazi dressing, naked billiard playing faux-woke fake environmentalist who thinks he’s better than everyone.



Totally agree.  Harry isn't a victim of anything.  He is, however,  boorish.


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> I’d say Melania, I always thought she had cat like eyes.


lol....how could I not get that?  maybe cause I'd like to forget her


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> lol....how could I not get that?  maybe cause I'd like to forget her



of course you knew. But, once again you get to make a nonpolitical/political post and get away with it


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> of course you knew. But, once again you get to make a nonpolitical/political post and get away with it


once again? I've been slapped before.  and for the record I sincerely didn't think of her

Poopsie you and I have been friendly in other subforums.  I can agree to disagree with you on some things


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Something to keep in mind, when in the future Meghan and Harry show up on Netflix. Whatever they do, there are sure to be claims that it's a huge success, or biggest ever etc. BUT, Netflix counts any show that is visited for *2 minutes *as having been watched. Don't even need to actually view it, just click on it. Envison a mass communication to all the stans to warm up their thumbs and start clicking to get the numbers into the stratosphere, when in fact, the show could be a real dud and no one is watching. Harry and Meghan could take turns and laugh all the way to the bank. This business model fits them to a T, minimum effort for the biggest payoff. Disgusting.
> 
> The numbers in red reference the citations from research materials used by the author and are part of the published article cut and pasted here:
> 
> "Netflix has been called out by some media organizations and competitors for only rarely and selectively releasing its ratings and viewer numbers. A notable instance of this involves the film _Bird Box_. A week after its release, Netflix claimed that it had the biggest seven-day viewing record of any of its original films at over 45 million viewers, but did not provide data to validate it.[478] It also was not possible to accurately compare its week-long success to a major cultural event such as the Super Bowl or Academy Awards or to a blockbuster film run.[479] In June 2019, Netflix claimed that 30,869,863 accounts watched the Adam Sandler- and Jennifer Aniston-starring Netflix original film _Murder Mystery_, despite it being critically panned, making it the biggest "opening weekend" for a Netflix original film. If the film had been in theaters it would have made the equivalent of $556 million based on a $9 ticket price. Critics cast doubt that this number of people would have watched the film given that it would have made the film more popular than the finale of _Game of Thrones_.[480]
> 
> In the fourth quarter of 2019, Netflix changed the method it used to estimate viewers for a show. Before this, Netflix counted a viewer towards viewership if they watched 70% of the show; with the new change, a viewer need only watch two minutes of the show to count. Netflix started the two-minute metric indicated that the viewer chose to watch the show, and thus counted in its viewership. This also eliminated factors such as the length of the work, so that both short and long works would be treated equally. In a statement to shareholders, Netflix estimated this increased viewership by 35% on average.[481] This new metric was criticized as commentators felt two minutes was far too little of any show to engage a viewer, and instead the move by Netflix was to artificially increase viewership to put their numbers on par with television networks and movie ticket sales, such as trying to compare viewership of The Witcher with that of HBO's Game of Thrones.[482][483]"


I have no intention of giving them 2 seconds. I've been trying to convince my family to cancel Neflix, but didn't succeed yet.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> We had an upscale department store chain on the west coast called Bullock's. I used to buy my sky high platform jute rope Sbicca sandals there in the 70's.  Their flagship Bullock's Wilshire was awesome. But I always wondered about the Bullock's/bollocks thing..........did they think people wouldn't notice?


I always feel sad when department stores close, it's like the end of an era. I believe the original building is still in downtown LA. Is Sandra Bullock a member of the Bullock family that owned those stores?


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> once again? I've been slapped before.  and for the record I sincerely didn't think of her
> 
> Poopsie you and I have been friendly in other subforums.  I can agree to disagree with you on some things



Yes. 
but my gawd, really? I don't want to get into anything further either, but just know that my self-imposed hiatus from TPF was strictly due to political postings. 
The constant snide remarks and digs add up. mUch as I have disagreed with multiple administrations I have managed to sit on my hands for years. It is very frustrating not to receive the same courtesy/respect in return.


----------



## CarryOn2020

To ascertain what kind of person H is, look at his previous relationships. While Chels has never said anything negative about him, their years long on/off relationship did not end in marriage. That says it all. What kind of guy, esp a Royal, takes up 6 years of a woman’s life? He is no gentleman. He uses people for his own gain — no wonder he and D get along.  Chelsy‘s own words: _Chelsy, who attended the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton on 29 April 2011, stated that she would not marry Prince Harry due to rising incompatibility of life choices in the relationship._








						Chelsy Davy - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Cress, too, was able to escape. As far as I know, neither woman has said anything more than “I wish him well/happiness/etc.”.  Not exactly a glowing, joyful sentiment.

If you are still in doubt, re-watch his engagement interview. He acts, sounds and behaves like a 15 yr old. Then, watch William’s.
Man-child vs adult.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I always feel sad when department stores close, it's like the end of an era. I believe the original building is still in downtown LA. Is Sandra Bullock a member of the Bullock family that owned those stores?



IKR!
We are losing out local Macy's, but that is different as there is another one 5 minutes away.
I have always regretted never making it to Filene's Basement. 
I literally wept when we lost our NM Last Call.
As for Sandra.....I really don't know.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> once again? I've been slapped before.  and for the record I sincerely didn't think of her


Once you start to notice the cat-eye lift thing-y, you can't help but see it on all your favourite, and not so favourite celebs.  And it's not makeup.

So, lets use Bella as an extreme example of the lift that some think Meg got. Here's Bella in the before, with a new nose and lips, but look at the cat eye in the after!


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Once you start to notice the cat-eye lift thing-y, you can't help but see it on all your favourite, and not so favourite celebs.  And it's not makeup.
> 
> So, lets use Bella as an extreme example of the lift that some think Meg got. Here's Bella in the before, with a new nose and lips, but look at the cat eye in the after!


I'm sorry maybe I'm old but to me it's a shame that one so young alters her face like that.  I can see if a young woman has a truly unfortunate feature that makes her uncomfortable like a huge nose.  but to do this?  guess she felt it would help her modelling career and maybe it did.
In the case of a more mature woman, is this cat eye thing more a by-product of surgery to lift the eyes, rather than intentionally making them slant?


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> IKR!
> We are losing out local Macy's, but that is different as there is another one 5 minutes away.
> I have always regretted never making it to Filene's Basement.
> I literally wept when we lost our NM Last Call.
> As for Sandra.....I really don't know.


We lost our Macy's several years ago. Don't even mention Filene's Basement, it brings to mind so many good memories. It was a favorite from my time as a student in Boston. It was a lot of fun. I didn't miss much NM Last Call (yet), but I keep my fingers crossed that NM and BG stay around for many many years to come.


----------



## Jayne1

I hadn't noticed Meg's cat-eyes, but she is part of the Hollywood scene now so I'm thinking she did... ? Very Kimmy. 

Bad pics off recent videos...


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry maybe I'm old but to me it's a shame that one so young alters her face like that.  I can see if a young woman has a truly unfortunate feature that makes her uncomfortable like a huge nose.  but to do this?  guess she felt it would help her modelling career and maybe it did.
> In the case of a more mature woman, is this cat eye thing more a by-product of surgery to lift the eyes, rather than intentionally making them slant?


Yes, apparently it can be a one stitch thing, quite simple, and you'll now notice how so many (reality types especially) seem to have it!


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> IKR!
> We are losing out local Macy's, but that is different as there is another one 5 minutes away.
> I have always regretted never making it to Filene's Basement.
> I literally wept when we lost our NM Last Call.
> As for Sandra.....I really don't know.


I haven't frequented the local macys much.....what I miss is Loehmanns


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Once again, have learned something here, and the next time it's appropriate to use it , it will be_ *bollocks* _to Harry!


Too bad Harry is missing a set of that particular appendage.


----------



## Chagall

It was heartbreaking when Eatons closed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DP.


----------



## Lounorada

I took a break for several weeks from reading anything about these two insufferable gobshites, but i'm back for some guilty pleasure to see all your reactions after hearing about the upcoming Oprah look-at-me-show interview, The Queen stripping them of their patronages and their spoilt little brat of a response 
So excuse me replying to days old posts as I catch up on 50 or so pages of posts... I'm about half way through! 



gracekelly said:


> Color me incredulous that these two are worthy of a TV interview.  They are not.  One would think that he was his Uncle  David who walked away from being King and an actual throne.  *All these two walked away from was opening a dairy in West Anglia  and living in former servants' quarters that looked like a renovated post office. * And that is precisely why she wanted out. My answer to that is that she should have thought about it before putting the ring on her finger.  Wouldn't it be cool if Oprah asked her that exact question.  Love to hear the answer. I guess if you pay the PR people enough money, they can shove you into the media to whine at how unfair life is.  We will be treated to every cramp and sanitary napkin that she used during her "miscarriage."  I don't know whether to order a case of popcorn or tissues.












RAINDANCE said:


> *Meghan’s talk-show move undermines the very monarchy that made her*
> The last thing the Queen needs is another explosive TV interview with family members – especially when they left their royal duties behind
> ALLISON PEARSON16 February 2021 • 7:12pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah will be aired in March and last 90 minutes CREDIT: Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> 
> Say what you like about Prince Charles, he’s never shown us his bunions. The heir to the throne must, perforce, cut a more dignified figure than his younger son and for that we must be grateful.
> Prince Harry put his foot in it (both of them actually, without socks or shoes) in a romantic black and white photograph which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released to announce they are expecting their second child. (The pregnancy explains why Meghan succeeded in getting a postponement of her recent successful privacy trial against the Mail on Sunday for “confidential reasons”.)
> The baby – judging by the size of that bump he or she will be born not long after big brother Archie’s second birthday in May – will be eighth in line to the throne. This pregnancy is a blessing coming after Meghan’s miscarriage last year and everyone will wish the young family well.
> 
> As is so often the case with the Sussexes, though, there is something contrived about the communication. The picture shows Meghan, head in a beaming Harry’s lap, lying in the dappled shade of a tree. It is one of those artfully artless shots that celebrities post on Instagram to show how authentically natural they are while, out of shot, you just know the poor stylist, hairdresser and make-up artist are sweating buckets to make sure everything looks perfect.
> It’s almost as if each detail of the portrait were selected to make a point. “See how grounded we are! We lie on the grass! We disdain footwear! We are free spirits not uptight, stuffy Royals like, to take a completely random example, William and Kate!”
> Misan Harriman, who recently became British Vogue’s first black cover photographer, somehow snapped the “spontaneous” moment in LA remotely with an iPad from London. “With the tree of life behind them and the garden representing fertility, life and moving forward, they didn’t need any direction, because they are, and always have been, waltzing through life together as absolute soulmates,” said Harriman. Spoken totally spontaneously, I’m sure, and in no way prompted by breathless, sub-_Bridgerton _prose signed off by the Duchess and her PR team.
> 
> Although such prompts have been known to happen. _Finding Freedom_, a doting, unauthorised biography of the couple published last year, reported events and dialogue which many believe could only have been known to the two people present at the time.
> We will never unlock the mystery of that remarkable act of ventriloquism. Nor will we find out whether Meghan’s strange, scolding, self-exculpating letter to her father, Thomas Markle (published in the _Mail on Sunday_), was written with a bigger audience in mind. The judge ruled in the Duchess’s favour before any court proceedings began. Pity. It would have been interesting to hear from the man who raised Meghan, who paid for her private education; the darling daddy to whom she was seemingly devoted until he naively cooperated with a reporter before the Royal wedding. Or maybe she thought he would look bad in the photographs? Either way, he was hastily written out of the fairytale by his calligrapher daughter.
> *By now, even the most ardent Royalist – no, actually, let’s make that especially the most ardent Royalist – may find themselves deeply irritated by a couple who left the UK to escape the attention of the ghastly, prying media, but who seem perfectly happy to invade their own privacy when it suits.* And please don’t get me started on the allegations that Meghan’s treatment at the hands of the British media was cruel, even “racist”. A billion column inches raved about what a “breath of fresh air” she was and delighted in the happiness she brought our favourite cheeky prince. Any change in tone was caused by the Sussexes and their sensitivity to criticism, no matter how well deserved. The Duke and Duchess’s not entirely convincing ambivalence about being in the public eye was superbly summed up in a _Daily Star _headline: “Publicity-shy woman tells 7.67 billion people; I’m pregnant.”
> 
> It was the best of British irony. California-born Meghan would never get the joke. Harry’s old mates in the regiment would. So would the Prince, unless he has drunk too deep of wheatgrass shots and chai lattes. That’s what we all fear, isn’t it?
> As if that wasn’t quite enough “unwanted” media attention to be going on with, now we learn Meghan and Harry are planning to do “wide-ranging” and “intimate” TV interview with Oprah Winfrey. The “tell-all” 90-minute special, to air on CBS on March 7, will focus on the Duchess of Sussex who will discuss “everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood and philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure”. *The public pressure that would surely be quite simple to escape by staying home with Archie and maybe not risk embarrassing the Royal family in front of 40 million Americans.*
> It has been reported that Prince Harry will join the show later. Will it be a non-speaking appearance? Or will he be given cue cards? Rule nothing out. *The awkward fact is that Meghan’s sole claim to global fame, the reason why a former cable TV actress commands such a high-profile interview at all, arises from her husband, and hence from the Crown. *
> After the devastation caused by Prince Andrew’s _Newsnight _appearance, I would say the very last thing the Queen needs right now is another explosive TV interview featuring close family members. *How very unkind to Harry’s Granny, who celebrates her 95th birthday in April.* *It’s one thing for the “spare” to leave the country and carve out a happier life for himself out of the shadow of his brother, the heir. **Quite another to leverage your status to moan about the vast privilege of being Royal.*
> Do Meghan and Harry care? I doubt it.
> The UK, and its people, who gave them such a rapturous, heartfelt reception at their wedding in May 2018, are increasingly irrelevant to their ambitions. That pregnancy announcement photograph was targeted at a US audience. With good reason. No American would quip, as one cynical Brit did, that the baby’s middle name should be “Netflix”.
> Nonetheless, the Oprah interview could turn out to be the final straw. Until now, the Windsors have treated Harry with kid gloves, leaving the door open for him to resume Royal duties if things went wrong. Yesterday, Palace sources suggested the Sussexes are set to lose their last Royal patronages, a mark of displeasure if it’s true. How much longer can they hang onto their Royal titles if they use them to become talk-show-circuit celebs, undermining the monarchy that made them?
> Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer Royals who wear socks.


This article- well said!






CarryOn2020 said:


> Proving once again, they do not know when to be quiet:
> 
> _A spokesman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said: *'As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to the organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT be returning as working royals
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed to The Queen that they will not be returning as working members of the Royal Family, Buckingham Palace said today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Harry’s 99 year old grandfather, Prince Phillip,  remains in hospital.






Work? If the wOrK they have done in the past year is evidence to go by then that translates to:






viciel said:


> This is what people with NPD do, they will bait you over and over again, to lure you into a war of words. The Firm needs to NOT engage. Set boundaries by not engaging. It will make them more angry and they will keep coming at you with more baiting and attacks, just ignore these people let them put on their circus show and the palace should go about their business. I would not take Harry back even if he and MM end up divorcing and he realizes his mistakes. A lifetime of teachings about duty clearly hasn't done anything for him, this one is a lost cause.


THIS!







QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found this one when people predicted what the outcome of the Oprah interview would be, but it's actually a very well written analysis of Meghan's behaviour in general:


Serving all the truths on a silver platter




Thanks for posting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Another good title for the already recorded interview:
> 
> *Meghan and Harry filmed Oprah interview on Tuesday and the Duchess believes the prime-time TV tell-all is the 'loudest way she'll get her voice back' because a 'voice within the royal family wasn't enough'*
> 
> Speaking about the Oprah interview which was filmed in California, the source close the couple told the Times: 'Having an institutional voice within the royal family wasn't enough [for Meghan]. This interview will be the loudest way she'll get her voice back.'
> 
> 'When they first started dating Meghan felt she had lost her voice. She had had a platform as a moderately successful actress, and when she was told to stop using her social media and be careful what she said, I could tell that loss of voice and independence pained her.'
> 
> TV companies are already locked in an international bidding war for the rights to the programme, which will see Meghan talk about marriage and motherhood, having recently announced her second pregnancy, as well as her handling of life under the most intense of spotlights.
> 
> She is highlighted as the star of the show, with CBS, the American network broadcasting the special in the States, billing Harry as something of a support act.
> 
> The all voice is here!


Romanticising this type of behaviour? Seriously?! Meggy dear, if the EARLY stages of dating a guy causes you to lose your independence and your voice then that is a major red flag and you need to exit that relationship ASAP for your own good. Which is probably what all of H's clever exes did before this narcissistic fool came along like a praying mantis with this man-child in her sights. I would have thought a feminist would understand that and spot this issue a mile away because your independence and your voice are _everything_.
I can't with this nonsense.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Once you start to notice the cat-eye lift thing-y, you can't help but see it on all your favourite, and not so favourite celebs.  And it's not makeup.
> 
> So, lets use Bella as an extreme example of the lift that some think Meg got. Here's Bella in the before, with a new nose and lips, but look at the cat eye in the after!


Wow.  I didn't even know this was a thing!  My daughter has the most amazing green/cat like colored eyes, (Yes, I'm biased, but she gets compliments incessantly!) but if she did this alteration to her actual eyes, I think I'd cry!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> I took a break for several weeks from reading anything about these two insufferable gobshites, but i'm back for some guilty pleasure to see all your reactions after hearing about the upcoming Oprah look-at-me-show interview, The Queen stripping them of their patronages and their spoilt little brat of a response
> So excuse me replying to days old posts as I catch up on 50 or so pages of posts... I'm about half way through!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This article- well said!
> View attachment 5001217
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5001221
> 
> 
> Work? If the wOrK they have done in the past year is evidence to go by then that translates to:
> View attachment 5001220
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THIS!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serving all the truths on a silver platter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting!


Yay!  You're back!  I miss your perfectly appropriate GIFs!


----------



## lulu212121

Lounorada said:


> Romanticising this type of behaviour? Seriously?! Meggy dear, if the EARLY stages of dating a guy causes you to lose your independence and your voice then that is a major red flag and you need to exit that relationship ASAP for your own good. Which is probably what all of H's clever exes did before this narcissistic fool came along like a praying mantis with this man-child in her sights. I would have thought a feminist would understand that and spot this issue a mile away because your independence and your voice are _everything_.
> I can't with this nonsense.


Yay!!! Lou your back! Love your insightYour gifs are so needed right now


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lou is back, yay!

I practically grew up at Filene’s Basement! I went to high school with daughter of the owner at the time.


----------



## purseinsanity

How Prince William, Kate Feel About Harry and Meghan's Sit-Down Interview
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are set to give their first tell-all interview since their royal step down in March 2020 — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## redney

purseinsanity said:


> How Prince William, Kate Feel About Harry and Meghan's Sit-Down Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are set to give their first tell-all interview since their royal step down in March 2020 — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


They are "appalled." Join the club, Wills & Kate!


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I'm so sick of seeing that green cape outfit.....she might as well have worn it 50 times for all the times that horrid photo has been used



I sorta liked the dress, beautiful color, but her smugness and head crammed in turtle like in all those photos ruined it. Ugh.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless!
> View attachment 4998143
> 
> Undesirable guests!


----------



## purseinsanity

He only wants to go to the party to try to get all the attention.  Nice try JCMH.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> How Prince William, Kate Feel About Harry and Meghan's Sit-Down Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are set to give their first tell-all interview since their royal step down in March 2020 — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com





redney said:


> They are "appalled." Join the club, Wills & Kate!



“_The queen was hoping that they’d return, but there is not much she can do about it and accepts their decision,_”_ a source previously revealed. _

I wonder who this source is, I bet the queen was relieved. The last thing the BRF needs is more damage from MM&H.


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> I took a break for several weeks from reading anything about these two insufferable gobshites, but i'm back for some guilty pleasure to see all your reactions after hearing about the upcoming Oprah look-at-me-show interview, The Queen stripping them of their patronages and their spoilt little brat of a response
> So excuse me replying to days old posts as I catch up on 50 or so pages of posts... I'm about half way through!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This article- well said!
> View attachment 5001217
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5001221
> 
> 
> Work? If the wOrK they have done in the past year is evidence to go by then that translates to:
> View attachment 5001220
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THIS!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serving all the truths on a silver platter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting!


Happy to see you!  You were missed!


----------



## bag-mania

So I guess CNN is Team Sussex. They are reporting the donation to repair the roof at the Texas women’s shelter as news.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> “_The queen was hoping that they’d return, but there is not much she can do about it and accepts their decision,_”_ a source previously revealed. _
> 
> I wonder who this source is, I bet the queen was relieved. The last thing the BRF needs is more damage from MM&H.


I believe The Queen is thinking that the Russians had the right idea back in the day, which was to send troublesome people to Siberia. Peeps were so busy keep warm that it kept them out of trouble.   Unfortunately it is nice and warm in So Cal so they won't be feeling any pain.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> So I guess CNN is Team Sussex. They are reporting the donation to repair the roof at the Texas women’s shelter as news.
> 
> View attachment 5001389
> View attachment 5001390


That looks like a ceiling to me, and maybe all that is needed is a patch on the roof and some new overhead ceiling tiles in the room.  That's about all their $200 donation will cover anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

So strange, this podcast I love does this thing called $2 Thursdays, it’s basically a micro donation thing, where many people are willing to give $2 a week, but it adds up! Last week that was the selected charity and we, as a group donated $5000


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> That looks like a ceiling to me, and maybe all that is needed is a patch on the roof and some new overhead ceiling tiles in the room.  That's about all their $200 donation will cover anyway.



Yeah, everything they do seems to be exaggerated to make them look better. A lot of people believe it, even those in the news business.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> So strange, this podcast I love does this thing called $2 Thursdays, it’s basically a micro donation thing, where many people are willing to give $2 a week, but it adds up! Last week that was the selected charity and we, as a group donated $5000
> 
> View attachment 5001394



Interesting. It wouldn’t surprise me if the podcast group’s $5,000 was more than Archewell donated, yet they aren’t getting major news coverage for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DDoS rarely announce the amount of the donations. Difficult to applaud unknown amounts.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> So strange, this podcast I love does this thing called $2 Thursdays, it’s basically a micro donation thing, where many people are willing to give $2 a week, but it adds up! Last week that was the selected charity and we, as a group donated $5000
> 
> View attachment 5001394


It looks like the Sussex $200 dollars donation was not enough to fix all the ceiling tiles, and they need to collect more funds.


----------



## rose60610

M&H's $42.17 donation to buy 9 shingles is surely headline worthy. The next place to get hit with a catastrophic flood will get a $54.82 donation from M&H to put toward some sponges. And they'd better be damned grateful and make headlines also. Because it's all about star power, if somebody as (sniff sniff) im-PUAAAHW-tahnt as M&H donated, then it stun gun jolts us plebes (raindrops) into donating action too. Dontcha know that M&H are so moved by philanthropy, that they told the Queen that SERVICE IS UNIVERSAL? Whatever would we do without the profound wisdom and generosity of M&H? I'm waiting for a Go Fund Me by their stans to build a shrine dedicated to their silent, behind the scenes donations to disaster causes. Of course it'll ask (beg sobbingly while gasping for air) for outside money. You don't expect M&H or their stans to actually use THEIR OWN money, do you?


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> It was heartbreaking when Eatons closed.


Not to me. The sons inherited  a fabulous business, grabbed all the money, and drove it into the ground. What a waste.

I still miss Simpsons though!


----------



## Chanbal

According to Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers, the interview was moved to an earlier date because MM&H knew they were going to lose their patronages by the March 31 deadline. It's all Showbiz! 

"_Mr Myers said: “It was described to me this week that someone had said the dates had been brought forward because they knew they were going to lose their patronages, because of the March 31 deadline coming up for the 12-month review of them leaving the Royal Family.

“And they wanted to put across the notion that they had made these decisions of their own volition, that they made it look like they were stepping down, rather than the Queen stripping them of their patronages, which has emerged this week actually._"









						Meghan Markle’s Oprah interview date ‘brought forward'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey was brought forward due to the couple losing their patronages, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has anyone heard from OW?
She must be furious by now.


----------



## elvisfan4life

poopsie said:


> Charles has always seemed like a weak person to me. Far easier to just throw money at the problem and let others deal with the ramifications of his second son's shortcomings.
> What is the saying? If you can't be a good example, at least be a horrible warning.
> Looks like in JCMH's case he failed at either option


Charles has a servant to squeeze his toothpaste for him


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> I believe The Queen is thinking that the Russians had the right idea back in the day, which was to send troublesome people to Siberia. Peeps were so busy keep warm that it kept them out of trouble.   Unfortunately it is nice and warm in So Cal so they won't be feeling any pain.


Elizabeth I had the right idea of what to do with troublesome relatives ( Mary Queen of Scots for instance) and we still have the Tower!!! It’s closed to the public now anyway


----------



## poopsie

elvisfan4life said:


> Charles has a servant to squeeze his toothpaste for him



Now that is something I could use!  Especially if they roll the tube up from the bottom as they go. 
I can't get the knack of that and my toothpaste tubes always end up looking like week old roadkill by the time I'm done with them


----------



## doni

I can’t help it, I just hate it when vocabulary is manipulated to advance an agenda.

Philanthropy is not service. Activism is not service. Charity is not service. Generosity is not service. Sacrifice is not service. All these things are very good and loable, but they simply are not “public service” in the sense used in the Queen’s statement. Service is not universal. We have different words to signify different meanings. Public service is when the actions are linked to a public function or position, be it the royal family, the civil service or the army... These two in the legitimate exercise of their freedom have chosen not to live a life of public service, and that is all there is to it. Own it.


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Not to me. The sons inherited  a fabulous business, grabbed all the money, and drove it into the ground. What a waste.
> 
> I still miss Simpsons though!


I still miss Simpsons also. I loved the downtown Toronto Simpsons and the beautiful restaurant. Can’t remember the name of it.


----------



## Sina08

Re Harry being a victim, if anything I think he’s an enabler and definitely not a victim.
As suggested a few posts before, I checked out W&K’s engagement video (never watched H&M’s except for snippets, because, you know). W says sth very significant, that he wanted to give K and her family enough time to grasp the true meaning and weight of living this life with him (and by that the chance to back out if necessary). That’s not only wise, it’s his responsibility as being the one who’s part of the royal family. 

So Harry is the royal in this relationship, he’s the one who knew how things worked in their circles, what’s allowed and what’s considered inappropriate etc. It would have been his duty to look out for his family, but he was willing to throw them under the bus without hesitation. 
There’s no way he can’t see through M’s behavior, she’s doing everything with him in tow. All the lies and inconsistencies we’ve been reading about, he’s living it first hand. So he must know about at least a few of them (e.g. their constantly changing engagement story) because there sure is a discrepancy between reality as it happened and how they painted it for the public. If he can’t see the difference and believes her lies being the truth, he sure must have a rare mental condition. He knows she’s lying about things and he’s lying just as much when he sits there not contradicting her. If you’re standing by your spouse knowing all this, then it’s not because you’re a victim or a blind fool in love who got tricked into things, but because you’re complicit and in this case that makes him even worse than her. 

M is what she is. I think we can agree that she didn’t really change that much over the years. The only thing that has changed is the huge platform she received due to her marriage, and she just continued being M using all the perks and benefits along the way. Nevertheless, she never would have been able to pull all these things off, if it wasn’t for his compliance and enabling. Therefore I think, if he hadn’t been such an enabler right from the start, there never would have been a wedding in the first place. M saw her chance and closed the deal. Those two deserve each other. 
The annoying part is that they brought two innocent children into their mess, hurt their respective families, cost the UK public a lot of money and aren’t willing to shut the f up already.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> They paid an additional $4M is about 1 year, that is impressive. So their mortgage should be now about 20-25K/month, not bad! I wonder what was the source of those funds, H/UK or Neflix/Spotify. I believe we can exclude MM/Suits funds.


My guess, the money came from Harry’s UK inheritance from Diana
it can take time to access capital and get permissions from trustees, if required


----------



## marietouchet

A few posts back , discussion of whether the Harkles want to be liked/loved more ...
in a 2018-2019 interview MM stated she did not want to be loved (Princess of their hearts was a term coined by Diana) but wanted to be HEARD


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Or maybe the money came from Harry’s UK inheritance from Diana
> it can take time to access capital and get permissions from trustees, if required



There was a rumor that Harry didn’t like touching his inheritance money, but maybe his hand was forced by you know who.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> I took a break for several weeks from reading anything about these two insufferable gobshites, but i'm back for some guilty pleasure to see all your reactions after hearing about the upcoming Oprah look-at-me-show interview, The Queen stripping them of their patronages and their spoilt little brat of a response
> So excuse me replying to days old posts as I catch up on 50 or so pages of posts... I'm about half way through!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This article- well said!
> View attachment 5001217
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5001221
> 
> 
> Work? If the wOrK they have done in the past year is evidence to go by then that translates to:
> View attachment 5001220
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THIS!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serving all the truths on a silver platter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting!


Oh yes, they will probably have to talk about the miscarriage.  After all, this woman who so wants her privacy will need to share with all those less fortunate women who have suffered loss of a baby so they will feel better knowing they have something in common with The Duchess.


----------



## sdkitty

elvisfan4life said:


> Charles has a servant to squeeze his toothpaste for him


seriously?


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I no good at assessing these things but looks like maybe she has had fillers?  why?  what FL? Nancy?


M******a. Her eyes didn't always have that tilt.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> A few posts back , discussion of whether the Harkles want to be liked/loved more ...
> in a 2018-2019 interview MM stated she did not want to be loved (Princess of their hearts was a term coined by Diana) but wanted to be HEARD


because what she has to say is so valuable to us lesser beings....we need to hear from her


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> I can’t help it, I just hate it when vocabulary is manipulated to advance an agenda.
> 
> Philanthropy is not service. Activism is not service. Charity is not service. Generosity is not service. Sacrifice is not service. All these things are very good and loable, but they simply are not “public service” in the sense used in the Queen’s statement. Service is not universal. We have different words to signify different meanings. Public service is when the actions are linked to a public function or position, be it the royal family, the civil service or the army... These two in the legitimate exercise of their freedom have chosen not to live a life of public service, and that is all there is to it. Own it.


Agree, thank you 
And to drive home your point, lecturing the public is not service, one can discuss if it is philanthropy


----------



## drifter

Too much fuss about "having a voice" and "wanting to be heard" nowadays.  Yeah, you can have a voice but I should be allowed the freedom not to hear it!  These 2 are seriously annoying hogging the headlines with all kinds of self-serving "news".


----------



## Sina08

sdkitty said:


> Oh yes, they will probably have to talk about the miscarriage.  After all, this woman who so wants her privacy will need to share with all those less fortunate women who have suffered loss of a baby so they will feel better knowing they have something in common with The Duchess.



Having gone through a miscarriage only recently, this wouldn’t make me feel any better but quite nauseous. Using these topics to gain sympathy or whatever is just pathetic.


----------



## sdkitty

Sina08 said:


> Having been through a miscarriage only recently, this wouldn’t make me feel any better but quite nauseous. Using these topics to gain sympathy or whatever is just pathetic.


sorry for your loss


----------



## Sina08

sdkitty said:


> sorry for your loss



Thank you


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> A valid opinion about MM's claimed victory on the letter to her father.  The next trial date is March 2.
> View attachment 5000713
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has won her privacy case against Associated Newspapers for publishing extracts from a letter she wrote to her father Thomas Markle. However, *the judge said he would not give a summary judgement on the copyright claim and a trial date for that has been set for March 2.* In her statement on the ruling, Meghan claimed a “comprehensive win” on both issues, despite one being, as of yet, unresolved.
> 
> *Meghan also chose to use her statement to slate alleged “misinformation” spread about her in the media, when the case in question wasn't about accuracy at all, it was about privacy.*
> 
> Indeed, she has been vindicated on the privacy issue, but there is no court ruling backing up her claim of misinformation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s ‘uncalled for’ statement criticised  by royal experts
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's statement regarding her court case win has been criticised  by royal experts, who questioned whether it was the time or place for a "broadside against the media".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I hate the word 'misinformation'. It has become synonymous with lying. So she is accusing them of lying. What did they lie about?


----------



## Allisonfaye

lanasyogamama said:


> I believe that’s based on the estimated price with 20% down, but the actual mortgage on the property.



I think you mean not the actual mortgage and yes that's just Zillow giving you an estimate. Often people in that price range don't even take mortgages. Do we know for a fact that they have one?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Allisonfaye said:


> I think you mean not the actual mortgage and yes that's just Zillow giving you an estimate. Often people in that price range don't even take mortgages. Do we know for a fact that they have one?


Yes, that’s what I meant. 

Sounds like someone did find the actual mortgage info.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Sina08 said:


> Having gone through a miscarriage only recently, this wouldn’t make me feel any better but quite nauseous. Using these topics to gain sympathy or whatever is just pathetic.


My deepest condolences on your loss.


----------



## Sina08

jennlt said:


> My deepest condolences on your loss.



Thank you, you’re so kind to say so.


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> My guess, the money came from Harry’s UK inheritance from Diana
> it can take time to access capital and get permissions from trustees, if required


 Both Diana and the Queen mother settled money on William and Harry on their deaths - Harry is the main beneficiary to make up for him being number two


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Sina08 said:


> Having gone through a miscarriage only recently, this wouldn’t make me feel any better but quite nauseous. Using these topics to gain sympathy or whatever is just pathetic.



I'm so sorry for your loss


----------



## Sina08

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm so sorry for your loss



Thank you


----------



## Chanbal

doni said:


> I can’t help it, I just hate it when vocabulary is manipulated to advance an agenda.
> 
> Philanthropy is not service. Activism is not service. Charity is not service. Generosity is not service. Sacrifice is not service. All these things are very good and loable, but they simply are not “public service” in the sense used in the Queen’s statement. Service is not universal. We have different words to signify different meanings. Public service is when the actions are linked to a public function or position, be it the royal family, the civil service or the army... These two in the legitimate exercise of their freedom have chosen not to live a life of public service, and that is all there is to it. Own it.



Your post could be forwarded to MM's PR machine, but I'm afraid it would be ignored. 



I know, I will add the emojis:


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> I still miss Simpsons also. I loved the downtown Toronto Simpsons and the beautiful restaurant. Can’t remember the name of it.


Arcadian Court? 

Yes, was only thinking of Queen Street, not the mall stores!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> A few posts back , discussion of whether the Harkles want to be liked/loved more ...
> in a 2018-2019 interview MM stated she did not want to be loved (Princess of their hearts was a term coined by Diana) but wanted to be HEARD


Well she could join TPF, we hear each other here.


----------



## doni

Chanbal said:


> Your post could be forwarded to MM's PR machine, but I'm afraid it would be ignored.
> 
> View attachment 5001744
> 
> I know, I will add the emojis:



And another thing these spinners are missing is that in demo-cratic societies public service is ALWAYS under the control and scrutiny of the people, accountable to demo-cratic institutions in particular a Parliament, subject to more cumbersome rules and codes that the general population. These two can do whatever crosses their heads, support whatever cause takes their fancy, use money as they see fit, free of scrutiny and without answering to anyone. How on earth is that _public service_???


----------



## marietouchet

too funny ... 
in the French press, new mom Katherine McPhee is called the wife of David Foster
in new Tatler blurb, UK aristo gossip mag,  the baby announcement identifies K as the friend of MM, DF must be thrilled that he is mentioned only way down in the rubrics ...


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> A few posts back , discussion of whether the Harkles want to be liked/loved more ...
> in a 2018-2019 interview MM stated she did not want to be loved (Princess of their hearts was a term coined by Diana) but wanted to be HEARD


Hmmm, I'd rather be loved (by family and friends anyway).  There's plenty of things I hear and can't stand, like some songs, some shows, some people, some MM.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sina08 said:


> Having gone through a miscarriage only recently, this wouldn’t make me feel any better but quite nauseous. Using these topics to gain sympathy or whatever is just pathetic.


I'm sorry for your loss!


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm, I'd rather be loved (by family and friends anyway).  There's plenty of things I hear and can't stand, like some songs, some shows, some people, some MM.


Same here, but we have known for some time friends and family aren’t exactly a priority with her.


----------



## Sina08

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sorry for your loss!



Thank you


----------



## Chagall

Jayne1 said:


> Arcadian Court?
> 
> Yes, was only thinking of Queen Street, not the mall stores!


Yes the Arcadian Court, that’s it. Used to love having lunch there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

so OW is getting ‘slammed’ for her interviewing skills. Wow.  How the mighty have fallen.









						Oprah Winfrey asks Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen 'what size are you?'
					

A resurfaced interview between Oprah Winfrey and twin actresses Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen is courting controversy, as it featured the chat show queen asking the teenage girls 'what size are you?'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> so OW is getting ‘slammed’ for her interviewing skills. Wow.  How the mighty have fallen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey asks Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen 'what size are you?'
> 
> 
> A resurfaced interview between Oprah Winfrey and twin actresses Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen is courting controversy, as it featured the chat show queen asking the teenage girls 'what size are you?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



No fan of Oprah here but can we just let things that happened 17 years ago go?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> No fan of Oprah here but can we just let things that happened 17 years ago go?



She [and plenty of others] have done lots of interviews over the years, undoubtedly asked lots of politically-incorrect questions. Still, if we are holding men accountable, shouldn’t we hold these interviewers too?  IMO, they have much to answer for. They made billions for themselves and their networks with these ‘interviews’.  CBS has had plenty of troubles recently with its behavior.  She should have passed on this H&M interview. It will ruin her career, if not her ‘legacy’. All my opinion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> No fan of Oprah here but can we just let things that happened 17 years ago go?



The thing is, I feel there's a message in *why* that's being posted nearly 20 years after the fact.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> She [and plenty of others] have done lots of interviews over the years, undoubtedly asked lots of politically-incorrect questions. Still, if we are holding men accountable, shouldn’t we hold these interviewers too?  IMO, they have much to answer for. They made billions for themselves and their networks with these ‘interviews’.  CBS has had plenty of troubles recently with its behavior.  She should have passed on this H&M interview. It will ruin her career, if not her ‘legacy’. All my opinion.


it think - as much as I dislike H&M and all the support they get from US media - it will take more than this to bring Oprah down


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I have got this right?  The Queen writes Harry a letter explaining her decision and it is written before she even knew about the interview. BP find out about the interview and gets out the statement regarding the loss of patronages right after they find out about it.  Harry then slaps back with his statement.  The date on the letter is prior to the taping of the interview?  If they reshoot the interview, then why would they show it? *It could just turn them into liars* and that they had it in writing that they were going to loose the patronages.  In reality, they knew it all along since last Jan. 2020.


I think we know that they have been LIARS all along; sadly, their stans must be too stupid to realize this!


----------



## bag-mania

Everyone who has ever watched Oprah knows she has weight issues and has been fixated on the subject of weight loss for decades. She says it right there in the interview "I'm obsessed with size."  I don't think she was setting up the Olsens as much as she allowed herself to get carried away to the point of insensitivity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> it think - as much as I dislike H&M and all the support they get from US media - it will take more than this to bring Oprah down



Agree, this H&M interview paired with a ‘long-ish’ list of incidents may be problematic for her.


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/01/09/oprah-might-run-for-president-we-did-the-opposition-research-for-you/


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Everyone who has ever watched Oprah knows she has weight issues and has been fixated on the subject of weight loss for decades. She says it right there in the interview "I'm obsessed with size."  I don't think she was setting up the Olsens as much as she allowed herself to get carried away to the point of insensitivity.


She usually made most interviews somehow about herself.  Got very tiresome.  Maybe she'll claim she's "American Royalty" to JCMH LOL.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Everyone who has ever watched Oprah knows she has weight issues and has been fixated on the subject of weight loss for decades. She says it right there in the interview "I'm obsessed with size."  I don't think she was setting up the Olsens as much as she allowed herself to get carried away to the point of insensitivity.



Oprah was 50 at the time. The twins were 17. 
Even back then, it showed a level of insensitivity(?) that went against her “brand”.


----------



## marietouchet

I am a stickler for grammar, there are ambiguous verbs in the article. Did they support this project in the PAST ? Or did they get on the bus just in the last few days ??? I am not sure.

why announce this yesterday, we have waited all year for some action from the Harkles ... it has been as if the CW did not exist for them for the last year ... am I too harsh ?

Sudden support YESTERDAY for a Commonwealth related project, great project, but the timing of this announcement is so suspicious, if it had happened last Thursday , before “ service was declared to be universal”, I would take their contribution a lot more seriously.

Is this just more petulant pushback on the stripping of CW patronages ?









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce New Commonwealth Project After Stepping Down as Working Royals
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Archewell Foundation is undertaking a project in the Commonwealth nation of Dominica




					people.com


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Key words:  let down  and take control of her story.  The highs and lows of royal life. Speak out for themselves.
> 
> OK the whine fest will be out in full force. Nobody asked if she was OK.   Taking control of her story means she has to have the last word as she always does.  It's all about her, per usual.  What about Harry taking control of his story?  Oh, he really hasn't got one because his story is whatever Meghan says it is.  The highs of royal life:  very expensive clothing, very expensive wedding with a nice tiara. a newly renovated home to live in and a train trip with The Queen.
> Lows of royal Life:  Showing up and smiling when it isn't all about you and being a dressed up civil servant.  (why do you think they paid for all those expensive clothes that didn't fit?)
> They want to speak out for themselves?  Can't wait!  I want to hear how they explain their entitlement and why they are such special snowflakes.
> 
> If she pinched his arm any tighter during that podcast she would have drawn blood.


I'm sure her whine-fest will be filled with the big "doe eyes" we saw in Africa.  I have a feeling that this 'interview' is NOT going to go well for her because she just can't help herself with her self-pity.  For someone who (supposedly) has a degree in International Relations, she must have barely graduated to be that STUPID and not have done a fair amount of research on what life in a Royal family would be like.  Did she plaster on that big smile every time she was photographed performing "royal duties", or was that a lie too (or acting?!?! - HA).  This whole business about "losing her voice" was very well articulated by that writer that said Meghan is about "self-service", certainly NOT about service to others!!


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I am a stickler for grammar, there are ambiguous verbs in the article. Did they support this project in the PAST ? Or did they get on the bus just in the last few days ??? I am not sure.
> 
> why announce this yesterday, we have waited all year for some action from the Harkles ...
> 
> Sudden support YESTERDAY for a Commonwealth related project, great project, but the timing of this announcement is so suspicious, if it had happened last Thursday , before “ service was declared to be universal”, I would take their contribution a lot more seriously.
> 
> Is this just more petulant pushback on the stripping of CW patronages ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Announce New Commonwealth Project After Stepping Down as Working Royals
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Archewell Foundation is undertaking a project in the Commonwealth nation of Dominica
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



This is a repeat. It was announced back in December. They needed MORE GIVING in the press ASAP to counter the royal demotion.

It is really José Andrés' charity World Central Kitchen that is doing the lion's share of the work, but Harry and Meghan gave them a little and they get to attach their names to it and wallow in the media acclaim.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"All I can say is, I sincerely hope and pray, please dear Lord, please spare us the farce that happened when Archie was being gestated."

LOL


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> I'm sure her whine-fest will be filled with the big "doe eyes" we saw in Africa.  I have a feeling that this 'interview' is NOT going to go well for her because she just can't help herself with her self-pity.  For someone who (supposedly) has a degree in International Relations, she must have barely graduated to be that STUPID and not have done a fair amount of research on what life in a Royal family would be like.  Did she plaster on that big smile every time she was photographed performing "royal duties", or was that a lie too (or acting?!?! - HA).  This whole business about "losing her voice" was very well articulated by that writer that said Meghan is about "self-service", certainly NOT about service to others!!



It seems like the doe eyes have been filled out too much and don’t exist anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"[Meghan] is undoubtedly a woman with an ego in excess of what it ought to be." Well, that's one way of putting it!


----------



## poopsie

Sina08 said:


> Having gone through a miscarriage only recently, *this wouldn’t make me feel any better* but quite nauseous. Using these topics to gain sympathy or whatever is just pathetic.



So very sorry for your loss 
i would think that most would be more likely to feel as you do rather than feel uplifted kinship


----------



## CeeJay

Chagall said:


> I can’t imagine that he would want to put it all into a house. What did MM contribute? Would the house be in both their names or god forbid in hers. If there is a split Harry could loose his shirt. Can’t remember if there was a pre-nup?


My understanding is that the house was purchased via a Trust, which .. alas, has Meghan's name on it!  Remember, if Harry were to have his name on the title, the US IRS would just LOVE to be able to open his books .. (hee hee hee)


----------



## Lounorada

Chloe302225 said:


> Looking very desperate to get good PR in the run up to their upcoming interview.








That death stare of hers gives me the creeps. All she's missing is lazer beams shining from her eyes, burning a hole in whatever she sets her sights on. Meanwhile, in her delusional mind she thinks it's a loving gaze  
That could just be an unfortunate screenshot of JCMH, but he looks so uncomfortable, a shadow of his former self, like the light is gone from his eyes.



Lodpah said:


> She does not do anything without a goal and in this case her mind is saying she’s being given lemons so she will make lemonade . . . in her mind. That’s what I think.





Yes! This was exactly my first thought on her choice of dress.



CobaltBlu said:


> I forgot to mention.... this thread....gives me life.


Yes to this!









sdkitty said:


> wow, Meghan is a saint for wearing a $2,000 dress twice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Announcement Dress Conveyed a "Powerful Message" About Sustainability
> 
> 
> The Carolina Herrera creative director explained that promoting sustainability was top of mind for the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com











marietouchet said:


> Forgot to add ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 4999961







elvisfan4life said:


> Charles has a servant to squeeze his toothpaste for him










doni said:


> I can’t help it, I just hate it when vocabulary is manipulated to advance an agenda.
> 
> Philanthropy is not service. Activism is not service. Charity is not service. Generosity is not service. Sacrifice is not service. All these things are very good and loable, but they simply are not “public service” in the sense used in the Queen’s statement. Service is not universal. We have different words to signify different meanings. Public service is when the actions are linked to a public function or position, be it the royal family, the civil service or the army... These two in the legitimate exercise of their freedom have chosen not to live a life of public service, and that is all there is to it. Own it.







Well said, @doni



Sina08 said:


> Re Harry being a victim, if anything I think he’s an enabler and definitely not a victim.
> As suggested a few posts before, I checked out W&K’s engagement video (never watched H&M’s except for snippets, because, you know). W says sth very significant, that he wanted to give K and her family enough time to grasp the true meaning and weight of living this life with him (and by that the chance to back out if necessary). That’s not only wise, it’s his responsibility as being the one who’s part of the royal family.
> 
> So Harry is the royal in this relationship, he’s the one who knew how things worked in their circles, what’s allowed and what’s considered inappropriate etc. It would have been his duty to look out for his family, but he was willing to throw them under the bus without hesitation.
> There’s no way he can’t see through M’s behavior, she’s doing everything with him in tow. All the lies and inconsistencies we’ve been reading about, he’s living it first hand. So he must know about at least a few of them (e.g. their constantly changing engagement story) because there sure is a discrepancy between reality as it happened and how they painted it for the public. If he can’t see the difference and believes her lies being the truth, he sure must have a rare mental condition. He knows she’s lying about things and he’s lying just as much when he sits there not contradicting her. If you’re standing by your spouse knowing all this, then it’s not because you’re a victim or a blind fool in love who got tricked into things, but because you’re complicit and in this case that makes him even worse than her.
> 
> M is what she is. I think we can agree that she didn’t really change that much over the years. The only thing that has changed is the huge platform she received due to her marriage, and she just continued being M using all the perks and benefits along the way. Nevertheless, she never would have been able to pull all these things off, if it wasn’t for his compliance and enabling. Therefore I think, if he hadn’t been such an enabler right from the start, there never would have been a wedding in the first place. M saw her chance and closed the deal. Those two deserve each other.
> The annoying part is that they brought two innocent children into their mess, hurt their respective families, cost the UK public a lot of money and aren’t willing to shut the f up already.


----------



## Chagall

CeeJay said:


> My understanding is that the house was purchased via a Trust, which .. alas, has Meghan's name on it!  Remember, if Harry were to have his name on the title, the US IRS would just LOVE to be able to open his books .. (hee hee hee)


Yes they would have a ball doing that for sure. If they were to split he would have no rights to the title. His money must be going towards the mortgage in some way?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Looking at that lemon dress again...wouldn't that seam where the skirt starts cut right into the belly?


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> Excellent comment and analysis of 'service V narcissism' from Brendan O'Neill, editor of Spiked online (UK)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Why the prince and princess of woke had to leave the royal family
> Harry and Meghan’s narcissism doesn’t sit well with the ideal of public service.*
> 
> "So Harry and Meghan are out. The Prince and Princess of Woke are formally splitting from the monarchy. The Soft Megxit of 2020 – when the painfully PC pair flounced off to North America with the intention of becoming ‘financially independent’ – has become a Hard Megxit. The queen has decreed that Harry and Meghan’s antics are incompatible with ‘the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service’ and therefore they have to hand back all their royal patronages. This is about as close to saying ‘bugger off’ as the famously restrained queen will ever get.
> 
> What’s this all about? What does Megxit tell us about the world, if anything? Listening to the Meghan-loving chattering classes you’d be forgiven for thinking the poor dear and her loving husband were driven out of this godforsaken country by racism. Naturally, these people wilfully overlook that the vast majority of Britons took Meghan to their hearts when she got hitched to Harry, and only tired of her when she started wagging her manicured fingers at us about everything from feminism to climate change. Your everyday Brit doesn’t take kindly to being talked down to by right-on aristocrats who then get on a private jet to wing it to Elton John’s swanky pad in the South of France or to some barefoot, ******** eco-gathering of the super-rich.
> 
> Others blame it all on the press. Our horrible, rapacious press, criticising Meghan day in, day out. They even cheer when Harry and Meghan launch legal cases against the media for saying rude or revealing things about them. It is testament to the middle classes’ turn against press freedom – which, let’s not forget, was won for us by people who dissed royalty, by the likes of the 18th-century prince-mocker John Wilkes – that they will cheerfully support two arrogant royals’ crusade against the papers. ‘Whatever you think of Harry and Meghan, their media critics are far worse’, says Marina Hyde at the _Guardian_. It’s not surprising that an aristocrat like Hyde would defend two aristocratic bores from the rabble that is the redtop press, but it’s pretty shocking the _Guardian_ won’t stand up for press freedom against the Sussexes’ constant barbs and suing.
> 
> All these narratives tell us more about the narrators than they do about the reality of Megxit. They confirm the snobbery of the woke set, who are more than happy to take the side of a privileged pair of virtue-signallers over what they view as the irredeemably prejudiced British masses. And they confirm the ongoing, increasingly irrational hostility of the posh against the ‘low-rent’ press, which is now blamed for every ill in society. Meghan’s sadness? Our dumbed-down culture? Sexism? Far-right activism? Blame it on the tabloids. It’s the _Sun_ wot did it.
> 
> 
> 
> The truth, as always, is more complex. What the great Harry and Meghan flounce really demonstrates is the incompatibility of the modern culture of narcissism with the old-world ideals of duty, loyalty and service. Meghan felt trapped in the royal family not because Princess Michael once wore a colonial-era brooch or because it is _so hard_ to spend your days chilling in palaces, but because royal life runs so counter to the shallower, selfie-era, virtue-advertising outlook that Meghan has come to embody over the past couple of years. Megxit is fundamentally a battle between the narcissism of the 21st century and the more stoic, giving culture of the past.
> 
> 
> This is where the Windsors’ and the Sussexes’ spat over ‘service’ is interesting. The queen firmly insisted that Harry and Meghan’s ‘independent’ globe-trotting did not sit comfortably with a ‘life of public service’. In the passive-aggressive manner of a certain type of Californian, Meghan and Harry fired back that everyone can do some ‘service’. ‘We can all have a life of service. Service is universal’, they said.
> 
> They don’t know what service means. Here’s the difference: the Meghans of this world primarily serve themselves, always seeking new opportunities for self-expression, virtuous preening, ‘emotional growth’. The queen, in contrast, serves the crown. She has _negated_ the self. She suppresses her self-expression, her political views and her emotions, to the end of submitting to something bigger than herself: the crown, the monarchy, the constitution. Now, we can discuss whether the crown is good or bad – I’m a **********, so I’m not a fan. But it is clear that Meghan and Elizabeth II have unbridgeably different understandings of ‘service’. Meghan’s idea of service always involves her expressing herself and revealing herself and reminding us how virtuous she is; the queen’s idea of service is to _hide_ the self, to fold it into a larger, apparently more important project. The queen is about service, Meghan is about self-service.
> 
> 
> This is clear from how Harry and Meghan talk about the monarchy as if it were some kind of hot-desking workspace where you might pick up a few new skills before ‘moving on’. Last year they said they wanted to ‘make a transition’ and ‘carve out a progressive new role within this institution’, as if they were media consultants and the monarchy a mere brand. They said they wanted to ‘continue to collaborate with Her Majesty The Queen’, as if the queen were a fashion house and they were Jameela Jamil-style celebs providing it with a dash of BS ‘social change’. Again and again, they show that they have a very weak grip on the ideas of duty and loyalty, of _giving things up_ for a greater good.
> 
> The cult of narcissism is widespread today. We are encouraged to obsess over our bodies and our image, to work out exactly where we fit on the infinite list of made-up genders, to obsess over our mental wellbeing, to hide in a ‘safe space’ in order to protect our sacrosanct self-esteem from any form of insult or inquiry. And of course this all generates a very flimsy sense of self – not the robust selfhood of 19th-century liberalism, but the fragile, easily injured selfhood of the social-media era, in which we require constant validation and protection from rowdy speech or else we will feel ‘erased’.
> 
> So in inviting us to turn away from big, sacrifice-demanding national or social projects, and encouraging us instead to obsess over the self, the culture of narcissism represents the worst of both worlds. It diminishes the old idea that it can be good to devote oneself to something external, to something important, while also nurturing a warped form of individualism that is built on notions of fragility, fear of freedom, and psychic enslavement to the validation of officialdom and of others.
> 
> This is the culture Meghan and Harry now symbolise. Their idea of public service is a fleeting one, involving little more than occasionally giving talks at a women’s shelter or doing a Spotify chat with ‘social changers’. And their sense of self is both an obsessive and a fragile one – witness their focus on wellbeing and mental health and, in Meghan’s words, ‘sharing our pain’. The queen could not be more different. Her public service has been full-on, lifelong, unflinching; and her selfhood is of the confident, stoic variety. These are the moral and social clashes swirling around Megxit. I might be a **********, but in this spat I’m very much Team Queen."







A great read! Thanks for posting.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 4999037
> 
> 
> Seriously, what is wrong with her face?


OMG. Tilted eyes and duck lips. Harry must be swooning.


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> Yay!  You're back!  I miss your perfectly appropriate GIFs!





lulu212121 said:


> Yay!!! Lou your back! Love your insightYour gifs are so needed right now





lanasyogamama said:


> Lou is back, yay!
> 
> I practically grew up at Filene’s Basement! I went to high school with daughter of the owner at the time.





gracekelly said:


> Happy to see you!  You were missed!


Thanks ladies! I am back and ready with gifs aplenty


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> That death stare of hers gives me the creeps. All she's missing is lazer beams shining from her eyes, burning a hole in whatever she sets her sights on. Meanwhile, in her delusional mind she thinks it's a loving gaze
> That could just be an unfortunate screenshot of JCMH, but he looks so uncomfortable, a shadow of his former self, like the light is gone from his eyes.


She looks like a creepy porcelain doll, the kind that stares ahead with dead eyes and looks like it comes to life when everyone else is asleep to _murder_!


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> We had an upscale department store chain on the west coast called Bullock's. I used to buy my sky high platform jute rope Sbicca sandals there in the 70's.  Their flagship Bullock's Wilshire was awesome. But I always wondered about the Bullock's/bollocks thing..........did they think people wouldn't notice?


I heard of that store but never went because they closed before I moved here.  That all being said, to me .. this is somewhat like all the stupid celebrities who are constantly putting up a (_what they think_) is the peace sign - *BUT* .. they are, in fact, putting up a F/U - see below (_when I worked in London, they always commented on this - "why do your US celebs keep on doing this?_") .. 

*Picture 1* = traditional US "peace" sign 
*Picture 2* = non-traditional "peace" sign which signifies "F/U" in the UK


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> IKR!
> We are losing out local Macy's, but that is different as there is another one 5 minutes away.
> I have always regretted never making it to Filene's Basement.
> I literally wept when we lost our NM Last Call.
> As for Sandra.....I really don't know.


HA - the good 'ole Filene's Basement, can't even say how many times I would be on the 'T' (_subway system in Boston_) and see folks looking at a map, the map of the various subway lines and back and forth .. such that I would say "_what are you looking for?_" and the oft response was "_Filene's Basement_"!  

I went .. *ONCE*, and that was *ENOUGH* for me .. *OMG*!!!!!  If you liked a place where things were just all mixed up on a big table, people shoving/pushing, having someone pull an item right out of your hands, nasty sales folks (_can't blame them in some respects_), the constant smell of an underground subway (_the stop was Downtown Crossing_), hot as heck in the summer and cold as hell in the winter .. and were small-sized, then yes .. you could often find some deals there.  Me, being an "XL" (_size 10 - 12 - and yes, that used to piss me off that I was considered 'XL' or even 'XLL'_) .. *NEVER*, *EVER* found anything there, but my petite friend used to clean up (_and yes - she actually had the balls to go to the insane wedding gown sale_)!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Longish but an interesting read. This was posted on Quora on Christmas Day last year, as answer to the question where people see Harry and Meghan in 10 years. I'll say the OP did a brilliant job analyzing Meghan and the dynamics of this weird relationship, but she also had a thing or two to say on how the BRF will operate and what can I say, part of her predictions have come true already.



> Harry wil be discarded by Meghan.
> 
> She has a pattern: she idealizes, love bomb with lots of charm and then discard and eliminates from her life without remorse. She says they were toxic to her and she was protecting herself.
> 
> Meghan has only two ways of viewing things. Either they are perfect, ideal, flawless or they are toxic, evil, monsters. As nothing is ever perfect, flaws begin to appear, hence the pattern of discarding.
> 
> At first, she idealized Harry as the perfect husband. He is a royal prince and rich. Being British was even part of this idealization process. He had a perfect family, etc. Then, the flaws appeared. Catherine dresses as an old lady, that's not perfect. If it's not perfect in her view, it's horrible.
> 
> The same way she sees others, she also sees herself. She's either perfect or horrible. Thinking she's horrible would drive her into a deep depression. Her mind protects her from it by fighting to stay in the perfect side. Obviously, this is impossible and she can't discard herself. So, she keeps fighting.
> 
> There's no way Harry can leave her without her fighting. The alternative for her would be a spiral shame depression. She would be ashamed for being dumped. She couldn't handle it. Her first move would be to fight. Unless she's restrained by a force that's impossible for her to overcome, she'll fight.
> 
> The Firm knows that and the firm has a weakness. The public opinion. They can't fight against her without risking public opinion; so the game must be carefully planned.
> 
> William is also capable of seeing through Meghan's pattern. He's seen this before. After their parents divorce he went to therapy and later in life helped several projects for mental health. Diana probably had a similar pattern but her, instead of Meghan, did not tend to the fight mode; Diana tended to the depressed mode. Diana worshippers also think in a similar way. This black or white thinking is not that uncommon and whenever you see a person using too much extreme adjectives, like she's a saint, he's a villain, that's useless, without pondering the in between, you can suspect of this.
> 
> Harry is currently jumping from hinting he's made a mistake and feeling depressed and being love bombed and doubting he did. Meghan does not want him to go, so she still love bombs him here and there. That's enough to trauma bond him. He'll not leave. In order to leave, he would have to securely feel he's made a mistake and admit it publicly. He can't. Not yet. He's not ready for being this vulnerable. People stay is this vibe for decades without leaving.
> 
> The game the firm is playing is to carefully remove from Megan the things she would fight for. At first, it was her position as a senior royal and some money, but not much. In a few months, they will probably loose more, probably the allowance, we won't know. Since shame is part of the problem, the monarch will try to avoid that. Instead, they will let her shame herself as she's been doing.
> 
> The final move would be the removal of the title, but I don't think they will play it. In my opinion, before that, she'll meet somebody ideal instead of toxic horrible Harry that only brings her problems and problems. She'll leave him for this guy.
> 
> The title might be used in the negotiation for Archie. Instead of what people believe, the Queen does not have automatic custody over him. That's an ancient law that would never be enforced today. Remember: Meghan fights. The Monarchy can't risk loosing. My bet is that the announcement of divorce will be accompanied by her keeping her title and having joint custody of Archie. The latter will be fake in practice because he would be living in the UK, just spending some time with her. It will be announced as joined to protect her from mommy shaming. She'll also receive a sort of alimony and some money. Not much. The amount will not be announced by the family officially. She'll lie to the press saying it was more than it was. Because she wants to leave the family and want it fast, she'll accept the deal.
> 
> Harry wil grieve a lot. He'll not want her to leave. He'll feel betrayed. Deep down, he will know that's the best outcome and that she was actually abusive. But it will take him years of therapy to admit that.
> 
> Both of them will play victim. She'll say he was a coward and didn't defend her against his toxic family.
> 
> He will say they were a victim of this horrible home wrecker that destroyed their marriage. He'll also blame his own family who didn't help him. Eventually, after fighting his own internal demons, maybe with alcohol, excessive work, lets hope not drugs, he'll heal. Unfortunately, before that, he'll suffer as hell.
> 
> I really hope an angel appears in his life to rescue him of this self destructive behaviour shortening his path of healing. I pray that he be able to rise after everything wiser and stronger and not loose the battle as others have done. Archie needs him.
> 
> I don't see Meghan healing. She'll repeat the pattern. Always discarding, always fighting to win, allegedly to protect herself from others. In reality, without empathy for other people's needs, feelings or desires.
> 
> I also pray for Archie be able to escape the karma, as William did. His mother is not a villain as Diana was not a saint. She's just the product of her own tragic life as all of us are.



(I do think she is pretty evil, though. She is not this broken character with the hard childhood, she displayed massive personality flaws at age 5 already)


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA - the good 'ole Filene's Basement, can't even say how many times I would be on the 'T' (_subway system in Boston_) and see folks looking at a map, the map of the various subway lines and back and forth .. such that I would say "_what are you looking for?_" and the oft response was "_Filene's Basement_"!
> 
> I went .. *ONCE*, and that was *ENOUGH* for me .. *OMG*!!!!!  If you liked a place where things were just all mixed up on a big table, people shoving/pushing, having someone pull an item right out of your hands, nasty sales folks (_can't blame them in some respects_), the constant smell of an underground subway (_the stop was Downtown Crossing_), hot as heck in the summer and cold as hell in the winter .. and were small-sized, then yes .. you could often find some deals there.  Me, being an "XL" (_size 10 - 12 - and yes, that used to piss me off that I was considered 'XL' or even 'XLL'_) .. *NEVER*, *EVER* found anything there, but my petite friend used to clean up (_and yes - she actually had the balls to go to the insane wedding gown sale_)!!


talking about messes, there is a Nordstrom last chance or something like that in AZ.  Stuff from NR goes there.  I went there once.  I'm sure you can find some good stuff but it was a mess and a lot of not great merchandise.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> HA - *the good 'ole Filene's Basement, can't even say how many times I would be on the 'T' (subway system in Boston)* and see folks looking at a map, the map of the various subway lines and back and forth .. such that I would say "_what are you looking for?_" and the oft response was "_Filene's Basement_"!
> 
> I went .. *ONCE*, and that was *ENOUGH* for me .. *OMG*!!!!!  If you liked a place where things were just all mixed up on a big table, people shoving/pushing, having someone pull an item right out of your hands, nasty sales folks (_can't blame them in some respects_), the constant smell of an underground subway (_the stop was Downtown Crossing_), hot as heck in the summer and cold as hell in the winter .. and were small-sized, then yes .. you could often find some deals there.  Me, being an "XL" (_size 10 - 12 - and yes, that used to piss me off that I was considered 'XL' or even 'XLL'_) .. *NEVER*, *EVER* found anything there, but my petite friend used to clean up (_and yes - she actually had the balls to go to the insane wedding gown sale_)!!


Red line, I miss that T.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> HA - the good 'ole Filene's Basement, can't even say how many times I would be on the 'T' (_subway system in Boston_) and see folks looking at a map, the map of the various subway lines and back and forth .. such that I would say "_what are you looking for?_" and the oft response was "_Filene's Basement_"!
> 
> I went .. *ONCE*, and that was *ENOUGH* for me .. *OMG*!!!!!  If you liked a place where things were just all mixed up on a big table, people shoving/pushing, having someone pull an item right out of your hands, nasty sales folks (_can't blame them in some respects_), the constant smell of an underground subway (_the stop was Downtown Crossing_), hot as heck in the summer and cold as hell in the winter .. and were small-sized, then yes .. you could often find some deals there.  Me, being an "XL" (_size 10 - 12 - and yes, that used to piss me off that I was considered 'XL' or even 'XLL'_) .. *NEVER*, *EVER* found anything there, but my petite friend used to clean up (_and yes - she actually had the balls to go to the insane wedding gown sale_)!!




LOL
I think I was more interested in the _life _experience than the _shopping _experience
Besides......................I'm originally from the East side of Cleveland. We don't scare easily


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Longish but an interesting read. This was posted on Quora on Christmas Day last year, as answer to the question where people see Harry and Meghan in 10 years. I'll say the OP did a brilliant job analyzing Meghan and the dynamics of this weird relationship, but she also had a thing or two to say on how the BRF will operate and what can I say, part of her predictions have come true already.
> 
> 
> (I do think she is pretty evil, though. She is not this broken character with the hard childhood, she displayed massive personality flaws at age 5 already)


ITA.  MM has not had any "tragic life" at all, although maybe that's the next thing she'll claim.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  MM has not had any "tragic life" at all, although maybe that's the next thing she'll claim.


sounds to me like she grew up very spoiled


----------



## Lodpah

Yo! If the sugars that read postings on here think we are hard on Machiavellian Meghan they should trot over to Quora, they’re brutal over there.

Harry boy, you can’t push against a dead bolt . . . that your “loving” wife won’t open. You’re a lion and she’s an eagle. Eagles swoop in while lions prowl.

*Machiavellianism* in psychology refers to a personality trait which sees a person so focused on their own interests they will manipulate, deceive, and exploit others to achieve their goals. *Machiavellianism* is one of the traits in what is called the 'Dark Triad', the other two being narcissism and psychopathy.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Longish but an interesting read. This was posted on Quora on Christmas Day last year, as answer to the question where people see Harry and Meghan in 10 years. I'll say the OP did a brilliant job analyzing Meghan and the dynamics of this weird relationship, but she also had a thing or two to say on how the BRF will operate and what can I say, part of her predictions have come true already.
> 
> 
> 
> (*I do think she is pretty evil, though. She is not this broken character with the hard childhood, she displayed massive personality flaws at age 5 already*)





purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  *MM has not had any "tragic life" at all, although maybe that's the next thing she'll claim*.



Up until recent events, she has had things pretty much her own way and has been unchallenged. 
IMO she has a full deck of 'victim cards' to play. Some cards have more mileage than others. She can play the race card as often as she wants, the miscarriage card was pretty much a one and done. 
Is it too far fetched to expect  a molestation/abuse card if things start to go against her? Who is going to challenge something like that, no matter how outlandish the 'details'?


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Up until recent events, she has had things pretty much her own way and has been unchallenged.
> IMO she has a full deck of 'victim cards' to play. Some cards have more mileage than others. She can play the race card as often as she wants, the miscarriage card was pretty much a one and done.
> Is it too far fetched to expect  a molestation/abuse card if things start to go against her? Who is going to challenge something like that, no matter how outlandish the 'details'?


with "me too" as an actress maybe claiming to have been


poopsie said:


> Up until recent events, she has had things pretty much her own way and has been unchallenged.
> IMO she has a full deck of 'victim cards' to play. Some cards have more mileage than others. She can play the race card as often as she wants, the miscarriage card was pretty much a one and done.
> Is it too far fetched to expect  a molestation/abuse card if things start to go against her? Who is going to challenge something like that, no matter how outlandish the 'details'?


she could get in on "me too"


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Your post could be forwarded to MM's PR machine, but I'm afraid it would be ignored.
> 
> View attachment 5001744
> 
> I know, I will add the emojis:


Oh really?!?!?! .. okay, call me "*Joanne *(_instead of John_) *Q Public*" .. and *WHAT HAVE THEY DONE FOR ME*??? (_other than clogging up practically every news/gossip/entertainment, etc. outlet with their BS_)?!?!?! 

Hey .. how about a GoFundMe (_or whatever they are called_) .. to set me up for a short period of time in Montecito, with the possibility of running into either of them at some *PUBLIC space* .. such that I could give them *MY VERSION* of a Word Salad (_in other words - EAT THEM ALIVE for all their hypocrisy, lies, narcissism, entitlement, self-serving, adolescent, etc., etc., etc._) -- because I know that neither of these dimwits would be able to provide a good argument for their actions!


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> with "me too" as an actress maybe claiming to have been
> 
> she could get in on "me too"



I don't see that. 
"me too"  implies that there are _others_. She would only be one voice among many. 
No, her story is special and MUST stand alone.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> I don't see that.
> "me too"  implies that there are _others_. She would only be one voice among many.
> No, her story is special and MUST stand alone.


Yep, she can't share the spotlight, *EVER*.  Even if it's for a cause shared by others.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Yo! If the sugars that read postings on here think we are hard on Machiavellian Meghan they should trot over to Quora, they’re brutal over there.
> 
> *Harry boy, you can’t push against a dead bolt . . . that your “loving” wife won’t open. You’re a lion and she’s an eagle. Eagles swoop in while lions prowl.
> 
> Machiavellianism* in psychology refers to a personality trait which sees a person so focused on their own interests they will manipulate, deceive, and exploit others to achieve their goals. *Machiavellianism* is one of the traits in what is called the 'Dark Triad', the other two being narcissism and psychopathy.


I wouldn't call Harry a lion, unless he's the kind at the zoo that people just ogle at but without any freedom.  Mouse maybe.  Dog crap I accidentally step in, maybe.  He's like an annoying pest that won't go away.  Gnat or fruit fly like.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> I wouldn't call Harry a lion, unless he's the kind at the zoo that people just ogle at but without any freedom.  Mouse maybe.  Dog crap I accidentally step in, maybe.  He's like an annoying pest that won't go away.  Gnat or fruit fly like.


I'm going to confess . . . I've been putting "eagle" and "lion" in there as references to what the countries are known for. "Eagle" for America and "Lion" for Great Britain . . ,.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, she can't share the spotlight, *EVER*.  Even if it's for a cause shared by others.



You know it has to just be _killing_ her to have to give JCMH a few minutes airtime on HER interview


----------



## Sina08

poopsie said:


> So very sorry for your loss
> i would think that most would be more likely to feel as you do rather than feel uplifted kinship



Thank you  

I guess that women can feel very different about that. There may be women who would like to hear from someone “famous” and have the feeling that they “share” the same experience and feelings. It’s really hard to say and totally fine either way. This probability may be a sufficient enough justification for her to talk about this in the upcoming interview and everywhere else like she’s the official spokesperson on that matter. 
The main problem I see is that she’s just the wrong person. It’s a sensitive topic and she doesn’t come off as compassionate and sincere. In fact  she seems to be the exact opposite and that’s something that can make your stomach turn.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> She [and plenty of others] have done lots of interviews over the years, undoubtedly asked lots of politically-incorrect questions. Still, if we are holding men accountable, shouldn’t we hold these interviewers too?  IMO, they have much to answer for. They made billions for themselves and their networks with these ‘interviews’.  CBS has had plenty of troubles recently with its behavior.  She should have passed on this H&M interview. It will ruin her career, if not her ‘legacy’. All my opinion.


I 100%+++ agree with you on this, and as I've said before .. what's in it for her?  A lot of $$$ (like she doesn't have enough)  -OR-  to "restart" her career?  It could also be the END of her career ..


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Longish but an interesting read. This was posted on Quora on Christmas Day last year, as answer to the question where people see Harry and Meghan in 10 years. I'll say the OP did a brilliant job analyzing Meghan and the dynamics of this weird relationship, but she also had a thing or two to say on how the BRF will operate and what can I say, part of her predictions have come true already.
> 
> 
> 
> (I do think she is pretty evil, though. She is not this broken character with the hard childhood, she displayed massive personality flaws at age 5 already)


Very interesting .. but .. IF (and this is a big IF) they do split up and Meghan tries other 'victim' cards (+Me Too, etc.), IMO .. she needs to be very careful.  Remember, there have also been rumors about some of her behavior when she was younger (e.g., "Yacht Girl", cheating on Trevor with the Toronto Chef, etc.) .. and as much as the Internet seems to have been 'erased' in regards to any of these stories/rumors, she could just incite others to come forward .. especially if she tries to blame certain individuals.  To me, one of the reasons why Thomas came forward with her letter, is because HE got bad press about it .. it upset him, and he wanted "the truth" to come out.  Certain people (and I admit - I am this way) will come forward to tell their side of the story, especially if she is lying (which she seems to pull A LOT).  I know if it was me, I would FOR SURE come out of the woodwork to get the truth out there!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Very interesting .. but .. IF (and this is a big IF) they do split up and Meghan tries other 'victim' cards (+Me Too, etc.), IMO .. she needs to be very careful.  Remember, there have also been rumors about some of her behavior when she was younger (e.g., "Yacht Girl", cheating on Trevor with the Toronto Chef, etc.) .. and as much as the Internet seems to have been 'erased' in regards to any of these stories/rumors, she could just incite others to come forward .. especially if she tries to blame certain individuals.  To me, one of the reasons why Thomas came forward with her letter, is because HE got bad press about it .. it upset him, and he wanted "the truth" to come out.  Certain people (and I admit - I am this way) will come forward to tell their side of the story, especially if she is lying (which she seems to pull A LOT).  I know if it was me, I would FOR SURE come out of the woodwork to get the truth out there!



Oh, I totally see them splitting up. Not today or tomorrow, but there will come a day when JCMH becomes less of an asset and more of a liability. He was already virtually irrelevant in the long haul/big picture scheme of things even before recent events. He's not immediate to the throne (thank god!!!!) and has no pull in H'wood. I don't see him as having any political coin either. Without his family connections he brings nothing to the table. He is merely a novelty act and in a 30 second sound byte world that won't last long.
Besides...............just think of the drah-ma that she could wring out of it! Endless victim scenarios.
JCMH would never know what hit him. He wouldn't even be able to defend himself. Anyone who would dare speak out against her would run the risk of being vilified, excoriated, bullied and/or threatened at worst or have their voice 'erased' at best.
Sad. isn't it


----------



## bag-mania

They are in this together. I  don’t see them splitting up, not as long as they have that “us against the world” mentality they’ve got going. They may be dissatisfied with various things going on in their lives but I don’t get any indication they are dissatisfied with each other.


----------



## 1LV

I think eventually the very things that brought them together will drive them apart.  The grass is always greener on the other side.


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> Oh, I totally see them splitting up. Not today or tomorrow, but there will come a day when JCMH becomes less of an asset and more of a liability. He was already virtually irrelevant in the long haul/big picture scheme of things even before recent events. He's not immediate to the throne (thank god!!!!) and has no pull in H'wood. I don't see him as having any political coin either. Without his family connections he brings nothing to the table. He is merely a novelty act and in a 30 second sound byte world that won't last long.
> Besides...............just think of the drah-ma that she could wring out of it! Endless victim scenarios.
> JCMH would never know what hit him. He wouldn't even be able to defend himself. Anyone who would dare speak out against her would run the risk of being vilified, excoriated, bullied and/or threatened at worst or have their voice 'erased' at best.
> Sad. isn't it



I don't see them being together forever either. Maybe not tomorrow or the next day, but just another celeb couple that you hear about splitting one day. Isolating your spouse from their entire family and previous life is not a recipe for success.


----------



## csshopper

Poopsie, oh, the memories you generated!

Higbees. Halle Brothers. Taylor's. Sterling Lindner Davis....long gone. We dressed up, with gloves no less, to go "Downtown" shopping. They were magical stores at Christmas. For those of you who have watched the movie "A Christmas Story" you have visited Higbees. E

These were the kinds of old school department stores that had "fur salons." After one of them closed, and my Mom had died, I had her mink repurposed into a teddy bear for each of my children so part of the city lives on in the west.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I reported the "blank one" #46,267 , it was posted in error. Is there a faster way to do it?



Don’t worry about it. Things go so fast here an occasional blank post doesn’t matter.


----------



## Chanbal

Such an eco-friendly couple, everything they do is sustainable... The picture is from DM, and the rumor is that MM wanted to give her stans a hint with the pink color. For the lovers of the green outfit, I'm afraid it has been replaced by the lemon dress and Botticelli hair in many of the last PR releases. The size of the bump is also creating confusion, it's possible that the lemon dress didn't fit with the one from Valentine's day.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Such an eco-friendly couple, everything they do is sustainable... The picture is from DM, and the rumor is that MM wanted to give her stans a hint with the pink color. For the lovers of the green outfit, I'm afraid it has been replaced by the lemon dress and Botticelli hair in many of the last PR releases. The size of the bump is also creating confusion, it's possible that the lemon dress didn't fit with the one from Valentine's day.
> 
> View attachment 5002405



 What, exactly, is a _sustainable_ sapphire?
Google wasn't much help


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Such an eco-friendly couple, everything they do is sustainable... The picture is from DM, and the rumor is that MM wanted to give her stans a hint with the pink color. For the lovers of the green outfit, I'm afraid it has been replaced by the lemon dress and Botticelli hair in many of the last PR releases. The size of the bump is also creating confusion, it's possible that the lemon dress didn't fit with the one from Valentine's day.
> 
> View attachment 5002405


When I first looked at this picture I noticed her hands and thought it was an awkward pose. Thought maybe Sunshine Sachs had finally impressed upon her not to continually cling on Harry and she had her right hand over her left to literally remind herself not to reach out and grab onto him. No, turns out it was a product placement and I wonder what $he collects for it. 

Pictures sometimes look different depending on the device I'm logged onto. On my MacBook the colors are so distinct the demarcation between her real hair and her extensions is more obvious. Not flattering for a middle aged woman trying to look like an ingenue.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> What, exactly, is a _sustainable_ sapphire?
> Google wasn't much help


A sustainable sapphire is a sapphire purchased or worn by MM.  
I hope the above definition is helpful to you.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> What, exactly, is a _sustainable_ sapphire?
> Google wasn't much help



It’s a marketing gimmick to make gullible people believe they are doing something good for the earth when they buy insanely overpriced jewelry.

The caption claims it is made from recycled gold and “ethically-sourced” diamonds.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> A sustainable sapphire is a sapphire purchased or worn by MM.
> I hope the above definition is helpful to you.



We need to inform Google right away! 
There must be other inquiring minds wanting to know


----------



## rose60610

The ultimate definition of "sustainable" is a house with 18 bathrooms. M's stans must be so proud. I'm waiting for Vanity Fair to do a spread that gloats how important sustainability is to M&H. Of course they won't criticize their mansion with beaucoup de toilets or her expensive outfits. All Meghan has to do is point to a $500 crystal water glass and say she can't bring herself to buy disposable Dixie cups and Vanity Fair will gush that she's singlehandedly saving the Earth. VF will admonish the rest of us and say we must all be more like Meghan.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Poopsie, oh, the memories you generated!
> 
> Higbees. Halle Brothers. Taylor's. Sterling Lindner Davis....long gone. We dressed up, with gloves no less, to go "Downtown" shopping. They were magical stores at Christmas. For those of you who have watched the movie "A Christmas Story" you have visited Higbees. E
> 
> These were the kinds of old school department stores that had "fur salons." After one of them closed, and my Mom had died, I had her mink repurposed into a teddy bear for each of my children so part of the city lives on in the west.



Great memories!
The Christmas tree at Sterling Linders, seeing Mr Jingaling on Halle's 7th floor, the little cardboard stoves the kids meals were served in at Higbee's. stopping for roasted nuts in The Arcade. On Sundays we would go dine at at The Kon Tiki in the Sheraton on the other side of Public Square.
Summer days at Euclid Beach with the popcorn balls and the taffy. I _think_ you can still mail order those from Humphrey's. 
I was devastated when my parents dragged me out to California. Must've been around 65/66. Eventually I came to appreciate it......I mean there are worse fates than living in San Diego, right?

excuse the OT


----------



## Sharont2305

Redirect Notice
		


Good advice from Grandma, maybe people should think of others instead of themselves


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> sounds to me like she grew up very spoiled


Yes she was very spoiled. The main causes creating narcissism are unfair neglectful parenting and extreme overindulgence. In the latter instance everything the child does is praised to the hilt and they are given everything they want. They are put on a pedestal by their parent, or parents. They grow up believing they are wonderful and are owed the world. I really think that MM fell into the latter category. No matter what happens she will never ever change.


----------



## K.D.

Just saw a news item from ANP that Harry feels 'media attention is detrimental to his mental health'. I snorted because why then do an interview with Oprah... Apparently said to James Corden but can't find any English links. Wait found a link: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/harry-speaks-family-life-meghan-071513634.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Yes she was very spoiled. The main causes creating narcissism are unfair neglectful parenting and extreme overindulgence. In the latter instance everything the child does is praised to the hilt and they are given everything they want. They are put on a pedestal by their parent, or parents. They grow up believing they are wonderful and are owed the world. I really think that MM fell into the latter category. No matter what happens she will never ever change.



I wonder what caused it in my mother. Not only are my aunts fairly normal, I somehow can't see my grandparents doing either. Then again, my mother was an only child for 5 years and 60 years later the big catastrophe of her life that destroyed her is when the next sister was born. Go figure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

K.D. said:


> Just saw a news item from ANP that Harry feels 'media attention is detrimental to his mental health'. I snorted because why then do an interview with Oprah... Apparently said to James Corden but can't find any English links. Wait found a link: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/harry-speaks-family-life-meghan-071513634.html



Or an interview with Corden, or constant coverage of whatever insignificant thing you do that day. I mean, I'm sure Charles would have bought him a farm had he said he wanted a quiet life e.g. growing vegetables, breeding polo horses, conservating elephants or whatever.


----------



## Chagall

N/M


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Edited because OT.


----------



## Chagall

N/M


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> A sustainable sapphire is a sapphire purchased or worn by MM.
> I hope the above definition is helpful to you.


Great definition ! but to help clarify even more ... LOL 
Bamboo is sustainable because you can easily grow more and replace what you took from the earth 
Same for sapphires LOL


----------



## LittleStar88

Maybe she thought buying a “sustainable” piece of jewelry (my guess it was gifted and not purchased by her) would offset the water usage of 16 toilets-a-flushing throughout the house.


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she thought buying a “sustainable” piece of jewelry (my guess it was gifted and not purchased by her) would offset the water usage of 16 toilets-a-flushing throughout the house.



Sadly, this is what passes for "logic" these days.


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H must have little consideration for the intelligence of their stans/followers. I wonder if they are so thick that they can't realize their absurds.   



Prince Harry has today claimed that he and Meghan . 'never walked away' from the royal family and he did 'what any husband or father would do' by emigrating to Los Angeles from London, declaring: 'I had to get my family out there'. 

The Duke of Sussex said the move to California last year was about 'stepping back rather than stepping down' as royals as he appeared on The Late Late Show with James Corden, who has gazumped Oprah Winfrey to the exclusive interview with his friend.

In one extraordinary moment Harry raps the theme tune to The Fresh Prince Of Bel-Air outside the mansion where it was filmed, before Corden video calls Meghan, who calls her husband 'Haz' and tells him not to buy it because she's 'done moving'. Harry then pops inside to use the toilet before the friends head off to complete a muddy army assault course together. 

In a wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Harry also reveals that he has had Zoom calls with Prince Philip and Queen, who sent Archie a waffle maker for Christmas, and describes his son as 'hysterical', claiming his first word was 'crocodile'. He also says he knew Meghan was 'the one' after two dates, describing their relationship as '0-60 in two months'. 

Prince Harry also decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'. 

Describing the couple's decision he said: 'It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down. It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.

And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages last week, Harry appears to know what was coming and says: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing. As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], I will never walk away'.

Critics have questioned the timing of his TV appearance, released last night just as the Queen gave a rare public statement encouraging all Britons to have the Covid-19 jab. Others watching the film, where Harry complains about the media attention he received in the UK, urged him to 'stop bl**dy whining' and accused him of 're-writing history' and 'ignoring' the multi-million dollar deals he has signed with Netflix and Spotify.

In the interview Harry also reveals:   


*He knew that Meghan was 'the one' on the second date said they 'went from 0-60 in two months' before going public in 2017; *
*He speaks about his 'usual night in' where the couple 'do Archie's tea, give him a bath, read him a book and put him down'. He adds: 'Meg might order a meal or get a takeaway. Then we go up to bed, turn on the TV and watch Jeopardy or Netflix'.*
*Archie's first word was 'crocodile' and the Queen sent him a waffle maker as a gift, which the family use most days using Meghan's 'organic mix';*
*Harry admits he's seen The Crown, shown on Netflix where the Sussexes will be making films, and defends it despite the negative light it paints of the Queen, his parents and other senior royals. He says: 'It's loosely based on the truth. Of course it's not strictly accurate but it loosely it gives you an idea of that lifestyle and the pressures of putting duty and service above everything else and what can come from that'. *
*The Queen and Prince Philip have worked out how to use Zoom to speak to their grandson and great-grandson - but the Duke of Edinburgh , who is now in hospital, doesn't know how to end the call so he just slams down the laptop's lid;*
*What an absolute crap*


----------



## lanasyogamama

I watched a couple minutes, H is not charming.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry, HAZ


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she thought buying a “sustainable” piece of jewelry (my guess it was gifted and not purchased by her) would offset the water usage of 16 toilets-a-flushing throughout the house.


I wouldn't be surprised if she is being paid to advertise the pink ring, it's all about money for MM imo.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she thought buying a “sustainable” piece of jewelry (my guess it was gifted and not purchased by her) would offset the water usage of 16 toilets-a-flushing throughout the house.


Thank you all for the smiles that I get from this thread


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> MM&H must have little consideration for the intelligence of their stans/followers. I wonder if they are so thick that they can't realize their absurds.
> 
> View attachment 5002895
> 
> Prince Harry has today claimed that he and Meghan . 'never walked away' from the royal family and he did 'what any husband or father would do' by emigrating to Los Angeles from London, declaring: 'I had to get my family out there'.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said the move to California last year was about 'stepping back rather than stepping down' as royals as he appeared on The Late Late Show with James Corden, who has gazumped Oprah Winfrey to the exclusive interview with his friend.
> 
> In one extraordinary moment Harry raps the theme tune to The Fresh Prince Of Bel-Air outside the mansion where it was filmed, before Corden video calls Meghan, who calls her husband 'Haz' and tells him not to buy it because she's 'done moving'. Harry then pops inside to use the toilet before the friends head off to complete a muddy army assault course together.
> 
> In a wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Harry also reveals that he has had Zoom calls with Prince Philip and Queen, who sent Archie a waffle maker for Christmas, and describes his son as 'hysterical', claiming his first word was 'crocodile'. He also says he knew Meghan was 'the one' after two dates, describing their relationship as '0-60 in two months'.
> 
> Prince Harry also decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'.
> 
> Describing the couple's decision he said: 'It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down. It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.
> 
> And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages last week, Harry appears to know what was coming and says: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing. As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], I will never walk away'.
> 
> Critics have questioned the timing of his TV appearance, released last night just as the Queen gave a rare public statement encouraging all Britons to have the Covid-19 jab. Others watching the film, where Harry complains about the media attention he received in the UK, urged him to 'stop bl**dy whining' and accused him of 're-writing history' and 'ignoring' the multi-million dollar deals he has signed with Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> In the interview Harry also reveals:
> 
> 
> *He knew that Meghan was 'the one' on the second date said they 'went from 0-60 in two months' before going public in 2017; *
> *He speaks about his 'usual night in' where the couple 'do Archie's tea, give him a bath, read him a book and put him down'. He adds: 'Meg might order a meal or get a takeaway. Then we go up to bed, turn on the TV and watch Jeopardy or Netflix'.*
> *Archie's first word was 'crocodile' and the Queen sent him a waffle maker as a gift, which the family use most days using Meghan's 'organic mix';*
> *Harry admits he's seen The Crown, shown on Netflix where the Sussexes will be making films, and defends it despite the negative light it paints of the Queen, his parents and other senior royals. He says: 'It's loosely based on the truth. Of course it's not strictly accurate but it loosely it gives you an idea of that lifestyle and the pressures of putting duty and service above everything else and what can come from that'. *
> *The Queen and Prince Philip have worked out how to use Zoom to speak to their grandson and great-grandson - but the Duke of Edinburgh , who is now in hospital, doesn't know how to end the call so he just slams down the laptop's lid;*
> *What an absolute crap*


Has the episode been officially released or is this just a leak ahead of time ? 
Honestly, my bad, I did read the drivel, I need the Cliff Notes version, so thank you


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> MM&H must have little consideration for the intelligence of their stans/followers. I wonder if they are so thick that they can't realize their absurds.



I mean, they are not wrong from what I've seen.

Why Harry thinks the whole world consists of idiots though is beyond me...or is he so delusional he actually believes the story?

P.S. Haz and Meg? Wasn't it H and M a hot minute ago?


----------



## Chanbal

I hope your stomachs are strong this morning. More from DM:


In contrast to what he did to the BRF, this time H is following the old saying, "don't spit in the plate you eat from." It gives the impression that he sold his family and soul to Netflix.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or an interview with Corden, or constant coverage of whatever insignificant thing you do that day. I mean, I'm sure Charles would have bought him a farm had he said he wanted a quiet life e.g. growing vegetables, breeding polo horses, conservating elephants or whatever.



Charles did offer them a farm of sorts in the early days; I think it was a house on Balmoral's grounds. When stories started to first emerge of how overwhelming it all was, some thought they would take up this offer and live there like Will and Kate lived in Wales for a few years when they first married.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Has the episode been officially released or is this just a leak ahead of time ?
> Honestly, my bad, I did read the drivel, I need the Cliff Notes version, so thank you


I'm under the impression that was released today. These private and publicity shy people are releasing videos almost daily, so their voices can be heard.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I still think Meghan is an evil witch and master manipulator, but I'm rapidly losing all respect for Harry. That guy has issues.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they are not wrong from what I've seen.
> 
> Why Harry thinks the whole world consists of idiots though is beyond me...or is he so delusional he actually believes the story?
> 
> P.S. Haz? Wasn't it H and M a hot minute ago?


Haz's brain seems to be the size of a pea.  MM is probably looking for a more showbiz name for H. Haz & Meg? I still prefer Ginge and Cringe!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still think Meghan is an evil witch and master manipulator, but I'm rapidly losing all respect for Harry. That guy has issues.



I've come to believe they are equals in this mess. Yes, Meghan put the ideas in his head and she had the PR/show biz contacts, but it was Harry who had the final say to make it happen. It's clear he wants all the attention and adulation without the responsibility. They are two peas in a pod.


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Harry Vows He 'Will Never Walk Away' from the Royal Family Despite Stepping Back from Role
					

The Prince candidly opened up to James Corden about how staying in England "was destroying my mental health"




					people.com
				




In other words, he wants his cake and to eat it too!


----------



## purseinsanity

OMG I wonder how much People is paid to be on retainer to be their pasty voice piece?  The whole page is about MM and JCMH with ridiculous sound bites (read bites?).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Vows He 'Will Never Walk Away' from the Royal Family Despite Stepping Back from Role
> 
> 
> The Prince candidly opened up to James Corden about how staying in England "was destroying my mental health"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, he wants his cake and to eat it too!



Or he just wants to put the blame on his family basically saying they bullied him and his precious wife out of their service. At this point, I'm at a loss how their malfunctioning brains work.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry, HAZ


As in Haz Been


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or he just wants to put the blame on his family basically saying they bullied him and his precious wife out of their service.* At this point, I'm at a loss how their malfunctioning brains work.*


None of us need to go down that rabbit hole.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this revenge? MM&H have no respect for QE.  Prince Philip is in the hospital. This is shocking and sad.



But critics have questioned the timing of his 'prancing' TV appearance, released last night just as the Queen gave a rare public statement encouraging all Britons to 'think about others' and have the Covid-19 jab.

Palace sources told MailOnline the timing of Harry's TV appearance is 'unhelpful, and has caused 'disquiet' at the palace, especially with Prince Philip spending his 11th day in hospital battling a nasty infection.  'When the Queen speaks as she has done about the vaccine it is accepted that she has a clear field', the insider said.

the timing of his 'prancing' TV appearance


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> Haz's brain seems to be the size of a pea.  MM is probably looking for a more showbiz name for H. Haz & Meg? I still prefer Ginge and Cringe!



Ginge and Whinge.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Is this revenge? MM&H have no respect for QE.  Prince Philip is in the hospital. This is shocking and sad.
> 
> View attachment 5002959
> 
> But critics have questioned the timing of his 'prancing' TV appearance, released last night just as the Queen gave a rare public statement encouraging all Britons to 'think about others' and have the Covid-19 jab.
> 
> Palace sources told MailOnline the timing of Harry's TV appearance is 'unhelpful, and has caused 'disquiet' at the palace, especially with Prince Philip spending his 11th day in hospital battling a nasty infection.  'When the Queen speaks as she has done about the vaccine it is accepted that she has a clear field', the insider said.
> 
> the timing of his 'prancing' TV appearance



I think we all need to overhaul our attitude, and with we I mean the palace. Those two nobodies are not part of the BRF anymore, who cares what they have to say and when they feel the need to say it. (but yes, it p*sses me off too. We as a family have spent the past year keeping my grandmother alive by basically jailing her, and keeping her in good spirits while doing so, and look how he treats his grandparents)


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Is this revenge? MM&H have no respect for QE.  Prince Philip is in the hospital. This is shocking and sad.
> 
> View attachment 5002959
> 
> But critics have questioned the timing of his 'prancing' TV appearance, released last night just as the Queen gave a rare public statement encouraging all Britons to 'think about others' and have the Covid-19 jab.
> 
> Palace sources told MailOnline the timing of Harry's TV appearance is 'unhelpful, and has caused 'disquiet' at the palace, especially with Prince Philip spending his 11th day in hospital battling a nasty infection.  'When the Queen speaks as she has done about the vaccine it is accepted that she has a clear field', the insider said.
> 
> the timing of his 'prancing' TV appearance


A bit of a stretch from DM. Here in the UK, we really don't pay that much attend to H. No one I know saw Harry's interview (myself included) whiles we all saw Queen's as it was on major news headlines in multiple channels at prime time yesterday. A lot of discussion on Queen's TV statement on Twitter too. NO COMPARISON whatsoever!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> OMG I wonder how much People is paid to be on retainer to be their pasty voice piece?  The whole page is about MM and JCMH with ridiculous sound bites (read bites?).



Maybe but People and all of these publications are desperate to get clicks on their web sites and keep the money flowing in. Whether the click is from someone who loves them or hates them, it doesn't matter. Harry and Meghan are controversial and they are getting plenty of clicks.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chagall said:


> Yes she was very spoiled. The main causes creating narcissism are unfair neglectful parenting and extreme overindulgence. In the latter instance everything the child does is praised to the hilt and they are given everything they want. They are put on a pedestal by their parent, or parents. They grow up believing they are wonderful and are owed the world. I really think that MM fell into the latter category. No matter what happens she will never ever change.



Wow! That sure sounds like my estranged brother.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> OMG I wonder how much People is paid to be on retainer to be their pasty voice piece?  The whole page is about MM and JCMH with ridiculous sound bites (read bites?).


People's magazine, VF... are all part of the MM's PR machine, so I avoid clicking on those articles. However, I'm not surprised with the title of the article. MM&H will continue sucking from the BRF all they can imo.


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or he just wants to put the blame on his family basically saying they bullied him and his precious wife out of their service. At this point, I'm at a loss how their malfunctioning brains work.


He wanted to have his cake and eat it too.  The Queen told him to grow up and that it doesn't work that way.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> A bit of a stretch from DM. Here in the UK, we really don't pay that much attend to H. No one I know saw Harry's interview (myself included) whiles we all saw Queen's as it was on major news headlines in multiple channels at prime time yesterday. A lot of discussion on Queen's TV statement on Twitter too. NO COMPARISON whatsoever!


Haha, I prefer DM's news about MM&H even if a bit stretched to the soap opera news from People or VF.

"_the chat sparked debate online, with some social media users questioning the Duke's claims about Archie's first word._"


----------



## justwatchin

From the BBC website:

Asked what a regular evening was like for the Sussexes in Santa Barbara, Harry said: "Depending on how the day's been and how busy it's been, we do Archie's tea, give him a bath, read him a book, put him down, go downstairs, Meg might cook a meal, might order a takeaway, go upstairs sit in bed, turn the TV on, watch some Jeopardy, maybe watch a little bit of Netflix."

Yeah, I’m not believing this, that “Meg” is whipping up dinner in their little bungalow. Also find it hard to believe that Archie wanted a waffle maker from Grandma, but the article said that is what Meg said he wanted. Ugh..


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Maybe but People and all of these publications are desperate to get clicks on their web sites and keep the money flowing in. Whether the click is from someone who loves them or hates them, it doesn't matter. Harry and Meghan are controversial and they are getting plenty of clicks.


Surprised, pleasantly, yesterday saw new issue of People with Kate the Great on the cover


----------



## bag-mania

I've noticed a number of newspaper/magazine/gossip web sites no longer allow reader comments for their articles, not just about H&M but for anything. I guess they got tired of having their writers called talentless hacks.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder what caused it in my mother. Not only are my aunts fairly normal, I somehow can't see my grandparents doing either. Then again, my mother was an only child for 5 years and 60 years later the big catastrophe of her life that destroyed her is when the next sister was born. Go figure.


it's possible your mom was treated much differently than her siblings.  I was listening to a podcast yesterday with bruce springsteen.  his grandparents played a big part in raising him.  he said he could stay up as late as he wanted, get up in the morning at whatever time he wanted.  basically as a young child they treated him almost like an adult.  I think they had lost a daughter so they just indulged him.  fortunately while he may have a decent sized ego, he turned out to be a decent, thoughtful man.


----------



## Chanbal

It was neither "dog", "mama" nor "crocodile" , Archie's first word was "pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis". Journalists can't get anything right these days!


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder who decided that their relationship went from 0-60 in two months?


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder who decided that their relationship went from 0-60 in two months?


H was being modest, Tesla does the same (0-60 mph) in as little as 3.1 seconds.


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder who decided that their relationship went from 0-60 in two months?


Meg


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Some narcissists are born not made. Meghan was clearly spoiled rotten as a child, but there are too many cases of families where all of the kids were raised to have the same values, yet there was one who always thought he/she was better than everyone else.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they are not wrong from what I've seen.
> 
> Why Harry thinks the whole world consists of idiots though is beyond me...or is he so delusional he actually believes the story?
> 
> P.S. Haz and Meg? Wasn't it H and M a hot minute ago?



Both “H” and “Harry” are more difficult to say out loud than Harry, it’s so dumb.  

I think I mentioned this before, but I always get a bad feeling when a woman tries to change a man’s name. I had an uncle James who left the seminary, was in a bit of a personal crisis, and this woman swept in and insisted they get married within months, and always calls him “Jim”.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It was neither "dog", "mama" nor "crocodile" , Archie's first word was "pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis". Journalists can't get anything right these days!
> 
> View attachment 5003027



Clearly they are mistaken, Archie's first word was "philanthropist." Because SERVICE IS UNIVERSAL!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just saw the pictures that went with the bus interview, and Harry looks like he has a massive alcohol or other substance abuse problem. Dunno.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder who decided that their relationship went from 0-60 in two months?



I don't know (ok, we do know!), but let's remember that at that point they were seeing each other every other weekend. So what, ten meetings to make a huge decision?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Here's the actual clip if anyone wants to watch (doubtful I realize in this crowd but I always prefer original sources so I googled for the link)...


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they are not wrong from what I've seen.
> 
> Why Harry thinks the whole world consists of idiots though is beyond me...or is he so delusional he actually believes the story?
> 
> P.S. Haz and Meg? Wasn't it H and M a hot minute ago?


More like Hag and septic peg


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Haha, I prefer DM's news about MM&H even if a bit stretched to the soap opera news from People or VF.
> 
> "_the chat sparked debate online, with some social media users questioning the Duke's claims about Archie's first word._"
> 
> View attachment 5003005


Let me explain, or rather put crocodile in context ... LOL
the first word from most children is a nickname for Mummy


----------



## bag-mania

I think Harry got off easy by having "Haz" as his pet name from Meghan. She used to call her first husband "Trevity Trev Trev."


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Here's the actual clip if anyone wants to watch (doubtful I realize in this crowd but I always prefer original sources so I googled for the link)...



I can't get past the toilet break....maybe watch more later....so he wants his privacy, right?


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder who decided that their relationship went from 0-60 in two months?



Meghan went from 0-60 as soon as she realized she was going to meet Harry. 

And I'm no child psychologist, but how can a kid's first word be "crocodile"? If it was, then "Mom, you're a crock of sh*t" can't be far behind. 

And if Harry was forced out of England due to the "toxic press", then why was he upset at losing his patronages? It should have been a relief. So he runs to "safe space" America? I thought America was such a horrifically racist country that woke-sters hate and are ashamed of. Is it hated so much because it's the only country that pays well over a hundred million dollars to people with zero talent?


----------



## elvisfan4life

chicinthecity777 said:


> A bit of a stretch from DM. Here in the UK, we really don't pay that much attend to H. No one I know saw Harry's interview (myself included) whiles we all saw Queen's as it was on major news headlines in multiple channels at prime time yesterday. A lot of discussion on Queen's TV statement on Twitter too. NO COMPARISON whatsoever!



Sadly not true James Corden is being fawned  over on ITV all day who I have no idea and universally people love the bus ride and interview - the younger generation especially I just wish the media would stop giving them oxygen - the important message is only the Queens on getting people vaccinated if the pathetic twosome had any service on their bones they would be promoting that not their miserable selves


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I think Harry got off easy by having "Haz" as his pet name from Meghan. She used to call her first husband "Trevity Trev Trev."



OMG please say you are joking. That is vomit-inducing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haz = Hazard? Such an odd, unloving nickname, so unnecessary to tell us this
The more we see and hear of the gruesome twosome, the more we see they have absolutely nothing to offer. There is nothing interesting, even believable, in their conversations.  Less is truly more.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Why doesn’t she call him Henry that’s his name maybe scared he might behave like Henry VIII???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry, HAZ


More like HAZ-been!
ETA: Oops @purseinsanity beat me to it!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I think Harry got off easy by having "Haz" as his pet name from Meghan. She used to call her first husband "Trevity Trev Trev."


'Harry Haz Haz', I see! Does she mean "Hazard/Hazardous" or "Hazardous Cargo"?


----------



## Chagall

elvisfan4life said:


> Sadly not true James Corden is being fawned  over on ITV all day who I have no idea and universally people love the bus ride and interview - the younger generation especially I just wish the media would stop giving them oxygen - the important message is only the Queens on getting people vaccinated if the pathetic twosome had any service on their bones they would be promoting that not their miserable selves


I just saw the interview. I can’t believe this cringeworthy segment got good press. I must be living on a different planet or something.


----------



## lulu212121

Oh my...His nickname from her is Haz?  He is so stupid! It appears she has made him a negative in the relationship. Just a matter of time now. Haz as in past tense? Hazardous...waste? Hmm he just admitted mental health as a reason for leaving. I'm sure she has a list going.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Haha, I prefer DM's news about MM&H even if a bit stretched to the soap opera news from People or VF.
> 
> "_the chat sparked debate online, with some social media users questioning the Duke's claims about Archie's first word._"
> 
> View attachment 5003005


Maybe he meant snake and was referring to his mother?


----------



## Kaka_bobo

LOL crocodile as Archie's first words..... maybe.....for all the crocodile tears his parents shed.


----------



## Sharont2305

Haz, to be fair, here in the UK names do get similarly shortened like this....
Gaz/Gazza - Gary
Shaz/Shazza - Sharon
Kaz/Kazza - Karen
Baz/Bazza - Barry
Those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.
I'd understand it more if she was the Brit and he was the American, it's baffling hearing her say it. She must have heard him being called it once upon a time when he had friends. Or, I bet William is the only one that's ever called him Haz and nobody has even known that before so, of course she has to adopt it, and make it public.


----------



## chicinthecity777

elvisfan4life said:


> Sadly not true James Corden is being fawned  over on ITV all day who I have no idea and universally people love the bus ride and interview - the younger generation especially I just wish the media would stop giving them oxygen - the important message is only the Queens on getting people vaccinated if the pathetic twosome had any service on their bones they would be promoting that not their miserable selves


Not in my circle and I don't watch ITV news.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG please say you are joking. That is vomit-inducing.



Oh, it's true. Though supposedly the nickname originally came from LL Cool J and Meghan appropriated it. Who knows?


----------



## csshopper

'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never* walked away'.*

Nope, not us, we take private jets!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Netflix employee...


----------



## LibbyRuth

justwatchin said:


> From the BBC website:
> 
> Asked what a regular evening was like for the Sussexes in Santa Barbara, Harry said: "Depending on how the day's been and how busy it's been, we do Archie's tea, give him a bath, read him a book, put him down, go downstairs, Meg might cook a meal, might order a takeaway, go upstairs sit in bed, turn the TV on, watch some Jeopardy, maybe watch a little bit of Netflix."
> 
> Yeah, I’m not believing this, that “Meg” is whipping up dinner in their little bungalow. Also find it hard to believe that Archie wanted a waffle maker from Grandma, but the article said that is what Meg said he wanted. Ugh..



I have a family member who does that.  Ask her for give ideas for her husband, she'll tell you things that she'd like - gift certificates for her favorite restaurants are a big one. Ask what to give her kids, she'll tell you thinks they need to organize their lives.  All her gift ideas are self serving.  Not surprised for an instant that Meghan would be like that!  Wouldn't surprise me at all if she'd tell people that Harry would like conflict free sapphire jewelry that would fit her!


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Some narcissists are born not made. Meghan was clearly spoiled rotten as a child, but there are too many cases of families where all of the kids were raised to have the same values, yet there was one who always thought he/she was better than everyone else.


I agree. Like I mentioned in an earlier post this morning, narcissism can be genetically as well as environmentally caused. In the case of Harry and Meghan I think we would be safe in assuming it was nurture and not nature. They were both raised in an extremely over the top privileged manner. Put the two of them together as a couple and they become a narc force hard for the average person to fathom.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if Oprah is mad James Corden beat her to the punch with a Harry/Meghan show. Her show will be more serious but at least some viewers will have had their fill by the time it alrs. Interviewing them is not exactly _exclusive_ anymore.


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> Netflix employee...
> View attachment 5003133




Wow. He just talked major $hit about his family without actually saying it. What a jerk. He comes off as bitter and ungrateful. If I were his dad I’d be handing out a long overdue spanking when I saw him next. Such a cad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Oprah is mad James Corden beat her to the punch with a Harry/Meghan show. Her show will be more serious but at least some viewers will have had their fill by the time it alrs. Interviewing them is not exactly _exclusive_ anymore.



Im pretty certain this was done in tandem with the Oprah interview as a teaser...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Some narcissists are born not made. Meghan was clearly spoiled rotten as a child, but there are too many cases of families where all of the kids were raised to have the same values, *yet there was one who always thought he/she was better than everyone else*.


Or like my oldest sister, who liked to play the victim even though it was of her fault that she never achieved much in life. At every family reunion, she had to be the centre of attention, pretending to know everything and enjoyed deprecating others while saying she was just joking.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Im pretty certain this was done in tandem with the Oprah interview as a teaser...



Ah, I didn't realize CBS owns them both. They made such a big deal over saying that Oprah didn't pay them for the interview, but I wonder if the network did.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Or like my oldest sister, who liked to play the victim even though it was of her fault that she never achieved much in life. At every family reunion, she had to be the centre of attention, pretending to know everything and enjoyed deprecating others while saying she was just joking.



You know I think every family has someone like this in it. Not necessarily a textbook narcissist, but certainly a self-absorbed pain in the ass.


----------



## elvisfan4life

chicinthecity777 said:


> Not in my circle and I don't watch ITV news.



ITV have clearly bought the awful interview BBC and SKY refused to bid for it ITV will be featuring every move of the gruesome twosome from how on - trying to get their money’s worth - I won’t be watching


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> MM&H must have little consideration for the intelligence of their stans/followers. I wonder if they are so thick that they can't realize their absurds.
> 
> View attachment 5002895
> 
> Prince Harry has today claimed that he and Meghan . 'never walked away' from the royal family and he did 'what any husband or father would do' by emigrating to Los Angeles from London, declaring: 'I had to get my family out there'.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said the move to California last year was about 'stepping back rather than stepping down' as royals as he appeared on The Late Late Show with James Corden, who has gazumped Oprah Winfrey to the exclusive interview with his friend.
> 
> In one extraordinary moment Harry raps the theme tune to The Fresh Prince Of Bel-Air outside the mansion where it was filmed, before Corden video calls Meghan, who calls her husband 'Haz' and tells him not to buy it because she's 'done moving'. Harry then pops inside to use the toilet before the friends head off to complete a muddy army assault course together.
> 
> In a wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Harry also reveals that he has had Zoom calls with Prince Philip and Queen, who sent Archie a waffle maker for Christmas, and describes his son as 'hysterical', claiming his first word was 'crocodile'. He also says he knew Meghan was 'the one' after two dates, describing their relationship as '0-60 in two months'.
> 
> Prince Harry also decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'.
> 
> Describing the couple's decision he said: 'It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down. It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.
> 
> And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages last week, Harry appears to know what was coming and says: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing. As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], I will never walk away'.
> 
> Critics have questioned the timing of his TV appearance, released last night just as the Queen gave a rare public statement encouraging all Britons to have the Covid-19 jab. Others watching the film, where Harry complains about the media attention he received in the UK, urged him to 'stop bl**dy whining' and accused him of 're-writing history' and 'ignoring' the multi-million dollar deals he has signed with Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> In the interview Harry also reveals:
> 
> 
> *He knew that Meghan was 'the one' on the second date said they 'went from 0-60 in two months' before going public in 2017; *
> *He speaks about his 'usual night in' where the couple 'do Archie's tea, give him a bath, read him a book and put him down'. He adds: 'Meg might order a meal or get a takeaway. Then we go up to bed, turn on the TV and watch Jeopardy or Netflix'.*
> *Archie's first word was 'crocodile' and the Queen sent him a waffle maker as a gift, which the family use most days using Meghan's 'organic mix';*
> *Harry admits he's seen The Crown, shown on Netflix where the Sussexes will be making films, and defends it despite the negative light it paints of the Queen, his parents and other senior royals. He says: 'It's loosely based on the truth. Of course it's not strictly accurate but it loosely it gives you an idea of that lifestyle and the pressures of putting duty and service above everything else and what can come from that'. *
> *The Queen and Prince Philip have worked out how to use Zoom to speak to their grandson and great-grandson - but the Duke of Edinburgh , who is now in hospital, doesn't know how to end the call so he just slams down the laptop's lid;*
> *What an absolute crap*



First word was crocodile? I call BS. Maybe he watches Jeopardy, too.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> ITV have clearly bought the awful interview BBC and SKY refused to bid for it ITV will be featuring every move of the gruesome twosome from how on - trying to get their money’s worth - I won’t be watching


Well, ITV need a follow up on the "Are you Okay?" documentary they filmed.


----------



## Allisonfaye

marietouchet said:


> Let me explain, or rather put crocodile in context ... LOL
> the first word from most children is a nickname for Mummy



I think most kids say dada or some form of it first. Supposedly kids form the d sound earlier.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jeopardy is distributed by CBS.
James Cordon, CBS
Gayle, CBS
OW, CBS 









						‘Evil’ & ‘Unicorn’ Headed To Netflix In One-Year Licensing Deal By CBS TV Studios Aimed At Finding New Audiences
					

Netflix has picked up freshman CBS series Evil and The Unicorn. In an unusual deal, CBS TV Studios, which produces both series, has licensed their first seasons to Netflix in advance of the shows&#…




					deadline.com
				



CBS series are among the most popular titles on Netflix. Recent Nielsen reports list veteran procedurals _NCIS_ and  _Criminal Minds,_ which recently ended its network run, as two of the most heavily viewed series on the streaming platform.


----------



## CarryOn2020

That FaceTime photo of MM - gasp


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> You know I think every family has someone like this in it. Not necessarily a textbook narcissist, but certainly a self-absorbed pain in the ass.


This is true, but my sister was a both a narcissist and a self-absorbed pain in this ass.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> I think most kids say dada or some form of it first. Supposedly kids form the d sound earlier.



Oh but it made Megs furious when Archie sad Dada on camera. So maybe that's why it was deleted from collective memory.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jan, 2020:









						Prince Harry Said He Doesn't Want 'The Crown' to Cover His Life
					

"I'm going to make sure I stop it before they get to me."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok I'm apparently super slow...is that James Cordon guy the one who usually drives around pop stars (and Michelle) and makes them sing? I obviously don't consume much pop culture besides H & M gossip haha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jan, 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Said He Doesn't Want 'The Crown' to Cover His Life
> 
> 
> "I'm going to make sure I stop it before they get to me."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Who cares about the balderdash I spouted yesterday.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok I'm apparently super slow...is that James Cordon guy the one who usually drives around pop stars (and Michelle) and makes them sing? I obviously don't consume much pop culture besides H & M gossip haha.



Yes, that is the one!  Obviously, this ‘interview’ was heavily scripted. But this photo, oh dear.


----------



## ChanelFan29

The James Corden interview went on far too long and the obstacle course at the end was a waste of time.  I think they should have kept it to about 7-8 minutes and not gotten into any heavy stuff.  Keep it light and fluffy.


----------



## Chagall

I think the thing that I find so hard to take about M&H is their ‘smugness’. Having self confidence is one thing and great, but even that is usually earned in some way. These two are so completely self satisfied and pleased with themselves. For what?


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, that is the one!  Obviously, this ‘interview’ was heavily scripted. But this photo, oh dear.
> View attachment 5003294


I was annoyed earlier by women online going on about how good she looked.  She looks desperate to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is so desperate, but we gotta laugh at the ridiculous power plays:








						Oprah's interview with Harry and Meghan is 'the best she's ever done'
					

Gayle, 66, is one of Oprah's closest friends, and is also an anchor for CBS - the network that airs Corden's show and will air the TV mogul's interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Commenter summed it up:
_ Murphy, On a plane, Canada, 5 minutes ago

Oh please, all concerned parties are represented by Sunshine Sachs and if you have to "push" this hard it's blatantly obvious that no one is interested in you._


----------



## marietouchet

How do they manage to do this and think they are treading carefully ?
Cordon was the same day as the Queen’s speech to get vaccinated ...


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> *How do they manage to do this and think they are treading carefully ?*
> Cordon was the same day as the Queen’s speech to get vaccinated ...



They are overwhelmed by their own confidence in their cleverness.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, that is the one!  Obviously, this ‘interview’ was heavily scripted. But this photo, oh dear.
> View attachment 5003294


Crafting that selfie took hours


----------



## mdcx

It must pain Meghan to know that people don't really care about her leaving the BRF anymore. She's a selfish person who will do anything for money and fame. After all the outrage she might just end up being ignored. Harry is a mess obviously, but then he is actively participating in this attention mongering. The celebrity world moves quickly, and without the substance of the BRF behind them, they are just another couple of has-beens trying to get the spotlight again imo. I don't expect the Oprah special to get many viewers. We all know their poor-me narrative backwards and forwards at this point...


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jan, 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Said He Doesn't Want 'The Crown' to Cover His Life
> 
> 
> "I'm going to make sure I stop it before they get to me."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Already pre-planning their next lawsuit


----------



## Allisonfaye

mdcx said:


> It must pain Meghan to know that people don't really care about her leaving the BRF anymore. She's a selfish person who will do anything for money and fame. After all the outrage she might just end up being ignored. Harry is a mess obviously, but then he is actively participating in this attention mongering. The celebrity world moves quickly, and without the substance of the BRF behind them, they are just another couple of has-beens trying to get the spotlight again imo. I don't expect the Oprah special to get many viewers. We all know their poor-me narrative backwards and forwards at this point...



Maybe if it's a slow news day. I do think there will be a number of people who might want to see Oprah. She had a huge following back in the day.


----------



## poopsie

justwatchin said:


> Already pre-planning their next lawsuit



yup.................just keep on biting the hands that feed you.
Gotta hope that some day one of the hands will bite back


----------



## mdcx

Allisonfaye said:


> Maybe if it's a slow news day. I do think there will be a number of people who might want to see Oprah. She had a huge following back in the day.


I love O and am a bit disappointed in her doing this interview. I think she is just being used to convey the same old poor-us narrative by H and M. Personally, I won't watch but yes I'm sure there is some audience for this show.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is so desperate, but we gotta laugh at the ridiculous power plays:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah's interview with Harry and Meghan is 'the best she's ever done'
> 
> 
> Gayle, 66, is one of Oprah's closest friends, and is also an anchor for CBS - the network that airs Corden's show and will air the TV mogul's interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wow, I didn't realize Oprah set her bar so low!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ah, I didn't realize CBS owns them both. They made such a big deal over saying that Oprah didn't pay them for the interview, but I wonder if the network did.


Was this information provided during the bus interview? I recall to have seen somewhere that Oprah was sharing with them the CBS payment for the March 7 interview. I can't remember the source, so I don't how reliable this information is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jan, 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Said He Doesn't Want 'The Crown' to Cover His Life
> 
> 
> "I'm going to make sure I stop it before they get to me."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


He changed his $$$$$$ (mind). He is now wanting Damian Lewis to play him on screen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My theory is there are plenty of people in the US who despise the BRF and all that it stands for, especially in Hwood. They will mock it at every opportunity while saying how much they _luvvv_ the family (little f), usually so they get the invites. The fact that H participates in these super-fake love-fests - it shows how truly stupid he is. I cannot think of any other word for it. It is one thing for Brits to mock them, but for H himself to do it, wow.

Completely out of balance. So uncool.


----------



## Chanbal

We can't miss Jan Moir's opinion on Ginge & Cringe's public disservice in America:

*Soft scoop and waffle from the Duke of Haz-ard: JAN MOIR on Harry and Meghan's profile-raising offensive in America*

Think about others rather than yourself, said the Queen this week. Yet over in LA, her wise words beseeching altruism and humanity fell on deaf ears. 

'My life is always going to be about public service,' said the Duke of Sussex in his first post–Megxit TV interview, rather proving that the service he has in mind is chiefly in honour of himself.

Despite the bad timing, the pandemic, the ailing Duke of Edinburgh and the clenched dismay of the entire Windsor family aghast at their publicity manoeuvres, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are plunging ahead with their profile-raising offensive in America.

Next week we can look forward to Meghan being asked if she is OK by Oprah Winfrey, on a CBS Primetime Special that will be watched by millions. 

This week we nibbled on an appetiser served up by Harry, who appeared on The Late Late Show (also broadcast by CBS), presented by his friend James Corden. The pals had tea and scones on an open-topped tourist bus that roved around Los Angeles.

On the top deck, Corden served up the kind of soft scoop questions guaranteed to put a non-raspberry ripple of delight deep inside the royal sundae. When did you know Meghan was the one? How are you finding fatherhood? Why are you so goddam fabulous and perfect in every way? 

A beaming Harry volunteered that the Queen gave his son Archie a waffle maker for Christmas, and that the family had waffles every morning after Meghan makes a 'beautiful, like, organic, mix'. Of course she does.

Yes, but what exactly do you have on those oh so beautiful waffles, Harry? That was the question no one was asking, not even James, but the Prince ploughed on regardless.

'I have them with a bit of yoghurt, a bit of jam on top, a bit of berry maybe, bit of honey maybe, some syrup.'

Soon it was time to add a bit of sauce, too, with the Prince returning to his pet theme that the 'toxic' British media had affected his mental health so much that he had to move to America and sign a Netflix deal to regain his equilibrium. 

And he had only done what any father and husband would have done, he claimed, which seems to be living in a succession of enviable and luxurious mansions before buying one of his own.

Clearly, the Prince is much more comfortable with the kind of media coverage that only friends and wedding guests can provide. 

Throughout the fun, 17-minute clip, Corden came across like a clammy flunkey oozing obsequiousness and throbbing with a desire to make his royal guest look good, even if that meant flagellating himself.

He even puffed around an assault course behind the Prince, in a segment designed to show off Harry's fitness and military training. 

Whether clambering over fences or climbing ropes, James was on bow and scrape duty like any good Tudor jester keen to keep his place in the royal court. 'Prithee welcome to this pleesant comedie, sire,' — he almost said, before going full mud pancake during the barbed wire crawl.

The Prince clearly enjoyed the kind of fawning treatment that would please even Kim Jong-un.

However, it was lovely to see Harry looking so happy for once, his face a picture of sun-toasted sincerity, his marmalade hair ablaze in the golden Californian morning.

There he is, this noble dandelion of do-good who has been brave enough to uproot himself from destiny and replant himself in the rich loam of Hollywood, where he is learning fast. 

There were at least three mentions of Netflix, who have paid the Duke and Duchess millions for upcoming projects.

Harry even defended The Crown, the Netflix series that depicts his family as little more than flinty, heartless opportunists on the make. Sometimes you can see their point. What else did we learn? She calls him Haz, he calls her Meg, Archie's first word was 'crocodile'.

There was no confirmation on who was in the room at the time, although my money is on David Foster, the alarmingly youthful-looking 71-year-old music mogul who is married to one of Meghan's best friends and has become, according to her, a 'father figure' to the Prince. 

Meanwhile, dressed down in a T-shirt and jeans for this historic appearance, Harry seemed to be emphasising once more that he has descended from the dank ramparts of royal status to let a little light into his life.

Yet even the newly-minted Duke of Haz-ard cannot quite leave behind the prestige of his past, which clings to him like the curl of smoke that lingers from a snuffed candle.

'You know us royals, we don't carry cash,' he said at the start of the interview, revealing himself to be a man who still wants a bit of jam on top and maybe some syrup, too.

Jan Moir on the bus and more


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _
> Think about others rather than yourself, said the Queen this week. Yet over in LA, her wise words beseeching altruism and humanity fell on deaf ears.
> 
> The Prince clearly enjoyed the kind of fawning treatment that would please even Kim Jong-un.
> 
> *'You know us royals, we don't carry cash*,' he said at the start of the interview, revealing himself to be a man who still wants a bit of jam on top and maybe some syrup, too._
> 
> Jan Moir on the bus and more



_Us royals_??? 
Has no one told Haz?  He deserves a hazzie for this performance.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> We can't miss Jan Moir's opinion on Ginge & Cringe's public disservice in America:
> 
> *Soft scoop and waffle from the Duke of Haz-ard: JAN MOIR on Harry and Meghan's profile-raising offensive in America*
> 
> Think about others rather than yourself, said the Queen this week. Yet over in LA, her wise words beseeching altruism and humanity fell on deaf ears.
> 
> 'My life is always going to be about public service,' said the Duke of Sussex in his first post–Megxit TV interview, rather proving that the service he has in mind is chiefly in honour of himself.
> 
> Despite the bad timing, the pandemic, the ailing Duke of Edinburgh and the clenched dismay of the entire Windsor family aghast at their publicity manoeuvres, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are plunging ahead with their profile-raising offensive in America.
> 
> Next week we can look forward to Meghan being asked if she is OK by Oprah Winfrey, on a CBS Primetime Special that will be watched by millions.
> 
> This week we nibbled on an appetiser served up by Harry, who appeared on The Late Late Show (also broadcast by CBS), presented by his friend James Corden. The pals had tea and scones on an open-topped tourist bus that roved around Los Angeles.
> 
> On the top deck, Corden served up the kind of soft scoop questions guaranteed to put a non-raspberry ripple of delight deep inside the royal sundae. When did you know Meghan was the one? How are you finding fatherhood? Why are you so goddam fabulous and perfect in every way?
> 
> A beaming Harry volunteered that the Queen gave his son Archie a waffle maker for Christmas, and that the family had waffles every morning after Meghan makes a 'beautiful, like, organic, mix'. Of course she does.
> 
> Yes, but what exactly do you have on those oh so beautiful waffles, Harry? That was the question no one was asking, not even James, but the Prince ploughed on regardless.
> 
> 'I have them with a bit of yoghurt, a bit of jam on top, a bit of berry maybe, bit of honey maybe, some syrup.'
> 
> Soon it was time to add a bit of sauce, too, with the Prince returning to his pet theme that the 'toxic' British media had affected his mental health so much that he had to move to America and sign a Netflix deal to regain his equilibrium.
> 
> And he had only done what any father and husband would have done, he claimed, which seems to be living in a succession of enviable and luxurious mansions before buying one of his own.
> 
> Clearly, the Prince is much more comfortable with the kind of media coverage that only friends and wedding guests can provide.
> 
> Throughout the fun, 17-minute clip, Corden came across like a clammy flunkey oozing obsequiousness and throbbing with a desire to make his royal guest look good, even if that meant flagellating himself.
> 
> He even puffed around an assault course behind the Prince, in a segment designed to show off Harry's fitness and military training.
> 
> Whether clambering over fences or climbing ropes, James was on bow and scrape duty like any good Tudor jester keen to keep his place in the royal court. 'Prithee welcome to this pleesant comedie, sire,' — he almost said, before going full mud pancake during the barbed wire crawl.
> 
> The Prince clearly enjoyed the kind of fawning treatment that would please even Kim Jong-un.
> 
> However, it was lovely to see Harry looking so happy for once, his face a picture of sun-toasted sincerity, his marmalade hair ablaze in the golden Californian morning.
> 
> There he is, this noble dandelion of do-good who has been brave enough to uproot himself from destiny and replant himself in the rich loam of Hollywood, where he is learning fast.
> 
> There were at least three mentions of Netflix, who have paid the Duke and Duchess millions for upcoming projects.
> 
> Harry even defended The Crown, the Netflix series that depicts his family as little more than flinty, heartless opportunists on the make. Sometimes you can see their point. What else did we learn? She calls him Haz, he calls her Meg, Archie's first word was 'crocodile'.
> 
> There was no confirmation on who was in the room at the time, although my money is on David Foster, the alarmingly youthful-looking 71-year-old music mogul who is married to one of Meghan's best friends and has become, according to her, a 'father figure' to the Prince.
> 
> Meanwhile, dressed down in a T-shirt and jeans for this historic appearance, Harry seemed to be emphasising once more that he has descended from the dank ramparts of royal status to let a little light into his life.
> 
> Yet even the newly-minted Duke of Haz-ard cannot quite leave behind the prestige of his past, which clings to him like the curl of smoke that lingers from a snuffed candle.
> 
> 'You know us royals, we don't carry cash,' he said at the start of the interview, revealing himself to be a man who still wants a bit of jam on top and maybe some syrup, too.
> 
> Jan Moir on the bus and more


The description of his "marmalade hair" made me giggle


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is so desperate, but we gotta laugh at the ridiculous power plays:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah's interview with Harry and Meghan is 'the best she's ever done'
> 
> 
> Gayle, 66, is one of Oprah's closest friends, and is also an anchor for CBS - the network that airs Corden's show and will air the TV mogul's interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Commenter summed it up:
> _ Murphy, On a plane, Canada, 5 minutes ago
> 
> Oh please, all concerned parties are represented by Sunshine Sachs and if you have to "push" this hard it's blatantly obvious that no one is interested in you._


Wow Oprah is so invested in selling the interview. They know if the interview doesn't get what MM&H need (audience for Netflix and Spotify), their public disservice in the US is going to be a lot more difficult.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jan, 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Said He Doesn't Want 'The Crown' to Cover His Life
> 
> 
> "I'm going to make sure I stop it before they get to me."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Of course he doesn't.  Wonder if he'd be singing Netflix' praises if they depicted "Meg" in all her snake and venom glory?

Oh, sorry, I meant crocodile.


----------



## Lounorada

K.D. said:


> Just saw a news item from ANP that *Harry feels 'media attention is detrimental to his mental health'*. I snorted because why then do an interview with Oprah... Apparently said to James Corden but can't find any English links. Wait found a link: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/harry-speaks-family-life-meghan-071513634.html


Then _stop _going on television to talk about your private life, you annoying little manchild.





Chanbal said:


> I hope your stomachs are strong this morning. More from DM:
> View attachment 5002930
> 
> In contrast to what he did to the BRF, this time H is following the old saying, "don't spit in the plate you eat from." It gives the impression that he sold his family and soul to Netflix.


After hearing what he said about The Crown and the fact that they signed a deal with Netflix, makes me wonder if he has been or would feed information to the people making that show.



purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Vows He 'Will Never Walk Away' from the Royal Family Despite Stepping Back from Role
> 
> 
> The Prince candidly opened up to James Corden about how staying in England "was destroying my mental health"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In other words, he wants his cake and to eat it too!



Walking away is exactly what you did, Hazmat.







Chanbal said:


> Is this revenge? MM&H have no respect for QE.  Prince Philip is in the hospital. This is shocking and sad.
> 
> View attachment 5002959








justwatchin said:


> From the BBC website:
> 
> Asked what a regular evening was like for the Sussexes in Santa Barbara, Harry said: "Depending on how the day's been and how busy it's been, we do Archie's tea, give him a bath, read him a book, put him down, go downstairs, Meg might cook a meal, might order a takeaway, go upstairs sit in bed, turn the TV on, watch some Jeopardy, maybe watch a little bit of Netflix."





Said no one ever.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> Already pre-planning their next lawsuit



They want to make sure that no media outlet dares to say anything negative about them.


----------



## bag-mania

@Lounorada

“Hazmat”  The perfect nickname for Harry!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Us royals_???
> Has no one told Haz?  He deserves a hazzie for this performance.


It was so ridiculous starting the interview with "us royals". Well, us non-royals don't give a rat's ass for whatever idiots say.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It was so ridiculous starting the interview with "us royals". Well, us non-royals don't give a rat's ass for whatever idiots say.


ITA.  If he'd said "Us A$$holes" it would've been much more appropriate!


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Of course he doesn't.  Wonder if he'd be singing Netflix' praises if they depicted "Meg" in all her snake and venom glory?
> 
> Oh, sorry, I meant crocodile.


100%!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Despite the bad timing, the pandemic, the ailing Duke of Edinburgh and the clenched dismay of the entire Windsor family aghast at their publicity manoeuvres, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are plunging ahead with their *profile-raising offensive in America.*



Indeed, they are offensive. We must defend ourselves from this ear poison.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> @Lounorada
> 
> “Hazmat”  The perfect nickname for Harry!


“Hazmat” or ”’azwipe”?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting opinion on Ginger Hazmat's last claims about The Crown:  




Watching the Duke of Sussex’s knockabout routine with comedian James Corden on America’s Late Late Show, you soon see why Netflix executives wanted to sign up the Duke and Duchess to make TV programmes.

Here is the impish, funny Harry of yesteryear. It’s rather reassuring to see he hasn’t been completely erased by Harry the earnest podcasting champion of ‘connection’ and ‘systemic change’.

However, where the new-look Harry seems to have gone entirely native in sunny California is with his glowing endorsement of The Crown — in contrast to the ghastly British media.

‘I am way more comfortable with The Crown than I am seeing the stories written about my family, or my wife or myself,’ he tells Corden.

*For Prince Harry and The Crown are on the same payroll, answering to the same masters: Netflix.*

The Crown is the glossy TV soap which has inflicted grave damage on his family through a catalogue of untruths.

I use that word advisedly because the writer of the series, Peter Morgan, has himself claimed: ‘I’m absolutely fastidious about there being an underlying truth.’

Prince Harry has now given it his own seal of approval.

‘It’s fictional but it’s loosely based on the truth,’ he says in this latest interview (they are coming thick and fast these days).

‘Of course it’s not strictly accurate, but, loosely it gives you a rough idea about that lifestyle.’

Netflix will, no doubt, be grateful for his remarks. Within the royal orbit, however, many are flabbergasted.

I fully accept that the Duke cannot abide the British media, whom he accuses, en masse, of ‘destroying’ his mental health. I can only say that I have never received a word of complaint from him about anything I have written.



*The verdict of ROBERT HARDMAN *(you can read here about "fabrications tossed around by The Crown")


----------



## gracekelly

Stepping down, and not away?  California is kind of far from Buckingham Palace.

I think it's great that Haz is still in good shape and can do the military course.  I really didn't think he had the strength for that since whenever we usually see him, his wife is propping him up. 

So this is the new and relatable Haz?  If his bashful bladder continues to trouble him, there are drug companies with medications for that who might want him as a spokesperson. 

I must remind myself to be camera ready at all times because I might get a Face Time phone call.  Of course it will require a hairdresser and makeup person come to my house at 6am daily.  What is money for, it not to waste?  Oh and don't forget to set the filters on the phone ahead of time so my face is as narrow as a ruler.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The more H gets out there and exposes himself [ahem], the faster he will become the laughingstock of Hwood. The same for MM. 
Bad press in the UK made them “walk away”. SNL can be relentless. TMZ, too. Everything in this interview shows how low H is. The jokes right themselves.

Relentless. Just wait. The hounds of hell haz been waiting 

ETA: @gracekelly  the only reason H looks to be in any kind of shape, consider his competition - a well-nourished TV host.


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The more H gets out there and exposes himself [ahem], the faster he will become the laughingstock of Hwood. The same for MM.
> Bad press in the UK made them “walk away”. SNL can be relentless. TMZ, too. Everything in this interview shows how low H is. The jokes right themselves.
> 
> Relentless. Just wait. The hounds of hell haz been waiting
> 
> ETA: @gracekelly  the only reason H looks to be in any kind of shape, consider his competition - a well-nourished TV host.


It's really funny that only lately did I discover how disliked James Corden is by many Brits.  What happened to his diet?  I thought that not that long ago, he lost a massive amount of weight.  I guess the Covid pounds got him.  

I don't see where Harry did himself any favors by being on this.


----------



## jcnc

Saw this article on US magazine. Going by the headlines, i am not sure what they were trying to achieve. It makes H come across as mentally weak/unstable. If this is their PR, clearly they only follow M’s direction who doesn’t mind throwing H under the bus time and again. https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...-a-royal-was-destroying-my-mental-health/amp/


----------



## purseinsanity

jcnc said:


> Saw this article on US magazine. Going by the headlines, i am not sure what they were trying to achieve. It makes H come across as mentally weak/unstable. If this is their PR, clearly *they only follow M’s direction who doesn’t mind throwing H under the bus time and again*. https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...-a-royal-was-destroying-my-mental-health/amp/


Or in this case, throwing him onto a bus.    Either way, he comes across very unfavorable.  Just reinforced my gut feeling that he's a tool.  In Meg's shed.


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> It was so ridiculous starting the interview with "us royals". Well, us non-royals don't give a rat's ass for whatever idiots say.



All that expensive posh education (it's clear now why there are rumors that someone "helped" him get through school, by cheating).


----------



## rose60610

Harry----HAZ?  As in HAS-been instead of Hus-band?  That works.  The Haz-been prince. I mean, he's a green carder wannabe in America now. Get in line, Haz. So quaint.
What are you qualified to do, Haz? Sorry, "whining" isn't a skill set America is in need right now. We've got a lot of those already, trust us. In abundance, really. We'd like to export them to acquire this stiff upper lip we've heard about. Ever heard of that? Oh, you're a whiner, so we can't expect you to know what "sacrifice" or "stoic" mean. Sacrifice? Stoic? They're in all the dictionaries, look them up. HAZ. 
Quite certain they don't mean "what's in it for me?"  or "all I have to do is whimper, complain, blame others for my stupidity, and whine like the vet was paid to remove my balls". 
Nice you got yourself some nice and tidy Netflix and Spotify deals, Haz.  All you have to do now is produce something. Good thing Grandma has connections, Haz. Nobody believes you or "Ask Me If I'm OK" has the talent to pull it off. That's fine, ol' Haz. Your bar is set SO low that you could do a documentary by setting a live feed on sea cucumbers and it'd look like a success. It DOES take talent to be viewed as stupid whiners and upgrade that image into opportunistic whores that make a fortune by degrading the country that pays you 180 million pounds  dollars for producing a doc about humping sea cucumbers. Wait, they don't hump, just find themselves preggars and spawn. Without stuffing a pillow under a sustainable $3,000 couture dress. 
Gotta hand it to ya, Haz. You're a blue-blooded-led-by-the-nose dope.  You landed huge deals in America, the horrible country that's fashionable to bash by the Woke Crowd. Surely you'll give away THAT filthy lucre. It's not as though you're a hypocrite or anything, right?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since he has now exposed [ahem] himself on American tv, when the paps show up, he cannot legally claim privacy, can he?

ETA: same for MM, right?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since he has now exposed [ahem] himself on American tv, when the paps show up, he cannot legally claim privacy, can he?
> 
> ETA: same for MM, right?


Waiting for the US to become as toxic as the UK. Should we throw them a going away party?  Actually we should have the party for ourselves to celebrate their leaving. The big question is where would they go?  Chunga Changa is a possibility.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, that is the one!  Obviously, this ‘interview’ was heavily scripted. But this photo, oh dear.
> View attachment 5003294


 Why is Harry calling Khloe Kardashian ??????


----------



## Chagall

gracekelly said:


> Waiting for the US to become as toxic as the UK. Should we throw them a going away party?  Actually we should have the party for ourselves to celebrate their leaving. The big question is where would they go?  Chunga Changa is a possibility.


Well they left Canada for the US. Next would probably be Mexico so they could be close to family. They could say that they finally woke to the fact that Archie needs his granddad.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> It's really funny that only lately did I discover how disliked James Corden is by many Brits.  What happened to his diet?  I thought that not that long ago, he lost a massive amount of weight.  I guess the Covid pounds got him.
> 
> I don't see where Harry did himself any favors by being on this.


Yes please keep the equally talentless and repulsive corden over there too


----------



## chicinthecity777

elvisfan4life said:


> ITV have clearly bought the awful interview BBC and SKY refused to bid for it ITV will be featuring every move of the gruesome twosome from how on - trying to get their money’s worth - I won’t be watching


Yep! They planted a story about the TV bidding war on MM/OW interview and it turned out there was none. Only ITV bought the right, both BBC and Sky didn't want to touch it. ITV has sunk quite low to be more like tabloids TV station.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

gracekelly said:


> It's really funny that only lately did I discover how disliked James Corden is by many Brits.  What happened to his diet?  I thought that not that long ago, he lost a massive amount of weight.  I guess the Covid pounds got him.
> 
> I don't see where Harry did himself any favors by being on this.


My SO describes Corden in words i can't type here without being censored!


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> My SO describes Corden in words i can type here without being censored!


I feel the same, I can't understand how he got lucky..... I hated Gavin and Stacey!


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Waiting for the US to become as toxic as the UK. Should we throw them a going away party?  Actually we should have the party for ourselves to celebrate their leaving. The big question is where would they go?  Chunga Changa is a possibility.



It will never become as toxic for them here. There is a low bar set for celebrities. As long as they don’t commit a crime or say anything unPC, they will be given a pass for whatever they do by the media. They would have to outdo themselves in stupidity to mess up such a good thing.

Now in social media, that’s another matter.  But I don’t see them packing up and moving for it. It will follow them no matter where they go.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> Then _stop _going on television to talk about your private life, you annoying little manchild.
> View attachment 5003484
> 
> 
> 
> After hearing what he said about The Crown and the fact that they signed a deal with Netflix, makes me wonder if he has been or would feed information to the people making that show.
> 
> 
> 
> Walking away is exactly what you did, Hazmat.
> 
> View attachment 5003513
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5003514
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5003517
> 
> Said no one ever.


I know tea is big with English (Irish too).  But for a two-year-old at bedtime?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It will never become as toxic for them here. There is a low bar set for celebrities. As long as they don’t commit a crime or say anything unPC, they will be given a pass for whatever they do by the media. They would have to outdo themselves in stupidity to mess up such a good thing.
> 
> Now in social media, that’s another matter.  But I don’t see them packing up and moving for it. It will follow them no matter where they go.


so our best hope is that the media loses interest in them?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since he has now exposed [ahem] himself on American tv, when the paps show up, he cannot legally claim privacy, can he?
> 
> ETA: same for MM, right?


Of course he can!  He and Meg have their own set of rules.  After all, “them royals” are far superior than even the BRF!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I know tea is big with English (Irish too).  But for a two-year-old at bedtime?



Tea is what the British call dinner.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It will never become as toxic for them here. There is a low bar set for celebrities. *As long as they don’t commit a crime or say anything unPC, they will be given a pass for whatever they do by the media.* They would have to outdo themselves in stupidity to mess up such a good thing.
> 
> Now in social media, that’s another matter.  But I don’t see them packing up and moving for it. It will follow them no matter where they go.


If they are celebrities and commit crimes, they’re still forgiven in the US.  If celebrities say something unPC, a “heartfelt” apology is all it takes!   I can’t stand cancel culture, but celebrities in the US can get away with the most ridiculous things. It’s also the land of lawsuits. Haz and Meg have come to the right place to be celebrated for no real talent, self serving egos, and to preach to the masses since celebrities here are so much more intelligent here than the rest of us .


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so our best hope is that the media loses interest in them?



That’s right. And it will happen eventually. It’s hard to predict how long it will take. Maybe another year or two. The new baby and the Netflix/Spotify shows (whenever they happen) will ensure them press interest for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5003602
> 
> 
> *‘I am way more comfortable with The Crown than I am seeing the stories written about my family, or my wife or myself,’ *he tells Corden.
> 
> *‘It’s fictional but it’s loosely based on the truth,’ *he says in this latest interview (they are coming thick and fast these days).
> 
> *‘Of course it’s not strictly accurate, but, loosely it gives you a rough idea about that lifestyle.’*








He really is incapable of completing a sentance without it being full of contradictions and/or word salad?

And for someone who keeps saying his mental health is mostly affected by the media attention he receives, then it would be a very good idea to stop reading EVERYTHING that is written about you. It's pretty obvious that he has a very unhealthy obsession with the media/tabloids/social media and what people say about him. If anyone (JCMH) actually wanted to try and heal themselves and take control of their mental health in a positive way, then they would probably try and steer clear of the things that trigger it in a negative way.
As I was doing my catching up of posts on here a few days ago I remember reading an article posted (it was from Daily Mail but I can't remember who shared it on here) but the headline was spot on:
*"They don't want privacy, they just want to control the media and use it to promote themselves when it suits them"*
The sooner the wider public figure that out, the better. I can't understand how more people can't see straight through their manipulations and bullsh*t. It's baffling.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tea is what the British call dinner.


Depending on which part of the UK you're from. 
Some people say breakfast, lunch, dinner
Some say breakfast, dinner, tea.


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> I know tea is big with English (Irish too).  But for a two-year-old at bedtime?


Tea is a way to describe an early dinner, that's probably what he means. It's a common expression in parts of the UK & Ireland.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of the comment of leaving U.K. due to toxic BRITISH media ... hmmm 
The UK print media ie tabloids and newspapers are relatively controlled by BP , was that the problem ? The MOS article on letter to dad ? The People article does not count, it is arguably US  press
there was also harsh social media when they were in the U.K. eg comments about tiara gate , well, as our international group here knows, social media extends well beyond country borders...
Ok, the excuse for leaving does not hold water, at all , what a load ....


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> Tea is a way to describe an early dinner, that's probably what he means. It's a common expression in parts of the UK & Ireland.


oh ok
I know Americans sometimes go to tea places and have little sandwiches with tea...whatever...the stories about Archie are getting silly to me.  his first word was crocodile?  not something simple like da da?  I guess he is well above average intelligence


----------



## rose60610

Archie's first word? Any bets it's "sue"?  Easy to say and goodness knows he's heard it often.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I know Americans sometimes go to tea places and have little sandwiches with tea...



That's afternoon tea  (NOT high tea)

The crocodile claim is so...random. Crocodile. How do these people come up with stuff like this.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> If they are celebrities and commit crimes, they’re still forgiven in the US.  If celebrities say something unPC, a “heartfelt” apology is all it takes!   I can’t stand cancel culture, but celebrities in the US can get away with the most ridiculous things. It’s also the land of lawsuits. Haz and Meg have come to the right place to be celebrated for no real talent, self serving egos, and to preach to the masses since celebrities here are so much more intelligent here than the rest of us .


not really anymore
Charlie Rose is gone.....Louis CKs career may be over....will be interested to see if the HBO documentary will impact Woody Allen


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> If they are celebrities and commit crimes, they’re still forgiven in the US.  If celebrities say something unPC, a “heartfelt” apology is all it takes!   I can’t stand cancel culture, but celebrities in the US can get away with the most ridiculous things. It’s also the land of lawsuits. Haz and Meg have come to the right place to be celebrated for no real talent, self serving egos, and to preach to the masses since celebrities here are so much more intelligent here than the rest of us .



I doubt they will have a long run. Meghan’s sapphire ring may be sustainable, but her appeal is not.

In a sense COVID-19 has both helped and hurt them. They didn’t get to make a big splash when they moved here last spring but on the other hand they have faced almost no competition for attention by the Hollywood elite. With the Covid vaccines that is slowly changing. More studios are opening up, production is happening, things are beginning to become normal again. There are young, unknown, soon-to-be-stars waiting in the wings  to be discovered. Ms. “Pushing 40 ingenue”  cannot compete with the fickle whims of fame.


----------



## Chanbal

One more opinion about Ginge (AKA Hazmat) & Cringe (AKA Me-Gain) and how they are "monetising the Royal Family all the time". Enjoy and have a wonderful Weekend! 

*'Disingenuous' Meghan Markle 'always planned to leave the Royals' and Prince Harry is 'barely recognisable', expert and friend of late Princess Diana claims*

*Meghan Markle, 39,  is 'totally disingenuous,' a royal biographer claimed *
*Robert Jobson alleged that the Duchess of Sussex 'had a plan from the outset'*
*Added royal couple are using their interview with Oprah Winfrey to boost their brand in the US as part of a strategy of 'monetising the Royal Family all the time'*
Prince Harry is 'barely recognisable' while Meghan Markle is 'totally disingenuous' and 'always planned to leave the Royals', a royal biographer has claimed.

Speaking exclusively to The Royal Beat, available on True Royalty TV, royal expert Robert Jobson who knew the late Princess' 'well' alleged the Duchess of Sussex, 39, had always planned to leave the Royal Family.

'I think she had a plan from the outset that she wasn't going to stick with it [The Royal Family] and it didn't take long, before all that thanking the royal family,' he commented.

'The royal family would have done their best to have helped her and they would have tried.'

Elsewhere, former Buckingham Palace Press Officer Dickie Arbiter called the Sussexes' statement on their future 'petulant, rude and immature'.

The Queen's decision to remove Harry and Meghan's royal patronages because a 'life of public service' is not compatible with the couple's lucrative new career in America sparked a barbed response from the Sussexes.

The royal couple stated 'service is universal', which Royal sources called 'horribly disrespectful' and ''you can't line your pockets while undertaking official duties'.

The Royals are braced for Harry and Meghan to hit back at the Palace in an interview with Oprah Winfrey - who flew into California on her £50million private jet and was with the couple hours before they released their statement.

'They are not going to rubbish the Royal Family, because it is not in their interest,' Dickie Arbiter said. 'So they will talk about the 'suits', how the officials didn't back them up.'

'They will certainly talk about what they are aiming to achieve; they will talk about family life, babies, and motherhood. They will talk about the British media because that sticks in the craw as fair as they are concerned.'   

Jobson added: 'The rudeness of the statement they issued after they left! Frankly, they have been given a lot of slack, but they were damn right rude to The Queen and the Royal Family.'

Author and Vanity Fair Royal Correspondent Katie Nicholl also told the programme: 'I think The Palace felt off guard about the pregnancy announcement [and] the Oprah announcement.

'It was clear that the Sussex's were working as a machine in their own right - they weren't working with the Palace.

'[Buckingham Palace] had made their minds up. They didn't need until the 31 st of March to make that statement.

'My understanding from the sources that I have spoken to at the Palace was that they would [release it] earlier and bring an end to all this speculation.'

When discussing the surprise move to film an interview with Oprah Winfrey after requesting a more private life, *Jobson also accused the couple of 'monetising the Royal Family all the time.'*

'Let's be clear, the reason they are doing Oprah is to boost their brand and get as much attention as possible because that is the power of the buck,' he claimed.

'The reason they are talking about their private life is because they need to make sure their brand is high and highly visible in America.' 

Also speaking on the programme, Dickie Arbiter's daughter, royal commentator Victoria Arbiter added: 'This is Meghan and Harry trying to win over and woo Americans.'

totally disingenuous


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I know tea is big with English (Irish too).  But for a two-year-old at bedtime?


The British refer to the evening meal as ‘tea’.
Edit: Oops didn’t realize that had already been posted.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tea is what the British call dinner.


No, tea is what _*some*_ British people call dinner/supper, mainly from up north. We call the last meal of the day supper. Dinner refers to the main meal of the day, it can be lunch or supper.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> oh ok
> I know Americans sometimes go to tea places and have little sandwiches with tea...whatever...the stories about Archie are getting silly to me.  his first word was crocodile?  not something simple like da da?  I guess he is well above average intelligence


Crocodile was probably the first _acceptable _word Archie said that conformed to the "perfect family" narrative they have in place. A merely pedestrian word such as dada or mama wouldn't be royal or woke enough for the Sussex brand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, tea is what _*some*_ British people call dinner/supper, mainly from up north. We call the last meal of the day supper. Dinner refers to the main meal of the day, it can be lunch or supper.



I was just wondering about that! Because somehow it always felt wrong to say lunch for our German midday meal because that's when we cook a full meal, while the evening meal is often just breakfast foods (but savory).

That said, is Harry from up north, or is this just more pretentiousness because it sounds cute and exotic and gets people talk?


----------



## Chagall

Harry walks away from royal responsibilities, pretty much abandoned his family including his very senior grandparents, and then refers to himself as ‘we royals’. Where does he get the gall. He is an embarrassment to watch. Surely the American public will be turned off and will see through these two!


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Harry walks away from royal responsibilities, pretty much abandoned his family including his very senior grandparents, and then refers to himself as ‘we royals’. Where does he get the gall. He is an embarrassment to watch. Surely the American public will be turned off and will see through these two!


I wish
but nothing will change the minds of the stans....dunno about the general public


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> Harry walks away from royal responsibilities, pretty much abandoned his family including his very senior grandparents, and then refers to himself as ‘we royals’. Where does he get the gall.



Now lets not be unfair, he told us in no unclear terms that he merely stepped back but NEVER stepped down nor away, even when changing continents and not doing any meaningful work for a year. He'd probably also insist he was never rude to his grandmother who incidentally is also his sovereign.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I wish
> but nothing will change the minds of the stans....dunno about the general public


I'm going to amend that.  I think they have stans and people who dislike them.  most americans probably don't care


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I wish
> but nothing will change the minds of the stans....dunno about the general public


People here in the general public are for the most part disinterested in them. I guess in the US with them living among you there would be heightened interest. One guy I know did refer to ‘Haz’ as being a pompous a**.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> Crocodile was probably the first _acceptable _word Archie said that conformed to the "perfect family" narrative they have in place. A merely pedestrian word such as dada or mama wouldn't be royal or woke enough for the Sussex brand.



It was good but it didn’t quite reached Meghan-level pandering. If Archie was going to name an animal for his first word it should have been an incredibly endangered species, like rhinoceros maybe.


----------



## bag-mania

Most Americans don’t seek out information about them. Unfortunately, they are being forced on the average American by our news outlets. I saw stories about them on the evening news three nights last week.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Most Americans don’t seek out information about them. Unfortunately, they are being forced on the average American by our news outlets. I saw stories about them on the evening news three nights last week.


I think the media still finds them interesting but once the wedding was over most people probably lost interest


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bag-mania said:


> Most Americans don’t seek out information about them. Unfortunately, they are being forced on the average American by our news outlets. I saw stories about them on the evening news three nights last week.



That's so funny because I'm in the US and was just thinking almost the only place I read or hear anything about them is this thread. I never see them on the news or my social media etc. Maybe it depends on the market/medium?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Oh lookie lookie what we have here! Obviously someone's trying to appear regular because she's wearing a $30 dress after all the comments on her pregnancy announcement dress, lemon dress and so-called sustainable sapphire ring.


----------



## Chagall

I found out that they were expecting their second child on my iPhone CBC app. I was surprised and disappointed. Usually the CBC sticks to hard news. Usually the pandemic.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> It was good but it didn’t quite reached Meghan-level pandering. If Archie was going to name an animal for his first word it should have been an incredibly endangered species, like rhinoceros maybe.


I don't know how bright or intelligent Archie must be, but let's pretend he is what we used to call special or genius, he might see his parents as predators and therefore "crocodile" would be so à propos.


----------



## gracekelly

They are tiresome. Everyday there is an assault. The PR has been instructed to dribble out drivel. I just would love to know who is paying for this. Them?  Is that why she is wearing a $30 dress?  I wouldn’t call that sustainable fashion. Really cheap clothing often doesn’t make it through a cleaning process as it shrinks or falls apart.   This is such an obvious clap back to the criticism directed at a $3750 dress worn for 20 seconds on the Spotify plug.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> It was good but it didn’t quite reached Meghan-level pandering. If Archie was going to name an animal for his first word it should have been an incredibly endangered species, like rhinoceros maybe.


Or possibly those imaginary "North Pole penguins" Haz and faux Greta Thunberg discussed?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't know how bright or intelligent Archie must be, but let's pretend he is what we used to call special or genius, he might see his parents as predators and therefore "crocodile" would be so à propos.


I think after listening to his parents it would be more likely for his first word to be crockofsh*t. His editorial comment regarding the word salad spewing from his parents.  Out of the mouths of babes...... *sigh*


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> Or possibly those imaginary "North Pole penguins" Haz and faux Greta Thunberg discussed?


Little Prince Louis said “amimal“ so needed to outcute him


----------



## jennlt

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That's so funny because I'm in the US and was just thinking almost the only place I read or hear anything about them is this thread. I never see them on the news or my social media etc. Maybe it depends on the market/medium?


The _Today Show_ has done pieces in the past several days on the pregnancy, the loss of their patronages, the upcoming Oprah interview and this morning there was a piece about the James Cordon interview. NBC gives them quite a bit of (positive) publicity.


----------



## byzina

sdkitty said:


> I think the media still finds them interesting but once the wedding was over most people probably lost interest



I would have watched their interview to Oprah before/after the wedding. Now I just don't want to spend time on it. I will read a brief summary somewhere. I have to admit I feel curious to hear how far they will go in describing the burden of the royal life. But I have no interest in their projects/their current life or plans. Each time I read/hear them talking I can't make out anything but word salad.

*H&M Interview Bingo*
The UK press is toxic
No one asked if we were OK
We are disappointed at the RF but we are still a tightly-knit family
We are excited to help people by talking to them via Zoom about important issues
People should be kinder to each other/save the planet/stop writing rubbish about us


----------



## Aimee3

His first word should’ve been barracuda!  To be fair, I think there’s a kid book about somebody crocodile but even if he said crocodile I’m sure it wasn’t clear to anyone but them.  Perhaps he pointed to a picture in the book and said “Kako” or something like that.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

jennlt said:


> The _Today Show_ has done pieces in the past several days on the pregnancy, the loss of their patronages, the upcoming Oprah interview and this morning there was a piece about the James Cordon interview. NBC gives them quite a bit of (positive) publicity.



Oh thanks that explains it I don’t watch those morning news/entertainment shows.


----------



## bag-mania

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That's so funny because I'm in the US and was just thinking almost the only place I read or hear anything about them is this thread. I never see them on the news or my social media etc. Maybe it depends on the market/medium?



It was on the evening local news on both CBS (understandably) and Fox affiliates. Not sure about the ABC and NBC affiliates but I wouldn’t be surprised if they covered it too.


----------



## marietouchet

byzina said:


> I would have watched their interview to Oprah before/after the wedding. Now I just don't want to spend time on it. I will read a brief summary somewhere. I have to admit I feel curious to hear how far they will go in describing the burden of the royal life. But I have no interest in their projects/their current life or plans. Each time I read/hear them talking I can't make out anything but word salad.
> 
> *H&M Interview Bingo*
> The UK press is toxic
> No one asked if we were OK
> We are disappointed at the RF but we are still a tightly-knit family
> We are excited to help people by talking to them via Zoom about important issues
> People should be kinder to each other/save the planet/stop writing rubbish about us



Lol but if I may suggest ? change talking to lecturing , next to last lime


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bag-mania said:


> It was on the evening local news on both CBS (understandably) and Fox affiliates. Not sure about the ABC and NBC affiliates but I wouldn’t be surprised if they covered it too.



Yes definitely sounds like it varies although I will admit I rarely watch local news.


----------



## Lodpah

Aimee3 said:


> His first word should’ve been barracuda!  To be fair, I think there’s a kid book about somebody crocodile but even if he said crocodile I’m sure it wasn’t clear to anyone but them.  Perhaps he pointed to a picture in the book and said “Kako” or something like that.


Don’t you know it’s an ode to Uncle John Elton as in Crocodile Rock? Maybe they need his private jet? These two are insidious, the evil and anyways have evil intentions. JMHO.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They can’t go on about how awful it was in England forever can they?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> It's really funny that only lately did I discover how disliked James Corden is by many Brits.  What happened to his diet?  I thought that not that long ago, he lost a massive amount of weight.  I guess the Covid pounds got him.
> 
> I don't see where Harry did himself any favors by being on this.


My husband absolutely *HATES* James Cordon and frankly, I'm not really a fan.  While the Carpool Karaoke was initially funny, he has taken it to a new level of basically *SINGING *the songs so loudly that the actual musician is made to play 2nd fiddle - seriously???  He seems to think that he has a voice (_I believe he has said that he really wanted to do Broadway_); he was in that HORRIBLE CATS movie and we all saw how "well" (sic) that was rated! 

In regards to Harry ("Haz") .. apparently, his military buddies originally started with the nickname "Hazza", and I admit .. I've used it a few times when referring to him on this thread.  In the James Cordon "interview" (some 'interview' - utter fluffy crap!) .. Hazza almost seems giddy with himself that "_oh look - I'm getting the Hollywood treatment_"!  I honestly think that he loved it and sees himself as the "Celebrity" Royal (_and do not get me started on the fact that he is referring to himself as a Royal in a country that fought HIS relatives many years ago to get rid of the Crown_)!  So, for me .. just seeing a snippet of it confirms that he wanted to be out of the BRF (_as in "I'll never be as important or newsworthy as William" _) and Meghan gave him the opportunity to be that "Celebrity" Royal such that he can usurp the BRF and especially William & Kate.  So, while I first I 100% blamed Meghan .. now?!?! .. it's *BOTH *of them!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> My husband absolutely *HATES* James Cordon and frankly, I'm not really a fan.  While the Carpool Karaoke was initially funny, he has taken it to a new level of basically *SINGING *the songs so loudly that the actual musician is made to play 2nd fiddle - seriously???  He seems to think that he has a voice (_I believe he has said that he really wanted to do Broadway_); he was in that HORRIBLE CATS movie and we all saw how "well" (sic) that was rated!
> 
> In regards to Harry ("Haz") .. apparently, his military buddies originally started with the nickname "Hazza", and I admit .. I've used it a few times when referring to him on this thread.  In the James Cordon "interview" (some 'interview' - utter fluffy crap!) .. Hazza almost seems giddy with himself that "_oh look - I'm getting the Hollywood treatment_"!  I honestly think that he loved it and sees himself as the "Celebrity" Royal (_and do not get me started on the fact that he is referring to himself as a Royal in a country that fought HIS relatives many years ago to get rid of the Crown_)!  So, for me .. just seeing a snippet of it confirms that he wanted to be out of the BRF (_as in "I'll never be as important or newsworthy as William" _) and Meghan gave him the opportunity to be that "Celebrity" Royal such that he can usurp the BRF and especially William & Kate.  So, while I first I 100% blamed Meghan .. now?!?! .. it's *BOTH *of them!


I think you are spot on!  Celebrity Royal.  A new breed.  He will be doing the color commentary  for Royal Events.  He would rather stay here and make mucho dinero than go back and have to be in the second balcony to the far left.  Not sure the family will care at that point.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Harry take a backseat, you'll never be his equal.  

*Capt. Sir Tom Moore, who raised millions for charity, honoured with WWII plane flypast at funeral*

Associated Press Article


----------



## bag-mania

*How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much*

Now that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have completed their Hollywood transition, the couple is entering an uncharted new chapter in life now that they won’t be returning as full-time working members of the British royal family. No diplomatic formalities. No government security detail. And no royal patronage.

Up until last year, Harry’s father, the Prince of Wales, covered the majority of the expenses associated with their royal duties, including staff and travel, through the Duchy of Cornwall, which _Forbes_ estimates amounted to about $800,000 a year. The Crown paid for more than $3 million for renovations underway at Frogmore Cottage before it became their family home in the U.K. They voluntarily repaid the sum in September with a contribution to the Sovereign Grant. 

That’s left them with the progressive new life they want but also the kind financial uncertainty—a former royal’s version of it, at least—of recent college graduates who’ve just left home to embark on the independence of adulthood. His older brother and future king, Prince William, covers expenses with help from the Duchy of Cornwall, which in the last fiscal year spent about $8 million to support the public, charitable and personal activities of Prince Charles and his immediate family.

Prince Harry spoke about his withdrawal from official Royal duties with fellow Brit James Corden on _The Late Late Show _yesterday—a week after Buckingham Palace released a statement—but he took issue with Corden’s depiction of him “walking away” from the family. “It was never walking away; it was stepping back rather than stepping down,” said the Duke, saying he decided to leave to escape a relentless press. “We all know what the British press can be like and it was destroying my mental health. This is toxic. So I did what any husband, what any father, would do. I need to get my family out of here.”

His late mother, Princess Diana, who famously died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi, made the move possible. With financial support from the Crown abruptly shut off, the relocated royals have relied largely on the estimated $10 million inheritance Harry received from his late mother’s estate. Contrary to published reports, a representative confirms he was not a beneficiary of any of the nearly $100 million (£70 million) fortune left by his great-grandmother, the Queen Mother. Meghan Markle contributed an estimated $2 million in after-tax earnings from her work in films and television shows, most notably the long-running legal drama _Suits_. 

They bought a $14.7 million estate in Montecito, the seaside Santa Barbara, California, enclave that’s home to such Hollywood celebrities as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, in August 2020. They put down $5 million and now have a nearly $10 million mortgage. The Duke and Duchess also repaid the Sovereign Grant for the $3 million spent to remodel Frogmore, which remains their UK family home. That leaves Prince Harry and Meghan with a surprisingly modest nest egg of roughly $5 million—at least for now. Their estimated net worth, including the equity from their Montecito home, is roughly $10 million. The Queen has a net worth of $500 million, according to the last tally by _Forbes_ in 2019, while the combined value of the British Monarch’s holdings with the Crown Estate, the Duchy of Lancaster (a real estate trust), were worth an estimated $25 billion.

The Prince and his American wife want to dedicate their life to helping others and improving the world. “My life is always going to be about public service, and Meghan signed up to that,” Prince Harry told Corden. But they also have to pay the bills, and thanks to their global celebrity and cachet, Hollywood is only happy to capitalize, helping to cushion the financial blow.

Earlier in the week, they touted their partnership with Spotify during a livestreamed event that also featured Justin Bieber, Billie Eilish, Bruce Springsteen, Barack ***** and Ava DuVernay. The Duke and Duchess plan to produce podcasts and shows that “elevate voices that maybe aren’t being heard” exclusively for the streaming service’s 320 million monthly users around the world.

Spotify’s three-year podcasting deal with Prince Harry and Meghan could be worth as much as $15 million to $18 million, according to industry sources. It’s unknown whether the streaming music service has begun writing checks, however, since the first podcast from Archewell Audio is likely to take at least a year to develop. But when the checks arrive, it would add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes.

The couple had begun to tentatively trod Hollywood’s red carpet long before their move to California. Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey announced in April 2019 that they would executive produce a mental health series for Apple TV+. The series, which was caught up in the pandemic’s production delays, is an extension of the Duke’s long-standing work in this area, in which he has candidly shared details of his own experience of loss. Deal terms could not be determined.  

Speaking engagements are another potential avenue for them. Prince Harry spoke at a private JPMorgan summit in Miami in February 2020, which reportedly fetched $1 million. Last June, they retained the New York-based Harry Walker Agency to drum up speaking engagements. It’s the same agency that represents the Obamas, Bill and Hillary *******, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Stacey Abrams.

Perhaps the biggest potential moneymaker for them: a lucrative five-year, $100 million contract with Netflix, signed in September 2020, to produce documentaries, docuseries, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming. It’s unclear whether Prince Harry and Meghan received an advance on the deal, which is likely to contribute handsomely to their net worth down the road. But the streaming service recognizes its subscribers’ fascination with the British royal family. Netflix renewed _The Crown,_ a hit drama about the reign of Queen Elizabeth II_,_for a sixth and final season last fall. 

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also will sit for an extended interview with Oprah Winfrey that airs at 8 p.m. EST Sunday, March 7, on CBS, where Meghan is expected to discuss such topics as “stepping into life as a royal,” a topic bound to stir unease behind the gates of Buckingham Palace, and Prince Harry will later join the two to discuss the move to the United States and his hopes for their expanding family.









						How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are largely living off Prince Harry’s inheritance from his late mother and Markle’s earnings as an actress. Deals with Spotify and Netflix will help boost their future earnings.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much*
> 
> Now that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have completed their Hollywood transition, the couple is entering an uncharted new chapter in life now that they won’t be returning as full-time working members of the British royal family. No diplomatic formalities. No government security detail. And no royal patronage.
> 
> Up until last year, Harry’s father, the Prince of Wales, covered the majority of the expenses associated with their royal duties, including staff and travel, through the Duchy of Cornwall, which _Forbes_ estimates amounted to about $800,000 a year. The Crown paid for more than $3 million for renovations underway at Frogmore Cottage before it became their family home in the U.K. They voluntarily repaid the sum in September with a contribution to the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> That’s left them with the progressive new life they want but also the kind financial uncertainty—a former royal’s version of it, at least—of recent college graduates who’ve just left home to embark on the independence of adulthood. His older brother and future king, Prince William, covers expenses with help from the Duchy of Cornwall, which in the last fiscal year spent about $8 million to support the public, charitable and personal activities of Prince Charles and his immediate family.
> 
> Prince Harry spoke about his withdrawal from official Royal duties with fellow Brit James Corden on _The Late Late Show _yesterday—a week after Buckingham Palace released a statement—but he took issue with Corden’s depiction of him “walking away” from the family. “It was never walking away; it was stepping back rather than stepping down,” said the Duke, saying he decided to leave to escape a relentless press. “We all know what the British press can be like and it was destroying my mental health. This is toxic. So I did what any husband, what any father, would do. I need to get my family out of here.”
> 
> His late mother, Princess Diana, who famously died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi, made the move possible. With financial support from the Crown abruptly shut off, the relocated royals have relied largely on the estimated $10 million inheritance Harry received from his late mother’s estate. Contrary to published reports, a representative confirms he was not a beneficiary of any of the nearly $100 million (£70 million) fortune left by his great-grandmother, the Queen Mother. Meghan Markle contributed an estimated $2 million in after-tax earnings from her work in films and television shows, most notably the long-running legal drama _Suits_.
> 
> They bought a $14.7 million estate in Montecito, the seaside Santa Barbara, California, enclave that’s home to such Hollywood celebrities as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, in August 2020. They put down $5 million and now have a nearly $10 million mortgage. The Duke and Duchess also repaid the Sovereign Grant for the $3 million spent to remodel Frogmore, which remains their UK family home. That leaves Prince Harry and Meghan with a surprisingly modest nest egg of roughly $5 million—at least for now. Their estimated net worth, including the equity from their Montecito home, is roughly $10 million. The Queen has a net worth of $500 million, according to the last tally by _Forbes_ in 2019, while the combined value of the British Monarch’s holdings with the Crown Estate, the Duchy of Lancaster (a real estate trust), were worth an estimated $25 billion.
> 
> The Prince and his American wife want to dedicate their life to helping others and improving the world. “My life is always going to be about public service, and Meghan signed up to that,” Prince Harry told Corden. But they also have to pay the bills, and thanks to their global celebrity and cachet, Hollywood is only happy to capitalize, helping to cushion the financial blow.
> 
> Earlier in the week, they touted their partnership with Spotify during a livestreamed event that also featured Justin Bieber, Billie Eilish, Bruce Springsteen, Barack ***** and Ava DuVernay. The Duke and Duchess plan to produce podcasts and shows that “elevate voices that maybe aren’t being heard” exclusively for the streaming service’s 320 million monthly users around the world.
> 
> Spotify’s three-year podcasting deal with Prince Harry and Meghan could be worth as much as $15 million to $18 million, according to industry sources. It’s unknown whether the streaming music service has begun writing checks, however, since the first podcast from Archewell Audio is likely to take at least a year to develop. But when the checks arrive, it would add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes.
> 
> The couple had begun to tentatively trod Hollywood’s red carpet long before their move to California. Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey announced in April 2019 that they would executive produce a mental health series for Apple TV+. The series, which was caught up in the pandemic’s production delays, is an extension of the Duke’s long-standing work in this area, in which he has candidly shared details of his own experience of loss. Deal terms could not be determined.
> 
> Speaking engagements are another potential avenue for them. Prince Harry spoke at a private JPMorgan summit in Miami in February 2020, which reportedly fetched $1 million. Last June, they retained the New York-based Harry Walker Agency to drum up speaking engagements. It’s the same agency that represents the Obamas, Bill and Hillary *******, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Stacey Abrams.
> 
> Perhaps the biggest potential moneymaker for them: a lucrative five-year, $100 million contract with Netflix, signed in September 2020, to produce documentaries, docuseries, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming. It’s unclear whether Prince Harry and Meghan received an advance on the deal, which is likely to contribute handsomely to their net worth down the road. But the streaming service recognizes its subscribers’ fascination with the British royal family. Netflix renewed _The Crown,_ a hit drama about the reign of Queen Elizabeth II_,_for a sixth and final season last fall.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also will sit for an extended interview with Oprah Winfrey that airs at 8 p.m. EST Sunday, March 7, on CBS, where Meghan is expected to discuss such topics as “stepping into life as a royal,” a topic bound to stir unease behind the gates of Buckingham Palace, and Prince Harry will later join the two to discuss the move to the United States and his hopes for their expanding family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are largely living off Prince Harry’s inheritance from his late mother and Markle’s earnings as an actress. Deals with Spotify and Netflix will help boost their future earnings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


so the deal with Netflix is dependent on what they produce?  if they don't produce anything worthwhile they don't get paid?


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the FaceTime photo, how does anyone identify the dress?  Unless she is the source, surprise!
Why not ID the necklace, too? [or did I miss something?]


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so the deal with Netflix is dependent on what they produce?  if they don't produce anything worthwhile they don't get paid?



Yes, now it’s possible they were given a handsome advance but they won’t receive any more until they’ve produced something worthy of airing.

Welcome to the world of capitalism, Harry! Your extravagant life won’t be funded forever for just being you.


----------



## redney

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That's so funny because I'm in the US and was just thinking almost the only place I read or hear anything about them is this thread. I never see them on the news or my social media etc. Maybe it depends on the market/medium?


Count me there with you, OB. I don't see them anywhere except this thread. Nothing in my social media feeds, and I don't watch network news or shows like morning talk shows or evening "investigation" shows like 20/20. I do grocery pickup and don't see the tabloid covers in the grocery stores anymore. Definitely not watching the OW interview - just like I wouldn't be interested in any celebrity interview. It's all canned anyway - PR flacks provide topics "the talent" will/will not discuss, and the interviewer's questions are vetted in advance. It's nothing new, just bespoke, mutual PR.

Now, this thread I'll read because I enjoy everyone's sense of humor about these two wastes of space.


----------



## redney

Also, with their Spotify contract, have they done only that one podcast? Perhaps listenership sucked so Spotify isn't doing any more with them?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who??









						Americans shown this photo of Harry mistake him for a country singer
					

While Prince Harry has ditched his Royal duties to build a billion-dollar brand on the other side of the Atlantic, it seems that few in smalltown America actually know who he is.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans shown this photo of Harry mistake him for a country singer
> 
> 
> While Prince Harry has ditched his Royal duties to build a billion-dollar brand on the other side of the Atlantic, it seems that few in smalltown America actually know who he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


the pic looks blurred....filters?


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> *How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much*
> 
> Now that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have completed their Hollywood transition, the couple is entering an uncharted new chapter in life now that they won’t be returning as full-time working members of the British royal family. No diplomatic formalities. No government security detail. And no royal patronage.
> 
> Up until last year, Harry’s father, the Prince of Wales, covered the majority of the expenses associated with their royal duties, including staff and travel, through the Duchy of Cornwall, which _Forbes_ estimates amounted to about $800,000 a year. The Crown paid for more than $3 million for renovations underway at Frogmore Cottage before it became their family home in the U.K. They voluntarily repaid the sum in September with a contribution to the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> That’s left them with the progressive new life they want but also the kind financial uncertainty—a former royal’s version of it, at least—of recent college graduates who’ve just left home to embark on the independence of adulthood. His older brother and future king, Prince William, covers expenses with help from the Duchy of Cornwall, which in the last fiscal year spent about $8 million to support the public, charitable and personal activities of Prince Charles and his immediate family.
> 
> Prince Harry spoke about his withdrawal from official Royal duties with fellow Brit James Corden on _The Late Late Show _yesterday—a week after Buckingham Palace released a statement—but he took issue with Corden’s depiction of him “walking away” from the family. “It was never walking away; it was stepping back rather than stepping down,” said the Duke, saying he decided to leave to escape a relentless press. “We all know what the British press can be like and it was destroying my mental health. This is toxic. So I did what any husband, what any father, would do. I need to get my family out of here.”
> 
> His late mother, Princess Diana, who famously died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi, made the move possible. With financial support from the Crown abruptly shut off, the relocated royals have relied largely on the estimated $10 million inheritance Harry received from his late mother’s estate. Contrary to published reports, a representative confirms he was not a beneficiary of any of the nearly $100 million (£70 million) fortune left by his great-grandmother, the Queen Mother. Meghan Markle contributed an estimated $2 million in after-tax earnings from her work in films and television shows, most notably the long-running legal drama _Suits_.
> 
> They bought a $14.7 million estate in Montecito, the seaside Santa Barbara, California, enclave that’s home to such Hollywood celebrities as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, in August 2020. They put down $5 million and now have a nearly $10 million mortgage. The Duke and Duchess also repaid the Sovereign Grant for the $3 million spent to remodel Frogmore, which remains their UK family home. That leaves Prince Harry and Meghan with a surprisingly modest nest egg of roughly $5 million—at least for now. Their estimated net worth, including the equity from their Montecito home, is roughly $10 million. The Queen has a net worth of $500 million, according to the last tally by _Forbes_ in 2019, while the combined value of the British Monarch’s holdings with the Crown Estate, the Duchy of Lancaster (a real estate trust), were worth an estimated $25 billion.
> 
> The Prince and his American wife want to dedicate their life to helping others and improving the world. “My life is always going to be about public service, and Meghan signed up to that,” Prince Harry told Corden. But they also have to pay the bills, and thanks to their global celebrity and cachet, Hollywood is only happy to capitalize, helping to cushion the financial blow.
> 
> Earlier in the week, they touted their partnership with Spotify during a livestreamed event that also featured Justin Bieber, Billie Eilish, Bruce Springsteen, Barack ***** and Ava DuVernay. The Duke and Duchess plan to produce podcasts and shows that “elevate voices that maybe aren’t being heard” exclusively for the streaming service’s 320 million monthly users around the world.
> 
> Spotify’s three-year podcasting deal with Prince Harry and Meghan could be worth as much as $15 million to $18 million, according to industry sources. It’s unknown whether the streaming music service has begun writing checks, however, since the first podcast from Archewell Audio is likely to take at least a year to develop. But when the checks arrive, it would add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes.
> 
> The couple had begun to tentatively trod Hollywood’s red carpet long before their move to California. Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey announced in April 2019 that they would executive produce a mental health series for Apple TV+. The series, which was caught up in the pandemic’s production delays, is an extension of the Duke’s long-standing work in this area, in which he has candidly shared details of his own experience of loss. Deal terms could not be determined.
> 
> Speaking engagements are another potential avenue for them. Prince Harry spoke at a private JPMorgan summit in Miami in February 2020, which reportedly fetched $1 million. Last June, they retained the New York-based Harry Walker Agency to drum up speaking engagements. It’s the same agency that represents the Obamas, Bill and Hillary *******, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Stacey Abrams.
> 
> Perhaps the biggest potential moneymaker for them: a lucrative five-year, $100 million contract with Netflix, signed in September 2020, to produce documentaries, docuseries, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming. It’s unclear whether Prince Harry and Meghan received an advance on the deal, which is likely to contribute handsomely to their net worth down the road. But the streaming service recognizes its subscribers’ fascination with the British royal family. Netflix renewed _The Crown,_ a hit drama about the reign of Queen Elizabeth II_,_for a sixth and final season last fall.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also will sit for an extended interview with Oprah Winfrey that airs at 8 p.m. EST Sunday, March 7, on CBS, where Meghan is expected to discuss such topics as “stepping into life as a royal,” a topic bound to stir unease behind the gates of Buckingham Palace, and Prince Harry will later join the two to discuss the move to the United States and his hopes for their expanding family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are largely living off Prince Harry’s inheritance from his late mother and Markle’s earnings as an actress. Deals with Spotify and Netflix will help boost their future earnings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


WOW .. @bag-mania  .. this is a *very INTERESTING* article!!!  So, as we've stated before, given how these 2 spend .. and it appears that they will not continue to get funded by the Duchy of Cornwall (_happy to hear that_!) .. they *should* watch their pennies  very carefully!  Now, supposedly, Hazza (_can't resist anymore_) .. is WICKED CHEAP, but Meghan? .. uh, no - she likes the fine goods (_although my god - she always seems to be dressed horrible - taste in her ass_)!!! 

What I don't get is .. did they *REALLY* need to buy a house with 16 bathrooms .. you have 3 (_okay - almost 4_) people, 2 of which are very young .. and then a mortgage payment of (*what*?) - $6000+ a month, plus taxes, plus maids/servants, groundskeeping, etc., etc., etc. -- that starts to add up pretty darn quickly!  Maybe it's all about "placement", given Meghan's propensity to be near people that she feels will give her a step-up (_Oprah, Ellen, etc_.)? 

However, that all being said .. I just finished an extremely interesting article about Andre Leon Talley (_former US Vogue editor_) .. and about all the "gifting" that goes on in the Fashion business!  Since, oftentimes, many folks in the Fashion business were grossly underpaid, instead of pay .. they would be gifted outfits, handbags, car services, etc. - in the hope that the Fashion House/Designer would get a bigger mention in the high-fashion magazines.  The other interesting part was that, nowadays, with the (_too many IMO_) resale boutiques (especially now online) .. many of these folks that were 'gifted' items are now selling them to make some extra $$$.  Sooooooooo .. how much do we bet that Meghan was 'gifted' that Oscar de la Renta dress such that not only can they merchandise off of it, but she then she can just re-sell it!

The Andre Leon Talley article:  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/style/andre-leon-talley-house-lawsuit.html?searchResultPosition=1


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> However, that all being said .. I just finished an extremely interesting article about Andre Leon Talley (_former US Vogue editor_) .. and about all the "gifting" that goes on in the Fashion business!  Since, oftentimes, many folks in the Fashion business were grossly underpaid, instead of pay .. they would be gifted outfits, handbags, car services, etc. - in the hope that the Fashion House/Designer would get a bigger mention in the high-fashion magazines.  The other interesting part was that, nowadays, with the (_too many IMO_) resale boutiques (especially now online) .. many of these folks that were 'gifted' items are now selling them to make some extra $$$.  Sooooooooo .. how much do we bet that Meghan was 'gifted' that Oscar de la Renta dress such that not only can they merchandise off of it, but she then she can just re-sell it!
> 
> The Andre Leon Talley article:  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/style/andre-leon-talley-house-lawsuit.html?searchResultPosition=1



Oooooh yes!  About time the truth gets told about that industry, these ‘influencers’, etc.  Thank you @CeeJay for the article. 
H&M are skilled merchers. Hoping their ’brand’ bottoms out soon. Harry who? 

@sdkitty he clearly has had work done on his face — the brows & beard are trimmer, the face, glossy and the hair, mercy that hair.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Also, with their Spotify contract, have they done only that one podcast? Perhaps listenership sucked so Spotify isn't doing any more with them?


they got me to listen by having it pop up on my phone but it won't happen again....pretty boring


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much*
> 
> Now that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have completed their Hollywood transition, the couple is entering an uncharted new chapter in life now that they won’t be returning as full-time working members of the British royal family. No diplomatic formalities. No government security detail. And no royal patronage.
> 
> Up until last year, Harry’s father, the Prince of Wales, covered the majority of the expenses associated with their royal duties, including staff and travel, through the Duchy of Cornwall, which _Forbes_ estimates amounted to about $800,000 a year. The Crown paid for more than $3 million for renovations underway at Frogmore Cottage before it became their family home in the U.K. They voluntarily repaid the sum in September with a contribution to the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> That’s left them with the progressive new life they want but also the kind financial uncertainty—a former royal’s version of it, at least—of recent college graduates who’ve just left home to embark on the independence of adulthood. His older brother and future king, Prince William, covers expenses with help from the Duchy of Cornwall, which in the last fiscal year spent about $8 million to support the public, charitable and personal activities of Prince Charles and his immediate family.
> 
> Prince Harry spoke about his withdrawal from official Royal duties with fellow Brit James Corden on _The Late Late Show _yesterday—a week after Buckingham Palace released a statement—but he took issue with Corden’s depiction of him “walking away” from the family. “It was never walking away; it was stepping back rather than stepping down,” said the Duke, saying he decided to leave to escape a relentless press. “We all know what the British press can be like and it was destroying my mental health. This is toxic. So I did what any husband, what any father, would do. I need to get my family out of here.”
> 
> His late mother, Princess Diana, who famously died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi, made the move possible. With financial support from the Crown abruptly shut off, the relocated royals have relied largely on the estimated $10 million inheritance Harry received from his late mother’s estate. Contrary to published reports, a representative confirms he was not a beneficiary of any of the nearly $100 million (£70 million) fortune left by his great-grandmother, the Queen Mother. Meghan Markle contributed an estimated $2 million in after-tax earnings from her work in films and television shows, most notably the long-running legal drama _Suits_.
> 
> They bought a $14.7 million estate in Montecito, the seaside Santa Barbara, California, enclave that’s home to such Hollywood celebrities as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, in August 2020. They put down $5 million and now have a nearly $10 million mortgage. The Duke and Duchess also repaid the Sovereign Grant for the $3 million spent to remodel Frogmore, which remains their UK family home. That leaves Prince Harry and Meghan with a surprisingly modest nest egg of roughly $5 million—at least for now. Their estimated net worth, including the equity from their Montecito home, is roughly $10 million. The Queen has a net worth of $500 million, according to the last tally by _Forbes_ in 2019, while the combined value of the British Monarch’s holdings with the Crown Estate, the Duchy of Lancaster (a real estate trust), were worth an estimated $25 billion.
> 
> The Prince and his American wife want to dedicate their life to helping others and improving the world. “My life is always going to be about public service, and Meghan signed up to that,” Prince Harry told Corden. But they also have to pay the bills, and thanks to their global celebrity and cachet, Hollywood is only happy to capitalize, helping to cushion the financial blow.
> 
> Earlier in the week, they touted their partnership with Spotify during a livestreamed event that also featured Justin Bieber, Billie Eilish, Bruce Springsteen, Barack ***** and Ava DuVernay. The Duke and Duchess plan to produce podcasts and shows that “elevate voices that maybe aren’t being heard” exclusively for the streaming service’s 320 million monthly users around the world.
> 
> Spotify’s three-year podcasting deal with Prince Harry and Meghan could be worth as much as $15 million to $18 million, according to industry sources. It’s unknown whether the streaming music service has begun writing checks, however, since the first podcast from Archewell Audio is likely to take at least a year to develop. But when the checks arrive, it would add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes.
> 
> The couple had begun to tentatively trod Hollywood’s red carpet long before their move to California. Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey announced in April 2019 that they would executive produce a mental health series for Apple TV+. The series, which was caught up in the pandemic’s production delays, is an extension of the Duke’s long-standing work in this area, in which he has candidly shared details of his own experience of loss. Deal terms could not be determined.
> 
> Speaking engagements are another potential avenue for them. Prince Harry spoke at a private JPMorgan summit in Miami in February 2020, which reportedly fetched $1 million. Last June, they retained the New York-based Harry Walker Agency to drum up speaking engagements. It’s the same agency that represents the Obamas, Bill and Hillary *******, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Stacey Abrams.
> 
> Perhaps the biggest potential moneymaker for them: a lucrative five-year, $100 million contract with Netflix, signed in September 2020, to produce documentaries, docuseries, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming. It’s unclear whether Prince Harry and Meghan received an advance on the deal, which is likely to contribute handsomely to their net worth down the road. But the streaming service recognizes its subscribers’ fascination with the British royal family. Netflix renewed _The Crown,_ a hit drama about the reign of Queen Elizabeth II_,_for a sixth and final season last fall.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also will sit for an extended interview with Oprah Winfrey that airs at 8 p.m. EST Sunday, March 7, on CBS, where Meghan is expected to discuss such topics as “stepping into life as a royal,” a topic bound to stir unease behind the gates of Buckingham Palace, and Prince Harry will later join the two to discuss the move to the United States and his hopes for their expanding family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are largely living off Prince Harry’s inheritance from his late mother and Markle’s earnings as an actress. Deals with Spotify and Netflix will help boost their future earnings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


what capability do the z-list actress and the prince have to produce entertainment?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like H and M don’t realize their content needs to be entertaining, bit preachy to be successful.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> what capability do the z-list actress and the prince have to produce entertainment?



They believe having their names on it alone will be enough. That’s the level of arrogance they have, they overestimate their importance.   Even their most loyal stans won’t sit through hours of crap on their behalf.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the FaceTime photo, how does anyone identify the dress?  Unless she is the source, surprise!
> Why not ID the necklace, too? [or did I miss something?]



The designer of the dress released all the information about it. They gave her one so that they could advertise it.

From gossip site Popsugar:

“Our guesswork didn't have to go much further, because LA-based brand Velvet Touch stepped forward to proudly share that Meghan wore its $30 puff-sleeve dress. From there, it took very little time for the "Meghan effect" to jump into action. You're probably not surprised to learn that the dress is currently sold out, but never fear, the brand is already taking preorders for eager shoppers.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here comes the fun  

There was a time when pals of Royalty would never wish to fall out with their famous friends for fear of being excluded from the inner sanctum.

_But after Prince Harry exiled himself, socialite friends don't feel the need to hide their private views any more.

Take Lady Alice Manners and Sabine Getty– two Royal pals who weighed in on the treatment of the Queen by Harry and Meghan by telling Meghan: *'Girl. Take a seat.'*_

That's American slang for stand down, shut up and – in this instance – leave our Queenie alone!

It was Sabine, who attended Princess Eugenie's wedding, who got the ball rolling. She shared Meghan and Harry's churlish statement – 'We can all live a life of service. Service is universal' – issued after Buckingham Palace announced the couple had been stripped of their Royal patronages.
Sabine was gobsmacked by Meghan's riposte and felt defensive of the Monarch. 'Am I actually reading this?!' she rebuked. 
'Saying this to the Queen who is 94 years old and has been in public service her entire life?' Sabine also seemed to blame Meghan as the brains behind the statement, adding: 'Girl. Take a seat.' 
Then Alice put Sabine's post on her own Instagram page along with an emoji of two raised hands in the 'preach' position. Ouch!









						TALK OF THE TOWN: Royal pals tear into Meghan Markle
					

TALK OF THE TOWN: Lady Alice Manners and Sabine Getty weighed in on the treatment of the Queen by Harry and Meghan by telling Meghan: 'Girl. Take a seat.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan They put down $5 million and now have a nearly $10 million mortgage.  Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much*
> 
> Now that Prince Harry and Meghan it would add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes. have completed their Hollywood transition, the couple is entering an uncharted new chapter in life now that they won’t be returning as full-time working members of the British royal family. No diplomatic formalities. No government security detail. And no royal patronage.
> 
> Up until last year, Harry’s father, the Prince of Wales, covered the majority of the expenses associated with their royal duties, including staff and travel, through the Duchy of Cornwall, which _Forbes_ estimates amounted to about $800,000 a year. The Crown paid for more than $3 million for renovations underway at Frogmore Cottage before it became their family home in the U.K. They voluntarily repaid the sum in September with a contribution to the Sovereign Grant.
> 
> That’s left them with the progressive new life they want but also the kind financial uncertainty—a former royal’s version of it, at least—of recent college graduates who’ve just left home to embark on the independence of adulthood. His older brother and future king, Prince William, covers expenses with help from the Duchy of Cornwall, which in the last fiscal year spent about $8 million to support the public, charitable and personal activities of Prince Charles and his immediate family.
> 
> Prince Harry spoke about his withdrawal from official Royal duties with fellow Brit James Corden on _The Late Late Show _yesterday—a week after Buckingham Palace released a statement—but he took issue with Corden’s depiction of him “walking away” from the family. “It was never walking away; it was stepping back rather than stepping down,” said the Duke, saying he decided to leave to escape a relentless press. “We all know what the British press can be like and it was destroying my mental health. This is toxic. So I did what any husband, what any father, would do. I need to get my family out of here.”
> 
> His late mother, Princess Diana, who famously died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi, made the move possible. With financial support from the Crown abruptly shut off, the relocated royals have relied largely on the estimated $10 million inheritance Harry received from his late mother’s estate. Contrary to published reports, a representative confirms he was not a beneficiary of any of the nearly $100 million (£70 million) fortune left by his great-grandmother, the Queen Mother. Meghan Markle contributed an estimated $2 million in after-tax earnings from her work in films and television shows, most notably the long-running legal drama _Suits_.
> 
> They bought a $14.7 million estate in Montecito, the seaside Santa Barbara, California, enclave that’s home to such Hollywood celebrities as Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres and wife Portia de Rossi, in August 2020. They put down $5 million and now have a nearly $10 million mortgage. The Duke and Duchess also repaid the Sovereign Grant for the $3 million spent to remodel Frogmore, which remains their UK family home. That leaves Prince Harry and Meghan with a surprisingly modest nest egg of roughly $5 million—at least for now. Their estimated net worth, including the equity from their Montecito home, is roughly $10 million. The Queen has a net worth of $500 million, according to the last tally by _Forbes_ in 2019, while the combined value of the British Monarch’s holdings with the Crown Estate, the Duchy of Lancaster (a real estate trust), were worth an estimated $25 billion.
> 
> The Prince and his American wife want to dedicate their life to helping others and improving the world. “My life is always going to be about public service, and Meghan signed up to that,” Prince Harry told Corden. But they also have to pay the bills, and thanks to their global celebrity and cachet, Hollywood is only happy to capitalize, helping to cushion the financial blow.
> 
> Earlier in the week, they touted their partnership with Spotify during a livestreamed event that also featured Justin Bieber, Billie Eilish, Bruce Springsteen, Barack ***** and Ava DuVernay. The Duke and Duchess plan to produce podcasts and shows that “elevate voices that maybe aren’t being heard” exclusively for the streaming service’s 320 million monthly users around the world.
> 
> Spotify’s three-year podcasting deal with Prince Harry and Meghan could be worth as much as $15 million to $18 million, according to industry sources. It’s unknown whether the streaming music service has begun writing checks, however, since the first podcast from Archewell Audio is likely to take at least a year to develop. But when the checks arrive, it would add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes.
> 
> The couple had begun to tentatively trod Hollywood’s red carpet long before their move to California. Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey announced in April 2019 that they would executive produce a mental health series for Apple TV+. The series, which was caught up in the pandemic’s production delays, is an extension of the Duke’s long-standing work in this area, in which he has candidly shared details of his own experience of loss. Deal terms could not be determined.
> 
> Speaking engagements are another potential avenue for them. Prince Harry spoke at a private JPMorgan summit in Miami in February 2020, which reportedly fetched $1 million. Last June, they retained the New York-based Harry Walker Agency to drum up speaking engagements. It’s the same agency that represents the Obamas, Bill and Hillary *******, Lin-Manuel Miranda and Stacey Abrams.
> 
> Perhaps the biggest potential moneymaker for them: a lucrative five-year, $100 million contract with Netflix, signed in September 2020, to produce documentaries, docuseries, feature films, scripted shows and children’s programming. It’s unclear whether Prince Harry and Meghan received an advance on the deal, which is likely to contribute handsomely to their net worth down the road. But the streaming service recognizes its subscribers’ fascination with the British royal family. Netflix renewed _The Crown,_ a hit drama about the reign of Queen Elizabeth II_,_for a sixth and final season last fall.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also will sit for an extended interview with Oprah Winfrey that airs at 8 p.m. EST Sunday, March 7, on CBS, where Meghan is expected to discuss such topics as “stepping into life as a royal,” a topic bound to stir unease behind the gates of Buckingham Palace, and Prince Harry will later join the two to discuss the move to the United States and his hopes for their expanding family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Much Are Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Worth? Surprisingly, Not That Much
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are largely living off Prince Harry’s inheritance from his late mother and Markle’s earnings as an actress. Deals with Spotify and Netflix will help boost their future earnings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


This is an interesting article, but I wonder if Forbes has all the figures. For example, a TPF member, who has the resources to check mortgages, posted a few days ago that, in addition to the ~$5M they put down at the time of purchase, they had paid an additional ~$4M on the mortgage. So their current mortgage is about half of $10M shown in the article. 

In any event,  if they will be able to "add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes" from Spotify, it's a respectful figure, particularly for 2 people with limited talent and credentials.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting article, but I wonder if Forbes has all the figures. For example, a TPF member, who has the resources to check mortgages, posted a few days ago that, in addition to the ~$5M they put down at the time of purchase, they had paid an additional ~$4M on the mortgage. So their current mortgage is about half of $10M shown in the article.
> 
> In any event,  if they will be able to "add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes" from Spotify, it's a respectful figure, particularly for 2 people with limited talent and credentials.



He has sold his integrity, character, soul to the Hwood bosses.
If his mother’s death, British press disrupted his mental health, just wait.  Hwood is not known for its loving and caring side. When the gruesome twosome don’t deliver, it will be ugly.


----------



## Lodpah

Did I read that right? No more government security? It’s a lot of money for private security. That’s a big cost.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> *He has sold his integrity, character, soul to the Hwood bosses.*
> If his mother’s death, British press disrupted his mental health, just wait.  Hwood is not known for its loving and caring side. *When the gruesome twosome don’t deliver, it will be ugly*.



Can't sell what you never had.
I don't get the feeling that pre-Meg Hazzy was all that noble. I'm sure his handlers had their hands full protecting the good-old-boy-happy-go-lucky-one-of-the-chaps image that was fed to us.
Not too sure about the ugly part, either. I think their failure will just be quietly swept under the rug. Netflix/Spotify aren't going to publicize their error in judgement. Not sure how much $$$$ the Twosome will get to keep, but it will be enough to keep them out of court.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting article, but I wonder if Forbes has all the figures. For example, a TPF member, who has the resources to check mortgages, posted a few days ago that, in addition to the ~$5M they put down at the time of purchase, they had paid an additional ~$4M on the mortgage. So their current mortgage is about half of $10M shown in the article.
> 
> In any event,  if they will be able to "add around $3.5 million a year to their coffers, after taxes" from Spotify, it's a respectful figure, particularly for 2 people with limited talent and credentials.



There’s no way of knowing whether Charles has truly cut Harry off, and if he did, when it happened. Forbes wouldn’t have that information to factor in, only their future earning potential.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> He has sold his integrity, character, soul to the Hwood bosses.
> If his mother’s death, British press disrupted his mental health, just wait.  Hwood is not known for its loving and caring side. *When the gruesome twosome don’t deliver, it will be ugly*.


Do you think they would go crawling back to the RF for more moolah? Hope BP has the last laugh, saying "Ah, ah, that's a big NO!"


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. @bag-mania  .. this is a *very INTERESTING* article!!!  So, as we've stated before, given how these 2 spend .. and it appears that they will not continue to get funded by the Duchy of Cornwall (_happy to hear that_!) .. they *should* watch their pennies  very carefully!  Now, supposedly, Hazza (_can't resist anymore_) .. is WICKED CHEAP, but Meghan? .. uh, no - she likes the fine goods (_although my god - she always seems to be dressed horrible - taste in her ass_)!!!
> 
> What I don't get is .. did they *REALLY* need to buy a house with 16 bathrooms .. you have 3 (_okay - almost 4_) people, 2 of which are very young .. and then a mortgage payment of (*what*?) - $6000+ a month, plus taxes, plus maids/servants, groundskeeping, etc., etc., etc. -- that starts to add up pretty darn quickly!  Maybe it's all about "placement", given Meghan's propensity to be near people that she feels will give her a step-up (_Oprah, Ellen, etc_.)?
> 
> However, that all being said .. I just finished an extremely interesting article about Andre Leon Talley (_former US Vogue editor_) .. and about all the "gifting" that goes on in the Fashion business!  Since, oftentimes, many folks in the Fashion business were grossly underpaid, instead of pay .. they would be gifted outfits, handbags, car services, etc. - in the hope that the Fashion House/Designer would get a bigger mention in the high-fashion magazines.  The other interesting part was that, nowadays, with the (_too many IMO_) resale boutiques (especially now online) .. many of these folks that were 'gifted' items are now selling them to make some extra $$$.  Sooooooooo .. how much do we bet that Meghan was 'gifted' that Oscar de la Renta dress such that not only can they merchandise off of it, but she then she can just re-sell it!
> 
> The Andre Leon Talley article:  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/style/andre-leon-talley-house-lawsuit.html?searchResultPosition=1


I know that some celebrities used to ask for free clothes, shoes... They would claim to be profitable for the designers to have them wearing their pieces. It's possible that MM is getting or asking for some freebies. I suspect the pink ring that she was 'advertising' is one of them.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> There’s no way of knowing whether Charles has truly cut Harry off, and if he did, when it happened. Forbes wouldn’t have that information to factor in, only their future earning potential.


I wonder how much they spend in PR, lawyers, nannies, and other staff. I don't think they are cleaning the 16 bathrooms or mowing the grass.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Maggie Muggins said:


> Do you think they would go crawling back to the RF for more moolah? Hope BP has the last laugh, saying "Ah, ah, that's a big NO!"



Or they could just live a normal life. Buy a 4/5 bedroom house like a normal family and they would still live better than most!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much they spend in PR, lawyers, nannies, and other staff. I don't think they are cleaning the 16 bathrooms or mowing the grass.



I am sure they are spending a fortune. Not only for what you mentioned but they need to pay people to create and work on their Netflix shows for them. If they got an advance from Netflix it will go towards that. 

Just because they are rich doesn’t mean they aren’t carrying a lot of debt. They could owe a lot that we would never hear about.


----------



## rose60610

I get the feeling that Meghan & Hazza will eventually go the route of Jessica Simpson. JS morphed her ditzy reputation into an extremely lucrative shoe and clothing line. Many other celebrities also went into the cosmetics/perfume/shoe/clothes biz, making a good buck. Think about it, "Duchess of Sussex clothing and bla bla bla", "PRINCE HAZZA cologne, boxers, corkscrews, microwave meals, sparkling wine, gray polo shirts, rain related gear-umbrellas, galoshes, maybe a Burberry/Hazza trench line", etc. Can't end there, we have to resurrect deceased Princess Diana to hawk more merch (family crest scarves? black dress with John Travolta dance in the White House fame? Diana dolls that grandmothers can give the kids? Tea?) in whatever form can make a buck for her loving ginger son.

Hey, they're here in America, the horrible rotten racist capitalist country that already gave them 180 million in communications deals. Since they love spouting about political crap they can preach socialism to the wah-wah-poor-me-butt-wipes crowd while raking in every dime the capitalist way while bashing capitalism. What have they to lose by being two faced? It's never bothered them before.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My 2 cents:
The doublespeak, the loss of integrity and character, etc., it all adds up. H’s addictions are well known. With each failed effort, each time he is laughed at, each time somebody disrespects him, each time his bosses demand more, it will put him on a slippery slope to rehab. After one full year away with plenty of time to think about life, he is still referring to himself as ‘Royal’ and preaching to us about the Royal lifestyle that we plebeians could not possibly understand. Once the UK begins hosting Royal functions, he will meltdown. He did not seem all that comfortable with James, especially when asking a stranger to use her restroom. Let’s hope Charles sends his team over sooner rather than later.


----------



## Chanbal

No surprises here, many of us share the opinion that Oprah's staged interview is just to promote MM and to make a few extra millions to buy fuel for her $75M private jet. 

_"However, the BBC's Royal expert Johnny Dymond believes that the Duchess of Sussex will get off with a light grilling from her host.

He said: "Now, Meghan is going to get an easier ride from Oprah, I don’t think there’s any doubt about it.

"But you have to wonder how this will play.”

It's a sentiment shared by Kitty Kelley, who wrote a controversial unauthorised biography on Ms Winfrey in 2010."_









						Meghan Markle expected to get 'easier ride' in Oprah interview
					

MEGHAN Markle's upcoming interview with TV chat show legend Oprah Winfrey has sparked huge speculation about what to expect from the encounter.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Sol Ryan

rose60610 said:


> I get the feeling that Meghan & Hazza will eventually go the route of Jessica Simpson. JS morphed her ditzy reputation into an extremely lucrative shoe and clothing line. Many other celebrities also went into the cosmetics/perfume/shoe/clothes biz, making a good buck. Think about it, "Duchess of Sussex clothing and bla bla bla", "PRINCE HAZZA cologne, boxers, corkscrews, microwave meals, sparkling wine, gray polo shirts, rain related gear-umbrellas, galoshes, maybe a Burberry/Hazza trench line", etc. Can't end there, we have to resurrect deceased Princess Diana to hawk more merch (family crest scarves? black dress with John Travolta dance in the White House fame? Diana dolls that grandmothers can give the kids? Tea?) in whatever form can make a buck for her loving ginger son.
> 
> Hey, they're here in America, the horrible rotten racist capitalist country that already gave them 180 million in communications deals. Since they love spouting about political crap they can preach socialism to the wah-wah-poor-me-butt-wipes crowd while raking in every dime the capitalist way while bashing capitalism. What have they to lose by being two faced? It's never bothered them before.



This. I think they’re gonna start putting their names on everything or trying the insta everything they can. I also think they see themselves as the second coming of the Magnolia/Gaines empire but they think with the royal angle they’ll be bigger.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> No surprises here, many of us share the opinion that Oprah's staged interview is just to promote MM and to make a few extra millions to buy fuel for her $75M private jet.
> 
> _"However, the BBC's Royal expert Johnny Dymond believes that the Duchess of Sussex will get off with a light grilling from her host.
> 
> He said: "Now, Meghan is going to get an easier ride from Oprah, I don’t think there’s any doubt about it.
> 
> "But you have to wonder how this will play.”
> 
> It's a sentiment shared by Kitty Kelley, who wrote a controversial unauthorised biography on Ms Winfrey in 2010."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle expected to get 'easier ride' in Oprah interview
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle's upcoming interview with TV chat show legend Oprah Winfrey has sparked huge speculation about what to expect from the encounter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I‘m going with the “*damp squib*, with the exchange carefully choreographed in advance.”


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I‘m going with the “*damp squib*, with the exchange carefully choreographed in advance.”


Absolutely, the staged interview was likely modified zillions of times to become the perfect sales pitch. 

According to the Telegraph, "_Meghan wanted the 90-minute special to be broadcasted on the BBC_." 









						BBC 'won't open chequebook' for Meghan Markle's Oprah interview
					

THE BBC will not "pull out the chequebook" to obtain rights to the Meghan Markle exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey - despite the intentions of the Duchess of Sussex.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> My 2 cents:
> The doublespeak, the loss of integrity and character, etc., it all adds up. H’s addictions are well known. With each failed effort, each time he is laughed at, each time somebody disrespects him, each time his bosses demand more, it will put him on a slippery slope to rehab. After one full year away with plenty of time to think about life, he is still referring to himself as ‘Royal’ and preaching to us about the Royal lifestyle that we plebeians could not possibly understand. Once the UK begins hosting Royal functions, he will meltdown. He did not seem all that comfortable with James, especially when asking a stranger to use her restroom. Let’s hope Charles sends his team over sooner rather than later.


The sad thing is that Harry played along with the gags and the bathroom gag had me aghast. I wonder what his family thought of it. It was all desperate and demeaning. For someone who suffers from too much pride, he didn’t seem to have any on that program. He was used and made fun of.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> Little Prince Louis said “amimal“ so needed to outcute him




Louis is a darling my fav of all our baby royals I could adopt him in a heartbeat


----------



## elvisfan4life

CeeJay said:


> My husband absolutely *HATES* James Cordon and frankly, I'm not really a fan.  While the Carpool Karaoke was initially funny, he has taken it to a new level of basically *SINGING *the songs so loudly that the actual musician is made to play 2nd fiddle - seriously???  He seems to think that he has a voice (_I believe he has said that he really wanted to do Broadway_); he was in that HORRIBLE CATS movie and we all saw how "well" (sic) that was rated!
> 
> In regards to Harry ("Haz") .. apparently, his military buddies originally started with the nickname "Hazza", and I admit .. I've used it a few times when referring to him on this thread.  In the James Cordon "interview" (some 'interview' - utter fluffy crap!) .. Hazza almost seems giddy with himself that "_oh look - I'm getting the Hollywood treatment_"!  I honestly think that he loved it and sees himself as the "Celebrity" Royal (_and do not get me started on the fact that he is referring to himself as a Royal in a country that fought HIS relatives many years ago to get rid of the Crown_)!  So, for me .. just seeing a snippet of it confirms that he wanted to be out of the BRF (_as in "I'll never be as important or newsworthy as William" _) and Meghan gave him the opportunity to be that "Celebrity" Royal such that he can usurp the BRF and especially William & Kate.  So, while I first I 100% blamed Meghan .. now?!?! .. it's *BOTH *of them!



Sadly Harry is Princess Margaret all over again H thinks because he is a Hollywood “star” now and has People fawning all over him he is now gorgeous intelligent witty interesting / sad deluded idiot that he is


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans shown this photo of Harry mistake him for a country singer
> 
> 
> While Prince Harry has ditched his Royal duties to build a billion-dollar brand on the other side of the Atlantic, it seems that few in smalltown America actually know who he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Love this !!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh yes!  About time the truth gets told about that industry, these ‘influencers’, etc.  Thank you @CeeJay for the article.
> H&M are skilled merchers. Hoping their ’brand’ bottoms out soon. Harry who?
> 
> @sdkitty he clearly has had work done on his face — the brows & beard are trimmer, the face, glossy and the hair, mercy that hair.



Still ugly inside and out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## drifter

According to the Forbes article, Prince Harry is only worth $10 million?!  Ha, MM must be really dumb and publicity-hungry to push for so many deals and incurring so much expenses when she could have put some of it with private bankers who would have produced some real returns by now (BitCoin, Tesla etc.).  Surely they should know that American press can be just as toxic as British press.  Re:  Britney Spears???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just wondering about that! Because somehow it always felt wrong to say lunch for our German midday meal because that's when we cook a full meal, while the evening meal is often just breakfast foods (but savory).
> 
> That said, is Harry from up north, or is this just more pretentiousness because it sounds cute and exotic and gets people talk?


He was just being pretentious! Nobody in his normal circle would call it tea!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> He was just being pretentious! Nobody in his normal circle would call it tea!



These people are such clowns. But Harry is more clumsy in his foolish attempts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hi everyone!
Long time lurker and new member!
I think this is the funniest thread I’ve read in ages.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Little Prince Louis said “amimal“ so needed to outcute him


No one will out cute that little cutie


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Hi everyone!
> Long time lurker and new member!
> I think this is the funniest thread I’ve read in ages.



Hi there! Love your username!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hi there! Love your username!


Thank you very much queen of the wrap dress. I like yours. 
I wanted a subtle reference to being a  Brit lol.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> This. I think they’re gonna start putting their names on everything or trying the insta everything they can. I also think they see themselves as the second coming of the Magnolia/Gaines empire but they think with the royal angle they’ll be bigger.


I second this but I doubt it’ll work for them.
1. For every celebrity line success  there are a hundred flops.

2. Merchers like Jessica Simpson and the Kardashians have sold themselves on being ‘all access’ and relatable. I think this is key to convincing people you actually like your merch. H&M, of course, HATE the evil press and want to act all aloof and I don’t think that’ll work if you are trying to convince someone to buy generic cologne and a branded tea towel.

edit : changed singular to plural


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Hi everyone!
> Long time lurker and new member!
> I think this is the funniest thread I’ve read in ages.


Welcome!  This thread gives me life and lots of comfort that there are still people with common sense left in this world!


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan and Harry should not be allowed to re-enter royal life - poll
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry burned their bridges when stepped down from royal life and should never be allowed to resume their public duties, according to a new poll.




					www.express.co.uk
				




‘One reader said: "Not only shouldn't the door be left open, it should be closed, taken down and the opening bricked over.'   

Doesn’t sound like any love lost in the UK!


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> Or they could just live a normal life. Buy a 4/5 bedroom house like a normal family and they would still live better than most!


right.  but that would not be worthy of their magnificence


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I second this but I doubt it’ll work for them.
> 1. For every celebrity line success  there are a hundred flops.
> 
> 2. Merchers like Jessica Simpson and the Kardashians have sold themselves on being ‘all access’ and relatable. I think this is key to convincing people you actually like your merch. H&M, of course, HATE the evil press and want to act all aloof and I don’t think that’ll work if you are trying to convince someone to buy generic cologne and a branded tea towel.
> 
> edit : changed singular to plural


Joanna Gaines has actual talent IMO.  Is Meghan a designer now?


----------



## jelliedfeels

redney said:


> Also, with their Spotify contract, have they done only that one podcast? Perhaps listenership sucked so Spotify isn't doing any more with them?


Yes I don’t have Spotify but I have noticed it has gone very quiet.
If I was a celebrity who’d given some of my time for them I’d be wondering when I’m going to get my publicity.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes I don’t have Spotify but I have noticed it has gone very quiet.
> If I was a celebrity who’d given some of my time for them I’d be wondering when I’m going to get my publicity.


maybe they haven't done anything since the first one


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan and Harry should not be allowed to re-enter royal life - poll
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry burned their bridges when stepped down from royal life and should never be allowed to resume their public duties, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘One reader said: "Not only shouldn't the door be left open, it should be closed, taken down and the opening bricked over.
> 
> Doesn’t sound like any love lost in the UK!


Nope


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Hi everyone!
> Long time lurker and new member!
> I think this is the funniest thread I’ve read in ages.


Welcome to this great thread. It's very entertaining, which helps at a time like this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

What compassion are MM&H talking about? Compassion towards her sick father, sister in wheelchair, QE being taught about public service with Prince Philip in the hospital...   











						Harry and Meghan replace Archewell letter with short paragraph
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have updated the homepage of their Archewell website, swapping an image of Prince Harry's late mother with a picture of the couple volunteering in California




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lulilu

jennlt said:


> Crocodile was probably the first _acceptable _word Archie said that conformed to the "perfect family" narrative they have in place. A merely pedestrian word such as dada or mama wouldn't be royal or woke enough for the Sussex brand.


I thought he was heard in the background of their podcast saying "bye" or something.



Chagall said:


> Harry walks away from royal responsibilities, pretty much abandoned his family including his very senior grandparents, and then refers to himself as ‘*we royals*’. Where does he get the gall. He is an embarrassment to watch. Surely the American public will be turned off and will see through these two!


He actually said "us royals," showing just how stupid he is.  I guess they didn't teach grammar at Oxford.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes I don’t have Spotify but I have noticed it has gone very quiet.
> If I was a celebrity who’d given some of my time for them I’d be wondering when I’m going to get my publicity.





sdkitty said:


> maybe they haven't done anything since the first one



I think it was a case of them having made empty promises they have neither the creativity nor ability to fulfill. Now they have to hire people to do all the work for them so they can just breeze in at the end and read their lines (when and if they get around to it). Just don’t expect anything until well after the baby is born. Because everyone knows a pregnant Meghan needs to sit on a velvet pillow all day and not worry herself about anything but what other people should do to make the world better. In the meantime Harry putters around the mansion, that is the extent of his contributions.

It’s an insult to the tens of thousands of Podcasters out there who work very hard at producing good content every week with almost no budget at all.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> What compassion are MM&H talking about? Compassion towards her sick father, sister in wheelchair, QE being taught about public service with Prince Philip in the hospital...
> 
> View attachment 5005088
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan replace Archewell letter with short paragraph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have updated the homepage of their Archewell website, swapping an image of Prince Harry's late mother with a picture of the couple volunteering in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


what a slap in the face to both their fathers....his who they probably still depend on for money to some extent.  and hers who raised her and gave her an expensive education

and how many times has Meghan done volunteer service like what is shown?  once? twice?  certainly not every day or every week.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Finally, Charles cuts them off — baby steps, but still:









						Harry and Meghan 'look for new mailing address' after Clarence House cuts ties
					

Prince Harry and Meghan are reportedly searching for a new arrangement for their correspondence as the Prince of Wales stopped financing the mail service at Clarence House




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> What compassion are MM&H talking about? Compassion towards her sick father, sister in wheelchair, QE being taught about public service with Prince Philip in the hospital...
> 
> View attachment 5005088
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan replace Archewell letter with short paragraph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have updated the homepage of their Archewell website, swapping an image of Prince Harry's late mother with a picture of the couple volunteering in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Creative Activations"?  WTH does that mean?  

As usual, Meg is up front and center, even in the picture.  Haz is in the background.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Finally, Charles cuts them off — baby steps, but still:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'look for new mailing address' after Clarence House cuts ties
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan are reportedly searching for a new arrangement for their correspondence as the Prince of Wales stopped financing the mail service at Clarence House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Finally  

With all the time on their hands, they should be able to find "creative activations" to answer their own mail!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What compassion are MM&H talking about? Compassion towards her sick father, sister in wheelchair, QE being taught about public service with Prince Philip in the hospital...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan replace Archewell letter with short paragraph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have updated the homepage of their Archewell website, swapping an image of Prince Harry's late mother with a picture of the couple volunteering in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What are ‘creative activations’?  

Haaaaa, we are asking the same questions !   Gotta love it


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What are ‘creative activations’?
> 
> Haaaaa, we are asking the same questions !   Gotta love it


Great minds think alike


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> What are ‘creative activations’?
> 
> Haaaaa, we are asking the same questions !   Gotta love it



Guessing it is Cali-talk for “we have no idea what to do”.  Marketing schools really need to plant their feet in the real world.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> What compassion are MM&H talking about? Compassion towards her sick father, sister in wheelchair, QE being taught about public service with Prince Philip in the hospital...
> 
> View attachment 5005088
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan replace Archewell letter with short paragraph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have updated the homepage of their Archewell website, swapping an image of Prince Harry's late mother with a picture of the couple volunteering in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



??? You mean we get a photo op of M handing food made by somebody else and handing it to somebody driving a gas guzzling giant SUV to demonstrate "compassion"?  With her scraggly hair extensions all over it. Did she pull down her mask so the driver knew who she was? Compassion, you know. "*We drive systemic cultural change*..."

I didn't realize "compassion" included suing everyone and anyone over anything. Like privacy. Oh look! There they are again! In front of cameras showing off their staged "compassion". How inspiring.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kkfiregirl said:


> Or they could just live a normal life. Buy a 4/5 bedroom house like a normal family and they would still live better than most!


This for sure. But, doncha know they are so much more important than us.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> "Creative Activations"?  WTH does that mean?
> 
> As usual, Meg is up front and center, even in the picture.  Haz is in the background.





CarryOn2020 said:


> What are ‘creative activations’?
> 
> Haaaaa, we are asking the same questions !   Gotta love it


It's above my understanding. Creative activation of Public Disservice???


----------



## CarryOn2020

Around the 17:00 mark, he says MM signed up for “a life of service”.  Hmmmmm.


@rose60610  I will just say it - _that hair _is gross. There are better photos they could have chosen. It’s always a miss with them.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> ??? You mean we get a photo op of M handing food made by somebody else and handing it to somebody driving a gas guzzling giant SUV to demonstrate "compassion"?  With her scraggly hair extensions all over it. Did she pull down her mask so the driver knew who she was? Compassion, you know. "*We drive systemic cultural change*..."
> 
> I didn't realize "compassion" included suing everyone and anyone over anything. Like privacy. Oh look! There they are again! In front of cameras showing off their staged "compassion". How inspiring.


I know, it's shocking! Who are they to impose a "_systemic cultural change_"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I know, it's shocking! Who are they to impose a "_systemic cultural change_"?


they are very impressed with themselves...and apparently some others (like Oprah) are also impressed with them.  why?  She was crafty enough to nab a prince?  he was born into royalty?  She is a WOC?


----------



## jelliedfeels

*Ed*


lulilu said:


> I thought he was heard in the background of their podcast saying "bye" or something.
> 
> 
> He actually said "us royals," showing just how stupid he is.  I guess they didn't teach grammar at Oxford.


Hahaha he didn’t get into Oxford
They have higher standards than THAT


----------



## Chanbal

Mentor and mentee?  _"IN her exclusive Californian enclave of Montecito she is *treated like royalty* as she spreads her philanthropy around the world, *making a fortune in the process*."_











						How chat show queen Oprah Winfrey has built an empire Meghan Markle would love
					

IN her exclusive Californian enclave of Montecito she is treated like royalty as she spreads her philanthropy around the world, making a fortune in the process. No, not Meghan, but chat show queen …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 17:00 mark, he says MM signed up for “a life of service”.  Hmmmmm.
> 
> 
> @rose60610  I will just say it - _that hair _is gross. There are better photos they could have chosen. It’s always a miss with them.



I hadn't watched that before, but finally gave in, LOL.  Watching it makes me a little sad, actually.  Harry looks like he's trying too hard to be "a normal guy", but just looks like he's sunk to a new low.  Telling Corden to come get him from the bathroom if he's in there more than 20 minutes?  That's not cute or endearing.  I read an article that said the Queen is revered because she never revealed too much about her personal self, that the mystery was part of the charm.  It said Prince Charles has revealed too much and thus will never be as loved as the Queen.  Extrapolating further, Harry looks like an utter idiot.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the week of hype has begun.  
Still expect it to be a ‘damp squib’.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Mentor and mentee?  _"IN her exclusive Californian enclave of Montecito she is *treated like royalty* as she spreads her philanthropy around the world, *making a fortune in the process*."_
> 
> View attachment 5005122
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How chat show queen Oprah Winfrey has built an empire Meghan Markle would love
> 
> 
> IN her exclusive Californian enclave of Montecito she is treated like royalty as she spreads her philanthropy around the world, making a fortune in the process. No, not Meghan, but chat show queen …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


but she doesn't have Oprah's likeability


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, the week of hype has begun.
> Still expect it to be a ‘damp squib’.


Sigh.  I feel like the hype is endless, even when there's nothing to hype!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh.  I feel like the hype is endless, even when there's nothing to hype!


what do you mean?  he is Diana's son!  and she is Doria's daughter.  suddenly Doria is a promotable asset.  so she can remind everyone there is one family member she is on speaking terms with?  and that person is a WOC


----------



## CarryOn2020

Up close, H&M are just not personable or likable.  The awkwardness, the nervousness are so painful to watch. QE excels at making people feel comfortable and relaxed, Charles and Camilla are good at it too. W&K, Sophie and Ed, very good.  Perhaps that is the difference between a Senior Royal and amateur hour. Seems Harry was never expected to be front and center.


----------



## kipp

The main thing that irks me, and I think for most of us who are annoyed by these two, is all the inauthenticity.   People can spot that from very far away.  No amount of "creative activation" will change that.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5005088
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan replace Archewell letter with short paragraph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have updated the homepage of their Archewell website, swapping an image of Prince Harry's late mother with a picture of the couple volunteering in California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Up close, H&M are just not personable or likable.  The awkwardness, the nervousness are so painful to watch. QE excels at making people feel comfortable and relaxed, Charles and Camilla are good at it too. W&K, Sophie and Ed, very good.  Perhaps that is the difference between a Senior Royal and amateur hour. Seems Harry was never expected to be front and center.


I think they would retain more interest if they were still royals


----------



## rose60610

kipp said:


> The main thing that irks me, and I think for most of us who are annoyed by these two, is all the *inauthenticity.*   People can spot that from very far away.  No amount of "creative activation" will change that.



This. On their wedding day I think most people were happy for them. I was. They've destroyed themselves through their own words and actions. It's clear they're opportunistic parasites who'll stop at nothing to cash in on the BRF's connections for every nickel they can get. When criticized for it, they whine and whimper "people are so mean".  

I'm done with 40 year old schemer who tries to pass herself off as some kind of young naive "just didn't realize what I got into boo-hoo me" and accomplice Hazza who's the ultimate dumb patsy and doesn't realized he's being played every single day.

 I'll give it to Meghan, I don't think the CIA could have cracked that code to find, connive and mold her lottery ticket to worldwide fame.  After a couple of starter marriages, she hit one out of the park. Practice made perfect! Except that her idea of celebrating is to beg for pity because her life is so hard. Weird.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> but she doesn't have Oprah's likeability


In my opinion Oprah doesn't have Oprah's likeability anymore let alone Megain have one iota of Oprah's.


----------



## Jktgal

What they meant...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> I hadn't watched that before, but finally gave in, LOL.  Watching it makes me a little sad, actually.  Harry looks like he's trying too hard to be "a normal guy", but just looks like he's sunk to a new low.  Telling Corden to come get him from the bathroom if he's in there more than 20 minutes?  That's not cute or endearing.  I read an article that said the Queen is revered because she never revealed too much about her personal self, that the mystery was part of the charm.  It said Prince Charles has revealed too much and thus will never be as loved as the Queen.  Extrapolating further, Harry looks like an utter idiot.



I was way more interested in celebs before Instagram, when they didn’t tell us every detail about their lives.


----------



## Chagall

While I’m not a fan of Oprah, I can’t see how they can compare MM to her in any way. Oprah earned her own money and worked hard to do so. What has MM done besides staring in Suits. What makes anyone think she could follow in Oprah’s footsteps.

edit: obvious typo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Finally, Charles cuts them off — baby steps, but still:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'look for new mailing address' after Clarence House cuts ties
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan are reportedly searching for a new arrangement for their correspondence as the Prince of Wales stopped financing the mail service at Clarence House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Ha. I mean, his compliance was getting ridiculous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 17:00 mark, he says MM signed up for “a life of service”.  Hmmmmm.
> 
> 
> @rose60610  I will just say it - _that hair _is gross. There are better photos they could have chosen. It’s always a miss with them.




That is probably the funniest thing I've heard in a while. The delusion is strong with these two.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Will they get a PO Box at the Montecito post office?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> but she doesn't have Oprah's likeability


She certainly doesn't in this thread, but she can fool many people. Her father and 'Trevy Trev Trev' are good examples imo.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> I was way more interested in celebs before Instagram, when they didn’t tell us every detail about their lives.



I actually quite like it this way - now I view then as regular people.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> *As usual, Meg is up front and center, even in the picture.  Haz is in the background.*



Quite the sad metaphor for their relationship.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I think they would retain more interest if they were still royals


You can bet on that. They never expected to be kicked out of the BRF. They were planing to go back for major events, visit their ex-Patronages... and all luxurious travel expenses paid by the monarchy.


----------



## Sina08

kkfiregirl said:


> Or they could just live a normal life. Buy a 4/5 bedroom house like a normal family and they would still live better than most!



That’s the point. If it had been about privacy, they would have done just that and be happy with it. She thought by marrying him she would get to live in her own castle and order people around. When she ended up in a cottage, she realized things didn’t work that way, so she took off. And since MM has to keep up with the ones she sees herself on par with, they couldn’t take a “normal” house, thus the 16 bathrooms.



kipp said:


> The main thing that irks me, and I think for most of us who are annoyed by these two, is all the inauthenticity.   People can spot that from very far away.  No amount of "creative activation" will change that.



Exactly. I can’t get myself to watch anything they’re in, because it’s just too damn painful to do so. Even reading about them. This thread is a perfect buffer, it breaks everything down and gives you the gist so you don’t get hit full force. 

Also, I think it’s quite a common thing with narcissists that in the beginning they’re able to impress/charm people quite easily. But when there’s nothing there to follow, this is what happens. You keep giving people second hand embarrassment every time you say or do something, because everything seems just shallow and as you said inauthentic. 



lanasyogamama said:


> I was way more interested in celebs before Instagram, when they didn’t tell us every detail about their lives.



I agree, social media changed that for good. That’s why MM&H’s constant preaching isn’t such a good idea. Celebs have lost all appeal and people are sick of them (and other self important and overly privileged individuals) telling others what’s good/bad, what to do, how to do it etc.


----------



## justwatchin

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Fresh Prince of Bel Air! Hilarious


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 17:00 mark, he says MM signed up for “a life of service”.  Hmmmmm.
> 
> 
> @rose60610  I will just say it - _that hair _is gross. There are better photos they could have chosen. It’s always a miss with them.



Yes!  That totally slayed me!  If The Queen heard that, I think she would fall off her chair. Will and Kate laughed so hard it frightened the dogs.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Will they get a PO Box at the Montecito post office?


I think they should get a PO Box in Needles or Death Valley. More in keeping with the kind of people the are.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That is probably the funniest thing I've heard in a while. The delusion is strong with these two.


More like she signed up for a life of being served.


----------



## gelbergirl

justwatchin said:


> Fresh Prince of Bel Air! Hilarious



I though it was funny, cute gags - tea service on an open top bus,
Harry's never been on one.
Harry looked good I have to say!
But I don't want him doing this stuff, he should pipe down and lay low IMO

Him sticking his head outside the Mansion bathroom - UGH


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> I though it was funny, cute gags - tea service on an open top bus,
> Harry's never been on one.
> Harry looked good I have to say!
> But I don't want him doing this stuff, he should pipe down and lay low IMO
> 
> Him sticking his head outside the Mansion bathroom - UGH


Bathroom gags have always been the lowest form of humor except when Mel Brooks does it and then it is funny.   Corden is no Mel Brooks and neither is Hapless Hazza


----------



## jennlt

lulilu said:


> *I thought he was heard in the background of their podcast saying "bye" or something. *





Harry was on James Corden's show claiming that Archie's first word was "crocodile" but I don't think Archie said it during his Spotify appearance. However, there has been speculation as to whom Archie was referring when he said "crocodile".


----------



## sdkitty

Sina08 said:


> That’s the point. If it had been about privacy, they would have done just that and be happy with it. She thought by marrying him she would get to live in her own castle and order people around. When she ended up in a cottage, she realized things didn’t work that way, so she took off. And since MM has to keep up with the ones she sees herself on par with, they couldn’t take a “normal” house, thus the 16 bathrooms.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. I can’t get myself to watch anything they’re in, because it’s just too damn painful to do so. Even reading about them. This thread is a perfect buffer, it breaks everything down and gives you the gist so you don’t get hit full force.
> 
> Also, I think it’s quite a common thing with narcissists that in the beginning they’re able to impress/charm people quite easily. But when there’s nothing there to follow, this is what happens. You keep giving people second hand embarrassment every time you say or do something, because everything seems just shallow and as you said inauthentic.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, social media changed that for good. That’s why MM&H’s constant preaching isn’t such a good idea. Celebs have lost all appeal and people are sick of them (and other self important and overly privileged individuals) telling others what’s good/bad, what to do, how to do it etc.


but wasn't that cottage the got in Britian equivalent to a very large house in reality? (just called a cottage)


----------



## LittleStar88

I don’t buy that his first word was crocodile. Not “no”, not “mama”, not “dada”? The kid just popped out “crocodile”? They have to be joking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> but wasn't that cottage the got in Britian equivalent to a very large house in reality? (just called a cottage)



Yeah, but it was "tiny" and unattractive from the outside compared to Will's and Kate's country home, and apparently what they had really wanted was Frogmore House. If true that must be the most genius move ever to firmly put them into their place.


----------



## Sina08

sdkitty said:


> but wasn't that cottage the got in Britian equivalent to a very large house in reality? (just called a cottage)


Of course it was. Still, it wasn’t  what she expected or thought she was owed.


----------



## sdkitty

Sina08 said:


> Of course it was. Still, it wasn’t  what she expected or thought she was owed.


they're ridiculous
I know it might be a bit hard for Harry having grown up alongside his brother and now seeing they aren't equal.  but that's the monarchy.  he should understand that and he should have made her understand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ladies, I am shocked. I was reading across on another forum where I'm not a member but where you can read the MM and Harry thread, and apparently (I don't have it in me to go search right now...in fact I should prepare for a tough week but can't bring myself to...will just get up an hour early I guess) when Lady CC wrote her book a person who knows both her (Lady CC) and Harry called her up and implied "the worst thing a father could do to a daughter happened to MM, and that's why she treats her father like she does". They say she mentioned it in one of her videos, but I only started watching her a few weeks ago and have not come across that particular video.

Now Lady CC is not dumb and idenfitied this as an attempt to set her up and didn't take the bait, so never mentioned it in her book. But can you imagine bringing up that kind of accusation to both tarnish her father's reputation and make Lady CC look like the crazy looner who can't be taken seriously all in one strike? This is seriously, extremely messed up and disgusting. And it kind of reaffirms my opinion on the miscarriage.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> but wasn't that cottage the got in Britian equivalent to a very large house in reality? (just called a cottage)



She was given 2 cottages. The one in Kensington Palace (my favorite) was relatively small, but I think QE would have given her an upgrade if she had behaved and stayed in the UK. 

If the interview with Oprah doesn't bring her the needed audience, I bet she will be missing Nott Cott.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I am shocked. I was reading across on another forum where I'm not a member but where you can read the MM and Harry thread, and apparently (I don't have it in me to go search right now...in fact I should prepare for a tough week but can't bring myself to...will just get up an hour early I guess) when Lady CC wrote her book a person who knows both her (Lady CC) and Harry called her up and *implied "the worst thing a father could do to a daughter happened to MM, and that's why she treats her father like she does".* They say she mentioned it in one of her videos, but I only started watching her a few weeks ago and have not come across that particular video.
> 
> Now Lady CC is not dumb and idenfitied this as an attempt to set her up and didn't take the bait, so never mentioned it in her book. But can you imagine bringing up that kind of accusation to both tarnish her father's reputation and make Lady CC look like the crazy looner who can't be taken seriously all in one strike? This is seriously, extremely messed up and disgusting. And it kind of reaffirms my opinion on the miscarriage.



Sad to say I envisioned this scenario several pages back.

Of course it does nothing to explain why she treats everyone else that way too but we all know how this will play out


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> What they meant...
> 
> View attachment 5005187


That picture really is cringe. Also  giving someone a prepared meal when it suits you is probably the least helpful way a foundation could be allieviating food poverty.


----------



## Sina08

sdkitty said:


> they're ridiculous
> I know it might be a bit hard for Harry having grown up alongside his brother and now seeing they aren't equal.  but that's the monarchy.  he should understdand that and he should have made her understand.


That would have been his job, to make her understand and guide her. Instead, he chose to take off with her and lead a life he’s absolutely not equipped to live. Now she guides him.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 17:00 mark, he says MM signed up for “a life of service”.  Hmmmmm.
> 
> 
> @rose60610  I will just say it - _that hair _is gross. There are better photos they could have chosen. It’s always a miss with them.




The fake laugh track is very appropriate.

The toilet humor was cringe worthy, his apparent urinary incontinence problem  may explain a home with 16 bathrooms in Montecito, need quick access?  

The thought of the person in this video standing on the balcony of Buckingham Palace during Trooping of Colors is too far fetched to think about. 

Couldn't watch the rest of it, I was gagging.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> She was given 2 cottages. The one in Kensington Palace (my favorite) was relatively small, but I think QE would have given her an upgrade if she had behaved and stayed in the UK.
> 
> If the interview with Oprah doesn't bring her the needed audience, I bet she will be missing Nott Cott.



It was Harry's bachelor pad, and it only had one bedroom and one bathroom, so yeah, that was really not a stately home.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Sad to say I envisioned this scenario several pages back.
> 
> Of course it does nothing to explain why she treats everyone else that way too but we all know how this will play out



OMG you're right, I read what you were saying about the "me too" movement. That said, apparently when Lady CC ignored them that was the end of it so far. But who knows!

That said, it doesn't even explain why she treats her father the way she does, conveniently correlating with her wedding into the most famous family of the western world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I am shocked. I was reading across on another forum where I'm not a member but where you can read the MM and Harry thread, and apparently (I don't have it in me to go search right now...in fact I should prepare for a tough week but can't bring myself to...will just get up an hour early I guess) when Lady CC wrote her book a person who knows both her (Lady CC) and Harry called her up and implied "the worst thing a father could do to a daughter happened to MM, and that's why she treats her father like she does". They say she mentioned it in one of her videos, but I only started watching her a few weeks ago and have not come across that particular video.
> 
> Now Lady CC is not dumb and idenfitied this as an attempt to set her up and didn't take the bait, so never mentioned it in her book. But can you imagine bringing up that kind of accusation to both tarnish her father's reputation and make Lady CC look like the crazy looner who can't be taken seriously all in one strike? This is seriously, extremely messed up and disgusting. And it kind of reaffirms my opinion on the miscarriage.


Wow, I have a hard time believing such thing. I trust Lady C's opinion on the subject, and she has always praise words for Thomas. Whoever if behind such disgusting accusation/rumor is very sick and dangerous imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Wow, I have a hard time believing such thing. I trust Lady C's opinion on the subject, and she has always praise words for Thomas. Whoever if behind such disgusting accusation/rumor is very sick and dangerous imo.



She has said before while writing the book she was contacted with all kinds of nasty rumors to tarnish Thomas' reputation, I just had never heard what kind of rumours. Good grief.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5005088



I think there's a misspelling on their website.  You'd think someone with full knowledge of The Queen's English would know this, but I'm sure what it meant to say was:

Compassion INACTION.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has said before while writing the book she was contacted with all kinds of nasty rumors to tarnish Thomas' reputation, I just had never heard what kind of rumours. Good grief.


Not shocking that Meg is behind the rumors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Incidentally, the ladies on the other forum also brought up how apparently Harry used to chat to journalists pre-Meghan to feed them sh*t about William, has anyone ever heard of such a thing before? What the hell is going on.


----------



## csshopper

Given how warped Meghan is, the "worst thing a father could do" in her case could mean he finally said "no" when she wanted something.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was Harry's bachelor pad, and it only had one bedroom and one bathroom, so yeah, that was really not a stately home.


I know, this is why I think she could have gotten a bigger home there if she had behaved. The location of Kensington Palace is perfect.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> She was given 2 cottages. The one in Kensington Palace (my favorite) was relatively small, but I think QE would have given her an upgrade if she had behaved and stayed in the UK.
> 
> If the interview with Oprah doesn't bring her the needed audience, I bet she will be missing Nott Cott.


The Harkles had a small place at KP and were scheduled to get a bigger one at KP but they complained and got Frog Cot instead due to privacy reasons supposedly, after all the kerfuffle about privacy when Archie was born


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t buy that his first word was crocodile. Not “no”, not “mama”, not “dada”? The kid just popped out “crocodile”? They have to be joking.


At the end of the cringe worthy reading Megain did with Archie of his "favorite" book, he says "da da" and Megain immediately tells the world he said duck rabbit. I think someone is very good at telling 'porkie pies'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has said before while writing the book she was contacted with all kinds of nasty rumors to tarnish Thomas' reputation, I just had never heard what kind of rumours. Good grief.



Isn’t it strange that Thomas was very much a part of MM’s adult life (attended her graduations, wedding to Trev, was invited to attend the Harry wedding) right up until 1 or 2 days before the Harry wedding?   Hmmmm, surely MM wouldn’t lie, would she?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t it strange that Thomas was very much a part of MM’s adult life (attended her graduations, wedding to Trev, was invited to attend the Harry wedding) right up until 1 or 2 days before the Harry wedding?   Hmmmm, surely MM wouldn’t lie, would she?



Right! Not buying any of it, I'm just shocked someone would go that far.


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Will they get a PO Box at the Montecito post office?



If they did they'd have to check it every day. But we know how much they value privacy .  Would they trust their mail with a servant? Doubt it.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has said before while writing the book she was contacted with all kinds of nasty rumors to tarnish Thomas' reputation, I just had never heard what kind of rumours. Good grief.


I wonder who is behind such rumors. Someone who has no problem in using the worst 'bare-knuckle tactics'... This is so low that it is hard to even comment on it.


----------



## rose60610

I wouldn't put one single thing past Meghan. Not a one. Play dirty? No problem. Maybe she will go into politics.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think there's a misspelling on their website.  You'd think someone with full knowledge of The Queen's English would know this, but I'm sure what it meant to say was:
> 
> Compassion INACTION.


I agree, and I think they meant to write '*Disservice*' around the little logo sign.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I am shocked. I was reading across on another forum where I'm not a member but where you can read the MM and Harry thread, and apparently (I don't have it in me to go search right now...in fact I should prepare for a tough week but can't bring myself to...will just get up an hour early I guess) when Lady CC wrote her book a person who knows both her (Lady CC) and Harry called her up and implied *"the worst thing a father could do to a daughter happened to MM, and that's why she treats her father like she does".* They say she mentioned it in one of her videos, but I only started watching her a few weeks ago and have not come across that particular video.
> 
> Now Lady CC is not dumb and idenfitied this as an attempt to set her up and didn't take the bait, so never mentioned it in her book. But can you imagine bringing up that kind of accusation to both tarnish her father's reputation and make Lady CC look like the crazy looner who can't be taken seriously all in one strike? This is seriously, extremely messed up and disgusting. And it kind of reaffirms my opinion on the miscarriage.


I called that a load of BS after listening to Lady CC's video commenting on Samantha's book. She diplomatically addresses both sides of the issue as it's a father's responsibility to care for his daughter, but agrees with Samantha that he did more than his duty and that MM is an ungrateful brat, who threw her father under the bus. (I'm paraphrasing here.)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Finally, Charles cuts them off — baby steps, but still:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'look for new mailing address' after Clarence House cuts ties
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan are reportedly searching for a new arrangement for their correspondence as the Prince of Wales stopped financing the mail service at Clarence House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I wonder if Philip is behind some of Charles's actions. According to DM, Charles was summoned to hospital to discuss the future of the monarchy, and we know that Philip is not a fan of MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors like that one reflect on Doria, too.  D and Thomas had joint custody, so D could have done something, if needed. 








						Doria Ragland’s struggle when raising Meghan with Thomas Markle
					

MEGHAN MARKLE's mother Doria Ragland faced an incredibly difficult period in her life shortly after her daughter was born, when she was still living with her now ex-husband Thomas Markle, a biographer has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Meghan is ALWAYS the victim.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Given how warped Meghan is, the "worst thing a father could do" in her case could mean he finally said "no" when she wanted something.



Yes, he probably said no to going along with her fictional narrative about her life.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors like that one reflect on Doria, too.  D and Thomas had joint custody, so D could have done something, if needed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland’s struggle when raising Meghan with Thomas Markle
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's mother Doria Ragland faced an incredibly difficult period in her life shortly after her daughter was born, when she was still living with her now ex-husband Thomas Markle, a biographer has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Of course, MM was living with TM, but was in constant contact with Doria. 

In any event, Mr Smith who wrote ‘Meghan Misunderstood’ sounds like Omid #2 in the article. His statement that "_Meghan and her mother were also in LA during the five days of rioting and violence that erupted in 1992_" was contradicted in Samantha's book. According to Samantha, TM took MM to spend some time in Palm Springs during the 1992 riots.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5005088



I knew I'd seen that image before. It was taken six months ago...
Totalcelnews aticle


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right! Not buying any of it, I'm just shocked someone would go that far.


I saw that on the other site.  I don't buy it either.  It was a fishing expedition to see if Lady C would bite.  Lady C, by her own admission, is not stranger to being in court.  I believe that she is quite experienced and is very careful at this stage in her life.  She researches carefully.  She would never print anything that she couldn't back up, especially something as heinous as this allegation.  I don't know if this was a sanctioned phone call or some intern thinking they were being clever.


----------



## EverSoElusive

LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t buy that his first word was crocodile. Not “no”, not “mama”, not “dada”? The kid just popped out “crocodile”? They have to be joking.



Or maybe they simply don't know what's Archie's first word because Archie spends most of his time with a nanny vs. Ginge and Cringe


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> She was given 2 cottages. The one in Kensington Palace (my favorite) was relatively small, but I think QE would have given her an upgrade if she had behaved and stayed in the UK.
> 
> If the interview with Oprah doesn't bring her the needed audience, I bet she will be missing Nott Cott.




Genuine question for all... Whatever happened to the house that they supposedly planned to buy or bought in Oxfordshire or somewhere else outside of London?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yes, he probably said no to going along with her fictional narrative about her life.


She could even been referring to that incident at her HS when she demanded he give up planning the lighting for the student stage production because she had some issue with another student.  She could have felt that she lost her standing with the other students.  I could imagine her thinking this was an unforgivable insult to her.  Who knows?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Genuine question for all... Whatever happened to the house that they supposedly planned to buy or bought in Oxfordshire or somewhere else outside of London?



Wasn't that rented...in the Cotswolds near the Beckhams and Clooneys? Though I never fully understood why they'd need to rent anything. To quote Margaret "We have enough houses".


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't that rented...in the Cotswolds near the Beckhams and Clooneys? Though I never fully understood why they'd need to rent anything. To quote Margaret "We have enough houses".



Yes, Costwolds!! But I guess they have no need for that seeing how they have 16 bathrooms in Montecito


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't that rented...in the Cotswolds near the Beckhams and Clooneys? Though I never fully understood why they'd need to rent anything. To quote Margaret "We have enough houses".


"We have enough houses", but none was near enough to the Beckhams and Clooneys.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> "We have enough houses", but none was near enough to the Beckhams and Clooneys.



That said, Amal seems to have distanced herself. Apparently that private jet to the baby shower was not a good investment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Of course, MM was living with TM, but was in constant contact with Doria.
> 
> In any event, Mr Smith who wrote ‘Meghan Misunderstood’ sounds like Omid #2 in the article. His statement that "_Meghan and her mother were also in LA during the five days of rioting and violence that erupted in 1992_" was contradicted in Samantha's book. According to Samantha, TM took MM to spend some time in Palm Springs during the 1992 riots.


Glad you pointed that out about the article
my eyes were bugging out on how hard life was for Doria , step-kids ! She married a man from a different culture and adapting was hard ... I bet half the planet has suffered from those hardships ...


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Of course, MM was living with TM, but was in constant contact with Doria.
> 
> In any event, Mr Smith who wrote ‘Meghan Misunderstood’ sounds like Omid #2 in the article. His statement that "_Meghan and her mother were also in LA during the five days of rioting and violence that erupted in 1992_" was contradicted in Samantha's book. According to Samantha, TM took MM to spend some time in Palm Springs during the 1992 riots.



I want to see the receipts on that.  Hopefully Ceejay will clarify.
Here is an interesting item








						Mapping the 1992 LA Uprising
					

A map guide the major events and places that shaped one of the biggest episodes of civil unrest in U.S. history.




					la.curbed.com
				



The Express article said that Doria had relocated to a safe neighborhood in midtown LA, and had joint custody of her daughter with her ex-husband. 
Looking at the riot map I wonder just which "safe neighborhood" it was to have been so close to the action that their tree was charred
The ex and I lived on Highwood Ct in Simi Valley at that time-----not far at all from the infamous courthouse. We were getting ready to fly back for the KY Derby when everything hit the fan. We were on strike/locked out of work at Hollywood Park at the time and had already paid up front for everything so we decided to still go, little knowing just how bad things were going to get. When we flew out of LAX we could see everything in the surrounding area on fire. I was a wreck the entire trip just waiting to hear that the rioting had hit SV. I must have called the cat sitter 20 times a day


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> I want to see the receipts on that.  Hopefully Ceejay will clarify.
> Here is an interesting item
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mapping the 1992 LA Uprising
> 
> 
> A map guide the major events and places that shaped one of the biggest episodes of civil unrest in U.S. history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> la.curbed.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Express article said that Doria had relocated to a safe neighborhood in midtown LA, and had joint custody of her daughter with her ex-husband.
> Looking at the riot map I wonder just which "safe neighborhood" it was to have been so close to the action that their tree was charred
> The ex and I lived on Highwood Ct in Simi Valley at that time-----not far at all from the infamous courthouse. We were getting ready to fly back for the KY Derby when everything hit the fan. We were on strike/locked out of work at Hollywood Park at the time and had already paid up front for everything so we decided to still go, little knowing just how bad things were going to get. When we flew out of LAX we could see everything in the surrounding area on fire. I was a wreck the entire trip just waiting to hear that the rioting had hit SV. I must have called the cat sitter 20 times a day



I was not in LA during the 1992 riots, so I don't know much about the affected neighborhoods. However, Vista Delmar Ave, where she was living with her father at the time of the riots, doesn't seem to have been one of the affected areas. It's very possible that MM made up her memories of the 1992 riots.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> ??? "*We drive systemic cultural change*..."


@rose60610  .. you highlighted *EXACTLY* the same piece of garbage that really OFFENDED me .. "*WE DRIVE SYSTEMIC CULTURAL CHANGE*"?!?!?!?!  

Not that I should be surprised, but the *ARROGANCE *of that statement is (_to me_) mind-blowing!!!  They actually think that they ARE going to change culture?? .. *to what*?? 

I can tell you all that from my Management Consulting training & actual work in Corporate America, *the BIGGEST challenge* is to *CHANGE CULTURE*!!!  Bottom line, in order to do that, you have to get rid of the *OLD* (_executives and others at the top_) and bring in *NEW* (_new Executives that don't know about the old culture_).  Soooooooo .. given that, *what do they plan on doing*? .. "firing" our President, our Vice President, get rid of the Senate and Congress .. and all the State Governers???? .. for what?? .. to put *THEMSELVES at the top* .. vis-a-vis, *ROYALS*?????????  *Who the F#CK do they think they are????* *Measley-Meghan*?? .. who didn't have the backbone to actually TALK to the Queen and Prince Charles re: Meg-Exit .. *oh NO * .. she has to sneak out of the middle of the night to stay in Canada .. and then .. she & *Hapless-Hazza* write their screed on their SussexRoyal website .. "telling" the Queen and Prince Charles *THEIR *PLANS .. and well, you know .. the Queen and Prince Charles are just going to have to "deal" with their plans.  

Their *EGOTISM*, *SMUGNESS*, *CONCEIT*, *POMPOSITY*, *GALL*, *NERVE*, *AUDACITY* and *SELF-IMPORTANCE* is really unbelievable!!!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, Amal seems to have distanced herself. Apparently that private jet to the baby shower was not a good investment.


If Amal distanced herself, it supports that she is indeed a smart woman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> They actually think that they ARE going to change culture?? .. *to what*??



1. Get rid of the un-woke old people, such as Thomas, Charles (unless he pays up), W&K, etc. Foster, Doria, OW, Gayle, Marianne can stay, of course.

2. The new culture will be ‘Royal Tea on the 105’ as Harry says in the video. People will understand that he and his family are royalty. We must show deference to their greatness. We do that by giving them $$$$, saying how wonderful they are, driving vehicles they deem are eco-friendly, traveling only when they say to, etc.  It is  all in the H&M Grand Reset, a lot like Charles’s but much grander.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I was not in LA during the 1992 riots, so I don't know much about the affected neighborhoods. However, Vista Delmar Ave, where she was living with her father at the time of the riots, doesn't seem to have been one of the affected areas. It's very possible that MM made up her memories of the 1992 riots.



It wasn't
It is
For the life of me I will NEVER understand why people make outlandish statements in this day and age when they can be so easily fact checked in real time
For several years I worked a booth at the Del Mar Fair and we were always next to the same mop people. Part of their sales pitch was that the product was offered for much more on QVC. The first time I heard it I immediately whipped out my phone to check QVC. I never did find their product there but it amazed me how no one else ever checked and called them out on it -----that I saw, any way.


----------



## TC1

Perhaps Archies first word was indeed "crock" as in what these two are. We all know it sure as hell wasn't crocodile.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I was not in LA during the 1992 riots, so I don't know much about the affected neighborhoods. However, Vista Delmar Ave, where she was living with her father at the time of the riots, doesn't seem to have been one of the affected areas. It's very possible that MM made up her memories of the 1992 riots.


Honestly I don’t understand what Meg has to gain by claiming she was in LA during the riots?  I was in my freshman year at USC and I was in the heart of it.  It was terrifying, but it’s not like my home was burned down or a loved one was killed.  What’s her point?  To prove how much she’s suffered as a WOC?  How she’s seen hardships?  What, exactly?  More fuel to her “I am victim, hear my roar” story line?  She’s sick.  I think she has more mental issues than Haz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I want to see the receipts on that.  Hopefully Ceejay will clarify.
> Here is an interesting item
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mapping the 1992 LA Uprising
> 
> 
> A map guide the major events and places that shaped one of the biggest episodes of civil unrest in U.S. history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> la.curbed.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Express article said that Doria had relocated to a safe neighborhood in midtown LA, and had joint custody of her daughter with her ex-husband.
> Looking at the riot map I wonder just which "safe neighborhood" it was to have been so close to the action that their tree was charred
> The ex and I lived on Highwood Ct in Simi Valley at that time-----not far at all from the infamous courthouse. We were getting ready to fly back for the KY Derby when everything hit the fan. We were on strike/locked out of work at Hollywood Park at the time and had already paid up front for everything so we decided to still go, little knowing just how bad things were going to get. When we flew out of LAX we could see everything in the surrounding area on fire. I was a wreck the entire trip just waiting to hear that the rioting had hit SV. I must have called the cat sitter 20 times a day



The KY Derby at Churchill Downs? The run for the roses? You are speaking to my heart now. Hope your horse won  








						The Best Kentucky Derby Hats of 2019
					

There was no disputing spectators’ style at the 2019 Kentucky Derby and Oaks. Nerissa Sparkman captured the best Derby hats and outfits at Churchill Downs




					gardenandgun.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly I don’t understand what Meg has to gain by claiming she was in LA during the riots?
> 
> *To prove how much she’s suffered as a WOC?  How she’s seen hardships?  What, exactly?  More fuel to her “I am victim, hear my roar” story line?*



She wants to show that she’s a “woman of the people,” a mixed-race girl who experienced racial upheaval up close and personal. She’s trying to buy more woke cultural capital.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly I don’t understand what Meg has to gain by claiming she was in LA during the riots?  I was in my freshman year at USC and I was in the heart of it.  It was terrifying, but it’s not like my home was burned down or a loved one was killed.  What’s her point?  To prove how much she’s suffered as a WOC?  How she’s seen hardships?  What, exactly?  More fuel to her “I am victim, hear my roar” story line?  She’s sick.  I think she has more mental issues than Haz.



Even tho she spent her entire education in the entitled private school world and is(?) a member of one of most entitled sororities ever, she is a global citizen with a diverse background, so much more diverse than Harry who spent many nights serving those in need as well as living in Africa.  Because downtown LA is so much rougher than any place in downtown London, Glasgow, Ireland, Afghanistan, etc.


----------



## kkfiregirl

rose60610 said:


> Meghan is ALWAYS the victim.



I feel like this constant whining and pernicious victimhood is suddenly EVERYWHERE.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> The KY Derby at Churchill Downs? The run for the roses? You are speaking to my heart now. Hope your horse won
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Best Kentucky Derby Hats of 2019
> 
> 
> There was no disputing spectators’ style at the 2019 Kentucky Derby and Oaks. Nerissa Sparkman captured the best Derby hats and outfits at Churchill Downs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gardenandgun.com



Yep
Made out like a bandit.  Had planned to wheel the two California horses top and bottom in the exacta and when they scratched AP Indy (the _better_ horse) that morning I doubled down on Casual Lies. Lil ET with Pat Day won at 17/1 and my horse was second at 30 something to one.
Paid for our whole trip


----------



## CeeJay

Not sure what other site some of the posters were referring to in regards to this "rumor" about Thomas; please let me know because I'm going to CRY FOUL as hell!!!  If I am perceiving this right, did MM (in essence) say that Thomas had an inappropriate "relationship" with her??? .. and people wonder why he went to the length he did to try to get the TRUTH out when she lied previously?!?!?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dear, first rumblings about interview ....  does not sound like BP will be pleased ... were you silent or were you silenced ?

and the outfit, she has morphed into a nun in a bun ... where is the long tressed and curled lady of the lemons, spotted a week ago ..









						Oprah Tells Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'You've Said Shocking Things Here' in Sit-Down
					

"Were you silent or were you silenced?" Oprah Winfrey asks the Duchess of Sussex during <em>Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special</em>, airing on March 7




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> 1. Get rid of the un-woke old people, such as Thomas, Charles (unless he pays up), W&K, etc. Foster, Doria, OW, Gayle, Marianne can stay, of course.
> 
> 2. The new culture will be ‘Royal Tea on the 105’ as Harry says in the video. People will understand that he and his family are royalty. We must show deference to their greatness. We do that by giving them $$$$, saying how wonderful they are, driving vehicles they deem are eco-friendly, traveling only when they say to, etc.  It is  all in the H&M Grand Reset, a lot like Charles’s but much grander.


I ended up watching Haz's propaganda video, the all thing on the bus was pretty silly. Cringe's turn on March 7 will likely be as brainless as Ginge's bus tour. All propaganda to increase audiences and donations. The Grand Reset for MM is only about making her famous and ultra-rich imo.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear, first rumblings about interview ....  does not sound like BP will be pleased ... were you silent or were you silenced ?
> 
> and the outfit, she has morphed into a nun in a bun ... where is the long tressed and curled lady of the lemons, spotted a week ago ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Tells Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'You've Said Shocking Things Here' in Sit-Down
> 
> 
> "Were you silent or were you silenced?" Oprah Winfrey asks the Duchess of Sussex during <em>Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special</em>, airing on March 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Here we go with the sad eyes


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I ended up watching Haz's propaganda video, the all thing on the bus was pretty silly. Cringe's turn on March 7 will likely be as brainless as Ginge's bus tour. All propaganda to increase audiences and donations. The Grand Reset for MM is only about making her famous and ultra-rich imo.


I think H on the bus was to give him some time to shine without Meg, he is the blood royal after all, since most of the Oprah time will be with her only, H had tea with Corden
All of this was orchestrated by CBS... 
The Harkles have had a bad week in the press, ever since they spoke back to QEII


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear, first rumblings about interview ....  does not sound like BP will be pleased ... were you silent or were you silenced ?
> 
> and the outfit, she has morphed into a nun in a bun ... where is the long tressed and curled lady of the lemons, spotted a week ago ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Tells Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'You've Said Shocking Things Here' in Sit-Down
> 
> 
> "Were you silent or were you silenced?" Oprah Winfrey asks the Duchess of Sussex during <em>Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special</em>, airing on March 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Pity party on steroids! Supposedly the black/white dress is a nod the black/white outfit Diana wore for her disastrous Bashir interview.
These promo photos make this look like the most staged interview of the least interesting people in the US. Even OW looks uninterested.


ETA:  They all look constipated. No joke.


----------



## marietouchet

the hand on the tummy ... mark that one on your bingo cards !

Does anyone have a card with big pregnancy boobs on it ? I think the V neck dress was chosen to scream pregnant !

And a LOCK of silver hair ? Her left side, right side of second photo ...




LittleStar88 said:


> Here we go with the sad eyes





LittleStar88 said:


> Here we go with the sad eyes


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> the hand on the tummy ... mark that one on your bingo cards !



The other clutching Har-di-har-har's hand in her patented death grip


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@marietouchet 
Are they wearing tarnished halos and speaking with forked tongues? I couldn't read the entire article because I was gagging too much. 
	

		
			
		

		
	




PS. Let's not forget the belly cradling...


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear, first rumblings about interview ....  does not sound like BP will be pleased ... we you silent or were you silenced ?
> 
> and the outfit, she has morphed into a nun in a bun ... where is the long tressed and curled lady of the lemons, spotted a week ago ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Tells Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'You've Said Shocking Things Here' in Sit-Down
> 
> 
> "Were you silent or were you silenced?" Oprah Winfrey asks the Duchess of Sussex during <em>Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special</em>, airing on March 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Here is the article for the ones that prefer not to click on it. 



*Oprah Tells Pregnant Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'You've Said Shocking Things Here' in Sit-Down*

"Were you silent or were you silenced?" Oprah Winfrey asks the Duchess of Sussex during _Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special_, airing on March 7.

The first look at Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey has aired.
On Sunday, during _60 Minutes_, a teaser of the trio's sit-down, _Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special_, was previewed on CBS.

"I just want to make it clear to everybody there is no subject that's off-limits," Winfrey said in the clip, who later told Meghan, "Were you silent or were you silenced?" and "Almost unsurvivable sounds like there was a breaking point."

"My biggest concern was history repeating itself," said Harry, who is expecting his second child with Meghan.

At the end of the preview, Winfrey, who is also one of Meghan and Harry's neighbors in their Montecito neighborhood in California, told the couple: "You've said some pretty shocking things here."

As seen in the preview, Meghan and Harry will have individual interviews with Winfrey as well as a joint sit-down.

In a second preview, which also aired during the 60 Minutes broadcast, Harry spoke about his late mother, Princess Diana.

"You know, for me, I'm just really relieved and happy to be sitting here, talking to you with my wife by my side because I can't begin to imagine what it must've been like for her going through this process by herself all those years ago," he told Winfrey about the public scrutiny Diana dealt with.

"Because it has been unbelievably tough for the two of us, but at least we have each other," Harry said as Meghan agreed.

Winfrey, who attended the couple's May 2018 wedding at Windsor Castle, is set to have an "intimate conversation" with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for a 90-minute primetime special, according to CBS.
"Winfrey will speak with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, in a wide-ranging interview, covering everything from stepping into life as a Royal, marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work to how she is handling life under intense public pressure," the network said in a statement. "Later, the two are joined by Prince Harry as they speak about their move to the United States and their future hopes and dreams for their expanding family."

The March 7 interview will air weeks after Buckingham Palace confirmed that Meghan and Harry will officially not be returning to their royal roles. The announcement came a few weeks shy of their 12-month review period.

Meghan and Harry will no longer keep their patronages (their royal involvement with numerous U.K. charities), and Harry will lose his honorary military appointments, which will subsequently be redistributed "among working members of The Royal Family."

Although Meghan and Harry no longer use their coveted His/Her Royal Highness titles, they will retain them — along with their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles. "While all are saddened by their decision, The Duke and Duchess remain much loved members of the family," the Buckingham Palace announcement said.

Winfrey's close friend, Gayle King, teased the interview on Friday.
"We want to remind you Harry and Meghan are talking to Oprah," King said on _CBS This Morning_. "It's their first major broadcast since giving up their senior royal duties … and I've heard from reliable sources – this is Oprah talking – that it's the best interview she's ever done."
The co-host added, "So I'm curious. I think that's saying something."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meanwhile, in the UK, the future king and his wife serving the people properly.


*The Duke of Cambridge warns of misinformation on social media *about coronavirus vaccinations.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her makeup looks nice.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

This inquiring mind wants to know... Is Harry pregnant? His gut is busting out of his shirt and his abdomen is protruding as much as Me-gain's. Also known as Couvade Syndrome or sympathetic pregnancy


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> @marietouchet
> Are they wearing tarnished halos and speaking with forked tongues? I couldn't read the entire article because I was gagging too much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5005642
> 
> 
> PS. Let's not forget the belly cradling...


Ginge's statement on Diana:"_You know, for me, I'm just really relieved and happy to be sitting here, talking to you with my wife by my side because I can't begin to imagine what it must've been like for her going through this process by herself all those years ago,_" is  Diana was loved and MM is disliked, it's not the same. It looks like MM is about to shed tears (*crocodile* tears)!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> This inquiring mind wants to know... Is Harry pregnant? His gut is busting out of his shirt and his abdomen is protruding as much as Me-gain's. Also known as Couvade Syndrome or sympathetic pregnancy


This in love couple share everything, including bumps.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Ginge's statement on Diana:"_You know, for me, I'm just really relieved and happy to be sitting here, talking to you with my wife by my side because I can't begin to imagine what it must've been like for her going through this process by herself all those years ago,_" is  Diana was loved and MM is disliked, it's not the same. It looks like MM is about to shed tears (*crocodile* tears)!


At the rate we're puking and laughing, will OW realize that she's orchestrating a puky-tragi-comedy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Her makeup looks nice.


She has indeed the cat eyes that someone mentioned a few posts ago. The makeup is giving her a soft appearance imo, but I'm no expert. Everything is so staged.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Ginge's statement on Diana:"_You know, for me, I'm just really relieved and happy to be sitting here, talking to you with my wife by my side because *I can't begin to imagine what it must've been like for her going through this process by herself all those years ago*,_" is  Diana was loved and MM is disliked, it's not the same. It looks like MM is about to shed tears (*crocodile* tears)!



THIS PROCESS??????
What process can he be referring to? All WHAT years ago? Can't be pregnancy. Publicity? Who ever even heard of her before him? WTH is he talking about?


now I have the George Harrison song running through my head---LOL

NM-------I completely misread this as MM not Diana.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> THIS PROCESS??????
> What process can he be referring to? All WHAT years ago? Can't be pregnancy. Publicity? Who ever even heard of her before him? WTH is he talking about?
> now I have the George Harrison song running through my head---LOL



The divorce from Charles. I believe he is comparing his situation to his mother’s. During the divorce, she went through all the media attention *alone*. He at least has MM to help him through the mucky muck press.

What a s$itshow.  H&M will never get past this mess. OW knows it, too. 
No glory in this sort of thing.

ETA: as someone else said, they really do know only one song, Pity me.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> THIS PROCESS??????
> What process can he be referring to? All WHAT years ago? Can't be pregnancy. Publicity? Who ever even heard of her before him? WTH is he talking about?
> 
> 
> now I have the George Harrison song running through my head---LOL



I assume he means separating from the royal family. Diana left it, but she was on her own because of the divorce. 

He makes it sound like leaving that family is as dangerous as quitting the mob.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: as someone else said, they really do know only one song, Pity me.


They could always move to Pityme a small village in north Cornwall, England. Mind you, not too many Brits wish to see them again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So grateful for W&K.  
They do their jobs with love, kindness, professionalism, style and panache.
Sometimes it is difficult to believe William and Harry have the same parents, same grandparents, same aunts, uncles, etc.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I assume he means separating from the royal family. Diana left it, but she was on her own because of the divorce.
> 
> He makes it sound like leaving that family is as dangerous as quitting the mob.





CarryOn2020 said:


> The divorce from Charles. I believe he is comparing his situation to his mother’s. During the divorce, she went through all the media attention *alone*. He at least has MM to help him through the mucky muck press.
> 
> What a s$itshow.  H&M will never get past this mess. OW knows it, too.
> No glory in this sort of thing.
> 
> ETA: as someone else said, they really do know only one song, Pity me.



LMAO-----I thought he was talking about his wifey, not his mother


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> They could always move to Pityme a small village in north Cornwall, England. Mind you, not too many Brits wish to see them again.


@Maggie Muggins You, dear lady, are my hero!  Who would have thought such a town exists.
from the Wiki:
The public house is the Pityme Inn and there is a small trading estate south of the village. The name of the village has its origins in a tragic tale of loss at sea. The skipper of a fishing vessel set to sea despite the deteriorating weather. All hands were lost. The women of the village went, as a group, to the widow of the captain to berate her for her husband's culpability in their widowhood. She explained: "I have lost my husband too, so you should also pity me" - hence Pityme Inn. Another story refers to the sea having been closer to the village and is a corruption of the French expression petite mer (small sea).


----------



## Aimee3

I don’t know that MM had the fox eye surgery/stitch because her eyes don’t look like they have an upward tilt to me in those photos.  She used to have large eyes, now her eyes just look like slits.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins You, dear lady, are my hero!  Who would have thought such a town exists.
> from the Wiki:
> The public house is the Pityme Inn and there is a small trading estate south of the village. The name of the village has its origins in a tragic tale of loss at sea. The skipper of a fishing vessel set to sea despite the deteriorating weather. All hands were lost. The women of the village went, as a group, to the widow of the captain to berate her for her husband's culpability in their widowhood. She explained: "I have lost my husband too, so you should also pity me" - hence Pityme Inn. Another story refers to the sea having been closer to the village and is a corruption of the French expression petite mer (small sea).


Thank you! I love researching all kinds of interesting things to keep busy during the pandemic. Who am I kidding... I'm nosy and I want to know everything.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> THIS PROCESS??????
> What process can he be referring to? All WHAT years ago? Can't be pregnancy. Publicity? Who ever even heard of her before him? WTH is he talking about?
> 
> 
> now I have the George Harrison song running through my head---LOL
> 
> NM-------I completely misread this as MM not Diana.


I think it is about Diana being always on tabloids and followed by paparazzi just because of her association to the BRF. Diana had to deal with all that 'unwanted' fame alone. He is ignoring that MM is the one that hired a PR agency to stage photo-ops and release news about her every single day. The all thing is ridiculous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> LMAO-----I thought he was talking about his wifey, not his mother



With him, it is always about his mother. 
Oedipus complex? What would Freud say?


----------



## lanasyogamama

MM looks angry.


----------



## prettyprincess

I can’t wait for this interview. Y’all are about to lose your minds over it


----------



## CarryOn2020

prettyprincess said:


> I can’t wait for this interview s$itshow. Y’all are about to lose your minds over it



Fixed it for ya


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@prettyprincess
You wish!!! It's no problem, as long as this thought makes you happy. I will not watch the interview, but I enjoy chatting with all the open-minded posters on this thread.


----------



## poopsie

prettyprincess said:


> I can’t wait for this interview. Y’all are about to lose your minds over it




Absofreakinlutely!!!!

I won't watch it ---I don't have cable---- but I can't wait either! It ought to be good for at least 40 pages of witty banter, hilarious gifs and fun fun fun!


----------



## bag-mania

prettyprincess said:


> I can’t wait for this interview. Y’all are about to lose your minds over it



No way. It’ll be fabulous! How many minutes into the interview will it take before Meghan cradles her belly for the camera? We could make a drinking game out of the belly holding alone. Will she tear up again as we hear about how hard it was when nobody asked if she was okay TWO YEARS AGO? Or will they have a brand new tale of unfairness and woe, created just for this TV opportunity? Why the possibilities are limitless.


----------



## rose60610

"Process"?????    Meghan had a pretty good "process".  Good schools, Northwestern (very $$$$$ university that failed to teach her about the British Commonwealth during her International Relations major), good marriages (plural), acting gigs to pay her to a net worth of FIVE MILLION DOLLARS (POOR POOR POOR POOR POOR POOR little victim boohoohoohoo)  that she leveraged into a date then DATES to a world famous prince (albeit a very stupid one) had a 50 million dollar wedding, riches galore, part of the BRF that welcomed her very warmly, and all the rest, bla bla.  Wasn't good enough.  

Why?

Because she and Haz planned to eff the BRF from the get-go. HAZ was never going to be anything more than second wheel to William. And a low rung on the ladder at that. But, HAZ had the WINDSOR name.  HAZ, aka, "I have no shame when it comes to whoring out my family to make a buck for my wife who yanks my choke chain".  Haz already grew up livin' the life, had the life, loved it but didn't realize that all he had to do was do NOTHING and continue. Then met beautiful ME-gain.  HAZ was so naive he had no clue what he was up against. He depended on his bodyguards to tell him when to wipe his *ss, inhale and exhale. To her credit, Meghan recognized this, starved to maintain a 22" waist, went through the motions, we know the rest. 

Yes, by gosh, Meghan knew the process. Pity? HAH!!! What a joke. Who's going to feel sorry for somebody who told the BRF to go hell because she wanted even more bucks in her pocket. She recruited and married an insider to assist her that goal. When she divorces that same idiot it won't be before she pockets mega dough. By then, she'll be too old for Bezos, but still OK for the 70+ year billionaires for round #4. 

Maybe Archies next words will be: "Mom, you're really rich now, new dad is REALLY rich, I can get *gold plated* *crocodiles*.".


----------



## Chanbal

Dear Omid, this is so sweet, I can't stop  

Unbelievably tough to live in a 16 toilet mansion, make multi-million dollars deals by cashing in on the BRF... all this while millions of people are struggling with COVID, losing jobs... It's indeed unbelievably tough, but they have each other.  Gosh, these are the imbeciles that want to drive systemic cultural change.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, Amal seems to have distanced herself. Apparently that private jet to the baby shower was not a good investment.


Yes she has it seems. Clearly she has more important things on the agenda than socialising. But..... it is telling how people who aren’t journalists/presenters seem to drop out of this couple’s life.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> *she has morphed into a nun in a bun* ... where is the long tressed and curled lady of the lemons, spotted a week ago ..


 That's brilliant!


----------



## rose60610

Harry looks terrible. Not that anyone expected anything less. Unbuttoned shirt, belly bulge gap, nervous stiff posture, it's painful to watch. Especially Meghan's overfilled face. Only the hard core stans would like this.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> MM looks angry.


Meg looks like she's trying hard to hold in a fart that would be audible on the mics.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> No way. It’ll be fabulous! How many minutes into the interview will it take before Meghan cradles her belly for the camera? We could make a drinking game out of the belly holding alone. Will she tear up again as we hear about how hard it was when nobody asked if she was okay TWO YEARS AGO? Or will they have a brand new tale of unfairness and woe, created just for this TV opportunity? Why the possibilities are limitless.


MM says nothing in the staged interview trailer but cradles her bump 




Meghan, 39, donned a $4,700 Armani dress as she sat down for the 90-minute CBS exclusive interview
Duchess of Sussex gazed into the host's eyes and placed hands on her baby bump as she answered questions
The expectant mother says nothing in the trailer, while fielding questions from Oprah about royal life
Oprah, 67, asks Meghan whether she was 'silent or silenced' - presumably referring to the royals
Comes just weeks after Meghan and Prince Harry revealed that there were expecting their second child
gazing into the host's eyes So dramatic


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly I don’t understand what Meg has to gain by claiming she was in LA during the riots?  I was in my freshman year at USC and I was in the heart of it.  It was terrifying, but it’s not like my home was burned down or a loved one was killed.  What’s her point?  To prove how much she’s suffered as a WOC?  How she’s seen hardships?  What, exactly?  More fuel to her “I am victim, hear my roar” story line?  She’s sick.  I think she has more mental issues than Haz.


I think it’s exactly that, to prove she has seen hardships and has suffered and therefore should be seen as an empathetic figurehead of POC. 

I am not 100 on Lady C but when I read her book she talks a lot about how MM says she was an outsider at Immaculate Heart due to her being biracial but Lady C says the stats she saw for the school at that time said not only was it not majority white at the time but also she was not the only biracial girl in attendance.

I do get that you can feel alone even when you’re not, especially as a teen, but I am also very aware that the misunderstood outsider is a common narrative to gain sympathy and it would play especially well with all the POC who did feel lonely as minorities in white majority schools.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I can’t help it... but these pics make it look like she’s had plastic surgery to turn herself into Jennifer Lawrence circa 2014.... her face shape looks totally different...

I can‘t stop seeing it...


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> MM says nothing in the staged interview trailer but cradles her bump
> 
> View attachment 5005742
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, donned a $4,700 Armani dress as she sat down for the 90-minute CBS exclusive interview
> Duchess of Sussex gazed into the host's eyes and placed hands on her baby bump as she answered questions
> The expectant mother says nothing in the trailer, while fielding questions from Oprah about royal life
> Oprah, 67, asks Meghan whether she was 'silent or silenced' - presumably referring to the royals
> Comes just weeks after Meghan and Prince Harry revealed that there were expecting their second child
> gazing into the host's eyes So dramatic


That dress looks just like something Wallis Simpson would wear. As does her low bun. 
Quite literal isn’t she? 
All she needs is a sustainable emerald ring. 
Oh wait, emeralds are a sore spot.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Dear Omid, this is so sweet, I can't stop
> 
> Unbelievably tough to live in a 16 toilet mansion, make multi-million dollars deals by cashing in on the BRF... all this while millions of people are struggling with COVID, losing jobs... It's indeed unbelievably tough, but they have each other.  Gosh, these are the imbeciles that want to drive systemic cultural change.
> 
> View attachment 5005711



This 100%! The nerve to complain about your privilege when so many people are struggling.


----------



## kkfiregirl

That dress cost $4700?!!! I swear my mother has a similar one in polyester from a Macy’s clearance rack.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Meg looks like she's trying hard to hold in a fart that would be audible on the mics.



I had the same thought, but didn’t think it would be polite to say! hahahaha


----------



## EverSoElusive

Me-gain doesn't look like Me-gain in those promo shots. 

In lemon dress, hardly any bump. In interview dress, moderate bump. In announcement dress, f*cking huge bump for however far along she's supposed to be. 

All the ladies who had been pregnant before, did your baby bump size fluctuate back and forth everyday? Whatever is happening to Me-gain, is that normal?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> I don’t know that MM had the fox eye surgery/stitch because her eyes don’t look like they have an upward tilt to me in those photos.  She used to have large eyes, now her eyes just look like slits.


I believe it’s called the Voldemort. An eye stitch coupled with an extreme nose job. Tongue forking optional.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM says nothing in the staged interview trailer but cradles her bump
> 
> View attachment 5005742
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, donned a $4,700 Armani dress as she sat down for the 90-minute CBS exclusive interview
> Duchess of Sussex gazed into the host's eyes and placed hands on her baby bump as she answered questions
> The expectant mother says nothing in the trailer, while fielding questions from Oprah about royal life
> Oprah, 67, asks Meghan whether she was 'silent or silenced' - presumably referring to the royals
> Comes just weeks after Meghan and Prince Harry revealed that there were expecting their second child
> gazing into the host's eyes So dramatic



Everyone knows you must strike the right pose to look motherly. She way overdid it the first time and yet here it is again, her signature move.


----------



## gracekelly

kkfiregirl said:


> That dress cost $4700?!!! I swear my mother has a similar one in polyester from a Macy’s clearance rack.


It's really awful and what was Armani thinking with this design?  Looks more like A. R. Mani made in Tijuana.


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Me-gain doesn't look like Me-gain in those promo shots.
> 
> In lemon dress, hardly any bump. In interview dress, moderate bump. In announcement dress, f*cking huge bump for however far along she's supposed to be.
> 
> All the ladies who had been pregnant before, did your baby bump size fluctuate back and forth everyday? Whatever is happening to Me-gain, is that normal?


I’m actually pregnant now (2nd trimester) and I can’t tell you what a relief it is on the days I wake up and my swollen belly has temporarily disappeared for the day. It means I can fit in designer sample sizes! 

In all seriousness, when I read she might be faking the 1st pregnancy because of inheritance laws among the nobility (which prevent adopted or surrogate children from inheriting) I felt those laws are extremely prejudiced and she had a point. (I hear Christopher Guest’s children won’t get his title either because they are adopted which just seems wrong to me.) 
However, she really doesn’t need to now so why lie about it this time round?

Ironic there is a lot of stigma surrounding infertility and using surrogates or donor sperm/eggs but MM and H won’t touch that with a barge pole when they are meant to be global innovators.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> That dress looks just like something Wallis Simpson would wear. As does her low bun.
> Quite literal isn’t she?
> All she needs is a sustainable emerald ring.
> Oh wait, emeralds are a sore spot.


Your comment about WS is interesting. There is something about MM&H's picture that brought Wallis S and Edward to my mind when I saw it. It could be the dress and her posture. She might be imitating WS, we know that originality is not MM's strong suit.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Your comment about WS is interesting. There is something about MM&H's picture that brought Wallis S and Edward to my mind when I saw it. It could be the dress and her posture. She might be imitating WS, we know that originality is not MM's strong suit.





This is Wallis’ photo on wikipedia. WS also coupled up with a confused-looking, scruffy, morally dubious man in a pale suit. Not even subtle.
I see people saying black and white is a Diana reference as well and that makes a lot of sense. Like in most healthy marriages the wife frequently draws comparison to the husband’s mother.

edit: I think the engagement ring she is wearing is actually her emerald from Edward. I don’t like him at all but he did have a great taste with that one. Of course, poor Meg must make do with a pink sapphire


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5005742
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, donned a $4,700 Armani dress as she sat down for the 90-minute CBS exclusive interview


LOLOL playing a victim again while wearing an overpriced designer dress.  You, poor, poor, thing Meg, you poor, poor thing!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> It's really awful and what was Armani thinking with this design?  Looks more like A. R. Mani made in Tijuana.


At least then she’d be supporting local business like the saint she is. 

So funny they span a news story out of a $30 limited run sundress selling out in springtime LA. Next up, “Meghan drinks a coke and it becomes the most popular soda in the world!”


----------



## mellibelly

jelliedfeels said:


> I am not 100 on Lady C but when I read her book she talks a lot about how MM says she was an outsider at Immaculate Heart due to her being biracial but Lady C says the stats she saw for the school at that time said not only was it not majority white at the time but also she was not the only biracial girl in attendance.



Outsider? She was homecoming queen! Poor MM always being marginalized. I say this as a biracial woman myself, though my California high school was public (the horror!).


----------



## mellibelly

Double post


----------



## mellibelly

Sol Ryan said:


> I can’t help it... but these pics make it look like she’s had plastic surgery to turn herself into Jennifer Lawrence circa 2014.... her face shape looks totally different...
> 
> I can‘t stop seeing it...



Saaame. Her face looks so weird now. It's bad LA face. Too much under eye and cheek filler.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I bab


mellibelly said:


> Outsider? She was homecoming queen! Poor MM always being marginalized. I say this as a biracial woman myself, though my California high school was public (the horror!).


 I have to say I was rooting for them at the beginning. I didn’t know that much about them and I just believed she really did feel like the ‘odd one out’ among the royals and Harry and her really did want a private life without the drama. It has become extremely evident that is not the case.
It upsets me that this pair of grifters highjack serious issues like discrimination, bullying and mental illness and just use the conversation to talk about themselves and their ‘brand’.

Edit: added a was and tried to change weird formatting. I’m sorry. I am still new to this forum.


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> Outsider? She was homecoming queen! Poor MM always being marginalized. I say this as a biracial woman myself, though my California high school was public (the horror!).
> 
> I have to say I was rooting for them at the beginning. I didn’t know that much about them and I just believed she really did feel like the “odd one out” among the royals and Harry and her really did want a private life without the drama. It has become extremely evident that is not the case.
> It upsets me that this pair of grifters highjack serious issues like discrimination, bullying and mental illness and just use the conversation to talk about themselves and their “brand”.



Edit: missing was and quote marks


double post.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I bab
> 
> I have to say I rooting for them at the beginning. I didn’t know that much about them and I just believed she really did feel like the odd one out among the royals and Harry and her really did want a private life without the drama. It has become extremely evident that is not the case.
> It upsets me that this pair of grifters highjack serious issues like discrimination, bullying and mental illness and just use the conversation to talk about themselves and their “brand”.


Ditto.  I had never heard about her before reading that she was Haz' girlfriend.  I had no opinion of her, but the romantic in me always loved the idea of royal weddings.  I stayed up late to watch William and Kate's, and I watched Haz and Meg's as well.  I wished them all happiness.  I was a touch "jealous" of Kate and Meg because of their instant access to actual history and historical figures, being a history buff, but not because they were marrying princes.  Any idiot can see you'd immediately be in a fish bowl and face a life of scrutiny, and attention wherever you go.  As an actress, that's likely what she's always dreamed about: paps following her about and being utterly famous.  It's Meg's pathetic actions that have caused me to sour on her, and now on her idiot Haz as well.  It has nothing to do with her being biracial, and I'm tired of them constantly making that their narrative.


----------



## mshermes

Too much filler to appear appear puffy from faux pregnancy? Checking her belly to ensure that Moonbump is in place and the correct size. Personally, I think she has gotten her Moonbump months all mixed up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Throwback to Dec., 1995 - for all who remember Anthony Edwards playing Diana on SNL -
So, who will play MM? H?  Because, yes, these interviews are comedy gold 




ETA:  “Turning Point was a parody of a talk show hosted by Barbara Walters where they interviewed Anthony Edwards as Princess Diana to show her ditsy side while she discussed how she didn’t fit in with the royal family.”
www.onesnladay.com/2019/10/22/december-2-1995-anthony-edwards-foo-fighters-s21-e7/


----------



## elvisfan4life

poopsie said:


> LMAO-----I thought he was talking about his wifey, not his mother




No he is talking about being attacked by the nasty British media being hounded to her death by cameramen and how he had to be a hero and save his equally beautiful and caring wifey from the same fate - unbelievable tosh from the whinging ginge


----------



## byzina

Chanbal said:


> MM says nothing in the staged interview trailer but cradles her bump
> 
> View attachment 5005742
> 
> 
> Meghan, 39, donned a $4,700 Armani dress as she sat down for the 90-minute CBS exclusive interview
> Duchess of Sussex gazed into the host's eyes and placed hands on her baby bump as she answered questions
> The expectant mother says nothing in the trailer, while fielding questions from Oprah about royal life
> Oprah, 67, asks Meghan whether she was 'silent or silenced' - presumably referring to the royals
> Comes just weeks after Meghan and Prince Harry revealed that there were expecting their second child
> gazing into the host's eyes So dramatic



It looks as if a pigeon was flying over the $4,700 Armani dress. 
There is so much contrast between her dramatic look and Oprah's casual day outfit.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Throwback to Dec., 1995 - for all who remember Anthony Edwards playing Diana on SNL -
> So, who will play MM? H?  Because, yes, these interviews are comedy gold
> 
> View attachment 5005817




OMG he NAILED IT! I am literally LOL

Maya Rudolph gets my vote to play MM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> I can’t help it... but these pics make it look like she’s had plastic surgery to turn herself into Jennifer Lawrence circa 2014.... her face shape looks totally different...
> 
> I can‘t stop seeing it...



Haha I thought the same. An older JLaw


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I have to say I was rooting for them at the beginning.



I feel it's safe to say none of us here started out hating her, especially not for racist reasons her stans like to accuse everyone of who doesn't worship the ground she walks on. But then we watched the trainwreck unfold.


----------



## jelliedfeels

C





jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5005784
> 
> This is Wallis’ photo on wikipedia. WS also coupled up with a confused-looking, scruffy, morally dubious man in a pale suit. Not even subtle.
> I see people saying black and white is a Diana reference as well and that makes a lot of sense. Like in most healthy marriages the wife frequently draws comparison to the husband’s mother.
> 
> edit: I think the engagement ring she is wearing is actually her emerald from Edward. I don’t like him at all but he did have a great taste with that one. Of course, poor Meg must make do with a pink sapphire


Come to think of it, bit ironic if they are trying to draw comparisons to Wallis and Edward given they were f*scist sympathisers and everyone knows that’s the real reason he was pushed. (The brits wouldn’t care that much about a royal bride being an American or a divorcee even in the 30’s.)

Maybe it’s a stretch but I think it’s a striking similarity and not her normal style at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe it’s a stretch but I think it’s a striking similarity and not her normal style at all.



That said, what IS her style? She didn't dress like this or wear super heavy m/u and way too long hair pre Harry, did she? (I never watched Suits and only found out about her when they got engaged, so maybe she did...but I thought I'd read here and there about her minimalistic approach) And she for sure didn't have the cash for a new 5000 bucks dress every day. Or millions in jewelry.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel it's safe to say none of us here started out hating her, especially not for racist reasons her stans like to accuse everyone of who doesn't worship the ground she walks on. But then we watched the trainwreck unfold.



Yes definitely. It is a thorny issue because they have hijacked so many issues. 
The thing is, I can see why when people hear that she’s suffered racist abuse they leap to her defence even if they haven’t seen anything themselves. A part of being an ally is believing when a minority tells you something is wrong even if you don’t know or think it yourself. 
However, the thing is any good intentioned system can be abused by a cynical, selfish few and I think it’s obvious to everyone but the stans these two fall into that camp.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tea is what the British call dinner.



Only in working-class households. Officially called high-tea by commentators to distinguish it form 'afternoon tea', it was/is around 6pm because everyone would come in from work very hungry and/or  a night shift. Both versions of 'tea' also include tea drinking. A small hot dish is followed by a sweet plus tea.

Upper-classes including royalty served afternoon tea to bridge the gap between lunch(eon) and dinner (sometimes supper). Very delicate and just used as a pick-me-up actual tea (the beverage) was served as the drink of choice. The convention made a useful tool for socialising when an invitation was in order but the recipient was not quite worthy of a grand dinner. Aspiring middle-class households also took up afternoon tea. Afternoon tea is a couple of tiny sandwiches and very small piece of cake or similar. Dinners were for social engagement, diplomacy and leverage, suppers for after evening's entertainment such as the theatre, parties and balls, on neither occasion was not done to show your appetite.

If any member of the BRF calls their dinner 'tea' it's the equivalent of cultural appropriation and a 'slumming party'. Very bad form.

In any case tea is still served at tea-time. Children of 2 don't normally drink tea.


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> Tea is a way to describe an early dinner, that's probably what he means. It's a common expression in parts of the UK & Ireland.



Common for commoners but not by royalty. Total faux pas. 

They want all the privileges whilst pretending to be 'one of us'


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just wondering about that! Because somehow it always felt wrong to say lunch for our German midday meal because that's when we cook a full meal, while the evening meal is often just breakfast foods (but savory).
> 
> That said, is Harry from up north, or is this *just more pretentiousness* because it sounds cute and exotic and gets people talk?



  It's called class-tourism


----------



## mellibelly

jelliedfeels said:


> It upsets me that this pair of grifters highjack serious issues like discrimination, bullying and mental illness and just use the conversation to talk about themselves and their ‘brand’.



1000% and let's not forget environmentalism. They are masters of nothing, repeating buzzwords like authenticity, vulnerability and sustainability with no education or real work in any of these fields. Their brand is faux woke performative word salad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, what IS her style? She didn't dress like this or wear super heavy m/u and way too long hair pre Harry, did she? (I never watched suits and only found out about her when they got engaged, so maybe she did...but I thought I'd read here and there about her minimalistic approach) And she for sure didn't have the cash for a new 5000 bucks dress every day. Or millions in jewelry.



Even as I was writing it I thought ‘does she even have a style?’
I’d say wallis (awful as she was ) did have a style and was famous at the time for it. She wore a lot of expensive statement jewellery and popularised platinum. She wore a lot of florals, prints, skirt suits, tea dresses and her hair close to her head with a centre part. 

I do not think any of those things are Meg’s look. She is more beige tones, bodycons and those infamous extensions worn long and flappy. (Basically Kim kardashian 5 years ago.) So it is strange to see her wearing something so similar to another ‘royal’ figure especially such a controversial one! 

Oh apart from Diana of course! She likes a subtle nod to her, naturally, because she probably doesn’t want to draw too many people to compare their ‘style’. It needs just enough to send Harry off on another spiral like the ball gown in Rebecca.


----------



## mellibelly

Thank god for this thread! On another celebrity gossip site I used to frequent, starts with the letter C and ends with b*itchy, the MM stans are craaazy!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Doesn’t matter how much she paid for the dress, big mistake. Who _are _her advisors?


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, this is not their house...heaven forbid, they get the details correct from the beginning. Always a mess with them. Omid was wrong!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Only in working-class households. Officially called high-tea by commentators to distinguish it form 'afternoon tea', it was/is around 6pm because everyone would come in from work very hungry and/or  a night shift. Both versions of 'tea' also include tea drinking. A small hot dish is followed by a sweet plus tea.
> 
> Upper-classes including royalty served afternoon tea to bridge the gap between lunch(eon) and dinner (sometimes supper). Very delicate and just used as a pick-me-up actual tea (the beverage) was served as the drink of choice. The convention made a useful tool for socialising when an invitation was in order but the recipient was not quite worthy of a grand dinner. Aspiring middle-class households also took up afternoon tea. Afternoon tea is a couple of tiny sandwiches and very small piece of cake or similar. Dinners were for social engagement, diplomacy and leverage, suppers for after evening's entertainment such as the theatre, parties and balls, on neither occasion was not done to show your appetite.



Thank you, these are the subtle nuances they don't teach you in English class in school!



> If any member of the BRF calls their dinner 'tea' it's the equivalent of cultural appropriation and a 'slumming party'. Very bad form.



*headdesk* It is increasingly uncomfortable to watch.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This OW interview would be their one last shot. After the tell-all TV interview, what else have they got? Another baby isn't interesting enough. I hope Spotify is getting their $30m's worth! 

I don't normally comment on people's appearances but her face looks very odd. Too many cosmetic surgeries and harsh make-up. Not to my taste but to each their own.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t matter how much she paid for the dress, big mistake. Who _are _her advisors?




Why would she pay advisors if she never listens to advice anyway.


----------



## justwatchin

LittleStar88 said:


> Here we go with the sad eyes





LittleStar88 said:


> Here we go with the sad eyes


check out the hand placement...bump cradling has begun


----------



## justwatchin

Maggie Muggins said:


> This inquiring mind wants to know... Is Harry pregnant? His gut is busting out of his shirt and his abdomen is protruding as much as Me-gain's. Also known as Couvade Syndrome or sympathetic pregnancy


Or too many of Meg’s organic waffles from Archie’s Xmas gift from the Queen


----------



## drifter

chicinthecity777 said:


> This OW interview would be their one last shot. After the tell-all TV interview, what else have they got? Another baby isn't interesting enough. I hope Spotify is getting their $30m's worth!
> 
> I don't normally comment on people's appearances but her face looks very odd. Too many cosmetic surgeries and harsh make-up. Not to my taste but to each their own.


yes!!! I think her face looks odd too.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Duke of Edinburgh has just been transferred to St Bartholemews hospital for further tests for a pre existing heart condition.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duke of Edinburgh has just been transferred to St Bartholemews hospital for further tests for a pre existing heart condition.


Really wish him a full and speedy recovery!


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> Really wish him a full and speedy recovery!


So do I


----------



## chicinthecity777

I see that some H&M fan has been throwing shades again. I want to put it on record that I don't hate H&M. "Hate" means that they actually mean anything to me. They don't. They have no relevance to my life, they don't have any impact in any aspect of my life. Hearing about them via media is just a very casual pastime for me when I am bored, such as waiting in a queue at supermarket or waiting for my next zoom call to open. It's like watch car crash TV, like you see a random person's house is having a really bad rat infestation. It's horrible to see but by the end of day, I am not going to lose any sleep over it! They are just entertainment!


----------



## Mendocino

sdkitty said:


> seriously?


I think that was around the time he was playing polo and fell from his pony.  Didn't he break his arm? It was so many years ago so I don't clearly remember.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Harry will never be able to come back to to the UK once that interview airs he has burnt his boats big time - I fear for Philip and hope he will be ok maybe his ill health might derail their pathetic tv drama interview - as for OW respect for her is now in the gutter


----------



## LittleStar88

elvisfan4life said:


> Harry will never be able to come back to to the UK once that interview airs he has burnt his boats big time - I fear for Philip and hope he will be ok maybe his ill health might derail their pathetic tv drama interview - as for OW respect for her is now in the gutter



I know many here won’t watch the interview. I plan to simply because I like to watch a good train wreck. I expect that this little pity party will come off as shallow and pathetic in the current environment. It will be hard for most people to feel sorry for wealthy, privilidged H&M. I don’t think it will elevate their profile in any way.

I don’t blame Oprah for this cash grab. She has no allegiance to anyone but herself and her bank account. This is the US so she has nothing to lose.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this is not their house...heaven forbid, they get the details correct from the beginning. Always a mess with them. Omid was wrong!




Nice to see they aren’t doing any unnecessary travelling during corona. 
Of course, we plebs cannot be allowed to see their actual patio set.


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh apart from Diana of course! She likes a subtle nod to her, naturally, because she probably doesn’t want to draw too many people to compare their ‘style’. It needs just enough to send Harry off *on another spiral like the ball gown in Rebecca*.



LOL! Thank you for this reference to "Rebecca", one of my favorite books as a teen!


----------



## Handbag1234

I’ve seen the trailer. It’s worse than I thought. Let’s hope this the last we see of them. Surprised OW signed up to this. May backfire on her too.


----------



## sdkitty

Mendocino said:


> a
> I think that was around the time he was playing polo and fell from his pony.  Didn't he break his arm? It was so many years ago so I don't clearly remember.


I'm sorry but I feel compelled to go OT on the toothpaste thing.  My mother had a friend who waited on her husband and son  hand and foot, including apparently putting the toothpaste on her husbands toothbrush.  Then at about age 38 she got a job as a bank teller.  Men started paying attention to her.  Next thing you know she's left the husband.  She's dating like crazy - younger men, etc.  They eventually divorced.  I guess she was a very repressed housewife and once she got a taste of freedom that was over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duke of Edinburgh has just been transferred to St Bartholemews hospital for further tests for a pre existing heart condition.



I just read that. I really want him to get well and be there at the Queen's Platinum Jubilee next year.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I see that some H&M fan has been throwing shades again. I want to put it on record that I don't hate H&M. "Hate" means that they actually mean anything to me. They don't. They have no relevance to my life, they don't have any impact in any aspect of my life. Hearing about them via media is just a very casual pastime for me when I am bored, such as waiting in a queue at supermarket or waiting for my next zoom call to open. It's like watch car crash TV, like you see a random person's house is having a really bad rat infestation. It's horrible to see but by the end of day, I am not going to lose any sleep over it! They are just entertainment!



This. We've been stuck at home for a year. You can only watch so much TV, organize your kitchen or read books.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I know many here won’t watch the interview. I plan to simply because I like to watch a good train wreck.



I count on you to keep us posted! I don't even want to not watch to make a point (even though I do feel they will just twist morbid curiosity somehow into "Look how popular we are!"), I just find watching MM on video especially grating.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I count on you to keep us posted! I don't even want to not watch to make a point (even though I do feel they will just twist morbid curiosity somehow into "Look how popular we are!"), I just find watching MM on video especially grating.


they aren't that interesting ....I'm sure we'll get plenty of clips on Entertainment Tonight or whatever


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I count on you to keep us posted! I don't even want to not watch to make a point (even though I do feel they will just twist morbid curiosity somehow into "Look how popular we are!"), I just find watching MM on video especially grating.



Bwahahaha! If I were in my 20’s I’d make it a drinking game.

Every time she touches her stomach, do a shot.
Every time she emotes sadness with her eyes, do a shot.
Every time they mention privacy, philanthropy, service... Do a shot!

I‘d be drunk and on the floor in 15 minutes.

I expect my eyes will be sore from all the eye rolling I’ll be doing.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Bwahahaha! If I were in my 20’s I’d make it a drinking game.
> 
> Every time she touches her stomach, do a shot.
> Every time she emotes sadness with her eyes, do a shot.
> Every time they mention privacy, philanthropy, service... Do a shot!
> 
> I‘d be drunk and on the floor in 15 minutes.
> 
> I expect my eyes will be sore from all the eye rolling I’ll be doing.


the "highlight" of the other TV show was "no one has asked how I'm feeling"....I'm sure there will be some oft shown clip on this one.  what will it be?  She is so sorry she and Kate could not really connect?  they already did the racism thing and the pap  thing.  she can't claim to be sorry about being estranged from her father as he's right there over the border where she could reach out if she wanted to.


----------



## sdkitty

here we go.  H says it was "unbelievably tough" for them....and milks his mom again
First Look: Pregnant Meghan Markle, Prince Harry's Interview with Oprah | PEOPLE.com


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> here we go.  H says it was "unbelievably tough" for them....and milks his mom again
> First Look: Pregnant Meghan Markle, Prince Harry's Interview with Oprah | PEOPLE.com



Give me an effing break.

I would like to know what exactly was “unbelievably tough”. They had buckets of money, access to anything they need to be comfortable, private jets and mansions, organic food, job opportunities to bring them wealth, dad’s bank account.

I really need them to elaborate. Because at their level “hurt feelings” just don’t cut it. Most average people have their feelings hurt on a way more regular basis. 

Was it the move? That was their choice. Many people have to move due to no choice of their own and leave families behind for a better life or just basic survival.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Bwahahaha! If I were in my 20’s I’d make it a drinking game.
> 
> Every time she touches her stomach, do a shot.
> Every time she emotes sadness with her eyes, do a shot.
> Every time they mention privacy, philanthropy, service... Do a shot!
> 
> I‘d be drunk and on the floor in 15 minutes.
> 
> I expect my eyes will be sore from all the eye rolling I’ll be doing.


Guys guys guys ... you are going bananas over the sneak peek at the interview LOL
you need to save some of this awesome energy for 07 March, don’t peak too soon


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Give me an effing break.
> 
> I would like to know what exactly was “unbelievably tough”. They had buckets of money, access to anything they need to be comfortable, private jets and mansions, organic food, job opportunities to bring them wealth, dad’s bank account.
> 
> I really need them to elaborate. Because at their level “hurt feelings” just don’t cut it. Most average people have their feelings hurt on a way more regular basis.
> 
> Was it the move? That was their choice. Many people have to move due to no choice of their own and leave families behind for a better life or just basic survival.


yes, Harry it is unbelievable....quit whining


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Even as I was writing it I thought ‘does she even have a style?’
> I’d say wallis (awful as she was ) did have a style and was famous at the time for it. She wore a lot of expensive statement jewellery and popularised platinum. She wore a lot of florals, prints, skirt suits, tea dresses and her hair close to her head with a centre part.
> 
> I do not think any of those things are Meg’s look. She is more beige tones, bodycons and those infamous extensions worn long and flappy. (Basically Kim kardashian 5 years ago.) So it is strange to see her wearing something so similar to another ‘royal’ figure especially such a controversial one!
> 
> Oh apart from Diana of course! She likes a subtle nod to her, naturally, because she probably doesn’t want to draw too many people to compare their ‘style’. It needs just enough to send Harry off on another spiral like the ball gown in Rebecca.



She changes her “style” the way she changes the causes she supports, she goes with whatever she thinks will get her the most attention in the moment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She changes her “style” the way she changes the causes she supports, she goes with whatever she thinks will get her the most attention in the moment.



But if she isn't careful she'll be one of these tragic women who can't seem to comprehend that they are not 20 anymore, with botched plastic surgery and clothes and hair which are desperately trying to say "But I'm still young!".


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t matter how much she paid for the dress, big mistake. Who _are _her advisors?



LOL - hand on belly


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Thank god for this thread! On another celebrity gossip site I used to frequent, starts with the letter C and ends with b*itchy, the MM stans are craaazy!



I would love to know what kind of things they say. Do they admire how she says one thing but then does another? Do they argue about how much better it is for your unborn baby if you have one hand supporting it at all times? Do they believe she must be a wonderful person because that’s what she tells us she is?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I would love to know what kind of things they say. Do they admire how she says one thing but then does another? Do they argue about how much better it is for your unborn baby if you have one hand supporting it at all times? Do they believe she must be a wonderful person since that’s what she tells us she is?


we used to have some fans here....don't really recall what they liked about her as much as  how mad they were at us for not liking her


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Guys guys guys ... you are going bananas over the sneak peek at the interview LOL
> you need to save some of this awesome energy for 07 March, don’t peak too soon



I haven’t watched the preview yet and I’m already on fire about this $hitshow.

Saving it all up for Sunday night


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> we used to have some fans here....don't really recall what they liked about her as much as  how mad they were at us for not liking her


There are a few around, in the Celeb Style section.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> There are a few around, in the Celeb Style section.


yes I recall seeing one awhile back....I dont usually go there


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> yes I recall seeing one awhile back....*I dont usually go there*


oh I know! I only glanced at it once or twice. I don't need celeb style advice from that!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> we used to have some fans here....don't really recall what they liked about her as much as  how mad they were at us for not liking her



True, I remember one of them liked her look and style. Others were like the US press, as long as she parrots the nice-sounding, inspirational social messages, they give her a pass on her blatant hypocrisy.

But you’re right, most of the ones here were irritated that we don’t like her, even though they didn’t have anything particularly good to say about her.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Bwahahaha! If I were in my 20’s I’d make it a drinking game.
> 
> Every time she touches her stomach, do a shot.
> Every time she emotes sadness with her eyes, do a shot.
> Every time they mention privacy, philanthropy, service... Do a shot!
> 
> I‘d be drunk and on the floor in 15 minutes.
> 
> I expect my eyes will be sore from all the eye rolling I’ll be doing.


I am too old for a drinking game and too many calories ... I need BINGO cards for 07 Mar


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duke of Edinburgh has just been transferred to St Bartholemews hospital for further tests for a pre existing heart condition.


I hope Haz makes time to Zoom him today.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Bwahahaha! If I were in my 20’s I’d make it a drinking game.
> 
> Every time she touches her stomach, do a shot.
> Every time she emotes sadness with her eyes, do a shot.
> Every time they mention privacy, philanthropy, service... Do a shot!
> 
> I‘d be drunk and on the floor in 15 minutes.
> 
> I expect my eyes will be sore from all the eye rolling I’ll be doing.


I think if I actually watched, I'll be drunk in 2!  I predict she'll emote from her new cat eyes and cradle her belly in the first 1.5 minutes!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She changes her “style” the way she changes the causes she supports, she goes with whatever she thinks will get her the most attention in the moment.


Meg changes the cause close to her heart more often than her underwear.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Handbag1234

On a different note. I thought Prince Edward came across really well in a recent interview asking after Prince Philip. Very relaxed and likeable. Edward and Sophie are doing more to support the Queen in senior royal roles now JCMH and MM have left the firm and Prince Andrew had been ‘retired’. The Queen is very fond of Sophie. Sophie keeps under the radar but she does a lot to support the royal family. I will be happy to see more of them and less of JCMH and MM


----------



## youngster

I haven't been posting much in this thread lately mostly because these two just aren't that interesting.  I'm not interested enough to watch the interview with Oprah, though I'll come here to read what you all say about it lol!

Fascinating though, that the Duke and Duchess don't see the irony of giving a sit-down interview when one of their main reasons for leaving the UK was about wanting privacy, which they could have in spades, if they just stopped issuing press releases, making random "surprise" appearances at various Zoom meetings, stopped hauling around a personal photographer for every "volunteering" photo-op or cemetery walk, and giving interviews to Oprah Winfrey.  They could have all the privacy they want, if they actually wanted privacy.

Interesting too, that they seem not to have learned from the infamous documentary, the "nobody asked me if I'm OK" documentary, and are doing another lengthy interview during a MM pregnancy in which they likely will continue complaining about how the UK press and the BRF have mistreated them.  Harry is still pushing the same twaddle in a promo clip: _he needed to make sure history doesn't repeat itself! _ (Despite that MM isn't even remotely likely to step into a vehicle with a drunk driver and race around at breakneck speeds without a seat belt on.) Oprah will almost certainly ask MM if she's OK but certainly _not_ call them out for living in splendor in Santa Barbara with hundreds of millions in Netflix and Spotify deals while they sit and complain about how mean the Queen has been to them. 

So, I don't think this will go well for them if it turns out to be another sad, doe-eyed pity party interview.  There is a pandemic going on. Perhaps they haven't noticed?  I think Harry said at one point that he doesn't pay attention or read the news.  So, here's the executive briefing he would have received if he was still a working royal: many, many people are actually suffering from the virus, suffering from the aftermath of the virus, from job loss, from isolation and loneliness, and have had their lives turned upside down. They don't have staffs, they don't have nannies, they don't have house cleaners and drivers, they don't have 16 toilet mansions in idyllic coastal California, they don't have trust funds or the Prince of Wales to bail them out with millions in yearly allowances to pay for $4,700 dresses.  So, I'd hazard a guess that most people don't want to hear that the Queen doesn't understand them and isn't nice enough to them, and that MM is sad about having her patronage of the National Theater taken away, and that Harry is devastated that he can't be Captain General of the Royal Marines whilst living in California.  Like someone posted previously, they are an SNL skit waiting to happen.  That, I'd _definitely_ watch.


----------



## rose60610

Harry thought the media were "too toxic" for his wife, so it was HIS idea to flee the country? I'm not buying that. He didn't have to work too hard to tear Meghan away from the BRF. Basically saying the British paps were out to kill Meghan is beyond the pale. Notice how he shamelessly takes Diana's death as PROOF that the paps were out for Meghan in the same way. 

I think the media were far meaner to Kate and Camilla. They didn't have the option to flee to a safe space or even think about it. 

Leave it to Oprah to allow M&H to make all kinds of accusations and beg for pity for all their suffering as though no one has it harder than they do. All three will end up looking like idiots. I hope SNL puts on an over the top skit about their "suffering".


----------



## lanasyogamama

I really thought one of the things Megan wanted by coming back to California was to be free to have a more casual style. But she is dressing fussier than she ever did in England.


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> Harry thought the media were "too toxic" for his wife, so it was HIS idea to flee the country? I'm not buying that. He didn't have to work too hard to tear Meghan away from the BRF. Basically saying the British paps were out to kill Meghan is beyond the pale. Notice how he shamelessly takes Diana's death as PROOF that the paps were out for Meghan in the same way.
> 
> I think the media were far meaner to Kate and Camilla. They didn't have the option to flee to a safe space or even think about it.
> 
> Leave it to Oprah to allow M&H to make all kinds of accusations and beg for pity for all their suffering as though no one has it harder than they do. All three will end up looking like idiots. I hope SNL puts on an over the top skit about their "suffering".


MM wasn't nearly as popular as Diana, so Harry being afraid of "history repeating itself" is total bullcrap! 

and don't get me started with those fans wheeling out Prince Andrew every time! If Prince Andrew is the only example you can come up with to be compared with H&M, you already failed to argue your point!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, all 3 look ridiculous. Shameful. 









						Experts accuse Oprah of claiming Queen's 'mafia Don silencing Meghan'
					

Buckingham Palace should be 'scared' after it emerged that the Sussexes' tell-all interview due for broadcast on Sunday night was extended from 90 minutes to two hours.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> and don't get me started with those fans wheeling out Prince Andrew every time! If Prince Andrew is the only example you can come up with to be compared with H&M, you already failed to argue your point!



That's true. When someone has no good defense for their argument that's when you hear "but so-and-so is worse."  Sure, if we compare Meghan to a child predator she is definitely better. It's just a shame the bar has to be set so low for Meghan to come out looking good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looking good ????









						Experts call on CBS to postpone Oprah interview with Harry and Meghan
					

Prince Philip was helped into a waiting ambulance because of 'a pre-existing heart condition' hours after a trailer of the Susssexes' tell-all interview with Oprah.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking good ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Experts call on CBS to postpone Oprah interview with Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Prince Philip was helped into a waiting ambulance because of 'a pre-existing heart condition' hours after a trailer of the Susssexes' tell-all interview with Oprah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006181



I don't see any TV executives delaying an interview they have been hyping for weeks. The only reason they _might_ do it is if Philip died and that would only be to edit it more to make them (and particularly Oprah) seem more sympathetic.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> She changes her “style” the way she changes the causes she supports, she goes with whatever she thinks will get her the most attention in the moment.


Ok, it is an Armani lotus flower dress, to coordinate with garden setting, and there is some story about the lotus , can’t remember that one, I remember only that the Egyptians got high on them ... 

i just cannot get over thinking that the imagery is lost on most folks! Kind of a bit too erudite and esoteric ... 

their stylists are trying too hard 

The blue *lotus* flower (Nymphea caerulea) is an *Egyptian* water lily containing apomorphine and nuciferine. Apomorphine has been described as a psychoactive alkaloid and is a non-selective dopamine agonist primarily used to treat Parkinson's disease as it stimulates dopamine receptors and improves motor function. From Google


----------



## youngster

She's wearing way too much make-up and her face and lips look puffy.  That dress, like someone posted, looks like a pigeon had an accident just overhead.  She has good natural  bone structure so I don't understand why she's gone so overboard with the fillers.


----------



## marietouchet

From DM 

Interview has been extended and is now 2 hrs long ! QEII likened to Don Corleone .....  Cooooool esp.  in light of health of Prince Philip ... 

You cannot invent this ...


----------



## justwatchin

chicinthecity777 said:


> *MM wasn't nearly as popular as Diana, so Harry being afraid of "history repeating itself" is total bullcrap!*


This exactly!


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> From DM
> 
> Interview has been extended and is now 2 hrs long ! QEII likened to Don Corleone .....  Cooooool esp.  in light of health of Prince Philip ...
> 
> You cannot invent this ...



Two hours, did they sell that many more commercials? Odd that CBS waited until March to air it. It would have been better for them to get the ratings during the February sweeps period.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If I understand it, they wanted the interview to overshadow UK’s Commonwealth Day. 
Remember their s$itshow from 2020 -


2021


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Ok, it is an Armani lotus flower dress, to coordinate with garden setting, and there is some story about the lotus , can’t remember that one, I remember only that the Egyptians got high on them ...
> 
> i just cannot get over thinking that the imagery is lost on most folks! Kind of a bit too erudite and esoteric ...
> 
> their stylists are trying too hard
> 
> The blue *lotus* flower (Nymphea caerulea) is an *Egyptian* water lily containing apomorphine and nuciferine. Apomorphine has been described as a psychoactive alkaloid and is a non-selective dopamine agonist primarily used to treat Parkinson's disease as it stimulates dopamine receptors and improves motor function. From Google


They'll probably claim Meg's dress was a subtle nod to Anesthesiologists for being on the front line during COVID.


----------



## purseinsanity

mshermes said:


> Too much filler to appear appear puffy from faux pregnancy? Checking her belly to ensure that Moonbump is in place and the correct size. Personally, I think she has gotten her Moonbump months all mixed up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5005825


She's doing the Khloe Kardashian "Oh, my lips are HUGE because I'm pregnant.  It's not filler, I swear, it's all natural!  Other women can look like $hit during pregnancy, but I only get fat in my rear, my breasts, and my lips" route.


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> "Creative Activations"?  WTH does that mean?
> 
> As usual, Meg is up front and center, even in the picture.  Haz is in the background.


Her and her gawd-awful extensions. Didn't even notice haz-mat.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Interview has been extended and is now 2 hrs long ! QEII likened to Don Corleone .....  Cooooool esp.  in light of health of Prince Philip...



This is laughable.  If The Queen really was like Don Corleone, I think the little problem known as Meg would've been, ahem, "dealt with" a LONG time ago.  You don't go around insulting family and get away with it, at least not in Mafia movies.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I understand it, they wanted the interview to usurp UK’s Commonwealth Day.
> Remember their s$itshow from 2020 -
> View attachment 5006219
> 
> 2021
> 
> View attachment 5006220



But what does Commonwealth Day mean in the US? Nothing. Almost nobody here knows when it is and that includes network execs. I refuse to believe Harry and Meghan got to pick the day the interview aired.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> I think the media were far meaner to Kate and Camilla. They didn't have the option to flee to a safe space or even think about it.



THIS. I just recently rewatched footage of how a young Kate was haunted by the press in a way Meghan has never experienced, a whole bunch of photographers at nighttime blocking her way physically  and DEMANDING she take her hands off her face so they can take a picture, then they'd leave her alone and sh*t like that. They haunted her at her work, they ridiculed her mother. But yeah, Meghan had it harder.


----------



## purseinsanity

From Daily Mail:

The 'Sphinx-like' Duchess of Sussex maintains an 'enigmatic' smile as she speaks to Oprah Winfrey in the first trailer for their bombshell interview in echoes of Princess Diana on Panorama, a body language expert has told MailOnline

LOLOL.  Is that what we are calling the cat eye surgery?  "Sphinx-like"?  And it says she's wearing a "$13000 bracelet that belonged to Diana".  Ugh.  Can you please stop milking your dead MIL that you never met?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> She has good natural  bone structure so I don't understand why she's gone so overboard with the fillers.



She also has gotten plastic surgery since her teens, so I'm not sure the face we are used to is "natural". But yes, the work she'd done before was subtle and made her look great, not like a parody.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> From DM
> 
> Interview has been extended and is now 2 hrs long ! QEII likened to Don Corleone .....  Cooooool esp.  in light of health of Prince Philip ...
> 
> You cannot invent this ...



Honestly, Harry is a POS. We know Meghan has the character of a starved hyena, but this is his very own grandmother who spoiled him rotten for nearly 40 years. WTFFF.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> This is laughable.  If The Queen really was like Don Corleone, I think the little problem known as Meg would've been, ahem, "dealt with" a LONG time ago.  You don't go around insulting family and get away with it, at least not in Mafia movies.


Do you mean something like this?!?


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> LOL! Thank you for this reference to "Rebecca", one of my favorite books as a teen!


I love it too. The classic hitchcock film is great as well. The 2020 remake is cringe inducing.
H&M


marietouchet said:


> Ok, it is an Armani lotus flower dress, to coordinate with garden setting, and there is some story about the lotus , can’t remember that one, I remember only that the Egyptians got high on them ...
> 
> i just cannot get over thinking that the imagery is lost on most folks! Kind of a bit too erudite and esoteric ...
> 
> their stylists are trying too hard
> 
> The blue *lotus* flower (Nymphea caerulea) is an *Egyptian* water lily containing apomorphine and nuciferine. Apomorphine has been described as a psychoactive alkaloid and is a non-selective dopamine agonist primarily used to treat Parkinson's disease as it stimulates dopamine receptors and improves motor function. From Google


In the Odyssey, if you eat a lotus you forget everything about your life and loved ones and just devote yourself to the euphoria of eating lotuses.
Perhaps it is apt imagery.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everything H&M and OW do, wear, say, every single thing is loaded with meaning, significance, careful thought (merching $$$$) -

“The lotus flower's daily resurrection is certainly interesting, and surely symbolic of revival. (This makes it the perfect gift for anyone recovering from injury or a traumatic experience.) But the flower also has a fascinating will to live. A lotus seed can withstand thousands of years without water, able to germinate over two centuries later," according to _Town & Country_.
"With such refusal to accept defeat, it's almost impossible not to associate this flower with unwavering faith. Although cultures have largely dubbed the lotus as a spiritual figurehead, it is most emblematic of the faith within ourselves. It is particularly what the Buddhist proverb, aims to edify; living life with unwavering faith, as the lotus does, ensures the most beautiful revivals."









						Why Meghan Markle Wore Princess Diana's Bracelet for Interview with Oprah Winfrey
					

Meghan Markle wore Princess Diana's bracelet for interview with Oprah Winfrey for a special reason




					people.com
				




ETA:  just my 2 cents, we are still in a pandemic that is mostly affecting the elderly. Throwing shade at H’s grandparents who have shown extraordinary devotion to duty and country over 70+ years, OW looks so desperate. Harry should heed his mother’s advice:










						Royal fans go wild over clip of Princess Diana scolding Prince Harry
					

Fans have gone wild over a resurfaced clip of Princess Diana telling a young Prince Harry to behave himself.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> But what does Commonwealth Day mean in the US? Nothing. Almost nobody here knows when it is and that includes network execs. I refuse to believe Harry and Meghan got to pick the day the interview aired.



To me. born in the USA, CW means that Canada, India, Australia get lots of BRF visits and amazing wardrobes worn by the ladies

As an Anglophile raised by my English granny to speak with an English accent, I did not realize until recently that those countries acknowledge QEII as head of state, nor did I realize CWD is an annual shindig, she never told me ...

But honestly, Harry would have had CWD on his calendar since until 2 weeks ago, he was a CW grand poobah, he could have objected to the date - HE KNEW


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> From Daily Mail:
> 
> The 'Sphinx-like' Duchess of Sussex maintains an 'enigmatic' smile as she speaks to Oprah Winfrey in the first trailer for their bombshell interview in echoes of Princess Diana on Panorama, a body language expert has told MailOnline
> 
> LOLOL.  Is that what we are calling the cat eye surgery?  "Sphinx-like"?  And it says she's wearing a "$13000 bracelet that belonged to Diana".  Ugh.  Can you please stop milking your dead MIL that you never met?


My inner Greek mythology nerd is dying to say the Sphinx devours men if they don’t give her the right answer haha

Yes the way they use Diana and her death for publicity is disgraceful. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Everything H&M and OW do, wear, say, every single thing is loaded with meaning, significance, careful thought (merching $$$$) -
> 
> The lotus flower's daily resurrection is certainly interesting, and surely symbolic of revival. (This makes it the perfect gift for anyone recovering from injury or a traumatic experience.) But the flower also has a fascinating will to live. A lotus seed can withstand thousands of years without water, able to germinate over two centuries later," according to _Town & Country_.
> "With such refusal to accept defeat, it's almost impossible not to associate this flower with unwavering faith. Although cultures have largely dubbed the lotus as a spiritual figurehead, it is most emblematic of the faith within ourselves. It is particularly what the Buddhist proverb, aims to edify; living life with unwavering faith, as the lotus does, ensures the most beautiful revivals."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle Wore Princess Diana's Bracelet for Interview with Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore Princess Diana's bracelet for interview with Oprah Winfrey for a special reason
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Geez Meghan can’t you leave the poor Buddhists out of this? Also this sounds like cultural appropriation to me. Not very woke. Their religion isn’t your accessory.


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting playing the Diana card ...  

Bringing up the implicit family medical problems (bulimia) and daddy's indiscretions - great idea ...

Yes, she was always swamped by press, I will give you that, but she never tried a quiet life in the country, she chose to remain center stage 

Bashir interview was D's worst moment


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> *She's wearing way too much make-up *and her face and lips look puffy.  That dress, like someone posted, looks like a pigeon had an accident just overhead.  She has good natural  bone structure so I don't understand why she's gone so overboard with the fillers.



Someone just reposted a picture from Cringe's wedding day on IG and she was darn proud of her freckles. Her wedding day barely-there look is nothing like this Kartrashian makeup.


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> I love it too. The classic hitchcock film is great as well. The 2020 remake is cringe inducing.



I love the 1940 Hitchcock movie. Laurence Olivier as Max de Winter.  Joan Fontaine as the second Mrs. de Winter.  Amazing cast.  I skipped the Netflix remake because I read it was awful and how were they going to ever improve on Hitchcock and Olivier?   

OK . . . back on topic . . .


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> I see that some H&M fan has been throwing shades again. I want to put it on record that I don't hate H&M. "Hate" means that they actually mean anything to me. They don't. They have no relevance to my life, they don't have any impact in any aspect of my life. Hearing about them via media is just a very casual pastime for me when I am bored, such as waiting in a queue at supermarket or waiting for my next zoom call to open. It's like watch car crash TV, like you see a random person's house is having a really bad rat infestation. It's horrible to see but by the end of day, I am not going to lose any sleep over it! They are just entertainment!



Hear, hear

I don't like the word 'hate', and I don't apply it to people. I don't like MM&H because of their absurd hypocrisy. I also think that their greed is more dangerous than it may appear. 

I have a choice to be either annoyed by them or entertained. I started by being annoyed by their multiple Press releases cluttering the news, but after joining this thread, I have been mostly entertained. Cheers!


----------



## csshopper

This may be a minority view, and I understand, but "postponing the interview" gives it too much importance. Air it and let the world see the pompous narcissists and the puffed up interviewer at their game. There is a reason the Queen is routinely identified as one of the most admired women in the world and "Lady O" as she sometimes is referred to is playing with fire if she tries to besmirch her.

I "get" Oprah's stature in the business and can admire her business acumen, but this is a woman with a huge sense of her own importance, like her interviewee, who had a print magazine with her own name as the oversized masthead for 20 years. In 239 of those 240 issues on every newsstand in America, had herself (once or twice shared with Michelle O and Ellen Degeneres) on the cover (the one off was the September 2020 issue with Breonna Taylor on the cover). The EGO centric magazine was marketed:

*Oprah Magazine - Life Advice, Beauty Tips, Wellness ...*
*O, The Oprah Magazine* is dedicated to helping people live their best lives, delivering you the latest in beauty, wellness, culture, news, and more.

"Life Advice" "helping people live their best lives" .......sound familiar? And it routinely included her (and BFF Gayle's) lists of all the things she deemed we all should be buying. Yes it was successful and some of it was good stuff, but it was all about her. 

However, the preaching has been diluted: the magazine is no longer a monthly print publication, having, according to an industry article on line, dropped from a high subscription rate of 2.7 million to a June 30, 2020 subscription rate of 1.8 million. Note to CBS: Almost 1 million less interested people....

The  self absorbed attraction among the 3 of them seems obvious, can imagine M salivates about the fantasy of what it would have been like to have had her own magazine, all 3 are "preachers" and see themselves as needed to bestow their wisdom and guidance on the rest of us. 

I think, I hope, after the year of Covid and all of the consequences of it emotionally, physically, financially enough people will view this interview through the lens of "who the h--- do these people think they are with the victim bit?- they know nothing about real life" and will be turned off. The numbers change, but in February the US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported 10.1 million Americans unemployed. It hurts to even type this as family is included in the number, there are 525,790 deaths from Covid and the number could have changed since I started typing. 

In this context, the Sussexes' "issues" and Oprah are trivial, except in their own minds. 

If, Prince Phillip does succumb to his infection and his heart problem, rightly or wrongly, they will be linked to it and will have to bear the consequences. Air the interview as planned. 

Finally, one snide remark, for those of you US based who remember this TV show from the 60's, I think MM is morphing into Morticia Addams, matriarch of the Adams family.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> That's true. When someone has no good defense for their argument that's when you hear "but so-an-so is worse."  Sure, if we compare Meghan to a child predator she is definitely better. It's just a shame the bar has to be set so low for Meghan to come out looking good.


100 likes.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She also has gotten plastic surgery since her teens, so I'm not sure the face we are used to is "natural". But yes, the work she'd done before was subtle and made her look great, not like a parody.



Agree that the plastic surgery she had done in her teens/20's was well done.  It enhanced her features greatly. She was average looking prior to the work she had done.  But, at almost 40, she's fallen into the same trap as all these other actresses and reality TV stars.  Puffy faces and puffy lips that don't actually make them look younger.  They just look puffier lol.


----------



## Chanbal

The much awaited Opinion by *PIERS MORGAN: 

It takes a staggering degree of narcissism to play hard-done-by victims from your Californian mansion as the world reels from a pandemic and Prince Philip lies seriously ill in hospital. The only service Meghan and Harry know is self-service*

'I want to be alone,' Greta Garbo famously said in the movie Grand Hotel, 'I just want to be alone.'

The Hollywood actress adopted the same mantra in her own life off screen, with a slight twist, explaining: 'I want to be let alone.'

And she got her wish, mainly because she behaved in a way that enabled almost complete privacy.

The more famous that media-hating Garbo became, and for a while she was the biggest star in the world, the more she retreated from the limelight.

She shunned interviews, stopped attending premieres and awards shows, refused to sign autographs, and didn't even respond to fan mail.

It worked.

She was left alone and enjoyed the privacy she craved.

Compare and contrast Garbo's behaviour with that of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who've also regularly pleaded to be left alone since quitting the Royal Family 14 months ago.

They were sick of the dreadfully intrusive British press, sick of the constraints of royal life, sick of being criticised, and desperate for a new life in America that would free them from their terrible lives.
Above all, they wanted PRIVACY.

Today, they have everything they wished for.

They live in a vast $11 million mansion in Santa Barbara, California.

They are no longer required to perform any royal duties despite retaining their royal titles.

They can lead exactly the lives they want.

They're free!

But it turns out that being left alone is the very last thing Meghan and Harry wanted.

Granted, there were a few weeks after they first fled Britain when they did keep themselves to themselves in Canada as a global pandemic swept the world.

But since then, they've embarked on a relentless media blitz that makes a complete mockery of their claim to want privacy.

Barely a week has gone by without some new announcement from the couple – from their lucrative Spotify podcast and Netflix documentary deals, to endless Zoom interviews and chats, a newspaper op-ed written by Meghan revealing she'd had a miscarriage, and then news of a new baby accompanied by intimate pictures of them lying under the tree of love.

They even invited a photographer to join them as they visited an LA cemetery on Remembrance Sunday after Harry was refused permission to have someone lay a wreath on his behalf in London at the official ceremony.

Amid all this endless self-promotion, they've been engaged in a furious indignant war against news organizations, especially the British press, complaining about intrusion and inaccuracy, and filing lawsuits to protect their privacy.

I've watched all this with increasing disdain and repeatedly ridiculed their obvious double standards and extraordinarily arrogant desire to want to have their privacy cake and eat it as they exploit their royal status for huge financial gain.

It's the same hypocrisy that caused their rift with the British press in the first place.

Right up to their wedding in May 2018, Meghan and Harry enjoyed a fantastically positive press from the same papers they now profess to despise.

The fact a royal Prince was marrying a bi-racial woman was seen as a brilliant thing for the country, and almost universally welcomed by the media and public.

Then came the furore over Meghan's father, and her decision to disown him after he colluded with a photographer to take pictures of him to improve his image.

Imagine how Thomas Markle must feel today when he sees the way his estranged daughter, and the son-in-law he's never met, constantly collude with photographers to improve their own images?

After the wedding, Meghan and Harry decided it was their job to now lecture the rest of us on how to lead our lives.

They banged on about the environment whilst using private jets like taxis.

They preached about poverty whilst throwing $500,00 baby showers in New York.

They took millions in tax-payer cash to refurbish their gifted home Frogmore Cottage, then refused to release even basic details about their son Archie's birth.

And so, it went on.

They kept doing hypocritical stuff that deserved criticism, but when the media duly criticised them, they then accused the media of racist bullying.

Just 18 months after the wedding that sent Britain into a frenzy of joy, fuelled by an ecstatic press, they were gone.

And now we've reached the absolute nadir of this absurd ongoing royal soap opera, the week when everything the Sussexes have claimed to be, and profess to want, has blown up their faces in a a manner so laughably hypocritical that it's almost beyond parody.

First, Harry decided to prove his lust for privacy by giving an interview about his private life on top of an open-top bus in Hollywood to his mate James Corden.

Now don't get me wrong; it was another cracking scoop for Corden, who's been a mate of mine for a lot longer than he's been a mate of Harry's.

But on what planet does the latter think he's on that permits him to continue pleading for privacy when he's spilling his guts about his family on a bus tour of Beverly Hills?

Well, it turns out he's on the same planet as his wife Meghan who also thinks that privacy is a commodity to be traded for self-publicity, fame and financial gain.

Harry's bus confessional was just the hors d'oeuvres for the main 8-course meal this Sunday when the pair of them sit down with chat queen Oprah Winfrey for a mega prime time CBS interview that's apparently so juicy (Oprah says it's the best she's ever done, which should ring alarm bells at Buckingham Palace given how many extraordinarily revealing interviews she has conducted in her long career) it's had to be extended from 90 minutes to two hours.

If the movie-style trailer tease released last night is anything to go by, it could make Princess Diana's infamous BBC interview look like a tea party.

Oprah promises 'shocking' revelations, says 'no subject was off limits, and tells the couple they've said, 'some pretty shocking things.'

Meghan, wearing a $4,700 black Armani dress, says nothing, and is only seen either cradling her baby bump or holding on to her husband's hand in the garden of their luxury home.

'It sounds like there was a breaking point,' Oprah asks her. 'Were you silent or were you silenced?'

We'll hear the answers on Sunday, but we can already have a good guess at them because during his bus chat, Harry blamed the 'toxic' British press for the decision to quit Britain and the royals, and in the Oprah tease, he says it was to avoid Meghan ending up the same way as his mother.

Of course, he's said all this many times before, and there will be many who have sympathy with a man who as a young boy had to walk behind his mum's coffin after she was killed in a car crash.

For what it's worth, I do too. No kid should ever have been made to go through that, and I speak as someone who attended his own father's funeral aged one.

But it was 24 years ago now, and Harry's belief that the press killed Diana on that fateful night in Paris ignores the fact it was in fact a speeding drunk driver.

Yes, she was being chased by paparazzi, as she always was, but Diana played the media game hard and fast when it suited her, as I can attest from numerous personal experiences of her colluding directly with me, when I was a newspaper editor, on stories and photos.

I now see the same contradictory trait in Meghan and Harry – a furious pretence that they hate media attention, but a constant willingness to use the media when it suits them.

At the heart of the debate over them lies two things: 1) why, if they really want freedom from the royals, do they still use their titles to promote their brand and make millions? 2) why, if they truly want privacy, are they now doing all these huge TV interviews, dishing the dirt on their families?

Even now, the usual suspects will be screaming at me to 'LEAVE THEM ALONE!'

But whether you love or hate them, surely we have passed the stage of thinking they have any wish to be left alone?

In a new updated cover note to their charity foundation, they declare: 'Welcome to Archewell. Through our non-profit work, as well as creative activations, we drive systemic cultural change across all communities, one act of compassion at a time.'

This all sounds great until you remember this a couple who've been at bitter compassion-devoid war with both their own families for years.

We'll hear a lot more of this cheesy guff on Sunday.

Meghan will clutch her bump and cry about the awful intrusion into their lives.

Harry's lip will tremble as he rages against the negative media.

And they'll do all this whilst using the biggest media platform in the world to intrude into their own lives and be negative about everyone they blame for their current life of duty-devoid luxury in America.

In the most jarring part of the Oprah tease, Harry says 'it's been unbelievably tough for the two of us but at least we have each other.'

It really does take a staggering degree of self-wallowing narcissism to say those words after a year in which 2.5 million people have died in a global pandemic and tens of millions have lost their jobs and are suffering horrific financial hardship.

To say them from the gloriously safe luxury of a Californian millionaire row, as the glorious year-round sun beats down on you and your family while you bank gazillions trading off your royal status, is the most tone-deaf load of entitled garbage since Marie Antoinette was told that starving French citizens had no bread and sneered: 'Let them eat cake!'

And to do all this as Harry's grandfather, Prince Philip, lies seriously ill in a London hospital is frankly outrageous.

But what more should we expect from a couple who recently tried to lecture the Queen on 'service'?

The only service these two self-obsessed, rankly hypocritical, professional victims know is self-service.

Piers on the Hypocrites


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> To me. born in the USA, CW means that Canada, India, Australia get lots of BRF visits and amazing wardrobes worn by the ladies
> 
> As an Anglophile raised by my English granny to speak with an English accent, I did not realize until recently that those countries acknowledge QEII as head of state, nor did I realize CWD is an annual shindig, she never told me ...
> 
> But honestly, Harry would have had CWD on his calendar since until 2 weeks ago, he was a CW grand poobah, he could have objected to the date - HE KNEW



I can’t stand commonwealth day because I think it completely whitewashes Britain’s colonial past. I also think it’s tacky that they are trying to overshadow one of the only royal events which celebrates the other countries of the royal dominion. 

Again with the lotus symbolism, I’m not sure how Buddhist wearing a 4K dress and a diamond bracelet is


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t stand commonwealth day because I think it completely whitewashes Britain’s colonial past. I also think it’s tacky that they are trying to overshadow one of the only royal events which celebrates the other countries of the royal dominion.
> 
> Again with the lotus symbolism, I’m not sure how Buddhist wearing a 4K dress and a diamond bracelet is


Well, now through Archewell, and their creative activations, they will drive systemic cultural change across all *religions*.



^ I just vomited a little in my mouth repeating such drivel.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> But honestly, Harry would have had CWD on his calendar since until 2 weeks ago, he was a CW grand poobah, he could have objected to the date - HE KNEW



Is Harry allowed to object to anything? Meghan handles all the publicity and sets up the business deals. It's obvious he shows up when and where he's told to be.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Is Harry allowed to object to anything? Meghan handles all the publicity and sets up the business deals. It's obvious he shows up when and where he's told to be.


Give him a break.  He's just being a dutiful man-bot.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Give him a break.  He's just being a dutiful man-bot.



Now that's something nice I can say about Meghan. She has incomparable husband-training skills. He is obedient and never voices a contradictory opinion.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder, given she's channelling Diana, will we get a "well, there were three of us in this marriage" type of quote?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, all 3 look ridiculous. Shameful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Experts accuse Oprah of claiming Queen's 'mafia Don silencing Meghan'
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace should be 'scared' after it emerged that the Sussexes' tell-all interview due for broadcast on Sunday night was extended from 90 minutes to two hours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I find Oprah's question "_Were you silent or were you silenced?_" incredibly disturbing. It gives the terrible impression that MM was a hostage in the hands of the BRF. This is too vulgar for my stomach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I find Oprah's question "_Were you silent or were you silenced?_" incredibly disturbing. It gives the terrible impression that MM was a hostage in the hands of the BRF. This is too vulgar for my stomach.



OW has turned a corner in her dotage.
Either because her companies are failing or she has dementia [as so many are falsely accused of] or she is in touch with her true self or something else. In any case, *this* disturbing interview is not what made her a billionaire. It will not help H&M either.
 Shameful. Just shameful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

They also look like they’re dressed for different seasons/occasions. He looks like he going to a summer party and she’s dressed for a funeral.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Now that's something nice I can say about Meghan. She has incomparable husband-training skills. He is obedient and never voices a contradictory opinion.


Would this explain your observations?


----------



## 1LV

I don’t think the upcoming interview will be interesting, and I don’t plan to watch it, but I’ll tell you one I think would be interesting.  I’d watch Piers Morgan interview Oprah about JCMH & MM.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW has turned a corner in her dotage.
> Either because her companies are failing or she has dementia [as so many are falsely accused of] or she is in touch with her true self or something else. In any case, *this* disturbing interview is not what made her a billionaire. It will not help H&M either.
> Shameful. Just shameful.


If the interview is going to be in line with the trailer, it will be a disaster for MM&H. For Oprah, it doesn't matter much, she is at the end of her career and already made her billions. Though, it's possible that they put out a dramatic trailer just to increase the audience, and MM will keep her lips sealed about the BRF for most of the time. MM&H want to profit more from the BRF, so they will likely focus their attacks on journalists and tabloids in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the People article:



> When designing her ring, Harry took two stones from his late mother's bracelet to include in Meghan's three-stone ring. The couple wanted Meghan, who is expecting her second child, to wear the bracelet during the interview so Diana could be with them, PEOPLE has learned.



I had always been under the impression these were loose stones Diana happened to have. Taking random stones out of an existing, not broken item of jewelry strikes me as weird, but what do I know. But anyway, onto the "so Diana could be with them". I don't know what's worse, Harry who very obviously needs lots, lots, LOTS of therapy (and who seems to completely ignore the fact that everyone who knew Diana says she would have been apalled by his behaviour) or Meghan who goes along with this sh*t. If he ends up completely losing his marbles she will have her part in it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t stand commonwealth day because I think it completely whitewashes Britain’s colonial past. But I also think it’s tacky that they are trying to overshadow one of the only royal events which celebrates  the other countries outside of the peninsula.
> 
> Again with the lotus symbolism, I’m not sure how Buddhist wearing a 4K dress and a diamond bracelet is



Edited for  clarity


----------



## lanasyogamama

You can tell MM is seething by her face.  She would be so much more successful if she had a friendly, positive energy.


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan just left her face alone for the last year she'd look far more beautiful than her current odd look. It is not flattering. I doubt her smart phone facial recognition feature recognizes her so she has to press her digital code to turn it on.


----------



## poopsie

It turns out that the Sparkles aren't the only ones with a growing family. 
This morning I looked out my kitchen window across my carport and into the neighbors patio and saw THIS!!!!!!!!


----------



## bellecate

For me these two have slipped from being increasingly annoying into slimey snakeskin hucksters. They will throw anybody under the bus to make a buck. Disgraceful.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the People article:
> 
> 
> 
> I had always been under the impression these were loose stones Diana happened to have. Taking random stones out of an existing, not broken item of jewelry strikes me as weird, but what do I know. But anyway, onto the "so Diana could be with them". I don't know what's worse, Harry who very obviously needs lots, lots, LOTS of therapy (and who seems to completely ignore the fact that everyone who knew Diana says she would have been apalled by his behaviour) or Meghan who goes along with this sh*t. If he ends up completely losing his marbles she will have her part in it.


Hmmm lest we forget MM had her wedding ring redone ... I doubt she would feel the sentimental compunction of keeping Diana’s mementoes intact


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t matter how much she paid for the dress, big mistake. Who _are _her advisors?



.. yes, and what they didn't mention is her *over $2500* necklace by Pippa Small!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> You can tell MM is seething by her face.  She would be so much more successful if she had a friendly, positive energy.


I also think that she would benefit from having a friendly and positive energy. It will be terrible for them if she keeps that victim face ...


----------



## TimeToShop

rose60610 said:


> Harry looks terrible. Not that anyone expected anything less. Unbuttoned shirt, belly bulge gap, nervous stiff posture, it's painful to watch. Especially Meghan's overfilled face. Only the hard core stans would like this.



The way his shirt is - makes him look like he has boobs. Definite dad bod, not that that’s a bad thing. His shoes - scuffed and the soles are so worn. His socks are falling down. Obviously the clothing budget went to her bird poo dress.

Did they not have anyone on set to help him?


----------



## youngster

Even these two dim bulbs have to realize that attacking the 94 year old and very popular Queen, 99 year old Prince Philip (in the hospital no less), and even Prince Charles is not wise.  So, I think they will mostly focus their inflammatory comments on the anonymous "suits" in the Palace and the evil press. No one will be named specifically, just lots of discussion with Oprah about all the terrible hostility they endured at the hands of anonymous staffers and the tabloid press. This would be incredibly easy for them to do with few ramifications, other than burning Harry's last remaining bridges to his family which MM doesn't care at all about. So, they can say whatever they want about the "Palace staff" and the "tabloid press" being mean and hostile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> It turns out that the Sparkles aren't the only ones with a growing family.
> This morning I looked out my kitchen window across my carport and into the neighbors patio and saw THIS!!!!!!!!
> View attachment 5006401


Is this a bird's nest with eggs? I don't want to sound rude, but it was easier to see the bump on Misan Harriman's picture of the Sparkles.


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Guys guys guys ... you are going bananas over the sneak peek at the interview LOL
> you need to save some of this awesome energy for 07 March, don’t peak too soon


I'm HOPING that I will be enjoying my Birthday dinner and (hopefully) a HUGE Piece of German Chocolate cake!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Comparison pictures, anyone?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Definitely requested the JLaw 2014 








						Jennifer Lawrence's Platinum Blonde Hair Is Even Brighter Than Before, & It's Stunning — PHOTO
					

Tis the season for celebrity hair transformations! Between Kristen Stewart dying her hair platinum blonde, Emma Roberts debuting rose gold locks, and now another starlet with a new 'do, I can barely keep up with the constant change-ups of…




					www.bustle.com


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder, given she's channelling Diana, will we get a "well, there were three of us in this marriage" type of quote?



What could she possibly say that would elicit such sympathy? It's easy to empathize with someone whose spouse was a cheater. It's harder when the person whining has never endured hardship beyond the tabloids weren't always nice. Boo hoo!


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan just left her face alone for the last year she'd look far more beautiful than her current odd look. It is not flattering. I doubt her smart phone facial recognition feature recognizes her so she has to press her digital code to turn it on.


The first surgeries improved her looks a lot. Though, a big problem of plastic surgery is that people often don't  know when to stop, plastic surgery addiction.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One year ago:


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Is this a bird's nest with eggs? I don't want to sound rude, but it was easier to see the bump on Misan Harriman's picture of the Sparkles.




LOL

It's Mama Hummingbird on her nest
Their nests are about the size of a half dollar. I didn't want to disturb her so I had to use zoom and it fuzzes things up a bit


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Comparison pictures, anyone?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006457


You're right!

I do think she might be pregnant this time.  Big boobs, fuller face.  Last time all she had was a moon bump and no other signs.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Comparison pictures, anyone?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006457


His somber face didn't change much.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> One year ago:
> View attachment 5006482
> View attachment 5006484


Where is @sdkitty? She loves this green dress.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> .. yes, and what they didn't mention is her *over $2500* necklace by Pippa Small!



I was really admiring that necklace.


----------



## lanasyogamama

DM cracks me up


----------



## CarryOn2020

*This.*
This is why she is The Queen.  It’s called grace, charm, dignity.
Wears pink with the Pearl Trefoil, giggles, bye.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The new clown car?




lanasyogamama said:


> DM cracks me up
> View attachment 5006495
> View attachment 5006496


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> Comparison pictures, anyone?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006457


I see her hand-clutching has not changed one bit .. gee, afraid he might just RUN away Meghan???


----------



## Lodpah

The sad is when Prince Philip and her father pass away they will make it about them.


----------



## madamelizaking

lanasyogamama said:


> DM cracks me up
> View attachment 5006495
> View attachment 5006496


Lookie Lookie. Backgrid. Her favorite agency to call when she's in need of attention.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> I was really admiring that necklace.


I used to like her work way back in the day given its very organic nature.  What I really *HATE* about her work is the prices; it is *RIDICULOUSLY *expensive for the very simple design and it's not like she uses the finest gemstones!  Even when she uses Diamonds, they are foiled-back slices (_very common in Indian jewelry_) and/or Herkimer "diamonds" (which in fact are not diamonds at all).  She used to use 22k but is now (like many others) using 18k or vermeil .. yet, the prices are still TOO HIGH!  I know the gal who works in her store at the Brentwood Country Mart and as she is a jeweler herself, she agrees that the prices are too high .. but you know when you start dressing the "stars", you get the 'brand name' and thus .. $$$$$!


----------



## CeeJay

madamelizaking said:


> Lookie lookie...
> 
> View attachment 5006510


Likely an HSE (Turbo) .. minimum $$$ = $65k +++


----------



## EverSoElusive

No offence to anyone but there are many similar necklaces on Etsy that look like Pippa Small's necklace. They look just as cute, except they aren't clad in pure gold


----------



## madamelizaking

CeeJay said:


> Likely an HSE (Turbo) .. minimum $$$ = $65k +++


More like 92k starting. That's not the sport edition. Not that it matters, they have the funds. I'm just shocked that it's not at least a hybrid. Well, not really, they are hypocrites.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely requested the JLaw 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Lawrence's Platinum Blonde Hair Is Even Brighter Than Before, & It's Stunning — PHOTO
> 
> 
> Tis the season for celebrity hair transformations! Between Kristen Stewart dying her hair platinum blonde, Emma Roberts debuting rose gold locks, and now another starlet with a new 'do, I can barely keep up with the constant change-ups of…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006475



Jennifer Lawrence was around, what, 22 or so then?   I guess that's what all the fillers are for, trying to capture that look. It doesn't make a 40 year old look 22 though.


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> No offence to anyone but there are many similar necklaces on Etsy that look like Pippa Small's necklace. They look just as cute, except they aren't clad in pure gold


I know for a fact that Pippa has "outfitted" Meghan before with her jewelry (it was 'supposedly' gifted to her by Prince Charles but I'm not buying that as it's doubtful that he would even know about Pippa's work).  Besides, why would Meghan NOT wear high-priced jewels to go with her high-priced dress and high-priced Diana tennis bracelet???


----------



## CeeJay

madamelizaking said:


> More like 92k starting. That's not the sport edition. Not that it matters, they have the funds. I'm just shocked that it's not at least a hybrid. Well, not really, they are hypocrites.


WHOA .. $92k now???  I had quite a few Range Rovers (_the husband had an '82 Series II or III - can never remember_), BUT .. we lived in Boston and my "territory" was all of New England, so I DID need a very sturdy car for the winter snowstorms.  Out here in sunny CA? .. yeah, maybe for some off-roading, but other than that .. they just GUZZLE a LOT of Gas!


----------



## Lounorada

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear, first rumblings about interview ....  does not sound like BP will be pleased ... were you silent or were you silenced ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Tells Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'You've Said Shocking Things Here' in Sit-Down
> 
> 
> "Were you silent or were you silenced?" Oprah Winfrey asks the Duchess of Sussex during <em>Oprah with Meghan and Harry: A CBS Primetime Special</em>, airing on March 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com








Chanbal said:


> Ginge's statement on Diana:"_You know, for me, I'm just really relieved and happy to be sitting here, talking to you with my wife by my side because I can't begin to imagine what it must've been like for her going through this process by herself all those years ago,_" is  Diana was loved and MM is disliked, it's not the same. It looks like MM is about to shed tears (crocodile tears)!





Is he seriously comparing this sh*tshow that he and his wIfE created themselves to what his mother went through?
It really is beyond creepy that they use what happened to Diana as a way to gain sympathy, attention and admiration to further their quest for world domination or whatever twisted ideas they they have for themselves.




CarryOn2020 said:


> So grateful for W&K.
> They do their jobs with love, kindness, professionalism, style and panache.
> Sometimes it is difficult to believe William and Harry have the same parents, same grandparents, same aunts, uncles, etc.


And we only hear about and see them when they are doing their work. Otherwise they are living their lives privately and working behind the scenes. Imagine, it can be done!



Aimee3 said:


> I don’t know that MM had the fox eye surgery/stitch because her eyes don’t look like they have an upward tilt to me in those photos.  She used to have large eyes, now her eyes just look like slits.





Sol Ryan said:


> I can’t help it... but these pics make it look like she’s had plastic surgery to turn herself into Jennifer Lawrence circa 2014.... her face shape looks totally different...
> 
> I can‘t stop seeing it...


I'm guessing she's using fillers and lots of them. She now has that look that a lot of celebs do who use them, the puffy/rounded face, the smaller sunken eyes, generally looking like their face hurts.



lanasyogamama said:


> MM looks angry.


And really uncomfortable. Must be trying so hard to remember her rehearsed word-salad-pity-me answers.



gracekelly said:


> It's really awful and what was Armani thinking with this design?  Looks more like A. R. Mani made in Tijuana.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CeeJay said:


> I know for a fact that Pippa has "outfitted" Meghan before with her jewelry (it was 'supposedly' gifted to her by Prince Charles but I'm not buying that as it's doubtful that he would even know about Pippa's work).  Besides, why would Meghan NOT wear high-priced jewels to go with her high-priced dress and high-priced Diana tennis bracelet???



I agree, Meghan will never go cheap  My prior post about similar necklaces was just in case someone wanted to find an affordable dupe. Here's one if anyone's interested: Etsy listing


----------



## carmen56

I’m certain that the Oprah interview will backfire on H and M hugely.


----------



## Chanbal

The circus is coming to town!  The performers are driving around before the big night! 

*Prince Harry and Meghan drive themselves around Santa Barbara with her mother Doria after opening up to Oprah about their 'unbelievably tough' exit from 'un-survivable' royal life*

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were pictured driving their Range Rover in Santa Barbara on Sunday afternoon, ahead of the release of two teaser clips from their upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey *
*Meghan's mother Doria Ragland was seated behind her daughter, who wore a wide-brimmed sun hat and a pair of sunglasses for the outing *
*Harry, 36, who was driving the car, was also wearing a pair of dark sunglasses, along with a pale polo shirt *
*Both he and 39-year-old Meghan, who is pregnant with their second child, wore very subdued expressions*
*Shortly after the couple were photographed in the exclusive images, two short clips from their Oprah sit-down were shared online, offering a glimpse into the sensitive topics that they will discuss  *
*Circus in Town*


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The circus is coming to town!  The performers are driving around before the big night!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan drive themselves around Santa Barbara with her mother Doria after opening up to Oprah about their 'unbelievably tough' exit from 'un-survivable' royal life*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were pictured driving their Range Rover in Santa Barbara on Sunday afternoon, ahead of the release of two teaser clips from their upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey *
> *Meghan's mother Doria Ragland was seated behind her daughter, who wore a wide-brimmed sun hat and a pair of sunglasses for the outing *
> *Harry, 36, who was driving the car, was also wearing a pair of dark sunglasses, along with a pale polo shirt *
> *Both he and 39-year-old Meghan, who is pregnant with their second child, wore very subdued expressions*
> *Shortly after the couple were photographed in the exclusive images, two short clips from their Oprah sit-down were shared online, offering a glimpse into the sensitive topics that they will discuss *
> *Royal experts have warned Buckingham Palace to 'hide behind the sofa' when the interview is broadcast  *
> *At one point, Harry speaks to Oprah about his late mother Princess Diana's death, explaining that his 'biggest fear was history repeating itself', and that is why he decided to quit royal life and move to the US *
> *Meghan was not seen speaking in the clips, however Oprah probed her over whether she was 'silenced' by the palace, and made reference to a comment made by the Duchess about her 'un-survivable' situation *
> *The interview, which airs on CBS on March 7 at 8PM ET, was extended from 90 minutes to two hours it was revealed on Sunday - likely so the couple can discuss Megxit, which was finalized after their initial shoot*
> *Circus in Town*
> 
> View attachment 5006552


Did Harry get a CA drivers's license?  I believe the rule is that if you have moved here, you have 30 days to do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> WHOA .. $92k now???  I had quite a few Range Rovers (_the husband had an '82 Series II or III - can never remember_), BUT .. we lived in Boston and my "territory" was all of New England, so I DID need a very sturdy car for the winter snowstorms.  Out here in sunny CA? .. yeah, maybe for some off-roading, but other than that .. *they just GUZZLE a LOT of Gas!*



And have you checked the price of gas in our little corner of the world?
The cheapo stations here have had premium pushing $4 a gallon


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Where is @sdkitty? She loves this green dress.


yes, if I was bulemic it would be helpful


----------



## gracekelly

Calling the paps to show off the car?  Merching that too for a local dealer?  Next thing will be merching the baby seat.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new clown car?


haha, I just posted about the 'circus comes to town' before seeing this. 
It came to my mind when performers used to walk around the town before their big night.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> DM cracks me up
> View attachment 5006495
> View attachment 5006496


that "unsurvivable" comment is gonna come back to bite him big time I think.  People are out of work and some are literally hungry.  what a ridiculous and disgusting thing for a super privileged man-boy to say


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder, given she's channelling Diana, will we get a "well, there were three of us in this marriage" type of quote?


LOLOL, the three being "Me, Myself, and I".  Oh, and Haz flitting in the background


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> haha, I just posted about the 'circus comes to town' before seeing this.
> It came to my mind when performers used to walk around the town before their big night.



Great minds here  Love love the fun we have here!

The clown car — they most definitely did not pay for it. Ya kno, ‘us royals’ get freeee stuff.

The jewelry — MM can spend all she wants. Nothing she wears will ever look like QE’s, the lady with jewels. 
Today’s choice - the Pearl Trefoil, but of course.








						The Pearl Trefoil Brooch
					

The Pearl Trefoil Brooch   The Pearl Trefoil Brooch has three top loops which mimic the three-fold trefoil design present in architecture,...




					queensjewelvault.blogspot.com


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> You can tell MM is seething by her face.  She would be so much more successful if she had a friendly, positive energy.


One can only hide their true personality for so long before the ugliness boils out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*The look of Love!* 
(to quote @sdkitty: gawd)



Chanbal said:


>


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great minds here  Love love the fun we have here!
> 
> The clown car — they most definitely did not pay for it. Ya kno, ‘us royals’ get freeee stuff.
> 
> The jewelry — MM can spend all she wants. Nothing she wears will ever look like QE’s, the lady with jewels.
> Today’s choice - the Pearl Trefoil, but of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Pearl Trefoil Brooch
> 
> 
> The Pearl Trefoil Brooch   The Pearl Trefoil Brooch has three top loops which mimic the three-fold trefoil design present in architecture,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> queensjewelvault.blogspot.com


She looked lovely in pink with the brooch and pearls.  Simple and elegant as always.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Comparison pictures, anyone?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006457


Her eyes look so much smaller.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> One can only hide their true personality for so long before the ugliness boils out.


This is so true and when I look at pix of Kate smiling, it looks real and not forced.  I will never get over  the smile plastered on Meghan's face at the Commonwealth Service, out of my mind.  I don't know how she kept it up without her face cracking.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> DM cracks me up
> View attachment 5006495
> View attachment 5006496


Why is she wearing that big hat inside the car?  Is it an attention grabber?  They need ensure a big audience!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Her eyes look so much smaller.


Too much cheek filler pushing her lower lids up?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The look of Love!*
> (to quote @sdkitty: gawd)


If you know the pap is taking your picture, look animated.  They look like they are going to a funeral or the accountant.  Going to the accountant may actually be like going to a funeral.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The circus is coming to town!  The performers are driving around before the big night!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan drive themselves around Santa Barbara with her mother Doria after opening up to Oprah about their 'unbelievably tough' exit from 'un-survivable' royal life*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were pictured driving their Range Rover in Santa Barbara on Sunday afternoon, ahead of the release of two teaser clips from their upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey *
> *Meghan's mother Doria Ragland was seated behind her daughter, who wore a wide-brimmed sun hat and a pair of sunglasses for the outing *
> *Harry, 36, who was driving the car, was also wearing a pair of dark sunglasses, along with a pale polo shirt *
> *Both he and 39-year-old Meghan, who is pregnant with their second child, wore very subdued expressions*
> *Shortly after the couple were photographed in the exclusive images, two short clips from their Oprah sit-down were shared online, offering a glimpse into the sensitive topics that they will discuss  *
> *Circus in Town*
> 
> View attachment 5006552


What ???? TWO teaser clips ...where is the second ?


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> DM cracks me up
> View attachment 5006495
> View attachment 5006496


PLEASE everyone, don't misconstrue this as actually defending them, but this is silly.  If you took a random picture of DH and I driving, we might look like we hate each other


----------



## LittleStar88

purseinsanity said:


> PLEASE everyone, don't misconstrue this as actually defending them, but this is silly.  If you took a random picture of DH and I driving, we might look like we hate each other



Hahaha! Same! If DH is driving, I’m not liking how he’s driving. If I’m driving, I’m not liking how other people are driving.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> PLEASE everyone, don't misconstrue this as actually defending them, but this is silly.  If you took a random picture of DH and I driving, we might look like we hate each other



No chances of a random picture here, I bet they kept those somber faces during the entire trip.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> This is so true and when I look at pix of Kate smiling, it looks real and not forced.  I will never get over  the smile plastered on Meghan's face at the Commonwealth Service, out of my mind.  I don't know how she kept it up without her face cracking.


Her creepy smile that day always reminded me of "the cat that swallowed the canary" sort of smug grin.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> I used to like her work way back in the day given its very organic nature.  What I really *HATE* about her work is the prices; it is *RIDICULOUSLY *expensive for the very simple design and it's not like she uses the finest gemstones!  Even when she uses Diamonds, they are foiled-back slices (_very common in Indian jewelry_) and/or Herkimer "diamonds" (which in fact are not diamonds at all).  She used to use 22k but is now (like many others) using 18k or vermeil .. yet, the prices are still TOO HIGH!  I know the gal who works in her store at the Brentwood Country Mart and as she is a jeweler herself, she agrees that the prices are too high .. but you know when you start dressing the "stars", you get the 'brand name' and thus .. $$$$$!


You're the one who convinced me not to buy her stuff.  I really liked it and thought I might splurge, but after reading what you described, I never purchased anything!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> If you know the pap is taking your picture, look animated.  They look like they are going to a funeral or the accountant.  Going to the accountant may actually be like going to a funeral.


This promotional drive was done on Sunday, so the accountant might be out of the picture. Though, they are still mourning the loss of their Patronages and H's titles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> PLEASE everyone, don't misconstrue this as actually defending them, but this is silly.  If you took a random picture of DH and I driving, we might look like we hate each other


I’d be looking down at my phone!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> PLEASE everyone, don't misconstrue this as actually defending them, but this is silly.  If you took a random picture of DH and I driving, we might look like we hate each other



I know I know, it is so easy to forget :: ’we’ are not ‘they’ :: 
They opened this flood gate. No sympathy. 
[my husband has just been ‘talked to’ about our driving faces. It’s a risky move because he has a vicious sense of humor.]


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *This promotion drive *was done on Sunday, so the accountant might be out of the picture. Though, they are still mourning the loss of their Patronages and H's titles.



I’m dying here


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> If you know the pap is taking your picture, look animated.  They look like they are going to a funeral or the accountant.  Going to the accountant may actually be like going to a funeral.


but they're not supposed to know, right?


----------



## mshermes

So they are out for a nice leisurely drive with Doria.....where’s Archie? Poor kid.


----------



## sdkitty

now they are claiming to drive systematic change.....what huge egos they have
And they took the mom photos off their site
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Edit Archewell Website to Remove Personal Childhood Photos (yahoo.com)


----------



## CarryOn2020

“oh dear, this looks bad. Say something, William.”   
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
   We’re thinking of ya, mate.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> I used to like her work way back in the day given its very organic nature.  What I really *HATE* about her work is the prices; it is *RIDICULOUSLY *expensive for the very simple design and it's not like she uses the finest gemstones!  Even when she uses Diamonds, they are foiled-back slices (_very common in Indian jewelry_) and/or Herkimer "diamonds" (which in fact are not diamonds at all).  She used to use 22k but is now (like many others) using 18k or vermeil .. yet, the prices are still TOO HIGH!  I know the gal who works in her store at the Brentwood Country Mart and as she is a jeweler herself, she agrees that the prices are too high .. but you know when you start dressing the "stars", you get the 'brand name' and thus .. $$$$$!



I made the mistake of browsing some of the threads over in the jewelry forum and boy was that a mistake. Someone posted a photo of their Temple St Clair and it was so lovely I was smitten. I was on fire to get some for myself until I saw the prices for what it was. This piece reminded me of TSC.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This promotional drive was done on Sunday, so the accountant might be out of the picture. Though, they are still mourning the loss of their Patronages and H's titles.


Hmm.. entirely possible that the accountant opened the office for them, to maintain privacy you know.  They ARE very PRIVATE people.  They wouldn't have to deal with any plebes in the waiting room or the staff.  The accountant offered to go to their home for the tax interview, but they didn't want to give out the address of where they are living because the accountant might have a body cam and take picture of Archie, or the empty rooms and busted toilet in the powder room.  They told the accountant that they were remodeling the house as their excuse..............the question is which house and where is it really.......


----------



## gracekelly

mshermes said:


> So they are out for a nice leisurely drive with Doria.....where’s Archie? Poor kid.


They sent the doll back to the factory for an upgrade.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Did Harry get a CA drivers's license?  I believe the rule is that if you have moved here, you have 30 days to do it.


Yes, you are right .. now how did he pass the test?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> And have you checked the price of gas in our little corner of the world?
> The cheapo stations here have had premium pushing $4 a gallon


Oh trust me, I know!!!!!  When I had my Range Rovers (_based in Boston at the time_), I had my own Management Consulting business (_hence the New England travel_), so I was able to write off a fair amount of it (_plus - I never owned, always leased them_)!  Which makes me wonder??? .. it used to be that the BRF were *GIFTED* Range Rovers in the past .. hmmmmmm?


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Oh trust me, I know!!!!!  When I had my Range Rovers (_based in Boston at the time_), I had my own Management Consulting business (_hence the New England travel_), so I was able to write off a fair amount of it (_plus - I never owned, always leased them_)!  Which makes me wonder??? .. it used to be that the BRF were *GIFTED* Range Rovers in the past .. hmmmmmm?



They most definitely did not pay for it. Ya kno, ‘us royals’ get freeee stuff.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Yes, you are right .. now how did he pass the test?!?!



He found a red haired guy to take it for him    He wanted Damian Lewis, but he was unavailable.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They most definitely did not pay for it. Ya kno, ‘us royals’ get freeee stuff.


He worked out a deal with the dealership.  That is why they had the picture of him driving.  Now the dealer can say that THE PRINCE is driving a car from his business.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> now they are claiming to drive systematic change.....what huge egos they have
> And they took the mom photos off their site
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Edit Archewell Website to Remove Personal Childhood Photos (yahoo.com)


Systemic change.  Sounds like something you take when constipated, like a laxative.


----------



## Chanbal

At this point, I think it's better that MM&H will go ahead with their staged interview on Sunday, prolonging this drama is worse for the BRF imo. This is a nice article on Prince Philip that shows how shallow, pathetic, and cruel MM&H are. 

*How CAN Prince Harry's TV show go on while his grandfather is so sick? As Oprah's explosive interview with Harry and Meghan nears - and with Prince Philip still receiving treatment in hospital - RICHARD KAY asks an urgent question*

Timing is everything, especially bad timing.

And what could have been worse than for Prince Harry to be gazing out of television screens all over the world yesterday with another incendiary blast about the misery of his privileged life just as his grandfather Prince Philip was leaving one London hospital by ambulance for another?

Even allowing for the fact that Harry had no control over when the trailer for his and Meghan's upcoming 'no subject off-limits' interview with Oprah Winfrey was to be aired — there is another question here: a question of taste.

His comments, recorded last month, that the couple's decision to leave Britain for a new life in Los Angeles had been 'unbelievably tough' are not new, but the implied criticism of the Royal Family in the melodramatic trailer — at a time when the focus is on Philip — looks both insensitive and thoughtless.

When someone of the Duke of Edinburgh's great age — 99 — is in hospital there are always uncertainties.

Although for so long a man of robust health, his move from the King Edward VII Hospital to Bart's suggests a concerning escalation in his welfare.

How much better it would have been to have ensured that no advance publicity for the interview was authorised until the news about Philip had been a little more positive.

That would, of course, have required an element of wisdom from Harry.

Just imagine if he had sought the views of his famously blunt-speaking grandfather and paused to compare the cossetted life he has enjoyed with that of Philip before giving full rein to his complaints on camera.

Might he have thought twice had he considered his loving upbringing with that of Philip?

For Harry the death of his mother when he was just 12 was profound and the loss has shaped him ever since.

But his grandfather too knew tragedy: the loss of a father, a gambling reprobate he barely knew, and an eccentric mother who had little involvement in how her son was raised or, indeed, who was responsible for it.

Uprooted from his family home, he was moved between uncles and aunts, and when war came was separated from those he loved most, his three surviving sisters (one sister died aged 26 in a plane crash) who had married into the Prussian aristocracy.

Instead of complaining about his lot, Philip seized the opportunities he was offered.

Like Harry he made a success of his military career, serving with distinction in the Navy throughout World War II.

But then came the crushing disappointment of having to give up a life at sea for one of duty on the death of King George VI when his wife, Princess Elizabeth, succeeded as Queen. Never once did Philip allow personal interests to overcome this sense of obligation.

His unflinching dedication saw him become the architect of the modern Royal Family in which public service has been central to everything that he and the Queen have represented for more than seven decades.

Atruly curious Harry might also have wondered how Philip had handled speculation about his private life.

No royal has put up with more gossip than Prince Philip; rumours of affairs have followed him throughout his married life. How has he handled this gossip? By ignoring it.

But even if Harry chose to discount all that his grandfather might have to offer on so many aspects of being royal, there is surely one key facet he — or Meghan — should have solicited help on.

For like the Duchess of Sussex, Prince Philip was an outsider marrying into the Royal Family.

No one was better placed to guide the former American actress into the protocols and pitfalls of royalty, what was worth fighting for and what was not, how to fit in but also how to retain that spark of independence, so critical in Philip's make up.

Indeed, nearly 30 years ago Philip was using that experience in an exchange of letters with Harry's mother, Princess Diana, as she struggled to save her marriage to Prince Charles.

In the carefully curated extract from next Sunday's interview, trailed by the American television station CBS yesterday, Harry says he cannot imagine how his mother coped.

Drawing parallels between Diana's situation and his own, he speaks of his mother 'going through this process by herself all those years ago'.

But here he is wrong. Diana was sometimes lonely but she was never alone. She had her sons, she had her own family in the Spencers, she had a loyal staff and she had her friends.

Harry's attempt at equating what he perceives as the ill-treatment he and Meghan claim to have received from the media with Princess Diana's own battles over privacy and intrusion are hopelessly muddled and woefully ill‑thought out.

There really is no comparison with what Diana endured in terms of media interest over 17 years and what Meghan had to put up with for 20 months.

For the last four years of her life Diana, at her choice, had no police bodyguards to fend off the paparazzi. They swarmed around her — her every move was photographed and no aspect escaped scrutiny.

But as Harry well knows there was a paradox to his mother's relationship with the Press.

She had friends who were journalists — I was one of them — and despite the provocation, she never once described the media as 'toxic' as Harry did, in another interview, with presenter James Corden last week.

For her brief spell as a working royal, Meghan was never without Scotland Yard protection. Her movements and Harry's were shrouded in secrecy — as they should be. They took holidays with no one knowing where or when, and if they were seen in public it was because they chose to be seen.

When Oprah Winfrey came to see Diana at Kensington Palace, the Princess saw through her flattery. She gave her tea and sent her away empty-handed.

It's too late for Harry now, the interview is in the can. But maybe there is still time for some nobility. Out of respect to his grandfather, might Harry see if Oprah will reschedule?

It surely can't hurt to ask.

Prince Philip


----------



## viciel

doni said:


> I can’t help it, I just hate it when vocabulary is manipulated to advance an agenda.
> 
> Philanthropy is not service. Activism is not service. Charity is not service. Generosity is not service. Sacrifice is not service. All these things are very good and loable, but they simply are not “public service” in the sense used in the Queen’s statement. Service is not universal. We have different words to signify different meanings. Public service is when the actions are linked to a public function or position, be it the royal family, the civil service or the army... These two in the legitimate exercise of their freedom have chosen not to live a life of public service, and that is all there is to it. Own it.


I love this. I feel like we should all copy and paste and bombard their social media with this post! I saw a couple of photos of the promo and vomited a little.


----------



## viciel

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, that’s what I meant.
> 
> Sounds like someone did find the actual mortgage info.


Mortgage info is public. Just go to the property's county recorder's office online and do a property search it will show up who actually holds the deed and if there's a mortgage.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Yes, you are right .. now how did he pass the test?!?!


I was wondering if it's easy to switch sides of the street and car for driving?  I've never tried it, but I'm a klutz, so not sure anyone needs to experience that.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Her creepy smile that day always reminded me of "the cat that swallowed the canary" sort of smug grin.


It's on line somewhere, but at the end, Harry turned to her and made a comment, something like "well' it's over." and the smirks between them were disgusting, especially with all that followed. A nasty pair.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> It's on line somewhere, but at the end, Harry turned to her and made a comment, something like "well' it's over." and the smirks between them were disgusting, especially with all that followed. A nasty pair.


Like attracts like.  They both deserve each other.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> They sent the doll back to the factory for an upgrade.


Oh that was so unkind... No, not the doll, but I choked on my tea when I laughed and I can't stop laughing thinking about MM's outing with the doll in Canada.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Hmm.. entirely possible that the accountant opened the office for them, to maintain privacy you know.  They ARE very PRIVATE people.  They wouldn't have to deal with any plebes in the waiting room or the staff.  The accountant offered to go to their home for the tax interview, but they didn't want to give out the address of where they are living because the accountant might have a body cam and take picture of Archie, or the empty rooms and busted toilet in the powder room.  They told the accountant that they were remodeling the house as their excuse..............the question is which house and where is it really.......


All good points! The thought of tax season is giving me a somber face.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I was wondering if it's easy to switch sides of the street and car for driving?  I've never tried it, but I'm a klutz, so not sure anyone needs to experience that.


That scares the  pants off of me!  I can barely cross the street in the UK!  I always look the wrong way.


----------



## marietouchet

GOALS .... a question for the one or two of you will will take one for the team and spend 2 hrs watching the INTERVIEW, TIA

It seems like the Harkle goals, as they stated, have shown a seismic shift

The reason for Megxit was stated to be the desire to make money ie financial independence , they wrote the original announcement not BP

Now, it appears they left ( sorry, stepped back or aside or somewhere else ... ) the BRF due to almost “unsurvivable“ conditions

please share any new info on this topic


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> GOALS .... a question for the one or two of you will will take one for the team and spend 2 hrs watching the INTERVIEW, TIA
> 
> It seems like the Harkle goals, as they stated, have shown a seismic shift
> 
> The reason for Megxit was stated to be the desire to make money ie financial independence , they wrote the original announcement not BP
> 
> Now, it appears they left ( sorry, stepped back or aside or somewhere else ... ) the BRF due to almost “unsurvivable“ conditions
> 
> please share any new info on this topic



I am going to TiVo it.  I will subsequently watch it with closed captioning because i CAN'T STAND listening to her voice.  I will be able to speed through the interview and be done in 5 minutes!


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> GOALS .... a question for the one or two of you will will take one for the team and spend 2 hrs watching the INTERVIEW, TIA
> 
> It seems like the Harkle goals, as they stated, have shown a seismic shift
> 
> The reason for Megxit was stated to be the desire to make money ie financial independence , they wrote the original announcement not BP
> 
> Now, it appears they left ( sorry, stepped back or aside or somewhere else ... ) the BRF due to almost “unsurvivable“ conditions
> 
> please share any new info on this topic



Nah... that’s what the news is for... they can watch it and tell me what happened... I’ll be watching 90 day Fiancé....

Only have room for one sh!tshow on my tv...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5006603
> 
> 
> 
> “oh dear, this looks bad. Say something, William.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006602
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We’re thinking of ya, mate.


What is that thing on the windshield ?  bottom right of photo.

I hope it is a camera so they can do YouTube videos from car

AND is H wearing his seatbelt ?


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> I was wondering if it's easy to switch sides of the street and car for driving?  I've never tried it, but I'm a klutz, so not sure anyone needs to experience that.


I’m in the States but go to Ireland every summer (not this past year sadly). Switching sides of the Road isn’t too bad, the first 10 minutes and the first roundabout are the worst.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> If you know the pap is taking your picture, look animated.  They look like they are going to a funeral or the accountant.  Going to the accountant may actually be like going to a funeral.


Oh, have a heart! Can't you all see their precious and valued above all else privacy is being _unbelievably_ invaded  For such fiercely private individuals as H&M are, this obviously not alerted the paps for breech of privacy, must be absolute torment. Torment! The poor dears


----------



## lulu212121

marietouchet said:


> What is that thing on the windshield ?  bottom right of photo.
> 
> I hope it is a camera so they can do YouTube videos from car
> 
> AND is H wearing his seatbelt ?


It looks like both of them are not wearing a seatbelt.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I see her hand-clutching has not changed one bit .. gee, afraid he might just RUN away Meghan???



It’s how she controls her puppet. One squeeze means answer yes. Two squeezes means Harry should say no.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> The sad is when Prince Philip and her father pass away they will make it about them.



Yes, Harry will claim he really wanted to visit Philip but the big bad British media made that impossible. It wasn’t SAFE.


----------



## redney

lulu212121 said:


> It looks like both of them are not wearing a seatbelt.


Maybe they're taking a page from Kim Kardashian's playbook and doing a pap shoot in a parking lot.


----------



## bag-mania

mshermes said:


> So they are out for a nice leisurely drive with Doria.....where’s Archie? Poor kid.



Archie is back home in the yard with the dogs. Guy and Pula are doing their best to raise him right.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, he’s wearing the seatbelt, so is she, but not Dorz who looks to turned sideways, perhaps changing a diaper.
Didn‘t he tell James that he loves having Dorz there? Guess not all the time?
Even if this is a staged unhappy photo designed to generate noise about them, it still is an amateur move. We aren’t as stupid as they think we are. As someone said earlier, their lack of authenticity makes them very un-attractive. They regret nothing they do, no matter how hurtful.


ETA: The really good news — W&K and the adorable Cambridge kids do not have to see, hear or listen to the toxic complainers.  
Truly a blessing there.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Not gonna lie, I giggled... when I was a kid, I had an Aunt that all but worshiped Oprah... she was always hoping she’d get something from her... just reminded me of my aunt...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> Maybe they're taking a page from Kim Kardashian's playbook and doing a pap shoot in a parking lot.



The Kardashian's are cerebral geniuses compared to Meg and Hazza. I never followed the K fam, but to my knowledge they never sat around pouting, feeling sorry for themselves and crying about how they're victims.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Not gonna lie, I giggled... when I was a kid, I had an Aunt that all but worshiped Oprah... she was always hoping she’d get something from her... just reminded me of my aunt...
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006854



It’s funny, but kind of disturbing that every CBS employee is pimping this interview.


----------



## bag-mania

I saw part of Entertainment Tonight while I was eating dinner and they spent about five minutes promoting the Oprah interview. I had no idea that that show was owned by CBS but seeing that plug clued me in.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> It’s funny, but kind of disturbing that every CBS employee is pimping this show.



is it surprising? They’re trying to sell it like it’s the super bowl...

I just dont know who is supposed to care... it’ll still probably win the time slot though...


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> is it surprising? They’re trying to sell it like it’s the super bowl...
> 
> I just dont know who is supposed to care... it’ll still probably win the time slot though...


IDK but unless you're a Nielsen family, how do they really know who watched?
even though me watching or not won't really affect them I won't watch, partly on principle


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> is it surprising? They’re trying to sell it like it’s the super bowl...
> 
> I just dont know who is supposed to care... it’ll still probably win the time slot though...



They are pushing it so hard they must have paid Oprah a fortune for it.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> GOALS .... a question for the one or two of you will will take one for the team and spend 2 hrs watching the INTERVIEW, TIA
> 
> It seems like the Harkle goals, as they stated, have shown a seismic shift
> 
> The reason for Megxit was stated to be the desire to make money ie financial independence , they wrote the original announcement not BP
> 
> Now, it appears they left ( sorry, stepped back or aside or somewhere else ... ) the BRF due to almost “unsurvivable“ conditions
> 
> please share any new info on this topic


I'm not planning to watch the interview, so I'm hopping that someone will post a YouTube video. We can also count on DM for the juicy parts.


----------



## needlv

Ladies - we don’t have to watch the interview.  Dailymail will give you a blow by blow account and their comments section is a goldmine of comedy responses...  that way if MM and H are cashing in on the interview we aren’t giving them the clicks or viewer count.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Ladies - we don’t have to watch the interview.  Dailymail will give you a blow by blow account and their comments section is a goldmine of comedy responses...  that way if MM and H are cashing in on the interview we aren’t giving them the clicks or viewer count.


----------



## Jayne1

Sol Ryan said:


> Not gonna lie, I giggled... when I was a kid, I had an Aunt that all but worshiped Oprah... she was always hoping she’d get something from her... just reminded me of my aunt...
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006854


You know, calling O a queen really went to her head. I liked her better in her Chicago days.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Ladies - we don’t have to watch the interview.  Dailymail will give you a blow by blow account and their comments section is a goldmine of comedy responses...  that way if MM and H are cashing in on the interview we aren’t giving them the clicks or viewer count.



I wasn’t originally planning on watching, but now I’m wondering if those of us at home that night should meet here and have a viewer party.  It will be fun to watch together and make our comments and observations about them as it’s happening. 

Unfortunately since we’re all in different time zones we might have to do it in shifts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Royal Reporters, MurkyMeg, etc. will post it on their Twitter feed.
‘No need to watch, just wait.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wasn’t originally planning on watching, but now I’m wondering if those of us at home that night should meet here and have a viewer party.  It will be fun to watch together and make our comments and observations about them as it’s happening.
> 
> Unfortunately since we’re all in different time zones we might have to do it in shifts.



Fun! That would be fun. I am central time.  Then again, most likely this will be a time waster.

We would earn our RoyalReporter badge for sure!

ETA: Live blogging during these shows adds to the entertainment. I can’t take another night of murder shows, so I am in.


----------



## kipp

I will not be watching, as I think we will hear all about it ad nauseum after the fact.  The last thing I would want is for that interview to get good ratings...  I'm sure that we all will have plenty to discuss on our own time here.  Just my 2 cents...


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is having a blast today! 

_"Morgan complained that the prince's recent TV bookings were completely at odds with the couple's claims of media intrusion into their lives and pleas for privacy. Speaking on Good Morning Britain, he said: "They only want positive media coverage... Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, they only want positive media coverage, don't they? That's not how it works in a democracy.

"It can't just be me who sees Prince Harry on top of a Hollywood open-top bus... Great scoop for James Corden, from that point of view, but from Prince Harry's point of view, does it get any more embarrassing than this? "Seriously, being on an open-top bus in Hollywood, after you've banged on about privacy for years on end."

He said: "Oh, what toxic negative publicity? I don't think anyone's ever had better press coverage than these two until the wedding. "Then she disowned her dad and started bleating on about the environment and getting private jets all the time, they got criticism which was completely justified. "They couldn't deal with the criticism of being rank hypocrites and now we have them in their Californian mansion garden spewing their guts to Oprah Winfrey whilst banging on about intrusive media – you couldn't make this up."_









						Piers Morgan: 'It doesn't get any more embarrassing' for Harry than prince's latest TV interview
					

The 'GMB' host panned the prince's recent TV interviews.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Unless you are compiling your viewing habits for Nielsen, what you watch as an individual won’t influence the ratings count. So don’t let that put you off. I get the feeling H&M and Oprah are going to say it got good ratings no matter what.


----------



## Chanbal

I took all the screenshots below in the last 5 min. The headlines are positive to MM, but unkind to QE and Will.  Can one be convinced that MM's PR machine is not behind this?


----------



## Yanca

Hazza and Megnuts are full forced with their assault on the people Lol Sorry for the names, I can't force myself to call him " Prince" anymore after watching his  recent antics with James Corden, and the preview of  their endless whining with Oprah. I am sure it must have been so hard for them, ( eye roll)   being " attacked by the press" as they call it, sure some of the tabloids were nasty, but some articles I read were fair and fact based and just calling them out on their  multitudes of hypocrisy and self righteousness . As a Minority myself and a Royal fan, I was excited when she joined the Royal family, but I must admit even during the engagement interview there was a nagging thought that she does not seemed that 100 percent sincere, and then the actions followed, cutting of her Father  stealing the thunder of Princess Eugenie,  competing  with other Royals when they have events, spreading news through her " friends" I really wished the trial pushed thru , it would have been informative to know if there are really  5 friends and if its truly them that just decided on their own to go to People to defend Megain honor against her father.

Had they ony lie low ,  after they left, bought a modest mansion, still did their philantrophy works quitely like other Rich people, voluntarily give up the Dukedom,  live in privacy as they claimed they sought, they would not be as despised  and unliked as they are right now. They are always using the reason that she is biracial, that  she was  a divorcee  that people cant accept her, but in reality it's because of her actions, and Hazza just keep on whining, in time of Global Pandemic, of so much suffering and poverty, people  dying, loosing their livelihoods,  way of life, love ones,  jobs and security, the goverment in turmoil, these two can't get over the fact that last year was so " tough " on them, I don't quite grasp what he meant by hard,  with them having multi -million dollar  deals, having not to worry about the struggles of  day to day in the truest sense, I am sure they have their struggles too, but  while the masses were  just fighthing to survive, their issues are trivial in comparison.  And   why can't they just donate silently, I know the Charities also want the publicity so  many more people will be encourage to give , but with them the donation is highligted 100 times,  when in fact it's just a tiny slice of their pie- the 50 hats purchased in NZ,  the boxed lunches, the contributions to the woman shelter, even their contirbution in The world Kitchen - but no definite amount given. And if their  sugars will come after me, I can proudly say that I have given my fair share as my Health Care worker salary  allowed.

The Oprah Clips are not enough, they had to call their paps to have their photos splashed  all over the news, blogs and websites and their mouthpiece Scoobie tweeting their website and their every move every minute it seemed, one may start thinking he is on their Payroll.  Even if you don't want to read or hear about them, they are all over. I refuse to believe they don't know  they will be pap. They wanted this, I watched a documentary about JFK Jr and his friend said that as much as he hated being photograph, when He noticed that he is not in any papers for a while, he will go to Central park to be papped. I wonder what will be the duos next action because aside from the dailymail they are not really dominating the major news in US.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooops, one was left out, @Chanbal 









						Meghan Markle Handed Out Bananas Inscribed With Her "Affirmations"
					

Markle felt inspired to copy the viral "talking bananas" gesture during a charity visit.




					www.wmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, one was left out, @Chanbal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Handed Out Bananas Inscribed With Her "Affirmations"
> 
> 
> Markle felt inspired to copy the viral "talking bananas" gesture during a charity visit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006935


I stopped scrolling down after a few minutes, so I'm sure I missed several.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, one was left out, @Chanbal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Handed Out Bananas Inscribed With Her "Affirmations"
> 
> 
> Markle felt inspired to copy the viral "talking bananas" gesture during a charity visit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5006935



Is she holding something in front of her belly
WHERE did her boobs go???? Is it me or do they look smaller


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Is she holding something in front of her belly
> WHERE did her boobs go???? Is it me or do they look smaller



Photo from 2019, the first pregnancy. They were making lunches for the sex workers.
The happiness on their faces is just amazing.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photo from 2019, the first pregnancy. They were making lunches for the sex workers.
> The happiness on their faces is just amazing.



Thank you

I couldn't believe she was going Bananas Part Deux


----------



## Chanbal

Oops one more: 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle urge followers to 'unleash a groundswell of compassion' ahead of International Women's Day next week and suggest 'good deeds' for fans to do this month*

*Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, have updated Archewell website  *(Again!)
*Duke and Duchess changed the site for International Women's Day on March 8 *
*Removed photo of couple volunteering and shared image of Meghan speaking at UN conference*
*Called on followers to 'unleash acts of compassion' on women in month of March*
_Prince Harry and Meghan's organisation has also created a portable list of good deeds to 'share with friends, hang it in your fridge, and inspire acts of compassion everyday, all month long.'_

Here are a couple of good deeds from their long list:


	

		
			
		

		
	
 MM is calling and checking in on her father. 


	

		
			
		

		
	
 MM is supporting a safe space for her wheelchair-bound sister who was victim of domestic violence not long ago. 


	

		
			
		

		
	
 Waiting for you. 











						Harry and Meghan update Archewell site for International Women's Day
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex removed a photograph which showed them volunteering in LA, with the site now featuring a picture of Meghan Markle, 39, speaking at a UN conference in 2015.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sol Ryan

Okay, watched Colbert... he looked really annoyed that he had to plug it... it was kinda funny... maybe there’s still hope...


----------



## gracekelly

Unleash a groundswell of compassion?  I’m not sure I understand this.   This from the people who treat their families badly?


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> WHOA .. $92k now???  I had quite a few Range Rovers (_the husband had an '82 Series II or III - can never remember_), BUT .. we lived in Boston and my "territory" was all of New England, so I DID need a very sturdy car for the winter snowstorms.  Out here in sunny CA? .. yeah, maybe for some off-roading, but other than that .. they just GUZZLE a LOT of Gas!


"affectionately" known here as the Chelsea Tractor.


----------



## kkfiregirl

I would love for them to share a list of their compassionate actions from 2020 so we may all follow suit.


----------



## madamelizaking

Meghan Markle Endures Bird **** Trauma During Oprah Interview

I’m dying laughing


----------



## gracekelly

Why aren’t they driving a hybrid vehicle?  i do think the comment about being stuck in The 90’s is correct.   Peg wanting to live in a place populated by people who where big in the 90’s and now retired.  She wears her hair like a teen. Wears these complicated costumes dresses with capes and flounces    She is living ( we think ) in a home that was built in the 90’s.   She’s in a time capsule.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> Why aren’t they driving a hybrid vehicle?  i do think the comment about being stuck in The 90’s is correct.   Peg wanting to live in a place populated by people who where big in the 90’s and now retired.  She wears her hair like a teen. Wears these complicated costumes dresses with capes and flounces    She is living ( we think ) in a home that was built in the 90’s.   She’s in a time capsule.



Because they are hypocrites.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> At this point, I think it's better that MM&H will go ahead with their staged interview on Sunday, prolonging this drama is worse for the BRF imo. This is a nice article on Prince Philip that shows how shallow, pathetic, and cruel MM&H are.
> 
> *How CAN Prince Harry's TV show go on while his grandfather is so sick? As Oprah's explosive interview with Harry and Meghan nears - and with Prince Philip still receiving treatment in hospital - RICHARD KAY asks an urgent question*
> 
> Timing is everything, especially bad timing.
> 
> And what could have been worse than for Prince Harry to be gazing out of television screens all over the world yesterday with another incendiary blast about the misery of his privileged life just as his grandfather Prince Philip was leaving one London hospital by ambulance for another?
> 
> Even allowing for the fact that Harry had no control over when the trailer for his and Meghan's upcoming 'no subject off-limits' interview with Oprah Winfrey was to be aired — there is another question here: a question of taste.
> 
> His comments, recorded last month, that the couple's decision to leave Britain for a new life in Los Angeles had been 'unbelievably tough' are not new, but the implied criticism of the Royal Family in the melodramatic trailer — at a time when the focus is on Philip — looks both insensitive and thoughtless.
> 
> When someone of the Duke of Edinburgh's great age — 99 — is in hospital there are always uncertainties.
> 
> Although for so long a man of robust health, his move from the King Edward VII Hospital to Bart's suggests a concerning escalation in his welfare.
> 
> How much better it would have been to have ensured that no advance publicity for the interview was authorised until the news about Philip had been a little more positive.
> 
> That would, of course, have required an element of wisdom from Harry.
> 
> Just imagine if he had sought the views of his famously blunt-speaking grandfather and paused to compare the cossetted life he has enjoyed with that of Philip before giving full rein to his complaints on camera.
> 
> Might he have thought twice had he considered his loving upbringing with that of Philip?
> 
> For Harry the death of his mother when he was just 12 was profound and the loss has shaped him ever since.
> 
> But his grandfather too knew tragedy: the loss of a father, a gambling reprobate he barely knew, and an eccentric mother who had little involvement in how her son was raised or, indeed, who was responsible for it.
> 
> Uprooted from his family home, he was moved between uncles and aunts, and when war came was separated from those he loved most, his three surviving sisters (one sister died aged 26 in a plane crash) who had married into the Prussian aristocracy.
> 
> Instead of complaining about his lot, Philip seized the opportunities he was offered.
> 
> Like Harry he made a success of his military career, serving with distinction in the Navy throughout World War II.
> 
> But then came the crushing disappointment of having to give up a life at sea for one of duty on the death of King George VI when his wife, Princess Elizabeth, succeeded as Queen. Never once did Philip allow personal interests to overcome this sense of obligation.
> 
> His unflinching dedication saw him become the architect of the modern Royal Family in which public service has been central to everything that he and the Queen have represented for more than seven decades.
> 
> Atruly curious Harry might also have wondered how Philip had handled speculation about his private life.
> 
> No royal has put up with more gossip than Prince Philip; rumours of affairs have followed him throughout his married life. How has he handled this gossip? By ignoring it.
> 
> But even if Harry chose to discount all that his grandfather might have to offer on so many aspects of being royal, there is surely one key facet he — or Meghan — should have solicited help on.
> 
> For like the Duchess of Sussex, Prince Philip was an outsider marrying into the Royal Family.
> 
> No one was better placed to guide the former American actress into the protocols and pitfalls of royalty, what was worth fighting for and what was not, how to fit in but also how to retain that spark of independence, so critical in Philip's make up.
> 
> Indeed, nearly 30 years ago Philip was using that experience in an exchange of letters with Harry's mother, Princess Diana, as she struggled to save her marriage to Prince Charles.
> 
> In the carefully curated extract from next Sunday's interview, trailed by the American television station CBS yesterday, Harry says he cannot imagine how his mother coped.
> 
> Drawing parallels between Diana's situation and his own, he speaks of his mother 'going through this process by herself all those years ago'.
> 
> But here he is wrong. Diana was sometimes lonely but she was never alone. She had her sons, she had her own family in the Spencers, she had a loyal staff and she had her friends.
> 
> Harry's attempt at equating what he perceives as the ill-treatment he and Meghan claim to have received from the media with Princess Diana's own battles over privacy and intrusion are hopelessly muddled and woefully ill‑thought out.
> 
> There really is no comparison with what Diana endured in terms of media interest over 17 years and what Meghan had to put up with for 20 months.
> 
> For the last four years of her life Diana, at her choice, had no police bodyguards to fend off the paparazzi. They swarmed around her — her every move was photographed and no aspect escaped scrutiny.
> 
> But as Harry well knows there was a paradox to his mother's relationship with the Press.
> 
> She had friends who were journalists — I was one of them — and despite the provocation, she never once described the media as 'toxic' as Harry did, in another interview, with presenter James Corden last week.
> 
> For her brief spell as a working royal, Meghan was never without Scotland Yard protection. Her movements and Harry's were shrouded in secrecy — as they should be. They took holidays with no one knowing where or when, and if they were seen in public it was because they chose to be seen.
> 
> When Oprah Winfrey came to see Diana at Kensington Palace, the Princess saw through her flattery. She gave her tea and sent her away empty-handed.
> 
> It's too late for Harry now, the interview is in the can. But maybe there is still time for some nobility. Out of respect to his grandfather, might Harry see if Oprah will reschedule?
> 
> It surely can't hurt to ask.
> 
> Prince Philip



Best article I have read -this needs to be sold to one of the US media outlets pronto and spread far and wide to give the public over there the true story - as if Harry isn’t disrespecting his aged grandparents enough surely Diana should finally please just be left in peace ? - Harry has spent his entire life mouthing about how  outraged he is at her treatment yet  now he is using her in the most unspeakable fashion for his obnoxious wife’s celebrity and monetary ends - truly what toxic wants toxic gets - Harry you are a complete and disgrace fgs man up leave the royal family formally stay over there and leave us alone we are done with you. This whole interview is based on him saving toxic from the same fate as Diana I wondered how low Harry could go we have just found out he has no limit at all May God forgive him


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m in the States but go to Ireland every summer (not this past year sadly). Switching sides of the Road isn’t too bad, the first 10 minutes and the first roundabout are the worst.



I’m Irish  -we have few cars here and awful drivers who are often on the wrong side of the road anyway so you are safe and will feel at home but please never drive on England’s smart motorways they are lethal so you need to be really careful


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Yes, Harry will claim he really wanted to visit Philip but the big bad British media made that impossible. It wasn’t SAFE.




But while his desperately ill 99 yr old grandfather lies in hospital the ginge runs around celeb land being a complete arsehole making himself even more of a laughing stock than when he lived here but being completely unfunny at the same time - epic fail


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> I wasn’t originally planning on watching, but now I’m wondering if those of us at home that night should meet here and have a viewer party.  It will be fun to watch together and make our comments and observations about them as it’s happening.
> 
> Unfortunately since we’re all in different time zones we might have to do it in shifts.


Nope don’t give them the oxygen for the fire they want publicity any publicity the way to get rid of them is ignore them


----------



## elvisfan4life

kipp said:


> I will not be watching, as I think we will hear all about it ad nauseum after the fact.  The last thing I would want is for that interview to get good ratings...  I'm sure that we all will have plenty to discuss on our own time here.  Just my 2 cents...



Absolutely agree


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> I took all the screenshots below in the last 5 min. The headlines are positive to MM, but unkind to QE and Will.  Can one be convinced that MM's PR machine is not behind this?
> 
> View attachment 5006914
> View attachment 5006916
> View attachment 5006915
> 
> View attachment 5006913
> 
> View attachment 5006912
> 
> View attachment 5006909
> 
> View attachment 5006911
> 
> View attachment 5006917
> View attachment 5006918


Now I want to know what Will does indoors??? Someone enlighten me ???


----------



## kkfiregirl

I just took a look at the archewell website; it looks very sleek, but I found the whole _Duke _and _Duchess _so tiresome. 

Why must they insist on calling themselves the D & D on their website?! It makes it seem as though they are working on behalf of the royal family. FFS, you wanted financial independence, so use your legal names (Meghan/Henry) or your married name (Mr. & Mrs. _Whatever)._

I got second hand embarrassment reading the ‘about us’ section, but other than that, I have no problem with their charity website - if they can actually do good, I like it!


----------



## jelliedfeels

mshermes said:


> So they are out for a nice leisurely drive with Doria.....where’s Archie? Poor kid.


That is an excellent question.

Apparently  he’s not needed for the united front


CeeJay said:


> Oh trust me, I know!!!!!  When I had my Range Rovers (_based in Boston at the time_), I had my own Management Consulting business (_hence the New England travel_), so I was able to write off a fair amount of it (_plus - I never owned, always leased them_)!  Which makes me wonder??? .. it used to be that the BRF were *GIFTED* Range Rovers in the past .. hmmmmmm?


Yes Land Rover is or at least was a British brand and there’s been a lot of PR of the queen driving hers. Typical hypocrisy they are allowed to drive a gas guzzler when they don’t even live in the country.  Then watch them claim it to the ‘meh effect’ that popularised this little known brand.


Lodpah said:


> The sad is when Prince Philip and her father pass away they will make it about them.


PP is just trying to steal their limelight obviously.
I’m not interested in judging anyone’s difficult relationship with their relatives but surely they/PR should realise the optics of this situation? 
You’d  think they’d at least make a superficial effort of expressing support every few days.


----------



## Sol Ryan

kkfiregirl said:


> I just took a look at the archewell website; it looks very sleek, but I found the whole _Duke _and _Duchess _so tiresome.
> 
> Why must they insist on calling themselves the D & D on their website?! It makes it seem as though they are working on behalf of the royal family. FFS, you wanted financial independence, so use your legal names (Meghan/Henry) or your married name (Mr. & Mrs. _Whatever)._
> 
> I got second hand embarrassment reading the ‘about us’ section, but other than that, I have no problem with their charity website - if they can actually do good, I like it!



Because we are “linked, not ranked” except for Harry and Meghan who lord above us mere peasants with their wisdom... such as when they suggested at the start of COVID we train to become counselors with all of our sudden free time since we‘re working from home...

Who got more free time when the started working from home? My workload doubled and I had do all the house stuff still...

Edited to add: Not only that, but most of those that suddenly had free time, had free time because they lost their jobs... not because it was some vacation... it just makes me sick... so many businesses have closed because of this pandemic... It not free time when you’re job hunting trying to keep a roof over your head...


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Archie is back home in the yard with the dogs. Guy and Pula are doing their best to raise him right.


Well his parents seem like they were raised by wolves so it makes sense.

Poor Guy limping to catch him. Weird she didn’t get that other dog she loved so much back now she’s on the same continent. I guess rescues aren’t fashionable anymore. 



rose60610 said:


> The Kardashian's are cerebral geniuses compared to Meg and Hazza. I never followed the K fam, but to my knowledge they never sat around pouting, feeling sorry for themselves and crying about how they're victims.


Yeah for all the stick the Ks get; a lot of the ‘highbrow’ celebs copy their playbook.

_created a portable list of good deeds to 'share with friends, hang it in your fridge, - _
This typo made me laugh. Who hangs things inside their fridge? Is it meant to be like a prayer scroll flapping on the breeze of the motor? Megz is trying to be the new dalai llama this week.

Im not watching it on ITV. I will watch the meme version on YouTube and obviously come here for the roast of the century.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> I was wondering if it's easy to switch sides of the street and car for driving?  I've never tried it, but I'm a klutz, so not sure anyone needs to experience that.


When we are in the states and continental Europe, my SO drives our rental car, no problems. But he is an very experienced driver and he loves cars. I can only remember one time in the U.S. he tried to turn on to the main road on the wrong side but quickly realised and corrected it. Bless him!


----------



## chicinthecity777

redney said:


> Maybe they're taking a page from Kim Kardashian's playbook and doing a pap shoot in a parking lot.


I see more and more similarities between MM and KK! From the looks to actions! I previously tweeted the same on Twitter and immediately got attacked by their stans. Had to block and mute by bulk!


----------



## chicinthecity777

I had to laugh so hard at the photos of them in the Range Rover. (A top of the range model will easily set you back £120k! And if it's not a hybrid model, it uses ton of fuel! My father-in-law has one and it costs so much to run! But it's very safe and has a very smooth ride. I very much like being driven in it but my SO doesn't like to drive it due to the size.) 

Where do I start with this? 1. So there is no invasion of privacy here? 2. Who are they gonna sue for those photos now? 3. They escaped to CA so they can be away from the "un-survivable" press. Sure there is no press in CA?


----------



## pukasonqo

Sharont2305 said:


> "affectionately" known here as the Chelsea Tractor.



Or “ Toorak Tank” in Melbourne


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Latest report is DM group is going to appeal the summary judgement decision. Please let it happen!


----------



## elvisfan4life

I fear for Prince Phillip I think him asking Charles to visit was him putting his affairs in order. 

There is already a plan in place to deal with his death and that of the Queen - it will have to be altered for covid so if Philip passes it could be some time before we are told to allow things to get moving in the background and to give the Queen some private time before the world knows

The BBC have made sure all its presenters today including weather presenters are dressed in sombre attire -formal suits or tailored dresses in black or very dark navy or grey - a royal death should not be announced in a garish dress - unless you are ITV and more interested in making money by showing two morons with OW on Monday rather than showing respect to the Queen and  the real BRF


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> The BBC have made sure all its presenters today including weather presenters are dressed in sombre attire -formal suits or tailored dresses in black or very dark navy or grey - a royal death should not be announced in a garish dress - unless you are ITV and more interested in making money by showing two morons with OW on Monday rather than showing respect to the Queen and  the real BRF


Funny you should mention that, I'd noticed the news presenters were more toned down dress wise this morning.


----------



## LittleStar88

If PP passes away before the O interview airs, it will be so callous and tacky for H & M to allow the O interview to happen and not postpone. I do not believe that they have zero control over the air date, especially in that kind of situation


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> If PP passes away before the O interview airs, it will be so callous and tacky for H & M to allow the O interview to happen and not postpone. I do not believe that they have zero control over the air date, especially in that kind of situation


They are in a tight corner, if PP dies after their interview, the optics is that the interview might have aggravated it. It's a lose lose for them!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Weren't us told that Harry was self-isolating in case he needed to fly back to the UK for PP?? Is there anything their PR machine put out not a lie?


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Piers is having a blast today!
> 
> _"Morgan complained that the prince's recent TV bookings were completely at odds with the couple's claims of media intrusion into their lives and pleas for privacy. Speaking on Good Morning Britain, he said: "They only want positive media coverage... Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, they only want positive media coverage, don't they? That's not how it works in a democracy.
> 
> "It can't just be me who sees Prince Harry on top of a Hollywood open-top bus... Great scoop for James Corden, from that point of view, but from Prince Harry's point of view, does it get any more embarrassing than this? "Seriously, being on an open-top bus in Hollywood, after you've banged on about privacy for years on end."
> 
> He said: "Oh, what toxic negative publicity? I don't think anyone's ever had better press coverage than these two until the wedding. "Then she disowned her dad and started bleating on about the environment and getting private jets all the time, they got criticism which was completely justified. "They couldn't deal with the criticism of being rank hypocrites and now we have them in their Californian mansion garden spewing their guts to Oprah Winfrey whilst banging on about intrusive media – you couldn't make this up."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan: 'It doesn't get any more embarrassing' for Harry than prince's latest TV interview
> 
> 
> The 'GMB' host panned the prince's recent TV interviews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



It really would have been nice if Harry had gotten on the *clue bus *instead of the open-top bus with James Corden.


----------



## elvisfan4life

LittleStar88 said:


> If PP passes away before the O interview airs, it will be so callous and tacky for H & M to allow the O interview to happen and not postpone. I do not believe that they have zero control over the air date, especially in that kind of situation




I can’t help thinking Phillip would get great joy of sticking it to them if he was to pass on the day their pathetic interview airs but I pray he pulls through and spends his birthday with the Queen in June it would be too cruel for her not to be able to pass him his telegram herself what a photo that will be


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> I can’t help thinking Phillip would get great joy of sticking it to them if he was to pass on the day their pathetic interview airs but I pray he pulls through and spends his birthday with the Queen in June it would be too cruel for her not to be able to pass him his telegram herself what a photo that will be



I'm not prepared for any more bad news. I'd be genuinely sad if something happened to either one of them even though at their age it's likely at some point.


----------



## Sina08

Chanbal said:


> Oops one more:
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle urge followers to 'unleash a groundswell of compassion' ahead of International Women's Day next week and suggest 'good deeds' for fans to do this month*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, have updated Archewell website  *(Again!)
> *Duke and Duchess changed the site for International Women's Day on March 8 *
> *Removed photo of couple volunteering and shared image of Meghan speaking at UN conference*
> *Called on followers to 'unleash acts of compassion' on women in month of March*
> _Prince Harry and Meghan's organisation has also created a portable list of good deeds to 'share with friends, hang it in your fridge, and inspire acts of compassion everyday, all month long.'_
> 
> Here are a couple of good deeds from their long list:
> View attachment 5007008
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM is calling and checking in on her father.
> View attachment 5007015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM is supporting a safe space for her wheelchair-bound sister who was victim of domestic violence not long ago.
> View attachment 5007059
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Waiting for you.
> View attachment 5007061
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan update Archewell site for International Women's Day
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex removed a photograph which showed them volunteering in LA, with the site now featuring a picture of Meghan Markle, 39, speaking at a UN conference in 2015.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



There’s definitely need of a facepalm emoji!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I took all the screenshots below in the last 5 min. The headlines are positive to MM, but unkind to QE and Will.  Can one be convinced that MM's PR machine is not behind this?
> 
> View attachment 5006914
> View attachment 5006916
> View attachment 5006915
> 
> View attachment 5006913
> 
> View attachment 5006912
> 
> View attachment 5006909
> 
> View attachment 5006911
> 
> View attachment 5006917
> View attachment 5006918


The Harkles are now reality stars... she promotes Armanis ... OK ... so what ...  KK has made a fortune selling underwear 

But compare and contrast - the Ks had a blockbuster story when Bruce became Caitlin ... THERE WAAS GOING TO BE A TRANSITION AND THES TORY BROKE NICELY , C made the announcement not the Ks, Kendall and Kylie were circumspect about their relations with B/C/father,  no obvious family public squabbles except Kris maintained she never suspected and B/C suggested otherwise , I get it Kris was hurt ...

Megxit has been a knee jerk decision - beginning to end - misplayed by the Harkles - with lots of GRATUITOUS goopy family nonsense (Tom & BRF), lawsuits, how many houses ? (KP, Frog Cot, Vancouver, TP house, Montecito), and a prime time  TV interviews (plural, one at end of Africa trip, now the OW mess) - tacky, 2 ill grandfathers (no ones fault but it is how you tackle these crises...), plus COPIOUS gossip (tiaragate, stealing  Eugenie thunder at the wedding, NONE OF THAT HAD TO HAPPEN IN PUBLIC BUT IT DID


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photo from 2019, the first pregnancy. They were making lunches for the sex workers.
> The happiness on their faces is just amazing.


that's the worst picture ive seen of her


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Why aren’t they driving a hybrid vehicle?  i do think the comment about being stuck in The 90’s is correct.   Peg wanting to live in a place populated by people who where big in the 90’s and now retired.  She wears her hair like a teen. Wears these complicated costumes dresses with capes and flounces    She is living ( we think ) in a home that was built in the 90’s.   She’s in a time capsule.


Hello @gracekelly ... you are behind the times  LOL .. Electric Vehicles are now the IN thing ... They could support CALIFORNIA by getting a TESLA, or the JAGUAR EV would be a nod to the UK, the Porsche TAYCAN EV is good for those who like fast cars, an EV would be better than the Land Rover gas guzzler ... they could get a promo deal ...


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I just took a look at the archewell website; it looks very sleek, but I found the whole _Duke _and _Duchess _so tiresome.
> 
> Why must they insist on calling themselves the D & D on their website?! It makes it seem as though they are working on behalf of the royal family. FFS, you wanted financial independence, so use your legal names (Meghan/Henry) or your married name (Mr. & Mrs. _Whatever)._
> 
> I got second hand embarrassment reading the ‘about us’ section, but other than that, I have no problem with their charity website - if they can actually do good, I like it!


I know
last night I saw a clip of gayle king promoting O's special....it was Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan


----------



## sdkitty

elvisfan4life said:


> I fear for Prince Phillip I think him asking Charles to visit was him putting his affairs in order.
> 
> There is already a plan in place to deal with his death and that of the Queen - it will have to be altered for covid so if Philip passes it could be some time before we are told to allow things to get moving in the background and to give the Queen some private time before the world knows
> 
> The BBC have made sure all its presenters today including weather presenters are dressed in sombre attire -formal suits or tailored dresses in black or very dark navy or grey - a royal death should not be announced in a garish dress - unless you are ITV and more interested in making money by showing two morons with OW on Monday rather than showing respect to the Queen and  the real BRF


sometimes when a couple (or really any two people) have been together for a very long time and are old, after the death of the first the second will follow before long.  but in this case the queen is several years younger and seems pretty robust.  sorry if I'm sounding like he's already dead but it seems he may not have long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Hello @gracekelly ... you are behind the times  LOL .. Electric Vehicles are now the IN thing ... They could support CALIFORNIA by getting a TESLA, or the JAGUAR EV would be a nod to the UK, the Porsche TAYCAN EV is good for those who like fast cars, an EV would be better than the Land Rover gas guzzler ... they could get a promo deal ...


maybe elon musk and the rest are on to them and don't want hypocrites "promoting" their products


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Hello @gracekelly ... you are behind the times  LOL .. Electric Vehicles are now the IN thing ... They could support CALIFORNIA by getting a TESLA, or the JAGUAR EV would be a nod to the UK, the Porsche TAYCAN EV is good for those who like fast cars, an EV would be better than the Land Rover gas guzzler ... they could get a promo deal ...



They took what they could get for free, I’m sure. Which is what isn’t selling well right now in CA. EV sell themselves and don’t need to be given away to celebs in order to promote sales.

The only range rovers I see are broke down on the side of the road or being towed. They’re not reliable vehicles.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> Now I want to know what Will does indoors??? Someone enlighten me ???


I don't click on those articles, but I wonder if whoever is behind the massive release of positive headlines on MM here in the US is also behind the ones rather questionable on QE and Will.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> They took what they could get for free, I’m sure. Which is what isn’t selling well right now in CA. EV sell themselves and don’t need to be given away to celebs in order to promote sales.
> 
> The only range rovers I see are broke down on the side of the road or being towed. They’re not reliable vehicles.


My husband wants a RR so badly, but I can’t handle paying that much money for an unreliable vehicle.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> My husband wants a RR so badly, but I can’t handle paying that much money for an unreliable vehicle.


It's not that bad. My FIL's had no issues with his. It's a very well built car and they are increasingly popular in the UK.
Source: WhatCar.com

*Reliability for luxury SUVs aged up to five years old*

RankMake and modelScore1.Porsche Macan 2014-on96.9%2.Audi Q7 2015-on94.0%3.Mercedes GLE 2015-201992.8%4.Volvo XC90 2015-on91.6%5.BMW X5 2013-201889.9%6.Range Rover 2013-on85.4%7.Range Rover Velar 2017-on81.9%8.Land Rover Discovery 2017-on77.0%9.Range Rover Sport 2014-on74.2%


----------



## Sina08

sdkitty said:


> that "unsurvivable" comment is gonna come back to bite him big time I think.  People are out of work and some are literally hungry.  what a ridiculous and disgusting thing for a super privileged man-boy to say


I totally agree. Even if not today or tomorrow, some time in the future it will happen. Sometimes it takes a while to reflect on said things and their actual meaning. It’s the same with Diana. She’s no longer loved unconditionally, people are more willing to accept that she had her flaws and was no saint.
Hopefully H&M will be alive and kicking when their chronic verbal incontinence comes to haunt them.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> I can’t help thinking Phillip would get great joy of sticking it to them if he was to pass on the day their pathetic interview airs but I pray he pulls through and spends his birthday with the Queen in June it would be too cruel for her not to be able to pass him his telegram herself what a photo that will be



It would also be in keeping with the recurring theme of Meghan and Harry always having the absolute worst timing in everything they do. 

I hope Philip gets better. We aren't getting as much news about him here but I heard he was transferred to a different hospital.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> If PP passes away before the O interview airs, it will be so callous and tacky for H & M to allow the O interview to happen and not postpone. I do not believe that they have zero control over the air date, especially in that kind of situation



If Prince Philip passes away, CBS will likely postpone the interview to avoid potential criticism and losing viewers (audience distraction). Of course, they will say that was out of respect for PP... 

After the release of that damaging trailer, it's better for the BRF to be done with that interview ASAP imo. Postponing that interview is only going to prolong their pain.  However, they could cancel the interview.


----------



## Sina08

Question: is it normal that there’s so much noise about an upcoming interview? All the promotion, releasing teasers, articles already dissecting the two sentences that are known from the interview. 
I haven’t been watching TV for years, especially no celebrity interviews and certainly don’t know how things work in the US. 
When the interview was announced I didn’t expect so much pre interview info. Seems just strange.


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not that bad. My FIL's had no issues with his. It's a very well built car and they are increasingly popular in the UK.
> Source: WhatCar.com
> 
> *Reliability for luxury SUVs aged up to five years old*
> 
> RankMake and modelScore1.Porsche Macan 2014-on96.9%2.Audi Q7 2015-on94.0%3.Mercedes GLE 2015-201992.8%4.Volvo XC90 2015-on91.6%5.BMW X5 2013-201889.9%6.Range Rover 2013-on85.4%7.Range Rover Velar 2017-on81.9%8.Land Rover Discovery 2017-on77.0%9.Range Rover Sport 2014-on74.2%



Well compared amongst a list of least reliable vehicles (talking reliability beyond three years/typical manufacturer warranty), then yeah. If you want a worry-free car for the long term, none of these should be on the list.


----------



## Chanbal

Go for it DM! 
*Meghan Markle's privacy claim over letter she wrote to her father 'cried out' for cross-examination, lawyers for Mail On Sunday and MailOnline tell High Court bid to appeal against judge's decision to deny them a trial*

*A High Court judge last month ruled in favour of Meghan Markle's privacy claim summarily without testing the evidence at trial*
*Today lawyers for the Mail On Sunday and MailOnline outlined ten separate points that the judge failed to take into account in his original ruling*
*They argued that the judge failed to sufficiently take into account that the Duchess 'undermined or diminished' the weight of her own privacy by collaborating in publication of extracts of the letter*
*The publisher's lawyers have also insisted that Meghan authorised five of her close friends to speak with People magazine*
*They also insisted that a full trial should take place because further evidence would be made available by then*
_However lawyers for the publishers are today challenging the judge's decision, outlining ten separate grounds that the judge failed to take into account in his original ruling.  _









						Meghan 'should be cross-examination' in privacy claim, appeal told
					

Lawyers for the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline went to the High Court in a bid to appeal a judge's decision to deny them a trial in Meghan Markle's privacy case, which was refused by the judge.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> Well compared amongst a list of least reliable vehicles (talking reliability beyond three years/typical manufacturer warranty), then yeah. If you want a worry-free car for the long term, none of these should be on the list.


You can't compare a Range Rover with a say Toyota or a Nissan, which are among the most reliable cars. Anyways, my friend from work also has a full size RR and he has 3 young kids, no problem with the car. No more on this since it's off-topic.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Go for it DM!
> *Meghan Markle's privacy claim over letter she wrote to her father 'cried out' for cross-examination, lawyers for Mail On Sunday and MailOnline tell High Court bid to appeal against judge's decision to deny them a trial*
> 
> *A High Court judge last month ruled in favour of Meghan Markle's privacy claim summarily without testing the evidence at trial*
> *Today lawyers for the Mail On Sunday and MailOnline outlined ten separate points that the judge failed to take into account in his original ruling*
> *They argued that the judge failed to sufficiently take into account that the Duchess 'undermined or diminished' the weight of her own privacy by collaborating in publication of extracts of the letter*
> *The publisher's lawyers have also insisted that Meghan authorised five of her close friends to speak with People magazine*
> *They also insisted that a full trial should take place because further evidence would be made available by then*
> _However lawyers for the publishers are today challenging the judge's decision, outlining ten separate grounds that the judge failed to take into account in his original ruling.  _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'should be cross-examination' in privacy claim, appeal told
> 
> 
> Lawyers for the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline went to the High Court in a bid to appeal a judge's decision to deny them a trial in Meghan Markle's privacy case, which was refused by the judge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


DM's request to appeal to the judge has been refused. Not uncommon as no judges will want to admit they are wrong in the first place. DM can now appeal to Court of Appeal.


----------



## bag-mania

Sina08 said:


> Question: is it normal that there’s so much noise about an upcoming interview? All the promotion, releasing teasers, articles already dissecting the two sentences that are known from the interview.
> I haven’t been watching TV for years, especially no celebrity interviews and certainly don’t know how things work in the US.
> When the interview was announced I didn’t expect so much pre interview info. Seems just strange.



No, it is not normal. There would be promotion for any special show but not to this extent. CBS is giving this far more advertising and promotion. They may be capitalizing on the current interest in the BRF due to the popularity of The Crown. They likely paid Oprah such a large amount they need to get it back in viewers and advertising. In short, they cannot afford for it to be a flop.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> maybe elon musk and the rest are on to them and don't want hypocrites "promoting" their products



Knowing M&H, they're waiting impatiently for Elon Musk to just give them the highest end Tesla. They're important, you know. And they suffer for our benefit    .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Honestly, I'm not a fan of cancel culture, but I want these two to be cancelled. It's not like their livelihood depends on being in our faces all the time (or maybe it does now that they have alienated every single one of their family members).


----------



## rose60610

The last time Prince Philip left the hospital to go home, when he exited the hospital he was dressed to the nine's in a beautiful suit. I want to see that image again. Get well soon, Philip!


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> You can't compare a Range Rover with a say Toyota or a Nissan, which are among the most reliable cars. Anyways, my friend from work also has a full size RR and he has 3 young kids, no problem with the car. No more on this since it's off-topic.



I would say it’s relatively on topic as H & M push a sustainable, climate-saving lifestyle while rolling around in a vehicle that is anything but. If they practiced what they preach, they would at least be driving a Prius like other celebs.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I would say it’s relatively on topic as H & M push a sustainable, climate-saving lifestyle while rolling around in a vehicle that is anything but. If they practiced what they preach, they would at least be driving a Prius like other celebs.


right?  when I watch Curb Your Enthusiasm Larry David driving his Prius looks so modest


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> I would say it’s relatively on topic as H & M push a sustainable, climate-saving lifestyle while rolling around in a vehicle that is anything but. If they practiced what they preach, they would at least be driving a Prius like other celebs.



Since they have no problem using other people's private jets, I'm surprised they're not being driven around in other people's Bentleys.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> right?  when I watch Curb Your Enthusiasm Larry David driving his Prius looks so modest



My dad has had his Prius for 10 years and he loves it. No problems mechanically to result in waste and great gas mileage.

Leonardo DiCaprio has been very vocal about the planet and he drives one, too.

H & M in a RR only further flaunts their hypocrisy.


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> I would say it’s relatively on topic as H & M push a sustainable, climate-saving lifestyle while rolling around in a vehicle that is anything but. If they practiced what they preach, they would at least be driving a Prius like other celebs.


It was off topic when we started to discuss whether a RR is reliable or not.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> My dad has had his Prius for 10 years and he loves it. No problems mechanically to result in waste and great gas mileage.
> 
> Leonardo DiCaprio has been very vocal about the planet and he drives one, too.
> 
> H & M in a RR only further flaunts their hypocrisy.
> 
> View attachment 5007428


guess they're not as smart as they think they are


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I would say it’s relatively on topic as H & M push a sustainable, climate-saving lifestyle while rolling around in a vehicle that is anything but. If they practiced what they preach, they would at least be driving a Prius like other celebs.



But that wouldn't please their fan base, who love that they live a glamorous "royal" lifestyle and have outrageously expensive material possessions. There isn't any glamour to being a Prius driver. They don't have the self-confidence to live the way they preach.


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was off topic when we started to discuss whether a RR is reliable or not.



Speaking in terms of sustainability and waste, it is. In context of two people trying to save the planet.

Im fine if folks like the car. I’m not debating what’s better for individuals but what is better for the planet. Cars that have a history of mechanical issues result in more waste (broken parts ending up in landfill, etc.). None of the vehicles on that list would fall under a sustainability/reliability category.


----------



## kkfiregirl

LittleStar88 said:


> Well compared amongst a list of least reliable vehicles (talking reliability beyond three years/typical manufacturer warranty), then yeah. If you want a worry-free car for the long term, none of these should be on the list.



OT, but which car do you recommend?


----------



## LittleStar88

kkfiregirl said:


> OT, but which car do you recommend?



The OT police will come for me but happy to discuss in PM


----------



## kkfiregirl

LittleStar88 said:


> The OT police will come for me but happy to discuss in PM



Okay, thank you!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> But that wouldn't please their fan base, who love that they live a glamorous "royal" lifestyle and have outrageously expensive material possessions. There isn't any glamour to being a Prius driver. *They don't have the self-confidence to live the way they preach. *



To be fair, Meghan DID wear the $3,000 Carolina dress more than once. TWICE, in fact. And maybe we'll see her in the $100,000 Dior Kaftan again when she uses the bigger pillow. She inspires us all.    And who knows--maybe she instructed her servants to use the same toilet brush to clean more than one bathroom.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> To be fair, Meghan DID wear the $3,000 Carolina dress more than once. TWICE, in fact. And maybe we'll see her in the $100,000 Dior Kaftan again when she uses the bigger pillow. She inspires us all.    And who knows--maybe she instructed her servants to use the same toilet brush to clean more than one bathroom.



It must kill her to have been gifted so many beautiful, expensive things and she has only had a few opportunities (mostly on video chats) to be seen wearing them in the past year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, I'm not a fan of cancel culture, but I want these two to be cancelled. It's not like their livelihood depends on being in our faces all the time (or maybe it does now that they have alienated every single one of their family members).



I'm no fan of cancel culture either, but I find it entertaining when our privacy demanding duo stick their pouty faces in front of any camera they can get and cry "Victim!".  Despite not having their resources, they do make me feel better about myself. I typically end each day feeling gratitude whereas they appear chronically miserable. They must be exhausted trying to think of new photo ops that don't backfire. Their failure rate would demoralize the average person, but it doesn't stop them!


----------



## chicinthecity777

LittleStar88 said:


> Speaking in terms of sustainability and waste, it is. In context of two people trying to save the planet.
> 
> Im fine if folks like the car. I’m not debating what’s better for individuals but what is better for the planet. Cars that have a history of mechanical issues result in more waste (broken parts ending up in landfill, etc.). None of the vehicles on that list would fall under a sustainability/reliability category.


I already said my specific post was about the RR's reliability, which was off topic, it has nothing to do with sustainability! Move on now!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh. Lady CC has a new video up, and the very first thing she's saying is that she's been informed by two different cycles that Philip is beyond himself over the situation with H & M, and that he suffered a TIA (commonly known as ministroke). Shame on them. Actually, more shame on Harry as it's his grandfather and his responsibility to maybe not kill him.


----------



## Chloe302225

From an old interview. The difference between the brothers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> From an old interview. The difference between the brothers.




I bet the Queen sacrifices to the Gods daily to thank them Wills was born first.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry must be sooo jealous of his brother. His spite is coming out for all to see.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Harry must be sooo jealous of his brother. His spite is coming out for all to see.


a shame really because along with the adulation William gets the responsibilities....while H gets to do whatever he wants


----------



## LittleStar88

chicinthecity777 said:


> I already said my specific post was about the RR's reliability, which was off topic, it has nothing to do with sustainability! Move on now!



Already have! You’re welcome to exercise the ignore button if the topic bothers you


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> a shame really because along with the adulation William gets the responsibilities....while H gets to do whatever he wants



Does H really get to do what he wants?  He answers to his Netflix & Spotify bosses and whoever else he is indebted to. IMO, he is less free now than he was a year ago. Just look at the nonsense James made him do. Some of it was funny, but who wants to wake up and do that stuff?


----------



## Sina08

sdkitty said:


> a shame really because along with the adulation William gets the responsibilities....while H gets to do whatever he wants


That’s what I don’t really get.
It’s so much more fun to be in Harry’s position than in William’s. You get to live a life of unseen privilege, yet don’t have the same responsibilities. Harry got away with so many things, William could never dream of. Why can one not enjoy that?


----------



## sdkitty

Sina08 said:


> That’s what I don’t really get.
> It’s so much more fun to be in Harry’s position than in William’s. You get to live a life of unseen privilege, yet don’t have the same responsibilities. Harry got away with so many things, William could never dream of. Why can one not enjoy that?


I guess jealousy is the green monster


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does H really get to do what he wants?  He answers to his Netflix & Spotify bosses and whoever else he is indebted to. IMO, he is less free now than he was a year ago. Just look at the nonsense James made him do. Some of it was funny, but who wants to wake up and do that stuff?


IDK.  I think he liked doing that stuff with Corden....as far as netflix and spotify, they want him and his WIFE to produce.  doubt they try to control them in any other way


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does H really get to do what he wants?  He answers to his Netflix & Spotify bosses and whoever else he is indebted to. IMO, he is less free now than he was a year ago. Just look at the nonsense James made him do. Some of it was funny, but who wants to wake up and do that stuff?



He has the illusion of getting to do as he pleases. I'm sure he didn't get to make the decision about where they lived for example. He still has someone else calling the shots for him. The only the difference is he allows it to happen willingly.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He has the illusion of getting to do as he pleases. I'm sure he didn't get to make the decision about where they lived for example. He still has someone else calling the shots for him. The only the difference is he allows it to happen willingly.


well yes, his WIFE runs the show as far as we can tell


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> I would say it’s relatively on topic as H & M push a sustainable, climate-saving lifestyle while rolling around in a vehicle that is anything but. If they practiced what they preach, they would at least be driving a Prius like other celebs.



...the way they go on about the environment they should be on push-bikes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> a shame really because along with the adulation William gets the responsibilities....while H gets to do whatever he wants



shame for them perhaps but not for us


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> ...the way they go on about the environment they should be on push-bikes


kinda seems like they say what they think people in the Hollywood community want to hear


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> shame for them perhaps but not for us


the British are much better off with William as future king.  thats for sure.  as we've said here before, he was a bit older than H when their mother died and that can make a difference.  but I'm not making or accepting excuses for H anymore.  He is so proud to be a grown man with a WIFE and child.  So time to put on your grown man pants and stop complaining about the loss of your mommie.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> IDK.  I think he liked doing that stuff with Corden....as far as netflix and spotify, they want him and his WIFE to produce.  doubt they try to control them in any other way



Slag-off the media >

Cite the media as responsible for your every ill(ness) >

so

>Join the media



Delete as appropriate the below statement:

Makes sense / stupid hypocrites


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does H really get to do what he wants?  He answers to his Netflix & Spotify bosses and whoever else he is indebted to. IMO, he is less free now than he was a year ago. Just look at the nonsense James made him do. Some of it was funny, but who wants to wake up and do that stuff?



That was his choice though... they could have lived wherever they wanted, but they chose this...

And that’s why we know everything he says about the press cameras bothering him is a lie....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sure, he and James laugh, make it look fun - that is what tv is all about.
That show was heavily scripted. H messed up some of his lines and was cut off a few times. He must do and say what he is told. That is not my definition of freedom. His bosses have expectations, and he must deliver.  That is so much more pressure than the Royal life of service. Plus, he is aging. H wood demands youth. He will find out what so many others have - people are fickle, tastes change.



Sol Ryan said:


> That was his choice though... they could have lived wherever they wanted, but they chose this...



Yes, they chose one of the most expensive places in the world. Brilliant. They needed money. Their lifestyle is not cheap. Security, housing, transportation, clothing, etc. Other than the military, his bosses were his father and grandmother. Bank of Dad was open 24/7. Every request granted, more or less. That isn’t how Hwood works.

Wow:








						Mail on Sunday ordered to pay 90% of Meghan's legal costs | ITV News
					

Lord Justice Warby said the percentage was a rough calculation of the costs incurred "on matters on which she succeeded" in the case. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com


----------



## Lodpah

Since she can’t technically‘markle’ the Queen she intends to destroy her through PR. In my opinion once MM wants to destroy you she will not stop at anything. She’s utterly vile but then that’s her true color.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does H really get to do what he wants?  *He answers to his Netflix & Spotify bosses and whoever else he is indebted to.* IMO, he is less free now than he was a year ago. Just look at the nonsense James made him do. Some of it was funny, but who wants to wake up and do that stuff?


So true, but lets not forget that his ultimate boss is Me-gain because I think she doesn't let him forget for even one nanosecond.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> That scares the  pants off of me!  I can barely cross the street in the UK!  I always look the wrong way.


Now that?? .. crossing the street in the UK, yup .. 100% agree with you and as such, there are a LOT of signs that have now been put up (especially in the Financial areas) to tell people to LOOK BOTH WAYS!  However, I've had no choice but to drive in various countries with left-hand drive .. Virgin Islands (yes - the US VI drive British drive), England, Scotland and Ireland.  Not that I've loved it, but you do get used to it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> DM's request to appeal to the judge has been refused. Not uncommon as no judges will want to admit they are wrong in the first place. DM can now appeal to Court of Appeal.


I strongly suspect BP had a hand in Welby’s decision 1st time round because they didn’t want the drama of their staff/ Megz being cross/examined.

This time round, after all that’s happened, hopefully they will give the public what they want!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Now that?? .. crossing the street in the UK, yup .. 100% agree with you and as such, there are a LOT of signs that have now been put up (especially in the Financial areas) to tell people to LOOK BOTH WAYS!  However, I've had no choice but to drive in various countries with left-hand drive .. Virgin Islands (yes - the US VI drive British drive), England, Scotland and Ireland.  Not that I've loved it, but you do get used to it.



My mother's childhood friend was run over by a bus because after having lived in the UK for a decade she looked to the wrong side while visiting her parents. So scary.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Publicity shy woman seeks national newspaper front page apology!  

From Hello!

*Meghan Markle seeks £1.5m in legal costs and front page apology in court case*

The *Duchess of Sussex* has been granted an interim £450,000 as payment towards her £1.5m legal costs in her privacy case against _The Mail On Sunday_ and _MailOnline._ 
Meghan's legal team had asked for ANL to pay £750,000 within two weeks as "an interim payment on account" of the Duchess' legal costs in bringing the claim. 

*At Tuesday's hearing, Lord Justice Warby also dismissed an application by ANL for permission to appeal against last month's ruling, saying it had "no real prospect" of success.*

The judge added: "The Court of Appeal, of course, may take a different view and the defendant has a right to renew this application to a Court of Appeal judge."

Lord Justice Warby also granted the Duchess "a final injunction restraining misuse of private information," but he refused to grant an injunction in relation to Meghan's copyright claim, saying it would not be "appropriate" while parts of that claim are unresolved.


----------



## redney

This thread moves fast! RR makes a hybrid version but theirs doesn't look to be the hybrid (charging plug located in front grill). 

Carry on!


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> Publicity shy woman seeks national newspaper front page apology!
> 
> From Hello!
> 
> *Meghan Markle seeks £1.5m in legal costs and front page apology in court case*
> 
> The *Duchess of Sussex* has been granted an interim £450,000 as payment towards her £1.5m legal costs in her privacy case against _The Mail On Sunday_ and _MailOnline._
> Meghan's legal team had asked for ANL to pay £750,000 within two weeks as "an interim payment on account" of the Duchess' legal costs in bringing the claim.
> 
> *At Tuesday's hearing, Lord Justice Warby also dismissed an application by ANL for permission to appeal against last month's ruling, saying it had "no real prospect" of success.*
> 
> The judge added: "The Court of Appeal, of course, may take a different view and the defendant has a right to renew this application to a Court of Appeal judge."
> 
> Lord Justice Warby also granted the Duchess "a final injunction restraining misuse of private information," but he refused to grant an injunction in relation to Meghan's copyright claim, saying it would not be "appropriate" while parts of that claim are unresolved.



I'm no PR expert, but this isn't the kind of thing that endears you to the public.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I'm no PR expert, but this isn't the kind of thing that endears you to the public.



Maybe it does to her public. They believe she deserves it because she was so wronged.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> Oprah will almost certainly ask MM if she's OK but certainly _not_ call them out for living in splendor in Santa Barbara



...whilst preaching to others about their carbon footprint..


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> The last time Prince Philip left the hospital to go home, when he exited the hospital he was dressed to the nine's in a beautiful suit. I want to see that image again. Get well soon, Philip!



He can still fit into the suit he worse for his wedding - he has more class in his little toe than his cringing grandson


----------



## LittleStar88

redney said:


> This thread moves fast! RR makes a hybrid version but theirs doesn't look to be the hybrid (charging plug located in front grill).
> 
> Carry on!



At the risk of ruffling feathers some more, a quick google check shows RR on the dirty dozen list of most polluting cars. And keeping it very much on topic, H & M really should have thought to check that first given that they’re out to save the world.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> IDK but unless you're a Nielsen family, how do they really know who watched?
> even though me watching or not won't really affect them I won't watch, partly on principle


Years ago, whilst at Bain & Co. - I had to do a project for the Nielsen Ratings.  It was, truly .. THE WORST bunch of data I have EVER had to analyze!!!  When I complained to one of their "analysts", he said "oh - yeah, we know .. it's really bad so we just kind of guess"!  WHAT?? .. so, the all-mighty Nielsen ratings are GUESSES?!?!?!  After that, I put ZERO STOCK in those values!


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> This thread moves fast! RR makes a hybrid version but theirs doesn't look to be the hybrid (charging plug located in front grill).
> 
> Carry on!



Range Rover? or Rolls Royce?    I see that Rolls planned to come out with an electric car, but said it wouldn't be called Rolls. If Meg & Hazza got any electric or hybrid it'd only be for show for those times they "demand privacy", which means it'd have pictures plastered all over the place.  Electric vehicles don't make much noise, and I'd be startled to think that Me-Haz could sneak up on me . I'd prefer they give advance warning with Harley Davidson noise. But then, I don't pout about Montecito feeling sorry for myself.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> DM's request to appeal to the judge has been refused. Not uncommon as no judges will want to admit they are wrong in the first place. DM can now appeal to Court of Appeal.


NOOOOO! Do you know if they are going to appeal? Keep us informed.


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> I'm no PR expert, but this isn't the kind of thing that endears you to the public.


But but show some compassion and love always wins, no?


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> At the risk of ruffling feathers some more, a quick google check shows RR on the dirty dozen list of most polluting cars. And keeping it very much on topic, H & M really should have thought to check that first given that they’re out to save the world.



Meghan and Harry only "care" about the environment when it suits their self-promoting agenda. That is, when they can personally benefit because they get lots of positive press for talking about it. They would never consider making any sacrifices themselves or, God forbid, living the modest, no carbon footprint way they tell everyone else they should live.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> No, it is not normal. There would be promotion for any special show but not to this extent. CBS is giving this far more advertising and promotion. They may be capitalizing on the current interest in the BRF due to the popularity of The Crown. They likely paid Oprah such a large amount they need to get it back in viewers and advertising. In short, they cannot afford for it to be a flop.


I'm crossing my fingers that will be a flop! I'm not watching it! Will be waiting for the videos...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another tell-all??????









						Harry and Meghan plan Netflix tell-all documentary about royal life
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are set to produce at least one "reveal-all' documentary with Netflix, according to a leading royal insider.




					www.express.co.uk
				




ETA:  is a ‘reveal-all’ different from a ‘tell-all’?  One is a video, the other an interview???


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another tell-all??????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan plan Netflix tell-all documentary about royal life
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are set to produce at least one "reveal-all' documentary with Netflix, according to a leading royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Good grief!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another tell-all??????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan plan Netflix tell-all documentary about royal life
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are set to produce at least one "reveal-all' documentary with Netflix, according to a leading royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



What more could they possibly say? Meghan was only a working royal (and I use that term _very_ loosely) for about 18 months.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> From an old interview. The difference between the brothers.



Beautiful video, Diana would be so proud. 

What H and MM are doing to Diana's memory is deplorable imo. Diana had her limitations (who doesn't?), but she was a genuinely kind person that wanted to be loved. She deserves to rest in peace and not to have people cashing in on her memory.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does H really get to do what he wants?  He answers to his Netflix & Spotify bosses and whoever else he is indebted to. IMO, he is less free now than he was a year ago. Just look at the nonsense James made him do. Some of it was funny, but who wants to wake up and do that stuff?


Yes, this is absolutely right. He lost his freedom to Netflix & Spotify. If the BRF cut his allowance, he has now to do whatever Netflix & Spotify ask him to do to provide MM with the A-list lifestyle that she loves.


----------



## lanasyogamama

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another tell-all??????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan plan Netflix tell-all documentary about royal life
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are set to produce at least one "reveal-all' documentary with Netflix, according to a leading royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  is a ‘reveal-all’ different from a ‘tell-all’?  One is a video, the other an interview???


I'm not surprised. Do you remember the rumors about them making secret videos at Buckingham? Netflix would not pay them several millions for their (lack of) talent.


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh!! *CNN sucks!* I remember back when they used to be a highly respected news organization. They don't even pretend to be about news anymore, it's all personal opinion they put out as fact. Get a load of this biased, celebrity-worshipping piece of crap. The author is clearly imposing some of her own personal feelings onto Harry and Meghan. They've been traumatized now. 


*Prince Harry's brave decision*
Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle recently spoke with Oprah Winfrey about their struggles, in the first interview they've given since quitting as working members of the royal family last year. What we learned from clips released in advance of the interview's airing on March 7: It's not easy being a prince.

For all of his many privileges, it's easy to feel bad for Harry, who grew up in the spotlight, and for Meghan, who many would say both pursued that attention and fought it. Since he was small, Harry's life was one of being followed, trailed. He was young when his mother, Princess Diana, was pursued to her death by paparazzi, but old enough to remember.

Childhood trauma is common, according to statistics cited by the Department of Veterans Affairs: About 60% of men and 50% of women have experienced some trauma in their lives. That trauma affects them as adults, showing up in an inability to regulate their emotions, sleep well, or have proper immune function. Post-traumatic stress disorder (or PTSD) can happen weeks or many years after a traumatic event. Many people don't get help because they think it's normal to feel frightened or unsettled. But becoming a parent, like Harry, can trigger effects of PTSD, as parenting makes a person aware of dynamics that were present when they were a child.

In Harry's case, too, his childhood experience with his mother being a target of the media to such an extreme that led to her death was monumental. He was 12 when she died. Even though many viewers of season four of "The Crown" could remember the paparazzi frenzy that preceded Diana's death, it was still shocking to watch it replayed as it had to have been for Harry. It's likely that season five will show her death.

So now, when as an adult, Harry tells Winfrey that he "can't imagine what it must have been like" for his mother and that his "biggest concern was history repeating itself," it's not hard to see why he and Markle stepped away from the royal family, even as that action has shocked many both in the UK and around the world.

Harry's not ungrateful for not performing his "duty." He's human and chose to recognize the pain that performing those duties caused. As he told late-night show host James Corden in an unusual interview that aired last week: "We all know what the British press can be like, and it was destroying my mental health. I was like, this is toxic. So I did what any husband and what any father would do."

We can't change our past, but we can change how we relate to it. Based on what we know of the royal family -- where appearances are more important than comfort, where all children go through etiquette training, where rules are many and made to be followed -- that sort of save-yourself mentality is not common. It's certainly not admired. But that's what makes Harry's decision to step away even braver and more admirable.

In their interview with Winfrey, Markle wore Diana's bracelet so that she "could be with them," as well as a dress decorated with a lotus flower, which is symbolic of revival and a will to live, particularly resonant for survivors of trauma and believers in faith. A lotus seed can stay alive for thousands of years without water.

At one point, Winfrey inquired of Markle: "Were you silent or were you silenced?" We don't yet know her answer. But it's clear that in doing the interview at all, Harry and his wife are breaking away from a long-standing and all too familiar pattern of staying quiet for the sake of appearances. For years, the royal family was pursued to satisfy a public's unending hunger for details and insight into their lives. Now, Harry and Meghan are giving us that. Hopefully, we will be brave enough to hear them.









						Prince Harry's brave decision | CNN
					

Selections from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's upcoming interview with Oprah reveal important truths about childhood trauma and the bravery it takes to face that difficulty and make different life choices, says psychologist Peggy Drexler.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ugh!! *CNN sucks!* I remember back when they used to be a highly respected news organization. They don't even pretend to be about news anymore, it's all personal opinion they put out as fact. Get a load of this biased, celebrity-worshipping piece of crap. The author is clearly imposing some of her own personal feelings onto Harry and Meghan. They've been traumatized now.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry's brave decision*
> Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle recently spoke with Oprah Winfrey about their struggles, in the first interview they've given since quitting as working members of the royal family last year. What we learned from clips released in advance of the interview's airing on March 7: It's not easy being a prince.
> 
> For all of his many privileges, it's easy to feel bad for Harry, who grew up in the spotlight, and for Meghan, who many would say both pursued that attention and fought it. Since he was small, Harry's life was one of being followed, trailed. He was young when his mother, Princess Diana, was pursued to her death by paparazzi, but old enough to remember.
> 
> Childhood trauma is common, according to statistics cited by the Department of Veterans Affairs: About 60% of men and 50% of women have experienced some trauma in their lives. That trauma affects them as adults, showing up in an inability to regulate their emotions, sleep well, or have proper immune function. Post-traumatic stress disorder (or PTSD) can happen weeks or many years after a traumatic event. Many people don't get help because they think it's normal to feel frightened or unsettled. But becoming a parent, like Harry, can trigger effects of PTSD, as parenting makes a person aware of dynamics that were present when they were a child.
> 
> In Harry's case, too, his childhood experience with his mother being a target of the media to such an extreme that led to her death was monumental. He was 12 when she died. Even though many viewers of season four of "The Crown" could remember the paparazzi frenzy that preceded Diana's death, it was still shocking to watch it replayed as it had to have been for Harry. It's likely that season five will show her death.
> 
> So now, when as an adult, Harry tells Winfrey that he "can't imagine what it must have been like" for his mother and that his "biggest concern was history repeating itself," it's not hard to see why he and Markle stepped away from the royal family, even as that action has shocked many both in the UK and around the world.
> 
> Harry's not ungrateful for not performing his "duty." He's human and chose to recognize the pain that performing those duties caused. As he told late-night show host James Corden in an unusual interview that aired last week: "We all know what the British press can be like, and it was destroying my mental health. I was like, this is toxic. So I did what any husband and what any father would do."
> 
> We can't change our past, but we can change how we relate to it. Based on what we know of the royal family -- where appearances are more important than comfort, where all children go through etiquette training, where rules are many and made to be followed -- that sort of save-yourself mentality is not common. It's certainly not admired. But that's what makes Harry's decision to step away even braver and more admirable.
> 
> In their interview with Winfrey, Markle wore Diana's bracelet so that she "could be with them," as well as a dress decorated with a lotus flower, which is symbolic of revival and a will to live, particularly resonant for survivors of trauma and believers in faith. A lotus seed can stay alive for thousands of years without water.
> 
> At one point, Winfrey inquired of Markle: "Were you silent or were you silenced?" We don't yet know her answer. But it's clear that in doing the interview at all, Harry and his wife are breaking away from a long-standing and all too familiar pattern of staying quiet for the sake of appearances. For years, the royal family was pursued to satisfy a public's unending hunger for details and insight into their lives. Now, Harry and Meghan are giving us that. Hopefully, we will be brave enough to hear them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's brave decision | CNN
> 
> 
> Selections from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's upcoming interview with Oprah reveal important truths about childhood trauma and the bravery it takes to face that difficulty and make different life choices, says psychologist Peggy Drexler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


Thanks for posting this crappy article, so many of us will not feel tempted to click on it. 

"_Markle wore Diana's bracelet so that she "could be with them," as well as a dress decorated with a lotus flower, which is symbolic of revival and a will to live, particularly resonant for survivors of trauma ..._"


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another tell-all??????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan plan Netflix tell-all documentary about royal life
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are set to produce at least one "reveal-all' documentary with Netflix, according to a leading royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  is a ‘reveal-all’ different from a ‘tell-all’?  One is a video, the other an interview???


She was there a short while only. Harry has truly sold his soul to the devil to ruin his family. He learned from the best, MM. 
The thing is The Queen was installed to be a Queen for such a time as this and no schemes of the devil, no power of man/woman can topple her unless it’s ordained for a reason. I truly believe that. What they intend for evil will turn for good. They can scream from the top of the mountain to ruin the Queen but it will backfire tremendously.


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> They took what they could get for free, I’m sure. Which is what isn’t selling well right now in CA. EV sell themselves and don’t need to be given away to celebs in order to promote sales.
> 
> The only range rovers I see are broke down on the side of the road or being towed. They’re not reliable vehicles.


There are still a TON of Range Rovers down here in the LA area, but .. let's face it, the owners are just being show-offs IMO!  As I said, I had quite a few of them back in the day, but .. I also had to drive around New England in the Wintertime and there is a LOT of snow in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, etc. -- and of course, when Boston would get a Nor'Easter, I would still make it into the office (_which I had to because I was "essential staff"_).  However, since I leased mine .. I NEVER had a service issue, but the joke used to be about the 'Lucas Electronics' (_British firm_) as in "_oh geez, the lights are out again_" (_and always in the rain - WTH_???)!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this crappy article, so many of us will not feel tempted to click on it.
> 
> "_Markle wore Diana's bracelet so that she "could be with them," as well as a dress decorated with a lotus flower, which is symbolic of revival and a will to live, particularly resonant for survivors of trauma ..._"



I know. How long are we supposed to pity Harry and consider him brave? Apparently 24 years is not enough. I guess nobody's pain is as important as a prince's pain. That this was written by an American journalist representing one of our major news bureaus is an embarrassment.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Ugh!! *CNN sucks!* I remember back when they used to be a highly respected news organization. They don't even pretend to be about news anymore, it's all personal opinion they put out as fact. Get a load of this biased, celebrity-worshipping piece of crap. The author is clearly imposing some of her own personal feelings onto Harry and Meghan. They've been traumatized now.
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry's brave decision*
> Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle recently spoke with Oprah Winfrey about their struggles, in the first interview they've given since quitting as working members of the royal family last year. What we learned from clips released in advance of the interview's airing on March 7: It's not easy being a prince.
> 
> For all of his many privileges, it's easy to feel bad for Harry, who grew up in the spotlight, and for Meghan, who many would say both pursued that attention and fought it. Since he was small, Harry's life was one of being followed, trailed. He was young when his mother, Princess Diana, was pursued to her death by paparazzi, but old enough to remember.
> 
> Childhood trauma is common, according to statistics cited by the Department of Veterans Affairs: About 60% of men and 50% of women have experienced some trauma in their lives. That trauma affects them as adults, showing up in an inability to regulate their emotions, sleep well, or have proper immune function. Post-traumatic stress disorder (or PTSD) can happen weeks or many years after a traumatic event. Many people don't get help because they think it's normal to feel frightened or unsettled. But becoming a parent, like Harry, can trigger effects of PTSD, as parenting makes a person aware of dynamics that were present when they were a child.
> 
> In Harry's case, too, his childhood experience with his mother being a target of the media to such an extreme that led to her death was monumental. He was 12 when she died. Even though many viewers of season four of "The Crown" could remember the paparazzi frenzy that preceded Diana's death, it was still shocking to watch it replayed as it had to have been for Harry. It's likely that season five will show her death.
> 
> So now, when as an adult, Harry tells Winfrey that he "can't imagine what it must have been like" for his mother and that his "biggest concern was history repeating itself," it's not hard to see why he and Markle stepped away from the royal family, even as that action has shocked many both in the UK and around the world.
> 
> Harry's not ungrateful for not performing his "duty." He's human and chose to recognize the pain that performing those duties caused. As he told late-night show host James Corden in an unusual interview that aired last week: "We all know what the British press can be like, and it was destroying my mental health. I was like, this is toxic. So I did what any husband and what any father would do."
> 
> We can't change our past, but we can change how we relate to it. Based on what we know of the royal family -- where appearances are more important than comfort, where all children go through etiquette training, where rules are many and made to be followed -- that sort of save-yourself mentality is not common. It's certainly not admired. But that's what makes Harry's decision to step away even braver and more admirable.
> 
> In their interview with Winfrey, Markle wore Diana's bracelet so that she "could be with them," as well as a dress decorated with a lotus flower, which is symbolic of revival and a will to live, particularly resonant for survivors of trauma and believers in faith. A lotus seed can stay alive for thousands of years without water.
> 
> At one point, Winfrey inquired of Markle: "Were you silent or were you silenced?" We don't yet know her answer. But it's clear that in doing the interview at all, Harry and his wife are breaking away from a long-standing and all too familiar pattern of staying quiet for the sake of appearances. For years, the royal family was pursued to satisfy a public's unending hunger for details and insight into their lives. Now, Harry and Meghan are giving us that. Hopefully, we will be brave enough to hear them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's brave decision | CNN
> 
> 
> Selections from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's upcoming interview with Oprah reveal important truths about childhood trauma and the bravery it takes to face that difficulty and make different life choices, says psychologist Peggy Drexler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com



I'd love to send H&M a box of butt wipes, barf bags and Kleenex and other things they'd find useful for their whiney behavior and self pity. Anybody with working brain cells have to look at these two and wonder why they deserve so much sympathy from ordinary people who truly do suffer. They had all the resources/protections of the BRF only to leave it, and Harry grew up with it. OK, Hazza, your mom was killed, I get it, sorry. But Diana sure does come in handy to make a buck! I think Harry and Meg do more to dishonor Diana's memory by trying to merch it to the hilt. Begging pity at age 40 is beyond pathetic when it was THEY who turned THEIR backs on the BRF under the guise of, what, a mean press? They're sick! And for Oprah to give them a sounding board? This is getting worse than the Jerry Springer Show.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry’s dislike (hatred?) of the press goes way back, if this Twitter video is true.  Perhaps his mental health issue is something very serious, perhaps he needs full time care? If so, all of this contact with the media won’t be healthy for him.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sure, he and James laugh, make it look fun - that is what tv is all about.
> That show was heavily scripted. H messed up some of his lines and was cut off a few times. He must do and say what he is told. That is not my definition of freedom. His bosses have expectations, and he must deliver.  That is so much more pressure than the Royal life of service. Plus, he is aging. H wood demands youth. He will find out what so many others have - people are fickle, tastes change.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, they chose one of the most expensive places in the world. Brilliant. They needed money. Their lifestyle is not cheap. Security, housing, transportation, clothing, etc. Other than the military, his bosses were his father and grandmother. Bank of Dad was open 24/7. Every request granted, more or less. That isn’t how Hwood works.
> 
> Wow:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mail on Sunday ordered to pay 90% of Meghan's legal costs | ITV News
> 
> 
> Lord Justice Warby said the percentage was a rough calculation of the costs incurred "on matters on which she succeeded" in the case. | ITV National News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.itv.com


"_The barrister finally argued that Meghan’s “extremely large costs bill” of around £1.5 million was disproportionate._" This is >$2M dollars, wow!


----------



## redney

rose60610 said:


> Range Rover? or Rolls Royce?   I see that Rolls planned to come out with an electric car, but said it wouldn't be called Rolls. If Meg & Hazza got any electric or hybrid it'd only be for show for those times they "demand privacy", which means it'd have pictures plastered all over the place. Electric vehicles don't make much noise, and I'd be startled to think that Me-Haz could sneak up on me . I'd prefer they give advance warning with Harley Davidson noise. But then, I don't pout about Montecito feeling sorry for myself.


RR=Range Rover is what I was referring to. But that wouldn't be obvious enough for Haz and Me-gain. If they really wanted to throw how oh-so-environmentally conscious they are in everyone's faces, they would be driving around in a Tesla. But they're not. Par for the course for them.


----------



## redney

CeeJay said:


> There are still a TON of Range Rovers down here in the LA area, but .. let's face it, the owners are just being show-offs IMO!  As I said, I had quite a few of them back in the day, but .. I also had to drive around New England in the Wintertime and there is a LOT of snow in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, etc. -- and of course, when Boston would get a Nor'Easter, I would still make it into the office (_which I had to because I was "essential staff"_).  However, since I leased mine .. I NEVER had a service issue, but the joke used to be about the 'Lucas Electronics' (_British firm_) as in "_oh geez, the lights are out again_" (_and always in the rain - WTH_???)!!!


They are the wealthy Mommy cars where I live. We get major winter weather here but this generation of Range Rovers handle poorly in snow and ice, even with snow tires.


----------



## A1aGypsy

elvisfan4life said:


> He can still fit into the suit he worse for his wedding - he has more class in his little toe than his cringing grandson



I mean, I’m no fan of the Markles and I also am cautious at throwing shade when someone may be dying but I believe we have to be real about people.

I’m not sure “class” is the best descriptor for Prince Philip. Whilst a snappy dresser, the man has done and said some jaw droppingly horrid things in his time.  And he has doubled down on incredibly racist and sexist views.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I wonder if they’ll use they interview to go after Piers...


----------



## madamelizaking

bag-mania said:


> What more could they possibly say? Meghan was only a working royal (and I use that term _very_ loosely) for about 18 months.


And for only 72 days out of those 18 months. She's a joke.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sure, he and James laugh, make it look fun - that is what tv is all about.
> That show was heavily scripted. H messed up some of his lines and was cut off a few times. He must do and say what he is told. That is not my definition of freedom. His bosses have expectations, and he must deliver.  That is so much more pressure than the Royal life of service. Plus, he is aging. H wood demands youth. He will find out what so many others have - people are fickle, tastes change.
> 
> Yes, they chose one of the most expensive places in the world. Brilliant. They needed money. Their lifestyle is not cheap. Security, housing, transportation, clothing, etc. Other than the military, his bosses were his father and grandmother. Bank of Dad was open 24/7. Every request granted, more or less. That isn’t how Hwood works.


Honestly, I think the only person Haz has to answer to now is Meg!  Keeping her happy is probably a heck of a lot harder than keeping a stiff upper lip with the BRF.  Wrong choice, Hazzy boy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Since she can’t technically‘markle’ the Queen she intends to destroy her through PR. In my opinion once MM wants to destroy you she will not stop at anything. She’s utterly vile but then that’s her true color.


I agree, but up until now, she's Markled people without means or care to fight back.  I think she's picking on the wrong group of people now and has bitten off more than she can chew.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Beautiful video, Diana would be so proud.
> 
> What H and MM are doing to Diana's memory is deplorable imo. Diana had her limitations (who doesn't?), but she was a genuinely kind person that wanted to be loved. *She deserves to rest in peace and not to have people cashing in on her memory.*


Especially when it's her own son!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry’s dislike (hatred?) of the press goes way back, if this Twitter video is true.  Perhaps his mental health issue is something very serious, perhaps he needs full time care? If so, all of this contact with the media won’t be healthy for him.



I’ve always felt he should’ve left the limelight years ago. He could’ve been active but a bit more low-key like Anne and Edward. 
Unfortunately;
a) BP initially benefited from good press about popular Diana’s popular boys and they didn’t want it to end. 
b) Harry clearly wants to compete with Will and would take the advice to drop back as a slight.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Ugh!! *CNN sucks!* I remember back when they used to be a highly respected news organization. They don't even pretend to be about news anymore, it's all personal opinion they put out as fact. Get a load of this biased, celebrity-worshipping piece of crap. The author is clearly imposing some of her own personal feelings onto Harry and Meghan. They've been traumatized now.


I'm sure they don't care, but CNN lost my respect years ago.


----------



## zen1965

A1aGypsy said:


> I mean, I’m no fan of the Markles and I also am cautious at throwing shade when someone may be dying but I believe we have to be real about people.
> 
> I’m not sure “class” is the best descriptor for Prince Philip. Whilst a snappy dresser, the man has done and said some jaw droppingly horrid things in his time.  And he has doubled down on incredibly racist and sexist views.



True dat. He has never been afraid to stick his foot in, and for years was the poster boy of anti-political correctness. Uncalled for at times, yet rather entertaining at others.
To be fair, the man is almost 100 years old, he is a representative of an utterly different era and should not be judged by today’s woke agenda. Being born into high European nobility 100 years ago came with a huge amount of what we nowadays call entitlement. However, entitled or not, elitist or not, Philip has been the epitome of an old-world aristocrat‘s life of public duty and service (retiring at the age of 94!). For that I bow my head to him.

(And shame on Lazy Hazy who always was the royal with the least number of engagements p.a.)


----------



## zen1965

madamelizaking said:


> And for only 72 days out of those 18 months. She's a joke.


Exactly - she hit the ground running for much less than 18 months!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I agree, but up until now, she's Markled people without means or care to fight back.  I think she's picking on the wrong group of people now and has bitten off more than she can chew.



I'm not so sure. Obviously the BRF could destroy her if they really wanted to, alas they don't seem to be very ambitious to do so.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure they don't care, but CNN lost my respect years ago.



Yeah, it went downhill fast when Jeff Zucker got there.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure. Obviously the BRF could destroy her if they really wanted to, alas they don't seem to be very ambitious to do so.


No, they don't.  In the famous words of Cher in Moonlight, I wish they'd "Snap out of it!"


----------



## poopsie

Sol Ryan said:


> I wonder if they’ll use they interview to go after Piers...



Oh I'd pay real money to see that!!!

TEAM PIERS!!!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I agree, but up until now, she's Markled people without means or care to fight back.  I think she's picking on the wrong group of people now and has bitten off more than she can chew.


She has been so disrespectful to the BRF, fingers crossed that you are right.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure. Obviously the BRF could destroy her if they really wanted to, alas they don't seem to be very ambitious to do so.




I'm pretty sure they don't want a rehash of the Diana debacle.  Besides clapping back just gives the Dysfunctional Duo more ammo.  
Who here remembers the popularity of the K's in their heyday. Those threads were massive. Now, Kim's divorce barely gets a nod and the rest of the family can often be found buried in the back pages.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I guess jealousy is the green monster


Couldn't resist @sdkitty !!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Couldn't resist @sdkitty !!!
> View attachment 5007760


ha...that whole thing gets me - the smug face, the shade of green, the sheer volume of green including the hat
You may recall we had a member here who was a fan of M and accused us all of being jealous of her


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I'm not surprised. Do you remember the rumors about them making secret videos at Buckingham? Netflix would not pay them several millions for their (lack of) talent.


Yes, I remember those rumors .. but could THEY be sued for that if, in fact, they "secretly" recorded some of this stuff without the consent of the BRF?  Ooooooooh - would that be precious, but I'm sure the BRF would never publicly sue them .. however, could they STOP Netflix from showing it???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Yes, I remember those rumors .. but could THEY be sued for that if, in fact, they "secretly" recorded some of this stuff without the consent of the BRF?  Ooooooooh - would that be precious, but I'm sure the BRF would never publicly sue them .. however, could they STOP Netflix from showing it???


I don't know what privacy (ahem) laws are in the UK, but I don't believe it's legal to record/videotape someone in the US without their permission, especially in a private location.  I'm not a lawyer though, so not sure.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now we get the truth.  Didn’t we all know that christening was a joke!
Thank you, DM.  Tell us more, please.

All of them are shady, sleazy #)&@:&)@&$









						Meghan Markle has been planning interview with Oprah for two YEARS
					

Meghan originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019, but was overruled by the royals' PR.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Spoiler: Our lives .. our way



*Meghan Markle has been planning bombshell interview with Oprah for two YEARS*
Meghan Markle has been planning her upcoming interview with Oprah Winfreyfor almost two years, sources tell DailyMail.com.

The Duchess of Sussex originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019 – but was overruled by the Royal Family's public relations machine, the sources claimed.

TV insiders say King and Winfrey have been in talks over a sit-down with the Sussexes ever since, eventually leading to the 90-minute interview set to air on CBS March 7.

In 2019 Meghan was hoping to do a 'short interview' about her time adjusting to Royal life and becoming a mother.

But public relations officials at Kensington Palace, who at the time were trying to tamp down rumors of tensions between the Sussexes and senior royals, quickly put a stop to the plans fearing 'it would alienate the UK press', a source close to the controversy said.






Meghan Markle and Prince Harry sat down with Oprah Winfrey for a tell-all interview which is to be aired Sunday March 7 on CBS





Sources tell DailyMail.com that Meghan had been in talks with Oprah and Gayle King for two years

Oprah shares explosive promo of Prince Harry and Meghan interview


An uneasy compromise was struck, with King and her CBS TV crew instead being invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor.

Traditionally footage is shared between British TV broadcasters as a 'royal pool arrangement', but the insider said that after her interview was denied by royal handlers, 'Meghan put her foot down' that King, close friend to the Duchess' confidante Oprah, would be invited to the shoot.





'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said
The spat was an early sign of the rift between the Palace and the Sussexes that eventually led to the couple losing their royal titles.

The source said Meghan was attempting to 'manage their own public image away from select UK media' and told staff that her motto was 'our lives - our way.'

'It was seen as a huge stride away from the usual methodology of Royal PR. It caused friction with the Sussexes, and a feeling that this was forbidden,' said the palace source.

'They were emphatically told she could not conduct her own lengthy interviews with US media friends after Archie's birth.

'That led to tension with courtiers as the pair wanted to tell their stories about philanthropic and personal matters.

'Certainly from their side there was an element of feeling handcuffed and not having full ownership of their image.

'The couple wanted to usher in a new era and mindset about having control, not just in their messaging but also about who they chose to speak with. Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place.'

King, the host of CBS This Morning, was in London at the time filming Meghan and Harry Plus One, a 60-minute show that aired that month and was sympathetic to the couple.

The show's producers Patti Aronofsky and Judy Tygard included in the documentary commentators accusing UK media and others of having racist and sexist motivations for speaking out against Markle.

The morning show legend's team got access to Markle's makeup artist Daniel Martin and friend and actress Janina Gavankar for the program – perceived as a 'nod of approval' from the Sussexes.

Although King failed to secure the coveted sit-down with the Sussexes in 2019, she, Winfrey and the couple stayed in touch with a 'discussion on the table about when they would do that interview' the source said.





'Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place,' sources said





Gayle covered the royal wedding of Meghan and Harry and has been supportive of the couple since they were first dating

'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said.

'It is what the Sussexes have wanted for a long time - to present ''our lives, our way''.'

The world witnessed Harry and Meghan's increasing frustrations with the British press play out publicly during their African state visit in October 2019.

Harry snapped furiously at a Sky News reporter for asking a question as he walked to his car. During his tour finale speech he addressed his anger with the media.

'My deepest fear is history repeating itself,' he said. 'I've seen what happens when someone I love is commoditized to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person.

'I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.'

In her 2019 documentary Harry and Meghan Plus One, King compared Markle to Princess Diana, outlining clear comparisons between her outlook on child-rearing and that of Harry's late mother.

King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York, has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie – a claim that has become increasingly unlikely as the divide between the Royal Family and the Sussexes widened.





King and her CBS TV crew were invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor after the interview was denied





Gayle King teased her 'royal special report' and spoke of her trip to Winsdor when Meghan was overdue and hours away from labor in 2019

The royal source said that King is helping Oprah prepare questions for their March 7 interview and played a key role in the deal to secure it.

The source also claimed that the Sussexes' decision to hire Hillary *******'s former senior campaign aide Sara Latham as their Head of Communications in the UK was a key aspect of their drive for independence – though they later parted ways when the Sussexes left the country.

Meghan's decision to work with Latham on carving out her own family's media image was announced in March 2019.

Latham, who was part of their Kensington Palace office and media team, helped ensure that CBS TV cameras were present for baby Archie's reveal photo shoot at Windsor Castle.

Despite tradition that only UK media record such an occasion, one of King's CBS camera team attended the three-minute briefing.

The invitation prompted a furor in Royal circles.

Former press spokesperson Dickie Arbiter said: 'Choosing a US Network, friend or not, is treading on dodgy ground. That the inclusion of CBS in the pool means the pictures will make US Breakfast Shows is a fatuous excuse.'

But the palace source said that the Royal family's handlers were worried about an even greater 'backlash' from UK broadcasters had they let the planned interview with King go ahead.





King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York (pictured), has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie

Prince Harry and Meghan show off new royal baby boy Archie


'Had the Sussexes sat down with Gayle then, it would have prompted a war behind closed doors,' the source said. 'Senior Palace courtiers felt a move would prompt a backlash from major UK broadcasters, including the BBC.

'Buckingham Palace has always stood firm that no matter the severity of news or issues cutting off media outlets was never an option. The monarchy's famous motto 'Never complain. Never explain' stands firm.

'It led to frustration and angst between the Sussexes' team and other royals' handlers.'

But the source added that Harry and Meghan's split has afforded them new freedoms.

'Now that they are separated from royal duties, the Sussexes have full ownership of who they speak to and what they discuss,' the source said. 'The Oprah and Gayle experiment is the start of their sole ownership of their media representation.'

On Friday's episode of Good Morning America, King said that Oprah's interview had been filmed at the Sussexes' Montecito home and was a triumph.

'Harry and Meghan are talking to Oprah. It's their first major broadcast since giving up their senior royal duties,' King said. 'I've heard from reliable sources – this is Oprah talking – that it's the best interview she's ever done. So I'm curious. I think that's saying something!'


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> ha...that whole thing gets me - the smug face, the shade of green, the sheer volume of green including the hat
> You may recall we had a member here who was a fan of M and accused us all of being jealous of her


Yes, I remember those days although have to admit, they would be put on IGNORE rather quickly!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know what privacy (ahem) laws are in the UK, but I don't believe it's legal to record/videotape someone in the US without their permission, especially in a private location.  I'm not a lawyer though, so not sure.


Well, I know that CA law is that you MUST tell the other person about the taping .. remember Kanye was slapped for recording Taylor Swift?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now we get the truth.  Didn’t we all know that christening was a joke!
> Thank you, DM.  Tell us more, please.
> 
> All of them are shady, sleazy #)&@:&)@&$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been planning interview with Oprah for two YEARS
> 
> 
> Meghan originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019, but was overruled by the royals' PR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Our lives .. our way
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle has been planning bombshell interview with Oprah for two YEARS*
> Meghan Markle has been planning her upcoming interview with Oprah Winfreyfor almost two years, sources tell DailyMail.com.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019 – but was overruled by the Royal Family's public relations machine, the sources claimed.
> 
> TV insiders say King and Winfrey have been in talks over a sit-down with the Sussexes ever since, eventually leading to the 90-minute interview set to air on CBS March 7.
> 
> In 2019 Meghan was hoping to do a 'short interview' about her time adjusting to Royal life and becoming a mother.
> 
> But public relations officials at Kensington Palace, who at the time were trying to tamp down rumors of tensions between the Sussexes and senior royals, quickly put a stop to the plans fearing 'it would alienate the UK press', a source close to the controversy said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry sat down with Oprah Winfrey for a tell-all interview which is to be aired Sunday March 7 on CBS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources tell DailyMail.com that Meghan had been in talks with Oprah and Gayle King for two years
> 
> Oprah shares explosive promo of Prince Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> An uneasy compromise was struck, with King and her CBS TV crew instead being invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor.
> 
> Traditionally footage is shared between British TV broadcasters as a 'royal pool arrangement', but the insider said that after her interview was denied by royal handlers, 'Meghan put her foot down' that King, close friend to the Duchess' confidante Oprah, would be invited to the shoot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said
> The spat was an early sign of the rift between the Palace and the Sussexes that eventually led to the couple losing their royal titles.
> 
> The source said Meghan was attempting to 'manage their own public image away from select UK media' and told staff that her motto was 'our lives - our way.'
> 
> 'It was seen as a huge stride away from the usual methodology of Royal PR. It caused friction with the Sussexes, and a feeling that this was forbidden,' said the palace source.
> 
> 'They were emphatically told she could not conduct her own lengthy interviews with US media friends after Archie's birth.
> 
> 'That led to tension with courtiers as the pair wanted to tell their stories about philanthropic and personal matters.
> 
> 'Certainly from their side there was an element of feeling handcuffed and not having full ownership of their image.
> 
> 'The couple wanted to usher in a new era and mindset about having control, not just in their messaging but also about who they chose to speak with. Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place.'
> 
> King, the host of CBS This Morning, was in London at the time filming Meghan and Harry Plus One, a 60-minute show that aired that month and was sympathetic to the couple.
> 
> The show's producers Patti Aronofsky and Judy Tygard included in the documentary commentators accusing UK media and others of having racist and sexist motivations for speaking out against Markle.
> 
> The morning show legend's team got access to Markle's makeup artist Daniel Martin and friend and actress Janina Gavankar for the program – perceived as a 'nod of approval' from the Sussexes.
> 
> Although King failed to secure the coveted sit-down with the Sussexes in 2019, she, Winfrey and the couple stayed in touch with a 'discussion on the table about when they would do that interview' the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place,' sources said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle covered the royal wedding of Meghan and Harry and has been supportive of the couple since they were first dating
> 
> 'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said.
> 
> 'It is what the Sussexes have wanted for a long time - to present ''our lives, our way''.'
> 
> The world witnessed Harry and Meghan's increasing frustrations with the British press play out publicly during their African state visit in October 2019.
> 
> Harry snapped furiously at a Sky News reporter for asking a question as he walked to his car. During his tour finale speech he addressed his anger with the media.
> 
> 'My deepest fear is history repeating itself,' he said. 'I've seen what happens when someone I love is commoditized to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person.
> 
> 'I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.'
> 
> In her 2019 documentary Harry and Meghan Plus One, King compared Markle to Princess Diana, outlining clear comparisons between her outlook on child-rearing and that of Harry's late mother.
> 
> King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York, has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie – a claim that has become increasingly unlikely as the divide between the Royal Family and the Sussexes widened.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King and her CBS TV crew were invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor after the interview was denied
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King teased her 'royal special report' and spoke of her trip to Winsdor when Meghan was overdue and hours away from labor in 2019
> 
> The royal source said that King is helping Oprah prepare questions for their March 7 interview and played a key role in the deal to secure it.
> 
> The source also claimed that the Sussexes' decision to hire Hillary *******'s former senior campaign aide Sara Latham as their Head of Communications in the UK was a key aspect of their drive for independence – though they later parted ways when the Sussexes left the country.
> 
> Meghan's decision to work with Latham on carving out her own family's media image was announced in March 2019.
> 
> Latham, who was part of their Kensington Palace office and media team, helped ensure that CBS TV cameras were present for baby Archie's reveal photo shoot at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Despite tradition that only UK media record such an occasion, one of King's CBS camera team attended the three-minute briefing.
> 
> The invitation prompted a furor in Royal circles.
> 
> Former press spokesperson Dickie Arbiter said: 'Choosing a US Network, friend or not, is treading on dodgy ground. That the inclusion of CBS in the pool means the pictures will make US Breakfast Shows is a fatuous excuse.'
> 
> But the palace source said that the Royal family's handlers were worried about an even greater 'backlash' from UK broadcasters had they let the planned interview with King go ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York (pictured), has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan show off new royal baby boy Archie
> 
> 
> 'Had the Sussexes sat down with Gayle then, it would have prompted a war behind closed doors,' the source said. 'Senior Palace courtiers felt a move would prompt a backlash from major UK broadcasters, including the BBC.
> 
> 'Buckingham Palace has always stood firm that no matter the severity of news or issues cutting off media outlets was never an option. The monarchy's famous motto 'Never complain. Never explain' stands firm.
> 
> 'It led to frustration and angst between the Sussexes' team and other royals' handlers.'
> 
> But the source added that Harry and Meghan's split has afforded them new freedoms.
> 
> 'Now that they are separated from royal duties, the Sussexes have full ownership of who they speak to and what they discuss,' the source said. 'The Oprah and Gayle experiment is the start of their sole ownership of their media representation.'
> 
> On Friday's episode of Good Morning America, King said that Oprah's interview had been filmed at the Sussexes' Montecito home and was a triumph.
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan are talking to Oprah. It's their first major broadcast since giving up their senior royal duties,' King said. 'I've heard from reliable sources – this is Oprah talking – that it's the best interview she's ever done. So I'm curious. I think that's saying something!'


Not surprised ONE BIT .. she's been planning this shindig for-evah; *DISGUSTING*!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Not surprised ONE BIT .. she's been planning this shindig for-evah; *DISGUSTING*!



with Oprah and Gayle — *shameful, just shameful*

Brits and Americans need to realize exactly how much they have been played!


----------



## Handbag1234

zen1965 said:


> True dat. He has never been afraid to stick his foot in, and for years was the poster boy of anti-political correctness. Uncalled for at times, yet rather entertaining at others.
> To be fair, the man is almost 100 years old, he is a representative of an utterly different era and should not be judged by today’s woke agenda. Being born into high European nobility 100 years ago came with a huge amount of what we nowadays call entitlement. However, entitled or not, elitist or not, Philip has been the epitome of an old-world aristocrat‘s life of public duty and service (retiring at the age of 94!). For that I bow my head to him.
> 
> (And shame on Lazy Hazy who always was the royal with the least number of engagements p.a.)



When Prince Philip retired there was lots of press coverage and one article said a lot of his jokes were to amuse the Queen and put her at ease as she’s very shy.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> with Oprah and Gayle — *shameful, just shameful*



I think the concept of 'shame' went out with rotary dials


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> PLEASE everyone, don't misconstrue this as actually defending them, but this is silly.  If you took a random picture of DH and I driving, we might look like we hate each other



WAS it random? Their agency's name on the bottom corner?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now we get the truth.  Didn’t we all know that christening was a joke!
> Thank you, DM.  Tell us more, please.
> 
> All of them are shady, sleazy #)&@:&)@&$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been planning interview with Oprah for two YEARS
> 
> 
> Meghan originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019, but was overruled by the royals' PR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Our lives .. our way
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle has been planning bombshell interview with Oprah for two YEARS*
> Meghan Markle has been planning her upcoming interview with Oprah Winfreyfor almost two years, sources tell DailyMail.com.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019 – but was overruled by the Royal Family's public relations machine, the sources claimed.
> 
> TV insiders say King and Winfrey have been in talks over a sit-down with the Sussexes ever since, eventually leading to the 90-minute interview set to air on CBS March 7.
> 
> In 2019 Meghan was hoping to do a 'short interview' about her time adjusting to Royal life and becoming a mother.
> 
> But public relations officials at Kensington Palace, who at the time were trying to tamp down rumors of tensions between the Sussexes and senior royals, quickly put a stop to the plans fearing 'it would alienate the UK press', a source close to the controversy said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry sat down with Oprah Winfrey for a tell-all interview which is to be aired Sunday March 7 on CBS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources tell DailyMail.com that Meghan had been in talks with Oprah and Gayle King for two years
> 
> Oprah shares explosive promo of Prince Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> An uneasy compromise was struck, with King and her CBS TV crew instead being invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor.
> 
> Traditionally footage is shared between British TV broadcasters as a 'royal pool arrangement', but the insider said that after her interview was denied by royal handlers, 'Meghan put her foot down' that King, close friend to the Duchess' confidante Oprah, would be invited to the shoot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said
> The spat was an early sign of the rift between the Palace and the Sussexes that eventually led to the couple losing their royal titles.
> 
> The source said Meghan was attempting to 'manage their own public image away from select UK media' and told staff that her motto was 'our lives - our way.'
> 
> 'It was seen as a huge stride away from the usual methodology of Royal PR. It caused friction with the Sussexes, and a feeling that this was forbidden,' said the palace source.
> 
> 'They were emphatically told she could not conduct her own lengthy interviews with US media friends after Archie's birth.
> 
> 'That led to tension with courtiers as the pair wanted to tell their stories about philanthropic and personal matters.
> 
> 'Certainly from their side there was an element of feeling handcuffed and not having full ownership of their image.
> 
> 'The couple wanted to usher in a new era and mindset about having control, not just in their messaging but also about who they chose to speak with. Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place.'
> 
> King, the host of CBS This Morning, was in London at the time filming Meghan and Harry Plus One, a 60-minute show that aired that month and was sympathetic to the couple.
> 
> The show's producers Patti Aronofsky and Judy Tygard included in the documentary commentators accusing UK media and others of having racist and sexist motivations for speaking out against Markle.
> 
> The morning show legend's team got access to Markle's makeup artist Daniel Martin and friend and actress Janina Gavankar for the program – perceived as a 'nod of approval' from the Sussexes.
> 
> Although King failed to secure the coveted sit-down with the Sussexes in 2019, she, Winfrey and the couple stayed in touch with a 'discussion on the table about when they would do that interview' the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place,' sources said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle covered the royal wedding of Meghan and Harry and has been supportive of the couple since they were first dating
> 
> 'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said.
> 
> 'It is what the Sussexes have wanted for a long time - to present ''our lives, our way''.'
> 
> The world witnessed Harry and Meghan's increasing frustrations with the British press play out publicly during their African state visit in October 2019.
> 
> Harry snapped furiously at a Sky News reporter for asking a question as he walked to his car. During his tour finale speech he addressed his anger with the media.
> 
> 'My deepest fear is history repeating itself,' he said. 'I've seen what happens when someone I love is commoditized to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person.
> 
> 'I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.'
> 
> In her 2019 documentary Harry and Meghan Plus One, King compared Markle to Princess Diana, outlining clear comparisons between her outlook on child-rearing and that of Harry's late mother.
> 
> King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York, has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie – a claim that has become increasingly unlikely as the divide between the Royal Family and the Sussexes widened.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King and her CBS TV crew were invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor after the interview was denied
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King teased her 'royal special report' and spoke of her trip to Winsdor when Meghan was overdue and hours away from labor in 2019
> 
> The royal source said that King is helping Oprah prepare questions for their March 7 interview and played a key role in the deal to secure it.
> 
> The source also claimed that the Sussexes' decision to hire Hillary *******'s former senior campaign aide Sara Latham as their Head of Communications in the UK was a key aspect of their drive for independence – though they later parted ways when the Sussexes left the country.
> 
> Meghan's decision to work with Latham on carving out her own family's media image was announced in March 2019.
> 
> Latham, who was part of their Kensington Palace office and media team, helped ensure that CBS TV cameras were present for baby Archie's reveal photo shoot at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Despite tradition that only UK media record such an occasion, one of King's CBS camera team attended the three-minute briefing.
> 
> The invitation prompted a furor in Royal circles.
> 
> Former press spokesperson Dickie Arbiter said: 'Choosing a US Network, friend or not, is treading on dodgy ground. That the inclusion of CBS in the pool means the pictures will make US Breakfast Shows is a fatuous excuse.'
> 
> But the palace source said that the Royal family's handlers were worried about an even greater 'backlash' from UK broadcasters had they let the planned interview with King go ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York (pictured), has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan show off new royal baby boy Archie
> 
> 
> 'Had the Sussexes sat down with Gayle then, it would have prompted a war behind closed doors,' the source said. 'Senior Palace courtiers felt a move would prompt a backlash from major UK broadcasters, including the BBC.
> 
> 'Buckingham Palace has always stood firm that no matter the severity of news or issues cutting off media outlets was never an option. The monarchy's famous motto 'Never complain. Never explain' stands firm.
> 
> 'It led to frustration and angst between the Sussexes' team and other royals' handlers.'
> 
> But the source added that Harry and Meghan's split has afforded them new freedoms.
> 
> 'Now that they are separated from royal duties, the Sussexes have full ownership of who they speak to and what they discuss,' the source said. 'The Oprah and Gayle experiment is the start of their sole ownership of their media representation.'
> 
> On Friday's episode of Good Morning America, King said that Oprah's interview had been filmed at the Sussexes' Montecito home and was a triumph.
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan are talking to Oprah. It's their first major broadcast since giving up their senior royal duties,' King said. 'I've heard from reliable sources – this is Oprah talking – that it's the best interview she's ever done. So I'm curious. I think that's saying something!'



I think the answer DM's answer  to the current outcome of the lawsuit is the clapping back.   Every day or so, a story at how deceitful she was from the beginning.  They will remind readers that the lawsuit dragged on longer than it should have because she kept changing her story and adding things that were not even relevant to the story.  They will keep pushing their need for daily publicity whilst screaming for privacy.

The Sussex via their mouthpiece Scobie, keep trying to tell us that it OK for them to push articles about themselves, make Zoom appearances, show up at charity events, and walk in cemeteries,  because that is not the same thing as invading their privacy.  The only problem with that is there is going to be commentary and reportage  on what they are putting out, and that is what is riling them up.  The commentary and reportage.  They have no control over that.  They can't prevent a tabloid from taking what they do and reporting it as they wish to report it. They get plenty of good along with the bad, but  they can't prevent the public from commenting on the article and calling them out for being hypocritical vis a vis the privacy angle. The only way to stop that is to completely shut up, stay home and be really private.  Oh, and stop whining.  We are all pretty sick of that. So stay home and paint your 14 bedrooms and 16 bathrooms.  That should keep you busy and out of trouble.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I'm no PR expert, but this isn't the kind of thing that endears you to the public.



or the press short-term or longterm


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

First comment on the DM article: "Oprah to Harry: Do you feel dominated by your wife? Meghan: No, he doesnt."


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know what privacy (ahem) laws are in the UK, but I don't believe it's legal to record/videotape someone in the US without their permission, especially in a private location.  I'm not a lawyer though, so not sure.



It depends on the state. Some states are _one party consent_ states, so someone could legally record you without your permission.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> WAS it random? Their agency's name on the bottom corner?


they were trying to make it look random?


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


>



The earrings are gorgeous! So MM didn't let the dubious provenance of the earrings get in the way of her woke image. She is an expert in feeding lies to the media.


----------



## madamelizaking

HOLY CRAP I had to rush over here to start reading all the comments. TODAY IS SO JUICY. The war has begun!

Royal aides reveal Meghan bullying claim before Oprah interview


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The earrings are gorgeous! So MM didn't let the dubious provenance of the earrings get in the way of her woke image. She is an expert in feeding lies to the media.



this, it seems to me is Very Bad for her Woke image.  she accepts a very expensive gift from a murderer and then lies about it.
  But will it be publicized?  probably not


----------



## rose60610

Ugh. Architectural Digest has an article "Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Help Texas Women's Shelter Replace Roof".  Oh sure, let's just give them the friggin' Nobel Peace Prize now. If they donate some Lion Chow to a zoo surely National Geographic will cover it.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> The earrings are gorgeous! So MM didn't let the dubious provenance of the earrings get in the way of her woke image. She is an expert in feeding lies to the media.


Which makes me wonder? .. do members of the BRF (of which she was one at the time) have to 'report' on what is "gifted" (and/or received)?  I had thought that, especially in the US, items (especially like this) must be reported on .. even the celebs have to 'declare' the contents of their gift bags now (thank you IRS)!!


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> this, it seems to me is Very Bad for her Woke image.  she accepts a very expensive gift from a murderer and then lies about it.
> But will it be publicized?  probably not



Right. She's probably got the matching necklace and bracelet at home.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Ugh. Architectural Digest has an article "Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Help Texas Women's Shelter Replace Roof".  Oh sure, let's just give them the friggin' Nobel Peace Prize now. If they donate some Lion Chow to a zoo surely National Geographic will cover it.


Oh brother .. why would AD be posting a story like this???  I canceled my subscription to AD many years ago; I pretty much don't look at very many magazines anymore!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this, it seems to me is Very Bad for her Woke image.  she accepts a very expensive gift from a murderer and then lies about it.
> But will it be publicized?  probably not


Until this type of news is released in the US, she will continue pretending to be woke or whatever is convenient to her image & wallet.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Which makes me wonder? .. do members of the BRF (of which she was one at the time) have to 'report' on what is "gifted" (and/or received)?  I had thought that, especially in the US, items (especially like this) must be reported on .. even the celebs have to 'declare' the contents of their gift bags now (thank you IRS)!!


actually American Presidents aren't even allowed to keep gifts from foreign governments or officials.
from The Atlantic:
In the past, all gifts from foreign dignitaries had to be approved by Congress, after which they could become the property of the recipient. But as the U.S. gained prominence on the world stage, a division of protocol was created in 1928 to help presidents entertain visiting dignitaries and of course, organize the customary gift exchanges. Today, foreign gifts—from paintings to ceremonial daggers—are sent to the National Archives. 

Don't know what the rules are for British royals.


----------



## Chloe302225

CeeJay said:


> Which makes me wonder? .. do members of the BRF (of which she was one at the time) have to 'report' on what is "gifted" (and/or received)?  I had thought that, especially in the US, items (especially like this) must be reported on .. even the celebs have to 'declare' the contents of their gift bags now (thank you IRS)!!



The BRF has an official gift list that is distributed each year but only gifts given in an official capacity (given while on public duty etc) are listed. These were wedding gifts so there was no obligation to report who gifted them (wedding = personal so the gift was in a private capacity) or that they were even a gift in the first place.


----------



## CeeJay

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5007996


.. any chance you can post the entire article text?  If you click on the link, it brings you to the Times .. but it won't let you read the article "for free" (BOO HISS)!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Until this type of news is released in the US, she will continue pretending to be woke or whatever is convenient to her image & wallet.


why not release it?  would reporting on this make the media outlet racist?


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


> The BRF has an official gift list that is distributed each year but only gifts given in an official capacity (given while on public duty etc) are listed. These were wedding gifts so there was no obligation to report who gifted them (wedding = personal so the gift was in a private capacity) or that they were even a gift in the first place.


OK.  thanks.  but still a gift from a murderer.
they're not much on walking the talk are they?


----------



## gracekelly

Royal aides reveal bullying claim before Meghan’s Oprah interview
					

Royal aides have hit back at the Duchess of Sussex before her television interview with Oprah Winfrey by revealing that she faced a bullying complaint made by




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




@papertiger  Are you able to print the article?  It is pretty juicy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## madamelizaking

CeeJay said:


> .. any chance you can post the entire article text?  If you click on the link, it brings you to the Times .. but it won't let you read the article "for free" (BOO HISS)!!!


I'll DM you with a copy. I'm not sure if it's okay to post as it's behind a paywall.


----------



## Chloe302225

sdkitty said:


> actually American Presidents aren't even allowed to keep gifts from foreign governments or officials.
> from The Atlantic:
> In the past, all gifts from foreign dignitaries had to be approved by Congress, after which they could become the property of the recipient. But as the U.S. gained prominence on the world stage, a division of protocol was created in 1928 to help presidents entertain visiting dignitaries and of course, organize the customary gift exchanges. Today, foreign gifts—from paintings to ceremonial daggers—are sent to the National Archives.
> 
> Don't know what the rules are for British royals.



There are rules for private and public gifts. These were a private gift and therefore no information has to be publicly released about them. It is interesting that information on them is being dug up especially with what is coming up on the horizon.


----------



## Chloe302225

CeeJay said:


> .. any chance you can post the entire article text?  If you click on the link, it brings you to the Times .. but it won't let you read the article "for free" (BOO HISS)!!!


 Sorry, don't have access to what is behind the pay wall.


----------



## Chanbal

madamelizaking said:


> HOLY CRAP I had to rush over here to start reading all the comments. TODAY IS SO JUICY. The war has begun!
> 
> Royal aides reveal Meghan bullying claim before Oprah interview


I don't currently subscribe to The Times, so I couldn't read the entire article. However, this paragraph by itself says already a lot. 

_"The sources approached The Times because they felt that only a partial version had emerged of Meghan’s two years as a working member of the royal family and they wished to tell their side, concerned about how such matters are handled by the palace. The complaint claimed that she drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member."_


----------



## Lounorada

LittleStar88 said:


> Here we go with the sad eyes





I don't know what they are saying but I know the tiny violin should be playing 
She looks dressed for a funeral. He looks hungover. Although, now that I think of it, Hazmat looks hungover every time I see pics of him. 




byzina said:


> It looks as if a pigeon was flying over the $4,700 Armani dress.
> There is so much contrast between her dramatic look and Oprah's casual day outfit.


She's a Duchess dahling. Of course she will be dressed far more formal than Oprah the commoner.
That image on the dress really does look like bird sh*t, I can't un-see it 




marietouchet said:


> From DM
> *Interview has been extended and is now 2 hrs long* ! QEII likened to Don Corleone .....  Cooooool esp.  in light of health of Prince Philip ...
> You cannot invent this ...


----------



## gracekelly

Click on the main portion to read the article


> *Royal aides reveal Meghan bullying claim before Oprah interview | News | The Times*
> 
> 
> Royal aides have hit back at the Duchess of Sussex before her television interview with Oprah Winfrey by revealing that she faced a bullying complaint from one of her closest advisers during her time at Kensington Palace.
> 
> The sources approached_ The Times _because they felt that only a partial version had emerged of Meghan’s two years as a working member of the royal family and they wished to tell their side, concerned about how such matters are handled by the palace. The complaint claimed that she drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member.
> 
> It was submitted in October 2018 by Jason Knauf, the couple’s communications secretary at the time, seemingly in an effort to get Buckingham Palace to protect staff who he claimed were coming under pressure from the duchess. Prince Harry pleaded with Knauf not to pursue it, according to a source.
> 
> _The Times _was approached by sources who stated that they wanted to give their account of the turmoil within the royal household from Meghan’s arrival as Harry’s girlfriend in 2017 to the couple’s decision to stand down as working royals last year.
> 
> A spokesman for the Sussexes said they were the victims of a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation. They said the duchess was “saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma”.
> 
> 
> Knauf sent his email to Simon Case, then the Duke of Cambridge’s private secretary and now the cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Case then forwarded it to Carruthers, who was based at Clarence House.
> 
> In his email Knauf said Carruthers “agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious”. He added: “I remain concerned that nothing will be done.”
> 
> Sources say they were concerned that nothing was done at the time to investigate the situation, and nothing done since to protect staff against the possibility of bullying by a member of the royal family. Aides also insist that behind the scenes they did more to welcome Meghan and help her to find a role than has been publicly acknowledged.
> 
> They believe the public should have insight into their side of the story before watching the couple’s much-publicised interview with Winfrey, due to be televised in the United States on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> The couple’s lawyers told _The Times _that this newspaper is “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative” before the interview.
> 
> However, _The Times_ understands that the palace establishment is highly concerned that the allegations have emerged.
> 
> The sources have revealed a febrile atmosphere within Kensington Palace, where Meghan and Harry lived alongside the Cambridges after their wedding until the split between the two households at the beginning of 2019. Staff would on occasion be reduced to tears; one aide, anticipating a confrontation with Meghan, told a colleague: “I can’t stop shaking.”
> 
> Two senior members of staff have claimed that they were bullied by the duchess. Another former employee told _The Times_ they had been personally “humiliated” by her and claimed that two members of staff had been bullied.
> 
> Another aide claimed it felt “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation, which I guess could also be called bullying”.
> 
> The duchess denies bullying and her lawyers stated that one individual left after findings of misconduct. _The Times _was not able to corroborate that claim.
> 
> _The Times _can also reveal that the duchess wore earrings to a formal dinner in Fiji in 2018 that were a wedding gift from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who is said by US intelligence agencies to have approved the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The dinner took place three weeks after the killing.
> 
> At the time it was reported that the earrings were borrowed. The duchess does not deny this was what she said, despite being aware of their provenance.
> 
> On the same tour sources said the main reason that the duchess cut short an engagement in Fiji was because of her reservations about the organisation UN Women. It is not clear why she is said to have felt so strongly about its presence. The duchess denies the sources’ claims about the event.
> 
> Knauf wrote in his email: “I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable.”
> 
> He added: “The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.”
> 
> The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple’s private secretary, concluded: “I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.”
> 
> The complaint was sent to the HR department. However, one source said: “I think the problem is, not much happened with it. It was, ‘How can we make this go away?’, rather than addressing it.”
> 
> After Harry was told about the complaint a source insists he had a meeting with Knauf in which he begged him not to pursue it. Lawyers for the duke and duchess deny that any meeting took place or that the duke would have interfered with any staff matter.
> 
> Another source claimed: “Senior people in the household, Buckingham Palace and Clarence House, knew that they had a situation where members of staff, particularly young women, were being bullied to the point of tears.
> 
> “The institution just protected Meghan constantly. All the men in grey suits who she hates have a lot to answer for, because they did absolutely nothing to protect people.”
> 
> Knauf‘s complaint never progressed. Two of the people named in his email are are said to feel that nothing has been done to investigate the bullying claim. The following month Knauf handed in his notice.
> 
> When the households split the following March he took up a job as an adviser to the Duke of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges’ Royal Foundation.
> 
> After a newspaper revealed that a PA had left after only six months, it is understood that the duchess became extremely concerned about the number of stories in the press about staff leaving. Her lawyers state that she did not read the press.
> 
> The tour of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga was a difficult one for staff, sources told _The Times_. When the duchess wore the earrings in Fiji given by the crown prince she told aides who were preparing to brief the media about her outfit for the state dinner that they had been “borrowed” from a jeweller, a source said, an explanation that was widely reported. This was three weeks after the murder of Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.
> 
> Lawyers for the duchess said she may have stated they were borrowed but did not say they were borrowed from a jeweller and denied that she had misled anyone about their provenance.
> 
> Although Case had no managerial responsibility for the staff mentioned in Knauf’s complaint, he is understood to have taken it seriously. He made sure it was sent to HR, and took a close interest in the welfare of the staff member still employed there.
> 
> The issue of staff — their treatment, and the fact that they were shared between William and Harry — became so pressing that William and Case accelerated the process of splitting the two households. “What was a long-term plan became an immediate plan,” a source said.
> 
> The spokesman for the Sussexes said in a statement: “Let’s just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation. We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of The Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It’s no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining The Duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and The Duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years.


----------



## madamelizaking

Chanbal said:


> I don't currently subscribe to The Times, so I couldn't read the entire article. However, this paragraph by itself says already a lot.
> 
> _"The sources approached The Times because they felt that only a partial version had emerged of Meghan’s two years as a working member of the royal family and they wished to tell their side, concerned about how such matters are handled by the palace. The complaint claimed that she drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member."_


Here's some juicy parts. Not sure if posting an excerpt is okay, if it isn't can someone please let me know.


_Knauf wrote in his email: “I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable.”

He added: “The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.”

The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple’s private secretary, concluded: “I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.”

The complaint was sent to the HR department. However, one source said: “I think the problem is, not much happened with it. It was, ‘How can we make this go away?’, rather than addressing it.”

After Harry was told about the complaint a source insists he had a meeting with Knauf in which he begged him not to pursue it. Lawyers for the duke and duchess deny that any meeting took place or that the duke would have interfered with any staff matter.

Another source claimed: “Senior people in the household, Buckingham Palace and Clarence House, knew that they had a situation where members of staff, particularly young women, were being bullied to the point of tears.

“The institution just protected Meghan constantly. All the men in grey suits who she hates have a lot to answer for, because they did absolutely nothing to protect people.”

Knauf‘s complaint never progressed. Two of the people named in his email are are said to feel that nothing has been done to investigate the bullying claim. The following month Knauf handed in his notice.

When the households split the following March he took up a job as an adviser to the Duke of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges’ Royal Foundation._


----------



## Chloe302225

So the same "men in grey suits" that were so oppressive to MM are also the same ones that went above and beyond to protect her at the detriment of others. Ok....


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Oh brother .. why would AD be posting a story like this???  I canceled my subscription to AD many years ago; I pretty much don't look at very many magazines anymore!



I haven’t read the story, I do hope it is about the shelter and the people who run it, not H&M. The lady who runs the shelter is highly respected, has done enormous good for the city and is very well connected with and respected by the elites, such as George W and the Mrs. and many others.  H&M could only wish to be as effective as she has been. She has the ‘it’ quality.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Click on the main portion to read the article


OMG, this might explain the $2M dollars lawyer's fees that she wants DM to pay for the letter privacy case. Her lawyers have been working non-stop on several other allegations, and their bills need to be paid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't currently subscribe to The Times, so I couldn't read the entire article. However, this paragraph by itself says already a lot.
> 
> _"The sources approached The Times because they felt that only a partial version had emerged of Meghan’s two years as a working member of the royal family and they wished to tell their side, concerned about how such matters are handled by the palace. The complaint claimed that she drove two personal assistants out of the household and was undermining the confidence of a third staff member."_



And just like that the dominoes will fall. Oprah and Gayle should take note. We know MM has no scruples (ask Trev, Corey, etc.), when I saw a photo of O nibbling on Harvey’s ear, I  .  Sure, I understand many were duped by HW, still not everyone stuck their tongue in his ear. Gross!  Now this with H&M — it’s been going on for 2 years. Let it goooo. With all of her billions, why is she so desperate?


----------



## gracekelly

The Times wouldn't print any of this if they couldn't back it up.  It's a tsunami!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> First comment on the DM article: "Oprah to Harry: Do you feel dominated by your wife? Meghan: No, he doesnt."



Oh, if only Oprah would be that candid. No, there will no surprises for the besotted couple with a bun in the oven. It will be two hours glorifying them for their triumph over the adversity of being born into royalty (and marrying into it).


----------



## gracekelly

Now if they could only find some good receipts to prove that _you know who _started the Rose Hanbury rumors.  I think Kate would float on a cloud over that.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Oh, if only Oprah would be that candid. No, there will no surprises for the besotted couple with a bun in the oven. It will be two hours glorifying them for their triumph over the adversity of being born into royalty (and marrying into it).


Exactly.  Get your blood sugar drawn after the interview because medication may be required.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

madamelizaking said:


> Here's some juicy parts. Not sure if posting an excerpt is okay, if it isn't can someone please let me know.
> 
> 
> _Knauf wrote in his email: “I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable.”
> 
> He added: “The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.”
> 
> The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple’s private secretary, concluded: “I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.”
> 
> The complaint was sent to the HR department. However, one source said: “I think the problem is, not much happened with it. It was, ‘How can we make this go away?’, rather than addressing it.”
> 
> After Harry was told about the complaint a source insists he had a meeting with Knauf in which he begged him not to pursue it. Lawyers for the duke and duchess deny that any meeting took place or that the duke would have interfered with any staff matter.
> 
> Another source claimed: “Senior people in the household, Buckingham Palace and Clarence House, knew that they had a situation where members of staff, particularly young women, were being bullied to the point of tears.
> 
> “The institution just protected Meghan constantly. All the men in grey suits who she hates have a lot to answer for, because they did absolutely nothing to protect people.”
> 
> Knauf‘s complaint never progressed. Two of the people named in his email are are said to feel that nothing has been done to investigate the bullying claim. The following month Knauf handed in his notice.
> 
> When the households split the following March he took up a job as an adviser to the Duke of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges’ Royal Foundation._



I do feel sorry that the BRF has to be dealing with this situation when Prince Philip is in the hospital. The BRF is in a tough position. If the the men in grey suits have acted against the duchess, they would have been accused of being racists, so they had to protect her at the expenses of closing their eyes to bulling. 

The best thing that happened to the BRF was MM's move to the US. Unfortunately, we have to put up with her here.


----------



## Lodpah

Let it start. MM does not know what she’s up against! My prayer group is praying for the Queen. Not to bash MM but for protection of the Queen.

The problem with people like MM is their arrogance. Pride goes before a fall. The Queen is respected so her PR of course hired by MM will play dirty. Let them play, arrogance and dirty dealings always get exposed.

God save the Queen.

MM is truly Jezebel with Harry as her hapless Ahab. It turned out badly for them.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I do feel sorry that the BRF has to be dealing with this situation when Prince Philip is in the hospital. The BRF is in a tough position. If the the men in grey suits have acted against the duchess, they would have been accused of being racists, so they had to protect her at the expenses of closing their eyes to bulling.
> 
> The best thing that happened to the BRF was MM's move to the US. Unfortunately, we have to put up with her here.


In the interview she complains about the environment being "unsurvivable" and it seem that the only people who were in that unsurvivable environment were the people that worked for her and were bullied by her.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> So the same "men in grey suits" that were so oppressive to MM are also the same ones that went above and beyond to protect her at the detriment of others. Ok....


They were in a tough situation. I bet if they didn't, they would be called racists.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I think this is part of the unique position of the BRF in that they’re a family, but the Senior members are also Government Employees to an extent. They are answerable to the taxpayer and Harry and Meghan refuse to understand that.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now we get the truth.  Didn’t we all know that christening was a joke!
> Thank you, DM.  Tell us more, please.
> 
> All of them are shady, sleazy #)&@:&)@&$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been planning interview with Oprah for two YEARS
> 
> 
> Meghan originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019, but was overruled by the royals' PR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Our lives .. our way
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle has been planning bombshell interview with Oprah for two YEARS*
> Meghan Markle has been planning her upcoming interview with Oprah Winfreyfor almost two years, sources tell DailyMail.com.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex originally tried to arrange a televised talk with friend and CBS anchor Gayle King after her son Archie's birth in May 2019 – but was overruled by the Royal Family's public relations machine, the sources claimed.
> 
> TV insiders say King and Winfrey have been in talks over a sit-down with the Sussexes ever since, eventually leading to the 90-minute interview set to air on CBS March 7.
> 
> In 2019 Meghan was hoping to do a 'short interview' about her time adjusting to Royal life and becoming a mother.
> 
> But public relations officials at Kensington Palace, who at the time were trying to tamp down rumors of tensions between the Sussexes and senior royals, quickly put a stop to the plans fearing 'it would alienate the UK press', a source close to the controversy said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry sat down with Oprah Winfrey for a tell-all interview which is to be aired Sunday March 7 on CBS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources tell DailyMail.com that Meghan had been in talks with Oprah and Gayle King for two years
> 
> Oprah shares explosive promo of Prince Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> An uneasy compromise was struck, with King and her CBS TV crew instead being invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor.
> 
> Traditionally footage is shared between British TV broadcasters as a 'royal pool arrangement', but the insider said that after her interview was denied by royal handlers, 'Meghan put her foot down' that King, close friend to the Duchess' confidante Oprah, would be invited to the shoot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said
> The spat was an early sign of the rift between the Palace and the Sussexes that eventually led to the couple losing their royal titles.
> 
> The source said Meghan was attempting to 'manage their own public image away from select UK media' and told staff that her motto was 'our lives - our way.'
> 
> 'It was seen as a huge stride away from the usual methodology of Royal PR. It caused friction with the Sussexes, and a feeling that this was forbidden,' said the palace source.
> 
> 'They were emphatically told she could not conduct her own lengthy interviews with US media friends after Archie's birth.
> 
> 'That led to tension with courtiers as the pair wanted to tell their stories about philanthropic and personal matters.
> 
> 'Certainly from their side there was an element of feeling handcuffed and not having full ownership of their image.
> 
> 'The couple wanted to usher in a new era and mindset about having control, not just in their messaging but also about who they chose to speak with. Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place.'
> 
> King, the host of CBS This Morning, was in London at the time filming Meghan and Harry Plus One, a 60-minute show that aired that month and was sympathetic to the couple.
> 
> The show's producers Patti Aronofsky and Judy Tygard included in the documentary commentators accusing UK media and others of having racist and sexist motivations for speaking out against Markle.
> 
> The morning show legend's team got access to Markle's makeup artist Daniel Martin and friend and actress Janina Gavankar for the program – perceived as a 'nod of approval' from the Sussexes.
> 
> Although King failed to secure the coveted sit-down with the Sussexes in 2019, she, Winfrey and the couple stayed in touch with a 'discussion on the table about when they would do that interview' the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Oprah and Gayle have been supportive publicly of Meghan and Harry, since they dated. So for the Sussexes their friends felt like a safe place,' sources said
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle covered the royal wedding of Meghan and Harry and has been supportive of the couple since they were first dating
> 
> 'This interview has been two years in the making with either Gayle or Oprah asking the questions. In reality it is the two of them prepping for the in-depth conversation,' the source said.
> 
> 'It is what the Sussexes have wanted for a long time - to present ''our lives, our way''.'
> 
> The world witnessed Harry and Meghan's increasing frustrations with the British press play out publicly during their African state visit in October 2019.
> 
> Harry snapped furiously at a Sky News reporter for asking a question as he walked to his car. During his tour finale speech he addressed his anger with the media.
> 
> 'My deepest fear is history repeating itself,' he said. 'I've seen what happens when someone I love is commoditized to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person.
> 
> 'I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.'
> 
> In her 2019 documentary Harry and Meghan Plus One, King compared Markle to Princess Diana, outlining clear comparisons between her outlook on child-rearing and that of Harry's late mother.
> 
> King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York, has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie – a claim that has become increasingly unlikely as the divide between the Royal Family and the Sussexes widened.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King and her CBS TV crew were invited to the first photo shoot of Harry and Meghan with their newborn baby at St. George's Hall in Windsor after the interview was denied
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King teased her 'royal special report' and spoke of her trip to Winsdor when Meghan was overdue and hours away from labor in 2019
> 
> The royal source said that King is helping Oprah prepare questions for their March 7 interview and played a key role in the deal to secure it.
> 
> The source also claimed that the Sussexes' decision to hire Hillary *******'s former senior campaign aide Sara Latham as their Head of Communications in the UK was a key aspect of their drive for independence – though they later parted ways when the Sussexes left the country.
> 
> Meghan's decision to work with Latham on carving out her own family's media image was announced in March 2019.
> 
> Latham, who was part of their Kensington Palace office and media team, helped ensure that CBS TV cameras were present for baby Archie's reveal photo shoot at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Despite tradition that only UK media record such an occasion, one of King's CBS camera team attended the three-minute briefing.
> 
> The invitation prompted a furor in Royal circles.
> 
> Former press spokesperson Dickie Arbiter said: 'Choosing a US Network, friend or not, is treading on dodgy ground. That the inclusion of CBS in the pool means the pictures will make US Breakfast Shows is a fatuous excuse.'
> 
> But the palace source said that the Royal family's handlers were worried about an even greater 'backlash' from UK broadcasters had they let the planned interview with King go ahead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King, who regularly speaks with the Duchess and attended her baby shower in New York (pictured), has previously insisted that despite reports of tensions in the House of Windsor, the Queen and Prince Charles support the former actress and are part of a 'team' raising Archie
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan show off new royal baby boy Archie
> 
> 
> 'Had the Sussexes sat down with Gayle then, it would have prompted a war behind closed doors,' the source said. 'Senior Palace courtiers felt a move would prompt a backlash from major UK broadcasters, including the BBC.
> 
> 'Buckingham Palace has always stood firm that no matter the severity of news or issues cutting off media outlets was never an option. The monarchy's famous motto 'Never complain. Never explain' stands firm.
> 
> 'It led to frustration and angst between the Sussexes' team and other royals' handlers.'
> 
> But the source added that Harry and Meghan's split has afforded them new freedoms.
> 
> 'Now that they are separated from royal duties, the Sussexes have full ownership of who they speak to and what they discuss,' the source said. 'The Oprah and Gayle experiment is the start of their sole ownership of their media representation.'
> 
> On Friday's episode of Good Morning America, King said that Oprah's interview had been filmed at the Sussexes' Montecito home and was a triumph.
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan are talking to Oprah. It's their first major broadcast since giving up their senior royal duties,' King said. 'I've heard from reliable sources – this is Oprah talking – that it's the best interview she's ever done. So I'm curious. I think that's saying something!'


1. the Oprah interview is MM’s vindictive payback for BP saying no to the 2019 interview with Gayle
2. Kerfuffle over Gayle interview was the cause of all the chaos in at Archie’s birth and christening
3. if BP said no the Gayle, then I am 100 percent sure Megxit had a no interview clause 
So, the Harkles violated the Megxit agreement by doing Oprah before review was complete 

Badly done Harkles


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lodpah  Amen. On most days, I am startled by the  Biblical connections. Seems like only the BRF have read the good book.

@bag-mania  what is wrong with O and Gayle? Why pursue this mess? Wonder if she will ever explain herself.








						Oprah 'livid' with Prince Harry over James Corden interview and 'why he left UK'
					

Oprah Winfrey is reportedly upset that some of her exclusive lines from her chat with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been used in an interview on The Late Late Show




					www.mirror.co.uk
				






Spoiler: OW livid



*Oprah Winfrey is reportedly upset that some of her exclusive lines from her chat with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been used in an interview on The Late Late Show*




Oprah Winfrey is reportedly 'livid' that Prince Harry spoke with James Corden and that the interview has aired before her much anticipated chat.

The 67-year-old talk show host sat down with Meghan Markle and Harry while they were touring South Africa and it is believed they opened up about all aspects of their lives. 

One of the main subjects was the reason why the couple left their royal duties and moved from the UK to California to forge a new life.

So, it is thought that there has been some upset that the Duke of Sussex spilled the beans about his reasoning to James Corden in a chat on an open top bus for The Late Late Show.

This means that the revelation that he quit the country due to his anger towards the British media is no longer the exclusive that Oprah wanted kept for her no-holds-barred interview.





Oprah would not be happy that Prince Harry spoke to James Corden
Speaking about how Oprah's chat could have been devalued by Harry's reveal, the i Paper’s Late Editor Benjamin Butterworth said: “I think they were desperate to get their story out there.

“Anyone that saw James Corden and Prince Harry on Friday, first of all, Oprah must have been livid that he'd already given the line of why he quit the Royals to James Corden so she's not got that as an exclusive." 

He went on to claim that this would have cost Oprah's budget big time as she was hoping to have kept the line for herself.

He continued: "So she's wasted a couple of million there but I just find it utterly extraordinary how a couple that are so rich and have had such a high position in life as the Duke and Duchess can manage to make themselves appear so cheap."


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Who here remembers the popularity of the K's in their heyday. Those threads were massive. Now, Kim's divorce barely gets a nod and the rest of the family can often be found buried in the back pages.



Yes, but the Kardashians had been popular for well over a decade before they finally faded. No one could ever have predicted such a long run for a family with no particular talents beyond marketing themselves.

Harry and Meghan are going to burn out way before that.  They aren’t entertaining on any level.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> In the interview she complains about the environment being "unsurvivable" and it seem that the only people who were in that unsurvivable environment were the people that worked for her and were bullied by her.


I believe the environment that she created was indeed "unsurvivable". It was rich in lies, greed, and bulling. I wonder how many lies were needed just to have her first date with H... She is ruthless! Shame on Oprah who is supporting a bully.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Other than O’s fury over Diana refusing her interview requests and serving full fat mousse at her luncheon, what the hell is O’s obsession with the BRF?  Odd that O, Gayle, CBS has this vendetta(?) against the BRF.  We all know what is driving MM, so no my$tery there.  Just odd the 2 women of a certain age [I’m their same age] would do this. Waste of their time, their good will, their skills. Odd.

ETA: Maybe Sarah can help us understand or will she be silenced????


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Lodpah  Amen. On most days, I am startled by the  Biblical connections. Seems like only the BRF have read the good book.
> 
> @bag-mania  what is wrong with O and Gayle? Why pursue this mess? Wonder if she will ever explain herself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah 'livid' with Prince Harry over James Corden interview and 'why he left UK'
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey is reportedly upset that some of her exclusive lines from her chat with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been used in an interview on The Late Late Show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: OW livid
> 
> 
> 
> *Oprah Winfrey is reportedly upset that some of her exclusive lines from her chat with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been used in an interview on The Late Late Show*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey is reportedly 'livid' that Prince Harry spoke with James Corden and that the interview has aired before her much anticipated chat.
> 
> The 67-year-old talk show host sat down with Meghan Markle and Harry while they were touring South Africa and it is believed they opened up about all aspects of their lives.
> 
> One of the main subjects was the reason why the couple left their royal duties and moved from the UK to California to forge a new life.
> 
> So, it is thought that there has been some upset that the Duke of Sussex spilled the beans about his reasoning to James Corden in a chat on an open top bus for The Late Late Show.
> 
> This means that the revelation that he quit the country due to his anger towards the British media is no longer the exclusive that Oprah wanted kept for her no-holds-barred interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah would not be happy that Prince Harry spoke to James Corden
> Speaking about how Oprah's chat could have been devalued by Harry's reveal, the i Paper’s Late Editor Benjamin Butterworth said: “I think they were desperate to get their story out there.
> 
> “Anyone that saw James Corden and Prince Harry on Friday, first of all, Oprah must have been livid that he'd already given the line of why he quit the Royals to James Corden so she's not got that as an exclusive."
> 
> He went on to claim that this would have cost Oprah's budget big time as she was hoping to have kept the line for herself.
> 
> He continued: "So she's wasted a couple of million there but I just find it utterly extraordinary how a couple that are so rich and have had such a high position in life as the Duke and Duchess can manage to make themselves appear so cheap."


haha, "_a couple that are so rich and have had such a high position in life as the Duke and Duchess can *manage to make themselves appear so cheap*_*.*" I couldn't agree more with this, they are so vulgar!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Yes, but the Kardashians had been popular for well over a decade before they finally faded. No one could ever have predicted such a long run for a family with no particular talents beyond marketing themselves.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are going to burn out way before that.  They aren’t entertaining on any level.


I hope you are right, can you imagine 10 years of MM&H?


----------



## marietouchet

A final thought on today’s tsunami on bullying ...

During LETTERGATE, Remember the 4 at the palace who “were eager” to testify about how the letter was written ... that never made sense to me at the time ...

Why would these palace staffers, who were just doing their job, want to get involved in goopy LETTERGATE ?  I thought why are they not staying out of this, this isn’t their fight ... These are people who would think twice about getting involved due to lawyer costs ...

Well, maybe they felt ill used while helping to get out the letter ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I do feel sorry that the BRF has to be dealing with this situation when Prince Philip is in the hospital. The BRF is in a tough position. If the the men in grey suits have acted against the duchess, they would have been accused of being racists, so they had to protect her at the expenses of closing their eyes to bulling.
> 
> *The best thing that happened to the BRF was MM's move to the US. Unfortunately, we have to put up with her here.*



‘I am just delighted and relieved those adorable Cambridge kids get to grow up without this toxic H&M bs.  For them, we can put up with gruesome twosome.

In the Alec Baldwin section, there is discussion about pregnant women using fillers, Botox , etc. Supposedly pregnant women are not supposed to use it.  Ummm, what gives with MM’s face? Is she not pregnant?  She wouldn’t like about that, would she?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bag-mania  what is wrong with O and Gayle? Why pursue this mess? Wonder if she will ever explain herself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah 'livid' with Prince Harry over James Corden interview and 'why he left UK'
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey is reportedly upset that some of her exclusive lines from her chat with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been used in an interview on The Late Late Show
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: OW livid
> 
> 
> 
> *Oprah Winfrey is reportedly upset that some of her exclusive lines from her chat with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been used in an interview on The Late Late Show*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey is reportedly 'livid' that Prince Harry spoke with James Corden and that the interview has aired before her much anticipated chat.
> 
> The 67-year-old talk show host sat down with Meghan Markle and Harry while they were touring South Africa and it is believed they opened up about all aspects of their lives.
> 
> One of the main subjects was the reason why the couple left their royal duties and moved from the UK to California to forge a new life.
> 
> So, it is thought that there has been some upset that the Duke of Sussex spilled the beans about his reasoning to James Corden in a chat on an open top bus for The Late Late Show.
> 
> This means that the revelation that he quit the country due to his anger towards the British media is no longer the exclusive that Oprah wanted kept for her no-holds-barred interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah would not be happy that Prince Harry spoke to James Corden
> Speaking about how Oprah's chat could have been devalued by Harry's reveal, the i Paper’s Late Editor Benjamin Butterworth said: “I think they were desperate to get their story out there.
> 
> “Anyone that saw James Corden and Prince Harry on Friday, first of all, Oprah must have been livid that he'd already given the line of why he quit the Royals to James Corden so she's not got that as an exclusive."
> 
> He went on to claim that this would have cost Oprah's budget big time as she was hoping to have kept the line for herself.
> 
> He continued: "So she's wasted a couple of million there but I just find it utterly extraordinary how a couple that are so rich and have had such a high position in life as the Duke and Duchess can manage to make themselves appear so cheap."



I’m going to cut Oprah some slack on this because I think the story was fabricated by the Mirror. All they have is some guy saying “Oprah must be livid” instead of a quote from someone who has actually spoken with Oprah. Since both shows are on CBS, I consider it all part of one package. The James Corden bit was supposed to be the appetizer, with the Oprah interview as the entrée.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I hope you are right, can you imagine 10 years of MM&H?



The time will fly by! We’re already three years in.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to cut Oprah some slack on this because I think the story was fabricated by the Mirror. All they have is some guy saying “Oprah must be livid” instead of a quote from someone who has actually spoken with Oprah. Since both shows are on CBS, I consider it all part of one package. The James Corden bit was supposed to be the appetizer, with the Oprah interview as the entrée.



Pretty much. Everyone on CBS is shoving this down our throats... if I wasn’t such a big Colbert fan, I’d drop it for the rest of the week...


----------



## lanasyogamama

madamelizaking said:


> HOLY CRAP I had to rush over here to start reading all the comments. TODAY IS SO JUICY. The war has begun!
> 
> Royal aides reveal Meghan bullying claim before Oprah interview



Wow wow wow.  I really hope this gets picked up in the US media, but I seriously doubt it will. 

She’s a truly awful woman


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to cut Oprah some slack on this because I think the story was fabricated by the Mirror. All they have is some guy saying “Oprah must be livid” instead of a quote from someone who has actually spoken with Oprah. Since both shows are on CBS, I consider it all part of one package. The James Corden bit was supposed to be the appetizer, with the Oprah interview as the entrée.



True, it does have some logic to it. After H saying how toxic the UK press is, what is left to say?
They seem to know only 1 song.

ETA: Could be CBS overplaying their hand.  I am so tired of this PityParty.

ETA2: maybe MM could learn from Serena. Doom and gloom are never big sellers. The joy in this video is invigorating
www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9318023/Serena-Williams-daughter-Olympia-wear-matching-outfits-star-fashion-campaign.html


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘I am just delighted and relieved those adorable Cambridge kids get to grow up without this toxic H&M bs.  For them, we can put up with gruesome twosome.
> 
> In the Alec Baldwin section, there is discussion about pregnant women using fillers, Botox , etc. Supposedly pregnant women are not supposed to use it.  Ummm, what gives with MM’s face? Is she not pregnant?  She wouldn’t like about that, would she?



Will may have lost his brother to MM, but it's a small price to pay compared to having this woman near his family. I agree, MM&H are both toxic. 

After the last news releases on lies and bulling, the circulating rumors about fake bumps are becoming believable. The entire situation is  and .


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The time will fly by! We’re already three years in.


I joined the boat after the start of COVID, and it already feels like it's been forever.


----------



## madamelizaking

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow wow wow.  I really hope this gets picked up in the US media, but I seriously doubt it will.
> 
> She’s a truly awful woman


Harpers Bazaar is already defending her. It's ridiculous.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, it does have some logic to it. After H saying how toxic the UK press is, what is left to say?
> They seem to know only 1 song.
> 
> ETA: Could be CBS overplaying their hand.  I am so tired of this PityParty.
> 
> ETA2: maybe MM could learn from Serena. Doom and gloom are never big sellers. The joy in this video is invigorating
> www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9318023/Serena-Williams-daughter-Olympia-wear-matching-outfits-star-fashion-campaign.html



I am wondering if Oprah got one big surprise statement out of them, maybe something previously unknown about the BRF.  There has to be some payoff for an interview she describes as being her best ever. 

Or maybe the whole thing is just ridiculous hype to sucker us all in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I joined the boat after the start of COVID, and it already feels like it's been forever.



I joined 03/27/2020.  I have aged 40 years.

@bag-mania  Unless they tell us that H has serious mental health issues, the it will be the biggest nothing-burger ever.  
Diana conspiracy theories better not be included.

@madamelizaking  Omid works for Harper’s. Can’t trust anything they print about H&M.


----------



## bag-mania

madamelizaking said:


> Harpers Bazaar is already defending her. It's ridiculous.




That is to be expected. Their mouthpiece Omid Scobie works for Harpers.


----------



## Chanbal

Hope ITV loses that _£1million... _ 

_"ITV has today been branded 'deplorable' after it bought up the Duke and Duchess and Sussex's 'grossly insensitive' two-hour interview with Oprah despite warnings its broadcast could detonate a 'diplomatic bomb' if the Duke of Edinburgh's health deteriorates. Philip is starting his third week in hospital after being moved to a cardiac unit, and hasn't seen his wife the Queen for more than a fortnight.

The Oprah deal is said to have cost the broadcaster around £1million, having beaten Sky to the rights after talks with ViacomCBS were completed yesterday. It was a largely open field in the UK after the BBC declined to broadcast it.

But some experts have questioned whether ITV will make any money from the deal because businesses may not want to advertise during the 'toxic' two hour show as Philip battles heart problems in hospital and claims the public have more affection for him than Meghan and Harry. 

*Some ITV viewers have already vowed to boycott the show completely due to the 'horrendous timing'."*









						Meghan Markle will 'raise issue of race in Britain' during Oprah chat
					

The Duchess of Sussex will also open up about her wellbeing and self-esteem while living in Britain for two years after her husband said life in the UK was 'destroying my mental health'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Yanca

The US media it seemed is  Megnuts friendly, they are running, The denial claims and side of Megnuts instead of publishing the claims of the people she bullied.  They should run the story, the facts, the dates and situations, Bring it!! if she really threw tea to a staffer during their Australia Tour, release the details, These gruesome twosome " survivors" are getting nastier by the minute.  Staffer and former employee should be given a choice and a voice should they choose to speak up, why should  speaking up her truth only be afforded to her because she is more powerful and influential! Ughhh


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> That is to be expected. Their mouthpiece Omid Scobie works for Harpers.


Everything is an attack on her? What about her attacks on the BRF? Tone deaf much? Honestly, if I did not adore the Queen and respected her years of service and dedication and her graceful and endearing ways and attitude I would care less but MM is definitely an expert at gaslighting so . . . 

Here's an apple juice off to you MM. This song is you.


Rollins Band - Liar'

lyrics:

( Spoken)So, you think you're gonna live your life alone In darkness and seclusion Yeah I know, you've been out there Tried to mix with the animals And it just left you full of humiliated confusion But the feeling of loneliness never leaves you It haunts you everywhere you go And then you meet me and Your whole world changes Because everything I say is everything You've ever wanted to hear So you drop your defenses, and you drop all your fears And you're so busy feeling good That you never question why Things are going so well

You want to know why?

(Singing) Cause I'm a liar, yeah, I'm a liar I'll tear your mind out, I'll burn your soul I'll turn you into me I’ll turn you into me!! 'Cause I'm a liar, a liar, a liar, a liar
*
(Spoken) I'll hide behind a smile and understanding eyes And I'll tell you things that you already know So you can say: I really identify with you, so much! I'll come to you like an affliction but I'll leave you like an addiction You'll never forget me... You wanna know why?*

(Singing) Cause I'm a liar, yeah, I'm a liar! I'll rip your mind out, I'll burn your soul I'll turn you into me I’ll turn you into me!! 'Cause I'm a liar, a liar, liar, liar, liar liar... I don't know why I feel the need to lie and cause you so much pain Maybe it's something inside, Maybe it's something I can't explain 'Cause all I do is mess you up and lie to you I'm a liar, oh, I am a liar

(Spoken) But if you'll give just one more chance I swear I will never lie to you again Because now I see The destructive power of a lie That's stronger than truth I can't believe I ever hurt you, I swear I will never lie to you again Please, just give me more chance, I'll never lie to you again, no I swear I will never tell a lie (x2) No, no

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho Ho! Sucker! Sucker! Oh, sucker!

(Singing) I am a liar, yeah! I like it! I feel good!!

Song I got off the Internet about best songs about Narcissistic people. I'm crediting the band Rollins as it is their song.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I joined 03/27/2020.  I have aged 40 years.
> 
> @bag-mania  Unless they tell us that H has serious mental health issues, the it will be the biggest nothing-burger ever.
> Diana conspiracy theories better not be included.
> 
> @madamelizaking  Omid works for Harper’s. Can’t trust anything they print about H&M.


You made me look back, but couldn't find my 1st post. I may have joined around 05/2020, I'm always late to the party.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> You made me look back, but couldn't find my 1st post. I may have joined around 05/2020, I'm always late to the party.



You two missed the wedding. Most of us still liked her at that point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

What’s Richard talking about — the CBS Empire?


----------



## madamelizaking

CarryOn2020 said:


> What’s Richard talking about — the CBS Empire?



The fact that American media is sweeping these allegations under the rug. That no major media source has ever really been critical of MM.


----------



## LittleStar88

Lodpah said:


> Everything is an attack on her? What about her attacks on the BRF? Tone deaf much? Honestly, if I did not adore the Queen and respected her years of service and dedication and her graceful and endearing ways and attitude I would care less but MM is definitely an expert at gaslighting so . . .
> 
> Here's an apple juice off to you MM. This song is you.
> 
> 
> Rollins Band - Liar'
> 
> lyrics:
> 
> ( Spoken)So, you think you're gonna live your life alone In darkness and seclusion Yeah I know, you've been out there Tried to mix with the animals And it just left you full of humiliated confusion But the feeling of loneliness never leaves you It haunts you everywhere you go And then you meet me and Your whole world changes Because everything I say is everything You've ever wanted to hear So you drop your defenses, and you drop all your fears And you're so busy feeling good That you never question why Things are going so well
> 
> You want to know why?
> 
> (Singing) Cause I'm a liar, yeah, I'm a liar I'll tear your mind out, I'll burn your soul I'll turn you into me I’ll turn you into me!! 'Cause I'm a liar, a liar, a liar, a liar
> 
> *(Spoken) I'll hide behind a smile and understanding eyes And I'll tell you things that you already know So you can say: I really identify with you, so much! I'll come to you like an affliction but I'll leave you like an addiction You'll never forget me... You wanna know why?*
> 
> (Singing) Cause I'm a liar, yeah, I'm a liar! I'll rip your mind out, I'll burn your soul I'll turn you into me I’ll turn you into me!! 'Cause I'm a liar, a liar, liar, liar, liar liar... I don't know why I feel the need to lie and cause you so much pain Maybe it's something inside, Maybe it's something I can't explain 'Cause all I do is mess you up and lie to you I'm a liar, oh, I am a liar
> 
> (Spoken) But if you'll give just one more chance I swear I will never lie to you again Because now I see The destructive power of a lie That's stronger than truth I can't believe I ever hurt you, I swear I will never lie to you again Please, just give me more chance, I'll never lie to you again, no I swear I will never tell a lie (x2) No, no
> 
> Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho Ho! Sucker! Sucker! Oh, sucker!
> 
> (Singing) I am a liar, yeah! I like it! I feel good!!
> 
> Song I got off the Internet about best songs about Narcissistic people. I'm crediting the band Rollins as it is their song.



Love this song and video so much. Henry Rollins is awesome!


----------



## madamelizaking

bag-mania said:


> You two missed the wedding. Most of us still liked her at that point.


I knew from their first interview together that she was a narc. I liked her up until then. The way she guided the conversation and took the lead. My ex husband would do the same thing. Also, she seemed fake.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are the claims true?  Misleading does not mean false. Misinformation does not mean false.
Which part is a “wholly false narrative“?  All of them? Some? None?
When so many are claiming bullying, etc., it seems simple statements would help this situation.

Was a letter written by Jason? Did Harry beg him not to give it to HR?  Simple questions do not require a lengthy answer.
So, uh, these claims are a conspiracy ?  to discredit H&M right before their huge US debut?  Final question — are the claims true?


from HBazaar:
_A spokesperson for the Sussexes denied the claim in the British newspaper, saying it was "based on misleading and harmful misinformation." The rep added that Meghan views the claim as another dishonest attack on her character, something she and Prince Harry have long called out the British media for enabling and allowing. The couple's lawyers also said The Times was being used "by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative" before their interview with Oprah._


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


>



What a freaking hypocrite.  After all the crap about how her engagement ring has "ethically sourced" diamonds, yet she wears these and lies about the source.  Disgusting, repulsive, sorry excuse for a human being.


----------



## purseinsanity

madamelizaking said:


> HOLY CRAP I had to rush over here to start reading all the comments. TODAY IS SO JUICY. The war has begun!
> 
> Royal aides reveal Meghan bullying claim before Oprah interview


Oh, the poor little WOC is a bully?!!?  NO! Can't be!


----------



## gracekelly

madamelizaking said:


> Harpers Bazaar is already defending her. It's ridiculous.



That magazine is so up her azz that you can barely see their ankles. I was greeted this AM with an article describing how I could have skin like hers.  Really!  Beauty advice from a woman who has filled her face with chemical and rearranged the rest!


----------



## Lodpah

What do you all think of this article? Didn't they say last year Archie's first word was "da da"? I kinda believe it as it is been said MM swears worse than a sailor (nothing wrong with that if that's your thing but to play righteous and high falutin in public and in the rear all nasty and mean, then it's . . . ")

 Moderator · Posted by 
Benjamin Smallbrook
HARRY AND MEGHAN REACH A NEW LOW!
I’ve been in two minds about telling you this, but have decided to, because we are all being taken for fools. All of us, even Harry and Meghan’s fervent, but misguided supporters. I will start with an apology to the ladies for the content of this post.
Yesterday, I received a phone call from the father of one of Harry’s old friends. I have known him for over twenty years. His own son tipped him off about Harry and Meghan’s disgusting antics when dealing with the media.
Harry and Meghan think they are clever. They think we are all fools. He and Meghan concoct the most childish, filthy pranks and release them on an unsuspecting public. They probably snigger together when they watch the news when Harry has been interviewed.





They started by telling us they cooked 'roast chicken' together when they first met. No, they didn’t. This is an Urban Dictionary euphemism. They thought it was a huge joke to say this on air.
In 2020, Harry told us that Archie’s first words were “Da, da, da, da.”
When interviewed by TV host, James Corden, he said, “Archie’s first word was crocodile.” Meghan probably told him to say this. What a hoot!
Of course, Archie's first word wasn't 'crocodile' and he didn't ask for a 'waffle maker'. Check out these three sexual terms in the Urban Dictionary and you will realise Harry and Meghan's joke on the public should be left in the sewer, along with the two of them.
They think it is funny to use sexually explicit jokes on the public.
And what kind of parents would bring their baby into something that is offensive and unpleasant?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Now if they could only find some good receipts to prove that _you know who _started the Rose Hanbury rumors.  I think Kate would float on a cloud over that.


Yep.  If she's spreading vicious rumors about her own father, there's no way she wouldn't throw her BIL/SIL she's hugely jealous about under the open bus that Haz rode on.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> *And what kind of parents would bring their baby into something that is offensive and unpleasant?*


Haz and Meg.  The King and Queen of WokeDumb


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I joined the boat after the start of COVID, and it already feels like it's been forever.


It's mentally exhausting, isn't it?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What’s Richard talking about — the CBS Empire?



Well, most US media seems one sided lately, doesn't it?  This is par for course.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Are the claims true? *
[She lied? about the earrings.]

_The newspaper also claimed Meghan wore a pair of diamond earrings to a dinner in Fiji in 2018 that were a wedding gift from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, said by the US to have approved the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

The dinner took place three weeks after the killing. *At the time it was reported the earrings were borrowed. The Times says Meghan does not deny this was what she said, despite being aware of their provenance.*

Lawyers for the duchess denied she had misled anyone about their provenance. The couple's lawyers told The Times it was 'being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative' before the interview._








						MEGHAN 'BULLY' CLAIM: Duchess 'bullied two of her staff' as a royal
					

A spokesman for the Sussexes denied the claims, saying they were 'the victims of a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. 
  
 



Lodpah said:


> What do you all think of this article? Didn't they say last year Archie's first word was "da da"? I kinda believe it as it is been said MM swears worse than a sailor (nothing wrong with that if that's your thing but to play righteous and high falutin in public and in the rear all nasty and mean, then it's . . . ")
> 
> Moderator · Posted by
> Benjamin Smallbrook
> HARRY AND MEGHAN REACH A NEW LOW!
> I’ve been in two minds about telling you this, but have decided to, because we are all being taken for fools. All of us, even Harry and Meghan’s fervent, but misguided supporters. I will start with an apology to the ladies for the content of this post.
> Yesterday, I received a phone call from the father of one of Harry’s old friends. I have known him for over twenty years. His own son tipped him off about Harry and Meghan’s disgusting antics when dealing with the media.
> Harry and Meghan think they are clever. They think we are all fools. He and Meghan concoct the most childish, filthy pranks and release them on an unsuspecting public. They probably snigger together when they watch the news when Harry has been interviewed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They started by telling us they cooked 'roast chicken' together when they first met. No, they didn’t. This is an Urban Dictionary euphemism. They thought it was a huge joke to say this on air.
> In 2020, Harry told us that Archie’s first words were “Da, da, da, da.”
> When interviewed by TV host, James Corden, he said, “Archie’s first word was crocodile.” Meghan probably told him to say this. What a hoot!
> Of course, Archie's first word wasn't 'crocodile' and he didn't ask for a 'waffle maker'. Check out these three sexual terms in the Urban Dictionary and you will realise Harry and Meghan's joke on the public should be left in the sewer, along with the two of them.
> They think it is funny to use sexually explicit jokes on the public.
> And what kind of parents would bring their baby into something that is offensive and unpleasant?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Haz and Meg.  The King and Queen of WokeDumb


Also, the Duke and Duchess of Sleaze


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> What do you all think of this article? Didn't they say last year Archie's first word was "da da"? I kinda believe it as it is been said MM swears worse than a sailor (nothing wrong with that if that's your thing but to play righteous and high falutin in public and in the rear all nasty and mean, then it's . . . ")
> 
> Moderator · Posted by
> Benjamin Smallbrook
> HARRY AND MEGHAN REACH A NEW LOW!
> I’ve been in two minds about telling you this, but have decided to, because we are all being taken for fools. All of us, even Harry and Meghan’s fervent, but misguided supporters. I will start with an apology to the ladies for the content of this post.
> Yesterday, I received a phone call from the father of one of Harry’s old friends. I have known him for over twenty years. His own son tipped him off about Harry and Meghan’s disgusting antics when dealing with the media.
> Harry and Meghan think they are clever. They think we are all fools. He and Meghan concoct the most childish, filthy pranks and release them on an unsuspecting public. They probably snigger together when they watch the news when Harry has been interviewed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They started by telling us they cooked 'roast chicken' together when they first met. No, they didn’t. This is an Urban Dictionary euphemism. They thought it was a huge joke to say this on air.
> In 2020, Harry told us that Archie’s first words were “Da, da, da, da.”
> When interviewed by TV host, James Corden, he said, “Archie’s first word was crocodile.” Meghan probably told him to say this. What a hoot!
> Of course, Archie's first word wasn't 'crocodile' and he didn't ask for a 'waffle maker'. Check out these three sexual terms in the Urban Dictionary and you will realise Harry and Meghan's joke on the public should be left in the sewer, along with the two of them.
> They think it is funny to use sexually explicit jokes on the public.
> And what kind of parents would bring their baby into something that is offensive and unpleasant?



I just checked "waffle maker" 
And "crocodile" 

Too many coincidences, these people are sick.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I just checked "waffle maker"
> And "crocodile"
> 
> Too many coincidences, these people are sick.


Ummm, I just did too.  Don't forget the "roast chicken".  They're actually referencing their toddler to sexual references?  WTF is wrong with these scumbags?  It does explain the snort Haz gave when he claimed crocodile was Archie's first word.  These people are practically worse than Prince Andrew, which is hard to do.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*. *Sick*.


The article makes a strong point, I also checked "roast chicken".   If this is true, they are sick, deranged,... need institutionalization. Their disrespect for people is scary.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I just checked "waffle maker"
> And "crocodile"
> 
> Too many coincidences, these people are sick.


Their games are so disgusting. Who in the hell do they think they are with their bullying, lying and talking trash while pretending to be saints.
Please add this icon 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
or this one 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 to the LIKE button, so we can use it when reading such news about this nasty couple.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Their games are so disgusting. Who in the hell do they think they are with their bullying, lying and talking trash while pretending to be saints.
> Please add this icon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5008162
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5008170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> to the LIKE button, so we can use it when reading such news about this nasty couple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5008163


Can we get a devil emoji too!?


----------



## bag-mania

That cannot be true. Even Harry isn’t that stupid. 

Isn’t nearly every word something sexual or disgusting according to the Urban Dictionary?


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> *I just checked "waffle maker*"
> And "crocodile"
> 
> Too many coincidences, these people are sick.




Well that first one......................According to the UD  "The position is commonly used when the woman's vagina is not tight enough to pleasure the man."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

If anyone suspects H&MM of being so evil, I hope they have the courage to report them to the proper authorities. I don't think they should be raising their son or bring another child into their perverted environment.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> That cannot be true. Even Harry isn’t that stupid.
> 
> Isn’t nearly every word something sexual or disgusting according to the Urban Dictionary?


I don’t know but crocodile is kinda strange for him to say that when they said last year their child’s first words were da da.


----------



## bag-mania

Their PR people are working hard into the night. This from Marie Claire.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> That cannot be true. Even Harry isn’t that stupid.
> 
> Isn’t nearly every word something sexual or disgusting according to the Urban Dictionary?



Yes, UrbD does that. Still, we all knew H was lying based on last year’s video.  H gives us many ‘tells’ in that segment. James interrupted (!) H and changed the subject. James knew. He speaks “gutter” as does Harry.  Wonder if BP will deny the gift claim.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are the claims true? 
[She lied? about the earrings.]






bag-mania said:


> Their PR people are working hard into the night. This from Marie Claire.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Can we get a devil emoji too!?


With pleasure.


----------



## madamelizaking

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know but crocodile is kinda strange for him to say that when they said last year their child’s first words were da da.


Uh, Crocodile is NO child's first word, like ever in the history of humans. I believe this nonsense. We already know Harry is a perv.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kaka_bobo

If anyone is launching a smear campaign.....it's these two pathetic losers on the BRF.

Give me a break US media, you really think the world is dumb.


----------



## madamelizaking

Kaka_bobo said:


> If anyone is launching a smear campaign.....it's these two pathetic losers on the BRF.
> 
> Give me a break US media, you really think the world is dumb.


Their advantage is that it's 3am in London. I suspect in the next 3-4 hours we'll start to see the counter attack.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are the claims true?
> [She lied? about the earrings.]



All of the usual publications are rushing to support her. For example this People article needed three chicks to write it.  

*Meghan Markle 'Saddened' by 'Attack on Her Character' amid Bullying Allegations from Palace Staffers*
A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex says Meghan "will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good"

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are set to sit down with Oprah Winfrey for a much-anticipated interview on Sunday — and five days before it is scheduled to air, a new report is leveling allegations of "bullying" by the Duchess of Sussex

On Tuesday, _The Times_ in the U.K. claimed that the Duchess of Sussex faced a bullying complaint made by one of her close advisers during her time as a working royal at Kensington Palace — something her office has strongly refuted.

"The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma," a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a statement obtained by PEOPLE. "She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good."

Says one observer of the timing of the new report given the looming Oprah Winfrey interview: "The whole thing reminds me of an old rugby saying: 'Get your retaliation in first.' "

The complaint, which _The Times_reports was made in October 2018 by the couple's former communications secretary Jason Knauf, claimed that Meghan drove two personal assistants out of the household and undermined the confidence of a third staff member.

_The Times _says Knauf submitted the complaint in an effort to protect palace staffers who were allegedly bullied by the Duchess of Sussex, at times reduced to tears. One royal aide, who anticipated a confrontation with Meghan, is alleged to have told a colleague: "I can't stop shaking."

In February 2019, several of Meghan's friends told PEOPLE that the Duchess herself had been the victim of "global bullying" by the tabloid press, with a friend noting, "Meg has silently sat back and endured the lies and untruths." One report in November 2018 in the _Mail on Sunday _branded the Duchess — who is the first woman of color in the royal family in modern history — "Hurricane Meghan" and claimed that she "bombarded aides" with 5 a.m. emails and texts.

In the story published in _The Times_ on Tuesday, a source says that Harry pleaded with Knauf not to pursue the HR complaint. According to _The Times_, lawyers for Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, deny that any meeting took place or that the Duke of Sussex would have interfered with any staff matter.

Knauf reportedly sent an email to Simon Case, Prince William's private secretary at the time and now the cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Case then forwarded it to Carruthers.

In his email, Knauf said Carruthers "agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious." He added: "I remain concerned that nothing will be done." (PEOPLE has not independently corroborated _The Times _report.)



			Redirect Notice


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> That cannot be true. Even Harry isn’t that stupid.
> 
> Isn’t nearly every word something sexual or disgusting according to the Urban Dictionary?



The thing that lends credence for me is that we all remember the Duck Rabbit reading where Archie spoke. Although we didn't see it, wasn't it supposedly Archie's voice on the podcast? Not that those were necessarily touted as first words but they were sufficiently childish to make it hard to believe that crocodile preceded them. And if he had, wouldn't they be gloating about how precocious he was? 
And the ridiculous story about the Queen gifting the small kitchen appliance? 
This is Nazi-dressing, naked pool playing, racial slur using HARRY. And those are just the incidents we know about. Something about this Porky's sophomoric frat boy humor just doesn't seem that far fetched any more. 
They know they can say and do just about anything with little to no repercussion from the media.


----------



## CarryOn2020

After today’s news:
*based on all gloves being taken off the media,
*counting on the BRF/MI6? having an advanced copy of the interview,
*Charles tears (crocodile?) when leaving the hospital,
I think Phil gave the order (using O’s theme). 

H is out, forget birth order, H is out.
No money, no titles, no succession.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> The thing that lends credence for me is that we all remember the Duck Rabbit reading where Archie spoke. Although we didn't see it, wasn't it supposedly Archie's voice on the podcast? Not that those were necessarily touted as first words but they were sufficiently childish to make it hard to believe that crocodile preceded them. And if he had, wouldn't they be gloating about how precocious he was?
> And the ridiculous story about the Queen gifting the small kitchen appliance?
> This is Nazi-dressing, naked pool playing, racial slur using HARRY. And those are just the incidents we know about. Something about this Porky's sophomoric frat boy humor just doesn't seem that far fetched any more.
> They know they can say and do just about anything with little to no repercussion from the media.



I find it hard to believe Meghan  would allow him to get off mission like that. It’s her plan for them to be seen as highly respected philanthropists who are beloved by all. Harry making trashy jokes is definitely not part of the great plan.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I just checked "waffle maker"
> And "crocodile"
> 
> Too many coincidences, these people are sick.


I read about this and had to look up the terms.  If this is true, that they think this is a big joke, then they have the emotional IQ's of 13 year old boys.  Really doubt that a 1.5 year old would be given a waffle maker.  Certainly not by The Queen.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I find it hard to believe Meghan  would allow him to get off mission like that. It’s her plan for them to be seen as highly respected philanthropists who are beloved by all. Harry making trashy jokes is definitely not part of the great plan.



yeppers, I would tend to agree  but it DID happen during one of the few (only????????) times he was allowed to roam free.
I would love to be a bug on the rug if he DID go off script. 

He really must have been a tough assignment for his 'handlers'. It sounds like he needs constant supervision/revision


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> yeppers, I would tend to agree  but it DID happen during one of the few (only????????) times he was allowed to roam free.
> I would love to be a bug on the rug if he DID go off script.



She will never allow him off his leash again. That’s if she knows. We didn’t know the alternate meanings for those words until a few minutes ago. Maybe Meghan doesn’t know either. She’s pushing 40 after all, we can’t expect her to be on top of everything.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know but crocodile is kinda strange for him to say that when they said last year their child’s first words were da da.


To be a good liar, one must have an excellent memory.  Haz and Meg are liars, but $hitty ones.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> That cannot be true. Even Harry isn’t that stupid.
> 
> Isn’t nearly every word something sexual or disgusting according to the Urban Dictionary?


Apparently?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Their PR people are working hard into the night. This from Marie Claire.
> 
> View attachment 5008171


I'm getting tired, so I read "This from Marie Curie" instead of "This from Marie Claire" and it immediately  came to my mind that MM was claiming a scientific contribution. 

In any event, MM&H are washing their dirty laundry in public, big mistake!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> With pleasure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5008181


LOVE!!!


----------



## madamelizaking

“It is also understood that when Meghan wore the earrings to a state dinner in Fiji, she was not aware of the news regarding Salman's alleged involvement in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The event took place several weeks after Khashoggi's death.”

She’s using the “ I didn’t know” nonsense. She‘s such a brilliant person that she doesn’t know one of the greatest scandals in the world?

Also, I’m so sick of being called racist. Disliking her has nothing to do with race and EVERYTHING to do with character and behavior.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are the claims true?
> [*She lied?* about the earrings.]



Were her lips moving?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

I wish all the people she bullied would simply come forth and tell us, in great detail, with dates, times, and locations, what she did to bully them.  Also, this Jason Knauf doesn’t have anything to gain does he?  He’s coming forth with the truth at his own expense.  His integrity will be attacked by their relentless PR machine.  So I am inclined to believe Mr Knauf.  I just wish we had specific details from all the victims involved.  That would totally turn their little “compassion foundation” on its head wouldn’t it?  It’s founder being a mean bully.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Well that first one......................According to the UD  "The position is commonly used when the woman's vagina is not tight enough to pleasure the man."


I didn't click on any of the definitions, but what it shows without clicking is enough to get an idea.


----------



## purseinsanity

madamelizaking said:


> “It is also understood that when Meghan wore the earrings to a state dinner in Fiji, she was not aware of the news regarding Salman's alleged involvement in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The event took place several weeks after Khashoggi's death.”
> 
> She’s using the “ I didn’t know” nonsense. She‘s such a brilliant person that she doesn’t know one of the greatest scandals in the world?
> 
> Also, I’m so sick of being called racist. Disliking her has nothing to do with race and EVERYTHING to do with character and behavior.


Well, sure, when you look the other way and pretend you "didn't know".  Ignorance is bliss, except she claims to be an expert on anything and everything, since she feels fit to lecture us on every imaginable subject.  Maybe the Woke Goddess should actually get educated before spewing forth more oral diarrhea.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The inside joke, the secret language, the us vs. them, the ‘we are so cool‘.
She loves that kind of low-level stuff - her Larry King interview proved it. It could be what SoHo is all about. Puerile antics, shocking language, anything to get a reaction, to prove he is just a regular fun lad. Yes, I am certain he did it. James’s career could be ending now.

The issue, though, is both are pushing 40.
“Men Behaving Badly” only worked because the team was young.

ETA:  the interview was filmed Feb. 6.  Undoubtedly, H thought his patronages were secure. 
=========
About the earrings — she wore them one month after Fiji, to Charles‘s 70th birthday dinner. Everyone knew then.





						Meghan Markle Wears Giant Jeweled Earrings to Prince Charles's 70th Birthday Party
					

It's a big night for Meghan, who will be mingling with Europe's other royals.




					www.elle.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Leave some feedback about the language H used. They will pay attention.
CBS knows what the rules are.









						Show Feedback
					

Have a question about CBS programming or want to leave us feedback? Just fill out this form to have someone get back to you as soon as possible.




					www.cbs.com


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The article makes a strong point, I also checked "roast chicken".   If this is true, they are sick, deranged,... need institutionalization. Their disrespect for people is scary.


The most disgusting part is linking waffle maker to the Queen. Meghan told the Queen that’s what Archie wanted.....

_Edited to add the actual quote from the Corden interview. Of all the anecdotes about his son Harry might have shared, he chose this one:_
"During their conversation, Corden asked Harry about his and Meghan's son, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor—and the Prince revealed an entertaining anecdote about Archie and his great-grandmother, Queen Elizabeth.
"My grandmother asked us what Archie wanted for Christmas, and Meg said a waffle maker," Harry told Corden. "She sent us a waffle maker for Archie. So breakfast now, Meg makes up a beautiful organic mix" and throws it in the waffle iron. Archie's review? "He loves it." So much so, "Archie wakes up in the morning and literally just goes, 'Waffle?'"


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> The most disgusting part is linking waffle maker to the Queen. Meghan told the Queen that’s what Archie wanted.....


If they're implying Archie likes that sexual position at less than age 2, they have serious issues.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Ya’ll nah... I’m tapping out for my mental health... back after the interview airs... this is just ridiculous...

I hope Phillip gets better soon....


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> *The most disgusting part is linking waffle maker to the Queen*. Meghan told the Queen that’s what Archie wanted.....



You know that was done deliberately.......it truly is appalling how deeply their hatred runs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Ya’ll nah... I’m tapping out for my mental health... back after the interview airs... this is just ridiculous...
> 
> I hope Phillip gets better soon....



Stay strong, we will get through this.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to cut Oprah some slack on this because I think the story was fabricated by the Mirror. All they have is some guy saying “Oprah must be livid” instead of a quote from someone who has actually spoken with Oprah. Since both shows are on CBS, I consider it all part of one package. The James Corden bit was supposed to be the appetizer, with the Oprah interview as the entrée.


Not so sure.  There was a blind item that Corden was supposed to hold off on showing his piece until MM said it was OK.  She wanted the Oprah interview to air first and he decided he didn't want to wait or... decided to scoop Oprah.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I read about this and had to look up the terms.  If this is true, that they think this is a big joke, then they have the emotional IQ's of 13 year old boys.  Really doubt that a 1.5 year old would be given a waffle maker.  Certainly not by The Queen.


I never bought the waffle maker gift from the queen, but I thought that he was just being an idiot.
They may be a lot worse than idiots.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I never bought the waffle maker gift from the queen, but I thought that he was just being an idiot.
> They may be a lot worse than idiots.


They are. Just take a look back at their history. They are literally sickos. Sorry to be blunt but with these two, they think they are smarter than anyone else. The games they play are planned. I truly believe that.
The banana incident was so offensive I’m surprised that there was no backlash that ended their careers. It’s like giving a down and out heroin addict a needle with no heroin.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> The most disgusting part is linking waffle maker to the Queen. Meghan told the Queen that’s what Archie wanted.....


Yep! So disgraceful.


----------



## gracekelly

A fortune is being spent o


Chanbal said:


> I never bought the waffle maker gift from the queen, but I thought that he was just being an idiot.
> They may be a lot worse than idiots.


They thought that making these inside jokes was clever and laughed themselves silly that people took these utterances seriously.  I don't think they are laughing at the moment.  Their little crystal bubble is going to crack as more of these mean girl stories come in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The inside joke, the secret language, the us vs. them, the ‘we are so cool‘.
> She loves that kind of low-level stuff - her Larry King interview proved it. It could be what SoHo is all about. Puerile antics, shocking language, anything to get a reaction, to prove he is just a regular fun lad. Yes, I am certain he did it. James’s career could be ending now.
> 
> The issue, though, is both are pushing 40.
> “Men Behaving Badly” only worked because the team was young.
> 
> ETA:  the interview was filmed Feb. 6.  Undoubtedly, H thought his patronages were secure.
> =========
> About the earrings — she wore them one month after Fiji, to Charles‘s 70th birthday dinner. Everyone knew then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wears Giant Jeweled Earrings to Prince Charles's 70th Birthday Party
> 
> 
> It's a big night for Meghan, who will be mingling with Europe's other royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5008210



She looked so vulgar on the interview with Larry King. 

Those earrings are gorgeous. Can you imagine the amount of serious bling (from dubious and less dubious sources, from Diana...) that she brought from the UK.


----------



## mellibelly

That Times article is damning. Her lawyer trying to deny every staffer claim of abuse and bullying when there are emails/paper trails. MM is a compulsive liar. So called borrowed earrings that were gifts from a murderer crown prince of a nation with atrocious human rights violations against women and LGBT. Def not sustainable or woke is she?

I've been rewatching Vanity Fair (the 1998 series with Natasha Little as Becky Sharp) and MM is a modern day Becky. Full blown sociopath.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, UrbD does that. Still, we all knew H was lying based on last year’s video.  H gives us many ‘tells’ in that segment. James interrupted (!) H and changed the subject. James knew. *He speaks “gutter” as does Harry. * Wonder if BP will deny the gift claim.



Lest we forget Hazy is the spawn of the man who endearingly confided to his paramour how he would come back as a tampon.  As bawdy barnyard humor goes it lacks the mean spiritedness that I associate with Lazy&Hazy


----------



## redney

Don't believe all these U.S. magazines are writing "independently." Just as CBS is plugging the OW interview on every.single.show, Hearst is also plugging the Gruesome Twosome. Hearst's U.S. magazines include those below (not the full list but the most relevant for Ging & Cringe)
Cosmopolitan
Elle
Esquire
Good Housekeeping
*Harper's Bazaar
Marie Claire*
Men's Health
*O the Oprah Magazine*
Redbook
Seventeen
*Town & Country*
Women's Day
Women's Health

https://www.hearst.com/magazines


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020 
@Chanbal

Larry King & MM Interview

I've listened to this interview some time ago, but I can't anymore; her voice is worse than nails across the blackboard.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I never bought the waffle maker gift from the queen, but I thought that he was just being an idiot.
> They may be a lot worse than idiots.


Now I'm wondering what Haz meant by Meg "whips up something organic" for the waffles and how he likes his what honey or whatever.  Is that all a croc (pardon the pun) too??


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Lest we forget Hazy is the spawn of the man who endearingly confided to his paramour how he would come back as a tampon.  As bawdy barnyard humor goes it lacks the mean spiritedness that I associate with Lazy&Hazy



Not to defend Charles, he _thought_ he was  speaking on a private phone call. He did not know the evil press? was taping him. You are right. It is disgusting images with Chas and his son. For H to say those things in public, knowing his kid will read it one day, gross.
=====

Question for anyone about the earrings :
H&M were on tour. How did she happen to have these earrings?
Do the royals ‘check out’ these pieces prior to leaving on the tour? If so, then whoever checked them out to her would be the one to know the provenance. I thought I read these earrings were a wedding gift so I assumed she had them in her own jewelry box. Are the royals allowed to keep the jewels in their personal possessions or do the jewels go in some huge vault? Perhaps the first wearing can be given a pass, but the 2nd time, surely the press would have written about them from the first wearing.

Once again,   every.single.thing   with them is a huge thang.  Everything.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> They are. Just take a look back at their history. They are literally sickos. Sorry to be blunt but with these two, they think they are smarter than anyone else. The games they play are planned. I truly believe that.
> The banana incident was so offensive I’m surprised that there was no backlash that ended their careers. It’s like giving a down and out heroin addict a needle with no heroin.


I agree.  Total sickos.  What banana incident?  The one where she posted two spooning bananas on her IG?

Edit:  Never mind.  I googled it.  Sigh.  She's such an idiot, but the way the article I read is written, people were "touched" and "in awe" of her gesture.  Good Lord, PR at work even then.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to defend Charles, he _thought_ he was  speaking on a private phone call. He did not know the evil press? was taping him. You are right. It is disgusting images with Chas and his son. For H to say those things in public, knowing his kid will read it one day, gross.


I agree.  Not a sentiment I think of as romantic , but whatever people say/do in what they think is private with their willing lover is none of my business.  
Haz, if truly using the Urban Dictionary innuendos, is beyond belief.


----------



## poopsie

Going back to the UD references it makes me wonder about the (unsubstantiated) yacht girl rumors. 
I know nothing has been definitively proven, but it no longer seems as far fetched as it did, iykwim
As The Bard said "The truth will out"


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Going back to the UD references it makes me wonder about the (unsubstantiated) yacht girl rumors.
> I know nothing has been definitively proven, but it no longer seems as far fetched as it did, iykwim
> As The Bard said "The truth will out"



What a sh$tshow. 
And O’s show hasn’t even aired.  Not only are they upstaging QE but also OW.  That is not a good sign.
I do hope O asks MM why she married into this family. She was a divorced, nearly 40 year old woman with a career.  She must have been well aware of the role families play in a marriage, any marriage. So, why choose this crowd?  Was the money worth it?


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to defend Charles, he _thought_ he was  speaking on a private phone call. He did not know the evil press? was taping him. You are right. It is disgusting images with Chas and his son. For H to say those things in public, knowing his kid will read it one day, gross.
> =====





purseinsanity said:


> I agree.  Not a sentiment I think of as romantic , but whatever people say/do in what they think is private with their willing lover is none of my business.
> Haz, if truly using the Urban Dictionary innuendos, is beyond belief.



Oh, ITA.  that whatever floats your boat is fine by me. In private.
It is just that I highly doubt that it was a one off statement. If that is your sense of humor it is going to be _your _sense of humor. It is part and parcel of who you are. Maybe Hazz got his dad's sense of humor. Maybe they watched Benny Hill together. Who knows.
I've always wondered if there wasn't a bit of the "attaboy" attitude towards H from Charles.


----------



## Lodpah

Go!

M.A. from Queens College (CUNY) (Graduated 1996)
How does Queen Elizabeth II and the rest of the royal family feel about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry doing a very candid 90-minute tell all interview with Oprah Winfrey?
Probably the same way she felt about another American:





Meghan, stop trolling.

18.3K views92 upvotes2 shares22 comments


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> Go!
> 
> M.A. from Queens College (CUNY) (Graduated 1996)
> How does Queen Elizabeth II and the rest of the royal family feel about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry doing a very candid 90-minute tell all interview with Oprah Winfrey?
> Probably the same way she felt about another American:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, stop trolling.
> 
> 18.3K views92 upvotes2 shares22 comments




Who Wore It Better
or ..............
B!tch Stole My Look!  (she must get that particular one A LOT)


----------



## bettiney

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle in legal stink with Filipino deodorant maker
					

The name "Archewell" is shared with the organization founded by Harry and Meghan that currently includes Archewell Foundation, Archewell Audio and Archewell Productions.




					www.philstar.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


>




Ugh she is unbelievable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I woke up today to a German gossip rag titling "Harry and Meghan: why is the Oprah interview more important than grandpa Philip?"


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Royal aides reveal bullying claim before Meghan’s Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Royal aides have hit back at the Duchess of Sussex before her television interview with Oprah Winfrey by revealing that she faced a bullying complaint made by
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @papertiger  Are you able to print the article?  It is pretty juicy!



I think all THIS, all the drama including leaving, alllll goes back to THIS. 

She obviously went in to the Palace, acted like a diva, was accused of bullying and pushing staff around and so she has to turn tables and become the victim. It's quite a common device used by vulnerable narcissist


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> The BRF has an official gift list that is distributed each year but only gifts given in an official capacity (given while on public duty etc) are listed. These were wedding gifts so there was no obligation to report who gifted them (wedding = personal so the gift was in a private capacity) or that they were even a gift in the first place.



I never thought of this before, but that woman must have raked in millions in wedding gifts. And she deserves none of it.


----------



## Lodpah

bettiney said:


> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle in legal stink with Filipino deodorant maker
> 
> 
> The name "Archewell" is shared with the organization founded by Harry and Meghan that currently includes Archewell Foundation, Archewell Audio and Archewell Productions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.philstar.com


I wish him all the success and I hope he fights to the bitter end to keep his product.


----------



## Sharont2305

Don't you just love time zones? Recently when checking here in the morning I've usually got about 8 pages to catch up on. I dread to think what Monday morning is going to bring, the sh%tshow interview will air over there during the night here (UK) so probably best for me not to plan anything to do as I'll have about 50 pages to trawl through, lol.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Everything is an attack on her? What about her attacks on the BRF? Tone deaf much? Honestly, if I did not adore the Queen and respected her years of service and dedication and her graceful and endearing ways and attitude I would care less but MM is definitely an expert at gaslighting so . . .
> 
> Here's an apple juice off to you MM. This song is you.
> 
> 
> Rollins Band - Liar'
> 
> lyrics:
> 
> ( Spoken)So, you think you're gonna live your life alone In darkness and seclusion Yeah I know, you've been out there Tried to mix with the animals And it just left you full of humiliated confusion But the feeling of loneliness never leaves you It haunts you everywhere you go And then you meet me and Your whole world changes Because everything I say is everything You've ever wanted to hear So you drop your defenses, and you drop all your fears And you're so busy feeling good That you never question why Things are going so well
> 
> You want to know why?
> 
> (Singing) Cause I'm a liar, yeah, I'm a liar I'll tear your mind out, I'll burn your soul I'll turn you into me I’ll turn you into me!! 'Cause I'm a liar, a liar, a liar, a liar
> 
> *(Spoken) I'll hide behind a smile and understanding eyes And I'll tell you things that you already know So you can say: I really identify with you, so much! I'll come to you like an affliction but I'll leave you like an addiction You'll never forget me... You wanna know why?*
> 
> (Singing) Cause I'm a liar, yeah, I'm a liar! I'll rip your mind out, I'll burn your soul I'll turn you into me I’ll turn you into me!! 'Cause I'm a liar, a liar, liar, liar, liar liar... I don't know why I feel the need to lie and cause you so much pain Maybe it's something inside, Maybe it's something I can't explain 'Cause all I do is mess you up and lie to you I'm a liar, oh, I am a liar
> 
> (Spoken) But if you'll give just one more chance I swear I will never lie to you again Because now I see The destructive power of a lie That's stronger than truth I can't believe I ever hurt you, I swear I will never lie to you again Please, just give me more chance, I'll never lie to you again, no I swear I will never tell a lie (x2) No, no
> 
> Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho Ho! Sucker! Sucker! Oh, sucker!
> 
> (Singing) I am a liar, yeah! I like it! I feel good!!
> 
> Song I got off the Internet about best songs about Narcissistic people. I'm crediting the band Rollins as it is their song.



I'm just chuckling to myself meeting a Rollins' fan on the H&M gossip thread on tPF


----------



## Lodpah

Found this gem:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I hope that Times article will be noticed on the other side of the pond. Not for a minute do I think the Times posted gossip without substance, especially not with the full name of a high employee of William and Kate. 

Also, what does it teach us? The rumours about Meghan being a jerk and yelling at Kate's stuff were true all along. Also what struck me as really interesting: that the narc's preferred victims are described as young women.


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Don't believe all these U.S. magazines are writing "independently." Just as CBS is plugging the OW interview on every.single.show, Hearst is also plugging the Gruesome Twosome. Hearst's U.S. magazines include those below (not the full list but the most relevant for Ging & Cringe)
> Cosmopolitan
> Elle
> Esquire
> Good Housekeeping
> *Harper's Bazaar
> Marie Claire*
> Men's Health
> *O the Oprah Magazine*
> Redbook
> Seventeen
> *Town & Country*
> Women's Day
> Women's Health
> 
> https://www.hearst.com/magazines



That's how it roles. 

Don't forget, H&M hate the media...


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to defend Charles, he _thought_ he was  speaking on a private phone call. He did not know the evil press? was taping him. You are right. It is disgusting images with Chas and his son. For H to say those things in public, knowing his kid will read it one day, gross.
> =====
> 
> Question for anyone about the earrings :
> H&M were on tour. How did she happen to have these earrings?
> Do the royals ‘check out’ these pieces prior to leaving on the tour? If so, then whoever checked them out to her would be the one to know the provenance. I thought I read these earrings were a wedding gift so I assumed she had them in her own jewelry box. Are the royals allowed to keep the jewels in their personal possessions or do the jewels go in some huge vault? Perhaps the first wearing can be given a pass, but the 2nd time, surely the press would have written about them from the first wearing.
> 
> Once again,   every.single.thing   with them is a huge thang.  Everything.



_If _they were a wedding gift, they are _hers_ to keep.


----------



## Lodpah

I think so many people adore Queen Elizabeth that they are now stepping up.  I mean go up against a woman who has people who care for her (ahem . . . MI6/M15) and who does not deserve this cruelty from these two hapsagers?  I can see if they were straight up nasty but to bite the hand that feeds you and who do insidious things to gain fame. Here's a snippet of a quote:







Kelly Jagger
·
4h ago

Former County of Los Angeles (1991–2021)
Well, well, well…if it isn't the consequences of your actions. Reports are everywhere suddenly (this timing is perfect) about official bullying complaints that had been filed against a certain crappy American actress. These reports are sourced from Buckingham Palace. Of course, denials are cobbled together as press releases calling these claims nothing more than a “smear campaign.” *I sure hope these denials invalidate all those non-disclosure agreements these many people were forced to sign. Can someone be that out of touch with reality that she seriously would think that none of these incidents would come to light, especially when she's getting ready to disparage the Royal Family for two hours in primetime. It seems it truly did not occur to her that turnabout is always fair play. Well played, BP. And prayers for Prince Phillip ❤️*


So if there's any lawyers here, if there are NDA's signed and people come out of the woodworks and JCMH and MM deny, does it invalidate it


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Found this gem:
> 
> View attachment 5008328
> View attachment 5008328



Sounds like the courtiers 'made a fuss' at the time but were placated, now they are being given the green light on these incidents. So yer, the gloves are off, but that's the way it's always been and not just at the Palace. They are 'letting' the truth come out. I am just sorry we didn't get to hear about it when it happened, I hate workplace bullies.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are the claims true?  Misleading does not mean false. Misinformation does not mean false.
> Which part is a “wholly false narrative“?  All of them? Some? None?
> When so many are claiming bullying, etc., it seems simple statements would help this situation.
> 
> Was a letter written by Jason? Did Harry beg him not to give it to HR?  Simple questions do not require a lengthy answer.
> So, uh, these claims are a conspiracy ?  to discredit H&M right before their huge US debut?  Final question — are the claims true?
> 
> 
> from HBazaar:
> _A spokesperson for the Sussexes denied the claim in the British newspaper, saying it was "based on misleading and harmful misinformation." The rep added that Meghan views the claim as another dishonest attack on her character, something she and Prince Harry have long called out the British media for enabling and allowing. The couple's lawyers also said The Times was being used "by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative" before their interview with Oprah._


These quotes are  straight from the Jeffrey archer school of obfuscation.

I suppose she’s going to claim she thought throwing tea at people was a quaint British tradition. 

Ockham’s razor comes in here; either a host of former employees, the staff at BP and the vast majority of the press are all crazed racists who are happy to bankrupt themselves slandering this woman (who has many powerful connections) because they just hate her that much OR she’s not the the saint she says she is.

hmm I wonder.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> That cannot be true. Even Harry isn’t that stupid.
> 
> Isn’t nearly every word something sexual or disgusting according to the Urban Dictionary?



Yeah I feel that's reaching, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Times article, click and read the thread for more content:


----------



## chicinthecity777

The Times reached out to H&M for comment, but they declined. this may explain why they both looked miserable in the photo in the car. Are they going to sue Times now?    if she did, I would love to hear the witness testify!!! And all paper trail etc!

What H&M and in this case MM don't failed to understand is, the media is not attacking them/her! The Times was contacted by "the source". The Times is a serious publication and if they said a source contacted them, then that's it. It's the people who she treated badly in the past come back to bite her!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> All of the usual publications are rushing to support her. For example this People article needed three chicks to write it.
> 
> *Meghan Markle 'Saddened' by 'Attack on Her Character' amid Bullying Allegations from Palace Staffers*
> A spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex says Meghan "will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good"
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are set to sit down with Oprah Winfrey for a much-anticipated interview on Sunday — and five days before it is scheduled to air, a new report is leveling allegations of "bullying" by the Duchess of Sussex
> 
> On Tuesday, _The Times_ in the U.K. claimed that the Duchess of Sussex faced a bullying complaint made by one of her close advisers during her time as a working royal at Kensington Palace — something her office has strongly refuted.
> 
> "The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma," a spokesperson for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said in a statement obtained by PEOPLE. "She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good."
> 
> Says one observer of the timing of the new report given the looming Oprah Winfrey interview: "The whole thing reminds me of an old rugby saying: 'Get your retaliation in first.' "
> 
> The complaint, which _The Times_reports was made in October 2018 by the couple's former communications secretary Jason Knauf, claimed that Meghan drove two personal assistants out of the household and undermined the confidence of a third staff member.
> 
> _The Times _says Knauf submitted the complaint in an effort to protect palace staffers who were allegedly bullied by the Duchess of Sussex, at times reduced to tears. One royal aide, who anticipated a confrontation with Meghan, is alleged to have told a colleague: "I can't stop shaking."
> 
> In February 2019, several of Meghan's friends told PEOPLE that the Duchess herself had been the victim of "global bullying" by the tabloid press, with a friend noting, "Meg has silently sat back and endured the lies and untruths." One report in November 2018 in the _Mail on Sunday_branded the Duchess — who is the first woman of color in the royal family in modern history — "Hurricane Meghan" and claimed that she "bombarded aides" with 5 a.m. emails and texts.
> 
> In the story published in _The Times_ on Tuesday, a source says that Harry pleaded with Knauf not to pursue the HR complaint. According to _The Times_, lawyers for Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, deny that any meeting took place or that the Duke of Sussex would have interfered with any staff matter.
> 
> Knauf reportedly sent an email to Simon Case, Prince William's private secretary at the time and now the cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Case then forwarded it to Carruthers.
> 
> In his email, Knauf said Carruthers "agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious." He added: "I remain concerned that nothing will be done." (PEOPLE has not independently corroborated _The Times _report.)
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


@bagmania you are the MVP for copying all this out and depriving this tripe of clicks!
Can’t help noticing in the quote given she didn’t actually deny anything. Some unnamed friends/minions denied it for her.
She’s upset..... I’m sure many a secret bully was upset when the skeletons began to waltz out of the closet.

I’d say the timing is convenient but this was already been rumoured in the British press last year and lady CC talks about it in her book.

The weird thing is, bullying your staff and taking bungs from the dodgy despots is kind of piecemeal really.

MM does a lot of this to herself as she tries to convince everyone she’s some sort of martyr. 

If this were Anna Wintour or Naomi Campbell they’d just look at the camera and say ‘yes I’m a b*tch and?...’ and the story would be DOA.

As for the earrings, it’s awful but let’s be honest, there’s a lot of cuddling up to the dodgy and the powerful and there are definitely blood diamonds in many elite collections. It does seem a bit convenient to me to bring this up now. If you want to bury them don’t pick soft balls.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> MM is a compulsive liar. So called borrowed earrings that were gifts from a murderer crown prince of a nation with atrocious human rights violations against women and LGBT. Def not sustainable or woke is she?



I know start to understand. The Donald (whom I greatly dislike as well) wouldn't have been so bad had he sent a sufficiently dazzling wedding gift. I didn't think I could be more disgusted by her than I already was, but yeah.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I think all THIS, all the drama including leaving, alllll goes back to THIS.
> 
> She obviously went in to the Palace, acted like a diva, was accused of bullying and pushing staff around and so she has to turn tables and become the victim. It's quite a common device used by vulnerable narcissist


Ding ding got it in one!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> As for the earrings, it’s awful but let’s be honest, there’s a lot of cuddling up to the dodgy and the powerful and there are definitely blood diamonds in many elite collections. It does seem a bit convenient to me to bring this up now. If you want to bury them don’t pick soft balls.



Yeah, but most owners of not so flawless jewels which were acquired just a hot minute ago (as opposed to inherited from greatgrandma) don't constantly run their mouth on human rights and call themselves the feminist of feminists. It's not so much the crime but as usual the accompanying circumstances.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know start to understand. The Donald (whom I greatly dislike as well) wouldn't have been so bad had he sent a sufficient dazzling wedding gift. I didn't think I could be more disgusted by her than I already was, but yeah.



Even if she did not know about the journalist‘s murder, she certainly knew about the human rights violations through her UN work. Certainly, the jewelry from the Kingdom is exquisite and stunning. Many of Diana’s sapphire pieces come from her trips to SA.  These earrings in question are beautiful. Still, why create so much controversy? It’s called diplomacy.  Time and place for everything.


Not to defend anyone, but,,,_they did ask for cash donations in lieu of gifts_.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/don...ding-meghan-harry-wedding-gift-193200152.html
_In April, Markle and Harry, whose family has a reported net worth of $88 billion, requested in a palace statement that in lieu of wedding gifts, fans should make a charitable donation. 

“Prince Harry and Ms. Meghan Markle are incredibly grateful for the goodwill shown to them since the announcement of their engagement and are keen that as many people as possible benefit from this generosity of spirit,” read the statement. “The couple have therefore asked that anyone who might wish to mark the occasion considers making a donation to charity, rather than sending a wedding gift.”_


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> _If _they were a wedding gift, they are _hers_ to keep.


Yes, which is another thing that doesn’t add up were they ‘borrowed’ or a ‘gift’?  
I think the borrowed thing is only there to try and suggest they belong to QE


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sure. What I meant with this is how she refused to even talk to the one guy because he's gross and sexist (true), but wears jewelry given by a guy - dismembering a journalist while still alive aside - who represents a state known for abhorrent human rights violations, modern slavery and a stand on women's rights that belongs into the Middle Ages. Which I personally finde quite...interesting. And she obviously KNEW how problematic this was, or why else would she have told her staff to lie about the earrings?

And yes, other members of the BRF have worn Saudi jewels as well, but they also don't kick up a fuss about their personal wokeness (also, I loved the Queen for subtly trolling by driving around the Saudi king (?) herself when women in SA were not allowed to at the time).



CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to defend anyone, but,,,they did ask for cash donations in lieu of gifts


----------



## chicinthecity777

Note that MM's lawyer/PR didn't say those allegations were untrue! They said she was saddened and the allegations were mis-information. They are definitely true then in this case!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but most owners of not so flawless jewels which were acquired just a hot minute ago (as opposed to inherited from greatgrandma) don't constantly run their mouth on human rights and call themselves the feminist of feminists. It's not so much the crime but as usual the accompanying circumstances.


This may be OT but..
MM is on the hypocrisy train for life but I would say the royal family themselves have hosted parties for and taken plenty of ‘gifts’ from leaders with questionable human rights records  and are presented as the spiritual and constitutional leaders of the country so I think leading with this story is unwise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The claim was filed in October, 2018. The Australia tour was in October, 2018. The tea incident happened while H&M were in Australia. Rather than face the consequences, they bailed. Surely H knew what would happen. He must have seen it all slipping away.


----------



## poopsie

Looking forward to Piers weighing in on Wafflegate.


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> This may be OT but..
> MM is on the hypocrisy train for life but I would say the royal family themselves have hosted parties for and taken plenty of ‘gifts’ from leaders with questionable human rights records  and are presented as the spiritual and constitutional leaders of the country so I think leading with this story is unwise.


It still doesn't make it right for MM to accept/wear the earrings, which apparently were rumoured to be worth £1m.


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> It still doesn't make it right for MM to accept/wear the earrings, which apparently were rumoured to be worth £1m.


No, I’m not defending anyone. I think everyone comes out terribly in this. The immorality of the action is obvious but that’s not my point.

The issue for me is that, it seems like the palace are finally responding in kind and what they are leading with is extremely hypocritical and just seems cynical.
(Sorry if this is too political)
Frankly, the relationship between the UK and Saudi is too important to be compromised and MM could say that she was just following etiquette as she was a ‘working royal’ at the time.

It also bears mention that this kind of scandal is, for whatever reason, a weak weapon. Accepting blood diamonds from a dictator didn’t kill Naomi Campbell’s career after all.

Finally, I think they should just not say anything. They also need to start paying their PR people more to try and get some better candidates.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One of Germany's reputable (so no yellow press; also said magazine is firmly in the left-liberal corner) magazines just published a piece titled "Worries about Prince Philip grow...as does the anger towards Harry and Meghan".


----------



## bubablu

Sharont2305 said:


> Don't you just love time zones? Recently when checking here in the morning I've usually got about 8 pages to catch up on. I dread to think what Monday morning is going to bring, the sh%tshow interview will air over there during the night here (UK) so probably best for me not to plan anything to do as I'll have about 50 pages to trawl through, lol.


Yes, we have to admit that in these corona times, they are providing us a lot of fun! I can see a disaster in the making.


----------



## elvisfan4life

ITV panicking


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Don't you just love time zones? Recently when checking here in the morning I've usually got about 8 pages to catch up on. I dread to think what Monday morning is going to bring, the sh%tshow interview will air over there during the night here (UK) so probably best for me not to plan anything to do as I'll have about 50 pages to trawl through, lol.



Ditto I’m avoiding ITV so fed up with constant support for poor Meghan Holly Willoughby seems to want to be her best friend and give her a hug fgs get a brain cell love


----------



## jelliedfeels

elvisfan4life said:


> ITV panicking


What an expensive white elephant it’d be!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to defend anyone, but,,,_they did ask for cash donations in lieu of gifts_.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/don...ding-meghan-harry-wedding-gift-193200152.html
> _In April, Markle and Harry, whose family has a reported net worth of $88 billion, requested in a palace statement that in lieu of wedding gifts,* fans* should make a charitable donation.
> 
> “Prince Harry and Ms. Meghan Markle are incredibly grateful for the goodwill shown to them since the announcement of their engagement and are keen that as many people as possible benefit from this generosity of spirit,” read the statement. “The couple have therefore asked that anyone who might wish to mark the occasion considers making a donation to charity, rather than sending a wedding gift.”_



"fans" (20 3463 paper decorations, toasters, jewellery made from seashells and tin can ring pulls etc)

This was not directed at Saudi Princes (who is after all a member of another royal family).


----------



## chicinthecity777

elvisfan4life said:


> ITV panicking


I hope ITV executives who decided to buy this show sh1t bricks now! They can choke on this interview for all I care! And any company plan to buy ad slots of this show should think very carefully! Do they really want to be associated with those 2 poisonous pests?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> What an expensive white elephant it’d be!



These 2 have possibly the worse luck with timing ever. 

Just to air it when PP is in hospital is enough actually. Mind you, they got married when her father was ill and couldn't travel (or whatever the story was at the time) so forget I spoke.  

Never mind 'love always wins' I think 'the universe is trying to tell me something' is bigger.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Staff members left while H&M were with the Crown:


----------



## CarryOn2020

From The Guardian - Spring, 2018:
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are to break with tradition for their wedding, *with UK and foreign politicians not on the official guest list.*


From May, 2018: What the US leaders gave and why: 
www.architecturaldigest.com/story/the-united-states-might-gift-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-a-bowl-when-they-get-married

If you're wondering what exactly a _royal_ couple could possibly receive as wedding gifts, it's not as exciting as you'd imagine. Turns out, the United States has a history of gifting something extraordinarily banal: a bowl. Yes, the same thing that your aunt might buy you from your registry has been gifted by two U.S. presidents for past royal weddings—but these aren't just any regular dishes.

According to _InStyle_, Harry Truman was the first to kick off the trend with a Steuben “Merry-Go-Round Bowl," gifted to Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip in 1947. Later, Ronald and Nancy Reagan gave Princess Diana and Prince Charles a $75,000 engraved Steuben glass bowl as a wedding gift in 1981 as a homage to Truman's purchase—though Nancy reportedly used State Department funds and haggled the price down to $8,000. (A woman after our own hearts.)

In all likelihood, if Melania and Donald ***** do give Prince Harry and Meghan Markle a gift, it probably won't be a bowl. *In 2011, Kate Middleton and Prince William started a new tradition of asking for charitable donations rather than material items for their wedding day. *(Previously, Charles and Diana's wedding gifts were even put on display for the public to pay to see for months after their ceremony.) *Prince Harry and his bride-to-be have followed in his older brother's footsteps, asking any guests to donate to one of seven charities handpicked by the couple, which range from women's empowerment to HIV and conservation organizations.* Michelle and Barack ***** gave six Apple notebook computers to PeacePlayers International in honor of Will and Kate's big day, but there is no word on if or where Donald and Melania—who did not receive wedding invites [no foreign politicians did] might donate on behalf of the United States on May 19.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M Wedding Gifts:
May, 2018








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly Returning $9 Million Worth of Wedding Gifts
					

The reason actually makes a lot of sense.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




ETA:  Traveling down this rabbit hole is interesting— no mention of the earrings
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...ing-gifts-revealed-*****-macron-a8362831.html


Spoiler: Gifts by country



*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding gifts revealed, from baby koalas to an Indian bull*
*World leaders have revealed how they plan to congratulate the royal couple*
Sarah YoungTuesday 22 May 2018 20:13
From knowing how much to spend to avoiding duplicate gifts, buying presents for newlyweds can be a thorny issue – especially when the couple are royalty.
Luckily though, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – who married at the weekend at St George’s Chapel in Windsor – made it easier for anyone wanting to mark their nuptials by requesting just one thing – a donation to charity.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle asked that friends, family and well-wishers who wanted to gift them something donate to one of seven charities close to their hearts including Children’s HIV association (CHIVA); homeless charity Crisis; the Myna Mahila Foundation, supporting women in Mumbai’s slums; Scotty’s Little Soldiers, a charity supporting children who have lost a parent in the Armed Forces; young persons charity Street Games; marine conservation organisation Surfers Against Sewage (SAS); and, finally, the Wilderness Foundation.
Despite Harry and Meghan’s wedding not hosting as many international or political figures as the 2011 nuptials of William and Kate, world leaders have been quick to reveal what they will gift the happy couple.
Here’s what we know the newlyweds have received so far.


*Justin Trudeau*




Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau issued a statement on Saturday to congratulate Harry and Meghan announcing that Canada will be donating $50,000 (£29,000) to youth sports-focused charity Jumpstart.
“Today, Canadians joined in celebration as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle married,” the release read.

*INDY/LIFE Newsletter
Be inspired with the latest lifestyle trends every week*

“To celebrate their union, Canada will donate $50,000 to Jumpstart, a Canadian charity dedicated to making play and sports more accessible to children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Since 2005, Jumpstart has helped more than 1.6 million children of all abilities get out on the field and be part of a team.”


*Donald ******


Despite not receiving an invitation to the couple’s wedding, a White House spokesperson confirmed that Donald ***** and First Lady Melania ***** “would be making a contribution to one of the seven charities the royal couple has designated in lieu of gifts.”


*Peta India*




Undoubtedly one of the most unique gifts that Harry and Meghan will receive, Peta India has announced that it has adopted an Indian bull who was found weak and injured on behalf of the happy couple.
The organisation has even named the bull Merry – a hybrid of Harry and Meghan’s names – in their honour. He will spend the rest of his days relaxing in peace at a sanctuary in Maharashtra, India.


*Jacinda Ardern*


New Zealand’s prime minister Jacinda Ardern told reporters that the country will be making a donation of $5,000 (£2,500) to the New Zealand charity Pillars, which is aimed at supporting the children and families of prisoners.


*Malcolm Turnbull*




Australian Prime Minister Malcom Turnbull revealed on Instagram that the country will be making a donation to the Invictus Games charity – which are being hosted down under in Sydney later this year – and will also be presenting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with traditional Aussie Akubra hats.


*Emmanuel Macron*


The French president has gifted the royal couple a bespoke piece from ST Dupont’s 007 collection which incudes a pen and a lighter.
It’s not the first time ST Dupont has donated a gift for a British royal wedding either. In 1947, then French president Vincent Auriol presented a bespoke travel case to Queen Elizabeth in celebration of her marriage to Prince Philip, while former President Nicholas Sarkozy, gifted the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge a travel case for their wedding in 2011.


*New South Wales*




In addition to Malcom Turnbull’s generous gift the Australian region of New South Wales has revealed that they will be naming two koalas after Harry and Meghan.
The new additions at Taronga Zoo have been given the royal names “as a gift of the people of NSW”. The region will also be making a donation of $5,000 (£2,800) “towards preserving koala habitats.”


----------



## drifter

wow I now know more about roasting chickens, crocodiles and waffle makers than I need to know.  My poor innocent mind!


----------



## kemilia

drifter said:


> wow I now know more about roasting chickens, crocodiles and waffle makers than I need to know.  My poor innocent mind!


Ditto here, and I thought I knew stuff .

But this, to me, reeks of "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it IS a duck." No  toddler kid says crocodile as a first word and also wants a waffle maker as a Christmas gift. Too many "urban" coincidences. 

They have been found out, and they are icky and rude beyond belief. But it fills in the missing pieces (imo) of what changed after the Jamaican wedding (Hazmat was having none of M at that event and then--BAM--love bomb (or maybe roasted chicken or waffle maker)). All IMO, of course.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Camilla says Prince Phillip is improving slightly and they are all hoping for good news but he is still in pain intermittently


----------



## carmen56

With any luck the wheels are beginning to come off the Harkle juggernaut!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> But wait, there is more : stuff like this could really ruin the ‘golden couple’s’ reputation :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan ‘had help writing “private” letter to dad from palace aides’
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle had help writing a “private” letter to her dad Thomas Markle from Palace aides, court documents claim. The Duchess of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers, the publi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _But court documents say the letter was not Meghan's "own intellectual creation" in claims that could blow the case apart if proved to be true.
> 
> Lawyers for Associated Newspaper argue the letter was "copied" from an electronic draft.
> 
> And they say the Kensington Palace communications team "contributed to the writing" of the draft._
> 
> *'HELP WRITING LETTER'*
> _The documents continue: "It is for the Claimant to prove she was the only person who contributed to the writing of the Electronic Draft.
> 
> "Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the Defendant infers that Jason Knauf and/or others in the Kensington Palace Communications team contributed to the writing of the Electronic Draft.
> 
> 
> "Precisely which parts were the result of such contribution is uniquely known to the Claimant, Jason Knauf and others in the team."
> 
> Associated Newspapers claimed Prince Harry's wife had herself leaked details of the letter to the media through friends.
> 
> The publisher argued that Meghan was "pleased" when five friends spoke up to defend her in an interview with People Magazine, which mentioned the letter._


Eureka! I found it !
HUGE

*BULLYING MESS IS RELATED TO THE LAWSUIT*

Bullying : X and Y complained about bullying to Knaïf who spoke to Case, now a PM, and Case reported to HR, so, the allegations were recorded, see today’s Times article which has great detail
”palace aides” went  to the press about the story

Lawsuit: Knauf was one of the palace four involved in the letter writing , see above

Now BP is accused of covering  employee mistreatment

STAY TUNED


----------



## marietouchet

Ps I must apologize , 10 new pages of this thread since bedtime, I did not get a chance to read all, no disrespect, the intended, must get to work , this thread moves fast !


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> No, I’m not defending anyone. I think everyone comes out terribly in this. The immorality of the action is obvious but that’s not my point.
> 
> The issue for me is that, it seems like the palace are finally responding in kind and what they are leading with is extremely hypocritical and just seems cynical.
> (Sorry if this is too political)
> Frankly, the relationship between the UK and Saudi is too important to be compromised and MM could say that she was just following etiquette as she was a ‘working royal’ at the time.
> 
> It also bears mention that this kind of scandal is, for whatever reason, a weak weapon. Accepting blood diamonds from a dictator didn’t kill Naomi Campbell’s career after all.
> 
> Finally, I think they should just not say anything. They also need to start paying their PR people more to try and get some better candidates.


On the earrings, there are lots of BRF jewels of dubious colonial provenance 

MM is known to have jewelry , wedding ring, redone a lot, and she could have done that here

but boy those are swell baubles


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> The Times wouldn't print any of this if they couldn't back it up.  It's a tsunami!


No, it's a _groundswell _


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I hope that Times article will be noticed on the other side of the pond. Not for a minute do I think the Times posted gossip without substance, especially not with the full name of a high employee of William and Kate.
> 
> Also, what does it teach us? The rumours about Meghan being a jerk and yelling at Kate's stuff were true all along. Also what struck me as* really interesting: that the narc's preferred victims are described as young women.*


You mean the women that Meg claims to empower?


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Times reached out to H&M for comment, but they declined. this may explain why they both looked miserable in the photo in the car. Are they going to sue Times now?    if she did, I would love to hear the witness testify!!! And all paper trail etc!
> 
> What H&M and in this case MM don't failed to understand is, the media is not attacking them/her! The Times was contacted by "the source". The Times is a serious publication and if they said a source contacted them, then that's it. It's the people who she treated badly in the past come back to bite her!


I'm grabbing the popcorn!


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Staff members left while H&M were with the Crown:



Well, I'm sure the only reason they left is simply because they're racist!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> You mean the women that Meg claims to empower?



Meghan empowers others by dominating them. Just look at how she empowered Harry.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

If I were La Oprah, I'd have my people contact the BRF's people right about now


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If I were La Oprah, I'd have my people contact the BRF's people right about now



Yeah, at this point a seasoned journalist must have gotten the memo that their beloved interviewees are full of it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> This may be OT but..
> MM is on the hypocrisy train for life but I would say the royal family themselves have hosted parties for and taken plenty of ‘gifts’ from leaders with questionable human rights records  and are presented as the spiritual and constitutional leaders of the country so I think leading with this story is unwise.


True, but HM hosted these world leaders at the behest of the government of the day... just like HM didn't have say about entertaining the Donald and, there is always a gift exchange at these events.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If I were La Oprah, I'd have my people contact the BRF's people right about now





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, at this point a seasoned journalist must have gotten the memo that their beloved interviewees are full of it.



Naw, if anything Oprah will double down on her support of them. To do otherwise would be admitting she was taken in by their sob story.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> It still doesn't make it right for MM to accept/wear the earrings, which apparently were rumoured to be worth £1m.


I can see that price tag on those earrings. I agree with you, particularly being so 'woke' as she wants us to believe. She really looks a 'whatever brings celebrity status and money' of convenience.


----------



## pukasonqo

I don’t think the provenance of the gift is the issue, the Vatican, the BRF vault, etc very likely have treasures of dubious origins or plainly stolen from a vanquished civilisation 
The problem is when you flaunt an expen$ive gift from a country who does have no respect for women’s rights, supports the death penalty, suppresses dissenters (including those female members of the royal family) and was involved in the brutal murder of a journalist
The Kashoggi murder was everywhere 
I don’t expect MM to take a stand against the Saudis all by herself but not wearing the earrings so soon after the murder would have been a more ethical stand


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M Wedding Gifts:
> May, 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly Returning $9 Million Worth of Wedding Gifts
> 
> 
> The reason actually makes a lot of sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  Traveling down this rabbit hole is interesting— no mention of the earrings
> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...ing-gifts-revealed-*****-macron-a8362831.html
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Gifts by country
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding gifts revealed, from baby koalas to an Indian bull*
> *World leaders have revealed how they plan to congratulate the royal couple*
> Sarah YoungTuesday 22 May 2018 20:13
> From knowing how much to spend to avoiding duplicate gifts, buying presents for newlyweds can be a thorny issue – especially when the couple are royalty.
> Luckily though, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – who married at the weekend at St George’s Chapel in Windsor – made it easier for anyone wanting to mark their nuptials by requesting just one thing – a donation to charity.
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle asked that friends, family and well-wishers who wanted to gift them something donate to one of seven charities close to their hearts including Children’s HIV association (CHIVA); homeless charity Crisis; the Myna Mahila Foundation, supporting women in Mumbai’s slums; Scotty’s Little Soldiers, a charity supporting children who have lost a parent in the Armed Forces; young persons charity Street Games; marine conservation organisation Surfers Against Sewage (SAS); and, finally, the Wilderness Foundation.
> Despite Harry and Meghan’s wedding not hosting as many international or political figures as the 2011 nuptials of William and Kate, world leaders have been quick to reveal what they will gift the happy couple.
> Here’s what we know the newlyweds have received so far.
> 
> 
> *Justin Trudeau*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau issued a statement on Saturday to congratulate Harry and Meghan announcing that Canada will be donating $50,000 (£29,000) to youth sports-focused charity Jumpstart.
> “Today, Canadians joined in celebration as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle married,” the release read.
> 
> *INDY/LIFE Newsletter
> Be inspired with the latest lifestyle trends every week*
> 
> “To celebrate their union, Canada will donate $50,000 to Jumpstart, a Canadian charity dedicated to making play and sports more accessible to children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Since 2005, Jumpstart has helped more than 1.6 million children of all abilities get out on the field and be part of a team.”
> 
> 
> *Donald ******
> 
> 
> Despite not receiving an invitation to the couple’s wedding, a White House spokesperson confirmed that Donald ***** and First Lady Melania ***** “would be making a contribution to one of the seven charities the royal couple has designated in lieu of gifts.”
> 
> 
> *Peta India*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Undoubtedly one of the most unique gifts that Harry and Meghan will receive, Peta India has announced that it has adopted an Indian bull who was found weak and injured on behalf of the happy couple.
> The organisation has even named the bull Merry – a hybrid of Harry and Meghan’s names – in their honour. He will spend the rest of his days relaxing in peace at a sanctuary in Maharashtra, India.
> 
> 
> *Jacinda Ardern*
> 
> 
> New Zealand’s prime minister Jacinda Ardern told reporters that the country will be making a donation of $5,000 (£2,500) to the New Zealand charity Pillars, which is aimed at supporting the children and families of prisoners.
> 
> 
> *Malcolm Turnbull*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Australian Prime Minister Malcom Turnbull revealed on Instagram that the country will be making a donation to the Invictus Games charity – which are being hosted down under in Sydney later this year – and will also be presenting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with traditional Aussie Akubra hats.
> 
> 
> *Emmanuel Macron*
> 
> 
> The French president has gifted the royal couple a bespoke piece from ST Dupont’s 007 collection which incudes a pen and a lighter.
> It’s not the first time ST Dupont has donated a gift for a British royal wedding either. In 1947, then French president Vincent Auriol presented a bespoke travel case to Queen Elizabeth in celebration of her marriage to Prince Philip, while former President Nicholas Sarkozy, gifted the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge a travel case for their wedding in 2011.
> 
> 
> *New South Wales*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In addition to Malcom Turnbull’s generous gift the Australian region of New South Wales has revealed that they will be naming two koalas after Harry and Meghan.
> The new additions at Taronga Zoo have been given the royal names “as a gift of the people of NSW”. The region will also be making a donation of $5,000 (£2,800) “towards preserving koala habitats.”


haha, I loved the gift from Peta India. They could send the bull to Montecito, the couple has now plenty of space...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Ya’ll nah... I’m tapping out for my mental health... back after the interview airs... this is just ridiculous...



I'm just the opposite, I'm loving all this. The thread is moving incredibly fast and every day something crazier about them comes out. It's fabulous.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I'm just the opposite, I'm loving all this. The thread is moving incredibly fast and every day something crazier about them comes out. It's fabulous.
> 
> View attachment 5008693


Me too!  I check in as often as I can!


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If I were La Oprah, I'd have my people contact the BRF's people right about now


Oprah has been linked to people in the past that turned out to be criminals. She has experience in getting out of controversial situations.


----------



## Chanbal

Who was waiting for *PIERS MORGAN? *Well, he is here: 

*After these shocking Palace bullying allegations, please spare me anymore of halo-cracked hypocrites Meghan and Harry's women-empowering victimhood garbage*

On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.

Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.

'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.

Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.

'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
In a series of bombshell revelations in the UK's Times newspaper, Meghan stands accused of waging a systematic reign of bullying terror against her personal staff at Kensington Palace.

Two young female personal assistants were said to have been bullied out of their jobs, and a third more senior female member of staff was also allegedly mistreated. The claims were made in a formal complaint.

Naturally, Meghan came out fighting, instructing her legal team to say it was all 'a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation', and insisting, of course, that SHE was the real victim.

The Duchess, her spokesman said, was 'saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.'

The clear implication from this ferocious and laughably self-righteous riposte was that the allegations are untrue.

So, where did they come from?

Was it the nasty lying British press again?

Well, no.

The allegations were in an email written by the couple's then communications secretary Jason Knauf.
In it, he said: 'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'

Knauf sent his email to Simon Case, then Prince William's private secretary and now the UK Government's cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of Human Resources at the Palace.

In his email, Knauf also expressed concern about the stress allegedly being experienced by Samantha Cohen, Meghan and Harry's private secretary, and said: 'I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.'

Knauf said Carruthers 'agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious' and he added: 'I remain concerned that nothing will be done.'

The Times reports that Prince Harry pleaded with him not to continue with his complaint, something Harry has denied.

Knauf was right to be concerned about the claims being brushed under the royal carpet because indeed, nothing was done - and a month later Knauf quit his job and went to work for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge as one of their top aides.

The details of the Times story are jaw-dropping, outlining a litany of alleged bullying by Meghan towards her young female staff that reduced some to tears.

Aides spoke of being humiliated and feeling 'sick' and 'terrified' by the dreadful treatment they received.

After one row over an event, one reportedly told another: 'I feel terrified. I can't stop shaking.'

A Palace source told the Times: 'There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.' The source described one member of staff as 'completely destroyed.'

And it wasn't just Meghan.

Harry stands accused of bullying behavior, too.

The Times reports that even before the wedding, one aide told a colleague the couple were both 'outrageous bullies' and said they were considering resigning.

The two personal assistants said to have been bullied out of the Palace have been silenced by Non-Disclosure Agreements they apparently signed that prevent them from talking about their experiences.

The Sussexes deny knowing about the NDAs.

When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'

All of this makes shocking reading and if it's all true, then it makes a complete mockery of Meghan and Harry's endless victimhood tour.

It's too late for Oprah to ask them about it because her interview is in the can.

Instead, we'll just hear the Sussexes portray themselves as the bullied victims, not the bullies that it is now claimed they were themselves.

And we'll hear Meghan cry that she was silenced, when in fact it's the alleged victims of her own bullying who have been silenced and had THEIR voice taken away.

If Meghan and Harry truly believe what they wrote in their 20-point manifesto for empowering women, then they should today demand the non-disclosure agreements with their two former assistants be removed so the young women are free to tell their stories in their own words. Now THAT would be empowering.

Then we can all hear the truth about the astonishing claims from the Sussexes' own communications secretary, directly from those he said were bullied out of their jobs.

And rather than dismiss Knauf's sensational claims as one giant smear, perhaps they could explain why someone working so close to them made a formal complaint about their bullying, why the Palace HR department believed the allegations were 'very serious' and why nothing was done about it?

The Times also contained a second shocking, and undenied, story: that Meghan wore a massive set of diamond chandelier earrings to a dinner during the Sussexes' tour of Fiji, which had been given to her as a wedding gift by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Three weeks before she wore them, Bin Salman ordered a hit squad to murder Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by sawing up his body into small pieces, because Khashoggi had dared to criticise the Crown Prince's brutal regime.

The story made huge international news, and the finger of suspicion laid firmly and publicly at the murderous hand of Bin Salman.

But we're supposed to believe, as claimed by her spokesman, that Meghan, who has regularly spouted off about her horror at human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, didn't know anything about it because she doesn't read the papers.

Yet somehow, she always knows what's in the papers!

I wonder how empowered the horribly oppressed women of Saudi Arabia feel today knowing that Meghan Markle is happy to brazenly sport expensive jewels lavished on her by the murderous leader who oppresses them?
Meanwhile, amid all this unedifying royal mudslinging, the Duke of Edinburgh remains seriously ill in hospital.

The poor Queen must be in utter turmoil.

It's bad enough that Meghan and Harry have done this interview at such an incredibly insensitive time for the family.

But to play the compassionate women-empowering victims of bullying on prime-time TV, when they've now been accused of their own shocking compassion-devoid bullying towards multiple women, is both beyond the pale, and beyond parody.

Take the hypocritical halos off, your royal highnesses – they're cracked.    

The hypocrites!


----------



## rose60610

This thread is a guilty pleasure with no calories.  It's not our fault that Me-Gain and Hazza are gifts that keep on giving.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> Oprah has been linked to people in the past that turned out to be criminals. She has experience in getting out of controversial situations.


I think she's stepped in it this time. Facilitating and joining in on the public bullying of near to centenarians, one of them poorly, is a hard one to scrape off, even for her.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like we have busy weeks ahead of us! 





_Buckingham Palace today denied claims by Meghan Markle that it is orchestrating a 'calculated smear campaign' against her ahead of the Sussexes' Oprah interview after it was alleged she bullied and 'drove out' two PAs and eroded the confidence of a third royal aide.

Buckingham Palace has refused to comment today but senior royal sources told MailOnline that complaints being made by ex-staff members were not in any way being orchestrated by the palace or members of the Royal Family, who are focused on Prince Philip's health problems in hospital. 

*The Times said it was contacted by sources who felt a 'partial version' had emerged of Meghan's two years as a working royal.*

Sensationally, the couple's lawyers told the newspaper it was 'being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative' before this weekend's interview with Oprah Winfrey.

A spokesman for the Sussexes said in a statement to The Times: 'Let's just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation. We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of The Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It's no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining The Duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and The Duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years.

*'In a detailed legal letter of rebuttal to The Times, we have addressed these defamatory claims in full, including spurious allegations regarding the use of gifts loaned to The Duchess by The Crown.

Revealed: Meghan's £500,000 diamond earrings were NOT 'borrowed' but a 'wedding gift from Saudi Crown Prince' - and worn by Duchess three weeks after assassination of Jamal Khashoggi in consulate*

'The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.'

*Defending the Duchess' management of people, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand's Finding Freedom book says: 'Americans can be much more direct, and that often doesn't sit well in the much more refined institution of the monarchy.'*_

This is a very long article with detailed information about the complains against Ms. Markle. You may want to read it whenever you have time. 

_Here is the entire article!_


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> This thread is a guilty pleasure with no calories.  It's not our fault that Me-Gain and Hazza are gifts that keep on giving.



This thread is addictively delicious! Waiting for all of their BS to catch up with them. Because eventually it will.


----------



## bag-mania

It's times like this I wish the web sites still allowed comments. TMZ posted an article leaning favorably towards Meghan about the bullying accusations and I would love to read what the maniacs who post there would say.


----------



## Chloe302225

jelliedfeels said:


> This may be OT but..
> MM is on the hypocrisy train for life but I would say the royal family themselves have hosted parties for and taken plenty of ‘gifts’ from leaders with questionable human rights records  and are presented as the spiritual and constitutional leaders of the country so I think leading with this story is unwise.



I see your point but all of these gifts were acquired while in duty for her country. Whichever government at the time is the one who decides which country gets state visits, tours etc aligned to the foreign policy they are trying to achieve. This has no bearing on what HM personally feels about these individual because her personal feelings are not taken in to account when the agenda is set but she is expected to carry out her duty to best of her ability no matter who is sitting across from her at the time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Who was waiting for *PIERS MORGAN? *Well, he is here:




You know, I am starting to take a liking to him. At least he tells it like it is.



> The Times reports that even before the wedding, one aide told a colleague the couple were both 'outrageous bullies' and said they were considering resigning.



Though I will say I was under the impression that at that time staff also said Harry before Meghan had not treated them like sh*t on the regular, but was spiraling out of control leading up to the wedding.



> When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'



I can believe she said that. It sounds just like what her deflated ego would tell her. It is gross.



> Three weeks before she wore them, Bin Salman ordered a hit squad to murder Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by sawing up his body into small pieces, because Khashoggi had dared to criticise the Crown Prince's brutal regime.



I was not a fan of Khashoggi while he was alive and working as a journalist, but may I add, just in case someone missed it....sawing him up while he was alive and conscious?



> But we're supposed to believe, as claimed by her spokesman, that Meghan, who has regularly spouted off about her horror at human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, didn't know anything about it because she doesn't read the papers.



See, this is what I meant earlier. This woman has no morals and no principles that can't be overruled by her greed and her need to feel important. At this point I think she'd sell Archie if it would benefit her. She probably will, in the divorce negotiations.


----------



## bag-mania

I bet the the Oprah interview is being recut again to address the bullying accusations. That thing will need to be edited right up until airtime.


----------



## bag-mania

Actually Oprah must be loving this. The accusations will likely get her more viewers.


----------



## Aimee3

Going back to the post about wedding gifts, it was listed that two Koalas in a part of Australia were named after H&M...all I could think of was they should've named two SNAKES after H&M, and not sweet Koalas!


----------



## bag-mania

Has this been posted? Speaking of interesting timing. Notice it is from a CBS affiliate.

*Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Made Secret Visit To Stanford Researcher Who Studies Science Of Compassion*
 Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in the Bay Area February of 2020 right before the pandemic. It was for a secret visit of sorts to meet with Stanford University’s Dr. James Doty whose work focuses on the science of compassion.

“They are one of the nicest, sweetest couples… very down to earth,” said Dr. Doty, founder of Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education at Stanford Medicine.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been outspoken about issues like hate speech and online bullying. They’ve been very open sharing their own experiences.

“And as we have seen even with the death of Diana how the paparazzi is around you 24/7, it can profoundly affect your mental health and affect everything you do,” said Doty.

The couple created a non-profit called the Archewell Foundation, named after their son Archie. The Archewell Foundations purpose is to uplift and unite communities locally and globally, online and offline, one act of compassion at a time.

“Their heart is in the right place,” said Doty, who met with the couple in person.

The couple announced new partnerships between their foundation and several tech and research focused groups including Stanford University’s, Dr. Doty, whose work focuses on the science of compassion and the neuroscience of compassion.

When asked if Doty knew it was going to be Prince Harry and Meghan Markle taking interest in his Center he said, “No, not at all.”

Doty is the founder and director of the Center for Compassion and Altruism of Research and Education at Stanford School of Medicine (CCARE) and said he received an email about the couple’s interest in his work.

“In the face of the pandemic I would suggest there is a concept of this global reset where compassion is at the focus,” said Doty.

The Archwell Foundation supports CCARES mission for groundbreaking research and education on techniques for developing compassion and promoting altruism within individuals and society.

“And interestingly we know when someone is more compassionate it is actually in terms of physiology offers more benefit than being at your ideal body weight or exercise,” said Doty.

He added that being kind and compassionate actually slows down the aging process in some of the cells of our body.

He says, “Be kind. It’s good for your health.”

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle believe compassion is the defining cultural force of the 21st century.









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Made Secret Visit To Stanford Researcher Who Studies Science Of Compassion
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in the Bay Area February of 2020 right before the pandemic. It was a secret visit of sorts to meet with Stanford University's Dr. James Doty whose work focuses on the science of compassion.




					sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

poopsie said:


> Lest we forget Hazy is the spawn of the man who endearingly confided to his paramour how he would come back as a tampon.  As bawdy barnyard humor goes it lacks the mean spiritedness that I associate with Lazy&Hazy


Charles has always loved Camilla, even as an older lady.  I always found that sweet.

If Hazy is the spawn of Charles, he is also the spawn of the headstrong Diana, the woman who stated she hated the press while famously manipulating it and using her favourite media outlets to tell her stories.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Has this been posted? Speaking of interesting timing. Notice it is from a CBS affiliate.
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Made Secret Visit To Stanford Researcher Who Studies Science Of Compassion*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in the Bay Area February of 2020 right before the pandemic. It was for a secret visit of sorts to meet with Stanford University’s Dr. James Doty whose work focuses on the science of compassion.
> 
> “They are one of the nicest, sweetest couples… very down to earth,” said Dr. Doty, founder of Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education at Stanford Medicine.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been outspoken about issues like hate speech and online bullying. They’ve been very open sharing their own experiences.
> 
> “And as we have seen even with the death of Diana how the paparazzi is around you 24/7, it can profoundly affect your mental health and affect everything you do,” said Doty.
> 
> The couple created a non-profit called the Archewell Foundation, named after their son Archie. The Archewell Foundations purpose is to uplift and unite communities locally and globally, online and offline, one act of compassion at a time.
> 
> “Their heart is in the right place,” said Doty, who met with the couple in person.
> 
> The couple announced new partnerships between their foundation and several tech and research focused groups including Stanford University’s, Dr. Doty, whose work focuses on the science of compassion and the neuroscience of compassion.
> 
> When asked if Doty knew it was going to be Prince Harry and Meghan Markle taking interest in his Center he said, “No, not at all.”
> 
> Doty is the founder and director of the Center for Compassion and Altruism of Research and Education at Stanford School of Medicine (CCARE) and said he received an email about the couple’s interest in his work.
> 
> “In the face of the pandemic I would suggest there is a concept of this global reset where compassion is at the focus,” said Doty.
> 
> The Archwell Foundation supports CCARES mission for groundbreaking research and education on techniques for developing compassion and promoting altruism within individuals and society.
> 
> “And interestingly we know when someone is more compassionate it is actually in terms of physiology offers more benefit than being at your ideal body weight or exercise,” said Doty.
> 
> He added that being kind and compassionate actually slows down the aging process in some of the cells of our body.
> 
> He says, “Be kind. It’s good for your health.”
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle believe compassion is the defining cultural force of the 21st century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Made Secret Visit To Stanford Researcher Who Studies Science Of Compassion
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in the Bay Area February of 2020 right before the pandemic. It was a secret visit of sorts to meet with Stanford University's Dr. James Doty whose work focuses on the science of compassion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com


I recall to have read about a visit to Stanford University, but don't remember the details. Is this being released now?

Thanks for posting the article and here are the emojis for it:


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I'm just the opposite, I'm loving all this. The thread is moving incredibly fast and every day something crazier about them comes out. It's fabulous.
> 
> View attachment 5008693



That’s the problem. I’m checking this thread too much lol...


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Who was waiting for *PIERS MORGAN? *Well, he is here:
> 
> *After these shocking Palace bullying allegations, please spare me anymore of halo-cracked hypocrites Meghan and Harry's women-empowering victimhood garbage*
> 
> On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.
> 
> Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.
> 
> 'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
> On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.
> 
> Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.
> 
> 'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
> In a series of bombshell revelations in the UK's Times newspaper, Meghan stands accused of waging a systematic reign of bullying terror against her personal staff at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Two young female personal assistants were said to have been bullied out of their jobs, and a third more senior female member of staff was also allegedly mistreated. The claims were made in a formal complaint.
> 
> Naturally, Meghan came out fighting, instructing her legal team to say it was all 'a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation', and insisting, of course, that SHE was the real victim.
> 
> The Duchess, her spokesman said, was 'saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.'
> 
> The clear implication from this ferocious and laughably self-righteous riposte was that the allegations are untrue.
> 
> So, where did they come from?
> 
> Was it the nasty lying British press again?
> 
> Well, no.
> 
> The allegations were in an email written by the couple's then communications secretary Jason Knauf.
> In it, he said: 'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'
> 
> Knauf sent his email to Simon Case, then Prince William's private secretary and now the UK Government's cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of Human Resources at the Palace.
> 
> In his email, Knauf also expressed concern about the stress allegedly being experienced by Samantha Cohen, Meghan and Harry's private secretary, and said: 'I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.'
> 
> Knauf said Carruthers 'agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious' and he added: 'I remain concerned that nothing will be done.'
> 
> The Times reports that Prince Harry pleaded with him not to continue with his complaint, something Harry has denied.
> 
> Knauf was right to be concerned about the claims being brushed under the royal carpet because indeed, nothing was done - and a month later Knauf quit his job and went to work for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge as one of their top aides.
> 
> The details of the Times story are jaw-dropping, outlining a litany of alleged bullying by Meghan towards her young female staff that reduced some to tears.
> 
> Aides spoke of being humiliated and feeling 'sick' and 'terrified' by the dreadful treatment they received.
> 
> After one row over an event, one reportedly told another: 'I feel terrified. I can't stop shaking.'
> 
> A Palace source told the Times: 'There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.' The source described one member of staff as 'completely destroyed.'
> 
> And it wasn't just Meghan.
> 
> Harry stands accused of bullying behavior, too.
> 
> The Times reports that even before the wedding, one aide told a colleague the couple were both 'outrageous bullies' and said they were considering resigning.
> 
> The two personal assistants said to have been bullied out of the Palace have been silenced by Non-Disclosure Agreements they apparently signed that prevent them from talking about their experiences.
> 
> The Sussexes deny knowing about the NDAs.
> 
> When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'
> 
> All of this makes shocking reading and if it's all true, then it makes a complete mockery of Meghan and Harry's endless victimhood tour.
> 
> It's too late for Oprah to ask them about it because her interview is in the can.
> 
> Instead, we'll just hear the Sussexes portray themselves as the bullied victims, not the bullies that it is now claimed they were themselves.
> 
> And we'll hear Meghan cry that she was silenced, when in fact it's the alleged victims of her own bullying who have been silenced and had THEIR voice taken away.
> 
> If Meghan and Harry truly believe what they wrote in their 20-point manifesto for empowering women, then they should today demand the non-disclosure agreements with their two former assistants be removed so the young women are free to tell their stories in their own words. Now THAT would be empowering.
> 
> Then we can all hear the truth about the astonishing claims from the Sussexes' own communications secretary, directly from those he said were bullied out of their jobs.
> 
> And rather than dismiss Knauf's sensational claims as one giant smear, perhaps they could explain why someone working so close to them made a formal complaint about their bullying, why the Palace HR department believed the allegations were 'very serious' and why nothing was done about it?
> 
> The Times also contained a second shocking, and undenied, story: that Meghan wore a massive set of diamond chandelier earrings to a dinner during the Sussexes' tour of Fiji, which had been given to her as a wedding gift by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
> Three weeks before she wore them, Bin Salman ordered a hit squad to murder Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by sawing up his body into small pieces, because Khashoggi had dared to criticise the Crown Prince's brutal regime.
> 
> The story made huge international news, and the finger of suspicion laid firmly and publicly at the murderous hand of Bin Salman.
> 
> But we're supposed to believe, as claimed by her spokesman, that Meghan, who has regularly spouted off about her horror at human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, didn't know anything about it because she doesn't read the papers.
> 
> Yet somehow, she always knows what's in the papers!
> 
> I wonder how empowered the horribly oppressed women of Saudi Arabia feel today knowing that Meghan Markle is happy to brazenly sport expensive jewels lavished on her by the murderous leader who oppresses them?
> Meanwhile, amid all this unedifying royal mudslinging, the Duke of Edinburgh remains seriously ill in hospital.
> 
> The poor Queen must be in utter turmoil.
> 
> It's bad enough that Meghan and Harry have done this interview at such an incredibly insensitive time for the family.
> 
> But to play the compassionate women-empowering victims of bullying on prime-time TV, when they've now been accused of their own shocking compassion-devoid bullying towards multiple women, is both beyond the pale, and beyond parody.
> 
> Take the hypocritical halos off, your royal highnesses – they're cracked.
> 
> The hypocrites!



All this confirms what I was told by someone close to royal circles at the time of H&M's engament, i.e. that she's a nasty person who bullies and ill treats her staff. I had never heard of her before and she seemed to me a nice girl (she's my DD's age so I can call her a "girl" lol), so I dismissed it as plain gossip, but now it all come back to me and the person who told me must have known his facts!


----------



## Chanbal

Here is a video that does a nice summary of the current situation!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Who was waiting for *PIERS MORGAN? *Well, he is here:
> 
> *After these shocking Palace bullying allegations, please spare me anymore of halo-cracked hypocrites Meghan and Harry's women-empowering victimhood garbage*
> 
> On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.
> 
> Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.
> 
> 'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
> On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.
> 
> Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.
> 
> 'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
> In a series of bombshell revelations in the UK's Times newspaper, Meghan stands accused of waging a systematic reign of bullying terror against her personal staff at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Two young female personal assistants were said to have been bullied out of their jobs, and a third more senior female member of staff was also allegedly mistreated. The claims were made in a formal complaint.
> 
> Naturally, Meghan came out fighting, instructing her legal team to say it was all 'a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation', and insisting, of course, that SHE was the real victim.
> 
> The Duchess, her spokesman said, was 'saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.'
> 
> The clear implication from this ferocious and laughably self-righteous riposte was that the allegations are untrue.
> 
> So, where did they come from?
> 
> Was it the nasty lying British press again?
> 
> Well, no.
> 
> The allegations were in an email written by the couple's then communications secretary Jason Knauf.
> In it, he said: 'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'
> 
> Knauf sent his email to Simon Case, then Prince William's private secretary and now the UK Government's cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of Human Resources at the Palace.
> 
> In his email, Knauf also expressed concern about the stress allegedly being experienced by Samantha Cohen, Meghan and Harry's private secretary, and said: 'I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.'
> 
> Knauf said Carruthers 'agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious' and he added: 'I remain concerned that nothing will be done.'
> 
> The Times reports that Prince Harry pleaded with him not to continue with his complaint, something Harry has denied.
> 
> Knauf was right to be concerned about the claims being brushed under the royal carpet because indeed, nothing was done - and a month later Knauf quit his job and went to work for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge as one of their top aides.
> 
> The details of the Times story are jaw-dropping, outlining a litany of alleged bullying by Meghan towards her young female staff that reduced some to tears.
> 
> Aides spoke of being humiliated and feeling 'sick' and 'terrified' by the dreadful treatment they received.
> 
> After one row over an event, one reportedly told another: 'I feel terrified. I can't stop shaking.'
> 
> A Palace source told the Times: 'There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.' The source described one member of staff as 'completely destroyed.'
> 
> And it wasn't just Meghan.
> 
> Harry stands accused of bullying behavior, too.
> 
> The Times reports that even before the wedding, one aide told a colleague the couple were both 'outrageous bullies' and said they were considering resigning.
> 
> The two personal assistants said to have been bullied out of the Palace have been silenced by Non-Disclosure Agreements they apparently signed that prevent them from talking about their experiences.
> 
> The Sussexes deny knowing about the NDAs.
> 
> When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'
> 
> All of this makes shocking reading and if it's all true, then it makes a complete mockery of Meghan and Harry's endless victimhood tour.
> 
> It's too late for Oprah to ask them about it because her interview is in the can.
> 
> Instead, we'll just hear the Sussexes portray themselves as the bullied victims, not the bullies that it is now claimed they were themselves.
> 
> And we'll hear Meghan cry that she was silenced, when in fact it's the alleged victims of her own bullying who have been silenced and had THEIR voice taken away.
> 
> If Meghan and Harry truly believe what they wrote in their 20-point manifesto for empowering women, then they should today demand the non-disclosure agreements with their two former assistants be removed so the young women are free to tell their stories in their own words. Now THAT would be empowering.
> 
> Then we can all hear the truth about the astonishing claims from the Sussexes' own communications secretary, directly from those he said were bullied out of their jobs.
> 
> And rather than dismiss Knauf's sensational claims as one giant smear, perhaps they could explain why someone working so close to them made a formal complaint about their bullying, why the Palace HR department believed the allegations were 'very serious' and why nothing was done about it?
> 
> The Times also contained a second shocking, and undenied, story: that Meghan wore a massive set of diamond chandelier earrings to a dinner during the Sussexes' tour of Fiji, which had been given to her as a wedding gift by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
> Three weeks before she wore them, Bin Salman ordered a hit squad to murder Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by sawing up his body into small pieces, because Khashoggi had dared to criticise the Crown Prince's brutal regime.
> 
> The story made huge international news, and the finger of suspicion laid firmly and publicly at the murderous hand of Bin Salman.
> 
> But we're supposed to believe, as claimed by her spokesman, that Meghan, who has regularly spouted off about her horror at human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, didn't know anything about it because she doesn't read the papers.
> 
> Yet somehow, she always knows what's in the papers!
> 
> I wonder how empowered the horribly oppressed women of Saudi Arabia feel today knowing that Meghan Markle is happy to brazenly sport expensive jewels lavished on her by the murderous leader who oppresses them?
> Meanwhile, amid all this unedifying royal mudslinging, the Duke of Edinburgh remains seriously ill in hospital.
> 
> The poor Queen must be in utter turmoil.
> 
> It's bad enough that Meghan and Harry have done this interview at such an incredibly insensitive time for the family.
> 
> But to play the compassionate women-empowering victims of bullying on prime-time TV, when they've now been accused of their own shocking compassion-devoid bullying towards multiple women, is both beyond the pale, and beyond parody.
> 
> Take the hypocritical halos off, your royal highnesses – they're cracked.
> 
> The hypocrites!


I'm starting to fall in love with Piers


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Sharont2305

Off to buy aaaalllll the popcorn from my local Waitrose which is, Ironically, the one the Duchess of Cambridge shopped at when living here on Anglesey


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hang on, isnt  chicken and waffles a traditional dish in the US?
First the lotuses now this.
They just want to spoil everything for everyone don’t they?


Chloe302225 said:


> I see your point but all of these gifts were acquired while in duty for her country. Whichever government at the time is the one who decides which country gets state visits, tours etc aligned to the foreign policy they are trying to achieve. This has no bearing on what HM personally feels about these individual because her personal feelings are not taken in to account when the agenda is set but she is expected to carry out her duty to best of her ability no matter who is sitting across from her at the time.



By the same logic that’s being applied to MM QE could not wear the gifts given to her which she does. As I said before,  MM could also say she was following royal precedent by wearing the gift & not passing a moral judgement. 









						Saudi Arabia diamond MILLION GIFTS to Royal Family REVEALED
					

SAUDI Arabia has gifted the British Royal Family luxurious jewellery worth millions for decades, but the royals are now facing increasing pressure to cut ties following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Here are some of the pieces the Queen and other royals have been gifted.




					www.google.co.uk
				




I guess, ultimately, it’s a matter of perspective. I view the hospitality shown to despotic leaders and wearing their gifts to be a recognition of their authority and a form of tacit support but I can see how someone else would say they are just going their duty as political neutrals.

However, I would also say the royals have more freedom of refusal than is made out.  Charles has made his feelings about China & Tibet very clear








						Why Prince Charles Isn't Going to a State Dinner With China
					

The Crown Prince — who has had rocky relations with Beijing — will still meet Chinese President Xi Jinping as the U.K. rolls out the red carpet




					time.com
				



And he is the crown prince after all. MM was on maternity leave when ***** visited 
They do manage to be ‘busy’ when they want to avoid something. 
I know it’s a very difficult personal time for the Queen and I don’t want to dog her for no reason but it strikes me as being a bit strange the morality of the ethics of the enormous stores of royal jewellery not to mention other gifts aren’t at least as questionable as MM’s earrings. 

And as I’ve said, QE has an enormous responsibility to be a moral authority because she is the head of the Anglican Church which is our state religion.

I feel like I’ve thrashed this point out enough as I think it’s a probably matter of interpreting duty.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Ps I must apologize , 10 new pages of this thread since bedtime, I did not get a chance to read all, no disrespect, the intended, must get to work , this thread moves fast !


Wild threads run fast 


marietouchet said:


> On the earrings, there are lots of BRF jewels of dubious colonial provenance
> 
> MM is known to have jewelry , wedding ring, redone a lot, and she could have done that here
> 
> but boy those are swell baubles


I’m guessing if she had done this they couldn’t have been ID’d and it is kind of ironic considering how much she loves people to publish articles about her jewellery.


----------



## mellibelly

None of this is surprising. This is a woman that never held a real job besides acting. She’s never worked in an office in any capacity of seniority, leadership or management. She was a low level actress in an ensemble cable series. She wasn’t a producer or director. She wasn’t in charge of anything other than knowing her lines. Good leaders know how to get the best from employees while being respectful. I call BS on the Americans are more direct excuse. I’m American and that doesn’t mean I can be an a**hole to subordinates.

I watched the video someone posted many pages back of the young Meghan at her friend’s birthday party, bossing everyone around and making them call her Queen...and it wasn’t even her party or birthday LMAO. She’s always been this way


----------



## csshopper

Bring it on!   

Meghan, the  is long over due to get her "comeuppance" as my grandmother used to say.


----------



## justwatchin

I’m predicting they will double down with more articles about the perceived harassment, threaten another lawsuit and Meg will be on bed rest for the rest of her moon bump pregnancy.


----------



## gracekelly

But she bought the crew pizza!  Maybe they became upset because it didn’t have any pepperonI Bawhahaha!

@csshopper Granny had it just right!  Time for the comeuppance!


----------



## rose60610

One of my favorites is from Queen of Wrap Dress' above post: 

*When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'*

Well, you know what, it's not OUR job to coddle HER, either!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> I’m predicting they will double down with more articles about the perceived harassment, threaten another lawsuit and Meg will be on bed rest for the rest of her moon bump pregnancy.


They will be calling the paramedics and Oprah will be there with a camera crew to report it. She will definitely turn this into a dramatic pity party


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> One of my favorites is from Queen of Wrap Dress' above post:
> 
> *When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'*
> 
> Well, you know what, it's not OUR job to coddle HER, either!



That was Meghan's moment to ask the aide if she was okay. Oh, that's right, it only matters if MEGHAN is okay.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5008805



So less than flattering things are coming out about Meghan, yet somehow Wills and Kate are at fault and in panic? Why would they be, they do their job, they have a stable family life, and they have never been accused of bullying their staff. WTF.


----------



## madamelizaking

Oh MY GOD!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

Someone wrote that when Kate was upset it wasn’t about the tights for the little girls, it was about the way she was treating people. Also that the separation of the courts had to do with the bullying. William wouldn’ t stand for it and wanted no part of them   In addition, more credence is being giving to MM taking the pictures of the children and of KP.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Meghan even bullied poor little Princess Charlotte at the wedding and made her cry until Kate stepped in - I really hope the bump isn’t a little girl can you imagine how she would treat a cute little girl who would be competition for Harry’s and her adoring fan bases affections ?


----------



## Chloe302225

I don't want to celebrate too early but I think it is happening; the cardboard box they have built themselves upon is starting to crumble.


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, I don't want to get my hopes up. There are too many people still trying to defend them. By this time, if there are any objective members of the US news media, they should be getting a whiff that maybe things aren't as they believed. That doesn't appear to be the case, at least not yet. They are spending more time on Meghan's rebuttal to the accusations than on the accusations themselves.

From today's _LA Times_:
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reclaiming their narrative after the United Kingdom’s Times newspaper published a buzzy report about a bullying complaint allegedly filed from inside Kensington Palace.


----------



## gracekelly

madamelizaking said:


> Oh MY GOD!!!!



People will be coming out of 5he woodwork. Hope that tea tossing incident in AU is mentioned and verified.
Last night I discovered that there were numerous stories going  back to 2017 about her bad behavior with others. Now they are all coalescing and finally getting traction.   Let’s see them use Diana and racism as an excuse for their bad behavior.


----------



## EverSoElusive

elvisfan4life said:


> Meghan even bullied poor little Princess Charlotte at the wedding and made her cry until Kate stepped in - I really hope the bump isn’t a little girl can you imagine how she would treat a cute little girl who would be competition for Harry’s and her adoring fan bases affections ?




How did she bully Charlotte at the wedding? I'm interested to know because I've never seen stories on this before. If this indeed happened, I feel for sweet little Charlotte  Charlotte has more class than Me-gain.


----------



## gracekelly

They will keep purchasing bots and get the sugar army in full swing. Hopefully that will bankrupt them.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Click on the main portion to read the article


the arrogance is staggering...but her fans and media outlets in the US will say this is typical of a strong woman being treated differently from men


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> How did she bully Charlotte at the wedding? I'm interested to know because I've never seen stories on this before. If this indeed happened, I feel for sweet little Charlotte  Charlotte has more class than Me-gain.


Charlotte does act up, but she is a little girl and her mother was present. It would have been really out of line for Meghan to yell at her.  If Meghan expected perfection from a three year old, she was nuts.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> the arrogance is staggering...but her fans and media outlets in the US will say this is typical of a strong woman being treated differently from men


If so, good thing that Harry was accused as well of bullying.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> haha, "_a couple that are so rich and have had such a high position in life as the Duke and Duchess can *manage to make themselves appear so cheap*_*.*" I couldn't agree more with this, they are so vulgar!!


the really tacky part of that video was H asking to use the bathroom ....uugh....I can relate...but a Prince doing this on camera at a stranger's home?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

justwatchin said:


> I’m predicting they will double down with more articles about the perceived harassment, threaten another lawsuit and Meg will be on bed rest for the rest of her moon bump pregnancy.


To deny the bump rumors, should we expect a pic of her wearing a bikini on DM? Bikini poses seem to be a thing with celebrities these days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> I don't want to celebrate too early but I think it is happening; the cardboard box they have built themselves upon is starting to crumble.



*knocks on wood*


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> If so, good thing that Harry was accused as well of bullying.


but he was just protecting his WIFE


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So less than flattering things are coming out about Meghan, yet somehow Wills and Kate are at fault and in panic? Why would they be, they do their job, they have a stable family life, and they have never been accused of bullying their staff. WTF.



That post was from Celebitchy. I stopped visiting that site as the articles and stans would twist themselves into pretzels trying to blame everything on Will and Kate being “jealous” and wanting to take the Sussexes down a peg. If you disagreed you were deemed racist.

The thing is, why is the American media so far up Ginge & Cringe’s azzes? I live in Los Angeles and I don’t know a single person that like them. The general consensus is 1. Who?? or 2. Harry and Meghan are annoying, should stfu and go back to England. Are they paying for this glowing US coverage?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just to kill some time until we find out what happens next. Ignore the article, the comments are gold.

https://dlisted.com/2021/03/01/cbs-...with-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/#comments


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The article makes a strong point, I also checked "roast chicken".   If this is true, they are sick, deranged,... need institutionalization. Their disrespect for people is scary.


if true, it's sick....could this be coincidence?


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> If so, good thing that Harry was accused as well of bullying.


 "What Meghan Wants, Meghan GETS!" If I recall, and there's been so much, Harry tried to bully Angela Kelley because he felt she did not give in to his demands in trying to secure the Tiara Meghan wanted to wear.


----------



## Annawakes

SO looking forward to the results of the BP investigation!!!  Although I wonder is there any chance they will try to sweep it under again?  To protect themselves from admitting wrongdoing the first time when they didn’t take action?  Then as a by product she wins again


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What a sh$tshow.
> And O’s show hasn’t even aired.  Not only are they upstaging QE but also OW.  That is not a good sign.
> I do hope O asks MM why she married into this family. She was a divorced, nearly 40 year old woman with a career.  She must have been well aware of the role families play in a marriage, any marriage. So, why choose this crowd?  Was the money worth it?


She fell in LOVE with a man who just happend to be a prince doncha know?


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> None of this is surprising. This is a woman that never held a real job besides acting. She’s never worked in an office in any capacity of seniority, leadership or management. She was a low level actress in an ensemble cable series. She wasn’t a producer or director. She wasn’t in charge of anything other than knowing her lines. *Good leaders know how to get the best from employees while being respectful*. I call BS on the Americans are more direct excuse. I’m American and that doesn’t mean I can be an a**hole to subordinates.
> 
> I watched the video someone posted many pages back of the young Meghan at her friend’s birthday party, bossing everyone around and making them call her Queen...and it wasn’t even her party or birthday LMAO. She’s always been this way


Absolutely!  I ran my own business for quite a number of years, and there's a reason my former employees still keep in touch with me, years after I closed shop.  It wasn't because I treated them like minions.  Mutual respect goes a long way, but of course someone who thinks she's better than everyone else wouldn't know that.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just to kill some time until we find out what happens next. Ignore the article, the comments are gold.
> 
> https://dlisted.com/2021/03/01/cbs-...with-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/#comments


Wow, I love this comment by Maggie the Cat. Sums up how most of us feel.

"Guarantee you that her heavy black eyeliner is a strategy to evoke the memory of Diana's giant, sad (and heavily lined) emoting eyes during her Panorama interview. Except we're comparing apples and ****ing oranges, Meghan. Diana's life was a tragedy that unfolded over the course of nearly twenty years before it inevitably met its violent and lonely conclusion. Meghan jumped ship with her idiot husband 18 months into her marriage, landed in a sprawling California mansion, and somehow still expects we will collectively clutch our pearls for her and Harry as we listen to them relay their suffering...in an interview conducted during a global pandemic that has killed or financially ruined and upended the mental health of millions upon millions of people, no less.
She's nearly 40 and he's not that far behind. Their immaturity and lack of self-awareness is a bit staggering when you take that into account."


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> No, I’m not defending anyone. I think everyone comes out terribly in this. The immorality of the action is obvious but that’s not my point.
> 
> The issue for me is that, it seems like the palace are finally responding in kind and what they are leading with is extremely hypocritical and just seems cynical.
> (Sorry if this is too political)
> Frankly, the relationship between the UK and Saudi is too important to be compromised and MM could say that she was just following etiquette as she was a ‘working royal’ at the time.
> 
> It also bears mention that this kind of scandal is, for whatever reason, a weak weapon. Accepting blood diamonds from a dictator didn’t kill Naomi Campbell’s career after all.
> 
> Finally, I think they should just not say anything. They also need to start paying their PR people more to try and get some better candidates.


but Naomi doesn't pretend to be a saint or a person leading all the rest of us to wokeness with her actions


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just to kill some time until we find out what happens next. Ignore the article, the comments are gold.
> 
> https://dlisted.com/2021/03/01/cbs-...with-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/#comments



Hysterical!!


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> None of this is surprising. This is a woman that never held a real job besides acting. She’s never worked in an office in any capacity of seniority, leadership or management. She was a low level actress in an ensemble cable series. She wasn’t a producer or director. She wasn’t in charge of anything other than knowing her lines. Good leaders know how to get the best from employees while being respectful. I call BS on the Americans are more direct excuse. I’m American and that doesn’t mean I can be an a**hole to subordinates.
> 
> I watched the video someone posted many pages back of the young Meghan at her friend’s birthday party, bossing everyone around and making them call her Queen...and it wasn’t even her party or birthday LMAO. She’s always been this way


don't forget yacht girl


----------



## lulu212121

gracekelly said:


> People will be coming out of 5he woodwork. Hope that tea tossing incident in AU is mentioned and verified.
> Last night I discovered that there were numerous stories going  back to 2017 about her bad behavior with others. Now they are all coalescing and finally getting traction.   Let’s see them use Diana and racism as an excuse for their bad behavior.


Much of this has been discussed here over the years. Much of what is coming out isn't new, just better verification. Thank goodness! The only new thing is the urban dictionary stuff


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> if true, it's sick....could this be coincidence?


Let's hope it's coincidence for the sake of Archie and baby #2. If true, it's certainly sick. These are the people running a charitable foundation and making millions preaching others.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh, one of my every day earrings (given to me by my grandmother 10+ years ago, I've worn them ever since unless I wanted to wear other earrings. Even slept in them) just broke. You think bin Salman will send me another pair if I ask nicely?


----------



## LittleStar88

purseinsanity said:


> Absolutely!  I ran my own business for quite a number of years, and there's a reason my former employees still keep in touch with me, years after I closed shop.  It wasn't because I treated them like minions.  Mutual respect goes a long way, but of course someone who thinks she's better than everyone else wouldn't know that.



Having supported my fair share of a-hole execs who were totally and completely unreasonable... They were all self-serving, self-entitled narcissists. I’ve been stressed out and reduced to tears. I can see H & M  behaving this way, ruthless and obnoxious. We have well-established that M is the quintessential narcissist so I would 100% believe that she made her staff feel way stressed out and reduced to tears.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Charlotte does act up, but she is a little girl and her mother was present.* It would have been really out of line for Meghan to yell at her.  *If Meghan expected perfection from a three year old, she was nuts.



It is the behavior of a bridezilla. If that had been the only inkling of a problem with Meghan we could have easily passed it off as just being nerves about the wedding. But there has been sooo much more...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> don't forget yacht girl



Is THAT why she was given jewelry by a Saudi prince?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Is THAT why she was given jewelry by a Saudi prince?


----------



## purseinsanity

Palace Launches Probe into Bullying Allegations Made by Staffers for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry
					

Buckingham Palace reacts to allegations of Meghan Markle bullying staffers, per a piece published in The Times




					people.com
				



Oh good, Haz is on the chain too!


Buckingham Palace says they are "very concerned" by a new report that Meghan Markle faced a bullying complaint made by one of her close advisers during her time as a working royal — something her office has strongly refuted.
On Wednesday, the palace announced they will launch a probe into the allegations, which were reported by _The Times_ in the U.K. last night.
"We are clearly very concerned about allegations in _The Times _following claims made by former staff of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex," the palace said. "Accordingly, our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article. Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned."

The statement continued, "The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace."
Buckingham Palace is not classifying the inquiry an "internal investigation," but rather an examination of the allegations and an opportunity for those involved to participate.
*RELATED: A Complete Timeline of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Exit from Royal Life*


| CREDIT: DOMINIC LIPINSKI/PA IMAGES VIA GETTY
The Duchess of Sussex has denied the allegations. In a statement obtained by PEOPLE after _The Times_ published their story on Tuesday night, a spokesperson for Meghan and Prince Harry said, "The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. *She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good."*

The complaint, which _The Times_ reports was made in October 2018 by the couple's former communications secretary Jason Knauf, claimed that Meghan drove two personal assistants out of the household and undermined the confidence of a third staff member.
*RELATED: Meghan Markle 'Saddened' by 'Attack on Her Character' amid Bullying Allegations from Palace Staffers*
_The Times _says Knauf submitted the complaint in an effort to protect palace staffers who were allegedly bullied by the Duchess of Sussex, at times reduced to tears. One royal aide, who anticipated a confrontation with Meghan, is alleged to have told a colleague: "I can't stop shaking."


| CREDIT: CHRIS JACKSON/GETTY
In the story published in _The Times_ on Tuesday, a source says that Harry pleaded with Knauf not to pursue the HR complaint. According to _The Times_, lawyers for Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, deny that any meeting took place or that the Duke of Sussex would have interfered with any staff matter.
Knauf reportedly sent an email to Simon Case, Prince William's private secretary at the time and now the cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Case then forwarded it to Carruthers.
In his email, Knauf said Carruthers "agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious." He added: "I remain concerned that nothing will be done." (PEOPLE has not independently corroborated _The Times _report.)
*Get the premiere issue of PEOPLE Royals for glamorous new photos and inside stories royals fans haven't seen or read elsewhere! Subscribe at peopleroyals.com/launch*


| CREDIT: CHRIS JACKSON/GETTY
A spokesperson for the Sussexes told _The Times_ in a statement: "Let's just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation. We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of The Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It's no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining The Duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and The Duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years."

_*Can't get enough of *_*PEOPLE*_*'s Royals coverage? Sign up for our free Royals newsletter to get the latest updates on Kate Middleton, Meghan Markle and more!*_
The report comes five days before Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey is due to air on CBS. The interview is expected to cover Meghan's journey from stepping into life as a royal to marriage, motherhood, philanthropic work and facing intense public pressure. Harry will then join his wife to talk about their historic move to the United States.
In a preview of the interview, Winfrey alludes to an experience that was "almost unsurvivable," asking if there was "a breaking point."

LOLOL, ok Meg.  Go look in the mirror and experience some actual personal growth!


----------



## bag-mania

Speaking of Urban Dictionary, here's the top definition for Prince Harry.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> the arrogance is staggering...but her fans and media outlets in the US will say this is typical of a strong woman being treated differently from men


The big media outlets are all in the same camp protecting their investments! They will not discard them until they really don't think they can get any profits out of them! Those mega deals aren't going to pay themselves!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, I don't want to get my hopes up. There are too many people still trying to defend them. By this time, if there are any objective members of the US news media, they should be getting a whiff that maybe things aren't as they believed. That doesn't appear to be the case, at least not yet. They are spending more time on Meghan's rebuttal to the accusations than on the accusations themselves.
> 
> From today's _LA Times_:
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reclaiming their narrative after the United Kingdom’s Times newspaper published a buzzy report about a bullying complaint allegedly filed from inside Kensington Palace.


While LA Times is likely supporting them, the above paragraph might not be very helpful. Many people in the US wouldn't notice the UK Times's article, but after reading that comment, they may look for it and it's not a pretty one for Ms Markle.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5008804
> View attachment 5008805
> View attachment 5008806
> View attachment 5008807
> View attachment 5008808
> View attachment 5008810
> View attachment 5008811
> View attachment 5008812
> View attachment 5008813





sdkitty said:


> but Naomi doesn't pretend to be a saint or a person leading all the rest of us to wokeness with her actions


This all comes down to what you view  as genuine philanthropy and what you see as cynical ‘wokeness for publicity but I think you could  say Naomi  pushes a narrative of her engagement with social issues and of being a role model to young WOC in fashion:


			Redirect Notice
		









						At 50, Supermodel Naomi Campbell Matures From Bad Girl to Mentor and Activist
					

Today marks supermodel Naomi Campbell’s 50th birthday. The trailblazing, controversy-courting,...




					www.everythingzoomer.com
				




 Which is coupled with a reticence about the incident with Charles Taylor








						Naomi Campbell: ‘I will not be held hostage to my past’
					

The supermodel opens up about friends, enemies, taking on the tabloids – and fashion’s new world order




					www.theguardian.com
				




In any case, surely MM’s posturing is just the icing on the cake? It is the immoral acts themselves  that are the problem.
My original point about Naomi was that her unrepentant attitude has actually played better to the UK press than MM and that yet again, ironically, MM’s obsession with having a spotless image is making things worse.

I don’t think there should be any question that what Naomi did with the diamonds and the trial is disgraceful no matter how it is spun.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Urban Dictionary, here's the top definition for Prince Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5008960


Love this!  And look!  It doesn't have a sexual meaning.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, one of my every day earrings (given to me by my grandmother 10+ years ago, I've worn them ever since unless I wanted to wear other earrings. Even slept in them) just broke. You think bin Salman will send me another pair if I ask nicely?


Will you promise to wear them no matter what the press says he did? 
Remember it’s the press who are the evil bullies not him and certainly not the saintly MM.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m afraid they’ve left the building and left behind a broken trail of hurt people and massive garbage it would take years to clean up.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Will you promise to wear them no matter what the press says he did?
> Remember it’s the press who are the evil bullies not him and certainly not the saintly MM.



Just because a man has the people he doesn't like assassinated doesn't mean he can't have fine taste in jewelry!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

chicinthecity777 said:


> The big media outlets are all in the same camp protecting their investments! They will not discard them until they really don't think they can get any profits out of them! Those mega deals aren't going to pay themselves!



Indeed--- all the controversy and conflict is golden to the media.  It means more clicks, viewers, readers, whatever.  I was once coached by a communications consultant before a media interview about a local issue and he warned me that "conflict" was one of the things that they would hone in on. 
While I realize that we need an objective, fair, and unfettered press, it is still no wonder our media in general has stoked so much division both societally and politically.

ETA:  you can bet that as long as there is controversy about them  (some or much of which is promoted by H&M) in the news, the media (and unfortunately, H&M by proxy) will be raking it in.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Is THAT why she was given jewelry by a Saudi prince?


The only reason I see men won’t say anything is because of maybe wives, girlfriends and significant others, you know.


----------



## bag-mania

As far as the US press is concerned, the BRF was in a no-win situation as far as releasing info on the Meghan-bullying-her-staff situation. If they had waited until after the Oprah interview (and whatever bombshells that might have) they would be accused of retaliation. If they had done it any earlier, they would have been accused of attacking Meghan for no reason. By releasing it now they are being accused of a preemptive strike. 

They had the right to protect her and cover it up back when she was part of The Firm. Now when H&M are making it look like the family did nothing to help her, they are fully within their rights to point out the unpleasantness where they did help her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

So basically all those "rumours" did the rounds a few years ago before they left are all true!!!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Just because a man has the people he doesn't like assassinated doesn't mean he can't have fine taste in jewelry!



Dark babe


----------



## chicinthecity777

The BP have no choice but to launch an investigation after the Times article. They can't appear to be doing nothing while people claim they were being wronged. It's the right thing to do. It doesn't matter how the timing is in relation to the OW interview.

I am not a royalist at all but God all mighty MM is a serial family and life wrecker!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Not sure if this was posted before and if it's true. Clarence House may stop responding to mails sent to Hazza and Me-gain


----------



## Lounorada

Yanca said:


> Hazza and Megnuts are full forced with their assault on the people Lol Sorry for the names, I can't force myself to call him " Prince" anymore after watching his  recent antics with James Corden, and the preview of  their endless whining with Oprah. I am sure it must have been so hard for them, ( eye roll)   being " attacked by the press" as they call it, sure some of the tabloids were nasty, but some articles I read were fair and fact based and just calling them out on their  multitudes of hypocrisy and self righteousness . As a Minority myself and a Royal fan, I was excited when she joined the Royal family, but I must admit even during the engagement interview there was a nagging thought that she does not seemed that 100 percent sincere, and then the actions followed, cutting of her Father  stealing the thunder of Princess Eugenie,  competing  with other Royals when they have events, spreading news through her " friends" I really wished the trial pushed thru , it would have been informative to know if there are really  5 friends and if its truly them that just decided on their own to go to People to defend Megain honor against her father.
> 
> Had they ony lie low ,  after they left, bought a modest mansion, still did their philantrophy works quitely like other Rich people, voluntarily give up the Dukedom,  live in privacy as they claimed they sought, they would not be as despised  and unliked as they are right now. They are always using the reason that she is biracial, that  she was  a divorcee  that people cant accept her, but in reality it's because of her actions, and Hazza just keep on whining, in time of Global Pandemic, of so much suffering and poverty, people  dying, loosing their livelihoods,  way of life, love ones,  jobs and security, the goverment in turmoil, these two can't get over the fact that last year was so " tough " on them, I don't quite grasp what he meant by hard,  with them having multi -million dollar  deals, having not to worry about the struggles of  day to day in the truest sense, I am sure they have their struggles too, but  while the masses were  just fighthing to survive, their issues are trivial in comparison.  And   why can't they just donate silently, I know the Charities also want the publicity so  many more people will be encourage to give , but with them the donation is highligted 100 times,  when in fact it's just a tiny slice of their pie- the 50 hats purchased in NZ,  the boxed lunches, the contributions to the woman shelter, even their contirbution in The world Kitchen - but no definite amount given. And if their  sugars will come after me, I can proudly say that I have given my fair share as my Health Care worker salary  allowed.


Well said!





Chanbal said:


> Go for it DM!
> *Meghan Markle's privacy claim over letter she wrote to her father 'cried out' for cross-examination, lawyers for Mail On Sunday and MailOnline tell High Court bid to appeal against judge's decision to deny them a trial*
> 
> *A High Court judge last month ruled in favour of Meghan Markle's privacy claim summarily without testing the evidence at trial*
> *Today lawyers for the Mail On Sunday and MailOnline outlined ten separate points that the judge failed to take into account in his original ruling*
> *They argued that the judge failed to sufficiently take into account that the Duchess 'undermined or diminished' the weight of her own privacy by collaborating in publication of extracts of the letter*
> *The publisher's lawyers have also insisted that Meghan authorised five of her close friends to speak with People magazine*
> *They also insisted that a full trial should take place because further evidence would be made available by then*
> _However lawyers for the publishers are today challenging the judge's decision, outlining ten separate grounds that the judge failed to take into account in his original ruling.  _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'should be cross-examination' in privacy claim, appeal told
> 
> 
> Lawyers for the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline went to the High Court in a bid to appeal a judge's decision to deny them a trial in Meghan Markle's privacy case, which was refused by the judge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk








rose60610 said:


> To be fair, Meghan DID wear the $3,000 Carolina dress more than once. TWICE, in fact. And maybe we'll see her in the $100,000 Dior Kaftan again when she uses the bigger pillow. She inspires us all.    And who knows--maybe she instructed her servants to use the same toilet brush to clean more than one bathroom.


I am still shocked every time I read about that Dior kaftan costing $100,000. Like, WTF!?








bag-mania said:


> Harry must be sooo jealous of his brother. His spite is coming out for all to see.


This. Every day, this is Hazmat & his bride:





Chloe302225 said:


>









bag-mania said:


> Their PR people are working hard into the night. This from Marie Claire.
> 
> View attachment 5008171


----------



## chicinthecity777

On the bright side for H&M, they can finally say they made BBC 6pm news again! The whole segment lasted about 3 sentences and 20 seconds long and they then moved on to talk about Prince Philip!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Who was waiting for *PIERS MORGAN? *Well, he is here:
> 
> *After these shocking Palace bullying allegations, please spare me anymore of halo-cracked hypocrites Meghan and Harry's women-empowering victimhood garbage*
> 
> On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.
> 
> Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.
> 
> 'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
> On Monday, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a 20-point guide to how to empower women.
> 
> Timed to coincide with next week's International Women's Day, it dripped with all the usual insufferably patronising self-righteousness that's become the hallmark of the couple's endless hectoring homilies to the world.
> 
> 'Let's unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion for the women in your life!' they beseeched on their foundation website.
> In a series of bombshell revelations in the UK's Times newspaper, Meghan stands accused of waging a systematic reign of bullying terror against her personal staff at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Two young female personal assistants were said to have been bullied out of their jobs, and a third more senior female member of staff was also allegedly mistreated. The claims were made in a formal complaint.
> 
> Naturally, Meghan came out fighting, instructing her legal team to say it was all 'a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation', and insisting, of course, that SHE was the real victim.
> 
> The Duchess, her spokesman said, was 'saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma. She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.'
> 
> The clear implication from this ferocious and laughably self-righteous riposte was that the allegations are untrue.
> 
> So, where did they come from?
> 
> Was it the nasty lying British press again?
> 
> Well, no.
> 
> The allegations were in an email written by the couple's then communications secretary Jason Knauf.
> In it, he said: 'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'
> 
> Knauf sent his email to Simon Case, then Prince William's private secretary and now the UK Government's cabinet secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of Human Resources at the Palace.
> 
> In his email, Knauf also expressed concern about the stress allegedly being experienced by Samantha Cohen, Meghan and Harry's private secretary, and said: 'I questioned if the Household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals.'
> 
> Knauf said Carruthers 'agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious' and he added: 'I remain concerned that nothing will be done.'
> 
> The Times reports that Prince Harry pleaded with him not to continue with his complaint, something Harry has denied.
> 
> Knauf was right to be concerned about the claims being brushed under the royal carpet because indeed, nothing was done - and a month later Knauf quit his job and went to work for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge as one of their top aides.
> 
> The details of the Times story are jaw-dropping, outlining a litany of alleged bullying by Meghan towards her young female staff that reduced some to tears.
> 
> Aides spoke of being humiliated and feeling 'sick' and 'terrified' by the dreadful treatment they received.
> 
> After one row over an event, one reportedly told another: 'I feel terrified. I can't stop shaking.'
> 
> A Palace source told the Times: 'There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.' The source described one member of staff as 'completely destroyed.'
> 
> And it wasn't just Meghan.
> 
> Harry stands accused of bullying behavior, too.
> 
> The Times reports that even before the wedding, one aide told a colleague the couple were both 'outrageous bullies' and said they were considering resigning.
> 
> The two personal assistants said to have been bullied out of the Palace have been silenced by Non-Disclosure Agreements they apparently signed that prevent them from talking about their experiences.
> 
> The Sussexes deny knowing about the NDAs.
> 
> When Meghan was allegedly warned by a senior Palace aide to treat her staff better, she is reported to have retorted: 'It's not my job to coddle people.'
> 
> All of this makes shocking reading and if it's all true, then it makes a complete mockery of Meghan and Harry's endless victimhood tour.
> 
> It's too late for Oprah to ask them about it because her interview is in the can.
> 
> Instead, we'll just hear the Sussexes portray themselves as the bullied victims, not the bullies that it is now claimed they were themselves.
> 
> And we'll hear Meghan cry that she was silenced, when in fact it's the alleged victims of her own bullying who have been silenced and had THEIR voice taken away.
> 
> If Meghan and Harry truly believe what they wrote in their 20-point manifesto for empowering women, then they should today demand the non-disclosure agreements with their two former assistants be removed so the young women are free to tell their stories in their own words. Now THAT would be empowering.
> 
> Then we can all hear the truth about the astonishing claims from the Sussexes' own communications secretary, directly from those he said were bullied out of their jobs.
> 
> And rather than dismiss Knauf's sensational claims as one giant smear, perhaps they could explain why someone working so close to them made a formal complaint about their bullying, why the Palace HR department believed the allegations were 'very serious' and why nothing was done about it?
> 
> The Times also contained a second shocking, and undenied, story: that Meghan wore a massive set of diamond chandelier earrings to a dinner during the Sussexes' tour of Fiji, which had been given to her as a wedding gift by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
> Three weeks before she wore them, Bin Salman ordered a hit squad to murder Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by sawing up his body into small pieces, because Khashoggi had dared to criticise the Crown Prince's brutal regime.
> 
> The story made huge international news, and the finger of suspicion laid firmly and publicly at the murderous hand of Bin Salman.
> 
> But we're supposed to believe, as claimed by her spokesman, that Meghan, who has regularly spouted off about her horror at human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia, didn't know anything about it because she doesn't read the papers.
> 
> Yet somehow, she always knows what's in the papers!
> 
> I wonder how empowered the horribly oppressed women of Saudi Arabia feel today knowing that Meghan Markle is happy to brazenly sport expensive jewels lavished on her by the murderous leader who oppresses them?
> Meanwhile, amid all this unedifying royal mudslinging, the Duke of Edinburgh remains seriously ill in hospital.
> 
> The poor Queen must be in utter turmoil.
> 
> It's bad enough that Meghan and Harry have done this interview at such an incredibly insensitive time for the family.
> 
> But to play the compassionate women-empowering victims of bullying on prime-time TV, when they've now been accused of their own shocking compassion-devoid bullying towards multiple women, is both beyond the pale, and beyond parody.
> 
> Take the hypocritical halos off, your royal highnesses – they're cracked.
> 
> The hypocrites!



ME!!!!!!!
I 'm usually up til 2 or 3 Pacific Time anyway. Not like I have a job to be at any more
This was the first place I came as soon as my head was off the pillow 
Thank you for posting this


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> I agree.  Not a sentiment I think of as romantic , but whatever people say/do in what they think is private with their willing lover is none of my business.
> Haz, if truly using the Urban Dictionary innuendos, is beyond belief.



I am giving them the benefit of the doubt on the innuendos. But I will go to my grave saying NO KID SAID CROCODILE FOR A FIRST WORD....not even Einstein himself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG ladies...Meena, niece to the 2nd important person in the US, is over on Twitter going for Piers. WTFFFF.


----------



## poopsie

duna said:


> All this confirms what I was told by someone close to royal circles at the time of H&M's engament, i.e. that she's a nasty person who bullies and ill treats her staff. I had never heard of her before and she seemed to me a nice girl (she's my DD's age so I can call her a "girl" lol), so I dismissed it as plain gossip, but now it all come back to me and the person who told me must have known his facts!



Who is that person????? Sign him up! We need him in here STAT


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> As far as the US press is concerned, the BRF was in a no-win situation as far as releasing info on the Meghan-bullying-her-staff situation. If they had waited until after the Oprah interview (and whatever bombshells that might have) they would be accused of retaliation. If they had done it any earlier, they would have been accused of attacking Meghan for no reason. By releasing it now they are being accused of a preemptive strike.
> 
> They had the right to protect her and cover it up back when she was part of The Firm. Now when H&M are making it look like the family did nothing to help her, they are fully within their rights to point out the unpleasantness where they did help her.



I agree with everything... BRF are in a tricky situation. That being said I don't like the viewpoint that they had a right to protect M and cover it up when she was in the Firm.... yes, they had the right legally of course but that's pretty sickening! I think this whole thing just makes them look worse if it does emerge that they knew and did nothing or enabled the bullying. Don't know how they could not know really, though I guess maybe they just are too far up to be concerned with personnel changes. You'd think someone would look into it if a staff member's 3 PAs quit unexpectedly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG ladies...Meena, niece to the 2nd important person in the US, is over on Twitter having a screaming match with Piers. WTFFFF.



Doesn’t matter who it is, anyone connected to this couple will be damaged by their association.  This is why so many are trying to defend the seemingly psycho behavior.  

Those using the ‘Diana did it defense’ should understand that Diana had serious mental issues.  Are they saying MM has serious mental issues?  

Here’s the link:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG ladies...Meena, niece to the 2nd important person in the US, is over on Twitter having a screaming match with Piers. WTFFFF.



Really?! That's not entirely surprising. Meena reminds me of Meghan. She does Meghan-ish things, such as pretentiously naming her fashion company after a Maya Angelou poem and founding an organization to "bring awareness to social causes."

And she uses people. This sentence had to be added to Meena's Wikipedia entry: She was asked by the White House to stop using *************'s name for personal enrichment.


----------



## lalame

I don't get the argument that it's a smear campaign intended to tank their Oprah interview. This man, who worked for them directly and put his name on the record and risked his professional credibility, made an internal company complaint in 2018. He just held the secret until now because he knew they'd do a sit down 3 years later so he could cash in? What is he gaining exactly from the private company complaint?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> How did she bully Charlotte at the wedding? I'm interested to know because I've never seen stories on this before. If this indeed happened, I feel for sweet little Charlotte  Charlotte has more class than Me-gain.



There were photos at the time of Kate consoling her and the split with Kate started then in our press and a satirical magazine called Private Eye


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I agree with everything... BRF are in a tricky situation. That being said I don't like the viewpoint that they had a right to protect M and cover it up when she was in the Firm.... yes, they had the right legally of course but that's pretty sickening! I think this whole thing just makes them look worse if it does emerge that they knew and did nothing or enabled the bullying. Don't know how they could not know really, though I guess maybe they just are too far up to be concerned with personnel changes. You'd think someone would look into it if a staff member's 3 PAs quit unexpectedly.



Not defending anyone, MM was a ‘new’ employee who is married to a high-ranking senior employee. The married-in’s always present difficulties in the work place - always - unless the spouse makes it clear how to function. Man-child, drama-lover H never did that. Thus, this mess.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Just because a man has the people he doesn't like assassinated doesn't mean he can't have fine taste in jewelry!


Ye


QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG ladies...Meena, niece to the 2nd important person in the US, is over on Twitter having a screaming match with Piers. WTFFFF.


Link please?
My husband has a love/hate for piers’ Twitter


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Love this!  And look!  It doesn't have a sexual meaning.


Maybe because he's been turned into a eunuch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I don't get the argument that it's a smear campaign intended to tank their Oprah interview. This man, who worked for them directly and put his name on the record and risked his professional credibility, made an internal company complaint in 2018. He just held the secret until now because he knew they'd do a sit down 3 years later so he could cash in? What is he gaining exactly from the private company complaint?



Jason K [if that is the man in question] is protecting his former employer, the palace. He is not looking to cash in. He did follow procedure and sent the complaint onward.  Before he did that,  he took the complaint to the spouse with the hope that the spouse would explain the business to his wife.  Instead, this spouse tried to stop further action from Jason K.  That is the real issue. Why would H try to stop further action?  No good answers come to mind.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> I am giving them the benefit of the doubt on the innuendos. But I will go to my grave saying NO KID SAID CROCODILE FOR A FIRST WORD....not even Einstein himself.


Haz and Meg spew forth "crocs" of $hit.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t matter who it is, anyone connected to this couple will be damaged by their association.  This is why so many are trying to defend the seemingly psycho behavior.
> 
> Those using the ‘Diana did it defense’ should understand that Diana had serious mental issues.  Are they saying MM has serious mental issues?
> 
> Here’s the link:



Ah yes, the good old "You're a Racist!!!!!!" excuse.

Just because someone is a WOC/POC doesn't make them untouchable or angels sent from God.  No one, regardless of their color, should be above reproach for their horrible, "unsurvivable" actions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020

From 1997, Christopher Hitchens on the reaction to Diana‘s death:
Around the 2 minute mark, he refers to OW as ‘street therapy’


----------



## mshermes

Aimee3 said:


> Going back to the post about wedding gifts, it was listed that two Koalas in a part of Australia were named after H&M...all I could think of was they should've named two SNAKES after H&M, and not sweet Koalas!


Agree....especially in light of the fact that she speaks with forked tongue.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Really?! That's not entirely surprising. Meena reminds me of Meghan. She does Meghan-ish things, such as pretentiously naming her fashion company after a Maya Angelou poem and founding an organization to "bring awareness to social causes."
> 
> And she uses people. This sentence had to be added to Meena's Wikipedia entry: She was asked by the White House to stop using *************'s name for personal enrichment.


Yes and trying to trade on her family name for fame and fortune. 
I wish the White House would ask H&M to stop using certain names for ‘personal enrichment’. 
It’s been said before, The US fought a war to be free from the aristocracy after all, they should respect your culture- oh wait.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jason K [if that is the man in question] is protecting his former employer, the palace. He is not looking to cash in. He did follow procedure and sent the complaint onward.  Before he did that,  he took the complaint to the spouse with the hope that the spouse would explain the business to his wife.  Instead, this spouse tried to stop further action from Jason K.  That is the real issue. Why would H try to stop further action?  No good answers come to mind.



You make a good point earlier that the royal household is probably used to weathering some initial awkwardness and want to protect everyone's dignity while they transition into the family. OK, I give them a pass for that.... though it's a bit odd that "Buckingham Palace" seems totally unawares of these allegations based on all the news bytes I've seen today... yet Jason seemed to have followed royal protocol up to their Head of HR. Wouldn't that mean they had to have known and investigated it at that time?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, UrbD does that. Still, we all knew H was lying based on last year’s video.  H gives us many ‘tells’ in that segment. James interrupted (!) H and changed the subject. James knew. He speaks “gutter” as does Harry.  Wonder if BP will deny the gift claim.


Hmmmmm .. well, well, well .. if Harry knows the "meaning" of these words, who do you think might have 'schooled' him?? .. a former Yacht Girl?????  Makes you go hmmmmmm ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So here's a thread on the infamous earrings. About in the middle of it there's more quotes from another article, clearly stating that these two lowlives were well aware where they came from, DELIBERATELY lied about the provenance (apparently they not only said they were borrowed, but borrowed off Chopard no less) and when Harry was confronted by staff (as apparently they feared another eruption by erratic Meghan had they confronted her) after not one, but two media appearances of said earrings, he was shocked - not at the circumstances but that they had been found out. I've typed it many times over the past few weeks, but...WHAT EXACTLY IS WRONG WITH THESE TWO?

(BTW that's the occasion where she wanted to wear a tiara but Charles told her no LOL)


----------



## bellecate

*Whew! * These two need to slow down a tad on their lies and horrible acts. It's taken me hours to catch up on it all this morning.  Two self entitled brats ( can one refer to middle aged people as brats?)that seem to get off on thinking they get one over on the rest of us plebs. Nasty pieces of work I do feel so bad for their children.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I'm sure William is aware.  I'm also sure of his competency of "seeing" people and their ulterior motives, which is why he warned Haz to slow down in the first place!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> You make a good point earlier that the royal household is probably used to weathering some initial awkwardness and want to protect everyone's dignity while they transition into the family. OK, I give them a pass for that.... though it's a bit odd that "Buckingham Palace" seems totally unawares of these allegations based on all the news bytes I've seen today... yet Jason seemed to have followed royal protocol up to their Head of HR. Wouldn't that mean they had to have known and investigated it at that time?



Just guessing, they _hoped_ the new employee would do better.  Most HR’s try to give the new employees a couple of chances to understand how to do the job. Seems to me the more senior royals, Chas/Camilla, could have had a word. Perhaps they did. Nevertheless, the new employee seemed not to get it.  Wise choice to bail.  Now we know racism and evil press weren‘t really the reason. New employee and spouse were about to be given consequences for their un-Royal conduct.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5009030


Yes, damn you Piers for being white, male and having an opinion 


Don't be so b***y predictable, Meena Harris.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder how many employees they've gone through since they've been in California.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how many employees they've gone through since they've been in California.


 
That’s private


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Last Sunday, I asked the question, "Are they wearing tarnished halos and speaking with forked tongues?" Thank you for posting well researched info so that I can now say: YES & YES.  I hope you enjoy this thread as much as I do. The humour and the laughter is wonderful for the soul. Great thread.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> That’s private



I'm sure. So many non-disclosure agreements.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, this is the network of H&M, OW, Gayle, Charlie Rose, etc.  One more reason not to watch! 









						CBS 'settles with actress after her Les Moonves allegations leaked'
					

CBS hired two law firms to probe Moonves, left, after he was accused of assaulting several women. After the report leaked Vanity Fair says CBS had to settle with accuser Bobbie Phillips, right.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

All I did was leave for a COVID shot and there are 20 more pages here, go team. Huge news day when the TIMES chimes in .... 

One way to view things: Press is bad cop. The British press helps cover up for the BRF. They pick and choose what to print. It is an editorial process. 

Another way to see the editorial process: Press is good cop , they afford the BRF some privacy. 

Oprah must be agonizing over how to edit the show. She is working late for sure...


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 1997, Christopher Hitchens on the reaction to Diana‘s death:
> Around the 2 minute mark, he refers to OW as ‘street therapy’



they're too cynical for me but I agree if their driver had not been drunk they would probably be alive today.....as far as Diana hoping to marry Dody, I don't really think so


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So here's a thread on the infamous earrings. About in the middle of it there's more quotes from another article, clearly stating that these two lowlives were well aware where they came from, DELIBERATELY lied about the provenance (apparently they not only said they were borrowed, but borrowed off Chopard no less) and when Harry was confronted by staff (as apparently they feared another eruption by erratic Meghan had they confronted her) after not one, but two media appearances of said earrings, he was shocked - not at the circumstances but that they had been found out. I've typed it many times over the past few weeks, but...WHAT EXACTLY IS WRONG WITH THESE TWO?
> 
> (BTW that's the occasion where she wanted to wear a tiara but Charles told her no LOL)



Let's see if I understood this, the earrings were given to MM by the infamous prince as a wedding gift. They were for MM's personal use and to be kept in MM's personal collection, but they ultimately belong to the crown. 
It was her decision to wear them (or not) as she was the only one with the right to wear them, personal gift. I wonder where those earrings are at the present time, London or Montecito? In Murky Meg's video, there is a reference to lost earrings, I wonder if she was talking about those stunning pieces.


----------



## Lounorada

madamelizaking said:


> Oh MY GOD!!!!








QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just to kill some time until we find out what happens next. Ignore the article, the comments are gold.
> https://dlisted.com/2021/03/01/cbs-...with-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/#comments











bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Urban Dictionary, here's the top definition for Prince Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5008960


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

I go on my twitter feed and see prince andrew is trending. Click to see why ???  Surprise Megain's stans screaming in deflection. A couple of examples: 

"Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew Prince Andrew"  
Another one
"Sorry media, I'm not going to take a single story about Meghan Markle seriously until Prince Andrew is drop kicked into the sun."

 And they go on ad infinitum.   Seriously people, Andrew being slimy scum and pointing it out takes nothing away from the fact so are M&H.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> All I did was leave for a COVID shot and there are 20 more pages here, go team. Huge news day when the TIMES chimes in ....
> 
> One way to view things: Press is bad cop. The British press helps cover up for the BRF. They pick and choose what to print. It is an editorial process.
> 
> Another way to see the editorial process: Press is good cop , they afford the BRF some privacy.
> 
> *Oprah must be agonizing over how to edit the show. She is working late for sure...*



Congrats on getting the Covid vaccine. Hopefully we'll all have it in the next several weeks. 

Now I'm doubting Oprah will address the accusations at all. To mention it is to give it credibility and she's not a journalist, it isn't her responsibility to investigate allegations. This interview is mainly for entertainment purposes and if there are any reveals it will be about the BRF, not Harry and Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Let's see if I understood this, the earrings were given to MM by the infamous prince as a wedding gift. They were for MM's personal use and to be kept in MM's personal collection, but they ultimately belong to the crown.
> It was her decision to wear them (or not) as she was the only one with the right to wear them, personal gift. I wonder where those earrings are at the present time, London or Montecito? In Murky Meg's video, there is a reference to lost earrings, I wonder if she was talking about those stunning pieces.


they are beautiful and I can see where it would be tempting to wear them but to be the people they want us to believe they are - so socially conscious and liberal - and to wear those - Very shallow and hypocritical


----------



## bellecate




----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Congrats on getting the Covid vaccine. Hopefully we'll all have it in the next several weeks.
> 
> Now I'm doubting Oprah will address the accusations at all. To mention it is to give it credibility and she's not a journalist, it isn't her responsibility to investigate allegations. This interview is mainly for entertainment purposes and if there are any reveals it will be about the BRF, not Harry and Meghan.


I agree.  I think she and Gayle are Meghan's "friends" and won't cross her.  When I heard Gayle gushing over how In Love they looked in that pregnancy announcement, I could have been sick


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I never watched the whole wedding, so I never saw this clip before...but people more eagle-eyed than me pointed out how she slapped away the hand the help wanted to lend to her. WTF? I won't be that shocked if on top of the bullying accusations people will come forward to say she was violent towards them. There's already the rumour with the hot tea thrown at staff while on tour.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I agree.  I think she and Gayle are Meghan's "friends" and won't cross her.  When I heard Gayle gushing over how In Love they looked in that pregnancy announcement, I could have been sick



That segment made me appreciate Gayle's acting ability.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> I agree.  I think she and Gayle are Meghan's "friends" and won't cross her.  When I heard Gayle gushing over how In Love they looked in that pregnancy announcement, I could have been sick





I found these on Amazon. Pity they can't deliver in time for THE Interview



			https://www.amazon.com/Barf-Bag-50-Count-Hangovers-Disposable/dp/B01LMOJFQC


----------



## Chanbal

Something light until more juicy news arrive. 
There are complains on DM that H doesn't change his grey suit, I wonder if he needs a 'go fund me'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Seriously people, Andrew being slimy scum and pointing it out takes nothing away from the fact so are M&H.



Nope, plus I can't remember anyone ever defending Andrew. At all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Something light until more juicy news arrive.
> There are complains on DM that H doesn't change his grey suit, I wonder if he needs a 'go fund me'.
> View attachment 5009113
> 
> View attachment 5009108



J.Crew makes suits for 500 bucks?


----------



## Aimee3

What possible reason could MM have had to throw hot tea at the staff??? Oh I see now, MM wanted coffee and was annoyed they brought her tea.
Seriously, that is absolutely disgraceful behavior.  No wonder people were fleeing!


----------



## Chanbal

*RICHARD KAY* is of the opinion that "this is a crisis that echoes the Abdication", get the  


When Jason Knauf left the Treasury to go and work for RBS — the bank that had been bailed out with £45 billion of taxpayers' money following the 2008 financial crisis — he was dubbed 'gamekeeper turned poacher'.

*But his silky skills in crisis management were never tested there as they were in his next big job — working for Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex.*

Yesterday, the quietly spoken American was revealed to have been the author of a sensational bullying complaint against former actress Meghan, which threatens a new royal crisis every bit as divisive as the War of the Waleses.

Stung by Meghan's astonishing statement in response to allegations of bullying — that she was the victim of a 'smear' and that the newspaper that published the email was 'being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative' — the Queen hit back.

Announcing an inquiry into the claims about the two employees who left their jobs and a third whose confidence was said to have been undermined is an astonishing development.

Never before has the Palace held a member of the Royal Family to account, and its move represents a serious blow to the *Duchess's carefully curated status of victimhood*.

*It also shows that the Queen's deep reserve of patience for her grandson, Harry, has reached a tipping point.*

The move was not just a result of the incendiary remarks of the Sussexes' American public relations team, but also because of the implications that the Palace could face legal action over nothing being done when the complaints were first raised. In other words, a cover-up.

*'The Palace is taking the gravity of the situation extremely seriously,' *I am told.

*Prince William was appalled by the reports that reached his ears, and many now wonder whether it was this that ultimately led to the split between the brothers.*

Initially, I understand, Harry acknowledged that something was not right, but he swiftly backed his wife.

At the time William and Harry shared their staff, but the issue of their treatment became so acute that William and his aides accelerated the process of splitting the household in two. 'What was a long-term plan became an immediate plan,' said a source.

This is a long, but interesting, article. Enjoy!









						Meghan Markle's 'bully' crisis echoes abdication, writes RICHARD KAY
					

RICHARD KAY: Never before has the Palace held a member of the Royal Family to account, and its move represents a serious blow to the Duchess's carefully curated status of victimhood.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

[QUOTE="QueenofWrapDress, post: 34378607, member: 689574"
*I loved the Queen for subtly trolling by driving around the Saudi king (?) herself when women in SA were not allowed to at the time)*
[/QUOTE]
*I loved this 100%++++++* howled my a$$ off!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So here's a thread on the infamous earrings. About in the middle of it there's more quotes from another article, clearly stating that these two lowlives were well aware where they came from, DELIBERATELY lied about the provenance (apparently they not only said they were borrowed, but borrowed off Chopard no less) and when Harry was confronted by staff (as apparently they feared another eruption by erratic Meghan had they confronted her) after not one, but two media appearances of said earrings, he was shocked - not at the circumstances but that they had been found out. I've typed it many times over the past few weeks, but...WHAT EXACTLY IS WRONG WITH THESE TWO?
> 
> (BTW that's the occasion where she wanted to wear a tiara but Charles told her no LOL)




Chopard or the Crown, so what? IMO, the real point of this story is no one, absolutely no one, said the earrings came from the SA prince as a wedding gift. If people had known the SA prince gave them, people would have connected the dots and a suitable outrage would have been expressed. This would have been another failed tour for H&M. It almost seems as if everyone wanted to avoid this worldwide outrage.  Of course, H&M will say ‘we didn’t know’. Yet, they can tell us each and every one of Diana’s pieces.  They knew.  They knew so they were dodgy about the story.  Possible QE didn’t remember the earrings, Chas knew, Cam would have recognized them.  People knew. No one spoke up...until now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Congrats on getting the Covid vaccine. Hopefully we'll all have it in the next several weeks.
> 
> Now I'm doubting Oprah will address the accusations at all. To mention it is to give it credibility and she's not a journalist, it isn't her responsibility to investigate allegations. This interview is mainly for entertainment purposes and if there are any reveals it will be about the BRF, not Harry and Meghan.



I think they've long taped and closed the books on the interview...


----------



## CarryOn2020

IIRC, Diana was able to get away with some really awful behavior toward staff while Sarah was not. H&M never understood that this was a job. As in any job, there is an organizational chart. She and H would be in the middle. Anne and Edward well understand that. Margaret fought it her whole life. Better to go along and get along, no?

For the ‘middles’,  the standards of behavior are higher - in any company.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It also shows that the Queen's deep reserve of patience for her grandson, Harry, *has reached a tipping point.*



*MeToo*.
In sum —
renounce those titles, give back those damn earrings and other jewels, stop taking the money, stay off our screens for at least a year.
Begone.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> they are beautiful and I can see where it would be tempting to wear them but to be the people they want us to believe they are - so socially conscious and liberal - and to wear those - Very shallow and hypocritical


I agree... It didn't necessarily bother me that anyone would wear gifted items from the Saudi Prince even after all that went down (not that I condone what happened to Kashoggi at all) but for people who have really made social awareness their brand.... it's not a good look.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Something light until more juicy news arrive.
> There are complains on DM that H doesn't change his grey suit, I wonder if he needs a 'go fund me'.
> View attachment 5009113
> 
> View attachment 5009108


I hope he at least dry cleans it.  I'm surprised he hasn't been praised for his "sustainability".


----------



## chicinthecity777

Oh boy, H&M have just hit the jackpot and became even more (in)famous than ever before! My SO who really didn't give rat's ass about them just discussed this with me without my prompt!   he said "if she goes on OW to say UK is racist, she would never been forgiven (by the British people)." He went on to say he talked about MM with one of his business associates and a good friend who is a POC. My SO said he didn't realise MM was black until I told him not long ago. He even asked "so who in Maghan's family is black then?" That's how much he knew about MM. Bless the old innocent "racist"!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> J.Crew makes suits for 500 bucks?


And Haz wears J. Crew?


----------



## Chanbal

She finally found freedom to accept "freebie designer clothes" in the US:

*MEGHAN Markle clashed with aides after furious rows over freebie designer clothes sent to Kensington Palace, The Sun can reveal.*

The alleged claims are believed to include rows sparked when the former actress was told by aides that keeping clothes sent by fashion labels was against royal protocol.

Sources say boxes of designer garments were sent to Kensington Palace for Meghan after she was unveiled as Harry's girlfriend.

One said: "As an actress it was perfectly acceptable to take freebies sent by fashion chains and designer labels.

"But Meghan had to be told it was not the done thing when you are a member of the royal family.”

Meghan was pictured during her time as a royal wearing designer labels including Stella McCartney, Givenchy, Prada and Chanel.

Prince Charles eventually picked up Meghan's wardrobe bill after she married Harry in May 2018.

She needed the clothes to go with the earrings!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> J.Crew makes suits for 500 bucks?


I don't know, but the price tag may also include the shoes.


----------



## chicinthecity777

If UK was so racist, how come they started quite popular and went downhill from there? The graph shows how their popularity changed over time? Has her race changed over time? 








						Royal popularity: Harry and Meghan drop significantly | YouGov
					

The latest update to the YouGov Royal Favourability tracker sees Harry and Meghan’s scores reach their lowest point to date




					yougov.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I agree with everything... BRF are in a tricky situation. That being said I don't like the viewpoint that they had a right to protect M and cover it up when she was in the Firm.... yes, they had the right legally of course but that's pretty sickening! I think this whole thing just makes them look worse if it does emerge that they knew and did nothing or enabled the bullying. Don't know how they could not know really, though I guess maybe they just are too far up to be concerned with personnel changes. You'd think someone would look into it if a staff member's 3 PAs quit unexpectedly.



Unfortunately, this is common at institutions of many kinds. 

Actually, I think it was an ace (card) they kept up their sleeve. Now their hand has been forced - to play


----------



## lalame

Aimee3 said:


> What possible reason could MM have had to throw hot tea at the staff??? Oh I see now, MM wanted coffee and was annoyed they brought her tea.
> Seriously, that is absolutely disgraceful behavior.  No wonder people were fleeing!


Was this in the original story?  Has anyone found a good second hand source to read all the things listed in the complaint? The Times article is paywalled and I haven't found a good secondary source.


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> She finally found freedom to accept "freebie designer clothes" in the US:
> 
> *MEGHAN Markle clashed with aides after furious rows over freebie designer clothes sent to Kensington Palace, The Sun can reveal.*
> 
> The alleged claims are believed to include rows sparked when the former actress was told by aides that keeping clothes sent by fashion labels was against royal protocol.
> 
> Sources say boxes of designer garments were sent to Kensington Palace for Meghan after she was unveiled as Harry's girlfriend.
> 
> One said: "As an actress it was perfectly acceptable to take freebies sent by fashion chains and designer labels.
> 
> "But Meghan had to be told it was not the done thing when you are a member of the royal family.”
> 
> Meghan was pictured during her time as a royal wearing designer labels including Stella McCartney, Givenchy, Prada and Chanel.
> 
> Prince Charles eventually picked up Meghan's wardrobe bill after she married Harry in May 2018.
> 
> She needed the clothes to go with the earrings!


It amazes me how Charles had to foot the bill for so much for these two. Why couldn’t Haz spend some of his money that Diana left him and support his wife’s clothing habit?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Aimee3 said:


> Going back to the post about wedding gifts, it was listed that two Koalas in a part of Australia were named after H&M...all I could think of was they should've named two SNAKES after H&M, and not sweet Koalas!



the Koalas....I hope they're OK



purseinsanity said:


> I'm starting to fall in love with Piers



It so irks me that I am #teamPiers when I really do not like him at all. (till now)  But he has definitely been bringing his A-game to this party and I am here for all of that.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Also, nasolabial folds are fine.  C'mon Meghan, let them be....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I don't know, but the price tag may also include the shoes.


I literally laughed out loud. Thanks! Needed that.


----------



## marietouchet

justwatchin said:


> It amazes me how Charles had to foot the bill for so much for these two. Why couldn’t Haz spend some of his money that Diana left him and support his wife’s clothing habit?


TECHNICALLY, actors must report gifts of clothes and pay taxes, borrowing for one night is another thing and common

The BRF does endorse certain clothing lines , via the royal warrant system, so, they don’t want to do free publicity for gifts, so, gifts are refused, given to the state, or they can can be kept if the recipient pays income  tax on them
There are no freebie gifts received by the BRF 
it is the assumed way that large gifts of jewelry have been kept by Camilla, Charles paid the tax on the gift, so, not a freebie
If the earrings were a gift, and if M kept them as personal property, someone paid for them eg Charles or Harry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Chopard or the Crown, so what? IMO, the real point of this story is no one, absolutely no one, said the earrings came from the SA prince as a wedding gift. If people had known the SA prince gave them, people would have connected the dots and a suitable outrage would have been expressed. This would have been another failed tour for H&M. It almost seems as if everyone wanted to avoid this worldwide outrage.  Of course, H&M will say ‘we didn’t know’. Yet, they can tell us each and every one of Diana’s pieces.  They knew.  They knew so they were dodgy about the story.  Possible QE didn’t remember the earrings, Chas knew, Cam would have recognized them.  People knew. No one spoke up...until now.



The point is these two made up an elaborate lie to use the earrings nevertheless. Staff identified the problem and adressed it with Harry, who was shocked only because their little game had been noticed. What were they supposed to do at that point? Of course they tried to keep quiet and make the troublesome two not use them anymore.

(not sure why Charles or Camilla would have known all wedding presents by heart, though)


----------



## csshopper

[


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never watched the whole wedding, so I never saw this clip before...but people more eagle-eyed than me pointed out how she slapped away the hand the help wanted to lend to her. WTF? I won't be that shocked if on top of the bullying accusations people will come forward to say she was violent towards them. There's already the rumour with the hot tea thrown at staff while on tour.


Good grief she's a *****, can't even be civil in front of the Mulroney boys,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I agree... It didn't necessarily bother me that anyone would wear gifted items from the Saudi Prince even after all that went down (not that I condone what happened to Kashoggi at all) but for people who have really made social awareness their brand.... it's not a good look.



At this point, what shocks me most is their deceitfulness (is that a word?). They KNEW there would be trouble, they knew the palace probably wouldn't stand for prancing around in those things in the middle of the scandal, and so they made up this elaborate story that was all lies to use them anyway, then were shocked when confronted about it. This greed. I'm sure the Queen would have found her another pair of earrings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The point is these two made up an elaborate lie to use the earrings nevertheless. Staff identified the problem and adressed it with Harry, who was shocked only because their little game had been noticed. What were they supposed to do at that point? Of course they tried to keep quiet and make the troublesome two not use them anymore.
> 
> (not sure why Charles or Camilla would have known all wedding presents by heart, though)



Certainly not all, just the ones over $500K. 
The SA Royals are known for their beautiful gifts of jewelry to all royal houses.








						Saudi Arabia diamond MILLION GIFTS to Royal Family REVEALED
					

SAUDI Arabia has gifted the British Royal Family luxurious jewellery worth millions for decades, but the royals are now facing increasing pressure to cut ties following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Here are some of the pieces the Queen and other royals have been gifted.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

I've always enjoyed Piers Morgan. He will call out anyone he wants incl two white men. He's indiscriminate. And compared to Americans he is so polite (at least, to my Asian ears).

Edit, wow this is the thread that keeps on giving. I bet now we will hear about bullying in Meghan's past lives. Her best friend the Canadian (can't recall her name now) was also accused of bullying, no?


----------



## bag-mania

Oooo, it keeps getting better. Here is Omid Scobie’s article.  Since we know everything he says is coming right from Meghan’s mouth, we see the game plan here is to play the race card while simultaneously  blaming all of the people making the accusations. I hope you all put on your high boots, the bull**** gets pretty deep.   

*Duchess Meghan Is “Disturbed” by Palace Aide’s Bullying Claims: “They Knew It Would Get Ugly”*
After being accused of causing “emotional distress” to Kensington Palace staff, sources and friends close to the Sussexes speak out. 


With just days to go before Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s prime-time interview with Oprah Winfrey hits the air, the couple had been expecting reaction from the palace. But when the Duchess of Sussex was informed by her team on Friday, February 26, that a small group of royal aides—past and present—had contributed to a “takedown” of her character in a British newspaper, including accusations of bullying and emotional cruelty toward staff, she was speechless, sources say.

“Harry and Meghan knew that it would get ugly in the run up [to the Oprah special], but seeing such an obvious attempt at destroying her character was distressing and upsetting,” a friend of the couple tells BAZAAR.com.

The details, shared in the March 3 edition of The Times of London,revealed that Meghan—who is currently pregnant with her second child—had been the subject of a formal email complaint sent to Buckingham Palace’s HR department in October 2018 by her then Kensington Palace press secretary Jason Knauf after reported concerns over her “unacceptable behaviour” towards staff.

In the email to Prince William’s newly appointed private secretary, Simon Case, Knauf expressed worry that the duchess “was able to bully two PA’s out of the [royal] household in the past year. … The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights.” He alleged that Meghan “drove” two personal assistants out and was “undermining the confidence” of a third staff member.

A follow-up email from Knauf to Case, who had started working for the Duke of Cambridge that summer, went on to question whether the establishment’s policy on bullying and harassment “applies to [members of the royal family].” He added that the palace’s head of PR, Samantha Carruthers, “agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious.” Knauf left his role at Kensington Palace a month later but has continued to work closely with Prince William and Duchess Kate on their charitable foundation since.

As the article dropped online yesterday, lawyers acting for Meghan swiftly denied bullying accusations, with a spokesperson going on the record to address the situation publicly. “Let’s just call this what it is—a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation,” said the Sussex rep. “We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of the Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It’s no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining the duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and the duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years.”

A close friend of the duchess—who speaks on the condition of anonymity—shares their own take on the situation, telling BAZAAR,“I hate to say it, but find me a woman of color in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace. It’s sad that it’s happening, but I’m not surprised. These claims are so far from the woman I know.” 

Though the Times article does not include any examples or details of the alleged bullying, the newspaper does share the feelings of two palace aides—who during moments said they felt “terrified” and “broken” while working for the duchess. However, missing from the paper’s report is the detail that neither staff member made complaints of their own or were aware that Knauf had sent an email to HR citing grievances. “When it became known to [the two individuals], they each asked for the matter to be rescinded and for it to not become an official complaint,” a source tells BAZAAR.com. (Reports that Prince Harry tried to intervene have been denied by the couple’s lawyers.)

Accusations of being “difficult” are nothing new for the Duchess of Sussex, whose 5 a.m. emails, text messages, and American work ethic became the subject of a flurry of damning reports leaked to tabloids in 2018 by dissatisfied staff members, who preferred a more genteel pace. “It’s not about what she does, it’s the fact she is so bloody opinionated all the time,” a source says one “frazzled” aide confessed after working on her May 2018 wedding. Another, who worked with Meghan on a charity initiative, told a colleague, “Her expectations are unrealistic. She wants everything done now. This is not Hollywood!”

One of those employees, personal assistant Melissa Toubati, left Kensington Palace in October 2018 after reportedly being “driven to tears,” according to British tabloid reports at the time. An aide anonymously defended the abrupt departure, quickly giving a glowing account of her tenure to the Daily Mail. However, it later emerged in court documents during Meghan’s privacy case against The Mail on Sunday that Toubati had, in fact, been dismissed from her role by the couple due to misconduct (the details of which are known to this author but cannot be repeated for legal reasons). In the Sussex biography, Finding Freedom,sources revealed that it was Knauf’s longtime friendship with Toubati that had led the Sussexes to believe that certain staff, including their own press secretary, were “more interested in protecting one of their own than [Meghan].”

One of Meghan's friends, who has known her for 10 years, adds, “I know that Meg would feel awful if she knew that someone felt that way about working with her, but I also know that no one ever approached her about anything like this at all during that time. I have never known her to be anything but kind and considerate to her friends and colleagues.”

When approached by BAZAAR,Buckingham Palace refused to answer a list of questions regarding the story (including why individuals currently working for the queen and other members of the royal family were allowed to contribute to the article); however, a spokesperson announced todaythat their HR team will soon be looking into the circumstances outlined in the Times article. “Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned,” read the statement. “The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”

For Harry and Meghan, who launched a suggested list of “real acts of compassion” on their Archewell Foundation website on Monday, their focus remains on work and not “what they feel is a pre-emotive strike on their interview,” says a friend. “You can’t ignore the timing of this,” a source close to the couple tells BAZAAR. “This has been done to undermine her character or undermine the topics that they discuss on Sunday.” One of the subjects will indeed be bullying, which a Sussex spokesperson says Meghan is “deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma.”

Adds a friend, “They have had everything and the kitchen sink thrown at them this week, but ultimately nothing will stop them from sharing their truth.”









						Duchess Meghan Is “Disturbed” by Palace Aide’s Bullying Claims: “They Knew It Would Get Ugly”
					

After being accused of causing “emotional distress” to Kensington Palace staff, sources and friends close to the Sussexes speak out.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Chanbal

There is another story! She wanted to be a victim from day one. She was always planning to get out.


----------



## marietouchet

lest we forget ...
M plans to give her proceeds from lawsuit to anti bullying charity , how fitting


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (not sure why Charles or Camilla would have known all wedding presents by heart, though)


I think some people still blame Charles and Camilla for Diana's death and so C&C have become the perfect scapegoats for whatever problems arise in the RF. I've seen this kind of reasoning so many times before.


----------



## Jktgal

What is Melissa's actual last name? Is it Touabti or Toubati? I see variations all the time. If the former, to me it sounds not very french but African/middle eastern. So she is also a WOC?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> There is another story! She wanted to be a victim from day one. She was always planning to get out.



Interesting this is on ITV, the dummies who bought the OW interview.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jktgal said:


> What is Melissa's actual last name? Is it Touabti or Toubati? I see variations all the time. If the former, to me it sounds not very french but African/middle eastern. So she is also a WOC?


Who's Melissa?


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Who's Melissa?


Jessica Mulroney is a Canadian fashion stylist and marketing consultant, noted for her previous work with Kleinfeld Bridal, past guest appearances on television shows Good Morning America and CityLine, and host of I Do, Redo. She is a Canadian fashion advocate and contributor to Sunwing's Wedding Vacations magazine. 


	

		
			
		

		
	
 Supposedly MM bestie til Jessica was accused of bullying a WOC. Her kids were in MM's wedding party.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Interesting this is on ITV, the dummies who bought the OW interview.



It makes sense from a marketing perspective. They bought the rights to the show because they believe it will get good ratings. Whether people like Meghan or dislike her they’ll want to watch the show to see what is said.  Airing it doesn’t mean they support her.


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle’s Dress in CBS Tell-All Draws Similarities to Wallis Simpson
					

The dress Meghan Markle wore for her upcoming CBS tell-all interview has a striking similarity to Wallis Simpson — details




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Seeing double! Fans were quick to call out that Meghan Markle’s dress choice for her CBS tell-all interview bears a striking resemblance to one worn by Wallis Simpson, the American actress who sparked royal controversy.

*See Meghan Markle's Epic Style Evolution*
In a promo clip released on March 1, the 39-year-old royal is seen wearing a black Armani wrap dress embellished with a white lotus flower design across the upper right panel.
And to no surprise, royal style watchers were quick to dissect Markle’s fashion choice for the event. As Us reported, the Suits star was wearing a diamond bracelet that once belong to Princess Diana.
Others, namely on social media, drew a connection to another royal, the Duchess of Windsor, whom King Edward VIII famously abdicated the throne to wed.
*Take a Look Back at Meghan Markle's Maternity Style*
In a portrait from 1936, Simpson was photographed wearing a black, silky wrap dress with a white floral design that bears an uncanny parallel to Markle’s $4,700 designer frock.
The dress isn’t the only thing that’s is causing a fuss though. One user commented on the Youtube clip posted by CBS saying, “Her hairstyle reminds me of Wallis Simpson.”
It’s true, both women are sporting a similar look! Simpson has a slicked back chignon with a center part, while Markle is styled with a modernized, messier version of the same ‘do.
We’d be remiss to ignore a few key differences between the ensembles, however. Simpson’s dress is short sleeved and has a floral pattern throughout, while Markle’s has long sleeves and the flower design is localized to one side.

“I’ve said it before and I will say it again. #MeghanMarkle is the single worst thing to happen to the English monarchy in 100 years. And it has absolutely NOTHING to do with her #WallisSimpson vibe, but the disrespect to the Queen on a regular basis?! Come. On,” one person tweeted on February 23, shortly after Prince Harry and Markle announced they would be stepping back from the royal family.
Another user points out that both women not only chose to be called by their middle names (Markle’s first name is actually Rachel), but they’ve also followed similar trajectories in the royal family.* “Married twice before marrying into the Royal family, then both couples leave the Royal family & move abroad. Both cause upset in their wake,” the tweeter concludes.*

Interesting that the tweeter states both were 'married twice' before marrying into the Royal Family!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Jessica Mulroney is a Canadian fashion stylist and marketing consultant, noted for her previous work with Kleinfeld Bridal, past guest appearances on television shows Good Morning America and CityLine, and host of I Do, Redo. She is a Canadian fashion advocate and contributor to Sunwing's Wedding Vacations magazine.
> View attachment 5009376
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supposedly MM bestie til Jessica was accused of bullying a WOC. Her kids were in MM's wedding party.


Yes, that's Jessica.  The poster mentioned Melissa.  I'm still confused who Melissa is?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I can't keep up with these two Pieces of Sh*t.  Someone message me when they've fallen off the face of the earth.


----------



## csshopper

Jktgal said:


> What is Melissa's actual last name? Is it Touabti or Toubati? I see variations all the time. If the former, to me it sounds not very french but African/middle eastern. So she is also a WOC?


Found this online a few minutes ago: Melissa Touabti, the duchess's former personal assistant, had previously worked for Robbie Williams and Madonna.

She played a key role in preparations for Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, but quit after just six months.

The Frenchwoman, 41, took a job with the billionaire Livingstone family – owners of the stately home Cliveden


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Found this online a few minutes ago: Melissa Touabti, the duchess's former personal assistant, had previously worked for Robbie Williams and Madonna.
> 
> She played a key role in preparations for Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, but quit after just six months.
> 
> The Frenchwoman, 41, took a job with the billionaire Livingstone family – owners of the stately home Cliveden


Thank you!  I was so confused


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, that's Jessica.  The poster mentioned Melissa.  I'm still confused who Melissa is?


sorry my bad. Maybe this is her
*Meghan Markle's personal assistant handed in her notice after the royal 'left her in tears with her demands', it is claimed*

*Melissa Toubati resigned after working with Meghan Markle for just six months*


----------



## marietouchet

Good question , interviewers on Canadian TV were saying M was not known to be a bully prior to UK, why did it start in the UK ?

OK, we all know she was a bridezilla (isnt that listed as a synonym for bully in the dictionary?)  and we have chatted about spoiled childhood and family feuds (demanding but maybe not exactly bullying, or do I have it wrong?

Anyone have insights on bully/diva behavior on Suits maybe ? Probably something I missed back on page 1956 of this thread LOL


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> sorry my bad. Maybe this is her
> *Meghan Markle's personal assistant handed in her notice after the royal 'left her in tears with her demands', it is claimed*
> 
> *Melissa Toubati resigned after working with Meghan Markle for just six months*


LOL thanks.  It doesn't take much to confuse me, so I was lost.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, but I'm still confused who Melissa is?  Is that Jessica's real name?



If you follow the link you'll find a presentation of Jessica and the rest of the staff allegedly bullied by H&M. It's a long word-y article but explains some things discussed on this thread since the marriage. Added it for those who can't follow or don't want to follow the link.









						Revenge of the Sussex survivors' club: How fairytale turned nightmare
					

REBECCA ENGLISH: It is the one royal group that no one wants to join. Referred to only half-jokingly as the 'Sussex Survivors' Club', its membership is sadly rising. But its select band of members have...




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Revenge of the Sussex survivors' club: The extraordinary inside story of how a fairytale turned into a nightmare of 'traumatised' staff - by Royal Editor REBECCA ENGLISH, who saw so much of it herself*

It is the one royal group that no one wants to join. Referred to only half-jokingly as the 'Sussex Survivors' Club', its membership is sadly rising.
But its select band of members have one thing in common: all have worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and lived to tell the tale.
Joking aside, some even believe they may have a form of post-traumatic stress, defined by doctors as an anxiety disorder caused by distressing or frightening events.

Such experiences, of course, are now widely acknowledged not to be limited to soldiers who have undergone traumatic experiences on the battlefield, but also to people at work. Even if that work is in a palace.And today, many former palace staff look back on the moment that Prince Harry introduced to the world his beautiful, intelligent and passionate bride-to-be as the beginning of one of the most traumatic periods in their lives.

Let us be clear: Harry is a complex man but one with a strong sense of natural justice and charity, given to acts of compassion and kindness.
'He wears his heart on his sleeve and genuinely wants to do good in the world,' one admirer tells me.But he is also equally capable, say those who know him well and like him, of behaving 'like an absolute brat'.

It had been clear for years to anyone he came into contact with that he wasn't happy working with the palace machinery – or, particularly, the British media (sometimes understandably so). He was, they say, always capable of self-destructively 'pressing the nuclear button' on his royal life. Meghan, they stress, was simply the catalyst. But the result was more toxic, more personally harmful, than anyone could ever have imagined.

To begin with, however, the atmosphere at Kensington Palace was heady and exciting. Here was a glamorous couple, clearly deeply in love. Meghan was the missing piece of the jigsaw that poor, motherless Harry had been searching for all those years. Famously she once paid for an ice cream stand for her new staff at Kensington Palace, with the event later – surprise! – being breathlessly revealed in People, a 'pro-Sussex' American magazine, as the 'best day of work, ever'.

More than that, they were a couple determined to do good on a world stage – at the same time sprinkling a little stardust on Britain's 'fusty' old Royal Family. And their small team of loyal staff believed in them – until, that is, the scales fell from their eyes.

Notoriously, within a few weeks of Meghan's arrival in England and the announcement of the couple's engagement in November 2017, word was leaking out about the couple's 'autocratic' and 'difficult' behaviour. Occasionally it slipped into print: that Meghan (a claim robustly sourced by the Mail) had refused to wear a hat on her first official engagement with the Queen in Chester, despite being strongly advised it would be appropriate and respectful to do so. Then came the famous row over which tiara she wanted to wear to the couple's wedding, resulting in Harry publicly admonishing one of the Queen's most senior members of staff, Angela Kelly: 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.'

(Edited to remove the bigger part of the article as just too huge.)


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> Found this online a few minutes ago: Melissa Touabti, the duchess's former personal assistant, had previously worked for Robbie Williams and Madonna.
> 
> She played a key role in preparations for Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, but quit after just six months.
> 
> The Frenchwoman, 41, took a job with the billionaire Livingstone family – owners of the stately home Cliveden



Photo...


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Who's Melissa?











						Meghan Markle loses a NINTH member of staff as top aide quits
					

Natalie Campbell - who helped Meghan on her Together cookbook after they met at a kitchen supporting those affected by the Grenfell fire in west London - has quit after five months in the job.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Good question , interviewers on Canadian TV were saying M was not known to be a bully prior to UK, why did it start in the UK ?
> 
> OK, we all know she was a bridezilla (isnt that listed as a synonym for bully in the dictionary?)  and we have chatted about spoiled childhood and family feuds (demanding but maybe not exactly bullying, or do I have it wrong?
> 
> Anyone have insights on bully/diva behavior on Suits maybe ? Probably something I missed back on page 1956 of this thread LOL



Bullies are only bullies when they can get away with it. She didn’t have any kind of status back when she was on Suits. Nobody would have tolerated that nonsense from an actress who wasn’t a star.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jktgal said:


> What is Melissa's actual last name? Is it Touabti or Toubati? I see variations all the time. If the former, to me it sounds not very french but African/middle eastern. So she is also a WOC?











						Meghan Markle loses a NINTH member of staff as top aide quits
					

Natalie Campbell - who helped Meghan on her Together cookbook after they met at a kitchen supporting those affected by the Grenfell fire in west London - has quit after five months in the job.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## madamelizaking

This is disgusting. They better lose their titles and BP better counter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle’s Dress in CBS Tell-All Draws Similarities to Wallis Simpson
> 
> 
> The dress Meghan Markle wore for her upcoming CBS tell-all interview has a striking similarity to Wallis Simpson — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seeing double! Fans were quick to call out that Meghan Markle’s dress choice for her CBS tell-all interview bears a striking resemblance to one worn by Wallis Simpson, the American actress who sparked royal controversy.
> 
> *See Meghan Markle's Epic Style Evolution*
> In a promo clip released on March 1, the 39-year-old royal is seen wearing a black Armani wrap dress embellished with a white lotus flower design across the upper right panel.
> And to no surprise, royal style watchers were quick to dissect Markle’s fashion choice for the event. As Us reported, the Suits star was wearing a diamond bracelet that once belong to Princess Diana.
> Others, namely on social media, drew a connection to another royal, the Duchess of Windsor, whom King Edward VIII famously abdicated the throne to wed.
> *Take a Look Back at Meghan Markle's Maternity Style*
> In a portrait from 1936, Simpson was photographed wearing a black, silky wrap dress with a white floral design that bears an uncanny parallel to Markle’s $4,700 designer frock.
> The dress isn’t the only thing that’s is causing a fuss though. One user commented on the Youtube clip posted by CBS saying, “Her hairstyle reminds me of Wallis Simpson.”
> It’s true, both women are sporting a similar look! Simpson has a slicked back chignon with a center part, while Markle is styled with a modernized, messier version of the same ‘do.
> We’d be remiss to ignore a few key differences between the ensembles, however. Simpson’s dress is short sleeved and has a floral pattern throughout, while Markle’s has long sleeves and the flower design is localized to one side.
> 
> “I’ve said it before and I will say it again. #MeghanMarkle is the single worst thing to happen to the English monarchy in 100 years. And it has absolutely NOTHING to do with her #WallisSimpson vibe, but the disrespect to the Queen on a regular basis?! Come. On,” one person tweeted on February 23, shortly after Prince Harry and Markle announced they would be stepping back from the royal family.
> Another user points out that both women not only chose to be called by their middle names (Markle’s first name is actually Rachel), but they’ve also followed similar trajectories in the royal family.* “Married twice before marrying into the Royal family, then both couples leave the Royal family & move abroad. Both cause upset in their wake,” the tweeter concludes.*
> 
> Interesting that the tweeter states both were 'married twice' before marrying into the Royal Family!


Was this published in a US magazine?  Please confirm that I'm reading this right.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Was this published in a US magazine?  Please confirm that I'm reading this right.


Yep!


----------



## Chanbal

madamelizaking said:


> This is disgusting. They better lose their titles and BP better counter.



If they are so critical of the Firm, why this ignoramus keeps calling her Duchess Meghan instead of Ms. Markle.


----------



## madamelizaking

Chanbal said:


> If they are so critical of the Firm, why this ignoramus keeps calling her Duchess Meghan instead of Ms. Markle.


“perpetuated falsehoods”... This woman is a psychopath.

This woman notified her ex-husband that she was divorcing him by mailing him her ring. A man who no one speaks badly of. She disowned her dad while he was having heart problems. Had no family at her wedding other than her mother. She thinks everyone else is the problem, when in reality it is her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If monarchy is defined by the constitution as the *dignified* branch, H&M have failed epically. 


_Another problem the pair appear not to understand is their desire to be progressive—but seemingly without the controversy and criticism that comes from taking a stance on issues of public debate. At heart, it’s unclear whether Harry and Meghan realize being progressive is not an apolitical act. Climate change is not apolitical. Even mental health is not apolitical. These issues, which the couple have voiced their opinion on, come with real, important, and political questions attached. On climate, it’s one thing to say it’s important, another to say what should be done about it. Who should bear the costs of tackling it, for instance? Mental health also comes with big, unanswered, and deeply political questions: Who should pay for treatment? Should it receive parity of funding with physical health? None of these questions have universally agreed-on answers—they are political.

*In Britain, royalty and politics are not supposed to mix. The monarchy has a defined constitutional role as the “dignified” branch, symbolizing the state through ceremony and duty; the government as the “efficient” branch, running the country by passing laws through Parliament, which is elected. The two cannot mix. One is apolitical and unifying, the other political and inherently divisive.*_

From Jan, 2020 








						The Hypocrisy of Harry and Meghan’s Decision
					

The couple have committed Britain’s greatest possible sin.




					www.theatlantic.com
				





Spoiler: Hypocrisy of H&M



*The Hypocrisy of Harry and Meghan’s Decision*
*The couple have committed Britain’s greatest possible sin.*
Tom McTagueJanuary 10, 2020





Matt Short / Barcroft Images via Getty Images
In January 2014, the then-president of France, François Hollande, arrived in England for talks with Prime Minister David Cameron on military and nuclear cooperation. No one in the British press really cared about the official reason for the visit, though. At the time, Hollande was living at the Élysée Palace with his girlfriend, but he had just been revealed to have been having an affair with a French actress—he had been darting to her apartment on the back of a scooter, protected by his official security team and his face hidden from view by a motorbike helmet. He had flown into England as the storm still swirled back home. Whatever else was happening at the summit, or in the world at large, all the British press pack could talk about was the affair and their chance to ask Hollande about it.
At the press conference, the moment came. _The Daily Telegraph_’s Christopher Hope asked the president if his private life had made France “an international joke,” whether he was still having an affair, and whether he wished the actress was with him at the summit. Hollande was not impressed, and declined to answer. The French reporters, who had sidestepped the issue, seemed beside themselves with excitement and curiosity afterwards. Had 10 Downing Street put us British reporters—I was working for the _Daily Mirror_ at the time—up to it, they asked. (It hadn’t.)
The truth was, this was a case of two cultures colliding: France, where a thick red line is drawn between private and personal matters, and Britain, which doesn’t accept such binary distinctions. For the British press, personal misbehavior is fair game because it reveals character traits which, the argument goes, the public is entitled to know given that politicians are asking for power over the citizenry. Even the sniff of hypocrisy, of a life less faithful than projected, has traditionally been enough. (The irony, of course, is that Britain has now elected a prime minister not dissimilar to Hollande, with a track record of infidelity, an unknown number of children, and a live-in girlfriend.)
In Britain, hypocrisy is the killer charge, the worst sin of all. John Major’s government was kicked out of office in 1997 in part because its “back to basics” campaign, advocating a return to traditional values, gave the press more ammunition with which to target its “sleaze.” The former Labour Party leader Ed Miliband suffered endless mockery for professing socialism while having two kitchens in his house. And David Cameron’s failure to know the price of bread because he had “a breadmaker at home” was front-page news, showing that he was out of touch with the people he was imposing austerity upon. When Boris Johnson was asked the same question, he replied: “I can tell you the price of a bottle of champagne; how about that?” For this answer, Johnson received amused applause, not vitriol. Why? It painted him as more out of touch than his predecessors but less hypocritical.

And here we arrive at Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have announced that they are stepping back as senior members of the royal family, taking on fewer duties while continuing to “fully support” the Queen. The pair will split their time between Britain and North America in order to pursue more “cause-driven activities” and take greater control over their public engagements.
Johnson, who once described his policy on cake as “pro–having it and pro–eating it,” appears to have fellow cakeists in the Sussexs. It doesn’t take a royal kremlinologist to work out that you can’t step back from your duties _and_ fully support the person in charge of doling out those duties, or retain the privileges of a constitutionally apolitical institution _and_ promote causes that stray into politics. It’s rather like me suggesting to my editor that I intend to step back from my daily duties as a journalist, while insisting I remained fully supportive of his vision to publish stories and to pay me anyway. Perhaps I should try?
Harry and Meghan are easy to sympathize with. Who _isn’t_ in favor of having cake and eating it, too? In politics, after all, everyone is a cakeist: No one wants to pay more tax, but everyone wants better services. Conservatives espouse self-sufficiency and a small state—but not for _their_ voters, who rather like universal benefits. Young liberals, meanwhile, beat their chests for redistribution—as long as it flows in their direction.

But just because everyone is a hypocrite doesn’t make hypocrisy a virtue. And like many vices, hypocrisy is often expensive, which means lots of people can’t afford it. Most, for instance, don’t have the money to fly on a private jet; therefore they’re unlikely to become a climate-change activist _and a_ frequent luxury flier (as Harry and Meghan stand accused of).
This, in essence, was Ricky Gervais’s point at the Golden Globes about hypocrisy in Hollywood. From here in London, Gervais’s monologue had a particularly British edge to it. Is any other country on Earth so obsessed with hypocrisy? Perhaps we Brits are because we know it so well: We make our money in part by accepting cash and investments from countries we regard as rogue or nasty; we profess pride in gentle manners and temperament but have been among the most violent nations in Europe; and, of course, we got rich through plunder.
Which gets us back to Harry and Meghan. What is it that they’re asking for? They have, they tell us, “chosen to make a transition,” which will see them “carve out a progressive new role” within the “institution.” Remember, that institution is monarchy: the system of inheriting authority as well as a whole range of other titles, wealth, land, and property. Harry is a duke and Meghan a duchess—not your classic _progressive _positions.
This, then, is perhaps the most problematic part of their plan. They want to remain in the royal family, retain the titles of the English aristocracy and the houses renovated with public funds, but step back from the duties that come attached to these privileges. Harry would not have got very far in the military asking whether he could stay but step back from his duty to serve. (Except, and this is a deeper problem, perhaps _he_ could.)
To be fair to them, Harry and Meghan have seen the potential problem with their plan and declared their intention to “become financially independent.” But can they do this without trading off the institution they hope to step back from? Their opening move in this direction doesn’t suggest so. As my colleague Helen Lewis points out, the domain name of their new website is SussexRoyal.com.
Read: Harry and Meghan might not like the price of financial independence
Another problem the pair appear not to understand is their desire to be _progressive—_but seemingly without the controversy and criticism that comes from taking a stance on issues of public debate. At heart, it’s unclear whether Harry and Meghan realize being progressive is not an apolitical act. Climate change is not apolitical. Even mental health is not apolitical. These issues, which the couple have voiced their opinion on, come with real, important, and _political _questions attached. On climate, it’s one thing to say it’s important, another to say what should be done about it. Who should bear the costs of tackling it, for instance? Mental health also comes with big, unanswered, and deeply political questions: Who should pay for treatment? Should it receive parity of funding with physical health? None of these questions have universally agreed-on answers—they are _political._
In Britain, royalty and politics are not supposed to mix. The monarchy has a defined constitutional role as the “dignified” branch, symbolizing the state through ceremony and duty; the government as the “efficient” branch, running the country by passing laws through Parliament, which is elected. The two cannot mix. One is apolitical and unifying, the other political and inherently divisive. The royal family’s website puts it succinctly: “As Head of State The Queen has to remain strictly neutral with respect to political matters.”
Harry and Meghan’s popularity is, in part, tied to this unifying neutrality. Choosing to intervene politically might give them a quick hit of satisfaction but erodes the basis of their popularity. Once they start to behave like ordinary people, giving ordinary opinions, then people will treat them as ordinary. Certainly, anyone can understand Harry and Meghan’s desire to be independent, to say what they believe, to give themselves something to do and stand for. But ask any politician: That is not cost free.
Read: The issue with Meghan Markle’s Vogue issue
What complicates the cakeist charge against the pair is that Harry did not get a choice in this. He is not alone in the world being born into wealth, but he had no choice in the role assigned to him. Harry, like anybody else, can want privacy, hate criticism of his wife, try to protect his child, mourn his mother, and loathe the people who chased her through the streets of Paris and took pictures of her as she lay dying. He can love his country, his family, and even the institution he wants to step back from at the same time that he longs for the freedom he has tasted in North America alongside his wife. He can strongly want to keep it all—and, perhaps, more than most, he might be able to.
But he can’t escape the cost of his choices entirely. He and his wife will be pilloried for their decision, for their hypocrisy or greed, sanctimony or privilege, depending on who is dishing out the criticism. Some of the commentary will be unfair and hurtful, even sexist and racist—as indeed it has been. Some will be out of bounds, defamatory, and a breach of their privacy. But some will be fair, and the life they have chosen means they are potentially more open to legitimate critique than before.
“You say you’re woke, but the companies you work for [in China are] unbelievable,” said Gervais on Sunday night, tearing into the cream of Hollywood. He was right to say Hollywood is pro–having cake and pro–eating it. But so too, it seems, are Harry and Meghan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

madamelizaking said:


> This is disgusting. They better lose their titles and BP better counter.




Maybe, fingers crossed, this is their farewell interview. Could it be?   
      

Go on, now. Go.
Walk out the door.
Leave your key.

Drop the pedal and go.


----------



## madamelizaking

She disowned her family and has made her husband disown him. Classic Narc.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> If they are so critical of the Firm, why this ignoramus keeps calling her Duchess Meghan instead of Ms. Markle.



Because he’s a sniveling sycophant. Also he conveniently forgets that the title came from the Firm. He acts like it came from Harry.


----------



## Yanca

This couple are vile, direct attack to the palace and calling them "the firm", wherein they have never attack her directly. If she so despise them and can't stand them, why not walk away completely? Loose your titles, and give up your line to the sucession. She is trouble from day one, and of course with the political climate now in US, she will have free reign to spew whatever she wants to say, because they will be scared that they will be cancelled.  I just read in twitter that Meena Harris  niece of the VP called Piers Morgan racist for calling Megnuts out. I am for progress but this is insane. Both side of the story should come to light, she is a perpetual victim, and if her sugars will come after me  This is  coming from a  former immigrant,  and also a minority.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Yep!


There is hope for us in the US! We are so tired of being bombarded by her PR machine.


----------



## tiktok

madamelizaking said:


> This is disgusting. They better lose their titles and BP better counter.




This woman is deranged. No other explanation. All I want to know is if Oprah ever asked her a single hard question that isn't just going along with her I-have-it-worse-than-people-starving-in-Africa-or-dying-of-COVID victim narrative.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, absolutely, there is a lot lost.
‘But look how much we’ve gained.

Oh yes, I am wise
But it's wisdom born of pain
Yes, I've paid the price
But look how much I gained
If I have to, I can do anything
I am strong
(Strong)
I am invincible
(Invincible)
I am woman

Yeah yeah, we know, we see, 
‘Go on, now. Go.


----------



## kipp

csshopper said:


> Found this online a few minutes ago: Melissa Touabti, the duchess's former personal assistant, had previously worked for Robbie Williams and Madonna.
> 
> She played a key role in preparations for Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, but quit after just six months.
> 
> The Frenchwoman, 41, took a job with the billionaire Livingstone family – owners of the stately home Cliveden



Can you imagine being more difficult to work with than Madonna?  (and btw, I like Madonna, but surely she is relatively demanding).


----------



## Yanca

tiktok said:


> This woman is deranged. No other explanation. All I want to know is if Oprah ever asked her a single hard question that isn't just going along with her I-have-it-worse-than-people-starving-in-Africa-or-dying-of-COVID victim narrative.




Oprah is her accomplice, just like fawning Gayle King. Oprah will just give  her more platform to spew vile, if she is unbias, she will ask Megnuts, hard questions, real questions, questions a journalist would ask  that the people want to hear , questions like: why are you strange from your family, and now Hazza is  also  estrange from his, where in before he was close to his brotherm sister in law and  talks highly of his grandparents.  Why was it so easy for you to cut people off?   Was there really an overlap of the Hazza and the Chef that you were living in Toronto.  What can you say about the written  reports that you were a bully and mean to your staff, did you really throw tea at a staffer in the  Governor General House in Australia during your tour, what can you say about the claims that you were a yatch girl before?  that your  were one of Harvey's women?  what can you say about the speculations that Archie was born of a surrogate, why was it hard for you to follow the Royal Protocol? what was so hard that you can't do it? like why so much secrecy during your childs birth? your child baptism?  But of course Oprah won't, it will just be an attack against the Royals. I hope more people see Megnuts for what she really is, not for the facade that she is trying to show.


----------



## Chanbal

Oprah released another Promo video today, it is in the article. MM is indeed attacking the Firm.  

*'There's a lot that's been lost': Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us' in teaser released for bombshell Oprah interview just hours after the palace launched probe into allegations she 'bullied' royal staff*

Winfrey asks Markle: 'How do you feel about the Palace hearing you speak your truth today?'

She replies: 'I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.

'And, if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost already.'









						Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us'
					

CBS on Wednesday night released a second clip previewing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air on Sunday night in the U.S.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Poor Queen Elizabeth. Her husband is in the hospital, the country is in crises, and she has to deal with an egotistical woman and ungrateful grandchild who intends to destroy her. God save the Queen. Watch over her, protect her from the fiery darts. Let her enemies turn on themselves and expose the evildoers and their deeds. Above all, surround her with your peace and understanding and give her strength.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe, fingers crossed, this is their farewell interview. Could it be?
> 
> 
> Go on, now. Go.
> Walk out the door.
> Leave your key.
> 
> Drop the pedal and go.


My father used to say, "Don't Let the Door Hit You on the Way Out".


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> If they are so critical of the Firm, why this ignoramus keeps calling her Duchess Meghan instead of Ms. Markle.


And the ignoramus sitting next to her goes along with everything she says about his family.  Harry is a grown up version of a snot nosed little brat throwing a temper tantrum at the grocery store because his mommy said no candy.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oprah released another Promo video today, it is in the article. MM is indeed attacking the Firm.
> 
> *'There's a lot that's been lost': Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us' in teaser released for bombshell Oprah interview just hours after the palace launched probe into allegations she 'bullied' royal staff*
> 
> Winfrey asks Markle: 'How do you feel about the Palace hearing you speak your truth today?'
> 
> She replies: 'I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.
> 
> 'And, if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost already.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us'
> 
> 
> CBS on Wednesday night released a second clip previewing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air on Sunday night in the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Come on, "The Firm", PLEASE take away these idiots' titles that are bestowed upon them by you, the very entity they despise!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Poor Queen Elizabeth. Her husband is in the hospital, the country is in crises, and she has to deal with an egotistical woman who intends to destroy her. God save the Queen. Watch over her, protect her from the fiery darts. Let her enemies turn on themselves and expose the evildoers and their deeds. Above all, surround her with your peace and understanding and give her strength.



What about the vile grandson who not only turned his back on his family, but is outright publicly attacking them?  Meghan wouldn’t be in a position to do it without Harry's full support.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> What about the vile grandson who not only turned his back on his family, but is outright publicly attacking them?  Meghan wouldn’t be in a position to do it without Harry's full support.


Oh yes I’ll put that request in!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana did the Bashir interview; QE said Divorce;
Andrew did his interview; QE said Stay in the house;
H does this interview; QE says   

ETA: what would be so cool is if she announced on Friday H has abdicated.  
No one would watch their pity party then.


----------



## gracekelly

Jktgal said:


> What is Melissa's actual last name? Is it Touabti or Toubati? I see variations all the time. If the former, to me it sounds not very french but African/middle eastern. So she is also a WOC?


I think she is French by way of North Africa.  Many people left Morocco and Algeria n the 60's and went to France.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana did the Bashir interview; QE said Divorce;
> Andrew did his interview; QE said Stay in the house;
> H does this interview; QE says
> 
> ETA: what would be so cool is if she announced on Friday H has abdicated.
> No one would watch their pity party then.


I don’t see any way out except for the Monarchy to ask him to step down.


----------



## Lodpah

What I don’t get is why these two did not do things with dignity? Dignity for them and their families. Put up a United front and move forward to fulfilling whatever it is they want to fulfill? Just why?


----------



## Chanbal

Ms. Markle is a despot. This article provides a nice review of all involved parties in the last drama. The way MM used to treat her aids is very similar how she treated her father in Samantha's book. Nice attitude from the aids, the royals can't fight back, but they can.  

_Those aides who have broken the royal omerta say they refuse to sit by and watch Harry and Meghan's 'duplicitous' behaviour, especially when 'good people and brilliant professionals' are having their reputations unfairly traduced. _*One source warns: 'The royals cannot fight back. 'Never complain, never explain.' But they can.'*









						Revenge of the Sussex survivors' club: How fairytale turned nightmare
					

REBECCA ENGLISH: It is the one royal group that no one wants to join. Referred to only half-jokingly as the 'Sussex Survivors' Club', its membership is sadly rising. But its select band of members have...




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Omerta?  I learned a new word today.
Using the Mafia to describe the BRF?  They are playin with fire. Seriously.

Still, kudos and praises to the SSC for speaking out. We support you


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the video.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did everyone know this? Does Harry know?
_Jamal Khashoggi was also the first cousin of Dodi Fayed, who was the companion of Diana, Princess of Wales








						Jamal Khashoggi
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

This is getting weirder and weirder.  I’ve stopped watching Netflix.  I’m glued to this thread y’all.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did everyone know this? Does Harry know?
> _Jamal Khashoggi was also the first cousin of Dodi Fayed, who was the companion of Diana, Princess of Wales
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jamal Khashoggi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


WTF?!  I wonder if Haz blames Dodi for Diana’s death, and Meg flaunting the SA earrings was his way of sticking it to the Khashoggi family?!  

Wow, this web is woven and tangled by some venomous black widows!


----------



## csshopper

If the interview results in Meghan being revealed as the nasty phony narcissist she is and her popularity really tanks, Oprah could get Markled. It’s been advertised that Oprah has been working on getting an interview for several years, cozying up to Doria, planning Apple project with Harry, working it. Based on MM’s history, going back pre puberty, she would  probably claim it was Oprah’s fault, she was pressured into the interview, Oprah asked the wrong questions, it was poorly edited blah blah blah. Could be interesting.

i wonder if Harry will attend his grandfather’s funeral when it happens? Hard to imagine they would be excited to see the spineless traitor.


----------



## purseinsanity

Harry, Meghan's Friends Think Palace Tried to 'Strike Back' Over Tell-All
					

Buckingham Palace issued a statement on Wednesday, March 3, addressing claims that Meghan Markle bullied royal aides — exclusive




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Their pals?  What pals?  Do they have any left?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> WTF?!  I wonder if Haz blames Dodi for Diana’s death, and Meg flaunting the SA earrings was his way of sticking it to the Khashoggi family?!
> 
> Wow, this web is woven and tangled by some venomous black widows!



I see where you are going with that idea. It is now time to put our tin foil hats on. 
Another theory - since Chas told MM a Tiara would be inappropriate, H&M decided to level up to a much more inappropriate item that would have more tongues wagging. Pretend they actually read the papers and knew about the SA connections. Wearing these doorknockers one time would be the height of inappropriate.  Then, they double-downed a month later and wore the things to Chas’ 70th birthday dinner.  Agree, H&M were definitely flaunting those things twice, for all the world to see. It is always jr high stuff with them.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> WTF?!  I wonder if Haz blames Dodi for Diana’s death, and Meg flaunting the SA earrings was his way of sticking it to the Khashoggi family?!
> 
> Wow, this web is woven and tangled by some venomous black widows!



She really wanted to wear those earrings. 

_According to The Telegraph, royal aides advised the Duchess not to wear the earrings. A palace insider said: "Members of Royal Household staff sometimes advise people on their options. “But what they choose to do with that advice is a very different matter.”

Three days after the Fiji dinner, on October 20, Saudi Arabia admitted its embassy officials in Istanbul were responsible for Khashoggi's death sparking worldwide condemnation.

The following month, Meghan wore the earrings AGAIN at Prince Charles' 70th birthday party at Buckingham Palace._









						Meghan 'ignored aides' advice not to wear earrings gifted by Saudi Crown Prince'
					

MEGHAN Markle wore earrings gifted to her by the Saudi Crown Prince despite palace aides telling her not to, it is claimed. The Duchess, 39, wore the jewellery at a dinner in Fiji in October 2018 &…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Harry, Meghan's Friends Think Palace Tried to 'Strike Back' Over Tell-All
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace issued a statement on Wednesday, March 3, addressing claims that Meghan Markle bullied royal aides — exclusive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their pals?  What pals?  Do they have any left?


Omid, Omid, and dear Omid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M, Doria, Marianne W’s charity — such a small world after all








						Lori Loughlin pictured for the first time since prison release
					

The “Full House” alum was spotted volunteering in Los Angeles this week.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> This is getting weirder and weirder.  I’ve stopped watching Netflix.  I’m glued to this thread y’all.



Weird, no!


----------



## Lodpah

A few posts back the picture of MM and JCMH in the SUV looking glum I understand from another site is that they were asked about the bullying so they knew the article was coming out. I don't know, just passing on info I read. I honestly was watching Youtube about Mount Etna erupting and someone in the comment section said don't worry about the eruption, worry about the pyroclastic flow and then I looked the word up and OMGee, it describes these two perfectly.  Dang, I can't even get in a decent show without something popping up to relate to these two.

So from a volcanic mountain when it erupts it creates a pyroclastic flow. Those two were a volcano waiting for a pyroclastic flow.   I'm being silly.  Off to watch more of Mount Etna erupting. It's fascinating. Utterly fascinating.

Pyroclastic flow:


a dense, destructive mass of very hot ash, lava fragments, and gases ejected explosively from a volcano and typically *flowing downslope at great speed.*


----------



## byzina

Lodpah said:


> Poor Queen Elizabeth. Her husband is in the hospital, the country is in crises, and she has to deal with an egotistical woman and ungrateful grandchild who intends to destroy her. God save the Queen. Watch over her, protect her from the fiery darts. Let her enemies turn on themselves and expose the evildoers and their deeds. Above all, surround her with your peace and understanding and give her strength.



I can imagine how disappointed and irritated William is in this situation. He must feel sorry for his grandparents and his father who, I'm pretty sure, didn't use to be cruel to Meghan and Haz. This couple is looking more and more like Wallis and David from _The Crown. _Will might be rather tough with them when he becomes the King.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry if this has been posted before, I have six pages to catch up with since last night. This came up in my FB feed. I have not had the strength yet to read comments.

Meghan Markle Says The Palace Is ‘Perpetuating Falsehoods About Us’ In New Oprah Clip


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Good question , interviewers on Canadian TV were saying M was not known to be a bully prior to UK, why did it start in the UK ?



Because she was not known period. She was a supporting actress in a cable show, not a huge star.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> A few posts back the picture of MM and JCMH in the SUV looking glum I understand from another site is that they were asked about the bullying so they knew the article was coming out. I don't know, just passing on info I read. I honestly was watching Youtube about Mount Etna erupting and someone in the comment section said don't worry about the eruption, worry about the pyroclastic flow and then I looked the word up and OMGee, it describes these two perfectly.  Dang, I can't even get in a decent show without something popping up to relate to these two.
> 
> So from a volcanic mountain when it erupts it creates a pyroclastic flow. Those two were a volcano waiting for a pyroclastic flow.   I'm being silly.  Off to watch more of Mount Etna erupting. It's fascinating. Utterly fascinating.
> 
> Pyroclastic flow:
> 
> 
> a dense, destructive mass of very hot ash, lava fragments, and gases ejected explosively from a volcano and typically *flowing downslope at great speed.*



In 79 AD [Roman times], this pyroclastic flow covered up Pompeii for about 100 years. It acted as a preservative, saved everything as it was so years later we learned about Roman life. Fascinating how things work.

ETA:  and, of course, Herculaneum. Thank you @QueenofWrapDress  for that reminder


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> If the interview results in Meghan being revealed as the nasty phony narcissist she is and her popularity really tanks, Oprah could get Markled. It’s been advertised that Oprah has been working on getting an interview for several years, cozying up to Doria, planning Apple project with Harry, working it. Based on MM’s history, going back pre puberty, she would  probably claim it was Oprah’s fault, she was pressured into the interview, Oprah asked the wrong questions, it was poorly edited blah blah blah. Could be interesting.
> 
> i wonder if Harry will attend his grandfather’s funeral when it happens? Hard to imagine they would be excited to see the spineless traitor.



In a way, this preemptive strike (in The Times) has nullified the interview's power, whatever H&M say, it's moot, totally yesterday's news, it's now in the context of a response (even though it was recorded first). People have already chosen sides even before the 'big' reveal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry if this has been posted before, I have six pages to cage up with since last night. This came up in my FB feed. I have not had the strength yet to read comments.
> 
> Meghan Markle Says The Palace Is ‘Perpetuating Falsehoods About Us’ In New Oprah Clip



Must be rerecording by the minute then.


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> Poor Queen Elizabeth. Her husband is in the hospital, the country is in crises, and she has to deal with an egotistical woman and ungrateful grandchild who intends to destroy her. God save the Queen. Watch over her, protect her from the fiery darts. Let her enemies turn on themselves and expose the evildoers and their deeds. Above all, surround her with your peace and understanding and give her strength.



Ugh I am so disappointed they would do this. I stayed off the negativity with all their other self promotional stuff because, whatever, they can do what they like even if it’s not to my taste. But this whole “tell all” during a tough time for everyone... just why? I’m so appalled at all these news bytes about how she expected it to get ugly around the tell all... but then why do it? It seemed like all the megxit drama was finally nearing an end.


----------



## lalame

And all those questions are rhetorical of course. The only explanation is they are addicted to being in the news cycle they love to hate and will force themselves on the front page, whether the news is negative or positive. While decrying the system!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did everyone know this? Does Harry know?
> _Jamal Khashoggi was also the first cousin of Dodi Fayed, who was the companion of Diana, Princess of Wales
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jamal Khashoggi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Oh wow, I did not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I honestly was watching Youtube about Mount Etna erupting and someone in the comment section said don't worry about the eruption, worry about the pyroclastic flow and then I looked the word up and OMGee, it describes these two perfectly.



OMG it does! The pyroclastic flow is what destroyed Pompeji and Herculaneum.


----------



## maryg1

CarryOn2020 said:


> In 79 AD [Roman times], this pyroclastic flow covered up Pompeii for about 100 years. It acted as a preservative, saved everything as it was so years later we learned about Roman life. Fascinating how things work.
> 
> ETA:  and, of course, Herculaneum. Thank you @QueenofWrapDress  for that reminder


Archaelogists started to work in Pompei in 1700, so that makes a lot of centuries since the eruption.
Every now and then we have news about new findings, last one was a nuptial chariot with erotic scenes discovered in the last weeks


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Must be rerecording by the minute then.


You mean they keep going back into the studio to redo the interview?


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> In a way, this preemptive strike (in The Times) has nullified the interview's power, whatever H&M say, it's moot, totally yesterday's news, it's now in the context of a response (even though it was recorded first). People have already chosen sides even before the 'big' reveal.


Yes, let it be so!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Oooo, it keeps getting better. Here is Omid Scobie’s article.  Since we know everything he says is coming right from Meghan’s mouth, we see the game plan here is to play the race card while simultaneously  blaming all of the people making the accusations. I hope you all put on your high boots, the bull**** gets pretty deep.
> 
> *Duchess Meghan Is “Disturbed” by Palace Aide’s Bullying Claims: “They Knew It Would Get Ugly”*
> After being accused of causing “emotional distress” to Kensington Palace staff, sources and friends close to the Sussexes speak out.
> 
> 
> With just days to go before Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s prime-time interview with Oprah Winfrey hits the air, the couple had been expecting reaction from the palace. But when the Duchess of Sussex was informed by her team on Friday, February 26, that a small group of royal aides—past and present—had contributed to a “takedown” of her character in a British newspaper, including accusations of bullying and emotional cruelty toward staff, she was speechless, sources say.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan knew that it would get ugly in the run up [to the Oprah special], but seeing such an obvious attempt at destroying her character was distressing and upsetting,” a friend of the couple tells BAZAAR.com.
> 
> The details, shared in the March 3 edition of The Times of London,revealed that Meghan—who is currently pregnant with her second child—had been the subject of a formal email complaint sent to Buckingham Palace’s HR department in October 2018 by her then Kensington Palace press secretary Jason Knauf after reported concerns over her “unacceptable behaviour” towards staff.
> 
> In the email to Prince William’s newly appointed private secretary, Simon Case, Knauf expressed worry that the duchess “was able to bully two PA’s out of the [royal] household in the past year. … The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights.” He alleged that Meghan “drove” two personal assistants out and was “undermining the confidence” of a third staff member.
> 
> A follow-up email from Knauf to Case, who had started working for the Duke of Cambridge that summer, went on to question whether the establishment’s policy on bullying and harassment “applies to [members of the royal family].” He added that the palace’s head of PR, Samantha Carruthers, “agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious.” Knauf left his role at Kensington Palace a month later but has continued to work closely with Prince William and Duchess Kate on their charitable foundation since.
> 
> As the article dropped online yesterday, lawyers acting for Meghan swiftly denied bullying accusations, with a spokesperson going on the record to address the situation publicly. “Let’s just call this what it is—a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation,” said the Sussex rep. “We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of the Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It’s no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining the duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and the duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years.”
> 
> A close friend of the duchess—who speaks on the condition of anonymity—shares their own take on the situation, telling BAZAAR,“I hate to say it, but find me a woman of color in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace. It’s sad that it’s happening, but I’m not surprised. These claims are so far from the woman I know.”
> 
> Though the Times article does not include any examples or details of the alleged bullying, the newspaper does share the feelings of two palace aides—who during moments said they felt “terrified” and “broken” while working for the duchess. However, missing from the paper’s report is the detail that neither staff member made complaints of their own or were aware that Knauf had sent an email to HR citing grievances. “When it became known to [the two individuals], they each asked for the matter to be rescinded and for it to not become an official complaint,” a source tells BAZAAR.com. (Reports that Prince Harry tried to intervene have been denied by the couple’s lawyers.)
> 
> Accusations of being “difficult” are nothing new for the Duchess of Sussex, whose 5 a.m. emails, text messages, and American work ethic became the subject of a flurry of damning reports leaked to tabloids in 2018 by dissatisfied staff members, who preferred a more genteel pace. “It’s not about what she does, it’s the fact she is so bloody opinionated all the time,” a source says one “frazzled” aide confessed after working on her May 2018 wedding. Another, who worked with Meghan on a charity initiative, told a colleague, “Her expectations are unrealistic. She wants everything done now. This is not Hollywood!”
> 
> One of those employees, personal assistant Melissa Toubati, left Kensington Palace in October 2018 after reportedly being “driven to tears,” according to British tabloid reports at the time. An aide anonymously defended the abrupt departure, quickly giving a glowing account of her tenure to the Daily Mail. However, it later emerged in court documents during Meghan’s privacy case against The Mail on Sunday that Toubati had, in fact, been dismissed from her role by the couple due to misconduct (the details of which are known to this author but cannot be repeated for legal reasons). In the Sussex biography, Finding Freedom,sources revealed that it was Knauf’s longtime friendship with Toubati that had led the Sussexes to believe that certain staff, including their own press secretary, were “more interested in protecting one of their own than [Meghan].”
> 
> One of Meghan's friends, who has known her for 10 years, adds, “I know that Meg would feel awful if she knew that someone felt that way about working with her, but I also know that no one ever approached her about anything like this at all during that time. I have never known her to be anything but kind and considerate to her friends and colleagues.”
> 
> When approached by BAZAAR,Buckingham Palace refused to answer a list of questions regarding the story (including why individuals currently working for the queen and other members of the royal family were allowed to contribute to the article); however, a spokesperson announced todaythat their HR team will soon be looking into the circumstances outlined in the Times article. “Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned,” read the statement. “The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
> 
> For Harry and Meghan, who launched a suggested list of “real acts of compassion” on their Archewell Foundation website on Monday, their focus remains on work and not “what they feel is a pre-emotive strike on their interview,” says a friend. “You can’t ignore the timing of this,” a source close to the couple tells BAZAAR. “This has been done to undermine her character or undermine the topics that they discuss on Sunday.” One of the subjects will indeed be bullying, which a Sussex spokesperson says Meghan is “deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma.”
> 
> Adds a friend, “They have had everything and the kitchen sink thrown at them this week, but ultimately nothing will stop them from sharing their truth.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan Is “Disturbed” by Palace Aide’s Bullying Claims: “They Knew It Would Get Ugly”
> 
> 
> After being accused of causing “emotional distress” to Kensington Palace staff, sources and friends close to the Sussexes speak out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



BAZAAR,“I hate to say it, but find me a woman of color in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace.”

This is just ludicrous. Billions of WOC  go to work everyday and are never accused of anything or have any kind of HR drama. Even as an opinion this is just ridiculous.
As another poster said, what does an  actress and her ‘anonymous friend’ ’
know about workplace relationships and management? Much less about statistics.
As another poster also said, funny how the same people who say a good ally and feminist should believe the victims are now dismissing these claims as obviously false because their fave is accused.

I also notice the quotes from H&M don’t actually include an explicit denial of the truth of these claims.

also the people who are bringing up Andrew. The public aren’t defending Andrew (although I do think the photo ops QE did with him were ghastly) but he can’t be convicted overnight. This is an enormous international  trial with multiple complicated issues of the inditement of international figures under US law. Also the fact he’s a prince, unfortunately, doesn’t make it a legal cake walk. Plus COVID complications. It takes a year to bring even a straightforward case to trial.

The mills of gods grind slow but they grind small.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry if this has been posted before, I have six pages to catch up with since last night. This came up in my FB feed. I have not had the strength yet to read comments.
> 
> Meghan Markle Says The Palace Is ‘Perpetuating Falsehoods About Us’ In New Oprah Clip


If anyone news person was brave enough to ask her to list those falsehoods, I bet she can't name one but one can certainly name the number of goodies/freebies she received from their hands.


----------



## jelliedfeels

double post


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> “I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us,” Meghan says in the teaser, released Wednesday.



As CeeJay is probably asleep I'll step in and FIX THAT for Meghan: I personally don't know how she could expect everyone including the BRF sit back and watch her spread lies and wreck havoc. And she still doesn't get it. If you ask me, this was only a mild warning.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> You mean they keep going back into the studio to redo the interview?



The new OW clip MM mentions 'falsehoods' are being  fed by 'the Firm' so it appears so. I'm not going to click as I have to be at work in 5 mins, but MM also seems to be alone in the still of the clip (i.e. not sitting next to H) whereas they are being interviewed together for the big show and seen in previous pics (of said interview). 

That she uses 'the Firm' (a term Diana either made-up or is now first credited for when she used in private - although to my knowledge never in public) is really OTT. Proclaiming herself to be the Diana (again) in this story, and likening the RF to Mafia (organised crime) when hypocritically, 9 people have resigned because of her bullying behaviour and her choosing to wear jewellery given by someone who basically was thought to have organised a 'hit'.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> The new OW clip MM mentions 'falsehoods' are being  fed by 'the Firm' so it appears so. I'm not going to click as I have to be at work in 5 mins, but MM also seems to be alone in the still of the clip (i.e. not sitting next to H) whereas they are being interviewed together for the big show and seen in previous pics (of said interview).
> 
> That she uses 'the Firm' (a term Diana either made-up or is now first credited for when she used in private - although to my knowledge never in public) is really OTT. Proclaiming herself to be the Diana (again) in this story, and likening the RF to Mafia (organised crime) when hypocritically, 9 people have resigned because of her bullying behaviour and her choosing to wear jewellery given by someone who basically was thought to have organised a 'hit'.


Thanks. Great explanation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

maryg1 said:


> Archaelogists started to work in Pompei in 1700, so that makes a lot of centuries since the eruption.
> Every now and then we have news about new findings, last one was a nuptial chariot with erotic scenes discovered in the last weeks



And a streetfood stall, complete with a painted on menu!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sina08

papertiger said:


> The new OW clip MM mentions 'falsehoods' are being  fed by 'the Firm' so it appears so. I'm not going to click as I have to be at work in 5 mins, but MM also seems to be alone in the still of the clip (i.e. not sitting next to H) whereas they are being interviewed together for the big show and seen in previous pics (of said interview).
> 
> That she uses 'the Firm' (a term Diana either made-up or is now first credited for when she used in private - although to my knowledge never in public) is really OTT. Proclaiming herself to be the Diana (again) in this story, and likening the RF to Mafia (organised crime) when hypocritically, 9 people have resigned because of her bullying behaviour and her choosing to wear jewellery given by someone who basically was thought to have organised a 'hit'.


I haven’t watched it and I’m not going to. But, it was stated before, that M will be interviewed first and H will join her later. So this is probably just a clip of the part where she’s talking alone to OW.

ETA: if it is re-recorded, it should be easy to detect after the complete interview airs. There should be slight differences in her appearance etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I posted on the FB Huffpost article that I really don't believe a reputable newspaper like The Times would publish something like this without proofs to back them up...and wouldn't you know, seconds later I got the comment "Where's the investigation against Andrew"? I think I know why Meghan has a fanbase. These people are slightly disadvantaged in the intelligence department.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I posted on the FB Huffpost article that I really don't believe a reputable newspaper like The Times would publish something like this without proofs to back them up...and wouldn't you know, seconds later I got the comment "Where's the investigation against Andrew"? I think I know why Meghan has a fanbase. These people are slightly disadvantaged in the intelligence department.


A lot of them are really vile, just like their master! The ones on Twitter are the worst! Disgusting things! They say things like "MM should be the Queen!" and death wish to members of RF and anybody who don't support MM etc. So delusional and deranged!


----------



## CarryOn2020

maryg1 said:


> Archaelogists started to work in Pompei in 1700, so that makes a lot of centuries since the eruption.
> Every now and then we have news about new findings, last one was a nuptial chariot with erotic scenes discovered in the last weeks



You are correct. Humble apologies.
www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/pompeii
_When Mount Vesuvius erupted cataclysmically in the summer of _*A.D. 79*_, the nearby Roman town of Pompeii was buried under several feet of ash and rock. The ruined city remained frozen in time until it was discovered by a surveying engineer in _*1748*_._


----------



## chicinthecity777

Will H&M being introduced as Duke and Duchess at OW? They hate "the firm" so much that they can't wait to denounce the titles! Oh wait ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some of those commenters could be part of the bot army that MM has used in the past.
From 2019:








						Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
					

A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Canada is catching on:

Palace probing Meghan Markle's reported bullying


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, someone elsewhere pointed out that her close friend Serena didn't even invite MM to her wedding and baby shower. They only started to make up this narrative of being close friends for years after it benefited them mutually. Ah, nothing as it seems.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Much more important news


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I've talked a few times how I knew she was trouble mere days after the wedding, but never could find the footage back. Ta da! And now I really do need to get some work done, all I've done the past few hours is hanging out with y'all and answered emails.


----------



## Sina08

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, someone elsewhere pointed out that her close friend Serena didn't even invite MM to her wedding and baby shower. They only started to make up this narrative of being close friends for years after it benefited them mutually. Ah, nothing as it seems.



That’s hardly a surprise. She barely knew any of the A-list crowd she invited. Or more the other way around. None of *her *guests knew who she was, and had to google her name after they’ve had RSVPed to the wedding of the Queen’s grandson and some girl.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As CeeJay is probably asleep I'll step in and FIX THAT for Meghan: I personally don't know how she could expect everyone including the BRF sit back and watch her spread lies and wreck havoc. And she still doesn't get it. If you ask me, this was only a mild warning.


I want to see her evidence of the accusations! But we all know we won't get it because it's simply not true! Her bullying though has plenty of proof! I secretly wish she would sue The Times. Then I would really enjoy a court room show down!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Who else would tune in for interviews with her bully victims??? If i was a TV producer, I would be working on that project now!


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Oprah released another Promo video today, it is in the article. MM is indeed attacking the Firm.
> 
> *'There's a lot that's been lost': Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us' in teaser released for bombshell Oprah interview just hours after the palace launched probe into allegations she 'bullied' royal staff*
> 
> Winfrey asks Markle: 'How do you feel about the Palace hearing you speak your truth today?'
> 
> She replies: 'I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.
> 
> 'And, if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost already.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us'
> 
> 
> CBS on Wednesday night released a second clip previewing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air on Sunday night in the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It will be interesting to see if Harry verbally(not clutching on to her) backs up Meg’s response to O about these falsehoods. Also, it appears from the clips released that this interview is really about Meg and O is on board with that. Harry is basically a prop.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> Weird, no!
> 
> View attachment 5009532



I have to say, Meghan leading a boy child Harry was what I saw with the cemetery photoshoot in November.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Rebecca English piece:



> At first, my sources tell me, Harry tried to keep the peace, gently placating his wife and quietly apologising to staff.
> 
> On one occasion described to me by several sources, he even gently admonished Meghan about the way she behaved with palace staff – many of whom work long hours for relatively little money out of pride for the institution – after a particularly explosive encounter.
> 
> The details are subject to conjecture (and have become something of a palace legend) but resulted in Harry speaking to one of his close protection officers, who confirmed his fiancee's behaviour.
> 
> But as the weeks went on, the prince became increasingly hostile to his once-loyal aides.



So what happened there? Apparently Harry did not start out being unreasonable with staff and hating his family, but quickly spiraled out of control. How did she do it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW isn't Knauf American too? So if it was just a cultural conflict, wouldn't he of all people have identified it as such instead of clearly calling it bullying?


----------



## drifter

Who's this whatever Harris whom nobody outside America even cares about and thinks too much of herself (sounds like MM, no wonder she's defending her).  I don't even see what's wrong with Piers' article.  He basically summarised various incidents in a more dramatic and gossipy way.  And he didn't criticise MM alone, he criticised Harry too.


----------



## Sina08

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW isn't Knauf American too? So if it was just a cultural conflict, wouldn't he of all people have identified it as such instead of clearly calling it bullying?


Your on point assumption includes too much logic for their taste. 

I’m neither British nor American, but coming from a completely different culture I always perceived Americans to be the more indirect ones (compared to Brits). Brits make it sound like they’re indirect by wording etc., but they’re actually quite blunt.
With my husband working from home right now, I can see the difficulties regarding communication between their US based offices and the Germany based offices. Of course that’s just an outside observation. 
Ultimately this is not about America vs Britain, but about being a decent person and I would say that’s universal.


----------



## chicinthecity777

drifter said:


> Who's this whatever Harris whom nobody outside America even cares about and thinks too much of herself (sounds like MM, no wonder she's defending her).  I don't even see what's wrong with Piers' article.  He basically summarised various incidents in a more dramatic and gossipy way.  And he didn't criticise MM alone, he criticised Harry too.


I was about to post the same. This Harris is a nobody in the UK and as if Pier M will be rattled by her!    I am no fan of PM but he's been in the show biz for decades and he would not take any sh1t from the likes of her!


----------



## mia55

papertiger said:


> Unfortunately, this is common at institutions of many kinds.
> 
> Actually, I think it was an ace (card) they kept up their sleeve. Now their hand has been forced - to play



I hope the main ace they have is her yatch girl proof. That’ll be so juicy


----------



## marietouchet

Woke to clip where MM says BP lied about her ... it is taken out of context ... so I will wait til the full interview ...
but reading the political news, I was struck by one thing ...

MM reminds me of the worst of the previous US president, too *CONFRONTATIONAL*
hopefully, I can go back and read the 15 pages that appeared over night

and *HER *narrative is morphing - why did she leave ? Abusive PRESS? Abusive men in gray suits ? Abusive BRF family? The Markle side of family ? There is no fixed story anymore, but 07 Mar will tell all


----------



## lanasyogamama

Are we at the point yet where she has been complaining about her time in the royal family for longer than she was actually in the royal family?


----------



## Sharont2305

What about the perpetual falsehoods M told? My head is fuzzy at the moment, the only two I can think of are, wanting to get to know the Commonwealth and wanting to get out to the different communities here in the UK.


----------



## marietouchet

Was thinking of the difference between  ... being a random DIVA lady of the manor who cannot keep her staff, OK, at some point her lord would complain the chateau is not getting cleaned, what's up ? I guess she could get away with it until DH stepped in - I guess, there would be no records of the arguments with the staff

Compare and contrast a DIVA member of the BRF who works with the FIRM.  A key thing is that the palaces have an HR department, at some point people will complain, and the allegations will be recorded for posterity - it is like the internet , everything is PUBLIC and FOREVER

In the modern company paradigm, employees have to behave, because all the skeletons are buried at HR


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mia55 said:


> I hope the main ace they have is her yatch girl proof. That’ll be so juicy



I can't see them doing this to Harry, even if they secretly wish they could feed her a poisoned apple.


----------



## Aimee3

I watched the latest promo and MM sounds soooo rehearsed.  I wonder how many “takes” it took to get the final scene.  Her voice sounds like she did on Suits:  flat, monotone and boring!  In the promo her face doesn’t move.  No emotion was visible.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I posted on the FB Huffpost article that I really don't believe a reputable newspaper like The Times would publish something like this without proofs to back them up...and wouldn't you know, seconds later I got the comment "Where's the investigation against Andrew"? I think I know why Meghan has a fanbase. These people are slightly disadvantaged in the intelligence department.



There is something unhealthy about fanbases. Getting too emotionally invested in supporting anything, whether it be a celebrity, a political view, a sports team, etc., cannot be good for the mental health.

Sooner or later whatever you put up on a pedestal is going to let you down.


----------



## bag-princess

They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

I believe they will have words of admiration for QE and Charles in the interview, because they still need to be linked to them, and maybe PP since he’s in the hospital.
They will trash anybody else in the bin instead, without naming them obviously.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-princess said:


> They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH


Maybe because Andrew is a blood relative and MM just married into the family.


----------



## bag-mania

bag-princess said:


> They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH



Can't they both be horrible people? It doesn't have to be one or the other.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-princess said:


> They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH



How lucky that the BRF has Andrew, or else you'd actually have to have a good close look at yourself to determine why you will find excuses for everything Meghan does, however sh*tty it is.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Can't they both be horrible people? It doesn't have to be one or the other.


I find it real odd that not liking MM = support for Andrew? what?   
Or Andrew is horrible = MM can do no wrong, What?

Like I said before, Andrew is a very very low bar to be used for any comparison!


----------



## Chanbal

Good morning (afternoon or evening)! It is indeed a circus!  


Meghan and Harry have today been accused of being disrespectful to the Queen and her husband after it emerged they won't delay the release of their Oprah Winfrey interview despite Prince Philip's health problems.  

The couple are under huge pressure to ask Ms Winfrey to delay the broadcast in the US on Sunday night and across the world on Monday after it was revealed Harry's 99-year-old grandfather underwent heart surgery yesterday.

Critics including several MPs have warned them they are 'badly advised' to go along with the plan - but the couple insist that it is up to CBS, who don't have 'any intention' to delay the show set to make them millions of dollars in sales and advertising revenue.

A source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex today confirmed that the screening on Sunday night is still expected to go ahead, claiming the decision now lies with the broadcasters set to make millions from the two-hour show.









						Meghan and Harry confirm Oprah interview WILL go ahead
					

ITV released a trailer at 4pm today ahead of the two-hour show, which featured the same footage released by CBS in the early hours of this morning - but this time with ITV's branding in the corner.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## maryg1

bag-princess said:


> They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH


Both attitude are to be condamned TBH, but this is H&M thread so we discuss *their* behaviour here.
The sins of one person don’t make the other a saint.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Anybody else is so excited about the next episode of *H&M* "Jerry Springer" show? The possibilities are endless!


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> I am giving them the benefit of the doubt on the innuendos. But I will go to my grave saying *NO KID SAID CROCODILE FOR A FIRST* *WORD*....not even Einstein himself.



After reading some of the threads in the Hermes Forum, if "crocodile" were ever a kid's first word, I might be able to see a child of one of those croc Birkin collectors saying it. In which case it'd be perfectly understandable  . But Archie? I'm surprised he didn't pick up "sustainable" or "creative activations" or "it's not my job to coddle them" .


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of those commenters could be part of the bot army that MM has used in the past.
> From 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca


You are onto something here! Who is behind this? 

*Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World Summit*

Today, Ms Robertson tweeted at *8.18am*: *'Not having any of it. The Queen is the world's most stunning example of duty and service. The Sussexes have grievances but should sort out in person privately. Hurting the Queen in public is really low.'*

(_But she apologised three hours later following a backlash_)

Royal author Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes biography Finding Freedom, then quoted the post in a tweet at *9.12am*, which saw it gain a greater audience.

Mr Scobie wrote: 'It seems that not everybody will be watching on Sunday, including the founder of One Young World, a youth-focused global forum that the Duchess of Sussex has been involved with for years.'

But by *11.11am*, Ms Robertson's initial tweet had disappeared, *and she wrote an apology, saying: 'I am so sorry. I sent a tweet this morning that was unduly critical of people I admire, care about and have worked with for a long time.

'People have called me out on it and they were right to do so - we should all choose to contribute to a culture of kindness.*









						Charity chief blasts Duke and Duchess for 'hurting' the Queen
					

Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World, said that 'hurting the Queen in public is really low' and praised the monarch for being the 'world's most stunning example of public service'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## maryg1

Chanbal said:


> You are onto something here! Who is behind this?
> 
> *Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World Summit*
> 
> Today, Ms Robertson tweeted at *8.18am*: *'Not having any of it. The Queen is the world's most stunning example of duty and service. The Sussexes have grievances but should sort out in person privately. Hurting the Queen in public is really low.'*
> 
> (_But she apologised three hours later following a backlash_)
> 
> Royal author Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes biography Finding Freedom, then quoted the post in a tweet at *9.12am*, which saw it gain a greater audience.
> 
> Mr Scobie wrote: 'It seems that not everybody will be watching on Sunday, including the founder of One Young World, a youth-focused global forum that the Duchess of Sussex has been involved with for years.'
> 
> But by *11.11am*, Ms Robertson's initial tweet had disappeared, *and she wrote an apology, saying: 'I am so sorry. I sent a tweet this morning that was unduly critical of people I admire, care about and have worked with for a long time.
> 
> 'People have called me out on it and they were right to do so - we should all choose to contribute to a culture of kindness.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charity chief blasts Duke and Duchess for 'hurting' the Queen
> 
> 
> Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World, said that 'hurting the Queen in public is really low' and praised the monarch for being the 'world's most stunning example of public service'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So people can’t criticize other people even though they admire them? 
or the other way?
It looks like she receveid some sort of blackmail.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of those commenters could be part of the bot army that MM has used in the past.
> From 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca


"Twitter bot army" LOLOL, sounds about right.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Canada is catching on:
> 
> Palace probing Meghan Markle's reported bullying


Well, we should give ourselves pats on the back!  We were WAAAAAAYYYY ahead of the times here!


----------



## chicinthecity777

maryg1 said:


> So people can’t criticize other people even though they admire them?
> or the other way?
> It looks like she receveid some sort of blackmail.


She was probably trolled by Sussex Squads, receiving death threads from the bots. It's common these days. She's just being bullied online for stating her opinions. Sounds familiar, no?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> You are onto something here! Who is behind this?
> 
> *Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World Summit*
> 
> Today, Ms Robertson tweeted at *8.18am*: *'Not having any of it. The Queen is the world's most stunning example of duty and service. The Sussexes have grievances but should sort out in person privately. Hurting the Queen in public is really low.'*
> 
> (_But she apologised three hours later following a backlash_)
> 
> Royal author Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes biography Finding Freedom, then quoted the post in a tweet at *9.12am*, which saw it gain a greater audience.
> 
> Mr Scobie wrote: 'It seems that not everybody will be watching on Sunday, including the founder of One Young World, a youth-focused global forum that the Duchess of Sussex has been involved with for years.'
> 
> But by *11.11am*, Ms Robertson's initial tweet had disappeared, *and she wrote an apology, saying: 'I am so sorry. I sent a tweet this morning that was unduly critical of people I admire, care about and have worked with for a long time.
> 
> 'People have called me out on it and they were right to do so - we should all choose to contribute to a culture of kindness.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charity chief blasts Duke and Duchess for 'hurting' the Queen
> 
> 
> Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World, said that 'hurting the Queen in public is really low' and praised the monarch for being the 'world's most stunning example of public service'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What is this. Her tweet wasn't even offensive, yet she back-pedals like this. At this point I wonder who's behind an ex-prince and a wannabe movie star, because they surely don't possess that kind of power. It's like people are afraid of someone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, having your bot army go after someone sounds a whole lot like...cyber-bullying.


----------



## lanasyogamama

maryg1 said:


> So people can’t criticize other people even though they admire them?
> or the other way?
> It looks like she receveid some sort of blackmail.


That’s scary.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I was about to post the same. This Harris is a nobody in the UK and as if Pier M will be rattled by her!    I am no fan of PM but he's been in the show biz for decades and he would not take any sh1t from the likes of her!


Oh, but isn't that the problem?  Both women have more self importance than is warranted?  She is a MegBot, and if your claim to fame is your famous aunt, whoop dee doo.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Are we at the point yet where she has been complaining about her time in the royal family for longer than she was actually in the royal family?


Almost!!


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think some people still blame Charles and Camilla for Diana's death and so C&C have become the perfect scapegoats for whatever problems arise in the RF. I've seen this kind of reasoning so many times before.


I can see people disliking Chares & Camilla for their affair during the marriage.  but I don't see how it's their fault she died?  why?  because if she was still married she would not have been in that car with Dodi?  that's a stretch


----------



## bag-mania

What is the first thing a liar says? _They are lying about me!_

The best defense is a good offense.


----------



## bag-princess

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How lucky that the BRF has Andrew, or else you'd actually have to have a good close look at yourself to determine why you will find excuses for everything Meghan does, however sh*tty it is.




no - don't need to take any closer look than any of you that constantly post about any sh*tty thing that you think she does in your little minds.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> I watched the latest promo and MM sounds soooo rehearsed.  I wonder how many “takes” it took to get the final scene.  *Her voice sounds like she did on Suits:  flat, monotone and boring!  In the promo her face doesn’t move.  No emotion was visible.*


Botox will do that to your face.  
Maybe she had some injected into her vocal cords as well?  To prevent a gag reflex?


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, that's Jessica.  The poster mentioned Melissa.  I'm still confused who Melissa is?


she's the staffer who I think complained and then was fired for misconduct


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I can see people disliking Chares & Camilla for their affair during the marriage.  but I don't see how it's their fault she died?  why?  because if she was still married she would not have been in that care with Dodi?  that's a stretch



There were conspiracy theories at the time that the accident was a hit. Dodi's father in particular had a hard time accepting that it was an accident caused by drunk driving.


----------



## purseinsanity

maryg1 said:


> Both attitude are to be condamned TBH, but this is H&M thread so we discuss *their* behaviour here.
> The sins of one person don’t make the other a saint.


The Prince Andrew threads condemns him too!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is this. Her tweet wasn't even offensive, yet she back-pedals like this. At this point I wonder who's behind an ex-prince and a wannabe movie star, because they surely don't possess that kind of power. It's like people are afraid of someone.


well, she criticized the Prince and the Duchess...that's offensive


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> There were conspiracy theories at the time that the accident was a hit. Dodi's father in particular had a hard time accepting that it was an accident caused by drunk driving.


I know but.....there are always conspiracy theories and most of them are pretty farfetched


----------



## daisychainz

I haven't worried over these two in so long! It was soooo healthy. I thought with the pandemic we had gotten rid of them, but they resurfaced it seems. I just saw a few days ago about their interview and read back a few pages. I don't even understand why they need to do an interview? They asked to be released and got that, so why do an interview focused on his family and pushing some narrative she has about being a victim, for the few months she was there. I'm shocked and appalled by her and by his willingness to go along.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-princess said:


> They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH



You're saying BRF should also ignore the case of women being bullied? The should investigate both. Actually, Andrew should be sent to USA for questioning etc. But this is not a thread about him, is it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## madamelizaking

Omid the bully propagating falsehoods to a deluded crowd that is taking this as fact and not satire.


----------



## justwatchin

maryg1 said:


> I believe they will have words of admiration for QE and Charles in the interview, because they still need to be linked to them, and maybe PP since he’s in the hospital.
> They will trash anybody else in the bin instead, without naming them obviously.


Well O should ask her for specifics...toss out some names...back up those claims of racism, injustice, blah blah.
And does the BRF refer to themselves as The Firm because if not, I personally think it’s disrespectful considering that is her spouse’s family.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> What is the first thing a liar says? _They are lying about me!_
> 
> The best defense is a good offense.
> 
> View attachment 5009775


the one report I saw said she was "hurt"....makes her sound nicer than if she was angry


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Good morning (afternoon or evening)! It is indeed a circus!
> View attachment 5009732
> 
> Meghan and Harry have today been accused of being disrespectful to the Queen and her husband after it emerged they won't delay the release of their Oprah Winfrey interview despite Prince Philip's health problems.
> 
> The couple are under huge pressure to ask Ms Winfrey to delay the broadcast in the US on Sunday night and across the world on Monday after it was revealed Harry's 99-year-old grandfather underwent heart surgery yesterday.
> 
> Critics including several MPs have warned them they are 'badly advised' to go along with the plan - but the couple insist that it is up to CBS, who don't have 'any intention' to delay the show set to make them millions of dollars in sales and advertising revenue.
> 
> A source close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex today confirmed that the screening on Sunday night is still expected to go ahead, claiming the decision now lies with the broadcasters set to make millions from the two-hour show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry confirm Oprah interview WILL go ahead
> 
> 
> ITV released a trailer at 4pm today ahead of the two-hour show, which featured the same footage released by CBS in the early hours of this morning - but this time with ITV's branding in the corner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It isn’t just the broadcasters set to make money; we know H&M aren’t doing this for free


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-princess said:


> no - don't need to take any closer look than any of you that constantly post about any sh*tty thing that you think she does in your little minds.



One doesn't even have to look far, the things she does and says on camera or their own social media is telling enough. And you seriously think a high ranking royal employee filed a complaint against the Queen's grandson's wife just because it's a fun thing to do on a rainy afternoon? Gosh I wish I possessed this kind of simple mind, my life would be so much easier.


----------



## byzina

bag-mania said:


> There were conspiracy theories at the time that the accident was a hit. Dodi's father in particular had a hard time accepting that it was an accident caused by drunk driving.



I always found it strange that people believed in them. It was nearly proved that Diana would have survived had she fastened the seat belt. Unfortunately she was just unlucky to get this kind of injury. If the angle at which she hit the seat had been a little bit different, she wouldn't have died.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the one report I saw said she was "hurt"....makes her sound nicer than if she was angry



Angry is bad for the brand. Acting hurt evokes sympathy. It makes it seem like she doesn't understand why anyone would say such things. I wouldn't be surprised if some company gives her another contract if her performance is convincing enough.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> What about the perpetual falsehoods M told? My head is fuzzy at the moment, the only two I can think of are, wanting to get to know the Commonwealth and wanting to get out to the different communities here in the UK.


AGREE she has not made no effort (being charitable here) with the CW or UK communities. TO ME, that is crucial to success with the BRF. I would judge her very severely for not making more of an effort with Sussex for ex. 

BUT, I would not put those in  the LIE category, I would put them in the UNREALIZED GOALS category - if asked, she would make flimsy excuses. My definition of lie is when you say X, and it is not true at the time you say it. BUT if you say I want to do X (in the future) there is wiggle room if you don't get it done, but I am splitting hairs 

I am currently thinking that the epithet of bully (not liar) is more on target. Remember the original MEGXIT manifesto - authored unilaterally by the Harkles. It had a list of DEMANDS of the crown - free security, keep patronages, financial independence (no BP scrutiny of work). Bullies make demands.


----------



## madamelizaking

I fell in love with Meghan. But thanks to her endless carping I’ve now fallen head over heels for uncomplaining Kate

Good read.


----------



## sdkitty

byzina said:


> I always found it strange that people believed in them. It was nearly proved that Diana would have survived had she fastened the seat belt. Unfortunately she was just unlucky to get this kind of injury. If the angle at which she hit the seat had been a little bit different, she wouldn't have died.


yes, the combo of the seat belt and mainly the drunk driver IMO...yes, the paps were chasing them but if the driver hadn't been impaired I don't think the crash would have happened


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

madamelizaking said:


> I fell in love with Meghan. But thanks to her endless carping I’ve now fallen head over heels for uncomplaining Kate
> 
> Good read.



I feel this sums up how a lot of people feel. Perfectly so. Also it points out what I've said before by neatly lining up the biggest cruelties Kate was exposed to. I still maintain that her experience with the media was far worse than Meghan's.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I can see people disliking Chares & Camilla for their affair during the marriage.  but I don't see how it's their fault she died?  why?  because if she was still married she would not have been in that car with Dodi?  that's a stretch


I'm not saying that these people are making a rational decision, but that C&C are easy targets for some of the pro-Diana followers. Just look at some of the comments from MM's stans to understand the concept of blind devotion and hatred; anything is fair game to them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Emily Hill might be a wise woman.



> By opening up to Oprah Winfrey, the Duchess of Sussex is hoping for a PR coup - and I’m now convinced she’s going to get one… just not for her. Instead, she'll be handing all the positive spin to another woman, my new royal crush the Duchess of Cambridge.



I'll admit it, when the dreadful two first started acting like lunatics (but still within reason lunatics) it briefly crossed my mind if this all was a genius PR move to make the actual heir and his wife look great in comparison (not that they'd needed it). Of course, this thought has long gone because these two have completely lost it, but yeah, as a byproduct they make anyone look good.


----------



## rose60610

Andrew has been crucified in this website. 
Andrew is independent of Meghan. 
Meghan's faults don't vaporize because Andrew exists.
Meghan is already four years older than Diana's age at DOD. 
It's blatant and appalling that M&H use Diana as a marketing and self promotion tool.
Without the BRF, Meghan would only be known as an answer to a trivia question. 
Nonetheless, Meghan attempts to make us believe the BRF treated her horribly.
BRF = 1,000 years of history. Some good. Some bad.
Meghan = 3 years of celebrity. One year good. Two years spent whining about victimhood and begging for pity.
BRF will outlast Meghan. Shortly she will become nothing more than an answer to trivia questions again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I know but.....there are always conspiracy theories and most of them are pretty farfetched


The most preposterous one being Prince Philip being behind it. Yeah, being behind the "murder" of your grandsons mother, Okaaaay!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

sdkitty said:


> I can see people disliking Chares & Camilla for their affair during the marriage.  but I don't see how it's their fault she died?  why?  because if she was still married she would not have been in that car with Dodi?  that's a stretch



I think it's because had she retained HRH tittle she'd have had proper security.


----------



## RAINDANCE

byzina said:


> I always found it strange that people believed in them. It was nearly proved that Diana would have survived had she fastened the seat belt. Unfortunately she was just unlucky to get this kind of injury. If the angle at which she hit the seat had been a little bit different, she wouldn't have died.


It was more than nearly proven ! In his facinating book "Unnatural Causes" the pathologist Richard Shephard, who undertook a full and thorough review of the French Pathologist's report, concurred with the findings that had Daiane been wearing a seatbelt she would have survived. Cause of death was a tear to the aorta behind the heart which was slowing bleeding out and was not apparent to the paramedics at the scene. Diana, at 5'10 and my guess prob 9&1/2 stone, was catapulteded directly into her 6ft+ probably 15+stone body guard in front of her who was restrained by his own seat belt and survived. 

Fascinating book - bit gory in places - I think by virtue of the hospital he worked at in London and his professional experience that the author has been involved in some of the most high-profile cases of recent times.


----------



## Jktgal

Goodness, so much excitement.



Lodpah said:


> Pyroclastic flow:
> a dense, destructive mass of very hot ash, lava fragments, and gases ejected explosively from a volcano and typically *flowing downslope at great speed.*



Living in the ring of fire here - you're on to something.   



gracekelly said:


> I think she is French by way of North Africa.  Many people left Morocco and Algeria n the 60's and went to France.



Thanks, yeah I thought so, it doesn't sound western to me. 



purseinsanity said:


> LOL thanks.  It doesn't take much to confuse me, so I was lost.


Sorry for the confusion. But she was the trigger that made me sure my perception of M is correct. Because this woman had worked for superstars, so she couldn't be a dummy. And if she is WOC, how could she be racist towards Meghan. So she was not the problem. M was.


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


> The most preposterous one being Prince Philip being behind it. Yeah, being behind the "murder" of your grandsons mother, Okaaaay!



Right. Like Philip had Diana's driver get drunk and arranged for him to drive over 100 MPH with Diana in the car and commit suicide in the process? What fertile mind came up with that one?


----------



## Sina08

byzina said:


> I always found it strange that people believed in them. It was nearly proved that Diana would have survived had she fastened the seat belt. Unfortunately she was just unlucky to get this kind of injury. If the angle at which she hit the seat had been a little bit different, she wouldn't have died.


I think for people outside the UK the BRF is some kind of abstract formation, that they don’t get and aren’t really interested in. It’s more likely for them to believe in something they’ve once read or heard. They don’t feel the need to question or verify, so conspiracy theories continue existing and eventually become reality.
That’s the reason H&M have gotten so far. No one outside the UK really cares, so no one sees the entirety of their ridiculous musings.


----------



## Jktgal

You don't learn bullying overnight. I am sure the stories from Canada will trickle out. She wasn't a big star but there were probably stagehands etc to be bossed/bullied around. Bullies seek out those with less power than themselves. Stories from the Africa/Australia tour will also trickle out now that BRF is not putting a lid on them.

Need to stock up on some popcorn.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of those commenters could be part of the bot army that MM has used in the past.
> From 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca



This was my first thought as well. Before this week, 90% of comments on HM articles on Huffington Post were disparaging. Now there’s a handful of male, very Caucasian screen names using first and last names (who does that?) leaving the same rabidly positive comments. Bots.


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.'



Listening to this interview I am, like, no sh$t Sherlock


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> the one report I saw said she was "hurt"....makes her sound nicer than if she was angry


but we know that she was mad , very mad.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> This was my first thought as well. Before this week, 90% of comments on HM articles on Huffington Post were disparaging. *Now there’s a handful of male, very Caucasian screen names using first and last names (who does that?) leaving the same rabidly positive comments. Bots.*



What if it's really Harry using multiple screen names? 

He has to be doing something with all that spare time he has, what better than to spend it defending his lady?


----------



## youngster

So, the interview is likely to go down as we expected: perhaps a few kind words for the Queen and Charles to hopefully keep the allowance money flowing, but slamming the mostly nameless/faceless Palace staff. 

How ironic that MM will state that she lost her "voice" during her marriage but she and Harry have effectively silenced the voices of their former staff through those NDA's.  We all knew that their staff turnover wasn't usual or normal. One person leaving, fine. Not numerous people starting and then leaving in a few months. It sure goes a long way to explain why Will split his office from Harry's so abruptly.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.'



Great video, thanks for posting it. The gentleman sounds really puzzled, but as he said, 'they are making millions for it'...


----------



## Jktgal

Lol


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t know if any of you watched the HBO program about how to make a person   Instagram famous. The bottom line was that the man who created the program was buying bot armies to achieve this. They were totally open about it to show how a person could achieve fame and followers and the perks that it generated. So if you are seeing these short and similar comments and from men in particular, it is more than likely that these are purchased bots by SS.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> What about the perpetual falsehoods M told? My head is fuzzy at the moment, the only two I can think of are, wanting to get to know the Commonwealth and wanting to get out to the different communities here in the UK.


1. I don’t think anyone believes she couldn’t have brought that poor rescue dog to the UK if she wanted to. (I find this one so egregious it’s number 1)
2. one could argue she has fudged family history. 
3. She initially denied  anyone else being involved in the Thomas M letter writing. 
4. She pretended she didn’t really know who H was. Her ex friend said she loved Diana and she visited London 
5. That’s all that’s coming to my mind straight off


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm dying. One of the people writing in to Lady CC's newest video called Meghan "a cornfed Neanderthalette" (in the context of not very refined Harry marrying someone not very refined either).


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> There is something unhealthy about fanbases. Getting too emotionally invested in supporting anything, whether it be a celebrity, a political view, a sports team, etc., cannot be good for the mental health.
> 
> Sooner or later whatever you put up on a pedestal is going to let you down.


OT but this is the agony of so many Trekkies after the execrable reboots.
I suppose you could say those writers live in the same nepotistic, performative-woke world as M&H.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.'



Thanks!  Great video. He worries what will happen to them if they don’t have each other to cling to Lol!  Meghan will be fine. I don’t know about Harry.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> You are onto something here! Who is behind this?
> 
> *Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World Summit*
> 
> Today, Ms Robertson tweeted at *8.18am*: *'Not having any of it. The Queen is the world's most stunning example of duty and service. The Sussexes have grievances but should sort out in person privately. Hurting the Queen in public is really low.'*
> 
> (_But she apologised three hours later following a backlash_)
> 
> Royal author Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes biography Finding Freedom, then quoted the post in a tweet at *9.12am*, which saw it gain a greater audience.
> 
> Mr Scobie wrote: 'It seems that not everybody will be watching on Sunday, including the founder of One Young World, a youth-focused global forum that the Duchess of Sussex has been involved with for years.'
> 
> But by *11.11am*, Ms Robertson's initial tweet had disappeared, *and she wrote an apology, saying: 'I am so sorry. I sent a tweet this morning that was unduly critical of people I admire, care about and have worked with for a long time.
> 
> 'People have called me out on it and they were right to do so - we should all choose to contribute to a culture of kindness.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charity chief blasts Duke and Duchess for 'hurting' the Queen
> 
> 
> Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World, said that 'hurting the Queen in public is really low' and praised the monarch for being the 'world's most stunning example of public service'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This is all very feudal isn’t it? 
“I am the mighty benefactor of you, yeoman robertson, don’t you question the divine right of princesses/duchesses/ change activator or I will remove my patronage!”

I wonder if she took the same attitude with the staff...
“Who is the princess here commoner?!?!”

I would’ve thought if it was a cultural difference the American would take a more egalitarian stance than us class addled Brits hmm....


----------



## 1LV

LittleStar88 said:


> They took what they could get for free, I’m sure. Which is what isn’t selling well right now in CA. EV sell themselves and don’t need to be given away to celebs in order to promote sales.
> 
> The only range rovers I see are broke down on the side of the road or being towed. They’re not reliable vehicles.


Omgosh, it’s funny you should say that about Range Rovers.  When I wanted one my husband told me I’d look good sitting in one... on the side of the road.


----------



## bellecate

At times I feel sorry for these two. What horrible sad lives they live and will likely always live, feeling perpetually victimized. A sad way to live, and I imagine will have lasting impacts on their children. On the flip side it angers me that they have the ability from 'woke' people to give them a platform to denigrate and destroy others reputations, livelihoods and lives. When they first were married I argued with my sister about how wonderful that Harry married her. Sister staunchly felt Harry should have married someone British or at least from the Commonwealth.  My how times have changed.


----------



## Chanbal

Some creepy photos are appearing online.





Spoiler: click at your own risk!


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Oooo, it keeps getting better. Here is Omid Scobie’s article.  Since we know everything he says is coming right from Meghan’s mouth, we see the game plan here is to play the race card while simultaneously  blaming all of the people making the accusations. I hope you all put on your high boots, the bull**** gets pretty deep.
> 
> *Duchess Meghan Is “Disturbed” by Palace Aide’s Bullying Claims: “They Knew It Would Get Ugly”*
> After being accused of causing “emotional distress” to Kensington Palace staff, sources and friends close to the Sussexes speak out.
> 
> 
> With just days to go before Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s prime-time interview with Oprah Winfrey hits the air, the couple had been expecting reaction from the palace. But when the Duchess of Sussex was informed by her team on Friday, February 26, that a small group of royal aides—past and present—had contributed to a “takedown” of her character in a British newspaper, including accusations of bullying and emotional cruelty toward staff, she was speechless, sources say.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan knew that it would get ugly in the run up [to the Oprah special], but seeing such an obvious attempt at destroying her character was distressing and upsetting,” a friend of the couple tells BAZAAR.com.
> 
> The details, shared in the March 3 edition of The Times of London,revealed that Meghan—who is currently pregnant with her second child—had been the subject of a formal email complaint sent to Buckingham Palace’s HR department in October 2018 by her then Kensington Palace press secretary Jason Knauf after reported concerns over her “unacceptable behaviour” towards staff.
> 
> In the email to Prince William’s newly appointed private secretary, Simon Case, Knauf expressed worry that the duchess “was able to bully two PA’s out of the [royal] household in the past year. … The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights.” He alleged that Meghan “drove” two personal assistants out and was “undermining the confidence” of a third staff member.
> 
> A follow-up email from Knauf to Case, who had started working for the Duke of Cambridge that summer, went on to question whether the establishment’s policy on bullying and harassment “applies to [members of the royal family].” He added that the palace’s head of PR, Samantha Carruthers, “agreed with me on all counts that the situation was very serious.” Knauf left his role at Kensington Palace a month later but has continued to work closely with Prince William and Duchess Kate on their charitable foundation since.
> 
> As the article dropped online yesterday, lawyers acting for Meghan swiftly denied bullying accusations, with a spokesperson going on the record to address the situation publicly. “Let’s just call this what it is—a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation,” said the Sussex rep. “We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of the Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet. It’s no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining the duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and the duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years.”
> 
> A close friend of the duchess—who speaks on the condition of anonymity—shares their own take on the situation, telling BAZAAR,“I hate to say it, but find me a woman of color in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace. It’s sad that it’s happening, but I’m not surprised. These claims are so far from the woman I know.”
> 
> Though the Times article does not include any examples or details of the alleged bullying, the newspaper does share the feelings of two palace aides—who during moments said they felt “terrified” and “broken” while working for the duchess. However, missing from the paper’s report is the detail that neither staff member made complaints of their own or were aware that Knauf had sent an email to HR citing grievances. “When it became known to [the two individuals], they each asked for the matter to be rescinded and for it to not become an official complaint,” a source tells BAZAAR.com. (Reports that Prince Harry tried to intervene have been denied by the couple’s lawyers.)
> 
> Accusations of being “difficult” are nothing new for the Duchess of Sussex, whose 5 a.m. emails, text messages, and American work ethic became the subject of a flurry of damning reports leaked to tabloids in 2018 by dissatisfied staff members, who preferred a more genteel pace. “It’s not about what she does, it’s the fact she is so bloody opinionated all the time,” a source says one “frazzled” aide confessed after working on her May 2018 wedding. Another, who worked with Meghan on a charity initiative, told a colleague, “Her expectations are unrealistic. She wants everything done now. This is not Hollywood!”
> 
> One of those employees, personal assistant Melissa Toubati, left Kensington Palace in October 2018 after reportedly being “driven to tears,” according to British tabloid reports at the time. An aide anonymously defended the abrupt departure, quickly giving a glowing account of her tenure to the Daily Mail. However, it later emerged in court documents during Meghan’s privacy case against The Mail on Sunday that Toubati had, in fact, been dismissed from her role by the couple due to misconduct (the details of which are known to this author but cannot be repeated for legal reasons). In the Sussex biography, Finding Freedom,sources revealed that it was Knauf’s longtime friendship with Toubati that had led the Sussexes to believe that certain staff, including their own press secretary, were “more interested in protecting one of their own than [Meghan].”
> 
> One of Meghan's friends, who has known her for 10 years, adds, “I know that Meg would feel awful if she knew that someone felt that way about working with her, but I also know that no one ever approached her about anything like this at all during that time. I have never known her to be anything but kind and considerate to her friends and colleagues.”
> 
> When approached by BAZAAR,Buckingham Palace refused to answer a list of questions regarding the story (including why individuals currently working for the queen and other members of the royal family were allowed to contribute to the article); however, a spokesperson announced todaythat their HR team will soon be looking into the circumstances outlined in the Times article. “Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned,” read the statement. “The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
> 
> For Harry and Meghan, who launched a suggested list of “real acts of compassion” on their Archewell Foundation website on Monday, their focus remains on work and not “what they feel is a pre-emotive strike on their interview,” says a friend. “You can’t ignore the timing of this,” a source close to the couple tells BAZAAR. “This has been done to undermine her character or undermine the topics that they discuss on Sunday.” One of the subjects will indeed be bullying, which a Sussex spokesperson says Meghan is “deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma.”
> 
> Adds a friend, “They have had everything and the kitchen sink thrown at them this week, but ultimately nothing will stop them from sharing their truth.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan Is “Disturbed” by Palace Aide’s Bullying Claims: “They Knew It Would Get Ugly”
> 
> 
> After being accused of causing “emotional distress” to Kensington Palace staff, sources and friends close to the Sussexes speak out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



God, I HATE that expression...'sharing their truth'. There is not my truth and YOUR truth. There is THE truth. 

It just makes no sense. The BRB welcomed her and then decided they didn't like her because of her race? So they decide to assassinate her character?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> There is another story! She wanted to be a victim from day one. She was always planning to get out.





Well, in all fairness to her, being a victim is really 'in' right now so...


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> OT but this is the agony of so many Trekkies after the execrable reboots.
> I suppose you could say those writers live in the same nepotistic, performative-woke world as M&H.



I tried to watch ST Discovery when they were running episodes on CBS but I couldn't make it through more than one episode. It was all over the place. Why reboot a show if you are not going to stay true to the source material?

There is so much hype this week that you would think it will guarantee good ratings for Oprah. Except people have short attention spans and it's still three more days to go. The average person, one who neither likes nor dislikes them, may already have had their fill of Harry and Meghan with all stories that have landed in their newsfeed over the past few days.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Are we at the point yet where she has been complaining about her time in the royal family for longer than she was actually in the royal family?


I burst out laughing so hard when I read your post I scared the dog!


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> This is all very feudal isn’t it?
> “I am the mighty benefactor of you, yeoman robertson, don’t you question the divine right of princesses/duchesses/ change activator or I will remove my patronage!”
> 
> I wonder if she took the same attitude with the staff...
> “Who is the princess here commoner?!?!”
> 
> I would’ve thought if it was a cultural difference the American would take a more egalitarian stance than us class addled Brits hmm....


She brought this attitude with her. She was acting like this with the photographer for the Reitman’s photo shoot and the stylist for a Suits promo and probably many other times snd places as well.  It just became more full blown and worse when she had the title  of Duchess.
For the life of me, I have such difficulty understanding how a person can feel so entitled and feel it is fine to push people around the way she has done.  It is one thing to request that a staff person do something and if you don’t like it, request that they do it again, but quite another to do it in such a derisive fashion to cause such upset and anguish. At that point you have to ask yourself if the person is getting enjoyment and/or a thrill from making another human being so miserable.  There is something really medieval about this kind of behavior.


----------



## mellibelly

youngster said:


> So, the interview is likely to go down as we expected: perhaps a few kind words for the Queen and Charles to hopefully keep the allowance money flowing, but slamming the mostly nameless/faceless Palace staff.
> 
> How ironic that MM will state that she lost her "voice" during her marriage but she and Harry have effectively silenced the voices of their former staff through those NDA's.  We all knew that their staff turnover wasn't usual or normal. One person leaving, fine. Not numerous people starting and then leaving in a few months. It sure goes a long way to explain why Will split his office from Harry's so abruptly.



Palace staff:


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> Well, in all fairness to her, being a victim is really 'in' right now so...


Unfortunately, you are likely right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

I really don't see what Harry and MM hope to accomplish with this interview. Getting into a war of words with the Palace and with the Queen doesn't seem very smart long term.  It certainly won't restore their popularity in the UK.  The Queen is much more popular than either of them and, with Prince Philip undergoing heart surgery, the timing of this is obscene on Harry and MM's part. They will get a ton of negative publicity as a result.

Will this help them in the U.S.? They must be counting on that. It's why they chose Oprah for a softball interview. I still say the majority of people here could care less about them, especially during a pandemic.  We have about a 5 minute attention span after all lol, and a lot more important things to deal with. And, how exactly have they suffered?  A $50 million dollar wedding, prestigious patronages, complete home remodels, glamorous trips overseas to represent the Queen, lavish wardrobe, bailing out on all the boring stuff to live in splendor on the California coast?  I'd like to suffer like that. For sure, they will get some immediate attention in the aftermath of the interview. But, will it make them more likeable or more marketable in the long run?  Will companies want to throw mega-dollars at them for speeches as a result if they weren't doing so before?  Will it drive listeners to their podcast or to their "documentary" for Netflix?  Will NPR start calling them up for their comments on current events?    Ultimately, their future long term success and celebrity will depend on how talented they are at producing interesting content for Spotify and Netflix, which I'd place money on that they are unable to do. It's not that easy, especially if they only have their past grievances from Meghan's 15 minutes as a working royal to re-hash, plus their word salad lectures. 

It sure will be interesting to see where they are in a year though! Only so many Oprah interviews can be done.  I originally thought, way back, that their marriage would last 5 - 7 years, that Meghan would get bored with the duties and restrictions and that the glamour of being a civil servant with a tiara would wear off.  Now, I think the marriage likely will last longer as Harry really has backed himself up to the edge of a cliff and has nowhere else to go.


----------



## sdkitty

maybe there is a shift coming from US media....I heard a woman on CNN this morning reporting on the whole H&M interview thing.  She was pretty balanced.  She basically said that while the royals are uncomfortable slinging mud, meghan is an actress so its different for her.  and she said depending on what M says in the interview, they will hit back.  but not directly.  they will do through "sources"
and she commented that this could make it very difficult for H to have any kind of relationship with his family
Now this was a news outlet - not ET


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> God, I HATE that expression...'sharing their truth'. There is not my truth and YOUR truth. There is THE truth.



That phrase became popular and quickly used to death around the time of the #MeToo movement. "Your truth" meaning _your perspective_ which you want/expect other people to acknowledge and respect. As with anything else in life, you cannot force other people to always see things your way, even if you are shouting it from the rooftops.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> and she commented that this could make it very difficult for H to have any kind of relationship with his family
> Now this was a news outlet - not ET



I don't know how Harry expects to maintain a relationship with anyone in his family after this.  We had been hearing reports that he and Will had been repairing their relationship slowly and the Eugenie was speaking with MM and Harry frequently. Who knows if that was actually true though.  I doubt William will want anything to do with Harry now and I don't think Eugenie would be very happy with anyone that made their grandmother and grandmother upset and unhappy.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> People will be coming out of 5he woodwork. Hope that tea tossing incident in AU is mentioned and verified.
> Last night I discovered that there were numerous stories going  back to 2017 about her bad behavior with others. Now they are all coalescing and finally getting traction.   Let’s see them use Diana and racism as an excuse for their bad behavior.


The buried story I would like to hear more about is her super glue/eyelashes sorority prank when she was at Northwestern U here in Chicago-land (Evanston to be specific). 

Something bad happened and she was shipped off for a year and her "sisters" were obviously told to clam up. Scrub a-dub-dub the internet on this one.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I don't know how Harry expects to maintain a relationship with anyone in his family after this.  We had been hearing reports that he and Will had been repairing their relationship slowly and the Eugenie was speaking with MM and Harry frequently. Who knows if that was actually true though.  I doubt William will want anything to do with Harry now and I don't think Eugenie would be very happy with anyone that made their grandmother and grandmother upset and unhappy.


esp when Philip is gravely ill and could be dying


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe there is a shift coming from US media....I heard a woman on CNN this morning reporting on the whole H&M interview thing.  She was pretty balanced.  She basically said that while the royals are uncomfortable slinging mud, meghan is an actress so its different for her.  and she said depending on what M says in the interview, they will hit back.  but not directly.  they will do through "sources"
> and she commented that this could make it very difficult for H to have any kind of relationship with his family
> Now this was a news outlet - not ET



They are waiting to see how it all plays out. Once the bullying claims surfaced the news media had to take a step back. To do otherwise would be to risk embarrassment down the line.


----------



## bag-mania

Where is Charles in all this? Does he have any kind of relationship with Harry anymore? 

Going by the Markle playbook, jettisoning your father is the first step towards making all your dreams come true.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Is THAT why she was given jewelry by a Saudi prince?


Maybe she roasted his chicken too.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Where is Charles in all this? Does he have any kind of relationship with Harry anymore?
> 
> Going by the Markle playbook, jettisoning your father is the first step towards making all your dreams come true.


I think Charles will keep the door open for Harry.  After all, in addition to being his child, he has the guilt over Diana


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> *I think Charles will keep the door open for Harry.*  After all, in addition to being his child, he has the guilt over Diana


I think H knows that.  That's why he's acting like a spoiled, petulant child having a prolonged temper tantrum.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think Charles will keep the door open for Harry.  After all, in addition to being his child, *he has the guilt over Diana*



Does he? It never occurred to me that Charles might feel guilt because he doesn't believe he did anything wrong. Maybe some of our UK members can chime in on that. They would know better about it than me.

I don't know what it would feel like as a parent to have a child publicly betray you the way Harry has. What Harry is doing now does not reflect well on Charles as a father or a future king.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> the one report I saw said she was "hurt"....makes her sound nicer than if she was angry


It’s all semantics isn’t it?


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Oprah released another Promo video today, it is in the article. MM is indeed attacking the Firm.
> 
> *'There's a lot that's been lost': Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us' in teaser released for bombshell Oprah interview just hours after the palace launched probe into allegations she 'bullied' royal staff*
> 
> Winfrey asks Markle: 'How do you feel about the Palace hearing you speak your truth today?'
> 
> She replies: 'I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.
> 
> 'And, if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost already.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan slams The Firm for 'perpetuating falsehoods about us'
> 
> 
> CBS on Wednesday night released a second clip previewing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air on Sunday night in the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk












QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've talked a few times how I knew she was trouble mere days after the wedding, but never could find the footage back. Ta da! And now I really do need to get some work done, all I've done the past few hours is hanging out with y'all and answered emails.









maryg1 said:


> Both attitude are to be condamned TBH, but this is H&M thread so we discuss *their* behaviour here.
> The sins of one person don’t make the other a saint.










Chanbal said:


> You are onto something here! Who is behind this?
> 
> *Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World Summit*
> 
> Today, Ms Robertson tweeted at *8.18am*: *'Not having any of it. The Queen is the world's most stunning example of duty and service. The Sussexes have grievances but should sort out in person privately. Hurting the Queen in public is really low.'*
> 
> (_But she apologised three hours later following a backlash_)
> 
> Royal author Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes biography Finding Freedom, then quoted the post in a tweet at *9.12am*, which saw it gain a greater audience.
> 
> Mr Scobie wrote: 'It seems that not everybody will be watching on Sunday, including the founder of One Young World, a youth-focused global forum that the Duchess of Sussex has been involved with for years.'
> 
> But by *11.11am*, Ms Robertson's initial tweet had disappeared, *and she wrote an apology, saying: 'I am so sorry. I sent a tweet this morning that was unduly critical of people I admire, care about and have worked with for a long time.
> 
> 'People have called me out on it and they were right to do so - we should all choose to contribute to a culture of kindness.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charity chief blasts Duke and Duchess for 'hurting' the Queen
> 
> 
> Kate Robertson, co-founder of One Young World, said that 'hurting the Queen in public is really low' and praised the monarch for being the 'world's most stunning example of public service'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





So Megafool can't possibly be accused or even be guilty of being a bully (in the opinion of her stans), but it's perfectly OK for her mouthpiece and chief-a$$-kisser Scooby Doo to jump on twitter, quote that womans perfectly acceptable tweet knowing full well it will draw in all of MM's deranged stans to attack and BULLY this woman to the point of her apologising _for having an opinion_ and then deleting her tweet. SERIOUSLY!!? _That _is OK??
This type of sh*t makes my blood boil.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, having your bot army go after someone sounds a whole lot like...cyber-bullying.


----------



## Lodpah

My daily prayer for the Queen.

God save the Queen. Uphold her withYour righteous right hand and give her strength, peace, wisdom, and safety. Let her be blessed in the courtyards, in the streets, in the alleyways, in all the hidden corners where her enemies want to attack her. Give her favor. Thank You God.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

Speaking of mean girls...from Blind Gossip today

[Blind Gossip] If you are a fan of the movie Mean Girls, you may remember a scene in which some of the characters devise a plan of attack on The Plastics.

Janis Ian (played by Lizzy Caplan) and Damien (Daniel Franzese) befriend new student Cady Heron (Lindsay Lohan).






They tell her about a terrible group of girls called The Plastics. They then work together to take down The Plastics, methodically listing each point of attack.






There is a similar war going on right now in real life between two famous parties.

The Mean Girl in this case is a TV actress who married well but wants more. In order to elevate herself, she has been painting herself as the pure and virtuous protagonist… and everyone else as the horrible and evil antagonists.

She’s a victim, yo!

The victim of what? Everything! Misogyny, classism, racism, whatever.

Where the heck is Actress’ husband in all this?



> He seems to be in some sort of haze and relegated to the role of her assistant or accomplice.


The Actress’ list of antagonists is long and distinguished: her own family, her husband’s family, the media, the people of an entire country, etc.

Let’s focus on her husband’s family, as they are The Antagonists of The Week who are currently being dragged into battle with her. And they are none too pleased about it.

The Family believes they rolled out the red carpet to Actress and welcomed her into the fold.

However, according to Actress, they treated her badly, they didn’t train her, they didn’t protect her, they didn’t let her do what she wanted, etc. While she won’t label them directly, she clearly wants you to think of them as bad people. Misogynists, classists, racists, whatever.

Her husband’s family are not about to let those assertions go unanswered.

While they can’t directly defend themselves (it’s complicated), they can attack back in a less direct manner.

They are basically taking the Mean Girls approach!



> *While they ordinarily would not go on the offensive against [a member of their own family], her appalling actions have left them little choice but to lay bare her hypocrisy.
> Every characteristic that [The Actress] considers part of her virtuous and superior “brand” will be dismantled piece by piece.*


*That means that there is a list. A list of behaviors and actions that expose who she really is and will undermine her brand when made public.*

Cady Heron could not attack The Mean Girls directly and all at once. However, she could methodically chip away at them bit by bit. So she did.

After defeating the Mean Girls, Cady Heron wound up winning Spring Fling Queen, complete with a crown on her head.






Let’s see who takes the crown in this war!

Similar: Fast Baby

Actress:

[Optional] Who will win? How will all this end?


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Andrew has been crucified in this website.
> Andrew is independent of Meghan.
> Meghan's faults don't vaporize because Andrew exists.
> Meghan is already four years older than Diana's age at DOD.
> It's blatant and appalling that M&H use Diana as a marketing and self promotion tool.
> *Without the BRF, Meghan would only be known as an answer to a trivia question.*
> Nonetheless, Meghan attempts to make us believe the BRF treated her horribly.
> BRF = 1,000 years of history. Some good. Some bad.
> Meghan = 3 years of celebrity. One year good. Two years spent whining about victimhood and begging for pity.
> BRF will outlast Meghan. Shortly she will become nothing more than an answer to trivia questions again.


You're giving her too much credit.    I don't think most people had ever heard of her to even make her a trivia question!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.'



Yay!  Australia is now woke to Haz and Meg's ways


----------



## purseinsanity

I think Meg married the wrong spare Henry from the wrong era, when the monarch got to do and say practically whatever he/she wanted.  Henry VIII was like Haz, overly spoiled, bratty, and getting whatever he wanted.  He only became king because his older brother died.  Meg is probably hoping for the same.  Hopefully she remembers what happened to most of VIII's wives.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> *1. I don’t think anyone believes she couldn’t have brought that poor rescue dog to the UK if she wanted to. (I find this one so egregious it’s number 1)*
> 2. one could argue she has fudged family history.
> 3. She initially denied  anyone else being involved in the Thomas M letter writing.
> 4. She pretended she didn’t really know who H was. Her ex friend said she loved Diana and she visited London
> 5. That’s all that’s coming to my mind straight off



ITA with you!  I cannot stand people who mistreat animals, and anyone who truly loves their pets would do anything for them.  They certainly wouldn't be leaving them behind because they're suddenly more self important than before.  I honestly don't thing Meg is capable of truly loving anything or anyone besides herself.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, at this point a seasoned journalist must have gotten the memo that their beloved interviewees are full of it.


I'm not sure Oprah really cares anymore; this seems to be either a *$$$$$* opportunity or some means to get "*back in the BIZ*"!?!!  As I noted before, I'm not really sure what/why Oprah felt the need to do this .. but I can tell you (_as I'm already NO FAN of Oprah given what I've been told by folks who have worked for/with her_) .. that this sh!tshow has me disliking her even more!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan forced open a door that she cannot close and it is going to keep on coming. The more about her that leaks out, the worse she looks.

*Meghan Markle was livid after palace aides sent back designer freebies*
Stacks of freebie designer clothes poured in when Meghan Markle started dating Prince Harry — and the future duchess had furious fights with palace aides who sent them all back, according to a new report.

Keeping the free designer fashions sent by major labels is fine for an actress — but it’s against royal protocol, sources told the Sun.

Markle was livid when told she couldn’t keep the duds, which were sent to her at Kensington Palace after news broke that she was Prince Harry’s girlfriend, the Sun reported.

News of the high-fashion tantrum is just the latest accusation of bullying to flood the gossip pages in the days before her and Harry’s much-anticipated interview with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday.

“As an actress it was perfectly acceptable to take freebies sent by fashion chains and designer labels,” one source told the UK paper.

“But Meghan had to be told it was not the done thing when you are a member of the royal family.”

Prince Charles eventually picked up the tab for Markle’s wardrobe expenses after she married Harry in May 2018.

Buckingham Palace is launching a probe into the bullying allegations, which Markle has countered are just a “calculated smear campaign” orchestrated by the palace to deflect attention from the Winfrey sit-down.









						Meghan Markle was livid after palace aides sent back designer freebies
					

Freebie designer clothes poured in by the stack-load when Meghan Markle started dating Prince Harry.




					pagesix.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Some creepy photos are appearing online.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: click at your own risk!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5009950


Is that a mug shot??


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Cavalier Girl said:


> I think it's because had she retained HRH tittle she'd have had proper security.


Reminder: Diana did not have security from BP because  she had refused it.  In attempting to establish independence and control of her life and choices, she sadly was prey to both aggressive paparazzi and poor decisions by others (Fayed’s employees)


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M, Doria, Marianne W’s charity — such a small world after all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lori Loughlin pictured for the first time since prison release
> 
> 
> The “Full House” alum was spotted volunteering in Los Angeles this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5009529



"Volunteer work' or required community service?


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I really don't see what Harry and MM hope to accomplish with this interview. Getting into a war of words with the Palace and with the Queen doesn't seem very smart long term.  It certainly won't restore their popularity in the UK.  The Queen is much more popular than either of them and, with Prince Philip undergoing heart surgery, the timing of this is obscene on Harry and MM's part. They will get a ton of negative publicity as a result.
> It sure will be interesting to see where they are in a year though! Only so many Oprah interviews can be done.  I originally thought, way back, that their marriage would last 5 - 7 years, that Meghan would get bored with the duties and restrictions and that the glamour of being a civil servant with a tiara would wear off.  *Now, I think the marriage likely will last longer as Harry really has backed himself up to the edge of a cliff and has nowhere else to go.*


Until Meg pushes him off


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> The buried story I would like to hear more about is her super glue/eyelashes sorority prank when she was at Northwestern U here in Chicago-land (Evanston to be specific).
> 
> Something bad happened and she was shipped off for a year and her "sisters" were obviously told to clam up. Scrub a-dub-dub the internet on this one.


Was it Gorilla Glue?  In that case, Meg was ahead of her time then as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow! I walk away for a few hours and, mercy, lots of catching up to do. 


Allisonfaye said:


> "Volunteer work' or required community service?



Who knows? the article claims she is doing much more comm. service than the required hours.


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> Maybe she roasted his chicken too.


Or whipped up some organic waffles


----------



## pukasonqo

youngster said:


> So, the interview is likely to go down as we expected: perhaps a few kind words for the Queen and Charles to hopefully keep the allowance money flowing, but slamming the mostly nameless/faceless Palace staff.
> 
> How ironic that MM will state that she lost her "voice" during her marriage but she and Harry have effectively silenced the voices of their former staff through those NDA's.  We all knew that their staff turnover wasn't usual or normal. One person leaving, fine. Not numerous people starting and then leaving in a few months. It sure goes a long way to explain why Will split his office from Harry's so abruptly.


Hers is the only voice that matters


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> She brought this attitude with her. She was acting like this with the photographer for the Reitman’s photo shoot and the stylist for a Suits promo and probably many other times snd places as well.  It just became more full blown and worse when she had the title  of Duchess.
> For the life of me, I have such difficulty understanding how a person can feel so entitled and feel it is fine to push people around the way she has done.  It is one thing to request that a staff person do something and if you don’t like it, request that they do it again, but quite another to do it in such a derisive fashion to cause such upset and anguish. At that point you have to ask yourself if the person is getting enjoyment and/or a thrill from making another human being so miserable.  There is something really medieval about this kind of behavior.


Yikes I hadn’t heard about her queening it up in Canada. That thing about her hiring an ice cream stall for her staff but also messaging them at 5am is right out of the egomaniacal management book.
“You should be grateful for my largesse because I am so important.”
“I can make demands of you out of office because my time is more important than yours.”
“If you question me or refuse me you are motivated by personal animosity.”


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Does he? It never occurred to me that Charles might feel guilt because he doesn't believe he did anything wrong. Maybe some of our UK members can chime in on that. They would know better about it than me.
> 
> I don't know what it would feel like as a parent to have a child publicly betray you the way Harry has. What Harry is doing now does not reflect well on Charles as a father or a future king.


I don't know what Charles feels....but if not guilt, then surely great sympathy for his sons losing their mother....yes would like to hear from Brits here


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> ITA with you!  I cannot stand people who mistreat animals, and anyone who truly loves their pets would do anything for them.  They certainly wouldn't be leaving them behind because they're suddenly more self important than before.  I honestly don't thing Meg is capable of truly loving anything or anyone besides herself.


Agree. I think everything she does is an act. But since she isn't a very good actress, her mannerisms, body language, facial expressions don't vary greatly whether she talks about being a victim or doing her good deeds or missing her dog. Maybe she's just a good liar or a compulsive liar. I've seen people like this constantly lying (or fabricating) about everything for absolutely no reason.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, Charles will always put country over family, as any king would and as QE has done.
Police officers are required to arrest a family member, if needed. Similar thing, no?

RE: Diana’s security - she had plenty of money to pay for her own security, chauffeur, etc. She also knew how to pick up the phone and make those arrangements. She chose not to.

RE: MM’s bullying and sense of entitlement began long ago. There are several YouTube videos from her youth that show it. Same for Harry. He exhibited lots of bullying behavior over the years. I’ve said all along H&M are just not likeable people. That comes across in the photos and the videos.

RE: Oprah. In yesterday’s  preview, Oprah did not look convinced of MM’s claims. Not at all. The body language seemed skeptical.  Same as with the latte pitch, O  did not seem happy to be there.


----------



## lalame

I see a lot of support for M in this mess among US millenials and other youth and it stems from 2 things I think:

They don't really understand the BRF and culture... they treat M as a normal celebrity not royalty. And it's very American to speak your mind and especially to call out authority these days (nothing wrong with that), so they just see all of the negative attention on Meghan as an oppression against her right to speak out. The BRF's history of doing this to others doesn't help, even though they clearly tried to turn a new leaf with M. These people wouldn't dream of moving to Thailand and putting down the royal family there but for whatever reason they don't get Meghan did the same thing in UK.   
This particular cultural moment with BLM and heightened awareness of racism was just the right condition for M to become a symbol of yet another POC being oppressed by a white institution. I think she has gotten a huge lift from this rising tide but it's just a matter of time until the rolling coverage reveals that they are unlikeable people otherwise. They violate all the other youth social causes like anti-classicism, elitism, materialism, and I think on the horizon will be shameless self-promotion.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Oprah. In yesterday’s  preview, Oprah did not look convinced of MM’s claims. Not at all. The body language seemed skeptical.  Same as with the latte pitch, O  did not seem happy to be there.



Oprah is a pro. She is going to ask the questions that allow them to say their piece and she is going to squeeze out as much as she can while still being polite and solicitous. I expect it will be mostly favorable but in two hours (more like one hour, 15 minutes, after commercials) we are going to see little bits, here and there, that are going to raise eyebrows.


----------



## chicinthecity777

#MeToo like moment of this sorry saga! From The Mirror. This huge turn of their previous stance of support of H&M.
*At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan Markle and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe*
EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they 'have been silent for too long'.

At least 10 royal aides who worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “queuing up” to assist a probe into claims Meghan bullied her staff, the Mirror can reveal.
The investigation, ordered by the Queen, will examine claims Meghan “humiliated” aides, subjecting them to “emotional cruelty and manipulation”, driving out two personal assistants.









						At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe
					

EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they   'have been silent for too long'



					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

You know how some people go straight to comments instead of watching a video itself? That’s me unless it’s something I’m truly interesting. I’ll go straight to the comments after it’s uploaded. Those comments dictate the mood of the people. The video/interview itself is just going to be for curiosity purposes cause I can’t stand her voice and I’m sure no one wants to watch a 2 hour show about me, me, me and me again. Harry is of no consequence in this H&M Circus Hour. He’s just a prop to her but he’s also part of the destruction plan of his family.


----------



## youngster

Pages ago, @Chloe302225 posted from an interesting blog that said the Palace wanted the marriage to be successful, very much so, because they knew they would be judged if it failed and if Meghan was unhappy.  So, they tried hard to make sure she was happy.  But, the Palace (and the family) made a huge mistake in assuming that Meghan herself wanted to be happy. They realize now that she never did and that she (and likely Harry) always had an agenda and a plan to justify leaving. 

This actually makes sense to me. It explains so much of why this all fell apart so quickly, literally just a few months after they were married. Harry was either complicit from the beginning or brought around to stand with her, no matter what, by the pregnancy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> You know how some people go straight to comments instead of watching a video itself? That’s me unless it’s something I’m truly interesting. I’ll go straight to the comments after it’s uploaded. Those comments dictate the mood of the people. The video/interview itself is just going to be for curiosity purposes cause I can’t stand her voice and I’m sure no one wants to watch a 2 hour show about me, me, me and me again. Harry is of no consequence in this H&M Circus Hour. He’s just a prop to her but he’s also part of the destruction plan of his family.



Jup, I love the comments sections. Also, I still can't wrap my head around how apparently Harry knew her behaviour was wrong, tried to tell her and apologized to staff, then just a few weeks later became as vicious as her. What did she do, up the dose of voodoo or what?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> #MeToo like moment of this sorry saga! From The Mirror. This huge turn of their previous stance of support of H&M.
> *At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan Markle and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe*
> EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they 'have been silent for too long'.
> 
> At least 10 royal aides who worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “queuing up” to assist a probe into claims Meghan bullied her staff, the Mirror can reveal.
> The investigation, ordered by the Queen, will examine claims Meghan “humiliated” aides, subjecting them to “emotional cruelty and manipulation”, driving out two personal assistants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they   'have been silent for too long'
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



That's a pretty elaborate prank the BRF is pulling off, hu?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> People will be coming out of 5he woodwork. Hope that tea tossing incident in AU is mentioned and verified.
> Last night I discovered that there were numerous stories going  back to 2017 about her bad behavior with others. Now they are all coalescing and finally getting traction.   Let’s see them use Diana and racism as an excuse for their bad behavior.


There were stories about her 'behavior' when she was on Suits! .. her DIVA behavior and given what my friends who knew her even back in her High School days .. well, this is something that she has done for a LONG TIME!


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup, I love the comments sections. Also, I still can't wrap my head around how apparently *Harry knew her behaviour was wrong, tried to tell her and apologized to staff, then just a few weeks later became as vicious as her. What did she do, up the dose of voodoo or what?*



I'd guess it was the pregnancy and she threatened to leave.  Stand with her or she's walking out.  Just a handful of months after the $50 million dollar wedding, it would have been humiliating for him.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup, I love the comments sections. Also, I still can't wrap my head around how apparently Harry knew her behaviour was wrong, tried to tell her and apologized to staff, then just a few weeks later became as vicious as her. What did she do, up the dose of voodoo or what?


I think 
She tweaked the ball. He got addicted. There’s an ancient method that women of a certain  group do (lol don’t ask me what it is I can’t go there as soon as I’ve only heard of it).


----------



## madamelizaking

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M, Doria, Marianne W’s charity — such a small world after all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lori Loughlin pictured for the first time since prison release
> 
> 
> The “Full House” alum was spotted volunteering in Los Angeles this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5009529


Who wants to bet Sunshine Sacs represents her?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.'



He was so articulate, thanks for that!


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> The buried story I would like to hear more about is her super glue/eyelashes sorority prank when she was at Northwestern U here in Chicago-land (Evanston to be specific).
> 
> Something bad happened and she was shipped off for a year and her "sisters" were obviously told to clam up. Scrub a-dub-dub the internet on this one.


I remember when this appeared pages and pages ago on the Thread and at the time I thought, "no way, she can't be that nasty", but now don't doubt it.  The timing is that following the sorority hazing incident she left Northwestern (not clear if it was by choice or not) and applied for an Internship with the State Department at the Embassy in Argentina, but she failed the Qualifying Exam for the position. So Daddy stepped in and strong armed his brother, who talked to the Ambassador, and got her the job. This was at the end of her Sophomore year at Northwestern. (There are multiple articles on line about her Uncle being really angry at not being invited to the wedding "after all I did for her!) As is typical with her, things get a little murky and can't verify the facts of this, but there were rumors she had an affair with a married serviceman assigned to the Embassy Staff  while she was in Buenos Aires and was sent on her way. She graduated from Northwestern but it's unclear if she attended classes on campus there again or not. One article claimed that Daddy's Lottery winnings helped pay for the damage the women at Northwestern had suffered and for sealing the transcripts.  When I was trying to refresh my memory today I Googled and found that Scobie had included the story of the Internship in his book. Spun it as she was devastated at not passing the Examination to get an Internship, but being Wonder Woman she persevered and emerged better than ever ( I am paraphrasing, I will not gush about her as he does!)

From the Evanston  Illinois newspaper at the time of the wedding:
       Northwestern University is eager to capitalize on the attention brought by the royal wedding of an alum, hosting historians discussing the evolution of England's monarchy and publishing remembrances of Princess Diana's visit more than two decades ago. *But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported.
The Evanston chapter of the sorority voted against holding any celebration to mark the occasion, citing Markle's "privacy," and its national offices said it will not be giving interviews on the subject.*

One of those times when silence actually speaks volumes? Checked the sorority's history page and she is not listed as a Notable Alumnae.


----------



## CeeJay

mellibelly said:


> The thing is, why is the American media so far up Ginge & Cringe’s azzes? I live in Los Angeles and I don’t know a single person that like them. The general consensus is 1. Who?? or 2. Harry and Meghan are annoying, should stfu and go back to England. Are they paying for this glowing US coverage?


Same here, live in LA .. and I don't know a SINGLE person that likes either of them!!!  Yes, I'm sure that Ginge & Cringe are paying a LOT for that glowing coverage .. remember, a LOT of the magazines have suffered greatly from the pandemic and so some extra $$$ comes in handy for them.  I'm just hoping that *THE TRUTH* will get out now, such that they just *GO PRIVATE* (_as they said they SOOOOOOOOO needed_) and then just *STFU*!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Allisonfaye said:


> *God, I HATE that expression...'sharing their truth'. There is not my truth and YOUR truth. There is THE truth.*
> 
> It just makes no sense. The BRB welcomed her and then decided they didn't like her because of her race? So they decide to assassinate her character?


I was going to write this exact thing, thank you


----------



## Lodpah

Sharon Osborne throwing a little “shade.”









						The Talk - Sharon Osbourne Reacts to Meghan Markle 'bullying' claims
					

Just days before Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey is set to air, a new Royal report alleges of "bullying" by the Duchess of Sussex. Reps for Markle are denying the claims. "Oh, it's all kicking off and I think this is just the beginning, unfortunately," says...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup, I love the comments sections. Also, I still can't wrap my head around how apparently Harry knew her behaviour was wrong, tried to tell her and apologized to staff, then just a few weeks later became as vicious as her. What did she do, up the dose of voodoo or what?



She knows which buttons to push to bring out his overprotective side and she plays him like a cheap violin. He's a simple man.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> It’s all semantics isn’t it?


to me hurt sounds like she's a victim; angry would make her seem to fit the description of bully better


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup, I love the comments sections. Also, I still can't wrap my head around how apparently Harry knew her behaviour was wrong, tried to tell her and apologized to staff, then just a few weeks later became as vicious as her. What did she do, up the dose of voodoo or what?


Well, rumor was Wallis was very skilled in, um, the Urban Dictionary of years past, for lack of a better phrase LOL.  Maybe that's Meg's secret?  I don't think you get to be a yacht girl (not 100% sure what that is either, but I think I do!) by just knowing how to tie a sailor's knot.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> From the Evanston  Illinois newspaper at the time of the wedding:
> Northwestern University is eager to capitalize on the attention brought by the royal wedding of an alum, hosting historians discussing the evolution of England's monarchy and publishing remembrances of Princess Diana's visit more than two decades ago. *But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported.
> The Evanston chapter of the sorority voted against holding any celebration to mark the occasion, citing Markle's "privacy," and its national offices said it will not be giving interviews on the subject.*
> 
> One of those times when silence actually speaks volumes? Checked the sorority's history page and she is not listed as a Notable Alumnae.



If a former (horrible) employee lists you as a reference, you can't be brutally honest (because you can get sued for loss of employment), but can say "No comment".  That doesn't given details, but speaks volumes.


----------



## purseinsanity

From Quora (I stumbled upon it trying to figure out what a yacht girl is LOL):
"Savoy Bancroft
, Attended University of Michigan and earned masters degree in
Answered February 1, 2021

A yacht girl is a prostitute………they service rich men on their yachts when they have parties. I live in the states and knew of her nasty past….yacht girl, porn actress long before anyone even heard about her and Suits. *She was on Epstein’s yacht at the same time as Prince Andrew and knew him before she knew Harry. *And if anyone wants proof do your research……I am not Google……do your own home work if you have any smarts you will find the proof."

My oh my.


----------



## csshopper

From the body language expert who is analyzing the preview clips from the Interview:

Highlighting that Harry's hand was on his crotch, Judi added: "He is doing a male pose, he's got his hand between his legs. It's called the fig leave pose, it is a very self-protective gesture."
She highlights how different his body language is to when he was interviewed by James Corden.
"Here he looks way more guarded and a lot more uncomfortable and very much in need of that hand clasp that he's getting from Meghan."
DailyMirror

This is Meghan's hold over him, she is in charge, which we all had figured out eons ago, but nobody asked us.

The "fig leaf" pose screams out that he has also figured out that he better be a good boy or mommy will be very angry with him. He obviously is not willing to risk any balls in standing up to Mommy Meghan and treating his family with the decency and respect they deserve. I think he is completely lost to her, my heart aches for the Queen and Prince Philip and all who had hopes for Harry.

Sick pair.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> From the Evanston  Illinois newspaper at the time of the wedding:
> Northwestern University is eager to capitalize on the attention brought by the royal wedding of an alum, hosting historians discussing the evolution of England's monarchy and publishing remembrances of Princess Diana's visit more than two decades ago. *But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported.
> The Evanston chapter of the sorority voted against holding any celebration to mark the occasion, citing Markle's "privacy," and its national offices said it will not be giving interviews on the subject.*
> 
> One of those times when silence actually speaks volumes? Checked the sorority's history page and she is not listed as a Notable Alumnae.




Yes. It does.
Dawn Wells (Mary Ann on Gilligan's Island RIP ) was my sorority's most famous member, afaik. Throughout the years she acknowledged that association favorably. As did AXO


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> From the body language expert who is analyzing the preview clips from the Interview:
> 
> Highlighting that Harry's hand was on his crotch, Judi added: "He is doing a male pose, he's got his hand between his legs. It's called the fig leave pose, it is a very self-protective gesture."
> She highlights how different his body language is to when he was interviewed by James Corden.
> "Here he looks way more guarded and a lot more uncomfortable and very much in need of that hand clasp that he's getting from Meghan."


He's probably protecting his family jewels from getting socked by Meg, given she is sitting so close 
I'm sure he's used to having them kicked or put in a vice like grip by now.  Maybe he doesn't even own them any more?


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> #MeToo like moment of this sorry saga! From The Mirror. This huge turn of their previous stance of support of H&M.
> *At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan Markle and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe*
> EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they 'have been silent for too long'.
> 
> At least 10 royal aides who worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “queuing up” to assist a probe into claims Meghan bullied her staff, the Mirror can reveal.
> The investigation, ordered by the Queen, will examine claims Meghan “humiliated” aides, subjecting them to “emotional cruelty and manipulation”, driving out two personal assistants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they   'have been silent for too long'
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



They are lucky this is the BRF and not a private commercial company. For better or worse people working in the Palace seem to have an additional sense of duty and reverence for the crown... if Meghan were say a VP at Deloitte people would be coming out in droves on social media telling their tales.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Sharon Osborne throwing a little “shade.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Talk - Sharon Osbourne Reacts to Meghan Markle 'bullying' claims
> 
> 
> Just days before Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey is set to air, a new Royal report alleges of "bullying" by the Duchess of Sussex. Reps for Markle are denying the claims. "Oh, it's all kicking off and I think this is just the beginning, unfortunately," says...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


did I miss something (just read the printed stuff) - don't see any real shade there


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## c18027

Meghan was featured on the Summer 2018 cover of _The Key_ magazine of Kappa Kappa Gamma. The issue contained an article about Kappas traveling to London to watch the royal wedding, and was reflective of the excitement felt by many worldwide at the time. No articles about Meghan have been published since then by the sorority.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> did I miss something (just read the printed stuff) - don't see any real shade there


She talks about “royals” being interviewed about their personal lives and that’s why they don’t. A sleight of words. The CR does not do interviews about their personal lives alluding to others who have.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> #MeToo like moment of this sorry saga! From The Mirror. This huge turn of their previous stance of support of H&M.
> *At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan Markle and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe*
> EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they 'have been silent for too long'.
> 
> At least 10 royal aides who worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “queuing up” to assist a probe into claims Meghan bullied her staff, the Mirror can reveal.
> The investigation, ordered by the Queen, will examine claims Meghan “humiliated” aides, subjecting them to “emotional cruelty and manipulation”, driving out two personal assistants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least 10 ex-aides of Meghan and Harry 'queuing up' to assist bullying probe
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Former royal aides of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been given assurances of confidentiality by the Palace as they queue up to be involved, with a source telling the Mirror they   'have been silent for too long'
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Great! If these women were indeed victims of bulling as I believe they were, I hope they will be able to tell their stories. These are women that are/were doing their jobs in exchange of modest salaries. They do not have the financial resources or protection given to MM.

I just watched a video with Whoopi and several other women talking about these allegations. They all discarded the allegations of the victims of bulling. They didn't even bother to give them the benefit of the doubt. They preferred to explain the entire situation as racism from the palace. It is sad when people stop using common sense and just go with what sells better.


----------



## rose60610

c18027 said:


> Meghan was featured on the Summer 2018 cover of _The Key_ magazine of Kappa Kappa Gamma. The issue contained an article about Kappas traveling to London to watch the royal wedding, and was reflective of the excitement felt by many worldwide at the time. No articles about Meghan have been published since then by the sorority.
> View attachment 5010355



Her hair looks really nice when it's illustrated.


----------



## csshopper

c18027 said:


> Meghan was featured on the Summer 2018 cover of _The Key_ magazine of Kappa Kappa Gamma. The issue contained an article about Kappas traveling to London to watch the royal wedding, and was reflective of the excitement felt by many worldwide at the time. No articles about Meghan have been published since then by the sorority.
> View attachment 5010355


Yes, some of her sisters went to London for the wedding and I think serenaded her? She spotted them in the crowd.
By National avoiding interviews, it saved any embarrassment to the Sorority, which is fair to all the innocent members. No problem with that, if I had a daughter who had been a Kappa with her, I would have been relieved.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Great! If these women were indeed victims of bulling as I believe they were, I hope they will be able to tell their stories. These are women that are/were doing their jobs in exchange of modest salaries. They do not have the financial resources or protection given to MM.
> 
> *I just watched a video with Whoopi and several other women talking about these allegations. They all discarded the allegations of the victims of bulling. They didn't even bother to give them the benefit of the doubt. They preferred to explain the entire situation as racism from the palace. It is sad when people stop using common sense and just go with what sells better.*


Sigh.  Once upon a time I actually enjoyed The View.  They were more balanced....One left wing, one right wing, a couple moderate views.  I enjoyed it like 20 years ago when I was on bed rest, pregnant, and no IG or tPF to keep me entertained.  They have spiraled into a bunch of batty women spewing forth the same old garbage.  Unless of course, it applies to them.  Joy Behar and BlackFace anyone?    THAT is okay because Joy did it, but accusing someone of bullying is racist?  MmmmKay.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Her hair looks really nice when it's illustrated.


OMG I laughed so hard I started wheezing!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Well, rumor was Wallis was very skilled in, um, the Urban Dictionary of years past, for lack of a better phrase LOL.  Maybe that's Meg's secret?  I don't think you get to be a yacht girl (not 100% sure what that is either, but I think I do!) by just knowing how to tie a sailor's knot.


Or, maybe it just depends where you're tying the sailor's knot.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> From the body language expert who is analyzing the preview clips from the Interview:
> 
> Highlighting that Harry's hand was on his crotch, Judi added: "He is doing a male pose, he's got his hand between his legs. It's called the fig leave pose, it is a very self-protective gesture."
> She highlights how different his body language is to when he was interviewed by James Corden.
> "Here he looks way more guarded and a lot more uncomfortable and very much in need of that hand clasp that he's getting from Meghan."
> DailyMirror
> 
> This is Meghan's hold over him, she is in charge, which we all had figured out eons ago, but nobody asked us.
> 
> The "fig leaf" pose screams out that he has also figured out that he better be a good boy or mommy will be very angry with him. He obviously is not willing to risk any balls in standing up to Mommy Meghan and treating his family with the decency and respect they deserve. I think he is completely lost to her, my heart aches for the Queen and Prince Philip and all who had hopes for Harry.
> 
> Sick pair.



Reminded me of this


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Her hair looks really nice when it's illustrated.



Now THAT'S shade


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Now THAT'S shade


I'm STILL wheezing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Those British papers really cannot tolerate that Prince Harry loves a black woman", author Roxane Gay tweeted.

Supporters rally behind Meghan Markle, call out racist attacks ahead of Oprah interview

Yeah, this is the problem here (both the headline and the quote). What is it that makes apparently smart, accomplished people completely shut off their brains as soon as Meghan is involved?


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh.  Once upon a time I actually enjoyed The View.  They were more balanced....One left wing, one right wing, a couple moderate views.  I enjoyed it like 20 years ago when I was on bed rest, pregnant, and no IG or tPF to keep me entertained.  They have spiraled into a bunch of batty women spewing forth the same old garbage.  Unless of course, it applies to them.  Joy Behar and BlackFace anyone?    THAT is okay because Joy did it, but accusing someone of bullying is racist?  MmmmKay.




Wasn't there a kerfluffle (or not) with WhoopiPad and Ted Danson doing the same thing


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Wasn't there a kerfluffle with WhoopiPad and Ted Danson doing the same thing


Sure was!  Ted Danson did it.  Whoopi I remember in a tub of milk or something.  WhiteFace?  Not sure what that's called??


----------



## poopsie

Q
[QUOTE="purseinsanity said:


> Sure was!  Ted Danson did it.  Whoopi I remember in a tub of milk or something.  WhiteFace?  Not sure what that's called??



I think he showed up at her roast like that. Weren't (aren't????) they good friends


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I’m trying to stay balanced so I watch documentaries and now from Mt. Etna to watching Botticelli’s Inferno on Amazon Prime - fascinating. He drew this famous art about steps to hell and I said to myself: wow, lust, greed, etc. Hmmm why did Botticelli draw the building it seems upside down? Things that might you go hmmmm.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> *She was on Epstein’s yacht at the same time as Prince Andrew and knew him before she knew Harry. *




I feel that would make for very uncomfortable family occasions.



> And if anyone wants proof do your research……I am not Google……do your own home work if you have any smarts you will find the proof.
> 
> My oh my.




I'm interested to see if someone will actually go down that rabbit hole. I wouldn't even know where to look.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> I think he showed up at her roast like that. Weren't (aren't????) they good friends


I think they were dating at the time if I recall correctly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the reason H&M are accused of bullying is because this is what they do. It has nothing to do with ethnicity and everything to do with character.  They are not likeable people.

 He knew this would be a sh$itshow.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I think they were dating at the time if I recall correctly.



I seem to recall that as well. 
But you know that had to be before most of the peeps on the interwebs were even born


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> I seem to recall that as well.
> But you know that had to be before most of the peeps on the interwebs were even born


I guess we are showing our age!   As I typed "20 years ago on bed rest" in the post above, I thought OMG I am getting old!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I feel that would make for very uncomfortable family occasions.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm interested to see if someone will actually go down that rabbit hole. I wouldn't even know where to look.


I think that none of them cared, we are not talking about regular people here.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I guess we are showing our age!   As I typed "20 years ago on bed rest" in the post above, I thought OMG I am getting old!


You are not alone!


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I guess we are showing our age!   As I typed "20 years ago on bed rest" in the post above, I thought OMG I am getting old!



Tell me!
In 8 months I become eligible for medicare and my pension 
On bad days at work I always thought how I couldn't _wait _to retire. Now that pandemonomics have forced my hand I'm not sure I feel the same
so, yes, listening to these two bang on about how sucky _their_ life is makes me


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Reminded me of this




It’s been a long time since I’ve seen that movie!


----------



## Lodpah

Ok, I'm not going to link cause I'm not a conspiracy theorist but this person made some good points. Tell me what you think.

Apparently MM was a yacht girl (not verified of course) and the reason she was given and wore those expensive earrings is that because she serviced that giver of the earring (again no proof of that). The point I'm making is why would her husband who would have been briefed allow her to wear those earrings unless MM told him and maybe was "coerced" to wear those earrings to improve someone's optics?  I don't know but wanted to see what you all think. 

Someone put together a detail about her earnings on Suits and other projects and with all she has to pay out wouldn't she need to supplement her income?  

I think more and more as people she has hurt and damaged will come out. You all should see the video of her father's adoration of her and did everything possible for her. So sad to see him at this stage in his life suffering. Kudos to him for staying out of this drama.


----------



## Chanbal

*Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press about her' claim aides as Palace war intensifies - after CBS and ITV insisted the Oprah show WILL still air despite Prince Philip having heart surgery*

Meghan Markle blamed the Duchess of Cambridge, the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Charles for leaking stories about her to the Press when she was a senior royal, a source has claimed.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt negative stories about them - including the Duchess of Cambridge allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting before Meghan's 2018 wedding - must have been briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the palace insider said. 

They also claimed the couple 'assumed that the men in grey suits were obsessed with destroying them' during their time in Kensington Palace.









						Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press'
					

Meghan and Harry felt stories - including Kate allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting - were briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the source said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Ok, I'm not going to link cause I'm not a conspiracy theorist but this person made some good points. Tell me what you think.
> 
> Apparently MM was a yacht girl (not verified of course) and the reason she was given and wore those expensive earrings is that because she serviced that giver of the earring (again no proof of that). The point I'm making is why would her husband who would have been briefed allow her to wear those earrings unless MM told him and maybe was "coerced" to wear those earrings to improve someone's optics?  I don't know but wanted to see what you all think.
> 
> Someone put together a detail about her earnings on Suits and other projects and with all she has to pay out wouldn't she need to supplement her income?



That completely does not make any sense to me (the part of bin Salman getting off on giving her the earrings and forcing her to wear them, her confiding in Harry, he agreeing that what needs to be done is wear them out twice). Plus, the Arab sovereigns are known for their very elaborate, very expensive jewelry gifts.

The yacht girl thing, who knows. It was her aspiration to marry rich, and she strikes me as a woman who'd do anything to get ahead on her masterplan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press about her' claim aides as Palace war intensifies - after CBS and ITV insisted the Oprah show WILL still air despite Prince Philip having heart surgery*



Kate and Camilla? I thought it was Victoria Beckham! That chick is not right in the head and it starts to wear on me how many people are unable to see it.

ETA: the article says they even blamed Charles. I am starting to feel worried about their mental state.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Those British papers really cannot tolerate that Prince Harry loves a black woman", author Roxane Gay tweeted.
> 
> Supporters rally behind Meghan Markle, call out racist attacks ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> Yeah, this is the problem here (both the headline and the quote). What is it that makes apparently smart, accomplished people completely shut off their brains as soon as Meghan is involved?



That is how people are being influenced these days. You have enough people saying the same thing over and over until it becomes part of the collective unconsciousness.  Most people aren’t going to take the time to research a subject themselves anymore, but if they hear a point of view  repeated enough it is going to sink in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt negative stories about them - including the Duchess of Cambridge allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting before Meghan's 2018 wedding - must have been briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the palace insider said.



So they don't deny it happened, they just take issue that it came out? Find the mistake.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> That is how people are being influenced these days. You have enough people saying the same thing over and over until it becomes part of the collective unconsciousness.  Most people aren’t going to take the time to research a subject themselves anymore, but if they hear a point of view  repeated enough it is going to sink in.



That seems to be the situation now.
Still, this is the British Royal Family. Once the BRF returns to normal functions, all of these ppl, the wannabe’s, making ugly claims will find themselves left out. They are not an integral part of the BRF group now, but if they thought H&M were their ticket in , nope.  Big mistake.

Harry was the ultimate insider. He could invite lots of ppl to lots of significant, historic functions — the kind you tell your grandkids about.  They would have the best seats, finest transportation and lodging, hob-nob with the top of the tops, maybe get their kids in the prestigious schools, all that stuff that wealthy wannabe’s want . With this one interview, the wannabe’s are realizing , it is game over.  No coronation invite, no state dinner invite, no racing invite, no nothing. Truly, Harry has lost not just his patronages, not just his housing, not just his money,  but all of his influence, all of his  importance. 

With one interview.

  Boom, mic drop.


----------



## gelbergirl

I’m disgusted with these two.
Someone please explain to me, what is her endgame? 
what does she actually want


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Reminded me of this



You made my day!


----------



## Chanbal

We may not like it, but Piers is right. MM called QE & PP liars. This shows a tremendous lack of education, I feel very sorry for QE and PP to have to deal with this woman. They made her rich and famous, and this is how she pays back.   



For the ones in the UK: *Prince William and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, will join Her Majesty the Queen in a TV show hours before the Sussexes’ Oprah Winfrey chat   *


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> That seems to be the situation now.
> Still, this is the British Royal Family. Once the BRF returns to normal functions, all of these ppl, the wannabe’s, making ugly claims will find themselves left out. They are not an integral part of the BRF group now, but if they thought H&M were their ticket in , nope.  Big mistake.
> 
> Harry was the ultimate insider. He could invite lots of ppl to lots of functions. They would have the best seats, finest transportation and lodging, hob-nob with the top of the tops, maybe get their kids in the prestigious schools, all that stuff that wealthy wannabe’s want . With this one interview, the wannabe’s are realizing , it is game over.  No coronation invite, no state dinner invite, no racing invite, no nothing. Truly, Harry has lost not just his patronages, not just his housing, not just his money,  but all of his influence, all of his  importance.
> 
> With one interview.
> 
> Boom, mic drop.



Agreed. Harry has become a liability to the BRF and he is only a novelty here in the US, he is not going to hold the public’s interest.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate and Camilla? I thought it was Victoria Beckham! That chick is not right in the head and it starts to wear on me how many people are unable to see it.
> 
> ETA: the article says they even blamed Charles. I am starting to feel worried about their mental state.


So every one is bad but them?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate and Camilla? I thought it was Victoria Beckham! That chick is not right in the head and it starts to wear on me how many people are unable to see it.
> 
> ETA: the article says they even blamed Charles. I am starting to feel worried about their mental state.


She is so low. She can wear $5K dresses, wear $1M earrings... but she will never be an elegant women.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> You are not alone!


----------



## Straight-Laced

The BRF, the monarchy, gently piling on the pressure ...









						Meghan: Royal aides listened in to my Oprah call before wedding
					

The Duchess of Sussex has claimed that royal aides listened to her telephone conversation with Oprah Winfrey months before her wedding to Prince Harry.In a newl




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				



*Top royal aides face questions on Meghan bullying claims

The Buckingham Palace investigation into allegations that staff were bullied by the Duchess of Sussex will question some of the most senior aides in the royal household, it is understood.*

The Palace review was opened less than 24 hours after The Times reported that a senior adviser had made a complaint that the duchess bullied staff when she was at Kensington Palace.

The review team will seek to talk to employees past and present who believe they were bullied, to see if lessons can be learnt. Meghan and Harry will not be part of the process. The Palace hopes to start the investigation soon.

It will also look at the decisions made after Jason Knauf, the couple’s communications secretary at the time, submitted his complaint to Simon Case, who was then the Duke of Cambridge’s private secretary and is now the cabinet secretary. The prime minister’s official spokesman said yesterday that Boris Johnson had full confidence in Mr Case.

Although the review is not expected to be what one source called a “kangaroo court”, some staff who were allegedly bullied are hoping it will examine what happened after the complaint reached Sam Carruthers, the head of human resources (HR) for Kensington Palace. The duchess denies bullying.

It is thought highly likely that Carruthers, who was based at Clarence House, would have referred the complaint to Clive Alderton, private secretary to the Prince of Wales, who was her boss. Alderton, a former ambassador to Morocco, is the second most powerful figure in the royal household after Sir Edward Young, the Queen’s private secretary. He led the negotiations between the households after the Sandringham meeting over the Sussexes’ decision to stand down as working royals.

Sources believe that it is likely that Young would also have been informed of the complaint. A number of insiders have said that they feared little was done with the complaint after it reached HR. The Palace’s attitude, claimed one, was more about making the problem go away than addressing any bullying.

One insider has suggested that the review will be headed by Elisabeth Hunka, director of HR at Buckingham Palace. She could be aided by Catherine James, the treasurer of Prince Charles’s household, who is responsible for HR at Clarence House. The Palace statement said: “We are clearly very concerned about allegations in The Times following claims made by former staff of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Accordingly, our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article . . . The royal household will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”

At least five people allegedly affected by the behaviour of the duchess will be invited to talk to the review team. They are two former PAs, another member of staff, the couple’s private secretary, Samantha Cohen, and Knauf himself.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Tell me!
> In 8 months I become eligible for medicare and my pension
> On bad days at work I always thought how I couldn't _wait _to retire. Now that pandemonomics have forced my hand I'm not sure I feel the same
> so, yes, listening to these two bang on about how sucky _their_ life is makes me


----------



## Lodpah

Anyone buy a new bag lately? Kinda bored now. Looking for any recommendations. Ok this is the wrong thread. Sorry.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> She is so low. She can wear $5K dresses, wear $1M earrings... but she will never be an elegant women.


Money can't buy you class!

(Now I have the Countess' song stuck in my head!  )


----------



## CarryOn2020

Actually, this is the best. QE, Charles, Camilla, etc. are making their lists of their supporters, and, most importantly H&M supporters. This has been an excellent way to sort out the hangers-on.  Hoist by their own petard.
Chess vs. checkers. Old money vs. nouveau 

Will O, Gayle, etc. ever get another invite? No. 
Will David Foster be invited to play?   
So, go ahead, let‘s have the H&M crowd call QE, etc. names.   




Chanbal said:


> We may not like it, but Piers is right. MM called QE & PP liars. This shows a tremendous lack of education, I feel very sorry for QE and PP to have to deal with this woman. They made her rich and famous, and this is how she pays back.
> View attachment 5010437
> 
> 
> For the ones in the UK: *Prince William and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, will join Her Majesty the Queen in a TV show hours before the Sussexes’ Oprah Winfrey chat  *


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press about her' claim aides as Palace war intensifies - after CBS and ITV insisted the Oprah show WILL still air despite Prince Philip having heart surgery*
> 
> Meghan Markle blamed the Duchess of Cambridge, the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Charles for leaking stories about her to the Press when she was a senior royal, a source has claimed.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt negative stories about them - including the Duchess of Cambridge allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting before Meghan's 2018 wedding - must have been briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the palace insider said.
> 
> They also claimed the couple 'assumed that the men in grey suits were obsessed with destroying them' during their time in Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press'
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry felt stories - including Kate allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting - were briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wow!  If Charles doesn't cut these two off after this, he is a sniveling appendage less wimp!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press about her' claim aides as Palace war intensifies - after CBS and ITV insisted the Oprah show WILL still air despite Prince Philip having heart surgery*
> 
> Meghan Markle blamed the Duchess of Cambridge, the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Charles for leaking stories about her to the Press when she was a senior royal, a source has claimed.
> 
> *They also claimed the couple 'assumed that the men in grey suits were obsessed with destroying them' during their time in Kensington Palace.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press'
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry felt stories - including Kate allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting - were briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"The men in the grey suits"?  LOLOL.  Are there little green Martians also wrecking havoc on poor wittle Meg and Haz too?


----------



## purseinsanity

gelbergirl said:


> I’m disgusted with these two.
> Someone please explain to me, what is her endgame?
> what does she actually want


World Domination!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Mom of the Year!*










						Kate Middleton's mother turns down interview publicity
					

Carole Middleton has interviewed with Good Housekeeping to share an insight into her business Party Pieces and her family life which features on the cover of the magazine's April issue.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Mom of the Year!



*Kate Middleton's mother turns down interview publicity*
Katie Feehan
Kate Middleton's mother Carole has asked the publishers of Good Housekeeping magazine not to promote a cover interview with her over fears it will look 'insensitive' while Prince Philip is battling ill-health in hospital. 

Carole Middleton, who runs party supply company Party Pieces, interviewed with the magazine in January but has reportedly asked its publishers not to promote it as Prince Philip, 99, is still in hospital.

The news comes ahead of a 'tell-all' interview with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Oprah Winfrey which is set to air in the UK on Monday night, despite criticism of its timing.






Kate Middleton's mother Carole turned down publicity for  an interview in Good Housekeeping magazine because she did not want to be 'insensitive' while Prince Philip, 99, was in hospital

A source told the Sun: 'Carole is incredibly proud of her company and all the hard work that goes into it.

'But whilst backing the business, she didn't want to turn any news into a media circus because she is so respectful and sensitive to Catherine, and the royal family.

 'She always gets William's go-ahead before any interview like this, and he is incredibly supportive.

'But the more the PR machine rolled out in Los Angeles with Meghan and Harry, the more sensitive Carole became.

'She decided she didn't want to do any PR for the interview - even if it cost her thousands in potential lost marketing.'

In the interview, which features in the April issue and is out now, Carole shares insights into her company Party Pieces as well as her family life.





Respectful: Carole Middleton, pictured on the cover of Good Housekeeping, discusses her business and family life in the interview which features in the April issue and is out now





*Spring clean your style like Carole in a floral dress by Wyse London*
You'll never go too far wrong with florals, but they're particularly appropriate at this time of year as we head into spring.
So with that in mind, if you're keen to update your wardrobe for the new season then Carole Middleton's printed number might just do the trick. 
The Duchess of Cambridge's mother is modelling the 'Sophie' dress by Wyse London here, a brand that can count UK celebrities Amanda Holden, Alex Jones and Holly Willoughby as fans. We love the ditsy floral design, high neckline and puffy sleeves on this midi dress. The frill hem is a nice touch too. 
It's available for pre-order now (click right) and needs only a pair of white sneakers to look effortlessly fresh. 
Or pick florals with the help of our edit below instead.
* PRICES MAY NOT BE AS ADVERTISED
...NOW GET ONE LIKE IT FOR LESS



She appears on the cover of the magazine wearing a £375 Seventies-inspired floral print dress from Wyse London, befitting the arrival of spring.


----------



## Chanbal

gelbergirl said:


> I’m disgusted with these two.
> Someone please explain to me, what is her endgame?
> what does she actually want



Angela Levin's comments may partially answer your question. The BRF needs to cut ties with MM&H asap, a rotten apple can destroy all apples in a basket.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments of the Carole Middleton piece, it does make sense:



> Wilrey;  then you have not been paying attention.  The 'Palace Four' - basically the Sussex Comms team, wrote to the Court in the MM v MOS copyright case, volunteering to shed some light on the issue of who wrote the letter to MM's father.  This strongly suggests that they want to say that they did. Then a lot more about MM would have come out in court, which side-steps any NDAs.  However she first had it postponed due to miscarriage, then had the judge throw the case out without a trial - so it was not heard.  The idea that these 4 have something worth hearing is at the nub of the MOS Appeal.  So she shut them down then IMMEDIATELY filmed this Oprah interview days later - this is only a couple of weeks ago.  The Palace Four have then clearly gone to The Times to try get their story out within the boundaries of those NDAs.   So this has happened as a result of the legal case, not her interview with Oprah.


----------



## rose60610

When M went from being a near nobody to BRF, at the beginning it appeared she loved it all. The we got the drips of her being mean to staff, crazy demands, etc. Now it's "they were mean to me" and looky me now make a huge buck by trashing them.

Well, she's about 40, she's got to make money while she can. As long as there are enough stupid/naive/gullible people to swallow her crap she can make out. She'd better hurry before they catch on. When this pandemic is over and everybody has been vaccinated, we'll all be busy catching up on things, traveling, _actually seeing people, _etc. M will find out no one will be interested in her pity parties post Covid and be devastated. She may turn extra whacko just for the attention.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> She is so low. She can wear $5K dresses, wear $1M earrings... but she will never be an elegant women.


Yes! Nor will she ever be a classy lady nor a true aristocrat. Just outright trash trying to denigrate everyone who is better than her because her jealousy has no bounds. HM has more integrity in her little finger than MM&H could ever hope to have. MM just STFU and stick to your acting... oops I forgot you're not very good at that either.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Tell me!
> In 8 months I become eligible for medicare and my pension
> On bad days at work I always thought how I couldn't _wait _to retire. Now that pandemonomics have forced my hand I'm not sure I feel the same
> so, yes, listening to these two bang on about how sucky _their_ life is makes me


Just think that, hopefully soon, you will be able to travel without needing to squeeze your trips in between deadlines. You will have more flexibility to take advantage of cheaper flights, read all the books you want, spend 2-3 months on the beach instead of 10 days...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Playing the long game. Time is on QE’s side.









						Meghan 'bullying' inquiry findings may not be released until 2022
					

The Queen launched the probe into the behaviour of her grandson and his wife following allegations they inflicted 'emotional cruelty' on aides and 'drove them out'. Sources say there is 'no timeframe' for inquiry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: this photo is v disturbing. Why is he yelling at his grandmother?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press about her' claim aides as Palace war intensifies - after CBS and ITV insisted the Oprah show WILL still air despite Prince Philip having heart surgery*
> 
> Meghan Markle blamed the Duchess of Cambridge, the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Charles for leaking stories about her to the Press when she was a senior royal, a source has claimed.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt negative stories about them - including the Duchess of Cambridge allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting before Meghan's 2018 wedding - must have been briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the palace insider said.
> 
> They also claimed the couple 'assumed that the men in grey suits were obsessed with destroying them' during their time in Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press'
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry felt stories - including Kate allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting - were briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So, we have a confirmation that M caused tears at dress fitting !

Who/why the leak ?

Do I believe K confided in a gray suit ? NOT ! She may have said something to W and let him handle.

Do I believe in a gray suit leaEd at request of BRF? Ludicrous. There was nothing for the BRF to gain from a sanctioned (by BRF) leak of more family issues at the same time as all the Tom issues.

Did a gray suit do an in sanctioned leak out of dislike for M ? I highly doubt that, the suit’s job depends on discretion , he/she signed an NDA to get the job.  The suits were all too busy finding new jobs to create leaks out of spite

Could the leak have come from the dress maker, staff or someone on the other side ?   Say one of the five friends that indiscreetly blabbed to People  about the letter ? The 5 friends are not subject to NDAs

M is digging herself in deeper.

First law of holes - if you are in one, stop digging.


----------



## poopsie

gelbergirl said:


> I’m disgusted with these two.
> Someone please explain to me, what is her endgame?
> what does she actually want



I think she wants to take the BRF down. Elevating herself isn't enough. From what I can see she is mean and vindictive as hell. What did that one article about the aides say? She always had someone in her sights


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interview from another time. Remember, this is a man born to be king, not the spare.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Wow!  If Charles doesn't cut these two off after this, he is a sniveling appendage less wimp!


I agree. H is his son, but he went too far. It's time for Charles start acting like a king. QE needs to be assured that the crown will be in good hands when she will not be around.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Playing the long game. Time is on QE’s side.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'bullying' inquiry findings may not be released until 2022
> 
> 
> The Queen launched the probe into the behaviour of her grandson and his wife following allegations they inflicted 'emotional cruelty' on aides and 'drove them out'. Sources say there is 'no timeframe' for inquiry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: this photo is v disturbing. Why is he yelling at his grandmother?
> 
> View attachment 5010490


I do hope time is on QE's side. The results of the inquiry may affect that precious duchess title and the line of succession.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

poopsie said:


> I think she wants to take the BRF down. Elevating herself isn't enough. From what I can see she is mean and vindictive as hell. What did that one article about the aides say? She always had someone in her sights


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Wow!  If Charles doesn't cut these two off after this, *he is a sniveling appendage less wimp!*



Sadly I think this is most likely


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I agree. H is his son, but he went too far. *It's time for Charles start acting like a king. QE needs to be assured that the crown will be in good hands when she will not be around.*



Sorry, but have never seen Charles as monarch material. I see him more at home judging rosebushes or some such
I have always thought that the Queen has stuck around far longer than she might have liked, due to Charles' instability


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interview from another time. Remember, this is a man born to be king, not the spare.



Compared to MM&H, Wallis and Edward were almost harmless to the BRF.

Please note, the above is just a joke!


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Sorry, but have never seen Charles as monarch material. I see him more at home judging rosebushes or some such
> I have always thought that the Queen has stuck around far longer than she might have liked, due to Charles' instability


Yes, it is very possible. I believe that she sees Will as her replacement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I do hope time is on QE's side. The results of the inquiry may affect that precious duchess title and the line of succession.



QE well understands the monarchy always win. It will go on long after QE passes. She knows this in her soul.
The idea that H&M could or would ‘take down the monarchy’ is pure ego.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> So every one is bad but them?



That’s a narcissist for you. When something goes wrong it’s always someone else’s fault. Occasionally, it’s everyone else’s fault. But it is NEVER the narcissist’s fault.


----------



## Lodpah

Small business owner takes on ‘greedy’ Prince Harry, Meghan Markle in copyright battle
					

A small-business owner in the Philippines has found himself in a nasty copyright battle with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over the name of his deodorant brand, “Archewell Harvatera” &…




					www.google.com


----------



## youngster

poopsie said:


> I think she wants to take the BRF down. Elevating herself isn't enough. From what I can see she is mean and vindictive as hell. What did that one article about the aides say? She always had someone in her sights



I think more likely there will be a ground swell of support in the UK for the queen, Apparently, _everybody _conspired against the two of them from day one in the minds of H & M. This is crazy talk and won't gain them any support in the UK.

So, sitting in California, Ms. Markle can rage all she likes but I don't see this kerfuffle anywhere close to the scale of the Abdication crisis or WWII or even the Charles/Diana mess. Charles was the heir and there were serious questions about his suitability at the time. Harry was the spare, but is no longer, and is pretty far down the line of succession. So, the BRF has survived a thousand years and they'll survive these two. They might want to remove Harry from the line of succession though as unfit.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Yes, it is very possible. I believe that she sees Will as her replacement.



is that even possible------- To skip Charles and go straight to Will


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lodpah  Get a Launer - the Boss Bag. 





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> View attachment 5010519


----------



## Straight-Laced

purseinsanity said:


> Wow!  If Charles doesn't cut these two off after this, he is a sniveling appendage less wimp!


Absolutely. He needs to get some of Princess Anne's testicular fortitude !


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> Compared to MM&H, Wallis and Edward were almost harmless to the BRF.



I thought Edward encouraged Hitlers troops to bomb England, the nazi historians had it all in writing proof and asked for asylum and protection from England in exchange for the information, then years later or what not somehow the info was leaked so the BRF had to release the info themselves of sorts?  No links from me today I am typing with two thumbs.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Some general thoughts and observations based on this thread, everyone’s opinions and the facts as reported in the press:

We live in a time of absolutes and intolerance. One is either right or wrong, few take personal responsibility for their behavior, and most feel entitled to and deserving of wealth and accolades regardless of merit. A perfect Petrie dish for M and H and their minions.
It is particularly frustrating when anyone with a platform can denigrate the validity of an opposing position based on either the current mood or their personal agenda.  If every woman has a voice, every voice must be heard. We can disagree. We can call foul.   But we cannot and should not reduce every disagreement with the expedient use of title characterization—one should be able to take a stance, voice a complaint, criticize bad behavior or poor manners and not have that disagreement tossed aside with claims of bigotry, bias, or cultural differences.   I am white. I do not judge M because she is a WOC. I dislike her behavior and her arrogance.  I dislike H and M for being sanctimonious. We are all capable of human error and mistakes.  Not them.  We all know how to apologize.  Not them.  We all know that we can evolve and learn from mistakes.  Not them. Sadly we have people in the public eye (the Whoopis, etc) who reduce everything to race.  That convenient trope demeans real issues and real people who have experienced and are living with the pain and struggles each day. 

I am an American and I respect and admire the Queen and wish her continued good health and peace in her household. She is deserving of abundant praise.  I believe even non royalists respect her devotion and constancy and love of country.  How can Harry —even with a shattered home and childhood heartbreak— be so heartless and disrespectful.  Shame on him.  

They are childish, petty, and vindictive. They believe they are always right. They are perfect.   They never forgive. They never ask for forgiveness. Last I heard, someone was already on the Cross.

They would make any mother or grandmother weep.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> is that even possible------- To skip Charles and go straight to Will


I believe Charles could abdicate, but he may not want to. I see Charles more like an emeritus king. He would still be a king, but would have more time to do what he really likes without the pressure of the crown. Hopefully, QE will stay around for several more years, she is particularly needed to deal with this crisis.


----------



## viciel

Chanbal said:


> I believe Charles could abdicate, but he may not want to. I see Charles more like an emeritus king. He would still be a king, but would have more time to do what he really likes without the pressure of the crown. Hopefully, QE will stay around for several more years, she is particularly needed to deal with this crisis.


The last thing QE needs is a spike in blood pressure and stroke out. Please I pray that the Queen keeps calm and carries on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## madamelizaking

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interview from another time. Remember, this is a man born to be king, not the spare.










She's so predictable


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hoist by their own petard.


_Meghan Markle pledged her commitment to fighting for women’s empowerment Wednesday, saying men and women must come together to support movements like *Time’s Up and #MeToo.*

“Women don’t need to find a voice,” Markle said during the first annual forum for the Royal Foundation, the philanthropic organization currently run by Prince William, Kate Middleton and Prince Harry. “They have a voice. They need to feel empowered to use it, and people need to be encouraged to listen.”









						Meghan Markle: 'There Is No Better Time' for Movements Like Time's Up and #MeToo
					

She voiced support for the movements during a joint royal forum




					time.com
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> I thought Edward encouraged Hitlers troops to bomb England, the nazi historians had it all in writing proof and asked for asylum and protection from England in exchange for the information, then years later or what not somehow the info was leaked so the BRF had to release the info themselves of sorts?  No links from me today I am typing with two thumbs.


If true, a former king encouraging to bomb his own country (or any country imo) is certainly worse than terrible. In any event, my comment was only meant as a joke.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interview from another time. Remember, this is a man born to be king, not the spare.



What terribly odd posture he had in this interview.  It was kind of unsettling.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> What terribly odd posture he had in this interview.  It was kind of unsettling.



I’ve read he was 75 at the time of the interview and already in ill health.  He died in 1972. Interview happened in 1970.
He does make some valid points about the monarchy, its purpose and politics. The Nazi connections with the BRF were strong. It comes up in many discussions about them. If you google his quotes, he clearly was a racist. Still, it is a fascinating bit of history, all things considered.








						Edward, HRH Duke of Windsor
					

The Duke and Duchess of Windsor discuss their lives and express their opinions on such topics as modern youth, smoking, the establishment and the role of women in society.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## viciel

I used to think Sparkle was smart enough to go from a twice divorced D list actress to landing a prince albeit the dumb one and just retire into the sunset. But too quickly it became obvious that she's actually really dumb, a typical NPD who overestimates her powers. She could have done well in one of two ways. One, stay as a working royal and enjoy all the admiration her ego can afford to handle and lives fabulously off of Charles, who obviously had and perhaps still has some unresolved guilt over his hands in Harry's inability to grow into a man and continues to live off the "I lost my mum" crutch; or two, quit being a working royal and profits over their lifestyle brand and still enjoy being the life of all the hollywood parties and get treated like real royals by the LA crowd because let's face it that's really all they have to offer, their faux title. But no, she has decided to double down, triple down, because she wants to be known as the perfect and virtuous little girl who took down the most famous monarchy. She forgets too quickly that she, and ginger are nothing without the BRF, never bite the hands that feed you! She might have gone to a prestigious private school and went to Northwestern, actually a very good school, but she clearly has not learned enough class, or strategy, I imagine people who can indeed give sound advice she won't listen to, people who have any self respect won't work for her, so that's how you will end up with a bunch of yes men and women who only further perpetuate your own delusions. Not a royal, not a blue blood, not even a respectful hardworking decent human being. She is cheap, cheap, cheap.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I think more likely there will be a ground swell of support in the UK for the queen, Apparently, _everybody _conspired against the two of them from day one in the minds of H & M. This is crazy talk and won't gain them any support in the UK.
> 
> *So, sitting in California, Ms. Markle can rage all she likes *but I don't see this kerfuffle anywhere close to the scale of the Abdication crisis or WWII or even the Charles/Diana mess. Charles was the heir and there were serious questions about his suitability at the time. Harry was the spare, but is no longer, and is pretty far down the line of succession. So, the BRF has survived a thousand years and they'll survive these two. They might want to remove Harry from the line of succession though as unfit.



After these last events, I believe the UK will be free of them relatively soon and the monarchy will resume back to normal. Unfortunately, Ms. Markle and husband will likely continue annoying us here in the US.


----------



## Jayne1

scarlet555 said:


> I thought Edward encouraged Hitlers troops to bomb England, the nazi historians had it all in writing proof and asked for asylum and protection from England in exchange for the information, then years later or what not somehow the info was leaked so the BRF had to release the info themselves of sorts?  No links from me today I am typing with two thumbs.


Yes Wallis did the world a favour and if H would just go away forever, Meg will be doing the same.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Small business owner takes on ‘greedy’ Prince Harry, Meghan Markle in copyright battle
> 
> 
> A small-business owner in the Philippines has found himself in a nasty copyright battle with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over the name of his deodorant brand, “Archewell Harvatera” &…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I hope he wins!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Yes Wallis did the world a favour and if H would just go away forever, Meg will be doing the same.





I gotta ask, why does a divorced, pushing 40 yr old marry into this family ,,, at 40 years old? ?? 
The guy she ‘chose’ wore a Nazi shirt to a party.  Get a clue, get a f-ing clue. 
Aristotle said it well:* Ignorantia (legis) non excusat*


----------



## purseinsanity

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Some general thoughts and observations based on this thread, everyone’s opinions and the facts as reported in the press:
> 
> We live in a time of absolutes and intolerance. One is either right or wrong, few take personal responsibility for their behavior, and most feel entitled to and deserving of wealth and accolades regardless of merit. A perfect Petrie dish for M and H and their minions.
> It is particularly frustrating when anyone with a platform can denigrate the validity of an opposing position based on either the current mood or their personal agenda.  If every woman has a voice, every voice must be heard. We can disagree. We can call foul.   But we cannot and should not reduce every disagreement with the expedient use of title characterization—one should be able to take a stance, voice a complaint, criticize bad behavior or poor manners and not have that disagreement tossed aside with claims of bigotry, bias, or cultural differences.   I am white. I do not judge M because she is a WOC. I dislike her behavior and her arrogance.  I dislike H and M for being sanctimonious. We are all capable of human error and mistakes.  Not them.  We all know how to apologize.  Not them.  We all know that we can evolve and learn from mistakes.  Not them. Sadly we have people in the public eye (the Whoopis, etc) who reduce everything to race.  That convenient trope demeans real issues and real people who have experienced and are living with the pain and struggles each day.
> 
> I am an American and I respect and admire the Queen and wish her continued good health and peace in her household. She is deserving of abundant praise.  I believe even non royalists respect her devotion and constancy and love of country.  How can Harry —even with a shattered home and childhood heartbreak— be so heartless and disrespectful.  Shame on him.
> 
> They are childish, petty, and vindictive. They believe they are always right. They are perfect.   They never forgive. They never ask for forgiveness. Last I heard, someone was already on the Cross.
> 
> They would make any mother or grandmother weep.


Beautifully put!


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan still has defenders in the press. The author of this headline has written many pro-Meghan articles for Vanity Fair. I’ll spare you reading the rather biased article but the gist of it is the author, Erin Vanderhoof, doesn’t understand why accusations by former employees should be news two years later. Oddly, she doesn’t explain why she believes Meghan’s own two-year-old accusations are quite valid and timely.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve read he was 75 at the time of the interview and already in ill health.  He died in 1972. Interview happened in 1970.
> He does make some valid points about the monarchy, its purpose and politics. The Nazi connections with the BRF were strong. It comes up in many discussions about them. If you google his quotes, he clearly was a racist. *Still, it is a fascinating bit of history, all things considered.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edward, HRH Duke of Windsor
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Windsor discuss their lives and express their opinions on such topics as modern youth, smoking, the establishment and the role of women in society.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk


I love history, so this is fascinating.  Doesn't mean I admire Edward, Megbots!    Many people in that time and age were racist.  Churchill was also.  Doesn't make it right, but to impose today's standards on days past seems ridiculous to me.


----------



## Chanbal

One more opinion about the tough year of the poor couple: 

CLEMMIE MOODIE *So moving to LA and banking £120million is a ‘tough’ year, Harry?*

The fact that since harrumphing away from the Royal Family, citing a need for greater privacy, they’ve signed deals with Netflix and Spotify, given self-important weekly Zooms (from their very private own front room) or, now, given a warts ’n’ all interview to the planet’s most famous celebrity interviewer.

Despite their rather grand designs to end global poverty, is it not a bit ironic that Harry should give his first interview to multi-millionaire diet company ambassador James Corden? A man literally being paid to eat less.

*Anyway. While Harry came across as pretty likeable in his open-top bus chat, we do not know what percentage of monies made by the couple post-Megxit have been distributed to the needy.*

Like her celebrity pals, Oprah preaches philanthropy and wellness to her millions of followers.

She also practises what she preaches, donating millions to charities across the world, including the ******* Foundation, the Born This Way Foundation and Women For Women International.

This latest televised chat wasn’t a Comic Relief endeavour. This was purely about self-advancement.

*I really don’t care that the self-satisfied trio, sitting within the sun-dappled grounds of a mutual pal’s sprawling mansion, are worth a combined £1.9billion and use private jets like you and I use the Northern Line.*

And you and I probably don’t harp on about climate change.

*No, what’s really, really galling is that the couple — despite Harry’s £40,000-a-year Eton education and Meg’s college degree — are so wilfully ignorant.*

Even the language of Sunday night’s Oprah spoiler was inflammatory.

Billed as “two teaser clips”, the Hollywood Reporter breathlessly gushed about a “first look at the 90-minute primetime special.”

Again, “primetime special” doesn’t exactly smack of two publicity- shy individuals desperate to stay out of the limelight.

*THEY PROVE THEMSELVES MASTERS OF CONTRADICTION*
Like some sort of Love Island cliff-hanger, supreme operator Oprah teases at the end: “You’ve said some pretty shocking things here.”

*No one expects Meghan and Harry to sit there in coffee-stained pyjamas, like two Stigs of the dump, but the actress’s decision to wear a £3,300 Armani dress, and the late Princess Diana’s Cartier bracelet, jars.*

Because showbiz is inherently still quite sexist, nobody has yet bothered to find out where Harry’s nice suit was from. But it probably wasn’t Florence & Fred.

In their fashion choices, the couple again prove themselves masters of contradiction.

Earlier this week they updated their Archewell website, outlining their non-profit works.

Gone went a touching photo of toddler Harry sitting on the shoulders of his late mother. In its place, a photo of the big-hearted Sussexes handing out food to low-income families at a charity event in LA.

But in their tell-all chat with superstar Oprah — a classy Jeremy Kyle, if you will — Harry talks at length about Diana’s undeniably tragic death.

Losing a mum at any age is heart-breaking, and Harry has every right to be bitter and grieving still. Grief doesn’t have a timeframe.

But by claiming his greatest fear is “history repeating itself”, while describing the process of quitting the Royal Family over the past 12 months as “incredibly tough”, he has shown rhino-skin levels of insensitivity.

*No, mate. “Incredibly tough” is losing loved ones to Covid-19, losing your job or losing your home.

It is not moving to a £12million home in California, and making a reported £120million in your first year in the workplace.*

Year review!


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Meghan still has defenders in the press. The author of this headline has written many pro-Meghan articles for Vanity Fair. I’ll spare you reading the rather biased article but the gist of it is the author, Erin Vanderhoof, doesn’t understand why accusations by former employees should be news two years later. Oddly, she doesn’t explain why she believes Meghan’s own two-year-old accusations are quite valid and timely.
> 
> View attachment 5010632


Money from PR, I presume. They have no integrity. Money buys press.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Meghan still has defenders in the press. The author of this headline has written many pro-Meghan articles for Vanity Fair. I’ll spare you reading the rather biased article but the gist of it is *the author, Erin Vanderhoof, doesn’t understand why accusations by former employees should be news two years later.* Oddly, she doesn’t explain why she believes Meghan’s own two-year-old accusations are quite valid and timely.
> 
> View attachment 5010632


Well, gee, in these woke times, if we can judge forefathers of countries by their actions hundreds of years ago, why can't we judge her actions from two years ago?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more opinion about the tough year of the poor couple:
> 
> CLEMMIE MOODIE *So moving to LA and banking £120million is a ‘tough’ year, Harry?*
> 
> The fact that since harrumphing away from the Royal Family, citing a need for greater privacy, they’ve signed deals with Netflix and Spotify, given self-important weekly Zooms (from their very private own front room) or, now, given a warts ’n’ all interview to the planet’s most famous celebrity interviewer.
> 
> Despite their rather grand designs to end global poverty, is it not a bit ironic that Harry should give his first interview to multi-millionaire diet company ambassador James Corden? A man literally being paid to eat less.
> 
> *Anyway. While Harry came across as pretty likeable in his open-top bus chat, we do not know what percentage of monies made by the couple post-Megxit have been distributed to the needy.*
> 
> Like her celebrity pals, Oprah preaches philanthropy and wellness to her millions of followers.
> 
> She also practises what she preaches, donating millions to charities across the world, including the ******* Foundation, the Born This Way Foundation and Women For Women International.
> 
> This latest televised chat wasn’t a Comic Relief endeavour. This was purely about self-advancement.
> 
> *I really don’t care that the self-satisfied trio, sitting within the sun-dappled grounds of a mutual pal’s sprawling mansion, are worth a combined £1.9billion and use private jets like you and I use the Northern Line.*
> 
> And you and I probably don’t harp on about climate change.
> 
> *No, what’s really, really galling is that the couple — despite Harry’s £40,000-a-year Eton education and Meg’s college degree — are so wilfully ignorant.*
> 
> Even the language of Sunday night’s Oprah spoiler was inflammatory.
> 
> Billed as “two teaser clips”, the Hollywood Reporter breathlessly gushed about a “first look at the 90-minute primetime special.”
> 
> Again, “primetime special” doesn’t exactly smack of two publicity- shy individuals desperate to stay out of the limelight.
> 
> *THEY PROVE THEMSELVES MASTERS OF CONTRADICTION*
> Like some sort of Love Island cliff-hanger, supreme operator Oprah teases at the end: “You’ve said some pretty shocking things here.”
> 
> *No one expects Meghan and Harry to sit there in coffee-stained pyjamas, like two Stigs of the dump, but the actress’s decision to wear a £3,300 Armani dress, and the late Princess Diana’s Cartier bracelet, jars.*
> 
> Because showbiz is inherently still quite sexist, nobody has yet bothered to find out where Harry’s nice suit was from. But it probably wasn’t Florence & Fred.
> 
> In their fashion choices, the couple again prove themselves masters of contradiction.
> 
> Earlier this week they updated their Archewell website, outlining their non-profit works.
> 
> Gone went a touching photo of toddler Harry sitting on the shoulders of his late mother. In its place, a photo of the big-hearted Sussexes handing out food to low-income families at a charity event in LA.
> 
> But in their tell-all chat with superstar Oprah — a classy Jeremy Kyle, if you will — Harry talks at length about Diana’s undeniably tragic death.
> 
> Losing a mum at any age is heart-breaking, and Harry has every right to be bitter and grieving still. Grief doesn’t have a timeframe.
> 
> But by claiming his greatest fear is “history repeating itself”, while describing the process of quitting the Royal Family over the past 12 months as “incredibly tough”, he has shown rhino-skin levels of insensitivity.
> 
> *No, mate. “Incredibly tough” is losing loved ones to Covid-19, losing your job or losing your home.
> 
> It is not moving to a £12million home in California, and making a reported £120million in your first year in the workplace.*
> 
> Year review!



I hope the IRS is paying attention!!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Money from PR, I presume. They have no integrity. Money buys press.





purseinsanity said:


> Well, gee, in these woke times, if we can judge forefathers of countries by their actions hundreds of years ago, why can't we judge her actions from two years ago?



Journalists like this one are like  many of Meghan’s fans, they are the true believers. They bought into the romantic tale we were told when Meghan and Harry got engaged. Later they loved the narrative that they gave it all up for love and embraced the victimhood story. Someone who is all in like that isn’t going to welcome any information that conflicts with set beliefs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Well, gee, in these woke times, if we can judge forefathers of countries by their actions hundreds of years ago, why can't we judge her actions from two years ago?



Isn’t this happening in NY with the current gov?
Isn’t this what happened with HarveyW? Cosby? Ad nauseam?
Why, other than $$$,  does VF print this rubbish?  It makes their ‘reporter’ look really dumb.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a Poll in The Sun about attending Oprah's interview.


----------



## Lodpah

Pregnant Meghan Markle ‘hissed’ at staffer in 2018, left her in ‘tears’: report
					

“I was there at the time and witnessed Meghan turn an ‘hiss’ at a member of her entourage, clearly incandescent with rage about something, and demand to leave,” recalled Reb…




					www.google.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Pregnant Meghan Markle ‘hissed’ at staffer in 2018, left her in ‘tears’: report
> 
> 
> “I was there at the time and witnessed Meghan turn an ‘hiss’ at a member of her entourage, clearly incandescent with rage about something, and demand to leave,” recalled Reb…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Further proof she's a snake and has a forked tongue.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

purseinsanity said:


> I hope the IRS is paying attention!!


Read earlier that they are receiving NO funds or donation to charity for the OW interview/grievance airing. This cannot be true as they do nothing for free.  Perhaps it is a delayed payout for tax avoidance. I do not have the knowledge of the various means of hiding funds but boy oh boy cannot wait to hear the nefarious choices they make.  Guess they would have us believe this prime time show is only being done because they are good folks (just a little richer and more important than everyone) who have been done wrong. And they want us to understand.  Oh we understand all right.


----------



## purseinsanity

Oh, for Pete's sake!  From PopSugar (so no one gives them unnecessary clicks):

*When Will the British Press Finally Leave Meghan Markle Alone?*


March 4, 2021by MONICA SISAVAT
178 Shares









Image Source: Getty / Pool

The British press just doesn't know when to quit, huh? Despite the fact that Meghan Markle is no longer a working royal, doesn't live in the UK anymore, and recently won her privacy lawsuit against Associated Newspapers, the character assassination against her continues. Ahead of her anticipated sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey, the tabloids are once again trying to dim Meghan's sparkle by smearing her name, this time with bullying allegations. On Feb. 3, the UK's *The Times* published an article outlining claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied several staff members during her time at Kensington Palace in 2018. According to a former palace adviser, Meghan reportedly "drove two personal assistants out of the household and undermined the confidence of a third staff member."

The following day, Meghan addressed the allegations through a statement from her spokesperson. "Let's just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation . . . It's no coincidence that distorted several-year-old accusations aimed at undermining The Duchess are being briefed to the British media shortly before she and The Duke are due to speak openly and honestly about their experience of recent years." In a separate statement to *People*, her spokesperson said that Meghan "is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma." However, she remains committed to "her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good." Per usual, Buckingham Palace didn't do anything to refute the claims. Instead, they released a statement of their own, saying that they are looking into the allegations. "Accordingly our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article. Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned," it said. "The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace." Coincidentally, that same day, CBS released another clip of Meghan and Prince Harry's forthcoming interview with Oprah, in which the duchess states that "there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us," which seems right in line with how they're handling this situation.

Of course, the timing of the allegations doesn't surprise me. Every time Meghan does anything — in her personal life or on the public stage — the British press circulates the same tired rumors about her. One day it's that she's feuding with Kate Middleton and the next is that she's competing with Queen Elizabeth II. Each rumor somehow gets more ridiculous than the last and each comment is more disgusting and vile than the previous. But has the British media really learned nothing at all?

The world witnessed first hand how the media tore Princess Diana apart following her divorce from Prince Charles in 1996 and how that ultimately led to her death a year later. Harry recently spoke about it too in a sneak peek of his interview with Oprah, saying one of his biggest concerns was "history repeating itself," seemingly referencing the intense public pressure Diana dealt with as a royal. He _also_ touched on it during his appearance on *The Late Late Show* as he explained his and Meghan's decision to step back as senior royals. "It was a really difficult environment, as I think a lot of people saw. We all know what the British press can be like, and it was destroying my mental health. I was like 'this is toxic', so I did what any husband and what any father would do. I thought, 'I need to get my family out of here,'" he said.

Meghan herself has even publicly spoken out about how she's struggled with the excessive scrutinyfrom the press. "Not many people have asked if I'm OK," Meghan admitted to ITV's Tom Bradby in 2019. "It's a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes." Here you have both Harry and Meghan telling the world how the unfair treatment from the British press is literally affecting their mental health, and yet they still refuse to back down.

Meghan has already stepped down as a royal and she's back in the US — what more is it going to take for the tabloids to leave her alone? Why must they continue to crucify her time and time again? Can they really just not stand the fact that Harry married a biracial woman? Or, is it the fact that Meghan continues to stand up for herself and refuses to conform to antiquated palace politics? Perhaps it's both. Regardless, nothing can justify the horrifying amount of abuse and harassment Meghan has been — and continues to be put — through. It's time to leave Meghan Markle alone.

*How about they'll leave her alone when she leaves herself alone?  ie, stop talking about yourself and go be private!

  *


----------



## purseinsanity

^ Sorry for such a vomit inducing giant picture of her.

Slightly off topic, but my work's website features a giant picture of a woman who at first glance looks like Meg.  It irritates me EVERY.SINGLE.MORNING because my first thought is always, "WTF are they showing MM on here?!!?", even though I know it's not.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Pregnant Meghan Markle ‘hissed’ at staffer in 2018, left her in ‘tears’: report
> 
> 
> “I was there at the time and witnessed Meghan turn an ‘hiss’ at a member of her entourage, clearly incandescent with rage about something, and demand to leave,” recalled Reb…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


From the article:* "It was very hot and humid in there so perhaps it wasn’t the best environment for a pregnant woman,” one witness told the Mirror at the time.*
What a BS excuse. Why does she deserve to be treated with kid gloves after misbehaving, while the rest of us know how to behave properly during that delicate condition, no matter the weather or whatever else is thrown at us.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> ^ Sorry for such a vomit inducing giant picture of her.
> 
> Slightly off topic, but my work's website features a giant picture of a woman who at first glance looks like Meg.  It irritates me EVERY.SINGLE.MORNING because my first thought is always, "WTF are they showing MM on here?!!?", even though I know it's not.



Honestly, she is gorgeous. But that's the only reason they even care... I really don't believe they'd be putting her on magazine covers constantly, recycling endless photos, etc if she were unattractive. No offense to those ladies but Fergie and other members of the royal family hardly ever ate this many news cycles.


----------



## lalame

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Read earlier that they are receiving NO funds or donation to charity for the OW interview/grievance airing. This cannot be true as they do nothing for free.  Perhaps it is a delayed payout for tax avoidance. I do not have the knowledge of the various means of hiding funds but boy oh boy cannot wait to hear the nefarious choices they make.  Guess they would have us believe this prime time show is only being done because they are good folks (just a little richer and more important than everyone) who have been done wrong. And they want us to understand.  Oh we understand all right.



I'm sure they're getting paid for the interview in some way... why would the network put it on if no money was to be made? And I somehow doubt Oprah and M+H are doing it without some compensation. Nevertheless, PR opportunities are worth their weight in gold for their brand, which bring them business at the end of the day... companies pay serious dollar for opportunities like this.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> From Quora (I stumbled upon it trying to figure out what a yacht girl is LOL):
> "Savoy Bancroft
> , Attended University of Michigan and earned masters degree in
> Answered February 1, 2021
> 
> A yacht girl is a prostitute………they service rich men on their yachts when they have parties. I live in the states and knew of her nasty past….yacht girl, porn actress long before anyone even heard about her and Suits. *She was on Epstein’s yacht at the same time as Prince Andrew and knew him before she knew Harry. *And if anyone wants proof do your research……I am not Google……do your own home work if you have any smarts you will find the proof."
> 
> My oh my.


I don’t know, I’m inclined to be disbelieve a prostitution rumour because it’s such a well-worn sexist trope about how women become either prominent themselves or the wives of the prominent  is so common especially in anon posts on forums: 
“She must have slept her way to the top” -
even if the top in this case is just meeting a royal  and him fancying you which isn’t really an achievement just chance. 
To be clear, I do think she engineered the meeting but that’s different  from being a prostitute who trades favours for prominence.

 My problem is I think the idea that the main way a woman can manipulate and manoeuvre is through sex, especially paid sex work, is inherently misogynistic.


I also think it doesn’t fit her MO - she’s an Uber-privileged LA girl with daddy’s money, elite university connections  and a  myth of being socially engaged and progressive about her. She’s never needed to do anything as opportunities just get given her on a plate despite her clear lack of talent and credentials.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Oprah. In yesterday’s  preview, Oprah did not look convinced of MM’s claims. Not at all. The body language seemed skeptical.



I sensed that too, glad I'm not the only one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Those British papers really cannot tolerate that Prince Harry loves a black woman", author Roxane Gay tweeted.
> 
> Supporters rally behind Meghan Markle, call out racist attacks ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> Yeah, this is the problem here (both the headline and the quote). What is it that makes apparently smart, accomplished people completely shut off their brains as soon as Meghan is involved?


I think @bagmania got it right that it’s a problem with our social media politics and lack of reportage at large.

I would also say it fits a number of popular narratives and stereotypes:
1. It’s a good way of showing your racial progressiveness without having to express a view about class or wider political issues which would, of course, be divisive.
2. Couple with that The British  royal family seem like a soap opera for the rest of the world so it seems low stakes. 
3. It fits with the stereotype that  the British are duplicitous, reactionary and dated society. Thus we still cling to our racism of yesteryear but we are too naturally false to even say it outright. 
4. Honestly, it simply makes People feel better about themselves and that they must be progressive and self-aware compared to these awful two-faced racist brits


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Mom of the Year!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's mother turns down interview publicity
> 
> 
> Carole Middleton has interviewed with Good Housekeeping to share an insight into her business Party Pieces and her family life which features on the cover of the magazine's April issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Mom of the Year!
> 
> 
> 
> *Kate Middleton's mother turns down interview publicity*
> Katie Feehan
> Kate Middleton's mother Carole has asked the publishers of Good Housekeeping magazine not to promote a cover interview with her over fears it will look 'insensitive' while Prince Philip is battling ill-health in hospital.
> 
> Carole Middleton, who runs party supply company Party Pieces, interviewed with the magazine in January but has reportedly asked its publishers not to promote it as Prince Philip, 99, is still in hospital.
> 
> The news comes ahead of a 'tell-all' interview with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Oprah Winfrey which is set to air in the UK on Monday night, despite criticism of its timing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's mother Carole turned down publicity for  an interview in Good Housekeeping magazine because she did not want to be 'insensitive' while Prince Philip, 99, was in hospital
> 
> A source told the Sun: 'Carole is incredibly proud of her company and all the hard work that goes into it.
> 
> 'But whilst backing the business, she didn't want to turn any news into a media circus because she is so respectful and sensitive to Catherine, and the royal family.
> 
> 'She always gets William's go-ahead before any interview like this, and he is incredibly supportive.
> 
> 'But the more the PR machine rolled out in Los Angeles with Meghan and Harry, the more sensitive Carole became.
> 
> 'She decided she didn't want to do any PR for the interview - even if it cost her thousands in potential lost marketing.'
> 
> In the interview, which features in the April issue and is out now, Carole shares insights into her company Party Pieces as well as her family life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respectful: Carole Middleton, pictured on the cover of Good Housekeeping, discusses her business and family life in the interview which features in the April issue and is out now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Spring clean your style like Carole in a floral dress by Wyse London*
> You'll never go too far wrong with florals, but they're particularly appropriate at this time of year as we head into spring.
> So with that in mind, if you're keen to update your wardrobe for the new season then Carole Middleton's printed number might just do the trick.
> The Duchess of Cambridge's mother is modelling the 'Sophie' dress by Wyse London here, a brand that can count UK celebrities Amanda Holden, Alex Jones and Holly Willoughby as fans. We love the ditsy floral design, high neckline and puffy sleeves on this midi dress. The frill hem is a nice touch too.
> It's available for pre-order now (click right) and needs only a pair of white sneakers to look effortlessly fresh.
> Or pick florals with the help of our edit below instead.
> * PRICES MAY NOT BE AS ADVERTISED
> ...NOW GET ONE LIKE IT FOR LESS
> 
> 
> 
> She appears on the cover of the magazine wearing a £375 Seventies-inspired floral print dress from Wyse London, befitting the arrival of spring.


Class.


----------



## Sharont2305

poopsie said:


> is that even possible------- To skip Charles and go straight to Will


Only if Charles became ill I believe, with something that makes him not fit to rule.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-princess said:


> They are more concerned about Meghan being a bully than they are about Prince Andrew being besties with Jeffrey Epstein and the many report of him supporting the trafficking/drugging of underage girls? GTFOH



I mean, when the ONLY comparison you can draw for MM to come out (somewhat, relatively) on top of from the RBF is a *pedophile*....that should say enough shouldn't it?


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I believe Charles could abdicate, but he may not want to. I see Charles more like an emeritus king. He would still be a king, but would have more time to do what he really likes without the pressure of the crown. Hopefully, QE will stay around for several more years, she is particularly needed to deal with this crisis.


He can't abdicate, he's not king yet. He can renounce his place in succession. I don't think he will though, it's what he was born to do, and duty comes first. 
Harry needs to renounce his place too, but again, he won't. It needs to be taken away from him and alternative plans need to be made should Charles an William die before George becomes 18. We don't want Harry in charge thank you very much.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Popsugar “Per usual, Buckingham Palace didn't do anything to refute the claims. Instead, they released a statement of their own, saying that they are looking into the allegations. "Accordingly our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article. Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned," it said. "The Royal Household has had a Dignity at Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace."

last time I checked, it would be extremely unethical for any workplace to make a preemptive statement of denial on a misconduct claim before it had been investigated. 

People really seem to have no idea how long these cases take.


----------



## papertiger

gelbergirl said:


> I’m disgusted with these two.
> Someone please explain to me, what is her endgame?
> what does she actually want



Everything


----------



## byzina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So they don't deny it happened, they just take issue that it came out? Find the mistake.



Wow. From Cinderella to an Ugly Sister just in three years.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> So every one is bad but them?



Classic narc(s) mentality.

In that Oz vid that @QueenofWrapDress posted ('Australia's Sky News host Andrew Bolt: "Harry and Meghan made an art form of presenting themselves as victims.' Clare Rowe ('psychologist') does the whole professional disclaimer thing but says they may be viewed as displaying traits blah "...young, self-entitled, self-obsessed couple"  whilst others view them as "fearless" etc but you really can't get better examples of narcs than these two. I don't think this 'expert' looked at these 2 for longer than the 5 mins she had to prepare for that interview.  Notice she called them "young" - even when conjecturing what their harsh critics would believe, so that part of the emerald-greenwash worked on her. I would never call them young - coz they're not. 

Rowe was also badly informed about what a monarchy is (she thought H&M abdicated (er no, coz they weren't King and Queen) and that members of the BRF are always abdicating - like, wha?). I do think H&M think they were King and Queen and have abdicated though, they have no clue either, H seems to have no clue we (British people) are glad this useless appendage of the Public Purse has 'slung his hook' along with his trophy wife.


----------



## papertiger

scarlet555 said:


> I thought *Edward encouraged Hitlers troops to bomb England*, the nazi historians had it all in writing proof and asked for asylum and protection from England in exchange for the information, then years later or what not somehow the info was leaked so the BRF had to release the info themselves of sorts?  No links from me today I am typing with two thumbs.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> He can't abdicate, he's not king yet. He can renounce his place in succession. I don't think he will though, it's what he was born to do, and duty comes first.
> Harry needs to renounce his place too, but again, he won't. It needs to be taken away from him and alternative plans need to be made should Charles an William die before George becomes 18. *We don't want Harry in charge thank you very much.*


Which would actually mean Meg would be in charge!


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Which would actually mean Meg would be in charge!


Yep! Just like she wanted all along!


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


>


Yeah all the more reason that visually likening themselves to Edward (pale suits, terrible posture and unkempt hair) and Wallis (everything) is a bizarre decision.
Still I suppose they got to “American wife, controversial and cast out” and thought that was enough. Can’t be expected to know the history can they?


----------



## chicinthecity777

This thread moves too fast and I haven't caught up yet but here is some good news!

The video comment is brilliant! A souce said "corgis are incredibly loyal", the Queen "got on better with corgis than with some people", and most recently the source said "corgis don't give interviews"!   

*DOG SAVE THE QUEEN Queen gets two new corgi puppies after last one died to help her through royal crisis with Meghan*









						Queen gets two new corgi puppies to help her through royal crisis with Meghan
					

THE Queen is being helped through the royal crisis by some new additions to her household — two adorable corgi puppies. The dogs have cheered her up while Prince Philip, 99, is in hospital — and as…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## gelbergirl

chicinthecity777 said:


> This thread moves too fast and I haven't caught up yet but here is some good news!
> 
> The video comment is brilliant! A souce said "corgis are incredibly loyal", the Queen "got on better with corgis than some people", and most recently the source said "corgis don't give interviews"!
> 
> *DOG SAVE THE QUEEN Queen gets two new corgi puppies after last one died to help her through royal crisis with Meghan*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen gets two new corgi puppies to help her through royal crisis with Meghan
> 
> 
> THE Queen is being helped through the royal crisis by some new additions to her household — two adorable corgi puppies. The dogs have cheered her up while Prince Philip, 99, is in hospital — and as…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Woo Hoo!  I love royal corgis!
She needs this, and once she passes, one of her kennel managers will surely take on the dogs (or a dedicated rescue group!
Team Monarch


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

We didn't like Wallis. We didn't like Fergie. We don't like Prince Andrew. We don't like Prince Harry, but sure we are racists! Yeah right! We see through a bad apple no matter what race!


----------



## papertiger

Maybe we already had it. Apologies for bringing you the Daily Fail:

*"Did courtiers bury bullying claims to PROTECT Meghan? Duchess says she is the victim of a cruel Palace conspiracy - but, asks RICHARD KAY, could the truth be far more tantalising?*

*Meghan Markle is the subject of bullying complaints from her former royal aides, in leaked email to the Times*
*Jason Knauf alleges Duchess of Sussex forced two assistants out of jobs amid claims of 'emotional cruelty'*
*Buckingham Palace is launching an unprecedented investigation into the allegations, deepening the crisis*
*Last night, a new promotion video for Harry and Meghan's Oprah Winfrey talk was posted on social media*
*In the video, Meghan alleges 'The Firm'  is playing 'active role in perpetuating falsehoods' about her and Harry*
By RICHARD KAY FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:05, 4 March 2021 | UPDATED: 23:28, 4 March 2021

His grand oak-panelled office with its conference table and comfy sofas in the heart of Whitehall, four miles from Kensington Palace, is too far away for Simon Case to hear the cries of anguish emanating from the royal bunker where he used to work.
The irony that he left the back-stabbing, hot-tempered intrigue of palace politics for the comparative tranquillity of Downing Street when he took the job as Britain's top civil servant is not lost on the £200,000-a-year, risk-averse Cabinet Secretary.
But the chaos that has enveloped the royal world with incendiary claims that the Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry bullied staff – and that he was privy to them as a senior courtier – has plunged the mandarin into the deepest crisis to hit the monarchy for a generation.
At its heart the turmoil engulfing the royals has occurred not because of what the bespectacled Dr Case did – but because of what, it is alleged, didn't happen after the bullying claims reached his desk.








Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle are set to feature in a tell all interview with American chat show host Oprah Winfrey on Sunday...*"*


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> I sensed that too, glad I'm not the only one.


Oprah's been around the block. Didn't she have a lot of problems with grifter friends and relatives when she herself became rich? She knows one when she sees one. But as M's "truth" suits () Oprah's current agenda, she obviously has no problem going ahead with this or she'd rethink. Hospitalised 99-year old grandfathers and bully girl and her Royal wing man's other numerous victims be damned.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

More Sky News: 
*Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview is ‘extraordinarily arrogant’ and 'self-wallowing narcissism'*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yesterday I quickly scanned the comments section under the Huffpost article posted on FB...the stans don't even say they don't believe the allegations. They openly admit that they don't care. WTF???


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yesterday I quickly scanned the comments section under the Huffpost article posted on FB...the stans don't even say they don't believe the allegations. They openly admit that they don't care. WTF???


This is the problem with identity "politics". Nothing could ever get in the way of ones' narrative once they took a side. Truth doesn't matter to them.


----------



## LibbyRuth

lalame said:


> I'm sure they're getting paid for the interview in some way... why would the network put it on if no money was to be made? And I somehow doubt Oprah and M+H are doing it without some compensation. Nevertheless, PR opportunities are worth their weight in gold for their brand, which bring them business at the end of the day... companies pay serious dollar for opportunities like this.


The statement is that Harry and Meghan are not getting payment, right?  So that takes Oprah and CBS out of the equation - they are getting plenty of money.  Oprah has already done one social media post promoting products for Meghan's tea company.  She could have agreed to more of those (which are worth A LOT for access to Oprah's followers and influence) as a form of payment and it would allow H&M to claim they were not paid.


----------



## Sharont2305

Good news. The Duke of Edinburgh has been moved back to King Edward VII hospital. Looks like he's doing well, fingers crossed


----------



## Jktgal

chicinthecity777 said:


> We didn't like Wallis. We didn't like Fergie. We don't like Prince Andrew. We don't like Prince Harry, but sure we are racists! Yeah right! We see through a bad apple no matter what race!



I also don't like the monarchy. No one should be privy to the wealth that they have by birth, and even more so by marriage. When NHS nurses get a measly 3.5 pounds/WEEK raise, royalty are sitting on a vault of jewels they wear to dinner once in a while.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is the problem with identity "politics". Nothing could ever get in the way of ones' narrative once they took a side. Truth doesn't matter to them.



This is the problem with this ignorant, jump-guessing version of identity politics. True equality is when we give _all _people the benefit of the doubt that he/she behaved well _or_ ill and can weigh-up the evidence.


----------



## floatinglili

Douglas Murray weighs in...









						How Meghan won
					

In their dream world, the Sussexes remain blissfully unaware of their fall from grace




					unherd.com
				




Excerpt:
Over the past month, a new English dialect has mysteriously sprung into existence: let us call it “_Sussex-ese_”. It was first spotted in the British press in February, when its creator — who shall remain unnamed for now — wrote: “We all lose when misinformation sells more than truth, when moral exploitation sells more than decency, and when companies create their business model to profit from people’s pain. But, for today, with this comprehensive win on both privacy and copyright, we have all won.”

Typified by its remarkable tendency to sound both sincere _and_ insincere simultaneously, this _Sussex-ese_appeared again in a separate news story this week. “[We are] saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma,” the author wrote. “She is determined to continue her work building compassion around the world and will keep striving to set an example for doing what is right and doing what is good.”

No doubt you will have guessed by now how _Sussex-ese_ was given its name. Both of the above statements come from the House of Sussex, specifically from the spokesperson for the Duchess of Sussex and/or the Duchess herself. And I suspect that they won’t be the last — by all accounts, _Sussex-ese_ is here to stay.

As tempting as it may be, it is not enough to dismiss the House of Sussex’s latest statements as bland, sub-***** pabulum. They almost always have a certain twist of their own; a style which suggests that Harry and, more importantly, Meghan are not only surprised, but almost amazed that anybody might think ill of them. Excerpts from the couple’s upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey only confirm this.

History is, of course, rife with examples of princes and their spouses expressing their distaste with the _lèse-majesté_ of their critics. But what’s different about _Sussex-ese_ is that it is a creation born not from the Duke’s blue blood, so much as the couple’s unquestionably golden intentions. And as a result, a very modern form of deference is demanded: do not criticise me, for I am doing much good in the world.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> I remember when this appeared pages and pages ago on the Thread and at the time I thought, "no way, she can't be that nasty", but now don't doubt it.  The timing is that following the sorority hazing incident she left Northwestern (not clear if it was by choice or not) and applied for an Internship with the State Department at the Embassy in Argentina, but she failed the Qualifying Exam for the position. So Daddy stepped in and strong armed his brother, who talked to the Ambassador, and got her the job. This was at the end of her Sophomore year at Northwestern. (There are multiple articles on line about her Uncle being really angry at not being invited to the wedding "after all I did for her!) As is typical with her, things get a little murky and can't verify the facts of this, but there were rumors she had an affair with a married serviceman assigned to the Embassy Staff  while she was in Buenos Aires and was sent on her way. She graduated from Northwestern but it's unclear if she attended classes on campus there again or not. One article claimed that Daddy's Lottery winnings helped pay for the damage the women at Northwestern had suffered and for sealing the transcripts.  When I was trying to refresh my memory today I Googled and found that Scobie had included the story of the Internship in his book. Spun it as she was devastated at not passing the Examination to get an Internship, but being Wonder Woman she persevered and emerged better than ever ( I am paraphrasing, I will not gush about her as he does!)
> 
> From the Evanston  Illinois newspaper at the time of the wedding:
> Northwestern University is eager to capitalize on the attention brought by the royal wedding of an alum, hosting historians discussing the evolution of England's monarchy and publishing remembrances of Princess Diana's visit more than two decades ago. *But the local chapter of Meghan Markle's sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, voted against holding any celebration to mark the May 19 ceremony and the group's national office declined interview requests, the Evanston Review reported.
> The Evanston chapter of the sorority voted against holding any celebration to mark the occasion, citing Markle's "privacy," and its national offices said it will not be giving interviews on the subject.*
> 
> One of those times when silence actually speaks volumes? Checked the sorority's history page and she is not listed as a Notable Alumnae.


Thanks for the research you did on this, @csshopper! 

Like you said, the silence from NU speaks volumes. Every now and then I come across some little news bit where there is a mention of Diana's visit to the school and how she wore a purple gown (NU's colors) and it is obvious there are still nice memories (the Princess came to our school/town!). 

To ignore the fact that a student of the same school was marrying the son (Prince) of the the very same "star" makes no sense until you dig deep.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Well, gee, in these woke times, if we can judge forefathers of countries by their actions hundreds of years ago, why can't we judge her actions from two years ago?





CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t this happening in NY with the current gov?
> Isn’t this what happened with HarveyW? Cosby? Ad nauseam?
> Why, other than $$$,  does VF print this rubbish?  It makes their ‘reporter’ look really dumb.



Certain people are always protected, sometimes even after the dam breaks, to protect narratives and/or idols. This is commonly known as effing hypocrites circling the wagons to protect their sacred cows. And when you point out this hypocrisy, the knives come out for YOU. And if protected idols do pass the point of no return, media coverage mysteriously stops. If non-protected people drop a gum wrapper they get branded as Public Enemy #1. I predict Vanity Fair will eventually get enough blowback that their royal butt kissing will taper off.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

lalame said:


> I'm sure they're getting paid for the interview in some way... why would the network put it on if no money was to be made? And I somehow doubt Oprah and M+H are doing it without some compensation. Nevertheless, PR opportunities are worth their weight in gold for their brand, which bring them business at the end of the day... companies pay serious dollar for opportunities like this.


I did not explain myself clearly.  It is H and M who purportedly are not being paid in any manner.   Every other entity will make a fortune throughout the world. This is highly suspect. I repeat — H and M  get money or goods or profit from EVERYTHING with which they are involved.


----------



## Chanbal

Fourth promo video has been released.  Why does she keep the duchess title given by an institution that she despises? Is Oprah asking this question?

*CBS releases new clip from bombshell interview: Meghan claims she was stopped by Palace aides from talking to Oprah 'personally' when host tried to set up interview with her before her wedding and says that she's now 'ready to talk'*
The Duchess of Sussex has claimed royal aides blocked her from having a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey in the months leading up to her wedding to Prince Harry, in the latest preview clip released by CBS two days before the full bombshell interview comes out.

Oprah revealed she called Meghan in February or March 2018 - two or three months before the royal wedding at Windsor Castle in May that year - to ask for an interview, but she declined because it was not 'the right time'.

The Duchess said she remembered this talk with the US chat show queen 'very well' and 'wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally' because there had to be other people in the same room.

Asked why she was now speaking out, Meghan gave a long pause and seemed to hesitate, before saying: 'Well, so many things. That we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then.'

The 39-year-old Duchess added: 'That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'

After playing the latest clip today, CBS presenter Gayle King, who is good friends with Oprah, told the programme: 'Listen to those words. The right and the privilege to be able to speak. I heard Oprah say what was her intention in doing this interview? To give them the opportunity to say in their own words. Because a big question is how did they leave, why did they leave, what happened, did something happen, what is it all about?

'To give them the opportunity in their own words to speak their own truth about what went into their decision. I think by the time the interview is over, people will have a very clear understanding about what went into their thought process. I believe that that will be the case. And then people can make up their own minds.

*Full transcript for fourth Oprah preview video clip *

Oprah: 'So I just want to say that I called you either February or March 2018 before the wedding, asking would you please give me an interview, and you said I'm sorry, it's not the right time, and finally we get to sit down and have this conversation.'
Meghan: 'Well, I remember that conversation very well. I wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally, right? There had to be people from the… sitting there, everything was…
Oprah: 'There were other people in the room when I was having that conversation.'
Meghan: 'Yeah, even on that call.'
Oprah: 'You turned me down nicely and said, perhaps there will be another time when there's the right time. What is right about this time?'
Meghan: 'Um [long pause]. Well, so many things. Um, that we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then. That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
Oprah: 'And to say it for yourself.'
Meghan: 'Yeah. To say it for yourself.'
Oprah: 'And not to have to consult with anybody at this point.'
Meghan: 'Yeah, to be able to just make a choice on your own and be able to speak for yourself.'









						Meghan claims she was 'stopped by Palace aides' from talking to Oprah
					

The Duchess of Sussex said she was not allowed to have a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey two months before her wedding.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Yanca

With the political climate going on right now, the cancel culture, the mob police, the wokes of hollywood,  Meghan is more embolden then ever. It would have been a more interesting interview had it not been Oprah but somebody who is ojective and fair, but than they will not do the interview, for them, any critism , or fully legitimate questions but the one that does not fit their narritives or paint them rosy  is an attack against them.  The Ladies of the View, some Hollywood People are lining up behind her, and that is fine if that is what they so incline  to do and just want to give her support , but what  I think they want is something else, I think they want the total destruction or elimination of Monarchy, I mean if they can cancel Dr  Seuss, renamed Mr Potato Head and dropped the Mister in Mister Potato Head, the woke Mob and cancel culture mob will hail Meghan as a trailblazer.  Meghan  and her US  Staff and PR know this.
I think this is their last bullet, I think they lashed out that what they wanted was not given by the "firm" , sure they have Netflix and Spotify, but where is the actual proof that they indeed received the said amount. Did Netflix and spotify confirm the amount or just their PR people to drive more interest towards them?  the Monarchy has been around for centuries, it's so arrogant of her to think that She alone can bring it to its knees,  From what I can see, she does not want to follow the protocols, were unhappy with the restrictions, want to do things her own way and don't  want  listen to advice of the staff that has been doing it for years, those very staff were employed to protect the interest of the Monarchy and the Royals. She wanted to have the perks but none of the gritty stuff that came with it, now that she is out, she want the Monarchy to be cancelled , She is saying she is silenced ,that she can't talk to Oprah or other media  outlets when she as a Royal before consulting the firm - Is this not a Standard protocol for  any employment?  I am just a regular worker  but  there are handbooks and rules that I have to follow in my place of employment. I mean even posting something on social media like Facebook and IG can get you fired!!  But She wants to do what she likes, She wants to be called a Duchess, while not respecting the meaning, privilege, responsibility  and the burden of carryinvg those titles.  I guess some people are counting on that because they see BRF as an archaic insitituition , that this si a payback, but the Monarchy will endure ,I hope it does. I pray that it does and this is coming from a US citizen, a former immigrant and also a Minority and a woman of color.


----------



## jelliedfeels

An interesting article for history buffs
Mainly focused on the history of pageantry


----------



## lanasyogamama

That’s the bombshell?  Snooze.


----------



## Aimee3

There’s another item in the news about MM’s BBF from Northwestern.  Apparently the woman is defending MM on line.  What I find interesting is that MM was this woman’s maid of honor at her 2016 wedding, but no mention of her being even a guest at MM’s wedding?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Fourth promo video has been released.  Why does she keep the duchess title give by an institution that she despises? Is Oprah asking this question?
> 
> *CBS releases new clip from bombshell interview: Meghan claims she was stopped by Palace aides from talking to Oprah 'personally' when host tried to set up interview with her before her wedding and says that she's now 'ready to talk'*
> The Duchess of Sussex has claimed royal aides blocked her from having a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey in the months leading up to her wedding to Prince Harry, in the latest preview clip released by CBS two days before the full bombshell interview comes out.
> 
> Oprah revealed she called Meghan in February or March 2018 - two or three months before the royal wedding at Windsor Castle in May that year - to ask for an interview, but she declined because it was not 'the right time'.
> 
> The Duchess said she remembered this talk with the US chat show queen 'very well' and 'wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally' because there had to be other people in the same room.
> 
> Asked why she was now speaking out, Meghan gave a long pause and seemed to hesitate, before saying: 'Well, so many things. That we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then.'
> 
> The 39-year-old Duchess added: 'That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> 
> After playing the latest clip today, CBS presenter Gayle King, who is good friends with Oprah, told the programme: 'Listen to those words. The right and the privilege to be able to speak. I heard Oprah say what was her intention in doing this interview? To give them the opportunity to say in their own words. Because a big question is how did they leave, why did they leave, what happened, did something happen, what is it all about?
> 
> 'To give them the opportunity in their own words to speak their own truth about what went into their decision. I think by the time the interview is over, people will have a very clear understanding about what went into their thought process. I believe that that will be the case. And then people can make up their own minds.
> 
> *Full transcript for fourth Oprah preview video clip *
> 
> Oprah: 'So I just want to say that I called you either February or March 2018 before the wedding, asking would you please give me an interview, and you said I'm sorry, it's not the right time, and finally we get to sit down and have this conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Well, I remember that conversation very well. I wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally, right? There had to be people from the… sitting there, everything was…
> Oprah: 'There were other people in the room when I was having that conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, even on that call.'
> Oprah: 'You turned me down nicely and said, perhaps there will be another time when there's the right time. What is right about this time?'
> Meghan: 'Um [long pause]. Well, so many things. Um, that we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then. That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> Oprah: 'And to say it for yourself.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah. To say it for yourself.'
> Oprah: 'And not to have to consult with anybody at this point.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, to be able to just make a choice on your own and be able to speak for yourself.'


She failed to understand being part of the RF is not like being a celebrity! Doing TV interviews are generally considered to be quite tacky in the UK. Diana's TV interview didn't help her image. People thought she came across desperate, together with the heavy eyeliner puppy eye look was pathetic. Andrew's TV interview was just beyond a joke and it was considered to be a huge mistake here. What an idiot he was! So no, BP just don't do TV interviews and for good reason! Nothing says "tacky" more than airing your private dirty laundry in public!


----------



## Chanbal

After MM voiced all her 'kind' complains about the Firm,  was H still waiting for more loyalty and support from "across the pond"? This is puzzling! 

*EXCLUSIVE: 'What's done is done!' Meghan Markle says she would never postpone tell-all Oprah interview and claims the palace is using Prince Philip's health as an 'excuse to keep her muzzled' and the world can now see what she's had to endure*

*Meghan Markle** says would never ask to postpone Sunday's release of her tell-all interview with Oprah and claims the royal family is using Prince Philip's health as an excuse to keep her 'muzzled,' sources tell DailyMail.com. *

Mounting pressure has been put on Meghan, Harry and CBS to push back the much-anticipated interview special out of respect for Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, who is recovering from heart surgery. 

*'Prince Harry has no say on the matter. What's done is done. Meghan said now the whole world can see what she had to endure for months on end. No support whatsoever and now even across the pond, still no loyalty or support. '

'Meghan said she is beyond relieved and grateful that she can enjoy her pregnancy surrounded by love and support, unlike what she experienced behind the walls of the Palace.'*









						Meghan Markle would 'never' postpone the tell-all Oprah interview
					

A Hollywood insider with ties to the Sussexes tells DailyMail.com, 'Even if Meghan had the choice to postpone the Oprah special she said she wouldn't'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> After MM voiced all her 'kind' complains about the Firm,  was H still waiting for more loyalty and support from "across the pond"? This is puzzling!
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'What's done is done!' Meghan Markle says she would never postpone tell-all Oprah interview and claims the palace is using Prince Philip's health as an 'excuse to keep her muzzled' and the world can now see what she's had to endure*
> 
> *Meghan Markle** says would never ask to postpone Sunday's release of her tell-all interview with Oprah and claims the royal family is using Prince Philip's health as an excuse to keep her 'muzzled,' sources tell DailyMail.com. *
> 
> Mounting pressure has been put on Meghan, Harry and CBS to push back the much-anticipated interview special out of respect for Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, who is recovering from heart surgery.
> 
> *'Prince Harry has no say on the matter. What's done is done. Meghan said now the whole world can see what she had to endure for months on end. No support whatsoever and now even across the pond, still no loyalty or support. '
> 
> 'Meghan said she is beyond relieved and grateful that she can enjoy her pregnancy surrounded by love and support, unlike what she experienced behind the walls of the Palace.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'never' postpone the tell-all Oprah interview
> 
> 
> A Hollywood insider with ties to the Sussexes tells DailyMail.com, 'Even if Meghan had the choice to postpone the Oprah special she said she wouldn't'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Pure evil, she is a vile human being. Disgusting.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

There are truths everyone knows. One does not air dirty laundry in public and one does not discuss personal business or relationships in public.  

M missed that class.  She also missed a fact which is common knowledge. The British Royals do not discuss politics and do not give interviews unless they pertain to innocuous topics like gardens, architecture, children’s well-being, etc.  

She entered a marriage as an experienced and presumably worldly adult. Virginal white and veil aside, she knew the requirements and role.  She didn’t know she would lose her personal voice? She didn’t know her job was to support the Queen?

She married for love.   Sigh.  She made a Faustian bargain and now wants out.  Ok. You are out.  Now be quiet. Your voice is not original, or genuine or meaningful. You spread no sunshine. You offer no solace to the needy masses. You are noise. And destruction. Go away and take your spoiled ingrate with you.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> That’s the bombshell?  Snooze.


Yep.  I'm sure William and The Queen are hiding behind the couch as we speak.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> After MM voiced all her 'kind' complains about the Firm,  was H still waiting for more loyalty and support from "across the pond"? This is puzzling!
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'What's done is done!' Meghan Markle says she would never postpone tell-all Oprah interview and claims the palace is using Prince Philip's health as an 'excuse to keep her muzzled' and the world can now see what she's had to endure*
> 
> *Meghan Markle** says would never ask to postpone Sunday's release of her tell-all interview with Oprah and claims the royal family is using Prince Philip's health as an excuse to keep her 'muzzled,' sources tell DailyMail.com. *
> 
> Mounting pressure has been put on Meghan, Harry and CBS to push back the much-anticipated interview special out of respect for Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, who is recovering from heart surgery.
> 
> *'Prince Harry has no say on the matter. What's done is done. Meghan said now the whole world can see what she had to endure for months on end. No support whatsoever and now even across the pond, still no loyalty or support. '
> 
> 'Meghan said she is beyond relieved and grateful that she can enjoy her pregnancy surrounded by love and support, unlike what she experienced behind the walls of the Palace.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'never' postpone the tell-all Oprah interview
> 
> 
> A Hollywood insider with ties to the Sussexes tells DailyMail.com, 'Even if Meghan had the choice to postpone the Oprah special she said she wouldn't'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I doubt very much she has genuine support from anybody, apart from maybe Harry and Doria. Most of her supporters will fall under the following categories:

1. Identity politikers and race-baiters who just want to jump onto the bandwagon
2. Crazy fans on Twitter who are probably mentally unstable 
3. People who want to and will profit from her
4. People who have never met her but liked a good story and somehow decided they must love her


----------



## Chloe302225

When all else fails bring out Archie.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Meghan: 'Um [long pause]. Well, so many things. Um, that we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then. That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'



How earth shattering, what a revelation, what horrible abuse.  She wasn't allowed to do an interview with Oprah prior to the wedding for even more publicity.  Oh poor Meghan and Harry, living in splendor in California on tens of millions in Spotify and Netflix dollars, profiting by attacking his family for publicity and money. She couldn't keep the free designer clothes, do interviews at will with Oprah, tweet at will about current events, merch everything she ever wore and we're supposed to believe this added up to such horrific abuse. Her "voice" was silenced! Silenced, people!  She was silenced!


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Fourth promo video has been released.  Why does she keep the duchess title given by an institution that she despises? Is Oprah asking this question?
> 
> *CBS releases new clip from bombshell interview: Meghan claims she was stopped by Palace aides from talking to Oprah 'personally' when host tried to set up interview with her before her wedding and says that she's now 'ready to talk'*
> The Duchess of Sussex has claimed royal aides blocked her from having a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey in the months leading up to her wedding to Prince Harry, in the latest preview clip released by CBS two days before the full bombshell interview comes out.
> 
> Oprah revealed she called Meghan in February or March 2018 - two or three months before the royal wedding at Windsor Castle in May that year - to ask for an interview, but she declined because it was not 'the right time'.
> 
> The Duchess said she remembered this talk with the US chat show queen 'very well' and 'wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally' because there had to be other people in the same room.
> 
> Asked why she was now speaking out, Meghan gave a long pause and seemed to hesitate, before saying: 'Well, so many things. That we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then.'
> 
> The 39-year-old Duchess added: 'That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> 
> After playing the latest clip today, CBS presenter Gayle King, who is good friends with Oprah, told the programme: 'Listen to those words. The right and the privilege to be able to speak. I heard Oprah say what was her intention in doing this interview? To give them the opportunity to say in their own words. Because a big question is how did they leave, why did they leave, what happened, did something happen, what is it all about?
> 
> 'To give them the opportunity in their own words to speak their own truth about what went into their decision. I think by the time the interview is over, people will have a very clear understanding about what went into their thought process. I believe that that will be the case. And then people can make up their own minds.
> 
> *Full transcript for fourth Oprah preview video clip *
> 
> Oprah: 'So I just want to say that I called you either February or March 2018 before the wedding, asking would you please give me an interview, and you said I'm sorry, it's not the right time, and finally we get to sit down and have this conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Well, I remember that conversation very well. I wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally, right? There had to be people from the… sitting there, everything was…
> Oprah: 'There were other people in the room when I was having that conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, even on that call.'
> Oprah: 'You turned me down nicely and said, perhaps there will be another time when there's the right time. What is right about this time?'
> Meghan: 'Um [long pause]. Well, so many things. Um, that we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then. That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> Oprah: 'And to say it for yourself.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah. To say it for yourself.'
> Oprah: 'And not to have to consult with anybody at this point.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, to be able to just make a choice on your own and be able to speak for yourself.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claims she was 'stopped by Palace aides' from talking to Oprah
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was not allowed to have a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey two months before her wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



“I’ve been isolated and abused. The men in the gray suits have done me a grave injustice. No famine in Africa or pandemic in the entire world could ever compare: THEY WOULDN’T LET ME TALK TO OPRAH!!!!!”


----------



## kipp

Chloe302225 said:


> When all else fails bring out Archie.



Yep!  Quelle surprise!


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> *She failed to understand being part of the RF is not like being a celebrity!* Doing TV interviews are generally considered to be quite tacky in the UK. Diana's TV interview didn't help her image. People thought she came across desperate, together with the heavy eyeliner puppy eye look was pathetic. Andrew's TV interview was just beyond a joke and it was considered to be a huge mistake here. What an idiot he was! So no, BP just don't do TV interviews and for good reason! Nothing says "tacky" more than airing your private dirty laundry in public!


MM shows a tremendous lack of understanding and culture, apart of being 100% self-centered. She is totally oblivious to Prince Philip's health and QE's pain. It is very possible that MM&H's irresponsible actions have contributed to PP's health situation. MM is apparently accusing the palace of using Prince Philip's health to keep her muzzled as if her voice is more important than the suffering of others.  Was does she have to say that is so important in a time like this? All this situation is shocking to say the least.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Honestly, she is gorgeous. But that's the only reason they even care... I really don't believe they'd be putting her on magazine covers constantly, recycling endless photos, etc if she were unattractive. No offense to those ladies but Fergie and other members of the royal family hardly ever ate this many news cycles.



Had the internet and 24-hour news cycle existed back in Diana's and Fergie's day, you better believe they would have been obsessed over every bit as much, maybe more, whether the news was good or bad. The weekly tabloids back then brutalized and mocked Fergie about her weight all the time. It was as if the tabloids competed over which one could print the most unflattering photos of her. They did that to Diana and every Hollywood actress as well, no matter how pretty they normally were. There was no such word as fat-shaming back then and none of the press felt the least bit bad about it.


----------



## youngster

Chloe302225 said:


> When all else fails bring out Archie.




This friend of Meghan's should have been more careful.  Posting a pic of little Archie without paying Harry and Meghan seven figures for the rights?  I fear a lawsuit is heading her way.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interview from another time. Remember, this is a man born to be king, not the spare.



this is of course when they are older but to me, he looks weak and she looks hard - kind fits the narrative about them


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> After MM voiced all her 'kind' complains about the Firm,  was H still waiting for more loyalty and support from "across the pond"? This is puzzling!
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'What's done is done!' Meghan Markle says she would never postpone tell-all Oprah interview and claims the palace is using Prince Philip's health as an 'excuse to keep her muzzled' and the world can now see what she's had to endure*
> 
> *Meghan Markle** says would never ask to postpone Sunday's release of her tell-all interview with Oprah and claims the royal family is using Prince Philip's health as an excuse to keep her 'muzzled,' sources tell DailyMail.com. *
> 
> Mounting pressure has been put on Meghan, Harry and CBS to push back the much-anticipated interview special out of respect for Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, who is recovering from heart surgery.
> 
> *'Prince Harry has no say on the matter. What's done is done. Meghan said now the whole world can see what she had to endure for months on end. No support whatsoever and now even across the pond, still no loyalty or support. '
> 
> 'Meghan said she is beyond relieved and grateful that she can enjoy her pregnancy surrounded by love and support, unlike what she experienced behind the walls of the Palace.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'never' postpone the tell-all Oprah interview
> 
> 
> A Hollywood insider with ties to the Sussexes tells DailyMail.com, 'Even if Meghan had the choice to postpone the Oprah special she said she wouldn't'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Using Prince Philip as an excuse to muzzle her—how evil and nasty can she get?  Appalling.  There are no words.


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> This friend of Meghan's should have been more careful.  Posting a pic of little Archie without paying Harry and Meghan seven figures for the rights?  I fear a lawsuit is heading her way.



He's Me-gain's mini-me. Hair doesn't look as red as what they showed on their Christmas card.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> This friend of Meghan's should have been more careful.  Posting a pic of little Archie without paying Harry and Meghan seven figures for the rights?  I fear a lawsuit is heading her way.


am I understanding correctly?  her name is Royal Addicted, she's 25 and lives in Italy?


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Using Prince Philip as an excuse to muzzle her—how evil and nasty can she get?  Appalling.  There are no words.


"endure"?
of course, we don't actually know if these are her words


----------



## lanasyogamama

A fan account seems like a pretty lame way to finally reveal the Arche.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> am I understanding correctly?  her name is Royal Addicted, she's 25 and lives in Italy?


Its a Royal fan site. She's reposted from Meghan's friends insta which is @silvertreedirector


----------



## youngster

Has anyone noticed that, while Meghan's friends have occasionally come to her defense and posted supportive comments, all of Harry's close, lifelong friends have gone absolutely silent?


----------



## justwatchin

kipp said:


> Yep!  Quelle surprise!


And she is holding on to her moon bump


----------



## lulilu

marietouchet said:


> This friend of Meghan's should have been more careful.  Posting a pic of little Archie without paying Harry and Meghan seven figures for the rights?  I fear a lawsuit is heading her way.



This doesn't look like other photos of Archie.  How do we know they aren't photos of this woman's children?


----------



## lulilu

I really despise the visceral feelings of hate that photos of her evoke in me.  And frustration that she is likely going to get away with all these awful antics.  I don't believe in karma either.


----------



## csshopper

Yanca said:


> With the political climate going on right now, the cancel culture, the mob police, the wokes of hollywood,  Meghan is more embolden then ever. It would have been a more interesting interview had it not been Oprah but somebody who is ojective and fair, but than they will not do the interview, for them, any critism , or fully legitimate questions but the one that does not fit their narritives or paint them rosy  is an attack against them.  The Ladies of the View, some Hollywood People are lining up behind her, and that is fine if that is what they so incline  to do and just want to give her support , but what  I think they want is something else, I think they want the total destruction or elimination of Monarchy, I mean if they can cancel Dr  Seuss, renamed Mr Potato Head and dropped the Mister in Mister Potato Head, the woke Mob and cancel culture mob will hail Meghan as a trailblazer.  Meghan  and her US  Staff and PR know this.
> I think this is their last bullet, I think they lashed out that what they wanted was not given by the "firm" , sure they have Netflix and Spotify, but where is the actual proof that they indeed received the said amount. Did Netflix and spotify confirm the amount or just their PR people to drive more interest towards them?  the Monarchy has been around for centuries, it's so arrogant of her to think that She alone can bring it to its knees,  From what I can see, she does not want to follow the protocols, were unhappy with the restrictions, want to do things her own way and don't  want  listen to advice of the staff that has been doing it for years, those very staff were employed to protect the interest of the Monarchy and the Royals. She wanted to have the perks but none of the gritty stuff that came with it, now that she is out, she want the Monarchy to be cancelled , She is saying she is silenced ,that she can't talk to Oprah or other media  outlets when she as a Royal before consulting the firm - Is this not a Standard protocol for  any employment?  I am just a regular worker  but  there are handbooks and rules that I have to follow in my place of employment. I mean even posting something on social media like Facebook and IG can get you fired!!  But She wants to do what she likes, She wants to be called a Duchess, while not respecting the meaning, privilege, responsibility  and the burden of carryinvg those titles.  I guess some people are counting on that because they see BRF as an archaic insitituition , that this si a payback, but the Monarchy will endure ,I hope it does. I pray that it does and this is coming from a US citizen, a former immigrant and also a Minority and a woman of color.


Eloquently stated! Your thoughtful, reasoned Post is the kind of writing/thinking that should be seen and read by a wider audience. Her stans are a lost cause, but there are many who are not familiar with the "whole story" and the propaganda against the Monarchy that will be broadcast Sunday night needs to be balanced by what you have written. Hope you consider sharing it further.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> am I understanding correctly?  her name is Royal Addicted, she's 25 and lives in Italy?



That's wacky. She is supposedly Meghan's friend, she's claiming Meghan did all of those things for her because she is so nice. But she's 25 and she lives in Italy.  All these things happened before Harry so Ms. Royal Addicted would have been 20 or younger but she was hanging out with Meghan?

Now maybe she is like Hilaria Baldwin and she "identifies" as a 25-year-old Italian woman but she's really a 39-year-old American trying to cling to her youth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> How earth shattering, what a revelation, what horrible abuse.  She wasn't allowed to do an interview with Oprah prior to the wedding for even more publicity.  Oh poor Meghan and Harry, living in splendor in California on tens of millions in Spotify and Netflix dollars, profiting by attacking his family for publicity and money. She couldn't keep the free designer clothes, do interviews at will with Oprah, tweet at will about current events, merch everything she ever wore and we're supposed to believe this added up to such horrific abuse. Her "voice" was silenced! Silenced, people!  She was silenced!


If only it had stayed "silent'!


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> That's wacky. She is supposedly Meghan's friend, she's claiming Meghan did all of those things for her because she is so nice. But she's 25 and she lives in Italy.  All these things happened before Harry so Ms. Royal Addicted would have been 20 or younger but she was hanging out with Meghan?
> 
> Now maybe she is like Hilaria Baldwin and she "identifies" as a 25-year-old Italian woman but she's really a 39-year-old American trying to cling to her youth.


Its a Royal fan site, she's reposted the original


----------



## marietouchet

deleted DP


----------



## Sharont2305

The original poster


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> This doesn't look like other photos of Archie.  How do we know they aren't photos of this woman's children?


That's exactly what I thought when I saw the photo. The baby doesn't even have the ginger hair?


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Its a Royal fan site, she's reposted the original



Ah! Thank you. I was confused. Did she give the name of the actual friend?


----------



## bag-mania

I didn't realize "Silver Tree" was the woman's name. I naturally assumed it was a screen name.

Here is what she is most famous for, from her wiki entry:


----------



## zinacef

youngster said:


> This friend of Meghan's should have been more careful.  Posting a pic of little Archie without paying Harry and Meghan seven figures for the rights?  I fear a lawsuit is heading her way.


Probably not, it‘s Meg as a friend, publicist, PA, etc... she‘s a busy body.


----------



## csshopper

Here you go: 
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1719186/ - 205k - Cached - Similar pages 
*Silver Tree*, Director: Dead to Me. *Silver Tree* is known for her work on Dead to Me (2019), You (2018) and Shameless (2011).

If this does not open, just search Silver Tree imbd
She's been "in the business" since the early 90's.

Makes one wonder with a friend like this, why Harry had to go hunting for  voice over work for his wife with Disney,.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Here you go:
> https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1719186/ - 205k - Cached - Similar pages
> *Silver Tree*, Director: Dead to Me. *Silver Tree* is known for her work on Dead to Me (2019), You (2018) and Shameless (2011).
> 
> If this does not open, just search Silver Tree imbd
> She's been "in the business" since the early 90's.
> 
> Makes one wonder with a friend like this, why Harry had to go hunting for  voice over work for his wife with Disney,.



That is an unimpressive IMDB entry. Her best known work was for Netflix. What a coincidence!


----------



## Chagall

purseinsanity said:


> Wow!  If Charles doesn't cut these two off after this, he is a sniveling appendage less wimp!


OMG . When will it end? This is becoming more of a mess by the minute. I bet Charles regrets not making this mean spirited woman make her own way down the aisle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

After this week of drip-drip ‘teasers’, it looks like 90 minutes of ear-poison from privileged people.
Not for me. I’ve got to protect my brain.

ETA:  Oprah had the right idea. Fly to Hawaii and frolic in the sun.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Oprah was sued many years back by the Texas Cattle Producers.  Oprah frequently commented at that time that they were trying to “muzzle” her and she would NOT be muzzled!  Not sure if Meg copied O, or if O influenced the word choices. 

Charles walked her down the aisle because they were afraid she would pull some kind of stunt if she walked alone which was what she wanted.

ETA:Oprah info


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

sdkitty said:


> "endure"?
> of course, we don't actually know if these are her words


Endure works. So does Carry On.
Perhaps these are not her words. Fair enough. But when one uses the voices of others—whether authorized or volunteered—to explain and defend one’s position or action, statements made cannot be checked for veracity. If she silenced her team of paid and unpaid supporters, we would only hold her accountable for direct quotes.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

youngster said:


> Has anyone noticed that, while Meghan's friends have occasionally come to her defense and posted supportive comments, all of Harry's close, lifelong friends have gone absolutely silent?


Wow.  Great observation.  The silence is deafening.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Bejeezus, even Smerconish was talking about it this morning. 
Make it stoaaaaaapppp!!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Does anyone else find it ironic that friends of 20+ years and 17 years come out defending Me-gain on social media but they are otherwise not seen and not heard at other times? I'm also surprised that Jessica Mulroney didn't already come out of the woodwork to defend Me-gain too.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

V0N1B2 said:


> Bejeezus, even Smerconish was talking about it this morning.
> Make it stoaaaaaapppp!!!!


This made me laugh aloud.  It is perfect.   But now I feel guilty because this is no laughing matter.


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> Does anyone else find it ironic that friends of 20+ years and 17 years come out defending Me-gain on social media but they are otherwise not seen and not heard at other times? I'm also surprised that Jessica Mulroney didn't already come out of the woodwork to defend Me-gain too.


MM didn’t publicly defend Jessica when Jessica was called out and lost all her jobs.  Karma was swift in this case.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Fourth promo video has been released.  Why does she keep the duchess title given by an institution that she despises? Is Oprah asking this question?
> 
> *CBS releases new clip from bombshell interview: Meghan claims she was stopped by Palace aides from talking to Oprah 'personally' when host tried to set up interview with her before her wedding and says that she's now 'ready to talk'*
> The Duchess of Sussex has claimed royal aides blocked her from having a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey in the months leading up to her wedding to Prince Harry, in the latest preview clip released by CBS two days before the full bombshell interview comes out.
> 
> Oprah revealed she called Meghan in February or March 2018 - two or three months before the royal wedding at Windsor Castle in May that year - to ask for an interview, but she declined because it was not 'the right time'.
> 
> The Duchess said she remembered this talk with the US chat show queen 'very well' and 'wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally' because there had to be other people in the same room.
> 
> Asked why she was now speaking out, Meghan gave a long pause and seemed to hesitate, before saying: 'Well, so many things. That we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then.'
> 
> The 39-year-old Duchess added: 'That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> 
> After playing the latest clip today, CBS presenter Gayle King, who is good friends with Oprah, told the programme: 'Listen to those words. The right and the privilege to be able to speak. I heard Oprah say what was her intention in doing this interview? To give them the opportunity to say in their own words. Because a big question is how did they leave, why did they leave, what happened, did something happen, what is it all about?
> 
> 'To give them the opportunity in their own words to speak their own truth about what went into their decision. I think by the time the interview is over, people will have a very clear understanding about what went into their thought process. I believe that that will be the case. And then people can make up their own minds.
> 
> *Full transcript for fourth Oprah preview video clip *
> 
> Oprah: 'So I just want to say that I called you either February or March 2018 before the wedding, asking would you please give me an interview, and you said I'm sorry, it's not the right time, and finally we get to sit down and have this conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Well, I remember that conversation very well. I wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally, right? There had to be people from the… sitting there, everything was…
> Oprah: 'There were other people in the room when I was having that conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, even on that call.'
> Oprah: 'You turned me down nicely and said, perhaps there will be another time when there's the right time. What is right about this time?'
> Meghan: 'Um [long pause]. Well, so many things. Um, that we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then. That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> Oprah: 'And to say it for yourself.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah. To say it for yourself.'
> Oprah: 'And not to have to consult with anybody at this point.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, to be able to just make a choice on your own and be able to speak for yourself.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claims she was 'stopped by Palace aides' from talking to Oprah
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was not allowed to have a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey two months before her wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



of course _we_ are all soooo free to say_ exactly_ what we feel about our in-laws to be and future places of employment with no repercussions  and it's a given that of course the entire world would all love to know


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> She failed to understand being part of the RF is not like being a celebrity! Doing TV interviews are generally considered to be quite tacky in the UK. Diana's TV interview didn't help her image. People thought she came across desperate, together with the heavy eyeliner puppy eye look was pathetic. Andrew's TV interview was just beyond a joke and it was considered to be a huge mistake here. What an idiot he was! So no, BP just don't do TV interviews and for good reason! Nothing says "tacky" more than airing your private dirty laundry in public!



She wouldn't have been allowed to marry in to the RF full-stop.


----------



## Yanca

what a shocker !! Chrissy Teigen join the issue. why am I not surprise.


----------



## youngster

CBS, of course, can probably kiss goodbye any royal access for the next two generations.  At the next coronation, they will be assigned a spot for their cameras around, say, Dover. 

I think we all recognize that this isn't a serious interview being conducted by a serious journalist though.  Oprah is a friend who went to the wedding and is helping merch some coffee product. Gayle King went to the baby shower. Serious journalists don't interview friends if they intend to be hard hitting, ask tough questions, dig for the truth.  This is a celebrity interview and its being reported by entertainment reporters. That's here in the U.S. of course. For most people here I think, it's just kind of fluffy, puffy cotton candy type "news", the kind that we get all the time from celebs about their marriages, their addictions, their recoveries, their prison stays, etc.


----------



## elvisfan4life

youngster said:


> Has anyone noticed that, while Meghan's friends have occasionally come to her defense and posted supportive comments, all of Harry's close, lifelong friends have gone absolutely silent?



They gave up on him long ago when he stopped drinking smoking being a jack the lad and basically having a life


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chagall said:


> OMG . When will it end? This is becoming more of a mess by the minute. I bet Charles regrets not making this mean spirited woman make her own way down the aisle.


 Down the aisle then round the side and out  the back door without marrying his son!!!  then locking and barricading the doors lol


----------



## lulilu

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's exactly what I thought when I saw the photo. The baby doesn't even have the ginger hair?



The OP deleted the photo and replaced it of one of MM with a little girl.  Maybe it is him.



Yanca said:


> what a shocker !! Chrissy Teigen join the issue. why am I not surprise.



Yes, and her Suits co-star, Patrick something, going on about how a member of the royal family is "growing inside her."  I am so sick of the idea that pregnancy shields a woman from any and all criticism or responsibility for their cr*p.


----------



## youngster

youngster said:


> CBS, of course, can probably kiss goodbye any royal access for the next two generations.  At the next coronation, they will be assigned a spot for their cameras around, say, Dover.
> 
> I think we all recognize that this isn't a serious interview being conducted by a serious journalist though.  Oprah is a friend who went to the wedding and is helping merch some coffee product. Gayle King went to the baby shower. Serious journalists don't interview friends if they intend to be hard hitting, ask tough questions, dig for the truth.  This is a celebrity interview and its being reported by entertainment reporters. That's here in the U.S. of course. For most people here I think, it's just kind of fluffy, puffy cotton candy type "news", the kind that we get all the time from celebs about their marriages, their addictions, their recoveries, their prison stays, etc.



Meant to also add, that what turns this into a legitimate news story even in the U.S. are the bullying charges.  That's going to get attention, especially since it looks like there are 10+ people who have now come forward.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of their fans speaks up! Enough already.









						I’m a big Meghan and Harry fan — hopefully now they can put the Royal Family behind them
					

When Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s watershed interview with Oprah Winfrey was first announced, the whole world erupted. Headlines blared, Twitter trolls seethed - it was bedlam. The interview more than delivered, with shocking revelations from the pair concerning everything from an...




					www.standard.co.uk
				





Spoiler: Give it a rest



*I’m a big Meghan fan — and even I’m losing patience*
Natasha Mwansa3 hours ago
The Sussexes just can’t catch a break. In response to their upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey, headlines are blaring, Twitter trolls are seething and Piers Morgan is frothing at the mouth. As the self-appointed chairwoman of the Meghan fan club, I always have and always will be rooting for her and Prince Harry. But for heaven’s sake, even I’m a bit tired of it all now.

Marrying into the royal family has been tough for Meghan; she’s been criticised for everything from what colour she paints her nails to how often she rubs her pregnancy bump. In all classic fairytales, the prince and princess eventually escape the monster and ride off into the sunset. They did that. We cheered. But then they came back to treat the monster to another round.

Take one of the clips from the Oprah interview, which seems to feature Meghan accusing “The Firm” of “perpetuating falsehoods”. Though she may be referring to the Palace and the institution rather than senior royals, her use of language invites the interpretation she is directly criticising the family.

Who exactly are the Sussexes doing this for and why do they feel the need to keep explaining themselves? If they’re trying to appeal to those of us with a shred of sympathy, they’re preaching to the converted. If they’re trying to reason with the same hate mob which linked Meghan’s preference for avocado with human rights abuses, then I’m afraid this is a battle the Sussexes just won’t win.
We’re all struggling to hold it together during a pandemic that has had us on our knees for a year now. I will defend Meghan and Harry until I’m blue in the face, but I can’t help coming back to the fact that this “beleaguered” pair are also a very well-connected, very wealthy couple, with an array of opportunities ahead of them. Once the Oprah interview is out the door, perhaps they should give it a rest.


----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this has been posted already....but OMG...the nerve!  if she didn't know what she was getting into she should have.  harry knew now "the firm" worked








						Meghan Markle Says 'I'm Ready To Talk' In Newly Released Oprah Clip
					

"CBS This Morning" released a new clip of the Duchess of Sussex speaking with Oprah Winfrey in an upcoming interview special.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chagall said:


> OMG . When will it end? This is becoming more of a mess by the minute. I bet Charles regrets not making this mean spirited woman make her own way down the aisle.


I read that MM wouldn't adhere to the royal wedding protocols as in no veils and only off-white gowns for divorcees, no bare shoulders in church, no solo walk down the aisle. But, MM wanted to walk down the aisle alone with a veil covering her face like the "pure and virginal bride" that she was and so she wore white, almost-bare-shoulders gown and a veil to cover her innocent self. When it became apparent that MM was flaunting the rules, Charles was asked to intervene and he walked her down the aisle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

It's only a matter of time, I think, until Meghan  supposedly suffers some kind of pregnancy distress....put on bed rest, whatever, as a result of the way she is being (mis)treated by the horrid people reporting the truth about her.

It's going to get played and played and played.....


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> Yes, and her Suits co-star, Patrick something, going on about how *a member of the royal family is "growing inside her." * I am so sick of the idea that pregnancy shields a woman from any and all criticism or responsibility for their cr*p.



How very feudal, patriarchal, white male privilege of him to say so


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has been posted already....but OMG...the nerve!  if she didn't know what she was getting into she should have.  harry knew now "the firm" worked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says 'I'm Ready To Talk' In Newly Released Oprah Clip
> 
> 
> "CBS This Morning" released a new clip of the Duchess of Sussex speaking with Oprah Winfrey in an upcoming interview special.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


The one thing that stands out to me is how the BRF is referred to as ‘The Firm’. That phrase was originated by Princess Diana. They don’t have an original bone in their body. Do they have to keep harking back to Diana?


----------



## Aimee3

lulilu said:


> The OP deleted the photo and replaced it of one of MM with a little girl.  Maybe it is him.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and her Suits co-star, Patrick something, going on about how a member of the royal family is "growing inside her."  I am so sick of the idea that pregnancy shields a woman from any and all criticism or responsibility for their cr*p.





csshopper said:


> It's only a matter of time, I think, until Meghan  supposedly suffers some kind of pregnancy distress....put on bed rest, whatever, as a result of the way she is being (mis)treated by the horrid people reporting the truth about her.
> 
> It's going to get played and played and played.....


she could just put the moon bump pillow to bed!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Had the internet and 24-hour news cycle existed back in Diana's and Fergie's day, you better believe they would have been obsessed over every bit as much, maybe more, whether the news was good or bad. The weekly tabloids back then brutalized and mocked Fergie about her weight all the time. It was as if the tabloids competed over which one could print the most unflattering photos of her. They did that to Diana and every Hollywood actress as well, no matter how pretty they normally were. There was no such word as fat-shaming back then and none of the press felt the least bit bad about it.



But how many respected media companies put Fergie on the cover, as if she was a saint? Tabloids are one thing, but respectable media publications don't put purposefully unflattering photos of people on their cover... Vogue, Harper, etc peddle in aspirational and glossy images. I believe the only reason M continues to be put on the pedestal week after week long after the original issues have lost steam is she's attractive. The world of celebrity is only really interested in respecting attractive people.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> Has anyone noticed that, while Meghan's friends have occasionally come to her defense and posted supportive comments, all of Harry's close, lifelong friends have gone absolutely silent?


Harry is now beneath all his friends! The friends are now the ones look down on him!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Duchess said she remembered this talk with the US chat show queen 'very well' and 'wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally' because there had to be other people in the same room.



And you know why? Because the very qualified people working at the palace knew da*n well they couldn't trust you. Or do you seriously think Kate's phone calls are being screened? Of course Kate was also never caught taking pictures inside of private areas of Buckingham Palace.

BTW, Sky News Australia is on fire. They have several more videos up on their Youtube channel which are absolutely not flattering. And this is not your typical yellow press outlet, it's pretty conservative and has won press awards before.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has been posted already....but OMG...the nerve!  if she didn't know what she was getting into she should have.  harry knew now "the firm" worked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says 'I'm Ready To Talk' In Newly Released Oprah Clip
> 
> 
> "CBS This Morning" released a new clip of the Duchess of Sussex speaking with Oprah Winfrey in an upcoming interview special.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


the irony. Oprah only wanted to interview her when she was marrying into "The Firm" . Only reason she would of had interest in interviewing her since I don't think Oprah ever asked MeGain for an interview prior to that during her Suits/Suitcase-holder/Hallmark movies career.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan Markle says she would never postpone tell-all Oprah interview and claims the palace is using Prince Philip's health as an 'excuse to keep her muzzled' and the world can now see what she's had to endure*




OMG what a POS she is. The nearly 100yo man has been at the hospital for weeks and just had heart surgery, but of course he probably just had the procedure to throw shade at her. Harry, do you really want your children near this monster completely void of normal human emotions? WTFFF.

Also the delusion. She literally tries to destroy them, yet whines they are not offering "loyalty and support"? I just can't.


----------



## marietouchet

Chagall said:


> The one thing that stands out to me is how the BRF is referred to as ‘The Firm’. That phrase was originated by Princess Diana. They don’t have an original bone in their body. Do they have to keep harking back to Diana?


I don’t know if D used the term in her only interview ie with Bashir
Morton used the term in his book but it was not in a quote from D, and I read the recent 25th anniversary edition , edited
Sarah Ferguson used the terms Firm and gray suits in her book and interviews with Oprah 20 odd years ago


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> When all else fails bring out Archie.




Oh my. Dear bought friends of Meghan, you would be a lot more believable if you didn't overdo it so much. Bridezilla was not making you  a playlist the morning of her wedding. I'm pretty sure nice, laid back Kate didn't check in on people the morning of her wedding while she was preparing for the event of a century. So please, b*tch.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Chanbal said:


> Fourth promo video has been released.  Why does she keep the duchess title given by an institution that she despises? Is Oprah asking this question?
> 
> *CBS releases new clip from bombshell interview: Meghan claims she was stopped by Palace aides from talking to Oprah 'personally' when host tried to set up interview with her before her wedding and says that she's now 'ready to talk'*
> The Duchess of Sussex has claimed royal aides blocked her from having a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey in the months leading up to her wedding to Prince Harry, in the latest preview clip released by CBS two days before the full bombshell interview comes out.
> 
> Oprah revealed she called Meghan in February or March 2018 - two or three months before the royal wedding at Windsor Castle in May that year - to ask for an interview, but she declined because it was not 'the right time'.
> 
> The Duchess said she remembered this talk with the US chat show queen 'very well' and 'wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally' because there had to be other people in the same room.
> 
> Asked why she was now speaking out, Meghan gave a long pause and seemed to hesitate, before saying: 'Well, so many things. That we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then.'
> 
> The 39-year-old Duchess added: 'That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> 
> After playing the latest clip today, CBS presenter Gayle King, who is good friends with Oprah, told the programme: 'Listen to those words. The right and the privilege to be able to speak. I heard Oprah say what was her intention in doing this interview? To give them the opportunity to say in their own words. Because a big question is how did they leave, why did they leave, what happened, did something happen, what is it all about?
> 
> 'To give them the opportunity in their own words to speak their own truth about what went into their decision. I think by the time the interview is over, people will have a very clear understanding about what went into their thought process. I believe that that will be the case. And then people can make up their own minds.
> 
> *Full transcript for fourth Oprah preview video clip *
> 
> Oprah: 'So I just want to say that I called you either February or March 2018 before the wedding, asking would you please give me an interview, and you said I'm sorry, it's not the right time, and finally we get to sit down and have this conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Well, I remember that conversation very well. I wasn't even allowed to have this conversation with you personally, right? There had to be people from the… sitting there, everything was…
> Oprah: 'There were other people in the room when I was having that conversation.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, even on that call.'
> Oprah: 'You turned me down nicely and said, perhaps there will be another time when there's the right time. What is right about this time?'
> Meghan: 'Um [long pause]. Well, so many things. Um, that we're on the other side of a lot of - a lot of life experience that's happened, and also that we have the ability to make our own choices in a way that I couldn't have said yes to you then. That wasn't my choice to make. So as an adult who lived a really independent life to then go into this construct that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, it's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk.'
> Oprah: 'And to say it for yourself.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah. To say it for yourself.'
> Oprah: 'And not to have to consult with anybody at this point.'
> Meghan: 'Yeah, to be able to just make a choice on your own and be able to speak for yourself.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claims she was 'stopped by Palace aides' from talking to Oprah
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was not allowed to have a personal conversation with Oprah Winfrey two months before her wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


will the next promo release be Oprah asking MeGain: "Are you okay?"


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Great! If these women were indeed victims of bulling as I believe they were, I hope they will be able to tell their stories. These are women that are/were doing their jobs in exchange of modest salaries. They do not have the financial resources or protection given to MM.
> 
> I just watched a video with Whoopi and several other women talking about these allegations. They all discarded the allegations of the victims of bulling. They didn't even bother to give them the benefit of the doubt. They preferred to explain the entire situation as racism from the palace. It is sad when people stop using common sense and just go with what sells better.


I just watched the episode of the view from day before yesterday.  they all supported Meghan.  Whoopi more less acted as moderator and didn't say much.  Sunny, as expected was avidly pro H&M.  More than one of them cited M's late night emails as the example of her bullying - like that was the worst thing she did to staff and they handn't heard about anything else.  and they cited Andrew who is so much worse.  Meghan - the conservative - was just as pro-Meghan as the rest of them.
Basically they all seemed to think the powerful Firm was doing a mean hatchet job on a poor young woman.  Oh, and they should have defended her when she was picked on by the British tabloids.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> But how many respected media companies put Fergie on the cover, as if she was a saint? Tabloids are one thing, but respectable media publications don't put purposefully unflattering photos of people on their cover... Vogue, Harper, etc peddle in aspirational and glossy images. I believe the only reason M continues to be put on the pedestal week after week long after the original issues have lost steam is she's attractive. The world of celebrity is only really interested in respecting attractive people.



Long dark glossy hair, red lips, heavy eyeliner, thin — that’s a standard look now in Hwood. Kardashian ladies perfected it. Amal added to it, Joanna Gaines continued it, etc. IMO she is on the cover because of her Royal connection. The media wants to pit Kate against MM much as they pitted Diana against Sarah. Happiness doesn’t sell mags, bitter disputes do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Has anyone noticed that, while Meghan's friends have occasionally come to her defense and posted supportive comments, all of Harry's close, lifelong friends have gone absolutely silent?



How surprising. Not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> But how many respected media companies put Fergie on the cover, as if she was a saint? Tabloids are one thing, but respectable media publications don't put purposefully unflattering photos of people on their cover... Vogue, Harper, etc peddle in aspirational and glossy images. I believe the only reason M continues to be put on the pedestal week after week long after the original issues have lost steam is she's attractive. The world of celebrity is only really interested in respecting attractive people.



Yeah, when it come to getting hits for a web article, nothing beats an attractive photo with a provoking headline.

Back then there used to be a clear distinction between what was news and what was entertainment. One story could occasionally fall into both categories, such as when Diana died, but normally they were separate entities. The line between those two forms of media blurred years ago and there isn't much difference today. Society in general is more obsessed with beautiful people today. Anyone who watches reruns of old shows from the '60s and '70s knows that many of the TV actors back then were far from gorgeous, they were hired for their acting ability.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Long dark glossy hair, red lips, heavy eyeliner, thin — that’s a standard look now in Hwood. Kardashian ladies perfected it. Amal added to it, Joanna Gaines continued it, etc. IMO she is on the cover because of her Royal connection. The media wants to pit Kate against MM much as they pitted Diana against Sarah. Happiness doesn’t sell mags, bitter disputes do.



But all those people you mentioned are really only famous for being attractive. :/ Lbr, lots of people have drama... the only reason the Kardashians got famous for it is they're fun to look at. Amal married a famous man but... so do many star's spouses. The only reason she's a household name and not say Christian Bale's wife or Jason Gordon Levitt's wife is that she is attractive. Same with Joanna - she is hardly the most innovative or successful interior designer out there. I don't think I even know what Prince Edward's wife's name is but for eons now Meghan has been shoved down everyone's throats.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, Sky News Australia is on fire. They have several more videos up on their Youtube channel which are absolutely not flattering. And this is not your typical yellow press outlet, it's pretty conservative and has won press awards before.



Thank you, thank you!  Great stuff 












						Meghan’s image as a ‘poor bullied woman’ is being undercut by Palace investigation
					

Spiked Online Editor Brendan O’Neill says Meghan Markle complaining about her life is “identity politics summed up” as she has immense wealth and is a celebrity but "makes herself the victim”.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> After MM voiced all her 'kind' complains about the Firm,  was H still waiting for more loyalty and support from "across the pond"? This is puzzling!
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: 'What's done is done!' Meghan Markle says she would never postpone tell-all Oprah interview and claims the palace is using Prince Philip's health as an 'excuse to keep her muzzled' and the world can now see what she's had to endure*
> 
> *Meghan Markle** says would never ask to postpone Sunday's release of her tell-all interview with Oprah and claims the royal family is using Prince Philip's health as an excuse to keep her 'muzzled,' sources tell DailyMail.com. *
> 
> Mounting pressure has been put on Meghan, Harry and CBS to push back the much-anticipated interview special out of respect for Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, who is recovering from heart surgery.
> 
> *'Prince Harry has no say on the matter. What's done is done. Meghan said now the whole world can see what she had to endure for months on end. No support whatsoever and now even across the pond, still no loyalty or support. '
> 
> 'Meghan said she is beyond relieved and grateful that she can enjoy her pregnancy surrounded by love and support, unlike what she experienced behind the walls of the Palace.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle would 'never' postpone the tell-all Oprah interview
> 
> 
> A Hollywood insider with ties to the Sussexes tells DailyMail.com, 'Even if Meghan had the choice to postpone the Oprah special she said she wouldn't'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Muzzled? Wouldn’t that imply she is a b*tch?

The thing is being a royal is like joining the armed forces:
1. There’s lots of arbitrary rules
2. There’s a hierarchy and a strict protocol
3. You can’t just do or say what you want because it could be seen as compromising

People join, despite these limitations, because they feel it is their duty and that they will benefit from the resources military service offers.

Very few things in life are all give no take - apart from an overindulgent parent maybe.


----------



## lalame

Another gossip outlet I watch is Oh No They Didn't (more millenial crowd)... the trickling clips about the oprah interview had been getting a lot of sympathy for M there. BUT the latest one really seems to have turned the tide. They're now seeing how out of touch M is. Thought that was interesting.

In case you want to browse the comments... https://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/120234559.html


----------



## lalame

Clearly Meghan has never worked for any type of company... her "they didn't even let me talk to Oprah about an interview!" really does come across as out of touch for anyone who actually works for an employer. Even my CEO listens to advice from the PR team and always has an expert in the room when vetting and giving interviews.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Amal married a famous man but... so do many star's spouses. The only reason she's a household name and not say Christian Bale's wife or Jason Gordon Levitt's wife is that she is attractive.



Amal was a successful human rights' lawyer with prestigious cases long before she married George, though. She's not just a pretty, well-dressed mannequin.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Amal was a successful human rights' lawyer with prestigious cases long before she married George, though. She's not just a pretty, well-dressed mannequin.



But how many other successful human rights' lawyers are household names..... very few. Jason Gordon Levitt's wife is a tech entrepreneur and CEO. Their accomplishments got them professional acclaim, but their looks got them on Vogue.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> But how many other successful human rights' lawyers are household names..... very few. Jason Gordon Levitt's wife is a tech entrepreneur and CEO. Their accomplishments got them professional acclaim, but their looks got them on Vogue.



Ah, I missed the Vogue part! You're right.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I just watched the episode of the view from day before yesterday.  they all supported Meghan.  Whoopi more less acted as moderator and didn't say much.  Sunny, as expected was avidly pro H&M.  More than one of them cited M's late night emails as the example of her bullying - like that was the worst thing she did to staff and they handn't heard about anything else.  and they cited Andrew who is so much worse.  Meghan - the conservative - was just as pro-Meghan as the rest of them.
> Basically they all seemed to think the powerful Firm was doing a mean hatchet job on a poor young woman.  Oh, and they should have defended her when she was picked on by the British tabloids.



I think they'll likely change their tune when more details emerge from the staff who were bullied and then again when the results of the Palace's investigation comes out. I expect the Palace's investigation will be extremely thorough and meticulously documented.  One person you can write off as a disgruntled ex-employee, but not 10+ employees.  So, you'd hope that the hosts of the View would take seriously almost a dozen people coming forward.  

I think both Harry and Meghan thought they were protected due to the NDAs and because the two initial staff members declined to pursue the charges a year or two ago and also because Meghan's behavior is probably standard operating procedure in Hollywood.  But, they can't hide behind NDAs if they've broken the law and/or violated policies regarding the workplace environment and behavior and such, so that's how the NDA's will be invalidated and look out then, Meghan and Harry's every interaction and email with staff will be scrutinized. It may take a year or so, but this won't end well for them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't get over how callous she is. My grandfather would be 100 next year but sadly passed away 10 years ago. If the way she speaks about his grandfather who could die at any minute doesn't get through to Harry I guess nothing will.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, I missed the Vogue part! You're right.



I don't even know what my point was tbh lol. It was just an observation as I was thinking "Meghan's attractive ... well duh of course she is because everyone would've long forgotten her by now if she weren't."


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> But how many other successful human rights' lawyers are household names..... very few. Jason Gordon Levitt's wife is a tech entrepreneur and CEO. Their accomplishments got them professional acclaim, but their looks got them on Vogue.



IMO Vogue, etc. can make anyone look ‘cover-ready’.  It’s all lighting, angles, photoshop, etc.  I could be wrong, in today’s world, aren’t most covers paid promotions?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I don't even know what my point was tbh lol. It was just an observation as I was thinking "Meghan's attractive ... well duh of course she is because everyone would've long forgotten her by now if she weren't."



That said, I'm not feeling her new face at all. And I don't think it's all pregnancy because she was very puffy after Archie's birth for months, even at Trooping the Colours, and she didn't look that awful.


----------



## lalame

I have no experience with pregnancy so I don't feel qualified to make any judgments or have expectations on what is normal but..... I did notice her face looked quite different in the clips. Wasn't sure if it was weight gain but it didn't look like a weight gain thing.... plastic surgery?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I think they'll likely change their tune when more details emerge from the staff who were bullied and then again when the results of the Palace's investigation comes out. I expect the Palace's investigation will be extremely thorough and meticulously documented.  One person you can write off as a disgruntled ex-employee, but not 10+ employees.  So, you'd hope that the hosts of the View would take seriously almost a dozen people coming forward.
> 
> I think both Harry and Meghan thought they were protected due to the NDAs and because the two initial staff members declined to pursue the charges a year or two ago and also because Meghan's behavior is probably standard operating procedure in Hollywood.  But, they can't hide behind NDAs if they've broken the law and/or violated policies regarding the workplace environment and behavior and such, so that's how the NDA's will be invalidated and look out then, Meghan and Harry's every interaction and email with staff will be scrutinized. It may take a year or so, but this won't end well for them.



Well said, thank you.
Guessing H&M never thought their ‘mistreatment’ could be view as an ‘employee vs. employer’ issue.  Seems to be a basic misunderstanding that should have been worked out in the vetting process. Oh, but wait, H&M insisted on a rushed engagement. Hmmmm.

ETA:  *The Queen "told Harry 'you work for the monarchy, the monarchy doesn't work for you'"*
Seeee, it is a job, not a title! Seriously, Disney has damaged so many females.

ETA2: when more people understand this is an employment issue, more people will realize they’ve been duped by H&M. Then, watch things change. Netflix and Spotify are probably dusting off their contracts, just to make sure everyone is clear. Haaa.


----------



## lalame

I saw a comment somewhere that was like "She's clearly a toxic person. She went through some things but she clearly cannot/will not move on." and ... just yes. Move on from this mess... stop giving it air. You already moved to another continent, so why are you still talking about these people all the time?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG what a POS she is. The nearly 100yo man has been at the hospital for weeks and just had heart surgery, but of course he probably just had the procedure to throw shade at her. Harry, do you really want your children near this monster completely void of normal human emotions? WTFFF.
> 
> Also the delusion. She literally tries to destroy them, yet whines they are not offering "loyalty and support"? I just can't.


Flash back didn’t she say something like her father too!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I saw a comment somewhere that was like "She's clearly a toxic person. She went through some things but she clearly cannot/will not move on." and ... just yes. Move on from this mess... stop giving it air. You already moved to another continent, so why are you still talking about these people all the time?



And yet their are writers out there publishing opinion pieces about how the UK press can't let go of her even though she moved continents. 

I am puzzled, there's really a whole crowd who thinks bullying accusations should be ignored just because it's Duchess Disney. Like...what. Then again, they don't take issue with her harping on and on about her in-laws who never say anything back, so what do I expect.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Anybody else find it odd that MM has those showbiz "friends" coming out of the woodwork to support her yet not a single person from her own family has said anything good about her?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Anybody else find it odd that MM has those showbiz "friends" coming out of the woodwork to support her yet not a single person from her own family has said anything good about her?



Actually I find that pretty logical haha.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Actually I find that pretty logical haha.


Of course and I was being sarcastic!


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> Another gossip outlet I watch is Oh No They Didn't (more millenial crowd)... the trickling clips about the oprah interview had been getting a lot of sympathy for M there. BUT the latest one really seems to have turned the tide. They're now seeing how out of touch M is. Thought that was interesting.
> 
> In case you want to browse the comments... https://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/120234559.html


Her lip fillers are way bad.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Anybody else find it odd that MM has those showbiz "friends" coming out of the woodwork to support her yet not a single person from her own family has said anything good about her?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Actually I find that pretty logical haha.



I'm sure after that love note from Ms. Silver Tree, she is already on the short list to direct some of their Netflix ventures.


----------



## kemilia

lalame said:


> I saw a comment somewhere that was like "She's clearly a toxic person. She went through some things but she clearly cannot/will not move on." and ... just yes. Move on from this mess... stop giving it air. You already moved to another continent, so why are you still talking about these people all the time?


Because she is _NOTHING_ without these people (BRF). And she knows it and will ride til it can't be ridden anymore.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Race card, pitty party and tell-all interviews can only go so far and will not last forever. She better have a long term viable plan. Netflix shows and podcast competition is fierce!


----------



## Yanca

Here's one more thing I don't get,  ( some)  People here in theUS are always sprouting, inclusivity, equality, all voices should be heard, respect of other cultures and other values, and then celebrities  will say BRF is archaic and   should have been abolished years ago, WHO are they to say and decide for another country and group of people?? Meghan is not the first foreigner to marry into royalty but Princess Mary and Marie of Denmark seemed not to make a lot of waves, and followed the customs, protocols and respected the tradition of the family they married in to.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think they'll likely change their tune when more details emerge from the staff who were bullied and then again when the results of the Palace's investigation comes out. I expect the Palace's investigation will be extremely thorough and meticulously documented.  One person you can write off as a disgruntled ex-employee, but not 10+ employees.  So, you'd hope that the hosts of the View would take seriously almost a dozen people coming forward.
> 
> I think both Harry and Meghan thought they were protected due to the NDAs and because the two initial staff members declined to pursue the charges a year or two ago and also because Meghan's behavior is probably standard operating procedure in Hollywood.  But, they can't hide behind NDAs if they've broken the law and/or violated policies regarding the workplace environment and behavior and such, so that's how the NDA's will be invalidated and look out then, Meghan and Harry's every interaction and email with staff will be scrutinized. It may take a year or so, but this won't end well for them.


we'll see.  I'd like to think these women speak their honest opinions.  they were all firmly on H&M side.  Sunny is not at all surprising as she is very much into the whole BLM thing.  Meghan McCain is a conservative (while Meegan is liberal).  But McCain is also a big fan of the Housewives franchise which to me doesn't seem like something a serious commentator would brag about.  sorry if there are some here who are fans of the housesives.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yanca said:


> Here's one more thing I don't get,  ( some)  People here in theUS are always sprouting, inclusivity, equality, all voices should be heard, respect of other cultures and other values, and then celebrities  will say BRF is archaic and   should have been abolished years ago, WHO are they to say and decide for another country and group of people?? Meghan is not the first foreigner to marry into royalty but Princess Mary and Marie of Denmark seemed not to make a lot of waves, and followed the customs, protocols and respected the tradition of the family they married in to.



Or Queen Maxima of the Netherlands. That said, I read some juicy bits how Marie seems to be Denmark's Meghan, jealous of Mary and trying to be trouble. But other than polite and patient Queen Elizabeth Queen Marghrete wasn't having any of it and nipped it in the bud.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Meghan McCain is a conservative (while Meegan is liberal).  But McCain is also a big fan of the Housewives franchise which to me doesn't seem like something a serious commentator would brag about. sorry if there are some here who are fans of the housesives.



I mean, I have a few private guilty pleasures I wouldn't dare speaking about at work. My co-workers don't need to know that I follow a Youtube channel that covers Sister Wives and the fundamentalist families with a gazillion kids that made it to national TV, do they. Or that I spend too much time on Duchess Disney and her token husband. There's a time and place for everything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Has anyone noticed that, while Meghan's friends have occasionally come to her defense and posted supportive comments, all of Harry's close, lifelong friends have gone absolutely silent?


They are probably real friends and not  friends of convenience. Real friends can't support what he is doing.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press about her' claim aides as Palace war intensifies - after CBS and ITV insisted the Oprah show WILL still air despite Prince Philip having heart surgery*
> 
> Meghan Markle blamed the Duchess of Cambridge, the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Charles for leaking stories about her to the Press when she was a senior royal, a source has claimed.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex felt negative stories about them - including the Duchess of Cambridge allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting before Meghan's 2018 wedding - must have been briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the palace insider said.
> 
> They also claimed the couple 'assumed that the men in grey suits were obsessed with destroying them' during their time in Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'blamed Kate and Camilla for leaking stories to the Press'
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry felt stories - including Kate allegedly being left in tears following a bridesmaids' dress fitting - were briefed by Kate, Camilla or Charles' households, the source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I can't believe what a clusterfuc$ this has turned into. Any chance at a reconciliation is surely lost now. The expression that comes to mind is 'scorched earth'.


----------



## bag-mania

Yanca said:


> Here's one more thing I don't get,  ( some)  People here in theUS are always sprouting, inclusivity, equality, all voices should be heard, respect of other cultures and other values, and then celebrities  will say BRF is archaic and   should have been abolished years ago, WHO are they to say and decide for another country and group of people?? Meghan is not the first foreigner to marry into royalty but Princess Mary and Marie of Denmark seemed not to make a lot of waves, and followed the customs, protocols and respected the tradition of the family they married in to.



*Psssst* The people who consider themselves to be the most enlightened and the most tolerant are usually the least tolerant of views other than their own. That includes many celebrities who think they should share their wisdom with the common folk. It's why Meghan fits in so well with the hypocrisy. Now don't give away their little secret.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> of course _we_ are all soooo free to say_ exactly_ what we feel about our in-laws to be and future places of employment with no repercussions  and it's a given that of course the entire world would all love to know


She is ignoring that the BRF has a sort of a diplomatic role. People in diplomatic positions have to be discreet, they can't give 'tell all' interviews to Oprah.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I have no experience with pregnancy so I don't feel qualified to make any judgments or have expectations on what is normal but..... I did notice her face looked quite different in the clips. Wasn't sure if it was weight gain but it didn't look like a weight gain thing.... plastic surgery?


Well it might be different for some but I would say from my own pregnancies that if she’s only 2nd trimester then it is a little early for visible puffiness.
 By the time I was near labour my rings didn’t fit and my face looked completely different and I stayed that way for a couple of months after as I lost the weight but as I understand mainly water retention to prepare you for the exertion.

So TLDR: no it’s not common to be very puffy early in pregnancy. I also think it is fillers because her eyes are a different cat flick shape now.

nothing wrong with cosmetic procedures, btw, it is just she’s too sanctimonious to say she’s done anything- a ‘natural beauty’


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> we'll see.  I'd like to think these women speak their honest opinions.  they were all firmly on H&M side.  Sunny is not at all surprising as she is very much into the whole BLM thing.  Meghan McCain is a conservative (while Meegan is liberal).  But McCain is also a big fan of the Housewives franchise which to me doesn't seem like something a serious commentator would brag about.  sorry if there are some here who are fans of the housesives.



I think they've probably given this about 30 seconds of thought, there are so many other more important things to be discussing during a pandemic. It's certainly not very woke of them to immediately side with the people in power who were Harry and Meghan.  

When the multi-hundred page report comes out from the Palace's investigation, and the details are reported by The Times and other papers, I'd like to think they'd look into it more thoroughly and give the dozen or so Palace staffers a fair hearing.  Maybe I expect too much though lol.

ETA:  The TV news/entertainment media also doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to investigating their fellow celebrities.  Look how long it took for Weinstein, Cosby, etc., to be brought to account.


----------



## melissatrv

I don't think this interview will reveal much and will all be very choreographed.  Meghan will do some "poor me" whining, talk of her miscarriage while doing the weird bump cradling.  Then H will come in and they will do their nauseating hand holding while Meghan looks up at him adoringly while he speaks.  They will promote their charity, we may get a peak at Archie (in black and white as part of a behind the scenes montage).  No names will be named it will all be "palace staff members".   I bet she told Oprah the topic of her father is off limits or will say so because of the legal battle.  Still I cannot wait to watch this **** show!


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And yet their are writers out there publishing opinion pieces about how the UK press can't let go of her even though she moved continents.
> 
> I am puzzled, there's really a whole crowd who thinks bullying accusations should be ignored just because it's Duchess Disney. Like...what. Then again, they don't take issue with her harping on and on about her in-laws who never say anything back, so what do I expect.



Ugh yes I was appalled at some of the victim blaming comments I saw around. Some were just nasty, like "are they just blaming her because she expected them to stop being lazy and do their job?" or even "they just misconstrued her direct American communication style." The guy who made the formal complaint was American! 

I've even seen people blaming Jason K for making the complaint without the bullying victims' knowledge. Sorry, direct victims aren't the only people who can make a complaint... even if I'm just observing bullying in the workplace, I'm putting in a complaint.


----------



## lalame

Yikes, J. Patrick Adams steps into it now. THIS is what Meghan and Harry wanted?  Bad vibes all around.




Source: https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...adams-slams-palace-amid-bullying-accusations/


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. Dear bought friends of Meghan, you would be a lot more believable if you didn't overdo it so much. Bridezilla was not making you  a playlist the morning of her wedding. I'm pretty sure nice, laid back Kate didn't check in on people the morning of her wedding while she was preparing for the event of a century. So please, b*tch.





jelliedfeels said:


> Muzzled? Wouldn’t that imply she is a b*tch?
> 
> The thing is being a royal is like joining the armed forces:
> 1. There’s lots of arbitrary rules
> 2. There’s a hierarchy and a strict protocol
> 3. You can’t just do or say what you want because it could be seen as compromising
> 
> People join, despite these limitations, because they feel it is their duty and that they will benefit from the resources military service offers.
> 
> Very few things in life are all give no take - apart from an overindulgent parent maybe.


Well said.  You make it sound obvious.  And it is for rational people. And for those who feel they are unable to cope with those restrictions and requirements, they do not re-enlist. Thus, M and H could have stepped back or away or whatever they call it, and lived their life of service without needing justification or behaving callously and vindictively.


----------



## Lodpah

Why do you think no one wants to link arms with her? Maybe drama backstage? Awkward.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Yikes, J. Patrick Adams steps into it now. THIS is what Meghan and Harry wanted?  Bad vibes all around.
> 
> View attachment 5011571
> 
> 
> Source: https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...adams-slams-palace-amid-bullying-accusations/


Will Harry defend his family?


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Yikes, J. Patrick Adams steps into it now. THIS is what Meghan and Harry wanted?  Bad vibes all around.
> 
> View attachment 5011571
> 
> 
> Source: https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...adams-slams-palace-amid-bullying-accusations/


with all due respect but who the F gives a rat's a55 about what Patrick Adams have to say about anything?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Nece


lalame said:


> Yikes, J. Patrick Adams steps into it now. THIS is what Meghan and Harry wanted?  Bad vibes all around.
> 
> View attachment 5011571
> 
> 
> Source: https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...adams-slams-palace-amid-bullying-accusations/


Never heard of him but I guess he sees life through Meghan’s lens.  They all drink the same cool aid. Everyone is wrong.  Everyone is hurtful. Meg is pure and good. Even when she is not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That said, I can believe she picks causes with her friends to insert herself into, e.g. being supportive over a sick child. The narcissist in my life always has some people they suck up to and do everything for so they can earn adoration and feed off the narcisstic supply...until they drop them and go on to the next. Other than Meghan though they rarely pick people who they thinks can do something for them, but people they wouldn't normally sozialize with because they'll be somewhat in awe they even speak to them LOL

But yeah, playlist on her wedding day my a*s.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Never heard of him but I guess he sees life through Meghan’s lens.  They all drink the same cool aid. Everyone is wrong.  Everyone is hurtful. Meg is pure and good. Even when she is not.



Somewhere someone said - I think it was in a comments' section, but eh, my brain is a sieve - he was her sidepiece while she was still married to Trevor. Have we heard that rumour before?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Patrick Adams played the Mike character on Suits. IMO his was the most boring storyline. The character lied about his schooling, being a lawyer, previous convictions, etc. He is her best friend irl, supposedly.

Yes, @QueenofWrapDress, there were rumors.

Why is their departure characterized as fleeing?  Are they refugees? Was there gunfire?  Did they escape with the silver and jewels?
Some people are addicted to drama.  Isn’t the drama of a pandemic enough?  Sheesh.  Let it go, learn a new tune, move on.

ETA: A-listers are coming back, new shows are being cast and recorded, the gruesome twosome has 2/3 more days of media cycle.
Then, boom. Good luck. Good riddance. Good bye.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Patrick Adams played the Mike character on Suits. IMO he was the most boring storyline. The character lied about his schooling, being a lawyer, previous convictions, etc. He is her best friend irl, supposedly.



He is? Did Marcus get markled?


----------



## tiktok

Now Glennon Doyle is in the fray... comments mostly aligned with the US media perspective but some renegades out there say what we're saying:


----------



## bag-mania

I don't know or particularly care who J. Patrick Adams is, but his grammar mistake confusing flee with flea is hilariously on point. Comparing Meghan to a blood drinking parasite who fed on the UK couldn't be more accurate.


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> Now Glennon Doyle is in the fray... comments mostly aligned with the US media perspective but some renegades out there say what we're saying:




Meh, they are all falling over themselves jumping on the bandwagon.


----------



## Lodpah

They’re really working hard to portray Virgin MM as a saint. Where are her relevant friends? Amal, Serena, Elton John? Things must be getting super hard to go with their narrative that they’re reaching now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Patrick Adams — more than anyone needs to know








						The Truth About The Relationship Between Patrick J. Adams And Meghan Markle - The List
					

Before she was Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex and wife of Prince Harry, she was simply Meghan Markle, the well-known actress, beloved for her portrayal of Rachel Zane in Suits. During that time, she developed a friendship with her on-screen flame, Patrick J. Adams. Read on to find out more!




					www.thelist.com


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> They’re really working hard to portray Virgin MM as a saint. Where are her relevant friends? Amal, Serena, Elton John? Things must be getting super hard to go with their narrative that they’re reaching now.



Elton John doesn't want to give up any future visits with royalty. There's friends and then there are _friends_.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Meh, they are all falling over themselves jumping on the bandwagon.


So now it’s a them against us? Team selection? Those two ingrates leave destruction in their wake. Hopefully this Oprah debacle will settle everything because those two have nothing to bargain with after their “tell all.” Nothing. Absolutely nothing.


----------



## lalame

You would think Meghan or Harry would at least put out a statement to call off the attack dogs sic'd on his family. Yikes. I mean out of nowhere you decide to do a HIGHLY publicized, sensational tell all interview where you clearly blame said family for all of your troubles..... and then all your friends start piling on too? WHO is the victim and who is the perpetrator here again? We're supposed to believe Granny and grandpa are the evil schemers?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> So now it’s a them against us? Team selection? Those two ingrates leave destruction in their wake. Hopefully this Oprah debacle will settle everything because those two have nothing to bargain with after their “tell all.” Nothing. Absolutely nothing.



You never know. They could always star as themselves when their season of The Crown comes around.


----------



## chicinthecity777

tiktok said:


> Now Glennon Doyle is in the fray... comments mostly aligned with the US media perspective but some renegades out there say what we're saying:



Nope, still zero F is given about what this person has to say! I don't know nor do I care who he is!

I doubt any of these people have even set a foot on the UK soil before, let alone know anything or dealt with the BRF before! So yeah F off, the lot of them!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or Queen Maxima of the Netherlands. That said, I read some juicy bits how Marie seems to be Denmark's Meghan, jealous of Mary and trying to be trouble. But other than polite and patient Queen Elizabeth Queen Marghrete wasn't having any of it and nipped it in the bud.


You have to realize that Queen Margrethe has always been a very outspoken person, never afraid to comment on issues of the day sometimes borderline political like immigration. When Princes Frederik & Joachim were involved in some incident during their youth in France, she publicly sanctioned them and made them apologize to the citizens.


----------



## bellecate

Lodpah said:


> Will Harry defend his family?


No, that would require a backbone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> You never know. They could always star as themselves when their season of The Crown comes around.



Too old


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Maybe all these people jumping on the bandwagon and #teammeghan are well known in the US?? But to the rest of us around the world, WHO???? 

Not sure why their opinions are worth more, and doubt the world gives a rat ass about whose team they're on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> You have to realize that Queen Margrethe has always been a very outspoken person, never afraid to comment on issues of the day sometimes borderline political like immigration. When Princes Frederik & Joachim were involved in some incident during their youth in France, she publicly sanctioned them and made them apologize to the citizens.



I'm not even blaming the Queen. I feel no sane person could have suspected what a complete psycho this woman really is.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I just watched the episode of the view from day before yesterday.  they all supported Meghan.  Whoopi more less acted as moderator and didn't say much.  Sunny, as expected was avidly pro H&M.  More than one of them cited M's late night emails as the example of her bullying - like that was the worst thing she did to staff and they handn't heard about anything else.  and they cited Andrew who is so much worse.  Meghan - the conservative - was just as pro-Meghan as the rest of them.
> Basically they all seemed to think the powerful Firm was doing a mean hatchet job on a poor young woman.  Oh, and they should have defended her when she was picked on by the British tabloids.


Yes, these are women ignoring other women being bullied, nice! I noticed that Whoopi didn't comment on it, I wonder if she sees through MM.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not even blaming the Queen. I feel no sane person could have suspected what a complete psycho this woman really is.


Yes, I know, I saw no offense to HM. I was just commenting on two very  different royal house styles. I'm sure that some of Margrethe's comments weren't always welcomed by everyone.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Another gossip outlet I watch is Oh No They Didn't (more millenial crowd)... the trickling clips about the oprah interview had been getting a lot of sympathy for M there. BUT the latest one really seems to have turned the tide. They're now seeing how out of touch M is. Thought that was interesting.
> 
> In case you want to browse the comments... https://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/120234559.html


Great! Anyone with common sense can see how out of touch MM is. I didn't include H, because he is whatever she tells him to be. He is a very problematic man.


----------



## Lodpah

So I read online that a bullying charity is defending MM. How crazy is that? This will lead people who are really bullied to not want to get help. Those two are the most insidious and evil people. They do it through the media. Their hearts are so darkened

Im having faith that reasonable and informed people will see through them. My heart goes out to those bullied and now even a charity that purportedly helps bullied have seemed to turn their back. You can check out the charity at HarryMarkle blog.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Yes, these are women ignoring other women being bullied, nice! I noticed that Whoopi didn't comment on it, I wonder if she sees through MM.


Whoopi also narrates a TV show called _The Con, _so she may be savvy enough to be skeptical_. _Coincidentally, next week's episode is subtitled _The Royal Con._


----------



## Chagall

One thing that MM doesn’t seem to grasp is that the more people know about you the less they are interested. That was Jackie Kennedy’s secret. She remained a complete mystery.


----------



## csshopper

Someday a young man named Archie Harrison Mountbatten Windsor is going to get curious about the generations of people in Great Britain who are his unknown relatives and he's going to do a Google search.......Harry and Meghan will pay the price for the choices they are making and I hope there are funds available for the years of therapy this young man will need. A pox on both his parents.


----------



## kkfiregirl

I don’t see why they needed CBS for this interview- they could have just uploaded the video to youtube.


----------



## youngster

Kaka_bobo said:


> Maybe all these people jumping on the bandwagon and #teammeghan are well known in the US?? But to the rest of us around the world, WHO????
> 
> Not sure why their opinions are worth more, and doubt the world gives a rat ass about whose team they're on.



I'm in the U.S. and I've never heard of them either.  Tweeting support is pretty easy. It probably took them all of a minute to type that.  Let's see if they stand by her and Harry after the results of the Palace investigation are concluded. If Harry and Meghan are guilty of bullying their staff, berating and demeaning them, let's see how many of MM's friends side with them.  They'll go silent most likely.


----------



## mellibelly

Patrick who? Glennon friend of Oprah, the shrieking hags of the View
and let’s not forget the so thirsty she’s dehydrated Chrissy Tiegan and wannabe influencer Meena Harris on team Cringe. Sooo what?! These are all useless celebrities or wannabe celebrities picking sides so they can get future invites. That and their brains are warped from living in the celebrity bubble of self importance, self promotion, narcissism and elitism. These people are not smarter or more interesting than you. I live in LA. They are very ordinary in person, many are incredibly stupid and entitled beyond comprehension. A friend was just telling me yesterday about a celebrity wanting $12,000 worth of product and in return offered to make an Instagram post as payment!

As I said earlier, I don’t know anyone in the real world buying the sob story they’re selling. The general feeling is “read the room”. This is not the time after the year we’ve had for this. If anything I’m taking notes, Netflix and Spotify may soon lose my business.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don't know or particularly care who J. Patrick Adams is, but his grammar mistake confusing flee with flea is hilariously on point. Comparing Meghan to a blood drinking parasite who fed on the UK couldn't be more accurate.
> 
> View attachment 5011607


Excuse me @bag-mania, but I am with Adams on this one. He is absolutely right on the flea/parasite thing.


----------



## Lodpah

MM and her father. Actually her father seems to be very good father.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> MM and her father. Actually her father seems to be very good father.





Holy sh!t but that needs to come with a spoiler alert!!!!


----------



## Lodpah

poopsie said:


> Holy sh!t but that needs to come with a spoiler alert!!!!


Sorry! I hope you will be ok


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


> When all else fails bring out Archie.



Is that Archie or some random prop?  I really don't know.  He looks nothing like his illustrations.


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> Sorry! I hope you will be ok



I'd just switched to my desktop with the large monitor and that just sort of jumps out at you


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> I don't think this interview will reveal much and will all be very choreographed.  Meghan will do some "poor me" whining, talk of her miscarriage while doing the weird bump cradling.  Then H will come in and they will do their nauseating hand holding while Meghan looks up at him adoringly while he speaks.  They will promote their charity, we may get a peak at Archie (in black and white as part of a behind the scenes montage).  No names will be named it will all be "palace staff members".   I bet she told Oprah the topic of her father is off limits or will say so because of the legal battle.  Still I cannot wait to watch this **** show!


and H will say he had to protect his WIFE


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Holy sh!t but that needs to come with a spoiler alert!!!!



What? That she won an English award?

Obviously she was in a class of one that year.


----------



## papertiger

The Telegraph
*Exclusive: Charity Commission reviewing Harry and Meghan's Sussex Royal organisation*

Claire Newell
Fri, 5 March 2021, 8:30 pm







Prince Harry and Meghan face charity review
The Charity Commission is conducting a review of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's philanthropic organisation, The Telegraph can disclose.
Well-placed sources have told The Telegraph the watchdog is examining how Sussex Royal was run and whether it complied with charity law.
The "regulatory and compliance case" is understood to be looking at concerns about the charity before the royal couple decided to shut it down last July following their move to America.
A Charity Commission spokesman said: "Our regulatory compliance case is ongoing. We cannot comment further."
It came as the latest teaser clip was released from the couple's Oprah Winfrey interview, which is set to air in the US on Sunday night and on Monday in the UK.
In it, the Duchess said it felt "liberating" to be able to speak and accused the Royal Family of effectively gagging her and taking away that choice.

She claimed that when Ms Winfrey had first approached her ahead of her wedding, they had not even been allowed to have the conversation without Kensington Palace aides listening in.
Meghan, 39, suggested that now the couple had stepped away from "the construct" of royal life they were free to make their own decisions and said: "It's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk, to be able to make a choice on your own and to be able to speak for yourself," she said.
Tensions with the Royal Family have escalated in recent days, amid allegations that claims the Duchess bullied her staff were part of an orchestrated smear campaign by palace aides.
The Telegraph understands that members of the family have been in contact with Prince Harry this week to find out what is disclosed in the no-holds barred chat. Buckingham Palace has not been given an advanced copy of the interview.
The Duchess is thought to confirm rumours of a rift with her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, by suggesting she was among those who failed to support her as a newcomer to the Royal fold.
"There is going to be a lot of discussion about how Meghan felt unsupported – including by Kate," a US TV insider revealed.
It is understood that the Charity Commission had not yet determined whether or not there was any wrongdoing at Sussex Royal.
A "regulatory compliance case" falls short of a formal investigation. If the regulator finds wrongdoing, it can then issue formal regulatory advice or use a power such as an official warning.
The charity was founded after the couple decided to break away from The Royal Foundation, the charity they previously ran with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.




The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge watch a flypast from the balcony of Buckingham Palace in 2018 - Max Mumby/Indigo /Getty Images Europe
The Charity Commission first looked at The Royal Foundation and Sussex Royal in July after Republic, the anti-monarchy campaign group, asked it to examine nearly £300,000 of grants, including £145,000 given to the Sussexes' former UK charity.
At the time, the Commission said it was assessing information in the complaint to determine whether it was appropriate to investigate.
According to well-placed sources, it examined whether it was appropriate for the Royal Foundation to have transferred the money to Sussex Royal in the first place.
The watchdog is understood to have deemed it appropriate. It is understood that some of the trustees of the Royal Foundation have expressed "disappointment" that the money given to Sussex Royal was effectively wasted on a Foundation that was dissolved shortly afterwards.
A source said it was "very frustrating" and looked from the outside like "rash" decision-making by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, adding: "They might have thought about that before setting it up, but using charitable money to set up a foundation is completely legitimate and it happens all the time. The issue was setting it up and closing it down months later."
In addition to the £145,000 grant to Sussex Royal, The Royal Foundation made grants totalling £151,856 "for the continued development of the Duke of Sussex's Sustainable Tourism programme, Travalyst".
It is understood that some money from the Royal Foundation was also earmarked for the community kitchen set up for victims of the Grenfell Tower fire. 
It is unclear if the Royal Foundation is also being reviewed by the Commission.
Lawyers for the Sussexes said: "Sussex Royal was managed by a board of trustees which made decisions about the charity in accordance with its constitutional document and the requirements of charity law.
"Therefore, any suggestion of mismanagement or decision making being handled in a 'rash' fashion solely by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be entirely false."


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Holy sh!t but that needs to come with a spoiler alert!!!!


He seems very sweet and she seemed like a normal kid.  He's probably still a sweet man, but we know how she turned out.


----------



## Lodpah

mellibelly said:


> Patrick who? Glennon friend of Oprah, the shrieking hags of the View
> and let’s not forget the so thirsty she’s dehydrated Chrissy Tiegan and wannabe influencer Meena Harris on team Cringe. Sooo what?! These are all useless celebrities or wannabe celebrities picking sides so they can get future invites. That and their brains are warped from living in the celebrity bubble of self importance, self promotion, narcissism and elitism. These people are not smarter or more interesting than you. I live in LA. They are very ordinary in person, many are incredibly stupid and entitled beyond comprehension. A friend was just telling me yesterday about a celebrity wanting $12,000 worth of product and in return offered to make an Instagram post as payment!
> 
> As I said earlier, I don’t know anyone in the real world buying the sob story they’re selling. The general feeling is “read the room”. This is not the time after the year we’ve had for this. If anything I’m taking notes, Netflix and Spotify may soon lose my business.


You’re absolutely right. Read the room. It’s all hyper media cause the more they shout pushing this show it means one thing: no one cares.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> What? That she won an English award?
> 
> Obviously she was in a class of one that year.



No............that crazy-eyed photo. I never even clicked on the vid part. I have to watch video on my phone or tablets


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, these are women ignoring other women being bullied, nice! I noticed that Whoopi didn't comment on it, I wonder if she sees through MM.


I think Whoopi tries to be kinda neutral or open minded on a lot of things.....yet people seem to dislike her....it's like they have an idea of who she is and they don't necessarily listen to what she says.  I'm not a huge fan of hers but this is what I see


----------



## purseinsanity

Yanca said:


> what a shocker !! Chrissy Teigen join the issue. why am I not surprise.


Another woman with a massive head and more self importance than warranted.  They gotta stick together, don't cha know?


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> The Telegraph
> *Exclusive: Charity Commission reviewing Harry and Meghan's Sussex Royal organisation*
> 
> Claire Newell
> Fri, 5 March 2021, 8:30 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan face charity review
> The Charity Commission is conducting a review of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's philanthropic organisation, The Telegraph can disclose.
> Well-placed sources have told The Telegraph the watchdog is examining how Sussex Royal was run and whether it complied with charity law.
> The "regulatory and compliance case" is understood to be looking at concerns about the charity before the royal couple decided to shut it down last July following their move to America.
> A Charity Commission spokesman said: "Our regulatory compliance case is ongoing. We cannot comment further."
> It came as the latest teaser clip was released from the couple's Oprah Winfrey interview, which is set to air in the US on Sunday night and on Monday in the UK.
> In it, the Duchess said it felt "liberating" to be able to speak and accused the Royal Family of effectively gagging her and taking away that choice.
> 
> She claimed that when Ms Winfrey had first approached her ahead of her wedding, they had not even been allowed to have the conversation without Kensington Palace aides listening in.
> Meghan, 39, suggested that now the couple had stepped away from "the construct" of royal life they were free to make their own decisions and said: "It's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk, to be able to make a choice on your own and to be able to speak for yourself," she said.
> Tensions with the Royal Family have escalated in recent days, amid allegations that claims the Duchess bullied her staff were part of an orchestrated smear campaign by palace aides.
> The Telegraph understands that members of the family have been in contact with Prince Harry this week to find out what is disclosed in the no-holds barred chat. Buckingham Palace has not been given an advanced copy of the interview.
> The Duchess is thought to confirm rumours of a rift with her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, by suggesting she was among those who failed to support her as a newcomer to the Royal fold.
> "There is going to be a lot of discussion about how Meghan felt unsupported – including by Kate," a US TV insider revealed.
> It is understood that the Charity Commission had not yet determined whether or not there was any wrongdoing at Sussex Royal.
> A "regulatory compliance case" falls short of a formal investigation. If the regulator finds wrongdoing, it can then issue formal regulatory advice or use a power such as an official warning.
> The charity was founded after the couple decided to break away from The Royal Foundation, the charity they previously ran with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge watch a flypast from the balcony of Buckingham Palace in 2018 - Max Mumby/Indigo /Getty Images Europe
> The Charity Commission first looked at The Royal Foundation and Sussex Royal in July after Republic, the anti-monarchy campaign group, asked it to examine nearly £300,000 of grants, including £145,000 given to the Sussexes' former UK charity.
> At the time, the Commission said it was assessing information in the complaint to determine whether it was appropriate to investigate.
> According to well-placed sources, it examined whether it was appropriate for the Royal Foundation to have transferred the money to Sussex Royal in the first place.
> The watchdog is understood to have deemed it appropriate. It is understood that some of the trustees of the Royal Foundation have expressed "disappointment" that the money given to Sussex Royal was effectively wasted on a Foundation that was dissolved shortly afterwards.
> A source said it was "very frustrating" and looked from the outside like "rash" decision-making by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, adding: "They might have thought about that before setting it up, but using charitable money to set up a foundation is completely legitimate and it happens all the time. The issue was setting it up and closing it down months later."
> In addition to the £145,000 grant to Sussex Royal, The Royal Foundation made grants totalling £151,856 "for the continued development of the Duke of Sussex's Sustainable Tourism programme, Travalyst".
> It is understood that some money from the Royal Foundation was also earmarked for the community kitchen set up for victims of the Grenfell Tower fire.
> It is unclear if the Royal Foundation is also being reviewed by the Commission.
> Lawyers for the Sussexes said: "Sussex Royal was managed by a board of trustees which made decisions about the charity in accordance with its constitutional document and the requirements of charity law.
> "Therefore, any suggestion of mismanagement or decision making being handled in a 'rash' fashion solely by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be entirely false."


Checkmate. The gloves are off. No more protecting their “integrity.” Let it all hang out.

So if the trend continues maybe something super newsworthy will eclipse this circus show sham (of course only newsworthy that it’s a good thing, like people getting their much needed stimulus cause it’s real out there the suffering and every one is busy taking care of business or something fabulous like a new anticipated movie is released tonight or Sunday).


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> Yes, and her Suits co-star, Patrick something, going on about *how a member of the royal family is "growing inside her.*"  I am so sick of the idea that pregnancy shields a woman from any and all criticism or responsibility for their cr*p.


Allegedly.  Unless I do the ultrasound myself, I ain't buying it any more!


----------



## Chanbal

Remove titles and allowances, and goodbye and good luck bambinos! 

*Queen has not been given 'advance copy' of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah interview as senior royals and Palace aides 'reserve judgement' and will decide after show's release if it warrants a public response*

The Queen has not been given an 'advanced copy' of Meghan and Harry's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey, reports claim.

Senior royals and Palace aides will watch the much-anticipated interview 'at the same time' as the rest of the world with network CBS set to air the two-hour special in the US at 1am UK time on Sunday night.

Officials have vowed to 'reserve judgement' on the show and will decide on Monday whether to make a public response in light of anything specific Meghan and Harry have to say. ITV will broadcast it at 9pm that evening.


A friend earlier said Meghan would never ask to postpone Sunday's release of her tell-all interview with Oprah and said the royal family is using the Duke of Edinburgh's health as an excuse to keep her 'muzzled'. 

Although most of the interview will be a one-to-one chat on what the duchess has to say about her brief but acrimonious time as a working royal, Harry is understood to come in towards the end to have his say on the media and discuss their plans for the future. 

*It is believed that this approach has in part been done in an attempt to distance himself from any of the stronger allegations made about his own family by his wife. 

But if the 36-year-old prince, who is still sixth in line to the throne, thinks it will go any way to protecting his already fragile relationships with his relatives, notably his brother, the Duke of Cambridge, he will have to think again. *

William has barely spoken to his brother in recent months and their relationship is said to be 'hanging by a thread' – although Prince Charles is understood to have tried not to get involved. 

Despairing officials also cannot believe that Harry is so 'blinkered' that he cannot see how the interview is likely to destroy any vestige of trust between him and his family.  

QE is patiently waiting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> is that even possible------- To skip Charles and go straight to Will



Can't imagine what that would do to Charles and Will's relationship. I doubt it will happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: these ‘supporters’ are most likely working for the PR company, not H&M
Pay these people enough and they will say anything. Times are tough.


----------



## purseinsanity

Yanca said:


> Here's one more thing I don't get,  ( some)  People here in theUS are always sprouting, inclusivity, equality, all voices should be heard, respect of other cultures and other values, and then celebrities  will say BRF is archaic and   should have been abolished years ago, WHO are they to say and decide for another country and group of people?? Meghan is not the first foreigner to marry into royalty but Princess Mary and Marie of Denmark seemed not to make a lot of waves, and followed the customs, protocols and respected the tradition of the family they married in to.


Because many people in the US suddenly subscribe to the "Rules for Thee, Not for Me" philosophy.  The ultimate hypocrites!


----------



## marietouchet

Why are the Harkles doing the interview ?

Well it is NOT a for big bucks, they get nada, and neither does a charity of their choice.

CBS is making a fortune, dunno about OW, but not the Harkles 

Clearly, it is all about a voice AT ALL COSTS


----------



## mshermes

bellecate said:


> No, that would require a backbone.


And.....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wouldn’t it be just perfect if Chas told us that the Haz is not his kid???!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> Yikes, J. Patrick Adams steps into it now. THIS is what Meghan and Harry wanted?  Bad vibes all around.
> 
> View attachment 5011571
> 
> 
> Source: https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...adams-slams-palace-amid-bullying-accusations/


Sigh, you know what bothers me?  If someone wants to act pompous, all knowing, and condescending, please use proper spellings and grammar, otherwise you look extremely foolish to those of us that are actually educated.  

If you're trying to paint Meg as a victim who fled (FLEE) the UK under to cover of darkness, Patrick, please use the correct spelling, otherwise you are referring to Meg as a small, flightless insect that survives as an external parasite on mammals and birds (FLEA). 

Or maybe you're actually correct and giving amazingly brilliant shade that went over my head?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I don't know or particularly care who J. Patrick Adams is, but his grammar mistake confusing flee with flea is hilariously on point. Comparing Meghan to a blood drinking parasite who fed on the UK couldn't be more accurate.
> 
> View attachment 5011607


OMG just saw your post!       Sorry, posted mine too late!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I think Whoopi tries to be kinda neutral or open minded on a lot of things.....yet people seem to dislike her....it's like they have an idea of who she is and they don't necessarily listen to what she says.  I'm not a huge fan of hers but this is what I see


I don't know much about Whoopi. I always liked her as an actress, and she gave me the impression of being direct and open minded. This is why I thought that she was not being fooled by MM's story.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@mshermes 
Wow! Blue balls! MM really squeezed the hell out of those balls.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't know much about Whoopi. I always liked her as an actress, and she gave me the impression of being direct and open minded. This is why I thought that she was not being fooled by MM's story.


she was the only one who didn't really comment.  and when their engagement was announced I remember she was very excited.  said something to the effect that this would give little girls of color a very positive idea - that they too could be a princess


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> @mshermes
> Wow! Blue balls! MM really squeezed the hell out of those balls.


I expect them to be black and eschared soon...


----------



## CarryOn2020

We’ve covered the spelling error, but consider these points:

— the use of caps. He is shouting at us. Methinks thou dost protest too much. Is this his kid?

— growing inside of her??? Good grief, this must be his kid. Harry has said nothing.

— promoting and amplifying. Seems redundant. Calm down, do you need yoga?

— mental health. How many times do H&M talk about their mental health? Such a fragile flower. Seriously, get some therapy ASAP.

— admonish, berate and torment ?   Good  to know she is feeling  a lil bit of the angst she has spewed out.

This guy is unhinged.  Plus, he is an awful actor.

‘One Last Con‘ was the title of the last Suits show. Hmmmm.

ETA: 
https://www.eonline.com/news/119551...d-to-reach-out-to-suits-co-star-meghan-markle
The last time the _Suits_ stars spoke was around the time that Harry and Meghan welcomed Archie in May 2019, and Patrick and Troian added baby Aurora Adams to the fam in October 2018.

"After our children were born, there were some texts sent and gifts sent, but I guess I'm a little scared," Patrick said. "I think it's pure fear. I guess I'm scared about the idea of breaking through whatever walls exist to have that conversation."


lalame said:


> Yikes, J. Patrick Adams steps into it now. THIS is what Meghan and Harry wanted?  Bad vibes all around.
> 
> View attachment 5011571
> 
> 
> Source: https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...adams-slams-palace-amid-bullying-accusations/


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> MM and her father. Actually her father seems to be very good father.



This made me sad as I viewed it, no wonder her father feels gutted if this is any indication of the earlier years.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, wow, Wyatt is inspired!!!!   

PETRONELLA WYATT *Meghan Markle has convinced cheerful Prince Harry he was desperately miserable all along*

I disagree with my friend Piers Morgan that its broadcast is a scandal, given that the Duke of Edinburgh is recovering from heart surgery. In my view, it would be a scandal if it wasn’t shown.
Not since Peter Finch’s character threatened to blow his brains out on live TV in the 1976 film Network has anyone committed such a public act of self-destruction. When the credits roll, I have a feeling that the heads of Haz and Megs will roll with them.

The Prince of Sighs and the Duchess of Self Delusion have committed their ultimate act of folly. They should have remembered the saying “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. And boy, has their house turned out to be glass of the least durable kind.

That slick trailer promised heartrending tales of Meghan’s victimhood. These include her “silencing” by bullying palace officials and her “almost unsurvivable” ordeals, presumably at the hands of the British Press, to the extent that Harry says, between gulps, that his greatest concern was: “History repeating itself.” 

But it’s all gone horribly wrong for The World’s Greatest Victim. No less a paper than The Times reported on Wednesday that Meghan had faced allegations, which she denies, that she bullied two female members of her private staff at Kensington Palace, who were then allegedly silenced by way of NDA agreements.

*CROCODILE TEARS *
Delicious, isn’t it? To make matters worse for our tragic heroine, it was revealed that Markle sparkled at a banquet in 2018 in cascades of diamonds that were a wedding present from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is accused not only of ordering the assassination of a journalist (something in her dreams Meghan would doubtless like to do herself) but has kept the women of his country in virtual slavery.

Not a good look in both senses of the phrase. But Megs has always wanted to have her diamonds and wear them. I sometimes wonder into what sort of a mirror she looks at herself every morning? 

The woman believes herself to be a swan among swans, the physical, moral and intellectual peer of such great figures as Emmeline Pankhurst, Audrey Hepburn and Mother Teresa. Where self-knowledge should be is a hole so large it could be filled by a new galaxy. 

It is not the Royal Family but Megs and Haz who should hide behind the sofa in embarrassment.

One striking irony about personalities such as Meghan is that they continually attack others for the faults that they themselves possess, using them as stalking horses under the cover of which they cry great crocodile tears.

Markle likes to present herself as a perfect presence, a woman of crystal, unsoiled, guileless, dewy. Harry, like all weak men, goes along with this as a bedroom back-seat driver to the extent of fanaticism. 

Last year the couple were accused of cooperating on a book about themselves with the ridiculous title Finding Freedom, which begged the question did they think they were Mr and Mrs Nelson Mandela? 

Only Mandela spent 27 years in a South African jail. Meghan spent just over one year in the luxury of the British Royal Family. No matter; she appears to see herself as a secular saint, and like a saint has to endure unspeakable suffering daily. 

I cannot help but feel that Meghan actually enjoys being unhappy and wronged. 

She seems to have convinced a once cheerful and uncomplicated Harry that he was really desperately miserable all along, and abominably ill-served by all around him, to the point where his once-smiling features have set into a permanent, resentful frown.

Let’s rewind to Meghan and Harry’s move to Los Angeles, in what looks like the first staging post on the Duchess’s quest to convince an awestruck world of her stature as an humanitarian and A-list personality; to take her rightful place in the pantheon alongside George and Amal Clooney, Serena Williams and the Obamas. 
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
The harder she and Harry tried to coerce us into acknowledging their worth, the more they resembled gilt as opposed to genuine 18-carat gold. 

We were treated to self-indulgent podcasts, patronising homilies on race and equality, the announcement of a tawdry and undeserved deal with the streaming giant Netflix, and then the photoshoot of pregnant Meghan lying on the grass beside a barefooted Harry. It tried so hard to be Hollywood, but it looked like Hollyoaks. 

And the discordant soundtrack to all of this? Meghan’s continual, histrionic pleas for privacy, while acting like Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard, permanently ready for her close-up.

Meghan has made her distaste for journalists known at every turn, even suing one British paper. She has now accused The Times of “peddling a false narrative” to smear her character. That’s rich. Meghan peddles her own narrative so fast she could outdistance the entire Tour de France.

Moreover, it seems that some journalists are more her equal than others. One can only marvel that she and Harry have put themselves into the hands of Oprah, the world’s most ruthless operator, who will squeeze them like an orange and then cast the peel into the nearest refuse dump. 

But Meghan’s entire life has been a masquerade. She thinks she is a brilliant actress, perhaps one of the best of her generation. But for some reason she never managed to win any parts worth having.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
*IMPRISONED IN PALACES*
Playing Rachel in the cable TV drama Suits was the apogee of her career. How come her transcendent talent has languished unrecognised?

Yet she attempts to set up her stall among the cream of America; among people whose fame is of the solid and enduring kind that is based on extraordinary talent and grindingly hard work. 

Meghan’s one big chance to prove her merit was as a dutiful member of the Royal Family. When the curtain came up on the first act of her new, starring role, her audience — namely the British public — were warm to the point of effusion. So were the Press, though the Sussexes have singled them out for particular opprobrium. 

The Queen even gave Meghan privileges, such as allowing her to stay at Sandringham before her marriage, that were denied to her sister-in-law, Kate. Could the barometer have been set more fair?

During the Oprah interview, Meghan will discuss “race in Britain”. Doubtless it will be some woke diatribe against the institutionalised racism of the British. Hard to watch straight-faced when Megs married a man who found it amusing to wear a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party. Oprah, of course, will be suitably impressed and horror-struck by her devastating tales of life in the heart of the Royal Family. If only we had realised how wretched it must have been! 

Imprisoned in palaces, forced to wear jewels and frocks beyond price, served, literally, on bended knee by liveried courtiers. Chauffeured around in stultifying limousines, protected and pampered at the expense of the British taxpayer. How humiliating for a couple who loudly trumpet their “independence”! 

And, their supporters might add, what of the inhumane tedium of having to perform royal duties — surely that contravened their human rights? 

Poor Meghan had to shake hands with unwashed plebs on a weekly basis. She even had to do walkabouts in the rain, for Heaven’s sake, and was a tragic captive of a thing called protocol. Meghan and Harry were actually forced to walk behind Prince William and his wife Kate. Even Mandela was never subject to such an ordeal.

The trouble is that this sorry pair have always relied less on their memory than their imaginations. There is a type of person who, according to their own account, is perpetually the victim of unwarranted criticism and unkindness. 

People of this kind can, like Meghan, seem plausible and secure sympathy from those who do not know them. There is nothing inherently improbable about each separate story they relate — a treacherous father (Thomas Markle), a cruel article in the Press, an encounter with a bully, even an incident of racism. This kind of ill treatment does sometimes occur in the life of a famous person. 

What in the end arouses suspicion is the multiplicity of villains whom it has been the sufferer’s ill fortune to meet. 

*PERSECUTION MANIA*
If one individual claims to receive almost universal bad treatment, the likelihood is the cause lies in themselves, and that they either imagine these injuries or behave in such a way as to arouse uncontrollable irritation. This appears to have led, in Meghan’s case, and now Harry’s, almost to a sort of Persecution Mania. 

The Sussexes expect everyone to feel towards them the same unquestioning love and respect that they feel towards themselves. But neither have the talent to work for their high living, particularly Harry. They know that Prince Charles, who is, according to royal sources, hurt and dismayed by their ingratitude, will not finance, ad infinitum, the LA lifestyle of a couple approaching middle age. 

So they have turned to Oprah as a way of building their financial “brand”. No matter that this may wound Harry’s closest family, including his father and grandmother, our irreproachable Queen, while her 99-year-old husband receives painful hospital treatment for a heart condition.

There was always a tragic inevitability about it. Having left the safety of the Royal Family and upped sticks to ruthless, hypocritical La La Land, they cannot escape the toils they have made for themselves. 
Genuine celebrity is like diamonds; its value depends on a controlled and limited output, yet as the world endures a terrible pandemic, this pair will undertake a two-hour moanathon.

There may, nonetheless, be foolish and gullible people, the sort who are a sucker for conspiracy theories and tales of wicked royals — and there are many in America — who will believe them. But the sophisticates the Sussexes love and aspire to join will be laughing at them. 

In urbane American society, in the world of the Clooneys and the Obamas, Meghan will never be taken seriously again. She has descended too deeply into the mud. 

That is why I say of Oprah; bring it on!  
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> she was the only one who didn't really comment.  and when their engagement was announced I remember she was very excited.  said something to the effect that this would give little girls of color a very positive idea - that they too could be a princess


I agree, and MM failed the little girls. That makes me sad and mad.


----------



## Straight-Laced

MM should never be thought of as an inspiration to little girls - she’s an inspiration to con artists the world over.


----------



## V0N1B2

purseinsanity said:


> Is that Archie or some random prop?  I really don't know.  He looks nothing like his illustrations.


I think that tweeter had to remove the Ar-Kay photo from her tweet. I bet Meghan was planning to have Merchie, erm I mean Archie walk or crawl into the frame as she’s pouring her heart out to Oprah about never knowing what love was until she felt the love of her child (or whatever bullish!t people spew about that nonsense) like it was a total accident that her kid just happened to be crawling around the living room or garden with a flower in his hand for mommy. You can bet her fan will have Arkay’s play suit and where to buy it on her Twitter minutes after she rolls the kid out for his big reveal. 
And I can almost guarantee that Oprah is not going to ask Meghan about her due date, and if she does it will be the crowd favourite - “this Spring”. LAWL


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Although most of the interview will be a one-to-one chat on what the duchess has to say about her brief but acrimonious time as a working royal, Harry is understood to come in towards the end to have his say on the media and discuss their plans for the future.
> 
> *It is believed that this approach has in part been done in an attempt to distance himself from any of the stronger allegations made about his own family by his wife.
> 
> But if the 36-year-old prince, who is still sixth in line to the throne, thinks it will go any way to protecting his already fragile relationships with his relatives, notably his brother, the Duke of Cambridge, he will have to think again.*



If Harry thinks he can "distance himself" from what Meghan says, he's an even bigger idiot than I thought.  He's put a flaming torch to the last of his relationship with his brother and likely all of the rest of his family too. It would probably be highly amusing to hear him try to explain himself to Charles and Will and the Queen though lol!  Would love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation.

Interesting too, that the Spencer relatives, are very, _very_ silent. They probably don't know Meghan at all. Not like Harry and she were hanging about with any of Harry's cousins from Diana's side.  She wasn't in the UK for more than a blink of an eyelash.  Still, I figure the silence is revealing, especially since Diana's brother has never been hesitant to speak up before.  So, the Spencers are staying well out of it, along with Harry's former life long friends.


----------



## jennlt

Lots of big numbers.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Interview With Oprah Fetches at Least $7 Million From CBS
					

The network was seeking about $325,000 for 30 seconds of commercial time in the highly anticipated interview, ad buyers said.




					www.wsj.com
				




*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Interview With Oprah Fetches at Least $7 Million From CBS*
*The network was seeking about $325,000 for 30 seconds of commercial time in highly-anticipated interview, ad buyers say*





*Oprah Winfrey’s two-hour interview with Prince Harry and Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle is scheduled for Sunday on CBS at 8 p.m.*
PHOTO: HARPO PRODUCTIONS/REUTERS
By 
Joe Flint
 and 
Suzanne Vranica
March 5, 2021 6:37 pm ET

Talk isn’t cheap when it comes to Oprah Winfrey, Prince Harry and Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle.
CBS is paying a license fee of between $7 million and $9 million for the rights to air Ms. Winfrey’s interview with Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex, according to people familiar with the pact.
The two-hour interview is scheduled for Sunday on CBS at 8 p.m. ET, after the network’s popular news magazine “60 Minutes.” Sunday is one of the biggest nights of television consumption.
As part of the agreement between CBS and Ms. Winfrey’s production company, Harpo Productions, the network also has rights to license the special in international markets. In the U.K., the interview will air Monday on ITV. CBS is a unit of ViacomCBS Inc.
A spokeswoman for the couple said they are not being compensated for the interview.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Long read in The Telegraph UK today.  
Some things in here that I hadn't heard before ... the Scotland tour where Palace PR 'body blocked' one of Meghan's former advisers because M didn't want to make eye contact with her ... ?!!!









						The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm
					

As the Sussexes tell-all to Oprah Winfrey, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				



*'She wanted drama': The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm*
As the Sussexes give their tell-all Oprah Winfrey interview, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'


There was something distinctly familiar about the Oprah Winfrey teaser in which Prince Harry declared: "My biggest concern was history repeating itself."

The words, due to be aired during the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes' tell-all interview on Sunday night, bore an uncanny resemblance to the statement released by Harry's communications secretary, Jason Knauf, in November 2016 after the Sunday Express had revealed that the Prince was dating the American actress.

Confirming that "his girlfriend Meghan Markle" had been "subject to a wave of abuse and harassment", the statement criticised the "racial undertones" of newspaper coverage, adding: "Prince Harry is worried about Ms Markle's safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. This is not a game – it is her life and his."

The unprecedented salvo created two important narratives around the former Suits star – it formally confirmed her status as the woman in Harry's life but also positioned her, in the eyes of the palace and the public, as the victim at the heart of a media "storm". As the statement suggested, a line had been "crossed".


But the tirade "by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry" also put Mr Knauf in a compromising position. How was the former director of corporate affairs for the Royal Bank of Scotland going to be able to handle media relations for a couple when the Prince had so publicly made plain their deep hostility towards the press?

Almost exactly two years later, the 39-year-old spin doctor would submit a a bullying claim accusing Meghan of driving two personal assistants out of the household and undermining the confidence of a third staff member.

The Sussexes have denied that Harry pleaded with Mr Knauf not to pursue it, claiming the couple are the victims of a calculated smear campaign based on harmful misinformation. They said the Duchess was "saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma".

Those highlighting the "outrageous bullying" say they want to "tell the other side of the story" to the picture expected to be painted by the Duchess on the Oprah special of her "almost unsurvivable" time in the Royal family. "Anyone who is a victim can't bear to watch it," said one.

The couple's lawyers insist Buckingham Palace is manipulating the press to peddle a "wholly false narrative" –notwithstanding the fact that the complainants no longer work in the royal household and the lack of palace action has now prompted an internal inquiry.


The Telegraph has spoken to a number of well-placed insiders who witnessed first-hand the turmoil within the royal household from Meghan's arrival as Prince Harry's girlfriend to the couple's decision to stand down as working royals last year.

All spoke on the condition of anonymity amid claims they had been operating in a "climate of fear", where employees were routinely "humiliated" in front of their peers and repeatedly subjected to "unreasonable demands" by both Meghan and Harry.

Unwilling to play a supporting role

It was not until October 2017, a year after Mr Knauf's unprecedented statement that Meghan gave an interview to Vanity Fair in which she declared of her relationship with Harry: "We're in love. I'm sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell, but what I hope people will understand is that this is our time."

The public did not have to wait long. Just a month later, the couple announced their engagement with a photocall in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace and an interview with the BBC's Mishal Husain in which Harry described his fiancee as "another team player as part of the bigger team".

Yet behind palace gates, it was quickly becoming apparent that Meghan had no intention of she and Harry being seen as the "supporting act" to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, despite their seniority in the royal pecking order.

That Christmas, determined to walk side by side with William and Kate to Sandringham's St Mary Magdalene Church, rather than several steps behind, they were pictured together as the so-called "Fab Four".

The Cambridges invited the Sussexes to spend the festive period at their nearby bolthole, Anmer Hall, an experience Meghan spoke of fondly afterwards. "Meghan was very positive about it," said a former aide.

Two months later, the quartet appeared at their first official event together at the inaugural forum of their Royal Foundation – a highly choreographed event described by one royal insider as "designed to send a message that they would be working as a team. It was all very carefully rehearsed beforehand".

Disagreements with the Cambridges

After Meghan showcased her years of previous work with "larger NGOs and smaller grassroots organisations", both William and Harry acknowledged that working so closely with loved ones had led to "healthy disagreements" over how to best guide the foundation's work.

"Working as a family does have its challenges, of course it does," Harry said. "But we're stuck together for the rest of our lives."

By now, Kensington Palace staff had already become familiar with a mantra that would come to characterise the run-up to the Sussexes' wedding in May 2018.

"What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" may have been shouted by Prince Harry to Angela Kelly, the Queen's personal assistant, following a row over a tiara – but royal aides were already well acquainted with the importance of meeting the Duchess's exacting standards.

"Everyone wanted her to be happy because they knew that would make him happy," said one. "Do whatever it takes to make it work for Meghan was the mantra. We all cared deeply about Harry. Contrary to this idea that they weren't supported, we were going to great lengths to accommodate their needs."

'We all cared deeply about Harry,' said one royal aide CREDIT: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP

So much so that there was an extraordinary incident during the couple's first tour of Scotland when members of the palace PR team "body blocked" Meghan's former adviser Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne during a visit to an Edinburgh cafe in what one former aide described as "the most embarrassing moment of my professional career".

The Duchess had apparently expressed "a reluctance to make eye contact" with Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne, who was reduced to having to post an Instagram shot of her former close friend and client visiting the Social Bites cafe from a considerable distance. "Anyone from the past was a problem," observed the former aide.

Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne's name would later reappear in court documents accusing Meghan's close friend and stylist Jessica Mulroney of "putting pressure on her [Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne] to withdraw or change statements" she had made in an April 2018 interview with the Mail on Sunday.

The defence documents claimed the Sunday newspaper's features editor complained about the intervention to Mr Knauf, who allegedly responded by saying he would ensure "this does not happen again". In the piece, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne described Meghan as: "Picky, not only when it comes to her clothes but also her colleagues, instantly dismissing those who didn’t share her 'vision'."

Describing how the Duchess had "given me a bit of a difficult time" after meeting Harry, she added: "Meghan likes to move on".

When contacted by The Telegraph, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne declined to comment on the incident.

'Email bombardments'

As the world was gearing up for what the LA Times had billed as "a royal wedding for the 21st century", behind palace gates the atmosphere was becoming fraught.

Staff had grown used to "email bombardments" by Meghan and Harry, with one describing how "the last thing we'd do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we'd do in the morning is reply to their messages. Weekends, holidays – there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time".

Despite publicly claiming they largely ignored the press coverage, in reality the couple were often consumed by it. "They're both very thin-skinned," said one former employee.

Meghan's supporters say staff members "who preferred a more genteel pace" could not keep up with the Duchess's "American work ethic" – with one close friend now suggesting the criticism was racially motivated. "Find me a woman of colour in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace," the friend said.

Yet it was not just palace employees who found themselves on the receiving end of "inescapable screaming and shouting".

Much has been written about the bridesmaids' dress fitting, first revealed in The Telegraph in November 2018, that left the Duchess of Cambridge in tears.

Contrary to subsequent reports that the row concerned Princess Charlotte's tights, what actually happened was that the dress itself did not fit Kate's then nearly three-year-old daughter. According to a well-placed source, "demands were made about when subsequent fittings would be, and Kate left sobbing".

While Meghan's allies suggest that Kate did not make enough of an effort to welcome her future sister-in-law into the royal fold, allies of the Cambridges suggest she "tried to arrange social things" and invited her to watch tennis together but "there was a sense that Meghan never really wanted to be friends".

Those inside the palace concede, however, that the Cambridges can "appear standoffish" and are "often out of contact for extended periods".

Another former royal aide claimed the Duke, particularly, appreciated the "deflection" from his own occasionally demanding behaviour. "Bullying is endemic across all the households," the former aide added.

"The Meghan thing is a disgrace, but it's not in isolation. They cut you out, undermine you, talk down to you. One minute you're in – the next you're persona non grata. Some staff have special protection. I've never witnessed behaviour like it before. I wish I'd never seen behind the curtain."

A reprimand from the Queen

One member of staff afforded "special protection" is Angela Kelly, who has served as the Queen's closest aide since 2002. Rumours of Meghan being dubbed "Duchess Difficult" began to surface around the time it emerged that the Liverpudlian docker's daughter had been given a tongue-lashing by Harry.

Yet what was never accurately reported around the time of "Tiaragate" was that far from being denied the item from the Crown Jewels she wanted, Meghan was in fact given her first choice.

The argument erupted after the Duchess demanded that Queen Mary's Diamond Bandeau Tiara be produced for an unscheduled hairdressing appointment.

"Angela told Harry it was priceless and couldn't suddenly be handed over at short notice. He was furious and shouted: 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.' Suffice to say it didn't go down too well." So badly, in fact, that the no-nonsense 53-year-old, who has her own fearsome reputation among colleagues, reported the incident to the Queen, prompting a grandmotherly telling off for Harry.

Little did the Prince know at the time that staff had also given him a nickname: "The hostage".

According to one person with first-hand knowledge of the events: "They insisted that they had the same inflation-adjusted budget for the wedding as William and Kate – she got the choir she wanted, the dress, the carriage procession, the tiara – she got everything she wanted but it still wasn't enough.

"She was constantly looking for reasons to say she had been deprived. Also, she wanted drama from the very beginning."

Although the couple wanted their spokespeople to deny it, a story about Meghan requesting air freshener to be sprayed around the "musty" St George's Chapel was true, according to multiple sources.

Even The Kingdom Choir did not get off lightly after the couple changed their song 12 times before they were happy with the arrangement of "Stand By Me". As choir member Karen Gibson revealed: "Gospel music is all about the cherries on top and it's not about stinting on anything. But we got word back that they wanted something a little less, so we did a second version which had an Etta James arrangement but again we had word back that it wasn't right."

The group was then asked to meet Harry and Meghan face to face, before the couple finally settled on an arrangement after 11 previous attempts.

"The wedding was hugely stressful for everyone involved in it," said one former aide. "Staff were spending most of their time having smooth things over with suppliers."

Tears before the big day

The "Markle Debacle", when Meghan's father Thomas pulled out of the wedding at the last minute, only added to the tension as royal aides scrambled to "rescue" the narrative around the "big day" by having the Prince of Wales step in to walk Meghan down the aisle.

Despite Meghan later claiming to ITV's Tom Bradby that "not many people have asked if I'm ok", royal insiders insist they "rallied around" the couple – who were both in tears at times.

The Most Rev Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who officiated the ceremony, is also understood to have given "psychological as well as spiritual" support. The principle leader of the Church of England caused hilarity among his staff by failing to recognise Ms Winfrey at the lunchtime reception at Windsor Castle, asking the US chat show host what she did for a living.

By the time the couple had returned from their honeymoon, relations between the Sussexes, the Cambridges and their staff became so bad that Harry and Meghan appeared reluctant to engage with anyone at the June 2018 leaving party for Miguel Head, William's former private secretary.

According to two separate sources, the couple "remained aloof" throughout the bash in the private garden at Kensington Palace. "It was a really convivial atmosphere with William giving a touching speech about Mig, but Harry and Meghan just remained on the outskirts and didn't mingle with anyone. They were the last to arrive and the first to leave."

Eyebrows were similarly raised when, having shared the news of her pregnancy at the Champagne reception following Princess Eugenie's wedding to Jack Brooksbank in October 2018, Meghan declined to attend the evening do. The bride was said to have been "upset" that Harry only "popped along for a drink without Meghan" – although they were due to fly to Australia for their first Commonwealth tour the day after.

During the 16-day tour, which also took in Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, the couple appeared reluctant to engage with the press. Although Harry managed to be persuaded at one point to speak to reporters at the back of the plane, he told them: "Thanks for coming, even though you weren't invited."

Bullying claims emerge

On the same trip, it was claimed that Meghan had cut short a visit to a market in Fiji because she was concerned about the presence of a UN organisation promoting women, with which she had previously worked but now was no longer associated.

At the time, officials suggested that it was because it was humid and the crowd was oppressive in the market. After Meghan had been ushered away, a female member of her entourage was spotted sitting in an official car, looking extremely upset. Meghan's female personal protection officer left her post shortly afterwards.

Lawyers for the Duchess said she met other leaders from UN Women later on the tour and denied she left for the reason alleged.

Although Mr Knauf had not gone on the tour, he is thought to have been "deeply concerned" by reports of the couple's behaviour overseas.

"There was a sense that they were just refusing to take advice, and insisting on doing everything their way," said one royal source. "No one, from the most senior to the most junior employee, wasn't under constant attack," said another.

Matters came to a head in October 2018 following the departure of a second member of the Duchess's private office.

Mr Knauf emailed Simon Case, then William's private secretary and now the Cabinet Secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Mr Case then forwarded it to Ms Carruthers, who is based at Clarence House.

The email read: "I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y."

The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple's private secretary, concluded: "I questioned if the household's policy on harassment and bullying applies to principals."

While Mr Case was "very personally supportive" of the individual members of staff, Mr Knauf expressed his concern in the email that "nothing will be done". The palace is now holding an investigation, having been criticised for failing to act sooner.

It was not until a month later that it was reported that Melissa Toubati, the Duchess's former PA, had "quit suddenly", just six months into the job. The following month, it was announced that Ms Cohen would not stay in post after the Sussexes' baby was born.



The couple were apparently "furious" about reports of their high staff turnover, piling more pressure on their PR team to "try to turn negative headlines into positive ones".

According to one former employee: "What people fail to understand is Harry's hatred of the media is probably one of the most important things in his life. It is defining for him. So the narrative is always – it’s the press's fault, never theirs."

That Christmas, the Sussexes were once again photographed alongside the Cambridges on Dec 25 but opted to stay with the Queen at the "main house" rather than Anmer Hall.

It came after an awkward staff Christmas party in which "all mention of Melissa's name was banned", according to one royal insider. "It was as if she never existed." Some employees found it hard to reconcile the couple's erratic conduct with moments of genuine kindness, such as when Meghan would buy female staff members flowers or even jewellery.

Relations break down

By the New Year, relations within Kensington Palace had "irretrievably broken down," with Prince Harry no longer on speaking terms with Mr Knauf after he had failed to persuade him to drop the complaint against his wife. The Sussexes' lawyers deny any such conversation took place.

Sources close to the couple say Ms Toubati, who was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, was sacked for misconduct, pointing out neither staff member made complaints of their own to HR. Ms Toubati's friends deny she was sacked for misconduct.

With Harry and Meghan already operating in a silo – and increasingly consulting the Duchess's US team of advisers rather than palace officials – a split of the two households at Kensington Palace appeared an inevitability.

It was around the time that the couple moved to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor in March 2019 that Amy Pickerill became the third of the Duchess's staff to leave her role, having served as her assistant private secretary since November 2017.

Mr Knauf also stepped down to work as senior adviser to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges' Royal Foundation. Friends say he "bitterly regrets" not warning Sara Latham, who was appointed as the Sussexes' director of communications in April 2019, how difficult working for the couple could be.

The American PR supremo, who used to advise the *******s, quickly worked this out for herself when the couple insisted on secrecy around son Archie's birth on May 6, while trying to maximise global coverage.

Around the same time it was falsely claimed that the Duchess had been prevented from doing an interview with CBS anchor Gayle King, Ms Winfrey's close friend. In fact, insiders say "the Duchess was calling shots throughout."

It came after Meghan had attended a high-profile baby shower in New York with Serena Williams and Amal Clooney, without being accompanied by any palace press officers. Concerns were raised behind palace gates when freebies started arriving at New York's Mark Hotel, causing consternation for staff back in the UK having to wrestle with the Royal family's strict rules on gifting.

Having courted controversy throughout the summer of 2019 for snubbing the Queen's invitation to Balmoral and taking four private jets in 11 days instead, relations with the media were at rock bottom at the start of the Sussexes' September tour to Africa.

Royal aides were then left dumbfounded when what had been a surprisingly successful 10-day trip with Archie was overshadowed by Meghan's interview with Mr Bradby, in which she revealed the "struggles" she had faced adapting to life in the Royal family.

Duke's fears for wife

It came as Harry released an attack on the tabloid press as the couple announced they would be suing the Mail on Sunday over the publication of a letter Meghan had written to her father.

In a highly personal and scathing statement, Harry said some newspapers had "vilified her almost daily for the past nine months" and claimed they had published "lie after lie" at Meghan's expense simply because she was out of public view on maternity leave.

Referencing his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, who died in a car crash in Paris while being pursued by the paparazzi, the Duke said: "Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."

The interview set the tone for their January 2020 announcement that they would be "stepping back as senior royals" to become "financially independent".

As the world gathers to watch the most highly anticipated royal television event since Diana's Panorama interview in 1995, it will be left to the viewers to decide which version of history represents the truth.


----------



## Jayne1

Chagall said:


> They don’t have an original bone in their body. Do they have to keep harking back to Diana?


That's all he's got to make himself special.   Think about it.


----------



## Chanbal

This Cartoon summarizes it well!


----------



## Chanbal

Straight-Laced said:


> MM should never be thought of as an inspiration to little girls - she’s an inspiration to con artists the world over.


Wow, this is an inspired message! I wonder how she ranks compared to Charles Ponzi or Victor Lustig.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> We’ve covered the spelling error, but consider these points:
> 
> — the use of caps. He is shouting at us. Methinks thou dost protest too much. Is this his kid?
> 
> — growing inside of her??? Good grief, this must be his kid. Harry has said nothing.
> 
> — promoting and amplifying. Seems redundant. Calm down, do you need yoga?
> 
> — mental health. How many times do H&M talk about their mental health? Such a fragile flower. Seriously, get some therapy ASAP.
> 
> — admonish, berate and torment ?   Good  to know she is feeling  a lil bit of the angst she has spewed out.
> 
> This guy is unhinged.  Plus, he is an awful actor.
> 
> ‘One Last Con‘ was the title of the last Suits show. Hmmmm.



Hey now, we need to listen when a *white male actor* that went to *USC* tells us all about race, feminism, bullying, mental health and privilege!


----------



## bag-mania

Well, Twitter is abuzz with celebs who are supporting her and won’t believe anything negative said about her.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chanbal said:


> This Cartoon summarizes it well!
> View attachment 5011806


Cartoon credit to the wonderful Johannes Leak  

Here's an old one of his :


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> If Harry thinks he can "distance himself" from what Meghan says, he's an even bigger idiot than I thought.  He's put a flaming torch to the last of his relationship with his brother and likely all of the rest of his family too. It would probably be highly amusing to hear him try to explain himself to Charles and Will and the Queen though lol!  Would love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation.
> 
> Interesting too, that the Spencer relatives, are very, _very_ silent. They probably don't know Meghan at all. Not like Harry and she were hanging about with any of Harry's cousins from Diana's side.  She wasn't in the UK for more than a blink of an eyelash.  Still, I figure the silence is revealing, especially since Diana's brother has never been hesitant to speak up before.  So, the Spencers are staying well out of it, along with Harry's former life long friends.



To me, it was all planned by MM & Oprah, so MM could say whatever she wanted without cutting an important source of money and status. H would keep his relationship with family, and MM could later blame whatever she said on pregnancy hormones.    

I wonder if Today's promo was taped after they learned about the loss of patronages, a very weird laugh...


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> Wow, wow, Wyatt is inspired!!!!
> 
> PETRONELLA WYATT *Meghan Markle has convinced cheerful Prince Harry he was desperately miserable all along*
> 
> I disagree with my friend Piers Morgan that its broadcast is a scandal, given that the Duke of Edinburgh is recovering from heart surgery. In my view, it would be a scandal if it wasn’t shown.
> Not since Peter Finch’s character threatened to blow his brains out on live TV in the 1976 film Network has anyone committed such a public act of self-destruction. When the credits roll, I have a feeling that the heads of Haz and Megs will roll with them.
> 
> The Prince of Sighs and the Duchess of Self Delusion have committed their ultimate act of folly. They should have remembered the saying “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. And boy, has their house turned out to be glass of the least durable kind.
> 
> That slick trailer promised heartrending tales of Meghan’s victimhood. These include her “silencing” by bullying palace officials and her “almost unsurvivable” ordeals, presumably at the hands of the British Press, to the extent that Harry says, between gulps, that his greatest concern was: “History repeating itself.”
> 
> But it’s all gone horribly wrong for The World’s Greatest Victim. No less a paper than The Times reported on Wednesday that Meghan had faced allegations, which she denies, that she bullied two female members of her private staff at Kensington Palace, who were then allegedly silenced by way of NDA agreements.
> 
> *CROCODILE TEARS *
> Delicious, isn’t it? To make matters worse for our tragic heroine, it was revealed that Markle sparkled at a banquet in 2018 in cascades of diamonds that were a wedding present from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is accused not only of ordering the assassination of a journalist (something in her dreams Meghan would doubtless like to do herself) but has kept the women of his country in virtual slavery.
> 
> Not a good look in both senses of the phrase. But Megs has always wanted to have her diamonds and wear them. I sometimes wonder into what sort of a mirror she looks at herself every morning?
> 
> The woman believes herself to be a swan among swans, the physical, moral and intellectual peer of such great figures as Emmeline Pankhurst, Audrey Hepburn and Mother Teresa. Where self-knowledge should be is a hole so large it could be filled by a new galaxy.
> 
> It is not the Royal Family but Megs and Haz who should hide behind the sofa in embarrassment.
> 
> One striking irony about personalities such as Meghan is that they continually attack others for the faults that they themselves possess, using them as stalking horses under the cover of which they cry great crocodile tears.
> 
> Markle likes to present herself as a perfect presence, a woman of crystal, unsoiled, guileless, dewy. Harry, like all weak men, goes along with this as a bedroom back-seat driver to the extent of fanaticism.
> 
> Last year the couple were accused of cooperating on a book about themselves with the ridiculous title Finding Freedom, which begged the question did they think they were Mr and Mrs Nelson Mandela?
> 
> Only Mandela spent 27 years in a South African jail. Meghan spent just over one year in the luxury of the British Royal Family. No matter; she appears to see herself as a secular saint, and like a saint has to endure unspeakable suffering daily.
> 
> I cannot help but feel that Meghan actually enjoys being unhappy and wronged.
> 
> She seems to have convinced a once cheerful and uncomplicated Harry that he was really desperately miserable all along, and abominably ill-served by all around him, to the point where his once-smiling features have set into a permanent, resentful frown.
> 
> Let’s rewind to Meghan and Harry’s move to Los Angeles, in what looks like the first staging post on the Duchess’s quest to convince an awestruck world of her stature as an humanitarian and A-list personality; to take her rightful place in the pantheon alongside George and Amal Clooney, Serena Williams and the Obamas.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> The harder she and Harry tried to coerce us into acknowledging their worth, the more they resembled gilt as opposed to genuine 18-carat gold.
> 
> We were treated to self-indulgent podcasts, patronising homilies on race and equality, the announcement of a tawdry and undeserved deal with the streaming giant Netflix, and then the photoshoot of pregnant Meghan lying on the grass beside a barefooted Harry. It tried so hard to be Hollywood, but it looked like Hollyoaks.
> 
> And the discordant soundtrack to all of this? Meghan’s continual, histrionic pleas for privacy, while acting like Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard, permanently ready for her close-up.
> 
> Meghan has made her distaste for journalists known at every turn, even suing one British paper. She has now accused The Times of “peddling a false narrative” to smear her character. That’s rich. Meghan peddles her own narrative so fast she could outdistance the entire Tour de France.
> 
> Moreover, it seems that some journalists are more her equal than others. One can only marvel that she and Harry have put themselves into the hands of Oprah, the world’s most ruthless operator, who will squeeze them like an orange and then cast the peel into the nearest refuse dump.
> 
> But Meghan’s entire life has been a masquerade. She thinks she is a brilliant actress, perhaps one of the best of her generation. But for some reason she never managed to win any parts worth having.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> *IMPRISONED IN PALACES*
> Playing Rachel in the cable TV drama Suits was the apogee of her career. How come her transcendent talent has languished unrecognised?
> 
> Yet she attempts to set up her stall among the cream of America; among people whose fame is of the solid and enduring kind that is based on extraordinary talent and grindingly hard work.
> 
> Meghan’s one big chance to prove her merit was as a dutiful member of the Royal Family. When the curtain came up on the first act of her new, starring role, her audience — namely the British public — were warm to the point of effusion. So were the Press, though the Sussexes have singled them out for particular opprobrium.
> 
> The Queen even gave Meghan privileges, such as allowing her to stay at Sandringham before her marriage, that were denied to her sister-in-law, Kate. Could the barometer have been set more fair?
> 
> During the Oprah interview, Meghan will discuss “race in Britain”. Doubtless it will be some woke diatribe against the institutionalised racism of the British. Hard to watch straight-faced when Megs married a man who found it amusing to wear a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party. Oprah, of course, will be suitably impressed and horror-struck by her devastating tales of life in the heart of the Royal Family. If only we had realised how wretched it must have been!
> 
> Imprisoned in palaces, forced to wear jewels and frocks beyond price, served, literally, on bended knee by liveried courtiers. Chauffeured around in stultifying limousines, protected and pampered at the expense of the British taxpayer. How humiliating for a couple who loudly trumpet their “independence”!
> 
> And, their supporters might add, what of the inhumane tedium of having to perform royal duties — surely that contravened their human rights?
> 
> Poor Meghan had to shake hands with unwashed plebs on a weekly basis. She even had to do walkabouts in the rain, for Heaven’s sake, and was a tragic captive of a thing called protocol. Meghan and Harry were actually forced to walk behind Prince William and his wife Kate. Even Mandela was never subject to such an ordeal.
> 
> The trouble is that this sorry pair have always relied less on their memory than their imaginations. There is a type of person who, according to their own account, is perpetually the victim of unwarranted criticism and unkindness.
> 
> People of this kind can, like Meghan, seem plausible and secure sympathy from those who do not know them. There is nothing inherently improbable about each separate story they relate — a treacherous father (Thomas Markle), a cruel article in the Press, an encounter with a bully, even an incident of racism. This kind of ill treatment does sometimes occur in the life of a famous person.
> 
> What in the end arouses suspicion is the multiplicity of villains whom it has been the sufferer’s ill fortune to meet.
> 
> *PERSECUTION MANIA*
> If one individual claims to receive almost universal bad treatment, the likelihood is the cause lies in themselves, and that they either imagine these injuries or behave in such a way as to arouse uncontrollable irritation. This appears to have led, in Meghan’s case, and now Harry’s, almost to a sort of Persecution Mania.
> 
> The Sussexes expect everyone to feel towards them the same unquestioning love and respect that they feel towards themselves. But neither have the talent to work for their high living, particularly Harry. They know that Prince Charles, who is, according to royal sources, hurt and dismayed by their ingratitude, will not finance, ad infinitum, the LA lifestyle of a couple approaching middle age.
> 
> So they have turned to Oprah as a way of building their financial “brand”. No matter that this may wound Harry’s closest family, including his father and grandmother, our irreproachable Queen, while her 99-year-old husband receives painful hospital treatment for a heart condition.
> 
> There was always a tragic inevitability about it. Having left the safety of the Royal Family and upped sticks to ruthless, hypocritical La La Land, they cannot escape the toils they have made for themselves.
> Genuine celebrity is like diamonds; its value depends on a controlled and limited output, yet as the world endures a terrible pandemic, this pair will undertake a two-hour moanathon.
> 
> There may, nonetheless, be foolish and gullible people, the sort who are a sucker for conspiracy theories and tales of wicked royals — and there are many in America — who will believe them. But the sophisticates the Sussexes love and aspire to join will be laughing at them.
> 
> In urbane American society, in the world of the Clooneys and the Obamas, Meghan will never be taken seriously again. She has descended too deeply into the mud.
> 
> That is why I say of Oprah; bring it on!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> [/QUOT.  This seems to be the definitive summary of this tragic episode in British history. Wish I could have written it.  Wish it never had to have been written.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Chanbal said:


> Wow, this is an inspired message! I wonder how she ranks compared to Charles Ponzi or Victor Lustig.


Hmm, as far as I know neither of them possessed a magical Woke Cloak or a Royal VIP Access all areas admission pass to the world ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

On a lighter note.....the Queen got herself two new little Corgis! Bless her heart...


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Wow, wow, Wyatt is inspired!!!!
> 
> PETRONELLA WYATT *Meghan Markle has convinced cheerful Prince Harry he was desperately miserable all along*
> 
> I disagree with my friend Piers Morgan that its broadcast is a scandal, given that the Duke of Edinburgh is recovering from heart surgery. In my view, it would be a scandal if it wasn’t shown.
> Not since Peter Finch’s character threatened to blow his brains out on live TV in the 1976 film Network has anyone committed such a public act of self-destruction. When the credits roll, I have a feeling that the heads of Haz and Megs will roll with them.
> 
> The Prince of Sighs and the Duchess of Self Delusion have committed their ultimate act of folly. They should have remembered the saying “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. And boy, has their house turned out to be glass of the least durable kind.
> 
> That slick trailer promised heartrending tales of Meghan’s victimhood. These include her “silencing” by bullying palace officials and her “almost unsurvivable” ordeals, presumably at the hands of the British Press, to the extent that Harry says, between gulps, that his greatest concern was: “History repeating itself.”
> 
> But it’s all gone horribly wrong for The World’s Greatest Victim. No less a paper than The Times reported on Wednesday that Meghan had faced allegations, which she denies, that she bullied two female members of her private staff at Kensington Palace, who were then allegedly silenced by way of NDA agreements.
> 
> *CROCODILE TEARS *
> Delicious, isn’t it? To make matters worse for our tragic heroine, it was revealed that Markle sparkled at a banquet in 2018 in cascades of diamonds that were a wedding present from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is accused not only of ordering the assassination of a journalist (something in her dreams Meghan would doubtless like to do herself) but has kept the women of his country in virtual slavery.
> 
> Not a good look in both senses of the phrase. But Megs has always wanted to have her diamonds and wear them. I sometimes wonder into what sort of a mirror she looks at herself every morning?
> 
> The woman believes herself to be a swan among swans, the physical, moral and intellectual peer of such great figures as Emmeline Pankhurst, Audrey Hepburn and Mother Teresa. Where self-knowledge should be is a hole so large it could be filled by a new galaxy.
> 
> It is not the Royal Family but Megs and Haz who should hide behind the sofa in embarrassment.
> 
> One striking irony about personalities such as Meghan is that they continually attack others for the faults that they themselves possess, using them as stalking horses under the cover of which they cry great crocodile tears.
> 
> Markle likes to present herself as a perfect presence, a woman of crystal, unsoiled, guileless, dewy. Harry, like all weak men, goes along with this as a bedroom back-seat driver to the extent of fanaticism.
> 
> Last year the couple were accused of cooperating on a book about themselves with the ridiculous title Finding Freedom, which begged the question did they think they were Mr and Mrs Nelson Mandela?
> 
> Only Mandela spent 27 years in a South African jail. Meghan spent just over one year in the luxury of the British Royal Family. No matter; she appears to see herself as a secular saint, and like a saint has to endure unspeakable suffering daily.
> 
> I cannot help but feel that Meghan actually enjoys being unhappy and wronged.
> 
> She seems to have convinced a once cheerful and uncomplicated Harry that he was really desperately miserable all along, and abominably ill-served by all around him, to the point where his once-smiling features have set into a permanent, resentful frown.
> 
> Let’s rewind to Meghan and Harry’s move to Los Angeles, in what looks like the first staging post on the Duchess’s quest to convince an awestruck world of her stature as an humanitarian and A-list personality; to take her rightful place in the pantheon alongside George and Amal Clooney, Serena Williams and the Obamas.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> The harder she and Harry tried to coerce us into acknowledging their worth, the more they resembled gilt as opposed to genuine 18-carat gold.
> 
> We were treated to self-indulgent podcasts, patronising homilies on race and equality, the announcement of a tawdry and undeserved deal with the streaming giant Netflix, and then the photoshoot of pregnant Meghan lying on the grass beside a barefooted Harry. It tried so hard to be Hollywood, but it looked like Hollyoaks.
> 
> And the discordant soundtrack to all of this? Meghan’s continual, histrionic pleas for privacy, while acting like Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard, permanently ready for her close-up.
> 
> Meghan has made her distaste for journalists known at every turn, even suing one British paper. She has now accused The Times of “peddling a false narrative” to smear her character. That’s rich. Meghan peddles her own narrative so fast she could outdistance the entire Tour de France.
> 
> Moreover, it seems that some journalists are more her equal than others. One can only marvel that she and Harry have put themselves into the hands of Oprah, the world’s most ruthless operator, who will squeeze them like an orange and then cast the peel into the nearest refuse dump.
> 
> But Meghan’s entire life has been a masquerade. She thinks she is a brilliant actress, perhaps one of the best of her generation. But for some reason she never managed to win any parts worth having.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> *IMPRISONED IN PALACES*
> Playing Rachel in the cable TV drama Suits was the apogee of her career. How come her transcendent talent has languished unrecognised?
> 
> Yet she attempts to set up her stall among the cream of America; among people whose fame is of the solid and enduring kind that is based on extraordinary talent and grindingly hard work.
> 
> Meghan’s one big chance to prove her merit was as a dutiful member of the Royal Family. When the curtain came up on the first act of her new, starring role, her audience — namely the British public — were warm to the point of effusion. So were the Press, though the Sussexes have singled them out for particular opprobrium.
> 
> The Queen even gave Meghan privileges, such as allowing her to stay at Sandringham before her marriage, that were denied to her sister-in-law, Kate. Could the barometer have been set more fair?
> 
> During the Oprah interview, Meghan will discuss “race in Britain”. Doubtless it will be some woke diatribe against the institutionalised racism of the British. Hard to watch straight-faced when Megs married a man who found it amusing to wear a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party. Oprah, of course, will be suitably impressed and horror-struck by her devastating tales of life in the heart of the Royal Family. If only we had realised how wretched it must have been!
> 
> Imprisoned in palaces, forced to wear jewels and frocks beyond price, served, literally, on bended knee by liveried courtiers. Chauffeured around in stultifying limousines, protected and pampered at the expense of the British taxpayer. How humiliating for a couple who loudly trumpet their “independence”!
> 
> And, their supporters might add, what of the inhumane tedium of having to perform royal duties — surely that contravened their human rights?
> 
> Poor Meghan had to shake hands with unwashed plebs on a weekly basis. She even had to do walkabouts in the rain, for Heaven’s sake, and was a tragic captive of a thing called protocol. Meghan and Harry were actually forced to walk behind Prince William and his wife Kate. Even Mandela was never subject to such an ordeal.
> 
> The trouble is that this sorry pair have always relied less on their memory than their imaginations. There is a type of person who, according to their own account, is perpetually the victim of unwarranted criticism and unkindness.
> 
> People of this kind can, like Meghan, seem plausible and secure sympathy from those who do not know them. There is nothing inherently improbable about each separate story they relate — a treacherous father (Thomas Markle), a cruel article in the Press, an encounter with a bully, even an incident of racism. This kind of ill treatment does sometimes occur in the life of a famous person.
> 
> What in the end arouses suspicion is the multiplicity of villains whom it has been the sufferer’s ill fortune to meet.
> 
> *PERSECUTION MANIA*
> If one individual claims to receive almost universal bad treatment, the likelihood is the cause lies in themselves, and that they either imagine these injuries or behave in such a way as to arouse uncontrollable irritation. This appears to have led, in Meghan’s case, and now Harry’s, almost to a sort of Persecution Mania.
> 
> The Sussexes expect everyone to feel towards them the same unquestioning love and respect that they feel towards themselves. But neither have the talent to work for their high living, particularly Harry. They know that Prince Charles, who is, according to royal sources, hurt and dismayed by their ingratitude, will not finance, ad infinitum, the LA lifestyle of a couple approaching middle age.
> 
> So they have turned to Oprah as a way of building their financial “brand”. No matter that this may wound Harry’s closest family, including his father and grandmother, our irreproachable Queen, while her 99-year-old husband receives painful hospital treatment for a heart condition.
> 
> There was always a tragic inevitability about it. Having left the safety of the Royal Family and upped sticks to ruthless, hypocritical La La Land, they cannot escape the toils they have made for themselves.
> Genuine celebrity is like diamonds; its value depends on a controlled and limited output, yet as the world endures a terrible pandemic, this pair will undertake a two-hour moanathon.
> 
> There may, nonetheless, be foolish and gullible people, the sort who are a sucker for conspiracy theories and tales of wicked royals — and there are many in America — who will believe them. But the sophisticates the Sussexes love and aspire to join will be laughing at them.
> 
> In urbane American society, in the world of the Clooneys and the Obamas, Meghan will never be taken seriously again. She has descended too deeply into the mud.
> 
> That is why I say of Oprah; bring it on!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#



.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Well, Twitter is abuzz with celebs who are supporting her and won’t believe anything negative said about her.
> 
> View attachment 5011848
> View attachment 5011849
> View attachment 5011850
> 
> 
> View attachment 5011851


Oprah is very well connected, which helps. The UK will be happy to be free of MM&H, but we will have to put up with more hypocrites. As someone else mentioned, these are ultra privileged Hollywood people that feel entitled to tell us on how to live our lives.


----------



## Chanbal

Oprah is apparently making $9M with the interview, and it is still not clear about the financial arrangements for MM&H. 
The picture below which is circulating on the net, shows that MM has indeed a voice. Though, her audience doesn't look very happy with it.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wouldn’t it be just perfect if Chas told us that the Haz is not his kid???!!!


I thought about that the other day but I was afraid to post it!  Maybe that’s why it seems Charles is bending over backwards for H&M?  Although H would really have nothing at that news and MM would probably dump him immediately!


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> she was the only one who didn't really comment.  and when their engagement was announced I remember she was very excited.  said something to the effect that this would give little girls of color a very positive idea - that they too could be a princess



Oh to go back to those carefree days.... This is why we can't have anything nice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely no one actually believes H&M are not getting money from this interview.
Of course, they are. Doubt they get out of bed for less than 3 million. 

According to DM, they aren’t being paid an “_appearance_” fee. 
I think we all know what to call this money.










						CBS is paying Oprah up to $9M to air interview with Meghan and Harry
					

ViacomCBS has forked out between $7 million and $9 million in license fees to Winfrey's production company Harpro Productions for the rights to the show, according to a report.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Chanbal said:


> Oprah is apparently making $9M with the interview, and it is still not clear about the financial arrangements for MM&H.
> The picture below which is circulating on the net, shows that MM has indeed a voice. Though, her audience doesn't look very happy with it.
> View attachment 5011884


----------



## madamelizaking

mellibelly said:


> Hey now, we need to listen when a *white male actor* that went to *USC* tells us all about race, feminism, bullying, mental health and privilege!


He went to the University of Spoiled Children? How am I not surprised. He could not be more privileged.


----------



## madamelizaking

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely no one actually believes H&M are not getting money from this interview.
> Of course, they are. Doubt they get out of bed for less than 3 million.
> 
> According to DM, they aren’t being paid an “_appearance_” fee.
> I think we all know what to call this money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS is paying Oprah up to $9M to air interview with Meghan and Harry
> 
> 
> ViacomCBS has forked out between $7 million and $9 million in license fees to Winfrey's production company Harpro Productions for the rights to the show, according to a report.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I bet you Archwell is receiving a FAT donation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc.










						Meghan and Harry interview: Jessica Mulroney defends actress
					

The Canadian fashion stylist said no one 'has ever had to deal with the pressure, the politics and the press' like Meghan in an Instagram post ahead of the Oprah interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

mshermes said:


> On a lighter note.....the Queen got herself two new little Corgis! Bless her heart...


What a fabulous way to deal with family stress ... rather than talking to the press ... 
I hope we will see corgi pix, please Your Majesty


----------



## madamelizaking

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry interview: Jessica Mulroney defends actress
> 
> 
> The Canadian fashion stylist said no one 'has ever had to deal with the pressure, the politics and the press' like Meghan in an Instagram post ahead of the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"No one has ever had to deal with..." Sounds like a T rump line. Funny how Markle and him have a lot of similar traits.


----------



## madamelizaking

Chanbal said:


> Oprah is apparently making $9M with the interview, and it is still not clear about the financial arrangements for MM&H.
> The picture below which is circulating on the net, shows that MM has indeed a voice. Though, her audience doesn't look very happy with it.
> View attachment 5011884



And these beauties


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020 
"Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc."

@madamelizaking
"No one has ever had to deal with..." Sounds like a T rump line. Funny how Markle and him have a lot of similar traits.

Maybe Jessica Mulroney took lessons from her FIL, who could talk out of both sides of his mouth.

ET fix quotes


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry interview: Jessica Mulroney defends actress
> 
> 
> The Canadian fashion stylist said no one 'has ever had to deal with the pressure, the politics and the press' like Meghan in an Instagram post ahead of the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I am waiting for Hilaria la Española de   Boston to come out on Megan’s defense


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

madamelizaking said:


> "No one has ever had to deal with..." Sounds like a T rump line. Funny how Markle and him have a lot of similar traits.


Pathetic. She's still trying to get back in her good graces.

They probably think MM and JCHM will set up a monarchy in LA and . . . never mind. . . it’s hilarious.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry interview: Jessica Mulroney defends actress
> 
> 
> The Canadian fashion stylist said no one 'has ever had to deal with the pressure, the politics and the press' like Meghan in an Instagram post ahead of the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



"_I have never seen her wave from kindness, empathy and love_."  

Didn't JM bully another woman not long ago? JM and MM share the same kind of kindness, empathy and love imo.  They are like two peas in a pod.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> The picture below which is circulating on the net, shows that MM has indeed a voice. Though, her audience doesn't look very happy with it.
> View attachment 5011884



The waiter looks _perplexed _& Harry looks _embarrassed. _

I wonder what she was saying? She doesn’t look so ‘_woman of the people_’ here.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely no one actually believes H&M are not getting money from this interview.
> Of course, they are. Doubt they get out of bed for less than 3 million.
> 
> According to DM, they aren’t being paid an “_appearance_” fee.
> I think we all know what to call this money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS is paying Oprah up to $9M to air interview with Meghan and Harry
> 
> 
> ViacomCBS has forked out between $7 million and $9 million in license fees to Winfrey's production company Harpro Productions for the rights to the show, according to a report.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I bet they are on the books of Harpo Productions as producers.  So technically, not an appearance fee.  It's all semantics.


----------



## csshopper

Straight-Laced said:


> Long read in The Telegraph UK today.
> Some things in here that I hadn't heard before ... the Scotland tour where Palace PR 'body blocked' one of Meghan's former advisers because M didn't want to make eye contact with her ... ?!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm
> 
> 
> As the Sussexes tell-all to Oprah Winfrey, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'She wanted drama': The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm*
> As the Sussexes give their tell-all Oprah Winfrey interview, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'
> 
> 
> There was something distinctly familiar about the Oprah Winfrey teaser in which Prince Harry declared: "My biggest concern was history repeating itself."
> 
> The words, due to be aired during the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes' tell-all interview on Sunday night, bore an uncanny resemblance to the statement released by Harry's communications secretary, Jason Knauf, in November 2016 after the Sunday Express had revealed that the Prince was dating the American actress.
> 
> Confirming that "his girlfriend Meghan Markle" had been "subject to a wave of abuse and harassment", the statement criticised the "racial undertones" of newspaper coverage, adding: "Prince Harry is worried about Ms Markle's safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. This is not a game – it is her life and his."
> 
> The unprecedented salvo created two important narratives around the former Suits star – it formally confirmed her status as the woman in Harry's life but also positioned her, in the eyes of the palace and the public, as the victim at the heart of a media "storm". As the statement suggested, a line had been "crossed".
> 
> 
> But the tirade "by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry" also put Mr Knauf in a compromising position. How was the former director of corporate affairs for the Royal Bank of Scotland going to be able to handle media relations for a couple when the Prince had so publicly made plain their deep hostility towards the press?
> 
> Almost exactly two years later, the 39-year-old spin doctor would submit a a bullying claim accusing Meghan of driving two personal assistants out of the household and undermining the confidence of a third staff member.
> 
> The Sussexes have denied that Harry pleaded with Mr Knauf not to pursue it, claiming the couple are the victims of a calculated smear campaign based on harmful misinformation. They said the Duchess was "saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma".
> 
> Those highlighting the "outrageous bullying" say they want to "tell the other side of the story" to the picture expected to be painted by the Duchess on the Oprah special of her "almost unsurvivable" time in the Royal family. "Anyone who is a victim can't bear to watch it," said one.
> 
> The couple's lawyers insist Buckingham Palace is manipulating the press to peddle a "wholly false narrative" –notwithstanding the fact that the complainants no longer work in the royal household and the lack of palace action has now prompted an internal inquiry.
> 
> 
> The Telegraph has spoken to a number of well-placed insiders who witnessed first-hand the turmoil within the royal household from Meghan's arrival as Prince Harry's girlfriend to the couple's decision to stand down as working royals last year.
> 
> All spoke on the condition of anonymity amid claims they had been operating in a "climate of fear", where employees were routinely "humiliated" in front of their peers and repeatedly subjected to "unreasonable demands" by both Meghan and Harry.
> 
> Unwilling to play a supporting role
> 
> It was not until October 2017, a year after Mr Knauf's unprecedented statement that Meghan gave an interview to Vanity Fair in which she declared of her relationship with Harry: "We're in love. I'm sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell, but what I hope people will understand is that this is our time."
> 
> The public did not have to wait long. Just a month later, the couple announced their engagement with a photocall in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace and an interview with the BBC's Mishal Husain in which Harry described his fiancee as "another team player as part of the bigger team".
> 
> Yet behind palace gates, it was quickly becoming apparent that Meghan had no intention of she and Harry being seen as the "supporting act" to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, despite their seniority in the royal pecking order.
> 
> That Christmas, determined to walk side by side with William and Kate to Sandringham's St Mary Magdalene Church, rather than several steps behind, they were pictured together as the so-called "Fab Four".
> 
> The Cambridges invited the Sussexes to spend the festive period at their nearby bolthole, Anmer Hall, an experience Meghan spoke of fondly afterwards. "Meghan was very positive about it," said a former aide.
> 
> Two months later, the quartet appeared at their first official event together at the inaugural forum of their Royal Foundation – a highly choreographed event described by one royal insider as "designed to send a message that they would be working as a team. It was all very carefully rehearsed beforehand".
> 
> Disagreements with the Cambridges
> 
> After Meghan showcased her years of previous work with "larger NGOs and smaller grassroots organisations", both William and Harry acknowledged that working so closely with loved ones had led to "healthy disagreements" over how to best guide the foundation's work.
> 
> "Working as a family does have its challenges, of course it does," Harry said. "But we're stuck together for the rest of our lives."
> 
> By now, Kensington Palace staff had already become familiar with a mantra that would come to characterise the run-up to the Sussexes' wedding in May 2018.
> 
> "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" may have been shouted by Prince Harry to Angela Kelly, the Queen's personal assistant, following a row over a tiara – but royal aides were already well acquainted with the importance of meeting the Duchess's exacting standards.
> 
> "Everyone wanted her to be happy because they knew that would make him happy," said one. "Do whatever it takes to make it work for Meghan was the mantra. We all cared deeply about Harry. Contrary to this idea that they weren't supported, we were going to great lengths to accommodate their needs."
> 
> 'We all cared deeply about Harry,' said one royal aide CREDIT: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP
> 
> So much so that there was an extraordinary incident during the couple's first tour of Scotland when members of the palace PR team "body blocked" Meghan's former adviser Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne during a visit to an Edinburgh cafe in what one former aide described as "the most embarrassing moment of my professional career".
> 
> The Duchess had apparently expressed "a reluctance to make eye contact" with Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne, who was reduced to having to post an Instagram shot of her former close friend and client visiting the Social Bites cafe from a considerable distance. "Anyone from the past was a problem," observed the former aide.
> 
> Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne's name would later reappear in court documents accusing Meghan's close friend and stylist Jessica Mulroney of "putting pressure on her [Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne] to withdraw or change statements" she had made in an April 2018 interview with the Mail on Sunday.
> 
> The defence documents claimed the Sunday newspaper's features editor complained about the intervention to Mr Knauf, who allegedly responded by saying he would ensure "this does not happen again". In the piece, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne described Meghan as: "Picky, not only when it comes to her clothes but also her colleagues, instantly dismissing those who didn’t share her 'vision'."
> 
> Describing how the Duchess had "given me a bit of a difficult time" after meeting Harry, she added: "Meghan likes to move on".
> 
> When contacted by The Telegraph, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne declined to comment on the incident.
> 
> 'Email bombardments'
> 
> As the world was gearing up for what the LA Times had billed as "a royal wedding for the 21st century", behind palace gates the atmosphere was becoming fraught.
> 
> Staff had grown used to "email bombardments" by Meghan and Harry, with one describing how "the last thing we'd do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we'd do in the morning is reply to their messages. Weekends, holidays – there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time".
> 
> Despite publicly claiming they largely ignored the press coverage, in reality the couple were often consumed by it. "They're both very thin-skinned," said one former employee.
> 
> Meghan's supporters say staff members "who preferred a more genteel pace" could not keep up with the Duchess's "American work ethic" – with one close friend now suggesting the criticism was racially motivated. "Find me a woman of colour in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace," the friend said.
> 
> Yet it was not just palace employees who found themselves on the receiving end of "inescapable screaming and shouting".
> 
> Much has been written about the bridesmaids' dress fitting, first revealed in The Telegraph in November 2018, that left the Duchess of Cambridge in tears.
> 
> Contrary to subsequent reports that the row concerned Princess Charlotte's tights, what actually happened was that the dress itself did not fit Kate's then nearly three-year-old daughter. According to a well-placed source, "demands were made about when subsequent fittings would be, and Kate left sobbing".
> 
> While Meghan's allies suggest that Kate did not make enough of an effort to welcome her future sister-in-law into the royal fold, allies of the Cambridges suggest she "tried to arrange social things" and invited her to watch tennis together but "there was a sense that Meghan never really wanted to be friends".
> 
> Those inside the palace concede, however, that the Cambridges can "appear standoffish" and are "often out of contact for extended periods".
> 
> Another former royal aide claimed the Duke, particularly, appreciated the "deflection" from his own occasionally demanding behaviour. "Bullying is endemic across all the households," the former aide added.
> 
> "The Meghan thing is a disgrace, but it's not in isolation. They cut you out, undermine you, talk down to you. One minute you're in – the next you're persona non grata. Some staff have special protection. I've never witnessed behaviour like it before. I wish I'd never seen behind the curtain."
> 
> A reprimand from the Queen
> 
> One member of staff afforded "special protection" is Angela Kelly, who has served as the Queen's closest aide since 2002. Rumours of Meghan being dubbed "Duchess Difficult" began to surface around the time it emerged that the Liverpudlian docker's daughter had been given a tongue-lashing by Harry.
> 
> Yet what was never accurately reported around the time of "Tiaragate" was that far from being denied the item from the Crown Jewels she wanted, Meghan was in fact given her first choice.
> 
> The argument erupted after the Duchess demanded that Queen Mary's Diamond Bandeau Tiara be produced for an unscheduled hairdressing appointment.
> 
> "Angela told Harry it was priceless and couldn't suddenly be handed over at short notice. He was furious and shouted: 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.' Suffice to say it didn't go down too well." So badly, in fact, that the no-nonsense 53-year-old, who has her own fearsome reputation among colleagues, reported the incident to the Queen, prompting a grandmotherly telling off for Harry.
> 
> Little did the Prince know at the time that staff had also given him a nickname: "The hostage".
> 
> According to one person with first-hand knowledge of the events: "They insisted that they had the same inflation-adjusted budget for the wedding as William and Kate – she got the choir she wanted, the dress, the carriage procession, the tiara – she got everything she wanted but it still wasn't enough.
> 
> "She was constantly looking for reasons to say she had been deprived. Also, she wanted drama from the very beginning."
> 
> Although the couple wanted their spokespeople to deny it, a story about Meghan requesting air freshener to be sprayed around the "musty" St George's Chapel was true, according to multiple sources.
> 
> Even The Kingdom Choir did not get off lightly after the couple changed their song 12 times before they were happy with the arrangement of "Stand By Me". As choir member Karen Gibson revealed: "Gospel music is all about the cherries on top and it's not about stinting on anything. But we got word back that they wanted something a little less, so we did a second version which had an Etta James arrangement but again we had word back that it wasn't right."
> 
> The group was then asked to meet Harry and Meghan face to face, before the couple finally settled on an arrangement after 11 previous attempts.
> 
> "The wedding was hugely stressful for everyone involved in it," said one former aide. "Staff were spending most of their time having smooth things over with suppliers."
> 
> Tears before the big day
> 
> The "Markle Debacle", when Meghan's father Thomas pulled out of the wedding at the last minute, only added to the tension as royal aides scrambled to "rescue" the narrative around the "big day" by having the Prince of Wales step in to walk Meghan down the aisle.
> 
> Despite Meghan later claiming to ITV's Tom Bradby that "not many people have asked if I'm ok", royal insiders insist they "rallied around" the couple – who were both in tears at times.
> 
> The Most Rev Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who officiated the ceremony, is also understood to have given "psychological as well as spiritual" support. The principle leader of the Church of England caused hilarity among his staff by failing to recognise Ms Winfrey at the lunchtime reception at Windsor Castle, asking the US chat show host what she did for a living.
> 
> By the time the couple had returned from their honeymoon, relations between the Sussexes, the Cambridges and their staff became so bad that Harry and Meghan appeared reluctant to engage with anyone at the June 2018 leaving party for Miguel Head, William's former private secretary.
> 
> According to two separate sources, the couple "remained aloof" throughout the bash in the private garden at Kensington Palace. "It was a really convivial atmosphere with William giving a touching speech about Mig, but Harry and Meghan just remained on the outskirts and didn't mingle with anyone. They were the last to arrive and the first to leave."
> 
> Eyebrows were similarly raised when, having shared the news of her pregnancy at the Champagne reception following Princess Eugenie's wedding to Jack Brooksbank in October 2018, Meghan declined to attend the evening do. The bride was said to have been "upset" that Harry only "popped along for a drink without Meghan" – although they were due to fly to Australia for their first Commonwealth tour the day after.
> 
> During the 16-day tour, which also took in Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, the couple appeared reluctant to engage with the press. Although Harry managed to be persuaded at one point to speak to reporters at the back of the plane, he told them: "Thanks for coming, even though you weren't invited."
> 
> Bullying claims emerge
> 
> On the same trip, it was claimed that Meghan had cut short a visit to a market in Fiji because she was concerned about the presence of a UN organisation promoting women, with which she had previously worked but now was no longer associated.
> 
> At the time, officials suggested that it was because it was humid and the crowd was oppressive in the market. After Meghan had been ushered away, a female member of her entourage was spotted sitting in an official car, looking extremely upset. Meghan's female personal protection officer left her post shortly afterwards.
> 
> Lawyers for the Duchess said she met other leaders from UN Women later on the tour and denied she left for the reason alleged.
> 
> Although Mr Knauf had not gone on the tour, he is thought to have been "deeply concerned" by reports of the couple's behaviour overseas.
> 
> "There was a sense that they were just refusing to take advice, and insisting on doing everything their way," said one royal source. "No one, from the most senior to the most junior employee, wasn't under constant attack," said another.
> 
> Matters came to a head in October 2018 following the departure of a second member of the Duchess's private office.
> 
> Mr Knauf emailed Simon Case, then William's private secretary and now the Cabinet Secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Mr Case then forwarded it to Ms Carruthers, who is based at Clarence House.
> 
> The email read: "I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y."
> 
> The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple's private secretary, concluded: "I questioned if the household's policy on harassment and bullying applies to principals."
> 
> While Mr Case was "very personally supportive" of the individual members of staff, Mr Knauf expressed his concern in the email that "nothing will be done". The palace is now holding an investigation, having been criticised for failing to act sooner.
> 
> It was not until a month later that it was reported that Melissa Toubati, the Duchess's former PA, had "quit suddenly", just six months into the job. The following month, it was announced that Ms Cohen would not stay in post after the Sussexes' baby was born.
> 
> 
> 
> The couple were apparently "furious" about reports of their high staff turnover, piling more pressure on their PR team to "try to turn negative headlines into positive ones".
> 
> According to one former employee: "What people fail to understand is Harry's hatred of the media is probably one of the most important things in his life. It is defining for him. So the narrative is always – it’s the press's fault, never theirs."
> 
> That Christmas, the Sussexes were once again photographed alongside the Cambridges on Dec 25 but opted to stay with the Queen at the "main house" rather than Anmer Hall.
> 
> It came after an awkward staff Christmas party in which "all mention of Melissa's name was banned", according to one royal insider. "It was as if she never existed." Some employees found it hard to reconcile the couple's erratic conduct with moments of genuine kindness, such as when Meghan would buy female staff members flowers or even jewellery.
> 
> Relations break down
> 
> By the New Year, relations within Kensington Palace had "irretrievably broken down," with Prince Harry no longer on speaking terms with Mr Knauf after he had failed to persuade him to drop the complaint against his wife. The Sussexes' lawyers deny any such conversation took place.
> 
> Sources close to the couple say Ms Toubati, who was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, was sacked for misconduct, pointing out neither staff member made complaints of their own to HR. Ms Toubati's friends deny she was sacked for misconduct.
> 
> With Harry and Meghan already operating in a silo – and increasingly consulting the Duchess's US team of advisers rather than palace officials – a split of the two households at Kensington Palace appeared an inevitability.
> 
> It was around the time that the couple moved to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor in March 2019 that Amy Pickerill became the third of the Duchess's staff to leave her role, having served as her assistant private secretary since November 2017.
> 
> Mr Knauf also stepped down to work as senior adviser to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges' Royal Foundation. Friends say he "bitterly regrets" not warning Sara Latham, who was appointed as the Sussexes' director of communications in April 2019, how difficult working for the couple could be.
> 
> The American PR supremo, who used to advise the *******s, quickly worked this out for herself when the couple insisted on secrecy around son Archie's birth on May 6, while trying to maximise global coverage.
> 
> Around the same time it was falsely claimed that the Duchess had been prevented from doing an interview with CBS anchor Gayle King, Ms Winfrey's close friend. In fact, insiders say "the Duchess was calling shots throughout."
> 
> It came after Meghan had attended a high-profile baby shower in New York with Serena Williams and Amal Clooney, without being accompanied by any palace press officers. Concerns were raised behind palace gates when freebies started arriving at New York's Mark Hotel, causing consternation for staff back in the UK having to wrestle with the Royal family's strict rules on gifting.
> 
> Having courted controversy throughout the summer of 2019 for snubbing the Queen's invitation to Balmoral and taking four private jets in 11 days instead, relations with the media were at rock bottom at the start of the Sussexes' September tour to Africa.
> 
> Royal aides were then left dumbfounded when what had been a surprisingly successful 10-day trip with Archie was overshadowed by Meghan's interview with Mr Bradby, in which she revealed the "struggles" she had faced adapting to life in the Royal family.
> 
> Duke's fears for wife
> 
> It came as Harry released an attack on the tabloid press as the couple announced they would be suing the Mail on Sunday over the publication of a letter Meghan had written to her father.
> 
> In a highly personal and scathing statement, Harry said some newspapers had "vilified her almost daily for the past nine months" and claimed they had published "lie after lie" at Meghan's expense simply because she was out of public view on maternity leave.
> 
> Referencing his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, who died in a car crash in Paris while being pursued by the paparazzi, the Duke said: "Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."
> 
> The interview set the tone for their January 2020 announcement that they would be "stepping back as senior royals" to become "financially independent".
> 
> As the world gathers to watch the most highly anticipated royal television event since Diana's Panorama interview in 1995, it will be left to the viewers to decide which version of history represents the truth.


Thank you for posting this, can’t access the Times and would have missed it. Excellent article. This must really bug the whiners, the Times is respected, hard to be dismissive if they print it. Hope they keep the articles coming.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yikes.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

madamelizaking said:


> And these beauties
> View attachment 5011983
> 
> View attachment 5011978


She’s darn scary, does anyone know what function they were attending?  Don’t seem to be many people around them.....in a toxic cloud?


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wouldn’t it be just perfect if Chas told us that the Haz is not his kid???!!!



climb into Mr Peabody's WayBack Machine and revisit the first post of this thread


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> She’s darn scary, does anyone know what function they were attending?  Don’t seem to be many people around them.....in a toxic cloud?



The Jamaica wedding of Harry’s friend, where it all started to change. He knew what he was marrying and so did she.

the happy couple:











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
					

Photo of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding




					www.popsugar.com


----------



## Chanbal

Creepy, so much jealousy... 

_"Royal aides dubbed Prince Harry 'the hostage' in the run-up to his and Meghan Markle's wedding, it has been claimed.'

The couple reportedly "insisted" on the same-inflation adjusted budget for their wedding as Prince William and Kate.

One source told the Telegraph Meghan "got everything she wanted but it still wasn’t enough."

They added: “She was constantly looking for reasons to say she had been deprived.

"Also she wanted drama from the very beginning. In the centre of a storm, she’d always be very calm.”_









						Prince Harry nicknamed 'The Hostage' by aides ahead of Meghan Markle wedding
					

Harry and Meghan Markle's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey over their decision to step away from their roles senior members of the Royal Family is due to air this weekend in a dramatic week for the monarchy




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

“I couldn’t have said yes to you then, *that wasn’t my choice to make,*” Meghan said. “So as an adult who lived a really independent life *to then go into this construct *that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, i*t’s really liberating* to be able to have the right and *the privilege* in some ways *to be able to say yes*. I mean, I’m ready to talk.”

Can you believe it? She knew what she was getting into. She didn't mind one %&**&# bit about "liberty"and she had quite a bit of privilege I'd say. So she had every luxury at her fingertips. Poor Baby!  She's sick!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I read years ago that the Queen wouldn’t get any more Corgis because she didn’t want them to outlive her. I’m glad she changed her mind!


----------



## rose60610

mellibelly said:


> Patrick who? Glennon friend of Oprah, *the shrieking hags of the View*
> and let’s not forget the *so thirsty she’s dehydrated Chrissy Tiegan* and wannabe influencer Meena Harris on *team Cringe.* Sooo what?! These are all useless celebrities or wannabe celebrities picking sides so they can get future invites. That and their brains are warped from living in the celebrity bubble of self importance, self promotion, narcissism and elitism. These people are not smarter or more interesting than you. I live in LA. They are very ordinary in person, many are incredibly stupid and entitled beyond comprehension. A friend was just telling me yesterday about a celebrity wanting $12,000 worth of product and in return offered to make an Instagram post as payment!
> 
> As I said earlier, I don’t know anyone in the real world buying the sob story they’re selling. The general feeling is “read the room”. This is not the time after the year we’ve had for this. If anything I’m taking notes, Netflix and Spotify may soon lose my business.



I want to "like" those phrases a hundred times!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Well, Twitter is abuzz with celebs who are supporting her and won’t believe anything negative said about her.
> 
> View attachment 5011848
> View attachment 5011849
> View attachment 5011850
> 
> 
> View attachment 5011851


Hmmm, the usual suspects.  Jameela Jamil, of course.  The "expert" hypochondriac who's a victim of her own body!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

madamelizaking said:


> He went to the University of Spoiled Children? How am I not surprised. He could not be more privileged.


Excuse me!  Not all of us that went there were spoiled!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry interview: Jessica Mulroney defends actress
> 
> 
> The Canadian fashion stylist said no one 'has ever had to deal with the pressure, the politics and the press' like Meghan in an Instagram post ahead of the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She's probably trying to get back into Meg's good graces despite the fact that once Markled, always Markled.  It's interesting how all the pictures of them together are from years ago, most recent was the 2018 wedding, LOL.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> Why are the Harkles doing the interview ?
> 
> Well it is NOT a for big bucks, they get nada, and neither does a charity of their choice.
> 
> CBS is making a fortune, dunno about OW, but not the Harkles
> 
> Clearly, it is all about a voice AT ALL COSTS



Perhaps it's a way to mollify their mega Netflix deal check signers to buy more time to crank out a doc to earn the $$. They could say "You think the Oprah interview is something, you ain't seen nuthin' "  Who knows? Oprah would play along for this game.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Dear all, must we bring US presidents in to the conversation when mods and admins have specifically asked us not to? Can't we just revel across politics, just as we do across our other differences, in our touching mutual disdain for the Duchess of Perpetual Grievances and Unprecedented Victim Hood?!

I'm only saying this because when you bring up the shortcomings of one US president, you are poking me to bring up the shortcomings of current and former other US presidents, whose numerous shortcomings it would be an absolute and irresistible delight for me to bring to your attention 

This will only draw upon us the wrath of Vlad, so please, let's not


----------



## V0N1B2

madamelizaking said:


> "No one has ever had to deal with..." Sounds like a T rump line. Funny how Markle and him have a lot of similar traits.


Yup. Two peas in a pod.
I was just thinking that today.  She could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue and she wouldn't lose a single follower.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Unleash the wrath of Vlad!


----------



## Chanbal

I googled SM to see if she had chimed in on MM's last events, but didn't find anything. However, I found this older article showing that she reads her sister very well. So until more juicy news, here it is:









						Meghan's sister attacks duchess for seeking fame at expense of royals
					

Follow our live royal updates HERE




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Jamaica wedding of Harry’s friend, where it all started to change. He knew what he was marrying and so did she.
> 
> the happy couple:
> 
> View attachment 5012014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
> 
> 
> Photo of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com


Wasn't this the wedding she showed up to uninvited? I thought the rumours were that Harry had given her the heave-ho and she wasn't having any if it, so she showed up in Jamaica by herself.


----------



## V0N1B2

Let me rephrase my post then for the pearl-clutchers:
I bet Meghan could kick a puppy in the face down Santa Monica Blvd. and not lose a single follower. 
Better?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

V0N1B2 said:


> Let me rephrase my post then for the pearl-clutchers:
> I bet Meghan could kick a puppy in the face down Santa Monica Blvd. and not lose a single follower.
> Better?


Are you calling Vlad a pearl clutcher?!


----------



## mellibelly

purseinsanity said:


> She's probably trying to get back into Meg's good graces despite the fact that *once Markled, always Markled*.  It's interesting how all the pictures of them together are from years ago, most recent was the 2018 wedding, LOL.



 I wonder if Markled Priyanka Chopra will jump to her defense now?


----------



## Lodpah

So I've been wondering what Nadya Suleiman (Octomom) has been up to and lo and behold, this lady is a modern day super woman who is my heroine now. She was unfortunately thrushed into the limelight by a nurse and eventually had to do some shady things to feed her family but then she realized she wanted privacy so she let it all go and now she's earned her masters, raising her children vegan who I might add are very well behaved and proper.  She acknowledged her past and said that was not her but the media intrusion made her realize she wanted privacy. She kinda looks like MM but she's a much stronger woman. See, if you want privacy you can achieve it. That's the way it's done Nadya.  Well done. 

Now MM could learn a lesson from her.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Jamaica wedding of Harry’s friend, where it all started to change. He knew what he was marrying and so did she.
> 
> the happy couple:
> 
> View attachment 5012014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
> 
> 
> Photo of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com


Thanks, I had read references to the wedding, but never saw the pictures. She reeks jealousy,  control, disdain. Stupid fool, he’s gotten what he deserves.

Can’t imagine her as a boss.

LOL, “the other side” should get time after the interview to show video like this, and the touching one posted a few days ago of William talking about his Mother’s legacy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don’t know who this journalist is, but he makes a good point — 2 things can be true at the same time:


----------



## bag-mania

I hadn’t watched Entertainment Tonight in several years but this week I’ve watched it three times because of this interview. They spent the first five minutes plugging it, complete with a lengthy appearance by Omid Scobie.  It does make me wonder if they’ve given away enough snippets where it might actually cause some people to lose interest.  Four teasers in a week will make everyone think they’ve already seen the most interesting parts of the show.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> I read years ago that the Queen wouldn’t get any more Corgis because she didn’t want them to outlive her. I’m glad she changed her mind!


And, poor lady, I think it demonstrates the emotional pain she must be feeling, knowing they will be a comfort as she worries about Phillip and struggles with H&M.


----------



## bisousx

I’m trying to catch up with the bullying news. The RF brought it on themselves to ignore the bullying claims for this long. It’s fun reading about Meghan hissing at an assistant and bringing staff members to tears way back in 2018, but too little too late now in releasing this information. People are siding with who they predict will win the war, and it’s uber fashionable these days to be a victim whose race will protect her from accountability.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan and Harry are talking to Oprah. Here’s why they shouldn’t say too much.*

What happens when British royalty sits down with the American queen of TV interviewers? A family feud of majestic proportions.
U.S. and U.K. headlines this week resemble a plot line from “The Crown”: Buckingham Palace is investigating claims that the Duchess of Sussex “bullied” staff. Allegedly against advice, she wore diamond earrings from a murderous foreign prince. The renegade Sussexes are poised to skewer their royal relatives while the duke’s 99-year-old grandfather, Prince Philip, has been hospitalizedand just had heart surgery.

It’s all opening salvos ahead of the Oprah Winfrey interview set to air Sunday with the Sussexes, better known as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The same day in Britain, a television special will feature an address from the queen and messages from other senior royals to mark Commonwealth Day. The competing images are likely to feed the narrative that while some royals do their duty, others are out for themselves.

Reality is more complicated. But no one will win this grudge match if the Windsors’ family dysfunction continues to play out in public.

It’s been a year since Harry and Meghan made their last official appearance after stepping down from their royal roles. In recent months, they have been raising their profile: inking production deals, announcing Meghan’s pregnancy, appearing on James Corden’s late-night show. Next up: “Oprah With Meghan & Harry.”
“My biggest concern was history repeating itself,” Harry says in a promotional clip, alluding to media pressure on his mother, Princess Diana, who died in a 1997 car crash while trying to flee paparazzi.

Sensing ratings gold, CBS extended a 90-minute program to two hours — and released video of Meghan saying, “I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there’s an active role that ‘The Firm’ is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.”

If we’re to believe CBS’s promotional machine, royal tea is about to be spilled.
But is it? This is not the first time Harry and Meghan have derided media bias or tabloid aggression. What’s different now is the couple’s position: After the palace rejected their request to create hybrid public-private roles, the couple opted out of official life. They moved to Canada and then California, where they bought a mansion in Montecito. Harry and Meghan have clinched producing deals with Netflix and Spotify and launched a nonprofit. Financially, at least for the moment, they can do whatever they want.

No doubt, the couple have some legitimate complaints. Whatever palace protocols Meghan may have disliked (or breached), tabloid coverage of her compared with that of other royals shows a bias againstthe biracial U.S.-born duchess.

The palace’s failure to aggressively call out that distortion was an unforced error — contributing to the Sussexes’ exit and, by failing to embrace Meghan, missing a potentially huge opportunity to help modernize an ancient institution. Both sides have since taken some petty shots, widening the rift.
But opening up on camera tends to create more royal problems than it solves. Fallout from Princess Diana’s tell-all interview in 1995included Queen Elizabeth II ordering Harry’s parents to divorce; Prince Charles admitting that he had been unfaithful to Diana tanked his approval ratings; more recently, Prince Andrew’s tone-deaf interview about his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein got him retired from public duties.

There’s a logic to the queen’s never-complain, never-explain approach: The fly-on-the-wall 1969 “Royal Family” documentary hasn’t been rebroadcast in decades because the queen realizes that oversharing on camera normalizes royalty, potentially undermining their position.

The 94-year-old queen appears to take the long view with Harry and Meghan. While refusing some of their requests, she has laced personal language into palace statements, referring to them as “much loved members” of her family.
Will they now repay the favor? Or, having achieved escape velocity, will they dish about family grudges as well?
On Corden’s show, Harry talked about Zooming with his grandparents and the waffle maker the queen sent his toddler son. Oprah viewers will be listening for family drama, such as details about reported rifts with Harry’s brother and sister-in-law, whether the couple has plans for a U.K. visit and if Harry is adjusting to the States better than Meghan fared in Britain.

“It’s really liberating,” Meghan says in another excerpt, “to be able to say, Yes, I’m ready to talk.”

If they are wise, however, they won’t tell Oprah much.



			https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/05/oprah-interview-british-royals-expectations/%3foutputType=amp


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I hadn’t watched Entertainment Tonight in several years but this week I’ve watched it three times because of this interview. They spent the first five minutes plugging it, complete with a lengthy appearance by Omid Scobie.  It does make me wonder if they’ve given away enough snippets where it might actually cause some people to lose interest.  Four teasers in a week will make everyone think they’ve already seen the most interesting parts of the show.



Me, I have lost interest in watching ... unless they cover The William Scarf incident — 


From Dec, 2018:








						Is the real royal feud between Meghan and WILLIAM?
					

Footage of the royals leaving church at Sandringham, posted to Instagram, appears to show William ignoring Meghan to fiddle with his scarf as she tried to speak to him.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DebbieAnn

lalame said:


> But how many other successful human rights' lawyers are household names..... very few. Jason Gordon Levitt's wife is a tech entrepreneur and CEO. Their accomplishments got them professional acclaim, but their looks got them on Vogue.


*His name is "Joseph Gordon-Levitt", not "Jason"*


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I read years ago that the Queen wouldn’t get any more Corgis because she didn’t want them to outlive her. I’m glad she changed her mind!


I read that too, but I guess she was talking about no more breeding them, which she was doing. Not adopting?  Curious about this...


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I’m trying to catch up with the bullying news. The RF brought it on themselves to ignore the bullying claims for this long. It’s fun reading about Meghan hissing at an assistant and bringing staff members to tears way back in 2018, but too little too late now in releasing this information. People are siding with who they predict will win the war, and it’s uber fashionable these days to be a victim whose race will protect her from accountability.



They were in a no-win situation either way. I remember when those rumors were going around about the various staff members who were quitting and their reasons (5 am messages, anyone?). We discussed it here at the time. Can you imagine the tantrums from both Meghan and Harry if Buckingham Palace had looked into it then? That was covered up for them and H&M still found many other things to feel butt hurt about.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> I’m trying to catch up with the bullying news. The RF brought it on themselves to ignore the bullying claims for this long. It’s fun reading about Meghan hissing at an assistant and bringing staff members to tears way back in 2018, but too little too late now in releasing this information. People are siding with who they predict will win the war, and it’s uber fashionable these days to be a victim whose race will protect her from accountability.



Has the victimhood chart changed? Bullying is the top, isn’t it?
H&M thought they had closed the door on these bullying issues, but MM dared to open it in this interview = big mistake.
Especially the way O asked the question: were you being silent or were you silenced?  For 10,001 reason, awful choice of words. IMO


ETA:  to clarify, I am definitely not making light of victims and their ordeal. I do not view H&M as victims, they lose victim status with their privilege in their 16 bathroom house, private jet, range rovers, Rolls Royce’s, etc.


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan and Harry are talking to Oprah. Here’s why they shouldn’t say too much.*
> 
> What happens when British royalty sits down with the American queen of TV interviewers? A family feud of majestic proportions.
> U.S. and U.K. headlines this week resemble a plot line from “The Crown”: Buckingham Palace is investigating claims that the Duchess of Sussex “bullied” staff. Allegedly against advice, she wore diamond earrings from a murderous foreign prince. The renegade Sussexes are poised to skewer their royal relatives while the duke’s 99-year-old grandfather, Prince Philip, has been hospitalizedand just had heart surgery.
> 
> It’s all opening salvos ahead of the Oprah Winfrey interview set to air Sunday with the Sussexes, better known as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The same day in Britain, a television special will feature an address from the queen and messages from other senior royals to mark Commonwealth Day. The competing images are likely to feed the narrative that while some royals do their duty, others are out for themselves.
> 
> Reality is more complicated. But no one will win this grudge match if the Windsors’ family dysfunction continues to play out in public.
> 
> It’s been a year since Harry and Meghan made their last official appearance after stepping down from their royal roles. In recent months, they have been raising their profile: inking production deals, announcing Meghan’s pregnancy, appearing on James Corden’s late-night show. Next up: “Oprah With Meghan & Harry.”
> “My biggest concern was history repeating itself,” Harry says in a promotional clip, alluding to media pressure on his mother, Princess Diana, who died in a 1997 car crash while trying to flee paparazzi.
> 
> Sensing ratings gold, CBS extended a 90-minute program to two hours — and released video of Meghan saying, “I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there’s an active role that ‘The Firm’ is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.”
> 
> If we’re to believe CBS’s promotional machine, royal tea is about to be spilled.
> But is it? This is not the first time Harry and Meghan have derided media bias or tabloid aggression. What’s different now is the couple’s position: After the palace rejected their request to create hybrid public-private roles, the couple opted out of official life. They moved to Canada and then California, where they bought a mansion in Montecito. Harry and Meghan have clinched producing deals with Netflix and Spotify and launched a nonprofit. Financially, at least for the moment, they can do whatever they want.
> 
> No doubt, the couple have some legitimate complaints. Whatever palace protocols Meghan may have disliked (or breached), tabloid coverage of her compared with that of other royals shows a bias againstthe biracial U.S.-born duchess.
> 
> The palace’s failure to aggressively call out that distortion was an unforced error — contributing to the Sussexes’ exit and, by failing to embrace Meghan, missing a potentially huge opportunity to help modernize an ancient institution. Both sides have since taken some petty shots, widening the rift.
> But opening up on camera tends to create more royal problems than it solves. Fallout from Princess Diana’s tell-all interview in 1995included Queen Elizabeth II ordering Harry’s parents to divorce; Prince Charles admitting that he had been unfaithful to Diana tanked his approval ratings; more recently, Prince Andrew’s tone-deaf interview about his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein got him retired from public duties.
> 
> There’s a logic to the queen’s never-complain, never-explain approach: The fly-on-the-wall 1969 “Royal Family” documentary hasn’t been rebroadcast in decades because the queen realizes that oversharing on camera normalizes royalty, potentially undermining their position.
> 
> The 94-year-old queen appears to take the long view with Harry and Meghan. While refusing some of their requests, she has laced personal language into palace statements, referring to them as “much loved members” of her family.
> Will they now repay the favor? Or, having achieved escape velocity, will they dish about family grudges as well?
> On Corden’s show, Harry talked about Zooming with his grandparents and the waffle maker the queen sent his toddler son. Oprah viewers will be listening for family drama, such as details about reported rifts with Harry’s brother and sister-in-law, whether the couple has plans for a U.K. visit and if Harry is adjusting to the States better than Meghan fared in Britain.
> 
> “It’s really liberating,” Meghan says in another excerpt, “to be able to say, Yes, I’m ready to talk.”
> 
> If they are wise, however, they won’t tell Oprah much.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/05/oprah-interview-british-royals-expectations/%3foutputType=amp



Many of the comments are very surprisingly not pro-Meghan in this liberal US newspaper! 
(You may have to go to the original link to view comments: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/05/oprah-interview-british-royals-expectations/)


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Well, Twitter is abuzz with celebs who are supporting her and won’t believe anything negative said about her.
> 
> View attachment 5011848
> View attachment 5011849
> View attachment 5011850
> 
> 
> View attachment 5011851



"years and years"?????  what desperate losers.  They're in full CYA CYA CYA CYA mode. Fooling no one.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan and Harry are talking to Oprah. Here’s why they shouldn’t say too much.*
> 
> What happens when British royalty sits down with the American queen of TV interviewers? A family feud of majestic proportions.
> U.S. and U.K. headlines this week resemble a plot line from “The Crown”: Buckingham Palace is investigating claims that the Duchess of Sussex “bullied” staff. Allegedly against advice, she wore diamond earrings from a murderous foreign prince. The renegade Sussexes are poised to skewer their royal relatives while the duke’s 99-year-old grandfather, Prince Philip, has been hospitalizedand just had heart surgery.
> 
> It’s all opening salvos ahead of the Oprah Winfrey interview set to air Sunday with the Sussexes, better known as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The same day in Britain, a television special will feature an address from the queen and messages from other senior royals to mark Commonwealth Day. The competing images are likely to feed the narrative that while some royals do their duty, others are out for themselves.
> 
> Reality is more complicated. But no one will win this grudge match if the Windsors’ family dysfunction continues to play out in public.
> 
> It’s been a year since Harry and Meghan made their last official appearance after stepping down from their royal roles. In recent months, they have been raising their profile: inking production deals, announcing Meghan’s pregnancy, appearing on James Corden’s late-night show. Next up: “Oprah With Meghan & Harry.”
> “My biggest concern was history repeating itself,” Harry says in a promotional clip, alluding to media pressure on his mother, Princess Diana, who died in a 1997 car crash while trying to flee paparazzi.
> 
> Sensing ratings gold, CBS extended a 90-minute program to two hours — and released video of Meghan saying, “I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there’s an active role that ‘The Firm’ is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us.”
> 
> If we’re to believe CBS’s promotional machine, royal tea is about to be spilled.
> But is it? This is not the first time Harry and Meghan have derided media bias or tabloid aggression. What’s different now is the couple’s position: After the palace rejected their request to create hybrid public-private roles, the couple opted out of official life. They moved to Canada and then California, where they bought a mansion in Montecito. Harry and Meghan have clinched producing deals with Netflix and Spotify and launched a nonprofit. Financially, at least for the moment, they can do whatever they want.
> 
> No doubt, the couple have some legitimate complaints. Whatever palace protocols Meghan may have disliked (or breached), tabloid coverage of her compared with that of other royals shows a bias againstthe biracial U.S.-born duchess.
> 
> The palace’s failure to aggressively call out that distortion was an unforced error — contributing to the Sussexes’ exit and, by failing to embrace Meghan, missing a potentially huge opportunity to help modernize an ancient institution. Both sides have since taken some petty shots, widening the rift.
> But opening up on camera tends to create more royal problems than it solves. Fallout from Princess Diana’s tell-all interview in 1995included Queen Elizabeth II ordering Harry’s parents to divorce; Prince Charles admitting that he had been unfaithful to Diana tanked his approval ratings; more recently, Prince Andrew’s tone-deaf interview about his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein got him retired from public duties.
> 
> There’s a logic to the queen’s never-complain, never-explain approach: The fly-on-the-wall 1969 “Royal Family” documentary hasn’t been rebroadcast in decades because the queen realizes that oversharing on camera normalizes royalty, potentially undermining their position.
> 
> The 94-year-old queen appears to take the long view with Harry and Meghan. While refusing some of their requests, she has laced personal language into palace statements, referring to them as “much loved members” of her family.
> Will they now repay the favor? Or, having achieved escape velocity, will they dish about family grudges as well?
> On Corden’s show, Harry talked about Zooming with his grandparents and the waffle maker the queen sent his toddler son. Oprah viewers will be listening for family drama, such as details about reported rifts with Harry’s brother and sister-in-law, whether the couple has plans for a U.K. visit and if Harry is adjusting to the States better than Meghan fared in Britain.
> 
> “It’s really liberating,” Meghan says in another excerpt, “to be able to say, Yes, I’m ready to talk.”
> 
> If they are wise, however, they won’t tell Oprah much.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/05/oprah-interview-british-royals-expectations/%3foutputType=amp



" _tabloid coverage of her compared with that of other royals shows a bias againstthe biracial U.S.-born duchess_"

The author is trying to provide a balanced view, but he or she is falling to see that MM didn't behave like the other royals. It is also not fair to say that the Palace failed "_to embrace Meghan_", they gave her a lot, but nothing was ever enough for her.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I hadn’t watched Entertainment Tonight in several years but this week I’ve watched it three times because of this interview. They spent the first five minutes plugging it, complete with a lengthy appearance by Omid Scobie.  It does make me wonder if they’ve given away enough snippets where it might actually cause some people to lose interest.  Four teasers in a week will make everyone think they’ve already seen the most interesting parts of the show.


Here in Canada, this was making the news and CTV, one of our major TV stations, had some reporters giving a balanced take on things. Not fawning over Meg, but stating facts.

I turned the channel to CNN and they had Omid Scobie on and he was giving his one-sided take and the news anchor interviewing him was really in Meg's corner saying the BRF is racist and Meg is the victim. Not exactly balanced journalism.

I thought the two views were interesting, but then again, we're still part of the Commonwealth, so maybe we see the BRF a little differently than the States.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Me, I have lost interest in watching ... unless they cover The William Scarf incident —
> View attachment 5012073
> 
> From Dec, 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is the real royal feud between Meghan and WILLIAM?
> 
> 
> Footage of the royals leaving church at Sandringham, posted to Instagram, appears to show William ignoring Meghan to fiddle with his scarf as she tried to speak to him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Mmmmmemories....





 



rose60610 said:


> "years and years"?????  what desperate losers.  They're in full CYA CYA CYA CYA mode. Fooling no one.


I know, right? I had a good laugh at that one too. Years and years. Like one and a half


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> They were in a no-win situation either way. I remember when those rumors were going around about the various staff members who were quitting and their reasons (5 am messages, anyone?). We discussed it here at the time. Can you imagine the tantrums from both Meghan and Harry if Buckingham Palace had looked into it then? That was covered up for them and H&M still found many other things to feel butt hurt about.



I don’t disagree - and the Queen has to be extremely cautious with how she deals with relatives after the backlash over Diana’s death. Just SMH like where were these 10 aides willing to testify when it counted (ie, the privacy lawsuit) or why the bullying complaint from 2018 was leaked now, conveniently before the Oprah interview. There’s no reigning in or cancelling these two - the Markles are raking in millions and sadly, this is a time in our society where they’ll continue to harm others with no repercussions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> Mmmmmemories....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know, right? I had a good laugh at that one too. Years and years. Like one and a half



As I watch this now, I think W&K saw a ‘new’ photographer (perhaps Omid) in the crowd. They knew MM arranged it, W tells Harry who says BS, Charles sees it, Kate tells Anne. The Senior Royals look in the same direction. No wonder William was furious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> " _tabloid coverage of her compared with that of other royals shows a bias againstthe biracial U.S.-born duchess_"
> 
> The author is trying to provide a balanced view, but he or she is falling to see that MM didn't behave like the other royals. It is also not fair to say that the Palace failed "_to embrace Meghan_", they gave her a lot, but nothing was ever enough for her.



It’s the _Post_. Frankly, I was surprised it was as balanced as it was (probably because it was an opinion piece).


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> Many of the comments are very surprisingly not pro-Meghan in this liberal US newspaper!
> (You may have to go to the original link to view comments: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/03/05/oprah-interview-british-royals-expectations/)



You must have read a different batch of comments than I did. The ones I saw were pro-Meghan (or at least anti-royal family) by about 5 to 1.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Here in Canada, this was making the news and CTV, one of our major TV stations, had some reporters giving a balanced take on things. Not fawning over Meg, but stating facts.
> 
> I turned the channel to CNN and they had Omid Scobie on and he was giving his one-sided take and the news anchor interviewing him was really in Meg's corner saying the BRF is racist and Meg is the victim. Not exactly balanced journalism.
> 
> I thought the two views were interesting, but then again, we're still part of the Commonwealth, so maybe we see the BRF a little differently than the States.



CNN has become such a joke over the last 7 or 8 years.

It’s the same now as it was  when Megxit happened. The narrative in the press was that they left because of racism. You aren’t going to find anyone representing the mainstream US news media who is going to dare to say otherwise. In this sensitive climate it makes sense.  It isn’t worth it to risk losing their jobs over Meghan Markle.


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> So I've been wondering what Nadya Suleiman (Octomom) has been up to and lo and behold, this lady is a modern day super woman who is my heroine now. She was unfortunately thrushed into the limelight by a nurse and eventually had to do some shady things to feed her family but then she realized she wanted privacy so she let it all go and now she's earned her masters, raising her children vegan who I might add are very well behaved and proper.  She acknowledged her past and said that was not her but the media intrusion made her realize she wanted privacy. She kinda looks like MM but she's a much stronger woman. See, if you want privacy you can achieve it. That's the way it's done Nadya.  Well done.
> 
> Now MM could learn a lesson from her.



You should repost this in the Alec Baldwin thread


----------



## mshermes

lanasyogamama said:


> I read years ago that the Queen wouldn’t get any more Corgis because she didn’t want them to outlive her. I’m glad she changed her mind!


Apparently they were gifted:

The corgis were reportedly gifted to the 94-year-old monarch, and are believed to be the queen’s first not descended from Susan, the corgi she received for her 18th birthday in 1944.

The family continued to breed dogs from Susan’s lineage, with Elizabeth owning at least 30 Pembroke Welsh corgis descended from her through the years. Whisper, the last of the royal line, passed away in October 2018.


----------



## Straight-Laced

csshopper said:


> Thank you for posting this, can’t access the Times and would have missed it. Excellent article. This must really bug the whiners, the Times is respected, hard to be dismissive if they print it. Hope they keep the articles coming.


Happy to oblige! I subscribe to both The Times and The Telegraph and that particular article appeared in The Telegraph


----------



## Jktgal




----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> As I watch this now, I think W&K saw a ‘new’ photographer (perhaps Omid) in the crowd. They knew MM arranged it, W tells Harry who says BS, Charles sees it, Kate tells Anne. The Senior Royals look in the same direction. No wonder William was furious.
> View attachment 5012094


Looking at her smirking face I think you are very perceptive!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Senior royals and Palace aides will watch the much-anticipated interview 'at the same time' as the rest of the world with network CBS set to air the two-hour special in the US at 1am UK time on Sunday night.



Honestly I hope they are not doing that to themselves. Let staff watch it and give you cliffnotes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The woman believes herself to be a swan among swans, the physical, moral and intellectual peer of such great figures as Emmeline Pankhurst, Audrey Hepburn and Mother Teresa. Where self-knowledge should be is a hole so large it could be filled by a new galaxy.



Ouch.



> But Meghan’s entire life has been a masquerade. She thinks she is a brilliant actress, perhaps one of the best of her generation. But for some reason she never managed to win any parts worth having.
> 
> Playing Rachel in the cable TV drama Suits was the apogee of her career. How come her transcendent talent has languished unrecognised?



More ouch.



> If one individual claims to receive almost universal bad treatment, the likelihood is the cause lies in themselves, and that they either imagine these injuries or behave in such a way as to arouse uncontrollable irritation. This appears to have led, in Meghan’s case, and now Harry’s, almost to a sort of Persecution Mania.



Jup.




> There may, nonetheless, be foolish and gullible people, the sort who are a sucker for conspiracy theories and tales of wicked royals — and there are many in America — who will believe them. But the sophisticates the Sussexes love and aspire to join will be laughing at them.
> 
> In urbane American society, in the world of the Clooneys and the Obamas, Meghan will never be taken seriously again. She has descended too deeply into the mud.



I hope so. That said, Amal has been very quiet on Meghan for a long while. Michelle has kept herself out of the mess, too.


----------



## elvisfan4life

I feel so sorry for Charles the Queen and the BP / Firm- they have bent over backwards for years now and thrown every Royal protocol out of the window to pamper these these two ingrates - he because he is the unused spare and his mum died when he was 12 ( oh his poor mental health ) - she because she is non white and so god forbid that they be accused of being racist if they tried to stop any of her disgusting inappropriate behaviours which are all coming out now  - I have disliked the woman from day one not because of her colour ( as I was often accused of on this thread which was initially all her fawning supporters ) but because of her actions from day one - it was obvious she was trying to oust William and Kate - her behaviour to Kate was disgusting -the Firm tried to cover all this up and support these two non entities - they should just have let Philip had his way and it would have been sorted years ago- get well soon Sir your wife needs you back by her side more than ever - Charles needs to man up and tell Harry he has made his choice and so he now can no longer be part of the institution he so despises particularly after the bus trip and the OW **** show  - the 21st century “it’s a knockout” 

William is more of a man and will sever any bonds Charles tries to maintain though I suspect Camilla will be quietly making Charles face up to his responsibilities to the Queen and she has considerable clout behind the scenes 

Bye bye Ginge don’t let the door hit you on the way out we won’t miss you


----------



## CarryOn2020

_"The perfection that comes with summertime. Picnics and barbecues, laying out by the pool with friends, and toasting to the season are high on my list. And while I generally opt to whet my whistle with a glass of rosé or crisp Sauvignon Blanc, sometimes the day calls for a cocktail. Cue the Tig Cup."

The TIG Cup is Meghan’s own riff on a Summer Cup – a summer punch-style drink, often featuring a fizzy mixer to make it refreshing and longer, plus chopped fruit for garnish. Pimm’s is a classic example – and Meghan’s own recipe isn’t far off.

The alcohol base comprises of gin and Maraschino Cherry liqueur, which sounds positively delightful. Her recipe doesn’t include measurements, so you can make it as strong or as weak as you please. On the liqueur, Meghan says “I personally loathe syrupy sweet drinks but this has just enough of a subtle sweetness that it really acts as more of a back note in the drink. Plus the maraschino cherry of it all reminds me of drinking Shirley temples as a little girl.”

This is topped up with both tonic water and soda water. Meghan suggests slightly more soda than tonic: "I don’t gravitate to the taste of tonic so I always go heavier on the soda, but feel free to […] play around with it to taste.”

Why you’d put something you don’t necessarily like in your own signature cocktail, we don’t quite understand – but we’re rolling with it.

While a classic Pimm’s might be finished with cucumber, strawberries, orange and mint, the Tig Cup’s garnish goes slightly more savoury. Meghan recommends cucumber ribbons, grapefruit rind, thinly sliced radishes, celery, lime and mint for the perfect accompaniments.

"Any or all of the listed ingredients are great, but the key pieces are citrus and herbs," she says. "If you don’t have grapefruit, lemon works. No radish, no problem."_

 
_








						This Is How To Make Meghan Markle’s Signature Cocktail
					

It’s kinda like Pimm’s… Without the Pimm’s.




					www.delish.com
				



_


Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5012110


----------



## lalame

If Meghan just wanted to speak out... why wouldn't she do it with a statement or address it herself in a video she posts to their website, social media, etc? She's been "liberated" for a year plus now.... she HAD to "muzzle" HERSELF until the right paying opportunity came along?  Why can't people see through this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> *'She wanted drama': The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm*
> As the Sussexes give their tell-all Oprah Winfrey interview, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'




I agree with the headline, and I also feel the article - again published by a respected medium - is pretty balanced, mentioning the few positive scraps and critizising other members of the BRF. There's just too much sh*t to report about these two. 



> That Christmas, determined to walk side by side with William and Kate to Sandringham's St Mary Magdalene Church, rather than several steps behind, they were pictured together as the so-called "Fab Four".



...



> According to one person with first-hand knowledge of the events: "They insisted that they had the same inflation-adjusted budget for the wedding as William and Kate – she got the choir she wanted, the dress, the carriage procession, the tiara – she got everything she wanted but it still wasn't enough.



Just...wow.



> Little did the Prince know at the time that staff had also given him a nickname: "The hostage".



I find it really interesting that a) not only did close employees see the situation exactly like we do and b) how early on that happened. Very telling.



> Sources close to the couple say Ms Toubati, who was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, was sacked for misconduct, pointing out neither staff member made complaints of their own to HR. Ms Toubati's friends deny she was sacked for misconduct.



Are they seriously trying to ruin someone's future career prospects to cover up for their sh*tty characters? Maybe Ms. Toubati should consider a lawsuit.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Too old


Too old lol! The ingenue won’t like that! 
A bit of a drop in acting quality from Olivia Colman too.
MM can’t even sound sincere talking about herself and well... we all saw that skit with Harry and Ed Sheeran (shudders)
From Oscar winner to dog’s dinner.

edit: just checked and OC’s Surname is spelt without an e


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Turning their ire on the Queen, bad move! 

*Drunk on their own drama: Harry and Meghan say relentless negativity forced them out... yet these joyously positive front pages prove the opposite. SARAH VINE unearths the real cause for their TV high noon*

Few things exemplify Britishness more than dear old Marks & Spencer. 

So when, in May 2018, the Windsor branch changed its name to ‘Markle and Sparkle’ in honour of the marriage of Harry Windsor to Meghan Markle, it felt like the ultimate stamp of approval.

Swept away by the giddy excitement of a royal wedding — and not just any royal wedding, the marriage of Princess Diana’s younger son, that brave little soldier who carved his name on all our hearts the day he walked behind his mother’s coffin just aged 12 —we were as entranced by Meghan as Harry clearly was.

It wasn’t just that she was gorgeous, there was also far more to her than most royal fiancees. She had a backstory that wasn’t all pony clubs and boarding schools.

Here was a woman who had worked hard to forge a career and a name for herself, who understood what it meant to overcome adversity.
She was talented, with a successful acting career behind her; but above all else she was strong — and that was reassuring. Despite his stint in the Army, there was still a degree of vulnerability to Harry.

By contrast, Meghan was a grown-up who could stand on her own two feet, even if those feet were invariably encased in vertiginous heels that would have crippled most mortals.

It felt like Harry had chosen wisely: someone capable of withstanding the inevitable challenges of becoming a royal consort and providing him with the solid foundation he needed to leave the past behind and start building a family of his own.

For two decades since the death of his mother, we had watched with trepidation, never certain how the psychological effects of that trauma would play out. Successive girlfriends had never seemed quite able to cope.
But when Meghan came along it felt like he had finally found someone up to it. We could all heave a huge sigh of relief. And we were just so happy, for both of them.

My goodness, how wrong we were. It seems astonishing that we could have been so naive. For far from being the making of Harry, Meghan might just prove his downfall. All that initial goodwill and promise has been, in just a few short years, entirely squandered.

The headlines that welcomed their union so enthusiastically have slowly soured, as the couple’s behaviour has grown ever more paranoid and self-destructive.
As for Harry, with Meghan at his side he has gone from being almost universally adored to an angry, bitter, resentful and — astonishingly for someone who grew up in his circumstances — decidedly chippy shadow of his former self, clipped and stony-faced, now all but unrecognisable from the man we thought we knew.

And now, a crossroads. The next few days will determine the outcome of this extraordinary stand-off between the Queen and her grandson.

And although the forthcoming Oprah Winfrey interview will no doubt paint them both as victims of a terrible conspiracy by the British Press and ‘The Firm’ to discredit them in the eyes of the public, that same public will judge them not by their performances on the sofa of a chat show hostess, but by their actions.

In her latest clip to promote the interview, Meghan tells Oprah that now she has escaped the ‘construct’ of the Royal Family, ‘it’s really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say, yes, I’m ready to talk’.
But this so-called liberation comes at a cost — and Harry is the one who stands to lose the most. Stripped of his royal patronages and without any of the infrastructure that has surrounded him all his life, he now faces a future of cold, hard commercial reality.

Together they seem intent on an aggressive approach that, while perhaps satisfying both financially and emotionally in the short term, will leave them with fewer options in future.

*Not even Prince Philip’s stay in hospital and his subsequent heart operation seems to have been able to soften the couple’s determination to pursue this collision course.*

When did it all change for them? After all, at the moment Meghan first appeared, they had the goodwill of the nation firmly behind them. The coverage was universally positive.

And while Meghan’s complicated family life inevitably drew some attention, to a great extent it was seen as a measure of her resilience that she had managed to make her way in the world despite it. There were many, myself included, who admired her as a result.

But while so much of the focus has been on Meghan and her allegedly disruptive influence on the Prince, the seeds of this conflict were sown long before she came on the scene.
It is often the way of these things that the woman takes the blame, but that would be unfair. She was simply the catalyst for the simmering undercurrents of resentment that had long stirred deep in the heart of the Prince.

The true strength of those feelings was made abundantly clear in 2017, in a documentary filmed by the brothers to mark the 20th anniversary of their mother’s death.

The extent of the damage done to the young Prince by his parents’ acrimonious divorce, the Palace’s treatment of Diana and his father’s relationship with Camilla was painfully obvious.

While William came across as a man who had, not easily but with thoughtfulness and dedication, done his best to make his peace with the past, for Harry the hurt and anger were still raw. In particular his loathing of the Press, which he directly blamed for his mother’s death, was marked. While in some ways understandable — though her driver was drunk, the paparazzi were indeed following her — it seemed to be eating away at him in a way that was clearly toxic.

When he met and married Meghan, Harry’s anger in this respect seems to have escalated and, to an extent, become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In November 2016, he hit back at the media in a strongly-worded statement, accusing the Press of harassment and sharp practices towards Meghan, alleging racism and, most tellingly, expressing his disappointment that he had ‘not been able to protect her’.

This goes to the heart of how and why it has all gone so horribly wrong. Even before he had proposed to Meghan, Harry had decided to go to war with those he held responsible for his pain.
He had been too young to protect his beloved mother; he was not going to make the same mistake with his wife.

In many ways, what we are dealing with here is not a 36-year-old man, but the part of him that remains an angry young boy, racked with the pain of losing his mother.

It is certainly telling that one of the first clips released from the Oprah interview was Harry saying he feared ‘history repeating itself’.

To some degree, this is understandable: but there was a strong element of Harry’s behaviour that suggested he was not only prepared to take a defensive position; he was actively spoiling for a fight.

Except a lot of the time he was tilting at windmills.

Yes, Meghan did receive a horrible amount of online abuse — but that is sadly true of almost any high- profile woman.

Of course there was a huge amount of media interest in her family, some of whom turned out to be self-interested attention-seekers, hoping to profit by association.

Nevertheless, the compliments were flowing for her: ‘Dazzling debut’, ‘a very modern royal’, ‘magic’. At every turn she garnered praise.

But it was almost as if the couple had developed a narrative of victimhood that they were determined to pursue wherever possible.

Perfectly legitimate questioning of their subsequent behaviour — of their doom-mongering about climate change allied to their proclivity for private jets, of their clear preference for the company of celebrities over royal duties — was interpreted by them, entirely erroneously, as rooted in prejudice.

The truth is, the attention they received was by no means any worse than previous royal couples had endured. In fact, it was much better. Kate Middleton had a torrid time of it, humiliatingly dubbed ‘Waity Katie’ for the time it took William to propose; poor Camilla was frequently painted as an evil witch in contrast to the saintly Diana; even the Queen has had to endure speculation about her marriage over the years.

However hurtful and damaging these other royals might have found these stories, they all found ways of turning public opinion in their favour. With the help of advisers, they managed to carve out the privacy they needed within the context of wider scrutiny.

But right from the start, Harry and Meghan insisted that everything had to be done their way.

Witness the rapid turnover of staff in their private office, not to mention subsequent accusations of bullying, now being formally investigated by the Palace.

Again, they handled the Press with all the skill and maturity of petulant teenagers, reducing those around them — people who only wanted the best for them — to emotional rubble.

It’s these accusations of staff bullying that will ultimately prove problematic for them. Not just back home in Blighty but also in their adopted land of California, where bullying is as much of a no-no as sexual harassment.

Witness the downfall of Ellen DeGeneres, once the undisputed queen of American TV, brought low by a bullying scandal very similar to the one that now threatens to engulf the Sussexes. It won’t play out well for them in their new life among the gilded ranks of politically-correct Hollywood celebrity to have something like that hanging over their heads.

*But perhaps the biggest mistake Harry and Meghan have made is to turn their ire on the Queen.*

If they had made a decision to simply walk away on the grounds that the trappings of fame and fortune were, ultimately, too much to bear, no one would have blamed them. It is a tough existence and one that not everyone can stomach. No one could begrudge Harry for wanting a quiet life.

But that is not what they have done. *They have deliberately courted publicity. And instead of bowing out gracefully from royal life, they have embarked on an astonishing smear campaign against the very people and institution to which they owe their exalted status.*

It is one thing to walk away from the House of Windsor; it is quite another to torch the place on the way out. Lecturing the Queen, who has dedicated seven decades to her country, on the nature of ‘service’ is not only absurd — especially when you consider they lasted, by comparison, five minutes — but extreme arrogance.

Bleating about privacy while selling details of their existence to the highest bidder, and styling themselves as ambassadors for kindness and compassion and allegedly causing material distress to a woman whose husband is seriously ill in hospital, is not acceptable.

Allowing the monarch to be cast as some sort of mafia boss — ‘were you silent or were you silenced?’ Oprah asked of them — is unforgivable.

As for claiming that the whole experience — lavish wedding, free houses, hot and cold running staff and every conceivable privilege —was ‘unsurvivable’; that’s just insulting to the millions of souls on this planet whose lives are truly insufferable, not to mention the many thousands back home who have spent the past year doing their best to survive the pandemic without the benefit of 14 bedrooms and a swimming pool.

It’s a sad, sorry situation. No doubt they — and the fans who buy into their tale of victimhood — will see their audience with Oprah as triumphant retribution for their suffering.

But there will be many more who will see it for what it is: The delusional, one-sided ravings of a couple drunk on their own drama. 

The all Drama here!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I agree, and MM failed the little girls. That makes me sad and mad.


TBH I think encouraging girls to aspire to princesshood is negative anyway.

If you ain’t born one you gotta marry a prince. Is focusing your ambitions on marrying a stranger based on his status a positive thing? 
I wouldn’t have though so. I’d say it’s shallow and unrealistic. 
Why not encourage them to do what makes them happy regardless of limiting ideas of status and wealth?

Also if you just love royal pageantry and drama but want to see different faces there are many royal families of colour around the world it’s just a lot of people are too lazy to want to learn about different cultures and the mainstream media is supply and demand.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Well, Twitter is abuzz with celebs who are supporting her and won’t believe anything negative said about her.
> 
> View attachment 5011848
> View attachment 5011849
> View attachment 5011850
> 
> 
> View attachment 5011851


I’ve lost what respect I had for Jameela Jamil. It’s one thing to say protect black women as they get unfair scrutiny: I don’t agree that’s what’s happening in MM’s case but I can see why you might think that.
It is another to start making a joke of sexual abuse to try and prove some straw man point.

JJ is a pop music DJ who fancies herself a political commentator.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For two decades since the death of his mother, we had watched with trepidation, never certain how the psychological effects of that trauma would play out. Successive girlfriends had never seemed quite able to cope.
> But when Meghan came along it felt like he had finally found someone up to it. We could all heave a huge sigh of relief. And we were just so happy, for both of them.
> 
> My goodness, how wrong we were. It seems astonishing that we could have been so naive. For far from being the making of Harry, Meghan might just prove his downfall. All that initial goodwill and promise has been, in just a few short years, entirely squandered.



THIS THIS THIS.

I'm one of the people who always had a soft spot for Harry. He reminded me of my little brothers walking behind that coffin, and I was initially happy he had found someone who seemed good for him. Then the engagement interview aired. Then the infamous quote about "the family she never had". And it all went downhill from there.



> When did it all change for them? After all, at the moment Meghan first appeared, they had the goodwill of the nation firmly behind them. The coverage was universally positive.



The moment we saw her true character shine through...the arrogance, the selfishness, the unwillingness to adapt and accept her place in the royal pecking order.



> The extent of the damage done to the young Prince by his parents’ acrimonious divorce, the Palace’s treatment of Diana and his father’s relationship with Camilla was painfully obvious.



The thing is, at some point you can expect a grown man to get over it. There are lots of children of divorced parents, lots of children whose parents hated each other, cheated, created a horrible atmosphere at home. But very little of these children have Harry's privilege and ressources, and very little spiral so completely out of control.



> Nevertheless, the compliments were flowing for her: ‘Dazzling debut’, ‘a very modern royal’, ‘magic’. At every turn she garnered praise.
> 
> But it was almost as if the couple had developed a narrative of victimhood that they were determined to pursue wherever possible.
> 
> Perfectly legitimate questioning of their subsequent behaviour — of their doom-mongering about climate change allied to their proclivity for private jets, of their clear preference for the company of celebrities over royal duties — was interpreted by them, entirely erroneously, as rooted in prejudice.



Exactly.



> The truth is, the attention they received was by no means any worse than previous royal couples had endured. In fact, it was much better. Kate Middleton had a torrid time of it, humiliatingly dubbed ‘Waity Katie’ for the time it took William to propose; poor Camilla was frequently painted as an evil witch in contrast to the saintly Diana; even the Queen has had to endure speculation about her marriage over the years.



EXACTLY.



> If they had made a decision to simply walk away on the grounds that the trappings of fame and fortune were, ultimately, too much to bear, no one would have blamed them. It is a tough existence and one that not everyone can stomach. No one could begrudge Harry for wanting a quiet life.
> 
> But that is not what they have done. *They have deliberately courted publicity. And instead of bowing out gracefully from royal life, they have embarked on an astonishing smear campaign against the very people and institution to which they owe their exalted status.*



*EXACTLY!!!*



> Allowing the monarch to be cast as some sort of mafia boss — ‘were you silent or were you silenced?’ Oprah asked of them — is unforgivable.



If you think about it it's laughable...if the gullible wouldn't eat it up like candy.



> It’s a sad, sorry situation. No doubt they — and the fans who buy into their tale of victimhood — will see their audience with Oprah as triumphant retribution for their suffering.
> 
> But there will be many more who will see it for what it is: The delusional, one-sided ravings of a couple drunk on their own drama.



One can only hope.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve lost what respect I had for Jameela Jamil. It’s one thing to say protect black women as they get unfair scrutiny: I don’t agree that’s what’s happening in MM’s case but I can see why you might think that.
> It is another to start making a joke of sexual abuse to try and prove some straw man point.
> 
> JJ is a pop music DJ *who fancies herself a political commentator.*



Doesn't everyone these days? 

I'm shocked how many celebs out themselves as poorly informed in all aspects of the issues they publicly speak/post about.


----------



## jelliedfeels

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Are you calling Vlad a pearl clutcher?!


Eek.
Let’s just agree everyone here is a clutch clutcher - this is purse forum after all.
Especially if i could get a McQueen clutch in green lizard with GHW.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5012110


Don't you just love how she treated this poor POC???


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> From Quora (I stumbled upon it trying to figure out what a yacht girl is LOL):
> "Savoy Bancroft
> , Attended University of Michigan and earned masters degree in
> Answered February 1, 2021
> 
> A yacht girl is a prostitute………they service rich men on their yachts when they have parties. I live in the states and knew of her nasty past….yacht girl, porn actress long before anyone even heard about her and Suits. *She was on Epstein’s yacht at the same time as Prince Andrew and knew him before she knew Harry. *And if anyone wants proof do your research……I am not Google……do your own home work if you have any smarts you will find the proof."
> 
> My oh my.



Well, I don't know if this is true or not, but a video, posted many pages back in this thread,  of M on a roof top (I think) dressed very provocatively and cooking a barbecue with very  sexually explicit movements, really had me baffled! What nice honest girl would do that????? Maybe I'm just old.......


----------



## mshermes

lalame said:


> If Meghan just wanted to speak out... why wouldn't she do it with a statement or address it herself in a video she posts to their website, social media, etc? She's been "liberated" for a year plus now.... she HAD to "muzzle" HERSELF until the right paying opportunity came along?  Why can't people see through this?


And she is with child bump.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, I am starting to take a liking to him. At least he tells it like it is.
> 
> 
> 
> Though I will say I was under the impression that at that time staff also said Harry before Meghan had not treated them like sh*t on the regular, but was spiraling out of control leading up to the wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> I can believe she said that. It sounds just like what her deflated ego would tell her. It is gross.
> 
> 
> 
> I was not a fan of Khashoggi while he was alive and working as a journalist, but may I add, just in case someone missed it....sawing him up while he was alive and conscious?
> 
> 
> 
> See, this is what I meant earlier. This woman has no morals and no principles that can't be overruled by her greed and her need to feel important. At this point I think she'd sell Archie if it would benefit her. She probably will, in the divorce negotiations.


Couldn’t agree with you more, especially the last two sentences.  I’m thinking even her mom’s days are numbered, unless of course she knows where the bodies are buried, so to speak.


----------



## carebearz

Not understanding it...If she hates everything that’s the establishment, why didnt she voluntarily give up the royal titles, including the Duchess title.


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> If Meghan just wanted to speak out... why wouldn't she do it with a statement or address it herself in a video she posts to their website, social media, etc? She's been "liberated" for a year plus now.... she HAD to "muzzle" HERSELF until the right paying opportunity came along?  Why can't people see through this?


I think that BP imposed a gag order for the trial year of Megxit, so, she was not supposed to do interviews until the review, although the Harkles jumped the gun a bit
Clearly, MM was not livid when BP a said no to 2018 and 2019 interviews with Gayle and Oprah, so, this caused laryngitis, and now MM wants her voice back ...
but, oh my dear, this has become so personal , the friends are talking of her personality, MM has accused family members (K and C) of leaks 

I remember Sarah F chatted with Oprah , some difficulties she mentioned were that Andrew as a career navy man, was never at home, and S lived at BP, which is not a jolly, fun place, the kitchens are so far from the dining room that the food is always cold, and you can’t order out pizza
Sarah’s complaints were NOT personal


----------



## rose60610

carebearz said:


> Not understanding it...If she hates everything that’s the establishment, why didnt she voluntarily give up the royal titles, including the Duchess title.



Because that's the way hypocrites roll!    Meghan was soooo "mistreated" by the BRF that she was upset at losing the patronages.  Don't bother trying to find logic, there isn't any. She's happy to exploit their money and fame.


----------



## marietouchet

Supposedly MM lashes at at K in interview, for not supporting her arrival and QEII should apologize for not protecting MM from vicious family ...
H wanted to protect MM from family ... shades of Diana’s issues with C and QEII
Who was right, who was wrong ???

BUT going on TV about your family ? Get out sure, but, TV ????


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Jess steps in — just note the long, dark, glossy hair, red lips, thin, does yoga, has rich husband who is well connected, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry interview: Jessica Mulroney defends actress
> 
> 
> The Canadian fashion stylist said no one 'has ever had to deal with the pressure, the politics and the press' like Meghan in an Instagram post ahead of the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


so she got to choose her character's wedding gown on Suits?  seems off to me.  she wasn't even the star of the show, right? (I never watched)
does her butt look more curvy in that pink dress?  maybe padded?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

madamelizaking said:


> And these beauties
> View attachment 5011983
> 
> View attachment 5011978


do we know what occasion these pics are from?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> “I couldn’t have said yes to you then, *that wasn’t my choice to make,*” Meghan said. “So as an adult who lived a really independent life *to then go into this construct *that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, i*t’s really liberating* to be able to have the right and *the privilege* in some ways *to be able to say yes*. I mean, I’m ready to talk.”
> 
> Can you believe it? She knew what she was getting into. She didn't mind one %&**&# bit about "liberty"and she had quite a bit of privilege I'd say. So she had every luxury at her fingertips. Poor Baby!  She's sick!


triple like


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> And, poor lady, I think it demonstrates the emotional pain she must be feeling, knowing they will be a comfort as she worries about Phillip and struggles with H&M.


most people wouldn't take on new puppies at such a difficult time but fortunately for her she has people to care of them.  she can just enjoy them when she has time


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> CNN has become such a joke over the last 7 or 8 years.
> 
> It’s the same now as it was  when Megxit happened. The narrative in the press was that they left because of racism. You aren’t going to find anyone representing the mainstream US news media who is going to dare to say otherwise. In this sensitive climate it makes sense.  It isn’t worth it to risk losing their jobs over Meghan Markle.


I saw some commentator (don't know who she was - royal reporter maybe) on CNN who was not presenting a pro-Meghan view - giving a pretty balanced report, saying she didnt know how harry could maintain any kind of relationship with his family after this


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> I am waiting for Hilaria la Española de   Boston to come out on Megan’s defense



I'm still laughing at the idea of "Hilaria la Española de Boston" jumping to MM's defense.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Is that Archie or some random prop?  I really don't know.  He looks nothing like his illustrations.


looks like he may be a ginger


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Why do you think no one wants to link arms with her? Maybe drama backstage? Awkward.






CarryOn2020 said:


> Me, I have lost interest in watching ... unless they cover The William Scarf incident —
> View attachment 5012073
> 
> From Dec, 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is the real royal feud between Meghan and WILLIAM?
> 
> 
> Footage of the royals leaving church at Sandringham, posted to Instagram, appears to show William ignoring Meghan to fiddle with his scarf as she tried to speak to him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Will pretending to be distracted with his scarf shows a very similar attitude to the singers in @Lodpah's   video. I wouldn't be surprised if MM demanded in an nice (bullying) way to be in the center...  But she kept a big smile during the performance, like someone said in one of the articles, _"Also she wanted drama from the very beginning. In the centre of a storm, she’d always be very calm.” _(Post 48,030)


----------



## lulilu

csshopper said:


> Looking at her smirking face I think you are very perceptive!



She is always smug and smirking when she's not doing her Bambi eyes or looking adoringly at H.  

There is a post on twitter today quoting HM's lawyers statement about the alleged Archie photo that has been taken down.  Says HM have copyrights on it and no one is to publish it.  How could she not know her friend took a photo and would post it?  Just leave it up long enough to tantalize and then lock it up?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Well, Twitter is abuzz with celebs who are supporting her and won’t believe anything negative said about her.
> 
> View attachment 5011848
> View attachment 5011849
> View attachment 5011850
> 
> 
> View attachment 5011851


so - and I may get flamed for this but I don't think I'm a racist.  All of of these black celebs, most of whom came up the hard way and didn't get to go to expensive private schools, will defend her to the death no matter what because in their eyes anything negative said about her is based on her being a WOC?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I saw some commentator (don't know who she was - royal reporter maybe) on CNN who was not presenting a pro-Meghan view - giving a pretty balanced report, saying she didnt know how harry could maintain any kind of relationship with his family after this



Well, at least that’s one.  Commentators are more likely to stick to the facts when reporting a story than the news anchors, who you can almost always tell how they feel about it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Well, at least that’s one.  Commentators are more likely to stick to the facts when reporting a story than the news anchors, who you can almost always tell how they feel about it.


I'm not sure who she was.  not a regular CNN reporter that I'm aware of.  an older white woman - American as I recall.  often when I get my news I come in on the middle part and don't get the beginning


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Me, I have lost interest in watching ... unless they cover The William Scarf incident —
> View attachment 5012073
> 
> From Dec, 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is the real royal feud between Meghan and WILLIAM?
> 
> 
> Footage of the royals leaving church at Sandringham, posted to Instagram, appears to show William ignoring Meghan to fiddle with his scarf as she tried to speak to him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He seems to imply he's already feeling choked, thus Haz had better watch out!


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> I feel so sorry for Charles the Queen and the BP / Firm- they have bent over backwards for years now and thrown every Royal protocol out of the window to pamper these these two ingrates - he because he is the unused spare and his mum died when he was 12 ( oh his poor mental health ) - she because she is non white and so god forbid that they be accused of being racist if they tried to stop any of her disgusting inappropriate behaviours which are all coming out now  - I have disliked the woman from day one not because of her colour ( as I was often accused of on this thread which was initially all her fawning supporters ) but because of her actions from day one - it was obvious she was trying to oust William and Kate - her behaviour to Kate was disgusting -the Firm tried to cover all this up and support these two non entities - they should just have let Philip had his way and it would have been sorted years ago- get well soon Sir your wife needs you back by her side more than ever - Charles needs to man up and tell Harry he has made his choice and so he now can no longer be part of the institution he so despises particularly after the bus trip and the OW **** show  - the 21st century “it’s a knockout”
> 
> William is more of a man and will sever any bonds Charles tries to maintain though I suspect Camilla will be quietly making Charles face up to his responsibilities to the Queen and she has considerable clout behind the scenes
> 
> Bye bye Ginge don’t let the door hit you on the way out we won’t miss you



It's like Meg took the old adage "Give an Inch, They'll Take a Mile" as her daily mantra.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _"The perfection that comes with summertime. Picnics and barbecues, laying out by the pool with friends, and toasting to the season are high on my list. And while I generally opt to whet my whistle with a glass of rosé or crisp Sauvignon Blanc, sometimes the day calls for a cocktail. Cue the Tig Cup."
> 
> The TIG Cup is Meghan’s own riff on a Summer Cup – a summer punch-style drink, often featuring a fizzy mixer to make it refreshing and longer, plus chopped fruit for garnish. Pimm’s is a classic example – and Meghan’s own recipe isn’t far off.
> 
> The alcohol base comprises of gin and Maraschino Cherry liqueur, which sounds positively delightful. Her recipe doesn’t include measurements, so you can make it as strong or as weak as you please. On the liqueur, Meghan says “I personally loathe syrupy sweet drinks but this has just enough of a subtle sweetness that it really acts as more of a back note in the drink. Plus the maraschino cherry of it all reminds me of drinking Shirley temples as a little girl.”
> 
> This is topped up with both tonic water and soda water. Meghan suggests slightly more soda than tonic: "I don’t gravitate to the taste of tonic so I always go heavier on the soda, but feel free to […] play around with it to taste.”
> 
> Why you’d put something you don’t necessarily like in your own signature cocktail, we don’t quite understand – but we’re rolling with it.
> 
> While a classic Pimm’s might be finished with cucumber, strawberries, orange and mint, the Tig Cup’s garnish goes slightly more savoury. Meghan recommends cucumber ribbons, grapefruit rind, thinly sliced radishes, celery, lime and mint for the perfect accompaniments.
> 
> "Any or all of the listed ingredients are great, but the key pieces are citrus and herbs," she says. "If you don’t have grapefruit, lemon works. No radish, no problem."_
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This Is How To Make Meghan Markle’s Signature Cocktail
> 
> 
> It’s kinda like Pimm’s… Without the Pimm’s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I think the REAL recipe for making Meg's "signature cocktail" is the following:

1. Equal parts piss and vinegar
2. 2 cups of the juice of extra sour lemons
3. A shot of bitter per serving

Voila!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so - and I may get flamed for this but I don't think I'm a racist.  All of of these black celebs, most of whom came up the hard way and didn't get to go to expensive private schools, will defend her to the death no matter what because in their eyes anything negative said about her is based on her being a WOC?



If we didn’t follow what H&M are doing here and only heard the one-sided view that was reported in the American news, we might feel the same way. These celebs feel unity with Meghan and want to show support for another POC. All they’ve heard is the evil, archaic BRF is trying to bring down one of their own. They aren’t going to dig any deeper to see that there’s a lot they don’t know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> *TBH I think encouraging girls to aspire to princesshood is negative anyway.*
> 
> If you ain’t born one you gotta marry a prince. Is focusing your ambitions on marrying a stranger based on his status a positive thing?
> I wouldn’t have though so. I’d say it’s shallow and unrealistic.
> Why not encourage them to do what makes them happy regardless of limiting ideas of status and wealth?


Absolutely!  I say encourage every girl to someday be a QUEEN in her own kingdom!


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> TBH I think encouraging girls to aspire to princesshood is negative anyway.
> 
> If you ain’t born one you gotta marry a prince. Is focusing your ambitions on marrying a stranger based on his status a positive thing?
> I wouldn’t have though so. I’d say it’s shallow and unrealistic.
> Why not encourage them to do what makes them happy regardless of limiting ideas of status and wealth?
> 
> Also if you just love royal pageantry and drama but want to see different faces there are many royal families of colour around the world it’s just a lot of people are too lazy to want to learn about different cultures and the mainstream media is supply and demand.



I believe what Whoopi meant to say with giving "_little girls of color a very positive idea - that they too could be a princess_" is that little girls could aspire to be whatever they want in life.
I don't think Whoopi had in mind that those achievements would come through marriage, she seems too independent for that. This is a very important matter for me. I saw along the way, many talented and gifted women giving up (the fight against gender and other barriers) before reaching their potential or top positions in their careers.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I think the REAL recipe for making Meg's "signature cocktail" is the following:
> 
> 1. Equal parts piss and vinegar
> 2. 2 cups of the juice of extra sour lemons
> 3. A shot of bitter per serving
> 
> Voila!


All the witch needs is a cauldron for making a big batch, got to keep Harry hooked on the elixir.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Bullies are only bullies when they can get away with it. She didn’t have any kind of status back when she was on Suits. Nobody would have tolerated that nonsense from an actress who wasn’t a star.


Absolutely!


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> so - and I may get flamed for this but I don't think I'm a racist.  All of of these black celebs, most of whom came up the hard way and didn't get to go to expensive private schools, will defend her to the death no matter what because in their eyes anything negative said about her is based on her being a WOC?



It’s no longer about judging people by the contents of their character. We’re supposed to simply judge based on the color of skin.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> _"The perfection that comes with summertime. Picnics and barbecues, laying out by the pool with friends, and toasting to the season are high on my list. And while I generally opt to whet my whistle with a glass of rosé or crisp Sauvignon Blanc, sometimes the day calls for a cocktail. Cue the Tig Cup."
> 
> The TIG Cup is Meghan’s own riff on a Summer Cup – a summer punch-style drink, often featuring a fizzy mixer to make it refreshing and longer, plus chopped fruit for garnish. Pimm’s is a classic example – and Meghan’s own recipe isn’t far off.
> 
> The alcohol base comprises of gin and Maraschino Cherry liqueur, which sounds positively delightful. Her recipe doesn’t include measurements, so you can make it as strong or as weak as you please. On the liqueur, Meghan says “I personally loathe syrupy sweet drinks but this has just enough of a subtle sweetness that it really acts as more of a back note in the drink. Plus the maraschino cherry of it all reminds me of drinking Shirley temples as a little girl.”
> 
> This is topped up with both tonic water and soda water. Meghan suggests slightly more soda than tonic: "I don’t gravitate to the taste of tonic so I always go heavier on the soda, but feel free to […] play around with it to taste.”
> 
> Why you’d put something you don’t necessarily like in your own signature cocktail, we don’t quite understand – but we’re rolling with it.
> 
> While a classic Pimm’s might be finished with cucumber, strawberries, orange and mint, the Tig Cup’s garnish goes slightly more savoury. Meghan recommends cucumber ribbons, grapefruit rind, thinly sliced radishes, celery, lime and mint for the perfect accompaniments.
> 
> "Any or all of the listed ingredients are great, but the key pieces are citrus and herbs," she says. "If you don’t have grapefruit, lemon works. No radish, no problem."_
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This Is How To Make Meghan Markle’s Signature Cocktail
> 
> 
> It’s kinda like Pimm’s… Without the Pimm’s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Wow. When was the last time a mixed drink was so pretentious?  It sounds too sweet for me. I might need something to get me through the interview though.  

What kind of wine goes with whine?


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> It’s no longer about judging people by the contents of their character. We’re supposed to simply judge based on the color of skin.


apparently there is some very deep pain that comes from slavery.  I don't claim to understand that completely but I don't see why a person who has had all the opportunity she has had growing up and then the great privilege she had when she married her prince gets a pass on everything.


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> I find it real odd that not liking MM = support for Andrew? what?
> Or Andrew is horrible = MM can do no wrong, What?
> 
> Like I said before, Andrew is a very very low bar to be used for any comparison!


Amen.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

madamelizaking said:


> "No one has ever had to deal with..." Sounds like a T rump line. Funny how Markle and him have a lot of similar traits.



I was just thinking about that...they really do have so much in common! 



sdkitty said:


> so - and I may get flamed for this but I don't think I'm a racist.  All of of these black celebs, most of whom came up the hard way and didn't get to go to expensive private schools, will defend her to the death no matter what because in their eyes anything negative said about her is based on her being a WOC?



I think most people just don't know much about her. As I have mentioned I hardly ever see her in my social media or the programs I watch or news I read. And I don't think anyone can deny racism is not only prevalent it is sadly on the rise these days. So it is easy to for people who don't follow her closely to conclude it may be a factor here too.  



bisousx said:


> It’s no longer about judging people by the contents of their character. We’re supposed to simply judge based on the color of skin.



I don't believe anyone is asking for that. 



sdkitty said:


> apparently there is some very deep pain that comes from slavery.  I don't claim to understand that completely but I don't see why a person who has had all the opportunity she has had growing up and then the great privilege she had when she married her prince gets a pass on everything.



Unfortunately privilege doesn't erase racism.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> She is always smug and smirking when she's not doing her Bambi eyes or looking adoringly at H.
> 
> There is a post on twitter today quoting HM's lawyers statement about the alleged Archie photo that has been taken down.  Says HM have copyrights on it and no one is to publish it.  How could she not know her friend took a photo and would post it?  Just leave it up long enough to tantalize and then lock it up?



If her friend took the pic then by law the friend should own the copyright.

Seems a mix-up between moral obligation by law (taking/publishing pics of minors) and C law


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I was just thinking about that...they really do have so much in common!
> 
> 
> 
> I think most people just don't know much about her. As I have mentioned I hardly ever see her in my social media or the programs I watch or news I read. And I don't think anyone can deny racism is not only prevalent it is sadly on the rise these days. So it is easy to for people who don't follow her closely to conclude it may be a factor here too.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't believe anyone is asking for that.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately privilege doesn't erase racism.



thank you for that.  I guess you could call Amanda Gorman privileged now but did she grow up with all the advantages Meghan had?  also, she is black so I would think her experience is different from Meghan's.  It's terrible what that security guard did to her.  If he was so suspicious (for no good reason) he could have simply watched her use her key to enter and not harrassed her.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Wow. When was the last time a mixed drink was so pretentious?  It sounds too sweet for me. I might need something to get me through the interview though.
> 
> *What kind of wine goes with whine?*



Tignanello


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I think the REAL recipe for making Meg's "signature cocktail" is the following:
> 
> 1. Equal parts piss and vinegar
> 2. 2 cups of the juice of extra sour lemons
> 3. A shot of bitter per serving
> 
> Voila!



I think there's plenty of artificial sweeteners in that recipe, I can smell the saccharine in the presentation of tonight's airing of dirty laundry


----------



## maryg1

Italian newspaper is reporting that Harry was urged to go back to London immediately


----------



## sdkitty

maryg1 said:


> Italian newspaper is reporting that Harry was urged to go back to London immediately


oh,  grandfather may be at the end.....IMO H will look bad if he doesn't show up


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

Exclusive: Prince Harry 'Is Being Advised To Fly Home To Say Goodbye' To Grandfather Prince Philip As He Fights Infection, Insider Reveals
					

Prince Harry 'is being advised to fly home to say goodbye' to his grandfather, Prince Philip, an insider exclusively tells The Royal Observer. Get details.




					www.theroyalobserver.com
				



This is the article the newspaper is referring as source


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> oh,  grandfather may be at the end.....IMO H will look bad if he doesn't show up



It'll be an interesting 'reunion' if he does


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Tignanello



 Boom!


----------



## maryg1

Maybe PP wants to say a word or two to Harry regarding his beahviour


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> thank you for that.  I guess you could call Amanda Gorman privileged now but did she grown up with all the advantages Meghan had?  also, she is black so I would think her experience is different from Meghan's.  It's terrible what that security guard did to her.  If he was so suspicious (for no good reason) he could have simply watched her use her key to enter and not harrassed her.



I think the issue is these incidents happen to people of color all the time...sometimes they end up violently and in the news so we hear about them, but more often they occur every day in many different ways that are more quiet but no less painful. I have been with friends who were treated differently in stores, who could not hail taxis (I'm aging myself here this was before uber and lyft!), who had every advantage, or in some cases more, than I did but were treated differently because of the color of their skin. You're right it IS terrible ... and yet it keeps happening, way too often.

ETA...I realize this is not the thread to discuss racism but I do think its important to consider those experiences and perspectives to understand why some people believe there may be racism, even unconscious bias, in this situation. Especially if they aren't following all the stories shared here.


----------



## duna

maryg1 said:


> Maybe PP wants to say a word or two to Harry regarding his beahviour



Maybe, as long as he doesn't strain his poor heart.....it might be worst for P to see H at this point...


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> thank you for that.  I guess you could call Amanda Gorman privileged now but did she grown up with all the advantages Meghan had?  also, she is black so I would think her experience is different from Meghan's.  It's terrible what that security guard did to her.  If he was so suspicious (for no good reason) he could have simply watched her use her key to enter and not harrassed her.



Privilege doesn't really prevent racism. The only difference between a POC who's privileged and not in the eyes of a racist is what... a blazer instead of a hoodie? One obvious issue I saw (and I didn't see much being over here) is there were publications jumping way too fast to the conclusion that she must've had some rough and tumble upbringing because what... must've been her race. Believe me no one has ever made the assumption I grew up in the ghetto and I certainly came closer than M!


----------



## lalame

I think there are such raw wounds around this in the US in particular right now, they are automatically giving the benefit of the doubt to the accuser. I generally agree with this but people just aren't caring enough to keep on the thread and adjust their perceptions as they learn more about this situation.


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don't believe anyone is asking for that.




I disagree, celebrity supporters and people like Hally Berry posting blanket statements like “It’s still Protect Black Women.” when you’re looking at this context at hand - alleged bullying from an employer to employee, person in power to hired help ... it screams that we should arbitrarily take Meghan’s side and dismiss any other claims... simply because she’s black. That’s what’s wrong with the mindset today.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is PP dies, will they claim he did so purposely to silence them?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

maryg1 said:


> Italian newspaper is reporting that Harry was urged to go back to London immediately


I hope JCMH goes to London to visit PP and that they lock him in the tower until he renounces his titles and style and removes himself and all posterity from the line of succession. If his bitch of a wife wants to emulate Wallis Simpson, let there be consequences.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bisousx said:


> I disagree, celebrity supporters and people like Hally Berry posting blanket statements like “It’s still Protect Black Women.” when you’re looking at this context at hand - alleged bullying from an employer to employee, person in power to hired help ... it screams that we should arbitrarily take Meghan’s side and dismiss any other claims... simply because she’s black. That’s what’s wrong with the mindset today.



Agree to disagree...while I don't support that mindset either there is a lot wrong today. I believe admitting that, and looking at how our own actions contribute, is the first step in trying to understand each other. Pointing fingers is much easier but doesn't change anything.


----------



## lalame

Why are all the testimonials from her friends SO over the top? I just saw this quote from Abigail Spencer: "There are some people who are so bright and exude such deep purpose that they change the molecules in the air simply through their being." You guys, no need to be so OTT. She could be a fantastic friend but no need to get so dramatic.

Why don't people get that some people can be kind to people they like and unkind or abusive to others? She sounds like a great friend to these people, and I believe that, but this has nothing to do with the way she might treat personal assistants - people in a much lower power perspective. I bet Harvey Weinstein treated some of his friends and family great too.


----------



## Yanca

I think all of Megnuts gripes against The BRF was all about, not wanting to follow the royal pecking order, not being able to drop interviews with her newly found US media friends, not being able to accept all the freebies being send to the palace. It was not about the press, the media or loosing her voice, THEY WANTED to be part time royals, while earning money on the side, when the Queen said NO  and you have to return everything- the royal patronages, that Philanthropy is different from public service, they lashed out, because they wanted to be seen as humanitarians. I hope I don't get a lot of hate for saying this too, but I think the US Celebrities are being gentle with her because they are afraid of being cancelled, the cancel culture here is getting out of hand in my humble opinion, but as Olivia Munn said your anti- racism  and activism has to be inclusive, there are a lot of hate and violence against Older Asians  all over the states but there's not a lot of enough spot light or news about it, NO outrages from celebrities,  aside from celebrities of Asian descent. This is what turns me off and make me sad at the same time. The 12 employees should be heard irregardless of their race, afterall they did say that every one matters and every voice matters.


----------



## sdkitty

Yanca said:


> I think all of Megnuts gripes against The BRF was all about, not wanting to follow the royal pecking order, not being able to drop interviews with her newly found US media friends, not being able to accept all the freebies being send to the palace. It was not about the press, the media or loosing her voice, THEY WANTED to be part time royals, while earning money on the side, when the Queen said NO  and you have to return everything- the royal patronages, that Philanthropy is different from public service, they lashed out, because they wanted to be seen as humanitarians. I hope I don't get a lot of hate for saying this too, but I think the US Celebrities are being gentle with her because they are afraid of being cancelled, the cancel culture here is getting out of hand in my humble opinion, but as Olivia Munn said your anti- racism  and activism has to be inclusive, there are a lot of hate and violence against Older Asians  all over the states but there's not a lot of enough spot light or news about it, NO outrages from celebrities,  aside from celebrities of Asian descent. This is what turns me off and make me sad at the same time. The 12 employees should be heard irregardless of their race, afterall they did say that every one matters and every voice matters.


100 percent agree....and that crap about harry not wanting history to repeat itself is just that - crap - IMO.  Diana died being driven by a drunk driver and followed by paps.  Harry's WIFE's issue is racist treatment by the british tabloids, not being chased if I'm not mistaken.  two entirely different things.  oh, maybe he thinks that the racist remarks in the tabloids were going to cause her death?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

lanasyogamama said:


> Is PP dies, will they claim he did so purposely to silence them?


Really?


----------



## Chanbal

Piers responded to Adams's attack on the BRF, good for Piers! 

*Piers Morgan brands Meghan Markle's friend Patrick J Adams a 'jumped-up twerp' after the Suits actor called the Royal Family 'obscene' and suggested it should be abolished*

Mr Morgan, 55, replied: 'Actually, what's ''OBSCENE'' is your friend trashing her husband's family on global TV as the Queen's 99-yr-old husband lies in hospital.

'How dare you attack our Royal Family like this, you jumped-up little twerp.'

He added: 'Meghan Markle's showbiz mates who flew over and grovelled up to the Royals at her wedding now publicly trashing the Monarchy - and suggesting it be abolished.

'Disgusting.'









						Piers Morgan brands Meghan Markle's friend a 'jumped-up twerp'
					

The GMB presenter branded Mr Adams (pictured with Meghan in Suits) a 'jumped-up twerp' and said his comments were 'disgusting' after the Canadian actor's lengthy Twitter post.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

bisbee said:


> Really?



Well, based on this?


----------



## byzina

maryg1 said:


> Exclusive: Prince Harry 'Is Being Advised To Fly Home To Say Goodbye' To Grandfather Prince Philip As He Fights Infection, Insider Reveals
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'is being advised to fly home to say goodbye' to his grandfather, Prince Philip, an insider exclusively tells The Royal Observer. Get details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theroyalobserver.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the article the newspaper is referring as source



I hope that he will be fine. I understand that he is 99 and he has lived a long and hopefully happy life, but still. 

H&M are rather unlucky. When they moved to LA, the pandemic occurred. When they want to tell-all to get some public sympathy, Philip gets ill turning the situation against them.


----------



## Chanbal

DM covers from 2017 & 2018 showing how well MM was received in the UK, but apparently she was not able to keep her act up and her true colors started to emerge:


----------



## byzina

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, based on this?



The RF must have locked them up in the basement of the Buckingham Palace, starved them or beaten them or done something terrible. Otherwise I can't explain why they are so ruthless.


----------



## bisbee

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, based on this?


Believe what you will.  The news outlets I follow don’t publish stories like that.


----------



## Chanbal

Tomorrow will be a big day in the UK. I hope PP will get better and enjoy his family. 



The Royal Family has put on a united front to mark Commonwealth Day ahead of Harry and Meghan's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday. 

Kate Middleton will hail the 'amazing work' of key workers and frontline NHS staff throughout the coronavirus crises in the special Commonwealth programme - which will be aired just hours before the Sussexes' no-holes-barred Oprah tell-all.

The Duchess of Cambridge will also say it was 'sad, almost' how it has taken a pandemic for the public to 'really back and support all those working on the front line'.
Senior royals have banded together ahead of the highly-anticipated two-hour interview - which they will watch along with the rest of the world on Sunday - as they turn their attention to a Commonwealth Day celebration to be released on Sunday. 

The Queen, the Prince of Wales, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Countess of Wessex and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge address the global impact of the coronavirus pandemic in the programme.

*A Celebration For Commonwealth Day will be on BBC One in the UK and globally on the BBC's YouTube channel from 5pm on Sunday.*









						Kate Middleton hails 'amazing work' of key workers and frontline NHS
					

The Duchess of Cambridge's comments came as the Royals celebrated Commonwealth Day in a BBC TV show set to air tomorrow at 5pm.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

byzina said:


> I hope that he will be fine. I understand that he is 99 and he has lived a long and hopefully happy life, but still.
> 
> H&M are rather unlucky. When they moved to LA, the pandemic occurred. When they want to tell-all to get some public sympathy, Philip gets ill turning the situation against them.


He probably won’t, I’m hoping he does. MM will probably throw a fit if he does go. She will be afraid he will see right through her when he’s back with them. It’s all about them.
Remember a few posts back I said with their trend something always overshadows them? Well this is not good. I hope PP will be ok.


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> He probably won’t, I’m hoping he does. MM will probably throw a fit if he does go. She will be afraid he will see right through her when he’s back with them. It’s all about them.
> Remember a few posts back I said with their trend something always overshadows them? Well this is not good. I hope PP will be ok.



Can you imagine if Philip were to pass the same day the interview airs? Even the week of is SUCH a bad look for them. I get they probably couldn't have foreseen this happening at the same time but wow. I can only hope they might take this as a sign to stop these petty blame game activities.


----------



## bag-mania

We are living in a bizarro world. So help me, there actually exists a podcast called “Kind Thoughts for Meghan Markle.”  Some poor deluded soul actually does a Meghan podcast every few days. It has its own website. 

Before anyone asks, no, I couldn’t bring myself to listen to it so I don’t know exactly what it entails.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Can you imagine if Philip were to pass the same day the interview airs? Even the week of is SUCH a bad look for them. I get they probably couldn't have foreseen this happening at the same time but wow. I can only hope they might take this as a sign to stop these petty blame game activities.


doubt it


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> He probably won’t, I’m hoping he does. MM will probably throw a fit if he does go. She will be afraid he will see right through her when he’s back with them. It’s all about them.
> Remember a few posts back I said with their trend something always overshadows them? Well this is not good. I hope PP will be ok.


well, if she were to throw a fit, then he would probably not go.  after all, what meghan wants meghan gets


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> well, if she were to throw a fit, then he would probably not go.  after all, what meghan wants meghan gets


Do you think she’s that cold and calculating?


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> This friend of Meghan's should have been more careful.  Posting a pic of little Archie without paying Harry and Meghan seven figures for the rights?  I fear a lawsuit is heading her way.


THAT’S Archie?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> Is PP dies, will they claim he did so purposely to silence them?


Of course they will. MM is probably clawing at the walls of Montecito with her eyes deranged and for the first time in her life summoning up her whatever to not let PP die so she can have her voice. That will be the most decent thing she would have done. I fear for the safety of her staff.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Do you think she’s that cold and calculating?



If she was truly calculating then she would know that keeping him from a dying relative would be too much. Bad optics! She could milk it much more if she appeared to be magnanimously putting aside her personal feelings so that Harry could be with his family during their difficult time. Meghan is definitely calculating when comes to financial gain and playing the victim, but she still needs to work on seeing the big picture.


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes and trying to trade on her family name for fame and fortune.
> I wish the White House would ask H&M to stop using certain names for ‘personal enrichment’.
> It’s been said before, *The US fought a war to be free from the aristocracy after all, they should respect your culture*- oh wait.


.. and *BOOM*, couldn't agree with you more and this is a *MAJOR pet-peeve* of mine in regards to the US Media referring to them as "_Duke & Duchess_" (_more like *Douche-ess* for her_)!!  While I cannot remember the law (_or when passed - although I think it was in the later 1700s_) .. Americans would not recognize the British Monarchy titles and did not need to address the person(s) using the title nor did Americans need to curtsy, etc.  Now, that all being said, many Americans would likely curtsy to the Queen just to be polite and in the same case, refer to Prince Harry as just that .. using his Prince title.  However, the US Media *should NOT continue* to refer to them as the "_Duke & Duchess_"!!!!  *It should be Prince Harry and Meghan .. PERIOD! *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I still don't understand where this deep hatred from either of them comes from. No explanation I've heard so far is good enough, really none. Not the childhood trauma, and certainly not "I had to walk behind Kate".


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> If she was truly calculating then she would know that keeping him from a dying relative would be too much. Bad optics! She could milk it much more if she appeared to be magnanimously putting aside her personal feelings so that Harry could be with his family during their difficult time. Meghan is definitely calculating when comes to financial gain and playing the victim, but she still needs to work on seeing the big picture.



She did not calculate the events of this past week. IMO H&M cannot go.  Doubt H should even go to the funeral. They will be just bystanders, like Sarah was at other events. Too much merching, too much greed, they need to stay put. They did this O interview because they needed attention, their brand was not selling. So, now, they can reap whatever rewards come from selling one’s family.


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> As I watch this now, I think W&K saw a ‘new’ photographer (perhaps Omid) in the crowd. They knew MM arranged it, W tells Harry who says BS, Charles sees it, Kate tells Anne. The Senior Royals look in the same direction. No wonder William was furious.
> View attachment 5012094


Good observation. I always wondered why William was so obviously annoyed and he  deliberately ignored MM. Everyone else knows their place and behaves with proper decorum. She was out of control right from the beginning. I saw little examples of it at the onset but gave her the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## youngster

1LV said:


> THAT’S Archie?



I think it was actually Archie. The photo was a post by a friend of MM's who must have been visiting her with her own child. I think I read later in the thread that the pic disappeared quickly.  Most likely this friend hadn't gotten the word about never ever posting a pic of Archie without MM and Harry's permission.  On one hand, I understand that as a parent. I wouldn't want anyone posting pics of one of my children without my permission (which actually happened to me years ago). On the other hand, you know that they don't want random pics of Archie appearing anywhere since they likely hope to sell them one day.


----------



## scarlet555

these two leeches are pathetic... Nutty and Red are so annoying...  What’s with Oprah, just thirsty?  Or did the BRF pay her to have Nutty and Red give an interview as part of their exit package?  I really doubt these two left England out of their own recognizances... media hungry vulture Nutcase?  No way!


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Do you think she’s that cold and calculating?


don't know.....but I do think she's the boss


----------



## 1LV

madamelizaking said:


> "No one has ever had to deal with..." Sounds like a T rump line. Funny how Markle and him have a lot of similar traits.


100%


----------



## Chagall

That looks like Archie. He is a cute kid.  I would certainly be annoyed if someone had posted a picture of my child anywhere without my knowledge. That is a terrible picture of MM. What has she got on her head? If she objected to the picture it was probably because she looked awful in it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> She was out of control right from the beginning. I saw little examples of it at the onset but gave her the benefit of the doubt.



As most of us did! I saw it too very early on but dismissed it...you know, she's new, she's nervous, I misinterpreted that, I can be harsh on people.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> She did not calculate the events of this past week. IMO H&M cannot go.  Doubt H should even go to the funeral. They will be just bystanders, like Sarah was at other events. Too much merching, too much greed, they need to stay put. They did this O interview because they needed attention, their brand was not selling. So, now, they can reap whatever rewards come from selling one’s family.


They did this O interview because they were likely committed to do it as part of Oprah's help to cash in on the royal titles (their most valuable credentials). I believe O is behind their housing arrangements, Netflix/Spotify and other contacts. She is a powerful women, and her help is now bringing her $9M or more. Let's see what else it brings for MM&H.


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> They did this O interview because they were likely committed to do it as part of Oprah's help to cash in on the royal titles (their most valuable credentials). I believe O is behind their housing arrangements, Netflix/Spotify and other contacts. She is a powerful women, and her help is now bringing her $9M or more. Let's see what else it brings for MM&H.


They should cancel the airing of this interview. Postpone it until PP is on the mend. It happens all the time. Absolutely a very bad decision to go ahead with it now. It will come back on them big time!


----------



## CarryOn2020

O and Gayle were in this from day 1.  Not sure why they have this odd _interest_ in the BRF, it has certainly driven H&M. Maybe Sarah told them stuff? Maybe they need to rehabilitate their careers - they partied with some of the undesirable men.

Somewhere I read there was concern about MM filming stuff without proper permission and with intent to sell the film. This would explain why there was so much friction. Completely understandable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> They should cancel the airing of this interview. Postpone it until PP is on the mend. It happens all the time. Absolutely a very bad decision to go ahead with it now. It will come back on them big time!



Honestly, at this point I feel they should just go ahead and dig their hole even deeper. I just feel for that 94yo woman who probably doesn't sleep over her husband of 70+ years being so ill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chagall said:


> They should cancel the airing of this interview. Postpone it until PP is on the mend. It happens all the time. Absolutely a very bad decision to go ahead with it now. It will come back on them big time!



I vote to air it. Let the world see all this hype leads to a nothing burger.  Let them see that the world does not care much about them, Diana or their kid. Their ego really has the best of them now.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I wonder how many employees they've gone through since they've been in California.


Sadly, it seems that we have way too many obsequious people here in the LA area who are perfectly willing to take the abuse (_not sure why_) but .. I've seen it first-hand.  I've always said that I would be the ABSOLUTE worst "personal assistant" to any of these so-called Stars/Celebrities because I simply would never take their sh!t!!!  I would likely get fired w/in 15 minutes or so ..


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, at this point I feel they should just go ahead and dig their hole even deeper. I just feel for that 94yo woman who probably doesn't sleep over her husband of 70+ years being so ill.


Oh it will dig their hole deeper for sure but hurt others along the way.


----------



## csshopper

It's a terribly sad irony to me that Harry is the source of so much pain for his grandmother. She has always put service before family, except when Diana died....it was a rare time that she was harshly criticized by press and public for not returning to London from Balmoral immediately to pay honor to Diana. She did come back, but not until she felt she had been the presence and support her grandsons needed to begin dealing with the tragedy. In a rare event, a letter she had written to one of her Ladies in Waiting was published a week after the Funeral. The whole of it is still on line, the comments she made about Diana in the address  referenced in the third paragraph were laudatory and focused on all the good things. The antithesis of her ungrateful grandson and his wife in what they have done.

 From the Net:  
*Queen Elizabeth was criticized after Princess Diana 's death for remaining in Balmoral with **Prince William** and **Prince Harry**, who were mourning their mother, rather than returning to London as tributes poured in from around the world. The handwritten note reveals the anguish Queen Elizabeth felt as her grandchildren struggled with Princess Diana's tragic death*.

Prince William and Prince Harry were with Queen Elizabeth, Prince Philip and Prince Charles at Balmoral as cards, notes and floral tributes flooded in after Princess Diana's death. When the royal family returned to London, William, then 15, and Harry, then 12, were seen with their father looking closely at the sea of floral tributes that stretched from the Kensington Palace gates hundreds of feet through Kensington Palace Gardens to the street.

With the British nation mourning Princess Diana, Queen Elizabeth made a rare address to the country the night before Diana's funeral, speaking she said *"as a monarch and a grandmother."* The broadcast from Buckingham Palace, which has become a defining moment of her monarchy, was clearly spoken from the heart by the Queen, who was dressed in black.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember Vegas, Croatia, all the weddings he came to drunk, his addiction issues?   H has caused pain his entire life.
This is nothing new for this guy. He thrives on being rude to other people and messing up their day.

That lawyers had to issue a statement about using the kid’s photo — these people.

Y‘all it’s Gayle’s house!  These 2 old folks can’t help themselves!  FFS get off the stage.









						Gayle King's stunning home that hosts Meghan Markle's bombshell chat with Oprah
					

The CBS presenter's stunning California mansion is the backdrop for the The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah




					www.mirror.co.uk
				







csshopper said:


> It's a terribly sad irony to me that Harry is the source of so much pain for his grandmother. She has always put service before family, except when Diana died....it was a rare time that she was harshly criticized by press and public for not returning to London from Balmoral immediately to pay honor to Diana. She did come back, but not until she felt she had been the presence and support her grandsons needed to begin dealing with the tragedy. In a rare event, a letter she had written to one of her Ladies in Waiting was published a week after the Funeral. The whole of it is still on line, the comments she made about Diana in the address  referenced in the third paragraph were laudatory and focused on all the good things. The antithesis of her ungrateful grandson and his wife in what they have done.
> 
> From the Net:
> *Queen Elizabeth was criticized after Princess Diana 's death for remaining in Balmoral with **Prince William** and **Prince Harry**, who were mourning their mother, rather than returning to London as tributes poured in from around the world. The handwritten note reveals the anguish Queen Elizabeth felt as her grandchildren struggled with Princess Diana's tragic death*.
> 
> Prince William and Prince Harry were with Queen Elizabeth, Prince Philip and Prince Charles at Balmoral as cards, notes and floral tributes flooded in after Princess Diana's death. When the royal family returned to London, William, then 15, and Harry, then 12, were seen with their father looking closely at the sea of floral tributes that stretched from the Kensington Palace gates hundreds of feet through Kensington Palace Gardens to the street.
> 
> With the British nation mourning Princess Diana, Queen Elizabeth made a rare address to the country the night before Diana's funeral, speaking she said *"as a monarch and a grandmother."* The broadcast from Buckingham Palace, which has become a defining moment of her monarchy, was clearly spoken from the heart by the Queen, who was dressed in black.


----------



## 1LV

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I think the issue is these incidents happen to people of color all the time...sometimes they end up violently and in the news so we hear about them, but more often they occur every day in many different ways that are more quiet but no less painful. I have been with friends who were treated differently in stores, who could not hail taxis (I'm aging myself here this was before uber and lyft!), who had every advantage, or in some cases more, than I did but were treated differently because of the color of their skin. You're right it IS terrible ... and yet it keeps happening, way too often.
> 
> ETA...I realize this is not the thread to discuss racism but I do think its important to consider those experiences and perspectives to understand why some people believe there may be racism, even unconscious bias, in this situation. Especially if they aren't following all the stories shared here.


I’ve spent hours catching up with this thread.  Commented here and there, likes galore, laughed out loud more than a few times.  This post...  this post touched me.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember Vegas, Croatia, all the weddings he came to drunk, his addiction issues?   H has caused pain his entire life.
> This is nothing new for this guy. He thrives on being rude to other people and messing up their day.
> 
> That lawyers had to issue a statement about using the kid’s photo — these people.
> 
> Y‘all it’s Gayle’s house!  These 2 old folks can’t help themselves!  FFS get off the stage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King's stunning home that hosts Meghan Markle's bombshell chat with Oprah
> 
> 
> The CBS presenter's stunning California mansion is the backdrop for the The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


guess that R Kelly interview paid off big for Gayle.


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> They should cancel the airing of this interview. Postpone it until PP is on the mend. It happens all the time. Absolutely a very bad decision to go ahead with it now. It will come back on them big time!


They should have canceled the interview, but at this point, the promo videos already made serious damage.  For the BRF, it is perhaps better to have this interview done asap and move on with their lives.


----------



## Chagall

Well my plan is not to watch the interview tomorrow night. I don’t want to support Oprah or these other two in any way. I hope I continue to have the strength to resist. I’m pretty bored now.


----------



## sdkitty

maybe the US media is starting to change a bit.  just read something in the daily beast, which I think would be considered to lean liberal.  they reported on the Oprah interview putting quotes around Meghan saying she wasn't "allowed" to speak her mind....hmm


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn't this the wedding she showed up to uninvited? I thought the rumours were that Harry had given her the heave-ho and she wasn't having any if it, so she showed up in Jamaica by herself.


Yes, that was my understanding.  Looking at that series of pictures, you see her pulling the hand on his back routine.  It is a way of letting the other woman know that he is hers.  Honestly, she is like an animal spaying urine to leave their scent.   She managed to wangle her way into his room, he was probably drunk by that point, and arranged for a pap to take her picture the next morning on his balcony.  It that isn't a set up, I don't know what is, so after that, the world thought they were a definite couple.  Harry was furious about the pap because he told Skippy that he wanted absolute privacy at t  he resort where he was staying.  Good luck with that Harry when Meghan is involved.  And now, boy oh boy, has the worm turned!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

bag-mania said:


> Wow. When was the last time a mixed drink was so pretentious? It sounds too sweet for me. I might need something to get me through the interview though.



Yep. I'm with ya, sistah!  I'm thinking a vodka martini.....how about you?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> maybe the US media is starting to change a bit.  just read something in the daily beast, which I think would be considered to lean liberal.  they reported on the Oprah interview putting quotes around Meghan saying she wasn't "allowed" to speak her mind....hmm


In those clips, I thought that Oprah was leading her into the responses, which struck me as being as rehearsed as the SA interview with Bradby.  Your Honor, I object, counsel is leading the witness.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yes, that was my understanding.  Looking at that series of pictures, you see her pulling the hand on his back routine.  It is a way of letting the other woman know that he is hers.  Honestly, she is like an animal spaying urine to leave their scent.   She managed to wangle her way into his room, he was probably drunk by that point, and arranged for a pap to take her picture the next morning on his balcony.  It that isn't a set up, I don't know what is, so after that, the world thought they were a definite couple.  Harry was furious about the pap because he told Skippy that he wanted absolute privacy at t  he resort where he was staying.  Good luck with that Harry when Meghan is involved.  And now, boy oh boy, has the worm turned!


she used her voodoo on him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One more Victim of MM speaks out!  Interesting article!




*Meghan Markle’s half-sister fears Harry and Meghan’s Oprah interview could affect the health of their father and that of Prince Philip.*

Samantha Markle says she and dad Thomas, 76, are preparing to watch the two-hour show which has been described as “shocking” with “no subject off-limits”.

The interview is expected to include footage of the Duchess speaking about her father and the Royal Family.

But Samantha says chat queen Oprah Winfrey, 67, should have postponed the screening of the interview until the Duke of Edinburgh leaves hospital.

Speaking exclusively to the Sunday Mirror, Samantha, 56, said: “I’m worried all this could affect my dad’s health. And it’s terrible that this is happening when Prince Philip is in hospital.

*“It’s stressful to have someone making this drama and personal affronts on the family at a time when he’s so fragile.

“My dad could die at any time but it doesn’t seem to matter to Meghan. All that seems to matter to her is she gets her way. She’s like a bull in a china shop.”*

Samantha believes clips released ahead of tomorrow night’s programme show that *Meghan,* who is pregnant with her second child, *has now turned on the royal family in the same way she says she did on her own, including brother Thomas Jnr, 55.*

Meghan says she was stopped from speaking out by Palace aides and accused the royal family of “perpetuating falsehoods”.

*Samantha said: “The royal family welcomed Meg in and were so gracious. Now she’s acting like they’re the problem.*

“For her to turn on them now feels like such a slap in the face, *but I did once say ‘if she’ll do this to our family, she’ll do this to yours’ and I’ve been proven right.

“They shouldn’t be surprised because my father gave Meg everything she has but she treated him exactly the same way.*

"I’m sure it will have affected their family and hurt them deeply, just as it has ours.”

Asked what she expects Meghan to say on the show – to be broadcast in the US tomorrow to mark International Women’s Day – she said: *“I’m sure Meghan will play the victim and blame us for everything.*

"It’s easier than apologising and acknowledging her own mistakes.

“Clips I’ve seen look like gaslighting at its finest.

*"She talks of empowering women, but what about the voice of her sister in a wheelchair? Or her father who had two heart attacks? Or the voices of Prince Philip and the Queen?

"The only voices she cares about are ones that praise her.”*
Thomas, an award-winning Hollywood lighting director, has said he spent thousands sending Meghan to private schools and university.

Meghan, 39, and Harry, 36, live in Montecito, California, just 240 miles from Thomas in Rosarito, Mexico.

But he has not spoken to Meghan since she cut off all contact with him after he took part in a paparazzi shoot before her wedding in May 2018 and he has still not met his grandson Archie, one.

It is understood Meghan remains close to mum Doria, 64, a social worker and yoga teacher. She was the only member of the family to attend the wedding, at which Prince Charles walked Meghan part-way down the aisle. She has never spoken publicly.

Last month, Meghan won a privacy battle against the Mail on Sunday for publishing extracts from a letter to her father.

In a High Court judgement, Mr Justice Warby said they showed “her feelings of anguish about her father’s behaviour” and called them “inherently private and personal matters.”

*Samantha said: “The way Meghan has treated my father is horrifying. He’s been on the phone to me in tears. He couldn’t understand it.*

"Some people have accused my dad of spoiling her growing up.

*"When she was young I made excuses for her and thought ‘she needs to feel special’. But I didn’t see what effect it was having.

“She’d throw hissy fits when she didn’t get her own way so a lot of people, including me and my dad, said ‘oh, don’t upset her’.*

"It became her way of dealing with people. She was everyone’s joy, I loved that little girl but it’s not the same person she is today.

"He’s now come to terms with what she is.

*"My poor dad is coming to terms with the fact he can’t take this personally.*

"I don’t know how you recover from something like this.”

Wheelchair-bound Samantha, who has multiple sclerosis, says her health has suffered due to being targeted by fans of Meghan, including one who was handed a two-year restraining injunction.

*She added: “This interview will go down as one of the worst things the royal family has had to deal with.

"Harry is enabling and rationalising her behaviour on television. To turn on his own family reminds me of kidnap victims defending their captives.

"He’d never have treated his family like this before he met Meghan.”*

Samantha, who has published her own book The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister, also criticised Oprah, saying: “She’s wrong to do this interview knowing the effect it can have on others. She shouldn’t be showing it while Prince Philip is in hospital.

"If she had any decency as a human she would wait until things stabilise. I don’t feel Oprah is a neutral unbiased interviewer. She runs in the same circles as Meghan.

“I don’t expect it to happen, but the best thing Meghan could do is apologise for her past behaviour and *maybe Oprah could offer her counselling.”*

A bull in a China shop!


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> They should cancel the airing of this interview. Postpone it until PP is on the mend. It happens all the time. Absolutely a very bad decision to go ahead with it now. It will come back on them big time!



It has to be shown. Heaven forbid Meghan be given more ammunition to claim her “voice” is being suppressed. Let her get it ALL out there and be done with it and let the chips fall where they may. Even in a favorable interview, I can see the average viewer having their fill of Meghan and her dramatic complaints by the time it is over. 

In the short term it may hurt the BRF’s reputation, but only briefly, and only among those who probably didn’t care for them anyway.


----------



## gracekelly

Cavalier Girl said:


> Yep. I'm with ya, sistah!  I'm thinking a vodka martini.....how about you?


 
In that picture taken at the wedding, when she was displaying the thunder face, my thought was that she gave the waiter some extreme drink order and the expression on her face was that she felt she did not get it so she was excoriating him over it.  I feel sorry for the guy.  Don't forget her screaming at the chef that there was egg in her food at the wedding breakfast.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

rose60610 said:


> Tignanello



I hate that she ruined a perfectly good wine for me.  But, since I still have a few bottles in the cellar, I won't deprive myself just because of her.


----------



## lalame

I was just watching a CNN clip with Diana's previous Chief of Staff. He pointed out that H+M should be careful because the royal track record on "tell all" interviews is not good... Charles, Diana, Andrew, etc had the opposite intended effect of gaining sympathy. You'd think they'd learn their lessons but maybe M just thinks she's much more popular and skilled than those people at managing her image. I say M because I highly doubt H would've done a tell all with Oprah if M weren't in the picture.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she used her voodoo on him


That woman is very bad juju.  I sent Eugenie some instructions about cleansing  Frog Cot.  She took the advice to heart and moved right out and didn't go back until the place was certified by a mambo (voodoo priestess).  I told her to have the Archbishop of Canterbury sprinkle holy water around  for good measure and have a rabbi  say a barucha as well.  Can't be too careful when dealing with bad juju!  The Dalai Lama was busy or I would have sent him as well.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I was just watching a CNN clip with Diana's previous Chief of Staff. He pointed out that H+M should be careful because the royal track record on "tell all" interviews is not good... Charles, Diana, Andrew, etc had the opposite intended effect of gaining sympathy. You'd think they'd learn their lessons but maybe M just thinks she's much more popular and skilled than those people at managing her image. I say M because I highly doubt H would've done a tell all with Oprah if M weren't in the picture.


of course she thinks she's smarter than all those people.....smarter than any of us - hence her presentation of her husband and herself as role models who we need to tell us what do do and think


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> I disagree, celebrity supporters and people like Hally Berry posting blanket statements like “It’s still Protect Black Women.” when you’re looking at this context at hand - alleged bullying from an employer to employee, person in power to hired help ... it screams that we should arbitrarily take Meghan’s side and dismiss any other claims... simply because she’s black. That’s what’s wrong with the mindset today.


Amen.  Most of these "celebs" don't even know her yet defend her simply because she must be above reproach as a WOC.  They give no merit to the accusers (the number of which seems to be growing) because OMG, poor Meg must be a victim


----------



## purseinsanity

maryg1 said:


> Maybe PP wants to say a word or two to Harry regarding his beahviour


Maybe PP should give him a verbal lashing then toss him out with the trash.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I was just watching a CNN clip with Diana's previous Chief of Staff. He pointed out that H+M should be careful because the royal track record on "tell all" interviews is not good... Charles, Diana, Andrew, etc had the opposite intended effect of gaining sympathy. You'd think they'd learn their lessons but maybe M just thinks she's much more popular and skilled than those people at managing her image. I say M because I highly doubt H would've done a tell all with Oprah if M weren't in the picture.



H&M are counting on the Americans to rescue her.  If we don’t,  we must be racist. 
Here’s my question — when did the BRF and the UK become racist? Before the wedding or after? If before, why marry into it? 
She did have a choice.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe the US media is starting to change a bit.  just read something in the daily beast, which I think would be considered to lean liberal.  they reported on the Oprah interview putting quotes around Meghan saying she wasn't "allowed" to speak her mind....hmm



I don’t know. They may have use the quotes because Meghan actually said the word allowed. How was the tone of the article?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M are counting on the Americans to rescue her.  If we don’t,  we must be racist.
> Here’s my question — when did the BRF and the UK become racist? Before the wedding or after? If before, why marry into it?
> She did have a choice.


ha
probably the most politically incorrect one in the family was H with his nazi uniform


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know. They may have use the quotes because Meghan actually said the word allowed. How was the tone of the article?


kind of matter of fact I thought.  here it is








						Meghan Markle Tells Oprah Winfrey She Wasn’t ‘Allowed’ to Make Her Own Choices as a Royal
					

A new clip from Oprah dropped on CBS Friday morning. In it, Meghan repeated her complaints that Buckingham Palace tried to strip her of agency and a voice.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## bag-mania

Cavalier Girl said:


> Yep. I'm with ya, sistah!  I'm thinking a vodka martini.....how about you?



That sounds good. I don’t have much in the house. I may have to make a trip to the liquor store tomorrow.


----------



## gracekelly

I don't think that TQ is going to watch.  Why should she.  She has kept her equilibrium all these decades by delegating things like this to the palace professionals who deal with train wrecks.  She will get their assessments and then decide what to do.  Charles and Camilla might watch, and HE should definitely watch if he is still funding them.  Who is paying for the media blitz from SS?  Hopefully Charles isn't funding a campaign against himself and the rest of the family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I was just watching a CNN clip with Diana's previous Chief of Staff. *He pointed out that H+M should be careful because the royal track record on "tell all" interviews is not good.*.. Charles, Diana, Andrew, etc *had the opposite intended effect of gaining sympathy. *You'd think they'd learn their lessons but maybe M just thinks she's much more popular and skilled than those people at managing her image. I say M because I highly doubt H would've done a tell all with Oprah if M weren't in the picture.


At this point, I hope Diana's previous Chief of Staff is right. MM & H don't deserve sympathy after what they have been doing. They are just being cruel, greedy, and hypocritical imo.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> *Why are all the testimonials from her friends SO over the top?* I just saw this quote from Abigail Spencer: "There are some people who are so bright and exude such deep purpose that they change the molecules in the air simply through their being." You guys, no need to be so OTT. She could be a fantastic friend but no need to get so dramatic.
> 
> Why don't people get that some people can be kind to people they like and unkind or abusive to others? She sounds like a great friend to these people, and I believe that, but this has nothing to do with the way she might treat personal assistants - people in a much lower power perspective. I bet Harvey Weinstein treated some of his friends and family great too.


I guess one of the benefits of hanging out with her was how to engage in word salad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> I disagree, celebrity supporters and people like Hally Berry posting blanket statements like “It’s still Protect Black Women.” when you’re looking at this context at hand - *alleged bullying from an employer to employee, person in power to hired help* ... it screams that we should arbitrarily take Meghan’s side and dismiss any other claims... simply because she’s black. That’s what’s wrong with the mindset today.



I disagree politely with the bold. Ethnicity does not give the employer, the person in power,  a free pass.
Our laws state otherwise. If the claim is that MM bullied employees  because at some point in her life someone bullied her, that is a mental health issue. She will need to go to court-appointed therapy.

To my eye, MM’s alleged behavior falls more in the category of verbal abuse, possibly physical abuse.
The investigation will sort this out.


----------



## TC1

Based on the transcripts posted here, Meghan is just parotting what Oprah says..nearly line by line. In Miranda Priestley voice "groundbreaking"


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> well, if she were to throw a fit, then he would probably not go.  after all, what meghan wants meghan gets


I'm sure if Haz even considers going, Meg will check in to a hospital (allegedly across from some place an old former slave ancestor of hers worked so that particular hospital has a special place in her heart) claiming she's bleeding and has a high risk pregnancy.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> That woman is very bad juju.  I sent Eugenie some instructions about cleansing  Frog Cot.  She took the advice to heart and moved right out and didn't go back until the place was certified by a mambo (voodoo priestess).  I told her to have the Archbishop of Canterbury sprinkle holy water around  for good measure and have a rabbi  say a barucha as well.  Can't be too careful when dealing with bad juju!  The Dalai Lama was busy or I would have sent him as well.


Great advice.  Add a Buddha in the garden for good vibes outside.

I think the stories planted by the HM hacks claiming they are so close to Jack and Eugenie are B.S. Both she and her sister have always been close to the Queen and Phillip and I don't believe they would have any part of this drama. The cousins were evidently close with Harry at one time, but that was before MM showed up to ruin another family relationship.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tell it, Joanna!

_Appearing on The Last Leg, Absolutely Fabulous actress Joanna said: "I just hate squabbling in public, I really hate it actually. 

"It sort of destroys everybody and everything, and it makes everybody watching take sides and argue with each other, and become hateful. It spreads hatefulness, I really don't like it. 

"I'm not rubbing my hands, I won't watch the interview. I can't do it."_









						Joanna Lumley accuses Meghan and Harry interview of 'spreading hatefulness'
					

Joanna Lumley has told that she won't be watching Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey, and says that public arguments on the subject have become 'hateful'




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> kind of matter of fact I thought.  here it is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Tells Oprah Winfrey She Wasn’t ‘Allowed’ to Make Her Own Choices as a Royal
> 
> 
> A new clip from Oprah dropped on CBS Friday morning. In it, Meghan repeated her complaints that Buckingham Palace tried to strip her of agency and a voice.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



I had to look him up. The author is British. He’s undoubtedly been keeping track of Meghan’s shenanigans better than the American press.


----------



## Chanbal

Poor MM, QE is likely going to ignore her and her falsehoods... Though, the investigations on MM's bulling will continue... 

*Palace officials give withering dismissal of Harry and Meghan's interview that will be 'lost in the mists of time' as most Britons 'will be thinking about schools going back, their vaccines and Prince Philip getting better' - the only winner will be Oprah*

Palace aides last night brushed off the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey as a 'sideshow' which will barely register with the British public amid the more pressing concerns of a global pandemic and the Duke of Edinburgh's health.

After a frenzied week dominated by bombshell claims of alleged bullying and fierce denials, Royal officials signalled their determination not to be dragged into a tawdry tit-for-tat battle with the couple.

While acknowledging that the two-hour interview, to be screened in the US tonight and the UK tomorrow, is likely to include further uncomfortable moments, an insider icily highlighted Britain faced more important issues.
'On Monday most people in Britain will be thinking about schools going back, getting the vaccine and, at the Palace particularly, looking forward to the Duke of Edinburgh coming out of hospital. This is just a sideshow,' they said.

The comments will be interpreted by many as a sign that 'The Firm' believes Harry and Meghan will in time struggle to attract the kind of attention they received in the UK before they stepped back from their Royal duties a year ago.
Aides described the mood at Buckingham Palace ahead of the interview as 'calm', with courtiers said to be maintaining a sense of 'this, too, will pass'.

One source told The Mail on Sunday: 'Most of what is said will be lost in the mists of time. *History teaches us that only the interviewer wins from these programmes.'*

Palace officials have no idea what the couple have said to Ms Winfrey, beyond the pre-released teasers.

'We haven't got a clue what they say in the interview,' said the source. 'But there is determination not to play their game. *There is a very clear sense right from the top that it's best not to react.' *

They will, however, have gained a flavour of the interview from the series of clips released during a heavy promotional campaign by the US network CBS.

A Side Show!


----------



## CarryOn2020

They knew!

Sussexes ‘were reeling at Palace’s statement' stripping them of their titles and patronages when they sat down with Oprah

Meghan and Harry knew they were being stripped of titles before interview
Sources say the shock explains the couple's hurt and dismay shown in trailers
Statement from Royal Family 'explosive' as it risked reaction from Sussexes









						Sussexes 'were reeling at Palace's statement' when they saw Oprah
					

Meghan and Harry already knew they were being stripped of their titles and patronages when they sat down for their 'no subject off-limits' interview with Oprah Winfrey, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





GASP*!!! *Why keep these things?

Meghan STILL has the tainted diamond earrings from the Saudi Crown Prince in her collection

Duchess of Sussex still has responsibility for the controversial diamond earrings
Meghan was gifted the jewels by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman
The Saudi royal family has regularly given jewellery to their British counterparts









						Meghan STILL has tainted diamond earrings from the Saudi Crown Prince
					

The controversial diamond earrings gifted to the Duchess of Sussex by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman remain her responsibility, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

I cannot believe ...  Half the DM stories are Harkle related ....

You can assume a broken internet as soon as the interview starts ...


----------



## CeeJay

CobaltBlu said:


> It so irks me that I am #teamPiers when I really do not like him at all. (till now)  But he has definitely been bringing his A-game to this party and I am here for all of that.


Could not agree with you more; I have a *major-league LOVE / HATE relationship* with this man but he has really been nailing it with these two hypocritical 13-year-olds!


----------



## Chanbal

The earrings again!  No more protection from the BRF for you, MM!

_*The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi* *over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the man accused of ordering the brutal killing.*

Michael Eisner, who heads a human rights group founded by Mr Khashoggi three months before his death, said the stunning chandelier earrings were 'bought with blood money' by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

He said he was 'baffled' that the Duchess did not know the Prince, known as MBS, was linked to the murder when she wore the earrings at a State dinner, or his appalling human rights record.

'Those earrings were bought with blood money and given to her by a murderer,' said Mr Eisner, chief operating officer of Democracy for the Arab World Now (Dawn). 'She has no business wearing them.'

*The Duchess's lawyers last week insisted that at the time of the dinner she was unaware of speculation that MBS was involved in Mr Khashoggi's murder. However, well-placed sources last night claimed the Duchess ignored advice from aides not to wear the jewellery.*_









						Meghan's 'blood money' earrings condemned by Khashoggi's lawyer
					

The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the Saudi Crown Prince.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They knew!
> 
> Sussexes ‘were reeling at Palace’s statement' stripping them of their titles and patronages when they sat down with Oprah
> 
> Meghan and Harry knew they were being stripped of titles before interview
> Sources say the shock explains the couple's hurt and dismay shown in trailers
> Statement from Royal Family 'explosive' as it risked reaction from Sussexes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes 'were reeling at Palace's statement' when they saw Oprah
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry already knew they were being stripped of their titles and patronages when they sat down for their 'no subject off-limits' interview with Oprah Winfrey, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GASP*!!! *Why keep these things?
> 
> Meghan STILL has the tainted diamond earrings from the Saudi Crown Prince in her collection
> 
> Duchess of Sussex still has responsibility for the controversial diamond earrings
> Meghan was gifted the jewels by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman
> The Saudi royal family has regularly given jewellery to their British counterparts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan STILL has tainted diamond earrings from the Saudi Crown Prince
> 
> 
> The controversial diamond earrings gifted to the Duchess of Sussex by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman remain her responsibility, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They are total liars.  If they put one over on Oprah and she really didn't know, she won't be too forgiving.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I cannot believe ...  Half the DM stories are Harkle related ....
> 
> You can assume a broken internet as soon as the interview starts ...


Haha, one more from the DM. QE is not going to lose any sleep over MM!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Don't slam me, but I think the earrings are the least of it.  What she did to living breathing human beings is far far worse.  To be the cause of real misery and upset is unforgivable.  Even taking the stories of the bullied individuals with a grain of salt, her relentless criticism is hard to take.  I am sure every one of these people at some point in their work lives, did something that their employer did think was good enough or they didn't like.  It happens to all of us, but there are ways to get that information across and it sounds like at best, she never had any basic lessons in how to deal with employees and at worst didn't care to.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Haha, one more from the DM. QE is not going to lose any sleep over MM!
> 
> View attachment 5013044


I said she wouldn't watch it. I hope they didn't tell PP about it.  He has enough to think about.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> The earrings again!  No more protection from the BRF for you, MM!
> 
> _*The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi* *over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the man accused of ordering the brutal killing.*
> 
> Michael Eisner, who heads a human rights group founded by Mr Khashoggi three months before his death, said the stunning chandelier earrings were 'bought with blood money' by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
> 
> He said he was 'baffled' that the Duchess did not know the Prince, known as MBS, was linked to the murder when she wore the earrings at a State dinner, or his appalling human rights record.
> 
> 'Those earrings were bought with blood money and given to her by a murderer,' said Mr Eisner, chief operating officer of Democracy for the Arab World Now (Dawn). 'She has no business wearing them.'
> 
> *The Duchess's lawyers last week insisted that at the time of the dinner she was unaware of speculation that MBS was involved in Mr Khashoggi's murder. However, well-placed sources last night claimed the Duchess ignored advice from aides not to wear the jewellery.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's 'blood money' earrings condemned by Khashoggi's lawyer
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the Saudi Crown Prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sell the earrings and donate the proceeds to a charity that helps women and children.  ALL of the proceeds.


----------



## rose60610

So if M&H left Britain due to the "mean" BRF and all the racism, why did they even want to have the "one year review"? Makes zero sense. Zero. If the BRF were so "mean" and suffocating, why even think of wanting to go back?  Did they think they would get the Queen to grovel and beg them back? Because they were so valuable? And loved? 

They only wanted the "one year review" in case they fell on their faces and didn't thrive, only existed. 

In other words, they were just using the BRF as a safety net like they use everybody else. Now when it's clear they don't "need" to go back with their sorry tails between their legs, NOW we get the accusations that the BRF WAS SO MEAN!!  So yes, this accusation wasn't useful until now, AFTER they got offers from Netflix and Spotify. Had those or other deals not come through, they'd have limped their way back to Frogmore. Now, it's safe for them to trash the family that gave them everything, better yet, make some major dough by doing so.  Total fame whores, throwing everyone under the bus to save and promote their own demented hides. When Philip passes, the fame whores who demand privacy yet stick their faces into everything will probably be silent "out of respect". They'll attend the funeral but keep the plane engines running to leave ASAP.


----------



## bag-mania

This is slightly off-topic but it involves Oprah. Today is Stedman Graham’s 70th birthday. He was involved with Oprah for many years. Is he still? I have never heard otherwise.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The earrings again!  No more protection from the BRF for you, MM!
> 
> _*The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi* *over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the man accused of ordering the brutal killing.*
> 
> Michael Eisner, who heads a human rights group founded by Mr Khashoggi three months before his death, said the stunning chandelier earrings were 'bought with blood money' by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
> 
> He said he was 'baffled' that the Duchess did not know the Prince, known as MBS, was linked to the murder when she wore the earrings at a State dinner, or his appalling human rights record.
> 
> 'Those earrings were bought with blood money and given to her by a murderer,' said Mr Eisner, chief operating officer of Democracy for the Arab World Now (Dawn). 'She has no business wearing them.'
> 
> *The Duchess's lawyers last week insisted that at the time of the dinner she was unaware of speculation that MBS was involved in Mr Khashoggi's murder. However, well-placed sources last night claimed the Duchess ignored advice from aides not to wear the jewellery.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's 'blood money' earrings condemned by Khashoggi's lawyer
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the Saudi Crown Prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


do we have a hooray emoji?


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> *Sell the earrings and donate the proceeds to a charity that helps women and children.  ALL of the proceeds.*


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

    

Surely you jest!  This is Meg and Haz were are talking about!!!  They'll sell the earrings to avoid any more negative publicity, keep the money, then very, very, very generously donate $50 for sandwiches!

And have pictures of them handing the check over!  You know, to prove they made the donation...


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> This is slightly off-topic but it involves Oprah. Today is Stedman Graham’s 70th birthday. He was involved with Oprah for many years. Is he still? I have never heard otherwise.


Unlike some "badgered" individuals, Stedman likes his privacy...


----------



## Chanbal

A ton of interesting articles today! A very good opinion!!!    

TOM BOWER *Meghan Markle wanted to be Queen… Oprah interview is her revenge*
*FINDING fame and fortune in Hollywood has been Meghan Markle’s burning ambition for over 30 years.*

Ever since her father — a film lighting designer — took his young daughter to a studio she has yearned for stardom.

*Repeatedly, Tinseltown rejected her. Tonight’s two-hour appearance on US TV and its replay to millions worldwide is her revenge.

Not only against some of the studio bosses who dismissed her as another second-rate actress, but also against everyone else who failed to appreciate her immense talents.*

Fixed firmly in her sights tonight is the Queen, the Royal Family and Britain’s establishment.

*Like everyone else in Meghan’s self-centred world, their sin is to have rejected her wishes.*

Like a Hollywood diva, she has cursed those who don’t understand that being the Duchess of Sussex was not enough.

*Walking in procession behind the other royals, especially Prince William and Kate, was demeaning.*

*'DESTROY HER DESTINY'*
*She wanted to be the Queen of England. All those Britons who stood in her way are accused of sexism and racism.*


The question is whether Meghan ever intended to stay in Britain.

Did she honestly want to sacrifice her Californian lifestyle and serve as a member of the Royal Family in rainy Britain?

*Or did she, as I believe, always intend to use the marriage and title as a stepping stone to further her ambitions in the sunshine?*

Convinced of her own greatness, Meghan thinks she has, for years, been the victim of plots to destroy her destiny.

While others shone in leading roles, Meghan had bit parts.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14256882/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-queen-tom-bower/#
Until five years ago, her most recognised credit was featuring in a Canadian TV soap called Suits.

After she was written out in 2016, her career hit a brick wall. Adrift but undaunted in Toronto, she orchestrated a new start.

Brilliantly, she invented a new script. *Intelligent, attractive and ruthless, Meghan set her sights on marrying higher. And she headed to London.

“Who are the single men?” she asked an Englishwoman. Among the cast list was Prince Harry.

Their meeting in a London club was described as “a blind date”. But Meghan knew exactly who she was meeting — and how much the relationship could work for her.*

Alone and miserable, Harry, then 31, was a forlorn character searching for love.

*'A DENT IN HIS REPUTATION'*
A series of unhappy relationships and public relations disasters had put a dent in his reputation.

But his military service in Afghanistan and his creation of the Invictus Games for disabled military servicemen had added supporters to those who still recalled the enchanting small boy walking behind his mother’s coffin.

Harry fell head over heels in love. We don’t know if the actress felt the same.  

One truth is certain: Harry’s closest relations including William and Prince Charles were wary whether the Hollywood divorcee would make the necessary sacrifices to serve as a loyal member of the Royal Family.

*Insiders heard how she had ended her two-year marriage to Trevor Engelson.

Without forewarning, Engelson opened a letter sent from Toronto to Los Angeles containing her wedding and engagement rings. Outraged, he told a friend: “I feel like I was a piece of something stuck to the bottom of her shoe.”*
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14256882/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-queen-tom-bower/#
On Meghan and Harry’s brilliant wedding day in Windsor in 2018, the Royal Family genuinely embraced the bride and her mother. The waiting crowds cheered themselves hoarse. Only a few insiders could have imagined the horrors which have followed.

“What Meghan wants, Meghan gets,” Harry famously raged during the preparations. Meghan’s demand to wear a particular tiara had been vetoed by Buckingham Palace.

*Even on that sunlit day, no doubt she fumed against the Royal Family.

Like a consummate actress, she concealed her anger and smiled.* *Over the following months, stories emerged of Meghan’s tearful staff complaining of bullying and worse. Her spokespeople vigorously denied the allegations.*

Her decision to move from Kensington Palace to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor hinted at the breach with the Royal Family. Insiders could not believe that a Californian would want to live for long under the Heathrow flight path.

*Flying on a private jet to New York for a £350,000 baby shower party with US celebrities confirmed her contempt for modesty.*

*'HYPOCRISY'*
*Refusing to show son Archie’s face to the camera after his birth and demanding privacy, while constantly speaking to US journalists, confirmed her hypocrisy.*

Friends’ criticisms of the Queen, prompted it seemed by Meghan, were outrightly rude. Insiders know there is more scandal to emerge.

*One year later, I considered writing the truth about Meghan. I knew the Royal Family and their staff had become alarmed that she threatened to become an agent of destruction.

The fragile House of Windsor feared that Meghan’s refusal to discard Hollywood’s celebrity culture and adopt the conservative traditions embraced by the palaces would doom her new marriage and jeopardise the monarchy. Those suspicions were dismissed as racist.*

That reaction was not entirely unjustified. In Britain and in America, Meghan is remarkably popular, especially among women.

Her supporters admire her ambition and outspokenness. Her critics are usually white.

Those who foresee that she and Harry are determined to plunge the country into a similar crisis as the abdication of King Edward VIII in 1936 are dismissed as prejudiced.

Yet seeing Meghan and Harry on the lawn with Oprah Winfrey, the image is strikingly similar to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after 1937.

The ex-king’s relationship with US divorcee Wallis Simpson critically damaged the monarchy.

At least the Windsors were aware of the problems.

*Meghan and Harry clearly do not care about the uproar they are causing. On the contrary, they are clearly eager for a battle.*

Buckingham Palace fears that Meghan sees outright warfare as a badge of pride.
*In her selfish manner, she believes that she is entitled to say what she wants to Oprah Winfrey. Those who criticise her inventions are racist and sexist.*

Amid the gunfire, many are sad that Harry has been turned against his family. By appearing on US TV tonight, he has sold his soul. The outcome can only be bloody casualties in both camps.

*Britain’s monarchy will survive and Meghan won’t be Queen of England. But she clearly dreams that, when the smoke of battle disappears, she might be a US senator or even president.*

*10 questions we want to hear*
*Here are ten questions we would like the couple to answer:

Q: *Meghan, why did you split from your first husband, film producer Trevor Engelson after just two years of marriage? Your friends were shocked and suggested you put your career first after landing a role filming Suits in Toronto.
*Q:* Harry, don’t you think it’s odd you’ve never met your father-in-law Thomas? And Meghan why won’t you make it up to him? He is desperate to see his grandson before he dies.
*Q:* Why did you both lecture us on climate change and then take private jets on holidays?
*Q:* Meghan, why have reports emerged that you bullied Kensington Palace staff and why would anyone make them up?
*Q:* Harry, how does any of this help to heal the rift with the royal family, particularly your brother William?
*Q:* How could you bring about all this negative publicity when Prince Philip in hospital?

*Bully rap 'time up'*
Too much time has passed for action to be taken regarding bullying claims against Meghan, says an employment rights expert.

Alex Monaco said: “There is a three-month limit for most claims and as this complaint was made in 2018, it seems that deadline has long passed.

“If normal procedures were followed then Meghan, as effective manager of the employees, should have been spoken to at the time.

“After that, it’s up to the human resources department to decide if the allegations are true and if the manager needs to be sent for retraining or even dismissed.”

MM the Queen of Hypocrisy!


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
> 
> 
> 
> Surely you jest!  This is Meg and Haz were are talking about!!!  They'll sell the earrings to avoid any more negative publicity, keep the money, then very, very, very generously donate $50 for sandwiches!
> 
> And have pictures of them handing the check over!  You know, to prove they made the donation...


Well hell. It sounded good.  Yours though sounds more realistic.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
> 
> 
> 
> Surely you jest!  This is Meg and Haz were are talking about!!!  They'll sell the earrings to avoid any more negative publicity, keep the money, then very, very, very generously donate $50 for sandwiches!
> 
> And have pictures of them handing the check over!  You know, to prove they made the donation...



Her  response to that suggestion would be OVER MY DEAD BODY!  If necessary she will find a pawn broker to sell them to who will  break up the stones in the setting  or she will have them reset.


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Have a 'Great' Relationship With the Queen
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II after stepping down from royal duties in 2020 — find out more




					www.usmagazine.com
				




A little over one year after they announced their decision to step down from their roles as senior members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Tell-All: Where and When to Watch and More*
Royal correspondent Omid Scobie opened up about the relationship between the Duke of Sussex, 36, Suits alum, 39, and the queen, 94, in an interview with Entertainment Tonight on Friday, March 5. Days before Harry and Meghan’s tell-all interview is set to air on CBS, the longtime royal reporter admitted that the talk could put the couple in a difficult spot with the monarch.

“It’s a tough one for Harry and Meghan,” Scobie said. “They planned this interview before [the queen’s husband] Prince Philip was admitted to the hospital, and, unfortunately, here we are facing the third weekend of him still in the care of the hospital here in London. But for Harry and Meghan, they have kept a great relationship with Philip and the queen.”







Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and Queen Elizabeth II. Shutterstock (2)

The Finding Freedom coauthor continued: “We heard Harry talking very warmly about his grandfather on James Corden‘s show not so long ago, and I think we’ll hear more of that [during their CBS primetime tell-all].”

Scobie told ET, “This idea that people have that they may be throwing the queen under the bus on national television … is far from the truth.”

*Meghan Markle’s ‘Suits’ Costars Defend Her Amid Bullying Claims*
He noted, “This is a couple that understands the difference between the machine of the monarchy, the institution, and the family itself. And it’s that family with certain individuals they have a great relationship with.”

Scobie’s comments come days after an article from The Times on Tuesday, March 2, alleged the California native bullied royal advisers before stepping down in March 2020. Buckingham Palace responded to the allegations in a statement to Us Weekly, “We are clearly very concerned about allegations in The Times following claims made by former staff of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”

The British royal household’s statement continued: “Accordingly our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article. Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned. The Royal Household has had a Dignity in Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”

Allegations of mistreatment outlined in the article suggest the newspaper’s staff was approached by royal palace aides who claimed a former adviser to Markle filed a bullying complaint as she and Harry were leaving Kensington Palace. The outlet reported that Jason Knauf, the couple’s communications secretary, filed a complaint with Prince William‘s private secretary alleging that Meghan drove out two personal assistants and was affecting the confidence of another staff member.

Meghan and Harry’s communications team denied the allegations in a statement published by The Times. “Let’s just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation,” the statement read. “We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of The Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet.”
The former actress released another statement addressing the claims the same day the Times‘ article was published. “The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma,” she said.

*A Timeline of Meghan Markle’s Ups and Downs With the Royal Family*
In a preview for her upcoming tell-all interview, set to air on CBS on March 7, Meghan accused the royals of playing a role in pushing false narratives about her and Harry.
“I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us,” she said in the trailer, released on Wednesday, March 3. “And if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost



MmmmKay.  Whatever Scobie Dobie DooDoo


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Unlike some "badgered" individuals, Stedman likes his privacy...



Stedman is still around! I found an article from about a year ago where he came back from a trip and Oprah banished him to the guest house for 14 days to self quarantine before he was allowed back in the house with her.


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> Sell the earrings and donate the proceeds to a charity that helps women and children.  ALL of the proceeds.


Earrings, which earrings are you talking about? Ha, those earring! They got lost during the move.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> A ton of interesting articles today! A very good opinion!!!
> 
> TOM BOWER *Meghan Markle wanted to be Queen… Oprah interview is her revenge*
> *FINDING fame and fortune in Hollywood has been Meghan Markle’s burning ambition for over 30 years.*
> 
> Ever since her father — a film lighting designer — took his young daughter to a studio she has yearned for stardom.
> 
> *Repeatedly, Tinseltown rejected her. Tonight’s two-hour appearance on US TV and its replay to millions worldwide is her revenge.
> 
> Not only against some of the studio bosses who dismissed her as another second-rate actress, but also against everyone else who failed to appreciate her immense talents.*
> 
> Fixed firmly in her sights tonight is the Queen, the Royal Family and Britain’s establishment.
> 
> *Like everyone else in Meghan’s self-centred world, their sin is to have rejected her wishes.*
> 
> Like a Hollywood diva, she has cursed those who don’t understand that being the Duchess of Sussex was not enough.
> 
> *Walking in procession behind the other royals, especially Prince William and Kate, was demeaning.*
> 
> *'DESTROY HER DESTINY'*
> *She wanted to be the Queen of England. All those Britons who stood in her way are accused of sexism and racism.*
> 
> 
> The question is whether Meghan ever intended to stay in Britain.
> 
> Did she honestly want to sacrifice her Californian lifestyle and serve as a member of the Royal Family in rainy Britain?
> 
> *Or did she, as I believe, always intend to use the marriage and title as a stepping stone to further her ambitions in the sunshine?*
> 
> Convinced of her own greatness, Meghan thinks she has, for years, been the victim of plots to destroy her destiny.
> 
> While others shone in leading roles, Meghan had bit parts.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14256882/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-queen-tom-bower/#
> Until five years ago, her most recognised credit was featuring in a Canadian TV soap called Suits.
> 
> After she was written out in 2016, her career hit a brick wall. Adrift but undaunted in Toronto, she orchestrated a new start.
> 
> Brilliantly, she invented a new script. *Intelligent, attractive and ruthless, Meghan set her sights on marrying higher. And she headed to London.
> 
> “Who are the single men?” she asked an Englishwoman. Among the cast list was Prince Harry.
> 
> Their meeting in a London club was described as “a blind date”. But Meghan knew exactly who she was meeting — and how much the relationship could work for her.*
> 
> Alone and miserable, Harry, then 31, was a forlorn character searching for love.
> 
> *'A DENT IN HIS REPUTATION'*
> A series of unhappy relationships and public relations disasters had put a dent in his reputation.
> 
> But his military service in Afghanistan and his creation of the Invictus Games for disabled military servicemen had added supporters to those who still recalled the enchanting small boy walking behind his mother’s coffin.
> 
> Harry fell head over heels in love. We don’t know if the actress felt the same.
> 
> One truth is certain: Harry’s closest relations including William and Prince Charles were wary whether the Hollywood divorcee would make the necessary sacrifices to serve as a loyal member of the Royal Family.
> 
> *Insiders heard how she had ended her two-year marriage to Trevor Engelson.
> 
> Without forewarning, Engelson opened a letter sent from Toronto to Los Angeles containing her wedding and engagement rings. Outraged, he told a friend: “I feel like I was a piece of something stuck to the bottom of her shoe.”*
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14256882/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-queen-tom-bower/#
> On Meghan and Harry’s brilliant wedding day in Windsor in 2018, the Royal Family genuinely embraced the bride and her mother. The waiting crowds cheered themselves hoarse. Only a few insiders could have imagined the horrors which have followed.
> 
> “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets,” Harry famously raged during the preparations. Meghan’s demand to wear a particular tiara had been vetoed by Buckingham Palace.
> 
> *Even on that sunlit day, no doubt she fumed against the Royal Family.
> 
> Like a consummate actress, she concealed her anger and smiled.* *Over the following months, stories emerged of Meghan’s tearful staff complaining of bullying and worse. Her spokespeople vigorously denied the allegations.*
> 
> Her decision to move from Kensington Palace to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor hinted at the breach with the Royal Family. Insiders could not believe that a Californian would want to live for long under the Heathrow flight path.
> 
> *Flying on a private jet to New York for a £350,000 baby shower party with US celebrities confirmed her contempt for modesty.*
> 
> *'HYPOCRISY'*
> *Refusing to show son Archie’s face to the camera after his birth and demanding privacy, while constantly speaking to US journalists, confirmed her hypocrisy.*
> 
> Friends’ criticisms of the Queen, prompted it seemed by Meghan, were outrightly rude. Insiders know there is more scandal to emerge.
> 
> *One year later, I considered writing the truth about Meghan. I knew the Royal Family and their staff had become alarmed that she threatened to become an agent of destruction.
> 
> The fragile House of Windsor feared that Meghan’s refusal to discard Hollywood’s celebrity culture and adopt the conservative traditions embraced by the palaces would doom her new marriage and jeopardise the monarchy. Those suspicions were dismissed as racist.*
> 
> That reaction was not entirely unjustified. In Britain and in America, Meghan is remarkably popular, especially among women.
> 
> Her supporters admire her ambition and outspokenness. Her critics are usually white.
> 
> Those who foresee that she and Harry are determined to plunge the country into a similar crisis as the abdication of King Edward VIII in 1936 are dismissed as prejudiced.
> 
> Yet seeing Meghan and Harry on the lawn with Oprah Winfrey, the image is strikingly similar to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after 1937.
> 
> The ex-king’s relationship with US divorcee Wallis Simpson critically damaged the monarchy.
> 
> At least the Windsors were aware of the problems.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry clearly do not care about the uproar they are causing. On the contrary, they are clearly eager for a battle.*
> 
> Buckingham Palace fears that Meghan sees outright warfare as a badge of pride.
> *In her selfish manner, she believes that she is entitled to say what she wants to Oprah Winfrey. Those who criticise her inventions are racist and sexist.*
> 
> Amid the gunfire, many are sad that Harry has been turned against his family. By appearing on US TV tonight, he has sold his soul. The outcome can only be bloody casualties in both camps.
> 
> *Britain’s monarchy will survive and Meghan won’t be Queen of England. But she clearly dreams that, when the smoke of battle disappears, she might be a US senator or even president.*
> 
> *10 questions we want to hear*
> *Here are ten questions we would like the couple to answer:
> 
> Q: *Meghan, why did you split from your first husband, film producer Trevor Engelson after just two years of marriage? Your friends were shocked and suggested you put your career first after landing a role filming Suits in Toronto.
> *Q:* Harry, don’t you think it’s odd you’ve never met your father-in-law Thomas? And Meghan why won’t you make it up to him? He is desperate to see his grandson before he dies.
> *Q:* Why did you both lecture us on climate change and then take private jets on holidays?
> *Q:* Meghan, why have reports emerged that you bullied Kensington Palace staff and why would anyone make them up?
> *Q:* Harry, how does any of this help to heal the rift with the royal family, particularly your brother William?
> *Q:* How could you bring about all this negative publicity when Prince Philip in hospital?
> 
> *Bully rap 'time up'*
> Too much time has passed for action to be taken regarding bullying claims against Meghan, says an employment rights expert.
> 
> Alex Monaco said: “There is a three-month limit for most claims and as this complaint was made in 2018, it seems that deadline has long passed.
> 
> “If normal procedures were followed then Meghan, as effective manager of the employees, should have been spoken to at the time.
> 
> “After that, it’s up to the human resources department to decide if the allegations are true and if the manager needs to be sent for retraining or even dismissed.”
> 
> MM the Queen of Hypocrisy!



How about:  Tell us about your annulment for that college guy who became a lawyer.  
                   Or When exactly did you stop seeing Corey and start seeing Harry.  
                   Is your relationship with Markus Anderson transactional?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Stedman is still around! I found an article from about a year ago where he came back from a trip and Oprah banished him to the guest house for 14 days to self quarantine before he was allowed back in the house with her.



How do you spell beard?


----------



## gracekelly

How is it that Omid knows everything yet he never sees them or speaks with them?  Are they linked telepathically?  Is that how he wrote the book?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Earrings, which earrings are you talking about? Ha, those earring! They got lost during the move.


Those were the ones?  How convenient.


----------



## gracekelly

CANDACE OWENS says she predicted Harry and Meghan would end up in LA
					

CANDACE OWENS: I could see Meghan Markle coming from some distance. And that's because I'm an American - and she is the dreaded 'Hollywood-kind'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Have a 'Great' Relationship With the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II after stepping down from royal duties in 2020 — find out more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little over one year after they announced their decision to step down from their roles as senior members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Tell-All: Where and When to Watch and More*
> Royal correspondent Omid Scobie opened up about the relationship between the Duke of Sussex, 36, Suits alum, 39, and the queen, 94, in an interview with Entertainment Tonight on Friday, March 5. Days before Harry and Meghan’s tell-all interview is set to air on CBS, the longtime royal reporter admitted that the talk could put the couple in a difficult spot with the monarch.
> 
> “It’s a tough one for Harry and Meghan,” Scobie said. “They planned this interview before [the queen’s husband] Prince Philip was admitted to the hospital, and, unfortunately, here we are facing the third weekend of him still in the care of the hospital here in London. But for Harry and Meghan, they have kept a great relationship with Philip and the queen.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and Queen Elizabeth II. Shutterstock (2)
> 
> The Finding Freedom coauthor continued: “We heard Harry talking very warmly about his grandfather on James Corden‘s show not so long ago, and I think we’ll hear more of that [during their CBS primetime tell-all].”
> 
> Scobie told ET, “This idea that people have that they may be throwing the queen under the bus on national television … is far from the truth.”
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s ‘Suits’ Costars Defend Her Amid Bullying Claims*
> He noted, “This is a couple that understands the difference between the machine of the monarchy, the institution, and the family itself. And it’s that family with certain individuals they have a great relationship with.”
> 
> Scobie’s comments come days after an article from The Times on Tuesday, March 2, alleged the California native bullied royal advisers before stepping down in March 2020. Buckingham Palace responded to the allegations in a statement to Us Weekly, “We are clearly very concerned about allegations in The Times following claims made by former staff of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”
> 
> The British royal household’s statement continued: “Accordingly our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article. Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned. The Royal Household has had a Dignity in Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
> 
> Allegations of mistreatment outlined in the article suggest the newspaper’s staff was approached by royal palace aides who claimed a former adviser to Markle filed a bullying complaint as she and Harry were leaving Kensington Palace. The outlet reported that Jason Knauf, the couple’s communications secretary, filed a complaint with Prince William‘s private secretary alleging that Meghan drove out two personal assistants and was affecting the confidence of another staff member.
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s communications team denied the allegations in a statement published by The Times. “Let’s just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation,” the statement read. “We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of The Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet.”
> The former actress released another statement addressing the claims the same day the Times‘ article was published. “The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma,” she said.
> 
> *A Timeline of Meghan Markle’s Ups and Downs With the Royal Family*
> In a preview for her upcoming tell-all interview, set to air on CBS on March 7, Meghan accused the royals of playing a role in pushing false narratives about her and Harry.
> “I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us,” she said in the trailer, released on Wednesday, March 3. “And if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost
> 
> 
> 
> MmmmKay.  Whatever Scobie Dobie DooDoo





_He noted, “This is a couple that understands the difference between the machine of the monarchy, the institution, and the family itself. And it’s that family with certain individuals they have a great relationship with.”
_


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> How is it that Omid knows everything yet he never sees them or speaks with them?  Are they linked telepathically?  Is that how he wrote the book?



He lives under their porch like a groundhog.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> How about:  Tell us about our annulment for that college guy who became a lawyer.
> Or When exactly did you stop seeing Corey and start seeing Harry.
> Is your relationship with Markus Anderson transactional?


The apparent hazing incident... I'm sure we could easily come up with a list of questions for the 2 hour interview.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Have a 'Great' Relationship With the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II after stepping down from royal duties in 2020 — find out more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little over one year after they announced their decision to step down from their roles as senior members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Tell-All: Where and When to Watch and More*
> Royal correspondent Omid Scobie opened up about the relationship between the Duke of Sussex, 36, Suits alum, 39, and the queen, 94, in an interview with Entertainment Tonight on Friday, March 5. Days before Harry and Meghan’s tell-all interview is set to air on CBS, the longtime royal reporter admitted that the talk could put the couple in a difficult spot with the monarch.
> 
> “It’s a tough one for Harry and Meghan,” Scobie said. “They planned this interview before [the queen’s husband] Prince Philip was admitted to the hospital, and, unfortunately, here we are facing the third weekend of him still in the care of the hospital here in London. But for Harry and Meghan, they have kept a great relationship with Philip and the queen.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, and Queen Elizabeth II. Shutterstock (2)
> 
> The Finding Freedom coauthor continued: “We heard Harry talking very warmly about his grandfather on James Corden‘s show not so long ago, and I think we’ll hear more of that [during their CBS primetime tell-all].”
> 
> Scobie told ET, “This idea that people have that they may be throwing the queen under the bus on national television … is far from the truth.”
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s ‘Suits’ Costars Defend Her Amid Bullying Claims*
> He noted, “This is a couple that understands the difference between the machine of the monarchy, the institution, and the family itself. And it’s that family with certain individuals they have a great relationship with.”
> 
> Scobie’s comments come days after an article from The Times on Tuesday, March 2, alleged the California native bullied royal advisers before stepping down in March 2020. Buckingham Palace responded to the allegations in a statement to Us Weekly, “We are clearly very concerned about allegations in The Times following claims made by former staff of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”
> 
> The British royal household’s statement continued: “Accordingly our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article. Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the Household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learned. The Royal Household has had a Dignity in Work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
> 
> Allegations of mistreatment outlined in the article suggest the newspaper’s staff was approached by royal palace aides who claimed a former adviser to Markle filed a bullying complaint as she and Harry were leaving Kensington Palace. The outlet reported that Jason Knauf, the couple’s communications secretary, filed a complaint with Prince William‘s private secretary alleging that Meghan drove out two personal assistants and was affecting the confidence of another staff member.
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s communications team denied the allegations in a statement published by The Times. “Let’s just call this what it is — a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation,” the statement read. “We are disappointed to see this defamatory portrayal of The Duchess of Sussex given credibility by a media outlet.”
> The former actress released another statement addressing the claims the same day the Times‘ article was published. “The Duchess is saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma,” she said.
> 
> *A Timeline of Meghan Markle’s Ups and Downs With the Royal Family*
> In a preview for her upcoming tell-all interview, set to air on CBS on March 7, Meghan accused the royals of playing a role in pushing false narratives about her and Harry.
> “I don’t know how they could expect that after all of this time we would still just be silent if there is an active role that The Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us,” she said in the trailer, released on Wednesday, March 3. “And if that comes with risk of losing things, there is a lot that has been lost
> 
> 
> 
> MmmmKay.  Whatever Scobie Dobie DooDoo



You mean they have such a great relationship that Meghan is throwing QEII under the bus, claiming she was silenced and lost her liberties? And the Crown is coming out with Meghan's abuses with staff, etc?  Oh, I'll bet the relationship is a great one. Sure. Can't The Firm send over MI6 to L.A. to force them to shut up and quit bothering us with their whining?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I had to look him up. The author is British. He’s undoubtedly been keeping track of Meghan’s shenanigans better than the American press.


at least it's being reported by a US outlet


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The earrings again!  No more protection from the BRF for you, MM!
> 
> _*The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi* *over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the man accused of ordering the brutal killing.*
> 
> Michael Eisner, who heads a human rights group founded by Mr Khashoggi three months before his death, said the stunning chandelier earrings were 'bought with blood money' by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
> 
> He said he was 'baffled' that the Duchess did not know the Prince, known as MBS, was linked to the murder when she wore the earrings at a State dinner, or his appalling human rights record.
> 
> 'Those earrings were bought with blood money and given to her by a murderer,' said Mr Eisner, chief operating officer of Democracy for the Arab World Now (Dawn). 'She has no business wearing them.'
> 
> *The Duchess's lawyers last week insisted that at the time of the dinner she was unaware of speculation that MBS was involved in Mr Khashoggi's murder. However, well-placed sources last night claimed the Duchess ignored advice from aides not to wear the jewellery.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's 'blood money' earrings condemned by Khashoggi's lawyer
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the Saudi Crown Prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I hope Harry's "dear friend" Jill see this


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Stedman is still around! I found an article from about a year ago where he came back from a trip and Oprah banished him to the guest house for 14 days to self quarantine before he was allowed back in the house with her.


What Oprah wants, Oprah gets


----------



## octopus17

Mr CB has just said "She knows the price of everything but the value of nothing" (attributed to Oscar Wilde apparently ...). Nail on head.  Mr CB.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> How about:  Tell us about our annulment for that college guy who became a lawyer.
> Or When exactly did you stop seeing Corey and start seeing Harry.
> Is your relationship with Markus Anderson transactional?


What yacht(s) were you on?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> What yacht(s) were you on?



Right!  I don't know that she reached that level exactly, but I always wondered at how she made money without a real world job when she wasn't acting and don't tell me calligraphy! Later on, I am willing to bet that she was on Markus Anderson's list of girls who like to socialize for the evening.


----------



## kkfiregirl

gracekelly said:


> CANDACE OWENS says she predicted Harry and Meghan would end up in LA
> 
> 
> CANDACE OWENS: I could see Meghan Markle coming from some distance. And that's because I'm an American - and she is the dreaded 'Hollywood-kind'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I liked the article, but she was far more restrained than I would have been, but I guess that’s why I’m not a  journalist. 

I am so tired of seeing pictures of M’s chicken legs on every article. Someone please send them some new photos!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Right!  I don't know that she reached that level exactly, but I always wondered at how she made money without a real world job when she wasn't acting and don't tell me calligraphy! Later on, I am willing to bet that she was on Markus Anderson's list of girls who like to socialize for the evening.



Speaking of Markus, I wonder what he’s doing these days. He seemed to be such an influential piece of the puzzle early on and then he just kind of disappeared.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> He lives under their porch like a groundhog.


Thanks for clarifying, I was convinced that was a skunk.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> kind of matter of fact I thought.  here it is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Tells Oprah Winfrey She Wasn’t ‘Allowed’ to Make Her Own Choices as a Royal
> 
> 
> A new clip from Oprah dropped on CBS Friday morning. In it, Meghan repeated her complaints that Buckingham Palace tried to strip her of agency and a voice.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


I could have sworn that was Megain's whining voice on her interview in Africa?  Guess that "voice" didn't get her what she wanted so it doesn't count.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> He lives under their porch like a groundhog.



You are too funny!!


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> http://Royal correspondent Omid Sco...ttps://www.usmagazine.com/shows/suits/']Suits alum, 39, and the queen, 94, in an interview with Entertainment Tonight on Friday, March 5. Days before Harry and Meghan’s tell-all interview is set to air on CBS, the longtime royal reporter admitted that the talk could put the couple in a difficult spot with the monarch.
> 
> “It’s a tough one for Harry and Meghan,” Scobie said. “They planned this interview before [the queen’s husband] Prince Philip was admitted to the hospital, and, unfortunately, here we are facing the third weekend of him still in the care of the hospital here in London. *But for Harry and Meghan, they have kept a great relationship with Philip and the queen*.”



I think I posted previously that MM and Harry will likely direct their ire to the nameless, faceless suits of the Palace.  Seems a safe thing to do, right?  Blame the Palace though MM I think mistakenly named "The Firm" in the teaser clip.  Isn't "The Firm" the name for the royal family effectively as a whole that is used by Palace insiders and the family itself?  So, Meghan did actually blame the family for her troubles, which maybe she hasn't realized (?)

Still, the Palace and the suits will bear the brunt of the criticism from her most likely. Of course, these "suits" are people too you know and I'm sure they don't want to be thrown under the bus after they apparently worked so hard for both Harry and MM.  So, they are likely the ones who are coming forward with their personal stories of bullying and humiliation by both Harry and MM.  But, that will all come out over the course of the next year. Frankly, both Harry and MM should be very worried if even a quarter of the stories are true.  The report of tea being thrown at one aide really gets to me. No one should ever have to put up with that kind of behavior. I don't care if you are the Queen of Earth, you don't do that.  Still, I expect lots of warm words for the Queen and Charles in this interview as if that will be enough to make up for all the rest. Keep on California dreaming, Harry.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Markus, I wonder what he’s doing these days. He seemed to be such an influential piece of the puzzle early on and then he just kind of disappeared.


I'm starting to think that he may have been markled. In her delusion of grandeur, she might think that she  is too important to deal with the likes of him... Her friends are now bigger fish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> You mean they have such a great relationship that Meghan is throwing QEII under the bus, claiming she was silenced and lost her liberties? And the Crown is coming out with Meghan's abuses with staff, etc?  Oh, I'll bet the relationship is a great one. Sure. Can't The Firm send over MI6 to L.A. to force them to shut up and quit bothering us with their whining?



Just shut off their wifi. 

Gotta love the way BP plays with H&M -
H&M - film JC bus ride
BP - remove patronages + issue announcement abt removal
H&M - record OW interview + release word salad abt service
BP - respected reporter writes about claims of MM bullying
H&M - clip 1 & 2 released + declare the racist BP is smearing them
BP - launch formal, official investigation into claims + earring story released
H&M - clip 3 released + kid pic + demands to be part of investigation
BP - announce more claims come forward + formal inquiry (?)into Sussex House funds
H&M - ‘old’ friends crawl out of woodwork to give polite support
BP - blast the DM with more unflattering stories and photos
H&M - nothing
BP - anyone there? anyone?  Okaaay, we’ve got more. We will wait.


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> That woman is very bad juju.  I sent Eugenie some instructions about cleansing  Frog Cot.  She took the advice to heart and moved right out and didn't go back until the place was certified by a mambo (voodoo priestess).  I told her to have the Archbishop of Canterbury sprinkle holy water around  for good measure and have a rabbi  say a barucha as well.  Can't be too careful when dealing with bad juju!  The Dalai Lama was busy or I would have sent him as well.



She might have to sacrifice some llamas to apease the Inca god, Wiracocha and it might also help with a couple of blood thirsty Mayan and Aztec deities just to make sure
An Australian Aboriginal smoke ceremony is needed


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> She might have to sacrifice some llamas to apease the Inca god, Wiracocha and it might also help with a couple of blood thirsty Mayan and Aztec deities just to make sure
> An Australian Aboriginal smoke ceremony is needed



It will take an entire village to clean up this mess.
OR one of those MI6 (?) deep cleans.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

P


byzina said:


> I hope that he will be fine. I understand that he is 99 and he has lived a long and hopefully happy life, but still.
> 
> H&M are rather unlucky. When they moved to LA, the pandemic occurred. When they want to tell-all to get some public sympathy, Philip gets ill turning the situation against them.


Poor M and H.  So unlucky.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to think that he may have been markled. In her delusion of grandeur, she might think that she  is too important to deal with the likes of him... Her friends are now bigger fish.



Or... he may know about some skeletons in her closet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tsk tsk, Gayle. — what happened to 2 sides to a story? A “full-scale takedown“?  Wow.









						Meghan's pals say she's been vilified by 'obscene' royals
					

The Royal Family launched a 'full-scale takedown' of the Duchess of Sussex, according to close friend Gayle King. The US broadcaster made the accusation on her radio show.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/10/gayle-king-charlie-rose-cbs-this-morning-sexual-misconduct
_Charlie Rose was ousted from CBS This Morning after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct from dozens of women—but Gayle King has not abandoned her former co-anchor. In fact, the two are still friends. And although King has not hidden this fact in the past, a new profile from The New York Times offers new insight into the anchor’s continued relationship with her disgraced former CBS This Morning colleague.
King has been tough on her network at times while reporting on alleged misconduct by its on-air talent and executives. But she also told the Times’s Amy Chozick that she believes “you can hold two ideas in your head at the same time”—meaning, per the Times, that King both believes the women who accused Rose of sexual misconduct and rejects the notion that all accused men should be forever shunned from polite society. Of Rose, she added, “I know there are two sides to every story, that’s what I know.”_


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I liked the article, but she was far more restrained than I would have been, but I guess that’s why I’m not a  journalist.
> 
> I am so tired of seeing pictures of M’s chicken legs on every article. Someone please send them some new photos!!


wow....an american WOC dares to criticize the Duchess
yes, the chicken legs...the only sexy thing in that photo is the hair extensions IMO


----------



## bag-mania

I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.  

I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!



I have no way to watch. I was counting on a blow by blow here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

poopsie said:


> I have no way to watch. I was counting on a blow by blow here.



same!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> I have no way to watch. I was counting on a blow by blow here.





kkfiregirl said:


> same!



I’ll do my best and watch as long as I can stand it.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
> 
> 
> 
> Surely you jest!  This is Meg and Haz were are talking about!!!  They'll sell the earrings to avoid any more negative publicity, keep the money, then very, very, very generously donate $50 for sandwiches!
> 
> And have pictures of them handing the check over!  You know, to prove they made the donation...


Great post but.... the earrings are hers to wear and only her BUT they belong to the crown as they were a state gift.  Presumably they must be returned. We will never know.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!


Great idea but I’m supposed to flee from evil.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

gracekelly said:


> CANDACE OWENS says she predicted Harry and Meghan would end up in LA
> 
> 
> CANDACE OWENS: I could see Meghan Markle coming from some distance. And that's because I'm an American - and she is the dreaded 'Hollywood-kind'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What a read!  Astute clairvoyant and accurate.


----------



## bag-mania

From the previews we all know what to expect from Meghan. What about Harry? I’m thinking he’s going to come away from the interview looking much more unlikable.


----------



## bellecate

poopsie said:


> I have no way to watch. I was counting on a blow by blow here.


Same here. My drink will be Sambuca.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t
> mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!



Excellent idea. After this hyped-up week,  I have decided not to watch it.  CBS pushed it too much. OW got her 9 million, she does need my eyeballs, too.

I watched the Andrew interview. That was just sad. Try as OW may, H&M will not say anything riveting. I  remember watching the Diana interview with Bashir. I felt awful afterwards, felt like I had wasted a huge portion of my life, and that Diana needed a strong dose of therapy. When OW interviewed Sarah, the interview seemed more balanced, not too edgy.  OW’s Lance Armstrong interview was a complete turn-off because of O lecturing him. I dislike that style of interview. So, with this one, I feel the clips and the JC bus ride have been enough. I get it. They are mad.

All that said, I am concerned about posting my own comments in a public forum. H&M and their squad have proven how mean, vindictive, litigious, etc. they can be. I am thinking it is time to change passwords, etc. However, I will read your thoughts. Y’all have the best insight. Take good care,  

ETA: apologies, I cannot remember whom OW interviewed that I thought she was unkind so I removed my original  sentence. I will think of it later. Still, I am not planning on watching. There will plenty of clips all over Twitter, YouTube and beyond.  Cheers, all.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex 'called all the PR shots', say royal sources despite Oprah interview claims she was gagged
					

The Duchess of Sussex “called all the shots” when it came to managing her own media, royal sources have said, casting doubt on her claim she could not be interviewed by Oprah Winfrey three years ago. Multiple royal sources have told The Telegraph the 39-year-old former actress “had full control”...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!



Please do!! I don't have regular TV so I'll just be following the chatter to know what's going on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex 'called all the PR shots', say royal sources despite Oprah interview claims she was gagged
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex “called all the shots” when it came to managing her own media, royal sources have said, casting doubt on her claim she could not be interviewed by Oprah Winfrey three years ago. Multiple royal sources have told The Telegraph the 39-year-old former actress “had full control”...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Excellent article. Puts it all in perspective, no?


----------



## gracekelly

I suspect that it will appear in pieces on YouTube


----------



## pukasonqo

Watching “Hunting Brittney Spears”, comparing to what the press and paparazzi did to her these two have nothing to complain about it


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Markus, I wonder what he’s doing these days. He seemed to be such an influential piece of the puzzle early on and then he just kind of disappeared.


Good point. Maybe he is retracting and rethinking  as he realizes that his posh artisto club members won’t take lightly to Queen bashing.


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> How about:  Tell us about your annulment for that college guy who became a lawyer.
> Or When exactly did you stop seeing Corey and start seeing Harry.
> Is your relationship with Markus Anderson transactional?



In light of the current world pandemic:  tell us the above (LOL)and not your daily whining about the unfair treatment about who didn’t let you do what you wanted...  so f!cking vindictive-from all of us working for a living:  B!tch, STFU about your whining!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kkfiregirl said:


> *I am so tired of seeing pictures of M’s chicken legs on every article. Someone please send them some new photos!!*


Me too!! Don't you find that some times when she tries to look sexy, she ends up looking more like a slut. 

ET fix quote


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Markus, I wonder what he’s doing these days. He seemed to be such an influential piece of the puzzle early on and then he just kind of disappeared.


Markus was Markled.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex 'called all the PR shots', say royal sources despite Oprah interview claims she was gagged
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex “called all the shots” when it came to managing her own media, royal sources have said, casting doubt on her claim she could not be interviewed by Oprah Winfrey three years ago. Multiple royal sources have told The Telegraph the 39-year-old former actress “had full control”...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Yes, the chickens are coming home to roost!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!


Honestly, just the thought of watching her for two hours and listening to her arrogant voice makes me want to eat glass, but it's hard to turn down such a tempting invitation as yours!  I'm still not sure I can do it...it'll be a last minute spur of the moment thing, but I think it'll just be much more fun to get live commentary on this thread.  I find you all vastly more entertaining!


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!


Sounds good!


----------



## gracekelly

Here is the thing about the aftermath of the Sunday program. Will people be incredulous at the whinathon or will they be sympathetic?  Given the hardships experienced I don’t see how it could be the latter, but you never can tell.  Meghan can not sit there and complain without giving specific instances and proof.   I saw a report from a man who claimed he viewed a good portion of it and he said she was making it up as she went along and she was in it for the drama alone. Some people are like that and they love nothing better than going from crisis to crisis. They’re attention hounds, and that much I do think is true about her.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly, just the thought of watching her for two hours and listening to her arrogant voice makes me want to eat glass, but it's hard to turn down such a tempting invitation as yours!  I'm still not sure I can do it...it'll be a last minute spur of the moment thing, but I think it'll just be much more fun to get live commentary on this thread.  I find you all vastly more entertaining!


I feel the same. Undecided. Don’t want to listen. Turn off the sound and use closed captions


----------



## csshopper

scarlet555 said:


> In light of the current world pandemic:  tell us the above (LOL)and not your daily whining about the unfair treatment about who didn’t let you do what you wanted...  so f!cking vindictive-from all of us working for a living:  B!tch, STFU about your whining!


And tell us about your black family, the people, with the exception of your Mother whom you put on display when it seems to suit your needs, whose DNA you share that makes you biracial and a WOC, but are not acknowledged. From the little available on line about them, they are good, productive members of society, don't seem to want to "use" you, wish only the best for you according to an uncle who has been quoted, yet you ignore them. Why?


----------



## CarryOn2020

dp


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, the chickens are coming home to roost!



Speaking of...this is an interview with the journalist from The Times. He wrote the initial article. Apparently GMA had tweeted his interview, but then took it down. This person, Kenzie, had saved the interview.
ETA:  Typically, I check Royal Reporter Richard Palmer’s tweets. He had posted the GMA link to the interview. When people left messages saying the video had been removed, Kenzie (no one I know) tweeted she had recorded it.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking of...this is an interview with the journalist from The Times. He wrote the initial article. Apparently GMA had tweeted his interview, but then took it down. This person, Kenzie, had saved the interview.
> ETA:  Typically, I check Royal Reporter Richard Palmer’s tweets. He had posted the GMA link to the interview. When people left messages saying the video had been removed, Kenzie (no one I know) tweeted she had recorded it.



He said it all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Palace officials give withering dismissal of Harry and Meghan's interview that will be 'lost in the mists of time' as most Britons 'will be thinking about schools going back, their vaccines and Prince Philip getting better' - the only winner will be Oprah*




I don't think the UK is their target audience, though. They put in this sh*t show for the US and maybe the rest of the world they think they can fool. 




> 'We haven't got a clue what they say in the interview,' said the source. 'But there is determination not to play their game. *There is a very clear sense right from the top that it's best not to react.' *




Aw, the kids are throwing sand and their little shovels and the grown-ups ignore them. So mean.


----------



## Rouge H

Shame on Oprah too..for collecting nine million to interview these two. A friend indeed. Ok we get it, didn’t work out so get on with your life and raise that sweet baby along with the newly expected and cut the drama that everyone is so tired of.


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Markus, I wonder what he’s doing these days. He seemed to be such an influential piece of the puzzle early on and then he just kind of disappeared.



Maybe he’s unemployed. Soho House like all hospitality groups was hit hard by the pandemic. SH also received $22 million in coronavirus small business PPP loans which p*sses me off as they’re an international company backed by billionaire investors


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> ha
> probably the most politically incorrect one in the family was H with his nazi uniform



Politically incorrect is when someone uses an out of date term for something. Dressing up in a Nazi uniform is more than politically incorrect. 

British citizens are the subjects of Harry's *grandmother* the Queen. We have no constitution. Our national anthem is 'hym', an exaltation to her, our passports shows we have her permission to travel given by her, our money carries her portrait. 

It would take an article to explain how astonishing that the grandson of our monarch thought about wearing a Nazi uniform, never mind actually obtaining it from somewhere and going out. 

Had his great-uncle remained King, then it may have made sense (although I wouldn't be here to see it).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Her  response to that suggestion would be OVER MY DEAD BODY!  If necessary she will find a pawn broker to sell them to who will  break up the stones in the setting  or *she will have them reset*.



That's _exactly_ what will happen. 

Hey presto, "_what_ earrings?!"


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> A ton of interesting articles today! A very good opinion!!!
> 
> TOM BOWER *Meghan Markle wanted to be Queen… Oprah interview is her revenge*
> *FINDING fame and fortune in Hollywood has been Meghan Markle’s burning ambition for over 30 years.*
> 
> Ever since her father — a film lighting designer — took his young daughter to a studio she has yearned for stardom.
> 
> *Repeatedly, Tinseltown rejected her. Tonight’s two-hour appearance on US TV and its replay to millions worldwide is her revenge.
> 
> Not only against some of the studio bosses who dismissed her as another second-rate actress, but also against everyone else who failed to appreciate her immense talents.*
> 
> Fixed firmly in her sights tonight is the Queen, the Royal Family and Britain’s establishment.
> 
> *Like everyone else in Meghan’s self-centred world, their sin is to have rejected her wishes.*
> 
> Like a Hollywood diva, she has cursed those who don’t understand that being the Duchess of Sussex was not enough.
> 
> *Walking in procession behind the other royals, especially Prince William and Kate, was demeaning.*
> 
> *'DESTROY HER DESTINY'*
> *She wanted to be the Queen of England. All those Britons who stood in her way are accused of sexism and racism.*
> 
> 
> The question is whether Meghan ever intended to stay in Britain.
> 
> Did she honestly want to sacrifice her Californian lifestyle and serve as a member of the Royal Family in rainy Britain?
> 
> *Or did she, as I believe, always intend to use the marriage and title as a stepping stone to further her ambitions in the sunshine?*
> 
> Convinced of her own greatness, Meghan thinks she has, for years, been the victim of plots to destroy her destiny.
> 
> While others shone in leading roles, Meghan had bit parts.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14256882/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-queen-tom-bower/#
> Until five years ago, her most recognised credit was featuring in a Canadian TV soap called Suits.
> 
> After she was written out in 2016, her career hit a brick wall. Adrift but undaunted in Toronto, she orchestrated a new start.
> 
> Brilliantly, she invented a new script. *Intelligent, attractive and ruthless, Meghan set her sights on marrying higher. And she headed to London.
> 
> “Who are the single men?” she asked an Englishwoman. Among the cast list was Prince Harry.
> 
> Their meeting in a London club was described as “a blind date”. But Meghan knew exactly who she was meeting — and how much the relationship could work for her.*
> 
> Alone and miserable, Harry, then 31, was a forlorn character searching for love.
> 
> *'A DENT IN HIS REPUTATION'*
> A series of unhappy relationships and public relations disasters had put a dent in his reputation.
> 
> But his military service in Afghanistan and his creation of the Invictus Games for disabled military servicemen had added supporters to those who still recalled the enchanting small boy walking behind his mother’s coffin.
> 
> Harry fell head over heels in love. We don’t know if the actress felt the same.
> 
> One truth is certain: Harry’s closest relations including William and Prince Charles were wary whether the Hollywood divorcee would make the necessary sacrifices to serve as a loyal member of the Royal Family.
> 
> *Insiders heard how she had ended her two-year marriage to Trevor Engelson.
> 
> Without forewarning, Engelson opened a letter sent from Toronto to Los Angeles containing her wedding and engagement rings. Outraged, he told a friend: “I feel like I was a piece of something stuck to the bottom of her shoe.”*
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14256882/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-queen-tom-bower/#
> On Meghan and Harry’s brilliant wedding day in Windsor in 2018, the Royal Family genuinely embraced the bride and her mother. The waiting crowds cheered themselves hoarse. Only a few insiders could have imagined the horrors which have followed.
> 
> “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets,” Harry famously raged during the preparations. Meghan’s demand to wear a particular tiara had been vetoed by Buckingham Palace.
> 
> *Even on that sunlit day, no doubt she fumed against the Royal Family.
> 
> Like a consummate actress, she concealed her anger and smiled.* *Over the following months, stories emerged of Meghan’s tearful staff complaining of bullying and worse. Her spokespeople vigorously denied the allegations.*
> 
> Her decision to move from Kensington Palace to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor hinted at the breach with the Royal Family. Insiders could not believe that a Californian would want to live for long under the Heathrow flight path.
> 
> *Flying on a private jet to New York for a £350,000 baby shower party with US celebrities confirmed her contempt for modesty.*
> 
> *'HYPOCRISY'*
> *Refusing to show son Archie’s face to the camera after his birth and demanding privacy, while constantly speaking to US journalists, confirmed her hypocrisy.*
> 
> Friends’ criticisms of the Queen, prompted it seemed by Meghan, were outrightly rude. Insiders know there is more scandal to emerge.
> 
> *One year later, I considered writing the truth about Meghan. I knew the Royal Family and their staff had become alarmed that she threatened to become an agent of destruction.
> 
> The fragile House of Windsor feared that Meghan’s refusal to discard Hollywood’s celebrity culture and adopt the conservative traditions embraced by the palaces would doom her new marriage and jeopardise the monarchy. Those suspicions were dismissed as racist.*
> 
> That reaction was not entirely unjustified. In Britain and in America, Meghan is remarkably popular, especially among women.
> 
> Her supporters admire her ambition and outspokenness. Her critics are usually white.
> 
> Those who foresee that she and Harry are determined to plunge the country into a similar crisis as the abdication of King Edward VIII in 1936 are dismissed as prejudiced.
> 
> Yet seeing Meghan and Harry on the lawn with Oprah Winfrey, the image is strikingly similar to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after 1937.
> 
> The ex-king’s relationship with US divorcee Wallis Simpson critically damaged the monarchy.
> 
> At least the Windsors were aware of the problems.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry clearly do not care about the uproar they are causing. On the contrary, they are clearly eager for a battle.*
> 
> Buckingham Palace fears that Meghan sees outright warfare as a badge of pride.
> *In her selfish manner, she believes that she is entitled to say what she wants to Oprah Winfrey. Those who criticise her inventions are racist and sexist.*
> 
> Amid the gunfire, many are sad that Harry has been turned against his family. By appearing on US TV tonight, he has sold his soul. The outcome can only be bloody casualties in both camps.
> 
> *Britain’s monarchy will survive and Meghan won’t be Queen of England. But she clearly dreams that, when the smoke of battle disappears, she might be a US senator or even president.*
> 
> *10 questions we want to hear*
> *Here are ten questions we would like the couple to answer:
> 
> Q: *Meghan, why did you split from your first husband, film producer Trevor Engelson after just two years of marriage? Your friends were shocked and suggested you put your career first after landing a role filming Suits in Toronto.
> *Q:* Harry, don’t you think it’s odd you’ve never met your father-in-law Thomas? And Meghan why won’t you make it up to him? He is desperate to see his grandson before he dies.
> *Q:* Why did you both lecture us on climate change and then take private jets on holidays?
> *Q:* Meghan, why have reports emerged that you bullied Kensington Palace staff and why would anyone make them up?
> *Q:* Harry, how does any of this help to heal the rift with the royal family, particularly your brother William?
> *Q:* How could you bring about all this negative publicity when Prince Philip in hospital?
> 
> *Bully rap 'time up'*
> Too much time has passed for action to be taken regarding bullying claims against Meghan, says an employment rights expert.
> 
> Alex Monaco said: “There is a three-month limit for most claims and as this complaint was made in 2018, it seems that deadline has long passed.
> 
> “If normal procedures were followed then Meghan, as effective manager of the employees, should have been spoken to at the time.
> 
> “After that, it’s up to the human resources department to decide if the allegations are true and if the manager needs to be sent for retraining or even dismissed.”
> 
> MM the Queen of Hypocrisy!


Re Alex Monaco thing, as is my understanding there were complaints about her behaviour back in 2018 and Jason Knauff said he spoke to her. It is admitted even in finding freedom that M had disagreements in management. So to me this would seem to be the secondary escalation of a complaint not the initial. Evidently, it was felt l, for whatever reason, the initial conversation about M’s management was not enough.
I’m not sure if there’s a time frame in complaint escalation. Is there anyone who knows more about this?

Also I’d say there’s a limit to how helpful normal employment law is. Obviously, MM couldn’t be fired from her role even if she was still there.

Do I think the timing of the complaints seems opportune? Yes, but that is how the modern news cycle works. Most allegations against prominent figures  are made or, at least, publicised at opportune times either during their big campaigns or when the celeb is on the decline anyway.  
 This is because it’s when the media is interested in covering the story.

There have been plenty of cases of allegations being ignored for years and then suddenly the story is everywhere. 

It’s very morally questionable but it definitely isn’t the victim’s fault or means their story is fabricated.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Re Alex Monaco thing, as is my understanding there were complaints about her behaviour back in 2018 and Jason Knauff said he spoke to her. It is admitted even in finding freedom that M had disagreements in management. So to me this would seem to be the secondary escalation of a complaint not the initial. Evidently, it was felt l, for whatever reason, the initial conversation about M’s management was not enough.
> I’m not sure if there’s a time frame in complaint escalation. Is there anyone who knows more about this?
> 
> Also I’d say there’s a limit to how helpful normal employment law is. Obviously, MM couldn’t be fired from her role even if she was still there.
> 
> Do I think the timing of the complaints seems opportune? Yes, but that is how the modern news cycle works. Most allegations against prominent figures  are made or, at least, publicised at opportune times either during their big campaigns or when the celeb is on the decline anyway.
> This is because it’s when the media is interested in covering the story.
> 
> There have been plenty of cases of allegations being ignored for years and then suddenly the story is everywhere.
> 
> It’s very morally questionable but it definitely isn’t the victim’s fault or means their story is fabricated.



It's _the Palace_ that's being investigated ATM as for why they didn't follow-up the bullying accusations at the time. 

This'll mean the Palace are putting their own neck out (for the chopping block, sorry marm  ) to demonstrate what they felt compelled to hide about M (and H) and the couple's terrible behaviour. 

They will show how they they bent over backwards for H's GF/wife, disobeyed rules and laws for this woman, this new member to the RF. The victims can testify their original allegations even though this has gone way past the original 3 months (since 2018) - coz_ this_ is not what it's about in 2021. 

It's a legal dispute that the Palace hopes they will actually loose, the real 'trial' is the public's perception of M as victim/perpetrator/bully and how the RF protected her in the past.


----------



## scarlet555

Just saw a twitter from Chrissy Teigen c/o that people are mean to Nutty and they won’t stop until she miscarries... well duh, that’s a no brainer, the stress of pregnancy alone to the body is plenty, she invites the paps, the interviews when she is pregnant so she can be a seen as vulnerable and anyone attacking her is attacking ‘a helpless pregnant’ woman.  I see what she is doing, but if you don[‘t want stress, you don’t get stress.  You know, there is Montana, Alaska, many states where even the pap cant be too bothered to go.  She waited to get pregnant to get her interview so the press would be more gentle and sympathetic towards her and people would inadvertently defend her (state of pregnancy)=she is a sick disgusting power hungry loser.  The redhead is an idiot and a prop, definitely complicit at every turn-that guy may never wake up.  
I’m glad so many articles are calling her out.


----------



## Chagall

How ridiculous of her to say she wasn’t allowed to speak her mind. Everybody has to edit what they say and think to some degree. We have to keep how we really feel about a lot of people and situations to ourselves. It’s often important to self preservation. They might discover how very much the truth will ‘set them free’.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Had to post this cartoon.


----------



## floatinglili

Now that the full extent of the bullying allegations have come to light (tea throwing, staff breaking down in tears) I am wondering if more will come to light regarding the University hazing incident where younger students had their eyelids superglued together. ?? Crazy stuff. 
Very graphic and detailed comment under the Candice Owen DM article unfortunately can’t find that comment now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Now hopefully we will find out whether the tea-throwing on Australia tour was just rumour or not! 

*Meghan Markle bullying claims: Bust-ups with aides during royal tour of Australia to be focus of probe*









						Meghan's bust-ups with aides on Oz royal tour to be focus of bullying probe
					

EXPLOSIVE bust-ups between the Duchess of Sussex and her aides during the royal tour of Australia are to be the focus of the Buckingham Palace bullying probe. The 16-day trip in 2018 is said to hav…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

The latest word out there is Thomas Markle will be on Pier Morgan next week! Now I would watch that.


----------



## floatinglili

Re the often-discussed nazi dress ups for the red headed one. 
While I have plenty of respect for everyone else’s opinions on the topic (and lord knows I am not a fan
Of Hazza) one aspect I feel that is underplayed is the cultural context of nazism as viewed by some British.
I don’t presume to speak for British ppl as I myself am Australian, but I was fed a steady diet of British comedy in my child hood and in those postwar years there was much ridicule to be made of the Nazis. Presumably because Germany lost, I suppose, and also to diffuse the sheer horror of the war and also the great pain and incredible loss that Britain (and the Allies generally) suffered in the course of the war. 
Although I am not a fan of Harry, and yes was not wise for a young man in his position to go there, I do not ‘read’ his costume as specifically pro Nazi, even though he was wearing it, if you follow me. Recall John Cleese and the type of hysterical humour poking fun of the Nazis which was a part and parcel of British culture until more recently.
This kind of silliness would probably would not be tolerated now at all. 
Flame me if you must but I felt this reading had been missing from the thread.
Still think Harry is an underwhelming intellectual lightweight and pompous shallow ass. But is it is fault? He is the end result of a sheltered gene pool and lifestyle ultimately.


----------



## pukasonqo

floatinglili said:


> Re the often-discussed nazi dress ups for the red headed one.
> While I have plenty of respect for everyone else’s opinions on the topic (and lord knows I am not a fan
> Of Hazza) one aspect I feel that is underplayed is the cultural context of nazism as viewed by some British.
> I don’t presume to speak for British ppl as I myself am Australian, but I was fed a steady diet of British comedy in my child hood and in those postwar years there was much ridicule to be made of the Nazis. Presumably because Germany lost, I suppose, and also to diffuse the sheer horror of the war and also the great pain and incredible loss that Britain (and the Allies generally) suffered in the course of the war.
> Although I am not a fan of Harry, and yes was not wise for a young man in his position to go there, I do not ‘read’ his costume as specifically pro Nazi, even though he was wearing it, if you follow me. Recall John Cleese and the type of hysterical humour poking fun of the Nazis which was a part and parcel of British culture until more recently.
> This kind of silliness would probably would not be tolerated now at all.
> Flame me if you must but I felt this reading had been missing from the thread.
> Still think Harry is an underwhelming intellectual lightweight and pompous shallow ass. But is it is fault? He is the end result of a sheltered gene pool and lifestyle ultimately.


 The difference is that John Cleese was not wearing a Nazi armband and was very obviously making fun of Basil (his character) being tactless w his German guests
A bit like saying that Hazza wearing the Nazi armband is like Mel Brooks in “The Producers”, there was no irony or mocking in Hazza’s choice but a spoilt rich twat showing lack of insight and historical knowledge


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> Re the often-discussed nazi dress ups for the red headed one.
> While I have plenty of respect for everyone else’s opinions on the topic (and lord knows I am not a fan
> Of Hazza) one aspect I feel that is underplayed is the cultural context of nazism as viewed by some British.
> I don’t presume to speak for British ppl as I myself am Australian, but I was fed a steady diet of British comedy in my child hood and in those postwar years there was much ridicule to be made of the Nazis. Presumably because Germany lost, I suppose, and also to diffuse the sheer horror of the war and also the great pain and incredible loss that Britain (and the Allies generally) suffered in the course of the war.
> Although I am not a fan of Harry, and yes was not wise for a young man in his position to go there, I do not ‘read’ his costume as specifically pro Nazi, even though he was wearing it, if you follow me. Recall John Cleese and the type of hysterical humour poking fun of the Nazis which was a part and parcel of British culture until more recently.
> This kind of silliness would probably would not be tolerated now at all.
> Flame me if you must but I felt this reading had been missing from the thread.
> Still think Harry is an underwhelming intellectual lightweight and pompous shallow ass. But is it is fault? He is the end result of a sheltered gene pool and lifestyle ultimately.



John Cleese was playing the role of an ass (Faulty Towers) and everyone (was supposed to be) embarrassed by him.

People who dress-up in offensive costumes _are_ "underwhelming intellectual lightweight(s) and pompous shallow ass(zz)", agreed.

Maybe H could dress-up as a 'Moorish' slave-trader next Halloween/fancy dress party?


----------



## floatinglili

I see what you are saying paperTiger and yes a moorish slave driver seems like it would have been a very suitable festive costume for a dress up party back in the day. Not in today’s day though!! Come to think of it, cross dressing hetero guys seem to have gone past the use by date as well. Costume parties - and comedy - is a little trickier these days.
The best part of historic British humour was its irony.
Edited for typo


----------



## Jktgal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> What a read!  Astute clairvoyant and accurate.



Not really. The people in this thread predicted most of them way back when, down to the fake liberal/feminist/kidness woke-ness.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> John Cleese was playing the role of an ass (Faulty Towers) and everyone (was supposed to be) embarrassed by him.
> 
> People who dress-up in offensive costumes _are_ "underwhelming intellectual lightweight(s) and pompous shallow ass(zz)", agreed.
> 
> Maybe H could dress-up as a 'Moorish' slave-trader next Halloween/fancy dress party?


The difference for Harry is he is not a comedian! He at the time was a grown up man who represented the crown as part of the RF. He should have known better than turning up at a party in that costume!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I saw one clip of the O interview where O asked a question and MM’s eyes started blinking furiously before and possibly during part of her answer.  To me this was a red flag that MM was lying.  I seem to recall body language experts saying that is the sign of someone lying.


----------



## chicinthecity777

*The worst is yet to come out! *








						Aides vow to 'come out swinging' with fresh revelations against Meghan
					

ROYAL aides have vowed to “come out swinging” with fresh revelations on the Duchess of Sussex if Meghan and Harry attack any individuals in their interview with Oprah. A source familiar…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## chicinthecity777

From Sky Australia.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> After she was written out in 2016, her career hit a brick wall. Adrift but undaunted in Toronto, she orchestrated a new start.



Wait...I thought she gave up Suits after she and Harry got serious? Now that's...interesting.



> Harry fell head over heels in love. We don’t know if the actress felt the same.



Ouch. (spoiler alert: I doubt it)

*



			Q:
		
Click to expand...

*


> Meghan, why did you split from your first husband, film producer Trevor Engelson after just two years of marriage? Your friends were shocked and suggested you put your career first after landing a role filming Suits in Toronto.
> *Q:* Harry, don’t you think it’s odd you’ve never met your father-in-law Thomas? And Meghan why won’t you make it up to him? He is desperate to see his grandson before he dies.
> *Q:* Why did you both lecture us on climate change and then take private jets on holidays?
> *Q:* Meghan, why have reports emerged that you bullied Kensington Palace staff and why would anyone make them up?
> *Q:* Harry, how does any of this help to heal the rift with the royal family, particularly your brother William?
> *Q:* How could you bring about all this negative publicity when Prince Philip in hospital?



I'd love to hear their answers.

BTW my own sister critisized me for critisizing Meghan as recent as last summer. Today she asked me what was wrong with her and why she was waging war against the BRF after skimming the news.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Have a 'Great' Relationship With the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II after stepping down from royal duties in 2020 — find out more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little over one year after they announced their decision to step down from their roles as senior members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain close with Queen Elizabeth II.



I was typing out "I'll have what that journalist has been drinking" when I saw it was Scobie. I wonder, does he really believe the nonsense he writes?

I mean, she openly says during their interview they don't have a good relationship.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.



I won't watch (I think it would be in the middle of the night for me anyway?), but I'm so here for the comments.


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> I see what you are saying paperTiger and yes a moorish slave driver seems like it would have been a very suitable festive costume for a dress up party back in the day. Not in today’s day though!! Come to think of it, cross dressing hetero guys seem to have gone past the use by date as well. Costume parties - and comedy - is a little trickier these days.
> The best part of historic British humour was its irony.
> Edited for typo



Except in Europe the threat of the far-Right has never left. Or the far-Left for that matter. Unfortunately, we still have many that dress-up in uniforms with no ironic refs at all. 

The best part of British humour is when it's actually funny, not hurtful. Historic, cheap British humour that was tolerated through canned laughter and kept 'others' in their place was never funny, never. It's just anyone who objected or just didn't laugh just didn't get the 'irony'. It was mostly done to remind people to keep in the place (including class - like jokes about 'chavs') 

I understand that there are discussions on 'the use of' Nazi uniforms (_The Night Porter_, _The Producers_ or _Cabaret_ TV sketch shows etc) but that's nothing to do with someone in the line of succession (No. 3 - as he was then) wearing the uniform more than half of Europe still convulses against (including Germany - where he would have been arrested).

H never did anything as an ironic/comedic/artistic/stylistic statement, he wouldn't have have a clue, and it's Harry we're discussing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> Just saw a twitter from Chrissy Teigen c/o that people are mean to Nutty and they won’t stop until she miscarries...



Oh Chrissie. I stopped finding her entertaining a long time ago because I thought she grew increasingly vulgar. I felt for her when she had her late-term abortion (not throwing dirt here at all...while it's been widely described as miscarriage she herself has said they had to end the pregnancy to keep her from bleeding out and - again, her own words - like with her dogs she had had to put down in the past she made her doctors wait until the moment felt right to her). But this is just eyeroll-inducingly dramatic and stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> The latest word out there is Thomas Markle will be on Pier Morgan next week! Now I would watch that.



I can help but hope this is untrue. Sure, he probably feels like he wants to speak his truth, and rightfully so. But it will just be tragic and he'll be eaten alive by the stans as he is not that media-savvy.


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> Not really. The people in this thread predicted most of them way back when, down to the fake liberal/feminist/kidness woke-ness.



The biggest con people and best psychopaths prey on other's desire to be seen as good, compassionate and helpful. We need minds of our own.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> The difference for Harry is he is not a comedian! He at the time was a grown up man who represented the crown as part of the RF. He should have known better than turning up at a party in that costume!



But don't you know, it was all William's fault.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> *The worst is yet to come out! *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aides vow to 'come out swinging' with fresh revelations against Meghan
> 
> 
> ROYAL aides have vowed to “come out swinging” with fresh revelations on the Duchess of Sussex if Meghan and Harry attack any individuals in their interview with Oprah. A source familiar…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Now suddenly 2021 doesn't seem so drab anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Except in Europe the threat of the far-Right has never left. Or the far-Left for that matter. Unfortunately, we still have many that dress-up in uniforms with no ironic refs at all.



I'm in Germany, the very country of Nazism, and we have a far-right party at the Bundestag who smartly used the refugee crisis to gain traction that has just been declared as suspicious by our Office for the Protection of the Constitution. They were to be monitored nationwide, but a court threw that out. 

I mean, if Germany of all countries hasn't learned enough from a not so far away past!



> I understand that there are discussions on 'the use of' Nazi uniforms (_The Night Porter_, _The Producers_ or _Cabaret_ TV sketch shows etc) but that's nothing to do with someone in the line of succession (No. 3 - as he was then) wearing the uniform more than half of Europe still convulses against (*including Germany - where he would have been arrested*).



Jup.


----------



## bag-mania

Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load. 

Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.

Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:

1) my voice
2) my truth
3) my choice
4) liberating

If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.

In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.

Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Sun article:



> At one point Meghan is claimed to have lost her temper with an assistant and a hot drink was knocked over.



I feel we're getting there. While still entirely and completely inappropriate, especially if the staff member in question suffered burns, this sounds quite a bit more believable than "threw the cup of tea at x".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> 
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> 
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> 
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.



Eat a chocolate each time you mean?   I think 5) the Firm needs to be a clue, too.


----------



## rose60610

How much gall and arrogance does one have to have to even contemplate taking on the BRF?  We see a complete nobody (well, a pretty lady with chicken legs and hair extensions) target Harry, morph him into a cyranoid* (Cyranoids are "people who do not speak thoughts originating in their own central nervous system") turned him against his family so she could leverage that family's fame and fortune into her own private enterprise.
You're only as strong as your weakest link. 
Well, Meghan located and conquered the weakest link and look what we got: a spoiled, whiny pathetic couple who despite their millions presumed their best strategy is to portray themselves as the ultimate victims. They look like fools.
Meghan is, however, useful as a Public Service Announcement. Investigate ulterior motives of those who seek to ingratiate themselves into your circle. Recognize others like her as being the grenade to destroy all you have worked for, then hear them cry: "I'm a victim!"

*I just heard about "cyranoids" from a TV episode of Blacklist and thought of Harry right away


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> 
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> 
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> 
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.


Guys guys guys 

Are we doing lo cal bingo cards or hits ? 

working On my appetizer menu and shopping list now


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eat a chocolate each time you mean?   I think 5) the Firm needs to be a clue, too.



Absolutely!  If the night goes as expected I might have to switch over to chocolate after the first hour or else my posts may become incoherent.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I know some of you have made the decision to not watch tomorrow and I respect that choice. However, for those of you who don’t mind inflicting a little self-torture (like me) I hope you will join me for viewer party tomorrow night. We can watch the fiasco together and make our comments as we go.
> 
> I realize we are in different time zones but I think we can make it work. I’m on the east coast so let’s get this party started at 8 PM ET. Be sure to have your alcoholic beverage of choice handy. Let’s have fun with it and make it our own!!


I said I wouldn't watch but now I'm thinking I'll record it so I can watch parts if I want


----------



## rose60610

I think we could all get hammered on just the references to "Diana": "Harry's mom", "H's revered mother", "The most beloved woman of all time", "Archie's grandmother" etc. Diana is the biggest marketing tool for H&M so she must be exploited as much as possible. Of course, we're not supposed to catch on because Meghan is a genius and no one is capable of seeing through her %&*#.  

Ten bucks says at some point Meghan is going to pretend to hold back tears and Harry will quickly reach into his suit coat pocket for a freshly pressed and monogrammed handkerchief to hand her. She's going to dab her eyes and mutter "I'm sorry, this is hard for me," sniff, "but I have to get my truth out".


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Here is the thing about the aftermath of the Sunday program. Will people be incredulous at the whinathon or will they be sympathetic?  Given the hardships experienced I don’t see how it could be the latter, but you never can tell.  Meghan can not sit there and complain without giving specific instances and proof.   I saw a report from a man who claimed he viewed a good portion of it and he said she was making it up as she went along and she was in it for the drama alone. Some people are like that and they love nothing better than going from crisis to crisis. They’re attention hounds, and that much I do think is true about her.


agree she is an attention whore....and she is also extremely self-important.  imagine being accepted with open arms by the queen of england and slapping her in the face? (while her husband lies possibly dying)


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Politically incorrect is when someone uses an out of date term for something. Dressing up in a Nazi uniform is more than politically incorrect.
> 
> British citizens are the subjects of Harry's *grandmother* the Queen. We have no constitution. Our national anthem is 'hym', an exaltation to her, our passports shows we have her permission to travel given by her, our money carries her portrait.
> 
> It would take an article to explain how astonishing that the grandson of our monarch thought about wearing a Nazi uniform, never mind actually obtaining it from somewhere and going out.
> 
> Had his great-uncle remained King, then it may have made sense (although I wouldn't be here to see it).


and I had forgotten the occasion for this....it wasn't a costume party but a formal dinner?


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> From Sky Australia.



did Oprah try to look her worst for the interview in order for M to look better?  those glasses


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I think we could all get hammered on just the references to "Diana": "Harry's mom", "H's revered mother", "The most beloved woman of all time", "Archie's grandmother" etc. Diana is the biggest marketing tool for H&M so she must be exploited as much as possible. Of course, we're not supposed to catch on because Meghan is a genius and no one is capable of seeing through her %&*#.
> 
> *Ten bucks says at some point Meghan is going to pretend to hold back tears and Harry will quickly reach into his suit coat pocket for a freshly pressed and monogrammed handkerchief to hand her. She's going to dab her eyes and mutter "I'm sorry, this is hard for me," sniff, "but I have to get my truth out".*



I'm not betting because I know you've already read the script!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh Chrissie. I stopped finding her entertaining a long time ago because I thought she grew increasingly vulgar. I felt for her when she had her late-term abortion (not throwing dirt here at all...while it's been widely described as miscarriage she herself has said they had to end the pregnancy to keep her from bleeding out and - again, her own words - like with her dogs she had had to put down in the past she made her doctors wait until the moment felt right to her). But this is just eyeroll-inducingly dramatic and stupid.


yes, I don't care how many followers you have some things should be private


----------



## Tootsie17

I am going to tune in, but I doubt I will last the entire two hours. H& M's funds must be getting low. The need to do an interview now seems nothing more than a plea for pity from Hollywood to up their bankability.  I guess M thinks the optics look good for a pregnant woman to wallow in being a victim, and she will definitely show off her Z-list acting skills.   OK, bag-mania, I'll watch for a while, until I become to nauseous to continue. Let the games begin!


----------



## bag-mania

Tootsie17 said:


> I am going to tune in, but I doubt I will last the entire two hours. H& M's funds must be getting low. The need to do an interview now seems nothing more than a plea for pity from Hollywood to up their bankability.  I guess M thinks the optics look good for a pregnant woman to wallow in being a victim, and she will definitely show off her Z-list acting skills.  *OK, bag-mania, I'll watch for a while, until I become to nauseous to continue. *Let the games begin!



It’ll be fun because we make it fun, you’ll see.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> agree she is an attention whore....and she is also extremely self-important.  imagine being accepted with open arms by the queen of england and slapping her in the face? (while her husband lies possibly dying)


Dang!  Thousands of posts in a nutshell.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maryg1

bag-mania said:


> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.


add “empowering” to your list, it will get you tipsy in less than 10 minutes


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and I had forgotten the occasion for this....it wasn't a costume party but a formal dinner?



Friend's fancy dress Bday party in 2005. Plenty there were not wearing fancy dress at all so we only have Clarence House PR machine to say it was fancy dress.

His future in the British armed forces was called into question - but by who it's not clear - nothing came of that either, swept under the carpet in half-sentence apology(-ish) . 

"If it was anyone else the application wouldn't be considered. It should be withdrawn immediately." Perhaps there should be a historic probe into that decision like M's - alleged - bullying allegations?









						Royal family caught up in Nazi row
					

Clarence House was last night forced into a major damage limitation exercise after Prince Harry was pictured on the front page of the Sun in Nazi uniform at a fancy dress party. By Sam Jones.




					www.theguardian.com
				




https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326 'Highs and lows of Prince Harry's royal life - including 'Nazi' uniform and naked game' 12:55, 31 MAR 2020


----------



## pukasonqo

I think her career is officially over, especially after the interview no studio/producer/director would risk giving MM a role and run the risk of being treated the same way she treats the BRF
But then is Hollyweird I am speaking about and her stans might pay to see their goddess on a big screen
About stans, cannot understand their emotional investment on someone who, ver likely, does not personally gives an eff about any of them


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> I think her career is officially over, especially after the interview no studio/producer/director would risk giving MM a role and run the risk of being treated the same way she treats the BRF
> But then is Hollyweird I am speaking about and her stans might pay to see their goddess on a big screen
> About stans, cannot understand their emotional investment on someone who, ver likely, does not personally gives an eff about any of them


I doubt her stans would be a large enough audience to make money on a film.  but I could be wrong.  if somehow she got the wider POC audience that could be a money maker.  what's she gonna be in? a comic book action film?  with those skinny little legs?  LOL


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Friend's fancy dress Bday party in 2005. Plenty there were not wearing fancy dress at all so we only have Clarence House PR machine to say it was fancy dress.
> 
> His future in the British armed forces was called into question - but by who it's not clear - nothing came of that either, swept under the carpet in half-sentence apology(-ish) .
> 
> "If it was anyone else the application wouldn't be considered. It should be withdrawn immediately." Perhaps there should be a historic probe into that decision like M's - alleged - bullying allegations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal family caught up in Nazi row
> 
> 
> Clarence House was last night forced into a major damage limitation exercise after Prince Harry was pictured on the front page of the Sun in Nazi uniform at a fancy dress party. By Sam Jones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326 'Highs and lows of Prince Harry's royal life - including 'Nazi' uniform and naked game' 12:55, 31 MAR 2020


what a sense of humor he had!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> How ridiculous of her to say she wasn’t allowed to speak her mind. Everybody has to edit what they say and think to some degree. We have to keep how we really feel about a lot of people and situations to ourselves. It’s often important to self preservation. They might discover how very much the truth will ‘set them free’.


Very true!  In all reality, I’ve held back quite a bit in how I feel about her!


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm in the US so I'm wondering if anyone knows where I can watch the BRF broadcast online and at what time (UK time, that is) before Cringe's crocodile tears interview


----------



## sdkitty

reading this article, we are definitely in the minority as far as the US goes....but the writer seems a bit skeptical to me

SussexSquad v The Firm: Why Harry and Meghan are winning the PR war in America (yahoo.com)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I doubt *her stans* would be a large enough audience to make money on a film.  but I could be wrong.  if somehow she got the wider POC audience that could be a money maker.  what's she gonna be in? a comic book action film?  with those skinny little legs?  LOL


I've read enough articles stating that many of her stans are bots, so I doubt very many bots could attend her movies.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Not sure if I have done this correctly ..


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> Just saw a twitter from Chrissy Teigen c/o that people are mean to Nutty and they won’t stop until she miscarries... well duh, that’s a no brainer, the stress of pregnancy alone to the body is plenty, she invites the paps, the interviews when she is pregnant so she can be a seen as vulnerable and anyone attacking her is attacking ‘a helpless pregnant’ woman.  I see what she is doing, but if you don[‘t want stress, you don’t get stress.  You know, there is Montana, Alaska, many states where even the pap cant be too bothered to go.  She waited to get pregnant to get her interview so the press would be more gentle and sympathetic towards her and people would inadvertently defend her (state of pregnancy)=she is a sick disgusting power hungry loser.  The redhead is an idiot and a prop, definitely complicit at every turn-that guy may never wake up.
> I’m glad so many articles are calling her out.



I like Chrissy but she was clearly speaking from a triggered place because of her own issues. I take her views here with a grain of salt.


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> Very true!  In all reality, I’ve held back quite a bit in how I feel about her!


Hey guess what?  Lucky you, holding back your thoughts bc you’re a little lady, little victim(eye roll)..time for that Oprah interview....to discuss how you’ve been suppress and oppressed, it’s tough being you I say....I mean never as tough as Nutty, having been married in a multimillion dollar wedding and then constantly being bullied by BRF and their staff, due to sexism, racism, or just for existing... having a million dollar wardrobe, a supporting husband, being paid to do nothing, flying private jet, living and renovating a multimillion dollar cottage-that’s not nearly enough...


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's _the Palace_ that's being investigated ATM as for why they didn't follow-up the bullying accusations at the time.
> 
> This'll mean the Palace are putting their own neck out (for the chopping block, sorry marm  ) to demonstrate what they felt compelled to hide about M (and H) and the couple's terrible behaviour.
> 
> They will show how they they bent over backwards for H's GF/wife, disobeyed rules and laws for this woman, this new member to the RF. The victims can testify their original allegations even though this has gone way past the original 3 months (since 2018) - coz_ this_ is not what it's about in 2021.
> 
> It's a legal dispute that the Palace hopes they will actually loose, the real 'trial' is the public's perception of M as victim/perpetrator/bully and how the RF protected her in the past.


Thank you for the clarification.
I did think the palace comes out of it looking bad but essentially that’s on purpose- they are admitting to fudging the investigation for H&M’s sake. we shall see how it 



floatinglili said:


> Re the often-discussed nazi dress ups for the red headed one.
> While I have plenty of respect for everyone else’s opinions on the topic (and lord knows I am not a fan
> Of Hazza) one aspect I feel that is underplayed is the cultural context of nazism as viewed by some British.
> I don’t presume to speak for British ppl as I myself am Australian, but I was fed a steady diet of British comedy in my child hood and in those postwar years there was much ridicule to be made of the Nazis. Presumably because Germany lost, I suppose, and also to diffuse the sheer horror of the war and also the great pain and incredible loss that Britain (and the Allies generally) suffered in the course of the war.
> Although I am not a fan of Harry, and yes was not wise for a young man in his position to go there, I do not ‘read’ his costume as specifically pro Nazi, even though he was wearing it, if you follow me. Recall John Cleese and the type of hysterical humour poking fun of the Nazis which was a part and parcel of British culture until more recently.
> This kind of silliness would probably would not be tolerated now at all.
> Flame me if you must but I felt this reading had been missing from the thread.
> Still think Harry is an underwhelming intellectual lightweight and pompous shallow ass. But is it is fault? He is the end result of a sheltered gene pool and lifestyle ultimately.


I disagree with your interpretation and I don’t think the analogy to Basil works. I think Harry knew enough about the nazis (sheltered life or otherwise) to know what an outrage it would cause and ignored any advice against it because he wanted attention and to ‘get a rise out of people.’
A consistent feature of his character way before MM has been he likes to pick a fight with the press for
 ‘getting in his face’ while actually  provoking the situation. The fact that he did this by wearing something which represents the death of millions is not a misinterpretation of cultural norms on his part but a sign of the deep contempt and disregard he has for others & his invulnerability to the consequences of his actions.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Thank you for the clarification.
> I did think the palace comes out of it looking bad but essentially that’s on purpose- they are admitting to fudging the investigation for H&M’s sake. we shall see how it
> 
> 
> I disagree with your interpretation and I don’t think the analogy to Basil works. I think Harry knew enough about the nazis (sheltered life or otherwise) to know what an outrage it would cause and ignored any advice against it because he wanted attention and to ‘get a rise out of people.’
> A consistent feature of his character way before MM has been he likes to pick a fight with the press for
> ‘getting in his face’ while actually  provoking the situation. The fact that he did this by wearing something which represents the death of millions is not a misinterpretation of cultural norms on his part but a sign of the deep contempt and disregard he has for others & his invulnerability to the consequences of his actions.


well he was young and immature then so I'm sure M has given him a pass on that behavior - esp since he was in a position to make her rich and famous beyond her wildest dreams


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the PartyBoy shirt -  there are so many ‘party’ costumes someone can wear. Why choose a most offensive one?  It smacks of someone desperately needing attention [‘thirsty’ as the kids say] and desperately immature. Very poor decision making skills.


Yes, yes, it is only speculation, possibly wishful thinking, but I must smile at the phrase “cheesed off”








						Queen 'may strip Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after Oprah interview'
					

Buckingham Palace courtiers are said to have held crisis talks about stripping Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles




					www.mirror.co.uk
				





Spoiler: QE “cheesed off”



*Queen 'may strip Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after Oprah interview'*
*Buckingham Palace courtiers are said to have held crisis talks about stripping Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles*
Ryan Merrifield
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be stripped of their titles, *with the Queen said to be "pretty cheesed off" by their interview with Oprah Winfrey, it has been reported.*

Senior courtiers are understood to have held crisis talks at Buckingham Palace in recent days, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's controversial tell-all chat to air tonight in the US.

The pair - who chose to live as private citizens in the US before buying a £10.1 million mansion in Santa Barbara - have already had their royal patronages taken away.

War veteran Harry has also lost his military titles, including his cherished captain general of the Royal Marines.

Taking away the dukedom would, in effect, go against last year's Sandringham agreement after they both announced they would be stepping down.

_*Do you think Harry and Meghan should lose their titles? Let us know in the comments*_






Meghan and Harry's tell-all interview airs in the US tonight (Image: AFP via Getty Images)
It appears no definitive decision was made during Palace talks last week, but is was concluded Harry could lose his title or be asked to give it back, according to reports.

However, courtiers are said to be keen for him to retain the right to being addressed as HRH, which was conveyed on him at birth.

That was previously taken away from his mum Diana, Princess of Wales, after her divorce from Prince Charles.

If it is taken away Harry would also be removed as sixth in line to the throne, which would require legislation.





The Queen confirmed last month Harry and Meghan would not return as working royals (Image: Getty Images)
The issue is yet to be raised with the monarch, who would have final approval, it has been reported.

“There were talks at the Palace looking at how you strip him of his dukedom,” a source told The Times.

“It has never been done before but there are people who think it is both feasible and desirable.”

Another insider is said to have compared the situation to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor who continued "trading on their links" to the Royal Family for years after Edward VIII abdicated.

“Even though it’s going to be dreadfully disruptive now, you need to sort this out. Otherwise you’re living with this for 40 or 50 years,” they added.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The wrong shade of red!









						Meghan 'went mental over wrong colour blankets', sources claim
					

Not long after she became engaged to Prince Harry, Meghan hosted a get-together at Sandringham for her fiance's friends. She told her PA to get blankets for each guest, a source claims.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> I see what you are saying paperTiger and yes a moorish slave driver seems like it would have been a very suitable festive costume for a dress up party back in the day. Not in today’s day though!! Come to think of it, cross dressing hetero guys seem to have gone past the use by date as well. Costume parties - and comedy - is a little trickier these days.
> The best part of historic British humour was its irony.
> Edited for typo


I think there’s still a rich strain of irony in British culture and humour. 
Without wishing to sound pretentious I think a big part of the interest in the whole markle debacle is that it is positively swimming in irony.
There is also still plenty of subversive, ironic British humour out there but it tends to be framed with a bit more subtlety.
 Comedians in general are a lot more aware that their material can be misread and used to justify actual  prejudices. 
I would say a good example of this is Chris Rock no longer doing his ‘n words vs black people’ routine because of how it has been abused.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’ll be fun because we make it fun, you’ll see.


so it's been expanded to two hours.  CBS must feel they have a winner.  but really is the general public interested.  using my DH as a a gauge, I'm thinking not.  will see


----------



## chicinthecity777

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm in the US so I'm wondering if anyone knows where I can watch the BRF broadcast online and at what time (UK time, that is) before Cringe's crocodile tears interview


I don't know for sure but try BBC America?


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> John Cleese was playing the role of an ass (Faulty Towers) and everyone (was supposed to be) embarrassed by him.
> 
> People who dress-up in offensive costumes _are_ "underwhelming intellectual lightweight(s) and pompous shallow ass(zz)", agreed.
> 
> Maybe H could dress-up as a 'Moorish' slave-trader next Halloween/fancy dress party?


Wouldn’t that set off a firestorm?  As someone previously posted, I don't hear many celebrities speak up about racism towards Asians (unless the celebrity is Asian) or Jews (which never made sense to me, as so much of Hollywood is Jewish!).  If we are to truly be "equal", then every type of racism should be admonished, and every group celebrated and equal, whether they're black, Asian, even Caucasian.  Equal is equal.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the PartyBoy shirt -  there are so many ‘party’ costumes someone can wear. Why choose a most offensive one?  It smacks of someone desperately needing attention [‘thirsty’ as the kids say] and desperately immature. Very poor decision making skills.
> 
> 
> Yes, yes, it is only speculation, possibly wishful thinking, but I must smile at the phrase “cheesed off”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen 'may strip Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace courtiers are said to have held crisis talks about stripping Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: QE “cheesed off”
> 
> 
> 
> *Queen 'may strip Harry and Meghan of their Sussex titles after Oprah interview'*
> *Buckingham Palace courtiers are said to have held crisis talks about stripping Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles*
> Ryan Merrifield
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be stripped of their titles, *with the Queen said to be "pretty cheesed off" by their interview with Oprah Winfrey, it has been reported.*
> 
> Senior courtiers are understood to have held crisis talks at Buckingham Palace in recent days, with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's controversial tell-all chat to air tonight in the US.
> 
> The pair - who chose to live as private citizens in the US before buying a £10.1 million mansion in Santa Barbara - have already had their royal patronages taken away.
> 
> War veteran Harry has also lost his military titles, including his cherished captain general of the Royal Marines.
> 
> Taking away the dukedom would, in effect, go against last year's Sandringham agreement after they both announced they would be stepping down.
> 
> _*Do you think Harry and Meghan should lose their titles? Let us know in the comments*_
> 
> 
> It appears no definitive decision was made during Palace talks last week, but is was concluded Harry could lose his title or be asked to give it back, according to reports.
> 
> However, courtiers are said to be keen for him to retain the right to being addressed as HRH, which was conveyed on him at birth.
> 
> That was previously taken away from his mum Diana, Princess of Wales, after her divorce from Prince Charles.
> 
> If it is taken away Harry would also be removed as sixth in line to the throne, which would require legislation.
> 
> The Queen confirmed last month Harry and Meghan would not return as working royals (Image: Getty Images)
> The issue is yet to be raised with the monarch, who would have final approval, it has been reported.
> 
> “There were talks at the Palace looking at how you strip him of his dukedom,” a source told The Times.
> 
> “It has never been done before but there are people who think it is both feasible and desirable.”
> 
> Another insider is said to have compared the situation to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor who continued "trading on their links" to the Royal Family for years after Edward VIII abdicated.
> 
> “Even though it’s going to be dreadfully disruptive now, you need to sort this out. Otherwise you’re living with this for 40 or 50 years,” they added.



I really hope she will!  Remove the HRH especially.  Meg is nothing but a Royal Pain in the A$$!


----------



## mellibelly

Let’s not forget Harry’s use of “r*ghead” and “our little p*ki”. The guy is a disgusting moron. Imagine what racial slurs he’s used over the years that weren’t caught on tape.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> Let’s not forget Harry’s use of “r*ghead” and “our little p*ki”. The guy is a disgusting moron. Imagine what racial slurs he’s used over the years that weren’t caught on tape.


Yep!  But don't forget, he's suddenly WOKE.  He's been with his little wifey for almost 5 years, so he's now so in tune with all the racism she's faced 
Just because you're married to someone of a different race doesn't suddenly make you completely aware of what they've gone through (and honestly, in Meg's case, I don't think she went through much).  I've been with my husband for almost 25 years, and he definitely understands now much more than ever the difficulties POCs face, but he can't begin to claim to know internally what it feels like on a personal level.  To claim so, I think, is very insulting.


----------



## mellibelly

Yes, suddenly racism matters when it affects his biracial wife and him by proxy. Prince of Hypocrites


----------



## chicinthecity777

Brave woman! She too will be eaten alive!

*'Cry me a river... the plight of being a game show host to suffering in a palace with Oprah on speed dial': Former Real Housewives of New York star Bethenny Frankel slams Meghan Markle ahead of explosive interview alongside Prince Harry tonight*


----------



## mellibelly

I still LOL at the Windsors tv show running gag that Harry doesn’t know how to read


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Except in Europe the threat of the far-Right has never left. Or the far-Left for that matter. Unfortunately, we still have many that dress-up in uniforms with no ironic refs at all.
> 
> The best part of British humour is when it's actually funny, not hurtful. Historic, cheap British humour that was tolerated through canned laughter and kept 'others' in their place was never funny, never. It's just anyone who objected or just didn't laugh just didn't get the 'irony'. It was mostly done to remind people to keep in the place (including class - like jokes about 'chavs')
> 
> I understand that there are discussions on 'the use of' Nazi uniforms (_The Night Porter_, _The Producers_ or _Cabaret_ TV sketch shows etc) but that's nothing to do with someone in the line of succession (No. 3 - as he was then) wearing the uniform more than half of Europe still convulses against (including Germany - where he would have been arrested).
> 
> H never did anything as an ironic/comedic/artistic/stylistic statement, he wouldn't have have a clue, and it's Harry we're discussing.


Well said. We should never forget that just because the UK is relatively tolerant and relatively safe that the growth of extremism in all forms is a real and persistent threat.

Harry has never made a joke in his life apart from being one. He wore the costume  to ‘troll’ people and get attention and show he was immune to consequence. It was a malicious act and the only reason he’s not doing so now is because he knows he can’t get away with it anymore in the days of social media.

 (I honestly don’t know what MM thinks of this incident. When I first heard he planned to marry a biracial woman I wondered whether she knew about the nazi outfit.)

OT but this sort of dubious stereotyping humour was still going on so late. This is why I can’t stand David Walliams and Matt Lucas’ smug, offensive faces.


----------



## chicinthecity777

mellibelly said:


> I still LOL at the Windsors tv show running gag that Harry doesn’t know how to read


Nor did he know where was North America!


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> I’ll do my best and watch as long as I can stand it.



You're brave....I wouldn't watch it even if I had a gun to my head, I really have no patience with these two


----------



## bubablu

bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> 
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> 
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> 
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.


Add "organic" to the list. It was the word that put me off during the engagement interview. (I was SO right!)
I would love to be with you all, but I'm in Italy and I didn't even wake up for the Prada cup, that I loved. Like Lizzie I won't lose my beauty sleep for this two. But I will read everything tomorrow morning!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> *Wouldn’t that set off a firestorm?*  As someone previously posted, I don't hear many celebrities speak up about racism towards Asians (unless the celebrity is Asian) or Jews (which never made sense to me, as so much of Hollywood is Jewish!).  If we are to truly be "equal", then every type of racism should be admonished, and every group celebrated and equal, whether they're black, Asian, even Caucasian.  Equal is equal.



Well exactly. That was my point. An unequivocal firestorm (I hope).


----------



## duna

bubablu said:


> Add "organic" to the list. It was the word that put me off during the engagement interview. (I was SO right!)
> I would love to be with you all,* but I'm in Italy *and I didn't wake up even for the Prada cup, that I loved. Like Lizzie I won't lose my beauty sleep for this two. But I will read everything tomorrow morning!!



So am I!


----------



## maryg1

duna said:


> So am I!





bubablu said:


> I'm in Italy


Me three!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eat a chocolate each time you mean?   I think 5) the Firm needs to be a clue, too.


Yeah I can’t drink at the moment but it sounds like I’m going to be sick as well if I’m on the chocolate! Maybe it’ll have to be alternated with rice cakes.


papertiger said:


> Friend's fancy dress Bday party in 2005. Plenty there were not wearing fancy dress at all so we only have Clarence House PR machine to say it was fancy dress.
> 
> His future in the British armed forces was called into question - but by who it's not clear - nothing came of that either, swept under the carpet in half-sentence apology(-ish) .
> 
> "If it was anyone else the application wouldn't be considered. It should be withdrawn immediately." Perhaps there should be a historic probe into that decision like M's - alleged - bullying allegations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal family caught up in Nazi row
> 
> 
> Clarence House was last night forced into a major damage limitation exercise after Prince Harry was pictured on the front page of the Sun in Nazi uniform at a fancy dress party. By Sam Jones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/highs-lows-prince-harrys-royal-21780326 'Highs and lows of Prince Harry's royal life - including 'Nazi' uniform and naked game' 12:55, 31 MAR 2020


I seem to be replying to everything  you say - sorry if it is a bit intense.  It really grinds my gears that even in the guardian his wearing the nazi uniform is mentioned with the same glibness as his harmless naked japes in Vegas.

The other thing that strikes me is how the royal PR has declined over the decades. It’s amazing to compare how quickly they swept the nazi controversy away with the cack-handed job they’ve been doing during H&M’s reign of error.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case anyone missed this — Hazzie is so protective of his mom \sarcasm 









						Exec behind Sussex interview producer of show that showed dying Diana
					

Susan Zirinsky worked on CBS's 48 Hours Investigates in 2004 when it screened two images of an unconscious Diana slumped in the back of a car after the crash in Paris in 1997.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> “I don’t expect it to happen, but the best thing Meghan could do is apologise for her past behaviour and *maybe Oprah could offer her counselling.”*
> 
> A bull in a China shop!



Maybe she could do a segment on Dr. Phil next.

When you spoil a kid, this is the result.


----------



## EverSoElusive

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know for sure but try BBC America?



Thank you!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> Nor did he know where was North America!


Nor Chunga-Changa!


----------



## bubablu

maryg1 said:


> Me three!


I live in Milan and I'm sooooo over this endless lockdown (thanks to all the people without mask, grrr). But this thread it's so fun. Ehi, at the end these two are really doing a public service!


----------



## maryg1

bubablu said:


> I live in Milan and I'm sooooo over this endless lockdown (thanks to all the people without mask, grrr). But this thread it's so fun. Ehi, at the end these two are really doing a public service!


I’m in “zona rossa” for 2 weeks from tomorrow


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe these two have made me respect the Kardashians for generally working and not complaining and Bethany Frankel for being truthful.


----------



## marietouchet

Let’s all be well behaved in our comments, humor is a yes, bitterness is a no 
this thread is about fun! Love the humor !
i too have had family probs, and humor helps so much , priceless


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Brave woman! She too will be eaten alive!
> 
> *'Cry me a river... the plight of being a game show host to suffering in a palace with Oprah on speed dial': Former Real Housewives of New York star Bethenny Frankel slams Meghan Markle ahead of explosive interview alongside Prince Harry tonight*



Haha Bethenny can be annoying at times, and can have a vicious delivery, but she's usually common sense, matter of fact, and tells it like it is!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Apparently Joe Rogan said that if they don’t produce content for Spotify, they won’t get paid. Which seems pretty obvious, bey everyone is always banging on about their big deals.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.


Hey y'all, here's a bingo card for the folks at home.
If I have time, I'll make a custom one by 5pm PST.
Five extra points not on the bingo card for:
Speaking your truth, Shining a light, Sustainable, Making your voice heard, Unsupported, Unsurvivable (we already know that's in there), Authentic, Forces for Change, Empowerment, Vulnerable...

Five points for: Harry looking down at the ground, Harry having dead eyes, Harry fidgeting...
Ten points for: Meghan looking up to the sky hands clasped in front of her chest, brushing the hair out of her eyes, trying hard to appear poised and sophisticated...

No extra points for cradling her belly, holding Harry's hand, touching his back as if giving him cues when to speak, looking as if she's on the verge of tears, smug face, mentioning of Diana and/or her legacy...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Wouldn’t that set off a firestorm?  As someone previously posted, I don't hear many celebrities speak up about racism towards Asians (unless the celebrity is Asian) or Jews (which never made sense to me, as so much of Hollywood is Jewish!).  If we are to truly be "equal", then every type of racism should be admonished, and every group celebrated and equal, whether they're black, Asian, even Caucasian.  Equal is equal.


❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️


----------



## purseinsanity

bubablu said:


> Add "organic" to the list. It was the word that put me off during the engagement interview. (I was SO right!)
> I would love to be with you all, but I'm in Italy and I didn't even wake up for the Prada cup, that I loved. Like Lizzie I won't lose my beauty sleep for this two. But I will read everything tomorrow morning!!





duna said:


> So am I!



I wish I was in Italy with you both!  I'm still a little bitter my trip to Italy last year got cancelled.


----------



## purseinsanity

maryg1 said:


> Me three!


Oh with you too!!


----------



## bisbee

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh Chrissie. I stopped finding her entertaining a long time ago because I thought she grew increasingly vulgar. I felt for her when she had her late-term abortion (not throwing dirt here at all...while it's been widely described as miscarriage she herself has said they had to end the pregnancy to keep her from bleeding out and - again, her own words - like with her dogs she had had to put down in the past she made her doctors wait until the moment felt right to her). But this is just eyeroll-inducingly dramatic and stupid.


if the doctors had to deliver her to save her life, referring to it as an abortion is really unnecessary.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisbee said:


> if the doctors had to deliver her to save her life, referring to it as an abortion is really unnecessary.


In medical terminology, if before 20 weeks of pregnancy, she may have had to have a medical abortion.


----------



## mellibelly

I can’t believe I agreed for the first time ever with Piers Morgan and Candice Owens


----------



## Chanbal

This video confirms that it was indeed the picture of Archie posted by MM's friend. 





Spoiler: When Harry met Meggy


----------



## CarryOn2020

A bit OT and I’m not advertising for it, I just now saw it in the NYT book reviews. Although the Amazon reviewers don’t love it, it seems to have a good sense of humor [which may help in the coming days].  Maybe it’s the picture that is drawing me to it.  








						Queen Elizabeth II, Amateur Detective (Published 2021)
					

This week’s crime fiction column includes SJ Bennett’s new novel, “The Windsor Knot,” in which the monarch investigates a murder at Windsor Castle.




					www.nytimes.com
				




_I began reading THE WINDSOR KNOT (Morrow, 288 pp., $27.99)in a state of bafflement.
Queen Elizabeth II solves mysteries? 
Is “Lady Caroline Cadwallader” a homage to the celebrated Guardian journalist? Why is Prince Philip behaving so gallantly? But when one character opines that “the problem with Windsor Castle is that it is a dream. Real people only ruin it,” I put aside confusion and surrendered to the sheer entertainment value of SJ Bennett’s first mystery for adults, set as the queen approaches an alternate-reality version of her 90th birthday in 2016.

The life of a monarch is heavily regimented, and murders are, shall we say, inconvenient. The case of the Russian pianist found strangled at the castle proves vexing, since MI5 reaches a conclusion the queen takes umbrage with. So, as her assistant private secretary, Rozie Oshodi, discovers in astonishment, Elizabeth starts to sleuth it out herself — so long as it’s clear she’ll never get credit.

_


----------



## PerfectPudding

First time poster. I will not be watching the interview tonight, but look forward to hearing about it. I can only hope that some good comes out of the interview. Perhaps they will decide to highlight how disproportionately COVID has been hitting the BIPOC and low SES communities in LA or highlight national or local organizations that need support directly.  I feel like if they want to garner more respect as humanitarians, this would be the way to do it otherwise if the entire interview is bashing the BRF it will come across as incredibly tone deaf (same vibes as when Ellen D. made jokes about quarantining in her mansion or that PR imagine song stunt that came out at the beginning of the pandemic lol).  But I’m not going to hold my breath and I imagine it will be more of the same fluff we’ve been getting through the teasers and plugs for Archewell.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A comment from the Bethenny article on DM:



> At last. An  American who is not swallowing all this MM nonsense.  I am a Brit and I can tell you Markle was given the best of everything.  She had absolutely nothing to complain about except wearing expensive clothes, being lorded over and waving to her (then) adoring public. She has spat on the whole nation, the monarchy. *And turned her husband who swore an oath to country and monarch into a, some would suggest, traitor. *



This one really hit me. It must be so painful for the Queen on so many levels.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bisbee said:


> if the doctors had to deliver her to save her life, referring to it as an abortion is really unnecessary.


Abortion is a medical term meaning removal of the fetus from the uterus before it is viable. Spontaneous abortion = miscarriage.  A life-saving abortion is called an induced abortion. Medical professionals have known these terms for years and most of them have never attached a moral caveat to any of them.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> 
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> 
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> 
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.



I would add the use of 'I, me, mine, we'. Overuse of these personal pronouns points to narcissist.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> In medical terminology, if before 20 weeks of pregnancy, she may have had to have a medical abortion.


Yes! Sorry I posted definitions before I saw your post.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't remember where I read it, but somewhere it was mentioned that apparently Charles forked over 12 millions to pay for their security when public funding for that ended. The person suggested the money wasn't spent on security though, in fact said they don't have constant security anymore, but implied that's where their, sorry, MEGHAN's McMansion came from. 

I don't know if any of this is true or not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't remember where I read it, but somewhere it was mentioned that apparently Charles forked over 12 millions to pay for their security when public funding for that ended. The person suggested the money wasn't spent on security though, in fact said they don't have constant security anymore, but implied that's where their, sorry, MEGHAN's McMansion came from.
> 
> I don't know if any of this is true or not.



I read that same article, don’ t remember where. Google search shows as of last summer Charles is not paying for security.  We do know he cut them off of Clarence Houses’s mail system. Wonder where should we send these messages of support?








						Fearful Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Report Multiple Drone Flybys to LAPD, Will Now Pay for Own Security
					

Harry and Meghan have reported multiple drone incidents at their home to the cops, The Daily Beast has learned. They intend to hire their own security team, paid for by themselves.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Sorry Brits. This time the “Ugly American” is firing off the first shot but they’re blanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read that same article, don’ t remember where.




I think it was one of the newer ones from the past few days.



> We do know he cut them off of Clarence Houses’s mail system. Wonder where should we send these messages of support?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fearful Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Report Multiple Drone Flybys to LAPD, Will Now Pay for Own Security
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have reported multiple drone incidents at their home to the cops, The Daily Beast has learned. They intend to hire their own security team, paid for by themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Interesting opinion on that here (Quora):

Why did Prince Charles leave Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with no UK base by cutting off their UK address service for letters that are sent to them by well-wishers?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so it's been expanded to two hours.  CBS must feel they have a winner.  but really is the general public interested.  using my DH as a a gauge, I'm thinking not.  will see



They sold lots of commercials, they could afford to make it longer.


----------



## bag-mania

For those of you in different time zones or who have cut the cord and no longer have access to regular network television, you can watch the show online at 8 PM ET on cbs.com. 

Come join the party! 









						Harry and Meghan detail royal struggles, from discussions of baby's skin tone to suicidal thoughts
					

Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, told Oprah Winfrey about their exit from the royal family in an exclusive interview on CBS.




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh Chrissie. I stopped finding her entertaining a long time ago because I thought she grew increasingly vulgar. I felt for her when she had her late-term abortion (not throwing dirt here at all...while it's been widely described as miscarriage she herself has said they had to end the pregnancy to keep her from bleeding out and - again, her own words - like with her dogs she had had to put down in the past she made her doctors wait until the moment felt right to her). But this is just eyeroll-inducingly dramatic and stupid.



I wouldn't listen to a word she said even if she was giving out winning lottery numbers


----------



## Chagall

RAINDANCE said:


> Not sure if I have done this correctly ..


QE2 don’t miss when she aims her gun.


----------



## gelbergirl

I continue to be completed disgusted.
Sometimes I feel we need a special, separate thread where we can just express how disgusted we are with these two.


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> I like Chrissy but she was clearly speaking from a triggered place because of her own issues. I take her views here with a grain of salt.



going by all the cancel culture crap she spouts she has more issues than Reader's Digest


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> For those of you in different time zones or who have cut the cord and no longer have access to regular network television, you can watch the show online at 8 PM ET on cbs.com.
> 
> *Come join the party!*



Part of me is a bit tempted to watch, the part that knows these interviews tend to go badly for the royals involved even if it takes them time to recognize it. Diana's interview with Bashir, for example, when you look back at it, you realize it was actually a very cruel thing to do to both William and Harry.  Diana put herself and her pain ahead of her sons' best interests for the immediate sympathy and attention that it generated.  She came to regret doing that interview when she realized the impact it had on Will and Harry.  The other part of me is thinking, no, no, don't want to give these two any more headspace so I don't plan to watch at this point.

Tomorrow morning, they both may be feeling quite pleased with themselves as they get tons of sympathy from the twitterati.    But, then the backlash and the examination of what they both said will start.  The words will be parsed, fact checked, and fact checked again.  We'll see how their claims stand up to that.  

I do think they thought they could get away with trashing the Palace and its staff as long as they didn't specifically name names, just lots of mean behavior by those "gray suits". Maybe they figured the Palace would just do their typical "never complain, never explain" and they would be protected by those NDA's signed by their staff.  However, a number of their former staff were proud to work at the Palace and likely don't take kindly to being smeared after what they apparently endured themselves at the hands of these two.  It's not 1921; they don't have to take it. There is nothing preventing them from coming forward with their side of the story, except those NDA's, which are invalidated once charges of bullying and workplace humiliation are made.  So, all of the stories, both big and small, are going to come out.  I bet they never imagined that.  Kind of hard to be the Duke and Duchess of Compassion when you've been abusing and humiliating your own staff on a regular basis.


----------



## pukasonqo

As a POC what irks me about MM is her constant telling us she is a victim but does nothing to highlight that she is one of many or to empower WOC to take control of their own narrative ( admittedly, not always possible) but her only interest is in herself
I think most of us have experienced racism, sexism and the usual “good girls don’t...” but MM is making an industry of her experience with NIL empowerment either to herself or Hazza
I don’t belittle her experiences but she is not the first nor the last WOC experiencing racism, being patronised, etc
She had a position to do so much but chose to do so little


----------



## Chloe302225

I saw a story stating that Kate may be asked to participate in the inquiry in relation to the story from a few years ago where it said she confronted Meghan about her behaviour towards the staff.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes! Sorry I posted definitions before I saw your post.


No worries!  Great minds


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle Reportedly Kind to Kate Middleton in Oprah Interview
					

Meghan Markle is taking off the gloves in her highly-anticipated/feared interview with Oprah, but she reportedly is nothing but nice to a Royal with whom she had issues ... Kate Middleton.




					www.tmz.com
				




Haha I bet she is.  She thinks she can trash the current Queen, but sucking up to the future one will secure her place in the family.  I don't think Kate or Will have any love lost for this horrible woman.


----------



## poopsie

Chagall said:


> QE2 don’t miss when she aims her gun.



 ♫  That's the night that the lights went out in Cali ♫


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"I actually am seriously beginning to think that Meghan Markle doesn't only have a serious personality disorder...and I will now actually say what I think that serious personality disorder is. I think of all the evidence of what I have seen about her conduct, what I've heard about her etc. etc., that she is a malignant narcissist with sociopathic tendencies, who has a sadistic streak in her nature that allows her to perpetrate cruelties upon others and think that it's perfectly ok. She has no empathy whatsoever. I also think she is paranoid."

Lady CC doesn't only talk out of thin air either...she grew up with a malicious narcissist as a mother. Also, right at the beginning of the video she confirms she knew of the bullying years ago.



Maybe we should write to Lady CC and ask her about those hazing rumours.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "I actually am seriously beginning to think that Meghan Markle doesn't only have a serious personality disorder...and I will now actually say what I think that serious personality disorder is. I think of all the evidence of what I have seen about her conduct, what I've heard about her etc. etc., that *she is a malignant narcissist with sociopathic tendencies, who has a sadistic streak in her nature that allows her to perpetrate cruelties upon others and think that it's perfectly ok. She has no empathy whatsoever. I also think she is paranoid."*
> 
> Lady CC doesn't only talk out of thin air either...she grew up with a malicious narcissist as a mother. Also, right at the beginning of the video she confirms she knew of the bullying years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe we should write to Lady CC and ask her about those hazing rumours.





Nailed it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG ladies, the next question (18:44) is about crocodile, chicken and waffle. Which one of you wrote in???  They even mention "The site I go to mentioned the Urban Dictionary definitions".


----------



## redney

I won't be watching but will be reading here!


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "I actually am seriously beginning to think that Meghan Markle doesn't only have a serious personality disorder...and I will now actually say what I think that serious personality disorder is. *I think of all the evidence of what I have seen about her conduct, what I've heard about her etc. etc., that she is a malignant narcissist with sociopathic tendencies, who has a sadistic streak in her nature that allows her to perpetrate cruelties upon others and think that it's perfectly ok. *She has no empathy whatsoever. I also think she is paranoid."
> 
> Lady CC doesn't only talk out of thin air either...she grew up with a malicious narcissist as a mother. Also, right at the beginning of the video she confirms she knew of the bullying years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe we should write to Lady CC and ask her about those hazing rumours.




Yep. MM is a sick person, from all that I’ve read about her and observed. Those who don’t understand are privileged, because they’ve never had close experience with someone with these kinds of personality disorders.

Dating an a$&hole doesn’t always make him a psychopath, and a selfie-obsessed woman does not mean she’s a narcissist. People get it twisted all the time, but that’s understandable because we all want to label things to make ourselves feel better.

People with real personality disorders are an entirely different animal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok I know Lady CC is not everyone's cup of tea, but you must watch this episode. 23:12 asking about Meghan fabricating the cheating rumour.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chagall said:


> QE2 don’t miss when she aims her gun.


Great song!  
If anyone is interested, it's from the song "The Night The Lights Went Out In England" appropriated by @Chagall from "The Night The Lights Went Out In Georgia"


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> Great song!
> If anyone is interested, it's from the song "The Night The Lights Went Out In England" appropriated by @Chagall from "The Night The Lights Went Out In Georgia"




I changed Georgia to Cali to fit this evenings festivities


----------



## rose60610

gelbergirl said:


> I continue to be completed disgusted.
> Sometimes I feel we need a special, separate thread where we can just express how disgusted we are with these two.



Every post would include     , a few   , a few  when they insinuate how important they are, and a count of how many glasses of wine/cocktails it takes to get through their interviews.


----------



## Lodpah

chicinthecity777 said:


> The latest word out there is Thomas Markle will be on Pier Morgan next week! Now I would watch that.


I want to watch that.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> 
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> 
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> 
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.


Oh my .....I love this!  Too bad it's a work day though


----------



## lalame

Did anyone see this Page Six article about Jason Knauf? How does this square up with people's claims that Meghan's PAs were lazy, not used to the "direct" American working style, or were legacy employees who didn't want to change? This man worked on at least 3 continents, with financial institutions AND heads of state, and he only joined the royal staff in 2016... hardly a lifelong courtier. He also was competent and trusted enough to help M directly on sensitive issues like her letter to her father.

What did he have to gain exactly by tanking their reputation as some claim? His star was clearly rising in the establishment and he professionally put in a private complaint then transferred to a different team when he didn't see change. What he did was inscrutable imo.

Source: https://pagesix.com/2021/03/05/who-is-jason-knauf-source-of-the-meghan-markle-bullying-claims/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is @CeeJay around? You know I love the comments section, someone just claimed in highschool Meghan maintained she was Italian. Have you heard of that?


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> Did anyone see this Page Six article about Jason Knauf? How does this square up with people's claims that Meghan's PAs were lazy, not used to the "direct" American working style, or were legacy employees who didn't want to change? This man worked on at least 3 continents, with financial institutions AND heads of state, and he only joined the royal staff in 2016... hardly a lifelong courtier. He also was competent and trusted enough to help M directly on sensitive issues like her letter to her father.
> 
> What did he have to gain exactly by tanking their reputation as some claim? His star was clearly rising in the establishment and he professionally put in a private complaint then transferred to a different team when he didn't see change. What he did was inscrutable imo.
> 
> Source: https://pagesix.com/2021/03/05/who-is-jason-knauf-source-of-the-meghan-markle-bullying-claims/



Never let facts get in the way of an agenda......errrr........narrative


----------



## Lounorada

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Some general thoughts and observations based on this thread, everyone’s opinions and the facts as reported in the press:
> 
> We live in a time of absolutes and intolerance. One is either right or wrong, few take personal responsibility for their behavior, and most feel entitled to and deserving of wealth and accolades regardless of merit. A perfect Petrie dish for M and H and their minions.
> It is particularly frustrating when anyone with a platform can denigrate the validity of an opposing position based on either the current mood or their personal agenda.  If every woman has a voice, every voice must be heard. We can disagree. We can call foul.   But we cannot and should not reduce every disagreement with the expedient use of title characterization—one should be able to take a stance, voice a complaint, criticize bad behavior or poor manners and not have that disagreement tossed aside with claims of bigotry, bias, or cultural differences.   I am white. I do not judge M because she is a WOC. I dislike her behavior and her arrogance.  I dislike H and M for being sanctimonious. We are all capable of human error and mistakes.  Not them.  We all know how to apologize.  Not them.  We all know that we can evolve and learn from mistakes.  Not them. Sadly we have people in the public eye (the Whoopis, etc) who reduce everything to race.  That convenient trope demeans real issues and real people who have experienced and are living with the pain and struggles each day.
> 
> I am an American and I respect and admire the Queen and wish her continued good health and peace in her household. She is deserving of abundant praise.  I believe even non royalists respect her devotion and constancy and love of country.  How can Harry —even with a shattered home and childhood heartbreak— be so heartless and disrespectful.  Shame on him.
> 
> They are childish, petty, and vindictive. They believe they are always right. They are perfect.   They never forgive. They never ask for forgiveness. Last I heard, someone was already on the Cross.
> 
> They would make any mother or grandmother weep.


Great post!








madamelizaking said:


> View attachment 5010609
> View attachment 5010610
> 
> View attachment 5010611
> View attachment 5010612
> 
> She's so predictable










CarryOn2020 said:


> Hoist by their own petard.
> _Meghan Markle pledged her commitment to fighting for women’s empowerment Wednesday, saying men and women must come together to support movements like *Time’s Up and #MeToo.*
> 
> “Women don’t need to find a voice,” Markle said during the first annual forum for the Royal Foundation, the philanthropic organization currently run by Prince William, Kate Middleton and Prince Harry. “They have a voice. They need to feel empowered to use it, and people need to be encouraged to listen.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: 'There Is No Better Time' for Movements Like Time's Up and #MeToo
> 
> 
> She voiced support for the movements during a joint royal forum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _











elvisfan4life said:


> Down the aisle then round the side and out  the back door without marrying his son!!!  then locking and barricading the doors lol


And firing mothballs out the windows.



papertiger said:


> The Telegraph
> *Exclusive: Charity Commission reviewing Harry and Meghan's Sussex Royal organisation*
> Claire Newell
> Fri, 5 March 2021, 8:30 pm
> Prince Harry and Meghan face charity review
> The Charity Commission is conducting a review of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's philanthropic organisation, The Telegraph can disclose.
> Well-placed sources have told The Telegraph the watchdog is examining how Sussex Royal was run and whether it complied with charity law.
> The "regulatory and compliance case" is understood to be looking at concerns about the charity before the royal couple decided to shut it down last July following their move to America.
> A Charity Commission spokesman said: "Our regulatory compliance case is ongoing. We cannot comment further."
> It came as the latest teaser clip was released from the couple's Oprah Winfrey interview, which is set to air in the US on Sunday night and on Monday in the UK.
> In it, the Duchess said it felt "liberating" to be able to speak and accused the Royal Family of effectively gagging her and taking away that choice.
> 
> She claimed that when Ms Winfrey had first approached her ahead of her wedding, they had not even been allowed to have the conversation without Kensington Palace aides listening in.
> Meghan, 39, suggested that now the couple had stepped away from "the construct" of royal life they were free to make their own decisions and said: "It's really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say yes, I'm ready to talk, to be able to make a choice on your own and to be able to speak for yourself," she said.
> Tensions with the Royal Family have escalated in recent days, amid allegations that claims the Duchess bullied her staff were part of an orchestrated smear campaign by palace aides.
> The Telegraph understands that members of the family have been in contact with Prince Harry this week to find out what is disclosed in the no-holds barred chat. Buckingham Palace has not been given an advanced copy of the interview.
> The Duchess is thought to confirm rumours of a rift with her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, by suggesting she was among those who failed to support her as a newcomer to the Royal fold.
> "There is going to be a lot of discussion about how Meghan felt unsupported – including by Kate," a US TV insider revealed.
> It is understood that the Charity Commission had not yet determined whether or not there was any wrongdoing at Sussex Royal.
> A "regulatory compliance case" falls short of a formal investigation. If the regulator finds wrongdoing, it can then issue formal regulatory advice or use a power such as an official warning.
> The charity was founded after the couple decided to break away from The Royal Foundation, the charity they previously ran with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge watch a flypast from the balcony of Buckingham Palace in 2018 - Max Mumby/Indigo /Getty Images Europe
> The Charity Commission first looked at The Royal Foundation and Sussex Royal in July after Republic, the anti-monarchy campaign group, asked it to examine nearly £300,000 of grants, including £145,000 given to the Sussexes' former UK charity.
> At the time, the Commission said it was assessing information in the complaint to determine whether it was appropriate to investigate.
> According to well-placed sources, it examined whether it was appropriate for the Royal Foundation to have transferred the money to Sussex Royal in the first place.
> The watchdog is understood to have deemed it appropriate. It is understood that some of the trustees of the Royal Foundation have expressed "disappointment" that the money given to Sussex Royal was effectively wasted on a Foundation that was dissolved shortly afterwards.
> A source said it was "very frustrating" and looked from the outside like "rash" decision-making by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, adding: "They might have thought about that before setting it up, but using charitable money to set up a foundation is completely legitimate and it happens all the time. The issue was setting it up and closing it down months later."
> In addition to the £145,000 grant to Sussex Royal, The Royal Foundation made grants totalling £151,856 "for the continued development of the Duke of Sussex's Sustainable Tourism programme, Travalyst".
> It is understood that some money from the Royal Foundation was also earmarked for the community kitchen set up for victims of the Grenfell Tower fire.
> It is unclear if the Royal Foundation is also being reviewed by the Commission.
> Lawyers for the Sussexes said: "Sussex Royal was managed by a board of trustees which made decisions about the charity in accordance with its constitutional document and the requirements of charity law.
> "Therefore, any suggestion of mismanagement or decision making being handled in a 'rash' fashion solely by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be entirely false."










Chanbal said:


> Wow, wow, Wyatt is inspired!!!!
> 
> PETRONELLA WYATT *Meghan Markle has convinced cheerful Prince Harry he was desperately miserable all along*
> 
> I disagree with my friend Piers Morgan that its broadcast is a scandal, given that the Duke of Edinburgh is recovering from heart surgery. In my view, it would be a scandal if it wasn’t shown.
> Not since Peter Finch’s character threatened to blow his brains out on live TV in the 1976 film Network has anyone committed such a public act of self-destruction. When the credits roll, I have a feeling that the heads of Haz and Megs will roll with them.
> 
> The Prince of Sighs and the Duchess of Self Delusion have committed their ultimate act of folly. They should have remembered the saying “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. And boy, has their house turned out to be glass of the least durable kind.
> 
> That slick trailer promised heartrending tales of Meghan’s victimhood. These include her “silencing” by bullying palace officials and her “almost unsurvivable” ordeals, presumably at the hands of the British Press, to the extent that Harry says, between gulps, that his greatest concern was: “History repeating itself.”
> 
> But it’s all gone horribly wrong for The World’s Greatest Victim. No less a paper than The Times reported on Wednesday that Meghan had faced allegations, which she denies, that she bullied two female members of her private staff at Kensington Palace, who were then allegedly silenced by way of NDA agreements.
> 
> *CROCODILE TEARS *
> Delicious, isn’t it? To make matters worse for our tragic heroine, it was revealed that Markle sparkled at a banquet in 2018 in cascades of diamonds that were a wedding present from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is accused not only of ordering the assassination of a journalist (something in her dreams Meghan would doubtless like to do herself) but has kept the women of his country in virtual slavery.
> 
> Not a good look in both senses of the phrase. But Megs has always wanted to have her diamonds and wear them. I sometimes wonder into what sort of a mirror she looks at herself every morning?
> 
> The woman believes herself to be a swan among swans, the physical, moral and intellectual peer of such great figures as Emmeline Pankhurst, Audrey Hepburn and Mother Teresa. Where self-knowledge should be is a hole so large it could be filled by a new galaxy.
> 
> It is not the Royal Family but Megs and Haz who should hide behind the sofa in embarrassment.
> 
> One striking irony about personalities such as Meghan is that they continually attack others for the faults that they themselves possess, using them as stalking horses under the cover of which they cry great crocodile tears.
> 
> Markle likes to present herself as a perfect presence, a woman of crystal, unsoiled, guileless, dewy. Harry, like all weak men, goes along with this as a bedroom back-seat driver to the extent of fanaticism.
> 
> Last year the couple were accused of cooperating on a book about themselves with the ridiculous title Finding Freedom, which begged the question did they think they were Mr and Mrs Nelson Mandela?
> 
> Only Mandela spent 27 years in a South African jail. Meghan spent just over one year in the luxury of the British Royal Family. No matter; she appears to see herself as a secular saint, and like a saint has to endure unspeakable suffering daily.
> 
> I cannot help but feel that Meghan actually enjoys being unhappy and wronged.
> 
> She seems to have convinced a once cheerful and uncomplicated Harry that he was really desperately miserable all along, and abominably ill-served by all around him, to the point where his once-smiling features have set into a permanent, resentful frown.
> 
> Let’s rewind to Meghan and Harry’s move to Los Angeles, in what looks like the first staging post on the Duchess’s quest to convince an awestruck world of her stature as an humanitarian and A-list personality; to take her rightful place in the pantheon alongside George and Amal Clooney, Serena Williams and the Obamas.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> The harder she and Harry tried to coerce us into acknowledging their worth, the more they resembled gilt as opposed to genuine 18-carat gold.
> 
> We were treated to self-indulgent podcasts, patronising homilies on race and equality, the announcement of a tawdry and undeserved deal with the streaming giant Netflix, and then the photoshoot of pregnant Meghan lying on the grass beside a barefooted Harry. It tried so hard to be Hollywood, but it looked like Hollyoaks.
> 
> And the discordant soundtrack to all of this? Meghan’s continual, histrionic pleas for privacy, while acting like Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard, permanently ready for her close-up.
> 
> Meghan has made her distaste for journalists known at every turn, even suing one British paper. She has now accused The Times of “peddling a false narrative” to smear her character. That’s rich. Meghan peddles her own narrative so fast she could outdistance the entire Tour de France.
> 
> Moreover, it seems that some journalists are more her equal than others. One can only marvel that she and Harry have put themselves into the hands of Oprah, the world’s most ruthless operator, who will squeeze them like an orange and then cast the peel into the nearest refuse dump.
> 
> But Meghan’s entire life has been a masquerade. She thinks she is a brilliant actress, perhaps one of the best of her generation. But for some reason she never managed to win any parts worth having.
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#
> *IMPRISONED IN PALACES*
> Playing Rachel in the cable TV drama Suits was the apogee of her career. How come her transcendent talent has languished unrecognised?
> 
> Yet she attempts to set up her stall among the cream of America; among people whose fame is of the solid and enduring kind that is based on extraordinary talent and grindingly hard work.
> 
> Meghan’s one big chance to prove her merit was as a dutiful member of the Royal Family. When the curtain came up on the first act of her new, starring role, her audience — namely the British public — were warm to the point of effusion. So were the Press, though the Sussexes have singled them out for particular opprobrium.
> 
> The Queen even gave Meghan privileges, such as allowing her to stay at Sandringham before her marriage, that were denied to her sister-in-law, Kate. Could the barometer have been set more fair?
> 
> During the Oprah interview, Meghan will discuss “race in Britain”. Doubtless it will be some woke diatribe against the institutionalised racism of the British. Hard to watch straight-faced when Megs married a man who found it amusing to wear a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party. Oprah, of course, will be suitably impressed and horror-struck by her devastating tales of life in the heart of the Royal Family. If only we had realised how wretched it must have been!
> 
> Imprisoned in palaces, forced to wear jewels and frocks beyond price, served, literally, on bended knee by liveried courtiers. Chauffeured around in stultifying limousines, protected and pampered at the expense of the British taxpayer. How humiliating for a couple who loudly trumpet their “independence”!
> 
> And, their supporters might add, what of the inhumane tedium of having to perform royal duties — surely that contravened their human rights?
> 
> Poor Meghan had to shake hands with unwashed plebs on a weekly basis. She even had to do walkabouts in the rain, for Heaven’s sake, and was a tragic captive of a thing called protocol. Meghan and Harry were actually forced to walk behind Prince William and his wife Kate. Even Mandela was never subject to such an ordeal.
> 
> The trouble is that this sorry pair have always relied less on their memory than their imaginations. There is a type of person who, according to their own account, is perpetually the victim of unwarranted criticism and unkindness.
> 
> People of this kind can, like Meghan, seem plausible and secure sympathy from those who do not know them. There is nothing inherently improbable about each separate story they relate — a treacherous father (Thomas Markle), a cruel article in the Press, an encounter with a bully, even an incident of racism. This kind of ill treatment does sometimes occur in the life of a famous person.
> 
> What in the end arouses suspicion is the multiplicity of villains whom it has been the sufferer’s ill fortune to meet.
> 
> *PERSECUTION MANIA*
> If one individual claims to receive almost universal bad treatment, the likelihood is the cause lies in themselves, and that they either imagine these injuries or behave in such a way as to arouse uncontrollable irritation. This appears to have led, in Meghan’s case, and now Harry’s, almost to a sort of Persecution Mania.
> 
> The Sussexes expect everyone to feel towards them the same unquestioning love and respect that they feel towards themselves. But neither have the talent to work for their high living, particularly Harry. They know that Prince Charles, who is, according to royal sources, hurt and dismayed by their ingratitude, will not finance, ad infinitum, the LA lifestyle of a couple approaching middle age.
> 
> So they have turned to Oprah as a way of building their financial “brand”. No matter that this may wound Harry’s closest family, including his father and grandmother, our irreproachable Queen, while her 99-year-old husband receives painful hospital treatment for a heart condition.
> 
> There was always a tragic inevitability about it. Having left the safety of the Royal Family and upped sticks to ruthless, hypocritical La La Land, they cannot escape the toils they have made for themselves.
> Genuine celebrity is like diamonds; its value depends on a controlled and limited output, yet as the world endures a terrible pandemic, this pair will undertake a two-hour moanathon.
> 
> There may, nonetheless, be foolish and gullible people, the sort who are a sucker for conspiracy theories and tales of wicked royals — and there are many in America — who will believe them. But the sophisticates the Sussexes love and aspire to join will be laughing at them.
> 
> In urbane American society, in the world of the Clooneys and the Obamas, Meghan will never be taken seriously again. She has descended too deeply into the mud.
> 
> That is why I say of Oprah; bring it on!
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14250045/meghan-markle-convinced-prince-harry-he-was-miserable/#











This article was a reeeead and a half   Thanks for sharing!




CarryOn2020 said:


> As I watch this now, I think W&K saw a ‘new’ photographer (perhaps Omid) in the crowd. They knew MM arranged it, W tells Harry who says BS, Charles sees it, Kate tells Anne. The Senior Royals look in the same direction. No wonder William was furious.
> View attachment 5012094


I loved Kate's outfit on this day, one of my favourites she's ever worn! Gorgeous colour and that coat .



chicinthecity777 said:


> *The worst is yet to come out! *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aides vow to 'come out swinging' with fresh revelations against Meghan
> 
> 
> ROYAL aides have vowed to “come out swinging” with fresh revelations on the Duchess of Sussex if Meghan and Harry attack any individuals in their interview with Oprah. A source familiar…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## melissatrv

Add to list - have a drink every time


Meghan cradles her bump




bag-mania said:


> Come on ladies, don’t leave me hanging tonight.  I can’t do all the commentary by myself, I need at least a few of you to help share the load.
> 
> Let me sweeten the pot by offering rules to our viewer party drinking game.
> 
> Everyone takes a sip any time Meghan says:
> 
> 1) my voice
> 2) my truth
> 3) my choice
> 4) liberating
> 
> If anyone has better choices for words, feel free to change them.
> 
> In addition, take one big swig the first time Meghan cradles her belly and the first time she grabs Harry’s hand.
> 
> Disclaimer time: Tomorrow is a work day, try not to get too hammered.  And if you don’t drink alcohol, by all means play along with something you do like.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

No comments!

_"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family. 

The couple, who are preparing to welcome their second later this year, said they felt they 'needed to have their say' but now considered the matter closed and wanted to 'move on'.

It comes as Prince Harry and Prince William prepare to display a united front when they unveil a statue in honour of their mother Princess Diana later this year."_









						Harry and Meghan say they will 'move on' after Oprah interview
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air tonight in the US, would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## melissatrv

Uggh.  Too bad they will not go into exile after the interview.  Every time I see "the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" it infuriates me as to why these titles (their bread and butter) and not stripped. Just be done with them already



Chanbal said:


> No comments!
> 
> _"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple, who are preparing to welcome their second later this year, said they felt they 'needed to have their say' but now considered the matter closed and wanted to 'move on'.
> 
> It comes as Prince Harry and Prince William prepare to display a united front when they unveil a statue in honour of their mother Princess Diana later this year."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they will 'move on' after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air tonight in the US, would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Soooo, everyone is happy now?
Have they worked out a deal for Hazzie to abdicate renounce titles after the Diana ceremony?
This article is puzzling.  Rumors are swirling that MM wants another OW interview to address the bullying.


ETA: fixed it [only kings and queens abdicate]



Chanbal said:


> No comments!
> 
> _"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple, who are preparing to welcome their second later this year, said they felt they 'needed to have their say' but now considered the matter closed and wanted to 'move on'.
> 
> It comes as Prince Harry and Prince William prepare to display a united front when they unveil a statue in honour of their mother Princess Diana later this year."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they will 'move on' after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air tonight in the US, would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> No comments!
> 
> _"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple, who are preparing to welcome their second later this year, said they felt they 'needed to have their say' but now considered the matter closed and wanted to 'move on'.
> 
> It comes as Prince Harry and Prince William prepare to display a united front when they unveil a statue in honour of their mother Princess Diana later this year."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they will 'move on' after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air tonight in the US, would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Still pretending to call the shots.


----------



## needlv

Ok - so let me get this straight.  The interview is at Gails mansion - so Gail’s company would have hired out the space to OW’s company.  OW sells the interview to CBS who makes $ on advertising and selling to international outlets... and we are supposed to believe MM and H aren’t being paid?  there is no way MM won’t make money off this - maybe a sizeable donation to their foundation (so the foundation can pay MM and H expenses and salaries as execs of the foundation?)

All participants are getting rich off this publicity stunt.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Lounorada said:


> Great post!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And firing mothballs out the windows.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This article was a reeeead and a half   Thanks for sharing!
> 
> 
> 
> I loved Kate's outfit on this day, one of my favourites she's ever worn! Gorgeous colour and that coat .


Where is the last GIF from, with that guy one-armedly throwing down his chair, anyone who knows?! His attitude is hilarious and the only version funnier is where a mitten-clad person "involved in US politics" sits on the chair as it's thrown down


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> No comments!
> 
> _"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple, who are preparing to welcome their second later this year, said they felt they 'needed to have their say' but now considered the matter closed and wanted to 'move on'.
> 
> It comes as Prince Harry and Prince William prepare to display a united front when they unveil a statue in honour of their mother Princess Diana later this year."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they will 'move on' after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air tonight in the US, would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So a couple of pipsqueaks will lie to the public with OW and then move on thinking that all will be tickety-boo with the RF. Please William don't let your kid brother bamboozle you again. Sorry folks, I'm using words that JCMH can understand knowing that he was so dumb in school that his teachers had to either write exams for him or give him the answers.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> No comments!
> 
> _"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex last night insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> The couple, who are preparing to welcome their second later this year, said they felt they 'needed to have their say' but now considered the matter closed and wanted to 'move on'.
> 
> It comes as Prince Harry and Prince William prepare to display a united front when they unveil a statue in honour of their mother Princess Diana later this year."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they will 'move on' after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which will air tonight in the US, would be the 'last word' on their rift with the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Move On?  And move out!  These idiots really think they are in the right all the time, don't they?  And that their actions won't have any consequences!


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Where is the last GIF from, with that guy one-armedly throwing down his chair, anyone who knows?! His attitude is hilarious and the only version funnier is where a mitten-clad person "involved in US politics" sits on the chair as it's thrown down











						Dis Gon B Gud
					

“Dis Gon B Gud” is an expression often used in forums or comment threads to denote that the poster is going to enjoy watching a complex argument or discussion topic unfold. The phrase has been also iterated in the form of a reaction GIF featuring a man opening up a fold-up chair and getting...




					knowyourmeme.com
				




*Jason Momoa Folding Chair*
On May 8th, 2009, season 3 episode 20 of the television show _The Game_ aired, featuring a scene in which Jason Momoa's character Roman unfolds a folding chair with a one-handed thrusting motion and sits in it.

ETA: Another view of Jason shows us why we should never trust Hwood:








						Jason Momoa’s Super Bowl Ad Freaked Absolutely Everyone Out
					

<p>A weird Super Bowl ad starring Jason Momoa has left people feeling, well, weird… after it saw the star quite literally tearing his muscles off. Everyone knows the Super Bowl brings its fair share of unusual adverts, during a time where every man and his dog is watching, but this commercial...




					www.unilad.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> Part of me is a bit tempted to watch, the part that knows these interviews tend to go badly for the royals involved even if it takes them time to recognize it. Diana's interview with Bashir, for example, when you look back at it, you realize it was actually a very cruel thing to do to both William and Harry.  Diana put herself and her pain ahead of her sons' best interests for the immediate sympathy and attention that it generated.  She came to regret doing that interview when she realized the impact it had on Will and Harry.  The other part of me is thinking, no, no, don't want to give these two any more headspace so I don't plan to watch at this point.
> 
> Tomorrow morning, they both may be feeling quite pleased with themselves as they get tons of sympathy from the twitterati.    But, then the backlash and the examination of what they both said will start.  The words will be parsed, fact checked, and fact checked again.  We'll see how their claims stand up to that.
> 
> I do think they thought they could get away with trashing the Palace and its staff as long as they didn't specifically name names, just lots of mean behavior by those "gray suits". Maybe they figured the Palace would just do their typical "never complain, never explain" and they would be protected by those NDA's signed by their staff.  However, a number of their former staff were proud to work at the Palace and likely don't take kindly to being smeared after what they apparently endured themselves at the hands of these two.  It's not 1921; they don't have to take it. There is nothing preventing them from coming forward with their side of the story, except those NDA's, which are invalidated once charges of bullying and workplace humiliation are made.  So, all of the stories, both big and small, are going to come out.  I bet they never imagined that.  Kind of hard to be the Duke and Duchess of Compassion when you've been abusing and humiliating your own staff on a regular basis.


^^^^^  This!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> So a couple of pipsqueaks will lie to the public with OW and then move on thinking that all will be tickety-boo with the RF. Please William don't let your kid brother bamboozle you again. Sorry folks, I'm using words that JCMH can understand knowing that he was so dumb in school that his teachers had to either write exams for him or give him the answers.



Saw this idea on another site — kinda helps with perspective:     
1 billionaire commiserating with 2 millionaires about leaving a family of billionaires.  
And with commercials!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Saw this idea on another site — kinda helps with perspective:
> 1 billionaire commiserating with 2 millionaires about leaving a family of billionaires.
> And with commercials!


LOLOL so perfectly put!  "Woe is me" all around.  And so out of touch with reality.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I posted on the FB Huffpost article that I really don't believe a reputable newspaper like The Times would publish something like this without proofs to back them up...and wouldn't you know, seconds later I got the comment "Where's the investigation against Andrew"? I think I know why Meghan has a fanbase. These people are slightly *SEVERLY disadvantaged* in the intelligence department.


Fixed that for you @QueenofWrapDress !!!


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "I actually am seriously beginning to think that Meghan Markle doesn't only have a serious personality disorder...and I will now actually say what I think that serious personality disorder is. I think of all the evidence of what I have seen about her conduct, what I've heard about her etc. etc., that she is a malignant narcissist with sociopathic tendencies, who has a sadistic streak in her nature that allows her to perpetrate cruelties upon others and think that it's perfectly ok. She has no empathy whatsoever. I also think she is paranoid."
> 
> Lady CC doesn't only talk out of thin air either...she grew up with a malicious narcissist as a mother. Also, right at the beginning of the video she confirms she knew of the bullying years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe we should write to Lady CC and ask her about those hazing rumours.




I made it about 40 mins into this.  I loved the suggestion where she says the Queen should remove the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles and just leave them with Earl of Dumbarton!  Great idea!


----------



## bag-mania

melissatrv said:


> Add to list - have a drink every time
> 
> 
> Meghan cradles her bump



Oh hey, slow down.  Do you want to be plastered by the second commercial break?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

30 minutes until go time, ladies. Don't forget the popcorn


----------



## Chanbal

"_Sources fear pregnant Meghan’s decision to tell millions worldwide her side of their fall-out with “The Firm” means she has no intention of returning to these shores_."









						Meghan may never return to UK after angering Royal Family with Oprah interview
					

MEGHAN Markle may never come back to Britain after her bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview angered the Royal Family. Insiders fear she and Prince Harry could have burnt their bridges by failing to te…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## egak

The interview is showing tonight my time, since it's a public holiday I'll get the goss from this thread as there is no way I'm watching it!


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> Ok - so let me get this straight.  The interview is at Gails mansion - so Gail’s company would have hired out the space to OW’s company.  OW sells the interview to CBS who makes $ on advertising and selling to international outlets... and we are supposed to believe MM and H aren’t being paid?  there is no way MM won’t make money off this - maybe a sizeable donation to their foundation (so the foundation can pay MM and H expenses and salaries as execs of the foundation?)
> 
> All participants are getting rich off this publicity stunt.


I still can't get over gayle having a mansion in that prime area.  when we watch these people on tv they seem so relatable.  I know O is very wealthy and I know gayle has a good job but I didn't really think she was at that level

according to this she has a net worth of 38 mil.....not on oprahs level but far above the average








						Gayle King's Net Worth and Life Story (Updated 2022)
					

Gayle King's Net Worth and Life Story (Updated 2022)




					www.projecthatch.co


----------



## V0N1B2

Time to rock 'n roll dolls!






Let's do this!


----------



## bag-mania

I guess she didn’t trust Harry to talk to Oprah alone.


----------



## misskittee

My blood is already boiling


----------



## EverSoElusive

She didn't know about the BRF and she never looked Ginge up    Yeah right!


----------



## Chanbal

Waiting for news!


----------



## misskittee

This feels like she's practicing a scene for a television show


----------



## EverSoElusive

She used to take care of her grandmother. Oh really? Ginge asked if she knew how to curtsy


----------



## misskittee

Ok I feel validated guys - my husband goes "ok, she's full of ****" lololol


----------



## pinky7129

She has her original wedding band- the gold one. Didn’t she change it?


----------



## bag-mania

First commercial break and first impressions. She looks straight at Oprah when she is in her comfort zone. She looks away and blinks a lot when she’s trying to think of how to answer.


----------



## TimeToShop

Oh please, she didn’t google him?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Coming up will be the if she's silent or silenced question!!


----------



## rose60610

The first commercial was for Febreeze. A product to cover up stink. Appropriate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She knew Eug before meeting Hazzie??? Wow.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan, Oprah and Harry are sitting in a chicken coop with chickens. NOT social distancing! Even though they made a big deal of it at the start.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Wtf? Her bump is so huge in the button down shirt


----------



## bag-mania

Holy crap. Three days before the big wedding they got married in a small service.


----------



## misskittee

I've never seen someone enjoy talking about themselves so much. She's in utter heaven here.


----------



## EverSoElusive

People she love rescuing  she must thinks she rescued Ginge from BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMGGGGG.  Kate made her cry????


----------



## EverSoElusive

Her turning point was that she left Kate Middleton in tears!


----------



## bag-mania

She didn’t make Kate cry. Kate apologized to her for being upset.


----------



## rose60610

Kate made HER cry?  Lots of turning the tables!


----------



## Chanbal

TimeToShop said:


> Oh please, she didn’t google him?


Not watching, but hope you find your answer here!



Spoiler: When Harry met Meggy


----------



## bag-mania

Of course Kate made HER cry.


----------



## TC1

Why does she call Sarah Ferguson "Fergie" that seems a tad disrespectful to me. 
Now she's throwing Kate under the bus? ohh, ok


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## megs0927

I can’t. Kate made her cry???
“She apologized and I forgave her”


----------



## misskittee

Oh, thank goodness. MM has forgiven Kate. We can all go home now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The humblebragger lives on!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Awww poor Cringe cried She forgave Kate.


----------



## Jktgal

Good morning goodness fun! I'm here in spirit for the blow by blow.


----------



## Sly_Fox

*Malevolent or “monster” obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) includes obsessions about hurting other people.*
*
“Anger is like a flame blazing up and consuming our self-control, making us think, say, and do things that we will probably regret later.” — Thich Nhat Hanh*
*
“Hate is a mighty strong emotion. This mental venom can pollute your spirit, poison your soul and seep into all of the relationships that surround you. Anyone who has found themselves wrapped up in the arms of hate knows how damaging and mind-consuming it can become.”*



I really wouldn’t like to take advice on mental health from those two. They need to stop stalking the Royal Family in their juvenile attempt to stay relevant. They are seriously obsessed and not in a good way.

The shame of their petty behaviour will follow them for the rest of their lives which is the downside of airing your vacuous dirty linen in public.

How can anyone who preaches kindness to others treat an elderly family member with such vindictiveness.

How could anyone disparage the Queen on worldwide TV, one of the most dignified ladies in the world, at a time when her husband is in hospital.

Vultures - both of them!


----------



## bag-mania

Ooo Oprah called out the belly cradling.


----------



## queennadine

living for this play by play


----------



## EverSoElusive

She doesn't read things i.e. tabloids


----------



## TC1

AS IF Doria asked "Did Diana ever do any interviews?"


----------



## bag-mania

I’m not drinking enough yet, ladies. Please add the word “narrative” to the drinking game and take a couple swigs retroactively.


----------



## EverSoElusive

We want a hero and a villain hence she's held up to different standards than Kate


----------



## baghagg

Does anyone here know what kate's beef was with the dresses by any chance?  Just curious..


----------



## bag-mania

Is there a good reason to have a mini wedding service before the big one? Was she afraid he’d get cold feet or something?


----------



## TimeToShop

EverSoElusive said:


> Wtf? Her bump is so huge in the button down shirt



But yet she could squat pretty low in the chicken coop.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Take a drink!


----------



## baghagg

Ps. Silenced is golden


----------



## Tootsie17

This is so ridiculously funny and barf inducing at the same time!  I haven't had a drink yet, but I will need one soon.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She was silenced!!!! Her mouth was sewn shut


----------



## TimeToShop

Chanbal said:


> Not watching, but hope you find your answer here!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: When Harry met Meggy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5014514



Said she didn’t know much about him. Everything she needed to know she learned from him during their courtship. And said it with a straight face. I believe the tailor story.


----------



## bag-mania

Now she’s blaming them for not protecting her. They cannot protect you from yourself, Meg.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She's starting to wanna cry crocodile tears


----------



## bag-mania

At least she says nice things about the Queen.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap. Three days before the big wedding they got married in a small service.


Hey, you got to seal the deal in case someone locks the prince in the dungeon...  ahem...  seen the crown?  People disappear for their own protection...


----------



## Lounorada

I'm not watching, but reading your comments I am wondering what's the reason for Kate 'making her cry'? I don't believe that for a second but am interested to know the bullsh*t, perpetual victim story she made up in her head to say that.


----------



## misskittee

This is so self-indulgent and self-serving. Any person with an iota of self-awareness would not come near this with a 10 foot pole. There are a number of uber famous, uber rich people who basically don't seem to even exist. These two could have that if that's what they genuinely wanted but they don't.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lounorada said:


> I'm not watching, but reading your comments I am wondering what's the reason for Kate 'making her cry'? I don't believe that for a second but am interested to know the bullsh*t, perpetual victim story she made up in her head to say that.



Something to do with the flower girl dress. That's what she said but no specifics.


----------



## Tootsie17

She had such a "full" life.  I need a barf bag!!!!


----------



## lalame

I'm so done with CBS. I can't find any way to watch online at all... this after having a DirectTV login and signing up for paramount+.


----------



## pinky7129

lalame said:


> I'm so done with CBS. I can't find any way to watch online at all... this after having a DirectTV login and signing up for paramount+.


I’m watching it on paramount +. Go to live tv


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

She's really driving this conversation the way she wants. Why is Oprah even there? This is so cringe, and she's so smug. I want to reach out and slap her


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## EverSoElusive

She just claimed people were worried about how dark Archie's skin would be when born. I think she's the only person who plays the color card every chance she gets. I'm a WOC and totally disgusted by this.


----------



## TimeToShop

Commercial teaser .... there were questions about how dark Archie’s skin would be.


----------



## rose60610

There was concern how dark the baby was going to be. Oh. So she was welcomed, had the 50 million wedding, THEN this becomes a concern? A BRIDGE TOO FAR!


----------



## lalame

pinky7129 said:


> I’m watching it on paramount +. Go to live tv


It just plays local news...


----------



## Tootsie17

Wasn't the issue with the flower girls dresses that Kate thought the girls should be wearing tights as protocol dictated, but M didn't want them to wear the tights because it was allegedly going to be a warm day on the wedding?


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> I'm not watching, but reading your comments I am wondering what's the reason for Kate 'making her cry'? I don't believe that for a second but am interested to know the bullsh*t, perpetual victim story she made up in her head to say that.



She conveniently didn’t go into detail. She said because she put it behind her. That way she didn’t need to make up something.


----------



## scarlet555

sroze said:


> As I was signing into my account this afternoon to check the jewelry forum
> I became was curious as to what was being said about Megan And Prince Harry as it caught my eye under recent posts.
> I can’t begin to describe how horrible these comments are.
> So full of insults and belittling and hate from people who do not even know the couple. How does the purse forum let this go on? Slanderous things are being said. Is there no one who looks at what is being written? This is beyond gossip. This is full of hate.
> You are allowing horrible things to be written and go unchecked.
> I guess this is a side of a the purse forum that I was unaware of.
> Are you all having fun yet?



Sroze, you don’t sound like a Stan, fan...   hmmm, was the Interview Pre-tapped....  anyone? I almost feel like doing an edit to some of the sentences, like the one about slander... to add, ‘about me’. JK. Lol.  This is a gossip thread.  Have you been to the Kim K thread?


----------



## pinky7129

lalame said:


> It just plays local news...


What!? Really? That’s where i am...


----------



## Coconuts40

Why is she throwing Kate under the bus in this interview?

This really is so self serving.


----------



## poopsie

Holy guacamole I have some catching up!
Ran out of cat food thought I could hit PetSmart and be right back but nooooooo. One PetSmart, 3 Walmarts and 2 hours later! NO one has any cat food. They are going to HATE what they got


----------



## sgj99

How can you complain and whine about a life you chose!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

They just shown the South Africa interview


----------



## Lounorada

EverSoElusive said:


> Something to do with the flower girl dress. That's what she said but no specifics.


Thanks for the reply!
That's interesting, seeing as all witness/royal staff accounts in the media of that flower girl dress fitting state that it was Kate who was reduced to tears from MM behaviour. 
Not buying the perpetual victim's account of that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is nauseating self-indulgent nonsense. 
Live updates here :








						Boris Johnson says BBC must ensure Bashir’s Diana interview scandal never ‘happens again’ - follow live
					

Follow the latest on the fallout after an inquiry found ‘serious’ breaches were committed in the BBC’s explosive 1995 interview with Princess Diana




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Those trips are so exhausting!  Poor baby!


----------



## bag-mania

She had been suffering. She asked the BRF for protection and they wouldn’t give it!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Her royal life was exhausting and she's fried


----------



## lalame

pinky7129 said:


> What!? Really? That’s where i am...


I'm in the West Coast... maybe I actually have to wait until 8 pm local time?? That's really annoying.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> She conveniently didn’t go into detail. She said because she put it behind her. That *way she didn’t need to make up somethin*g.


LOL!  
on serious note, I forgot to get the jiffy pop popcorn when I went to Vons earlier...   really feel like a gin and tonic though...


----------



## EverSoElusive

After Australia, they weren't being protected?! Not protected from the tabloids. But she feeds the tabloid every damn day.


----------



## bag-mania

She is claiming the family weren’t going to provide security for Archie. And that Archie wouldn’t be a prince. I thought Meghan and Harry insisted he not be a prince.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Archie wasn't gonna receive security


----------



## rose60610

scarlet555 said:


> LOL!
> on serious note, I forgot to get the jiffy pop popcorn when I went to Vons earlier...   really feel like a gin and tonic though...



You're going to need ten G&T's


----------



## misskittee

Why are we claiming this is an interview? This is just a platform for Meghan to share her version of events while Oprah nods and repeats Meghan's sentiments with gusto.


----------



## EverSoElusive

They didn't create the monster machine


----------



## Allisonfaye

Ha. I called the walk around her garden and how peaceful....


----------



## TimeToShop

Oh please, “the most important title I will ever have is mom”.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If it meant Archie gets protection then the title of prince matters to her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Oprah called her out about the discrepancy.


----------



## TC1

She wants her kids to be princes SO BADLY 
I think the security is based on how close you are to the throne, not the colour of your skin if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## Megs

I forgot this was going to be on and just tuned in. Did Harry speak yet?


----------



## baghagg

Aren't their children not prince or princess because they're half American???


----------



## misskittee

I need more wine


----------



## TC1

Megs said:


> I forgot this was going to be on and just tuned in. Did Harry speak yet?


not yet!


----------



## baghagg

Megs said:


> I forgot this was going to be on and just tuned in. Did Harry speak yet?


In this gig he doesn't have a speaking role lol


----------



## scarlet555

rose60610 said:


> You're going to need ten G&T's


The G&T is for forgetting the Jiffy Pop Popcorn, for this interview I would have to do whiskey... no jokes, like straight or on the rocks, no other way to watch it, just like the how Nutty married Ginge before the wedding in a private ceremony, I will need a private cocktail booze fest before the interview and hopefully won’t be sober enough to find the channel.


----------



## Allisonfaye

megs0927 said:


> I can’t. Kate made her cry???
> “She apologized and I forgave her”



Crazy the press got it so wrong....


----------



## TC1

Calling the immediate royal family racist is a whole new low. If she wants to bring up the brooch, go ahead, I'm on board with that! But don't hide behind secret conversations that Harry relayed to you (allegedly)


----------



## scarlet555

misskittee said:


> I need more wine


Misskittee, may I take your order?  I would suggest whiskey or bourbon, straight vodka is fine too...


----------



## EverSoElusive

She's not telling who had skin color conversation with Harry.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She said it would be damaging to the BRF members.


----------



## rose60610

on the color of the baby: "I can't say who was in those conversations. It would be too damaging to them."

Oh, the relief they must be feeling!  What a liar!


----------



## Tootsie17

I don't believe her for one second about the title and security for Archie. Everything is relayed to her by Harry. Did she every confront this person that talked about Archie and his possible skin color?  As a mom, I would be ready to kick someone's a$$, if they talked badly about my child.  I call BS!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> She conveniently didn’t go into detail. She said because she put it behind her. That way she didn’t need to make up something.


Sounds about right, not one bit surprised by that. I hate that sneaky type of behaviour, she is so full of lies. Classic narcissist.


----------



## scarlet555

EverSoElusive said:


> She's not telling who had skin color conversation with Harry.


What’s Ginger doing while she is saying this load of crap... 
worried about damaging the BRF members?  Really?   REALLY?


----------



## bag-mania

It is compelling, I’ll say that.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm sorry, they need to be cut off completely and Duke and Duchess titles taken away. She should only be Meghan. Period. After all the welcome she received, she called everyone a racist. The effing nerve!


----------



## Jktgal

lalame said:


> Did anyone see this Page Six article about Jason Knauf? How does this square up with people's claims that Meghan's PAs were lazy, not used to the "direct" American working style, or were legacy employees who didn't want to change?
> Source: https://pagesix.com/2021/03/05/who-is-jason-knauf-source-of-the-meghan-markle-bullying-claims/



Because people don't understand how the 0.01% live. No, they don't recruit their staff from McDonalds.


----------



## rose60610

scarlet555 said:


> The G&T is for forgetting the Jiffy Pop Popcorn, for this interview *I would have to do whiskey.*.. no jokes,* like straight or on the rocks*, no other way to watch it, just like the how Nutty married Ginge before the wedding in a private ceremony, I will need a private cocktail booze fest before the interview and hopefully won’t be sober enough to find the channel.



I suggest skip the glass, just straight out of the bottle.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> Is there a good reason to have a mini wedding service before the big one? Was she afraid he’d get cold feet or something?


Pay attention please.   It was for THEM.    The big show was for everyone else.


----------



## bag-mania

For those not watching, she said the family didn’t give Archie a prince title because his skin might be too dark. When Oprah pressed her to say who said that, she wouldn’t give a name(s).


----------



## rose60610

I can't believe this huge LIE FEST!


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> She said it would be damaging to the BRF members.



This is a perfect training interview for all HR departments. She is not answering the questions because she wants to control what you think. Without stating it directly, she leaves the impression that W&K or C&C were concerned about skin color. If ever questioned directly, she will say, “I never said that.” Technically, true, but she knows exactly what she is doing.  

I know, right


----------



## EverSoElusive

How can Ginge let Cringe do this to his blood family? In a regular family, he would have been disowned.


----------



## rose60610

How many times has she said "RIGHT" ?


----------



## TC1

She has to keep catching herself saying she doesn't read any gossip or tabloids, but somehow she knew things were being spread.


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> How many times has she said "RIGHT" ?



It sounded as though like OW has the answers and she's just confirming them.


----------



## bag-mania

She is claiming she asked for help and she was refused.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

She didn't want to be alive!!! Awww.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> It is *compelling*, I’ll say that.


Bag-mania, Nutty will take that as a compliment... are you drunk yet?  Or doing the chocolate-if so, you may need a barf bag, there is a limit, can’t pee it out fast like alcohol.


----------



## Allisonfaye

She was 'silenced'. Poor thing. Because she was half black...don't you know.


----------



## lanasyogamama

So the RF was totally fine with the marriage but not with a mixed race baby? Doesn’t make sense.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She is referring to senior people as the institution. Just say who already if she ain't scared. She's supposed to tell her truths now, no?


----------



## bag-mania

She is saying she had suicidal thoughts. 

Hmm, none of this made it into Finding Freedom. Omid is probably watching like WTF.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> She is claiming she asked for help and she was refused.





EverSoElusive said:


> She didn't want to be alive!!! Awww.



In the beginning, everybody loved her! The media fawned over her!  SHE was the one who was the stupid one. THAT'S what started the negative coverage. It's on HER.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She had suicidal thoughts!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> How many times has she said "RIGHT" ?



Too drunk to count, right?


----------



## artax two

She cared so much for Archie that she contemplated suicide


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> She had suicidal thoughts!!!



‘Just like Diana’ — she’s admitting to mental health issues.
where was her mother?

”I can’t be left alone”. There it is — how she controls him.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Sister(s) in law...OPRAH.


----------



## bag-mania

She is making a lot of inflammatory claims but not naming names.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Too drunk to count, right?



I haven't had anything beyond water yet. That may change.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She had to turn over her passport, DL and keys. But she got to fly to NYC for baby shower


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

She's done. Attacking the future wife of the King of England? She has basically alienated millions of people and she won't be able to recover from this.  Harry, you just threw your family into the gutter but they're strong, you, meanwhile and your wife, you both have nothing to offer but to regurgitate this BS the rest of your lives. You both have no talent, or minimal at best for your wife and you, you are a disgrace to your family. Maybe you are not of the gene pool of your family. Maybe, just maybe.


----------



## bag-mania

Here comes the tears.


----------



## misskittee

I am a therapist, working in behavioral health, and I find this very difficult to believe. She speaks of her lethality as if she were talking about her Hermès collection. I never want to dismiss someone's pain but the underlying motivation is not to speak about mental health and bring awareness but to create a narrative of victimization and blame. Ultimately, the truth is likely somewhere in between. I am sure it was difficult but she is relishing in sharing these biased details with the world right now.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> She is saying she had suicidal thoughts.
> 
> Hmm, none of this made it into Finding Freedom. Omid is probably watching like WTF.


Good point! I was wondering the same thing.


----------



## TimeToShop

Now she’s saying the media almost drove her to suicide, asked for help, and was told no. She was begging for help but no one would. Said she had to find her own solution. Asked Diana’s best friend for help.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if she’s hinting that it’s Charles she spoke to.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Crocodile tears


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that are not watching, here is a picture of the scenario from DM:


----------



## bag-mania

Oprah slipped in a plug for her mental health series.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Word salad!!!


----------



## bag-mania

One hour down, one to go.


----------



## rose60610

Oprah's face looks terrible. Not due to age, it's like a mix of fillers that don't coordinate.


----------



## Aimee3

She was suicidal while pregnant with Archie?!  I don’t believe it!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Harry carries the weight of the world? He is not the king, girl!


----------



## Lodpah

artax two said:


> She cared so much for Archie that she contemplated suicide


Strong, independent woman of WOKE that she is could not walk out the door? Ok. I


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

On a serious note: I am sure Oprah followed with:  are you getting/seeking mental health, since she did talk about suicidal thoughts.  Didn’t Oprah used to be a journalist... let me look... reporter and news anchor-from Britannica... any follow up on Cringe seeing or seeking mental health, it would be the responsible thing to ask and not to ignore it... anyone?


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> Harry carries the weight of the world? He is not the king, girl!



Right? Right? Right? Right?


----------



## Tootsie17

If Kate is watching this, I know she is LIVID! I wonder if William has called Harry yet?


----------



## Aimee3

These commercials are pretty much one vein : sanitizers, women’s deodorants, laundry products lol


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are not watching, here is a picture of the scenario from DM:
> View attachment 5014540


Look at stupid Harry sitting there hearing all these things about his family and looks down. Shameful! I think he is a dim witted mentally ill and going more mental by his wife's hand.


----------



## Allisonfaye

I don't believe her story about not getting security because of no title.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Tootsie17 said:


> If Kate is watching this, I know she is LIVID! I wonder if William has called Harry yet?



Kate has been the bigger person and doesn't give into BS like this. I'm glad she's the future queen and not Cringe. I hope Kate isn't wasting her time watching. Her assistant would probably watch and give her an update.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She's not gonna live in fear. She doesn't know how they can expect them to be just silent.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She lost her father??? She did that herself. Not the BRF.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ok now I think she’s pointing at William.


----------



## TC1

She sure sayd "I" a lot, then has to follow up quickly with "we"


----------



## bag-mania

Now she is saying she “lost her dad.” As if he died instead of her cutting him off.


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> She's not gonna live in fear. She doesn't know how they can expect them to be just silent.


Silent? Last look a book about them, daily barrage of media onslaught about how they are saving the world and silent? She's so delusional.  These two are pretty sickos and playing us for fools. Did they throw in any "innuendos" like crocodile, waffle and chicken? 

I don't think any A list producer, director or whatever will take them seriously. I'm wondering what Daniel Craig is thinking right now.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> She is making a lot of inflammatory claims but not naming names.



Well this can easily be fact checked because lucky for her that an investigation on workplace behaviour is about to happen.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Even Oprah doesn't believe the part about Archie's skin color.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Aimee3 said:


> These commercials are pretty much one vein : sanitizers, women’s deodorants, laundry products lol


So much for strong, independent female type commercials, huh?


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> Silent? Last look a book about them, daily barrage of media onslaught about how they are saving the world and silent? She's so delusional.  These two are pretty sickos and playing us for fools. Did they throw in any "innuendos" like crocodile, waffle and chicken?
> 
> I don't think any A list producer, director or whatever will take them seriously. I'm wondering what *Daniel Craig is thinking right no*w.


What is this about Daniel Craig... I may have blinked and missed it...


----------



## EverSoElusive

I think one thing that Cringe doesn't understand about the BRF is that they have better things to do i.e. serve the UK people than to respond to every single tabloid or rumor to confirm or negate every gossip. BRF is not effing Kartrashian clan.


----------



## Chanbal

I sincerely don't believe this, but it is making me sick. 

"_When Oprah asked if she was denied the title because of he is mixed-race, Oprah asked if the palace had concerns Archie would be 'too brown', Meghan said: 'In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, we have in tandem, the conversation of "He won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title," and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he's born'.

Oprah then interrupted and said: 'Hold on. Hold up. Stop right now. There's a conversation... about how dark your baby is going to be?' Meghan replied: 'Potentially, and what that would mean or look like'.

'And you're not going to tell me who had the conversation?', Oprah asked. To which Meghan replied: 'I think that would be very damaging to them.  That was relayed to me from Harry. Those were conversations that family had with him'. _" 









						'I was naive marrying Harry', says Meghan as Oprah gets underway
					

The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah said she 'couldn't be left alone' and that her husband had 'cradled' her as she told him she her suicidal thoughts at their cottage next to Windsor Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

She grabbed his hand, drink!


----------



## Lodpah

scarlet555 said:


> What is this about Daniel Craig... I may have blinked and missed it...


He was in a video with the Queen in James Bond and from reading his interviews he seemed like a Royalist and supporter of everything that is good and right. Really cute video.


----------



## gracekelly

I want to know if Lady CC heard about the suicidal thoughts or the question of Archie's skin color.  She is the last person on earth I would think of having thoughts about suicide.


----------



## bag-mania

They are having a girl baby.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

rose60610 said:


> There was concern how dark the baby was going to be. Oh. So she was welcomed, had the 50 million wedding, THEN this becomes a concern? A BRIDGE TOO FAR!


I do not understand.  The Queen felt this marriage was a way for the monarchy to evolve and be relevant for her people.  A Black child was to be expected.  Could there have been an individual who said this? Yes.  But I doubt if it was the inner circle.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

scarlet555 said:


> What is this about Daniel Craig... I may have blinked and missed it...


We may be ready for a 007 hit.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I bet this is the first that the BRF is hearing that these grifters are having a girl.


----------



## gracekelly

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I do not understand.  The Queen felt this marriage was a way for the monarchy to evolve and be relevant for her people.  A Black child was to be expected.  Could there have been an individual who said this? Yes.  But I doubt if it was the inner circle.


She is throwing that on Harry as he is the one who relayed this to her.


----------



## HiromiT

bag-mania said:


> She is saying she had suicidal thoughts.
> 
> Hmm, none of this made it into Finding Freedom. Omid is probably watching like WTF.


BS. She wants to mirror Diana who supposedly threw herself down a flight of stairs while pregnant.

I’m not watching so I thank everyone who is and posting updates!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is so fake, so staged, such BS.

Does everyone understand that they are not safe!  Sheesh, not safe! e.v.e.r.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is not an intelligent man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Why exactly would they expect paid security by BRF when living outside the UK?


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is so fake, so staged, such BS.
> 
> Does everyone understand that they are not safe!  Sheesh, not safe! e.v.e.r.


Stop your slandering!  Lol!!!


----------



## bag-mania

They are mad because they didn’t get all the amenities even though they willingly left.


----------



## Aimee3

I don’t understand what they needed help with. Kind of vague.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> They are having a girl baby.



wonder what her name will be?


----------



## TC1

Harry has been so coached for this. When he goes off script, she steps in to correct him and take over


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Why exactly would they expect paid security by BRF when living outside the UK?



because they are so beloved worldwide.  Right?


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> wonder what her name will be?


I bet it'll be Diana, either first or middle name.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> wonder what her name will be?



Harpo


----------



## Allisonfaye

She went to a palace official and told them she needed mental help health and they said no. Not buying it.


----------



## misskittee

How is Oprah just getting away with egging these two on and putting words in their mouths?


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## bag-mania

Off topic but Gayle’s property is gorgeous.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan has that shovel in hand and keeps digging herself in deeper with every word out of her mouth. It's almost unbelievable what a self-destruction mission she is on...Not sure who exactly is going to buy her sob stories and how she will benefit from them. Certainly her goose is cooked back in the UK and Commonwealth.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Allisonfaye said:


> She went to a palace official and told them she needed mental help health and they said no. Not buying it.



BRF does not want more drama and I'm sure they could have brought in a therapist to the palace ground for her. Just saying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

EverSoElusive said:


> Why exactly would they expect paid security by BRF when living outside the UK?


Obviously, they, I joke not when I say this, are not obviously mentally well and I do hope for the sake of their children, they get some mental health, albeit they may have to pay for it themselves and not expect Oprah or the BRF to pay for it... which could pose a problem, you know like ’who‘s paying for security? Who’s paying for mental health? Who’s paying for my meds?’
Harry has really turned into Edward, I do believe he is Charles son... coward-like behavior while someone is talking sh!t about your family across the world and you‘re counting chickens in your head.


----------



## bellecate

Tootsie17 said:


> Wasn't the issue with the flower girls dresses that Kate thought the girls should be wearing tights as protocol dictated, but M didn't want them to wear the tights because it was allegedly going to be a warm day on the wedding?


Something I read said the dress didn't fit and didn't look good and megain was all, it's fine.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.


----------



## Allisonfaye

You know what would solve ALL of her mental health issues? A crapload of money. Need an eyeroll emoji.


----------



## Kansashalo

Aww, they are having a girl!  YAY!

What M&H is sharing in this interview is not surprising to me  - especially give the tone of this thread.  While I'm from the US (so I know I come from a totally different POV of "royalty" and what that means) however I know what it's like to experience an onslaught of microaggression on a daily basis, the need to cut off certain family members, and doing what I need to do for my own mental well-being - even if it displeased others.   And this is without the "gift" of being in the public eye.

I applaud Harry for putting his family first instead of his title.  It takes a lot.


----------



## Lake Effect

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are not watching, here is a picture of the scenario from DM:
> View attachment 5014540


As someone on the fringe of watching this, who is somewhat curious, what in the actual ... is Oprah doing interviewing them in a ??? chicken coop ??? It looks like Harry is playing with a chicken. 
Oprah has lost her mind?


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.


probably got tired of him always asking for money


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> BRF does not want more drama and I'm sure they could have brought in a therapist to the palace ground for her. Just saying.


They gave one to Diana per the Morton book which she dictated, she did not like the person


----------



## EverSoElusive

It's all about their mental health!! What about Ginge's family members'???


----------



## Aimee3

So Charles stopped taking H’s calls.


----------



## rose60610

Ooh, Oprah informing M that she orchestrated and calculated the Megzit, and M gives her the "wha? evil smirk".


----------



## Lodpah

From a Scott White on Quora:

t could be out of Her Majesty's hands anyways. _*If the British Government feel that they have in anyway done damage to the British reputation and to the reputation of Her Majesty's Government, T*_he PM may inform The Queen that it is the advice of Her Majesty's Government that the Titles and their spot in Succession be removed permanently from them immediately and that Her Majesty's Government will provide any assistance necessary to make it happen. The Queen will be obligated to follow the advice from the Government. She may even get calls from the 15 other nations that she is Queen of and request the same.

And if Boris is smart, he will release a press statement saying that this is happening on the advice and instance of the British Government to send a clear indication to M fans and supporters that it is not The Queen acting but the British Government, to save The Queen from getting even more abuse online and on TV from the US


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie asked for calm 3 times, dammit. 
Yay, the future King of England stopped taking H&M‘s  calls.
  Okaaay, Charles, I am impressed. That is a boss move. Respect. 



Aimee3 said:


> So Charles stopped taking H’s calls.


----------



## Coconuts40

Why would security be provided to them when they're no longer working royals?
This is definitely not straightofward since this is a family business.  As a family member I understand the desire for security, but when you're no longer a working royal, how did they expect the taxpayers would continue to pay for security?


----------



## Allisonfaye

She's so proud of the courage she displayed in admitting she needs help.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> They gave one to Diana per the Morton book which she dictated, she did not like the person



This is exactly why it's so hard for us to believe that Me-gain wasn't given help when she asked. BRF would have brought someone on. Without any doubt. She's a liar with every word she spews.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Coconuts40 said:


> Why would security be provided to them when they're no longer working royals?
> This is definitely not straightofward since this is a family business.  As a family member I understand the desire for security, but when you're no longer a working royal, how did they expect the taxpayers would continue to pay for security?



Exactly! She tried to make it seem like it was racism.


----------



## lalame

Wills and Harry also said they went to therapy themselves so I also am perplexed by this claim they denied her mental healthcare. I mean.... how can anyone deny her mental healthcare? In the UK of all places?


----------



## bag-mania

Lake Effect said:


> As someone on the fringe of watching this, who is somewhat curious, what in the actual ... is Oprah doing interviewing them in a ??? chicken coop ??? It looks like Harry is playing with a chicken.
> Oprah has lost her mind?



They visited the chicken coop at the beginning. Meghan has rescue chickens, don’t you know?  Isn’t any chicken that is allowed to live a rescue chicken?


----------



## Lodpah

Lake Effect said:


> As someone on the fringe of watching this, who is somewhat curious, what in the actual ... is Oprah doing interviewing them in a ??? chicken coop ??? It looks like Harry is playing with a chicken.
> Oprah has lost her mind?


An ode to the chicken roast, I suppose or O is playing mind games with them and has relegated them to the CS level.


----------



## Aimee3

Not part of the UK but wow, I imagine no one would want this Azz on the throne!


----------



## scarlet555

Allisonfaye said:


> She went to a palace official and told them she needed mental help health and they said no. Not buying it.


That’s a lie to end all truth right there... NO WAY in this world would this ever happen.  BRF have plenty of specialist/mental expert.  Now BRF may not pay for OW’s or Dr. Phil’s list of mental (health) providers (LOL), but they have their own ‘family’ doctors and those would include mental health.
Now of course I am sure Cringe said something in the line of “she wanted to seek mental health (of her choosing-and didn’t mention this important bid in the interview) and the palace said:  “(F*cking) no (way when we are already paying a bunch of shrinks for the firm-and _in your contract-you agreed to see palace appointed mental health shrinks-and probably showed her the contract-wedding papers prenuptial whatever)_


----------



## bag-mania

She is comparing herself to the Little Mermaid!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.


Finally.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie asked for calm 3 times, dammit.
> Yay, the future King of England stopped taking H&M‘s  calls.
> Okaaay, Charles, I am impressed. That is a boss move. Respect.




Charles probably got a telling by Phillip


----------



## mdcx

Allisonfaye said:


> She went to a palace official and told them she needed mental help health and they said no. Not buying it.


Translation: "Meghan demanded a very particular, expensive, hard to obtain, inappropriate, not acceptable under palace protocol around privacy etc form of therapy via a very non standard channel of communication, and when she received a response that her request could not be accommodated exactly as demanded but options X Y and Z from highly respected UK professionals were available, she refused them and decided this would all be a good contribution to her _Little Black Book of Offenses Against Princess Meghan_ and noted it down."


----------



## bag-mania

She pretty much has admitted she wanted out within about six months.


----------



## A1aGypsy

bag-mania said:


> She is comparing herself to the Little Mermaid!




What????? Still trolling Disney, I see


----------



## TC1

Megs is the little mermaid ya'll. Married a prince, lost her voice and got it back. REJOICE


----------



## EverSoElusive

She's the Little Mermaid? Noooooo. Ariel wasn't nasty like her!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie asked for calm 3 times, dammit.
> Yay, the future King of England stopped taking H&M‘s  calls.
> Okaaay, Charles, I am impressed. That is a boss move. Respect.


F+cking finally! Is all I could think of.


----------



## marietouchet

Kansashalo said:


> Aww, they are having a girl!  YAY!
> 
> What M&H is sharing in this interview is not surprising to me  - especially give the tone of this thread.  While I'm from the US (so I know I come from a totally different POV of "royalty" and what that means) however I know what it's like to experience an onslaught of microaggression on a daily basis, the need to cut off certain family members, and doing what I need to do for my own mental well-being - even if it displeased others.   And this is without the "gift" of being in the public eye.
> 
> I applaud Harry for putting his family first instead of his title.  It takes a lot.


Agree sometimes an exit is the best strategy 
What I don’t understand is the benefit of blaming others, who are no longer in your life, two years after the fact ...


----------



## mdcx

The BRF have boss moves dating back hundreds of years. Meghan is no match for them...


----------



## EverSoElusive

Why would the BRF say anything? They didn't say anything when Andrew was linked to Epstein. The BRF simply doesn't answer to tabloids ok, Ginge?


----------



## DrDior

This interview proves the old saying, "It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it."


----------



## Allisonfaye

I can't see any future relationship at all after this between them and the BRF. It's over.


----------



## Lake Effect

bag-mania said:


> They visited the chicken coop at the beginning. Meghan has rescue chickens, don’t you know?  Isn’t any chicken that is allowed to live a rescue chicken?





Lodpah said:


> An ode to the chicken roast, I suppose or O is playing mind games with them and has relegated them to the CS level.


lol ty


----------



## lalame

Now my question is.... how is what they are doing ANY different than what her father did - making a big public stink just to "tell their side of the story"... I thought her dad was a sleazeball for doing all that press (as I think they are now) but I hope he addresses this huge hypocrisy with Piers. AND I hope Meghan has more sympathy for her family now.


----------



## Kansashalo

marietouchet said:


> Agree sometimes an exit is the best strategy
> What I don’t understand is the benefit of blaming others, who are no longer in your life, two years after the fact ...



If the others were a major contributor to your exit, then you have every right to call them out should you so desire.


----------



## rose60610

Despite throwing everyone under the bus, they still suck up to the Queen. Obviously it's only because of Philip's ill health and they know they couldn't recover from criticizing THEM. I hope they've buried themselves with this interview regardless.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Allisonfaye said:


> I can't see any future relationship at all after this between them and the BRF. It's over.



One almost wonders if that is was the purpose. I’m gobsmacked by all of this.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Who says 'summertime' when asked when the baby is due?


----------



## needlv

The claim about titles bothers me.  Only up to grandchildren of the monarch do you get prince and princess titles.  Archie would be a great grandchild of the Queen and too far down the line of succession.  For W&K kids, the Queen issued Letters Patent changing the rules and giving it to their kids because W will be King.


----------



## misskittee

So Meghan aside, because she is a disingenuous and poor representative of action and change, but I do support that institutions like the BRF could probably do more to enact systemic change, in a deliberate and non-passive way. But same could be said for any major institution and organization with a global reach. Ultimately, the world must do better but Megan and Harry are not the ones to pioneer this. They'd have to give up this self-centered narrative first and that's not something they are willing to do.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree sometimes an exit is the best strategy
> What I don’t understand is the benefit of blaming others, who are no longer in your life, two years after the fact ...



She needs a nameless enemy to play the victim.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

scarlet555 said:


> That’s a lie to end all truth right there... NO WAY in this world would this ever happen.  BRF have plenty of specialist/mental expert.  Now BRF may not pay for OW’s or Dr. Phil’s list of mental (health) providers (LOL), but they have their own ‘family’ doctors and those would include mental health.
> Now of course I am sure Cringe said something in the line of “she wanted to seek mental health (of her choosing-and didn’t mention this important bid in the interview) and the palace said:  “(F*cking) no (way when we are already paying a bunch of shrinks for the firm-and _in your contract-you agreed to see palace appointed mental health shrinks-and probably showed her the contract-wedding papers prenuptial whatever)_


My explanation, she wanted to go to an alternate type of treatment for which there are numerous if buts and ands


----------



## Aimee3

Why did she have to write them letters?  They couldn’t speak?


----------



## misskittee

Lol my husband: "you didn't have a career, you were on Suits."


----------



## bag-mania

She cut Harry off when he tried to talk.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Prince Harry, you need to earn the security because it's paid by UK taxpayers. It ain't free.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry says he was trapped but he didn’t know it.


----------



## BriLilyMoore

Kansashalo said:


> Aww, they are having a girl!  YAY!
> 
> What M&H is sharing in this interview is not surprising to me  - especially give the tone of this thread.  While I'm from the US (so I know I come from a totally different POV of "royalty" and what that means) however I know what it's like to experience an onslaught of microaggression on a daily basis, the need to cut off certain family members, and doing what I need to do for my own mental well-being - even if it displeased others.   And this is without the "gift" of being in the public eye.
> 
> I applaud Harry for putting his family first instead of his title.  It takes a lot.



I COMPLETELY agree. The comments are astounding.


----------



## marietouchet

Kansashalo said:


> If the others were a major contributor to your exit, then you have every right to call them out should you so desire.


Agree, getting back is one’s prerogative ...


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> The claim about titles bothers me.  Only up to grandchildren of the monarch do you get prince and princess titles.  Archie would be a great grandchild of the Queen and too far down the line of succession.  For W&K kids, the Queen issued Letters Patent changing the rules and giving it to their kids because W will be King.


This shows her basic lack of understanding.  If she was really interested she would have investigated this while pregnant and known it was not the done thing for Harry's children.


----------



## mdcx

Kansashalo said:


> If the others were a major contributor to your exit, then you have every right to call them out should you so desire.


You have to ask yourself at some point, why did she enter into this role, in this institution when she had no intention whatsoever of fulfilling the duties of it? It's almost as though she married into the BRF solely to have something to protest against and contribute to her victim narrative. That and the money, title etc obviously.
The BRF thoroughly educate "commoners" on what is required of them marrying in at such a high level. It is beyond belief that Meghan did not understand the magnitude of this decision. Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas both turned the role down....


----------



## bag-mania

I hope Philip doesn’t see this.


----------



## lalame

Kansashalo said:


> If the others were a major contributor to your exit, then you have every right to call them out should you so desire.



I think everyone has a RIGHT to air their grievance for sure but the question is when does it become counter-productive? You normally don't leave a job by emailing everyone trashing your boss... ending a friendship by blasting that person all over your facebook... stop talking to family members by airing their dirty laundry all over the neighborhood... You just peace out and move on. This doesn't sound like they did anything illegal or abusive towards her that would justify a huge tell all like this so it seems out of proportion.


----------



## rose60610

ULTIMATE VICTIM! It's all POOR ME! And Harry said he was TRAPPED. But didn't know he was trapped. 

WTF?  Dear husband just said "Trapped my *ss!" DH is trapped watching this show with me (not really, he's at liberty to leave but it's become a slow train wreck and we can't turn away.)


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> She needs a nameless enemy to play the victim.



For someone who wants to tell her truths so badly, she really isn't doing so. She's just telling ambiguity


----------



## rose60610

misskittee said:


> Lol my husband: "you didn't have a career, you were on Suits."



MY husband said "What was Suits? Was she an actress?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Harry says he was trapped but he didn’t know it.


Harry is a perfect example of Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry says he was trapped but he didn’t know it.



The whole family is trapped and don’t know it.
We need a hero. Who can rush in and rescue them?  Send in the heroes ASAP!


----------



## Gracilan

Delighted that they’re living THEIR lives. Good for them!


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> The whole family is trapped and don’t know it.
> We need a hero. Who can rush in and rescue them?  Send in the heroes ASAP!



They are all porcelain dolls


----------



## cafecreme15

I am hesitant to weigh in on this thread due to some of the vitriol as of late but I can’t resist. Harry and Wills and Charles are TRAPPED?? Because they have to wake up and show up to events and shake hands with a smile?? If anyone is trapped it’s us normal working folks, who have to wake up every day to do jobs we hate just to keep a roof over our heads and the bills paid. He doesn’t know the meaning of the word. What an embarrassment. TRAPPED....


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> For those not watching, she said the family didn’t give Archie a prince title because his skin might be too dark. When Oprah pressed her to say who said that, she wouldn’t give a name(s).


He becomes a prince when Charles becomes King.   This according to Harry’s great great grandfather who changed the rule when the family was too big with too many “royals”


----------



## Coconuts40

Well, so glad Harry untrapped himself.  
The reason for this interview still eludes me.  
He doesn't have to worry about being trapped again, this sealed the deal that he will never need to worry about being part of the Institution ever again.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Does Oprah seem to get that this is a gong show? (I’m not watching)


----------



## artax two

Harry is backed so far into a corner he can never get out


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Harry is a perfect example of Stockholm Syndrome.



Perfect example of someone in love with himself.  
I am a Prince. I asked 3 times for The tabloids to back off. 3 times. I shouldn‘t need to ask once.  3 times.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Harry says he was trapped but he didn’t know it.


I think his past and present tense is confusing him.  I think he means, he is trap and doesn’t know it...


----------



## TC1

This is all so clearly sour grapes. They say numerous times they just wanted to "step back" umm, you wanted to be paid of service, but do no service.


----------



## bag-mania

She’s got a grip on his hand when Oprah is asking the uncomfortable questions.


----------



## lalame

cafecreme15 said:


> I am hesitant to weigh in on this thread due to some of the vitriol as of late but I can’t resist. Harry and Wills and Charles are TRAPPED?? Because they have to wake up and show up to events and shake hands with a smile?? If anyone is trapped it’s us normal working folks, who have to wake up every day to do jobs we hate just to keep a roof over our heads and the bills paid. He doesn’t know the meaning of the word. What an embarrassment. TRAPPED....



I think there's a collective side eye from the internet, and even Oprah, at that comment!


----------



## mdcx

TC1 said:


> This is all so clearly sour grapes. They say numerous times they just wanted to "step back" umm, you wanted to be paid of service, but do no service.


Yes, give us the dosh but respect our privacy! No we do not want to shake hands with common villagers who waited hours to meet us!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

He's cut off financially but he bought a mansion with more bathrooms than his small family ever needs?    Not very financially astute is he?


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan and Harry are literally LDC in the movie Shutter Island looking for enemies in the BRF. This is how it will end up for them when reality hits them and get their treatment from professionals.


----------



## EverSoElusive

He is trying to heal the relationship by doing this interview. Perfect!!


----------



## Allisonfaye

Although I think Oprah is buying most of the racism stuff, I don't think she is buying everything they are saying. Like when she said why would they have said the queen was blindsided?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Ginge won't share the conversation about Archie's skin color.


----------



## Kansashalo

mdcx said:


> You have to ask yourself at some point, why did she enter into this role, in this institution when she had no intention whatsoever of fulfilling the duties of it? It's almost as though she married into the BRF solely to have something to protest against and contribute to her victim narrative. That and the money, title etc obviously.
> The BRF thoroughly educate "commoners" on what is required of them marrying in at such a high level. It is beyond belief that Meghan did not understand the magnitude of this decision. Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas both turned the role down....



Per Meghan herself, she said she did want to be apart of the BRF but circumstances (including the overall lack of support) that impacted her mental well-being made it clear that life wasn't possible.

In a simplistic way, it's like you are excited to take a new job...you go through new hire orientation learning all the rules, culture, etc....then you start your job and it sucks.  Yes, its the job they promised you, but your department's culture is nothing like they showed during orientation. lol


----------



## haute okole

She is your typical D list, clout chasing actress.  Look at the way she talks and carries herself.  She is so poised, practiced and fake.  She bagged the Golden Goose and once she held the power, she was determined to make changes from within because she knew she could.  When she did not get her way, she threw tantrums, took her toys and boyfriend with her and started badmouthing the hand that feeds, which is SO L.A.  Things will end up tragically sad for them.  I wonder how Harry likes being "woke."  The Duke and Duchess of "Sucks to be Them", she has dragged him into the eternal, "I am a victim" mentality.  Such a shame, she could have been awesome.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Harry says he was trapped but he didn’t know it.


What Harry was and continues to be is the village idiot.


----------



## scarlet555

cafecreme15 said:


> I am hesitant to weigh in on this thread due to some of the vitriol as of late but I can’t resist. Harry and Wills and Charles are TRAPPED?? Because they have to wake up and show up to events and shake hands with a smile?? If anyone is trapped it’s us normal working folks, who have to wake up every day to do jobs we hate just to keep a roof over our heads and the bills paid. He doesn’t know the meaning of the word. What an embarrassment. TRAPPED....


----------



## EverSoElusive

They did everything they could to protect the BRF y'all!


----------



## gracekelly

It seems that many of Meghan's misunderstandings, and I am being polite using the word misunderstanding, stems from her willful ignorance.  If she truly did not know about this family, what was expected of her, she should have kept a low profile when first married and learned all of the above.  The problem is that when you come in "hitting the ground running" it is hard to do that.  Where did the idea spring up that she had to rush into doing anything with an institution that was well set up and had been running itself for a long time without her help.   Did she actually expect to change things in 5 minutes?  The fact that the family welcomed a woman of color so warmly was a interesting development right there in my way of thinking.  I didn't think they had it in them to do that and they surprised me.  The meanest thing she has said so far was to say that comments were being made about the child's potential color and they didn't say that to her directly she is claiming, but to Harry.  I think that Harry was the one who was thinking about this and perhaps worried he couldn't handle it if the child came out darker than Meghan.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> She is claiming she asked for help and she was refused.


Diana has therapy in house for years when they realized she was in trouble   Why would they deny M?


----------



## gracekelly

Gracilan said:


> Delighted that they’re living THEIR lives. Good for them!


Right, bully for them and now that they have had their whine and hard cheese party, they can really become private people in their mega mansion and live happily  ever after.  When will they come out to whine again?  Is never too soon?


----------



## bag-mania

Back to the chicken coop.


----------



## lalame

I don't blame M or H for leaving. That life is not suited to their personalities at ALL - namely the stifling rules, lack of personal support, etc. Just like any company, it's a fit for some and not for others. Nothing wrong with leaving.

But I think the main reason they're getting hate now is the ongoing airing of dirty laundry and continued profiting off of what the BRF gave them (namely the platform) WHILE blaming them. I just think it's all in very bad taste. If it were me, I would've left and never said another negative thing about them. Just live your life. As a celebrity, everyone says everything about you all the time!! Ignore it! They're making it VERY personal, and notice most of the bombshell claims have been about the family dynamics not the business.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Kansashalo said:


> ...the need to cut off certain family members, and doing what I need to do for my own mental well-being - even if it displeased others.



They've cut off ALL family members - hers and his and their son's. Systematically. This interview seals the deal. All of them, down to grandparents who basically raised him; people who paid her elite private school/university/, and provided network of emmy award winning/industry jobs; etc. TOXIC, the lot of them. But not when they were writing the checks. Their son now calls the kind compassionate human David Foster as grandpa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Y’all, she had to learn the UK anthem!!!  It is different from the USA anthem !!! Whaaaa???!!!!


----------



## Megs

I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's like to be them, so putting all that aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or what has happened to them - what is their hope to gain from this interview? 

People that love them will continue to love them and this will give them more reason to love them. But those who aren't fond of them, won't believe any of this. And then there's the Royal Family - what do they think this will do for them with the Royal Family?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Harry is not saying more than he is saying. He is trying to protect the system to a degree. She is not.


----------



## 1LV

haute okole said:


> She is your typical D list, clout chasing actress.  Look at the way she talks and carries herself.  She is so poised, practiced and fake.  She bagged the Golden Goose and once she held the power, she was determined to make changes from within because she knew she could.  When she did not get her way, she threw tantrums, took her toys and boyfriend with her and started badmouthing the hand that feeds, which is SO L.A.  Things will end up tragically sad for them.  I wonder how Harry likes being "woke."  The Duke and Duchess of "Sucks to be Them", she has dragged him into the eternal, "I am a victim" mentality.  Such a shame, she could have been awesome.


Amen.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Harry is a big bore.


----------



## Silverplume

I’ve just read and “liked” posts here for a few months, but am popping out of my lurkdom to *thank you* all for the laughs! This is my favorite thread on the internet.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I don't need to wait till the end of the interview to say this. I learned nothing concrete from it. It's all ambiguity with zero courageous truth that the promo clips made me think Cringe was dying to share with the world. All she wanted to do is to simply thrash the BRF. Cringe is nothing but an attention wh*re and just wanted front page coverage to garner sympathy because everyone has wronged her for being a WOC. 4 minutes to go and I can shower at last!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Favorite word is drive safe


----------



## justwatchin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Diana has therapy in house for years when they realized she was in trouble   Why would they deny M?


I’m sure they didn’t or wouldn’t if that really happened. And why if you needed mental help wouldn’t you have gone to your spouse? Not buying it.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Y’all, she had to learn the UK anthem!!!  It is different from the USA anthem !!! Whaaaa???!!!!



Heaven forbid an actress would have to learn new lines


----------



## lalame

Megs said:


> I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's like to be them, so putting all that aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or what has happened to them - *what is their hope to gain from this interview?*
> 
> People that love them will continue to love them and this will give them more reason to love them. But those who aren't fond of them, won't believe any of this. And then there's the Royal Family - what do they think this will do for them with the Royal Family?



Even the mythical Sphinx couldn't answer this riddle.


----------



## Aqua01

The biatch: "We did everything we could to protect them (BRF) "
The hostage: "I love my grandma, father, and brother to bits"
Me: "Bwaahaahahahahaha. WHA.....?? What the actual F do you think you're doing right now then???"


----------



## gracekelly

If  Meghan had never come on the scene, Harry would still be dressing up in his various uniforms to play toy soldier and reading speeches written for him by people who can actually create a coherent sentence.  He would do his various charity bits, go visit his aristo friends on shooting party weekends and he would have been happier on the whole.  If he didn't want to do any of the above, he would have been quietly released from doing it and still getting a nice livable allowance from Daddy, and still be on speaking terms with his brother and greater family.  As it happens, the right person came along and awakened the devil child/bad seed  gene in him and encouraged it.  We know the rest of the story.


----------



## Gracilan

gracekelly said:


> Right, bully for them and now that they have had their whine and hard cheese party, they can really become private people in their mega mansion and live happily  ever after.  When will they come out to whine again?  Is never too soon?


Good for them, no longer trapped in that weird world


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Back to the chicken coop.


I wonder if the chickens are Gayle’s? This is important  ....


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's like to be them, so putting all that aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or what has happened to them - what is their hope to gain from this interview?
> 
> People that love them will continue to love them and this will give them more reason to love them. But those who aren't fond of them, won't believe any of this. And then there's the Royal Family - what do they think this will do for them with the Royal Family?



Revenge.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Greater than any fairytale    She definitely lives in a fantasy land. That's nutty for a 40 yo woman.


----------



## Allisonfaye

She had to learn the British National anthem on her own? Wow. Life is hard.


----------



## tiktok

Kansashalo said:


> If the others were a major contributor to your exit, then you have every right to call them out should you so desire.



The difference is most people don't exit and then continue to profit from their association with said (supposed) contributors. If Harry wasn't part of the British royal family no one would give a @#$% about him or his wife, with all due respect to her former "career". If you continue to profit from that association it's so much better to just shut up and live your life. But they always want to have their cake and eat it too - just like they did with the "we want to take a step back, keep all the perks and none of the responsibilities". Which is why anyone who's really looked into their demands and behavior can't stand them.


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> I wonder if the chickens are Gayle’s? This is important  ....


They are probably going to be roasted chickens


----------



## V0N1B2

Megs said:


> I have a sincere question.... what is their hope to gain from this interview?


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perfect example of someone in love with himself.
> I am a Prince. I asked 3 times for The tabloids to back off. 3 times. I shouldn‘t need to ask once.  3 times.


But they need the tabloids to keep them famous.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I wonder if the chickens are Gayle’s? This is important  ....



The chicken coop scenes were on their property. I thought the beautiful gazebo scenes were not, but maybe they were?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Harry has to be on his A game and smile when working? Geez. Who doesn't?


----------



## CarryOn2020

They did this interview because they are emotionally stunted fame-w@ores. 
‘Plus, they need money$$$ for their security.


----------



## Tootsie17

I got a phone call and missed most of the last hour, so I will catch up tomorrow.  It's been fun reading the comments and I only had one drink.  You all are the most astute group of thread members with great wit and charm.  Thanks for a fun evening.


----------



## artax two

I hope W and K have 17 children


----------



## gracekelly

Megs said:


> I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's like to be them, so putting all that aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or what has happened to them - what is their hope to gain from this interview?
> 
> People that love them will continue to love them and this will give them more reason to love them. But those who aren't fond of them, won't believe any of this. And then there's the Royal Family - what do they think this will do for them with the Royal Family?



There is a blind on Blind Gossip dating back to January 2020.  The gist of it is that the family believes that they will be divorced within 5 years and at that time,  if things with Harry haven't eroded totally, they want him back.  They think that if they come after them too hard now , then he won't feel that he can leave her and that is the long game they are playing to get him back.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> They did this interview because they are emotionally stunted fame-w@ores.
> ‘Plus, they need money$$$ for their security.



Again I ask. Why should the British taxpayers be on the hook for their security?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Back to the chicken coop.


And all the chicken sh!t.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> But they need the tabloids to keep them famous.



The Faustian bargain.


----------



## Chanbal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I do not understand.  The Queen felt this marriage was a way for the monarchy to evolve and be relevant for her people.  A Black child was to be expected.  Could there have been an individual who said this? Yes.  But I doubt if it was the inner circle.


I sincerely think QE and the rest of the family were thrilled to have another baby (black or white) in the family. Archie looks white in the picture posted by MM's friend. With exception of Will's kids (a future king), all great grandkids of QE are not princes or princesses. I believe Archie will become a prince when Charles will become king.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> Again I ask. Why should the British taxpayers be on the hook for their security?



Because we Americans will not pay for this entitled brat.


----------



## gracekelly

Allisonfaye said:


> Again I ask. Why should the British taxpayers be on the hook for their security?


I don't get why they need that much security in general.  If they are really making such big money they can pay for it themselves.


----------



## scarlet555

Fam, you are making me ’google’ for terminology...


----------



## sgj99

I have 3 take always from the interview:

*Megan, you chose to marry into the BRF.  Cry me a river!
*Y’all think you deserve security protection paid for by the British taxpayers yet you live in the U.S?
*You are shocked and saddened that you’ve been cutoff financially (don’t believe that) but you don’t want to work for the Firm?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely think QE and the rest of the family were thrilled to have another baby (black or white) in the family. Archie looks white in the picture posted by MM's friend. With exception of Will's kids (a future king), all great grandkids of QE are not princes or princesses. I believe Archie will become a prince when Charles will become king.



Meghan acts like she has no clue why he didn't become a prince. You KNOW she knows exactly.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

misskittee said:


> I am a therapist, working in behavioral health, and I find this very difficult to believe. She speaks of her lethality as if she were talking about her Hermès collection. I never want to dismiss someone's pain but the underlying motivation is not to speak about mental health and bring awareness but to create a narrative of victimization and blame. Ultimately, the truth is likely somewhere in between. I am sure it was difficult but she is relishing in sharing these biased details with the world right now.


I am not a therapist but I speak as someone who has had three children ( and understands the exhaustion and stress) and am married to an Ob-Gyn.  Did it never occur to her that her stress in acclimating was exacerbated to the point of depression and suicidal thoughts by hormonal changes?  And again hormonal imbalances after Archie’s birth ?   Understandable and within the parameters of normal.  And treatable.


----------



## rose60610

"YOU NEED TO WANT TO BE SAVED!"  Well how are they going to save themselves from this interview?


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> I wonder if the chickens are Gayle’s? This is important  ....


I'm worried about those chickens. I love animals, mammals, etc.


----------



## lalame

Allisonfaye said:


> Again I ask. Why should the British taxpayers be on the hook for their security?



That's the thing.... Charles could read the room. Even all the way over here in the US it was painfully obvious to me how high the tensions were over public funds being used for this family - and that's for working royals! What's Charles going to do, keep spending his money, which comes from a monarchist legacy and privileged land-owning rights, on 2 non-working royals living in LA while he's STILL getting skewered about Kate's expensive clothes??? No way.


----------



## madamelizaking

Jesus Christ she is a sociopath.


----------



## V0N1B2

haute okole said:


> She is your typical D list, clout chasing actress.  Look at the way she talks and carries herself.  She is so poised, practiced and fake.  She bagged the Golden Goose and once she held the power, she was determined to make changes from within because she knew she could.  When she did not get her way, she threw tantrums, took her toys and boyfriend with her and started badmouthing the hand that feeds, which is SO L.A.  Things will end up tragically sad for them.  I wonder how Harry likes being "woke."  The Duke and Duchess of "Sucks to be Them", she has dragged him into the eternal, "I am a victim" mentality.  Such a shame, she could have been awesome.





tiktok said:


> The difference is most people don't exit and then continue to profit from their association with said (supposed) contributors. If Harry wasn't part of the British royal family no one would give a @#$% about him or his wife, with all due respect to her former "career". If you continue to profit from that association it's so much better to just shut up and live your life. But they always want to have their cake and eat it too - just like they did with the "we want to take a step back, keep all the perks and none of the responsibilities". Which is why anyone who's really looked into their demands and behavior can't stand them.


----------



## needlv

Megs said:


> I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's likthat aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or





Megs said:


> I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's like to be them, so putting all that aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or what has happened to them - what is their hope to gain from this interview?
> 
> People that love them will continue to love them and this will give them more reason to love them. But those who aren't fond of them, won't believe any of this. And then there's the Royal Family - what do they think this will do for them with the Royal Family?



Money and revenge.  

They wanted to merch the royal titles (“Sussex royal“ trademark etc) and sell it on everything from tv documentaries to tea cups.  The Queen said no - so they lost the ability to be rich that way.
 This interview gives them money and publicity.  They will use that to garner more publicity from Netflix releases etc.  And every time there is a royal family scandal or issue, they will be asked to comment (which they can charge for).  Lucrative speaking fees may also be in their sights - using archwell/mental health as their topic.

Most likely they have burned bridges with Will.  Charles may be more forgiving but MM and H can stick a knife in for revenge each time they are asked to comment by the US or UK media.  It will follow Charles and Will around so long as MM and H are there to sell their comment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely think QE and the rest of the family were thrilled to have another baby (black or white) in the family. Archie looks white in the picture posted by MM's friend. With exception of Will's kids (a future king), all great grandkids of QE are not princes or princesses. I believe Archie will become a prince when Charles will become king.


I don't think so and have said so right along.  Charles wants to trim down the payroll and the number of titles floating around.  There are dozens of Princes floating around Europe with titles that are meaningless,  There was nothing wrong with Harry's secondary title which could have been given to Archie at birth, The Earl of Dumbarton.  Oprah should have asked her why they didn't use that. The answer, obviously, was that it wasn't Prince.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry can never go back. He didn’t just burn bridges with his family, he doused them with gasoline and hit ‘em with a blowtorch.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.


Was H calling about his allowance?


----------



## Jktgal

Megs said:


> I have a sincere question. Of course I don't know what it's like to be them, so putting all that aside because I can't say how either of them truly feel or what has happened to them - what is their hope to gain from this interview?



Global exposure for their re-launched brand. Recently they launched their website and there's has been onslaught of PR pieces. 



gracekelly said:


> It seems that many of Meghan's misunderstandings, and I am being polite using the word misunderstanding, stems from her willful ignorance.



Nah, she's faking ignorance.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.



The family has to cut off TOXIC members of the family for their own well being.


----------



## lalame

Did anyone else catch Harry saying that the family encouraged Meghan to continue acting? That's big IMO - there was a huge narrative about how she was stifled in her career because they wouldn't let her work.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Meg: 'OMG, we did EVERYTHING we could to protect them'. BS.


----------



## Megs

bag-mania said:


> Revenge.



Yes, it does feel like that. And I understand majority of people when they feel they've been wronged, myself included, want to share their side. But this is on the world's stage and they know they have people who really don't like them - this will not help that. People who don't like them will not see this and be like oh ok, that changed my mind.



V0N1B2 said:


>



It's a bit hard to feel compassion for their finances when they are living in a mansion and lived off the British tax payers for years. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> They did this interview because they are emotionally stunted fame-w@ores.
> ‘Plus, they need money$$$ for their security.



I think they are solidifying their big deals - love them or hate them, there will be high viewing numbers which translates to $$$$$



gracekelly said:


> There is a blind on Blind Gossip dating back to January 2020.  The gist of it is that the family believes that they will be divorced within 5 years and at that time,  if things with Harry haven't eroded totally, they want him back.  They think that if they come after them too hard now , then he won't feel that he can leave her and that is the long game they are playing to get him back.



He sounds like he is in it pretty solid right now, but hey, like she said she was putting on a front maybe he is? The last thing she said on this interview is their story is "better than any fairytale you've ever read". I chuckled a bit at that, because the couples and people that I know that post about how great their lives are the most are usually the least happy.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Again I ask. Why should the British taxpayers be on the hook for their security?



Because they didn’t want to have to pay for it themselves.


----------



## Allisonfaye

I do think she is much smarter than Harry.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> Money and revenge.
> 
> They wanted to merch the royal titles (“Sussex royal“ trademark etc) and sell it on everything from tv documentaries to tea cups.  The Queen said no - so they lost the ability to be rich that way.
> This interview gives them money and publicity.  They will use that to garner more publicity from Netflix releases etc.  And every time there is a royal family scandal or issue, they will be asked to comment (which they can charge for).  Lucrative speaking fees may also be in their sights - using archwell/mental health as their topic.
> 
> Most likely they have burned bridges with Will.  Charles may be more forgiving but MM and H can stick a knife in for revenge each time they are asked to comment by the US or UK media.  It will follow Charles and Will around so long as MM and H are there to sell their comment.


I hope Camilla puts on her big girl panty on and tell Charles what she thinks. He's a wimp thus the son is a wimp.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't think so and have said so right along.  Charles wants to trim down the payroll and the number of titles floating around.  There are dozens of Princes floating around Europe with titles that are meaningless,  There was nothing wrong with Harry's secondary title which could have been given to Archie at birth, The Earl of Dumbarton.  Oprah should have asked her why they didn't use that. The answer, obviously, was that it wasn't Prince.


You are probably right. I'm not watching the interview, but from what I'm reading, it doesn't look good.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Harry can never go back. He didn’t just burn bridges with his family, he doused them with gasoline and hit ‘em with a blowtorch.


Co-sign


----------



## gracekelly

Jktgal said:


> Global exposure for their re-launched brand. Recently they launched their website and there's has been onslaught of PR pieces.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, she's faking ignorance.


She definitely fakes a heck of a lot of it, but the ins and outs she really may not have known and those are the things that she needed to get up to speed with and since she is so "whip smart" she should have been able to do that in say....10 minutes.  More importantly, once learned they had to be put into use, but that didn't seem to be her strength.


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> I hope Camilla puts on her big girl panty on and tell Charles what she thinks. He's a wimp thus the son is a wimp.



I hope so too. #TeamCamilla


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jktgal said:


> The family has to cut of TOXIC members of the family for their own well being.



Exactly.  Even with a costly divorce, Hazzie is clearly damaged, probably from his war days or the alcohol. He needs a really long time in a top-rated healing place. Space, indeed. Space is his best healer. I’m not a doctor, so I’m not sure if meds help with this. He is clearly frazzled and rattled.

Notice how he curls into himself but tries to still look strong. Yeah, he needs help, yall.  Surprised Oprah didn’t see that.


----------



## Megs

I think they also not only burned all the bridges with the royal family, but they also will have all of the British people turn on them too. Which then makes it seem like their end game truly is their brand and money, which again, will make it hard for many people to believe this interview fully.


----------



## marietouchet

Recap on town and country is good








						Meghan Markle Opens Up About Her Mental Health Struggles During Her Conversation With Oprah — Town & Country
					

She says the institution would not let her get help.




					apple.news
				



she went to HR (sic) for help with her mental issues, not friends or family or doctor or NHS


----------



## Allisonfaye

So no on camera moments with Archie? Were they afraid he wouldn't say crocodile and might say ball?


----------



## V0N1B2

Megs said:


> Yes, it does feel like that. And I understand majority of people when they feel they've been wronged, myself included, want to share their side. But this is on the world's stage and they know they have people who really don't like them - this will not help that. People who don't like them will not see this and be like oh ok, that changed my mind.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a bit hard to feel compassion for their finances when they are living in a mansion and lived off the British tax payers for years.
> 
> 
> 
> I think they are solidifying their big deals - love them or hate them, there will be high viewing numbers which translates to $$$$$
> 
> 
> 
> He sounds like he is in it pretty solid right now, but hey, like she said she was putting on a front maybe he is? The last thing she said on this interview is their story is "better than any fairytale you've ever read". I chuckled a bit at that, because the couples and people that I know that post about how great their lives are the most are usually the least happy.


Meg? Promise us you won't do a WIMB feature on the blog with her okay? 
For realz, k?


----------



## Lodpah

Here's an appropro send off to these two.  They should have played this as a theme song as the credits rolled:


Burning Bridges

Friends all tried to warn me
But I held my head up high
All the time they warned me
But I only passed them by
They all tried to tell me
But I guess I didn't care
I turned my back and
Left them standing there
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Joey tried to help me find a job
A while ago
When I finally got it I didn't want to go
The party Mary gave for me
When I just walked away
Now there's nothing left for me to say
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Years have passed and I keep thinking
What a fool I've been
I look back into the past and
Think of way back then
I know that I lost everything I thought I that could win
I guess I should have listened to my friends
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Burning bridges lost forevermore


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely think QE and the rest of the family were thrilled to have another baby (black or white) in the family. Archie looks white in the picture posted by MM's friend. With exception of Will's kids (a future king), all great grandkids of QE are not princes or princesses. I believe Archie will become a prince when Charles will become king.


Agree, none of the other gg kids are titled, but MM wanted a special thing for A


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> Recap on town and country is good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Opens Up About Her Mental Health Struggles During Her Conversation With Oprah — Town & Country
> 
> 
> She says the institution would not let her get help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she went to HR (sic) for help with her mental issues, not friends or family or doctor or NHS



I'm confused. She didn't have the money to pay out of pocket for a therapist like us plebs do when we have a mental health problem? I mean, I've never thought to go to HR for that but maybe HR in Hollywood works differently than I'm used to.


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Recap on town and country is good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Opens Up About Her Mental Health Struggles During Her Conversation With Oprah — Town & Country
> 
> 
> She says the institution would not let her get help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> she went to HR (sic) for help with her mental issues, not friends or family or doctor or NHS



Because she turned in her DL and keys and cannot call Uber


----------



## Megs

V0N1B2 said:


> Meg? Promise us you won't do a WIMB feature on the blog with her okay?
> For realz, k?



HAHAHA! Come on, I'd love to see what is in her bag though!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> They visited the chicken coop at the beginning. Meghan has rescue chickens, don’t you know?  Isn’t any chicken that is allowed to live a rescue chicken?


Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Calling the BRF racist is pretty unbelievable. What's she trying to accomplish by doing that? In the current climate? Is she trying to bring the institution down? What's the goal?


----------



## cafecreme15

lalame said:


> Did anyone else catch Harry saying that the family encouraged Meghan to continue acting? That's big IMO - there was a huge narrative about how she was stifled in her career because they wouldn't let her work.
> 
> View attachment 5014576


Omg YES! Was just talking about this. She said that herself earlier in the interview - that she made such huge sacrifices to marry Harry by giving up her career. Girl, I’d admire you more if you just admitted you didn’t want to work anymore. Heck if I had been in her shoes about to marry a prince and his family suggested I continue my work as an attorney I would have said I think not!


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Agree, none of the other gg kids are titled, but MM wanted a special thing for A



Probably because Charles is going to be king so Archie should be oh so special. I thought this is about love for Cringe and Ginge. The fairytale!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> I'm confused. She didn't have the money to pay out of pocket for a therapist like us plebs do when we have a mental health problem? I mean, I've never thought to go to HR for that but maybe HR in Hollywood works differently than I'm used to.



You are thinking logically. She gets far more mileage and $$$$  ‘sharing her nonsense’ with OW than getting any real help.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I hope so too. #TeamCamilla


I see Camilla sitting there watching this with a big glass of her favorite spirit, turning to Charles and saying "can you believe this bull cocka?"


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> At least she says nice things about the Queen.


Because she knows who butters her bread.


----------



## Lodpah

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Thanks for the laugh.


Whatever happened to her cats?


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Because she turned in her DL and keys and cannot call Uber


Her US/Canadian DL is useless in the UK, she would be traveling on some special diplomatic passport for the BRF and who needs the keys to the Toronto flat ? All those things were obsolete ....


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Because she knows who butters her bread.


There was the whine about having to curtsy to HM


----------



## Lodpah

The news/commentaries will be exploding tomorrow, fast and furious.  This is better than any reality shows out there.


----------



## bag-mania

I expect all of the usual US publications will be in lockstep support of them.  Will they consider that there was never even a tiny hint of the wild revelations and accusations made tonight? Nope.  Will they consider the fact that they didn’t name names, thereby providing zero evidence.  Probably not. Just saying it is good enough.


----------



## purseinsanity

I’m not watching, but having great fun catching up on TWENTY TWO pages already!  I decided to get an IV infusion of vitamins, NAD and glutathione so my brain cells would remain intact after simply reading about all the BS she spewed forth


----------



## poopsie

Aimee3 said:


> These commercials are pretty much one vein : sanitizers, women’s deodorants, laundry products lol


No hemorrhoid cream yet


----------



## marietouchet

My money is now on Boris staging an intervention


----------



## bisousx

My heart is breaking for this poor little girl about to be brought into the world by these two


----------



## lalame

V0N1B2 said:


> Meg? Promise us you won't do a WIMB feature on the blog with her okay?
> For realz, k?



LMAO Can you imagine a Closet Confidential from Meghan


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely don't believe this, but it is making me sick.
> 
> "_When Oprah asked if she was denied the title because of he is mixed-race, Oprah asked if the palace had concerns Archie would be 'too brown', Meghan said: 'In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, we have in tandem, the conversation of "He won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title," and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he's born'.
> 
> Oprah then interrupted and said: 'Hold on. Hold up. Stop right now. There's a conversation... about how dark your baby is going to be?' Meghan replied: 'Potentially, and what that would mean or look like'.
> 
> 'And you're not going to tell me who had the conversation?', Oprah asked. To which Meghan replied: 'I think that would be very damaging to them.  *That was relayed to me from Harry. Those were conversations that family had with him'. *_*"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I was naive marrying Harry', says Meghan as Oprah gets underway
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah said she 'couldn't be left alone' and that her husband had 'cradled' her as she told him she her suicidal thoughts at their cottage next to Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So ask Harry.......he's sitting right there for cripes sake. Or is he not allowed to speak during 'her time'


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Because she knows who butters her bread.



Or maybe she’s smart enough to know that trashing a beloved 94-year-old monarch would turn people against her. Although she pretty much trashed the whole family later.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Allisonfaye said:


> I do think she is much smarter than Harry.


But not by much. However, she has the gift of gab.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

CNN has a blow-by-blow of the various themes and topics:









						Meghan's one regret: "Believing them when they said I would be protected"
					

Harry and Meghan opened up in an interview with Oprah Winfrey about the Duchess of Sussex experiencing suicidal thoughts, the royal family's concerns over baby Archie's race, and the gender of their second child. Follow live updates.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely don't believe this, but it is making me sick.
> 
> "_When Oprah asked if she was denied the title because of he is mixed-race, Oprah asked if the palace had concerns Archie would be 'too brown', Meghan said: 'In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, we have in tandem, the conversation of "He won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title," and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he's born'.
> 
> Oprah then interrupted and said: 'Hold on. Hold up. Stop right now. There's a conversation... about how dark your baby is going to be?' Meghan replied: 'Potentially, and what that would mean or look like'.
> 
> 'And you're not going to tell me who had the conversation?', Oprah asked. To which Meghan replied: 'I think that would be very damaging to them.  That was relayed to me from Harry. Those were conversations that family had with him'. _"



I’m not watching and just going by your recaps, but maybe the “family” that had this convo with Harry (if it indeed happened) is Phillip. He’s ancient and known to say offensive things. There is no freaking way this was Charles, Camilla, William or Kate. I can’t imagine the queen either.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> My heart is breaking for this poor little girl about to be brought into the world by these two



You mean baby Diana? Because there can be no other name.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Is Piers Morgan still up?


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> I’m not watching and just going by your recaps, but maybe the “family” that had this convo with Harry (if it indeed happened) is Phillip. He’s ancient and known to say offensive things. There is no freaking way this was Charles, Camilla, William or Kate. I can’t imagine the queen either.



Maybe. But to refuse to say who invites speculation that it could be any or all of them.


----------



## Lodpah

For those who want to see the CW 2021 here it is. Some obscure D&D of S were not mentioned. I guess they were too busy having a victim/pity party celebrating their victimhood.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who’s interview was more shocking?
Diana
Sarah
Andrew
H&M

My vote is Diana. H&M’s was just moaning and groaning from ingrates.


----------



## needlv

Buckingham Palace PR team must be working through the night...  the first thing I would correct would be over the Archie not getting Titles claim.  That’s easily false - he gets it when Charles is King...


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who’s interview was more shocking?
> Diana
> Sarah
> Andrew
> H&M
> 
> My vote is Diana. H&M’s was just moaning and groaning from ingrates.


I didn't watch any of them. My attention span is short.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> She needs a nameless enemy to play the victim.



She could pick a fight in an empty room


----------



## kkfiregirl

A cousin just told me that I should watch the interview to hear “Meghan’s point of view.” I told her that M is a whiny brat and she told me to shut up, LOL. 

I think many people think like my cousin does.


----------



## bisousx

mellibelly said:


> I’m not watching and just going by your recaps, but maybe the “family” that had this convo with Harry (if it indeed happened) is Phillip. He’s ancient and known to say offensive things. There is no freaking way this was Charles, Camilla, William or Kate. I can’t imagine the queen either.



Hm, that’s a good point.


----------



## Jktgal

Kansashalo said:


> In a simplistic way, it's like you are excited to take a new job...you go through new hire orientation learning all the rules, culture, etc....then you start your job and it sucks.  Yes, its the job they promised you, but your department's culture is nothing like they showed during orientation. lol





gracekelly said:


> She definitely fakes a heck of a lot of it, but the ins and outs she really may not have known and those are the things that she needed to get up to speed with and since she is so "whip smart" she should have been able to do that in say....10 minutes.  More importantly, once learned they had to be put into use, but that didn't seem to be her strength.



She knows perfectly well what the job was, but it wasn't her intent to be successful in that job. Her endgame is Hollywood. She has succeeded.



Megs said:


> I think they also not only burned all the bridges with the royal family, but they also will have all of the British people turn on them too. Which then makes it seem like their end game truly is their brand and money, which again, will make it hard for many people to believe this interview fully.



Most British people already ignore them if the polls are correct. One good thing that may come out of this is more scrutiny of the monarchy and how it operates. Modern society don't have a place for queens and princes (and their spouses), this is another impetus for dismantling their privileges. The Sussex brand will do well enough on the global market, much less talented people have done so.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> I’m not watching and just going by your recaps, but maybe the “family” that had this convo with Harry (if it indeed happened) is Phillip. He’s ancient and known to say offensive things. There is no freaking way this was Charles, Camilla, William or Kate. I can’t imagine the queen either.


I'm also not watching it, but I don't think Philip would say such thing. He was very welcoming to MM.


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> Wills and Harry also said they went to therapy themselves so I also am perplexed by this claim they denied her mental healthcare. I mean.... how can anyone deny her mental healthcare? In the UK of all places?



Yes, can’t she just pick up the phone and schedule a therapy appointment like the rest of us pleebs?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Maybe. But to refuse to say who invites speculation that it could be any or all of them.



That is exactly why MM said it the way she said.
Employers need to watch this as a training exercise. How to evade the question.


----------



## lalame

mellibelly said:


> Yes, can’t she just pick up the phone and schedule a therapy appointment like the rest of us pleebs?



Or... she uses Harry's therapist? IDK, am I getting too tactical here lol but it just seems unbelievable.


----------



## gracekelly

There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Or maybe she’s smart enough to know that trashing a beloved 94-year-old monarch would turn people against her. Although she pretty much trashed the whole family later.


Oh but these two got preempted by the CW 2021 celebration. That was truly wonderful. Especially the Bob Marley song Three Little Birds/One Love.  The BRF did it right. It literally cannot be criticized as to how they presented it. I'm impressed as ultra liberal BBC is they didn't buy the victimhood celebration of the two.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Right, *bully for them* and now that they have had their whine and hard cheese party, they can really become private people in their mega mansion and live happily  ever after.  When will they come out to whine again?  Is never too soon?



I see what you did there


----------



## CarryOn2020

Had no idea Meghan Kelly was interested in H&M:


			https://twitter.com/megynkelly
		

Harry refuses to say who in his family was concerned about the color H&M’s kids’ skin would be. So they’ve basically thrown the entire Royal family under the bus - w/Harry adding they haven’t done “the work” he’s done in educating himself.


O Hazzie, you are so smart now. Please please preach to us!


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?



I've known people who got officially married quietly before the wedding so the wedding can be a bit more carefree, without worrying about having the right licensed officiant, signing of papers, mailing it within the deadlines, etc. Is this common in the UK?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?


She said it was the three of them, don’t you need witnesses ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

OW should have asked if they were married on their Africa trip. Rumors, rumors, rumors. Turns out they may be true.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> She was suicidal while pregnant with Archie?!  I don’t believe it!!!


Hmmm, shades of Diana again?  Didn't Diana throw herself down the stairs when pregnant with William?


----------



## poopsie

artax two said:


> I hope W and K have 17 children



After tonight they're probably getting right on it


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Had no idea Meghan Kelly was interested in H&M:
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/megynkelly
> 
> 
> Harry refuses to say who in his family was concerned about the color H&M’s kids’ skin would be. So they’ve basically thrown the entire Royal family under the bus - w/Harry adding they haven’t done “the work” he’s done in educating himself.
> 
> 
> O Hazzie, you are so smart now. Please please preach to us!



She's on the ball


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Kansashalo said:


> In a simplistic way, it's like you are excited to take a new job...you go through new hire orientation learning all the rules, culture, etc....then you start your job and it sucks. Yes, its the job they promised you, but your department's culture is nothing like they showed during orientation. lol



This is a fairly good analogy, except Meghan kept the signing bonus, and wanted to maintain her title without performing the job.  Oh, and expected to still be paid by the company.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> She said it was the three of them, don’t you need witnesses ?


And why then spend $50 million on a second wedding?


----------



## Yanca

needlv said:


> Buckingham Palace PR team must be working through the night...  the first thing I would correct would be over the Archie not getting Titles claim.  That’s easily false - he gets it when Charles is King...




I am not British, but I read that only the granchildren of the reigning monarch can have the style of Prince and Princess, even Queen Elizabeth had to make letters of patent  That all the children of the eldest child of the Prince of Wales be called Prince and Princess ? when Prince George was born, Meghan said it was a break from Protocol, did Prince Harry not know this? Archie will be automatically be a Prince when Charles becomes the Monarch?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Ten minutes in on the west coast airing. Dummy didnt look into what marrying into the family would mean and relied on conversations she and Harry had about it. Basically this is on her for not understanding the depth of the lifestyle she was going to marry into.

And also shows how clueless Harry is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, Hazzie baby, when you were smiling, shaking hands with strangers, you really didn’t like it, right?  It was a chore, a job, a performance, right?

And now??  

Right, that’s what we thought.  Violate the public’s trust, no one believes you, ever.


----------



## sgj99

bag-mania said:


> Harry can never go back. He didn’t just burn bridges with his family, he doused them with gasoline and hit ‘em with a blowtorch.


I agree .  When they first announced they were leaving the Firm this may have been the case.  But H&M have burned their bridges and become persona non-grata similar to the Duke of Windsor with the airing of this interview.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> And when then spend $50 million on a second wedding?



That one was for us. 
We needed the ‘feel-good’ moment, right?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely don't believe this, but it is making me sick.
> 
> "_When Oprah asked if she was denied the title because of he is mixed-race, Oprah asked if the palace had concerns Archie would be 'too brown', Meghan said: 'In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, we have in tandem, the conversation of "He won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title," and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he's born'.
> 
> Oprah then interrupted and said: 'Hold on. Hold up. Stop right now. There's a conversation... about how dark your baby is going to be?' Meghan replied: 'Potentially, and what that would mean or look like'.
> 
> 'And you're not going to tell me who had the conversation?', Oprah asked. To which Meghan replied: 'I think that would be very damaging to them.  That was relayed to me from Harry. Those were conversations that family had with him'. _"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I was naive marrying Harry', says Meghan as Oprah gets underway
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah said she 'couldn't be left alone' and that her husband had 'cradled' her as she told him she her suicidal thoughts at their cottage next to Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm confused.  Her answer to O asking about there being a conversation about skin color, was "possibly"?  Like there was a possible conversation that happened?  Sorry, I am not watching, LOL.


----------



## poopsie

Jktgal said:


> The family has to cut off TOXIC members of the family for their own well being.



Where have we heard that before recently


----------



## lalame

I'm finally watching the interview for myself now...

The chickens are Harry and Meghan's!!! They "rescued them".... okay it's admirable but.... how does this jive with the famous roasted chicken meals???


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazzie baby, when you were smiling, shaking hands with strangers, you really didn’t like it, right?  It was a chore, a job, a performance, right?
> 
> And now??
> 
> Right, that’s what we thought.  Violate the public’s trust, no one believes you, ever.



Anyone who has ever met him in the context of his duties should feel so insulted. What a jerk.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

gracekelly said:


> She definitely fakes a heck of a lot of it, but the ins and outs she really may not have known and those are the things that she needed to get up to speed with and since she is so "whip smart" she should have been able to do that in say....10 minutes.  More importantly, once learned they had to be put into use, but that didn't seem to be her strength.


So much to learn and so much was so difficult.  Like wearing a hat when accompanying the Queen on official business. Or walking behind Harry and those who rank ahead of her when on official business.   Or reading the hymns from the hymnal instead of memorizing 40 different ones.


----------



## poopsie

Allisonfaye said:


> I do think she is much smarter than Harry.



Who isn't


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> So much to learn and so much was so difficult.  Like wearing a hat when accompanying the Queen on official business. Or walking behind Harry and those who rank ahead of her when on official business.   Or reading the hymns from the hymnal instead of memorizing 40 different ones.



She had to learn a new anthem because the UK anthem is different from the US’s.
People, people, that’s too much for lil MeeeeMeeee. She has a college degree, puhleeeze.


ETA: maybe now H&M will move off the PityMe song?
How odd that Sarah would be sent out to make sure MM knows to curtsy.  Even odder that MM would think she didn’t need to.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> wonder what her name will be?


Diana Squared.
Diana Infinity.


----------



## poopsie

Megs said:


> HAHAHA! Come on, I'd love to see what is in her bag though!



We all know Harry's nurtz are in there


----------



## haute okole

Ahhh, so it is now playing in L.A. and I am now understanding her delusion better.  She is hungry attention seeking actress.  Because in the U.S., we do not have a royal family, celebrities are our version of royalty.  In her demented, pretty, privileged, LA raised head, she has always been a princess.  On set, she was treated with kid gloves on the set where her Dad worked.  She is beautiful, so she was treated well.  However, she is not a talented actress, so she had to do something else to elevate herself.  Harry is a means to an end.

What is really sad is that she has belittled Harry's family, his legacy, labelled his family, his heritage and the Commonwealth racists.  By doing so, she has also denigrated her son's legacy.  Shame on her.  She has destroyed her son's future and made Harry a white apologist.  Sad.

Shame on them for giving this interview on the grounds of their million dollar estate as they rescue chickens thanks to the money the British public funded for them, in one way of another.  Harry is the biggest idiot.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> A cousin just told me that I should watch the interview to hear “Meghan’s point of view.” I told her that M is a whiny brat and she told me to shut up, LOL.
> 
> I think many people think like my cousin does.



Unfortunately, you are right. They believe “her truth.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.


As long as he keeps paying his bills, it's all good!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lake Effect said:


> As someone on the fringe of watching this, who is somewhat curious, what in the actual ... is Oprah doing interviewing them in a ??? chicken coop ??? It looks like Harry is playing with a chicken.
> Oprah has lost her mind?


I thought the same LOL!  I'm not watching either and my first thought was why are they in a coop?  Why is Meg squatting?  Is she recreating the moment Haz fell in love with her??


----------



## Coconuts40

haute okole said:


> Ahhh, so it is now playing in L.A. and I am now understanding her delusion better.  She is hungry attention seeking actress.  Because in the U.S., we do not have a royal family, celebrities are our version of royalty.  In her demented, pretty, privileged, LA raised head, she has always been a princess.  On set, she was treated with kid gloves on the set where her Dad worked.  She is beautiful, so she was treated well.  However, she is not a talented actress, so she had to do something else to elevate herself.  Harry is a means to an end.
> 
> *What is really sad is that she has belittle Harry's family, his legacy, labelled his family, his heritage and the Commonwealth racists.  By doing so, she has also denigrated her son's legacy.  Shame on her.  She has destroyed her son's future and made Harry a white apologist.  Sad.*



So so true, and well said!


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> For those who want to see the CW 2021 here it is. Some obscure D&D of S were not mentioned. I guess they were too busy having a victim/pity party celebrating their victimhood.



Thanks so much for posting this.  The highlight for me was the New Zealand Youth Choir and Sophie Wessex's Zoom with the other women. On the whole, it was a very uplifting program and very well done.


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> Megs is the little mermaid ya'll. Married a prince, lost her voice and got it back. REJOICE


She's probably jockeying for the lead role as the new black Ariel in the new live movie version.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Yes, can’t she just pick up the phone and schedule a therapy appointment like the rest of us pleebs?



She made it sound like they discouraged her from seeking assistance, like it just wasn’t done.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Had no idea Meghan Kelly was interested in H&M:
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/megynkelly
> 
> 
> Harry refuses to say who in his family was concerned about the color H&M’s kids’ skin would be. So they’ve basically thrown the entire Royal family under the bus - w/Harry adding they haven’t done “the work” he’s done in educating himself.
> 
> 
> O Hazzie, you are so smart now. Please please preach to us!


It was Harry himself.  His unconscious racism was creeping out and he got nervous.


----------



## lalame

Meghan: "They were willing to LIE to protect other members of the royal family but they weren't willing to tell the truth to protect me."

Ummm why did Oprah skip over this.... WHO did they lie about? What was the lie?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Harry says he was trapped but he didn’t know it.


I hope he knows he jumped out of the frying pan right into the fire!  Ginge is getting singed.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I'm finally watching the interview for myself now...
> 
> The chickens are Harry and Meghan's!!! They "rescued them".... okay it's admirable but.... how does this jive with the famous roasted chicken meals???



They rescued the chickens so they could roast them?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She had to learn a new anthem because the UK anthem is different from the US’s.
> People, people, that’s too much for lil MeeeeMeeee. She has a college degree, puhleeeze.
> 
> 
> ETA: maybe now H&M will move off the PityMe song?
> How odd that Sarah would be sent out to make sure MM knows to curtsy.  Even odder that MM would think she didn’t need to.


The melody is the same as 'Tis of Thee.  Just different words.  Hard hard is that?  Oh right, she couldn't even sing in the USO show so how could she sing God Save the Queen.


----------



## baghagg

mdcx said:


> Translation: "Meghan demanded a very particular, expensive, hard to obtain, inappropriate, not acceptable under palace protocol around privacy etc form of therapy via a very non standard channel of communication, and when she received a response that her request could not be accommodated exactly as demanded but options X Y and Z from highly respected UK professionals were available, she refused them and decided this would all be a good contribution to her _Little Black Book of Offenses Against Princess Meghan_ and noted it down."


100 %!!!  After all, this is the same woman who figured out a way to get out of the country _sans child_ for bridal showers, yoga, tennis matches, etc


----------



## baghagg

Why couldn't Meghan's husband teach her his national anthem???


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They rescued the chickens so they could roast them?


They may not taste good if they are Foster Farm rejects.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Thanks so much for posting this.  The highlight for me was the New Zealand Youth Choir and Sophie Wessex's Zoom with the other women. On the whole, it was a very uplifting program and very well done.


Yes, all them. Also shout out to gorgeous Lianne La Havas! That voice!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> Or... she uses Harry's therapist? IDK, am I getting too tactical here lol but it just seems unbelievable.


Completely unbelievable, how hard is it to make a mental health appt in England.  We know it’s hard in the US, but we also know people of ‘privilege’ have access on a whim.


----------



## EverSoElusive

When they started dating, I'm sure she knew she's dating Prince Harry and not Harry Potter. Dating a real life prince means there are plenty of rules and protocols to be followed. BRF members are people but they are not regular people. 

And when Harry asked if she knew how to curtsy the first time while they were on their way to meet the Queen, again, she  already learned there are rules to be followed. The Queen is not a regular grandmother like Carole Middleton. The Queen is the monarch and her own grandchildren and grandchildren-in-law still need to curtsy or bow to her, blood related or not so why does Cringe think she's so special that she shouldn't have to because the Queen was about to be her grandmother-in-law? 

BRF members' lives are dictated by the Queen and the UK government. All the rules and protocols are in place to maintain order. Without order, the palace would have been in shambles like DJT's WH.

If she found the rules and protocols to be so restrictive and the silence that the BRF practices so detrimental to her mental health, why did she not tell Ginge early on that life as a royal with all those rules and the need to act with decorum (not that she has any), is not for her and that she wishes him all the best and she moves on with her life? She chose to stay. I'm fairly certain that the Queen didn't beg her to stay. She still had her passport, DL and keys early on so why didn't she leave? She could have chosen to walk away and find her another Trevity Trev Trev. We all know why she stayed on - FAME and MONEY. But of course she told us it's love, it's fairytale, it's rescue chickens. 

Having made her choice to marry into the BRF, why blame everyone else but herself? Throughout the interview, I didn't once hear her owning up to any of the choices that she's made but always pointing finger at someone else e.g. Kate, the senior people, HR etc. 

Also, if she really felt that the BRF is racist, do you really think she would have just stood there and let them disrespect her when she's a mighty strong and independent woman who has always spoken her mind from a very young age as she made aware of? 

Cringe believes in her own lies. She can no longer tell what's real and what's not. She conjured so much up in her chicken brain that she can hardly see straight. She continues with more lies and digs a deeper grave every time. Cringe does not deserve the welcome and love that the British people, not just BRF, bestowed upon her. Yes, some parts of the media were nasty to her but gosh, the support from the UK people was simply astonishing! Still, Cringe chose to play the race card and call almost everyone a racist. Why, just why?

She Markled her own dad yet in the interview, she indirectly insinuated that she lost her dad because of the BRF. Again, where's the accountability on her end? Ever since she's moved back to the US, did she once tried to touch base with her dad, if she so cared and loved him? There hasn't been news about that so I take it she hasn't? If she did, Scobie would have been the first to leak it on Twitter.

All in all, Cringe is not and should not be the WOC that GOC look up to or want to emulate. She's a narcissist and she's a pathological liar. I'm a grown a*s WOC and even I don't want to be her. For a person who's about to have her second child with Ginge, I'm beyond shocked that they chose to burn the bridge with the BRF, alienating the kids further from Ginge's side of the family. If it's true that Ginge is trying to repair his relationship with his family, Ginge and Cringe should just mind their own business and stop talking about the BRF to the press and just have personal communications with the BRF members. Additionally, they should focus on what they plan to do through Archewell and talk about that in public instead if they are truly all about service to others. 

I don't think Ginge understands the difference between himself and the other BRF members that live on the palace ground and continue to work a regular job while holding the titles of prince, princess, duke and duchess. Ginge totally forgot that his father Charles is next in line to be king therefore Ginge is the son of a future king. Ginge is not a child of Andrew like Eugenie and Beatrice, where they are so far down the line of succession that they aren't considered senior royals hence they do have a bit more freedom and only represents the Queen on a now-and-then basis. But again, what do I know? 

That's enough for now. I have spent more time tonight on these two ungrateful POS than I should have. Time for me to shop some Louis. Come tomorrow, Ginge and Cringe will still continue to blame everyone else. I hope they will be cut off 100% in every single possible sense. They want to be independent, they should be. They should work like regular people and not expect anything just because they feel entitled, this includes Ginge despite being born into the BRF. Writing letter pleading with the Queen for security because Ginge is a prince. Kiss my a*s  

It's been fun tonight! You guys are the best


----------



## rose60610

M makes it sound like every second before the marriage was sheer bliss, then every second after was torture. She said she became suicidal and couldn't get help. Oh. She's mentally distraught, goes through all this drama, says Harry saved her life and is basically recovering in Montecito. So we're supposed to believe the rantings of a spoiled mentally distraught person who thought the BRF had it in for her? Nope.

Anybody see the clip where they're all on the beach? And Meghan throws a ball from a throw stick for Guy? The dog can't even walk straight (remember somebody ran over him in England and broke two of his legs), he's pigeon-toed like he needs braces--and here M throws a ball a long distance like the old crippled dog is supposed to run after it! Wacko!


----------



## tiktok

Watching on the west coast... It's unbelievable how she makes up stuff like her child being entitled to the title "prince" (which he's not), and then it's proof that the BRF is racist since they took away that right she just made up from "the first member of color" of the family.


----------



## Coconuts40

Congratulations Meghan, you got everything you ever wanted at the expense of your husband losing everything he has ever had, worked for, or known.

Harry says he was trapped and didn't even know it.  Well, I would not be surprised if he wakes up in several years and says the same about his marriage.

Any partner that alienates their other half from everyone in their life and everything they have, well, is simply a toxic and dangerous person.


----------



## purseinsanity

Coconuts40 said:


> Congratulations Meghan, you got everything you ever wanted at the expense of your husband losing everything he has ever had, worked for, or known.
> Harry says he was trapped and didn't even know it.  Well, I would not be surprised if he wakes up in several years and says the same about his marriage.
> 
> *Any partner that alienates their other half from everyone in their life and everything they have, well, is simply a toxic and dangerous person.*



One might even call that an abusive relationship....


----------



## LittleStar88

For someone who never reads the tabloids, she sure seemed to know a lot about every single negative article with her name in it.


----------



## purseinsanity

I'm still quite confused by the chicken coop.  Why are they rescuing chickens when she claimed (lied) they got engaged while "roasting a chicken" at their little cottage at KP?  Did she have a sudden epiphany?  Did chickens come to her in her dreams??


----------



## scarlet555

baghagg said:


> Why couldn't Meghan's husband teach her his national anthem???


Hey now, you got to know it before you can teach it to someone...


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> The melody is the same as 'Tis of Thee.  Just different words.  Hard hard is that?  Oh right, she couldn't even sing in the USO show so how could she sing God Save the Queen.


Every time I watched The Crown and God Save the Queen started playing, my brain automatically started singing, "My country tis of thee..." and then would wander to "OMG we stole the tune from the British??"


----------



## tiktok

Congrats to H&M's PR machine, you did it. Even Bethenny is now apologizing (and getting roasted in the comments):


----------



## LittleStar88

Regarding asking for help for mental health... She could not ask for a doctor appointment without saying why and start there?* Where was Harry and why not ask him*?. If it’s that dire (“what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”) I’m sure he could do something. Why continue to spin your wheels with people who say they can’t or won’t help?

For someone who touts herself as smart and educated, she seems clueless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> Completely unbelievable, how hard is it to make a mental health appt in England.  We know it’s hard in the US, but we also know people of ‘privilege’ have access on a whim.



W&K with Hazzie did the Heads Together program.  The Fab 4 did a ‘talk’ on mental health because, ya kno, Diana struggled.  And he says he did not know who to call????  Doesn’t say much for his participation in those programs. Put nothing in, get nothing out.  Kinda like what MM did with those UK citizenship classes.  Hmmmm.

From 2019!








						Meghan, Harry, Kate, and William Have Gotten REAL About Their Mental Health
					

From processing grief to letting go of social media.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still quite confused by the chicken coop.  Why are they rescuing chickens when she claimed (lied) they got engaged while "roasting a chicken" at their little cottage at KP?  Did she have a sudden epiphany?  Did chickens come to her in her dreams??



Didn’t she say it was for Archie?


----------



## melissatrv

What questions do you think Oprah should have asked?   


Harry:  will you become a US citizen?
Meghan:   Ask about her relationship with her Dad
Meghan:  The Tiara gate incident

What is on your list?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she say it was for Archie?


I didn't watch, LOL, so I only know what you all have told me


----------



## purseinsanity

tiktok said:


> Congrats to H&M's PR machine, you did it. Even Bethenny is now apologizing (and getting roasted in the comments):



Ah Bethenny, I just lost some respect for you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Ah Bethenny, I just lost some respect for you!



Oh, pishposh, she doesn’t mean it. She just wants to be on the winning side. She’ll flip again.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan obviously knows nothing about British humour because this lone interview contains enough material for about ten savage comedy spoofs...


----------



## LittleStar88

What’s this “lost my father” BS?

If she can forgive Kate for “making her cry”, she can forgive her ailing father in his twilight years.

Girl, your dad is not lost. He’s about 200 miles south. I’m sure the navigation system in your Rover can help you find his house.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> For those not watching, she said the family didn’t give Archie a prince title because his skin might be too dark. When Oprah pressed her to say who said that, she wouldn’t give a name(s).



Why would anyone think Archie would be dark? His mother is very light and mixed race and his father is white- it’s nearly impossible that he would be dark!


----------



## scarlet555

tiktok said:


> Congrats to H&M's PR machine, you did it. Even Bethenny is now apologizing (and getting roasted in the comments):



Nah, first reaction is the true reaction, but whoever, whomever believes in her and ginger’s story is not deserving of any respect.  Donot make me say this... a divorced 40year old wannabe z-list hollywood actress unhappy because of the rules and restrictions of BRF?  Is that your bread and butter?  F off- you are too OLD and seasoned to be spouting out that load of crap on national TV.  You weren't raised on a Sheltered land like the little mermaid.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan currently planning how to get rid of the chickens because they are getting more attention than her...


----------



## LittleStar88

kkfiregirl said:


> Why would anyone think Archie would be dark? His mother is very light and mixed race and his father is white- it’s nearly impossible that he would be dark!



Well, not impossible. But also not tremendously likely. Genetics are unpredictable and you never know how Those genes will get assigned.

That said, the skin color shouldn’t have been an issue.


----------



## kkfiregirl

misskittee said:


> Why are we claiming this is an interview? This is just a platform for Meghan to share her version of events while Oprah nods and repeats Meghan's sentiments with gusto.



I agree, which I why I said earlier that they should have used youtube to accomplish the same goal.


----------



## kkfiregirl

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, not impossible. But also not tremendously likely. Genetics are unpredictable and you never know how Those genes will get assigned.
> 
> That said, the skin color shouldn’t have been an issue.



I agree, not impossible, but highly unlikely.


----------



## LittleStar88

Regarding security. They’re now living somewhere where there are way more important people, people of greater value than them. Even Gaga’s dogs were more valuable. 

If they truly feel threatened, pay for it on your own and write it off as a business expense. Or... stop trolling for attention.


----------



## artax two

mdcx said:


> Meghan obviously knows nothing about British humour because this lone interview contains enough material for about ten savage comedy spoofs...


Just when I thought she couldn't possibly be any dumber, she goes and does something like this interview....and totally redeems herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh my goodness! The comments.
ETA: Very unpopular couple. Wonder if they will need to leave LA now.


----------



## TC1

Pretending the Netflix deal and Spotify deal were just brought up by "a friend" mmmhmm, okay "you know she does voice overs?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

tiktok said:


> Congrats to H&M's PR machine, you did it. Even Bethenny is now apologizing (and getting roasted in the comments):




I see why Bethenny changed her tune; she would look like a jerk if she made light of _racism _and _suicide _publicly. I don’t think she’s actually changed her mind about them, but she doesn’t want to seem cruel.


----------



## kkfiregirl

TC1 said:


> Pretending the Netflix deal and Spotify deal were just brought up by "a friend" mmmhmm, okay "you know she does voice overs?"



Perhaps the same “friend” that introduced her to Harry.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

baghagg said:


> Why couldn't Meghan's husband teach her his national anthem???


Maybe he doesn't know it either and just moved his lips when he had to sing it. Remember he's not brainiest one in the family. But after all, he knew the most important things in life like drinking, brawling, naked partying, wearing Nazi uniform, calling his army mates racist names. Did I miss anything?


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I see why Bethenny changed her tune; she would look like a jerk if she made light of _racism _and _suicide _publicly. I don’t think she’s actually changed her mind about them, but she doesn’t want to seem cruel.



Why you could almost say she was bullied into changing her tune.


----------



## mdcx

I just realized, she has already alienated all her own family apart from her mother, and there is speculation that her mother has a financial incentive to stick around. Now she has laid waste to Harry's entire family too meaning H will be utterly dependent on her emotionally etc. Particularly living in the US away from any friends. It's so very calculated isn't it?
How long until Harry gets his red card and it sent back the UK to deal with what's left of his life on his own? I assume M does not want him to work on getting US citizenship because this would make it harder to send him home and cut him off completely. 
(I see parallels here with the case of actress Kelly Rutherford and her ex husband who never attained citizenship. This case ended quite differently than Kelly had planned though.)


----------



## Hermes Zen

OMGosh I finally got to the end of this thread. Of course after I'm done typing this I'll have five pages waiting for me to read. 

Thank you all for your postings. I refused to watch the interview and knew I'd get the details here. I did watch the Queen's Commonwealth live.  It was FABULOUS.  Thank you again!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGosh I finally got to the end of this thread. Of course after I'm done typing this I'll have five pages waiting for me to read.
> 
> Thank you all for your postings. I refused to watch the interview and knew I'd get the details here. I did watch the Queen's Commonwealth live.  It was FABULOUS.  Thank you again!




OH ... and my DH thanks to you too!  He said it kept me off of the H website and I haven't spent anything for the last couple days.  He's right.


----------



## mellibelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still quite confused by the chicken coop.  Why are they rescuing chickens when she claimed (lied) they got engaged while "roasting a chicken" at their little cottage at KP?  Did she have a sudden epiphany?  Did chickens come to her in her dreams??


It’s like having rescue dogs and then other dogs you eat. Lord knows if they went vegetarian or vegan we would have heard about it.


----------



## lalame

Oprah: Would you have ever left without Meghan?
Harry: No, I wouldn't have because I was trapped.
Harry's truth: ...by my lack of achievement or money-earning ability.


----------



## mdcx

It is widely acknowledged that Harry is not very smart. He's the perfect target for a grifter - loaded, dim and unstable.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still quite confused by the chicken coop.  Why are they rescuing chickens when she claimed (lied) they got engaged while "roasting a chicken" at their little cottage at KP?  Did she have a sudden epiphany?  Did chickens come to her in her dreams??



maybe the chickens have come home to roost..................


----------



## Jaxion

I still can't believe how brazenly she lies. Lies that are so easy to disprove and yet she's so sure that she can get away with and that it doesn't matter if she's called out. 

Honestly I'm glad I don't have anyone like her in my life. She's dangerous.


----------



## bisousx

mdcx said:


> It is widely acknowledged that Harry is not very smart. He's the perfect target for a grifter - loaded, dim and unstable.



I wonder if Harry is capable of reading and understanding a basic contract, like the partnership agreement needed for that shell company holding the title of their home. No way would Meghan allow Harry to seek his own separate counsel before he forked over his inheritance for the down payment of the mansion. Methinks he will get fleeced during divorce and that’s why there are so many rumors about the Royal Family’s long term plan to welcome him back with open arms.


----------



## ck2802

I haven’t watched the show, but I’m enjoying everyones comments. I’m in Australia & it’s airing here tonight, but I won’t watch it.
With regards to her seeking assistance for her mental health issues, I don’t believe she can just call any old Dr & make an appointment.  Diana would see Drs & counsellors & they were on the payroll of the tabloids & selling information to them. Meghan would have had to see a Royal approved Dr.  
I don’t think you can compare Meghan to Diana in anyway whatsoever. Diana was 19 & truly had no idea what she was getting into. We all know the Diana story, & how it ended including Meghan. Meghan was not a naive 19 year old, she was a divorcee in her mid 30’s.


----------



## AB Negative

Didn't Harry have problems coping with his Mother's death...to the point of "being in a dark place" then?  MM may have suffered hormonal suicide thoughts or maybe she didn't.  What better way to totally control Harry.  It seemed to work much better than wearing his mother's perfume.  

Oprah just glossed over so many problems without follow ups.  She makes a point in the beginning to say nothing is off limits then drops follow up questions on any inconsistencies.  The Australian trip is brought up, then it is switched over to Diana's trip.  Even H looked confused at that point.  MM's behavior in Australia is what turned everyone against her.  Throwing hot tea at someone because she didn't want tea?  What a privileged twit.  Also, it was very unfair and irresponsible of Oprah not to ask who exactly was racist and concerned with the baby's skin color.  Now the entire family and Firm look racist.  Another fluff piece by a LALA land insider.  I hope Katherine and William respond...I have a feeling Kate may have fought back after MM's abysmal behavior towards Charlotte and then, being the well-bred and classy lady that she is, Kate apologized to keep the peace.  What a waste of time---two whole hours---and a lot of crap.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM111

scarlet555 said:


> Completely unbelievable, how hard is it to make a mental health appt in England.  We know it’s hard in the US, but we also know people of ‘privilege’ have access on a whim.


Absolute lies. I’m not a duchess, but when I lived in the U.K. and had severe depression episode due to mobbing at work, it was enough to talk to my GP who was the most compassionate and caring and not only gave me antidepressants, advice but pointed me to several resources (eventually I got counselling through my insurer). Also, list of private psychotherapists who charge about £40 per hour is long and available via Google.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Thankfully a little bit of humour courtesy of The Times.  The Brits are just waking up to this $h!t-show ... 









						Harry and Meghan interview: This sorry gloopathon was an act of self-harm
					

One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.As a work of televised theatre, the Oprah Winfrey’s interview was sof




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




Harry and Meghan interview ditches subtlety in embrace of tabloid television​One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.

As a work of televised theatre, the Oprah Winfrey’s interview was soft-focus: the setting bucolic, Queen Oprah in delicate mauve, shots of the royal couple’s pets and — privacy alert — of toddler Archie. There were meaningful, emotive nods as they said “yeah” to each other in the Californian manner.

But the content was unsubtle. This was Semtex in swaddling bands. Cyanide en gelee. The biggest act of strategic self-harm since the scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow. It may have been presented as schmaltz but this two-hour gloopathon was politically ruinous.

“Life is about telling stories, right?” said la Markle, all high-resolution lip gloss. “Telling stories through a truthful lens.” Her eyes sparkled behind lashes as long as ravens’ wings.

Stories were duly delivered, a steaming dump of indiscretions: whinges about money and titles and bodyguards and the rotten tabloid press (which must be quite different from tabloid television). That Kate Cambridge? A B*I*T*C*H! “But I have forgiven her,” purred Meghan with her truthful lens.

Further atrocities: she had had to teach herself the words to God Save the Queen; no one had advised her how to keep her legs crossed; people had been beastly about her on the internet. We had our first blinked-back tear at 1.54am. Either that, or some unfortunate midge had made it past the ravens’ wings and had jabbed her in the eyeball.

Then came the intended killer blow: someone in royal circles had speculated about what skin tone the Sussexes’ baby was going to have. “That conversation I am never going to share,” said Prince Harry, after he and his wife had disgorged its existence to a worldwide audience.

Every so often we broke away for the CBS adverts, many aimed at hypochondriacs or handsome people who were smiling through bouts of raging diarrhoea. Useful context.

Harry had not appeared in the first half, when we were assured Meghan was not a gold-digger. “I never looked up my husband online,” she claimed, when Oprah asked if she had done her “research”. Harry now took his place alongside his duchess and we found he has started saying “like” and he has the beginnings of an American accent. He disclosed that his father stopped taking his telephone calls for a while. Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.

And yet Harry was less clunkingly dim than one possibly expected. He has certainly drunk deeply of the west-coast Kool-Aid. At one point he made it sound as if he himself had breastfed Archie.

The programme was entitled Meghan & Harry. Most of us used to put them the other way round. Her Grace wore a dark dress with white splodges. Blasted seagulls. She, in turn, proceeded to deposit industrial quantities of guano on a royal family that had, we heard, welcomed her warmly to their midst. Things only started to go wrong after the row about the bridesmaids’ dresses. Or was it after the couple’s official trip to the Pacific (translation: the rest of “the Firm” were envious of its success)? We heard both.

Further inconsistencies followed. One minute Meghan disclaimed grandeur, the next she was concerned about her “status”. One moment she was unfussed about honorifics, the next she was furious Archie was not going to be a prince. She was astonished when her police protection was withdrawn (bodyguards are a must-have accessory in Hollywood). The next she was writing to the Queen to say she didn’t care less about protection. Oprah let these self-contradictions go through to the wicketkeeper.

It ended with Meghan comparing herself — sorry about this — to the Little Mermaid and Harry saying “time heals all things, hopefully”. Someone possibly said the same to the Earl of Uxbridge at the Battle of Waterloo, even as much of one of his legs was disappearing over the brow of the hill attached to a cannon ball.


----------



## Iceskater88

This is the end of the road for H. So sad for him. He’s truly the real loser. They’ll get their billion dollar book deal and have a sympathetic American press keep rolling interview clips. Free press for their foundation. I’m certain we’ll get “new exclusives” in the days ahead. The editing was so badly done. The BRF will recover from this with no problems.


----------



## Chanbal

Blame it on the stars!









						Meghan Markle has made Prince Harry her servant, royal astrologer says
					

ROYAL astrologer Debbie Frank says Meghan has made Prince Harry her servant. And Debbie, who predicted Megxit and sweeping changes in the Royal Family, warns the Sussexes’ latest actions will cause…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

Morning from the UK, 32 pages for me to catch up on. 
Here we go, see you on the other side.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gayle said several times this is OW’s best interview, ever.
Really? Her best????   OW seemed annoyed with the gruesome twosome so much so that she did not hesitate to interrupt them. She knows when the audience is leaving. Yet, supposedly, Gayle and OW have outtakes to show us tomorrow. This sh$tshow will go on all week. Read the room, CBS. We’re out. Boom.

ETA: the poor lil Hazzie routine ended when he did this — very similar to TomC’s couch-jumping. Staged, anyone?


----------



## csshopper

There was a bright spot: Charles stopped taking his ingrate son's calls.

I do not believe for one minute she was suicidal, she is too narcissistic to shorten the time she has on earth to proclaim her self perceived wonderfulness to the world and how would we ever be able to get through life without her telling us how we need to live????.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Diana was suicidal during her first pregnancy, and at other times during the marriage.
Diana complained that she'd asked for help with her mental health and it was denied to her.
Diana blamed the fact that she overshadowed Charles during the Australia tour in 1983 for him turning against her and seeing her as a rival.  

Is there anything else that could be straight out of Diana's life story, and given the necessary tweak to make it part of Meghan's story?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gayle said several times this is OW’s best interview, ever.
> Really? Her best????   OW seemed annoyed with the gruesome twosome so much so that she did not hesitate to interrupt them. She knows when the audience is leaving. Yet, supposedly, Gayle and OW have outtakes to show us tomorrow. This sh$tshow will go on all week. Read the room, CBS. We’re out. Boom.
> 
> ETA: the poor lil Hazzie routine ended when he did this — very similar to TomC’s couch-jumping. Staged, anyone?
> View attachment 5014723


It was boring. She is insufferable.  He is a twit. Oprah‘s eyes were glazing over from the BS and bad acting.


----------



## Joelene

kkfiregirl said:


> I see why Bethenny changed her tune; she would look like a jerk if she made light of _racism _and _suicide _publicly. I don’t think she’s actually changed her mind about them, but she doesn’t want to seem cruel.


She corrected herself because she’s clearly not the person to be calling them out. People were putting embarrassing things with receipts about stuff she’s done.


----------



## Lodpah

Straight-Laced said:


> Diana was suicidal during her first pregnancy, and at other times during the marriage.
> Diana complained that she'd asked for help with her mental health and it was denied to her.
> Diana blamed the fact that she overshadowed Charles during the Australia tour in 1983 for him turning against her and seeing her as a rival.
> 
> Is there anything else that could be straight out of Diana's life story, and given the necessary tweak to make it part of Meghan's story?


Yes, I now believe MM has officially put a new diagnosis in the Physician's Desk Reference; Pseudocyesise. Like a woman who believes she's pregnant. MM probably is exhibiting Pseudocyesise D-Syndrome (Diana Syndrome). Very scary stuff and very much needed help for the person. At this point, Harry is the enabler but then again he's not very bright - he is still on tricycles.


----------



## Jktgal

ck2802 said:


> With regards to her seeking assistance for her mental health issues, I don’t believe she can just call any old Dr & make an appointment.



She managed to have work done on her face/teeth quietly, so no reason she/friends can not arrange for mental health issues.


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> Diana was suicidal during her first pregnancy, and at other times during the marriage.
> Diana complained that she'd asked for help with her mental health and it was denied to her.
> Diana blamed the fact that she overshadowed Charles during the Australia tour in 1983 for him turning against her and seeing her as a rival.
> 
> Is there anything else that could be straight out of Diana's life story, and given the necessary tweak to make it part of Meghan's story?


That’s what I thought. Meg knows how to manipulate Harry with the similarities and he’s too dumb to catch on.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> It was boring. She is insufferable.  He is a twit. Oprah‘s eyes were glazing over from the BS and bad acting.


gracekelly, Yes, Yes, and Yes!   The money grubbing aspect of this program, extending from the original 90 minutes to two hours so more ads could be sold is predictable, but nevertheless, disgusting. Maybe the extra 30 was to accommodate the "chicken ****."


----------



## kkfiregirl

Straight-Laced said:


> *Is there anything else that could be straight out of Diana's life story, and given the necessary tweak to make it part of Meghan's story?*



MM is currently planning her _near death _paparazzi chase as we speak.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Handbag1234

I see the stans on Twitter are on overdrive. Someone even described MM as ‘the people’s princess’. Really? I’ve heard enough.


----------



## jelliedfeels

*w*


mellibelly said:


> I can’t believe I agreed for the first time ever with Piers Morgan and Candice Owens


Me too. I guess Polem


bag-mania said:


> Is there a good reason to have a mini wedding service before the big one? Was she afraid he’d get cold feet or something?


ding ding got it in one!


----------



## jelliedfeels

scarlet555 said:


> Hey, you got to seal the deal in case someone locks the prince in the dungeon...  ahem...  seen the crown?  People disappear for their own protection...


Thinking about it, I think she might have pulled a K Fed and married him soon after meeting him because they are just so spontaneous and romantic like that. 
If they were already married and the BRF feared it might come out which would explain their comparatively rushed courtship.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap. Three days before the big wedding they got married in a small service.



Just...why. Did she have to nail down the deal? I have 33 pages to catch up on and this will probably not be the most scandalous, but it's the unnecessary lies about the small things that is utterly sick. Did they mention what the Queen thought?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear.  A 40 year old woman with a degree from Northwestern says this, believes this, thinks this:









						Viewers react after Meghan compares herself to The Little Mermaid
					

Meghan told the talk show host she watched the Disney movie and saw parallels between the character Ariel and her own life since meeting her real-life prince.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Y’all, she had to learn the UK anthem!!!  It is different from the USA anthem !!! Whaaaa???!!!!


Well, good for her..... Not! As well as the UK anthem which is also the anthem for England, Catherine has learnt the Welsh national anthem too, which is obviously in Welsh. She sang it with gusto at her first official engagement 10 years ago.


----------



## kkfiregirl

jelliedfeels said:


> Thinking about it, I think she might have pulled a K Fed and married him soon after meeting him because they are just so spontaneous and romantic like that.
> If they were already married and the BRF feared it might come out which would explain their comparatively rushed courtship.



Good point! I’ll bet they were married before the engagement interview, which is why the family seemed so welcoming and accepting- they had no choice, she was already family!


----------



## kkfiregirl

Jayne1 said:


> That’s what I thought. Meg knows how to manipulate Harry with the similarities and he’s too dumb to catch on.



I’m sure that some of his friends/family can see that she’s exploiting the trauma of his mother’s death, but they just find it too _grotesque_ to mention.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Not even worth wasting breath on either of these two


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She is claiming the family weren’t going to provide security for Archie. And that Archie wouldn’t be a prince. I thought Meghan and Harry insisted he not be a prince.



Ha. I feel validated. I said pages and pages back I bet it rubbed her the wrong way the Queen wouldn't offer a princely title and THAT is why they insisted they didn't want one. And no, it wasn't racism, but Harry being far down the line by now. William is the heir.


----------



## lalame

Iceskater88 said:


> This is the end of the road for H. So sad for him. He’s truly the real loser. They’ll get their billion dollar book deal and have a sympathetic American press keep rolling interview clips. Free press for their foundation. I’m certain we’ll get “new exclusives” in the days ahead. The editing was so badly done. The BRF will recover from this with no problems.



Didn’t you hear Oprah say at the end that there was so much material they had to cut for time but “you can watch more clips and analysis with Gayle... tomorrow!”  There’s no time to waste when you’re milking this opportunity as far as it will go.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> For those not watching, she said the family didn’t give Archie a prince title because his skin might be too dark. When Oprah pressed her to say who said that, she wouldn’t give a name(s).



Which is a straight out lie if you know anything about how the monarchy works. And yet there will be people believing it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She is saying she had suicidal thoughts.
> 
> Hmm, none of this made it into Finding Freedom. Omid is probably watching like WTF.



I just read that as breaking news on HuffPost. I don't believe it for a second, but like the miscarriage, what do you say to that? You can't call her out.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> She was suicidal while pregnant with Archie?!  I don’t believe it!!!



I _really_ worry for Archie - and I'm thinking more about the future


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> She is claiming the family weren’t going to provide security for Archie. And that Archie wouldn’t be a prince. I thought Meghan and Harry insisted he not be a prince.


How much security does he need if no one knows who he is or what he looks like? 
Jk
I don’t buy it for a second. It’s already on record Charles gave them millions for security this year. How they choose to portion it  is on them.

Archie can’t be a prince if YOU left the royal family! Duh!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Sharont2305 said:


> Well, good for her..... Not! As well as the UK anthem which is also the anthem for England, Catherine has learnt the Welsh national anthem too, which is obviously in Welsh. She sang it with gusto at her first official engagement 10 years ago.



Hats off to her!
I took some Gaelic classes  here and it is amazing how a word that looks one way is pronounced, well, nothing like it looks. I saw the post on the Will and Kate thread that was in Welsh and I was  ummmmm........uh-huh, not even going to try it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s what Diana would say:












						Royal fans go wild over clip of Princess Diana scolding Prince Harry
					

Fans have gone wild over a resurfaced clip of Princess Diana telling a young Prince Harry to behave himself.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> ULTIMATE VICTIM! It's all POOR ME! And Harry said he was TRAPPED. But didn't know he was trapped.
> 
> WTF?  Dear husband just said "Trapped my *ss!" DH is trapped watching this show with me (not really, he's at liberty to leave but it's become a slow train wreck and we can't turn away.)



What did one of the UK journalists write a few das ago..."She convinced our cheerful prince he had been miserable all along".


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> She's the Little Mermaid? Noooooo. Ariel wasn't nasty like her!



Mermaids were the original sirens. Lure nice sailors to their deaths. Sailors used to have mermaid tattoo put on their arms to remind them 'don't mess with mermaids'!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It seems that many of Meghan's misunderstandings, and I am being polite using the word misunderstanding, stems from her willful ignorance.  If she truly did not know about this family, what was expected of her, she should have kept a low profile when first married and learned all of the above.  The problem is that when you come in "hitting the ground running" it is hard to do that.  Where did the idea spring up that she had to rush into doing anything with an institution that was well set up and had been running itself for a long time without her help.   Did she actually expect to change things in 5 minutes?  The fact that the family welcomed a woman of color so warmly was a interesting development right there in my way of thinking.  I didn't think they had it in them to do that and they surprised me.  The meanest thing she has said so far was to say that comments were being made about the child's potential color and they didn't say that to her directly she is claiming, but to Harry.  I think that Harry was the one who was thinking about this and perhaps worried he couldn't handle it if the child came out darker than Meghan.



You mean she's a fantasist and he's racist? 

ITA


----------



## ck2802

Jktgal said:


> She managed to have work done on her face/teeth quietly, so no reason she/friends can not arrange for mental health issues.


Definitely agree I don’t believe she couldn’t get help.  This is Diana’s story, not hers.


----------



## Sol Ryan

So Harry thinks his relationship with Wills is gonna survive this?

Glad I didn’t miss much...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?



Great point. Now that you mention it, it's the same in Germany. But seeing in the US you can get married on your private property or in a park if you want to, I didn't question it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Opinions opinions opinions


			https://twitter.com/GMB


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Soooo, everyone is happy now?
> Have they worked out a deal for Hazzie to abdicate renounce titles after the Diana ceremony?
> This article is puzzling.  *Rumors are swirling that MM wants another OW interview to address the bullying.*
> 
> 
> ETA: fixed it [only kings and queens abdicate]



THIS is what I was afraid of. She is going to want to clap back at everything. Hopefully Oprah can read the room and let it be a one and done.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?



The law changed a few years ago. The venue just has to be licensed. 

I don't buy the double ceremony though. Firstly, I can't believe that any religious minister or registrar would perform it since they have to take an oath to the Queen. 

If the date of the ceremony on the marriage cert is the same as the wedding we saw then what they were yapping about was a rehearsal for the big day. Ultimately, the date on the cert is the real wedding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Meghan: "They were willing to LIE to protect other members of the royal family but they weren't willing to tell the truth to protect me."
> 
> Ummm why did Oprah skip over this.... WHO did they lie about? What was the lie?



That's why they are now being investigated for stiffling the bullying allegations, hu?


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Opinions opinions opinions
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GMB



Wonder what they're saying over on Quora..........


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wealthy men should stay away from American women?


----------



## papertiger

baghagg said:


> Why couldn't Meghan's husband teach her his national anthem???



Too stupid 

If anyone would like to learn our national anthem, words and tune are on-line BTW.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

TimeToShop said:


> Oh please, “the most important title I will ever have is mom”.


Funny she insists on being referred to by the duchess title so much then. 


TC1 said:


> She wants her kids to be princes SO BADLY
> I think the security is based on how close you are to the throne, not the colour of your skin if I'm not mistaken.


Yeah they left before Charles became monarch that’s the reason he’s not a prince. He isn’t close enough in succession to be an automatic prince because William and Charles are alive and William has kids. 

The race of the child disinheriting them is a total crock. It would go against every British law on racial discrimination and also why would they let them marry if they cannot have legitimate children? It would insult the sacrament of marriage which the Queen is meant to protect as leader of the Church of England.

I’m pretty sure their Sussex royal Instagram post publicly announced he wouldn’t have a title so the queen could hardly give him a title after that and go against their wishes. 

 Also other people in the royal family have refused titles like Zara Phillips. It doesn’t mean they are second class citizens. If anything people respect Anne and her children more.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It isn’t all roses over here!









						Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull
					

Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you? And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her…




					nypost.com
				





Spoiler: full of bull??



*Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull*
By Maureen Callahan
Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you?

And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her the help she begged for — that will destroy once and for all any chance Harry had of reconciling with the British royal family.

“I wasn’t planning to say anything shocking!” Megs told Oprah.

Please. As we all know, Meghan’s not that good an actress. Or a dissembler.

Whopper Number One, at the interview’s outset: Meghan knew nothing of the British royal family — nothing! She’s American, after all!

Here she was, living her life, starring on a basic cable legal drama, when she got sucked into the vortex of royal life. Castles, riches, titles, instant global fame, a team of servants and advisors — none of these mattered a whit to her

“All the grandeur attached to this stuff,” said Meghan, has never meant anything, not part of the attraction at all.

Says the woman who invited Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney to her wedding — A-listers she’d never even met.

Oh, and lest we forget the Palace’s clapback this week, revealing that Meghan had been gifted blood diamonds by MBS after he authorized the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and wore them even though warned not to — a charge Meghan has not denied.

Whopper Number Two: She never so much as Googled Harry when they began dating. She also never so much as Googled herself or followed any of her media coverage because that too has never mattered to her — says the woman who posed for a Vanity Fair cover story before she and Harry were even engaged.

As for the catastrophic event Meghan calls “the turning point,” the moment she knew that the royals were plotting to destroy her and she and Harry had to go: The tabloid report that she made Duchess Kate cry.

No, says Meghan: Kate made _her _cry. And The Firm wouldn’t let Meghan issue a denial.

As Harry once infamously said, “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”

So are we to believe Meghan had no recourse until now? No friend or surrogate who could set the record straight? She is, after all, famously litigious when it comes to the British tabloids — you know, the ones she claims not to read.

Then came the day Meghan was advised not to go out to lunch with a friend, because she’d been far too visible.

“Well,” Meghan recalled saying, “I haven’t left the house in months!”

While we enter year two of quarantine.

Not since griping “not many people have asked me if I’m OK” amid starving, impoverished children in South Africa have we gotten such a tone-deaf utterance from dear old Megs, that perpetual victim.

“The Queen has always been wonderful to me,” said Meghan, before stating that a very senior royal — that would be either the Queen, Harry’s father Prince Charles (who, Harry tells us, stopped taking his calls for a time and has cut him off financially, wonder why), or brother Prince William — told a desperate, suicidal Meghan that she could not seek professional help.

So is Meghan saying they’d be happy if she killed herself?

Sure sounds like it. But after Harry joined the chat, he told Oprah that he never told any member of his family about that.

So which is it? The top royals knew and didn’t care or truly had no idea?

Meghan swiftly moved on, claiming that there was a serious discussion inside the royal family about how black her baby might be and the decision to refuse the child any security — zero, zip, nada, Meghan again implying the royals wouldn’t mind harm coming to a royal infant who wouldn’t be 100% white.

The British taxpayers spent millions on Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Prince Charles walked her down the aisle. The Queen, by Meghan’s own admission, was warm and embracing and maternal. Meghan quickly became an object of fascination and adoration, a unique figure who, like Diana, could modernize the crown.

Meghan and Harry had a lot of goodwill. People were rooting for them.

That was then.

As to Oprah’s question about whether Meghan wanted a royal life only to quickly leave and build her brand as a newly-minted global celebrity, nonsense, she says! None.

No follow-up from Oprah about building the SussexRoyal website once outside the castle walls and the couple’s attempt to monetize their title until the Queen smacked them down.

Interestingly, after Meghan denied having any kind of plan, Harry told Oprah he would never have left the royal family if not for Meghan.  

“I was trapped,” he said, “but I didn’t know I was trapped.”

Meghan helped him figure that out, he said. That’s why they announced they wanted a life of privacy before settling in L.A. and streaming endless videos from their $14 million mansion and signing deals with Spotify and Netflix and appearing on “So You Think You Can Dance” (Meghan) and sitting down for a primetime tell-all with Oprah Winfrey.

In the run-up to tonight’s special, Meghan and Harry announced that this would be their final word, for real. They’ve said all they’ve had to say and will be furthermore unavailable for comment.

What? You don’t believe them?


----------



## jelliedfeels

baghagg said:


> Aren't their children not prince or princess because they're half American???


I don’t think so, other nobility have married Americans and their children have inherited their titles. The duke of Marlborough married American Consuelo Vanderbilt in Edwardian times and their son became the duke. Also the Canadian citizen Autumn Phillips’ children are still in the line of succession.
I would say the opposite is true, that if you choose to live in America or another Republic you should not use your titles out of respect cough Harry cough.
Edit : when I said ***** I meant the system of governance without a monarchy not the political party so I changed it to Republic for clarity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s what Diana would say:
> 
> View attachment 5014770
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal fans go wild over clip of Princess Diana scolding Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Fans have gone wild over a resurfaced clip of Princess Diana telling a young Prince Harry to behave himself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What makes me really laugh and is ironic in hindsight is how William can be heard in the background saying "Yes Harry, shush!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok I'm exhausted now. I feel that didn't live up to the expectations built up, but I am slightly irritated how tons of people ate it up (an Emmy award winning journalist publishing such a gushing review on FB I thought for a moment she was being sarcastic).


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> She said it would be damaging to the BRF members.


Yes that makes sense. Whereas leaving suspicion to fall on all of them doesn’t hurt?
Isn’t it rather because you can’t be sued for slander if you never specify who said it?


bag-mania said:


> She is saying she had suicidal thoughts.
> 
> Hmm, none of this made it into Finding Freedom. Omid is probably watching like WTF.


If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times, it is disgusting how these two hijack serious issues.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> So the RF was totally fine with the marriage but not with a mixed race baby? Doesn’t make sense.


Clearly they advised him never to consummate the marriage haha


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t all roses over here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull
> 
> 
> Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you? And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: full of bull??
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull*
> By Maureen Callahan
> Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you?
> 
> And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her the help she begged for — that will destroy once and for all any chance Harry had of reconciling with the British royal family.
> 
> “I wasn’t planning to say anything shocking!” Megs told Oprah.
> 
> Please. As we all know, Meghan’s not that good an actress. Or a dissembler.
> 
> Whopper Number One, at the interview’s outset: Meghan knew nothing of the British royal family — nothing! She’s American, after all!
> 
> Here she was, living her life, starring on a basic cable legal drama, when she got sucked into the vortex of royal life. Castles, riches, titles, instant global fame, a team of servants and advisors — none of these mattered a whit to her
> 
> “All the grandeur attached to this stuff,” said Meghan, has never meant anything, not part of the attraction at all.
> 
> Says the woman who invited Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney to her wedding — A-listers she’d never even met.
> 
> Oh, and lest we forget the Palace’s clapback this week, revealing that Meghan had been gifted blood diamonds by MBS after he authorized the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and wore them even though warned not to — a charge Meghan has not denied.
> 
> Whopper Number Two: She never so much as Googled Harry when they began dating. She also never so much as Googled herself or followed any of her media coverage because that too has never mattered to her — says the woman who posed for a Vanity Fair cover story before she and Harry were even engaged.
> 
> As for the catastrophic event Meghan calls “the turning point,” the moment she knew that the royals were plotting to destroy her and she and Harry had to go: The tabloid report that she made Duchess Kate cry.
> 
> No, says Meghan: Kate made _her _cry. And The Firm wouldn’t let Meghan issue a denial.
> 
> As Harry once infamously said, “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”
> 
> So are we to believe Meghan had no recourse until now? No friend or surrogate who could set the record straight? She is, after all, famously litigious when it comes to the British tabloids — you know, the ones she claims not to read.
> 
> Then came the day Meghan was advised not to go out to lunch with a friend, because she’d been far too visible.
> 
> “Well,” Meghan recalled saying, “I haven’t left the house in months!”
> 
> While we enter year two of quarantine.
> 
> Not since griping “not many people have asked me if I’m OK” amid starving, impoverished children in South Africa have we gotten such a tone-deaf utterance from dear old Megs, that perpetual victim.
> 
> “The Queen has always been wonderful to me,” said Meghan, before stating that a very senior royal — that would be either the Queen, Harry’s father Prince Charles (who, Harry tells us, stopped taking his calls for a time and has cut him off financially, wonder why), or brother Prince William — told a desperate, suicidal Meghan that she could not seek professional help.
> 
> So is Meghan saying they’d be happy if she killed herself?
> 
> Sure sounds like it. But after Harry joined the chat, he told Oprah that he never told any member of his family about that.
> 
> So which is it? The top royals knew and didn’t care or truly had no idea?
> 
> Meghan swiftly moved on, claiming that there was a serious discussion inside the royal family about how black her baby might be and the decision to refuse the child any security — zero, zip, nada, Meghan again implying the royals wouldn’t mind harm coming to a royal infant who wouldn’t be 100% white.
> 
> The British taxpayers spent millions on Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Prince Charles walked her down the aisle. The Queen, by Meghan’s own admission, was warm and embracing and maternal. Meghan quickly became an object of fascination and adoration, a unique figure who, like Diana, could modernize the crown.
> 
> Meghan and Harry had a lot of goodwill. People were rooting for them.
> 
> That was then.
> 
> As to Oprah’s question about whether Meghan wanted a royal life only to quickly leave and build her brand as a newly-minted global celebrity, nonsense, she says! None.
> 
> No follow-up from Oprah about building the SussexRoyal website once outside the castle walls and the couple’s attempt to monetize their title until the Queen smacked them down.
> 
> Interestingly, after Meghan denied having any kind of plan, Harry told Oprah he would never have left the royal family if not for Meghan.
> 
> “I was trapped,” he said, “but I didn’t know I was trapped.”
> 
> Meghan helped him figure that out, he said. That’s why they announced they wanted a life of privacy before settling in L.A. and streaming endless videos from their $14 million mansion and signing deals with Spotify and Netflix and appearing on “So You Think You Can Dance” (Meghan) and sitting down for a primetime tell-all with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> In the run-up to tonight’s special, Meghan and Harry announced that this would be their final word, for real. They’ve said all they’ve had to say and will be furthermore unavailable for comment.
> 
> What? You don’t believe them?



And I’m going to click on that link to make sure they get the credit for being honest...


----------



## artax two

Watch and wait. When H and M get nothing but negative reactions worldwide for race baiting and outright falsehoods, Meggs will claim it was the way OW's or the channel's editing team edited the interview together to portray them that way for ratings.


----------



## Handbag1234

papertiger said:


> The law changed a few years ago. The venue just has to be licensed.
> 
> I don't buy the double ceremony though. Firstly, I can't believe that any religious minister or registrar would perform it since they have to take an oath to the Queen.
> 
> If the date of the ceremony on the marriage cert is the same as the wedding we saw then what they were yapping about was a rehearsal for the big day. Ultimately, the date on the cert is the real wedding.


This is spot on! Legally the date of their wedding would be on the marriage certificate. It was a rehearsal in the garden. You can’t legally get married twice. One would be the official legal wedding and the second a blessing ceremony. If they had got legally  married in the garden why the drama and insist on full royal wedding at huge cost to tax payers?


----------



## jelliedfeels

TimeToShop said:


> Now she’s saying the media almost drove her to suicide, asked for help, and was told no. She was begging for help but no one would. Said she had to find her own solution. Asked Diana’s best friend for help.


I don’t want to sound insensitive but it doesn’t sound at all realistic she’s had so little power over her own medical issues. 
Not to stereotype but I especially can’t believe a rich American wouldn’t be demanding medications and therapy ASAP.
 The UK also has free emergency medical care here accessible for basically everyone regardless of their nationality so I find it hard to believe a VIP princess couldn’t quietly get some citalopram IF she needed it. 

 I’ve had severe mental health problems in the past myself but I had to go to the doctor myself, you know?
I didn’t realise I had a problem, told a relative  and waited for everything to be organised for me. I’m not saying other people didn’t care: I’m saying you can’t take absolutely no responsibility for your own recovery.
I’m calling BS on all of this. 
The mentally ill are just another victimised community they can appropriate from.


----------



## Sharont2305

Of course the new baby will be called Diana, have to one up William and Catherine for choosing it as ONLY a middle name for Charlotte. As the only granddaughter (thus far) her parents knew how much she will be compared to Diana as she grows up without saddling her with her name too. Also, when Charles becomes King, this new little girl will be known as Princess Diana just like grandma, even though Diana was never Princess Diana officially. Charlotte will still have the upper hand though as she is a Princess from birth, not when Grandpa becomes King.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yes


scarlet555 said:


> On a serious note: I am sure Oprah followed with:  are you getting/seeking mental health, since she did talk about suicidal thoughts.  Didn’t Oprah used to be a journalist... let me look... reporter and news anchor-from Britannica... any follow up on Cringe seeing or seeking mental health, it would be the responsible thing to ask and not to ignore it... anyone?


Yes. It’s horribly irresponsible for them not talk about the necessity of seeking medical help and maybe outline the process of recovery. Especially as they all fancy themselves advocates.
It can actually be dangerous for the mentally ill to think they can get better by just  ‘speaking their truth’.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s a transcript of the engagement interview. They both say they fully understand their roles, etc. What went wrong? They were not then teenagers or young 20 year olds.

In the JamesC interview, Hazzie says he knew she was the one on the second date, iirc. In the engagement interview he says - 1 or 2 months in. Which is it?

OW should have asked these things.

_Prince Harry: Of course. That sense of responsibility was was essentially from day one or maybe a couple of months in, when I sort of realized actually, this is you know, I feel I know that I'm in love with this girl._









						Full transcript of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's engagement interview
					

The two announced their engagement today.




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I commented on the HuffPost article stating Archie was denied a princely title out of spite and racism with the mere facts, and wouldn't you know it took only minutes for a stan to inform me I was lying because everyone knows all children of royals and all grandchildren of the Queen are princes and princesses and both the BRF and I are racists.

I kindly let them know that Archie isn't the Queen's grandson, Harry is. Wanna bet a fiver even with the disclaimer they'll come back and screech about how I am saying Archie isn't part of the family?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Now that I think of it, how extremely sh*tty is it to plant into a child's head "Your family rejected you because they disliked the colour of your skin"? So utterly cruel.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> I want to know if Lady CC heard about the suicidal thoughts or the question of Archie's skin color.  She is the last person on earth I would think of having thoughts about suicide.


It might be true. I was a bit dismissive but hormones can seriously change you. The point to me is that she isn’t saying anything positive about the necessity of seeking medical help and the possibility of recovery or anything at all positive. She is just using this issue to play the blame game.


Kansashalo said:


> Aww, they are having a girl!  YAY!
> 
> What M&H is sharing in this interview is not surprising to me  - especially give the tone of this thread.  While I'm from the US (so I know I come from a totally different POV of "royalty" and what that means) however I know what it's like to experience an onslaught of microaggression on a daily basis, the need to cut off certain family members, and doing what I need to do for my own mental well-being - even if it displeased others.   And this is without the "gift" of being in the public eye.
> 
> I applaud Harry for putting his family first instead of his title.  It takes a lot.


I’m sorry that you have suffered but surely you recognise he hasn’t put his family before his title? They clearly want to keep both their titles, gain a prince title for Archie on Charles’ ascension, and pursue commercial enterprise free from onerous royal responsibilities.


----------



## doni

Haven’t seen (or will see) the interview, only reports, but so many things that I don’t get...

So they got married three days before the “wedding”, and hence the wedding was not such. Why did they go through with it then? Which world do we live in where one happily confesses, without regret or embarrassment, that they cheated on the whole world by organizing a theatre of a wedding that was a lie? Plus the entitlement of just “phoning up” the Archbishop of Canterbury to pop in your private courtyard to marry you on a whim. Didn’t he have anything better to do on the day? I mean, if they the whole purpose of this was to be low key, why not call on the local priest? The paper work must have been a nightmare too...

On the mental health, when she’s reached for help to, we assume, other members of the Royal family. Why didn’t she reach to her own husband? Couldn’t he have got her some medical support? Is he _that_ useless?!
But okay, he was also apparently no use to help her learn God Save the Queen, so she had to do it _on_ _her own_, the struggle is real.

And the suffering because of the press, it cannot be paparazzi because, precisely since Diana, that is the last thing that is going to bother members of the Royal Family while in the UK. It is a no go. And she doesn’t mind living in LA which is paparazzi land (and where paparazzi do follow her). So I guess the trouble was what the media said of her. But she claimed multiple times she did not read the press or social media. So how was she so affected? Don’t get it...


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t all roses over here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull
> 
> 
> Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you? And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: full of bull??
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull*
> By Maureen Callahan
> Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you?
> 
> And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her the help she begged for — that will destroy once and for all any chance Harry had of reconciling with the British royal family.
> 
> “I wasn’t planning to say anything shocking!” Megs told Oprah.
> 
> Please. As we all know, Meghan’s not that good an actress. Or a dissembler.
> 
> Whopper Number One, at the interview’s outset: Meghan knew nothing of the British royal family — nothing! She’s American, after all!
> 
> Here she was, living her life, starring on a basic cable legal drama, when she got sucked into the vortex of royal life. Castles, riches, titles, instant global fame, a team of servants and advisors — none of these mattered a whit to her
> 
> “All the grandeur attached to this stuff,” said Meghan, has never meant anything, not part of the attraction at all.
> 
> Says the woman who invited Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney to her wedding — A-listers she’d never even met.
> 
> Oh, and lest we forget the Palace’s clapback this week, revealing that Meghan had been gifted blood diamonds by MBS after he authorized the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and wore them even though warned not to — a charge Meghan has not denied.
> 
> Whopper Number Two: She never so much as Googled Harry when they began dating. She also never so much as Googled herself or followed any of her media coverage because that too has never mattered to her — says the woman who posed for a Vanity Fair cover story before she and Harry were even engaged.
> 
> As for the catastrophic event Meghan calls “the turning point,” the moment she knew that the royals were plotting to destroy her and she and Harry had to go: The tabloid report that she made Duchess Kate cry.
> 
> No, says Meghan: Kate made _her _cry. And The Firm wouldn’t let Meghan issue a denial.
> 
> As Harry once infamously said, “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”
> 
> So are we to believe Meghan had no recourse until now? No friend or surrogate who could set the record straight? She is, after all, famously litigious when it comes to the British tabloids — you know, the ones she claims not to read.
> 
> Then came the day Meghan was advised not to go out to lunch with a friend, because she’d been far too visible.
> 
> “Well,” Meghan recalled saying, “I haven’t left the house in months!”
> 
> While we enter year two of quarantine.
> 
> Not since griping “not many people have asked me if I’m OK” amid starving, impoverished children in South Africa have we gotten such a tone-deaf utterance from dear old Megs, that perpetual victim.
> 
> “The Queen has always been wonderful to me,” said Meghan, before stating that a very senior royal — that would be either the Queen, Harry’s father Prince Charles (who, Harry tells us, stopped taking his calls for a time and has cut him off financially, wonder why), or brother Prince William — told a desperate, suicidal Meghan that she could not seek professional help.
> 
> So is Meghan saying they’d be happy if she killed herself?
> 
> Sure sounds like it. But after Harry joined the chat, he told Oprah that he never told any member of his family about that.
> 
> So which is it? The top royals knew and didn’t care or truly had no idea?
> 
> Meghan swiftly moved on, claiming that there was a serious discussion inside the royal family about how black her baby might be and the decision to refuse the child any security — zero, zip, nada, Meghan again implying the royals wouldn’t mind harm coming to a royal infant who wouldn’t be 100% white.
> 
> The British taxpayers spent millions on Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Prince Charles walked her down the aisle. The Queen, by Meghan’s own admission, was warm and embracing and maternal. Meghan quickly became an object of fascination and adoration, a unique figure who, like Diana, could modernize the crown.
> 
> Meghan and Harry had a lot of goodwill. People were rooting for them.
> 
> That was then.
> 
> As to Oprah’s question about whether Meghan wanted a royal life only to quickly leave and build her brand as a newly-minted global celebrity, nonsense, she says! None.
> 
> No follow-up from Oprah about building the SussexRoyal website once outside the castle walls and the couple’s attempt to monetize their title until the Queen smacked them down.
> 
> Interestingly, after Meghan denied having any kind of plan, Harry told Oprah he would never have left the royal family if not for Meghan.
> 
> “I was trapped,” he said, “but I didn’t know I was trapped.”
> 
> Meghan helped him figure that out, he said. That’s why they announced they wanted a life of privacy before settling in L.A. and streaming endless videos from their $14 million mansion and signing deals with Spotify and Netflix and appearing on “So You Think You Can Dance” (Meghan) and sitting down for a primetime tell-all with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> In the run-up to tonight’s special, Meghan and Harry announced that this would be their final word, for real. They’ve said all they’ve had to say and will be furthermore unavailable for comment.
> 
> What? You don’t believe them?


Well you know the Times will be on their side


----------



## jelliedfeels

If  MM wants to be an advocate for mentally ill pregnant women she is actually giving terrible advice.
Pregnancy and Post natal depression are incredibly serious conditions. 
They don’t just go away. Don’t ever dismiss it. Tell your midwife and or your doctor immediately if you ever feel like harming yourself or your baby.

Even  if she has good intentions she cannot be so irresponsible when speaking from authority on this issue. This is like when ‘13 reasons why’ was actually attributed with causing a rise in teen suicide because it was relaying dangerous messages.


----------



## gelbergirl

jelliedfeels said:


> If  MM wants to be an advocate for mentally ill pregnant women she is actually giving terrible advice.
> Pregnancy and Post natal depression are incredibly serious conditions.
> They don’t just go away. Don’t ever dismiss it. Tell your midwife and or your doctor immediately if you ever feel like harming yourself or your baby.
> 
> Even  if she has good intentions she cannot be so irresponsible when speaking from authority on this issue. This is like when ‘13 reasons why’ was actually attributed with causing a rise in teen suicide because it was relaying dangerous messages.



I just read some of the interview.
So her advice to post natal depression is to leave the palace and move to an LA mansion,
Have a sit-down with Oprah.

UGH.  I understand the Queen did not watch but was briefed on the OW broadcast this morning.


----------



## jelliedfeels

MM


lalame said:


> Wills and Harry also said they went to therapy themselves so I also am perplexed by this claim they denied her mental healthcare. I mean.... how can anyone deny her mental healthcare? In the UK of all places?


H&M : we couldn’t get medical help anywhere 
NHS is typing.....


----------



## mdcx

jelliedfeels said:


> If  MM wants to be an advocate for mentally ill pregnant women she is actually giving terrible advice.
> Pregnancy and Post natal depression are incredibly serious conditions.
> They don’t just go away. Don’t ever dismiss it. Tell your midwife and or your doctor immediately if you ever feel like harming yourself or your baby.
> 
> Even  if she has good intentions she cannot be so irresponsible when speaking from authority on this issue. This is like when ‘13 reasons why’ was actually attributed with causing a rise in teen suicide because it was relaying dangerous messages.


Exactly. She accepts zero responsibilty for the power her words have, given her position. BRF members can’t just carelessly say whatever pops into their heads to the media. I get the impression Meghan doesn’t “do” duty, loyalty, self-disipline, discretion etc unless it nets her cash or the equivalent...


----------



## Chagall

I only saw a bit of it and found it extremely hard to stomach. The thing that did me in was her depiction of Charlotte’s bridesmaid dress fitting. She said Kate made HER cry. That Kate gave her flowers and apologized and she forgave her. This is the exact opposite of what was widely reported, over and over again in many areas of media. Kate must be livid. I tuned out long before Harry came in at the end.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Kansashalo said:


> Per Meghan herself, she said she did want to be apart of the BRF but circumstances (including the overall lack of support) that impacted her mental well-being made it clear that life wasn't possible.
> 
> In a simplistic way, it's like you are excited to take a new job...you go through new hire orientation learning all the rules, culture, etc....then you start your job and it sucks.  Yes, its the job they promised you, but your department's culture is nothing like they showed during orientation. lol


I think that’s a fair read of the situation. I likened it to enlisting in the army a while back.

I wouldn’t have any problem at all with them if they said they had personal problems with their family ( I can see why it’s difficult tbh) and wanted to go their own way. 
My problem is they want the job title but they won’t do the work & they are absolutely scattergun in blaming people for things.


----------



## doni

Chagall said:


> I only saw a bit of it and found it extremely hard to stomach. The thing that did me in was her depiction of Charlotte’s bridesmaid dress fitting. She said Kate made HER cry. That Kate gave her flowers and apologized and she forgave her. This is the exact opposite of what was widely reported, over and over again in many areas of media. Kate must be livid. I tuned out long before Harry came in at the end.


I think it is perfectly possible that Kate gave her flowers as a peace gesture. And that instead of seeing the kindness and grace, she translated it into she is apologizing and acknowledging that I am right.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the NY Post article:



> No, says Meghan: Kate made_ her_ cry. And the firm wouldn't let Meghan issue a denial.



That's the next big, fat lie everyone who wants to can easily dismiss. Because I remember too well that in a completely unprecedented move the palace issued a statement that said "That never happened."


----------



## doni

Anyway, I think the most remarkable thing of all is how well they have sold the narrative, also to their detractors, that they left the Royal Family and the UK as a means to escape what they perceived as an intolerable situation.

They did nothing of the sort, and the funny thing is that the story is there, for everyone to see. They decided they wanted to give up their sovereign grant (5% of their income) to make their own money and that they would _continue to work_ for the Queen and maintain all their pratonages while switching between Frogmore and the US. They published pages describing in painstaking detail the whole arrangement. When they were told _that_ was not possible because they could not make money as working Royals, _then_ they left...


----------



## jelliedfeels

Tyr


gracekelly said:


> I don't get why they need that much security in general.  If they are really making such big money they can pay for it themselves.


Yeah I’d assume it’s a normal expense in Celebrity circles. Surely Madonna’s kids have a bodyguard or two? To me it’s a bit like moaning that the British taxpayer won’t pay your water bill or your gardener.

From what I’ve heard Charles sent them a load of ‘his’ cash anyway so they could have got him an armoured tank if they wanted.
Weird they’ve  always got diamonds and designer clothes but apparently can’t get CCTV and a bouncer.


----------



## duna

Yikes, 40 pages since yesterday.....I'll never catch up....oh well, at least it seems the infamous interview must have been entertaining!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

doni said:


> Anyway, I think the most remarkable thing of all is how well they have sold the narrative, also to their detractors, that they left the Royal Family and the UK as a means to escape what they perceived as an intolerable situation.
> 
> They did nothing of the sort, and the funny thing is that the story is there, for everyone to see. They decided they wanted to give up their sovereign grant (5% of their income) to make their own money and that they would _continue to work_ for the Queen and maintain all their pratonages while switching between Frogmore and the US. They published pages describing in painstaking detail the whole arrangement. When they were told _that_ was not possible because they could not make money as working Royals, _then_ they left...


Beautifully put.


----------



## Sharont2305

I haven't watched the interview, as I'm obviously in the UK but someone on TV just made a good point on inconsistencies. He pointed out that M said about the conversation taking place when she was pregnant with Archie about his colouring. She then later said the conversation was with Harry. Later Harry said that the conversation took place before they actually got married! So, which is it?


----------



## jelliedfeels

tiktok said:


> I'm confused. She didn't have the money to pay out of pocket for a therapist like us plebs do when we have a mental health problem? I mean, I've never thought to go to HR for that but maybe HR in Hollywood works differently than I'm used to.


Yeah I asked my milkman for medical advice the other day and he was pretty unhelpful. I can only assume he’s sexist.


----------



## chicinthecity777

TimeToShop said:


> Now she’s saying the media almost drove her to suicide, asked for help, and was told no. She was begging for help but no one would. Said she had to find her own solution. Asked Diana’s best friend for help.


Did she said she didn't read what's written about her in the media?


Allisonfaye said:


> I don't believe her story about not getting security because of no title.


Great grandchildren of those who are not direct in line of succession don't automatically get titles and security. Once Charles becomes the king, then Archie will get a title. They previously said they didn't want title for Archie, so which is which? I thought titles didn't matter to them?


CarryOn2020 said:


> wonder what her name will be?


Diana!


bag-mania said:


> Harry is saying Charles stopped taking his calls.


I wouldn't if I was Charles!


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I won my bet. The stans are back with more nonsense. JUST GOOGLE WHO IS ENTITLED TO A PRINCELY TITLE INSTEAD OF GETTING ON MY NERVES.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> She said it was the three of them, don’t you need witnesses ?


Yeah 2 witnesses as well as the performer of the ceremony . The witnesses can be absolutely anyone.

 They would need to specify a date for their intended marriage when they applied for the licence. I think it would be newsworthy if they chose a different date to the lublicjded

I’m not 100% you can get married in your own house in England - this implies no:








						Getting married outdoors or at home could be legalised in England and Wales under new proposals
					

The Law Commission says the Marriage Act of 1836 is outdated and out of line with the modern approaches of Scotland and Ireland.




					www.google.co.uk
				




I find it a bit unlikely an Archbishop would willingly marry two people in a secular area and then go through a charade of a sacrament in the church days later. Mind you W*lby is shady. 

Also  they are legally married when they sign the registry not after the vows.  

I suspect what actually happened is the Archbishop did some blessing on them as she is divorced and wanted to marry in church and she is claiming that was a private marriage ceremony.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I haven't watched the interview, as I'm obviously in the UK but someone on TV just made a good point on inconsistencies. He pointed out that M said about the conversation taking place when she was pregnant with Archie about his colouring. She then later said the conversation was with Harry. Later Harry said that the conversation took place before they actually got married! So, which is it?



There is much of the “which is it” throughout the ‘interview’.  Either OW did a terrible job of getting answers to questions OR H&M decided to evade as much as possible. Maybe the follow-up true true story will be on Netflix.  So far we’ve had the true story from FF and OW. Now we need the true true story. 

 Seems there is a lot more trashtalk to tell.


----------



## EmilyM111

She reminds me of a colleague of mine -professional victim. She walked into highly paid corporate job in one of the top world companies where everybody knows the expectations and performance management (it's all over internet and glassdoor + the company itself is clear) and most mature people understand very high pay=stress and politics.
She didn't have experience in the field but was unwilling to learn so and decided to argue on every occasion with our new boss. Needless to say, the rating for the year is low and the professional victim is now running around plotting with less fortunate colleagues against the boss. What's more, despite being surrounded with friendship and care (a lot of us are helping her, I am an expert in the field and for example shared a lot of my work with her to copy, we also worked together on her projects making her shine in front of leadership without me taking credit), she's also putting other people at fault (eg. I'm a 'boss' favourite, the other colleague is 'playing the game too much'). Man, it's a hard work and obviously I'm out of this. Sounds familiar.
(I am not by this stating racism isn't real, I can imagine she experienced it)


----------



## mdcx

And Oprah is the queen of the “uncomfortable question” and the “uncomfortable silence while waiting for an answer” which makes all of this  even more rubbish. O really sent her career/legacy down the toilet with this imo.


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I suspect what actually happened is the Archbishop did some blessing on them as she is divorced and wanted to marry in church and she is claiming that was a private marriage ceremony.



She is not divorced in the eyes of the Church of England though, as her previous marriage wasn't in that faith. Just like Queen Letizia of Spain is not considered divorced in the Catholic church as her first marriage was just a civil ceremony.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> And why then spend $50 million on a second wedding?


She was charitably providing publicity for her little-known designer friend Claire Waight Keller.


----------



## chicinthecity777

If they did get married a few days before the Royal Wedding then I want my tax payer's money back!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Slightly OT my 7th grandchild was born last Monday, March 1st, and she was named......DIANA obviously not for Diana Princess of Wales but for the Roman Goddess!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Slightly OT my 7th grandchild was born last Monday, March 1st, and she was named......DIANA obviously not for Diana Princess of Wales but for the Roman Goddess!!



Congratulations!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha. I feel validated. I said pages and pages back I bet it rubbed her the wrong way the Queen wouldn't offer a princely title and THAT is why *they insisted they didn't want one*. And no, it wasn't racism, but Harry being far down the line by now. William is the heir.



But they said it (or sources said it on their behalf) and we know they never let anything stand uncorrected.









						Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Son, Archie, Doesn’t Have a Royal Title
					

And why he may have one in the future.




					www.vogue.com
				




'It was first reported by the _Times of London_ that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were considering not giving their child a formal label, in hopes of giving him or her a “a relatively normal life".'

'“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex consider their son to be a ‘private citizen’ and feel strongly about ‘shielding’ him from excessive scrutiny,” sources told _The Times of London_ this past Sunday.'

Are we not to believe a single word they say then?


----------



## nymeria

Congratulations, duna. Beautiful name and I'm sure, a beautiful baby


----------



## justwatchin

I didn’t watch it but enjoy the comments here as always.

My opinion is that they got exactly what they were hoping for with this interview (just like Diana did) only more effective thanks to prime time tv promos and the social media. BBC has a good synopsis with the highlights.

I don’t know how these two hooked up but it’s not like they got married after the first date, so this ignorance she claims about not researching anything, curtsying to the Queen, etc is b.s. And I don’t believe H didn’t make her aware of the protocol. Also, not feeling sorry about Charles cutting money off; not like H was suddenly homeless or penniless

I’m sure the BRF will not be getting into a pi$$ing contest with these two and they know it. Will they now go away quietly and raise their family and chickens? Nope.


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> Slightly OT my 7th grandchild was born last Monday, March 1st, and she was named......DIANA obviously not for Diana Princess of Wales but for the Roman Goddess!!


Congratulations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looking forward to BP’s thoughtful and reasoned response — perhaps something like this, only better:

_Yes, across our amazing commonwealth, much to our dismay and disapproval, some people continue to make racist comments. Using recommendations from weforum.org, here is what we are doing to change that awful situation — commitment, diverse leadership, actively monitor progress, keep the conversation going. We welcome any and all suggestions and recommendations. We had hoped H&M would assist with our efforts. We are saddened they have chosen not to. 








						7 ways your organisation can uproot systemic racism in the workplace
					

From promoting diverse employees, to capturing and analysing data, to recognizing intersectionality, here are steps organisations can take right now.




					www.weforum.org
				



_


----------



## duna

nymeria said:


> Congratulations, duna. Beautiful name and I'm sure, a beautiful baby



Thanks my dear!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> But they said it (or sources said it on their behalf) and we know they never let anything stand uncorrected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Son, Archie, Doesn’t Have a Royal Title
> 
> 
> And why he may have one in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'It was first reported by the _Times of London_ that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were considering not giving their child a formal label, in hopes of giving him or her a “a relatively normal life".'
> 
> '“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex consider their son to be a ‘private citizen’ and feel strongly about ‘shielding’ him from excessive scrutiny,” sources told _The Times of London_ this past Sunday.'
> 
> Are we not to believe a single word they say then?



I think I said the same as you? They said they didn't want the title for him to save face, because it sounded better than "Granny won't let #7 in line be a prince like the Cambridge kids".


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Congratulations.



Thanks Sharon, sorry I don't know how to multiquote!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting that an American activist/actress is so hung up on a title.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Congratulations!



Thanks dear!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that I think of it, how extremely sh*tty is it to plant into a child's head "Your family rejected you because they disliked the colour of your skin"? So utterly cruel.



and I tried to kill you/me when I was pregnant (with you).


----------



## mdcx

Meghan must be enormously draining to be around imo. If not wondering when her mood will switch dramatically, you’re probably wondering when she will throw you under the bus. I suspect she views all her relationships in strictly transactional terms.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?


Sounds like another exception that was made for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still quite confused by the chicken coop.  Why are they rescuing chickens when she claimed (lied) they got engaged while "roasting a chicken" at their little cottage at KP?  Did she have a sudden epiphany?  Did chickens come to her in her dreams??


The chickens are her friends now and just like her human friends when they are no longer useful they get the axe.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I said the same as you? They said they didn't want the title for him to save face, because it sounded better than "Granny won't let #7 in line be a prince like the Cambridge kids".



I was agreeing 

But if was _Granny_ wouldn't allow, then they're saying QEII blocked their wishes on account she is a racist(?). Earlier they were praising her. No one else can allow/bestow/deny a discretionary title that is given save for the reigning monarch (as opposed to the automatic right of a child/grandchild of monarch to be called Prince/Princess).

Like most of their lies, I don't think they think the whole scenario.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Like most of their lies, I don't think they think the whole scenario.



Indeed, plus at this point they are having difficulties keeping their lies straight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## AmeeLVSBags

I thought when she first said security meant a paycheck not physical security. I think Oprah should have pressed more that you wanted it both ways, be Royal by title, get all the benefits and still be left alone. she asked them once or twice but didn’t push them to admit.

Her story didn’t add up, she went to HR to get help? They told her your not an employee, so as someone else mentioned couldn’t she get help on her own then. Or her mother or friends put someone on the phone to talk to her! I also don’t think she really meant she wanted to end her life as in suicide. She kept saying it takes a lot of courage and strength to say you need help. She didn’t come across genuine.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is satire!


----------



## chicinthecity777

This got me a chuckle!


----------



## jelliedfeels

scarlet555 said:


> Hey now, you got to know it before you can teach it to someone...


It is too painful for Haz as he knows that people will never sing it to him.

Side note our national anthem is slow and repetitive so I don’t see how it could be difficult to learn especially compared to ‘Star Spangled Banner.’

side side note. I really wish the UK national anthem was ‘Jerusalem’ with England changed to Britain because:
1. It is a much better tune
2. It is about the nation itself not one important person
3. If ever a country would suit an ironic national anthem you’d think it’d be


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> It is too painful for Haz as he knows that people will never sing it to him.
> 
> Side note our national anthem is slow and repetitive so I don’t see how it could be difficult to learn especially compared to ‘Star Spangled Banner.’
> 
> side side note. I really wish the UK national anthem was ‘Jerusalem’ with England changed to Britain because:
> 1. It is a much better tune
> 2. It is about the nation itself not one important person
> 3. If ever a country would suit an ironic national anthem you’d think it’d be the UK


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> It is too painful for Haz as he knows that people will never sing it to him.
> 
> Side note our national anthem is slow and repetitive so I don’t see how it could be difficult to learn especially compared to ‘Star Spangled Banner.’
> 
> side side note. I really wish the UK national anthem was ‘Jerusalem’ with England changed to Britain because:
> 1. It is a much better tune
> 2. It is about the nation itself not one important person
> 3. If ever a country would suit an ironic national anthem you’d think it’d be


I disagree, I think the national anthem of England should be Jerusalem, with God Save the Queen as the UK one. After all, we Welsh and the Scots have our own (Not sure what the Northern Irish have as their own) Plus, it does refer to England. Its a beautiful hymn, it always gets to me when I hear it and I'm not English


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> It’s like having rescue dogs and then other dogs you eat. Lord knows if they went vegetarian or vegan we would have heard about it.


Well isn’t it a bit like having a rescue dog and then abandoning it when you don’t want to pay to transport it abroad?


----------



## Sharont2305

Deleted


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is not divorced in the eyes of the Church of England though, as her previous marriage wasn't in that faith. Just like Queen Letizia of Spain is not considered divorced in the Catholic church as her first marriage was just a civil ceremony.


Indeed, you cannot even be divorced under canon law. Either your are married or your marriage never existed (annulment or it was a civil marriage and it does not count).
For a catholic marriage to be valid under canon law, you need at least a priest and two witnesses. I don’t know how it is in the Anglican church...

To me this whole first wedding business (or whatever it was) illustrates just how far the Royal Family and England went to ingratiate her and satisfy their every whim. The Archibishop of Canterbury must be fuming right now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

BBC just lost my respect completely, still calling them Dukes and Duchess! Disgusted!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everyone is walking on eggshells right now, trying to tiptoe around these hyper-sensitive fame-w$ores.
The gruesome twosome really do know how to destroy goodwill and make the news all about them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

For anyone who may be struggling right now ... help is always available 24/7 .... please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-TALK (8255)


----------



## 1LV

Straight-Laced said:


> Diana was suicidal during her first pregnancy, and at other times during the marriage.
> Diana complained that she'd asked for help with her mental health and it was denied to her.
> Diana blamed the fact that she overshadowed Charles during the Australia tour in 1983 for him turning against her and seeing her as a rival.
> 
> Is there anything else that could be straight out of Diana's life story, and given the necessary tweak to make it part of Meghan's story?


Looks like she really did do her research!


----------



## marietouchet

Lilliesdaughter said:


> So much to learn and so much was so difficult.  Like wearing a hat when accompanying the Queen on official business. Or walking behind Harry and those who rank ahead of her when on official business.   Or reading the hymns from the hymnal instead of memorizing 40 different ones.


I remember her comment that she had 3 ring binders full of royal how tos, must not have opened them 
as to the hat, the queen’s dresser tried To drop a hint about that, M was not listening


----------



## Chagall

The CBC is reporting their interview showed a damaging view on race. Sadly it seems like a lot of people believed her. She was welcomed with opened arms by the BRF. If the baby’s skin colour was a problem, which is absolutely ridiculous, they would not have seemed to genuinely like her prior to the wedding. They are not dumb. If that was a problem it would not surface so long after the fact. It seems like the only one in the group who is racist is MM. On a lighter note, I did think her baby bump looked way to perfectly shaped.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?


----------



## marietouchet

The int


1LV said:


> Looks like she really did do her research!


the Interview was full court press ( sorry, sports metaphor that means major attempt) Diana

Some of the D themes that were used:

suicidal thoughts 
lack of protection (esp on day D died)
POC , D dated several men of color, but knew it would never be, it was said they did not want the media circus
no one told me how to be royal, D said she was never trained, MM was given 3 ring binders of note


----------



## bubablu

OMG, Michael Moore just wrote a post on Facebook all in M defense. I though he was joking! But no. I'm appalled.


----------



## LittleStar88

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?



Not tearing them apart, but tearing apart their stories and picking out inconsistencies. They believe their own BS and expect everyone else to as well. That doesn’t fly here.


----------



## marietouchet

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?


there have been 3500 pages of comments over two years,


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> She made it sound like they discouraged her from seeking assistance, like it just wasn’t done.



It makes no sense. After Diana, it seems like they would bend over backwards to get her help. And she told them she was suicidal and they just said 'Suck it up, Buttercup'? Not buying it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> She made it sound like they discouraged her from seeking assistance, like it just wasn’t done.



It makes no sense. After Diana, it seems like they would bend over backwards to get her help. And she told them she was suicidal and they just said 'Suck it up, Buttercup'? Not buying it.


----------



## jennlt

poopsie said:


> She could pick a fight in an empty room


Especially if the rug is the wrong shade of red.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Racist Britain and British people lined up for their wedding!


----------



## artax two

chicinthecity777 said:


> Racist Britain and British people lined up for their wedding!
> 
> View attachment 5014929


This. SHE is the one who sees race. The racism is in HER head.


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> It makes no sense. After Diana, it seems like they would bend over backwards to get her help. And she told them she was suicidal and they just said 'Suck it up, Buttercup'? Not buying it.


The detail in the interview is that’s she asked the BP HR department for help, they said that their scope was employees only, not BRF family
Why go to HR? Makes no sense, there is something unsaid, why was she at HR at all , she never said

reminds me of an anecdote in Morton book, BRF physicians were sent to treat D but she did not like them and did not cooperate

if you don’t like one doctor, go find another, we all do it , but you have to work at it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

More photos from the wedding. I am disgusted on Charles' behalf!


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

marietouchet said:


> there have been 3500 pages of comments over two years,



I’m aware. And every time I peek in here after a major news break about them, there are almost only negative comments. I don’t know of many couples who are as hated as them.


----------



## doni

marietouchet said:


> The detail in the interview is that’s she asked the BP HR department for help, they said that their scope was employees only, not BRF family
> Why go to HR? Makes no sense, there is something unsaid,
> why was she at HR at all , she never said


She went to the HR department that takes care of _her staff_ to ask for help with mental illness?
That is so bizarre... Why put them in that situation? Why couldn‘t she ask Harry? Surely she had a well connected husband who could have identified a good doctor...


----------



## doni

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m aware. And every time I peek in here after a major news break about them, there are almost only negative comments. I don’t know of many couples who are as hated as them.


I personally have no feelings of hate whatsoever for the couple... I would very much welcome any diversity of views and would be very interested in hearing yours.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

LittleStar88 said:


> Not tearing them apart, but tearing apart their stories and picking out inconsistencies. They believe their own BS and expect everyone else to as well. That doesn’t fly here.



Ok... But is it assumed that the royal family has no reason to ever lie? Everyone has secrets...


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

artax two said:


> This. SHE is the one who sees race. The racism is in HER head.



Spoken like a person who just might not understand racism and the microagressions that come with it...


----------



## Lounorada

Oh my god! I fell asleep super early last night and now i'm popping on here to see 30+ pages I have to catch up on 
Ladies, you have been busy! I'm off to make a cup of coffee to catch up on the extensive low-down of this narcissistic sh*tshow!


----------



## marietouchet

doni said:


> She went to the HR department that takes care of _her staff_ to ask for help with mental illness?
> That is so bizarre... Why put them in that situation? Why couldn‘t she ask Harry? Surely she had a well connected husband who could have identified a good doctor...


Agree, my question exactly 
There is a disconnect here .. MAJOR issue (suicide) ... but she did not PURSUE it (she gave up after first try)


----------



## mshermes

We all know about the kid who cried wolf. She is a mythomaniac. I believe probably less than 5% of what she says. She has lied so much that she believes them and is living her lies. She has been Diana to Haz for so long that I believe she believes it  from her thoughts of suicide to....well, everything. I believe what I see, not what she says and they are usually diametrically opposed. Simply despicable.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

doni said:


> I personally have no feelings of hate whatsoever for the couple... I would very much welcome any diversity of views and would be very interested in hearing yours.



I’m just trying to understand the total lack of empathy that I’ve seen in this thread. I’ve seen people that say things like, “Oh she knew what she signed up for.” Who knows the amount of pressure and scrutiny that comes with being a royal unless they’ve lived that life before? Anyone seen “The Princess Diaries”? (Lol, just joking) The point is, it can’t be easy for anyone, so I’m wondering why there’s an assumption that they are liars and that the royal family has been just peachy towards them and that racism and/or the belief that she isn’t good enough for him cannot possibly be a factor in any of the crap they’ve been put through.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is satire!




Give them time and something like this will come up.


----------



## mshermes

This was the beginning....a foreshadow of her future and was imprinted....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?



Not currently, no.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chagall said:


> I only saw a bit of it and found it extremely hard to stomach. The thing that did me in was her depiction of Charlotte’s bridesmaid dress fitting. She said Kate made HER cry. That Kate gave her flowers and apologized and she forgave her. This is the exact opposite of what was widely reported, over and over again in many areas of media. Kate must be livid. I tuned out long before Harry came in at the end.



And she knows Kate will do the classy thing and remain silent.


----------



## marietouchet

Security and titles - not default/automatic perks of the BRF - there are currently rules about that

Not all members of the BRF get MET (Police security, not private) security eg York girls dont get it. HM cannot accord POLICE security at will, the MET is paid by taxpayer dollars.

Not all members of the BRF are princes eg Edward's kids. Yes, QEII can probably accord the dignity at will (dont know if Boris has a say...) but rules were put in place that currently say no for Archie. 

In both cases, MM wanted *SPECIAL *treatment for Archie - title + security, and was turned down


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Apparently Oprah has just said that... 
Harry wants to make it clear it *wasn't* the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh who mentioned the baby's colour. 
The interview was 3hrs 20mins but cut down to 1hr 20mins.


----------



## doni

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m just trying to understand the total lack of empathy that I’ve seen in this thread. I’ve seen people that say things like, “Oh she knew what she signed up for.” Who knows the amount of pressure and scrutiny that comes with being a royal unless they’ve lived that life before? Anyone seen “The Princess Diaries”? (Lol, just joking) The point is, it can’t be easy for anyone, so I’m wondering why there’s an assumption that they are liars and that the royal family has been just peach towards them and that racism and/or the belief that she isn’t good enough for him cannot possibly be a factor in any of the crap they’ve been put through.



I hear what you are saying. It must be absolute horror to come into that enviroment and try to adapt and become part of it. I can believe it would be hard for everyone and unbearable for some. It would have been specially difficult for any American citizen and there is no doubt in my mind she had to deal with racism (from some quarters and institutionalised) on top of everything.
But that is like being a woman, you are going to face male chauvinist behaviour whatever career you choose, in whatever environment. I do not believe that as a black citizen she didn’t have to face racism in the US. Actually, from the evidence we have, racism is rampant in America.
Which is not to justify it AT ALL, only to say, that the specific difficulties she encounter had to do more with the role and circumstances and her strangeness to them.

But I think what irks people is the feeling of entitlement that they transmit. And the sense of dishonesty. We can all understand rich priviledged people also cry, but we want them to be at least aware of their privilege and not look down on us. And not be sanctimonious on top. And you (or some people at least) get that feeling with them.

What irks me is the evidence that money and prestige are behind some of their choices.


----------



## drifter

So she's been a victim of racism, suicidal, suffered a miscarriage, brought to tears by Kate?  Err.....even if all those things were true, shouldn't she, as a strong woman who has got her voice back, be able to empathise more with similar victims and use her voice to do something productive to help them?  Perhaps more than a television interview?  I'm confused.  And I'm also confused as to why she didn't refuse spending her racist in-laws' money???


----------



## Allisonfaye

Sharont2305 said:


> I haven't watched the interview, as I'm obviously in the UK but someone on TV just made a good point on inconsistencies. He pointed out that M said about the conversation taking place when she was pregnant with Archie about his colouring. She then later said the conversation was with Harry. Later Harry said that the conversation took place before they actually got married! So, which is it?



It's NONE of those because none of it happened.


----------



## TimeToShop

I was surprised that while discussing suicide and mental health issues nothing was put on the screen about where to go for help. Usually the national hotline number is put up.

Also, if that was during the time of her first pregnancy why didn’t she talk to her OB?


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

doni said:


> I hear what you are saying. It must be absolute horror to come into that enviroment and try to adapt and become part of it. I can believe it would be hard for everyone and unbearable for some. It would have been specially difficult for any American citizen and there is no doubt in my mind she had to deal with racism (from some quarters and institutionalised) on top of everything.
> But that is like being a woman, you are going to face male chauvinist behaviour whatever career you choose, in whatever environment. I do not believe that as a black citizen she didn’t have to face racism in the US. Actually, from the evidence we have, racism is rampant in America.
> Which is not to justify it AT ALL, only to say, that the specific difficulties she encounter had to do more with the role and circumstances and her strangeness to them.
> 
> But I think what irks people is the feeling of entitlement that they transmit. And the sense of dishonesty. We can all understand rich priviledge people also cry, but we want them to be at least aware of their privilege and not look down on us. And not be sanctimonious on top. And you (or some people at least) get that feeling with them.
> 
> What irks me is the evidence that money and prestige are behind some of their choices.



Understandable. Money + fame, especially large amounts of it, comes with a lot of strings... and the decisions you make with it can effect precarious situations. I, personally wouldn’t want to marry a celebrity, let alone a prince. The paparazzi alone would give me a perpetual headache...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m just trying to understand the total lack of empathy that I’ve seen in this thread. I’ve seen people that say things like, “Oh she knew what she signed up for.” Who knows the amount of pressure and scrutiny that comes with being a royal unless they’ve lived that life before? Anyone seen “The Princess Diaries”? (Lol, just joking) The point is, it can’t be easy for anyone, so I’m wondering why there’s an assumption that they are liars and that the royal family has been just peachy towards them and that racism and/or the belief that she isn’t good enough for him cannot possibly be a factor in any of the crap they’ve been put through.



I can only speak for myself, but I did not start out having anything against her at all. In fact I had a major soft spot for Harry and was genuinely happy for him at first. But then she did and said things that made me uneasy, and I am not talking about things she *supposedly* did and said as reported by the yellow press - though interestingly, at this point many of the early incidents have been confirmed, so it was obviously not malicious gossip - but things she did and said on camera or through her own media outlets. And to be honest, it leaves me extremely perplexed all this info is out there and yet her fans don't seem to take issue with any of it.

And also, I have no problem with someone admitting royal life isn't for them and retiring. But as usual with these two, not only is there so much hypocrisy (e.g. do you think their behaviour reaffirms the point they wanted privacy? I don't), the way they did it - loud, obnoxious, rude, with no regards to the people directly affected - is problematic.

ETA: we think they are liars because she has been caught lying over and over again...and I'm again not speaking about yellow press gossip, but her contradicting herself.


----------



## marietouchet

deleted post


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> I don’t understand what they needed help with. Kind of vague.


she is implying she needed psychiatric help and they could not arrange it themselves.  so she went to HR.  that is a joke.  HR is for employees.  She - the Duchess - was Well Aware that she was not an employee.  She is trying to say that they could not go to a doctor without someone from The Firm arranging it.  Really?  such an independent woman.  Now harry was raised having everything done for him but still - between the two of them they couldn't make a doctors's appointment?


----------



## TimeToShop

She had to work it in...at the end she said that now that they’re on the other side they are thriving, not just surviving.


----------



## Chanbal

I have about a million posts to catch up with all the information, but here is *PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry's nauseating two-hour Oprah whine-athon was a disgraceful diatribe of cynical race-baiting propaganda designed to damage the Queen as her husband lies in hospital - and destroy the Monarchy*

"_Here we had the Duke and Duchess of Privacy flinging out the filthy family laundry for the delectation of tens of millions of people all over the world, whilst simultaneously bleating about press intrusion.

They moaned about the terrible pain of their royal titles but were also outraged their son Archie wasn't allowed to be a Prince.

They told of their constant trauma from nasty newspaper stories, but repeatedly insisted they never read any of them.

They claimed they were forced to sign gazillion-dollar deals with Netflix and Spotify because Prince Charles cut off their allowance, despite Harry inheriting millions from his late mother Princess Diana and having his entire life bankrolled by the Royal Family.

And so, it went nauseatingly on.

*In the middle of a pandemic that has already taken over 2.5 million lives, a staggeringly rich and entitled couple living in a $14 million sun-kissed California mansion wanted us all to know that THEY are the real victims around here.*

Meghan even compared her former life living in a palace to the crippling freedom-robbing existence of coronavirus lockdowns, which must have sounded so empathetic to large families living at the top of tower blocks with three kids they're trying to home-school and no job to pay for food.

*'I couldn't even meet my friends for lunch!' wailed the Duchess of Delusion, who flew to New York for a $500,000 baby shower with all her new-found celebrity pals, then flew back to London like any good eco-warrior on George Clooney's carbon footprint guzzling private jet.*

But amid all the relatively trivial gossipy stuff emerged some incredibly damaging bombshells deliberately detonated to do maximum damage to the British Royal Family and the Monarchy.._.

_*...But make no mistake, this interview will be a triumph for Meghan in America. Her narrative of a poor, vulnerable, unsuspecting bi-racial woman thrown to the wolves by a white, racist Royal Family and racist British press is already being heralded as 'courageous' and 'brave' and 'iconic' across the United States.*_

_*She's got exactly what she wants: her homeland feeling sorry for her..."*_










						PIERS MORGAN: Meghan and Harry's Oprah whine-athon was disgraceful
					

Sickening. Shameful. Self-pitying. Those were just my initial thoughts after ten minutes of the Oprah whine-athon with Meghan and Harry. Never have I watched a more disingenuous interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

KiaG said:


> What your life must be like to come on the internet and bash a woman that you don’t even know. To blindly believe articles that were written from someone in their underwear sitting on a couch. Most of you are just as blind, deaf and dumb as ***** supporters.


As a new member, not a long time contributor to the thread, may I suggest you read the earlier posts, many of which are newspaper articles and quotes from H & M themselves,  contradicting what was said in the interview,


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, not filmed at Gayle’s house, even tho plenty of articles say otherwise .  Okaaay.
MM, the only child, did not really know Samantha, her half sister. Okaaay. 
Hazzie really is the smart one in his family b/c he is no longer trapped. Social media changed everything.
 Wow!  The ego of these perpetual victims. They have such a negative vibe, very difficult to feel sympathy for their experience. 
So, why not renounce titles and be truly free? Seems simple enough. We all want them to have a happy life. Why not renounce?


----------



## mshermes

KiaG said:


> What your life must be like to come on the internet and bash a woman that you don’t even know. To blindly believe articles that were written from someone in their underwear sitting on a couch. Most of you are just as blind, deaf and dumb as Donald T supporters.


There are people on here who know her far better than you. And name calling people on here is doing just what you say you dislike. You do not know any of us.

edited for typo


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently Oprah has just said that...
> Harry wants to make it clear it *wasn't* the Queen or the Duke of Edinburgh who mentioned the baby's colour.
> The interview was 3hrs 20mins but cut down to 1hr 20mins.



Ok. In this case, who would be a) so bold and b) even care? Never knew Princess Michael was considered a senior royal. I just cannot see Charles or Wills saying that AT ALL. I would have been willing to consider it was 99yo Philip who has had more than one foot-in-mouth incident.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They visited the chicken coop at the beginning. Meghan has rescue chickens, don’t you know?  Isn’t any chicken that is allowed to live a rescue chicken?


did you catch the part where she said she adopted her dog from a "kill shelter".....just saying rescue or shelter wasn't enough - had to say "kill" .....more self-promotion

I adopted my kitties from the local humane society...they are wonderful and adopt out most all of the animals but technically they can't say they are "no-kill"
do I go around saying I adopted from a "kill shelter"? No, I do not.  Please Meghan we're not buying your saint act


----------



## TimeToShop

KiaG said:


> What your life must be like to come on the internet and bash a woman that you don’t even know. To blindly believe articles that were written from someone in their underwear sitting on a couch. Most of you are just as blind, deaf and dumb as Donald T supporters.



Hmm. You are on the internet bashing people you don’t know. So...


----------



## sdkitty

misskittee said:


> Lol my husband: "you didn't have a career, you were on Suits."


my husband - are you kidding - I'm not gonna watch that sheet - just the same as the kardashians


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry is a perfect example of Stockholm Syndrome.


except he went voluntarily


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

KiaG said:


> What your life must be like to come on the internet and bash a woman that you don’t even know. To blindly believe articles that were written from someone in their underwear sitting on a couch. Most of you are just as blind, deaf and dumb as Donald T supporters.



Well, hello there, welcome to the thread and we're so happy to have you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. In this case, who would be a) so bold and b) even care? Never knew Princess Michael was considered a senior royal. I just cannot see Charles or Wills saying that AT ALL. I would have been willing to consider it was 99yo Philip who has had more than one foot-in-mouth incident.



They want to keep us guessing, so we will watch their Netflix docu-drama, listen to their Spotify, blah blah. OW was just the beginning. They will be dining out on their exit for years.  After viewing today’s omitted clips, Hazzie certainly is chatty, spews lots of venom and hate, kinda like a spoiled jr high kid.


----------



## Allisonfaye

KiaG said:


> What your life must be like to come on the internet and bash a woman that you don’t even know. To blindly believe articles that were written from someone in their underwear sitting on a couch. Most of you are just as blind, deaf and dumb as Donald T supporters.



Irony?


----------



## TC1

Meghan stated that they were never asked to do a picture after Archie's birth. Well, it's difficult when you play cloak and dagger with when he was actually born? I know there are conflicting reports on that, I'm sure the firm wasn't chasing them around for info. People would have loved to see a picture. 
They will name the new baby Diana. But for Wonder Woman, not just Harry's beloved mother.


----------



## Kansashalo

tiktok said:


> The difference is most people don't exit and then continue to profit from their association with said (supposed) contributors. If Harry wasn't part of the British royal family no one would give a @#$% about him or his wife, with all due respect to her former "career". If you continue to profit from that association it's so much better to just shut up and live your life. But they always want to have their cake and eat it too - just like they did with the "we want to take a step back, keep all the perks and none of the responsibilities". Which is why anyone who's really looked into their demands and behavior can't stand them.



So when you leave a job you hate, you don't include it on your resume?  

Harry has every right to use his heritage as he wishes - not as the institution of the BRF wished for him.  There is a difference.


----------



## TC1

Kansashalo said:


> So when you leave a job you hate, you don't include it on your resume?
> 
> Harry has every right to use his heritage as he wishes - not as the institution of the BRF wished for him.  There is a difference.


I don't think anyone disagrees with that. But don't expect to be on the taxpayers payroll if you're no longer willing and able to do the work. IE "handing out prizes"


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can only speak for myself, but I did not start out having anything against her at all. In fact I had a major soft spot for Harry and was genuinely happy for him at first. But then she did and said things that made me uneasy, and I am not talking about things she *supposedly* did and said as reported by the yellow press - though interestingly, at this point many of the early incidents have been confirmed, so it was obviously not malicious gossip - but things she did and said on camera or through her own media outlets. And to be honest, it leaves me extremely perplexed all this info is out there and yet her fans don't seem to take issue with any of it.
> 
> And also, I have no problem with someone admitting royal life isn't for them and retiring. But as usual with these two, not only is there so much hypocrisy (e.g. do you think their behaviour reaffirms the point they wanted privacy? I don't), the way they did it - loud, obnoxious, rude, with no regards to the people directly affected - is problematic.
> 
> ETA: we think they are liars because she has been caught lying over and over again...and I'm again not speaking about yellow press gossip, but her contradicting herself.



Mmhmm. And the royal family hasn’t had stories circulating around things they said and did that seemed contradictory? 

The point is, they aren’t perfect and they are expected to be. Don’t use a penny of the money. How are you being environmentally friendly if you’re taking a jet instead of biking? If someone isn’t invited to an event, it is a definite snub. Every. Single. Thing. They. Do. is under a microscope. That must royally suck...


----------



## rose60610

Hermes Zen said:


> OH ... and my DH thanks to you too!  He said it *kept me off of the H website* and *I haven't spent anything* for the last couple days.  He's right.



Make up for lost time, Hermes would appreciate it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Kansashalo said:


> So when you leave a job you hate, you don't include it on your resume?



I would. I would however not try to secure freebies, deals, access by claiming I still held the position.


----------



## doni

KiaG said:


> What your life must be like to come on the internet and bash a woman that you don’t even know. To blindly believe articles that were written from someone in their underwear sitting on a couch. Most of you are just as blind, deaf and dumb as Donald T supporters.



I respect your views. Myself, I don‘t think I have once criticized Meghan or Harry on the basis of anything anyone has said, but only on the basis of their own declarations of which there have been many.
I am sure I am wrong in many of my opinions, but I am by all evidence not blind, deaf or dumb.


----------



## Chagall

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m just trying to understand the total lack of empathy that I’ve seen in this thread. I’ve seen people that say things like, “Oh she knew what she signed up for.” Who knows the amount of pressure and scrutiny that comes with being a royal unless they’ve lived that life before? Anyone seen “The Princess Diaries”? (Lol, just joking) The point is, it can’t be easy for anyone, so I’m wondering why there’s an assumption that they are liars and that the royal family has been just peachy towards them and that racism and/or the belief that she isn’t good enough for him cannot possibly be a factor in any of the crap they’ve been put through.


Empathy is a wonderful thing but it should be used for the people that really need it. People starving, people who have lost everything in the pandemic, which is incidentally occurring at this minute. People that have lost loved ones, their jobs and homes. Don’t waste your empathy for pampered people who live in the absolute lap of luxury, in a huge mansion with absolutely everything they could want in life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

What the heck happened at the fitting???


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> There is something screwy here.  She said they were married in their garden by Welby.  The UK has strict rules as to where marriages can take place.  Registry Office, Church or Synagogue, Quaker Meeting House and some exceptions if one person is incarcerated or in hospital and I think some special venues like where Nicky Hilton was married.  Your home garden does not qualify.  Plus it was just the three of them and no witnesses.  So was this a pretend wedding?  A fake wedding? What was going on here? A wedding rehearsal?  Why did Welby agree to this?  Is this more of them having a private joke at public expense like their Urban Dictionary word droppings?  The best would be a wedding rehearsal,  and if so, why lull the public into thinking otherwise?


right
and the big wedding was for everyone else...not them.  she (the 38-year-old twice before married woman) didn't want to walk down the aisle with a long veil over her face, etc


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t all roses over here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull
> 
> 
> Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you? And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: full of bull??
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull*
> By Maureen Callahan
> Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you?
> 
> And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her the help she begged for — that will destroy once and for all any chance Harry had of reconciling with the British royal family.
> 
> “I wasn’t planning to say anything shocking!” Megs told Oprah.
> 
> Please. As we all know, Meghan’s not that good an actress. Or a dissembler.
> 
> Whopper Number One, at the interview’s outset: Meghan knew nothing of the British royal family — nothing! She’s American, after all!
> 
> Here she was, living her life, starring on a basic cable legal drama, when she got sucked into the vortex of royal life. Castles, riches, titles, instant global fame, a team of servants and advisors — none of these mattered a whit to her
> 
> “All the grandeur attached to this stuff,” said Meghan, has never meant anything, not part of the attraction at all.
> 
> Says the woman who invited Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney to her wedding — A-listers she’d never even met.
> 
> Oh, and lest we forget the Palace’s clapback this week, revealing that Meghan had been gifted blood diamonds by MBS after he authorized the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and wore them even though warned not to — a charge Meghan has not denied.
> 
> Whopper Number Two: She never so much as Googled Harry when they began dating. She also never so much as Googled herself or followed any of her media coverage because that too has never mattered to her — says the woman who posed for a Vanity Fair cover story before she and Harry were even engaged.
> 
> As for the catastrophic event Meghan calls “the turning point,” the moment she knew that the royals were plotting to destroy her and she and Harry had to go: The tabloid report that she made Duchess Kate cry.
> 
> No, says Meghan: Kate made _her _cry. And The Firm wouldn’t let Meghan issue a denial.
> 
> As Harry once infamously said, “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”
> 
> So are we to believe Meghan had no recourse until now? No friend or surrogate who could set the record straight? She is, after all, famously litigious when it comes to the British tabloids — you know, the ones she claims not to read.
> 
> Then came the day Meghan was advised not to go out to lunch with a friend, because she’d been far too visible.
> 
> “Well,” Meghan recalled saying, “I haven’t left the house in months!”
> 
> While we enter year two of quarantine.
> 
> Not since griping “not many people have asked me if I’m OK” amid starving, impoverished children in South Africa have we gotten such a tone-deaf utterance from dear old Megs, that perpetual victim.
> 
> “The Queen has always been wonderful to me,” said Meghan, before stating that a very senior royal — that would be either the Queen, Harry’s father Prince Charles (who, Harry tells us, stopped taking his calls for a time and has cut him off financially, wonder why), or brother Prince William — told a desperate, suicidal Meghan that she could not seek professional help.
> 
> So is Meghan saying they’d be happy if she killed herself?
> 
> Sure sounds like it. But after Harry joined the chat, he told Oprah that he never told any member of his family about that.
> 
> So which is it? The top royals knew and didn’t care or truly had no idea?
> 
> Meghan swiftly moved on, claiming that there was a serious discussion inside the royal family about how black her baby might be and the decision to refuse the child any security — zero, zip, nada, Meghan again implying the royals wouldn’t mind harm coming to a royal infant who wouldn’t be 100% white.
> 
> The British taxpayers spent millions on Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Prince Charles walked her down the aisle. The Queen, by Meghan’s own admission, was warm and embracing and maternal. Meghan quickly became an object of fascination and adoration, a unique figure who, like Diana, could modernize the crown.
> 
> Meghan and Harry had a lot of goodwill. People were rooting for them.
> 
> That was then.
> 
> As to Oprah’s question about whether Meghan wanted a royal life only to quickly leave and build her brand as a newly-minted global celebrity, nonsense, she says! None.
> 
> No follow-up from Oprah about building the SussexRoyal website once outside the castle walls and the couple’s attempt to monetize their title until the Queen smacked them down.
> 
> Interestingly, after Meghan denied having any kind of plan, Harry told Oprah he would never have left the royal family if not for Meghan.
> 
> “I was trapped,” he said, “but I didn’t know I was trapped.”
> 
> Meghan helped him figure that out, he said. That’s why they announced they wanted a life of privacy before settling in L.A. and streaming endless videos from their $14 million mansion and signing deals with Spotify and Netflix and appearing on “So You Think You Can Dance” (Meghan) and sitting down for a primetime tell-all with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> In the run-up to tonight’s special, Meghan and Harry announced that this would be their final word, for real. They’ve said all they’ve had to say and will be furthermore unavailable for comment.
> 
> What? You don’t believe them?



Maureen Callahan seems to be one of the few journalists in the US that is not afraid to speak her mind about this couple. Cheers to her!

“_All the grandeur attached to this stuff,” said Meghan, has never meant anything, not part of the attraction at all.

Says the woman who invited Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney to her wedding — A-listers she’d never even met._"


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Chagall said:


> Empathy is a wonderful thing but it should be used for the people that really need it. People starving, people who have lost everything in the pandemic, which is incidentally occurring at this minute. People that have lost loved ones, their jobs and homes. Don’t waste your empathy for pampered people who live in the absolute lap of luxury, in a huge mansion with absolutely everything they could want in life.



That’s the thing with empathy... it can be exercised for any number of reasons. Being rich and famous doesn’t not excuse someone from being empathized with, in my opinion. Plenty of rich people are unhappy and/or suffer from mental health issues. Money isn’t everything, and fame has driven plenty of folks to the edge of madness.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> did you catch the part where she said she adopeted her dog from a "kill shelter".....just saying rescue or shelter wasn't enough - had to say "kill" .....more self-promotion



She practically tilted her halo to a jaunty angle when she said that, she was so proud of herself.


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Completely unbelievable, how hard is it to make a mental health appt in England.  We know it’s hard in the US, but we also know people of ‘privilege’ have access on a whim.


yes, if you pay cash you can go to anyone you want


----------



## zinacef

So sad, this interview will be a big part of their family history. They have truly burn bridges with everybody—- from the start, it is clear that nobody else but 4 of them matters. Meghan will always be a victim, it is a mentality that she cannot shake off because it has serve her purpose everyday—- money, love from a Prince, approval from the society and a modern day heroine of nothing. I’m sure the Firm is relieved that this interview has been made public and now the real work starts. Harry and Meghan will be a real sad couple like Edward and Wallis. History always repeats itself —-


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Sharont2305 said:


> I disagree, I think the national anthem of England should be Jerusalem, with God Save the Queen as the UK one. After all, we Welsh and the Scots have our own (Not sure what the Northern Irish have as their own) Plus, it does refer to England. Its a beautiful hymn, it always gets to me when I hear it and I'm not English


It gets to me and I am American.  Another beauty is Oh Canada.
As an American, I can say willingly God Bless the Queen.


----------



## Jktgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Opinions opinions opinions
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GMB



I quite enjoyed Piers Morgan take down of this cabinet minister over the measly NHS nurse pay rise. People can simply watch a few videos and know that he takes on everyone.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> What the heck happened at the fitting???


I thought there was a disagreement about whether the little girls should wear tights or be bare-legged


----------



## Sharont2305

So, they couldn't announce the birth time or place or godparents of Archie but they can reveal the gender of the unborn child on Oprah?


----------



## littlemisskeira

If my sister in law and I had a disagreement over how things should be done, we discuss or we give in.. basically we give and take. That's how most human relationships are maintained right?
But amazing that this woman has to go on international TV to talk about this seemingly trivial matter which reduced her to tears.

And after doing that, she still expects to be treated like family? Oh come on ...


----------



## sdkitty

I watched about a half of that "show".  My big takeaways were she could have gotten "help" without the firm's approval or assistance.  She was Duchess is not an employee.  Even if Harry was not used to arranging things for himself, she grew up in the US.  Between the two of them with their money they could have made a doctors appointment.
The conversation about archie's skin tone - if the royals were concerned about that they would have been concerned right away when H said he wanted to marry her.  but Charles walked her down the aisle.  now they seem to be throwing him under the bus.  are they sure he won't pay them anymore allowance?

her saying she "lost" her father was the height of hypocrisy.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I watched about a half of that "show".  My big takeaways were she could have gotten "help" without the firm's approval or assistance.  She as Duchess is not an employee.  Even if Harry was not used to arranging things for himself, she grew up in the US.  Between the two of them with their money they could have made a doctors appointment.
> The conversation about archie's skin tone - if they royals were concerned about that they would have been concerned right away when H said he wanted to marry her.  but Charles walked her down the aisle.  now they seem to be throwing him under the bus.  are they sure he won't pay them anymore allowance?
> 
> her saying she "lost" her father was the height of hypocrisy.
> 
> Oh, and the part about Kate making her cry, then apologizing.  and the RF should have put that out there in the media.  Uugh


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> If  MM wants to be an advocate for mentally ill pregnant women she is actually giving terrible advice.
> Pregnancy and Post natal depression are incredibly serious conditions.
> They don’t just go away. Don’t ever dismiss it. Tell your midwife and or your doctor immediately if you ever feel like harming yourself or your baby.
> 
> Even  if she has good intentions she cannot be so irresponsible when speaking from authority on this issue. This is like when ‘13 reasons why’ was actually attributed with causing a rise in teen suicide because it was relaying dangerous messages.



She has been out of the UK for >1year, has she been in therapy since she left the Firm?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?



If you read the first pages this was a fan thread until Meghan showed her true colours and set out to ruin the British monarchy


----------



## littlemisskeira

Actually things were not exactly smooth-sailing for Kate too I believe? Off hand, i can recall her waity katey nick, her partying photos from the past and her nudes... but this lady has class. She manages the adversities thrown to her and turn them into victories. 

As for Meghan, how long was she in the royal family? 3 seconds? And now she is going to spend a lifetime moaning (and milking) it.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> maybe the chickens have come home to roost..................


Maybe it was an analogy?  She felt "coop"ed up?  And that any day she may be roasted?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why. Did she have to nail down the deal? I have 33 pages to catch up on and this will probably not be the most scandalous, but it's the unnecessary lies about the small things that is utterly sick. Did they mention what the Queen thought?



Meghan was extremely careful not to say anything specific about any particular individual. It was all deliberately vague, saying they, the  Firm, the institution. Nothing that could be directly refuted by anyone.

I could imagine the whole BRF getting together and looking at each other like “did anyone say that to her?” “No?” “What the hell is she talking about?”


----------



## sdkitty

littlemisskeira said:


> Actually things were not exactly smooth-sailing for Kate too I believe? Off hand, i can recall her waity katey nick, her partying photos from the past and her nudes... but this lady has class. She manages the adversities thrown to her and turn them into victories.
> 
> As for Meghan, how long was she in the royal family? 3 seconds? And now she is going to spend a lifetime moaning (and milking) it.


And I'm pretty sure Kate will not be responding to this latest accusation that she made Meghan cry.  I do believe it's possible Meghan cried as I seem to recall reading some report that during the time leading up to the wedding H&M were very fussy about everything - made the choir do several versions of Stand By Me, etc - and were in tears a lot.  So if they were going around crying with everyone, Kate would just be one of many


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Meghan was extremely careful not to say anything specific about any particular individual. It was all deliberately vague, saying they, the  Firm, the institution. Nothing that could be directly refuted by anyone.
> 
> I could imagine the whole BRF getting together and looking at each other like “did anyone say that to her?” “No?” “What the hell is she talking about?”



Actually I think they have more important things to think about protecting The Queen and Phillip esp now


----------



## rose60610

M was given concessions and exceptions--she lived with Harry and went to Christmas at Sandringham before they got married. She did the meet & greets for about a year and was immersed in the life style. She loved it. The media loved her.  She had the time to choose and be fitted for how many designer clothes the family paid for, got a custom made yoga studio for her yoga workouts--yet the BRF is racist and she was forbidden from seeking mental help? If she had the time for all the clothes shopping, fittings, yoga, the parties, etc--how was she deprived from getting help if she needed it? Harry claims it's HIS inherited $ they're spending in America, so why didn't he give her a few pounds to see a therapist in England? When you put their claims on a time line, it doesn't add up. Her biggest supporters have to admit this. She acts like she was just a naive 19 year old (like Diana!!) and had no idea about anything. Hardly my idea of somebody who purports to be a strong, outspoken woman standing up for women. Her message: pretend you didn't know and cry for pity.


----------



## Sharont2305

Here ya go Meg


----------



## Jktgal

Meghan was there to launch Shout, the mental health hotline. That she couldn't find help for herself is actually comical. And why you should leave the heavy lifting to professionals and not inbred princes and z-list actress.


----------



## Swanky

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?



Everyone is welcome! I personally hate this thread as it causes a great deal of work for the mod/admin team lol
But ALL opinions are welcome, even positive ones!  Also reminder to discuss the celebs, not the members


----------



## EverSoElusive

littlemisskeira said:


> Actually things were not exactly smooth-sailing for Kate too I believe? Off hand, i can recall her waity katey nick, her partying photos from the past and her nudes... but this lady has class. She manages the adversities thrown to her and turn them into victories.
> 
> As for Meghan, how long was she in the royal family? 3 seconds? And now she is going to spend a lifetime moaning (and milking) it.



She was called a social climber too, I think. Also, tabloids said that her parents groomed her to marry up by sending her to rich kids schools.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Spoken like a person who just might not understand racism and the microagressions that come with it...


Life is FULL of little and large aggressions.  Kate dealt with constant abuse regarding her coal miner grandfather, her mother’s career as a stewardess, her grandparents living in council housing, her self made parents wealth.  Britain is a society of classes. She was mocked for being common.  There is bigotry in the world regarding color, nationality AND religion ( that’s a big one too). POC do not have a monopoly on pain. Yes it is pervasive. America particularly has work to do. But there is something wrong when “woe is me” is constant. There is a world of people who cope and manage.
Regarding mental health, pre and post partum depression, anxiety and suicide—-these are real issues. M has a litany of complaints. It is always someone else. No one ever has had HER pain.  Sorry. Wrong.  People are hungry.  Homeless.  Unemployed.  Families have lost members to genocide— pre WW II and  STILL!  Governments are run by dictators and people have no civil rights. The world is in pain. Being subjected to racism is terrible. Easier to handle with food in your belly, a bed for your child, money in the bank, etc. My point is stop complaining, get help if you need it and go do some good for the world.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


>



Very sad that the above might be true!


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Life is FULL of little and large aggressions.  Kate dealt with constant abuse regarding her coal miner grandfather, her mother’s career as a stewardess, her grandparents living in council housing, her self made parents wealth.  Britain is a society of classes. She was mocked for being common.  There is bigotry in the world regarding color, nationality AND religion ( that’s a big one too). POC do not have a monopoly on pain. Yes it is pervasive. America particularly has work to do. But there is something wrong when “woe is me” is constant. There is a world of people who cope and manage.
> Regarding mental health, pre and post partum depression, anxiety and suicide—-these are real issues. M has a litany of complaints. It is always someone else. No one ever has had HER pain.  Sorry. Wrong.  People are hungry.  Homeless.  Unemployed.  Families have lost members to genocide— pre WW II and  STILL!  Governments are run by dictators and people have no civil rights. The world is in pain. Being subjected to racism is terrible. Easier to handle with food in your belly, a bed for your child, money in the bank, etc. My point is stop complaining, get help if you need it and go do some good for the world.


I didn't finish watching.....did they say what good Archewell was doing for the world?


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone post this yet? The thread is moving so fast I have to catch up on several pages but this is too good not to share.  For any Meghan supporters lurking here, THIS is why we don’t like her! 


*Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull*
Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you?

And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her the help she begged for — that will destroy once and for all any chance Harry had of reconciling with the British royal family.

“I wasn’t planning to say anything shocking!” Megs told Oprah.

Please. As we all know, Meghan’s not that good an actress. Or a dissembler.

Whopper Number One, at the interview’s outset: Meghan knew nothing of the British royal family — nothing! She’s American, after all!

Here she was, living her life, starring on a basic cable legal drama, when she got sucked into the vortex of royal life. Castles, riches, titles, instant global fame, a team of servants and advisers — none of these mattered a whit to her.

All the grandeur attached to this stuff,” said Meghan, has never meant anything, not part of the attraction at all.

“Says the woman who invited Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney to her wedding — A-listers she’d never even met.

Oh, and let’s not forget Buckingham Palace’s clapback this week, revealing that Meghan had been gifted blood diamonds by MBS after he authorized the murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and wore them even though warned not to — a charge Meghan has not denied.

Whopper Number Two: She never so much as Googled Harry when they began dating. She also never so much as Googled herself or followed any of her media coverage because that too has never mattered to her — says the woman who posed for a Vanity Fair cover story before she and Harry were even engaged.

As for the catastrophic event Meghan calls “the turning point,” the moment she knew that the royals were plotting to destroy her and she and Harry had to go: The tabloid report that she made Duchess Kate cry.

No, says Meghan: Kate made _her _cry. And The Firm wouldn’t let Meghan issue a denial.

As Harry once infamously said, “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets!”

So are we to believe Meghan had no recourse until now? No friend or surrogate who could set the record straight? She is, after all, famously litigious when it comes to the British tabloids — you know, the ones she claims not to read.

Then came the day Meghan was advised not to go out to lunch with a friend, because she’d been far too visible.

Well,” Meghan recalled saying, “I haven’t left the house in months!”

While we enter year two of quarantine.

Not since griping “not many people have asked me if I’m OK” amid starving, impoverished children in South Africa have we gotten such a tone-deaf utterance from dear old Megs, that perpetual victim.

“The Queen has always been wonderful to me,” said Meghan, before stating that a very senior royal — that would be either the Queen, Harry’s father, Prince Charles (who, Harry tells us, stopped taking his calls for a time and has cut him off financially, wonder why), or brother, Prince William — told a desperate, suicidal Meghan that she could not seek professional help.

So is Meghan saying they’d be happy if she killed herself?

Sure sounds like it. But after Harry joined the chat, he told Oprah that he never told any member of his family about that.

So which is it? The top royals knew and didn’t care or truly had no idea?

Meghan swiftly moved on, claiming that there was a serious discussion inside the royal family about how black her baby might be and the decision to refuse the child any security — zero, zip, nada, Meghan again implying the royals wouldn’t mind harm coming to a royal infant who wouldn’t be 100% white.

The British taxpayers spent millions on Harry and Meghan’s wedding. Prince Charles walked her down the aisle. The Queen, by Meghan’s own admission, was warm and embracing and maternal. Meghan quickly became an object of fascination and adoration, a unique figure who, like Diana, could modernize the crown.

Meghan and Harry had a lot of goodwill. People were rooting for them.

That was then.

As to Oprah’s question about whether Meghan wanted a royal life only to quickly leave and build her brand as a newly minted global celebrity, nonsense, she says! None.

No follow-up from Oprah about building the SussexRoyal website once outside the castle walls and the couple’s attempt to monetize their title until the Queen smacked them down.

Interestingly, after Meghan denied having any kind of plan, Harry told Oprah he would never have left the royal family if not for Meghan.  

“I was trapped,” he said, “but I didn’t know I was trapped.”

Meghan helped him figure that out, he said. That’s why they announced they wanted a life of privacy before settling in LA and streaming endless videos from their $14 million mansion and signing deals with Spotify and Netflix and appearing on “So You Think You Can Dance” (Meghan) and sitting down for a primetime tell-all with Oprah Winfrey.

In the run-up to tonight’s special, Meghan and Harry announced that this would be their final word, for real. They’ve said all they have to say and will be furthermore unavailable for comment.

What? You don’t believe them?









						Meghan Markle’s interview was full of bull
					

Pity poor Meghan Markle, won’t you? And do so as she drops the kind of bombshells — Prince Harry’s family is not just openly racist, they drove her to consider suicide while pregnant and denied her…




					nypost.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I have such diificulties with the unsubstantiated allegation


ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Understandable. Money + fame, especially large amounts of it, comes with a lot of strings... and the decisions you make with it can effect precarious situations. I, personally wouldn’t want to marry a celebrity, let alone a prince. The paparazzi alone would give me a perpetual headache...


on papparazzi, and press in general
the BRF has a long standing agreement with the UK press intended to limit this ... the royals do photo ops and the press agrees to limit its intrusion
MM wanted to do interviews with Gayle and Oprah , palace said no it violates the agreement , MM wanted a SPECIAL permission 
Tne downside of doing the interviews is that you violate the agreement and have opened up Pandora’s box to intrusion
so, palace “silenced“ her
now she complains about intrusive press
you can’t have your cake and eat it too

Her choice - be silent or be intruded upon


----------



## Chanbal

AmeeLVSBags said:


> I thought when she first said security meant a paycheck not physical security. I think Oprah should have pressed more that you wanted it both ways, be Royal by title, get all the benefits and still be left alone. she asked them once or twice but didn’t push them to admit.
> 
> Her story didn’t add up, she went to HR to get help? They told her your not an employee, so as someone else mentioned couldn’t she get help on her own then. Or her mother or friends put someone on the phone to talk to her! I also don’t think she really meant she wanted to end her life as in suicide. She kept saying it takes a lot of courage and strength to say you need help. She didn’t come across genuine.



This was probably one of Oprah's worse performances. I believe she is a very smart woman, so I was expecting a lot more from her.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I didn't finish watching.....did they say what good Archewell was doing for the world?



No they didn't because it doesn't fit into their personification of being victims


----------



## uhpharm01

Chanbal said:


> This was probably one of Oprah's worse performances. I believe she is a very smart woman, so I was expecting a lot more from her.


Why do you think that this is probably one of Oprah's worse performances? thank you


----------



## queennadine

Her life is like “The Little Mermaid” alright. Except, she’s Ursula and Harry is both Flotsam and Jetsam combined. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.  A 40 year old woman with a degree from Northwestern says this, believes this, thinks this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Viewers react after Meghan compares herself to The Little Mermaid
> 
> 
> Meghan told the talk show host she watched the Disney movie and saw parallels between the character Ariel and her own life since meeting her real-life prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5014755


----------



## chicinthecity777

I feel real sense of sadness for all those that involved in this sorry saga! Airing dirty laundry in public benefits no one emotionally. I hope people find ways of dealing with this.

I also hope those people who are bullying victims do also seek help, and can get support they need!


----------



## marietouchet

The question of who in the BRF made comments about Archie prior to birth , well not QEII or PP, an unnamed person

But, suspicions falls squarely on PC, W, K rather than on some minor member of which there are lots and lots , one of Gloucester grandkids for ex, we don’t know , the whole clan was assembled when MM announced pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding

nor do we know the circumstances, casual conversation ? Deliberate insult ? Joke that went wrong ? At a party where liquor was consumed and where recollections are fuzzy?

I don’t think Oprah pressed H on this , did H complain at the time the remark was made? Or later ? Did he allow the comment to slide at the time or pick up phone ?

to me, the lack of context for the remark is troubling

BTW, one of the Gloucester daughters went to Australia and married a person of Maori descent.


----------



## marietouchet

AmeeLVSBags said:


> I thought when she first said security meant a paycheck not physical security. I think Oprah should have pressed more that you wanted it both ways, be Royal by title, get all the benefits and still be left alone. she asked them once or twice but didn’t push them to admit.
> 
> Her story didn’t add up, she went to HR to get help? They told her your not an employee, so as someone else mentioned couldn’t she get help on her own then. Or her mother or friends put someone on the phone to talk to her! I also don’t think she really meant she wanted to end her life as in suicide. She kept saying it takes a lot of courage and strength to say you need help. She didn’t come across genuine.


Great summary of interview !

A LOT OF THINGS DONT ADD UP ...

awesome analysis


----------



## uhpharm01

I hate to critical of Oprah but I don't know why she was so shocked by the fact that someone in the RF wondered about what skin tone Archie would have. There is a lot of color-ism in the black race in USA and has been for years, there is even the paper bag test that dates back for many years.


----------



## ByTheFireplace

uhpharm01 said:


> I hate to critical of Oprah but I don't know why she was so shocked by the fact that someone in the RF wondered about what skin tone Archie would have. There is a lot of color-ism in the black race in USA and has been for years, there is even the paper bag test that dates back for many years.



She was probably shocked that the disgusting color-ism is still alive and pervasive today


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

sdkitty said:


> I didn't finish watching.....did they say what good Archewell was doing for the world?


Tune in.   Plans are in the works. They will let us know. Patience please.


----------



## Chanbal

doni said:


> I hear what you are saying. It must be absolute horror to come into that enviroment and try to adapt and become part of it. I can believe it would be hard for everyone and unbearable for some. It would have been specially difficult for any American citizen and there is no doubt in my mind she had to deal with racism (from some quarters and institutionalised) on top of everything.
> But that is like being a woman, you are going to face male chauvinist behaviour whatever career you choose, in whatever environment. I do not believe that as a black citizen she didn’t have to face racism in the US. Actually, from the evidence we have, racism is rampant in America.
> Which is not to justify it AT ALL, only to say, that the specific difficulties she encounter had to do more with the role and circumstances and her strangeness to them.
> 
> But I think what irks people is the feeling of entitlement that they transmit. And the sense of dishonesty. We can all understand rich priviledged people also cry, but we want them to be at least aware of their privilege and not look down on us. And not be sanctimonious on top. And you (or some people at least) get that feeling with them.
> 
> What irks me is the evidence that money and prestige are behind some of their choices.



The comment below may add to your explanation. People are starting to understand that MM is all about self-service. 



Spoiler: Choice of Mate


----------



## papertiger

Repercussions in Parliament. A Labour MP is asking for an investigation in the racism allegations. They may be asked to name names and give dates (M's and H's dates are already inconsistent) although I think H&M will refuse. Personally, I would welcome an investigation. 









						Harry and Meghan interview: Labour MP condemns Palace amid calls for investigation over racism claims
					

The couple have plunged the monarchy into crisis with a series of astonishing claims.




					uk.yahoo.com


----------



## marietouchet

Correct me if I am wrong ... the discussion about Archie prior to birth ...
Was detailed by MM  who had it as second hand knowledge from H. 

WHY did H tell his then pregnant (read moody) wife ?  There are some things best left unsaid ... Keep her away from the yucky family member .. then deal with the issue one on one

IT DOES NOT ADD UP

pls tell me if I missed something,  did H ever say he stood up for his wife to the family member, or bring it  to the BP people ? Or, was his reaction entirely passive ? What active role did he play ?


----------



## Katel

Jktgal said:


> I quite enjoyed Piers Morgan take down of this cabinet minister over the measly NHS nurse pay rise. People can simply watch a few videos and know that he takes on everyone.




in my opinion:

She is mentally ill.
I believe they both are.
What does anyone expect but a load of rubbish from these two?
And Oprah is also a mess.

If people who think she’s so put upon and she’s being attacked would just read this thread from start to finish, they might be surprised - we all rooted for Harry & Meghan. No one was saying at the start “oh it’s a terrible thing” - we wanted them to be happy.

Call it what you want:
Karma
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
We reap what we sow - and they've dug themselves a big hole of mess.
Poor kids - who will be watching out for them?

Has Piers written his column yet - can’t wait to read it. He’s normally hard to read, but he sure has their number.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Coconuts40

papertiger said:


> Repercussions in Parliament. A Labour MP is asking for an investigation in the racism allegations. They may be asked to name names and give dates (M's and H's dates are already inconsistent) although I think H&M will refuse. Personally, I would welcome an investigation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan interview: Labour MP condemns Palace amid calls for investigation over racism claims
> 
> 
> The couple have plunged the monarchy into crisis with a series of astonishing claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.yahoo.com



I do agree, I think an investigation of these racist allegations is necessary.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Repercussions in Parliament. A Labour MP is asking for an investigation in the racism allegations. They may be asked to name names and give dates (M's and H's dates are already inconsistent) although I think H&M will refuse. *Personally, I would welcome an investigation.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan interview: Labour MP condemns Palace amid calls for investigation over racism claims
> 
> 
> The couple have plunged the monarchy into crisis with a series of astonishing claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.yahoo.com


I agree! That's the only way to find out the truth!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> So, they couldn't announce the birth time or place or godparents of Archie but they can reveal the gender of the unborn child on Oprah?


Oprah's interview was not the first place for the baby girl announcement. Murky Meg had already announced that in a couple of videos ago, she added also information on how she found out.


----------



## Chagall

From what I saw she really is out to destroy the BRF. I don’t think she is going to stop. I don’t know how they will respond. Maybe the best thing for Royalty to do is to completely ignore the entire situation. Don’t respond to them in any way. It’s all a complete misrepresentation IMO. Peoples memories are short, so countering in any way will only keep H/M in the limelight.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Oprah's interview was not the first place for the baby girl announcement. Murky Meg had already announced that in a couple of videos ago, she added also information on how she found out.


Ah, thank you, I didn't know that. Can you direct me to them?


----------



## TC1

I don't think Harry knew Megs was going to drop the -your family have racist conversations- before he was on screen. She said "when I was pregnant" this alleged convo took place and then he came on to say "when we met, it was mentioned"


----------



## sdkitty

I'm honestly shocked at this "review" from NPR - more like a recap - just repeating what they said









						Harry And Meghan: Where Things Stand And 10 Takeaways From The Big Oprah Interview
					

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, and Prince Harry talked to Oprah Winfrey about darkest moments, family conflicts, the persistence of racism and the symbiosis between the royal family and the tabloid press.




					www.npr.org


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> and I tried to kill you/me when I was pregnant (with you).


I hadn’t even thought about that. I hope he and his sister never hear that. Tragically, they probably will. To announce that on record and expecta child to understand it without being terrified is borderline abusive.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. In this case, who would be a) so bold and b) even care? Never knew Princess Michael was considered a senior royal. I just cannot see Charles or Wills saying that AT ALL. I would have been willing to consider it was 99yo Philip who has had more than one foot-in-mouth incident.


I can believe 99-year-old Philip might have said something to that effect - not anything official, just him commenting.....I don't believe charles or will would have said anything like this


----------



## maris.crane

Chagall said:


> *From what I saw she really is out to destroy the BRF.* I don’t think she is going to stop. I don’t know how they will respond. Maybe the best thing for Royalty to do is to completely ignore the entire situation. Don’t respond to them in any way. It’s all a complete misrepresentation IMO. Peoples memories are short, so countering in any way will only keep H/M in the limelight.



I mean, I think the BRF has done enough self-inflicted damage at this point between the Camilla Parker-Bowles 80's-sexting, Randy Andy's scandals, and Philip's numerous foot-in-mouth moments.



sdkitty said:


> I can believe 99-year-old Philip might have said something to that effect - not anything official, just him commenting.....I don't believe charles or will would have said anything like this



Honestly, Philip was my first thought... but we all know Philip has said - at his best, wacky things and unfortunately, at his worst, racially offensive things - so I don't think there'd be the big secrecy or hush-hush around whom said it if it was him. I'm leaning more towards Charles or William.

I came out of this feeling no different to Harry and Meghan (I enjoy her clothes; I wish them well, but they really are just figure-heads like the Queen to me) but *I am* side-eyeing Charles. How you stop taking your own son's calls for essentially leaving the family business is beyond, to me.


----------



## marietouchet

On the not taking calls thing ... we need more context , when/why did this start? How long has this been going on ?

we also don’t know when and if he stopped sending checks


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> Very sad that the above might be true!



No might about it. Large companies now have to hire Diversity Officers.


----------



## rose60610

Nothing says "We demand privacy and we fled the horrors of Britain to heal in America" like sitting down for a tell-all to Oprah. My favorite claim: 'I didn't plan to say anything shocking--but the BRF was concerned what color Archie was going to be and I didn't want to live anymore.'

And then Harry: "I didn't know I was trapped until I met Meghan".  (try not to choke on that). "My whole family is trapped". 

It's a play on "Everyone is a racist even if they don't know it".  Except of course, Harry and Meghan. If someone says you are something, then you are--you have no say on how YOU feel if M&H say you feel something that feeds THEIR narrative. These people are THAT sick. 

So is Harry the first BRF member to ESCAPE, like a prisoner from Alcatraz? Meghan should arrange her own Navy Seal Special Forces kind of team to BREAK INTO Buckingham Palace to RESCUE THEM ALL from their horrific existence!  They just don't realize they're ALL TRAPPED!  And Meghan would get to be a hero!!


----------



## marietouchet

Lest we forget, Megxit was a business deal with a one year review, with requirements on each side
The no interview for a year clause has clearly been violated


----------



## TC1

I need clarity on the whole "I had no idea about the Royals" or "protocol" until I was about to meet the Queen. Also.. "I've been friends with Eugenie *waves hand* forever"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

Perhaps the investigators could also follow up on the historic “doors to manual”’comments as well (apparently these were hilarious comments from snobby friends in social situations, directed to William about Kate as a jibe about her ‘common’ roots - mum having worked as an air hostess). 
Are these not deeply hurtful jibes, made worse because delivered literally as comedy in a social group setting?
Yet for some reason the Markle Sparkle has suffered far worse???


----------



## sdkitty

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Mmhmm. And the royal family hasn’t had stories circulating around things they said and did that seemed contradictory?
> 
> The point is, they aren’t perfect and they are expected to be. Don’t use a penny of the money. How are you being environmentally friendly if you’re taking a jet instead of biking? If someone isn’t invited to an event, it is a definite snub. Every. Single. Thing. They. Do. is under a microscope. That must royally suck...


yes, I recally sympathizing with H when he was criticized for having a hole on the bottom of his shoe.  but it comes with the territory.  the royals live a lavish life due to their "birthright"....and Harry knew this so he should have made sure she knew before the marriage
It is beyond tasteless for them to complain when people are out of work and worse  - actually starving


----------



## WillstarveforLV

TC1 said:


> I need clarity on the whole "I had no idea about the Royals" or "protocol" until I was about to meet the Queen. Also.. "I've been friends with Eugenie *waves hand* forever"


Exactly!! Non stop contradiction.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Candace tweets on a roll....


			https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?



I like a lot of things about her. Actually I had no problem with her at all pre-Megxit - you can even see my older posts in here defending her.  I don't even mind that they left the BRF (I'm American so I don't really care), but the very public things they've done since then have really rubbed me the wrong way. Him, I've always thought he was an entitled idiot.


----------



## bisousx

maris.crane said:


> I mean, I think the BRF has done enough self-inflicted damage at this point between the Camilla Parker-Bowles 80's-sexting, Randy Andy's scandals, and Philip's numerous foot-in-mouth moments.
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, Philip was my first thought... but we all know Philip has said - at his best, wacky things and unfortunately, at his worst, racially offensive things - so I don't think there'd be the big secrecy or hush-hush around whom said it if it was him. I'm leaning more towards Charles or William.
> 
> I came out of this feeling no different to Harry and Meghan (I enjoy her clothes; I wish them well, but they really are just figure-heads like the Queen to me) but *I am* side-eyeing Charles. How you stop taking your own son's calls for essentially leaving the family business is beyond, to me.



I don’t think the reason Charles stopped taking Harry’s calls was because he left the family business. Looks like Charles does not trust those two anymore, and rightfully so. The two have already released a tell-all book (cleverly “ghostwritten”) that revealed a lot of personal information like where the Queen keeps her jewels. Endless leaks to the media from Sunshine Sachs. Embarrassing lawsuit against a media outlet. Million dollar deals with Netflix where there are strong rumors that Harry & Meghan have offered up information and/or personal videos. Bullying allegations. Behaving in ways that make the British people hate the monarchy even more than they already do. This is a lot of drama packed into a few short years.

People have their limits, even parents. It may not be for forever that he stops taking Harry’s calls, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Charles, for now, is just fed up.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Ah, thank you, I didn't know that. Can you direct me to them?


Murky Meg posts extensively on Twitter ... you would have to go fish through her recents
I doubt her Youtube channel would help


----------



## Coconuts40

Chloe302225 said:


>



Thank you for sharing this


----------



## tiktok

Allisonfaye said:


> No might about it. Large companies now have to hire Diversity Officers.



I'm sorry but these two things aren't even remotely related. Large companies hire diversity officers because people in them are incapable of increasing diversity within the workforce on their own. That has absolutely nothing to do with victimhood. It's just the reality that people will keep hiring whoever they always hired and therefore left to their own devices we'll keep the white male dominance in the workforce forever. As someone who's worked in the corporate world I can tell you from experience misogyny is alive and well (as is racism and a whole bunch of other societal ills).


----------



## lalame

I don't know if Brits here share this view but one big question this tell all brought up for me was.... why are all of y'all (the public) even keeping this show going? Your public funds are going into this family and *they don't even appreciate it*. Trapped, they say! As if your hard-earned money was oppressing them. You don't want to oppress people, right? This should absolutely alarm the Queen.


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting post yesterday, I did not know ... Boris could ask the Queen to remove the Sussex title and remove H from line of succession, and she would likely comply after formal request from the government
But, racism trumps bullying, so, no action will ensue until after possible government look-see into racism claims and BP does the bullying investigation, which they have already said will take at least a year (why?)


----------



## Chanbal

uhpharm01 said:


> Why do you think that this is probably one of Oprah's worse performances? thank you


I think Oprah is a very smart woman and I was expecting more pertinent questions from her. I felt there were serious insinuations being made and she didn't press MM&H much for supporting them.

For example, with exception of Will's kids (a future king), all several great grandkids of QE are not princes or princesses, Oprah should have brought that out imo.

She never asked about the exorbitant amounts of pounds spent by MM&H in clothing and trips, which shocked the British people, the infamous earrings linked to the journalist Jamal Khashoggi...

When MM mentioned about not having her passport, Oprah didn't ask how she managed to come to the US for that very costly baby shower.

Oprah didn't ask why so many of MM's aids lost their job during the short period of time that MM joined the royal family.

The insinuation on the color of the baby was a very painful one, and since MM brought it up, it should have been further clarified. This is not how we fight discrimination imo. She was very welcomed into the royal family, with favorable and exciting news headlines all over the country; the story of how and why this changed was not explored.

MM invited to her weeding several A-list guests that she didn't know (including Oprah) and didn't invite family members, for example, that uncle who helped her to get an important internship in Argentina, why?

Why Thomas M never met Harry before the wedding... TM was always a very supportive father who paid for all her education in great private schools... Why she talks about compassion and TM didn't have a chance to meet his grandkid yet.

These are some of the unanswered questions that would help us to better understand the situation. Discrimination is a very serious subject, and we can't fight it with only insinuations in platforms like CBS. Assuming the Firm is racist, why does MM make a point in using the duchess title given by the Firm (QE is the head of the royal family/the Firm) in the US?

Many of us here wished her a very happy life with Harry, I believe this is how this thread started. Our problem has to do with so much apparent hypocrisy...


----------



## madamelizaking

Anyone else think that her being friends with Eugenie prior to meeting Harry was a way to strategize to meeting him. I know this sounds crazy, but I feel like her end game was always Prince Harry. From the schools she attended, to the men she dated, the other man she married, the friends she surrounded herself with. I know It sounds crazy, but I think she's truly that pathological and sociopathic.


----------



## jelliedfeels

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Ok... But is it assumed that the royal family has no reason to ever lie? Everyone has secrets...


Long answer but...
I don’t think everyone assumes the Royal family are always in the right and definitely not lying/spinning stories here.
A lot of the Brits on here especially  think they’ve gotten away with some extremely shifty things. Some people also object to them on the grounds that the UK should be a Republic.
But I do think it is the timing of the H&M interview which is especially egregious for us Brits, we are in a recession and an international health crisis and an NHS stretched to breaking and we are being told a prince and princess didn’t have enough care and support and we should focus our sympathies on them.  Especially when a lot of their claims seem vague and contradictory. 

I think that both families in the wrong in different ways and they both have enormous media and PR circuses around them which tacitly encourages people to discuss them. To put it bluntly, if the Sussexes didn’t want to be talked about they wouldn’t put out a press release every couple of days.

In answer to the does anyone like anything about them question:

1. I do like that they have consistently minimised the press exposure Archie gets. I wouldn’t want a load of pics of my kids in the public domain either.
2. Any charity work no matter how rampantly publicised is better than nothing. This is also true of the royals.
3. If they did genuinely hate the exposure and strain of royal life I think stepping down was the right choice. I just find almost everything they have done since then to be contradictory to this statement but then you could well say being a media celebrity is very different from being a royal and I would have no experience to the contrary.
4. If the tensions in your family are impossible to overcome sometimes it is best to walk away.
5. I like red hair.

edit: awful grammar


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting side note ... 

The BRF has a fleet of old airplanes from the 1980s, not sure how many, but they are being retired and will not be replaced 
The BRF will now have to share the airplane used by Boris or fly commercial

There has been a big push to cut costs


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> Long answer but...
> I don’t think everyone assumes the Royal family are always in the right and definitely not lying/spinning stories here.
> A lot of the Brits on here especially  think they’ve gotten away with some extremely shifty things. Some people also object to them on the grounds that the UK should be a Republic.
> But I do think it is the timing of the H&M interview which is especially egregious for us Brits, we are in a recession and an international health crisis and an NHS stretched to breaking and we are being told a prince and princess didn’t have enough care and support and we should focus our sympathies on a row before their wedding and something horrible an unnamed person said several years ago.
> 
> I think that both families in the wrong in different ways and they both have enormous media and PR circuses around them which tacitly encourages people to discuss them. To put it bluntly, if the Sussexes didn’t want to be talked about they wouldn’t put out a press release every couple of days.
> 
> In answer to the does anyone like anything about them question:
> 1. I do like that they have consistently minimised the press exposure Archie gets. I wouldn’t want a load of pics of my kids in the public domain either.
> 2. Any charity work no matter how rampantly publicised is better than nothing. This is also true of the royals.
> 3. If they did genuinely hate the exposure and strain of royal life I think stepping down was the right choice. I just find almost everything they have done since then to be contradictory to this statement but then you could well say being a media celebrity is very different from being a royal and I would have no experience to the contrary.
> 4. If the tensions in your family are impossible to overcome sometimes it’s best to walk away.
> 5. I like red hair.


Like your list


----------



## chicinthecity777

So Harry complained about Charles cutting him off financially. Was this before or after they declared that they quit the job they were supposed to be paid for and announced that they wished to be financially independent? This coming from a man in his late 30s is a bit rich! I mean how dare Charles left him to draw down from his £50m trust fund, after he no longer wish to work for "The firm"? Which firm will continue to pay you money after you quit?


----------



## SoCalGal2016

I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

jelliedfeels said:


> Long answer but...
> I don’t think everyone assumes the Royal family are always in the right and definitely not lying/spinning stories here.
> A lot of the Brits on here especially  think they’ve gotten away with some extremely shifty things. Some people also object to them on the grounds that the UK should be a Republic.
> But I do think it is the timing of the H&M interview which is especially egregious for us Brits, we are in a recession and an international health crisis and an NHS stretched to breaking and we are being told a prince and princess didn’t have enough care and support and we should focus our sympathies on a row before their wedding and something horrible an unnamed person said several years ago.
> 
> I think that both families in the wrong in different ways and they both have enormous media and PR circuses around them which tacitly encourages people to discuss them. To put it bluntly, if the Sussexes didn’t want to be talked about they wouldn’t put out a press release every couple of days.
> 
> In answer to the does anyone like anything about them question:
> 1. I do like that they have consistently minimised the press exposure Archie gets. I wouldn’t want a load of pics of my kids in the public domain either.
> 2. Any charity work no matter how rampantly publicised is better than nothing. This is also true of the royals.
> 3. If they did genuinely hate the exposure and strain of royal life I think stepping down was the right choice. I just find almost everything they have done since then to be contradictory to this statement but then you could well say being a media celebrity is very different from being a royal and I would have no experience to the contrary.
> 4. If the tensions in your family are impossible to overcome sometimes it’s best to walk away.
> 5. I like red hair.



Ah ok... thank you for sharing! Yeah, having tension between families is stressful enough without being famous. I can imagine the type of discussions that have been had regarding money, tradition, boundaries, media representation, child rearing, and the like!


----------



## madamelizaking

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?



Former presidents families do not get protection. In fact, ***** signed an order to extend his family's protection so that they could continue receiving it 6 months after leaving office. If their intent is to be financially independent, then the expense of security should fall on them. Harry is a multi-millionaire in his own right. Complaining about losing free security just makes them sound like spoiled middle-aged brats. My husband called him a whiney trust funder and Meghan a con artist.


----------



## scarlet555

papertiger said:


> Repercussions in Parliament. A Labour MP is asking for an investigation in the racism allegations. They may be asked to name names and give dates (M's and H's dates are already inconsistent) although I think H&M will refuse. Personally, I would welcome an investigation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan interview: Labour MP condemns Palace amid calls for investigation over racism claims
> 
> 
> The couple have plunged the monarchy into crisis with a series of astonishing claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.yahoo.com



The severity of their accusation deserves an investigation.  But entering this kind of 'institution' is not without challenges-you know exactly what I am saying here, not expecting it and claiming to be naïve at every turn is boatload of crap-it does not justify the racist treatment she claims to have had-some of it not necessarily by the BRF itself, it includes the press.  the BRF cannot protect everyone from the press-it's the press... and if you want them to protect you, YOU DO have to play nice as well.


----------



## Coconuts40

Chanbal said:


> I think Oprah is a very smart woman and I was expecting more pertinent questions from her. I felt there were serious insinuations being made and she didn't press MM&H much for supporting them.
> 
> For example, with exception of Will's kids (a future king), all several great grandkids of QE are not princes or princesses, Oprah should have brought that out imo.
> 
> She never asked about the exorbitant amounts of pounds spent by MM&H in clothing and trips, which shocked the British people, the infamous earrings linked to the journalist Jamal Khashoggi...
> 
> When MM mentioned about not having her passport, Oprah didn't ask how she managed to come to the US for that very costly baby shower.
> 
> Oprah didn't ask why so many of MM's aids lost their job during the short period of time that MM joined the royal family.
> 
> The insinuation on the color of the baby was a very painful one, and since MM brought it up, it should have been further clarified it. This is not how we fight discrimination imo. She was very welcomed into the royal family, with favorable and exciting news headlines all over the country; the story of how and why this changed was not explored.
> 
> MM invited several A-list guests that she didn't know (including Oprah) and didn't invite family members, for example, that uncle who helped her to get an important internship in Argentina, why?
> 
> Why Thomas M never met Harry before the wedding... TM was always a very supportive father who paid for all her education in great private schools... Why she talks about compassion and TM didn't have a chance to meet his grandkid yet.
> 
> These are some of the unanswered questions that would help us to better understand the situation. Discrimination is a very serious subject, and we can't fight it with only insinuations in platforms like CBS. Assuming the Firm is racist, why does MM make a point in using the duchess title given by the Firm (QE is the head of the royal family/the Firm) in the US?
> 
> Many of us here wished her a very happy life with Harry, I believe this is how this thread started. Our problem has to do with so much apparent hypocrisy...



I am in agreement with you here and I was going to post a similar concern here. 

If I can share my thoughts, Oprah did start the interview with the disclosure that they are friends, neighbors, and Oprah and Harry are working on a project together.  This was not an unbiased interview, and although she did ask some good questions, I agree she should have pressed more on the topics you mention.  It makes it tough though when they are connected the way they are.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Ah, thank you, I didn't know that. Can you direct me to them?


Here is the video, the baby girl info is towards the end.


----------



## kkfiregirl

SoCalGal2016 said:


> *As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?*



I see what you’re saying, however, it’s a little different. They simply don’t have the same visibility here as a former President’s family. Most people don’t know/care about them. Perhaps if they had stayed in the UK, they could make a better argument fir security.


----------



## haute okole

I wish someone would sit the Duchess of Sucks to be Them that people don’t like her because she is unlikeable, period, end of story.  My first husband is English and I am a WOC.  I can tell you without hesitation that my White Caucasian American Mid-Western in-laws were far more racist and intolerant than my British inlaws.  Meghan makes everything about race.  She needs to take a long look at what she did and how she handled the situation to bring about universal disdain, including the disdain of her own blood family.  She’s delusional, vapid and vengeful.  She made things so much more worse for herself because she showed herself to be a spiteful, spoiled liar.  Harry is borderline intellectually disabled.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

rose60610 said:


> Nothing says "We demand privacy and we fled the horrors of Britain to heal in America" like sitting down for a tell-all to Oprah. My favorite claim: 'I didn't plan to say anything shocking--but the BRF was concerned what color Archie was going to be and I didn't want to live anymore.'
> 
> And then Harry: "I didn't know I was trapped until I met Meghan".  (try not to choke on that). "My whole family is trapped".
> 
> It's a play on "Everyone is a racist even if they don't know it".  Except of course, Harry and Meghan. If someone says you are something, then you are--you have no say on how YOU feel if M&H say you feel something that feeds THEIR narrative. These people are THAT sick.
> 
> So is Harry the first BRF member to ESCAPE, like a prisoner from Alcatraz? Meghan should arrange her own Navy Seal Special Forces kind of team to BREAK INTO Buckingham Palace to RESCUE THEM ALL from their horrific existence!  They just don't realize they're ALL TRAPPED!  And Meghan would get to be a hero!!



By no means is Harry the first one to escape, King Edward abdicated the throne when he married American divorcee, Wallis Simpson.  Edward never returned to live in England and I don't think Harry will either


----------



## floatinglili

The Oprah Winfrey interview was a dead-on certainty from the moment OW turned up for the wedding. I’m surprised it took this long but no doubt a careful timeline was planned out long ago as part of the escape / monetisation strategy. Monarchy always looked like celebrity for MM.


----------



## nyshopaholic

The New York Post is on a roll today: https://pagesix.com/2021/03/08/opra...56.1695130017.1615223505-397548516.1518207472

*Oprah confirms Queen, Prince Philip not involved in talks over Archie’s skin color*
By Lia Eustachewich
March 8, 2021 | 8:40am

Meghan Markle reveals the Royal family expressed concern about Archie’s skin color



















Oprah Winfrey confirmed on Monday morning that neither Queen Elizabeth nor husband Prince Philip were involved in the conversation about Archie’s skin color.

But the iconic talk show host said Prince Harry refused to reveal who in the royal family did share those concerns.

“He did not share the identity with me but he wanted to make sure that I knew, and if I had an opportunity to share it, that it was not his grandmother nor his grandfather that were part of those conversations,” Winfrey said on “CBS This Morning” — a day after her bombshell sit-down with Harry and Meghan Markle aired on the network.

“He did not tell me who were part of those conversations. As you can see, I tried to get that answer — on camera and off.”

In a stunning revelation, Markle said that while she was pregnant with Archie, the couple’s first child, someone in the royal family raised “concerns” over how dark the baby’s skin might be.

Meghan Markle revealed that someone in the royal family raised “concerns” over how dark Archie’s skin might be.

“All around this same time — we have in tandem the conversation of, ‘He won’t be given security, he’s not going to be given a title,’ and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born,” she told Winfrey in the no-holds-barred interview.
Oprah said Prince Harry would not tell her who in the family raised the concerns.

Neither Markle nor Harry would divulge who was behind the concerns.

On Monday, the veteran TV host said it was that part of the 85-minute interview — which was trimmed down from 3 hours and 20 minutes — that shocked her the most.

But she wasn’t surprised the royals reacted that way.

“I was surprised that they [Markle and Harry] were telling me about it,” Winfrey said on “CBS This Morning.”

Winfrey added that she was also stunned by Harry’s admission that he was “trapped” in the royal family.

“Yes, they want privacy but they understand that they are public figures and the privacy is not to be intruded upon. There is a difference between privacy and intrusion and being able to have boundaries,” Winfrey explained about why the couple came forward.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I can believe 99-year-old Philip might have said something to that effect - not anything official, just him commenting.....I don't believe charles or will would have said anything like this


Haha yes PP could have said something like that. He has always had a lovely way of saying completely inappropriate things. He habitually placed his foot in his mouth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> She has been out of the UK for >1year, has she been in therapy since she left the Firm?


Well to be fair, I can see why Oprah would think it was inappropriate and invasive to ask that about her personal treatment.

I think they should, as people who profess to advocate for mental health,  have talked more generally about  seeking help and recovery. I don’t know if they showed the suicide helpline or any other helpful numbers during the US broadcast but that would be good too. Pls do let me know.

edit: added last line as I don’t know.


----------



## Jayne1

SoCalGal2016 said:


> By no means is Harry the first one to escape, King Edward abdicated the throne when he married American divorcee, Wallis Simpson.  Edward never returned to live in England and I don't think Harry will either


Edward wanted back but wasn't allowed, other than funerals and an operation. Not until his death - he's buried there.


----------



## lalame

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?



HUGE difference. Heads of state are voted in and in some cases, out. They play a critical role in the functioning of the country... there are very real consequences to our society if they are harmed (sudden transfer of power is a vulnerable point) and it's in our best interest that they perform the job without disruption. The BRF are modern-day celebrities, albeit with important cultural ties but they are not critical to the functioning of any society.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

madamelizaking said:


> Former presidents families do not get protection. In fact, ***** signed an order to extend his family's protection so that they could continue receiving it 6 months after leaving office. If their intent is to be financially independent, then the expense of security should fall on them. Harry is a multi-millionaire in his own right. Complaining about losing free security just makes them sound like spoiled middle-aged brats. My husband called him a whiney trust funder and Meghan a con artist.











						United States Secret Service - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




The Secret Service is authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3056(a) to protect  Former presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes, except if the spouse remarries.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?


Well no actually. A woman of substance yes. I just don’t like liars and people who tear and are divisive and looking for publicity.

Edited: and bullying people like her. She’s bullied her way through life, in a menacing and manipulative manner, from all accounts. By the way do you not sympathize with the women shes’s accused of bullying?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> Edward wanted back but wasn't allowed, other than funerals and an operation. Not until his death - he's buried there.


Sadly yes he was banned from coming back to the UK. At this speed, Harry would be too!


----------



## lalame

SoCalGal2016 said:


> United States Secret Service - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Secret Service is authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3056(a) to protect  Former presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes, except if the spouse remarries.



What @madamelizaking pointed out was president's children don't get protection indefinitely. The president and his/her spouse is guaranteed protection. In this analogy, only the Queen and Philip should be guaranteed protection.... not all God-knows-how-many children and grandchildren!


----------



## chicinthecity777

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?


It doesn't matter how U.S. chose how to or not to protect their formal president. It's different in the UK. No public money should be used for their security in the U.S. after they quit. Charles however is free to pay out of his own pocket.


----------



## maris.crane

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?



It was a bit of a controversy here when they were going to stay in BC whether our police force should be providing security (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harry-meghan-security-costs-rcmp-canada-1.5478022).

I think they had a valid argument... re: security and kind of not. I agree they probably _do_ need security, but if they are choosing to be celebrities and not working members of the Royal Family, I think the security charges should come from their pay. They have their Netflix specials, and they can work (paid speaking engagements) just based on their notoriety. I think politicians/real heads of state are a separate case.


----------



## lalame

And believe me I WOULD throw a fit if I were paying for the protection of prior presidents' children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren for life.  Granted that would be a greater number than the BRF.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?



I like Meghan's style and have bought some of the handbags she owns!    But other than that, I agree with the criticism she is getting here and in the press.  There is NO way that she didn't know what she was getting into when she married him.  It is just too unbelievable that a college educated, television star does not know about the royal family. Her explanation is total fiction IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

just heard on NPR radio a teaser about how Meghan spoke "candidly" about her life as a royal.....seems imply she is being truthful.  I consider NPR to be a legitimate news source, not an entertainment venue (for the most part) so this is disappointing to me.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Here is the video, the baby girl info is towards the end.



Thanks, the video asks the question that IF it's a girl, not announcing it is a girl


----------



## marietouchet

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?


Googled it...

The Former Presidents Protection Act of 2012. All living former presidents and their spouses after Dwight D. Eisenhower are now entitled to receive lifetime Secret Service protection. *Their children (of former presidents) are entitled to protection "until they become 16 years of age".  *So, only minor children under 16 get protection, not grandkids, great grand kids etc.

Harry is the grandchild of QEII, and A is a great grand child. *Neither would get protection under the US system*. Too far removed...


----------



## chicinthecity777

On a unrelated note, Happy International Women's Day!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> It doesn't matter how U.S. chose how to or not to protect their formal president. It's different in the UK. No public money should be used for their security in the U.S. after they quit. Charles however is free to pay out of his own pocket.


Harry acted like they didn't quit.....they left but didn't quit - still wanted to work - just not as senior royals?  so if they were not senior royals and not living in GB, then how would they qualify for security?


----------



## justwatchin

madamelizaking said:


> Anyone else think that her being friends with Eugenie prior to meeting Harry was a way to strategize to meeting him. I know this sounds crazy, but I feel like her end game was always Prince Harry. From the schools she attended, to the men she dated, the other man she married, the friends she surrounded herself with. I know It sounds crazy, but I think she's truly that pathological and sociopathic.


I’d like to know how she was friends with Eugenie?How could that have come about?


----------



## Chagall

TC1 said:


> I need clarity on the whole "I had no idea about the Royals" or "protocol" until I was about to meet the Queen. Also.. "I've been friends with Eugenie *waves hand* forever"


Meghan and Harry announced Meghans pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding which was very inappropriate. She got a lot of flack for that. Perhaps that’s why she said they were friends. She is one tricky person.


----------



## lalame

Something to keep in mind too when we talk about security costs... 












						Caitlyn Jenner Estimates Daughter Kylie Jenner Spends 'Anywhere Between $300,000 and $400,000 a Month' on Security
					

Caitlyn Jenner, currently a contestant on I'm a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here!, confirmed the famous family has security "everywhere" they go




					people.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> Harry acted like they didn't quit.....they left but didn't quit - still wanted to work - just not as senior royals?  so if they were not senior royals and not living in GB, then how would they qualify for security?


They wanted their cake and eat it, they wanted a half in and half out, they don't want the duty but want the titles so they can make money. The Queen stopped that. They got p1ssed off, now seeking revenge. The END!


----------



## lulilu

I won't believe the colorism allegations until HM explain why M claims it happened when she was pregnant and H claims it happened before they were married.  Unless I misheard the interview.  And why didn't O follow up on that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

maris.crane said:


> I came out of this feeling no different to Harry and Meghan (I enjoy her clothes; I wish them well, but they really are just figure-heads like the Queen to me) but *I am* side-eyeing Charles. How you stop taking your own son's calls for essentially leaving the family business is beyond, to me.



They did not "just leave". They did it in an extremely offensive manner...did you read the little speech on their website where they layed down the law to the Queen, after posting their farewell on social media with 5 mins of notice to the BRF? And that is just what the bystander saw, who knows how they acted behind closed doors. I don't see why the right to be hurt and angry is only reserved for Harry and Meghan.


----------



## muddledmint

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Does anyone in this thread like ANYTHING about either one of them or is this just a thread to tear them apart?


I kind of liked Meghan just for the drama and entertainment value, and there was always the element of skepticism about the truth being reported by British tabloids, but this interview has put all that doubt to rest. She is so full of lies and more lies on top of lies.


----------



## Allisonfaye

madamelizaking said:


> Anyone else think that her being friends with Eugenie prior to meeting Harry was a way to strategize to meeting him. I know this sounds crazy, but I feel like her end game was always Prince Harry. From the schools she attended, to the men she dated, the other man she married, the friends she surrounded herself with. I know It sounds crazy, but I think she's truly that pathological and sociopathic.



Didn't see ask what rich men were available when she go to the UK? Am I making that up or was that a thing?


----------



## marietouchet

To put things in context, Sweden and Denmark have been removing royal perks in the last few years due to large family sizes. They have slimmed their monarchies. So, other monarchies are marginalizing the distant family members like Harry. He is only 6th in the line of succession. Archie is 7th.

Sweden actually REMOVED HRHs from numerous royal grand kids. 

Denmark said only one grandchild (of 8) would get financial support.  There is the Queen, her son Frederick and his son Christian (the only grandchild) who get $$$$. The Danish govt stated this was because the queen had too many grandkids.


----------



## jcnc

I saw the interview yesterday and I have got to say it was quiet damning to the Riyal family. Every story has two sides and in the word of social media, the side with more pr/visibility wins. I can kind of understand if they felt flustered in the RF norms but blaming everything on color without proof felt off to me


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> I won't believe the colorism allegations until HM explain why M claims it happened when she was pregnant and H claims it happened before they were married.  Unless I misheard the interview.  And why didn't O follow up on that?


Guys on Twitter already pointed out this inconsistency. But nothing can get in the way of the narrative, is there?


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Well to be fair, I can see why Oprah would think it was inappropriate and invasive to ask that about her personal treatment.
> 
> I think they should, as people who profess to advocate for mental health,  have talked more generally about  seeking help and recovery. I don’t know if they showed the suicide helpline or any other helpful numbers during the US broadcast but that would be good too. Pls do let me know.
> 
> edit: added last line as I don’t know.


This was not a question for Oprah to ask, but I'm surprised that MM didn't volunteer the info. She brought up the subject of mental health and volunteered that she wasn't able to find help in the UK, did she find it in the US? In my view, this would be helpful info to share with others, "as people who profess to advocate for mental health."


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> Something to keep in mind too when we talk about security costs...
> 
> View attachment 5015239
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caitlyn Jenner Estimates Daughter Kylie Jenner Spends 'Anywhere Between $300,000 and $400,000 a Month' on Security
> 
> 
> Caitlyn Jenner, currently a contestant on I'm a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here!, confirmed the famous family has security "everywhere" they go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Kylie is worth a billion, not $40M like Harry.  The value of the Birkins and Kelly bags in her closet exceeds Harry's entire fortune. 

I have heard the number of $3M/yr floated for the Harkle security. But, it depends on which options you choose, and what you have to protect.  

For ex, security for Archie. What does that mean?  How often is he without his parents (who are presumably protected).  Does he need 24/7 individual protection in addition to that of H and M? Can they share bodyguards?


----------



## lalame

Not sure if you're all still keeping up with the trickle of info but thought this would validate some of you.  Um does that just leave William and Kate?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> So, they couldn't announce the birth time or place or godparents of Archie but they can reveal the gender of the unborn child on Oprah?


Maybe it goes back to what her mom told her about not giving it away.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

lalame said:


> Something to keep in mind too when we talk about security costs...
> 
> View attachment 5015239
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caitlyn Jenner Estimates Daughter Kylie Jenner Spends 'Anywhere Between $300,000 and $400,000 a Month' on Security
> 
> 
> Caitlyn Jenner, currently a contestant on I'm a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here!, confirmed the famous family has security "everywhere" they go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



In comparison, we also have private neighborhood security at our house and pay $30 per month


----------



## maris.crane

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They did not "just leave". They did it in an extremely offensive manner...did you read the little speech on their website where they layed down the law to the Queen, after posting their farewell on social media with 5 mins of notice to the BRF? And that is just what the bystander saw, who knows how they acted behind closed doors. I don't see why the right to be hurt and angry is only reserved for Harry and Meghan.



Well, we can agree to disagree. I don't think Harry's actions were on par with murder or destructive drug use; so I'm not impressed with Chuck's decision to cut his son.


----------



## chicinthecity777

maris.crane said:


> Well, we can agree to disagree. I don't think Harry's actions were on par with murder or destructive drug use; so I'm not impressed with Chuck's decision to cut his son.


This said son has £50m in a trust but OK.


----------



## TC1

maris.crane said:


> Well, we can agree to disagree. I don't think Harry's actions were on par with murder or destructive drug use; so I'm not impressed with Chuck's decision to cut his son.


It's not up to Charles to cut them off. They are no longer "working royals", which is taxpayer funded.


----------



## Chagall

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> That’s the thing with empathy... it can be exercised for any number of reasons. Being rich and famous doesn’t not excuse someone from being empathized with, in my opinion. Plenty of rich people are unhappy and/or suffer from mental health issues. Money isn’t everything, and fame has driven plenty of folks to the edge of madness.


I agree, money isn’t everything, and people in all stations of life can have mental health problems. I think we all know that. She may have had postpartum depression. I have no idea. But the thing is, most people suffering from depression are no problem to anyone but themselves. They don’t go about trying to destroy other people, blame others for their depression, and self promote to such a ridiculous degree.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Kylie is worth a billion, not $40M like Harry.  The value of the Birkins and Kelly bags in her closet exceeds Harry's entire fortune.
> 
> I have heard the number of $3M/yr floated for the Harkle security. But, it depends on which options you choose, and what you have to protect.
> 
> For ex, security for Archie. What does that mean?  How often is he without his parents (who are presumably protected).  Does he need 24/7 individual protection in addition to that of H and M? Can they share bodyguards?



I definitely don't think any of them need as many security services as Kylie but at a certain point, it doesn't matter how much you're valued... it's how often you need the security. A 24/7 hired guard doesn't care how much money you make... he charges what he charges to follow you everywhere you go! The LA market is also really expensive for this I bet.


----------



## TC1

marietouchet said:


> To put things in context, Sweden and Denmark have been removing royal perks in the last few years due to large family sizes. They have slimmed their monarchies. So, other monarchies are marginalizing the distant family members like Harry. He is only 6th in the line of succession. Archie is 7th.
> 
> Sweden actually REMOVED HRHs from numerous royal grand kids.
> 
> Denmark said only one grandchild (of 8) would get financial support.  There is the Queen, her son Frederick and his son Christian (the only grandchild) who get $$$$. The Danish govt stated this was because the queen had too many grandkids.


In this day and age, things do need to be slimmed down. (IMO) The Monarchy isn't as relevant as it used to be. Again (IMO)


----------



## Joelene

artax two said:


> This. SHE is the one who sees race. The racism is in HER head.


Anyone that claims to not see race is obviously lying. Race is the first thing you see when looking at someone. The racism is not always is her head. Reading some of the British tabloids and commentary is sickening, because of the racial undertones.


----------



## melissatrv

I do believe the Kate made her cry incident only because M likes to be made the victim and she could have whined to Harry about how she was treated. But I also believe the Tiara incident occurred, and notice how THAT was not brought up.

There could have been a comment on Archie's skin color but I am sure this was made by a staffer and not a family member. Out of line either way.

The suicide business was her way to play on Harry's fears of "history repeating" and put Megxit into motion. She would have divorced Harry before resorting to that if he did not give in to her. She is a master of self preservation if nothing else.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Not sure if you're all still keeping up with the trickle of info but thought this would validate some of you.  Um does that just leave William and Kate?
> 
> View attachment 5015251


My immediate thought was one of the suits maybe saying something, not a family member.  Did she say it was a family member and why are we believing this pathological liar anyway?

But if someone said something, perhaps it was a kind comment/compliment like maybe the baby will have your (beautiful) colouring?

Whenever Meg speaks, I try to decipher what really happened if indeed, anything actually happened.


----------



## maris.crane

chicinthecity777 said:


> This said son has £50m in a trust but OK.



Well, as I said previously: I don't think they can have it both ways regarding the security charges; they should be paying their own way in life. Now, the two of them have Netflix and public speaking engagements - and_ absolutely should _be paying for their own security and lifestyle. But I do think not taking your kids phone calls, no matter how messy they may have been on social media - is just mind-blowing. (Especially when Charles himself is a hot mess express and committed his own embarrassing follies)


----------



## chicinthecity777

Joelene said:


> Anyone that claims to not see race is obviously lying. *Race is the first thing you see when looking at someone.* The racism is not always is her head. Reading some of the British tabloids and commentary is sickening, because of the racial undertones.


Nope! Absolutely not! I don't judge a person by their skin colour and I don't care about their racial composition. I will however call out people that do treat people differently because of their skin colour!


----------



## chicinthecity777

maris.crane said:


> Well, as I said previously: I don't think they can have it both ways regarding the security charges; they should be paying their own way in life. Now, the two of them have Netflix and public speaking engagements - and_ absolutely should _be paying for their own security and lifestyle. But I do think not taking your kids phone calls, no matter how messy they may have been on social media - is just mind-blowing. (Especially when Charles himself is a hot mess express and committed his own embarrassing follies)


You are making a judgement based on entire one-sided claim. I choose not to. So let's just agree to disagree!


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

chicinthecity777 said:


> Nope! Absolutely not! I don't judge a person by their skin colour and I don't care about their racial composition. I will however call out people that do treat people differently because of their skin colour!



The point is, race can’t be unseen. The folks claiming they can’t see race don’t help the problem, because most people see it. (Because they aren’t blind.) Seeing race and judging folks for it is not one in the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

chicinthecity777 said:


> You are making a judgement based on entire one-sided claim. I choose not to. So let's just agree to disagree!



Charles, William, Kate and co. all have their own side of the story, but they will never be able to tell it in public. That’s the dirty game Harry & Meghan are playing.  They can throw any claim out there, and the royal family by protocol will not be able to officially dispute.


----------



## floatinglili

The ‘concerns’ about skin colour, the vague description of this reported conversation of ‘concerns’ seems so dark.

It could be possible that there was in fact a deep worried discussion about the possible appearance of the forthcoming baby. An investigation might bring the facts to light. (Seems slightly implausible to me in light of the fact that the marriage went ahead at quite a pace without much delay, and was made much of. )

But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.

My sister in law is a WOC and my niece and nephew are very different in skin tone from each other. One is blue eyed, very fair and blonde, the other from the same parents has a much deeper skin tone and appearance generally, it would be possible to think they had different heritage if you judged on their appearance.

Is it wrong to even speculate or convivially discuss family resemblances or possibilities? Would this constitute a ‘concern’ warranting international headlines and a crisis in the monarchy?

Raising the issue like this seems possible a deliberate play for the US audience, where race is such a huge, huge divisive issue??

i mean Meghan described herself as Caucasian unti very recently, so it possible a discussion of future baby appearance was not expected to raise the hackles quite so much?

in the other hand we do have the ‘doors to
Manual’ example of how sheltered and silly these people can be so I’m putting it down as possibly an awkward, snobby and nasty convo with a friend of Harry’s....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SoCalGal2016 said:


> United States Secret Service - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Secret Service is authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3056(a) to protect  Former presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes, except if the spouse remarries.



Yes, but I think the person referring to family not being protected meant children. Plus, the equivalent of the president and their spouse would be the Queen and Philip, not her grandson and wife.

ETA: it had been said already, with 6+ pages to catch I answer as I go along, not after I've read everything because I would never find what I wanted to comment on again.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bisousx said:


> Charles, William, Kate and co. all have their own side of the story, but they will never be able to tell it in public. That’s the dirty game Harry & Meghan are playing.  They can throw any claim out there, and the royal family by protocol will not be able to officially dispute.


Exactly! The RF will not stoop that low to their level and they know there will be no come back from the RF.


----------



## melissatrv

Meghan accomplished what she wanted. Sympathy.  #abolishthemonarchy is trending on Twitter.  Is it me or does Harry look completely miserable?


----------



## lalame

maris.crane said:


> Well, as I said previously: I don't think they can have it both ways regarding the security charges; they should be paying their own way in life. Now, the two of them have Netflix and public speaking engagements - and_ absolutely should _be paying for their own security and lifestyle. But I do think not taking your kids phone calls, no matter how messy they may have been on social media - is just mind-blowing. (Especially when Charles himself is a hot mess express and committed his own embarrassing follies)



I think they have started talking again so maybe Charles was just angry and needed a break from all the drama. Is this right? IDK, but parents can also be flawed people who may react to things impulsively out of anger. I think same can be said for M and her father.


----------



## 1LV

marietouchet said:


> On the not taking calls thing ... we need more context , when/why did this start? How long has this been going on ?
> 
> we also don’t know when and if he stopped sending checks


Also don’t know when or if Harry stopped cashing them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

melissatrv said:


> Meghan accomplished what she wanted. Sympathy.  #abolishthemonarchy is trending on Twitter.  Is it me or does Harry look completely miserable?


To be fair, Twitter is full of twats and bots so cannot be used to reflect the true mood of our country.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> Didn't see ask what rich men were available when she go to the UK? Am I making that up or was that a thing?



Jup, a female media person (can't remember if a journalist or a reality star?) who swiftly got markled. But she asked for "rich and famous".

ETA: it was Lizzie Cundie.

Lizzie Cundy says 'Meghan Markle asked me to find her a famous British man' but 'was GHOSTED when she met Prince Harry' as she details surprise friendship


----------



## lalame

floatinglili said:


> The ‘concerns’ about skin colour, the vague description of this reported conversation of ‘concerns’ seems so dark.
> 
> It could be possible that there was in fact a deep worried discussion about the possible appearance of the forthcoming baby. An investigation might bring the facts to light. (Seems slightly implausible to me in light of the fact that the marriage went ahead at quite a pace without much delay, and was made much of. )
> 
> But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.
> 
> My sister in law is a WOC and my niece and nephew are very different in skin tone from each other. One is blue eyed, very fair and blonde, the other from the same parents has a much deeper skin tone and appearance generally, it would be possible to think they had different heritage if you judged on their appearance.
> 
> Is it wrong to even speculate or convivially discuss family resemblances or possibilities? Would this constitute a ‘concern’ warranting international headlines and a crisis in the monarchy?
> 
> Raising the issue like this seems possible a deliberate play for the US audience, where race is such a huge, huge divisive issue??
> 
> i mean Meghan described herself as Caucasian unti very recently, so it possible a discussion of future baby appearance was not expected to raise the hackles quite so much?
> 
> in the other hand we do have the ‘doors to
> Manual’ example of how sheltered and silly these people can be so I’m putting it down as possibly an awkward, snobby and nasty convo with a friend of Harry’s....



I agree, I think a lot more needs to be revealed about the CONTEXT of that conversation. Context is everything. It could have been any one of these possible scenarios and I'm not comfortable yet making a judgment until I know more:

Malicious remark made by haters = racism
Innocent remark made by haters = no one at fault
Malicious remark made by people who love them = ignorance or racism
Innocent remark made by people who love them = no one at fault


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

floatinglili said:


> The ‘concerns’ about skin colour, the vague description of this reported conversation of ‘concerns’ seems so dark.
> 
> It could be possible that there was in fact a deep worried discussion about the possible appearance of the forthcoming baby. An investigation might bring the facts to light. (Seems slightly implausible to me in light of the fact that the marriage went ahead at quite a pace without much delay, and was made much of. )
> 
> But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.
> 
> My sister in law is a WOC and my niece and nephew are very different in skin tone from each other. One is blue eyed, very fair and blonde, the other from the same parents has a much deeper skin tone and appearance generally, it would be possible to think they had different heritage if you judged on their appearance.
> 
> Is it wrong to even speculate or convivially discuss family resemblances or possibilities? Would this constitute a ‘concern’ warranting international headlines and a crisis in the monarchy?
> 
> Raising the issue like this seems possible a deliberate play for the US audience, where race is such a huge, huge divisive issue??
> 
> i mean Meghan described herself as Caucasian unti very recently, so it possible a discussion of future baby appearance was not expected to raise the hackles quite so much?
> 
> in the other hand we do have the ‘doors to
> Manual’ example of how sheltered and silly these people can be so I’m putting it down as possibly an awkward, snobby and nasty convo with a friend of Harry’s....



Wow... comparing a discussion on inherited features to colorism within the black community in this manner: “But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.”

*sigh*

I don’t have the time or energy to discuss the depth, history, and harm of colorism. Maybe someone else will. (It isn’t just a problem in America, either.)

...Also, when did she describe herself as Caucasian?


----------



## bag-mania

maris.crane said:


> I came out of this feeling no different to Harry and Meghan (I enjoy her clothes; I wish them well, but they really are just figure-heads like the Queen to me) *but I am side-eyeing Charles. How you stop taking your own son's calls for essentially leaving the family business is beyond, to me.*



Charles doesn't come across as being a particularly warm, supportive man. That said, we are only hearing Harry's take and he certainly didn't reveal to Oprah any of the things HE said or did that might have prompted such a reaction from his father. In fact Harry and Meghan took great pains to try to present themselves as being totally blameless in everything.


----------



## sdkitty

well, I guess we are in the minority on this....everyone in the us media is reporting what she said as fact.  the discussion about archies color is getting a lot of attention.  if harry has been jealous and resentful all his life for being called the "spare" maybe he's getting his revenge.  they have ruled out the queen and philip but not william (and not sure about charles)


----------



## Coconuts40

Today happens to be my day off, so I am also watching television and the media's response to the interview.
The View, The Talk, American morning shows.... not one person suggested to fact check Meghans and Harry's claims.  They are all defending them and taking their word for everything said by them.  These are strong allegations they claimed last night,and I honestly feel an inquest is needed to get to the truth, no matter what the truth may be.  This is a circus.


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Wow... comparing a discussion on inherited features to colorism within the black community in this manner: “But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.”
> 
> *sigh*
> 
> I don’t have the time or energy to discuss the depth, history, and harm of colorism. Maybe someone else will. (It isn’t just a problem in America, either.)
> 
> ...Also, when did she describe herself as Caucasian?



Colorism is absolutely harmful, in every non-white society (I'm just not as confident it's the same among Caucasians). But I think there needs to be a lot more context given about what the conversation was with the family. The way Harry said it, "how's he going to look?" "what will the color of his skin be?" seems more curiosity than malicious to me. I'm a WOC and my husband is white. We've absolutely had discussions about how our child would look, would they be lighter or darker, what their hair would be like, etc. Am I racist against my own (non-existent) child? Not unless I followed it up with "... and I hope he doesn't look like ___" It's the judgment that's harmful, not the question. That's what I'm missing from what they've said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lies, lies, lies. 

Camilla?  This speculation and disruption are exactly what the gruesome twosome want.  If there really was racism, why not specify who, what, where, when and why. No one can do anything about speculation. It leads to a witch-hunt. 

This one story shows their immaturity. Time to grow up, be adults, and handle these serious allegations effectively.
There is much doubt about the veracity of their other claims, namely a wedding 3 days prior.





marietouchet said:


> The question of who in the BRF made comments about Archie prior to birth , well not QEII or PP, an unnamed person
> 
> But, suspicions falls squarely on PC, W, K rather than on some minor member of which there are lots and lots , one of Gloucester grandkids for ex, we don’t know , the whole clan was assembled when MM announced pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding
> 
> nor do we know the circumstances, casual conversation ? Deliberate insult ? Joke that went wrong ? At a party where liquor was consumed and where recollections are fuzzy?
> 
> I don’t think Oprah pressed H on this , did H complain at the time the remark was made? Or later ? Did he allow the comment to slide at the time or pick up phone ?
> 
> to me, the lack of context for the remark is troubling
> 
> BTW, one of the Gloucester daughters went to Australia and married a person of Maori descent.


----------



## littleblackbag

Meghan is not relevant, and wouldn't even be in the public eye anymore if it weren't for Harry! And I'm disappointed in Harry. He was always one of my fave Royals. However I do think he has issues over his Mothers death, and I think Meghan has managed to play on this and somehow manipulated him into her way of thinking. I just don't get it!! I will not be watching the interview tonight, I don't think my blood pressure could take it. Some people have real problems in this world...


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

lalame said:


> Colorism is absolutely harmful, in every non-white society (I'm just not as confident it's the same among Caucasians). But I think there needs to be a lot more context given about what the conversation was with the family. The way Harry said it, "how's he going to look?" "what will the color of his skin be?" seems more curiosity than malicious to me. I'm a WOC and my husband is white. We've absolutely had discussions about how our child would look, would they be lighter or darker, what their hair would be like, etc. Am I racist against my own (non-existent) child? Not unless I followed it up with "... and I hope he doesn't look like ___" It's the judgment that's harmful, not the question. That's what I'm missing from what they've said.



The fact that it came up at all (if it was) is puzzling and saddening to me. Like, why does it matter and when will it not matter? Context would be very helpful, of course, so I guess I’ll try not to speculate on it.


----------



## bisousx

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Wow... comparing a discussion on inherited features to colorism within the black community in this manner: “But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.”
> 
> *sigh*
> 
> I don’t have the time or energy to discuss the depth, history, and harm of colorism. Maybe someone else will. (It isn’t just a problem in America, either.)
> 
> ...Also, when did she describe herself as Caucasian?



I am with you on this one. It’s cringey when people are trying to explain how a white family could appropriately comment on the potential skin color of an unborn baby. Just.. no.  

My personal thought is that this ludicrous conversation never even existed, at least it would never happen to Harry’s face like they claim.

If you read some of the bullying allegations, the staff surrounding Meghan were highly aware of her nasty personality and her need to fixate on targets before she even became pregnant. They knew Harry had no spine and he was done for.

Just think: what would you do if you had volatile family members like Harry and Meghan? Most of us probably be walking on eggshells around them.

It’s far-fetched that any family member would find it productive to make a bold, racist statement about Archie’s potential skin color like that knowing Harry will run around and tell his wife immediately, when she’s already caused so much ruckus and drama within the family _before they even got married_.

Anyways, there’s a lot of talk about Meghan writing in that she’s Caucasian (and not identifying as black) but someone with the receipts can chime in on that topic.


----------



## lalame

I mean frankly I'm a little side eyeing Harry in the first place for assigning the racism label to whoever in his family was asking about the baby's color. He partied in a freakin Nazi uniform! Now, I've moved past it because he was ignorant, contrite, give him the benefit of the doubt, etc etc yet he doesn't seem willing to extend that same benefit to whichever family member he's talking about. It reeks of hypocrisy. I don't remember any family members coming out at that time with "...and one family member who I won't name actually made jest of anti-semitism. It was so awkward and hard to see."


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, I guess we are in the minority on this....*everyone in the us media is reporting what she said as fact.  *the discussion about archies color is getting a lot of attention.  if harry has been jealous and resentful all his life for being called the "spare" maybe he's getting his revenge.  they have ruled out the queen and philip but not william (and not sure about charles)



It's exactly what I expected. With the media it's all about the narrative, backing up a story with facts is unnecessary these days. The mainstream US media is loving the chance to chip away at the monarchy by calling it an antiquated racist institution.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Picture drop!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Time to educate — the UK has laws about accusing people = libel



			https://mobile.twitter.com/royalreporter


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> The fact that it came up at all (if it was) is puzzling and saddening to me. Like, why does it matter and when will it not matter? Context would be very helpful, of course, so I guess I’ll try not to speculate on it.



Honestly sometimes it's just curiosity that is ignorant (or unaware if you prefer) of social context or politeness. It's kind of like the "where do you come from" - yes, when you peel back the layers that is a loaded question, but I give most people the benefit of the doubt that they're just innocently curious and don't know how it could be offensive because they've never felt discrimination for that particular reason. Do we really think the BRF know anything about colorism in black culture? No, I highly, highly doubt it. I don't think it was malicious. Ignorance, meet knowledge when you get called out for it as H has done.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who confuses a private exchange of vows for a wedding????  A fantasist.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I mean frankly I'm a little side eyeing Harry in the first place for assigning the racism label to whoever in his family was asking about the baby's color.* He partied in a freakin Nazi uniform! *Now, I've moved past it because he was ignorant, contrite, give him the benefit of the doubt, etc etc yet he doesn't seem willing to extend that same benefit to whichever family member he's talking about. It reeks of hypocrisy. I don't remember any family members coming out at that time with "...and one family member who I won't name actually made jest of anti-semitism. It was so awkward and hard to see."



Didn't it come out years later that Harry blamed William for the Nazi uniform? That he said William encouraged him to wear it.

Wouldn't it be weird if it all came down to a deep bitterness Harry has been nurturing for years?


----------



## maris.crane

bag-mania said:


> Charles doesn't come across as being a particularly warm, supportive man. That said, we are only hearing Harry's take and he certainly didn't reveal to Oprah any of the things HE said or did that might have prompted such a reaction from his father. In fact Harry and Meghan took great pains to try to present themselves as being totally blameless in everything.



Well, there are two sides to every story and I do believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. Some points could've been embellished on both sides.

However: I think Charles cutting off Harry for inelegantly leaving the BRF (even if he thinks Harry is being "held hostage" by Meghan) is something I can't get past - my feelings on BRF/Harry/Meghan remained the same as when I went in, but I had new opinions and thoughts about Charles. Especially with his own history, and that of his sibling (allegedly), I just think Charles being judge-y is rich.

(But I am not Royalty, so maybe I don't understand these things.)


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

lalame said:


> Honestly sometimes it's just curiosity that is ignorant (or unaware if you prefer) of social context or politeness. It's kind of like the "where do you come from" - yes, when you peel back the layers that is a loaded question, but I give most people the benefit of the doubt that they're just innocently curious and don't know how it could be offensive because they've never felt discrimination for that particular reason. Do we really think the BRF know anything about colorism in black culture? No, I highly, highly doubt it. I don't think it was malicious. Ignorance, meet knowledge when you get called out for it as H has done.



Hmmm... I see what you’re saying. Very plausible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Coconuts40 said:


> Today happens to be my day off, so I am also watching television and the media's response to the interview.
> The View, The Talk, American morning shows.... not one person suggested to fact check Meghans and Harry's claims.  They are all defending them and taking their word for everything said by them.  These are strong allegations they claimed last night,and I honestly feel an inquest is needed to get to the truth, no matter what the truth may be.  This is a circus.



Right? I have a background in media too, and this is just sh*tty journalism.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fame-w$ores



If this picture was taken on the same day as the lay-on-the-ground picture, she is definitely further along than they are telling people or she might have accidentally wore the wrong moon bump  And poor Archie is still hidden though someone in her circle already dropped a frontal shot of the cutie pie last week.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Wow... comparing a discussion on inherited features to colorism within the black community in this manner: “But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.”
> 
> *sigh*
> 
> I don’t have the time or energy to discuss the depth, history, and harm of colorism. Maybe someone else will. (It isn’t just a problem in America, either.)
> 
> ...Also, when did she describe herself as Caucasian?


Skin tone discussions ... lol have I got an anecdote for you .. hopefully this will be funny ... that is my intent 
I buy Hermès scarves, and follow all the chat here about scarf colors, we go on and on and on .... this scarf color does not flatter/go with my hair color (which I changed last week), my new malachite van cleef and arpels Alhambra necklace, and yes my skintone, and getting the scarf color to work with all three is a miracle  
we are fussy about scarf color and skin tones in the name of fashion and looking good, aren’t we all a bit fussy about color ?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Great comment from another site:

I don’t believe the part that when Meghan was suicidal (assuming that is true) that they couldn’t get her any help.

Harry was in therapy for years; why didn’t they call his therapist? In one of Charles’ biographies, it was revealed that he was in therapy for 14 years. He would have been a resource. Kate and William and Kate’s brother have had therapy. Harry and William
and Kate created the Heads Together initiative...

Meghan’s mother has a master’s degree in social work with a focus on mental health. Meghan had plenty of resources.

And most of all, since Meghan was 5 months pregnant, she would have been under the care of an OB-GYN. Surely she could have told her medical doctor that she was suicidal and help would have been provided.

The claim that Archie was denied a title due to his race also makes no sense. Typically, only the eldest son of the eldest son receives a title. The Queen made an exception for Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis to have titles alongside Prince George. Harry is the second son and not in the direct line of succession. Archie not being a prince has nothing to do with race. Even then, I’m not sure why Archie isn’t Lord Archie, Earl of Dumbarton. Surely Archie is entitled to use one of his father’s lesser titles? Look at Princess Eugenie’s newborn son; he doesn’t have a title.

Then there was Harry whining about how his family cut him off financially. Good heavens, you are 30 something years old! Supposedly they left the RF so they could be “financially independent”, so what’s the problem?

What strikes me is that Harry and Meghan told plenty of lies in the past, or are bending the truth now, because their version of events doesn’t add up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Didn't it come out years later that Harry blamed William for the Nazi uniform? That he said William encouraged him to wear it.
> 
> Wouldn't it be weird if it all came down to a deep bitterness Harry has been nurturing for years?



Hazzie hates that he will never be king.  Shakespeare, the Bible have plenty of stories of jealous family members.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who confuses a private exchange of vows for a wedding????  A fantasist.




Stans coming out claiming no harm was done in 3...2...1. While they are right, I think this is completely disturbed.


----------



## marietouchet

maris.crane said:


> Well, there are two sides to every story and I do believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. Some points could've been embellished on both sides.
> 
> However: I think Charles cutting off Harry for inelegantly leaving the BRF (even if he thinks Harry is being "held hostage" by Meghan) is something I can't get past - my feelings on BRF/Harry/Meghan remained the same as when I went in, but I had new opinions and thoughts about Charles. Especially with his own history, and that of his sibling (allegedly), I just think Charles being judge-y is rich.
> 
> (But I am not Royalty, so maybe I don't understand these things.)


We don’t know for sure if they were ever cut off and when and why ..


----------



## bag-mania

@lalame *Here's a follow up to my post about how Harry blames William for the Nazi costume.*
Apparently he blames William for not mentoring him properly (sound familiar?). From one of the many biographies:

Prince Harry, reportedly, blamed Prince William for the backlash that he received after he was photographed wearing a Nazi costume.

In the book Battle of Brothers, author Robert Lacey said that Prince Harry thought that Prince William should be mentoring him.

When they bought costumes for the party together, the Duke of Cambridge didn’t try to talk Prince Harry out of wearing the Nazi costume. In fact, they even laughed about it on their way home.

But while at the bash, someone took a photo of Prince Harry wearing a Nazi costume and he was lambasted for it.

Prince William, on the other hand, bought a costume that features tight black leggings and furry paws.

“William laughed all the way back to Highgrove with the younger sibling he was supposed to be mentoring—and then onwards to the party together,” Lacey wrote.

Following the backlash, Prince Harry released an apology saying that it was a poor choice in costume. And behind closed doors, Meghan Markle’s husband, reportedly, resented how his brother got away so lightly.










						Prince Harry Blamed Prince William For The Backlash He Received After Wearing Nazi Costume
					

Prince Harry didn't like how Prince William didn't shoulder part of the blame for him wearing a Nazi costume at a party.




					www.entertaintimes.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Someone asked about Serena Williams (this thread moves too fast for me to find the post to quote so hope whoever it was will see this)!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oprah Winfrey's interview with Meghan and Harry pulls in 17.1 million viewers on CBS
					

Oprah Winfrey's highly anticipated interview with Prince Harry and wife Meghan was the most-watched nonsports program since 2020's Oscars telecast.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## SoCalGal2016

bisousx said:


> Charles, William, Kate and co. all have their own side of the story, but they will never be able to tell it in public. That’s the dirty game Harry & Meghan are playing.  They can throw any claim out there, and the royal family by protocol will not be able to officially dispute.



Agree! The royal family cannot officially dispute Meghan's claims, but they can use  the "invisible contract" Harry mentioned to control the allegations.  For example, have the press insinuate it was a non-royal, lower tier level member of their staff that made the skin color comment....removing the royal family from the drama.


----------



## maris.crane

marietouchet said:


> We don’t know for sure if they were ever cut off and when and why ..



I don’t know what one can call not taking your kids’ calls anything but emotionally cutting them off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has Hazzie ever claimed responsibility for anything?  




bag-mania said:


> @lalame *Here's a follow up to my post about how Harry blames William for the Nazi costume.*
> Apparently he blames William for not mentoring him properly (sound familiar?). From one of the many biographies:
> 
> Prince Harry, reportedly, blamed Prince William for the backlash that he received after he was photographed wearing a Nazi costume.
> 
> In the book Battle of Brothers, author Robert Lacey said that Prince Harry thought that Prince William should be mentoring him.
> 
> When they bought costumes for the party together, the Duke of Cambridge didn’t try to talk Prince Harry out of wearing the Nazi costume. In fact, they even laughed about it on their way home.
> 
> But while at the bash, someone took a photo of Prince Harry wearing a Nazi costume and he was lambasted for it.
> 
> Prince William, on the other hand, bought a costume that features tight black leggings and furry paws.
> 
> “William laughed all the way back to Highgrove with the younger sibling he was supposed to be mentoring—and then onwards to the party together,” Lacey wrote.
> 
> Following the backlash, Prince Harry released an apology saying that it was a poor choice in costume. And behind closed doors, Meghan Markle’s husband, reportedly, resented how his brother got away so lightly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Blamed Prince William For The Backlash He Received After Wearing Nazi Costume
> 
> 
> Prince Harry didn't like how Prince William didn't shoulder part of the blame for him wearing a Nazi costume at a party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

maris.crane said:


> I don’t know what one can call not taking your kids’ calls anything but emotionally cutting them off.



If my adult child [or anyone] verbally abuses me, I am not required to listen.  Clearly, Charles is trying to teach Hazzie how to be an adult. We don’t get to yell or berate other people, especially when we don’t get our way. Undoubtedly, Charles has witnessed this behavior many times through the years.


----------



## floatinglili

I’m not an apologist for anything amd I’m sorry I made you sigh.
Many Caucasian families do discuss skin tone but not as a judgement, perhaps more as a lighthearted family conversation or perhaps even as a bit of a tease. Colouris is an experience that is outside the points of reference iykwim.

Just as the British have their own personal experience and relationship with the nazi enemy of WW2 - yes, informed by the experience of the Europeans but also their own personal experience - so too they have their own social issues which for the broad majority is a deep and pernicious classism which was and in many ways still a defining historic social division.
And they also have their own experience of enjoying family resemblances or not.

MM has raised a vague secondhand discussion calculated to draw intense US media coverage, without details. To even speculate about the quality of that vague conversation makes me an ‘apologist’?
Hm I’m not sure on that.

ETA: sorry I somehow cannot manage to include the original quote for the conversation I am responding to.


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> In this day and age, things do need to be slimmed down. (IMO) The Monarchy isn't as relevant as it used to be. Again (IMO)


Yes I agree. I think this is the way it is going for all the royal houses. It will be a very slow process for the UK especially though.


----------



## pursekitten

lalame said:


> Honestly sometimes it's just curiosity that is ignorant (or unaware if you prefer) of social context or politeness. It's kind of like the "where do you come from" - yes, when you peel back the layers that is a loaded question, but I give most people the benefit of the doubt that they're just innocently curious and don't know how it could be offensive because they've never felt discrimination for that particular reason. Do we really think the BRF know anything about colorism in black culture? No, I highly, highly doubt it. I don't think it was malicious. Ignorance, meet knowledge when you get called out for it as H has done.



This is so very important. Racism and colorism can be conscious and overt or they can be subconscious and stem from the ignorance of lack of exposure or just thoughtlessness. Now, being of mixed race—to be seen as not black enough to be black and not white enough to be white—can be a toxic enough as a regular human, but compounded with having such a public position/job/presence/what have you that will never ever go away, THAT pressure has crushed people. That pressure almost irrevocably crushed MDS MM. She will forever be reminded that she is different through micro-aggressions, thoughtlessness, and malicious intent.

What an incredible Oprah interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

Jayne1 said:


> I think they have started talking again so maybe Charles was just angry and needed a break from all the drama. Is this right? IDK, but parents can also be flawed people who may react to things impulsively out of anger. I think same can be said for M and her father.



Maybe Charles stopped taking his calls after Harry made 1001 petulant calls demanding money.




bag-mania said:


> Charles doesn't come across as being a particularly warm, supportive man. That said, we are only hearing Harry's take and he certainly didn't reveal to Oprah any of the things HE said or did that might have prompted such a reaction from his father. In fact Harry and Meghan took great pains to try to present themselves as being totally blameless in everything.



Charles was very warm to Meg.  Just look at the wedding, walking her down the aisle; walking her mother out of the church, paying for the outlandish spending she did on her designer wardrobe.  He paid through the nose, and I am sure it was to keep the peace.  Harry's just mad he stopped the checks.  And stopped listening to him gripe about it.




dangerouscurves said:


> Oh wow! The racists apologists in this thread.... To do what she did, Meghan is really brave. The royal could pay the best 'person' to take care of her. She said what she said, no need to interpret it other way. The royals never tried to clean name. Period!



This is totally unclear.  She said it so it's true?  No.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has Hazzie ever claimed responsibility for anything?



No, he has not. Come to think of it, neither has Meghan. When anything goes wrong, it is always someone else's fault. They cannot be held accountable. Everything is always done _to_ them by mean people. I think we can see what the common bond was that brought these two lovebirds together.


----------



## muddledmint

maris.crane said:


> Well, there are two sides to every story and I do believe the truth is somewhere in the middle. Some points could've been embellished on both sides.
> 
> However: I think Charles cutting off Harry for inelegantly leaving the BRF (even if he thinks Harry is being "held hostage" by Meghan) is something I can't get past - my feelings on BRF/Harry/Meghan remained the same as when I went in, but I had new opinions and thoughts about Charles. Especially with his own history, and that of his sibling (allegedly), I just think Charles being judge-y is rich.
> 
> (But I am not Royalty, so maybe I don't understand these things.)


Charles stopped taking Harry’s calls for a short period of time. Harry did say that he is now speaking to Charles again. Moreover, Charles has been so generous with Meghan and Harry. He was basically providing almost their entire income and paying for her extravagant wardrobe, with  no appreciation. What is the big deal with him being hurt and not wanting to talk to Harry for a while? Meghan has completely cut off her father for years now and will probably never have contact with him again.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Not sure if you're all still keeping up with the trickle of info but thought this would validate some of you.  Um does that just leave William and Kate?
> 
> View attachment 5015251


 
And Charles.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

CarryOn2020 said:


> If my adult child [or anyone] verbally abuses me, I am not required to listen.  Clearly, Charles is trying to teach Hazzie how to be an adult. We don’t get to yell or berate other people, especially when we don’t get our way. Undoubtedly, Charles has witnessed this behavior many times through the years.



Charles not taking Harry's calls is because Charles is a sh!tty parent, not because this is a teachable moment. Remember Charles "whatever love is" comment he made during his engagement interview with Diana?  Charles has relationship/intimacy issues and probably has no clue what to say or how to resolve issues with his family.  It's easier for him to not take calls than try to resolve things.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And Camilla.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

I think I got the just of this thread: anything that comes out of Meghan or Harry’s mouth is a lie and the royal family is faultless for their departure. *shrugs*

I haven’t much else to say on the matter; TBH I’d rather discuss bags and jewelry. Lol


----------



## lulilu

SoCalGal2016 said:


> Charles not taking Harry's calls is because Charles is a sh!tty parent, not because this is a teachable moment. Remember Charles "whatever love is" comment he made during his engagement interview with Diana?  Charles has relationship/intimacy issues and probably has no clue what to say or how to resolve issues with his family.  It's easier for him to not take calls than try to resolve things.



And of course you are concluding that Charles has not grown or matured or changed over the years.  Truth is, he spent tons of time with the boys after Diana died.  I don't think you know what you are talking about and letting your dislike/hatred of Charles color your opinions.

Maybe Harry's been having one of his widely-acknowledged temper tantrums and Charles is tired of it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> I agree, I think a lot more needs to be revealed about the CONTEXT of that conversation. Context is everything. It could have been any one of these possible scenarios and I'm not comfortable yet making a judgment until I know more:
> 
> Malicious remark made by haters = racism
> Innocent remark made by haters = no one at fault
> Malicious remark made by people who love them = ignorance or racism
> Innocent remark made by people who love them = no one at fault



I agree. MM was what I consider to be purposely vague about the context and the speaker.


----------



## SoCalGal2016

lulilu said:


> And of course you are concluding that Charles has not grown or matured or changed over the years.  Truth is, he spent tons of time with the boys after Diana died.  I don't think you know what you are talking about and letting your dislike/hatred of Charles color your opinions.



I don't have dislike or hatred of Charles at all. Just speaking as a Mom, I have to be the better person and listen to my kids issue and not cut them off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Patience. The truth will come out. 
The wedding story has already been debunked. Lie/mislead/deceive about that, what else will they lie/mislead/deceive about?


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Colorism is absolutely harmful, in every non-white society (I'm just not as confident it's the same among Caucasians). But I think there needs to be a lot more context given about what the conversation was with the family. The way Harry said it, "how's he going to look?" "what will the color of his skin be?" seems more curiosity than malicious to me. I'm a WOC and my husband is white. We've absolutely had discussions about how our child would look, would they be lighter or darker, what their hair would be like, etc. Am I racist against my own (non-existent) child? Not unless I followed it up with "... and I hope he doesn't look like ___" It's the judgment that's harmful, not the question. That's what I'm missing from what they've said.



You aren't supposed to fact check this stuff. We are supposed to take any claims of racism as a given. The fact presented during the summer riots were often lies, too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I don't have dislike or hatred of Charles at all. Just speaking as a Mom, I have to be the better person and listen to my kids issue and not cut them off.



Charles has boundaries. Every parent should.  I support anyone who does not allow their adult child to abuse them.









						Royal 'revelations' put to the test
					

Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Jktgal said:


> You don't learn bullying overnight. I am sure the stories from Canada will trickle out. She wasn't a big star but there were probably stagehands etc to be bossed/bullied around. Bullies seek out those with less power than themselves. Stories from the Africa/Australia tour will also trickle out now that BRF is not putting a lid on them.
> 
> Need to stock up on some popcorn.


I recall reading more than a few stories (can't recall where though) .. where various members on the Suits set said she was a major-league DIVA and even though she was on the 2nd-tier of the show (not in the 'STAR' sphere), she sure acted like it!  Doesn't surprise me one bit having heard stories about her in her earlier years!


----------



## dangerouscurves

lulilu said:


> Maybe Charles stopped taking his calls after Harry made 1001 petulant calls demanding money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles was very warm to Meg.  Just look at the wedding, walking her down the aisle; walking her mother out of the church, paying for the outlandish spending she did on her designer wardrobe.  He paid through the nose, and I am sure it was to keep the peace.  Harry's just mad he stopped the checks.  And stopped listening to him gripe about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is totally unclear.  She said it so it's true?  No.


Maybe what she said is true, maybe it's not but people are so quick to dismiss it. I see y'all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> I’m not an apologist for anything amd I’m sorry I made you sigh.
> Many Caucasian families do discuss skin tone but not as a judgement, perhaps more as a lighthearted family conversation or perhaps even as a bit of a tease. Colouris is an experience that is outside the points of reference iykwim.
> 
> Just as the British have their own personal experience and relationship with the nazi enemy of WW2 - yes, informed by the experience of the Europeans but also their own personal experience - so too they have their own social issues which for the broad majority is a deep and pernicious classism which was and in many ways still a defining historic social division.
> And they also have their own experience of enjoying family resemblances or not.
> 
> MM has raised a vague secondhand discussion calculated to draw intense US media coverage, without details. To even speculate about the quality of that vague conversation makes me an ‘apologist’?
> Hm I’m not sure on that.
> 
> ETA: sorry I somehow cannot manage to include the original quote for the conversation I am responding to.



I’m a bit confused by what you mean here. 
To the first point just because someone thinks what they are saying  is a lighthearted joke doesn’t mean the recipient will take it as a joke or that it cannot be hurtful or have hurtful implications/consequences. For example, there could be a joke about gay men that is funny on tv but if it’s constantly repeated to the one gay guy at the office and he then notices people are treating him differently then it has escalated into something harmful. But for other gay men that may never happen: maybe everyone has a laugh and moves on or it never comes up.  I think the point here is you can’t really make blanket statements about people’s intentions. You’ve got to evaluate it situation by situation.

Second, I’d say a lot has happened since WW2 and as ingrained as it is on Europe’s psyche it is strange to consider it so prominently but not anything else.  Britain was still an empire in WW2, E.g, that’s a pretty big difference.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time to educate — the UK has laws about accusing people = libel
> 
> 
> 
> https://mobile.twitter.com/royalreporter
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015327


According to O, who went on TV this morning and told Gayle that H called O to clarify -- the concern? accusation? comment? about skin colour did _no_t come from Philip or the Queen.

I still say a staff member, if it happened at all.


----------



## muddledmint

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I think I got the just of this thread: anything that comes out of Meghan or Harry’s mouth is a lie and the royal family is faultless for their departure. *shrugs*
> 
> I haven’t much else to say on the matter; TBH I’d rather discuss bags and jewelry. Lol


Basically, yes. 
Most of their lies can be verified as lies or half truths with some basic fact checking. And while some of the other things she is claiming cannot be confirmed, there is really no reason to believe someone who has made so many other obvious lies and misrepresentations. She is banking on Americans being distracted by the insinuations of racism and blinded by ignorance of the British royal family and England in general.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> Patience. The truth will come out.
> The wedding story has already been debunked. Lie/mislead/deceive about that, what else will they lie/mislead/deceive about?



I knew that would would be easy to fact check.


----------



## scarlet555

Coconuts40 said:


> Today happens to be my day off, so I am also watching television and the media's response to the interview.
> The View, The Talk, American morning shows.... not one person suggested to fact check Meghans and Harry's claims.  They are all defending them and taking their word for everything said by them.  These are strong allegations they claimed last night,and I honestly feel an inquest is needed to get to the truth, no matter what the truth may be.  This is a circus.


very sad circus, journalism is DEAD.  people are such vultures, anyone that questions her is labeled a racist so go figure.


----------



## Jayne1

SoCalGal2016 said:


> Charles not taking Harry's calls is because Charles is a sh!tty parent, not because this is a teachable moment. Remember Charles "whatever love is" comment he made during his engagement interview with Diana?  Charles has relationship/intimacy issues and probably has no clue what to say or how to resolve issues with his family.  It's easier for him to not take calls than try to resolve things.


Charles was in love with a woman for years and still is, it was a life-long love. He was forced to marry a virgin, someone in the aristocracy, no common folk allowed at that time. They decided Diana was appropriate and that was that.

"Whatever love is" almost sounds reasonable to me when asked if he loved the girl he barely knew.


----------



## mdcx

For the ardent Meghan supporters reading here, did you happen to notice that nothing is ever Meghan’s fault? There is always someone else to blame - her sister-in-law Kate, her sister Samantha, her dad, the media, the entire British Royal Family, the British public, the Wimbledon audience...
It’s not a sign of a well person when they can’t accept responsibility for any of the troubles in their life...


----------



## jennlt

SoCalGal2016 said:


> In comparison, we also have private neighborhood security at our house and pay $30 per month


My SimpliSafe alarm monitoring is $24.95/month. H & M should look into that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> According to O, who went on TV this morning and told Gayle that H called O to clarify -- the concern? accusation? comment? about skin colour did _no_t come from Philip or the Queen.
> 
> I still say a staff member, if it happened at all.



Hazzie called to clarify because he knows accusing QE and PP is very different than accusing someone else.  It was his CYA call.


----------



## pursekitten

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Wow... comparing a discussion on inherited features to colorism within the black community in this manner: “But it is also common amongst caucasians to discuss skin tone as part of the overall package of family resemblance (who is more olive, who is more fair, which side of the family the baby will resemble etc). I am sure POC also discuss skin tone with family amongst when discussing which child resembles who.”
> 
> *sigh*
> 
> I don’t have the time or energy to discuss the depth, history, and harm of colorism. Maybe someone else will. (It isn’t just a problem in America, either.)
> 
> ...Also, when did she describe herself as Caucasian?



All this and more! I am Puerto Rican, my family is both Black and Caucasian, and growing up my elders flippantly discussed skin tone, the shape of people's noses, and thickness of their lips, etc. Looking back as an adult, I understand those moments were colorism, racism, and "anti-blackness" at work stemming from colonialism. Problems and accidentally furthering colorism Puerto Ricans and other Hispanic and Latinx have issues identifying as Black, Caucasian, or Taino. Insightful perspectives below that just scratch the surface:

"No, I’m Not A Proud Latina" by Dash Harris
"Puerto Rico, Island Of Racial Harmony?" by Adrian Florido via Code Switch



ouiouilexiaussi said:


> The fact that it came up at all (if it was) is puzzling and saddening to me. Like, why does it matter and when will it not matter? Context would be very helpful, of course, so I guess I’ll try not to speculate on it.



It had to come up because it's a part of MM's identity that's so vehemently attacked so it is a part of the conversion. Yes, it's sad but if it's not addressed and questioned then people don't know it's wrong.

I hope these conversations bring healthy awareness and change.


----------



## chicinthecity777

So they hired private doctors for her pregnancy but couldn't get access to help for her mental health issues? I don't understand it. Her husband was working with mental health charities and was very out spoken about mental health! Why didn't she seek help? What's said between her and a health care professional would be privileged just like her private doctors. So would be no issue there. Why contact BP HR? It's just too odd!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> I knew that would would be easy to fact check.



If only OW knew the UK laws, she would have challenged MM. Wonder how she feels knowing she was duped.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pursekitten said:


> That pressure almost irrevocably crushed MDS.



Who is MDS?


----------



## CarryOn2020

pursekitten said:


> I hope these conversations bring healthy awareness and change.



IMO the healthy awareness and change will happen when the conversations are open and honest and without a hidden agenda.  H&M want money and security from Charles. Surely they wouldn’t try to extort a family member, would they?


----------



## muddledmint

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they hired private doctors for her pregnancy but couldn't get access to help for her mental health issues? I don't understand it. Her husband was working with mental health charities and was very out spoken about mental health! Why didn't she seek help? What's said between her and a health care professional would be privileged just like her private doctors. So would be no issue there. Why contact BP HR? It's just too odd!
> View attachment 5015382


I guess she really is a good actress after all because I don’t think anyone else could keep a straight face while telling a ridiculous lie like that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Personally I have not read any press or commentary that attacked Meghan’s racial identity, and I regularly read the Daily Mail comments which can be very rough. I would be cautious assuming much about the racial politics etc of regular posters here - we are a diverse bunch and you don’t know a lot about our racial makeup, our spouses, children, friends, communities etc. My life has been, and is, full of diversity and Meghans race was never an issue in my eyes.


----------



## maris.crane

CarryOn2020 said:


> If my adult child [or anyone] verbally abuses me, I am not required to listen.  Clearly, Charles is trying to teach Hazzie how to be an adult. We don’t get to yell or berate other people, especially when we don’t get our way. Undoubtedly, Charles has witnessed this behavior many times through the years.



We have no more proof Harry was abusive verbally or demanding financially; than we do Charles stopped taking his calls; but as I said - the truth is likely somewhere in the middle with this drama.

Personally, I can absolutely believe there's a level of detachment a parent (i.e. Charles) can have towards their own kid (Harry) when that parent themselves was perhaps raised by governesses' and staff. But as a non-BRF, and middle class person, _I personally_ saw that moment and was disgusted; and I found Harry completely credible. 

Regarding being financially cut off, to me, is a completely different story - H&M can make their own money at this point. A dissertation on how wonderful Charles is will not change my mind at this point.


----------



## bisbee

CarryOn2020 said:


> If my adult child [or anyone] verbally abuses me, I am not required to listen.  Clearly, Charles is trying to teach Hazzie how to be an adult. We don’t get to yell or berate other people, especially when we don’t get our way. Undoubtedly, Charles has witnessed this behavior many times through the years.


How do you know that Harry has verbally abused Charles?  Were you present?  Did you listen to their phone calls?  You assume Charles has witnessed this many times throughout the years...what are you basing this on?  And no, I did not use another name for Harry...I use his real name when referring to him.  The nicknames used in this thread are very juvenile in my opinion.


----------



## pursekitten

Allisonfaye said:


> I agree. MM was what I consider to be purposely vague about the context and the speaker.



Agreed, MM was purposely vague about the context because it would be unhelpful to know the details. To me, that was classy on her part not to point fingers at specific people on who asked those ignorant questions about her baby. The person/people who asked those  questions know they are in the wrong and hopefully will evolve to embrace diversity and acknowledge their own unconscious bias in the future. Having the conversation about colorism and racism in public is more important than dragging specific people for their ignorance, IMO.


----------



## pursekitten

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is MDS?



Sorry, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. I'll edit to use MM instead for clarity.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If only OW knew the UK laws, she would have challenged MM. Wonder how she feels knowing she was duped.



Oprah got $9 million for the interview. I think she's feeling great today.


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I think I got the just of this thread: anything that comes out of Meghan or Harry’s mouth is a lie and the royal family is faultless for their departure. *shrugs*
> 
> I haven’t much else to say on the matter; TBH I’d rather discuss bags and jewelry. Lol



Truth is always somewhere in the middle. I don't think either side is faultless or either side has a monopoly on lies. One thing I learned that I agree sucked was the whole Kate making her cry thing. The injustice of being blamed for something that happened to you just universally sucks. That situation in particular pushes many of my buttons. I'm glad she got that out finally but I can't say I was surprised at KP not wanting to kill those rumors. Whenever you put out a statement, you're drawing attention to the allegations... which just feeds them more and more. It invites the media to poke the bear just to get the reaction. Kind of like paying ransom money... you don't want to encourage the behavior unless you HAVE to.


----------



## mia55

So what happens next? Queen has a policy to not stop and fight with every barking dog, as a result for a week media will enjoy the gossip and then move on to the next one. The only loser is Harry who lost all the trust and now stuck with Megan. Do they understand that nobody cares what these mid-life crisis brats feel, rather everyone is waiting to get a reaction from BRF. Once there is no reaction, media will move on to next circus leaving these two clowns behind. There’s going to be a very rude awakening for these middle aged people.


----------



## poopsie

bubablu said:


> OMG, Michael Moore just wrote a post on Facebook all in M defense. I though he was joking! But no. I'm appalled.



Appalling.....absolutely
Surprising? not when you consider the source


----------



## Allisonfaye

pursekitten said:


> Agreed, MM was purposely vague about the context because it would be unhelpful to know the details. To me, that was classy on her part not to point fingers at specific people on who asked those ignorant questions about her baby. The person/people who asked those  questions know they are in the wrong and hopefully will evolve to embrace diversity and acknowledge their own unconscious bias in the future. Having the conversation about colorism and racism in public is more important than dragging specific people for their ignorance, IMO.



Well, it's easy to lob bombs at a general target. No one can call the out. If they told who it was, they would have a shot at disputing it, which is why I don't believe it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

For the skin tone incident, I think an inquiry should be launched and H&M should be invited to name the person in private and if found to be true then give them an opportunity to be re-educated. I think it's the right thing to do.


----------



## pursekitten

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the healthy awareness and change will happen when the conversations are open and honest and without a hidden agenda.  H&M want money and security from Charles. Surely they wouldn’t try to extort a family member, would they?



Exactly, so refusing to publicly drag someone (as PH said in the interview) would indicate they don't have the intention to extort family. In the interview they also touched on getting death threats and racially charged vitriolic messages, which understandably made them concerned about the safety of their children and explained why a security detail would be so important. 

Consider that all previous Presidents of the United States are "by law, former presidents are entitled to a pension, staff, office expenses, medical care, health insurance, and Secret Service protection" paid for by government taxes unless they refuse these benefits. @lalame (thank you!) touched on how security details are expensive, let alone lifetime security details. People will never leave PH, MM, and their children alone because of their birth so it's understandable that the lowest bar to meet is to provide security against attempts on their lives.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie = yes, I refer to him with a childish nickname because his behavior is indeed childish IMO.   Throughout these 3,200+ pages, links are provided that show he behaves immaturely and rudely, even to QE. Additionally, listening to him speak in this OW interview, he seems to lack the necessary critical thinking skills to understand his situation. He will never be king. Time for him to move forward.


----------



## bag-mania

mia55 said:


> So what happens next? Queen has a policy to not stop and fight with every barking dog, as a result for a week media will enjoy the gossip and then move on to the next one. The only loser is Harry who lost all the trust and now stuck with Megan. Do they understand that nobody cares what these mid-life crisis brats feel, rather everyone is waiting to get a reaction from BRF. Once there is no reaction, media will move on to next circus leaving these two clowns behind. There’s going to be a very rude awakening for these middle aged people.



Harry and Meghan will be able to ride the fallout from this interview for as much as another year. They will continue to promote Archewell, their Netflix shows (whenever they are made), Spotify, etc., until even those who believe they were wronged lose interest in them.

At some point they need to show they can stand up on their own two feet and accomplish something by themselves (besides a 2-hour long  whinefest).


----------



## maris.crane

muddledmint said:


> Obviously! How can you even compare the two. But just because one is a national nightmare doesn’t mean that Meghan can’t be criticized? If she were just living quietly doing “service” and not complaining about her oh so terrible experience, that would be one thing. But she asked for this by coming out with an attention seeking two hour lie-a-thon on the world stage.



Well, I think a more apt comparison for Meghan - IMHO - would be someone like Paris Hilton or a celebutante (not that the Hiltons are some US royal family). I just find the amount of vitriol directed toward this woman over the top; when she hasn't done anything to really warrant it (kinda like how I feel about Paris Hilton in 2021.) 

I absolutely think she can expect some negative press - she's a public figure, but I do find the comments in this thread defending the BRF and bashing her consistently, claiming that any good she does is just for press... downright bizarre.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

So, I don't have time right now to go through the last 30+ pages of this thread, so does anyone have a good recap? I didn't watch, just read a quick news article this morning, and this is what was summarized there:

* Somebody at the Palace made a comment about baby Archie's skin tone or skin color.
* Meghan approached the Palace about her mental health, that she was miserable, but they didn't have any solutions for her.
* They were actually married in a small private ceremony prior to their big public wedding. (This has possibly been debunked?)
* They were financially cut-off a year ago and had to survive on Harry's multi-million inheritance from Diana.
* She gets along just fine with the Queen.
* They are having a girl. (Congratulations.)

Anything else? 

Ratings were apparently good, about 17.1 million viewers.  That seems small to me when 100+ million people watch the Super Bowl or a big TV series finale but maybe it's big for this kind of thing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I thought there was a disagreement about whether the little girls should wear tights or be bare-legged


IRC Catherine asked for a refitting because Charlotte's dress didn't fit properly but was ignored.


----------



## muddledmint

After this interview and all the stories coming out about the bullying claims (in the TIMES!!), I see how she fits this mold to a T:

from Mayo Clinic:

Signs and symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder and the severity of symptoms vary. People with the disorder can:


Have an exaggerated sense of self-importance
Have a sense of entitlement and require constant, excessive admiration
Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
Exaggerate achievements and talents
Be preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
Believe they are superior and can only associate with equally special people
Monopolize conversations and belittle or look down on people they perceive as inferior
Expect special favors and unquestioning compliance with their expectations
Take advantage of others to get what they want
Have an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
Be envious of others and believe others envy them
Behave in an arrogant or haughty manner, coming across as conceited, boastful and pretentious
Insist on having the best of everything — for instance, the best car or office
At the same time, people with narcissistic personality disorder have trouble handling anything they perceive as criticism, and they can:


Become impatient or angry when they don't receive special treatment
Have significant interpersonal problems and easily feel slighted
React with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make themselves appear superior
Have difficulty regulating emotions and behavior
Experience major problems dealing with stress and adapting to change
Feel depressed and moody because they fall short of perfection
Have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation


----------



## purseinsanity

justwatchin said:


> I’d like to know how she was friends with Eugenie?How could that have come about?


Some friend!  Stole the bride's thunder by announcing her pregnancy.  With friends like that...


----------



## Hermes Zen

rose60610 said:


> Make up for lost time, Hermes would appreciate it!


I wish! I woke up to a ton of pages to catch up on. My DH has been coming by to check on me so I can vent my feelings.  I had A LOT to say.   ohhh I see him ... he's coming back. He'd rather I read instead of shop.


----------



## bisbee

Are the blatantly racist articles published in the British press just to be dismissed or forgotten?  I know it has been a minute since they appeared, but that is something that’s, in my mind, is a major catalyst in this whole affair.  Those articles should be referred to EVERY time this whole subject is discussed.


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> Some friend!  Stole the bride's thunder by announcing her pregnancy.  With friends like that...


There is really no proof that they are friends.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I think is frustrating when people say there hasnt been any racism in the press coverage of MM and Archie.  There was the article about her coming from Compton and the drawing of Archie that I can think of Off the top of my head.

It’s a small part of their coverage, which was initially overwhelming glowing, but the racism was there. 

The Palace’s Policy of Never Complain Never Explain is something is think she just couldn’t understand and so she let things get to her. But that’s on Harry to have explained to her. Will made sure Kate wanted the Royal Life before she married into it. I think they should have waited a bit more before they got married and let her have more time to adjust to Royal Life before fully committing. 

Personally, if they go off and make their own money and do their own thing, more power to them. If I can get them out of my news feed I’ll be happy.


----------



## K.D.

Some of the unaired footage from the original interview is being shared by CBS I guess: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56324215 Harry discusses racism was the reason for leaving. I seem to have read in my local news a headline about Boris Johnson saying this interview and the consequences are a matter for the palace. So no request to remove titels as was suggested somewhere in this thread?

ETA: I just found Boris's comments in the link from the BBC


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> The question of who in the BRF made comments about Archie prior to birth , well not QEII or PP, an unnamed person
> 
> But, suspicions falls squarely on PC, W, K rather than on some minor member of which there are lots and lots , one of Gloucester grandkids for ex, we don’t know , the whole clan was assembled when MM announced pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding
> 
> nor do we know the circumstances, casual conversation ? Deliberate insult ? Joke that went wrong ? At a party where liquor was consumed and where recollections are fuzzy?
> 
> I don’t think Oprah pressed H on this , did H complain at the time the remark was made? Or later ? Did he allow the comment to slide at the time or pick up phone ?
> 
> to me, the lack of context for the remark is troubling
> 
> BTW, one of the Gloucester daughters went to Australia and married a person of Maori descent.



Harry was shocked ? Has he forgotten how he referred to an Asian colleague as “ our little paki????? “ unbelievable how he has been forgiven for that


----------



## bellecate

duna said:


> Slightly OT my 7th grandchild was born last Monday, March 1st, and she was named......DIANA obviously not for Diana Princess of Wales but for the Roman Goddess!!


Congratulations. Grandchildren are wonderful. My last granddaughter was born a few weeks ago. To keep it on topic, such a shame Archie's great grandmother doesn't get to know him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pursekitten said:


> Exactly, so refusing to publicly drag someone (as PH said in the interview) would indicate they don't have the intention to extort family. In the interview they also touched on getting death threats and racially charged vitriolic messages, which understandably made them concerned about the safety of their children and explained why a security detail would be so important.
> 
> Consider that all previous Presidents of the United States are "by law, former presidents are entitled to a pension, staff, office expenses, medical care, health insurance, and Secret Service protection" paid for by government taxes unless they refuse these benefits. @lalame (thank you!) touched on how security details are expensive, let alone lifetime security details. People will never leave PH, MM, and their children alone because of their birth so it's understandable that the lowest bar to meet is to provide security against attempts on their lives.



I see it differently. By telling the world that “someone in the family“ made a racist comment, they are letting the person know that they could easily name the person, too. That is more threatening than actually naming the person. It is manipulative behavior. It is playing a game with the truth. Will I tell or won’t I? Remember these are 40 yr old people.

Once they decided to leave the UK, why would they expect their security paid for?  I’m not questioning the need for it, just who pays. He is no longer working for the BRF, why would they pay his bills?  Why should Charles?


----------



## muddledmint

Sol Ryan said:


> I think is frustrating when people say there hasnt been any racism in the press coverage of MM and Archie.  There was the article about her coming from Compton and the drawing of Archie that I can think of Off the top of my head.
> 
> It’s a small part of their coverage, which was initially overwhelming glowing, but the racism was there.
> 
> The Palace’s Policy of Never Complain Never Explain is something is think she just couldn’t understand and so she let things get to her. But that’s on Harry to have explained to her. Will made sure Kate wanted the Royal Life before she married into it. I think they should have waited a bit more before they got married and let her have more time to adjust to Royal Life before fully committing.
> 
> Personally, if they go off and make their own money and do their own thing, more power to them. If I can get them out of my news feed I’ll be happy.


Links?
She knew what she was getting into. Her childhood friends said she was obsessed with Diana and read her biography and wanted to be a princess. To claim now that she was soooo naive and didn’t even know that she had to curtsy to the queen is disingenuous.


----------



## bisbee

Essaeeeee said:


> I think the poster you quoted is  Camilla lol. She seems super defensive of the BRF.


Camilla posting (or even reading) this forum?  That’s ridiculous!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Picture drop!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015323


Archie is literally nothing but a prop.  A prop for their photo ops and a prop for the propaganda.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

gelbergirl said:


> What the heck happened at the fitting???



Depends on who you ask........and what day it is...........and what _time_ of day it is...........and where Mercury happens to be at the moment............etc


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has Hazzie ever claimed responsibility for anything?


Nope.  That's why he and Meg get along so well!  They are never responsible for their actions and anything negative is always someone else's fault.


----------



## muddledmint

bisbee said:


> Are the blatantly racist articles published in the British press just to be dismissed or forgotten?  I know it has been a minute since they appeared, but that is something that’s, in my mind, is a major catalyst in this whole affair.  Those articles should be referred to EVERY time this whole subject is discussed.


Which articles are these? 
also, how does that explain or excuse her bald faced lies?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> No, he has not. Come to think of it, neither has Meghan. When anything goes wrong, it is always someone else's fault. They cannot be held accountable. Everything is always done _to_ them by mean people. I think we can see what the common bond was that brought these two lovebirds together.


Sorry just saw your post, LOL!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisbee said:


> Are the blatantly racist articles published in the British press just to be dismissed or forgotten?  I know it has been a minute since they appeared, but that is something that’s, in my mind, is a major catalyst in this whole affair.  Those articles should be referred to EVERY time this whole subject is discussed.



There are two distinct institutions  that need to be fixed. One group cannot fix the other, can they?
1. The tabloid press - No one is saying forget those articles.  Almost all have said they should be held accountable. Maybe the consumers could stop buying those rags. That would help put them out of business.

2. The palace, the monarchy - needs to be investigated, policies need to be re-examined, corrections made.  Just as with any other corporation, publicly funded or not.

Who is saying not to investigate?

ETA: Sure, it is awful that these racist comments happened to MM. Just as it is awful that racist comments happen to anyone. Ideally, her incidents could be used to educate people, so the world can be a better place.

ETA2:  Looking at that stuff is poison to the mind. Poison. We must protect our minds and hearts at all costs. Best not to look, not to fixate on it, certainly not to buy it or support the advertisers.  When we all agree to stop it, we can have a huge impact.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?


We provide for former presidents and only minor children until 16.  On occasion executive order might extend that.  ***** extended for his family for 6 months. ******* extended for Chelsea and G Bush extended for his daughters as well.  This does not compare to H as a non working royal. For example, Prince Philip though retired would qualify as a senior royal.  Harry has walked away, stepped back, or whatever and left the UK.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Charles has boundaries. Every parent should.  *I support anyone who does not allow their adult child to abuse them.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal 'revelations' put to the test
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Amen.  I have witnessed first hand for the past 25 years how my now 58 year old SIL abuses her 92 and 83 year old parents.  Demanding they pay for her housing, car, spending, etc.  If they ever try to stop, she threatens suicide, not because she actually has mental health issues, but because she's a manipulative, conniving, witch.  My MIL is so fearful she'll try (she never has), that she ALWAYS gives in to SIL's demands, and is now expecting hubby and his brother to carry on the responsibility/burden.  It's a parent's job to love and support their child, and teach them life lessons, at least until they're 18 years old.  It is NOT a parent's responsibility to fund their child until the parent dies and beyond.    Grow the F up, Haz.  You're already a father of one, almost 2.  I hope your children turn out better than you and your conniving wife.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Allisonfaye said:


> And Charles.



And Camilla


----------



## TC1

They knew after their first tour the Royal work wasn't for them "we were so exhausted after having to be ON all the time"
I'm sorry but this is funny. A) aren't you an actress that is "on" for hours at a time? and B) Harry has been doing this to an extent his entire life
We know they didn't WANT to shake hands and hand out small prizes. They only wanted the patronages where they could shine. Harry eluded to this with the comment of "history repeating itself" meaning..like Diana, Meghan could outshine the blood heir.


----------



## Sol Ryan

muddledmint said:


> Links?
> She knew what she was getting into. Her childhood friends said she was obsessed with Diana and read her biography and wanted to be a princess. To claim now that she was soooo naive and didn’t even know that she had to curtsy to the queen is disingenuous.



Oh, I’m not saying she didn’t know what she was getting into... that’s malarky.

I‘m just saying there were some racist press articles. Just off the top of my head...

BBC Writer Fired for Archie Tweet

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-s-girlfriend-actress-Meghan-Markles.html

ttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3909362/RACHEL-JOHNSON-Sorry-Harry-beautiful-bolter-failed-Mum-Test.html


----------



## Lodpah

My 2 daughters are half black. When the second one was born some relatives said . . . she’s darker than so and takes after her father. When the first one was born some said she looks nothing like you she’s darker. Did I get offended? Not at all. They were darker than me and to this day no one thinks they’re my daughters as they took the dad’s side. 

For your amusement one of my daughters and I were in Italy shopping and one of the Italian sales person thought I was her maid. My daughter corrected her and we all laughed. I don’t care. As long as humanity is alive on this planet we will always have ignorant people . . . how you handle and correct that person is important.

There is only one time though that my daughter actually said something at Barney’s. She did confront the sales person directly but firmly. We didn’t need drama. After that the sales person and I became acquainted and she would be so helpful. Sometimes education is the key. That’s it.


----------



## bisousx

elvisfan4life said:


> Go to another thread then if you can’t stay on topic there are plenty of others to discuss bags and racism too




Um, that’s not kind at all. All are welcome here, except people who come in here to attack or troll others.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a perfect training interview for all HR departments. She is not answering the questions because she wants to control what you think. Without stating it directly, she leaves the impression that W&K or C&C were concerned about skin color. If ever questioned directly, she will say, “I never said that.” Technically, true, but she knows exactly what she is doing.





mellibelly said:


> I’m not watching and just going by your recaps, but maybe the “family” that had this convo with Harry (if it indeed happened) is Phillip. He’s ancient and known to say offensive things. There is no freaking way this was Charles, Camilla, William or Kate. I can’t imagine the queen either.





bag-mania said:


> She is making a lot of inflammatory claims but not naming names.


Or, maybe them making such inflammatory claims WITHOUT bothering to name names is because it's all a lie. I wouldn't put anything past these two, especially with her being a narcissist & perpetual victim (and lier) and seemingly becoming more desperate in finding ways to be a victim and garner sympathy.
If you are going to make claims like that about an individual person/people on an international platform, then why not stand tall, pull out the receipts and name names?








EverSoElusive said:


> She had to turn over her passport, DL and keys. But she got to fly to NYC for baby shower








misskittee said:


> I am a therapist, working in behavioral health, and I find this very difficult to believe. She speaks of her lethality as if she were talking about her Hermès collection. I never want to dismiss someone's pain but the underlying motivation is not to speak about mental health and bring awareness but to create a narrative of victimization and blame. Ultimately, the truth is likely somewhere in between. I am sure it was difficult but she is relishing in sharing these biased details with the world right now.







Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are not watching, here is a picture of the scenario from DM:
> View attachment 5014540










DrDior said:


> This interview proves the old saying, "It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it."











lalame said:


> I think everyone has a RIGHT to air their grievance for sure but the question is when does it become counter-productive? You normally don't leave a job by emailing everyone trashing your boss... ending a friendship by blasting that person all over your facebook... stop talking to family members by airing their dirty laundry all over the neighborhood... You just peace out and move on. This doesn't sound like they did anything illegal or abusive towards her that would justify a huge tell all like this so it seems out of proportion.








CarryOn2020 said:


> Y’all, she had to learn the UK anthem!!!  It is different from the USA anthem !!! Whaaaa???!!!!


I can't understand what her problem is. It's such a simple anthem to learn, probably one of the easiest. If she finds it hard to learn a simple song, then she really isn't equipped for real life in the real world, she really does live in her own twisted fantasy world. Having to learn a national anthem, a national anthem who's lyrics are literally about your husbands own grandmother- the actual QUEEN? I mean, how does she manage to survive such hardship...






Megs said:


> He sounds like he is in it pretty solid right now, but hey, like she said she was putting on a front maybe he is? *The last thing she said on this interview is their story is "better than any fairytale you've ever read". I chuckled a bit at that, because the couples and people that I know that post about how great their lives are the most are usually the least happy.*


This!




melissatrv said:


> *What questions do you think Oprah should have asked? *
> 
> 
> Harry:  will you become a US citizen?
> Meghan:   Ask about her relationship with her Dad
> Meghan:  The Tiara gate incident
> 
> What is on your list?


_-What do your friends think about everything thas gone on?_ [Watch them panic in their seats trying to think of an answer because they don't have any friends left to give a damn about them and their sh*tty behaviour]

_-Why do you think it's OK to dismiss claims by your ex-staff members that you bullied and belittled them while working for you, instead of reflecting on those accusations and trying to understand and correct your bad behaviour and improve yourself as a person, BUT you are allowed to make claims that everyone in the world who doesn't fall to your feet in worship of you has bullied you and been mean to you without any details or evidence of such behaviour against you?

-Will you ever f*ck off and live a private life like you keep preaching about or is that another one of your lies you keep stirring in your cauldron ready to dish up and use to whine about the eViL media/people when they mention your names in any way you don't like. 'LeAvE uS AlOnE, wE wAnT pRiVaCy = pLeAsE dOn'T lEaVe uS aLoNe, wE nEeD AlL tHe AtTeNtIoN'_

-_Why are you so f**king annoying?_



Jaxion said:


> I still can't believe how brazenly she lies. Lies that are so easy to disprove and yet she's so sure that she can get away with and that it doesn't matter if she's called out.
> 
> *Honestly I'm glad I don't have anyone like her in my life. She's dangerous.*


Agreed.



AB Negative said:


> Oprah just glossed over so many problems without follow ups.  She makes a point in the beginning to say nothing is off limits then drops follow up questions on any inconsistencies.  The Australian trip is brought up, then it is switched over to Diana's trip.  Even H looked confused at that point.  MM's behavior in Australia is what turned everyone against her.  Throwing hot tea at someone because she didn't want tea?  What a privileged twit.  Also, it was very unfair and irresponsible of Oprah not to ask who exactly was racist and concerned with the baby's skin color.  Now the entire family and Firm look racist.  Another fluff piece by a LALA land insider.


----------



## muddledmint

The real gist of this interview, besides the lying, is that she blames racism for everything when the real cause of her unhappiness was that she was jealous that she wasn’t treated (and PROTECTED - it killed me how much she harped on that) the same as William and Kate. Because of racism, naturally. Not the fact that William and his family are in the direct line and higher ranking. And royal protocol and precedent. What are those piddling details anyway.


----------



## Sol Ryan

muddledmint said:


> The real gist of this interview, besides the lying, is that she blames racism for everything when the real cause of her unhappiness was that she was jealous that she wasn’t treated (and PROTECTED - it killed me how much she harped on that) the same as William and Kate. Because of racism, naturally. Not the fact that William and his family are in the direct line and higher ranking. And royal protocol and precedent. What are those piddling details anyway.



I don’t think she understood that the BRF is not a meritocracy..... it’s a hierarchy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are two distinct institutions  that need to be fixed. One group cannot fix the other, can they?
> 1. The tabloid press - No one is saying forget those articles.  Almost all have said they should be held accountable. Maybe the consumers could stop buying those rags. That would help put them out of business.
> 
> 2. The palace, the monarchy - needs to be investigated, policies need to be re-examined, corrections made.  Just as with any other corporation, publicly funded or not.
> 
> Who is saying not to investigate?
> 
> ETA: Sure, it is awful that these racist comments happened to MM. Just as it is awful that racist comments happen to anyone. Ideally, her incidents could be used to educate people, so the world can be a better place.
> 
> ETA2:  Looking at that stuff is poison to the mind. Poison. We must protect our minds and hearts at all costs. Best not to look, not to fixate on it, certainly not to buy it or support the advertisers.  When we all agree to stop it, we can have a huge impact.



Racism is not OK... I do not support it in any form, but people being racist against you does not make everything coming out of your mouth gospel truth is what I am saying.  Also, for people who are self appointed spokesperson for racism, I am surprised crazy  hasn't said anything against 'hate crimes against Asians'-of course she is not Asian, but my goodness this woman has inserted herself at every occasions.  I guess it doesn't benefit her or ginger, so who cares if others sufffer...


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

lalame said:


> What @madamelizaking pointed out was president's children don't get protection indefinitely. The president and his/her spouse is guaranteed protection. In this analogy, only the Queen and Philip should be guaranteed protection.... not all God-knows-how-many children and grandchildren!


Would it not be appropriate for Charles to be protected ?


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> There is really no proof that they are friends.


That's my problem with what I've read here.  They didn't offer up much proof for any of their allegations.  It's like they threw out every nasty accusation they could to see what sticks and what bandwagon the public will bounce on and sympathize with them for.


----------



## muddledmint

Sol Ryan said:


> Oh, I’m not saying she didn’t know what she was getting into... that’s malarky.
> 
> I‘m just saying there were some racist press articles. Just off the top of my head...
> 
> BBC Writer Fired for Archie Tweet
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-s-girlfriend-actress-Meghan-Markles.html
> 
> ttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3909362/RACHEL-JOHNSON-Sorry-Harry-beautiful-bolter-failed-Mum-Test.html


That last one was pretty racist and the writer is vile. The fired bbc guy tweeted that on his own and was justly fired for it. But while things like this provide context, it still doesn’t excuse Meghan and Harry’s whining and lies.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Nothing says "We demand privacy and we fled the horrors of Britain to heal in America" like sitting down for a tell-all to Oprah. My favorite claim: 'I didn't plan to say anything shocking--but the BRF was concerned what color Archie was going to be and I didn't want to live anymore.'
> 
> And then Harry: "I didn't know I was trapped until I met Meghan".  (try not to choke on that). "My whole family is trapped".
> 
> It's a play on "Everyone is a racist even if they don't know it".  Except of course, Harry and Meghan. If someone says you are something, then you are--you have no say on how YOU feel if M&H say you feel something that feeds THEIR narrative. These people are THAT sick.
> 
> So is Harry the first BRF member to ESCAPE, like a prisoner from Alcatraz? Meghan should arrange her own Navy Seal Special Forces kind of team to BREAK INTO Buckingham Palace to RESCUE THEM ALL from their horrific existence!  They just don't realize they're ALL TRAPPED!  *And Meghan would get to be a hero!!*


Please not while wearing that awful green dress and cape.


----------



## poopsie

muddledmint said:


> That is Twitter and memes, not the press. I fail to see how the middle one from 60 min Australia counts as racist.



Well, in this day and age those sources are considered journalism, I guess


----------



## purseinsanity

bisbee said:


> View attachment 5015433


I sincerely hope no normal human being these days thinks black face or racist tweets are okay.  But these are tweets, and internet trolls will exist as long as the internet does.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One of the outtakes apparently adresses the situation with her father (just saw the headline while scrolling on FB, so I don't have more information).


----------



## bag-mania

What they wanted was the equivalent of if one of us quit our job, moved across the world, but still expected our former employer to pay for our benefits, our old salary, and allow us to keep the executive's title.

They thought they deserved all that as long as they phoned their patronages a couple of times a year.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> So, I don't have time right now to go through the last 30+ pages of this thread, so does anyone have a good recap? I didn't watch, just read a quick news article this morning, and this is what was summarized there:
> 
> * Somebody at the Palace made a comment about baby Archie's skin tone or skin color.
> * Meghan approached the Palace about her mental health, that she was miserable, but they didn't have any solutions for her.
> * They were actually married in a small private ceremony prior to their big public wedding. (This has possibly been debunked?)
> * They were financially cut-off a year ago and had to survive on Harry's multi-million inheritance from Diana.
> * She gets along just fine with the Queen.
> * They are having a girl. (Congratulations.)
> 
> Anything else?
> 
> Ratings were apparently good, about 17.1 million viewers.  That seems small to me when 100+ million people watch the Super Bowl or a big TV series finale but maybe it's big for this kind of thing.



* She didn't make Kate cry as was rumored - Kate made her cry, and Kate apologized privately, sent her flowers, etc. She said Kate is a good person. She was frustrated that KP wouldn't debunk the rumors when it knew they were false and also didn't let her friends or even Kate address the rumors. 
* They wouldn't let Archie have a Prince title which meant he couldn't have security paid for
* Charles stopped taking Harry's calls for a time but they're talking now
* H and William's relationship is "space" currently (whatever that means)


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t think she understood that the BRF is not a meritocracy..... it’s a hierarchy.


Well, if it WAS a meritocracy, I think Anne and her children as well as Beatrice and Eugenie, Edward and Sophie, would leap frog over Harry


----------



## Sol Ryan

muddledmint said:


> That last one was pretty racist and the writer is vile. The fired bbc guy tweeted that on his own and was justly fired for it. But while things like this provide context, it still doesn’t excuse Meghan and Harry’s whining and lies.



I never said it did. I just hate it when people say there wasn’t any racism in their press coverage because that’s disingenuous. It makes Megan and Harry’s argument for them by dismissing their claims when it isn’t true.

The way they went about leaving was unprofessional and an almost 40 year old man complaining about having to be self sufficient after putting out a manifesto saying they wanted to be financially independent is laughable. I don’t know how Harry wanted to come off in this interview but he looked childish.

I also don’t understand a lot of the things she said... esp about going to HR about a mental health issue. Even in the US that would be between you and your doctor, why would HR be involved?

In the comments in the Daily Mail last night, I saw someone suggested Anne might have made the comment... kinda jives with it being an older Royal...  I tried to find it to screenshot, but after 6 pages of comments I can’t find it again... those pages move fast and my iPad hates their site


----------



## poopsie

bisbee said:


> *How do you know that Harry has verbally abused Charles?  Were you present?  Did you listen to their phone calls?  You assume Charles has witnessed this many times throughout the years...what are you basing this on?*  And no, I did not use another name for Harry...I use his real name when referring to him.  The nicknames used in this thread are very juvenile in my opinion.




Well, you seem very sure that Camilla doesn't read here. How do you? Do you look over her shoulder?
oh, Harry's _real _name is Henry Charles Albert David
And yes, I had to look it up


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> What they wanted was the equivalent of if one of us quit our job, moved across the world, but still expected our former employer to pay for our benefits, our old salary, and allow us to keep the executive's title.
> 
> They thought they deserved all that as long as they phoned their patronages a couple of times a year.



Bingo!  I loved Harry saying they wanted to be in Canada so they could still serve as the Queen wished. The Queen wished for them to serve by living in England, tending to their patronages, and doing the jobs she asked them to do.  They didn't do that!


----------



## SoCalGal2016

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One of the outtakes apparently adresses the situation with her father (just saw the headline while scrolling on FB, so I don't have more information).











						Meghan Markle Opens Up About Her Dad's 'Betrayal'
					

"I’m just trying to decide if I’m comfortable even talking about that," the Duchess of Sussex told Oprah.




					www.huffpost.com
				




What didn't make sense is why she would not be able to ask the press to kill the story about her father because it would mean she couldn't protect her children from the press in the future?  Is there a limit to the number of times the royal family can ask the press to kill a story?  This didn't make alot of sense to me....maybe someone in the UK has more info on this or was she just lying about killing the story?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> Thankfully a little bit of humour courtesy of The Times.  The Brits are just waking up to this $h!t-show ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan interview: This sorry gloopathon was an act of self-harm
> 
> 
> One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.As a work of televised theatre, the Oprah Winfrey’s interview was sof
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan interview ditches subtlety in embrace of tabloid television
> 
> One o’clock in the morning and the sentries at Windsor Castle were having another quiet night, nothing to ruffle their Busbys. Five thousand miles to the west, kerrump, came eruptions which could send a tsunami across the Atlantic.
> 
> As a work of televised theatre, the Oprah Winfrey’s interview was soft-focus: the setting bucolic, Queen Oprah in delicate mauve, shots of the royal couple’s pets and — privacy alert — of toddler Archie. There were meaningful, emotive nods as they said “yeah” to each other in the Californian manner.
> 
> But the content was unsubtle. This was Semtex in swaddling bands. Cyanide en gelee. The biggest act of strategic self-harm since the scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow. It may have been presented as schmaltz but this two-hour gloopathon was politically ruinous.
> 
> “Life is about telling stories, right?” said la Markle, all high-resolution lip gloss. “Telling stories through a truthful lens.” Her eyes sparkled behind lashes as long as ravens’ wings.
> 
> Stories were duly delivered, a steaming dump of indiscretions: whinges about money and titles and bodyguards and the rotten tabloid press (which must be quite different from tabloid television). That Kate Cambridge? A B*I*T*C*H! “But I have forgiven her,” purred Meghan with her truthful lens.
> 
> Further atrocities: she had had to teach herself the words to God Save the Queen; no one had advised her how to keep her legs crossed; people had been beastly about her on the internet. We had our first blinked-back tear at 1.54am. Either that, or some unfortunate midge had made it past the ravens’ wings and had jabbed her in the eyeball.
> 
> Then came the intended killer blow: someone in royal circles had speculated about what skin tone the Sussexes’ baby was going to have. “That conversation I am never going to share,” said Prince Harry, after he and his wife had disgorged its existence to a worldwide audience.
> 
> Every so often we broke away for the CBS adverts, many aimed at hypochondriacs or handsome people who were smiling through bouts of raging diarrhoea. Useful context.
> 
> Harry had not appeared in the first half, when we were assured Meghan was not a gold-digger. “I never looked up my husband online,” she claimed, when Oprah asked if she had done her “research”. Harry now took his place alongside his duchess and we found he has started saying “like” and he has the beginnings of an American accent. He disclosed that his father stopped taking his telephone calls for a while. Maybe Charles simply didn’t recognise him with that valley girl uplift.
> 
> And yet Harry was less clunkingly dim than one possibly expected. He has certainly drunk deeply of the west-coast Kool-Aid. At one point he made it sound as if he himself had breastfed Archie.
> 
> The programme was entitled Meghan & Harry. Most of us used to put them the other way round. Her Grace wore a dark dress with white splodges. Blasted seagulls. She, in turn, proceeded to deposit industrial quantities of guano on a royal family that had, we heard, welcomed her warmly to their midst. Things only started to go wrong after the row about the bridesmaids’ dresses. Or was it after the couple’s official trip to the Pacific (translation: the rest of “the Firm” were envious of its success)? We heard both.
> 
> Further inconsistencies followed. One minute Meghan disclaimed grandeur, the next she was concerned about her “status”. One moment she was unfussed about honorifics, the next she was furious Archie was not going to be a prince. She was astonished when her police protection was withdrawn (bodyguards are a must-have accessory in Hollywood). The next she was writing to the Queen to say she didn’t care less about protection. Oprah let these self-contradictions go through to the wicketkeeper.
> 
> It ended with Meghan comparing herself — sorry about this — to the Little Mermaid and Harry saying “time heals all things, hopefully”. Someone possibly said the same to the Earl of Uxbridge at the Battle of Waterloo, even as much of one of his legs was disappearing over the brow of the hill attached to a cannon ball.


All of this!









EverSoElusive said:


> When they started dating, I'm sure she knew she's dating Prince Harry and not Harry Potter. Dating a real life prince means there are plenty of rules and protocols to be followed. BRF members are people but they are not regular people.
> 
> And when Harry asked if she knew how to curtsy the first time while they were on their way to meet the Queen, again, she  already learned there are rules to be followed. The Queen is not a regular grandmother like Carole Middleton. The Queen is the monarch and her own grandchildren and grandchildren-in-law still need to curtsy or bow to her, blood related or not so why does Cringe think she's so special that she shouldn't have to because the Queen was about to be her grandmother-in-law?
> 
> BRF members' lives are dictated by the Queen and the UK government. All the rules and protocols are in place to maintain order. Without order, the palace would have been in shambles like DJT's WH.
> 
> If she found the rules and protocols to be so restrictive and the silence that the BRF practices so detrimental to her mental health, why did she not tell Ginge early on that life as a royal with all those rules and the need to act with decorum (not that she has any), is not for her and that she wishes him all the best and she moves on with her life? She chose to stay. I'm fairly certain that the Queen didn't beg her to stay. She still had her passport, DL and keys early on so why didn't she leave? She could have chosen to walk away and find her another Trevity Trev Trev. We all know why she stayed on - FAME and MONEY. But of course she told us it's love, it's fairytale, it's rescue chickens.
> 
> Having made her choice to marry into the BRF, why blame everyone else but herself? Throughout the interview, I didn't once hear her owning up to any of the choices that she's made but always pointing finger at someone else e.g. Kate, the senior people, HR etc.
> 
> Also, if she really felt that the BRF is racist, do you really think she would have just stood there and let them disrespect her when she's a mighty strong and independent woman who has always spoken her mind from a very young age as she made aware of?
> 
> Cringe believes in her own lies. She can no longer tell what's real and what's not. She conjured so much up in her chicken brain that she can hardly see straight. She continues with more lies and digs a deeper grave every time. Cringe does not deserve the welcome and love that the British people, not just BRF, bestowed upon her. Yes, some parts of the media were nasty to her but gosh, the support from the UK people was simply astonishing! Still, Cringe chose to play the race card and call almost everyone a racist. Why, just why?
> 
> She Markled her own dad yet in the interview, she indirectly insinuated that she lost her dad because of the BRF. Again, where's the accountability on her end? Ever since she's moved back to the US, did she once tried to touch base with her dad, if she so cared and loved him? There hasn't been news about that so I take it she hasn't? If she did, Scobie would have been the first to leak it on Twitter.
> 
> All in all, Cringe is not and should not be the WOC that GOC look up to or want to emulate. She's a narcissist and she's a pathological liar. I'm a grown a*s WOC and even I don't want to be her. For a person who's about to have her second child with Ginge, I'm beyond shocked that they chose to burn the bridge with the BRF, alienating the kids further from Ginge's side of the family. If it's true that Ginge is trying to repair his relationship with his family, Ginge and Cringe should just mind their own business and stop talking about the BRF to the press and just have personal communications with the BRF members. Additionally, they should focus on what they plan to do through Archewell and talk about that in public instead if they are truly all about service to others.
> 
> I don't think Ginge understands the difference between himself and the other BRF members that live on the palace ground and continue to work a regular job while holding the titles of prince, princess, duke and duchess. Ginge totally forgot that his father Charles is next in line to be king therefore Ginge is the son of a future king. Ginge is not a child of Andrew like Eugenie and Beatrice, where they are so far down the line of succession that they aren't considered senior royals hence they do have a bit more freedom and only represents the Queen on a now-and-then basis. But again, what do I know?
> 
> That's enough for now. I have spent more time tonight on these two ungrateful POS than I should have. Time for me to shop some Louis. Come tomorrow, Ginge and Cringe will still continue to blame everyone else. I hope they will be cut off 100% in every single possible sense. They want to be independent, they should be. They should work like regular people and not expect anything just because they feel entitled, this includes Ginge despite being born into the BRF. Writing letter pleading with the Queen for security because Ginge is a prince. Kiss my a*s
> 
> It's been fun tonight! You guys are the best


Great post @EverSoElusive, so well said!





csshopper said:


> There was a bright spot: Charles stopped taking his ingrate son's calls.
> I do not believe for one minute she was suicidal, she is too narcissistic to shorten the time she has on earth to proclaim her self perceived wonderfulness to the world and how would we ever be able to get through life without her telling us how we need to live????





Coconuts40 said:


> Why would security be provided to them when they're no longer working royals?
> This is definitely not straightofward since this is a family business.  As a family member I understand the desire for security, but when you're no longer a working royal, how did they expect the taxpayers would continue to pay for security?





lalame said:


> Wills and Harry also said they went to therapy themselves so I also am perplexed by this claim they denied her mental healthcare. I mean.... how can anyone deny her mental healthcare? In the UK of all places?





needlv said:


> The claim about titles bothers me.  Only up to grandchildren of the monarch do you get prince and princess titles.  Archie would be a great grandchild of the Queen and too far down the line of succession.  For W&K kids, the Queen issued Letters Patent changing the rules and giving it to their kids because W will be King.





bag-mania said:


> I expect all of the usual US publications will be in lockstep support of them.  Will they consider that there was never even a tiny hint of the wild revelations and accusations made tonight? Nope.  Will they consider the fact that they didn’t name names, thereby providing zero evidence.  Probably not. Just saying it is good enough.





LittleStar88 said:


> For someone who never reads the tabloids, she sure seemed to know a lot about every single negative article with her name in it.


I agree with all of these points, well said ladies.



If OW was in any way a good journalist & interviewer, she would have done her research on royal workings/protocols/matters before this sh*tshow so she would have more of an understanding and be able to investigate their answers instead of allowing them to answer with _their _opinions as fact and the only truth, allowing them to PERPETUATE FALSEHOODS about the Royal Family with no follow-up. You can hardly call it a 'great interview' or even simply an 'interview' when the entire thing is completely and utterly biased and their is no real questioning just lots of preludes for the other two to voice their opinions & lies.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. *As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers. * Isn't this a similar situation?


Were Harry and Meghan prime ministers of England (more or less equivalent to a president elsewhere? I don't think so. Are they now king & queen (Oh they wish!!) of the UK? No. They aren't even senior royals at their own behest. Therefore, no work equals no moolah.


----------



## Joelene

When POC discuss skin tone it is coming from a more sinister place. It’s rooted in colorism and featurism. Where lighter skin and European features are seen in a more favorable light, and darker features are put down.


----------



## muddledmint

Lounorada said:


> All of this!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great post @EverSoElusive, so well said!
> View attachment 5015454
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with all of these points, well said ladies.
> View attachment 5015471
> 
> 
> If OW was in any way a good journalist & interviewer, she would have done her research on royal workings/protocols/matters before this sh*tshow so she would have more of an understanding and be able to investigate their answers instead of allowing them to answer with _their _opinions as fact and the only truth, allowing them to PERPETUATE FALSEHOODS about the Royal Family with no follow-up. You can hardly call it a 'great interview' or even simply an 'interview' when the entire thing is completely and utterly biased and their is no real questioning just lots of preludes for the other two to voice their opinions & lies.


Oprah’s questions and responses were all leading. She clearly had an agenda for this interview. The whole thing was so blatantly biased and calculated to elicit sympathy and stifle criticism. Because anyone who sees through this is a racist, naturally!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stans coming out claiming no harm was done in 3...2...1. While they are right, I think this is completely disturbed.


Adults committing to each other can make vows privately in a garden, a restaurant, a museum or a bed, etc.  The exchange can be beautiful and romantic and meaningful and sacred. It does not need the blessing of an archbishop or need to be shared with the world.


----------



## Lounorada

muddledmint said:


> Oprah’s questions and responses were all leading. She clearly had an agenda for this interview. The whole thing was so blatantly biased and calculated to elicit sympathy and stifle criticism. Because anyone who sees through this is a racist, naturally!


100% agree!


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> I agree, I think a lot more needs to be revealed about the CONTEXT of that conversation. Context is everything. It could have been any one of these possible scenarios and I'm not comfortable yet making a judgment until I know more:
> 
> Malicious remark made by haters = racism
> Innocent remark made by haters = no one at fault
> Malicious remark made by people who love them = ignorance or racism
> Innocent remark made by people who love them = no one at fault


You make an excellent point, context is everything.

I remember thinking when I heard she was pregnant that I wondered if a child could be a ginger and black skinned? I had a conversation about potential dark skin color with a retired doctor friend. There was no value judgement, nor racism, just a struggle in an old lady's mind trying to remember genetics.(The answer, is "yes" if both parents carry the same gene, can't remember the exact # of it "MC__")

And, How do we know the discussion of the baby's skin color, if it did indeed happen since Harry and Meghan seem to have differing memories of when it took place, was a negative one? It might have been the opposite to the way in which Harry and Meghan spun it, and instead, in the context of hoping the baby would be dark skinned, a celebration of the Royal Family's new diversity within the Commonwealth? Just the fact the potential color of the child's skin was discussed does not make it racist, unless the forever victims Harry and Meghan chose to interpret it that way. We will never know.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> * She didn't make Kate cry as was rumored - Kate made her cry, and Kate apologized privately, sent her flowers, etc. She said Kate is a good person. She was frustrated that KP wouldn't debunk the rumors when it knew they were false and also didn't let her friends or even Kate address the rumors.
> * *They wouldn't let Archie have a Prince title which meant he couldn't have security paid for*
> * Charles stopped taking Harry's calls for a time but they're talking now
> * H and William's relationship is "space" currently (whatever that means)



Thanks!  So, the story that they didn't want Archie to have a title, since they wanted him to have a normal life, is false?  

But, is it not true that only the great-grandchildren of the Queen that get the prince/princess titles are the heirs' children?  So, Will's children get the titles because he's the heir, but not Harry's.  Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice are grandchildren of the Queen, not great-grandchildren and Andrew lobbied for the titles while Princess Anne and Prince Edward did not. 

So, will Charles bestow the titles on Archie and his sibling down the road when he becomes king since these two are his grandchildren?  Or, will he likely not since they don't live in the UK and won't be living a working royal type life?  Anybody from the UK care to speculate?


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Colorism is absolutely harmful, in every non-white society (I'm just not as confident it's the same among Caucasians). But I think there needs to be a lot more context given about what the conversation was with the family. The way Harry said it, "how's he going to look?" "what will the color of his skin be?" seems more curiosity than malicious to me. I'm a WOC and my husband is white. We've absolutely had discussions about how our child would look, would they be lighter or darker, what their hair would be like, etc. Am I racist against my own (non-existent) child? Not unless I followed it up with "... and I hope he doesn't look like ___" It's the judgment that's harmful, not the question. That's what I'm missing from what they've said.



Thank you for your post, it contributes to moving forward in the right direction imo. Context is very important, and taking things out of context can be very dangerous. This is why I felt sick with MM's insinuations without providing any other information. Instead of fighting against discrimination, comments without context only contribute to inflame situations. I hope that one day we all look at skin color the same way we look at eye or hair color... I'm not minimizing the detrimental effects and pain caused by microaggressions, but we all need to do better. For God's sake, we all belong to one human race!


----------



## scarlet555

muddledmint said:


> Oprah’s questions and responses were all leading. She clearly had an agenda for this interview. The whole thing was so blatantly biased and calculated to elicit sympathy and stifle criticism. Because anyone who sees through this is a racist, naturally!



Very true... Oh, Oprah, why have you stooped to this level?


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Honestly sometimes it's just curiosity that is ignorant (or unaware if you prefer) of social context or politeness. It's kind of like the "where do you come from" - yes, when you peel back the layers that is a loaded question, but I give most people the benefit of the doubt that they're just innocently curious and don't know how it could be offensive because they've never felt discrimination for that particular reason. Do we really think the BRF know anything about colorism in black culture? No, I highly, highly doubt it. I don't think it was malicious. Ignorance, meet knowledge when you get called out for it as H has done.


Whoopi on the view today actually admitted she had raised the question of what color the baby would come out....said something to the effect the baby could come out light and turn dark in a matter of days....so - this from a WOC


----------



## Diamondbirdie

youngster said:


> Thanks!  So, the story that they didn't want Archie to have a title, since they wanted him to have a normal life, is false?
> 
> But, is it not true that only the great-grandchildren of the Queen that get the prince/princess titles are the heirs' children?  So, Will's children get the titles because he's the heir, but not Harry's.  Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice are grandchildren of the Queen, not great-grandchildren and Andrew lobbied for the titles while Princess Anne and Prince Edward did not.
> 
> So, will Charles bestow the titles on Archie and his sibling down the road when he becomes king since these two are his grandchildren?  Or, will he likely not since they don't live in the UK and won't be living a working royal type life?  Anybody from the UK care to speculate?


I’m pretty sure I read that George 5th made it that only the heir and his kids would be Princes and Princesses, and the Queen had to change the rule for George, Charlotte and Louis. I think it is extremely unlikely Charles will give more titles to Harry‘s kids, Archie will be a Duke one day anyway as that title is hereditary.

Normally, the son of a Duke would have a separate title, such as Marquess or Earl, but I guess it’s different if you’re in the Royal Family.


----------



## marietouchet

Good fact checking style posts on the DM site, we have mostly gone over that, but still good if you want the Cliff Notes version


----------



## BagOuttaHell

She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.


----------



## haute okole

Oh boy!  Thomas Markle will be interviewed Tuesday morning on Good Morning Britain by Piers Morgan.  How can I watch this from LA?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Diamondbirdie

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.


Come on, Diana died because she was in a speeding car driven by a drunk man and wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. That’s it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO this interview did nothing for them.  They did not bring people together on the important issues. They showed no appreciation or gratitude for the privileges they have been given. They just demanded more. *That* is tiresome.

Wonder if anyone has donated $$$ today?


----------



## tiktok

The whole issue here is lack of nuance in any narrative so we have two camps, just like in politics. Unfortunately when you look at the nuance, H&M don't come out as clean and saintly as they do now. 

- Meghan can be the subject of a certain level of racism in the press but at the same time we all know not every attack was racist - Kate was "waitie Katie", had nude photos of her in a private vacation splashed across tabloids, harrassed due to her flight attendant mom, uncle etc. It doesn't justify any racism, but it does show that tabloids are a cesspool across the board and a mature adult would treat them as such and try to learn not to take it so personally (or do something to reduce the harm they cause people at large).

- Meghan can be the subject of some racism from a family member but at the same time have other members of the family be very supportive and welcoming in their own royal / upperclass British way. That way isn't the same as that of your average yoga studio teacher in West Hollywood who's your bestie on day 1, but any mature adult would understand there are cultural differences and give it some more time, or choose to bail, feeling empowered, not victimized.

- Harry's father could be a terrible dad, while at the same time Harry or Meghan or both could have tried his patience to the point where he's had enough of giving them money for their high lifestyle and was sick of their ungratefulness and entitlement. 

- Meghan could have been the subject of bullying by the press, while at the same time bullying her own employees - those stories were in the press years ago, they didn't come out now. No one has the turnover she did amongst her staff while being a holier-than-thou saint. 

The thing is, when you add up all the other things these two said yesterday, it's very hard to take them seriously:
- Did Harry really not know that Archie is not going be a prince until Charles is king, not because of skin color but because he's just not eligible? Was that in the homework one of his tutors did for him? It's on Wikipedia if he bothered to look it up. 
- Half the BRF had therapy before, yet Meghan went to HR (what?) and they denied her? She could get her veneers replaced quietly but she couldn't get a therapist when she was suicidal? She could keep blood diamonds and wear them publicly despite the protests of her staff yet she didn't have authority to go above HR in order to not kill herself? 
- They were so burned by the family that within a few months of the suicidal thoughts, the new baby's birth, moving to a new house and all the drama with the BRF they were launching plans (that take a while to form) to move countries and profit from the Sussex Royal brand while doing none of the work required from royals? Was seeing $ signs the cure for their mental health problems?
- They know Eugenie and Beatrice don't get security protection, yet they were floored Archie wouldn't either?
- We are in the middle of a pandemic, half the US population has family members who they deem racist or lib or whatever for voting for a party that advocates for what they deem existential threats to their body or freedom, thousands of families were torn apart by political disagreements in the past 4 years, yet H&M's life, with the millions in clothing and jewelry and private jets to see Elton John and the Cloonies was "unsurvivable"?
- They never read the press yet they know the press was racist, they sued the press multiple times etc.
- Kate made Meghan cry - right, and that matters because...? My best friend made me cry, my mom made me cry, my sister made me cry. I made them cry. Who gives a @#$%? Are we in kindergarten? Why even mention that? Adults make each other cry and then they move on and never think about it anymore. 
- Everything was insinuations, no verifiable facts whatsoever, and they know the other side has a "never complain never explain" policy. How convenient.  

Give me a break. The only thing that saves them is the fact that in today's lazy media world what matters is how many untouchable words your narrative includes. She now has "racism", "miscarriage", "suicide", "mental health", "setting boundaries with your in-laws" - that's more than enough for no one to want to touch the topic with a 10-foot pole and just hail her as a role model for us all.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> Whoopi on the view today actually admitted she had raised the question of what color the baby would come out....said something to the effect the baby could come out light and turn dark in a matter of days....so - this from a WOC



Well, for one thing, colorism is a problem within POC communities... But two, I don't know that her comment was colorism necessarily. To me an -ism requires a judgment not just an observation. I'm not being racist if I notice someone is black. If I show preference, disdain, etc is where it gets ugly. And it CAN get ugly among POCs.


----------



## lalame

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.



You actually think the BRF had Diana killed because she was dating an Egyptian man?


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they hired private doctors for her pregnancy but couldn't get access to help for her mental health issues? I don't understand it. Her husband was working with mental health charities and was very out spoken about mental health! Why didn't she seek help? What's said between her and a health care professional would be privileged just like her private doctors. So would be no issue there. Why contact BP HR? It's just too odd!
> View attachment 5015382


she was locked in a tower and they wouldnt let her out to go see a shrink


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> If this picture was taken on the same day as the lay-on-the-ground picture, she is definitely further along than they are telling people or she might have accidentally wore the wrong moon bump  And poor Archie is still hidden though someone in her circle already dropped a frontal shot of the cutie pie last week.


Actually everyone's face is hidden except for HRH the Duchess of Moon Bumps.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Actually everyone's face is hidden except for HRH the Duchess of Moon Bumps.



You are so right! Attention should only be on the Little Mermaid


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> Thanks!  So, the story that they didn't want Archie to have a title, since they wanted him to have a normal life, is false?
> 
> But, is it not true that only the great-grandchildren of the Queen that get the prince/princess titles are the heirs' children?  So, Will's children get the titles because he's the heir, but not Harry's.  Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice are grandchildren of the Queen, not great-grandchildren and Andrew lobbied for the titles while Princess Anne and Prince Edward did not.
> 
> So, will Charles bestow the titles on Archie and his sibling down the road when he becomes king since these two are his grandchildren?  Or, will he likely not since they don't live in the UK and won't be living a working royal type life?  Anybody from the UK care to speculate?



She said she didn't care about Archie's title or her title except when not having the title meant losing some privileges she felt he deserved by birth, like private security. Though she later said "I accepted that they wouldn't secure me or my child, but I pleaded with them not to take away Harry's security." (paraphrasing) so not sure how that jives with that...


----------



## carmen56

When Charles becomes King, Archie will get the title of Prince.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Adults committing to each other can make vows privately in a garden, a restaurant, a museum or a bed, etc.  The exchange can be beautiful and romantic and meaningful and sacred. It does not need the blessing of an archbishop or need to be shared with the world.



For me it is more the going on national TV and claiming "Three days before our wedding we got married" when she knew da*n well they didn't. Why not call it a blessing, a private not legally binding ceremony, just something not meant to stir up even more controversy? Can this woman not for once act normal?


----------



## mdcx

People can, and do, dislike Meghan for reasons other than her race. It’s pretty absurd to insist that if you dislike MM, you must also be racist...

Meghan and Harry know that the BRF will not publicly respond to anything said in the Oprah interview. They know this bc both are well versed in BRF protocol, no matter what Meghan claims. 
So Meghan was aware that she could lie her way through the interview and Kate/William/Charles etc would have no right of reply...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> But, is it not true that only the great-grandchildren of the Queen that get the prince/princess titles are the heirs' children?  So, Will's children get the titles because he's the heir, but not Harry's.



It is. And I have no clue how she can sit there and keep a straight face while making up this lie about Archie being too black to be a prince and everyone just running with that instead of doing a freaking fact check.


----------



## gracekelly

I am disgusted with the coverage of this interview.  I am waiting for the excitement and emotionalism  to die down and for people to think about what was said and what wasn't said, i.e the proof to back up allegations.  You can't go casting aspersions and not have some proof.   This was a drama played out by an actress, and I use that term loosely, with her director, Oprah feeding her the response lines.  There was so incendiary and by  plan.  I think that weeks or months were spent coming up with things to say that would have the most hurtful effect yet couldn't be challenged.  

 Harry was so nervous that he was beet red and ready to flee.  He talked about being trapped?  He looked trapped at the interview. 

I won't even discuss the joke of a clip showing Archie.  You couldn't even see what he looked like and we were going back to the black and white nonsense again.  Were we cosplaying JFK on the beach with Jackie, John Jr. and Caroline in Hyannis?


----------



## Chanbal

maris.crane said:


> I don’t know what one can call not taking your kids’ calls anything but emotionally cutting them off.


I couldn't imagine myself not taking my kid's calls. Having said that, this might have been a temporary response to some of H's insistent demands. We don't know if he offended his father to the point that his father needed to take a break from the situation. At some point, Charles had COVID and was probably under a lot of pressure. The bottom line is that we don't know much about the situation apart of that single comment. When Oprah asked if he had resumed his conversations with his father, I'm under the impression that H answered yes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Adults committing to each other can make vows privately in a garden, a restaurant, a museum or a bed, etc.  The exchange can be beautiful and romantic and meaningful and sacred. It does not need the blessing of an archbishop or need to be shared with the world.


Absolutely, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's legally binding, as MM claimed by saying they were "married" 3 days before.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For me it is more the going on national TV and claiming "Three days before our wedding we got married" when she knew da*n well they didn't. Why not call it a blessing, a private not legally binding ceremony, just something not meant to stir up even more controversy? Can this woman not for once act normal?



Nooooo, she cannot. She lives in a Disney fantasy world, remember?  It’s all photoshoots, perfect lighting, harmonious spa music, v expensive clothes.  The alternative is the ‘bikes and cars show up’, sirens blaring and they must go shake the public’s hands, smile and be pleasant. Eeek.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is. And I have no clue how she can sit there and keep a straight face while making up this lie about Archie being to black to be a prince and everyone just running with that instead of doing a freaking fact check.


She knows that people in the US are not familiar with this protocol and won't check it and take it as "her truth."  That was the problem with calling this interview "her truth."  Her truth was not the actual whole truth, but most if not all of the viewers don't realize that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Diamondbirdie said:


> Normally, the son of a Duke would have a separate title, such as Marquess or Earl, but I guess it’s different if you’re in the Royal Family.



No. Archie could use Harry's secondary title (Earl of Dumbarton), as does Edward's son, Viscount Severn. But the special snowflakes refused, presumably because Archie was a private citizen. I said a long time ago I thought it was more likely they were miffed rules were not bent for Archie, so that was their defiant reaction, and I feel somewhat validated now.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> She said she didn't care about Archie's title or her title except when not having the title meant losing some privileges she felt he deserved by birth, like private security. Though she later said "*I accepted that they wouldn't secure me or my child, but I pleaded with them not to take away Harry's security.*" (paraphrasing) so not sure how that jives with that...



What a drama queen.  This is ridiculous.  

Once you are out as a working royal, you don't get your security paid for by the taxpayer.  Full stop.  Once Harry walked away, he walked away from his expensive, taxpayer funded protection.  Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice also don't have their security paid for either, for example.  If you need security, pay for it yourself or con your FIL, Prince Charles, into paying for it.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

lalame said:


> You actually think the BRF had Diana killed because she was dating an Egyptian man?



Yep. In part. On top of other reasons. They like things lily white in that clique.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Absolutely, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's legally binding, as MM claimed by saying they were "married" 3 days before.


It wasn't legally binding in the UK.  The UK has strict rules as to the venues where legal marriages can take place.  Registry Office, church, synagogue or special venues.  Home or hospital marriages can only take place if one party is so ill that they can't travel to the other approved venues.  That was not the case here.  In addition two witnesses are required and there were none.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.



Absolutely! They somehow made her not wear a seatbelt and paid her driver enough to consider committing suicide by drunk speeding a great idea so he could then ride into the sunshine with his new wealth. Oh wait.


----------



## TC1

"I woke up that morning and was listening/singing (?) to Going to the Chapel"  < Oprah


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Diamondbirdie said:


> Come on, Diana died because she was in a speeding car driven by a drunk man and wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. That’s it.



I bet.


----------



## sdkitty

if H is trying to throw shade on his brother (by letting people think he was the one making the remarks about the baby's skin tone) he maybe should keep in mind that whether he likes it or not, William will be king some day and may be in a position to cut him off financially (if he's still getting money from the family)


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No. Archie could use Harry's secondary title (Earl of Dumbarton), as does Edward's son, Viscount Severn. But the special snowflakes refused, presumably because Archie was a private citizen. I said a long time ago i thought it was more likely they were miffed rules were not bent for Archie, so that was their defiant reaction, and I feel somewhat validated now.


Absolutely.  They were miffed and this was posted in this thread  at the time of his birth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

haute okole said:


> Oh boy!  Thomas Markle will be interviewed Tuesday morning on Good Morning Britain by Piers Morgan.  How can I watch this from LA?



Ugh. I know people have said "Good for him", but I am not looking forward to this. I think he'll be eaten alive (not by Piers but the staunch supporters), and sometimes cutting your losses and just keeping quiet is the better choice.


----------



## seasounds

I was very impressed by the interview, although sometimes I wished Oprah would have let them just keep talking, rather than interrupting.

I thought the pain was very real and sincere.  I wish them well.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> if H is trying to throw shade on his brother (by letting people think he was the one making the remarks about the baby's skin tone) he maybe should keep in mind that whether he likes it or not, William will be king some day and may be in a position to cut him off financially (if he's still getting money from the family)



His attitude and behavior towards William has shown me how stupid he really is.  If William warranted that kind of behavior that would be one thing, but he doesn't.  Dragging Kate into the interview won't endear him more either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For me it is more the going on national TV and claiming "Three days before our wedding we got married" when she knew da*n well they didn't. Why not call it a blessing, a private not legally binding ceremony, just something not meant to stir up even more controversy? Can this woman not for once act normal?


And then she went on to say that her actual public wedding was for us!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SoCalGal2016 said:


> Charles not taking Harry's calls is because Charles is a sh!tty parent, not because this is a teachable moment. Remember Charles "whatever love is" comment he made during his engagement interview with Diana?  C*harles has relationship/intimacy issues and probably has no clue what to say or how to resolve issues with his family.*  It's easier for him to not take calls than try to resolve things.


You're comparing apples and oranges. You can't lump spousal and parental love in one neat little bundle. Maybe as it was rumoured, Charles wasn't in love with Diana, but that does not preclude him from dearly loving his children.


----------



## mdcx

It’s slightly funny to me that Meghan’s whole m.o. to get what she wants from the BRF is to play victim. Do people really ultimately have any respect for that? It seems so opposite to most respected achievers who tend to lean towards take responsibility for your life/decisions/mistakes, work hard and smart to reach your goals.
My opinion of Oprah is sadly diminished.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> She said she didn't care about Archie's title or her title except when not having the title meant losing some privileges she felt he deserved by birth, like private security. Though she later said "I accepted that they wouldn't secure me or my child, but I pleaded with them not to take away Harry's security." (paraphrasing) so not sure how that jives with that...



Yeah, RIGHT.


----------



## BagOuttaHell

Sorry ladies. Quoting me ain’t about going to change anyone’s opinion about Diana. So I won’t be going back and forth about that anymore.

Harry never forgot how his mom was treated. And I am old enough to remember when Diana wasn’t the so called People’s Princess. A convenient title she received upon death. Idc how many royal pundits get on tv and say things are different now for H&M compared to Diana. These people take pleasure in running you down into the ground. I am also old enough to remember when they hated Kate. But she is their darling. For now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He is an *adult*. There are plenty of shocking stories out there long before Meghan. He bullied QE into taking his call so he could complain about the Sandringham situation. She said she was busy all week and hung up. He seems to enjoy badgering people who clearly do not want to speak to him. He seems to think he ‘knows’ all the reasons people avoid him - kinda like he’s a mind-reader. After being given millions, if my adult child continues to request more ... I will be very slow to answer that call. It sounds like he is on a power trip on the EgoExpress. 








						9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
					

From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think that weeks or months were spent coming up with things to say that would have the most hurtful effect yet couldn't be challenged.



Just like that personal, heartfelt letter that was being outlined, drafted, written and rewritten with the help of staff until it was perfectly designed to do what it was supposed to do.


----------



## CeeJay

viciel said:


> I used to think Sparkle was smart enough to go from a *twice divorced D list actress* to landing a prince albeit the dumb one and just retire into the sunset. But too quickly it became obvious that she's actually really dumb, a typical NPD who overestimates her powers. She could have done well in one of two ways. One, stay as a working royal and enjoy all the admiration her ego can afford to handle and lives fabulously off of Charles, who obviously had and perhaps still has some unresolved guilt over his hands in Harry's inability to grow into a man and continues to live off the "I lost my mum" crutch; or two, quit being a working royal and profits over their lifestyle brand and still enjoy being the life of all the hollywood parties and get treated like real royals by the LA crowd because let's face it that's really all they have to offer, their faux title. But no, she has decided to double down, triple down, because she wants to be known as the perfect and virtuous little girl who took down the most famous monarchy. She forgets too quickly that she, and ginger are nothing without the BRF, never bite the hands that feed you! She might have gone to a prestigious private school and went to Northwestern, actually a very good school, but she clearly has not learned enough class, or strategy, I imagine people who can indeed give sound advice she won't listen to, people who have any self respect won't work for her, so that's how you will end up with a bunch of yes men and women who only further perpetuate your own delusions. Not a royal, not a blue blood, not even a respectful hardworking decent human being. She is cheap, cheap, cheap.


Please people .. a *D-List actress* is *waaaaaaayyyyyy too good* for her, she is *Z-List* .. let's remember that so that I don't have to keep "fixing"  people's posts!!


----------



## lalame

I think people are being really hypocritical by demanding the palace investigate the racism conversation but scoffing at the palace saying they're going to investigate the bullying allegations. FWIW, I think both need to be investigated. They aren't just a family, they are an employer that should take employee harassment seriously.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> This was probably one of Oprah's worse performances. I believe she is a very smart woman, so I was expecting a lot more from her.


I have not watched so I cannot comment on her performance but when I heard she was doing this interview, I thought "she (Oprah) is desperate (a new thing for her) to talk to these two grifters, and convince CBS that that this would be a ratings grabber (it may have been, I haven't heard). 

I agree with her being smart and savvy and all (she was in Chicago for years--Harpo Studios--well-respected, loved, etc.) but all things wind down eventually, even her stellar career. Talking to M&H was, imo, pretty sad.


----------



## dangerouscurves

The truth will come out. I believe Meghan. After what happened to Lady D, I don't have any respect for this bunch.


----------



## rose60610

SoCalGal2016 said:


> I read through most of the comments and was surprised at the comments that believed Harry and Meghan should not get security covered by the royal family anymore because since they stepped away from their senior royal status, taxpayers should not be covering these costs. As a comparison, in the US, we provide security to our former presidents and their families, paid for by taxpayers.  Isn't this a similar situation?



No. 
M&H would have protection had they fulfilled their traditional duties. It is my understanding that people in the British monarchy are figureheads, and do not perform legislative duties that Parliament does. They are not elected officials. It was M&H's choice to leave the BRF, just as if they were employees of a corporation and left, they would no longer have any right to salary, the company car, health insurance, or any other perk. If security were SO important to them, they should have stayed and performed the duties expected of them.


----------



## Allisonfaye

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.



So you think Diana was murdered?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> And then she went on to say that her actual public wedding was for us!



They sure had a lot of opinions and demands for something they just did to do the unwashed masses a favour.


----------



## muddledmint

kemilia said:


> I have not watched so I cannot comment on her performance but when I heard she was doing this interview, I thought "she (Oprah) is desperate (a new thing for her) to talk to these two grifters, and convince CBS that that this would be a ratings grabber (it may have been, I haven't heard).
> 
> I agree with her being smart and savvy and all (she was in Chicago for years--Harpo Studios--well-respected, loved, etc.) but all things wind down eventually, even her stellar career. Talking to M&H was, imo, pretty sad.


I don’t think this at all. The interview was ratings gold and Oprah knew it would be. Who wouldn’t want to do this interview and I’m sure cbs was dying to have the rights to air it. However, I am disappointed at how Oprah conducted this interview.

By the way, I literally never watch live tv anymore (Netflix and streaming all the way!), and I turned on the tv to watch this!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.



Does this mean you think the driver was paid off to get drunk and speed excessively?


----------



## youngster

Do our UK members think the dukedom will eventually be revoked?  Is that the correct term? Revoked?  I didn't think it would be but now I think perhaps, yes, down the road. Not today, not tomorrow, maybe in a few years, especially if Harry does stay permanently in the U.S. and if his relationship with his father and brother is frosty and distant. 

I could also see Harry being removed from the succession, if that's possible, down the road.  If I'm Will, I don't want even a small chance that one day Harry could be Regent for George or Charlotte.


----------



## mdcx

kemilia said:


> I have not watched so I cannot comment on her performance but when I heard she was doing this interview, I thought "she (Oprah) is desperate (a new thing for her) to talk to these two grifters, and convince CBS that that this would be a ratings grabber (it may have been, I haven't heard).
> 
> I agree with her being smart and savvy and all (she was in Chicago for years--Harpo Studios--well-respected, loved, etc.) but all things wind down eventually, even her stellar career. Talking to M&H was, imo, pretty sad.


It’s a pretty sad addition to Oprah’s body of work. Did she agree to the future interview in order to get an invite to the wedding? She certainly doesn't need the money. It really has tainted her reputation imo.


----------



## Allisonfaye

mdcx said:


> People can, and do, dislike Meghan for reasons other than her race. It’s pretty absurd to insist that if you dislike MM, you must also be racist...
> 
> Meghan and Harry know that the BRF will not publicly respond to anything said in the Oprah interview. They know this bc both are well versed in BRF protocol, no matter what Meghan claims.
> So Meghan was aware that she could lie her way through the interview and Kate/William/Charles etc would have no right of reply...



So who really ARE the silenced ones?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BagOuttaHell said:


> I bet.



Serious question: if it was MI6 or whatever secret department would be responsible for murdering people, wouldn't it be counterproductive to have a bunch of paparazzi follow you while you're at it?


----------



## lalame

Oprah was too involved with them to do an objective interview IMO. It was a softball interview and while there were new things released we didn't know before, they were obviously only things that M+H felt comfortable sharing. The only time she really challenged them was when she asked Harry how he was "trapped"... I felt her eyeroll lol.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> I couldn't imagine myself not taking my kid's calls. Having said that, this might have been a temporary response to some of H's insistent demands. We don't know if he offended his father to the point that his father needed to take a break from the situation. At some point, Charles had COVID and was probably under a lot of pressure. The bottom line is that we don't know much about the situation apart of that single comment. When Oprah asked if he had resumed his conversations with his father, I'm under the impression that H answered yes.



He wasn't very convincing when he said that. He just kind of hung his head and went yeah.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> I agree. MM was what I consider to be purposely vague about the context and the speaker.



She probably didn’t want to leave her self open to be sued or called out for lying.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> He wasn't very convincing when he said that. He just kind of hung his head and went yeah.



It seemed pretty obvious they had worked out in advance what “their truth” would be for the interview.  At one point I thought it looked like Harry was trying to remember what he should say.


----------



## mdcx

Oh this is too good:








						Royal 'revelations' put to the test
					

Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## maris.crane

rose60610 said:


> No.
> *M&H would have protection had they fulfilled their traditional duties. *It is my understanding that people in the British monarchy are figureheads, and do not perform legislative duties that Parliament does. They are not elected officials.* It was M&H's choice to leave the BRF,* just as if they were employees of a corporation and left, they would no longer have any right to salary, the company car, health insurance, or any other perk. *If security were SO important to them, they should have stayed and performed the duties expected of them.*



I mean, Harry should've known a bit better. But on this note, I did feel a lot of sympathy for Meghan - I genuinely do not believe - and I think even she acknowledged this at the beginning - that she went in with a true understanding of what being a member of the BRF is. Maybe she thought being on a show and having some fame, or hanging out with federal government-adjacent family, that these experiences would be enough to prepare her.


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> And then she went on to say that her actual public wedding was for us!


How kind of her!  I'm sure the British public loved their taxpayer money being spent on a "play" that this horrible actress put on for them and the world!


----------



## lalame

I think anyone who's ever started a job that wasn't a good fit for them can empathize. But the way you leave said job matters.


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> It’s slightly funny to me that Meghan’s whole m.o. to get what she wants from the BRF is to play victim. Do people really ultimately have any respect for that? It seems so opposite to most respected achievers who tend to lean towards take responsibility for your life/decisions/mistakes, work hard and smart to reach your goals.
> My opinion of Oprah is sadly diminished.


Are you kidding?  I would hope what you said is true, but the current environment in the US is who can play/act/be the biggest victim of all and take advantage of it.  Evidence is not needed.  She's in the perfect country for her victimhood.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I gotta ask, why does a divorced, pushing 40 yr old marry into this family ,,, at 40 years old? ??
> The guy she ‘chose’ wore a Nazi shirt to a party.  Get a clue, get a f-ing clue.
> Aristotle said it well:* Ignorantia (legis) non excusat*


Ah, so you had to take Latin too?  When I mention that to the younger folks, they go "what?" .. sheesh! 

Anyhow .. 1 "word" (_not even a word_) - *$$$$$*  |  *£££££ *.. remember, when she asked her Toronto & British crews (_sorry - won't use the term friends here_) .. to find her a RICH British husband, emphasis .. RICH!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely! They somehow made her not wear a seatbelt and *paid her driver enough to consider committing suicide by drunk speeding* a great idea so he could then ride into the sunshine with his new wealth. Oh wait.



Talk about taking one for the team


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Serious question: if it was MI6 or whatever secret department would be responsible for murdering people, wouldn't it be counterproductive to have a hoard of paparazzi follow you while you're at it?


Nope.  They're *THAT *good


----------



## youngster

One of the claims I find amusing is that "they took her passport, drivers license and keys".  

Keys to what?  A house she no longer had in Toronto? Without a passport, how did she get to New York for that baby shower?  How did she drive herself on those few occasions we saw her driving in the UK?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It seemed pretty obvious they had worked out in advance what “their truth” would be for the interview.  At one point I thought it looked like Harry was trying to remember what he should say.


That's why I can't stand the term "My truth".  So you can make up BS, claim it's your truth, then spew it out and expect everyone to believe it.  Lunacy.


----------



## Chagall

muddledmint said:


> Charles stopped taking Harry’s calls for a short period of time. Harry did say that he is now speaking to Charles again. Moreover, Charles has been so generous with Meghan and Harry. He was basically providing almost their entire income and paying for her extravagant wardrobe, with  no appreciation. What is the big deal with him being hurt and not wanting to talk to Harry for a while? Meghan has completely cut off her father for years now and will probably never have contact with him again.


Charles has every right to refuse Hazzies calls, I think anyone would. Everyone around these two are held to high standards, have to act impeccably, while they do whatever they want with no thought to who gets hurt. No racism here! They are disliked for their behaviour. Period! If anyone on this planet behaved like them they would be disliked.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> I recall reading more than a few stories (can't recall where though) .. where various members on the Suits set said she was a major-league DIVA and even though she was on the 2nd-tier of the show (not in the 'STAR' sphere), she sure acted like it!  Doesn't surprise me one bit having heard stories about her in her earlier years!


*EXCLUSIVE: 'After the camera stops, she's not the most friendly.' Meghan Markle had strict rules not to shoot her funky FEET, videographer reveals and was already called a 'princess' for her 'diva'
 behavior*

DM Article


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> One of the claims I find amusing is that "they took her passport, drivers license and keys".
> 
> Keys to what?  A house she no longer had in Toronto? Without a passport, how did she get to New York for that baby shower?  How did she drive herself on those few occasions we saw her driving in the UK?


The keys to her heart.  The keys to her truth.  The keys to her SOUL.  The keys to her very essence.


----------



## kemilia

mdcx said:


> It’s a pretty sad addition to Oprah’s body of work. Did she agree to the future interview in order to get an invite to the wedding? She certainly doesn't need the money. It really has tainted her reputation imo.


This interview may make her invite to the eventual Coronation get lost in the mail.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> This interview may make her invite to the eventual Coronation get lost in the mail.



After what he said last night, Harry’s invitation may well be “lost” in the mail.


----------



## rose60610

muddledmint said:


> I guess she really is a good actress after all because I don’t think anyone else could keep a straight face while telling a ridiculous lie like that.



It's like how a sociopath can fool a lie detector test


----------



## kkfiregirl

Maggie Muggins said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: 'After the camera stops, she's not the most friendly.' Meghan Markle had strict rules not to shoot her funky FEET, videographer reveals and was already called a 'princess' for her 'diva'
> behavior*
> 
> DM Article



Her feet are fine! What she needs to worry about is the chicken legs! I hope she’s been doing her squats and calf exercises!


----------



## muddledmint

The saintly holier than thou, living for service, humanitarian and eco warrior image they try to portray is the most annoying thing of all. Can they just actually be authentic and admit that they are fame and money hungry wannabe celebrities? I would like them a lot more. They like to live in luxury with tons of security and not have anyone telling them what they can or cannot do. That’s fine, go do that. Have a reality show or something like the kardashians.


----------



## bag-mania

So now that they spent two hours speaking their truth and publicly venting their various insults, all is going to be well for Harry and Meghan from here on out, correct?

I mean they said themselves they are so very happy now so we no longer need to hear from them every week. *fingers crossed.*


----------



## bag-mania

From TMZ.


----------



## haute okole

bag-mania said:


> So now that they spent two hours speaking their truth and publicly venting their various insults, all is going to be well for Harry and Meghan from here on out, correct?
> 
> I mean they said themselves they are so very happy now so we no longer need to hear from them every week. *fingers crossed.*


The whole interview was a study of paranoia, mental illness, self aggrandizement and delusion.  Although there were elements of truth when she spoke of her feelings of being invalidated, her superiority/inferiority complex and need to demonstrate her “grandness” is so so sick.  As a mom to 2 teenage girls in Los Angeles, I can see how the entertainment industry creates Monstrous Princesses like her.  They are quite common here and she is nothing special and so cliche.  I cannot believe Harry fell for such a grifter.  She could not stand the heat because she lacks the substance.  She is your typical LA poser.

BTW, truly happy people live peacefully and do not cause chaos with every word they utter and write.  She was lying, of course.  She will not be happy until Harry is King, she is Queen or she is Pres. Of the US, God forbid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Tj


BagOuttaHell said:


> Sorry ladies. Quoting me ain’t about going to change anyone’s opinion about Diana. So I won’t be going back and forth about that anymore.
> 
> Harry never forgot how his mom was treated. And I am old enough to remember when Diana wasn’t the so called People’s Princess. A convenient title she received upon death. Idc how many royal pundits get on tv and say things are different now for H&M compared to Diana. These people take pleasure in running you down into the ground. I am also old enough to remember when they hated Kate. But she is their darling. For now.


ere is actually a book written by a credible investigative journalist who’s interviewed most of the world leaders and dictators who devoted many hours and wrote extensively and interviewed tons of people in the need to know positions who take your point of view but it was not the BRF who he concluded that called it a hit, it was a different country. I’ll get you the title if you are interested. I was fascinated by the amount of collusion and planning it took to “possibly” stage it.


----------



## lulilu

muddledmint said:


> Basically, yes.
> Most of their lies can be verified as lies or half truths with some basic fact checking. And while some of the other things she is claiming cannot be confirmed, there is really no reason to believe someone who has made so many other obvious lies and misrepresentations. She is banking on Americans being distracted by the insinuations of racism and blinded by ignorance of the British royal family and England in general.






lalame said:


> Truth is always somewhere in the middle. I don't think either side is faultless or either side has a monopoly on lies. One thing I learned that I agree sucked was the whole Kate making her cry thing. The injustice of being blamed for something that happened to you just universally sucks. That situation in particular pushes many of my buttons. I'm glad she got that out finally but I can't say I was surprised at KP not wanting to kill those rumors. Whenever you put out a statement, you're drawing attention to the allegations... which just feeds them more and more. It invites the media to poke the bear just to get the reaction. Kind of like paying ransom money... you don't want to encourage the behavior unless you HAVE to.



Just because M said "no, Kate made me cry" is not a good enough reason to believe her over Kate.  In fact, all of M's other lies give rise to the conclusion that M is lying about this.

When you find that a person has lied about one or more (material) things, you are perfectly entitled to disregard everything they claim is truth/fact.  Actually, in the US, juries are given such an instruction for evaluating a witness' credibility.  It makes perfect sense.


----------



## mellibelly

The memes have begun


----------



## lalame

lulilu said:


> Just because M said "no, Kate made me cry" is not a good enough reason to believe her over Kate.  In fact, all of M's other lies give rise to the conclusion that M is lying about this.
> 
> When you find that a person has lied about one or more (material) things, you are perfectly entitled to disregard everything they claim is truth/fact.  Actually, in the US, juries are given such an instruction for evaluating a witness' credibility.  It makes perfect sense.



I can't know for certain but I don't think she's lying... it's too specific. She wasn't attacking Kate either, she made it a point to say she did everything right.


----------



## Chanbal

Well it looks like Piers is right when he wrote "_But make no mistake, this interview will be a triumph for Meghan in America. Her narrative of a poor, vulnerable, unsuspecting bi-racial woman thrown to the wolves by a white, racist Royal Family and racist British press is already being heralded as 'courageous' and 'brave' and 'iconic' across the United States. She's got exactly what she wants: her homeland feeling sorry for her._"



Spoiler:  Piers was right! 



https://www.express.co.uk/news/poli...House-statement-Royal-Family-row-Queen-update


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> One of the claims I find amusing is that "they took her passport, drivers license and keys".
> 
> Keys to what?  A house she no longer had in Toronto? Without a passport, how did she get to New York for that baby shower?  How did she drive herself on those few occasions we saw her driving in the UK?



I can fathom them taking those things to keep them safe....especially if she needs to travel for her job.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Is anyone else wondering why Harry would tell Megan what someone supposedly said about whatever color Archie might be when he knew it would upset her, and hurt her feeling?  I would have taken that to my grave rather than upset my spouse in such cruel way.


----------



## Katel

It has begun 








I can’t listen to or watch them - is this her new face? (Maybe it’s pregnancy puff, not ps.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cavalier Girl said:


> Is anyone else wondering why Harry would tell Megan what someone supposedly said about whatever color Archie might be that he knew would upset her, and hurt her feeling?  I would have taken that to my grave rather than upset my spouse in such cruel way.



For the same reason he took her to the palace, says are you ready to meet QE, then you will need to curtsy.  Fergie had to come out to teach her.  Ooooh the drama!

ETA: if you haven’t guessed by now, he loves to pull everyone’s chain. He gets away with b/c he is a Prince,, swoon.


----------



## muddledmint

Allisonfaye said:


> I can fathom them taking those things to keep them safe....especially if she needs to travel for her job.


Yes, she’s acting like they did that to keep her prisoner when in reality, IF that happened, it was so she wouldn’t have to deal with those things herself. She had servants to make all the travel arrangements and open doors for her, and she’s complaining about that too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> It has begun
> 
> 
> I can’t listen to or watch them - is this her new face?



‘Yes, she requested to 2014 Jen Lawrence.


----------



## muddledmint

Katel said:


> It has begun
> 
> View attachment 5015610
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015611
> 
> 
> I can’t listen to or watch them - is this her new face?


Very inspiring message: girls, you will be oppressed no matter what!


----------



## CarryOn2020

muddledmint said:


> Yes, she’s acting like they did that to keep her prisoner when in reality, IF that happened, it was so she wouldn’t have to deal with those things herself. She had servants to make all the travel arrangements and open doors for her, and she’s complaining about that too.



She had security to keep the documents secure. This is the level of security she claims she wants. Now, she complains about it. Charlene of Monaco fussed about the same thing pre wedding. Then, she learned the reason why and understood. Security.


----------



## Chanbal

Someone that thinks Oprah did a very good job!


----------



## bag-mania

Cavalier Girl said:


> Is anyone else wondering why Harry would tell Megan what someone supposedly said about whatever color Archie might be that he knew would upset her, and hurt her feeling?  I would have taken that to my grave rather than upset my spouse in such cruel way.



Harry and Meghan feed off of each other’s slights and offenses. They are an “us against everyone else” couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Cavalier Girl said:


> Is anyone else wondering why Harry would tell Megan what someone supposedly said about whatever color Archie might be that he knew would upset her, and hurt her feeling?  I would have taken that to my grave rather than upset my spouse in such cruel way.



No, I would definitely want to know if it were me! You wouldn't want to know if someone was talking $hit about your baby (allegedly)?? Oh it'd be ON!


----------



## mdcx

Katel said:


> It has begun
> 
> View attachment 5015610
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015611
> 
> 
> I can’t listen to or watch them - is this her new face? (Maybe it’s pregnancy puff, not ps.)


Maybe she got mega doses of injectables before her IVF, knowing that she couldn't have it done while preggo? Her face looks filled to absolute capacity.


----------



## meluvs2shop

Omg I literally got teary eyed when Harry said, “it’s a girl!” How sweet and exciting for the couple. 

Some of the comments in here got me like :/


----------



## mdcx

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan feed off of each other’s slights and offenses. They are an “us against everyone else” couple.


Won’t Harry get a shock that day in the future when he realises the worm has turned, and they are now a “Meghan against Harry” couple.


----------



## Chanbal

"_Buckingham Palace was paralysed with 'horror and dismay' last night as Prince Harry stood accused of 'blowing up his family' with his bombshell interview.

The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William were all locked in crisis talks over how to react to a string of incendiary accusations unleashed by Harry and wife Meghan during a two-hour special with Oprah Winfrey on American TV.

With pressure growing for a statement today, Palace insiders described a mood of 'intense personal shock and sadness' that the prince had pressed the 'nuclear button on his own family'. 'People are just reeling,' a source said_"









						Queen holds crisis talks after Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview
					

The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William were all locked in crisis talks over how to react to a string of incendiary accusations unleashed by Harry and wife Meghan.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> "_Buckingham Palace was paralysed with 'horror and dismay' last night as Prince Harry stood accused of 'blowing up his family' with his bombshell interview.
> 
> The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William were all locked in crisis talks over how to react to a string of incendiary accusations unleashed by Harry and wife Meghan during a two-hour special with Oprah Winfrey on American TV.
> 
> With pressure growing for a statement today, Palace insiders described a mood of 'intense personal shock and sadness' that the prince had pressed the 'nuclear button on his own family'. 'People are just reeling,' a source said_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen holds crisis talks after Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William were all locked in crisis talks over how to react to a string of incendiary accusations unleashed by Harry and wife Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So, has the Rubicon *finally* been crossed?


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> Very inspiring message: girls, you will be oppressed no matter what!


Doesn't sound very feminist to me!  (Is Gloria listening?)


----------



## muddledmint

mdcx said:


> Maybe she got mega doses of injectables before her IVF, knowing that she couldn't have it done while preggo? Her face looks filled to absolute capacity.


I don’t really see anything different other than maybe some bloating, which could just be from pregnancy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Neighbor’s house for sale:








						BizHawk: Savoy Cafe & Deli in Santa Barbara Installs Parklet for Serving Diners
					

Webinar focuses on restaurants interested in serving liquor outside, city parking garages are open and free, and actor Rob Lowe's Montecito estate is for sale




					www.noozhawk.com


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is an *adult*. There are plenty of shocking stories out there long before Meghan. He bullied QE into taking his call so he could complain about the Sandringham situation. She said she was busy all week and hung up. He seems to enjoy badgering people who clearly do not want to speak to him. He seems to think he ‘knows’ all the reasons people avoid him - kinda like he’s a mind-reader. After being given millions, if my adult child continues to request more ... I will be very slow to answer that call. It sounds like he is on a power trip on the EgoExpress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 Cringe-Worthy Prince Harry Scandals We've All Conveniently Forgotten About
> 
> 
> From that time he dressed up as a Nazi, to that other time he used racial slurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


The article sadly forgot the frolic au naturel in Las Vegas, strip billiards maybe


----------



## kkfiregirl

Cavalier Girl said:


> Is anyone else wondering why Harry would tell Megan what someone supposedly said about whatever color Archie might be that he knew would upset her, and hurt her feeling?  I would have taken that to my grave rather than upset my spouse in such cruel way.



I think he did it to fuel the fire; he knew he needed M’s help to hurt his family/break away from them.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.


Little green men have landed in Leicester Square.


----------



## DeMonica

kemilia said:


> This interview may make her invite to the eventual Coronation get lost in the mail.


This interview wasn't exactly holding out an olive branch to BRF. Saying things about Charles like  "But at the same time, of course I will always love him but there's a lot of hurt that's happened and I will continue to make it one of my priorities to try and heal that relationship." sounds  so hypocritical.


----------



## youngster

Allisonfaye said:


> I can fathom them taking those things to keep them safe....especially if she needs to travel for her job.



Actually, I can too, now that I think about it.  Can you imagine having to leave for some important event, like the opening of Parliament or something lol, and have Harry or Meghan say something like I've misplaced the car keys or can't find my drivers license oops.  It's probably happened in the past with others.  So, yes, they'd want one of the staff to hang on to all that.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Neighbor’s house for sale:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BizHawk: Savoy Cafe & Deli in Santa Barbara Installs Parklet for Serving Diners
> 
> 
> Webinar focuses on restaurants interested in serving liquor outside, city parking garages are open and free, and actor Rob Lowe's Montecito estate is for sale
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.noozhawk.com




His _former_ home? Where did he go? Wasn't that long ago he made the ponytail comment. 
That was quick


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

BEL MOONEY: My pity for these sad, naive, damaged souls










						BEL MOONEY: My pity for these sad, naive, damaged souls
					

BEL MOONEY: Somebody told me there is a 'Team Meghan' and a 'Team Queen' and you have to pick your side. Now, having watched, I feel a sympathy that has surprised me.




					mol.im
				






DOMINIQUE SAMUELS: This clash of the Royals was about culture not color








						DOMINIQUE SAMUELS: This clash of the Royals was about culture
					

DOMINIQUE SAMUELS: Who can forget the goodwill that gripped this country in the run-up to the wedding of Prince Harry and his bride-to-be?




					mol.im


----------



## Chanbal

Have fun!



Spoiler: Which one is which?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

tiktok said:


> The whole issue here is lack of nuance in any narrative so we have two camps, just like in politics. Unfortunately when you look at the nuance, H&M don't come out as clean and saintly as they do now.
> 
> - Meghan can be the subject of a certain level of racism in the press but at the same time we all know not every attack was racist - Kate was "waitie Katie", had nude photos of her in a private vacation splashed across tabloids, harrassed due to her flight attendant mom, uncle etc. It doesn't justify any racism, but it does show that tabloids are a cesspool across the board and a mature adult would treat them as such and try to learn not to take it so personally (or do something to reduce the harm they cause people at large).
> 
> - Meghan can be the subject of some racism from a family member but at the same time have other members of the family be very supportive and welcoming in their own royal / upperclass British way. That way isn't the same as that of your average yoga studio teacher in West Hollywood who's your bestie on day 1, but any mature adult would understand there are cultural differences and give it some more time, or choose to bail, feeling empowered, not victimized.
> 
> - Harry's father could be a terrible dad, while at the same time Harry or Meghan or both could have tried his patience to the point where he's had enough of giving them money for their high lifestyle and was sick of their ungratefulness and entitlement.
> 
> - Meghan could have been the subject of bullying by the press, while at the same time bullying her own employees - those stories were in the press years ago, they didn't come out now. No one has the turnover she did amongst her staff while being a holier-than-thou saint.
> 
> The thing is, when you add up all the other things these two said yesterday, it's very hard to take them seriously:
> - Did Harry really not know that Archie is not going be a prince until Charles is king, not because of skin color but because he's just not eligible? Was that in the homework one of his tutors did for him? It's on Wikipedia if he bothered to look it up.
> - Half the BRF had therapy before, yet Meghan went to HR (what?) and they denied her? She could get her veneers replaced quietly but she couldn't get a therapist when she was suicidal? She could keep blood diamonds and wear them publicly despite the protests of her staff yet she didn't have authority to go above HR in order to not kill herself?
> - They were so burned by the family that within a few months of the suicidal thoughts, the new baby's birth, moving to a new house and all the drama with the BRF they were launching plans (that take a while to form) to move countries and profit from the Sussex Royal brand while doing none of the work required from royals? Was seeing $ signs the cure for their mental health problems?
> - They know Eugenie and Beatrice don't get security protection, yet they were floored Archie wouldn't either?
> - We are in the middle of a pandemic, half the US population has family members who they deem racist or lib or whatever for voting for a party that advocates for what they deem existential threats to their body or freedom, thousands of families were torn apart by political disagreements in the past 4 years, yet H&M's life, with the millions in clothing and jewelry and private jets to see Elton John and the Cloonies was "unsurvivable"?
> - They never read the press yet they know the press was racist, they sued the press multiple times etc.
> - Kate made Meghan cry - right, and that matters because...? My best friend made me cry, my mom made me cry, my sister made me cry. I made them cry. Who gives a @#$%? Are we in kindergarten? Why even mention that? Adults make each other cry and then they move on and never think about it anymore.
> - Everything was insinuations, no verifiable facts whatsoever, and they know the other side has a "never complain never explain" policy. How convenient.
> 
> Give me a break. The only thing that saves them is the fact that in today's lazy media world what matters is how many untouchable words your narrative includes. She now has "racism", "miscarriage", "suicide", "mental health", "setting boundaries with your in-laws" - that's more than enough for no one to want to touch the topic with a 10-foot pole and just hail her as a role model for us all.
> Excellent post


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Have fun!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Which one is which?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015673



Di did it better
Every.Single.Time


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> Ah, so you had to take Latin too?  When I mention that to the younger folks, they go "what?" .. sheesh!
> 
> Anyhow .. 1 "word" (_not even a word_) - *$$$$$*  |  *£££££ *.. remember, when she asked her Toronto & British crews (_sorry - won't use the term friends here_) .. to find her a RICH British husband, emphasis .. RICH!


She might have gotten a RICH husband but she got one with very few brain cells!


----------



## DrDior

He’s his mother & not in a good way.


----------



## Sly_Fox

bag-mania said:


> Charles doesn't come across as being a particularly warm, supportive man. That said, we are only hearing Harry's take and he certainly didn't reveal to Oprah any of the things HE said or did that might have prompted such a reaction from his father. In fact Harry and Meghan took great pains to try to present themselves as being totally blameless in everything.



My Dad wasn’t warm and supportive in many ways. But he taught me independence, respect for my elders and an incredible work ethic.

I wouldn’t trade him or those qualities for anything.

And I left home at 17 financially independent and well equipped to deal with life. For that I have and always will be eternally grateful to my Dad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Royal 'revelations' put to the test
					

Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: fact check?



*Royal 'revelations' put to the test*
Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.

They made jaw-dropping claims of brazen racism and delved into difficult conversations of family rifts. 

Although much of the interview was an outpouring of emotion, many of the claims can be stood up - or knocked down - with facts.

Here, MailOnline drills down into some of the central claims of the interview. 






The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on them quitting as senior royals 

Meghan never researched the Royal Family prior to joining

Meghan said: 'I didn't do any research about what that would mean,' she said. 'I never looked up my husband online.'

Fact check: Unlikely

Meghan's claim that she never researched Harry, nor the Royal Family, before entering into the relationship is at odds with claims made in the couple's biography.

Although the Sussexes maintain they did not contribute to Finding Freedom, it was written by friendly journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, who say the book was impeccably well-sourced by those closest to the couple.

Prior to their first date at Dean Street Townhouse in 2016, the authors write: 'Naturally both participants in this blind date did their homework with a thorough Google search. Harry, who scoped out Meghan on social media, was interested.'

A friend is also claimed to have impressed on Meghan the attention she would command for dating Harry, saying: 'This could be crazy...you will be the most wanted woman'.





Meghan Markle is seen heading to a hotel to meet up with some friends in Toronto, Canada, in November 2016

Harry and Meghan were actually secretly wed three days before the Windsor ceremony by the Archbishop of Canterbury 

Meghan said: 'You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that... We called the Archbishop and we just said, 'Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world but we want our union between us.' 

Fact check: Unlikely

Church of England marriages require at least two witnesses and the public must also have unrestricted access to the building during any marriage ceremony to allow for valid objections against the marriage. 

At the time the couple were living in the grounds of Kensington Palace, and their residence is off limits to the public.

A couple who are already lawfully married cannot choose to re-marry each other, unless there is some doubt as to the validity of the earlier marriage.

Reverend David Green, Vicar of St Mary's, West Malling and the Rector of St Michael's, Offham, said it was impossible to have had two weddings, adding: 'I think the Archbishop needs to clarify what did or did not happen three days before.' 

This means that one of the two ceremonies was more likely just an exchange of vows rather than a legally recognised wedding.  





Secret: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have revealed that they were married in secret three days before their royal wedding on May 19, 2018





Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared candid footage of Archie playing on a beach during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey 

Archie has a birthright to be a prince

Meghan said: Idea of the first member of colour in this family, not being titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be... It's not their right to take it away' 

Fact check: False

Archie did not have a birthright to be a prince, but could potentially become one when Charles accedes to the throne. 

That William and Kate's children have the HRH title and are styled as prince and princesses - and Archie is not - stems from a ruling more than 100 years ago.

In 1917, King George V issued a written order that only royal offspring who are in the direct line of succession could be made a prince and receive HRH titles.

The Letters Patent read: '...the grandchildren of the sons of any such sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of these our realms.'

Under the rules, only Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge's eldest son Prince George - as a great-grandson of the monarch down the direct line of succession to the throne - was originally entitled to be a prince.

The Queen stepped in ahead of George's birth in 2013 to issue a Letters Patent to ensure all George's siblings - as the children of future monarch William - would have fitting titles, meaning they were extended to Charles and Louis.

Under the George V rules, Archie would be entitled to be an HRH or a prince when his grandfather Charles, the Prince of Wales, accedes to the throne.  





The Duke and Duchess of Sussex introduce their baby son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor during a photocall in St George's Hall at Windsor Castle in May 2019

Archie wouldn't get 24/7 security because he wasn't a prince

Meghan said: In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, so we (had) the conversation of he won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title.

Fact check: False

Being a prince or princess does not automatically mean royals have police protection.

Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie's security is no longer paid for by the taxpayer.

Harry and Meghan no longer receive British police protection, and are understood to be paying for private security.  





The Duchess of Cambridge with Princess Charlotte and other bridesmaids arriving at St George's Chapel in Windsor Castle for the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan in May 2018 

Kate made Meghan cry before her wedding to Harry  

Responding to claims that she reduced Kate to tears, Meghan said: 'No, no. The reverse happened'.

Fact check: Contested  

Reports of a pre-wedding clash between the duchesses first emerged in November 2018, when sources claimed Meghan had been left displeased with a 'stressful' dress fitting for the flower girls. 

Accounts differed as to the source of the row. Some said it was a disagreement on whether the bridesmaids should wear tights - Meghan reportedly believed they should not.

Other reports said it stemmed from Princess Charlotte's dress not fitting, meaning another had to be scheduled.

A source said at the time: 'Kate had only just given birth to her third child, Prince Louis, and was feeling quite emotional.' 

But during the Oprah interview Meghan flatly denied the reports and claimed it was Kate that left her upset.  

Couple witnessed racism inside the monarchy 

Meghan said: [There were] concerns and conversations about how dark his [Archie's] skin might be when he's born' 

Fact check: Almost impossible to verify 

Harry and Meghan said they will never reveal the person who made these comments.

However Oprah revealed that Harry confirmed it was not the Queen nor Prince Philip. 

While currently not commenting on the contents interview, Buckingham Palace are almost certain to push back on suggestions of institutional racism.

They could launch an investigation - as they have done with claims of bullying. 

Prince Harry was asked what babies with Meghan 'will look like'


Harry was financially cut off from the royals 

Harry said: 'My family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us'

Fact check: They wanted to be financially independent

 When Harry and Meghan announced their intention to step back from being senior royals, they said they wanted to be 'financially independent'.

Before cutting ties, 95 per cent of their money came from Prince Charles's income from the Duchy of Cornwall, and 5 per cent from the taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant.

Princes William and Harry received most of a £13million fortune left by their mother Princess Diana. Harry is also thought to have had millions left to him by the Queen mother.  

Meghan has not seen Samantha Markle in almost 20 years

Meghan said: 'The last time I saw her must have been at least 18, 19 years.' 

Fact check: False

During the interview Meghan distanced herself from her half-sister Samantha, who she said she hardly knows and she grew up 'an only child'.

A photograph from 2008 - 13 years ago - shows Meghan with Samantha at her graduation.





A photograph from 2008 - 13 years ago - shows Meghan with her half-sister Samantha Markle at her graduation

Meghan had to turn over her passport, keys and driving licence to royal aides

Meghan said: 'When I joined that family, that was the last time I saw my passport, my driving licence, my keys - all of that gets turned over.'

Fact check: Difficult to verify   

Senior royals are often pictured driving themselves and it is believed there have never been prior claims of a royal having keys and passports held. 

Harry and Meghan received police protection, meaning their travel was meticulously planned by officers. 

Meghan's press team didn't defend her when 'things weren't true'

Oprah asked Meghan about stories that she made Kate cry, saying: 'So, all the time the stories were out that you had made Kate cry, you knew all along, and people around you knew that that wasn't true.' Meghan replied: 'Everyone in the institution knew it wasn't true.' And Oprah then said: 'So, why didn't somebody just say that?' Meghan said: 'That's a good question.'

Fact check: Contested

Making a wider point, Mail on Sunday royal correspondent Emily Andrews has said that Meghan's press team did in fact defend untrue stories, saying this was 'just not right'.

Ms Andrews said that she interacted with a press team who defended the Sussexes 'again and again and again, told me things were wrong - so didn't publish - and indeed tried to stop me when true.'

Palace lied to protect other members of the Royal Family

Meghan said: 'I came to understand that not only was I not being protected but that they were willing to lie to protect other members of the family, but they weren't willing to tell the truth to protect me and my husband.'

Fact check: Contested 

There was clearly frustration felt by the couple, with some justification, towards the Palace PR machine, which was sometimes reluctant to 'fight every little fire', as one source put it. 

But the Palace did robustly stand ground on many other stories that the couple insisted were not true, resulting in the media not running them. 

The Palace pursued at least one national newspaper all the way to press regulator IPSO over a story about their Frogmore home, and won a decisive victory for Harry and Meghan.

The duchess complained that she was 'not protected', but Palace sources have hit back at the idea the duchess was left to fend for herself, suggesting it was her own aides who needed protection from her bullying ways – something she strenuously denies.

Meghan was banned from going out for lunch with her friends 

Meghan: 'I remember so often people within The Firm would say, 'Well, you can't do this because it'll look like that. You can't'... so, even, 'Can I go and have lunch with my friends?' 'No, no, no. You're oversaturated. You're everywhere. It would be best for you to not go out to lunch with your friends.' I go, 'Well, I haven't left the house in months.'

Fact check: Contested   

Meghan appears to be talking about a four-year period, and it is likely the situation varied. 

She was spotted enjoying outings on numerous occasions, including a pub lunch with Harry, going for facials near their Kensington Palace home and shopping trips. 

Every British newspaper declined to buy photographs of these trips. No member of staff would dare tell Meghan where she could go.* 

Newspaper held story about Thomas Markle until Sunday before Meghan's wedding*

Meghan: 'If we were going to use the word betrayal, it's because when I asked him, when we were told by the comms team, this is a story that was going to be coming out, which, by the way, the tabloids had apparently known for a month or so and decided to hold until the Sunday before our wedding because they wanted to create drama, which is also a really key point in all this.'

Fact check: False

Meghan claimed 'the tabloids had apparently known for a month' that Thomas Markle had staged paparazzi photos before the wedding but 'decided to hold till the Sunday before our wedding... to create drama,' adding: 'They did not report the news, they created the news.' She suggested she had 'lost' her father forever as a result. 

In truth, far from sitting on the paparazzi story, the Mail on Sunday, which broke it, published within 24 hours of getting the proof.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Charles doesn't come across as being a particularly warm, supportive man. That said, we are only hearing Harry's take and he certainly didn't reveal to Oprah any of the things HE said or did that might have prompted such a reaction from his father. _*In fact Harry and Meghan took great pains to try to present themselves as being totally blameless in everything.*_



And therein lies the issue. Couldn’t they show a modicum of appreciation? Gratitude? They come off as so un-likeable. William had the same upbringing, similar experiences, he learned restraint, Hazzie not so much. He actually goes to a stranger’s house for a wee? Gross.


----------



## Lake Effect

purseinsanity said:


> Archie is literally nothing but a prop.  A prop for their photo ops and a prop for the propaganda.


Okay, I cannot get this image out of my head now.  Eddie from Ab Fab " A mixed race baby!! it's the Chanel of babies!!"


Sol Ryan said:


> I don’t think she understood that the BRF is not a meritocracy..... it’s a hierarchy.


She must have thought it was a Democracy 

Okay I'm out. That made me want to go watch some Absolutely Fabulous.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan really seems to hate Kate imo. Obviously there is some unhealthy psychology at play. I assume all that business about William having an affair with Rose started back under Meghan’s door. It would be frightening to have a family member that seemed to have some kind of vendetta against you.
Imo, Kate is the one she is trying to implicate in the suggestion that a BRF member discussed babies skin tone.


----------



## kkfiregirl

A Tale Old and New as Another Royal Wife Breaks Free (Published 2021)
					

A quarter-century after Princess Diana broke her silence about life among the British royals, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, did the same. Their stories were remarkably similar.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## sgj99

Didn’t Diana leave her fortune to William and Harry?  So since he quit the Firm he’s not destitute by any means.


----------



## bisousx

sgj99 said:


> Didn’t Diana leave her fortune to William and Harry?  So since he quit the Firm he’s not destitute by any means.



For some, $30 million is simply not enough


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet this article is excellent. Bel Mooney really captures the situation.

Her truth, his truth, your truth, my truth. There is only the truth and nothing but the truth.  In the background, I hear Jack Nicholson yelling ‘you can’t handle the truth’. So now, we have her truth, his truth, my truth, blah blah.

*To me it revealed an almost pathetic neediness for status.*
This, 1000 times this. Most American women do not hunger for a title of Princess. How disappointing to find girls and 40 year old women thirst for this. 




Spoiler: Sad, naive, damaged souls



*BEL MOONEY: My pity for these sad, naive, damaged souls*
Somebody told me that there is a ‘Team Meghan’ and a ‘Team Queen’ and you have to pick your side.

I thought it was true — and certainly knew where I stood. As the ‘sides’ lined up on social media, ready to watch the Oprah Winfrey interview, this passionate monarchist — devoted to the Queen and the Prince of Wales — felt nothing but acute hostility towards Meghan and her hapless husband.

Now, having watched the (seemingly endless) programme, I feel a sympathy that has surprised me.
In spite of all I know of their privileged lifestyle, somewhat-hypocritical ‘woke’ pretensions and all that’s irritating in their self-indulgent California-speak, watching the Sussexes parade their feelings to the U.S.’s Queen of TV left me feeling very sad.

It was tragic to watch Prince Harry patronise his father and brother by expressing ‘compassion’ for them, pour salt into existing wounds and then state so glibly that ‘time heals’. Because it doesn’t — or at least, not always.

Yes, time can slowly restore and people can forgive, but only when they stay calm, gradually forget harsh words and mistaken actions and move quietly and deliberately towards reconciliation.

How can that happen when you have just chosen to wash your monogrammed family linen in front of millions of people?

I kept wondering how I’d feel if these were two ‘ordinary’ people writing to my Saturday advice column about the stress of marrying someone very different, or the rising panic when you don’t fit in, or the loneliness of feeling misunderstood by everybody, or hating your life so much you think you might be happier if you were dead.
The world is full of confused people who get things very wrong in their lives and usually blame others. Advice columns like mine are inundated with toxic family problems — to the point where I often despair and wonder if anybody ever communicates properly or thinks twice before an angry rant.

Why should the rich and famous be different? Why are they any less deserving of understanding — even compassion — for their shocking mistakes?

Watching Oprah’s interview, I tried to feel furious with those hugely rich, pampered people, living in a gated paradise while whinging about how badly they have been treated.

*But I’m afraid I couldn’t help but pity the couple as two surprisingly naïve, youngish souls who know astonishingly little about real life — and have instead revealed just how damaged they both are.

Was the decision to spill the beans to Oprah part of a strategy to promote their lucrative brand — or yet another yelp in one long cry for help?

This isn’t so much a case of ‘their own truth’ (as Winfrey would put it, in that wince-inducing phrase) as a painful revelation of how little they understand of what they are really saying.*

They present themselves as truth-tellers, more sinned against than sinning. Yet they seem ignorant of the fact that ‘truth’ is a double-edged sword, and that by stating one thing you can reveal something quite different.
How extraordinary, for example, that Meghan — the allegedly free spirit — should prove to be so obsessed with titles. It came up again and again, especially when talking about their baby son.

Meghan wanted him to be called Prince Archie, even though he has no claim to the title yet. What’s more, since all titles are in the Queen’s gift, this was in fact a complaint against the grandmother-in-law who, she also said, had been ‘wonderful’ to her.

The Duchess seems unaware of the contradictions between pretending to know nothing of the monarchy (really?), then feeling trapped and frustrated by its protocols and complaining because of this perceived slight to her son.

*To me it revealed an almost pathetic neediness for status.*

The institution of the monarchy is indeed a stuffy, hidebound thing. If it was tough for Diana, born into the English aristocracy, how strange must it have seemed to this American actress who accepted her Prince after a whirlwind courtship in which both were blinded by the stars in their eyes.

Did they really ask for help which was refused? Did they not have good, wise friends outside?

Yes, it seems curious for Meghan to moan that she wasn’t reminded or helped to learn the National Anthem (come on, lass, actresses have to learn their lines), but there’s undoubtedly a rigidity to royal protocol which must chafe.

It must have felt entrapping to both the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, who nevertheless resolutely do their duty.

I don’t believe anybody has the right to say Meghan is exaggerating the loneliness and despair that led her to think it would be better if she were no longer alive. I feel compassion for somebody so out of their depth in a foreign country. *The trouble with her revelation is that she seemed to forget her responsibility towards those watching.

It is extremely unwise to parade your suicidal thoughts when you have a professed interest in mental health and are followed by millions of young people who, in the stress of lockdown, may be adversely influenced by your words.*

_*Ah, but there was little of mature wisdom in this interview. Sadly, I was reminded of children caught in wrongdoing who brightly spin a yarn to get themselves off the hook.*_

*There was so much that should have been kept strictly private. I wish for her own sake that she had understood there are times when ‘your own truth’ can do untold damage. I also wish she could have shown her love for her (clearly much weaker) husband by protecting him from his own version of the ‘truth’ about his family, too.*

The horrible story of questions over the colour of a baby’s skin is left hanging — and therefore, by implication, trashes the whole family. Was this deliberate?

Anybody who reveres the lifelong service of the Queen and Prince Charles and respects their love of the Commonwealth will know the suggestion of racism is outrageous.

It reveals a terrible lack of emotional intelligence in Harry and Meghan not to realise how cruel is the hurt they are dishing out.

For all the glitz, glamour and big bucks, they are a sad couple.

Is there anybody to give them wise advice? Would they listen if somebody like me — who so adored our soldier prince and celebrated his wonderful wedding to a stunning, ‘ordinary’ woman — begged them now to embrace the privacy they have so shockingly breached and focus on their babies?

Because if they don’t, they are storing up greater unhappiness in the future. If things go wrong you will find, Sir, you need your family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pursekitten

CarryOn2020 said:


> I see it differently. By telling the world that “someone in the family“ made a racist comment, they are letting the person know that they could easily name the person, too. That is more threatening than actually naming the person. It is manipulative behavior. It is playing a game with the truth. Will I tell or won’t I? Remember these are 40 yr old people.



Fair interpretation, yet I question why didn't they just name drop the person and be done with it. If the person (or people?) were named, wouldn't that person/people be forced toward an apologetic gesture?



CarryOn2020 said:


> Once they decided to leave the UK, why would they expect their security paid for?  I’m not questioning the need for it, just who pays. He is no longer working for the BRF, why would they pay his bills?  Why should Charles?



Unlike a US President, Prince Harry and his son Archie were not elected and did not have a choice into which family they were born into and the inherent dangers that come with that life. From an American perspective and not knowing anything about what is said behind closed doors, I just thought PH's father/family would want to ensure PH and his son and grandson's safety by offering private security detail if that's all PH and MM wanted in the end. Maybe it's the meaning behind the "no, no security" that emotionally stung the most? Who really knows.

Cutting ties was the best thing PH and MM could've done IMO, just to leave the Institution to live their lives as they choose. The decision is irrevocable and good on them for doing it.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> A Tale Old and New as Another Royal Wife Breaks Free (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> A quarter-century after Princess Diana broke her silence about life among the British royals, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, did the same. Their stories were remarkably similar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


They're "remarkably similar", because as her old friends said, MM was obsessed with Diana, and as part of the BRF, was able to access even more info about her.  She's even plagiarizing Diana's stories.    This woman has mental health issues all right, with her alleged depression being the least dangerous to others.


----------



## youngster

sgj99 said:


> Didn’t Diana leave her fortune to William and Harry?  So since he quit the Firm he’s not destitute by any means.



Diana did leave her estate, which was many millions, to her sons.  I read somewhere that Harry got the majority too since he was the spare and William will eventually be king. So, his claim last night that he was "cut off financially", if true, meant he had to dip into some of his tens of millions of dollars to support himself.  _Quelle horreur!_  Probably never had to pay for a meal out of his own pocket before. 

That was one of the more ludicrous and out-of-touch things he said from what I've read.  He's in his late 30's for heaven's sake.  He's acting as if he had nowhere to go, no food on the table, no roof over their heads, during a pandemic no less where millions have died and many, many more around the planet are actually suffering.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Diana did leave her estate, which was many millions, to her sons.  I read somewhere that Harry got the majority too since he was the spare and William will eventually be king. So, his claim last night that he was "cut off financially", if true, meant he had to dip into some of his tens of millions of dollars to support himself.  _Quelle horreur!_ *Probably never had to pay for a meal out of his own pocket before.*
> 
> That was one of the more ludicrous and out-of-touch things he said from what I've read.  He's in his late 30's for heaven's sake.  He's acting as if he had nowhere to go, no food on the table, no roof over their heads, during a pandemic no less where millions have died and many, many more around the planet are actually suffering.


Well, remember now, "Them Royals" don't carry cash!


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> A Tale Old and New as Another Royal Wife Breaks Free (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> A quarter-century after Princess Diana broke her silence about life among the British royals, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, did the same. Their stories were remarkably similar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


The NYT! Quelle surprise....................................NOT
I wish our media wasn't so predictable as to what they run with 
That goes both ways


----------



## CarryOn2020

sgj99 said:


> Didn’t Diana leave her fortune to William and Harry?  So since he quit the Firm he’s not destitute by any means.



Noooooo. They must have security. That requires $$$$$. Charles, Diana and the Queen Mother gave him millions.  He can buy whatever he wants. Pleeeeze.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pursekitten said:


> Fair interpretation, yet I question why didn't they just name drop the person and be done with it. If the person (or people?) were named, wouldn't that person/people be forced toward an apologetic gesture?



That info will be the next 3 hour OW interview, or the Netflix docu-drama or the Spotify poddie.  Seee, they know how to string out this stuff.


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle’s Sister Samantha Fires Back After Her Tell-All Interview
					

Meghan Markle’s half-sister, Samantha Markle, clapped back at the duchess’ tell-all interview claim that she grew up an only child — details




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Clapping back! Meghan Markle’s half-sister, Samantha Markle, spoke out after the duchess’ CBS tell-all interview on Sunday, March 7.

*Every Revelation From Meghan and Harry's Interview*
“The truth was totally ignored and omitted,” Samantha, 56, told Inside Edition on Monday, March 8, after Meghan claimed, “I don’t really know [her],” despite growing up with the same father, Thomas Markle.

The former Suits star, 39, addressed her relationship with Samantha in a bonus clip from her and Prince Harry’s interview that aired on CBS This Morning on Monday, revealing her true thoughts on her half-sibling’s book, The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister, which was released in January.

“I think it would be very hard to ‘tell all’ when you don’t know me,” Meghan said. “I don’t feel comfortable talking about people that I really don’t know. I grew up as an only child, which everyone who grew up around me knows, and I wished I had siblings.”

Samantha, however, did not agree with Meghan’s recollection of their childhood. “I don’t know how she can say, ‘I don’t know her’ and she was an only child,” she said on Monday. “We’ve got photographs over a lifespan of us together. So how can she not know me?”

*Meghan Markle's Family: Everything We Know About the Royal In-Laws *
The author shared snaps of the half-sisters together through the years, including one from her graduation in 2008. She claimed the photo, which was taken 13 years ago, contradicts Meghan’s comment that “the last time I saw her must have been at least 18, 19 years ago.”

Meghan and Samantha have been at odds since before her marriage to Harry in May 2018, with Samantha criticizing her sister in the press and social media. Samantha was not invited to the royal wedding and later admitted she was “hurt at not being included” in the celebrations.

During the Tig founder’s explosive sit-down with CBS, she also claimed that Samantha “changed her last name back to Markle in her early 50s … only when I started dating Harry. I think that says enough.”

Samantha again denied the activist’s allegations, showing a photo of her petition to change her name to Markle in December 1997. She also had a record of her college diploma, which lists her name as Samantha M. Markle.

“I was a Markle before she was,” she said. “I thought that was kind of weird that she would say I only changed my name back when she met Harry. Markle has always been my name.”

Samantha also said that she didn’t have any sympathy for Meghan, who is expecting her second child, after she spoke out about her suicidal thoughts, which she experienced as a result of the pressures of being a royal, living in the U.K. and expecting the couple’s first child, Archie.
“Depression is not an excuse for treating people like dishrags and disposing of them,” she said.

Samantha published the first half of her book about Meghan, which includes allegations about her half-sister’s “demanding” attitude and stories about the philanthropist’s first marriage to producer Trevor Engelson. It also featured text messages between Thomas, 76, and Harry, 36, after Meghan’s fallout with her father following his paparazzi photo scandal in May 2018.

Thomas told Us Weekly in January that he was “very pleased” by Samantha’s book. Samantha, for her part, insisted to Us that the book was “never designed to attack my sister.”
Meghan and Harry spoke openly about both of their families during the sit-down, with the duchess explaining her father “wasn’t able” to tell her the truthabout the paparazzi photo scandal. Her mother, Doria Ragland, “never said a word” to the press, according to Meghan, who praised her ability to remain “in silent dignity for four years watching me go through this.”


----------



## purseinsanity

Meghan Markle's Sister Calls Her Narcissist for 'Lost Her Dad' Claim to Oprah
					

Meghan Markle's sister Samantha trashed her as a narcissist after the Oprah interview.




					www.tmz.com
				




Fifi, Fev & Nick on The Fox
*Meghan Markle*'s sister is furious the Duchess essentially disavowed her family -- especially their dad -- during the Oprah interview, and claims she's merely playing victim for sympathy.
*Samantha Markle* went HAM Monday while on the Australian radio show "Fifi, Fev & Nick" ... calling BS on Meghan *telling Oprah* she'd lost her father because of Royal family pressures.
Samantha said, "When she said 'I lost my dad' -- the world watched as my dad was in interviews wanting communication with his daughter. She didn't lose her dad. She iced her dad!"

Play video content
"YOU DON'T KNOW ME"CBS
Samantha didn't pull punches, as she played dime-store psychologist on Meghan, saying ... "I see a narcissistic personality disorder," and suggested Meghan needs counseling.
It gets worse ... she also equated *Prince Harry* to a kidnapping victim who's falling in love with his captor. Samantha said, “I feel sorry for Harry. He fell victim to her negligence, and I will say sociopathy ... she pulled him away from his family, all of his friends, the life that he knew."
As for Meghan's claim to Oprah that she didn't know anything about the Royals and their way of life -- Samantha claims Meghan studied the UK Monarchy, and even tries to emulate *Princess Diana*.

Samantha added, she doesn't think Meghan's embarrassed of her family -- she just didn't want them around to expose lies Samantha claims her sister's told.
She thinks Meghan was tired of getting "busted" on stuff in the media ... "So she started playing victim."


----------



## purseinsanity

You know, I initially thought Samantha Markle was a loon, but I'm finding myself agreeing with her.


----------



## Jayne1

The only time I saw Oprah challenge them was when she mentioned the Netflix and Spotify gigs, it was almost like she didn’t want the competition. Barging in on her territory.


----------



## rose60610

I took the interview as an example of courtroom proceedings where an opposing attorney shouts "Objection!", and Judge responds "Overruled-jurors will disregard the question".  But of course the jurors already heard the planted catnip bait the attorney knew full well would be overruled. 

That's what's happened with the interview. M&H just needed enough sympathetic gullible people to hear a bunch of crap that they can't prove and the RF can't disprove. They needed juicy scandals to fuel their Netflix/Spotify endeavors to preserve the contracts. Such salacious accusations would attract huge eyeballs and ears. Disgusting. But I guess it's the new woke! Pimp your victimhood for millions of dollars. It's in their best interest to cast themselves as victims for dollars while at the same at the same time hawking themselves as strong role models for young women. Unfortunately the media are taking their sides. Comments on other sites, shall we say, _are not kind._


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> The NYT! Quelle surprise....................................NOT
> I wish our media wasn't so predictable as to what they run with
> That goes both ways


The NYT is the print equivalent of CNN, IMO.  Used to be a reliable source of news, now just yellow journalism that don't even fact check.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> *Pimp your victimhood for millions of dollars. *


----------



## Chagall

Narcissists crave attention, it is what fuels them. Any kind off attention will do. Preferably positive, but even negative will do in a pinch. He was the spare prince that nobody thought much about, and she an actress I had never heard of. Now the eyes of the world are on them. You have got to hand it to them - if it was attention they wanted, they played their hand like grand masters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Sigh, I gotta say, I literally come online to this thread, then hop off.  I do not go to any other site (besides banking maybe) because I can't mentally deal with seeing MM and JCMH's stupid mugs EVERYWHERE.  It's causing me mental anguish, and makes me feel utterly drained LOL.  Thank you to everyone on this thread, whether you're with the majority opinion or not, because you are keeping me sane!


----------



## artax two

Chagall said:


> Narcissists crave attention, it is what fuels them. Any kind off attention will do. Preferably positive, but even negative will do in a pinch. He was the spare prince that nobody thought much about, and she an actress I had never heard of. Now the eyes of the world are on them. You have got to hand it to them - if it was attention they wanted, they played their hand like grand masters.


I think this could have been a big part of it for M. She couldn't get attention/reactions from the royal family. Like how if you ignore a bully, they leave you alone, or if you don't react to a child's tantrum. All the acting out, and still Kate was the center of attention. So even Megxit didn't make them react, and so now she is publicly calling them racist and claiming they ignored her mental health struggles. She is admitting openly that it drove her to near suicide.


----------



## rose60610

Chagall said:


> Narcissists crave attention, it is what fuels them. Any kind off attention will do. Preferably positive, but even negative will do in a pinch. He was the spare prince that nobody thought much about, and she an actress I had never heard of. Now the eyes of the world are on them. You have got to hand it to them - if it was attention they wanted, they played their hand like grand masters.



You can't argue with facts!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Neighbor’s house for sale:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BizHawk: Savoy Cafe & Deli in Santa Barbara Installs Parklet for Serving Diners
> 
> 
> Webinar focuses on restaurants interested in serving liquor outside, city parking garages are open and free, and actor Rob Lowe's Montecito estate is for sale
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.noozhawk.com


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for bringing this to my attention. I checked the house, but I have to pass on it. It has only 13 restrooms, which is far below the standard 16 or 19 restrooms ...


----------



## mdcx

sgj99 said:


> Didn’t Diana leave her fortune to William and Harry?  So since he quit the Firm he’s not destitute by any means.


Harry is notoriously tight with his own cash. Someone else always pays. I believe it was Cressida Bonas who had to pay her own way to attend one of Harrys friends overseas weddings when she was his girlfriend. 
The idea of dipping into his own trust to fund the Markles Free At Last! jaunt to America must have been rough on the poor dear.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, I gotta say, I literally come online to this thread, then hop off.  I do not go to any other site (besides banking maybe) because I can't mentally deal with seeing MM and JCMH's stupid mugs EVERYWHERE.  It's causing me mental anguish, and makes me feel utterly drained LOL.  Thank you to everyone on this thread, whether you're with the majority opinion or not, because you are keeping me sane!



I  enjoy your posts. Or, as MeMeMe/Haz would say: The posts you put forward are an inspiration to all raindrops who seek creative activations each and every day because Diana huge merch plug would so agree with you, and, most importantly, with US. Do continue the hard work that we pretend we're doing because so many find your creative activations inspiring and uplifting.


----------



## Kevinaxx

bag-mania said:


> They are having a girl baby.


I honestly feel sorry for Archie and this new life that’s about to come into this world with those two as their parents.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> I  enjoy your posts. Or, as MeMeMe/Haz would say: The posts you put forward are an inspiration to all raindrops who seek creative activations each and every day because Diana huge merch plug would so agree with you, and, most importantly, with US. Do continue the hard work that we pretend we're doing because so many find your creative activations inspiring and uplifting.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Harry is notoriously tight with his own cash. Someone else always pays. I believe it was Cressida Bonas who had to pay her own way to attend one of Harrys friends overseas weddings when she was his girlfriend.
> The idea of dipping into his own trust to fund the Markles Free At Last! jaunt to America must have been rough on the poor dear.



Notice Harry said it was his money from his mother that they used. Remember the press telling us at the time of the engagement that Meghan has several million dollars of her own, apparently she still does.


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> You know, I initially thought Samantha Markle was a loon, but I'm finding myself agreeing with her.


Because she came with receipts!!!


----------



## youngster

So, MM said they actually got married 3 days prior to the big wedding which was "just for the two of them" and the big, public wedding was "for the world".   

I guess some have previously posted that the first wedding, if it took place, was likely not legal for several reasons, especially since they didn't have witnesses. I assume the Archbishop of Canterbury will be along at some point to verify this. I'm really having a hard time imagining that he went along with marrying them secretly.  

So, they spent $50 million taxpayer dollars and they considered themselves already married. "The world" would have been fine without the spectacle.  They could have had a quiet, private wedding like Princess Beatrice just did with a handful of relatives and close friends if that was what they truly wanted.  What a hoax.  I always thought that Harry wore some odd expressions during the wedding and carriage ride, like he was tense and impatient at times.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chagall said:


> Narcissists crave attention, it is what fuels them. Any kind off attention will do. Preferably positive, but even negative will do in a pinch. He was the spare prince that nobody thought much about, and she an actress I had never heard of. Now the eyes of the world are on them. You have got to hand it to them - if it was attention they wanted, *they played their hand like grand masters*.


Yes, but it's only one move in a long game of wits and patience until the real masters execute the final move and declare checkmate.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> You know, I initially thought Samantha Markle was a loon, but I'm finding myself agreeing with her.



Because that is how the media wanted us to see her. When she made her comments back then the press portrayed her as a raving nutcase who was trying to make her wonderful sister look bad. Today the entire rest of the Royal Family knows what it feels like to be Samantha. I bet they wish they had paid attention to her at the time.


----------



## Chagall

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, but it's only one move in a long game of wits and patience until the real masters execute the final move and declare checkmate.


Queen Elizabeth may be 94 but she is nobody’s fool. She is well suited to play the long game. Not so sure about our boy Charlie though.


----------



## kkfiregirl

poopsie said:


> The NYT! Quelle surprise....................................NOT
> I wish our media wasn't so predictable as to what they run with
> That goes both ways



I agree. My DH was surprised at the front page _breathless_ coverage by the NYT. 

They even had this gem!









						Prince Harry Finally Takes On White Privilege: His Own (Published 2021)
					

Meghan Markle and Harry’s interview revealed a catalyst for their reinvention, our critic writes: Harry’s racial awakening after attacks on Markle.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

About their house...

 Here's everything we know about Harry and Meghan's California home

Most of the headlines, hot takes and apoplectic tweets emerging from Sunday's humdinger of an interview between Oprah Winfrey and the Sussexes revolve around how the British royal family are allegedly (surprise!) still racist; how Prince Charles ghosted his son; and how Piers Morgan successfully made it all about Piers Morgan.

Viewers of the CBS Special on Sunday were also fascinated by a charming chicken coop.

Markle said in the interview that the family (who also revealed they are expecting a baby girl in the summer) want to "live authentically" and get back "down to basics" before offering viewers a rare glimpse into their new California life. This included footage of the family playing on a nearby beach, and the couple's son Archie, donning Wellington boots, tending to hens rescued from a factory farm in "Archie's Chick Inn." 

Even the sixth in line to the throne isn't above a poultry pun.

Despite the fact that the royal couple were cut off financially by "the firm," as Harry claimed in the interview, they still managed to rustle together enough cash to buy the $14.7 million château on the Santa Barbara coast in June. Harry said that money "my mum left me" helped buy the home.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's house and land, though, also has a fascinating back story.

The property, known as the Château of Riven Rock, sits the corner of what was once the “Riven Rock” estate owned by Cyrus McCormick, inventor of the mechanical grain reaper — a man credited with revolutionizing agriculture.

McCormick's son Stanley, also know as the “mad millionaire,” suffered from schizophrenia and was confined on the property from the age of 34 until his death at 72.

According to The Telegraph millions of dollars were spent in comforting McCormick in his "gilded cage." This included the construction of a nine-hole golf course and a theatre complete with in-house musical director.

The inventor's son's mental health deteriorated to such an extent that the best behavioral scientists in America were hired to live on the estate to observe Stanley and find a cure, to no avail.

McCormick's wife, Katharine, meanwhile, was prevented from contact with her violent husband and often reduced to crouching in bushes and watching him with binoculars.

The story inspired the 1998 novel, "Riven Rock" and was referenced in "The Sopranos" episode, "Pax Soprana."

The main house was demolished after the 1925 Santa Barbara earthquake and the estate was eventually subdivided, with its outbuildings sold off as separate residences, one of which is now owned by the royals.

After seeing out the start of the pandemic in Tyler Perry's Los Angeles home, the couple bought the nine-bedroom house on the corner of the former estate in June for $14.6 million.

Variety revealed that a $9.5 million dollar mortgage was taken out as part of the deal. It was also reported that the seller, Russian businessman Sergey Grishin, acquired the estate in 2009 for $25.3 million and had attempted to sell it many times over the past decade before finally accepting a $10 million-plus financial loss.

The house, built in 2003, has 13 full bathrooms and six half bathrooms, a five-car garage, movie theater, games room, wine cellar and spa with a massage room.

Their five-acre estate also boasts rose gardens, century-old olive trees, an outdoor pizza oven, pool, playground, vegetable garden, tennis court, a two-bedroom guest cottage.

Outside of the hen house, Archie may also enjoy a tea house and a children’s house listed on the property.

Current residents in bougie Montecito include Gwyneth Paltrow, Ellen DeGeneres, Ariana Grande, and Oprah Winfrey herself, who owns a lavish 70-acre “Promised Land” compound in the neighborhood.

Variety describes the neighborhood as "laid-back and mostly paparazzi-free," though if the interest stoked by Sunday's interview is anything to go by, that may be short-lived.


----------



## Chanbal

How tragic indeed!

"_That such incendiary claims about cruelty, neglect, snobbery and racism existing at the heart of the Royal Family should come from two people who, barely a moment ago, were representing the Queen and the very institution they were so casually disparaging only adds to the enormity of this unfolding crisis.

No doubt the private telephone line at the Sussexes’ California mansion has been ringing non-stop with friends telling Meghan she had been brave, fearless and formidable with the bouquets and plaudits arriving by the truckload.

*It was, let’s not forget, a consummate performance, proving that the Duchess is both articulate and ruthless.*

In an 85-minute-long interview that was breathtaking in its audacity, she and Harry stripped away what few vestiges of mystery the monarchy had left, reducing it to the dimensions of a tawdry soap opera, while making the Palace and its advisers seem malevolent and destructive.

*What concerns those who have the goodwill of the monarchy at heart is how Meghan and Harry have wrought such damage on its image and reputation oversea with their wilful and groundlessly vindictive remarks.

A reputation, remember, cultivated over almost 70 years of tireless service by Harry’s grandmother, the Queen.*

How tragic that at almost 95, she should see her life’s work jeopardised by such thoughtlessness.

*Two red light issues, racism and mental health. Both guaranteed to attract huge empathy for the duchess. If that is truly all she wanted, then of course there will be sympathy and understanding for her.*

But her lack of emotional intelligence will convince many that Harry and Meghan’s interview was no cri de coeur but a self-centred rush of attention-seeking.

The tragedy is that in doing it they have opened a wound to the heart of the monarchy . The blood is flowing and it is hard to see how it can be staunched.

*To survive, and here the Queen (and the Government) will have the overwhelming support of the British people, Harry and Meghan will be need to jettisoned and left without the accoutrements of their royal lives — their HRH titles.*

Do nothing and the reputation of our Queen and our monarchy will be fatally impaired. If this means losing support in countries like the U.S. it must be a chance worth taking._"









						RICHARD KAY: The only winners are those who hate the monarchy
					

RICHARD KAY: Not even the height of the Charles and Diana wars brought such a glow to the heart of anti-monarchists everywhere as Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey has done.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Notice Harry said it was his money from his mother that they used. Remember the press telling us at the time of the engagement that Meghan has several million dollars of her own, apparently she still does.


The bulk of Harry's money from his mother is really from his father and the divorce settlement which was so large that he had to borrow from The Queen.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


>





rose60610 said:


> I  enjoy your posts. Or, as MeMeMe/Haz would say: The posts you put forward are an inspiration to all raindrops who seek creative activations each and every day because Diana huge merch plug would so agree with you, and, most importantly, with US. Do continue the hard work that we pretend we're doing because so many find your creative activations inspiring and uplifting.



Thanks so much for shining a light on this!  Your compassion is so appreciated!


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> So, MM said they actually got married 3 days prior to the big wedding which was "just for the two of them" and the big, public wedding was "for the world".
> 
> I guess some have previously posted that the first wedding, if it took place, was likely not legal for several reasons, especially since they didn't have witnesses. I assume the Archbishop of Canterbury will be along at some point to verify this. I'm really having a hard time imagining that he went along with marrying them secretly.
> 
> So, they spent $50 million taxpayer dollars and they considered themselves already married. "The world" would have been fine without the spectacle.  They could have had a quiet, private wedding like Princess Beatrice just did with a handful of relatives and close friends if that was what they truly wanted.  What a hoax.  I always thought that Harry wore some odd expressions during the wedding and carriage ride, like he was tense and impatient at times.


You know, I couldn't help but imagine thinking she must've dreamt herself to be in the Game of Thrones, playing Lyanna Stark, secretly marrying her Rhaegan Targaryen by the river with just the Archbishop, just the two of them and their love.    Both heroines didn't speak much, and weren't "heard".


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> You know, I couldn't help but imagine thinking she must've dreamt herself to be in the Game of Thrones, playing Lyanna Stark, secretly marrying her Rhaegan Targaryen by the river with just the Archbishop, just the two of them and their love.    Both heroines didn't speak much, and weren't "heard".


Lyanna died in childbirth.  Just sayin'


----------



## Twelve

Cindy Adams still writes at age 90









						Cindy Adams on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah
					

I’m no TV columnist, whose job is to rate any television show. Now that we’ve established that, and I’m probably next in line for impeachment, I therefore will talk about Oprah Winfrey’s Sunday sho…




					pagesix.com


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Lyanna died in childbirth.  Just sayin'


Tru dat!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle may lose royal titles over Oprah interview
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle risk losing their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex for breaking their Megxit deal with Sunday night’s Oprah TV tell-all, according to reports. Royal courtie…




					pagesix.com
				




*Prince Harry, Meghan Markle may lose royal titles over Oprah interview*
By Lee Brown
March 7, 2021 | 11:51am

*A closer look at Meghan Markle’s Oprah interview dres*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle risk losing their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex for breaking their Megxit deal with Sunday night’s Oprah TV tell-all, according to reports.
Royal courtiers met last week to discuss stripping the couple’s titles and tearing up the “Sandringham summit” agreement made a year ago involving their exit from life as senior royals, sources told The Times of London.
“I don’t think that after this interview, anything is off the table, to be honest,” one source in the royal household told the UK paper, referring to the potential stripping of the pair’s titles.
Such a move would be “a big step,” the source conceded — stressing that it highlights how“cheesed off” Queen Elizabeth II is over the “circus” around the Oprah Winfrey special airing on CBS at 8 p.m.
One source told the UK paper that Harry and Meghan are “playing with fire” with the “very high-stakes” interview.
Still, another source close to the queen who confirmed Palace discussions over the upcoming TV chat insisted that “the titles are not up for debate,” the Times stressed.
One source said, “The response will depend very much on if they go after the institution or the people” in the royal family.
Queen Elizabeth II, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex watch a flypast to mark the centenary of the Royal Air Force from the balcony of Buckingham PalaceGetty Images
“If they go after the people, the people will come out swinging. The institution can take the blows, the people cannot,” the source said.

“The institution is not at war, the Sussexes are at war


----------



## gracekelly

Twelve said:


> Cindy Adams still writes at age 90
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cindy Adams on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> I’m no TV columnist, whose job is to rate any television show. Now that we’ve established that, and I’m probably next in line for impeachment, I therefore will talk about Oprah Winfrey’s Sunday sho…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



CINDY TELLS YOU HOW SHE REALLY FEELS!!!

I have been waiting for Cindy.  She has previously written about MM and not in a flattering way.  She really nailed it down.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Twelve said:


> Cindy Adams still writes at age 90
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cindy Adams on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> I’m no TV columnist, whose job is to rate any television show. Now that we’ve established that, and I’m probably next in line for impeachment, I therefore will talk about Oprah Winfrey’s Sunday sho…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Ouch! Looking forward to this dénouement. Wonder if MM is feeling the earth tremble underneath her chicken coop. Here's hoping!


----------



## mshermes

purseinsanity said:


> The NYT is the print equivalent of CNN, IMO.  Used to be a reliable source of news, now just yellow journalism that don't even fact check.


I get it to line my macaw's bird cage!


----------



## uhpharm01

Twelve said:


> Cindy Adams still writes at age 90
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cindy Adams on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> I’m no TV columnist, whose job is to rate any television show. Now that we’ve established that, and I’m probably next in line for impeachment, I therefore will talk about Oprah Winfrey’s Sunday sho…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


wow she's still alive.


----------



## purseinsanity

mshermes said:


> I get it to line my macaw's bird cage!


Does the NYT wind up looking like Meg's interview dress?


----------



## purseinsanity

uhpharm01 said:


> wow she's still alive.


LOL, that was my first thought too.  I watched her _*years*_ ago on some entertainment show.  I'd hate to be on the receiving end of her sarcastic bite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Does the NYT wind up looking like Meg's interview dress?


hahahahahahahahahahaha!
My DH call the NYT says the tag line should be  all the news that is fit to print and a hellofalot that's not!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, that was my first thought too.  I watched her _*years*_ ago on some entertainment show.  I'd hate to be on the receiving end of her sarcastic bite.


She laced into Gov Cuomo last week.  At 90 she takes no prisoners.


----------



## poopsie

mshermes said:


> I get it to line my macaw's bird cage!



Oooohhhhh what kind of macaw 

I LOVE birds, but I have cats. Lots of cats 
aaaaaannnnnddddd.........I think I'm inheriting 3 more as the people across the street seem to have moved on and left theirs. I've been feeding them since the end of Dec


----------



## poopsie

uhpharm01 said:


> wow she's still alive.



90 is the new 75!!!!!


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle may lose royal titles over Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle risk losing their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex for breaking their Megxit deal with Sunday night’s Oprah TV tell-all, according to reports. Royal courtie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle may lose royal titles over Oprah interview*
> By Lee Brown
> March 7, 2021 | 11:51am
> 
> *A closer look at Meghan Markle’s Oprah interview dres*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle risk losing their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex for breaking their Megxit deal with Sunday night’s Oprah TV tell-all, according to reports.
> Royal courtiers met last week to discuss stripping the couple’s titles and tearing up the “Sandringham summit” agreement made a year ago involving their exit from life as senior royals, sources told The Times of London.
> “I don’t think that after this interview, anything is off the table, to be honest,” one source in the royal household told the UK paper, referring to the potential stripping of the pair’s titles.
> Such a move would be “a big step,” the source conceded — stressing that it highlights how“cheesed off” Queen Elizabeth II is over the “circus” around the Oprah Winfrey special airing on CBS at 8 p.m.
> One source told the UK paper that Harry and Meghan are “playing with fire” with the “very high-stakes” interview.
> Still, another source close to the queen who confirmed Palace discussions over the upcoming TV chat insisted that “the titles are not up for debate,” the Times stressed.
> One source said, “The response will depend very much on if they go after the institution or the people” in the royal family.
> Queen Elizabeth II, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex watch a flypast to mark the centenary of the Royal Air Force from the balcony of Buckingham PalaceGetty Images
> “If they go after the people, the people will come out swinging. The institution can take the blows, the people cannot,” the source said.
> 
> “The institution is not at war, the Sussexes are at war



Lose titles? Cryin' shame. Last night Hazza said it was the money left to him by his mother that they spent to buy their house (like it was a huge sacrifice to actually spend HIS money on something--not that I believe THAT). But let's play along. Reports say Diana left Hazza 25MM. Invested over 25 years untouched, take the ol' power of 7 (doubling your money in ten years at 7% on average each year) let's say the pot is now at around 220MM (or if it contained Amazon and/or other super high flyers with even an insignificant portion of the funds, well beyond). So they have a 10MM mortgage, so what? Security costs? Even $200K/mo= 2.4MM/year, so what? They make it sound like they came to America with just the clothes on their backs and each had to work 3 jobs to afford a studio apartment in Kansas. Then they complain that Charles cut them off. Boo hoo. Especially after all the accusations they hurled at the BRF. Should we set up a GoFundMe for the dumb ba$tards? What's most scary is that these idiots are breeding. If they're hurting so much, why does MeMeMe wear a 5 grand dress to sniffle with Oprah to discuss how disadvantaged they were? Will Merriam Webster please use these sorry losers for the illustration under the word "pathetic"?


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> They make it sound like they came to America with just the clothes on their backs and each had to work 3 jobs to afford a studio apartment in Kansas. Then they complain that Charles cut them off. Boo hoo. Especially after all the accusations they hurled at the BRF. *Should we set up a GoFundMe for the dumb ba$tards? *What's most scary is that these idiots are breeding. If they're hurting so much, why does MeMeMe wear a 5 grand dress to sniffle with Oprah to discuss how disadvantaged they were? Will Merriam Webster please use these sorry losers for the illustration under the word "pathetic"?



Oh hell to the no! There's too many even dumber ba$tards that would contribute


----------



## jelliedfeels

SoCalGal2016 said:


> Meghan Markle Opens Up About Her Dad's 'Betrayal'
> 
> 
> "I’m just trying to decide if I’m comfortable even talking about that," the Duchess of Sussex told Oprah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What didn't make sense is why she would not be able to ask the press to kill the story about her father because it would mean she couldn't protect her children from the press in the future?  Is there a limit to the number of times the royal family can ask the press to kill a story?  This didn't make alot of sense to me....maybe someone in the UK has more info on this or was she just lying about killing the story?


So I’ll have a go at trying to answer this.
First, I think something to bear in mind in general is the royals have a different public relationship to other celebrities and politicians.
With a politician you can vote them out, force a resignation  or imp*ach them. With a celebrity just don’t buy what they are selling and they will fade into obscurity.
With a royal neither of these things works. The only clear mechanism for criticism is and always has been the press.
Now the press is not unambiguously just in general nor is it immune to a little quid pro quo which is where the royal press team come in.
I have no doubt at some point during the Thomas Markle story a conversation exactly like this happened - she asked for it to be pulled and they said don’t you want to save your ammo for your kids perhaps? But what is missing is the wider context.
The reasoning for this would be there is ’ the family who are marrying into royalty and the wedding guests for an upcoming public wedding, especially FofB would be classed as legitimate public interest. To pull a legitimate interest story is a lot more questionable than something which is arguably slander, harassment or a privacy violation. For example, they removed and sued for pap pics of Kate Middleton topless.

TM was consenting to press involvement also, they couldn’t claim he was being harassed and he had a right to talk to the press if he wanted. One could argue they had no right to intrude in his arrangements.

They would probably also take the line that pulling the story would direct press attention to its ‘juiciness’ and lead to more investigating. I think they made the right call on this, actually, Thomas markle initially got buried under the grandeur of the wedding immediately and people liked Charles doing the aisle walk. I’d say TM only became at all positively regarded during the court case.
now the TM trial is a great counter example of the limits of the royal PR team: MM won the decision that her privacy was violated while I’m sure they predicted she would lose or it would be a Pyrrhic victory. They also undoubtedly felt the bad blood wasn’t worth it.
The thing is they have fundamentally different aims so it’s not surprising they had problems.
MM wants good press like any celeb and to be protected from the bad by the team.
Protection is not actually the royal PR team’s aim in every case. What they want to do is flush through as many stories ASAP to keep a constant cycle of relevance going and to constantly feed the press to maintain their good relationship. In their view a royal family that can be ridiculed is a sign that they have a positive mature relationship with their people. I think it’s also clear that it’s a hierarchical system. Senior members like the queen do not get made fun of for anything even minor the way lower ranks do. So what this means in simple terms is if the press is going to publish ‘Beatrice looks like an ugly sister in her wedding hat’ B needs to take one for the team to maintain the family image of ‘quiet dignity.’
It’s also a gradual system of earning ammo it seems. Kate Middleton/Camilla had to take a lot of hazing in the early years especially and she still gets bad press with the good. At that point MM did not have a lot in her cache and she was trying to actually get something tricky to pull pulled.

it doesn’t take a lot to notice that women are often more targeted then men. It makes some sense that the WAG is an easier target than the prince. WAGs are not of the same status as princes and maintaining the status quo is central to the royal press. Also women - ugly clothes- easy article right?

 Is it fair? No. Is it yellow rag bottom of the barrel stuff with little fact checking? Sometimes. Is it justified that so many resources are being used to maintain the social standing of the royal family and is it a respectable use of the tool of journalism? That’s for you to decide.

so TLDR: it’s legit to say didn’t have the pull at that point but the story itself was also hard to pull if TM consented to interview and it’s arguably legit interest.

Also to be a little shady how come it’s ‘quiet dignity’ when Doria doesn’t speak to the press through all MM has suffered  but it is wrong for the royal in-laws not to speak out and publicly defend her?
 Especially Kate Middleton, of course, who should have weighed in on the incredibly important matter of who was crying over tights at a dress fitting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meanwhile:


----------



## Chanbal

Not everybody is joining the MM club.









						Megyn Kelly rips Meghan Markle as ‘un-self-aware’ after Oprah interview
					

“What I saw tonight was somebody who is totally un-self-aware, completely unaware of how she sounded,” she said.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

I thought Colbert was pretty Colbert about it. There was a healthy dose of skepticism there...


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meanwhile:
> View attachment 5015911



Does this remind anyone of when Demi Moore attended a party about 10 years ago and was coddling a kitten the whole night? How do you go from Buckingham to being rejected by a chicken in a cage?  By marrying the woman that tore you from your family, moved to Montecito because you're famous, rich and stupid, and who's going to Markle you! That's how! Next time, Hazza, get a dog, you can't look to chickens for affirmation. That chicken treated you the way Megan does. You're good enough to be a meal ticket, after that, meh.


----------



## mdcx

H thinks hes done a hard days work by parking on the ground and hand feeding the poor chickens the cheapest chicken food he could find at Discount Hen Mart.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

jelliedfeels said:


> So I’ll have a go at trying to answer this.
> First, I think something to bear in mind in general is the royals have a different public relationship to other celebrities and politicians.
> With a politician you can vote them out, force a resignation  or imp*ach them. With a celebrity just don’t buy what they are selling and they will fade into obscurity.
> With a royal neither of these things works. The only clear mechanism for criticism is and always has been the press.
> Now the press is not unambiguously just in general nor is it immune to a little quid pro quo which is where the royal press team come in.
> I have no doubt at some point during the Thomas Markle story a conversation exactly like this happened - she asked for it to be pulled and they said don’t you want to save your ammo for your kids perhaps? But what is missing is the wider context.
> The reasoning for this would be there is ’ the family who are marrying into royalty and the wedding guests for an upcoming public wedding, especially FofB would be classed as legitimate public interest. To pull a legitimate interest story is a lot more questionable than something which is arguably slander, harassment or a privacy violation. For example, they removed and sued for pap pics of Kate Middleton topless.
> 
> TM was consenting to press involvement also, they couldn’t claim he was being harassed and he had a right to talk to the press if he wanted. One could argue they had no right to intrude in his arrangements.
> 
> They would probably also take the line that pulling the story would direct press attention to its ‘juiciness’ and lead to more investigating. I think they made the right call on this, actually, Thomas markle initially got buried under the grandeur of the wedding immediately and people liked Charles doing the aisle walk. I’d say TM only became at all positively regarded during the court case.
> now the TM trial is a great counter example of the limits of the royal PR team: MM won the decision that her privacy was violated while I’m sure they predicted she would lose or it would be a Pyrrhic victory. They also undoubtedly felt the bad blood wasn’t worth it.
> The thing is they have fundamentally different aims so it’s not surprising they had problems.
> MM wants good press like any celeb and to be protected from the bad by the team.
> Protection is not actually the royal PR team’s aim in every case. What they want to do is flush through as many stories ASAP to keep a constant cycle of relevance going and to constantly feed the press to maintain their good relationship. In their view a royal family that can be ridiculed is a sign that they have a positive mature relationship with their people. I think it’s also clear that it’s a hierarchical system. Senior members like the queen do not get made fun of for anything even minor the way lower ranks do. So what this means in simple terms is if the press is going to publish ‘Beatrice looks like an ugly sister in her wedding hat’ B needs to take one for the team to maintain the family image of ‘quiet dignity.’
> It’s also a gradual system of earning ammo it seems. Kate Middleton/Camilla had to take a lot of hazing in the early years especially and she still gets bad press with the good. At that point MM did not have a lot in her cache and she was trying to actually get something tricky to pull pulled.
> 
> it doesn’t take a lot to notice that women are often more targeted then men. It makes some sense that the WAG is an easier target than the prince. WAGs are not of the same status as princes and maintaining the status quo is central to the royal press. Also women - ugly clothes- easy article right?
> 
> Is it fair? No. Is it yellow rag bottom of the barrel stuff with little fact checking? Sometimes. Is it justified that so many resources are being used to maintain the social standing of the royal family and is it a respectable use of the tool of journalism? That’s for you to decide.
> 
> so TLDR: it’s legit to say didn’t have the pull at that point but the story itself was also hard to pull if TM consented to interview and it’s arguably legit interest.
> 
> Also to be a little shady how come it’s ‘quiet dignity’ when Doria doesn’t speak to the press through all MM has suffered  but it is wrong for the royal in-laws not to speak out and publicly defend her?
> Especially Kate Middleton, of course, who should have weighed in on the incredibly important matter of who was crying over tights at a dress fitting.


Great point about Doria’s silence versus BP silence and lack of support.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I thought Colbert was pretty Colbert about it. There was a healthy dose of skepticism there...


I agree, a very healthy dose of skepticism...he was having a blast with the situation. He asks if she doesn't know this thing called Google... and then he says something like 'your husband knew princess Di'... I had a few laughs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, they know the truth:

_UK officers cannot carry guns under US laws or access intelligence about potential threats. 

Harry told Oprah Winfrey they were informed at ‘short notice’ that their Met police security detail would be cut off. 

The prince said, ‘Their justification was a change in status’, adding that he ‘pushed back’. 

Mr Davies said he was ‘gobsmacked’ that the couple expected British taxpayers to pick up the bill – estimated at £4million a year.

He insisted: ‘It shows you their naivety and sense of entitlement.

‘It was utterly unrealistic to think they could continue to have their royal protection team working in America – in fact it would have put their [police] lives at risk._









						Former royal security unit chief: No way they could keep bodyguards
					

The assumption by Harry that tax-payers would fund security after he and Meghan left the UK was branded 'arrogant' and 'unworkable' by former chief superintendent Dai Davies.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

I think if they did so now or even years down the road, it would resurface the racist accusations.  



youngster said:


> Do our UK members think the dukedom will eventually be revoked?  Is that the correct term? Revoked?  I didn't think it would be but now I think perhaps, yes, down the road. Not today, not tomorrow, maybe in a few years, especially if Harry does stay permanently in the U.S. and if his relationship with his father and brother is frosty and distant.
> 
> I could also see Harry being removed from the succession, if that's possible, down the road.  If I'm Will, I don't want even a small chance that one day Harry could be Regent for George or Charlotte.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Lose titles? Cryin' shame. Last night Hazza said it was the money left to him by his mother that they spent to buy their house (like it was a huge sacrifice to actually spend HIS money on something--not that I believe THAT). But let's play along. Reports say Diana left Hazza 25MM. Invested over 25 years untouched, take the ol' power of 7 (doubling your money in ten years at 7% on average each year) let's say the pot is now at around 220MM (or if it contained Amazon and/or other super high flyers with even an insignificant portion of the funds, well beyond). So they have a 10MM mortgage, so what? Security costs? Even $200K/mo= 2.4MM/year, so what? They make it sound like they came to America with just the clothes on their backs and each had to work 3 jobs to afford a studio apartment in Kansas. Then they complain that Charles cut them off. Boo hoo. Especially after all the accusations they hurled at the BRF. Should we set up a GoFundMe for the dumb ba$tards? What's most scary is that these idiots are breeding. If they're hurting so much, why does MeMeMe wear a 5 grand dress to sniffle with Oprah to discuss how disadvantaged they were? Will Merriam Webster please use these sorry losers for the illustration under the word "pathetic"?



You went OFF  So true. They're so out of touch, struggling for them probably means struggling to afford a .001% lifestyle.


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle may lose royal titles over Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle risk losing their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex for breaking their Megxit deal with Sunday night’s Oprah TV tell-all, according to reports. Royal courtie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle may lose royal titles over Oprah interview*
> By Lee Brown
> March 7, 2021 | 11:51am
> 
> *A closer look at Meghan Markle’s Oprah interview dres*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle risk losing their titles as Duke and Duchess of Sussex for breaking their Megxit deal with Sunday night’s Oprah TV tell-all, according to reports.
> Royal courtiers met last week to discuss stripping the couple’s titles and tearing up the “Sandringham summit” agreement made a year ago involving their exit from life as senior royals, sources told The Times of London.
> “I don’t think that after this interview, anything is off the table, to be honest,” one source in the royal household told the UK paper, referring to the potential stripping of the pair’s titles.
> Such a move would be “a big step,” the source conceded — stressing that it highlights how“cheesed off” Queen Elizabeth II is over the “circus” around the Oprah Winfrey special airing on CBS at 8 p.m.
> One source told the UK paper that Harry and Meghan are “playing with fire” with the “very high-stakes” interview.
> Still, another source close to the queen who confirmed Palace discussions over the upcoming TV chat insisted that “the titles are not up for debate,” the Times stressed.
> One source said, “The response will depend very much on if they go after the institution or the people” in the royal family.
> Queen Elizabeth II, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex watch a flypast to mark the centenary of the Royal Air Force from the balcony of Buckingham PalaceGetty Images
> “If they go after the people, the people will come out swinging. The institution can take the blows, the people cannot,” the source said.
> 
> “The institution is not at war, the Sussexes are at war



What are these possibilities I read about?  Make it happen already, it is clear there was no point to the interview with Oprah and her leading questions... except to shoot arrows to the BRF- Cringe at her contrive story about how she compares herself to Ariel...  I mean do you hear yourself?  You sound like a complete idiot... I am Ariel and fall in love with a prince and I lose my voice... That’s something you write in a journal, not tell Oprah...  I don’t even know how OW kept a straight face...  This is so demeaning to the interviewer as well... you’re losing integrity here OW!


----------



## Lodpah

Harry certainly does not look trapped. The BRF seem to have a sense of humor. What happened?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> You went OFF  So true. They're so out of touch, struggling for them probably means struggling to afford a .001% lifestyle.



If QE had followed our sage advice months ago, this would not have happened.  
They have said this 1000 times, they want the .0001% lifestyle that they had in the UK.  All of it for free. Hazzie should never spend his mother’s money. He is a Prince. He does not carry cash. He can go wee wee wherever he wants.


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> Not everybody is joining the MM club.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megyn Kelly rips Meghan Markle as ‘un-self-aware’ after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> “What I saw tonight was somebody who is totally un-self-aware, completely unaware of how she sounded,” she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Megyn kelly is far from my favorite person, but she’s not stupid and she tells it like she sees it, you have to give her that.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> It seemed pretty obvious they had worked out in advance what “their truth” would be for the interview.  At one point I thought it looked like Harry was trying to remember what he should say.



Just once ? He must have been trained for months for that performance and I doubt Hollywood will be calling on either of them any time soon the chickens were more authentic


----------



## melissatrv

A couple of things....this is not a big deal in the scheme of things, but M said she had "no training".   I recall articles and maybe even a quote of her saying she had defensive driving training and hostage situation training.  Plus so-called princess training to learn royal etiquette.  There is no way she would NOT have received coaching on the etiquette part.  

I also seem to recall the BRF denying the row over Charlotte's dress. They were not exactly going to come out and say "It was Kate". They will just deny the whole thing, what did she expect?

If she needed a therapist, she could have easily had someone come to the house privately. But she went to the palace HR department instead??!!

Beatrice and Eugenie lost their private security detail once they became non-working royals. Now they only receive security if attending royal events in an official capacity. Why should they expect any different? 

Wah, wah, wah....these two whine more than Archie.


----------



## elvisfan4life

mdcx said:


> Meghan really seems to hate Kate imo. Obviously there is some unhealthy psychology at play. I assume all that business about William having an affair with Rose started back under Meghan’s door. It would be frightening to have a family member that seemed to have some kind of vendetta against you.
> Imo, Kate is the one she is trying to implicate in the suggestion that a BRF member discussed babies skin tone.



Absolutely despite getting all the press attention when she arrives on the scene she has hated Kate from day 1 as she will be Queen end of


----------



## purseinsanity

melissatrv said:


> A couple of things....this is not a big deal in the scheme of things, but M said she had "no training".   I recall articles and maybe even a quote of her saying she had defensive driving training and hostage situation training.  Plus so-called princess training to learn royal etiquette.  There is no way she would NOT have received coaching on the etiquette part.
> 
> I also seem to recall the BRF denying the row over Charlotte's dress. They were not exactly going to come out and say "It was Kate". They will just deny the whole thing, what did she expect?
> 
> If she needed a therapist, she could have easily had someone come to the house privately. But she went to the palace HR department instead??!!
> 
> Beatrice and Eugenie lost their private security detail once they became non-working royals. Now they only receive security if attending royal events in an official capacity. Why should they expect any different?
> 
> Wah, wah, wah....these two whine more than Archie.


Archie is the most mature one in the Sussex family.  His mother is having the Terrible Twos more than he’s ever had!  Plus he knows how to stay out of the limelight and maintain his privacy


----------



## poopsie

I just took a little video break
If anyone has HULU they have a show Charles & Diana 1983.
I'd forgotten just how douchey he was


----------



## mshermes

purseinsanity said:


> Does the NYT wind up looking like Meg's interview dress?


As a matter of fact, i showed him that dress and he felt he could have done a far superior job.


----------



## mshermes

poopsie said:


> Oooohhhhh what kind of macaw
> 
> I LOVE birds, but I have cats. Lots of cats
> aaaaaannnnnddddd.........I think I'm inheriting 3 more as the people across the street seem to have moved on and left theirs. I've been feeding them since the end of Dec


Best not to get a bird with all of your cats! My macaw is a yellow collared mini who is almost 34 years old and I have had him since he was eight weeks old. Loooong time. He is my buddy. I also have five dogs. I am a big animal lover. A REAL one....not a faux one.  He was a christening gift. Don't want to let age get into this!


----------



## poopsie

mshermes said:


> Best not to get a bird with all of your cats! My macaw is a yellow collared mini who is almost 34 years old and I have had him since he was eight weeks old. Loooong time. He is my buddy. I also have five dogs. I am a big animal lover. A REAL one....not a faux one.  He was a christening gift. Don't want to let age get into this!


Oh i know,............ I have to love them from afar


----------



## Hermes Zen

Cavalier Girl said:


> Is anyone else wondering why Harry would tell Megan what someone supposedly said about whatever color Archie might be when he knew it would upset her, and hurt her feeling?  I would have taken that to my grave rather than upset my spouse in such cruel way.


I had something similar happen to me. I'm half asian and when my husband told his family he wanted to marry, they tried to talk him out of it. Saying our children may look like xxxxxxxxx. I think you can plug in your thoughts. I think my husband shared this with me because he was very upset with his family. As I was after hearing about the discussion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mshermes

She can never get back into acting. She can't even squeeze a tear out of her crying eye. She boasted about being able to cry on demand from that left eye.


----------



## Chanbal

On security:

"But the Duchess's claims that Archie wasn't going to receive security were met with bafflement by palace insiders yesterday.

One described the logic as 'ridiculous', saying it had always been made very clear that as long as Harry was a member of the royals, his wife and children would be covered by the royal protection squad.

*It is understood a great effort was made to get Meghan a female personal protection officer after she noted both Camilla and Kate had one*, *although eventually the woman officer only remained in post for about six months."*









						Why Meghan was 'a bit naughty' when referring to Archie's skin colour
					

Royal biographer Hugo Vickers told the BBC's Newsnight that Meghan Markle had misleadingly claimed in her interview that there was a discussion about whether the boy could take the title.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

mshermes said:


> She can never get back into acting. She can't even squeeze a tear out of her crying eye. She boasted about being able to cry on demand from that left eye.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015956


Can Archie say, “Crocodile Tears”?


----------



## Sharont2305

At the end, when the credits were rolling, what was all that stupid giggling for?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> I can fathom them taking those things to keep them safe....especially if she needs to travel for her job.



Honestly, the Queen is not the ruler of Dubai. It sounds not very believable they'd confiscate her personal things at all. Maybe that's how other royals do it out of convenience, but I'm sure had she said that's a bit too intimate for her she would have been accomodated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Have fun!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Which one is which?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015673



I had no clue who this guy is, but he is is apparently a filmmaker (so has the Hollywood connections) AND candidate for Governor or California, so needs to keep an eye on public opinion. Yet he doesn't hold back at all. Interesting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Royal 'revelations' put to the test
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: fact check?
> 
> 
> 
> *Royal 'revelations' put to the test*
> Meghan and Harry unleashed bombshell after bombshell in their Oprah interview that was sure to send shockwaves pulsing through the heart of the monarchy.
> 
> They made jaw-dropping claims of brazen racism and delved into difficult conversations of family rifts.
> 
> Although much of the interview was an outpouring of emotion, many of the claims can be stood up - or knocked down - with facts.
> 
> Here, MailOnline drills down into some of the central claims of the interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have insisted their interview with Oprah Winfrey would be the 'last word' on them quitting as senior royals
> 
> Meghan never researched the Royal Family prior to joining
> 
> Meghan said: 'I didn't do any research about what that would mean,' she said. 'I never looked up my husband online.'
> 
> Fact check: Unlikely
> 
> Meghan's claim that she never researched Harry, nor the Royal Family, before entering into the relationship is at odds with claims made in the couple's biography.
> 
> Although the Sussexes maintain they did not contribute to Finding Freedom, it was written by friendly journalists Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, who say the book was impeccably well-sourced by those closest to the couple.
> 
> Prior to their first date at Dean Street Townhouse in 2016, the authors write: 'Naturally both participants in this blind date did their homework with a thorough Google search. Harry, who scoped out Meghan on social media, was interested.'
> 
> A friend is also claimed to have impressed on Meghan the attention she would command for dating Harry, saying: 'This could be crazy...you will be the most wanted woman'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is seen heading to a hotel to meet up with some friends in Toronto, Canada, in November 2016
> 
> Harry and Meghan were actually secretly wed three days before the Windsor ceremony by the Archbishop of Canterbury
> 
> Meghan said: 'You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that... We called the Archbishop and we just said, 'Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world but we want our union between us.'
> 
> Fact check: Unlikely
> 
> Church of England marriages require at least two witnesses and the public must also have unrestricted access to the building during any marriage ceremony to allow for valid objections against the marriage.
> 
> At the time the couple were living in the grounds of Kensington Palace, and their residence is off limits to the public.
> 
> A couple who are already lawfully married cannot choose to re-marry each other, unless there is some doubt as to the validity of the earlier marriage.
> 
> Reverend David Green, Vicar of St Mary's, West Malling and the Rector of St Michael's, Offham, said it was impossible to have had two weddings, adding: 'I think the Archbishop needs to clarify what did or did not happen three days before.'
> 
> This means that one of the two ceremonies was more likely just an exchange of vows rather than a legally recognised wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Secret: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have revealed that they were married in secret three days before their royal wedding on May 19, 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared candid footage of Archie playing on a beach during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey
> 
> Archie has a birthright to be a prince
> 
> Meghan said: Idea of the first member of colour in this family, not being titled in the same way that other grandchildren would be... It's not their right to take it away'
> 
> Fact check: False
> 
> Archie did not have a birthright to be a prince, but could potentially become one when Charles accedes to the throne.
> 
> That William and Kate's children have the HRH title and are styled as prince and princesses - and Archie is not - stems from a ruling more than 100 years ago.
> 
> In 1917, King George V issued a written order that only royal offspring who are in the direct line of succession could be made a prince and receive HRH titles.
> 
> The Letters Patent read: '...the grandchildren of the sons of any such sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of these our realms.'
> 
> Under the rules, only Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge's eldest son Prince George - as a great-grandson of the monarch down the direct line of succession to the throne - was originally entitled to be a prince.
> 
> The Queen stepped in ahead of George's birth in 2013 to issue a Letters Patent to ensure all George's siblings - as the children of future monarch William - would have fitting titles, meaning they were extended to Charles and Louis.
> 
> Under the George V rules, Archie would be entitled to be an HRH or a prince when his grandfather Charles, the Prince of Wales, accedes to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex introduce their baby son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor during a photocall in St George's Hall at Windsor Castle in May 2019
> 
> Archie wouldn't get 24/7 security because he wasn't a prince
> 
> Meghan said: In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, so we (had) the conversation of he won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title.
> 
> Fact check: False
> 
> Being a prince or princess does not automatically mean royals have police protection.
> 
> Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie's security is no longer paid for by the taxpayer.
> 
> Harry and Meghan no longer receive British police protection, and are understood to be paying for private security.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge with Princess Charlotte and other bridesmaids arriving at St George's Chapel in Windsor Castle for the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan in May 2018
> 
> Kate made Meghan cry before her wedding to Harry
> 
> Responding to claims that she reduced Kate to tears, Meghan said: 'No, no. The reverse happened'.
> 
> Fact check: Contested
> 
> Reports of a pre-wedding clash between the duchesses first emerged in November 2018, when sources claimed Meghan had been left displeased with a 'stressful' dress fitting for the flower girls.
> 
> Accounts differed as to the source of the row. Some said it was a disagreement on whether the bridesmaids should wear tights - Meghan reportedly believed they should not.
> 
> Other reports said it stemmed from Princess Charlotte's dress not fitting, meaning another had to be scheduled.
> 
> A source said at the time: 'Kate had only just given birth to her third child, Prince Louis, and was feeling quite emotional.'
> 
> But during the Oprah interview Meghan flatly denied the reports and claimed it was Kate that left her upset.
> 
> Couple witnessed racism inside the monarchy
> 
> Meghan said: [There were] concerns and conversations about how dark his [Archie's] skin might be when he's born'
> 
> Fact check: Almost impossible to verify
> 
> Harry and Meghan said they will never reveal the person who made these comments.
> 
> However Oprah revealed that Harry confirmed it was not the Queen nor Prince Philip.
> 
> While currently not commenting on the contents interview, Buckingham Palace are almost certain to push back on suggestions of institutional racism.
> 
> They could launch an investigation - as they have done with claims of bullying.
> 
> Prince Harry was asked what babies with Meghan 'will look like'
> 
> 
> Harry was financially cut off from the royals
> 
> Harry said: 'My family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us'
> 
> Fact check: They wanted to be financially independent
> 
> When Harry and Meghan announced their intention to step back from being senior royals, they said they wanted to be 'financially independent'.
> 
> Before cutting ties, 95 per cent of their money came from Prince Charles's income from the Duchy of Cornwall, and 5 per cent from the taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant.
> 
> Princes William and Harry received most of a £13million fortune left by their mother Princess Diana. Harry is also thought to have had millions left to him by the Queen mother.
> 
> Meghan has not seen Samantha Markle in almost 20 years
> 
> Meghan said: 'The last time I saw her must have been at least 18, 19 years.'
> 
> Fact check: False
> 
> During the interview Meghan distanced herself from her half-sister Samantha, who she said she hardly knows and she grew up 'an only child'.
> 
> A photograph from 2008 - 13 years ago - shows Meghan with Samantha at her graduation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A photograph from 2008 - 13 years ago - shows Meghan with her half-sister Samantha Markle at her graduation
> 
> Meghan had to turn over her passport, keys and driving licence to royal aides
> 
> Meghan said: 'When I joined that family, that was the last time I saw my passport, my driving licence, my keys - all of that gets turned over.'
> 
> Fact check: Difficult to verify
> 
> Senior royals are often pictured driving themselves and it is believed there have never been prior claims of a royal having keys and passports held.
> 
> Harry and Meghan received police protection, meaning their travel was meticulously planned by officers.
> 
> Meghan's press team didn't defend her when 'things weren't true'
> 
> Oprah asked Meghan about stories that she made Kate cry, saying: 'So, all the time the stories were out that you had made Kate cry, you knew all along, and people around you knew that that wasn't true.' Meghan replied: 'Everyone in the institution knew it wasn't true.' And Oprah then said: 'So, why didn't somebody just say that?' Meghan said: 'That's a good question.'
> 
> Fact check: Contested
> 
> Making a wider point, Mail on Sunday royal correspondent Emily Andrews has said that Meghan's press team did in fact defend untrue stories, saying this was 'just not right'.
> 
> Ms Andrews said that she interacted with a press team who defended the Sussexes 'again and again and again, told me things were wrong - so didn't publish - and indeed tried to stop me when true.'
> 
> Palace lied to protect other members of the Royal Family
> 
> Meghan said: 'I came to understand that not only was I not being protected but that they were willing to lie to protect other members of the family, but they weren't willing to tell the truth to protect me and my husband.'
> 
> Fact check: Contested
> 
> There was clearly frustration felt by the couple, with some justification, towards the Palace PR machine, which was sometimes reluctant to 'fight every little fire', as one source put it.
> 
> But the Palace did robustly stand ground on many other stories that the couple insisted were not true, resulting in the media not running them.
> 
> The Palace pursued at least one national newspaper all the way to press regulator IPSO over a story about their Frogmore home, and won a decisive victory for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> The duchess complained that she was 'not protected', but Palace sources have hit back at the idea the duchess was left to fend for herself, suggesting it was her own aides who needed protection from her bullying ways – something she strenuously denies.
> 
> Meghan was banned from going out for lunch with her friends
> 
> Meghan: 'I remember so often people within The Firm would say, 'Well, you can't do this because it'll look like that. You can't'... so, even, 'Can I go and have lunch with my friends?' 'No, no, no. You're oversaturated. You're everywhere. It would be best for you to not go out to lunch with your friends.' I go, 'Well, I haven't left the house in months.'
> 
> Fact check: Contested
> 
> Meghan appears to be talking about a four-year period, and it is likely the situation varied.
> 
> She was spotted enjoying outings on numerous occasions, including a pub lunch with Harry, going for facials near their Kensington Palace home and shopping trips.
> 
> Every British newspaper declined to buy photographs of these trips. No member of staff would dare tell Meghan where she could go.*
> 
> Newspaper held story about Thomas Markle until Sunday before Meghan's wedding*
> 
> Meghan: 'If we were going to use the word betrayal, it's because when I asked him, when we were told by the comms team, this is a story that was going to be coming out, which, by the way, the tabloids had apparently known for a month or so and decided to hold until the Sunday before our wedding because they wanted to create drama, which is also a really key point in all this.'
> 
> Fact check: False
> 
> Meghan claimed 'the tabloids had apparently known for a month' that Thomas Markle had staged paparazzi photos before the wedding but 'decided to hold till the Sunday before our wedding... to create drama,' adding: 'They did not report the news, they created the news.' She suggested she had 'lost' her father forever as a result.
> 
> In truth, far from sitting on the paparazzi story, the Mail on Sunday, which broke it, published within 24 hours of getting the proof.



I wish just one US magazin would put together something like this, especially to counter the outrageous lie Archie was stripped of a title because he was too black.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan Markle’s Sister Samantha Fires Back After Her Tell-All Interview
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s half-sister, Samantha Markle, clapped back at the duchess’ tell-all interview claim that she grew up an only child — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During the Tig founder’s explosive sit-down with CBS, she also claimed that Samantha “changed her last name back to Markle in her early 50s … only when I started dating Harry. I think that says enough.”



WTFFFF. Why would Samantha not take back on her maiden name after a divorce? It's not always about Meghan, Meghan, Meghan (and also, another lie exposed because Samantha has the paperwork to proof it, yet nobody cares).


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Great point about Doria’s silence versus BP silence and lack of support.


Thinking about it from KM’s perspective for a moment, if I heard a rumour that another woman and I had a cat fight over clothes,  I wouldn’t dignify it with an answer.
Bit of a double standard for sure.

Edit : from to for and some commas
Changed media to edit - my typing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> At the end, when the credits were rolling, what was all that stupid giggling for?



But Sharon, she is young and oh so cute!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thomas on GMB — guessing the whole interview gets posted later, there are several clips on the Twitter. 


			https://twitter.com/GMB?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
		




Hazzie was snotty.
#TeamThomas


----------



## RAINDANCE

jelliedfeels said:


> Thinking about it from KM’s perspective from a moment if I heard a rumour that another woman and I had a cat fight over clothes I wouldn’t dignify it with an answer.
> Bit of a double standard for sure.



It's the lack of honesty that really gets to me with this whole saga (and deeply saddens me for all involved) The degree of duplicity and bending of actual facts to support various narratives is insane ! Total addict behavior in my experience.

I would put money on the fact that at the dress fitting Meghan shouted at either the children (may be specifically Charlotte if she was playing up - because 3 year-olds do !) or the dressmaker/other staff and Kate told her off ! But then sent flowers in a " I know this is stressful - here are some flowers" kind of way. It has been presented with shade that Kate was the aggressor and we know from past behavior that MM is incapable of seeing her part in any interaction and consequence.
IMO MM was way out of line by saying " she thought Kate would appreciate MM acknowledging her mistake for her !" Straight out of Mean Girls that one !


----------



## papertiger

melissatrv said:


> I think if they did so now or even years down the road, it would resurface the racist accusations.



That's always been the fear.

At this point, I would take every privilege away from them and take the rap. They've already called all British people and institutions racist (coz you know the US, the country where they have chosen to make their home, has a _much_ better track record).


----------



## Lodpah

J.D. Law, Marxist Leninist
What do you think of Meghan and Harry’s Oprah interview?
I am a lawyer. Catching liars is part of my job as a litigator. I watched the interview.
People can easily lie with words. But unless they are superb actors, their body language and microexpressions reveal what is really going on.
Want to know the truth? Turn off the sound. Watch the interview. Look at the body language. Does it seem sincere? Does your gut give you a feeling something is “off?” Listen to this. Look closer.
Harry was sitting off to the side, in a gesture of “I am going along with this, trying to seem supportive, but I am not so sure about this. But Meghan wants it, I love her, so I will go along with it.”








Meghan is an actress. But not a good one. Her eyes appeared contrived and insincere. I’ve seen footage of her being herself. Everything looked stiff and rehearsed.
Then turn on the sound. Watch it again. Oh boy. Do the facts support what they are claiming? It is factual that almost a dozen members of the royal staff who had to work with Meghan quit. All of them said they faced abuse from Meghan. People who were loyal for years quit, nearly all at once. Meghan had a reputation for abusing staff.
Some things she said were unbelievable, such as the fact that she “didn’t know much about the royal family before I got married.” Really? A nearly 40 year old woman, dating a prince, never asked Harry about his home life? Or what it was like to be a working royal? Harry speaks frequently about the media and how they were involved in his mother’s death. He didn’t mention it to Meghan? Come on.
Further, she said she was upset Archie wasn’t given a royal title. You think the other great grandchildren of the Queen (other than William’s kids) automatically get titles? They don’t. It has nothing to do with racism.
As far as the racism claim. I wouldn’t be surprised if Prince Phillip or someone made a racist comment. He is always doing things like that. He’s old. Everybody knows he is a loose cannon. But Charles, the Queen, and others regularly see Archie on Zoom. Charles still is in contact with Harry. Families can be complicated because they are human. But I highly doubt William, Kate, and others are extremely racist and behave in a racist manner.
Is Meghan Markle hot? Yes. She is an extremely beautiful looking person. But she has many narcissistic traits. She isn’t a beautiful person on the inside.
The British monarchy is a symbol of the British people. It is a national brand, that brings in more value than it costs. The working royals head major institutions, raise money for important causes, and help raise the morale of the people. The Queen has instituted the job of a “working royal” as a life of service and humility. Meghan refused that role. She didn’t like the hierarchical life of the royal family. She didn’t want to accept that the Queen is the center of attention. Then Charles, then William, and then George. Not her. This isn’t Hollywood.
Initially I liked Meghan Markle and felt she was being treated unfairly. But enough facts have been revealed to show that she is not a sincere person. She is fake. And her attention mongering is growing old.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> At this point, I would take every privilege away from them and take the rap.



This. That stupid, uh, woman was sitting on national TV blabbering on how it wasn't the Queen's right to take away a princely title from Archie because he was too black. Nobody is putting in the minute it would take to google and see she's full of sh*t. Who cares at this point what the US public thinks. The UK public will be on board.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Initially I liked Meghan Markle and felt she was being treated unfairly. But enough facts have been revealed to show that she is not a sincere person. She is fake. And her attention mongering is growing old.



Ha.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thomas on GMB — guessing the whole interview gets posted later, there are several clips on the Twitter.
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GMB?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hazzie was snotty.
> #TeamThomas



Honestly, I think he's a sincere man and hurting for his daughter. She threw him under the bus. I just wonder how does she sleep at night. Does she not think of her father at all? From all accounts in pictures, home videos he was a doting father, wanting her to excel. The staged photos have already been explained. He went along with it with no idea of the consequences or thinking it was a bad thing. She can't forgive him for that? How would she feel when he passes away? This is heartbreaking.


----------



## floatinglili

Interesting theory that it is Kate that is going to be named and shamed in the baby skin tone ‘concerns’ debacle. If a senior Royal I was thinking it is obviously someone one step away from central power as otherwise the wedding would not have gone ahead so quickly and with such fulsomeness. 
I was wondering when the music stops whether it would be Camilla emerging as the villain with snobby, sheltered, nasty and casually racist comments. Let’s face it the British aristocracy have previously made themselves famous for ‘telling it like it is’ and being jarringly rude about it, apparently for laughs. 
PC concerns are only for ‘the little people’.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha.


I don't know how this ended up here. It was part of the article I posted lol. Not by my thoughts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW a nutjob stan went OFF on me yesterday on Instagram because I had dared to comment on a jewelry account on one of the Queen's pieces and they were generally in the comments screeching at the account holder how "after yesterday" she dared to ever post that awful woman again (mind you, the account is for jewelry of the BRF!). It was so bad the comment got deleted. These people are like rabid dogs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Honestly, I think he's a sincere man and hurting for his daughter. She threw him under the bus. I just wonder how does she sleep at night. Does she not think of her father at all? From all accounts in pictures, home videos he was a doting father, wanting her to excel. The staged photos have already been explained. He went along with it with no idea of the consequences or thinking it was a bad thing. She can't forgive him for that? How would she feel when he passes away? This is heartbreaking.



Completely agree. He is honest, speaking from his heart with raw emotion.  Based on OW’s interview, I can hear Hazzie saying  “if you had listened to meeee”.   Love Thomas for saying Hazzie is _snotty, _so Thomas hung up.  Well done, Thomas, well done!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I don't know how this ended up here. It was part of the article I posted lol. Not by my thoughts.



Oh true...I think it happened when I shortened the quote. I liked it because so many have said, me included, we went in all positive and where we're at right now was a development.


----------



## floatinglili

This thread runs so fast it’s hard to keep up. I am really surprised that MM said Samantha changed her name back to Mwrkle ‘in her 50s’ when she MM started dating Harry. 
And for Samantha to have the paperwork to disprove that. 
Firstly was MM using that spiteful and familiar device of sexist ageism, that younger women often invoke against their older females rivals? 
if so, how common and classless. 
Further, I was surprised at the petty arrogance and entitlement of MM in saying this as a complaint against Samantha. A person’s name - and their own personal original family name at that - is surely their own business at any age or stage?


----------



## mdcx

Regards her poor dad, I don’t think MM is capable of empathy. People are just a means to an end.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Honestly, I think he's a sincere man and hurting for his daughter. She threw him under the bus. I just wonder how does she sleep at night. Does she not think of her father at all? From all accounts in pictures, home videos he was a doting father, wanting her to excel. The staged photos have already been explained. He went along with it with no idea of the consequences or thinking it was a bad thing. She can't forgive him for that? How would she feel when he passes away? This is heartbreaking.



Remember, she already "lost" her father 

He's already dead to her.


----------



## floatinglili

Thomas, like Samantha, was initially ridiculed -
Let’s be honest he was presented as ‘white trash’ but over time has proven himself to be a thoughtful and a considerate human being doing his best to father his complicated family. His supportive comments regarding Samantha’s book were interpreted as being anti- MM sentiment but as a parent myself I see him as a father trying to be evenhanded and supportive of his children.
Good parents may be hurt and even resentful of being treated badly by their children but decent people they do not allow themselves to be spiteful towards their children.
MM’s self pitying representation of having ‘lost’ her father is frankly laughable and embarrassing.


----------



## Lodpah

Thought you’d all like to see this


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Remember, she already "lost" her father
> 
> He's already dead to her.


I think that is the saddest thing. I just can't fathom it. I just can't. He was not toxic and loved her. I mean your blood has to be frozen (not cold) to just disregard your parent like that (I know there are instances where someone has to due to issues) but in this case, if PP and her father pass away without her reconciling I think people will finally realize what a cold blooded viper she is.


----------



## byzina

I have been thinking about the interview and everything that was said recently. I don't believe everything they said (for example this mental health issue) but something could be true. I do believe there were some racist comments from the family. After the Epstein scandal it is not news that some family members could be involved in something bad including racism. At the same time they didn't give names. And the family members who are not racists are now condemned for it by the public. So this is a huge blow for the whole family.
And Harry is still associated with the RF. And his whole wealth, reputation and popularity are strongly connected with it. By making all these unpleasant things public he makes his own career much weaker.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW a nutjob stan went OFF on me yesterday on Instagram because I had dared to comment on a jewelry account on one of the Queen's pieces and they were generally in the comments screeching at the account holder how "after yesterday" she dared to ever post that awful woman again (mind you, the account is for jewelry of the BRF!). It was so bad the comment got deleted. These people are like rabid dogs.


If they had their rabies shots, it would cure them of being rabid dogs.


----------



## Lodpah

floatinglili said:


> Interesting theory that it is Kate that is going to be named and shamed in the baby skin tone ‘concerns’ debacle. If a senior Royal I was thinking it is obviously someone one step away from central power as otherwise the wedding would not have gone ahead so quickly and with such fulsomeness.
> I was wondering when the music stops whether it would be Camilla emerging as the villain with snobby, sheltered, nasty and casually racist comments. Let’s face it the British aristocracy have previously made themselves famous for ‘telling it like it is’ and being jarringly rude about it, apparently for laughs.
> PC concerns are only for ‘the little people’.


She goes after Kate it will just show how petty she it, oh wait!


----------



## floatinglili

It would have taken a degree of tact and mutual understanding for the BRF to merge with a mixed race African American family and come up smelling of lilies.
British aristocracy is cold and their ‘humour’ can be cutting. The class system supports a bald system of horrific emotional cruelty to be honest. This is a social culture which indulged in systemic class cruelty over eons to protect the interests of the upper classes. And, in spite of the historic British efforts in tackling racism by abolishment of global slavery, that classism would flow through to casual racist remarks too. Kate lived it and won. MM, a newcomer to the country, thought she was entitled not to suffer. But as I said in my previous post, PC concerns - especially the detailed concerns of US race politics - are merely for ‘the little people’.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just an opinion piece, but something.

"*Harry and Meghan: an Undignifyed Hollywood Show*

With their embarrassing appearance with Oprah Winfrey Meghan and Harry are working on their future as a Hollywood brand. But the price is higher than anticipated says our author."


----------



## dangerouscurves

Lies or not, I'm glad Meghan is out of that 'house'. She could've been the next Lady D.


----------



## Lodpah

I just thought of something. Since Harry and Meghan were made President and Vice President of the Queen's Commonwealth but were stripped and the CW Day was really diverse, culturally appropriate, gorgeous presentations, they could have been a part of it's production and could have brought their A-Game but did not. Do you think their bitterness could have had something to do with that?


----------



## dangerouscurves

Found this gem


----------



## Lodpah

dangerouscurves said:


> Lies or not, I'm glad Meghan is out of that 'house'. She could've been the next Lady D.


Lies or not. That sums it all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I think that is the saddest thing. I just can't fathom it. I just can't. He was not toxic and loved her. I mean your blood has to be frozen (not cold) to just disregard your parent like that (I know there are instances where someone has to due to issues) but in this case, if PP and her father pass away without her reconciling I think people will finally realize what a cold blooded viper she is.



I don't have such high hopes. Intelligent, educated people have put themselves in her corner.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> If they had their rabies shots, it would cure them of being rabid dogs.



Sadly no, once the disease came to a head it is deadly in 99,9 % of cases. The 0,01 % usually only make it out with severe damages. If you vaccinate the minute they got bitten there's a better chance.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sadly no, once the disease came to a head it is deadly in 99,9 % of cases. The 0,01 % usually only make it out with severe damages. If you vaccinate the minute they got bitten there's a better chance.


Makes sense. I didn't know that.


----------



## floatinglili

I’m actually more prepared now to consider that MM actively lies to protect her perspective or interests. Before, I assumed there was a base normal level of some self control and perspective. 
Her attack in Samantha’s use of her birth name, her dismissal of issues relating to staff mistreatment, even the bullying allegations themselves ... I see now an unusually wilful woman determined to have things all her own way at almost all costs...


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M are bitter, angry, etc. about every little slight, every little frown, every little offense. People may say or do something to us, but we move onward. It doesn’t eat us up. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have such high hopes. Intelligent, educated people have put themselves in her corner.



Perhaps because they profit off of H&M?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Makes sense. I didn't know that.



I'm in the countryside with lots of critters, that's why. Not that I ever feared *I* could get it haha.


----------



## CarryOn2020

70 miles away, it is very possible Doria has visited him, called him, or had one of her relatives/friends contact him.
She may have shared some stories.  Just a thought.

Perhaps Charles should call Thomas and apologize for this snotty son. I know many fathers who would do that. In a world where manners matter, it would be the proper thing to do.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Dis Gon B Gud
> 
> 
> “Dis Gon B Gud” is an expression often used in forums or comment threads to denote that the poster is going to enjoy watching a complex argument or discussion topic unfold. The phrase has been also iterated in the form of a reaction GIF featuring a man opening up a fold-up chair and getting...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> knowyourmeme.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Jason Momoa Folding Chair*
> On May 8th, 2009, season 3 episode 20 of the television show _The Game_ aired, featuring a scene in which Jason Momoa's character Roman unfolds a folding chair with a one-handed thrusting motion and sits in it.
> 
> ETA: Another view of Jason shows us why we should never trust Hwood:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Momoa’s Super Bowl Ad Freaked Absolutely Everyone Out
> 
> 
> <p>A weird Super Bowl ad starring Jason Momoa has left people feeling, well, weird… after it saw the star quite literally tearing his muscles off. Everyone knows the Super Bowl brings its fair share of unusual adverts, during a time where every man and his dog is watching, but this commercial...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.unilad.co.uk


Thank you! It's been nagging on my mind for over a year, who is that guy?!, so happy to finally be able to let it go


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I think that is the saddest thing. I just can't fathom it. I just can't. He was not toxic and loved her. I mean your blood has to be frozen (not cold) to just disregard your parent like that (I know there are instances where someone has to due to issues) but in this case, if PP and her father pass away without her reconciling I think people will finally realize what a cold blooded viper she is.



Never to see your grandchild.


----------



## chicinthecity777

No time to read all pages yet but here is the link to Thomas Markle interview. It was very sad to see that he's completely heart broken! How many more hearts have been broken just because those 2 wanted to "have a voice"? SMH!


----------



## Lodpah

Interesting POV. 




Latagia Copeland-Tyronce
, AS, BS(Hons), MSW(Policy)
Updated August 1, 2019


What do you think about Meghan Markle?
Well...
As a woke millennial Afro-American woman, and longtime social justice advocate and writer/journalist, I am quite tired of being bombarded with Meghan Markle news and questions. To be honest, I didn't know anything about Ms Markle or her work on the Suits TV show prior to her engagement to Prince Harry. And that was a huge red flag to me. This (half Black) woman and small time actress is in her late 30s, someone who has had all the support in the world from friends and family, and the most important thing she has done in life is marry Prince Harry. Really?
That said, I have to get this off of my chest, and it may sound harsh to some but hey, I have never been one to mince words and I dont intend on starting now. I despise Ms Markle because she is the very epitome of everything that I fight against every day: useless celebrity, celebrity worship, selfishness, shameless gold-digging, superficial, narcissistic, backstabbing, weakness, racism (against Black people including her own family), and comfort with white supremacy.
When Ms Markle became engaged to the Prince many American Black women were thrilled, and I do mean thrilled, for her and thought that we, Black women, would finally have an advocate in the royal family, however, I wasn't one of these women.
After all, I can't think of or find a single time or incident where Ms Markle has done or even said a single thing in support of the civil rights of Black Americans (whom are still being severely oppressed and discriminated agaisnt in the US), and I looked, despite being half Black herself and having plenty of Black family (most of which she has completely let fall of the face of the earth since she met the Prince).
Indeed, the more I found out about Ms Markle (including her parasitic previous marriage to and longterm relationships with white men in the entertainment industry) and her so-called advocacy and humanitarian efforts*laughs*, the more disgusted I became. And that wedding, where were all of her family? Her Black family? Oh she didn't invite them. Whoa. I was horrified and I completely lost all respect for her, although I didn't have much for her anyway.
I think it's become clear to most Black people in America that Ms Markle is, just as she has always been but even more so now, a useless gold-digging, racist, (having spent almost all of her time and life perpetually seeking out and being around white people, marrying white people, and desperately trying to look like and become a white woman with the plastic surgery, skin bleaching, and constant straightening her hair) narc with no loyalty to anyone but herself. I actually feel bad for the British people because she's your headache now.
I hope that answers your question


----------



## Monoi

I watched the interview last night and I found the interview uncomplete. Oprah never got straight answers on her questions. Especially with Meghan. She starts something and derail.

Her fiction about not knowing who the RF is and if Diana ever did an interview was the worst lie and very transparent.
The rascist comment was awful and must have hurt big time, but tbh if u watched and read enough stories about royalty u would know this comes with it. 

Im still not sure what she really wanted that she didnt get. They had money, respect from the people, love from family even if that came with snark (most of us have family that are toxic) the only thing was the media that was harsh.

Im left with questions on why they left so soon? Also why didnt they contact a doctor to help her in secret for instance??


----------



## Lodpah

Other than the Vogue guy and Serena, are there any pictures of her having close POC  friends? Not talking about O and G as those are newly found friends through marriage and for publicity.


----------



## floatinglili

Thomas is getting slated hard in the Twitter comments. 
I don’t actually blame him for agreeing to be interviewed, even now. He seems to have a fatherly embarrassment regarding MM’s behaviour as well as personal deep hurt. His previous clumsy attempts to assert control over the situation have all failed, humiliatingly. He is conservative enough to wish to be seen to publicly support the inlaws.
Glad Im not in his shoes, and I’m glad my children are not likely to enjoy my elderly discomfort.  Megain go see your dad!!


----------



## Lodpah

floatinglili said:


> Thomas is getting slated hard in the Twitter comments.
> I don’t actually blame him for agreeing to be interviewed, even now. He seems to have a fatherly embarrassment regarding MM’s behaviour as well as personal deep hurt. His previous clumsy attempts to assert control over the situation have all failed, humiliatingly. He is conservative enough to wish to be seen to publicly support the inlaws.
> Glad Im not in his shoes, and I’m glad my children are not likely to enjoy my elderly discomfort.  Megain go see your dad!!


It's sad, for both her and her father.


----------



## CarryOn2020

floatinglili said:


> Thomas is getting slated hard in the Twitter comments.
> I don’t actually blame him for agreeing to be interviewed, even now. He seems to have a fatherly embarrassment regarding MM’s behaviour as well as personal deep hurt. His previous clumsy attempts to assert control over the situation have all failed, humiliatingly. He is conservative enough to wish to be seen to publicly support the inlaws.
> Glad Im not in his shoes, and I’m glad my children are not likely to enjoy my elderly discomfort.  Megain go see your dad!!



IMO many of those anti-Thomas comments are H&M stans/PR people.  I saw and heard a father concerned about his daughter’s well-being. This is what we want our fathers to do. Why criticize him for caring? He has met all of MM’s husbands and boyfriends over the years. He knows how to assess someone’s character.  He and Doria need to protect their daughter as much as possible. That is what parents do. I am glad he is stepping up. Surprising that OW didn’t include him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 70 miles away, it is very possible Doria has visited him, called him, or had one of her relatives/friends contact him.
> She may have shared some stories.  Just a thought.



I don't know. I didn't have the feeling they were amicable. Not a huge fall-out or something, but Doria seems to move on and not look back too. Plus, her spot for now is comfortable, why risk that?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> Interesting POV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Latagia Copeland-Tyronce
> , AS, BS(Hons), MSW(Policy)
> Updated August 1, 2019
> 
> 
> What do you think about Meghan Markle?
> Well...
> As a woke millennial Afro-American woman, and longtime social justice advocate and writer/journalist, I am quite tired of being bombarded with Meghan Markle news and questions. To be honest, I didn't know anything about Ms Markle or her work on the Suits TV show prior to her engagement to Prince Harry. And that was a huge red flag to me. This (half Black) woman and small time actress is in her late 30s, someone who has had all the support in the world from friends and family, and the most important thing she has done in life is marry Prince Harry. Really?
> That said, I have to get this off of my chest, and it may sound harsh to some but hey, I have never been one to mince words and I dont intend on starting now. I despise Ms Markle because she is the very epitome of everything that I fight against every day: useless celebrity, celebrity worship, selfishness, shameless gold-digging, superficial, narcissistic, backstabbing, weakness, racism (against Black people including her own family), and comfort with white supremacy.
> When Ms Markle became engaged to the Prince many American Black women were thrilled, and I do mean thrilled, for her and thought that we, Black women, would finally have an advocate in the royal family, however, I wasn't one of these women.
> After all, I can't think of or find a single time or incident where Ms Markle has done or even said a single thing in support of the civil rights of Black Americans (whom are still being severely oppressed and discriminated agaisnt in the US), and I looked, despite being half Black herself and having plenty of Black family (most of which she has completely let fall of the face of the earth since she met the Prince).
> Indeed, the more I found out about Ms Markle (including her parasitic previous marriage to and longterm relationships with white men in the entertainment industry) and her so-called advocacy and humanitarian efforts*laughs*, the more disgusted I became. And that wedding, where were all of her family? Her Black family? Oh she didn't invite them. Whoa. I was horrified and I completely lost all respect for her, although I didn't have much for her anyway.
> I think it's become clear to most Black people in America that Ms Markle is, just as she has always been but even more so now, a useless gold-digging, racist, (having spent almost all of her time and life perpetually seeking out and being around white people, marrying white people, and desperately trying to look like and become a white woman with the plastic surgery, skin bleaching, and constant straightening her hair) narc with no loyalty to anyone but herself. I actually feel bad for the British people because she's your headache now.
> I hope that answers your question


I’m done with this thread - we are in the middle of a pandemic with getting toward 3 million dead it’s touch and go how things will pan out and if we arent careful there will be another massive wave and this thing will really take hold - yet the papers aren’t mentioning it today -the only thing they report is M&H!!! You have to search hard to find this Chris Whitty is our chief medical man - this is being ignored today because of you know who!!!


But I Love this lady every word is spot on !!!!!!


----------



## floatinglili

Here is an interesting article that touches on some of the issues we have been discussing recently.
I hope it is not deemed too political.
I will cut and paste and excerpt:

*Why monarchies are more tolerant*

by Ed West
In 1850, an eight-year-old orphan from west Africa called Sarah Forbes Bonetta Davies was sent on the long journey to England. Sarah, a Yoruba from what is now Nigeria, had been captured by the King of Dahomey during a conflict in which both her parents were killed, and spent two years as a slave until a Royal Navy Captain, on a diplomatic mission for the Queen, took pity on her and persuaded the ruler to hand her over, telling him: “She would be a present from the King of the Blacks to the Queen of the Whites.” Once in England, Queen Victoria had Sarah raised by a couple from Chatham, and the girl became a regular visitor to Windsor Castle.

Alas, the story did not have a fairytale ending. Sarah died, aged just 40, from tuberculosis in 1880 after travelling to Madeira to convalesce, Victoria by now queen of much of Africa.

It was not so unusual for the Queen of the Whites to play host to an African girl. As ruler and empress of much of the globe, Victoria saw herself as the benevolent ruler of a family of nations, of all shades of humanity; at the same time, millions of her subjects at home lived in abject poverty, and when Miss Davies was growing up barely 1.5m could vote out of a population 20 times that.

Most American men, in contrast, could choose their head of state, thanks to the revolution that had ousted Victoria’s grandfather. The creation of Jefferson, Hamilton and the other Founding Fathers had been a tremendous success, not just in terms of wealth and power but in fulfilling its high-minded hope that all men might be able to pursue happiness. President Andrew Jackson was raised in the Waxhaws, a backcountry region of the Carolinas, the son of Irish immigrants, and had gone on to the White House; Abraham Lincoln grew up in a log cabin and reached the very top.

Yet Sarah Davies could never have dreamed of dining in the White House. Although there had been black guests since the time of Lincoln, the first African-American to be invited to have dinner at the president’s home was Booker T Washington – in 1901. Even then, it caused such anger that it wouldn’t be repeated for decades.

Such a visit would have raised few eyebrows in Britain, where Queen Victoria’s circle hosted people from various backgrounds, as did those of her successors; George V, in particular, had views on race that were unusually liberal for the time. The House of Windsor, whatever their other, many faults, have always stood for what most regard as basically decency on the subject — which is why perhaps the most damaging revelation in yesterday’s Oprah Winfrey interview was Meghan Markle’s suggestion that Harry had heard “there were concerns and conversations about how dark [Archie’s] skin might be”. The Oprah interview has placed race at the heart of the royal fall-out, and, as a result, the British Royal Family has been cancelled by American progressives. The Windsor family fall-out has, unfortunately, become part of The Discourse.


Obviously the royal family _should_ be cancelled by progressives; hereditary monarchy is, after all, a very reactionary concept. Americans cancelled the monarchy in 1776. Yet monarchies have also historically been, paradoxically, more racially tolerant than republics.

The America that rebelled against Victoria’s grandfather came to be both more egalitarian and at the same time more racially conscious and prejudiced than Britain; it developed a “colour bar” and “one-drop rule”, ideas designed to separate races into a hierarchy (although these ideas were far more pronounced in the South). Most African-Americans, when given the chance, sided with Britain in 1776, as did pretty much every Native American, because they rightly understood that as racial outsiders they were better off with a monarch ruling an empire, rather than an egalitarian republic from which they were excluded.

But these American ideas about race did not develop back in Europe; they didn’t even develop in some other parts of the Americas. Modern academia, largely colonised by the American narrative, is obsessed with ideas of “whiteness” and race even though they make little sense in the context of pre-20th century British and European history. At the end of George III’s reign, life expectancy among slaves in Trinidad was 17. For the working class in Preston it was 18, while in Liverpool it was 16. What on earth does “white privilege” mean in the context of 19thcentury Lancashire? What does it even mean in 21stcentury Lancashire?


It’s an American concept, fitting the fact that Americans historically had far more antagonistic views about race. During the Second World War the behaviour of British people towards black soldiers — and the behaviour of British women in particular — shocked US soldiers stationed here. Indeed, it was the objections of US servicemen to sharing a hotel with a black man that led to British courts reaffirming that segregation did not and could not exist in England.

That racial attitudes in Britain were not as harsh as those in America partly reflected demography — there just weren’t many black people until the 1950s — but they were also the product of the hierarchical, class-bound nature of British society. In contrast to the awesome ascent of Jackson and Lincoln, Britain didn’t have a working-class MP until (arguably) 1874, 30 years after a mixed-race man of African heritage first sat in the Commons. The UK didn’t have a working-class prime minister until 1924. No one born in a Cornish mining community could have risen to the top in Victorian England. They certainly wouldn’t have been invited to dine with the Queen.

In Britain class differences were far more important than race and were often so highly formalised as to resemble segregation. When Blackburn Rover’s Jimmy Forrest became the first professional — i.e. working-class — footballer to play for England, he had to wear a different coloured shirt to his gentleman team mates. “Professional” players also had to have separate dressing rooms. That kind of open snobbery has always been anathema to the US, even if it had its own class system and elite schools.
...continues...









						Why monarchies are more tolerant
					

History shows that the Royal Family has always been a better friend to minorities than American ********s




					unherd.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

I cannot get my head around when people criticise Charles for cutting Harry off, after Harry's announcement of them stepping down from Royal duties and wanted to be financially independent, Harry who is in his late 30s and a multi-millionaire, but at the same time give Meghan a complete pass for cutting off her father completely, who supported her and provided for her throughout her early life! The double standard knows no bounds! They talked about healing, why not start with your own father then? SMH! 

Also, why can't people accept that one could be target of racism but also at the same time a bully, a liar and etc? These things aren't mutually exclusive! People from different races experience racism every day and that doesn't instantly make them all saints! The allegation was apparently 1 person was "concerned" about her baby's skin tone, how does that then translate to "the whole of RF is racists and Britain is a racist country"? Give me a break!


----------



## Jktgal

floatinglili said:


> I was wondering when the music stops whether it would be Camilla emerging as the villain with snobby, sheltered, nasty and casually racist comments.



I think it is Camilla. Kate and William would have kept themselves at arms length and being very careful round them given how H reacted to suggestions of slowing down the relationship. Camilla seems to have the least to lose in the grand scheme of things and she probably saw through the Diana fixation.

Edit, interesting wording for this poll.


----------



## floatinglili

Older generation would be generally less cowed / influenced  by the changing culture as well. You could expect this older aristocratic type to be somewhat oblivious to the huge impact and sensitivity of US racial culture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

Harry said he couldn't go on a bike ride as a kid. He's either a liar, has a selective memory or is just delusional!


----------



## chicinthecity777

One thing for sure all came out of this is H&M do need tons of therapy! Delusion of grandeur is a real mental illness!


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Oprah was too involved with them to do an objective interview IMO. It was a softball interview and while there were new things released we didn't know before, they were obviously only things that M+H felt comfortable sharing. The only time she really challenged them was when she asked Harry how he was "trapped"... I felt her eyeroll lol.



Well, it turns out that Oprah promoted a coffee company that MM invested in and they said the promotion could be worth $1mm to MM's company. I will see if I can find the video. So the load of crap that they didn't get paid is just that...a load of crap.


----------



## chicinthecity777

So we can probably say this TV interview is the most overly hyped of the century yet? They said it was going to be bigger than the Super Bowl! Viewing figures are coming in. U.S. CBS 17.1m(?), last night's ITV 11m. Super Bowl drew 100m+!


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> Have fun!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Which one is which?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015673



OMFG. Unbelievable.


----------



## marietouchet

The kerfuffle over the title, wonderful title for the article , I love the word naughty, not too pejorative









						Why Meghan was 'a bit naughty' when referring to Archie's skin colour
					

Royal biographer Hugo Vickers told the BBC's Newsnight that Meghan Markle had misleadingly claimed in her interview that there was a discussion about whether the boy could take the title.




					mol.im


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Have fun!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Which one is which?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5015673


But but she never researched BRF!!!


----------



## marietouchet

The big guns , the Times, source of the bullying allegations 
Palace in turmoil over Meghan’s racism claims 






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

So my SO booked his covid jab for today at lunch time. He's got a real needle-phobia and was dreading it since last weekend after he booked it. Last night, I was discussing it with him to give him some moral support. He was still unease. He then said he was "going to call Oprah to tell her it was all Queens' fault" that he had to "get stabbed" by a needle!


----------



## marietouchet

I want your opinions please. do you agree ? 
It seems to me the interview was 100 percent about complaints
Was there any mention of the good works that HM have done, hope to do , will do etc, plans, future ?
Did I miss it ?

I think that is why the interview is being received the way it is

What are your thoughts?


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> So my SO booked his covid jab for today at lunch time. He's got a real needle-phobia and was dreading it since last weekend after he booked it. Last night, I was discussing it with him to give him some moral support. He was still unease. He then said he was "going to call Oprah to tell her it was all Queens' fault" that he had to "get stabbed" by a needle!


I get it , I hate Needles, doctors, procedures , it is tough , I feel for him
I use my “breathe deep and pretend you are in Cancun” technique at the doctors, prefer Ben and Jerry’s ice cream to Bourbon after the fact


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 for bringing this to my attention. I checked the house, but I have to pass on it. It has only 13 restrooms, which is far below the standard 16 or 19 restrooms ...



I would have taken the one he sold in Montecito for $50 million a short while ago in a heartbeat. It's beautiful. His wife has exquisite taste....in houses and men. Did I mention I got to meet him at one of his shows and I almost fell over when I saw how freaking beautiful he is? Sorry for OT.


----------



## marietouchet

bisousx said:


> For some, $30 million is simply not enough


I get it, if you expect $3M security a year, then $30M does not go far after buying the $15M house


----------



## marietouchet

Another poll, I want your opinions ... 

Do you think this story has legs? I guess there are two answers one of the US and one for the UK

Do they have a future in Netflix in the US?

How long do you think the kerfuffle will go on in the UK ? Or will it wind up being handled quietly, similar to the way that the Andrew mess is not talked about ?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Good opinion piece.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## artax two

marietouchet said:


> I want your opinions please. do you agree ?
> It seems to me the interview was 100 percent about complaints
> Was there any mention of the good works that HM have done, hope to do , will do etc, plans, future ?
> Did I miss it ?
> 
> I think that is why the interview is being received the way it is
> 
> What are your thoughts?


We know the entirety of the interview was close to 4 hours long. The parts that were aired were clearly the most scandalous. I would be interested in seeing the entire 4 hours to see how far OW pressed on many of the claims, how much more MM claimed victimhood about, to see if it was a much more balanced set of topics or viewpoints than what we saw. My gut tells me it would be 4 hours of complaining and accusations and victimization, but I would still like to see it to know for sure.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Good opinion piece.



sad sad sad I really wanted this interview to be a positive thing ... the title of the opinion piece says it all - I agree with the title unfortunately
I want them to succeed on Netlix and Spotify where I can tune them out, the interview has filled up every one of my news feeds, GO AWAY

I could not believe that The press secretary of the current president, the wife of another president and the 6 oclock SERIOUS news all commented - guys there is COVID, immigration, BREXIT that re real issues


----------



## zinacef

Allisonfaye said:


> OMFG. Unbelievable.


like she has look book or something?  This is so creepy.


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> So we can probably say this TV interview is the most overly hyped of the century yet? They said it was going to be bigger than the Super Bowl! Viewing figures are coming in. U.S. CBS 17.1m(?), last night's ITV 11m. Super Bowl drew 100m+!


I did read somewhere ... the audience was not as big as expected/ as for other BIG interviews, that would agree with your findings 
Will try and find that article


----------



## haute okole

marietouchet said:


> Another poll, I want your opinions ...
> 
> Do you think this story has legs? I guess there are two answers one of the US and one for the UK
> 
> Do they have a future in Netflix in the US?
> 
> How long do you think the kerfuffle will go on in the UK ? Or will it wind up being handled quietly, similar to the way that the Andrew mess is not talked about ?


Gosh, I hope not.  I hope to banish them to Pariah Island where OJ Simpson and the former President now occupy.  All have the dubious distinction of having wasted too much TV air time with their I am such a victim mentality and turned it into ratings gold.  What astonishes me the most is the inappropriate timing of this whine-fest.  At a time when the world is really suffering, I mean REAL suffering, Meagan is complaining about her slights because she was not given the status and adoration she was expecting and due her.  My husband, who is a psychiatrist here in LA watched the interview with me and said that Meagan is truly mentally ill.  However, her goal is not to heal, it is to exact revenge.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I want your opinions please. do you agree ?
> It seems to me the interview was 100 percent about complaints
> Was there any mention of the good works that HM have done, hope to do , will do etc, plans, future ?
> Did I miss it ?
> 
> I think that is why the interview is being received the way it is
> 
> What are your thoughts?



I think H&M need to to grow-up, get serious and go to work


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> Honestly, I think he's a sincere man and hurting for his daughter. She threw him under the bus. I just wonder how does she sleep at night. Does she not think of her father at all? From all accounts in pictures, home videos he was a doting father, wanting her to excel. The staged photos have already been explained. He went along with it with no idea of the consequences or thinking it was a bad thing. She can't forgive him for that? How would she feel when he passes away? This is heartbreaking.



Sociopaths feel no remorse.


----------



## sdkitty

I'm not a conservative but I get these emails from some conservative organization.  this is the first negative report I've seen on Meghan's TV show

Here’s The Most Honest Review Of Meghan And Harry’s Interview With Oprah (freepressfail.com)


----------



## Allisonfaye

This is great: 








						Opinion | Fox News
					

Captivating commentary from newsmakers, authors, experts and others on topics you care about from politics to family, faith, values and more.




					www.foxnews.com
				




Page down to this. Not sure why it won't copy the direction link.

Former royal millionaires Harry, Meghan cry victim from their mansion


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think people are being really hypocritical by demanding the palace investigate the racism conversation but scoffing at the palace saying they're going to investigate the bullying allegations. FWIW, I think both need to be investigated. They aren't just a family, they are an employer that should take employee harassment seriously.


But she was not an employee....she was in in-law, member of the family.....and they say they know who made racist remarks, they just aren't telling


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Serious question: if it was MI6 or whatever secret department would be responsible for murdering people, wouldn't it be counterproductive to have a bunch of paparazzi follow you while you're at it?


that whole narrative came from Dodi's father....I think it's ridiculous


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> This is great:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Fox News
> 
> 
> Captivating commentary from newsmakers, authors, experts and others on topics you care about from politics to family, faith, values and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Page down to this. Not sure why it won't copy the direction link.
> 
> Former royal millionaires Harry, Meghan cry victim from their mansion


This is a  serious political news channel, not a tabloid and they have FOUR articles on this kerfuffle

MY BAD, I did not scroll down enough there are MORE articles,


----------



## jelliedfeels

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5016079
> 
> I’m done with this thread - we are in the middle of a pandemic with getting toward 3 million dead it’s touch and go how things will pan out and if we arent careful there will be another massive wave and this thing will really take hold - yet the papers aren’t mentioning it today -the only thing they report is M&H!!! You have to search hard to find this Chris Whitty is our chief medical man - this is being ignored today because of you know who!!!
> 
> 
> But I Love this lady every word is spot on !!!!!!


Do I detect the smell of burnt martyr in the air? 
People come to purse forum threads to try and relax from the stress of life especially during the pandemic. If you are worried about the press coverage why not contact  the news agencies themselves? Not sure what you think your comment will achieve.


----------



## Monoi

The last comment of Harry about MM being the one who saved him really made me a bit sad and I found the comment very telling about their relationship. Its not equal thats for sure.

Feel like that comment can be dissected from a psychology pov and I would love to read all about it. The savior complex in a relationship.

Also how did MM didnt see any stories about herself, did she not own a smartphone or laptop. I find that hard to believe. She wasnt up at 5 oclock in the morning doing yoga...its all so messy..


----------



## doni

Monoi said:


> Im left with questions on why they left so soon? Also why didnt they contact a doctor to help her in secret for instance??


They never intended to. But when the Queen did not buy their plan to live between the two continents (security in tow) while continuing to work for her and making their own money on top, they had to.



Monoi said:


> Also why didnt they contact a doctor to help her in secret for instance??



Maybe Harry is not sufficiently well connected in the UK?

Still, this is troubling, to champion the need for professional assistance for mental illness and then be so lighthearted about having come through without it...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?

I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.


----------



## byzina

BagOuttaHell said:


> She looks gorgeous in the interview. As for the revelations. I’m not surprised. I’ve always believed Diana was killed in part because she was dating an Egyptian man. Even though she wasn’t in the day to day fold. That was still too close to the monarchy for comfort.



They couldn't kill her like this. No one could make her not fasten her seat belt. If she had done it, she would be alive.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> that whole narrative came from Dodi's father....I think it's ridiculous


Diana was injured due to being a car driven by a drunk driver, and  she died due to not wearing a seatbelt

Yes the paps made things worse chasing them but that is why celebs are supposed to have trained chauffeurs, not drunk ones

I doubt the drunk driver was a kamikaze  - intending suicide - hired by evil forces.  He died in the crash. Along with D & D - in the back seat - no seatbelts. The fourth rider - front passenger side - survived thanks to his seatbelt.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Diana was injured to being a car driven by a drunk driver, and  she died due to not wearing a seatbelt
> 
> Yes the paps made things worse chasing them but that is why celebs are supposed to have trained chauffeurs, not drunk ones
> 
> I doubt the drunk driver was a kamikaze  - intending suicide - hired by evil forces.  He died in the crash. Along with D & D - in the back seat - no seatbelts. The fourth rider - front passenger side - survived thanks to his seatbelt.


exactly....I supposed it's possible some evil force would want to murder her but that's not what happened


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.



Thank you for posting this, I enjoy the diversity of opinions and learn from knowing what others think even when the theory is close to being an evil forces (she is being set up) kind of view. I welcome all opinions.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> This is a  serious political news channel, not a tabloid and they have FOUR articles on this kerfuffle
> 
> MY BAD, I did not scroll down enough there are MORE articles,


while I agree with you on a lot of things and I don't have a problem with this article, Fox has a news arm which is serious but this is from a commentator.  there are (other) Fox commentators who are the furthest thing from serious news people


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> I want your opinions please. do you agree ?
> It seems to me the interview was 100 percent about complaints
> Was there any mention of the good works that HM have done, hope to do , will do etc, plans, future ?
> Did I miss it ?
> 
> I think that is why the interview is being received the way it is
> 
> What are your thoughts?


Well... they promoted hen keeping....um.....
No you’re right nothing about their foundation at all. Nothing about the future. Just score settling & accusations.

I don’t think the Andrew controversy has  been swept away. Rather the press is walking on eggshells as they don’t want to say anything they can get sued for. you know everyone  possibly involved in that case will sue at a moments noticed. 
The lawyers are still working out the legalities of whether you can subpoena a prince under American or international law. GM is also making things as hard as possible. 
Nonetheless,  I think the reckoning is coming. It may take some time though.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Well... they promoted hen keeping....um.....
> No you’re right nothing about their foundation at all. Nothing about the future. Just score settling & accusations.
> 
> I don’t think the Andrew controversy has  been swept away. Rather the press is walking on eggshells as they don’t want to say anything they can get sued for. you know everyone  possibly involved in that case will sue at a moments noticed.
> The lawyers are still working out the legalities of whether you can subpoena a prince under American or international law. GM is also making things as hard as possible.
> Nonetheless,  I think the reckoning is coming. It may take some time though.


yes score settling....and it seems that they have succeeded in doing some damage to the RF.  The RF will survive but will they thrive?
Will they keep funding these two grifters?  Is their idea that having put all this out there, the RF will not dare do anything to further piss them off?
I saw yesterday on tv that Boris Johnson declined to comment except to say something nice about the queen.
This story isn't over.  Wonder what will come of the bullying allegations.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I thought Colbert was pretty Colbert about it. There was a healthy dose of skepticism there...



He makes his living by listening to pretentious, over-the-top phony celebrities. It's all in a day's work for him.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.



To quote my immigrant grandfather (may his memory be a blessing) you can go to college  but it doesn’t give you smarts!   Not every MD or PhD is smart or astute. Some just want to hear their own voices.


----------



## LittleStar88

News cycles are usually very short. They’ve lucked out that there’s not anything major that’s happened since Sunday night to eclipse the interview. Until there’s a major news event (war, death, terrorist attack, etc) to take over, this will continue to have traction.

Really it’s just a matter of time until everyone forgets about this and they dwindle into obscurity. And their whine fest will be all they’re remembered for.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Not everybody is joining the MM club.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Megyn Kelly rips Meghan Markle as ‘un-self-aware’ after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> “What I saw tonight was somebody who is totally un-self-aware, completely unaware of how she sounded,” she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


would have been interesting if oprah had asked about those earrings.  but no....


----------



## chicinthecity777

Deleted.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thomas on GMB — guessing the whole interview gets posted later, there are several clips on the Twitter.
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GMB?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hazzie was snotty.
> #TeamThomas



I feel very badly for Thomas.  He's the one that was betrayed, not his snotty future son in law and especially not his a$$ spawn Meg.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> I just took a little video break
> If anyone has HULU they have a show Charles & Diana 1983.
> *I'd forgotten just how douchey he was*



I've never forgotten. There has been a 20+ year long campaign to reinvent his image as being this kindly, thoughtful man and I still haven't forgotten. Maybe he has mellowed some with age, but frankly once a douche, always a douche.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> The bulk of Harry's money from his mother is really from his father and the divorce settlement which was so large that he had to borrow from The Queen.


That’s true. I wonder why no one ever mentions that.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Honestly, I think he's a sincere man and hurting for his daughter. She threw him under the bus. I just wonder how does she sleep at night. Does she not think of her father at all? From all accounts in pictures, home videos he was a doting father, wanting her to excel. The staged photos have already been explained. He went along with it with no idea of the consequences or thinking it was a bad thing. She can't forgive him for that? How would she feel when he passes away? This is heartbreaking.


Well said!  For those blathering on and on about how dare Charles as a father *temporarily* stop taking his traitorous son's calls...what is your opinion on how dare a spoiled daughter stop taking her ailing father's phone calls for *YEARS*?


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> I feel very badly for Thomas.  He's the one that was betrayed, not his snotty future son in law and especially not his a$$ spawn Meg.


I agree, I feel really bad for Thomas! He never came across vicious or fake to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

floatinglili said:


> This thread runs so fast it’s hard to keep up. I am really surprised that MM said Samantha changed her name back to Mwrkle ‘in her 50s’ when she MM started dating Harry.
> And for Samantha to have the paperwork to disprove that.
> Firstly was MM using that spiteful and familiar device of sexist ageism, that younger women often invoke against their older females rivals?
> if so, how common and classless.
> Further, I was surprised at the petty arrogance and entitlement of MM in saying this as a complaint against Samantha. A person’s name - and their own personal original family name at that - is surely their own business at any age or stage?


Meghan sincerely feels she has ownership of anything and everything, even a last name that was first her older sister's.  I didn't think this evil entity could disgust me more, but I stand corrected!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chicinthecity777 said:


> I cannot get my head around when people criticise Charles for cutting Harry off, after Harry's announcement of them stepping down from Royal duties and wanted to be financially independent, Harry who is in his late 30s and a multi-millionaire, but at the same time give Meghan a complete pass for cutting off her father completely, who supported her and provided for her throughout her early life! The double standard knows no bounds! They talked about healing, why not start with your own father then? SMH!
> 
> Also, why can't people accept that one could be target of racism but also at the same time a bully, a liar and etc? These things aren't mutually exclusive! People from different races experience racism every day and that doesn't instantly make them all saints! The allegation was apparently 1 person was "concerned" about her baby's skin tone, how does that then translate to "the whole of RF is racists and Britain is a racist country"? Give me a break!


Thank you  I'm just too nauseated and sickened by this whole divisive victim hood charade to make a comment myself right now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I wonder what Netflix and Spotify think of those 2 of their employees. Free ads? Or stolen revenue? I mean they peaked at this interview. What's next big project? They can't ride this sorry gravy train forever. I hope Netflix and Spotify can get their investment back!


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I saw yesterday on tv that Boris Johnson declined to comment except to say something nice about the queen.


Quite right that he declined to comment, he was doing the frequent press briefing he and other ministers and medical experts do on Covid, a couple of journalists tried to squeeze questions about the interview as well as asking Covid questions, but it wasn't the time or place to answer those.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.




I have known some psychologists who seem to need lots of therapy themselves - this woman might be one of them.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I feel very badly for Thomas.  He's the one that was betrayed, not his snotty future son in law and especially not his a$$ spawn Meg.


I feel he's the victim here too but, did he literally "spoil" her by indulging her too much as a child and a young woman?  or are narcissists born, not created?


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Quite right that he declined to comment, he was doing the frequent press briefing he and other ministers and medical experts do on Covid, a couple of journalists tried to squeeze questions about the interview as well as asking Covid questions, but it wasn't the time or place to answer those.


right and maybe he should not comment in any forum.....seems he is growing into his job?


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Harry said he couldn't go on a bike ride as a kid. *He's either a liar, has a selective memory or is just delusiona*l!
> View attachment 5016138


All three.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> I feel he's the victim here too but, did he literally "spoil" her by indulging her too much as a child and a young woman?  or are narcissists born, not created?



She has two parents, so we should also be looking at Doria to see how she contributed to this narcissism.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Honestly, I think he's a sincere man and hurting for his daughter. She threw him under the bus. I just wonder how does she sleep at night. Does she not think of her father at all? From all accounts in pictures, home videos he was a doting father, wanting her to excel. The staged photos have already been explained. He went along with it with no idea of the consequences or thinking it was a bad thing. She can't forgive him for that? How would she feel when he passes away? This is heartbreaking.



I think she sees it as her dad crossed her by not doing exactly as she instructed him to do. He's dead to her now, as is anyone who doesn't do what Meghan wants.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> All three.



I’ve read somewhere that childhood trauma can cause people to forget a lot of their childhood, so perhaps something like that is happening here.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> She had two parents, so we should also be looking at Doria to see how she contributed to this narcissism.


yes, I keep thinking of her living with him as a teen and him paying for her education but Doria had her as a little girl so who knows what she instilled in her?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> She had two parents, so we should also be looking at Doria to see how she contributed to this narcissism.


I think Doria taught her how to leave, never look back, and only return if there's some benefit.  Just because she's been quiet doesn't mean she's a saint.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think she sees it as her dad crossed her by not doing exactly as she instructed him to do. He's dead to her now, as is anyone who doesn't do what Meghan wants.


so he is dead to her, hence her remark to O that she "lost" her dad


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> I’ve read somewhere that childhood trauma can cause people to forget a lot of their childhood, so perhaps something like that is happening here.


Absolutely!  Adverse childhood events can affect us for life, but what childhood trauma is Meg now claiming to have had?

Sorry, you meant Haz, didn't you?


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.




Scary. Could you imagine going into therapy for your narc parents or partner, and the therapist falls for their victim act?


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Charles Laughs at Question About Harry and Meghan’s Interview
					

A reporter tried to get Prince Charles’ reaction to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s tell-all interview as the heir visited a COVID-19 vaccine site — photos




					www.usmagazine.com
				




A chuckle from Charles. Prince Charles made his first public appearance since his son Prince Harry and daughter-in-law Meghan Markle’s bombshell tell-all interview.

The Prince of Wales, 72, paid a visit to a COVID-19 vaccine site at the Jesus House church in London on Tuesday, March 9, nearly one year after he battled the novel coronavirus. He appeared to be in good spirits as he walked through the pop-up clinic and chatted with its staff members and volunteers.

At the end of his royal engagement, Charles began walking toward the exit when a Sky News reporter shouted out, “Sir, can I ask what did you think of the interview?” The heir apparent to the British throne turned in response to the question and subtly reacted.

“He chuckled and carried on walking,” tweeted Daily Express royal correspondent Richard Palmer, who also attended the visit.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Thank you for posting this, I enjoy the diversity of opinions and learn from knowing what others think even when the theory is close to being an evil forces (she is being set up) kind of view. I welcome all opinions.


This might


QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.



I’m pretty sure


QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.




so long answer- because I think this doctor is discrediting valuable work for fame. 

Im pretty sure it’s not professional to start diagnosing someone over Twitter. What happened to medical confidentiality? 

Moreover, I’m absolutely sure no ethical medic professional would diagnose anyone from edited video footage and press releases. This is why that Australian psychologist wouldn’t say anything about narcissism on her interview just made some layman statements about needy behaviour. 

She’s a forensic psychologist isn’t that more criminal behaviour specific? I’m not sure whether she has the expertise to diagnose childhood trauma cases on her own. Certainly not people she has never met.

To say you can see someone on TV and Twitter and know their psychological make-up sounds like something from Sherlock aka bad fiction. 

All in all, whatever her credentials are she’s not doing her job properly, I’d take this about as seriously as a horoscope.


----------



## purseinsanity

Harry and Meghan’s Rep Addresses Questions About Legality of Secret Wedding
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s rep spoke out after a Church of England vicar tweeted that the couple legally ‘can’t get married twice’ — read more




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Just a celebration of love! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprised royal watchers by announcing that they secretly married days before their royal nuptials, which raised questions about their actual wedding date.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Relationship Timeline*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s spokesperson set the record straight on Monday, March 8, telling E! News that they were legally married on May 19, 2018, as originally reported.

The clarification came after a Church of England vicar called into question the legality of the couple’s backyard nuptials, which took place on May 16, 2018.

*“I’ve no idea what they mean,” Reverend David Green wrote in a since-deleted tweet on Monday. “You can’t get married twice. So what was the thing three days before? And if it was a marriage, what on earth are we doing ‘playing’ at prayer/holy matrimony for cameras.”*

According to the clergy guidebook on the Church of England’s official website, couples “who are already lawfully married cannot choose to re-marry each other, unless there is some doubt as to the validity of the earlier marriage.” The church’s guidelines also state that at least two witnesses must be present for a union to be considered legal.
Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, revealed during their CBS interview on Sunday, March 7, that they had quietly exchanged vows in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, on the grounds of their U.K. home. The prince said “just the three of us” were present, indicating that they did not have enough witnesses.
“We called the archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us,’” the Suits alum said during the bombshell special.
*Meghan Markle’s Ups and Downs With the Royal Family*
The same archbishop presided over the pair’s actual wedding later that week at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle. He also christened their son, Archie, in July 2019.


*Here come all the "clarifications"!  ie explanations of all the lies!  *


----------



## bag-mania

floatinglili said:


> Thomas, like Samantha, was initially ridiculed -
> Let’s be honest *he was presented as ‘white trash’ *but over time has proven himself to be a thoughtful and a considerate human being doing his best to father his complicated family. His supportive comments regarding Samantha’s book were interpreted as being anti- MM sentiment but as a parent myself I see him as a father trying to be evenhanded and supportive of his children.
> Good parents may be hurt and even resentful of being treated badly by their children but decent people they do not allow themselves to be spiteful towards their children.
> MM’s self pitying representation of having ‘lost’ her father is frankly laughable and embarrassing.



Yep. Remember how the press portrayed Thomas as a greedy, stupid lowlife who somehow managed to father this incredible daughter? That was the story sold to us by a media which was already heavily invested in the symbolism of a mixed race "breath of fresh air" coming into the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

I apologize if this video has already been shared here, I didn't have a chance to read the last posts. The face of suffering....


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps Charles should call Thomas and apologize for this snotty son. I know many fathers who would do that. In a world where manners matter, it would be the proper thing to do.



I'd like to listen in on that call as they commiserate on how difficult it is having irresponsible entitled offspring.


----------



## Chanbal

Are we all being blinded by our ignorance? Another evidence that Piers was right and MM's interview worked like a charm in the US. There is hope for her wished career here (Senator or President?)    



Spoiler: I have no further comments! 



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-cruelty-Meghan-outrageous-slams-Royals.html


----------



## doni

floatinglili said:


> Thomas is getting slated hard in the Twitter comments.
> I don’t actually blame him for agreeing to be interviewed, even now. He seems to have a fatherly embarrassment regarding MM’s behaviour as well as personal deep hurt. His previous clumsy attempts to assert control over the situation have all failed, humiliatingly. He is conservative enough to wish to be seen to publicly support the inlaws.
> Glad Im not in his shoes, and I’m glad my children are not likely to enjoy my elderly discomfort.  Megain go see your dad!!



I don‘t feel particularly sorry for Mr Markle. I suspect Meghan and him are similar personalities, they are father and daughter and she even chose to live with him. They both appear to enjoy the attention.

The father sure made a mistake talking to the press before the wedding. But if this was the reason for the fall out, what I have always wondered is, how come he was never introduced to Harry? As far as we know Harry and Meghan are not lazy about catching planes and travel back and forth. How do you not introduce your father (to whom you claim to be so close) to your husband before the wedding? Specially _such a_ wedding. And to expect that first meeting to happen in the middle of the theater of a royal wedding in England... I mean, there is something bizarre in this whole narrative...


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> exactly....I supposed it's possible some evil force would want to murder her but that's not what happened


Other than the two boys, it worked out very well for the rest of the royal family.

She was such a loose cannon, they had no idea what she was going to do next and what trouble she was going to cause and her having died made life a lot easier for them.

Maybe there was a plot against her, I just can’t see how that plot was initiated on the night that she died.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I apologize if this video has already been shared here, I didn't have a chance to read the last posts. The face of suffering....



Wow TM claims he was harassed by invasive press so he went against official advice on ignoring them and tried to find a sympathetic figure to make him look good (whether or not money changed hands.)
He then helps issue frequent press releases to try and get a reaction from his estranged relative. 

Gosh darn it if that story don’t sound familiar. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree does it?

If he isn’t actually upset: he’s actually a better actor than MM though.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Harry said he couldn't go on a bike ride as a kid. He's either a liar, has a selective memory or is just delusional!
> View attachment 5016138



He has adopted his wife's habit of creating her own reality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

doni said:


> I don‘t feel particularly sorry for Mr Markle. I suspect Meghan and him are similar personalities, *they are father and daughter and she even chose to live with him. They both appear to enjoy the attention.*


I would disagree using the case of my SO and his siblings and parents. It's more to do with how one is brought up by the parents. My SO's oldest sister has the most narcissistic personality while the parents aren't at all. She was a real beautiful girl and she was spoilt rotten and that made her for what she is now.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I want your opinions please. do you agree ?
> It seems to me the interview was 100 percent about complaints
> Was there any mention of the good works that HM have done, hope to do , will do etc, plans, future ?
> Did I miss it ?
> 
> I think that is why the interview is being received the way it is
> 
> What are your thoughts?



The interview was 100% about them venting and slinging accusations about things real and imagined.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Wow TM claims he was harassed by invasive press so he went against official advice on ignoring them and tried to find a sympathetic figure to make him look good (whether or not money changed hands.)
> He then helps issue frequent press releases to try and get a reaction from his estranged relative.
> 
> Gosh darn it if that story don’t sound familiar. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree does it?
> 
> If he isn’t actually upset: he’s actually a better actor than MM though.



He was being portrayed in a terrible light by several tabloids and a journalist offered to write a more favorable article about him, which he accepted. According to Samantha, he wanted to look good for his daughter. I do believe he is suffering. He seems to be a decent person.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I would disagree using the case of my SO and his siblings and parents. It's more to do with how one is brought up by the parents. My SO's oldest sister has the most narcissistic personality while the parents aren't at all. She was a real beautiful girl and she was spoilt rotten and that made her for what she is now.


it does go back to nature or nurture though, right?  certain personality traits can be just how a person is, not due to the way the are raised IMO.... with M, it could have been a combination but she does seem narcissistic to me


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.




You know there are psychologists who got into psychology because they had issues about themselves they didn't understand and wanted to figure out. I think it's safe to put this woman in the f**ked up psychologist category.


----------



## JY89

TimeToShop said:


> Oh please, she didn’t google him?



Not sure to say that she didn’t have to as she had already knew and was obsessed with the RF way before?  She did her homework more than 20 years ago? Lol 









						Did Meghan Markle Lie About Not Knowing Prince Harry Before They Met?
					

Meghan Markle will probably never escape rumors as long as she's a member of the royal family, but did the duchess lie about knowing Prince Harry?




					www.cheatsheet.com
				




RF who?


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Are we all being blinded by our ignorance? Another evidence that Piers was right and MM's interview worked like a charm in the US. There is hope for her wished career here (Senator or President?)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: I have no further comments!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...s-cruelty-Meghan-outrageous-slams-Royals.html



This is all so disappointing. Smart, educated, thoughtful people are literally making her a martyr just by listening to her mud-slinging victimhood, half-truths, outright lies and wild insinuations without caring about any of the facts, hearing the other side or holding her accountable for her part in it. It's no longer just "lazy journalism" - it's people who are supposed to be better than some freelance writer generating articles as quickly as possible at People magazine. I expected so much more from these people. I don't think anyone should side with the royal family (we all know they have a whole host of issues), but I would expect them to give some general statement (e.g. "I abhor racism" etc.) rather than condemning the royal family and nominating her for sainthood. So lazy and so intellectually dishonest.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> would have been interesting if oprah had asked about those earrings.  but no....



At this point they are all but members of her production company.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I’ve read somewhere that childhood trauma can cause people to forget a lot of their childhood, so perhaps something like that is happening here.



You would think he would have held on to the good times with his mother though. Goodness knows he evokes her memory enough.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Harry and Meghan’s Rep Addresses Questions About Legality of Secret Wedding
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s rep spoke out after a Church of England vicar tweeted that the couple legally ‘can’t get married twice’ — read more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a celebration of love! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprised royal watchers by announcing that they secretly married days before their royal nuptials, which raised questions about their actual wedding date.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Relationship Timeline*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s spokesperson set the record straight on Monday, March 8, telling E! News that they were legally married on May 19, 2018, as originally reported.
> 
> The clarification came after a Church of England vicar called into question the legality of the couple’s backyard nuptials, which took place on May 16, 2018.
> 
> *“I’ve no idea what they mean,” Reverend David Green wrote in a since-deleted tweet on Monday. “You can’t get married twice. So what was the thing three days before? And if it was a marriage, what on earth are we doing ‘playing’ at prayer/holy matrimony for cameras.”*
> 
> According to the clergy guidebook on the Church of England’s official website, couples “who are already lawfully married cannot choose to re-marry each other, unless there is some doubt as to the validity of the earlier marriage.” The church’s guidelines also state that at least two witnesses must be present for a union to be considered legal.
> Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, revealed during their CBS interview on Sunday, March 7, that they had quietly exchanged vows in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, on the grounds of their U.K. home. The prince said “just the three of us” were present, indicating that they did not have enough witnesses.
> “We called the archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us,’” the Suits alum said during the bombshell special.
> *Meghan Markle’s Ups and Downs With the Royal Family*
> The same archbishop presided over the pair’s actual wedding later that week at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle. He also christened their son, Archie, in July 2019.
> 
> 
> *Here come all the "clarifications"!  ie explanations of all the lies!  *


 
The synod should ask Welby about this too. What’s he doing presiding over secret ceremonies? He should definitely clarify what he was up to.


----------



## Chanbal

How cruel can one be to throw his/her own family under the bus, the way MM&H did. 

"_The Prince of Wales - who is said to be 'absolutely devastated' at Harry's claims he cut him off, put on a brave face as he spoke to medics, clerics and patients at Jesus House church near Brent Cross in London, following the deluge of personal attacks in front of a TV audience of 28million in the UK and US alone.

Harry - through comments to Oprah - has ruled out the Queen and Prince Philip as having made the alleged racist comments about Archie but left other royals under suspicion. 

Charles is said to be 'deeply' concerned over the racism claims, with a source saying: '*It goes against everything the Prince of Wales believes in. He believes diversity is the strength of our society.*_*''*

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-Meghans-bombshell-Oprah-revelations.html


----------



## Allisonfaye

tiktok said:


> This is all so disappointing. Smart, educated, thoughtful people are literally making her a martyr just by listening to her mud-slinging victimhood, half-truths, outright lies and wild insinuations without caring about any of the facts, hearing the other side or holding her accountable for her part in it. It's no longer just "lazy journalism" - it's people who are supposed to be better than some freelance writer generating articles as quickly as possible at People magazine. I expected so much more from these people. I don't think anyone should side with the royal family (we all know they have a whole host of issues), but I would expect them to give some general statement (e.g. "I abhor racism" etc.) rather than condemning the royal family and nominating her for sainthood. So lazy and so intellectually dishonest.



Journalism has been dead. There are major stories that the press just refuses to even report on.


----------



## 1LV

Twelve said:


> Cindy Adams still writes at age 90
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cindy Adams on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> I’m no TV columnist, whose job is to rate any television show. Now that we’ve established that, and I’m probably next in line for impeachment, I therefore will talk about Oprah Winfrey’s Sunday sho…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


OUCH!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.




These people just ride the wave of popular topics for their own publicity. 

No real trauma or mental health expert of worth would make such judgements on people or incidences that they're not treating. People they'd be actually treating would be protected by confidentiality. 

Dr Grande did a youtube vid on the interview, first the usual disclaimer and was very measured. Very funny about the Matrix though (M as Morpheous, H as Neo)


----------



## TC1

OK, question. So. MM hates that her sister's last name is Markle (riding on her coattails) has "lost" her father (Markle) I assume Harry's last name is Windsor (?) and Archie is Montbatten-Windsor. How long until she changes her last name to Montbatten? (I must assume not as long as PP is alive) 
Clearly I'm just wondering what else she can do to cause a stir *shrug*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

.


----------



## purseinsanity

JY89 said:


> Not sure to say that she didn’t have to as she had already knew and was obsessed with the RF way before?  She did her homework more than 20 years ago? Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan Markle Lie About Not Knowing Prince Harry Before They Met?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will probably never escape rumors as long as she's a member of the royal family, but did the duchess lie about knowing Prince Harry?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RF who?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5016305


I guess she didn't realize that was Buckingham Palace behind her?  She just thought it was a big, fancy, English building!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had no clue who this guy is, but he is is apparently a filmmaker (so has the Hollywood connections) AND candidate for Governor or California, so needs to keep an eye on public opinion. Yet he doesn't hold back at all. Interesting.


I also didn't know him until a few days ago when I came across one of his tweets. He is obviously not buying MM's victim story.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thomas on GMB — guessing the whole interview gets posted later, there are several clips on the Twitter.
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GMB?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hazzie was snotty.
> #TeamThomas



I didn't know that you had posted this video, so I posted it as well. After dedicating his life to raise MM the best way he could, he must be suffering a lot.


----------



## Chanbal

floatinglili said:


> Interesting theory that it is Kate that is going to be named and shamed in the baby skin tone ‘concerns’ debacle. If a senior Royal I was thinking it is obviously someone one step away from central power as otherwise the wedding would not have gone ahead so quickly and with such fulsomeness.
> I was wondering when the music stops whether it would be Camilla emerging as the villain with snobby, sheltered, nasty and casually racist comments. Let’s face it the British aristocracy have previously made themselves famous for ‘telling it like it is’ and being jarringly rude about it, apparently for laughs.
> PC concerns are only for ‘the little people’.


First, I don't believe Will would make racist remarks, that would be Harry's department. Though I would bet on Will to be blamed, he is a very popular future king that must be destroyed... MM&H's jealousy seems limitless. I came across this article a few days ago, it's a little creepy, but if you have some time...



Spoiler: very creepy prediction! 













						Prince Harry BOMBSHELL: Shock claim 'Harry will be KING' in Nostradamus prophecy
					

PRINCE Harry will ascend the throne of Britain after Queen Elizabeth II dies, according to an astonishing prophecy about the Royal Family made nearly 500 years ago.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## JY89

purseinsanity said:


> I guess she didn't realize that was Buckingham Palace behind her?  She just thought it was a big, fancy, English building!



Exactly!
Wow that’s a nice huge random building with pretty architecture. Let’s take a photo!
20ish years later:
I totally have no idea that’s Buckingham palace or who lives within that compound.  I’m from the states and I don’t know much about the UK. And what’s British royal family btw?
Prince Harry? Oh I thought Prince was his first name and Harry was his middle name 
Poor girl let’s not fault her for being clueless uh


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The big guns , the Times, source of the bullying allegations
> Palace in turmoil over Meghan’s racism claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


Great article! 'God Save the Queen' applies here. She will need all the support she can get to deal with MM&H's cruel interview.


----------



## Allisonfaye

1LV said:


> OUCH!



lol. Love it. My favorite is the apt title "Prince Empty".


----------



## Sharont2305

Statement by Buckingham Palace


----------



## Allisonfaye

I only hope I am around long enough see Kate Queen.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Good opinion piece.



Does someone here has the connections to send this video to the US Press, and to other uninformed people in prominent positions? It's shocking to see some of the attacks to the BRF based only on insinuations.


----------



## JY89

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry apparently didn’t secretly marry before public ceremony
					

Meghan Markle told Oprah Winfrey, “Three days before our wedding, we got married.”




					pagesix.com
				




Looks like someone “mistook” backyard practice sess for secret ceremony? Loll more like the latter 
Well, they can make up any claims on a “secret ceremony” since it’s meant to be a secret ?


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> This is great:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Fox News
> 
> 
> Captivating commentary from newsmakers, authors, experts and others on topics you care about from politics to family, faith, values and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Page down to this. Not sure why it won't copy the direction link.
> 
> Former royal millionaires Harry, Meghan cry victim from their mansion


Is the article by MC that you want to post? Let me see if I can post the link. 








						Martha MacCallum: Meghan, Harry interview with Oprah burns down their London Bridge and leaves a royal mess
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spilled all to Oprah in an interview on Sunday night.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

JY89 said:


> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry apparently didn’t secretly marry before public ceremony
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle told Oprah Winfrey, “Three days before our wedding, we got married.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like someone “mistook” backyard practice sess for secret ceremony? Loll more like the latter
> Well, they can make up any claims on a “secret ceremony” since it’s meant to be a secret ?


To be fair, it's no longer a secret since they announced it on international television!


----------



## lishukha

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


This statement symbolizes class and grace.

for anyone with common sense - you would think if you have a problem, you should talk to the source, rather than whining to the public...

This is my first post on this thread and it truly has been a delight reading everyone’s point of view other than the one sided press here in the US.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Does someone here has the connections to send this video to the US Press, and to other uninformed people in prominent positions? It's shocking to see some of the attacks to the BRF based only on insinuations.


Same, people who don't fact check to see what protocols are


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Harry and Meghan’s Rep Addresses Questions About Legality of Secret Wedding
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s rep spoke out after a Church of England vicar tweeted that the couple legally ‘can’t get married twice’ — read more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a celebration of love! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprised royal watchers by announcing that they secretly married days before their royal nuptials, which raised questions about their actual wedding date.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Relationship Timeline*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s spokesperson set the record straight on Monday, March 8, telling E! News that they were legally married on May 19, 2018, as originally reported.
> 
> The clarification came after a Church of England vicar called into question the legality of the couple’s backyard nuptials, which took place on May 16, 2018.
> 
> *“I’ve no idea what they mean,” Reverend David Green wrote in a since-deleted tweet on Monday. “You can’t get married twice. So what was the thing three days before? And if it was a marriage, what on earth are we doing ‘playing’ at prayer/holy matrimony for cameras.”*
> 
> According to the clergy guidebook on the Church of England’s official website, couples “who are already lawfully married cannot choose to re-marry each other, unless there is some doubt as to the validity of the earlier marriage.” The church’s guidelines also state that at least two witnesses must be present for a union to be considered legal.
> Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, revealed during their CBS interview on Sunday, March 7, that they had quietly exchanged vows in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, on the grounds of their U.K. home. The prince said “just the three of us” were present, indicating that they did not have enough witnesses.
> “We called the archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us,’” the Suits alum said during the bombshell special.
> *Meghan Markle’s Ups and Downs With the Royal Family*
> The same archbishop presided over the pair’s actual wedding later that week at St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle. He also christened their son, Archie, in July 2019.
> 
> 
> *Here come all the "clarifications"!  ie explanations of all the lies!  *


The duplicate weddings .. OK a private vow ceremony - sweet ...  

IMHO, mention of the private ceremony was an unforced error by H & M. I dont think the anecdote will play very well in the UK. Two huge issues that come to my mind, the ceremony:

1. Makes light of  (?) of the second Church of England (COE) wedding ceremony.  And QEII is the head of the church (last time I looked). And what is the current COE position on divorce (Charles was not remarried in the Church ...)?  Lets not get religion into this interview maelstrom ... 
2. Makes light of the $50M wedding extravaganza financed by UK taxpayers. 

But, why did O choose to insert this anecdote in the broadcast? Lots of stuff was edited out.  I think O did not realize how this would play in the UK rather than in the US.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace



_Some recollections may vary_, LOL! Or _some may reinvent history_ to suit their narrative(s).


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace



I rather like this statement by BP.  Short, direct, to the point.
And . . . "_recollections may vary_" comment lololol!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


Some people on Twitter are saying they called H&M by their names, not Duke and Duchess, in this statement. There were also rumours saying they have contacted the government officials, raising hopes of stripping off their titles/his line of succession. All rumours!


----------



## rose60610

Meghan has a long and proven history of blowing up relationships. Are you happy, Harry?  Harry is going to need a new place to sleep. Maybe he can tell the chickens to move over, he's moving in with them. Meghan convinced him that he was trapped when he was happy as a royal, jet setting around the world and living in the lap of luxury. I'd say he's trapped NOW, in a cage with the rescue chickens.


----------



## kkfiregirl

doni said:


> *I don‘t feel particularly sorry for Mr Markle. I suspect Meghan and him are similar personalities, they are father and daughter and she even chose to live with him. They both appear to enjoy the attention.*



Hmm, I’m not sure I agree. Perhaps she chose to live with her father, because she and her mother were too similar, so they would constantly have conflicts.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> At this point they are all but members of her production company.


The earrings ... another unforced error ... 

Maybe M did not put 2 and 2 together and realize they were from MBS, and read the papers about the murder ... Maybe she was giving MBS the benefit of the doubt... ( I am giving MM the benefit of the doubt ...)

But the CIA report on the murder has been released, she CAN NEVER wear the earrings again ... so why not auction them off for charity?


----------



## kkfiregirl

TC1 said:


> OK, question. So. MM hates that her sister's last name is Markle (riding on her coattails) has "lost" her father (Markle) I assume Harry's last name is Windsor (?) and Archie is Montbatten-Windsor. How long until she changes her last name to Montbatten? (I must assume not as long as PP is alive)
> Clearly I'm just wondering what else she can do to cause a stir *shrug*



They can come up with a new _family_ name; _Spencer_, _Kennedy_, _Rockefeller_ - whatever and whomever they’d like to be next.


----------



## artax two

JY89 said:


> Exactly!
> Wow that’s a nice huge random building with pretty architecture. Let’s take a photo!
> 20ish years later:
> I totally have no idea that’s Buckingham palace or who lives within that compound.  I’m from the states and I don’t know much about the UK. And what’s British royal family btw?
> Prince Harry? Oh I thought Prince was his first name and Harry was his middle name
> Poor girl let’s not fault her for being clueless uh


What she should have said was something like "I'd been aware of the whole royal thing for most of my life. I have always loved Di, just like everyone else in the world. When I met Harry, I was thrilled, I researched everything I could on the royal life, asked questions, threw myself in 100%. But what I'd learned was only a taste of the horror that is the BRF, british tabloids, working royal life." Something like that would be so much more relatable, believeable, realistic. But no, she chose, "I had no idea who or what the royal family is. Who is Harry?"


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> But the CIA report on the murder has been released, she CAN NEVER wear the earrings again ... so why not auction them off for charity?



I'm not sure that would help. Those earrings are publicly known as blood diamonds now. Who would want to buy them them and what charity would want to get money from them?


----------



## kkfiregirl

artax two said:


> What she should have said was something like "I'd been aware of the whole royal thing for most of my life. I have always loved Di, just like everyone else in the world. When I met Harry, I was thrilled, I researched everything I could on the royal life, asked questions, threw myself in 100%. But what I'd learned was only a taste of the horror that is the BRF, british tabloids, working royal life." Something like that would be so much more relatable, believeable, realistic. But no, she chose, "I had no idea who or what the royal family is. Who is Harry?"



She doesn’t have good advisers, so she’s just digging herself into a deeper hole. She crafted the whole “I didn’t know Harry” thing to elicit the most sympathy, but I agree, she would be a more sympathetic and relatable figure if she was authentic. 

I gave my DH a small pop quiz on the BRF and he knew Harry, but not William. He said “Harry has a brother??” Haha, but goes to show that Harry is the popular brother, so she would have definitely heard about him.


----------



## bag-mania

JY89 said:


> Not sure to say that she didn’t have to as she had already knew and was obsessed with the RF way before?  She did her homework more than 20 years ago? Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan Markle Lie About Not Knowing Prince Harry Before They Met?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will probably never escape rumors as long as she's a member of the royal family, but did the duchess lie about knowing Prince Harry?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RF who?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5016305



LOL, that photo! It looks like two teenagers hanging around wishing William and Harry would come out and talk to them.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


Here is the DM article on the subject:

"_The Queen has broken her silence on Harry and Meghan's bombshell interview to say that 'while some recollections may vary' the 'whole family is saddened' to hear of the couple's 'challenging few years'.

Her Majesty said in a statement an alleged racist comment made about what colour the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's baby Archie would be was 'concerning' and will be 'addressed by the family privately'.

She added the couple and their son 'will always be much loved family members'.

Her statement said: 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.

'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.

'Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.'

*It is understood the Queen waited until Tuesday to comment on the tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey so Britons had the chance to watch it first - but they will not be commenting further.*_"









						Queen breaks her silence on Harry and Meghan
					

The Palace issued a statement on behalf of the Queen saying: 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> They never intended to. But when the Queen did not buy their plan to live between the two continents (security in tow) while continuing to work for her and making their own money on top, they had to.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe Harry is not sufficiently well connected in the UK?
> 
> Still, this is troubling, to champion the need for professional assistance for meOhntal illness and then be so lighthearted about having come through without it...


Oh and Harry claimed in the O interview that the palace wanted them to just tough it out - that they didn't do that sort of thing (therapy).  But he himself had therapy as someone here pointed out and he and his brother got involved with promoting treatment for mental illness.  Makes no sense.  He thinks no one remembers anything and they an say any lie the want to.  Which apparently to most US media outlets it correct.  everything they said in the interview was accepted as fact.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Journalism has been dead. There are major stories that the press just refuses to even report on.



The press wields a frightening amount of power and influence. It always has, but at least you used to believe they could be trusted to convey the facts without filtering out the inconvenient ones that would be detrimental to their narrative.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> yes, I keep thinking of her living with him as a teen and him paying for her education but Doria had her as a little girl so who knows what she instilled in her?


The formative years?


----------



## Chanbal

Royal insiders rejected this narrative and said Charles feels 'let down' by his son's comments.

*'The Prince of Wales went out of his way to make sure his son and daughter in law were financially supported,' a senior source told the Evening Standard.  *









						Prince Charles 'did NOT cut off Harry', royal insider says
					

During the explosive Oprah interview, Harry explained he struck lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify as his father was no longer prepared to bankroll his lifestyle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

apparently the queen has responded
says the matter will be handled privately....how appropriate
Palace Reacts to Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Oprah Interview | PEOPLE.com


----------



## muddledmint

marietouchet said:


> The earrings ... another unforced error ...
> 
> Maybe M did not put 2 and 2 together and realize they were from MBS, and read the papers about the murder ... Maybe she was giving MBS the benefit of the doubt... ( I am giving MM the benefit of the doubt ...)
> 
> But the CIA report on the murder has been released, she CAN NEVER wear the earrings again ... so why not auction them off for charity?


She cannot. Those earrings are legally the property of the crown since they were given by a head of state.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> The formative years?


right....we don't know much about Doria.....not sure what the half sister said in her book


----------



## JY89

Reminds me of the story of the Boy who cried wolf except that we have a Girl who’s crying wolf here.

Honestly speaking, if she truly loves and cares for Harry, she wouldn’t put him through such emotional turmoil with his family by going public on a “tell-all” interview. I don’t see how it would benefit anyone apart from their pockets. There are many things that can be settled privately within the family but I guess that’s not her style anyway ( for someone who wanted privacy?- that’s a slap on your own face )

Royal family being racist? Cmon, if they are truly racist, there will be no way in hell they will even approve the rs or marriage. Let alone paying millions and broadcast your grandeur wedding on TV for the world to watch.

The topic on the baby’s skin colour may possibly be viewed as pure curiosity due to mixed race which they openly accepted her into the family. However, receiving end ( Harry) might perceive the comment to be negative if there was any existing rift or between him and the commenter or that people are just highly sensitive these days ?) -only they know.

All we know is that she sure knows how to stir things up when it’s all calm and peaceful and not forgetting how she make up stories and twist it to her favour- pretty shameless tbh

She’s 35 when she marry into the RF
( unlike Diana who was just turned 20 then) and she clearly knows what she’s getting herself into. She tend to shadow Diana from time to time, using the tragic history of Diana to relate it to herself which ultimately allows her to get her way around Harry- Using Harry’s traumatic childhood experience to manipulate him

I just hate to see how she turned her back against the RF along with Harry when matters like this can be settled privately and yet she chose to burn bridges. And I guess with that, Harry will only be left with her and the kids allowing her full control over him.

Fairytale? Only for Meghan I guess 

Queen? Yes, Queen of manipulation without a doubt.

#whatmeghanwantsmeghangets


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> apparently the queen has responded
> says the matter will be handled privately....how appropriate
> Palace Reacts to Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Oprah Interview | PEOPLE.com



That means we'll hear about it when Harry and Meghan run to Oprah for Interview 2.0.


----------



## doni

purseinsanity said:


> Harry and Meghan’s Rep Addresses Questions About Legality of Secret Wedding
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s rep spoke out after a Church of England vicar tweeted that the couple legally ‘can’t get married twice’ — read more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



Wow.

So they decided to privatedly celebrate their love to each other. And somehow that involved calling the Archbishop of Canterbury and telling him ”look” why don’t you pop by and see how much we love each other just because, as if he didn’t have anything better to do (the Archbishop!) and in the knowledge that he couldn’t well say no because the one asking was a Prince of the realm...

This is just so entitled and capricious, so humiliating and unrespectful towards the Archbishop, so utterly decadent... Only these two could have got away with it...


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


I rather like the statement! Short, neutral but with hints of shades and classy! Privately! Some people can't seem to understand the meaning of it!


----------



## JY89

lishukha said:


> This statement symbolizes class and grace.
> 
> for anyone with common sense - you would think if you have a problem, you should talk to the source, rather than whining to the public...
> 
> This is my first post on this thread and it truly has been a delight reading everyone’s point of view other than the one sided press here in the US.



Perhaps the reason why she never fitted in- Lack of class and Grace it is

Look at all the lowly moves she’s pulling just made her look despicable to me than a victim.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> First, I don't believe Will would make racist remarks, that would be Harry's department. Though I would bet on Will to be blamed, he is a very popular future king that must be destroyed... MM&H's jealousy seems limitless. I came across this article a few days ago, it's a little creepy, but if you have some time...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: very creepy prediction!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5016361
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry BOMBSHELL: Shock claim 'Harry will be KING' in Nostradamus prophecy
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry will ascend the throne of Britain after Queen Elizabeth II dies, according to an astonishing prophecy about the Royal Family made nearly 500 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I always found Nostradamus interesting, but in this case, I think Meg is in cahoots with him 
Haz may never want to be King, but you can damn well be sure Meg wants to be Queen!


----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> Oh and Harry claimed in the O interview that the palace wanted them to just tough it out - that they didn't do that sort of thing (therapy).  But he himself had therapy as someone here pointed out and he and his brother got involved with promoting treatment for mental illness.  Makes no sense.  He thinks no one remembers anything and they an say any lie the want to.  Which apparently to most US media outlets it correct.  everything they said in the interview was accepted as fact.


Not just that. He credited his brother with being the one suggesting therapy and convincing him to go through it!


----------



## purseinsanity

lishukha said:


> This statement symbolizes class and grace.
> 
> for anyone with common sense - you would think if you have a problem, you should talk to the source, rather than whining to the public...
> 
> This is my first post on this thread and it truly has been a delight reading everyone’s point of view other than the one sided press here in the US.


Welcome!  I've had hours of entertainment here, reading everyone's views, whether I agree with them or not.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> exactly....I supposed it's possible some evil force would want to murder her but that's not what happened


From what I read, Dodi himself changed drivers at the last minute so there was no “murder.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I rather like this statement by BP.  Short, direct, to the point.
> And . . . "_recollections may vary_" comment lololol!


I wish they hadn't said they'll remain "loved members of the family".  LOL, yes, I am petty like that!


----------



## bag-mania

*Piers Morgan storms off Good Morning Britain after Alex Beresford condemns him for ‘trashing’ Meghan Markle*

*Beresford described Morgan’s behaviour as ‘pathetic’ and ‘diabolical’*

Piers Morgan walked off the set of _Good Morning Britain_ midway through filming this morning (9 March) after co-star Alex Beresford condemned his recent comments about Meghan Markle.

The presenter has faced heavy criticism for his remarks about Prince Harry and Meghan, following the couple’s interview with Oprah Winfrey which aired in the US on Sunday (7 March).

In the interview, Meghan revealed she previously had suicidal thoughts due to the abuse she had received when joining the royal family. On yesterday’s episode of _Good Morning Britain_, Morgan said: “I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word she said, Meghan Markle. I wouldn’t believe it if she read me a weather report.”

His remarks were widely criticised by his co-presenters and on social media, with broadcaster ITV also being called “hypocritical” for allowing him to “cast aspersions” while also running the mental health campaign Get Britain Talking.

_GMB_ viewers, who are mocking Morgan for storming off, called upon ITV to sack Morgan.

On this morning’s episode of _Good Morning Britain_, Beresford addressed Morgan’s comments, describing yesterday’s segment about Meghan as “incredibly hard to watch”.

“[Harry and Meghan] have had an overwhelming amount of negative press,” he said. “I watched the programme yesterday and yes, they had some great press around the wedding ... but everything that has followed since has been incredibly damaging to Meghan’s mental health and to Harry.”

“I understand that you don’t like Meghan Markle. You’ve made it so clear a number of times on this programme, and I understand that you had a personal relationship with Meghan Markle and she cut you off. Has she said anything about you after she cut you off? She’s entitled to cut you off if she wants to. And yet you continue to trash her.”

At this point, Morgan stood up and walked away from the _Good Morning Britain _set, saying: “OK, I’m done with this.”

As Morgan was leaving, Beresford added: “Do you know what? That’s pathetic. This is absolutely diabolical behaviour. I’m sorry, but Piers spouts off on a regular basis and we all have to sit there and listen – 6.30 to 7 o’clock yesterday was incredibly hard to watch.”









						Piers Morgan storms off GMB as Alex Beresford calls his behaviour ‘diabolical’
					

Beresford described Morgan’s behaviour as ‘pathetic’ and ‘diabolical’




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> The earrings ... another unforced error ...
> 
> Maybe M did not put 2 and 2 together and realize they were from MBS, and read the papers about the murder ... Maybe she was giving MBS the benefit of the doubt... ( I am giving MM the benefit of the doubt ...)
> 
> But the CIA report on the murder has been released, she CAN NEVER wear the earrings again ... *so why not auction them off for charity?*


*LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO*
These suggestions that these two imbeciles actually do any good for society and not just themselves cracks me up every time!!!


----------



## bag-mania

To our UK members: So has the UK press jumped on the sympathy train for Meghan?

It would seem to be so from what happened to Piers this morning and how some are calling for him to be fired.


----------



## jennlt

Lilliesdaughter said:


> To quote my immigrant grandfather (may his memory be a blessing) you can go to college  but it doesn’t give you smarts!   Not every MD or PhD is smart or astute. Some just want to hear their own voices.



And 50% of them graduate in the bottom half of their class.


----------



## justwatchin

chicinthecity777 said:


> I wonder what Netflix and Spotify think of those 2 of their employees. Free ads? Or stolen revenue? I mean they peaked at this interview. What's next big project? They can't ride this sorry gravy train forever. I hope Netflix and Spotify can get their investment back!


I imagine NETFLIX is looking at this as more episodes for The Crown. Meghan can even play herself because she is an “actress”(ha ha) and even Harry can play himself. Can’t be much of an effort; he just needs to prop himself next to a wall, chair, a chicken....Meghan would have all of the lines anyway.


----------



## JY89

bag-mania said:


> LOL, that photo! It looks like two teenagers hanging around wishing William and Harry would come out and talk to them.



haha if we all wish and stalk hard enough, our dream may just come true one day- here we have a living example loll


----------



## Chanbal

In one of the videos in the article below (I don't know how to post it), TM says that MM was never a victim of racism in school... and he doesn't believe that what is happening in the UK has to do with racism. He thinks the UK is more liberal than California. 









						Meghan Markle's estranged father Thomas speaks out after Oprah
					

Mr Markle says that he's apologised '100 times' for doing a deal with a paparazzi photographer before the Royal Wedding in 2018 and urged the couple to see him now they live '70 miles away'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aqua01

chicinthecity777 said:


> They wanted their cake and eat it, they wanted a half in and half out, they don't want the duty but want the titles so they can make money. The Queen stopped that. They got p1ssed off, now seeking revenge. The END!


Abso-f*ckin'-lutely!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace



You know, at this point it sounds hollow. I understand their position between a rock and a hard place, but do we believe for one second anyone over there "loves Meghan"? I'd prefer they tried not so very hard to accomodate the jerks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Times article someone posted earlier (I have clicked about 50 links and don't have time to work through all of them haha):



> Additional clips were played on CBS yesterday in which Harry made further allegations, including that racism was a “large part” of why he and Meghan had left the country. In one he said he was suddenly told that he was no longer invited to spend time with the Queen at Sandringham after they returned from Canada in January last year because she was “too busy”.



Ok, is everyone a bit dull? Did Meghan suddenly change colour in Canada? Could it be the Queen was just fed up with their sh*tty behaviour, which I'd fully support? And didn't they snub her invitation the summer before, but of course don't let us look into their behaviour, right?


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> _Some recollections may vary_, LOL! Or _some may reinvent history_ to suit their narrative(s).


Subtle but powerful. The Queen don’t play. She’s had many years experience and is an expert at what she does.


----------



## piperdog

purseinsanity said:


> The NYT is the print equivalent of CNN, IMO.  Used to be a reliable source of news, now just yellow journalism that don't even fact check.


Were they ever, though? I'm old enough to remember calling CNN the ******* News Network (in support of Bill, not Hillary) and referring to the Washington Post as Pravda on the Potomac. Even in the late 80's-early 90's no nickname was even needed for the NYT. Its name was all readers needed to see to know what its 'truth' would be.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


Did anyone notice that they were addressed as Harry and Meghan (Statement by Buckingham Palace) and not as the duke and duchess?


----------



## shrpthorn

elvisfan4life said:


> Harry was shocked ? Has he forgotten how he referred to an Asian colleague as “ our little paki????? “ unbelievable how he has been forgiven for that


Or remember the "rag head" comment when he was serving in Afghanistan?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> *Piers Morgan storms off Good Morning Britain after Alex Beresford condemns him for ‘trashing’ Meghan Markle*
> 
> *Beresford described Morgan’s behaviour as ‘pathetic’ and ‘diabolical’*
> 
> Piers Morgan walked off the set of _Good Morning Britain_ midway through filming this morning (9 March) after co-star Alex Beresford condemned his recent comments about Meghan Markle.
> 
> The presenter has faced heavy criticism for his remarks about Prince Harry and Meghan, following the couple’s interview with Oprah Winfrey which aired in the US on Sunday (7 March).
> 
> In the interview, Meghan revealed she previously had suicidal thoughts due to the abuse she had received when joining the royal family. On yesterday’s episode of _Good Morning Britain_, Morgan said: “I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word she said, Meghan Markle. I wouldn’t believe it if she read me a weather report.”
> 
> His remarks were widely criticised by his co-presenters and on social media, with broadcaster ITV also being called “hypocritical” for allowing him to “cast aspersions” while also running the mental health campaign Get Britain Talking.
> 
> _GMB_ viewers, who are mocking Morgan for storming off, called upon ITV to sack Morgan.
> 
> On this morning’s episode of _Good Morning Britain_, Beresford addressed Morgan’s comments, describing yesterday’s segment about Meghan as “incredibly hard to watch”.
> 
> “[Harry and Meghan] have had an overwhelming amount of negative press,” he said. “I watched the programme yesterday and yes, they had some great press around the wedding ... but everything that has followed since has been incredibly damaging to Meghan’s mental health and to Harry.”
> 
> “I understand that you don’t like Meghan Markle. You’ve made it so clear a number of times on this programme, and I understand that you had a personal relationship with Meghan Markle and she cut you off. Has she said anything about you after she cut you off? She’s entitled to cut you off if she wants to. And yet you continue to trash her.”
> 
> At this point, Morgan stood up and walked away from the _Good Morning Britain _set, saying: “OK, I’m done with this.”
> 
> As Morgan was leaving, Beresford added: “Do you know what? That’s pathetic. This is absolutely diabolical behaviour. I’m sorry, but Piers spouts off on a regular basis and we all have to sit there and listen – 6.30 to 7 o’clock yesterday was incredibly hard to watch.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan storms off GMB as Alex Beresford calls his behaviour ‘diabolical’
> 
> 
> Beresford described Morgan’s behaviour as ‘pathetic’ and ‘diabolical’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


I just read he's now quit the show


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal  Between the lines:

_ 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan._
Stop trashing us, you snotty ingrates. 

_'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately._
You’re full of it, H&M. Gloves are off.

_'Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.'_
I know, right!

_*It is understood the Queen waited until Tuesday to comment on the tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey so Britons had the chance to watch it first - but they will not be commenting further.*_"


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kkfiregirl said:


> She has two parents, so we should also be looking at Doria to see how she contributed to this narcissism.


I think, MM adopted her mother's motto, "Don't give the milk away for free" at very early age.
MM: What shall I do mommy?
Doria: Don't give the milk away for free. I have this vision, invest in OW's business and gift her vegan tea. OW will reciprocate with a favourable interview that could lead to fame and fortune overnight. Now there's a good girl... go play outside and don't forget to tell all you little friends how superior you are... a real queen.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Did anyone notice that they were addressed as Harry and Meghan (Statement by Buckingham Palace) and not as the duke and duchess?



That’s called not wanting to give them the satisfaction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Did anyone notice that they were addressed as Harry and Meghan (Statement by Buckingham Palace) and not as the duke and duchess?



I think they do that to stress the family point. Dunno.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> I just read he's now quit the show



It will be interesting to see how this goes. Will another channel snap him up as soon as the immediate uproar from the interview dies down?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thomas said his phone call was 3 days before the tv wedding.
H&M say the garden ceremony was 3 days before the tv wedding.
When were the fittings?  Didn’t Doria arrive 1/2 days before?
Seems like something fishy was going on

Piers can do better — he did a smart thing getting Thomas to talk. H&M stans just cannot handle the truth!








						Piers Morgan leaving 'Good Morning Britain' after storming off set
					

Piers Morgan stormed off the set of Good Morning Britain following a heated discussion with co-host Alex Beresford about Meghan Markle.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think they do that to stress the family point. Dunno.


That's what I thought, rather than sounding cold in addressing them as Duke and Duchess. That would be picked up and criticised.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thomas said his phone call was 3 days before the tv wedding.
> H&M say the garden ceremony was 3 days before the tv wedding.
> When were the fittings?  Didn’t Doria arrive 1/2 days before?
> Seems like something fishy was going on



You mean some of their claims to Oprah turned out not to be factually correct? I am  shocked, shocked I tell you.


----------



## JY89

Let’s just hope that our aspiring Z-list actress gets nominated for Oscars for her very first leading role in the coming year


----------



## nyshopaholic

kkfiregirl said:


> They can come up with a new _family_ name; _Spencer_, _Kennedy_, _Rockefeller_ - whatever and whomever they’d like to be next.



My vote is for Foster (as in Harry's "father figure" David Foster).


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> Is the article by MC that you want to post? Let me see if I can post the link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martha MacCallum: Meghan, Harry interview with Oprah burns down their London Bridge and leaves a royal mess
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry spilled all to Oprah in an interview on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com



No, it was the Raymond Arroyou video. It was funny.


----------



## kkfiregirl

nyshopaholic said:


> My vote is for Foster (as in Harry's "father figure" David Foster).



Perfect! Harry, Meghan, Archie & Diana Foster


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> The synod should ask Welby about this too. What’s he doing presiding over secret ceremonies? He should definitely clarify what he was up to.


Maybe, it's all part of H&MM's subtle smear campaign against HMQ, who is the head of the Church of England, by trying to discredit the bishop. Other posters have already said was a Meghan innuendo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure what it is, but there is some kind of long game being played here. I’m guessing on a global level, possibly due to Charles’s global reset. H&M with OW are pawns in the game.  No one counted on Thomas. Haaa, good for him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

jelliedfeels said:


> Do I detect the smell of burnt martyr in the air?
> People come to purse forum threads to try and relax from the stress of life especially during the pandemic. If you are worried about the press coverage why not contact  the news agencies themselves? Not sure what you think your comment will achieve.


why on earth should I want it to achieve something ????? How bizarre


----------



## Aimee3

At this point I can’t believe anything that comes out of H&M’s mouths.  They really are stupid since it’s so easy to catch them in their lies.


----------



## tiktok

Aimee3 said:


> At this point I can’t believe anything that comes out of H&M’s mouths.  They really are stupid since it’s so easy to catch them in their lies.



Well, since so much of the world is about as stupid as they are, it doesn't seem to matter if they lie or not.


----------



## sdkitty

I am really baffled....just saw part of a segment on TMZ.  they were talking to some British woman - WOC.  she was apparently a psych (not sure; I came in on the middle).....she was saying how awful the royals were, particularly charles for not taking harry's calls, etc.
they ended by saying - not just her but TMZ - these are facts.  Really?  how do they know?  this is hearsay IMO.

the ladies of the view continue to be totally sympathetic.  Meghan McCain went as far as to say Meghan and O were finishing what the founders of our country started

TMZ is more a gossip venue than a liberal entertainment news media so this really surprised me
If they are lying about any of this they're getting a total pass from US media.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Well, since so much of the world is about as stupid as they are, it doesn't seem to matter if they lie or not.



They are being used to promote an anti-UK agenda.
‘Now that lies have been exposed, watch Hwood and certain politicians run from this.

ETA: Thomas calling Hazzie snotty, that may be the tipping point. How do H&M come back from that?  Now Charles is saying he did not cut Hazzie off.  See, the Dads have arrived.  Kiddies better scurry off.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I always found Nostradamus interesting, but in this case, I think Meg is in cahoots with him
> Haz may never want to be King, but you can damn well be sure Meg wants to be Queen!



Do you mean Nostradamus or Machiavelli? 

I think more Lucrezia Borgia with less wit and style


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, at this point it sounds hollow. I understand their position between a rock and a hard place, but do we believe for one second anyone over there "loves Meghan"? I'd prefer they tried not so very hard to accomodate the jerks.



It's a place holder but I think it works


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I am really baffled....just saw part of a segment on TMZ.  they were talking to some British woman - WOC.  she was apparently a psych (not sure; I came in on the middle).....she was saying how awful the royals were, particularly charles for not taking harry's calls, etc.
> they ended by saying - not just her but TMZ - these are facts.  Really?  how do they know?  this is hearsay IMO.
> 
> the ladies of the view continue to be totally sympathetic.  Meghan McCain went as far as to say Meghan and O were finishing what the founders of our country started
> 
> TMZ is more a gossip venue than a liberal entertainment news media so this really surprised me
> If they are lying about any of this they're getting a total pass from US media.


My goodness. The lack of history McCain does not know. That was for the US. Last I heard GB was still governing herself. The irony. MM and Harry want to create their own monarchy here. Even a 5th grader knows some history. I’m shaking my head as I’m not a natural born citizen and even I know the history of the US.


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> She cannot. Those earrings are legally the property of the crown since they were given by a head of state.


Oprah should have asked her about the earrings so she could claim she didnt hear about Kashoggi's brutal murder.  Oh never mind - as a self-proclaimed leader of wokeness, how could she not know?


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think, MM adopted her mother's motto, "Don't give the milk away for free" at very early age.
> MM: What shall I do mommy?
> Doria: Don't give the milk away for free. I have this vision, invest in OW's business and gift her vegan tea. OW will reciprocate with a favourable interview that could lead to fame and fortune overnight. Now there's a good girl... go play outside and don't forget to tell all you little friends how superior you are... a real queen.


I think in addition to Doria teaching her "Don't give the milk away for free", she also taught her, "Milk it for all you got!"


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I think in addition to Doria teaching her "Don't give the milk away for free", she also taught her, "Milk it for all you got!"


way back in the day (I'm much older than Meghan) that don't give the milk away for free was pretty common advice.  back then it meant stay a virgin until you marry.  not sure how doria meant it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Oprah should have asked her about the earrings so she could claim she didnt hear about Kashoggi's brutal murder.  Oh never mind - as a self-proclaimed leader of wokeness, how could she not know?



Oprah didn't ask them anything that they couldn't use to portray themselves as victims. Wearing blood diamonds would be hard for her to spin, even for Meghan's creative imagination.


----------



## meowkittycat

'This is going to be a trainwreck' were my first thoughts when I heard about this interview. I like Meghan... as far as style inspiration goes. The thing is, I don't think I could ever voice my true thoughts to anyone I know about Meghan without sounding like I'm trashing her. She's full of contradictions. No doubt the RF is out of touch. I'm also not questioning her part of the story with struggling mental health wise. However, if you wanted a life free from tabloids, why would you do this interview? Just being the sceptic.


----------



## purseinsanity

nyshopaholic said:


> My vote is for Foster (as in Harry's "father figure" David Foster).


And as in Foster Farms.

Goes with the chicken coop theme.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, whom do we believe?  Perhaps Hazzie does not know the definition of ‘literally’? Or ‘family’?


_Allies of Prince Charles today pushed back at claims he 'cut off' Prince Harry's funding when he and Meghan stepped down as senior royals.

During the explosive Oprah interview, Harry explained he struck lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify as his father was no longer prepared to bankroll his lifestyle.

*'My family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us,' he said.*_








						Prince Charles 'did NOT cut off Harry', royal insider says
					

During the explosive Oprah interview, Harry explained he struck lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify as his father was no longer prepared to bankroll his lifestyle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Not to belabor any more points. What's wrong with this picture?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I am really baffled....just saw part of a segment on TMZ.  they were talking to some British woman - WOC.  she was apparently a psych (not sure; I came in on the middle).....she was saying how awful the royals were, particularly charles for not taking harry's calls, etc.
> they ended by saying - not just her but TMZ - these are facts.  Really?  how do they know?  this is hearsay IMO.
> 
> the ladies of the view continue to be totally sympathetic.  Meghan McCain went as far as to say Meghan and O were finishing what the founders of our country started
> 
> *TMZ is more a gossip venue than a liberal entertainment news media so this really surprised me*
> If they are lying about any of this they're getting a total pass from US media.



Oh, TMZ is super liberal. They are very funny sometimes but they are obvious about how they feel.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> *Piers Morgan storms off Good Morning Britain after Alex Beresford condemns him for ‘trashing’ Meghan Markle*
> 
> *Beresford described Morgan’s behaviour as ‘pathetic’ and ‘diabolical’*
> 
> Piers Morgan walked off the set of _Good Morning Britain_ midway through filming this morning (9 March) after co-star Alex Beresford condemned his recent comments about Meghan Markle.
> 
> The presenter has faced heavy criticism for his remarks about Prince Harry and Meghan, following the couple’s interview with Oprah Winfrey which aired in the US on Sunday (7 March).
> 
> In the interview, Meghan revealed she previously had suicidal thoughts due to the abuse she had received when joining the royal family. On yesterday’s episode of _Good Morning Britain_, Morgan said: “I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word she said, Meghan Markle. I wouldn’t believe it if she read me a weather report.”
> 
> His remarks were widely criticised by his co-presenters and on social media, with broadcaster ITV also being called “hypocritical” for allowing him to “cast aspersions” while also running the mental health campaign Get Britain Talking.
> 
> _GMB_ viewers, who are mocking Morgan for storming off, called upon ITV to sack Morgan.
> 
> On this morning’s episode of _Good Morning Britain_, Beresford addressed Morgan’s comments, describing yesterday’s segment about Meghan as “incredibly hard to watch”.
> 
> “[Harry and Meghan] have had an overwhelming amount of negative press,” he said. “I watched the programme yesterday and yes, they had some great press around the wedding ... but everything that has followed since has been incredibly damaging to Meghan’s mental health and to Harry.”
> 
> “I understand that you don’t like Meghan Markle. You’ve made it so clear a number of times on this programme, and I understand that you had a personal relationship with Meghan Markle and she cut you off. Has she said anything about you after she cut you off? She’s entitled to cut you off if she wants to. And yet you continue to trash her.”
> 
> At this point, Morgan stood up and walked away from the _Good Morning Britain _set, saying: “OK, I’m done with this.”
> 
> As Morgan was leaving, Beresford added: “Do you know what? That’s pathetic. This is absolutely diabolical behaviour. I’m sorry, but Piers spouts off on a regular basis and we all have to sit there and listen – 6.30 to 7 o’clock yesterday was incredibly hard to watch.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan storms off GMB as Alex Beresford calls his behaviour ‘diabolical’
> 
> 
> Beresford described Morgan’s behaviour as ‘pathetic’ and ‘diabolical’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


PM also has a mental health campaign?
First H&M and Oprah with their ‘suicidal to senatorial in just one easy long-haul flight’  approach to mental health recovery to mr ‘hard questions and phone hacks’ fronting a campaign on open conversation.
I think maybe some of these charities need to rethink their endorsements.

edit - superfluous ‘ to’ cut out.

but PPS - considering some of the shady things PM has done: if he gets sacked for questioning the validity of some very shaky claims while clearly hating her a bit. Well, it’s kind of an insult to some of his other targets.

edit edit -  never mind that just seen he’s quit. Good.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Not to belabor any more points. What's wrong with this picture?



Hmm, Harry forgot part of his job was to pretend to be happy to be there?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

purseinsanity said:


> Well said!  For those blathering on and on about how dare Charles as a father *temporarily* stop taking his traitorous son's calls...what is your opinion on how dare a spoiled daughter stop taking her ailing father's phone calls for *YEARS*?


 Jun on njuu hi nbhjnnjj junk hi j hi huh hi junhujjh


bag-mania said:


> I'd like to listen in on that call as they commiserate on how difficult it is having irresponsible entitled offspring.





Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


and that is how it is done.    Masterful statement. Politely disputes recollections, takes seriously allegations and ends with affection.  Hey H, are you paying attention?


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> Did anyone notice that they were addressed as Harry and Meghan (Statement by Buckingham Palace) and not as the duke and duchess?


Yes. I was a bit surprised, but they'd wanted to be average Joes, so the Queen gave them that.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

marietouchet said:


> The earrings ... another unforced error ...
> 
> Maybe M did not put 2 and 2 together and realize they were from MBS, and read the papers about the murder ... Maybe she was giving MBS the benefit of the doubt... ( I am giving MM the benefit of the doubt ...)
> 
> But the CIA report on the murder has been released, she CAN NEVER wear the earrings again ... so why not auction them off for charity?


Official state gift.   Belongs to the Crown.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Piers Morgan quit?! Bahahahaha!!!


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, Harry forgot part of his job was to pretend to be happy to be there?


From my observation, she stands alone to the side to be "recognized"


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That’s called not wanting to give them the satisfaction.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think they do that to stress the family point. Dunno.





Sharont2305 said:


> That's what I thought, rather than sounding cold in addressing them as Duke and Duchess. That would be picked up and criticised.


I think you are all right, but there is always a possibility that someone is working on those titles behind the scenes. 

Assuming that a comment on the color of the baby was made, I don't think it was a malicious one that would justify MM&H's comments. They knew their interview was being seen by millions and millions of people around the world, and this was an unscrupulous attack. 

Also the subject of Mental Health is putting the BRF in a very tough spot, so they have to be very careful until the baby is born. However, I don't think they will ever be trusted or welcomed in the family. MM acknowledges that QE was very kind with her when she joined the family, but she still goes ahead to publicly embarrass the BRF while Prince Philip is fighting for his life. She is ruthless and he is an idiot imo.


----------



## JY89

Meghan is betting on the facts that the RF will never wage a war with her (publicly by defending themselves) on whatever claims she made during the interview hence her audacity to stir up so much lies, manipulate everyone into buying her stories and tarnishing the reputation of her husband’s family. (One finger pointing at others and 4 fingers pointing back at yourself)

Perhaps she’s pulling another Diana move by doing a tell all interview just that the context is pretty much different in a way that one is made up and the other isn’t. One did cash in and the other didn’t. It would be an insult to Diana to be compared to Meghan honestly 

Meghan should also know better that whatever you put out to the public will be subjected to positive and negative comments. If you think you can’t take either one then don’t stir what you can’t handle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ITV seems to be anti-monarchy. The H&M horror show began with ITV reporter Tom Brady’s SoAfrica interview. 
Now ITV paid for the CBS OW interview. No real surprise that they would fan the flames against Piers, especially since Piers dared to interview Thomas who did not defend H&M 

Notice that Thomas did not buy the racism claim.  Seems to me a man who marries a WOC and who challenged MM’s teachers on race would know.  I’ll say again seems likely to me that he and Doria have chatted recently.  Parents have their own ways of communicating, especially when their baby is in trouble.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> At this point I can’t believe anything that comes out of H&M’s mouths.  They really are stupid since it’s so easy to catch them in their lies.



Yet only a small minority cares to check.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> The Queen has spent the day in emergency discussions with Prince of Wales and grandson Prince William



These two losers take up so many ressources.


----------



## sdkitty

from what I hear, while most Yanks (at least the media) like H&M, a lot (more?) of Brits like the queen better.  Brit members please weigh in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Piers Morgan quit?! Bahahahaha!!!


Your opinion matters very much too and it's a good thing to dialogue and get both sides of the story so to that end and I'm sincerely asking with an open mind, what do you find fascinating or rather what is it that you admire her for? Race issue aside as that issue is very much contentious (I even asked if she had any close friends other than O & G and Serena and if she had any cousins or aunts on her mom's side that she's close to or even MM has acknowledge), what do you see and admire?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is it?


The Australia tour and AUS governor and his wife.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These two losers take up so many ressources.



Do we really believe QE, Charles and William spent all that time discussing H&M? 
Guessing this was a fairly easy item to dismiss from their agenda. 4 simple sentences, it was handled in minutes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Do we think the new allegations the courtiers promised should the interview be intolerable will come on now, or will they proceed with caution and wait for the Queen to make a move?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do we really believe QE, Charles and William spent all that time discussing H&M?
> Guessing this was a fairly easy item to dismiss from their agenda. 4 simple sentences, it was handled in minutes.



They've been keeping them on their toes for years. At this point I doubt the can simply ignore them.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, whom do we believe?  Perhaps Hazzie does not know the definition of ‘literally’? Or ‘family’?
> 
> 
> _Allies of Prince Charles today pushed back at claims he 'cut off' Prince Harry's funding when he and Meghan stepped down as senior royals.
> 
> During the explosive Oprah interview, Harry explained he struck lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify as his father was no longer prepared to bankroll his lifestyle.
> 
> *'My family literally cut me off financially, and I had to afford security for us,' he said.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles 'did NOT cut off Harry', royal insider says
> 
> 
> During the explosive Oprah interview, Harry explained he struck lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify as his father was no longer prepared to bankroll his lifestyle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He's so blessed. How many of us here are helping our parents financially? My siblings and I do help our father financially.  Dang, that would be so nice to be carried by him but then again, we live in the real world and adults are not expected to be supported by their parents.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do we think the new allegations the courtiers promised should the interview be intolerable will come on now, or will they proceed with caution and wait for the Queen making a move?



New allegations?  I’ve missed something, let me check.


----------



## maris.crane

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Piers Morgan quit?! Bahahahaha!!!



And good riddance!


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do we really believe QE, Charles and William spent all that time discussing H&M?
> Guessing this was a fairly easy item to dismiss from their agenda. 4 simple sentences, it was handled in minutes.


I absolutely think the discussion of H/M would be considered an emergency by TRF. They have been slandered and who knows what’s at stake. I’m sure they had a long discussion on how to deal with these two loose cannons. They are dangerous. Look at the amount of time we spend discussing them, and we have no vested interest in them.


----------



## mdcx

kkfiregirl said:


> She has two parents, so we should also be looking at Doria to see how she contributed to this narcissism.


Doria seems very detached to me. Just based on the few times she has appeared in public. Perhaps she never set any boundaries with M or perhaps she modelled a lack of empathy? Her dad by contrast seems quite “normal” emotionally.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> way back in the day (I'm much older than Meghan) that don't give the milk away for free was pretty common advice.  back then it meant stay a virgin until you marry.  not sure how doria meant it.


I'm an old lady too and I heard similar adages in my youth. But by the time MM came around maybe virginity was not such a big deal. She could've interpreted it differently. Like pretending to be a virgin every time she boarded a yacht. Can you imagine the rewards.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chagall said:


> I absolutely think the discussion of H/M would be considered an emergency by TRF. They have been slandered and who knows what’s at stake. I’m sure they had a long discussion on how to deal with these two loose cannons. They are dangerous. Look at the amount of time we spend discussing them, and we have no vested interest in them.



My hope is that they have been discussing this issue all along, that long ago they developed a strategy. Even with Diana, they took their time. Nothing is rushed, all is well though-out and considered. At least that is my hope.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm an old lady too and I heard similar adages in my youth. But by the time MM came around maybe virginity was not such a big deal. She could've interpreted it differently. Like pretending to be a virgin every time she boarded a yacht. Can you imagine the rewards.


It'd be hard for Meg to claim she's a virgin, having been married twice previously and all...


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Lodpah said:


> Your opinion matters very much too and it's a good thing to dialogue and get both sides of the story so to that end and I'm sincerely asking with an open mind, what do you find fascinating or rather what is it that you admire her for? Race issue aside as that issue is very much contentious (I even asked if she had any close friends other than O & G and Serena and if she had any cousins or aunts on her mom's side that she's close to or even MM has acknowledge), what do you see and admire?



Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want their children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Sly_Fox

sdkitty said:


> from what I hear, while most Yanks (at least the media) like H&M, a lot (more?) of Brits like the queen better.  Brit members please weigh in.



I’m slightly patriotic, I throughly admire the Queen, she’s simply a Class Act. 

Irrespective of birthright and liking the Queen I’m not stupid enough to buy into any bullsh*t narrative. I will listen to both sides and make up my own mind. Oh except there wasn’t two sides ….


----------



## sdkitty

maris.crane said:


> And good riddance!


he walked off the set.  I don't think that necessarily means he quit


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meanwhile:
> View attachment 5015911









Lilliesdaughter said:


> Great point about Doria’s silence versus BP silence and lack of support.


I was wondering this... was there no mention at all during this look-at-me-show of her mother? Did she not take the chance to praise her mother for being supportive to her or _no_?




CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, they know the truth:
> 
> _UK officers cannot carry guns under US laws or access intelligence about potential threats.
> 
> Harry told Oprah Winfrey they were informed at ‘short notice’ that their Met police security detail would be cut off.
> 
> The prince said, ‘Their justification was a change in status’, adding that he ‘pushed back’.
> 
> Mr Davies said he was ‘gobsmacked’ that the couple expected British taxpayers to pick up the bill – estimated at £4million a year.
> 
> He insisted: ‘It shows you their naivety and sense of entitlement.
> 
> ‘It was utterly unrealistic to think they could continue to have their royal protection team working in America – in fact it would have put their [police] lives at risk._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former royal security unit chief: No way they could keep bodyguards
> 
> 
> The assumption by Harry that tax-payers would fund security after he and Meghan left the UK was branded 'arrogant' and 'unworkable' by former chief superintendent Dai Davies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





melissatrv said:


> A couple of things....this is not a big deal in the scheme of things, but M said she had "no training".   I recall articles and maybe even a quote of her saying she had defensive driving training and hostage situation training.  Plus so-called princess training to learn royal etiquette.  There is no way she would NOT have received coaching on the etiquette part.
> Beatrice and Eugenie lost their private security detail once they became non-working royals. Now they only receive security if attending royal events in an official capacity. Why should they expect any different?


More of their accusations that can _easily _be proven wrong. Why are so many people taking every word H&M speak as bible, with absolutely no questioning or fact-checking? It baffles me.




RAINDANCE said:


> *It's the lack of honesty that really gets to me with this whole saga (and deeply saddens me for all involved) The degree of duplicity and bending of actual facts to support various narratives is insane !* Total addict behavior in my experience.


THIS x1000000.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. A British TV psychologist (as in, a real psychologist with book deals and TV appearances) wrote a lenghty thread about poor trauma victim Meghan Markle who has been abused not only by the BRF, but her own family as well, and painted as the black sheep when all she did was speaking her truth and doing what is right for her. Seriously??? Where are the psychologists speaking out that they see a narcisstic liar and manipulator when they see one?
> 
> I followed that woman for her feminist views. Swiftly unfollowed her now.



IMO any doctor or psychiatrist/psychologist who takes to the media to promote themselves is more a famewhore than a healer. I could get better info from Google than Drs Phil, Oz or Drew


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> Statement by Buckingham Palace


This is the classy way to say
 “They are both fairly mentally unwell. We will handle things in house, per usual.”


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> And good riddance!



I’d rather listen to Piers Morgan that than whining, money-grabbing, vindictive liar.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> he walked off the set.  I don't think that necessarily means he quit



He later met with his ITV bosses and he did quit.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He later met with his ITV bosses and he did quit.


oh, ok


----------



## bag-mania

Quitting, now there is one thing Piers has in common with Harry and Meghan.


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> I’d rather listen to Piers Morgan that than whining, money-grabbing, vindictive liar.



...Okay. You're still welcome to enjoy your _Good Morning Britain_ re-runs and Taran Killam parody skits on SNL.




It's not that deep.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want her children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.


Fair enough. I think most everyone on this forum were of the same mindset as you were and were staunch supporters of her at the outset. The part where it took a turn was when things were not adding up to what she said and the actions. As a public figure regarding carbon footprints, charity and other issues of major importance. She has a lot of influence. 

All those points you made are very well understood.

Thanks for your response. 

Sharing a great song with you from my part of the world (even though I have lived in the US now for many years). Makes me want to get up and dance when things get hectic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want her children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.



You know, and that's totally fine with me. What I'd still like to know: how do you look at all the problematic stuff with Meghan? This is where I struggle to be honest. The blatant lies. Her trail of broken relationships, be it family, friends or professional contacts. The bullying allegations which have been out there for years. Don't they tarnish the fairytale lovestory just a little bit for you?


----------



## poopsie

tiktok said:


> This is all so disappointing. Smart, educated, thoughtful people are literally making her a martyr just by listening to her mud-slinging victimhood, half-truths, outright lies and wild insinuations without caring about any of the facts, hearing the other side or holding her accountable for her part in it. It's no longer just "lazy journalism" - it's people who are supposed to be better than some freelance writer generating articles as quickly as possible at People magazine. I expected so much more from these people. I don't think anyone should side with the royal family (we all know they have a whole host of issues), but I would expect them to give some general statement (e.g. "I abhor racism" etc.) rather than condemning the royal family and nominating her for sainthood. So lazy and so intellectually dishonest.



I feel like Jeff Daniels here


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> To our UK members: So has the UK press jumped on the sympathy train for Meghan?
> 
> It would seem to be so from what happened to Piers this morning and how some are calling for him to be fired.


Yes some of them, like Sky News, was literally on cloud 9 that another opportunity for them to talk down the country! And invited every race baiter they could find to come on TV bashing the RF. Some were even borderline hysterical! I don't watch SkyNews but saw some clips on Twitter.
But not every outlets. Many more negative reports in general and more balanced. Snap polls suggested Team Queen has majority. 
We have a very hard hitting journalist used to host a show on BBC called Andrew Neil where he grilled politicians from all sides. There are people calling him to interview H&M next and all their lies would be exposed.


sdkitty said:


> from what I hear, while most Yanks (at least the media) like H&M, a lot (more?) of Brits like the queen better.  Brit members please weigh in.


I was never a royalist. They didn't matter to me. I never followed any of them. I didn't watch H&M's wedding. But I started to pay attention after Megexit and dislike them more and more! Now my SO has turned too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes some of them, like Sky News, was literally on cloud 9 that another opportunity for them to talk down the country! And invited every race baiter they could find to come on TV bashing the RF. Some were even borderline hysterical! I don't watch SkyNews but saw some slips on Twitter.



How come, Sky News Australia seemed to be on a mission leading up to the interview. But the in-country one is hostile?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How come, Sky News Australia seemed to be on a mission leading up to the interview. But the in-country one is hostile?


Different owners.


----------



## tiktok

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want their children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.



I wanted to believe the same thing. How does that perspective work with going on Oprah to bash the entire family and tell obvious lies that could be easily fact checked? Doesn’t sound like someone who simply wants to be happy in her marriage to her prince.


----------



## TC1

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want their children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.


Once upon a time this thread was titled "We're just wild about Harry" not kidding. Posters were very much looking forward to what he would do in life. He kind of felt like a breath of fresh air as to the fact that he was more "out of line" than any royals had seen before, and some posters found him handsome (not my cup of tea, but alas) things have really escalated in matters of support, which is reflected by his life changing since meeting MM, etc.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, and that's totally fine with me. What I'd still like to know: how do you look at all the problematic stuff with Meghan? This is where I struggle to be honest. The blatant lies. Her trail of broken relationships, be it family, friends or professional contacts. The bullying allegations which have been out there for years. Don't they tarnish the fairytale lovestory just a little bit for you?



What blatant lies? Please enlighten me. Broken relationships... doesn’t everyone whose dated more than one person have those?

At least a portion of the rumors that have been swirling around her, or any celebrity, for that matter are unsubstantiated. As I have stated before, plenty of people have reason to lie... money and fame is tempting to many. No one is perfect. And yet... she is being scrutinized and vilified to such a degree, you’d think she was the devil. Is it really that deep? In my opinion, it ain’t. There are WAAAAAAY too many things to worry about than what this couple is doing. The obsession is real. Real strange...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> It'd be hard for Meg to claim she's a virgin, having been married twice previously and all...


Check out hymenoplasty and also Hymenorrhaphy
Several Hollywood celebs were endorsing the procedure several years ago.

EDT correct spelling


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Check out hymenoplasty and also Hymenorrhaphy
> Several Hollywood celebs were endorsing the procedure several years ago.
> 
> EDT correct spelling


She can reconstruct her hymen as often as she wants, she still ain't no virgin.  Just like she can put on the greatest act of her life, but she still stinks as an actress.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The earrings ... another unforced error ...
> 
> Maybe M did not put 2 and 2 together and realize they were from MBS, and read the papers about the murder ... Maybe she was giving MBS the benefit of the doubt... ( I am giving MM the benefit of the doubt ...)
> 
> *But the CIA report on the murder has been released, she CAN NEVER wear the earrings again ... so why not auction them off for charity?*


MM will never voluntarily donate those earrings to charity. The earrings can be transformed in other beautiful pieces of jewelry.


----------



## tiktok

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> What blatant lies? Please enlighten me. Broken relationships... doesn’t everyone whose dated more than one person have those?
> 
> At least a portion of the rumors that have been swirling around her, or any celebrity, for that matter are unsubstantiated. As I have stated before, plenty of people have reason to lie... money and fame is tempting to many. No one is perfect. And yet... she is being scrutinized and vilified to such a degree, you’d think she was the devil. Is it really that deep? In my opinion, it ain’t. There are WAAAAAAY too many things to worry about than what this couple is doing. The obsession is real. Real strange...



there are endless posts here about those but just to name a few - she didn’t know anything about Harry, Archie isn’t a prince because of his skin color and not because he’s simply not eligible, she couldn’t get a therapist to help her because of “HR” when half the royal family is getting mental health and advocates for mental health causes and she could easily get access to cosmetic procedures, the BRF took away security because it doesn’t care etc etc.


----------



## Kansashalo

Still laughing that Piers quit 
Go Alex!



ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want their children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.



Agreed.  It's interesting how different this situation is depending upon where you live and who you follow from a new perspective.  In my circle of friends/news, many women understand Meghan's POV and applaud Harry for putting his wife/family before anything else.  

I still think people struggle with this because from the 80,000 ft view says *who wouldn't want to be royalty? *


----------



## DeMonica

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Unlike a lot of the people in this forum, I don’t analyze everything Meghan does or says. That said, my view of her is admittedly limited. But what I do see is a woman who fell in love with a guy with a VERY complicated family life who was uncomfortable with her new life with them for a number of reasons, and has, with her husband’s support, decided that she doesn’t want their children to grow up in the same environment. Whether or not he is a duke, that still stands.


In the beginning I thought she was a really cool new addition to the royal family, an intelligent woman, who's unfortunately cursed with a difficult family, the Markles. I was convinced when I read Piers Morgan's article about Meghan (in the time of the wedding ?) that it's a perfect example of a sour grapes situation. Now I completely believe in his assessment of her. The Martha MacCallum article also highlighted a few important issues.
Yes, the guy she married comes from a complicated, as well as high-profile family. She joined this family without much hesitation on her free will. Unlike Diana, who was half of her age, less educated and very unexperienced with men when married, she was a grown woman who should have been able to grasp what she was getting into. Starting early on she didn't seem to make much effort to fit in that family. By now she's most likely alienated him from his family - as she's from her own family - and managed to create a different environment indeed, but it's questionable whether this new environment is any better than The firm was.


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> They can come up with a new _family_ name; _Spencer_, _Kennedy_, _Rockefeller_ - whatever and whomever they’d like to be next.


I wouldn't discard Musk or Bezos.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> What blatant lies? Please enlighten me. Broken relationships... doesn’t everyone whose dated more than one person have those?
> 
> At least a portion of the rumors that have been swirling around her, or any celebrity, for that matter are unsubstantiated. As I have stated before, plenty of people have reason to lie... money and fame is tempting to many. No one is perfect. And yet... she is being scrutinized and vilified to such a degree, you’d think she was the devil. Is it really that deep? In my opinion, it ain’t. There are WAAAAAAY too many things to worry about than what this couple is doing. The obsession is real. Real strange...


The thing is if you are trying to educate people you don't become a hypocrite. If you lecture people about carbon footprint, then practice what you preach. If you lecture people about overpopulation and then proceed to have another child after belittling a relative sinuously about having more than one child, I mean it's really come to the point where they say one thing and then another. 

Compassion. They talk about compassion then they don't display it to their own families. You can't be a beacon if your light don't shine, especially if you are in the public arena telling others. They attach themselves to strangers but you gotta clean your own house first.  

There's no question about their marriage, their love for each other, etc. but it's their public personal lecturing masses of people about one thing then doing another. The people they have bullied, don't they have a voice too? Like someone posted earlier, a millionaire talking to a billionaire commiserating about their problems.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As Colbert says, Google is your friend.



ouiouilexiaussi said:


> What blatant lies? Please enlighten me. Broken relationships... doesn’t everyone whose dated more than one person have those?
> 
> At least a portion of the rumors that have been swirling around her, or any celebrity, for that matter are unsubstantiated. As I have stated before, plenty of people have reason to lie... money and fame is tempting to many. No one is perfect. And yet... she is being scrutinized and vilified to such a degree, you’d think she was the devil. Is it really that deep? In my opinion, it ain’t. There are WAAAAAAY too many things to worry about than what this couple is doing. The obsession is real. Real strange...


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting perspective on the interview:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kansashalo said:


> Still laughing that Piers quit
> Go Alex!
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  It's interesting how different this situation is depending upon where you live and who you follow from a new perspective.  In my circle of friends/news, many women understand Meghan's POV and applaud Harry for putting his wife/family before anything else.
> 
> I still think people struggle with this because from the 80,000 ft view says *who wouldn't want to be royalty? *



Still thrilled that Thomas Markle was heard!  Hazzie is snotty = best line of the year!
imo


----------



## scarlet555

This is like beating a dead horse but: with all the trauma of Ginge's mother's death, dislikes for the paps and their criticism, yearning for privacy, fear for one's safety-I honestly think Hollywood is not that place one thinks of if they were honest-and obviously, in the end actions speaks louder than words.


----------



## maris.crane

Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio? 

Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

tiktok said:


> there are endless posts here about those but just to name a few - she didn’t know anything about Harry, Archie isn’t a prince because of his skin color and not because he’s simply not eligible, she couldn’t get a therapist to help her because of “HR” when half the royal family is getting mental health and advocates for mental health causes and she could easily get access to cosmetic procedures, the BRF took away security because it doesn’t care etc etc.



Will there be a grand sigh of relief if she takes a lie detector test, then?


----------



## CarryOn2020

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.



Great idea. Start a thread on that.


----------



## maris.crane

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great idea. Start a thread on that.



I don't feel like kvetching about Leo D when I don't live a carbon-free life, myself.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

CarryOn2020 said:


> As Colbert says, Google is your friend.



I’m not googling a bunch of rumors/stories. Waste of time, IMO. We get it, y’all hate her. *yawns*


----------



## stoic

bag-mania said:


> To our UK members: So has the UK press jumped on the sympathy train for Meghan?
> 
> It would seem to be so from what happened to Piers this morning and how some are calling for him to be fired.











						Can Harry and Meghan back up their incendiary allegations?
					

Well! On the bright side, Oprah Winfrey got her money’s worth. Also on the bright side, Prince Harry is sixth in line to the throne so bear in mind folks last night’s interview by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex does not, really, matter in the great scheme of things. On the final bright note, […]




					www.spectator.co.uk
				



I‘m from England and whilst the mainstream press seem to take their side there’s been a few who have seen the light. I’ve put in something from The Spectator, hopefully people can read it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

stoic said:


> Can Harry and Meghan back up their incendiary allegations?
> 
> 
> Well! On the bright side, Oprah Winfrey got her money’s worth. Also on the bright side, Prince Harry is sixth in line to the throne so bear in mind folks last night’s interview by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex does not, really, matter in the great scheme of things. On the final bright note, […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I‘m from England and whilst the mainstream press seem to take their side there’s been a few who have seen the light. I’ve put in something from The Spectator, hopefully people can read it.


Andrew Neil is the chairman at the Spectator. They have a U.S. version too.


----------



## purseinsanity

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.


I think Leo is a hypocrite too, but he seems to purposely stay out of the limelight, and want his privacy, which is what these two claim to want but constantly thrust themselves into the public view.  (More hypocrisy.)
I don't think most of us would be analyzing them so much if they weren't in our face every.single.day about every.little.thing.they.do. 
I don't hear about Leo taking a dump in the wilderness (thank God) or making a production about laying a wreath at a grave to compete with his relatives' big event.  I don't hear about him planting a weed with PreK kids nor handing out sandwiches, and I could go on and on.  If these two really wanted privacy, it's not that hard.


----------



## DeMonica

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.


It happens to be the Harry and Meghan thread, Leo would be a little out of place here. Besides, IMO people would complain less about their carbon footprint if they wouldn't be the champions of environmental issues.  It's a bit ironic.


----------



## CeeJay

chicinthecity777 said:


> I doubt very much she has genuine support from anybody, apart from maybe Harry and Doria. Most of her supporters will fall under the following categories:
> 
> 1. Identity politikers and race-baiters who just want to jump onto the bandwagon
> 2. Crazy fans on Twitter who are probably mentally unstable
> 3. People who want to and will profit from her
> 4. People who have never met her but liked a good story and somehow decided they must love her


Honestly, from what I'm seeing on FB (stupid of me to even comment), it's really the one thing for which they are supporting her .. the 'race' card.  My friend who has known the family since she was in High School told me flat-out that during that time, Meghan did not use the WOC card because SHE WANTED people to believe that she wasn't a WOC .. get that!!!!  She also reiterated, yet again, that during those years she and her son NEVER, EVER met Doria .. EVER!  So, that means that Doria was 'out-of-the-picture' during that time and she didn't even attend her daughter's plays????  WOW ..


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes some of them, like Sky News, was literally on cloud 9 that another opportunity for them to talk down the country! And invited every race baiter they could find to come on TV bashing the RF. Some were even borderline hysterical! I don't watch SkyNews but saw some clips on Twitter.
> But not every outlets. Many more negative reports in general and more balanced. Snap polls suggested Team Queen has majority.
> We have a very hard hitting journalist used to host a show on BBC called Andrew Neil where he grilled politicians from all sides. There are people calling him to interview H&M next and all their lies would be exposed.
> 
> I was never a royalist. They didn't matter to me. I never followed any of them. I didn't watch H&M's wedding. But I started to pay attention after Megexit and dislike them more and more! Now my SO has turned too!


so if a good percentage of Brits are not pro-H&M, then maybe the royals don't have that big a problem.....seems to be the Brits would be a lot more important than American media


----------



## sdkitty

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.


Leo has a real job.  He makes money as an actor (and a very good one).  He doesn't make a full time job out of preaching to all of us lesser beings.


----------



## mellibelly

dangerouscurves said:


> Lies or not, I'm glad Meghan is out of that 'house'. She could've been the next Lady D.



Nah, she’s Fergie in this scenario.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Honestly, from what I'm seeing on FB (stupid of me to even comment), it's really the one thing for which they are supporting her .. the 'race' card.  My friend who has known the family since she was in High School told me flat-out that during that time, Meghan did not use the WOC card because SHE WANTED people to believe that she wasn't a WOC .. get that!!!!  She also reiterated, yet again, that during those years she and her son NEVER, EVER met Doria .. EVER!  So, that means that Doria was 'out-of-the-picture' during that time and she didn't even attend her daughter's plays????  WOW ..


this is what irks me.....she  seems to have spent most of her life avoiding the apperance of being a WOC and now it's her ticket to make all her dreams come true...ironic

Sonny Hostin on the view said she watched the Meghan & O show with a group of WOC and they were all so touched because they totally related to her


----------



## kkfiregirl

If I think a thread/topic/discussion isn’t worth my time, I would just pass it by.

As for the question “_who wouldn’t want to be royalty_?” I know I wouldn’t - I’d prefer to be rich & _unknown_.


----------



## maris.crane

purseinsanity said:


> I think Leo is a hypocrite too, but he seems to purposely stay out of the limelight, and want his privacy, which is what these two claim to want but constantly thrust themselves into the public view.  (More hypocrisy.)
> I don't think most of us would be analyzing them so much if they weren't in our face every.single.day about every.little.thing.they.do.
> I don't hear about Leo taking a dump in the wilderness (thank God) or making a production about laying a wreath at a grave to compete with his relatives' big event.  I don't hear about him planting a weed with PreK kids nor handing out sandwiches, and I could go on and on.  If these two really wanted privacy, it's not that hard.



Well, I mean maybe I'm completely out of the loop - but beyond the past week when I feel they have been on every channel/network/show - they haven't been constantly 'in your face.' They're not really _that _loud on Insta, I haven't seen much of the baby before this; and I skipped the Corden puff piece because... well, I'm not a Corden fan.

I muted by city councillor on Instagram during the worst of COVID as it was tough to read the constant barrage of daily updates; and I feel like if people really disliked MM they could do the same. I just find the vitriol Meghan primarily elicits bizarre and over the top.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Will there be a grand sigh of relief if she takes a lie detector test, then?


Not really. Just lead by example and then she can say Follow Me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Nah, she’s Fergie in this scenario.



She is Wallis to a T.
 Several people cautioned her about that before the wedding.  Seems she didn’t listen.


----------



## Aqua01

purseinsanity said:


> Amen.  I have witnessed first hand for the past 25 years how my now 58 year old SIL abuses her 92 and 83 year old parents.  Demanding they pay for her housing, car, spending, etc.  If they ever try to stop, she threatens suicide, not because she actually has mental health issues, but because she's a manipulative, conniving, witch.  My MIL is so fearful she'll try (she never has), that she ALWAYS gives in to SIL's demands, and is now expecting hubby and his brother to carry on the responsibility/burden. * It's a parent's job to love and support their child, and teach them life lessons, at least until they're 18 years old. It is NOT a parent's responsibility to fund their child until the parent dies and beyond.  Grow the F up, Haz. You're already a father of one, almost 2. I hope your children turn out better than you and your conniving wife.*





tiktok said:


> The whole issue here is lack of nuance in any narrative so we have two camps, just like in politics. Unfortunately when you look at the nuance, H&M don't come out as clean and saintly as they do now.
> 
> - Meghan can be the subject of a certain level of racism in the press but at the same time we all know not every attack was racist - Kate was "waitie Katie", had nude photos of her in a private vacation splashed across tabloids, harrassed due to her flight attendant mom, uncle etc. It doesn't justify any racism, but it does show that tabloids are a cesspool across the board and a mature adult would treat them as such and try to learn not to take it so personally (or do something to reduce the harm they cause people at large).
> 
> - Meghan can be the subject of some racism from a family member but at the same time have other members of the family be very supportive and welcoming in their own royal / upperclass British way. That way isn't the same as that of your average yoga studio teacher in West Hollywood who's your bestie on day 1, but any mature adult would understand there are cultural differences and give it some more time, or choose to bail, feeling empowered, not victimized.
> 
> - Harry's father could be a terrible dad, while at the same time Harry or Meghan or both could have tried his patience to the point where he's had enough of giving them money for their high lifestyle and was sick of their ungratefulness and entitlement.
> 
> - Meghan could have been the subject of bullying by the press, while at the same time bullying her own employees - those stories were in the press years ago, they didn't come out now. No one has the turnover she did amongst her staff while being a holier-than-thou saint.
> 
> The thing is, when you add up all the other things these two said yesterday, it's very hard to take them seriously:
> - Did Harry really not know that Archie is not going be a prince until Charles is king, not because of skin color but because he's just not eligible? Was that in the homework one of his tutors did for him? It's on Wikipedia if he bothered to look it up.
> - Half the BRF had therapy before, yet Meghan went to HR (what?) and they denied her? She could get her veneers replaced quietly but she couldn't get a therapist when she was suicidal? She could keep blood diamonds and wear them publicly despite the protests of her staff yet she didn't have authority to go above HR in order to not kill herself?
> - They were so burned by the family that within a few months of the suicidal thoughts, the new baby's birth, moving to a new house and all the drama with the BRF they were launching plans (that take a while to form) to move countries and profit from the Sussex Royal brand while doing none of the work required from royals? Was seeing $ signs the cure for their mental health problems?
> - They know Eugenie and Beatrice don't get security protection, yet they were floored Archie wouldn't either?
> - We are in the middle of a pandemic, half the US population has family members who they deem racist or lib or whatever for voting for a party that advocates for what they deem existential threats to their body or freedom, thousands of families were torn apart by political disagreements in the past 4 years, yet H&M's life, with the millions in clothing and jewelry and private jets to see Elton John and the Cloonies was "unsurvivable"?
> - They never read the press yet they know the press was racist, they sued the press multiple times etc.
> - Kate made Meghan cry - right, and that matters because...? My best friend made me cry, my mom made me cry, my sister made me cry. I made them cry. Who gives a @#$%? Are we in kindergarten? Why even mention that? Adults make each other cry and then they move on and never think about it anymore.
> - Everything was insinuations, no verifiable facts whatsoever, and they know the other side has a "never complain never explain" policy. How convenient.
> 
> Give me a break. The only thing that saves them is the fact that in today's lazy media world what matters is how many untouchable words your narrative includes. She now has "racism", "miscarriage", "suicide", "mental health", "setting boundaries with your in-laws" - that's more than enough for no one to want to touch the topic with a 10-foot pole and just hail her as a role model for us all.


----------



## maris.crane

sdkitty said:


> Leo has a real job.  He makes money as an actor *(and a very good one)*.  He doesn't make a full time job out of preaching to all of us lesser beings.



I think that can be debated, but you're certainly entitled to your own opinion.


----------



## mellibelly

sdkitty said:


> Leo has a real job.  He makes money as an actor (and a very good one).  He doesn't make a full time job out of preaching to all of us lesser beings.



Yeah he’s a hypocrite too. He gets tons of flack online for his ‘do as I say not as I do’ stance.


----------



## poopsie

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Will there be a grand sigh of relief if she takes a lie detector test, then?





Wouldn't it just be nice if a liars pants really DID catch on fire?


----------



## kkfiregirl

I’m feeling very _vitriolic_ today; I love that word, I should use it more often.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> If I think a thread/topic/discussion isn’t worth my time, I would just pass it by.
> 
> As for the question “_who wouldn’t want to be royalty_?” I know I wouldn’t - I’d prefer to be rich & _unknown_.


Amen!  Me too!  Obviously, none of Haz' previous girlfriends wanted it either.
I wouldn't want to be a celebrity, period.  I don't have thick enough skin to have comments, criticisms, opinions, even lies, about every move I make.  Meg and Haz want celebrity, crave it, and actively seek it.  They subject themselves to everything thrown at them, and then cry victim on top of it.  No sympathy here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kkfiregirl said:


> If I think a thread/topic/discussion isn’t worth my time, I would just pass it by.
> 
> As for the question “_who wouldn’t want to be royalty_?” I know I wouldn’t - I’d prefer to be rich & _unknown_.



“Be careful what you wish for.”
My mother, my grandmother, all my aunts


----------



## mellibelly

maris.crane said:


> I think that can be debated, but you're certainly entitled to your own opinion.



I don’t think he’s a good actor, his carbon footprint is a huge issue, but this isn’t the Leo D gossip thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Amen!  Me too!  Obviously, none of Haz' previous girlfriends wanted it either.
> I wouldn't want to be a celebrity, period.  I don't have thick enough skin to have comments, criticisms, opinions, even lies, about every move I make.  Meg and Haz want celebrity, crave it, and actively seek it.  They subject themselves to everything thrown at them, and then cry victim on top of it.  No sympathy here.



If more people read Shakespeare, Faust, Marlowe, the ancient Greeks and Roman writers, what a wonderful world it would be.


----------



## maris.crane

mellibelly said:


> I don’t think he’s a good actor, his carbon footprint is a huge issue, but this isn’t the Leo D gossip thread.



I think it was clear it was used as an example, to follow up on a lot of the feedback that the dislike for Meghan seems... real out there to some of us.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

I wonder if Meg's "depression" during her pregnancy was due to that fact that she wasn't really pregnant and as the 9 months wore on, using a surrogate in secret and not using the regular palace doctors and hospital got her worrying how she could successfully pull it off.

That could certainly have been keeping her up at night.

I do think she's pregnant this time, she looks pregnant.  Last time, she looked like a skinny lady with a moon bump.


----------



## CarryOn2020

maris.crane said:


> I think it was clear it was used as an example, to follow up on a lot of the feedback that the dislike for Meghan seems... real out there to some of us.



There is a dislike for *H&M’s behavior and their choices. *None of us know them so it is impossible to dislike them. 
 There is a difference.


----------



## maris.crane

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is a dislike for *H&M’s behavior and their choices. *None of us know them so it is impossible to dislike them.
> There is a difference.



Fair enough.


----------



## muddledmint

chicinthecity777 said:


> We have a very hard hitting journalist used to host a show on BBC called Andrew Neil where he grilled politicians from all sides. There are people calling him to interview H&M next and all their lies would be exposed.


Ha! Meghan would never do that interview. She only wants someone like Oprah who would be on her side and have an agenda that aligns with her own.


----------



## sdkitty

has thrown dad under the bus
from Huffpost:  she's treacherous IMO








						Meghan Markle Opens Up About Her Dad's 'Betrayal'
					

"I’m just trying to decide if I’m comfortable even talking about that," the Duchess of Sussex told Oprah.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## purseinsanity

maris.crane said:


> Well, I mean maybe I'm completely out of the loop - but beyond the past week when I feel they have been on every channel/network/show - they haven't been constantly 'in your face.' They're not really _that _loud on Insta, I haven't seen much of the baby before this; and I skipped the Corden puff piece because... well, I'm not a Corden fan.
> 
> I muted by city councillor on Instagram during the worst of COVID as it was tough to read the constant barrage of daily updates; and I feel like if people really disliked MM they could do the same. I just find the vitriol Meghan primarily elicits bizarre and over the top.


Well, I feel like I can't get away from them.  People and US Magazine, and most other entertainment sites feel like their personal PR sites, to the point I avoid going there any more.  I certainly don't follow them on IG, nor watched the Corden piece or their interview because I try to avoid things I don't care for.  I come here for some laughs, TBH.  There's enough real issues going on in the world that are way more important than these two schmuks.  I really don't "hate" them because I don't know them.  I just dislike their condescending behavior and hypocrytical actions.


----------



## kkfiregirl

poopsie said:


> Wouldn't it just be nice if a liars pants really DID catch on fire?



There would be a lot of _scorched_ bottoms around here!


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is Wallis to a T.
> Several people cautioned her about that before the wedding.  Seems she didn’t listen.



True but Harry was the spare, not the actual King like Edward. And Megs is going Hollywood like Fergie tried to do. Oprah interview, check. Maybe they’ll be a Weight Watchers contract (Fergie had one) to lose the baby weight. Oprah could hook her up.


----------



## sdkitty

another from Huffpost.  according to this WOC, black women have "claimed her"








						I Know How Meghan Markle Feels. All Black Women Do.
					

"When the world watched Meghan break barriers at Buckingham Palace, Black women held silent prayer vigils for her emotional and physical safety."




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## muddledmint

Kansashalo said:


> Still laughing that Piers quit
> Go Alex!
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  It's interesting how different this situation is depending upon where you live and who you follow from a new perspective.  In my circle of friends/news, many women understand Meghan's POV and applaud Harry for putting his wife/family before anything else.
> 
> I still think people struggle with this because from the 80,000 ft view says *who wouldn't want to be royalty? *


I don’t get this. How can you just ignore all the lies that came out of her mouth during the interview? Almost everything that can possibly be fact checked is turning up to be a lie. That makes everything she says suspect. I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on the bullying and other stories until I watched this interview!


----------



## Jayne1

I think it's a shame that Piers Morgan is leaving Good Morning Britain. Not all hosts should be a sycophant, but I guess the stations don't like controversy.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> another from Huffpost.  according to this WOC, black women have "claimed her"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Know How Meghan Markle Feels. All Black Women Do.
> 
> 
> "When the world watched Meghan break barriers at Buckingham Palace, Black women held silent prayer vigils for her emotional and physical safety."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



That’s very interesting- she’s never referred to herself as _black_, she  was either biracial or caucasian, which makes me wonder why they’re trying so hard to claim her.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m not googling a bunch of rumors/stories. Waste of time, IMO. We get it, y’all hate her. *yawns*


You’re accusing us of hate? You love her? That’s cool but it’s contradictory. I leave you in peace. I asked in sincerity with an open mind and you responded about her and her husband’s love. No one is questioning it but it’s scary not to research things to draw a conclusion cause it’s dangerous in all facets of life, not just this thread.


----------



## mellibelly

maris.crane said:


> I think it was clear it was used as an example, to follow up on a lot of the feedback that the dislike for Meghan seems... real out there to some of us.



Sure, but if you did a quick google search on Leo and the flack he gets for his hypocrisy on the environment you would find plenty. Celebitchy for one tears into him.

I also think blind worship to celebrity is out there. Whataboutism isn’t going to change my opinion.


----------



## Allisonfaye

kkfiregirl said:


> That’s very interesting- she’s never referred to herself as _black_, she  was either biracial or caucasian, which makes me wonder why they’re trying so hard to claim her.



They loved OJ after he murdered his wife even though he had very little to do with the black community after he was a celebrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> True but Harry was the spare, not the actual King like Edward. And Megs is going Hollywood like Fergie tried to do. Oprah interview, check. Maybe they’ll be a Weight Watchers contract (Fergie had one) to lose the baby weight. Oprah could hook her up.



oooooooh, Wallis and Fergie in one!  Maybe she will skip the WW and just write baby books.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

kkfiregirl said:


> That’s very interesting- she’s never referred to herself as _black_, she  was either biracial or caucasian, which makes me wonder why they’re trying so hard to claim her.



Lol, I assume you’ve never heard of the one drop rule. At the end of the day, the majority of the world has made it very clear that if you look like you are even are part black, you will be treated as such. 

Where is Jane Elliott when you need her...?


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Lodpah said:


> You’re accusing us of hate? You love her? That’s cool but it’s contradictory. I leave you in peace. I asked in sincerity with an open mind and you responded about her and her husband’s love. No one is questioning it but it’s scary not to research things to draw a conclusion cause it’s dangerous in all facets of life, not just this thread.



I don’t love her. I don’t know her. Y’all don’t know her and you hate her. I refuse to waste energy looking up endless stories about her... there are plenty of people here that obviously do, so I’ll leave that to them.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Allisonfaye said:


> They loved OJ after he murdered his wife even though he had very little to do with the black community after he was a celebrity.



They. Yes, please do speak for everyone of color about our feelings on a murderer. Lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another lesson my parents taught me — the person who does the work does the learning.
I do my own research and form my own opinions.  Important to fact-check everything these days.


ETA: when the father of the bride says the groom is *snotty*, I listen. So should Prince Charles. That was 3 days before the wedding.


----------



## DeMonica

purseinsanity said:


> Well, I feel like I can't get away from them.  People and US Magazine, and most other entertainment sites feel like their personal PR sites, to the point I avoid going there any more.  I certainly don't follow them on IG, nor watched the Corden piece or their interview because I try to avoid things I don't care for.  I come here for some laughs, TBH.  There's enough real issues going on in the world that are way more important than these two schmuks.  I really don't "hate" them because I don't know them.  I just dislike their condescending behavior and hypocrytical actions.


I have no reason to hate them, either. It's just like watching a ridiculous soap opera and wondering about the next turn. I need distractions from the bitter reality because I'm fed up with being scared of covid 24/7. BTW I'm really jealous of their problems. Having to pay for their house and security from their own pocket padded with millions must be really harsh.


----------



## Aimee3

Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?



Guessing OW with her Harpo production company, possibly along with TylerP and his production company, will offer any needed guidance or advice.  There may be other powerful people with production companies who offer assistance, too.


----------



## Allisonfaye

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> They. Yes, please do speak for everyone of color about our feelings on a murderer. Lol!



I have no doubt some of them thought he was guilty but what I saw was them cheering when he was acquitted and my boyfriend at the time refused to believe was guilty.


----------



## Lodpah

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?


I don’t know. What could possibly top this? Like one hit wonder songs some continually receive royalties ( no pun intended).

It’s possible more about global issues from their perspectives and interviewing others? Most people move on to the next thing.


----------



## sdkitty

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Lol, I assume you’ve never heard of the one drop rule. At the end of the day, the majority of the world has made it very clear that if you look like you are even are part black, you will be treated as such.
> 
> Where is Jane Elliott when you need her...?


the one drop thing was racist
so now you are saying it's being adoped by POC as a positive thing?


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> Does anyone else find it ironic that friends of 20+ years and 17 years come out defending Me-gain on social media but they are otherwise not seen and not heard at other times? I'm also surprised that Jessica Mulroney didn't already come out of the woodwork to defend Me-gain too.


No, Jessica did .. but don't recall where she "posted" it (or possibly it was a verbal quote passed on by "a friend" - HA)!!!


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing OW with her Harpo production company, possibly along with TylerP and his production company, will offer any needed guidance or advice.  There may be other powerful people with production companies who offer assistance, too.



If this is the case, then MM is astute for inviting Oprah to the wedding and building that connection. Like her or not, MM represents something important to certain groups (media attention, gorgeous, classy, married to royalty, seemingly good role model, “charitable” etc). Oprah probably feels MM is the face of the future if it turns out she invested herself so heavily in MM. H is just a tool (in every sense of the word). Narcissists like MM won’t show her real face or attitude in front of people they need to climb ahead, so the two of them probably get along just fine!


----------



## muddledmint

DeMonica said:


> I have no reason to hate them, either. It's just like watching a ridiculous soap opera and wondering about the next turn. I need distractions from the bitter reality because I'm fed up with being scared of covid 24/7. BTW I'm really jealous of their problems. Having to pay for their house and security from their own pocket padded with millions must be really harsh.


This is how I felt - they were entertaining to see in the news, especially with all the drama, I liked looking at her outfits and style, the tabloid stuff was fun but i didn’t believe it 100%, I had no strong opinions ... until this interview! Now I am truly disgusted with both of them. They should have stayed silenced instead of outing themselves as whining, resentful, and jealous liars.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

sdkitty said:


> the one drop thing was racist
> so now you are saying it's being adoped by POC as a positive thing?



No, I’m saying that people still use variations of it to classify mixed people, regardless of how folks define their own identities.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> No, I’m saying that people still use variations of it to classify mixed people, regardless of how folks define their own identities.


do you mind saying what you think of @CeeJay's post about Meghan back in high school not wanting to identify as a POC?  does that matter to you?


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Allisonfaye said:


> I have no doubt some of them thought he was guilty but what I saw was them cheering when he was acquitted and my boyfriend at the time refused to believe was guilty.



Some people were cheering because he was able to do what many POC (innocent or not) found impossible: escape rotting in jail.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

sdkitty said:


> do you mind saying what you think of @CeeJay's post about Meghan back in high school not wanting to identify as a POC?  does that matter to you?



Regardless of what she wants to be identified as, she is considered by most others to be a person of color. We do not have the privilege of being seen as we want to be seen... and we also can’t wash our skin off.


----------



## Allisonfaye

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Some people were cheering because he was able to do what many POC (innocent or not) found impossible: escape rotting in jail.



It's hard for me to understand why they would be happy that someone who was rich enough to hire great lawyers and didn't really have anything to do with them would get away with murder but hey, what do I know?


----------



## maris.crane

mellibelly said:


> Sure, but if you did a quick google search on Leo and the flack he gets for his hypocrisy on the environment you would find plenty. Celebitchy for one tears into him.
> 
> I also think blind worship to celebrity is out there. Whataboutism isn’t going to change my opinion.



... well, I’m actually not a particularly big fan of Meghan, or Leo. My question was why this page is 3400+ pages when other equally controversial celebrities rate 30 pages.

I just find it bizarre; you don’t. Truce made. Stale mate.

Anywho, I probably need to find a Ginger Spice thread to blindly celeb worship in.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Allisonfaye said:


> It's hard for me to understand why they would be happy that someone who was rich enough to hire great lawyers and didn't really have anything to do with them would get away with murder but hey, what do I know?



If you don’t get it, you don’t get it.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> But she was not an employee....she was in in-law, member of the family.....and they say they know who made racist remarks, they just aren't telling



She's not an employee but the people involved may be... the people who reported her for bullying were definitely employees and it's unclear whether the person with racist remarks was a senior member of the family or advisors (as far as I know). Even if it's not an employee, that's an employment matter if someone related to the company is harassing someone else. Palace should investigate both.


----------



## sdkitty

maris.crane said:


> ... well, I’m actually not a particularly big fan of Meghan, or Leo. My question was why this page is 3400+ pages when other equally controversial celebrities rate 30 pages.
> 
> I just find it bizarre; you don’t. Truce made. Stale mate.
> 
> Anywho, I probably need to find a Ginger Spice thread to blindly celeb worship in.


they are not equally controversial....she is making it her mission in life to preach to all of us....Leo may have things to say about the environment and may not always practice what he preaches but he gets his fame and his income from working as an actor, which he has done since childhood


----------



## kkfiregirl

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Lol, I assume you’ve never heard of the one drop rule. At the end of the day, the majority of the world has made it very clear that if you look like you are even are part black, you will be treated as such.
> 
> Where is Jane Elliott when you need her...?



I have heard of the one drop rule, it’s a painful relic from slavery that was created to keep blacks in their place. The one drop rule meant that the mixed-race offspring of slave owners could never be free. 

Furthermore, MM doesn’t look very _black_ to me, so I disagree with the second part of your statement.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> another from Huffpost.  according to this WOC, black women have "claimed her"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Know How Meghan Markle Feels. All Black Women Do.
> 
> 
> "When the world watched Meghan break barriers at Buckingham Palace, Black women held silent prayer vigils for her emotional and physical safety."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Huffington Post employees have more to worry about than Meghan Markle. They had massive layoffs today.


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> ...Okay. You're still welcome to enjoy your _Good Morning Britain_ re-runs and Taran Killam parody skits on SNL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not that deep.



Read between the lines … I don’t watch GMB. 

Anyway I’m too busy working a real job so I don’t have to mump off my rich family that I detest.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

kkfiregirl said:


> I have heard of the one drop rule, it’s a painful relic from slavery that was created to keep blacks in their place. The one drop rule meant that the mixed-race offspring of slave owners could never be free.
> 
> Furthermore, MM doesn’t look very _black_ to me, so I disagree with the second part of your statement.



It doesn’t matter if she looks “very black” or not. It doesn’t matter how mixed someone is, if they are seen as a person of color, they are treated as such. And last time I checked, no one would choose to be treated the way POC are often treated.


----------



## scarlet555

I cannot conclude that anyone in thread 'hates' her.  I know a lot of us criticize her and comment on her and we are not kind about it... But honestly, she is really setting herself up for it-- being a total famewhore.  

Now Leo-I don't know of his hypocrisy as much because, though he is famous, I was never a fan of him until the departed, he can... miraculously keep his privacy.


----------



## maris.crane

sdkitty said:


> they are not equally controversial....she is making it her mission in life to preach to all of us....Leo may have things to say about the environment and may not always practice what he preaches but he gets his fame and his income from working as an actor, which he has done since childhood




I fail to see how Meghan is preachy. I guess that’s a matter of opinion.

And she did work. Maybe it was admittedly B-list work, and Canadaland commercials. Maybe she wasn’t a particularly fantastic actress... but she was employed. Gainfully and regularly employed which is more than what you can say for the majority of the acting community.

(She did put the two Reitmans One, Haute Couture ZERO! gents out of a job though.)


----------



## Angel1988

My thoughts on the interview:

1.: I just can't with how they gloss over the race comment. They talk very vaguely about it, while it is in my opinion the most important topic of the whole conversation and not just for their own interests (Harry, Meghan and Archie), but to the UK (and world) as a whole, as these people (BRF and their employees) have such a high representative status. 

2.: It is extremely unthoughtful to millions of people who don't even have enough income to lead a decent life, to complain about not having enough finances for security, while it is obvious that they are just not spending their money wisely. Security/safety for you and your family should come fist, living lavishly comes second and only when you have spare savings, not the other way around.

Anyway, those are my first impressions. I never judge people I don't personally know. For all I care, they might just have a really bad pr team.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> do you mind saying what you think of @CeeJay's post about Meghan back in high school not wanting to identify as a POC?  does that matter to you?





ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Regardless of what she wants to be identified as, she is considered by most others to be a person of color. We do not have the privilege of being seen as we want to be seen... and we also can’t wash our skin off.



It's a very tricky thing for mixed race people to categorize themselves. Meghan is just as white as she is black and only in the last decade maybe was there even an option to choose "mixed race" or "choose all that apply" on most forms... so if you're 1/2 white and 1/2 black, which ONE do you choose? It's a ridiculous choice so to me it's fair that they can arbitrarily choose one or the other. The choice is arbitrary and subjective to begin with... is it defined by which culture she was most a part of that week? which one she looks more like, to other people? Which one is more desirable in any situation? Flip a coin? IMO, any of the 3 are equally valid because choosing one is a false premise to begin with.


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> Read between the lines … I don’t watch GMB.
> 
> Anyway I’m too busy working a real job so I don’t have to mump off my rich family that I detest.



Well it was meant to be deadpan... but admittedly, sarcasm doesn’t come across well in text.

I mean, my original reply was in reaction to someone’s laughter at Piers’ (a journalist I find irritating) losing his cool on air ... and walking off the job. Totally relatable actually in working longer hours during a pandemic. Truly not that deep.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

lalame said:


> It's a very tricky thing for mixed race people to categorize themselves. Meghan is just as white as she is black and only in the last decade maybe was there even an option to choose "mixed race" or "choose all that apply" on most forms... so if you're 1/2 white and 1/2 black, which ONE do you choose? It's a ridiculous choice so to me it's fair that they can arbitrarily choose one or the other.



They can choose what they want, sure. I’m just saying that sadly enough, that choice will only be acknowledged/accepted by some. Not everyone can pull a Rachel Dolezal. Lol!


----------



## kkfiregirl

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> It doesn’t matter if she looks “very black” or not. It doesn’t matter how mixed someone is, if they are seen as a person of color, they are treated as such. And last time I checked, no one would choose to be treated the way POC are often treated.



Hmm, let me clarify. When I see her, I don’t see a _black_ person, she looks mixed or racially ambiguous, which is what she’s passed herself off as for years.


----------



## Sly_Fox

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes some of them, like Sky News, was literally on cloud 9 that another opportunity for them to talk down the country! And invited every race baiter they could find to come on TV bashing the RF. Some were even borderline hysterical! I don't watch SkyNews but saw some clips on Twitter.
> But not every outlets. Many more negative reports in general and more balanced. Snap polls suggested Team Queen has majority.
> We have a very hard hitting journalist used to host a show on BBC called Andrew Neil where he grilled politicians from all sides. There are people calling him to interview H&M next and all their lies would be exposed.
> 
> I was never a royalist. They didn't matter to me. I never followed any of them. I didn't watch H&M's wedding. But I started to pay attention after Megexit and dislike them more and more! Now my SO has turned too!



Andrew Neil would chew Meghan up and spit her out within minutes. I’d give my right arm to see that but of course she can only be interviewed by a** lickers who dare not ask a pointed question lest she start bawling and claiming victimisation.


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> They can choose what they want, sure. I’m just saying that sadly enough, that choice will only be acknowledged/accepted by some. Not everyone can pull a Rachel Dolezal. Lol!


Yes fair point, I was just talking about what the person chooses. What other people choose for them is a whole other thing!


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

kkfiregirl said:


> Hmm, let me clarify. When I see her, I don’t see a _black_ person, she looks mixed or racially ambiguous, which is what she’s passed herself off as for years.



Right, she is mixed. But lots of folks see her as black or other.... not white. There are only a handful of celebrities that I know of that are mixed but look white (Halsey and Logic, to name a couple).... Which makes me wonder... how many are out there that are white and look mixed? Either way, you are treated based on how you look, not based on what you claim you are.


----------



## lalame

Did anyone catch Meghan's dad's interview? It was quite sympathetic. My, my world looks very different today versus 2 years ago!!




I hope one good thing that comes out of this is they repair their relationship. And OOF at him calling out Harry, rightly.

Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meghan...rkle-reacts-harry-and-meghan-interview-oprah/


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Some people were cheering because he was able to do what many POC (innocent or not) found impossible: escape rotting in jail.


Wow! There are many innocent Black men and women who are innocently jailed and we are happy that he got away? That is such an insult to them.  Please don't equate that one to the innocent ones who languish in our jails and didn't have the monies to high priced lawyers and PR. 

Our humanity has come to call evil good and good evil.  What a sad state of affairs we are living our future children, grandchildren to inherit.


----------



## kkfiregirl

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Right, she is mixed. But lots of folks see her as black or other.... not white. There are only a handful of celebrities that I know of that are mixed but look white (Halsey and Logic, to name a couple).... Which makes me wonder... how many are out there that are white and look mixed? Either way, you are treated based on how you look, not based on what you claim you are.



There are many white people that look mixed- it just depends on where they’re from


----------



## Chagall

muddledmint said:


> This is how I felt - they were entertaining to see in the news, especially with all the drama, I liked looking at her outfits and style, the tabloid stuff was fun but i didn’t believe it 100%, I had no strong opinions ... until this interview! Now I am truly disgusted with both of them. They should have stayed silenced instead of outing themselves as whining, resentful, and jealous liars.


I was hoping to some degree that they would redeem themselves in this interview. Like you I was disgusted with them. I honestly couldn’t watch the whole interview. I switched off about half way through. I never saw the part with Harry.


----------



## maris.crane

CeeJay said:


> No, Jessica did .. but don't recall where she "posted" it (or possibly it was a verbal quote passed on by "a friend" - HA)!!!



Just as an FYI: Jessica has laid low and been non grata round here. She went after a local blogger via Instagram DMs, she lost her deal on Canadian TV pre-airing, and the husband went on leave from his show (he’s on the Canadian ET and he’s irritating too.)

Anyways, it’s not surprising Jessica hasn’t been seen hide nor hair from. She can’t defend Meghan without opening herself up to criticism.


----------



## Sly_Fox

Kansashalo said:


> Still laughing that Piers quit
> Go Alex!



At least Piers has principles. He won’t stay with ITV just for money but allow his voice to be taken.


----------



## maris.crane

Piers Morgan is a guy who was directly accused and implicated of breaking into a dead teenager’s cell phone... the hell?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spoiler: Sound and Fury



*Meghan Markle's former co-star Wendell Pierce slams her and Harry for interview during pandemic*
17:02 EST, 9 March 2021
By 

Published: 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021 | 

’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’.
Wendell Pierce, who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise.
The 57-year-old told radio station LBC: ‘Today 3,000 people are going to die in America from Covid.
‘A couple of hundred people are going to die, even this hour, in the UK.’
Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’.





Meghan Markle’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’




Wendell Pierce (pictured), who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise
The actor, who said he had not spoken to the duchess since 2019, added: ‘It was quite insensitive and offensive that we are all complicit in this sort of palace… gossip in the midst of so much death. I think it is insignificant.’
Asked who he included in this criticism, he said ‘everyone’ including Oprah, US network CBS, ITV, Prince Harry and Meghan, and the Palace. 
Pierce, who also starred in award-winning gangland drama The Wire, added that the monarchy should not get involved ‘in this sort of conversation’ and instead ‘focus on the throes of death that we’re in’.
The actor, from New Orleans, revealed he and Meghan had not talked much about race as they filmed Suits, despite the topic featuring in their roles.
He said: ‘We didn’t have long discussions about it, besides what was in the script and what was happening in our personal lives.’




Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan (pictured) for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’











						Wendell Pierce slams Meghan Markle and Harry for interview in pandemic
					

Meghan Markle's former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the 'throes of death'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Lodpah said:


> Wow! There are many innocent Black men and women who are innocently jailed and we are happy that he got away? That is such an insult to them.  Please don't equate that one to the innocent ones who languish in our jails and didn't have the monies to high priced lawyers and PR.
> 
> Our humanity has come to call evil good and good evil.  What a sad state of affairs we are living our future children, grandchildren to inherit.



I wouldn’t say “happy” per say. I’d say astonished. He had access to money and great lawyers and had his fame as well, but it was still a shock because his verdict was very VERY rare. The justice system is HIGHLY stacked against black men. This time, for some insane reason, one wasn’t punished.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

kkfiregirl said:


> There are many white people that look mixed- it just depends on where they’re from



Please name a few white celebrities that look mixed?


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.



Seriously? The difference being that none of us want to vomit when we look at Leonardo Di Caprio … au contraire


----------



## maris.crane

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I wouldn’t say “happy” per say. I’d say astonished. He had access to money and great lawyers and had his fame as well, but it was still a shock because his verdict was very VERY rare. The justice system is HIGHLY stacked against black men. This time, for some insane reason, one wasn’t punished.



SO MUCH YES.

OJ got his come uppance eventually. But I mean Episode II of OJ: Made in America.



Sly_Fox said:


> Seriously? The difference being that none of us want to vomit when we look at Leonardo Di Caprio … au contraire



I find Leo D irritating and overrated and bloated but if that is your fave... I’m sorry?


----------



## CarryOn2020

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Right, she is mixed. But lots of folks see her as black or other.... not white. There are only a handful of celebrities that I know of that are mixed but look white (Halsey and Logic, to name a couple).... Which makes me wonder... how many are out there that are white and look mixed? Either way, you are treated based on how you look, not based on what you claim you are.



My experience, fwiw = we are treated how we behave. 
Be snotty to someone and it should be no surprise people won’t take his calls.
Be kind, get kindness back.


----------



## sdkitty

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I wouldn’t say “happy” per say. I’d say astonished. He had access to money and great lawyers and had his fame as well, but it was still a shock because his verdict was very VERY rare. The justice system is HIGHLY stacked against black men. This time, for some insane reason, one wasn’t punished.


well I think most people would agree he did not have a jury of his peers.


----------



## Lodpah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I wouldn’t say “happy” per say. I’d say astonished. He had access to money and great lawyers and had his fame as well, but it was still a shock because his verdict was very VERY rare. The justice system is HIGHLY stacked against black men. This time, for some insane reason, one wasn’t punished.


Because of the press and his money. PERIOD.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Please stay on topic.
Thank you.


----------



## zinacef

Maybe we all can “agree” that something has happened to all of the involve whether it was a great experience or not but something. only, M and H decided to share their ”experience” be it happiness, anger, envy, feelings of being discriminations, love —- in front of 20 some million people. bottomline is, their relationship will never be the same. Christmas, birthdays, BP, holidays in Sandringham , etc... even phone calls will never be the same. M and H obviously has layed their cards out. I hope it’s not all for the money because it really is not worth it. Edward and Wallis eventually lived an “empty” life,  Edward missing his family, his lost glory, money and all that comes with being born royal. there is nothing left now to talk about t hey all have to live with the result of this interview—- I’m sure Nobody is coming to thanksgiving now.


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> What blatant lies? Please enlighten me. Broken relationships... doesn’t everyone whose dated more than one person have those?
> 
> At least a portion of the rumors that have been swirling around her, or any celebrity, for that matter are unsubstantiated. As I have stated before, plenty of people have reason to lie... money and fame is tempting to many. No one is perfect. And yet... she is being scrutinized and vilified to such a degree, you’d think she was the devil. Is it really that deep? In my opinion, it ain’t. There are WAAAAAAY too many things to worry about than what this couple is doing. The obsession is real. Real strange...



I would venture to guess this thread feels like overwhelming hate but it seems to me like we all have different things we like or don't like about her, so the average person just sees all the hate and thinks we all hate everything and feel it similarly intensely. But it's really just different people coming and going at different times, zoning in on different things. Not everyone believes every conspiracy theory or feels negatively about everything. But I certainly wouldn't blame a person for thinking it was because it can come off that way for sure.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

CarryOn2020 said:


> My experience, fwiw = we are treated how we behave.
> Be snotty to someone and it should be no surprise people won’t take his calls.
> Be kind, get kindness back.



If only it were that simple...


----------



## CarryOn2020

zinacef said:


> Maybe we all can “agree” that something has happened to all of the involve whether it was a great experience or not but something. only, M and H decided to share their ”experience” be it happiness, anger, envy, feelings of being discriminations, love —- in front of 20 some million people. bottomline is, their relationship will never be the same. Christmas, birthdays, BP, holidays in Sandringham , etc... even phone calls will never be the same. M and H obviously has layed their cards out. I hope it’s not all for the money because it really is not worth it. Edward and Wallis eventually lived an “empty” life,  Edward missing his family, his lost glory, money and all that comes with being born royal. there is nothing left now to talk about t hey all have to live with the result of this interview—- I’m sure Nobody is coming to thanksgiving now.



My calendar is full.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spoiler: Sound and Fury
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's former co-star Wendell Pierce slams her and Harry for interview during pandemic*
> 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021
> By
> 
> Published: 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021 |
> 
> ’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’.
> Wendell Pierce, who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise.
> The 57-year-old told radio station LBC: ‘Today 3,000 people are going to die in America from Covid.
> ‘A couple of hundred people are going to die, even this hour, in the UK.’
> Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wendell Pierce (pictured), who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise
> The actor, who said he had not spoken to the duchess since 2019, added: ‘It was quite insensitive and offensive that we are all complicit in this sort of palace… gossip in the midst of so much death. I think it is insignificant.’
> Asked who he included in this criticism, he said ‘everyone’ including Oprah, US network CBS, ITV, Prince Harry and Meghan, and the Palace.
> Pierce, who also starred in award-winning gangland drama The Wire, added that the monarchy should not get involved ‘in this sort of conversation’ and instead ‘focus on the throes of death that we’re in’.
> The actor, from New Orleans, revealed he and Meghan had not talked much about race as they filmed Suits, despite the topic featuring in their roles.
> He said: ‘We didn’t have long discussions about it, besides what was in the script and what was happening in our personal lives.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan (pictured) for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wendell Pierce slams Meghan Markle and Harry for interview in pandemic
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the 'throes of death'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He's right.


----------



## maris.crane

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spoiler: Sound and Fury
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's former co-star Wendell Pierce slams her and Harry for interview during pandemic*
> 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021
> By
> 
> Published: 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021 |
> 
> ’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’.
> Wendell Pierce, who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise.
> The 57-year-old told radio station LBC: ‘Today 3,000 people are going to die in America from Covid.
> ‘A couple of hundred people are going to die, even this hour, in the UK.’
> Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wendell Pierce (pictured), who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise
> The actor, who said he had not spoken to the duchess since 2019, added: ‘It was quite insensitive and offensive that we are all complicit in this sort of palace… gossip in the midst of so much death. I think it is insignificant.’
> Asked who he included in this criticism, he said ‘everyone’ including Oprah, US network CBS, ITV, Prince Harry and Meghan, and the Palace.
> Pierce, who also starred in award-winning gangland drama The Wire, added that the monarchy should not get involved ‘in this sort of conversation’ and instead ‘focus on the throes of death that we’re in’.
> The actor, from New Orleans, revealed he and Meghan had not talked much about race as they filmed Suits, despite the topic featuring in their roles.
> He said: ‘We didn’t have long discussions about it, besides what was in the script and what was happening in our personal lives.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan (pictured) for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wendell Pierce slams Meghan Markle and Harry for interview in pandemic
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the 'throes of death'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Just chiming into say: beyond Suits, WP is a total under utilized actor. Besides The Wire, his guest turns on old school Law and Order are


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

lalame said:


> I would venture to guess this thread feels like overwhelming hate but it seems to me like we all have different things we like or don't like about her, so the average person just sees all the hate and thinks we all hate everything and feel it similarly intensely. But it's really just different people coming and going at different times, zoning in on different things. Not everyone believes every conspiracy theory or feels negatively about everything. But I certainly wouldn't blame a person for thinking it was because it can come off that way for sure.



This is the nastiest, most negative thread I have come across in my several years of being on TPF. It may not have started as such, but it is. There is hardly anything positive in this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent comments, too!

_The actor, who said he had not spoken to the duchess since 2019, added: ‘It was quite insensitive and offensive that we are all complicit in this sort of palace… gossip in the midst of so much death. I think it is insignificant.’

Asked who he included in this criticism, he said ‘everyone’ including Oprah, US network CBS, ITV, Prince Harry and Meghan, and the Palace._








						Wendell Pierce slams Meghan Markle and Harry for interview in pandemic
					

Meghan Markle's former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the 'throes of death'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## tiktok

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.



I can tell you I've never found Leo particularly fascinating and didn't care about him (or other celebs) one way or the other.
As for Meghan, I was really glad to see a bi-racial, mature, progressive woman in such an influential position and thought she had a chance to really make a difference in the world with her platform. Based on what she said I thought she truly wanted to do that. The massive disappointment I experienced when I discovered she's a narcissist who whines, blames and destroys everything in her path is what created such a dissonance for me and made me spend more time on her than I do on any other random celebrity I never expected anything from. I'm also astounded and disappointed by the state of the media today, and by how little time people spend questioning what they hear. Probably not the healthiest thing for me to continue to ponder but here you go.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spoiler: Sound and Fury
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's former co-star Wendell Pierce slams her and Harry for interview during pandemic*
> 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021
> By
> 
> Published: 17:02 EST, 9 March 2021 |
> 
> ’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’.
> Wendell Pierce, who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise.
> The 57-year-old told radio station LBC: ‘Today 3,000 people are going to die in America from Covid.
> ‘A couple of hundred people are going to die, even this hour, in the UK.’
> Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the ‘throes of death’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wendell Pierce (pictured), who worked with Meghan for four years in his role as her character’s father, said the broadcast was ‘insignificant’ as Covid death tolls continued to rise
> The actor, who said he had not spoken to the duchess since 2019, added: ‘It was quite insensitive and offensive that we are all complicit in this sort of palace… gossip in the midst of so much death. I think it is insignificant.’
> Asked who he included in this criticism, he said ‘everyone’ including Oprah, US network CBS, ITV, Prince Harry and Meghan, and the Palace.
> Pierce, who also starred in award-winning gangland drama The Wire, added that the monarchy should not get involved ‘in this sort of conversation’ and instead ‘focus on the throes of death that we’re in’.
> The actor, from New Orleans, revealed he and Meghan had not talked much about race as they filmed Suits, despite the topic featuring in their roles.
> He said: ‘We didn’t have long discussions about it, besides what was in the script and what was happening in our personal lives.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite praising the former actress in the past, Pierce criticised Prince Harry and Meghan (pictured) for the interview, saying it evoked Shakespeare’s phrase ‘full of sound and fury signifying nothing’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wendell Pierce slams Meghan Markle and Harry for interview in pandemic
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's former Suits co-star criticised the Sussexes yesterday for staging an interview while the world is in the 'throes of death'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Fearless!  What will they accuse him of?  Racism?  Jealousy?  He even quoted Shakespear...


----------



## Lexgal

So, should the flower girls have worn tights or not?  I'm a yes.  It was tradition and the churches in England are cold.  Is anyone else wondering if both women were in tears?  

Team QEII


----------



## DrDior

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> This is the nastiest, most negative thread I have come across in my several years of being on TPF. It may not have started as such, but it is. There is hardly anything positive in this thread.



You must’ve missed the discussions of Mrs. T’s clothing choices. Altho no fan of her “style”, myself, I did attend the chat on occasion ...


----------



## scarlet555

tiktok said:


> I can tell you I've never found Leo particularly fascinating and didn't care about him (or other celebs) one way or the other.
> As for Meghan, I was really glad to see a bi-racial, mature, progressive woman in such an influential position and thought she had a chance to really make a difference in the world with her platform. Based on what she said I thought she truly wanted to do that. The massive disappointment I experienced when I discovered she's a narcissist who whines, blames and destroys everything in her path is what created such a dissonance for me and made me spend more time on her than I do on any other random celebrity I never expected anything from. I'm also astounded and disappointed by the state of the media today, and by how little time people spend questioning what they hear. Probably not the healthiest thing for me to continue to ponder but here you go.



It's true, we all started pretty much like fans.  I did find it funny she had commented she didn't know that much about Harry and what not-what's that suppose to mean?  No one knows that much about Harry except whats in the news...  was she championing her true love for Harry in that comment in contrary to the fact that she could be money/prestige/fame seeking?  Time will tell, and time has told...


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> This is the nastiest, most negative thread I have come across in my several years of being on TPF. It may not have started as such, but it is. There is hardly anything positive in this thread.


But voices likes yours keeps it balanced.  IMO when it gets overwhelmingly nasty or overwhelmingly stan-y is when it loses the fun. I drop out when I feel like it's going overwhelmingly in one direction for too long. So I appreciate your contribution.


----------



## Sly_Fox

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> This is the nastiest, most negative thread I have come across in my several years of being on TPF. It may not have started as such, but it is. There is hardly anything positive in this thread.



Why is it ok for you to hurt our feelings by calling our thread nasty and negative. But we can’t call Meghan’s behaviour nasty and negative? We need to have a voice too …


----------



## lalame

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.



Honestly what keeps it going here is the high engagement, which is self-reinforcing. I would totally keep going on other celeb threads but there just aren't many members posting there. Not surprisingly it's the controversial love-or-hate people who have hopping threads... the Kardashians, Johnny Depp for awhile, Prince Andrew for awhile, William and Kate sometimes.... common thread is whoever is in the press a lot at that moment.

Edit: Prince Andrew is pretty much hate-hate.


----------



## maris.crane

lalame said:


> Edit: Prince Andrew is pretty much hate-hate.



AND I watched the full two hours waiting for Oprah to ask Meghan or Harry if they believed the allegations!

He’s connected to both Epstein and Peter Nygard at this point, so I hope the book gets thrown at him.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Sly_Fox said:


> At least Piers has principles. He won’t stay with ITV just for money but allow his voice to be taken.



I would not call Piers a man of principles..., he’s done some shady things too lol... he just got burned by Megan too lol


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

Sly_Fox said:


> Why is it ok for you to hurt our feelings by calling our thread nasty and negative. But we can’t call Meghan’s behaviour nasty and negative? We need to have a voice too …



Whose feelings am I hurting? That was not my intention. But I will call a spade a spade... the things people have said about a woman they don’t know (some purely based on chatter and/or negative news gossip)... things about how she couldn’t have possibly been suicidal or that she was faking her first pregnancy can’t be seen as cruel? I didn’t say you couldn’t have a voice, I am trying to understand the meaning and point of it all.


----------



## scarlet555

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> This is the nastiest, most negative thread I have come across in my several years of being on TPF. It may not have started as such, but it is. There is hardly anything positive in this thread.



Be the light you seek.  Would you be defending her, otherwise?  Do you defend everyone?


----------



## JA_UK

Sly_Fox said:


> At least Piers has principles. He won’t stay with ITV just for money but allow his voice to be taken.


Is this the same Piers that loudly berated every politician about breaking COVID rules but jets off to Antigua for Xmas during tier 4 lockdown restricting non essential travel? Those principles?


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

scarlet555 said:


> Be the light you seek.  Would you be defending her, otherwise?



I came to check things out since I knew there would be activity in here after the interview (which I STILL haven’t seen) and stayed for the banter. My “TV watching” is mainly Netflix so I miss some of the juicier celebrity gossip... but there are items that are hard to miss and the public’s obsession with Meghan from both sides of the pond is one of them. My defense of her is light; I know very little about her and have already given my reasoning behind why I won’t degrade her several pages ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I actually tuned into Piers to see what his take of the interview was the day after and, while I agree with some of his views on Meghan (probably the only thing I'd agree with him on), his behavior was terrible honestly. He was bullying his co-anchor as well as his guest and even though he agreed with what Megyn Kelly said, was so rabid with anger he was talking all over her. She kept her cool well as a consummate professional but it made him look all the worse.


----------



## Sly_Fox

JA_UK said:


> Is this the same Piers that loudly berated every politician about breaking COVID rules but jets off to Antigua for Xmas during tier 4 lockdown restricting non essential travel? Those principles?



I was only referring to his voice in exchange for money. 

If I could get away with being a selfish person like he was at that time perhaps I might, I’d love a holiday, but I’d never EVER sell my family out for money.


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> Piers Morgan is a guy who was directly accused and implicated of breaking into a dead teenager’s cell phone... the hell?



True but he’s a journalist and they’ll do anything to get a story. 

Bit like Meghan and money I suppose …


----------



## lallybelle

The thing is she knew what she was doing bringing in racism & mental health. If you criticize her you are now labeled dismissive of racism and mental heath issues and attacked by the "Sussex Squad".

Even if there are inconsistencies and some downright lies. They will never be truly fact checked because unfortunately way too many people can relate to having had to deal w/ racism in their lives and in this day & age where it's a big issue (even as I hope we as human beings can start making real change) it just triggers what too many know to be true in their own experience. That isn't to say I don't believe that she experienced racism. We all know too well that there are too many ignorant fools around to dismiss that. I just wish they would cut the **** with the innuendo and name names if this was actually said because it is a disgusting thing to say about a child. And it's quite obvious she dangled it SO we would speculate, so it's unfair to those who's names are being bandied about if they had nothing to do with the supposed incident.


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> I was only referring to his voice in exchange for money.
> 
> If I could get away with being a selfish person like he was at that time perhaps I might, I’d love a holiday, but I’d never EVER sell my family out for money.



You’re also caping for a man who was directly implicated in the Levison inquiry. You can dislike Meghan without defending pond scum.


----------



## Lodpah

.


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> True but he’s a journalist and they’ll do anything to get a story.
> 
> Bit like Meghan and money I suppose …



... writing for a Murdoch owned trash mag does not a journalist make.


----------



## scarlet555

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I came to check things out since I knew there would be activity in here after the interview (which I STILL haven’t seen) and stayed for the banter. My “TV watching” is mainly Netflix so I miss some of the juicier celebrity gossip... but there are items that are hard to miss and the public’s obsession with Meghan from both sides of the pond is one of them. My defense of her is light; I know very little about her and have already given my reasoning behind why I won’t degrade her several pages ago.



Have people here on TPF treated you savagely?   We can be savages towards public figures/wannabees/celebrities..  it's gossip forum for entertainment... you can come here but not for solace, unless this is your solace... You will see deleted post if they are not in par with TPF...


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga




----------



## Chanbal

*Survey reveals the damaging impact Meghan and Harry's interview has had on opinions of the Royal Family:  *
_It reveals the monarchy has been damaged, with even the Queen's personal popularity taking a hit – though not as much as that of Harry and Prince Charles.

*But asked about the couple's incendiary accusations of racism within the Royal Family, more people disbelieved Meghan's claims than believed her.*

She is now the least popular royal after Prince Andrew.

*With the exceptions of the Duke of Edinburgh, the Duchess of Cornwall and the Princess Royal, all senior members of the family have suffered a dip in personal popularity.*

Most people felt Harry and Meghan prioritised media attention over service and duty, according to the findings of the online poll commissioned by the Daily Mail. The results reveal a split between older and younger Britons – with the latter often more willing to accept Harry and Meghan's claims.

*A majority of the public believes they have let down the Queen – and should be stripped of their royal titles.*



Spoiler: Poll 

















						Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
					

A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Sly_Fox

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Whose feelings am I hurting? That was not my intention. But I will call a spade a spade... the things people have said about a woman they don’t know (some purely based on chatter and/or negative news gossip)... things about how she couldn’t have possibly been suicidal or that she was faking her first pregnancy can’t be seen as cruel? I didn’t say you couldn’t have a voice, I am trying to understand the meaning and point of it all.



Come on let reason prevail. If she was suicidal and no one helped then Harry is even more useless than one could possibly imagine.  

Does he think fleeing to America and the pair of them obsessing over how many ways they can hurt BOTH their families is the right choice for a suicidal lady. 

I think not. It’s always been about money and jealousy. 

It took me a while to believe she faked the miscarriage. I’m still in two minds because I find it hard to allow myself to think people would stoop so low. But people really do behave like that and worse. The timing was too suspicious to just blindly believe her.


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> ... writing for a Murdoch owned trash mag does not a journalist make.



Talking trash does not a Duchess make


----------



## csshopper

Lexgal said:


> So, should the flower girls have worn tights or not?  I'm a yes.  It was tradition and the churches in England are cold.  Is anyone else wondering if both women were in tears?
> 
> Team QEII


Yes. It would have been such a simple gesture to have accepted tradition

They could have both been in tears. Meghan in anger in full bridezilla mode that anyone dared to tell her what to do in her wedding, and Kate as an exasperated, likely fatigued new mother of her third child, trying to help her sister-in-law, who disingenuously claims nobody tried to help her learn to live Royal, understand that tights on the little girls is the "custom" and getting screamed at for her efforts. Probably good that hot tea was not being served at the time. It could have been a non-issue, life goes on, weddings are stressful. But we, at this point already had knowledge about Tiaragate with Harry ripping into the Queen's dresser Angela Kelly, "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets",  Meghan requesting air freshener for the venue, the Markle family circus etc etc so it became "news".  If Meghan were a different personality it probably would have been faded away by now, but instead it seems is part of the "some recollections may vary" narrative. Personal opinion: a cheap shot out of jealousy of Kate and spun so that she Meghan is the heroine.


----------



## ouiouilexiaussi

scarlet555 said:


> Have people here on TPF treated you savagely?   We can be savages towards public figures/wannabees/celebrities..  it's gossip forum for entertainment... you can come here but not for solace, unless this is your solace... You will see deleted post if they are not in par with TPF...



I didn’t say I came here for solace. It is a very one-sided forum, and that is clear. If that is what’s preferred, so be it.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?


Rumor is they have home movies from their time in the UK


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> Talking trash does not a Duchess make



Well she did get a title, so she technically is a Duchess. That still doesn’t disprove Piers’ CV or his being a donkey’s bottom. Wasn’t the paper Piers was high up there at shut down under his watch?

Hoping someone can direct me to the rave thread for Geraldo if Piers is being lauded as ‘an honourable’ man.


----------



## Jktgal

[





JA_UK said:


> Is this the same Piers that loudly berated every politician about breaking COVID rules but jets off to Antigua for Xmas during tier 4 lockdown restricting non essential travel? Those principles?


The same Piers who called out Australian PM and MP over their denial of climate change, and British MP over measly 3.50pounds raise for NHS nurses.

Honestly, why do people expect a person to side 100% with their beliefs. Even I do not side 100% with me most of the time (vaccilating about bags and lipstick - one day they're meh and another day they're otw being shipped). It would be loony to post on one brand's thread to berate people for not posting on another brand's thread, wouldn't it?? Why do people think it's not loony here.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> If more people read Shakespeare, Faust, Marlowe, the ancient Greeks and Roman writers, what a wonderful world it would be.



Methinks H&M are more Sturm Und Drang


----------



## Lodpah

Let's assume arguendo, that these two succeed in tearing down the monarchy? What then? Their titles will mean nothing, they have nothing to bargain with, no more interest in what they say.  Has Harry not forgotten what happened to his Grandfather's family and his Russian Monarchy  family? 

What will they blame it on? I like the Monarchy because it's a link to the past, the historical significance, the meaningful contribution it has to my religion and the mere fact of Queen, King, princesses, princes, and now in the modern times, their charitable works. They can't dictate anymore but it's such a wonderful link to the past and their history. Plus I adore Queen Elizabeth. 

I don't want to end up in a world with building boxes apartments, everyone the same, no colors of the rainbow, and on and on.


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> Interesting POV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Latagia Copeland-Tyronce
> , AS, BS(Hons), MSW(Policy)
> Updated August 1, 2019
> 
> 
> What do you think about Meghan Markle?
> Well...
> As a woke millennial Afro-American woman, and longtime social justice advocate and writer/journalist, I am quite tired of being bombarded with Meghan Markle news and questions. To be honest, I didn't know anything about Ms Markle or her work on the Suits TV show prior to her engagement to Prince Harry. And that was a huge red flag to me. This (half Black) woman and small time actress is in her late 30s, someone who has had all the support in the world from friends and family, and the most important thing she has done in life is marry Prince Harry. Really?
> That said, I have to get this off of my chest, and it may sound harsh to some but hey, I have never been one to mince words and I dont intend on starting now. I despise Ms Markle because she is the very epitome of everything that I fight against every day: useless celebrity, celebrity worship, selfishness, shameless gold-digging, superficial, narcissistic, backstabbing, weakness, racism (against Black people including her own family), and comfort with white supremacy.
> When Ms Markle became engaged to the Prince many American Black women were thrilled, and I do mean thrilled, for her and thought that we, Black women, would finally have an advocate in the royal family, however, I wasn't one of these women.
> After all, I can't think of or find a single time or incident where Ms Markle has done or even said a single thing in support of the civil rights of Black Americans (whom are still being severely oppressed and discriminated agaisnt in the US), and I looked, despite being half Black herself and having plenty of Black family (most of which she has completely let fall of the face of the earth since she met the Prince).
> Indeed, the more I found out about Ms Markle (including her parasitic previous marriage to and longterm relationships with white men in the entertainment industry) and her so-called advocacy and humanitarian efforts*laughs*, the more disgusted I became. And that wedding, where were all of her family? Her Black family? Oh she didn't invite them. Whoa. I was horrified and I completely lost all respect for her, although I didn't have much for her anyway.
> I think it's become clear to most Black people in America that Ms Markle is, just as she has always been but even more so now, a useless gold-digging, racist, (having spent almost all of her time and life perpetually seeking out and being around white people, marrying white people, and desperately trying to look like and become a white woman with the plastic surgery, skin bleaching, and constant straightening her hair) narc with no loyalty to anyone but herself. I actually feel bad for the British people because she's your headache now.
> I hope that answers your question


OK, this woman is amazing! Well said. She needs to be on tv speaking her fair and honest opinion about MM and this whole sh*tshow.









chicinthecity777 said:


> Also, why can't people accept that one could be target of racism but also at the same time a bully, a liar and etc? These things aren't mutually exclusive! People from different races experience racism every day and that doesn't instantly make them all saints! The allegation was apparently 1 person was "concerned" about her baby's skin tone, how does that then translate to "the whole of RF is racists and Britain is a racist country"? Give me a break!


This. This. This. Except people seem to think these things _are _mutually exclusive. 
Bullying and traumatizing employees is as much an important issue as all the things they brough up with OW.



purseinsanity said:


> Harry and Meghan’s Rep Addresses Questions About Legality of Secret Wedding
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s rep spoke out after a Church of England vicar tweeted that the couple legally ‘can’t get married twice’ — read more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *“I’ve no idea what they mean,” Reverend David Green wrote in a since-deleted tweet on Monday. “You can’t get married twice. So what was the thing three days before? And if it was a marriage, what on earth are we doing ‘playing’ at prayer/holy matrimony for cameras.”*
> 
> According to the clergy guidebook on the Church of England’s official website, couples “who are already lawfully married cannot choose to re-marry each other, unless there is some doubt as to the validity of the earlier marriage.” The church’s guidelines also state that at least two witnesses must be present for a union to be considered legal.
> Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, revealed during their CBS interview on Sunday, March 7, that they had quietly exchanged vows in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, on the grounds of their U.K. home. The prince said “just the three of us” were present, indicating that they did not have enough witnesses.
> “We called the archbishop and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us,’” the Suits alum said during the bombshell special.


Well, come on through Reverend!








lishukha said:


> This statement symbolizes class and grace.
> 
> for anyone with common sense - you would think if you have a problem, you should talk to the source, rather than whining to the public...
> 
> *This is my first post on this thread and it truly has been a delight reading everyone’s point of view other than the one sided press here in the US.*


Welcome!





bag-mania said:


> You mean some of their claims to Oprah turned out not to be factually correct? I am  shocked, shocked I tell you.


Say it ain't so!


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> Well she did get a title, so she technically is a Duchess. That still doesn’t disprove Piers’ CV or his being a donkey’s bottom. Wasn’t the paper Piers was high up there at shut down under his watch?
> 
> Hoping someone can direct me to the rave thread for Geraldo if Piers is being lauded as ‘an honourable’ man.



They’re both a stinky donkeys bottom. But you’ve missed my original point, I’m not defending Piers in any or all the ways you appear to be insinuating. 

I said at least Piers didn’t give up his voice in exchange for money! For that I’ll laud him.


----------



## Lodpah

.


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> They’re both a stinky donkeys bottom. But you’ve missed my original point, I’m not defending Piers in any or all the ways you appear to be insinuating.
> 
> I said at least Piers didn’t give up his voice in exchange for money! For that I’ll laud him.



You call people you aren’t defending honourable? Wow. Usually people I find abhorrent I call... ‘abhorrent.’ Or ‘yellow journalists’. Or ‘space cadets’ (like Meghan’s besties’ husband.)

I mean, the man invaded people’s privacy (including a dead missing preteen) to sell papers for money but...     enemy of my enemy is my friend, I guess.


----------



## mdcx

csshopper said:


> Yes. It would have been such a simple gesture to have accepted tradition
> 
> They could have both been in tears. Meghan in anger in full bridezilla mode that anyone dared to tell her what to do in her wedding, and Kate as an exasperated, likely fatigued new mother of her third child, trying to help her sister-in-law, who disingenuously claims nobody tried to help her learn to live Royal, understand that tights on the little girls is the "custom" and getting screamed at for her efforts. Probably good that hot tea was not being served at the time. It could have been a non-issue, life goes on, weddings are stressful. But we, at this point already had knowledge about Tiaragate with Harry ripping into the Queen's dresser Angela Kelly, "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets",  Meghan requesting air freshener for the venue, the Markle family circus etc etc so it became "news".  If Meghan were a different personality it probably would have been faded away by now, but instead it seems is part of the "some recollections may vary" narrative. Personal opinion: a cheap shot out of jealousy of Kate and spun so that she Meghan is the heroine.


I would say part of the concern would be the possibility of the wind blowing their skirts up and their knickers being exposed. Sensible to have extra coverage of tights on the little girls imo with photographers everywhere.


----------



## DrDior

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I didn’t say I came here for solace. It is a very one-sided forum, and that is clear. If that is what’s preferred, so be it.



Speaking solely for myself - because that’s the only opinion Im entitled to (as much the planet would be better off otherwise ) - preference-wise, Im a solid NO.  I don’t need you to agree with me. My feelings are not hurt. I don’t take your forthright approach personally or as any type of indictment on my character (I have none).

What I do need is for you to be able to express a reasoned point of view in an adult manner and if you can make me stop & think for a second, even better — all of these you have done.

Whether we agree or not, Harry is a complete & utter ninny & I am still here because I enjoy nothing better than observing a good ole fashioned trainwreck - and that’s what all this goss is good for while I wait for Dallas Housewives to come on.


----------



## Jktgal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


>




Who doesn't know all along?! It is blasphemy for me to wear a hat INSIDE a church, it would be unsurvivable to have to curtsy to my mother in law. People who sign up for it when they have been recorded to abhor curtsying,  and later whine 'I didn't know I was supposed to curtseeeeey' is a huge hypocrite. But love trumps all. Until it doesn't. This we all know, too.


----------



## poopsie

maris.crane said:


> ... well, I’m actually not a particularly big fan of Meghan, or Leo. My question was why this page is 3400+ pages when other equally controversial celebrities rate 30 pages.
> 
> I just find it bizarre; you don’t. Truce made. Stale mate.
> 
> Anywho, I probably need to find a Ginger Spice thread to blindly celeb worship in.



This thread was started waaaaaaaaay back in 2006. So, 3300 pages over that period of time is nothing 
Kimmy's threads used to have this many posts in a matter of a few months. Maybe Cobalt Blu can verify this, but I could swear that there were at least 13 Kardashian threads archived with this many posts or more


----------



## rose60610

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely: all the people complaining about Meghan and Harry's carbon footprint (which a totally fair critique), do you spend the same amount of time writing dissertations about Leonardo DiCaprio?
> 
> Because I don't see a 3400+ page thread about Leo here.



Meghan and Harry give us SO MUCH MORE material than Leo. Leo is simply just another Hollywood Pretty Boy hypocrite, which is all anyone can expect. M&H demand and sue for privacy but just can't help inserting themselves in every cause that's fashionable for 5 minutes for the photo ops. They're worth likely hundreds of millions and beg for sympathy as though no one else knows what it's like to suffer. That said, Meghan is pretty and Harry seems kinda friendly. But now he hangs out with rescue chickens and even they don't give him the time of day.


----------



## Lodpah

Some one referenced One Drop but the only One Drop I’ve ever heard alluded to is from Bob Marley. I need to go get educated.


----------



## maris.crane

poopsie said:


> This thread was started waaaaaaaaay back in 2006. So, 3300 pages over that period of time is nothing
> Kimmy's threads used to have this many posts in a matter of a few months. Maybe Cobalt Blu can verify this, but I could swear that there were at least 13 Kardashian threads archived with this many posts or more



Well, to defend that - there are like 13 Kardashians and probably that many sattelite relatives and Friends  Of. I knew it had reached saturation by the time I knew Kris’ mother had been married four times _and_ her name.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> You’re also caping for a man who was directly implicated in the Levison inquiry. You can dislike Meghan without defending pond scum.



Again you’re bringing up subjects irrelevant to my point. The one singular point I made about putting principle before money. 

I’m impressed with Piers for this one singular trait.


----------



## mdcx

Sly_Fox said:


> Come on let reason prevail. If she was suicidal and no one helped then Harry is even more useless than one could possibly imagine.
> 
> Does he think fleeing to America and the pair of them obsessing over how many ways they can hurt BOTH their families is the right choice for a suicidal lady.
> 
> I think not. It’s always been about money and jealousy.
> 
> It took me a while to believe she faked the miscarriage. I’m still in two minds because I find it hard to allow myself to think people would stoop so low. But people really do behave like that and worse. The timing was too suspicious to just blindly believe her.


I would agree on the moving suddenly not being the ideal choice for someone in fragile mental health. The BRF has ready access to the absolute best health professionals in the UK. It is hard to believe M could not get urgent access to mental health care the minute she needed it...Harry is not well equipped at handling real life crises I imagine, but they had a retinue of aides, staff etc.


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> Again you’re bringing up subjects irrelevant to my point. The one singular point I made about putting principle before money.
> 
> I’m impressed with Piers for this one singular trait.



and a broken clock is right twice a day. Geraldo did one decent investigation special 40 years ago, doesn’t make him Cronkite. Piers is an honourable gent because he said Meghan sucks? Hopefully he gets the knighting he deserves.


----------



## KittyKat65

Well, I am bookmarking this thread for Friday night.  Never been on here before, but looks like a blast!    #teamharryandmeghan


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Survey reveals the damaging impact Meghan and Harry's interview has had on opinions of the Royal Family:  *
> _It reveals the monarchy has been damaged, with even the Queen's personal popularity taking a hit – though not as much as that of Harry and Prince Charles.
> 
> *But asked about the couple's incendiary accusations of racism within the Royal Family, more people disbelieved Meghan's claims than believed her.*
> 
> She is now the least popular royal after Prince Andrew.
> 
> *With the exceptions of the Duke of Edinburgh, the Duchess of Cornwall and the Princess Royal, all senior members of the family have suffered a dip in personal popularity.*
> 
> Most people felt Harry and Meghan prioritised media attention over service and duty, according to the findings of the online poll commissioned by the Daily Mail. The results reveal a split between older and younger Britons – with the latter often more willing to accept Harry and Meghan's claims.
> 
> *A majority of the public believes they have let down the Queen – and should be stripped of their royal titles.*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Poll
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5016926
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
> 
> 
> A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Wow, to be less popular than Andrew?    That's sinking pretty low Meg!


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> Meghan and Harry give us SO MUCH MORE material than Leo. Leo is simply just another Hollywood Pretty Boy hypocrite, which is all anyone can expect. M&H demand and sue for privacy but just can't help inserting themselves in every cause that's fashionable for 5 minutes for the photo ops. They're worth likely hundreds of millions and beg for sympathy as though no one else knows what it's like to suffer. That said, Meghan is pretty and Harry seems kinda friendly. But now he hangs out with rescue chickens and even they don't give him the time of day.


I love music why is it that lots of songs I equate to them. Here’s Dixie Chicken just change the words a bit but that war was lost long ago.


----------



## JY89

Being involved with the RF means that they will always be subjected to praises, criticism from the public and the press. Like it or not, that’s part of the deal and it’s never easy. I’m sure she knew what she was stepping into and she could have been more careful to stay out of British relentless press.

Last I knew, everyone loved her when she was first married into the RF with overwhelming well-wishers and supporters.
She was accepted into the RF with the Queen’s blessing and given a grand royal wedding costing millions. The wedding was broadcasted worldwide. Doesn’t sound like they were anything racist towards her? Despite it being her second marriage and her wanting a veil on her wedding day, they bend the rules to make her happy. Racist?Doesn’t sound like to me as well. She was even given a choice of tiara to pick from the Queen’s collection and she was being treated unfairly? I guess not. If they were truly racist, the marriage between Harry and her will never be on the cards.

Despite her claims as being a woman of colour and her complicated past, the RF still looked past it and welcome her into the family and even supported diversity. Things are definitely not easy for her as she try to adapt to the family. But being a member of the RF also means your every move will be scrutinised by the public and the press as we all know. However, she constantly contradicted the things she preaches and even made statement like she doesn’t know who Harry was. I mean seriously? We can be a little honest here and there’s nothing wrong about it isn’t it? But that’s not what she chose.

Speaking of negativity, how is the interview positive in any ways to anyone? How is shedding bad light on the RF publicly be positive to her in laws, her husband, her kids and even herself? Is this even healthy? Apart from the millions they pocketed from the interview at the expense of family relationship, I don’t see any positivity with this interview.

Food for thoughts: If she and Harry didn’t partake in the tell all interview, will we even be here discussing about it? They subjected themselves to this by putting themselves out there when they could have peacefully enjoying their private lives.

As much as many would try to sympathise with her situation, she’s very much not allowing it through her interview and the things she’s doing.

Family matters should always be handled privately and maturely within the family. By putting it out publicly will only worsen the relationship further and allowing all sort of speculations to surface.

Negativity? I guess that’s something for all to ponder upon.


----------



## maris.crane

purseinsanity said:


> Wow, to be less popular than Andrew?    That's sinking pretty low Meg!



That’s a depressing state when an accused epheabophile is getting better press or a better Q score than these two though.


----------



## JA_UK

Jktgal said:


> [
> The same Piers who called out Australian PM and MP over their denial of climate change, and British MP over measly 3.50pounds raise for NHS nurses.
> 
> Honestly, why do people expect a person to side 100% with their beliefs. Even I do not side 100% with me most of the time (vaccilating about bags and lipstick - one day they're meh and another day they're otw being shipped). It would be loony to post on one brand's thread to berate people for not posting on another brand's thread, wouldn't it?? Why do people think it's not loony here.


You cant have integrity/principles one day and forget them the next! Fake torture photos, hacking phone voicemails, browbeating your onscreen colleagues and guests to listen to your opinions then storming off set like a petulant child when you are faced with some home truths does not a good journalist make. I for one am glad he’s quit, horrible gobby man!


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> and a broken clock is right twice a day. Geraldo did one decent investigation special 40 years ago, doesn’t make him Cronkite. Piers is an honourable gent because he said Meghan sucks? Hopefully he gets the knighting he deserves.



I’m starting to learn how the RF must feel with a obsessed, deranged rabid dog nipping at their heels


----------



## maris.crane

Sly_Fox said:


> I’m starting to learn how the RF must feel with a obsessed, deranged rabid dog nipping at their heels



Well it’s a raccoon in my Avatar, not a dog.

You’re the individual whom originally quoted my saying good riddance to a trashy TV personality to another poster on this thread


----------



## Sly_Fox

maris.crane said:


> Calm down. You’re the individual whom originally quoted my saying good riddance to a trashy TV personality to another poster.



I am calm, I’m just a little surprised at the hypocrisy of your vitriol towards Piers whilst stating that Meghan shouldn’t be subjected to the similar by anyone else here.

I quoted a post indeed, I think that’s normal and promotes a healthy debate. I didn’t expect to be cyber stalked by someone with the oral squits


----------



## Chanbal

Sly_Fox said:


> Come on let reason prevail. If she was suicidal and no one helped then Harry is even more useless than one could possibly imagine.
> 
> Does he think fleeing to America and the pair of them obsessing over how many ways they can hurt BOTH their families is the right choice for a suicidal lady.
> 
> I think not. It’s always been about money and jealousy.
> 
> It took me a while to believe she faked the miscarriage. I’m still in two minds because I find it hard to allow myself to think people would stoop so low. But people really do behave like that and worse. The timing was too suspicious to just blindly believe her.



It's very hard to believe that MM was suicidal and didn't have access to therapy. The husband was there, and she was in contact with her mother, her PR-Agency, and I don't believe the BRF blocked her access to her own bank accounts. We also know that she was able to travel, the tabloids printed pictures of her in the US during her pregnancy (Archie). According to what she said, she was also in contact with a friend of Diana. I'm with the Palace on "_some recollections may vary_'".

Racism and Mental Health are very hot and important topics. Let's see if the interview will bring MM&H the audience and donations they want.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> She is ignoring that the BRF has a sort of a diplomatic role. People in diplomatic positions have to be discreet, they can't give 'tell all' interviews to Oprah.


My neighbor's husband (when living in Washington DC) was a Diplomat.  One evening, we (my future Husband at the time) and my neighbors had dinner outside (before it got stinking humid in the summer) on the patio .. and we started chatting about our travels here & there.  Well, after some many glasses of Wine, he told us just a little of the "rules" that they had to abide by and let me tell you .. holy cow, there were a LOT!!!  Mind you, this is in addition of having to be very well aware of the culture, etiquette, etc. - especially more so for his wife than himself in some matters.  All I know, is that I thought to myself "oh hell no would I ever want a job like that"!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> My neighbor's husband (when living in Washington DC) was a Diplomat.  One evening, we (my future Husband at the time) and my neighbors had dinner outside (before it got stinking humid in the summer) on the patio .. and we started chatting about our travels here & there.  Well, after some many glasses of Wine, he told us just a little of the "rules" that they had to abide by and let me tell you .. holy cow, there were a LOT!!!  Mind you, this is in addition of having to be very well aware of the culture, etiquette, etc. - especially more so for his wife than himself in some matters.  All I know, is that I thought to myself "oh hell no would I ever want a job like that"!


It has its perks, but it's not a celebrity lifestyle. I believe MM failed (or didn't want) to understand the required rules for her role.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Huffington Post employees have more to worry about than Meghan Markle. They had massive layoffs today.


Yes, HuffPost Canada's operations were closed and they laid off their workers as part of a broad restructuring plan for the company.  Now we have to read the US site if we want to read Huffington Post.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> It has its perks, but it's not a celebrity lifestyle. I believe MM failed (or didn't want) to understand the requires rules for her role.


100%. There are a ridiculous number of rules to follow.  So many she would not have even thought or known.  That’s perhaps why they should have taken their time before they were married...


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I actually tuned into Piers to see what his take of the interview was the day after and, while I agree with some of his views on Meghan (probably the only thing I'd agree with him on), his behavior was terrible honestly. He was bullying his co-anchor as well as his guest and even though he agreed with what Megyn Kelly said, was so rabid with anger he was talking all over her. She kept her cool well as a consummate professional but it made him look all the worse.


His co-anchor is so annoying and takes forever to ask a leading question that even Meg's father interrupted her and said he would like to speak.

I liked that. And didn't like the co-anchor at all.


csshopper said:


> They could have both been in tears. Meghan in anger in full bridezilla mode that anyone dared to tell her what to do in her wedding, and Kate as an exasperated, likely fatigued new mother of her third child, trying to help her sister-in-law, who disingenuously claims nobody tried to help her learn to live Royal, understand that tights on the little girls is the "custom" and getting screamed at for her efforts. Probably good that hot tea was not being served at the time. It could have been a non-issue, life goes on, weddings are stressful. But we, at this point already had knowledge about Tiaragate with Harry ripping into the Queen's dresser Angela Kelly, "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets",  Meghan requesting air freshener for the venue, the Markle family circus etc etc so it became "news".  If Meghan were a different personality it probably would have been faded away by now, but instead it seems is part of the "some recollections may vary" narrative. Personal opinion: a cheap shot out of jealousy of Kate and spun so that she Meghan is the heroine.


That's what I think.

Both in tears and Kate did the mature, regal thing and sent flowers and Meg used the opportunity to say Kate knew she was wrong and apologized.

For Kate, it was damned if you do and damned if you don't. Meg was going to twist it anyway she wanted.


----------



## maris.crane

needlv said:


> 100%. There are a ridiculous number of rules to follow.  So many she would not have even thought or known.  That’s perhaps why they should have taken their time before they were married...



My assumption for the (seemingly) rushed wedding was Meghan’s age and presumably wanting to have children. And really, I don’t think anything can truly prepare a person to go from a small family (two people) to a huge, extended one while also moving cross-continent.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## CarryOn2020

I give Piers credit for having the ability to interview Thomas.  No one else did. It took a Brit to bring balance.

Thomas has a voice, plays an important role in this horror show, and, Don’t Miss This Part, Piers let Thomas speak. Thomas brought the truth. No interruptions. Intelligent questions that were on topic. None of OW’s irritating theatrics — hold up, throw ya head back — or faux background or s$itty music.

After the 2 hour word salad where 2 millionaires hurled accusations at another at a family of billionaires, Thomas’s calm, steady voice was a soothing balm to the vitriolic nonsense.  

Seriously, 1 billionaire asking 2 millionaires about a family of billionaires ... in an “ugly-a$$” [sorry, OJ]  McMansion ... in Cali!!!! Good grief.    during a Pandemic.   

ETA:  Piers did that, not OW, not Gayle. Piers.


----------



## Lexgal

JY89 said:


> Family matters should always be handled privately and maturely within the family. By putting it out publicly will only worsen the relationship further and allowing all sort of speculations to surface.
> 
> Negativity? I guess that’s something for all to ponder upon.



This!  My mom always told me you don’t air the family laundry in public. No matter what the truth, she only made herself look bad. Especially with blatant and verifiable lies like the award of a title.


----------



## JY89

Chanbal said:


> It has its perks, but it's not a celebrity lifestyle. I believe MM failed (or didn't want) to understand the required rules for her role.



Should have gone for a millionaire/ billionaire instead and that would be the perfect lifestyle that she’s seeking. Get to enjoy a lavish lifestyle, attention, spend all you want or be a socialite or set up foundations for causes to jet setting around the world on private jet and no one will say a single thing or be receiving bad press.

Instead, she had gone for Prince Charming and that fame and fortune comes with a heavy price- Public scrutiny, good and bad press, supporters and non supporters are what every single royal members experience being in the establishment. If you want in, that’s what you have to deal with. Don’t want to be on the tabloids? Then don’t engage in interviews and stay low profile. 

Even if it didn’t work out her way and they chose to leave, she shouldn’t be taking on the RF publicly to resolve family issues. How would Harry, herself or her kids be able to ever face their family with such extensive damage being done?


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones interested on *Why Piers Morgan left Good Morning Britain*



Spoiler: Because he can!












						Why Piers Morgan left Good Morning Britain
					

The star presenter has stepped down amid a row over comments he made about the Duchess of Sussex.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## FreeSpirit71

One thing to address after that pathetic temper tantrum by Piers Morgan.

MM probably "ghosted" him once she started dating Harry as the BRF had a word in her ear about being associated with this a$$hole who was part of the British phone hacking scandal - Harry was one of the targets if anyone remembers.  Do you honestly think the BRF or Harry for that matter would have been ok with that continued association?

It may have less to do with Meghan than people think.  She's never responded to any of his vitriolic attacks. 

And good riddance to this piece of human garbage.


----------



## muddledmint

zinacef said:


> Maybe we all can “agree” that something has happened to all of the involve whether it was a great experience or not but something. only, M and H decided to share their ”experience” be it happiness, anger, envy, feelings of being discriminations, love —- in front of 20 some million people. bottomline is, their relationship will never be the same. Christmas, birthdays, BP, holidays in Sandringham , etc... even phone calls will never be the same. M and H obviously has layed their cards out. I hope it’s not all for the money because it really is not worth it. Edward and Wallis eventually lived an “empty” life,  Edward missing his family, his lost glory, money and all that comes with being born royal. there is nothing left now to talk about t hey all have to live with the result of this interview—- I’m sure Nobody is coming to thanksgiving now.


I’ve read this before! Eventually, Edward and Wallis were terribly unhappy with their lives and with each other, but they were trapped, because how can the great love that took a king from his throne ever fade? They had to stick it out no matter what to save face.


----------



## maris.crane

FreeSpirit71 said:


> One thing to address after that pathetic temper tantrum by Piers Morgan.
> 
> MM probably "ghosted" him once she started dating Harry as the BRF had a word in her ear about being associated with this a$$hole who was part of the British phone hacking scandal - Harry was one of the targets if anyone remembers.  Do you honestly think the BRF or Harry for that matter would have been ok with that continued association?
> 
> It may have less to do with Meghan than people think.  She's never responded to any of his vitriolic attacks.
> 
> And good riddance to this piece of human garbage.



I think this ‘quitting’ is a Star Jones-lite situation. I think the writing on the wall was here with this dude - he failed on CNN, and a half-century (?) old paper under his watch folded. Too many missteps in his career to be him leaving solely on his own accord.

Edited: Grammar.


----------



## LittleStar88

DH hasn’t been paying attention to this circus until the news came on today. He looks at me and asks, “WTF, why are they acting like they should have gone on to the Jerry Springer show? Who airs their personal family drama like this?!”


----------



## needlv

At the outset, this entire drama is because H&MMs expectations were not met, particular by them wanting a half-in, half-out option but keeping the perks.  If you go back and look at the original SussexRoyal statement - they wanted to Step back, live in North America, keep the patronage’s and fly back to the Uk as necessary.

original statement and initial response:









						In full: The Sussexes' statement and the Buckingham Palace response
					

A statement is released saying the Duke and Duchess of Sussex intend to step back as senior royals.



					www.bbc.com
				




the second statement the Queen offered a period of transition where they would spend their time between Canada and the UK and not be reliant upon public funds









						Queen's statement on future of Prince Harry and Meghan
					

The following is the full text of Queen Elizabeth's statement following discussions within the royal family on future arrangements for Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.reuters.com
				




however the fallout was over merchandising ”Sussex royal”.  When that was blocked by the Queen ( rightly so as there are ethical issues with royal family taking $ and public $ - and who could be “owed a favour” because of gifts etc) - it is clear by their statement of Sussex Royal they were very upset.

They expected the UK to pay their security.  Taxpayers in the UK were outraged at the time - why pay for people who are part-time royals?

I see this interview as scripted revenge and an opportunity for money and publicity. 
Were nasty things said? Probably - all family fall outs have those. 
was a racist thing said?  quite possibly but unfortunately because of O not pressing for details and H story (happened before they were married and once) vs MM story (conversation(s) plural, whilst she was pregnant) - we won’t know exactly what was said or who... until H and MM need more money or content for Netflix and they decide to exact more revenge.

They can also now use the issues of Mental Health and Racism as topics in their podcasts.  And perhaps because of the publicity of this interview more people in the US will tune in (not so much the UK or Commonwealth).

They are going to be a constant thorn for the Queen,Charles, Will and Kate To deal with.

  I suggest since they are so hurt by the family, the UK and racist press, they willingly give up H’s line in succession and the titles bestowed on them...  if the RF is that racist - neither H nor MM should keep their titles as a serious protest...  but alas - we all know that’s what they are using to sell themselves and their content in the USA.  So the hypocrisy will continue.


----------



## Lodpah

I see O.G. a lot under people’s avatar what does it mean?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

Allisonfaye said:


> It's hard for me to understand why they would be happy that someone who was rich enough to hire great lawyers and didn't really have anything to do with them would get away with murder but hey, what do I know?



The OJ trial happened after the Rodney King beating, the acquittal of all of the officers involved, the LA riots. Absolutely his money and celebrity paid a part in OJ’s acquittal, but I can’t judge some black people celebrating as it’s very complicated.









						What O. J. Simpson Means to Me
					

His great accomplishment was to be indicted for a crime and then receive the kind of treatment typically reserved for rich white guys.




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

I don’t watch the guy because I’m in the US, saw him on Larry King years ago, occasionally read his column in the DM, so I don’t know about these scandals. Maybe for us it would be like Jerry Springer doing the interview [not trying to disparage anyone].

All I know for certain is his interview with Thomas was heads-and-shoulders above OW‘s sycophant nonsense.  Thomas hit all the right chords for a pandemic. Perfect setting, perfect tone, perfect message.

Hazzie was *snotty*. 3 days before the wedding.
Kudos to Thomas for being brave to speak truth to power.


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> His co-anchor is so annoying and takes forever to ask a leading question that even Meg's father interrupted her and said he would like to speak.
> 
> I liked that. And didn't like the co-anchor at all.



I have annoying coworkers too, and some who are bad at their jobs, but you still can't talk over colleagues aggressively and interrupt them constantly especially in such a public venue. How much you like someone shouldn't dictate how well you treat them IMO - the default is polite, unless they wrong you. And she was just trying to get a word in edgewise, not being rude to him at all. It just made him look bad rather than her, if she were such a bad anchor.

He was rude to 2 co-anchors and 3 guests - in the same episode!!  Surely they weren't all annoying... he even agreed with Megyn Kelly on several points.

Just to be clear are we talking about this woman?


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> I’ve read this before! Eventually, Edward and Wallis were terribly unhappy with their lives and with each other, but they were trapped, because how can the great love that took a king from his throne ever fade? They had to stick it out no matter what to save face.


I think this is a false equivalence to continue to compare H & M to Wallis and Edward.  Harry was not going to be King.  And for a very long time before Meghan he expressed a desire to leave England and make a life for himself. There are numerous examples of this.  The BRF really doesn't know what to do or how to handle the "spare" and IMO have failed them quite miserably.

Meghan may have been the catalyst but Harry was already in this headspace.


----------



## muddledmint

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I didn’t say I came here for solace. It is a very one-sided forum, and that is clear. If that is what’s preferred, so be it.


Some of the speculation on here is ridiculous and unfounded, definitely. I don’t know if we can have any idea what Doria is like, for instance. However, there is very little that is defensible about Meghan at this point. People on her side are saying racism, but that doesn’t make her being a self centered liar acceptable. And the fact that she has made so many shameless lies on national tv makes her far from a credible voice. If she wanted people to believe her on being a victim of racism, she shouldn’t have lied about everything else.


----------



## eunaddict

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Spoken like a person who just might not understand racism and the microagressions that come with it...



Bold of you to assume that of posters. There are plenty of POC/minorities posting in here. And plenty who have experienced micro-aggression and actual aggression but who (therefore) don’t buy her vague, nondescript stories of words spoken that she learned of through a 3rd, 4th, 5th party.


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> At the outset, this entire drama is because H&MMs expectations were not met, particular by them wanting a half-in, half-out option but keeping the perks.  If you go back and look at the original SussexRoyal statement - they wanted to Step back, live in North America, keep the patronage’s and fly back to the Uk as necessary.
> 
> original statement and initial response:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In full: The Sussexes' statement and the Buckingham Palace response
> 
> 
> A statement is released saying the Duke and Duchess of Sussex intend to step back as senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the second statement the Queen offered a period of transition where they would spend their time between Canada and the UK and not be reliant upon public funds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's statement on future of Prince Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> The following is the full text of Queen Elizabeth's statement following discussions within the royal family on future arrangements for Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> however the fallout was over merchandising ”Sussex royal”.  When that was blocked by the Queen ( rightly so as there are ethical issues with royal family taking $ and public $ - and who could be “owed a favour” because of gifts etc) - it is clear by their statement of Sussex Royal they were very upset.
> 
> They expected the UK to pay their security.  Taxpayers in the UK were outraged at the time - why pay for people who are part-time royals?
> 
> I see this interview as scripted revenge and an opportunity for money and publicity.
> Were nasty things said? Probably - all family fall outs have those.
> was a racist thing said?  quite possibly but unfortunately because of O not pressing for details and H story (happened before they were married and once) vs MM story (conversation(s) plural, whilst she was pregnant) - we won’t know exactly what was said or who... until H and MM need more money or content for Netflix and they decide to exact more revenge.
> 
> They can also now use the issues of Mental Health and Racism as topics in their podcasts.  And perhaps because of the publicity of this interview more people in the US will tune in (not so much the UK or Commonwealth).
> 
> They are going to be a constant thorn for the Queen,Charles, Will and Kate To deal with.
> 
> I suggest since they are so hurt by the family, the UK and racist press, they willingly give up H’s line in succession and the titles bestowed on them...  if the RF is that racist - neither H nor MM should keep their titles as a serious protest...  but alas - we all know that’s what they are using to sell themselves and their content in the USA.  So the hypocrisy will continue.


Great quotes you unearthed, I had forgotten they were supposed to stay in Canada for the year but moved to Tyler Perry’s house and security team, when neither Canada nor the Met/UK would pay for the security, don’t know when Charles stopped paying (for what?) as H stated


----------



## mellibelly

Lodpah said:


> I see O.G. a lot under people’s avatar what does it mean?



It means we’re old lol. Been on tpf for   more than 10 years.


----------



## marietouchet

Rumors swirl that M will reveal the person who commented on Archie, interesting since it was H’s anecdote, she was not present, H should do the reveal 
also rumors the name will shortly be leaked


----------



## poopsie

maris.crane said:


> Well, to defend that - there are like 13 Kardashians and probably that many sattelite relatives and Friends  Of. I knew it had reached saturation by the time I knew Kris’ mother had been married four times _and_ her name.



I was very late to the K's, but IIRC Kim alone had so many threads (that must've been so epic) they were designated with Roman numerals and I am (almost) positive that they easily passed X
In descending order 
Kim
Khloe 
Two Kollege Kourtney and PMK deadheated for the show
Rob, while having a thread, was left in the dust to round out the superfecta

The Jenners seemed to be an afterthought


----------



## FreeSpirit71

marietouchet said:


> Rumors swirl that M will reveal the person who commented on Archie, interesting since it was H’s anecdote, she was not present, H should do the reveal
> also rumors the name will shortly be leaked


I believe it should be Harry as well, if anyone is to reveal who made the comment - as it was said directly to him.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

poopsie said:


> I was very late to the K's, but IIRC Kim alone had so many threads (that must've been so epic) they were designated with Roman numerals and I am (almost) positive that they easily passed X
> In descending order
> Kim
> Khloe
> Two Kollege Kourtney and PMK deadheated for the show
> Rob, while having a thread, was left in the dust to round out the superfecta
> 
> The Jenners seemed to be an afterthought


Dont forget the Skarsgard thread which always competed with the KK one.


----------



## madamelizaking

marietouchet said:


> Rumors swirl that M will reveal the person who commented on Archie, interesting since it was H’s anecdote, she was not present, H should do the reveal
> also rumors the name will shortly be leaked


Of course it will. The BRF didn't hang itself on the rope Meghan hung out for them. She will definitely release the name one way or another.

Her not revealing who it was because it would damage them was such malarky. She's done more than damage one individual, she's nearly annihilated the RF.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I have annoying coworkers too, and some who are bad at their jobs, but you still can't talk over colleagues aggressively and interrupt them constantly especially in such a public venue. How much you like someone shouldn't dictate how well you treat them IMO - the default is polite, unless they wrong you. And she was just trying to get a word in edgewise, not being rude to him at all. It just made him look bad rather than her, if she were such a bad anchor.
> 
> He was rude to 2 co-anchors and 3 guests - in the same episode!!  Surely they weren't all annoying... he even agreed with Megyn Kelly on several points.
> 
> Just to be clear are we talking about this woman?



This one. Same?

I was very interested in the father's statements and this female anchor took so long to ask her questions, it was eating into the interview.  I knew they would only give Markle 15 minutes or so and I didn't want it wasted on the anchor's love of her own voice.

Ask a simple question and let the person talk. That's all I want.


----------



## mellibelly

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?



Great question. If they’re smart hire an experienced production team, take a backseat to experts and not make content about themselves. Like the Obamas did with their Netflix deal and Oscar winning documentary. The question is, can they handle not being front and center? I don’t think so based on their track record.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

madamelizaking said:


> Of course it will. The BRF didn't hang itself on the rope Meghan hung out for them. She will definitely release the name one way or another.
> 
> Her not revealing who it was because it would damage them was such malarky. She's done more than damage one individual.



I thought H & M said that they weren't going to comment on anything re: the interview any further!   Right?  
LOL


----------



## madamelizaking

kipp said:


> I thought H & M said that they weren't going to comment on anything re: the interview any further!   Right?
> LOL


I think they expected a lot of pushback from The Queen and family, opening it up for further words of war.


----------



## kipp

madamelizaking said:


> I think they expected a lot of pushback from The Queen and family, opening it up for further words of war.


But they haven't gotten much (overt) pushback from the Queen and family---just a short statement about how they loved them...


----------



## Lodpah

Gotta hand it to her those abused staffers have been forgotten.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If MM reveals a name, then, wow.  Divorce or titles gone or both?


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> It's very hard to believe that MM was suicidal and didn't have access to therapy. The husband was there, and she was in contact with her mother, her PR-Agency, and I don't believe the BRF blocked her access to her own bank accounts. We also know that she was able to travel, the tabloids printed pictures of her in the US during her pregnancy (Archie). According to what she said, she was also in contact with a friend of Diana. I'm with the Palace on "_some recollections may vary_'".
> 
> Racism and Mental Health are very hot and important topics. Let's see if the interview will bring MM&H the audience and donations they want.


Yes, her story doesn’t hold up at all.


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> This one. Same?
> 
> I was very interested in the father's statements and this female anchor took so long to ask her questions, it was eating into the interview.  I knew they would only give Markle 15 minutes or so and I didn't want it wasted on the anchor's love of her own voice.
> 
> Ask a simple question and let the person talk. That's all I want.
> 
> View attachment 5017030



Thanks for sharing this one, I actually hadn't had a chance to watch it yet.  But yes that looks like the same woman.


----------



## poopsie

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Dont forget the Skarsgard thread which always competed with the KK one.



You know, I have never gone there. I only know of him from GaGa's video.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.

The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.

The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> Rumors swirl that M will reveal the person who commented on Archie, interesting since it was H’s anecdote, she was not present, H should do the reveal
> also rumors the name will shortly be leaked




I think H has had all the air time he is going to get. She can't trust him to stick to the script


----------



## Aimee3

mellibelly said:


> Great question. If they’re smart hire an experienced production team, take a backseat to experts and not make content about themselves. Like the Obamas did with their Netflix deal and Oscar winning documentary. The question is, can they handle not being front and center? I don’t think so based on their track record.


But that’s just it...who needs them then?  Netflix should just hire a production team themselves.  Who needs H&M to do it and be the middlemen so to speak.  I feel like they have nothing to offer and somebody else could do it better and for less money.


----------



## purseinsanity

kipp said:


> I thought H & M said that they weren't going to comment on anything re: the interview any further!   Right?
> LOL


Wishful thinking.


----------



## Aimee3

If MM really needed help they couldn’t sneak a therapist into the palace?  I  just don’t believe they wouldn’t help her.  A suicide would reflect very badly on the RF.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.



What makes what she said hard to believe if it's taken literally, that she asked for mental health support and didn't get it, is that William, Harry, and Kate have said before that they're in therapy. Even Diana had a therapist... It just doesn't seem plausible to me that they literally told her she could not have access to a therapist.

Now whether they handled her mental health well is another issue, though. I can absolutely believe they aren't a very affectionate family (not their style) and didn't provide the type of comfort to her that she might expect.


----------



## poopsie

kipp said:


> I thought H & M said that they weren't going to comment on anything re: the interview any further!   Right?
> LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## FreeSpirit71

lalame said:


> What makes what she said hard to believe if it's taken literally, that she asked for mental health support and didn't get it, is that William, Harry, and Kate have said before that they're in therapy. Even Diana had a therapist... It just doesn't seem plausible to me that they literally told her she could not have access to a therapist.
> 
> Now whether they handled her mental health well is another issue, though. I can absolutely believe they aren't a very affectionate family (not their style) and didn't provide the type of comfort to her that she might expect.


Regardless of how I feel about other comments in their interview, Meghan came across authentic to me when she talked about her mental health issues and feeling suicidal.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?



Purely speculation but I wonder if they will collaborate  with the makers of The Crown for “their season” of the show. Harry seemed as though he liked the show well enough. Maybe that is why.


----------



## purseinsanity

The Shady Side Of Meghan Markle - Nicki Swift
					

Meghan Markle has had an amazing life. After all, she went from television star to royalty in a matter of months. But some details aren't quite as storybook as they may seem. Here's a look at the shady side of Meghan Markle.




					www.nickiswift.com
				





The Shady Side Of Meghan Markle
Chris Jackson/Getty Images
BY MICKI SPOLLEN AND PHIL ARCHBOLD/JAN. 10, 2018 1:56 PM EST/UPDATED: APRIL 26, 2020 3:23 PM EST
Former Suits star Meghan Markle became Prince Harry's fiancée when the royal popped the question in November 2017, causing both American and British citizens to rejoice. Her mixed-race background, previous marriage, and, of course, status as an American citizen all drew extra attention to the groundbreaking engagement. And when the two married in a gorgeous ceremony at Windsor Castle on May 19, 2018, the public's interest in their relationship — and Markle, specifically — grew.

But there have been a few things behind the scenes that have made us raise our eyebrows. Here's a look at the shady side of the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle.

Did Hollywood change Meghan Markle?

Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
In December 2017, news broke that Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister, Samantha Markle, was gearing up to release a tell-all book focused on revealing some damning family secrets, going so far as to call Meghan a "social climber" in an interview with The Sun. "Hollywood has changed her. I think her ambition is to become a princess," said Samantha when Meghan and Prince Harry had started dating. Samantha also complained that Meghan all but forgot about her after gaining high society status. 

However, according to E! News, a person close to the family says Samantha can't be trusted. "Samantha [Markle] doesn't have a relationship with Meghan Markle and she never has," said the source. "Meghan has never done anything to her and continues to take the high road." Be that as it may, it's worth noting that it isn't only Samantha who thinks Meghan's completely different these days. "The person I knew is not there anymore," Meghan's former best friend, Ninaki Priddy, told the Daily Mail in December 2017. "There's Meghan Before Fame and Meghan After Fame."

Meghan Markle's career may have interfered with her first marriage

Michael Kovac/Getty Images
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's engagement was untraditional for a number of reasons — and her status as a divorced woman was arguably first among them. Before meeting Prince Harry, Markle was married to producer Trevor Engelson for two years before they split, citing "irreconcilable differences." 

Former friend Ninaki Priddy, who served as maid of honor at Markle's wedding to Engelson, told the Daily Mail that Markle's career ultimately led to the demise of that union, saying, "It was such a shock when she told me they were getting divorced." Another person close to the couple told Woman's Day (via Life & Style) that the stress of a long-distance relationship likely played a part, as Markle lived in Canada during filming on her USA Network series Suits while her husband lived in Los Angeles. As the magazine's source pointed out, "It was a very difficult way to start married life."

Did Meghan Markle have a secret royal fascination?

Chris Jackson/Getty Images
In their BBC engagement interview, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry revealed that they'd met on a blind date. "Because I'm from the States, you don't grow up with the same understanding of the royal family," Markle said. "And so while I now understand very clearly there's a global interest there, I didn't know much about him." However, former friend Ninaki Priddy's Daily Mail interview told a different story. 


"I know the Royal Family was something she found fascinating," said Priddy. "She had one of Princess Diana's books on her bookshelf." Plus, between Princess Diana's popularity and Prince Harry's days as prime tabloid fodder (remember that time he went wild in Vegas?), it's hard to believe she didn't know anything about the prince.

A look inside Meghan Markle's seemingly shady family ties

Wpa Pool/Getty Images/, ITV
Meghan Markle's relationship with her family was a hot topic in the run-up to her wedding. Her husband-to-be inadvertently caused a stink when he told BBC Radio 4 (per Us Weekly) that the Windsors were "the family that I suppose she's never had." Prince Harry's comment hurt the Markles, who hit back via the Daily Mail. "She's had a really good family," half-brother Thomas Markle Jr claimed. "We were as close as we could be." So why did Harry say that?

Some surmised that Markle had lied to her fiancé, which is apparently a family trait. Her estranged half-sister, Samantha Markle, admitted to staging those infamous paparazzi shots of their father, who has also copped to lying. Speaking in a Channel 5 documentary (via Fox News), Thomas Markle revealed that he concocted a story about the Sussexes contacting him after he missed their wedding following a heart attack, all to protect their image. "I said they called me back and they were really concerned about me and I said, 'Go on your honeymoon, don't worry about me, I'll be fine.' And that was all a lie."

There was no phone call, according to Thomas, but he did receive a handwritten letter from his daughter after her wedding. "I thought it would be an olive branch," he told the Daily Mail. "Instead, it was a dagger to the heart." In the letter (which is at the center of a landmark lawsuit), Markle reprimands her father for talking to the press and asking her for money.

Meghan Markle's puppy trouble

Wpa Pool/Getty Images
In her Daily Mail interview, former friend Ninaki Priddy claimed dog-loving Meghan Markle flaunted her status as a way to adopt a dog. Now the owner of two rescues, Markle seems to have a rocky relationship with both of them. 

In November 2017, a Kensington Palace spokesperson broke the news that Markle's retriever, Bogart, would not join her overseas. "It takes a toll on an animal to travel so far across Atlantic combined with the hard, long process of getting approval," said the spokesperson. "It's in the best interest of the animal's well-being to stay." Instead of traveling with Markle, Bogart will stay with one of her friends in the United States. 

That December, the Daily Mail reported that Markle's other dog, Guy, broke two legs. Circumstances surrounding the injury are unknown, but sources claimed Markle was "distraught" over the accident.

Meghan Markle's reps may have planted rumors

Chris Jackson/Getty Images
Meghan Markle starred on the hit show Suits for years — we would never try to take that away from her — but let's be honest: She didn't become a household name until her relationship with Prince Harry, and her reps may have tried to take advantage of that new-found notoriety. 

In December 2017, gossip emerged that Markle was on the short list for a role in the next James Bond movie. "Meghan fits the role of a Bond girl perfectly," a source told The Sun, but Blind Gossip refuted this claim. Its source said Markle was never in the running and alleged the chatter was just stirred up by "her people" for publicity. These rumors aren't too far-fetched if you consider the fact that Markle's former friend also suggested the actress had grown a bit too big for her britches. "Even by season two of Suits, she was turning down lunch with us because she said she'd be recognized," Ninaki Priddy told the Daily Mail. "There were instances when I felt she developed a sense of entitlement because she was on the show."

One of Meghan Markle's friendships ended in bitterness

Chris Jackson/Getty Images
While Ninaki Priddy did have some nice things to say about her former friend while recounting their childhood together, she didn't hesitate to call Meghan Markle out for her supposed opportunistic ways. "All I can say now is that I think Meghan was calculated — very calculated — in the way she handled people and relationships," Priddy told the Daily Mail. "She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends." Ouch! 


Priddy also claimed it was always Markle's dream to be famous, recalling that "she just loved to be the center of attention." That trait will likely serve her well in the royal palace — and may, in fact, be a reason her relationship with Prince Harry is likely to work out. "One of the advantages of Meghan is because she is in the public eye, she likes that," Penny Junor, author of Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son, told the Express. "The real problem with Harry's girlfriends in the past is that they absolutely hated the media attention and that's scared them off."

This gal pal says Meghan Markle 'ghosted' her after meeting Prince Harry

Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images
Meghan Markle is said to have spent a lot of time in London following her split from Trevor Engelson. The actress reportedly struck up a friendship with local TV personality Lizzie Cundy after they attended a charity dinner. According to Cundy, Markle was keen to find a new man, but the recent divorcee allegedly had two conditions: He had to be English, and he had to be famous. "We were having a girly chat and then she said, 'Do you know any famous guys? I'm single and I really love English men,'" Cundy wrote in the 2019 tell-all Tales From the Red Carper (via Yahoo! Sports). "So I said, 'We'll go out and find you someone.'"

Cundy claims Markle called controversial soccer star Ashley Cole "cute," but that went nowhere. Sources close to X-Factor winner Matt Cardle claim Markle quietly slid into his DM zone in 2015, but the singer reportedly stopped replying after meeting somebody else. Her Instagram interaction with Cardle allegedly took place just months before she started dating Harry, according to The Sun. Once Harry was on the hook, Markle apparently had no use for Cundy. "I texted saying, 'Oh my god, I heard about Harry,' and she was like, 'Yeah I know, we'll try and hook up,'" Cundy claims. "She was probably told by the Palace to end contact with people she befriended in the media. I was literally ghosted by her."

Meghan Markle reportedly caused a stink over air fresheners

Wpa Pool/Getty Images
To the millions watching around the world, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's wedding appeared every inch a flawless fairy tale, but reports suggest that it wasn't exactly smooth sailing behind the scenes. According to the Daily Mail, the American got a lot of British backs up when she requested that air fresheners be deployed at her wedding because the smell inside St. George's Chapel displeased her. According to one royal insider, the chapel's "musty" smell isn't "unpleasant at all, though. It just smells how you would expect an old building to smell." Keep in mind: St. George's Chapel has been an important place of worship for the British monarchy since 1475.

"Meghan wanted staff to go around with these atomisers, like spritzer guns, and spray the chapel with scent before anyone arrived," the source claimed. "Royal Household staff stepped in and told her office politely, but firmly, that this was the Queen's Chapel and it simply wasn't appropriate. This is a place that has held royal weddings, funerals and even contains the Royal Vault — I don't believe a request of that nature had been made before."

Did Meghan Markle throw a tantrum over an emerald tiara?

Jonathan Brady/Getty Images
Most brides would be ecstatic at the thought of walking down the aisle wearing a diamond and platinum bandeau tiara handpicked by the queen herself, but according to royal whistle-blowers, Meghan Markle wanted to choose her own. Household insiders with links to Dan Wootton (executive editor at The Sun) report that Prince Harry's bride-to-be made it clear which headpiece she wanted to wear on her big day, and things apparently got a little tense when her idea was shot down. "Meghan had her heart set on this tiara with emeralds and Prince Harry hit the roof when they were told it was impossible for her to wear it," one source claimed. "The provenance of the tiara could not be established — there were concerns it could have come from Russia originally."

When news of Markle's so-called "difficult" behavior reached the queen, her majesty reportedly decided to give her grandson a good talking to. "There was a very heated exchange that prompted the Queen to speak to Harry," Wootton's royal insider dished. "She said, 'Meghan cannot have whatever she wants, she gets what tiara she's given by me.' The message from the Queen was very much Meghan needed to think about how she speaks to staff members and be careful to follow family protocols." According to the source, the queen struck a low-blow during the exchange, questioning why Markle needed to wear a traditional wedding veil given it was her second marriage. Ouch!

Meghan Markle made Kate Middleton cry, multiple sources claim

Chris Jackson/Getty Images
Rumors of an ongoing feud between Meghan Markle and her sister-in-law began to swirl after it emerged that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be moving out of Kensington Palace. Tabloids claimed Kate Middleton had snapped at Markle after she caught the former actress speaking rudely to someone on her staff. The Palace denied this in a statement, which raised a few eyebrows among royal commentators. "It's fairly unprecedented for them to speak out in this way, and I think what Kensington Palace is wanting to do is to detract from this rift that's happening," royal expert Angela Mollard said (via Express). "The Queen is in the golden era of her reign. She wants a cohesive royal family."

The press has continued to dig into the allegedly splintered relationship between the two duchesses. Esteemed royal journalist Camilla Tominey, associate editor at The Telegraph, believes the rift began in the run-up to Markle and Prince Harry's wedding. Middleton's daughter, Princess Charlotte, was one of the stars of the wedding, but two of Tominey's sources claim Middleton was left in tears after an argument broke out during a fitting for her daughter's bridesmaid dress. "Kate had only just given birth to Prince Louis and was feeling quite emotional," one insider said (via the Daily Beast). This incident is said to have taken place around the same time as Markle's supposed emerald tiara drama.

Why did multiple royal aides reportedly quit on Meghan Markle?

Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images
It's not often that people with top positions in the royal household give up their post, so when three walk within quick succession, rumors of trouble in paradise are bound to fly. In May 2019, the Daily Mail revealed that Meghan Markle's right-hand woman, Amy Pickerill, was leaving when the royal couple moved to Frogmore Cottage, making her the third member of the duchess' staff to quit within a matter of months. "Amy is leaving," a royal insider confirmed. "It's very sad for her colleagues, as she is a really popular member of staff."

Pickerill was expected to stay on and succeed Markle's private secretary, Samantha "the Panther" Cohen, who (after 17 years with the royal family) also left her post. Cohen's departure followed that of Melissa Toubati, Markle's personal assistant. The latter caused a stir when she bolted less than six months after Markle's big wedding. According to the Mirror, the overwhelming demands put on Toubati by the new duchess broke her down. "She put up with quite a lot," a royal informant alleged. "Meghan put a lot of demands on her and it ended up with her in tears."

According to royal biographer Robert Jobson, Prince Harry has stood by his lady love. In his book, Charles at Seventy, Jobson claims Harry became "petulant and short-tempered" when employees didn't cooperate. "Raising his voice on occasion, Harry would insist: 'What Meghan wants, she gets.'"

Did Meghan Markle cheat on her ex with Prince Harry?

Mike Coppola, Ben A. Pruchnie/Getty Images
Meghan Markle's relationship with Prince Harry seemed to have all the hallmarks of a real-life fairy tale when it first started blossoming, but was it actually more of a love triangle? Before she hooked up with her redheaded prince, Markle was dating renowned Canadian chef Cory Vitiello, and reports have suggested that there may have been an overlap between the two relationships. Rumors started to fly when an eagle-eyed royal fan noticed that Vanity Fair had edited its Markle cover story at her explicit request. "The sentence regarding the first time Markle met Prince Harry has been amended," a note from the editor read. "Markle told Vanity Fair that the couple met in July 2016."

The original article stated that the Sussexes had met that May. The prince is said to have asked for Markle's number after encountering her at an Invictus Games event in Toronto, and, according to The Telegraph (a daily broadsheet newspaper that doesn't traditionally peddle in unfounded gossip), the actress was "still dating a Canadian chef" at the time. When the Daily Mail asked Vitiello if he and Markle had "parted permanently when Harry came on the scene," he appeared to confirm that they were still involved in some capacity without actually saying the words. "Well, I'm sure you've done your due diligence," the restaurateur told the reporter. "I really appreciate the professionalism in the way you're going about this." 

Make of that what you will.

Was Megxit the plan all along?

Chris Jackson/Getty Images
Right or wrong, Meghan Markle was widely blamed when the Sussexes announced they were going to step back from royal life and branch out on their own in January 2020, both on social media and in the tabloids.

"Is it Meghan's fault? It's hard to escape the conclusion that having grown up in a country that considers the Kennedys to be aristocracy, Meghan didn't understand that being a Windsor is not like being a celebrity," Express columnist Virginia Blackburn wrote. It wasn't just the Brits who were unhappy about Megxit either. Canadian millionaire Kevin O'Leary claimed the Sussexes were "much less interesting" now that they weren't senior royals, and he believed Markle was to blame, saying (via Tatler), "I think Meghan got him into a bad place, and maybe she should do a little soul-searching. She knew what she was getting into when she married him." 

If this claim is true, then was Megxit actually her plan all along? Many seem to think so, and there's even some proof — well, kind of. According to Page Six, Markle put some of her clothes in a Toronto storage facility prior to her wedding. An insider claimed that she had the items delivered to her and Prince Harry's rented property on Vancouver Island when they arrived in Canada following the announcement. Why did Markle keep all those clothes in storage across the Atlantic for two years? It appears as though she knew she'd be back at some stage.

An old friend has labeled Meghan Markle a 'shape-shifter'

Wpa Pool/Getty Images
We might never know if Meghan Markle had some form of Megxit in mind when she married Prince Harry, but according to someone who knows her personally, shedding her skin and starting over is a habit of hers. Writing for Tatler, Shinan Govani (who hosted Markle for dinner during her Suits days) claimed, "Something that has stayed with me, especially post-Megxit, is that Meghan is no stranger to picking up and reinventing herself. Both a go-getter as well as a shape-shifter, she returns now with more social mojo than she could have ever imagined then." 


By March 2020, Markle was already unleashing that social mojo on Los Angeles, where she and Harry moved after leaving Canada behind. The Sussexes were previously mocked when the prince was filmed asking Disney CEO Bob Iger to cast Markle in something ("You know she does voice overs?" the prince reportedly said, per Express), and later reports suggested that the actress had instructed her agent to find her a role in a superhero movie. It seems as though Markle was making herself at home, but how was Harry handling it? Was the royal keeping up with his shape-shifting wife? "I don't know how his career is going to map out," Dr. Jane Goodall, a famous primatologist and a good friend of Harry's told the Radio Times that April (via Entertainment Tonight). "I've been in touch, though I think he's finding life a bit challenging just now."

The Sussexes were accused of shading the York sisters and the queen

Wpa Pool/Getty Images
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle shocked everyone when they revealed they were stepping back as senior royals in a bombshell statement, including — according to senior palace sources – Queen Elizabeth herself. Her Majesty reportedly had no idea her grandson was about to ditch royalty in favor of a quieter life in North America, but after a period of negotiation, she accepted the decision. However, she also banned them from using the word "royal" in their private endeavors, which was a bit of a slap in the face considering they'd named their brand Sussex Royal. 

While the couple agreed to comply, they landed a seemingly shady dig on Harry's granny at the same time. A few months after their initial announcement, a new statement appeared on the Sussex Royal website. In it, the Sussexes stated that the queen doesn't have any "jurisdiction" over the word "royal" overseas, but noted they would stop using it anyway. Yikes! Elsewhere, in what appeared to be a barely-veiled shot at Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice, they said, "While there is precedent for other titled members of the royal family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place." The York sisters have both been allowed to work while keeping their titles, and this apparently snarky remark seems to prove that Harry and Meghan expected (or at least wanted) the same arrangement.

Meghan Markle reportedly thinks her royal in-laws lack 'warmth'

Richard Pohle/Getty Images
Now that Meghan Markle is stateside and out of The Firm's reach, she's apparently been dishing about Prince Harry's side of the family. What was life really like inside the palace? A little frosty, according to the American. In March 2020, a source cited by the Daily Mail claimed that Markle's bemoaned the lack of "warmth" at royal family gatherings and finds all the standoffish behavior very odd. Her sister-in-law, Kate Middleton, is reportedly the biggest culprit.

"It's still weird to her that no one hugs and that everyone is so uptight, especially Kate," the insider, said to be a close friend of Markle, told the tabloid. "She said it's obvious that Kate and William do not approve of their choices and that you could cut the tension with a knife." The source went on to say that "Kate barely even looked" at Markle during her final trip as a senior royal, and that "their interaction was kept to a bare minimum."

Rumors of a rift between the two duchesses have been dogging the royal family for some time now. However, this damaging narrative really started to take root in 2019, when Markle guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue: She neglected to put Middleton on the female "forces for change" list featured in her issue, and also said that it would have been "boastful" to appear on the cover herself. Middleton appeared on the cover of the mag in 2016. Awkward.

Read More: https://www.nickiswift.com/104261/shady-side-meghan-markle/?utm_campaign=clip


Interesting synopsis.


----------



## kkfiregirl

eunaddict said:


> Bold of you to assume that of posters. There are plenty of POC/minorities posting in here. And plenty who have experienced micro-aggression and actual aggression but who (therefore) don’t buy her vague, nondescript stories of words spoken that she learned of through a 3rd, 4th, 5th party.



Yes, exactly. None of us know the race/ethnicity of anyone posting in here, unless the posters are tPF ‘friends.’ Anyway, white women also experience daily _micro aggressions_ in the form of _sexism_ and _ageism_.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Due to her credibility issues, I would like to know what was asked, who [name and position] was asked and exactly what the response was. This is such a serious issue, especially in a pandemic.  Please, could we get the facts before we judge?









						Suicide often not preceded by warnings - Harvard Health
					

A close friend of one of my colleagues committed suicide last week. It happened as so many suicides do—out of the blue. A few days earlier, my colleague had spent the day hanging out with her fri...




					www.health.harvard.edu
				




With MM, she does not use simple words or simple sentences. “I need help” is very different from “I’m exhausted, need a break, etc”.  That is one of the hallmarks of suicidal thoughts — it is not always clear.  Since she was struggling with embarrassment (?), mental anguish, etc., she may have expressed herself clearly or not.   She said she went to HR, correct?  Understandable they would be reluctant to offer medical advice or recommendations, especially to a pregnant woman. She had a doctor.


National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 800-273-TALK. 
Counselors are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The service is available to anyone. All calls are confidential.








						Suicide often not preceded by warnings - Harvard Health
					

A close friend of one of my colleagues committed suicide last week. It happened as so many suicides do—out of the blue. A few days earlier, my colleague had spent the day hanging out with her fri...




					www.health.harvard.edu
				







FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Rumors swirl that M will reveal the person who commented on Archie, interesting since it was H’s anecdote, she was not present, H should do the reveal
> also rumors the name will shortly be leaked


Yep, otherwise it's a good old game of telephone.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Regardless of how I feel about other comments in their interview, Meghan came across authentic to me when she talked about her mental health issues and feeling suicidal.



I think she sounded authentic too and I don't doubt the pain she felt and any feelings of suicide. Enough celebrities I like and don't like have said how soul-crushing it can be to be in the public eye and get criticized constantly that I don't doubt for a minute she would feel the same. I just find her claim about being denied healthcare implausible... like there must be more to that story. Was it a perception issue? Was it a misunderstanding? Was it more like someone discouraged her from seeking healthcare for non-malicious reasons (eg "There's a big risk it could leak and invade your privacy")? I don't even jump to the conclusion it's malicious lying... but there are sooo many shades between truth and lie.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I think she sounded authentic too and I don't doubt the pain she felt and any feelings of suicide. Enough celebrities I like and don't like have said how soul-crushing it can be to be in the public eye and get criticized constantly that I don't doubt for a minute she would feel the same. I just find her claim about being denied healthcare implausible... like there must be more to that story. Was it a perception issue? Was it a misunderstanding? Was it more like someone discouraged her from seeking healthcare for non-malicious reasons (eg "There's a big risk it could leak and invade your privacy")? I don't even jump to the conclusion it's malicious lying... but there are sooo many shades between truth and lie.



There is too much about her claims that doesn’t pass the smell test. She’s a grown woman in her late 30s. She couldn’t talk to her own husband about getting mental health care?  Why didn’t Harry get her the help she needed?  The man who said “whatever Meghan  wants, Meghan gets”  isn’t going to blow off her cry for help. Why did she put the responsibility for her mental health issues on other people?


----------



## mdcx

I seriously doubt Meghan intended to reveal the name( frankly I think the whole incident is made up).
 I think she thought the implied threat of her revealing it would cause the BRF to react a particular way.
Obviously they have reacted in the way most infuriating to a narcissist -calmly, briefly, and with corncern about the narcissistic persons mental state.
Meghan still seems to think she can get a rise out of the BRF and I don’t see it happening ever.


----------



## muddledmint

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.


Ummm what?
Last time I checked Meghan and Harry are adults pushing 40. Who were not prisoners or hostages. They could easily pick up the phone and get help. Her story about going to HR makes no sense at all.


----------



## lalame

It is so easy to misunderstand people... it's not to be taken for granted. Even in this thread when what we say is clearly documented, how many times have we seen people get offended quickly and jump to conclusions about something said to them while others see it to be an innocuous comment? I'm sure that factors somewhat into some of these Meghan encounters that just sound so over the top. I very much doubt a member of the royal family, same family they both said welcomed them warmly in the beginning, literally told Harry that his baby would look too dark to get afforded private security. It's beyond the pale.


----------



## needlv

mdcx said:


> I seriously doubt Meghan intended to reveal the name( frankly I think the whole incident is made up).
> I think she thought the implied threat of her revealing it would cause the BRF to react a particular way.
> Obviously they have reacted in the way most infuriating to a narcissist -calmly, briefly, and with corncern about the narcissistic persons mental state.
> Meghan still seems to think she can get a rise out of the BRF and I don’t see it happening ever.


I think they will reveal - if they can make more money out of it or they want another stab at the RF for “revenge”.

 I agree with you - that the RF statement is not what they wanted - they wanted the RF to fight back issue by issue so they can then justify another tell all or response.


----------



## Chanbal

Surprising! 
"_Leading figures in American media have shown their support for British television presenter Piers Morgan, after he left his high-profile breakfast slot with the broadcaster ITV on Tuesday, following his strident criticism of Meghan Markle._"









						Jake Tapper and Megyn Kelly lead Americans defending Piers Morgan
					

CNN's Jake Tapper and former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly have sprung to the defense of Piers Morgan after he left his breakfast show following an outcry over his reaction to the Oprah interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.


Meghan was pregnant and presumably under the care of an OB/GYN.  It is routine for the expectant mothers to be questioned during prenatal visits. about their mental health.  There was ample opportunity to discuss any depression with a health care professional and receive a referral for therapy if required.  Given the history of the immediate family vis a vis seeking  psychological counselling, there should not have been a problem if the  patient wanted to pursue this.






						Quality statement 4: Asking about mental health and wellbeing | Antenatal and postnatal mental health | Quality standards | NICE
					






					www.nice.org.uk


----------



## gracekelly

If they name a name, that person will have the right of rebuttal.  They could also sue the Harkles for slander.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## haute okole

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.


I believe Meghan may have been depressed but blaming “the Firm or HR” for her inability to access mental health support is a BOLD face lie.  Her mother was a mental health professional and social worker in Los Angeles.  I guess the Firm took away her ability to talk to her Mom.  When she flew to NY for her baby shower, why not call a therapist.  Oh Sorry, she would have no one to scape goat and no way to manipulate Harry into moving to LA where she can have tea in the garden with Oprah and Bob Iger.  Meghan takes absolutely zero responsibility for her situation.  Everything is everybody else’s fault.  This girl is not only mentally ill, but she is a malingerer.


----------



## Aqua01

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m not googling a bunch of rumors/stories. Waste of time, IMO. We get it, y’all hate her. *yawns*


Aren't you here in this thread now wasting your time on a bunch of opinions/stories you don't agree with, and then turn around accusing other members of being obsessed with these you? But not you, huh?
If you refuse to do some reading, stop asking  why we feel the way we feel about H&M. Points of views have been explained _ad nauseam_ in this thread. It's easy to peek in every now and then and start to complain and wonder about the "viciousness" of the comments.


----------



## mellibelly

Aimee3 said:


> But that’s just it...who needs them then?  Netflix should just hire a production team themselves.  Who needs H&M to do it and be the middlemen so to speak.  I feel like they have nothing to offer and somebody else could do it better and for less money.



I agree, they have nothing to offer but their names for publicity. Netflix may lose big time with these two. Now the $25 million Spotify deal is another head scratcher. I’m a podcast addict and there’s already stellar content in every category Hags claims to support. The environment, sustainability, mental health, wellness, social justice, feminism etc. And those podcasters have been doing the work for years for much less pay. I think the Spotify deal has a bigger chance of failure. It’s already inundated with experts and celebrities and these two aren’t interesting enough to compete.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.


Diana had lots of help - medical doctors and therapists.  A lovely therapist in BC Canada was helping with her bulimia.

Was she strong headed? Would she do the work?  That's another story.

Meg is a mature woman who knows who to call if she wants help. If she really was pregnant, she could talk to her OBGYN.  They must hear about depression all the time and know who to refer her to.


----------



## Jayne1

haute okole said:


> I believe Meghan may have been depressed but blaming “the Firm or HR” for her inability to access mental health support is a BOLD face lie.  Her mother was a mental health professional and social worker in Los Angeles.  I guess the Firm took away her ability to talk to her Mom.  When she flew to NY for her baby shower, why not call a therapist.  Oh Sorry, she would have no one to scape goat and no way to manipulate Harry into moving to LA where she can have tea in the garden with Oprah and Bob Iger.  Meghan takes absolutely zero responsibility for her situation.  Everything is everybody else’s fault.  This girl is not only mentally ill, but she is a malingerer.


See how bad an interviewer Oprah is.

Not that we expected her to ask any follow up questions, but why does she have such a good reputation?


----------



## melissatrv

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I didn’t say I came here for solace. It is a very one-sided forum, and that is clear. If that is what’s preferred, so be it.



I prefer not to argue. If I don't like what someone says here, I hit the button to ignore them, or don't reply and move on.


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> Meghan was pregnant and presumably under the care of an OB/GYN.  It is routine for the expectant mothers to be questioned during prenatal visits. about their mental health.  There was ample opportunity to discuss any depression with a health care professional and receive a referral for therapy if required.  Given the history of the immediate family vis a vis seeking  psychological counselling, there should not have been a problem if the  patient wanted to pursue this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quality statement 4: Asking about mental health and wellbeing | Antenatal and postnatal mental health | Quality standards | NICE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nice.org.uk



Well, that is if she had an OBGYN, if she were a patient, if she was carrying the baby in her bun... particularly this would confirm, this wasn‘t the case, correct?


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I seriously doubt Meghan intended to reveal the name( frankly I think the whole incident is made up).
> I think she thought the implied threat of her revealing it would cause the BRF to react a particular way.
> Obviously they have reacted in the way most infuriating to a narcissist -calmly, briefly, and with corncern about the narcissistic persons mental state.
> Meghan still seems to think she can get a rise out of the BRF and I don’t see it happening ever.


Honestly, I don't believe it either.  They seemed to welcome her with open arms, so not sure why skin color would even be a question.  Duh, if they have children, the child will be a quarter black.  Einstein not needed.  I could see it being an issue if a surrogate was actually used.  I think she threw this narrative out there because race is such a hot topic/button right now, and she could make an insinuation without backing it up, as most of her other claims.  Who is actually going to doubt her claims of thinking of suicide or miscarrying?  (Well, besides me about the miscarriage!)


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> This one. Same?
> 
> I was very interested in the father's statements and this female anchor took so long to ask her questions, it was eating into the interview.  I knew they would only give Markle 15 minutes or so and I didn't want it wasted on the anchor's love of her own voice.
> 
> Ask a simple question and let the person talk. That's all I want.
> 
> View attachment 5017030



I finally watched this and.... you really can't help but feel bad for him. He sounds unwell (health-wise). I really, really hope she finally lets him in. He made a stupid A$$ mistake but I can understand it and after this tell-all they did, I don't see how they can be angry at him for going to the press to tell his side of the story too. He's literally doing it because they won't pick up the phone - the same thing Harry is throwing at his father's feet. He apologized hundreds of times too... having to do that time and again is humiliating and yet he's doing it as a way to communicate with her. 

*Note: I still think Samantha is a POS though.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> *Meghan was pregnant and presumably under the care of an OB/GYN.  It is routine for the expectant mothers to be questioned during prenatal visits. about their mental health. * There was ample opportunity to discuss any depression with a health care professional and receive a referral for therapy if required.  Given the history of the immediate family vis a vis seeking  psychological counselling, there should not have been a problem if the  patient wanted to pursue this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quality statement 4: Asking about mental health and wellbeing | Antenatal and postnatal mental health | Quality standards | NICE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nice.org.uk


I wish we had a clap emoji!

I remember reading she refused the royal doctors and found her own OBGYN for Archie's pregnancy.  She could've opened her mouth to him or her, seeing as she must've had a "voice" in her private doctor's visits!


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Oprah's interview lefts many unanswered questions, here are 10 from *Nick Parker*: 

HAZ ABOUT IT? *Private jets, taxpayer funded…the 10 questions Oprah didn’t ask Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during interview*

*OPRAH Winfrey landed the interview of the century as Meghan and Harry poured poison on the monarchy for two gripping hours of bombshell claims.*

But what should the US TV chat show queen have asked if she had been willing to place them under real scrutiny? Here are ten questions a more impartial inquisitor might have asked — and the tell-tale facts the couple chose not to reveal:

*1) MEGHAN and Harry said they quit the UK partly because they did not feel Archie was safe — but why should British taxpayers pay for security if you are not working as royals or living in the UK?
ANALYSIS: *It was clear that as long as Harry was a senior royal, his wife and all children would be covered around-the-clock by royal protection squad officers.
Prince Charles was reported to have been ready to give £2million for security costs in California.

*2) HARRY cut his multi-million deals with Netflix and Spotify to pay his way after being financially cut adrift by the royals. But is it not true he and Meghan are wealthy?
ANALYSIS:* From the age of 21, Harry has received £324,000 a year from Princess Diana’s estate.
He also received £7.2million from that source on his 30th birthday while Meghan has an estimated net worth of £3.6million from acting.

*3) DOES it jar to use royal titles to promote your brands while you say you want to be private citizens?
ANALYSIS:* Meghan told Oprah she cares little for “grandeur” and her husband says he prefers to be known as Harry. But his princely status will have inevitably played a part in the £100million Netflix content deal. And the couple’s royal titles gets headline billing on the site of their not-for-profit foundation Archewell.

*4) MEGHAN claimed her passport was taken from her by aides and she was a virtual prisoner at Frogmore House, Windsor. But did she not continue to enjoy a lavish social life and private trips abroad?
ANALYSIS:* She was spotted out on numerous occasions near their former Kensington Palace home.
Her most lavish away-day outing was a private jet flight to a baby shower party in New York in 2019, that reportedly cost £330,000. She also took a private jet to Sir Elton John’s holiday home on French Riviera in 2019.

*5) DID you raise the alleged racist baby question with anyone within the family at the time — and can you explain why you tell different stories about the timing?
ANALYSIS: *Meghan made much of Harry’s deeply offensive discussions with a mystery royal about her unborn baby’s skin colour but she admitted she heard no such talk herself. Harry referred specifically to “that conversation” suggesting there was just one time when hurtful remarks upset him.

*6) DID Meghan know that Archie was not entitled to be a prince from birth?
ANALYSIS: *Meghan gave the impression the title was withheld from Archie — or would be — over the colour of his skin. But the couple’s staff made it clear they did not want a title and preferred him as a private citizen.

*7) DO you not appreciate criticism of you, such as flying on jets while campaigning for eco issues?
ANALYSIS:* The pair stated on their Instagram account in 2019 that they would spend that month working to raise climate change awareness.
Two months later, flight logs revealed Harry used private jets for six out of ten flights since marrying despite claiming to travel commercial “99 per cent” of the time.

*8) MEGHAN told Oprah that she “just didn’t want to be alive any more” and said Palace officials would not help. But could your mother Doria or Harry not have found you help?
ANALYSIS:* Meghan could have gone to a GP or private treatment, as for any other health condition.
Her mother has qualifications and experience as a social worker for three years in California.
Harry, who had therapy, told Oprah he was ashamed of admitting that Meghan needed help but he launched a mental health campaign Heads Together and would have contacts there.

*9) WHY did Meghan and Harry get through three nannies in six weeks in the summer of 2019? And how do you account for the high turnover of staff in your household?
ANALYSIS: *In September 2019, Archie had his third nanny in six weeks. In November 2018, Meghan’s PA Melissa Touabti quit amid reports she was reduced to tears.
The couple’s private secretary Samantha Cohen resigned after 17 years with the royals. And in 2019, Meghan’s bodyguard departed followed by private secretaries Amy Pickerill and Heather Wong.

*10) MEGHAN said she never Googled Harry and knew little of royal life when joining The Firm. Does she really expect us to believe that?
ANALYSIS:* Friends of the Duchess have revealed she was fascinated by the royals.
Ninaki Priddy, her maid of honour at her first wedding to Trevor Engelson, said: “She wants to be Princess Diana 2.0.”

Oprah's forgotten questions!


----------



## purseinsanity

melissatrv said:


> I prefer not to argue. If I don't like what someone says here, *I hit the button to ignore them, or don't reply and move on.*


I'm loving the ignore option!


----------



## gracekelly

scarlet555 said:


> Well, that is if she had an OBGYN, if she were a patient, if she was carrying the baby in her bun... particularly this would confirm, it wasn‘t the case, correct?


Yep.  A good investigative reporter should have been working on this a long time ago.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> Ummm what?
> Last time I checked Meghan and Harry are adults pushing 40. Who were not prisoners or hostages. They could easily pick up the phone and get help. Her story about going to HR makes no sense at all.


What?  It's my opinion, and I am as entitled to it as you are to yours


----------



## meowkittycat

I have to agree. I'm not disputing that Meghan had mental health issues or even contemplated suicide, but it's hard for me to believe that she had been offered absolutely no help during those times. Not only that, they say they love the Queen and she had absolutely no part in whatever they proceeded to reveal but... you proceed to cut down the rest of the royal family. I know the Queen is not the establishment, but she still has a part in it. If there was any respect for her, this interview would not have been made public.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

Aimee3 said:


> If MM really needed help they couldn’t sneak a therapist into the palace?  I  just don’t believe they wouldn’t help her.  A suicide would reflect very badly on the RF.



Exactly!  If Harry was able to get therapy privately (before he publicly spoke of it) then why wasn't he able to get therapy for his wife?  If he wanted to take care of his family, he should have made this happen no matter what.


----------



## mdcx

Meghan is not about to publicy name either Camilla or Kate as a racist, unless her understanding of the BRF genuinely is so limited that she cant see how attacking the future Queen Consort may cause issues for her.
I do think she was trying to hint at Kate, although don't think the event actually happened...
Princess Michael of Kent maybe another one.


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> Yep.  A good investigative reporter should have been working on this a long time ago.


 
Those are pretty much non-existent and would be considered racist for seeking the truth... even if it wasn’t related to racial issue.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> I wish we had a clap emoji!
> 
> I remember reading she refused the royal doctors and found her own OBGYN for Archie's pregnancy.  She could've opened her mouth to him or her, seeing as she must've had a "voice" in her private doctor's visits!


Absolutely. The telling thing for me that she was not prohibited from anything is she clapped back at everything they advised her on, she did it her way and for us to believe that she didn't have a voice? Please, she fought them every step of the way and did what ever she wanted, no hat when advised, kicking people out of seats at Wimbledon, demanding a tiara, upstaging Eugenie, bringing her own people to perform at the wedding, I could go on and on.  She was a bully and so of course, the allegations from staffers of abuse from her, she claps back with crocodile tears, chicken coop interviews and now proclaiming mental health? Yes, I do believe she has mental health issues but her and lust and greed for fame and revenge is classic. Her husband does not get a pass either. 

Her mother is a professional, she could have gone to her mother. She's just vengeful.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chanbal said:


> Surprising!
> "_Leading figures in American media have shown their support for British television presenter Piers Morgan, after he left his high-profile breakfast slot with the broadcaster ITV on Tuesday, following his strident criticism of Meghan Markle._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jake Tapper and Megyn Kelly lead Americans defending Piers Morgan
> 
> 
> CNN's Jake Tapper and former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly have sprung to the defense of Piers Morgan after he left his breakfast show following an outcry over his reaction to the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's hardly surprising _these_ particular people support Piers.


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> Well, that is if she had an OBGYN, if she were a patient, if she was carrying the baby in her bun... particularly this would confirm, this wasn‘t the case, correct?


Even if she never had an OBGYN, I would assume she'd have seen a doctor or health care provider in the 18 months she was over there, whether it was an internist, family practitioner, or whatever.  Anyone of them could've referred her to a mental health specialist.  Of course, you can make an appointment yourself if you want to pay out of pocket, which I'm assuming Harry could've at least coughed up the cost for, seeing as how she was "only" worth $4 million or so before she found her little leprechaun with his pot of gold.


----------



## scarlet555

meowkittycat said:


> I have to agree. I'm not disputing that Meghan had mental health issues or even contemplated suicide, but it's hard for me to believe that she had been offered absolutely no help during those times. Not only that, they say they love the Queen and she had absolutely no part in whatever they proceeded to reveal but... you proceed to cut down the rest of the royal family. I know the Queen is not the establishment, but she still has a part in it. If there was any respect for her, this interview would not have been made public.


Words words words... Nutty says one thing and does another


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I wish we had a clap emoji!


Here just for you!


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's hardly surprising _these_ particular people support Piers.


Why do you say that? These 2 could not be any more different than one another...


----------



## melissatrv

Not sure how it is in the UK, but when I see my OB/GYN, I am always asked if I "feel safe in my home" and about my emotional well-being.   It is a matter of routine questioning. I also remember when I had each of my children being asked about post-partum depression.  I don't doubt that Meghan was depressed, but I do doubt that as a very resourceful woman and a husband who publicly advocated for mental health awareness, she could not get treatment.


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> Even if *she never had an OBGY*N, I would assume she'd have seen a doctor or health care provider in the 18 months she was over there, whether it was an internist, family practitioner, or whatever.  Anyone of them could've referred her to a mental health specialist.  Of course, you can make an appointment yourself if you want to pay out of pocket, which I'm assuming Harry could've at least coughed up the cost for, seeing as how she was "only" worth $4 million or so before she found her little leprechaun with his pot of gold.


It’s looking that way.

is there no medical staff to the BRF?  do you need authorization before seeking medical mental health, like a prior authorization?  I mean the follow up questions OW left out make her look like she is sucking up to cringe...sad OW being a peon of nuttys plans


----------



## mellibelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm loving the ignore option!



There’s an ignore option?! Ooo...looking for it now!


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I finally watched this and.... you really can't help but feel bad for him. He sounds unwell (health-wise). I really, really hope she finally lets him in. *He made a stupid A$$ mistake but I can understand it and after this tell-all they did, *I don't see how they can be angry at him for going to the press to tell his side of the story too. He's literally doing it because they won't pick up the phone - the same thing Harry is throwing at his father's feet. He apologized hundreds of times too... having to do that time and again is humiliating and yet he's doing it as a way to communicate with her.


He's from Hollywood, so is Meg.This is how it's done.  What is spontaneous and not calculated in Hollywood?

Besides, M&H did the same thing with Oprah.  They wanted to improve their image, so they did a planned interview. And probably for some cash in some way.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

lalame said:


> Why do you say that? These 2 could not be any more different than one another...


Oh come on now, let's be serious.


----------



## lalame

I also think it's nutty that Piers is being investigated for offensive remarks. Was he rude? Hell yes and I don't think there's anything wrong about him stepping down because his behavior was appalling to me. Very unprofessional.

But to be investigated for offensive remarks after public complaints? I didn't hear anything that was dangerous to the public... even unpopular views should be allowed. Whether his employer allows him to use their platform to do it is one thing but a regulator censoring it sounds a bit like book banning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I'm loving the ignore option!



I’ve just had to use the ignore button for the first time - thanks for the reminder!


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> It means we’re old lol. Been on tpf for   more than 10 years.


in 2018 Megs and Vlad organized it. LOL, Some of us were already “old” before then. tpf is my favorite internet spot, don’t do Facebook or Twitter. I feel safe and unexploited here, in all the Forums where I post, mostly here now. informative, fun, engaging conversations with great posters representing the world.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oh come on now, let's be serious.



Jake Tapper and Megyn Kelly? What about them is similar? One is CNN, the other Fox News, which are completely opposite ends of the political spectrum and you hardly ever hear the two share a single opinion on any issue. The only one I can think of in fact is the aftermath of Mr. T's "bleeding from her whatever" fiasco.


----------



## maris.crane

I mean other than Tapper... I would also agree that’s not a particularly illustrious or impressive list of defenders (and Jake’s wasn’t even a defence of Piers, more like a defence of free speech going by the two tweets.)

Megyn is a mediocre journalist who frequently put her foot in her mouth and got canned quickly with a golden parachute. Her interviews - softballs and with political figures - have been terrible. She’s had her moments, but too many missteps. And Sharon... while I like Sharon she is at best, a commentator.

(I don’t like Jake being lumped in with Megyn and a celebrity relative in this one. He has made his bones in print and television and does a decent job of calling out the BS on both sides.)


----------



## scarlet555

Piers Morgan will have the last laugh, he is not a favorite of mine at all, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be right about cringe!


----------



## lalame

Remember people, those you don't like can also have an opinion you happen to agree with. Those you like can also have opinions you disagree with. No one is all good or bad... and I would hope there is no one you agree 100% with on anything because there's a good chance that person's lying to you.


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> Jake Tapper and Megyn Kelly? What about them is similar? One is CNN, the other Fox News, which are completely opposite ends of the political spectrum and you hardly ever hear the two share a single opinion on any issue. The only one I can think of in fact is the aftermath of Mr. T's "bleeding from her whatever" fiasco.


This. I liked Jake Tapper before. I like him more now


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Honestly, Piers has the audacity to state that he doesn't believe someone under pressure for four years, might have mental health issues and suicidal thoughts and should toughen up, but couldn't put up with under two minutes of direct questioning by a co-worker about his own motives?

Thin-skinned indeed.  His diatribe the previous morning followed by his reaction to Alex Beresford would put a two year old to shame (no offense intended to two year olds).

The irony here is immense.


----------



## muddledmint

FreeSpirit71 said:


> What?  It's my opinion, and I am as entitled to it as you are to yours


Great point


----------



## maris.crane

lalame said:


> I also think it's nutty that Piers is being investigated for offensive remarks. Was he rude? Hell yes and I don't think there's anything wrong about him stepping down because his behavior was appalling to me. Very unprofessional.
> 
> But to be investigated for offensive remarks after public complaints? I didn't hear anything that was dangerous to the public... even unpopular views should be allowed. Whether his employer allows him to use their platform to do it is one thing but a regulator censoring it sounds a bit like book banning.



Genuinely, I think Piers has said so many terrible things that this hissy fit is the final straw. People are tired of his antics, so this - while relatively mundane for him but still hurtful - is well, enough.


----------



## lalame

maris.crane said:


> Genuinely, I think Piers has said so many terrible things that this hissy fit is the final straw. People are tired of his antics.


I agree with you. It was time for him to go. But I share Jake Tapper's point about the first amendment, and that's why I'm like  about him somehow falling out of favor just because it happens to be on the wrong side of Meghan on this issue (maybe? sounds more like a Piers thing). Just because it happened to someone I don't like doesn't mean I like that it happened period.


----------



## muddledmint

mdcx said:


> Princess Michael of Kent maybe another one.


She was the one that wore that offensive brooch when she first met Meghan so I could imagine that.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> Great point





lalame said:


> I agree with you. It was time for him to go. But I share Jake Tapper's point about the first amendment, and that's why I'm like  about him somehow falling out of favor just because it happens to be on the wrong side of Meghan on this issue (maybe? sounds more like a Piers thing). Just because it happened to someone I don't like doesn't mean I like that it happened period.


I don't think it was just about Meghan.  She was the main talking point, of course, but I think it was because he has a large platform on GMB and saying what he said about someone who claimed they were suicidal, not believing them or their mental health issues - could have wide ranging effects in the community.  People have a very hard time admitting they were suicidal or need help. To not be believed once they have done so, could be disastrous.

It probably goes against ITV's internal policy regarding such issues as well, so it was multi-pronged.


----------



## lalame

Also I have to laugh at the dynamics here as I'm pretty certain most if not all members here detest Piers lol. Every time I've heard him mentioned here has been a poster qualifying it with "I can't believe I agree with Piers on something" or "He's a horrible man but ..." Is anyone here defending Piers as a person??? I think he's horrid, but he's right once in awhile on some things (pick your things). I'm more on the side of the First Amendment than Piers Morgan.


----------



## maris.crane

lalame said:


> I agree with you. It was time for him to go. But I share Jake Tapper's point about the first amendment, and that's why I'm like  about him somehow falling out of favor just because it happens to be on the wrong side of Meghan on this issue (maybe? sounds more like a Piers thing). Just because it happened to someone I don't like doesn't mean I like that it happened period.



I think reading Tapper’s tweets he was absolutely defending free speech; Piers is just the “case.” The Daily Mail title was a bit clickbait-y, IMHO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I don't think it was just about Meghan.  She was the main talking point, of course, but I think it was because he has a large platform on GMB and saying what he said about someone who claimed they were suicidal, not believing them or their mental health issues - could have wide ranging effects in the community.  People have a very hard time admitting they were suicidal or need help. To not be believed once they have done so, could be disastrous.
> 
> It probably goes against ITV's internal policy regarding such issues as well, so it was multi-pronged.



I get your point about the social implications but I just don't think that's grounds to censor someone (or take it as serious as a regulator investigation). Even idiots, people who are wrong, or mean, or malicious have a right to speak unless they are inciting violence... Let them speak and be judged for it. Society should cancel him for saying insensitive things, not regulators.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Piers is entitled to free speech. And others are entitled to call him out.  That's how it works - and he proved he couldn't handle it with the way he responded to Alex Beresford.

I'm not even saying Piers should have been sacked.  I mean if you watch GMB with him on it, then you're a glutton for punishment in my opinion but *shrugs*, whatever. Should he have been pulled up on his comments regarding suicide and mental health, regardless of who it relates to? Yes, he should.

He's a very dodgy character. From the phone hacking scandal to the doctoring of photo's of British soliders, the guy is pond scum.


----------



## lalame

I'm one of the ones who called him out lol so believe me I thoroughly believe in that right. My beef is with regulators investigating him for offensive speech because 40k people complained - that's bordering on taking away free speech - not the public having opinions or even complaining. He's a thin-skinned man, certainly, but that's neither here nor there to me at least in this regard.


----------



## Mendocino

maris.crane said:


> Just chiming into say: beyond Suits, WP is a total under utilized actor. Besides The Wire, his guest turns on old school Law and Order are


I loved him as Robert Zane on Suits and is current work on Jack Ryan.


----------



## csshopper

haute okole said:


> I believe Meghan may have been depressed but blaming “the Firm or HR” for her inability to access mental health support is a BOLD face lie.  Her mother was a mental health professional and social worker in Los Angeles.  I guess the Firm took away her ability to talk to her Mom.  When she flew to NY for her baby shower, why not call a therapist.  Oh Sorry, she would have no one to scape goat and no way to manipulate Harry into moving to LA where she can have tea in the garden with Oprah and Bob Iger.  Meghan takes absolutely zero responsibility for her situation.  Everything is everybody else’s fault.  This girl is not only mentally ill, but she is a malingerer.


haute okole,  Thought provoking observations! I never thought about her Mom’s potential for help. Plus what others have mentioned about her doctors.

my question is what in heck was Harry doing?  As one of the founders of a Foundation focusing on mental health they had many possible resources.


----------



## lalame

Didn't Harry say he was ashamed to tell family members that they were suffering? Not sure if that meant he didn't tell them the full extent of it or if he did but just felt uncomfortable.


----------



## needlv

muddledmint said:


> She was the one that wore that offensive brooch when she first met Meghan so I could imagine that.



Yes absolutely- and Princess Michael of Kent has previously been accused of saying racist remarks too.  So it could be her.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

needlv said:


> Yes absolutely- and Princess Michael of Kent has been known to say racist remarks too.  So it could be her.


I don't think it's her.  While she most definitely has issues with PoC, I believe it may have been William or Charles and is what led to the falling out with either of them. But again, like everyone else I'm just speculating and reading between the lines of what they _didn't_ say in the interview.


----------



## Chanbal

Mendocino said:


> I loved him as Robert Zane on Suits and is current work on Jack Ryan.


Never watched Suits, but loved him as James Greer on Jack Ryan. Waiting for Season 3, I believe.


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> Also I have to laugh at the dynamics here as I'm pretty certain most if not all members here detest Piers lol. Every time I've heard him mentioned here has been a poster qualifying it with "I can't believe I agree with Piers on something" or "He's a horrible man but ..." Is anyone here defending Piers as a person??? I think he's horrid, but he's right once in awhile on some things (pick your things). I'm more on the side of the First Amendment than Piers Morgan.




I only know what I've seen posted here and since I tend to agree with it 
In debate I always welcomed taking the unpopular argument, so it wouldn't bother me to take up for Piers.


----------



## muddledmint

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I don't think it was just about Meghan.  She was the main talking point, of course, but I think it was because he has a large platform on GMB and saying what he said about someone who claimed they were suicidal, not believing them or their mental health issues - could have wide ranging effects in the community.  People have a very hard time admitting they were suicidal or need help. To not be believed once they have done so, could be disastrous.
> 
> It probably goes against ITV's internal policy regarding such issues as well, so it was multi-pronged.


The reason Meghan’s story is unbelievable is that the details do not hold up at all. Whether she was depressed or suicidal is something we cannot know for sure. However, there is no reason for her to go to HR for help (she’s not an employee and she had MANY better ways of getting help if she really needed it, such as her mom, her private physicians, Harry), and there is no reason why the firm would deny her if she really did. What is the upside for the royal family to deny her? If they were afraid of negative publicity, they could have arranged something quietly for Meghan under the radar. If anything, they would be hypersensitive to this after Diana and the fact that Harry, William, and Kate are such mental health advocates. It’s bad optics if they let the newest senior royal commit suicide. If this part of the story makes no sense, why should anyone believe the rest of the story?? Would Harry seriously let this go and allow the royal family to withhold lifesaving help for Meghan if he truly believed she needed it? No! Therefore, this HR incident either never happened or didn’t happen the way she said.

This is complete speculation, but I think a more likely story is this:
- staffers went to HR to complain about meghan
- Meghan was confronted with these claims and either used depression as an excuse for her behavior, or blamed staffers/racism/press etc for her depression, or maybe depression didn’t even come up in the discussion.
- she knows that details of this HR encounter might become public due to the bullying investigation and wants to get ahead of the story by making HR the villain by claiming they refused to help her when she was suicidal


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Rumors swirl that M will reveal the person who commented on Archie...


Wouldn't that person want to sue for defamation?

Especially if they didn’t mean it in the way that Harry interpreted it. They may not of been saying it in a derogatory way.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> Didn't Harry say he was ashamed to tell family members that they were suffering? Not sure if that meant he didn't tell them the full extent of it or if he did but just felt uncomfortable.


I guess he got over that shame because now he’s telling the whole world


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> The reason Meghan’s story is unbelievable is that the details do not hold up at all. Whether she was depressed or suicidal is something we cannot know for sure. However, there is no reason for her to go to HR for help (she’s not an employee and she had MANY better ways of getting help if she really needed it, such as her mom, her private physicians, Harry), and there is no reason why the firm would deny her if she really did. What is the upside for the royal family to deny her? If they were afraid of negative publicity, they could have arranged something quietly for Meghan under the radar. If anything, they would be hypersensitive to this after Diana and the fact that Harry, William, and Kate are such mental health advocates. It’s bad optics if they let the newest senior royal commit suicide. If this part of the story makes no sense, why should anyone believe the rest of the story?? Would Harry seriously let this go and allow the royal family to withhold lifesaving help for Meghan if he truly believed she needed it? No! Therefore, this HR incident either never happened or didn’t happen the way she said.
> 
> This is complete speculation, but I think a more likely story is this:
> - staffers went to HR to complain about meghan
> - Meghan was confronted with these claims and either used depression as an excuse for her behavior, or blamed staffers/racism/press etc for her depression, or maybe depression didn’t even come up in the discussion.
> - she knows that details of this HR encounter might become public due to the bullying investigation and wants to get ahead of the story by making HR the villain by claiming they refused to help her when she was suicidal



Well, the truth is you're responding to your bias in this situation - and I am responding with mine.  It's just we see things differently and that's fine.  I believe that she was struggling mentally.  Some things did hit wrong with me in this interview (The Little Mermaid story for example really grated on me).  Some things though...rang true.  The press _were_ horrendous to her, all the while she was expecting - that's atrocious no matter what infractions you feel she may have committed.  The press _were_ different to Meghan when juxtaposed with similar scenarios/headlines  with Kate - there's ample evidence of it.


----------



## muddledmint

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Well, the truth is you're responding to your bias in this situation - and I am responding with mine.  It's just we see things differently and that's fine.  I believe that she was struggling mentally.  Some things did hit wrong with me in this interview (The Little Mermaid story for example really grated on me).  Some things though...rang true.  The press _were_ horrendous to her, all the while she was expecting - that's atrocious no matter what infractions you feel she may have committed.  The press _were_ different to Meghan when juxtaposed with similar scenarios/headlines  with Kate - there's ample evidence of it.


Meghan has said on the record that she doesn’t read the press, or social media, so how does this affect her? Or is this again yet another lie? And what does that have to do with her story about going to HR and being refused help? If she had simply said that she suffered mentally and considered suicide, I could take that at face value, but using her mental health as a dagger to attack the royal family in a story that doesn’t even make sense makes me skeptical of the whole thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Never watched Suits, but loved him as James Greer on Jack Ryan. Waiting for Season 3, I believe.



Honestly................... Suits was a great show.


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> *The reason Meghan’s story is unbelievable is that the details do not hold up at all.* Whether she was depressed or suicidal is something we cannot know for sure. However, there is no reason for her to go to HR for help (she’s not an employee and she had MANY better ways of getting help if she really needed it, such as her mom, her private physicians, Harry), and there is no reason why the firm would deny her if she really did. What is the upside for the royal family to deny her? If they were afraid of negative publicity, they could have arranged something quietly for Meghan under the radar. If anything, they would be hypersensitive to this after Diana and the fact that Harry, William, and Kate are such mental health advocates. It’s bad optics if they let the newest senior royal commit suicide. If this part of the story makes no sense, why should anyone believe the rest of the story?? Would Harry seriously let this go and allow the royal family to withhold lifesaving help for Meghan if he truly believed she needed it? No! Therefore, this HR incident either never happened or didn’t happen the way she said.
> 
> This is complete speculation, but I think a more likely story is this:
> - staffers went to HR to complain about meghan
> - Meghan was confronted with these claims and either used depression as an excuse for her behavior, or blamed staffers/racism/press etc for her depression, or maybe depression didn’t even come up in the discussion.
> - she knows that details of this HR encounter might become public due to the bullying investigation and wants to get ahead of the story by making HR the villain by claiming they refused to help her when she was suicidal



Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story! MM has no attachment to the grandeur...  Bad, bad King George V!

*"When asked if it was 'important' for Meghan that Archie be called a prince, she said she does not have any attachment to the 'grandeur' of official titles.*
_
She said it was about 'the idea of our son not being safe' and the idea 'the first member of colour in this family not being titled in the same way'.

In 1917, King George V - the Queen's grandfather - issued a written order ruling only royal offspring in the direct line of succession could be made a prince or princess.
_
*But the Times reports the Sussexes are concerned Prince Charles will change the rules when he is king - meaning their son will not carry the title."*










						Sussexes 'fear CHARLES will refuse to make Archie a Prince'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (pictured in 2019) are said to believe the Prince of Wales plans to change the rules when the Queen dies.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

lalame said:


> Honestly................... Suits was a great show.


Yes - Until they removed Jessica’s character  ... and everyone knew Mike’s secret...  after that it got a bit boring...


----------



## kkfiregirl

How is Archie a person of color?! I didn’t know she said that, because I can’t bring myself to watch any of the interview clips, _yet_.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> Honestly................... Suits was a great show.


i watched it because of Meghan! To think I used to like her!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Honestly................... Suits was a great show.


I only heard about Suits well after MM married Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Absolutely. The telling thing for me that she was not prohibited from anything is she clapped back at everything they advised her on, she did it her way and for us to believe that she didn't have a voice? Please, she fought them every step of the way and did what ever she wanted, no hat when advised, kicking people out of seats at Wimbledon, demanding a tiara, upstaging Eugenie, bringing her own people to perform at the wedding, I could go on and on.  She was a bully and so of course, the allegations from staffers of abuse from her, she claps back with crocodile tears, chicken coop interviews and now proclaiming mental health? Yes, I do believe she has mental health issues but her and lust and greed for fame and revenge is classic. Her husband does not get a pass either.
> 
> Her mother is a professional, she could have gone to her mother. She's just vengeful.


Vengeful is really the perfect word. It fits in with her need to target people that she thinks wronged her.   If I was The Queen I would watch my back. She targeting her as well despite what she says. Don’t trust a thing coming out of Meghan’s mouth.


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story! MM has no attachment to the grandeur...  Bad, bad King George V!
> 
> *"When asked if it was 'important' for Meghan that Archie be called a prince, she said she does not have any attachment to the 'grandeur' of official titles.*
> 
> She said it was about 'the idea of our son not being safe' and the idea 'the first member of colour in this family not being titled in the same way'.
> 
> In 1917, King George V - the Queen's grandfather - issued a written order ruling only royal offspring in the direct line of succession could be made a prince or princess.
> 
> *But the Times reports the Sussexes are concerned Prince Charles will change the rules when he is king - meaning their son will not carry the title.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes 'fear CHARLES will refuse to make Archie a Prince'
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (pictured in 2019) are said to believe the Prince of Wales plans to change the rules when the Queen dies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She contradicts herself all the time! She cannot keep her lies straight. If she has no attachment to the grandeur, why is she so offended by the idea of Archie not being titled like Kate’s kids and why did she and Harry fight so hard to keep the Sussex titles? And she says she only cared about Archie being a prince to get a security detail, but then later said she wrote a letter begging for Harry’s security while saying it didn’t matter if she and Archie didn’t have security. My eyeballs are getting so much exercise


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Vengeful is really the perfect word. It fits in with her need to target people that she thinks wronged her.   If I was The Queen I would watch my back. She targeting her as well despite what she says. Don’t trust a thing coming out of Meghan’s mouth.


I think Will is the target, but I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## muddledmint

gracekelly said:


> Vengeful is really the perfect word. It fits in with her need to target people that she thinks wronged her.   If I was The Queen I would watch my back. She targeting her as well despite what she says. Don’t trust a thing coming out of Meghan’s mouth.


This is a classic trait in narcissistic people! Nothing is her fault, everyone else is to blame, she’s dying of envy (especially of Kate!) but claims that they were envious of her (re the success of the Australia tour), the world revolves around her (Samantha changing her last name back to markle after meghan got together with Harry), she is the greatest humanitarian and the most amazing voice for girls of color, the best cook and yogi, no royal has ever suffered from the press like her (except Diana who gets a pass because she’s dead) and etc. She is kind of like a carnival fun house distorted mirror image of another famous narcissist. The opposite but the same.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> Meghan has said on the record that she doesn’t read the press, or social media, so how does this affect her? Or is this again yet another lie? And what does that have to do with her story about going to HR and being refused help? If she had simply said that she suffered mentally and considered suicide, I could take that at face value, but using her mental health as a dagger to attack the royal family in a story that doesn’t even make sense makes me skeptical of the whole thing.


She also said on the record that well-meaning friends would call her or email her and say something along the lines of, "OMG have you seen what XYZ publication said about you?" so she wasn't saying she was completely oblivious to it.

When the Palace takes the time to respond to allegations about such (quite frankly) silly stories as Kate's supposed botox and hair extensions but does nothing to respond to the more serious articles about Meghan it speaks volumes.

None of us know how HR or issues such as mental health are dealt with inside Palace walls.


----------



## needlv

I am sure the Royal family has more than enough “evidence” on both H and MMs behaviour which they could leak if they choose.  It’s a no-win game if H and MM go too far (although debatable that maybe they have already).   in fact you may see some more leaks coming from the BRF subtly via media outlets - particularly if some staffers are released from NDAs.

I would like to hear from the staff member that had tea thrown/dropped on them...


----------



## muddledmint

FreeSpirit71 said:


> She also said on the record that well-meaning friends would call her or email her and say something along the lines of, "OMG have you seen what XYZ publication said about you?" so she wasn't saying she was completely oblivious to it.
> 
> When the Palace takes the time to respond to allegations about such (quite frankly) silly allegations as Kate's botox and hair extensions but does nothing to respond to the more serious articles about Meghan it speaks volumes.
> 
> None of us know how HR or issues such as mental health are dealt with inside Palace walls.


Have they made statements about Kate’s Botox? I’ve followed the royals pretty consistently since before Kate’s wedding and don’t recall that? And if they have, the difference is that Kate will be queen or consort or whatever they call the king’s wife and is a higher priority for the royal family. Meghan and Kate will never be equal in the eyes of the royal family. While I don’t agree that this is right in modern times, that is how it is, and Meghan and Harry should have known that from the start. And they shouldn’t take it so personally.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> I am sure the Royal family has more than enough “evidence” on both H and MMs behaviour which they could leak if they choose.  It’s a no-win game if H and MM go too far (although debatable that maybe they have already).   in fact you may see some more leaks coming from the BRF subtly via media outlets - particularly if some staffers are released from NDAs.
> 
> I would like to hear from the staff member that had tea thrown/dropped on them...


There's a guy over on Quora who said he was abused by MM but her father stepped in to stop it. He seemed credible as he put his full name in and his place of employment. He seemed pissed off about it but thanks to MM's father who stepped in. Where's @CeeJay  She had similar stories of MM actions in her youth.


----------



## viciel

The Queen's response is perfect. Shows compassion, restraint, and in stark contrast of sparkle and ginger. 

I know the media is focusing on who made the comment about Archie being too dark skinned to be royal blah blah blah. But it could easily have been someone expressing curiosity over how the child will look given the parents having such diverse bloodlines and she turns it around and make these outlandish comments. Once you throw out certain cards it becomes difficult for others to argue with you/disagree because it's already so contentious. We have plenty of WOC in my family and mixed race children and this gets asked, so what? Don't forget markle is a liar so she will twist and spin and make up whatever lies to fit the narrative in her head. She probably even believes the lies she's imagined. Truly truly she can't get any more NPD than this. She's a textbook NPD. Maybe she did seek help and the therapist codes her a F60.81. and she gets mad and doesn't mention anymore that she actually sought help but couldn't get someone to tell her she's depressed or suicidal. Maybe the therapist saw right through her. Being truly suicidal is nor just saying you want to kill yourself. There's a whole process or evaluation and interview. Anyone's capable of feeling blue or down or depressed but not everyone is diagnosed with depression. Those are totally different things. Arg I am going to take a break from reading any news about these two. They are so completely delusional.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muddledmint

muddledmint said:


> Have they made statements about Kate’s Botox? I’ve followed the royals pretty consistently since before Kate’s wedding and don’t recall that? And if they have, the difference is that Kate will be queen or consort or whatever they call the king’s wife and is a higher priority for the royal family. Meghan and Kate will never be equal in the eyes of the royal family. While I don’t agree that this is right in modern times, that is how it is, and Meghan and Harry should have known that from the start. And they shouldn’t take it so personally.


On a side note, I have a hard time believing Kate gets Botox. Does she really? She’s the same age as Meghan, but Meghan looks years younger!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> *Have they made statements about Kate’s Botox*? I’ve followed the royals pretty consistently since before Kate’s wedding and don’t recall that? And if they have, the difference is that Kate will be queen or consort or whatever they call the king’s wife and is a higher priority for the royal family. Meghan and Kate will never be equal in the eyes of the royal family. While I don’t agree that this is right in modern times, that is how it is, and Meghan and Harry should have known that from the start. And they shouldn’t take it so personally.


They did:


> Kensington Palace issued a rare statement about Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, to shut down speculation that she got "baby Botox" following a plastic surgeon's recent claims on social media. The rumors are "categorically not true," a palace rep said in a statement to _The New York Post, _adding, "The Royal Family never endorse commercial activity."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kensington Palace Shuts Down Kate Middleton "Baby Botox" Rumors
> 
> 
> Speculation heightened after a plastic surgeon made claims on Instagram.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



I agree with you about minor stories regarding Meghan and Harry but when stories are headlined with such things as "Harry's girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed" or "Royal wedding: How Meghan Markle’s flowers may have put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk" it does become personal.


----------



## eunaddict

maris.crane said:


> But I do think not taking your kids phone calls, no matter how messy they may have been on social media - is just mind-blowing. (Especially when Charles himself is a hot mess express and committed his own embarrassing follies)



People cut off toxic family members all the time. It's not for us to decide what level of toxicity is required before someone stops accepting calls from said family member. The general line in the sand when someone's presence in your life becomes more trouble than the relationship is worth.

(Besides, she cut her entire family (for....?toxicity, ?getting too friendly and too personal with the media), other than her mother out of her life...why can't Charles cut H off for the same reasons?)


----------



## FreeSpirit71

muddledmint said:


> On a side note, I have a hard time believing Kate gets Botox. Does she really? She’s the same age as Meghan, but Meghan looks years younger!


This was truly one of the silliest stories - that's why I'm surprised they took time to respond to it.  In this day and age a sprinkle of botox is pretty much no big deal.  I do think she gets it, and occasionally some filler, but again it's a bit of a "so what?" for me.


----------



## tiktok

Excellent points here:








						When Harry called his colleague the 'P'-word, it was 'without malice'
					

SARAH VINE: As the dust from that neutron bomb of an interview begins to settle, and the full extent of the fallout becomes clear, it seems Megxit has become even more divisive than Brexit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Essaeeeee

needlv said:


> I am sure the Royal family has more than enough “evidence” on both H and MMs behaviour which they could leak if they choose.  It’s a no-win game if H and MM go too far (although debatable that maybe they have already).


Then they should just do it shouldn't they?

You all royal apologists really try so hard to make excuses for them while they themselves come out with a statement that it may have happened.


----------



## JA_UK

muddledmint said:


> On a side note, I have a hard time believing Kate gets Botox. Does she really? She’s the same age as Meghan, but Meghan looks years younger!


Both she and her sister have looked haggard for years, if she was getting botox it wasn't working!


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> I imagine NETFLIX is looking at this as more episodes for The Crown. Meghan can even play herself because she is an “actress”(ha ha) and even Harry can play himself*. *Can’t be much of an effort; he just needs to prop himself next to a wall, chair, a chicken....*Meghan would have all of the lines anyway.*



Firstly, she'd forget what she said and make something else up, and secondly, she can't even learn a National Anthem that only has two verses.


----------



## Essaeeeee

JA_UK said:


> Both she and her sister have looked haggard for years, if she was getting botox it wasn't working!


If you see pictures of her from the initial lockdown last year and ones after you can see she gets treatments. She looked really wrinkly during the lockdown.


----------



## JA_UK

Essaeeeee said:


> If you see pictures of her from the initial lockdown last year and ones after you can see she gets treatments. She looked really wrinkly during the lockdown.


But she still looks haggard for her years...


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> She also said on the record that well-meaning friends would call her or email her and say something along the lines of, "OMG have you seen what XYZ publication said about you?" so she wasn't saying she was completely oblivious to it.
> 
> When the Palace takes the time to respond to allegations about such (quite frankly) silly stories as Kate's supposed botox and hair extensions but does nothing to respond to the more serious articles about Meghan it speaks volumes.
> 
> None of us know how HR or issues such as mental health are dealt with inside Palace walls.


You have to remember that when MM came on the scene she was truly adored by the press. They could not stop gushing about her, how wonderful she was . . . till she started showing her . . .the Wimbledon debacle was a disaster it showed entitlement. 

Kate endured her share of nasty press.


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> This is the classy way to say
> “They are both fairly mentally unwell. We will handle things in house, per usual.”



 That's _exactly_ what it says in British-English, you got it.


----------



## Sol Ryan

FreeSpirit71 said:


> They did:
> 
> 
> I agree with you about minor stories regarding Meghan and Harry but when stories are headlined with such things as "Harry's girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed" or "Royal wedding: How Meghan Markle’s flowers may have put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk" it does become personal.



I remember this. It was because there was a plastic surgeon out there saying he’d done the work. It wasn’t because she’d supposedly had Botox. Companies like Burberry and Boots have Royal Warrants and him going in the press like it was an endorsement, that was something the BRF felt needed to be addressed to protect those. If someone just said “ Kate looks like she had Botox.” I don’t think they’d care.









						List of royal warrant holders of the British royal family - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Fair enough. I think most everyone on this forum were of the same mindset as you were and were staunch supporters of her at the outset. The part where it took a turn was when things were not adding up to what she said and the actions. As a public figure regarding carbon footprints, charity and other issues of major importance. She has a lot of influence.
> 
> All those points you made are very well understood.
> 
> Thanks for your response.
> 
> Sharing a great song with you from my part of the world (even though I have lived in the US now for many years). Makes me want to get up and dance when things get hectic.




I love how this thread has a resident DJ and musical interludes


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> MM will never voluntarily donate those earrings to charity. *The earrings can be transformed in other beautiful pieces of jewelry.*



Just coz you cut a body up, don't mean there'z been no murder


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

muddledmint said:


> She contradicts herself all the time! *She cannot keep her lies straight.* If she has no attachment to the grandeur, why is she so offended by the idea of Archie not being titled like Kate’s kids and why did she and Harry fight so hard to keep the Sussex titles? And she says she only cared about Archie being a prince to get a security detail, but then later said she wrote a letter begging for Harry’s security while saying it didn’t matter if she and Archie didn’t have security. My eyeballs are getting so much exercise



She doesn't have to. 
As we have seen, those who are in her corner are, for the most part, impervious to anything negative said about her. That kind of blind devotion isn't usually amenable to reason. 
And those who do call her on it are dealt with accordingly


----------



## muddledmint

FreeSpirit71 said:


> They did:
> 
> 
> I agree with you about minor stories regarding Meghan and Harry but when stories are headlined with such things as "Harry's girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed" or "Royal wedding: How Meghan Markle’s flowers may have put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk" it does become personal.


That is ridiculous that they would respond to a Botox story of all things. But again, they are going to do more for Kate because of her position, and it’s not necessarily because of racism or whatever.  Hierarchy and protocol are supreme with them. Even Kate has to curtsy to Beatrice and Eugenie when she is not with Will because they outrank her as blood princesses. That’s just the way it is.


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> Once upon a time this thread was titled "We're just wild about Harry" not kidding. Posters were very much looking forward to what he would do in life. He kind of felt like a breath of fresh air as to the fact that he was more "out of line" than any royals had seen before, and some posters found him handsome (not my cup of tea, but alas) things have really escalated in matters of support, which is reflected by his life changing since meeting MM, etc.



We could rename the thread "Where did Harry Go?", "What Harry Did(n't Do) Next", "When Harry Met the Duchess" or "Too Dirty Harry"?


----------



## muddledmint

poopsie said:


> She doesn't have to.
> As we have seen, those who are in her corner are, for the most part, impervious to anything negative said about her. That kind of blind devotion isn't usually amenable to reason.
> And those who do call her on it are dealt with accordingly


So many parallels


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> another from Huffpost.  according to this WOC, black women have "claimed her"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Know How Meghan Markle Feels. All Black Women Do.
> 
> 
> "When the world watched Meghan break barriers at Buckingham Palace, Black women held silent prayer vigils for her emotional and physical safety."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Not 3 of my friends, one calls her a traitor (many Afro-Caribbeans are staunchly Royalist) and the others feel betrayed by her as they thought she was going to be a visible (hard) working Senior Royal.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?



I bet Netflix are asking themselves the same question.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> I love how this thread has a resident DJ and musical interludes


Can I just please add one more song for the night? Harry’s parting somg when it all goes awry (hopefully it dies not that way though)


----------



## Lodpah

bisousx said:


> If this is the case, then MM is astute for inviting Oprah to the wedding and building that connection. Like her or not, MM represents something important to certain groups (media attention, gorgeous, classy, married to royalty, seemingly good role model, “charitable” etc). Oprah probably feels MM is the face of the future if it turns out she invested herself so heavily in MM. H is just a tool (in every sense of the word). Narcissists like MM won’t show her real face or attitude in front of people they need to climb ahead, so the two of them probably get along just fine!


Old money or new?


----------



## Jktgal

I enjoyed the comment section of this article, so much information and logic. And what do we have here...


----------



## Jktgal

muddledmint said:


> ...but Meghan looks years younger!



I would too if I have a 16 room 19 bath mansion with swimming pool and fresh chicken and eggs from my own coop. And don't have 3 kids (one of whom needs to be prepared to be KING), whinny in laws (and worry that spare son will end up thusly), and a whole family to curtsy too. The curtsies would break my back and make me wrinkle like for sure. It's a wonder if she is not thinking of..... suicide (shudder).



*kids, wear sunscreen and don't smoke


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I see O.G. a lot under people’s avatar what does it mean?



Lifers


----------



## lalame

I don’t think Doria would’ve necessarily been a good choice as a therapist for her. Too close... and social worker isn’t really the same thing as a therapist... especially not a psychiatrist, if medication were needed. But I do wonder why Doria didn’t move into Frogmore with them. That certainly would’ve helped her with the loneliness at least.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, to get past the suicidal/depressive thoughts, she just needed Haz to ‘cradle’ her?  Or did she ever receive treatment?
That’s a humongous hole in this story.


----------



## poopsie

Jktgal said:


> I would too if I have a 16 room 19 bath mansion with swimming pool and fresh chicken and eggs from my own coop. And don't have 3 kids (one of whom needs to be prepared to be KING), whinny in laws (and worry that spare son will end up thusly), and a whole family to curtsy too. The curtsies would break my back and make me wrinkle like for sure. It's a wonder if she is not thinking of..... suicide (shudder).
> 
> View attachment 5017235
> 
> *kids, wear sunscreen and don't smoke




and don't get old?
Camilla looks fine. It's what people USED to look like when they lived their lives and aged naturally


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> I don’t think Doria would’ve necessarily been a good choice as a therapist for her. Too close... and social worker isn’t really the same thing as a therapist... especially not a psychiatrist, if medication were needed. But I do wonder why Doria didn’t move into Frogmore with them. That certainly would’ve helped her with the loneliness at least.


I don’t think people are suggesting doria could have been her therapist, rather that she is someone who could have been a resource in finding help for Meghan. I’m very curious to see what frogmore looks like from the inside, especially after renovations, and hope that someday we will see!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, to get past the suicidal/depressive thoughts, she just needed Haz to ‘cradle’ her?  Or did she ever receive treatment?
> That’s a humongous hole in this story.


He seems to cradle her a lot.    Isn’t that also how she described her dramatic miscarriage scene that she seemed to have plagiarized?  That he cradled her?


----------



## purseinsanity

Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
					

A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> He seems to cradle her a lot.    Isn’t that also how she described her dramatic miscarriage scene that she seemed to have plagiarized?  That he cradled her?



barf


----------



## jelliedfeels

maris.crane said:


> ... well, I’m actually not a particularly big fan of Meghan, or Leo. My question was why this page is 3400+ pages when other equally controversial celebrities rate 30 pages.
> 
> I just find it bizarre; you don’t. Truce made. Stale mate.
> 
> Anywho, I probably need to find a Ginger Spice thread to blindly celeb worship in.


Ok but a former spice girls or even former girl groups thread would be great. I love learning what the women do next but can’t be bothered with Instagram.

I’ve made a variation of this point before but what I’d say is that (of course I don’t know your nationality and you may feel differently) that for their subjects they are not just celebs. They are very powerful constitutional, religious and quasi-political figures.
In my experience there is no getting away from royals or ex-royals in the news or the wider British culture. So it’s not surprising we seem obsessed  and I don’t think there’s a very obvious parallel in Republics because politici*ns aren’t quite the same (though you could say they can also have very passionate cults of personality also.)

H&M‘s story is often compared to Diana’s and it’s quite fitting in many ways. They both have intense relationships with the press and were constantly in the news. Of course, the other similarity is they have both have done an interview which has caused controversy in the palace.
I hope I don’t sound pretentious in saying that Diana’s divorce and tragic death caused a schism in British culture to the extent that there was discussion whether the monarchy would continue & I think Britain is going through a similar debate now. It is also crucial that this is happening at a similar time to the Andrew case but that the media are much more wary of covering it - it is nonetheless very prominent in people’s minds.

There are royalists and Republic**ns on this thread. So in that alone there is a lot to discuss. There’s a lot of plain old gossip too & I will admit I love to joke about the whole situation and the key figures. I’m sure if I was around during the Charles and Diana years I’d find it simultaneously horrifying, fascinating and funny and I will be glued to finding out what this means for the future of the BRF.

I will admit I dislike both of their  public personas very much. I think their hypocrisies and selfishness is derailing a lot of important conversations about our constitution and the serious issues in our country because they are only interested in aggrandising themselves. Yet they are still given an enormously prominent place in the debate. It’s infuriating. As to their personal lives- I don’t want to know anymore than I want to know whether an MP likes their parents.

So TLDR: yes I and Brits in general certainly seem obsessed with this royal but I would say it’s because it has higher stakes for us than the Kimye divorce.


----------



## doni

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.



I agree that the British may have a different way to deal with some stuff compared to an American, who are so open. These are cultural differences, and one way of dealing with things is not necessarily better than the other. The implication that the way Americans view the world is the right way is something we have all learnt to live with but not everyone necessarily shares. Still I can believe it would be hard for Meghan to adapt.

But aside this, the problem with this story is that it does not fit other facts that an informed journalist may have brought up.

For a start, _before having met Meghan_, Harry talked about his mental stress and difficulties dealing with the trauma of loosing his mother and how he had received therapy. He credited his brother with coming up with the idea and convincing him to do therapy. He himself had been a macho type who thought he would get through it all through boxing and partying, but his family (he said) were concerned and wanted him to get medical help. This doesn’t seem to fit this story...

Plus, it is not fair to put the HR of _your staff _in such position... As a Prince, Harry is one of the best connected people in the UK, no one would have it easier to procure the best doctor for his wife and ensure the most discretion. Hell, he got the Archbishop of Canterbury to come partake in their private celebration of love and no one found out... Is he really so useless that, by his own acknowledgement, he was prepared to risk the life of his wife and child rather than calling someone _himself_? This really beats me...


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> If this is the case, then MM is astute for inviting Oprah to the wedding and building that connection. Like her or not, MM represents something important to certain groups (media attention, gorgeous, classy, married to royalty, seemingly good role model, “charitable” etc). Oprah probably feels MM is the face of the future if it turns out she invested herself so heavily in MM. H is just a tool (in every sense of the word). Narcissists like MM won’t show her real face or attitude in front of people they need to climb ahead, so the two of them probably get along just fine!





Lodpah said:


> Old money or new?



Bitcoin Gen


----------



## CarryOn2020

doni said:


> I agree that the British may have a different way to deal with some stuff compared to an American, who are so open. These are cultural differences, and one way of dealing with things is not necessarily better than the other. The implication that the way Americans view the world is the right way is something we have all learnt to live with but not everyone necessarily shares. Still I can believe it would be hard for Meghan to adapt.
> 
> But aside this, the problem with this story is that it does not fit other facts that an informed journalist may have brought up.
> 
> For a start, _before having met Meghan_, Harry talked about his mental stress and difficulties dealing with the trauma of loosing his mother and how he had received therapy. He credited his brother with coming up with the idea and convincing him to do therapy. He himself had been a macho type who thought he would get through it all through boxing and partying, but his family (he said) were concerned and wanted him to get medical help. This doesn’t seem to fit this story...
> 
> Plus, it is not fair to put the HR of _your staff _in such position... As a Prince, Harry is one of the best connected people in the UK, no one would have it easier to procure the best doctor for his wife and ensure the most discretion. Hell, he got the Archbishop of Canterbury to come partake in their private celebration of love and no one found out... Is he really so useless that, by his own acknowledgement, he was prepared to risk the life of his wife and child rather than calling someone _himself_? This really beats me...



Me too.  And that Oprah went back to film more. Gayle says O was really shocked at the mental health issue. Then, why not ask follow-ups?   Definitely not the OW of yesteryear.

We could all see that things weren’t happy happy, I just don’t get not reaching out. She claims she discussed it with a senior member. To me, it sounds like MM wants to cast aspersions on Kate with Haz’s blessing.  Crazy behavior, crazy comments.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> What blatant lies? Please enlighten me. Broken relationships... doesn’t everyone whose dated more than one person have those?



Ok at this point I feel a bit confused. We've been talking about both at length. I get it, you don't read stuff about Meghan I guess...but the last few pages alone have several massive lies told by her in the interview alone together with proof they are lies.


----------



## JY89

Aimee3 said:


> Changing the subject a little ...what are H&M supposed to do for Netflix?  Neither ever produced, directed, or wrote a script and one isn’t an actor and the other one is a pretty bad one at that.  I just don’t grasp what they have to offer.  We have already heard their story, ( I mean lies, ) so what’s the deal?



My apologies but I second this statement  
What we all just saw was directed by Meghan, written by Meghan, acted by Meghan and the other was just there as a prop (no lines needed)
I was still thinking that she make a pretty good script writer with all that stories she made up.
She literally had the crown played out for us live with the original cast even before Netflix starts writing the script for it. For a z-list actress, that’s pretty impressive uh


----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> another from Huffpost.  according to this WOC, black women have "claimed her"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Know How Meghan Markle Feels. All Black Women Do.
> 
> 
> "When the world watched Meghan break barriers at Buckingham Palace, Black women held silent prayer vigils for her emotional and physical safety."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



I am not a WOC so I really can‘t say. I have said it before, I am perfectly convinced that while working as a royal, Meghan was a victim of racist behaviour both from her entourage and from the press.

But the implication that being a (very privileged) WOM in this context is so much harder than being a WOM in so many other situations beats me. I mean, isn’t it harder as a WOM to make it, say, as a lawyer in corporate America, or as a journalist, or as a politician, or whatever. And are (so many) WOM in difficult economic circumstances living in dangerous neighborhoods not more at risk of physical and emotional violence?! Are you really telling me that as Charles, Prince of Wales, Heir to the Crown, took her by the arm clad in a haute couture Givenchy dress topped by a veil embroidered by a hundred seamstresses to the cheer of an ecstatic multitude of British citizens, WOM saw a martyr? I don’t understand, I would have assumed many a WOM who had to fight with nail and teeth for wherever they are in life would resent the implications of this, but maybe I am wrong. I’d love for a WOM to explain...


----------



## muddledmint

Tucker Carlson did a bit on the interview and I was like  while reading what he said. In what bizarro world am I to be agreeing with fox news hosts?!


----------



## chicinthecity777

JA_UK said:


> Is this the same Piers that loudly berated every politician about breaking COVID rules but jets off to Antigua for Xmas during tier 4 lockdown restricting non essential travel? Those principles?


Personally I can't stand the guy. But I don't agree with cancel culture and although some may disagree with what he says and I disagree with him 99% of the time. 

Edited because I just read the BBC article about why he had to quit, because ITV executives disagreed with his opinions. And they say cancel culture doesn't exist!  

Anyway, last post about Piers, while reading 30+ pages, I thought I was on Leo thread and then I thought i was on Pier's thread.


----------



## justwatchin

lalame said:


> What makes what she said hard to believe if it's taken literally, that she asked for mental health support and didn't get it, is that William, Harry, and Kate have said before that they're in therapy. Even Diana had a therapist... It just doesn't seem plausible to me that they literally told her she could not have access to a therapist.
> 
> Now whether they handled her mental health well is another issue, though. I can absolutely believe they aren't a very affectionate family (not their style) and didn't provide the type of comfort to her that she might expect.


I didn’t watch the interview so was Harry there when she brought up her mental health? Because I think the first person she would have gone to for help would have been him. This is a huge revelation and important topic. Did Oprah question her/him on this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> This is the nastiest, most negative thread I have come across in my several years of being on TPF. It may not have started as such, but it is. There is hardly anything positive in this thread.



And yet you're still here, while simultaneously claiming you are not that interested.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> Fearless!  What will they accuse him of?  Racism?  Jealousy?  He even quoted Shakespear...



Seeing the racism card is out they'll probably say he's jealous Harry didn't fall for him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

DrDior said:


> You must’ve missed the discussions of Mrs. T’s clothing choices. Altho no fan of her “style”, myself, I did attend the chat on occasion ...


I loved Mrs. ‘T’s style. Her choice in most things was excellent, with one possible exception.


----------



## justwatchin

lalame said:


> I don’t think Doria would’ve necessarily been a good choice as a therapist for her. Too close... and social worker isn’t really the same thing as a therapist... especially not a psychiatrist, if medication were needed. But I do wonder why Doria didn’t move into Frogmore with them. That certainly would’ve helped her with the loneliness at least.


I kind of get the feeling Doria is trotted out when needed and not the mother/daughter relationship M wants the public to believe.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jktgal said:


> I enjoyed the comment section of this article, so much information and logic. And what do we have here...
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017234


I was talking to my SO about exactly this! I said how come she didn't talk to her husband and mother? She had arranged private doctors for her pregnancy without issues and she didn't know how to seek help for mental issues? I don't buy it!


----------



## Roxanna

bag-mania said:


> There is too much about her claims that doesn’t pass the smell test. She’s a grown woman in her late 30s. She couldn’t talk to her own husband about getting mental health care?  Why didn’t Harry get her the help she needed?  The man who said “whatever Meghan  wants, Meghan gets”  isn’t going to blow off her cry for help. Why did she put the responsibility for her mental health issues on other people?


I agree with you.  Also, I wonder how her reasoning for going to HR of all places , but not asking for help from other sources,  starting from her husband or from  professional sources coincided with incidences that led Mr.Knauf to write that letter of enquiry re.bulling .  It would be interesting to see if there is any coincidence in this, timings for example.


----------



## mdcx

justwatchin said:


> I kind of get the feeling Doria is trotted out when needed and not the mother/daughter relationship M wants the public to believe.


I get the impression Doria doesn't mind this so much. After all she went along with her being the only family member at the wedding, when her three half-siblings, Meghan’s aunts/uncles could have been there. There is speculation that there is some financial agreement between D and M in exchange for D being very accomodating to what M wants.


----------



## Chagall

Roxanna said:


> I agree with you.  Also, I wonder how her reasoning for going to HR of all places , but not asking for help from other sources,  starting from her husband or from  professional sources coincided with incidences that led Mr.Knauf to write that letter of enquiry re.bulling .  It would be interesting to see if there is any coincidence in this, timings for example.


I know I read somewhere, please don’t ask me where it was a long time ago, that Diana was able to get counseling and was even prescribed antidepressants at one point. So help is available within palace walls if need be. The world is much more enlightened now, 25 years later, than they were back then. The stigma of mental health is so much less prevalent today.


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## jelliedfeels

maris.crane said:


> That’s a depressing state when an accused epheabophile is getting better press or a better Q score than these two though.


Just to be clear the article says she is the 2nd most unpopular after Andrew.
they are referring to this yougov pol


			https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/u9ldznwln2/YouGov%20-%20Royal%20favourability%20tracker%20Oct%202020.pdf
		


This poll was conducted in October. A is the most disliked  by quite some margin & I can’t see it changing should they redo the poll.


----------



## gelbergirl

I wonder if there was any other way they could have told their story without causing such a family rift?
Family counseling?
Private conversations that leaked to the media?
I agree the issues should be addressed and the monarchry as a family business has problems but there could have been a better way rather than airing the dirty laundry.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I feel bad for Archie and his little sister. Imagine Archie into the future, googling his parents and all of these come up! The whole world knew someone might have had concerns about his skin tone before he was even born! Poor thing! Wouldn't it be better if this was handled privately for children's sake? But nothing could get in the way of H&M having a field day!


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> At the outset, this entire drama is because H&MMs expectations were not met, particular by them wanting a half-in, half-out option but keeping the perks.  If you go back and look at the original SussexRoyal statement - they wanted to Step back, live in North America, keep the patronage’s and fly back to the Uk as necessary.
> 
> original statement and initial response:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In full: The Sussexes' statement and the Buckingham Palace response
> 
> 
> A statement is released saying the Duke and Duchess of Sussex intend to step back as senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the second statement the Queen offered a period of transition where they would spend their time between Canada and the UK and not be reliant upon public funds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's statement on future of Prince Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> The following is the full text of Queen Elizabeth's statement following discussions within the royal family on future arrangements for Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> however the fallout was over merchandising ”Sussex royal”.  When that was blocked by the Queen ( rightly so as there are ethical issues with royal family taking $ and public $ - and who could be “owed a favour” because of gifts etc) - it is clear by their statement of Sussex Royal they were very upset.
> 
> They expected the UK to pay their security.  Taxpayers in the UK were outraged at the time - why pay for people who are part-time royals?
> 
> I see this interview as scripted revenge and an opportunity for money and publicity.
> Were nasty things said? Probably - all family fall outs have those.
> was a racist thing said?  quite possibly but unfortunately because of O not pressing for details and H story (happened before they were married and once) vs MM story (conversation(s) plural, whilst she was pregnant) - we won’t know exactly what was said or who... until H and MM need more money or content for Netflix and they decide to exact more revenge.
> 
> They can also now use the issues of Mental Health and Racism as topics in their podcasts.  And perhaps because of the publicity of this interview more people in the US will tune in (not so much the UK or Commonwealth).
> 
> They are going to be a constant thorn for the Queen,Charles, Will and Kate To deal with.
> 
> I suggest since they are so hurt by the family, the UK and racist press, they willingly give up H’s line in succession and the titles bestowed on them...  if the RF is that racist - neither H nor MM should keep their titles as a serious protest...  but alas - we all know that’s what they are using to sell themselves and their content in the USA.  So the hypocrisy will continue.


 Very valid point about the Sussex royal situation and concisely expressed.


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely! They somehow made her not wear a seatbelt and paid her driver enough to consider committing suicide by drunk speeding a great idea so he could then ride into the sunshine with his new wealth. Oh wait.





BagOuttaHell said:


> I bet.




I don't know the background of most people in this thread but as part of my training for a healthcare position, we were run through trauma scenarios with our state's paramedic/EMS units (all scenarios used were based on real cases), including one that was based on the crash. 

Just about every paramedic/EMS force agrees that Diana died because of a drunk driver barrelling around Paris at high speeds and her lack of a seatbelt; in addition we were taught that the paramedics on site made the mistake of trying repeatedly to stabilize her vitals instead of loading and moving to the nearest trauma center. And her injuries needed immediate surgical intervention.

IIRC, we were told that the French medics (some ambulances have doctors in the back) were trained to "stay and play", whereas UK/USA/Canada/Australian etc protocols are "load and go". Even the best doctors are handicapped without the full range of equipment a well-stocked trauma center has.


----------



## Toby93

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Regardless of how I feel about other comments in their interview, Meghan came across authentic to me when she talked about her mental health issues and feeling suicidal.


It's interesting to me how Meghan is perceived by others.  I find her to be nothing but a cloying,  narcissistic phony.  She spewed nothing but lies for most of the "perfomance" so when it came to the mental health issue, I do not believe for one minute she was suicidal.  She loves herself too much to contemplate that.  She must be feeling very pleased with herself for the moment, with all the chaos she has created.


----------



## doni

needlv said:


> At the outset, this entire drama is because H&MMs expectations were not met, particular by them wanting a half-in, half-out option but keeping the perks.  If you go back and look at the original SussexRoyal statement - they wanted to Step back, live in North America, keep the patronage’s and fly back to the Uk as necessary.
> 
> original statement and initial response:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In full: The Sussexes' statement and the Buckingham Palace response
> 
> 
> A statement is released saying the Duke and Duchess of Sussex intend to step back as senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the second statement the Queen offered a period of transition where they would spend their time between Canada and the UK and not be reliant upon public funds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's statement on future of Prince Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> The following is the full text of Queen Elizabeth's statement following discussions within the royal family on future arrangements for Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> however the fallout was over merchandising ”Sussex royal”.  When that was blocked by the Queen ( rightly so as there are ethical issues with royal family taking $ and public $ - and who could be “owed a favour” because of gifts etc) - it is clear by their statement of Sussex Royal they were very upset.
> 
> They expected the UK to pay their security.  Taxpayers in the UK were outraged at the time - why pay for people who are part-time royals?
> 
> I see this interview as scripted revenge and an opportunity for money and publicity.
> Were nasty things said? Probably - all family fall outs have those.
> was a racist thing said?  quite possibly but unfortunately because of O not pressing for details and H story (happened before they were married and once) vs MM story (conversation(s) plural, whilst she was pregnant) - we won’t know exactly what was said or who... until H and MM need more money or content for Netflix and they decide to exact more revenge.
> 
> They can also now use the issues of Mental Health and Racism as topics in their podcasts.  And perhaps because of the publicity of this interview more people in the US will tune in (not so much the UK or Commonwealth).
> 
> They are going to be a constant thorn for the Queen,Charles, Will and Kate To deal with.
> 
> I suggest since they are so hurt by the family, the UK and racist press, they willingly give up H’s line in succession and the titles bestowed on them...  if the RF is that racist - neither H nor MM should keep their titles as a serious protest...  but alas - we all know that’s what they are using to sell themselves and their content in the USA.  So the hypocrisy will continue.


Exactly, which is why it is so bizarre the whole conversation is now about how or why they were compelled to leave. They never said they wanted to leave or to give up royal duties and privileges. They made extremely clear they wanted all that _plus_ the ability to make their own money using the royal name. When they were told _that_ was not possible _then_ they left. The press, racism, mental health... none of that had any play in the decision as per their own admission...


----------



## doni

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think this is a false equivalence to continue to compare H & M to Wallis and Edward.  Harry was not going to be King.  And for a very long time before Meghan he expressed a desire to leave England and make a life for himself. There are numerous examples of this.  The BRF really doesn't know what to do or how to handle the "spare" and IMO have failed them quite miserably.
> 
> Meghan may have been the catalyst but Harry was already in this headspace.



I completely agree. I think he probably wanted to leave more than she did and welcomed the opportunity to do it for a grand reason without feeling remorse. I have to say though, my impression is that what he always had in his head was living in Africa or New Zealand or something. Somewhere country like where he‘d live an outdorsy life with sports and charity thrown in. I don’t think his dream was living in LA and be surrounded by paparazzi every time he left his Spanish-style 25-bathroom mansion. But what do I know...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## byzina

chicinthecity777 said:


> I feel bad for Archie and his little sister. Imagine Archie into the future, googling his parents and all of these come up! The whole world knew someone might have had concerns about his skin tone before he was even born! Poor thing! Wouldn't it be better if this was handled privately for children's sake? But nothing could get in the way of H&M having a field day!



I couldn't agree more.

Probably I would say an unpopular thing but sometimes silence is more important than talking. Besides, the fact that they enthusiastically welcomed Meghan into the family could be a very strong anti-racist signal for some people. The RF were considered conservative. Maybe it sounds a little bit naive but I was happy to see the proof that the world had changed and there were no closed doors (even the palace doors) no matter what your skin/eye/hair colour is. Such a good example for other children. Now H&M told us that the family are racists and I feel sad about the whole thing. Now Archie (and other children, by the way) might have the feeling that the skin colour can still be an issue! In 2021!  I feel so sorry for him.


----------



## byzina

By the way, this could just have been an unthought, silly question. I have basically no doubt that the person, who said it, now feels sorry, bitter and ashamed and he/she loves Archie.


----------



## chicinthecity777

byzina said:


> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> Probably I would say an unpopular thing but sometimes silence is more important than talking. Besides, the fact that they enthusiastically welcomed Meghan into the family could be a very strong anti-racist signal for some people. The RF were considered conservative. Maybe it sounds a little bit naive but I was happy to see the proof that the world had changed and there were no closed doors (even the palace doors) no matter what your skin/eye/hair colour is. Such a good example for other children. Now H&M told us that the family are racists and I feel sad about the whole thing. Now Archie (and other children, by the way) might have the feeling that the skin colour can still be an issue! In 2021!  I feel so sorry for him.


I think talking in private should be encouraged. If they had concerns, they should have raised it, in private. Let the conversation takes place. Might be a good opportunity to educate the person. But not drop the bombshell on international TV! It just has a vicious way about how they did it!


----------



## chicinthecity777

byzina said:


> By the way, this could just have been an unthought, silly question. I have basically no doubt that the person, who said it, now feels sorry, bitter and ashamed and he/she loves Archie.


I certainly hope so! Archie is cute (all babies are cute) and whose heart wouldn't melt at him?


----------



## byzina

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think talking in private should be encouraged. If they had concerns, they should have raised it, in private. Let the conversation takes place. Might be a good opportunity to educate the person. But not drop the bombshell on international TV! It just has a vicious way about how they did it!



This is what I wanted to say. They could talk to them privately. If this hadn't helped, they could have moved far from this person, as they did.


----------



## Sharont2305

Breaking News! 
Meghan has formally complained to ITV about Piers Morgan comments.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

All the comments about putting people on ignore make me sad. Can we really not allow any other viewpoints on anything...even a gossip thread on a forum about handbags?!? I don’t agree with much of what’s posted but I’m trying to understand and hoping to learn so I keep reading. Talk about cancel culture, no wonder we’re so divided if we stay in our bubbles and can only accept information that agrees with our own assumptions and beliefs.

I realize I’m probably on so many ignore lists already only about 3 people will be able to read this!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

muddledmint said:


> I don’t think people are suggesting doria could have been her therapist, rather that she is someone who could have been a resource in finding help for Meghan. I’m very curious to see what frogmore looks like from the inside, especially after renovations, and hope that someday we will see!



Don't bring logic in to this   


And what about hubby Harry? He didn't know how to ask around to help his struggling, hurting wife? He couldn't call one of their numerous dear celebrity friends, who all seem so concerned with the welfare of Meghan, to ask for advice? If so, that really brings his mental capacities in to question. We are talking about two extremely privileged middle aged adults here, with any and every medical resource at their fingertips, and both so equally incapacitated? Unbelievably unbelievable.


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking News!
> Meghan has formally complained to ITV about Piers Morgan comments.


Well ITV is probably breathing a sigh of relief that he’s gone before H & M gear up for another lawsuit.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

What are Meghan's apologists on about, especially of African decent?! This is a woman so self absorbed, that after visiting with women and children subjected to AIDS, poverty and rape in some of the most crime ridden and poorest areas of Africa, didn't even hesitate to stand up in the midst of all this and whine: "Nobody asked me how I was". The thought of her own unbelievable elite hardships even brought tears to her eyes. _That_ is "her truth". Whatever "colour", this is not a particularly good person.

Can you imagine, after meeting people suffering through these horrors and thinking that was a suitable place and opportunity to pull her usual woe-is-only-her-number? No empathy or compassion for others, no humbling herself, no reflection on her own privileged situation in life compared to so many of those she met during that week.


I also suspect it was more the fact that someone (the BRF and their staff) finally said no to her demands, that caused her alleged hurt and suicidal thinking. Not getting what she wants, could probably trigger serious emotional upheavals in someone with a personality like hers.

People, just try and think rationally for a minute. Considering what happened to Diana, how many really think that the BRF would risk going through something similar again? Had Meghan committed suicide, the media dramatics would have tipped over Buckingham Palace. Whether they'd help her because of truly caring or for duty and self preservation, is another matter. But there is no way the BRF would have risked willingly putting themselves through another public scandal and trauma like that.


----------



## Sly_Fox

madamelizaking said:


> Of course it will. The BRF didn't hang itself on the rope Meghan hung out for them. She will definitely release the name one way or another.
> 
> Her not revealing who it was because it would damage them was such malarky. She's done more than damage one individual, she's nearly annihilated the RF.



It’s a veiled threat, that’s what it is. 

I have a friend who gives half a story for dramatic effect then says I don’t really want to say any more. Immature, attention seeking mind games, just like Meghan.


----------



## elvisfan4life

What will Kate Will Charles and the Queen do now


----------



## mshermes

maris.crane said:


> Just as an FYI: Jessica has laid low and been non grata round here. She went after a local blogger via Instagram DMs, she lost her deal on Canadian TV pre-airing, and the husband went on leave from his show (he’s on the Canadian ET and he’s irritating too.)
> 
> Anyways, it’s not surprising Jessica hasn’t been seen hide nor hair from. She can’t defend Meghan without opening herself up to criticism.


Apparently she has not “laid low”....








						Jessica Mulroney Stands Up for Meghan Markle After Fallout
					

Meghan Markle’s friend Jessica Mulroney backed her amid bullying claims despite the pair’s friendship fallout in June 2020 — details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> All the comments about putting people on ignore make me sad. Can we really not allow any other viewpoints on anything...even a gossip thread on a forum about handbags?!? I don’t agree with much of what’s posted but I’m trying to understand and hoping to learn so I keep reading. Talk about cancel culture, no wonder we’re so divided if we stay in our bubbles and can only accept information that agrees with our own assumptions and beliefs.
> 
> I realize I’m probably on so many ignore lists already only about 3 people will be able to read this!


You are not on my ignore list!


----------



## Kansashalo

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think this is a false equivalence to continue to compare H & M to Wallis and Edward.  Harry was not going to be King.  And for a very long time before Meghan he expressed a desire to leave England and make a life for himself. There are numerous examples of this.  The BRF really doesn't know what to do or how to handle the "spare" and IMO have failed them quite miserably.
> 
> *Meghan may have been the catalyst but Harry was already in this headspace.*




THIS!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Coconuts40

What irks me here is the loss of good and ethical journalism.  Meghan makes these claims during the interview and so so many people including many journalists are taking her word as truth instead of investigating the truth.  Just because someone says something does  not mean it is fact.  As a society we can't just slander a person or family or make claims that could be damaging to a person or insitution and not back this up with facts.


----------



## mshermes

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Whose feelings am I hurting? That was not my intention. But I will call a spade a spade... the things people have said about a woman they don’t know (some purely based on chatter and/or negative news gossip)... things about how she couldn’t have possibly been suicidal or that she was faking her first pregnancy can’t be seen as cruel? I didn’t say you couldn’t have a voice, I am trying to understand the meaning and point of it all.


It is a gossip thread. End of story.


----------



## chicinthecity777

elvisfan4life said:


> What will Kate Will Charles and the Queen do now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017367


I am not at least surprised! I have seen on Twitter that people calling the killing of the RF. The posts have been reported but I don't know anything has been done or not.


----------



## DrDior

eunaddict said:


> Just about every paramedic/EMS force agrees that Diana died because of a drunk driver barrelling around Paris at high speeds and her lack of a seatbelt; in addition we were taught that the paramedics on site made the mistake of trying repeatedly to stabilize her vitals instead of loading and moving to the nearest trauma center. And her injuries needed immediate surgical intervention.
> 
> IIRC, we were told that the French medics (some ambulances have doctors in the back) were trained to "stay and play", whereas UK/USA/Canada/Australian etc protocols are "load and go". Even the best doctors are handicapped without the full range of equipment a well-stocked trauma center has.



THIS. I’ve seen some of the research on this with gun shot victims. Police are now being told their protocol should be scoop and run if they’re the first ones on scene & waiting on an ambulance.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking News!
> Meghan has formally complained to ITV about Piers Morgan comments.


I just read the news on this. Her complain is about Piers diminishing the seriousness of mental health issues and potentially preventing others from seeking help, which is a valid point on its own. BUT (you know a but is coming... )
Didn't she say that she didn't read / watch anything about herself in the media? You say you don't read anything then you react to everything? How does it work? If she stops the inconsistencies and hypocrisy of herself, her voice will be much more welcomed! SMH!


----------



## mdcx

Inciting violence against members of the BRF. Wow. She is a ruthless piece of work imo.
Some of the posts on Twitter threatening KM in response to MMs interview claims are


----------



## lishukha

elvisfan4life said:


> What will Kate Will Charles and the Queen do now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017367
> View attachment 5017368
> View attachment 5017369
> View attachment 5017370


This is so heartbreaking to see. And this is the part that bothers me the most about MM. If she felt she was sooo mistreated by everything and everyone on earth, she literally just caused similar pain on someone else, over an incident that allegedly happened freaking 3 years ago that she had to bring up... What type of person would do that?! Is she truly happy now?!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lishukha said:


> This is so heartbreaking to see. And this is the part that bothers me the most about MM. If she felt she was sooo mistreated by everything and everyone on earth, she literally just caused similar pain on someone else, over an incident that allegedly happened freaking 3 years ago that she had to bring up... What type of person would do that?! Is she truly happy now?!


TBH, this whole thing disgusts me! The mob disgust me! I wish anybody who is calling for killing people (from all sides) should be found and prosecuted under the scope of law! Too many hide behind a keyboard get away with too much!


----------



## jelliedfeels

FreeSpirit71 said:


> She also said on the record that well-meaning friends would call her or email her and say something along the lines of, "OMG have you seen what XYZ publication said about you?" so she wasn't saying she was completely oblivious to it.
> 
> When the Palace takes the time to respond to allegations about such (quite frankly) silly stories as Kate's supposed botox and hair extensions but does nothing to respond to the more serious articles about Meghan it speaks volumes.
> 
> None of us know how HR or issues such as mental health are dealt with inside Palace walls.


IMO, this whole stance;  
“I don’t read the press but my friends tell me about articles so YOU should all condemn (and I will sue) this evil force who are destroying our lives.”
is indicative of her whole wilfully ignorant, passive-aggressive approach.
Secondhand selective information ought to be taken as fact when it concerns her and she doesn’t need to keep adrift of the bigger picture.

If your relationship with the press is central to your career and it is ruining your life- that is horrible and you have every right to leave your career but you also can’t then say you don’t really engage with it and you are just mad other people didn’t fight your battles for you.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jayne1 said:


> See how bad an interviewer Oprah is.
> 
> Not that we expected her to ask any follow up questions, but why does she have such a good reputation?



There was too much conflict of interest to be a serious interview. She has business ties with them for god's sake.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> I remember this. It was because there was a plastic surgeon out there saying he’d done the work. It wasn’t because she’d supposedly had Botox. Companies like Burberry and Boots have Royal Warrants and him going in the press like it was an endorsement, that was something the BRF felt needed to be addressed to protect those. If someone just said “ Kate looks like she had Botox.” I don’t think they’d care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> List of royal warrant holders of the British royal family - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


That’s really interesting. I’ve seen the symbol on marmalade and stuff but I didn’t realise there was so much red tape around it. 

Now I’m imagining a Harley street cosmetic surgeon furiously deleting ‘by royal appointment’ from his letter heads


----------



## Allisonfaye

chicinthecity777 said:


> TBH, this whole thing disgusts me! The mob disgust me! I wish anybody who is calling for killing people (from all sides) should be found and prosecuted under the scope of law! Too many hide behind a keyboard get away with too much!



Did I miss something? Who's calling for killing people?


----------



## Allisonfaye

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's hardly surprising _these_ particular people support Piers.



Jake Tapper? lol


----------



## papertiger

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think this is a false equivalence to continue to compare H & M to Wallis and Edward.  Harry was not going to be King.  And for a very long time before Meghan he expressed a desire to leave England and make a life for himself. There are numerous examples of this.  The BRF really doesn't know what to do or how to handle the "spare" and IMO have failed them quite miserably.
> Meghan may have been the catalyst but *Harry was already in this headspace.*




Lucky for him there was plenty of space in his head.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Interesting things have resurfaced!
But when Harry did it, he was without malice!








						Prince Harry apologizes over "Paki" remark
					

Britain's Prince Harry apologized on Saturday after a newspaper website published video footage showing him calling an Asian army colleague a "Paki," but he said he had used the term without malice.




					mobile.reuters.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

muddledmint said:


> The reason Meghan’s story is unbelievable is that the details do not hold up at all. Whether she was depressed or suicidal is something we cannot know for sure. However, there is no reason for her to go to HR for help (she’s not an employee and she had MANY better ways of getting help if she really needed it, such as her mom, her private physicians, Harry), and there is no reason why the firm would deny her if she really did. What is the upside for the royal family to deny her? If they were afraid of negative publicity, they could have arranged something quietly for Meghan under the radar. If anything, they would be hypersensitive to this after Diana and the fact that Harry, William, and Kate are such mental health advocates. It’s bad optics if they let the newest senior royal commit suicide. If this part of the story makes no sense, why should anyone believe the rest of the story?? Would Harry seriously let this go and allow the royal family to withhold lifesaving help for Meghan if he truly believed she needed it? No! Therefore, this HR incident either never happened or didn’t happen the way she said.
> 
> This is complete speculation, but I think a more likely story is this:
> - staffers went to HR to complain about meghan
> - Meghan was confronted with these claims and either used depression as an excuse for her behavior, or blamed staffers/racism/press etc for her depression, or maybe depression didn’t even come up in the discussion.
> - she knows that details of this HR encounter might become public due to the bullying investigation and wants to get ahead of the story by making HR the villain by claiming they refused to help her when she was suicidal



Makes way more sense than that garbage story she gave.


----------



## CarryOn2020

John Oliver's prescient comments on Meghan go viral after Oprah interview
					

Meghan Markle "might be marrying into a family that could cause some emotional complications," TV host John Oliver told Stephen Colbert in 2018.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> and don't get old?
> Camilla looks fine. It's what people USED to look like when they lived their lives and aged naturally



Camilla has certainly received her share of negative press. (as seen by the above image). So....


----------



## 1LV

lishukha said:


> This is so heartbreaking to see. And this is the part that bothers me the most about MM. If she felt she was sooo mistreated by everything and everyone on earth, she literally just caused similar pain on someone else, over an incident that allegedly happened freaking 3 years ago that she had to bring up... What type of person would do that?! *Is she truly happy now*?!


Getting there.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Glamour magazine article from 2018. How come nobody taught her anything? 
*Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess*








						Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess
					

The queen is reportedly making Meghan Markle take six months of royal lessons to prepare for her life as the duchess of Sussex.



					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Mendocino

muddledmint said:


> i watched it because of Meghan! To think I used to like her!



I liked her character as well. I thought the whole cast did a great job.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Allisonfaye said:


> Did I miss something? Who's calling for killing people?


This was one of them. Looks like it has been deleted. 

Did you read another post back 1 page or 2 about the racial abuse Kate received?


----------



## Allisonfaye

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if there was any other way they could have told their story without causing such a family rift?
> Family counseling?
> Private conversations that leaked to the media?
> I agree the issues should be addressed and the monarchry as a family business has problems but there could have been a better way rather than airing the dirty laundry.



They don't get $$ when they do it privately.


----------



## Allisonfaye

papertiger said:


> Lucky for him there was plenty of space in his head.



'Prince Empty'


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think I am going to borrow the phrase "some recollections may vary" in the future! I still chuckle at that one!


----------



## Aimee3

chicinthecity777 said:


> Glamour magazine article from 2018. How come nobody taught her anything?
> *Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess
> 
> 
> The queen is reportedly making Meghan Markle take six months of royal lessons to prepare for her life as the duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Clearly she thought she knew it all and didn’t bother to listen and learn.  I’m not surprised!


----------



## mshermes

MM stated that she worked at Humphrey Yogart when she was 13 years old. Is that legal in Cali?


----------



## maris.crane

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok but a former spice girls or even former girl groups thread would be great. I love learning what the women do next but can’t be bothered with Instagram.



Geri seems happily married with a nice enough husband. She was my favourite Spice Girl so besides their official group verified account, she's the only one I follow on the 'Gram. Honestly, I think her, Anthony Bourdain (RIP) and Martha Stewart are the only ones I'd run in and stan blindly for 



> I’ve made a variation of this point before but what I’d say is that (of course I don’t know your nationality and you may feel differently) that for their subjects they are not just celebs. They are very powerful constitutional, religious and quasi-political figures.
> In my experience there is no getting away from royals or ex-royals in the news or the wider British culture. So it’s not surprising we seem obsessed  and I don’t think there’s a very obvious parallel in Republics because politici*ns aren’t quite the same (though you could say they can also have very passionate cults of personality also.)



Firstly thank you for explaining this calmly  I am actually Canadian so a Commonwealth country, if that gives you any context. Absolutely I would agree - I think North Americans have a level of detachment from the BRF versus those on the island. I mean, we had a picture of the Queen's at her Coronation in my elementary school, but we also had a picture of the Pope (I won't say which Pope because I don't feel like aging myself ). The Queen is on our 20$ note and my loonies and toonies, I'm vaguely aware from 8th Grade History class it's supposed to go Queen-Governor General-PMO or something in the ascent order, BUT these people are all figure-heads to me (which while JUICY... meh.)



> H&M‘s story is often compared to Diana’s and it’s quite fitting in many ways. They both have intense relationships with the press and were constantly in the news. Of course, the other similarity is they have both have done an interview which has caused controversy in the palace.
> I hope I don’t sound pretentious in saying that Diana’s divorce and tragic death caused a schism in British culture to the extent that there was discussion whether the monarchy would continue & I think Britain is going through a similar debate now. It is also crucial that this is happening at a similar time to the Andrew case but that the media are much more wary of covering it - it is nonetheless very prominent in people’s minds.
> 
> There are royalists and Republic**ns on this thread. So in that alone there is a lot to discuss. There’s a lot of plain old gossip too & I will admit I love to joke about the whole situation and the key figures. I’m sure if I was around during the Charles and Diana years I’d find it simultaneously horrifying, fascinating and funny and I will be glued to finding out what this means for the future of the BRF.
> 
> I will admit I dislike both of their  public personas very much. I think their hypocrisies and selfishness is derailing a lot of important conversations about our constitution and the serious issues in our country because they are only interested in aggrandising themselves. Yet they are still given an enormously prominent place in the debate. It’s infuriating. As to their personal lives- I don’t want to know anymore than I want to know whether an MP likes their parents.
> 
> So TLDR: yes I and Brits in general certainly seem obsessed with this royal but I would say it’s because it has higher stakes for us than the Kimye divorce.



Again, thank you for explaining on this one. I know I called Meghan a celebutant in a previous post of mine; obviously Kimye's divorce while... maybe sad, is not going to affect a government institution the same way as Megsxit or a BRF scandal. I just find the critiques of H&M.... really cruel. I know I'm not going to change a lot of minds here, but that is my piece.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Aimee3 said:


> Clearly she thought she knew it all and didn’t bother to listen and learn.  I’m not surprised!


And went on to Oprah to complain nobody taught her?


----------



## kkfiregirl

muddledmint said:


> That is ridiculous that they would respond to a Botox story of all things. But again, they are going to do more for Kate because of her position, and it’s not necessarily because of racism or whatever.  Hierarchy and protocol are supreme with them. Even Kate has to curtsy to Beatrice and Eugenie when she is not with Will because they outrank her as blood princesses. That’s just the way it is.



I find the requirement that she curtsy to her cousins so pretentious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I certainly hope so! Archie is cute (*all babies are cute*) and whose heart wouldn't melt at him?


Having seen lots of babies, I can assure you, this is not necessarily true.


----------



## jelliedfeels

.


----------



## tiktok

mshermes said:


> MM stated that she worked at Humphrey Yogart when she was 13 years old. Is that legal in Cali?


yes, there are limitations on the type of work teens can do but they can legally work from the age of 13. I believe a yogurt shop would fall within the constraints of the law.
This particular tidbit, unlike many others, is probably 100% true.


----------



## kkfiregirl

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> All the comments about putting people on ignore make me sad. Can we really not allow any other viewpoints on anything...even a gossip thread on a forum about handbags?!? I don’t agree with much of what’s posted but I’m trying to understand and hoping to learn so I keep reading. Talk about cancel culture, no wonder we’re so divided if we stay in our bubbles and can only accept information that agrees with our own assumptions and beliefs.
> 
> I realize I’m probably on so many ignore lists already only about 3 people will be able to read this!



I generally agree with you on this, but I don’t like when people continue to _aggressively_ quote me. Just write your comment in the reply box and move on 

I welcome other viewpoints and I actually forgot about the ignore function


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> All the comments about putting people on ignore make me sad. Can we really not allow any other viewpoints on anything...even a gossip thread on a forum about handbags?!? I don’t agree with much of what’s posted but I’m trying to understand and hoping to learn so I keep reading. Talk about cancel culture, no wonder we’re so divided if we stay in our bubbles and can only accept information that agrees with our own assumptions and beliefs.
> 
> I realize I’m probably on so many ignore lists already only about 3 people will be able to read this!



LOL! 

I agree with you.  If we can't have discussions about differing viewpoints, there will never be any progress made.  I've personally put a couple people (not on this thread) on ignore if I felt they were unjustly attacking me.  I try not to attack others, so I don't appreciate being under "attack".  In addition, I come here to get away from the stress of daily life and have a laugh.  It's sometimes arduous  reading opinions that literally say the same thing over and over and over to the point it's getting argumentative with other posters.  It's exhausting to even read, and therefore, I pull myself out of it.


----------



## bisousx

I don’t think anyone’s hitting the ignore button bc there’s a difference of opinion. If someone comes into any thread and starts insulting members (calling them obsessed, nothing better to do with their time than doing research on MM&H, etc.) then being put on ignore is what’s recommended.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't normally put people on ignore unless they attack posters here personally, or calling people names, instead of actually put their POV forward.


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> What will Kate Will Charles and the Queen do now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017367
> View attachment 5017368
> View attachment 5017369
> View attachment 5017370



And this, I suspect, is exactly the effect Meg was going for.


----------



## maris.crane

eunaddict said:


> People cut off toxic family members all the time. It's not for us to decide what level of toxicity is required before someone stops accepting calls from said family member. The general line in the sand when someone's presence in your life becomes more trouble than the relationship is worth.



Perhaps "icing out" would be a better term. I know this is unpopular, and no one will change my view on this one. I think there's a marked difference between cutting out a semi-absentee father and you big age-gapped half-sister when they run on a Press Tour; and a parent icing out their son for being a brat when that son has already lost their other parent in a tragic way.

Absolutely - Oprah's interview was softball; so she didn't press Harry and ask "what did you do to affect your relationship with Charles?" But I explained this earlier - I think if it is over H&M inelegantly leaving the BRF and being too messy on social media (which Charles - pot meet kettle), I'm side-eyeing Charles, not Harry. I found Harry absolutely credible; other people disagree.



> (Besides, she cut her entire family (for....?toxicity, ?getting too friendly and too personal with the media), other than her mother out of her life...why can't Charles cut H off for the same reasons?)



I'll be honest: I thought watching Thomas Markle's interview with Piers that the man is not entirely on the ball and I could absolutely believe this man is being paid as well by some of these less-than-credible outlets. Regardless, I think if TM had done an interview with a true newspaper - even while being paid - I would feel a bit less icky about the whole thing. I don't think you can claim to in one breath to love your daughter but then, speak that piece to the exact man who has had a real hate for her since she snubbed him after a drinks outing.


----------



## Aimee3

IIRC the reason the BRF responded to the botox/Kate story is the way the doctor used Kates photo in his ads or something, made it appear that HE was her doctor and worked on her.  Since Kate was not his patient, it was misleading so they addressed the issue.  But this was several months ago, so I may not remember all the details!


----------



## purseinsanity

lishukha said:


> This is so heartbreaking to see. And this is the part that bothers me the most about MM. If she felt she was sooo mistreated by everything and everyone on earth, she literally just caused similar pain on someone else, over an incident that allegedly happened freaking 3 years ago that she had to bring up... What type of person would do that?! *Is she truly happy now?!*


She is the type of person who will *never* be happy.


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> I didn’t watch the interview so was Harry there when she brought up her mental health? Because I think the first person she would have gone to for help would have been him. This is a huge revelation and important topic. Did Oprah question her/him on this?


yes, she said she had to tell harry or she would have killed herself.  said he cradled her in his arms.  he said the firm or the family or whoever said something like we have all gone through this, just power through or carry on - something like that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think I am going to borrow the phrase "some recollections may vary" in the future! I still chuckle at that one!



I will say I often wish they would not be so utterly polite and understanding, but at a second glance, this one sentence alone was a masterpiece.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I get the impression Doria doesn't mind this so much. After all she went along with her being the only family member at the wedding, when her three half-siblings, Meghan’s aunts/uncles could have been there. There is speculation that there is some financial agreement between D and M in exchange for D being very accomodating to what M wants.


there may not be a formal arrangement but it's pretty obvious they set her up in a business, using an expensive beverly hills lawyer to do it


----------



## Jktgal

I didn't watch interview but I saw comments that said her request was for inpatient care for mental health. Staffers said no, that would be damaging to reputation etc. I think it's curious to ask for inpatient care. Did she mention that specific word in the interview? If yes, maybe with that request she was actually planning ahead for Hollywood. A major Jerry Springer reveal.



poopsie said:


> and don't get old?
> Camilla looks fine. It's what people USED to look like when they lived their lives and aged naturally


Sure. Compare Diana and Camilla in the looks dept, and Charles still chose C. My point was anyone would look better without crap from being a 'royal'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The story continues...  Good for Piers to defend 'freedom of speech', we need that! 

"_*Meghan Markle wrote to ITV's boss to complain about Piers Morgan hours before the Good Morning Britain co-host quit *on the day the show scored its highest ever ratings and beat BBC Breakfast, it was revealed today.  

*The Duchess of Sussex insists she was not upset that Mr Morgan* said he 'didn't believe a word she said' in her Oprah interview - *but was worried about how his comments could affect people attempting to deal with their own mental health problems*, an insider told the Press Association.

Standing firm today, Mr Morgan told reporters outside his West London home: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge that she came out with in that interview, so be it._'

_*Mr Morgan is understood to have been ordered to apologise - but he refused and quit instead saying he had the right to tell viewers his 'honestly held opinions'* and declaring: *'Freedom of speech is a hill I'm happy to die on'*._"









						'I still don't believe Meghan': Piers Morgan tweets defiant message
					

Speaking outside his West London home Mr Morgan told reporters: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge, so be it.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> The Shady Side Of Meghan Markle - Nicki Swift
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has had an amazing life. After all, she went from television star to royalty in a matter of months. But some details aren't quite as storybook as they may seem. Here's a look at the shady side of Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nickiswift.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Shady Side Of Meghan Markle
> Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> BY MICKI SPOLLEN AND PHIL ARCHBOLD/JAN. 10, 2018 1:56 PM EST/UPDATED: APRIL 26, 2020 3:23 PM EST
> Former Suits star Meghan Markle became Prince Harry's fiancée when the royal popped the question in November 2017, causing both American and British citizens to rejoice. Her mixed-race background, previous marriage, and, of course, status as an American citizen all drew extra attention to the groundbreaking engagement. And when the two married in a gorgeous ceremony at Windsor Castle on May 19, 2018, the public's interest in their relationship — and Markle, specifically — grew.
> 
> But there have been a few things behind the scenes that have made us raise our eyebrows. Here's a look at the shady side of the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle.
> 
> Did Hollywood change Meghan Markle?
> 
> Christopher Furlong/Getty Images
> In December 2017, news broke that Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister, Samantha Markle, was gearing up to release a tell-all book focused on revealing some damning family secrets, going so far as to call Meghan a "social climber" in an interview with The Sun. "Hollywood has changed her. I think her ambition is to become a princess," said Samantha when Meghan and Prince Harry had started dating. Samantha also complained that Meghan all but forgot about her after gaining high society status.
> 
> However, according to E! News, a person close to the family says Samantha can't be trusted. "Samantha [Markle] doesn't have a relationship with Meghan Markle and she never has," said the source. "Meghan has never done anything to her and continues to take the high road." Be that as it may, it's worth noting that it isn't only Samantha who thinks Meghan's completely different these days. "The person I knew is not there anymore," Meghan's former best friend, Ninaki Priddy, told the Daily Mail in December 2017. "There's Meghan Before Fame and Meghan After Fame."
> 
> Meghan Markle's career may have interfered with her first marriage
> 
> Michael Kovac/Getty Images
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's engagement was untraditional for a number of reasons — and her status as a divorced woman was arguably first among them. Before meeting Prince Harry, Markle was married to producer Trevor Engelson for two years before they split, citing "irreconcilable differences."
> 
> Former friend Ninaki Priddy, who served as maid of honor at Markle's wedding to Engelson, told the Daily Mail that Markle's career ultimately led to the demise of that union, saying, "It was such a shock when she told me they were getting divorced." Another person close to the couple told Woman's Day (via Life & Style) that the stress of a long-distance relationship likely played a part, as Markle lived in Canada during filming on her USA Network series Suits while her husband lived in Los Angeles. As the magazine's source pointed out, "It was a very difficult way to start married life."
> 
> Did Meghan Markle have a secret royal fascination?
> 
> Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> In their BBC engagement interview, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry revealed that they'd met on a blind date. "Because I'm from the States, you don't grow up with the same understanding of the royal family," Markle said. "And so while I now understand very clearly there's a global interest there, I didn't know much about him." However, former friend Ninaki Priddy's Daily Mail interview told a different story.
> 
> 
> "I know the Royal Family was something she found fascinating," said Priddy. "She had one of Princess Diana's books on her bookshelf." Plus, between Princess Diana's popularity and Prince Harry's days as prime tabloid fodder (remember that time he went wild in Vegas?), it's hard to believe she didn't know anything about the prince.
> 
> A look inside Meghan Markle's seemingly shady family ties
> 
> Wpa Pool/Getty Images/, ITV
> Meghan Markle's relationship with her family was a hot topic in the run-up to her wedding. Her husband-to-be inadvertently caused a stink when he told BBC Radio 4 (per Us Weekly) that the Windsors were "the family that I suppose she's never had." Prince Harry's comment hurt the Markles, who hit back via the Daily Mail. "She's had a really good family," half-brother Thomas Markle Jr claimed. "We were as close as we could be." So why did Harry say that?
> 
> Some surmised that Markle had lied to her fiancé, which is apparently a family trait. Her estranged half-sister, Samantha Markle, admitted to staging those infamous paparazzi shots of their father, who has also copped to lying. Speaking in a Channel 5 documentary (via Fox News), Thomas Markle revealed that he concocted a story about the Sussexes contacting him after he missed their wedding following a heart attack, all to protect their image. "I said they called me back and they were really concerned about me and I said, 'Go on your honeymoon, don't worry about me, I'll be fine.' And that was all a lie."
> 
> There was no phone call, according to Thomas, but he did receive a handwritten letter from his daughter after her wedding. "I thought it would be an olive branch," he told the Daily Mail. "Instead, it was a dagger to the heart." In the letter (which is at the center of a landmark lawsuit), Markle reprimands her father for talking to the press and asking her for money.
> 
> Meghan Markle's puppy trouble
> 
> Wpa Pool/Getty Images
> In her Daily Mail interview, former friend Ninaki Priddy claimed dog-loving Meghan Markle flaunted her status as a way to adopt a dog. Now the owner of two rescues, Markle seems to have a rocky relationship with both of them.
> 
> In November 2017, a Kensington Palace spokesperson broke the news that Markle's retriever, Bogart, would not join her overseas. "It takes a toll on an animal to travel so far across Atlantic combined with the hard, long process of getting approval," said the spokesperson. "It's in the best interest of the animal's well-being to stay." Instead of traveling with Markle, Bogart will stay with one of her friends in the United States.
> 
> That December, the Daily Mail reported that Markle's other dog, Guy, broke two legs. Circumstances surrounding the injury are unknown, but sources claimed Markle was "distraught" over the accident.
> 
> Meghan Markle's reps may have planted rumors
> 
> Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Meghan Markle starred on the hit show Suits for years — we would never try to take that away from her — but let's be honest: She didn't become a household name until her relationship with Prince Harry, and her reps may have tried to take advantage of that new-found notoriety.
> 
> In December 2017, gossip emerged that Markle was on the short list for a role in the next James Bond movie. "Meghan fits the role of a Bond girl perfectly," a source told The Sun, but Blind Gossip refuted this claim. Its source said Markle was never in the running and alleged the chatter was just stirred up by "her people" for publicity. These rumors aren't too far-fetched if you consider the fact that Markle's former friend also suggested the actress had grown a bit too big for her britches. "Even by season two of Suits, she was turning down lunch with us because she said she'd be recognized," Ninaki Priddy told the Daily Mail. "There were instances when I felt she developed a sense of entitlement because she was on the show."
> 
> One of Meghan Markle's friendships ended in bitterness
> 
> Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> While Ninaki Priddy did have some nice things to say about her former friend while recounting their childhood together, she didn't hesitate to call Meghan Markle out for her supposed opportunistic ways. "All I can say now is that I think Meghan was calculated — very calculated — in the way she handled people and relationships," Priddy told the Daily Mail. "She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends." Ouch!
> 
> 
> Priddy also claimed it was always Markle's dream to be famous, recalling that "she just loved to be the center of attention." That trait will likely serve her well in the royal palace — and may, in fact, be a reason her relationship with Prince Harry is likely to work out. "One of the advantages of Meghan is because she is in the public eye, she likes that," Penny Junor, author of Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son, told the Express. "The real problem with Harry's girlfriends in the past is that they absolutely hated the media attention and that's scared them off."
> 
> This gal pal says Meghan Markle 'ghosted' her after meeting Prince Harry
> 
> Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images
> Meghan Markle is said to have spent a lot of time in London following her split from Trevor Engelson. The actress reportedly struck up a friendship with local TV personality Lizzie Cundy after they attended a charity dinner. According to Cundy, Markle was keen to find a new man, but the recent divorcee allegedly had two conditions: He had to be English, and he had to be famous. "We were having a girly chat and then she said, 'Do you know any famous guys? I'm single and I really love English men,'" Cundy wrote in the 2019 tell-all Tales From the Red Carper (via Yahoo! Sports). "So I said, 'We'll go out and find you someone.'"
> 
> Cundy claims Markle called controversial soccer star Ashley Cole "cute," but that went nowhere. Sources close to X-Factor winner Matt Cardle claim Markle quietly slid into his DM zone in 2015, but the singer reportedly stopped replying after meeting somebody else. Her Instagram interaction with Cardle allegedly took place just months before she started dating Harry, according to The Sun. Once Harry was on the hook, Markle apparently had no use for Cundy. "I texted saying, 'Oh my god, I heard about Harry,' and she was like, 'Yeah I know, we'll try and hook up,'" Cundy claims. "She was probably told by the Palace to end contact with people she befriended in the media. I was literally ghosted by her."
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly caused a stink over air fresheners
> 
> Wpa Pool/Getty Images
> To the millions watching around the world, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's wedding appeared every inch a flawless fairy tale, but reports suggest that it wasn't exactly smooth sailing behind the scenes. According to the Daily Mail, the American got a lot of British backs up when she requested that air fresheners be deployed at her wedding because the smell inside St. George's Chapel displeased her. According to one royal insider, the chapel's "musty" smell isn't "unpleasant at all, though. It just smells how you would expect an old building to smell." Keep in mind: St. George's Chapel has been an important place of worship for the British monarchy since 1475.
> 
> "Meghan wanted staff to go around with these atomisers, like spritzer guns, and spray the chapel with scent before anyone arrived," the source claimed. "Royal Household staff stepped in and told her office politely, but firmly, that this was the Queen's Chapel and it simply wasn't appropriate. This is a place that has held royal weddings, funerals and even contains the Royal Vault — I don't believe a request of that nature had been made before."
> 
> Did Meghan Markle throw a tantrum over an emerald tiara?
> 
> Jonathan Brady/Getty Images
> Most brides would be ecstatic at the thought of walking down the aisle wearing a diamond and platinum bandeau tiara handpicked by the queen herself, but according to royal whistle-blowers, Meghan Markle wanted to choose her own. Household insiders with links to Dan Wootton (executive editor at The Sun) report that Prince Harry's bride-to-be made it clear which headpiece she wanted to wear on her big day, and things apparently got a little tense when her idea was shot down. "Meghan had her heart set on this tiara with emeralds and Prince Harry hit the roof when they were told it was impossible for her to wear it," one source claimed. "The provenance of the tiara could not be established — there were concerns it could have come from Russia originally."
> 
> When news of Markle's so-called "difficult" behavior reached the queen, her majesty reportedly decided to give her grandson a good talking to. "There was a very heated exchange that prompted the Queen to speak to Harry," Wootton's royal insider dished. "She said, 'Meghan cannot have whatever she wants, she gets what tiara she's given by me.' The message from the Queen was very much Meghan needed to think about how she speaks to staff members and be careful to follow family protocols." According to the source, the queen struck a low-blow during the exchange, questioning why Markle needed to wear a traditional wedding veil given it was her second marriage. Ouch!
> 
> Meghan Markle made Kate Middleton cry, multiple sources claim
> 
> Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Rumors of an ongoing feud between Meghan Markle and her sister-in-law began to swirl after it emerged that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would be moving out of Kensington Palace. Tabloids claimed Kate Middleton had snapped at Markle after she caught the former actress speaking rudely to someone on her staff. The Palace denied this in a statement, which raised a few eyebrows among royal commentators. "It's fairly unprecedented for them to speak out in this way, and I think what Kensington Palace is wanting to do is to detract from this rift that's happening," royal expert Angela Mollard said (via Express). "The Queen is in the golden era of her reign. She wants a cohesive royal family."
> 
> The press has continued to dig into the allegedly splintered relationship between the two duchesses. Esteemed royal journalist Camilla Tominey, associate editor at The Telegraph, believes the rift began in the run-up to Markle and Prince Harry's wedding. Middleton's daughter, Princess Charlotte, was one of the stars of the wedding, but two of Tominey's sources claim Middleton was left in tears after an argument broke out during a fitting for her daughter's bridesmaid dress. "Kate had only just given birth to Prince Louis and was feeling quite emotional," one insider said (via the Daily Beast). This incident is said to have taken place around the same time as Markle's supposed emerald tiara drama.
> 
> Why did multiple royal aides reportedly quit on Meghan Markle?
> 
> Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images
> It's not often that people with top positions in the royal household give up their post, so when three walk within quick succession, rumors of trouble in paradise are bound to fly. In May 2019, the Daily Mail revealed that Meghan Markle's right-hand woman, Amy Pickerill, was leaving when the royal couple moved to Frogmore Cottage, making her the third member of the duchess' staff to quit within a matter of months. "Amy is leaving," a royal insider confirmed. "It's very sad for her colleagues, as she is a really popular member of staff."
> 
> Pickerill was expected to stay on and succeed Markle's private secretary, Samantha "the Panther" Cohen, who (after 17 years with the royal family) also left her post. Cohen's departure followed that of Melissa Toubati, Markle's personal assistant. The latter caused a stir when she bolted less than six months after Markle's big wedding. According to the Mirror, the overwhelming demands put on Toubati by the new duchess broke her down. "She put up with quite a lot," a royal informant alleged. "Meghan put a lot of demands on her and it ended up with her in tears."
> 
> According to royal biographer Robert Jobson, Prince Harry has stood by his lady love. In his book, Charles at Seventy, Jobson claims Harry became "petulant and short-tempered" when employees didn't cooperate. "Raising his voice on occasion, Harry would insist: 'What Meghan wants, she gets.'"
> 
> Did Meghan Markle cheat on her ex with Prince Harry?
> 
> Mike Coppola, Ben A. Pruchnie/Getty Images
> Meghan Markle's relationship with Prince Harry seemed to have all the hallmarks of a real-life fairy tale when it first started blossoming, but was it actually more of a love triangle? Before she hooked up with her redheaded prince, Markle was dating renowned Canadian chef Cory Vitiello, and reports have suggested that there may have been an overlap between the two relationships. Rumors started to fly when an eagle-eyed royal fan noticed that Vanity Fair had edited its Markle cover story at her explicit request. "The sentence regarding the first time Markle met Prince Harry has been amended," a note from the editor read. "Markle told Vanity Fair that the couple met in July 2016."
> 
> The original article stated that the Sussexes had met that May. The prince is said to have asked for Markle's number after encountering her at an Invictus Games event in Toronto, and, according to The Telegraph (a daily broadsheet newspaper that doesn't traditionally peddle in unfounded gossip), the actress was "still dating a Canadian chef" at the time. When the Daily Mail asked Vitiello if he and Markle had "parted permanently when Harry came on the scene," he appeared to confirm that they were still involved in some capacity without actually saying the words. "Well, I'm sure you've done your due diligence," the restaurateur told the reporter. "I really appreciate the professionalism in the way you're going about this."
> 
> Make of that what you will.
> 
> Was Megxit the plan all along?
> 
> Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Right or wrong, Meghan Markle was widely blamed when the Sussexes announced they were going to step back from royal life and branch out on their own in January 2020, both on social media and in the tabloids.
> 
> "Is it Meghan's fault? It's hard to escape the conclusion that having grown up in a country that considers the Kennedys to be aristocracy, Meghan didn't understand that being a Windsor is not like being a celebrity," Express columnist Virginia Blackburn wrote. It wasn't just the Brits who were unhappy about Megxit either. Canadian millionaire Kevin O'Leary claimed the Sussexes were "much less interesting" now that they weren't senior royals, and he believed Markle was to blame, saying (via Tatler), "I think Meghan got him into a bad place, and maybe she should do a little soul-searching. She knew what she was getting into when she married him."
> 
> If this claim is true, then was Megxit actually her plan all along? Many seem to think so, and there's even some proof — well, kind of. According to Page Six, Markle put some of her clothes in a Toronto storage facility prior to her wedding. An insider claimed that she had the items delivered to her and Prince Harry's rented property on Vancouver Island when they arrived in Canada following the announcement. Why did Markle keep all those clothes in storage across the Atlantic for two years? It appears as though she knew she'd be back at some stage.
> 
> An old friend has labeled Meghan Markle a 'shape-shifter'
> 
> Wpa Pool/Getty Images
> We might never know if Meghan Markle had some form of Megxit in mind when she married Prince Harry, but according to someone who knows her personally, shedding her skin and starting over is a habit of hers. Writing for Tatler, Shinan Govani (who hosted Markle for dinner during her Suits days) claimed, "Something that has stayed with me, especially post-Megxit, is that Meghan is no stranger to picking up and reinventing herself. Both a go-getter as well as a shape-shifter, she returns now with more social mojo than she could have ever imagined then."
> 
> 
> By March 2020, Markle was already unleashing that social mojo on Los Angeles, where she and Harry moved after leaving Canada behind. The Sussexes were previously mocked when the prince was filmed asking Disney CEO Bob Iger to cast Markle in something ("You know she does voice overs?" the prince reportedly said, per Express), and later reports suggested that the actress had instructed her agent to find her a role in a superhero movie. It seems as though Markle was making herself at home, but how was Harry handling it? Was the royal keeping up with his shape-shifting wife? "I don't know how his career is going to map out," Dr. Jane Goodall, a famous primatologist and a good friend of Harry's told the Radio Times that April (via Entertainment Tonight). "I've been in touch, though I think he's finding life a bit challenging just now."
> 
> The Sussexes were accused of shading the York sisters and the queen
> 
> Wpa Pool/Getty Images
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle shocked everyone when they revealed they were stepping back as senior royals in a bombshell statement, including — according to senior palace sources – Queen Elizabeth herself. Her Majesty reportedly had no idea her grandson was about to ditch royalty in favor of a quieter life in North America, but after a period of negotiation, she accepted the decision. However, she also banned them from using the word "royal" in their private endeavors, which was a bit of a slap in the face considering they'd named their brand Sussex Royal.
> 
> While the couple agreed to comply, they landed a seemingly shady dig on Harry's granny at the same time. A few months after their initial announcement, a new statement appeared on the Sussex Royal website. In it, the Sussexes stated that the queen doesn't have any "jurisdiction" over the word "royal" overseas, but noted they would stop using it anyway. Yikes! Elsewhere, in what appeared to be a barely-veiled shot at Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice, they said, "While there is precedent for other titled members of the royal family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place." The York sisters have both been allowed to work while keeping their titles, and this apparently snarky remark seems to prove that Harry and Meghan expected (or at least wanted) the same arrangement.
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly thinks her royal in-laws lack 'warmth'
> 
> Richard Pohle/Getty Images
> Now that Meghan Markle is stateside and out of The Firm's reach, she's apparently been dishing about Prince Harry's side of the family. What was life really like inside the palace? A little frosty, according to the American. In March 2020, a source cited by the Daily Mail claimed that Markle's bemoaned the lack of "warmth" at royal family gatherings and finds all the standoffish behavior very odd. Her sister-in-law, Kate Middleton, is reportedly the biggest culprit.
> 
> "It's still weird to her that no one hugs and that everyone is so uptight, especially Kate," the insider, said to be a close friend of Markle, told the tabloid. "She said it's obvious that Kate and William do not approve of their choices and that you could cut the tension with a knife." The source went on to say that "Kate barely even looked" at Markle during her final trip as a senior royal, and that "their interaction was kept to a bare minimum."
> 
> Rumors of a rift between the two duchesses have been dogging the royal family for some time now. However, this damaging narrative really started to take root in 2019, when Markle guest-edited the September issue of British Vogue: She neglected to put Middleton on the female "forces for change" list featured in her issue, and also said that it would have been "boastful" to appear on the cover herself. Middleton appeared on the cover of the mag in 2016. Awkward.
> 
> Read More: https://www.nickiswift.com/104261/shady-side-meghan-markle/?utm_campaign=clip
> 
> 
> Interesting synopsis.


the one thing I see here that's news to me is her people saying she would be perfect for a Bond girl.  Yeah right - she's so sexy with those chicken legs


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Just to add, my browser is really short fused, so I don't have time to like/love or respond to all the posts I want to and when I can log on to tPF again, you've moved on so fast and far, I can never find the posts I want to   It's incredibly frustrating. This is also why I may post about something that's already been brought up. Apologies for this, but I prefer to think of it as great minds think alike  

About the ignore button, I've never put anyone on tPF on ignore. If I miss a reply to one of my posts and you think I should reply, just PM me a link.


----------



## sdkitty

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.


so you think she - a member of the family - needed to go to the firm or HR to get her a psych appointment?  Harry has been in therapy - why couldn't they get her in to see his therapist?  when you have money, you don't need insurance; you can to see any doctor you want


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*The Duchess of Sussex insists she was not upset that Mr Morgan* said he 'didn't believe a word she said' in her Oprah interview - *but was worried about how his comments could affect people attempting to deal with their own mental health problems*, an insider told the Press Association._



See, and this makes her so unlikeable. The woman known for an ego the weight of an elephant doesn't care, but for the greater good she just had to speak up. Of course, flower.



> _*Mr Morgan is understood to have been ordered to apologise - but he refused and quit instead saying he had the right to tell viewers his 'honestly held opinions'* and declaring: *'Freedom of speech is a hill I'm happy to die on'*._"



As most people here I don't especially like Piers, and I do find him vulgar, but not only has he said what nobody else dared to say, I also have respect for the way he is being consistent here.


----------



## carebearz

At this point, I’m just waiting for the bombshell to drop that the rumours of Harry not being Charles’s son are true. They can finally be stripped of their royal titles and financial support totally and see how long Megan sticks around.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> Yes, exactly. None of us know the race/ethnicity of anyone posting in here, unless the posters are tPF ‘friends.’ Anyway, white women also experience daily _micro aggressions_ in the form of _sexism_ and _ageism_.


I agree.  but I do think most of us have had an easier time of it than most black women.  I didn't grow up privileged by any means but still....


----------



## Jktgal

I learned about Piers Morgan from this thread and have only watched a few interviews which I enjoyed. Love the  directness (rudeness?). Reminds me of my family.  I'm sure he'll turn up in another outlet - much less fun without him. Piers and Meggie Markle - the best gifts from this thread.



FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.



Diana-gate was at least a quarter century ago. Seems to me that all the projects of the new royals are mental-health related so it's hard to believe they can't sort M out whatever her problem was. Unless of course they were daydreaming through all those charity visits/hotline launch etc.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> It's interesting to me how Meghan is perceived by others.  I find her to be nothing but a cloying,  narcissistic phony.  She spewed nothing but lies for most of the "perfomance" so when it came to the mental health issue, I do not believe for one minute she was suicidal.  She loves herself too much to contemplate that.  She must be feeling very pleased with herself for the moment, with all the chaos she has created.


Yes! Hell hath no fury as a woman or person who perceives themselves scorned or has their patronages and funding removed because they want to make big bucks while doing nothing worthwhile.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> It is so easy to misunderstand people... it's not to be taken for granted. Even in this thread when what we say is clearly documented, how many times have we seen people get offended quickly and jump to conclusions about something said to them while others see it to be an innocuous comment? I'm sure that factors somewhat into some of these Meghan encounters that just sound so over the top. I very much doubt a member of the royal family, same family they both said welcomed them warmly in the beginning, literally told Harry that his baby would look too dark to get afforded private security. It's beyond the pale.


and I think it's been established that the child would not be a prince or princess until charles is king....so that crap about the child not having security because it would be mixed race is BS.  If the RF was inclined this way they would not have accepted her, walked her down the aisle, etc.


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> On a side note, I have a hard time believing Kate gets Botox. Does she really? She’s the same age as Meghan, but Meghan looks years younger!


Work can age people. In contrast, plastic surgery can help, or not.


----------



## purseinsanity

carebearz said:


> At this point, I’m just waiting for the bombshell to drop that the rumours of Harry not being Charles’s son are true. They can finally be stripped of their royal titles and financial support totally and see how long Megan sticks around.


Unfortunately, I think that's wishful thinking, but I wish for it too!


----------



## artax two

purseinsanity said:


> She is the type of person who will *never* be happy.


THIS 1000%. Some people cannot accept happiness. They don't know how, or they don't recognize it when they have it, but they always sabotage it.


----------



## haute okole

What bothers me most about this entire situation is Oprah and all these celebrities giving this clearly mentally ill, delusional, damaged and vengeful person a platform and treating her statements as fact.  If she were in a courtroom, on the stand, she would have been massacred.  I liken her to Kelly on Real Housewives of New York on Scary Island.  Meghan is a damaged, mentally ill person who is unfortunately in a position of power.  People with any ability to think critically can see she is delusional. Opportunists like Oprah made a ton of money on this interview as we watched this crazy has been torpedo her reputation.  She came across as a completely selfish liar and for the most part, not someone we want to root for.


----------



## purseinsanity

artax two said:


> THIS 1000%. Some people cannot accept happiness. They don't know how, or they don't recognize it when they have it, but they always sabotage it.


Absolutely.  Look at everything she has going for her: looks (I actually thought she was pretty before all the fillers), "happily" married, one baby, another on the way, riches, titles, a mansion, notoriety, and she STILL wants more.  She harps on alleged slights and that not enough people asking if she "Was ok".  She seems to thrive on drama, and when there isn't any, she will create it to try to make others just as miserable as she is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> John Oliver's prescient comments on Meghan go viral after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle "might be marrying into a family that could cause some emotional complications," TV host John Oliver told Stephen Colbert in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com


I can't read it


----------



## purseinsanity

haute okole said:


> What bothers me most about this entire situation is Oprah and all these celebrpities giving this clearly mentally ill, delusional, damaged person a platform and treating her statements as fact.  If she were in a courtroom, on the stand, she would have been massacred.  I liken her to Kelly on Real Housewives of New York on Scary Island.  Meghan is a damaged, mentally ill person who is unfortunately in a position of power.  People with any ability to think critically can see she is delusional. Opportunist like Oprah made a ton of money on this interview as we watched this crazy has been torpedo her reputation.  She came across as a completely selfish liar and for the most part, not someone we want to root for.


Yes!!!  What also bothers me is that she is adding fuel to the current environment of someone MUST be guilty because they are "privileged".  What happened to "Innocent until proven guilty", at least in the US?  Cancel culture has taken over logic and reasoning.


----------



## artax two

purseinsanity said:


> Absolutely.  Look at everything she has going for her: looks (I actually thought she was pretty before all the fillers), "happily" married, one baby, another on the way, riches, titles, a mansion, notoriety, and she STILL wants more.  She harps on alleged slights and that not enough people asking if she "Was ok".  She seems to thrive on drama, and when there isn't any, she will create it to try to make others just as miserable as she is.


Yes she has so much to be grateful for. No one gets every single thing they want or need in life. But she got handed a much better lot than many. Life is full of struggles, but it is about finding the joy amid those struggles.


----------



## TC1

purseinsanity said:


> Absolutely.  Look at everything she has going for her: looks (I actually thought she was pretty before all the fillers), "happily" married, one baby, another on the way, riches, titles, a mansion, notoriety, and she STILL wants more.  She harps on alleged slights and that not enough people asking if she "Was ok".  She seems to thrive on drama, and when there isn't any, she will create it to try to make others just as miserable as she is.


I always thought MM was so pretty on Suits. Even in all the flashbacks in the Oprah interview she looked great. It's not just the pregnancy puffiness, but she has tweaked a few more things. Maybe it's also the bold face lying that has made her less attractive to me? *shrug*
ETA- I started to lose respect at the "no one has asked me if I'm okay" statement


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> Tucker Carlson did a bit on the interview and I was like  while reading what he said. In what bizarro world am I to be agreeing with fox news hosts?!


After reading your post, I looked for Tucker Carlson and MM on YouTube, but couldn't find that segment. However, this other video with Nigel Farage came up on the search, I don't know him, but he sounded really (and rightfully) upset.


----------



## byzina

I live in a country where TV is mostly controlled by the government (directly or indirectly) so it is in stagnation and we have tons of rubbish programmes to distract people from real problems. We have a number of cheap drama talk-shows. Some famous or not really famous people are paid money to come there and wash their dirty linen. Yes, they get the hype, they start earning money but they ruin their reputation and dignity forever. I hate watching them and I always switch the channel. When I was listening to H&M, I got literally the same feeling as watching some bits of these shows.
Meghan, of course, will earn more money, get more contracts and invitations. Maybe some day she will write a book or something. But she could never change the reputation of a person who sold her family's dirty linen (allegations only, no facts) to get some hype. She didn't think about her son and his feelings. She complained that she couldn't keep her passport and car keys, but she was provided with the passport, a private jet, a driver and bodyguards when she wanted to go to the most extravagant baby shower. Or Serena's match. 
Well, but this, in my opinion, is much better than what Harry did. He sold HIS family secrets to tabloids. No matter how toxic the family was, he made it public. He was the person who claimed he was looking for privacy. And to attract investors/Hollywood friends and attention he sold to tabloids more information than any member of the family. Even poorer people don't act like that. 
The royal family will take a pause, keep silence and go on the way they always did. And Haz is now forever a hype-seeking tabloid-selling idiot.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> [...]
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex insists she was not upset that Mr Morgan said he 'didn't believe a word she said' in her Oprah interview - but was worried about how his comments could affect people attempting to deal with their own mental health problems, an insider told the Press Association.
> 
> Standing firm today, Mr Morgan told reporters outside his West London home: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge that she came out with in that interview, so be it.'[...]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I still don't believe Meghan': Piers Morgan tweets defiant message
> 
> 
> Speaking outside his West London home Mr Morgan told reporters: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge, so be it.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Well, she _is_ The Duchess of Unprecedented Compassion, simply unleashing her groundswell of compassion on anyone or anything daring to question her compassionate ways 


These two nincompoops, although very willing accomplices of which one is probably more of a useful idiot, who can't even make an appointment to see a psychiatrist by themselves, are not the only or principal evil geniuses behind this take down of the BRF.  I'm not a royalist but this is getting serious, it's not just about the BRF but obviously in the long run about more important British institutions.

Somebody with the economic means and an agenda is funding and orchestrating this.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> And went on to Oprah to complain nobody taught her?


We may have a little disagreement here. She had 6 months of Royal lessons, but >2 years of interview preparation. It can make a difference!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Allisonfaye said:


> Camilla has certainly received her share of negative press. (as seen by the above image). So....


 Past actions linger in people's minds just as JCMH & MM's lies will never be erased even if and when they are proven to be liars. When I was very young (such a long time ago now) a teacher gave us a good example of what lying does. She said: Take a huge bag filled with feathers; climb to a high mountain; empty the bag and watch the feathers spread; now retrieve every single feather to remove the lie. Impossible!


----------



## jelliedfeels

maris.crane said:


> Geri seems happily married with a nice enough husband. She was my favourite Spice Girl so besides their official group verified account, she's the only one I follow on the 'Gram. Honestly, I think her, Anthony Bourdain (RIP) and Martha Stewart are the only ones I'd run in and stan blindly for
> 
> 
> 
> Firstly thank you for explaining this calmly  I am actually Canadian so a Commonwealth country, if that gives you any context. Absolutely I would agree - I think North Americans have a level of detachment from the BRF versus those on the island. I mean, we had a picture of the Queen's at her Coronation in my elementary school, but we also had a picture of the Pope (I won't say which Pope because I don't feel like aging myself ). The Queen is on our 20$ note and my loonies and toonies, I'm vaguely aware from 8th Grade History class it's supposed to go Queen-Governor General-PMO or something in the ascent order, BUT these people are all figure-heads to me (which while JUICY... meh.)
> 
> 
> 
> Again, thank you for explaining on this one. I know I called Meghan a celebutant in a previous post of mine; obviously Kimye's divorce while... maybe sad, is not going to affect a government institution the same way as Megsxit or a BRF scandal. I just find the critiques of H&M.... really cruel. I know I'm not going to change a lot of minds here, but that is my piece.


Thank you for your detailed reply. I’ve never actually been to Canada. Very keen to go one day. It does seem like a more distant relationship than our own.

Im, personally, not the concerned by the tone comments because:
1. H&M will never read them.
2. I’d be a hypocrite as I’ve made my fair share of *****y comments about them.
3. This thread is hilarious even if you don’t actually believe it. Like the moon bump thing- the jokes are funny. It’s subjective of course.
4. Periods of political turmoil in general are a big time for biting commentary and intense gossip. Just look at the rumours about Marie Antoinette. I think it’s human nature to look for clear, dramatic narratives in uncertainty. 
5. Further to that, you can see this in how the pro-HM side narrates the story as well.
6. Finally, I think H & M have done and said things far worse than anything the TPF gang has written here. So I don’t actually feel that sympathetic to them. Let’s not forget H, a man now trying to ruin journalists and his own family with accusations of racism (that he doesn’t care to back up with evidence) is the same person who was recorded calling his colleagues racial slurs and had his *ss saved by that same press and family whereas a common soldier would probably have been ruined.

Edit: to be clear, I’m not criticising people being punished for racist comments. I’m just pointing out that H is being incredibly hypocritical.


----------



## muddledmint

carebearz said:


> At this point, I’m just waiting for the bombshell to drop that the rumours of Harry not being Charles’s son are true. They can finally be stripped of their royal titles and financial support totally and see how long Megan sticks around.


I don’t know why people think this. Harry looks more like the queen’s side of the family than William. He has the same beady close set eyes, same big nose, same ruddy complexion. He looks so much like a Windsor!


----------



## Essaeeeee

Chanbal said:


> After reading your post, I looked for Tucker Carlson and MM on YouTube, but couldn't find that segment. However, this other video with Nigel Farage came up on the search, I don't know him, but he sounded really (and rightfully) upset.



Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> I agree.  but I do think most of us have had an easier time of it than most black women.  I didn't grow up privileged by any means but still....


and WOC in general, true...


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> I don’t know why people think this. Harry looks more like the queen’s side of the family than William. He has the same beady close set eyes, same big nose, same ruddy complexion. He looks so much like a Windsor!


because one of diana's lovers had red hair?


----------



## lalame

Essaeeeee said:


> Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.



People here are just sharing coverage and commentary about it. Feel free to share commentary from anyone on either side of the issue. Is only one side allowed? If you feel it's an echo chamber, share as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

Essaeeeee said:


> Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.


we must ALL sieve our news carefully, no matter the source...


----------



## Megs

I think a lot of us make assumptions that we clearly can't know for sure, myself included. It's part of celebrity culture in this day - we are able to "see" a lot and then we all make opinions based on that. I think some of the optics for H & M look bad - I think it could be how they've managed it or how it's been spun, I don't know because I only know what I am shown, listen to and read about.

Meghan could have asked for help and the protocol in the Royal family is that person X deals with appointments etc. Sure, in theory could she go and schedule an appointment - I guess. But remember, any Doctor or person they interact with needs to be vetted in hopes that they won't go and share private information. A doctor has an oath not to share, but that doesn't stop people from sharing. So I do think that is believable - she isn't like you and me (unless any of you are part of a Royal family as well), her life simply doesn't work like it did even when she was an actress. 

But, I believe that a life like the one she lives now as wife of Prince Harry quickly proved it was not all she thought it would be. I am sure she knew who Harry was before and knew about the Royals as much as most Americans do. I would guess she thought it would be more glamorous and easy, but she was met with intense scrutiny. And I am sure there has been plenty of racist remarks made toward her, because unfortunately I think every POC has heard them in their lives and she joined a family that is one of the most recognized families in the world with a very old-fashioned set up. No matter how much you think you are prepared for that, no one can be. She can't escape that and being faced with racist remarks, disdain from so many, and intense scrutiny would make anyone crumble. I would absolutely become a mess if I knew every publication and people around the world talked about me daily like that. No mansion would fix that. 

I still think some of the optics on how H&M have handled this haven't been good for them and I personally wouldn't handle it that way. I know there have also been stories from palace aids saying Meghan was very difficult etc. I think there's many sides to every story, but while I still don't fully understand them doing the interview with Oprah because for me, I feel like the end result invites more chaos, I suppose from their perspective they may have felt like it was the only option to get their side out there. Again, I wouldn't do it but I am not them.


----------



## purseinsanity

I don't understand why most journalists are so quick to take "her truth" as fact without fact checking, when both she and Haz profess to detesting the press (unless they're useful to them, that is!).


----------



## lalame

I didn't realize quoting someone could appear aggressive. I quote everyone not to @ you but just so everyone can follow what I might be responding to... no offense intended, ladies.


----------



## muddledmint

Jktgal said:


> I learned about Piers Morgan from this thread and have only watched a few interviews which I enjoyed. Love the  directness (rudeness?). Reminds me of my family.  I'm sure he'll turn up in another outlet - much less fun without him. Piers and Meggie Markle - the best gifts from this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Diana-gate was at least a quarter century ago. Seems to me that all the projects of the new royals are mental-health related so it's hard to believe they can't sort M out whatever her problem was. Unless of course they were daydreaming through all those charity visits/hotline launch etc.


I don’t like him, but he shouldn’t be canceled over this! People are too sensitive and quick to take offense now. If you don’t like him, don’t pay attention to him!


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Absolutely.  Look at everything she has going for her: looks (I actually thought she was pretty before all the fillers), "happily" married, one baby, another on the way, riches, titles, a mansion, notoriety, and she STILL wants more.  She harps on alleged slights and that not enough people asking if she "Was ok".  She seems to thrive on drama, and when there isn't any, she will create it to try to make others just as miserable as she is.



Still say her goal is to be Queen of the Woke.


----------



## maris.crane

jelliedfeels said:


> Thank you for your detailed reply. I’ve never actually been to Canada. Very keen to go one day. It does seem like a more distant relationship than our own.



Bienvenue au Canada! Yes, we're alleged to be very nice despite my bickering here - but you have to get to our Maritimes to find the nicest Canadians, IMHO 

It's been too long since I've been to the UK. I think I was too young for my parents to take my to London when they did and it was wayyyyyy too overwhelming, but I do love Glasgow!



Essaeeeee said:


> Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.



Don't forget the Daily Fail.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> After reading your post, I looked for Tucker Carlson and MM on YouTube, but couldn't find that segment. However, this other video with Nigel Farage came up on the search, I don't know him, but he sounded really (and rightfully) upset.




Stop it! Y'all are making me agree with people I detest otherwise!!!


----------



## doni

I will say it and I apologize if I offend anyone. All this would not be happening if Meghan was not American. For the US President to make declarations of support towards someone who makes unsubstantiated allegations against a Head of State in an TV show...  Really that is _so_ disgraceful. Because the Queen _is_ a Head of State and represents a country and its people. Can we imagine President Macron speaking up in support of the staff who accused the current US President of inappropriate behavior? Or the King of Spain giving an opinion on stuff people said about the last US President on TV, true or not? If Meghan was from Nigeria, or Argentina, or Belgium... no one would be playing to this game.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I can't read it


I think it's about one of these videos.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Stop it! Y'all are making me agree with people I detest otherwise!!!


I'm at that point!


----------



## Essaeeeee

muddledmint said:


> I don’t like him, but he shouldn’t be canceled over this! People are too sensitive and quick to take offense now. If you don’t like him, don’t pay attention to him!


Just to make it clear, he wasn't cancelled for anything, he quit. 

Piers Morgan is a horrible person who has spewed hate on many topics over the years with no consequences. He walked off the show because his co host opposed him on screen and told him he took things too far and his fragile ego couldn't handle not being praised for being an ass. 

Just because you hate MM doesn't mean that man didn't deserve to be booted long before today.


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> After reading your post, I looked for Tucker Carlson and MM on YouTube, but couldn't find that segment. However, this other video with Nigel Farage came up on the search, I don't know him, but he sounded really (and rightfully) upset.











						Tucker Carlson slams 'manipulative opportunist' Meghan Markle
					

The Fox News host insisted on Tuesday night he was uninterested in 'Prince Whatever-His-Name-Is and his angry wife from Los Angeles,' before proceeding to attack them.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> I didn't realize quoting someone could appear aggressive. I quote everyone not to @ you but just so everyone can follow what I might be responding to... no offense intended, ladies.



I think quoting is fine as long as folks don’t feel _attacked_.


----------



## muddledmint

Essaeeeee said:


> Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.


We’re not getting news from them, just laughing at their on point commentary


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> the one thing I see here that's news to me is her people saying she would be perfect for a Bond girl.  Yeah right - she's so sexy with those chicken legs



Bond girls are tough, confident, independent and smart, especially the villain Bond girls. They're pro weapon. They don't speak with little girl whiny voices. Their clothes fit well. None of them depend on a man to take care of them but enjoy a good romp. Things that never describe MM. However, the one commonality is that they often are manipulative.


----------



## kkfiregirl

carebearz said:


> At this point, I’m just waiting for the bombshell to drop that the rumours of Harry not being Charles’s son are true. They can finally be stripped of their royal titles and financial support totally and see how long Megan sticks around.



Well, to be fair, after all these years, Charles _is_ his father. Adoptive parents are _real_ parents too.


----------



## Toby93

mdcx said:


> I seriously doubt Meghan intended to reveal the name( frankly I think the whole incident is made up).
> I think she thought the implied threat of her revealing it would cause the BRF to react a particular way.
> Obviously they have reacted in the way most infuriating to a narcissist -calmly, briefly, and with corncern about the narcissistic persons mental state.
> Meghan still seems to think she can get a rise out of the BRF and I don’t see it happening ever.


Yep, I am with you - I don't for one second believe that conversation ever took place.  For a couple who wanted to leave the UK in search of privacy, they sure seem to like the spotlight.


----------



## muddledmint

Essaeeeee said:


> Just to make it clear, he wasn't cancelled for anything, he quit.
> 
> Piers Morgan is a horrible person who has spewed hate on many topics over the years with no consequences. He walked off the show because his co host opposed him on screen and told him he took things too far and his fragile ego couldn't handle not being praised for being an ass.
> 
> Just because you hate MM doesn't mean that man didn't deserve to be booted long before today.


Having 40000 complaints and demands he be fired and an investigation for saying he doesn’t believe Meghan is basically being canceled. I bet Meghan is cackling in her mansion over this.


----------



## lalame

doni said:


> I will say it and I apologize if I offend anyone. All this would not be happening if Meghan was not American. For the US President to make declarations of support towards someone who makes unsubstantiated allegations against a Head of State in an TV show...  Really that is _so_ disgraceful. Because the Queen is a Head of State and represents a country. Can we imagine President Macron speaking up in support of the staff who accused the current US President of inappropriate behavior? Or the King of Spain giving an opinion on stuff people said about the last US President on TV, true or not? If Meghan was from Nigeria, or Argentina, or Belgium... no one would be playing to this game.



I don't think we are as buttoned down here in the US with regard to decorum like that. Maybe that was once the case but our presidency has increasingly gone the way of Hollyweird, commenting on pop culture and courting celebrities easily. Maybe it goes back to how important the First Amendment is here.


----------



## bisousx

TC1 said:


> I always thought MM was so pretty on Suits. Even in all the flashbacks in the Oprah interview she looked great. It's not just the pregnancy puffiness, but she has tweaked a few more things. Maybe it's also the bold face lying that has made her less attractive to me? *shrug*
> ETA- I started to lose respect at the "no one has asked me if I'm okay" statement



I was super excited when Meghan came onto most people’s radar - after Harry’s PR warning to the press. Meghan is gorgeous, wears clothes well (my opinion) and looked glamorous, but in a refreshingly modest way. There’s really nothing special anymore about dressing sexy in Hollywood, so I enjoy looking at conservative fashion and _may_ have bought a couple Veronica Beard outfits after seeing it worn nicely on MM.

I also thought some of the early on criticism was racist, because there was very little evidence of Meghan’s behavior to criticize on. It also looks like people were hating and jealous of her, which does happen with pretty celebrities.

I do try to give everybody chances, sit back and observe.

But, I had to finally admit that Meghan is certifiable when I saw that she handwrote a snail mail letter to her father - _in calligraphy_. Meghan knew what she was doing plotting against her father, and come on - only a nutjob would send her father a handwritten letter in this day and age. 

After that, I started to see _everything_ she was doing in a different light. She’s insane. I don’t have any hate or malice when I say that, it’s more of an observation.

Meghan reminds me of Imelda Marcos, and only because I recently watched the Amazon documentary on Mrs. Marcos - narcissistic, power-hungry, delusional, glamorous, loves expensive clothes and media attention. Mrs. Marcos destroyed a lot of lives, but still manages to have followers to this day.


----------



## tiktok

Essaeeeee said:


> Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.



even a broken clock is right twice a day


----------



## maris.crane

Essaeeeee said:


> Just to make it clear, he wasn't cancelled for anything, he quit.
> 
> Piers Morgan is a horrible person who has spewed hate on many topics over the years with no consequences. He walked off the show because his co host opposed him on screen and told him he took things too far and his fragile ego couldn't handle not being praised for being an ass.
> 
> Just because you hate MM doesn't mean that man didn't deserve to be booted long before today.



I think if they just boot out Piers it unfortunately, martyrs him and gives into this narrative that speaking your mind gets you 'cancelled.'

BUT optically: it looks bad for ITV to tout mental health awareness and also have him on the air. Piers should also have been reading the room, though  - and I'm more irritated at how tone deaf and frankly, dumb this man is than anything else. When the world is going through a pandemic and there's more focus on people calling into mental health and suicide hotlines on an unprecedented scale, you're going to decide now is the time to claim he has no sympathy for someone's mental health struggles or believe they're suicidal ideations are poppycock or unwarranted. 

I think this was one of those firings where Piers was allowed to bow out semi-gracefully and try and spin it as if he's quitting.


----------



## muddledmint

bisousx said:


> I was super excited when Meghan came onto most people’s radar - after Harry’s PR warning to the press. Meghan is gorgeous, wears clothes well (my opinion) and looked glamorous, but in a refreshingly modest way. There’s really nothing special anymore about dressing sexy in Hollywood, so I enjoy looking at conservative fashion and _may_ have bought a couple Veronica Beard outfits after seeing it worn nicely on MM.
> 
> I also thought some of the early on criticism was racist, because there was very little evidence of Meghan’s behavior to criticize on. It also looks like people were hating and jealous of her, which does happen with pretty celebrities.
> 
> I do try to give everybody chances, sit back and observe.
> 
> But, I had to finally admit that Meghan is certifiable when I saw that she handwrote a snail mail letter to her father - _in calligraphy_. Meghan knew what she was doing plotting against her father, and come on - only a nutjob would send her father a handwritten letter in this day and age.
> 
> After that, I started to see _everything_ she was doing in a different light. She’s insane. I don’t have any hate or malice when I say that, it’s more of an observation.
> 
> Meghan reminds me of Imelda Marcos, and only because I recently watched the Amazon documentary on Mrs. Marcos - narcissistic, power-hungry, delusional, glamorous, loves expensive clothes and media attention. Mrs. Marcos destroyed a lot of lives, but still manages to have followers to this day.


I felt exactly the same way but my turning point was this interview. I mean I started thinking something was off with her a long time ago after all the stuff being reported about her, but this interview was the proof that she is a manipulative liar. Before that I had doubts that all the tabloid stuff could be true.


----------



## tiktok

doni said:


> I will say it and I apologize if I offend anyone. All this would not be happening if Meghan was not American. For the US President to make declarations of support towards someone who makes unsubstantiated allegations against a Head of State in an TV show...  Really that is _so_ disgraceful. Because the Queen _is_ a Head of State and represents a country and its people. Can we imagine President Macron speaking up in support of the staff who accused the current US President of inappropriate behavior? Or the King of Spain giving an opinion on stuff people said about the last US President on TV, true or not? If Meghan was from Nigeria, or Argentina, or Belgium... no one would be playing to this game.



Agree that it would have been better if Jen Psaki hadn’t commented at all, but to be fair (at least based on what I found) she didn’t say the president supports MM’s side of the story, she only said it takes courage to talk about your struggles with mental health (which in general I think we can all agree with).

“For anyone to come forward and speak about their own struggles with mental health and tell their own personal story, that takes courage,” said Ms Psaki.

“That is certainly something the president believes, and he has talked about the importance of investing in a lot of these areas that they are committed to in the future.”

Ms Psaki added that the ***** administration would not be commenting further on the lives of “private citizens sharing their own stories and struggles.”

“We have a strong and abiding relationship with the British people and a special partnership with the government of the United Kingdom on a range of issues, and that will continue,” she added.








						White House praises Meghan Markle’s ‘courage’ in speaking about her mental health struggles
					

Jen Psaki reaffirms ‘strong and abiding relationship’ between US and ‘British people’




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Essaeeeee said:


> Lol. Fox news and Piers Morgan. That's whom you link to support your views and say the media is biased. What an echo chamber this thread is.


I would appreciate if you could please avoid this type of insinuations while quoting (or replying) me. If you read my posts, you see that I respect the opinions of everybody (no personal attacks).

Part of being open minded is the ability of considering opinions from all sides, and agree or disagree with them. FYI, I know very little about Nigel or Piers, but I agree with their views on the subject of this thread so far.


----------



## Kansashalo

bisousx said:


> *But, I had to finally admit that Meghan is certifiable when I saw that she handwrote a snail mail letter to her father - in calligraphy. Meghan knew what she was doing plotting against her father, and come on - only a nutjob would send her father a handwritten letter in this day and age.*



What is it about writing a letter to your father in calligraphy that makes it "certifiable"?


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand why most journalists are so quick to take "her truth" as fact without fact checking, when both she and Haz profess to detesting the press (unless they're useful to them, that is!).


I have a word for that...  first they are NOT journalist... they're just kiss@sses, a great downfall this kiss@assery.


----------



## Sol Ryan

I dunno... I actually had a lot of sympathy for Megan Until this interview was announced. Marrying into that family was going to be hard and I wouldn’t be surprised if she spins a tale... we know the law, maybe it wasn’t explained properly, who knows? Admittedly, I got frustrated with how she behaved at Eugenie’s wedding. But, I think most people who were watching would have. 

My issue has always been with Harry. He’s the one who should know better and has been playing games. He judges others on things he does while not acknowledging he’s guilty of the same things until some one calls him out. Barefoot google conference on the environment, follows it up with private jet vacay with Elton John. I mean seriously? Then launches Travelyst.... and buys an Escalade and a Range Rover and not the Hybrid one... 

Megan, I think thought she was going to be a celeb and didn’t expect glorified civil servant. Even their rebuttal a couple weeks ago to the Queen showed a core misunderstanding between philanthropy and service.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Kansashalo said:


> What is it about writing a letter to your father in calligraphy that makes it "certifiable"?



It just seems a little _crazy_, lol. Usually people save the calligraphy for things like wedding invites or thank-you notes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

Kansashalo said:


> What about writing a letter to your father in calligraphy is "certifiable"?



If you don’t see how insane it is for an older millennial like Meghan to write an old-school letter instead of email, call or text like the rest of our generation, then there’s nothing more I can say. Most people haven’t picked up a pen for ordinary communication since 1999.

It is obvious she wrote it in her signature calligraphy with the intention to expose him.


----------



## TC1

Interesting that MM complained to ITV about Piers. I thought she didn't know or read things written about her? 
Also interesting that she thought throwing out the comment that tabloids are invited to the palace for a party during the holidays didn't land. I'm sure she thought that was going to be a grenade after everything Di went through and how they'd been pleading for privacy.


----------



## Kansashalo

kkfiregirl said:


> It just seems a little _crazy_, lol. Usually people save the calligraphy for things like wedding invites or thank-you notes.





bisousx said:


> If you don’t see how insane it is for an older millennial like Meghan to write an old-school letter instead of email, call or text like the rest of our generation, then there’s nothing more I can say. Most people haven’t picked up a pen for ordinary communication since 1999.
> 
> It is obvious she wrote it in her signature calligraphy with the intention to expose him.



I don't see it as insane.  In fact, I will handwrite a note to make it extra special simple because EVERYTHING is digital - and this in coming from a leader within the digital/AI communication space.


----------



## bisousx

Kansashalo said:


> I don't see it as insane.  In fact, I will handwrite a note to make it extra special simple because EVERYTHING is digital - and this in coming from a leader within the digital/AI communication space.



Serious question - You would discuss with your staff, handwrite a letter to your parent, put it in an envelope with actual stamps to discuss a serious issue instead of picking up the phone to hash it out?


----------



## sdkitty

Kansashalo said:


> I don't see it as insane.  In fact, I will handwrite a note to make it extra special simple because EVERYTHING is digital - and this in coming from a leader within the digital/AI communication space.


I don't know much about calligraphy but I don't think it's something natural.  the letters don't just flow naturally - you have to more or less draw them.  seems odd to me.  this is usually used for something like an invitation - not a letter to a family member.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The story continues...  Good for Piers to defend 'freedom of speech', we need that!
> 
> "_*Meghan Markle wrote to ITV's boss to complain about Piers Morgan hours before the Good Morning Britain co-host quit *on the day the show scored its highest ever ratings and beat BBC Breakfast, it was revealed today.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex insists she was not upset that Mr Morgan* said he 'didn't believe a word she said' in her Oprah interview - *but was worried about how his comments could affect people attempting to deal with their own mental health problems*, an insider told the Press Association.
> 
> Standing firm today, Mr Morgan told reporters outside his West London home: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge that she came out with in that interview, so be it._'
> 
> _*Mr Morgan is understood to have been ordered to apologise - but he refused and quit instead saying he had the right to tell viewers his 'honestly held opinions'* and declaring: *'Freedom of speech is a hill I'm happy to die on'*._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I still don't believe Meghan': Piers Morgan tweets defiant message
> 
> 
> Speaking outside his West London home Mr Morgan told reporters: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge, so be it.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





kkfiregirl said:


> It just seems a little _crazy_, lol. Usually people save the calligraphy for things like wedding invites or thank-you notes.


I would love to have beautiful handwriting ... I have a collection of fountain pens for personal notes, sadly, paper these days is so thin, the ink runs


----------



## mshermes

Kansashalo said:


> I don't see it as insane.  In fact, I will handwrite a note to make it extra special simple because EVERYTHING is digital - and this in coming from a leader within the digital/AI communication space.


IMO...a handwritten note is lovely. A note to a parent in calligraphy is a whole different ballgame.


----------



## Kansashalo

bisousx said:


> Serious question - You would discuss with your staff, handwrite a letter to your parent, put it in an envelope with actual stamps to discuss a serious issue instead of picking up the phone to hash it out?



Serious answer - Depends on the type of relationship I had with said parent.  If it wasn't a good one and I knew that the topic would cause an uproar, then yes - I would write a letter.  This isn't uncommon or maybe I know too many people in therapy with unhealthy parental relationshps lol


----------



## floatinglili

The thing is the letter was not intended as a special gift of love, to be kept as a souvenir  - it was intended as a manipulative sign-off - a theatrical kiss off along the lines of something you would expect from an emotional, self-centred and spoiled fifteen year old child.

Even if I could believe that MM didn’t expect to gain any media mileage from writing such a florid letter to her dad (which I don’t for a minute, I am sure a large part of her process for this letter was the briefing and leaking to the press) the letter, even if kept totally private, was a horrible act from a daughter to a father.

It would not reflect well on the teenage neighbour next door let alone someone of MM’s age and new position.


----------



## LittleStar88

Kansashalo said:


> Serious answer - Depends on the type of relationship I had with said parent.  If it wasn't a good one and I knew that the topic would cause an uproar, then yes - I would write a letter.  This isn't uncommon or maybe I know too many people in therapy with unhealthy parental relationshps lol



But would you go through the painstaking effort to write an emotional and lengthy letter in calligraphy for that purpose? I think that’s what the issue is. That’s just a lot of extra and over the top to me.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Kansashalo said:


> I don't see it as insane.  In fact, I will handwrite a note to make it extra special simple because EVERYTHING is digital - and this in coming from a leader within the digital/AI communication space.



I hear ya, but handwritten and calligraphy are different to me .


----------



## chicinthecity777

TC1 said:


> Interesting that MM complained to ITV about Piers. I thought she didn't know or read things written about her?
> Also interesting that she thought throwing out the comment that *tabloids are invited to the palace for a party during the holidays* didn't land. I'm sure she thought that was going to be a grenade after everything Di went through and how they'd been pleading for privacy.


Completely false and many working for those publications have come out and said there was no such a thing!


----------



## artax two

Ozzy Man has been making me laugh for years


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I hear ya, but handwritten and calligraphy are different to me .


agree.  and if you're consulting with staff, it's business, not personal


----------



## TC1

chicinthecity777 said:


> Completely false and many working for those publications have come out and said there was no such a thing!


*clutches pearls* something inaccurate was said??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

doni said:


> I will say it and I apologize if I offend anyone. All this would not be happening if Meghan was not American. For the US President to make declarations of support towards someone who makes unsubstantiated allegations against a Head of State in an TV show...  Really that is _so_ disgraceful. Because the Queen _is_ a Head of State and represents a country and its people. Can we imagine President Macron speaking up in support of the staff who accused the current US President of inappropriate behavior? Or the King of Spain giving an opinion on stuff people said about the last US President on TV, true or not? If Meghan was from Nigeria, or Argentina, or Belgium... no one would be playing to this game.


ITA!  I found it highly inappropriate that the current President is commenting on this.  There are enough issues in the US to keep him busy.


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> I dunno... I actually had a lot of sympathy for Megan Until this interview was announced. Marrying into that family was going to be hard and I wouldn’t be surprised if she spins a tale... we know the law, maybe it wasn’t explained properly, who knows? Admittedly, I got frustrated with how she behaved at Eugenie’s wedding. But, I think most people who were watching would have.
> 
> My issue has always been with Harry. He’s the one who should know better and has been playing games. He judges others on things he does while not acknowledging he’s guilty of the same things until some one calls him out. Barefoot google conference on the environment, follows it up with private jet vacay with Elton John. I mean seriously? Then launches Travelyst.... and buys an Escalade and a Range Rover and not the Hybrid one...
> 
> Megan, I think thought she was going to be a celeb and didn’t expect glorified civil servant. *Even their rebuttal a couple weeks ago to the Queen showed a core misunderstanding between philanthropy and service.*



What an insightful observation. I wasn't sure why their response seemed off to me but this captures it.


----------



## lalame

chicinthecity777 said:


> Completely false and many working for those publications have come out and said there was no such a thing!



Hmm I didn't think this one was so unbelievable or controversial if true. I'd think they would have special events (some bordering on partying) for the royal rota. Like how every public commercial company would do events for analysts and media.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> If you don’t see how insane it is for an older millennial like Meghan to write an old-school letter instead of email, call or text like the rest of our generation, then there’s nothing more I can say. Most people haven’t picked up a pen for ordinary communication since 1999.
> 
> It is obvious she wrote it in her signature calligraphy with the intention to expose him.


I'm surprised she didn't just do a telegram, which is the only possible way to be even colder:

We. Are. Done.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OMG 
Just on the topic of the interview’s ratings. I just heard that the million quid interview got 11.3 million viewers whereas  3 weeks before the series premier of ‘ant and dec’s Saturday night takeaway’ got 12 million! 
they must be cross!

NB ant and dec is a long- running variety show presented by two comedians. It is also on ITV.  It is beloved but it is definitely not expensive prestige programming.








						Ant & Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## bisousx

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised she didn't just do a telegram:
> 
> We. Are. Done.



Or carrier pigeon


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> Or carrier pigeon


Well, maybe she tried (and wound up with the interview dress), but decided to bag the idea.


----------



## Kansashalo

LittleStar88 said:


> But would you go through the painstaking effort to write an emotional and lengthy letter in calligraphy for that purpose? I think that’s what the issue is. That’s just a lot of extra and over the top to me.





kkfiregirl said:


> I hear ya, but handwritten and calligraphy are different to me .



Focusing on the calligraphy aspect is a REACH for me in terns of using it to define someone as "certifiable".lol


----------



## bisousx

Kansashalo said:


> Focusing on the calligraphy aspect is a REACH for me in terns of using it to define someone as "certifiable".lol



Not to worry, I have other examples too


----------



## zen1965

since 





FreeSpirit71 said:


> I think it was very believable that Meghan asked for help and didn't receive it, actually.  It's not like the BRF have good form in this regards.  Diana had mental health issues as well and it was not dealt with well at all by the Royal Family.
> 
> The symbiotic relationship they have with the press is really problematic and contributes to some of these issues, I believe.  They often make wrong moves based on optics - ie how will it look for someone in the family to seek help, what does it say about the monarchy that this is necessary.  Especially disappointing when so many of them have patronages that deal with mental health.
> 
> The phrase "never complain, never explain" may have worked in the stoic decades of the past, but smothering true mental health issues can have drastic consequences.



Since the Diana days a lot has changed. Harry and his brother spoke on national TV about their own therapy sessions.They actively supported (initiated?) mental health initiatives in the UK. But Harry cannot support his wife in seeking help, she has to turn to HR that denies her request? Utter nonsense in my book.

IMHO regarding these two twits „complain less, explain less“ would be beneficial to their mental health.

OT: Where have you been? I never see you around here anymore?


----------



## papertiger

kkfiregirl said:


> Well, to be fair, after all these years, Charles _is_ his father. Adoptive parents are _real_ parents too.



I agree, in any family in the World -_ except_ a Royal family (primogeniture and hereditary titles)


----------



## lulilu

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m not googling a bunch of rumors/stories. Waste of time, IMO. We get it, y’all hate her. *yawns*



Or perhaps you don't care to know the truth, but would prefer to perpetuate their lies?  yawn


----------



## Lodpah

Who needs a world war? MM and her husband have caused division between two countries, attempted murder threats on Harry’s SIL through her stans, alleged bullying of people, who worked under her, people being fired, people marked, and she walks away smelling like roses. She’s giddy, I suppose, drunk with power, lust and greed, her and Harry coming out with their big guns, to tear and rip every one out of their way, with regard that their stepping on all these people on their way up, they will meet them on their way down.


----------



## floatinglili

Kansashalo said:


> Focusing on the calligraphy aspect is a REACH for me in terns of using it to define someone as "certifiable".lol


Calligraphy takes an AGE though. I had a friend do a small poster for me once - had to cobble together all the bits, the right paper pens, ink etc - and then the actual writing - my Lord - talk about painstaking!! Calligraphy is a big part of the turn off for me lol. how many drafts did she have to throw out when the ink dribbled?? 
We are talking hours and hours of focussed high handed control of the narrative and goodbye to the daddy with this letter haha.


----------



## 1LV

floatinglili said:


> Calligraphy takes an AGE though. I had a friend do a small poster for me once - had to cobble together all the bits, the right paper pens, ink etc - and then the actual writing - my Lord - talk about painstaking!! Calligraphy is a big part of the turn off for me lol. how many drafts did she have to throw out when the ink dribbled??
> We are talking hours and hours of focussed high handed control of the narrative and goodbye to the daddy with this letter haha.


Have you seen her calligraphy?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised she didn't just do a telegram, which is the only possible way to be even colder:
> 
> We. Are. Done.



Didn't she break up with one partner with mailing rings?

And like that _nasty_ letter written as though in stone would be the one he'd want to keep because it came from his precious princess from the Palace? Like he'd put _that_ behind glass and hang on the wall for all to admire? Total beach (and I use that word advisedly and meaningfully, and I had a very ambivalent relationship to my father.


----------



## sdkitty

Kansashalo said:


> Focusing on the calligraphy aspect is a REACH for me in terns of using it to define someone as "certifiable".lol


I agree it doesn't mean she is crazy but it does seem the letter was intended as something other than or more than a personal letter to a parent


----------



## Tootsie17

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking News!
> Meghan has formally complained to ITV about Piers Morgan comments.


I thought she didn't read or watch coverage of her from the media.


----------



## lalame

I agree with Meghan McCain here. I don't question how M or any celebrity could be depressed or suffer bad mental health in that situation (therapy only helps so much). Occupational hazard for sure.


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> We could rename the thread "Where did Harry Go?", "What Harry Did(n't Do) Next", "When Harry Met the Duchess" or "Too Dirty Harry"?


Or...


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought Oprah took Meghan at her word for every single sentence, but she seem to push back on Harry more when his story he didn’t make sense.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m surprised that the majority of the comments on a New York Times Facebook post about the Queen’s response was very negative towards Harry and Megan.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> *Didn't she break up with one partner with mailing rings?*
> 
> And like that _nasty_ letter written as though in stone would be the one he'd want to keep because it came from his precious princess from the Palace? Like he'd put _that_ behind glass and hang on the wall for all to admire? Total beach (and I use that word advisedly and meaningfully, and I had a very ambivalent relationship to my father.


Yep, her husband!  The woman who wants to flood the earth with a groundswell of compassion, doesn't really seem to know what the word means.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I agree with Meghan McCain here. I don't question how M or any celebrity could be depressed or suffer bad mental health in that situation (therapy only helps so much). Occupational hazard for sure.
> 
> View attachment 5017728



The problem is separating people who_ want_ and furiously pursue celebrity and fame and the ones that work/worked in industries where that's path of the course and have to deal with the celebrity/fame aspect. 

I put it to you that MM is the first kind. Acting was only a means to an end > as was the do-gooding/woke/charity > it was always motivated by an insatiable hunger for celebrity/fame/power/money.  

She was obviously not well before (she married No 3.)


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> It's interesting to me how Meghan is perceived by others.  I find her to be nothing but a cloying,  narcissistic phony.  She spewed nothing but lies for most of the "perfomance" so when it came to the mental health issue, I do not believe for one minute she was suicidal.  She loves herself too much to contemplate that.  She must be feeling very pleased with herself for the moment, with all the chaos she has created.



You are perceptive. Others apparently see her as they want/expect her to be, rather than how she actually is (which is phony).


----------



## purseinsanity

Tootsie17 said:


> I thought she didn't read or watch coverage of her from the media.


MmmmmmmmHmmmmmmmm


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting things have resurfaced!
> But when Harry did it, he was without malice!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry apologizes over "Paki" remark
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry apologized on Saturday after a newspaper website published video footage showing him calling an Asian army colleague a "Paki," but he said he had used the term without malice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mobile.reuters.com



He's a hypocrite, she's a hypocrite. It's a marriage made in "do as I say, not as I do" heaven!


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Hmm I didn't think this one was so unbelievable or controversial if true. I'd think they would have special events (some bordering on partying) for the royal rota. Like how every public commercial company would do events for analysts and media.


No, that's not how RF handles the (tabloid) press. There are protocol agreements between the RF and press and how they work. It doesn't happen like that in this country. They are not any commercial entities. Her claim was completely bull!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Glamour magazine article from 2018. How come nobody taught her anything?
> *Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess
> 
> 
> The queen is reportedly making Meghan Markle take six months of royal lessons to prepare for her life as the duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Either she's a pathological liar or she has the memory of a gnat. Who am I kidding? I know it's the first one.


----------



## Lodpah

mshermes said:


> Apparently she has not “laid low”....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jessica Mulroney Stands Up for Meghan Markle After Fallout
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friend Jessica Mulroney backed her amid bullying claims despite the pair’s friendship fallout in June 2020 — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


She’s on that wheel rotating round and round until her door opens when her Queen says so. I can’t believe how hungry and desperate people are for fame. I think a study in this is warranted in psychology classes in college.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> Meghan is gorgeous, wears clothes well (my opinion) and looked glamorous, but in a refreshingly modest way.



I liked some of her outfits but I honestly thought one of her signature looks was "ill-fitting". And I never understood why, because with all that money, couldn't she get them fitted? Of course I understand now, seeing the evil royals denied her mental help they probably wouldn't let her have a seamstress either.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I liked some of her outfits but I honestly thought one of her signature looks was "ill-fitting". And I never understood why, because with all that money, couldn't she get them fitted? Of course I understand now, seeing the evil royals denied her mental help they probably wouldn't let her have a seamstress either.



I find it hard to like her outfits, since she is wearing them...  She's a big 'turn off'-I can't appreciate it on her because she is such a phony... don't make me link for calling her that... that's too much work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> If you don’t see how insane it is for an older millennial like Meghan to write an old-school letter instead of email, call or text like the rest of our generation, then there’s nothing more I can say. Most people haven’t picked up a pen for ordinary communication since 1999.
> 
> It is obvious she wrote it in her signature calligraphy with the intention to expose him.



After drafting, writing, editing and rewriting it with help of her PR staff. Don't we all handle our parents like this!


----------



## doni

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting things have resurfaced!
> But when Harry did it, he was without malice!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry apologizes over "Paki" remark
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry apologized on Saturday after a newspaper website published video footage showing him calling an Asian army colleague a "Paki," but he said he had used the term without malice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mobile.reuters.com


He also referred to someone as a "raghead"
Dressing up as a nazi was also done without malice.
It really is remarkable, to say the least, that the member of the Royal family that has been mingled in more racist behavior situations has been Harry...


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I agree with Meghan McCain here. I don't question how M or any celebrity could be depressed or suffer bad mental health in that situation (therapy only helps so much). Occupational hazard for sure.
> 
> View attachment 5017728


This might be classed as a little mean, but whenever I see one of these B list celebrities by birth like McCain talking about how incredibly psychologically challenging being a B list celebrity is: I do sort of wish they would magically be turned into the average high school teacher for a week or so. Just a normal teacher. Not a tragic life or anything. Just live their life for a week.

I  think some of these people can’t see clearly for the silver spoons in their mouths.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't know much about calligraphy but I don't think it's something natural.  the letters don't just flow naturally - you have to more or less draw them.  seems odd to me.  this is usually used for something like an invitation - not a letter to a family member.



It wasn't actually calligraphy - we know someone likes to be grander than they are -, it was ridiculously embellished cursive. But yeah, I've seen her use it to sign guest books and stuff and it took her forever to just write a short greeting and her name.


----------



## lalame

I also quite like Meghan's style! She doesn't look good in everything but I find that to be true about nearly everyone.  I'm also LA born and bred though so the toussled hair, slightly messy or imperfect look is up my alley.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ladies you're moving too fast for me. I'm answering as I try to catch up on 10+ pages, then I see it's already been discussed to death LOL


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I thought Oprah took Meghan at her word for every single sentence, but she seem to push back on Harry more when his story he didn’t make sense.



Oprah spent two days with them during the initial taping and then came back for some additional work later. We'll never know what was in the hours of taping that didn't make it into the show. She may have asked Meghan harder questions but didn't include them because clearly the point of the show was to be totally sympathetic towards Meghan.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> This might be classed as a little mean, but whenever I see one of these B list celebrities by birth like McCain talking about how incredibly psychologically challenging being a B list celebrity is: I do sort of wish they would magically be turned into the average high school teacher for a week or so. Just a normal teacher. Not a tragic life or anything. Just live their life for a week.
> 
> I  think some of these people can’t see clearly for the silver spoons in their mouths.



But how does that average school teacher compare to a rice farmer in Asia... there's always someone who suffers more. I think it's OK that people air the ways they suffer, especially if it's in an empathetic way just to say "I suffer too." I empathize with the fame because it does seem very tough, but obviously I don't feel TOOOOOO bad because the immense wealth and privilege is the compensation. Occupational hazard, I say.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> After drafting, writing, editing and rewriting it with help of her PR staff. Don't we all handle our parents like this!


Yep.  I don't care if she printed it, hand wrote it, calligraphied it, heck, even wrote in her own blood, but why do you need a staff of 8 (or however many there were) proof reading a letter to your OWN father??


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies you're moving to fast for me. I'm answering as I try to catch up on 10+ pages, then I see it's already been discussed to death LOL



You have something better to do snooze, you lose!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It wasn't actually calligraphy - we know someone likes to be grander than they are -, it was ridiculously embellished cursive. But yeah, I've seen her use it to sign guest books and stuff and it took her forever to just write a short greeting and her name.


Well, we've heard Haz has trouble reading.  Maybe Meg has trouble writing, hence all the help?


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I liked some of her outfits but I honestly thought one of her signature looks was "ill-fitting". And I never understood why, because with all that money, couldn't she get them fitted? Of course I understand now, seeing the evil royals denied her mental help they probably wouldn't let her have a seamstress either.



Her pre-royal casual outfits were fantastic. Every Z lister tries to grab attention with T&A, so I appreciate that MM dressed elegantly when she was a nobody and tried to be a somebody while looking classy.


----------



## sdkitty

bisousx said:


> Her pre-royal casual outfits were fantastic. Every Z lister tries to grab attention with T&A, so I appreciate that MM dressed elegantly when she was a nobody and tried to be a somebody while looking classy.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017812
> View attachment 5017813
> View attachment 5017814
> View attachment 5017815
> View attachment 5017816


I'm sorry but those stick legs always jump out at me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

bisousx said:


> Her pre-royal casual outfits were fantastic. Every Z lister tries to grab attention with T&A, so I appreciate that MM dressed elegantly when she was a nobody and tried to be a somebody while looking classy.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017812
> View attachment 5017813
> View attachment 5017814
> View attachment 5017815
> View attachment 5017816



LOL!  All I see is: liar liar pants on fire!


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> MM and her father. Actually her father seems to be very good father.



Many of the shots in this youtube video .. definitely prior to all the Dental work and Plastic Surgery she had to be a *"natural" beauty* .. HA!!   .. what a JOKE!


----------



## Chanbal

Murky Meg on the interview and its falsehoods!


----------



## kkfiregirl

CeeJay said:


> Many of the shots in this youtube video .. definitely prior to all the Dental work and Plastic Surgery she had to be a *"natural" beauty* .. HA!!   .. what a JOKE!



Haha, I think she’s naturally beautiful, she just wanted to look a certain way


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry but those stick legs always jump out at me



I’m surprised her ankles haven’t snapped under the weight of all that _ego_!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> Glamour magazine article from 2018. How come nobody taught her anything?
> *Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess
> 
> 
> The queen is reportedly making Meghan Markle take six months of royal lessons to prepare for her life as the duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


One learns by listening to instructors and reading recommended & accompanying material. In one interview, she said that she carried binders/books/whatever around. Did she read them or simply try to absorb information by osmosis?


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Many of the shots in this youtube video .. definitely prior to all the Dental work and Plastic Surgery she had to be a *"natural" beauty* .. HA!!   .. what a JOKE!



After Lorry Hill, I'm starting to think there is no such thing as "natural beauty" among today's celebrities anymore. Everyone's had something done!


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry but those stick legs always jump out at me



I wouldn’t mind swapping with her stick legs. She looks great to me


----------



## bisbee

CeeJay said:


> Many of the shots in this youtube video .. definitely prior to all the Dental work and Plastic Surgery she had to be a *"natural" beauty* .. HA!!   .. what a JOKE!


I guess you would have left a gap between your front teeth...yes?  I know you have no use for her, and your friends knew her in school, but what does her dental work have to do with anything?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> After Lorry Hill, I'm starting to think there is no such thing as "natural beauty" among today's celebrities anymore. Everyone's had something done!



I'll give her that, the work she had done earlier looked great, very subtle. You could believe this was her face. Right now she is going down a slippery slope, though.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry but those stick legs always jump out at me


Maybe I'm in the minority, but I wish I had twig legs that looked that good in leather pants!


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm in the minority, but I wish I had twig legs that looked that good in leather pants!



I dare not say it here but... I would kill for those legs too.  I'd happily trade in my flawed body for her flawed body.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> After Lorry Hill, I'm starting to think there is no such thing as "natural beauty" among today's celebrities anymore. Everyone's had something done!


And if they haven't, they photoshop themselves to death!


----------



## Jktgal

"My real concern was a disbelief frankly... that she went to a senior member of the Royal household and told them she was suicidal and was told she could not have any help because it would be a bad look for the family."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisbee said:


> I guess you would have left a gap between your front teeth...yes?  I know you have no use for her, and your friends knew her in school, but what does her dental work have to do with anything?



It's not just dental work, she had basically a whole new face made...think Kylie Jenner. Did it look great before she started to add more stuff? Yes. It is her original face? Just like Kylie's, not really. And before you come at me now: I personally don't have much of an opinion on drastically changing your appearance, just don't try to sell it to me as born this way


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Jktgal said:


> "My real concern was a disbelief frankly... that she went to a senior member of the Royal household and told them she was suicidal and was told she could not have any help because it would be a bad look for the family."
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5017829




I was not prepared to watch Piers be reasonable right now. I need a minute with this.


----------



## marietouchet

Many DM articles today are interesting, some support for MM, mostly rebuttal pieces on security, getting financially cut off, bias of British press tabloids comments in interview, sorry too numerous to mention

good citations in there, something to sink your teeth into, to make up your own mind

Similar pieces in the Times, but my edition is a day behind, and the UK saw the shoe a day late, so, some delay in press comments there, but a lot of rebuttals

interesting the queen’s statement that said racism issues to be handled privately, but made no mention of the other bombshell topic - lack of medical help for mental health issues. Don’t know what that means , not insinuating anything but gee whiz ... if I had suicial thoughts, I would hate to have my mental health care publicly discussed. So, I note the omission without insinuation


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who is Janina Gavankar?


----------



## Jktgal

@lalame I have only watched very few of his interviews but was always impressed how right he was. I need reference to one where he is being an *******     (and I understand enough to make judgement).


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is Janina Gavankar?


Actress and another of MM's "BFF" that speaks up in support when needed.
She was on True Blood


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> After Lorry Hill, I'm starting to think there is no such thing as "natural beauty" among today's celebrities anymore. Everyone's had something done!


Also, as Lorry Hill showed us, there was the first plastic surgery makeover (her Deal or No Deal days) and then one after where her longer face morphed into a Jennifer Lawrence type face with the beautiful cheekbones, no dark space at the ends of her veneers/corner of her mouth (I never really thought about that one!) and symmetry. 

I do think that last round of work, as Lorry Hill helped me figure out, made her so photogenic!


----------



## chicinthecity777

kkfiregirl said:


> Haha, I think she’s naturally beautiful, she just wanted to look a certain way


I think she _was_ naturally beautiful as I have a strong dislike to plastic surgery. I don't like her "enhanced" look at all. She was cute before and now she's just another cookie cutter face in Hollywood. She and KK look way more alike now!


----------



## mdcx

I reported a number of tweets that had a similar form to this, but the photo was replaced with a video clip of someone being physically attacked:


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> I dare not say it here but... I would kill for those legs too.  I'd happily trade in my flawed body for her flawed body.



Haha, I can see why you’d say that! She looks great in jeans/long pants . And, I agree, we all have our flaws.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> interesting the queen’s statement that said racism issues to be handled privately, *but made no mention of the other bombshell topic - lack of medical help for mental health issues. Don’t know what that means , not insinuating anything but gee whiz ... if I had suicial thoughts, I would hate to have my mental health care publicly discussed. So, I note the omission without insinuation*



The Queen might very well believe Meghan has mental problems. Whether she believes suicidal thoughts are among them is another matter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I can't read it



It’s about this John Oliver-Steven Colbert interview from 2018:





Spoiler: John Oliver warning



*John Oliver’s prescient comments on Meghan go viral after Oprah interview*
By Christi CarrasStaff Writer 
March 9, 2021 11:25 AM PT
John Oliver had a feeling marrying into the royal family would be a trying experience for Meghan Markle. He told fellow TV host Stephen Colbert as much in 2018.

In the wake of Oprah Winfrey’s bombshell interview with Meghan and Prince Harry, the “Last Week Tonight” star’s prescient comments on the Duchess of Sussex have gone viral on social media. During Markle’s intimate conversation with Winfrey, which aired Sunday in the U.S., the former “Suits” actress opened up about several challenges she has faced since wedding the prince, including suicidal thoughts and “concerns” from within the palace over her first child’s skin color.

“I would not blame [Meghan] if she pulled out of this at the last minute,” Oliver told Colbert on “The Late Show” before the Sussexes’ union in 2018. “I don’t think you need to have just seen the pilot episode of ‘The Crown’ to get a basic sense that she might be marrying into a family that could cause her some emotional complications.

“They’re an emotionally stunted group of fundamentally flawed people doing a very silly pseudo-job. That’s what she’s marrying into. So I hope she likes it. It’s going to be weird for her. I would not marry into the royal family. I’m a commoner. I would not be welcomed — especially after what I’ve just said.”

On Twitter, thousands of people have recently shared the British comedian’s remarks with captions such as "[Oliver] really called this one,” “John Oliver nailed it, really” and “John Oliver knew all along.” Oliver himself has not reacted to the Winfrey interview on social media.

As part of a two-hour TV event for CBS that drew more than 17 million viewers, Meghan told Winfrey she regretted believing that the crown would protect her from the barrage of negative and racist media scrutiny that has plagued her since she was first linked to Harry. She also accused the royal institution of refusing to support her as her mental health suffered, despite her pleas for help.

That lack of support significantly informed the Sussexes’ landmark decision to “step back” as senior members of the royal family and start a new, independent life in the duchess’ native California, Harry and Meghan explained to Winfrey.

“I just didn’t want to be alive anymore. And that was a very clear and real and frightening constant thought,” Meghan told Winfrey. “I went to the institution, and I said I needed to go somewhere to get help. I said that I never felt this way before and I need to go somewhere. And I was told that I couldn’t, that it wouldn’t be good for the institution.”

Buckingham Palace, which recently announced it would investigate bullying allegations leveled against the duchess and leaked to the British press shortly before the Winfrey interview aired, released a statement Tuesday morning in response to Harry and Meghan’s revelations.

“The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan,” read the statement on behalf of Queen Elizabeth II. 

Advertisement

“The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.”

During Sunday’s telecast, Meghan and Harry also revealed to Winfrey that they’re expecting a baby girl, adding that they do not plan to have more children beyond 1-year-old Archie and his incoming younger sister.

“To have a boy and then a girl. What more could you ask for?” Harry said.


----------



## poopsie

Toby93 said:


> It's interesting to me how Meghan is perceived by others.  I find her to be nothing but a cloying,  narcissistic phony.  She spewed nothing but lies for most of the "perfomance" so when it came to the mental health issue, I do not believe for one minute she was suicidal.  She loves herself too much to contemplate that.  She must be feeling very pleased with herself for the moment, with all the chaos she has created.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MurkyMeg says Cirque was on a Friday, the red coat/purple dress incident was on the Wednesday before, and MM’s hairdresser spent the weekend with her and posted the avocado toast photos.  Interesting noting the timeline. Perhaps the red coat was a turning point.


----------



## mellibelly

Sly_Fox said:


> It’s a veiled threat, that’s what it is.
> 
> I have a friend who gives half a story for dramatic effect then says I don’t really want to say any more. Immature, attention seeking mind games, just like Meghan.



I have a family member that does this. NPD and bipolar. And when you ask for clarification or more details to the story she clams up. Because if she told the whole truth she wouldn’t be the victim.

This is probably why I didn’t buy M’s schtick. When you grow up around narcissists it’s easy to spot those traits in others.


----------



## poopsie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> All the comments about putting people on ignore make me sad. Can we really not allow any other viewpoints on anything...even a gossip thread on a forum about handbags?!? I don’t agree with much of what’s posted but I’m trying to understand and hoping to learn so I keep reading. Talk about cancel culture, no wonder we’re so divided if we stay in our bubbles and can only accept information that agrees with our own assumptions and beliefs.
> 
> I realize I’m probably on so many ignore lists already only about 3 people will be able to read this!



Well there's over 15 likes for your post so maybe there's hope for us yet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> What are Meghan's apologists on about, especially of African decent?! This is a woman so self absorbed, that after visiting with women and children subjected to AIDS, poverty and rape in some of the most crime ridden and poorest areas of Africa, didn't even hesitate to stand up in the midst of all this and whine: "Nobody asked me how I was". The thought of her own unbelievable elite hardships even brought tears to her eyes. _That_ is "her truth". Whatever "colour", this is not a particularly good person.
> 
> Can you imagine, after meeting people suffering through these horrors and thinking that was a suitable place and opportunity to pull her usual woe-is-only-her-number? No empathy or compassion for others, no humbling herself, no reflection on her own privileged situation in life compared to so many of those she met during that week.
> 
> 
> I also suspect it was more the fact that someone (the BRF and their staff) finally said no to her demands, that caused her alleged hurt and suicidal thinking. Not getting what she wants, could probably trigger serious emotional upheavals in someone with a personality like hers.
> 
> People, just try and think rationally for a minute. Considering what happened to Diana, how many really think that the BRF would risk going through something similar again? Had Meghan committed suicide, the media dramatics would have tipped over Buckingham Palace. Whether they'd help her because of truly caring or for duty and self preservation, is another matter. But there is no way the BRF would have risked willingly putting themselves through another public scandal and trauma like that.



ANOTHER !!!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bisbee said:


> I guess you would have left a gap between your front teeth...yes?  I know you have no use for her, and your friends knew her in school, but what does her dental work have to do with anything?


Slightly OT but isn’t  there some controversy about tooth gaps in general? Recently there was  that old ANTM clip of Tyra banks telling a contestant to close her gap then on a later series she said she liked a white girl’s gap and slick woods did an Instagram post about it?

in answer to your question, I wouldn’t bother but then again...


----------



## CarryOn2020

OW did not tell the whole story???? Shocker! Noooo, say it isn’t so — unbelievable someone would fact-check that stuff!

*Headlines shown on screen during the Oprah interview to paint British media coverage as hostile and 'racist' were mocked up by the production company, often edited to remove context - and a third of them came from foreign media, new analysis has revealed today. 

The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse against Meghan. 

One segment showed a headline about how 'Meghan's seed will taint our Royal Family' - without noting that the story was actually exposing racist comments made by a model. 









						Headlines used to claim media bias on Oprah were taken out of context
					

The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## Chagall

mellibelly said:


> I have a family member that does this. NPD and bipolar. And when you ask for clarification or more details to the story she clams up. Because if she told the whole truth she wouldn’t be the victim.
> 
> This is probably why I didn’t buy M’s schtick. When you grow up around narcissists it’s easy to spot those traits in others.


Well sometimes when you grow up around narcissists, narcissistic behaviour seems perfectly normal to you. It’s all you have ever known. In that sense they are a bit harder to pinpoint. People who were raised by narcs sadly often go on to marry one.


----------



## beekmanhill

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's hardly surprising _these_ particular people support Piers.



Why , they are at complete opposite ends of the political spectrum?


----------



## bisbee

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's not just dental work, she had basically a whole new face made...think Kylie Jenner. Did it look great before she started to add more stuff? Yes. It is her original face? Just like Kylie's, not really. And before you come at me now: I personally don't have much of an opinion on drastically changing your appearance, just don't try to sell it to me as born this way


I never said she didn’t have work done, but where did anyone say she was born this way?  She hardly looks like Kylie Jenner...and I think she looked very similar in the early videos to how she looks now.  She doesn’t look like a different person.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I was not prepared to watch Piers be reasonable right now. I need a minute with this.


The expression 'hit and miss' could perhaps be applied to Piers, but he has been mostly spot on in the subject of this thread imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW did not tell the whole story???? Shocker! Noooo, say it isn’t so — unbelievable someone would fact-check that stuff!
> 
> *Headlines shown on screen during the Oprah interview to paint British media coverage as hostile and 'racist' were mocked up by the production company, often edited to remove context - and a third of them came from foreign media, new analysis has revealed today.
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse against Meghan.
> 
> One segment showed a headline about how 'Meghan's seed will taint our Royal Family' - without noting that the story was actually exposing racist comments made by a model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Headlines used to claim media bias on Oprah were taken out of context
> 
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


1 Meghan + 1 Oprah = 2 anti-monarchists. Unbelievable!


----------



## Megs

Sol Ryan said:


> I dunno... I actually had a lot of sympathy for Megan Until this interview was announced. Marrying into that family was going to be hard and I wouldn’t be surprised if she spins a tale... we know the law, maybe it wasn’t explained properly, who knows? Admittedly, I got frustrated with how she behaved at Eugenie’s wedding. But, I think most people who were watching would have.
> 
> My issue has always been with Harry. He’s the one who should know better and has been playing games. He judges others on things he does while not acknowledging he’s guilty of the same things until some one calls him out. Barefoot google conference on the environment, follows it up with private jet vacay with Elton John. I mean seriously? Then launches Travelyst.... and buys an Escalade and a Range Rover and not the Hybrid one...
> 
> Megan, I think thought she was going to be a celeb and didn’t expect glorified civil servant. Even their rebuttal a couple weeks ago to the Queen showed a core misunderstanding between philanthropy and service.



Yes! I think there are a lot of issues with Harry and somehow everything has focused on M. She is in the spotlight more, but man, his past is really filled with some nasty moments. And even 'crazier' as he is trained in how to be proper and he still had many glaring racist remarks/actions. 



Kansashalo said:


> Serious answer - Depends on the type of relationship I had with said parent.  If it wasn't a good one and I knew that the topic would cause an uproar, then yes - I would write a letter.  This isn't uncommon or maybe I know too many people in therapy with unhealthy parental relationshps lol



A lot of therapists actually recommend writing a letter if you have something to talk about that you know can be very heated. It can be really hard to calmly share your thoughts otherwise. The cursive/calligraphy is pretty over the top for me, mostly because that would personally take me HOURS. 



lalame said:


> I agree with Meghan McCain here. I don't question how M or any celebrity could be depressed or suffer bad mental health in that situation (therapy only helps so much). Occupational hazard for sure.
> 
> View attachment 5017728



Yep, truly I would NEVER want that type of spotlight and scrutiny. 



doni said:


> He also referred to someone as a "raghead"
> Dressing up as a nazi was also done without malice.
> It really is remarkable, to say the least, that the member of the Royal family that has been mingled in more racist behavior situations has been Harry...



Right, but didn't he say something in the interview with Oprah like: I've done the work and my family hasn't. 



bisousx said:


> Her pre-royal casual outfits were fantastic. Every Z lister tries to grab attention with T&A, so I appreciate that MM dressed elegantly when she was a nobody and tried to be a somebody while looking classy.



I really liked her style before and also think she is very pretty


----------



## bag-mania

Megs said:


> Right, but didn't he say something in the interview with Oprah like: I've done the work and my family hasn't.



Harry came off as being a bitter jerk. Of course he wanted to make sure we knew he's been educated Megucated about all of the important issues regarding awareness and sensitivity.


----------



## Chanbal

Jktgal said:


> @lalame I have only watched very few of his interviews but was always impressed how right he was. I need reference to one where he is being an *******     (and I understand enough to make judgement).


This is not the requested reference (I don't have one), but it is still interesting:

"_Thousands have signed petitions to get Piers Morgan re-instated on Good Morning Britain as ITV shares dived after he was forced to resign when Meghan Markle personally complained that he said he did not believe a word she said.

One, called 'Bring Back Piers Morgan!', accused the channel of treating him 'appallingly' and another - titled 'Keep Piers Morgan on GMB for his common sense approach to life' - had more than 95,000 signatures.

And a third, which has been signed by more than 35,000 people, described getting him sacked as 'an absolute farce' as viewers lament his loss from the show and vowed to stop watching it from now on._"









						'I still don't believe Meghan': Piers Morgan tweets defiant message
					

Speaking outside his West London home Mr Morgan told reporters: 'If I have to fall on my sword for expressing an honestly held opinion about Meghan Markle and that diatribe of bilge, so be it.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## elvisfan4life

Whoops


----------



## poopsie

bisbee said:


> I guess you would have left a gap between your front teeth...yes?  I know you have no use for her, and your friends knew her in school, but what does her dental work have to do with anything?



Maybe we can get Lauren Hutton in here to answer this


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW did not tell the whole story???? Shocker! Noooo, say it isn’t so — unbelievable someone would fact-check that stuff!
> 
> *Headlines shown on screen during the Oprah interview to paint British media coverage as hostile and 'racist' were mocked up by the production company, often edited to remove context - and a third of them came from foreign media, new analysis has revealed today.
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse against Meghan.
> 
> One segment showed a headline about how 'Meghan's seed will taint our Royal Family' - without noting that the story was actually exposing racist comments made by a model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Headlines used to claim media bias on Oprah were taken out of context
> 
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



WTF! It really doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on, this is not sloppy journalism, this is propaganda.. What was Oprah thinking?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW did not tell the whole story???? Shocker! Noooo, say it isn’t so — unbelievable someone would fact-check that stuff!
> 
> *Headlines shown on screen during the Oprah interview to paint British media coverage as hostile and 'racist' were mocked up by the production company, often edited to remove context - and a third of them came from foreign media, new analysis has revealed today.
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse against Meghan.
> 
> One segment showed a headline about how 'Meghan's seed will taint our Royal Family' - without noting that the story was actually exposing racist comments made by a model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Headlines used to claim media bias on Oprah were taken out of context
> 
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I noticed that most of the rags Oprah showed on the screen were just that -- rags. They cropped of the tabloid names so people would think it was done by a serious news outlet.

Really awful stuff, but why quote a tabloid no one takes seriously and tabloids who go after anyone on the planet - not just Meg.

Oprah was grasping at straws trying to make a point, but I thought it was weakened by it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisbee said:


> I never said she didn’t have work done, but where did anyone say she was born this way?  She hardly looks like Kylie Jenner...and I think she looked very similar in the early videos to how she looks now.  She doesn’t look like a different person.



I didn't say she looks like Kylie, I said the difference from her before and after face is similarly intense. But to be honest, this is not the hill I will die on, my problem with her is not her nose job.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF! It really doesn't matter which side of the fence you're on, this is not sloppy journalism, this is propaganda.. What was Oprah thinking?



She was thinking her interview was entertainment, not news, and they needed illustrations to make their point.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@QueenofWrapDress    Propaganda is correct!
From the DM article:

_The reality: A third of the headlines shown were also taken from foreign media, according to the Telegraph's analysis.

One said 'Harry trapped in marriage from hell!' - but that was taken from the American tabloid the National Enquirer.

Another National Enquirer headline was also used which said 'Monster Meghan exposed!'

In total 11 of more than 30 headlines shown during the interview were from American and Australian tabloids, according to the Daily Telegraph.

Of the 23 headlines from British news outlets which featured, around 14 were not published in print and only appeared online.

Other foreign publications used included Us Weekly, a celebrity magazine based in New York, and the Australia-based New Idea magazine._


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> Haha, I can see why you’d say that! She looks great in jeans/long pants . And, I agree, *we all have our flaws*.



Why do women do this to themselves?
The "flaws" are between our ears.......................not in our mirrors


----------



## ladysarah

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I’m just trying to understand the total lack of empathy that I’ve seen in this thread. I’ve seen people that say things like, “Oh she knew what she signed up for.” Who knows the amount of pressure and scrutiny that comes with being a royal unless they’ve lived that life before? Anyone seen “The Princess Diaries”? (Lol, just joking) The point is, it can’t be easy for anyone, so I’m wondering why there’s an assumption that they are liars and that the royal family has been just peachy towards them and that racism and/or the belief that she isn’t good enough for him cannot possibly be a factor in any of the crap they’ve been put through.


I have also observed a distinct hostility towards them (there is whole thread devoted to the subject and some appear to have spend the entire lockdown, *****ing about them -  long before the interview. I very rarely read or post in the gossip threads, but is hard to ignore the sheer quantity of venom, pouring out...)


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand why most journalists are so quick to take "her truth" as fact without fact checking, when both she and Haz profess to detesting the press (unless they're useful to them, that is!).


It’s not news anymore with celebrities it’s who pays the most for PR. That’s what I think.


----------



## Chagall

I always thought MM was very petite. Kate looked head and shoulders taller in all their photos together. In the interview she appeared much taller, as tall as Oprah. Oprah is not short, around 5’7. Odd. OMG I can’t believe I am scrutinizing this actress I had never heard of before’s height. They really have succeeded in getting everyone’s attention.


----------



## Lodpah

Drunk with power, lust and greed 

M&H came out with speed to

destroy the very thing that fed

you with fame and glory you seek

blood and gore you two leave

on your wake to destroy

love and compassion uttered from your lips

yet your hands destroy and beat 

People are a means for you 

to gain the world and lose your soul

He stands by assisting you 

in your quest to conquer all



Hearts as dark as the midnight hour

3 am is your magic hour

idle hands that scheme up things

to satisfy your wicked means

blood of souls you drink in glee

to smack your lips and say let’s see

who have we trampled on

our way to satan’s throne


----------



## lalame

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> Ok... But is it assumed that the royal family has no reason to ever lie? Everyone has secrets...



I'm sure everyone here would agree that the BRF is flawed and can be shady themselves. Hello, Andrew. But what does that have to do with Meghan lying (and I personally don't like to think of it as lying myself so much as misunderstanding or overdramatizing)?

It's like... Meghan received racist treatment. But Harry has said and done racist things as well. Does Harry's racism negate your sympathy for Meghan? Both are true.... they have flaws, and they can be sympathetic on some things too. My opinions are very situational.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> “I couldn’t have said yes to you then, *that wasn’t my choice to make,*” Meghan said. “So as an adult who lived a really independent life *to then go into this construct *that is different than I think what people imagine it to be, i*t’s really liberating* to be able to have the right and *the privilege* in some ways *to be able to say yes*. I mean, I’m ready to talk.”
> 
> Can you believe it? She knew what she was getting into. She didn't mind one %&**&# bit about "liberty"and she had quite a bit of privilege I'd say. So she had every luxury at her fingertips. Poor Baby!  She's sick!


*THIS 100%!!!! * For someone who (supposedly) has a degree in International Relations, she is as dumb as a rock!


----------



## bag-mania

For anyone who missed the Oprah interview (or wishes to see it again) CBS is re-airing it this Friday at 8 PM.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is Janina Gavankar?


American actress, see Wiki


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn't this the wedding she showed up to uninvited? I thought the rumours were that Harry had given her the heave-ho and she wasn't having any if it, so she showed up in Jamaica by herself.


That is what I recall as well, that Hazza had broken it off with her and while she had originally been 'invited', he didn't expect her to show up .. well, there you go .. she sure as heck showed up!!  If you look at some of the pictures, it appears that Harry wasn't particularly pleased that she had shown up .. and Meghan looks pissed in some of the pictures because Harry left her on her own at some points.  However (and I've said this numerous times), don't know what she did (fantastic sex??) .. to get him back???


----------



## Lodpah

I’m getting too involved in these two as far as spending time writing about them. The first time the thread was created I sensed darkness and evil emanating from her but not so much him as he got dragged into her machinations.
For some reason I tend to feel like this when exposed to certain people. I feel gifted in that sense.

So I’ll read your posts good and bad, for or against but I gotta cleanse the bad juju.

People are not to be used and abused and I hope those she has destroyed and threw away like garbage and those he has hurt will prevail. Goodness, true love and compassion always wins, in the end.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Megs said:


> Yes! I think there are a lot of issues with Harry and somehow everything has focused on M. She is in the spotlight more, but man, his past is really filled with some nasty moments. And even 'crazier' as he is trained in how to be proper and he still had many glaring racist remarks/actions.



Exactly. I don’t understand why she gets the blame when he’s right beside her. Even when he‘s is being judged, it’s like a little boy and she’s led him astray or down a dark path and I don’t think that’s true. At best, she gave him opportunity, but Harry still decided to follow through. He knows exactly what he’s doing.

Also, as a member of the BRF, it should have been Harry’s job to help Megan navigate the family dynamics, customs, rules and expectations. Who expects their sibling’s spouse to explain the family dynamics to their wife? Shouldn’t there have been the typical conversation on who to avoid (Princess Michael): Don’t talk to Aunt Maureen, she’ll try to invest your money in non-existent land in Florida. Uncle Frank steals flatware, etc  (Names changed to protect the innocent lol) My mom‘s family had to have a whole thing with my dad before she met my dad’s family and they aren’t rich, famous or anything.... just different country backgrounds in America and 20 years later dealing with his family was still super stressful for her...

As a celebrity (even b,c list whatever) Megan’s job was to get attention to sell something. If Harry doesn’t explain to her that as a Senior Royal the service she provides is to be secondary in order to raise awareness of the Charity, Cause, new building ward etc to boost morale, the Monarchy and represent the Queen again that’s a Harry failure. ( I could not fix this sentence, sorry... I tried. Hopefully it makes sense...)

Truth of the matter is that we don’t know where things broke down between the BRF and Team Sussex.  There’s tons of rumors out there.  The only thing we do know is one side decided to go to Oprah with a story that doesn’t make sense if you know the laws of the UK. Harry could have corrected that if he wanted to but he chose not to, so I don’t understand blaming just Megan.


----------



## mdcx

marietouchet said:


> American actress, see Wiki


Another of Meghan’s sycophant friends hoping to ride her coattails to fame/wealth. These “friends” will say whatever Meghan instructs them to imo.


----------



## mdcx

I would have loved to hear Meghan discuss why it was necessary to have a whole section of Wimbledon cleared for her. Oprah - another important question you neglected to ask!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I hadn’t watched Entertainment Tonight in several years but this week I’ve watched it three times because of this interview. They spent the first five minutes plugging it, complete with a lengthy appearance by *Omid Scobie*.  It does make me wonder if they’ve given away enough snippets where it might actually cause some people to lose interest.  Four teasers in a week will make everyone think they’ve already seen the most interesting parts of the show.


Well, right there .. a good reason not to tune into that show *ever again* (_like you, I haven't watched it in years_)!


----------



## marietouchet

Sol Ryan said:


> Exactly. I don’t understand why she gets the blame when he’s right beside her. Even when he‘s is being judged, it’s like a little boy and she’s led him astray or down a dark path and I don’t think that’s true. At best, she gave him opportunity, but Harry still decided to follow through. He knows exactly what he’s doing.
> 
> Also, as a member of the BRF, it should have been Harry’s job to help Megan navigate the family dynamics, customs, rules and expectations. Who expects their sibling’s spouse to explain the family dynamics to their wife? Shouldn’t there have been the typical conversation on who to avoid (Princess Michael): Don’t talk to Aunt Maureen, she’ll try to invest your money in non-existent land in Florida. Uncle Frank steals flatware, etc  (Names changed to protect the innocent lol) My mom‘s family had to have a whole thing with my dad before she met my dad’s family and they aren’t rich, famous or anything.... just different country backgrounds in America and 20 years later dealing with his family was still super stressful for her...
> 
> As a celebrity (even b,c list whatever) Megan’s job was to get attention to sell something. If Harry doesn’t explain to her that as a Senior Royal the service she provides is to be secondary in order to raise awareness of the Charity, Cause, new building ward etc to boost morale, the Monarchy and represent the Queen again that’s a Harry failure. ( I could not fix this sentence, sorry... I tried. Hopefully it makes sense...)
> 
> Truth of the matter is that we don’t know where things broke down between the BRF and Team Sussex.  There’s tons of rumors out there.  The only thing we do know is one side decided to go to Oprah with a story that doesn’t make sense if you know the laws of the UK. Harry could have corrected that if he wanted to but he chose not to, so I don’t understand blaming just Megan.


Time of the breakdown .... well it was seriously going downhill during the wedding prep ... many, many unflattering family stories around that time


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Another of Meghan’s sycophant friends hoping to ride her coattails to fame/wealth. These “friends” will say whatever Meghan instructs them to imo.



Does she have any friends left that aren’t Hollywood friends?


----------



## tiktok

Another saint Meghan protector...


----------



## CarryOn2020

From Day 1,  HE knew exactly what he was doing. Throughout his 20s and early 30s, he was known to throw stink bombs at wedding receptions. _Stink bombs at a reception._ Same thing he did to his family. The guy has serious issues. Vengeful, vindictive, vitriolic. Plenty of other women realized it and wisely walked away. So now that we understand very well that he has serious ego and mommy issues, we should walk away from this *******.  He is not a hero, not a savior, not a gentleman. 




Sol Ryan said:


> Exactly. I don’t understand why she gets the blame when he’s right beside her. Even when he‘s is being judged, it’s like a little boy and she’s led him astray or down a dark path and I don’t think that’s true. At best, she gave him opportunity, but Harry still decided to follow through. He knows exactly what he’s doing.
> 
> Also, as a member of the BRF, it should have been Harry’s job to help Megan navigate the family dynamics, customs, rules and expectations. Who expects their sibling’s spouse to explain the family dynamics to their wife? Shouldn’t there have been the typical conversation on who to avoid (Princess Michael): Don’t talk to Aunt Maureen, she’ll try to invest your money in non-existent land in Florida. Uncle Frank steals flatware, etc  (Names changed to protect the innocent lol) My mom‘s family had to have a whole thing with my dad before she met my dad’s family and they aren’t rich, famous or anything.... just different country backgrounds in America and 20 years later dealing with his family was still super stressful for her...
> 
> As a celebrity (even b,c list whatever) Megan’s job was to get attention to sell something. If Harry doesn’t explain to her that as a Senior Royal the service she provides is to be secondary in order to raise awareness of the Charity, Cause, new building ward etc to boost morale, the Monarchy and represent the Queen again that’s a Harry failure. ( I could not fix this sentence, sorry... I tried. Hopefully it makes sense...)
> 
> Truth of the matter is that we don’t know where things broke down between the BRF and Team Sussex.  There’s tons of rumors out there.  The only thing we do know is one side decided to go to Oprah with a story that doesn’t make sense if you know the laws of the UK. Harry could have corrected that if he wanted to but he chose not to, so I don’t understand blaming just Megan.


----------



## poopsie

Sol Ryan said:


> Exactly. I don’t understand why she gets the blame when he’s right beside her. Even when he‘s is being judged, it’s like a little boy and she’s led him astray or down a dark path and I don’t think that’s true. At best, she gave him opportunity, but Harry still decided to follow through. He knows exactly what he’s doing.
> 
> Also, as a member of the BRF, it should have been Harry’s job to help Megan navigate the family dynamics, customs, rules and expectations. Who expects their sibling’s spouse to explain the family dynamics to their wife? Shouldn’t there have been the typical conversation on who to avoid (Princess Michael): Don’t talk to Aunt Maureen, she’ll try to invest your money in non-existent land in Florida. Uncle Frank steals flatware, etc  (Names changed to protect the innocent lol) My mom‘s family had to have a whole thing with my dad before she met my dad’s family and they aren’t rich, famous or anything.... just different country backgrounds in America and 20 years later dealing with his family was still super stressful for her...
> 
> As a celebrity (even b,c list whatever) Megan’s job was to get attention to sell something. If Harry doesn’t explain to her that as a Senior Royal the service she provides is to be secondary in order to raise awareness of the Charity, Cause, new building ward etc to boost morale, the Monarchy and represent the Queen again that’s a Harry failure. ( I could not fix this sentence, sorry... I tried. Hopefully it makes sense...)
> 
> Truth of the matter is that we don’t know where things broke down between the BRF and Team Sussex.  There’s tons of rumors out there.  The only thing we do know is one side decided to go to Oprah with a story that doesn’t make sense if you know the laws of the UK. Harry could have corrected that if he wanted to but he chose not to, so I don’t understand blaming just Megan.




Oh, I think we've been taking Harry to the woodshed for at least the past 6 months
Things may have gotten rolling with blaming her but you can see when things started to change. Now he gets almost as much heat as she does. It's just that it's hard to criticize an inanimate object when their other half is baying at everything in sight attracting all the attention


----------



## mdcx

tiktok said:


> Another saint Meghan protector...



Oh this is disappointing. Some people hear the words “My truth...” and lose all critical thinking skills after that.
Meghan claiming racism and depression and suddenly all of her bad behaviour and history of major conflict with former friends/family goes poof!
Meghan positioning her “story” with Harry as some sort of romantic “rescue from the evil BRF” fairytale appeals to a certain audience I guess.
Imo Meghan views people as either resources to exploit, or conquests to dominate - by whatever means necessary.


----------



## poopsie

tiktok said:


> Another saint Meghan protector...




We really do need a barf emoticon in the like row. Sad and mad are sorta redundant so maybe one of them can get markled.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

tiktok said:


> Another saint Meghan protector...



Oh, phooey (not to you tiktok!). "Anti racism work"... H&M and Oprah have now done more to increase the racial divide than any society overthrowing revolutionary could ever have hoped for.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> For anyone who missed the Oprah interview (or wishes to see it again) CBS is re-airing it this Friday at 8 PM.


MM, H, and Oprah will thank you, but I don't have the stomach of QE.  
It would be nice to hear what QE has to say, do you think MM will share the recording with us? 

"_The Queen is to extend a personal olive branch to Harry and Meghan as she takes charge of the fallout from their bombshell television interview.

With senior royals still 'reeling' following a series of explosive allegations by the couple, she has issued a 'three-line whip' to prevent staff discussing the situation publicly.

It is understood that she intends to try to pour oil on troubled waters by reaching out to her grandson and his wife in California instead.

It is expected that they will speak on the phone in the next few days.

Although Harry and Meghan were informed of Buckingham Palace's statement on the issue prior to its release on Tuesday evening, this was done through officials.

But the Queen believes now is the time for a more personal approach._"









						Queen will reach out to Prince Harry for peace talks
					

The Queen has issued a 'three-line whip,' against Royal staff to prevent them discussing the fallout from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview publicly, as she is set to speak to Harry in the coming days.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Oh, phooey (not to you tiktok!). "Anti racism work"... H&M and Oprah have now done more to increase the racial divide than any society overthrowing revolutionary could ever have hoped for.



3....2....1....the ‘healing‘ show. A full week of OW et al teaching us how to be less of who we are and more of who they think we should be. Cue Marianne Williamson, Brene, Dr. Phil, etc.  Possible title: The Reset. Spin-offs guaranteed.

ETA: yes, this brings out the cynic in me because I have already lived through this with OW before. She did this with Fergie and many others. The sad thing is the ‘healing’ didn’t stick. So, here we go again. Yawn.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> *THIS 100%!!!! * For someone who (supposedly) has a degree in International Relations, she is as dumb as a rock!


She can't even have good International Relations with her international relatives.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I would have loved to hear Meghan discuss why it was necessary to have a whole section of Wimbledon cleared for her. Oprah - another important question you neglected to ask!


To have enough space for her big head!


----------



## kkfiregirl

poopsie said:


> Why do women do this to themselves?
> The "flaws" are between our ears.......................not in our mirrors



Good question. I would say that we learn to be hard on ourselves from a young age- not necessarily from our parents, but by going to school, the office & then dating.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> Good question. I would say that we learn to be hard on ourselves from a young age- not necessarily from our parents, but by going to school, the office & then dating.


Well, maybe most of us do, but Meg is certainly different!  She thinks she's the Queen of Everything!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Last post about Piers Morgan I promise! ITV just had £200m wiped off of its market value after PiersExit! LOL!









						ITV loses £200m in market value as Piers Morgan quits Good Morning Britain
					

Host left after saying he didn’t believe Duchess of Sussex when she said she had experienced suicidal thoughts




					www.theguardian.com
				




Anybody else feeling that this is like the alternative ending of Lord of the Rings where the evil Lords did get the ring and unleashed all hell in the (middle) earth???


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Oh, phooey (not to you tiktok!). "Anti racism work"... H&M and Oprah have now done more to increase the racial divide than any society overthrowing revolutionary could ever have hoped for.





CarryOn2020 said:


> 3....2....1....the ‘healing‘ show. *A full week of OW et al teaching us how to be less of who we are and more of who they think we should be.* Cue Marianne Williamson, Brene, Dr. Phil, etc.  Possible title: The Reset. Spin-offs guaranteed.
> 
> ETA: yes, this brings out the cynic in me because I have already lived through this with OW before. She did this with Fergie and many others. The sad thing is the ‘healing’ didn’t stick. So, here we go again. Yawn.



I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but what about Oprah's 2013 interview. Did she really come into the interview still carrying this mindset?
Not trying to be a pot-stirrer or a smarta$$------I would really like to know

WINFREY: It would be foolish to not recognize that we have evolved, and that we’re not still facing the same kind of terrorism against black people en masse as was displayed with the Scottsboro boys. It’s gotten better.
Are there still places where people are terrorized because of the color of their skin, because of the color of their black skin? Yes. But there are laws that have allowed us to progress beyond what we saw in the _Scottsboro Boys_, and beyond even prejudice that we see in _The Butler_. I mean, his ability to go in… One of my favorite scenes ever — spoiler alert — is him going in and asking for the raise. I think that’s one of the finest acting jobs I’ve ever seen. You know that moment?


INTERVIEWER: Of course. Are you saying problem solved?


WINFREY: I’m saying problem _not_ solved. I’m saying that, you know, that’s the beauty of a film like _The Butler_, and it’s the beauty of a film like _12 Years a Slave_, and it’s the beauty of what we’re seeing on stage with _Scottsboro Boys_ … it allows people to see where the root of the problem started. It allows people to see, “Oh, that’s where it all started, this is how far we’ve come, and now this is how much farther we need to go.”


*Of course the problem is not solved. As long as people can be judged by the color of their skin, the problem’s not solved. As long as there are people who still… And there’s a whole generation — I said this for apartheid South Africa, I said this for my own community in the South — there are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die.*


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm in the minority, but I wish I had twig legs that looked that good in leather pants!


they're better than cankles but still to skinny on the bottom IMO


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but what about Oprah's 2013 interview. Did she really come into the interview still carrying this mindset?
> Not trying to be a pot-stirrer or a smarta$$------I would really like to know
> 
> WINFREY: It would be foolish to not recognize that we have evolved, and that we’re not still facing the same kind of terrorism against black people en masse as was displayed with the Scottsboro boys. It’s gotten better.
> Are there still places where people are terrorized because of the color of their skin, because of the color of their black skin? Yes. But there are laws that have allowed us to progress beyond what we saw in the _Scottsboro Boys_, and beyond even prejudice that we see in _The Butler_. I mean, his ability to go in… One of my favorite scenes ever — spoiler alert — is him going in and asking for the raise. I think that’s one of the finest acting jobs I’ve ever seen. You know that moment?
> 
> 
> INTERVIEWER: Of course. Are you saying problem solved?
> 
> 
> WINFREY: I’m saying problem _not_ solved. I’m saying that, you know, that’s the beauty of a film like _The Butler_, and it’s the beauty of a film like _12 Years a Slave_, and it’s the beauty of what we’re seeing on stage with _Scottsboro Boys_ … it allows people to see where the root of the problem started. It allows people to see, “Oh, that’s where it all started, this is how far we’ve come, and now this is how much farther we need to go.”
> 
> 
> *Of course the problem is not solved. As long as people can be judged by the color of their skin, the problem’s not solved. As long as there are people who still… And there’s a whole generation — I said this for apartheid South Africa, I said this for my own community in the South — there are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die.*



I don't think she means we need to kill them. It sounds like she means older generations have to pass before huge generational changes in culture can really be prevalent.


----------



## needlv

artax two said:


> Ozzy Man has been making me laugh for years



 Oh that is so funny.  I laughed out loud - thank you for sharing that!


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> I don't think she means we need to kill them. It sounds like she means older generations have to pass before huge generational changes in culture can really be prevalent.



Right. I didn't see it as a call to arms, but is, IMO a simplistic solution.
I remember when my elementary school was desegregated......in Ohio. Real change does take time. Most today can't even imagine such a thing. But generations passing? The slave holders of the 1860's are gone, yet attitudes still persist


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Slightly OT but isn’t  there some controversy about tooth gaps in general? Recently there was  that old ANTM clip of Tyra banks telling a contestant to close her gap then on a later series she said she liked a white girl’s gap and slick woods did an Instagram post about it?
> 
> in answer to your question, I wouldn’t bother but then again...
> View attachment 5017917


does anyone remember super model lauren hutton who has a gap and refused to change it.....it became a signature part of her face
oops - typed this before I saw @poopsie's reference


----------



## mellibelly

tiktok said:


> Another saint Meghan protector...




They’re all on Spotify’s payroll, interesting...


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I always thought MM was very petite. Kate looked head and shoulders taller in all their photos together. In the interview she appeared much taller, as tall as Oprah. Oprah is not short, around 5’7. Odd. OMG I can’t believe I am scrutinizing this actress I had never heard of before’s height. They really have succeeded in getting everyone’s attention.


she was wearing very high heels and Oprah wasn't


----------



## Suncatcher

I find it really unsettling to see celebrities and politicians defend Meghan blindly, without question. There was so much in the interview that raised a ton of questions about the veracity of statements made out to sound like facts when they can actually be disproved. Worse, she purposely made incriminations and accusations knowing full well the BRF would not be able to defend them and knowing that the majority of the public would not be able to parse out the facts the way the people in this forum can. She essentially calls out the BRF as being racist yet she clings to her title despite it deriving from the BRF and despite the fact that she lives in a republic where titles are not recognized. Meghan is a master manipulator full of snake venom behind a victimhood-driven “woe is me” persona. Thin skinned and insecure to the core, nothing she does is even wrong or open to dispute and she appears to be obsessed with status, fame and celebrity-dom. She is every family’s nightmare. Please go away to live your private life and go speak to a therapist instead of the media. We want it for you too.


----------



## marietouchet

* Worse, she purposely made incriminations and accusations knowing full well the BRF would not be able to defend them and knowing that the majority of the public would not be able to parse out the facts the way the people in this forum can*

from previous post , yes, great analysis

ps quoting was not working ...


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> Right. I didn't see it as a call to arms, but is, IMO a simplistic solution.
> I remember when my elementary school was desegregated......in Ohio. Real change does take time. Most today can't even imagine such a thing. But generations passing? The slave holders of the 1860's are gone, yet attitudes still persist



Each generation seems to bring its own spin to their parents' social baggage... but there is progress being made at least.  I have hope for the generation here after I'm gone. Then again, Gen Z seems preoccupied with whether side bangs are cool or not so who knows lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Suncatcher said:


> I find it really unsettling to see celebrities and politicians defend Meghan blindly, without question. There was so much in the interview that raised a ton of questions about the veracity of statements made out to sound like facts when they can actually be disproved. Worse, she purposely made incriminations and accusations knowing full well the BRF would not be able to defend them and knowing that the majority of the public would not be able to parse out the facts the way the people in this forum can. She essentially calls out the BRF as being racist yet she clings to her title despite it deriving from the BRF and despite the fact that she lives in a republic where titles are not recognized. Meghan is a master manipulator full of snake venom behind a victimhood-driven “woe is me” persona. Thin skinned and insecure to the core, nothing she does is even wrong or open to dispute and she appears to be obsessed with status, fame and celebrity-dom. She is every family’s nightmare. Please go away to live your private life and go speak to a therapist instead of the media. We want it for you too.



Excellent post.
What H&M and OW did was feed the narrative (!) that pregnant women are hysterical, unstable, and need a (white) male savior.
This narrative (!) or construct (?) is as equally damaging as the (white) woman savior trope that Hwood & Disney persist in sending us.

Since it has attracted so much media attention, I’m guessing it will continue ad infinitum.
I wish all of us health, happiness, and wellness always. Wouldn‘t it have been comforting for OW, H&M to end with that message?


----------



## Chanbal

This is a very long article. The first half is a list of staff members that helped MM while in the UK , and the second part is a friend of MM who spoke on ITV’s This Morning informing that MM has many emails and texts to support claims... Interesting, we learned during the last lawsuit that texts are deleted every 30 days... 

*Palace: *
"_The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that the couple have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself.

In fact, sources say, the duchess was given a string of the Queen’s most senior staff as ‘mentors’ after the couple became engaged, as well as being allowed to hand-pick her own 15-strong team of loyal and talented private office staff.

‘It is very disingenuous to make such a sweeping generalisation,’ one insider said. ‘There was a brilliant team of very experienced and loyal aides to help them. Sadly, she and Harry were willing to listen to no one. And that is the honest truth...._’"

*Ms Markle*:

"*One of Meghan’s closest friends claimed yesterday that she and Harry have a collection of emails and text messages to back up their bombshell claims about the Royal Family.*

_Actress and musician Janina Gavankar has known the Duchess of Sussex for 17 years and was with her when she watched the broadcast of the interview on Sunday.

She insisted ‘the whole family and the whole staff’ at Buckingham Palace were aware that Meghan’s mental health was suffering. And she vowed ‘the truth’ would come out, as would evidence that had been collected which she believes proves their allegations.

She did not, however, detail which claims the messages referred to, the most incendiary of which is that a member of Harry’s family expressed ‘concern’ about ‘how dark’ their unborn son would be.

American Miss Gavankar, 40 – who took the photo of Harry, Meghan and son Archie that featured on their first family Christmas card – was speaking on ITV’s This Morning yesterday. She made clear she was speaking with Meghan’s knowledge. She said her friend – whom she described as ‘kind, generous and low-maintenance’ – was ‘happy’ for her to talk on her behalf.

*Asked about Buckingham Palace’s 61-word statement on Tuesday, Miss Gavankar, who lives in LA and says Meghan tells her ‘everything’, said: ‘After reading this short Palace statement that came out from Buckingham Palace I thought two things.

‘On one side I thought I am so thankful they are finally acknowledging the experience [that Meghan had], but on the other side I know the family and the staff were well aware of the extent of it, and although their recollections may vary, ours don’t because we lived through it with them.’*

She added: ‘And there are many emails and texts to support that._"









						The new battle royal: Palace staff vs Meghan's close friend
					

The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that Harry and Meghan have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself by Buckingham Palace staff.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## melissatrv

FreeSpirit71 said:


> They did:
> 
> 
> I agree with you about minor stories regarding Meghan and Harry but when stories are headlined with such things as "Harry's girl is (almost) straight outta Compton: Gang-scarred home of her mother revealed" or "Royal wedding: How Meghan Markle’s flowers may have put Princess Charlotte’s life at risk" it does become personal.



I read that "straight outta Compton" story back in 2016. I don't think I ever read another that focused on her race in a negative way. Other stories focused more on the positivity of diversity in the royal family and her bringing a breath of fresh air that would modernize the BRF.  Social media is another story.  But in press or tabloids I have not seen a negative race story after that one and think they might have been told to put the kibosh on angle.  Feel free to correct me if this is inaccurate


----------



## mellibelly

So CBS is re-airing the interview and every friend of MM is giving interviews/speaking on their behalf. When will it end? I was hoping they would fade out of the news cycle after this week but it appears they’re happy to keep it going. I’m sure they’ll release this so called email and text proof for more headlines


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> ITA!  I found it highly inappropriate that the current President is commenting on this.  There are enough issues in the US to keep him busy.



Do you have a link? I thought when asked Jen Psaki talked about the importance of mental health but specifically said the administration would not be commenting on any specifics etc...

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/03/joe-*****-prince-harry-meghan-stance



purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised she didn't just do a telegram, which is the only possible way to be even colder:
> 
> We. Are. Done.



Or a post it note a la Berger in Sex & The City?



jelliedfeels said:


> This might be classed as a little mean, but whenever I see one of these B list celebrities by birth like McCain talking about how incredibly psychologically challenging being a B list celebrity is: I do sort of wish they would magically be turned into the average high school teacher for a week or so. Just a normal teacher. Not a tragic life or anything. Just live their life for a week.
> 
> I  think some of these people can’t see clearly for the silver spoons in their mouths.



I usually agree but in this case her family was pretty viciously attacked, and at an especially vulnerable time,  so I cut her some slack.


----------



## melissatrv

I knew saw something about this!



chicinthecity777 said:


> Glamour magazine article from 2018. How come nobody taught her anything?
> *Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly Must Take Six Months of Royal Lessons Now That She's a Duchess
> 
> 
> The queen is reportedly making Meghan Markle take six months of royal lessons to prepare for her life as the duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


----------



## KittyKat65

Dang, you people talk a lot.  35 pages in 5 days about people you don't know personally?  Whose lives you read about in tabloids?  Unless the Queen is your Aunt Betty, it might be time to step back and wonder why any of this matters.  I don't have the amount of popcorn necessary to read it all, but I will try because this is better than any soap opera.  Toodle pip


----------



## CarryOn2020

Old people?  It isn’t just old people. The south, the north, Europe, everywhere is filled with young racists.  Rather than take responsibility for their own failings, these young ones blame skin color. It is revolting to realize this stuff is still with us. Sure, we are better in some areas, not nearly enough. H&M‘s real damage is in continuing the divisive rhetoric.  

OW gave them such a generous gift. Time to speak to the world and make it better.  Nope, didn’t happen. 
Just more vitriol, venom and vituperation.






poopsie said:


> I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but what about Oprah's 2013 interview. Did she really come into the interview still carrying this mindset?
> Not trying to be a pot-stirrer or a smarta$$------I would really like to know
> 
> WINFREY: It would be foolish to not recognize that we have evolved, and that we’re not still facing the same kind of terrorism against black people en masse as was displayed with the Scottsboro boys. It’s gotten better.
> Are there still places where people are terrorized because of the color of their skin, because of the color of their black skin? Yes. But there are laws that have allowed us to progress beyond what we saw in the _Scottsboro Boys_, and beyond even prejudice that we see in _The Butler_. I mean, his ability to go in… One of my favorite scenes ever — spoiler alert — is him going in and asking for the raise. I think that’s one of the finest acting jobs I’ve ever seen. You know that moment?
> 
> 
> INTERVIEWER: Of course. Are you saying problem solved?
> 
> 
> WINFREY: I’m saying problem _not_ solved. I’m saying that, you know, that’s the beauty of a film like _The Butler_, and it’s the beauty of a film like _12 Years a Slave_, and it’s the beauty of what we’re seeing on stage with _Scottsboro Boys_ … it allows people to see where the root of the problem started. It allows people to see, “Oh, that’s where it all started, this is how far we’ve come, and now this is how much farther we need to go.”
> 
> 
> *Of course the problem is not solved. As long as people can be judged by the color of their skin, the problem’s not solved. As long as there are people who still… And there’s a whole generation — I said this for apartheid South Africa, I said this for my own community in the South — there are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die.*


----------



## melissatrv

mellibelly said:


> So CBS is re-airing the interview and every friend of MM is giving interviews/speaking on their behalf. When will it end? I was hoping they would fade out of the news cycle after this week but it appears they’re happy to keep it going. I’m sure they’ll release this so called email and text proof for more headlines



This was a ratings bonanza, they kepts talking about on CBS This Morning...they will get as much mileage as they can out of it. When is the re-air?


----------



## mellibelly

Another poster said Friday at 8pm on CBS


----------



## CarryOn2020

KittyKat65 said:


> Dang, you people talk a lot.  35 pages in 5 days about people you don't know personally?  Whose lives you read about in tabloids?  Unless the Queen is your Aunt Betty, it might be time to step back and wonder why any of this matters.  I don't have the amount of popcorn necessary to read it all, but I will try because this is better than any soap opera.  Toodle pip



We regulars are friends. We like each other. We help each other.  We unabashedly and unashamedly have relied on TPF to get us through the pandemic.  Shockingly (?) H&M have given us plenty of food for discussion. When they really step back, darlin‘, we will too.

Have a cuppa and enjoy. Or not, it’s all good.

ETA: for the newbies, I’ve been told we get Birkin/Kelly points for using _vitriolic_ in our posts


----------



## FreeSpirit71

melissatrv said:


> I read that "straight outta Compton" story back in 2016. I don't think I ever read another that focused on her race in a negative way. Other stories focused more on the positivity of diversity in the royal family and her bringing a breath of fresh air that would modernize the BRF.  Social media is another story.  But in press or tabloids I have not seen a negative race story after that one and think they might have been told to put the kibosh on angle.  Feel free to correct me if this is inaccurate



Harry to marry into gangster royalty?

^That's just one.  But we're not just talking about specific headlines but the completely different tone of articles regarding Kate and Meghan.  There's been a plethora of articles on this but just for comparison sake, here you go.  That difference in tone is telling.

15 Headlines Show How Differently The British Press Treat Meghan Markle Vs Kate Middleton

A comprehensive list of all the s**t Meghan Markle has taken from the British press and public

Watch British Press Melt Down When Confronted With Racist Meghan Markle Headlines
Oprah's interview renewed attention on racism in the Royal Family, but it's also drawn attention to racism in the British press.

“Meghan Markle vs Kate Middleton: the dark subtext to the tabloid headlines”


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM, H, and Oprah will thank you, but I don't have the stomach of QE.
> It would be nice to hear what QE has to say, do you think MM will share the recording with us?
> 
> "_The Queen is to extend a personal olive branch to Harry and Meghan as she takes charge of the fallout from their bombshell television interview.
> 
> With senior royals still 'reeling' following a series of explosive allegations by the couple, she has issued a 'three-line whip' to prevent staff discussing the situation publicly.
> 
> It is understood that she intends to try to pour oil on troubled waters by reaching out to her grandson and his wife in California instead.
> 
> It is expected that they will speak on the phone in the next few days.
> 
> Although Harry and Meghan were informed of Buckingham Palace's statement on the issue prior to its release on Tuesday evening, this was done through officials.
> 
> But the Queen believes now is the time for a more personal approach._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen will reach out to Prince Harry for peace talks
> 
> 
> The Queen has issued a 'three-line whip,' against Royal staff to prevent them discussing the fallout from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview publicly, as she is set to speak to Harry in the coming days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I hope the Queen is careful about what she says and how she says it. Otherwise these two will make a Netflix special about it.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is a very long article. The first half is a list of staff members that helped MM while in the UK , and the second part is a friend of MM who spoke on ITV’s This Morning informing that MM has many emails and texts to support claims... Interesting, we learned during the last lawsuit that texts are deleted every 30 days...
> 
> *Palace: *
> "_The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that the couple have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself.
> 
> In fact, sources say, the duchess was given a string of the Queen’s most senior staff as ‘mentors’ after the couple became engaged, as well as being allowed to hand-pick her own 15-strong team of loyal and talented private office staff.
> 
> ‘It is very disingenuous to make such a sweeping generalisation,’ one insider said. ‘There was a brilliant team of very experienced and loyal aides to help them. Sadly, she and Harry were willing to listen to no one. And that is the honest truth...._’"
> 
> *Ms Markle*:
> 
> "*One of Meghan’s closest friends claimed yesterday that she and Harry have a collection of emails and text messages to back up their bombshell claims about the Royal Family.*
> 
> _Actress and musician Janina Gavankar has known the Duchess of Sussex for 17 years and was with her when she watched the broadcast of the interview on Sunday.
> 
> She insisted ‘the whole family and the whole staff’ at Buckingham Palace were aware that Meghan’s mental health was suffering. And she vowed ‘the truth’ would come out, as would evidence that had been collected which she believes proves their allegations.
> 
> She did not, however, detail which claims the messages referred to, the most incendiary of which is that a member of Harry’s family expressed ‘concern’ about ‘how dark’ their unborn son would be.
> 
> American Miss Gavankar, 40 – who took the photo of Harry, Meghan and son Archie that featured on their first family Christmas card – was speaking on ITV’s This Morning yesterday. She made clear she was speaking with Meghan’s knowledge. She said her friend – whom she described as ‘kind, generous and low-maintenance’ – was ‘happy’ for her to talk on her behalf.
> 
> *Asked about Buckingham Palace’s 61-word statement on Tuesday, Miss Gavankar, who lives in LA and says Meghan tells her ‘everything’, said: ‘After reading this short Palace statement that came out from Buckingham Palace I thought two things.
> 
> ‘On one side I thought I am so thankful they are finally acknowledging the experience [that Meghan had], but on the other side I know the family and the staff were well aware of the extent of it, and although their recollections may vary, ours don’t because we lived through it with them.’*
> 
> She added: ‘And there are many emails and texts to support that._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The new battle royal: Palace staff vs Meghan's close friend
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that Harry and Meghan have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself by Buckingham Palace staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


JG knowing of the emails reminds me of the 5 Friends who knew about the letter prior to publication


----------



## Allisonfaye

Suncatcher said:


> I find it really unsettling to see celebrities and politicians defend Meghan blindly, without question. There was so much in the interview that raised a ton of questions about the veracity of statements made out to sound like facts when they can actually be disproved. Worse, she purposely made incriminations and accusations knowing full well the BRF would not be able to defend them and knowing that the majority of the public would not be able to parse out the facts the way the people in this forum can. She essentially calls out the BRF as being racist yet she clings to her title despite it deriving from the BRF and despite the fact that she lives in a republic where titles are not recognized. Meghan is a master manipulator full of snake venom behind a victimhood-driven “woe is me” persona. Thin skinned and insecure to the core, nothing she does is even wrong or open to dispute and she appears to be obsessed with status, fame and celebrity-dom. She is every family’s nightmare. Please go away to live your private life and go speak to a therapist instead of the media. We want it for you too.



They did the same thing with Jusse Smollett. Celebrities talked about how awful it all was even though the story made no sense from the beginning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I hope the Queen is careful about what she says and how she says it. Otherwise these two will make a Netflix special about it.


The conversation will likely be recorded, and cashing in on it would be in line with their activities in the US.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> JG knowing of the emails reminds me of the 5 Friends who knew about the letter prior to publication


Those emails and texts were likely collected in preparation for megxit during the time they were in the UK. They are probably together with the supposedly existent secret recordings.


----------



## melissatrv

I want to watch this again for clarity - Meghan, who heard the baby's skin color conversations happened "several" times. I believe Harry said somewhere, maybe the unaired footage, that it was _one _conversation. I also don't remember if they said specifically if a member of the royal family or the staff. Realistically the royal family could any of hundreds of cousins etc. Or did they say high ranking member of the family? If so, the only I can think is the conversation Will had with H pre-engagement, about taking it slow, marrying an American actress, maybe he made a comment about what color the children would be? This could have been curiosity perhaps? Ignorance and bad form all around, but perhaps not as vindictive as it is made out to be.

On the other hand if these comments were made while she was pregnant with Archie, that is different.  No reason to bring it up now, the baby is coming and his skin tone does not matter.  Wonder if this is why M&H did not have the photo op on the hospital steps photos because they feared these types of comments?


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> Gotta hand it to her those abused staffers have been forgotten.


Hopefully they get their chance to share their experiences and actually be heard. This not an issue that should be ignored and just fade away into oblivion.




lallybelle said:


> The thing is she knew what she was doing bringing in racism & mental health. If you criticize her you are now labeled dismissive of racism and mental heath issues and attacked by the "Sussex Squad"
> Even if there are inconsistencies and some downright lies. They will never be truly fact checked because unfortunately way too many people can relate to having had to deal w/ racism in their lives and in this day & age where it's a big issue (even as I hope we as human beings can start making real change) it just triggers what too many know to be true in their own experience. That isn't to say I don't believe that she experienced racism. We all know too well that there are too many ignorant fools around to dismiss that. I just wish they would cut the **** with the innuendo and name names if this was actually said because it is a disgusting thing to say about a child. And it's quite obvious she dangled it SO we would speculate, so it's unfair to those who's names are being bandied about if they had nothing to do with the supposed incident.


Totally agree.




Chanbal said:


> It looks like Oprah's interview lefts many unanswered questions, here are 10 from *Nick Parker*:
> 
> HAZ ABOUT IT? *Private jets, taxpayer funded…the 10 questions Oprah didn’t ask Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during interview*
> 
> *OPRAH Winfrey landed the interview of the century as Meghan and Harry poured poison on the monarchy for two gripping hours of bombshell claims.*
> 
> But what should the US TV chat show queen have asked if she had been willing to place them under real scrutiny? Here are ten questions a more impartial inquisitor might have asked — and the tell-tale facts the couple chose not to reveal:
> 
> *1) MEGHAN and Harry said they quit the UK partly because they did not feel Archie was safe — but why should British taxpayers pay for security if you are not working as royals or living in the UK?
> ANALYSIS: *It was clear that as long as Harry was a senior royal, his wife and all children would be covered around-the-clock by royal protection squad officers.
> Prince Charles was reported to have been ready to give £2million for security costs in California.
> 
> *2) HARRY cut his multi-million deals with Netflix and Spotify to pay his way after being financially cut adrift by the royals. But is it not true he and Meghan are wealthy?
> ANALYSIS:* From the age of 21, Harry has received £324,000 a year from Princess Diana’s estate.
> He also received £7.2million from that source on his 30th birthday while Meghan has an estimated net worth of £3.6million from acting.
> 
> *3) DOES it jar to use royal titles to promote your brands while you say you want to be private citizens?
> ANALYSIS:* Meghan told Oprah she cares little for “grandeur” and her husband says he prefers to be known as Harry. But his princely status will have inevitably played a part in the £100million Netflix content deal. And the couple’s royal titles gets headline billing on the site of their not-for-profit foundation Archewell.
> 
> *4) MEGHAN claimed her passport was taken from her by aides and she was a virtual prisoner at Frogmore House, Windsor. But did she not continue to enjoy a lavish social life and private trips abroad?
> ANALYSIS:* She was spotted out on numerous occasions near their former Kensington Palace home.
> Her most lavish away-day outing was a private jet flight to a baby shower party in New York in 2019, that reportedly cost £330,000. She also took a private jet to Sir Elton John’s holiday home on French Riviera in 2019.
> 
> *5) DID you raise the alleged racist baby question with anyone within the family at the time — and can you explain why you tell different stories about the timing?
> ANALYSIS: *Meghan made much of Harry’s deeply offensive discussions with a mystery royal about her unborn baby’s skin colour but she admitted she heard no such talk herself. Harry referred specifically to “that conversation” suggesting there was just one time when hurtful remarks upset him.
> 
> *6) DID Meghan know that Archie was not entitled to be a prince from birth?
> ANALYSIS: *Meghan gave the impression the title was withheld from Archie — or would be — over the colour of his skin. But the couple’s staff made it clear they did not want a title and preferred him as a private citizen.
> 
> *7) DO you not appreciate criticism of you, such as flying on jets while campaigning for eco issues?
> ANALYSIS:* The pair stated on their Instagram account in 2019 that they would spend that month working to raise climate change awareness.
> Two months later, flight logs revealed Harry used private jets for six out of ten flights since marrying despite claiming to travel commercial “99 per cent” of the time.
> 
> *8) MEGHAN told Oprah that she “just didn’t want to be alive any more” and said Palace officials would not help. But could your mother Doria or Harry not have found you help?
> ANALYSIS:* Meghan could have gone to a GP or private treatment, as for any other health condition.
> Her mother has qualifications and experience as a social worker for three years in California.
> Harry, who had therapy, told Oprah he was ashamed of admitting that Meghan needed help but he launched a mental health campaign Heads Together and would have contacts there.
> 
> *9) WHY did Meghan and Harry get through three nannies in six weeks in the summer of 2019? And how do you account for the high turnover of staff in your household?
> ANALYSIS: *In September 2019, Archie had his third nanny in six weeks. In November 2018, Meghan’s PA Melissa Touabti quit amid reports she was reduced to tears.
> The couple’s private secretary Samantha Cohen resigned after 17 years with the royals. And in 2019, Meghan’s bodyguard departed followed by private secretaries Amy Pickerill and Heather Wong.
> 
> *10) MEGHAN said she never Googled Harry and knew little of royal life when joining The Firm. Does she really expect us to believe that?
> ANALYSIS:* Friends of the Duchess have revealed she was fascinated by the royals.
> Ninaki Priddy, her maid of honour at her first wedding to Trevor Engelson, said: “She wants to be Princess Diana 2.0.”
> 
> Oprah's forgotten questions!








lalame said:


> Remember people, those you don't like can also have an opinion you happen to agree with. Those you like can also have opinions you disagree with. No one is all good or bad... and I would hope there is no one you agree 100% with on anything because there's a good chance that person's lying to you.









chicinthecity777 said:


>



  



Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking News!
> Meghan has formally complained to ITV about Piers Morgan comments.








Coconuts40 said:


> What irks me here is the loss of good and ethical journalism.  Meghan makes these claims during the interview and so so many people including many journalists are taking her word as truth instead of investigating the truth.  Just because someone says something does  not mean it is fact.  As a society we can't just slander a person or family or make claims that could be damaging to a person or insitution and not back this up with facts.


Agreed. It's completely baffling.



papertiger said:


> Lucky for him there was plenty of space in his head.











chicinthecity777 said:


> I think I am going to borrow the phrase "*some recollections may vary*" in the future! I still chuckle at that one!











CarryOn2020 said:


> *Headlines shown on screen during the Oprah interview to paint British media coverage as hostile and 'racist' were mocked up by the production company, often edited to remove context - and a third of them came from foreign media, new analysis has revealed today.
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse against Meghan.
> 
> One segment showed a headline about how 'Meghan's seed will taint our Royal Family' - without noting that the story was actually exposing racist comments made by a model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Headlines used to claim media bias on Oprah were taken out of context
> 
> 
> The two-hour programme, which aired on CBS This Morning, included cuttings of stories intended to confirm the Sussexes' claim that UK newspapers were guilty of peddling racist abuse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Well, well, well...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This is a very long article. The first half is a list of staff members that helped MM while in the UK , and the second part is a friend of MM who spoke on ITV’s This Morning informing that MM has many emails and texts to support claims... Interesting, we learned during the last lawsuit that texts are deleted every 30 days...
> 
> *Palace: *
> "_The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that the couple have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself.
> 
> In fact, sources say, the duchess was given a string of the Queen’s most senior staff as ‘mentors’ after the couple became engaged, as well as being allowed to hand-pick her own 15-strong team of loyal and talented private office staff.
> 
> ‘It is very disingenuous to make such a sweeping generalisation,’ one insider said. ‘There was a brilliant team of very experienced and loyal aides to help them. Sadly, she and Harry were willing to listen to no one. And that is the honest truth...._’"
> 
> *Ms Markle*:
> 
> "*One of Meghan’s closest friends claimed yesterday that she and Harry have a collection of emails and text messages to back up their bombshell claims about the Royal Family.*
> 
> _Actress and musician Janina Gavankar has known the Duchess of Sussex for 17 years and was with her when she watched the broadcast of the interview on Sunday.
> 
> She insisted ‘the whole family and the whole staff’ at Buckingham Palace were aware that Meghan’s mental health was suffering. And she vowed ‘the truth’ would come out, as would evidence that had been collected which she believes proves their allegations.
> 
> She did not, however, detail which claims the messages referred to, the most incendiary of which is that a member of Harry’s family expressed ‘concern’ about ‘how dark’ their unborn son would be.
> 
> American Miss Gavankar, 40 – who took the photo of Harry, Meghan and son Archie that featured on their first family Christmas card – was speaking on ITV’s This Morning yesterday. She made clear she was speaking with Meghan’s knowledge. She said her friend – whom she described as ‘kind, generous and low-maintenance’ – was ‘happy’ for her to talk on her behalf.
> 
> *Asked about Buckingham Palace’s 61-word statement on Tuesday, Miss Gavankar, who lives in LA and says Meghan tells her ‘everything’, said: ‘After reading this short Palace statement that came out from Buckingham Palace I thought two things.
> 
> ‘On one side I thought I am so thankful they are finally acknowledging the experience [that Meghan had], but on the other side I know the family and the staff were well aware of the extent of it, and although their recollections may vary, ours don’t because we lived through it with them.’*
> 
> She added: ‘And there are many emails and texts to support that._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The new battle royal: Palace staff vs Meghan's close friend
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that Harry and Meghan have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself by Buckingham Palace staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



@Chanbal
I copied and translated this line from the article relating to emails supporting and favouring MM.
Miss Gavankar's quote_ "_And there are many emails and texts to support that."

Translation: "We have thousands and thousands of bots supporting that."


----------



## poopsie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Do you have a link? I thought when asked Jen Psaki talked about the importance of mental health but specifically said the administration would not be commenting on any specifics etc...
> 
> *Or a post it note a la Berger in Sex & The City?*



OMG I loved him! 
He was way too good for Carrie


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5018217


I was missing your replies to my posts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the hospital photo — my understanding is they wanted to monetize it. Ya kno, never give anything away for free.

RE: H&M’s ITV complaint — others will disagree, I strongly believe it is because Piers interviewed Thomas. And Thomas spoke truth (the audacity!). “Brits aren’t racists. Royals aren’t racists. LA is, Cali is”. Wow. He speaks with authority because he has the life experience to know, to know in his soul. Since they are out of crockery, guessing H&M punched some walls after they hit the roof.


----------



## melissatrv

poopsie said:


> Well there's over 15 likes for your post so maybe there's hope for us yet


I agree that this is an inclusive community and everyone has a right to be heard. However, sometimes it gets too heated after a disagreement and it goes on too long and the mods will lock this or any thread if it gets that way.  We all have to be conscious of that. and not let it spin out of control.   That is why I would rather no argue here.


----------



## mdcx

needlv said:


> Oh that is so funny.  I laughed out loud - thank you for sharing that!


Agreed, bloody hilarious!


----------



## CarryOn2020

artax two said:


> Ozzy Man has been making me laugh for years


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent post.
> What H&M and OW did was feed the narrative (!) that pregnant women are hysterical, unstable, and need a (white) male savior.
> This narrative (!) or construct (?) is as equally damaging as the (white) woman savior trope that Hwood & Disney persist in sending us.
> 
> Since it has attracted so much media attention, I’m guessing it will continue ad infinitum.
> I wish all of us health, happiness, and wellness always. Wouldn‘t it have been comforting for OW, H&M to end with that message?


Yes! The white male saviour bit got to me! I thought MM was a feminist? But she marries into this archaic institution(I am a fan of the BRF but can see it for what it is also), has a giant princess wedding with white dress, settles in for a life of being waited on hand and foot, and is outraged when it becomes apparent she has work to do and rules to follow. Cue her storyline that she was mistreated and her actual real life Prince stepped in and single handedly saved her life by leaving his whole world behind for her and buying her a castle, um mansion, in California where she could run free with the chickens and merch to her hearts content...


----------



## marietouchet

melissatrv said:


> I want to watch this again for clarity - Meghan, who heard the baby's skin color conversations happened "several" times. I believe Harry said somewhere, maybe the unaired footage, that it was _one _conversation. I also don't remember if they said specifically if a member of the royal family or the staff. Realistically the royal family could any of hundreds of cousins etc. Or did they say high ranking member of the family? If so, the only I can think is the conversation Will had with H pre-engagement, about taking it slow, marrying an American actress, maybe he made a comment about what color the children would be? This could have been curiosity perhaps? Ignorance and bad form all around, but perhaps not as vindictive as it is made out to be.
> 
> On the other hand if these comments were made while she was pregnant with Archie, that is different.  No reason to bring it up now, the baby is coming and his skin tone does not matter.  Wonder if this is why M&H did not have the photo op on the hospital steps photos because they feared these types of comments?


Agree this topic got MM’s hackles up and she declined to show off her baby.
but also at this time, Gayle - US press - had asked for an interview, but was told no, another reason MM hackles were up and she did not want to show the baby to the UK press
Maybe MM wanted to do a deal with Gayle for a big splash exclusive ?
The no about the Gayle interview was because she is not part of the UK press, and the UK a press get access, G was allowed to have a camera man in the room with the UK press, a concession to G and MM. Restricted access is to reduce the amount of cameramen, the US can buy the feed from the UK , just as ITV bought the interview from CBS


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Those emails and texts were likely collected in preparation for megxit du


very calculated approach to dealing with issues, JG post was orchestrated as part of the “going nuclear” interview strategy, interesting 
this is like a game of GO or chess, these people are really playing hardball


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Do you have a link? I thought when asked Jen Psaki talked about the importance of mental health but specifically said the administration would not be commenting on any specifics etc...
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/03/joe-*****-prince-harry-meghan-stance
> Or a post it note a la Berger in Sex & The City?



Here's one:









						White House Lauds Meghan Markle for Opening Up About Her Mental Health: 'That Takes Courage'
					

Everyone, including the White House, is talking about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's sit-down with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday night




					people.com
				




It's like throwing out a lob then refusing to play.  Don't comment at all, IMO.  Just my opinion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dear these health issues are spreading ..

Jameela Jamil Says she was suicidal over Piers Morgan’s comments about her in some kerfuffle a while back ....

I believe JJ was one of the MM women of the year for Vogue


----------



## purseinsanity

Suncatcher said:


> *I find it really unsettling to see celebrities and politicians defend Meghan blindly, without question.* There was so much in the interview that raised a ton of questions about the veracity of statements made out to sound like facts when they can actually be disproved. Worse, she purposely made incriminations and accusations knowing full well the BRF would not be able to defend them and knowing that the majority of the public would not be able to parse out the facts the way the people in this forum can. She essentially calls out the BRF as being racist yet she clings to her title despite it deriving from the BRF and despite the fact that she lives in a republic where titles are not recognized. Meghan is a master manipulator full of snake venom behind a victimhood-driven “woe is me” persona. Thin skinned and insecure to the core, nothing she does is even wrong or open to dispute and she appears to be obsessed with status, fame and celebrity-dom. She is every family’s nightmare. Please go away to live your private life and go speak to a therapist instead of the media. We want it for you too.


Makes sense.  I wouldn't say most celebrities are known for actual intelligence.  

They _*think*_ they have the right to educate us on every topic known, whether it's politics, the environment, health care, etc.  Most have financial ulterior motives, I think.  Hollywood should be called HypocriteVille.  They cover up rapists and child molesters and turn blind eyes to issues until they surface, then suddenly they're there to attack with their spears, their words, their social media!!  COVID has drilled it home for me that while some are truly good at their craft, most are dimwits as to real life, and I don't need guidance from them.

I'll keep my opinions about politicians to myself.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> Here's one:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> White House Lauds Meghan Markle for Opening Up About Her Mental Health: 'That Takes Courage'
> 
> 
> Everyone, including the White House, is talking about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's sit-down with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday night
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's like throwing out a lob then refusing to play.  Don't comment at all, IMO.  Just my opinion.



Sorry I'm confused...this article confirms what I posted? There was no official comment from the president, just the press secretary answering generally about the importance of mental health in response to a question.  Although the headline is definitely (and probably purposefully) misleading!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is a very long article. The first half is a list of staff members that helped MM while in the UK , and the second part is a friend of MM who spoke on ITV’s This Morning informing that MM has many emails and texts to support claims... Interesting, we learned during the last lawsuit that texts are deleted every 30 days...
> 
> *Palace: *
> "_The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that the couple have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself.
> 
> In fact, sources say, the duchess was given a string of the Queen’s most senior staff as ‘mentors’ after the couple became engaged, as well as being allowed to hand-pick her own 15-strong team of loyal and talented private office staff.
> 
> ‘It is very disingenuous to make such a sweeping generalisation,’ one insider said. ‘There was a brilliant team of very experienced and loyal aides to help them. Sadly, she and Harry were willing to listen to no one. And that is the honest truth...._’"
> 
> *Ms Markle*:
> 
> "*One of Meghan’s closest friends claimed yesterday that she and Harry have a collection of emails and text messages to back up their bombshell claims about the Royal Family.*
> 
> _Actress and musician Janina Gavankar has known the Duchess of Sussex for 17 years and was with her when she watched the broadcast of the interview on Sunday.
> 
> She insisted ‘the whole family and the whole staff’ at Buckingham Palace were aware that Meghan’s mental health was suffering. And she vowed ‘the truth’ would come out, as would evidence that had been collected which she believes proves their allegations.
> 
> She did not, however, detail which claims the messages referred to, the most incendiary of which is that a member of Harry’s family expressed ‘concern’ about ‘how dark’ their unborn son would be.
> 
> American Miss Gavankar, 40 – who took the photo of Harry, Meghan and son Archie that featured on their first family Christmas card – was speaking on ITV’s This Morning yesterday. She made clear she was speaking with Meghan’s knowledge. She said her friend – whom she described as ‘kind, generous and low-maintenance’ – was ‘happy’ for her to talk on her behalf.
> 
> *Asked about Buckingham Palace’s 61-word statement on Tuesday, Miss Gavankar, who lives in LA and says Meghan tells her ‘everything’, said: ‘After reading this short Palace statement that came out from Buckingham Palace I thought two things.
> 
> ‘On one side I thought I am so thankful they are finally acknowledging the experience [that Meghan had], but on the other side I know the family and the staff were well aware of the extent of it, and although their recollections may vary, ours don’t because we lived through it with them.’*
> 
> She added: ‘And there are many emails and texts to support that._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The new battle royal: Palace staff vs Meghan's close friend
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that Harry and Meghan have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself by Buckingham Palace staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


LOL, keep defending her Janina, until the day come that it is your time to be Markled.  Make no mistake about it, that day WILL come.


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry I'm confused...this article confirms what I posted? There was no official comment from the president, just the press secretary answering generally about the importance of mental health in response to a question.  Although the headline is definitely (and probably purposefully) misleading!


IMO, I don't think the White House Press Secretary, who I believe is the President's mouthpiece, needs to be commending anything Meg said in her interview.  It's a night time drama piece put out with nothing fact checked.  If he's so proud of her, send her a hand written note in calligraphy.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> So CBS is re-airing the interview and every friend of MM is giving interviews/speaking on their behalf. When will it end? I was hoping they would fade out of the news cycle after this week but it appears they’re happy to keep it going. I’m sure they’ll release this so called email and text proof for more headlines


You know they have zero intention of having the interview be their final say.  Another bunch of BS.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> JG knowing of the emails reminds me of the 5 Friends who knew about the letter prior to publication


Maybe she's one of the friends


----------



## poopsie

I think I wanna go buy a purse...............
BRB

well...............that passed.
no work = no shop and I bought one last month
These are truly trying times


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> IMO, I don't think the White House Press Secretary, who I believe is the President's mouthpiece, needs to be commending anything Meg said in her interview.  It's a night time drama piece put out with nothing fact checked.  If he's so proud of her, send her a hand written note in calligraphy.



If you read her actual words (again not the click bait or headlines or propaganda but what she actually said) she wasn't commending her but we will just have to agree to disagree I guess.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> IMO, I don't think the White House Press Secretary, who I believe is the President's mouthpiece, needs to be commending anything Meg said in her interview.  It's a night time drama piece put out with nothing fact checked.  If he's so proud of her, send her a hand written note in calligraphy.


Hmmm the Psaki comment was about matters (arguably and tangentially) concerning the head of state of the UK , better to have stayed out of it for diplomatic reasons


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry I'm confused...this article confirms what I posted? There was no official comment from the president, just the press secretary answering generally about the importance of mental health in response to a question.  Although the headline is definitely (and probably purposefully) misleading!



*no politics please! - megs

@marietouchet. completely agree for numerous reasons.
fwiw: several prominent females have weighed in with their support. One even wore a version of the Oscar lemon dress. IIRC one prominent wife visited H&M after the birth. Said all was well. Ellen, too, visited, right? Again said all was well. MM‘s mother was there for the birth, right?

ETA:  Seriously, as females, as people, as humans, we all know the struggle is real and serious.  That is why we advocate for FMLA. If you look up the history of FMLA it does not speak well for women...or men.  Does anyone remember when maternity leave was 6 weeks?  When there was no leave? Mad Men addressed this issue. Again, H&M and OW missed a golden opportunity to champion important issues. Instead it was a massively long complaint, point fingers, name some names but not others. Missed opportunity, big time.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> she was wearing very high heels and Oprah wasn't


I noticed that but I doubt that even adding 4 inches to MM’s height due to heels would make her so tall. She has repeatedly appeared tiny beside Kate in all the pictures they were together. I’ve heard everything from 5’2 to 5’7 as far as her height is concerned. Who knows? Actresses always claim to be younger and taller than they are.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe this will help:
> 
> @marietouchet. completely agree for numerous reasons.
> fwiw: several prominent females have weighed in with their support. One even wore a version of the Oscar lemon dress. IIRC one prominent wife visited H&M after the birth. Said all was well. Ellen, too, visited, right? Again said all was well. MM‘s mother was there for the birth, right?
> 
> ETA:  Seriously, as females, as people, as humans, we all know the struggle is real and serious.  That is why we advocate for FMLA. If you look up the history of FMLA it does not speak well for women...or men.  Does anyone remember when maternity leave was 6 weeks?  When there was no leave? Mad Men addressed this issue. Again, H&M and OW missed a golden opportunity to champion important issues. Instead it was a massively long complaint, point fingers, name some names but not others. Missed opportunity, big time.


I remember all the grief the previous president got for talking about the couple eg the US would not pay for their security
stay out of it, that is why we have diplomats, QEII is a head of state


----------



## EverSoElusive

They continue to use the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex though this was marked as Personal Correspondence and they weren't exactly representing the evil and racist British monarchy in this instance   And I thought the most important title is 'mom'?


----------



## Chagall

I am shocked that a comment made by two people who have habitually been know to misrepresent the truth is being taken verbatim. They picked a topic that is guaranteed in the US to really rile people up. Which it has! They complained about a supposed comment that would pretty much excuse their essentially dumping TRF. A comment that would get people on their side. All this discussion about who made the comment about Archie’s skin colour. It is quite possible that nobody made this comment!! Narcs can tell complete lies about anything, as MM has proven in the past, with absolutely no basis in fact. How gullible can people be. Everyone is bring played!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Let's face it. The interview was full of "creative activations" hoping all gullible raindrops would believe the crap that came out of their  mouths. The couple that promotes "compassion"? I'm not saying the BRF walks on water by a stretch. But when Harry said he was trapped but didn't know it until Meghan came along reminded me of how people get sucked into cults, go to Jonestown and drink the Kool-Aid. I'm so tired of MM trying to pass herself off as some extremely young and naive person who had no idea what she was getting into. People twist themselves into pretzel knots coming to her defense. For the first two years--the dating and early marriage time--she absolutely loved it all. She isn't that good of an actor to fake THAT. Then the "boo-hoo poor me" crap started. It's clear she enjoys blowing up relationships--how much of a history do you need? Now she's 40 and bawling to Oprah. She's got Harry where she wants him, when he said everyone back home is trapped also, how can he ever go back to those trapped people? When Philip dies, I don't know how they can even show their faces at the funeral. They won't go because they know they burned the bridge big time and they'd be mocked by the public. They'll feed us a line of sh*t that they were told "by someone in the institution" that they were not welcome and to stay home, when they REALLY WANTED to pay respects. You KNOW that's coming. And it'll be because of RACISM and the BRF is so MEAN!  See!! They TOLD us so! What have they got to lose? They already spewed enough bombshells, what's a few more?


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> xxx edited out for politics



Many people have chosen a side which they may later regret. Best to wait for all the facts to be brought in, no?


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I noticed that but I doubt that even adding 4 inches to MM’s height due to heels would make her so tall. She has repeatedly appeared tiny beside Kate in all the pictures they were together. I’ve heard everything from 5’2 to 5’7 as far as her height is concerned. Who knows? Actresses always claim to be younger and taller than they are.


I guess we could google their heights but I think they're both probably around average - maybe 5'5"....so if M was wearing six inch heels that would make her almost six ft....I didn't notice O's shoes but if they'd been super high like Meghan's I think I'd have noticed


----------



## Chanbal

The arrogance of this couple  Who are these people to impose themselves everywhere?  I'm speechless! 

*Meghan Markle’s team told BBC not to just use ‘old white men’ when debating Oprah interview*
MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s team warned the BBC to be impartial in their coverage before their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview aired.

The bizarre warning - sent to correspondents at the Beeb on Monday - reminded them to not just use “old white men” in subsequent debates around the divisive sit-down.

*The PR person for Harry and Meghan’s company Archewell urged reporters to impress on their seniors to use a “broad range of contributors” once it had been broadcast.

The news comes after it emerged that **Meghan had personally called ITV bosses over ousted Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan’s views on the royals.*

*A source said: “The BBC by its very nature has to be impartial at all times. So to be told how to conduct their coverage of a major news event by a PR person acting on behalf of Harry and Meghan is a bit strange to say the least.*

“This is the UK, not China. You can’t tell the BBC how to conduct its journalism, which frankly, was more than fair and balanced.”

A BBC spokesman said: “While we are contacted by PRs all the time, we would never confirm whether the representatives of anyone had been in touch.

“You mentioned contributors. We had a broad range of voices on our output and don’t believe there are any issues.”

Controlling the Press!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The arrogance of this couple  Who are these people to impose themselves everywhere?  I'm speechless!
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s team told BBC not to just use ‘old white men’ when debating Oprah interview*
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s team warned the BBC to be impartial in their coverage before their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview aired.
> 
> The bizarre warning - sent to correspondents at the Beeb on Monday - reminded them to not just use “old white men” in subsequent debates around the divisive sit-down.
> 
> *The PR person for Harry and Meghan’s company Archewell urged reporters to impress on their seniors to use a “broad range of contributors” once it had been broadcast.
> 
> The news comes after it emerged that **Meghan had personally called ITV bosses over ousted Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan’s views on the royals.*
> 
> *A source said: “The BBC by its very nature has to be impartial at all times. So to be told how to conduct their coverage of a major news event by a PR person acting on behalf of Harry and Meghan is a bit strange to say the least.*
> 
> “This is the UK, not China. You can’t tell the BBC how to conduct its journalism, which frankly, was more than fair and balanced.”
> 
> A BBC spokesman said: “While we are contacted by PRs all the time, we would never confirm whether the representatives of anyone had been in touch.
> 
> “You mentioned contributors. We had a broad range of voices on our output and don’t believe there are any issues.”
> 
> Controlling the Press!


arrogant again


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The arrogance of this couple  Who are these people to impose themselves everywhere?  I'm speechless!
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s team told BBC not to just use ‘old white men’ when debating Oprah interview*
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s team warned the BBC to be impartial in their coverage before their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview aired.
> 
> The bizarre warning - sent to correspondents at the Beeb on Monday - reminded them to not just use “old white men” in subsequent debates around the divisive sit-down.
> 
> *The PR person for Harry and Meghan’s company Archewell urged reporters to impress on their seniors to use a “broad range of contributors” once it had been broadcast.
> 
> The news comes after it emerged that **Meghan had personally called ITV bosses over ousted Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan’s views on the royals.*
> 
> *A source said: “The BBC by its very nature has to be impartial at all times. So to be told how to conduct their coverage of a major news event by a PR person acting on behalf of Harry and Meghan is a bit strange to say the least.*
> 
> “This is the UK, not China. You can’t tell the BBC how to conduct its journalism, which frankly, was more than fair and balanced.”
> 
> A BBC spokesman said: “While we are contacted by PRs all the time, we would never confirm whether the representatives of anyone had been in touch.
> 
> “You mentioned contributors. We had a broad range of voices on our output and don’t believe there are any issues.”
> 
> Controlling the Press!



My knee jerk reaction is WTF!


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> They continue to use the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex though this was marked as Personal Correspondence and they weren't exactly representing the evil and racist British monarchy in this instance   And I thought the most important title is 'mom'?
> 
> View attachment 5018384


What??? They had to type that letter and just write in the “dear Diana” and their signatures like a form letter?  MM didn’t want to use her “calligraphy”???  I thought they aren’t allowed to use “royal”???


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I noticed that but I doubt that even adding 4 inches to MM’s height due to heels would make her so tall. She has repeatedly appeared tiny beside Kate in all the pictures they were together. I’ve heard everything from 5’2 to 5’7 as far as her height is concerned. Who knows? Actresses always claim to be younger and taller than they are.


I didn't notice the height difference as they were seated most of the time.  but now that you mention it, Oprah looked the worst I've seen her look in years with those glasses.  seems ridiculous but could she have deliberitely downplayed her appearance to make The Duchess look much better?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The arrogance of this couple  Who are these people to impose themselves everywhere?  I'm speechless!
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s team told BBC not to just use ‘old white men’ when debating Oprah interview*
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s team warned the BBC to be impartial in their coverage before their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview aired.
> 
> The bizarre warning - sent to correspondents at the Beeb on Monday - reminded them to not just use “old white men” in subsequent debates around the divisive sit-down.
> 
> *The PR person for Harry and Meghan’s company Archewell urged reporters to impress on their seniors to use a “broad range of contributors” once it had been broadcast.
> 
> The news comes after it emerged that **Meghan had personally called ITV bosses over ousted Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan’s views on the royals.*
> 
> *A source said: “The BBC by its very nature has to be impartial at all times. So to be told how to conduct their coverage of a major news event by a PR person acting on behalf of Harry and Meghan is a bit strange to say the least.*
> 
> “This is the UK, not China. You can’t tell the BBC how to conduct its journalism, which frankly, was more than fair and balanced.”
> 
> A BBC spokesman said: “While we are contacted by PRs all the time, we would never confirm whether the representatives of anyone had been in touch.
> 
> “You mentioned contributors. We had a broad range of voices on our output and don’t believe there are any issues.”
> 
> Controlling the Press!


Oh, I see...it's okay to single people out/exclude them based on the color of their skin as long as it's Meg that does it.  Got it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Apologies if this has been posted before
*SIR KENNETH OLISA: Why I, the Queen's first black Lord Lieutenant, do not believe the royals are racist (and yes, my wife and I discussed the colour of our mixed-race child with our family)*

One of the most contentious claims made in Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah Winfrey this week was that one about race.

A member of the Royal Family is alleged to have raised questions or concerns about ‘how dark’ the skin of Meghan’s child might be.

And the uproar that ensued has been deafening, with the word ‘racist’ recurring in almost every news report.

But I would ask for a moment’s pause and reflection. Before we leap to the conclusion that this was a vulgar, racist question, we should recognise that we know neither the context nor the intent behind the supposed inquiry.

I’m drawing on first-hand experience here. My wife Julia and I were asked exactly the same question — in a spirit of benign interest — by my mother-in-law Muriel shortly before the first of our two daughters was born in 1980.

I should point out here that, like Meghan and Harry, I am black and Julia is white.

Resolve
My late mother-in-law, excited about the arrival of her first grandchild, was getting her knitting needles out and simply wanted to know what colour baby clothes would suit the newborn’s complexion.

She asked in much the same way that any of us might wonder: will the baby have her mother’s hair or her father’s nose? Absolutely no offence was intended or taken.

The context of that conversation was a loving family, its intent to resolve the question of buying wool — which goes to show that unless you know both context and intent of what people say, you must keep an open mind.

In light of this interview, I feel desperately sad that, after our collective response to Covid shone such a warm light on the British values of community, the nation is now in grave danger of being divided by the question of racism.

In 2015, Her Majesty The Queen appointed me as Her Lord-Lieutenant of Greater London — the first British-born non-white holder of this ancient post.

In that capacity I support the Queen and the Royal Family, helping them to build bridges, to connect people and organisations and enhance Londoners’ sense of belonging to an inclusive capital.

As a result, I have had the privilege of meeting all of the members of the Royal Family on many occasions — and I can confirm that they are charming and inclusive.

That is not just my perception — it is one shared by the many thousands of people whom I have seen react to the special ‘pixie dust’ which a royal visitor sprinkles over those they meet.

Continue reading here. Article from the DM


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> What??? They had to type that letter and just write in the “dear Diana” and their signatures like a form letter?  MM didn’t want to use her “calligraphy”???  I thought they aren’t allowed to use “royal”???



You know, they are special snowflakes  And like Harry said to Corden, "We Royals".

Correction: "Us Royals"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> My knee jerk reaction is WTF!
> View attachment 5018388


If they are contacting networks in the UK, I bet they are also doing it here. It's irritating the way they impose themselves to us. Two mediocre people with a giant ambition.


----------



## purseinsanity

I have a similar experience to the Lord Lieutenant.  My children are mixed race.  My in laws are New England WASPs...about as WASPy as you can get.  I was nervous before I met them the first time because no one in their family had ever married a different race or religion, so I wasn't sure what to expect.  My fears were unfounded, because they were the most wonderful people ever.  I've only come to love them more and more the last 25 years I've been with my husband.  Every time I was pregnant, ALL of my relatives would wonder (his family AND mine) who the child would look like.  Having darker features and knowing that usually darker is more dominant, we all assumed they'd lean more towards me.  My MIL especially (the same one who would lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a dark tan) was so excited at the thought of having brown grandchildren.  I think she was actually somewhat disappointed they came out looking nothing like me and practically whiter than my husband (didn't think that was possible! ).  She would often ask me if I thought they'd tan easily or if their eyes might darken as they grew out of babyhood.  They didn't, but that didn't mean she loved them any less.  Never once did I think anyone asking me how dark my baby's skin might be was a racist innuendo.  

I know not everyone is as lucky as I am.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this has been posted before
> *SIR KENNETH OLISA: Why I, the Queen's first black Lord Lieutenant, do not believe the royals are racist (and yes, my wife and I discussed the colour of our mixed-race child with our family)*
> 
> One of the most contentious claims made in Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah Winfrey this week was that one about race.
> 
> A member of the Royal Family is alleged to have raised questions or concerns about ‘how dark’ the skin of Meghan’s child might be.
> 
> And the uproar that ensued has been deafening, with the word ‘racist’ recurring in almost every news report.
> 
> But I would ask for a moment’s pause and reflection. Before we leap to the conclusion that this was a vulgar, racist question, we should recognise that we know neither the context nor the intent behind the supposed inquiry.
> 
> I’m drawing on first-hand experience here. My wife Julia and I were asked exactly the same question — in a spirit of benign interest — by my mother-in-law Muriel shortly before the first of our two daughters was born in 1980.
> 
> I should point out here that, like Meghan and Harry, I am black and Julia is white.
> 
> Resolve
> My late mother-in-law, excited about the arrival of her first grandchild, was getting her knitting needles out and simply wanted to know what colour baby clothes would suit the newborn’s complexion.
> 
> She asked in much the same way that any of us might wonder: will the baby have her mother’s hair or her father’s nose? Absolutely no offence was intended or taken.
> 
> The context of that conversation was a loving family, its intent to resolve the question of buying wool — which goes to show that unless you know both context and intent of what people say, you must keep an open mind.
> 
> In light of this interview, I feel desperately sad that, after our collective response to Covid shone such a warm light on the British values of community, the nation is now in grave danger of being divided by the question of racism.
> 
> In 2015, Her Majesty The Queen appointed me as Her Lord-Lieutenant of Greater London — the first British-born non-white holder of this ancient post.
> 
> In that capacity I support the Queen and the Royal Family, helping them to build bridges, to connect people and organisations and enhance Londoners’ sense of belonging to an inclusive capital.
> 
> As a result, I have had the privilege of meeting all of the members of the Royal Family on many occasions — and I can confirm that they are charming and inclusive.
> 
> That is not just my perception — it is one shared by the many thousands of people whom I have seen react to the special ‘pixie dust’ which a royal visitor sprinkles over those they meet.
> 
> Continue reading here. Article from the DM


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...ord-Lieutenant-not-believe-royals-racist.html


This is a very healthy comment, thanks for sharing it with us!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> You know, they are special snowflakes  And like Harry said to Corden, "We Royals".


Please don't call Meg a snowflake, as that might imply she is only white.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Please don't call Meg a snowflake, as that might imply she is only white.



Oh yeah. You are right. How about black ice?  I better behave now


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Oh yeah. You are right. How about black ice?  I better behave now



Would ‘cold as ice’ work?


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would ‘cold as ice’ work?




She's a wannabe queen so how about we settle with Ice Queen?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hesitate to post this, but why not? It is hilarious


----------



## Cavalier Girl

mellibelly said:


> Another poster said Friday at 8pm on CBS



It could be the only thing on TV and I still wouldn't watch.  And, this is while still in a pandemic.


----------



## floatinglili

Thank you for sharing these stories and your personal story purseinsanity ^^ 

Tbh the racial ‘debate’ has been so intense and relentless in the public conversation over the past few years and often gets very heated and dividing too.  
It is refreshing and reassuring to get ‘back to basics’ with personal stories of mutual connection and support. 
I am very firmly in the camp of ‘only one race - the human race’ and while I think many people are not willing to go there just yet for cultural reasons or grievance, hopefully the end result of all this discussion and earnest study has to take us there in the end in my view. My hope anyway.


----------



## floatinglili

This is brilliant. 
I’m not sure I should be even commenting on this thread lol - I haven’t watched the OW interview!!! This excerpt is the closest I have gotten haha 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Hesitate to post this, but why not? It is hilarious


----------



## purseinsanity

floatinglili said:


> This is brilliant.
> I’m not sure I should be even commenting on this thread lol - I haven’t watched the OW interview!!! This excerpt is the closest I have gotten haha


Me too!  It was almost too much to even listen to their voices, but too funny to stop!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> The arrogance of this couple  Who are these people to impose themselves everywhere?  I'm speechless!
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s team told BBC not to just use ‘old white men’ when debating Oprah interview*
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s team warned the BBC to be impartial in their coverage before their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview aired.
> 
> The bizarre warning - sent to correspondents at the Beeb on Monday - reminded them to not just use “old white men” in subsequent debates around the divisive sit-down.
> 
> *The PR person for Harry and Meghan’s company Archewell urged reporters to impress on their seniors to use a “broad range of contributors” once it had been broadcast.
> 
> The news comes after it emerged that **Meghan had personally called ITV bosses over ousted Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan’s views on the royals.*
> 
> *A source said: “The BBC by its very nature has to be impartial at all times. So to be told how to conduct their coverage of a major news event by a PR person acting on behalf of Harry and Meghan is a bit strange to say the least.*
> 
> “This is the UK, not China. You can’t tell the BBC how to conduct its journalism, which frankly, was more than fair and balanced.”
> 
> A BBC spokesman said: “While we are contacted by PRs all the time, we would never confirm whether the representatives of anyone had been in touch.
> 
> “You mentioned contributors. We had a broad range of voices on our output and don’t believe there are any issues.”
> 
> Controlling the Press!



They are trolling. They just want to see how far they can go. No claim will be too outrageous


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would ‘cold as ice’ work?


Thanks a lot.  Now I have this song in my head.    

I must say, I never truly listened to the words, but they kind of apply to her!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this has been posted before
> *SIR KENNETH OLISA: Why I, the Queen's first black Lord Lieutenant, do not believe the royals are racist (and yes, my wife and I discussed the colour of our mixed-race child with our family)*
> 
> One of the most contentious claims made in Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah Winfrey this week was that one about race.
> 
> A member of the Royal Family is alleged to have raised questions or concerns about ‘how dark’ the skin of Meghan’s child might be.
> 
> And the uproar that ensued has been deafening, with the word ‘racist’ recurring in almost every news report.
> 
> But I would ask for a moment’s pause and reflection. Before we leap to the conclusion that this was a vulgar, racist question, we should recognise that we know neither the context nor the intent behind the supposed inquiry.
> 
> I’m drawing on first-hand experience here. My wife Julia and I were asked exactly the same question — in a spirit of benign interest — by my mother-in-law Muriel shortly before the first of our two daughters was born in 1980.
> 
> I should point out here that, like Meghan and Harry, I am black and Julia is white.
> 
> Resolve
> My late mother-in-law, excited about the arrival of her first grandchild, was getting her knitting needles out and simply wanted to know what colour baby clothes would suit the newborn’s complexion.
> 
> She asked in much the same way that any of us might wonder: will the baby have her mother’s hair or her father’s nose? Absolutely no offence was intended or taken.
> 
> The context of that conversation was a loving family, its intent to resolve the question of buying wool — which goes to show that unless you know both context and intent of what people say, you must keep an open mind.
> 
> In light of this interview, I feel desperately sad that, after our collective response to Covid shone such a warm light on the British values of community, the nation is now in grave danger of being divided by the question of racism.
> 
> In 2015, Her Majesty The Queen appointed me as Her Lord-Lieutenant of Greater London — the first British-born non-white holder of this ancient post.
> 
> In that capacity I support the Queen and the Royal Family, helping them to build bridges, to connect people and organisations and enhance Londoners’ sense of belonging to an inclusive capital.
> 
> As a result, I have had the privilege of meeting all of the members of the Royal Family on many occasions — and I can confirm that they are charming and inclusive.
> 
> That is not just my perception — it is one shared by the many thousands of people whom I have seen react to the special ‘pixie dust’ which a royal visitor sprinkles over those they meet.
> 
> Continue reading here. Article from the DM


Stunningly beautiful defense of his Queen and his countrymen and their efforts to include and respect all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Telly tirade - cruel and shifty
 

_Let The Sun be clear about our sympathy towards any mental health issues and suicidal thoughts Meghan endured as a new Royal. If she was deprived of help that was wrong

Meghan suggested, with staggering irresponsibility, that Archie was denied the title Prince because of racism_




Spoiler: Telly tirade, cruel & shifty



*Meghan and Prince Harry’s telly tirade was cruel and shifty — so much for their ‘compassion’*

The Sun
*Telly tirade was cruel and shifty*
SO much for their “compassion”. Harry and Meghan’s account of their alleged suffering in the Royal Family was cruel as well as self-pitying and unreliable. But it did the job they wanted.

It won hearts among the more gullible of Americans while dragging the Royalsthrough the dirt on a global stage. But this ancient institution has survived far, far greater blows than the jibes of a petulant prince and a one-time actress.
First, though, let The Sun be clear about our sympathy towards any mental health issues and suicidal thoughts Meghan endured as a new Royal. If she was deprived of help that was wrong.

Why, though, would this not have made her warmer towards the similarly traumatised staff she is accused of bullying? If we are to blindly believe Meghan’s “truth”, as her celebrity friends recommend, why can we not give claims against her equal credence?

Let us also assume that a senior Royal’s remark about the skin colour of her and Harry’s child was as nakedly racist as the prince led Meghan to believe. No couple should suffer that.

But why did Harry trouble his apparently fragile and insecure wife with it?

Meghan says this happened when she was pregnant. Harry says they were only just dating. Which will they settle on?

*Televised whinge*
Did they keep this incendiary charge vague and anonymous to make it impossible to counter? In doing so they have smeared Harry’s entire family. Exonerating the Queen and Philip merely amplifies the injustice to the others.

As for the rest of their televised whinge, it was a mass of contradictions.

They said they adore the Queen, then blowtorched the institution she has shaped and defended her entire life.

Harry said he loved William to bits as Meghan tore into his wife.

Meghan suggested, with staggering irresponsibility, that Archie was denied the title Prince because of racism.
A minute’s Googling would have revealed the constitutional reality. But then she did no research into Royal life either.

The couple insist the newspapers (which they don’t read) are racist. Why, then, did the Press devote joyful editions to her wedding? Later criticisms had nothing to do with race.

The couple were furious to be cut off by Charles. But they had Harry’s huge inheritance from Diana and Meghan’s millions.

Plus, they cashed in on their fame as soon as they hit LA. What possible money worries have they ever had?

As for the privacy they are so keen to protect, they now spend their lives spilling secrets to friendly interviewers while serially invading the privacy of the Queen and others. The hypocrisy reeks.











						Meghan and Harry's telly tirade was cruel — so much for their 'compassion'
					

Telly tirade was cruel and shifty SO much for their “compassion”. Harry and Meghan’s account of their alleged suffering in the Royal Family was cruel as well as self-pitying and unreliable. But it…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I have a similar experience to the Lord Lieutenant.  My children are mixed race.  My in laws are New England WASPs...about as WASPy as you can get.  I was nervous before I met them the first time because no one in their family had ever married a different race or religion, so I wasn't sure what to expect.  My fears were unfounded, because they were the most wonderful people ever.  I've only come to love them more and more the last 25 years I've been with my husband.  Every time I was pregnant, ALL of my relatives would wonder (his family AND mine) who the child would look like.  Having darker features and knowing that usually darker is more dominant, we all assumed they'd lean more towards me.  My MIL especially (the same one who would lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a dark tan) was so excited at the thought of having brown grandchildren.  I think she was actually somewhat disappointed they came out looking nothing like me and practically whiter than my husband (didn't think that was possible! ).  She would often ask me if I thought they'd tan easily or if their eyes might darken as they grew out of babyhood.  They didn't, but that didn't mean she loved them any less.  Never once did I think anyone asking me how dark my baby's skin might be was a racist innuendo.
> 
> I know not everyone is as lucky as I am.


haha, I have a similar experience to your MIL. In my youth, I would also lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a tan, the darker the merrier. I'm now paying the price for those long beach months under the sun, too many visits to the dermatologist to remove skin cancers. Archie is white, but I bet QE would have been thrilled to have a darker great grandkid. Discussing the color of a baby should be normal and exciting, particularly if parents are mixed race. This is why I got upset with MM's insinuations, they are divisive and inflammatory. @floatinglili you are not alone, I have always been very firmly in the camp of ‘only one race - the human race’.


----------



## floatinglili

^^ if we are going to build an inclusive society that moves forward as a cohesive and supportive whole, we need stories like this. The ongoing separatist debates have sometimes left me quite shredded on a personal level., and one has to wonder what the effect will be on our human connections on a National and global level as well.
Still, the nature of humanity is to heal, to seek connection and mutual understanding, so surely after all this outpouring of fault-finding and upset we will heal old wounds and eventually build a society which is stronger and more confident as a whole.

i am glad I am not being flamed (yet anyway lol) for suggesting we are one?? This is an absolute minefield area to wade into.


----------



## TraceySH

OMG


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> haha, I have a similar experience to your MIL. In my youth, I would also lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a tan, the darker the merrier. I'm now paying the price for those long beach months under the sun, too many visits to the dermatologist to remove skin cancers. Archie is white, but I bet QE would have been thrilled to have a darker great grandkid. Discussing the color of a baby should be normal and exciting, particularly if parents are mixed race. This is why I got upset with MM's insinuations, they are divisive and inflammatory. @floatinglili you are not alone, I have always been very firmly in the camp of ‘only one race - the human race’.



MeToo.  Had my Mohs surgery in early summer, 2019. It took about 9 months to heal, then pandemic hit just as I was beginning to feel presentable. On the bright side, since I was already masking and wearing gloves,  it may have prevented me from getting COVID. It has been a wild 2 years. The good news about the pandemic is it has given me plenty of time to research skin care. Now, I not only feel like an expert on the BRF, but glass skin, K beauty, J beauty and scars. The learning never stops. Early on I found several bloggers who provide excellent tips and encouragement. We will get through this. 

ETA: thank you @Chanbal for your candid post. Truly you are an inspiration.


----------



## Jayne1

TraceySH said:


> OMG



Made my night!  So funny!


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this has been posted before
> *SIR KENNETH OLISA: Why I, the Queen's first black Lord Lieutenant, do not believe the royals are racist (and yes, my wife and I discussed the colour of our mixed-race child with our family)*
> 
> One of the most contentious claims made in Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah Winfrey this week was that one about race.
> 
> A member of the Royal Family is alleged to have raised questions or concerns about ‘how dark’ the skin of Meghan’s child might be.
> 
> And the uproar that ensued has been deafening, with the word ‘racist’ recurring in almost every news report.
> 
> But I would ask for a moment’s pause and reflection. Before we leap to the conclusion that this was a vulgar, racist question, we should recognise that we know neither the context nor the intent behind the supposed inquiry.
> 
> I’m drawing on first-hand experience here. My wife Julia and I were asked exactly the same question — in a spirit of benign interest — by my mother-in-law Muriel shortly before the first of our two daughters was born in 1980.
> 
> I should point out here that, like Meghan and Harry, I am black and Julia is white.
> 
> Resolve
> My late mother-in-law, excited about the arrival of her first grandchild, was getting her knitting needles out and simply wanted to know what colour baby clothes would suit the newborn’s complexion.
> 
> She asked in much the same way that any of us might wonder: will the baby have her mother’s hair or her father’s nose? Absolutely no offence was intended or taken.
> 
> The context of that conversation was a loving family, its intent to resolve the question of buying wool — which goes to show that unless you know both context and intent of what people say, you must keep an open mind.
> 
> In light of this interview, I feel desperately sad that, after our collective response to Covid shone such a warm light on the British values of community, the nation is now in grave danger of being divided by the question of racism.
> 
> In 2015, Her Majesty The Queen appointed me as Her Lord-Lieutenant of Greater London — the first British-born non-white holder of this ancient post.
> 
> In that capacity I support the Queen and the Royal Family, helping them to build bridges, to connect people and organisations and enhance Londoners’ sense of belonging to an inclusive capital.
> 
> As a result, I have had the privilege of meeting all of the members of the Royal Family on many occasions — and I can confirm that they are charming and inclusive.
> 
> That is not just my perception — it is one shared by the many thousands of people whom I have seen react to the special ‘pixie dust’ which a royal visitor sprinkles over those they meet.
> 
> Continue reading here. Article from the DM


I wish someone would make Queen Oprah read this.  Sometimes I think she lives in a California bubble.


----------



## TraceySH

Jayne1 said:


> Made my night!  So funny!


I am sitting here dying. My husband thinks I am (more) crazy. Kinda changes the way I see that $5000 dress now


----------



## CarryOn2020

TraceySH said:


> I am sitting here dying. My husband thinks I am (more) crazy. Kinda changes the way I see that $5000 dress now



What was Armani thinking?


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> haha, I have a similar experience to your MIL. In my youth, I would also lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a tan, the darker the merrier. I'm now paying the price for those long beach months under the sun, too many visits to the dermatologist to remove skin cancers. Archie is white, but I bet QE would have been thrilled to have a darker great grandkid. Discussing the color of a baby should be normal and exciting, particularly if parents are mixed race. This is why I got upset with MM's insinuations, they are divisive and inflammatory. @floatinglili you are not alone, I have always been very firmly in the camp of ‘only one race - the human race’.



Same here. Only we added iodine to our baby oil. Only the 'rich' kids bought stuff like Hawaiian Tropic or Bain de Soleil.


----------



## TraceySH

poopsie said:


> Same here. Only we added iodine to our baby oil. Only the 'rich' kids bought stuff like Hawaiian Tropic or Bain de Soleil.


Anyone else remember Crisco and Reynolds Wrap??


----------



## CarryOn2020

SPF 2 was the highest we had. Lifeguards used the total block. No one really thought of the chemicals, but my grandmother did try to warn us. Somehow she understood skin care more than my mother. This was early 70s, the height of sunbathing and Bain de Soleil. Lauren Hutton, Cheryl Tiegs, etc. showed us the way. Vogue has a lot to answer for.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Same here. Only we added iodine to our baby oil. Only the 'rich' kids bought stuff like Hawaiian Tropic or Bain de Soleil.


I remember doing that to get a nice even tan for graduation.


----------



## mellibelly

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear these health issues are spreading ..
> 
> Jameela Jamil Says she was suicidal over Piers Morgan’s comments about her in some kerfuffle a while back ....
> 
> I believe JJ was one of the MM women of the year for Vogue


Jameela Jamil: Piers Morgan gave me cancer. Twice.

Jameela Jamil: Piers Morgan transformed into a swarm of bees causing me to run into traffic and be struck. Twice.


----------



## EmilyM111

lalame said:


> I'm sure everyone here would agree that the BRF is flawed and can be shady themselves. Hello, Andrew. But what does that have to do with Meghan lying (and I personally don't like to think of it as lying myself so much as misunderstanding or overdramatizing)?
> 
> It's like... Meghan received racist treatment. But Harry has said and done racist things as well. Does Harry's racism negate your sympathy for Meghan? Both are true.... they have flaws, and they can be sympathetic on some things too. My opinions are very situational.


Somebody reflecting of potential colour of the baby’s skin is just IMO silly (it’s like in Eastern Europe we still learn what not to say even when it’s silly and meant well) but wearing a Nazi costume or calling somebody “paki” is an absolute NO GO zone. Yet...
I honestly feel sorry for whoever will be implicated - that person might have never said it at all.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> MeToo.  Had my Mohs surgery in early summer, 2019. It took about 9 months to heal, then pandemic hit just as I was beginning to feel presentable. On the bright side, since I was already masking and wearing gloves,  it may have prevented me from getting COVID. It has been a wild 2 years. The good news about the pandemic is it has given me plenty of time to research skin care. Now, I not only feel like an expert on the BRF, but glass skin, K beauty, J beauty and scars. The learning never stops. Early on I found several bloggers who provide excellent tips and encouragement. We will get through this.
> 
> ETA: thank you @Chanbal for your candid post. Truly you are an inspiration.


I’m glad you’re better!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> haha, I have a similar experience to your MIL. In my youth, I would also lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a tan, the darker the merrier. I'm now paying the price for those long beach months under the sun, too many visits to the dermatologist to remove skin cancers. Archie is white, but I bet QE would have been thrilled to have a darker great grandkid. Discussing the color of a baby should be normal and exciting, particularly if parents are mixed race. This is why I got upset with MM's insinuations, they are divisive and inflammatory. @floatinglili you are not alone, I have always been very firmly in the camp of ‘only one race - the human race’.


I hope it’s all resolved now!


----------



## lalame

nikka007 said:


> Somebody reflecting of potential colour of the baby’s skin is just IMO silly (it’s like in Eastern Europe we still learn what not to say even when it’s silly and meant well) but wearing a Nazi costume or calling somebody “paki” is an absolute NO GO zone. Yet...
> I honestly feel sorry for whoever will be implicated - that person might have never said it at all.



It's not that silly if you're a multi-racial couple. What my child would look like is a literal mystery to me... nothing like anyone in my family and nothing like anyone in my husband's. I know I have that curiosity, so I wouldn't blame other people for being curious too. But most important is context... what exactly was said, how was it said, what led up to it or followed it, etc. At its most innocent, questions about a baby's hair, skin color, facial features, etc are akin to "does he look more like mommy or daddy?" (a super common question) but of course it you say it with a shudder then that's a very different thing.


----------



## lalame

mellibelly said:


> Jameela Jamil: Piers Morgan gave me cancer. Twice.
> 
> Jameela Jamil: Piers Morgan transformed into a swarm of bees causing me to run into traffic and be struck. Twice.



I really WANT to like Jameela.... like I don't actually disagree with many of her viewpoints on body image, mental health, etc. but she has become like the Kardashian of wokeness. It's too over the top to be thoughtful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM111

lalame said:


> It's not that silly if you're a multi-racial couple. What my child would look like is a literal mystery to me... nothing like anyone in my family and nothing like anyone in my husband's. I know I have that curiosity, so I wouldn't blame other people for being curious too. But most important is context... what exactly was said, how was it said, what led up to it or followed it, etc. At its most innocent, questions about a baby's hair, skin color, facial features, etc are akin to "does he look more like mommy or daddy?" (a super common question) but of course it you say it with a shudder then that's a very different thing.


Agree and I’d ask this question in good faith myself if I was close enough to somebody in such situation.
I’m saying silly as realising it might upset somebody despite the intention.


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> I am shocked that a comment made by two people who have habitually been know to misrepresent the truth is being taken verbatim. They picked a topic that is guaranteed in the US to really rile people up. Which it has! They complained about a supposed comment that would pretty much excuse their essentially dumping TRF. A comment that would get people on their side. All this discussion about who made the comment about Archie’s skin colour. It is quite possible that nobody made this comment!! Narcs can tell complete lies about anything, as MM has proven in the past, with absolutely no basis in fact. How gullible can people be. Everyone is bring played!!


The interview was carefully structured to have questions that could be answered in these vagaries, yet work as triggers for people to get riled up against an institution that historically never answers back.  The palace maintains a policy that sometimes gets them into trouble.  That is what happened when Diana died and Tony Blair had to light a firecracker under The Queen (sorry @Sharont2305 ) to get her to respond.


----------



## lalame

I keep coming back to how there's always multiple ways to tell the same story. I thought Meghan was authentic in what she said (as in not lying per se) but the way she divulged each story seemed a little too disinterested in objectivity. I get it, it's her tell-all so she's going to tell her side but she could've been more responsible knowing that it is just a one-sided story. I think she did this well with the Kate thing, like she insisted Kate did everything right and was a good person and wasn't allowed to interfere with the media reports herself, and had the good sense not to reveal more of the private dispute. But here's how I would've handled some of the other claims:

Meghan: There were discussions about 'how dark is this baby going to be'.
Better: There has never been a black woman or other WOC in this family, so I did encounter the occasional ignorance in how to properly address issues of race, colorism, etc. Was it malicious? I don't know, I'd like to think not as everyone in the family welcomed me warmly and I have no reason to believe otherwise. It was lonely though not to have anyone around who I could relate to, culturally, and the translation between cultures wore me down.

Meghan: I asked someone for help and they said no, it's going to reflect badly on the family.
Better: I was really struggling... but given how public and highly scrutinized all our lives were, there were fears that there could be disastrous leaks. It was a really difficult position, but I appreciate that everyone had a job to do there and they felt this would be in my best interest at the end of the day. I don't blame them for following their protocols as they're trained to do, but it just wasn't an environment that I could thrive in.


----------



## lalame

Whether she intended to or not, a lot of what she said was designed to blame and shame. She's clearly still hurt. Whenever you hear such a one-sided account, where there's no acknowledgment of what the OTHER side may have been intending or thinking, it does make you question the objectivity and veracity of what you're hearing. Ok, no more word salad from me on this issue.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> IMO, I don't think the White House Press Secretary, who I believe is the President's mouthpiece, needs to be commending anything Meg said in her interview.  It's a night time drama piece put out with nothing fact checked.  If he's so proud of her, send her a hand written note in calligraphy.



and the White House got involved because?


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Whether she intended to or not, a lot of what she said was designed to blame and shame. She's clearly still hurt. Whenever you hear such a one-sided account, where there's no acknowledgment of what the OTHER side may have been intending or thinking, it does make you question the objectivity and veracity of what you're hearing. Ok, no more word salad from me on this issue.



...but you forget, they don't care.

The Earth, everything and everyone on it is _just_ for them. These two never made it past the the toddler stage. 

Archie will soon be the most mature person in the house.


----------



## Jktgal

I think it's more than blame and shame. It is to manipulate people to her advantage. She probably tried a little trick at beginning, find it successful, then paved the road with shells to be later trigered for her Hollywood success. It's H who is trapped. Later when he benefits her no more and discarded, nothing he says will be credible: He is white and priviledged so of course he is the oppressor. Right now she is peppering the field with shells to cement her future success.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was Armani thinking?



He wasn't


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> Truth of the matter is that we don’t know where things broke down between the BRF and Team Sussex.  There’s tons of rumors out there.  The only thing we do know is one side decided to go to Oprah with a story that doesn’t make sense if you know the laws of the UK. Harry could have corrected that if he wanted to but he chose not to, so I don’t understand blaming just Megan.



Because as usual she did the majority of the talking. He wasn't even there for extended periods of the "interview". But otherwise you are right.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> Another saint Meghan protector...




Is it too much to clean up your thumb if you are to prominently feature it in a humongous picture?


----------



## papertiger

nikka007 said:


> Somebody reflecting of potential colour of the baby’s skin is just IMO silly (it’s like in Eastern Europe we still learn what not to say even when it’s silly and meant well) but wearing a Nazi costume or calling somebody “paki” is an absolute NO GO zone. Yet...
> *I honestly feel sorry for whoever will be implicated - that person might have never said it at all.*



That person may not even exist. 

If s/he does, I'd like to know who it was. ATM everyone and anyone besides QEII and PP are implicated.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I have a similar experience to the Lord Lieutenant.  My children are mixed race.  My in laws are New England WASPs...about as WASPy as you can get.  I was nervous before I met them the first time because no one in their family had ever married a different race or religion, so I wasn't sure what to expect.  My fears were unfounded, because they were the most wonderful people ever.  I've only come to love them more and more the last 25 years I've been with my husband.  Every time I was pregnant, ALL of my relatives would wonder (his family AND mine) who the child would look like.  Having darker features and knowing that usually darker is more dominant, we all assumed they'd lean more towards me.  My MIL especially (the same one who would lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a dark tan) was so excited at the thought of having brown grandchildren.  I think she was actually somewhat disappointed they came out looking nothing like me and practically whiter than my husband (didn't think that was possible! ).  She would often ask me if I thought they'd tan easily or if their eyes might darken as they grew out of babyhood.  They didn't, but that didn't mean she loved them any less.  Never once did I think anyone asking me how dark my baby's skin might be was a racist innuendo.
> 
> I know not everyone is as lucky as I am.



I think yours is the more common experience, but so many people have so much to gain in making us think otherwise. Those are the people that are poisoning out minds. We have become afraid to talk to each other so the divide grows. That is what those people are counting on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

KittyKat65 said:


> Dang, you people talk a lot.  35 pages in 5 days about people you don't know personally?  Whose lives you read about in tabloids?  Unless the Queen is your Aunt Betty, it might be time to step back and wonder why any of this matters.  I don't have the amount of popcorn necessary to read it all, but I will try because this is better than any soap opera.  Toodle pip



We've already established we don't appreciate random posters lecturing us in a patronizing way on what we can and can't discuss, so please take a seat. Also, I'll help you out there as you admit you didn't read the past discussion: Harry and Meghan gave a two hour "interview" to Oprah last Sunday (you'll be able to watch the replay in case you missed it), which we are currently discussing. You might want to chime in once you caught up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> I am shocked that a comment made by two people who have habitually been know to misrepresent the truth is being taken verbatim. They picked a topic that is guaranteed in the US to really rile people up. Which it has! They complained about a supposed comment that would pretty much excuse their essentially dumping TRF. A comment that would get people on their side. All this discussion about who made the comment about Archie’s skin colour. It is quite possible that nobody made this comment!! Narcs can tell complete lies about anything, as MM has proven in the past, with absolutely no basis in fact. How gullible can people be. Everyone is bring played!!



The more pressing question is, why would Harry go along with this. She's been known to lie when she opens her mouth, he not so much, he just had people clean up after him after he was being his usual self.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The arrogance of this couple  Who are these people to impose themselves everywhere?  I'm speechless!
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s team told BBC not to just use ‘old white men’ when debating Oprah interview*
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s team warned the BBC to be impartial in their coverage before their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview aired.
> 
> The bizarre warning - sent to correspondents at the Beeb on Monday - reminded them to not just use “old white men” in subsequent debates around the divisive sit-down.
> 
> *The PR person for Harry and Meghan’s company Archewell urged reporters to impress on their seniors to use a “broad range of contributors” once it had been broadcast.
> 
> The news comes after it emerged that **Meghan had personally called ITV bosses over ousted Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan’s views on the royals.*
> 
> *A source said: “The BBC by its very nature has to be impartial at all times. So to be told how to conduct their coverage of a major news event by a PR person acting on behalf of Harry and Meghan is a bit strange to say the least.*
> 
> “This is the UK, not China. You can’t tell the BBC how to conduct its journalism, which frankly, was more than fair and balanced.”
> 
> A BBC spokesman said: “While we are contacted by PRs all the time, we would never confirm whether the representatives of anyone had been in touch.
> 
> “You mentioned contributors. We had a broad range of voices on our output and don’t believe there are any issues.”
> 
> Controlling the Press!



These people are sick. The one thing I'd like to know at this point: why's the whole world enabling them?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The good news about the pandemic is it has given me plenty of time to research skin care. Now, I not only feel like an expert on the BRF, but glass skin, K beauty, J beauty and scars.



I used being stuck to the house to up my skincare game too...no m/u, so I can slather on products, no social life, so I finally started Tretinoin after the one day I worked with people last year, and three months in I'm finally over the peeling stage.


----------



## jelliedfeels

ladysarah said:


> I have also observed a distinct hostility towards them (there is whole thread devoted to the subject and some appear to have spend the entire lockdown, *****ing about them -  long before the interview. I very rarely read or post in the gossip threads, but is hard to ignore the sheer quantity of venom, pouring out...)


If you want praise of inoffensive celebs and maybe a couple of photos go to the Carey Mulligan or the Ruth Negga thread. 

Maybe don’t go into the thread of two quasi-political celebs  who have raised questions about the legitimacy of a whole  institution to the extent of calling them racist and cruel and not expect slightly more fertile discussion. 

Also I’m entitled to be as hostile as I like towards them for their contemptible actions. How exactly am I hurting them? If they don’t read national press they certainly don’t read forum posts from commoners.

 If you want to post about how wonderful they both are no one will stop you.


----------



## Prettyinpnknwht

I don't know if anyone else has already shared this but I just saw it and it cracked me up!   

McSweeney's Internet Tendency: Oprah's Tell-All Interviews with Other Princesses


----------



## EmilyM111

papertiger said:


> That person may not even exist.
> 
> If s/he does, I'd like to know who it was. ATM everyone and anyone besides QEII and PP are implicated.



That's what I suspect. You know when I raised a case at work against my boss mobbing me, I had to substantiate everything (evidence, if spoken then dates, exact quotes, circumstances) and yet not sure the message landed with HR that I was a subject to discrimination (we settled but it was hard work). Nobody from work bothered to believe me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> For anyone who missed the Oprah interview (or wishes to see it again) CBS is re-airing it this Friday at 8 PM.


Gotta try and get those numbers up for the TV event of the century


----------



## jelliedfeels

tiktok said:


> Another saint Meghan protector...



This has very strong “I just did my first political theory class at college and now I’m a anarchist-feminist, postmodern Marxist” vibes.


----------



## floatinglili

jelliedfeels said:


> This has very strong “I just did my first political theory class at college and now I’m a anarchist-feminist, postmodern Marxist” vibes.


But there is so much of this vibe around these days! Most public conversation of seemingly all the ‘free’ world seems to reek of earnest second year undergrad uni tutorial!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This is a very long article. The first half is a list of staff members that helped MM while in the UK , and the second part is a friend of MM who spoke on ITV’s This Morning informing that MM has many emails and texts to support claims... Interesting, we learned during the last lawsuit that texts are deleted every 30 days...
> 
> *Palace: *
> "_The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that the couple have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself.
> 
> In fact, sources say, the duchess was given a string of the Queen’s most senior staff as ‘mentors’ after the couple became engaged, as well as being allowed to hand-pick her own 15-strong team of loyal and talented private office staff.
> 
> ‘It is very disingenuous to make such a sweeping generalisation,’ one insider said. ‘There was a brilliant team of very experienced and loyal aides to help them. Sadly, she and Harry were willing to listen to no one. And that is the honest truth...._’"
> 
> *Ms Markle*:
> 
> "*One of Meghan’s closest friends claimed yesterday that she and Harry have a collection of emails and text messages to back up their bombshell claims about the Royal Family.*
> 
> _Actress and musician Janina Gavankar has known the Duchess of Sussex for 17 years and was with her when she watched the broadcast of the interview on Sunday.
> 
> She insisted ‘the whole family and the whole staff’ at Buckingham Palace were aware that Meghan’s mental health was suffering. And she vowed ‘the truth’ would come out, as would evidence that had been collected which she believes proves their allegations.
> 
> She did not, however, detail which claims the messages referred to, the most incendiary of which is that a member of Harry’s family expressed ‘concern’ about ‘how dark’ their unborn son would be.
> 
> American Miss Gavankar, 40 – who took the photo of Harry, Meghan and son Archie that featured on their first family Christmas card – was speaking on ITV’s This Morning yesterday. She made clear she was speaking with Meghan’s knowledge. She said her friend – whom she described as ‘kind, generous and low-maintenance’ – was ‘happy’ for her to talk on her behalf.
> 
> *Asked about Buckingham Palace’s 61-word statement on Tuesday, Miss Gavankar, who lives in LA and says Meghan tells her ‘everything’, said: ‘After reading this short Palace statement that came out from Buckingham Palace I thought two things.
> 
> ‘On one side I thought I am so thankful they are finally acknowledging the experience [that Meghan had], but on the other side I know the family and the staff were well aware of the extent of it, and although their recollections may vary, ours don’t because we lived through it with them.’*
> 
> She added: ‘And there are many emails and texts to support that._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The new battle royal: Palace staff vs Meghan's close friend
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail can reveal there is genuine hurt that Harry and Meghan have perpetuated the image that Meghan was cut adrift and left to fend for herself by Buckingham Palace staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





I notice she isn’t going to confirm or deny the racism allegation explicitly. She’s not trying to get sued for bestie megs. 


Moreover, families are often all too aware of a relative’s health problems. But even the most supportive family can’t make them go away. To imply it’s their fault they ‘didn’t do something’ is just ludicrous. The patient has to go for treatment- she can’t even take responsibility for her own health & she’s meant to be a role model?


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just so I understand...the objection is that she said the president believes it takes courage for "anyone" (because that is the word she used and I am guessing it was said very deliberately so as not to answer specifically about MM) to discuss their mental health struggles?
> 
> Again that's the actual quote, plus...
> 
> _We aren't going to provide additional commentary from here on behalf of the President or others, given these are private citizens, sharing their own story and their own struggles. And let me just reiterate that we have a strong and abiding relationship with the British people and a special partnership with the government of the United Kingdom on a range of issues, and that will continue._


Thank you for providing the actual wording of what was said. I have seen several click-bait headlines, made it sound like the president personally came out and supported MM! I was thinking it would be very wrong to get involved in this from a official government's standing point. Glad to read this was not the case. I think her response was a diplomatic one. She couldn't just say nothing when asked about it and she answered well by going down a generic route!



purseinsanity said:


> I have a similar experience to the Lord Lieutenant.  My children are mixed race.  My in laws are New England WASPs...about as WASPy as you can get.  I was nervous before I met them the first time because no one in their family had ever married a different race or religion, so I wasn't sure what to expect.  My fears were unfounded, because they were the most wonderful people ever.  I've only come to love them more and more the last 25 years I've been with my husband.  Every time I was pregnant, ALL of my relatives would wonder (his family AND mine) who the child would look like.  Having darker features and knowing that usually darker is more dominant, we all assumed they'd lean more towards me.  My MIL especially (the same one who would lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a dark tan) was so excited at the thought of having brown grandchildren.  I think she was actually somewhat disappointed they came out looking nothing like me and practically whiter than my husband (didn't think that was possible! ).  She would often ask me if I thought they'd tan easily or if their eyes might darken as they grew out of babyhood.  They didn't, but that didn't mean she loved them any less.  Never once did I think anyone asking me how dark my baby's skin might be was a racist innuendo.
> 
> I know not everyone is as lucky as I am.


There was a radio phone-in the day after the interview was aired in the UK, there was a POC who called in and said that he had a large extended mixed race family and they discussed unborn "babies' skin tones all the time". He said "it was not racist"!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> We regulars are friends. We like each other. We help each other.  We unabashedly and unashamedly have relied on TPF to get us through the pandemic.  Shockingly (?) H&M have given us plenty of food for discussion. When they really step back, darlin‘, we will too.
> 
> Have a cuppa and enjoy. Or not, it’s all good.
> 
> ETA: for the newbies, I’ve been told we get Birkin/Kelly points for using _vitriolic_ in our posts


Ok but how many times do I have to say vitriolic before I can get that ‘market’ bag that looks like a milk churn?


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> But there is so much of this vibe around these days! Most public conversation of seemingly all the ‘free’ world seems to reek of earnest second year undergrad uni tutorial!



I'd pitch prep for foundation year, coz they obviously haven't read any theory yet


----------



## chicinthecity777

I hate to say it but tabloids seem to do more research than some mainstream media these days.

*DOESN'T ADD UP **Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoyed 13 holidays despite saying her passport was taken away*








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoyed 13 holidays despite saying her passport was taken away
					

MEGHAN had at least 13 foreign holidays after being welcomed into the royal fold — despite telling Oprah Winfrey her passport was taken away. The Queen is currently heading a family investigation i…



					www.the-sun.com


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Thank you for providing the actual wording of what was said. I have seen several click-bait headlines, made it sound like the president personally came out and supported MM! I was thinking it would be very wrong to get involved in this from a official government's standing point. Glad to read this was not the case. I think her response was a diplomatic one. She couldn't just say nothing when asked about it and she answered well by going down a generic route!



I think it would have been more prudent for WH reps to just say 'no comment'. Any (other) response was going to elicit provoking headlines.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Moreover, families are often all too aware of a relative’s health problems. But even the most supportive family can’t make them go away. To imply it’s their fault they ‘didn’t do something’ is just ludicrous. The patient has to go for treatment- she can’t even take responsibility for her own health & she’s meant to be a role model?



Also, she was well capable of dismissing the Queen's gynaecologists and putting together her own birth team. I'm not buying she couldn't book a shrink. Hell, you can book anonymous online appointments!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think it would have been more prudent for WH reps to just say 'no comment'. Any (other) response was going to elicit provoking headlines.



This.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I think it would have been more prudent for WH reps to just say 'no comment'. Any (other) response was going to elicit provoking headlines.


It's the U.S. president's office, because all U.S. media is supporting this, it's not unreasonable for them to think the U.S. people (read U.S. media) would want to hear a comment.


----------



## doni

purseinsanity said:


> I have a similar experience to the Lord Lieutenant.  My children are mixed race.  My in laws are New England WASPs...about as WASPy as you can get.  I was nervous before I met them the first time because no one in their family had ever married a different race or religion, so I wasn't sure what to expect.  My fears were unfounded, because they were the most wonderful people ever.  I've only come to love them more and more the last 25 years I've been with my husband.  Every time I was pregnant, ALL of my relatives would wonder (his family AND mine) who the child would look like.  Having darker features and knowing that usually darker is more dominant, we all assumed they'd lean more towards me.  My MIL especially (the same one who would lie out in the sun baked in baby oil to get a dark tan) was so excited at the thought of having brown grandchildren.  I think she was actually somewhat disappointed they came out looking nothing like me and practically whiter than my husband (didn't think that was possible! ).  She would often ask me if I thought they'd tan easily or if their eyes might darken as they grew out of babyhood.  They didn't, but that didn't mean she loved them any less.  Never once did I think anyone asking me how dark my baby's skin might be was a racist innuendo.
> 
> I know not everyone is as lucky as I am.


What an uplifting story. You are lucky that you are in a family environment where you all feel loved and confortable with each other. It is a blessing.

I am not in a mix race situation, but my DH family, that I also adore, are all fair-skin blue-eyed
stereotypical Germans. I am Spanish and my inlaws were SO disappointed when my first child was born with blue eyes . Thankfully the second one behaved and came out all olive skin and caramel eyes.

We cannot know the meaning or intention of "the person" who made the comment in the Royal Family, but if Meghan perceived it as racist then I assume it was.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, she was well capable of dismissing the Queen's gynaecologists and putting together her own birth team. I'm not buying she couldn't book a shrink. Hell, you can book anonymous online appointments!


Yes it’s actually cruel if you ask me.

If you have a health problem and whether you are either getting treatment or you are not it is just manipulative to turn on a relative (or an employee depending on which story she’s using) and say ‘your reaction and behaviour is the reason I’m not getting better. You aren’t doing enough to help me.’

Aren’t threats like ‘I’m unhappy because you aren’t treating me right’ , ‘why don’t you see you are wrong?’ and ‘Ill kill myself if you dont do x y and z’ - very common signs of an abusive relationship?


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's the U.S. president's office, because all U.S. media is supporting this, it's not unreasonable for them to think the U.S. people (read U.S. media) would want to hear a comment.



Media be damned, this is Head of State stuff. 

Unless the US is giving H&M official recognition as refugees/defectors, fleeing from being "trapped" from some merciless and terrifying regime, they should not get involved at all. All accusations were directly fired towards our Head of State (QEII and the Crown).  Now they've made a stupid, vapid entertainment interview into a political incident.


----------



## mdcx

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes it’s actually cruel if you ask me.
> 
> If you have a health problem and whether you are either getting treatment or you are not it is just manipulative to turn on a relative (or an employee depending on which story she’s using) and say ‘your reaction and behaviour is the reason I’m not getting better. You aren’t doing enough to help me.’
> 
> Aren’t threats like ‘I’m unhappy because you aren’t treating me right’ , ‘why don’t you see you are wrong?’ and ‘Ill kill myself if you dont do x y and z’ - very common signs of an abusive relationship?


To be frank, I suspect Diana operated like this, and at some level Harry may think it is normal.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Media be damned, this is Head of State stuff.
> 
> Unless the US is giving H&M official recognition as refugees/defectors, fleeing from being "trapped" from some merciless and terrifying regime, they should not get involved at all. All accusations were directly fired towards our Head of State (QEII and the Crown).  Now they've made a stupid, vapid entertainment interview into a political incident.


That's politiks for you!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> To be frank, I suspect Diana operated like this, and at some level Harry may think it is normal.



I'm too young to have grasped the whole Diana drama, but yeah...didn't she blame Charles for her bulemia? Sorry Di, while Charles surely wasn't Prince Charming that's just unfair and wrong.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not the world's most business-savvy person, but I was thinking...let's pretend for a moment we buy Meg's sob stories and the poor thing was horribly abused in her golden cage.

Wouldn't you still not touch her with a ten-foot pole only because of the freaking drama she stirs up wherever she goes? I prefer to hire and work for people who are dramafree and professional and don't feel the need to overshare. And she just doesn't have that much to offer. You might be willing to take the crazy from someone absolutely brilliant, but Meghan just...isn't.


----------



## gelbergirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not the world's most business-savvy person, but I was thinking...let's pretend for a moment we buy Meg's sob stories and the poor thing was horribly abused in her golden cage.
> 
> Wouldn't you still not touch her with a ten-foot pole only because of the freaking drama she stirs up wherever she goes? I prefer to hire and work for people who are dramafree and professional and don't feel the need to overshare. And she just doesn't have that much to offer. You might be willing to take the crazy from someone absolutely brilliant, but Meghan just...isn't.



MM's all about drama and chaos.
No wonder JCMH needs 14 rooms to make himself scarce.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titling "She is not quite as naive as she'd like to portray herself". Well.


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> Let's face it. The interview was full of "creative activations" hoping all gullible raindrops would believe the crap that came out of their  mouths. The couple that promotes "compassion"? I'm not saying the BRF walks on water by a stretch. But when Harry said he was trapped but didn't know it until Meghan came along reminded me of how people get sucked into cults, go to Jonestown and drink the Kool-Aid. I'm so tired of MM trying to pass herself off as some extremely young and naive person who had no idea what she was getting into. People twist themselves into pretzel knots coming to her defense. For the first two years--the dating and early marriage time--she absolutely loved it all. She isn't that good of an actor to fake THAT. Then the "boo-hoo poor me" crap started. It's clear she enjoys blowing up relationships--how much of a history do you need? Now she's 40 and bawling to Oprah. She's got Harry where she wants him, when he said everyone back home is trapped also, how can he ever go back to those trapped people? When Philip dies, I don't know how they can even show their faces at the funeral. They won't go because they know they burned the bridge big time and they'd be mocked by the public. They'll feed us a line of sh*t that they were told "by someone in the institution" that they were not welcome and to stay home, when they REALLY WANTED to pay respects. You KNOW that's coming. And it'll be because of RACISM and the BRF is so MEAN!  See!! They TOLD us so! What have they got to lose? They already spewed enough bombshells, what's a few more?


Great post.


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's politiks for you!



Remember the pres and his wife were very friendly with Hazz back in the day, mostly due to the military connections.  Just a guess, but seems likely they met while the flotus was in Cali on Tuesday. Time will tell. Hidden agendas everywhere.

ETA:  There ya have it. Polished, polite, to the point. End of? 
Between the lines, he may have said something like “I‘ve been dealing with 3 children during lockdown. I can easily handle 2 more.”








						Kate and William head out on first official engagement since Oprah
					

The couple were seen being driven in London today. They are said to be deeply upset by the way they were attacked by the Sussexes, with Meghan accusing Kate of making her cry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

And boom:








						Prince William denies allegations of royal bigotry, saying “we’re very much not a racist family.”
					

Prince William denies allegations of royal bigotry, saying “we’re very much not a racist family.”




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gossip and garbage.  The pushback is fierce:


----------



## limom

I hope for the Sussex that their deals come thru. Imo, they gambled that the US public will firmly be on their side and completely dismissed the British pop.
Time will tell.








						Home Page
					

Weekly magazine featuring the best British journalists, authors, critics and cartoonists, since 1828




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

Are these two American citizens?  British subjects?  Archie dual citizenship?


----------



## mdcx

I am quite shocked that William publicly said we are not a racist family. For him to make such a personal comment indicates that he is both deeply hurt and deeply angry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> I hope for the Sussex that their deals come thru. Imo, they gambled that the US public will firmly be on their side and completely dismissed the British pop.
> Time will tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home Page
> 
> 
> Weekly magazine featuring the best British journalists, authors, critics and cartoonists, since 1828
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk



Some here will take their side. Most will not. They want to be invited to the coronation, etc. 
H&M were unbelievably unprofessional. The public interview smacks at our sense of manners and work ethics. 
 Not cool. at all.  Keep it private.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not the world's most business-savvy person, but I was thinking...let's pretend for a moment we buy Meg's sob stories and the poor thing was horribly abused in her golden cage.
> 
> Wouldn't you still not touch her with a ten-foot pole only because of the freaking drama she stirs up wherever she goes? I prefer to hire and work for people who are dramafree and professional and don't feel the need to overshare. And she just doesn't have that much to offer. You might be willing to take the crazy from someone absolutely brilliant, but Meghan just...isn't.


That’s an interesting point. The ‘tortured genius’ trope is very commonly used about creative people so I can only assume she’s trying to convince us she’s the next Orson Welles.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gossip and garbage.  The pushback is fierce:



Is this Bill Murray’s secret double life? He looks just like him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Is this Bill Murray’s secret double life? He looks just like him.



No idea what his background is, but he makes a strong point. You’re right, I do see some Bill Murray.
Wonder if other royals will issue similar statements.


----------



## limom

gelbergirl said:


> Are these two American citizens?  British subjects?  Archie dual citizenship?


She is American and Archie is potentially dual.
In regard to her children being titled, can one be American and be a Prince in another country?
M is so childish and superficial. On what planet does a forty years old woman compare herself to the little mermaid?
Kudos to Oprah for not laughing at her face. Maybe, the Duchess is legitimately mentally illl.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> I think it's more than blame and shame. It is to manipulate people to her advantage. She probably tried a little trick at beginning, find it successful, then paved the road with shells to be later trigered for her Hollywood success. It's H who is trapped. Later when he benefits her no more and discarded, nothing he says will be credible: He is white and priviledged so of course he is the oppressor. Right now she is peppering the field with shells to cement her future success.


Yeah I was just thinking that. Those previous ‘incidents’ of his with the racial slurs and the nazi outfit will suddenly come to her attention when she’s done with him.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> I keep coming back to how there's always multiple ways to tell the same story. I thought Meghan was authentic in what she said (as in not lying per se) but the way she divulged each story seemed a little too disinterested in objectivity. I get it, it's her tell-all so she's going to tell her side but she could've been more responsible knowing that it is just a one-sided story. I think she did this well with the Kate thing, like she insisted Kate did everything right and was a good person and wasn't allowed to interfere with the media reports herself, and had the good sense not to reveal more of the private dispute. But here's how I would've handled some of the other claims:
> 
> Meghan: There were discussions about 'how dark is this baby going to be'.
> Better: There has never been a black woman or other WOC in this family, so I did encounter the occasional ignorance in how to properly address issues of race, colorism, etc. Was it malicious? I don't know, I'd like to think not as everyone in the family welcomed me warmly and I have no reason to believe otherwise. It was lonely though not to have anyone around who I could relate to, culturally, and the translation between cultures wore me down.
> 
> Meghan: I asked someone for help and they said no, it's going to reflect badly on the family.
> Better: I was really struggling... but given how public and highly scrutinized all our lives were, there were fears that there could be disastrous leaks. It was a really difficult position, but I appreciate that everyone had a job to do there and they felt this would be in my best interest at the end of the day. I don't blame them for following their protocols as they're trained to do, but it just wasn't an environment that I could thrive in.


I think that those two are overly  sensitive and make mountains of mole hills.
Plus they are incredibly vindictive, childish.
 Why would they do such an incredibly hurtful interview?
My truth, my truth .. How about the good of the family?
imho, they are short sighted and self involved. In short, they suck.


----------



## limom

Jktgal said:


> I think it's more than blame and shame. It is to manipulate people to her advantage. She probably tried a little trick at beginning, find it successful, then paved the road with shells to be later trigered for her Hollywood success. It's H who is trapped. Later when he benefits her no more and discarded, nothing he says will be credible: He is white and priviledged so of course he is the oppressor. Right now she is peppering the field with shells to cement her future success.


The divorce is going to be insane!!!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> I hope for the Sussex that their deals come thru. Imo, they gambled that the US public will firmly be on their side and completely dismissed the British pop.
> Time will tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home Page
> 
> 
> Weekly magazine featuring the best British journalists, authors, critics and cartoonists, since 1828
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


Word of caution for anybody who is thinking about booking them for future projects - if MM doesn't get her way, she's going to go to Oprah to trash you! Do you really want to work with that???


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was Armani thinking?


That “a fool and his money are soon parted”?


----------



## jelliedfeels

A while back a poster asked about the racist articles and now I can’t find it.
this is one list I found:








						Yes, the UK media’s coverage of Meghan Markle really is racist
					

The UK press’s continued denial of racism just shows how entrenched these attitudes are.




					www.google.co.uk


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok but how many times do I have to say vitriolic before I can get that ‘market’ bag that looks like a milk churn?


Ouch but  If that's what it takes, I'll never say or use vitriolic again


----------



## mdcx

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I was just thinking that. Those previous ‘incidents’ of his with the racial slurs and the nazi outfit will suddenly come to her attention when she’s done with him.


Meghan has a dossier of dirt on Harry ready to go, I’m fairly certain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not the world's most business-savvy person, but I was thinking...let's pretend for a moment we buy Meg's sob stories and the poor thing was horribly abused in her golden cage.
> 
> Wouldn't you still not touch her with a ten-foot pole only because of the freaking drama she stirs up wherever she goes? I prefer to hire and work for people who are dramafree and professional and don't feel the need to overshare. And she just doesn't have that much to offer. You might be willing to take the crazy from someone absolutely brilliant, but Meghan just...isn't.



It's like that friend that slags every other friend s/he's ever had and you think "OK, when's it my turn?" or "I wonder what s/he says about me when I'm not around?".


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s an interesting point. The ‘tortured genius’ trope is very commonly used about creative people so I can only assume she’s trying to convince us she’s the next *Orson Welles.*



I didn't realise he did calligraphy


----------



## floatinglili

Unherd website is on fire with articles about this silly pair lol 
- article by Giles Fraser
*Prince Harry is a Freudian dream*








						Prince Harry is a Freudian dream - UnHerd
					

It's hardly surprising that the Royal Family has its own Oedipus complex




					unherd.com


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok but how many times do I have to say vitriolic before I can get that ‘market’ bag that looks like a milk churn?



I hate to think what you think of the wicker Kelly Picnic! 

Nice bag for M though, status symbol made of straw


----------



## Kansashalo

jelliedfeels said:


> A while back a poster asked about the racist articles and now I can’t find it.
> this is one list I found:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the UK media’s coverage of Meghan Markle really is racist
> 
> 
> The UK press’s continued denial of racism just shows how entrenched these attitudes are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.co.uk


 I know Buzzfeed did analysis too.  This article resurfaced before the interview with Oprah









						Here Are 20 Headlines Comparing Meghan Markle To Kate Middleton That Might Show Why She And Prince Harry Are Cutting Off Royal Reporters
					

Over the years, Meghan has been shamed for the same things for which her sister-in-law, Kate, has been praised.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> The divorce is going to be insane!!!!



BOOM!


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm too young to have grasped the whole Diana drama, but yeah...didn't she blame Charles for her bulemia? Sorry Di, while Charles surely wasn't Prince Charming that's just unfair and wrong.



Not to diminish bulimia, but I read that Diana suffered with it well before she met/married PC.


----------



## artax two

floatinglili said:


> This is brilliant.
> I’m not sure I should be even commenting on this thread lol - I haven’t watched the OW interview!!! This excerpt is the closest I have gotten haha


Hahahahha that's a hilarious edit!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lulilu said:


> Not to diminish bulimia, but I read that Diana suffered with it well before she met/married PC.


I read somewhere that Charles apparently felt he was wronged for not being told about it before the marriage. I can understand that, bulimia is a hell of a condition for the sufferers _and_ those around them. 

I can't keep up with this thread! I just click likes incessantly as fast as I can


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’ve had to skip so many pages! 

I want this news cycle to die.


----------



## bubablu

mdcx said:


> I am quite shocked that William publicly said we are not a racist family. For him to make such a personal comment indicates that he is both deeply hurt and deeply angry.


Sure, but I can't concentrate on his words, KATE HAS A NEW PINK COAT. (Sorry, but I love her coats)








						Kate and William head out on first official engagement since Oprah
					

The couple were seen being driven in London today. They are said to be deeply upset by the way they were attacked by the Sussexes, with Meghan accusing Kate of making her cry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## doni

mdcx said:


> I am quite shocked that William publicly said we are not a racist family. For him to make such a personal comment indicates that he is both deeply hurt and deeply angry.


I would as well, specially if in the past I had had to deal with the reputational damage caused by the racist behaviour of the younger sibling who is now throwing shade.
And yes, Harry did apologize when instances of that racist behaviour surfaced (I wonder just how many didn’t?), he did say that dressing as a nazi was “_a poor choice of costume_” and that calling a fellow soldier a paki was meant as a “_nickname for someone who was popular_” and that calling someone a raghead was done “_without malice_”. Funny how someone who was so nonchalant about offending normal pebleyan people and who so readily accepted everyone’s indulgence is suddenly so righteous.


----------



## floatinglili

Can you imagine being a young girl stuck with Charles and Camilla though - puts Me-Me-Me in the shade. Diana seemed a lot more committed to the project of the royal family. I feel she tried her best to do what was expected of her, before those last ‘loose cannon’ years. MM seems to have barely clipped her ticket before running away.


----------



## JY89

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The more pressing question is, why would Harry go along with this. She's been known to lie when she opens her mouth, he not so much, he just had people clean up after him after he was being his usual self.



Well, what can we say? I guess it’s true that love is blind


----------



## drifter

Wonder if MM's twitter army is attacking this thread.  Anyways.  It was a bit sad that Piers had to resign although he could have worded his opinions better.  I mean, why is it that someone who questioned the validity of hearsay has to leave?  Why is it that a white man's criticism of a mixed race woman is immediately construed as racism?  Sigh.  By the way, questions about skin colour is commonplace in other places of the world and rarely interpreted as racism.  It's not unusual for relatives to wonder about a baby's skin colour even they're all of the same race.  And even within the same race, some people are dark and some are fair.  My parents are both ethnic Chinese but my father is really dark and my mother is extremely fair.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

limom said:


> She is American and Archie is potentially dual.
> In regard to her children being titled, can one be American and be a Prince in another country?
> M is so childish and superficial. On what planet does a forty years old woman compare herself to the little mermaid?
> Kudos to Oprah for not laughing at her face. Maybe, the Duchess is legitimately mentally illl.



The little mermaid gave her voice away willingly in exchange for a pair of legs, she stroke a faustian bargain so to speak
Has MM actually read the story?
She does have a point re: treatment by the tabloids, didn’t one published a horrid pic of her and JCMH holding a baby chimp as their baby? That was infantile racism at its lowest


----------



## artax two

lalame said:


> Whether she intended to or not, a lot of what she said was designed to blame and shame. She's clearly still hurt. Whenever you hear such a one-sided account, where there's no acknowledgment of what the OTHER side may have been intending or thinking, it does make you question the objectivity and veracity of what you're hearing. Ok, no more word salad from me on this issue.


Well yes, her words drip with vindictiveness. She must be so full of rage and bitterness because her tantrums didn't get her anywhere. And she can't even see how dumb and bitter she sounds and is making Harry sound. That's the sad thing. She needs to learn humility and resilience, and she needs some perspective, and it SHOWS.

Many people screw up great things in their lives in their 30's, because that is when things get serious (career choices, family choices, etc). At this age, some people have no idea how to cope with the fear of the unknown, making huge decisions that affect not only their own lives but the lives of those they love as well. There is a lot of choice and opportunity _for everyone_ in the world nowadays, but yet, nobody has a crystal ball. I think she has panicked in the face of challenges she didn't expect, because she had no idea how to cope, so she defaulted to the only thing she knows- to brush it off as everyone else being meanies.

One day she is going to look back on all of this and cringe so hard at the opportunity she had and ruined, and realize that had she picked her battles better, she could have been one of the most loved respected people in all of history- and for the best reasons, not for this garbage she has chosen.


----------



## bisousx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not the world's most business-savvy person, but I was thinking...let's pretend for a moment we buy Meg's sob stories and the poor thing was horribly abused in her golden cage.
> 
> Wouldn't you still not touch her with a ten-foot pole only because of the freaking drama she stirs up wherever she goes? I prefer to hire and work for people who are dramafree and professional and don't feel the need to overshare. And she just doesn't have that much to offer. You might be willing to take the crazy from someone absolutely brilliant, but Meghan just...isn't.



My thoughts exactly. I have to interact with the general public for my business, and while the vast majority of people are “good”, there’s quite a few who will annoy and disrespect you (about 5%, I’d say) That sector, you’ll be annoyed with, but won’t lose sleep over. What you need to be careful of is the 1% that will latch onto you, make you a target, threaten lawsuits, stalk your personal social media accounts, pull out every victim card in the book. I don’t need to count all of MM’s lawsuits/threats and over the top behavior to decide what type of person she is. Most of the time when I read about MM’s stories, I’m just damn glad that I’m not Kate or someone else that’s a target of this kind of person.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> That person may not even exist.
> 
> If s/he does, I'd like to know who it was. ATM everyone and anyone besides QEII and PP are implicated.


Agree person may not know ... It has happened to me ...
Remark made that I did not know was going to be taken in the way it was, for which I would have apologized but was never told that my remark was a problem
OR sometimes it is what you dont say that gets you in trouble ... you fail to support someone ...
OR it used to be fine to say something, but times have changed and no one told me - things change FAST these days
OR .... many other possibilities

The point is I did not know


----------



## elvisfan4life

drifter said:


> Wonder if MM's twitter army is attacking this thread.  Anyways.  It was a bit sad that Piers had to resign although he could have worded his opinions better.  I mean, why is it that someone who questioned the validity of hearsay has to leave?  Why is it that a white man's criticism of a mixed race woman is immediately construed as racism?  Sigh.  By the way, questions about skin colour is commonplace in other places of the world and rarely interpreted as racism.  It's not unusual for relatives to wonder about a baby's skin colour even they're all of the same race.  And even within the same race, some people are dark and some are fair.  My parents are both ethnic Chinese but my father is really dark and my mother is extremely fair.



I agree with you about the influx of vocal new posters with only one opinion my ignore button is red hot n smoking


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gossip and garbage.  The pushback is fierce:




Tell it like it is, YIH.


----------



## bisousx

floatinglili said:


> Can you imagine being a young girl stuck with Charles and Camilla though - puts Me-Me-Me in the shade. Diana seemed a lot more committed to the project of the royal family. I feel she tried her best to do what was expected of her, before those last ‘loose cannon’ years. MM seems to have barely clipped her ticket before running away.



It’s a sign of the times. No one wants to work for anything, pay for their loans and everyone wants free stuff and handouts. Well, not everyone, but it certainly seems like the trending thought among the younger generation. Who wouldn’t want to be royalty for 18 months then move onto a mansion and make million dollar deals? It’s a horrible example for younger people.


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> Not to diminish bulimia, but I read that Diana suffered with it well before she met/married PC.


Per the Morton book - dictated by Diana
Her bulimia started after the engagement
BUT an older sister of hers also suffered from bulimia when the sister dated Charles

IMHO, the press often got the sisters confused in the 1980s, it was not like now when you can Google everything


----------



## limom

pukasonqo said:


> The little mermaid gave her voice away willingly in exchange for a pair of legs, she stroke a faustian bargain so to speak
> Has MM actually read the story?
> She does have a point re: treatment by the tabloids, didn’t one published a horrid pic of her and JCMH holding a baby chimp as their baby? That was infantile racism at its lowest


This was beyond the pale. The person was swiftly fired by the BBC.








						BBC fires presenter for tweeting racist pic comparing Meghan Markle and Harry's baby boy to monkey
					

After the Royal baby’s birth, a BBC Radio 5 Live presenter, Danny Baker, took to Twitter to post a racist black and white picture of a man and woman walking out of a hospital with the caption, “Royal baby leaves hospital.”




					www.indiatoday.in


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not the world's most business-savvy person, but I was thinking...let's pretend for a moment we buy Meg's sob stories and the poor thing was horribly abused in her golden cage.
> 
> Wouldn't you still not touch her with a ten-foot pole only because of the freaking drama she stirs up wherever she goes? I prefer to hire and work for people who are dramafree and professional and don't feel the need to overshare. And she just doesn't have that much to offer. You might be willing to take the crazy from someone absolutely brilliant, but Meghan just...isn't.


Yes,  a lot of sturm and drang,  People who seem to exaggerate their probs for sympathy
I have been trying to put my finger on the terminology, HISTRIONICS maybe, perhaps DIVA is a better term, BRIDEZILLA is pertinent to the period prior to the wedding

Ex there seem to have been 2 separate tiara incidents - a lot of angst - M wanted to wear the emeralds reserved for her buddy Eugenie, then hassling Angela Kelly when another tiara could not be gotten out of the vault ASAP
2 SEPARATE tiara issues though it took a long time to figure that out ... more sturm and drang has come out over time


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> No idea what his background is, but he makes a strong point. You’re right, I do see some Bill Murray.
> Wonder if other royals will issue similar statements.



Karl? He's the head of the Habsburg family of Austria and grandson of Austria's last emperor and Hungary's last king. He'd be both had Austria not abolished its monarchy.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Gotta try and get those numbers up for the TV event of the century



They’ve got to get their $9 million back.


----------



## artax two

chicinthecity777 said:


> Word of caution for anybody who is thinking about booking them for future projects - if MM doesn't get her way, she's going to go to Oprah to trash you! Do you really want to work with that???


Yes, this is the mistake she is making right now. Not thinking ahead and making good PR decisions for her and her family.


----------



## chicinthecity777

pukasonqo said:


> The little mermaid gave her voice away willingly in exchange for a pair of legs, she stroke a faustian bargain so to speak
> Has MM actually read the story?
> She does have a point re: treatment by the tabloids, didn’t one published a horrid pic of her and JCMH holding a baby chimp as their baby? That was infantile racism at its lowest


It was the BBC, not a tabloid, and the guy got fired immediately!


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Yes,  a lot of sturm and drang,  People who seem to exaggerate their probs for sympathy
> I have been trying to put my finger on the terminology, HISTRIONICS maybe, perhaps DIVA is a better term, BRIDEZILLA is pertinent to the period prior to the wedding
> 
> Ex there seem to have been 2 separate tiara incidents - M wanted to wear the emeralds reserved for her buddy Eugenie, then hassling Angela Kelly when another tiara could not be gotten out of the vault ASAP
> 2 SEPARATE tiara issues though it took a long time to figure that out ...


And let’s not forget that Oprah most likely selected the most controversial part of the interview, imho.
And once again, buy your own freaking Tiara. So much entitlement.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

bisousx said:


> It’s a sign of the times. No one wants to work for anything, pay for their loans and everyone wants free stuff and handouts. Well, not everyone, but it certainly seems like the trending thought among the younger generation. Who wouldn’t want to be royalty for 18 months then move onto a mansion and make million dollar deals? It’s a horrible example for younger people.


No incentive to work when playing victims pays so much!


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> She is American and Archie is potentially dual.
> In regard to her children being titled, can one be American and be a Prince in another country?
> M is so childish and superficial. On what planet does a forty years old woman compare herself to the little mermaid?
> Kudos to Oprah for not laughing at her face. Maybe, the Duchess is legitimately mentally illl.


MM said she was suicidal and seemed to imply things are FINE now
Oprah did not pursue they subject of how she recovered and where she stands now, what did she do? How did she snap out of it ? 

Yoga, diet are fine answers maybe knowing that would help others. Ex Gwyneth is still suffering after effects of COVID and has detailed her diet and exercise approach to the chronic fatigue


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I think it would have been more prudent for WH reps to just say 'no comment'. Any (other) response was going to elicit provoking headlines.



With our press anything less than full support would’ve been interpreted as a negative comment.


----------



## Chanbal

He must be very hurt. I believe him!  

"_An impassioned Prince William today publicly hit back against Harry and Meghan's racism claims, insisting, 'We're very much not a racist family'. 

The Duke of Cambridge is the first royal to personally respond to the allegation during his first royal engagement since the Oprah interview, as he also revealed that he has not spoken to his brother since it came out but 'will do'. 

Meghan's claim that an unnamed royal raised concerns about Archie being 'too brown' was the most damaging allegation to come out of the broadcast, and caused untold damage to the Windsors' reputation around the world._
.....
*The decision to publicly respond to personal allegations is unprecedented for a senior royal, say experts, and is an indication of the strength of feeling in the royal household about the attacks directed at them.* "









						Kate and William head out on first official engagement since Oprah
					

The couple were seen being driven in London today. They are said to be deeply upset by the way they were attacked by the Sussexes, with Meghan accusing Kate of making her cry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> MM said she was suicidal and seemed to imply things are FINE now
> Oprah did not pursue they subject of how she recovered and where she stands now, what did she do? How did she snap out of it ?
> 
> Yoga, diet are fine answers maybe knowing that would help others. Ex Gwyneth is still suffering after effects of COVID and has detailed her diet and exercise approach to the chronic fatigue


Imho, she was severely homesick and isolated. 
Oprah did not buy the story either.


----------



## 1LV

limom said:


> This was beyond the pale. The person was swiftly fired by the BBC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC fires presenter for tweeting racist pic comparing Meghan Markle and Harry's baby boy to monkey
> 
> 
> After the Royal baby’s birth, a BBC Radio 5 Live presenter, Danny Baker, took to Twitter to post a racist black and white picture of a man and woman walking out of a hospital with the caption, “Royal baby leaves hospital.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indiatoday.in


Danny Baker #Lowlife


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> With our press anything less than full support would’ve been interpreted as a negative comment.


What is he going to say?
yes, I am a racist.
Such an impossible position to be in.
Otoh, racists do not readily admit to their fault ime.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Meghan has a dossier of dirt on Harry ready to go, I’m fairly certain.



 I am sure she does. But I don’t know that she’ll let him go. She’s never going to find a weaker famous man to boss around.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was the BBC, not a tabloid, and the guy got fired immediately!



It wasn't the BBC, was it? The guy was working for the BBC and tweeted it out on his private Twitter, then got swiftly sacked (rightfully so).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> And once again, buy your own freaking Tiara. So much entitlement.



Where's she going to wear it, while tending to her chickens?


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I am sure she does. But I don’t know that she’ll let him go. She’s never going to find a weaker famous man to boss around.


She eliminated everyone, her family, her friends and her ex husbands. 
He is bound to be gone imho. Us against the world gets old after a while, imho.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> What is he going to say?
> yes, I am a racist.
> Such an impossible position to be in.
> Otoh, racists do not readily admit to their fault ime.



I think they were referring to the US president's press secretary commenting on the interview, not William.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Meghan Markle isn't getting the Princess Diana treatment









						Meghan Markle isn't getting the Princess Diana treatment
					

If Princess Diana had retained her security detail provided by the palace, she would likely be alive today. Instead, her bodyguard, employed by her boyfriend's father, Mohamed al Fayed, allowed her to ride without a seat belt in a car driven by a man intoxicated at more than 3 times the legal limit.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




If Princess Diana had retained her security detail provided by the palace, she would likely be alive today. Instead, her bodyguard, employed by her boyfriend's father, Mohamed al Fayed, allowed her to ride without a seat belt in a car driven by a man intoxicated at more than 3 times the legal limit.

Royal security would have never allowed Diana into the situation that ultimately killed her, but given her paranoia that her palace-provided detail was spying on her for the Firm, the princess refused royal protection officers after her divorce from Prince Charles.

The similarities between the situations of Diana and Meghan Markle end there. Markle is not receiving remotely the same treatment that Diana suffered a quarter century ago, and Prince Harry's insistence otherwise is a gross abuse of his mother's legacy.

"My biggest concern was history repeating itself," Harry told Oprah of Markle's supposed struggles with the royal life. "I've said that before on numerous occasions, very publicly. And what I was seeing was history repeating itself, but perhaps, or definitely, far more dangerous because then you add race in, and you add social media in. And when I talk about history repeating itself, I'm talking about my mother."

It goes without saying that Diana didn't have to deal with the toxic wasteland of contemporary social media, and yes, Markle has been subjected to unacceptable racism by its dregs. But at the hands of the royal family, she received treatment orders of magnitude better than what Diana suffered and most likely because of how badly Diana suffered from it.

Consider, Charles went through so many women that Diana, then the virginal teenage daughter of an earl whose pedigree rivaled the queen's own, was essentially the only eligible bachelorette left in England. The only person who believed the royal romance was real was Diana herself. Only once their marriage was a done deal did Diana realize that not only was Charles not in love with her but that he was actually in love with Camilla Parker Bowles, who was then married to another man.

Contrary to the Netflix series The Crown, Charles did actually attempt to be faithful to Diana at the beginning of their marriage. But once she had secured Britain its heir and a spare, Charles turned back to Parker Bowles, and the queen's response was essentially to tell Diana to deal with it.

In short, the palace recruited a 19-year-old virgin to marry a man in love with another woman because he had slept with so many women that said virgin was the only real candidate remaining. And instead of forcing Charles to give up his Camilla habit, the palace covered for his affair. Only once their marital woes spilled into national news in the form of leaked phone calls, multiple damning interviews, and Diana secretly sourcing Andrew Morton's biography on her did the queen and Prince Philip allow the two to divorce finally.

Compare that to Markle, for whom the queen broke a plethora of traditions to include her in the family. She allowed Markle to join the family's Christmas celebrations before her wedding, a privilege not even Kate Middleton was given. Given Markle's messy relationship with her father, the palace broke the tradition of gifting a new coat of arms for the father of a bride marrying into the royal family and instead granted it solely to Markle. The queen also allowed her, a divorcee, to have a church wedding, an allowance she didn't extend to Charles and Parker Bowles. They eventually married in a civil service that the queen refused to attend.

From dress codes to the queen's ban on garlic, Meghan was allowed to break every rule in the book without reproach. All she had to do was her literal job.

Instead, in pursuit of "space" and privacy, she and Harry decided to quit their jobs and become full-time celebrities because somehow, the cutthroat Los Angeles media, protected by the First Amendment, is supposed to be less invasive than the tightly regulated British media that often bows down to the palace.

Even after divorcing Charles, Diana continued to work in her formal capacity as a royal and retained six of her royal patronages. She maintained her Kensington Palace apartments and earned an annual salary on top of her divorce settlement.

Markle and Harry wanted all of this and more — for not working.

Contrary to the fairy tale Markle evidently believed, being a royal is an actual job. In 2019, Princess Anne attended 506 total engagements over the course of 165 workdays. Charles worked 521 engagements over 125 total days. Compare that to Markle, who worked just 31 days. Now, she doesn't work at all.

Still, she didn't just complain about losing her salary. Harry and Markle complained that the palace wouldn't pay for their security, a perk Diana didn't keep even as she continued her work as a royal and one of the most onerous costs paid by taxpayers for the royals. Their whines are even more audacious when you consider that the two blamed their exit on their desire to become financially independent!

Maybe the palace complaints about her were secretly motivated by racism. But then, why would the person who filed the harassment complaint against her in 2018 be the same one who authored the statement emphatically defending her from racist and sexist coverage while she and Harry were still dating? It's possible that the palace did deny her access to mental health treatment, but both Harry and Diana received ample therapy with support from the royal family. And really, we're supposed to believe that a royal was dumb enough to fret publicly over the skin tone of Markle's future children, who would be three-quarters white?

Queen Elizabeth turns 95 next month, and the even older Philip remains hospitalized. Prince Andrew is under official investigation for his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking, and Charles and Camilla's already weak approval ratings haven't been helped by The Crown rehashing their abysmal treatment of the late princess of Wales. The future of the monarchy rests entirely upon Prince William and Middleton, the only royals whose public approval rivals that of the queen.

Harry and Meghan bring the palace nothing but trouble, and even after putting on the waterworks, the couple has still lost the war of public opinion. More than twice as many British adults polled by YouGov think the Oprah interview was inappropriate than those who found it appropriate. Only 12% report having "a lot" of sympathy for the couple. Markle wasn't treated like Diana, and the public certainly doesn't see her as the same. The palace is better off without her.


----------



## bisousx

Saw this on IG


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> MeToo.  Had my Mohs surgery in early summer, 2019. It took about 9 months to heal, then pandemic hit just as I was beginning to feel presentable. On the bright side, since I was already masking and wearing gloves,  it may have prevented me from getting COVID. It has been a wild 2 years. The good news about the pandemic is it has given me plenty of time to research skin care. Now, I not only feel like an expert on the BRF, but glass skin, K beauty, J beauty and scars. The learning never stops. Early on I found several bloggers who provide excellent tips and encouragement. We will get through this.
> 
> ETA: thank you @Chanbal for your candid post. Truly you are an inspiration.



Thank you @CarryOn2020, wishing you a full recovery. @purseinsanity all good, thank you! @poopsie didn't know about iodine, haha. Thank you all, I enjoy reading your very kind comments.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> This was beyond the pale. The person was swiftly fired by the BBC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC fires presenter for tweeting racist pic comparing Meghan Markle and Harry's baby boy to monkey
> 
> 
> After the Royal baby’s birth, a BBC Radio 5 Live presenter, Danny Baker, took to Twitter to post a racist black and white picture of a man and woman walking out of a hospital with the caption, “Royal baby leaves hospital.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indiatoday.in





QueenofWrapDress said:


> It wasn't the BBC, was it? The guy was working for the BBC and tweeted it out on his private Twitter, then got swiftly sacked (rightfully so).


An employee of the BBC. Yes.


----------



## floatinglili

Henceforth they shall be known as the Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. Or better yet  just plain ol’ Princes Harry. 
please
Please
PLEASE 
let it be so


----------



## JY89

As much as many would love to jump to her defence, can anyone explain what’s her true intentions of appearing in a tell-all interview? Making claims and “exposing” her husband family, insinuating hate towards the RF ( so much for compassion and kindness? ) 

Instead of speaking to a therapist or professional about her mental health, she went on national tv to speak to Oprah about it? Giving everyone the opportunity to provide their views on it or was she only expecting that everyone will be swayed by her playing victim on this? No doubt that she might be a victim to critics but she’s definitely no angel with the way she dealt with her issues with the RF publicly

Has she not considered the repercussions carefully before stuffing those millions into her pocket? Perhaps it’s a glorifying moment for her. But how about her husband and her kids who will have to live with this for the rest of their life- when she claimed that she wanted to give them a normal life and went on tell-all interview? Does it help her to resolve any issues or does it create more?

Didn’t she preach about compassion and kindness? Didn’t Harry mentioned about stepping back rather than stepping out? They are indeed a very confusing couple who can’t seem to decide on what they want or their words. So calling his family out for being racist along with his lovely wife on a tell-all interview stepping out or back? Does it help mend the existing damage or create an unrepairable one?

Whatever it is, the time will come when her kids will have to reap what she sow. So much for privacy.. lol


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where's she going to wear it, while tending to her chickens?


I don't know. I reckon she would wearing it 24x7, even in bed!


----------



## limom

JY89 said:


> As much as many would love to jump to her defence, can anyone explain what’s her true intentions of appearing in a tell-all interview? Making claims and “exposing” her husband family, insinuating hate towards the RF ( so much for compassion and kindness? )
> 
> Instead of speaking to a therapist or professional about her mental health, she went on national tv to speak to Oprah about it? Giving everyone the opportunity to provide their views on it or was she only expecting that everyone will be swayed by her playing victim on this? No doubt that she might be a victim to critics but she’s definitely no angel with the way she dealt with her issues with the RF publicly
> 
> Has she not considered the repercussions carefully before stuffing those millions into her pocket? Perhaps it’s a glorifying moment for her. But how about her husband and her kids who will have to live with this for the rest of their life- when she claimed that she wanted to give them a normal life and went on tell-all interview? Does it help her to resolve any issues or does it create more?
> 
> Didn’t she preach about compassion and kindness? Didn’t Harry mentioned about stepping back rather than stepping out? They are indeed a very confusing couple who can’t seem to decide on what they want or their words. So calling his family out for being racist along with his lovely wife on a tell-all interview stepping out or back? Does it help mend the existing damage or create an unrepairable one?
> 
> Whatever it is, the time will come when her kids will have to reap what she sow. So much for privacy.. lol


It is their brand whiny rich entitled people.
Meghan reminds me of Ellen. Her brand is kindness, in reality she is an insufferable drunk bit££


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Per the Morton book - dictated by Diana
> Her bulimia started after the engagement
> BUT an older sister of hers also suffered from bulimia when the sister dated Charles
> 
> IMHO, the press often got the sisters confused in the 1980s, it was not like now when you can Google everything


Yes, Charles is definitely vomit inducing!
(Sorry if I offended anyone but I couldn’t resist.  I do not mean to trivialize bulimia.  It is a serious disease)


----------



## jelliedfeels

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ouch but  If that's what it takes, I'll never say or use vitriolic again


Oh no I got the name wrong! It’s the ‘farming basket’. I love it. Hermes’ quirky stuff is great. Never seen this for sale anywhere though


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Word of caution for anybody who is thinking about booking them for future projects - if MM doesn't get her way, she's going to go to Oprah to trash you! Do you really want to work with that???


I thought about this, and I would avoid this couple at all costs. If one denies them whatever they want, they are ruthless.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lalame said:


> I keep coming back to how there's always multiple ways to tell the same story. I thought Meghan was authentic in what she said (as in not lying per se) but the way she divulged each story seemed a little too disinterested in objectivity. I get it, it's her tell-all so she's going to tell her side but she could've been more responsible knowing that it is just a one-sided story. I think she did this well with the Kate thing, like she insisted Kate did everything right and was a good person and wasn't allowed to interfere with the media reports herself, and had the good sense not to reveal more of the private dispute. But here's how I would've handled some of the other claims:
> 
> Meghan: There were discussions about 'how dark is this baby going to be'.
> Better: There has never been a black woman or other WOC in this family, so I did encounter the occasional ignorance in how to properly address issues of race, colorism, etc. Was it malicious? I don't know, I'd like to think not as everyone in the family welcomed me warmly and I have no reason to believe otherwise. It was lonely though not to have anyone around who I could relate to, culturally, and the translation between cultures wore me down.
> 
> Meghan: I asked someone for help and they said no, it's going to reflect badly on the family.
> Better: I was really struggling... but given how public and highly scrutinized all our lives were, there were fears that there could be disastrous leaks. It was a really difficult position, but I appreciate that everyone had a job to do there and they felt this would be in my best interest at the end of the day. I don't blame them for following their protocols as they're trained to do, but it just wasn't an environment that I could thrive in.



I’m sorry I really don’t mean to call you out because I have read your posts and know this isn’t what you meant but I think this is an interesting point ... can or should we dictate how others respond to their own experience, especially when we haven’t walked in their shoes?

Someone brought up the OJ trial. Ironically I just binge watched the entire miniseries. Do I think he was guilty? I do, absolutely. But can I also understand that a POC, right after Rodney King, reading what Mark Fuhrman said on tape, would celebrate that a Black man was acquitted? I have to at least try. (I thought Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a really interesting piece for anyone who wants to read more).

And here we are again, 21 years later. What has changed? Another trial about to begin. How do we expect POC to react? You are not allowed to peacefully protest and you believe you are unfairly targeted when you march. So who determines what's an acceptable response? 

MM has said she was suicidal and no one helped. A POC reading this thread will see her statement being doubted or in some cases ridiculed. I have no idea if she's being truthful. But I do know it is a fact that there are disparities in healthcare for POC, and WOC in particular. I am sure these healthcare professionals don't believe they are racist, but there is clearly unconscious bias. And part of the problem is POC not being believed or listened to when they describe their symptoms. 

Again in this thread posters are doubting or explaining or (or ridiculing) their story about their baby's skin color. I am reminded of
an incident on the playground when my son was younger. One of my friends asked a child if the woman standing nearby was his mother. It was an innocent question, she wanted to arrange a play date. But the other woman got angry and said “yes I’m his mother who do you think I am?” We were both taken aback and my friend was hurt. Later, when I got to know the other mom, I learned why
she responded that way. She’s a WOC and her husband is white, their children look very much like MM and she was often confused for the nanny. People made all sorts of assumptions and spoke to her in ways they never would have had they known she was the mother (which is awful but a whole other thread). So could she have been more gracious and polite in her response? Possibly. But how many times does someone have to check themselves? How endlessly patient and exhausted do we expect people to be before they snap? Where’s our grace and empathy in saying I am so sorry that keeps happening to you? I hear you, I get it (or at least I am trying to), and I'm sorry you have to deal with that...over and over and over again.



papertiger said:


> and the White House got involved because?



They didn’t. They responded to a question.



chicinthecity777 said:


> Thank you for providing the actual wording of what was said. I have seen several click-bait headlines, made it sound like the president personally came out and supported MM! I was thinking it would be very wrong to get involved in this from a official government's standing point. Glad to read this was not the case. I think her response was a diplomatic one. She couldn't just say nothing when asked about it and she answered well by going down a generic route!



Thank you so much! I have to admit this is a pet peeve of mine and one of the reasons I need extra blood pressure meds when I read this thread! People see a headline or start a rumor and others repeat it as truth (as long as it reinforces their own beliefs). Of course it's not just here it happens everywhere, especially on social media. It's why I am obsessed with researching sources. We are truly living in the time of alternative facts. 



papertiger said:


> I think it would have been more prudent for WH reps to just say 'no comment'. Any (other) response was going to elicit provoking headlines.



Agree to disagree I think no comment would have been much worse.



papertiger said:


> Media be damned, this is Head of State stuff.
> 
> Unless the US is giving H&M official recognition as refugees/defectors, fleeing from being "trapped" from some merciless and terrifying regime, they should not get involved at all. All accusations were directly fired towards our Head of State (QEII and the Crown).  Now they've made a stupid, vapid entertainment interview into a political incident.



Political incident? Doubtful. They clearly very purposely did not acknowledge that what she said was accurate. I am confident that the statement was checked and cleared (if not written) by the protocol office.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Media be damned, this is Head of State stuff.
> 
> Unless the US is giving H&M official recognition as refugees/defectors, fleeing from being "trapped" from some merciless and terrifying regime, they should not get involved at all. All accusations were directly fired towards our Head of State (QEII and the Crown).  Now they've made a stupid, vapid entertainment interview into a political incident.


You said this much better than I.  By "indirectly" supporting her and commenting how "brave" it is, they are basically taking a swipe at The Queen.  I don't think they would comment on Kayne's bipolar disorder?  At least, I hope not.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I hate to think what you think of the wicker Kelly Picnic!
> 
> Nice bag for M though, status symbol made of straw


I got the name wrong 
I think wicker is pretty but I think paying designer prices for something that gets destroyed so quickly would be too painful for me.

I think she’s more like one of those fake marmonts where one of the Gs is a C - only convincing from a distance.


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I am quite shocked that William publicly said we are not a racist family. For him to make such a personal comment indicates that he is both deeply hurt and deeply angry.


I am glad he spoke up to defend his family.  Enough is enough.


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> This was beyond the pale. The person was swiftly fired by the BBC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC fires presenter for tweeting racist pic comparing Meghan Markle and Harry's baby boy to monkey
> 
> 
> After the Royal baby’s birth, a BBC Radio 5 Live presenter, Danny Baker, took to Twitter to post a racist black and white picture of a man and woman walking out of a hospital with the caption, “Royal baby leaves hospital.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indiatoday.in



Jerks can be found everywhere. Good for BBC for firing him in 2019!


----------



## marietouchet

Verbs, nouns 

Gayle has said ‘I THINK MM has plenty of receipts’ , the clickbait title at DM is G ‘HAS receipts’ , badly done DM ... 

what is a receipt ? G is an American, so, it is not UK verbiage, we keep emails, texts ... what has M paid for ?


----------



## marietouchet

TraceySH said:


> Anyone else remember Crisco and Reynolds Wrap??


I remember Jodie foster started her career as the orange copper tone baby


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m sorry I really don’t mean to call you out because I have read your posts and know this isn’t what you meant but I think this is an interesting point ... can or should we dictate how others respond to their own experience, especially when we haven’t walked in their shoes?
> 
> Someone brought up the OJ trial. Ironically I just binge watched the entire miniseries. Do I think he was guilty? I do, absolutely. But can I also understand that a POC, right after Rodney King, reading what Mark Fuhrman said on tape, would celebrate that a Black man was acquitted? I have to at least try. (I thought Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a really interesting piece for anyone who wants to read more).
> 
> And here we are again, 21 years later. What has changed? Another trial about to begin. How do we expect POC to react? You are not allowed to peacefully protest and you believe you are unfairly targeted when you march. So who determines what's an acceptable response?
> 
> MM has said she was suicidal and no one helped. A POC reading this thread will see her statement being doubted or in some cases ridiculed. I have no idea if she's being truthful. But I do know it is a fact that there are disparities in healthcare for POC, and WOC in particular. I am sure these healthcare professionals don't believe they are racist, but there is clearly unconscious bias. And part of the problem is POC not being believed or listened to when they describe their symptoms.
> 
> Again in this thread posters are doubting or explaining or (or ridiculing) their story about their baby's skin color. I am reminded of
> an incident on the playground when my son was younger. One of my friends asked a child if the woman standing nearby was his mother. It was an innocent question, she wanted to arrange a play date. But the other woman got angry and said “yes I’m his mother who do you think I am?” We were both taken aback and my friend was hurt. Later, when I got to know the other mom, I learned why
> she responded that way. She’s a WOC and her husband is white, their children look very much like MM and she was often confused for the nanny. People made all sorts of assumptions and spoke to her in ways they never would have had they known she was the mother (which is awful but a whole other thread). So could she have been more gracious and polite in her response? Possibly. But how many times does someone have to check themselves? How endlessly patient and exhausted do we expect people to be before they snap? Where’s our grace and empathy in saying I am so sorry that keeps happening to you? I hear you, I get it (or at least I am trying to), and I'm sorry you have to deal with that...over and over and over again.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn’t. They responded to a question.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you so much! I have to admit this is a pet peeve of mine and one of the reasons I need extra blood pressure meds when I read this thread! People see a headline or start a rumor and others repeat it as truth (as long as it reinforces their own beliefs). Of course it's not just here it happens everywhere, especially on social media. It's why I am obsessed with researching sources. We are truly living in the time of alternative facts.
> 
> 
> 
> Agree to disagree I think no comment would have been much worse.
> 
> 
> 
> Political incident? Doubtful. They clearly very purposely did not acknowledge that what she said was accurate. I am confident that the statement was checked and cleared (if not written) by the protocol office.


At the end of the day, Megan is a Karen. Constantly complaining.
Does it mean that she did not experience racism? Absolutely not.
Imho, she is very much like OJ. She is using people that she would not have socialized with prior.
She got her wake up call......And it sucks. 
Otoh, she provides a good distraction and conversation, so for that I am thankful.


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Verbs, nouns
> 
> Gayle has said ‘I THINK MM has plenty of receipts’ , the clickbait title at DM is G ‘HAS receipts’ , badly done DM ...
> 
> what is a receipt ? G is an American, so, it is not UK verbiage, we keep emails, texts ... what has M paid for ?


She has receipts?


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Per the Morton book - dictated by Diana
> Her bulimia started after the engagement
> BUT an older sister of hers also suffered from bulimia when the sister dated Charles
> 
> IMHO, the press often got the sisters confused in the 1980s, it was not like now when you can Google everything


And as to whether Charles should have been told before wedding ...
Things were different 40 years ago, bulimia was not exactly seen as a mental health issue then, D to her credit helped dispel the stigma
i remember a college roommate who clogged up the plumbing, and no one knew what to do ... honestly we all knew because of the plumbing probs


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry I forgot to copy the link to the receipts 

Gayle King: Meghan 'has plenty of receipts' for interview allegations











						Gayle King: Meghan 'has plenty of receipts' for interview allegations
					

Gayle, 66, once again discussed the fallout from Harry and Meghan's explosive interview with her friend Oprah Winfrey on Thursday's CBS This Morning.




					mol.im


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> It is their brand whiny rich entitled people.
> Meghan reminds me of Ellen. Her brand is kindness, in reality she is an insufferable drunk bit££


And don't forget COMPASSION, she hides behind that word. We see her the compassion for her father that loves her, for the royal family that welcomed her and gave her the notoriety that she loves...


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think they were referring to the US president's press secretary commenting on the interview, not William.


On the response of the press secretary ... I saw the press conference
1. there is some sentiment Psaki comments played well to the left wing side of the party, fair enough
2. there are huge REAL issues - deficit, border, president health - Psaki has deflected questions about that all week - and honestly talking about MM helped change the subject

i am a geek who watches press conferences in their entirety, but lacks the attention span to do the full Oprah


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> MeToo.  Had my Mohs surgery in early summer, 2019. It took about 9 months to heal, then pandemic hit just as I was beginning to feel presentable. On the bright side, since I was already masking and wearing gloves,  it may have prevented me from getting COVID. It has been a wild 2 years. The good news about the pandemic is it has given me plenty of time to research skin care. Now, I not only feel like an expert on the BRF, but glass skin, K beauty, J beauty and scars. The learning never stops. Early on I found several bloggers who provide excellent tips and encouragement. We will get through this.
> 
> ETA: thank you @Chanbal for your candid post. Truly you are an inspiration.


me too....fair Irish skin.  I had mohs surgery on my face over a year ago followed by radiation.  I have a scar on my face from the PS closing the wound but it's not disfiguring.  I'm grateful that I had low level insitu.  But I'm going OT here.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> It's not that silly if you're a multi-racial couple. What my child would look like is a literal mystery to me... nothing like anyone in my family and nothing like anyone in my husband's. I know I have that curiosity, so I wouldn't blame other people for being curious too. But most important is context... what exactly was said, how was it said, what led up to it or followed it, etc. At its most innocent, questions about a baby's hair, skin color, facial features, etc are akin to "does he look more like mommy or daddy?" (a super common question) but of course it you say it with a shudder then that's a very different thing.


right....Meghan seemed to be implying that someone in the RF was worried that her baby would be dark.....but she wouldn't not say who or what they said - conveniently leading many people to suspect William or Charles were racist.....it's really disgusting that H is doing this to his family IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Sorry I forgot to copy the link to the receipts
> 
> Gayle King: Meghan 'has plenty of receipts' for interview allegations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King: Meghan 'has plenty of receipts' for interview allegations
> 
> 
> Gayle, 66, once again discussed the fallout from Harry and Meghan's explosive interview with her friend Oprah Winfrey on Thursday's CBS This Morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im



For things she wasn't sure if she or Harry had heard? Or for things that were blatant lies to begin with? For some reason I doubt it.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For things she wasn't sure if she or Harry had heard? Or for things that were blatant lies to begin with? For some reason I doubt it.


I think that she might have emails explaining to them what is going to take place.
IE no more security for you. Nothing earth shattering.
There is no ways that someone would write in an email:  How dark are your children going to be?
Then again, it is the Daily Fail, they write anything for clicks.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m sorry I really don’t mean to call you out because I have read your posts and know this isn’t what you meant but I think this is an interesting point ... can or should we dictate how others respond to their own experience, especially when we haven’t walked in their shoes?
> 
> Someone brought up the OJ trial. Ironically I just binge watched the entire miniseries. Do I think he was guilty? I do, absolutely. But can I also understand that a POC, right after Rodney King, reading what Mark Fuhrman said on tape, would celebrate that a Black man was acquitted? I have to at least try. (I thought Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a really interesting piece for anyone who wants to read more).
> 
> And here we are again, 21 years later. What has changed? Another trial about to begin. How do we expect POC to react? You are not allowed to peacefully protest and you believe you are unfairly targeted when you march. So who determines what's an acceptable response?
> 
> MM has said she was suicidal and no one helped. A POC reading this thread will see her statement being doubted or in some cases ridiculed. I have no idea if she's being truthful. But I do know it is a fact that there are disparities in healthcare for POC, and WOC in particular. I am sure these healthcare professionals don't believe they are racist, but there is clearly unconscious bias. And part of the problem is POC not being believed or listened to when they describe their symptoms.
> 
> Again in this thread posters are doubting or explaining or (or ridiculing) their story about their baby's skin color. I am reminded of
> an incident on the playground when my son was younger. One of my friends asked a child if the woman standing nearby was his mother. It was an innocent question, she wanted to arrange a play date. But the other woman got angry and said “yes I’m his mother who do you think I am?” We were both taken aback and my friend was hurt. Later, when I got to know the other mom, I learned why
> she responded that way. She’s a WOC and her husband is white, their children look very much like MM and she was often confused for the nanny. People made all sorts of assumptions and spoke to her in ways they never would have had they known she was the mother (which is awful but a whole other thread). So could she have been more gracious and polite in her response? Possibly. But how many times does someone have to check themselves? How endlessly patient and exhausted do we expect people to be before they snap? Where’s our grace and empathy in saying I am so sorry that keeps happening to you? I hear you, I get it (or at least I am trying to), and I'm sorry you have to deal with that...over and over and over again.
> 
> 
> 
> They didn’t. They responded to a question.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you so much! I have to admit this is a pet peeve of mine and one of the reasons I need extra blood pressure meds when I read this thread! People see a headline or start a rumor and others repeat it as truth (as long as it reinforces their own beliefs). Of course it's not just here it happens everywhere, especially on social media. It's why I am obsessed with researching sources. We are truly living in the time of alternative facts.
> 
> 
> 
> Agree to disagree I think no comment would have been much worse.
> 
> 
> 
> Political incident? Doubtful. They clearly very purposely did not acknowledge that what she said was accurate. I am confident that the statement was checked and cleared (if not written) by the protocol office.



I don’t mean to be patronising but all the examples you cite are all serious issues to do with USA. I’m not sure how relevant they are as comparisons the situation of an extremely privileged _actual princess_ in Britain.

I think it’s also relevant she’s only making these claims over a year after it’s supposed to have happened and in a profit-making interview. Furthermore, anyone’s statements merit questioning when they are publicly and harmfully implicating other people and they clearly contradict things they have said before.

RE your pet peeve, does it annoy you that Oprah did that very thing in her interview by misleadingly editing dozens of headlines to accuse an entire industry and the readership by extension of racism?  Or is it only annoying when people are joking about Meghan’s fillers?

edit : changed meant to mean


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Sorry I forgot to copy the link to the receipts
> 
> Gayle King: Meghan 'has plenty of receipts' for interview allegations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King: Meghan 'has plenty of receipts' for interview allegations
> 
> 
> Gayle, 66, once again discussed the fallout from Harry and Meghan's explosive interview with her friend Oprah Winfrey on Thursday's CBS This Morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


_Gayle said: 'I think Meghan has plenty of receipts, meaning she's been keeping track of things.'_

From day 1 that she joined the BRF, MM has likely been collecting whatever could be transformed in cash later...  interviews and deals need material. 
I wonder if she kept provoking the aids only to get potential responses that could be collected. As one of the aids said, she would provoke chaos and then remain very calm.


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's the U.S. president's office, because all U.S. media is supporting this, it's not unreasonable for them to think the U.S. people (read U.S. media) would want to hear a comment.



I think that's all the more reason to say "no comment".  M&H are empty-headed spoiled entitled celebrities. Nothing more. Even a generic response opens the flood gates to comment on whatever any other celebrity out there says. On the other hand, many politicians love shootin'-their-mouths-off-celebrities hanging around as they have parasitic uses for attention. There's no shortage of people promoting the importance of getting mental, physical, etc kind of help, which is great. Meghan being held up as any kind authority on anything is pathetic since IMO they use Diana's death as a promo tool.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Allisonfaye said:


> Meghan Markle isn't getting the Princess Diana treatment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle isn't getting the Princess Diana treatment
> 
> 
> If Princess Diana had retained her security detail provided by the palace, she would likely be alive today. Instead, her bodyguard, employed by her boyfriend's father, Mohamed al Fayed, allowed her to ride without a seat belt in a car driven by a man intoxicated at more than 3 times the legal limit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.washingtonexaminer.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Princess Diana had retained her security detail provided by the palace, she would likely be alive today. Instead, her bodyguard, employed by her boyfriend's father, Mohamed al Fayed, allowed her to ride without a seat belt in a car driven by a man intoxicated at more than 3 times the legal limit.
> 
> Royal security would have never allowed Diana into the situation that ultimately killed her, but given her paranoia that her palace-provided detail was spying on her for the Firm, the princess refused royal protection officers after her divorce from Prince Charles.
> 
> The similarities between the situations of Diana and Meghan Markle end there. Markle is not receiving remotely the same treatment that Diana suffered a quarter century ago, and Prince Harry's insistence otherwise is a gross abuse of his mother's legacy.
> 
> "My biggest concern was history repeating itself," Harry told Oprah of Markle's supposed struggles with the royal life. "I've said that before on numerous occasions, very publicly. And what I was seeing was history repeating itself, but perhaps, or definitely, far more dangerous because then you add race in, and you add social media in. And when I talk about history repeating itself, I'm talking about my mother."
> 
> It goes without saying that Diana didn't have to deal with the toxic wasteland of contemporary social media, and yes, Markle has been subjected to unacceptable racism by its dregs. But at the hands of the royal family, she received treatment orders of magnitude better than what Diana suffered and most likely because of how badly Diana suffered from it.
> 
> Consider, Charles went through so many women that Diana, then the virginal teenage daughter of an earl whose pedigree rivaled the queen's own, was essentially the only eligible bachelorette left in England. The only person who believed the royal romance was real was Diana herself. Only once their marriage was a done deal did Diana realize that not only was Charles not in love with her but that he was actually in love with Camilla Parker Bowles, who was then married to another man.
> 
> Contrary to the Netflix series The Crown, Charles did actually attempt to be faithful to Diana at the beginning of their marriage. But once she had secured Britain its heir and a spare, Charles turned back to Parker Bowles, and the queen's response was essentially to tell Diana to deal with it.
> 
> In short, the palace recruited a 19-year-old virgin to marry a man in love with another woman because he had slept with so many women that said virgin was the only real candidate remaining. And instead of forcing Charles to give up his Camilla habit, the palace covered for his affair. Only once their marital woes spilled into national news in the form of leaked phone calls, multiple damning interviews, and Diana secretly sourcing Andrew Morton's biography on her did the queen and Prince Philip allow the two to divorce finally.
> 
> Compare that to Markle, for whom the queen broke a plethora of traditions to include her in the family. She allowed Markle to join the family's Christmas celebrations before her wedding, a privilege not even Kate Middleton was given. Given Markle's messy relationship with her father, the palace broke the tradition of gifting a new coat of arms for the father of a bride marrying into the royal family and instead granted it solely to Markle. The queen also allowed her, a divorcee, to have a church wedding, an allowance she didn't extend to Charles and Parker Bowles. They eventually married in a civil service that the queen refused to attend.
> 
> From dress codes to the queen's ban on garlic, Meghan was allowed to break every rule in the book without reproach. All she had to do was her literal job.
> 
> Instead, in pursuit of "space" and privacy, she and Harry decided to quit their jobs and become full-time celebrities because somehow, the cutthroat Los Angeles media, protected by the First Amendment, is supposed to be less invasive than the tightly regulated British media that often bows down to the palace.
> 
> Even after divorcing Charles, Diana continued to work in her formal capacity as a royal and retained six of her royal patronages. She maintained her Kensington Palace apartments and earned an annual salary on top of her divorce settlement.
> 
> Markle and Harry wanted all of this and more — for not working.
> 
> Contrary to the fairy tale Markle evidently believed, being a royal is an actual job. In 2019, Princess Anne attended 506 total engagements over the course of 165 workdays. Charles worked 521 engagements over 125 total days. Compare that to Markle, who worked just 31 days. Now, she doesn't work at all.
> 
> Still, she didn't just complain about losing her salary. Harry and Markle complained that the palace wouldn't pay for their security, a perk Diana didn't keep even as she continued her work as a royal and one of the most onerous costs paid by taxpayers for the royals. Their whines are even more audacious when you consider that the two blamed their exit on their desire to become financially independent!
> 
> Maybe the palace complaints about her were secretly motivated by racism. But then, why would the person who filed the harassment complaint against her in 2018 be the same one who authored the statement emphatically defending her from racist and sexist coverage while she and Harry were still dating? It's possible that the palace did deny her access to mental health treatment, but both Harry and Diana received ample therapy with support from the royal family. And really, we're supposed to believe that a royal was dumb enough to fret publicly over the skin tone of Markle's future children, who would be three-quarters white?
> 
> Queen Elizabeth turns 95 next month, and the even older Philip remains hospitalized. Prince Andrew is under official investigation for his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein's sex-trafficking, and Charles and Camilla's already weak approval ratings haven't been helped by The Crown rehashing their abysmal treatment of the late princess of Wales. The future of the monarchy rests entirely upon Prince William and Middleton, the only royals whose public approval rivals that of the queen.
> 
> Harry and Meghan bring the palace nothing but trouble, and even after putting on the waterworks, the couple has still lost the war of public opinion. More than twice as many British adults polled by YouGov think the Oprah interview was inappropriate than those who found it appropriate. Only 12% report having "a lot" of sympathy for the couple. Markle wasn't treated like Diana, and the public certainly doesn't see her as the same. The palace is better off without her.


Well written.  Well said.  Kudos.


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> I think that's all the more reason to say "no comment".  M&H are empty-headed spoiled entitled celebrities. Nothing more. Even a generic response opens the flood gates to comment on whatever any other celebrity out there says. On the other hand, many politicians love shootin'-their-mouths-off-celebrities hanging around as they have parasitic uses for attention. There's no shortage of people promoting the importance of getting mental, physical, etc kind of help, which is great. Meghan being held up as any kind authority on anything is pathetic since IMO they use Diana's death as a promo tool.


They are parasitic. The only comparison applicable in their situation is the situation with Wallis And the former king.
It is so similar, it is uncanny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LemonDrop

does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> _Gayle said: 'I think Meghan has plenty of receipts, meaning she's been keeping track of things.'_
> 
> From day 1 that she joined the BRF, MM has likely been collecting whatever could be transformed in cash later...  interviews and deals need material.
> I wonder if she kept provoking the aids only to get potential responses that could be collected. *As one of the aids said, she would provoke chaos and then remain very calm.*



This is a very specific observation, and it’s telling - intelligent narcs thrive on provoking drama and then pull back to enjoy the chaos. It’s a shame that social media therapists get caught up in their emotional reaction to the interview and miss these important bits.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For things she wasn't sure if she or Harry had heard? Or for things that were blatant lies to begin with? For some reason I doubt it.


Oh - headline says she has plenty of receipts but article says Gayle "thinks" she has plenty of receipts.  uugh.  disappointed in Gayle


----------



## sdkitty

LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.


I don't like her.  Don't hate her either but find her very annoying - Harry too


----------



## limom

LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.


I don’t care for people like her. So no I don’t like her.
What do you see that I don’t see?


----------



## byzina

LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.



I don't hate her either. But for me she turned out to be cheap. Harry is much cheaper though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Karl? He's the head of the Habsburg family of Austria and grandson of Austria's last emperor and Hungary's last king. He'd be both had Austria not abolished its monarchy.


Aside from anything else, I learn so much about other countries royal set-ups in this thread.


Chanbal said:


> He must be very hurt. I believe him!
> 
> "_An impassioned Prince William today publicly hit back against Harry and Meghan's racism claims, insisting, 'We're very much not a racist family'.
> 
> The Duke of Cambridge is the first royal to personally respond to the allegation during his first royal engagement since the Oprah interview, as he also revealed that he has not spoken to his brother since it came out but 'will do'.
> 
> Meghan's claim that an unnamed royal raised concerns about Archie being 'too brown' was the most damaging allegation to come out of the broadcast, and caused untold damage to the Windsors' reputation around the world._
> .....
> *The decision to publicly respond to personal allegations is unprecedented for a senior royal, say experts, and is an indication of the strength of feeling in the royal household about the attacks directed at them.* "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate and William head out on first official engagement since Oprah
> 
> 
> The couple were seen being driven in London today. They are said to be deeply upset by the way they were attacked by the Sussexes, with Meghan accusing Kate of making her cry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thus is what’s so horrible about this anonymous accusation. People are speculating and everyone is susepcted and has to defend themselves. They aren’t protecting anyone just smearing everyone they can.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Verbs, nouns
> 
> Gayle has said ‘I THINK MM has plenty of receipts’ , the clickbait title at DM is G ‘HAS receipts’ , badly done DM ...
> 
> what is a receipt ? G is an American, so, it is not UK verbiage, we keep emails, texts ... what has M paid for ?


Basically means written proof (text, email, actual receipts, LOL, whatever).


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> And don't forget COMPASSION, she hides behind that word. We see her the compassion for her father that loves her, for the royal family that welcomed her and gave her the notoriety that she loves...


Don't forget: it's not simply compassion, it's a GROUNDSWELL of compassion.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

limom said:


> At the end of the day, Megan is a Karen. Constantly complaining.
> Does it mean that she did not experience racism? Absolutely not.
> Imho, she is very much like OJ. She is using people that she would not have socialized with prior.
> She got her wake up call......And it sucks.
> Otoh, she provides a good distraction and conversation, so for that I am thankful.



I think there are also similarities with Caitlyn Jenner who I believe is a very imperfect role model or ambassador for LGBTQ+ youth but at the same time she brought some important issues into the mainstream for exposure and discussion...and I hope understanding? Or maybe not and they're just too polarizing, it's easier to pick a side and stick with it I guess 



jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t meant to be patronising but all the examples you cite are all serious issues to do with USA. I’m not sure how relevant they are as comparisons the situation of an extremely privileged _actual princess_ in Britain.
> 
> I think it’s also relevant she’s only making these claims over a year after it’s supposed to have happened and in a profit-making interview. Furthermore, anyone’s statements merit questioning when they are publicly and harmfully implicating other people and they clearly contradict things they have said before.
> 
> RE your pet peeve, does it annoy you that Oprah did that very thing in her interview by misleadingly editing dozens of headlines to accuse an entire industry and the readership by extension of racism?  Or is it only annoying when people are joking about Meghan’s fillers?



Thanks so much I don't feel patronized at all. I was referring to the reaction to MM and why our own experiences may influence our perceptions. And yes as I mentioned it makes me crazy that it happens everywhere these days!



LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.



I think most of those people left but there's a style thread that might be more fun for you!


----------



## Allisonfaye

LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.



It's ok to like her. Maybe tell us why you like her?


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> Henceforth they shall be known as the Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. Or better yet  just plain ol’ Princes Harry.
> please
> Please
> PLEASE
> let it be so


The artifice formerly known as Prince Harry


----------



## mshermes

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh no I got the name wrong! It’s the ‘farming basket’. I love it. Hermes’ quirky stuff is great. Never seen this for sale anywhere though
> View attachment 5018778


There are a few out there to be had....eBay, Tradesy and TRR had one.


----------



## duna

Cavalier Girl said:


> It could be the only thing on TV and I still wouldn't watch.  And, this is while still in a pandemic.



ITA, it would make me


----------



## JY89

LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.



Yes, I did. I liked and supported her initially but unfortunately, she really made it hard for me to continue liking her imo.

I find her beautiful but not on the inside. If she’s truly kind and compassionate, she wouldn’t be causing so much damages to the family and instead she will try her best to resolve it amicably within the family. She will too consider the future of her offsprings and their relationship with their great grand parents and grandparents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

JY89 said:


> Has she not considered the repercussions carefully before stuffing those millions into her pocket? Perhaps it’s a glorifying moment for her. But how about her husband and her kids who will have to live with this for the rest of their life- when she claimed that she wanted to give them a normal life and went on tell-all interview? *Does it help her to resolve any issues or does it create more?*
> 
> Didn’t she preach about compassion and kindness? Didn’t Harry mentioned about stepping back rather than stepping out? They are indeed a very confusing couple who can’t seem to decide on what they want or their words. So calling his family out for being racist along with his lovely wife on a tell-all interview stepping out or back? Does it help mend the existing damage or create an unrepairable one?



She and Harry both crave attention.  They can say what they want about wanting privacy, but I don't know how anyone can look at their behavior and see anything but a couple that wants anything _but_ privacy. Bringing your own personal photographer to cemeteries and to volunteers gigs, issuing practically daily press releases on your activities, "surprise" Zoom call appearances, tell-all interviews with Oprah, and on and on.   But, they also want control, to have privacy when they want, and fawning attention when they want attention. It doesn't work that way but they haven't figured that out.


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I think there are also similarities with Caitlyn Jenner who I believe is a very imperfect role model or ambassador for LGBTQ+ youth but at the same time she brought some important issues into the mainstream for exposure and discussion...and I hope understanding? Or maybe not and they're just too polarizing, it's easier to pick a side and stick with it I guess
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks so much I don't feel patronized at all. I was referring to the reaction to MM and why our own experiences may influence our perceptions. And yes as I mentioned it makes me crazy that it happens everywhere these days!
> 
> 
> 
> I think most of those people left but there's a style thread that might be more fun for you!



I like Caitlyn and supported her transition on the forum when I recall it was not popular. She is an older privileged person with a lot of money, but she’s a pretty good role model because she seems to be a kind person at heart despite all the flaws. You don’t hear tons of stories about her bad behavior (today or in the past - except for that hit and run thing).

I understand and empathize with OJ supporters. There’s a lot of injustice and pain in the AA community, and so many black men are/were being thrown the book without proper representation or worse - with their local police colluding against them because it’s easier to pin the blame on some random person than to do a full investigation. And so. much. more. (I don’t want to cram my thoughts onto a paragraph, it wouldn’t do the topic justice).

Fast forward to today, I understand why people see Meghan in a positive light and ignore the other stuff that’s out there about her (and even refuse to do their own research as I recently saw someone announce). She is an important part of a modern movement that has meaning to many people.

That being said (cause you know it was coming lol) I personally don’t believe in condoning bad behavior or bad people, even if the person represents something important. I don’t vote for people just because they come from the same ethnic background as me, and I wouldn’t side with someone because we have similar features. I think it’s a dangerous thing when we lose our critical thinking and go for identity politics.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> She and Harry both crave attention.  They can say what they want about wanting privacy, but I don't know how anyone can look at their behavior and see anything but a couple that wants anything _but_ privacy. Bringing your own personal photographer to cemeteries and to volunteers gigs, issuing practically daily press releases on your activities, "surprise" Zoom call appearances, tell-all interviews with Oprah, and on and on.   But, they also want control, to have privacy when they want, and fawning attention when they want attention. It doesn't work that way but they haven't figured that out.


exactly....fawning attention is what she wanted....when she nabbed the prince she got the fame and adulation she desired, along with all the designer clothing, jewelry, etc.  But she wasn't thriving so here we are


----------



## limom

JY89 said:


> Yes, I did. I liked and supported her initially but unfortunately, she really made it hard for me to continue liking her imo.
> 
> I find her beautiful but not on the inside. If she’s truly kind and compassionate, she wouldn’t be causing so much damages to the family and instead she will try her best to resolve it amicably within the family. She will too consider the future of her offsprings and their relationship with their great grand parents and grandparents.


I too agreed that she is really pretty and I love her California Style.
Unlike many other here, I thought that she wore the Armani dress really well. It looked better on her that on the Neimans ad, imho.
She was over dressed compared to her sitting imho.
He looked like a bum.


----------



## Sharont2305

Just seen on another thread that today's engagement was only supposed to be Catherine's but William went along to support her.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bisousx said:


> That being said (cause you know it was coming lol) I personally don’t believe in condoning bad behavior or bad people, even if the person represents something important. I don’t vote for people just because they come from the same ethnic background as me, and I wouldn’t side with someone because we have similar features. I think it’s a dangerous thing when we lose our critical thinking and go for identity politics.



Totally agree and I hope it didn't seem like that's what I was endorsing!


----------



## TC1

They had to be trolling us, right? "there were discussions on how dark Archie's skin was going to be" cues up black and white video montage of said child to keep the conversation going.


----------



## csshopper

1. If the CBS replay, aka "Continuous Bull S***" wanted to be really meaningful, it would  be followed with a segment where all the FACTs that contradict the Sanctimonius Sussex's insinuations are revealed.

2. Take aways for me: Harry has made it plain he believes the Public Service required of a Monarch is a horrible trap, he feels sorry for his father and brother. He thinks his country and his family are racist.  If ever there were reasons to enact the laws that permanently remove him from the line of succession, these would be it. His hatred would skew any decision that had to be made.  He is (on many more levels than this, but to me, this is a BIG one) unfit to rule.

3. Two supposedly intelligent, worldly people who claim Mental Health as one of their most important interests can't figure out how to call and get services for a supposedly suicidal Meghan. Don't want anyone, except a world wide audience of millions, to know about this. Buy a burner phone and anonymously call the NHS Hotline # for Mental Health for help. Jeez.

4. A Royal Family member asked about the baby's potential skin color. Being Harry he immediately it seems jumps to the "racist" conclusion, never considering that it could be completely innocuous in intent......after all when he used racially charged terms like "paki" and "raghead", was caught out and forced to apologize this was the spin:

Quoted from one of many articles on line by his Spokesperson:

*Prince Harry used the term without any malice a*nd as a nickname about a highly popular member of his platoon. *There is no question that Prince Harry was in any way seeking to insult his friend."*

Harry was also caught on tape telling another cadet, "You look like a raghead." "Raghead" is a derogatory term for Arabs."

IF Oprah was truly a journalist and not a pandering opportunist, she would revisit this incident and draw a parallel between the two situations and see what his response is.


----------



## youngster

A few days ago, I read that one of the BP staff that worked with them said they are both on their phones 24/7.  They read everything about themselves and were obsessed with any story not glowingly positive. As an actress, she was likely obsessed with her public image and with social media, but not being well known prior to Harry, she could easily control what was out there on her. That loss of control was what she likely hated.  

She apparently wasn't even happy with how their engagement interview went, that the interviewer wasn't enthusiastic and glowing enough. Under real questioning, from an actual seasoned reporter that asked follow up questions to their statements, she and Harry would both have imploded.


----------



## lalame

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m sorry I really don’t mean to call you out because I have read your posts and know this isn’t what you meant but I think this is an interesting point ... can or should we dictate how others respond to their own experience, especially when we haven’t walked in their shoes?



I really had to think about this and I may not be articulating it perfectly but I do think there's a limit to that. When's the last time you blasted your loved ones around the neighborhood over family squabbles? If a boss casually asks, "how's your family?" when was the last time you went into how they cut you off financially, your dad's not talking to you, your siblings have "space" etc... You probably don't do that because, despite how you feel about them in that moment, you love your family and for God's sake it's TMI. If you DID do that, everyone's probably going to be thinking the same thing many in the public do... "Wow, she REALLY blasted her family. That's petty." 

It's also about scale. You really cannot compare their issues to major social issues that have day to day implications for millions of normal people like BLM, OJ Simpson, etc. What next... the Holocaust? The severity of the wrong SHOULD dictate the severity of the response. I don't think it was in sync here.

And lastly, I do think communication STYLE is a consideration. Everyone has a right to communicate badly of vaguely or be overdramatic but is it effective for what you're trying to achieve.... if she wanted sympathy first and foremost, a laundry list of wrongs that vary in specificity will achieve that. If she wanted objective understanding of the entire situation (which is what I always hope to see in an interview), it was missing for me on both her part and OW's.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm too young to have grasped the whole Diana drama, but yeah...didn't she blame Charles for her bulemia? Sorry Di, while Charles surely wasn't Prince Charming that's just unfair and wrong.


I'm old enough to remember the drama she created. She was bulimic before meeting Charles, but it wasn't good for her image to reveal it until later in life. Harry is probably a dumb a$$ as a result of her binge eating and purging during pregnancy as it is quite detrimental to the fetus. That's just my opinion and I don't want to upset the people that admire her.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lalame said:


> I really had to think about this and I may not be articulating it perfectly but I do think there's a limit to that. When's the last time you blasted your loved ones around the neighborhood over family squabbles? If a boss casually asks, "how's your family?" when was the last time you went into how they cut you off financially, your dad's not talking to you, your siblings have "space" etc... You probably don't do that because, despite how you feel about them in that moment, you love your family and for God's sake it's TMI. If you DID do that, everyone's probably going to be thinking the same thing many in the public do... "Wow, she REALLY blasted her family. That's petty."
> 
> It's also about scale. You really cannot compare their issues to major social issues that have day to day implications for millions of normal people like BLM, OJ Simpson, etc. What next... the Holocaust? The severity of the wrong SHOULD dictate the severity of the response. I don't think it was in sync here.
> 
> And lastly, I do think communication STYLE is a consideration. Everyone has a right to communicate badly of vaguely or be overdramatic but is it effective for what you're trying to achieve.... if she wanted sympathy first and foremost, a laundry list of wrongs that vary in specificity will achieve that. If she wanted objective understanding of the entire situation (which is what I always hope to see in an interview), it was missing for me on both her part and OW's.



I obviously wasn't clear so many apologies for the confusion. I was referring to the differences in the way people were responding to MM...not MM herself or her actions...I hope that makes more sense!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Just seen on another thread that today's engagement was only supposed to be Catherine's but William went along to support her.


I hope I'm not wrong, but I think Will is a very nice and responsible person. Instead of using his wealth/privilege to live like a useless playboy, he is prioritizing his duty.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm old enough to remember the drama she created. She was bulimic before meeting Charles, but it wasn't good for her image to reveal it until later in life. Harry is probably a dumb a$$ as a result of her binge eating and purging during pregnancy as it is quite detrimental to the fetus. That's just my opinion and I don't want to upset the people that admire her.


She also admitted on a tape  she sent to author Andrew Morton that, trying to get Charles' attention, she had thrown herself down a flight of stairs when 4 months pregnant with William. The Queen witnessed it.


----------



## Chagall

lulilu said:


> Not to diminish bulimia, but I read that Diana suffered with it well before she met/married PC.


I heard that to. Certainly having a husband who had a mistress throughout the entire marriage would not have helped with her problem. She was 19 and I think she genuinely loved Charles when she met him. Charles was a cold fish with her and cared only for Camilla. I think she tried hard in the beginning to be a good supportive royal and wife and didn’t go off the rails until the end of their marriage. She put herself in dangerous (or so it was thought at the time) situations by hugging AIDS patients, and even visiting leper colonies. I agree that she mishandled the situation in the end. She didn’t need to go running around from man to man and shouldn’t have relied on her young sons for emotional support. She should never have done that terrible Panorama interview. Initially her heart was, I think, in the right place. She was definitely mentally ill I believe, and had no help from Charles. I really don’t think she was a manipulative planner, just someone struggling with a very difficult situation. Unlike MM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

from yahoo - great source for sensational "news"
body language expert very supportive of M&H
Everything Meghan and Harry Left Unsaid in the Interview, as Told by a Body Language Expert (yahoo.com)


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm old enough to remember the drama she created. She was bulimic before meeting Charles, but it wasn't good for her image to reveal it until later in life. Harry is probably a dumb a$$ as a result of her binge eating and purging during pregnancy as it is quite detrimental to the fetus. That's just my opinion and I don't want to upset the people that admire her.



Diana did have insights into herself as she once said she was as thick as a plank. She admitted to not being a good student. Fine, not going to slam a person for that as at least they know their limitations. She made up for it by becoming more street smart later in life. Harry hasn’t become street smart or he would’t have become so manipulated.

Regarding his comments about his father and brother being trapped. If anyone was trapped into a role he didn’t want it was his great grandfather, but he took it on because it was his duty and he led the country through a war. Does he include his grand mother in the list of the trapped as well? She could have had a lovely life living in the country with her husband who could have remained in the Navy, and opening the occasional factory as part of her work as a senior royal. The fact that Harry can say these things about his family and what they feel is their duty to the country  that supports them is cruel, petty and unthinking. How does he think he landed where he is?  If he was a common person, he would be lucky to get a job sweeping floors and be spending his salary very  night at the local pub. Don’t think a Z list actress would have given him a look   As another poster said, at another point  in time the two of them would be residing in The Tower awaiting the King’s/Queen’s pleasure.


----------



## Chanbal

The title says everything:
*Trevor Phillips says Oprah should have asked Harry and 'remarkably ill-informed' Meghan about the prince's 'own past behaviour and remarks' on race*









						Trevor Phillips says Oprah should've asked Sussexes about Harry's past
					

The Monarchy has been plunged into crisis following the Sussexes' accusation of racism. Trevor Phillips says it would be interesting to ask about Harry's 'own past behaviour and remarks'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> from yahoo - great source for sensational "news"
> body language expert very supportive of M&H
> Everything Meghan and Harry Left Unsaid in the Interview, as Told by a Body Language Expert (yahoo.com)


Spare me!  This is in Kneepads so you know what it will be like. The so called expert is naive and can’t see bad acting for what it is.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> I hope I'm not wrong, but I think Will is a very nice and responsible person. Instead of using his wealth/privilege to live like a useless playboy, he is prioritizing his duty.



I've seen playboys/cheaters/unfaithfuls do their job and duties without difficulties, Will may be one of them.  Putting a good front is important, he seems to be doing it, behind the scenes could be totally different...


----------



## Chanbal

I don't know who Candace Owens is, but she sounds really upset! 


'_She [Meghan] said she doesn't read newspapers or check social media. That's not true because she then said that she was suicidal because of bad press,' Owens stated. 

Owens also claimed that Meghan's insinuation that her son, Archie, was not offered a title because of his skin tone was also untrue. 

'If you have seen a picture of Archie and you believe he suffered anti-black racism, then call me a Nigerian prince and give me your credit card,' the outspoken pundit proclaimed, saying that the baby Royal had a light skin tone._"









						Candace Owens tears into 'leftist narcissist' Meghan Markle
					

Owens told Sean Hannity Wednesday that Meghan 'couldn't keep her stories straight' during her bombshell interview with Oprah last weekend.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> The title says everything:
> *Trevor Phillips says Oprah should have asked Harry and 'remarkably ill-informed' Meghan about the prince's 'own past behaviour and remarks' on race*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trevor Phillips says Oprah should've asked Sussexes about Harry's past
> 
> 
> The Monarchy has been plunged into crisis following the Sussexes' accusation of racism. Trevor Phillips says it would be interesting to ask about Harry's 'own past behaviour and remarks'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can't wait for a real journalist or just a person to ask him that...  That'll be the day, and a follow up question would be, what did Nutty think of her husband's past behavior?


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Can't wait for a real journalist or just a person to ask him that...  That'll be the day, and a follow up question would be, what did Nutty think of her husband's past behavior?


they would never sit down with a reporter who wasn't a friend IMO
I wonder if 60 Minutes could do a legit interview

according to this bio from CBS Gayle King is a reporter.....but she isn't acting like one - fawning over H&M
--and I like Gayle....I'm not some hater of the "liberal media"








						Gayle King
					

Co-host, "CBS This Morning"




					www.cbsnews.com
				



.


----------



## gracekelly

scarlet555 said:


> I've seen playboys/cheaters/unfaithfuls do their job and duties without difficulties, Will may be one of them.  Putting a good front is important, he seems to be doing it, behind the scenes could be totally different...


Given the responses of the general public, and in particular  his wife and children, I don’t think  the man you see in public is different from the man you see in private. It is pretty wearing to keep up a false front all the time and requires periods of rest and relaxation like the numerous (13 by the count of a person who took the time to do it) trips to chill out, as William’s brother and sister in law felt compelled to do.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Given the responses of the general public, and in particular  his wife and children, I don’t this the man you see in public is different from the man you see in private. It is pretty wearing to keep up a false front all the time and requires periods of rest and relaxation like the numerous (13 by the count of a person who took the time to do it) trips to chill out, as William’s brother and sister in law felt compelled to do.


yes, I'm sure he isn't perfect but he and Kate seem to come pretty close


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yes, I'm sure he isn't perfect but he and Kate seem to come pretty close


I have watched them both on video clips and Zooms and they are funny and spontaneous. That is a real tell as to how genuine a person is.


----------



## Chanbal

One more interesting title on Page Six: 
*Meghan Markle reportedly took 13 trips despite claims passport was taken away*








						Meghan Markle reportedly took 13 trips despite claims passport was taken away
					

The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah Winfrey that she handed over her passport when she joined the royal fold in 2016.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> She eliminated everyone, her family, her friends and her ex husbands.
> He is bound to be gone imho. *Us against the world gets old after a while, imho.*



Especially when the world finally stops paying attention.


----------



## JY89

Candace Owens tears into 'leftist narcissist' Meghan Markle
					

Owens told Sean Hannity Wednesday that Meghan 'couldn't keep her stories straight' during her bombshell interview with Oprah last weekend.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




From a WOC calling Meghan out for her lies. She was absolutely right on how Meghan claims that she was suicidal due to bad press when she on the other hand  claim that she doesn’t read the newspaper or check the social media.

Imagine what Meghan die-hard supporters are gonna say? Call Candace out for being racist when she herself is a WOC? Or says that she’s jealous because she didn’t manage to snag herself a Prince? Loll very much as delusional and unrealistic as the person they are supporting.

I’m so glad that Candace stood for the facts, did her research and call the liar out than being swayed by Meghan’s sympathy card tricks.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Especially when the world finally stops paying attention.


can't wait


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

For those who drop by to tell us how horrible we are to continually call out Meghan on her behaviors, I (we) really do pay attention to all the news and here is an opportunity to share a nice gesture, one many of us can relate to.  I do wish a safe delivery of the little girl who will someday wear this. 

Probably fortuitous the Sussexes only plan to have one, no question about which daughter would be the recipient, or having to buy a second one, which, of course, they could afford. 

*Meghan Markle already has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her daughter*
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's little girl is due to be born this summer - and it appears Meghan Markle already has the baby's first heirloom ready and waiting.

Prince Harry and Meghan, who now live in Montecito, California, said they are preparing to welcome a sister for their 22-month-old son Archie later this year, during their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview earlier this week.

But despite still having a few months before they meet their newest family member, the duchess, 39, already has a gift lined up for her daughter - that she purchased before she had even met Prince Harry.

In an interview back in 2015, almost a year before Meghan began dating her now husband, the then Suits actress revealed the £4,800 heirloom Cartier piece she plans to give to her daughter.

Speaking to Hello! she said: 'I’ve always coveted the Cartier French Tank watch. When I found out Suits had been picked up for our third season – which, at the time, felt like such a milestone – I totally splurged and bought the two-tone version.

'I had it engraved on the back, "To M.M. From M.M.", and I plan to give it to my daughter one day. That's what makes pieces special, the connection you have to them.'

The duchess appears to have owned the watch since 2013, having been pictured wearing it often before her marriage to Prince Harry. 

The classic piece retails at almost £5,000 and the engraving is thought to stand for 'to Meghan Markle from Meghan Markle' because it was a gift to herself to celebrate the success of Suits.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> One more interesting title on Page Six:
> *Meghan Markle reportedly took 13 trips despite claims passport was taken away*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly took 13 trips despite claims passport was taken away
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah Winfrey that she handed over her passport when she joined the royal fold in 2016.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I think the whole "they took my passport and driver's license" thing was such a non-story. :/ I THINK I get what she meant when I peel back all the emotion, which is... she has a whole team of people who schedules appointments, books travel, handles immigration affairs, etc. so it's more practical for them to keep those documents rather than asking her each time to see them. It CAN feel odd to have strangers keep hold of your identity docs, and might feel like you're captive if you're desperate to leave, but it's obviously not a malicious or nefarious thing here. I really don't think she needed to make it seem that way. Things like this are part of the blame and shame, little objectivity. Imagine the difference in response if she had said what I said instead of what she said.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have watched them both on video clips and Zooms and they are funny and spontaneous. That is a real tell as to how genuine a person is.


I don't follow them closely but from what I've seen she is just lovely to people and great with the kids.  he seems to be a decent human performing his duties as a royal with grace


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> they would never sit down with a reporter who wasn't a friend IMO
> I wonder if 60 Minutes could do a legit interview
> 
> according to this bio from CBS Gayle King is a reporter.....but she isn't acting like one - fawning over H&M
> --and I like Gayle....I'm not some hater of the "liberal media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King
> 
> 
> Co-host, "CBS This Morning"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Gayle is on a morning show not the 6 o clock political news , yes, she does reporting

I remember Megyn Kelly went from being a hard core political journalist to being on a morning chat show , night and day, she was suddenly doing pieces on banana bread recipes not the elections 

Morning show is news show  is kind of like the DM is to The Times, different audience


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> For those who drop by to tell us how horrible we are to continually call out Meghan on her behaviors, I (we) really do pay attention to all the news and here is an opportunity to share a nice gesture, one many of us can relate to.  I do wish a safe delivery of the little girl who will someday wear this. The article goes on to say Meaghan engraved the back of it in anticipation of giving it to a daughter.
> 
> Probably fortuitous the Sussexes only plan to have one, no question about which daughter would be the recipient, or having to buy a second one, which, of course, they could afford.
> 
> *Meghan Markle already has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her daughter*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's little girl is due to be born this summer - and it appears Meghan Markle already has the baby's first heirloom ready and waiting.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan, who now live in Montecito, California, said they are preparing to welcome a sister for their 22-month-old son Archie later this year, during their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview earlier this week.
> 
> But despite still having a few months before they meet their newest family member, the duchess, 39, already has a gift lined up for her daughter - that she purchased before she had even met Prince Harry.
> 
> In an interview back in 2015, almost a year before Meghan began dating her now husband, the then Suits actress revealed the £4,800 heirloom Cartier piece she plans to give to her daughter.
> 
> Speaking to Hello! she said: 'I’ve always coveted the Cartier French Tank watch. When I found out Suits had been picked up for our third season – which, at the time, felt like such a milestone – I totally splurged and bought the two-tone version.


That very sweet about giving the little girl the expensive Cartier watch, but rubbing it in to the millions of people who are unemployed due  to Covid.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> That very sweet about giving the little girl the expensive Cartier watch, but rubbing it in to the millions of people who are unemployed due  to Covid.


True. It would have been more meaningful to have omitted the financials.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> A while back a poster asked about the racist articles and now I can’t find it.
> this is one list I found:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the UK media’s coverage of Meghan Markle really is racist
> 
> 
> The UK press’s continued denial of racism just shows how entrenched these attitudes are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.co.uk


Vox Media  USA media company based in Washington DC and New York City.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I have watched them both on video clips and Zooms and they are funny and spontaneous. That is a real tell as to how genuine a person is.


Will seems to be the one that inherited the kindness and empathy traits of Diana. Poor Harry, he may have inherited the complicated ones, which didn't help him to find a supportive partner.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> That very sweet about giving the little girl the expensive Cartier watch, but rubbing it in to the millions of people who are unemployed due  to Covid.


right....she is a role model for little girls of color....I guess if they like her they're happy for her even though some of them are poor and disadvantaged....they can dream of being an ex-princess like her


----------



## JY89

lalame said:


> I think the whole "they took my passport and driver's license" thing was such a non-story. :/ I THINK I get what she meant when I peel back all the emotion, which is... she has a whole team of people who schedules appointments, books travel, handles immigration affairs, etc. so it's more practical for them to keep those documents rather than asking her each time to see them. It CAN feel odd to have strangers keep hold of your identity docs, and might feel like you're captive if you're desperate to leave, but it's obviously not a malicious or nefarious thing here. I really don't think she needed to make it seem that way. Things like this are part of the blame and shame, little objectivity. Imagine the difference in response if she had said what I said instead of what she said.



And of course she wouldn’t. She simply will not ruin any opportunity given to convince everyone into thinking that the institution was controlling her even if it means to cover up the exact truth.

Playing victim is her forte and in her blood that she can’t seems to shake off. Not forgetting how she took things a notch up by claiming she was actually suicidal. The more dramatic, the better it is for her.

I don’t think she even truly left the UK? They claim they are leaving for good. But amazingly able to stir things up miles away and constantly associating themselves to the institution which they claim was bad for them.


----------



## bisousx

JY89 said:


> Candace Owens tears into 'leftist narcissist' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Owens told Sean Hannity Wednesday that Meghan 'couldn't keep her stories straight' during her bombshell interview with Oprah last weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From a WOC calling Meghan out for her lies. She was absolutely right on how Meghan claims that she was suicidal due to bad press when she on the other hand  claim that she doesn’t read the newspaper or check the social media.
> 
> Imagine what Meghan die-hard supporters are gonna say? Call Candace out for being racist when she herself is a WOC? Or says that she’s jealous because she didn’t manage to snag herself a Prince? Loll very much as delusional and unrealistic as the person they are supporting.
> 
> I’m so glad that Candace stood for the facts, did her research and call the liar out than being swayed by Meghan’s sympathy card tricks.



I would not want to be in the crossfire between Candace and Meghan. Candace is one super sharp and intelligent lady, and she’ll tell you whatever she wants you to hear to your face. Respect.

Meghan (who I also think is sharp) hides behind her PR company, cries victim, blames nonstop, and rages behind closed doors.

Two totally different styles of war.

Fwiw, Candace is my queen


----------



## marietouchet

Apologies if this was covered before ...

The Morton book has a quote from Diana stating that Charles was taken aback at Harry's birth (' oh God its a boy' and 'he's even got red hair'') .
The quotes from D are widely interpreted as C wanted a girl, and disliked the red hair. I give you the quotes to interpret yourself.  
*The topic of a baby not looking like parents started with Diana.   So, that can of worms was opened by Diana. *

Today's gossip ...  H may have started the chat about what Archie would look like. Something along the lines of maybe A would not have his own pallid skin and red hair. THIS MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME given the above comments from his mother.  

PS The red hair runs in the Spencer family.  H looks like his red headed Spencer aunt.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they would never sit down with a reporter who wasn't a friend IMO
> I wonder if 60 Minutes could do a legit interview
> 
> according to this bio from CBS Gayle King is a reporter.....but she isn't acting like one - fawning over H&M
> --and I like Gayle....I'm not some hater of the "liberal media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King
> 
> 
> Co-host, "CBS This Morning"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



You couldn’t trust 60 Minutes to do an unbiased story about them at this point. CBS has taken their side and they absolutely would not show an alternate viewpoint as it might  negate the Oprah show.


----------



## lalame

I can already imagine their next complaints...

There's a man who shows up at my property all the time with weapons and defaces nearly everything he sees. He hides the damage so we won't know!!  (it's the gardener)

There are people who steal away our cars and lock them in their own homes so we can't escape this hellhole!! We're prisoners!!(it's the butler living on top of the garage)

There's a revolving door of crazy people who kidnap Archie every day... I don't even know what they do to him but I hear his cries all day and night. Who is terrorizing us??? (it's the army of nannies)


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Apologies if this was covered before ...
> 
> The Morton book has a quote from Diana stating that Charles was taken aback at Harry's birth (' oh God its a boy' and 'he's even got red hair'') .
> The quotes from D are widely interpreted as C wanted a girl, and disliked the red hair. I give you the quotes to interpret yourself.
> *The topic of a baby not looking like parents started with Diana.   So, that can of worms was opened by Diana. *
> 
> Today's gossip ...  H may have started the chat about what Archie would look like. Something along the lines of maybe A would not have his own pallid skin and red hair. THIS MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME given the above comments from his mother.
> 
> PS The red hair runs in the Spencer family.  H looks like his red headed Spencer aunt.


in some cultures, red haired boys are considered very undesirable.  I recall my elderly Sicilian relatives disparaging a cousin's red headed boy.  But I would think it would be different in England.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Will seems to be the one that inherited the kindness and empathy traits of Diana. Poor Harry, he may have inherited the complicated ones, which didn't help him to find a supportive partner.



Harry may have inherited his troubled mental state from his mother, but he gets his douchiness from dad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Diana’s bulimia - Diana and her siblings have had and do have well-documented issues, either with food, alcohol, or education.  If you check their photos, you’ll see none of them have aged well.

RE: MM’s Cartier watch - at least this is a consistent story that has been written about for years. Just imagine the future photo op

RE: W&K - compare W&K’s family photos to Charles and Diana.  C&D’s were carefully staged and styled with very little joy and very stiff. W&K‘s are, too, but the people seem so much more natural and happy.  Sure, it was a different time, still unhappiness comes through. W&K’s children seem like fun, happy children.  H&M’s photos are carefully styled and staged, too.  Neither of them look natural. No one has really focused on the Archie video in OW’s interview. He is running away from his mother to a man’s legs, presumably Harry.  Something about that is kinda creepy. In addition, the full diaper birthday photo is unseemly. In the SA photo op, they both seemed excessively protective. Their photos don’t say natural or easy-going.

RE: H&M want free security. They will do and say anything to get it.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Harry may have inherited his troubled mental state from his mother, but he gets his douchiness from dad.


A real prize.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Apologies if this was covered before ...
> 
> The Morton book has a quote from Diana stating that Charles was taken aback at Harry's birth (' oh God its a boy' and 'he's even got red hair'') .
> The quotes from D are widely interpreted as C wanted a girl, and disliked the red hair. I give you the quotes to interpret yourself.
> *The topic of a baby not looking like parents started with Diana.   So, that can of worms was opened by Diana. *
> 
> Today's gossip ...  H may have started the chat about what Archie would look like. Something along the lines of maybe A would not have his own pallid skin and red hair. THIS MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME given the above comments from his mother.
> 
> PS The red hair runs in the Spencer family.  H looks like his red headed Spencer aunt.


The Spencer genes are amazingly strong. Many years ago I visited Blenheim. What most people don’t realize is that the family name is Spencer-Churchill because the only surviving child of the first Duke of Marlborough was a female and she married a Spencer. Whilst walking through the public rooms there are many family pictures displayed and there were pictures of Spencer cousins with Spencer-Churchill cousins and the resemblances were remarkable.   The genes really haven’t been watered down along the centuries.


----------



## lalame

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I obviously wasn't clear so many apologies for the confusion. I was referring to the differences in the way people were responding to MM...not MM herself or her actions...I hope that makes more sense!



No need for apologies!! I love to see your balanced comments. They are always worth engaging.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The Spencer genes are amazingly strong. Many years ago I visited Blenheim. What most people don’t realize is that the family name is Spencer-Churchill because the only surviving child of the first Duke of Marlborough was a female and she married a Spencer. Whilst walking through the public rooms there are many family pictures displayed and there were pictures of Spencer cousins with Spencer-Churchill cousins and the resemblances were remarkable.   The genes really haven’t been watered down along the centuries.



The Spencer family goes back to the 15th century. They were and are very much the aristocrats.  Physically Harry clearly is more Spencer than Wales. The red hair is Spencer, iirc. I expect we will hear and see much more from them as we get closer to the statue’s unveiling.









						Spencer family - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## JY89

bisousx said:


> I would not want to be in the crossfire between Candace and Meghan. Candace is one super sharp and intelligent lady, and she’ll tell you whatever she wants you to hear to your face. Respect.
> 
> Meghan (who I also think is sharp) hides behind her PR company, cries victim, blames nonstop, and rages behind closed doors.
> 
> Two totally different styles of war.
> 
> Fwiw, Candace is my queen



Yes, true respect for Candace and how sharp she is. Unlike the disturbing amount of celebs, influencers and politicians siding on Meghan blindly before fact checking.

Meghan is smart but she uses it in wrong ways to get what she wants to achieve. She’s also overly consumed by what’s being said about her. Unless she’s delusional or being unrealistic, she should clearly know that going on that interview will only allow more bad press to surface when you are pointing fingers at others. Again, not helping.

I just felt absolutely annoyed that Meghan is ALWAYS pulling the racist card, sympathy card, suicidal card(newly addded) and god knows what else she’s gonna claim next.

Using her mixed race heritage to her advantage and stirring the POC to support her from through personal experience from racism- what can I say? Nothing but manipulative.

 She’s considered so much more privileged than many of what the real POC are experiencing. Not even sure who’s the real victim here. And she seems to always relate it to herself when she mention abt POC than the people themselves. There are so many out there that are suffering and yet she’s all about herself being “mistreated”.


----------



## DeMonica

Chagall said:


> I heard that to. Certainly having a husband who had a mistress throughout the entire marriage would not have helped with her problem. She was 19 and I think she genuinely loved Charles when she met him. Charles was a cold fish with her and cared only for Camilla. I think she tried hard in the beginning to be a good supportive royal and wife and didn’t go off the rails until the end of their marriage. She put herself in dangerous (or so it was thought at the time) situations by hugging AIDS patients, and even visiting leper colonies. I agree that she mishandled the situation in the end. She didn’t need to go running around from man to man and shouldn’t have relied on her young sons for emotional support. She should never have done that terrible Panorama interview. Initially her heart was, I think, in the right place. She was definitely mentally ill I believe, and had no help from Charles. I really don’t think she was a manipulative planner, just someone struggling with a very difficult situation. Unlike MM.


I think she was very naive in the beginning, also very young. She had also come from a very difficult and unhappy family, so it's possible that she entered this marriage with high hopes to create a happy family for herself. She lacked proper support and guidance from her families (hers and his), probably had problems with self-control, and  had made a number of bad decisions she regretted later (James Hewitt or the Bashir interview - just to name a few).  I'm sure she wasn't easy to handle or particularly smart, and likely had some deep set emotional problems, but she was herself. She carved out her own way in history and became a fashion icon, champion of worthy causes and many things more. Now we have Meghan who tries to be the second coming of Diana by copying her dresses, poses and even her words. She is a mean copycat who's not afraid to tarnish anything or anybody for a minute of fame disregarding the possible long term consequences. I think she found the perfect puppet and meal ticket in Harry. He's neither educated, nor street smart in a world where people with university degrees fill shelves in supermarkets. His only achievements were with the army, although I wonder if it would have been different if he wasn't a prince, but an average soldier.  Since the lustre of "my famous mother died an I'm an ever grieving orphan" had worn off, he had to find something new - a woman with Diana-level ambitions. I wonder what will happen to him next. I think he managed to turn the whole RF against him and his wifey. Personally I can't see how he could mend fences with his family after this tragic interview.
Something I'd also like to see: how these two would handle a real interview. Because this wasn't that. It was a carefully rehearsed act, IMO on Oprah's side two. I'd be also interested how long it took to them to come up with these accusations and falsifications.


----------



## limom

csshopper said:


> For those who drop by to tell us how horrible we are to continually call out Meghan on her behaviors, I (we) really do pay attention to all the news and here is an opportunity to share a nice gesture, one many of us can relate to.  I do wish a safe delivery of the little girl who will someday wear this.
> 
> Probably fortuitous the Sussexes only plan to have one, no question about which daughter would be the recipient, or having to buy a second one, which, of course, they could afford.
> 
> *Meghan Markle already has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her daughter*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's little girl is due to be born this summer - and it appears Meghan Markle already has the baby's first heirloom ready and waiting.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan, who now live in Montecito, California, said they are preparing to welcome a sister for their 22-month-old son Archie later this year, during their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview earlier this week.
> 
> But despite still having a few months before they meet their newest family member, the duchess, 39, already has a gift lined up for her daughter - that she purchased before she had even met Prince Harry.
> 
> In an interview back in 2015, almost a year before Meghan began dating her now husband, the then Suits actress revealed the £4,800 heirloom Cartier piece she plans to give to her daughter.
> 
> Speaking to Hello! she said: 'I’ve always coveted the Cartier French Tank watch. When I found out Suits had been picked up for our third season – which, at the time, felt like such a milestone – I totally splurged and bought the two-tone version.
> 
> 'I had it engraved on the back, "To M.M. From M.M.", and I plan to give it to my daughter one day. That's what makes pieces special, the connection you have to them.'
> 
> The duchess appears to have owned the watch since 2013, having been pictured wearing it often before her marriage to Prince Harry.
> 
> The classic piece retails at almost £5,000 and the engraving is thought to stand for 'to Meghan Markle from Meghan Markle' because it was a gift to herself to celebrate the success of Suits.


She is incredibly vulgar. Always merching.....


----------



## Jktgal

JY89 said:


> Candace Owens tears into 'leftist narcissist' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Owens told Sean Hannity Wednesday that Meghan 'couldn't keep her stories straight' during her bombshell interview with Oprah last weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This column made me laugh, so funny. Certainly the thing I enjoy from this circus is the barbs - many I'll use in my rude ways.

Btw don't forget that Oprah is also an actress. She won awards for acting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Just seen on another thread that today's engagement was only supposed to be Catherine's but William went along to support her.



Yeah, if my wife was subjected to death threats over my SIL's crazy stans I'd probably want to support her too. Lovely gesture of him.


----------



## Chanbal

One more piece of information before I resume my activities, enjoy!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

'Recollections may vary': how the papers covered Queen's response to Meghan interview


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> She is incredibly vulgar. Always merching.....



Lady CC would agree.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> in some cultures, red haired boys are considered very undesirable.  I recall my elderly Sicilian relatives disparaging a cousin's red headed boy.  But I would think it would be different in England.


No, ginger hair (what you guys call red hair) and associated skin features are considered undesirable in general in the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> can't wait


Yeah though on that day I’m going to have to read up on who exactly Hilaria Baldwin is so I can move to the other non-stop comedy thread.


----------



## pukasonqo

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was the BBC, not a tabloid, and the guy got fired immediately!


 He got fired which is good but that doesn’t invalidate her experience of racism, he even tried to play it down





						Royal baby: BBC presenter Danny Baker fired for comparing Archie to a chimp
					






					amp.smh.com.au
				



And I stand corrected, he tweeted the pic


----------



## chicinthecity777

pukasonqo said:


> He got fired which is good but that doesn’t invalidate her experience of racism, he even tried to play it down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal baby: BBC presenter Danny Baker fired for comparing Archie to a chimp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.smh.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I stand corrected, he tweeted the pic


Yes, my point is it wasn't a UK tabloid who did it! I didn't dispute it happened or said it invalidated her experience.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, ginger hair (what you guys call red hair) and associated skin features are considered undesirable in general in the UK.


that would apply more for boys, right?


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> that would apply more for boys, right?


I don't think there would be any distinction between boys or girls.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't think there would be any distinction between boys or girls.


interesting....I think here in the US (at least used to be) red hair on boys wasn't considered attractive but the same prejudice didn't apply to girls....I'm maybe a bit biased as I have (dyed) red/auburn hair and it's my biggest asset


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know. I reckon she would wearing it 24x7, even in bed!


I can almost picture her wearing a tiara peeing in the woods.  Trust me, not an image I want in my head!


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> in some cultures, red haired boys are considered very undesirable.  I recall my elderly Sicilian relatives disparaging a cousin's red headed boy.  But I would think it would be different in England.


It is similar in some Andean communities 
My ex’s mum was hoping for a red head w my kids, my ex is an Aussie and his mum is one of 3 redheads so there was a lot of curiosity on how the kids would look as he is a dark Aussie and I am a bitser (bits of everything) from Peru so yup, family was curious on how the kids would look (human was the x’s reply)


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm old enough to remember the drama she created. She was bulimic before meeting Charles, but it wasn't good for her image to reveal it until later in life. Harry is probably a dumb a$$ as a result of her binge eating and purging during pregnancy as it is quite detrimental to the fetus. That's just my opinion and I don't want to upset the people that admire her.



I've read that children who are left-handed often have a mother who had an extremely stressful pregnancy. Do we know if Harry is left-handed? 
I'm a lefty and my mother had a very stressful pregnancy but she must have had better nutrition than Diana because I'm not a dumb a$$; I'm a smart a$$


----------



## limom

Why are red haired boys considered undesirable?


----------



## Aimee3

The Queen says “we will always love you” and probably means but not like we did before, you ungrateful brats!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh no I got the name wrong! It’s the ‘farming basket’. I love it. Hermes’ quirky stuff is great. Never seen this for sale anywhere though
> View attachment 5018778


Aha, I thought you meant another one which looks like some sort of exorbitantly priced cloth sack  Can't find it now but I swear I saw it on an H website. With the most miniscule collection of Calvis on tPF H forum, my H knowledge is pitiful, so don't trust me on this.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Why are red haired boys considered undesirable?


don't know....just a prejudice I think....some people view them as unattractive?


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, ginger hair (what you guys call red hair) and associated skin features are considered undesirable in general in the UK.


Yeah it is a little mean how it’s still ok to tease gingers. Like that stupid video Harry did with Ed sheeran. Red hair is, relatively, common in the UK compared to Italy I’d imagine?  It’s associated with the Celtic countries especially.

Lots of cultures do have this association with it being bad.  Seth in Egyptian mythology is a murderous redhead, I assume it’s something to do with redheads being rare and standing out a lot.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> interesting....I think here in the US (at least used to be) red hair on boys wasn't considered attractive but the same prejudice didn't apply to girls....I'm maybe a bit biased as I have (dyed) red/auburn hair and it's my biggest asset


It's not the same shade. The "ginger" refers to specific shade of bright very pigmented dark golden colour. Dyed red hair is called red hair here and doesn't have any negative connotations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

JY89 said:


> Yes, true respect for Candace and how sharp she is. Unlike the disturbing amount of celebs, influencers and politicians siding on Meghan blindly before fact checking.
> 
> Meghan is smart but she uses it in wrong ways to get what she wants to achieve. She’s also overly consumed by what’s being said about her. Unless she’s delusional or being unrealistic, she should clearly know that going on that interview will only allow more bad press to surface when you are pointing fingers at others. Again, not helping.
> 
> I just felt absolutely annoyed that Meghan is ALWAYS pulling the racist card, sympathy card, suicidal card(newly addded) and god knows what else she’s gonna claim next.
> 
> Using her mixed race heritage to her advantage and stirring the POC to support her from through personal experience from racism- what can I say? Nothing but manipulative.
> 
> She’s considered so much more privileged than many of what the real POC are experiencing. Not even sure who’s the real victim here. And she seems to always relate it to herself when she mention abt POC than the people themselves. There are so many out there that are suffering and yet she’s all about herself being “mistreated”.


But can she cry on demand like Meg prides herself on being able to do?  lol


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah it is a little mean how it’s still ok to tease gingers. Like that stupid video Harry did with Ed sheeran. Red hair is, relatively, common in the UK compared to Italy I’d imagine?  It’s associated with the Celtic countries especially.
> 
> Lots of cultures do have this association with it being bad.  Seth in Egyptian mythology is a murderous redhead, I assume it’s something to do with redheads being rare and standing out a lot.


They are commoner in Ireland, not very common in England. I said this before, no gingerism!


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Why are red haired boys considered undesirable?


found this article online








						The science behind anti-redhead prejudice
					

Studies show that people are less likely to make a move on a redheaded girl or accept the advances of a redheaded guy. Why?



					theweek.com


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> interesting....I think here in the US (at least used to be) red hair on boys wasn't considered attractive but the same prejudice didn't apply to girls....I'm maybe a bit biased as I have (dyed) red/auburn hair and it's my biggest asset


ooohhhh, I wanna see! I wanna see! your hair...


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not the same shade. The "ginger" refers to specific shade of bright very pigmented dark golden colour. Dyed red hair is called red hair here and doesn't have any negative connotations.


so what americans call carrot top


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> No idea what his background is, but he makes a strong point. You’re right, I do see some Bill Murray.
> Wonder if other royals will issue similar statements.



Let all the Royals around the world unite!


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> found this article online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The science behind anti-redhead prejudice
> 
> 
> Studies show that people are less likely to make a move on a redheaded girl or accept the advances of a redheaded guy. Why?
> 
> 
> 
> theweek.com


Great mind thinks alike.
Apparently in the middle Age Red haired children was a sign of parental sin
.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I think that this is the first time since I became a member on tPF that I'm actually wishing for Vlad or Meg to step in and pause a thread, so that I get a chance to catch up. Please, someone, make it so! Cause some drama! Report! Report!


----------



## pukasonqo

limom said:


> Why are red haired boys considered undesirable?
> [/
> No idea!
> “During the Spanish Inquisition (one of the fairest and justified of all inquisitions) flame colored hair was evidence that it's owner had stolen the fire of hell and had to be burned as a witch”.
> In the Andes Judas was traditionally described as a redhead but as Catholicism was imposed by the Spaniards it could have been a belief transferred from them


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> It was a carefully rehearsed act, IMO on Oprah's side two. I'd be also interested how long it took to them to come up with these accusations and falsifications.



Remember we neither saw nor heard a peep from Meghan from the end of December until about mid-February. 6-8 weeks was plenty of time to come up with a strategy plan on what to put in the interview.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Remember we neither saw nor heard a peep from Meghan from the end of December until about mid-February. 6-8 weeks was plenty of time to come up with a strategy plan on what to put in the interview.


Wasn’t close to the one year deadline?
As far as their grievances, it is a marketing gimmick, imho.
Plus, since the pandemic is coming to an end, commerce can resume and therefore they have to raise their profile.
I sincerely hope that their ventures are successful or we will have to brace for a realty show to fill their needs for attention....


----------



## kkfiregirl

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, ginger hair (what you guys call red hair) and associated skin features are considered undesirable in general in the UK.



I think there’s a similar attitude here in the US as far as I know.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

limom said:


> Imho, she was severely homesick and isolated.
> Oprah did not buy the story either.


Certainly not homesick for her father, whom she had disowned. Home sick for Doria? To me Doria seemed just an appropriate prop for good optics when it suited MM. Maybe she wanted to return to familiar territory and a larger audience that would "understand how mistreated she had been."


----------



## eunaddict

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I’m probably on so many ignore lists already only about 3 people will be able to read this!



Speaking for myself only, the ignore list is used for abusive people - those who waddle straight into a thread and proceed to insult everyone posting or those who make it their goal to argue with you over a singular point through multiple pages (there's someone in this thread I've muted because I'm really not invested enough in this thread to keep replying to their previously constantly quoting and misconstruing of my posts).

I also use it for people who don't know enough about a topic, refuse to do their own research into it but are happy to hold on to a very strong stance that undermines people who do know and who've researched. And this goes for a bunch of other topics - most recently being vax and anti-maskers.


*Dissension is welcomed!  *

(Man, I'm crotchety before my morning coffee)


----------



## mdcx

LemonDrop said:


> does anyone in here like Meghan? I like her.


It would be interesting to hear the reasons why.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> No, ginger hair (what you guys call red hair) and associated skin features are considered undesirable in general in the UK.


Not so much anymore.


----------



## limom

Maggie Muggins said:


> Certainly not homesick for her father, whom she had disowned. Home sick for Doria? To me Doria seemed just an appropriate prop for good optics when it suited MM. Maybe she wanted to return to familiar territory and a larger audience that would "understand how mistreated she had been."


I meant California and her career, friends/associates.
There is no doubt that moving from Northern America to London, marrying and having a baby in a short time is incredibly stressful.
Plus wanting a tiara and being denied. Just too much.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Certainly not homesick for her father, whom she had disowned. Home sick for Doria? To me Doria seemed just an appropriate prop for good optics when it suited MM. Maybe she wanted to return to familiar territory and a larger audience that would "understand how mistreated she had been."



“Homesickness” was another lie.  She moved to Canada when she got the job on Suits. She hadn’t lived in the US for several years.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know. I reckon she would wearing it 24x7, even in bed!


Or sitting on the throne in all her 16 bathrooms.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> “Homesickness” was another lie.  She moved to Canada when she got the job on Suits. She hadn’t lived in the US for several years.


The culture between Toronto and the US is very, very similar, imho.
Plus she travelled back and forth constantly.
Moving to England otoh...and marrying. She was not ready, imo


----------



## TC1

I can't imagine telling a reporter/journalist that I bought a Cartier watch and had it engraved "to MM, from MM"   I've bought myself a lot of milestone gifts over the years and can't imagine engraving them to myself


----------



## limom

TC1 said:


> I can't imagine telling a reporter/journalist that I bought a Cartier watch and had it engraved "to MM, from MM"   I've bought myself a lot of milestone gifts over the years and can't imagine engraving them to myself


What does the second MM stand for?
Mini Meagan ?


----------



## marietouchet

So funny , enjoy !


----------



## mdcx

limom said:


> What does the second MM stand for?
> Mini Meagan ?


To Meghan Markle from Meghan Markle...


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> The culture between Toronto and the US is very, very similar, imho.
> Plus she travelled back and forth constantly.
> Moving to England otoh...and marrying. She was not ready, imo



It doesn’t sound like she made much, if any, attempt to adapt to the cultural differences. I think she went into it thinking that once in, she could change things to suit herself. And as it turns out that is exactly what she did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not the same shade. The "ginger" refers to specific shade of bright very pigmented dark golden colour. Dyed red hair is called red hair here and doesn't have any negative connotations.



I always thought ginger was the carrot red accompanyed by freckles and light eyes, think Pippi Longstocking. From the pic Meghan's director friend posted Archie seems to have gotten the gorgeous variety, very deep red hair and brown eyes.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> It doesn’t sound like she made much, if any, attempt to adapt to the cultural differences. I think she went into it thinking that once in, she could change things to suit herself. And as it turns out that is exactly what she did.


Not only that but she travelled extensively in her short stints as a royal as well.
The real answer is that she hated the job and the job location.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Remember we neither saw nor heard a peep from Meghan from the end of December until about mid-February. 6-8 weeks was plenty of time to come up with a strategy plan on what to put in the interview.



Now that you say it! I even remember us wondering what she was plotting. Now we know.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I always thought ginger was the carrot red accompanyed by freckles and light eyes, think Pippi Longstocking. From the pic Meghan's director friend posted Archie seems to have gotten the gorgeous variety, very deep red hair and brown eyes.


So Archie is a red haired child. It is going to be a rough ride for her feelings....


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not that you say it! I even remember us wondering what she was plotting. Now we know.



We sure do. And the reality was so much worse than any of the wild ideas we speculated at the time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> Speaking for myself only, the ignore list is used for abusive people - those who waddle straight into a thread and proceed to insult everyone posting or those who make it their goal to argue with you over a singular point through multiple pages (there's someone in this thread I've muted because I'm really not invested enough in this thread to keep replying to their previously constantly quoting and misconstruing of my posts).
> 
> I also use it for people who don't know enough about a topic, refuse to do their own research into it but are happy to hold on to a very strong stance that undermines people who do know and who've researched. And this goes for a bunch of other topics - most recently being vax and anti-maskers.
> 
> 
> *Dissension is welcomed!  *
> 
> (Man, I'm crotchety before my morning coffee)



Jup, the one person I've blocked was a complete nutjob who personally insulted me in at least ten postings back to back. Everything else I can handle, even though the "But I refuse to let anything taint my opinion of  Meghan" crowd frustrates me.


----------



## mdcx

Homesick means being fed up with having to watch what she said and not just spout whatever word salad popped into her head imo. To a narcissist, being told that you cannot speak and act freely and on impulse, especially in public, would be very stressful I imagine.

Regards the comment earlier about MM creating chaos then standing back and staying calm - sounds about right. Maliciously provoking others just to watch them react and probably gather evidence of their “bad” behaviour is something that seems to fit.

Can you imagine how the watch story went down amongst the BRF if she shared it?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Not only that but she travelled extensively in her short stints as a royal as well.
> The real answer is that she hated the job and the job location.



Also she couldn’t stand having to answer to anyone else. She wanted to be top dog and being a few rungs down in the pecking order was unbearable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I can't imagine telling a reporter/journalist that I bought a Cartier watch and had it engraved "to MM, from MM"   I've bought myself a lot of milestone gifts over the years and can't imagine engraving them to myself



Right? I see nothing wrong in buying yourself something to mark a special occasion (or even no occasion at all), but of course she takes it to another self-absorbed level that just leaves me confused at best.


----------



## purseinsanity

JY89 said:


> Candace Owens tears into 'leftist narcissist' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Owens told Sean Hannity Wednesday that Meghan 'couldn't keep her stories straight' during her bombshell interview with Oprah last weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From a WOC calling Meghan out for her lies. She was absolutely right on how Meghan claims that she was suicidal due to bad press when she on the other hand  claim that she doesn’t read the newspaper or check the social media.
> 
> Imagine what Meghan die-hard supporters are gonna say? Call Candace out for being racist when she herself is a WOC? Or says that she’s jealous because she didn’t manage to snag herself a Prince? Loll very much as delusional and unrealistic as the person they are supporting.
> 
> I’m so glad that Candace stood for the facts, did her research and call the liar out than being swayed by Meghan’s sympathy card tricks.


It's refreshing to me when people like Trevor Phillips and Candace Owens, POC themselves, ditch the identity politics and use common sense.  I'm happy to see them calling out the inconsistencies in Meg's claims.  What are trolls going to accuse them of?  "You must be racist?"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> What does the second MM stand for?
> Mini Meagan ?



No...a gift from herself to herself.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> *Meghan Markle already has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her daughter*
> But despite still having a few months before they meet their newest family member, the duchess, 39, already has a gift lined up for her daughter - that she purchased before she had even met Prince Harry.
> Speaking to Hello! she said: 'I’ve always coveted the Cartier French Tank watch. When I found out Suits had been picked up for our third season – which, at the time, felt like such a milestone – I totally splurged and bought the two-tone version.
> 
> 'I had it engraved on the back, *"To M.M. From M.M."*, and I plan to give it to my daughter one day. That's what makes pieces special, the connection you have to them.'


Well, good for her for accomplishing something on her own!  I don't think anyone here doubts the love Meg has for herself though


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> It's refreshing to me when people like Trevor Phillips and Candace Owens, POC themselves, ditch the identity politics and use common sense.  I'm happy to see them calling out the inconsistencies in Meg's claims.  What are trolls going to accuse them of?  "You must be racist?"


In the case of Candace Owens, where do I start?


----------



## purseinsanity

JY89 said:


> Yes, true respect for Candace and how sharp she is. Unlike the disturbing amount of celebs, influencers and politicians siding on Meghan blindly before fact checking.
> 
> Meghan is smart but she uses it in wrong ways to get what she wants to achieve. She’s also overly consumed by what’s being said about her. Unless she’s delusional or being unrealistic, she should clearly know that going on that interview will only allow more bad press to surface when you are pointing fingers at others. Again, not helping.
> 
> *I just felt absolutely annoyed that Meghan is ALWAYS pulling the racist card, sympathy card, suicidal card(newly addded) and god knows what else she’s gonna claim next.*
> 
> Using her mixed race heritage to her advantage and stirring the POC to support her from through personal experience from racism- what can I say? Nothing but manipulative.


Don't forget the miscarriage card!!


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah though on that day I’m going to have to read up on who exactly Hilaria Baldwin is so I can move to the other non-stop comedy thread.


Yes, please join us!  We can mock Alec for being an a$$ without any accusations of racism!


----------



## gracekelly

DeMonica said:


> I think she was very naive in the beginning, also very young. She had also come from a very difficult and unhappy family, so it's possible that she entered this marriage with high hopes to create a happy family for herself. She lacked proper support and guidance from her families (hers and his), probably had problems with self-control, and  had made a number of bad decisions she regretted later (James Hewitt or the Bashir interview - just to name a few).  I'm sure she wasn't easy to handle or particularly smart, and likely had some deep set emotional problems, but she was herself. She carved out her own way in history and became a fashion icon, champion of worthy causes and many things more. Now we have Meghan who tries to be the second coming of Diana by copying her dresses, poses and even her words. She is a mean copycat who's not afraid to tarnish anything or anybody for a minute of fame disregarding the possible long term consequences. I think she found the perfect puppet and meal ticket in Harry. He's neither educated, nor street smart in a world where people with university degrees fill shelves in supermarkets. His only achievements were with the army, although I wonder if it would have been different if he wasn't a prince, but an average soldier.  Since the lustre of "my famous mother died an I'm an ever grieving orphan" had worn off, he had to find something new - a woman with Diana-level ambitions. I wonder what will happen to him next. I think he managed to turn the whole RF against him and his wifey. Personally I can't see how he could mend fences with his family after this tragic interview.
> Something I'd also like to see: how these two would handle a real interview. Because this wasn't that. It was a carefully rehearsed act, IMO on Oprah's side two. I'd be also interested how long it took to them to come up with these accusations and falsifications.



Exactly it was as rehearsed as it could be despite the disclaimer at the beginning of the show.  I take that with the same mountain of salt that I took when they said they weren't getting paid.  Even my DH made that observation.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, please join us!  We can mock Alec for being an a$$ without any accusations of racism!


if it weren't for the fact that Alec was and may still be a regular on SNL, they would be mocking his wife.  I call her Hilarious Baldwin and he is Senor Hilarious.  Like he didn't know the truth.  He met her parents for crying out loud!


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> if it weren't for the fact that Alec was and may still be a regular on SNL, they would be mocking his wife.  I call her Hilarious Baldwin and he is Senor Hilarious.  Like he didn't know the truth.  He met her parents for crying out loud!


The sex must be off the chains.
And all along, I thought that Kim Bassinger was the nutty one....


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I've read that children who are left-handed often have a mother who had an extremely stressful pregnancy. Do we know if Harry is left-handed?
> I'm a lefty and my mother had a very stressful pregnancy but she must have had better nutrition than Diana because I'm not a dumb a$$; I'm a smart a$$


Hmmm that's interesting!  I've never heard that before!  My pregnancies were very stressful and my daughter is left handed.  My SIL's 2 of 3 children are left handed.  We have a lot of southpaws in my family.  I wonder if all the females are just stressed out all the time?


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> The sex must be off the chains.
> And all along, I thought that Kim Bassinger was the nutty one....


Well you know there's a lot of it.  

Back to topic, LOL...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> For those who drop by to tell us how horrible we are to continually call out Meghan on her behaviors, I (we) really do pay attention to all the news and here is an opportunity to share a nice gesture, one many of us can relate to.  I do wish a safe delivery of the little girl who will someday wear this.
> 
> Probably fortuitous the Sussexes only plan to have one, no question about which daughter would be the recipient, or having to buy a second one, which, of course, they could afford.
> 
> *Meghan Markle already has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her daughter*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's little girl is due to be born this summer - and it appears Meghan Markle already has the baby's first heirloom ready and waiting.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan, who now live in Montecito, California, said they are preparing to welcome a sister for their 22-month-old son Archie later this year, during their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview earlier this week.
> 
> But despite still having a few months before they meet their newest family member, the duchess, 39, already has a gift lined up for her daughter - that she purchased before she had even met Prince Harry.
> 
> In an interview back in 2015, almost a year before Meghan began dating her now husband, the then Suits actress revealed the £4,800 heirloom Cartier piece she plans to give to her daughter.
> 
> Speaking to Hello! she said: 'I’ve always coveted the Cartier French Tank watch. When I found out Suits had been picked up for our third season – which, at the time, felt like such a milestone – I totally splurged and bought the two-tone version.
> 
> 'I had it engraved on the back, "To M.M. From M.M.", and I plan to give it to my daughter one day. That's what makes pieces special, the connection you have to them.'
> 
> The duchess appears to have owned the watch since 2013, having been pictured wearing it often before her marriage to Prince Harry.
> 
> The classic piece retails at almost £5,000 and the engraving is thought to stand for 'to Meghan Markle from Meghan Markle' because it was a gift to herself to celebrate the success of Suits.


Oh shoot. That means she’s probably not going with Diana after all. Unless she goes back to Cartier and gets them to redo it?
This is a non-story isn’t it? Celebrity has designer stuff- stop the press. 
Even us purseforum plebs have got some nice things. 


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Aha, I thought you meant another one which looks like some sort of exorbitantly priced cloth sack  Can't find it now but I swear I saw it on an H website. With the most miniscule collection of Calvis on tPF H forum, my H knowledge is pitiful, so don't trust me on this.


Yeah there’s so much obscure Hermes stuff out there. 
This article is great:








						The Ultimate Visual Guide to Hermès Bag Styles - PurseBlog
					

Finding information on Hermès bags is not easy, and that's by design; keeping its bags mostly shrouded in mystery helps the brand maintain the sense of exclusivity and scarcity that makes them the…




					www.purseblog.com
				



I think they’ve come out with some more stuff since then though. 
I struggle with totes or fiddly openings- so Hermes is not really me.
I will take that cute little milk churn bag for fun if  posters are getting points though


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Apologies if this was covered before ...
> 
> The Morton book has a quote from Diana stating that Charles was taken aback at Harry's birth (' oh God its a boy' and 'he's even got red hair'') .
> The quotes from D are widely interpreted as C wanted a girl, and disliked the red hair. I give you the quotes to interpret yourself.
> *The topic of a baby not looking like parents started with Diana.   So, that can of worms was opened by Diana. *
> 
> Today's gossip ...  H may have started the chat about what Archie would look like. Something along the lines of maybe A would not have his own pallid skin and red hair. THIS MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO ME given the above comments from his mother.
> 
> PS The red hair runs in the Spencer family.  H looks like his red headed Spencer aunt.


 

Good thing she wasn't in my family.  All my mother could ever talk about when there was a grandchild expected was she hated her brown eyes and didn't want any child to inherit them.  She had a pretty good wish record for the first four, but number five ruined things, with you guessed it, brown eyes.  That baby's mother had brown eyes!  How do you think she felt hearing what my mother was saying about brown eyes?  I have no idea myself because SIL is a very sweet woman and never said anything that I know of, but she got her revenge with number three child lol!  Point is, every family wonders what every single baby will look like.


----------



## JY89

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget the miscarriage card!!



hahah oh yes! Thanks for the reminder  You couldn’t have said it any better! Love what you said on the other post that you quoted- perfectly said


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> She is incredibly vulgar. Always merching.....



Sussex baby girl at age 18:  Mom do you expect me to wear that watch?  It is a vulgar bourgeois symbol of imperialist oppression!  I don't need a watch anyway, I have my phone chip in my brain so I always know what time it is!


----------



## Allisonfaye

JY89 said:


> Candace Owens tears into 'leftist narcissist' Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Owens told Sean Hannity Wednesday that Meghan 'couldn't keep her stories straight' during her bombshell interview with Oprah last weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From a WOC calling Meghan out for her lies. She was absolutely right on how Meghan claims that she was suicidal due to bad press when she on the other hand  claim that she doesn’t read the newspaper or check the social media.
> 
> Imagine what Meghan die-hard supporters are gonna say? Call Candace out for being racist when she herself is a WOC? Or says that she’s jealous because she didn’t manage to snag herself a Prince? Loll very much as delusional and unrealistic as the person they are supporting.
> 
> I’m so glad that Candace stood for the facts, did her research and call the liar out than being swayed by Meghan’s sympathy card tricks.



FYI, Candace's husband is white so she has an interracial marriage as well.


----------



## poopsie

floatinglili said:


> Unherd website is on fire with articles about this silly pair lol
> - article by Giles Fraser
> *Prince Harry is a Freudian dream*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is a Freudian dream - UnHerd
> 
> 
> It's hardly surprising that the Royal Family has its own Oedipus complex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unherd.com



Shakespeare would have had a field day with these two


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Shakespeare would have had a field day with these two


He could keep a therapist busier than Woody Allen and Allen was reputed to go 2-3 a week at one point.


----------



## poopsie

pukasonqo said:


> The little mermaid gave her voice away willingly in exchange for a pair of legs, she stroke a faustian bargain so to speak
> Has MM actually read the story?
> She does have a point re: treatment by the tabloids, didn’t one published a horrid pic of her and JCMH holding a baby chimp as their baby? That was infantile racism at its lowest



Kinda like that side by side of Camilla and the horse. Ageist? Sexist? Whatever.
Why is one 'acceptable' and the other creates a furor. 
I just don't like single edge swords


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, please join us!  We can mock Alec for being an a$$ without any accusations of racism!


You mean Alejandro Balduino of Casa de los Muchos Muchachos ( he’ll probably prefer Casa de los Muchos Machos o Casa Machos for short)


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Kinda like that side by side of Camilla and the horse. Ageist? Sexist? Whatever.
> Why is one 'acceptable' and the other creates a furor.
> I just don't like single edge swords


When Princess Anne was having her first, there were pictures of a her having a foal.  People do nasty things all the time.   The only one I know of regarding Archie was the stupid guy who found that old  time picture of a couple with the chimp and he was fired for his stupidity and insensitivity.


----------



## poopsie

bisousx said:


> It’s a sign of the times. No one wants to work for anything, pay for their loans and everyone wants free stuff and handouts. Well, not everyone, but it certainly seems like the trending thought among the younger generation. Who wouldn’t want to be royalty for 18 months then move onto a mansion and make million dollar deals? It’s a horrible example for younger people.



And it seems like there are plenty of office seekers that are more than willing to tell them what they want to hear.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Wasn’t close to the one year deadline?
> As far as their grievances, it is a marketing gimmick, imho.
> Plus, since the pandemic is coming to an end, commerce can resume and therefore they have to raise their profile.
> I sincerely hope that their ventures are successful or we will have to brace for a realty show to fill their needs for attention....


well a reality show is something I can definitely ignore


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I always thought ginger was the carrot red accompanyed by freckles and light eyes, think Pippi Longstocking. From the pic Meghan's director friend posted Archie seems to have gotten the gorgeous variety, very deep red hair and brown eyes.


that's rare....if he got that it's special


----------



## Prettyinpnknwht

limom said:


> I meant California and her career, friends/associates.
> *There is no doubt that moving from Northern America to London, marrying and having a baby in a short time is incredibly stressful.*
> Plus wanting a tiara and being denied. Just too much.



Does anyone else feel like half of this mess could have been avoided if they had waited more than 30 seconds to get engaged/get married/pop out a kid?  Of course, I don’t mean any offense to people who’ve gotten married after a short time (lots of people have very successful relationships!!), and I’m sure her age was a factor with them wanting to start a family (either that or she didn’t want to give Harry a chance to escape lol).  But if my understanding of the timeline of events is correct, their wedding was less than 2 years after they first met and started dating, and before their first anniversary they already had a child.  After officially being part of the family for less than a year, she’s already feeling so tormented by the whole situation that she wants to off herself.  

I can’t help but think that if there had been a little more breathing room between these events she might have realized, like Harry’s previous ex-gfs, that this was not necessarily the kind of life she wanted to live. And of course the rumors were that the rift between Harry and William originated when W was maybe trying to hint that you know, maybe it’s not such a good idea to rush into things, and H was having none of it. But as usual, _what Meghan wants Meghan gets.  _Now not only has the royal family been torn apart, H & M are also apparently trying to topple an entire institution because nobody could take 5 minutes beforehand to sit and think about whether this was such a good idea after all.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts? 

It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out! 

Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree 

Stay safe out there everyone!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Latest example of why the Sussexes are the most viperish couple on the planet. 

Having claimed they would "move on" after the Interview, of course they have not:

*"But since the screening, a raft of close friends and supporters have been given permission to push their case on social media and over the airwaves.

Yesterday, Meghan's close friend Janina Gavankar firmly rejected the Queen's statement that 'recollections may vary' over the claims made by the Sussexes. * 

*The actress, who has known Meghan for 17 years, said: 'Though their recollections may vary, ours don't.'

She also said the duchess gave her backing before she appeared on TV - despite Meghan reportedly agreeing a period of silence to cool tensions with the Palace".  *

As Piers said: "I wouldn't believe her (Meghan) if she read me a weather report."


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget the miscarriage card!!



If only. They won’t let us forget!


----------



## poopsie

limom said:


> *Imho, she was severely homesick and isolated.*
> Oprah did not buy the story either.



Has anyone asked Harry if *he* is okay?


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Has anyone asked Harry if *he* is okay?


he's ok just busy protecting His Wife


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Remember we neither saw nor heard a peep from Meghan from the end of December until about mid-February. 6-8 weeks was plenty of time to come up with a strategy plan on what to put in the interview.


I have to give it to her, she used her time creatively. It packed a punch.


----------



## chicinthecity777

kkfiregirl said:


> I think there’s a similar attitude here in the US as far as I know.


I feel it's less so in the U.S. but things do change.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> so what americans call carrot top


I learn something new every day! I have never heard that phrase before.


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts?
> 
> It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out!
> 
> Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree
> 
> Stay safe out there everyone!


Oh no, I don't see any of your posts should / have been deleted! Take care!


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I take that with the same mountain of salt that I took when they said they weren't getting paid.  Even my DH made that observation.



There are many creative ways to make sure to get paid. It could be as simple as Oprah making a generous donation to their money-laundering foundation  web site. Oops, I mean Archewell.


----------



## kkfiregirl

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I am reminded of
> an incident on the playground when my son was younger. One of my friends asked a child if the woman standing nearby was his mother. It was an innocent question, she wanted to arrange a play date. But the other woman got angry and said “yes I’m his mother who do you think I am?” We were both taken aback and my friend was hurt. Later, when I got to know the other mom, I learned why
> she responded that way. She’s a WOC and her husband is white, their children look very much like MM and she was often confused for the nanny. People made all sorts of assumptions and spoke to her in ways they never would have had they known she was the mother (which is awful but a whole other thread). So could she have been more gracious and polite in her response? Possibly. But how many times does someone have to check themselves? How endlessly patient and exhausted do we expect people to be before they snap? Where’s our grace and empathy in saying I am so sorry that keeps happening to you? I hear you, I get it (or at least I am trying to), and I'm sorry you have to deal with that...over and over and over again.



Thanks for sharing this story; I think these are important conversations to have. I don’t think your friend should have asked “are you the mother?” She should have said something like “the children seem to like each other, would you be interested in a okay date?” Then, the other person would reply “I’ll need to ask the parents” or “Sure! What’s your number?”

In general, I don’t think it’s very polite to ask “_are you the parent_?” It seems like a personal question that could be answered by befriending a person.


----------



## kkfiregirl

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts?
> 
> It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out!
> 
> Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree
> 
> Stay safe out there everyone!



Oh no! Sad to see you go! Maybe someone reported your posts? So strange, in any case, see you around the forum


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> I meant California and her career, friends/associates.
> There is no doubt that moving from Northern America to London, marrying and having a baby in a short time is incredibly stressful.
> Plus wanting a tiara and being denied. Just too much.


I do understand that it's entirely possible that rich and powerful people suffer mental health issues and it's no doubt moving to a different continent is stressful and I can totally believe she felt lonely at those times! But I cannot get over her tantrums and how she dealt or hasn't dealt with the situation! Going on national TV, attacking people, lying, playing victims etc! And her and Harry's hypocrisy! I just can't stand it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Latest example of why the Sussexes are the most viperish couple on the planet.
> 
> Having claimed they would "move on" after the Interview, of course they have not:
> 
> *"But since the screening, a raft of close friends and supporters have been given permission to push their case on social media and over the airwaves.
> 
> Yesterday, Meghan's close friend Janina Gavankar firmly rejected the Queen's statement that 'recollections may vary' over the claims made by the Sussexes. *
> 
> *The actress, who has known Meghan for 17 years, said: 'Though their recollections may vary, ours don't.'
> 
> She also said the duchess gave her backing before she appeared on TV - despite Meghan reportedly agreeing a period of silence to cool tensions with the Palace".  *
> 
> As Piers said: "I wouldn't believe her (Meghan) if she read me a weather report."



I can't say I'm surprised. The only thing that surprises me is that not more people are starting to grow suspicious.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't have time to copy and paste the article now, but can do it later. 












						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s Exit From ‘Royal Firm’ Shows Difficulty in Pruning Monarchy
					

Prince Charles wants to trim the ranks of working royal family members, but that exposes the palace to the risk that minor royals try to profit from their regal connections.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> I have to give it to her, she used her time creatively. It packed a punch.



I’m sure Netflix and Spotify really appreciate that they took a chance and gave those two inexperienced fools lucrative TV/podcast contracts, likely with substantial cash advances, only to be screwed over so that H&M could peddle the biggest story about them to another media outlet. H&M are loyal to no one but themselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I'm cleansed. Here is a good article about the protection. 






Tom Curran

Tue
What are your thoughts on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah?
As a lawyer, I follow the rule that once you’re caught lying in an answer - even slightly - your credibility is gone. *Especially if the lie is given in order to create a misleading impression.*
Here’s an example. Meghan complained that security was cut off, poor Archie was left unprotected. Oprah nodded in disapproving agreement.

But wait. There’s an international agreement regarding the protection of certain people - heads of state, heads of government and so on - requiring the country where those people are, to provide full security. They are called IPPs - internationally protected persons. So Canada paid for full protection after Harry and Meghan moved to Vancouver, as required by the treaty. But, after their move to LA, they quit being Senior Royals. Their choice. And one of the consequences is that they were no longer qualified as IPPs. Not a decision of the RF - a consequence of an international treaty. No more paid protection.
So, no, the RF didn’t cut off her protection - although her protection was indeed cut off. She framed it took look like the RF was the cause, a lie.

So - as a lawyer - I ask, what else did she lie about? Hard to tell. But for me, here’s one - that there were “concerns” - Markel’s word - about the colour of the child’s skin. She left the impression that it was a topic within the RF, and a worry. Then they were forced, later, to clarify that it wasn’t the Queen or Prince Phillip - thereby throwing everyone else under the bus by omission. And “concerns” - well, sorry Meghan, but you’ve been caught in self-serving lies, so I have to wonder whether “concerns” was no more than a dinner table, light-hearted inquiry - maybe even a legitimate question from someone not familiar with the genetics of bi-racial marriages, which are intricate to say the least.

*At the end of the day, I have the Queen - a woman of unquestionable dignity, honour, character and class - and I have Meghan Markel - a Deal or No Deal suitcase girl who found a playboy prince who likes to party naked. I ask myself, which one is more likely to have acted appropriately?*

36.8K views1.4K upvotes3 shares152 comments


----------



## bubablu

Prettyinpnknwht said:


> Does anyone else feel like half of this mess could have been avoided if they had waited more than 30 seconds to get engaged/get married/pop out a kid?  Of course, I don’t mean any offense to people who’ve gotten married after a short time (lots of people have very successful relationships!!), and I’m sure her age was a factor with them wanting to start a family (either that or she didn’t want to give Harry a chance to escape lol).  But if my understanding of the timeline of events is correct, their wedding was less than 2 years after they first met and started dating, and before their first anniversary they already had a child.  After officially being part of the family for less than a year, she’s already feeling so tormented by the whole situation that she wants to off herself.
> 
> I can’t help but think that if there had been a little more breathing room between these events she might have realized, like Harry’s previous ex-gfs, that this was not necessarily the kind of life she wanted to live. And of course the rumors were that the rift between Harry and William originated when W was maybe trying to hint that you know, maybe it’s not such a good idea to rush into things, and H was having none of it. But as usual, _what Meghan wants Meghan gets.  _Now not only has the royal family been torn apart, H & M are also apparently trying to topple an entire institution because nobody could take 5 minutes beforehand to sit and think about whether this was such a good idea after all.


This is obvious to everyone (except to him). But you have to remember that the stars were alligned when they magically met, and that they started to knew each other in such an organic way that it was impossible to refrain all.that.incredible.love. Meaning: Harry was pretty desperate to demonstrate that he was a big boy too, like Will and Kate. But no, he wasn't. But yes, he was so kind, olalalà.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> The New Yorker magazine mentions that the relationship between Meghan and her mother is close. The article quotes Meghan as saying of their relationship as being an "us against the world". Meghan paid for her mother to attend graduate school when she became wealthy.



From a foodnote of Wikipedia on Doria. Now...does the quote somehow sound familiar? Also I think it's interesting she couldn't be bothered to help her father when he was struggling financially - after he sank hundreds of thousands into her - but apparently paid for Doria's master's degree.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I'm cleansed.



Care to share what you do? If so, feel free to PM me!


----------



## Mendocino

jennlt said:


> I've read that children who are left-handed often have a mother who had an extremely stressful pregnancy. Do we know if Harry is left-handed?
> I'm a lefty and my mother had a very stressful pregnancy but she must have had better nutrition than Diana because I'm not a dumb a$$; I'm a smart a$$


I don't know if Harry is, but I know that William is. I'm a lefty as well, so I notice that characteristic in others.


----------



## Aimee3

I guess MM probably never heard the saying <<nobody believes a liar even when they’re telling the truth.>>
HM and MM likely rehearsed their lines but how did they have completely different timelines for the baby’s skin color comment?


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> I can't imagine telling a reporter/journalist that I bought a Cartier watch and had it engraved "to MM, from MM"   *I've bought myself a lot of milestone gifts over the years and can't imagine engraving them to myself *


Haha!  That was literally my first thought!


----------



## carmen56

jennlt said:


> I've read that children who are left-handed often have a mother who had an extremely stressful pregnancy. Do we know if Harry is left-handed?
> I'm a lefty and my mother had a very stressful pregnancy but she must have had better nutrition than Diana because I'm not a dumb a$$; I'm a smart a$$



William is left handed, don’t know about Harry.


----------



## purseinsanity

JY89 said:


> hahah oh yes! Thanks for the reminder  You couldn’t have said it any better! Love what you said on the other post that you quoted- perfectly said


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> You mean Alejandro Balduino of Casa de los Muchos Muchachos ( he’ll probably prefer Casa de los Muchos Machos o Casa Machos for short)


Yes, I stand corrected!  My apologies!


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> I think there’s a similar attitude here in the US as far as I know.



 the term redheaded stepchild comes immediately to mind............


----------



## Allisonfaye

JY89 said:


> Yes, true respect for Candace and how sharp she is. Unlike the disturbing amount of celebs, influencers and politicians siding on Meghan blindly before fact checking.
> 
> Meghan is smart but she uses it in wrong ways to get what she wants to achieve. She’s also overly consumed by what’s being said about her. Unless she’s delusional or being unrealistic, she should clearly know that going on that interview will only allow more bad press to surface when you are pointing fingers at others. Again, not helping.
> 
> I just felt absolutely annoyed that Meghan is ALWAYS pulling the racist card, sympathy card, suicidal card(newly addded) and god knows what else she’s gonna claim next.
> 
> Using her mixed race heritage to her advantage and stirring the POC to support her from through personal experience from racism- what can I say? Nothing but manipulative.
> 
> She’s considered so much more privileged than many of what the real POC are experiencing. Not even sure who’s the real victim here. And she seems to always relate it to herself when she mention abt POC than the people themselves. There are so many out there that are suffering and yet she’s all about herself being “mistreated”.



Maybe she should start fighting with the teacher's unions to get the kids in school. Black and brown kids suffer the most.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't say I'm surprised. The only thing that surprises me is that not more people are starting to grow suspicious.



The average person in the US knows very little about them. Maybe everything they know came from this interview and it’s intensive coverage. It was so completely one-sided it’s no wonder people assume it is true.


----------



## Allisonfaye

limom said:


> Why are red haired boys considered undesirable?



Maybe because since red hair rarely skips a generation, it became apparent it was the milk man's kid???


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> I can't imagine telling a reporter/journalist that I bought a Cartier watch and had it engraved "to MM, from MM"   I've bought myself a lot of milestone gifts over the years and can't imagine engraving them to myself


well, you're not a narcissist


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> The average person in the US knows very little about them. Maybe everything they know came from this interview and it’s intensive coverage. It was so completely one-sided it’s no wonder people assume it is true.


My DH who does not know anything about them watched the interview and commented later on that they were entitled.
I watched the housewives


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> found this article online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The science behind anti-redhead prejudice
> 
> 
> Studies show that people are less likely to make a move on a redheaded girl or accept the advances of a redheaded guy. Why?
> 
> 
> 
> theweek.com



Wow, who knew? I guess they are both oppressed. But it's a pretty good bet that Archie and Baby Diana will have freckles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

2 80+ year olds weight in — seem to be TeamQueen
Phil would have been a better interviewer

Marlo Thomas, 83, and Phil Donohue, 85, share the secret to their 40 year marriage ... and weigh in on Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview

Marlo Thomas, 83, and Phil Donohue, 85, are a rarity after 40 years together 
The duo told Drew Barrymore Show what it has been like working together 
They also weighed in on Oprah's interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
'I felt so sorry for the Queen. That poor woman,' said That Girl star Marlo
'What she’s been through trying to keep that family up,' the Friends vet added
'I mean every time she turns around wham something else has gone wrong'
'Prince Andrew, Prince Charles and Camilia and Diana dying,' she explained
'I mean, I really feel for her,' said the star who then talked about her husband
'Phil said he just wished he had the interview,' she said of the talk show host
'I felt very jealous of Oprah,' Donohue, a veteran media personality, admitted
'I mean that’s the kind of interview I would have loved to have had'









						Marlo Thomas and Phil Donohue on 40 years of marriage
					

Marlo Thomas and Phil Donohue sat down with The Drew Barrymore Show for a segment airing Thursday and discussed working together after decades as husband and wife.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, who knew? I guess they are both oppressed. But it's a pretty good bet that Archie and Baby Diana will have freckles.


you never know.......the little girl could come out looking like Doria.....or could be as white as Harry....perhaps this is the kind of speculation that was made by the evil member of the RF
I would think most likely their kids would be light brown but apparently you never know with genetics


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> My DH who does not know anything about them watched the interview and commented later on that they were entitled.
> I watched the housewives



My DH watched with me for about 20 minutes. Then he said “yeah, she’s lying” and left the room.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts?
> 
> It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out!
> 
> Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree
> 
> Stay safe out there everyone!



Same. You're up against it and not in a place where any real conversation can take place, when mods  - who are _supposed_ to be impartial - are weighing in on one side or the other.  Hardly a place without bias.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, who knew? I guess they are both oppressed. But it's a pretty good bet that Archie and Baby Diana will have freckles.


In anycase, baby Archie looks cute and healthy. 
I can’t wait to see her mini me..


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm that's interesting!  I've never heard that before!  My pregnancies were very stressful and my daughter is left handed.  My SIL's 2 of 3 children are left handed.  We have a lot of southpaws in my family.  I wonder if all the females are just stressed out all the time?



My first pregnancy was very stressful. I was working for my boss, AKA Satan at the time on our annual huge project. I was told to not work OT but Satan didn't care. Luckily, at 26 weeks, I started to go into premature labor and had to go on bedrest so Satan no longer controlled my life. My daughter is a righty.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> My first pregnancy was very stressful. I was working for my boss, AKA Satan at the time on our annual huge project. I was told to not work OT but Satan didn't care. Luckily, at 26 weeks, I started to go into premature labor and had to go on bedrest so Satan no longer controlled my life. My daughter is a righty.


was Satan a woman or a man?


----------



## CarryOn2020

When more people become aware of Hazzie’s falsehoods, opinions will change:









						Prince Harry DID ride bikes with his dad
					

PHOTOS have re-emerged casting doubt on one of the claims made by Prince Harry during his incendiary television interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts?
> 
> It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out!
> 
> Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree
> 
> Stay safe out there everyone!



No!
I'm late to this thread every day so it is possible that your posts may have already been deleted but I haven't seen anything either.
I noticed another poster to this thread was SKB and _that_ had me wondering as well what had happened with them


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute. So the people who slam Markle's critics as racists have zero problem criticizing Candace Owens and don't see themselves as racists? But I thought to criticize a POC is to be racist. Meghan's stans tell us so. OH I'M SO CONFUSED.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> was Satan a woman or a man?



It was a she. My name for her seemed nicer than my coworker who called her the C word.


----------



## Missydora

My own feeling is that they are somewhat sensationalising some of their accounts and stories.  To keep the drama going so people are second guessing getting exposure good or bad. They need this captive audience  After all they've signed this massive netflix deal and podcast so they will need to keep the audience watching and subscribing otherwise who's going to want to pay them the  $100million and continue a contract if they are boring to watch and viewers don't tune in.  So by keeping the attention on them even if it means throwing their families under a bus.   
 I don't dispute that racism and  mental health issues aren't  important messages to get across. But this really isn't the way to do it.   There are hundreds of other less attention grabbing ways that would have had a better outcome which don't require a major broadcast in solving some of their personal issues.  But I guess it wouldn't have given them the platform or a way to earn a crumb maybe boost their names and have a bit more power and command.   Well I hope now they have it . They use it to boost some good causes.    Even though I dont  feel they  deserve the recognition.  They have been a little bit too tactile and  ruthless to get to this point.  They definatley don't get my respect even if it's for good causes as they lead us to believe.  The ulterior motive is mostly for personal gains,  money and their egos.  In years to come I somehow feel they will major regret this interview.


----------



## poopsie

Aimee3 said:


> *I guess MM probably never heard the saying <<nobody believes a liar even when they’re telling the truth.>>*
> HM and MM likely rehearsed their lines but how did they have completely different timelines for the baby’s skin color comment?



Guess Doria never read Aesop's Fables to her, huh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Same. You're up against it and not in a place where any real conversation can take place, when mods  - who are _supposed_ to be impartial - are weighing in on one side or the other.  Hardly a place without bias.



You think? I'm asking without unterlying snark...I'm an admin in two FB groups and of course I participate in the discussions which can sometimes get heated as well. I don't moderate what is being said on topics, just how it's being said e.g. personal insults, swearing etc.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> Thanks for sharing this story; I think these are important conversations to have. I don’t think your friend should have asked “are you the mother?” She should have said something like “the children seem to like each other, would you be interested in a okay date?” Then, the other person would reply “I’ll need to ask the parents” or “Sure! What’s your number?”
> 
> In general, I don’t think it’s very polite to ask “_are you the parent_?” It seems like a personal question that could be answered by befriending a person.


I've had many instances where people assumed I was the nanny, because my children look absolutely nothing like me.  It was annoying in the beginning, but it's understandable, especially nowadays with adoption, surrogates, modern blended families, etc., It's human nature to be curious.  I don't take everything as an affront.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From a foodnote of Wikipedia on Doria. Now...does the quote somehow sound familiar? Also I think it's interesting she couldn't be bothered to help her father when he was struggling financially - after he sank hundreds of thousands into her - but apparently paid for Doria's master's degree.


LOL WTF does it need to mention Meg paid for her degree?  What a load of crap.  One of her bots has been tweeking her Wiki.


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> I've had many instances where people assumed I was the nanny, because my children look absolutely nothing like me.  It was annoying in the beginning, but it's understandable.  Nowadays with adoption, surrogates, modern blended families, etc., It's human nature to be curious.  I don't take everything as an affront.


I am asked where and how did I adopt. I laughed it off and depending on the situation showEd my stretch marks.  
The nurses at delivery made some weird comments..
It does not stop but I am too old to care.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You think? I'm asking without unterlying snark...I'm an admin in two FB groups and of course I participate in the discussions which can sometimes get heated as well. I don't moderate what is being said on topics, just how it's being said e.g. personal insults, swearing etc.


It's not just what I think, it's posts I've seen here from Mods.  I am also a Mod on two forums where the subjects can get a little touchy. If you're an admin or mod you need to try to remain impartial.  That is not what I've seen here.


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> LOL WTF does it need to mention Meg paid for her degree?  What a load of crap.  One of her bots has been tweeking her Wiki.


Anyone can edit Wiki.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> It was a she. My name for her seemed nicer than my coworker who called her the C word.


The kind you see next Tuesday?


----------



## limom

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's not just what I think, it's posts I've seen here from Mods.  I am also a Mod on two forums where the subjects can get a little touchy. If you're an admin or mod you need to try to remain impartial.  That is not what I've seen here.


the mods just erased the posts with no explanation?
Not my experience here.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Guess Doria never read Aesop's Fables to her, huh


She was too busy teaching Hilaria Baldwin her signature yoga moves.  The kind you get all bendy and twisty to attract a big baby boy.  Worked for Meg too!


----------



## FreeSpirit71

limom said:


> the mods just erased the posts with no explanation?
> Not my experience here.


I'm not talking about that, but about posting in the threads they are supposed to be moderating, with a very definite bias.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> The kind you see next Tuesday?



Yup.


----------



## limom

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not talking about that, but about posting in the threads they are supposed to be moderating, with a very definite bias.


Is there a rule against the mods having their own opinion?


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> It was a she. My name for her seemed nicer than my coworker who called her the C word.


LOL
probably my most difficult boss was a woman too....I wouldn't go as far as to call her satan but she was moody and could be very cold


----------



## FreeSpirit71

limom said:


> Is there a rule against the mods having their own opinion?


Probably not, but in my experience it's not wise and doesn't exactly show their decisions are unbiased.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Here in Canada, this was making the news and CTV, one of our major TV stations, had some reporters giving a balanced take on things. Not fawning over Meg, but stating facts.
> 
> I turned the channel to CNN and they had Omid Scobie on and he was giving his one-sided take and the news anchor interviewing him was really in Meg's corner saying the BRF is racist and Meg is the victim. Not exactly balanced journalism.
> 
> I thought the two views were interesting, but then again, we're still part of the Commonwealth, so maybe we see the BRF a little differently than the States.


Uggh .. I used to like CNN, but they seem to have an issue (_as of late_) with having 2 different views .. after all, they have got to know that Scoobie-dummy-doo is (in essence) Meghan's mouthpiece!


Chanbal said:


> Turning their ire on the Queen, bad move!
> 
> *Drunk on their own drama: Harry and Meghan say relentless negativity forced them out... yet these joyously positive front pages prove the opposite. SARAH VINE unearths the real cause for their TV high noon*
> 
> Few things exemplify Britishness more than dear old Marks & Spencer.
> 
> So when, in May 2018, the Windsor branch changed its name to ‘Markle and Sparkle’ in honour of the marriage of Harry Windsor to Meghan Markle, it felt like the ultimate stamp of approval.
> 
> Swept away by the giddy excitement of a royal wedding — and not just any royal wedding, the marriage of Princess Diana’s younger son, that brave little soldier who carved his name on all our hearts the day he walked behind his mother’s coffin just aged 12 —we were as entranced by Meghan as Harry clearly was.
> 
> It wasn’t just that she was gorgeous, there was also far more to her than most royal fiancees. She had a backstory that wasn’t all pony clubs and boarding schools.
> 
> Here was a woman who had worked hard to forge a career and a name for herself, who understood what it meant to overcome adversity.
> She was talented, with a successful acting career behind her; but above all else she was strong — and that was reassuring. Despite his stint in the Army, there was still a degree of vulnerability to Harry.
> 
> By contrast, Meghan was a grown-up who could stand on her own two feet, even if those feet were invariably encased in vertiginous heels that would have crippled most mortals.
> 
> It felt like Harry had chosen wisely: someone capable of withstanding the inevitable challenges of becoming a royal consort and providing him with the solid foundation he needed to leave the past behind and start building a family of his own.
> 
> For two decades since the death of his mother, we had watched with trepidation, never certain how the psychological effects of that trauma would play out. Successive girlfriends had never seemed quite able to cope.
> But when Meghan came along it felt like he had finally found someone up to it. We could all heave a huge sigh of relief. And we were just so happy, for both of them.
> 
> My goodness, how wrong we were. It seems astonishing that we could have been so naive. For far from being the making of Harry, Meghan might just prove his downfall. All that initial goodwill and promise has been, in just a few short years, entirely squandered.
> 
> The headlines that welcomed their union so enthusiastically have slowly soured, as the couple’s behaviour has grown ever more paranoid and self-destructive.
> As for Harry, with Meghan at his side he has gone from being almost universally adored to an angry, bitter, resentful and — astonishingly for someone who grew up in his circumstances — decidedly chippy shadow of his former self, clipped and stony-faced, now all but unrecognisable from the man we thought we knew.
> 
> And now, a crossroads. The next few days will determine the outcome of this extraordinary stand-off between the Queen and her grandson.
> 
> And although the forthcoming Oprah Winfrey interview will no doubt paint them both as victims of a terrible conspiracy by the British Press and ‘The Firm’ to discredit them in the eyes of the public, that same public will judge them not by their performances on the sofa of a chat show hostess, but by their actions.
> 
> In her latest clip to promote the interview, Meghan tells Oprah that now she has escaped the ‘construct’ of the Royal Family, ‘it’s really liberating to be able to have the right and the privilege in some ways to be able to say, yes, I’m ready to talk’.
> But this so-called liberation comes at a cost — and Harry is the one who stands to lose the most. Stripped of his royal patronages and without any of the infrastructure that has surrounded him all his life, he now faces a future of cold, hard commercial reality.
> 
> Together they seem intent on an aggressive approach that, while perhaps satisfying both financially and emotionally in the short term, will leave them with fewer options in future.
> 
> *Not even Prince Philip’s stay in hospital and his subsequent heart operation seems to have been able to soften the couple’s determination to pursue this collision course.*
> 
> When did it all change for them? After all, at the moment Meghan first appeared, they had the goodwill of the nation firmly behind them. The coverage was universally positive.
> 
> And while Meghan’s complicated family life inevitably drew some attention, to a great extent it was seen as a measure of her resilience that she had managed to make her way in the world despite it. There were many, myself included, who admired her as a result.
> 
> But while so much of the focus has been on Meghan and her allegedly disruptive influence on the Prince, the seeds of this conflict were sown long before she came on the scene.
> It is often the way of these things that the woman takes the blame, but that would be unfair. She was simply the catalyst for the simmering undercurrents of resentment that had long stirred deep in the heart of the Prince.
> 
> The true strength of those feelings was made abundantly clear in 2017, in a documentary filmed by the brothers to mark the 20th anniversary of their mother’s death.
> 
> The extent of the damage done to the young Prince by his parents’ acrimonious divorce, the Palace’s treatment of Diana and his father’s relationship with Camilla was painfully obvious.
> 
> While William came across as a man who had, not easily but with thoughtfulness and dedication, done his best to make his peace with the past, for Harry the hurt and anger were still raw. In particular his loathing of the Press, which he directly blamed for his mother’s death, was marked. While in some ways understandable — though her driver was drunk, the paparazzi were indeed following her — it seemed to be eating away at him in a way that was clearly toxic.
> 
> When he met and married Meghan, Harry’s anger in this respect seems to have escalated and, to an extent, become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
> 
> In November 2016, he hit back at the media in a strongly-worded statement, accusing the Press of harassment and sharp practices towards Meghan, alleging racism and, most tellingly, expressing his disappointment that he had ‘not been able to protect her’.
> 
> This goes to the heart of how and why it has all gone so horribly wrong. Even before he had proposed to Meghan, Harry had decided to go to war with those he held responsible for his pain.
> He had been too young to protect his beloved mother; he was not going to make the same mistake with his wife.
> 
> In many ways, what we are dealing with here is not a 36-year-old man, but the part of him that remains an angry young boy, racked with the pain of losing his mother.
> 
> It is certainly telling that one of the first clips released from the Oprah interview was Harry saying he feared ‘history repeating itself’.
> 
> To some degree, this is understandable: but there was a strong element of Harry’s behaviour that suggested he was not only prepared to take a defensive position; he was actively spoiling for a fight.
> 
> Except a lot of the time he was tilting at windmills.
> 
> Yes, Meghan did receive a horrible amount of online abuse — but that is sadly true of almost any high- profile woman.
> 
> Of course there was a huge amount of media interest in her family, some of whom turned out to be self-interested attention-seekers, hoping to profit by association.
> 
> Nevertheless, the compliments were flowing for her: ‘Dazzling debut’, ‘a very modern royal’, ‘magic’. At every turn she garnered praise.
> 
> But it was almost as if the couple had developed a narrative of victimhood that they were determined to pursue wherever possible.
> 
> Perfectly legitimate questioning of their subsequent behaviour — of their doom-mongering about climate change allied to their proclivity for private jets, of their clear preference for the company of celebrities over royal duties — was interpreted by them, entirely erroneously, as rooted in prejudice.
> 
> The truth is, the attention they received was by no means any worse than previous royal couples had endured. In fact, it was much better. Kate Middleton had a torrid time of it, humiliatingly dubbed ‘Waity Katie’ for the time it took William to propose; poor Camilla was frequently painted as an evil witch in contrast to the saintly Diana; even the Queen has had to endure speculation about her marriage over the years.
> 
> However hurtful and damaging these other royals might have found these stories, they all found ways of turning public opinion in their favour. With the help of advisers, they managed to carve out the privacy they needed within the context of wider scrutiny.
> 
> But right from the start, Harry and Meghan insisted that everything had to be done their way.
> 
> Witness the rapid turnover of staff in their private office, not to mention subsequent accusations of bullying, now being formally investigated by the Palace.
> 
> Again, they handled the Press with all the skill and maturity of petulant teenagers, reducing those around them — people who only wanted the best for them — to emotional rubble.
> 
> It’s these accusations of staff bullying that will ultimately prove problematic for them. Not just back home in Blighty but also in their adopted land of California, where bullying is as much of a no-no as sexual harassment.
> 
> Witness the downfall of Ellen DeGeneres, once the undisputed queen of American TV, brought low by a bullying scandal very similar to the one that now threatens to engulf the Sussexes. It won’t play out well for them in their new life among the gilded ranks of politically-correct Hollywood celebrity to have something like that hanging over their heads.
> 
> *But perhaps the biggest mistake Harry and Meghan have made is to turn their ire on the Queen.*
> 
> If they had made a decision to simply walk away on the grounds that the trappings of fame and fortune were, ultimately, too much to bear, no one would have blamed them. It is a tough existence and one that not everyone can stomach. No one could begrudge Harry for wanting a quiet life.
> 
> But that is not what they have done. *They have deliberately courted publicity. And instead of bowing out gracefully from royal life, they have embarked on an astonishing smear campaign against the very people and institution to which they owe their exalted status.*
> 
> It is one thing to walk away from the House of Windsor; it is quite another to torch the place on the way out. Lecturing the Queen, who has dedicated seven decades to her country, on the nature of ‘service’ is not only absurd — especially when you consider they lasted, by comparison, five minutes — but extreme arrogance.
> 
> Bleating about privacy while selling details of their existence to the highest bidder, and styling themselves as ambassadors for kindness and compassion and allegedly causing material distress to a woman whose husband is seriously ill in hospital, is not acceptable.
> 
> Allowing the monarch to be cast as some sort of mafia boss — ‘were you silent or were you silenced?’ Oprah asked of them — is unforgivable.
> 
> As for claiming that the whole experience — lavish wedding, free houses, hot and cold running staff and every conceivable privilege —was ‘unsurvivable’; that’s just insulting to the millions of souls on this planet whose lives are truly insufferable, not to mention the many thousands back home who have spent the past year doing their best to survive the pandemic without the benefit of 14 bedrooms and a swimming pool.
> 
> It’s a sad, sorry situation. No doubt they — and the fans who buy into their tale of victimhood — will see their audience with Oprah as triumphant retribution for their suffering.
> 
> But there will be many more who will see it for what it is: The delusional, one-sided ravings of a couple drunk on their own drama.
> 
> The all Drama here!


This is *BEST* article ever about these 2 grifters; *100% SPOT-ON*!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm that's interesting!  I've never heard that before!  My pregnancies were very stressful and my daughter is left handed.  My SIL's 2 of 3 children are left handed.  We have a lot of southpaws in my family.  I wonder if all the females are just stressed out all the time?


 I'm the only lefty in my family so I caused some trouble. My mother could _not_ figure out how to teach me how to tie my shoes lol.

I cancelled my WSJ subscription so I couldn't get the whole article but this came up in my Google results. 









						The Health Risks Of Being Left-Handed
					

Left-handers have been the subject of stigma over the centuries. Now researchers are recognizing the scientific importance of understanding why people primarily use one hand or the other. The findings could shed light on disorders related to brain development.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> probably my most difficult boss was a woman too....I wouldn't go as far as to call her satan but she was moody and could be very cold


A woman boss once game me a massager at a Christmas party and told me it was for stress lol. She was challenging but smart.


----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> you never know.......the little girl could come out looking like Doria.....or could be as white as Harry....perhaps this is the kind of speculation that was made by the evil member of the RF
> I would think most likely their kids would be light brown but apparently you never know with genetics


Their kids wouldn‘t be more than 20% African descent and Harry is red hair, which is as fair as it gets. So the kids are naturally going to be pretty fair, as seems to be the case with Archie. Skin “color” is just melanine, it gets mixed, it is not traits like eye color.

Which is not to say a family member might not have wondered o been concerned, people are stupid like that.


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> Has anyone asked Harry if *he* is okay?


Pretty sure no one cares at this point.


----------



## jennlt

limom said:


> What does the second MM stand for?
> Mini Meagan ?


Malignant Martyr?


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> I am asked where and how did I adopt. I laughed it off and depending on the situation showEd my stretch marks.
> The nurses at delivery made some weird comments..
> *It does not stop but I am too old to care.*


Me too!  At some point, it's just too exhausting to be offended by everything.  I don't have the energy.


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I used to like CNN, but they seem to have an issue (_as of late_) with having 2 different views .. after all, they have got to know that Scoobie-dummy-doo is (in essence) Meghan's mouthpiece!
> 
> This is *BEST* article ever about these 2 grifters; *100% SPOT-ON*!!!


Weenie boy. . .Scoobie-dummy-doo..  You do have a way of summing them up!


----------



## mdcx

purseinsanity said:


> I've had many instances where people assumed I was the nanny, because my children look absolutely nothing like me.  It was annoying in the beginning, but it's understandable, especially nowadays with adoption, surrogates, modern blended families, etc., It's human nature to be curious.  I don't take everything as an affront.


Asking "are you little Johnny's mother?" seems pretty inoffensive to me, something parents do a bit in my experience in order to pass along a message or birthday invite etc. Assuming someone is the nanny is another story altogether.


----------



## mdcx

doni said:


> Their kids wouldn‘t be more than 20% African descent and Harry is red hair, which is as fair as it gets. So the kids are naturally going to be pretty fair, as seems to be the case with Archie. Skin “color” is just melanine, it gets mixed, it is not traits like eye color.
> 
> Which is not to say a family member might not have wondered o been concerned, people are stupid like that.


In my experience, children with the same mixed-ethnicity biological parents can come out with significantly differently skin tones and features to each other.


----------



## limom

mdcx said:


> Asking "are you little Johnny's mother?" seems pretty inoffensive to me, something parents do a bit in my experience in order to pass along a message or birthday invite etc. Assuming someone is the nanny is another story altogether.


It happens all the time.
Once a woman knew that I was the mother of the other non white kid but could not remember who exactly so she calledme Sanjay’s mom.  (Not my kids name)


----------



## MommyDaze

doni said:


> Their kids wouldn‘t be more than 20% African descent and Harry is red hair, which is as fair as it gets. So the kids are naturally going to be pretty fair, as seems to be the case with Archie. Skin “color” is just melanine, it gets mixed, it is not traits like eye color.
> 
> Which is not to say a family member might not have wondered o been concerned, people are stupid like that.


It’s not quite that simple. The daughter could be similarly colored to Archie, but could also be significantly lighter or darker. 





						Can a couple have a baby that is significantly darker or lighter than either individual?
					






					genetics.thetech.org


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> In my experience, children with the same mixed-ethnicity biological parents can come out with significantly differently skin tones and features to each other.


Yep.  It's interesting how the same parents can have completely different looking children!  My brother has three.  All wound up very light skinned, one looks Swedish with blonde hair and blue eyes, off the charts in height and weight, one son has light brown hair with hazel eyes, tall and thin, and their daughter has dark hair and dark eyes an is very petite.  Genetics is fascinating to me.


----------



## limom

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I am not sure how I should have posted this as it is a topic not yet discussed. Since this MM description was succinct and accurate, I tagged on here.
> 
> I have read about opinions on the View and comments made by Hillary ******* and indirectly by Joe *****. I ascribe the politicians stance to pay back for H and M pre election statements. However, I think both were inappropriate. We Americans need to mind our own business sometimes.  Hillary is a trained lawyer   So is the President. They know better than to take MM at face value and her claims as gospel without investigation.  We won’t even discuss that this was a family problem on an international stage.
> 
> Regarding The View, I consider myself a proud American but take offense on behalf of Britain being chastised as a lesser or “wrong” form of government. Yes there was a Revolution and yes we declared independence. But for Meghan McCain to say the equivalent of down with the Monarchy and ours is the only way is just plain wrong. Chauvinism has no merit is any form. We have no right to tell another country whether they should or should not keep their monarchy.
> Any thoughts? Am I overthinking this?


Yes.
Plus political discourse is not allowed here.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I've had many instances where people assumed I was the nanny, because my children look absolutely nothing like me.  It was annoying in the beginning, but it's understandable, especially nowadays with adoption, surrogates, modern blended families, etc., It's human nature to be curious.  I don't take everything as an affront.



I totally get what you’re saying, but my experience has been different. I have several friends with babies that don’t look exactly like them and they’ve been offended by the ‘are you the parent/nanny’ question from random strangers at the playground. 

I get that you might not take everything as an affront, but everyone isn’t as confident/thick-skinned, so I try to be considerate of that.


----------



## kkfiregirl

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not talking about that, but about posting in the threads they are supposed to be moderating, with a very definite bias.



Hmm, I didn’t know mods couldn’t have a bias? I thought they were moderating for _civility_ & _on-topic_ discussions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

limom said:


> Yes.
> Plus political discourse is not allowed here.


Thanks.  Sorry.


----------



## Chanbal

This is on the Sun today.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *I saw along the way, many talented and gifted women giving up (the fight against gender and other barriers) before reaching their potential or top positions in their careers*.


I *WOULD* *NOT* give up, and kept on fighting and fighting until the day that they nailed my coffin shut (_laid me off - and I'm still PISSED_)!!  I mentored many young women when they first entered the Financial Services world because, quite honestly, it's one of the worst for women .. extremely male-oriented, they simply thought they were smarter and a fair amount of times treated the female high-level staff as glorified secretaries (_they had the gall to forward their Client calls to me as they went out to the Golf Club - seriously_?!?!?!!).  So, I made it to the executive level (_there were only 3 females - YUP, pretty pathetic right?_) in the Alternative Investments arena (_a hard enough area - Hedge Funds, Private Equity & Real Estate horizon performance_) .. but I had to scratch my way up and saw man after man get promoted over me until I said "*enough*" and (_in essence_) threatened our Global HR department that I would get the news out that they were supportive of that crap!  Typical, they laid off all the females .. but did the males get laid off??? .. I think we all know the answer to that question!


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This is in the Sun today.
> View attachment 5019458


Sounds like someone is feeling the repercussions of what she said. Still trying to have the upper hand. Too late, bridges have been burned.


----------



## kkfiregirl

TC1 said:


> I can't imagine telling a reporter/journalist that I bought a Cartier watch and had it engraved "to MM, from MM"   I've bought myself a lot of milestone gifts over the years and can't imagine engraving them to myself



It makes her seem like a 12-year-old who thinks she’s soooo clever.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> This is in the Sun today.
> View attachment 5019458



OMG, her third wedding anniversary is almost here and she still can’t let that dress fitting argument go!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Sounds like someone is feeling the repercussions of what she said. Still trying to have the upper hand. Too late, bridges have been burned.





Chanbal said:


> This is on the Sun today.
> View attachment 5019458


Hopefully she's not "asking" (ie demanding) an aide she previously bullied.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> I totally get what you’re saying, but my experience has been different. I have several friends with babies that don’t look exactly like them and they’ve been offended by the ‘are you the parent/nanny’ question from random strangers at the playground.
> 
> I get that you might not take everything as an affront, but everyone isn’t as confident/thick-skinned, so I try to be considerate of that.


I totally understand.  The nanny question is very offensive.  From my personal experience, I would never ask anyone that question (nor do I dare ask a soul if they're pregnant!).  I'm just saying I'm too tired to take everything as an offense.  It's mentally draining to me.


----------



## mdcx

So what will Little Miss Markle do next? She's (currently) got the title, the Prince, the money, the mansion, Oprah, worldwide coverage even if a lot of it is negative...I'm sure there is a next item on her agenda of world domination or whatever her actual goal here is.


----------



## JY89

kkfiregirl said:


> OMG, her third wedding anniversary is almost here and she still can’t let that dress fitting argument go!



The narcissist needs to win and will go lengths for it. Like how she didn’t let go of her royal life despite stepping down for more than a year ago?

Perhaps she really need to get herself a proper job- This is what happens when someone is too free lol


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> It makes her seem like a 12-year-old who thinks she’s soooo clever.


I'm wondering when Meg and Haz will join TikTok.


----------



## JY89

mdcx said:


> So what will Little Miss Markle do next? She's (currently) got the title, the Prince, the money, the mansion, Oprah, worldwide coverage even if a lot of it is negative...I'm sure there is a next item on her agenda of world domination or whatever her actual goal here is.



I’m guessing she’s gonna say that it affected her pregnancy( insert some detrimental conditions that she “suffer” from)  and she got all suicidal again for having a voice


----------



## kkfiregirl

JY89 said:


> The narcissist needs to win and will go lengths for it. Like how she didn’t let go of her royal life despite stepping down for more than a year ago?
> 
> Perhaps she really need to get herself a proper job- This is what happens when someone is too free lol



I’m going to need her to tell us _exactly_ what Kate said, because it must be really bad for her to keep bringing it up!


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I'm just saying I'm too tired to take everything as an offense.  It's mentally draining to me.



I like this- I will borrow it


----------



## drifter

all this "she made me cry!" talk reminds me of girls in elementary school where one would accuse the other of making her cry.  My friend said a girl in her class actually got mad at her friends for not "supporting her" when she cried.  I feel embarrassed for 40 something women who are still going around behaving like 10-12 year olds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## JY89

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m going to need her to tell us _exactly_ what Kate said, because it must be really bad for her to keep bringing it up!



She knew the exact protocol and rules of the RF that Kate or the RF will never publicly  defend themselves.

Therefore, she can make whatever claims as she pleases as no want will ever know the exact truth apart for herself and Kate or the RF. Hence her audacity to take on and bring the entire RF to the ground. Only spells destructive and pure evil to me rather than kindness or compassionate. And how am I suppose to bring myself to like or support her

Also why I call her the Girl who cried wolf.


----------



## bag-mania

drifter said:


> all this "she made me cry!" talk reminds me of girls in elementary school where one would accuse the other of making her cry.  My friend said a girl in her class actually got mad at her friends for not "supporting her" when she cried.  I feel embarrassed for 40 something women who are still going around behaving like 10-12 year olds.



It certainly doesn’t fit the “strong independent woman” cliche she tried to sell herself as when they first became engaged. There is nothing strong OR independent about her. She is needy as hell.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

drifter said:


> *all this "she made me cry!" talk reminds me of girls in elementary school where one would accuse the other of making her cry.*  My friend said a girl in her class actually got mad at her friends for not "supporting her" when she cried.  I feel embarrassed for 40 something women who are still going around behaving like 10-12 year olds.


And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.


----------



## JY89

purseinsanity said:


> I'm wondering when Meg and Haz will join TikTok.



No second doubt that they will appear there instantly if they are being offer millions

Perhaps to preach to all of us about kindness and her daily updates on how she’s suffering in her $14mil home


----------



## Jktgal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Meghan McCain to say the equivalent of down with the Monarchy and ours is the only way is just plain wrong.


I think private citizens should be able to comment on other political systems. Be critical of Myanmar dictatorship etc. I don't see why public officials can not comment as their personal opinion. Altough why public officials would do so baffle me as shouldn't they have lotsa work on their plate?

Discourse of _American_ politics is not allowed here but UK politics (for the monarchy has been raised in this and other threads) crops up all the time. Myanmar, Hongkong politics, etc. I comment all the time the monarchy should GO.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It certainly doesn’t fit the “strong independent woman” cliche she tried to sell herself as when they first became engaged. There is nothing strong OR independent about her. She is greedy needy as hell.


Sorry @bag-mania for the minor correction, but it was very tempting...


----------



## kkfiregirl

FreeSpirit71 said:


> And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.



I think that was because Kate had a 3-week-old infant at home, so _if_ Meghan made her cry, that would actually make a lot of sense.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

kkfiregirl said:


> I think that was because Kate had a 3-week-old infant at home, so _if_ Meghan made her cry, that would actually make a lot of sense.


The same sympathies have not been extended to a pregnant Meghan.


----------



## kkfiregirl

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The same sympathies have not been extended to a pregnant Meghan.



She’s not a very _sympathetic_ figure, pregnant or not.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

kkfiregirl said:


> She’s not a very _sympathetic_ figure, pregnant or not.


LOL...not to people here, at any rate.


----------



## Aimee3

My


kkfiregirl said:


> I think that was because Kate had a 3-week-old infant at home, so _if_ Meghan made her cry, that would actually make a lot of sense.


i thought I read that the bridesmaid dress for Charlotte didn’t fit properly and Kate wanted another fitting but MM (the queen of poorly fitted clothes) snapped at Kate that the dress was fine the way it was.


----------



## Jktgal

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm not talking about that, but about posting in the threads they are supposed to be moderating, with a very definite bias.


And why is that an issue? I see it all the time in the bag threads - mods waxing lyrical about brand, model, etc of bags the thread of which they are moderating.


----------



## kkfiregirl

FreeSpirit71 said:


> LOL...not to people here, at any rate.



She could have done her interview with oprah after she delivered her baby- why invite that stress into her life during her pregnancy? That alone makes her less sympathetic to me. Her allegations would have been shocking regardless of when she released her video, but for some reason she needed to have the last word? Put the Queen in her place? 

Not sure of her motives, but it doesn’t make her look good.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Aimee3 said:


> My
> 
> i thought I read that the bridesmaid dress for Charlotte didn’t fit properly and Kate wanted another fitting but MM (the queen of poorly fitted clothes) snapped at Kate that the dress was fine the way it was.



That hardly seems worth thinking about for three years.


----------



## Jktgal

Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
					

A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I don't agree with pundits that monarchy will survive unscathed. Slow and steady wins the race. Soon the public own the jewels. Go Brits! (With apologies to monarchists on here...)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Black Choir at Harry and Meghan's Wedding Says Prince Charles Invited Them
					

The Black choir from the Royal Wedding says Prince Charles invited them.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Black Choir at Harry and Meghan's Wedding Says Prince Charles Invited Them
> 
> 
> The Black choir from the Royal Wedding says Prince Charles invited them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



I don’t believe it! He’s old and racist!


----------



## tiktok

FreeSpirit71 said:


> And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.



Actually it always seemed really silly to me but I just considered it tabloid gossip. There is a difference between what the Daily Mail prints and what a mature, intelligent woman would choose to discuss. Which to me puts Meghan smack in the immature and not very intelligent bucket given that she chose to even bring that up. I mean, are we in high school? Who gives a &@$%?


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> I don’t believe it! He’s old and racist!


Wait! MM and Harry said they were surfing YouTube and found him. What’s the truth? Charles’ truth or their truth?


----------



## floatinglili

The racism comments


Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5019546
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
> 
> 
> A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree with pundits that monarchy will survive unscathed. Slow and steady wins the race. Soon the public own the jewels. Go Brits! (With apologies to monarchists on here...)


 Interesting. I am not really a fan of the royal family. The current iteration has been reduced to a shadow of their former glory and the transition from ruling tyrant to craven public service position has been rather unedifying. 
The class system is revolting, the last remnant of a horrific system of oppression amd exploitation. The innocent historically robbed of all hope, those on top seeing themselves as a different species in many ways. Ironic as in our interconnected world we can now see how entitled and yet how limited many of these ‘special’ people are.
My own family historically suffered badly under the class system. My ancestor - a young girl of around 22, shipped out to Australia as a prisoner under accusation of stealing two coins. As we found out from family research into the actual court records, those coins were never taken from the home, and were recovered. They were deemed to have been hidden inside the house by her. She was just married, and left behind a widowed father and a sick niece who she was helping by sending her paltry wages home. She never saw her family again. A huge amount of prisoner girls on their ship died before landfall. 
These are the people written off as comedy prostitutes and pirates. So the class system is horrifically oppressive. These ruling class people, especially historically, suck.
And yet...
A world without colour, without history, without tradition... the only collected wealth in the hands of striving business people or politicians.... sometimes history is worth preserving really just for the sake of it...


----------



## jcnc

Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5019546
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
> 
> 
> A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree with pundits that monarchy will survive unscathed. Slow and steady wins the race. Soon the public own the jewels. Go Brits! (With apologies to monarchists on here...)


In that case, can we expect to get our Kohinoor diamond  back .
Its been a few days and media is still talking about them. I used to like MM before her antics made we vary of her. Now whatever she says seems calculated to me. I don’t doubt that stint as a royal was stressful for her but the way she has portrayed some things is very questionable IMO. Especially the comment about the color of the to be born baby. I am not from a country where we have the black and white races but we do have a very prevalent problem of colorism. My DH is a lot darker than I am so when we were expecting our child, I have had relatives question me on similar lines. Based on my past interactions with those relatives, I could make out who was coming from a place of ignorance, who was hiding their colorism biases and who was having a casual conversation. My point being context matters a lot. MM and Harry didn’t provide that and let the viewer assume everything had ro do with race. That doesn’t sit well with me. Maybe it was race, I don’t know but the way they presented everything was very vague.


----------



## mdcx

Imagine if Meghan had still legged it to the US with Harry but instead of ripping strips off the BRF in her Oprah chat had said something like
"I'm sorry to all the supporters of the BRF. It's an important institution but looking back I realise I was quite naive about what marrying into it entails. I understand that people are annoyed at the costly wedding we had and that we have hurt some feelings. I am sorry about all of it and some of my behaviour was not up to standard. From now on I just want to live a private life here in the US and I won't be doing any more media interviews for the foreseeable future. Hopefully we can all get to a peaceful place in our extended family relationships..."

Obviously not Meghan's intention, but just to illustrate that at every turn there have been other choices that could have been made, ones to mend fences, not torch them with napalm...


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> For those who drop by to tell us how horrible we are to continually call out Meghan on her behaviors, I (we) really do pay attention to all the news and here is an opportunity to share a nice gesture, one many of us can relate to.  I do wish a safe delivery of the little girl who will someday wear this.
> 
> Probably fortuitous the Sussexes only plan to have one, no question about which daughter would be the recipient, or having to buy a second one, which, of course, they could afford.
> 
> *Meghan Markle already has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her daughter*
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's little girl is due to be born this summer - and it appears Meghan Markle already has the baby's first heirloom ready and waiting.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan, who now live in Montecito, California, said they are preparing to welcome a sister for their 22-month-old son Archie later this year, during their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview earlier this week.
> 
> But despite still having a few months before they meet their newest family member, the duchess, 39, already has a gift lined up for her daughter - that she purchased before she had even met Prince Harry.
> 
> In an interview back in 2015, almost a year before Meghan began dating her now husband, the then Suits actress revealed the £4,800 heirloom Cartier piece she plans to give to her daughter.
> 
> Speaking to Hello! she said: 'I’ve always coveted the Cartier French Tank watch. When I found out Suits had been picked up for our third season – which, at the time, felt like such a milestone – I totally splurged and bought the two-tone version.
> 
> 'I had it engraved on the back, "To M.M. From M.M.", and I plan to give it to my daughter one day. That's what makes pieces special, the connection you have to them.'
> 
> The duchess appears to have owned the watch since 2013, having been pictured wearing it often before her marriage to Prince Harry.
> 
> The classic piece retails at almost £5,000 and the engraving is thought to stand for 'to Meghan Markle from Meghan Markle' because it was a gift to herself to celebrate the success of Suits.


I'm always trailing to catch up on the thread!   So if this was already said by someone my apologies. When I read that M had it engraved for her future daughter "To M.M. from M.M." My immediate thought was hmmmm ... Not sure she thought ahead that if lets say she did name her daughter Diana and the last name initial be different too. Will M have it changed?  Wonder if she'd have the backing replaced and re-engraved?


----------



## RoryX

Aimee3 said:


> My
> 
> i thought I read that the bridesmaid dress for Charlotte didn’t fit properly and Kate wanted another fitting but MM (the queen of poorly fitted clothes) snapped at Kate that the dress was fine the way it was.


 Its been reported on several forums that Charlotte's dress didn't fit, she was squirmy during the fitting, and Meghan lost her temper and called her fat. Cue Kate crying. It also explains Kate's tight hold on her kids at the wedding.


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> I don’t believe it! He’s old and racist!




And a douche. Can't forget that


----------



## Lodpah

As a veteran of the armed forces, I'm absolutely glad that Harry was stripped as Captain General of the Royal Marines. Those chaps go through hell to get passed after intensive training. How can he command (albeit it ceremonially only but still important) to the morale of his troops? I watch a lot of military documentaries, etc.  Here's a nice clip of Harry with them when he was not yet sucked into the vortex. He calls himself trapped? This is a high honor to be appointed after his grandfather.


----------



## marietouchet

FreeSpirit71 said:


> And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.


The press has gotten a lot of the details wrong for this goopy saga all along eg tiaragate was two separate issues, not one.
M wanted emeralds already marked for Eugenie and M hassled Angela Kelly for not making the diamond tiara instantly available for trying on. 
No one corrected that narrative either. in that case, M was a lot more demanding than the press led to believe.
BP has a no comment policy.  It looks out for the institution, not the individuals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The press has gotten a lot of the details wrong for this goopy saga all along eg tiaragate was two separate issues, not one.
> M wanted emeralds already marked for Eugenie and M hassled Angela Kelly for not making the diamond tiara instantly available for trying on.
> No one corrected that narrative either. in that case, M was a lot more demanding than the press led to believe.
> BP has a no comment policy.  It looks out for the institution, not the individuals.



And so much of this back-and-forth is petty, emotional, ‘my feelings are hurt‘ and “I expect to get *my* way always” stuff.
Look at the facts - entitled millionaire is mad at his family of billionaires.  Yes, of course, horrible things are said. Welcome to life.
Lesson #1001 = Rise above it.  Lesson #1002 = Keep pressing forward.

BTW - if the Kohinoor goes back, then Greece still wants its marbles back.

ETA:  Some wise words for H&M [which William demonstrated quite well] :
  “To talk well and eloquently is a very great art, but that an equally great one is to know the right moment to stop.”
  Mozart


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.


I never believed those stories, FWIW. It seemed too petty for adults to be true so i was surprised it was true, but reversed.


----------



## mdcx

I think Meghan imagined the jewelry vault to be like Scrooge McDucks pile of money, where she could prance around touching and trying on everything (with selfies no doubt) at will.
“Erm, no ma’am, you must be invited to borrow a particular piece which is then brought to you for the occasion only....“


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

CarryOn2020 said:


> And so much of this back-and-forth is petty, emotional, ‘my feelings are hurt‘ and “I expect to get *my* way always” stuff.
> Look at the facts - entitled millionaire is mad at his family of billionaires.  Yes, of course, horrible things are said. Welcome to life.
> Lesson #1001 = Rise above it.  Lesson #1002 = Keep pressing forward.
> 
> BTW - if the Kohinoor goes back, then Greece still wants its marbles back.


I’m not sure how these great issues of history both international and internal can be easily resolved. International grievances / issues aside, when you think about the historical grievances created by the class system and how the poor really suffered at the hands of the aristocrats just within the UK, it is no great surprised that the British working class papers come after the royals the way they do. It’s a feature of the country history and culture. 
Tbh a lot of it is personal and nasty sure but not meant to be taken so seriously. It is simply a part of the cultural landscape. MM would have seen the circus and surely understood that by marrying in she was getting the privilege and also joining the circus so to speak. 
The modern royals have learned to wear their power lightly when it comes to class.
But the British have very long memories!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Wait! MM and Harry said they were surfing YouTube and found him. What’s the truth? Charles’ truth or their truth?


Well the choir head said Charles very graciously invited them.  I guess Meg told another little fib?


----------



## purseinsanity

RoryX said:


> Its been reported on several forums that Charlotte's dress didn't fit, she was squirmy during the fitting, and Meghan lost her temper and called her fat. Cue Kate crying. It also explains Kate's tight hold on her kids at the wedding.


Meg called a young child fat??  Is that for real?  If she did that to my daughter, I’d do a lot more than cry or take the high road.  She sunk that low?  I’d go lower.  Mama bear is not to be fooled around with.


----------



## JY89

FreeSpirit71 said:


> LOL...not to people here, at any rate.



It’s truly hard to sympathise on her when she picked the most ruthless method to put her points across, digging deeper into wounds and destroying any possible chance of reconciliation.

Firstly, she mentioned that the Queen had always been nice to her and Harry also mentioned that he was in good relationship with his grandmother during James Corden interview. So why didn’t they bring the issue up to the Queen and resolve it internally? Was it truly necessary to put the message across through a public interview? Have she not for once thought about the difficult situation she had put the Queen in when there were better ways to resolve this? Will the Queen ignore her/ Harry if they brought the issue of racism up to her? I highly doubt so.

Whether the colour of Archie’s skin colour was mentioned out of pure curiosity or malicious intentions, she should have clarified the matter with the family rather than exposing a matter that wasn’t clarified for the public to speculate who the person was. Allowing the public to perceive the entire RF of being racist than that individual who should be responsible for what he/ she said. Was it fair to the RF? I do not think so.

No doubt of her being a victim to British relentless press and racism but that does not equate to the entire RF or Britain being racist towards her - least I know that’s how many are feeling right now. Which Royal members have not been a victim to the British Press with their privacy being invaded from time to time? Eg. Kate too had it worse when she was being photographed topless for the world to see during her vacay etc

Unfortunately, with freedom of speech, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and that’s what she has to face- the good and the bad. Easy? Definitely not. Draining mentally? That’s without a doubt. Do I sympathise her on that? Yes, to a certain level of her struggles but not entirely.

However, I’ve lost respect for a person who chose the most distasteful way of resolving family matters which are meant to be private.  Would anyone you can think of or yourself choose to reveal family matters of such to the public and hurt innocent members of the family? So does telling everyone help with resolving her family matters? Has she for a moment forgot that those people are her dear husband and kids family members? ( and hers too?)  The detrimental effects and consequences on every family members? The stress the Queen has to face at her age?

Perhaps that interview glorified her emotionally and financially during that very moment. But at what cost? Was it truly worth it?

I strongly believe that many of us here tried to sympathise her or at least we once did.

Of course, you are allowed to have your own opinions as to how we are allowed to speak our minds. We apologise if most of the comments made weren’t on the same page as you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, H&M forgot this?










						Prince Harry in new racism row after remarks to comedian Stephen K Amos
					

Prince Harry told comedian 'you don't sound like a black chap'




					www.marieclaire.co.uk
				




*Prince Harry in new racism row after remarks to comedian Stephen K Amos*
Suzannah RamsdaleFebruary 11, 2009 10:07 am






Prince Harry told comedian 'you don't sound like a black chap' 

Prince Harry has sparked a new racism row after allegedly telling comedian Stephen K Amos that he didn’t ‘sound like a black chap.’ 

Harry apparently made the remark after the stand-up show We Are Not Amused for the Prince of Wales’ 60th birthday celebrations in November 2008.

Speaking on Five’s The Wright Stuff on Tuesday, he explained: ‘Harry said, “Hello, tell me, amusing… but you don’t sound like a black chap.”‘

He added: ‘I wanted to say, “How is I supposed to sound?”‘

*When asked if the remark had been made in jest, he replied: ‘I hope it was.’ *

The comedian put the comment down to a poor attempt at making banter, but fellow panelist on the show Lowri Turner said: ‘That’s not the point.’ 

Harry is already in hot water after it emerged that he referred to a Sandhurst colleague as ‘our little Paki friend’ and that he, Charles and Prince Williamaffectionately refer to an Indian polo club member as ‘Sooty’.

His latest gaffe has inevitably upset equality groups. 

‘Many young people will be disgusted by his remark – how is a black man meant to sound?’ Naomi Byron, national secretary of Youth Against Racism in Europe, told the Mirror.

‘But it is not just Prince Harry that is at fault. The aristocratic, rich circles he moves in obviously don’t have a problem with this kind of racist stereotyping.’


----------



## limom

JY89 said:


> It’s truly hard to sympathise on her when she picked the most ruthless method to put her points across, digging deeper into wounds and destroying any possible chance of reconciliation.
> 
> Firstly, she mentioned that the Queen had always been nice to her and Harry also mentioned that he was in good relationship with his grandmother during James Corden interview. So why didn’t they bring the issue up to the Queen and resolve it internally? Was it truly necessary to put the message across through a public interview? Have she not for once thought about the difficult situation she had put the Queen in when there were better ways to resolve this? Will the Queen ignore her/ Harry if they brought the issue of racism up to her? I highly doubt so.
> 
> Whether the colour of Archie’s skin colour was mentioned out of pure curiosity or malicious intentions, she should have clarified the matter with the family rather than exposing a matter that wasn’t clarified for the public to speculate who the person was. Allowing the public to perceive the entire RF of being racist than that individual who should be responsible for what he/ she said. Was it fair to the RF? I do not think so.
> 
> No doubt of her being a victim to British relentless press and racism but that does not equate to the entire RF or Britain being racist towards her - least I know that’s how many are feeling right now. Which Royal members have not been a victim to the British Press with their privacy being invaded from time to time? Eg. Kate too had it worse when she was being photographed topless for the world to see during her vacay etc
> 
> Unfortunately, with freedom of speech, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and that’s what she has to face- the good and the bad. Easy? Definitely not. Draining mentally? That’s without a doubt. Do I sympathise her on that? Yes, to a certain level of her struggles but not entirely.
> 
> However, I’ve lost respect for a person who chose the most distasteful way of resolving family matters which are meant to be private.  Would anyone you can think of or yourself choose to reveal family matters of such to the public and hurt innocent members of the family? So does telling everyone help with resolving her family matters? Has she for a moment forgot that those people are her dear husband and kids family members? ( and hers too?)  The detrimental effects and consequences on every family members? The stress the Queen has to face at her age?
> 
> Perhaps that interview glorified her emotionally and financially during that very moment. But at what cost? Was it truly worth it?
> 
> I strongly believe that many of us here tried to sympathise her or at least we once did.
> 
> Of course, you are allowed to have your own opinions as to how we are allowed to speak our minds. We apologise if most of the comments made weren’t on the same page as you.


In short, she is a moron.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Meg called a young child fat??  Is that for real?  If she did that to my daughter, I’d do a lot more than cry or take the high road.  She sunk that low?  I’d go lower.  Mama bear is not to be fooled around with.



Charlotte was a _baby_ at the time! Babies are supposed to be fat, LOL.


----------



## AB Negative

I for one am very pleased with the way the Mods are handling this thread now.  I didn't post for a very long time because a small group of mean girls lit into everyone who didn't support what they were saying, especially new posters (who then stopped posting). 



chicinthecity777 said:


> I learn something new every day! I have never heard that phrase before.



I heard a lot of people who are low men on the totem pole referred to as "red headed step children."  It's a very old and old fashioned saying.



bag-mania said:


> There are many creative ways to make sure to get paid. It could be as simple as Oprah making a generous donation to their money-laundering foundation  web site. Oops, I mean Archewell.



I heard an opinion piece on tv on Monday connecting the dots of Oprah's and MM's ways to make money off of this interview.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> Charlotte was a _baby_ at the time! Babies are supposed to be fat, LOL.


If MEghan is going to invoke Diana every chance she gets, she may want to educate herself on eating disorders.  Many start off by someone simply hearing an offhanded comment.  I've read children as young as 5 are getting eating disorders!  To call the young granddaughter of a woman who suffered from bulimia, and that she's trying overly hard to emulate, "fat", is beyond belief.


----------



## Chanbal

*JAN MOIR: I promise this column is a Meghan and Harry free zone (recollections may vary)*
This week’s column, I absolutely promise, is going to be a Meghan and Harry-free zone. Haven’t we all had quite enough of the *Duke and Duchess of **Netflix*?

For the last five days the planet has been marinated in Meghan, then dunked and pickled in an ocean of princely vinegar. Surely their Titanic of trouble has crashed into our iceberg of indulgence for the last time? Change the subject please!

Most are exhausted with their drama; we simply can’t absorb much more of their suffering.
From the rescued chickens to the Queen’s knee blanket to Humphrey Yogart to who said what at the fake wedding before the real wedding —you know the big Windsor wedding that they didn’t want to have anyway because it wasn’t about them?

I’m going to press pause just for a moment to say, that was a surprising revelation, wasn’t it? ‘This spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us,’ is what Meghan told Oprah she said to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who must have been wondering why in the name of holy tunicles he got his Sunday best vestments steam-cleaned if that was the case — but I digress.

No more Sussexation to ease vexation, palpitation and eternal damnation! That is my new creed.
Still, it kind of hurts that Harry and Meghan felt they were only going through the wedding day motions for the crowds; the civilians, the great unwashed, us mugs who were all genuinely thrilled by their union and swept away by the sheer romance of the event. 

What then was the point, at the very least, of inviting Oprah and George and Amal and all those other celebs they barely knew if they were secretly craving privacy and modesty?

As my friend Simon said during a socially-distanced coffee break, if Harry and Meghan really wanted a no-fuss register office do and a vegan sausage roll high tea afterwards, no one would have quibbled.

The union of a divorced bride and a second son who is sixth in line to the throne did not have to be such a Hollywood production, right? Right.

‘Well if they wanted a quiet wedding,’ said my mother on the hotline from the Highlands, ‘what was all that fuss about the borrowed tiara then?’

Hush, mater! If Meghan reads this, she might ring up the editor and get me sacked.

Anyway I’m not writing about them/her/him this week, even if it still strikes me as odd that Meghan only had her mother at the church and not a single other member of her family. ‘What does that say about her?’ asks my pal Amy on Zoom, but I don’t care because what I am writing about this week is a year of lockdown not a year of Meg-down, thanks all the same.

This week, an entire 365 days have passed since the pandemic began, and I just heard on the radio that it is also coincidentally a year almost to the day when Harry and Meghan attended Westminster Abbey on Commonwealth Day, which turned out to be their last appearance as working royals.

I do recall how the wintry relations between the Duchess of Sussex and the Duchess of Cambridge were plain for all to see for the first time; Green Hat versus Red Hat in the battle of bottled fury. 

‘OMG. Two sisters-in-law rowing about bridesmaids’ dresses,’ texts my friend Susan. ‘Sooo tacky. Like a second-rate plotline from Emmerdale.’

No comment, Susie, I’m moving on. I’m writing about a year in lockdown. ‘Well, who has done more in lockdown than those two?’ she counters, not unreasonably.

In the last year I made two bottles of handwash from sprigs of rosemary, failed to write a major work of fiction, tidied my cutlery drawer and did not defrost the fridge.

Meanwhile, Harry and Meghan have shipped halfway across the world, moved home at least three times, changed continents, changed nappies and got pregnant.

By claiming that Meghan suffered racism and contemplated suicide at the hands of the Royal Family, they also turned themselves into a cause celebre, earning the support of Hillary *******, Beyoncé and Labour leader Keir Starmer who believes that the ‘serious issues Meghan raised have to be taken seriously’. 

The couple also signed lucrative commercial deals with streaming giants and are the subjects of a flattering biography. ‘Well there is a major work of fiction for you,’ volunteers my mother. Mum! That is quite enough from you, or we’ll all end up in Meghan jail, please desist.

‘Well. It’s the Queen I feel sorry for,’ she says, before hanging up and getting back to batch baking enough shortbread to keep Meghan and Harry’s overworked ‘comms teams’ and ‘our team in the UK’ in sugary snacks for months. And I bet they could all use a treat.

Harry and Meghan, Meg and H — theirs is a kinship of wounded souls, how lucky that they can comfort and soothe each other in their padded bassinet of endless provocations. Now that they are neither silent nor silenced they say they want to move on, to draw a line under this week’s torrid events, and really, don’t we all?

But how easy is it going to be to escape the fallout from their blame-spraying victim fest with Oprah, this gleeful act of sabotage which has already been watched by 50 million people around the world?

I think a lot of hurts have to be healed before the Duke and Duchess of Netflix can crawl out of this vale of tears and rifts — but hang on. Didn’t I say this week was going to be a Harry and Meghan-free zone?

Recollections may vary.


----------



## TC1

I have a hard time believing anyone would call Charlotte fat. I would need more info than a "supposedly" in this scenario.


----------



## limom

I have always heard that they were fighting about the children not wearing tights.








						Meghan and Kate Got Into a “Row” Over Princess Charlotte Wearing Tights at the Royal Wedding
					

Kate apparently “left in tears.”




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## limom

TC1 said:


> I have a hard time believing anyone would call Charlotte fat. I would need more info than a "supposedly" in this scenario.


Because it is not true!


----------



## lalame

There have been sooo many stories about M and K out there, I instinctively don't believe most of them. I'm more shocked when they turn out to be true than the reverse.


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> I have a hard time believing anyone would call Charlotte fat. I would need more info than a "supposedly" in this scenario.


I hadn't heard the fat thing before.  Hopefully it's not true.  I always heard something about tights?  I don't know.  At this point, I don't care.  These are the most famous tights on the planet.  Three years later they're still coming up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

JY89 said:


> It’s truly hard to sympathise on her when she picked the most ruthless method to put her points across, digging deeper into wounds and destroying any possible chance of reconciliation.
> 
> Firstly, she mentioned that the Queen had always been nice to her and Harry also mentioned that he was in good relationship with his grandmother during James Corden interview. So why didn’t they bring the issue up to the Queen and resolve it internally?



This was hard for me to watch too. It's one thing if they made it clear it was scorched earth, like Samantha does... but they actually called these same people welcoming (the entire family), good people (Kate), "love them to bits".... and then went into all this dirty laundry.  If you love them, handle this $hit privately.


----------



## kkfiregirl

TC1 said:


> I have a hard time believing anyone would call Charlotte fat. I would need more info than a "supposedly" in this scenario.



If it was true, Meghan would’ve been photographed with Kate’s handprint on her face


----------



## gracekelly

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The same sympathies have not been extended to a pregnant Meghan.


Is she really pregnant?  I can never really tell with her. Those pillows are always moving up and down and changing size.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Just in case we're trying to guess Baby Diana's genetics makeup   Don't comment or ask about skin tone ok? If you do, you're a certified racist  

Gummy bears for everyone


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> Just in case we're trying to guess Baby Diana's genetics makeup   Don't comment or ask about skin tone ok? If you do, you're a certified racist
> 
> Gummy bears for everyone
> 
> View attachment 5019647



So which one is the finished product?


----------



## lalame

I heard a joke on one of the talk shows about how "You know it's got to be bad in the UK when Harry and Meghan move to AMERICA to get away from racism." I hope my fellow Americans know I love it here but boy these words hit me like a double decker! Truly it didn't make sense. I think their move was about not wanting to be near the family and wanting to be closer to Hollywood.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> So which one is the finished product?



My guess is the all green gummy. It's organic


----------



## JY89

kkfiregirl said:


> So which one is the finished product?



Will it be racist to be describing the colour of the gummy bears as a description of the outcome? -I don’t want to hurt the feelings of these gummy bears


----------



## kkfiregirl

JY89 said:


> Will it be racist to be describing the colour of the gummy bears as a description of the outcome? -I don’t want to hurt the feelings of these gummy bears



If would be racist if you had a preference for a desired gummy bear color


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> My guess is the all green gummy. It's organic



It will match the green hornet dress, too


----------



## gracekelly

Miss Lizzie Mountbatten-Windsor:  Mom, can I have my watch now?  I turned  18.
MM:  UMMMM.    WELL No....
Lizzie:  Why not ?  You promised!  Everyone says you promised it to me when you were pregnant with me!
MM:  Recollections may vary.......


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if I'm copying the right link. It is supposed to be SM's reaction to Oprah's interview. She is pointing out a few more falsehoods! 






						Player
					






					www.hit.com.au


----------



## Lodpah

Apparently, Archie's new words are:

Hydrate and Drive Safe.  There are some people insinuating and fact checking UD.

Ok. This is going too far


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Apparently, Archie's new words are:
> 
> Hydrate and Drive Safe.  There are some people insinuating and fact checking UD.
> 
> Ok. This is going too far


Wait until they have him staving off the bill collectors

Archie:  Sorreeee,  mommy daddy with bank people. Need money. Come back later.  Check in mail!  Drive safe!


----------



## Lodpah

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I’m really confused. What’s the difference between a blatant liar and falsehoods? I thought she didn’t know much about the monarchy.


Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?





Agueda Sanchez
·
Wed

M.A. from Queens College (CUNY)(Graduated 1996)

Originally Answered: Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
I find it very hard to believe.
Meghan was 16 years old when Princess Diana died in a car accident. Sixteen years old when Harry, who was only 12 years old at the time, walked behind his mother’s coffin. Everyone around the world saw that iconic, painful image. Princess Diana had made a huge impact around the world and it is impossible to believe that Meghan was not aware of that.
Another worldwide event was the Royal wedding of Prince William to the then Kate Middleton. This event was watched by 3 BILLION people. When you watch a wedding of this magnitude, there are tons of royal commentators explaining everything, every single detail.





It was a very happy event indeed, here we have HMTQ looking radiant:




This royal wedding was everywhere!
In 2014, a cable actress had a blog called The Tig. On that blog, said actress wrote about the royal wedding and the “pomp and circumstance” regarding this historical event.




How did she not know about the monarchy?





All information from public sites.

68K views
View 350 upvotes
View shares
 · Answer requested by


----------



## Chanbal

Sarah Vine and Vogue  









						STEPHEN GLOVER: What a grisly week this has been for our country
					

STEPHEN GLOVER: A week during which in many parts of the UK it is deemed inexcusable to question any allegation uttered by Meghan because she is a person of mixed race.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Vox Media  USA media company based in Washington DC and New York City.


Yeah it’s just hard to find an article that even lists the articles in question rather than just stating the racist articles exist. I’m just putting it there so the poster can look at the articles as they wanted to.

I think you have to discern the bias and credibility of each and every news source you read.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, H&M forgot this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry in new racism row after remarks to comedian Stephen K Amos
> 
> 
> Prince Harry told comedian 'you don't sound like a black chap'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry in new racism row after remarks to comedian Stephen K Amos*
> Suzannah RamsdaleFebruary 11, 2009 10:07 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry told comedian 'you don't sound like a black chap'
> 
> Prince Harry has sparked a new racism row after allegedly telling comedian Stephen K Amos that he didn’t ‘sound like a black chap.’
> 
> Harry apparently made the remark after the stand-up show We Are Not Amused for the Prince of Wales’ 60th birthday celebrations in November 2008.
> 
> Speaking on Five’s The Wright Stuff on Tuesday, he explained: ‘Harry said, “Hello, tell me, amusing… but you don’t sound like a black chap.”‘
> 
> He added: ‘I wanted to say, “How is I supposed to sound?”‘
> 
> *When asked if the remark had been made in jest, he replied: ‘I hope it was.’ *
> 
> The comedian put the comment down to a poor attempt at making banter, but fellow panelist on the show Lowri Turner said: ‘That’s not the point.’
> 
> Harry is already in hot water after it emerged that he referred to a Sandhurst colleague as ‘our little Paki friend’ and that he, Charles and Prince Williamaffectionately refer to an Indian polo club member as ‘Sooty’.
> 
> His latest gaffe has inevitably upset equality groups.
> 
> ‘Many young people will be disgusted by his remark – how is a black man meant to sound?’ Naomi Byron, national secretary of Youth Against Racism in Europe, told the Mirror.
> 
> ‘But it is not just Prince Harry that is at fault. The aristocratic, rich circles he moves in obviously don’t have a problem with this kind of racist stereotyping.’



In fact, so far, Harry has the most evidence of any Royal of being unthinking, ignorant and basically racist


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> found this article online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The science behind anti-redhead prejudice
> 
> 
> Studies show that people are less likely to make a move on a redheaded girl or accept the advances of a redheaded guy. Why?
> 
> 
> 
> theweek.com



Best take that article down before the Meghan stans get you. The survey clearly says mixed-ethnicity people are considered more attractive whereas we all ‘know’ that everyone hated her based on her appearance from day 1. 


sdkitty said:


> so what americans call carrot top


Yes I guess so.  Harry’s or Ed sheeran’s hair is definitely ginger whereas Julianne Moore might be classed as more auburn.

I personally think they are all beautiful colours. Harry’s hair has always been the only really  appealing thing about him to me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Wasn’t close to the one year deadline?
> As far as their grievances, it is a marketing gimmick, imho.
> Plus, since the pandemic is coming to an end, commerce can resume and therefore they have to raise their profile.
> I sincerely hope that their ventures are successful or we will have to brace for a realty show to fill their needs for attention....


I personally would be here for real housewives of Montecito especially if Christopher Guest directs and they get the really shady editors from Rupauls drag race season 2 in. 

I can just picture Meghan looking blankly at the camera and saying 
“We both love soup.”


----------



## jelliedfeels

Prettyinpnknwht said:


> Does anyone else feel like half of this mess could have been avoided if they had waited more than 30 seconds to get engaged/get married/pop out a kid?  Of course, I don’t mean any offense to people who’ve gotten married after a short time (lots of people have very successful relationships!!), and I’m sure her age was a factor with them wanting to start a family (either that or she didn’t want to give Harry a chance to escape lol).  But if my understanding of the timeline of events is correct, their wedding was less than 2 years after they first met and started dating, and before their first anniversary they already had a child.  After officially being part of the family for less than a year, she’s already feeling so tormented by the whole situation that she wants to off herself.
> 
> I can’t help but think that if there had been a little more breathing room between these events she might have realized, like Harry’s previous ex-gfs, that this was not necessarily the kind of life she wanted to live. And of course the rumors were that the rift between Harry and William originated when W was maybe trying to hint that you know, maybe it’s not such a good idea to rush into things, and H was having none of it. But as usual, _what Meghan wants Meghan gets.  _Now not only has the royal family been torn apart, H & M are also apparently trying to topple an entire institution because nobody could take 5 minutes beforehand to sit and think about whether this was such a good idea after all.



Well that wouldn’t happen because:
A)she was clearly pulling a K Fed - marry unstable celeb ASAP= instant fame & money
B) she clearly lives for the drama 
C) anyone who slights her must be punished!


----------



## doni

MommyDaze said:


> It’s not quite that simple. The daughter could be similarly colored to Archie, but could also be significantly lighter or darker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can a couple have a baby that is significantly darker or lighter than either individual?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> genetics.thetech.org


Of course, myself I have kids with significantly different skin coloring and type (German/Spanish), but it usually keeps within a range. What I mean is, skin color is not like eye color, where you get one or the other.

With other traits, say curly hair, yes the little girl may get her grandma’s hair. But it is highly unlikely she gets her skin tone, which is much lighter than that of Sub-Saharan Africans because it is mixed, as for all African Americans, but also because of the different sun exposure throughout generations.

The fact is skin color/melanin is one of the most (if not the most) fleeting of the human characteristics we notice. Melanin is just chemicals we produce to protect our skin for the sun.  You have changes in melanin within one generation in people who move to less sunny environments and it has been shown that indeed it takes only a generation for the genes that are responsible for melanin production to reshuffle. Adaptation can even happen over a lifetime. In evolutionary terms this is supersonic. So it is really absurd we are so focused on a difference that is so utterly irrelevant...


----------



## chicinthecity777

So do I get this right? She went on 13 vacations while her passport was taken away, got pregnant and was depressed and suicidal. It's sort of understandable! I would be depressed too coming back from those fabulous vacations to face the reality of child rearing and royal work! She looked pretty depressed to me in those photos!   

*Click on the tweet to read more. *


----------



## jelliedfeels

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The same sympathies have not been extended to a pregnant Meghan.


Haven’t they? I think that’s very selective reading. There’s been tons of positive press about how brave she is for talking about mental health and how great she looks during pregnancy for example look at this from her arch enemy only days ago:



			Redirect Notice
		


With Archie she also got:
1. maternity leave and additional leave from her duties.
2. To manage the release of photos of her son rather than the traditional lindo wing photo.
3. Interviewed extensively about her well-being during the African tour documentary (when it was arguably irrelevant)

It’s also a bit odd  that she’s organised  a ‘bombshell’ interview while pregnant but she’s also sensitive at this time and we should be careful of this delicate flower.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5019546
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
> 
> 
> A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree with pundits that monarchy will survive unscathed. Slow and steady wins the race. Soon the public own the jewels. Go Brits! (With apologies to monarchists on here...)


I 


Hermes Zen said:


> I'm always trailing to catch up on the thread!   So if this was already said by someone my apologies. When I read that M had it engraved for her future daughter "To M.M. from M.M." My immediate thought was hmmmm ... Not sure she thought ahead that if lets say she did name her daughter Diana and the last name initial be different too. Will M have it changed?  Wonder if she'd have the backing replaced and re-engraved?


it should be changed to DM from MD
Aka “to Diana Markle from Mommie Dearest”


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> And so much of this back-and-forth is petty, emotional, ‘my feelings are hurt‘ and “I expect to get *my* way always” stuff.
> Look at the facts - entitled millionaire is mad at his family of billionaires.  Yes, of course, horrible things are said. Welcome to life.
> Lesson #1001 = Rise above it.  Lesson #1002 = Keep pressing forward.
> 
> BTW - if the Kohinoor goes back, then Greece still wants its marbles back.
> 
> ETA:  Some wise words for H&M [which William demonstrated quite well] :
> “To talk well and eloquently is a very great art, but that an equally great one is to know the right moment to stop.”
> Mozart


The repatriation of treasures is an extremely interesting and off topic issue which I could bang on about for hours! So much to debate in conservation and ownership.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm always trailing to catch up on the thread!   So if this was already said by someone my apologies. When I read that M had it engraved for her future daughter "To M.M. from M.M." My immediate thought was hmmmm ... Not sure she thought ahead that if lets say she did name her daughter Diana and the last name initial be different too. Will M have it changed?  Wonder if she'd have the backing replaced and re-engraved?



No, because the second initials don't refer to a future daughter, but herself.


----------



## mdcx

chicinthecity777 said:


> So do I get this right? She went on 13 vacations while her passport was taken away, got pregnant and was depressed and suicidal. It's sort of understandable! I would be depressed too coming back from those fabulous vacations to face the reality of child rearing and royal work! She looked pretty depressed to me in those photos!
> 
> *Click on the tweet to read more. *



Ive never seen that pic on the left before of MM preggo in a skintight outfit. Her dresser must have had a heart attack when Ms Markle insisted that this was a suitable outfit...


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> So do I get this right? She went on 13 vacations while her passport was taken away, got pregnant and was depressed and suicidal. It's sort of understandable! I would be depressed too coming back from those fabulous vacations to face the reality of child rearing and royal work! She looked pretty depressed to me in those photos!
> 
> *Click on the tweet to read more. *




Most of her/their claims don't stand up to scrutiny 

But her stans and occasional onlookers don't scrutinise and that's what she's/they're banking on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Well said Trevor Phillips 









						Trevor Phillips says Oprah should've asked Sussexes about Harry's past
					

The Monarchy has been plunged into crisis following the Sussexes' accusation of racism. Trevor Phillips says it would be interesting to ask about Harry's 'own past behaviour and remarks'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> So do I get this right? She went on 13 vacations while her passport was taken away, got pregnant and was depressed and suicidal. It's sort of understandable! I would be depressed too coming back from those fabulous vacations to face the reality of child rearing and royal work! She looked pretty depressed to me in those photos!
> 
> *Click on the tweet to read more. *



This was the evening in the Royal Box where she was supposedly crying throughout the performance. I'd like to hear from the many people who were in that same box


----------



## jelliedfeels

mshermes said:


> There are a few out there to be had....eBay, Tradesy and TRR had one.


I must say belated thank you for finding this for me. I’ve never bought from TRR before so it looks like I should consider an account


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> Well said Trevor Phillips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trevor Phillips says Oprah should've asked Sussexes about Harry's past
> 
> 
> The Monarchy has been plunged into crisis following the Sussexes' accusation of racism. Trevor Phillips says it would be interesting to ask about Harry's 'own past behaviour and remarks'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh but there was no need, he already apologized (kind of) and explained he acted without malice, water under the bridge.
Plus you know, he was insulting Pakistani soldiers, and the children of holocaust victims, and North African inmigrants... Nothing half as glamorous as offending a  stunningly pretty Duchess from LA with celebrity friends. So who cares.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> you never know.......the little girl could come out looking like Doria.....or could be as white as Harry....perhaps this is the kind of speculation that was made by the evil member of the RF
> I would think most likely their kids would be light brown but apparently you never know with genetics



My sister married a POC and they had 2 boys, one darker than the other. These 2 boys both married white girls and now have children of their own: the darker boy has a baby daughter, blond with blue eyes, like her mum. The other boy, has a white son and a darker daughter. 

As far as I can tell the variations of skin colour in mixed race children are endless....


----------



## chicinthecity777

As we predicted, nobody came out a winner from the interview.


----------



## artax two

purseinsanity said:


> I'm wondering when Meg and Haz will join TikTok.


I'm wondering when she will have to start doing nude scenes in order to support their lifestyle.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> As we predicted, nobody came out a winner from the interview.



No surprise there.
I wonder if there is some type of equivalent in the US.


----------



## marietouchet

FreeSpirit71 said:


> And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.


The press has gotten a lot of the details wrong for this goopy saga all along eg tiaragate was two separate issues, not one.
M wanted emeralds already marked for Eugenie and M hassled Angela Kelly for not making the diamond tiara instantly available for trying on. 
No one corrected that narrative either. in that case, M was a lot more demanding than the press led to believe.
The BRF has a no comment policy.


----------



## marietouchet

Great video, I am loathe to use the word narcissist without a understanding it, and it is a medical diagnosis 

but this video was very informative, though not a medical definition type, but really put things in perspecive


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Great video, I am loathe to use the word narcissist without a understanding it, and it is a medical diagnosis
> 
> but this video was very informative, though not a medical definition type, but really put things in perspecive



The malady du jour.
However, it is obvious that they are BOTH going thru some things, in my laid woman opinion.

As far as looking as pictures proving/disproving that she was depressed/suicidal at one point, it is unfair and wrong. 
She is an actress and she knew to put on a happy face out there.
It will be interesting to see  what she says 10 years from now....


----------



## Kansashalo

You can not judge a person's suicidal tendencies simply by looking at them.  There is a thing called "smiling depression" - meaning they put on a happy face/smile in public and are able to carry on/work but are totally different behind closed doors.  In fact, these types of people are reported to have higher risk of suicide.


----------



## muddledmint

tiktok said:


> Actually it always seemed really silly to me but I just considered it tabloid gossip. There is a difference between what the Daily Mail prints and what a mature, intelligent woman would choose to discuss. Which to me puts Meghan smack in the immature and not very intelligent bucket given that she chose to even bring that up. I mean, are we in high school? Who gives a &@$%?


Exactly! The difference is also that you don’t see Kate talking about this 3 years later! Whether Meghan made Kate cry, or Kate made Meghan cry, or they both cried, or even that tabloids reported it correctly or incorrectly, it is not worth discussing on a public stage. Meghan thinks it’s important because of her narcissism. It just shows how immature and vindictive and jealous she is that she feels she MUST set the record straight on such a trivial issue.


----------



## Etriers

FreeSpirit71 said:


> She also said on the record that well-meaning friends would call her or email her and say something along the lines of, "OMG have you seen what XYZ publication said about you?" so she wasn't saying she was completely oblivious to it.
> 
> When the Palace takes the time to respond to allegations about such (quite frankly) silly stories as Kate's supposed botox and hair extensions but does nothing to respond to the more serious articles about Meghan it speaks volumes.
> 
> None of us know how HR or issues such as mental health are dealt with inside Palace walls.



I completely agree.  While I believe it is unrealistic for any public figures to want or expect that everyone love them or that there will be no vitriol from rag magazines, I also think that MM was treated particularly badly. I also think it is conceivable that there was perhaps a bit of jealousy (and likely nothing overt, but just a general feeling) coming from Kate and Will that may have colored the “firm’s” lack of response to H and M‘s pleas for assistance with the press.  Whatever you think of M, she is incredibly beautiful and H is the “fun” royal, and together they are a gorgeous, glamorous couple.  Also, let’s be real—the fact that she is person of color and an American threw everyone in the family and firm for a loop.  That M and H were obviously extremely happy and in love, probably didn’t make things easier for them either.  For some reason two gorgeous wealthy people who are in love and seem to have it all has a way of enticing the trolls.

I also think the royal family and palace establishment has a relatively poor record of dealing with women in general, especially women entering the family through marriage.  The party line appears to be put-up and shut up, which was always a bad idea, but just will no longer fly in 2021.  They will either need to modernize or that will be the end of it.


----------



## muddledmint

Lodpah said:


> I’m really confused. What’s the difference between a blatant liar and falsehoods? I thought she didn’t know much about the monarchy.
> 
> 
> Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> Agueda Sanchez
> ·
> Wed
> 
> M.A. from Queens College (CUNY)(Graduated 1996)
> 
> Originally Answered: Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
> I find it very hard to believe.
> Meghan was 16 years old when Princess Diana died in a car accident. Sixteen years old when Harry, who was only 12 years old at the time, walked behind his mother’s coffin. Everyone around the world saw that iconic, painful image. Princess Diana had made a huge impact around the world and it is impossible to believe that Meghan was not aware of that.
> Another worldwide event was the Royal wedding of Prince William to the then Kate Middleton. This event was watched by 3 BILLION people. When you watch a wedding of this magnitude, there are tons of royal commentators explaining everything, every single detail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a very happy event indeed, here we have HMTQ looking radiant:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This royal wedding was everywhere!
> In 2014, a cable actress had a blog called The Tig. On that blog, said actress wrote about the royal wedding and the “pomp and circumstance” regarding this historical event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How did she not know about the monarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All information from public sites.
> 
> 68K views
> View 350 upvotes
> View shares
> · Answer requested by


Thank you! I totally forgot about that post on the tig. It’s a real gem.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

muddledmint said:


> Exactly! The difference is also that you don’t see Kate talking about this 3 years later! Whether Meghan made Kate cry, or Kate made Meghan cry, or they both cried, or even that tabloids reported it correctly or incorrectly, it is not worth discussing on a public stage. Meghan thinks it’s important because of her narcissism. It just shows how immature and vindictive and jealous she is that she feels she MUST set the record straight on such a trivial issue.


This! Who haven't had some sort of disagreement with a family member? You talk through it and move on! MM has held that grudge for 3 years now and counting!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Great video, I am loathe to use the word narcissist without a understanding it, and it is a medical diagnosis
> 
> but this video was very informative, though not a medical definition type, but really put things in perspecive




Which stage are they at?


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> The malady du jour.
> However, it is obvious that they are BOTH going thru some things, in my laid woman opinion.
> 
> As far as looking as pictures proving/disproving that she was depressed/suicidal at one point, it is unfair and wrong.
> She is an actress and she knew to put on a happy face out there.
> It will be interesting to see  what she says 10 years from now....


An actress? OK. I watched Suits and she was awful! Couldn't act to save her life.

I have met and dealt with people who suffer depression IRL, bering in support groups myself, and there are sadness things in their eyes you just can't hide! We are talking about severe depression/suicidal here, people who in that state would find it a struggle to get out of bed or wash themselves. But please agree to disagree.


----------



## floatinglili

Douglas Murray again, this time concerned about the forces resignation / dismissal of the executive director of the Society of Editors, who said the Sussuxes should be expected to provide proper proof of media racism if they were making the public claim. 
This article is worth a read and the comments aren’t bad either. 









						The myth of tabloid racism
					

The febrile atmosphere whipped up by the Sussexes is already taking its toll




					unherd.com


----------



## Etriers

chicinthecity777 said:


> This! Who haven't had some sort of disagreement with a family member? You talk through it and move on! MM has held that grudge for 3 years now and counting!!!


 
Lol! Because Lord knows that’s how it works in families.  Family members always simply talk about their disagreements and move on.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Genetics is fascinating to me.



Same for me. I always enjoy going out and seeing an entire family. You can look at the parents and the kids and see who they look like. It's interesting when they look like both parents. I have two daughters. One looks exactly like her dad. And she is tall. And my other daughter is short (like me) and looks exactly like me. When they were younger, people often mistook them for twins which we all used to laugh at because other than their coloring, they look almost nothing alike. They are 20 months apart in age. The only thing my younger daughter got from me is my double uvula. Google for those who don't know what it is. I still remember the first time I saw it. She was about 1.5 and gagging on a piece of cellophane. I was opening her mouth and trying to get it out and I saw it. I was so happy. She was mine! lol


----------



## Etriers

floatinglili said:


> Douglas Murray again, this time concerned about the forces resignation / dismissal of the executive director of the Society of Editors, who said the Sussuxes should be expected to provide proper proof of media racism if they were making the public claim.
> This article is worth a read and the comments aren’t bad either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The myth of tabloid racism
> 
> 
> The febrile atmosphere whipped up by the Sussexes is already taking its toll
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unherd.com



Okay, now we’re just being silly.  That racism exists in this world, whether in the media or otherwise hardly needs “proving.” One need only open one’s eyes and look around a bit.


----------



## Chanbal

Black choir at Meghan and Harry's wedding was invited by Charles
					

Karen Gibson, who founded The Kingdom Choir - which performed at Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018 - told TMZ that she had trouble believing Prince Charles was racist.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## dangerouscurves




----------



## dangerouscurves

I have a friend who dated black guys and she's still racist and she befriended me (I'm Asian) and found out she was racist toward me behind my back. ‍♀‍♀


Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5020054
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black choir at Meghan and Harry's wedding was invited by Charles
> 
> 
> Karen Gibson, who founded The Kingdom Choir - which performed at Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018 - told TMZ that she had trouble believing Prince Charles was racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

ROYAL REPUTATION *Charles ‘wanted to issue point-by-point rebuttal’ to Meghan Markle and Harry’s Oprah interview – but ‘Queen vetoed it’*








						Charles 'wanted to issue point-by-point rebuttal' to Harry & Meg interview
					

PRINCE Charles wanted to issue a point-by-point rebuttal to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, it was claimed today. But the Queen’s 64-word statem…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

artax two said:


> I'm wondering when she will have to start doing nude scenes in order to support their lifestyle.


No, I doubt that.  She'd have Harry do it!


----------



## floatinglili

Etriers said:


> Okay, now we’re just being silly.  That racism exists in this world, whether in the media or otherwise hardly needs “proving.”


What was silly about the article? If you read it, you see the guy who walked is actually responsible for defending the media and the point was made in the article that the ‘evidence’ put up by Oprah Winfrey and the Markle was misrepresented.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> I’m really confused. What’s the difference between a blatant liar and falsehoods? I thought she didn’t know much about the monarchy.
> 
> 
> Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> Agueda Sanchez
> ·
> Wed
> 
> M.A. from Queens College (CUNY)(Graduated 1996)
> 
> Originally Answered: Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
> I find it very hard to believe.
> Meghan was 16 years old when Princess Diana died in a car accident. Sixteen years old when Harry, who was only 12 years old at the time, walked behind his mother’s coffin. Everyone around the world saw that iconic, painful image. Princess Diana had made a huge impact around the world and it is impossible to believe that Meghan was not aware of that.
> Another worldwide event was the Royal wedding of Prince William to the then Kate Middleton. This event was watched by 3 BILLION people. When you watch a wedding of this magnitude, there are tons of royal commentators explaining everything, every single detail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a very happy event indeed, here we have HMTQ looking radiant:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This royal wedding was everywhere!
> In 2014, a cable actress had a blog called The Tig. On that blog, said actress wrote about the royal wedding and the “pomp and circumstance” regarding this historical event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How did she not know about the monarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All information from public sites.
> 
> 68K views
> View 350 upvotes
> View shares
> · Answer requested by


Selective amnesia.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts?
> 
> It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out!
> 
> Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree
> 
> Stay safe out there everyone!


I'm reading like 10% of new posts on a good log in, I have no idea what's going on here anymore, or if you were actually really so very bad   but don't go. It's not the worst thing in the world to have posts deleted, just ask me  Also sometimes ones posts are just collateral damage when someone else's posts get deleted.



purseinsanity said:


> No, I doubt that.  She'd have Harry do it!


I think he's got the nude scenes down pat, non? Everything doesn't stay in Vegas. There's allegedly some bad gossip about underage girls and hookers in that story, isn't there? Saint Harry...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## dangerouscurves

purseinsanity said:


> Selective amnesia.


Maybe because not everyone cares about the monarchy? People who don't care would not know much.


----------



## floatinglili

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which stage are they at?


I actually really enjoyed that fun vid. It honestly put the narcissist claims in perspective for me, up until now I had never really formed a strong opinion apart from a natural dislike of the grabby hands and the walking in front etc I thought I was just reacting to bad manners but now I see perhaps it is a reflection of something else. 
Actually the video made me feel really sorry for Harry, which is a first - although the video didn’t really discuss him directly.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> An actress? OK. I watched Suits and she was awful! Couldn't act to save her life.
> 
> I have met and dealt with people who suffer depression IRL, bering in support groups myself, and there are


Not to be picky but how many times, do we hear ”I never knew he felt that way”. After a suicide.
Not everyone is the same, imho.
Anyways....


dangerouscurves said:


> I have a friend who dated black guys and she's still racist and she befriended me (I'm Asian) and found out she was racist toward me behind my back. ‍♀‍♀



They always come out eventually. All it takes is a disagreement and boom. Their true colors and N words and other racist language come out.....
I have zero doubts that MM experienced racism, classism and more.
Is she annoying? Yep
I hope that things change in my lifetime..


----------



## purseinsanity

doni said:


> Of course, myself I have kids with significantly different skin coloring and type (German/Spanish), but it usually keeps within a range. What I mean is,* skin color is not like eye color, where you get one or the other.*
> 
> With other traits, say curly hair, yes the little girl may get her grandma’s hair. But it is highly unlikely she gets her skin tone, which is much lighter than that of Sub-Saharan Africans because it is mixed, as for all African Americans, but also because of the different sun exposure throughout generations.
> 
> The fact is skin color/melanin is one of the most (if not the most) fleeting of the human characteristics we notice. Melanin is just chemicals we produce to protect our skin for the sun.  You have changes in melanin within one generation in people who move to less sunny environments and it has been shown that indeed it takes only a generation for the genes that are responsible for melanin production to reshuffle. Adaptation can even happen over a lifetime. In evolutionary terms this is supersonic. So it is really absurd we are so focused on a difference that is so utterly irrelevant...



Honestly, it's not that simple for eye color either.  I have brown eyes, my entire immediate family does.  My husband's are very blue, his father blue, his mother and sister have brown, his brother hazel.  When my husband and I married, I was saying how I'd love to have one blue eyed and one green eyed child.  (Having brown eyes, I thought it was the most boring color ever!)  Hubby's immediate comment?  Not going to happen unless we adopt!  I have great aunts/uncles with blue and green eyes.  My son was born with big blue eyes which slowly changed to a beautiful green after age 2.  My daughter's were grey and slowly turned to the same green as my son's.  No one else in our families that we know of have their exact color.  Strangers pick up they're siblings based on their eye color alone.  I told my husband, see Oprah (trying to make this somehow relevant to this thread ) read that book that said if you put it out into the universe, it'll happen!


----------



## kkfiregirl

dangerouscurves said:


> View attachment 5020056



Serious question. What is racist about this photo? What if they also carry around other notable black guests like this? This just seems like a cultural thing to me and the person sitting in the chair just happens to be white, but he could be any color.


----------



## Etriers

floatinglili said:


> What was silly about the article? If you read it, you see the guy who walked is actually responsible for defending the media and the point was made in the article that the ‘evidence’ put up by Oprah Winfrey and the Markle was misrepresented.



“[concern for]...the executive director of the Society of Editors, who said the Sussuxes should be expected to provide proper proof of media racism if they were making the public claim.”


----------



## dangerouscurves

kkfiregirl said:


> Serious question. What is racist about this photo? What if they also carry around other notable black guests like this? This just seems like a cultural thing to me and the person sitting in the chair just happens to be white, but he could be any color.


Lol! Okay then.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Allisonfaye said:


> The only thing my younger daughter got from me is my double uvula.



I read this as double vulva! 

I’m glad it’s something more benign!


----------



## limom

dangerouscurves said:


> Lol! Okay then.


While it looks awful, it is actually the tradition there to carry honored guests that ways.
It would have been impolite for them to decline.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Etriers said:


> Lol! Because Lord knows that’s how it works in families.  Family members always simply talk about their disagreements and move on.



MM considers herself a sophisticated & eloquent feminist, so yes, I think she could have talked to her sister-in-law about the problem.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> An actress? OK. I watched Suits and she was awful! Couldn't act to save her life.
> 
> I have met and dealt with people who suffer depression IRL, bering in support groups myself, and there are sadness things in their eyes you just can't hide! We are talking about severe depression/suicidal here, people who in that state would find it a struggle to get out of bed or wash themselves. But please agree to disagree.



I've had friends that sadly attempted/committed suicide from both camps. Those that put on a brave face and the that couldn't dress themselves.

Let's not wrap the idea of suicide in cotton wool, most people with suicidal tendencies are not nice people to have to deal with or take care of. What they are going to do is a very violent act. One of my teenage friends needed full-time care and watching around the clock by her family and friends, you couldn't have a normal conversation with her without her turning it into a melodrama (unfortunately, she succeeded with one of her plans when she was 18). She had almost killed her brother along with her on another occasion. Another friend starved herself to death and 3 jumped in front of trains (one purposely on her ex-BF's birthday) and the worst was when my friend's father murdered his wife (my friend's mother) before he killed himself because she'd tried to stop him from killing himself (with a knife).

If MM was/is suicidal or mad enough to pretend she was (especially when pregnant) she should be having serious professional treatment. Any other person would be attracting the attention of social services, especially re the kids.


----------



## artax two

kkfiregirl said:


> I read this as double vulva!
> 
> I’m glad it’s something more benign!


I read a reddit post the other week about a woman in Aus who had two vaginas, side by side. One she claimed she used for her escort service, the other she reserved for her personal relationships.


----------



## kkfiregirl

^^^^^


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I've had friends that sadly attempted/committed suicide from both camps. Those that put on a brave face and the that couldn't dress themselves.
> 
> Let's not wrap the idea of suicide in cotton wool, most people with suicidal tendencies are not nice people to have to deal with or take care of. What they are going to do is a very violent act. One of my teenage friends needed full-time care and watching around the clock by her family and friends, you couldn't have a normal conversation with her without her turning it into a melodrama (unfortunately, she succeeded with one of her plans when she was 18). She had almost killed her brother along with her on another occasion. Another friend starved herself to death and 3 jumped in front of trains (one purposely on her ex-BF's birthday) and the worst was when my friend's father murdered his wife (my friend's mother) before he killed himself because she'd tried to stop him from killing himself (with a knife).
> 
> If MM was/is suicidal or mad enough to pretend she was (especially when pregnant) she should be having serious professional treatment. Any other person would be attracting the attention of social services, especially re the kids.


Absolutely, I also read somewhere that many suicides attempts were spur of the moments thing.
One minute, the person was OK the next they jumped off the bridge.
They also said they were happy to survive.
If you need help, please call the suicide outline.


----------



## limom

artax two said:


> I read a reddit post the other week about a woman in Aus who had two vaginas, side by side. One she claimed she used for her escort service, the other she reserved for her personal relationships.


You won’t happen to have a link handy bu any chance...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muddledmint

dangerouscurves said:


> Lol! Okay then.


It’s a reasonable question. Not everything is racist


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> This was hard for me to watch too. It's one thing if they made it clear it was scorched earth, like Samantha does... but they actually called these same people welcoming (the entire family), good people (Kate),* "love them to bits".... and then went into all this dirty laundry.  If you love them, handle this $hit privately.*



They did it that way for self-serving reasons. It was absolutely mandatory they be seen as being the wounded, aggrieved party. Look at all the sympathy and encouragement they have had heaped on them this week. They also wanted to make sure the WORLD knew that they have overcome their hardship and that they magnanimously forgive those who have wronged them. 

Think of how many more months/years of good will they can milk out of this. The contracts! The speaking engagements! The CASH!


----------



## muddledmint

artax two said:


> I read a reddit post the other week about a woman in Aus who had two vaginas, side by side. One she claimed she used for her escort service, the other she reserved for her personal relationships.


There was a woman who had two sets of legs and reproductive organs and she had children with both!


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> You won’t happen to have a link handy bu any chance...


Yuck some reason this story makes me feel inspired to vomit. 
Obviously I must have deep seated latent woman hating tendencies  or at the very least hate my own body . I am a repressed sexist I see that now.


----------



## muddledmint

Etriers said:


> Okay, now we’re just being silly.  That racism exists in this world, whether in the media or otherwise hardly needs “proving.” One need only open one’s eyes and look around a bit.


Yes, it does need to be proved. Just like anything else.


----------



## Chanbal

I hope you are all seated and your stomachs are not too full:   



"_She wants to raise the giant figure of £7.1million to pay off Harry’s mortgage on his £11million, nine-bedroom home in Montecito, California – but has collected just £78.64 so far.

Insisting her fundraise-heir is no joke, Anastasia, from Ventura – just a 25-minute drive from the prince - told The Sun: “I like to help people and help them in any way I can.

“That gives me happiness. If you needed a home, I’d do the same for you. It’s a good deed._”


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5019546
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poll reveals most of Britons want Harry and Meghan stripped of titles
> 
> 
> A sobering survey has revealed the majority of the public feel Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have let down the Queen following their interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't agree with pundits that monarchy will survive unscathed. Slow and steady wins the race. Soon the public own the jewels. Go Brits! (With apologies to monarchists on here...)


Apologies be damned. We're not allowed to discuss US heads of states on this thread, but posters are allowed to cheer for the destruction of the UK monarchy and the removal of its head of state. Unbelievable!


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Great video, I am loathe to use the word narcissist without a understanding it, and it is a medical diagnosis
> 
> but this video was very informative, though not a medical definition type, but really put things in perspecive



Two things I got out of the video which is not a medical presentation
1. M likes control 
2. H did not want a girlfriend to like him for his title, so, M saying she was unaware of the BRF struck a chord with him 
We have all asked “what is this bit about“ not googling BRF, ignorance of BRF , or words to that effect ... well there you have it, it played to H’s sympathies
And since this was an important way of attracting H, she has had to maintain it all along 
I am loathe to make a medical diagnosis of someone I do know, but it was helpful to me, I am not a controlling type so am oblivious to that issue, I learned something about others


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Well said Trevor Phillips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trevor Phillips says Oprah should've asked Sussexes about Harry's past
> 
> 
> The Monarchy has been plunged into crisis following the Sussexes' accusation of racism. Trevor Phillips says it would be interesting to ask about Harry's 'own past behaviour and remarks'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It was never going to happen. This was the MEGHAN SHOW. Harry didn't get any time alone with Oprah. He was little more than a prop brought out towards the end to mumble a few sentences about how enlightened he became _because of Meghan_.


----------



## limom

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies be damned. We're not allowed to discuss US heads of states on this thread, but posters are allowed to cheer for the destruction of the UK monarchy and the removal of its head of state. Unbelievable!


Personally, I am partial to the guillotine.j/k


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Selective amnesia.


Lack of attention played to Harry, see my other post and video


----------



## artax two

limom said:


> You won’t happen to have a link handy bu any chance...



You know it.

This is an Ask Me Anything post. For those unfamiliar with how Reddit works, each comment that is positioned furthest to the left as possible are "parent" comments and those indented underneath them are "child" comments. Typically, comments are voted on by users (hence the "points" listed under the comment) so better content rises to the top, but because this was a q&a thread, I am not sure if the comments are all in time stamp order or highest vote order.


----------



## limom

The thing you learn on the purseforum
Thank you


----------



## marietouchet

On Charles wanting to address the video point by point but getting vetoed by Queen
Maybe he will do this in private, or by phone call, but not in public
I don’t think that geeky technique would work, actually it might backfire with H&M
i hope he does the list, at least for himself and his family in the UK to know which points might have some validity or be totally bogus
A typical technique , write a rant, then burn it


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Personally, I am partial to the guillotine.j/k


MAIS NON , le guillotine is FRENCH , we need a more UK technique, thinking back to the wives of Henry VIII that perished at the tower...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They did it that way for self-serving reasons. It was absolutely mandatory they be seen as being the wounded, aggrieved party. They *Look at all the sympathy and encouragement they have had heaped on them this week. *They also wanted to make sure the WORLD knew that they have overcome their hardship and that they magnanimously forgive those who have wronged them.
> 
> Think of how many more months/years of good will they can milk out of this. The contracts! The speaking engagements! The CASH!


And a fundraising on the GoFundMe site to pay for their mortgage. “_When they came to the USA they were without jobs and with limited funds_." I'm sorry this is LaLa land, since when $40M dollars or pounds are considered limited funds???  Did this lady notice the growing homeless population in CA? People leaving in cars and tends... 

More from the Sun article:
“_*They've stated that they've had a very rough time*, so this fundraiser is a way to give help, compassion, and love by paying their home loan in full. “I personally relate to mental health, racial equality, diversity, and inclusivity. “They both support these issues as well. Together, they can help bring healing and restoration to the whole world._”


----------



## muddledmint

marietouchet said:


> Two things I got out of the video which is not a medical presentation
> 1. M likes control
> 2. H did not want a girlfriend to like him for his title, so, M saying she was unaware of the BRF struck a chord with him
> We have all asked “what is this bit about“ not googling BRF, ignorance of BRF , or words to that effect ... well there you have it, it played to H’s sympathies
> And since this was an important way of attracting H, she has had to maintain it all along
> I am loathe to make a medical diagnosis of someone I do know, but it was helpful to me, I am not a controlling type so am oblivious to that issue, I learned something about others


Remember this?








						The Rules authors on how they 'helped Meghan snare Harry'
					

EXCLUSIVE: Speaking to MailOnline, Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider, whose 1995 book The Rules became a bestseller in 27 countries, say the princess in waiting played her cards 'perfectly'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> And a fundraising on the GoFundMe site to pay for their mortgage. “_When they came to the USA they were without jobs and with limited funds_." I'm sorry this is LaLa land, since when $40M dollars or pounds are considered limited funds???  Did this lady notice the growing homeless population in CA? People leaving in cars and tends...
> 
> More from the Sun article:
> “_*They've stated that they've had a very rough time*, so this fundraiser is a way to give help, compassion, and love by paying their home loan in full. “I personally relate to mental health, racial equality, diversity, and inclusivity. “They both support these issues as well. Together, they can help bring healing and restoration to the whole world._”



I am all for that fundraising(imo it is either a scam or untrue)
No funds needed from the tax payers.
here it is :








						Support for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, organized by Princess Fairy
					

CONGRATULATIONS   MEGHAN AND HARRY      We are dedicated fans and supporter… Princess Fairy needs your support for Support for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry




					www.gofundme.com


----------



## floatinglili

marietouchet said:


> On Charles wanting to address the video point by point but getting vetoed by Queen
> Maybe he will do this in private, or by phone call, but not in public
> I don’t think that geeky technique would work, actually it might backfire with H&M
> i hope he does the list, at least for himself and his family in the UK to know which points might have some validity or be totally bogus
> A typical technique , write a rant, then burn it


To be honest would be a great exercise to write up the rebuttals to each point not to release verbatim but to help prepare themselves for the inevitable awkward questions. The royals will be badgered about ‘these issues raised ‘ for a very long time and it would be helpful for them to  have some cohesive / fact-checked  talking points ready to go.
Honestly though, wasn’t this ‘tell all
Interview’ a dead cert (certainty) from the moment Oprah arrived at the wedding. What on earth else was she there for?!
I can’t wait /jk for the release of the home vids and secret recordings for the Netflix series!!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> And a fundraising on the GoFundMe site to pay for their mortgage. “_When they came to the USA they were without jobs and with limited funds_." I'm sorry this is LaLa land, since when $40M dollars or pounds are considered limited funds??? Did this lady notice the growing homeless population in CA? People leaving in cars and tends...
> 
> More from the Sun article:
> “_*They've stated that they've had a very rough time*, so this fundraiser is a way to give help, compassion, and love by paying their home loan in full. “I personally relate to mental health, racial equality, diversity, and inclusivity. “They both support these issues as well. Together, they can help bring healing and restoration to the whole world._”



Okay, I'd like to think Meghan and Harry have enough dignity not to take money from a fan fundraiser. Maybe it can be given to a deserving cause. 

ETA: I see they have only raised $11 so far. I guess there isn't much to worry about.


----------



## chicinthecity777

*CALIFORNIA LOVE  **Fundraising page to pay for Meghan Markle & Harry’s £11m mortgage after he moaned he was ‘cut off’ financially by royals*








						Fundraising page to pay for Harry's £11m mortgage after he was 'cut off'
					

A CALIFORNIAN woman has started a fundraising page to pay Prince Harry’s MORTGAGE – after the royal moaned to Oprah that he had been financially “cut off” by his family. The Duke of Sussex, 3…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

^^ currently the fund raised stands at $110.


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> There was a woman who had two sets of legs and reproductive organs and she had children with both!



She must have absorbed her twin. It happens.

No idea how I will link the above with H&M except_ both_ are two-faced


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> ^^ currently the fund raised stands at $110.



and some people think tPFers throw their money away


----------



## jelliedfeels

Etriers said:


> Okay, now we’re just being silly.  That racism exists in this world, whether in the media or otherwise hardly needs “proving.” One need only open one’s eyes and look around a bit.


There is a massive difference between recognising that something exists in abstract and saying it is the cause of a chain of events. Especially if my statement potentially incriminates others or brings disrepute on them.

E.G. The laws recognise that sexism and other forms of discrimination exist and they are crimes.
However, if I want to sue my boss for constructive dismissal on grounds of sexism then I need to prove that was the cause of my firing. Whether any other woman has been fired or mistreated in the world  is completely moot in proving my case. It is also irrelevant whether any other man has been sexist to me in the past- only the one man is on trial.

To me, secondhand conversation with her husband, a refusal to name the offender and inconsistency in when this happened are not very convincing. Add to this a vested interest to lie to make themselves look like they were forced to leave rather than they were angered when they couldn’t broker their preferred trade deal. Finally there are clear instances of them misrepresenting information to give a negative impression of the same people in the same interview.


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> My sister married a POC and they had 2 boys, one darker than the other. These 2 boys both married white girls and now have children of their own: the darker boy has a baby daughter, blond with blue eyes, like her mum. The other boy, has a white son and a darker daughter.
> 
> As far as I can tell the variations of skin colour in mixed race children are endless....


interesting.....so even though meghan's children will be only one quarter black it's possible the girl could be darker than Archie
I knew a couple at work.  The wife was a WOC (lighter skinned) the husband Mexican.  Their son (as a baby/toddler) was blonde with light brown skin.  I imagine the boy's hair will darken with age.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I hope you are all seated and your stomachs are not too full:
> 
> View attachment 5020108
> 
> "_She wants to raise the giant figure of £7.1million to pay off Harry’s mortgage on his £11million, nine-bedroom home in Montecito, California – but has collected just £78.64 so far.
> 
> Insisting her fundraise-heir is no joke, Anastasia, from Ventura – just a 25-minute drive from the prince - told The Sun: “I like to help people and help them in any way I can.
> 
> “That gives me happiness. If you needed a home, I’d do the same for you. It’s a good deed._”


I wish these people were giving their money to a worthier cause like that kickstarter which just says ‘potato salad’ on it.

Don’t they realise they are insulting two hard-working career people with their help?

Perhaps Harry will finally be able to afford another suit? Or some shoes without holes in them?

If they keep giving, Meghan will soon  be able to afford another new face.

waffle makers all round! 

enough jokes, this is kinda  sick when the world is suffering so much right now.


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> I am all for that fundraising(imo it is either a scam or untrue)
> No funds needed from the tax payers.
> here it is :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Support for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, organized by Princess Fairy
> 
> 
> CONGRATULATIONS   MEGHAN AND HARRY      We are dedicated fans and supporter… Princess Fairy needs your support for Support for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gofundme.com




The above is not the same fundraising for them on GoFundMe. Someone is now collecting to pay the mortgage for their 16-restroom mansion in Montecito. I forgot to include the link for the article, here it is:









						Fundraising page to pay for Harry's £11m mortgage after he was 'cut off'
					

A CALIFORNIAN woman has started a fundraising page to pay Prince Harry’s MORTGAGE – after the royal moaned to Oprah that he had been financially “cut off” by his family. The Duke of Sussex, 3…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> interesting.....so even though meghan's children will be only one quarter black it's possible the girl could be darker than Archie
> I knew a couple at work.  The wife was a WOC (lighter skinned) the husband Mexican.  Their son (as a baby/toddler) was blonde with light brown skin.  I imagine the boy's hair will darken with age.


One of the best movie about this subject. Oldies but goodies: 








						Imitation of Life (1959) - IMDb
					

Imitation of Life: Directed by Douglas Sirk. With Lana Turner, John Gavin, Sandra Dee, Susan Kohner. An aspiring white actress takes in an African-American widow whose mixed-race daughter is desperate to be seen as white.




					www.imdb.com
				




One of my grandfather passed his entire life. His tribe knew though....


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> The above is not the same fundraising for them on GoFundMe. Someone is now collecting to pay the mortgage for their 16-restroom mansion in Montecito. I forgot to include the link for the article, here it is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fundraising page to pay for Harry's £11m mortgage after he was 'cut off'
> 
> 
> A CALIFORNIAN woman has started a fundraising page to pay Prince Harry’s MORTGAGE – after the royal moaned to Oprah that he had been financially “cut off” by his family. The Duke of Sussex, 3…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> One of the best movie about this subject. Oldies but goodies:
> One of my grandfather passed his entire life. His tribe knew though....



Reminds me of the book _Passing_ by Nella Larsen.









						In Nella Larsen’s "Passing," Whiteness Isn’t Just About Race - Electric Literature
					

The classic book deals with the complicated intersection of race, class, and culture




					electricliterature.com


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> Serious question. What is racist about this photo? What if they also carry around other notable black guests like this? This just seems like a cultural thing to me and the person sitting in the chair just happens to be white, but he could be any color.


Absolutely agree. There are many different cultures throughout the world.


----------



## sdkitty

Etriers said:


> I completely agree.  While I believe it is unrealistic for any public figures to want or expect that everyone love them or that there will be no vitriol from rag magazines, I also think that MM was treated particularly badly. I also think it is conceivable that there was perhaps a bit of jealousy (and likely nothing overt, but just a general feeling) coming from Kate and Will that may have colored the “firm’s” lack of response to H and M‘s pleas for assistance with the press.  Whatever you think of M, she is incredibly beautiful and H is the “fun” royal, and together they are a gorgeous, glamorous couple.  Also, let’s be real—the fact that she is person of color and an American threw everyone in the family and firm for a loop.  That M and H were obviously extremely happy and in love, probably didn’t make things easier for them either.  For some reason two gorgeous wealthy people who are in love and seem to have it all has a way of enticing the trolls.
> 
> I also think the royal family and palace establishment has a relatively poor record of dealing with women in general, especially women entering the family through marriage.  The party line appears to be put-up and shut up, which was always a bad idea, but just will no longer fly in 2021.  They will either need to modernize or that will be the end of it.


It's possible IMO that Kate may have felt a twinge of jealousy around the time of the wedding when Meghan was getting a lot of attention and adulation.  But in the long run, once the wedding was over, I don't think she had anything to be jealous about.  She is beautiful and she is the one who will be queen.


----------



## csshopper

I had forgotten about Doria's invite to sacred Sandringham for Christmas, an invitation the Middletons have never received, for example. Guess Meghan conveniently forgot also since this does not fit her "truth" about being welcomed.

The information below may be one of the reasons the Queen stated, "while some recollections may vary..."

"Ragland was the only member of Meghan Markle's family to attend the royal wedding, and apparently she made such a good impression on Queen Elizabeth that she invited her to spend Christmas with the family at their estate in Sandringham, per The Daily Mail.

*This is especially impressive considering, as Vanity Fair notes, this makes her the first non-royal to be invited to spend Christmas at the estate in the history of the monarchy. "Kate did not go to Sandringham before she married William in 2011, and the Middletons are still not invited," etiquette expert William Hanson told the outlet.*

The queen wasn't the only member of the royal family delighted by Ragland. According to The Times UK, Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles were also charmed by their new relation when they had tea ahead of the wedding festivities."


----------



## chicinthecity777

*Founder of Black choir from Harry and Meghan's wedding joins defence of Royal Family*
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/karen-gibson-founder-kingdom-choir-harry-meghan-wedding-132512536.html


----------



## sdkitty

dangerouscurves said:


> I have a friend who dated black guys and she's still racist and she befriended me (I'm Asian) and found out she was racist toward me behind my back. ‍♀‍♀


so she is racist toward asians but not blacks?  or she dates black guys but still says racist things about black people?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> It's possible IMO that Kate may have felt a twinge of jealousy around the time of the wedding when Meghan was getting a lot of attention and adulation.  But in the long run, once the wedding was over, I don't think she had anything to be jealous about.  She is beautiful and she is the one who will be queen.


And she will have access to all the tiaras


----------



## Kendalia

Maybe I missed the answer in the endless discussions throughout social media but "what was the purpose, reason they gave for the Oprah interview"?   She's happily pregnant, has a great life in Calif with her love, and they have endless opportunities for a fulfilling life so why are they putting themselves out there to be gossiped about and to feel stressed about the talk about them and intrusion into their lives?  Doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Honestly, it's not that simple for eye color either.  I have brown eyes, my entire immediate family does.  My husband's are very blue, his father blue, his mother and sister have brown, his brother hazel.  When my husband and I married, I was saying how I'd love to have one blue eyed and one green eyed child.  (Having brown eyes, I thought it was the most boring color ever!)  Hubby's immediate comment?  Not going to happen unless we adopt!  I have great aunts/uncles with blue and green eyes.  My son was born with big blue eyes which slowly changed to a beautiful green after age 2.  My daughter's were grey and slowly turned to the same green as my son's.  No one else in our families that we know of have their exact color.  Strangers pick up they're siblings based on their eye color alone.  I told my husband, see Oprah (trying to make this somehow relevant to this thread ) read that book that said if you put it out into the universe, it'll happen!


I recall years ago working with a young woman who was brown skinned (probably bi-racial) with green eyes.  she was stunning


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> And she will have access to all the tiaras


In fact, I think the reverse may be true.  Meghan was the Hollywood actress and thought she would be the beauty getting all the attention.  But Kate, while not an actress, is beautiful in her own right, tall, slender, wears clothes well and very tasteful.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> The above is not the same fundraising for them on GoFundMe. Someone is now collecting to pay the mortgage for their 16-restroom mansion in Montecito. I forgot to include the link for the article, here it is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fundraising page to pay for Harry's £11m mortgage after he was 'cut off'
> 
> 
> A CALIFORNIAN woman has started a fundraising page to pay Prince Harry’s MORTGAGE – after the royal moaned to Oprah that he had been financially “cut off” by his family. The Duke of Sussex, 3…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Crazy and here I am clipping my weekly Safeway coupons. I need a Gofundme cause you know, groceries are going up in prices.


----------



## tiktok

Kendalia said:


> Maybe I missed the answer in the endless discussions throughout social media but "what was the purpose, reason they gave for the Oprah interview"?   She's happily pregnant, has a great life in Calif with her love, and they have endless opportunities for a fulfilling life so why are they putting themselves out there to be gossiped about and to feel stressed about the talk about them and intrusion into their lives?  Doesn't make sense to me.



“To tell their side of the story” is the justification I read everywhere for them airing their dirty laundry all over the media rather than solving the matter quietly with their family or taking positive actions on causes like racism in more productive ways.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Great video, I am loathe to use the word narcissist without a understanding it, and it is a medical diagnosis
> 
> but this video was very informative, though not a medical definition type, but really put things in perspecive



I dunno, I think this video has far too favourable view of Harry. He’s never struck me as someone with an ounce of empathy, ( cough nazi outfit cough) and the humanitarian work was basically his duty not his choice.


Can’t  help notice he’s barely mentioned sentebale since he moved to his California mansion. Could’ve plugged them in the interview? Introduced the project to the giant US audience? Maybe got a few donations? No? I guess that’s hardly surprising given Archewell barely gets a lookin anymore. 

I think he’s just an arrogant dummy and she knows how to stroke his ego. You don’t need to be Sherlock to solve a where’s Wally.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> It's possible IMO that Kate may have felt a twinge of jealousy around the time of the wedding when Meghan was getting a lot of attention and adulation.  But in the long run, once the wedding was over, I don't think she had anything to be jealous about.  She is beautiful and she is the one who will be queen.


Yeah it doesn’t make sense for her to be jealous 
Will’s wife is always going to have a bigger crown and a bigger palace than Harry’s that’s how hierarchical systems work.


----------



## bag-mania

Kendalia said:


> Maybe I missed the answer in the endless discussions throughout social media but "what was the purpose, reason they gave for the Oprah interview"?   She's happily pregnant, has a great life in Calif with her love, and they have endless opportunities for a fulfilling life so why are they putting themselves out there to be gossiped about and to feel stressed about the talk about them and intrusion into their lives?  Doesn't make sense to me.



Well, yeah. People who are _actually_ happy, fulfilled, and have a great life wouldn't be fixated on getting the last word and reliving past events, particularly unpleasant ones they believe they "escaped" from.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> And she will have access to all the tiaras


And green doesn’t even suit her!!! 



sdkitty said:


> In fact, I think the reverse may be true.  Meghan was the Hollywood actress and thought she would be the beauty getting all the attention.  But Kate, while not an actress, is beautiful in her own right, tall, slender, wears clothes well and very tasteful.


Yes I strongly suspect that even if Will’s wife was ugly as sin and dressed in the dark MM would be incredibly jealous as laws of primogeniture dictate that wifey would always outrank her.
It also makes sense as Harry is clearly wildly jealous of Will.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Well, yeah. People who are _actually_ happy, fulfilled, and have a great life wouldn't be fixated on getting the last word and reliving past events, particularly unpleasant ones they believe they "escaped" from.


Since they are now “celebrities/entertainers”, they have to be kept on the public eye.
Imho, it is nothing more than PR, no different from Matthew Bango boy, promoting his stupid book everywhere....


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Crazy and here I am clipping my weekly Safeway coupons. I need a Gofundme cause you know, groceries are going up in prices.


this is totally ridiculous.  If it is real and H hears about it he would have to politely decline.  or look like a money grubbing fool of a prince


----------



## Hurrem1001

Omg, I am sick to death of hearing about this pathetic couple. Didn’t they want privacy? What the heck happened to that? Yeah, let’s sign on for tv shows and interviews - even though we need our privacy so badly. Makes so much sense...not. Bloody hypocritical idiots.
This is my personal spin on it:-
“Let’s malign our own family to the world, because we need the money to live as we are accustomed - being multi-millionaires is so hard!
“We also have to pay for our own security (those meanies wouldn’t pay for it).
“Let’s complain that our son wasn’t granted a title. He’s NOT entitled to it, but that’s hardly the point now, is it?
“Let me whine that I actually had to... I can hardly say it without bursting into tears I found it so traumatic, had to...to...to...curtsy to the Queen of England - the sheer audacity!”
Queen Elizabeth (I don’t know if you’re here on tPF under a pseudonym, you might be because you have amazing taste in purses, your Majesty!), a word of advice: strip them of their titles, and ban them from ever entering Britain again.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Since they are now “celebrities/entertainers”, they have to be kept on the public eye.
> Imho, it is nothing more than PR, no different from Matthew Bango boy, promoting his stupid book everywhere....



It is incredibly important to Meghan (and maybe to Harry to a lesser degree) to WIN a popularity contest between them and the Royals. 

Any future earning potential depends on them being popular.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hurrem1001 said:


> Omg, I am sick to death of hearing about this pathetic couple. Didn’t they want privacy? What the heck happened to that? Yeah, let’s sign in for tv shows and interviews - even though we need our privacy so badly. Makes so much sense...not. Bloody hypocritical idiots.
> This is my personal spin on it:-
> “Let’s malign our own family to the world, because we need money to live as we are accustomed - being multi-millionaires is so hard!
> “We also have to pay for our own security (those meanies wouldn’t pay for it).
> “Also, let’s complain that our son wasn’t granted a title. He’s NOT entitled to it, but that’s hardly the point now, is it?
> “Let me whine that I actually had to... I can hardly say it without bursting into tears I found it so traumatic, had to...to...to...curtsy to the Queen of England - the sheer audacity!”
> Queen Elizabeth (I don’t know if you’re here on tPF under a pseudonym, you might be because you have amazing taste in purses, your Majesty!), a word of advice: strip them of their titles, and ban them from ever entering Britain again.


QE is on purseforum (hat&broochrevival2021) but she only comes on for the launer thread and to flex on people in “what jewellery am I wearing today”


----------



## chicinthecity777

*BAME leaders say Royals are not racist: First black Lord-Lieutenant of Bristol Peaches Golding is latest prominent figure to back Queen in wake of racism claims made by Meghan Markle *








						BAME leaders say Royals are not racist
					

Today, Lord-Lieutenant Golding said she did 'not believe in the least' allegations that the British Royal Family were racist.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

I know this is trivial in comparison to so much else that is going on in the world, but it does illustrate they never seem to have a new idea, but they always imply they are the "woke" leaders. I laughed out loud, made me think of the phrase "when the chickens come home to roost." 

 From the Phrase Finder: 
   What's the meaning of the Phrase "When the chickens come home to roost?" 
    "Bad deeds or words return to discomfort their perpetrator"
    First attributed to Geoffrey Chaucer's "The Parson's Tale " written in the 1300's.

*EXCLUSIVE: Birds of a feather! How Harry and Meghan's idea for little Archie's 'Chick Inn' was inspired by Oprah, who has a chicken coop of her own in star-studded Montecito, neighbor reveals*

*Penny Bianchi, 74, lives next door to Oprah's $52million 'Promised Land' estate in idyllic Montecito, California *
*The interior designer, who has been keeping chickens for 39 years, says the idea has become a popular trend in the community *
*Meghan and Harry, who moved into a $14.7M mansion in June, treated viewers to little Archie's 'Chick Inn' during their interview with Oprah on CBS Sunday  *
*Bianchi told DailyMail.com she believes she inspired residents to have chicken coops in Montecito, including her neighbor Oprah*
*'I gave her advice for her chicken coop and she probably passed that advice on to Harry and Meghan,' she said*


----------



## jelliedfeels

The real plot twist is H&M are on purseforum too:
she is ‘the emancipationofME!ME!’
He is ‘deadLo55’


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'd like to think Meghan and Harry have enough dignity not to take money from a fan fundraiser. Maybe it can be given to a deserving cause.
> 
> ETA: I see they have only raised $11 so far. I guess there isn't much to worry about.


I totally agree with you, they wouldn't take a couple of hundred dollars from a fundraiser. Though I'm not so sure about the $7M that this person wants to collect.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> It is incredibly important to Meghan (and maybe to Harry to a lesser degree) to WIN a popularity contest between them and the Royals.
> 
> Any future earning potential depends on them being popular.



She's going to be VERY unhappy, the latest Survey that rates the Royals says this is their lowest rating ever:

The couple's popularity has plummeted in the wake of the explosive broadcast, in which the couple made accusations of racism within the Royal Family.

But the British public appear to have reacted negatively to the couple's interview, with Prince Harry's popularity plunging 15 points since the broadcast, according to a new YouGov survey.

Meghan's popularity has also sunk by 13 points in the last 10 days, figures from the poll show.

Meanwhile, in a sign of unwavering show of support, Britons continue to be most fond of the Queen, with four in five people (80 per cent) liking her, the survey says.

Prince William and his wife Kate also remain very popular, according to the poll, with about three quarters of Britons giving them favourable reviews.

Prince Andrew remains by far the most unpopular royal, with an 82 per cent negative view, according to the poll.

*The most popular royals, according to a new YouGov poll *
These are the most popular royals (rated very positive of positive) according to a YouGov poll of 1,664 Britons between March 10 and 11:
The Queen: 80 per cent
Prince William: 76 per cent
Kate Middleton: 73 per cent
Princess Anne: 64 per cent
Prince Charles: 49 per cent
Prince Harry: 45 per cent 
Prince Edward: 41 per cent 
Camilla Parker Bowles: 39 per cent
Meghan Markle: 31 per cent
Prince Andrew: 7 per cent


----------



## Chanbal

One more complain:
*"The Duchess of Sussex has filed a complaint to Ofcom about Monday's episode of Good Morning Britain, the UK broadcast regulator has confirmed.*

_On the ITV breakfast show, presenter Piers Morgan said he "didn't believe a word" Meghan had said in her interview with Oprah Winfrey.

The duchess had spoken in the interview about having suicidal thoughts.

More than 41,000 others have also complained to Ofcom. Morgan left his job on the show the following day.

An Ofcom spokesperson said: *"We can confirm receipt of a standards complaint made on behalf of the Duchess of Sussex.*_*"*









						Duchess of Sussex has complained to Ofcom over Piers Morgan comments
					

The broadcast regulator says she was among the 41,000 complainants about ITV's Good Morning Britain.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Kansashalo

kkfiregirl said:


> Serious question. What is racist about this photo? What if they also carry around other notable black guests like this? This just seems like a cultural thing to me and the person sitting in the chair just happens to be white, but he could be any color.



It's probably an ode to people who say "I'm not racist!" and post a pic of them with their black friend as if that somehow makes it impossible to be racist LOL



limom said:


> One of the best movie about this subject. Oldies but goodies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Imitation of Life (1959) - IMDb
> 
> 
> Imitation of Life: Directed by Douglas Sirk. With Lana Turner, John Gavin, Sandra Dee, Susan Kohner. An aspiring white actress takes in an African-American widow whose mixed-race daughter is desperate to be seen as white.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of my grandfather passed his entire life. His tribe knew though....



That is MY MOVIE!!!   That is just a goodie!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Allisonfaye said:


> Same for me. I always enjoy going out and seeing an entire family. You can look at the parents and the kids and see who they look like. It's interesting when they look like both parents. I have two daughters. One looks exactly like her dad. And she is tall. And my other daughter is short (like me) and looks exactly like me. When they were younger, people often mistook them for twins which we all used to laugh at because other than their coloring, they look almost nothing alike. They are 20 months apart in age. The only thing my younger daughter got from me is my double uvula. Google for those who don't know what it is. I still remember the first time I saw it. She was about 1.5 and gagging on a piece of cellophane. I was opening her mouth and trying to get it out and I saw it. I was so happy. She was mine! lol



I'm Asian with light skin. A client's daughter, African-American with skin just a tad darker than mine, always joint at my hips whenever she visits my office and people think I'm her mom  We look nothing alike so I don't know how that assumption came about. She's the loveliest 4-year-old and I adore her though  

Genetics make each one of us unique. That's really neat!!




artax two said:


> I read a reddit post the other week about a woman in Aus who had two vaginas, side by side. One she claimed she used for her escort service, the other she reserved for her personal relationships.



A few years back, I read on Reddit about a guy who has 2 penises, he showed pictures and even did an AMA. He can date that lady who has 2 vaginas 




jelliedfeels said:


> And green doesn’t even suit her!!!
> 
> Yes I strongly suspect that even if Will’s wife was ugly as sin and dressed in the dark MM would be incredibly jealous as laws of primogeniture dictate that wifey would always outrank her.
> It also makes sense as Harry is clearly wildly jealous of Will.



She's an organic green-eyed monster that's why she's drawn to green color    Joking!


----------



## Chagall

Is it just me or has this thread really changed since the H/M interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

csshopper said:


> I know this is trivial in comparison to so much else that is going on in the world, but it does illustrate they never seem to have a new idea, but they always imply they are the "woke" leaders. I laughed out loud, made me think of the phrase "when the chickens come home to roost."
> 
> From the Phrase Finder:
> What's the meaning of the Phrase "When the chickens come home to roost?"
> "Bad deeds or words return to discomfort their perpetrator"
> First attributed to Geoffrey Chaucer's "The Parson's Tale " written in the 1300's.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Birds of a feather! How Harry and Meghan's idea for little Archie's 'Chick Inn' was inspired by Oprah, who has a chicken coop of her own in star-studded Montecito, neighbor reveals*
> 
> *Penny Bianchi, 74, lives next door to Oprah's $52million 'Promised Land' estate in idyllic Montecito, California *
> *The interior designer, who has been keeping chickens for 39 years, says the idea has become a popular trend in the community *
> *Meghan and Harry, who moved into a $14.7M mansion in June, treated viewers to little Archie's 'Chick Inn' during their interview with Oprah on CBS Sunday  *
> *Bianchi told DailyMail.com she believes she inspired residents to have chicken coops in Montecito, including her neighbor Oprah*
> *'I gave her advice for her chicken coop and she probably passed that advice on to Harry and Meghan,' she said*


Who are they going to interview next the mailman?


Kansashalo said:


> It's probably an ode to people who say "I'm not racist!" and post a pic of them with their black friend as if that somehow makes it impossible to be racist LOL
> 
> 
> 
> That is MY MOVIE!!!   That is just a goodie!


The funeral scene...
This movie needs to be remade, imho.
So good.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chagall said:


> Is it just me or has this thread really changed since the H/M interview.



I guess it depends on the day    Change is inevitable.


----------



## Aimee3

Lol, in the popularity/like poll, even Camilla scored higher than MM!  I don’t think I’ll ever get over my disgust regarding Camilla/Charles.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chagall said:


> Is it just me or has this thread really changed since the H/M interview.



I think the thread ebbs and flows, just like any ongoing conversation/discussion would.


----------



## Aimee3

limom said:


> Who are they going to interview next the mailman?
> 
> The funeral scene...
> This movie needs to be remade, imho.
> So good.


I only saw that movie once but I remember crying during that last scene.  It was SO upsetting.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> Lol, in the popularity/like poll, even Camilla scored higher than MM!  I don’t think I’ll ever get over my disgust regarding Camilla/Charles.



I don't support cheating but thankfully Charles made an honest woman out of Camilla. If he was allowed to marry Camilla from the start when they were young, all that cheating and tragedy involving Diana probably wouldn't have happened.


----------



## kkfiregirl

It’s so interesting how things can change in a week. My cousin that I mentioned on Sunday started off the week as an ardent Meghan supporter, but she just texted me that she rewatched the interview with an open mind and her opinion has changed!


----------



## Aminamina

I say this: I wish to see her marrying into, let’s say the Moroccan Royal Family(can’t play the race card!))) and try changing it singlehandedly! Is she nuts? Try joining ANY family and try “singlehandedly” changing it - who is in her right mind should be aiming at such? Be you a white, a black, a yellow - you join, take your place but don’t you impose your POV or **** over the whole establishment. Jeez. I can’t. Why, why do we have to witness this melodrama about the weak opportunist and a vengeful to no limit? LOL. It’s a shame.


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> It’s so interesting how things can change in a week. My cousin that I mentioned on Sunday started off the week as an ardent Meghan supporter, but she just texted me that she rewatched the interview with an open mind and her option has changed!


In which way?
I wonder if some people are being influenced by the barrage of negative press.


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> In which way?
> I wonder if some people are being influenced by the barrage of negative press.



She said that M wanted to retain the royal titles, but not the royal responsibilities.


----------



## dangerouscurves

sdkitty said:


> so she is racist toward asians but not blacks?  or she dates black guys but still says racist things about black people?


She was racist toward him. She kept asking me why this guy played with her. Later he told me that she kept belittling him because he was black (his words).


----------



## dangerouscurves

limom said:


> While it looks awful, it is actually the tradition there to carry honored guests that ways.
> It would have been impolite for them to decline.


Hi Darling! Please don't think that I don't believe you, but please let me know in which country it is considered to be a tradition? As I've known all my life, the colonized countries during colonial time would not accept this sort of 'tradition'.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> And green doesn’t even suit her!!!
> 
> Yes I strongly suspect that even if Will’s wife was ugly as sin and dressed in the dark MM would be incredibly jealous as laws of primogeniture dictate that wifey would always outrank her.
> It also makes sense as Harry is clearly wildly jealous of Will.


Well, isn't MM superior to everyone else? She blatantly ignores protocol. As stated before, Kate will agreeably walk behind William during engagements whereas MM orders her ventriloquist dummy aside so she can go first and orders him to sit whenever it suits her.


----------



## sdkitty

dangerouscurves said:


> She was racist toward him. She kept asking me why this guy played with her. Later he told me that she kept belittling him because he was black (his words).


very strange....maybe she wanted to date a black guy to be like a kardashian


----------



## Chanbal

No comments!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't support cheating but thankfully Charles made an honest woman out of Camilla. If he was allowed to marry Camilla from the start when they were young, all that cheating and tragedy involving Diana probably wouldn't have happened.


I agree. I don’t condone the mockery he made of his marriage but they never should have been married if he loved another.
I think it also shows how much things changed in just a generation.
Charles wanted Camilla, an aristocrat who wasn’t quite posh enough whereas his sons got complete freedom of choice and neither chose a girl from the gentry.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Same for me. I always enjoy going out and seeing an entire family. You can look at the parents and the kids and see who they look like. It's interesting when they look like both parents. I have two daughters. One looks exactly like her dad. And she is tall. And my other daughter is short (like me) and looks exactly like me. When they were younger, people often mistook them for twins which we all used to laugh at because other than their coloring, they look almost nothing alike. They are 20 months apart in age. The only thing my younger daughter got from me is my double uvula. Google for those who don't know what it is. I still remember the first time I saw it. She was about 1.5 and gagging on a piece of cellophane. I was opening her mouth and trying to get it out and I saw it. I was so happy. She was mine! lol


yes I find it interesting sometimes when I'm out shopping to look at families and see the resemblence.  I confess when I see a slender young girl with her overweight mom I think she is probably going to look like that some day.
genetics are funny.  my mother's second husband had four grown children.  the two boys were average looking.  the two girls were both overweight - one of them was very heavy from neck to waist and thinner in the legs.  go figure.


----------



## Allisonfaye

TC1 said:


> I have a hard time believing anyone would call Charlotte fat. I would need more info than a "supposedly" in this scenario.



I agree with this. Whatever side of anything you are on, you shouldn't believe EVERYTHING you read on the internet.


----------



## Allisonfaye

kkfiregirl said:


> If would be racist if you had a preference for a desired gummy bear color



I prefer the cherry ones. I am a limist.


----------



## byzina

I've just watched the Lady Colin Campbell's extended comment on Youtube in which she nearly destroyed Meghan. And her logic works perfectly imo. I don't know whether the comment was posted here or not - this thread is evolving too fast, I had to skip some pages. 
She said that the racist accusations are just nonsense and, unlike H&M, she provided some arguments. Well, I believe her.


----------



## Allisonfaye

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree. I don’t condone the mockery he made of his marriage but they never should have been married if he loved another.
> I think it also shows how much things changed in just a generation.
> Charles wanted Camilla, an aristocrat who wasn’t quite posh enough whereas his sons got complete freedom of choice and neither chose a girl from the gentry.



My understanding was that Charles was still playing the field and Camilla got tired of waiting around so she married someone else. Seems to be supported by the story I posted the other day about how Charles had pretty much slept with every one in England so they had to find someone really young because he needed a virgin.


----------



## limom

dangerouscurves said:


> Hi Darling! Please don't think that I don't believe you, but please let me know in which country it is considered to be a tradition? As I've known all my life, the colonized countries during colonial time would not accept this sort of 'tradition'.


Google is here for a reason....
But I am feeling generous today Soloman Islands.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> She's going to be VERY unhappy, the latest Survey that rates the Royals says this is their lowest rating ever:
> 
> The couple's popularity has plummeted in the wake of the explosive broadcast, in which the couple made accusations of racism within the Royal Family.
> 
> But the British public appear to have reacted negatively to the couple's interview, with Prince Harry's popularity plunging 15 points since the broadcast, according to a new YouGov survey.
> 
> Meghan's popularity has also sunk by 13 points in the last 10 days, figures from the poll show.
> 
> Meanwhile, in a sign of unwavering show of support, Britons continue to be most fond of the Queen, with four in five people (80 per cent) liking her, the survey says.
> 
> Prince William and his wife Kate also remain very popular, according to the poll, with about three quarters of Britons giving them favourable reviews.
> 
> Prince Andrew remains by far the most unpopular royal, with an 82 per cent negative view, according to the poll.
> 
> *The most popular royals, according to a new YouGov poll *
> These are the most popular royals (rated very positive of positive) according to a YouGov poll of 1,664 Britons between March 10 and 11:
> The Queen: 80 per cent
> Prince William: 76 per cent
> Kate Middleton: 73 per cent
> Princess Anne: 64 per cent
> Prince Charles: 49 per cent
> Prince Harry: 45 per cent
> Prince Edward: 41 per cent
> Camilla Parker Bowles: 39 per cent
> Meghan Markle: 31 per cent
> Prince Andrew: 7 per cent



She has written off the Britons as being a lost cause. She is focusing on popularity with Americans, many of whom didn't know much about her before the Oprah show. It would be interesting to see where they placed if there was a US popularity poll.


----------



## Lodpah

There’s one way to solve MM’s litigious nature towards press. They need to completely stop reporting about her and Harry. Full stop black out. No media at. Let’s see how long before she complains that her voice is being stifled. I wish she would just do a blanket complaint and just sue everyone, the whole world of people who don’t want to kiss her behind or hail her as the most saintly of saints. That would solve her problem and maybe she can be happy. Last time I read too much sugar is bad for your health. Need a little salt to season.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't support cheating but thankfully Charles made an honest woman out of Camilla. If he was allowed to marry Camilla from the start when they were young, all that cheating and tragedy involving Diana probably wouldn't have happened.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but apparently it was Camilla, who didn't want to marry Charles, something to do with the pomp and circumstance and so she opted for a quieter environment by marrying Parker-Bowles.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> I’m really confused. What’s the difference between a blatant liar and falsehoods? I thought she didn’t know much about the



The current word used when someone lies is 'misstated'.


----------



## sdkitty

RoryX said:


> Its been reported on several forums that Charlotte's dress didn't fit, she was squirmy during the fitting, and Meghan lost her temper and called her fat. Cue Kate crying. It also explains Kate's tight hold on her kids at the wedding.


don't know if this is true but anyone calling that adorable little girl fat would be a monster IMO


----------



## limom

He is one of us


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> My understanding was that Charles was still playing the field and Camilla got tired of waiting around so she married someone else. Seems to be supported by the story I posted the other day about how Charles had pretty much slept with every one in England so they had to find someone really young because he needed a virgin.



That's the way I remember it. Charles was sewing his wild oats throughout the '70s. Camilla was ready to get married. She was 25 and there was a stigma back then and most women married fairly young.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> Google is here for a reason....
> But I am feeling generous today Salomon Islands.


It’s Solomon Islands but I get you. Heck where I’m from dignitaries get fettered first. topless women pour oil on their backs and massage them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> It’s Solomon Islands but I get you. Heck where I’m from dignitaries get fettered first. topless women pour oil on their backs and massage them.


My apologies. I thought I had corrected the Typo.
Let me fix it.


----------



## Lodpah

dangerouscurves said:


> Hi Darling! Please don't think that I don't believe you, but please let me know in which country it is considered to be a tradition? As I've known all my life, the colonized countries during colonial time would not accept this sort of 'tradition'.


You’re kidding right? I mean absolutely joking? How old are you? I just can’t. I absolutely refuse to dignify your question and even tell you.


----------



## purseinsanity

dangerouscurves said:


> Maybe because not everyone cares about the monarchy? People who don't care would not know much.


I would think if she's marrying into the monarchy, she should do some research!


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> So do I get this right? She went on 13 vacations while her passport was taken away, got pregnant and was depressed and suicidal. It's sort of understandable! I would be depressed too coming back from those fabulous vacations to face the reality of child rearing and royal work! She looked pretty depressed to me in those photos!
> 
> *Click on the tweet to read more. *



She was suicidal, but put on a brave face for her many vacays.  I guess she's a superb actress after all!


----------



## lalame

dangerouscurves said:


> View attachment 5020056



Definitely NAGL but I have to believe these cultural visits are organized by the tourism government agency and it's not the visitor's team going "We must have people carry us like white Gods." That being said I think it's a valid thing to point out that they should be more mindful of the perception of things like this... it's not very cute in the modern age.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> She was suicidal, but put on a brave face for her many vacays.  I guess she's a superb actress after all!


I'm still working on her going to HR instead of her physician.  If she considered herself to be an employee by going to the HR office, then she should have thought about doing a better job so that when she received her quarterly employee review,  she would do well and get a raise.  Yes, my tongue is in firmly in my cheek.


----------



## purseinsanity

Kansashalo said:


> You can not judge a person's suicidal tendencies simply by looking at them.  There is a thing called "smiling depression" - meaning they put on a happy face/smile in public and are able to carry on/work but are totally different behind closed doors.  In fact, these types of people are reported to have higher risk of suicide.


Very true.  I've read many comedians are clinically depressed as well.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but apparently it was Camilla, who didn't want to marry Charles, something to do with the pomp and circumstance and so she opted for a quieter environment by marrying Parker-Bowles.





Allisonfaye said:


> My understanding was that Charles was still playing the field and Camilla got tired of waiting around so she married someone else. Seems to be supported by the story I posted the other day about how Charles had pretty much slept with every one in England so they had to find someone really young because he needed a virgin.


Virgin- yikes.
I wasn’t around for  any of this. I got the crib notes when he married Camilla. They did a good job of rebranding their marriage as the great love story. I give them that.


----------



## lalame

Keep in mind in a lot of non-white cultures, the awareness of things like cultural appropriation isn't as heightened as it is in the US or UK (maybe more but can only speak to these 2). Sometimes it's so innocent... thinking about how when I visited the Bahamas once there were local salons offering to give me dreadlocks or local styles of braids... of course they weren't like "culturally appropriate me," they just saw it as a nice souvenir or culture-sharing gesture. But coming from the US, I just didn't want to even go there. I'm not Caribbean or black.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Definitely NAGL but I have to believe these cultural visits are organized by the tourism government agency and it's not the visitor's team going "We must have people carry us like white Gods." That being said I think it's a valid thing to point out that they should be more mindful of the perception of things like this... it's not very cute in the modern age.


True the optics can look wrong but to refuse is very disrespectful too. It’s all about cultural exchanges. For example oiling men topless is repulsive to me but it’s a respect act so I shut up and don’t condemn the culture.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She has written off the Britons as being a lost cause. She is focusing on popularity with Americans, many of whom didn't know much about her before the Oprah show. It would be interesting to see where they placed if there was a US popularity poll.


True. Right now I'm guessing rating higher. I have hopes that as more information is shared contradicting the "truths" and the ugly Royal bashing continues, at least a sympathy vote for the Queen would offset some of the Sussexx vitriol. Sensitive to the appropriate "no politics" rule on tpf,  will only say I do not remember any comment from the Royal Family in the late 90's regarding the sexual predator whose wife this week spoke out in support of Meghan. The RF stayed out of her family business, she should have stayed out of theirs.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Virgin- yikes.
> I wasn’t around for  any of this. I got the crib notes when he married Camilla. They did a good job of rebranding their marriage as the great love story. I give them that.


In a strange way, it was. 
They look like they belong together...


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Definitely NAGL but I have to believe these cultural visits are organized by the tourism government agency and it's not the visitor's team going "We must have people carry us like white Gods." That being said I think it's a valid thing to point out that they should be more mindful of the perception of things like this... it's not very cute in the modern age.



Foreign visits are well laid out by the diplomatic office in any country.  What some might find offensive is SOP in other countries with non-western cultures.  It is very easy to insult if one is not properly informed ahead of time and that is the purpose of briefings.  Eating with the wrong hand, or wearing white, which is the color of mourning in some countries, would be considering insulting.  I don't think it is the role of the host country to change their traditions just to satisfy the woke culture of the visiting country.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I would think if she's marrying into the monarchy, *she should do some research!*



Especially a woman in her mid-30s who had at least one failed marriage under her belt. She wasn't some innocent babe in the woods! Being in and around show business her entire life would have made her more savvy than the average person. I don't buy that she went into it completely unaware. I do believe she thought she could do as she pleased once she was in there and then she balked every time she was told "no."


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> True the optics can look wrong but to refuse is very disrespectful too. It’s all about cultural exchanges. For example oiling men topless is repulsive to me but it’s a respect act so I shut up and don’t condemn the culture.



There's a difference there though. You can't tell other people what they do to/for themselves is repulsive... but if they ask YOU if you want it done, you can absolutely say no. That's not disrespectful at all. And especially if you're BRF! I'm sure they say no to a lot of things and it's fine so I doubt this would've created bad blood for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Foreign visits are well laid out by the diplomatic office in any country.  What some might find offensive is SOP in other countries with non-western cultures.  It is very easy to insult if one is not properly informed ahead of time and that is the purpose of briefings.  Eating with the wrong hand, or wearing white, which is the color of mourning in some countries, would be considering insulting.  I don't think it is the role of the host country to change their traditions just to satisfy the woke culture of the visiting country.



I'm not saying change their traditions... but you don't have to do everything. I'm sure when we all travel, we don't follow EVERY tradition and it's completely fine... it's always a meeting of cultures, not any one enforcing it on the other. If W and K were vegetarian for example, I'm sure they would've declined to eat a traditional meat dish and no one would've been insulted. I think it's a bad look for previous colonizers to be feted in this way. I don't think it means they're racist, I think it means they need to rethink a few norms that may not be norms any longer in today's world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Definitely NAGL but I have to believe these cultural visits are organized by the tourism government agency and it's not the visitor's team going "We must have people carry us like white Gods." That being said I think it's a valid thing to point out that they should be more mindful of the perception of things like this... it's not very cute in the modern age.



Came here to say exactly this...all of this.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> I'm not saying change their traditions... but you don't have to do everything. I'm sure when we all travel, we don't follow EVERY tradition and it's completely fine... it's always a meeting of cultures, not any one enforcing it on the other. If W and K were vegetarian for example, I'm sure they would've declined to eat a traditional meat dish and no one would've been insulted. I think it's a bad look for previous colonizers to be feted in this way. I don't think it means they're racist, I think it means they need to rethink a few norms that may not be norms any longer in today's world.


I was taught to eat everything on my plate. It is politeness to eat food offered.
We can’t judge them being carried by Westernized standards.
It is unfair


----------



## lalame

I think it's a tricky dance for the BRF because their whole charm is in antiquated traditions and all that. Some might find it offensive to have to curtsy to anyone as friggin' adults, but obviously few think about it like that anymore. Soooo I'd say in the case of Solomon islands, obviously they were invited to be a part of that so I don't think any harm was done. It's just not a choice I would've made personally... on the same level as declining to eat a food you don't like or not wearing something that violates your religious beliefs, etc.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> I was taught to eat everything on my plate. It is politeness to eat food offered.
> We can’t judge them being carried by Westernized standards.
> It is unfair



Sorry but... I'm a vegetarian, and I don't eat meat no matter where I've traveled. No one has ever considered that rude. There's plenty of traditional things to enjoy in any culture that don't infringe on your own beliefs. Do you also do a Muslim prayer when you go to the ME if you're not Muslim? Eat dog in countries that eat it? Likely not (unless you genuinely wanted to!)... and no one would judge you for it.


----------



## Lodpah

On this cultural thing I went home for a visit bringing gifts, Rag & Bone jeans, nice tops, etc. I happily gave them to relatives. They smiled, took it, and then put them away, never to be seen again. They went back using their colorful clothing.

We had a modern kitchen in our home on the islands. The girls go to the river to wash clothes and dishes. So culturally not everyone lives the western way nor do they want to live that way. It irks me to think that the only way is the western way.

These are women give birth at home, get up and go to work. They bust out their breasts to feed wherever they want to and when needed.

Bring your husband to their homes and they don’t wear tops, will we be offended and tell them to put a top on?

No we don’t, cause we came to their islands. Even the Peace Corps and  all the missionaries in the world could not change their culture and history.

Ok I’ve said what I said about cultures.


----------



## lalame

Are we talking about the same thing here... 100,000% you have no right to tell another person in their culture that the way they live is wrong. No one here is judging the LOCALS in Solomon islands for hoisting people up to celebrate them. The weirdness comes from a family that represents colonialism being treated in that way because... I'm sure they demanded that treatment sometime during a bloody history. Context matters... Prince Harry dressing up like a Nazi was more wrong than a regular idiot on the street dressing like a Nazi because of who he represents (both wrong tho), the history of Nazism and that family, etc.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> It’s Solomon Islands but I get you. Heck where I’m from dignitaries get fettered first. topless women pour oil on their backs and massage them.


From what I’m learning from this forum no one better tell Charles  or he’ll be on the first plane carbon footprint or no carbon footprint.




lalame said:


> I'm not saying change their traditions... but you don't have to do everything. I'm sure when we all travel, we don't follow EVERY tradition and it's completely fine... it's always a meeting of cultures, not any one enforcing it on the other. If W and K were vegetarian for example, I'm sure they would've declined to eat a traditional meat dish and no one would've been insulted. I think it's a bad look for previous colonizers to be feted in this way. I don't think it means they're racist, I think it means they need to rethink a few norms that may not be norms any longer in today's world.


This is a very valid point as well. 
I personally would like to see the royals adopt a more egalitarian and in-depth approach to their Public relations. It does feel like ‘everyone stop what you are doing for our whistlestop visit’ at times. 

However, I do understand Diplomatic negotiations are a minefield and it’d be highly situation based. I can imagine that in a hierarchical culture where the leaders traditionally receive gestures of genuflection (such as the UK’s bow and curtsy) to refuse to take part in asserting your place in the hierarchy by receiving a bow might be taken as a disavowal of the system.
On the other hand, the leaders may think that culturally specific things aren’t relevant for those outside it.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Sorry but... I'm a vegetarian, and I don't eat meat no matter where I've traveled. No one has ever considered that rude. There's plenty of traditional things to enjoy in any culture that don't infringe on your own beliefs. Do you also do a Muslim prayer when you go to the ME if you're not Muslim? Eat dog in countries that eat it? Likely not (unless you genuinely wanted to!)... and no one would judge you for it.


No but I dress modestly.


----------



## Allisonfaye

papertiger said:


> I've had friends that sadly attempted/committed suicide from both camps. Those that put on a brave face and the that couldn't dress themselves.
> 
> Let's not wrap the idea of suicide in cotton wool, most people with suicidal tendencies are not nice people to have to deal with or take care of. What they are going to do is a very violent act. One of my teenage friends needed full-time care and watching around the clock by her family and friends, you couldn't have a normal conversation with her without her turning it into a melodrama (unfortunately, she succeeded with one of her plans when she was 18). She had almost killed her brother along with her on another occasion. Another friend starved herself to death and 3 jumped in front of trains (one purposely on her ex-BF's birthday) and the worst was when my friend's father murdered his wife (my friend's mother) before he killed himself because she'd tried to stop him from killing himself (with a knife).



Wow, don't take this wrong but I am kind of glad I don't know you.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> I hope you are all seated and your stomachs are not too full:
> 
> View attachment 5020108
> 
> "_She wants to raise the giant figure of £7.1million to pay off Harry’s mortgage on his £11million, nine-bedroom home in Montecito, California – but has collected just £78.64 so far.
> 
> Insisting her fundraise-heir is no joke, Anastasia, from Ventura – just a 25-minute drive from the prince - told The Sun: “I like to help people and help them in any way I can.
> 
> “That gives me happiness. If you needed a home, I’d do the same for you. It’s a good deed._”



Where's the barf emoji? A fool and his money...


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I'm still working on her going to HR instead of her physician.  If she considered herself to be an employee by going to the HR office, then she should have thought about doing a better job so that when she received her quarterly employee review,  she would do well and get a raise.  Yes, my tongue is in firmly in my cheek.


this really gets me
when I was an employee working for senior management in a corporation I was very well aware that HR works for management - not for employees.  So first she isn't an employee and secondly she is in a much more powerful position than HR.  either she's an idiot or she thinks we are


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Are we talking about the same thing here... 100,000% you have no right to tell another person in their culture that the way they live is wrong. No one here is judging the LOCALS in Solomon islands for hoisting people up to celebrate them. The weirdness comes from a family that represents colonialism being treated in that way because... I'm sure they demanded that treatment sometime during a bloody history. Context matters... Prince Harry dressing up like a Nazi was more wrong than a regular idiot on the street dressing like a Nazi because of who he represents (both wrong tho), the history of Nazism and that family, etc.


You are viewing the situation with westernized eyes. Not a criticism btw.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but apparently it was Camilla, who didn't want to marry Charles, something to do with the pomp and circumstance and so she opted for a quieter environment by marrying Parker-Bowles.



You could be right but I was always under the impression that Camilla was said to be not aristocatic enough because the BRF wanted somebody who's younger and easier to groom to become a princess. Sorry if I was wrong but I was extremely young when I first heard about Princess Diana, the BRF and the news that surrounded them


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> this really gets me
> when I was an employee working for senior management in a corporation I was very well aware that HR works for management - not for employees.  So first she isn't an employee and secondly she is in a much more powerful position than HR.  either she's an idiot *or she thinks we are*



Meghan always thinks she is the smartest person in the room. Considering the only person in the room with her is usually Harry, it's easy to see where that arrogance comes from.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

limom said:


> One of the best movie about this subject. Oldies but goodies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Imitation of Life (1959) - IMDb
> 
> 
> Imitation of Life: Directed by Douglas Sirk. With Lana Turner, John Gavin, Sandra Dee, Susan Kohner. An aspiring white actress takes in an African-American widow whose mixed-race daughter is desperate to be seen as white.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of my grandfather passed his entire life. His tribe knew though....



I have seen that movie a bunch of times. The clothes are to die for if you like that kind of thing.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> It's possible IMO that Kate may have felt a twinge of jealousy around the time of the wedding when Meghan was getting a lot of attention and adulation.  But in the long run, once the wedding was over, I don't think she had anything to be jealous about.  She is beautiful and she is the one who will be queen.



I just don't get that vibe from Kate.


----------



## purseinsanity

artax two said:


> I read a reddit post the other week about a woman in Aus who had two vaginas, side by side. One she claimed she used for her escort service, the other she reserved for her personal relationships.


My vet has two doors: one for dogs and one for cats


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> The thing you learn on the purseforum
> Thank you


It's not just for purses any more.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> I have seen that movie a bunch of times. The clothes are to die for if you like that kind of thing.


Mildred Pierce has great clothing too.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> MAIS NON , le guillotine is FRENCH , we need a more UK technique, thinking back to the wives of Henry VIII that perished at the tower...


Disemboweling and Quartering?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'd like to think Meghan and Harry have enough dignity not to take money from a fan fundraiser. Maybe it can be given to a deserving cause.
> 
> ETA: I see they have only raised $11 so far. I guess there isn't much to worry about.


Dignity?  These two?  LOL, I think we are waaaaaay past that.


----------



## purseinsanity

Kendalia said:


> Maybe I missed the answer in the endless discussions throughout social media but "what was the purpose, reason they gave for the Oprah interview"?   She's happily pregnant, has a great life in Calif with her love, and they have endless opportunities for a fulfilling life so why are they putting themselves out there to be gossiped about and to feel stressed about the talk about them and intrusion into their lives?  Doesn't make sense to me.


*The almighty dollar!*


----------



## mshermes

I think the fundraising page is gone.....


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> You are viewing the situation with westernized eyes. Not a criticism btw.



I actually grew up in a country that's been colonized over and over again and it's a very touchy subject.  So I'm just sharing that perspective... respecting the culture also means respecting the history and perception based on what you represent. There is nothing wrong with what the citizens in Solomon Islands wanted to do or did. There may be nothing wrong with you or I being feted like that, but it's NAGL for the BRF. You can't really get a more colonial image than a future king being carried on the backs of the citizens of a colonized country.

And btw I'm just enjoying the debate and discussion, not trying to @ you or single you out. Interesting things to think about.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> The real plot twist is H&M are on purseforum too:
> she is ‘the emancipationofME!ME!’
> He is ‘deadLo55’


I thought he was D3AT83AT? (Deadbeat)


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> A few years back, I read on Reddit about a guy who has 2 penises, he showed pictures and even did an AMA. *He can date that lady who has 2 vaginas *


Teeeheeeheeeheeeheee.  I'm giggling trying to picture this!  Yes, I may be a middle aged woman, but apparently I have the maturity of a 10 year old!


----------



## lalame

One thing I can be thankful for H+M is all the dust kicked up has generated a lot of interesting discussion among me and my friends and we see it in the media as well... so that's one thing I appreciate.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't support cheating but thankfully Charles made an honest woman out of Camilla. If he was allowed to marry Camilla from the start when they were young, all that cheating and tragedy involving Diana probably wouldn't have happened.


And Haz (and Meg as a couple) wouldn't exist!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

It’s been a while since we had a musical interlude.
I can’t get this song out of my head when I think of this thread. Dunno why.

Kim Petras - I don’t want it at all

Opening lyrics:
“I want all my clothes designer (Ooh!) I want someone else to buy 'em (Yea!)
If I cannot get it right now (Right now, right now)
I don't want it, I don't want it, I don't want it at all
I don't want it, I don't want it, I don't want it at all
Give me all of your attention (Ooh!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> You could be right but I was always under the impression that Camilla was said to be not aristocatic enough because the BRF wanted somebody who's younger and easier to groom to become a princess. Sorry if I was wrong but I was extremely young when I first heard about Princess Diana, the BRF and the news that surrounded them


I thought it was because Camilla was "experienced" and they wanted a virgin?


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> Crazy and here I am clipping my weekly Safeway coupons. I need a Gofundme cause you know, groceries are going up in prices.


The charitable thing to do would be to send the coupons to the struggling young couple.


----------



## papertiger

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, don't take this wrong but I am kind of glad I don't know you.



BUT NOBODY ASKS ME IF IM OK(?)


----------



## papertiger

Sorry, doesn't work without original quote 



> I've had friends that sadly attempted/committed suicide from both camps. Those that put on a brave face and the that couldn't dress themselves.
> 
> Let's not wrap the idea of suicide in cotton wool, most people with suicidal tendencies are not nice people to have to deal with or take care of. What they are going to do is a very violent act. One of my teenage friends needed full-time care and watching around the clock by her family and friends, you couldn't have a normal conversation with her without her turning it into a melodrama (unfortunately, she succeeded with one of her plans when she was 18). She had almost killed her brother along with her on another occasion. Another friend starved herself to death and 3 jumped in front of trains (one purposely on her ex-BF's birthday) and the worst was when my friend's father murdered his wife (my friend's mother) before he killed himself because she'd tried to stop him from killing himself (with a knife).





Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, don't take this wrong but I am kind of glad I don't know you.



BUT NOONE'S ASKED IF I'M OK(?)!!!


----------



## mdcx

Guesses at Meghans next move to try and get public sympathy?
Pap stroll w Archie and when photos are published, claims she is being stalked?
Wonder what else is up her sleeve?


----------



## jennlt

mdcx said:


> Guesses at Meghans next move to try and get public sympathy?
> Pap stroll w Archie and when photos are published, claims she is being stalked?
> Wonder what else is up her sleeve?



She hasn't tried sexual harassment yet, has she? The list of her victimizations is so long that I'm starting to lose track...


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> i
> I thought he was D3AT83AT? (Deadbeat)


That might be a bit hard for him to remember.
I’m not sure if ‘mustntgrumble247’ is Anne or Eugenie though.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Guesses at Meghans next move to try and get public sympathy?
> Pap stroll w Archie and when photos are published, claims she is being stalked?
> Wonder what else is up her sleeve?


she had the big bombshells about wanting to commit suicide and racism.  harry said again that he didn't want history to repeat itself.  what else is there?  they are kind of a novelty act.  I guess maybe they (or someone they hire) could produce shows or podcasts about other people.  but there are plenty of other people doing that, right?
or when they have two kids and the kids are older and more interesting maybe they will trot them out


----------



## mdcx

I spoke too soon, she’s been hard at work:









						Meghan Markle makes a formal complaint to Ofcom about Piers Morgan
					

Meghan also complained to ITV bosses about the former co-host of Good Morning Britain after he said on-air that he 'didn't believe a word' of her interview with chat show host Oprah Winfrey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I spoke too soon, she’s been hard at work:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle makes a formal complaint to Ofcom about Piers Morgan
> 
> 
> Meghan also complained to ITV bosses about the former co-host of Good Morning Britain after he said on-air that he 'didn't believe a word' of her interview with chat show host Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


formal complaints, lawsuits....these two are really thin skinned


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

limom said:


> Personally, I am partial to the guillotine.j/k


People on forums dedicated to the purchasing of luxury items unattainable for the majority of the world's inhabitants, joking about Madame Guillotine, now that's insightfulness


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> One thing I can be thankful for H+M is all the dust kicked up has generated a lot of interesting discussion among me and my friends and we see it in the media as well... so that's one thing I appreciate.


I agree. I think that there is a lot of important discussion to be had about the nature of the commonwealth,  the role and future of the royal family and how Britain and other countries interact with its colonial past and current racial issues. Within the boundaries of non-political posting of course. 
I get annoyed by H&M trying to make everything about them but I do find their whole situation interesting.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> this really gets me
> when I was an employee working for senior management in a corporation I was very well aware that HR works for management - not for employees.  So first she isn't an employee and secondly she is in a much more powerful position than HR.  either she's an idiot or she thinks we are


So you’re saying it has to be one or the other?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies if previously posted


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> I know this is trivial in comparison to so much else that is going on in the world, but it does illustrate they never seem to have a new idea, but they always imply they are the "woke" leaders. I laughed out loud, made me think of the phrase "when the chickens come home to roost."
> 
> From the Phrase Finder:
> What's the meaning of the Phrase "When the chickens come home to roost?"
> "Bad deeds or words return to discomfort their perpetrator"
> First attributed to Geoffrey Chaucer's "The Parson's Tale " written in the 1300's.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Birds of a feather! How Harry and Meghan's idea for little Archie's 'Chick Inn' was inspired by Oprah, who has a chicken coop of her own in star-studded Montecito, neighbor reveals*
> 
> *Penny Bianchi, 74, lives next door to Oprah's $52million 'Promised Land' estate in idyllic Montecito, California *
> *The interior designer, who has been keeping chickens for 39 years, says the idea has become a popular trend in the community *
> *Meghan and Harry, who moved into a $14.7M mansion in June, treated viewers to little Archie's 'Chick Inn' during their interview with Oprah on CBS Sunday  *
> *Bianchi told DailyMail.com she believes she inspired residents to have chicken coops in Montecito, including her neighbor Oprah*
> *'I gave her advice for her chicken coop and she probably passed that advice on to Harry and Meghan,' she said*



 Very few chickens are male because they kill nearly all male chickens at birth.

You'd think the wholesale slaughter of all those poor male baby chickens would have been mentioned in the interview (no, not kidding - poor things). 

I hate people keeping chickens anywhere near me (thank goodness I have a felid as a garden). The seeds they throw or keep bring in the rats. A rat bit my cat. Don't keep chickens unless you are a farmer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree. I think that there is a lot of important discussion to be had about the nature of the commonwealth,  the role and future of the royal family and how Britain and other countries interact with its colonial past and current racial issues. Within the boundaries of non-political posting of course.
> I get annoyed by H&M trying to make everything about them but I do find their whole situation interesting.


same here. It is super interesting to hear other’s perspectives.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

muddledmint said:


> There was a woman who had two sets of legs and reproductive organs and she had children with both!


This side plot discussion of multivulvad women just somehow reminds me of that SNL skit with Kate McKinnon "Close Encounter"  It just progressively gets worse and worse. God bless Ryan Gosling for breaking like that. "Look, it wasn't my worst Wednesday night!"


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> Very few chickens are male because they kill nearly all male chickens at birth.
> 
> You'd think the wholesale slaughter of all those poor male baby chickens would have been mentioned in the interview (no, not kidding - poor things).
> 
> I hate people keeping chickens anywhere near me (thank goodness I have a felid as a garden). The seeds they throw or keep bring in the rats. A rat bit my cat. Don't keep chickens unless you are a farmer.


It is a fad here in the US. Apparently the chicken eat ticks which is a huge concern here in NY.
Plus people like the eggs.
Never mind that we also have foxes and now coyotes......
Rooster are forbidden in my hood.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> Guesses at Meghans next move to try and get public sympathy?
> Pap stroll w Archie and when photos are published, claims she is being stalked?
> Wonder what else is up her sleeve?


She will go after old white men in Hollywood. That they are racist against her thus she has not been asked to be in movies like Jessica Chastain, Meryl Streep, you know, all the who are acclaimed actresses.


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> Guesses at Meghans next move to try and get public sympathy?
> Pap stroll* w Archie and when photos are published*, claims she is being stalked?
> Wonder what else is up her sleeve?





sdkitty said:


> she had the big bombshells about wanting to commit suicide and racism.  harry said again that he didn't want history to repeat itself.  what else is there?  they are kind of a novelty act.  I guess maybe they (or someone they hire) could produce shows or podcasts about other people.  but there are plenty of other people doing that, right?
> or when* they have two kids and the kids are older* and more interesting maybe they will trot them out



This is a worry. 

My worry is she'll start to manifest munchausen by proxy and/or pull the kids into her antics - it's already worked with a 'grown' man.


----------



## Jayne1

Kendalia said:


> Maybe I missed the answer in the endless discussions throughout social media but "what was the purpose, reason they gave for the Oprah interview"?   She's happily pregnant, has a great life in Calif with her love, and they have endless opportunities for a fulfilling life so why are they putting themselves out there to be gossiped about and to feel stressed about the talk about them and intrusion into their lives?  Doesn't make sense to me.


My big takeaway from the interview was Harry sitting down and whining like a spoiled brat that his father cut him off financially and won't pay for his security anymore.  

I think Harry really wanted to get that out there, he couldn't wait to say it even though Oprah, who never does her homework or asks the hard questions, even asked.

By the way, how much security does an ex-royal living on a massive estate in CA really need?  One bodyguard and a state-of-the-art home alarm system?  I wonder if he bought a gun, now that he's living in the States.  lol


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> It is a fad here in the US. Apparently the chicken eat ticks which is a huge concern here in NY.
> Plus people like the eggs.
> Never mind that we also have foxes and now coyotes......
> Rooster are forbidden in my hood.



Wouldn't the ticks have to find the chickens? 
And aren't the chickens only 'let go' once they stop laying? (According to a Tweet these were not reared-for-meat type chickens)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> formal complaints, lawsuits....these two are really thin skinned



Interesting. They are trying to keep the press in line through intimidation. And in many cases it appears to be working! It's getting so the media will be afraid to say anything about them that isn't complimentary.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Foreign visits are well laid out by the diplomatic office in any country.  What some might find offensive is SOP in other countries with non-western cultures.  It is very easy to insult if one is not properly informed ahead of time and that is the purpose of briefings.  Eating with the wrong hand, or wearing white, which is the color of mourning in some countries, would be considering insulting.  I don't think it is the role of the host country to change their traditions just to satisfy the woke culture of the visiting country.


This! Remember the kerfuffle when a certain western head of state visited Japan and graciously inclined his head when greeting then Emperor Akihito?
Some people severely chastised him even though bowing is/was the normal Japanese greeting. That is how the general public greet each other. They bow from the waist when they meet royal members. Imperial family members also sometimes curtsey to foreign royals.


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> My big takeaway from the interview was Harry sitting down and whining like a spoiled brat that his father cut him off financially and won't pay for his security anymore.
> 
> I think Harry really wanted to get that out there, he couldn't wait to say it even though Oprah, who never does her homework or asks the hard questions, even asked.
> 
> By the way, how much security does an ex-royal living on a massive estate in CA really need?  One bodyguard and a state-of-the-art home alarm system?  I wonder if he bought a gun, now that he's living in the States.  lol


I think that Canada provided security(they had no choice) and then they ask the US to provide the same.
Then they ask daddy who said nope.
Then Tyler Perry provided security for them... That Madea‘s money is long.....
there is definitely a risk involved, however since they have decided to be private citizens, they have to worry about it, imho.
Look at Lady Gaga‘s dogs.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Interesting. They are trying to keep the press in line through intimidation. And in many cases it appears to be working! It's getting so the media will be afraid to say anything about them that isn't complimentary.



Actually, it seems to antagonise the same media outlets even more and so they don't bother going for the balance of publishing the H&M PR put-outs (you can find those regularly on Yahoo if you're a fan of the gruesome twosome) so let them carry on.


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting article in the latest TATLER with Carrie Symonds on cover. Sorry, no clue how to share without a subscription service. 
the article is on the famous Diana and Bashir interview. 
in sum, she was hoodwinked into doing it, there was a coverup (documents were stolen , who by? BBC ?) and people at the time did not pursue matters (her brother published his notes 25 years LATER ..., BBC people did not pursue  ... ), Diana was separated, vulnerable and isolated from all (gullible is a word that might apply maybe...  not seeking enough help )
In sum a perfect storm ...  it was not just about biased press, hounding by reporters,  all the participants were to blame for bits and pieces ... you can’t invent this stuff 
And lies have been circulated for 25 years ex UK spy agency MI6 pursued her, EXCEPT they do foreign ops (not BRF), Charles was in love with Camilla not Tiggy 
complicated story that cannot be reduced to a single term like MALICIOUS UK PRESS or MENTAL HEALTH or SPYING 
good article very fact based not gossipy , good read


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> Remember when the Twitter in chief announced that the US would not provide for the security.
> I think that Canada provided security(they had no choice) and then they ask the US to provide the same.
> Then they ask daddy who said nope.
> Then Tyler Perry provided security for them... That Madea‘s money is long.....
> there is definitely a risk involved, however since they have decided to be private citizens, they have to worry about it, imho.
> Look at Lady Gaga‘s dogs.


Yep


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> Lol, in the popularity/like poll, *even Camilla scored higher than MM! * I don’t think I’ll ever get over my disgust regarding Camilla/Charles.


Camilla stays by Charles' side, or a step behind, never tries to grab the limelight, dresses appropriately, performs her duties both at home and overseas and makes Charles happy.

I would think she is gaining in popularity, by just being a proper member of the BRF with no drama.

Plus, she can carry off the best and largest tiaras. lol


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This side plot discussion of multivulvad women just somehow reminds me of that SNL skit with Kate McKinnon "Close Encounter"  It just progressively gets worse and worse. God bless Ryan Gosling for breaking like that. "Look, it wasn't my worst Wednesday night!"



This skit never gets old!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Remember when the Twitter in chief announced that the US would not provide for the security.
> I think that Canada provided security(they had no choice) and then they ask the US to provide the same.
> Then they ask daddy who said nope.
> Then Tyler Perry provided security for them... That Madea‘s money is long.....
> there is definitely a risk involved, however since they have decided to be private citizens, they have to worry about it, imho.
> Look at Lady Gaga‘s dogs.



Wasn't it Oprah who connected them with Tyler Perry? What does it mean that Oprah has been their fairy godmother the entire time? That's a long investment to get an interview.


----------



## Lodpah

These two don’t listen to anyone. They open their mouths and say whatever.

I’m sure they were told not to discuss security issues.Now every knows their security problems or lack of it. There are certain things you keep mystique.

Just like when MM said she opens her door, that was not power move, that was a security move. Poor Archie. I really hope that he is going to be ok growing up.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Well, isn't MM superior to everyone else? She blatantly ignores protocol. As stated before, Kate will agreeably walk behind William during engagements whereas MM orders her ventriloquist dummy aside so she can go first and orders him to sit whenever it suits her.


You know, I just had a thought.  Maybe, just maybe, Meghan Markle was referring to Maggie Muggins when she inscribed her Cartier Tank, "To MM from MM"?


----------



## mdcx

papertiger said:


> Very few chickens are male because they kill nearly all male chickens at birth.
> 
> You'd think the wholesale slaughter of all those poor male baby chickens would have been mentioned in the interview (no, not kidding - poor things).
> 
> I hate people keeping chickens anywhere near me (thank goodness I have a felid as a garden). The seeds they throw or keep bring in the rats. A rat bit my cat. Don't keep chickens unless you are a farmer.


I agree on the chicken front. If you know nothing about animal husbandry, do not try and be an urban gamekeeper. Poor chickens, I have seen some poor results from people who think they are "just pets".
On topic, I'm sure H&Ms chickens have a professional caretaker 
Being litigious with anyone who expresses less than 100% adoration of her will keep MM busy I guess...


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> A few years back, I read on Reddit about a guy who has 2 penises, he showed pictures and even did an AMA. He can date that lady who has 2 vaginas


Yes, I'm still giggling about this.  Reminds me of a jigsaw puzzle.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> My big takeaway from the interview was Harry sitting down and whining like a spoiled brat that his father cut him off financially and won't pay for his security anymore.
> 
> I think Harry really wanted to get that out there, he couldn't wait to say it even though Oprah, who never does her homework or asks the hard questions, even asked.
> 
> By the way, how much security does an ex-royal living on a massive estate in CA really need?  One bodyguard and a state-of-the-art home alarm system?  I wonder if he bought a gun, now that he's living in the States.  lol



I wondered about this too. Are there really that many threats or is it just about seeming important.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would much rather have ducks than chickens. They wander around all day and come home at night, they’re cuter, and they don’t seem as messy and smelly.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Are we talking about the same thing here... 100,000% you have no right to tell another person in their culture that the way they live is wrong. No one here is judging the LOCALS in Solomon islands for hoisting people up to celebrate them. The weirdness comes from a family that represents colonialism being treated in that way because... I'm sure they demanded that treatment sometime during a bloody history. Context matters... Prince Harry dressing up like a Nazi was more wrong than a regular idiot on the street dressing like a Nazi because of who he represents (both wrong tho), the history of Nazism and that family, etc.



This might end the discussion. 









						Solomon Islands
					

Her Majesty is Queen of the Solomon Islands, and as such, she has a unique relationship with this remote group of islands in the south-west Pacific. She is kept fully briefed on matters of Government on the islands, and Royal visits throughout her reign have helped strengthen the relationship...




					www.royal.uk
				



.


Her Majesty is represented in the Solomon Islands on a day-to-day basis by a Governor-General. He or she is appointed by The Queen on the advice of the ministers of the Solomon Islands and is completely independent of the British Government.

In all her duties relating to the islands, she speaks and acts as Queen of The Solomon Islands, and not as Queen of the UK.

Royal visits
The Solomon Islands have enjoyed a number of Royal visits over the course of The Queen’s reign, including The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s 2012 visit to celebrate The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee with the islanders


The Queen, accompanied by The Duke of Edinburgh, Princess Anne and Captain Mark Phillips, first visited in 1974. The Duke of Edinburgh returned for two solo visits, in 1959 and 1971.

Her Majesty and His Royal Highness visited the islands again in October 1982 after attending the Commonwealth Games in Australia.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Actually, it seems to antagonise the same media outlets even more and so they don't bother going for the balance of publishing the H&M PR put-outs (you can find those regularly on Yahoo if you're a fan of the gruesome twosome) so let them carry on.



True. Nobody wants to be controlled. As a control-freak herself Meghan should appreciate that.


----------



## carmen56

purseinsanity said:


> Disemboweling and Quartering?



There’s always the red hot poker!


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> My big takeaway from the interview was Harry sitting down and whining like a spoiled brat that his father cut him off financially and won't pay for his security anymore.
> 
> I think Harry really wanted to get that out there, he couldn't wait to say it even though Oprah, who never does her homework or asks the hard questions, even asked.
> 
> By the way, how much security does an ex-royal living on a massive estate in CA really need?  One bodyguard and a state-of-the-art home alarm system?  I wonder if he bought a gun, now that he's living in the States.  lol



As a viewer.... The interview should've been all Harry IMO. He really spilled the tea!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> You know, I just had a thought.  Maybe, just maybe, Meghan Markle was referring to Maggie Muggins when she inscribed her Cartier Tank, "To MM from MM"?


Too funny! I don't need MM, I already have a sister who is a compulsive liar and it wasn't funny growing up in the same household. However I learned how to detect a liar, from an early age. Hubby can't pull too many jokes on me, because I know when he's 'lying' so to speak.


----------



## bag-mania

I hope anyone who watches the repeat of the interview will pay attention to the body language and behavior this time around. The first time it was hard to get past the wild accusations and revelations but the way those lines were delivered was interesting.


----------



## bisousx

This ad ran on my Facebook feed and I thought, how cruel is it to constantly plant in Harry’s mind that his life mirrors what his mother went through. It’s quite sick if you think about it.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> This is a worry.
> 
> My worry is she'll start to manifest munchausen by proxy and/or pull the kids into her antics - it's already worked with a 'grown' man.


I had the same thought 
she has protested she would never hurt him 
what is the quote ? methinks the lady protests too much


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

artax two said:


> I read a reddit post the other week about a woman in Aus who had two vaginas, side by side. One she claimed she used for her escort service, the other she reserved for her personal relationships.



OMG LOL


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I hope anyone who watches the repeat of the interview will pay attention to the body language and behavior this time around. The first time it was hard to get past the wild accusations and revelations but the way those lines were delivered was interesting.


And pls watch for the EXACT wording of the skin color comments. M mentioned it first but her knowledge was second hand, and used a plural - like it happened several times, H mentioned ONE incident where he was present


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, do we have a trifecta?

1. Kim&Kanye = split
2. JLo&ARod = split
3. H&M ??????


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, do we have a trifecta?
> 
> 1. Kim&Kanye = split
> 2. JLo&ARod = split
> 3. H&M ??????


That pandemic is really hard on people!!!!


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> That pandemic is really hard on people!!!!



It’s actually made me like my husband more!


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> It’s actually made me like my husband more!


Good for you. I am sick of everyone but my dogs,


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> It’s actually made me like my husband more!


My husband and I are too used to each other. I can’t imagine starting all over again.


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> Good for you. I am sick of everyone but my dogs,



You should plan a staycation!


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, do we have a trifecta?
> 
> 1. Kim&Kanye = split
> 2. JLo&ARod = split
> 3. H&M ??????



Huge difference between those 2...  all 4 in #1 and #2 are independently wealthy with little to benefit from being tied down.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Disemboweling and Quartering?


And they hang your entrails before your eyes!  Head on a spike too so the crows can pick at it.


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> You should plan a staycation!


No way! I am going to the spa the minute we are allowed to travel
I might permanently move there.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Huge difference between those 2...  all 4 in #1 and #2 are independently wealthy with little to benefit from being tied down.


Lots of stories about ARod and his wandering eye.  I don't think that Harry is let off the leash long enough for him to find another b*i*t*c*h


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> No way! I am going to the spa the minute we are allowed to travel
> I might permanently move there.



Take me with you!


----------



## kkfiregirl

gracekelly said:


> Lots of stories about ARod and his wandering eye.  I don't think that Harry is let off the leash long enough for him to find another b*i*t*c*h



Harry seems like a burden.


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> Lots of stories about ARod and his wandering eye.  I don't think that Harry is let off the leash long enough for him to find another b*i*t*c*h


Alex  has yet to outgrow the insta girls and the strippers. His rep is legendary in NYC.
Harry will find a way....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Sharon Osbourne apologizes for supporting Piers Morgan in Meghan row | CNN
					

Sharon Osbourne has issued a public apology to the Black community after facing controversy over her impassioned defense of Piers Morgan on panel show "The Talk".




					www.google.com


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Sharon Osbourne apologizes for supporting Piers Morgan in Meghan row | CNN
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne has issued a public apology to the Black community after facing controversy over her impassioned defense of Piers Morgan on panel show "The Talk".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


This was rough. She sounded really bad.
I fear for Sheryl’s job.


----------



## Lodpah

https://www.yahoo.com/news/barack-*****-picks-queen-one-191935368.html
He picks Queen as one of the people he wants in a group text.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, do we have a trifecta?
> 
> 1. Kim&Kanye = split
> 2. JLo&ARod = split
> 3. H&M ??????



Hmmm. Jeff Bezos' girlfriend seems to have dropped off the radar recently???? 
He would definitely check off in the "rich" category of her procurement list.


----------



## Chanbal

DM did its homework on MM&H's falsehoods, here is the dossier:

*Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth: Dossier reveals many explosive claims which rocked the Royal Family were contradictory or wrong... so will CBS and Oprah Winfrey now investigate the true story?*









						Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth
					

Across the globe, the Harry and Meghan interview has divided families, communities and even nations. Its fallout has been greater than anyone could have imagined.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure Netflix and Spotify really appreciate that they took a chance and gave those two inexperienced fools lucrative TV/podcast contracts, likely with substantial cash advances, only to be screwed over so that H&M could peddle the biggest story about them to another media outlet. H&M are loyal to no one but themselves.


She's a ruthless opportunist and he tags along. I don't know what the contract with Netflix or Sportify was about, but I have doubts that they can come up with something more explosive than the things they said in this interview. If these two firms had been expecting tell all shows, they were deceived. I think they can't continue with this level of slander unless they want to end up at court.


----------



## KittyKat65

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You might want to chime in once you caught up.


Pssst, I watched it at the time.


----------



## limom

DeMonica said:


> She's a ruthless opportunist and he tags along. I don't know what the contract with Netflix or Sportify was about, but I have doubts that they can come up with something more explosive than the things they said in this interview. If these two firms had been expecting tell all shows, they were deceived. I think they can't continue with this level of slander unless they want to end up at court.


They hired a professional








						Sources: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Tap Ben Browning to Lead Production Company
					

The couple have hired the president of film and television production at FilmNation to shepherd their rich deal at Netflix, sources tell The Hollywood Reporter.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> That pandemic is really hard on people!!!!


You bet! I just learned that Italy is closing again due to a new COVID wave.


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> You bet! I just learned that Italy is closing again due to a new COVID wave.


Yet France is reopening its border to expats.
What is going on?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2. JLo&ARod = split



Hu? That somehow went unnoticed by me. That said, I was bitter for years after the Marc Anthony divorce, I liked them together.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> They hired a professional
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Tap Ben Browning to Lead Production Company
> 
> 
> The couple have hired the president of film and television production at FilmNation to shepherd their rich deal at Netflix, sources tell The Hollywood Reporter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com



That they would hire a crew to do the work was expected. I'm just surprised it's taken eight months for them to find someone to do it.


----------



## marietouchet

It never ends 
MM has filed complaint against Piers’ with his former network .... 
She does not seem to know when to take her chips off the table


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Queen knows what we need - less OW and a good laugh
H&M should read the room:

_The Queen had a team of scientists in stitches when they asked what Yuri Gagarin, the first human in space, was like when she met him.

'Russian!' the monarch dead-panned, before bursting into giggles.

The 94-year-old sovereign was taking part in a virtual science showcase via video link with British scientists, educators and schoolchildren to mark British Science Week - a celebration of the role played in UK society by STEM subjects: science, technology, engineering and maths._









						Queen's answer to Yuri Gagarin question makes scientists laugh
					

The Queen, 94, was asked the question by Sky At Night presenter Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock during a video link with British scientists, educators and schoolchildren to mark British Science Week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> They hired a professional
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Tap Ben Browning to Lead Production Company
> 
> 
> The couple have hired the president of film and television production at FilmNation to shepherd their rich deal at Netflix, sources tell The Hollywood Reporter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com



Is this the person that is going to do their work for Netflix? The lady that is fundraising for them on GoFundMe needs to ask for more money, fringe benefits in CA are costly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> this really gets me
> when I was an employee working for senior management in a corporation I was very well aware that HR works for management - not for employees.  So first she isn't an employee and secondly she is in a much more powerful position than HR.  either she's an idiot or she thinks we are


My cynicism re MM will be clearly on display : She may have had some hint? knowledge? that talk of her bullying was becoming an issue. Throwing shade on HR now sets her up for the future when the investigations become news and she will not look good."HR wouldn't help me because they don't like me yada yada yada"


----------



## DeMonica

limom said:


> They hired a professional
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sources: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Tap Ben Browning to Lead Production Company
> 
> 
> The couple have hired the president of film and television production at FilmNation to shepherd their rich deal at Netflix, sources tell The Hollywood Reporter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


I understand the Spotify deal, but the Netflix is still a mystery to me. I mean what kind of content they can come up with for those series? Social climbing tutorial? Diary of a Wimpy Adult? How to Dress My Child for the Camera?


----------



## marietouchet

And yet another complaint filed on Piersgate, this time with OFCOM UK regulatory groux, like FCC .
She won over Piers...
something tells me they are low on crockery in Montecito

From that philosopher Kenny Rogers :

You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run
You never count your money
When you're sittin' at the table
There'll be time enough for countin'
When the dealin's done


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> And yet another complaint filed on Piersgate, this time with OFCOM UK regulatory groux, like FCC .
> She won over Piers...
> something tells me they are low on crockery in Montecito
> 
> From that philosopher Kenny Rogers :
> 
> Gotta know when to hold em
> know when to fold em
> know when to walk away and run ...


Piers obsession with Meg is weird. Doesn’t he have a wife and kids at home?
He sucked when he replaced the GOAT Larry King, imho.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> DM did its homework on MM&H's falsehoods, here is the dossier:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth: Dossier reveals many explosive claims which rocked the Royal Family were contradictory or wrong... so will CBS and Oprah Winfrey now investigate the true story?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth
> 
> 
> Across the globe, the Harry and Meghan interview has divided families, communities and even nations. Its fallout has been greater than anyone could have imagined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is a really thorough article. It goes through each claim, and points out the untruths they told and where the two of them even contradicted each other during the interview. Crazy stuff.  And, Oprah doesn't even follow up with a single reasonable question.


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> And yet another complaint filed on Piersgate, this time with OFCOM UK regulatory groux, like FCC .
> She won over Piers...
> something tells me they are low on crockery in Montecito
> 
> From that philosopher Kenny Rogers :
> 
> You've got to know when to hold 'em
> Know when to fold 'em
> Know when to walk away
> And know when to run
> You never count your money
> When you're sittin' at the table
> There'll be time enough for countin'
> When the dealin's done


She’s so busy fighting I hope she’s looking at her accounts. Lawyers ain’t cheap.

Reminds me of my friend’s family. Very wealthy, owned tins of commercial properties but went broke fighting each other on the estate of their parents.


----------



## Aimee3

If I read that right, MM is suing Piers and his former network???  Can you sue someone for his opinion?  He doesn’t work for that network anymore!  We should sue HER for all her lies in the OW interview!


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hesitate to post this, but why not? It is hilarious











TraceySH said:


> OMG










chicinthecity777 said:


> I hate to say it but tabloids seem to do more research than some mainstream media these days.
> 
> *DOESN'T ADD UP **Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoyed 13 holidays despite saying her passport was taken away*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoyed 13 holidays despite saying her passport was taken away
> 
> 
> MEGHAN had at least 13 foreign holidays after being welcomed into the royal fold — despite telling Oprah Winfrey her passport was taken away. The Queen is currently heading a family investigation i…
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com








limom said:


> She is American and Archie is potentially dual.
> In regard to her children being titled, can one be American and be a Prince in another country?
> *M is so childish and superficial. On what planet does a forty years old woman compare herself to the little mermaid?*
> Kudos to Oprah for not laughing at her face. Maybe, the Duchess is legitimately mentally illl.


On her own planet/fantasy world. Plus, I think she's got the names mixed up because she fits more with the character Ursula...





csshopper said:


> Latest example of why the Sussexes are the most viperish couple on the planet.
> 
> Having claimed they would "move on" after the Interview, of course they have not:
> 
> *"But since the screening, a raft of close friends and supporters have been given permission to push their case on social media and over the airwaves.
> 
> Yesterday, Meghan's close friend Janina Gavankar firmly rejected the Queen's statement that 'recollections may vary' over the claims made by the Sussexes. *
> 
> *The actress, who has known Meghan for 17 years, said: 'Though their recollections may vary, ours don't.'
> 
> She also said the duchess gave her backing before she appeared on TV - despite Meghan reportedly agreeing a period of silence to cool tensions with the Palace".  *
> 
> As Piers said: "I wouldn't believe her (Meghan) if she read me a weather report."


Is this the friend who spoke a ages ago about being ghosted by MM and also about how horrible MM treated her ex-husband in the way she broke-up with him? Or is that another woman?



Lodpah said:


> I'm cleansed. Here is a good article about the protection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Curran
> 
> Tue
> What are your thoughts on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah?
> As a lawyer, I follow the rule that once you’re caught lying in an answer - even slightly - your credibility is gone. *Especially if the lie is given in order to create a misleading impression.*
> Here’s an example. Meghan complained that security was cut off, poor Archie was left unprotected. Oprah nodded in disapproving agreement.
> 
> But wait. There’s an international agreement regarding the protection of certain people - heads of state, heads of government and so on - requiring the country where those people are, to provide full security. They are called IPPs - internationally protected persons. So Canada paid for full protection after Harry and Meghan moved to Vancouver, as required by the treaty. But, after their move to LA, they quit being Senior Royals. Their choice. And one of the consequences is that they were no longer qualified as IPPs. Not a decision of the RF - a consequence of an international treaty. No more paid protection.
> So, no, the RF didn’t cut off her protection - although her protection was indeed cut off. She framed it took look like the RF was the cause, a lie.
> 
> So - as a lawyer - I ask, what else did she lie about? Hard to tell. But for me, here’s one - that there were “concerns” - Markel’s word - about the colour of the child’s skin. She left the impression that it was a topic within the RF, and a worry. Then they were forced, later, to clarify that it wasn’t the Queen or Prince Phillip - thereby throwing everyone else under the bus by omission. And “concerns” - well, sorry Meghan, but you’ve been caught in self-serving lies, so I have to wonder whether “concerns” was no more than a dinner table, light-hearted inquiry - maybe even a legitimate question from someone not familiar with the genetics of bi-racial marriages, which are intricate to say the least.
> 
> *At the end of the day, I have the Queen - a woman of unquestionable dignity, honour, character and class - and I have Meghan Markel - a Deal or No Deal suitcase girl who found a playboy prince who likes to party naked. I ask myself, which one is more likely to have acted appropriately?*
> 
> 36.8K views1.4K upvotes3 shares152 comments










CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, H&M forgot this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry in new racism row after remarks to comedian Stephen K Amos
> 
> 
> Prince Harry told comedian 'you don't sound like a black chap'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry in new racism row after remarks to comedian Stephen K Amos*
> Suzannah RamsdaleFebruary 11, 2009 10:07 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry told comedian 'you don't sound like a black chap'
> 
> Prince Harry has sparked a new racism row after allegedly telling comedian Stephen K Amos that he didn’t ‘sound like a black chap.’
> 
> Harry apparently made the remark after the stand-up show We Are Not Amused for the Prince of Wales’ 60th birthday celebrations in November 2008.
> 
> Speaking on Five’s The Wright Stuff on Tuesday, he explained: ‘Harry said, “Hello, tell me, amusing… but you don’t sound like a black chap.”‘
> 
> He added: ‘I wanted to say, “How is I supposed to sound?”‘
> 
> *When asked if the remark had been made in jest, he replied: ‘I hope it was.’ *
> 
> The comedian put the comment down to a poor attempt at making banter, but fellow panelist on the show Lowri Turner said: ‘That’s not the point.’
> 
> Harry is already in hot water after it emerged that he referred to a Sandhurst colleague as ‘our little Paki friend’ and that he, Charles and Prince Williamaffectionately refer to an Indian polo club member as ‘Sooty’.
> 
> His latest gaffe has inevitably upset equality groups.
> 
> ‘Many young people will be disgusted by his remark – how is a black man meant to sound?’ Naomi Byron, national secretary of Youth Against Racism in Europe, told the Mirror.
> 
> ‘But it is not just Prince Harry that is at fault. The aristocratic, rich circles he moves in obviously don’t have a problem with this kind of racist stereotyping.’


Starting to wonder if this supposed conversation that was had with H about the skin colour of their child was actually Harry talking to himself out loud in front of the mirror.



Lodpah said:


> I’m really confused. What’s the difference between a blatant liar and falsehoods? I thought she didn’t know much about the monarchy.
> 
> 
> Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> Agueda Sanchez
> ·
> Wed
> 
> M.A. from Queens College (CUNY)(Graduated 1996)
> 
> Originally Answered: Why did Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, say that she did not pay attention to the Royals when she was growing up and that she was naive about the monarchy?
> I find it very hard to believe.
> Meghan was 16 years old when Princess Diana died in a car accident. Sixteen years old when Harry, who was only 12 years old at the time, walked behind his mother’s coffin. Everyone around the world saw that iconic, painful image. Princess Diana had made a huge impact around the world and it is impossible to believe that Meghan was not aware of that.
> Another worldwide event was the Royal wedding of Prince William to the then Kate Middleton. This event was watched by 3 BILLION people. When you watch a wedding of this magnitude, there are tons of royal commentators explaining everything, every single detail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a very happy event indeed, here we have HMTQ looking radiant:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This royal wedding was everywhere!
> In 2014, a cable actress had a blog called The Tig. On that blog, said actress wrote about the royal wedding and the “pomp and circumstance” regarding this historical event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How did she not know about the monarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All information from public sites.
> 
> 68K views
> View 350 upvotes
> View shares
> · Answer requested by


----------



## Materielgrrl

An observation for someone in her 50's.  This is not the first time in my teen/adult life that scandal or scuttlebutt of some sort has happened and been a big story in the media, brought unwanted attention to the BRF, and painted them with a wide wand as a horrible, miserable entitled bunch. QEII was viewed as the villain for most of what went wrong with Diana and Charles' marriage and her wanting to seek a life beyond the RF.  We could only discuss amongst our friends locally, the television screen or radio in our cars, or the few we knew abroad.  

There was no internet, chat forums, but there were members of the press or media happy to conduct interviews, and employees of the RF always ready to sell out.  Family issues didn't stay inside of the wall of BP.  Not for Charles and Diana (and Camille - I still can't get listening to the tape recording of Charles' call with her wishing he was her tampon out of my head).

QEII - she's been alive long enough to be a pro and not making the same mistakes with scandal, family issues, twice. None of this is sticking  on her this time, she's kind, sweet grammy in this scandal
Andrew - (still ongoing serious allegations I'm not hearing much of anything about)
Anne - 
Victoria
Henry's (with and without the guillotine)

In their time, the scandal, and personal attacks on RF and those marrying in, was probably just as salacious.  Just a lot of in person talk and letters (for those literate) around what a RF member or someone brought into the family.

The BRF will make whatever adjustments in their monarch that is necessary for it to survive.  Those changes are dependent upon what the taxpayers and citizens that support them want.

Their lives and family issues are rarely carried out in private.

I can't wait for the next chapter in the next 5-15 years.  Will Charles ever be King?  Will he disappoint during his reign? (yep, he's not the strategic brilliant leader that his mother is)  What happens to William and Kate as they grow older and mature?  What kind of young people will the children develop into?  What will they do in public to cause scorn as they rebel against the norms of the early 21st century? and H&M on the outskirts.  Is that where they remain?  What happens as the cousins mix and mingle?  I'll be watching from my nursing home from my touch tele screen that will appear when my brain thinks it to appear...


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> I hope you are all seated and your stomachs are not too full:
> 
> View attachment 5020108
> 
> "_She wants to raise the giant figure of £7.1million to pay off Harry’s mortgage on his £11million, nine-bedroom home in Montecito, California – but has collected just £78.64 so far.
> 
> Insisting her fundraise-heir is no joke, Anastasia, from Ventura – just a 25-minute drive from the prince - told The Sun: “I like to help people and help them in any way I can.
> 
> “That gives me happiness. If you needed a home, I’d do the same for you. It’s a good deed._”


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> she had the big bombshells about wanting to commit suicide and racism.  harry said again that he didn't want history to repeat itself.  what else is there?  they are kind of a novelty act.  I guess maybe they (or someone they hire) could produce shows or podcasts about other people.  but there are plenty of other people doing that, right?
> or when they have two kids and the kids are older and more interesting maybe they will trot them out


Maybe she's on line looking for unexploded landmines to traverse?


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> This is a really thorough article. It goes through each claim, and points out the untruths they told and where the two of them even contradicted each other during the interview. Crazy stuff.  And, Oprah doesn't even follow up with a single reasonable question.


FYI  on DM today,  am having issues that paragraphs are being chopped off or maybe hidden behind graphics on my iPad
so if there are non sequiturs , the text changes subject, maybe you are having same issues
so, it is a great article, but beware display issues ...


----------



## Chanbal

Materielgrrl said:


> An observation for someone in her 50's.  This is not the first time in my teen/adult life that scandal or scuttlebutt of some sort has happened and been a big story in the media, brought unwanted attention to the BRF, and painted them with a wide wand as a horrible, miserable entitled bunch. QEII was viewed as the villain for most of what went wrong with Diana and Charles' marriage and her wanting to seek a life beyond the RF.  We could only discuss amongst our friends locally, the television screen or radio in our cars, or the few we knew abroad.
> 
> There was no internet, chat forums, but there were members of the press or media happy to conduct interviews, and employees of the RF always ready to sell out.  Family issues didn't stay inside of the wall of BP.  Not for Charles and Diana (and Camille - I still can't get listening to the tape recording of Charles' call with her wishing he was her tampon out of my head).
> 
> QEII - she's been alive long enough to be a pro and not making the same mistakes with scandal, family issues, twice. None of this is sticking  on her this time, she's kind, sweet grammy in this scandal
> Andrew - (still ongoing serious allegations I'm not hearing much of anything about)
> Anne -
> Victoria
> Henry's (with and without the guillotine)
> 
> In their time, the scandal, and personal attacks on RF and those marrying in, was probably just as salacious.  Just a lot of in person talk and letters (for those literate) around what a RF member or someone brought into the family.
> 
> The BRF will make whatever adjustments in their monarch that is necessary for it to survive.  Those changes are dependent upon what the taxpayers and citizens that support them want.
> 
> Their lives and family issues are rarely carried out in private.
> 
> I can't wait for the next chapter in the next 5-15 years.  Will Charles ever be King?  Will he disappoint during his reign? (yep, he's not the strategic brilliant leader that his mother is)  What happens to William and Kate as they grow older and mature?  What kind of young people will the children develop into?  What will they do in public to cause scorn as they rebel against the norms of the early 21st century? and H&M on the outskirts.  Is that where they remain?  What happens as the cousins mix and mingle?  I'll be watching from my nursing home from my touch tele screen that will appear when my brain thinks it to appear...


You made some good points, but I feel like I have aged a lot just by reading your post.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I hope anyone who watches the repeat of the interview will pay attention to the body language and behavior this time around. The first time it was hard to get past the wild accusations and revelations but the way those lines were delivered was interesting.





Chanbal said:


> DM did its homework on MM&H's falsehoods, here is the dossier:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth: Dossier reveals many explosive claims which rocked the Royal Family were contradictory or wrong... so will CBS and Oprah Winfrey now investigate the true story?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth
> 
> 
> Across the globe, the Harry and Meghan interview has divided families, communities and even nations. Its fallout has been greater than anyone could have imagined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


DOUBLE DARE THEM, but at this point I don't think Oprah, Gayle, Scobie, Harry, the other mouthpieces, care about the real truth and of course MM only sees her perverted truth.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> This is a really thorough article. It goes through each claim, and points out the untruths they told and where the two of them even contradicted each other during the interview. Crazy stuff.  And, Oprah doesn't even follow up with a single reasonable question.


I still can't understand why Oprah is supporting them this way. She is a very smart woman, and she must know that MM's truth is very questionable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> DM did its homework on MM&H's falsehoods, here is the dossier:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth: Dossier reveals many explosive claims which rocked the Royal Family were contradictory or wrong... so will CBS and Oprah Winfrey now investigate the true story?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth
> 
> 
> Across the globe, the Harry and Meghan interview has divided families, communities and even nations. Its fallout has been greater than anyone could have imagined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The opening line alone!

_"For almost a week their voices — angry, entitled, vengeful and bitter — have echoed over the airwaves. And in their wake has come the sound and fury of recrimination."
_


----------



## josieblime

FreeSpirit71 said:


> And yet that same narrative was repeated _ad nauseum_ for years by the press (except the other way around) and no-one complained. Ok.


I always assumed Kate was hypersensitive because she was postpartum. Likewise, Meghan would likely have been on edge because of the stress involved with the wedding. Perhaps they both cried. Or Kate, or Meghan. It is hardly the first time people got their feelings hurt planning a wedding. It doesn’t make either of them evil. It was silly for the press to talk about it so much but also silly for M to bring up in the Oprah interview


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> I still can't understand why Oprah is supporting them this way. She is a very smart woman, and she must know that MM's truth is very questionable.


It is good for business, imho.
She cant in good conscience kick somebody who just said she was suicidal five minutes prior...
Plus she got fooled before by that author, James Frey.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> It never ends
> MM has filed complaint against Piers’ with his former network ....
> She does not seem to know when to take her chips off the table


Many people (including her sister) have been saying that she is a narcissist, if true, she will not take her chips off the table until she annihilates her opponents. 

People with narcissistic personality disorders are capable of seducing many, and of doing a lot of damage... we have examples from history.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I still can't understand why Oprah is supporting them this way. She is a very smart woman, and she must know that MM's truth is very questionable.



Since OW is advertising an interview with Chip and Joanna Gaines, I wonder if she is trying to ‘come back’. Her network failed, her magazine failed, etc. Perhaps she is trying to influence a younger demographic. Based on the negative reviews for this H&M chat, I don’t see it happening. OW and Gayle are 67.  I’m not that old yet, but I do know when to stop.  Let the young ones have the microphone. Otherwise, she just looks [gasp] desperate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> It is good for business, imho.
> She cant in good conscience kick somebody who just said she was suicidal five minutes prior...
> Plus she got fooled before by that author, James Frey.



Plus, HarveyW., Charlie Rose, etc.


----------



## mdcx

Imo this shot of Charlotte shows what Kate was concerned about in respect of the bridesmaid not wearing tights during the wedding and potentially exposing too much.
I don't believe for a minute that Kate made Meghan cry. The DM article debunking all of the Oprah stuff is great.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since OW is advertising an interview with Chip and Joanna Gaines, I wonder if she is trying to ‘come back’. Her network failed, her magazine failed, etc. Perhaps she is trying to influence a younger demographic. Based on the negative reviews for this H&M chat, I don’t see it happening. OW and Gayle are 67.  I’m not that old yet, but I do know when to stop.  Let the young ones have the microphone. Otherwise, she just looks [gasp] desperate.


Her network is part of the discovery umbrella. She is far from failing. She had difficulties at first then she hired the “right team” and cashed in big time..
Also she made tons of money from WW.
She makes muchoo money money from her touring as well.
She has   the mag.....and on and on.
As far as retiring, for what? Some people live to work. Oprah is one of them imho


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since OW is advertising an interview with Chip and Joanna Gaines, I wonder if she is trying to ‘come back’. Her network failed, her magazine failed, etc. Perhaps she is trying to influence a younger demographic. Based on the negative reviews for this H&M chat, I don’t see it happening. OW and Gayle are 67.  I’m not that old yet, but I do know when to stop.  Let the young ones have the microphone. Otherwise, she just looks [gasp] desperate.



People should know when to stop. I agree, OW and Gayle are filthy rich and it's time to let others shine. I wish they would stop promoting this mediocre couple, it's very disappointing (and dangerous imo).


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> Many people (including her sister) have been saying that she is a narcissist, if true, she will not take her chips off the table until she annihilates her opponents.
> 
> People with narcissistic personality disorders are capable of seducing many, and of doing a lot of damage... we have examples from history.



Many successful people are narcissists.  A never ending supply of delusional self-love and confidence goes further than old fashioned hard work by itself. Another classic narcissist trait is short sightedness. I bet without it, someone like MM could use her powers to actually help others while still making good money for herself.


----------



## scarlet555

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5020721


Every d@mn day to these two !!! The pathetic drama, the self-righteous load of crap, I can’t believe a word out of their mouth, one day they’ll tell the truth and it will be invisible!


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> People should know when to stop. I agree, OW and Gayle are filthy rich and it's time to let others shine. I wish they would stop promoting this mediocre couple, it's very disappointing (and dangerous imo).


It is literally their jobs to interview people.
Gayle works for CBS who has the oldest viewership of all the networks.
Let those two aunties be great!


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> Imo this shot of Charlotte shows what Kate was concerned about in respect of the bridesmaid not wearing tights during the wedding and potentially exposing too much.
> I don't believe for a minute that Kate made Meghan cry. The DM article debunking all of the Oprah stuff is great.
> View attachment 5020746



Yes Wear tights!  If Kate made Nutty cry, why did the little flower girls end up with no tights?  Nutty says a bunch of crap, accuses everyone of everything, and even has ‘proof’, and yet... if we were to evaluate ‘proof’-it’d be determined early on that you can’t trust anything from this crazy wannabe Zlister actress...what famewhores will do...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plus, HarveyW., Charlie Rose, etc.



Oprah seems to have a long list of "inspiring" (her word) interviews, which includes even people from other countries. 



Spoiler: inspiring



https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...o-deus-brazil-healer-allegations-sexual-abuse


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oprah seems to have a long list of "inspiring" (her word) interviews, which includes even people from other countries.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: inspiring
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...o-deus-brazil-healer-allegations-sexual-abuse



Yes, a quick google on OW will show many issues.  True, she is a billionaire, as with most billionaires she has many (billions?) issues to deal with. The question is why the ‘oh-so-woke‘ H&M chose her and CBS.   Plenty of other interviewers to choose from.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Coconuts40

Just flipping the channels and caught a few minutes of the encore presentation of the interview.

I just don't understand how she's saving chickens from being killed now, meanwhile freely shares she got engaged while roasting a chicken with Harry.  But proudly tells Oprah how she likes saving animals.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, a quick google on OW will show many issues.  True, she is a billionaire, as with most billionaires she has many (billions?) issues to deal with. The question is why the ‘oh-so-woke‘ H&M chose her and CBS.   Plenty of other interviewers to choose from.


They paid the highest price?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Wasn't it Oprah who connected them with Tyler Perry? What does it mean that Oprah has been their fairy godmother the entire time? That's a long investment to get an interview.



You know it! 
Not just M with an agenda

And the "entire time" goes back before the wedding (the only one that actually happened for _real - _let's not sweep that underwater fantasy under the carpet because we think M's out with the little fishes, sorry mermaids)


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, a quick google on OW will show many issues.  True, she is a billionaire, as with most billionaires she has many (billions?) issues to deal with. The question is why the ‘oh-so-woke‘ H&M chose her and CBS.   Plenty of other interviewers to choose from.



She's a friendly........ maybe she felt like she had nothing to lose by giving a softball interview. Real journalists would've probably hit harder.


----------



## floatinglili

mdcx said:


> Imo this shot of Charlotte shows what Kate was concerned about in respect of the bridesmaid not wearing tights during the wedding and potentially exposing too much.
> I don't believe for a minute that Kate made Meghan cry. The DM article debunking all of the Oprah stuff is great.
> View attachment 5020746


Little children in tights is a very sweet traditional feature of a Royal wedding and I can’t believe a stand was made against it. Why argue with cute children in tights?? 
personally I think it looks very romantic. A classic look. 
If this is the type of hill you are prepared to fight on, one wonders why marry into the royal family at all. Find a cashed up sportsman or celebrity instead - no pesky traditions to argue about.


----------



## floatinglili

Are we ever going to find out how these two desperados actually met...?


----------



## Etriers

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah it doesn’t make sense for her to be jealous
> Will’s wife is always going to have a bigger crown and a bigger palace than Harry’s that’s how hierarchical systems work.



I’m not sure jealousy operates on the basis of logic.  Neither of them have any reason to be jealous.  The whole thing on both sides is a tempest in a teapot.  But I do believe, as Diana once attested, that much drama is fueled by palace staff maintaining their own jurisdictions, hierarchies and ax-grinding.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Coconuts40 said:


> I just don't understand how she's saving chickens from being killed now, meanwhile freely shares she got engaged while roasting a chicken with Harry. But proudly tells Oprah how she likes saving animals.



Imagine having to explain that _contradiction_ to Archie and baby Diana.


----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> The opening line alone!
> 
> _"For almost a week their voices — angry, entitled, vengeful and bitter — have echoed over the airwaves. And in their wake has come the sound and fury of recrimination."_


Very powerful line. Here is the illustrating picture for the respective DM article, it's also informative.


----------



## Etriers

floatinglili said:


> Little children in tights is a very sweet traditional feature of a Royal wedding and I can’t believe a stand was made against it. Why argue with cute children in tights??
> personally I think it looks very romantic. A classic look.
> If this is the type of hill you are prepared to fight on, one wonders why marry into the royal family at all. Find a cashed up sportsman or celebrity instead - no pesky traditions to argue about.



I think like most couples who get married, they wanted to create a wedding that was meaningful to them.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Etriers said:


> I think like most couples who get married, they wanted to create a wedding that was meaningful to them.



But they already did that three days prior! This second wedding was for _the people_.


----------



## Etriers

Coconuts40 said:


> Just flipping the channels and caught a few minutes of the encore presentation of the interview.
> 
> I just don't understand how she's saving chickens from being killed now, meanwhile freely shares she got engaged while roasting a chicken with Harry.  But proudly tells Oprah how she likes saving animals.



Lol! I’m not sure that eating chicken and opposition to animal abuse are mutually exclusive.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Etriers said:


> Lol! I’m not sure that eating chicken and opposition to animal abuse are mutually exclusive.



Hmm, in this case they were rescuing chickens from being killed. They’re probably vegetarians now, but haven’t shared that with us yet.


----------



## mdcx

Etriers said:


> I think like most couples who get married, they wanted to create a wedding that was meaningful to them.


But they were not operating as private individuals during this event but as senior members of the BRF having a publicly televised wedding, thus there was a lot of protocol that was required to be observed. Meghan knew all of this. If she didn't want to follow along, she should have gone down the Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas route and said goodbye to H, not "I do".


----------



## Etriers

kkfiregirl said:


> But they already did that three days prior! This second wedding was for _the people_.



Lol!  I hear you.  Maybe they thought the people would want to see something different.  I actually thought it was a great wedding.  I loved the relatively low key aspect.  I loved the uniform H chose.  Loved M’s dress.  Loved all of the music.  It was sophisticated and snazzy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

floatinglili said:


> Little children in tights is a very sweet traditional feature of a Royal wedding and I can’t believe a stand was made against it. Why argue with cute children in tights??
> personally I think it looks very romantic. A classic look.
> If this is the type of hill you are prepared to fight on, one wonders why marry into the royal family at all. Find a cashed up sportsman or celebrity instead - no pesky traditions to argue about.



There is a practical aspect to having a little girl in tights.  Little girls at this age can do inappropriate things in their innocence like bending over. lifting their dresses for whatever reason and just running around.  The tights keep them covered and in a formal setting like this with camera coverage and the world watching, it was the appropriate thing to have the girls wear them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

floatinglili said:


> Are we ever going to find out how these two desperados actually met...?


A little mystique never hurts. However, having their lies globally debunked would be wonderful.


----------



## limom

Etriers said:


> I think like most couples who get married, they wanted to create a wedding that was meaningful to them.


On a practical note, shoes without socks could give the flower girls blisters.


----------



## Etriers

mdcx said:


> But they were not operating as private individuals during this event but as senior members of the BRF having a publicly televised wedding, thus there was a lot of protocol that was required to be observed. Meghan knew all of this. If she didn't want to follow along, she should have gone down the Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas route and said goodbye to H, not "I do".



Well, I guess I just disagree.  I think there is plenty of room for protocol and still to exercise your own style.  Things don’t have to be one extreme or the other.

This is part of the reason the palace gets itself in so much hot water with everyone in the family.  You cannot dictate every aspect of a person’s life.  A whole lot of disaster could have been averted if Margaret had married who she wanted and Charles had married who he  wanted.  But they never learn.  Harry fell in love with an American woman of color.  Get over it palace, support them and see what interesting things this new couple can bring to the party.  The establishment is totally out of touch, which will be the end of them.


----------



## gracekelly

kkfiregirl said:


> But they already did that three days prior! This second wedding was for _the people_.



What a sacrifice!  Actually, if they wanted a legal union they had to do it.  Anyone who wants to look up the UK rules regarding a marriage, as I did, or lives in the UK and knows already, the garden wedding wasn't going to cut it as far as legality and implying that it did is totally wrong.  Just another mistruth to add to the list.

“Venue” - Any location at which a legally binding marriage or civil partnership can take place. These include, among the various permitted places: Register Offices; approved premises for civil marriages and civil partnerships (that is, places approved by the local authority of the area in which the premises are situated); Church of England churches or chapels, certified places of worship that have been registered for the solemnisation of marriage (“registered buildings”); naval, military or air force chapels.


----------



## Etriers

gracekelly said:


> What a sacrifice!  Actually, if they wanted a legal union they had to do it.  Anyone who wants to look up the UK rules regarding a marriage, as I did, or lives in the UK and knows already, the garden wedding wasn't going to cut it as far as legality and implying that it did is totally wrong.  Just another mistruth to add to the list.
> 
> “Venue” - Any location at which a legally binding marriage or civil partnership can take place. These include, among the various permitted places: Register Offices; approved premises for civil marriages and civil partnerships (that is, places approved by the local authority of the area in which the premises are situated); Church of England churches or chapels, certified places of worship that have been registered for the solemnisation of marriage (“registered buildings”); naval, military or air force chapels.



I would imagine the local authority approves various premises, and probably even on a temporary basis.  Much the way in the U.S. a regular citizen can get approval from authorities to perform a wedding once.


----------



## Etriers

kkfiregirl said:


> Hmm, in this case they were rescuing chickens from being killed. They’re probably vegetarians now, but haven’t shared that with us yet.



Could be!


----------



## purseinsanity

Etriers said:


> Lol!  I hear you.  Maybe they thought the people would want to see something different.  I actually thought it was a great wedding.  I loved the relatively low key aspect.  I loved the uniform H chose.  Loved M’s dress.  Loved all of the music.  It was sophisticated and snazzy.


I actually liked Meg's dress for it's simplicity, but the fit seemed a little off.  Harry's uniform jacket gave me the creeps.  (No offense to anyone in the armed forces!)  It looked like a hundred epaulettes had come to die on his chest.


----------



## Coconuts40

Etriers said:


> Lol! I’m not sure that eating chicken and opposition to animal abuse are mutually exclusive.



Interesting perspective, how are they different?


----------



## gracekelly

Etriers said:


> I would imagine the local authority approves various premises, and probably even on a temporary basis.  Much the way in the U.S. a regular citizen can get approval from authorities to perform a wedding once.


Not three days before and you would have to apply.  The UK is much stricter than the US.  In the US you can get married just about anywhere and it is legal as long as you have the license and a person allowed to do it.  I have been to a wedding conducted by a person who received the internet permission to perform the wedding and it really was a joke.  

I would love to hear what Wilby has to say about this.  They put him in a difficult position by saying what they did.  The Queen is head of the Church of England and stating that they  were married 3 days before when she was attending what she believed to be their real wedding, is an insult directed at her.  As we like to say here, no bueno.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> I still can't understand why Oprah is supporting them this way. She is a very smart woman, and she must know that MM's truth is very questionable.


How many decades did it take for Oprah to realize the truth about Michael Jackson?  She has to be hit over the head with the facts.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I actually liked Meg's dress for it's simplicity, but the fit seemed a little off.  Harry's uniform jacket gave me the creeps.  (No offense to anyone in the armed forces!)  It looked like a hundred epaulettes had come to die on his chest.



I didn't like a black uniform at a wedding and that was my objection.  He had to apply to The Queen to obtain permission to wear this particular uniform.


----------



## Etriers

Coconuts40 said:


> Interesting perspective, how are they different?



I agree that for a vegetarian or vegan, there probably is no difference.  But I propose that not all of us omnivores are animal abusers.


----------



## Toby93

poopsie said:


> She doesn't have to.
> As we have seen, those who are in her corner are, for the most part, impervious to anything negative said about her. That kind of blind devotion isn't usually amenable to reason.
> And those who do call her on it are dealt with accordingly


100% correct!  The ones gullible to believe the nonsense she spouts are not about to be swayed by the truth


----------



## Jktgal

Etriers said:


> A whole lot of disaster could have been averted if Margaret had married who she wanted and Charles had married who he  wanted.


Andrew and Harry married who they wanted, Anne too. The problem is that marriage is essentially recruitment into a job position, and the firm do not have a good recruitment and job retainment protocol. Love and whatever anyone wanted should not be a criteria. That's the whole problem with a non-merit system. Even a merit system don't guarantee successful recruitment, much less love and whims. A hyrid system can be put in place where marriage and the job is separated. A spose can be recruited into the job if they have gone through a gradual system where they start small. Succesful performance will merit added responsibilities.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

floatinglili said:


> Are we ever going to find out how these two desperados actually met...?


There is the tailor story...


----------



## bisbee

gracekelly said:


> I have been to a wedding conducted by a person who received the internet permission to perform the wedding and it really was a joke.


In the past year, due to the pandemic, thousands of weddings have been officiated by people who received permission to do so through the Internet.  My stepson was married last August by a friend who performed the ceremony.  

Are all of these weddings a joke to you?


----------



## Etriers

Jktgal said:


> Andrew and Harry married who they wanted, Anne too. The problem is that marriage is essentially recruitment into a job position, and the firm do not have a good recruitment and job retainment protocol. Love and whatever anyone wanted should not be a criteria. That's the whole problem with a non-merit system. Even a merit system don't guarantee successful recruitment, much less love and whims. A hyrid system can be put in place where marriage and the job is separated. A spose can be recruited into the job if they have gone through a gradual system where they start small. Succesful performance will merit added responsibilities.



Lol! Love and whatever anyone wanted [in a spouse] should not be a criteria?


----------



## gracekelly

bisbee said:


> In the past year, due to the pandemic, thousands of weddings have been officiated by people who received permission to do so through the Internet.  My stepson was married last August by a friend who performed the ceremony.
> 
> Are all of these weddings a joke to you?


That's a bit of a reach by writing that and that you are directing that at me is not surprise. Try not to make your comments so personal.    I was only speaking about the one I attended 15 years ago and not about anyone else's wedding.  The person doing the officiating was the computer repair guy at the parent's office, he had never done it before, was so nervous that he had to start the ceremony over twice. I found out later, that the couple had had a ceremony in Sweden with the bride's parents present the month before. Have no idea which one was the "legal" one.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> I didn't like a black uniform at a wedding and that was my objection.  He had to apply to The Queen to obtain permission to wear this particular uniform.



I didn't give that a thought until I read your post. 

Harry in black. And Meghan in white. 

Hmmm. 

Roles "reversed"? 

Black tuxes aren't given a second thought. But a black uniform such as Harry's? William wore a red uniform. I wonder why Harry had to apply to the Queen to wear a black uniform. So I did a lazy cut/paste which may or may not relate: 

"However he could, if he wishes, as he hold a special position as a Member of *the* Royal Family," Bruce said. "*The* Duke of Cambridge *wore the uniform* of *the* Colonel, Irish Guards, because he *had* recently been appointed to this by *The* Queen and *his wedding*, as a future monarch, *was* a ceremonial one," he continued."

Then I read an explanation in Town and Country magazine, bla bla bla. Whatever. 

There has a be a solid reason why Harry wore THAT uniform as there were others he could have worn given the histories of various things. So. Black and white. Hmm.


----------



## Jayne1

Etriers said:


> Lol! Love and whatever anyone wanted [in a spouse] should not be a criteria?


In the BRF - are you serious?

Things have changed recently though.


----------



## Etriers

Jayne1 said:


> In the BRF - are you serious?
> 
> Things have changed recently though.



I don’t know, doesn’t it seem like all human beings deserve love, and to love who they marry?


----------



## Jktgal

Etriers said:


> Lol! Love and whatever anyone wanted [in a spouse] should not be a criteria?


In a spouse, yes, but not in the job. The spouse can be recruited for the public service job in a professional manner, it shouldn't be automatic. Starting small with limited responsibilities, transparent reviews. If they don't pass muster they should continue to be private citizens receiving no public money. Those born into the family shouldn't also be automatically expected to serve and I think this policy is already in place going forward. Having professional and competent people doing their job of being a 'royal' would benefit taxpayers.


----------



## Etriers

rose60610 said:


> I didn't give that a thought until I read your post.
> 
> Harry in black. And Meghan in white.
> 
> Hmmm.
> 
> Roles "reversed"?
> 
> Black tuxes aren't given a second thought. But a black uniform such as Harry's? William wore a red uniform. I wonder why Harry had to apply to the Queen to wear a black uniform. So I did a lazy cut/paste which may or may not relate:
> 
> "However he could, if he wishes, as he hold a special position as a Member of *the* Royal Family," Bruce said. "*The* Duke of Cambridge *wore the uniform* of *the* Colonel, Irish Guards, because he *had* recently been appointed to this by *The* Queen and *his wedding*, as a future monarch, *was* a ceremonial one," he continued."
> 
> Then I read an explanation in Town and Country magazine, bla bla bla. Whatever.
> 
> There has a be a solid reason why Harry wore THAT uniform as there were others he could have worn given the histories of various things. So. Black and white. Hmm.



Maybe he thought it was sexier. I certainly did. I thought the whole wedding was elegant without being over-the-top and hit all the right notes.


----------



## Etriers

Jktgal said:


> In a spouse, yes, but not in the job. The spouse can be recruited for the public service job in a professional manner, it shouldn't be automatic. Starting small with limited responsibilities, transparent reviews. If they don't pass muster they should continue to be private citizens receiving no public money. Those born into the family shouldn't also be automatically expected to serve and I think this policy is already in place going forward. Having professional and competent people doing their job of being a 'royal' would benefit taxpayers.



Who would do the interviews and job assessment?


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I didn't give that a thought until I read your post.
> 
> Harry in black. And Meghan in white.
> 
> Hmmm.
> 
> Roles "reversed"?
> 
> Black tuxes aren't given a second thought. But a black uniform such as Harry's? William wore a red uniform. I wonder why Harry had to apply to the Queen to wear a black uniform. So I did a lazy cut/paste which may or may not relate:
> 
> "However he could, if he wishes, as he hold a special position as a Member of *the* Royal Family," Bruce said. "*The* Duke of Cambridge *wore the uniform* of *the* Colonel, Irish Guards, because he *had* recently been appointed to this by *The* Queen and *his wedding*, as a future monarch, *was* a ceremonial one," he continued."
> 
> Then I read an explanation in Town and Country magazine, bla bla bla. Whatever.
> 
> There has a be a solid reason why Harry wore THAT uniform as there were others he could have worn given the histories of various things. So. Black and white. Hmm.



TBH, that never occurred to me.  The black and white aspect of it.  I just assumed that he liked the uniform and that is why he wanted to wear it LOL!  At the time, I thought it was odd that he did not choose the uniform from the the branch of the service that he was in when doing his tour in Afghanistan.  The black was also a rather heavy looking uniform for a May wedding.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> There has a be a solid reason why Harry wore THAT uniform as there were others he could have worn given the histories of various things.



We can safely assume Meghan selected the uniform from the choices available. I don’t think Harry made any decisions on his own for the wedding and he certainly has not for anything since.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the wedding tailor had the explanation and gave it in an interview.










						Prince Harry's Royal Wedding Uniform Sleeves Took One Week to Make
					

Savile Row tailor Dege & Skinner let us in on what it takes to dress a prince for his big day.




					www.gq.com
				




"I know a lot of people expected him to wear the Captain General Royal Marines uniform but he ended up wearing the Blues and Royals. Do you have any insight on what swayed that decision?
The Blues and Royals was his first regiment and because it's his first regiment it becomes his mother regiment. So the ties and the connections that he has with that regiment and the people that he served with, particularly in Afghanistan, it's very much a strong family atmosphere within the regiment."


----------



## floatinglili

Etriers said:


> Maybe he thought it was sexier. I certainly did. I thought the whole wedding was elegant without being over-the-top and hit all the right notes.


Black and white seems like Meg’s idea. Surely if she is going to pursue an agenda against babies in tights she is going to set the groom’s wear as well? Lol
Black to a wedding is an American fashion, is it not?


----------



## floatinglili

Etriers said:


> I think like most couples who get married, they wanted to create a wedding that was meaningful to them.


Maybe she should have married a well-to-do plumber? There’s so many very nice tradesmen about  and their family might not have been so worried about tiresome dusty traditional bosh...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Etriers

floatinglili said:


> Black and white seems like Meg’s idea. Surely if she is going to pursue an agenda against babies in tights she is going to set the groom’s wear as well? Lol
> Black to a wedding is an American fashion, is it not?



Civilian men in American weddings do frequently wear black tie after 6, which consists of a black dinner jacket and pants. Historically “morning dress” which is generally gray, is worn before 6. And of course, as most places, military members are authorized to wear the dress uniform of their service.


----------



## yuliachanel




----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> I think the wedding tailor had the explanation and gave it in an interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's Royal Wedding Uniform Sleeves Took One Week to Make
> 
> 
> Savile Row tailor Dege & Skinner let us in on what it takes to dress a prince for his big day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gq.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "I know a lot of people expected him to wear the Captain General Royal Marines uniform but he ended up wearing the Blues and Royals. Do you have any insight on what swayed that decision?
> The Blues and Royals was his first regiment and because it's his first regiment it becomes his mother regiment. So the ties and the connections that he has with that regiment and the people that he served with, particularly in Afghanistan, it's very much a strong family atmosphere within the regiment."


Interesting Harry had the Pageboy’s frocks initialed, as Meghan had the Girls’ shoes initialed.


----------



## Jayne1

Etriers said:


> I don’t know, doesn’t it seem like all human beings deserve love, and to love who they marry?


Marrying into the BRF, or most royal families, was not for a fairy tale life, it wasn’t supposed to be.

Throughout history, marriages were for diplomatic reasons, political gains, international alliances, sometimes the country just needed the other person’s money.

Inbreeding was common as well in royal dynasties, making for strong alliances and allegiances. 

It’s only very recently the BRF could get divorced and/or marry someone they love. Even Harry's father couldn't marry the woman he loved.


----------



## Etriers

Jayne1 said:


> Marrying into the BRF, or most royal families, was not for a fairy tale life, it wasn’t supposed to be.
> 
> Throughout history, marriages were for diplomatic reasons, political gains, international alliances, sometimes the country just needed the other person’s money.
> 
> Inbreeding was common as well in royal dynasties, making for strong alliances and allegiances.
> 
> It’s only very recently the BRF could get divorced and/or marry someone they love. Even Harry's father couldn't marry the woman he loved.



Therein being the seeds of the demise of an establishment.  Things change and times change.  Businesses (and royal families) that hold onto ancient dictates, and irrelevant customs that obviously make everyone miserable probably have a fairly limited future.


----------



## purseinsanity

yuliachanel said:


> View attachment 5020933



Did he really post that?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did they leave the wedding clothes in the UK? Perhaps at a museum?
Did the UK taxpayers pay for clothes?

ETA: @purseinsanity I doubt it because the account doesn't have a blue check. Still, it makes a valid point.
 So wish OW had fact-checked.


----------



## Lodpah

mdcx said:


> The BRF have boss moves dating back hundreds of years. Meghan is no match for them...


The war was won before she threw the first shot.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Did he really post that?



I think it’s a fan account with his photo.


----------



## kkfiregirl

I wonder if they went on family bike rides or they just posed for photos?


----------



## Lodpah

Another interesting POV.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> Another interesting POV.
> 
> View attachment 5020954



Yes ma’am!


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> Another interesting POV.
> 
> View attachment 5020954



Ok ladies and gents, which one of you went on and wrote this piece?  Step forward... now


----------



## Lodpah

scarlet555 said:


> Ok ladies and gents, which one of you went on and wrote this piece?  Step forward... now


I don’t write well so it’s definitely not me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I am certain this has been posted before, but it is worth repeating.
I do hope viewers understand OW’s interview was propaganda, as one of our wise posters noted.

OW uses an article written *a.f.t.e.r. *H&M left the UK as part of the reason H&M left. 
This is OW’s best, as Gayle said???? Really???  CBS loses more credibility daily.


*Journalist whose Meghan Markle story was flagged in Oprah interview debunks claims
Oprah Winfrey flagged a story written about Meghan Markle during their interview that was written 11 months after she and Prince Harry quit the Royal Family*
Molly Pike
A journalist whose story was flagged in Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey has hit back.

During the interview, Oprah had said Meghan was the target of "unrelenting, pervasive attacks" from the press, before flagging up articles written about her from several newspapers.

One of the stories was from a column by Telegraph writer Michael Deacon, titled: "The real problem with Meghan Markle : she just doesn’t speak our language."

Deacon has pointed out that the column was written in December 2020, more than 11 months after Meghan and Harry announced they were stepping down as senior royals.

He said his story couldn't have played a part in their decision.

Deacon wrote in a column published on Thursday : "*My column was published on December 19 last year, more than 11 months after Meghan announced she was stepping down as a senior royal. *

"So unless Meghan has access to a time machine, I tend to suspect that my influence on her decision was, at most, negligible.

"Especially as, up to that point, I'd never written a single word against her."

During the interview, screenshots of dozens articles written about Meghan were aired.

Oprah said: "When Meghan joined the Royal family in 2018 she became the target of unrelenting, pervasive attacks."


Deacon's article had accused Meghan of speaking "Californian".

Deacon's column said: "Essentially, it's like a hippie version of corporate management-speak: schmaltzy gushing mixed with robotic jargon. It's the language of people who are perpetually boasting about how 'humbled' they are.

"And there appears to be nothing on earth they aren't 'passionate' and 'excited' about, or 'empowered' and 'inspired' by."

Deacon wrote today: "Yet here was my column, being held up to the world as a brutal tirade that had helped make Meghan's time in Britain unendurable.

"Perhaps Oprah and her team had been so blinded by horror at what I'd written, they hadn't noticed the publication date. They certainly hadn't shown the date on screen."

During her interview, Meghan made a series of shocking allegations against the Royal Family.

She said she had been suicidal and claimed the Palace told her they couldn't help her.

The couple claimed one of the royals was concerned about the colour of baby Archie's skin, but they decided not to name them.

Harry also said Prince Charles stopped returning his calls when they made the decision to leave, admitting he felt "let down" by his dad.

Buckingham Palace said in a statement released after the interview: "The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan. The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning.

"While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."









						Journalist whose Meghan Markle story came up in Oprah interview debunks claims
					

Oprah Winfrey flagged a story written about Meghan Markle during their interview that was written 11 months after she and Prince Harry quit the Royal Family




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



Original article published in The Telegraph [behind a paywall].


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

.


----------



## zen1965

lalame said:


> Definitely NAGL but I have to believe these cultural visits are organized by the tourism government agency and it's not the visitor's team going "We must have people carry us like white Gods." That being said I think it's a valid thing to point out that they should be more mindful of the perception of things like this... it's not very cute in the modern age.


Visits of heads of state or their representatives are most certainly not organised by „tourism government agencies“, and it is not up to an outsider to decide on behalf of the Solomon Islands or any other nation what is a „cute look“ with regards to their respective traditions.


----------



## zen1965

gracekelly said:


> Foreign visits are well laid out by the diplomatic office in any country.  What some might find offensive is SOP in other countries with non-western cultures.  It is very easy to insult if one is not properly informed ahead of time and that is the purpose of briefings.  Eating with the wrong hand, or wearing white, which is the color of mourning in some countries, would be considering insulting.  I don't think it is the role of the host country to change their traditions just to satisfy the woke culture of the visiting country.


Excellently stated!


----------



## AB Negative

...professional energy reader...


----------



## zen1965

lalame said:


> Sorry but... I'm a vegetarian, and I don't eat meat no matter where I've traveled. No one has ever considered that rude. There's plenty of traditional things to enjoy in any culture that don't infringe on your own beliefs. Do you also do a Muslim prayer when you go to the ME if you're not Muslim? Eat dog in countries that eat it? Likely not (unless you genuinely wanted to!)... and no one would judge you for it.


Tourism and official state visits are two completely different things and simply cannot be compared.


----------



## Lodpah

First of all, I think MM has lovely relatives on Doria's side. I feel so bad for them. What classy people they seem to be and they retained their dignity even though I believe they were sincerely hurt they were not invited to the wedding. I find it heartbreaking, not one cousin?


Does Meghan Markle have a relationship with her black relatives besides her mom?
Mechelle Eleene
, Supporter of the Sussexes
Updated July 22, 2019

Originally Answered: Does Meghan Markle have a relationship for black relatives besides her mom?
Meghan’s uncle, Joseph Johnson spoke out to the press about Meghan’s family life as a child. When Meghan was younger, she had a very close relationship with members of her mother’s side of family including her grandmother Jeanette, grandfather Ragland and Aunt Sandra. At this current stage of her life, it seems she is no longer close to members of her mother’s side of family.





Meghan stayed at her grandparents house often and had a very close relationship with Jeanette (Doria’s mom) before she died in 2000. Jo mentioned that she sacrificed weekends to be at her grandmother’s bedside when she was sick.




She regularly went out with her cousins and attended family gatherings and get togethers with members of her mother’s side of family.




*Even though Joseph expressed delight and happiness for Meghan’s engagement and marriage to Harry, he said that family members from her mother’s side felt hurt because they didn’t receive invites to the wedding.*
_*Her Uncle Jo tried to make sense of why they hadn’t been invited when stating:*_
*'My wife was kind of miffed. You know — 800 guests. But I said, 'Right, we're not having that kind of close relationship right now. Meghan has her own set of friends now. They were the ones she invited. I guess you could say they are Hollywood royalty. People in the spotlight, and that's what her life is about.'*
Meghan’s uncle Joseph and wife




Update: Thanks for reading and for commenting. I just want to add that Meghan’s mother’s side of family is proud of her and loves her very much.

Edited to Add: How lovely the last couple look.


----------



## Chanbal

LA Times published a few Letters to the Editor on the subject of this thread, here is one:


----------



## papertiger

Etriers said:


> Lol!  I hear you.  Maybe they thought the people would want to see something different.  I actually thought it was a great wedding.  I loved the relatively low key aspect.  I loved the uniform H chose.  Loved M’s dress.  Loved all of the music.  It was sophisticated and snazzy.



No body asks the people, _they_ just take their money

Then _they_ tell them it was actually just a staged event na na na na na


----------



## papertiger

Etriers said:


> I would imagine the local authority approves various premises, and probably even on a temporary basis.  Much the way in the U.S. a regular citizen can get approval from authorities to perform a wedding once.



No, it has to be a fully licensed venue, e.g. a hotel, private club, function room


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla stays by Charles' side, or a step behind, never tries to grab the limelight, dresses appropriately, performs her duties both at home and overseas and makes Charles happy.
> 
> I would think she is gaining in popularity, by just being a proper member of the BRF with no drama.
> 
> Plus, she can carry off the best and largest tiaras. lol


I think tiaras are something that look better as you age.  I remember seeing a painting of the young queen and thinking the crown looked too big on her.
Now if we could just institute a nice Tiara as the default retirement gift 
I’ll even take the dreaded bandeau.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Not three days before and you would have to apply.  The UK is much stricter than the US.  In the US you can get married just about anywhere and it is legal as long as you have the license and a person allowed to do it.  I have been to a wedding conducted by a person who received the internet permission to perform the wedding and it really was a joke.
> 
> I would love to hear what Wilby has to say about this.  They put him in a difficult position by saying what they did.  The Queen is head of the Church of England and stating that they  were married 3 days before when she was attending what she believed to be their real wedding, is an insult directed at her.  As we like to say here, no bueno.



This lie alone was so outrageous, preposterous, ignorant and disrespectful it's beyond. This was country she has accepted titles from. 

She must be a compulsive liar, why would anyone even think about making-up a stupid lie like getting married before she actually did. A wedding is legal. The legal wedding took place on the day it did and says on the cert. How can anyone be so ridiculous to even say otherwise, why say it?


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Interesting article in the latest TATLER with Carrie Symonds on cover. Sorry, no clue how to share without a subscription service.
> the article is on the famous Diana and Bashir interview.
> in sum, she was hoodwinked into doing it, there was a coverup (documents were stolen , who by? BBC ?) and people at the time did not pursue matters (her brother published his notes 25 years LATER ..., BBC people did not pursue  ... ), Diana was separated, vulnerable and isolated from all (gullible is a word that might apply maybe...  not seeking enough help )
> In sum a perfect storm ...  it was not just about biased press, hounding by reporters,  all the participants were to blame for bits and pieces ... you can’t invent this stuff
> And lies have been circulated for 25 years ex UK spy agency MI6 pursued her, EXCEPT they do foreign ops (not BRF), Charles was in love with Camilla not Tiggy
> complicated story that cannot be reduced to a single term like MALICIOUS UK PRESS or MENTAL HEALTH or SPYING
> good article very fact based not gossipy , good read


I had to Google who Tiggy is. I was thinking of Twiggy. What a plot twist that would have been.
Diana/press relationship was undoubtedly complicated. It is a shame that Harry has allowed a evil press/good family dichotomy to dominate his life and work. Especially given he still has to rely on a positive press fo his current earnings. It must require some degree of cognitive dissonance.
O/T but I can’t stand how Carrie symonds keeps trying to become some sort of social-political maven & soak up the spotlight. She doesn’t seem like a good person to me at all- for completely separate reasons from her partner’s politics & I wish the press would stop giving her attention.


----------



## papertiger

Etriers said:


> I agree that for a vegetarian or vegan, there probably is no difference.  But I propose that not all of us omnivores are animal abusers.



Plus of course that these animals wouldn't be alive save for meat rearing/eggs laying production. 

I'd rather eat a (proper) free range chicken from a farm I can walk round, 4 times a year than vegan food from a fast food chain that (also sells mass produced meat products) is contained in a plastic tub and the ingredients are flown halfway around the world.


----------



## papertiger

kkfiregirl said:


> I wonder if they went on family bike rides or they just posed for photos?



There are plenty of other photos I've seen around. 

I think H should be treated for amnesia (as well as a few other things)


----------



## Kaka_bobo

zen1965 said:


> Visits of heads of state or their representatives are most certainly not organised by „tourism government agencies“, and it is not up to an outsider to decide on behalf of the Solomon Islands or any other nation what is a „cute look“ with regards to their respective traditions.



If I had extended someone a welcoming hospitality in my culture's highest respect custom and they declined it saying it wasn't a good look, I would be highly offended as it somewhat implies that my culture's traditions and customs is somehow inferior and not up to "standards".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

zen1965 said:


> Visits of heads of state or their representatives are most certainly not organised by „tourism government agencies“, and it is not up to an outsider to decide on behalf of the Solomon Islands or any other nation what is a „cute look“ with regards to their respective traditions.





Kaka_bobo said:


> If I had extended someone a welcoming hospitality in my culture's highest respect custom and they declined it saying it wasn't a good look, I would be highly offended as it somewhat implies that my culture's traditions and customs is somehow inferior and not up to "standards".



Guys, I’m not suggesting they literally tell them “that’s not a good look.” There are many diplomatic ways of declining to do something that may be against your beliefs while honoring local traditions. Again, one person should not be looking down on another persons cultural beliefs... I am not looking down on the cultural tradition of carrying people in that way. There is nothing inferior about what the people who live there want to do. They can do it all day long. What I don’t think is a good look is the BRF specifically doing it given the historical context. There are just safer ways to play it IMO. But different strokes for different folks. Let’s see if they actually change this with all the scrutiny.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> She’s so busy fighting I hope she’s looking at her accounts. Lawyers ain’t cheap.
> 
> Reminds me of my friend’s family. Very wealthy, owned tins of commercial properties but went broke fighting each other on the estate of their parents.


Spite is a hell of a drug.


Coconuts40 said:


> Just flipping the channels and caught a few minutes of the encore presentation of the interview.
> 
> I just don't understand how she's saving chickens from being killed now, meanwhile freely shares she got engaged while roasting a chicken with Harry.  But proudly tells Oprah how she likes saving animals.


TBF I don’t get why people find this so strange.  Many people don’t think livestock should be subjected to inhumane conditions and cruelty like battery farming but have no problem with eating animals.
I know I do.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Spite is a hell of a drug.
> 
> TBF I don’t get why people find this so strange.  Many people don’t think livestock should be subjected to inhumane conditions and cruelty like battery farming but have no problem with eating animals.
> I know I do.



You can eat meat without supporting factory farming or specifically inhumane farming. It’s the difference between putting an animal to sleep humanely vs beating the crap out of it (excuse my language). But I’m probably getting way off the reservation of this thread.

I don’t see the logic of “rescuing” chickens, and using that specific language to describe it, if you’re just going to kill them anyway or you eat other chicken. But I suppose at the end of the day if you find better ways to kill it or you keep them alive, it is still better for them.


----------



## lalame

I keep seeing coverage of the interview and find something new to roll my eyes almost daily. Can you really call it “getting cut off financially” when you put out a press release saying you’re leaving TO be financially independent??? And if he was really so worried about affording security... why splash on the fancy house.  so many questions without answers.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> You can eat meat without supporting factory farming or specifically inhumane farming. It’s the difference between putting an animal to sleep humanely vs beating the crap out of it (excuse my language). But I’m probably getting way off the reservation of this thread.
> 
> I don’t see the logic of “rescuing” chickens, and using that specific language to describe it, if you’re just going to kill them anyway or you eat other chicken. But I suppose at the end of the day if you find better ways to kill it or you keep them alive, it is still better for them.



Let's face it, it's a vanity project so people can tell others about it. 

I also suppose it's fun to visit the rescued chickens with guests before sitting down to dinner.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Etriers said:


> I’m not sure jealousy operates on the basis of logic.  Neither of them have any reason to be jealous.  The whole thing on both sides is a tempest in a teapot.  But I do believe, as Diana once attested, that much drama is fueled by palace staff maintaining their own jurisdictions, hierarchies and ax-grinding.


Well you are the one who asserted K&W were probably jealous of H&M to begin with so we’re both just asserting what we think is likely not logical. 
I would say they are in the unusual situation of being in a highly- publicised family business dynamic so they both have more need to let reason prevail.
 If I can’t stand my catty SIL but I only see her once a year that’s hardly going to harm my work or make the news is it? 

We will never know who said what but my instincts tell me the one who just  has to get the last word years later is probably the less emotionally mature one.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Etriers said:


> I think like most couples who get married, they wanted to create a wedding that was meaningful to them.


At tax payer expense in a public event. 
no one would care if they went to the registry office or had a private ceremony and, you know, paid for it themselves.
You  are trying to make aspects of their public lives private ones.


----------



## lalame

And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.


----------



## littlemisskeira

Sounds like something a 6 years old would say. We all know why she is not allowed to go out and pick up coffee. But maybe she thinks it got something to do with violating her freedom of movement and oh of cos.. because she is not white. 

So easy isn't it? just flash the race card. I'm not white myself but I think it's despicable for her and her useless husband to turn around after millions had been spent on their matrimony and, and do these things to hurt their family. She forgot that everyone in the family also had to adjust when she married Harry. But maybe in her eyes, she only sees herself.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002


This is all "bananas."


----------



## eunaddict

csshopper said:


> The actress, who has known Meghan for 17 years, said: 'Though their recollections may vary, *ours don't*.'
> 
> She also said the duchess gave her backing before she appeared on TV - despite Meghan reportedly agreeing a period of silence to cool tensions with the Palace".




Ah, because she was clearly present for that 1, maybe 2, maybe more racist conversations or was she there when the SILs disagreeing about the bridesmaids' dresses....or was she there for all 6 staff members quitting?

What is it with all her friends loving to wade into the middle of drama as though it actually involves them?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Etriers said:


> Lol!  I hear you.  Maybe they thought the people would want to see something different.  I actually thought it was a great wedding.  I loved the relatively low key aspect.  I loved the uniform H chose.  Loved M’s dress.  Loved all of the music.  It was sophisticated and snazzy.



I'm not sure "low key" is what would come to my mind first to describe a wedding that cost 40 millions (after #6 in line apparently insisted as much money was spent on him as on the future king's wedding), included a ton of celebrities, a priceless diamond tiara and a carriage ride to wave to the unwashed masses


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> How many decades did it take for Oprah to realize the truth about Michael Jackson?  She has to be hit over the head with the facts.


Or she just goes where the money is?
It always seemed to me like no one decided to look into Jackson or Weinstein until their careers were in the doldrums anyway.  We will never know what any one of these high profile people actually know.

edit: tense change.


----------



## lalame

Didn’t the wedding bring in ungodly amounts of money to the UK economy at least? Thought I read that. I enjoyed the wedding fanfare.... but little did I know what was to come...


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Did he really post that?


It’s a fan account.


AB Negative said:


> ...professional energy reader...


My horoscope told me I’d encounter doubters like you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## dangerouscurves

limom said:


> Google is here for a reason....
> But I am feeling generous today Soloman Islands.


It might be a tradition there, but if I was white and royal, I'm pretty sure I would not want to be carried like that and as a royal, I would use my power not to be carried like that.


----------



## dangerouscurves

sdkitty said:


> very strange....maybe she wanted to date a black guy to be like a kardashian


She didn't care about the Kardashians actually. But I do know there are many people who deny being racist and don't act like racist until their in their own 'group'.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> LA Times published a few Letters to the Editor on the subject of this thread, here is one:
> 
> View attachment 5020972


Please no! America the free! Stick to the principles of a republic!
I blame Disney for the insidious seduction of this infantilising princess cr*p



lalame said:


> Didn’t the wedding bring in ungodly amounts of money to the UK economy at least? Thought I read that. I enjoyed the wedding fanfare.... but little did I know what was to come...


The economics of what the royals bring in is an extremely contested topic which would be very against the forum rules. 
I would also say that something that makes money isn’t necessarily always in the public interest.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002


Meanwhile a servant asked if he could get them anything to eat or drink for the fifth time that morning.

I guess Brits not knowing how to make a good cup of Joe really is a deal breaker

Also I thought she was isolated with no one to talk to? Yet her mother was there? I thought she was her number 1 confidant? It don’t add up.

Another observation, a relative actually lives near George & Amal’
 Clooney’s English home. They have never seen them down the caff or supermarket either.


----------



## mshermes

dangerouscurves said:


> She didn't care about the Kardashians actually. But I do know there are many people who deny being racist and don't act like racist until their in their own 'group'.


Just curious....how do you know she didn't care about the Kardashians?  To what 'group' are you referring?


----------



## Chagall

Allisonfaye said:


> My understanding was that Charles was still playing the field and Camilla got tired of waiting around so she married someone else. Seems to be supported by the story I posted the other day about how Charles had pretty much slept with every one in England so they had to find someone really young because he needed a virgin.


Charles would be Charles I am afraid even if he married Camilla initially. There is a very good chance he would have cheated on her also. He has mellowed now but remember he is in his seventies. Didn’t he have other extra marital relations during his marriage to Diana.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> This lie alone was so outrageous, preposterous, ignorant and disrespectful it's beyond. This was country she has accepted titles from.
> 
> She must be a compulsive liar, why would anyone even think about making-up a stupid lie like getting married before she actually did. A wedding is legal. The legal wedding took place on the day it did and says on the cert. How can anyone be so ridiculous to even say otherwise, why say it?



We're talking about the people who made up a whole elaborate engagement story (roasting a chicken, anyone?), then let it slip they actually got engaged in Africa weeks earlier. Compulsive liar seems to be a fitting description.


----------



## dangerouscurves

mshermes said:


> Just curious....how do you know she didn't care about the Kardashians?  To what 'group' are you referring?


Well, she's an American living in Germany. She came to study but she's now back to the US and working for a church. The group I'm referring to is her church people. I saw her Facebook posts during the election and a friend of ours who also was in the same church told me what she said about me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002



For some reason, the other royals are seen out and about. Kate, the future queen, sometimes does her own supermarket shopping. But Meghan was held hostage and prevented from leaving the house? Yeah, right.


----------



## jelliedfeels

dangerouscurves said:


> It might be a tradition there, but if I was white and royal, I'm pretty sure I would not want to be carried like that and as a royal, I would use my power not to be carried like that.


Wouldn’t using your power to tell a commonwealth people that you won’t participle in their tradition be a bit of an imperialist act?

Especially if the main motivation is to make the British royal look better to a western audience.

As I said in previous post, there is no one answer to how cultures think outsiders should interact with their traditions.

The act of chair carrying is also, like anything, up for cultural interpretations. In Jewish weddings, the newlyweds are carried on chairs. This celebratory gesture is not meant to convey the deference or inferiority of the carriers. 
Similarly, US society has acts that other cultures may see as acts of submission but we don’t consider them this way. A waiter brings food. A hairdresser washes hair. They are providing these services as transactions there’s no sense of homage.


----------



## dangerouscurves

jelliedfeels said:


> Wouldn’t using your power to tell a commonwealth people that you won’t participle in their tradition be a bit of an imperialist act?
> 
> Especially if the main motivation is to make the British royal look better to a western audience.
> 
> As I said in previous post, there is no one answer to how cultures think outsiders should interact with their traditions.


Yes and no. It all depends on what kind of tradition it is.


----------



## Lodpah

Another reason one bites the dust. Wendell Pierce has backtracked. Too lazy to link. Tentacles.


----------



## Lodpah

dangerouscurves said:


> Yes and no. It all depends on what kind of tradition it is.


I doubt it. You really don’t know protocol. I’m not coming at you but there’s a difference between ignorance and ignorant.


----------



## Lodpah

dangerouscurves said:


> Yes and no. It all depends on what kind of tradition it is.


I have to correct myself. If your there as a tourist yes. As a diplomat, no. You show respect by honoring tradition.


----------



## mellibelly

papertiger said:


> Plus of course that these animals wouldn't be alive save for meat rearing/eggs laying production.
> 
> I'd rather eat a (proper) free range chicken from a farm I can walk round, 4 times a year than vegan food from a fast food chain that (also sells mass produced meat products) is contained in a plastic tub and the ingredients are flown halfway around the world.



I think you mean pasture raised chicken or eggs. Free range chicken isn’t much better than caged. They’re still packed in a barn, just not in cages and aren’t guaranteed outdoor access. Pasture raised have adequate space to graze outside.
What vegan fast food are you referring to?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> You can eat meat without supporting factory farming or specifically inhumane farming. It’s the difference between putting an animal to sleep humanely vs beating the crap out of it (excuse my language). But I’m probably getting way off the reservation of this thread.
> 
> I don’t see the logic of “rescuing” chickens, and using that specific language to describe it, if you’re just going to kill them anyway or you eat other chicken. But I suppose at the end of the day if you find better ways to kill it or you keep them alive, it is still better for them.



This is exactly why the rescue chicken thing irked me. “These chickens we rescued but pay no mind to the chickens we roast!” It’s so performative. They could have just said these are our chickens. I don’t believe they’re vegetarian or vegan. We would have been told already. They made sure to tell us those waffles are organic after all  

Remember when MM made Harry stop hunting? The stories at the time said she found game shooting barbaric and inhumane. Those wild pheasants 1000% lived a better life than their grocery store chicken.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> I think you mean pasture raised chicken or eggs. Free range chicken isn’t much better than caged. They’re still packed in a barn, just not in cages and aren’t guaranteed outdoor access. Pasture raised have adequate space to graze outside.
> What vegan fast food are you referring to?



Yes I do ('pasture raised' is not a legal British term) so we call perhaps the same 'organic' but that also means other stipulations are followed too (not familiar with US/other laws governing food labelling outside the UK).

I wasn't referring to any particular fast food chain but Starbucks, BK, Itsu, Wasabi, and Pret a Manger spring to mind. PaM (owned by McDonalds) promise meat "reared to higher welfare standards involving less intensive farm production systems" but say nothing about being GM free or not using Brazilian (ex-Rainforrest) soya crops, they are also not going plastic free for 4 years (2025).


----------



## mdcx

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002


Chelsy and Cressida bothered to pay attention to the rigid and fairly formal rules of conduct that were attached to being a Royal wife. They weighed them up (along with a serious consideration of Hs various personal issues no doubt) and turned down Harry.

This “can’t go for random coffees now Im a senior Royal” complaint is like ordering a cheeseburger at McDonalds, then complaining when they give you a cheeseburger.

The job description for Wife of Spare To The Heir basically is “little to no privacy, be on best behaviour 24/7, freedom of movement limited, some lovely perks, lots of hand shakng with random villagers.” It’s not being a Disney princess...
If Chelsy and Cressida said no thanks, you might want to reconsider rushing in...

Edited for messiness


----------



## mellibelly

papertiger said:


> Yes I do ('pasture raised' is not a legal British term) so we call perhaps the same 'organic' but that also means other stipulations are followed too (not familiar with US/other laws governing food labelling outside the UK).
> 
> I wasn't referring to any particular fast food chain but Starbucks, BK, Itsu, Wasabi, and Pret a Manger spring to mind. PaM (owned by McDonalds) promise meat "reared to higher welfare standards involving less intensive farm production systems" but say nothing about being GM free or not using Brazilian (ex-Rainforrest) soya crops, they are also not going plastic free for 4 years (2025).



Got it. I didn’t realize you were in the UK. Yeah the terminology at least here in the US is confusing. Eggs can be labeled Organic and Cage Free but still be cruel to the animal.

I agree on fast food chains. I wouldn’t trust companies of that scale being transparent about their ingredients. Green washing is such a huge issue


----------



## limom

dangerouscurves said:


> It might be a tradition there, but if I was white and royal, I'm pretty sure I would not want to be carried like that and as a royal, I would use my power not to be carried like that.


Meh, as a diplomat he might not have had a choice. But l agree with you it looks bad.
I once got on an elephant ride, my cousin who is a fierce animals protector lectured me over it. I changed my stance and won’t do it again.
Perhaps William feels the same way?
 Who knows?
But imho, the picture itself does not prove that he is a racist.


----------



## Sharont2305

mellibelly said:


> Got it. I didn’t realize you were in the UK. Yeah the terminology at least here in the US is confusing. Eggs can be labeled Organic and Cage Free but still be cruel to the animal.
> 
> I agree on fast food chains. I wouldn’t trust companies of that scale being transparent about their ingredients. Green washing is such a huge issue


Green washing? Is that why Americans store eggs in the fridge?


----------



## zen1965

dangerouscurves said:


> It might be a tradition there, but if I was white and royal, I'm pretty sure I would not want to be carried like that and as a royal, I would use my power not to be carried like that.



And in the course of doing so you would greatly offend the Solomon Islanders, ahem sorry the inhabitants of Tuvalu.
But the optics would be good in (woke) Europe and North America.  Except for the headlines „Princess DC Insults Tuvalu by Ignoring Age-old Tradition“.


----------



## Sharont2305

I hate to be a party pooper but the William being carried on a throne pics were in Tuvalu and not the Solomon Islands. Catherine was on one too.


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Green washing? Is that why Americans store eggs in the fridge?


Haha I’m not American and I have always kept my eggs in the fridge. Is that improper?


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> I hate to be a party pooper but the William being carried on a throne pics were in Tuvalu and not the Solomon Islands. Catherine was on one too.



damn, at least it is in the same region.
Google fail


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> Haha I’m not American and I have always kept my eggs in the fridge. Is that improper?


Not improper, I think in America the eggs are treated so need to stay refrigerated. In Britain (and Europe I think) eggs are not treated so don't need to be refrigerated. Notice they're not refrigerated in supermarkets?


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> Not improper, I think in America the eggs are treated so need to stay refrigerated. In Britain (and Europe I think) eggs are not treated so don't need to be refrigerated. Notice they're not refrigerated in supermarkets?


Our eggs are refrigerated in our supermarkets.


----------



## Coconuts40

Etriers said:


> I agree that for a vegetarian or vegan, there probably is no difference.  But I propose that not all of us omnivores are animal abusers.



Thank you for answering.
She was saving these chickens from a factory, about to be killed. I interpreted it as being killed for food consumption but she saved them from that.  So I am a bit confused by her motive when she eats chickens.  Anyways I don't want to take over this thread over this point.

With that said, I do see what you say, that not all omnivores are animal abusers.  I think that's a good point.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Oprah Effect.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> You bet! I just learned that Italy is closing again due to a new COVID wave.



Yes we are from next Monday total lockdown in most areas of Italy, they say until after Easter......I can't stand it any longer, if only they would hurry up with vaccinations!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

Sharont2305 said:


> I hate to be a party pooper but the William being carried on a throne pics were in Tuvalu and not the Solomon Islands. Catherine was on one too.
> 
> View attachment 5021117


I corrected my poste.  Thanks, dear.


----------



## orchard

Chagall said:


> Charles would be Charles I am afraid even if he married Camilla initially. There is a very good chance he would have cheated on her also. He has mellowed now but remember he is in his seventies. Didn’t he have other extra marital relations during his marriage to Diana.













						6 Rumored Prince Charles Affairs and Flings
					

He allegedly had an affair with Barbra Streisand, but could she could just be the tip of the iceberg?




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Not improper, I think in America the eggs are treated so need to stay refrigerated. In Britain (and Europe I think) eggs are not treated so don't need to be refrigerated. Notice they're not refrigerated in supermarkets?


Another major US -UK difference is egg treatments 
the eggs from one place cannot be sold in the other 
I have been researching cage free eggs and stumbled on that


----------



## marietouchet

Coconuts40 said:


> Thank you for answering.
> She was saving these chickens from a factory, about to be killed. I interpreted it as being killed for food consumption but she saved them from that.  So I am a bit confused by her motive when she eats chickens.  Anyways I don't want to take over this thread over this point.
> 
> With that said, I do see what you say, that not all omnivores are animal abusers.  I think that's a good point.


Relevant anecdotes, she eats chicken and claims to kinda be vegan, OK, interesting that discrepancy


----------



## Chagall

duna said:


> Yes we are from next Monday total lockdown in most areas of Italy, they say until after Easter......I can't stand it any longer, if only they would hurry up with vaccinations!


We are in the same boat too. Vaccinations rolling out extremely slowly.


----------



## bubablu

Coconuts40 said:


> Thank you for answering.
> She was saving these chickens from a factory, about to be killed. I interpreted it as being killed for food consumption but she saved them from that.  So I am a bit confused by her motive when she eats chickens.  Anyways I don't want to take over this thread over this point.
> 
> With that said, I do see what you say, that not all omnivores are animal abusers.  I think that's a good point.


(Well, sadly we are, indirectly, but we are. I'm including miself because I'm still not 100% vegan. And sorry for the OT.) At the start, even if I already didn't like her, I was very happy that MM brought attention to some topics like hunting, animal shelters, etc. The problem to me it's that she sounds so fake that she's not even a good ambassador for her causes. And now I think she has only one: herself. And it would be perfectly fine, if she wouldn't continue her pity party on every platform around the world.


----------



## bubablu

duna said:


> Yes we are from next Monday total lockdown in most areas of Italy, they say until after Easter......I can't stand it any longer, if only they would hurry up with vaccinations!


I started dreaming the vaccine, instead of bags, here we are.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I am eagerly awaiting the bullying and charity commission investigations reports to come out! We should hear their truth too!


----------



## dangerouscurves




----------



## Monoi

Have u guys seen the cover of Charlie Hebdo? Its disturbing and imo disgusting, the link to George Floyd. The cover reads: 'Why Meghan left Buckingham Palace', 'Because I couldn't breathe'.


----------



## limom

Monoi said:


> Have u guys seen the cover of Charlie Hebdo? Its disturbing and imo disgusting, the link to George Floyd. The cover reads: 'Why Meghan left Buckingham Palace', 'Because I couldn't breathe'.
> 
> View attachment 5021162


Meh. It is Charlie.


----------



## csshopper

eunaddict said:


> Ah, because she was clearly present for that 1, maybe 2, maybe more racist conversations or was she there when the SILs disagreeing about the bridesmaids' dresses....or was she there for all 6 staff members quitting?
> 
> What is it with all her friends loving to wade into the middle of drama as though it actually involves them?!


If a person has been a friend of MM for all those 17 years and not been Markled, that person must share the same narcissistic and hypocritical traits to have survived.   One of a group of “Markle Mouths” spewing the same crap to get attention.


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason, the other royals are seen out and about. Kate, the future queen, sometimes does her own supermarket shopping. But Meghan was held hostage and prevented from leaving the house? Yeah, right.



That's odd. Considering there were numerous articles about her in 2018 sneaking out of KP to dine at the local Soho House/Club.









						Meghan Markle Regularly Sneaks Out Of Kensington Palace And Here's Where You Might Find Her
					

She could be walking the streets of London as we speak




					www.elle.com
				




I'm assuming at some point, KP stopped trusting her not to get up to nonsense while she was out and about. Or it's another lie.


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> Our eggs are refrigerated in our supermarkets.



Not in mine


----------



## dangerouscurves

Monoi said:


> Have u guys seen the cover of Charlie Hebdo? Its disturbing and imo disgusting, the link to George Floyd. The cover reads: 'Why Meghan left Buckingham Palace', 'Because I couldn't breathe'.
> 
> View attachment 5021162


That's fu*ck up but racism appears in many faces or levels. But actually, Meghan said the queen was genuinely nice to her. I guess the Hebdo's cartoonists didn't watch the interview. SMGDH.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Monoi said:


> Have u guys seen the cover of Charlie Hebdo? Its disturbing and imo disgusting, the link to George Floyd. The cover reads: 'Why Meghan left Buckingham Palace', 'Because I couldn't breathe'.
> 
> View attachment 5021162



Well the French chopped the head off their last monarch so _quelle surprise_...

Still think H&M are benign anyone?


----------



## dangerouscurves

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002


Is that from Daily Mail? If it is, are we still believing the media? Especially those owned by R. Murdoch?


----------



## Helventara

This is exactly what applying western standard to locals is about. They have to change their culture to fit your way, your thinking, your comfort. It’s their way of honouring the guests. You judge it ridiculous based on your yardstick.  You feel good being ‘respectful' and woke by refusing their tradition but in reality you insult them by 'implying' that their tradition is in poor taste.
Note: you as in the royal you.


----------



## papertiger

dangerouscurves said:


> That's fu*ck up but racism appears in many faces or levels. But actually, Meghan said the queen was genuinely nice to her. I guess the Hebdo's cartoonists didn't watch the interview. SMGDH.



News in the 21st Century, there are only repeated headlines and Tweeted rumours


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> Well the French chopped the head off their last monarch so _quelle surprise_...
> 
> Still think H&M are benign anyone?


Charlie Hebdo is a provocative mag EO offender while it is shocking they also published the famous Mohamed cartoon at great human cost.


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> Not in mine


 It sure if it’s a good thing or not.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Charlie Hebdo is a provocative mag EO offender while it is shocking they also published the famous Mohamed cartoon at great human cost.



 

I defend free speech and I'm not even a staunch monarchist, but that cartoon is wholly offensive and worse inaccurate to the 'story'


----------



## floatinglili

bubablu said:


> (Well, sadly we are, indirectly, but we are. I'm including miself because I'm still not 100% vegan. And sorry for the OT.) At the start, even if I already didn't like her, I was very happy that MM brought attention to some topics like hunting, animal shelters, etc. The problem to me it's that she sounds so fake that she's not even a good ambassador for her causes. And now I think she has only one: herself. And it would be perfectly fine, if she wouldn't continue her pity party on every platform around the world.


You know I tend to agree with you.
she bashes her drum so hard -however there is one cause I wish she would take up - the noble cause of the endangered orangutans! Just one of her cashed up celebrity ‘friends’ could probably change the future of the entire species with much needed donations! Local volunteers spend years rehabilitating each orphan (mums often killed / burned in land clearing). They teach the babies how to live in the wild, using surrogate orangutan mums, and they are desperately trying to fund  forest refuge to give these beautiful animals safe haven and allow them to survive as remnant species.




__





						Home Page - The Orangutan Project
					

Orphans like Charlotte don’t know how to survive in the wild




					www.orangutan.org.au


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> There is a practical aspect to having a little girl in tights.  Little girls at this age can do inappropriate things in their innocence like bending over. lifting their dresses for whatever reason and just running around.  The tights keep them covered and in a formal setting like this with camera coverage and the world watching, it was the appropriate thing to have the girls wear them.



So true. My younger daughter insisted on wearing dresses everyday. She was always very active. I solved by having her wear those matched leggings all the time.


----------



## Chanbal

Good morning or goodbye?



_"And now *I've lost my job at Good Morning Britain because I chose not to apologise for disbelieving Meghan Markle's claims* in her interview with Oprah Winfrey.' 

He added: *'I thus became the latest ''victim'' of the cancel culture* that is permeating our country, every minute, of every hour, of everyday. Though of course, I consider myself to be neither a victim, nor actually cancelled.

'However, *I do believe the defence of free speech and the right to express honestly held opinions*, is the most important issue of my career, and the most important issue in British society."_









						Good Morning Britain loses 500,000 viewers after Piers Morgan quit
					

The 55-year-old left the daytime series after backlash over comments he made following Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's controversial interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Monoi said:


> Have u guys seen the cover of Charlie Hebdo? Its disturbing and imo disgusting, the link to George Floyd. The cover reads: 'Why Meghan left Buckingham Palace', 'Because I couldn't breathe'.
> 
> View attachment 5021162


yikes. That is disturbing.


----------



## floatinglili

papertiger said:


> I defend free speech and I'm not even a staunch monarchist, but that cartoon is wholly offensive and worse inaccurate to the 'story'


Hebdo characteristically has its illustrations in this obnoxious, childish style and with a characteristically irritating perspective - a little like adult ‘mad’ cartoons. However the politics behind the drawings are usually quite sophisticated even if provocative. You could read this cartoon as believing MM, or ridiculing her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Worth a mention here:




__





						William and Catherine, Prince and Princess of Wales
					

Yes, absolutely. I would think that the parents of this young boy have found things tough this past year, unlike some people who think they've had it "tough"  ...sitting in their multimillion dollar mansion with 16 bathrooms and multimillion dollar deals whining how it was "tough" to have a...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## papertiger

From Deadline 




Deadline
*Daily Mail Owner Writes To ViacomCBS Demanding Removal Of “Inaccurate, Misleading & Divisive” Content In Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Interview*

Jake Kanter
Fri, 12 March 2021, 5:05 pm

Associated Newspapers, the owner of UK tabloid the Daily Mail, has written to ViacomCBS demanding the removal of “inaccurate, misleading and divisive” content from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.
Associated Newspapers’ lawyers complained about a montage in the show that purported to feature headlines from British newspapers. They argue that the CBS special showed images that had been doctored or presented as headlines when they were not. They called for the images to be removed from the interview online and before it is repeated tonight.
More from Deadline

...

“Many of the headlines have been either taken out of context or deliberately edited and displayed as supporting evidence for the programme’s claim that the Duchess of Sussex was subjected to racist coverage by the British press. This editing was not made apparent to viewers and, as a result, this section of the programme is both seriously inaccurate and misleading,” Associated Newspapers’ group legal director Elizabeth Hartley said.
“I should be grateful for your urgent confirmation that the offending content will be removed from the programme currently being made available to the public. We also understand that a further broadcast is being planned tonight. The montage should therefore be deleted prior to that broadcast.”
Associated Newspapers lists three examples in its letter, arguing that the most “egregious” was an image containing the headline: “Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family.” The company said this was an edited version of the original headline, which reported on the suspension of a UKIP member over her racist texts about Markle. UKIP is a UK political party. The original headline was: “Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family’: UKIP chief’s glamour model lover, 25, is suspended from the party over racist texts about Prince Harry’s wife-to-be.”
Attorney Hartley said: “It is a thoroughly dishonest misrepresentation of a newspaper headline and article which was the opposite of racist. No one viewing the programme would have understood this from the montage.”
The letter comes amid a firestorm in the UK over press treatment of Markle. Concerns have been raised about the racially-charged nature of coverage on the Duchess Of Sussex after Prince Harry accused British tabloids of being “bigoted.” Associated Newspapers’ intervention also comes against the backdrop of its legal fight with Markle over the publication of a letter to her father. Markle secured a major victory in the ongoing battle last month.
_Oprah with Meghan and Harry _aired Sunday, March 7. The special was produced by Harpo Productions. Executive producers were Terry Wood and Tara Montgomery. Brian Piotrowicz was co-executive producer.
Deadline has contacted ViacomCBS for comment."


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> This is exactly why the rescue chicken thing irked me. “These chickens we rescued but pay no mind to the chickens we roast!” It’s so performative. They could have just said these are our chickens. I don’t believe they’re vegetarian or vegan. We would have been told already. They made sure to tell us those waffles are organic after all
> 
> Remember when MM made Harry stop hunting? The stories at the time said she found game shooting barbaric and inhumane. Those wild pheasants 1000% lived a better life than their grocery store chicken.


I would assume in general that pet chickens or backyard chickens are for eggs, not for killing and eating.  now my grandmother in Ireland wrung their necks but that was different - she was a real farmer.

I didn't hear her say rescue chickens but saying "rescue chickens" is almost as annoying as saying she rescued her dog from a "kill shelter" - rather than just saying he was a rescue or from the shelter

where do you get rescue chickens?  from a farm?  from the animal shelter?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Why Oprah?    

*MailOnline and Daily Mail owner Associated Newspapers complains to CBS over 'seriously inaccurate and misleading' montage of newspaper headlines from Oprah interview*

_The owner of MailOnline and the Daily Mail has complained to CBS for doctoring  headlines and taking them out of context during the Oprah interview.

Associated Newspapers said a section of the programme designed to illustrate racist coverage of Meghan by the British press was 'seriously inaccurate and misleading'.

CBS invited viewers to believe that a montage of cuttings were all headlines that had appeared in British newspapers - but some had been edited or even manufactured using sentences selectively plucked from the article. 
Many were not even articles from the UK media but from foreign newspapers, including US tabloids.

In a letter sent to Viacom CBS yesterday, Associated Newspapers' legal director Elizabeth Hartley demanded the montage be removed from the broadcast._









						Associated Newspapers complains to CBS after Oprah interview
					

Associated Newspapers said a section of the programme designed to illustrate racist coverage of Meghan by the British press was 'seriously inaccurate and misleading'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## floatinglili

chicinthecity777 said:


> Worth a mention here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Catherine, Prince and Princess of Wales
> 
> 
> Yes, absolutely. I would think that the parents of this young boy have found things tough this past year, unlike some people who think they've had it "tough"  ...sitting in their multimillion dollar mansion with 16 bathrooms and multimillion dollar deals whining how it was "tough" to have a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


Wow in spite of all my activity in this thread in recent days I am not actually a committed monarchist and so I have never heard William and Kate speak before! I presume that is their engagement announcement clip - so impressed!!


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I defend free speech and I'm not even a staunch monarchist, but that cartoon is wholly offensive and worse inaccurate to the 'story'


It is meant to shock you.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> It is meant to shock you.


The drawings are really obnoxious aren’t they. Like something my young teen boy would snigger at.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Deadline
> *Daily Mail Owner Writes To ViacomCBS Demanding Removal Of “Inaccurate, Misleading & Divisive” Content In Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Interview*



I hope more people / organizations / media outlets will follow suit and put in complaints or sue. Give them a taste of their own medicine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

floatinglili said:


> Wow in spite of all my activity in this thread in recent days I am not actually a committed monarchist and so I have never heard William and Kate speak before! I presume that is their engagement announcement clip - so impressed!!



You should absolutely watch one of their newer clips then. William was already a seasoned speaker back then, but Kate wasn't...she's grown into her role so much in the meanwhile.


----------



## CarryOn2020

floatinglili said:


> The drawings are really obnoxious aren’t they. Like something my young teen boy would snigger at.



IMO kinda like Oprah asking was MM _silenced_?   Please.  Way too much drama. 
Remember - 1 billionaire asking 2 millionaires about a family of billionaires. Difficult to sympathize with that.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> The drawings are really obnoxious aren’t they. Like something my young teen boy would snigger at.


There is so much going on right now in France, we also have our issues with rapid changes.
Macron is taking many steps to rectify the wrongs of our colonial past. IE finally apologizing for slavery, recognizing the murder of Ali Boumendjel and on and on.
The drawings are not my cup of tea but I understand where it is coming from.


----------



## chicinthecity777

floatinglili said:


> Hebdo characteristically has its illustrations in this obnoxious, childish style and with a characteristically irritating perspective - a little like adult ‘mad’ cartoons. However the politics behind the drawings are usually quite sophisticated even if provocative. You could read this cartoon as believing MM, or ridiculing her.


I find the cartoon disturbing, distasteful but at the same time weirdly brilliant! Agreed they mean to shock!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don’t see the logic of “rescuing” chickens, and using that specific language to describe it, if you’re just going to kill them anyway or you eat other chicken. But I suppose at the end of the day if you find better ways to kill it or you keep them alive, it is still better for them.



In their case I believe it’s a way for them to have “pets” for Archie that don’t require much care and don’t need to be in the house. It’s one step up from having a goldfish pond. 

Plus didn’t someone say that Oprah had a coop just like it? The opportunity to kiss up to her explains its presence. Don’t expect it to be there longer than a year or two (or the lifespan of those particular chickens).


----------



## dangerouscurves

Chanbal said:


> Good morning or goodbye?
> 
> View attachment 5021181
> 
> _"And now *I've lost my job at Good Morning Britain because I chose not to apologise for disbelieving Meghan Markle's claims* in her interview with Oprah Winfrey.'
> 
> He added: *'I thus became the latest ''victim'' of the cancel culture* that is permeating our country, every minute, of every hour, of everyday. Though of course, I consider myself to be neither a victim, nor actually cancelled.
> 
> 'However, *I do believe the defence of free speech and the right to express honestly held opinions*, is the most important issue of my career, and the most important issue in British society."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good Morning Britain loses 500,000 viewers after Piers Morgan quit
> 
> 
> The 55-year-old left the daytime series after backlash over comments he made following Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's controversial interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He's racist. He deserves it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> where do you get rescue chickens?  from a farm?  from the animal shelter?



I can only speak for Germany, but chickens for producing eggs are only "productive" for a limited amount of time, one or two years? They are then moved out of the barn, usually to the slaughterhouse, and replaced by new ones. That is when rescuers step in because often these farmers are happy to just give them away as they don't make much money on having them killed anyway. I follow a few chicken rescues and you really want to cry seeing those emaciated, often nearly naked creatures. My friend took in a few (and once nursed back to health, they'll still give you eggs, they just cannot compete in a harsh farming environment), she had to make them tiny sweaters until the feathers grew back in.  

When our local organic farmer joined the movement for the first time this year I was so happy to see his chickens were healthy and plump and fully feathered!


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> There are plenty of other photos I've seen around.
> 
> I think H should be treated for amnesia (as well as a few other things)


Like az-‘ole-itis?

*edited for clarity


----------



## dangerouscurves

papertiger said:


> From Deadline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Deadline
> *Daily Mail Owner Writes To ViacomCBS Demanding Removal Of “Inaccurate, Misleading & Divisive” Content In Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Interview*
> 
> Jake Kanter
> Fri, 12 March 2021, 5:05 pm
> 
> Associated Newspapers, the owner of UK tabloid the Daily Mail, has written to ViacomCBS demanding the removal of “inaccurate, misleading and divisive” content from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> Associated Newspapers’ lawyers complained about a montage in the show that purported to feature headlines from British newspapers. They argue that the CBS special showed images that had been doctored or presented as headlines when they were not. They called for the images to be removed from the interview online and before it is repeated tonight.
> More from Deadline
> 
> ...
> 
> “Many of the headlines have been either taken out of context or deliberately edited and displayed as supporting evidence for the programme’s claim that the Duchess of Sussex was subjected to racist coverage by the British press. This editing was not made apparent to viewers and, as a result, this section of the programme is both seriously inaccurate and misleading,” Associated Newspapers’ group legal director Elizabeth Hartley said.
> “I should be grateful for your urgent confirmation that the offending content will be removed from the programme currently being made available to the public. We also understand that a further broadcast is being planned tonight. The montage should therefore be deleted prior to that broadcast.”
> Associated Newspapers lists three examples in its letter, arguing that the most “egregious” was an image containing the headline: “Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family.” The company said this was an edited version of the original headline, which reported on the suspension of a UKIP member over her racist texts about Markle. UKIP is a UK political party. The original headline was: “Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family’: UKIP chief’s glamour model lover, 25, is suspended from the party over racist texts about Prince Harry’s wife-to-be.”
> Attorney Hartley said: “It is a thoroughly dishonest misrepresentation of a newspaper headline and article which was the opposite of racist. No one viewing the programme would have understood this from the montage.”
> The letter comes amid a firestorm in the UK over press treatment of Markle. Concerns have been raised about the racially-charged nature of coverage on the Duchess Of Sussex after Prince Harry accused British tabloids of being “bigoted.” Associated Newspapers’ intervention also comes against the backdrop of its legal fight with Markle over the publication of a letter to her father. Markle secured a major victory in the ongoing battle last month.
> _Oprah with Meghan and Harry _aired Sunday, March 7. The special was produced by Harpo Productions. Executive producers were Terry Wood and Tara Montgomery. Brian Piotrowicz was co-executive producer.
> Deadline has contacted ViacomCBS for comment."


I think CBS and Oprah didn't doctor the headlines. I've seen these headlines.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can only speak for Germany, but chickens for producing eggs are only "productive" for a limited amount of time, one or two years? They are then moved out of the barn, usually to the slaughterhouse, and replaced by new ones. That is when rescuers step in because often these farmers are happy to just give them away as they don't make much money on having them killed anyway. I follow a few chicken rescues and you really want to cry seeing those emaciated, often nearly naked creatures. My friend took in a few (and once nursed back to health, they'll still give you eggs, they just cannot compete in a harsh farming environment), she had to make them tiny sweaters until the feathers grew back in.
> 
> When our local organic farmer joined the movement for the first time this year I was so happy to see his chickens were healthy and plump and fully feathered!


Wow. Every day I learn something new!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

dangerouscurves said:


> I think CBS and Oprah didn't doctor the headlines. I've seen these headlines.



Well, it's well documented. They did a number of things to them, shortening, changing up words, taking away the context, or claiming they came from British newspapers when they didn't, so I'd be really surprised if you had actually seen these specific headlines before.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Another interesting POV.
> 
> View attachment 5020954





Lodpah said:


> First of all, I think MM has lovely relatives on Doria's side. I feel so bad for them. What classy people they seem to be and they retained their dignity even though I believe they were sincerely hurt they were not invited to the wedding. I find it heartbreaking, not one cousin?
> 
> 
> Does Meghan Markle have a relationship with her black relatives besides her mom?
> Mechelle Eleene
> , Supporter of the Sussexes
> Updated July 22, 2019
> 
> Originally Answered: Does Meghan Markle have a relationship for black relatives besides her mom?
> Meghan’s uncle, Joseph Johnson spoke out to the press about Meghan’s family life as a child. When Meghan was younger, she had a very close relationship with members of her mother’s side of family including her grandmother Jeanette, grandfather Ragland and Aunt Sandra. At this current stage of her life, it seems she is no longer close to members of her mother’s side of family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stayed at her grandparents house often and had a very close relationship with Jeanette (Doria’s mom) before she died in 2000. Jo mentioned that she sacrificed weekends to be at her grandmother’s bedside when she was sick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She regularly went out with her cousins and attended family gatherings and get togethers with members of her mother’s side of family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Even though Joseph expressed delight and happiness for Meghan’s engagement and marriage to Harry, he said that family members from her mother’s side felt hurt because they didn’t receive invites to the wedding.*
> _*Her Uncle Jo tried to make sense of why they hadn’t been invited when stating:*_
> *'My wife was kind of miffed. You know — 800 guests. But I said, 'Right, we're not having that kind of close relationship right now. Meghan has her own set of friends now. They were the ones she invited. I guess you could say they are Hollywood royalty. People in the spotlight, and that's what her life is about.'*
> Meghan’s uncle Joseph and wife
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Update: Thanks for reading and for commenting. I just want to add that Meghan’s mother’s side of family is proud of her and loves her very much.
> 
> Edited to Add: How lovely the last couple look.



Her black side of the family seems lovely, and at some point, seems to have gotten along with the white side of her family (maybe they all still do??).  It's a shame no one besides Doria was invited.  I had uncles I hadn't seen in years at my wedding because they'd played a huge part in my childhood.  And my wedding was 1/10 the number of people she had.  She couldn't manage to invite one cousin?  One aunt and uncle?  And Haz goes on to proclaim that he's providing her "the family she never had"?  What a slap in the face to all of them!  My guess is that it's hard to be "racially ambiguous" or pretend you're white, when you have a huge slew of black relatives at your wedding!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> LA Times published a few Letters to the Editor on the subject of this thread, here is one:
> 
> View attachment 5020972


LA has a lot of issues to deal with right now.  I'm glad this individual took his time to make Meg his priority.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I think tiaras are something that look better as you age.  I remember seeing a painting of the young queen and thinking the crown looked too big on her.
> *Now if we could just institute a nice Tiara as the default retirement gift *
> I’ll even take the dreaded bandeau.


Maybe we should all chip in, and start a GoFundMe page for one for Meg?


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> Her black side of the family seems lovely, and at some point, seems to have gotten along with the white side of her family (maybe they all still do??).  It's a shame no one besides Doria was invited.  I had uncles I hadn't seen in years at my wedding because they'd played a huge part in my childhood.  And my wedding was 1/10 the number of people she had.  She couldn't manage to invite one cousin?  One aunt and uncle?  And Haz goes on to proclaim that he's providing her "the family she never had"?  What a slap in the face to all of them!  My guess is that it's hard to be "racially ambiguous" or pretend you're white, when you have a huge slew of black relatives at your wedding!


I can imagine that it would be a financial burden for the invitees.
However, with their wealth  every family members should have been financed by them.
She is not family oriented whatsoever.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> There is so much going on right now in France, we also have our issues with rapid changes.
> Macron is taking many steps to rectify the wrongs of our colonial past. IE finally apologizing for slavery, recognizing the murder of Ali Boumendjel and on and on.
> The drawings are not my cup of tea but I understand where it is coming from.


Side note- I’m now reading up on the Algerian war- thank you.

So just so I understand:  you think that the cartoon is meant to be critical of the royal family and their dynamics and sympathetic to MM’s situation in broad terms?
And moreover it fits into a larger narrative of the French addressing  colonisation which we might not see as non-French.

Or Is the image meant to be reactionary to the context of Macron’s changes? Or more purely reacting against MM? 

I initially read it as being anti-MM but I’m not a francophone so it might be lost in translation.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002


Quelle Horreur!!!  More of her "I didn't know what I was getting into" crap?  You're marrying into the BRF.  You can no longer just grab your yoga mat and go get photographed.  But then again, I'm pretty sure this is more BS Meg is acting naive about.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Side note- I’m now reading up on the Algerian war- thank you.
> 
> So just so I understand:  you think that the cartoon is meant to be critical of the royal family and their dynamics and sympathetic to MM’s situation in broad terms?
> And moreover it fits into a larger narrative of the French addressing  colonisation which we might not see as non-French.
> 
> Or Is the image meant to be reactionary to the context of Macron’s changes? Or more purely reacting against MM?
> 
> I initially read it as being anti-MM but I’m not a francophone so it might be lost in translation.


Anti monarchy, anti racism imo.
If you are interested in learning about the ”Évènements” I suggest the Battle of Algiers. It is a movie incredibly well done and accurate.


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> I can imagine that it would be a financial burden for the invitees.
> However, with their wealth  every family members should have financed by them.
> *She is not family oriented whatsoever.*


I'm sure it is, especially at a royal wedding.  However, I'm sure most relatives would've loved to have had the choice to make that decision.  I highly doubt that was her line of thinking.  She obviously just didn't want them there.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason, the other royals are seen out and about. Kate, the future queen, sometimes does her own supermarket shopping. But Meghan was held hostage and prevented from leaving the house? Yeah, right.


Because she's the most important and must be the most protected, don't you know?


----------



## jelliedfeels

dangerouscurves said:


> Is that from Daily Mail? If it is, are we still believing the media? Especially those owned by R. Murdoch?


Just FYI, Murdoch owns the Sun & the Times.
This guy, Viscount Rothmere, owns the Mail group. He went to the same school as Prince Charles. 

All sources should be read with a critical eye.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can only speak for Germany, but chickens for producing eggs are only "productive" for a limited amount of time, one or two years? They are then moved out of the barn, usually to the slaughterhouse, and replaced by new ones. That is when rescuers step in because often these farmers are happy to just give them away as they don't make much money on having them killed anyway. I follow a few chicken rescues and you really want to cry seeing those emaciated, often nearly naked creatures. My friend took in a few (and once nursed back to health, they'll still give you eggs, they just cannot compete in a harsh farming environment), she had to make them tiny sweaters until the feathers grew back in.
> 
> When our local organic farmer joined the movement for the first time this year I was so happy to see his chickens were healthy and plump and fully feathered!


I wasn't aware of that.  so as much as I hate to say it, M may have done a service by saying they were rescue chickens if there are people out there who didn't know about these things and those people decide to adopt.


----------



## ChanelCartier

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't believe you can choose gender in any way , not via IVF?


Yes you can via IVF. I know someone that only wanted girls and that is what she chose and that is what she got.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Her black side of the family seems lovely, and at some point, seems to have gotten along with the white side of her family (maybe they all still do??).  It's a shame no one besides Doria was invited.  I had uncles I hadn't seen in years at my wedding because they'd played a huge part in my childhood.  And my wedding was 1/10 the number of people she had.  She couldn't manage to invite one cousin?  One aunt and uncle?  And Haz goes on to proclaim that he's providing her "the family she never had"?  What a slap in the face to all of them!  My guess is that it's hard to be "racially ambiguous" or pretend you're white, when you have a huge slew of black relatives at your wedding!


while I agree that in her younger years she may have tried to conceal her race, at the wedding, she made sure there was a black minister, black choir,etc.  
so why not invite the relatives?  makes no sense to me.  as you said, she had a big wedding.  and she found room for celebs who she may never have met (Clooneys)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I wasn't aware of that.  so as much as I hate to say it, M may have done a service by saying they were rescue chickens if there are people out there who didn't know about these things and those people decide to adopt.



I'd actually love that, but...that would require using Google, something Meghan fans don't seem to have mastered yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

chicinthecity777 said:


> I find the cartoon disturbing, distasteful but at the same time weirdly brilliant! Agreed they mean to shock!


I actually find the Hebdo stuff really aggressive and I don’t like it especially from an aesthetic perspective. However I have a ton of respect for the people who produce this publication and their work is always thought provoking.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Relevant anecdotes, she eats chicken and claims to kinda be vegan, OK, interesting that discrepancy


She also claims to be Woke and yet flaunts Blood Diamonds.  Go figure.  The hypocrite (excuse me, enigma) that is Meghan Markle.


----------



## dangerouscurves

jelliedfeels said:


> Just FYI, Murdoch owns the Sun & the Times.
> This guy, Viscount Rothmere, owns the Mail group. He went to the same school as Prince Charles.
> 
> All sources should be read with a critical eye.


Now it's even more telling.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am eagerly awaiting the bullying and charity commission investigations reports to come out! We should hear their truth too!


I'm waiting for Meg to file a complaint to our Megs regarding our unruliness, utter racism, lack of truth and lack of awareness of mental health, on this thread.


----------



## dangerouscurves




----------



## rose60610

I read where Doria's wedding outfit was made by Oscar de la Renta. Meghan wanted her to wear an American designer. It was lovely. If Charles paid for it and all her travel expenses, it doesn't matter, she was, after all, mother of the bride. I wonder if Meghan didn't want other family members attending even though the BRF could have easily paid their travel expenses. But the BRF wouldn't have forked out for wedding outfits. Since all the other guests were wealthy celebrities, their clothes were surely all going to be designer, custom made, etc. One wonders if Meghan was more concerned about how people were going to dress vs who they were. For Meghan, a $700 wedding outfit from Sak's or Neiman's wouldn't cut it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> I can imagine that it would be a financial burden for the invitees.
> However, with their wealth  every family members should have been financed by them.
> She is not family oriented whatsoever.


Yeah th


papertiger said:


> From Deadline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Deadline
> *Daily Mail Owner Writes To ViacomCBS Demanding Removal Of “Inaccurate, Misleading & Divisive” Content In Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Interview*
> 
> Jake Kanter
> Fri, 12 March 2021, 5:05 pm
> 
> Associated Newspapers, the owner of UK tabloid the Daily Mail, has written to ViacomCBS demanding the removal of “inaccurate, misleading and divisive” content from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> Associated Newspapers’ lawyers complained about a montage in the show that purported to feature headlines from British newspapers. They argue that the CBS special showed images that had been doctored or presented as headlines when they were not. They called for the images to be removed from the interview online and before it is repeated tonight.
> More from Deadline
> 
> ...
> 
> “Many of the headlines have been either taken out of context or deliberately edited and displayed as supporting evidence for the programme’s claim that the Duchess of Sussex was subjected to racist coverage by the British press. This editing was not made apparent to viewers and, as a result, this section of the programme is both seriously inaccurate and misleading,” Associated Newspapers’ group legal director Elizabeth Hartley said.
> “I should be grateful for your urgent confirmation that the offending content will be removed from the programme currently being made available to the public. We also understand that a further broadcast is being planned tonight. The montage should therefore be deleted prior to that broadcast.”
> Associated Newspapers lists three examples in its letter, arguing that the most “egregious” was an image containing the headline: “Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family.” The company said this was an edited version of the original headline, which reported on the suspension of a UKIP member over her racist texts about Markle. UKIP is a UK political party. The original headline was: “Meghan’s seed will taint our Royal Family’: UKIP chief’s glamour model lover, 25, is suspended from the party over racist texts about Prince Harry’s wife-to-be.”
> Attorney Hartley said: “It is a thoroughly dishonest misrepresentation of a newspaper headline and article which was the opposite of racist. No one viewing the programme would have understood this from the montage.”
> The letter comes amid a firestorm in the UK over press treatment of Markle. Concerns have been raised about the racially-charged nature of coverage on the Duchess Of Sussex after Prince Harry accused British tabloids of being “bigoted.” Associated Newspapers’ intervention also comes against the backdrop of its legal fight with Markle over the publication of a letter to her father. Markle secured a major victory in the ongoing battle last month.
> _Oprah with Meghan and Harry _aired Sunday, March 7. The special was produced by Harpo Productions. Executive producers were Terry Wood and Tara Montgomery. Brian Piotrowicz was co-executive producer.
> Deadline has contacted ViacomCBS for comment."


OT but speaking of ViacomCBS has anyone heard the rumours about the battle between Sumner and Shari Redstone, talk about family drama! Of course Sumner has passed now but I hear it’s still not all united at HQ.
From what I hear they won’t want to be throwing their money after another lawsuit!


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> I read where Doria's wedding outfit was made by Oscar de la Renta. Meghan wanted her to wear an American designer. It was lovely. If Charles paid for it and all her travel expenses, it doesn't matter, she was, after all, mother of the bride. I wonder if Meghan didn't want other family members attending even though the BRF could have easily paid their travel expenses. But the BRF wouldn't have forked out for wedding outfits. Since all the other guests were wealthy celebrities, their clothes were surely all going to be designer, custom made, etc. One wonders if Meghan was more concerned about how people were going to dress vs who they were. For Meghan, a $700 wedding outfit from Sak's or Neiman's wouldn't cut it.


What Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets.
Imho, not everyone was wearing couture nor tasteful outfits.


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> Charles would be Charles I am afraid even if he married Camilla initially. There is a very good chance he would have cheated on her also. He has mellowed now but remember he is in his seventies. *Didn’t he have other extra marital relations during his marriage to Diana.*



Yes, he did. It’s as though that has been completely forgotten. The idea that Charles and Camilla had this wonderful love story and they were always meant to be together is revisionist crap. He had plenty of other affairs. She had other affairs. They both cheated on their spouses. The chances of them being monogamous to each other back when they were young and horny was nil.

Where Camilla gets points is by being the only woman who was able to stick around him for the long-haul. That can’t be easy.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Yes, he did. It’s as though that has been completely forgotten. The idea that Charles and Camilla had this wonderful love story and they were always meant to be together is revisionist crap. He had plenty of other affairs. She had other affairs. They both cheated on their spouses. The chances of them being monogamous to each other back when they were young and horny was nil.
> 
> Where Camilla gets points is by being the only woman who was able to stick around him for the long-haul. That can’t be easy.


She is the perfect Royal wife, then.


----------



## rose60610

limom said:


> What Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets.
> Imho, not everyone was wearing couture nor tasteful outfits.



I agree. Even if they looked terrible, they were at least expensive, and that's what's important to Meghan. Except when she's getting comped by J Crew.


----------



## jennlt

...


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> I agree. Even if they looked terrible, they were at least expensive, and that's what's important to Meghan. Except when she's getting comped by J Crew.


you peeped that too, huh?
I have the same raincoat as MM. So special


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> She is the perfect Royal wife, then.



The perfect _eventual_ Royal wife. There was still the matter of pumping out the little royal heirs. Camilla had already had her own children with her husband before Charles met Diana.  

Apparently the rules say that womb must be pristine.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I'm waiting for Meg to file a complaint to our Megs regarding our unruliness, utter racism, lack of truth and lack of awareness of mental health, on this thread.



I hope they don’t ask me to testify!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

limom said:


> you peeped that too, huh?
> I have the same raincoat as MM. So special



Same raincoat? Lucky you! It must make you feel really special. I bought a wool coat that I found out Meghan was seen wearing. As beautiful as it was, I thought "ugh". On the other hand, MM has so many coats no one would make the connection.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Anti monarchy, anti racism imo.
> If you are interested in learning about the ”Évènements” I suggest the Battle of Algiers. It is a movie incredibly well done and accurate.


Thank you very much for clarifying. So I did read it the wrong way. 
Though I still find the use of the imagery of George Floyd’s death to be in poor taste. That’s their aim though I guess.

Thank you for the movie recommendation. It sounds interesting.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Thank you very much for clarifying. So I did read it the wrong way.
> Though I still find the use of the imagery of George Floyd’s death to be in poor taste. That’s their aim though I guess.
> 
> Thank you for the movie recommendation. It sounds interesting.


The British Media is characterizing it as anti BLM. I don’t see how. We all have our bias.
I might be completely wrong


----------



## lalame

dangerouscurves said:


> Is that from Daily Mail? If it is, are we still believing the media? Especially those owned by R. Murdoch?



the main quote is from Scobie’s article for HB. He’s a friendly to them and her friends were sources for his book.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002



Hmm, I would love to be _stuck_ at Frogmore- it seems like it could be very relaxing and quiet.


----------



## Chanbal

Different perceptions between the US and the UK? Interesting how the information is provided for the American poll, where is JCMH? Who cares? Should MM fire SS? OW seems to be a much better PR-agent for her...  




After a week of transatlantic turmoil, Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Harry, and Duchess Meghan of Sussex returned Friday to business-as-usual for royals: championing causes and highlighting success stories.

Harry and Meghan, whose interview with Oprah Winfrey on CBS last week unleashed a whirlwind of recriminations, announced their Archewell Foundation will back four charity organizations, including racial justice non-profit Color of Change, that they believe embody compassion, unify communities and drive systemic change.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex took over the headlines in Britain and America this week when they told Winfrey last Sunday that they fled to America last year to escape racism in the British media and in his family, and because Meghan got no support from the palace when she became suicidal over the pressure of being in the royal family.

*People are still reeling from the fallout. A post-interview YouGov poll in Britain found that both Harry and Meghan took big hits in their popularity ratings, now at their lowest ever level in the United Kingdom, YouGov said Friday.

However, the American pollster Morning Consult reported Friday that the interview boosted the ratings of the Sussexes. Meghan' favorability among Americans who watched climbed 22 points from a pre-interview poll to 67%.*

But the royal show must go on, and the 94-year-old queen continues to lead the way via Zoom from Windsor Castle, where she is sheltering during the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Friday, Buckingham Palace released pictures of the queen speaking this week to British scientists, educators and schoolchildren via video conference to mark British Science Week and to celebrate the role of science, technology, engineering and math in British society.

The exchange featured her fond reminiscing about how she met the first human to travel into space, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, when she invited him to Buckingham Palace in 1961 following his return to Earth. What was he like, she was asked.

“Russian,’’ she replied with a smile as her audience chuckled. “He didn’t speak English. He was fascinating, and I suppose being the first one it was particularly fascinating,’’ the queen said, according to the palace press release.
It must have been terrifying to be the first one to go into space and not really know what might happen, said space scientist and broadcaster Maggie Aderin-Pocock.

“Well, yes – and if you could come back again. That’s very important!” Her Majesty said, displaying some of her dry humor.

She was also shown the latest updates from NASA’s Mars Perseverance mission and the recent meteorite discovery in the U.K. by a scientist from the Natural History Museum.

“I’m glad it didn’t hit anyone!” the queen said.

As a memento, she was presented with a set of Mars Perseverance rover face masks, sent from NASA headquarters to Windsor Castle. One of them is intended for her space-loving husband, Prince Philip, 99, who is still hospitalized in London.

Prince William defended his family after his brother Harry and Meghan Markle's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey.

The queen said nothing about what has preoccupied royals, courtiers, journalists and commentators, celebrities and politicians throughout the past week: The bombshell Harry & Meghan interview that aired on March 7. But she wouldn't. Her official statement, issued by the palace two days later, was measured and brief: Harry and Meghan are "much loved." Their allegations of racism were "concerning" and are being taken seriously, although "recollections may vary" about who said what to whom. But it was a family matter, and will be dealt with privately behind closed doors. Move along, nothing to see here.

Harry's father, Prince Charles, had nothing to say either when he visited a London church on Tuesday for a long-scheduled engagement, staying mum when he was asked about the interview by reporters.
Harry's brother, Prince William, did have something to say when he visited a London school on Thursday and was asked by a reporter if his family is racist. "We're very much not a racist family," he declared, looking daggers over his face mask at the questioner.

Harry and Meghan, now living in Santa Barbara County, California, have been building their new non-profit foundation Archewell, through which they intend to carry out most of their charitable activities going forward. The causes they have chosen to support so far include:
Color of Change, identified as the largest online racial justice organization in the U.S.
Mind, a mental health charity that tries to raise public awareness and help people access information and resources.

The PressPad Charitable Foundation, a U.K.-based organization working to ensure greater diversity in the media by providing grants, training and and support to help lower financial barriers for young people who want to become journalists.

URL Media, a recently launched multi-platform network of Black and Brown media organizations (URL stands for Uplift, Respect, and Love) focused on building community media that serve and reflect their audiences.
_Contributing: The Associated Press
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Harry, Meghan get mixed poll results, Queen Elizabeth is back to work_


----------



## lalame

The thing that bothers me about the privacy complaint too is they didn’t want to be subtle royals... they wanted to be this bold and historic couple that was going to be like nothing the BRF has seen before. All that glitter drives the intense coverage and public interest. They could’ve easily stepped down as working royals after the wedding, supported their charities, and stopped doing endless events/projects.

You really can’t be famous these days without all the intense attention and scrutiny (sometimes from crazies). You accept i5 or don’t do it.


----------



## floatinglili

I find MM just insufferable. She is trying to out-Royale the royals! She is the ‘Royale with Cheese’


----------



## papertiger

ChanelCartier said:


> Yes you can via IVF. I know someone that only wanted girls and that is what she chose and that is what she got.



It's illegal to select the gender in the UK, but apparently not in the US(?)


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> I hope they don’t ask me to testify!


What would you wear?
If I am called, I shall wear YSL.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> What would you wear?
> If I am called, I shall wear YSL.


With tights.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Same raincoat? Lucky you! It must make you feel really special. I bought a wool coat that I found out Meghan was seen wearing. As beautiful as it was, I thought "ugh". On the other hand, MM has so many coats no one would make the connection.



I almost bought the same black Gucci coat with pearl buttons. Though she looked very nice, it kinda killed it for me  There was another 'celeb' that also wore Gucci and although she too looked pretty fabulous IMO, that coat was _done_.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> What would you wear?
> If I am called, I shall wear YSL.



any colour but Emerald green please

...or certain shades of red (apparently)


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> What would you wear?
> If I am called, I shall wear YSL.



I’m definitely wearing _leather_ pants, not sure which designer though


----------



## floatinglili

The most important important accessories by far are the unrelenting smug (or shall we say ‘uber-confident’) ear-to-ear grin and Lady Bountiful air.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m definitely wearing _leather_ pants, not sure which designer though
> [/QUOTE
> Of course, I will pair it with a Cartier watch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just get out your tiara for the occasion and you'll be perfectly dressed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

dangerouscurves said:


> I think CBS and Oprah didn't doctor the headlines. I've seen these headlines.


At this point I’m beginning to suspect that you are trolling.
1. The articles in their seeming undoctored form are still on the internet and don’t log recent updates whereas the versions that Oprah showed are not- well maybe the Mail deleted them you may say.
2. To double check this, I referenced some of the stories to see if they appeared elsewhere. E.G. I took the ‘tainted seed’ story and checked it and found that not only did other non-affiliated websites report this story as being racist quotes from this awful Marney  but it’s even on the L*bour P*rty Reddit from 3 years ago and they are definitely not politically linked with the Mail: 








						Meghan Markle's 'Seed Will Taint Our Royal Family' Says Politician's Lover
					

A politician has launched a vile racist attack on Meghan Markle.




					radaronline.com
				












						Meghan Markle Will "Taint" Royal Family with "Black Seed," Awful GF of UK Politician Warns
					

As it turns out, not everyone loves Meghan Markle. As it also turns out, not everyone is tolerant of people who are not Caucasian. A pretty major flap has arisen in Great Britain after The Daily




					www.thehollywoodgossip.com
				




reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/7q9o1d/meghans_seed_will_taint_our_royal_family_ukip/

if you care to check you will see that the ‘undoctored stories’ are traceable to several years ago.

3. (to me this is the smoking gun,) articles written before the interview which detail the racist and insensitive press MM has received do not reference any of these headlines. This vox article  I posted before makes no reference to ‘tainted seed’ or ‘trailer trash’ which would seem to be clear examples of the writer’s point and were written before (2018 and 2019) the vox article was written (jan 2020).

4) the only thing I’ve seen which seems at all accurate to its context is the one also mentioned in the vox article: Rachel Johnson’s “beautiful Bolter” article which although it does make a sentence within it about ‘exotic dna’ the headline when it wasn’t is at least an article where the writer themself was commenting on MM’s race.
One vaguely relevant citation does not defend a slew of misleading ones though.


----------



## jennlt

Lodpah said:


> Another interesting POV.
> 
> View attachment 5020954





AB Negative said:


> ...professional energy reader...



And Meghan's a professional victim. They sound equally matched to me


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Disemboweling and Quartering?



Hung drawn and quartered


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Yes, he did. It’s as though that has been completely forgotten. The idea that Charles and Camilla had this wonderful love story and they were always meant to be together is revisionist crap. He had plenty of other affairs. She had other affairs. They both cheated on their spouses. The chances of them being monogamous to each other back when they were young and horny was nil.
> 
> Where Camilla gets points is by being the only woman who was able to stick around him for the long-haul. That can’t be easy.


No Camilla should get a lot of points for sticking around. Let’s face it, Charles was hardly a heartthrob when he was younger. If it wasn’t for the fact that he was a future king the pickings would have been considerably slimmer for him IMO. That may sound mean but I don’t think he was a particularly nice person either.


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> No Camilla should get a lot of points for sticking around. Let’s face it, Charles was hardly a heartthrob when he was younger. If it wasn’t for the fact that he was a future king the pickings would have been considerably slimmer for him IMO. That may sound mean but I don’t think he was a particularly nice person either.


He had a certain charm. Who can refuse someone who wants to be your tampon?


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> No Camilla should get a lot of points for sticking around. Let’s face it, Charles was hardly a heartthrob when he was younger. If it wasn’t for the fact that he was a future king the pickings would have been considerably slimmer for him IMO. That may sound mean but I don’t think he was a particularly nice person either.


agree...he wasn't "hot" or "cute" at all when he was young


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> What Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets.
> Imho, not everyone was wearing couture nor tasteful outfits.


Yeah James Corden’s denim shoes need burning the way they burned my eyes.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just get out your tiara for the occasion and you'll be perfectly dressed.



Darn it QueenofWrapDress, if you get called you can ask them to only call you by your TPF name (You know to protect your privacy, your cat, your rescue chickens) and ask everyone to just call you ‘Queen‘ as an acceptable alternative, and then really do wear a crown!

thinking of a tpf name right this instant for myself...


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Yes, he did. It’s as though that has been completely forgotten. The idea that Charles and Camilla had this wonderful love story and they were always meant to be together is revisionist crap. He had plenty of other affairs. She had other affairs. They both cheated on their spouses. The chances of them being monogamous to each other back when they were young and horny was nil.
> 
> Where Camilla gets points is by being the only woman who was able to stick around him for the long-haul. That can’t be easy.


The only other woman who he cared about was Kanga  and she mysteriously committed suicide although there was talk she was PUSHED out that window because supposedly she couldn’t have managed on her own strength.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah James Corden’s denim shoes need burning the way they burned my eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5021324


love Gucci as much as the next person but good god.
Either that or I am salty she separated me from my man..


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> No Camilla should get a lot of points for sticking around. Let’s face it, Charles was hardly a heartthrob when he was younger. If it wasn’t for the fact that he was a future king the pickings would have been considerably slimmer for him IMO. That may sound mean but I don’t think he was a particularly nice person either.



Yep.  There's someone for everyone.  I always thought a younger Prince Charles looked like Disney's Ichabod Crane.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I'm waiting for Meg to file a complaint to our Megs regarding our unruliness, utter racism, lack of truth and lack of awareness of mental health, on this thread.



Oh I'd love to respond by pointing out the First Amendment (still somewhat in place despite her wanting to get rid of speech that isn't flattering to HER) and the fact that this is a gossip thread. I'd list a litany of her own stupid comments and utterances to back up whatever things we listed, reinforced by many photos that discredit and falsify her claims. I'd have a list of questions such as "You purport to be  strong role model for young women, encouraging them to speak up and stand up for themselves. You're almost 40, yet you couldn't even stand up for yourself when you claimed you were being wronged by the BRF, the same BRF you were immersed in by living with Harry well before the wedding. How can you be a strong role model when you couldn't even stand up for yourself? Either you're weak or you're lying. Which is it?


----------



## mellibelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Green washing? Is that why Americans store eggs in the fridge?



 Ha!! Yes it’s pretty ridiculous that we wash eggs, take off their natural protective coating, THEN have to refrigerate them. Your comment reminded me of a friend I used to have from wine country in California. She had a vanity chicken coop like Hags but never ate the eggs. She of course didn’t take care of the chickens, there was a handyman for that. He’d leave the fresh eggs on her doorstep and she’d throw them out or give them away...she was grossed out by the different colors and room temperature so she’d buy her eggs from the supermarket


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> There are plenty of other photos I've seen around.
> 
> I think H should be treated for amnesia (as well as a few other things)



Lots and lots Diana took them to amusement parks and made them queue with the unwashed public - ditto she took them to mcdonalds and made them queue she wanted them to have as normal a childhood as possible - exactly as w&k are doing - no cameras no publicity


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Different perceptions between the US and the UK? Interesting how the information is provided for the American poll, where is JCMH? Who cares? Should MM fire SS? OW seems to be a much better PR-agent for her...
> 
> View attachment 5021257
> 
> 
> After a week of transatlantic turmoil, Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Harry, and Duchess Meghan of Sussex returned Friday to business-as-usual for royals: championing causes and highlighting success stories.
> 
> Harry and Meghan, whose interview with Oprah Winfrey on CBS last week unleashed a whirlwind of recriminations, announced their Archewell Foundation will back four charity organizations, including racial justice non-profit Color of Change, that they believe embody compassion, unify communities and drive systemic change.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex took over the headlines in Britain and America this week when they told Winfrey last Sunday that they fled to America last year to escape racism in the British media and in his family, and because Meghan got no support from the palace when she became suicidal over the pressure of being in the royal family.
> 
> *People are still reeling from the fallout. A post-interview YouGov poll in Britain found that both Harry and Meghan took big hits in their popularity ratings, now at their lowest ever level in the United Kingdom, YouGov said Friday.
> 
> However, the American pollster Morning Consult reported Friday that the interview boosted the ratings of the Sussexes. Meghan' favorability among Americans who watched climbed 22 points from a pre-interview poll to 67%.*
> 
> But the royal show must go on, and the 94-year-old queen continues to lead the way via Zoom from Windsor Castle, where she is sheltering during the COVID-19 pandemic.
> 
> On Friday, Buckingham Palace released pictures of the queen speaking this week to British scientists, educators and schoolchildren via video conference to mark British Science Week and to celebrate the role of science, technology, engineering and math in British society.
> 
> The exchange featured her fond reminiscing about how she met the first human to travel into space, Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, when she invited him to Buckingham Palace in 1961 following his return to Earth. What was he like, she was asked.
> 
> “Russian,’’ she replied with a smile as her audience chuckled. “He didn’t speak English. He was fascinating, and I suppose being the first one it was particularly fascinating,’’ the queen said, according to the palace press release.
> It must have been terrifying to be the first one to go into space and not really know what might happen, said space scientist and broadcaster Maggie Aderin-Pocock.
> 
> “Well, yes – and if you could come back again. That’s very important!” Her Majesty said, displaying some of her dry humor.
> 
> She was also shown the latest updates from NASA’s Mars Perseverance mission and the recent meteorite discovery in the U.K. by a scientist from the Natural History Museum.
> 
> “I’m glad it didn’t hit anyone!” the queen said.
> 
> As a memento, she was presented with a set of Mars Perseverance rover face masks, sent from NASA headquarters to Windsor Castle. One of them is intended for her space-loving husband, Prince Philip, 99, who is still hospitalized in London.
> 
> Prince William defended his family after his brother Harry and Meghan Markle's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The queen said nothing about what has preoccupied royals, courtiers, journalists and commentators, celebrities and politicians throughout the past week: The bombshell Harry & Meghan interview that aired on March 7. But she wouldn't. Her official statement, issued by the palace two days later, was measured and brief: Harry and Meghan are "much loved." Their allegations of racism were "concerning" and are being taken seriously, although "recollections may vary" about who said what to whom. But it was a family matter, and will be dealt with privately behind closed doors. Move along, nothing to see here.
> 
> Harry's father, Prince Charles, had nothing to say either when he visited a London church on Tuesday for a long-scheduled engagement, staying mum when he was asked about the interview by reporters.
> Harry's brother, Prince William, did have something to say when he visited a London school on Thursday and was asked by a reporter if his family is racist. "We're very much not a racist family," he declared, looking daggers over his face mask at the questioner.
> 
> Harry and Meghan, now living in Santa Barbara County, California, have been building their new non-profit foundation Archewell, through which they intend to carry out most of their charitable activities going forward. The causes they have chosen to support so far include:
> Color of Change, identified as the largest online racial justice organization in the U.S.
> Mind, a mental health charity that tries to raise public awareness and help people access information and resources.
> 
> The PressPad Charitable Foundation, a U.K.-based organization working to ensure greater diversity in the media by providing grants, training and and support to help lower financial barriers for young people who want to become journalists.
> 
> URL Media, a recently launched multi-platform network of Black and Brown media organizations (URL stands for Uplift, Respect, and Love) focused on building community media that serve and reflect their audiences.
> _Contributing: The Associated Press
> This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Harry, Meghan get mixed poll results, Queen Elizabeth is back to work_


Well fingers crossed the charities get something positive out of this. 

I don’t think their track-record is good as charity partners but what do I know?

Interesting to note, color of change and URL media are US-focused organisations. Strange that they haven’t chosen a UK-based racial justice charity after expressing their concerns about the social climate.


----------



## scarlet555

limom said:


> love Gucci as much as the next person but good god.
> Either that or I am salty she separated me from my man..
> View attachment 5021336


That Gucci dress next to him is pretty much invisible, you have to point it out! All anyone sees is Mr. Dapper....


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> He had a certain charm. Who can refuse someone who wants to be your tampon?



The man had/has all the sensitivity of a tree stump. This is the same guy who said after a journalist told them, "You both look very much in love," and Diana replies, "Oh, yes. Absolutely." While Charles says, "Whatever 'in love' means." 

I assume he has a team of speech writers on his staff to help him with official statements.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> The man had/has all the sensitivity of a tree stump. This is the same guy who said after a journalist told them, "You both look very much in love," and Diana replies, "Oh, yes. Absolutely." While Charles says, "Whatever 'in love' means."
> 
> I assume he has a team of speech writers on his staff to help him with official statements.


He did not love her. 
He was honest there. To a fault.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> The only other woman who he cared about was Kanga  and she mysteriously committed suicide although there was talk she was PUSHED out that window because supposedly she couldn’t have managed on her own strength.



Yes, Kanga is the one he reportedly said was the only woman who truly understood him. 

He had flings with other women, whether he cared about them or just enjoyed  their company in the moment is unknown.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> He did not love her.
> He was honest there. To a fault.



And he was being truthful about wanting to be Camilla’s tampon. Although douchebag might be more appropriate. 

Can you tell I don’t think much of Charles?


----------



## bisousx

limom said:


> love Gucci as much as the next person but good god.
> Either that or I am salty she separated me from my man..
> View attachment 5021336



Love this outfit... Gucci done right, even if it’s a tad casual for a wedding.


----------



## limom

bisousx said:


> Love this outfit... Gucci done right, even if it’s a tad casual for a wedding.


Nope!
Casual, wrong hat and the woman is stunning.
A crime against fashion.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> The thing that bothers me about the privacy complaint too is they didn’t want to be subtle royals... they wanted to be this bold and historic couple that was going to be like nothing the BRF has seen before. All that glitter drives the intense coverage and public interest. They could’ve easily stepped down as working royals after the wedding, supported their charities, and stopped doing endless events/projects.
> 
> You really can’t be famous these days without all the intense attention and scrutiny (sometimes from crazies). You accept i5 or don’t do it.


Yeah Anne gets to judge the Wooton-Bassett biggest marrow contest wearing finest Marks and spencer. Oddly enough not a lot of paparazzi.


papertiger said:


> It's illegal to select the gender in the UK, but apparently not in the US(?)


That’s not that surprising. US laws on fertility treatments are extremely different to ours. For example you can’t profit from egg donation in the UK. In the US -women can price by their age/education/ethnicity.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Monoi said:


> Have u guys seen the cover of Charlie Hebdo? Its disturbing and imo disgusting, the link to George Floyd. The cover reads: 'Why Meghan left Buckingham Palace', 'Because I couldn't breathe'.
> 
> View attachment 5021162



I kind of get what they’re saying here though. They’re saying (I think) that Meghan has behaved as though she was the victim of some horrific racially motivated crime and that the way people have talked about it nonstop for a week is akin to the outrage during the BLM protests of last summer.


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> Nope!
> Casual, wrong hat and the woman is stunning.
> A crime against fashion.



I agree, she is beautiful, but the long cardigan is too causal. She & her husband do not appear to be dressed for the same occasion.


----------



## Chanbal

Did have a chance to watch this video yet, but they are usually very good. Enjoy!


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Anti monarchy, anti racism imo.
> If you are interested in learning about the ”Évènements” *I suggest the Battle of Algiers.* It is a movie incredibly well done and accurate.



Brilliant film


----------



## csshopper

ChanelCartier said:


> Yes you can via IVF. I know someone that only wanted girls and that is what she chose and that is what she got.


By sharing this I am not disparaging or being critical of families who seek medical procedures to enable them to have children. Know both family and friends who have been on this journey and it can be mentally, physically, financially exhausting. In every case it was deemed absolutely worth it to have the joy of a child.

This ad from the Fertility Institute is one of many I found on line with a quick Google Search.    (While doing this I also came across mind boggling sites for legal firms who deal with more issues related to this than my brain could sort out)

It's the commercialization tone that bothers me, but realize that's a generational bias. My jaw dropped, I had no idea the process has been taken to this level. It feels like hucksterism, lowest price, financing available, pick your gender and now we can throw in EYE COLOR SELECTION.

*World Leading Gender Selection Program*

World leading 100%* Gender Selection with PGD
Lowest base price of any U.S. PGD program
Affiliate clinics in over 42 countries
Screening for over 400 hereditary diseases
Now combinable with Microsort sperm sorting
Critical procedures performed by MDs and PhDs
Full assistance with travel discounts and visas
Financing available
Free Information Packet!
*Gender Selection Leaders*
Recognized by ABC, NBC, CNN, Fox and Reuters as among "THE" worldwide leaders in gender selection technology. If you want to be certain your next child will be the gender you are hoping for then no other method comes close to PGD (Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis). While traditional sperm-screening techniques have a success rates of 60-70%, only PGD offers virtually 100% accuracy.

And now, in one of the most major advances in the ability of parents to choose characteristics of their children, the Fertility Institutes announce the availability of EYE COLOR SELECTION. Following years of work and research, eye color selection has become an additional realistic option for those parents with such an interest.

Edit: not trying to get OT, thought of H and MM photographed exiting a building in LA where I believe it was stated a fertility clinic had offices. Mods, delete if necessary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> damn, at least it is in the same region.
> Google fail


Don’t feel bad. I’m from that part of the world. The islands in that region share common traditions.


----------



## Lodpah

duna said:


> Yes we are from next Monday total lockdown in most areas of Italy, they say until after Easter......I can't stand it any longer, if only they would hurry up with vaccinations!


Hi Duna. So sorry to hear that. Sardinia has largely not been affected though is that true? I love Italy and I feel so bad for you guys.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> First of all, I think MM has lovely relatives on Doria's side. I feel so bad for them. What classy people they seem to be and they retained their dignity even though I believe they were sincerely hurt they were not invited to the wedding. I find it heartbreaking, not one cousin?
> 
> 
> Does Meghan Markle have a relationship with her black relatives besides her mom?
> Mechelle Eleene
> , Supporter of the Sussexes
> Updated July 22, 2019
> 
> Originally Answered: Does Meghan Markle have a relationship for black relatives besides her mom?
> Meghan’s uncle, Joseph Johnson spoke out to the press about Meghan’s family life as a child. When Meghan was younger, she had a very close relationship with members of her mother’s side of family including her grandmother Jeanette, grandfather Ragland and Aunt Sandra. At this current stage of her life, it seems she is no longer close to members of her mother’s side of family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stayed at her grandparents house often and had a very close relationship with Jeanette (Doria’s mom) before she died in 2000. Jo mentioned that she sacrificed weekends to be at her grandmother’s bedside when she was sick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She regularly went out with her cousins and attended family gatherings and get togethers with members of her mother’s side of family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Even though Joseph expressed delight and happiness for Meghan’s engagement and marriage to Harry, he said that family members from her mother’s side felt hurt because they didn’t receive invites to the wedding.*
> _*Her Uncle Jo tried to make sense of why they hadn’t been invited when stating:*_
> *'My wife was kind of miffed. You know — 800 guests. But I said, 'Right, we're not having that kind of close relationship right now. Meghan has her own set of friends now. They were the ones she invited. I guess you could say they are Hollywood royalty. People in the spotlight, and that's what her life is about.'*
> Meghan’s uncle Joseph and wife
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Update: Thanks for reading and for commenting. I just want to add that Meghan’s mother’s side of family is proud of her and loves her very much.
> 
> Edited to Add: How lovely the last couple look.



Interesting to see Tom Jr inthe picture so the Markles socialized with Doria’s family. Funny how in the blended family pic, Doria is the only person not smiling.


----------



## dangerouscurves

jelliedfeels said:


> At this point I’m beginning to suspect that you are trolling.
> 1. The articles in their seeming undoctored form are still on the internet and don’t log recent updates whereas the versions that Oprah showed are not- well maybe the Mail deleted them you may say.
> 2. To double check this, I referenced some of the stories to see if they appeared elsewhere. E.G. I took the ‘tainted seed’ story and checked it and found that not only did other non-affiliated websites report this story as being racist quotes from this awful Marney  but it’s even on the L*bour P*rty Reddit from 3 years ago and they are definitely not politically linked with the Mail:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'Seed Will Taint Our Royal Family' Says Politician's Lover
> 
> 
> A politician has launched a vile racist attack on Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Will "Taint" Royal Family with "Black Seed," Awful GF of UK Politician Warns
> 
> 
> As it turns out, not everyone loves Meghan Markle. As it also turns out, not everyone is tolerant of people who are not Caucasian. A pretty major flap has arisen in Great Britain after The Daily
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thehollywoodgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/7q9o1d/meghans_seed_will_taint_our_royal_family_ukip/
> 
> if you care to check you will see that the ‘undoctored stories’ are traceable to several years ago.
> 
> 3. (to me this is the smoking gun,) articles written before the interview which detail the racist and insensitive press MM has received do not reference any of these headlines. This vox article  I posted before makes no reference to ‘tainted seed’ or ‘trailer trash’ which would seem to be clear examples of the writer’s point and were written before (2018 and 2019) the vox article was written (jan 2020).
> 
> 4) the only thing I’ve seen which seems at all accurate to its context is the one also mentioned in the vox article: Rachel Johnson’s “beautiful Bolter” article which although it does make a sentence within it about ‘exotic dna’ the headline when it wasn’t is at least an article where the writer themself was commenting on MM’s race.
> One vaguely relevant citation does not defend a slew of misleading ones though.


No, I'm not trolling. Seems like everyone is set on not believing her story when it seems legit TO ME. Just like when the media first got the story of Johnny Depp abusing Amber Heard and it was actually the other way around. British Monarchy is an intuition based on exploiting other countries and it's people, so racism is definitely there. Tell me which headline you think it's not true and I'll double check it.
In the video, the one who keeps saying the family is racist to her is not Meghan, it's actually Harry. I've been reminded and the topic should be talked with no personal judgement on the members of this forum. So, don't tell me I'm trolling because I'm not interested on hating people who I don't know personally. There's that.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I defend free speech and I'm not even a staunch monarchist, but that cartoon is wholly offensive and worse inaccurate to the 'story'


I am wishing I could unsee that cartoon ... I don’t demand it be censored ...


----------



## Etriers

sdkitty said:


> agree...he wasn't "hot" or "cute" at all when he was young



But he is rich


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> And here’s another gem on my newsfeed today.   She really had no sense of what this level of fame would mean. Of all the things to complain about.
> 
> View attachment 5021002


 Kate and Louis were stuck in a traffic jam on a bridge this summer. She left the car and walked on the bridge with him to show him the boats. There was foot traffic onthe bridge and they were recognized, but people left them alone. If she could do that then surely MM and her mother could have gone out for coffee.   I have seen actors on popular TV shows and movies at the grocery store, restaurants and gas stations, They aren’t bothered.


----------



## dangerouscurves

Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.


----------



## marietouchet

I have read the French press on the Oprah interview ...
I think there is a different reaction to Megxit in France than in the US or U.K., the French are not quite sure what to make of it .. for ex, Point de Vue had lots of stuff, but odd and disconnected, front page title was WAR IS DECLARED , wow 
first article in the mag had a blow by blow of the interview, just what was said by H &M, no analysis, of course that view is sympathetic to HM
then article on QEII CW speech
third article, written before interview maybe, was about bullying


----------



## Etriers

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure "low key" is what would come to my mind first to describe a wedding that cost 40 millions (after #6 in line apparently insisted as much money was spent on him as on the future king's wedding), included a ton of celebrities, a priceless diamond tiara and a carriage ride to wave to the unwashed masses



Low-key as in no gold Cinderella carriage, umpteen flower girls and attendants, 30 foot train, etc... I imagine the expense, celebrities and tiara are ubiquitous at a royal wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> LA Times published a few Letters to the Editor on the subject of this thread, here is one:
> 
> View attachment 5020972


Looked him up. He is a local attention seeker


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

dangerouscurves said:


> Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.
> View attachment 5021391



How is this relevant to the point we are making though? We say CBS doctored the headlines they used, we can prove it, yet you insist otherwise and come up with this. That's a strawman fallacy.


----------



## dangerouscurves

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How is this relevant to the point we are making though? We say CBS doctored the headlines they used, we can prove it, yet you insist otherwise and come up with this. That's a strawman fallacy.


It doesn't. I posted this one to proof that the British tabloids are crazy and that her claim allegations are not far-fetched.


----------



## Etriers

dangerouscurves said:


> Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.
> View attachment 5021391



And unfortunately there are a lot of morons who believe that stuff.  That isn’t freedom of the press, that is defamation.  I don’t care what various opinions are about liking or not liking M/H/whomever, but no one deserves that.  Truly getting tired of how far humanity is willing to allow ourselves to sink.


----------



## Etriers

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How is this relevant to the point we are making though? We say CBS doctored the headlines they used, we can prove it, yet you insist otherwise and come up with this. That's a strawman fallacy.



It’s relevant because H and M have a legitimate claim that were mercilessly bashed around by the media.  They were, in fact, mercilessly bashed around by the media.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## dangerouscurves

Etriers said:


> And unfortunately there are a lot of morons who believe that stuff.  That isn’t freedom of the press, that is defamation.  I don’t care what various opinions are about liking or not liking M/H/whomever, but no one deserves that.  Truly getting tired of how far humanity is willing to allow ourselves to sink.


IKR? And people are more upset that she left the family and took Harry away from her than that they do to Andrew who is a phaedopile!


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> I defend free speech and I'm not even a staunch monarchist, but that cartoon is wholly offensive and worse inaccurate to the 'story'


Ok to see if I have this straight, the magazine is implying that the way the Queen silenced MM is comparable to the way George Floyd was choked to death. Does this mean they have sympathies with MM? How utterly ridiculous. You have to hand this to TRF, if they are not livid, they are a very stoic bunch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Etriers said:


> And unfortunately there are a lot of morons who believe that stuff.  That isn’t freedom of the press, that is defamation.  I don’t care what various opinions are about liking or not liking M/H/whomever, but no one deserves that.  Truly getting tired of how far humanity is willing to allow ourselves to sink.



I think nobody in this thread will disagree with you on this.


----------



## Lodpah

dangerouscurves said:


> No, I'm not trolling. Seems like everyone is set on not believing her story when it seems legit TO ME. Just like when the media first got the story of Johnny Depp abusing Amber Heard and it was actually the other way around. British Monarchy is an intuition based on exploiting other countries and it's people, so racism is definitely there. Tell me which headline you think it's not true and I'll double check it.
> In the video, the one who keeps saying the family is racist to her is not Meghan, it's actually Harry. I've been reminded and the topic should be talked with no personal judgement on the members of this forum. So, don't tell me I'm trolling because I'm not interested on hating people who I don't know personally. There's that.


You said it! Legit to YOU.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

dangerouscurves said:


> IKR? And people are more upset that she left the family and took Harry away from her than that they do to Andrew who is a phaedopile!



When I first addressed you I actually deleted a sentence about Andrew and whataboutism. I guess I could have just left in in there...you really need to work on that argumentation skills.


----------



## lalame

dangerouscurves said:


> IKR? And people are more upset that she left the family and took Harry away from her than that they do to Andrew who is a phaedopile!



I don't think ANYONE, and I mean anyone, is more upset about M and H leaving the BRF than what Andrew did. I mean he's the most unpopular BRF according to polls, right? You can't find even one positive piece of coverage about him these days. His interview was roundly mocked and the BRF put out a statement basically saying he's going to STFU right after.

But we haven't heard a peep about him in months.... whereas here is a super highly watched, sensational tell all that just happened a week ago so of COURSE we're talking about this right now instead of Andrew.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s not that surprising. US laws on fertility treatments are extremely different to ours. For example you can’t profit from egg donation in the UK. In the US -women can price by their age/education/ethnicity.


People  come to California for this because the laws are easier   The Marqess and Marchioness of Bath did this.  Her health precluded her carrying and delivering a second child herself so they used their own genetic material  with a surrogate in California.








						The Marchioness of Bath opens up about her surrogacy journey
					

‘Having Henry the way we had him was incredible, and such a different experience’




					www.tatler.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Etriers said:


> It’s relevant because H and M have a legitimate claim that were mercilessly bashed around by the media.  They were, in fact, mercilessly bashed around by the media.



It is relevant to the discours, but not at all relevant to CBS faking headlines though, which is what we were discussing.


----------



## jelliedfeels

dangerouscurves said:


> No, I'm not trolling. Seems like everyone is set on not believing her story when it seems legit TO ME. Just like when the media first got the story of Johnny Depp abusing Amber Heard and it was actually the other way around. British Monarchy is an intuition based on exploiting other countries and it's people, so racism is definitely there. Tell me which headline you think it's not true and I'll double check it.
> In the video, the one who keeps saying the family is racist to her is not Meghan, it's actually Harry. I've been reminded and the topic should be talked with no personal judgement on the members of this forum. So, don't tell me I'm trolling because I'm not interested on hating people who I don't know personally. There's that.


I’m sorry if I offended by asking if you were trolling- it was glib of me to imply negative intentions of you. I apologise. 

We’re not actually discussing what either of them said in the interview right now. 
We’re discussing the montage of headlines shown during the interview which is what CBSviacom is getting sued over. Those are the headlines which I said are not representative of the articles. 
If you wish to double check for say the ‘tainted seed’ article as it appeared in the Oprah montage where it is apparently an editorial opinion hosted by the DM I would be interested to see it.
 I have been unable to find it. 
I have only found a version where it is reported with clear condemnation that  someone linked to a politician said it and other things in her texts.


----------



## Etriers

dangerouscurves said:


> IKR? And people are more upset that she left the family and took Harry away from her than that they do to Andrew who is a phaedopile!



OT but I‘m not convinced that Andrew, despite showing tremendously poor judgement, should be labeled a Pedophile.  I think that implies a psychiatric disorder.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sorry if I offended by asking if you were trolling- it was glib of me to imply negative intentions of you. I apologise.
> 
> We’re not actually discussing what either of them said in the interview right now.
> We’re discussing the montage of headlines shown during the interview which is what CBSviacom is getting sued over. Those are the headlines which I said are not representative of the articles.
> If you wish to double check for say the ‘tainted seed’ article as it appeared in the Oprah montage where it is apparently an editorial opinion hosted by the DM I would be interested to see it.
> I have been unable to find it.
> I have only found a version where it is reported with clear condemnation that  someone linked to a politician said it and other things in her texts.



TY for recapping the convo because I couldn't keep up and was roundly confused.  I didn't realize this was a thing (the lawsuit).


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> I'm waiting for Meg to file a complaint to our Megs regarding our unruliness, utter racism, lack of truth and lack of awareness of mental health, on this thread.


But but she doesn't read anything written about her!


----------



## DrDior

dangerouscurves said:


> It doesn't. I posted this one to proof that the British tabloids are crazy and that her claim allegations are not far-fetched.



The Globe is owned by American Media, which is based in Boca Raton, Florida


----------



## gracekelly

From what I have observed over the decades, is there anyone that the British tabloid press has not made fun of?  The first time I saw this was on my first trip to the U.K. in 1993. There was a huge picture of Michael Jackson on the  first page of a paper with the headline *Wacko Jacko!*  At the time I found it shocking on many levels and had never seen anything like this about a big celebrity even in our most egregious tabloid,  The Inquirer.   I had no idea that U.K. papers had that kind of freedom. So now when I see these ridiculous headlines,  I laugh.   Online it is nothing but clickbait.


----------



## jelliedfeels

dangerouscurves said:


> It doesn't. I posted this one to proof that the British tabloids are crazy and that her claim allegations are not far-fetched.



umm...The globe is an American magazine. Published in the place they arrived at to escape their treatment by the British press. The globe doesn’t show anything about the British press’ treatment of  H&M. 

There’s also a massive difference between the press publishing embarrassing gossip and the press publishing something racist or in any other way discriminatory against you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

dangerouscurves said:


> IKR? And people are more upset that she left the family and took Harry away from her than that they do to Andrew who is a phaedopile!


Weren’t you just saying I shouldn’t make insinuations about other posters and we should all be polite?
This seems like a bit of an impolite insinuation to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> But but she doesn't read anything written about her!


Mmmmmmhmmmmm   
I'm wondering which of her trolls is also here.  Scobie?  Janina?  Meg herself!?


----------



## lalame

Totally off topic.... Birks caught my eye after learning about them from M. I love the Splash and Snowflake lines... does anyone have tips on the best ways to buy them (for Americans)? Do they ever do sales?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> And he was being truthful about wanting to be Camilla’s tampon. Although douchebag might be more appropriate.
> *
> Can you tell I don’t think much of Charles? *


I didn't pick up on that at all.


----------



## gracekelly

Interestingly the US tabloid press was caught up in several expensive law suits that they lost. That was about 25 years ago. From that time on they became much more careful and wanted at least two verifiable sources for a story.  I personally  know of one story that was published that everyone though was totally  made up.  I knew that it wasn’t because I knew two people who were present and could verify it. I have to admit that when they told me about the people involved, I thought they were making it up! Eventually it came out that the story was true and the tabloid vindicated and the two guys that told me the story gave me “I told you so!”


----------



## purseinsanity

Etriers said:


> But he is rich


Haha, yep.  My mother (who NEVER talks about sex) raised me to be independent and NEVER marry a man for just money, because "You still have to sleep with him!"    That was a lesson I never forgot.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> TY for recapping the convo because I couldn't keep up and was roundly confused.  I didn't realize this was a thing (the lawsuit).


You are right, I’ve jumped the gun on this a little. They’ve sent them the ‘strongly worded letter’ atm. Not clear if they are prosecuting. I was getting confused because there is a lot of suing going on with these two.

The bone of contention is still the same: the montage of headlines shown during the Oprah interview.

It should also be noted that other British newspapers appeared in this montage- so they could have grounds against CBSviacom as well.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

dangerouscurves said:


> Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.
> View attachment 5021391


Are you suggesting this rag is printed in the UK?  It's a USA tabloid based in Boca Raton, Florida. So take it up with them. It might just fall on deaf ears, but you're still entitled to complain.

From Wiki Globe

Edit#1  @jelliedfeels  Sorry I posted this before reading your post.
Edit#2 @DrDior Sorry I didn't see your post also.


----------



## scarlet555

dangerouscurves said:


> Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.
> View attachment 5021391



How do we know this is not real?  I’m dead serious, wasn’t there talk here on tpf of the national enquiere having lawyers backing them and what not?


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Haha, yep.  My mother (who NEVER talks about sex) raised me to be independent and NEVER marry a man for just money, because "You still have to sleep with him!"    That was a lesson I never forgot.



Yes ma’am! Better to have _looks_ and _money _


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Mmmmmmhmmmmm
> I'm wondering which of her trolls is also here.  Scobie?  Janina?  Meg herself!?



MM seems to like fashion, so I believe she has _definitely_ found the purse forum by now.


----------



## lalame

Aside from what they said about the establishment, I really don't know how H+M reconcile the dirty laundry they aired about his family with their reaction to her family doing the same. Can they really blame the BRF for being angry? Just because you say something that's true (assuming it's true) doesn't mean you should say it to millions of strangers.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Just heard that they are up in the polls in the US and down in the UK polls so I guess her plan is working. I don't think she gives a rats a$$ how the Brits perceive her.


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> Just heard that they are up in the polls in the US and down in the UK polls so I guess her plan is working. I don't think she gives a rats a$$ how the Brits perceive her.


She may not ... I wonder about Harry though ....

I just read that they chose to go to the Lion King premiere with Beyoncé and JayZ instead of going to a Marines shindig. Yet he was livid when accused of ignoring his patronage, and bummed when he lost it

I see no rational explanation for his behavior, but that is my problem, I am looking for a non knee jerk rational behavior, silly me

I don’t get her behavior either ... she WON the lawsuit, got Piers to quit , she WON ... but she continues to lash out ... is there a point when vengeance no longer satisfies ? Beats me

and finally, she is kinda sorta burning English bridges for her kids ... who knows, it might matter to them


----------



## limom

Etriers said:


> OT but I‘m not convinced that Andrew, despite showing tremendously poor judgement, should be labeled a Pedophile.  I think that implies a psychiatric disorder.


Technically speaking he is an hebephile IE someone who likes teenage girls.
It has never been claimed that he molested children.
Nevertheless, he can be a perv and the Sussex attention whore/liars/ ungrateful morons and plain users.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Etriers said:


> It’s relevant because H and M have a legitimate claim that were mercilessly bashed around by the media.  They were, in fact, mercilessly bashed around by the media.


Agree they got lots of bad press ... but did they merit any of that ? I am on the fence about that , I am in the middle and have not completely been convinced one way or the other 
EX the SHE MADE ME CRY a story ..... the details still don’t add for me to say who was to blame, I still am on the fence, M did not erase my doubts
She needed to provide more context (facts) to convince me, but that is how I roll, gimme facts, you won’t convince me by tugging at my heart strings


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Technically speaking he is an hebephile IE someone who likes teenage girls.
> It has never been claimed that he molested children.
> Nevertheless, he can be a perv and the Sussex attention whore/liars/ ungrateful morons and plain users.


The Andrew thing is taking  forever...


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Agree they got lots of bad press ... but did they merit any of that ? I am on the fence about that , I am in the middle and have not completely been convinced one way or the other
> EX the SHE MADE ME CRY a story ..... the details still don’t add for me to say who was to blame, I still am on the fence, M did not erase my doubts
> She needed to provide more context (facts) to convince me, but that is how I roll, gimme facts, you won’t convince me by tugging at my heart strings


Who does not cry at a wedding?
It is so stressful for all involved.


----------



## bag-mania

dangerouscurves said:


> Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.
> View attachment 5021391



That kind of headline is typical for an American tabloid. If you become famous enough, eventually you will see your face on the covers. The outrageous headlines attract people to pick them up and buy the magazine at the checkout line in the supermarket.

I think the meaner headline on that cover was the small one that says Shelley Long’s overdose suicide attempt back in the early 2000s ruined her face. Talk about kicking someone when she’s down!


----------



## Aimee3

Somehow I doubt anyone can make MM cry REAL tears.


----------



## Lodpah

Etriers said:


> It’s relevant because H and M have a legitimate claim that were mercilessly
> bashed around by the media.  They were, in fact, mercilessly bashed around by the media.





marietouchet said:


> She may not ... I wonder about Harry though ....
> 
> I just read that they chose to go to the Lion King premiere with Beyoncé and JayZ instead of going to a Marines shindig. Yet he was livid when accused of ignoring his patronage, and bummed when he lost it
> 
> I see no rational explanation for his behavior, but that is my problem, I am looking for a non knee jerk rational behavior, silly me
> 
> I don’t get her behavior either ... she WON the lawsuit, got Piers to quit , she WON ... but she continues to lash out ... is there a point when vengeance no longer satisfies ? Beats me
> 
> and finally, she is kinda sorta burning English bridges for her kids ... who knows, it might matter to them


Like.


----------



## youngster

What a sign of the times. A prince of the United Kingdom, with all his privileges, advantages, and wealth, somehow thinks he too is a victim. A victim of the press, of his family, of the universe, of whatever.

He was cut off financially! 
Well, no, he apparently just got a lump sum payment from Prince Charles of something around 1 million British pounds to see him through his first year in the U.S. (For us little people, that's about $1.4 million U.S. dollars for 1 year of expenses.)  He might have had to dip into his own multi-million dollar fortune inherited from Diana!  What an insult.

His full time security was pulled! 
Well, he was no longer a senior working royal and he relocated to another continent.  Asking the UK taxpayer to provide his protection and that of the Duchess and baby was a ridiculous request.  First, if you aren't a senior working royal, you don't get full time protection. The end.  Even if an exception was made for the Exalted Sussex Couple, the cost of keeping a UK protection detail in the U.S. would be insanely high, something like 7 million GBP per year at a time when the UK economy is suffering from shutdowns and Covid and the Metropolitan Police have budget woes.  A British protection detail also wouldn't be able to operate in the U.S. as they would in the UK, they don't know U.S. laws, they can't carry weapons, they'd have to commute back and forth to the UK from their own homes on rotation, there would be visa issues and housing issues. What an entitled idiot Harry is.

They wouldn't make Archie a prince! 
Well, Archie is the great-grandchild of the Queen, not a grandchild. The only great-grandchildren who get the prince/princess titles are the children of the heir. So Archie doesn't get the title until Charles becomes King and even that has always been in doubt as Charles, for years and years, has stated he wants to slim down the monarchy and reduce the number of princes and princesses running around.  How hard is that to understand, Harry and MM?  

You could just keep going, for every topic that was covered. It's both entertaining and yet horrifying how clueless these two actually are.


----------



## Chanbal

My guess is that MM&H are not interested in normalizing diversity.  This is a great article!

*Trevor Phillips says the Royals seem 'no more prejudiced than any other family in multiracial Britain' after racism claims and believes Harry and Meghan 'blew their chance' to normalise diversity*
Trevor Phillips said the Royal Family seem 'no more or less prejudiced' than any other British family after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's racism claims.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey that there were 'concerns and conversations' about how dark their unborn son Archie's skin might be.

Meghan also appeared to suggest in the interview that Archie may not have received the royal title of prince because of alleged prejudice related to his skin colour.

Mr Phillips, the former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said it was 'almost certain' that members of the Royal Family 'speculated' over whether Archie would look more like his mother or father.
Trevor Phillips said the Royal Family seem 'no more or less prejudiced' than any other British family after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's racism claims.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey that there were 'concerns and conversations' about how dark their unborn son Archie's skin might be.

Meghan also appeared to suggest in the interview that Archie may not have received the royal title of prince because of alleged prejudice related to his skin colour.

*Mr Phillips, the former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said it was 'almost certain' that members of the Royal Family 'speculated' over whether Archie would look more like his mother or father.

However, he added that any family which does not have such a conversation would be 'heartless'.  *

He then said that the evidence presented does not portray the Royals in a worse light than any other British family.

The campaigner then drew a negative comparison between former US President Barack ***** and Harry and Meghan.

*He said that while Mr Ob***a had used his 'eloquence' and 'intelligence' to 'neuter' the question of race in high office in America, Meghan and Harry 'blew the chance to normalise diversity within the royal family.'*

Mr Phillips branded this an 'epic fail' in a nation which has people of colour such as Home Secretary Priti Patel, Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng and Chancellor Rishi Sunak in 'high office'.  

His comments come after Mr Phillips questioned why Miss Winfrey did not ask about Harry's own past racist remarks and behaviour.

Entire article here!


----------



## rose60610

I've never purchased any tabloid, but I always see the covers at check out aisles. Every single one I've seen over the years IS ALWAYS extremely vicious toward someone. If there is ever anything positive it's always in the tiny print. To single out MM as a "victim" of the tabloids is like saying no one else has ever been thrown under the bus by them. Not that I'm defending tabloids, but just because they're going after Meghan doesn't make her martyr. They go after everybody. The tabloid post in #51,583, while slanderous, scandalous and vicious, is not racist. I can think of people who not long ago were treated by the Main Stream Media every bit as bad as the tabloids! It's no wonder all media outlets have close to zero respect. 

Quite frankly, I think Meghan obviously employs and deploys the exact same tactics as the tabloids. The things she told Oprah? Oh please. She is every bit as vicious as the tabloids! She LOVES throwing mud. Then she cries "Victim!" to top it all off.


----------



## maris.crane

gracekelly said:


> Interestingly the US tabloid press was caught up in several expensive law suits that they lost. That was about 25 years ago. From that time on they became much more careful and wanted at least two verifiable sources for a story.  *I personally  know of one story that was published that everyone though was totally  made up.  I knew that it wasn’t because I knew two people who were present and could verify it. I have to admit that when they told me about the people involved, I thought they were making it up! Eventually it came out that the story was true and the tabloid vindicated* and the two guys that told me the story gave me “I told you so!”



Let it be noted _The Enquirer_ has won* a Pulitzer Prize. Obviously, I wouldn’t treat tabloids as gospel, but I think the tabloids have proven that where there is smoke, there is often fire.

Editing: they were considered/nominated from what I can find. But point still stands!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@youngster
@Chanbal
@rose60610

A+, perfect posts.  H&M were given a gift of international exposure. They squandered it.  They created more division than any politician. The pity party simply doesn’t resonate in a pandemic.

ETA: Poor little rich people???








						Prince Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion TRIPLES in value
					

Last year, the royal couple bought their nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion in the exclusive neighbourhood of Montecito, California, with the help of a $9.6million mortgage.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's nine-bedroom mansion in the exclusive neighbourhood of Montecito, California, has tripled in value just nine months after they bought it for £10million. 

Last year, the royal couple bought their nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion with the help of a $9.6million mortgage. 

The property market in Montecito has gone 'crazy' since the summer according to a local estate agent, meaning Harry and Meghan's home could have tripled in value._


----------



## poopsie

dangerouscurves said:


> Look how crazy the tabloids are and this is just one example.
> View attachment 5021391




Caroline is crippled??????? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> First of all, I think MM has lovely relatives on Doria's side. I feel so bad for them. What classy people they seem to be and they retained their dignity even though I believe they were sincerely hurt they were not invited to the wedding. I find it heartbreaking, not one cousin?
> 
> 
> Does Meghan Markle have a relationship with her black relatives besides her mom?
> Mechelle Eleene
> , Supporter of the Sussexes
> Updated July 22, 2019
> 
> Originally Answered: Does Meghan Markle have a relationship for black relatives besides her mom?
> Meghan’s uncle, Joseph Johnson spoke out to the press about Meghan’s family life as a child. When Meghan was younger, she had a very close relationship with members of her mother’s side of family including her grandmother Jeanette, grandfather Ragland and Aunt Sandra. At this current stage of her life, it seems she is no longer close to members of her mother’s side of family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stayed at her grandparents house often and had a very close relationship with Jeanette (Doria’s mom) before she died in 2000. Jo mentioned that she sacrificed weekends to be at her grandmother’s bedside when she was sick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She regularly went out with her cousins and attended family gatherings and get togethers with members of her mother’s side of family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Even though Joseph expressed delight and happiness for Meghan’s engagement and marriage to Harry, he said that family members from her mother’s side felt hurt because they didn’t receive invites to the wedding.*
> _*Her Uncle Jo tried to make sense of why they hadn’t been invited when stating:*_
> *'My wife was kind of miffed. You know — 800 guests. But I said, 'Right, we're not having that kind of close relationship right now. Meghan has her own set of friends now. They were the ones she invited. I guess you could say they are Hollywood royalty. People in the spotlight, and that's what her life is about.'*
> Meghan’s uncle Joseph and wife
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Update: Thanks for reading and for commenting. I just want to add that Meghan’s mother’s side of family is proud of her and loves her very much.
> 
> Edited to Add: How lovely the last couple look.


nice of them to be supportive of her after she snubbed them


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Caroline is crippled??????? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Almost certain it happened when she was abducted by aliens 


@sdkitty  one more topic OW could have asked about. So many missed opportunities


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> Technically speaking he is an hebephile IE someone who likes teenage girls.
> It has never been claimed that he molested children.
> Nevertheless, he can be a perv and the Sussex attention whore/liars/ ungrateful morons and plain users.



thanks for pointing that out. I don’t condone his behavior at all but I think it’s important to note that there _is_ a _difference_.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure "low key" is what would come to my mind first to describe a wedding that cost 40 millions (after #6 in line apparently insisted as much money was spent on him as on the future king's wedding), included a ton of celebrities, a priceless diamond tiara and a carriage ride to wave to the unwashed masses


right...the carriage ride alone makes it very grand....and that veil over her face.....for a divorcee to wear a Long veil over her face is wrong to me.  but I guess times have changed


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> My guess is that MM&H are not interested in normalizing diversity.  This is a great article!
> 
> *Trevor Phillips says the Royals seem 'no more prejudiced than any other family in multiracial Britain' after racism claims and believes Harry and Meghan 'blew their chance' to normalise diversity*
> Trevor Phillips said the Royal Family seem 'no more or less prejudiced' than any other British family after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's racism claims.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey that there were 'concerns and conversations' about how dark their unborn son Archie's skin might be.
> 
> Meghan also appeared to suggest in the interview that Archie may not have received the royal title of prince because of alleged prejudice related to his skin colour.
> 
> Mr Phillips, the former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said it was 'almost certain' that members of the Royal Family 'speculated' over whether Archie would look more like his mother or father.
> Trevor Phillips said the Royal Family seem 'no more or less prejudiced' than any other British family after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's racism claims.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey that there were 'concerns and conversations' about how dark their unborn son Archie's skin might be.
> 
> Meghan also appeared to suggest in the interview that Archie may not have received the royal title of prince because of alleged prejudice related to his skin colour.
> 
> *Mr Phillips, the former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said it was 'almost certain' that members of the Royal Family 'speculated' over whether Archie would look more like his mother or father.
> 
> However, he added that any family which does not have such a conversation would be 'heartless'.  *
> 
> He then said that the evidence presented does not portray the Royals in a worse light than any other British family.
> 
> The campaigner then drew a negative comparison between former US President Barack ***** and Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *He said that while Mr Ob***a had used his 'eloquence' and 'intelligence' to 'neuter' the question of race in high office in America, Meghan and Harry 'blew the chance to normalise diversity within the royal family.'*
> 
> Mr Phillips branded this an 'epic fail' in a nation which has people of colour such as Home Secretary Priti Patel, Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng and Chancellor Rishi Sunak in 'high office'.
> 
> His comments come after Mr Phillips questioned why Miss Winfrey did not ask about Harry's own past racist remarks and behaviour.
> 
> Entire article here!



Probs not relevant but the Marchioness of Bath who is half Nigerian, half English became the first black marchioness in English history in 2020
A marchioness holds  the second highest title in the peerage system
So, MM is not the first and she won’t be the last WOC in a high position on what seems (to me) an outdated system


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @youngster
> @Chanbal
> @rose60610
> 
> A+, perfect posts.  H&M were given a gift of international exposure. They squandered it.  They created more division than any politician. The pity party simply doesn’t resonate in a pandemic.
> 
> ETA: Poor little rich people???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion TRIPLES in value
> 
> 
> Last year, the royal couple bought their nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion in the exclusive neighbourhood of Montecito, California, with the help of a $9.6million mortgage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's nine-bedroom mansion in the exclusive neighbourhood of Montecito, California, has tripled in value just nine months after they bought it for £10million.
> 
> Last year, the royal couple bought their nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion with the help of a $9.6million mortgage.
> 
> The property market in Montecito has gone 'crazy' since the summer according to a local estate agent, meaning Harry and Meghan's home could have tripled in value._



Thanks, your posts are A++

I'm not surprised as MM's house was purchased far below its market value. I believe Scarface had it listed for >20M at one point.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> What a sign of the times. A prince of the United Kingdom, with all his privileges, advantages, and wealth, somehow thinks he too is a victim. A victim of the press, of his family, of the universe, of whatever.
> *You could just keep going, for every topic that was covered. It's both entertaining and yet horrifying how clueless these two actually are.*


I don't think they're clueless.  They (especially Meg) knows EXACTLY what they are doing.  She is manipulating the moronic "woke" US press and getting the attention she has always craved.


----------



## LemonDrop

What’s the latest way to watch this? I didn’t have any access to the CBS play and replay.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think they're clueless.  They (especially Meg) knows EXACTLY what they are doing.  She is manipulating the moronic "woke" US press and getting the attention she has always craved.



I thought of them as clueless because they seemed generally bewildered by reasonable concepts such as losing official UK security when they moved to another continent lol.


----------



## Lodpah

Laughter is good.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Looked him up. He is a local attention seeker



There is still hope!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> There is still hope!
> 
> View attachment 5021579



Waiting for the retraction in 3..............2.................1


----------



## poopsie

On a more serious note I hope that isn't Betty's real name and location


----------



## jennlt

Opinion | Why We Care About the Royal Family Feud
					

The British monarchy has endured for more than a millennium, and the queen is a symbol of stability.




					www.wsj.com
				










By 
Peggy Noonan
March 11, 2021 7:08 pm ET



What just happened?
That wasn’t just a high-charged celebrity interview that everyone talked about and then it went away. Oprah Winfrey’s conversation last weekend with the duke and duchess of Sussex will reverberate and last. It was history, a full-bore assault on an institution, the British monarchy, that has endured more than 1,000 years.
Harry and Meghan famously leveled two big charges, that the House of Windsor is racist and that it is weak. Previous incarnations of criticism painted it as invincible—the sharp-elbowed courtiers, the coldhearted family, they can crush you like a bug. No, Harry said, _they _are the bugs, trapped in fear of the tabloids that control whether they’ll keep the throne. “There is a level of control by fear that has existed for generations. I mean generations,” he said. “My father and my brother”—Prince Charles and Prince William —“they are trapped. They don’t get to leave. And I have huge compassion for that.” That must be a comfort to them.
No immediate-family heir to the British throne has ever talked like this. You are made quite vulnerable when people suddenly see you as weak. What remains of your mystique is lessened when you’re seen as just another group of frightened persons.
*NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Alerts from Peggy Noonan*
Sign up to receive email alerts from Peggy Noonan.
PREVIEW

SUBSCRIBE
*WSJ NEWSLETTER*
*Notes on the News*
The news of the week in context, with Tyler Blint-Welsh.
I would also like to receive updates and special offers from Dow Jones and affiliates. I can unsubscribe at any time.I agree to the Privacy Policy and Cookie Notice.

Meghan charged that her infant son, Archie—the “first member of color in this family”—was treated differently and denied things due him because he was biracial. There were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.” She wouldn’t say who was involved. “I think that would be very damaging to them.” So she knew the power of the charge she was bringing. Harry, asked about it, said, “That conversation I’m never going to share, but at the time—at the time it was awkward. I was a bit shocked.” His refusal to name the person with whom he had the conversation didn’t limit guilt but dispersed it.
The queen’s response was a small masterpiece of blandness that sucked the heat from the moment: Accusations of racism are “concerning” and will be “taken very seriously,” but “recollections may vary.”
This is a story that will evolve for some time. Some observations:
Public life has gotten extremely, unrelentingly performative. Have you noticed you keep hearing that word? It means everyone is always performing—the politician, the news anchor, the angry activist. This gives natural actors an edge, and leaves those who aren’t by nature actors at a disadvantage. Meghan was a professional actress.
*READ MORE DECLARATIONS*


America Loses a Wise Man March 4, 2021
The Old New York Won’t Come Back February 25, 2021
Rush Limbaugh’s Complicated Legacy February 18, 2021
A Vote to Acquit ***** Is a Vote for a Lie February 11, 2021
Liz Cheney Wins One for Sanity February 4, 2021
Both Meghan and Harry speak a kind of woke-corporate communications language that is smooth and calming but also slippery and opaque. You can never quite get your hands around the thought as you grab for meaning.
They spoke a great deal about their pain—it is a subject that animates them—but they seemed also to wield that pain as a weapon in a way that left you wondering if pain is really the word for what they experienced, as opposed to anger followed by cool desire for revenge.
Some of what was said beggared belief. Meghan claimed that going in she didn’t really have any idea what the royal family was, didn’t Google or do any research. “As Americans especially what you do know about the royals is what you read in fairy tales.” Actually, no. When Princess Diana died in 1997 it was a world-wide, epic drama. Diana was raised to heroic status, the people’s princess, roughly treated by royals who didn’t deserve her. Her funeral was watched by 2.5 billion people. Meghan Markle, home in California, was 16, presumably loved media, and went on to study acting. Is it believable she didn’t know this story, follow it, see who had the starring role?

As I watched I got the sense she knew more history than she said, that perhaps on some level she wanted to be Princess Diana, only she wanted not to die.
She sees herself as a moral instructor, an ethical leader. She and Harry were originally “aligned” by their “cause-driven work”: “I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights.” She wishes to “live authentically,” “just getting down to basics.” This apparently involves rescue chickens. She and Harry spirited them from a factory farm. “Well, you know, I just love rescuing,” she said. This was perhaps meant to underscore the idea that she rescued Harry from his charnel house of a family.
She is good at underscoring. She watches “The Little Mermaid” and comes up with a handy metaphor for her journey: “And I went, ‘Oh my God! She falls in love with the prince and because of that, she has to lose her voice.’ . . . But by the end, she gets her voice back.”
This is performative to the nth degree.
They have a foundation and a media-content company called Archewell. Asked about the latter, she said, “Life is about storytelling. About the stories we tell ourselves, what we’re told, and what we buy into.” Well, that’s part of what life is. “For us to be able to have storytelling through a truthful lens, that is hopefully uplifting, is going to be great knowing how many people that can land with.” Can land with? That is practiced show-people talk. She wishes to “give a voice” to those who “underrepresented, and aren’t really heard.”
Why should an American care about any of this? I suppose we shouldn’t. In a practical way we’re interested in the royal family because we don’t have one, don’t want one, and think it’s great that you do. We get the benefits—the pictures of clothes and castles, the horses and military outfits, the stories of backstairs and love affairs—and you pay the bills.
But I think there’s something deeper, more mystical in our interest, a sense that however messy the monarchy, it embodies a nation, the one we long ago came from and broke with. The high purpose of monarchy is to lend its mystique and authority to the ideas of stability and continuance.
Henry VIII, Mad King George, Victoria—these names still echo. It is rare and wonderful when you can say of a small old woman entering a large reception area, “England has entered the room.” Someday Elizabeth II will leave us and the world will honestly mourn, not only because of what she represented but because she was old-style. She performed but wasn’t performative. She was appropriately, heroically contained, didn’t share her emotions because after all it wasn’t about her, it was about a kingdom, united. You could rely on her to love her country and commonwealth; she was born and raised to love them. And so she has been for the world a constant. And in this world, a constant is a valuable thing.

I keep thinking of the special predicament she and her family are in. Diana did them a lot of damage in her life, and her death, but their feelings about her were mixed. She wasn’t born into the family, she was a thing that happened to the family. But Harry—Harry they would have loved, as brother and son and grandson. They would _miss _him. And now he has done great damage to everything they are and represent.
The old queen must be grieving. Not that she’d say it, or share the wound. There’s something so admirable in that.









2:08
	

	
	
		
		

		
			














Opinion: No Woke Duchess Is Bringing Down the Monarchy
Main Street: Britain's monarchy has lasted a thousand years, surviving Oliver Cromwell, Guy Fawkes, several Popes, the Nazis and Wallis Simpson. No woke Duchess is going to bring it down. Image: Chris Jackson/Getty Images


----------



## eunaddict

FreeSpirit71 said:


> The same sympathies have not been extended to a pregnant Meghan.




If this is regarding the Oprah interview then no, no sympathies. She looked for drama by agreeing to the interview (after things have been rather quiet between them and the BRF) and stirring the pot all over again. If you look for drama then cry when you find it, it's really no one's fault but yours.

Now, if she HAD PPD or was depressed while pregnant then the same advice (and sympathies) would go for Kate or her - seek help (and a lot of comments have said that she should have sought help just, not from HR). The exact same advice (and sympathy) people would give to Jane Doe from down the road who has depression/PPD.

With regards to who made whom cry over the bridesmaids' outfits, then the sympathies are definitely with Kate because so far, everyone (the public, staff etc.) has said she's kind IRL and easy to work with and she seems protective of her staff...meanwhile, that story fits much better as a piece of the jigsaw that are the other stories of MM being "difficult", stories that have stemmed from acting days, through her wedding and into her inability to keep staff.


----------



## Lodpah

I miss those days when people can laugh at themselves and others laugh with them and not get offended. That’s one thing this generation can probably never know. The comedians who didn’t have to be scared to joke about anything.

Anyway, it’s time for an interlude. At least for me. Enjoy. Popcorn, hotdogs, those snowy candies, pretzels, whatever you want. No roast chicken sold here, so please don’t ask and no waffles either, we don’t have waffle makers.

Prigrammimg will resume shortly, so please pee in the woods but watch for crocodiles as they do go on land, hydrate and drive safe when you leave.


----------



## Twelve

lalame said:


> Totally off topic.... Birks caught my eye after learning about them from M. I love the Splash and Snowflake lines... does anyone have tips on the best ways to buy them (for Americans)? Do they ever do sales?


Not sure if this help.






						Maison Birks  Canada’s Diamond & Fine Jewellery Leader
					

Discover Maison Birks' collection of luxury, watches and accessories. Maison Birks offers you a choice as unique and meaningful as each of life’s occasions.




					www.maisonbirks.com


----------



## eunaddict

RoryX said:


> Its been reported on several forums that Charlotte's dress didn't fit, she was squirmy during the fitting, and *Meghan lost her temper and called her fat.* Cue Kate crying. It also explains Kate's tight hold on her kids at the wedding.



If any of this turns out true, and Kate _*STILL*_ sent flowers after...she's a much bigger and better person than I could ever hope to be. Cripes, I would have pulled my entire family from the wedding AND publicized exactly why I did that. 

Who calls a 3 year old child "fat"?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

LemonDrop said:


> What’s the latest way to watch this? I didn’t have any access to the CBS play and replay.




Are you in the US? If you are, just download the CBS app and you'll be able to watch the full interview for free. I just tried that and I didn't have to pay for any app subscription whatsoever.

ETA: I didn't sign up for a CBS account either and it's playing just fine.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I thought of them as clueless because they seemed generally bewildered by reasonable concepts such as losing official UK security when they moved to another continent lol.


I think it's just part of her act.  She acts like an innocent ingenue, but pushing 40, that's a wee bit of a stretch!


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, without fuss.... 


			https://t.co/LMrElUMSFs


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> I miss those days when people can laugh at themselves and others laugh with them and not get offended. That’s one thing this generation can probably never know. The comedians who didn’t have to be scared to joke about anything.
> 
> Anyway, it’s time for an interlude. At least for me. Enjoy. Popcorn, hotdogs, those snowy candies, pretzels, whatever you want. No roast chicken sold here, so please don’t ask and no waffles either, we don’t have waffle makers.
> 
> Prigrammimg will resume shortly, so please pee in the woods but watch for crocodiles as they do go on land, hydrate and drive safe when you leave.



Gosh that was a lovely performance. Love that pianist coordinated her yellow nail polish to her blue and yellow dress.
On topic, I hope that Ms relatives were not excluded, or chose not to attend the wedding because of their more modest budgets for clothing and grooming. I like to think that 99% of people would be respectful towards Ms family no matter how they were dressed. M herself could have led by example instead of seeming almost embarrassed of them, which appeared to be a reason why they weren't there.

Edited bc posts I have half written but seemed to disappear on me pop back somehow into new posts. Sorry readers!


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Opinion | Why We Care About the Royal Family Feud
> 
> 
> The British monarchy has endured for more than a millennium, and the queen is a symbol of stability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By
> Peggy Noonan
> March 11, 2021 7:08 pm ET
> 
> 
> 
> What just happened?
> That wasn’t just a high-charged celebrity interview that everyone talked about and then it went away. Oprah Winfrey’s conversation last weekend with the duke and duchess of Sussex will reverberate and last. It was history, a full-bore assault on an institution, the British monarchy, that has endured more than 1,000 years.
> Harry and Meghan famously leveled two big charges, that the House of Windsor is racist and that it is weak. Previous incarnations of criticism painted it as invincible—the sharp-elbowed courtiers, the coldhearted family, they can crush you like a bug. No, Harry said, _they _are the bugs, trapped in fear of the tabloids that control whether they’ll keep the throne. “There is a level of control by fear that has existed for generations. I mean generations,” he said. “My father and my brother”—Prince Charles and Prince William —“they are trapped. They don’t get to leave. And I have huge compassion for that.” That must be a comfort to them.
> No immediate-family heir to the British throne has ever talked like this. You are made quite vulnerable when people suddenly see you as weak. What remains of your mystique is lessened when you’re seen as just another group of frightened persons.
> *NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
> Alerts from Peggy Noonan*
> Sign up to receive email alerts from Peggy Noonan.
> PREVIEW
> 
> SUBSCRIBE
> *WSJ NEWSLETTER*
> *Notes on the News*
> The news of the week in context, with Tyler Blint-Welsh.
> I would also like to receive updates and special offers from Dow Jones and affiliates. I can unsubscribe at any time.I agree to the Privacy Policy and Cookie Notice.
> 
> Meghan charged that her infant son, Archie—the “first member of color in this family”—was treated differently and denied things due him because he was biracial. There were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.” She wouldn’t say who was involved. “I think that would be very damaging to them.” So she knew the power of the charge she was bringing. Harry, asked about it, said, “That conversation I’m never going to share, but at the time—at the time it was awkward. I was a bit shocked.” His refusal to name the person with whom he had the conversation didn’t limit guilt but dispersed it.
> The queen’s response was a small masterpiece of blandness that sucked the heat from the moment: Accusations of racism are “concerning” and will be “taken very seriously,” but “recollections may vary.”
> This is a story that will evolve for some time. Some observations:
> Public life has gotten extremely, unrelentingly performative. Have you noticed you keep hearing that word? It means everyone is always performing—the politician, the news anchor, the angry activist. This gives natural actors an edge, and leaves those who aren’t by nature actors at a disadvantage. Meghan was a professional actress.
> *READ MORE DECLARATIONS*
> 
> 
> America Loses a Wise Man March 4, 2021
> The Old New York Won’t Come Back February 25, 2021
> Rush Limbaugh’s Complicated Legacy February 18, 2021
> A Vote to Acquit ***** Is a Vote for a Lie February 11, 2021
> Liz Cheney Wins One for Sanity February 4, 2021
> Both Meghan and Harry speak a kind of woke-corporate communications language that is smooth and calming but also slippery and opaque. You can never quite get your hands around the thought as you grab for meaning.
> They spoke a great deal about their pain—it is a subject that animates them—but they seemed also to wield that pain as a weapon in a way that left you wondering if pain is really the word for what they experienced, as opposed to anger followed by cool desire for revenge.
> Some of what was said beggared belief. Meghan claimed that going in she didn’t really have any idea what the royal family was, didn’t Google or do any research. “As Americans especially what you do know about the royals is what you read in fairy tales.” Actually, no. When Princess Diana died in 1997 it was a world-wide, epic drama. Diana was raised to heroic status, the people’s princess, roughly treated by royals who didn’t deserve her. Her funeral was watched by 2.5 billion people. Meghan Markle, home in California, was 16, presumably loved media, and went on to study acting. Is it believable she didn’t know this story, follow it, see who had the starring role?
> 
> As I watched I got the sense she knew more history than she said, that perhaps on some level she wanted to be Princess Diana, only she wanted not to die.
> She sees herself as a moral instructor, an ethical leader. She and Harry were originally “aligned” by their “cause-driven work”: “I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights.” She wishes to “live authentically,” “just getting down to basics.” This apparently involves rescue chickens. She and Harry spirited them from a factory farm. “Well, you know, I just love rescuing,” she said. This was perhaps meant to underscore the idea that she rescued Harry from his charnel house of a family.
> She is good at underscoring. She watches “The Little Mermaid” and comes up with a handy metaphor for her journey: “And I went, ‘Oh my God! She falls in love with the prince and because of that, she has to lose her voice.’ . . . But by the end, she gets her voice back.”
> This is performative to the nth degree.
> They have a foundation and a media-content company called Archewell. Asked about the latter, she said, “Life is about storytelling. About the stories we tell ourselves, what we’re told, and what we buy into.” Well, that’s part of what life is. “For us to be able to have storytelling through a truthful lens, that is hopefully uplifting, is going to be great knowing how many people that can land with.” Can land with? That is practiced show-people talk. She wishes to “give a voice” to those who “underrepresented, and aren’t really heard.”
> Why should an American care about any of this? I suppose we shouldn’t. In a practical way we’re interested in the royal family because we don’t have one, don’t want one, and think it’s great that you do. We get the benefits—the pictures of clothes and castles, the horses and military outfits, the stories of backstairs and love affairs—and you pay the bills.
> But I think there’s something deeper, more mystical in our interest, a sense that however messy the monarchy, it embodies a nation, the one we long ago came from and broke with. The high purpose of monarchy is to lend its mystique and authority to the ideas of stability and continuance.
> Henry VIII, Mad King George, Victoria—these names still echo. It is rare and wonderful when you can say of a small old woman entering a large reception area, “England has entered the room.” Someday Elizabeth II will leave us and the world will honestly mourn, not only because of what she represented but because she was old-style. She performed but wasn’t performative. She was appropriately, heroically contained, didn’t share her emotions because after all it wasn’t about her, it was about a kingdom, united. You could rely on her to love her country and commonwealth; she was born and raised to love them. And so she has been for the world a constant. And in this world, a constant is a valuable thing.
> 
> I keep thinking of the special predicament she and her family are in. Diana did them a lot of damage in her life, and her death, but their feelings about her were mixed. She wasn’t born into the family, she was a thing that happened to the family. But Harry—Harry they would have loved, as brother and son and grandson. They would _miss _him. And now he has done great damage to everything they are and represent.
> The old queen must be grieving. Not that she’d say it, or share the wound. There’s something so admirable in that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2:08
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: No Woke Duchess Is Bringing Down the Monarchy
> Main Street: Britain's monarchy has lasted a thousand years, surviving Oliver Cromwell, Guy Fawkes, several Popes, the Nazis and Wallis Simpson. No woke Duchess is going to bring it down. Image: Chris Jackson/Getty Images


Finally!  a critque of these phonies by a legitimate American journalist


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> Meanwhile, without fuss....
> 
> 
> https://t.co/LMrElUMSFs


Oh my gosh, Kate. That was so touching.
RIP Sarah Everard.


----------



## bag-mania

maris.crane said:


> Let it be noted _The Enquirer_ has won* a Pulitzer Prize. Obviously, I wouldn’t treat tabloids as gospel, but I think the tabloids have proven that where there is smoke, there is often fire.
> 
> Editing: they were considered/nominated from what I can find. But point still stands!



It was the National Enquirer of all publications that investigated and exposed a philandering presidential candidate so that he had to drop out of the race. I’m sure there must have been reporters at the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the three major TV networks who were all aware of it but they were happy enough to look the other way. Only after the Enquirer story broke were the “legitimate” press forced to report the story. 

Times have changed. I’m not sure a cheating candidate is news anymore.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Finally!  a critque of these phonies by a legitimate American journalist


This was such a mature, well thought out review.
It is going to be so sad to see QE2 pass away. I hope that she makes her 70 anniversary and more...


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Meanwhile, without fuss....
> 
> 
> https://t.co/LMrElUMSFs


I saw that!  Milling about with the peasants!   I mean how *could* she?? She must've hired her own photographers to document every step!! 
THIS is the difference between KM and MM.  Not their skin color (which is actually not that different), but their actions and genuine ness.
Although I'm sure the Meg trolls will claim otherwise.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> On a more serious note I hope that isn't Betty's real name and location


I googled her, and I'm afraid she may have used her real name... Let's hope SSS (Sunshine S & Sussex) missed this LA times.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I googled her, and I'm afraid she may have used her real name... Let's hope SSS (Sunshine S & Sussex) missed this LA times.



It's the rabid take no prisoners stans she needs to worry about


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> THIS is the difference between KM and MM.  Not their skin color (which is actually not that different), but their actions and genuine ness.



My first thought when I saw that was "The other one would have zoomed in on any camera around and graced them with a completely inappropriate megawatt smile." While with Kate, you get the impression it was personally important to her to be there for the right reasons.


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> I miss those days when people can laugh at themselves and others laugh with them and not get offended. That’s one thing this generation can probably never know. The comedians who didn’t have to be scared to joke about anything.
> 
> Anyway, it’s time for an interlude. At least for me. Enjoy. Popcorn, hotdogs, those snowy candies, pretzels, whatever you want. No roast chicken sold here, so please don’t ask and no waffles either, we don’t have waffle makers.
> 
> Prigrammimg will resume shortly, so please pee in the woods but watch for crocodiles as they do go on land, hydrate and drive safe when you leave.



Humor, I miss it too


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Meanwhile, without fuss....
> 
> 
> https://t.co/LMrElUMSFs



Head held high, shoulders back, assertive stride, eyes forward - *RESPECT  *for all around her as well as the deceased.
See, it is possible for even Royalty to show up and *not* be the center of attention. Every Hwood celeb/star/wanna-be should watch this.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> Finally!  a critque of these phonies by a legitimate American journalist



Right?! I was so thrilled when I found it. Peggy Noonan is above reproach.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Humor, I miss it too



And perspective, too.
Millionaires gritching about life with billionaires. In a pandemic. 
 Ewww.


----------



## Etriers

marietouchet said:


> Humor, I miss it too



Lol!   Okay, I get that a gossip thread is probably not going to be filled with sunshine and butterflies, and I’m all for a good roasting now and then, but you have to admit there’s something hilarious about people raking a couple of other people over the coals for raking other people over the coals_ while we’re raking them over the coals.  _


----------



## pukasonqo

Just to be irritating 
Megan identifies herself w the little mermaid, the Disney version as in it the mermaid loses her voice, gets the prince, gets voice back and lives happily ever after (the sea witch gets her punishment)
However, in the original Hans Christian Andersen story the little mermaid has no name, loses her voice and her life (becomes sea foam with other mermaids) because the prince does not fall in love w her
I would assume that an educated woman would know the HCA story but regardless in both versions a woman sacrifices herself (her voice) for a man who (in both versions) initially cannot remember her although she saved him from a shipwreck and (in the original version) dies because of him not recognising her
Not a very powerful or independent role model as her life depends on him recognising her, if he doesn’t (as in the original) she loses her voice, her life and the one she loves
So a woman needs to be heard and recognised by a man in order to exist
Yay, we have come a long way!


----------



## Etriers

jennlt said:


> Right?! I was so thrilled when I found it. Peggy Noonan is above reproach.



Until the times when she isn’t.  It’s not like this article was deeply researched, Pulitzer Prize winning material. It’s her opinion—whatever. Opinions are like you-know-whats.  We all have one.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Finally!  a critque of these phonies by a legitimate American journalist



She was spot on with this:

Both Meghan and Harry speak a kind of woke-corporate communications language that is smooth and calming but also slippery and opaque. You can never quite get your hands around the thought as you grab for meaning.

They spoke a great deal about their pain—it is a subject that animates them—but they seemed also to wield that pain as a weapon in a way that left you wondering if pain is really the word for what they experienced, as opposed to anger followed by cool desire for revenge.


----------



## Materielgrrl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since OW is advertising an interview with Chip and Joanna Gaines, I wonder if she is trying to ‘come back’. Her network failed, her magazine failed, etc. Perhaps she is trying to influence a younger demographic. Based on the negative reviews for this H&M chat, I don’t see it happening. OW and Gayle are 67.  I’m not that old yet, but I do know when to stop.  Let the young ones have the microphone. Otherwise, she just looks [gasp] desperate.


Network failed?  Girl I'm on OWN watching all the time, Queen Sugar, LAMH, Fix My Life, Belle Collective and Dr. Phil when I can't take the news, QVC, and fix it channels anymore.  She brought The Underground back on, that show needs a third season.  I need Super Soul Sunday when I need a cleanse or some inspiration.


----------



## kkfiregirl

pukasonqo said:


> So a woman needs to be heard and recognised by a man in order to exist
> Yay, we have come a long way!



Quite ironic, isn’t it. She wants everyone to know that she’s a _feminist_, but she needed a man to elevate her social standing.

She was actually more attractive to me before. This right here is simply pathetic.


----------



## mellibelly

Allisonfaye said:


> Just heard that they are up in the polls in the US and down in the UK polls so I guess her plan is working. I don't think she gives a rats a$$ how the Brits perceive her.



She Markled the Brits. They paid for her lavish wedding, made her a Duchess and now she has no use for them.


----------



## mdcx

pukasonqo said:


> Just to be irritating
> Megan identifies herself w the little mermaid, the Disney version as in it the mermaid loses her voice, gets the prince, gets voice back and lives happily ever after (the sea witch gets her punishment)
> However, in the original Hans Christian Andersen story the little mermaid has no name, loses her voice and her life (becomes sea foam with other mermaids) because the prince does not fall in love w her
> I would assume that an educated woman would know the HCA story but regardless in both versions a woman sacrifices herself (her voice) for a man who (in both versions) initially cannot remember her although she saved him from a shipwreck and (in the original version) dies because of him not recognising her
> Not a very powerful or independent role model as her life depends on him recognising her, if he doesn’t (as in the original) she loses her voice, her life and the one she loves
> So a woman needs to be heard and recognised by a man in order to exist
> Yay, we have come a long way!


I feel confident that Meghan is operating at the Disney, rather than the Hans Christian Andersen level.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Etriers said:


> Lol!   Okay, I get that a gossip thread is probably not going to be filled with sunshine and butterflies, and I’m all for a good roasting now and then, but you have to admit there’s something hilarious about people raking a couple of other people over the coals for raking other people over the coals_ while we’re raking them over the coals.  _



Hmm, I see what you’re saying, but we’re _anonymous_. No one can screen shot this thread and send it to my employer. It’s a little different when people attach their statements to their real name.


----------



## jennlt

Etriers said:


> Until the times when she isn’t.  It’s not like this article was deeply researched, Pulitzer Prize winning material. It’s her opinion—whatever. Opinions are like you-know-whats.  We all have one.


Well, hers don't stink   Opinions, that is.


----------



## mdcx

mellibelly said:


> She Markled the Brits. They paid for her lavish wedding, made her a Duchess and now she has no use for them.


Seems to be her eventual m.o. for everyone in her life.


----------



## Etriers

kkfiregirl said:


> Hmm, I see what you’re saying, but we’re _anonymous_. No one can screen shot this thread and send it to my employer. It’s a little different when people attach their statements to their real name.



True. Like how people flip each other off in traffic from the safety of their vehicles.  Life’s a funny thing.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> Didn't have a chance to watch this video yet, but they are usually very good. Enjoy!



I finally had a chance to watch this video. Lady C makes good points, but one comment about Will not talking to his brother for about 1 year stuck to my mind. So the news released by MM's PR machine about the Christmas gift exchange with the Cambridges is likely one more falsehood...


----------



## Etriers

jennlt said:


> Well, hers don't stink



_That_ I would have no idea about.  But I have read quite a lot of her articles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Etriers said:


> True. Like how people flip each other off in traffic from the safety of their vehicles.  Life’s a funny thing.



I don’t think the conversation here is anything like that at all. The flipping off from the car is vulgar and immature.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> So the news released by MM's PR machine about the Christmas gift exchange with the Cambridges is likely one more falsehood...



They might have actually exchanged gifts (for the children), but that doesn’t mean they’re friends.


----------



## jennlt

Etriers said:


> _That_ I would have no idea about.  But I have read quite a lot of her articles.


We were talking about opinions, weren't we?


----------



## Etriers

jennlt said:


> Well, hers don't stink   Opinions, that is.



Again, an opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*








						The Queen’s Statement on Harry and Meghan: Early Drafts
					

The pain that Harry, now my fourteenth-favorite grandson, and his wife, the American divorcée, are experiencing is a feeling that we in the larger family share, too.




					www.newyorker.com
				



*
Of the 5, this is hilarious:

_Fourth Draft

As a result of the quite remarkable events of Sunday evening, I would like to address nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. As I watched the interview—along with millions of others worldwide—I could not help but be struck by the number of advertisements for medications that seem to cause a great deal of nausea, vomiting, et cetera. Both Charles and William called halfway through the programme to say that they had counted thirty-two television commercials by that time, and that most seemed to be for medications that caused these horrific side effects. “Mummy, what’s going on in America?” Charles shouted. We are saddened by the gastrointestinal illnesses plaguing so many Americans, and we hope that Harry and Meghan and Archie get better soon._


----------



## sdkitty

Etriers said:


> Until the times when she isn’t.  It’s not like this article was deeply researched, Pulitzer Prize winning material. It’s her opinion—whatever. Opinions are like you-know-whats.  We all have one.


and a very astute opinion


----------



## Etriers

jennlt said:


> We were talking about opinions, weren't we?



Oh Heck, I don’t know. We have opinions. I’m not entirely sure we all know what the h we’re opining about though. But who cares, that’s nothing new. And that’s of course half the fun of a good rant.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> She Markled the Brits. They paid for her lavish wedding, made her a Duchess and now she has no use for them.


Despite the ton of money spent on her, I bet the Brits would love if she would completely forget them.  
However, she prefers to continue cashing in on the UK titles, attacking the BRF, making formal complains against journalists...


----------



## jennlt

Etriers said:


> Oh Heck, I don’t know. We have opinions. I’m not entirely sure we all know what the h we’re opining about though. But who cares, that’s nothing new. And that’s of course half the fun of a good rant.


You are in the right place then. Word salad is spoken (written) here and we're all getting more fluent everyday


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> They might have actually exchanged gifts (for the children), but that doesn’t mean they’re friends.



It's possible, but coming from the duke and duchess of falsehoods, we never know...


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies if previously posted











Chanbal said:


> DM did its homework on MM&H's falsehoods, here is the dossier:
> 
> *Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth: Dossier reveals many explosive claims which rocked the Royal Family were contradictory or wrong... so will CBS and Oprah Winfrey now investigate the true story?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, the inconvenient truth
> 
> 
> Across the globe, the Harry and Meghan interview has divided families, communities and even nations. Its fallout has been greater than anyone could have imagined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


DM:







mdcx said:


> Imo this shot of Charlotte shows what Kate was concerned about in respect of the bridesmaid not wearing tights during the wedding and potentially exposing too much.
> I don't believe for a minute that Kate made Meghan cry. The DM article debunking all of the Oprah stuff is great.
> View attachment 5020746


She is so adorable! 




Chanbal said:


> LA Times published a few Letters to the Editor on the subject of this thread, here is one:
> 
> View attachment 5020972








lalame said:


> I keep seeing coverage of the interview and find something new to roll my eyes almost daily. Can you really call it “getting cut off financially” when you put out a press release saying you’re leaving TO be financially independent??? And if he was really so worried about affording security... why splash on the fancy house.  so many questions without answers.
> 
> View attachment 5020992


This!
The clue is literally in the statement they put out when announcing leaving their royal duties. wE wAnT tO bE fInAnCiAlLy InDePeNdEnT. That means no more money from Bank of Dad, Hazmat.


Someone needs to get JCMH an audio version of the dictionary because there seems to be quite a few words he doesn't understand the basic meaning of and reading one doesn't seem to be something he'd manage very well.




limom said:


> He had a certain charm. *Who can refuse someone who wants to be your tampon?*








limom said:


> love Gucci as much as the next person but good god.
> Either that or I am salty she separated me from my man..
> View attachment 5021336







She's so gorgeous but that outfit pains me. It's too frumpy on her and too casual for a wedding in general, never mind a royal wedding. The cheap looking hat doesn't go with the outift at all. It looks like someting out of a clearance basket in a department store.


----------



## Chanbal

This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing... 

"_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.

Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"









						Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
					

One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> She is so adorable!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5021700
> 
> 
> 
> This!
> The clue is literally in the statement they out out when announcing leaving their royal duties. wE wAnT tO bE fInAnCiAlLy InDePeNdEnT. That means no more money from Bank of Dad, Hazmat.
> View attachment 5021713
> 
> Someone needs to get JCMH an audio version of the dictionary because there seems to be quite a few words he doesn't understand the basic meaning of and reading one doesn't seem to be something he'd manage very well.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5021726
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's so gorgeous but that outfit pains me. It's too frumpy on her and too casual for a wedding in general, never mind a royal wedding. The cheap looking hat doesn't go with the outift at all. It looks like someting out of a clearance basket in a department store.


After the last DM article on MM running for President, I was needing this. Thanks for the laughs!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Twelve said:


> Not sure if this help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maison Birks  Canada’s Diamond & Fine Jewellery Leader
> 
> 
> Discover Maison Birks' collection of luxury, watches and accessories. Maison Birks offers you a choice as unique and meaningful as each of life’s occasions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.maisonbirks.com


That’s a very pretty rabbit hole right there. Think I will just fall down that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> The Andrew thing is taking  forever...


Yes it is. I feel like it’s going to take years. A lot of subpoenas may need sending out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing...
> 
> "_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
> 
> 
> One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Absolutley, she should run!  Imagine the fun. Imagine the debates.  Imagine the other catty female candidates.
Spectator sport, indeed.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley, she should run!  Imagine the fun. Imagine the debates.  Imagine the other catty female candidates.
> Spectator sport, indeed.


Woo Hoo, then I could proactively call her out and challenge her "truths."


----------



## bisousx

I’m calling it now - not voting for any candidate confirmed to have burst into tears over a toddler’s dress fitting.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing...
> 
> "_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
> 
> 
> One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Do you think this is Malcolm tucker irl saying this?
 I think, whoever it is, they are stirring the pot. probably trying to make someone else look bad for messing in American politics. 
Everyone must know she wouldn’t last under campaign-trail scrutiny if she has flubs in a softball edit.


----------



## Lodpah

jennlt said:


> Opinion | Why We Care About the Royal Family Feud
> 
> 
> The British monarchy has endured for more than a millennium, and the queen is a symbol of stability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By
> Peggy Noonan
> March 11, 2021 7:08 pm ET
> 
> 
> 
> What just happened?
> That wasn’t just a high-charged celebrity interview that everyone talked about and then it went away. Oprah Winfrey’s conversation last weekend with the duke and duchess of Sussex will reverberate and last. It was history, a full-bore assault on an institution, the British monarchy, that has endured more than 1,000 years.
> Harry and Meghan famously leveled two big charges, that the House of Windsor is racist and that it is weak. Previous incarnations of criticism painted it as invincible—the sharp-elbowed courtiers, the coldhearted family, they can crush you like a bug. No, Harry said, _they _are the bugs, trapped in fear of the tabloids that control whether they’ll keep the throne. “There is a level of control by fear that has existed for generations. I mean generations,” he said. “My father and my brother”—Prince Charles and Prince William —“they are trapped. They don’t get to leave. And I have huge compassion for that.” That must be a comfort to them.
> No immediate-family heir to the British throne has ever talked like this. You are made quite vulnerable when people suddenly see you as weak. What remains of your mystique is lessened when you’re seen as just another group of frightened persons.
> *NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
> Alerts from Peggy Noonan*
> Sign up to receive email alerts from Peggy Noonan.
> PREVIEW
> 
> SUBSCRIBE
> *WSJ NEWSLETTER*
> *Notes on the News*
> The news of the week in context, with Tyler Blint-Welsh.
> I would also like to receive updates and special offers from Dow Jones and affiliates. I can unsubscribe at any time.I agree to the Privacy Policy and Cookie Notice.
> 
> Meghan charged that her infant son, Archie—the “first member of color in this family”—was treated differently and denied things due him because he was biracial. There were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.” She wouldn’t say who was involved. “I think that would be very damaging to them.” So she knew the power of the charge she was bringing. Harry, asked about it, said, “That conversation I’m never going to share, but at the time—at the time it was awkward. I was a bit shocked.” His refusal to name the person with whom he had the conversation didn’t limit guilt but dispersed it.
> The queen’s response was a small masterpiece of blandness that sucked the heat from the moment: Accusations of racism are “concerning” and will be “taken very seriously,” but “recollections may vary.”
> This is a story that will evolve for some time. Some observations:
> Public life has gotten extremely, unrelentingly performative. Have you noticed you keep hearing that word? It means everyone is always performing—the politician, the news anchor, the angry activist. This gives natural actors an edge, and leaves those who aren’t by nature actors at a disadvantage. Meghan was a professional actress.
> *READ MORE DECLARATIONS*
> 
> 
> America Loses a Wise Man March 4, 2021
> The Old New York Won’t Come Back February 25, 2021
> Rush Limbaugh’s Complicated Legacy February 18, 2021
> A Vote to Acquit ***** Is a Vote for a Lie February 11, 2021
> Liz Cheney Wins One for Sanity February 4, 2021
> Both Meghan and Harry speak a kind of woke-corporate communications language that is smooth and calming but also slippery and opaque. You can never quite get your hands around the thought as you grab for meaning.
> They spoke a great deal about their pain—it is a subject that animates them—but they seemed also to wield that pain as a weapon in a way that left you wondering if pain is really the word for what they experienced, as opposed to anger followed by cool desire for revenge.
> Some of what was said beggared belief. Meghan claimed that going in she didn’t really have any idea what the royal family was, didn’t Google or do any research. “As Americans especially what you do know about the royals is what you read in fairy tales.” Actually, no. When Princess Diana died in 1997 it was a world-wide, epic drama. Diana was raised to heroic status, the people’s princess, roughly treated by royals who didn’t deserve her. Her funeral was watched by 2.5 billion people. Meghan Markle, home in California, was 16, presumably loved media, and went on to study acting. Is it believable she didn’t know this story, follow it, see who had the starring role?
> 
> As I watched I got the sense she knew more history than she said, that perhaps on some level she wanted to be Princess Diana, only she wanted not to die.
> She sees herself as a moral instructor, an ethical leader. She and Harry were originally “aligned” by their “cause-driven work”: “I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights.” She wishes to “live authentically,” “just getting down to basics.” This apparently involves rescue chickens. She and Harry spirited them from a factory farm. “Well, you know, I just love rescuing,” she said. This was perhaps meant to underscore the idea that she rescued Harry from his charnel house of a family.
> She is good at underscoring. She watches “The Little Mermaid” and comes up with a handy metaphor for her journey: “And I went, ‘Oh my God! She falls in love with the prince and because of that, she has to lose her voice.’ . . . But by the end, she gets her voice back.”
> This is performative to the nth degree.
> They have a foundation and a media-content company called Archewell. Asked about the latter, she said, “Life is about storytelling. About the stories we tell ourselves, what we’re told, and what we buy into.” Well, that’s part of what life is. “For us to be able to have storytelling through a truthful lens, that is hopefully uplifting, is going to be great knowing how many people that can land with.” Can land with? That is practiced show-people talk. She wishes to “give a voice” to those who “underrepresented, and aren’t really heard.”
> Why should an American care about any of this? I suppose we shouldn’t. In a practical way we’re interested in the royal family because we don’t have one, don’t want one, and think it’s great that you do. We get the benefits—the pictures of clothes and castles, the horses and military outfits, the stories of backstairs and love affairs—and you pay the bills.
> But I think there’s something deeper, more mystical in our interest, a sense that however messy the monarchy, it embodies a nation, the one we long ago came from and broke with. The high purpose of monarchy is to lend its mystique and authority to the ideas of stability and continuance.
> Henry VIII, Mad King George, Victoria—these names still echo. It is rare and wonderful when you can say of a small old woman entering a large reception area, “England has entered the room.” Someday Elizabeth II will leave us and the world will honestly mourn, not only because of what she represented but because she was old-style. She performed but wasn’t performative. She was appropriately, heroically contained, didn’t share her emotions because after all it wasn’t about her, it was about a kingdom, united. You could rely on her to love her country and commonwealth; she was born and raised to love them. And so she has been for the world a constant. And in this world, a constant is a valuable thing.
> 
> I keep thinking of the special predicament she and her family are in. Diana did them a lot of damage in her life, and her death, but their feelings about her were mixed. She wasn’t born into the family, she was a thing that happened to the family. But Harry—Harry they would have loved, as brother and son and grandson. They would _miss _him. And now he has done great damage to everything they are and represent.
> The old queen must be grieving. Not that she’d say it, or share the wound. There’s something so admirable in that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2:08
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: No Woke Duchess Is Bringing Down the Monarchy
> Main Street: Britain's monarchy has lasted a thousand years, surviving Oliver Cromwell, Guy Fawkes, several Popes, the Nazis and Wallis Simpson. No woke Duchess is going to bring it down. Image: Chris Jackson/Getty Images


I have a problem with them saying Archie was treated differently. No one ever saw him, there was hardly any interaction as they kept him covered up and hidden away.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley, she should run!  Imagine the fun. Imagine the debates.  Imagine the other catty female candidates.
> Spectator sport, indeed.



She might not make it to the presidency, but I could see her landing in the senate.


----------



## kkfiregirl

jelliedfeels said:


> Do you think this is Malcolm tucker irl saying this?
> I think, whoever it is, they are stirring the pot. probably trying to make someone else look bad for messing in American politics.
> Everyone must know she wouldn’t last under campaign-trail scrutiny if she has flubs in a softball edit.



Even if her campaign is a flop, she can refer to herself as a _former presidential candidate_ for the rest of her life.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley, she should run!  Imagine the fun. Imagine the debates.  Imagine the other catty female candidates.
> Spectator sport, indeed.



Can you imagine? She would sue every candidate and journalist who dared say anything negative about her.  She is far too thin-skinned for politics. The last thing the US needs is a weak, weepy little Prez.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley, she should run!  Imagine the fun. Imagine the debates.  *Imagine the other catty female candidates.*
> Spectator sport, indeed.


You mean a real cat fight with no holds barred? Can hardly wait.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> I have a problem with them saying Archie was treated differently. No one ever saw him, there was hardly any interaction as they kept him covered up and hidden away.



Exactly! Remember when the royal family wished him happy 1st birthday? They used a photo from his christening, because that was probably the last time they saw him.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine? She would sue every candidate and journalist who dared say anything negative about her.  She is far too thin-skinned for politics. The last thing the US needs is a weak, weepy little Prez.



And you know when you run for president they dig up every damn thing from your past. Everyone will know the truth about her previous marriages and the opposition will pay discarded friends to tell their story.


----------



## bisousx

kkfiregirl said:


> And you know when you run for president they dig up every damn thing from your past. Everyone will know the truth about her previous marriages and the opposition will pay discarded friends to tell their story.



That was the old times. Modern times, the media will shelve and bury any stories they want.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bisousx said:


> That was the old times. Modern times, the media will shelve and bury any stories they want.



True, but the other candidates can dig up dirt on her if they’re so inclined.


----------



## bag-mania

If she did run for office she’d finally have to drop the duchess title. She would be openly mocked for it by her opponents. Might come off as a wee bit elitist.


----------



## 1LV

kkfiregirl said:


> Even if her campaign is a flop, she can refer to herself as a _former presidential candidate_ for the rest of her life.


Oh God.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

1LV said:


> Oh God.


----------



## limom

bisousx said:


> That was the old times. Modern times, the media will shelve and bury any stories they want.


Old Times?
The media has always covered what was deemed to be told.
Kennedy had mistresses everywhere.
Strom Thurmond the racist had a black child with his childhood maid.
And on and on.
The best ever Mitterand had a daughter and a mistress while being President...
This is nothing new


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing...
> 
> "_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
> 
> 
> One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





If her ego is as sensitive as it is by being a basic celebrity she won't last 2 mins in a political race.
I kind of want this to be true just to see how they would manage (terribly) in an environment so cut-throat and how massively it will fail.


----------



## gracekelly

kkfiregirl said:


> And you know when you run for president they dig up every damn thing from your past. Everyone will know the truth about her previous marriages and the opposition will pay discarded friends to tell their story.


They do and with experienced politicians, they sometimes have gentlemen's agreements about what won't be revealed.  Two Presidential candidates did just that back in the 90's. One of them had a girlfriend in Virginia and he was very much married  and the other had "zipper" problems and he too was very much married.  I don't think that a novice  will get the same treatment because they have no track record of public service.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> She might not make it to the presidency, but I could see her landing in the senate.


Especially in CA!


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> True, but the other candidates can dig up dirt on her if they’re so inclined.


No, she'd probably fake tears from her Botoxed face and cry they're being racist and male chauvinists.  Even the other women.


----------



## eunaddict

dangerouscurves said:


> Hi Darling! Please don't think that I don't believe you, but please let me know in which country it is considered to be a tradition? As I've known all my life, the colonized countries during colonial time would not accept this sort of 'tradition'.











						Litter (vehicle) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




"_In various colonies, litters of various types were maintained under native traditions, but often adopted by the colonials as a new ruling and/or socio-economic elite, either for practical reasons (often comfortable modern transport was unavailable, e.g. for lack of decent roads) and/or as a status symbol_."

Wikipedia is your friend. In modern day, they're definitely still used for royals, weddings and religious ceremonies...at least in Asia, where I've seen brides and idol statues in them in Taiwan, HK, Malaysia, Thailand, China etc....and apparently in a multitude of other nations. In many of these places, the tradition is pre-colonial.

I mean even the Popes used one in the pre-popemobile eras (pre 1978).

Of course, these days, it's not as common and therefore mishaps happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> You mean a real cat fight with no holds barred? Can hardly wait.



Imagine the opposition research file. His family, her family (!), SoHo house, oooh my.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine? She would sue every candidate and journalist who dared say anything negative about her.  She is far too thin-skinned for politics. The last thing the US needs is a weak, weepy little Prez.


Think of all the "creative activations" she would bestow upon her people.


----------



## mdcx

Lounorada said:


> DM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is so adorable!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5021700
> 
> 
> 
> This!
> The clue is literally in the statement they put out when announcing leaving their royal duties. wE wAnT tO bE fInAnCiAlLy InDePeNdEnT. That means no more money from Bank of Dad, Hazmat.
> View attachment 5021713
> 
> Someone needs to get JCMH an audio version of the dictionary because there seems to be quite a few words he doesn't understand the basic meaning of and reading one doesn't seem to be something he'd manage very well.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5021726
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She's so gorgeous but that outfit pains me. It's too frumpy on her and too casual for a wedding in general, never mind a royal wedding. The cheap looking hat doesn't go with the outift at all. It looks like someting out of a clearance basket in a department store.


Your gif game is


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah




----------



## DrDior

lalame said:


> Totally off topic.... Birks caught my eye after learning about them from M. I love the Splash and Snowflake lines... does anyone have tips on the best ways to buy them (for Americans)? Do they ever do sales?



Yes, they do sales. Just keep an eye on the website.


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


>


It is what it is.


----------



## Chagall

DrDior said:


> Yes, they do sales. Just keep an eye on the website.


I bought one of my first purses at Birks back when I lived in Toronto. I know they are mostly jewellery but they used to carry a beautiful selection of bags back then. Being a bag lover I bypassed the jewelry and made a beeline for the bags. My first engagement ring was also purchased at Birks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## JY89

kkfiregirl said:


> Even if her campaign is a flop, she can refer to herself as a _former presidential candidate_ for the rest of her life.



If her campaign is a flop, that’s means the majority are racist towards her (because she’s half black), sexist and whatever victimising claims she can make just because it didn’t work in her favour. Oh what’s new? She’s a victim again. Love how this victim card comes in handy for her all the time 

what Meghan wants, Meghan gets? If she doesn’t? You guys better watch it- she will blast you through national tv (actions of a sore loser)


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing...
> 
> "_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
> 
> 
> One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She would not be able to handle being picked apart or criticized in any way. Sad eyes, claiming racism, or complaining about being picked on doesn't work when you’re running for office. Skeletons you thought were buried come out of the closet... Zero chance of this happening.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing...
> 
> "_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
> 
> 
> One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


There is no way this is true.  She would have to work - even in the senate.  She had the opportunity to “work” for the Royal Family and couldn’t handle the scrutiny or criticism.  She doesn’t want to work.  She wants to be super rich, monetise her title, do some philanthropy and get endless praise.  But her do actual work?  Nope.


----------



## lalame

needlv said:


> There is no way this is true.  She would have to work - even in the senate.  She had the opportunity to “work” for the Royal Family and couldn’t handle the scrutiny or criticism.  She doesn’t want to work.  She wants to be super rich, monetise her title, do some philanthropy and get endless praise.  But her do actual work?  Nope.



Harry took offense to his family encouraging her to continue acting.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> This must be a bad joke, because I'm not laughing...
> 
> "_One senior Labour figure – a veteran of Tony Blair's Downing Street administration with strong links to Washington – claimed to The Mail on Sunday that Ms Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> Last night, a source close to the Duchess of Sussex declined to comment, but the couple have made little secret of their political beliefs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Meghan Markle preparing bid to be America's first woman President?
> 
> 
> One senior Labour figure claimed that Meghan Markle, 39, was networking among senior ********s with a view to building a campaign and fundraising teams for a tilt at the US Presidency.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If she can't handle being a contributing senior royal (which is far less work than governing a country), I highly doubt that she could handle being a president. She would probably like living in the WH with more than 16 bathrooms, SS protection, media exposure and money but she has insufficient work ethic to make it count for the people. At the end of the day, she might have yet another bombshell interview with OW and it's all about her, her, her and how the opponents were mean to her and spreading lies about her, simply because she's half black and they are all racists 

Don't forget, she's "depressed", "suicidal" and her life depends on Harry's cuddles   Running for president or being a president may just be the final straw that broke the camel's back


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> If she can't handle being a contributing senior royal (which is far less work than governing a country), I highly doubt that she could handle being a president. She would probably like living in the WH with more than 16 bathrooms, SS protection, media exposure and money but she has insufficient work ethic to make it count for the people. At the end of the day, she might have yet another bombshell interview with OW and it's all about her, her, her and how the opponents were mean to her and spreading lies about her, simply because she's half black and they are all racists
> 
> Don't forget, she's "depressed", "suicidal" and her life depends on Harry's cuddles   Running for president or being a president may just be the final straw that broke the camel's back


Perhaps she will take up golfing with Rudy to pass time when she is not cuddling. She might better the record 400 days on the links set by DT.


----------



## gracekelly

Page  Six
*Meghan Markle demanding to see evidence in Buckingham Palace bullying probe*

She is not standing down and getting aggressive. BP better be ready fir a fight from her. She feels invincible after  the interview. The fact that Harry is part of this destruction is just disgusting. He deserves to be tried for sedition.

When she was asked for emails, she couldn’t  find them. Right.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Page  Six
> *Meghan Markle demanding to see evidence in Buckingham Palace bullying probe*
> 
> She is not standing down and getting aggressive. BP better be ready fir a fight from her. She feels invincible after  the interview. The fact that Harry is part of this destruction is just disgusting. He deserves to be tried for sedition.
> 
> When she was asked for emails, she couldn’t  find them. Right.


That there is bullying by her. She can throw people under the bus but she won’t name names. I read both sides are lawyering up. Good. She loves drama!! I mean her life must be so pitiful that she has time is to conjure up hate, revenge and being vengeful. I would think she would work in her charities and practice compassion and move forward.


----------



## mellibelly

jennlt said:


> Think of all the "*creative activations"* she would bestow upon her people.



  The “woke-corporate communications language” vomit. It’s so third tier marketing firm word salad



EverSoElusive said:


> Don't forget, she's "depressed", "suicidal" and *her life depends on Harry's cuddles*



This is brilliant!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow.
How to lose goodwill.




_Charles was caught in an awkward spot this week during a tour of a COVID-19 vaccine distribution site, where he was asked if he had watched the interview and, if so, what he thought of it.

The royal simply chuckled and walked out of the facility._









						Prince Charles wanted to issue point-by-point rebuttal after Harry and Meghan interview
					

The Prince of Wales is reportedly upset by Harry’s comments during the interview.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Great tweet! Agree with everything with the exception of keeping "_Megan Markle in the US_".


----------



## JY89

She really needs to search up this 2 words that will be extremely useful to her and everyone else : Move on

If she really want good press then start doing something good or beneficial to help others rather than this trying too hard drama causing interview which leads to nothing but hate ( and a tons of awful lies )


----------



## JY89

Chanbal said:


> Great tweet! Agree with everything with the exception of keeping "_Megan Markle in the US_".



Same sentiments! Truly comforting to know that there are POC who see through her lies than believing her allegations blindly. I saw so many ridiculous comments from her die hard supporters that makes my stomach churn


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> There is no way this is true.  She would have to work - even in the senate.  She had the opportunity to “work” for the Royal Family and couldn’t handle the scrutiny or criticism.  She doesn’t want to work.  She wants to be super rich, monetise her title, do some philanthropy and get endless praise.  But her do actual work?  Nope.


She had a one hour zoom meeting with the California's governor not long ago, it may have been related to her political ambitions.


----------



## floatinglili

I honestly dont think flogging the Archie foundation in a painful bid to become the ‘real Disney’ US Royales is the right way to go. 
Their charitable efforts are already being investigated in Britain, the ‘not for profit’ activities in the US will also come under scrutiny. 
Time to drop the airs and graces and become the ordinary folks they set out to be - roll up the sleeves and get a job or start an honest for-profit business.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow.
> How to lose goodwill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Charles was caught in an awkward spot this week during a tour of a COVID-19 vaccine distribution site, where he was asked if he had watched the interview and, if so, what he thought of it.
> 
> The royal simply chuckled and walked out of the facility._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles wanted to issue point-by-point rebuttal after Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales is reportedly upset by Harry’s comments during the interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I think this happened before the queen's official reply.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> She had a one hour zoom meeting with the California's governor not long ago, it may have been related to her political ambitions.



Where's that damn barf emoticon in the 'like' row 
Anybody have any pull with Vlad?


----------



## JY89

Does this sounds familiar to anyone?


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H are becoming QE's worst nightmare...  

*Buckingham Palace 'brings in external legal firm to carry out bullying probe' as Meghan Markle demands to see emails and texts after palace aide accused her of 'unacceptable behaviour' towards two assistants*

Buckingham Palace will bring in an external independent legal firm to carry out an investigation into claims that the  Duchess of Sussex bullied royal staff, reports say.

*In an escalation of the standoff between the two parties, Meghan Markle has written to the Palace demanding to see documents, emails or text messages relating to the bullying complaint against her, *The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

But in an unprecedented move that will no doubt increase tensions further, royal staff have decided a third party should take the reins of the investigation, rather than the in-house inquiry first announced, according to The  Sunday Times.

A senior Palace aide had accused Meghan of 'unacceptable behaviour' towards two personal assistants and undermining the confidence of a third, leading to the investigation which will be given to a legal firm.

Former and current royal aides who were blocked from giving evidence in court during Meghan's recent legal privacy battle are expected to speak to the inquiry. 

*But in a clear indication that the Duchess is preparing to fight back against what she has termed 'a smear campaign', a senior Palace source confirmed that her office had 'written to request the evidence'.

In response, the Queen has passed the request to the Prince of Wales, whose closest aides are now conducting a search of files. *

Meanwhile, it emerged on Saturday night that William and Harry had 'been in contact' for the first time since last Sunday's explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Sunday Times reported. 

The interview saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussex make shockwaves with accusations of racism against 'The Firm'.

February saw two senior members of the royal staff claim they were bullied by Meghan, with a third saying they had been personally 'humiliated' and claimed two members of staff had been bullied.

Meghan has denied the accusations. 

However, according to a royal source speaking to The Times: 'The actual worst incidences haven't come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.'

'There's a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn't been told,' another source told the newspaper. 

*The Sussexes are not expected to be invited to take part in the investigation despite having written to Buckingham Palace about it, a decision that could widen the rift between the Royal Family and couple further.

"Meghan's bullying behavior" *


----------



## lalame

Did anyone actually listen to the Janina Gavankar interview? Well, don't waste your time. The interviewer actually asked her, basically, "why are you here... what is your role in this..." at the end because she was so practiced and guarded to every question. She provided no real value. Why bother?


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article! 

*DOUGLAS MURRAY: Being told we can't question 'the truth' of anyone who says they're a victim is more evidence of the world's mass derangement*

What is truth and does it matter? For centuries, civilised society has been founded on the idea that the answer to such questions was ‘Yes’.

But now the whole world is in the midst of a deep, cultural shift.

For some, it is not merely a battle but a war. We live in an age, whipped along by social media, where the concept of ‘the truth’ has disappeared.

Instead of ‘the truth’, we have that wonderful *Oprah-ism: ‘Your truth.*’ The troubles now roiling our Royal Family, and indeed our whole culture, largely originate in this change.


*








						DOUGLAS MURRAY: What is truth and does it matter?
					

DOUGLAS MURRAY: What is truth and does it matter? For centuries, society has been founded on the idea that the answer to such questions was 'Yes'. The world is in the midst of a cultural shift.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## Chanbal

Pure adoration (creepy look)!










						Prince Charles is 'deeply hurt' by Harry and Meghan's interview
					

Prince Charles was left 'deeply hurt' by Harry and Meghan's tell-all interview  but has resolved to 'mend the broken relationship' with his son. A friend said his mood is that of a 'father, not a statesman'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Hmmm... interesting that MM has requested copies of the evidence.  I would think you couldn’t have anyone’s names identified or any other personally identifiable information be transferred cross border (UK to USA) without a privacy law violation in the UK ( or without the consent of the whistleblower).  So she may get a lot of redacted info...


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Pure adoration (creepy look)!
> View attachment 5021963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles is 'deeply hurt' by Harry and Meghan's interview
> 
> 
> Prince Charles was left 'deeply hurt' by Harry and Meghan's tell-all interview  but has resolved to 'mend the broken relationship' with his son. A friend said his mood is that of a 'father, not a statesman'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



@Chanbal I think you may mean 'hammy' (also known as mugging). Guess her 'adoration' had to project to the shortest lens. Haven't seen an expression like that since Victorian Music Hall 1889.

On Charlie: Whatever... 
I'd let this one go Charles, you can't hold a normal conversation with someone who's delusional (you can trust me on this one  )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Harry took offense to his family encouraging her to continue acting.



I still can't get over how he spun it. They offer her to keep a part of her own life, and he's sitting on Oprah claiming they said that because she'd have to work for a living because "there would be no money for her". Not only do I feel the claim itself is ridiculous, but let's pretend for a moment it was true...there are people bringing home 2000 bucks and their wives are staying home with the baby, but he didn't make enough to have that arrangement? Oh Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Page  Six
> *Meghan Markle demanding to see evidence in Buckingham Palace bullying probe*
> 
> She is not standing down and getting aggressive. BP better be ready fir a fight from her. She feels invincible after  the interview. The fact that Harry is part of this destruction is just disgusting. He deserves to be tried for sedition.
> 
> When she was asked for emails, she couldn’t  find them. Right.



Oh god. It never ends, does it. Also she must well know there is proof, as there was a formal complaint.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *But in a clear indication that the Duchess is preparing to fight back against what she has termed 'a smear campaign', a senior Palace source confirmed that her office had 'written to request the evidence'.*



I'm pretty sure they don't have to hand anything to her office just because they are demanding it, though. Also, where's idiot Harry in this? He knows it's true, why is he supporting whatever she is trying to achieve right now when he knows they can't win?


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> I honestly dont think flogging the Archie foundation in a painful bid to become the ‘real Disney’ US Royales is the right way to go.
> Their charitable efforts are already being investigated in Britain, the ‘not for profit’ activities in the US will also come under scrutiny.
> Time to drop the airs and graces and become the ordinary folks they set out to be - roll up the sleeves and get a job or start an honest for-profit business.


I agree, to me having a career/project that involves interacting with the press so heavily is only harming Harry. He clearly doesn’t trust them and the cognitive dissonance must be quite a strain.

I think he’d be much happier coaching a sport for the LA super rich. Some of them must want to learn polo.

MM should go back to acting or maybe try to get on the view or (red table.)

If they want to do charity work- that’s great - I’m sure lots would love the publicity and connections but this whole archewell charity and media rollout has always seemed like a hydra they can’t handle. I don’t think they have the self-discipline to be entrepreneurs or any relevant experience.

edit: I don’t mean red table. Is there one called round table? It’s like the view basically. Can’t remember.


----------



## jblended

Rather remarkably, I've missed this entire debacle! Only just now having seen a clip of Harry saying he had been trapped but unaware that he was.
Sigh.
All those times we saw him playing with kids for Sentebale or promoting the Invictus Games- actually using his position to do good, and beaming with pride and joy as he did it...does he now mean to say that he was miserable and trapped as he conducted those visits and championed (nay, founded) those causes?
Because many would look upon that work as an honour and a privilege. Many would consider that duty of care a genuine lifetime achievement of the highest order and literally akin to no other.
Too bad he was feeling stifled by the good he was doing and was faking those smiles and dances. Good to know his heart wasn't in it. I'm sure all the children who looked up to him and held fond memories of personally connecting with him will feel totally violated as they realise it was nothing more than PR for the hapless prince and that his heart was never in it. 

I won't comment on MM. She is getting far too much attention as it is and she honestly should just be ignored. I can't think of anything that would infuriate her further. 

Edit: I must apologise for, no doubt, repeating what most of you would have already said since the interview. As noted, I'm very late to this news and had to post about it because I'm genuinely fuming!


----------



## gelbergirl

youngster said:


> What a sign of the times. A prince of the United Kingdom, with all his privileges, advantages, and wealth, somehow thinks he too is a victim. A victim of the press, of his family, of the universe, of whatever.
> 
> He was cut off financially!
> Well, no, he apparently just got a lump sum payment from Prince Charles of something around 1 million British pounds to see him through his first year in the U.S. (For us little people, that's about $1.4 million U.S. dollars for 1 year of expenses.)  He might have had to dip into his own multi-million dollar fortune inherited from Diana!  What an insult.
> 
> His full time security was pulled!
> Well, *he was no longer a senior working royal* and he relocated to another continent.  Asking the UK taxpayer to provide his protection and that of the Duchess and baby was a ridiculous request.  First, if you aren't a senior working royal, you don't get full time protection. The end.  Even if an exception was made for the Exalted Sussex Couple, the cost of keeping a UK protection detail in the U.S. would be insanely high, something like 7 million GBP per year at a time when the UK economy is suffering from shutdowns and Covid and the Metropolitan Police have budget woes.  A *British protection detail also wouldn't be able to operate in the U.S. as they would in the UK*, they don't know U.S. laws, they can't carry weapons, they'd have to commute back and forth to the UK from their own homes on rotation, there would be visa issues and housing issues. What an entitled idiot Harry is.
> 
> They wouldn't make Archie a prince!
> Well, *Archie is the great-grandchild of the Queen, not a grandchild. The only great-grandchildren who get the prince/princess titles are the children of the heir*. So Archie doesn't get the title until Charles becomes King and even that has always been in doubt as Charles, for years and years, has stated he wants to slim down the monarchy and reduce the number of princes and princesses running around.  How hard is that to understand, Harry and MM?
> 
> You could just keep going, for every topic that was covered. It's both entertaining and yet horrifying *how clueless these two actually are*.



I would love it if the BRF could do some kind of informative, Oprah-style PR stunt.  With all this information. Really.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pivoine66

jblended said:


> Too bad he was feeling stifled by the good he was doing and was faking those smiles and dances. Good to know his heart wasn't in it. I'm sure all the children who looked up to him and held fond memories of personally connecting with him will feel totally violated as they realise it was nothing more than PR for the hapless prince and that his heart was never in it.
> 
> *I won't comment on MM. She is getting far too much attention as it is and she honestly should just be ignored. I can't think of anything that would infuriate her further. *
> 
> Edit: I must apologise for, no doubt, repeating what most of you would have already said since the interview. As noted, I'm very late to this news and had to post about it because I'm genuinely fuming!


All of this and ... this - and - wishful thinking - take away her title of nobility.


----------



## floatinglili

Pivoine66 said:


> All of this and ... this - and - wishful thinking - take away her title of nobility.


The connection with the BRF the gift that keeps on giving though, from this point. The best thing to do would be to strip Harry of his titles as best they can, but of course this would be a terrible wrench for the family. BRF is in a horrible bind with this pair! The legal firm stepping in for an external examination of the bullying claims is a good move.


----------



## jblended

floatinglili said:


> The best thing to do would be to strip Harry of his titles as best they can


That's the thing, isn't it? Can't strip him of the Dukedom because then he's Prince Hazza (a birthright and literally grandson of the reigning monarch, so they can't suddenly pretend he isn't a prince) and she becomes a princess which is what she's aiming for.... They won't touch the titles for that reason.
_*Edited to remove a line because I called MM a silly name and I'm disappointed in myself for stooping that low. _

No doubt the BRF will just quietly carry on, only releasing little statements that disprove these claims on occasion, and their quiet dignity will shine bright in stark contrast to the low blows of this greedy pair.

You'd think MM's self-pitying moaning whilst amidst the impoverished in Africa was bad enough, but to now moan about loss of funds/security/titles/privileges during a pandemic when so many are losing actual family members, jobs and roofs over their heads...how tone deaf can they get?


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> Hi Duna. So sorry to hear that. Sardinia has largely not been affected though is that true? I love Italy and I feel so bad for you guys.



Hi Lodpah. Yes, at the moment Sardinia seems to be better off, although during last summer that's where the second wave started. The main problem here in Europe is that the supply of vaccines has been reduced by the producers, so the vaccination plan is very slow....Hopefully they'll speed up!


----------



## justwatchin

So she’s doubling down and demanding emails from BP? Interesting yet not unexpected that she is front and center with this and silence from Harry.
Honestly, whether Will or Charles are in contact with Harry, they would be wise to record all conversations because I would bet she is recording on her end.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree, to me having a career/project that involves interacting with the press so heavily is only harming Harry. He clearly doesn’t trust them and the cognitive dissonance must be quite a strain.
> 
> I think he’d be much happier coaching a sport for the LA super rich. Some of them must want to learn polo.
> 
> MM should go back to acting or maybe try to get on the view or (red table.)
> 
> If they want to do charity work- that’s great - I’m sure lots would love the publicity and connections but this whole archewell charity and media rollout has always seemed like a hydra they can’t handle. I don’t think they have the self-discipline to be entrepreneurs or any relevant experience.
> 
> edit: I don’t mean red table. Is there one called round table? It’s like the view basically. Can’t remember.


Red table talk with jada?
OMG, yes, yes, yes.
Let the cray fly free.


----------



## dangerouscurves

eunaddict said:


> Litter (vehicle) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "_In various colonies, litters of various types were maintained under native traditions, but often adopted by the colonials as a new ruling and/or socio-economic elite, either for practical reasons (often comfortable modern transport was unavailable, e.g. for lack of decent roads) and/or as a status symbol_."
> 
> Wikipedia is your friend. In modern day, they're definitely still used for royals, weddings and religious ceremonies...at least in Asia, where I've seen brides and idol statues in them in Taiwan, HK, Malaysia, Thailand, China etc....and apparently in a multitude of other nations. In many of these places, the tradition is pre-colonial.
> 
> I mean even the Popes used one in the pre-popemobile eras (pre 1978).
> 
> Of course, these days, it's not as common and therefore mishaps happen.


Thank you for the information. But to be honest, William on that thing is not a good photo-op.


----------



## limom

dangerouscurves said:


> Thank you for the information. But to be honest, William on that thing is not a good photo-op.


No one is denying that fact. Just pointing out that this does not make him a racist.


----------



## jennlt

Edit: Quote reply not working for me. Deleted.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I would love to see MM running for office! Let's see how she deal with critism! By suing everyone?


----------



## chicinthecity777

BTW, MM doesn't get to "demand" documents, emails or whatever! Her requests will be dealt with within the scope of the UK law!


----------



## marietouchet

Palace raises stakes in Meghan bullying inquiry 






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

jennlt said:


> Edit: Quote reply not working for me. Deleted.


I have had that problem too, and that was how I fixed it


----------



## marietouchet

Elon is always amusing, in a tweet of his. New game Woketopia - Battle for the Moral High Ground in this new game!”


----------



## jennlt

mellibelly said:


> The “woke-corporate communications language” vomit. It’s so third tier marketing firm word salad



M's woke word salad has a liberal splash of sour grapes vinaigrette which makes it even better (or bitter, as the case may be). And because it's third tier, there's plenty of shade


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> @Chanbal I think you may mean 'hammy' (also known as mugging). Guess her 'adoration' had to project to the shortest lens. Haven't seen an expression like that since Victorian Music Hall 1889.
> 
> On Charlie: Whatever...
> I'd let this one go Charles, you can't hold a normal conversation with someone who's delusional (you can trust me on this one  )


i think  Charles has to try a bit ... he was judged so harshly about not trying for Diana
And MM seems to getting away with jettisoning both her and Harry’s families, without a peep of commentary
i wanted to put in a derogatory word about the jettison but thought better .. 
I think he has to make a public try to mend fences so that later he can say he tried

What an effort to make nice, when people have thrown it in your face ....


----------



## 1LV

jblended said:


> Rather remarkably, I've missed this entire debacle! Only just now having seen a clip of Harry saying he had been trapped but unaware that he was.
> Sigh.
> All those times we saw him playing with kids for Sentebale or promoting the Invictus Games- actually using his position to do good, and beaming with pride and joy as he did it...does he now mean to say that he was miserable and trapped as he conducted those visits and championed (nay, founded) those causes?
> Because many would look upon that work as an honour and a privilege. Many would consider that duty of care a genuine lifetime achievement of the highest order and literally akin to no other.
> Too bad he was feeling stifled by the good he was doing and was faking those smiles and dances. Good to know his heart wasn't in it. I'm sure all the children who looked up to him and held fond memories of personally connecting with him will feel totally violated as they realise it was nothing more than PR for the hapless prince and that his heart was never in it.
> 
> I won't comment on MM. She is getting far too much attention as it is and she honestly should just be ignored. I can't think of anything that would infuriate her further.
> 
> Edit: I must apologise for, no doubt, repeating what most of you would have already said since the interview. As noted, I'm very late to this news and had to post about it because I'm genuinely fuming!


Maybe Harry is the better actor of the two.


----------



## chicinthecity777

jblended said:


> Rather remarkably, I've missed this entire debacle! Only just now having seen a clip of Harry saying he had been trapped but unaware that he was.
> Sigh.
> All those times we saw him playing with kids for Sentebale or promoting the Invictus Games- actually using his position to do good, and beaming with pride and joy as he did it...does he now mean to say that he was miserable and trapped as he conducted those visits and championed (nay, founded) those causes?
> Because many would look upon that work as an honour and a privilege. Many would consider that duty of care a genuine lifetime achievement of the highest order and literally akin to no other.
> Too bad he was feeling stifled by the good he was doing and was faking those smiles and dances. Good to know his heart wasn't in it. I'm sure all the children who looked up to him and held fond memories of personally connecting with him will feel totally violated as they realise it was nothing more than PR for the hapless prince and that his heart was never in it.
> 
> I won't comment on MM. She is getting far too much attention as it is and she honestly should just be ignored. I can't think of anything that would infuriate her further.
> 
> Edit: I must apologise for, no doubt, repeating what most of you would have already said since the interview. As noted, I'm very late to this news and had to post about it because I'm genuinely fuming!


Well said!


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Red table talk with jada?
> OMG, yes, yes, yes.
> Let the cray fly free.



I knew I’d heard of red table - from Jada’s affair. 

I meant the real originally but  MM going on red table would be great TV!


----------



## Jktgal

Today I saw some news on Japan and suddenly remember Japan's Empress Masako. On paper she also had seemed perfect for the role - multilingual, cosmopolitan, raised by parents in diplomatic corpse with frequent overseas posting, Harvard education, etc. She couldn't handle the pressure and had severe mental illnesses. However, I do not recall anyone crying 'fake!'. No leaks from friends, about friends, about royal family, no interviews, etc. The family was also open to the public about her condition. The general perception seems to be that the Japanese royal family is more traditional but reflecting on this, I think they are more modern in this respect.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Palace raises stakes in Meghan bullying inquiry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



"_A source close to Charles said: “It was a surprise to hear he’d been cut off, given the bank statements. The prince continued to provide Harry and Meghan with financial support after their move to America..._” However, MM&H told Charles in no uncertain terms that those million dollars were not enough. More millions are needed, many more!!! And don't forget that little HRH detail, the prince title for Archie...


----------



## Chanbal

If Charles doesn't give them those extra millions/year, they may need another GoFundMe fundraiser. They could also ask Oprah for protection or move to a smaller house in a gated community...  

"_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's mansion in Southern California, was breached two times by the same intruder over the Christmas holiday, a new report claims. 

Nickolas Brooks, 37, was first caught trespassing at the $14.65million property in Montecito on December 24, but officers with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office let him off with a warning, TMZ reported Sunday. 

Two days later Brooks showed up again on December 26 and was subsequently arrested and charged with one count of misdemeanor trespassing._"









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's CA home breached by intruder TWICE
					

Nickolas Brooks, 37, was first caught trespassing at the $14.65million property on December 24, but police let him off with a warning, TMZ reported Sunday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

But who told the press that they bought the £12m mansion with 19 bathrooms in Montecito. Let's sue them! Oh wait ... it was Variety, LA Times, Harpers Bazaar, Marie Claire etc.


----------



## bisousx

Jktgal said:


> Today I saw some news on Japan and suddenly remember Japan's Empress Masako. On paper she also had seemed perfect for the role - multilingual, cosmopolitan, raised by parents in diplomatic corpse with frequent overseas posting, Harvard education, etc. She couldn't handle the pressure and had severe mental illnesses. However, I do not recall anyone crying 'fake!'. No leaks from friends, about friends, about royal family, no interviews, etc. The family was also open to the public about her condition. The general perception seems to be that the Japanese royal family is more traditional but reflecting on this, I think they are more modern in this respect.



Japanese culture abhors scandal anyways. There’s so much about respect for family and elders in that culture that I’d be surprised if it ever happened even among regular families, let alone noble/royal ones. You will never see a son publicly lambaste or make unflattering allegations about his family with wife sitting smugly in tow, all while having taken money from the family pot.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> However, MM&H told Charles in no uncertain terms that those million dollars were not enough. More millions are needed, many more!!!



Wow, I can't even begin to grasp the depths of their brattiness and entitled behavior. A $3 million dollar house isn't good enough for them? They could have easily afforded a modestly (by their standards) priced home; I guess I will never understand why their small family needs a mansion.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> She had a one hour zoom meeting with the California's governor not long ago, it may have been related to her political ambitions.



That's what I've thought all along. She begged to be appointed Senator and she wasn't. But now Gov. Newsom is in recall controversies of his own. M is probably laughing at his problems since she didn't get her way. Politics is a tough business. She wouldn't last ten seconds in the political arena. Unless she hung out in a basement and kept her mouth shut. Works for some people. But we know she can't keep her mouth shut.


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> That's what I've thought all along. She begged to be appointed Senator and she wasn't. But now Gov. Newsom is in recall controversies of his own. M is probably laughing at his problems since she didn't get her way. Politics is a tough business. She wouldn't last ten seconds in the political arena. Unless she hung out in a basement and kept her mouth shut. Works for some people. But we know she can't keep her mouth shut.



She thinks the only way to stay relevant is to keep blabbing or having her people leak stories. And she wants to make damn sure we don't forget her and how everyone wronged her at every turn


----------



## floatinglili

bisousx said:


> Japanese culture abhors scandal anyways. There’s so much about respect for family and elders in that culture that I’d be surprised if it ever happened even among regular families, let alone noble/royal ones. You will never see a son publicly lambaste or make unflattering allegations about his family with wife sitting smugly in tow, all while having taken money from the family pot.


Interesting... I wonder how the Japanese royal family would have gone with welcoming a fourth tier LA actress who had dumped virtually her entire extended family including the Trevity Trev and more recent live-in love... but with a swag of very convenient and quite chatty  ‘friends’


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> Japanese culture abhors scandal anyways. There’s so much about respect for family and elders in that culture that I’d be surprised if it ever happened even among regular families, let alone noble/royal ones. You will never see a son publicly lambaste or make unflattering allegations about his family with wife sitting smugly in tow, all while having taken money from the family pot.


Yes, there are many cultures where the worst thing you can do is bring shame on the family. I have a close Japanese friend and she was recently telling me how, as a toddler, she’d have temper tantrums in public if she didn’t get her way.  Instead of giving in, her mother would drag her outside and hiss how she was bringing shame to her family.   
Meg basically had an adult temper tantrum.  I wish she’d get a spanking but instead, she’s not even getting a time out.  She’s getting exactly what you don’t give a bratty child:  coddling and lots of attention.


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> That's what I've thought all along. She begged to be appointed Senator and she wasn't. But now Gov. Newsom is in recall controversies of his own. M is probably laughing at his problems since she didn't get her way. Politics is a tough business. She wouldn't last ten seconds in the political arena.* Unless she hung out in a basement and kept her mouth shut.* Works for some people. But we know she can't keep her mouth shut.


What do you mean?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

I don’t think the Japanese royal family would have allowed an actress - especially one from another culture - over the threshold? I don’t know much about Japanese culture but it is interesting that the new bride was a graduate from a high flying public service family, trophy university etc. It seems all about studious duty and a business suit. Can you imagine the British royal men going for a Harvard graduate? I mean I guess theoretically it’s possible but it doesn’t seem the British aristocrat way.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> What do you mean?


It’s a joke but because it’s political it can’t be written.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> I don’t think the Japanese royal family would have allowed an actress - especially one from another culture - over the threshold? I don’t know much about Japanese culture but it is interesting that the new bride was a graduate from a high flying public service family, trophy university etc. It seems all about studious duty and a business suit. Can you imagine the British royal men going for a Harvard graduate? I mean I guess theoretically it’s possible but it doesn’t seem the British aristocrat way.


For all her faults, MM is well educated.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I don’t think the conversation here is anything like that at all. The flipping off from the car is vulgar and immature.


ha
I confess I've done that when I was stressed driving to work.....I don't do it anymore - you never know what crazy you're dealing with - you could get killed in a road rage incident


----------



## Sharont2305

floatinglili said:


> I don’t think the Japanese royal family would have allowed an actress - especially one from another culture - over the threshold? I don’t know much about Japanese culture but it is interesting that the new bride was a graduate from a high flying public service family, trophy university etc. It seems all about studious duty and a business suit. Can you imagine the British royal men going for a Harvard graduate? I mean I guess theoretically it’s possible but it doesn’t seem the British aristocrat way.


What's the difference between a Harvard Graduate and a British University Graduate? William did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Meg basically had an adult temper tantrum.  I wish she’d get a spanking but instead, she’s not even getting a time out.  She’s getting exactly what you don’t give a bratty child:  coddling and lots of attention.



So basically, what she's gotten all of her life, but for some reason instead of her parents and complicit husband it's now the public spoiling her rotten.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> Interestingly the US tabloid press was caught up in several expensive law suits that they lost. That was about 25 years ago. From that time on they became much more careful and wanted at least two verifiable sources for a story.  I personally  know of one story that was published that everyone though was totally  made up.  I knew that it wasn’t because I knew two people who were present and could verify it. I have to admit that when they told me about the people involved, I thought they were making it up! Eventually it came out that the story was true and the tabloid vindicated and the two guys that told me the story gave me “I told you so!”


I'm sure about 50 other posters have already asked, but I'm about 50 pages behind right now with little hope of catching up, so just out of unabashed curiosity , can you spill or just give a little hint?


----------



## sdkitty

JY89 said:


> Does this sounds familiar to anyone?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5021956


was this written specifically about Meghan?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

limom said:


> Red table talk with jada?
> OMG, yes, yes, yes.
> Let the cray fly free.


I'm sure the queen would love to discuss vagina rejuvenation with Jada. 
Article


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh god. It never ends, does it. Also she must well know there is proof, as there was a formal complaint.


she does have big cajones, doesn't she?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> For all her faults, MM is well educated.



Not to be a party pooper, but she has a bachelor's degree. That's basically the minimum university education you can get.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> What's the difference between a Harvard Graduate and a British University Graduate? William did.



Doesn't Sophie have a university degree as well?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doesn't Sophie have a university degree as well?


I think so.

ETA, actually no. Just checked. She went to two colleges. Over here University is higher than a college. (I'm saying that as I don't know where you are @QueenofWrapDress You'll already know this if you're in the UK)


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Palace raises stakes in Meghan bullying inquiry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


oh good
this is a reputable newspaper?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> That's what I've thought all along. She begged to be appointed Senator and she wasn't. But now Gov. Newsom is in recall controversies of his own. M is probably laughing at his problems since she didn't get her way. Politics is a tough business. She wouldn't last ten seconds in the political arena. Unless she hung out in a basement and kept her mouth shut. Works for some people. But we know she can't keep her mouth shut.


these comments will be deleted eventually but I just have to say it would be the height of delusion for her to expect to be appointed senator....surely even she has more sense than that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

kkfiregirl said:


> Wow, I can't even begin to grasp the depths of their brattiness and entitled behavior. A $3 million dollar house isn't good enough for them? They could have easily afforded a modestly (by their standards) priced home; I guess I will never understand why their small family needs a mansion.


Maybe their egos are too big to fit in anything less than 15,000 sq. ft.?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> oh good
> this is a reputable newspaper?



Yeah. Conservative but they check their facts.


----------



## sdkitty

so Sharon Osbourne had to apologize for supporting Piers Morgan.....and the episode where she and Cheryl got into it over what cheryl perceived as sharon supporting a racist is being investigated by CBS.  
Come on.....and I'm not a conservative saying this.  I doubt Sharon is either.  So now the mere implication that you may have a racist thought is cause for investigation?








						CBS Launches Internal Review After Sharon Osbourne's Heated Debate with Sheryl Underwood on The Talk
					

CBS is launching an internal review after The Talk co-hosts Sharon Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood had a heated on-air exchange.




					people.com


----------



## mshermes

prince-harry-meghan-markle-trespasser-montecito-home

So how conveniently this comes out almost three months after it occurred and a week after the interview.


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> For all her faults, MM is well educated.


 
I’m surprised that such a _well educated _person didn’t think to do any research into her husband’s family business.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to be a party pooper, but she has a bachelor's degree. That's basically the minimum university education you can get.


It is still up to par in the Royal Family.
The Queen herself does not have any degrees.
And MM graduated from a well regarded school.
Let’s get real here.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm sure the queen would love to discuss vagina rejuvenation with Jada.
> Article



Oh my! I am heading straight to google!


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> It is still up to par in the Royal Family.
> The Queen herself does not have any degrees.
> And MM graduated from a well regarded school.
> Let’s get real here.



One can graduate from college and still not be well educated. I know of many examples in my personal life. Anyway, education should be life long and MM seems like she stopped learning a long time ago.


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m surprised that such a _well educated _person didn’t think to do any research into her husband’s family business.


She is simply a liar, imho.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> so Sharon Osbourne had to apologize for supporting Piers Morgan.....and the episode where she and Cheryl got into it over what cheryl perceived as sharon supporting a racist is being investigated by CBS.
> Come on.....and I'm not a conservative saying this.  I doubt Sharon is either.  So now the mere implication that you may have a racist thought is cause for investigation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS Launches Internal Review After Sharon Osbourne's Heated Debate with Sheryl Underwood on The Talk
> 
> 
> CBS is launching an internal review after The Talk co-hosts Sharon Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood had a heated on-air exchange.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Everything is turning into a witch hunt.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Also, even though the queen doesn’t have any degrees, she is still well educated by this point in her life. College/University isn’t the only way for a person to become educated.


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> She is simply a liar, imho.



Well then she’s not very _astute_ if she thought the public would believe such an obvious lie.


----------



## limom

kkfiregirl said:


> One can graduate from college and still not be well educated. I know of many examples in my personal life. Anyway, education should be life long and MM seems like she stopped learning a long time ago.


That is possible however she was educated at one point.


kkfiregirl said:


> Well then she’s not very _astute_ if she thought the public would believe such an obvious lie.


We don’t know what her end game is.
If anything, she should write books about networking...
Ted talk and the like,


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> so Sharon Osbourne had to apologize for supporting Piers Morgan.....and the episode where she and Cheryl got into it over what cheryl perceived as sharon supporting a racist is being investigated by CBS.
> Come on.....and I'm not a conservative saying this.  I doubt Sharon is either.  So now the mere implication that you may have a racist thought is cause for investigation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS Launches Internal Review After Sharon Osbourne's Heated Debate with Sheryl Underwood on The Talk
> 
> 
> CBS is launching an internal review after The Talk co-hosts Sharon Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood had a heated on-air exchange.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



What a shame; people can never have honest conversations because they’re afraid of shet like this happening.


----------



## rose60610

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m surprised that such a _well educated _person didn’t think to do any research into her husband’s family business.



Especially one who went to a prestigious university (Northwestern), majored in International Relations, yet claimed not having known about the British Commonwealth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## JY89

sdkitty said:


> was this written specifically about Meghan?



Apparently, this post was posted in 2018 before all the drama happened but it does truly sounds exactly like her. All boxes ticked


----------



## sdkitty

JY89 said:


> Apparently, this post was posted in 2018 before all the drama happened but it does truly sounds exactly like her. All boxes ticked


yes I was being facetious 
sounds just like her


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> Especially one who went to a prestigious university (Northwestern), majored in International Relations, yet claimed not having known about the British Commonwealth.


Could not agree more which is why it is obvious that she is lying.


----------



## justwatchin

mshermes said:


> prince-harry-meghan-markle-trespasser-montecito-home
> 
> So how conveniently this comes out almost three months after it occurred and a week after the interview.


Exactly. And TMZ makes it sound like they had no security, headline calls it an invader but he was charged with misdemeanor trespassing. Tightwad Harry who is so worried about his family needs to invest in more than a RING doorbell....honestly these two....


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> What a shame; people can never have honest conversations because they’re afraid of shet like this happening.


from what I saw in clips she tried to have a civil conversation with cheryl yet she has to formally apoligize after the fact.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> from what I saw in clips she tried to have a civil conversation with cheryl yet she has to formally apoligize after the fact.


Did she forget to take her pills that day?
Sharon was cursing like a sailor (to put it mildly) before the commercial break.
She needed to apologize.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bisousx said:


> Japanese culture abhors scandal anyways. There’s so much about respect for family and elders in that culture that I’d be surprised if it ever happened even among regular families, let alone noble/royal ones. You will never see a son publicly lambaste or make unflattering allegations about his family with wife sitting smugly in tow, all while having taken money from the family pot.


You're not kidding. The men in grey suits from IHA (Imperial Household Agency) never forgive her for having a mental illness. They allowed Akishino (Naruhito's brother) to publicly chastise Naruhito for defending Masako. The IHA also prevented Masako from attending engagements and events for years by just saying she wasn't well enough to attend. Now that she is Empress Masako, it's more difficult to deny her these privileges.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> It is still up to par in the Royal Family.
> The Queen herself does not have any degrees.
> And MM graduated from a well regarded school.
> Let’s get real here.



I'll admit I'm biased because up until like 10 years ago you couldn't even get a bachelor's in Germany...the equivalent was the midterm exam which was about the same amount of education, but was just a stopover on your way to your glorious master's. If you left university with just your midterm, you wouldn't have earned any degree. 

Also, the Queen is a trained car mechanic!   She trained during the war to help out where needed. But yes, I always found it weird that her parents didn't think a future monarch could use formal education and I'm sure they'd have sent a son to university.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll admit I'm biased because up until like 10 years ago you couldn't even get a bachelor's in Germany...the equivalent was the midterm exam which was about the same amount of education, but was just a stopover on your way to your glorious master's. If you left university with just your midterm, you wouldn't have earned any degree.
> 
> Also, the Queen is a trained car mechanic!   She trained during the war to help out where needed. But yes, I always found it weird that her parents didn't think a future monarch could use formal education and I'm sure they'd have sent a son to university.


According to the Crown, she had private tutors to teach her the Constitution.
She is quite a smarty anyways.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Did she forget to take her pills that day?
> Sharon was cursing like a sailor (to put it mildly) before the commercial break....
> She needed to apologize.


I didn't see the whole thing.....maybe I'm wrong...cursing would have been bleeped out?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I didn't see the whole thing.....maybe I'm wrong...cursing would have been bleeped out?


It was bleeped out but you could tell, she went on a cursing bender.
She completely lost it.
Can you imagine cursing at your coworkers?????


----------



## kkfiregirl

limom said:


> Can you imagine cursing at your coworkers?????



I would love to curse at some of them!


----------



## Jktgal

@dangerouscurves
the traditional litters are used by many Pacific island nations to honor chiefs/dignitaries (incl in Hawaii, I think, before its annexation by USA).
Micronesia President in the Cook Islands source



former australian prime minister julia gillard in the cook islands.




one more, west papuan (separatist) leader honored in vanuatu (is that a pig he's sitting on lol).


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Maybe Harry is the better actor of the two.



Harry isn’t a very good actor. He does appear susceptible to mind control however.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> If Charles doesn't give them those extra millions/year, they may need another GoFundMe fundraiser. They could also ask Oprah for protection or move to a smaller house in a gated community...
> 
> "_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's mansion in Southern California, was breached two times by the same intruder over the Christmas holiday, a new report claims.
> 
> Nickolas Brooks, 37, was first caught trespassing at the $14.65million property in Montecito on December 24, but officers with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office let him off with a warning, TMZ reported Sunday.
> 
> Two days later Brooks showed up again on December 26 and was subsequently arrested and charged with one count of misdemeanor trespassing._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's CA home breached by intruder TWICE
> 
> 
> Nickolas Brooks, 37, was first caught trespassing at the $14.65million property on December 24, but police let him off with a warning, TMZ reported Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Meghan should be pleased.  Isn’t having your very own stalker a sign that you really have “made it” as a celebrity?  Unless he was stalking Harry...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> It was bleeped out but you could tell, she went on a cursing bender.
> She completely lost it.
> Can you imagine cursing at your coworkers?????


ok she shouldn't have cursed but is Piers being accused of being a racist because he said negative things about Meghan who is according to Cheryl a black woman?  even if he doesn't mention her race, just saying he doesn't like her or whatever is racist?
and then Sharon for saying he is her friend is a second-hand racist?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Meg basically had an adult temper tantrum.  I wish she’d get a spanking but instead, she’s not even getting a time out.  She’s getting exactly what you don’t give a bratty child:  coddling and lots of attention.



She’s Veruca Salt, all grown up and married.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> ok she shouldn't have cursed but is Piers being accused of being a racist because he said negative things about Meghan who is according to Cheryl a black woman?  even if he doesn't mention her race, just saying he doesn't like her or whatever is racist?
> and then Sharon for saying he is her friend is a second-hand racist?


I am just saying that she needed to apologize for the way she treated her coworker and cursing.
As far as defending PM, it is up to her.
She is free to say whatever she wants but she has to be ready for the consequences.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> I am just saying that she needed to apologize for the way she treated her coworker and cursing.
> As far as defending PM, it is up to her.
> She is free to say whatever she wants but she has to be ready for the consequences.


so respectfully, as you and I have agreed on things in the past, does anyone who doesn't like Meghan have to face consequences - be viewed as racist?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> It is still up to par in the Royal Family.
> The Queen herself does not have any degrees.
> And MM graduated from a well regarded school.
> Let’s get real here.



When the Queen was college-age, virtually no women anywhere had degrees. And not all that many men either.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so Sharon Osbourne had to apologize for supporting Piers Morgan.....and the episode where she and Cheryl got into it over what cheryl perceived as sharon supporting a racist is being investigated by CBS.
> Come on.....and I'm not a conservative saying this.  I doubt Sharon is either.  So now the mere implication that you may have a racist thought is cause for investigation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS Launches Internal Review After Sharon Osbourne's Heated Debate with Sheryl Underwood on The Talk
> 
> 
> CBS is launching an internal review after The Talk co-hosts Sharon Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood had a heated on-air exchange.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Yep. This is why most people hate the cancel culture. The bar for what is considered offensive keeps moving. At this rate everyone will inevitably think the wrong thing or break one of the arbitrary rules.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> so respectfully, as you and I have agreed on things in the past, does anyone who doesn't like Meghan have to face consequences - be viewed as racist?


We all face consequences for our actions.
I don’t know if Sharon is racist or not. I suspect that CBS  wants to end her contract because she is not economically viable.
If one is a racist, one should absolutely face consequences.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> When the Queen was college-age, virtually no women anywhere had degrees. And not all that many men either.


Only 34% of Americans are college educated, btw.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Only 34% of Americans are college educated, btw.



In the 1940s it was less than 5%.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> In the 1940s it was less than 5%.


What does it have to do with anything?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> What does it have to do with anything?



You said “the Queen herself does not have any degrees.”

My point was almost nobody pursued higher education back in her day. It isn’t comparable to now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> You said “the Queen herself does not have any degrees.”
> 
> My point was almost nobody pursued higher education back in her day. It isn’t comparable to now.


Exactly! She was born 90+ years ago for crying out loud! To put things to perspective, she was born in 1926, and UK passed the law to give women rights to vote in 1928. I can safely say that during her early years, pursuing higher education just wasn't a thing for women!


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> You said “the Queen herself does not have any degrees.”
> 
> My point was almost nobody pursued higher education back in her day. It isn’t comparable to now.


And yet her uncle and father both  attended Colleges.


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> ... but I just have to say it would be the height of delusion for her to expect to be appointed senator....surely even she has more sense than that


I'm beginning to wonder   But I do think she sees herself as qualified for such a position - it's the narc in her.


sdkitty said:


> so respectfully, as you and I have agreed on things in the past, does anyone who doesn't like Meghan have to face consequences - be viewed as racist?


It's beginning to seem this way, isn't it? 

Dolls, it took me six days - SIX DAYS! to get caught up on this thread. Every time I popped in there was always 35+ pages waiting for me.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> And yet her uncle and father both  attended Colleges.


good point
but back in the day (even much later than the Queen's youth) women mainly went to college to be a teacher or a nurse - and to find a husband.....much different than now, thankfully


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> And yet her uncle and father both  attended Colleges.



She was a woman. In the 1940s. And then there’s the little matter that she would’ve been college-age right in the middle of World War II. Cut the poor old girl some slack!


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> good point
> but back in the day (even much later than the Queen's youth) women mainly went to college to be a teacher or a nurse - and to find a husband.....much different than now, thankfully


Exactly, plus she was not expected to be queen.


bag-mania said:


> She was a woman. In the 1940s. And then there’s the little matter that she would’ve been college-age right in the middle of World War II. Cut the poor girl some slack!


I agree I am just pointing out that she did not study that is all.


----------



## V0N1B2

maris.crane said:


> I know this is unpopular, and no one will change my view on this one. I think there's a marked difference between cutting out a *semi*-*absentee* father and you big age-gapped half-sister when they run on a Press Tour...


I don't want to harp on something from like 3746382 posts ago, but Thomas Markle was anything but a "semi-absentee" father. He raised her. Raised her when her mother was off God knows where for a seemingly unknown amount of time (because nobody really knows). He went to the school plays, he paid for everything - including her tuition at Northwestern, his brother is the one that got her the internship in Argentina, he featured prominently on her blog The Tig, for many years. It was only when she met Harry, that Thomas no longer fit the false narrative she was pushing. Of being self-made, putting herself through school, of the young ingenue making it in the world. Everything she's ever gotten was due to a man. Didn't Trevity-Trev-Trev even get her the audition for Suits?
She's the feminist for the new millennium.


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Exactly, plus she was not expected to be queen.
> 
> I agree I am just pointing out that she did not study that is all.


She knew from the age of 10 that she would one day be queen. That was in 1936, the year of the abdication, years before she might have thought about higher education. I don't think we had colleges back then, only Universities.


----------



## V0N1B2

kkfiregirl said:


> They can come up with a new _family_ name; _Spencer_, _Kennedy_, _Rockefeller_ - whatever and whomever they’d like to be next.


Somewhere in Montecito, Meghan is absolutely seething that she missed the opportunity to call her first born son Spencer. I'm sure it’ll be someone else’s fault she didn’t think of it first.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Somewhere in Montecito, Meghan is absolutely seething that she missed the opportunity to call her first born son Spencer. I'm sure it’ll be someone else’s fault she didn’t think of it first.



Maybe that will be baby Diana’s middle name.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> I don't want to harp on something from like 3746382 posts ago, but Thomas Markle was anything but a "semi-absentee" father. He raised her. Raised her when her mother was off God knows where for a seemingly unknown amount of time (because nobody really knows). He went to the school plays, he paid for everything - including her tuition at Northwestern, his brother is the one that got her the internship in Argentina, he featured prominently on her blog The Tig, for many years. It was only when she met Harry, that Thomas no longer fit the false narrative she was pushing. Of being self-made, putting herself through school, of the young ingenue making it in the world. Everything she's ever gotten was due to a man. Didn't Trevity-Trev-Trev even get her the audition for Suits?
> She's the feminist for the new millennium.


I agree about Thomas.  as far as Doria, we don't know why she seemed to be absent.  maybe it was Meghans preference.


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> I agree I am just pointing out that she did not study that is all.



She would have had private tutors and learned in the castle. According to a Google search she studied constitutional history and law (how accurate that is I have no idea) .


----------



## Scarf Addict

sdkitty said:


> I agree about Thomas.  as far as Doria, we don't know why she seemed to be absent.  maybe it was Meghans preference.


I am just reading Andrew Morton's book about MM and she lived with her Dad in the week as her school was near his home (after he and Doria split).  HTH.


----------



## Lodpah

What a legacy MM and Harry have. A legacy of bitterness, hate, revenge and spitefullness. Nothing positive ever comes from them, like praising some organizations or even a person. It’s always about them.
They have no joy at all. It seems. Those are heavy chains to carry around.


----------



## mdcx

Thomas was the primary caretaker of MM for a good portion of her childhood I believe. By all accounts a very attentive parent also. Explains why he seems so devastated to be cut off imo. 
Meghan seems like a very angry person, can’t make for a very pleasant home life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> Somewhere in Montecito, Meghan is absolutely seething that she missed the opportunity to call her first born son Spencer. I'm sure it’ll be someone else’s fault she didn’t think of it first.



I wonder how she'll manage to squeeze Harry into the girl's name...call her Henrietta or borrow from the Nordic countries so she can be Henrysdottir or something? Or maybe Diana will do as apparently being Diana's son is Harry's sole identity.


----------



## Lodpah

Also, having two apparently mentally unstable people run organizations to help other people with mental health issues is kinda scary.

 They need to fix themselves before telling others how to fix others as they have shown they seem to be in the throes of it. It would be so much more helpful if they’ve been helped and then they can tell others how they got through it. It’s like one schizophrenic telling another schizophrenic while in mania status what to do.

It’s not a trend of the day thing. Its

Each person with a mental issue, no matter the type,  is so personal they need to deal with it one on one with professionals. 

Each person with a mental issue, no matter the type,  is so personal they need to deal with it one on one with professionals. Let true professionals and get the word out there for treatment be done by professionals.

This is such an important and potentially can lead to suicides type of issues that they should not monetize it.


----------



## muddledmint

Etriers said:


> Low-key as in no gold Cinderella carriage, umpteen flower girls and attendants, 30 foot train, etc... I imagine the expense, celebrities and tiara are ubiquitous at a royal wedding.


It was an extravagant but still relatively tasteful wedding. I thought it turned out really well.

It always seemed obvious to me that she didn’t invite any family members besides doria because she was embarrassed by them. Even if she paid for their travel expenses and their outfits, how would they fit in with the royals/aristocrats and Hollywood celebrities? You know snotty people would snicker about her relatives behind her back and the press might also make fun of them if they made any etiquette gaffes. She is too thin skinned to deal with any of that!


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> Also, having two apparently mentally unstable people run organizations to help other people with mental health issues is kinda scary.
> 
> They need to fix themselves before telling others how to fix others as they have shown they seem to be in the throes of it. It would be so much more helpful if they’ve been helped and then they can tell others how they got through it. It’s like one schizophrenic telling another schizophrenic while in mania status what to do.
> 
> It’s not a trend of the day thing. Its
> 
> Each person with a mental issue, no matter the type,  is so personal they need to deal with it one on one with professionals.
> 
> Each person with a mental issue, no matter the type,  is so personal they need to deal with it one on one with professionals. Let true professionals and get the word out there for treatment be done by professionals.
> 
> This is such an important and potentially can lead to suicides type of issues that they should not monetize it.



Especially if they don’t mention getting help, only complaining about it!  On national TV nonetheless.   I was feeling suicidal I got help, instead of BRF refused to help me... seriously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

muddledmint said:


> It was an extravagant but still relatively tasteful wedding. I thought it turned out really well.
> 
> It always seemed obvious to me that she didn’t invite any family members besides doria because she was embarrassed by them. Even if she paid for their travel expenses and their outfits, how would they fit in with the royals/aristocrats and Hollywood celebrities? You know snotty people would snicker about her relatives behind her back and the press might also make fun of them if they made any etiquette gaffes. She is too thin skinned to deal with any of that!


True. I went to a wedding and it was a nice wedding and one of the aunts had dementia but she was still invited and no one cared, cause a wedding is a celebration of love. The aunt seemed to enjoy it, whether she understood what was going on or not, it was nice to see her. She had moments of clarity and it was priceless when she recognized someone albeit briefly. 

 If one is embarrassed about how a loved one looks or by their illness, then that’s as shallow as a person gets. That’s their character. No love or compassion there.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> That's what I've thought all along. She begged to be appointed Senator and she wasn't. *But now Gov. Newsom is in recall controversies of his own. *M is probably laughing at his problems since she didn't get her way. Politics is a tough business. She wouldn't last ten seconds in the political arena. Unless she hung out in a basement and kept her mouth shut. Works for some people. But we know she can't keep her mouth shut.



Hallelujah 
Maybe she can send him an inspirational banana


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> Thomas was the primary caretaker of MM for a good portion of her childhood I believe. By all accounts a very attentive parent also. Explains why he seems so devastated to be cut off imo.
> Meghan seems like a very angry person, can’t make for a very pleasant home life.



Ginge c/o about his father not taking his calls, while Cringe is not taking her father’s calls... I mean again, and again, both idiots and hypocrites... sure a lot of us can have some hypocrisy, but why would you make it so obvious...  or not reflect on it and why has not one person not asked anything?  BC we are a bunch of racists for questioning Cringe at all... we’re jealous she married a prince...  But Royal life is not for everyone, and you don’t have to be 40 to know that Cringey!  You don’t have to do research to know that.... you have to be thirsty as a famewhore... because admit it, she was a nobody prior to dating Ginge...


----------



## Lodpah

poopsie said:


> Hallelujah
> Maybe she can send him an inspirational banana


For some reason that banana incident really saddens me that in my heart I knew she was mocking those women. Call me deluded, call me insane I don’t care but that there? It was to me a passive aggressive move on her part to demean them, embarrass them, put them notches below her. Has she followed up on human trafficking, Grenfels, the children and women in Africa? She’s too busy undermining any of those worthy causes to highlight her first world problems.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Maybe that will be baby Diana’s middle name.



I missed several posts. Are we now naming the baby? 

I propose Princess Doria Diana or Princess Diana Doria. If grandpa Charles slims down the Royal Family, the little girl is already a princess...


----------



## muddledmint

Lodpah said:


> For some reason that banana incident really saddens me that in my heart I knew she was mocking those women. Call me deluded, call me insane I don’t care but that there? It was to me a passive aggressive move on her part to demean them, embarrass them, put them notches below her. Has she followed up on human trafficking, Grenfels, the children and women in Africa? She’s too busy undermining any of those worthy causes to highlight her first world problems.


I don’t think she was intentionally mocking them. It just shows how shallow her understanding really is of their lives and the hardships they face. I just have secondhand embarrassment for her with this banana incident.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> The one we just had comes immediately to mind.
> I used to just have to plan for leaving California. Now, I guess I should start looking further afield.


Take me with you!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder how she'll manage to squeeze Harry into the girl's name...call her *Henrietta* or borrow from the Nordic countries so she can be Henrysdottir or something? Or maybe Diana will do as apparently being Diana's son is Harry's sole identity.


That could also go with the chicken coop theme!


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> For some reason that banana incident really saddens me that in my heart I knew she was mocking those women. Call me deluded, call me insane I don’t care but that there? It was to me a passive aggressive move on her part to demean them, embarrass them, put them notches below her. Has she followed up on human trafficking, Grenfels, the children and women in Africa? She’s too busy undermining any of those worthy causes to highlight her first world problems.



No, it was patently obvious. 
But the perfect thing for Gov Nuisance


----------



## Allisonfaye

kkfiregirl said:


> And you know when you run for president they dig up every damn thing from your past. Everyone will know the truth about her previous marriages and the opposition will pay discarded friends to tell their story.



Only if you are on one side of the political spectrum.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Allisonfaye said:


> Only if you are on one side of the political spectrum.



facts.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> The one we just had comes immediately to mind.
> I used to just have to plan for leaving California. Now, I guess I should start looking further afield.





purseinsanity said:


> Take me with you!


We will need a big truck, my closet is full. To avoid any delay, I could also leave some bags behind.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> good point
> but back in the day (even much later than the Queen's youth) women mainly went to college to be a teacher or a nurse - *and to find a husband.*....much different than now, thankfully



Not if you want to be a duchess


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> facts.



facts schmacts


----------



## Lodpah

This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> She knew from the age of 10 that she would one day be queen. That was in 1936, the year of the abdication, years before she might have thought about higher education. I don't think we had colleges back then, only Universities.



In the UK, colleges are part of some university groups (Oxbridge e.g. Kings College, Cambridge, and London e.g. Gloldsmiths College, London) but normally colleges are separate institutions, sometimes still called '6th-form' to do A Levels or vocational BTEC qualifications, they act as bridges between school that do not do A Levels and universities.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Mother's Day for the ones in the UK! 

*Prince Harry reveals he arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana’s grave in poignant Mother’s Day tribute – after Cambridges released George and Charlotte’s cards to ‘Granny Diana’*

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge shared their own tribute on Mother's Day, sharing cards on the Kensington Palace official Instagram account, with a sweet message encouraging those struggling with bereavement.

*Noting this Mother's Day was 'different,' the Palace revealed Prince William, 38, and Kate Middleton's children write letters to their paternal grandmother each year on Mother's Day.


*









						Harry arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana's grave
					

Prince Harry arranged for flowers to be laid at the grave of his mother, Princess Diana, within the grounds of Althorp, her family's stately home, to mark Mother's Day.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## shyla14

jennlt said:


> DH and I love _Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy_! We're ready for a post-Covid trip to Italy after seeing all the amazing scenery and food.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> For some reason that banana incident really saddens me that in my heart I knew she was mocking those women. Call me deluded, call me insane I don’t care but that there? It was to me a passive aggressive move on her part to demean them, embarrass them, put them notches below her. Has she followed up on human trafficking, Grenfels, the children and women in Africa? She’s too busy undermining any of those worthy causes to highlight her first world problems.



I don't even think she was mocking them, she really just thinks she is the universe's gift to everyone else and probably thought they would be delighted to see her silly messages. I always thought she had a really patronizing way of speaking to / interacting with the people she met (the ones she thought she would save).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.




At this point, I've dozens of articles and videos queued up. I fear I'll never get through them.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> In the UK, colleges are part of some university groups (Oxbridge e.g. Kings College, Cambridge, and London e.g. Gloldsmiths College, London) but normally colleges are separate institutions, sometimes still called '6th-form' to do A Levels or vocational BTEC qualifications, they act as bridges between school that do not do A Levels and universities.


I know, I'm in the UK


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Happy Mother's Day for the ones in the UK!
> 
> *Prince Harry reveals he arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana’s grave in poignant Mother’s Day tribute – after Cambridges released George and Charlotte’s cards to ‘Granny Diana’*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge shared their own tribute on Mother's Day, sharing cards on the Kensington Palace official Instagram account, with a sweet message encouraging those struggling with bereavement.
> 
> *Noting this Mother's Day was 'different,' the Palace revealed Prince William, 38, and Kate Middleton's children write letters to their paternal grandmother each year on Mother's Day.
> 
> View attachment 5022583
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana's grave
> 
> 
> Prince Harry arranged for flowers to be laid at the grave of his mother, Princess Diana, within the grounds of Althorp, her family's stately home, to mark Mother's Day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That was seriously the first non-offensive article I've read about Harry in a while. Also every royal who was featured was really thoughtful in their messages to their mothers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm obviously easier to please than some DM commenters:



> I'm sure he wrote a heartfelt message "Stuck it to Dad and William last week, hope you are proud"?





> Oh please !!! You insult your family x the Crown x the Queen then to try and earn brownie points put flowers on your mothers grave. Too late Harry as she would have been disgusted with your behaviour and how you are controlled by the actress Watch your back as now she has 2 kids off you and your money .....your uses are waning  ...dump time.



Ouch.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> so Sharon Osbourne had to apologize for supporting Piers Morgan.....and the episode where she and Cheryl got into it over what cheryl perceived as sharon supporting a racist is being investigated by CBS.
> Come on.....and I'm not a conservative saying this.  I doubt Sharon is either.  So now the mere implication that you may have a racist thought is cause for investigation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBS Launches Internal Review After Sharon Osbourne's Heated Debate with Sheryl Underwood on The Talk
> 
> 
> CBS is launching an internal review after The Talk co-hosts Sharon Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood had a heated on-air exchange.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


That's why that talk show, as are most daytime talk shows, very boring and not worth my time.

People can't say what they really think, they are all pussy footing around pretending to be so nice and very PC and everyone is afraid of cancel culture.


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.



Thanks for sharing this, looks great.


----------



## CarryOn2020

“Papa is missing you.”

In 3 words, Charlotte speaks truth. 




Chanbal said:


> Happy Mother's Day for the ones in the UK!
> 
> *Prince Harry reveals he arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana’s grave in poignant Mother’s Day tribute – after Cambridges released George and Charlotte’s cards to ‘Granny Diana’*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge shared their own tribute on Mother's Day, sharing cards on the Kensington Palace official Instagram account, with a sweet message encouraging those struggling with bereavement.
> 
> *Noting this Mother's Day was 'different,' the Palace revealed Prince William, 38, and Kate Middleton's children write letters to their paternal grandmother each year on Mother's Day.
> 
> View attachment 5022583
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana's grave
> 
> 
> Prince Harry arranged for flowers to be laid at the grave of his mother, Princess Diana, within the grounds of Althorp, her family's stately home, to mark Mother's Day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> There is still hope!
> 
> View attachment 5021579


Yes, Betty!





jennlt said:


> Opinion | Why We Care About the Royal Family Feud
> 
> 
> The British monarchy has endured for more than a millennium, and the queen is a symbol of stability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By
> Peggy Noonan
> March 11, 2021 7:08 pm ET
> 
> What just happened?
> That wasn’t just a high-charged celebrity interview that everyone talked about and then it went away. Oprah Winfrey’s conversation last weekend with the duke and duchess of Sussex will reverberate and last. It was history, a full-bore assault on an institution, the British monarchy, that has endured more than 1,000 years.
> Harry and Meghan famously leveled two big charges, that the House of Windsor is racist and that it is weak. Previous incarnations of criticism painted it as invincible—the sharp-elbowed courtiers, the coldhearted family, they can crush you like a bug. No, Harry said, _they _are the bugs, trapped in fear of the tabloids that control whether they’ll keep the throne. “There is a level of control by fear that has existed for generations. I mean generations,” he said. “My father and my brother”—Prince Charles and Prince William —“they are trapped. They don’t get to leave. And I have huge compassion for that.” That must be a comfort to them.
> No immediate-family heir to the British throne has ever talked like this. You are made quite vulnerable when people suddenly see you as weak. What remains of your mystique is lessened when you’re seen as just another group of frightened persons.
> 
> Meghan charged that her infant son, Archie—the “first member of color in this family”—was treated differently and denied things due him because he was biracial. There were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.” She wouldn’t say who was involved. “I think that would be very damaging to them.” So she knew the power of the charge she was bringing. Harry, asked about it, said, “That conversation I’m never going to share, but at the time—at the time it was awkward. I was a bit shocked.” His refusal to name the person with whom he had the conversation didn’t limit guilt but dispersed it.
> The queen’s response was a small masterpiece of blandness that sucked the heat from the moment: Accusations of racism are “concerning” and will be “taken very seriously,” but “recollections may vary.”
> This is a story that will evolve for some time. Some observations:
> Public life has gotten extremely, unrelentingly performative. Have you noticed you keep hearing that word? It means everyone is always performing—the politician, the news anchor, the angry activist. This gives natural actors an edge, and leaves those who aren’t by nature actors at a disadvantage. Meghan was a professional actress.
> 
> Both Meghan and Harry speak a kind of woke-corporate communications language that is smooth and calming but also slippery and opaque. You can never quite get your hands around the thought as you grab for meaning.
> They spoke a great deal about their pain—it is a subject that animates them—but they seemed also to wield that pain as a weapon in a way that left you wondering if pain is really the word for what they experienced, as opposed to anger followed by cool desire for revenge.
> Some of what was said beggared belief. Meghan claimed that going in she didn’t really have any idea what the royal family was, didn’t Google or do any research. “As Americans especially what you do know about the royals is what you read in fairy tales.” Actually, no. When Princess Diana died in 1997 it was a world-wide, epic drama. Diana was raised to heroic status, the people’s princess, roughly treated by royals who didn’t deserve her. Her funeral was watched by 2.5 billion people. Meghan Markle, home in California, was 16, presumably loved media, and went on to study acting. Is it believable she didn’t know this story, follow it, see who had the starring role?
> 
> As I watched I got the sense she knew more history than she said, that perhaps on some level she wanted to be Princess Diana, only she wanted not to die.
> She sees herself as a moral instructor, an ethical leader. She and Harry were originally “aligned” by their “cause-driven work”: “I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights.” She wishes to “live authentically,” “just getting down to basics.” This apparently involves rescue chickens. She and Harry spirited them from a factory farm. “Well, you know, I just love rescuing,” she said. This was perhaps meant to underscore the idea that she rescued Harry from his charnel house of a family.
> She is good at underscoring. She watches “The Little Mermaid” and comes up with a handy metaphor for her journey: “And I went, ‘Oh my God! She falls in love with the prince and because of that, she has to lose her voice.’ . . . But by the end, she gets her voice back.”
> This is performative to the nth degree.
> They have a foundation and a media-content company called Archewell. Asked about the latter, she said, “Life is about storytelling. About the stories we tell ourselves, what we’re told, and what we buy into.” Well, that’s part of what life is. “For us to be able to have storytelling through a truthful lens, that is hopefully uplifting, is going to be great knowing how many people that can land with.” Can land with? That is practiced show-people talk. She wishes to “give a voice” to those who “underrepresented, and aren’t really heard.”
> Why should an American care about any of this? I suppose we shouldn’t. In a practical way we’re interested in the royal family because we don’t have one, don’t want one, and think it’s great that you do. We get the benefits—the pictures of clothes and castles, the horses and military outfits, the stories of backstairs and love affairs—and you pay the bills.
> But I think there’s something deeper, more mystical in our interest, a sense that however messy the monarchy, it embodies a nation, the one we long ago came from and broke with. The high purpose of monarchy is to lend its mystique and authority to the ideas of stability and continuance.
> Henry VIII, Mad King George, Victoria—these names still echo. It is rare and wonderful when you can say of a small old woman entering a large reception area, “England has entered the room.” Someday Elizabeth II will leave us and the world will honestly mourn, not only because of what she represented but because she was old-style. She performed but wasn’t performative. She was appropriately, heroically contained, didn’t share her emotions because after all it wasn’t about her, it was about a kingdom, united. You could rely on her to love her country and commonwealth; she was born and raised to love them. And so she has been for the world a constant. And in this world, a constant is a valuable thing.
> 
> I keep thinking of the special predicament she and her family are in. Diana did them a lot of damage in her life, and her death, but their feelings about her were mixed. She wasn’t born into the family, she was a thing that happened to the family. But Harry—Harry they would have loved, as brother and son and grandson. They would _miss _him. And now he has done great damage to everything they are and represent.
> The old queen must be grieving. Not that she’d say it, or share the wound. There’s something so admirable in that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: No Woke Duchess Is Bringing Down the Monarchy
> Main Street: Britain's monarchy has lasted a thousand years, surviving Oliver Cromwell, Guy Fawkes, several Popes, the Nazis and Wallis Simpson. No woke Duchess is going to bring it down. Image: Chris Jackson/Getty Images


Great article.





pukasonqo said:


> Just to be irritating
> Megan identifies herself w the little mermaid, the Disney version as in it the mermaid loses her voice, gets the prince, gets voice back and lives happily ever after (the sea witch gets her punishment)
> However, in the original Hans Christian Andersen story the little mermaid has no name, loses her voice and her life (becomes sea foam with other mermaids) because the prince does not fall in love w her
> I would assume that an educated woman would know the HCA story but regardless in both versions a woman sacrifices herself (her voice) for a man who (in both versions) initially cannot remember her although she saved him from a shipwreck and (in the original version) dies because of him not recognising her
> Not a very powerful or independent role model as her life depends on him recognising her, if he doesn’t (as in the original) she loses her voice, her life and the one she loves
> So a woman needs to be heard and recognised by a man in order to exist
> Yay, we have come a long way!











Chanbal said:


> MM&H are becoming QE's worst nightmare...
> 
> *Buckingham Palace 'brings in external legal firm to carry out bullying probe' as Meghan Markle demands to see emails and texts after palace aide accused her of 'unacceptable behaviour' towards two assistants*
> 
> Buckingham Palace will bring in an external independent legal firm to carry out an investigation into claims that the  Duchess of Sussex bullied royal staff, reports say.
> 
> *In an escalation of the standoff between the two parties, Meghan Markle has written to the Palace demanding to see documents, emails or text messages relating to the bullying complaint against her, *The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> But in an unprecedented move that will no doubt increase tensions further, royal staff have decided a third party should take the reins of the investigation, rather than the in-house inquiry first announced, according to The  Sunday Times.
> 
> A senior Palace aide had accused Meghan of 'unacceptable behaviour' towards two personal assistants and undermining the confidence of a third, leading to the investigation which will be given to a legal firm.
> 
> Former and current royal aides who were blocked from giving evidence in court during Meghan's recent legal privacy battle are expected to speak to the inquiry.
> 
> *But in a clear indication that the Duchess is preparing to fight back against what she has termed 'a smear campaign', a senior Palace source confirmed that her office had 'written to request the evidence'.
> 
> In response, the Queen has passed the request to the Prince of Wales, whose closest aides are now conducting a search of files. *
> 
> Meanwhile, it emerged on Saturday night that William and Harry had 'been in contact' for the first time since last Sunday's explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Sunday Times reported.
> 
> The interview saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussex make shockwaves with accusations of racism against 'The Firm'.
> 
> February saw two senior members of the royal staff claim they were bullied by Meghan, with a third saying they had been personally 'humiliated' and claimed two members of staff had been bullied.
> 
> Meghan has denied the accusations.
> 
> However, according to a royal source speaking to The Times: 'The actual worst incidences haven't come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.'
> 
> 'There's a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn't been told,' another source told the newspaper.
> 
> *The Sussexes are not expected to be invited to take part in the investigation despite having written to Buckingham Palace about it, a decision that could widen the rift between the Royal Family and couple further.
> 
> "Meghan's bullying behavior" *










chicinthecity777 said:


> I would love to see MM running for office! Let's see how she deal with critism! *By suing everyone?*


Yeah 
Everyone:


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was seriously the first non-offensive article I've read about Harry in a while. Also every royal who was featured was really thoughtful in their messages to their mothers.


There are 2 other articles related to the Harkles on DM today. One that I can't post here because of obvious reasons, and the one below reminding that Harry is not an only child as MM refers to herself. 











						RICHARD KAY views the poignant Mother's Day cards to Princess Diana
					

RICHARD KAY: They are just the kind of heart-warming cards that were being opened by mothers up and down the country yesterday: Sweet, affectionate and lovingly homemade.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.



@Lodpah I believe the Palace would appreciate this video. I didn't watch all video yet, but the first part is impressive. Thanks for sharing it!


----------



## Annawakes

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.



I haven’t yet watched the whole thing, but it’s kinda funny how these very qualified, serious, and experienced people so meticulously analyze something as tabloid-y as this interview.  They do a great job.

my other thought was, Gee I’d hate if they were my dad.  Or my in-law  you know they’re analyzing everything you say, no matter if they’re trying to or not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even think she was mocking them, she really just thinks she is the universe's gift to everyone else and probably thought they would be delighted to see her silly messages. I always thought she had a really patronizing way of speaking to / interacting with the people she met (the ones she thought she would save).


this
I don't understand what she thinks her credentials are for showing/telling the rest of us what we should do or think.....who the heel does she think she is?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seeee? H&M must have [ freeeeee ] MI6-level security because they have ‘Royal blood’!








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's CA home breached by intruder TWICE
					

Nickolas Brooks, 37, was first caught trespassing at the $14.65million property on December 24, but police let him off with a warning, TMZ reported Sunday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, I'm in the UK


Sorry


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> this
> I don't understand what she thinks her credential are for showing/telling the rest of us what we should do or think.....who the heel does she think she is?



The mother of 2 Royal children.
Speaking of mother, why didn’t Hazzie recognize her for the UK’s Mother’s Day?  Or did I miss something?

ETA: when I hear this phrase ‘Royal blood’, I wonder if they believe it is different from us hoi polloi?  Does it contain special powers unknown to us commoners?  It sounds so backward! So 15th century!


----------



## Lodpah

Annawakes said:


> I haven’t yet watched the whole thing, but it’s kinda funny how these very qualified, serious, and experienced people so meticulously analyze something as tabloid-y as this interview.  They do a great job.
> 
> my other thought was, Gee I’d hate if they were my dad.  Or my in-law  you know they’re analyzing everything you say, no matter if they’re trying to or not.


They coach military, G7 participants, law enforcement, corporate, what more do you want?  Can't get more professional than these. That's their job *study body language*, whether through tabloids, in person interrogation (used a lot in criminal cases), etc. Yes, they did a great job (but if it was sarcasm was intended, they still did a great job. Their resume speak for themselves).


----------



## CarryOn2020

$100
Good job, team 









						Fundraiser to pay Harry and Meghan's £11m mortgage raises £78.64
					

A GoFundMe page was set up two days after the couple's Oprah interview and titled 'Harry and Meghan $5 Donation to Buy Home (£3.61)'  to help couple 'pay off their California mansion'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> They coach military, G7 participants, law enforcement, corporate, what more do you want?  Can't get more professional than these. That's their job *study body language*, whether through tabloids, in person interrogation (used a lot in criminal cases), etc. Yes, they did a great job (but if it was sarcasm was intended, they still did a great job. Their resume speak for themselves).



Haven‘t watched it all yet, but they seem very astute and on point. 
Still, family dinners would be tricky. We have several retired police officers in our family. They analyze everything, every word, every nuance. Even in emails. All in good fun. Usually.


----------



## Annawakes

Lodpah said:


> They coach military, G7 participants, law enforcement, corporate, what more do you want?  Can't get more professional than these. That's their job *study body language*, whether through tabloids, in person interrogation (used a lot in criminal cases), etc. Yes, they did a great job (but if it was sarcasm was intended, they still did a great job. Their resume speak for themselves).


I think they did a great job, very thorough.  Sarcasm was not intended at all.  Thanks for posting the video!


----------



## Lodpah

Annawakes said:


> I think they did a great job, very thorough.  Sarcasm was not intended at all.  Thanks for posting the video!


My bad and apologies to you.



Chanbal said:


> I missed several posts. Are we now naming the baby?
> 
> I propose Princess Doria Diana or Princess Diana Doria. If grandpa Charles slims down the Royal Family, the little girl is already a princess...


I'm opting out of that subject 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder how she'll manage to squeeze Harry into the girl's name...call her Henrietta or borrow from the Nordic countries so she can be Henrysdottir or something? Or maybe Diana will do as apparently being Diana's son is Harry's sole identity.


Wondering too.

So a commenter said *they can't wait to hear MM interview with Oprah as to why she's divorcing Harry. *

Another commenter said so *Harry can complain about Charles not taking his calls yet his wife is sitting there not taking her father's calls. *

We really can't make this up. The pandemic be damned.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Meghan Deserves an Oscar for That Performance



> Meghan deserves an Oscar for that performance
> Were the Duchess of Sussex to be nominated, there was a wealth of material to choose from to showcase her talent
> 
> By CELIA WALDEN
> 
> 8 March 2021 • 7:00pm
> 
> The following artist, nominated for Best Actress In A Leading Role, delivered her performance with complexity, nuance and depth. She brought to life a young, independent woman and mother who was forced to fight back against often unsurvivable odds. She illuminated a truth, on screen, that might help others facing similar challenges in real life. Let’s take a look at some of her best work now…”
> 
> Were Meghan Markle to be nominated at this year’s Oscars – as she deserves to be for her CBS feature-length drama, co-starring Oprah Winfrey and Prince Harry – the Academy would have trouble choosing which clip best showcases her talent. But in the end, I think we’re all agreed, it would have to be the Little Mermaid scene.
> 
> Some years ago, the Duchess of Sussex told Oprah on Sunday night, she was sitting in Nottingham Cottage, “and The Little Mermaid came on?” That’s not a question, incidentally, but like so many of the poignant truths Meghan shared with the world during her interview, it was delivered with the rising inflection favoured by Southern Californian teenage girls, known as ‘upspeak’. The purpose of upspeak? To turn definitive declarations and aggressions into ‘reassurance-seeking’ questions. To portray a woman with iron determination as a little girl lost.
> 
> Anyway, Meghan, framed against the chicken coop in her Santa Barbara garden where Oprah is unaccountably holding half a dozen free-range eggs, goes on: “Now who, as an adult, watches The Little Mermaid?” This really is a question, and one which serves to underline her inner child. “But I was, like, ‘Well, I’m just here all the time, so I may as well watch this?’”
> 
> Should the 48-point font subtext not be clear to all here (and I realise we’re mixing metaphors), Meghan is Rapunzel now, imprisoned in her Kensington Palace tower. Because, as she says elsewhere in the drama, she was only able to leave the house “twice in four months”. Really?
> 
> But back to the award-winning scene. “And I went: Oh my God? She [The Little Mermaid] falls in love with the prince and, because of that, she has to lose her voice.” Pause. Eye-misting. A small smile pushing through the pain. “But by the end, she gets her voice back.”
> 
> Boom. Deafening applause. Standing ovation. Although overlooked time and time again throughout her illustrious career – first for the 2011 TV movie The Boys and Girls Guide to Getting Down, and then, even more unfairly, for her 2016 Hallmark film, Dater’s Handbook – the Oscar for Best Actress 2021 goes to… Meghan Markle.
> 
> Daniel Day Lewis has nothing on this woman, either in terms of methodology or preparation. The pauses before Meghan answered Oprah’s most challenging questions were, in many ways, the high points. The heaving maternal chest, and “maybe she’s born with it, maybe it’s Maybelline” mid-distant stares, as she wrestles with whether to say the things she decided to make public months, if not years, ago.
> 
> Because this interview was as meticulously choreographed as the twin ‘flyaway’ hair strands Meghan uses as a prop throughout her performance, but it’s important for her to show every push and pull of that inner tug of war to up the drama. Just as she needs us to know, time and time again throughout this two-hour emotional tour de force, how “naïve” she was.
> 
> This would make her unique. After over a decade living in LA – where I’ve interviewed and socialised with actors daily – I have yet to meet a naïve actress. Yet Meghan was so guileless, she assures Oprah, that she knew nothing about either the royal family or what she was getting herself into. She has never looked up Prince Harry online. She “never researched what it would mean” to be his girlfriend or become his wife. She “honestly” thought The Firm was looking out for her best interests – it was left to Meghan’s friends to inform her, again, how naïve she was. She “didn’t have a plan”, and “genuinely hadn’t thought of” profiting from her royal title with whopping Netflix and Spotify deals.
> 
> Journalists famously ask leading questions. Meghan is the only celebrity interviewee I’ve ever seen to give such leading answers she might as well have been pulling poor Oprah along by a leash. She’d worked out exactly how to throw Kate under the bus while not wanting “in any way to be disparaging about her.” She’s “advocated for so long for women to use their voice”, she says on International Women’s Day (nothing has been left to chance here). “And then, I was silent…” Oh, Meghan, what are you saying? Silent… or silenced?
> 
> However superb, Meghan’s performance was not without the odd blooper, the odd misstep she might have wanted a second take on, if given the chance. The talking over and interrupting Harry sat awkwardly with her professed vulnerability. The equating of her pain to a pandemic that has killed 2.5 million people around the world was regrettable. The momentary loss of poise surrounding talk of lost titles.
> 
> And Oprah, usually such a fantastic interviewer, might also have wanted to re-shoot a journalistic misstep of her own. Because when Meghan, back in the chicken coop, explains that: “This morning, I woke up earlier than H and saw a note from someone in our team in the UK saying that the Duke of Edinburgh had gone to the hospital”, did this not beg for one of Oprah’s famous: “Wa-wa-wait a minute! You found that out this morning – and still you went ahead with this interview? Really?”
> 
> But in the end, as Meghan points out: “Life is about storytelling, right? About the stories we tell ourselves and what we buy into.” So let’s just sit back and watch how this “fairytale” pans out.



Just throwing that in there, Celia is Piers' wife.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I still refuse to watch the interview, but I just read she had another face malfunction (as in, other people's clothes slip, with her it's the smily face that slips to reveal these scary grimasses that send shivers up your spine) when Oprah asked her about being blamed for Megxit.


----------



## Lodpah

The more snippets I see of the interview, not the full interview, Oprah leaning back sideways kinda makes me think she knows this is all BS but allows MM to go ahead do her thing. To what end? I don't know.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How many cameras were used?  How much editing was done? Were any cue cards used? Any stage directions?
Hmmmm, in these heavily produced interviews, I’m always reminded of the movie Broadcast News. Albert Brooks cautioned us way back in the 80s of this sort of thing.

Tom Grannick: _Everybody has to sell a little. You're selling them this idea of you, you know, you're sort of saying, trust me I'm, um, credible. So when you feel yourself just reading, stop! Start selling a little._


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> How many cameras were used?  How much editing was done? Were any cue cards used? Any stage directions?
> Hmmmm, in these heavily produced interviews, I’m always reminded of the movie Broadcast News. Albert Brooks cautioned us way back in the 80s of this sort of thing.
> 
> Tom Grannick: _Everybody has to sell a little. You're selling them this idea of you, you know, you're sort of saying, trust me I'm, um, credible. So when you feel yourself just reading, stop! Start selling a little._


Yes, that’s all the media is  doing, selling a narrative, the same one, all across the world.
How many have seen the documentary Out Of Shadows?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The mother of 2 Royal children.
> Speaking of mother, why didn’t Hazzie recognize her for the UK’s Mother’s Day?  Or did I miss something?
> 
> ETA: when I hear this phrase ‘Royal blood’, I wonder if they believe it is different from us hoi polloi?  Does it contain special powers unknown to us commoners?  It sounds so backward! So 15th century!


Well, "Them Royals" of "Royal Blood" are Blue Bloods after all.  The rest of us suffer with red.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> The mother of 2 Royal children.
> Speaking of mother, why didn’t Hazzie recognize her for the UK’s Mother’s Day?  Or did I miss something?
> 
> ETA: when I hear this phrase ‘Royal blood’, I wonder if they believe it is different from us hoi polloi?  Does it contain special powers unknown to us commoners?  It sounds so backward! So 15th century!


Doncha know they bleed blue blood when they cut themselves!


----------



## Aimee3

Lodpah said:


> They coach military, G7 participants, law enforcement, corporate, what more do you want?  Can't get more professional than these. That's their job *study body language*, whether through tabloids, in person interrogation (used a lot in criminal cases), etc. Yes, they did a great job (but if it was sarcasm was intended, they still did a great job. Their resume speak for themselves).


OMG I’m 20 minutes into watching this and it’s fabulous!  Amazing!  Thank you sooo much for posting this.  I’d hate to know these guys in real life cause I’d hate to be analyzed like that!!!  Could you imagine your husband having that gift? Me:  “No I didn’t go shopping today!”   Him: “so why are your eyes blinking, your shoulders up, arranging your dress, and hand going stop?”  
Me: “Ok you caught me!”


----------



## Lodpah

Aimee3 said:


> OMG I’m 20 minutes into watching this and it’s fabulous!  Amazing!  Thank you sooo much for posting this.  I’d hate to know these guys in real life cause I’d hate to be analyzed like that!!!  Could you imagine your husband having that gift? Me:  “No I didn’t go shopping today!”   Him: “so why are your eyes blinking, your shoulders up, arranging your dress, and hand going stop?”
> Me: “Ok you caught me!”


I think they’re professional enough to use it to catch bad guys and coach VIPs for public consumption in their mannerisms.


----------



## needlv

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.




Fascinating.  Thank you... For those that don’t have time - start at one hour forty min - and watch them dissect Harry’s claims of racism.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> Fascinating.  Thank you... For those that don’t have time - start at one hour forty min - and watch them dissect Harry’s claims of racism.


Isn't this amazing? Not only for their views but for use in everyday life for us? Especially for interviews, etc.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> $100
> Good job, team
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fundraiser to pay Harry and Meghan's £11m mortgage raises £78.64
> 
> 
> A GoFundMe page was set up two days after the couple's Oprah interview and titled 'Harry and Meghan $5 Donation to Buy Home (£3.61)'  to help couple 'pay off their California mansion'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


No problem, "_I like to help people and help them in any way I can." _


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven‘t watched it all yet, but they seem very astute and on point.
> Still, family dinners would be tricky. We have several retired police officers in our family. They analyze everything, every word, every nuance. Even in emails. All in good fun. Usually.


I finished watching the video, the four gentlemen did a fantastic job. They supported many of our observations.


----------



## Chanbal

Well H, would you like to comment? 


*THE family of an Army officer called a P*** by Prince Harry have slammed him for suggesting the royals are racist, insisting: “You’re wrong.”*

Harry apologised in 2009 for using the vile slur against Sandhurst colleague Ahmed Raza Khan in a video that he filmed himself.

He also used a racial slur against another colleague in the clip — filmed a year after the prince sparked outrage by dressing as a Nazi at a fancy dress party.

Last night, Mr Khan’s father told The Sun he did not agree with the racism claim that emerged from Harry and Meghan’s bombshell TV interview with US talk show queen Oprah Winfrey.

Muhammad Yaqoob Khan Abbasi said: “Prince Harry might have his problems with the family but I don’t agree with him at all.

“I don’t think the UK people or the Royal Family are racists.

“They are accommodating to people from all parts of the world and giving them access to the best facilities as citizens and residents.”

Mr Abbasi, a former vice- president of Pakistan’s Muslim Bank, continued: “I have met members of the Royal Family and they were extremely polite and loving.”









						Prince Harry called our son the P-word… but he can't call the royals racist
					

THE family of an Army officer called a P*** by Prince Harry have slammed him for suggesting the royals are racist, insisting: “You’re wrong.” Harry apologised in 2009 for using the vile slur agains…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Go for it Candace! 



*CANDACE Owens today *launched another blistering assault on Meghan Markle's claim she was the victim of racism in the UK.

The conservative commentator claimed the Duchess used the issue as a "distraction" because she won't accept that British people don't like her character.

Owens - also a black American who married a white English aristocrat - drew parallels between Meghan's experience and her own.

She said it was normal for family members to wonder aloud how dark their baby son would turn out.

Owens wrote in today's Mail on Sunday: "It came from not only my sisters, who are fully black and darker than I am, but also from my husband and from me as we daydreamed about what our beautiful boy would look like.

"'What color do you think his eyes will be?’ we’d enquire aloud. ‘Will his hair be darker or lighter?’

"So hearing Meghan Markle frame the questions about her son’s skin color – however innocently intended – as racist ‘concern’ rather than harmless imagination made my skin crawl."









						Candace rips Meg's 'racist' UK claims & says Brits dislike her character
					

CANDACE Owens today launched another blistering assault on Meghan Markle’s claim she was the victim of racism in the UK. The conservative commentator claimed the Duchess used the issue as a &…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Cringe said when she got to the UK, she wrote letter (ETA: letters) to the BRF saying a bunch of word salad and "I'm here for you, use me as you like."

So should the BRF ask for a refund because they didn't really get to use her as they would have liked? Or maybe, get Harry back for good to save this soul?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I finished watching the video, the four gentlemen did a fantastic job. They supported many of our observations.



My experience tells me that if I _think or feel_ someone is telling a lie, then they usually are. I have learned to listen to the doubt.
The fact that so many people world wide are questioning these two, Royal or not, that is a huge red flag. Character matters.

Easiest way to avoid all of these aftermath shows and pushbacks = tell the truth. 
No, it may not get them $$$$ or awards,  but they won’t lose sleep at night.


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> Cringe said when she got to the UK, she wrote letter to the BRF saying a bunch of word salad and "I'm here for you, use me as you like."
> 
> So should the BRF ask for a refund because they didn't really get to use her as they would have liked? Or maybe, get Harry back for good to save this soul?


That would be epic. The British will use their SAS to rescue Harry but the US will use the Navy Seals to help Meghan hold on to her grip to Harry. It's going to be a bloodbath so it's better if they stay together. 

SAS can call it Operation "Toddler Extract" (a thin reference to protect their mission) and the US Navy Seals can call it whatever they want to call it.

Delta Forces will have to be neutral as they are comprised of members from different services so they can stand off to one side and control this stupid display of two opportunists creating a dramatic situation to throw countries into chaos.

Edited to Add: The Navy Seals can call it "Operation Claw Back"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> That would be epic. The British will use their SAS to rescue Harry but the US will use the Navy Seals to help Meghan hold on to her grip to Harry. It's going to be a bloodbath so it's better if they stay together.
> 
> SAS can call it Operation "Toddler Extract" (a thin reference to protect their mission) and the US Navy Seals can call it whatever they want to call it.
> 
> Delta Forces will have to be neutral as they are comprised of members from different services so they can stand off to one side and control this stupid display of two opportunists creating a dramatic situation to throw countries into chaos.



Best they stay together, in Cali. Kinda like the Kardashians - we know where they are so we can protect ourselves. 
Any person who would marry H or M after this - wow, I can’t, I just can’t.


----------



## needlv

Do you think MM and H are living way above their means?  H complained about having to pay out of his own money (from Diana) After he was “cut off financially”...

so far they splashed out with purchasing a huge mansion, pay for their own security, cars (?) and staff costs.  She was sitting in an expensive dress for the interview but he had repeated the same suit and awful shoes.  Plus costs of lawyers and PR is not cheap.

so how much $$ would it take to keep up their lifestyle?  Way more than they have...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> That would be epic. The British will use their SAS to rescue Harry but the US will use the Navy Seals to help Meghan hold on to her grip to Harry. It's going to be a bloodbath so it's better if they stay together.
> 
> SAS can call it Operation "Toddler Extract" (a thin reference to protect their mission) and the US Navy Seals can call it whatever they want to call it.
> 
> Delta Forces will have to be neutral as they are comprised of members from different services so they can stand off to one side and control this stupid display of two opportunists creating a dramatic situation to throw countries into chaos.



I would like to have Vin Diesel and Idris Alba in this rescue scene for the eye candy factor


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Do you think MM and H are living way above their means?  H complained about having to pay out of his own money (from Diana) After he was “cut off financially”...
> 
> so far they splashed out with purchasing a huge mansion, pay for their own security, cars (?) and staff costs.  She was sitting in an expensive dress for the interview but he had repeated the same suit and awful shoes.  Plus costs of lawyers and PR is not cheap.
> 
> so how much $$ would it take to keep up their lifestyle?  Way more than they have...



No worries - they will be churning out the BS for many years


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Do you think MM and H are living way above their means?  H complained about having to pay out of his own money (from Diana) After he was “cut off financially”...
> 
> so far they splashed out with purchasing a huge mansion, pay for their own security, cars (?) and staff costs.  She was sitting in an expensive dress for the interview but he had repeated the same suit and awful shoes.  Plus costs of lawyers and PR is not cheap.
> 
> so how much $$ would it take to keep up their lifestyle?  Way more than they have...



While I don't know how much Harry has spent from his inheritance, at the rate that they are going, I highly doubt it is sustainable unless money from Netflix and Spotify starts coming in.

For a family of four, a nanny or two, maybe the occasional Doria, a few rescue dogs AND rescue chickens, they could easily choose to live modestly. Had they gone down that path instead, his inheritance would probably last for awhile.

Also, if they don't sell themselves out to the media every darn minute of the day, they could also probably live a quiet life without the need for an expensive (and I assume extensive) private security team other than a select few personnel (which I also assume would cost less). Something is leaked from their camp on a daily basis and that puts them on everyone's radar, both good and malicious people.

The Obamas are well known yet they live quietly post-WH. Yes, they post on social media etc but they don't make themselves everyone's target or embarrass themselves incessantly. You don't see people hounding them. Cringe and Ginge have a lot to learn from them.

This is just my personal opinion. I'm not saying that I'm right so please don't be mad, people 

ETA: Of course these two can't live a quiet and modest life because then they will claim that they are SILENCED


----------



## LittleStar88

needlv said:


> Do you think MM and H are living way above their means?  H complained about having to pay out of his own money (from Diana) After he was “cut off financially”...
> 
> so far they splashed out with purchasing a huge mansion, pay for their own security, cars (?) and staff costs.  She was sitting in an expensive dress for the interview but he had repeated the same suit and awful shoes.  Plus costs of lawyers and PR is not cheap.
> 
> so how much $$ would it take to keep up their lifestyle?  Way more than they have...



My guess is they are using some creative tax strategies to minimize their expenses on these things.

And how much is “business expense” (cars, security, staff, meals, etc) that they can just have their foundation pay for?

Harry sounded like a spoiled brat when he made that comment about being cut off financially. Poor baby has to dip into his millions and millions because daddy won’t give him an allowance? And has to get a job? Cry me a river...


----------



## Annawakes

Hmm, I finished watching the behavioral experts analysis that Lodpah posted.  Based on it, I think:
- bad stuff did actually happen to them, However....
- ....the way they responded to it was really extreme; because their personalities exacerbated their interpretation of what happened.  They could have used the bad stuff to inform and educate people.....instead of burning down all of their relationships with the RF.

I think they actually DO believe themselves.  Even though their body language gives away when they’re being deceitful, they do really think this is the truth, “their truth”.  they’ve worked themselves up into this “us against the world” mentality.

Now I actually feel sorry for them (sorry they have such a twisted mindset) instead of just disliking them.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Cringe said when she got to the UK, she wrote letter (ETA: letters) to the BRF saying a bunch of word salad and "I'm here for you, use me as you like."
> 
> So should the BRF ask for a refund because they didn't really get to use her as they would have liked? Or maybe, get Harry back for good to save this soul?


The BRF should skip the asking for refund and just do a charge back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> Hmm, I finished watching the behavioral experts analysis that Lodpah posted.  Based on it, I think:
> - bad stuff did actually happen to them, However....
> - ....the way they responded to it was really extreme; because their personalities exacerbated their interpretation of what happened.  They could have used the bad stuff to inform and educate people.....instead of burning down all of their relationships with the RF.
> 
> I think they actually DO believe themselves.  Even though their body language gives away when they’re being deceitful, they do really think this is the truth, “their truth”.  they’ve worked themselves up into this “us against the world” mentality.
> 
> Now I actually feel sorry for them (sorry they have such a twisted mindset) instead of just disliking them.



IMO, right now MM is in the ‘us vs. the world’, ‘isn’t life great‘, ‘look what I have’ fairy-tale phase while H is in the vindictive-on-steroids phase. He is so pleased with himself for, in his mind, sticking it to the BRF. As he said, only 1 thing made her different from the others and that was her ethnicity. He is using her and her ethnicity as payback for all of his anger, and it really thrills him, disturbingly so.  When he says ‘it won’t end well’, that is more a commentary on his future than his past. Actually, he seems worryingly unhinged.


----------



## Frivole88

*10 Royal Rules Queen Elizabeth Has Broken For Meghan Markle*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bravo to Rose for speaking up: 








						African American who married into the aristocracy and made it work
					

Rose Hulse from Santa Monica, married George Hulse, the grandson of a baronet at St George's Church, London in 2017. She shares the advice she would've given Meghan for marrying into Royal family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Rose



Though Rose would have dearly loved to see Meghan shine in her royal role, she now believes the Duchess ultimately made the right decision to take a step back.

‘Meghan says she suffered with mental health issues and had thoughts of taking her own life. This is something we all have to respect and support,’ Rose says.

‘By taking a step back, she is in a better position to protect and care for herself so she can be the best mother and wife she can be.

‘I don’t think Meghan was suited for any role as a working royal, as she couldn’t handle the outside pressures and what was expected of her. She’d have had to give up a core part of herself that was proving too difficult. The monarchy has survived more than 1,000 years because they have certain protocols in place to ensure the successful running of the institution. One either steps in line or politely and quietly steps aside.

‘*More than 2,500 people are employed by the Royal Household. In 2017 alone they brought in more than £1.8 billion for the British economy. Let’s not underestimate the power and influence of the Royal Family and all that they provide to Britain.

‘Too much is at stake, and when one starts to pick away at the fabric and foundations of such a massive institution, everything comes crashing down.

‘They have an amazing platform to bring awareness to the causes that are important to them.

‘Meghan, too, has a platform and her words are very powerful . . . She needs to use them wisely, for they can unite or create great divide. When life gives you a platform, we should always use it to unite.’*


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bravo to Rose for speaking up:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> African American who married into the aristocracy and made it work
> 
> 
> Rose Hulse from Santa Monica, married George Hulse, the grandson of a baronet at St George's Church, London in 2017. She shares the advice she would've given Meghan for marrying into Royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rose
> 
> 
> 
> Though Rose would have dearly loved to see Meghan shine in her royal role, she now believes the Duchess ultimately made the right decision to take a step back.
> 
> ‘Meghan says she suffered with mental health issues and had thoughts of taking her own life. This is something we all have to respect and support,’ Rose says.
> 
> ‘By taking a step back, she is in a better position to protect and care for herself so she can be the best mother and wife she can be.
> 
> ‘I don’t think Meghan was suited for any role as a working royal, as she couldn’t handle the outside pressures and what was expected of her. She’d have had to give up a core part of herself that was proving too difficult. The monarchy has survived more than 1,000 years because they have certain protocols in place to ensure the successful running of the institution. One either steps in line or politely and quietly steps aside.
> 
> ‘*More than 2,500 people are employed by the Royal Household. In 2017 alone they brought in more than £1.8 billion for the British economy. Let’s not underestimate the power and influence of the Royal Family and all that they provide to Britain.
> 
> ‘Too much is at stake, and when one starts to pick away at the fabric and foundations of such a massive institution, everything comes crashing down.
> 
> ‘They have an amazing platform to bring awareness to the causes that are important to them.
> 
> ‘Meghan, too, has a platform and her words are very powerful . . . She needs to use them wisely, for they can unite or create great divide. When life gives you a platform, we should always use it to unite.’*


She put it beautifully.  Meg had the opportunity of a lifetime to educate, instead she chose to take the road to victim hood.


----------



## needlv

Annawakes said:


> Hmm, I finished watching the behavioral experts analysis that Lodpah posted.  Based on it, I think:
> - bad stuff did actually happen to them, However....
> - ....the way they responded to it was really extreme; because their personalities exacerbated their interpretation of what happened.  They could have used the bad stuff to inform and educate people.....instead of burning down all of their relationships with the RF.
> 
> I think they actually DO believe themselves.  Even though their body language gives away when they’re being deceitful, they do really think this is the truth, “their truth”.  they’ve worked themselves up into this “us against the world” mentality.
> 
> Now I actually feel sorry for them (sorry they have such a twisted mindset) instead of just disliking them.



i don’t feel sorry for either of them.  They are both mid to late 30s.  Time to grow-up and live by their own choices and the consequences that flow.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> “Papa is missing you.”
> 
> In 3 words, Charlotte speaks truth.


What she meant to say was Papa is missing you and wishes you were here to knock some sense into Uncle Harry!


----------



## mellibelly

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.




This is amazing, I watched the whole thing. They’re spot on, especially Scott identifying her narcissism. I had not watched the entire interview because yuck, so the clips they analyzed blew me away. She’s such a sociopath it’s astounding. And she really, really hates Kate.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> The BRF should skip the asking for refund and just do a charge back.





EverSoElusive said:


> Cringe said when she got to the UK, she wrote letter (ETA: letters) to the BRF saying a bunch of word salad and "I'm here for you, use me as you like."
> 
> So should the BRF ask for a refund because they didn't really get to use her as they would have liked? Or maybe, get Harry back for good to save this soul?



NO!!!! They need to SUE!!! File a LAWSUIT for PRODUCT LIABILITY...........the damn thing BLEW UP in their face, didn't it?


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> Do you think MM and H are living way above their means?  H complained about having to pay out of his own money (from Diana) After he was “cut off financially”...
> 
> so far they splashed out with purchasing a huge mansion, pay for their own security, cars (?) and staff costs.  She was sitting in an expensive dress for the interview but he had repeated the same suit and awful shoes.  Plus costs of lawyers and PR is not cheap.
> 
> so how much $$ would it take to keep up their lifestyle?  Way more than they have...





Aimee3 said:


> OMG I’m 20 minutes into watching this and it’s fabulous!  Amazing!  Thank you sooo much for posting this.  I’d hate to know these guys in real life cause I’d hate to be analyzed like that!!!  Could you imagine your husband having that gift? Me:  “No I didn’t go shopping today!”   Him: “so why are your eyes blinking, your shoulders up, arranging your dress, and hand going stop?”
> Me: “Ok you caught me!”


i know! Like my husband would say, while reading Purse Blog scoping out a new bag “Babe, you getting another bag?” me “no, just looking at them.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Twelve said:


> Not sure if this help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maison Birks  Canada’s Diamond & Fine Jewellery Leader
> 
> 
> Discover Maison Birks' collection of luxury, watches and accessories. Maison Birks offers you a choice as unique and meaningful as each of life’s occasions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.maisonbirks.com



Thanks for the link to birks. I've never heard of them. Seems very nice.  BUT I warn all the Rodeo Hermes clients to watch out for MM !


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> I would like to have Vin Diesel and Idris Alba in this rescue scene for the eye candy factor



I don't even know who they are but call them early, draw-up the contracts and tell them you have a heavy-hitter as Commander already up for it. George Clooney would be ideal, I bet he's totally PO he ever showed his face at the wedding (sorry, 'reenactment').


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Doncha know they bleed blue blood when they cut themselves!



Cut?  Not if they're Haemophiliacs (runs in Royal family circles and affects the male lines).


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> $100
> Good job, team
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fundraiser to pay Harry and Meghan's £11m mortgage raises £78.64
> 
> 
> A GoFundMe page was set up two days after the couple's Oprah interview and titled 'Harry and Meghan $5 Donation to Buy Home (£3.61)'  to help couple 'pay off their California mansion'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



and I bet _that_ was Oprah's 'tip'.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.




I only had a chance to watch this very late last night, thank you. Really informative and thought provoking (taking notes down for future meetings). I like that one had to Google M (and we could tell he wasn't lying).

So fascinating, but as we already thought:

Basically, the trained actor and the trained soldier still can't cover-up they are virtually compulsive liars and mix-it-up by telling half-truths to get away with the out-right BS.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> I don't even know who they are but call them early, draw-up the contracts and tell them you have a heavy-hitter as Commander already up for it. George Clooney would be ideal, I bet he's totally PO he ever showed his face at the wedding (sorry, 'reenactment').


George Clooney would probably say (these are some of his famous quotes):

You can't legislate good taste. George Clooney 

You never really learn much from hearing yourself talk. George Clooney

People know everything about everybody now. George Clooney 

I'm so lucky to have been raised the way I have, because my parents believed that everyone had the right to their own feelings, opinions, and existence; as long as they weren't harming others, you had to defend those rights. George Clooney


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> and I bet _that_ was Oprah's 'tip'.


I can't at this comment:

Gofundone.

MM/Harry: What have you done to your families? Next will be memes and gifs and all sorts of jokes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> Somewhere in Montecito, Meghan is absolutely seething that she missed the opportunity to call her first born son Spencer. I'm sure it’ll be someone else’s fault she didn’t think of it first.


Dammit, I like the name Spencer and never made the connection. Have to strike it off the list.

Archie and Harrison are super trendy names at the moment so I’m not that surprised they went for a really fashionable name.
That’s what is putting me off them picking Diana it isn’t very on trend ATM. The really hip names seem to be Olivia, Matilda and Amelia.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder how she'll manage to squeeze Harry into the girl's name...call her Henrietta or borrow from the Nordic countries so she can be Henrysdottir or something? Or maybe Diana will do as apparently being Diana's son is Harry's sole identity.


Come to think of it wasn’t one of the girls on pretty little liars called Spencer?

I was just saying problem with choosing Diana is it’s not very fashionable ATM. 
 A unisex name like Spencer on the other hand would be very Cali-cool.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Happy Mother's Day for the ones in the UK!
> 
> *Prince Harry reveals he arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana’s grave in poignant Mother’s Day tribute – after Cambridges released George and Charlotte’s cards to ‘Granny Diana’*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge shared their own tribute on Mother's Day, sharing cards on the Kensington Palace official Instagram account, with a sweet message encouraging those struggling with bereavement.
> 
> *Noting this Mother's Day was 'different,' the Palace revealed Prince William, 38, and Kate Middleton's children write letters to their paternal grandmother each year on Mother's Day.
> 
> View attachment 5022583
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arranged for flowers to be placed on Princess Diana's grave
> 
> 
> Prince Harry arranged for flowers to be laid at the grave of his mother, Princess Diana, within the grounds of Althorp, her family's stately home, to mark Mother's Day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don’t want to judge anyone else’s family arrangements but I find it weird that they both have publicly revealed something which seems so intimate.

  still I suppose the younger generations want to fight this ‘stiff upper lip and emotionally crippled’ stereotype.

edit- speech mark in wrong place


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t think they would’ve sent a male to university at that time either. I don’t know if any



Her father studied at Cambridge.



> Archie and Harrison are super trendy names at the moment so I’m not that surprised they went for a really fashionable name.



I am not fond of giving kids nicknames instead of full names. Like, I do think Archie sounds cute, but how hard is it to name the kid Archiebald and call him Archie?


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t want to judge anyone else’s family arrangements but I find it weird that they both have publicly revealed something which seems so intimate.
> 
> still I suppose the younger generations want to fight this ‘stiff upper lip and emotionally crippled’ stereotype.
> 
> edit- speech mark in wrong place



They both play the “Diana” card when necessary.  This is a shameless attempt to gain sympathy and goodwill points. W&K’s effort seems more heartfelt. IMO

I would like to know what they did for the mothers of their children, for their grandmothers, for their aunts, etc.
They deserve cards and flowers, too.
ETA: maybe special jewelry from the Diana collection!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Well H, would you like to comment?
> View attachment 5022806
> 
> *THE family of an Army officer called a P*** by Prince Harry have slammed him for suggesting the royals are racist, insisting: “You’re wrong.”*
> 
> Harry apologised in 2009 for using the vile slur against Sandhurst colleague Ahmed Raza Khan in a video that he filmed himself.
> 
> He also used a racial slur against another colleague in the clip — filmed a year after the prince sparked outrage by dressing as a Nazi at a fancy dress party.
> 
> Last night, Mr Khan’s father told The Sun he did not agree with the racism claim that emerged from Harry and Meghan’s bombshell TV interview with US talk show queen Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Muhammad Yaqoob Khan Abbasi said: “Prince Harry might have his problems with the family but I don’t agree with him at all.
> 
> “I don’t think the UK people or the Royal Family are racists.
> 
> “They are accommodating to people from all parts of the world and giving them access to the best facilities as citizens and residents.”
> 
> Mr Abbasi, a former vice- president of Pakistan’s Muslim Bank, continued: “I have met members of the Royal Family and they were extremely polite and loving.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry called our son the P-word… but he can't call the royals racist
> 
> 
> THE family of an Army officer called a P*** by Prince Harry have slammed him for suggesting the royals are racist, insisting: “You’re wrong.” Harry apologised in 2009 for using the vile slur agains…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


That is interesting.


EverSoElusive said:


> I would like to have Vin Diesel and Idris Alba in this rescue scene for the eye candy factor


Ok this is silly but imagine if Idris Elba bust into the scene with the other marines, picked up Archie and the dogs (I’m not too worried about Harry) and as he’s carrying them to safety, Harry wails: 
“What are you doing? Who are you?”
Idris smiles and says “the name’s Bond. James Bond.”
*Theme music plays* 
I think it’d be a memorable cast announcement and they should give the people what they want already.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I would like to know what they did for the mothers of their children, for their grandmothers, for their aunts, etc.
> They deserve cards and flowers, too.



Hu? Why would I give anyone who is not my mother (or in William's and Harry's case, mother of my children) anything for mother's day? Maybe in special circumstances (cousin died or is a deadbeat), but as a rule? Never crossed my mind.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Y


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her father studied at Cambridge.
> 
> 
> 
> I am not fond of giving kids nicknames instead of full names. Like, I do think Archie sounds cute, but how hard is it to name the kid Archiebald and call him Archie?


Yeah I’ve decided I’m not brave enough for the politics of the changing status of higher education. So I deleted that.

Yes I don’t want to offend anyone else’s choice but I do find it a bit strange when people give their child a nickname as a name. Why not give them the full name and then they’ve got the choice? They might feel they are more a James than a Jamie.

Most people just get used to it, I guess, I don’t actually like my own forename much either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> While I don't know how much Harry has spent from his inheritance, at the rate that they are going, I highly doubt it is sustainable unless money from Netflix and Spotify starts coming in.
> 
> For a family of four, a nanny or two, maybe the occasional Doria, a few rescue dogs AND rescue chickens, they could easily choose to live modestly. Had they gone down that path instead, his inheritance would probably last for awhile.
> 
> Also, if they don't sell themselves out to the media every darn minute of the day, they could also probably live a quiet life without the need for an expensive (and I assume extensive) private security team other than a select few personnel (which I also assume would cost less). Something is leaked from their camp on a daily basis and that puts them on everyone's radar, both good and malicious people.
> 
> The Obamas are well known yet they live quietly post-WH. Yes, they post on social media etc but they don't make themselves everyone's target or embarrass themselves incessantly. You don't see people hounding them. Cringe and Ginge have a lot to learn from them.
> 
> This is just my personal opinion. I'm not saying that I'm right so please don't be mad, people
> 
> ETA: Of course these two can't live a quiet and modest life because then they will claim that they are SILENCED


I agree. I think they are trying to keep up with Beyoncé and Serena Williams ignoring the fact that they both have over a decade of extremely profitable work behind them and married independently wealthy men. The real irony is don’t think either B or S care how big their friend’s house is anyway.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Why would I give anyone who is not my mother (or in William's and Harry's case, mother of my children) anything for mother's day? Maybe in special circumstances (cousin died or is a deadbeat), but as a rule? Never crossed my mind.



Oh, this may be a cultural thing?  Over here, everyone, fathers and children, are expected to honor the mothers and women in their lives with some sort of gift. Some make this a grand gesture, some give a small but touching memento.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, this may be a cultural thing?  Over here, everyone [fathers and children] are expected to honor the mothers and women in their lives with some sort of gift. Some make this a grand gesture, some give a small but touching memento.



Oh ok. I mean, I'm all for gifts and appreciation! That said, even in a normal sized family that seems like a task to keep up with


----------



## chicinthecity777

So they are still saying Harry will be back in the UK for Diana's statue revealing. I wouldn't count on it! Will MM let him out of the basement? We shall see! One thing for sure, Harry is pretty finished here in the UK. Discussed this with my SO last week. The general feeling among us is for MM, she's awful but she's just someone who is from another country and now live in another country. So it's kind of "whateves" but Harry, Harry was born into the family to serve the UK! He introduced this vile woman into the family and the country! He sat there and let this woman trash his own family and country and he joined in! Trapped? Trapped for a life of service! So highly of him! He will never be forgiven by the UK people! I would love for the UK government to issue a bill of £30m for the wedding to them! Since they said they got married 3 days before, then WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Ye


CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, this may be a cultural thing?  Over here, everyone [fathers and children] are expected to honor the mothers and women in their lives with some sort of gift. Some make this a grand gesture, some give a small but touching memento.


Yes this might be a cultural difference. In my upbringing (UK) I’d make my mum a card when I was a kid or buy her something now but I wouldn’t get my nans or wider family anything.
I think that’s the norm here.

edit. I’d definitely struggle to find some of my wider family a personal and touching memento - Finding gifts for my immediate family is a struggle at times. I’m much better at buying myself presents!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course the emphasis is on spending quality time with mom et al.









						Mother's Day - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_Mother's Day continues to be one of the most commercially successful U.S. occasions_








						45 Special Mother’s Day Activity Ideas That Go Way Beyond Breakfast in Bed
					

Only the best for mom.




					www.oprahmag.com
				












						These Are Our Favorite Ways to Spend Quality Time With Mom on Mother's Day
					

Doing things together — even if you're apart — may be the greatest gift of all.




					www.goodhousekeeping.com
				












						Mother's Day in the United States
					

Mother's Day in the United States is annually held on the second Sunday of May. It celebrates motherhood and it is a time to appreciate mothers and mother figures.




					www.timeanddate.com
				



Mother's Day in the United States is annually held on the second Sunday of May. It celebrates motherhood and it is a time to appreciate mothers and mother figures. Many people give gifts, cards, flowers, candy, a meal in a restaurant or other treats to their mother and mother figures, including grandmothers, great-grandmothers, stepmothers, and foster mothers.


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> Ye
> 
> Yes this might be a cultural difference. In my upbringing (UK) I’d *make my mum a card *when I was a kid or buy her something now but I wouldn’t get my nans or wider family anything.
> I think that’s the norm here.
> 
> edit. I’d definitely struggle to find some of my wider family a personal and touching memento - Finding gifts for my immediate family is a struggle at times. I’m much better at buying myself presents!


Same here! Card and/or flowers for mum. Nothing more. I appreciate mum every day!


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> That is interesting.
> 
> Ok this is silly but imagine if Idris Elba bust into the scene with the other marines, picked up Archie and the dogs (I’m not too worried about Harry) and as he’s carrying them to safety, Harry wails:
> “What are you doing? Who are you?”
> Idris smiles and says “the name’s Bond. James Bond.”
> *Theme music plays*
> I think it’d be a memorable cast announcement and they should give the people what they want already.



I think we need a female Jane Bond to do this job, the British men all seem too dumb. 

Kate may be free. No acting skills, martial arts may be rusty, but she seems impervious to the 'charm' and love-bombing that some certain narcissists have deployed on home and enemy soil.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course the emphasis is on spending quality time with mom et al.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother's Day - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mother's Day continues to be one of the most commercially successful U.S. occasions_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 45 Special Mother’s Day Activity Ideas That Go Way Beyond Breakfast in Bed
> 
> 
> Only the best for mom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These Are Our Favorite Ways to Spend Quality Time With Mom on Mother's Day
> 
> 
> Doing things together — even if you're apart — may be the greatest gift of all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodhousekeeping.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother's Day in the United States
> 
> 
> Mother's Day in the United States is annually held on the second Sunday of May. It celebrates motherhood and it is a time to appreciate mothers and mother figures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timeanddate.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother's Day in the United States is annually held on the second Sunday of May. It celebrates motherhood and it is a time to appreciate mothers and mother figures. Many people give gifts, cards, flowers, candy, a meal in a restaurant or other treats to their mother and mother figures, including grandmothers, great-grandmothers, stepmothers, and foster mothers.



It's all just playing the Diana card atm, and I'm not talking about the kids'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course, the US doesn’t celebrate the day until May, so maybe he & Archie are waiting until then.



chicinthecity777 said:


> Same here! Card and/or flowers for mum. Nothing more. I appreciate mum every day!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, the US doesn’t celebrate the day until May, so maybe he & Archie are waiting until then.


It's about Harry's mother Diana though. But yes MM's day will come in May and I am sure a big fuss will be made!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they are still saying Harry will be back in the UK for Diana's statue revealing. I wouldn't count on it! Will MM let him out of the basement? We shall see! One thing for sure, Harry is pretty finished here in the UK. Discussed this with my SO last week. The general feeling among us is for MM, she's awful but she's just someone who is from another country and now live in another country. So it's kind of "whateves" but Harry, Harry was born into the family to serve the UK! He introduced this vile woman into the family and the country! He sat there and let this woman trash his own family and country and he joined in! Trapped? Trapped for a life of service! So highly of him! He will never be forgiven by the UK people! I would love for the UK government to issue a bill of £30m for the wedding to them! Since they said they got married 3 days before, then WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK!



Jup. I still think she's the worse person, BUT his betrayal to both family and country is so much bigger.


----------



## CarryOn2020

To be fair, he wanted out long before MM.  I have not read the Junor book, so I’m guessing this snippet is actually in the book.
He just needed to find a female to assist:
From the 2014 biography - article written in 2020:

_"He's a rich young man; he could decide to kiss goodbye to the whole thing," a friend of Harry's noted, per Penny Junor's 2014 biography Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son. "He could say, 'I waive my rights to the throne, I waive my rights to any money, I'm not going to live in palaces, I'm going to look after myself and do my own thing.'

"He would be relatively in his rights to do so, so long as he paid for his own protection and all the rest of it. He's got enough money." It's been reported that Prince William and Harry each inherited $16 million from Princess Diana's estate on their respective 30th birthdays.

"Yes, they could work side by side," the friend said of the brothers, "but William's not going to be king for a really long time. It could be 20 years at least. Meanwhile, there's two of them on the same territory. So if Harry decided for five years to disappear off to Africa to focus on [his charity] Sentebale and being a helicopter pilot, if that's what he wants to do, and flying anti-poaching patrols or whatever, he could still come back x times a year and do his royal duties. He's got enough money to fly himself to and fro."









						Why Prince Harry's Royal Future Was in Question Long Before He Met Meghan Markle - E! Online
					

The couple may want to shrink their royal roles together now, but people close to Prince Harry suspected years ago that he might want to distance himself from the family popularly known as The Firm




					www.eonline.com
				



_


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course the emphasis is on spending quality time with mom et al.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother's Day - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mother's Day continues to be one of the most commercially successful U.S. occasions_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 45 Special Mother’s Day Activity Ideas That Go Way Beyond Breakfast in Bed
> 
> 
> Only the best for mom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These Are Our Favorite Ways to Spend Quality Time With Mom on Mother's Day
> 
> 
> Doing things together — even if you're apart — may be the greatest gift of all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodhousekeeping.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother's Day in the United States
> 
> 
> Mother's Day in the United States is annually held on the second Sunday of May. It celebrates motherhood and it is a time to appreciate mothers and mother figures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.timeanddate.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother's Day in the United States is annually held on the second Sunday of May. It celebrates motherhood and it is a time to appreciate mothers and mother figures. Many people give gifts, cards, flowers, candy, a meal in a restaurant or other treats to their mother and mother figures, including grandmothers, great-grandmothers, stepmothers, and foster mothers.


So do we (UK) 
My son buys myself and my mum a card and flowers. Under normal circumstances we would also go for a meal with my parents, my sister and her children but obviously, due to Covid, all restaurants are shut. His other gran is dead so we always lay flowers on her grave.


----------



## Sharont2305

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's about Harry's mother Diana though. But yes MM's day will come in May and I am sure a big fuss will be made!


They can't play the Diana card then as Diana wasn't American.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My brother just sent me this...I know we've seen the pictures before, but his comment is gold.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, he wanted out long before MM.  I have not read the Junor book, so I’m guessing this snippet is actually in the book.



I have no problem with him wanting out and going through with it. I have a problem with their freaking jerk moves, and for these I mainly blame MM because they have her, uh, _calligraphy_ written all over them.

And also, that 



> _"He's a rich young man; he could decide to kiss goodbye to the whole thing," a friend of Harry's noted, per Penny Junor's 2014 biography Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son. "He could say, 'I waive my rights to the throne, I waive my rights to any money, I'm not going to live in palaces, I'm going to look after myself and do my own thing.'_




is not exactly what he did.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, he wanted out long before MM.  I have not read the Junor book, so I’m guessing this snippet is actually in the book.
> He just needed to find a female to assist:
> From the 2014 biography - article written in 2020:
> 
> _"He's a rich young man; he could decide to kiss goodbye to the whole thing," a friend of Harry's noted, per Penny Junor's 2014 biography Prince Harry: Brother, Soldier, Son. "He could say, 'I waive my rights to the throne, I waive my rights to any money, I'm not going to live in palaces, I'm going to look after myself and do my own thing.'
> 
> "He would be relatively in his rights to do so, so long as he paid for his own protection and all the rest of it. He's got enough money." It's been reported that Prince William and Harry each inherited $16 million from Princess Diana's estate on their respective 30th birthdays.
> 
> "Yes, they could work side by side," the friend said of the brothers, "but William's not going to be king for a really long time. It could be 20 years at least. Meanwhile, there's two of them on the same territory. So if Harry decided for five years to disappear off to Africa to focus on [his charity] Sentebale and being a helicopter pilot, if that's what he wants to do, and flying anti-poaching patrols or whatever, he could still come back x times a year and do his royal duties. He's got enough money to fly himself to and fro."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry's Royal Future Was in Question Long Before He Met Meghan Markle - E! Online
> 
> 
> The couple may want to shrink their royal roles together now, but people close to Prince Harry suspected years ago that he might want to distance himself from the family popularly known as The Firm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Makes sense
He really was just hanging around England.  Doing something or nothing or Invictis.
I always thought he looked odd being the 3rd wheel with Kate and William while William built his family.
The 3-some is cute when you're 17 but as 30+ age men it looked weird.

So Meghan gave him the courage to exit, but messy and hurting his family. UGH


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> I think we need a female Jane Bond to do this job, the British men all seem too dumb.
> 
> Kate may be free. No acting skills, martial arts may be rusty, but she seems impervious to the 'charm' and love-bombing that some certain narcissists have deployed on home and enemy soil.



Zara gets my vote - would you mess with her !


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> Zara gets my vote - would you mess with her !


I'd love to know what she thinks of all this.


----------



## mdcx

After watching the Youtube video posted earlier (Meghan and Harry Oprah Interview Body Language Analysis), I can only conclude that both M&H are toxic, self-obsessed, mentally unwell people seething with anger at all who have wronged them. What a horrible combination. 
Oprah seemed pretty checked out, letting things slide that seemed obvious half-truths. 
I think we are probably looking at two narcissists here, egging each other on.


----------



## gelbergirl

mdcx said:


> After watching the Youtube video posted earlier (Meghan and Harry Oprah Interview Body Language Analysis), I can only conclude that both M&H are toxic, self-obsessed, mentally unwell people seething with anger at all who have wronged them. What a horrible combination.
> *Oprah seemed pretty checked out*, letting things slide that seemed obvious half-truths.
> I think we are probably looking at two narcissists here, egging each other on.



Yeah, what's wrong with her?


----------



## jelliedfeels

I know this old news but on the topic of vogue US’ and the claim that saying  niggling doubts is meant to have troubling racial connotations.

I can’t help wondering if Vogue has contacted Niger and Nigeria and told them Hamish Bowles of all people has decided their names are racially insensitive.

add on- it feels like there’s a whole set of these posh white opinion columnists who are now the official experts in all things discrimination related. I don’t get how anyone takes them seriously.


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> It's all just playing the Diana card atm, and I'm not talking about the kids'.


I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person. YMMV.
That YouTube video was interesting. A bit too long.
However, it illustrates what anyone with a brain can figure out. A whole lot of bull crap went on, in that talk.
There was an interview on French TV about the Oprah interview and the journalist(point of vue dude) said that this interview could put the British political system in crisis and cause some commonwealth countries most likely Australia to leave it.
Apparently, the people there are only 51%favorable to stay among the system. So pretty close.
It would be wild that MM could have such a gigantic impact.
There is a part of me who thinks that JCMH is actually using her to extract revenge on his father....


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> That is interesting.
> 
> Ok this is silly but imagine if Idris Elba bust into the scene with the other marines, picked up Archie and the dogs (I’m not too worried about Harry) and as he’s carrying them to safety, Harry wails:
> “What are you doing? Who are you?”
> *Idris smiles and says “the name’s Bond. James Bond.”
> *Theme music plays*
> I think it’d be a memorable cast announcement and they should give the people what they want already.*



Oh this is perfect! Cringe will be the crook in this Bond sequel but with her barely-there acting skills, she might just ruin the movie altogether for us    And when the movie doesn't make enough money, she's gonna tell people it's all Idris Alba's fault


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the DM article on the bridesmaids dresses:



> Referring to her sister-in-law simply as 'Kate', rather than the more formal 'Catherine', which the Duchess prefers to be called in public, Meghan continued: 'She was upset about something, but she owned it, and she apologised, and she brought me flowers and a note, apologising… She did what I would do if I knew that I hurt someone.'
> 
> Meghan magnanimously told Oprah Winfrey that she has forgiven Kate. But sources have told this newspaper that the apology was not the end of the matter.
> 
> A door was said to have been slammed in Kate's face and those flowers thrown in Meghan's bin.



I'm just...stunned.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person. YMMV.
> That YouTube video was interesting. A bit too long.
> However, it illustrates what anyone with a brain can figure out. A whole lot of bull crap went on, in that talk.
> There was an interview on French TV about the Oprah interview and the journalist(point of vue dude) said that this interview could *put the British political system in crisis and cause some commonwealth countries most likely Australia to leave it.*
> Apparently, the people there are only 51%favorable to stay among the system. So pretty close.
> It would be wild that MM could have such a gigantic impact.
> There is a part of me who thinks that JCMH is actually using her to extract revenge on his father....


Australians hates H&M! LOL! I don't think this guys knows much! But I have no problem for countries decide they want to leave the Commonwealth. It's their decision.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> Australians hates H&M! LOL! I don't think this guys knows much! But I have no problem for countries decide they want to leave the Commonwealth. It's their decision.


Some journalists also predicted that Brexit will precipitate Northern Ireland and Scotland to leave too.
It does not seem like anyone is going anywhere. Besides JCMH...


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person. YMMV.
> That YouTube video was interesting. A bit too long.
> However, it illustrates what anyone with a brain can figure out. A whole lot of bull crap went on, in that talk.
> There was an interview on French TV about the Oprah interview and the journalist(point of vue dude) said that this interview could put the British political system in crisis and cause some commonwealth countries most likely Australia to leave it.
> Apparently, the people there are only 51%favorable to stay among the system. So pretty close.
> It would be wild that MM could have such a gigantic impact.
> There is a part of me who thinks that JCMH is actually using her to extract revenge on his father....



It's a 'thing' atm to get chummy with the dead in the UK. Our beautiful park has a bench dedicated to loved ones every 2.5M down the paths. 6 are new since the start of the year (2021). Covid and everything being considered that's a lot of benches for a park. That's not what's weird. It's a regular park not a memorial gardens or graveyard. New or recent benches have become family shrines/alters, not just flowers but pictures, cards, 'offerings' and things tied to the chair so the public can't sit down. Why choose a bench to commemorate a 'passing' if you don't want people to sit down?

It's a shame for Harry that_ the_ two people he decides to fall-out with (father - "pain" / brother - "space (between)") are our future monarchs (and his "Commander in Chief").

So yer basically, _this_ ("we never left") is ALL about getting back at Daddy. Bit late for a rebellious phase in your 30s, but anyway... Unfortunately for him, Daddy is the PoW and holds all purse-strings.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My brother just sent me this...I know we've seen the pictures before, but his comment is gold.



It's very, _very_ worrying (the poses + the cos)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Some journalists also predicted that Brexit will precipitate Ireland and Scotland to leave too.
> It does not seem like anyone is going anywhere. Besides JCMH...


Do you mean Northern Ireland as Ireland isn't part of the UK? Us in Wales have been trying for independence too, for a long time.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Do you mean Northern Ireland as Ireland isn't part of the UK? Us in Wales have been trying for independence too, for a long time.


Yes my apologies for the mix up.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Do you mean Northern Ireland as Ireland isn't part of the UK? Us in Wales have been trying for independence too, for a long time.


Us French got a new island. Mayotte. 
The Corsicans tried to become independent but somehow they are still with us.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> No worries - they will be churning out the BS for many years



The irony is, they would be nobody if he weren't royal yet they are trying to bring down the institution. There have always been people who hated the very idea of having a royal family and there always will be. Their only goal in doing all of this has to be $$.


----------



## Brklynjuice10

I see this thread is still down right scary smh *slowly backs out*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, Sam is calling for a public apology tour.  a tour???
No. No. No.

Article in the spoiler. 


Spoiler: apology Tour??



*Harry and Meghan: Meghan's half-sister claims she and the Duke are heading for divorce*
Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister has launched another blistering attack on the Duchess of Sussex by claiming that her marriage to Prince Harry will end in divorce unless they get 'extensive counselling'.

Samantha Markle suggested the Duke may already be 'questioning' the marriage and predicted it could 'get nasty' until he 'starts dissenting or pulling back from her'.

The 56-year-old American also called on the Sussexes to go on an 'apology tour' after the couple made accusations of racism within the Royal Family during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.

Samantha, who has accused Meghan of having 'narcissistic personality disorder', also claimed that she 'did a lot of damage' to their father Thomas Markle and called on her half-sister to make a public apology to him.

Speaking to TMZ about Meghan and Harry's marriage, she said: 'I see it ending in divorce unless they get extensive counselling and can agree to work on being honest, to work on apologies to everyone that they've damaged in the course of this bull in a china shop two-year spiel. 

'I mean, nothing about any of this has been honest, and the damage to the Royals has been massive - especially now.'

She said of Harry: 'Maybe he's already questioning it, he has to be if he has a functioning frontal lobe. Come on, he's not 12.






Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister has launched another blistering attack on the Duchess of Sussex by claiming that her marriage to Prince Harry will end in divorce unless they get 'extensive counselling' 





In an extraordinary intervention, Samantha Markle suggested the Duke may already be 'questioning' the marriage and predicted it could 'get nasty' until he 'starts dissenting or pulling back from her'





Thomas Markle had his say on Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview to defend himself and the Royal Family, who he says are not racist, before laying into Harry claiming he had failed to properly support his daughter

'What man would be happy or comfortable like that? And the minute I believe he starts dissenting or pulling back from her, I think it can get nasty unless he has a really good lawyer or they have really good counsellors. 

'I don't know what it's gonna take.' 

When asked what would need to happen for Meghan and her father to 'restore their relationship', Samantha said: 'She would have to apologise - a public apology, god, I know would be like getting blood from a rock but she did a lot of public damage.

'Really, I mean I really feel like this thing was all orchestrated that she needs to unravel the damage. 

'She did a lot of damage to a man who gave her an incredible life - so hurtful, so wrong. She would need to make the first move and, I mean, you know, parents are always unconditionally loving but god, she really hurt him.'

MailOnline has contacted representatives for the Sussexes for comment.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-half-sister-claims-Duke-heading-divorce.html


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> They both play the “Diana” card when necessary.  This is a shameless attempt to gain sympathy and goodwill points. W&K’s effort seems more heartfelt. IMO
> 
> I would like to know what they did for the mothers of their children, for their grandmothers, for their aunts, etc.
> They deserve cards and flowers, too.
> ETA: maybe special jewelry from the Diana collection!



My daughter said she read somewhere that MM found out Diana's favorite perfume and wore in on their first few dates. I told her to send me the link.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a private conversation, no private wedding. 
Why didn’t Hazzie say something?  Odd. 









						'Sussexes' garden wedding was a private conversation with Archbishop'
					

Rev Mark Edwards, based in Newcastle, has urged the Archbishop of Canterbury to clarify the rules after Meghan Markle claimed her and Harry married in private before their official ceremony.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

needlv said:


> i don’t feel sorry for either of them.  They are both mid to late 30s.  Time to grow-up and live by their own choices and the consequences that flow.


I agree, if they were of sound mind.  I just feel sorry for them because they both seem mentally unstable, for different reasons.  She’s a narcissist and he’s still a ball of anger over his mother’s death.  That’s like the perfect storm of victim hood.


----------



## Allisonfaye

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person.



I believe the term is PR.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It's very, _very_ worrying (the poses + the cos)



It is. Most people keep their kinks in the bedroom and don't live them on the BP balcony. 

Also, moments like this make me feel bad for Harry all over again. A healthy man would have called out any woman who pulled that sh*t but on the trauma victim it works a treat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Brklynjuice10 said:


> I see this thread is still down right scary smh *slowly backs out*



Opinions may vary, but I personally find it way more scarier that grown, capable people insist on ignoring all the red flags and choose to enable this circus.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Harry and Meghan: Meghan's half-sister claims she and the Duke are heading for divorce*



I mean, Samantha is not wrong...but at this point, I'd appreciate if the Markles - ALL of them - could choose to please be quiet.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My brother just sent me this...I know we've seen the pictures before, but his comment is gold.



This collage is so creepy. For someone who doesn't Google her then boyfriend, she sure knows a lot about his mother and tries to mirror Diana every chance she gets 

I don't think Cringe is ever comfortable being herself. My speculation and again, not trying to fight anyone  ... She just always has to be the person with the loudest roar and/or has the last word. By being the loudest or having the last word, she can spin her "truths" into "facts" and she hopes really hard that we will not see through her inferiority complex.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a private conversation, no private wedding.
> Why didn’t Hazzie say something?  Odd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Sussexes' garden wedding was a private conversation with Archbishop'
> 
> 
> Rev Mark Edwards, based in Newcastle, has urged the Archbishop of Canterbury to clarify the rules after Meghan Markle claimed her and Harry married in private before their official ceremony.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



These people are full of it. She lies when she opens her mouth, and he just goes along. There is no way "Three days before our wedding, we got married" could be interpreted as a private conversation. She wanted to stir the pot, she knew exactly what she was doing, and I'm so tired of her antics.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's a 'thing' atm to get chummy with the dead in the UK. Our beautiful park has a bench dedicated to loved ones every 2.5M down the paths. 6 are new since the start of the year (2021). Covid and everything being considered that's a lot of benches for a park. That's not what's weird. It's a regular park not a memorial gardens or graveyard. New or recent benches have become family shrines/alters, not just flowers but pictures, cards, 'offerings' and things tied to the chair so the public can't sit down. Why choose a bench to commemorate a 'passing' if you don't want people to sit down?
> 
> It's a shame for Harry that_ the_ two people he decides to fall-out with (father - "pain" / brother - "space (between)") are our future monarchs (and his "Commander in Chief").
> 
> So yer basically, _this_ ("we never left") is ALL about getting back at Daddy. Bit late for a rebellious phase in your 30s, but anyway... Unfortunately for him, Daddy is the PoW and holds all purse-strings.


TBF to people this is not a normal time for grief. Loads of people didn’t get to see their loved one before they died or attend a funeral. Also I think a lot of people are just a lot more scared of dying than normal. So I can see why people are doing all this memorialising. It’s kind of like they are trying to appease death. Of course we used to do that all the time in ancient times.


----------



## bubablu

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person.


Me neither, and I find it really strange. Especially from K&W, they don't usually play this game.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person. YMMV.





bubablu said:


> Me neither, and I find it really strange. Especially from K&W, they don't usually play this game.


I read it somewhere that it's their "tradition" as they have been doing this for a few years but i could be wrong as I don't follow them closely.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> TBF to people this is not a normal time for grief. Loads of people didn’t get to see their loved one before they died or attend a funeral.



At the beginning of 2020 I had attended so many funerals I declared I wouldn't go to any more that year so whoever wanted to die would have to do without me. Well, wouldn't you know, a few weeks later we were in a lockdown and couldn't legally attend funerals, which is NOT what I had meant :/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bubablu said:


> Me neither, and I find it really strange. Especially from K&W, they don't usually play this game.



I was initially taken aback a little too, but I think William wanted to reclaim his mother - those two drama queens who apparently identify strongly as Diana's son and cheap copy have been hijacking her for quite a while. You never see William using her for his own agenda otherwise. Also as I understood it Kate does these cards each year with the kids to comfort William, they just usually don't publish them.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Do you think MM and H are living way above their means?  H complained about having to pay out of his own money (from Diana) After he was “cut off financially”...
> 
> so far they splashed out with purchasing a huge mansion, pay for their own security, cars (?) and staff costs.  She was sitting in an expensive dress for the interview but he had repeated the same suit and awful shoes.  Plus costs of lawyers and PR is not cheap.
> 
> so how much $$ would it take to keep up their lifestyle?  Way more than they have...



They are almost certainly living above their means. However, they have been given many gifts and perks by companies and other famous people. Tyler Perry isn't going to turn over his mansion to just anyone for four or five months. Netflix doesn't give $100+ million contracts (and brag about it to the press!) to all the inexperienced newbs who contact them. 

For the past year they have been trading on their fame and garnering sympathy. Millionaires who are crying poor. We'll see how far that takes them.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> They are almost certainly living above their means. However, they have been given many gifts and perks by companies and other famous people. Tyler Perry isn't going to turn over his mansion to just anyone for four or five months. Netflix doesn't give $100+ million contracts (and brag about it to the press!) to all the inexperienced newbs who contact them.
> 
> For the past year they have been trading on their fame and garnering sympathy. Millionaires who are crying poor. We'll see how far that takes them.


He inherited quite a large sum from Diana. Depending on how well it was managed, he could have quite a large amount of money.
He cries poor but in actuality, he is a freeloader, imho.
Tyler is a sweetie but he also stands to gain by associating his property with such a couple.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Ye
> 
> Yes this might be a cultural difference. In my upbringing (UK) I’d make my mum a card when I was a kid or buy her something now but I wouldn’t get my nans or wider family anything.
> I think that’s the norm here.
> 
> edit. I’d definitely struggle to find some of my wider family a personal and touching memento - Finding gifts for my immediate family is a struggle at times. I’m much better at buying myself presents!


Where I am from, they don't have mother's or father's day, because as my father would put it, "Every day is Mother's and Father's Day, respect them daily" 
In the US, it always ticked me off that hubby would NEVER get me a card (I always got him one for Father's Day).  He said I'm not his mother, so why would he.    He _would_ make sure the kids would always get me something when they were young though, I'll give him that.  I guess it's whatever you're comfortable with.


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> Where I am from, they don't have mother's or father's day, because as my father would put it, "Every day is Mother's and Father's Day, respect them daily"
> In the US, it always ticked me off that hubby would NEVER get me a card (I always got him one for Father's Day).  He said I'm not his mother, so why would he.    He _would_ make sure the kids would always get me something when they were young though, I'll give him that.  I guess it's whatever you're comfortable with.


These are what we call the Hallmark days! Invented by Hallmark to sell you stuff!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they are still saying Harry will be back in the UK for Diana's statue revealing. I wouldn't count on it! Will MM let him out of the basement? We shall see! One thing for sure, Harry is pretty finished here in the UK. Discussed this with my SO last week. The general feeling among us is for MM, she's awful but she's just someone who is from another country and now live in another country. So it's kind of "whateves" but Harry, Harry was born into the family to serve the UK! He introduced this vile woman into the family and the country! He sat there and let this woman trash his own family and country and he joined in! Trapped? Trapped for a life of service! So highly of him! He will never be forgiven by the UK people! I would love for the UK government to issue a bill of £30m for the wedding to them! Since they said they got married 3 days before, then WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK!



But they have the perfect excuse for not going to the statue unveiling. Didn't you hear? THEY ARE HAVING A BABY! Whether the little girl is already born by then or about to be born, they absolutely will not be able to be away.

It's a decent enough excuse for Meghan, but if the baby has already been born then why couldn't Harry go? We'll find out, because I don't think there is a chance in hell of her allowing him to go back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> These are what we call the Hallmark days! Invented by Hallmark to sell you stuff!








						Mother's Day Cards 2023 | Hallmark
					

Find the perfect Mother's Day card from Hallmark for your mom, grandma, nana, abuela, wife, aunt, mother-in-law, sister or friend.




					www.hallmark.com
				



_Of course, we don't just have cards for Mom and Grandma. You'll find cards for all the moms in your life, including your daughter, mother-in-law, stepmom, sister, aunt, niece and friends. A new mom's first Mother's Day is an extra special one that deserves celebrating! Pet moms can even receive Mother's Day cards from the dog and cat!

While you're here, shop Mother's Day gifts for moms of all ages and types; you'll find jewelry, bath & body, home decor and so much more. Wrap up the whole shebang in some pretty, feminine Mother's Day gift wrap and put together a fun breakfast in bed, and she'll have a Mother's Day to remember. _


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Mother's Day Cards 2023 | Hallmark
> 
> 
> Find the perfect Mother's Day card from Hallmark for your mom, grandma, nana, abuela, wife, aunt, mother-in-law, sister or friend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hallmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Of course, we don't just have cards for Mom and Grandma. You'll find cards for all the moms in your life, including your daughter, mother-in-law, stepmom, sister, aunt, niece and friends. A new mom's first Mother's Day is an extra special one that deserves celebrating! Pet moms can even receive Mother's Day cards from the dog and cat!
> 
> While you're here, shop Mother's Day gifts for moms of all ages and types; you'll find jewelry, bath & body, home decor and so much more. Wrap up the whole shebang in some pretty, feminine Mother's Day gift wrap and put together a fun breakfast in bed, and she'll have a Mother's Day to remember. _


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> He inherited quite a large sum from Diana. Depending on how well it was managed, he could have quite a large amount of money.
> He cries poor but in actuality, he is a freeloader, imho.


But but he will tell you that under no circumstances those few millions would be enough!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was initially taken aback a little too, but I think William wanted to reclaim his mother - those two drama queens who apparently identify strongly as Diana's son and cheap copy have been hijacking her for quite a while. You never see William using her for his own agenda otherwise. Also as I understood it Kate does these cards each year with the kids to comfort William, they just usually don't publish them.


Also, I think it's a way for W&K to honor Diana's role as a "grandmother" with George, Charlotte,  and Louis. As they mature they will certainly learn a great deal about all the roles Diana filled in her lifetime, the good and the bad, but having a perspective of her as their "grandmother," Dad's Mum, someone who, if alive, would be as important to them as their Granny Middleton, is important. George's comment "I think of you always"  and Charlotte's "Papa is missing you" to me, reflects in a healthy way that William and Kate are including Diana in their everyday lives.

Given the Cambridge's active, as opposed to Harry's passive, involvement in mental health and children's issues, I think they are sensitive to their children's needs. It would not be surprising at their ages for George, Charlotte and Louis to want to also do something for "Granny Diana" on Mother's Day just as they have probably made special cards for "Granny Middleton". They evidently like doing them, the card to the Queen and Prince Phillip on their Anniversary being another example.

Harry needs to confront the fact that Diana had two sons and would have had four grandchildren + another to be born this summer. His sense of "ownership" of his mother is getting gagging. This is one instance where I do not blame William for making it clear that she is his mother and his children's grandmother also. Charlotte's insightful innocent comment was powerful.

Edited "+" to include the baby due this summer.


----------



## floatinglili

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Samantha is not wrong...but at this point, I'd appreciate if the Markles - ALL of them - could choose to please be quiet.


I love Sam - I think she’s a great fun, smart, honest interview - and much better listened to in her own voice than in second hand, written report of her interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

CarryOn2020 said:


> Mother's Day Cards 2023 | Hallmark
> 
> 
> Find the perfect Mother's Day card from Hallmark for your mom, grandma, nana, abuela, wife, aunt, mother-in-law, sister or friend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hallmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _While you're here, shop Mother's Day gifts for moms of all ages and types; you'll find jewelry, bath & body, home decor and so much more. Wrap up the whole shebang in some pretty, feminine Mother's Day gift wrap and put together a fun breakfast in bed, and she'll have a Mother's Day to remember. _


I LOVE Mother’s Day! It’s better than Christmas (which is a LOT of work for me) and MUCH better than my birthday.
Mother’s Day always makes me cry a little bit - it’s nice to feel noticed and appreciated that special day of the year! I put soooo much work into being a loving Mum!
I can never be a cynic about Mothers Day now because I am so desperately needy of recognition, but I do remember feeling cynical before I had my kids.

edited -
Fat finger phone typos


----------



## bag-mania

There is no doubt it is members of the press who are approaching Samantha and Thomas for their comments. Maybe they should be quiet but I can understand that they feel publicly besmirched and the desire to set the story straight.


----------



## chicinthecity777

floatinglili said:


> I LOVE Mother’s Day! It’s better than Christmas (which is a LOT of work for me) and MUCH better than my birthday.
> Mother’s Day always makes me cry a little bit - it’s nice to feel noticed and appreciated that special day of the year! I put soooo much work into being a loving Mum!
> I can never be a cynic about Mothers Day now because I am so desperately needy of recognition, but I do remember feeling cynical before I had my kids.
> 
> edited -
> Fat finger phone typos


Sorry to be OT but I think you are missing a point of what we are saying. We are saying that mothers should be appreciated everyday, not just 1 day of the year.


----------



## floatinglili

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry to be OT but I think you are missing a point of what we are saying. We are saying that mothers should be appreciated everyday, not just 1 day of the year.


Lol but they’re not heh ... for a wide variety of reasons.
Anyway dont diss my special day lol


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> Lol but they’re not heh ... for a wide variety of reasons.
> Anyway dont diss my special day lol



I mean seriously!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> So they are still saying Harry will be back in the UK for Diana's statue revealing. I wouldn't count on it! Will MM let him out of the basement? We shall see! One thing for sure, Harry is pretty finished here in the UK. Discussed this with my SO last week. The general feeling among us is for MM, she's awful but she's just someone who is from another country and now live in another country. So it's kind of "whateves" but Harry, Harry was born into the family to serve the UK! He introduced this vile woman into the family and the country! He sat there and let this woman trash his own family and country and he joined in! Trapped? Trapped for a life of service! So highly of him! He will never be forgiven by the UK people! I would love for the UK government to issue a bill of £30m for the wedding to them! Since they said they got married 3 days before, then WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK!


ha
I would love to see them pay back the money for that big wedding, which was of course, not for them but for the people


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> There is no doubt it is members of the press who are approaching Samantha and Thomas for their comments. Maybe they should be quiet but I can understand that they feel publicly besmirched and the desire to set the story straight.


I personally don't see why the Markle family can't have their say. I like Michael Connelly's books and his most famous character, an LA detective Bosch has a saying I always liked - everybody counts or nobody counts. Let them have their field day too! Why not?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> There is no doubt it is members of the press who are approaching Samantha and Thomas for their comments. Maybe they should be quiet but I can understand that they feel publicly besmirched and the desire to set the story straight.



Oh, absolutely. I do think Thomas and Samantha as the lesser evil anyway. Now, if only Meghan could sh*t up for once, but I guess she needs to use that newly found voice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> I personally don't see why the Markle family can't have their say. I like Michael Connelly's books and his most famous character, an LA detective Bosch has a saying I always liked - everybody counts or nobody counts. Let them have their field day too! Why not?



I think y'all misunderstood me. They have absolutely the right to get their side out, but this family (and I'm including Meghan here) is so much drama. Plus, Meghan says something and is celebrated, Samantha and Thomas speak out and are being ridiculed, which I think is super unfair and would rather they spare themselves. Of course, if Meghan was a nice, quiet person, none of this would ever have happened.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> I personally don't see why the Markle family can't have their say. I like Michael Connelly's books and his most famous character, an LA detective Bosch has a saying I always liked - everybody counts or nobody counts. Let them have their field day too! Why not?


Isn’t it a bit of a double standard complaining that MM is talking about her family in law but applauding the Markle for doing the same?
Can‘t they all shut up?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, absolutely. I do think Thomas and Samantha as the lesser evil anyway. Now, if only Meghan could sh*t up for once, but I guess she needs to use that newly found voice.


just for POV of someone who doesn't keep up with this stuff - my DH heard something on the TV about Thomas speaking out.  His response - the whole family (including Meghan) are just a bunch of trash - same as kardashians.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think y'all misunderstood me. They have absolutely the right to get their side out, but this family (and I'm including Meghan here) is so much drama. Plus, Meghan says something and is celebrated, Samantha and Thomas speak out and are being ridiculed, which I think is super unfair and would rather they spare themselves. Of course, if Meghan was a nice, quiet person, none of this would ever have happened.


I get it. But I think that ship has long sailed and there is no stopping them now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> Isn’t it a bit of a double standard complaining that MM is talking about her family in law but applauding the Markle for doing the same?
> Can‘t they all shut up?


Yes when MM shut up too! Until that day ... everybody counts or nobody counts. And no, I didn't applaud them. I said they should not be silenced. Very different things.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly! She was born 90+ years ago for crying out loud! To put things to perspective, she was born in 1926, and UK passed the law to give women rights to vote in 1928. I can safely say that during her early years, pursuing higher education just wasn't a thing for women!



This, and especially royal and upper class girls were home schooled.

Oops, I don't know what happened above.....


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think y'all misunderstood me. They have absolutely the right to get their side out, but this family (and I'm including Meghan here) is so much drama. Plus, Meghan says something and is celebrated, Samantha and Thomas speak out and are being ridiculed, which I think is super unfair and would rather they spare themselves. Of course, if Meghan was a nice, quiet person, none of this would ever have happened.



I cannot think of anything comparable to this situation. Ever. Maybe that's why it is so fascinating. It's an indication of how low we have sunk as a society.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

I find it extremely cynical for MM to have only invited 1 person from her family to her big international wedding. She was clearly either ashamed of them, or was afraid something might be said from them which might be negative towards her. Instead, she invited celebrities who she hardly knew. This in itself already says so much about her!


----------



## bisousx

chicinthecity777 said:


> I find it extremely cynical for MM to have only invited 1 person from her family to her big international wedding. She was clearly either ashamed of them, or was afraid something might be said from them which might be negative towards her. Instead, she invited celebrities who she hardly knew. This in itself already says so much about her!



MM is short sighted and couldn’t think past the moment. If she had a longer range of vision, then she’d get over whatever embarrassment she might feel about her family and allow them to attend her wedding. Perhaps if MM treated her extended family kindly and properly, she could have even weaponized them to do her bidding and speak highly of her in the press.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> Isn’t it a bit of a double standard complaining that MM is talking about her family in law but applauding the Markle for doing the same?
> Can‘t they all shut up?


Listening to Sam Markle is more fun than listening to MM - more real, more lively, more everything!


----------



## duna

limom said:


> And yet her uncle and father both  attended Colleges.



In those days boys and girls were brought up very differently. My mother was the same generation as the Queen ( she was born the same year as Princess Margaret, in 1930) and she was home schooled while her brother , my uncle, went to Eton. One can hardly imagine that nowadays!


----------



## bag-mania

How do her fans rationalize it? Meghan didn't invite any relatives to the wedding except for her mother and that isn't a red flag? Even if they think all of the family on Thomas' side were bad people, what is the excuse for excluding the family on Doria's side? They have been nice and quiet and yet they were still blown off by Meghan like they were nothing.


----------



## limom

duna said:


> In those days boys and girls were brought up very differently. My mother was the same generation as the Queen ( she was born the same year as Princess Margaret, in 1930) and she was home schooled while her brother , my uncle, went to Eton. One can hardly imagine that nowadays!


My female ancestors were sent to the convent
If she had been born the heir, do you think that she would have gone to College herself?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> How do her fans rationalize it? Meghan didn't invite any relatives to the wedding except for her mother and that isn't a red flag? Even if they think all of the family on Thomas' side were bad people, what is the excuse for excluding the family on Doria's side? They have been nice and quiet and yet they were still blown off by Meghan like they were nothing.



They don't. They actively choose to ignore the magnitute of red flags with MM. Why that is, I am not entirely sure.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They don't. They actively choose to ignore the magnitute of red flags with MM. Why that is, I am not entirely sure.



There seems to be a compulsion to defend her, whether what she does is worth defending or not. It may be as simple as they think she is being picked on, so they automatically take her side.


----------



## Megs

FreeSpirit71 said:


> It's not just what I think, it's posts I've seen here from Mods.  I am also a Mod on two forums where the subjects can get a little touchy. If you're an admin or mod you need to try to remain impartial.  That is not what I've seen here.



Sorry, I am so late on finding this post and responding. 

I don't think mods/admins need to not post in threads that they moderate. That would mean if I want to talk about Chanel bags I can't post in that thread as well, or about a TV show or a celebrity like this? I do not believe we must remain neutral on different subjects that we want to partake in as long as our views aren't impacting how we moderate. 

As an admin, my job is to ensure that the threads and subjects follow our TOS. This thread has a ton of people and many viewpoints and opinions, but what I do is moderate the thread based on our rules. If I do miss anything, please do send me a PM directly. I truly find it nearly impossible to keep up with this thread and some problematic posts aren't reported or are missed.


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is satire BTW.


----------



## rose60610

As far as I'm concerned, QEII has more knowledge, acumen, perception, stamina, loyalty, class, fortitude, valor, backbone and guts than a thousand Ph.D.'s put together. I've met many "highly educated" people who are barely capable of wiping their own *ss. I've met many successful "non-educated" blue collars who'd be great at running a large country.  I'm sick of the assumption that just because someone went to college that somehow they're superior to someone who didn't. I graduated from a large university, DH has several advanced degrees as well as a doctorate. We have friends from all backgrounds. The smartest and/or most successful of them all comprise a huge mix of education levels.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> My female ancestors were sent to the convent
> If she had been born the heir, do you think that she would have gone to College herself?


sent to the convent to become nuns?
my mother had a half sister in Ireland who sent all her kids to be Catholic priests or nuns


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is satire BTW.



this is a joke
qualifications - WOC


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> this is a joke
> qualifications - WOC


It's a parody! Did you read my text above the link?


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Samantha is not wrong...but at this point, I'd appreciate if the Markles - ALL of them - could choose to please be quiet.



I do think at some point, he will no longer be useful to her and she will be bored with him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> sent to the convent to become nuns?
> my mother had a half sister in Ireland who sent all her kids to be Catholic priests or nuns


No it was for the Education. It was almost like a boarding school.
The men were also sent to Catholic school/boarding school and it was the dream/duty for one of them to enter the priesthood.
Part of my relatives were either French or Spaniard and they lived in the French Colonies.
The men were sent back to the Metropole if they were smart enough to study.


----------



## Tootsie17

muddledmint said:


> It was an extravagant but still relatively tasteful wedding. I thought it turned out really well.
> 
> It always seemed obvious to me that she didn’t invite any family members besides doria because she was embarrassed by them. Even if she paid for their travel expenses and their outfits, how would they fit in with the royals/aristocrats and Hollywood celebrities? You know snotty people would snicker about her relatives behind her back and the press might also make fun of them if they made any etiquette gaffes. She is too thin skinned to deal with any of that!


100% I sadly agree. How brazen M is to treat her family so poorly.  I know I am late commenting on this post, but I am still trying to catch up reading all these pages.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She put it beautifully.  Meg had the opportunity of a lifetime to educate, instead she chose to take the road to victim hood.


There is a conflict of interest. The education path is usually selflessness and it's often not monetarily rewarding.


----------



## EverSoElusive

chicinthecity777 said:


> I find it extremely cynical for MM to have only invited 1 person from her family to her big international wedding. She was clearly either ashamed of them, or was afraid something might be said from them which might be negative towards her. Instead, she invited celebrities who she hardly knew. This in itself already says so much about her!



She's a control freak. She cannot have anything negative being said about her. She wants to come off as the epitome of perfection. She needs to be worshipped, even if she doesn't come out tell us.

Back to my comment from a few pages ago about her not comfortable being herself, I must add that, I don't think she really embraces her black roots. For someone who gravitates towards using the race card against people whenever something doesn't go her way or paint her in a good light, when's the last time we see her natural unrelaxed hair (yes, her hair, her choice but even Michelle O and Beyonce flaunt their natural hair sometimes), spending time with Ragland family members (of course they are not good enough now because they are probably just working class people vs. her rich friends with mansions filled with lots of bathrooms) or doing any charity work specifically related to underprivileged black community even before she met Harry (not BLM considering she's been a "philanthropist" longer than her support for BLM that started in 2020)? 

The last time Cringe identified as black (or even half black) and was part of the Ragland clan was probably when she was a little girl. As soon as she hit her teen years, she was anything but! And with Archie in the picture now, I bet she teaches Archie nothing about black culture. If I had a kid, I would want my kid to learn about my culture and my husband's culture (were an interracial couple ) instead of claiming racism when it's convenient for me.

I'm just saying


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Sam is calling for a public apology tour.  a tour???
> No. No. No.
> 
> Article in the spoiler.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: apology Tour??
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan: Meghan's half-sister claims she and the Duke are heading for divorce*
> Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister has launched another blistering attack on the Duchess of Sussex by claiming that her marriage to Prince Harry will end in divorce unless they get 'extensive counselling'.
> 
> Samantha Markle suggested the Duke may already be 'questioning' the marriage and predicted it could 'get nasty' until he 'starts dissenting or pulling back from her'.
> 
> The 56-year-old American also called on the Sussexes to go on an 'apology tour' after the couple made accusations of racism within the Royal Family during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Samantha, who has accused Meghan of having 'narcissistic personality disorder', also claimed that she 'did a lot of damage' to their father Thomas Markle and called on her half-sister to make a public apology to him.
> 
> Speaking to TMZ about Meghan and Harry's marriage, she said: 'I see it ending in divorce unless they get extensive counselling and can agree to work on being honest, to work on apologies to everyone that they've damaged in the course of this bull in a china shop two-year spiel.
> 
> 'I mean, nothing about any of this has been honest, and the damage to the Royals has been massive - especially now.'
> 
> She said of Harry: 'Maybe he's already questioning it, he has to be if he has a functioning frontal lobe. Come on, he's not 12.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister has launched another blistering attack on the Duchess of Sussex by claiming that her marriage to Prince Harry will end in divorce unless they get 'extensive counselling'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In an extraordinary intervention, Samantha Markle suggested the Duke may already be 'questioning' the marriage and predicted it could 'get nasty' until he 'starts dissenting or pulling back from her'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle had his say on Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview to defend himself and the Royal Family, who he says are not racist, before laying into Harry claiming he had failed to properly support his daughter
> 
> 'What man would be happy or comfortable like that? And the minute I believe he starts dissenting or pulling back from her, I think it can get nasty unless he has a really good lawyer or they have really good counsellors.
> 
> 'I don't know what it's gonna take.'
> 
> When asked what would need to happen for Meghan and her father to 'restore their relationship', Samantha said: 'She would have to apologise - a public apology, god, I know would be like getting blood from a rock but she did a lot of public damage.
> 
> 'Really, I mean I really feel like this thing was all orchestrated that she needs to unravel the damage.
> 
> 'She did a lot of damage to a man who gave her an incredible life - so hurtful, so wrong. She would need to make the first move and, I mean, you know, parents are always unconditionally loving but god, she really hurt him.'
> 
> MailOnline has contacted representatives for the Sussexes for comment.
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-half-sister-claims-Duke-heading-divorce.html


Apology tour? After Oprah's interview, they need more like a pilgrimage journey on their knees from LA to the UK.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> She's a control freak. She cannot have anything negative being said about her. She wants to come off as the epitome of perfection. She needs to be worshipped, even if she doesn't come out tell us.
> 
> Back to my comment from a few pages ago about her not comfortable being herself, I must add that, I don't think she really embraces her black roots. For someone who gravitates towards using the race card against people whenever something doesn't go her way or paint her in a good light, when's the last time we see her natural unrelaxed hair (yes, her hair, her choice but even Michelle O and Beyonce flaunt their natural hair sometimes), spending time with Ragland family members (of course they are not good enough now because they are probably just working class people vs. her rich friends with mansions filled with lots of bathrooms) or doing any charity work specifically related to underprivileged black community even before she met Harry (not BLM considering she's been a "philanthropist" longer than her support for BLM that started in 2020)?
> 
> The last time Cringe identified as black (or even half black) and was part of the Ragland clan was probably when she was a little girl. As soon as she hit her teen years, she was anything but! And with Archie in the picture now, I bet she teaches Archie nothing about black culture. If I had a kid, I would want my kid to learn about my culture and my husband's culture (were an interracial couple ) instead of claiming racism when it's convenient for me.
> 
> I'm just saying


yes, to the hair.....if she wants to identify as black, why the long straight extensions? (100 percent of the time)
I may get flamed for this but when I see a WOC rocking her natural hair I almost always compliment her


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> yes, to the hair.....if she wants to identify as black, why the long straight extensions? (100 percent of the time)
> I may get flamed for this but when I see a WOC rocking her natural hair I almost always compliment her



I know and work with a lot of black ladies. They care for their hair and spend top dollar getting braids etc done. They very rarely get their hair relaxed. These ladies love their predominantly black hairstyles and when their hair is not done, they rock their natural curls. It's lovely


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> yes, to the hair.....if she wants to identify as black, why the long straight extensions? (100 percent of the time)
> I may get flamed for this but when I see a WOC rocking her natural hair I almost always compliment her


Her nose has also been much enhanced to look like white person's nose but who am I to judge.


----------



## zen1965

Sharont2305 said:


> What's the difference between a Harvard Graduate and a British University Graduate? William did.


I am many pages behind so most likely this has been addressed. To be fair both Windsor sons went for university graduates. 
Also, there are differences between universities. Harvard compares to Oxford and Cambridge in the UK. So yes, I think there is difference.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> I do think at some point, he will no longer be useful to her and she will be bored with him.



I think she is stuck with him. She’s never going to do any better. Now if the marriage implodes, that’s another matter!

Imagine the stories she would spin about a break up? Suddenly their incredible love story would become a tale of abuse and control with poor ‘lil Meghan starring as the victim of course. I almost believe Harry deserves to get the full Meghan treatment so he knows what it feels like.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I know and work with a lot of black ladies. They care for their hair and spend top dollar getting braids etc done. They very rarely get their hair relaxed. These ladies love their predominantly black hairstyles and when their hair is not done, they rock their natural curls. It's lovely


that's great
and just for the record - even though its a bit different and not race related - I have curly hair and I also have an issue with so many white celebs who used to have curly hair never showing their curls anymore.  Debra Messing is the first one who comes to my mind.  she had the beautiful red curls - now you always see her hair straightened


----------



## purseinsanity

I had a black roommate in college who used to say that she found it interesting that while people discriminate against blacks, they do things to their bodies to replicate black features.  She was primarily talking about getting perms (yes, I'm old), or enhancing the size of their lips, butts, etc.  She had a point I suppose.  I have naturally curly hair which I cannot control for the life of me after all my years on earth.  I get the Japanese straightening done because it's much easier for me to get ready, and because I always wished I had straight, beautifully silky straight Asian hair.  I certainly am not trying to pretend to be white or Asian because I'm straightening my hair.  Sometimes it's just whatever you need to do to make yourself happy about yourself.  As for Meg, I don't know why she's done her tweaks.  I can't say she wants to be white, but I don't see her promoting her black roots or trying to educate others on them either.  She's just disingenuous all around, IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I had a black roommate in college who used to say that she found it interesting that while people discriminate against blacks, they do things to their bodies to replicate black features.  She was primarily talking about getting perms (yes, I'm old), or enhancing the size of their lips, butts, etc.  She had a point I suppose.  I have naturally curly hair which I cannot control for the life of me after all my years on earth.  I get the Japanese straightening done because it's much easier for me to get ready, and because I always wished I had straight, beautifully silky straight Asian hair.  I certainly am not trying to pretend to be white or Asian because I'm straightening my hair.  Sometimes it's just whatever you need to do to make yourself happy about yourself.  As for Meg, I don't know why she's done her tweaks.  I can't say she wants to be white, but I don't see her promoting her black roots or trying to educate others on them either.  She's just disingenuous all around, IMO.


this trend toward women plumping their lips and butts is relatively recent.  that bothers me too.  there are all different kinds of beauty.  everyone doesn't need to look the same.

and I'd like to add there is nothing much worse than seeing an older woman trying to look young by disfiguring her face with very plump lips....really tragic looking


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> this trend toward women plumping their lips and butts is relatively recent.  that bothers me too.  there are all different kinds of beauty.  everyone doesn't need to look the same.


Totally agree! That's why I am very averse to cosmetic surgeries to alter a lot of your look at a young age. I appreciate procedures done to 1) correct dis-figuration, or 2) reverse ageing effect. But to dramatically change how you look at young age, that i don't understand. Your kids will end up either have to go through the same operations or they won't look like you at all!


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> yes, to the hair.....if she wants to identify as black, why the long straight extensions? (100 percent of the time)
> I may get flamed for this but when I see a WOC rocking her natural hair I almost always compliment her



I get what you’re saying, but many black women (of all shades) like to wear long straight extensions and they still “identify” as black. I don’t think choosing to wear your hair naturally curly (or not) makes a person less black. Some might straighten because they like that aesthetic & some keep their hair curly for the same reason.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

kkfiregirl said:


> I get what you’re saying, but many black women (of all shades) like to wear long, straight extensions and they still “identify” as black. I don’t think choosing to wear your hair naturally curly (or not) makes a person less black. Some might straighten because they like that aesthetic & some keep their hair curly for the same reason.


I think it's easier to maintain too? I wouldn't know the difference because I have poker straight hair.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> that's great
> and just for the record - even though its a bit different and not race related - I have curly hair and I also have an issue with so many white celebs who used to have curly hair never showing their curls anymore.  Debra Messing is the first one who comes to my mind.  she had the beautiful red curls - now you always see her hair straightened



She looked so much better with curls, too. The straight hair emphasizes her worst feature which is her nose.


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person. YMMV.
> That YouTube video was interesting. A bit too long.
> However, it illustrates what anyone with a brain can figure out. A whole lot of bull crap went on, in that talk.
> There was an interview on French TV about the Oprah interview and the journalist(point of vue dude) said that this interview could put the British political system in crisis and cause some commonwealth countries most likely Australia to leave it.
> Apparently, the people there are only 51%favorable to stay among the system. So pretty close.
> It would be wild that MM could have such a gigantic impact.
> There is a part of me who thinks that JCMH is actually using her to extract revenge on his father....


I have never felt that Harry was the innocent who was duped into all this. MM is what she is but Harry went along a little to quickly and easily to have not wanted all this at some level. And it could have been done so much more graciously by someone with his training and background.


----------



## kkfiregirl

If people want to plump their lips/butt/face whatever, then I support it! People should do whatever makes them feel happy & confident - if that means plastic surgery, then so be it.


----------



## kkfiregirl

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think it's easier to maintain too? I wouldn't know the difference because I have poker straight hair.



When I straighten my hair, it’s definitely easier to maintain


----------



## chicinthecity777

kkfiregirl said:


> If people want to plump their lips/butt/face whatever, then I support it! People should do whatever makes them feel happy & confident - if that means plastic surgery, then so be it.


Of course they do. But I can also have my opinion on it. I would never stop anybody to do it.


----------



## scarlet555

kkfiregirl said:


> I get what you’re saying, but many black women (of all shades) like to wear long straight extensions and they still “identify” as black. I don’t think choosing to wear your hair naturally curly (or not) makes a person less black. Some might straighten because they like that aesthetic & some keep their hair curly for the same reason.


I hate my curly hair, I prefer pin straight hair, people have told me I look younger with straight hair too, I don't know if you can associate it with race, in this case, it's just I thought she was white until I heard she wasn't.


----------



## kkfiregirl

chicinthecity777 said:


> Of course they do. But I can also have my opinion on it. I would never stop anybody to do it.



Of course! We can all have our own opinions on anything!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this trend toward women plumping their lips and butts is relatively recent.  that bothers me too.  there are all different kinds of beauty.  everyone doesn't need to look the same.
> 
> and I'd like to add there is nothing much worse than seeing an older woman trying to look young by disfiguring her face with very plump lips....really tragic looking


ITA.  There's something to be said for aging gracefully!  If you go on Instagram, it seems like most of the "models" look like blow up dolls.  Not attractive, IMO.  Again, I am all for doing whatever you need to do to feel better about yourself, but too many people are taking it way too far now, to the point of looking unnatural.  My husband says he's happy he doesn't have to date in today's day and age because everyone is "False Advertising" with extensions, fake eyelashes, mircoblading, boob and butt jobs, sky high heels, "conturing" etc.


----------



## jelliedfeels

duna said:


> In those days boys and girls were brought up very differently. My mother was the same generation as the Queen ( she was born the same year as Princess Margaret, in 1930) and she was home schooled while her brother , my uncle, went to Eton. One can hardly imagine that nowadays!


In a weird way, they may be doing the girls a favour. Boarding school seems like absolute pandemonium.


sdkitty said:


> sent to the convent to become nuns?
> my mother had a half sister in Ireland who sent all her kids to be Catholic priests or nuns


Well it varied what the job hopes were but there were loads of convent schools in catholic communities and lots of ‘missionary’ ones as well. I think a lot of people used them as an affordable way of educating their kids and stopping them getting pregnant.    
I know a lot of people in their 60s+ (men and women) who went to convent schools.

Now to combine the two threads there is still actually one catholic boarding school in England run by monks - ampleforth. Though catholic affiliated boarding schools are rare as they tend to be CofE

and that’s it for me being off topic!


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> My female ancestors were sent to the convent
> If she had been born the heir, do you think that she would have gone to College herself?


My Nan was sent to convent school but evidently they didn’t succeed in making her a nun!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> that's great
> and just for the record - even though its a bit different and not race related - I have curly hair and I also have an issue with so many white celebs who used to have curly hair never showing their curls anymore.  Debra Messing is the first one who comes to my mind.  she had the beautiful red curls - now you always see her hair straightened



I have a lot of Middle Eastern friends and was stunned to find out so many of them have natural curls but straighten them...with two I only learned when they showed beach pics from their honeymoon! When I asked why they didn't wear the curls out - because I would give an arm for real curls, I squeeze what I can out of my slightly wavy hair - they said it was so much more work to keep them presentable for days while the straightened hair looked good until the next wash.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> She's just disingenuous all around, IMO.



And I honestly think this is why people criticize her so much. She's fake, she preaches water and drinks wine...if she was more likeable, I bet some things would be complete non-issues, but so it just adds to the dislike.


----------



## Chanbal

Going back to Oprah's interview, Harry let (accidentally) escape that his family would like MM to continue her work as an actress. This was perhaps one of the few truths coming out of his mouth, and a very interesting one imo. In any event, she didn't have to give up on her career to join the BRF, it was her choice.


----------



## bag-mania

If anything good came out of the interview, it inspired lots of funny memes.

*Major meeting with Oprah to tell his side of the story.*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> I don’t understand writing a card to a dead person. YMMV.


If they post it on Instagram, or let their PR people advertise it, then the note is to show everyone how sensitive they are and hasn't much to do with the dead person.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Going back to Oprah's interview, Harry let (accidentally) escape that his family would like MM to continue her work as an actress. This was perhaps one of the few truths coming out of his mouth, and a very interesting one imo. In any event, she didn't have to give up on her career to join the BRF, it was her choice.


Yep.  Of course his spin was that "because there wasn't enough to pay for security".     I remember reading her claim that she "Gave up her whole life" to marry him.  She's BS after BS after BS.  And I'm not talking about her Northwestern degree.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> If anything good came out of the interview, it inspired lots of funny memes.
> 
> *Major meeting with Oprah to tell his side of the story.*
> View attachment 5023356


Now *this*, I would've watched!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm catching up on the body language experts' video (and it confirms I could not have sat through that farce), and one of them has a book about what your date really thinks about you


----------



## gracekelly

kkfiregirl said:


> I get what you’re saying, but many black women (of all shades) like to wear long straight extensions and they still “identify” as black. I don’t think choosing to wear your hair naturally curly (or not) makes a person less black. Some might straighten because they like that aesthetic & some keep their hair curly for the same reason.


This is reminding me of what Dolly Parton said.

“I'm not offended by all the dumb blonde jokes because I know I'm not dumb... and I also know that I'm not blonde.”


ETA. Find me a woman who is satisfied with her hair. Curly want straight, straight wants curly.   I’m wavy and I can never get it right!


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> yes, to the hair.....if she wants to identify as black, why the long straight extensions? (100 percent of the time)
> I may get flamed for this but when I see a WOC rocking her natural hair I almost always compliment her


I don’t think wearing any kind of hair piece or having it straightened makes you any less black.

With all the hair dye and wigs and stuff you don’t see a lot of people’s natural hair regardless of race. It’s their choice.

Edit: added the bit about straightening.


----------



## Jayne1

duna said:


> In those days boys and girls were brought up very differently. My mother was the same generation as the Queen ( she was born the same year as Princess Margaret, in 1930) and she was home schooled while her brother , my uncle, went to Eton. One can hardly imagine that nowadays!


My mother was from a large family and all the girls went to work to support their brother who went to medical school.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> My mother was from a large family and all the girls went to work to support their brother who went to medical school.


I swear, there's so much truth that behind every successful man is a strong, hard working woman (or women)!


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> My husband says he's happy he doesn't have to date in today's day and age because everyone is "False Advertising" with extensions, fake eyelashes, mircoblading, boob and butt jobs, sky high heels, "conturing" etc.


I've always thought that. 

Also, add in fake looking veneers, fake nails and coloured contacts. Their own mothers wouldn't recognize them.


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Also, I think it's a way for W&K to honor Diana's role as a "grandmother" with George, Charlotte,  and Louis. As they mature they will certainly learn a great deal about all the roles Diana filled in her lifetime, the good and the bad, but having a perspective of her as their "grandmother," Dad's Mum, someone who, if alive, would be as important to them as their Granny Middleton, is important. George's comment "I think of you always"  and Charlotte's "Papa is missing you" to me, reflects in a healthy way that William and Kate are including Diana in their everyday lives.
> 
> Given the Cambridge's active, as opposed to Harry's passive, involvement in mental health and children's issues, I think they are sensitive to their children's needs. It would not be surprising at their ages for George, Charlotte and Louis to want to also do something for "Granny Diana" on Mother's Day just as they have probably made special cards for "Granny Middleton". They evidently like doing them, the card to the Queen and Prince Phillip on their Anniversary being another example.
> 
> Harry needs to confront the fact that Diana had two sons and would have had four grandchildren + another to be born this summer. His sense of "ownership" of his mother is getting gagging. This is one instance where I do not blame William for making it clear that she is his mother and his children's grandmother also. Charlotte's insightful innocent comment was powerful.
> 
> Edited "+" to include the baby due this summer.


Sorry if it has already been said - I'm trying to catch up, but there are a LOT of posts.  I do believe they went to a gender selection clinic in order to "guarantee" a girl, and unfortunately, I am saddened to think that they will name this child Diana  William and Kate took the high road and put Diana's name as one of Charlottes middle names, but those two connivers are not able to be as classy.


----------



## limom

Toby93 said:


> Sorry if it has already been said - I'm trying to catch up, but there are a LOT of posts.  I do believe they went to a gender selection clinic in order to "guarantee" a girl, and unfortunately, I am saddened to think that they will name this child Diana  William and Kate took the high road and put Diana's name as one of Charlottes middle names, but those two connivers are not able to be as classy.


I don’t think so. After Archie, they will try some type of a weird trendy/unique name.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, Sam is calling for a public apology tour.  a tour???
> No. No. No.
> 
> Article in the spoiler.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: apology Tour??
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan: Meghan's half-sister claims she and the Duke are heading for divorce*
> Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister has launched another blistering attack on the Duchess of Sussex by claiming that her marriage to Prince Harry will end in divorce unless they get 'extensive counselling'.
> 
> Samantha Markle suggested the Duke may already be 'questioning' the marriage and predicted it could 'get nasty' until he 'starts dissenting or pulling back from her'.
> 
> The 56-year-old American also called on the Sussexes to go on an 'apology tour' after the couple made accusations of racism within the Royal Family during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> Samantha, who has accused Meghan of having 'narcissistic personality disorder', also claimed that she 'did a lot of damage' to their father Thomas Markle and called on her half-sister to make a public apology to him.
> 
> Speaking to TMZ about Meghan and Harry's marriage, she said: 'I see it ending in divorce unless they get extensive counselling and can agree to work on being honest, to work on apologies to everyone that they've damaged in the course of this bull in a china shop two-year spiel.
> 
> 'I mean, nothing about any of this has been honest, and the damage to the Royals has been massive - especially now.'
> 
> She said of Harry: 'Maybe he's already questioning it, he has to be if he has a functioning frontal lobe. Come on, he's not 12.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's estranged half-sister has launched another blistering attack on the Duchess of Sussex by claiming that her marriage to Prince Harry will end in divorce unless they get 'extensive counselling'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In an extraordinary intervention, Samantha Markle suggested the Duke may already be 'questioning' the marriage and predicted it could 'get nasty' until he 'starts dissenting or pulling back from her'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle had his say on Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview to defend himself and the Royal Family, who he says are not racist, before laying into Harry claiming he had failed to properly support his daughter
> 
> 'What man would be happy or comfortable like that? And the minute I believe he starts dissenting or pulling back from her, I think it can get nasty unless he has a really good lawyer or they have really good counsellors.
> 
> 'I don't know what it's gonna take.'
> 
> When asked what would need to happen for Meghan and her father to 'restore their relationship', Samantha said: 'She would have to apologise - a public apology, god, I know would be like getting blood from a rock but she did a lot of public damage.
> 
> 'Really, I mean I really feel like this thing was all orchestrated that she needs to unravel the damage.
> 
> 'She did a lot of damage to a man who gave her an incredible life - so hurtful, so wrong. She would need to make the first move and, I mean, you know, parents are always unconditionally loving but god, she really hurt him.'
> 
> MailOnline has contacted representatives for the Sussexes for comment.
> 
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-half-sister-claims-Duke-heading-divorce.html



Wow. I give the dad a pass since he only talks about his direct experiences but Samantha really needs to give it a rest. It sounds like she pulled all of this out her hoo-ha. How do you even talk with this kind of certainty and specificity about people you haven't talked to in maybe a decade? She's not wrong to doubt that marriage in general though... I don't think it will be final for either of them.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> I don’t think so. After Archie, they will try some type of a weird trendy/unique name.


You mean like....Truth?


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I had a black roommate in college who used to say that she found it interesting that while people discriminate against blacks, they do things to their bodies to replicate black features.  She was *primarily talking about getting perms (yes, I'm old), or enhancing the size of their lips, butts, etc.  She had a point I suppose.  I have naturally curly hair which I cannot control for the life of me after all my years on earth.  I get the Japanese straightening done because it's much easier for me to get ready, and because I always wished I had straight, beautifully silky straight Asian hair.  I certainly am not trying to pretend to be white or Asian because I'm straightening my hair.*  Sometimes it's just whatever you need to do to make yourself happy about yourself.  As for Meg, I don't know why she's done her tweaks.  I can't say she wants to be white, but I don't see her promoting her black roots or trying to educate others on them either.  She's just disingenuous all around, IMO.



now see, I have long THICK (as in enough for three people) straight hair that takes perms very well. I always got the loose wavy ones. I HATE trying to do anything with my hair when it is straight. It takes a scrunchie (I know I know) one or two clips and sometimes a headband to achieve any sort of look with it. When it is permed I just wash and go. I wasn't trying to steal anyone's culture either-----there ARE white folk with naturally curly hair. I'm just not one of them. 
I think it is human nature to want what we don't have. That could be why they came up with colored contact lenses


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Going back to Oprah's interview, Harry let (accidentally) escape that his family would like MM to continue her work as an actress. This was perhaps one of the few truths coming out of his mouth, and a very interesting one imo. In any event, she didn't have to give up on her career to join the BRF, it was her choice.


Yes I clocked that as well. She was making a big deal about giving up her career (cable show ended/approaching 40/staying in UK anyway for unknown reasons) - it doesn’t add up!
Especially given his cousins E&B have jobs and there’s already an actress in the family- Sophia Winkleman who has been in loads of tv shows while married. 
Also I don’t want to offend any actors on the thread, but it did crack me up when Harry was making it seem like them saying she could do some acting was the equivalent of sending her down the mines for a 12hr shift. I thought the reason acting was competitive was because it is enjoyable!

He’s so hilariously entitled, like when he was crying that his dad had stopped providing for him and his kids and he, gasp, had to use his inheritance!
I wonder if he ever thinks of all those disadvantaged people he met in his old job and how difficult their lives are - probably not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> As far as I'm concerned*, QEII has more knowledge, acumen, perception, stamina, loyalty, class, fortitude, valor, backbone and guts than a thousand Ph.D.'s put together*. I've met many "highly educated" people who are barely capable of wiping their own *ss. I've met many successful "non-educated" blue collars who'd be great at running a large country.  I'm sick of the assumption that just because someone went to college that somehow they're superior to someone who didn't. I graduated from a large university, DH has several advanced degrees as well as a doctorate. We have friends from all backgrounds. The smartest and/or most successful of them all comprise a huge mix of education levels.



IMO, one doesn't preclude the other. 

I love being formally educated - as one reaches a higher level(s) the subject becomes necessarily more singular, doesn't mean I don't teach myself other things too. The Queen had home schooling but some of her tutors were visiting professors and national experts, other women were not that lucky. It's great that women can earn degrees, teach each other and become leaders in their field - not 'just' a Queen (an honorary man in many states she visits and constitutionally lower than a King in her own)

My grandmother won a scholarship to one a prestigious university. Unfortunately, her father had died and her mother needed her in the family business and demanded she did so. I consider myself very lucky to have the opportunity, and I'm so glad I took it.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Going back to Oprah's interview, Harry let (accidentally) escape that his family would like MM to continue her work as an actress. This was perhaps one of the few truths coming out of his mouth, and a very interesting one imo. In any event, she didn't have to give up on her career to join the BRF, it was her choice.



I pointed this out too!! I don't know why more people aren't seizing on it. I believe Harry's gist was, "my family were being insulting towards her, insinuating she should continue acting because the family couldn't pay for her." WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT??? Harry, in the real world, yes, one works in order to afford one's lifestyle.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> He’s so hilariously entitled, like when he was crying that his dad had stopped providing for him and his kids and he, gasp, had to use his inheritance!
> *I wonder if he ever thinks of all those disadvantaged people he met in his old job and how difficult their lives are - probably not.*



100% - not.


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> Sorry if it has already been said - I'm trying to catch up, but there are a LOT of posts.  I do believe they went to a gender selection clinic in order to "guarantee" a girl, and unfortunately, I am saddened to think that they will name this child Diana  William and Kate took the high road and put Diana's name as one of Charlottes middle names, but those two connivers are not able to be as classy.



When a Royal baby is expected we often read betting on the odds for various names.  Wonder if there are any bets on her being "Diana Doria" and they could nickname her "DeeDee" ?.

The thought of what being raised by a mother like Meghan might be gives me shivers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes I clocked that as well. She was making a big deal about giving up her career (cable show ended/approaching 40/*staying in UK anyway for unknown reasons*) - it doesn’t add up!



I am dying to know what she did in the UK and why it specifically had to be a rich, famous, BRITISH man. Maybe she was targeting Harry all along...but could she really hope to get that lucky?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> You mean like....Truth?



How about:
MyTruth© #Inspiration $LoveAlwaysWins$

Isn't that a pretty name for a little girl?


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> I pointed this out too!! I don't know why more people aren't seizing on it. I believe gist was, "they were being insulting towards her, insinuating she should continue acting because the family couldn't pay for her." WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT??? Harry, in the real world, yes, one works in order to afford one's lifestyle.


Once again, he is an entitled moron.
Here is one of his cousin:








						Princess Margaret's Grandson Arthur Chatto Is Now a Personal Trainer!
					

Chatto, 21, has started work at the BoundFitness gym in Edinburgh, Scotland where he's currently studying for a degree in geography at the University of Edinburgh




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The thought of what being raised by a mother like Meghan might be gives me shivers.



One can only hope Harry doesn't love that little girl too much, or Meghan will make her pay.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Once again, he is an entitled moron.
> Here is one of his cousin:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Margaret's Grandson Arthur Chatto Is Now a Personal Trainer!
> 
> 
> Chatto, 21, has started work at the BoundFitness gym in Edinburgh, Scotland where he's currently studying for a degree in geography at the University of Edinburgh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Speaking as a left-leaning person generally... I really don't get why they have become THE liberal cause celebre. If she were white, everything else considered, they'd be another example of classism, elitism, privilege that normally gets skewered by this side.... NOT to mention Harry's own racist gaffes.


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> now see, I have long THICK (as in enough for three people) straight hair that takes perms very well. I always got the loose wavy ones. I HATE trying to do anything with my hair when it is straight. It takes a scrunchie (I know I know) one or two clips and sometimes a headband to achieve any sort of look with it. When it is permed I just wash and go. I wasn't trying to steal anyone's culture either-----there ARE white folk with naturally curly hair. I'm just not one of them.
> I think it is human nature to want what we don't have. That could be why they came up with colored contact lenses



From 1975 to 1992, we ALL got perms.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Speaking as a left-leaning person generally... I really don't get why they have become THE liberal cause celebre. If she were white, everything else considered, they'd be another example of classism, elitism, privilege that normally gets skewered by this side.... NOT to mention Harry's own racist gaffes.


She supported our current President and refused to meet the prior.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> From 1975 to 1992, we ALL got perms.



30 years later and I swear I can still smell it.


----------



## poopsie

Allisonfaye said:


> From 1975 to 1992, we ALL got perms.



Soon as everything gets rolling again I may just go get one.  After all this I just feel like I gotta do _something_


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I had a black roommate in college who used to say that she found it interesting that while people discriminate against blacks, they do things to their bodies to replicate black features.  She was primarily talking about getting perms (yes, I'm old), or enhancing the size of their lips, butts, etc.  She had a point I suppose.  I have naturally curly hair which I cannot control for the life of me after all my years on earth.  I get the Japanese straightening done because it's much easier for me to get ready, and because I always wished I had straight, beautifully silky straight Asian hair.  I certainly am not trying to pretend to be white or Asian because I'm straightening my hair.  Sometimes it's just whatever you need to do to make yourself happy about yourself.  As for Meg, I don't know why she's done her tweaks.  I can't say she wants to be white, but I don't see her promoting her black roots or trying to educate others on them either.  She's just disingenuous all around, IMO.



The grass is always greener and nobody is ever happy with their hair (mine's wavy and will go into ringlets if I'm in the rain and dries naturally and it's quite reddish  which runs in the family). 

I don't mind M's straight extensions, it's her prerogative to wear her hair anyway she pleases, like the rest of us. I like   it when people wear their hair naturally too, whatever that may be. In these days of lockdown when so many locations when most people can't go to hairdresser it would have appeared more empathetic for M to show solidarity with the majority, but hey, that would be asking for the moon.


----------



## kipp

Moderators, please delete this if you find it objectionable, and I'm not trying to advertise these local services, but I saw this on my IG and thought it was hilarious!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I pointed this out too!! I don't know why more people aren't seizing on it. I believe Harry's gist was, "my family were being insulting towards her, insinuating she should continue acting because the family couldn't pay for her." WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT??? Harry, in the real world, yes, one works in order to afford one's lifestyle.


“When I said go our separate ways for financial independence - I meant  I want to find ways to separate you from your finances, dad, independent of what my stupid brother thinks.”


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> 30 years later and I swear I can still smell it.



I used to go to the salon with my mom and aunts. I remember all the perm solution smell and not to mention, hairspray!!!


----------



## mdcx

I wonder if at one point H told M that no one would ever directly accuse a BRF member of telling outright lies. 
Because she seems to be joyfully spraying half truths around with no fear of being called on them.

Kate is enjoying her new niece while M simmers away in her rage juice.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> You mean like....Truth?



That would be quite Northern (UK- Northern) coz someone from 'up-north' would say 'our Jack' or 'our Susan', so perfect for H&M they can exclaim  "just taking _our_ Truth round to see aunty Oprah".


----------



## Toby93

mellibelly said:


> This is amazing, I watched the whole thing. They’re spot on, especially Scott identifying her narcissism. I had not watched the entire interview because yuck, so the clips they analyzed blew me away. She’s such a sociopath it’s astounding. And she really, really hates Kate.


Wow - absolutely amazing.  Spot on!


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> I used to go to the salon with my mom and aunts. I remember all the perm solution smell and not to mention, hairspray!!!



Putting those chemicals on our scalps could not have been healthy for us. And we paid top dollar for it. Anything for beauty!


----------



## mdcx

I get the feeling everything we see now on the O interview, is what William, Kate etc saw right at the start. Of course they were concerned.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> She supported our current President and refused to meet the prior.


so?
I am also left leaning and that doesn't prevent me from seeing her faults At All


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Soon as everything gets rolling again I may just go get one.  After all this I just feel like I gotta do _something_


I have NC hair so never had a perm.  but there is nothing worse than a bad perm....I think you probably have to be careful who you go to on that


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


>




Vid unavailable in my country*  

*when I say _my_ country I don't literally mean _my_ country like I'm the Queen, I mean my country as in "_my_ truth" coz I just conveniently happen to live here.


----------



## mdcx

limom said:


> My female ancestors were sent to the convent
> If she had been born the heir, do you think that she would have gone to College herself?


I believe some women preferred the certainty of the convent to the possibility of an abusive marriage and unending pregnancies.


----------



## papertiger

Allisonfaye said:


> From 1975 to 1992, we ALL got perms.



Perms go way back to the 1930s - just ask Wallis


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's a parody! Did you read my text above the link?


oops guess I missed that


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> I believe some women preferred the certainty of the convent to the possibility of an abusive marriage and unending pregnancies.


the Catholic church used to strongly urge parishioners to get their kids to be priests or nuns.  IDK if that's still true.  Maybe if there are practicing Catholics here they can weigh in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Wow - absolutely amazing.  Spot on!



I'm only like 20 mins in (verdicts: MM is full of it claiming she never googled, and the four specialists are certain she made Kate cry) and already find myself nodding in approval.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Soon as everything gets rolling again I may just go get one.  After all this I just feel like I gotta do _something_


salons are open....you just waiting til you have some place to go show off your hair?


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Putting those chemicals on our scalps could not have been healthy for us. And we paid top dollar for it. Anything for beauty!



This is why my mom's hair all fried


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.



I’m usually very cynical of these internet experts in psychology & body language & behaviour but I did watch a bit of this while cleaning and I thought they seemed quite balanced in explaining what they saw & also why it might not be true. 

I think they also made a good point about Harry being trained in self-presentation & therefore he might have better control of his tells than most. 

Another thing that cracked me up was when Meghan claimed that unlike the movies she never trained  in sitting nicely or curtsying. What a lie! Britain (the home of debretts, whose queen is a global metaphor for the prim and proper, and attaches great value to class boundaries) does not have etiquette teachers! Hahahahahahaha!


If ladies of London could get someone in: you’d think H could’ve picked up the phone lol. It’s all lies anyway as those pesky press reported her going to lessons at the time.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> The grass is always greener and nobody is ever happy with their hair (mine's wavy and will go into ringlets if I'm in the rain and dries naturally and it's quite reddish  which runs in the family).
> 
> I don't mind M's straight extensions, it's her prerogative to wear her hair anyway she pleases, like the rest of us. I like   it when people wear their hair naturally too, whatever that may be. In these days of lockdown when so many locations when most people can't go to hairdresser it would have appeared more empathetic for M to show solidarity with the majority, but hey, that would be asking for the moon.



She wore it natural as a child, the caption says she’s 11.


Here’s one at age 4. The kind of cute pic that will be published some day next to her daughter’s.


----------



## kkfiregirl

gracekelly said:


> You mean like....Truth?



One of the Kardashian sisters already used that name for her baby.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> This is why my mom's hair all fried



It was a fine balancing act, like walking a tightrope. Leave the solution on too long and your hair had the texture of dried out straw. Don't leave it on long enough and the perm doesn't take and then you are left with limp, bodiless hair you paid too much for. Oh, the memories!


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> the Catholic church used to strongly urge parishioners to get their kids to be priests or nuns.  IDK if that's still true.  Maybe if there are practicing Catholics here they can weigh in.


Catholic schools are still hoping for some recruitment. In my son’s high school, one girl is expected to be a nun.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> It was a fine balancing act, like walking a tightrope. Leave the solution on too long and your hair had the texture of dried out straw. Don't leave it on long enough and the perm doesn't take and then you are left with limp, bodiless hair you paid too much for. Oh, the memories!



When I lived in Simi I found a gal who totally had the knack for my hair. After I moved back to San Diego I would make the twice a year trek back to see her. Some thought I was nuts, but once you find a good hairdresser (or a good dentist----still looking for that one) you stick with them for as long as you can!


----------



## bag-mania

I doubt Michelle ***** really wanted to be sucked into the H&M train wreck. I think her comment was about as diplomatic as she could possibly have made it.

*Michelle ***** Reacts To Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview: ‘I Just Pray That There Is Forgiveness’*
Mario noted Michelle’s connection to Meghan Markle and asked her thoughts on the fallout of Meghan and Prince Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which the couple made troubling claims about their time as senior royals. Michelle, who Meghan interviewed for British Vogue in 2019, sent well wishes for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to find closure that works best for them and their future as they continue navigating their rift with the monarchy.

“My hope is that, when I think about what they’re going through, I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time,” Michelle said of Meghan and Harry. “Because there’s nothing more important than family.”

https://www.accessonline.com/articl...terview-i-just-pray-that-there-is-forgiveness


----------



## kkfiregirl

They photoshopped a kente cloth onto Harry, omg.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> It was a fine balancing act, like walking a tightrope. Leave the solution on too long and your hair had the texture of dried out straw. Don't leave it on long enough and the perm doesn't take and then you are left with limp, bodiless hair you paid too much for. Oh, the memories!



I'm so glad we have better haircare products to help with permed, straightened and colored hair these days to keep it in tip top shape


----------



## TC1

Interesting that Harry said people thought she should continue her acting. The minute she started seeing Harry, she was written out of Suits. So much so, that they had to rush filming and change the plot for future seasons because it made no sense. The departure was blamed on seeing someone from the Royal Family and that her career must cease immediately.


----------



## kkfiregirl




----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm so glad we have better haircare products to help with permed, straightened and colored hair these days to keep it in tip top shape



One of the many ways advances in science helps us daily.


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> When I lived in Simi I found a gal who totally had the knack for my hair. After I moved back to San Diego I would make the twice a year trek back to see her. Some thought I was nuts, but once you find a good hairdresser (or a good dentist----still looking for that one) you stick with them for as long as you can!



Preach!!! I've always gone back to my stylist regardless of where I've moved to. I had my hair ruined once by a different stylist and never again!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> When I lived in Simi I found a gal who totally had the knack for my hair. After I moved back to San Diego I would make the twice a year trek back to see her. Some thought I was nuts, but once you find a good hairdresser (*or a good dentist*----still looking for that one) you stick with them for as long as you can!



I hear that. The dentist I had for years retired awhile back and I have not been happy with any I've tried since.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I hear that. The dentist I had for years retired awhile back and I have not been happy with any I've tried since.



Same here! He had very small hands


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Another thing that cracked me up was when Meghan claimed that unlike the movies she never trained  in sitting nicely or curtsying. What a lie! Britain (the home of debretts, whose queen is a global metaphor for the prim and proper, and attaches great value to class boundaries) does not have etiquette teachers! Hahahahahahaha!



I mean that's the woman who claimed she did not have any help. She had access to Harry's PR team when they were only dating, and had a full team with women and Americans (mentioning both because of her hatred of the old men in suits) to advise her when she got married, only we know that special snowflake never took any advice.


----------



## gracekelly

kkfiregirl said:


> One of the Kardashian sisters already used that name for her baby.


It was close.. She named the baby True.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> One of the Kardashian sisters already used that name for her baby.



Her name is True. Which is even more weird than Truth but eh, her mother is also putting up with her serial cheater of a dad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I doubt Michelle ***** really wanted to be sucked into the H&M train wreck. I think her comment was about as diplomatic as she could possibly have made it.
> 
> *Michelle ***** Reacts To Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview: ‘I Just Pray That There Is Forgiveness’*
> Mario noted Michelle’s connection to Meghan Markle and asked her thoughts on the fallout of Meghan and Prince Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which the couple made troubling claims about their time as senior royals. Michelle, who Meghan interviewed for British Vogue in 2019, sent well wishes for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to find closure that works best for them and their future as they continue navigating their rift with the monarchy.
> 
> “My hope is that, when I think about what they’re going through, I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time,” Michelle said of Meghan and Harry. “Because there’s nothing more important than family.”
> 
> https://www.accessonline.com/articl...terview-i-just-pray-that-there-is-forgiveness



I knew Michelle wouldn't disappoint. Because there are several celebs I can never view the same after how they threw themselves into Meghan as their new cause. And yes, that includes Hillary.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m usually very cynical of these internet experts in psychology & body language & behaviour but I did watch a bit of this while cleaning and I thought they seemed quite balanced in explaining what they saw & also why it might not be true.
> 
> I think they also made a good point about Harry being trained in self-presentation & therefore he might have better control of his tells than most.
> 
> Another thing that cracked me up was when Meghan claimed that unlike the movies she never trained  in sitting nicely or curtsying. What a lie! Britain (the home of debretts, whose queen is a global metaphor for the prim and proper, and attaches great value to class boundaries) does not have etiquette teachers! Hahahahahahaha!
> 
> 
> If ladies of London could get someone in: you’d think H could’ve picked up the phone lol. It’s all lies anyway as those pesky press reported her going to lessons at the time.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean that's the woman who claimed she did not have any help. She had access to Harry's PR team when they were only dating, and had a full team with women and Americans (mentioning both because of her hatred of the old men in suits) to advise her when she got married, only we know that special snowflake never took any advice.



Even us norms can get royal etiquette lessons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh this body language video gives me more insight into the interview than I ever wanted...is she sitting there complaining the BRF made her think about if she could fit in? While I still think they were extremely welcoming, wouldn't that be the responsible thing to do? And very obviously she didn't think about it hard enough, she was only focussed on her prey.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I doubt Michelle ***** really wanted to be sucked into the H&M train wreck. I think her comment was about as diplomatic as she could possibly have made it.
> 
> *Michelle ***** Reacts To Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview: ‘I Just Pray That There Is Forgiveness’*
> Mario noted Michelle’s connection to Meghan Markle and asked her thoughts on the fallout of Meghan and Prince Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which the couple made troubling claims about their time as senior royals. Michelle, who Meghan interviewed for British Vogue in 2019, sent well wishes for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to find closure that works best for them and their future as they continue navigating their rift with the monarchy.
> 
> “My hope is that, when I think about what they’re going through, I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time,” Michelle said of Meghan and Harry. “Because there’s nothing more important than family.”
> 
> https://www.accessonline.com/articl...terview-i-just-pray-that-there-is-forgiveness


Yes, totally agree. I wondered how long it would take before someone probed the O's for a response.  Was not surprised they did not jump into the fray. 

Brief OT: They developed a strong bond with the Queen during visits and I think they probably recognize the toll of this on her. Remember MO was initially criticized for breaking protocol in a hug with the queen? But the shock to those who were initially critical was the photos showed the Queen had made the first move to hug MO. That was the real news because she is generally not physically expressive.

 I read where the gift they presented to the Queen during an Official visit was  "an iconic collection of memorabilia from her late father, King George VI's last visit to the United States including notes, invitations etc" that brought tears to the Queen's eyes.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Yes, totally agree. I wondered how long it would take before someone probed the O's for a response.  Was not surprised they did not jump into the fray.
> 
> Brief OT: They developed a strong bond with the Queen during visits and I think they probably recognize the toll of this on her. Remember MO was initially criticized for breaking protocol in a hug with the queen? But the shock to those who were initially critical was the photos showed the Queen had made the first move to hug MO. That was the real news because she is generally not physically expressive.
> 
> I read where the gift they presented to the Queen during an Official visit was  "an iconic collection of memorabilia from her late father, King George VI's last visit to the United States including notes, invitations etc" that brought tears to the Queen's eyes.


they are truly a class act


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> You mean like....Truth?


I like Faith.  

Or better yet, "Groundswell Compassion Markle Windsor Mountbatten".  Has quite a ring to it, don't you think?


----------



## rose60610

Are we REALLY supposed to feel sorry for Meghan that she "had to give up her career"?. So the "tradeoff" was marrying into the *BRF, *basically like hitting the lottery of worldwide fame and wealth. Boo hoo!  It's no one's fault but her own that she kicked it all to the curb and went crying to Oprah about how mean and racist everyone was. Hmm, considering Meghan's track record of slash and burn wherever she goes, it is her version of events that sounds like fiction. I wonder how Netflix and Spotify are reacting since by now they must realize Meghan is radioactive. If Netflix and Spotify dump M&H, Meghan will have another "It's because they're RACIST" rant to fall back on. That's her modus operandi.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> From 1975 to 1992, we ALL got perms.


LOL, yes even I.  Why?  Don't ask.  I already had curly hair.  I wound up looking like I had a brillo pad as hair.  Worst thing ever.  I wasn't the smartest 11 year old around.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Posted already? Didn't catch the interview, here's the two minute version


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> One of the Kardashian sisters already used that name for her baby.


It's True!  LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her name is True. Which is even more weird than Truth but eh, her mother is also putting up with her serial cheater of a dad.


Well, she didn't name her Faith!


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, yes even I.  Why?  Don't ask.  I already had curly hair.  I wound up looking like I had a brillo pad as hair.  Worst thing ever.  I wasn't the smartest 11 year old around.



I'm not trying to be mean or patronizing but why would your 11-year-old self want a perm at such a young age and did your parents try to stop you at all?   When I was 11, all I could get at a salon was a haircut. No more, no less


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm not trying to be mean or patronizing but why would your 11-year-old self want a perm at such a young age and did your parents try to stop you at all?   When I was 11, all I could get at a salon was a haircut. No more, no less


I was wondering about the parents too


----------



## gracekelly

Compassionata Mercy Didoria  Markle.  I predict that the US born child will be given  her mother's last name in a truly woke moment.  Meghan will want to distance this child from the toxic legacy of her father's family.  Jane Fonda had a son with Tom Hayden and they gave him a family name as a surname so he wouldn't be burdened by their respective fame.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, yes even I.  Why?  Don't ask.  I already had curly hair.  I wound up looking like I had a brillo pad as hair.  Worst thing ever.  I wasn't the smartest 11 year old around.



Same. At one point, my hair was really long and thick. They told me if my hair was any longer, they would have refused to spend the time rolling up the rods because it took so long. When I was done, I looked like Rosanne Rosannadanna. lol. That was my last perm.


----------



## Allisonfaye

limom said:


> She supported our current President and refused to meet the prior.



Did the prior express interest in meeting HER?


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Same. At one point, my hair was really long and thick. They told me if my hair was any longer, they would have refused to spend the time rolling up the rods because it took so long. When I was done, I looked like Rosanne Rosannadanna. lol. That was my last perm.


I love Rosanne Rosannadana


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> When I lived in Simi I found a gal who totally had the knack for my hair. After I moved back to San Diego I would make the twice a year trek back to see her. Some thought I was nuts, but once you find a good hairdresser (or a good dentist----still looking for that one) you stick with them for as long as you can!



Completely agree! I had a guy once who I loved and he moved to Canada to live near his wife's family. I was heartbroken.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> I love Rosanne Rosannadana



True, but you don't want her hair.


----------



## Allisonfaye

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm not trying to be mean or patronizing but why would your 11-year-old self want a perm at such a young age and did your parents try to stop you at all?   When I was 11, all I could get at a salon was a haircut. No more, no less



Mind if I ask how old you are? My mom did the at home perm around age 12 for me so I didn't go to a salon but EVERYONE, I mean EVERYONE had perms at the time. Even the men.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Mind if I ask how old you are? My mom did the at home perm around age 12 for me so I didn't go to a salon but EVERYONE, I mean EVERYONE had perms at the time. Even the men.


I remember by best friend having a home perm when she was a child.....but she had straight hair, not curly


----------



## yuliachanel




----------



## creme fraiche

I could not bring myself to watch the interview as I knew it would be a hatchet job and full of distortions.  I even avoided the news for 3 days as my well being would have been negatively impacted by the ubiquitous rehashing of the frankly unimportant and fictitious narrative these three are trying to sell the world.  The number of people buying their sob story really was making me question my sanity - are we really living in a world where character, dignity, selflessness, integrity and community mindedness mean so little?  Where truth is less important that perceived truths (which don’t even need to be true!)?  I have never felt so old, and I feel positively geriatric at the age of 50!

The sanest assessment I have seen of the impact of this interview is very sobering.  It is by Andrew Neil (what i would pay for these 2, most aptly nicknamed Cash & Carry, to be subjected to one of his interviews!).  Looks like these 2 will be annoying me for many years.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> they are truly a class act



They’re ok


----------



## mdcx

My goodness, could we never hear another "you're just jealous of Meghan" comment like ever, because what I saw in those clips from Oprah was not at all envy inducing. Both are very messy. They are the family members you have to have super strong boundaries with, and avoid unless absolutely necessary. 
Meghan's smug "see, I told you I was victimized by the BRF!" smirks and stares at Oprah were very unsettling.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I like Faith.
> 
> Or better yet, "Groundswell Compassion Markle Windsor Mountbatten".  Has quite a ring to it, don't you think?



What would her nickname be?


----------



## scarlet555

csshopper said:


> Yes, totally agree. I wondered how long it would take before someone probed the O's for a response.  Was not surprised they did not jump into the fray.
> 
> Brief OT: They developed a strong bond with the Queen during visits and I think they probably recognize the toll of this on her. Remember MO was initially criticized for breaking protocol in a hug with the queen? But the shock to those who were initially critical was the photos showed the Queen had made the first move to hug MO. That was the real news because she is generally not physically expressive.
> 
> I read where the gift they presented to the Queen during an Official visit was  "an iconic collection of memorabilia from her late father, King George VI's last visit to the United States including notes, invitations etc" that brought tears to the Queen's eyes.



Michelle O's words of wisdom is what one should say, when one shows respect to the Queen...  Listen up Cringe and Ginge...
I don't know what Cringe expected marrying into the BRF, and her giving up her career to be with Ginge, her career was going no where, a lot of people had no idea who she was, including me.   -In the OW showcase, she was encouraged to continue acting (probably after burning her meal ticket) , so she should be happy, they have re-opened the door for her full time acting-it sounded like she wanted to sound like she had to give up so much...  I want to hear Michelle's real thoughts is what I want.  Normal people can see right through the fools' 'revenge' showcase against the BRF-I can see Cringe seething in that interview...


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> Did the prior express interest in meeting HER?


I have no clue. Apparently, it happened during his visit in England.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9196110/donald-*****-meghan-markle-nasty-comment-uk-visit/


----------



## kkfiregirl

yuliachanel said:


> View attachment 5023586
> 
> View attachment 5023587



She’s so creative! She has something in common with so many brilliant minds; she’s simply inspirational!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Allisonfaye said:


> Mind if I ask how old you are? My mom did the at home perm around age 12 for me so I didn't go to a salon but EVERYONE, I mean EVERYONE had perms at the time. Even the men.



I'm in my 30s


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> She’s so creative! She has something in common with so many brilliant minds; she’s simply inspirational!


She only steals from the best


----------



## csshopper

Allisonfaye said:


> Mind if I ask how old you are? My mom did the at home perm around age 12 for me so I didn't go to a salon but EVERYONE, I mean EVERYONE had perms at the time. Even the men.


*TONI* home permanents was the brand in the 50's. My Mom did it, my Aunt came over and she did it, my cousin and I suffered through it. They would do each other, then us. LOL, I had completely forgotten about it. Toni was such a big deal, one Christmas my two cousins and I got TONI dolls as our "big" present, I got the brunette, one cousin the blond, and one the redhead. Yes, they had play permanent kits.  Then in the 70's my first husband and I did perms.To this day my 51 and 49 year old children still tease about it.


----------



## csshopper

kkfiregirl said:


> What would her nickname be?


"Woke"


----------



## gelbergirl

Sometimes I think about these two and I'm just so glad I have this thread to come to when I become irritated.


----------



## Jayne1

Allisonfaye said:


> From 1975 to 1992, we ALL got perms.


I was surprised to read from Diana's hairdresser that her's was also a perm. For some reason, I thought her hair was big and full bodied, if blown out by a hairdresser.

Maybe it was the bad hair during her wedding that made her realize she couldn't leave things to chance.

She still had her hair blown out twice a day though.


----------



## Jayne1

Allisonfaye said:


> Same. At one point, my hair was really long and thick. They told me if my hair was any longer, they would have refused to spend the time rolling up the rods because it took so long. When I was done, I looked like Rosanne Rosannadanna. lol. That was my last perm.


Rosanne Rosannadanna -  awww, RIP. 

Sorry, that was off topic...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was on Twitter preparing a lengthy thread that needs to go up in the morning when this popped up in my timeline. So now Jason is the bad guy.




Someone in that bubble also claimed the BRF is lawyering up because Meghan has dirt on William and Kate. Meghan has nothing but made-up stories if you ask me, so I actually hope she challenges them so everyone can see her craziness.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm not trying to be mean or patronizing but why would your 11-year-old self want a perm at such a young age and did your parents try to stop you at all?  When I was 11, all I could get at a salon was a haircut. No more, no less


Because I was dumb!   Every single one of my friends was getting them and wearing them with Madonna hair bands (even worse, right!?) I begged and begged and begged for over a year. My parents usually never gave in, but I asked for it as my one and only birthday gift. I guess my mother figured might as well, it'll grow out at some point and I'd learn my lesson. She was right.


----------



## Chanbal

This article gives the impression that H has been brainwashed, this is sad!   



PRINCE Harry is "a shadow of himself" after moving to the US with Meghan Markle, his royal biographer has claimed.

Angela Levin, author of Harry: Conversations with the Prince, says she has witnessed a "shift in energy" in the Duke of Sussex, who now appears to "prioritise" his wife's happiness at all costs.


Writing in the Telegraph, the royal biographer compared Harry and Meghan's relationship to that of Prince William and Kate Middleton's.

She noted that last week, William went along to one of Kate's solo engagements to protect her from difficult questions around Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview.

But Meghan is the leader in her relationship with Harry, Ms Levin suggested.

"William went along to protect her from questions over Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey, and the resulting accusations of racism in the royal family – which he furiously dismissed," she wrote.

"Meghan, however – an actress who has spent her life seeking the limelight – likes to lead.

*'SHADOW OF HIMSELF'*

"And it seems Harry’s priority is to make her happy, even when it affects his close family. She has also apparently given Harry something of a makeover, encouraging him to stop smoking and to meditate and practise yoga."

She added: "He used to have an awesome way of giving hope and confidence to those who had been physically and psychologically damaged, but I have witnessed a shift in this energy.

"Nowadays, he seems to use it to almost lecture others on how to live their lives, and take the moral high ground.

"He has looked a shadow of himself these past few months.

"He has left his country, family, friends and military connections to set up life in Santa Barbara – where he and Meghan are raising their one-year-old son Archie, rescuing battery hens, making deals with Netflix and Spotify, and awaiting the birth of their daughter."
...
Angela Levin said the revelations were "heartbreaking to hear," especially when Harry "was the charismatic, intuitive man who encouraged those with mental health issues to seek help".

But she suggested the Duke has now lost his voice too.

Speaking of the Oprah interview, she wrote: "When [Harry] occasionally tried to add a comment to the conversation with Oprah, [Meghan] often tapped him on the hand and he immediately stopped. She also noticeably talked over him.

*"What he did say was that he believed that his father and brother were “trapped” within the monarchy, adding: 'I was trapped and didn’t know it until Meghan told me.'"*










						Harry biographer claims he is 'shadow of himself' after move to US with Meg
					

PRINCE Harry is “a shadow of himself” after moving to the US with Meghan Markle, his royal biographer has claimed. Angela Levin, author of Harry: Conversations with the Prince, says she…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Speaking of the Oprah interview, she wrote: "When [Harry] occasionally tried to add a comment to the conversation with Oprah, [Meghan] often tapped him on the hand and he immediately stopped. She also noticeably talked over him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This article gives the impression that H has been brainwashed, this is sad!
> 
> a "shift in energy" in the Duke of Sussex, who now appears to "prioritise" his wife's happiness at all costs.
> 
> ========
> 
> Definitely a ‘downs$$ift  in energy’.   Once the $$$ rolls in, watch him up-shift


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Same. At one point, my hair was really long and thick. They told me if my hair was any longer, they would have refused to spend the time rolling up the rods because it took so long. When I was done, *I looked like Rosanne Rosannadanna*. lol. That was my last perm.


LOLOL!  I met my husband in school and I would painstakingly wash and straighten my hair every single day back then, until finals hit and I said screw it, I'm just letting it air dry, he's bound to find out at some point.  He came over to study and was shocked when I opened the door with crazy, curly hair.  I finally asked him what he was staring at and he says, "You have curly hair!".  I said yes, I know.  He then says no offense, it looks like Rosannadannadanna.  I had to look her up.   He was correct.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> What would her nickname be?


Groundspass


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> the Catholic church used to strongly urge parishioners to get their kids to be priests or nuns.  IDK if that's still true.  Maybe if there are practicing Catholics here they can weigh in.


Gosh this must have been 300 years ago.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Gosh this must have been 300 years ago.



I live next to the school of a Catholic branch that until recently was brandished as sect and excommunicated (I can't remember the details how and why they all made up), and ever since I read some of their publications I hope intelligence keeps an eye on them   And I say this as someone who went to a Catholic private school.


----------



## pukasonqo

kkfiregirl said:


> She’s so creative! She has something in common with so many brilliant minds; she’s simply inspirational!



Come on, we all know Maya Angelou and Eleanor Roosevelt plagiarised MM!
Cultural appropriation Eleanor Roosevelt stole words of wisdom from a WOC!!!
 (Warning: this post was done w humour and is tongue in cheek)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I knew she liked to "borrow" from other people, but the collage above was quite shocking. Who does that? At this point I'm convinced something in her brain isn't wired correctly.


----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> I get the feeling everything we see now on the O interview, is what William, Kate etc saw right at the start. Of course they were concerned.


This is probably why the BRF wanted MM to continue her career as an actress. This would keep her entertained and out of their way. Though, MM wanted a prime role and she knew that she wouldn't get it as an actress.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  Of course his spin was that "because there wasn't enough to pay for security".     I remember reading her claim that she "Gave up her whole life" to marry him.  She's BS after BS after BS.  And I'm not talking about her Northwestern degree.


She not only stopped her z-list actress career, but got two babies that assure a strong connection to the BRF. I feel sorry for QE to have to deal with this. Poor Will, he tried to convince his brother to wait and know MM a little better before rushing into marriage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case this has not been posted — MO knows how to throw the best shade 
_
“...I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time, because there's nothing more important than family." 
The First Lady Michelle ***** on Harry and Meghan. _


----------



## Chanbal

Breaking news: Piers is currently working from home and MM & JM are officially back together.


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> She wore it natural as a child, the caption says she’s 11.
> View attachment 5023464
> 
> Here’s one at age 4. The kind of cute pic that will be published some day next to her daughter’s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5023487


One of the few pics of her mom smiling.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> He came over to study and was shocked when I opened the door with crazy, curly hair.  I finally asked him what he was staring at and he says, "You have curly hair!".  I said yes, I know.  *He then says no offense, it looks like Rosannadannadanna.  *I had to look her up.   He was correct.



And you still married him after that comment. Now THAT is true love.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Because I was dumb!   Every single one of my friends was getting them and wearing them with Madonna hair bands (even worse, right!?) I begged and begged and begged for over a year. My parents usually never gave in, but I asked for it as my one and only birthday gift. I guess my mother figured might as well, it'll grow out at some point and I'd learn my lesson. She was right.



Bless your heart But hey, it was the 'in' thing to do so I don't blame you.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case this has not been posted — MO knows how to throw the best shade
> 
> _“...I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time, because there's nothing more important than family."
> The First Lady Michelle ***** on Harry and Meghan. _


I loved how she didn't praise MM for ANYTHING and was basically impartial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> *Bless your heart *But hey, it was the 'in' thing to do so I don't blame you.


You're not from the South are you?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> And you still married him after that comment. Now THAT is true love.


Haha, yes.  It'll be 21 years in May!


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> You're not from the South are you?



Definitely not. I'm from across the ocean but moved to the South thanks to my marriage


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Definitely not. I'm from across the ocean but moved to the South thanks to my marriage


Ooooh, nice!  I hope you felt more welcome in the South and that your voice was more heard than Meg did!


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> Definitely not. I'm from across the ocean but moved to the South thanks to my marriage



I love southern aphorisms! To keep it on topic a little, here are two that I think can apply to JCMH: '_he only has one oar in the water_' and '_his cornbread ain't done in the middle_.' What are some of your favorites?


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Ooooh, nice!  I hope you felt more welcome in the South and that your voice was more heard than Meg did!



I may be from Southeast Asia but oddly enough, I've assimilated just fine unlike our royal acquaintance  I take it the Southerners hear me well enough considering I haven't had the need to cry racism 

I greatly appreciate you asking and thank you for being so welcoming


----------



## mdcx

H is a sandwich short of a picnic. And madder than a cut snake.


----------



## shiba

So, he says he was cut of - didn't we have a huge discussion oh, about a year ago, when they decided they wanted to be independent on the irony of how they would only be losing the pay that came from their official duties which equaled about 1% of income loss.

She says she never looked him up - note the specific language. She didn't need to because she already knew who he was.

I believe this interview was intended to give credibility to their foundation = agenda

Do I believe she was being watched at the palace and listened to - absolutely. Harry should have known this protocol as his naked Vegas escapade was leaked because he wasn't careful with the cell phones of guests. And I think they will sell "access" to the inner workings of the palace and pictures.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> I love southern aphorisms! To keep it on topic a little, here are two that I think can apply to JCMH: '_he only has one oar in the water_' and '_his cornbread ain't done in the middle_.' What are some of your favorites?



On Cringe:
'(S)he thinks the sun comes up just to hear him (her) crow' 

On Cringe Part 2:
'She was madder than a wet hen'


----------



## poopsie

kkfiregirl said:


> I love southern aphorisms! To keep it on topic a little, here are two that I think can apply to JCMH: '_he only has one oar in the water_' and '_his cornbread ain't done in the middle_.' What are some of your favorites?



y'all fixin to keep this strictly southern? If not, let's just say that they're all hat and no cattle


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> On Cringe:
> '(S)he thinks the sun comes up just to hear him (her) crow'
> 
> On Cringe Part 2:
> 'She was madder than a wet hen'


I don’t think this is Southern, but as far as Harry’s intelligence, I like “The lights are on, but nobody’s home”


----------



## EverSoElusive

shiba said:


> So, he says he was cut of - didn't we have a huge discussion oh, about a year ago, when they decided they wanted to be independent on the irony of how they would only be losing the pay that came from their official duties which equaled about 1% of income loss.
> 
> She says she never looked him up - note the specific language. She didn't need to because she already knew who he was.
> 
> I believe *this interview was intended to give credibility to their foundation = agenda*
> 
> Do I believe she was being watched at the palace and listened to - absolutely. Harry should have known this protocol as his naked Vegas escapade was leaked because he wasn't careful with the cell phones of guests. And I think they will sell "access" to the inner workings of the palace and pictures.



With all the lies they told in this interview, I personally wouldn't have found them or their foundation to be credible. This interview is mainly for them to stay in the news cycle and stay "relevant".

If sponsors, partners and employers are better at character judging, they should stay away from these two, with or without a ten foot pole    They are worse than STDs!


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> I don’t think this is Southern, but as far as Harry’s intelligence, I like “The lights are on, but nobody’s home”



Let me go learn some more from my husband but I highly suspect it may be a case of the blind leading the blind because he is from the East coast    I think I'm more Southern than him  I'm hardly the Asian lady who moved here 3.5 years ago. Lord, help us all!


----------



## csshopper

A friend unleashed this one about Harry following the Interview:

          “useless as tits on a boar hog”


----------



## Aimee3

Didn’t Harry propose marriage to both Cressida and Chelsea and they both refused because neither of these women wanted the royal life?  So if Harry “always” wanted out of the royal family why didn’t he leave back then with one of these women who also didn’t want it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

poopsie said:


> y'all fixin to keep this strictly southern? If not, let's just say that they're all hat and no cattle


Or the UK version - "All fur coat and no knickers".


----------



## mdcx

Aimee3 said:


> Didn’t Harry propose marriage to both Cressida and Chelsea and they both refused because neither of these women wanted the royal life?  So if Harry “always” wanted out of the royal family why didn’t he leave back then with one of these women who also didn’t want it?


Chelsea and Cressida are both from aristo families. They wouldn't dream of marrying into the BRF then doing a bunk.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Aimee3 said:


> *So if Harry “always” wanted out of the royal family why didn’t he leave back then with one of these women who also didn’t want it?*



They were not interested in adopting a man-child.


----------



## floatinglili

csshopper said:


> A friend unleashed this one about Harry following the Interview:
> 
> “useless as tits on a boar hog”





mdcx said:


> Or the UK version - "All fur coat and no knickers".


Useless as pockets in underpants !


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I loved how she didn't praise MM for ANYTHING and was basically impartial.


Not that impartial imo. First, she explains that public service is not 'about us', but about the people 'we serve'. A lesson that MM failed. Then she mentions that this is a family. Families don't wash their dirty linen in public and MM threw H's entire family under the bus. The Ob***s favor an inclusive attitude, while MM is inflammatory and divisive, so they are in opposite directions imo.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Didn’t Harry propose marriage to both Cressida and Chelsea and they both refused because neither of these women wanted the royal life?  So if Harry “always” wanted out of the royal family why didn’t he leave back then with one of these women who also didn’t want it?



It would never have occurred to them. Neither of them was so self-important as to expect him to give up everything he was for her.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Didn’t Harry propose marriage to both Cressida and Chelsea and they both refused because neither of these women wanted the royal life?  So if Harry “always” wanted out of the royal family why didn’t he leave back then with one of these women who also didn’t want it?


This is a great question, but I don't think H ever thought seriously about leaving the royal life. MM in her pursuit for a celebrity lifestyle forced the situation. MM was the one that told him that he was trapped.


----------



## Chanbal

Was it lost in translation?


----------



## zinacef

EverSoElusive said:


> I may be from Southeast Asia but oddly enough, I've assimilated just fine unlike our royal acquaintance  I take it the Southerners hear me well enough considering I haven't had the need to cry racism
> 
> I greatly appreciate you asking and thank you for being so welcoming


Me too, 25 years plus in the south!


----------



## floatinglili

mdcx said:


> Chelsea and Cressida are both from aristo families. They wouldn't dream of marrying into the BRF then doing a bunk.


Interesting.. it’s a question of character ultimately isn’t it. A lot of middle or working class people would never dream of cutting and running either.
ETA the cultural difference and political perspective from hailing from LA is the decider probably. She really came from such a different cultural and political background and couldn’t or wouldn’t embrace the new perspective. If anything she really seems to have dug in.


----------



## shiba

EverSoElusive said:


> With all the lies they told in this interview, I personally wouldn't have found them or their foundation to be credible. This interview is mainly for them to stay in the news cycle and stay "relevant".



Agreed, but without knowing the lies, people are somewhat sympathetic. 
Credibility in the sense that people would think this foundation is a great place to donate because its founders understand the hardships of common folk, their "street cred". *eyeroll* I think there was an agenda to create a springboard to encourage large donations.


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> They were not interested in adopting a man-child.


I just noticed your profile picture, it's hilarious!!!


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> I just noticed your profile picture, it's hilarious!!!



Thank you!


----------



## EverSoElusive

shiba said:


> Agreed, but without knowing the lies, people are somewhat sympathetic.
> Credibility in the sense that people would think this foundation is a great place to donate because its founders understand the hardships of common folk, their "street cred". *eyeroll* I think there was an agenda to create a springboard to encourage large donations.



It is actually quite unfortunate that there are many people out there who believe them completely. I agree RE: their "street cred"


----------



## purseinsanity

floatinglili said:


> *Useless as pockets in underpants* !


Actually, those might be handy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Was it lost in translation?
> 
> View attachment 5023898


Yes.  English English is waaaay harder to understand than American English.  For example, "Not legitimate" in the Queen's English is actually quite ambiguous in American English, and therefore the confusion is understandable.


----------



## purseinsanity

shiba said:


> Agreed, but without knowing the lies, people are somewhat sympathetic.
> Credibility in the sense that people would think this foundation is a great place to donate because its founders understand the hardships of common folk,* their "street cred".* *eyeroll* I think there was an agenda to create a springboard to encourage large donations.





"Harry" and "Street Cred" in the same phrase is an oxymoron.  I don't know how much street cred Meg has from allegedly hanging out at her mother's house in "South Central" one weekend either.


----------



## needlv

So it seems the USA constitution would prevent MM with her Duchess title from running to be a president... Article 1, section 9 clause 8.  So even though i think this particular rumour is false - she couldn’t run without giving up that title which she holds on so tightly to...









						Clause VIII
					






					www.law.cornell.edu


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> "When [Harry] occasionally tried to add a comment to the conversation with Oprah, [Meghan] often tapped him on the hand and he immediately stopped. She also noticeably talked over him..... adding: 'I was trapped and didn’t know it until Meghan told me.'"


Aaaand.... BOOM!


----------



## Sharont2305

creme fraiche said:


> I could not bring myself to watch the interview as I knew it would be a hatchet job and full of distortions.  I even avoided the news for 3 days as my well being would have been negatively impacted by the ubiquitous rehashing of the frankly unimportant and fictitious narrative these three are trying to sell the world.  The number of people buying their sob story really was making me question my sanity - are we really living in a world where character, dignity, selflessness, integrity and community mindedness mean so little?  Where truth is less important that perceived truths (which don’t even need to be true!)?  I have never felt so old, and I feel positively geriatric at the age of 50!
> 
> The sanest assessment I have seen of the impact of this interview is very sobering.  It is by Andrew Neil (what i would pay for these 2, most aptly nicknamed Cash & Carry, to be subjected to one of his interviews!).  Looks like these 2 will be annoying me for many years.



I do like Andrew Neil, he says it as it is. I don't want to bring politics into this but during our last General Election when all the leaders of the various political parties were doing the rounds of being interviewed by people, the only one who didn't appear on Andrews programme was BoJo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Was it lost in translation?
> 
> View attachment 5023898



I mean, come on now. Not sure why they think painting her as basically intellectually disabled will do her a favour.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Even us norms can get royal etiquette lessons.




Unfortunately for M, you can't teach class


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I like Faith.
> 
> Or better yet, "Groundswell Compassion Markle Windsor Mountbatten".  Has quite a ring to it, don't you think?





gracekelly said:


> You mean like....Truth?



I think Hope is better for these 2, coz they haven't got a hope (of being happy)


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> I think Hope is better for these 2, coz they haven't got a hope (of being happy)


What about Happy? Happy Harkle


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> What about Happy? Happy Harkle



Or Merry, Merry Windsor









						Royal Shakespeare Company | RSC
					

We perform plays by Shakespeare, his contemporaries and by today’s writers in Stratford-upon-Avon, London and on tour.




					www.rsc.org.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I knew Michelle wouldn't disappoint. Because there are several celebs I can never view the same after how they threw themselves into Meghan as their new cause. And yes, that includes Hillary.


Not saying anything about her politics but Hilary has always been a late to the trendy bandwagon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh this body language video gives me more insight into the interview than I ever wanted...is she sitting there complaining the BRF made her think about if she could fit in? While I still think they were extremely welcoming, wouldn't that be the responsible thing to do? And very obviously she didn't think about it hard enough, she was only focussed on her prey.


Yes listening to what they said with such close attention when he said there were conversations about her and the possible kids before they were married I started wondering if this was the “you are moving too fast. You don’t know her” Conversations  he  had with Will according to FF. wThen MM then told him they were them being dismissive of her because of her race & planted the ‘we will never fit in’ seed.

I don’t know obviously but when someone won’t name the perpetrator or what was actually said and when; I don’t think they are really saying much at all.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> Or Merry, Merry Windsor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Shakespeare Company | RSC
> 
> 
> We perform plays by Shakespeare, his contemporaries and by today’s writers in Stratford-upon-Avon, London and on tour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rsc.org.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5024004




Happy could have a Disney tie-in though.............Grumpy and Dopey would like to announce the birth of their daughter Happy.


----------



## jelliedfeels

yuliachanel said:


> View attachment 5023580
> 
> View attachment 5023581
> 
> View attachment 5023582
> 
> View attachment 5023583
> 
> View attachment 5023585
> 
> View attachment 5023586
> 
> View attachment 5023587


Lol you can always tell when she’s paraphrasing someone because it doesn’t sound completely garbled.
TBF some of them are clearly just quotes. I suppose it’s better manners to attribute them but I don’t really know. 
The thing that really gets me is the shady picture choices of her.


----------



## byzina

From people.com

*Michelle ***** Weighs in on Meghan Markle’s Interview: ‘I Just Pray That There Is Forgiveness’*
“There’s nothing more important than family,” the former first lady said

Michelle ***** is sharing her thoughts about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey last week.
The former first lady was asked for her thoughts on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's headline-making interview last week during her own recent sit-down with _Access Hollywood_.
"My hope is that, when I think about what they're going through, I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time," Mrs. *****, 57, said. "Because there's nothing more important than family."
Markle, 39, and Harry, 36, opened up about their time as senior royals during their interview last week with Winfrey, 67.

Among the revelations, Duchess of Sussex said there were "concerns and conversations about how dark [her son Archie's] skin might be when he's born."


I have to say that I absolutely love Michelle!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

mdcx said:


> My goodness, could we never hear another "you're just jealous of Meghan" comment like ever, because what I saw in those clips from Oprah was not at all envy inducing. Both are very messy. They are the family members you have to have super strong boundaries with, and avoid unless absolutely necessary.
> Meghan's smug "see, I told you I was victimized by the BRF!" smirks and stares at Oprah were very unsettling.


yeah I find it all a bit sexist. You’d hardly ever find people saying these men are criticising a man because they are jealous of his good looks.
But immediately the obvious reason women dislike a woman is because they are hideous hags & she is so pretty (which is so important in a woman).

Also which of her faces is meant to be so pretty anyway?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Gosh this must have been 300 years ago.


Delete if OT.

I know a lot of practising Catholics. The thing that seems to be in now is joining a lay order. Lots of becoming carmelites & stuff but lay not nuns.

I think the Catholic Church has kind of given up on Europe for their recruitment drive. They know the Americas are the future.



Aimee3 said:


> Didn’t Harry propose marriage to both Cressida and Chelsea and they both refused because neither of these women wanted the royal life?  So if Harry “always” wanted out of the royal family why didn’t he leave back then with one of these women who also didn’t want it?


ding ding ding - that’s a very good point!


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Delete if OT.
> 
> I know a lot of practising Catholics. The thing that seems to be in now is joining a lay order. Lots of becoming carmelites & stuff but lay not nuns.
> 
> I think the Catholic Church has kind of given up on Europe for their recruitment drive. They know the Americas are the future.
> 
> 
> ding ding ding - that’s a very good point!


Agreed, they also gave up on the US.
The priests in our parish are Asian.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Gosh this must have been 300 years ago.


Delete if OT.

I know a lot of practising Catholics. The thing that seems to be in now is joining a lay order. Lots of becoming carmelites & stuff but lay not nuns.

I think the Catholic Church has kind of given up on Europe for their recruitment drive. They know the Americas & Africa are the future.



mdcx said:


> Chelsea and Cressida are both from aristo families. They wouldn't dream of marrying into the BRF then doing a bunk.


I think they could’ve faded into the background without formally leaving.
Thing is Harry couldn’t stand to play second fiddle to Will like Anne does to Charles.
What MM gives him is a cause where he can be, in fact, superior to Will. He loved being mr ‘politically incorrect’ before when it got him attention but now he’s super aware of micro aggressions?
 I don’t buy it.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Delete if OT.
> 
> I know a lot of practising Catholics. The thing that seems to be in now is joining a lay order. Lots of becoming carmelites & stuff but lay not nuns.
> 
> I think the Catholic Church has kind of given up on Europe for their recruitment drive. They know the Americas & Africa are the future.
> 
> 
> I think they could’ve faded into the background without formally leaving.
> Thing is Harry couldn’t stand to play second fiddle to Will like Anne does to Charles.
> What MM gives him is a cause where he can be, in fact, superior to Will. He loved being mr ‘politically incorrect’ before when it got him attention but now he’s super aware of micro aggressions?
> I don’t buy it.


How could they fade in the background and maintain a paycheck?
Regarding the fact that the Royals offered for Meaghan to work. It was actually very kind and modern from the Firm.
He interpreted as an affront when It was in actuality a way to keep MM happy and fulfilled.
He is so limited because of his anger. He cant think straight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> How could they fade in the background and maintain a paycheck?



Both Chelsea and Cressida are not too posh to work, though I admit they could not have made the cash Harry is used to. He could have been sent to an outpost in Africa or something (I think the Queen offered and the troublesome two refused?) and I've said before, I'm sure Charles would have bought him a farm to breed polo ponies or whatever to set him up if that had been what he really wanted and it had kept him stable and healthy. Also, he might even have quietly funded them had they just faded a little into the background instead of kicking everyone in the shins in the process.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> How could they fade in the background and maintain a paycheck?
> Regarding the fact that the Royals offered for Meaghan to work. It was actually very kind and modern from the Firm.
> He interpreted as an affront when It was in actuality a way to keep MM happy and fulfilled.
> He is so limited because of his anger. He cant think straight.



Yes follow the money! They would have had a good allowance and a house like the other minor royals but not 10k kaftan allowance 
“I needed to get everything Will gets or it’s because they are racists to my wife.”

I agree she’d have been happier acting & getting that attention but let’s be honest, she wouldn’t have got the parts she wanted. She’s :
A) not going to compete with the land of RSC and RADA
B) all our bad but posh actors ship out to LA anyway (cough Eddie redmayne)
C) at an awkward age for an actress primarily selling on her looks.
D) not willing to do character or cameo work. Only heroine roles are worthy of her great dignity  

Add on: ironically I think the U.K. is far less ageist to actresses than the US. 
both Joanna lumley and Helen mirren started with ‘babe’ roles but they only really became stars in middle age when they switched to comic and character roles respectively. But they have the talent I guess. 

sorry for repeats for some reason my page keeps reloading


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> B) all our bad but posh actors ship out to LA anyway (cough Eddie redmayne)



What, I love Eddie!


----------



## limom

^^
Sorry but your weather sucks. Cant blame anyone for leaving rainy London for sunny LA


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What, I love Eddie!


Aw sorry it’s just my opinion. I do think he’s good-looking & he’s done really well for himself.


----------



## chicinthecity777

*ITV edit “seriously inaccurate and misleading” section of Markle interview*









						ITV edit "seriously inaccurate and misleading" section of Markle interview
					

The British broadcaster of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s cushy interview with ultra-rich American celeb Oprah Winfrey, ITV, has promised to remove a number of manipulated headlines from the broadcast which alleged to show racism in the British press. The decision follows a complaint made to...




					foxhole.news


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Philip, 99, leaves hospital two weeks after heart surgery
					

Prince Philip, the nation's longest-serving consort, spent 28 nights as a patient in London at King Edward VII's Hospital and St Bartholomew's Hospital - his longest ever stay.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Prince Philip, 99, WALKS out of hospital two weeks after heart surgery: Duke is helped to car as he ends month-long stint under care of specialist cardiac doctors


----------



## chicinthecity777

I think this has already been posted but I can't find it now as this thread moves so fast:

  

Freddy: Harry and Meghan have established themselves as a of house of Woke, really. ... their world view is very much oriented around *celebrity*, and *therapy really*. ... if you watch Oprah interview, it's like a *long counselling session*. This is actually very potent in the media because people *love talking about their feelings*. And I think where Harry and Meghan got this idea from, was the Heads Together campaign ... the younger royals launched in 2017, when they decided mental health was a big drive. A lot sort of royal people, royal suck-ups, PR operatives, got very excited about this idea that younger royals could re-brand themselves ... talking about their feelings, and *how much they suffered*. But I think other people within the royal family realised that it was quite a bad idea because people don't want to hear royals gassing about their feelings. So William and Kate sort of pulled back a bit from that. But Harry and Meghan *came to them very naturally and couldn't stop themselves*... So they become this sort of rival house of therapeutic woke culture. ...


----------



## limom

When they go low, we go high, except for the nice diplomatic shade


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now that the Iron Duke is out of hospital, suddenly the world feels like it is returning to normal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Best news


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now that the Iron Duke is out of hospital, suddenly the world feels like it is returning to normal.


 Let’s hope Phillip let’s rip


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice how his car gleams.  Only the best.


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think this has already been posted but I can't find it now as this thread moves so fast:
> 
> 
> 
> Freddy: Harry and Meghan have established themselves as a of house of Woke, really. ... their world view is very much oriented around *celebrity*, and *therapy really*. ... if you watch Oprah interview, it's like a *long counselling session*. This is actually very potent in the media because people *love talking about their feelings*. And I think where Harry and Meghan got this idea from, was the Heads Together campaign ... the younger royals launched in 2017, when they decided mental health was a big drive. A lot sort of royal people, royal suck-ups, PR operatives, got very excited about this idea that younger royals could re-brand themselves ... talking about their feelings, and *how much they suffered*. But I think other people within the royal family realised that it was quite a bad idea because people don't want to hear royals gassing about their feelings. So William and Kate sort of pulled back a bit from that. But Harry and Meghan *came to them very naturally and couldn't stop themselves*... So they become this sort of rival house of therapeutic woke culture. ...



Yes it’s not bad but I can’t stand rod Liddle. How that dim bulb ever got anywhere is beyond me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Philip, 99, WALKS out of hospital two weeks after heart surgery: Duke is helped to car as he ends month-long stint under care of specialist cardiac doctors



This man is  apparently indestructible. Maybe he's immortal, too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Freddy: Harry and Meghan have established themselves as a of house of Woke, really. ... their world view is very much oriented around *celebrity*, and *therapy really*. ... if you watch Oprah interview, it's like a *long counselling session*.



Retail therapy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> When they go low, we go high, except for the nice diplomatic shade




I feel Jenna wanted to push Michelle in a certain direction the way she asked the initial question but Michelle wasn't having any of it. Also, reading between the lines I don't think she's impressed with the troublesome two. Service is not about themselves, Meghan has _feelings _about racism, and family above all


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel Jenna wanted to push Michelle in a certain direction the way she asked the initial question but Michelle wasn't having any of it. Also, reading between the lines I don't think she's impressed with the troublesome two. Service is not about themselves, Meghan has _feelings _about racism, and family above all


Michelle us such a class act. She managed to be outspoken without being mean.


----------



## rose60610

When Michelle said "I hope there is forgiveness" , was she talking about M&H "forgiving"" the BRF or the BFR forgiving M&H? That was a good way of being intentionally vague.


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> When Michelle said "I hope there is forgiveness" , was she talking about M&H "forgiving"" the BRF or the BFR forgiving M&H? That was a good way of being intentionally vague.


How about both?


----------



## rose60610

limom said:


> How about both?



"Both" implies M&H were at fault to some extent. Their stans wouldn't believe it. Oprah also needs M's image to be saintly to lend credence to her nauseating interview.


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> "Both" implies M&H were at fault to some extent. Their stans wouldn't believe it. Oprah also needs M's image to be saintly to lend credence to her nauseating interview.


Oprah is not stupid, she knows that they are entitled twerps. However, it would be in bad form to kick someone publicly when they are down. (especially someone with a business relationship)


----------



## chicinthecity777

rose60610 said:


> When Michelle said "I hope there is forgiveness" , was she talking about M&H "forgiving"" the BRF or the BFR forgiving M&H? That was a good way of being intentionally vague.


I think she chose her words very carefully and that's why her answer quite brilliant. I think she's secretively quite fond of The Queen but don't want to come out directly against MM given the current narrative.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> Michelle us such a class act. She managed to be outspoken without being mean.



Lesson for M, it's not just having a voice/being heard for the sake of it, it's what's being said that matters.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaaa are they playing at?











						Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
					

PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



Ms King, who attended Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, claimed Prince Harry also had a conversation with his father Prince Charles. 

Appearing on CBS This Morning, she said: "I am not trying to break news but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling and it's true, Harry has talked to his brother and his father too.

"The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive."

However, she added, the royals "are glad they at least started a conversation." 

Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.

"And until you can't acknowledge that I think it's going to be difficult to move forward, but they both want to move forward with this and they both want healing in this family, at the end of the day this is Harry's family."
More...








						Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
					

PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe MM and Oprah are secretly soulmates.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.



The delusion is strong with these people. I still don't get why a seasoned journalist would do this.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL!  I met my husband in school and I would painstakingly wash and straighten my hair every single day back then, until finals hit and I said screw it, I'm just letting it air dry, he's bound to find out at some point.  He came over to study and was shocked when I opened the door with crazy, curly hair.  I finally asked him what he was staring at and he says, "You have curly hair!".  I said yes, I know.  He then says no offense, it looks like Rosannadannadanna.  I had to look her up.   He was correct.


well, this is gonna age me but way back in the day when there weren't diffusers and gel and all the other specialized products my hair could look like that too...but now I wear it curly and it's my biggest asset.   admittedly climate can play a role too.  where I live it's not usually humid.
maybe you should try going natural again


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The delusion is strong with these people. I still don't get why a seasoned journalist would do this.



Being seasoned and experienced doesn't mean having scruples. They presented the story the way they wanted it to be seen. Showing both sides was never going to happen.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> So it seems the USA constitution would prevent MM with her Duchess title from running to be a president... Article 1, section 9 clause 8.  So even though i think this particular rumour is false - she couldn’t run without giving up that title which she holds on so tightly to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clause VIII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.law.cornell.edu


That's reassuring.  Assuming people still even follow the US Constitution.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> yeah I find it all a bit sexist. You’d hardly ever find people saying these men are criticising a man because they are jealous of his good looks.
> But immediately the obvious reason women dislike a woman is because they are hideous hags & she is so pretty (which is so important in a woman).
> 
> Also which of her faces is meant to be so pretty anyway?


Back to the Game of Thrones.  Many faces.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> They were not interested in adopting a man-child.


LOL at your new avatar


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> *ITV edit “seriously inaccurate and misleading” section of Markle interview*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ITV edit "seriously inaccurate and misleading" section of Markle interview
> 
> 
> The British broadcaster of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s cushy interview with ultra-rich American celeb Oprah Winfrey, ITV, has promised to remove a number of manipulated headlines from the broadcast which alleged to show racism in the British press. The decision follows a complaint made to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> foxhole.news


Too little, too late.


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> When they go low, we go high, except for the nice diplomatic shade



But, but, I thought her and Michelle were BFFs?!!?  How DARE Michelle say such a thing.  Watch out, Michelle, you're about to get Markled!


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> well, this is gonna age me but way back in the day when there weren't diffusers and gel and all the other specializedproducts my hair could look like that too...but now I wear it curly and it's my biggest asset.   admittedly climate can play a role too.  where I live it's not usually humid.
> maybe you should try going natural again


Seeing as we are back on the topic of curly hair, and referring back to earlier posts, my 16yo daughter has thick waist length curly hair that twists into natural dreadlock style ropes if she leaves it be. I was surprised to read recently in social media comments arguing that white people wearing dreadlocks deserved to be publicly abused (for cultural theft of a hairstyle). My daughter’s hair would naturally be that way within a matter of days if she let it matte. 
She has whole systems for both straightening and also for managing the curl if she chooses to have curls between washes. Her hair is gorgeous but it does seem like a lot of work.
Her colouring is fair - hair was reddish blonde as a child (growing darker post puberty to chestnut), her skin very very fair and will throw a red freckle. Eyes greyish blue. Some of the most magnificent cork screw curls I have ever seen have been from red headed girls I knew in school.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe Gayle is the new Omid.


----------



## floatinglili

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t believe Gayle is the new Omid.


Must be bank in it.


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> Oprah is not stupid, she knows that they are entitled twerps. However, *it would be in bad form to kick someone publicly when they are down*. (especially someone with a business relationship)


Absolutely, but she didn't need to promote their nonsense either!


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Agreed, they also gave up on the US.
> The priests in our parish are Asian.


probably Filipino?
OT but I worked at a medical group and almost all the general practitioners who were recruited were from other countries.  Americans want to be specialists for the money


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> probably Filipino?


Yes Catholic priests hailing from the Phillipines are an important part of Australia’s church community as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> But, but, I thought her and Michelle were BFFs?!!?  How DARE Michelle say such a thing.  Watch out, Michelle, you're about to get Markled!


now that is one person she wouldn't dare mess with


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa are they playing at?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ms King, who attended Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, claimed Prince Harry also had a conversation with his father Prince Charles.
> 
> Appearing on CBS This Morning, she said: "I am not trying to break news but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling and it's true, Harry has talked to his brother and his father too.
> 
> "The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive."
> 
> However, she added, the royals "are glad they at least started a conversation."
> 
> Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.
> 
> "And until you can't acknowledge that I think it's going to be difficult to move forward, but they both want to move forward with this and they both want healing in this family, at the end of the day this is Harry's family."
> More...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Is Gayle King branching into a psychic segment on her show? How the heck is she supposed to know what’s going to happen with the family and what everyone feels?

also it’s frustrating for them to see there’s a ‘racial conversation’ that they started with their accusations in the interview? riiiiggghhht.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa are they playing at?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ms King, who attended Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, claimed Prince Harry also had a conversation with his father Prince Charles.
> 
> Appearing on CBS This Morning, she said: "I am not trying to break news but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling and it's true, Harry has talked to his brother and his father too.
> 
> "The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive."
> 
> However, she added, the royals "are glad they at least started a conversation."
> 
> Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.
> 
> "And until you can't acknowledge that I think it's going to be difficult to move forward, but they both want to move forward with this and they both want healing in this family, at the end of the day this is Harry's family."
> More...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



What the actual F?  I have completely lost any respect for Gayle now too.  I haven't heard any new "disparaging stories" out of the Palace.  MM and JCMH keep talking about it.  STFU already.  OMG, I can't with these two.  They're like the most annoying, irritating, destructive child that I'd actually consider dropping off at a fire station!


----------



## chicinthecity777

purseinsanity said:


> Too little, too late.


Oh don't worry, ITV was not doing well before the stupid interview and they are doing worse afterwards!


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Is Gayle King branching into a psychic segment on her show? How the heck is she supposed to know what’s going to happen with the family and what everyone feels?
> 
> also it’s frustrating for them to see there’s a ‘racial conversation’ that they started with their accusations in the interview? riiiiggghhht.


I guess Gayle isn't concerned about her own credibility....just Meghan's


----------



## artax two

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm not trying to be mean or patronizing but why would your 11-year-old self want a perm at such a young age and did your parents try to stop you at all?  When I was 11, all I could get at a salon was a haircut. No more, no less


My whole family was into perms when I was 11. My cousins taught themselves how to do it and then permed all the ladies' hair on that side of the family. Including me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe the titles have been removed?










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle drop royal monogram for Archewell logo
					

The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, were met with criticism last year after they continued to use their official cypher, which features a crown, despite having stepped back from royal duty.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> probably Filipino?
> OT but I worked at a medical group and almost all the general practitioners who were recruited were from other countries.  Americans want to be specialists for the money


Actually Vietnamese and the other one looks like Bangladeshi (I am not a church goer, just went there for my son’s obligation)
In France, my family‘s priest is Polish.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The delusion is strong with these people. I still don't get why a seasoned journalist would do this.


No kidding.  It's scary how many people are sheep and literally believe anything.  I was on Instagram reading random posts and fell upon one about how "Bethenny should mind her own business".  The comments were 95% in favor of MM, with people ranting on and on like they know how hard her life was and how Bethenny is privileged and racist.  The 5% that said Bethenny clawed her way to the top and was accurate about a privileged princess whining, were promptly dismissed as "racist", because of course, if you don't agree with the majority, you're automatically whatever they claim to detest.  Mind boggling.


----------



## artax two

floatinglili said:


> Seeing as we are back on the topic of curly hair, and referring back to earlier posts, my 16yo daughter has thick waist length curly hair that twists into natural dreadlock style ropes if she leaves it be. I was surprised to read recently in social media comments arguing that white people wearing dreadlocks deserved to be publicly abused (for cultural theft of a hairstyle). My daughter’s hair would naturally be that way within a matter of days if she let it matte.
> She has whole systems for both straightening and also for managing the curl if she chooses to have curls between washes. Her hair is gorgeous but it does seem like a lot of work.
> Her colouring is fair - hair was reddish blonde as a child (growing darker post puberty to chestnut), her skin very very fair and will throw a red freckle. Eyes greyish blue. Some of the most magnificent cork screw curls I have ever seen have been from red headed girls I knew in school.


I adore natural hair on WOC and was thrilled when I discovered the curly girl method. I adopted the method myself hoping, since I'd been straightening my waves for 20+ years, that maybe I had Julia Roberts curls hiding that I never realized I had. After 4 years of no heat, all natural and CG approved products and application methods, all I realized is that my curly/wavy hair is worse than my straightened hair. No consistent curl pattern, low density. Plus I have to dye grays, so I can never go true CGM anyway. I don't have that effortlessly gorgeous hair, straight or wavy. So I went back to straightening, though I kept a few of the CG concepts and still use more natural products than not.


----------



## floatinglili

I’m glad the monogram has gone. It struck me as ridiculously pretentious, for some reason, a reach from a doodling ‘calligrapher’, to be stuck atop merching websites and online manifestos against the royal family etc. And yes I know the crowned monograms are a tradition for the family - but the Harkles walked didn’t they.

edited *’merching’ not ‘matching’!!


----------



## purseinsanity

artax two said:


> I adore natural hair on WOC and was thrilled when I discovered the curly girl method. I adopted the method myself hoping, since I'd been straightening my waves for 20+ years, that maybe I had Julia Roberts curls hiding that I never realized I had. After 4 years of no heat, all natural and CG approved products and application methods, all I realized is that my curly/wavy hair is worse than my straightened hair. No consistent curl pattern, low density. Plus I have to dye grays, so I can never go true CGM anyway. I don't have that effortlessly gorgeous hair, straight or wavy. So I went back to straightening, though I kept a few of the CG concepts and still use more natural products than not.


LOL, Julia Roberts gave me hope!  Except I didn't have the hairdressers on standby.  My curls look semi nice when soaking wet.  Even with product, as my hair dries, the curls slowly turn into frizz that's not even manageable.  I have very, very thick hair to boot.  My vacation pictures are atrocious, because we somehow manage to go to the most humid places on earth.  Even in a pony tail, you see a halo of frizz on me.  It's just not meant to be.  I did the Japanese straightening and even though a ton of my hair fell out, I plan on doing it again.    I should just shave my head and wear wigs.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> What the actual F?  I have completely lost any respect for Gayle now too.  I haven't heard any new "disparaging stories" out of the Palace.  MM and JCMH keep talking about it.  STFU already.  OMG, I can't with these two.  They're like the most annoying, irritating, destructive child that I'd actually consider dropping off at a fire station!



All I can figure is Oprah and Gayle are in cahoots to make Meghan and Harry successful. Whether they actually believe they are victims or they just want to see if they can do it to make themselves relevant again, I don't know.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe MM and Oprah are secretly soulmates.



Maybe it all started when a man took that portrait- it is not flattering at all!


chicinthecity777 said:


> Oh don't worry, ITV was not doing well before the stupid interview and they are doing worse afterwards!


yeah they are total idiots for buying such an expensive turkey. I’m general, their successes have been low budget and they should’ve realised something was up when the bbc wouldn’t pay for it. 

Know your brand ITV! 
The only self-described queen I want to see on your channel is Paul O’Grady.


----------



## rose60610

Wait, Gayle King reported that Harry spoke to his brother and father but the conversation "wasn't productive"? Ha! What were William and Charles supposed to say? "We enjoyed being humiliated with scandals that pits you against us. Since you weren't shy about quitting why were you shy about making the racist claims when they happened with your strong feminist wife? By the way, you wouldn't be worth a single dime without the family you just threw under the bus. No worries, Grandpa is in hospital, we hope  he lives. Can't wait to see you again! We'll provide all the security you need! And maybe you forgot, but Archie automatically gets the Prince title after Grandma is no longer Queen, nice little dig there, ignorant viewers will believe your version."

Oh I can't believe the conversation "wasn't productive".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> Seeing as we are back on the topic of curly hair, and referring back to earlier posts, my 16yo daughter has thick waist length curly hair that twists into natural dreadlock style ropes if she leaves it be. I was surprised to read recently in social media comments arguing that white people wearing dreadlocks deserved to be publicly abused (for cultural theft of a hairstyle). My daughter’s hair would naturally be that way within a matter of days if she let it matte.
> She has whole systems for both straightening and also for managing the curl if she chooses to have curls between washes. Her hair is gorgeous but it does seem like a lot of work.
> Her colouring is fair - hair was reddish blonde as a child (growing darker post puberty to chestnut), her skin very very fair and will throw a red freckle. Eyes greyish blue. Some of the most magnificent cork screw curls I have ever seen have been from red headed girls I knew in school.


your daughter sounds beautiful....I'm glad she doesn't hate her curls as so many do
as far as dreads, that doesn't appeal to me but if WOC can straighten their hair then why would it be wrong for a white woman to have dreads?


----------



## floatinglili

I like the Oprah portrait. I presume it’s one of a series. A portrait of substance.


----------



## sdkitty

artax two said:


> My whole family was into perms when I was 11. My cousins taught themselves how to do it and then permed all the ladies' hair on that side of the family. Including me.


LOL....perms aren't easy.  did they do a good job?


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> your daughter sounds beautiful....I'm glad she doesn't hate her curls as so many do
> as far as dreads, that doesn't appeal to me but if WOC can straighten their hair then why would it be wrong for a white woman to have dreads?


My take home thought is that eurodreads lol must have been extremely common back ‘in the day’


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Wait, Gayle King reported that Harry spoke to his brother and father but the conversation "wasn't productive"? Ha! What were William and Charles supposed to say? "We enjoyed being humiliated with scandals that pits you against us. Since you weren't shy about quitting why were you shy about making the racist claims when they happened with your strong feminist wife? By the way, you wouldn't be worth a single dime without the family you just threw under the bus. No worries, Grandpa is in hospital, we hope  he lives. Can't wait to see you again! We'll provide all the security you need! And maybe you forgot, but Archie automatically gets the Prince title after Grandma is no longer Queen, nice little dig there, ignorant viewers will believe your version."
> 
> Oh I can't believe the conversation "wasn't productive".


BUT at least C & W can now say that they tried ... that is an important milestone ... and H&M cannot deny it if G said so 
The convo is certainly recorded in the BP lawyers records


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe the titles have been removed?
> View attachment 5024348
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle drop royal monogram for Archewell logo
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, were met with criticism last year after they continued to use their official cypher, which features a crown, despite having stepped back from royal duty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So this is what people are giving their money for? New personalised stationary and a patronising letter to each & every good cause they visited once before?

If I was a headteacher & I read that this great mind felt we should ‘take the time to learn about trailblazing women.’ I’d consider writing back with ‘why don’t you take a look at the curriculum, loves, before you share your wisdom? PS I can only express my amazement that the late Princess Diana & you yourself are not yet on it.’


----------



## sdkitty

artax two said:


> I adore natural hair on WOC and was thrilled when I discovered the curly girl method. I adopted the method myself hoping, since I'd been straightening my waves for 20+ years, that maybe I had Julia Roberts curls hiding that I never realized I had. After 4 years of no heat, all natural and CG approved products and application methods, all I realized is that my curly/wavy hair is worse than my straightened hair. No consistent curl pattern, low density. Plus I have to dye grays, so I can never go true CGM anyway. I don't have that effortlessly gorgeous hair, straight or wavy. So I went back to straightening, though I kept a few of the CG concepts and still use more natural products than not.


good for you for trying on your NC hair....four years is a long time.  I guess I'm not true CG either since I dye my hair.  I recently tried a sample of a co-wash product and it seems to give me good curl formation  
So I bought some.  For me I'll alternate between that and shampoo.


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> My take home thought is that eurodreads lol must have been extremely common back ‘in the day’


maybe Way Back - to get that you wouldn't comb or brush your hair, right?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Oh I can't believe the conversation "wasn't productive".



It wasn't productive in that Harry and Meghan didn't get more money handed to them for doing nothing. They didn't get an apology for the upheaval in their lives that they created.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> No kidding.  It's scary how many people are sheep and literally believe anything.  I was on Instagram reading random posts and fell upon one about how "Bethenny should mind her own business".  The comments were 95% in favor of MM, with people ranting on and on like they know how hard her life was and how Bethenny is privileged and racist.  The 5% that said Bethenny clawed her way to the top and was accurate about a privileged princess whining, were promptly dismissed as "racist", because of course, if you don't agree with the majority, you're automatically whatever they claim to detest.  Mind boggling.


While I can see why some people might just be looking for an excuse to b*tch about Bethenny. (She got pretty grating on RHONY IMHO.)

It is true it really is ‘everything is partisan. Pick a side’ with people nowadays though.


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> maybe Way Back - to get that you wouldn't comb or brush your hair, right?


Yeah back before the modern Monarchs and the Harkles  
My husband looks to be a great product of when the romans rolled in to Britain. Lol. He has retained the ‘full’ Roman nose and yes very curly hair.


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> I like the Oprah portrait. I presume it’s one of a series. A portrait of substance.


I think it’s the eyes being closed, it makes me think she’s dead and they are doing one of those creepy Victorian funeral portraits. 

I think she normally looks striking and determined.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Her hair 








						Unseen photos of Wallis Simpson and Edward VIII go up for auction
					

Wallis Simpson is seen smiling with American-born shipbroker Ernest Simpson during a visit to her and Edward VIII's French country home in the 1950s, some 20 years after their 1936 split.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle, Prince Harry reportedly replace royal monogram with new logo*
Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have reportedly replaced their stationery’s royal monogram with their Archewell logo — an apparent nod to the Queen’s decision to prevent the couple from returning to public service.

The Duchess of Sussex penned a letter to a British school to mark International Women’s Day that she sent a day after the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Daily Express reported.

In the letter — which features the stylized A and W in a black oval — Markle recalled visiting students at the Robert Clark School last year when she and Harry returned to the UK to wrap up their royal duties.

“We had a very special delivery this week. It has been lovely to share this letter and advice with the students and remember our International Women’s Day celebrations last year,” the school said on Twitter, where it posted an image of the letter.

Last month, Buckingham Palace confirmed that the erstwhile royals would have to give up their key official patronages and that Harry would have to return his honorary military titles to the crown.

This letter was sent by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to the Robert Clack School, and features their new monogram.Twitter
While the couple have kept their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles, they may not use them in connection with their work going forward, according to the Express.

“It was this time a year ago that I had the pleasure of meeting so many of you during my visit to celebrate International Women’s Day and mark the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act,” Markle wrote in the letter.

“I look back on that day with such fond memories, and think of you all frequently, especially recognising how difficult it’s been for students and families during the past year,” she added.

Asked to explain royal monograms and who may use them, expert Iain MacMarthanne told the Express last year: “Monograms are used by all members of the Royal Family, either an individual letter or, when a couple, both letters intertwined.

“As things presently stand, in the event of Charles becoming king, the Duke of Sussex would continue to be able to use this monogram,” he said.

“However, dependent upon what is subsequently agreed, given the withdrawal of the [Sussexes] from royal duties, this might change. Only time will tell,” MacMarthanne added.









						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry reportedly replace royal monogram with new logo
					

It’s an apparent nod to the Queen’s decision to prevent the couple from returning to public service.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe it all started when a man took that portrait- it is not flattering at all!
> 
> yeah they are total idiots for buying such an expensive turkey. I’m general, their successes have been low budget and they should’ve realised something was up when the bbc wouldn’t pay for it.
> 
> Know your brand ITV!
> The only self-described queen I want to see on your channel is Paul O’Grady.


I wonder what ol Lil would say about this. She should come out of retirement


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry reportedly replace royal monogram with new logo*
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have reportedly replaced their stationery’s royal monogram with their Archewell logo — an apparent nod to the Queen’s decision to prevent the couple from returning to public service.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex penned a letter to a British school to mark International Women’s Day that she sent a day after the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, the Daily Express reported.
> 
> In the letter — which features the stylized A and W in a black oval — Markle recalled visiting students at the Robert Clark School last year when she and Harry returned to the UK to wrap up their royal duties.
> 
> “We had a very special delivery this week. It has been lovely to share this letter and advice with the students and remember our International Women’s Day celebrations last year,” the school said on Twitter, where it posted an image of the letter.
> 
> Last month, Buckingham Palace confirmed that the erstwhile royals would have to give up their key official patronages and that Harry would have to return his honorary military titles to the crown.
> 
> This letter was sent by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to the Robert Clack School, and features their new monogram.Twitter
> While the couple have kept their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles, they may not use them in connection with their work going forward, according to the Express.
> 
> “It was this time a year ago that I had the pleasure of meeting so many of you during my visit to celebrate International Women’s Day and mark the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act,” Markle wrote in the letter.
> 
> “I look back on that day with such fond memories, and think of you all frequently, especially recognising how difficult it’s been for students and families during the past year,” she added.
> 
> Asked to explain royal monograms and who may use them, expert Iain MacMarthanne told the Express last year: “Monograms are used by all members of the Royal Family, either an individual letter or, when a couple, both letters intertwined.
> 
> “As things presently stand, in the event of Charles becoming king, the Duke of Sussex would continue to be able to use this monogram,” he said.
> 
> “However, dependent upon what is subsequently agreed, given the withdrawal of the [Sussexes] from royal duties, this might change. Only time will tell,” MacMarthanne added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry reportedly replace royal monogram with new logo
> 
> 
> It’s an apparent nod to the Queen’s decision to prevent the couple from returning to public service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Sigh.  Every little thing they do is a headline.  I'm waiting for "Meg wiped her a$$ this morning!  Without screaming at her assistant to do so! How woke of her!"


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I think it’s the eyes being closed, it makes me think she’s dead and they are doing one of those creepy Victorian funeral portraits.
> 
> I think she normally looks striking and determined.


for some reason it reminds me of maya angelou


----------



## artax two

sdkitty said:


> LOL....perms aren't easy.  did they do a good job?


they did. we were rockin it like we were rock stars


----------



## artax two

sdkitty said:


> good for you for trying on your NC hair....four years is a long time.  I guess I'm not true CG either since I dye my hair.  I recently tried a sample of a co-wash product and it seems to give me good curl formation
> So I bought some.  For me I'll alternate between that and shampoo.


yeah the co-wash is nice but there has to be some shampoo in there maybe every couple of weeks, at least for me. good luck with your CG journey! i am not sure how far into it you are, if you're just getting started or a veteran, but i kind of let it take over my mind to where there were times i was scared to let almost any regular products even touch my hair! it can start to feel like a prison


----------



## sdkitty

artax two said:


> they did. we were rockin it like we were rock stars


we're getting OT here but one time I was getting my hair done in a salon and there was a woman with beautiful curls....I commented to my hairdressser and she told me that woman had naturally straight and Very coarse hair.  couldn't do anything with it.  she said the owner of the salon was very good at perms and this woman's hair wasn't NC - it was a perm.  impressive


----------



## sdkitty

artax two said:


> yeah the co-wash is nice but there has to be some shampoo in there maybe every couple of weeks, at least for me. good luck with your CG journey! i am not sure how far into it you are, if you're just getting started or a veteran, but i kind of let it take over my mind to where there were times i was scared to let almost any regular products even touch my hair! it can start to feel like a prison


I've been NC for years and I get my hair cut by a Deva trained stylist.  but I'm not super into all the "rules"
I just try too mostly use products with no cones, parabens, etc.
For me there are lots of DS products out there that have good reviews so I don't feel the need to buy expensive Deva products


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Yes.  English English is waaaay harder to understand than American English.  For example, "Not legitimate" in the Queen's English is actually quite ambiguous in American English, and therefore the confusion is understandable.


So happy that you have clarified the situation. If it wouldn't be a language barrier, I would be a little concerned with the Archbishop's explanation.


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh.  Every little thing they do is a headline.  I'm waiting for "Meg wiped her a$$ this morning!  Without screaming at her assistant to do so! How woke of her!"


I'm also waiting for the trolls to say, "What do you expect?  Her to wipe it herself?  Why, 'cause she's black?  YOU'RE RACIST!"


----------



## EverSoElusive

artax two said:


> My whole family was into perms when I was 11. My cousins taught themselves how to do it and then permed all the ladies' hair on that side of the family. Including me.



Oh wow! That's so cool that your cousins taught themselves perming and did it for the ladies in the family  Must be fun times!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa are they playing at?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ms King, who attended Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, claimed Prince Harry also had a conversation with his father Prince Charles.
> 
> Appearing on CBS This Morning, she said: "I am not trying to break news but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling and it's true, Harry has talked to his brother and his father too.
> 
> *"The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive."*
> 
> However, she added, the royals "are glad they at least started a conversation."
> 
> Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.
> 
> "And until you can't acknowledge that I think it's going to be difficult to move forward, but they both want to move forward with this and they both want healing in this family, at the end of the day this is Harry's family."
> More...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



This is what I understood: Harry spoke with his family, but Charles did not make a wire transfer yet!
Ms King is helping MM to keep the fire burning with her insinuations. It is disgusting imo.


----------



## artax two

EverSoElusive said:


> Oh wow! That's so cool that your cousins taught themselves perming and did it for the ladies in the family  Must be fun times!


Lots of late nights, cousins/aunt bonding, we were all really close and I didn't have any sisters. It was lots of fun!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *This is what I understood: Harry spoke with his family, but Charles did not make a wire transfer yet!*
> Ms King is helping MM to keep the burning with her insinuations. It is disgusting imo.


LOL, I bet you're 110% right!
As for the media, almost all disgust me.  The news is full of their innuendos, accusations, and opinions.  "Just the facts" is not the case.  I no longer watch any news, which is why I'm here in my spare time!  You all provide me hours of entertainment!


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe MM and Oprah are secretly soulmates.




Oprah looks constipated in that photo.


----------



## gelbergirl

Is the new logo on Instagram? What’s the account?


----------



## purseinsanity

carmen56 said:


> Oprah looks constipated in that photo.


How could she not?  She's full of herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes follow the money! They would have had a good allowance and a house like the other minor royals but not 10k kaftan allowance
> “I needed to get everything Will gets or it’s because they are racists to my wife.”
> 
> I agree she’d have been happier acting & getting that attention but let’s be honest, she wouldn’t have got the parts she wanted. She’s :
> A) not going to compete with the land of RSC and RADA
> B) all our bad but posh actors ship out to LA anyway (cough Eddie redmayne)
> C) at an awkward age for an actress primarily selling on her looks.
> D) not willing to do character or cameo work. Only heroine roles are worthy of her great dignity
> 
> Add on: ironically I think the U.K. is far less ageist to actresses than the US.
> both Joanna lumley and Helen mirren started with ‘babe’ roles but they only really became stars in middle age when they switched to comic and character roles respectively. But they have the talent I guess.
> 
> sorry for repeats for some reason my page keeps reloading
> 
> Remember this:
> *Meghan Markle demands she work with A-list directors in hopes of landing a breakout role*
> *They continued: 'One commercial could pay for their entire security team for the year. Meghan likes the idea that only the creme de la creme of actors are offered this type of work. She knows they need the money'*
> Meghan Markle plans to return to acting but is only interested in working with A-list directors in the hopes she'll secure a breakout role so she'll be taken seriously as an actress, an industry source exclusively told DailyMail.com.
> 
> The former Suits actress is worried critics are going to be especially hard on her, so she wants to make sure a director of the right caliber is attached to the project.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has 'been telling her agents that she wants Ava DuVernay involved, and that they need to find the right script,' the insider added.
> 
> Although Meghan has received lots of offers, 'she thinks the majority of them are cheesy and beneath her.'
> 
> Meghan's desire to land her next acting job in Hollywood could be the push behind Meghan and Prince Harry relocating from their Vancouver Island mansion hideaway, which they had been staying at since Thanksgiving, to Los Angeles last month.
> 
> Edit: somehow the sequence of this got messed up. Reprinting the article about MM should have read as a response to jelliedfeels with this as my comment at the end.
> Oh, the irony, the "best" she could do was a voiceover in a Disney Elephant Pic, a role set up for her by Harry, so much for her talent and feminist righteousness.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> How could she not?  She's full of herself.



Or she had one too many poisonous Me-gain latte (or whatever coffee they are peddling)


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh god yes. The embarrassment. Wait a minute... he was trying to sell her for voiceovers at the lion king premier but now he thinks making her act is oppression?


----------



## Chanbal

This appears to suggest that Oprah & Gayle are very invested in helping MM on her pursuit against the BRF. 

*Grim-faced Prince William emerges hours after Meghan Markle's friend revealed his 'unproductive phone call with Harry': Gayle King says couple told her they want royals to speak out against 'racist press' and claim they can prove everything*
Prince William was photographed looking glum while driving in London today after Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King revealed Prince Harry had spoken to him and their father Charles for the first time following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.

The CBS presenter, who attended Meghan's $500,000 baby shower in 2019, said she spoke to the Sussexes who told her that Harry had talked to the Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales over the weekend.

But she said the conversations were 'not productive' and the Sussexes were keen for the 'royals to intervene and tell the Press to stop with the unfair, inaccurate, false stories that definitely have a racial slant'.

Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.









						Prince William and Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview'
					

Gayle King, who is close friends with Oprah, revealed on CBS This Morning today that Harry had spoken to the Duke of Cambridge and his father Prince Charles.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa are they playing at?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ms King, who attended Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, claimed Prince Harry also had a conversation with his father Prince Charles.
> 
> Appearing on CBS This Morning, she said: "I am not trying to break news but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling and it's true, Harry has talked to his brother and his father too.
> 
> "The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive."
> 
> However, she added, the royals "are glad they at least started a conversation."
> 
> Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.
> 
> "And until you can't acknowledge that I think it's going to be difficult to move forward, but they both want to move forward with this and they both want healing in this family, at the end of the day this is Harry's family."
> More...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I guess the little birdie who shat on Meg's interview dress is now acting as carrier pigeon to get intel to Gayle!


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I guess the little birdie who shat on Meg's interview dress is now acting as carrier pigeon to get intel to Gayle!



That birdie has been busy; I hope he’s generously compensated for his talent & hard work.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Or she had one too many poisonous Me-gain latte (or whatever coffee they are peddling)


Too much coffee can give you diarrhea.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> That birdie has been busy; I hope he’s generously compensated for his talent & hard work.


He's a rescue.  That's compensation enough!


----------



## kkfiregirl

carmen56 said:


> Oprah looks constipated in that photo.



Or like she’s having labor pains/contractions.


----------



## Chanbal

So Smart Works helped women to find jobs, and MM is taking credit for it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> So Smart Works helped women to find jobs, and MM is taking credit for it!
> 
> View attachment 5024509


Nothing shocks me any more.  The world would not turn without Meg, despite all the racism, discrimination, lack of respect, and meanness sent her way.  We should all bow down to the great Meg!!


----------



## Chanbal

Follow QE's example and do not engage...  

"_Kate Middleton found it 'mortifying' that allegations she made Meghan Markle cry during a row over bridesmaids' dresses re-emerged during the Oprah Winfrey interview - two years ago after first being reported in 2018, a royal expert claimed. 

Katie Nicholl noted how you 'never hear' about the Duchess of Cambridge, 38, falling out with anyone because she is 'very careful with how she treats others.

Speaking to OK! magazine, Katie Nicholl explained: 'Kate has never wanted any suggestion of a rift with Meghan to come out in the press, so for this story to be circulating is very hard.' 

'Kate felt it was all sorted, so to have it brought up again was mortifying. Kate is not in a position to respond and Meghan and Harry know that._" 









						Kate Middleton 'mortified' by claims that she made Meghan Markle cry
					

Speaking to OK! magazine, royal expert Katie Nicholl claimed Kate Middleton, 39, found it 'mortifying' allegations that she made Meghan Markle cry re-emerged two years after first being reported.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

This is an opinion piece, but it shows how many people believed Meghan's claim that she felt suicidal and couldn't get anyone to help her. The poor woman who wrote the piece lost a teenage son to suicide so it's understandable that she was triggered. I wonder how many others were hurt or had bad memories resurface.









						Suicide took my son's life. I grieve for people like Meghan Markle, who ask for help and can't find it.
					

Watching Meghan’s interview with Oprah, I found myself wishing time was devoted to encouraging those struggling to take a breath and talk to someone.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Nothing shocks me any more.  The world would not turn without Meg, despite all the racism, discrimination, lack of respect, and meanness sent her way.  We should all bow down to the great Meg!!


She never misses a photo-op type event.


----------



## madamelizaking

Chanbal said:


> This supports that Oprah & Gayle are very invested in helping MM on her pursuit against the BRF.
> 
> *Grim-faced Prince William emerges hours after Meghan Markle's friend revealed his 'unproductive phone call with Harry': Gayle King says couple told her they want royals to speak out against 'racist press' and claim they can prove everything*
> Prince William was photographed looking glum while driving in London today after Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King revealed Prince Harry had spoken to him and their father Charles for the first time following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The CBS presenter, who attended Meghan's $500,000 baby shower in 2019, said she spoke to the Sussexes who told her that Harry had talked to the Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales over the weekend.
> 
> But she said the conversations were 'not productive' and the Sussexes were keen for the 'royals to intervene and tell the Press to stop with the unfair, inaccurate, false stories that definitely have a racial slant'.
> 
> Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Gayle King, who is close friends with Oprah, revealed on CBS This Morning today that Harry had spoken to the Duke of Cambridge and his father Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Why. Would. The. Family. Ever. Want. To. Talk. To. Them. Again. WHEN THEY CLEARLY LEAK EVERYTHING. Blackmailing, two timing pathetic weasels. I guarantee the "evidence" Meghan has is more content missing all the context.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gawd....she is so full of herself


----------



## artax two

Chanbal said:


> Follow QE's example and do not engage...
> 
> "_Kate Middleton found it 'mortifying' that allegations she made Meghan Markle cry during a row over bridesmaids' dresses re-emerged during the Oprah Winfrey interview - two years ago after first being reported in 2018, a royal expert claimed.
> 
> Katie Nicholl noted how you 'never hear' about the Duchess of Cambridge, 38, falling out with anyone because she is 'very careful with how she treats others.
> 
> Speaking to OK! magazine, Katie Nicholl explained: 'Kate has never wanted any suggestion of a rift with Meghan to come out in the press, so for this story to be circulating is very hard.'
> 
> 'Kate felt it was all sorted, so to have it brought up again was mortifying. Kate is not in a position to respond and Meghan and Harry know that._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton 'mortified' by claims that she made Meghan Markle cry
> 
> 
> Speaking to OK! magazine, royal expert Katie Nicholl claimed Kate Middleton, 39, found it 'mortifying' allegations that she made Meghan Markle cry re-emerged two years after first being reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I just don't get why it had to be a big deal if MM cried on her wedding day. I mean, everybody knows there is no such thing as a wedding without a hitch. Brides usually have hyper heightened emotions, the littlest thing that they could normally cope with easily could send them to tears. Even IF K made M cry, so what? Congratulations M, you're just like millions of other brides on their wedding days. Hell, I cried the night before my own wedding because one of hubbys cousins took him to the bar and I was afraid he was going to show up at the alter hungover. Anything can happen and usually DOES happen.

I think M just cannot rise to the level expected of her, so she knows nothing else than to try to drag everyone else down to hers.


Edit- spelling


----------



## bag-mania

artax two said:


> I just don't get why it had to be a big deal if MM cried on her wedding day. I mean, everybody knows there is no such thing as a wedding without a hitch. Brides usually have hyper heightened emotions, the littlest thing that they could normally cope with easily could send them to tears. Even IF K made M cry, so what? Congratulations M, you're just like millions of other brides on their wedding days. Hell, I cried the night before my own wedding because one of hubbys cousins took him to the bar and I was afraid he was going to show up at the alter hungover. Anything can happen and usually DOES happen.
> 
> I think M just cannot rise to the level expected of her, so she knows nothing else than to dry to drag everyone else down to hers.



I didn't think it was the wedding day. Wasn't it a fitting for the dresses which would have taken place days or even weeks before?


----------



## artax two

bag-mania said:


> I didn't think it was the wedding day. Wasn't it a fitting for the dresses which would have taken place days or even weeks before?


Oh well then even less reason for it to be any kind of thing


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I didn't think it was the wedding day. Wasn't it a fitting for the dresses which would have taken place days or even weeks before?


There are too many versions of saga

1. Flower girl dress did not fit, before wedding
2. Should flower girls wear tights? Same day? On wedding day?
3. Kate made M cry (about what?), but K sent flowers and M accepted apology
4. K made M cry, flowers delivered by K in person, door slammed in face, flowers in the bin, thus K cried

Someone made the bride cry about wedding, and M raising it on TV - arghhh - it is not as if M effectively set the whole story straight and shut down any of the gossipy versions, why raise it at all?


----------



## purseinsanity

artax two said:


> I just don't get why it had to be a big deal if MM cried on her wedding day. I mean, everybody knows there is no such thing as a wedding without a hitch. Brides usually have hyper heightened emotions, the littlest thing that they could normally cope with easily could send them to tears. Even IF K made M cry, so what? Congratulations M, you're just like millions of other brides on their wedding days. Hell, I cried the night before my own wedding because one of hubbys cousins took him to the bar and I was afraid he was going to show up at the alter hungover. Anything can happen and usually DOES happen.
> I think M just cannot rise to the level expected of her, so she knows nothing else than to try to drag everyone else down to hers.
> 
> Edit- spelling


Besides, her "real" wedding was 3 days earlier, so WTF does anyone care she cried on her "wedding day" that was put on for us mere mortals?


----------



## csshopper

madamelizaking said:


> Why. Would. The. Family. Ever. Want. To. Talk. To. Them. Again. WHEN THEY CLEARLY LEAK EVERYTHING. Blackmailing, two timing pathetic weasels. I guarantee the "evidence" Meghan has is more content missing all the context.
> 
> madamelizaking, YES, "pathetic weasels" who provide:
> A new definition of "bully": oprah, gayle, meghan, and their hand bag harry. The use of lower case names is very deliberate.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Someone made the bride cry about wedding, and M raising it on TV - arghhh - it is not as if M effectively set the whole story straight and shut down any of the gossipy versions, why raise it at all?



Meghan is as slippery as an eel. She throws around accusations wildly but she provides no details to back up her claims. If you are going to "clear the air" then say what actually happened. It isn't that difficult, _unless you are telling a big fat fib and the less you say the better._


----------



## CarryOn2020

- 3 days before the tv wedding lots of stuff happened: Thomas hung up on H&M, somebody made somebody cry at a fitting, there was a _personal_ _ceremony. _ Wonder why so much stuff was not done. Didn’t Doria fly in just one day before? Something about the timing is suspicious. Did someone have cold feet? Hmmm.

- just because MM says she has documentation does not mean she does. Prove it, H&M. Your word is meaningless as are your threats.

- Gayle’s lil reveal happened b/c CBS’s Grammy show had lowest ratings ever, Kate received much praise for her unannounced visit to the memorial, and people had moved on from H&M. So, if we don’t give oxygen to _their truth_, it may just go away 

ETA - notice GK did not mention this:
*ITV is forced to remove headlines which were doctored to smear the UK press as racist in the Oprah Winfrey interview with Harry and Meghan but US channel CBS refuses to act*
By Mark Hookham and Jonathan Bucks For The Mail On Sunday

ITV was last night forced to edit part of Oprah Winfrey's explosive interview with the Sussexes after it was revealed that it included misleading and distorted headlines which portrayed British press coverage of the couple as racist.

Headlines that were flashed on the screen during the controversial interview with the US chat show host were cynically manipulated to back up the couple's assertion that they were the victims of bigoted coverage.

Associated Newspapers, the publisher of The Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail and MailOnline, complained to Viacom CBS – the US TV giant which aired last week's two-hour programme – about 'the deliberate distortion and doctoring of newspaper headlines'.

It also demanded that ITV remove the 'misleading and inaccurate headlines' from the programme, which remains available on its ITV Hub catch-up service. ITV said it would remove four of the misleading headlines but not all of them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This can only be good!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> - Gayle’s lil reveal happened b/c CBS’s Grammy show had lowest ratings ever, Kate received much praise for her unannounced visit to the memorial, and people had moved on from H&M. So, if we don’t give oxygen to _their truth_, it may just go away



I'm wondering what they are going to do to keep their momentum going. After over a week of nonstop attention from the press, things are starting to scale back. At some point even their rabid supporters are going to believe they should move on and live their best life or whatever.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This supports that Oprah & Gayle are very invested in helping MM on her pursuit against the BRF.
> 
> *Grim-faced Prince William emerges hours after Meghan Markle's friend revealed his 'unproductive phone call with Harry': Gayle King says couple told her they want royals to speak out against 'racist press' and claim they can prove everything*
> Prince William was photographed looking glum while driving in London today after Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King revealed Prince Harry had spoken to him and their father Charles for the first time following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The CBS presenter, who attended Meghan's $500,000 baby shower in 2019, said she spoke to the Sussexes who told her that Harry had talked to the Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales over the weekend.
> 
> But she said the conversations were 'not productive' and the Sussexes were keen for the 'royals to intervene and tell the Press to stop with the unfair, inaccurate, false stories that definitely have a racial slant'.
> 
> Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Gayle King, who is close friends with Oprah, revealed on CBS This Morning today that Harry had spoken to the Duke of Cambridge and his father Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Jeez it is a slow news day.
Man gets into car looking grumpy.
Woman gossips about phone call she wasn’t part of.
Couple finally changes novelty stationery.



bag-mania said:


> This is an opinion piece, but it shows how many people believed Meghan's claim that she felt suicidal and couldn't get anyone to help her. The poor woman who wrote the piece lost a teenage son to suicide so it's understandable that she was triggered. I wonder how many others were hurt or had bad memories resurface.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suicide took my son's life. I grieve for people like Meghan Markle, who ask for help and can't find it.
> 
> 
> Watching Meghan’s interview with Oprah, I found myself wishing time was devoted to encouraging those struggling to take a breath and talk to someone.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usatoday.com


It’s how some confidence tricksters work. They find a sensitive place and they claim they have a shared experience to win people’s trust. Good people don’t want someone to suffer the way they did and want to empathise and help.

This is why I actually have a lot of sympathy for a lot of the H&M supporters. They see a bereaved man and a victim of racism and they share their pain. Now I don’t want to say that the duo are 100% lying to them but let’s just say I think they would have no interest in sharing in their fans’ pain should the situation be reversed.

edit: garbled


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I'm wondering what they are going to do to keep their momentum going. After over a week of nonstop attention from the press, things are starting to scale back. *At some point even their rabid supporters are going to believe they should move on and live their best life or whatever.*


Rabid is such a good way to describe their trolls!


----------



## Megs

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Okay...I may have wandered into bizarro world...I came back to multiple notifications of my posts being deleted and now I'm reading that Candace Owens is a paragon of truth and facts?
> 
> It's been real but I think with that y'all win, I'm officially out!
> 
> Thank you so much to those of you who tolerated my questions and perspectives, even or especially when you didn't agree
> 
> Stay safe out there everyone!



So sorry I didn't respond to this sooner, I honestly missed it! I did remove about 10 posts one night because of political commentary. We don't allow politics and even removed politician wife style threads somewhat recently, so anytime politics is brought up or quoted, we remove it and edit. That is why one of your posts was edited, no other reason! 

I know many would love to see you in this thread still! 



FreeSpirit71 said:


> Same. You're up against it and not in a place where any real conversation can take place, when mods  - who are _supposed_ to be impartial - are weighing in on one side or the other.  Hardly a place without bias.



I said this upthread a bit, but I am not sure why a mod can't have an opinion while moderating? I truly believe as long as a mod is there to keep our TOS enforced, they can share their opinions whether I agree or not or others do as well. I really like that moderators can still be members and enjoy the community and share their thoughts and have a lively discourse. If you think a moderator is moderating in a way that is one-sided, by all means let me know! 

As I said above, the only comments I've edited/deleted here recently are political in nature and I did remove a few comments that were name calling. Please do reach out if you think something has been edited wrongly or I am missing something!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I'm wondering what they are going to do to keep their momentum going. After over a week of nonstop attention from the press, things are starting to scale back. At some point even their rabid supporters are going to believe they should move on and live their best life or whatever.



Just like today - use GK to slow-drip their propaganda.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh.  Every little thing they do is a headline.  I'm waiting for "Meg wiped her a$$ this morning!  Without screaming at her assistant to do so! How woke of her!"


Or: Meg wiped her a$$ this morning, but skipped the toilet paper and single-handedly saved the environment .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

floatinglili said:


> I was surprised to read recently in social media comments arguing that white people wearing dreadlocks deserved to be publicly abused (for cultural theft of a hairstyle).



To be honest from a Euro viewpoint I think many US activists get cultural appropriation a tad wrong. And also, the Celts of Europe and some people of the Nordic countries used to wear dreadlocks as well, so it's not solely an African or African American tradition.



> She has whole systems for both straightening and also for managing the curl if she chooses to have curls between washes. Her hair is gorgeous but it does seem like a lot of work.
> Her colouring is fair - hair was reddish blonde as a child (growing darker post puberty to chestnut), her skin very very fair and will throw a red freckle. Eyes greyish blue. Some of the most magnificent cork screw curls I have ever seen have been from red headed girls I knew in school.



So many unique features


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> now that is one person she wouldn't dare mess with



And if she did, my money would be on Michelle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

William often looks quite serious when driving, possibly because he is being cautious?
But, the gruesome twosome just look cranky:


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe MM and Oprah are secretly soulmates.



Or smugly thinking, "Oh happy day, I've got the whole world in my hands."


----------



## Coconuts40

limom said:


> When they go low, we go high, except for the nice diplomatic shade




Thank you for posting.


I must say, I really loved Michelle O's reply.  Didn't feel to me like she took sides and as a public figure I feel her response was on point and hoped for some resolution.

On a side note, I am very disappointed with Gayle King and Oprah Winfrey continuing to update us on what I thought would be private discussions.  They are continuing to add fuel to the fire, and continue to provoke divisiveness instead of peace and compromise.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, Julia Roberts gave me hope!  Except I didn't have the hairdressers on standby.  My curls look semi nice when soaking wet.  Even with product, as my hair dries, the curls slowly turn into frizz that's not even manageable.  I have very, very thick hair to boot.  My vacation pictures are atrocious, because we somehow manage to go to the most humid places on earth.  Even in a pony tail, you see a halo of frizz on me.  It's just not meant to be.  I did the Japanese straightening and even though a ton of my hair fell out, I plan on doing it again.   *I should just shave my head and wear wigs*.



I can't tell you how many times those EXACT words have been uttered by yours truly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.



She does? So the Archbishop did indeed marry her in her garden and Archie was indeed eligible for a princely title? Or does that not count as "everything".


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> While I can see why some people might just be looking for an excuse to b*tch about Bethenny. (She got pretty grating on RHONY IMHO.)
> 
> *It is true it really is ‘everything is partisan. Pick a side’ with people nowadays though.*



If you're not for me you're against me


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Nothing shocks me any more.  *The world would not turn without Meg, despite all the racism, discrimination, lack of respect, and meanness sent her way.  We should all bow down to the great Meg!!*


This. OMG you have ESP and can read MM's selfish thoughts.  Wish some of her stans could be as astute.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> This appears to suggest that Oprah & Gayle are very invested in helping MM on her pursuit against the BRF.
> 
> *Grim-faced Prince William emerges hours after Meghan Markle's friend revealed his 'unproductive phone call with Harry': Gayle King says couple told her they want royals to speak out against 'racist press' and claim they can prove everything*
> Prince William was photographed looking glum while driving in London today after Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King revealed Prince Harry had spoken to him and their father Charles for the first time following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The CBS presenter, who attended Meghan's $500,000 baby shower in 2019, said she spoke to the Sussexes who told her that Harry had talked to the Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales over the weekend.
> 
> But she said the conversations were 'not productive' and the Sussexes were keen for the 'royals to intervene and tell the Press to stop with the unfair, inaccurate, false stories that definitely have a racial slant'.
> 
> Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Gayle King, who is close friends with Oprah, revealed on CBS This Morning today that Harry had spoken to the Duke of Cambridge and his father Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



WOW. Wonder how much longer she'll be a "friend"... clearly it's true what she says though that H+M are upset the palace wants to keep things private. They want everything all out there!!!

I hope they make the results of the investigation public. At this point everyone needs to see all the receipts on this issue.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest from a Euro viewpoint I think many US activists get cultural appropriation a tad wrong.



I’m genuinely curious; _what is _cultural appropriation?


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> I hope they make the results of the investigation public. At this point everyone needs to see all the receipts on this issue.



MM has already proven herself to be quite adept at plagiarism, so I wouldn’t count on those receipts being _authentic_ originals.


----------



## limom

Coconuts40 said:


> Thank you for posting.
> 
> 
> I must say, I really loved Michelle O's reply.  Didn't feel to me like she took sides and as a public figure I feel her response was on point and hoped for some resolution.
> 
> On a side note, I am very disappointed with Gayle King and Oprah Winfrey continuing to update us on what I was also hoping to be private discussions.  They are continuing to add fuel to the fire, and continue to provoke divisiveness instead of peace and compromise.


I agree about Gayle. I loved watching her in the morning. Her interview with R.Kelly was a classic. But it is almost as if she is regressing at this point. I expect those antics to be those of teenagers, not two mature and intelligent women.
The mind boggles.
As I always say, high school  is never really over.


poopsie said:


> I can't tell you how many times those EXACT words have been uttered by yours truly


Same here. So sick and tired of coloring, blow drying, finding the best shampoo yada, yada, yada.
Thankfully, I finally find a hair professional who understand me and my hair.


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe MM and Oprah are secretly soulmates.




Wow, it takes some balls to go against Oprah.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m genuinely curious; _what is _cultural appropriation?



You might want to google that only because it is a huge topic with many nuances. The Wikipedia article isn't half bad. In short, it's the unacknowledged or inappropriate adaption of customs (that can be clothes, hairstyles, rituals - think sweat lodge ceremonies or ayahuasca for tourists which completely lack the belief system that usually goes with them) that belong to a minority or marginalized group.

But in the US, more often than not it is heavily interlaced with the Critical Whiteness Movement, which is why I said from a Euro viewpoint it doesn't always make sense because our background is different.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> WOW. Wonder how much longer she'll be a "friend"... clearly it's true what she says though that H+M are upset the palace wants to keep things private. They want everything all out there!!!
> 
> I hope they make the results of the investigation public. At this point everyone needs to see all the receipts on this issue.



I think she'll be a friend as long as she's useful and right now both Gayle and Oprah are very useful. 

Think of it, Omid Scobie has been pushed aside in favor of a new, famous mouthpiece, Gayle King!!


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, Julia Roberts gave me hope!  Except I didn't have the hairdressers on standby.  My curls look semi nice when soaking wet.  Even with product, as my hair dries, the curls slowly turn into frizz that's not even manageable.  I have very, very thick hair to boot.  My vacation pictures are atrocious, because we somehow manage to go to the most humid places on earth.  Even in a pony tail, you see a halo of frizz on me.  It's just not meant to be.  I did the Japanese straightening and even though a ton of my hair fell out, I plan on doing it again.    I should just shave my head and wear wigs.



Sounds like my hair. Only it used to at least look healthy...now because of meds I take, it's dry.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, it takes some balls to go against Oprah.


He is British and loyal to the Crown.
what could she possibly do?


----------



## lalame

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m genuinely curious; _what is _cultural appropriation?



There's probably multiple flavors of this but it usually describes one culture (usually the dominant group in any country) borrowing or even taking ownership of key parts of another culture without giving that 2nd culture its due respect otherwise or discriminating against people from that culture at the same time. It's been a new-ish awareness I think. Some examples I've seen/heard of in the US over the years...

People looking down on or criticizing black women' natural hairstyles and yet the same people deciding that dreadlocks or afros are "cool" when it suits them and wearing those styles - eg parties, vacations, etc
Americans dressing up as Native Americans for halloween... obvious irony there is white Americans slaughtered the native americans and now wearing their garb as funny or cool costumes flippantly
People using "blaccents" or adopting rapper-ish clothes but not having any black friends, supporting black businesses, or having any real personal connection to black culture.
People wearing bindis randomly because it looks cool but knowing nothing about Indian culture, what the bindi stands for, etc.
It's a gray area and sometimes people go too far with accusations of cultural appropriation IMO. Like another poster said, it can be a very US-dominant perspective then again I am from the US so maybe that's all I see.


----------



## poopsie

Well.............can't WAIT to see how you all celebrate tomorrow sans "cultural appropriation" or racist stereotypes


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You might want to google that only because it is a huge topic with many nuances. The Wikipedia article isn't half bad. In short, it's the unacknowledged or inappropriate adaption of customs (that can be clothes, hairstyles, rituals - think sweat lodge ceremonies or ayahuasca for tourists which completely lack the belief system that usually goes with them) that belong to a minority or marginalized group.
> 
> But in the US, more often than not it is heavily interlaced with the Critical Whiteness Movement, which is why I said from a Euro viewpoint it doesn't always make sense because our background is different.



Yes, I can use google, but you since you commented above that the US flavor is different from your country, I thought you knew more about the topic.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> It's a gray area and sometimes people go too far with accusations of cultural appropriation IMO. Like another poster said, it can be a very US-dominant perspective then again I am from the US so maybe that's all I see



Thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed reply! I am learning a lot here


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I'm still working my way through that body language video because I only watch 10 mins here and there. Honestly, the most damage to MM's reputation is done when you just let her speak freely because it becomes clear that woman is simply not wired correctly. I can only imagine the faces of the members of the BRF who received one of her letters that said "I'm here for you, use me as you like" (that is a direct quote out of her own mouth).

Who does that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> Yes, I can use google, but you since you commented above that the US flavor is different from your country, I thought you knew more about the topic.



I didn't mean to brush you off, I just thought my short answer wouldn't quite cut it maybe. We've been quite a bit off topic these past days, apparently we all need a break from H&M


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And if she did, my money would be on Michelle.


oh yes.....the people Meghan wants to impress are not gonna turn on michelle


----------



## rose60610

I have a real dumb question, seriously : If Harry got stripped of his title as "Prince", is Archie still eligible to become a Prince when Charles ascends to the throne? In my google search I just got info that didn't answer that question. So I thought I'd ask the royal watchers here  .


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest from a Euro viewpoint I think many US activists get cultural appropriation a tad wrong. And also, the Celts of Europe and some people of the Nordic countries used to wear dreadlocks as well, so it's not solely an African or African American tradition.
> 
> 
> 
> So many unique features


That’s silly. If POC straighten their hair we don’t say it is cultural appropriation.


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> That’s silly. If POC straighten their hair we don’t say it is cultural appropriation.


Because you are in the majority.
This subject gets really touchy and personal.What is cultural appropriation is best answered by those who are slighted.
It is inappropriate for those who are not POC to speak for those who are, imho.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> I have a real dumb question, seriously : If Harry got stripped of his title as "Prince", is Archie still eligible to become a Prince when Charles ascends to the throne? In my google search I just got info that didn't answer that question. So I thought I'd ask the royal watchers here  .



I don't think he can be stripped of the Prince, can he? They can only take away the dukedom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

limom said:


> He is British and loyal to the Crown.
> what could she possibly do?



I don't know but I always felt like if Oprah didn't like you, she would squash you like a bug.


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> This appears to suggest that Oprah & Gayle are very invested in helping MM on her pursuit against the BRF.
> 
> *Grim-faced Prince William emerges hours after Meghan Markle's friend revealed his 'unproductive phone call with Harry': Gayle King says couple told her they want royals to speak out against 'racist press' and claim they can prove everything*
> Prince William was photographed looking glum while driving in London today after Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King revealed Prince Harry had spoken to him and their father Charles for the first time following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The CBS presenter, who attended Meghan's $500,000 baby shower in 2019, said she spoke to the Sussexes who told her that Harry had talked to the Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales over the weekend.
> 
> But she said the conversations were 'not productive' and the Sussexes were keen for the 'royals to intervene and tell the Press to stop with the unfair, inaccurate, false stories that definitely have a racial slant'.
> 
> Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Gayle King, who is close friends with Oprah, revealed on CBS This Morning today that Harry had spoken to the Duke of Cambridge and his father Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This is so sad. The end of any chance of a reconciliation imo. How could Harry stoop to this level...


----------



## rose60610

For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners? 

If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?


----------



## mdcx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I'm still working my way through that body language video because I only watch 10 mins here and there. Honestly, the most damage to MM's reputation is done when you just let her speak freely because it becomes clear that woman is simply not wired correctly. I can only imagine the faces of the members of the BRF who received one of her letters that said "I'm here for you, use me as you like" (that is a direct quote out of her own mouth).
> 
> Who does that?


Camilla sniggering from a corner armchair as that letter was read aloud


----------



## LibbyRuth

Coconuts40 said:


> Thank you for posting.
> 
> 
> I must say, I really loved Michelle O's reply.  Didn't feel to me like she took sides and as a public figure I feel her response was on point and hoped for some resolution.
> 
> On a side note, I am very disappointed with Gayle King and Oprah Winfrey continuing to update us on what I thought would be private discussions.  They are continuing to add fuel to the fire, and continue to provoke divisiveness instead of peace and compromise.



Gayle has always been in the business of promoting Oprah.  It used to be a full time job, and she did it at O Magazine.  When Oprah took a step back, it freed up Gayle to be able to do CBS This Morning while promoting Oprah as a side job.  
I think she's having to work hard right now on the Oprah promotion gig, because Oprah simply went into the interview not fully prepared.  She's never been a confrontational interviewer (unless interviewing an author who wrote fiction he claimed to be a memoir) but usually showed the knowledge to question things that did not make sense. But in this interview, it was a bit of a fail to not understand the monarchy well enough to understand WHY Archie was different than George, Charlotte, and Louis, and to understand that his not having a title or security was grounded in tradition, not racism.  There were non-confrontational ways to question that - she didn't bother.


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners?
> 
> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?


Woke screaming banshee says it all, doesn’t it?


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't know but I always felt like if Oprah didn't like you, she would squash you like a bug.



Well then the BRF must have crossed her, because she is out for blood.


----------



## Hermes Zen

floatinglili said:


> My take home thought is that eurodreads lol must have been extremely common back ‘in the day’


Like Bo Derek's back in the day?


----------



## poopsie

ahem...........you all DO know that banshees are an Irish folk legend.  
Just want to make sure that my grandparents culture isn't being inappropriately appropriated


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners?



You can. Where it gets sh*tty is when the white (and probably male) celebrity chef gets screen time with his famous tamales while the Mexican grandmother that's been doing them for 50 years gets ignored in the narrative, or people pay big bucks for an Italian meal but expect tacos or pho to be cheap.

I was trying to find a really great article that spoke about why the terms "ethnic" as well as something usually positive like "authentic" can be damaging when describing restaurants. It actually did make a lot of sense, alas I can't seem to remember where I stored it.



> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?



I occasionally wear the costume of a people not mine...besides them being pretty (and expensive *g*), I consider it as a support to their cause and I've never encountered anyone telling me I couldn't, quite the opposite. They usually feel seen and recognized, and I've been gifted full dresses, fabric and accessoires before. That said, if they took issue with this I'd stop doing so because it's the polite thing to do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> But in this interview, it was a bit of a fail to not understand the monarchy well enough to understand WHY Archie was different than George, Charlotte, and Louis, and to understand that his not having a title or security was grounded in tradition, not racism.



Besides staff has said as long as Harry was a working royal his wife and any minor children would always have had protection, so that's not even a fact either.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Well then the BRF must have crossed her, because she is out for blood.



Didn't Di blow off her bid for an interview? Think I read that here somewhere


----------



## RAINDANCE

bag-mania said:


> Well then the BRF must have crossed her, because she is out for blood.


Oprah interviewed Sarah back in the day (after her divorce when she was trying to make £ in the US) but had been invited to lunch by Diana in London and Diana gave her a hard pass. Probably goes back to that. All of them are a seething mass of resentment. 

A long time ago somebody pointed out to me that whenever one points a finger at another, there are three fingers pointing back at you. Still, it requires a bit of self-awareness and humility to see that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners?
> 
> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?



It's all about the context IMO. It's not cultural appropriation to dine in ethnic restaurants... you're benefiting that community and appreciating their culture. However... when you go to an ethnic restaurant and start complaining that the food is too XYZ because it's unfamiliar to your culture or that YOU know the best way to eat that food, as if you're the authority on their culture, that's not cool.

About the sari... are you wearing it like a costume or using it in a way it's not meant to be used? Do you show appreciation towards the Indian culture or people outside of wearing the sari? Then you're OK I think but some others may have different views. 

Heads of state visiting a culture are a little different because as others pointed out that it's a balance between respecting the local culture, being invited to do what they're doing, etc. Case by case I think... if you're wearing it like a costume, basically not taking it seriously or treating it like it's a freak show, then you're in the danger zone. I think this is why the BRF doesn't get called out for cultural appropriation (AFAIK)... they show respect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

limom said:


> Because you are in the majority.
> This subject gets really touchy and personal.What is cultural appropriation is best answered by those who are slighted.
> It is inappropriate for those who are not POC to speak for those who are, imho.



Thank you for saying this.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> I can't tell you how many times those EXACT words have been uttered by yours truly


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> This. OMG you have ESP and can read MM's selfish thoughts.  Wish some of her stans could be as astute.


I like to think I've gotten more intelligent since my perm days.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Didn't Di blow off her bid for an interview? Think I read that here somewhere



I don't know. But if Oprah had a problem with Diana, why help her son bring down the rest of them?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Like Bo Derek's back in the day?


Bo had cornrows (I think or maybe they are boxer braids) with beads attached. This is another hairstyle associated with black hair. It’s done by braiding the hair. It’s thought to not actually be a good style for white hair as it puts pressure on it. 

Dreads are different because they are created by matting rather than braiding the hair. It is associated with the Rastafarian religion and with Reggae culture. Bob Marley, for example, wore dreads.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> MM has already proven herself to be quite adept at plagiarism, so I wouldn’t count on those receipts being _authentic_ originals.


LOL they're photocopies


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, *am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero *about economics for business owners?
> 
> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?



The same college student who wouldn't think twice about swilling green beer, listening to U2 and eating corned beef and cabbage when it ought to be Harp or Guinness, ceilidh music, and bangers and mash

not that there is anything wrong with listening to U2........Joshua Tree is one of my desert island albums


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't mean to brush you off, I just thought my short answer wouldn't quite cut it maybe. We've been quite a bit off topic these past days, apparently *we all need a break from H&M*


Join me on the Alec Baldwin thread.


----------



## marietouchet

just dawned on me, G only tells the HM side of the story ie the part interesting to her US audience, she does not report the other story from across the pond 

I missed this bit in the Gayle recap from this morning

King also revealed that “no one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet or at this particular time,” and that both Harry and Meghan “want to move forward” with Harry’s family, despite their frustration over the royals failing to quell racist stories in the tabloids about Markle. “The family has to acknowledge that there are issues, and right now, no one is acknowledging, _Houston, we have a problem! _That’s all they really want. They want a conversation.”

more demands, the BRF must acknowledge issues,  remember the unilateral Megxit manifesto ? I guess W words about the family and race were not well received...

and what racist story has been in the tabloids last week ? In the last week, the story was the interview, and the HM point of view ...









						Gayle King Has an Update on Meghan and Harry and the Royals and It’s Not Great
					

“No one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet or at this particular time.”




					www.vulture.com


----------



## poopsie

Speaking of Bo..................ran into her a few years ago in Del Mar after a CHRB meeting. She looked great. She's two weeks younger than me. I guess the weeks were longer back then


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners?
> 
> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?


I think in general, in the US, (and I say this as a US Citizen), many people go to extremes and it's a hard line as to what's  "right" and what's "wrong" almost to the point of lunacy.  People are so wound up lately it's ridiculous.  As someone from another culture, I really couldn't care less if someone wants to wear the clothing, eat the food, learn the religion, wear the hairstyle, etc., of my country, as long as it's done with respect.  I'd be irritated if it was mocked or insulted.


----------



## purseinsanity

LibbyRuth said:


> Gayle has always been in the business of promoting Oprah.  It used to be a full time job, and she did it at O Magazine.  When Oprah took a step back, it freed up Gayle to be able to do CBS This Morning while promoting Oprah as a side job.
> I think she's having to work hard right now on the Oprah promotion gig, because Oprah simply went into the interview not fully prepared.  She's never been a confrontational interviewer (unless interviewing an author who wrote fiction he claimed to be a memoir) but usually showed the knowledge to question things that did not make sense. But in this interview, it was a bit of a fail to not understand the monarchy well enough to understand WHY Archie was different than George, Charlotte, and Louis, and to understand that his not having a title or security was grounded in tradition, not racism.  There were non-confrontational ways to question that - she didn't bother.


So you're saying Gayle is the Jessica to Oprah's Megan?


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> LOL they're photocopies


 
_Altered_ photocopies


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh...I just read that apparently Meghan shut Doria up the same way she shuts up Harry when she took her along to an event (was it that community kitchen?). Doria said something, Meghan gave her the death stare. I haven't gone looking for the video but at this point I wonder what the hell is going on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> King also revealed that “no one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet or at this particular time,” and that both Harry and Meghan “want to move forward” with Harry’s family, despite their frustration over the royals failing to quell racist stories in the tabloids about Markle. “The family has to acknowledge that there are issues, and right now, no one is acknowledging, _Houston, we have a problem! _That’s all they really want. They want a conversation.”



Yeah, and that problem is Meghan, and if I was the BRF I'd never speak to her ever again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Well.............can't WAIT to see how you all celebrate tomorrow sans "cultural appropriation" or racist stereotypes


Haha touche!!  Everyone else has the right to get offended, yet dress up like Leprechauns on St. Patrick's Day and drink Guiness, wear lederhosen for Oktoberfest and act like drunk fools, and have taco trucks on Cinco de Mayo and have margaritas.    Double standards drive me to Meghan levels of insanity.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh...I just read that apparently Meghan shut Doria up the same way she shuts up Harry when she took her along to an event (was it that community kitchen?). Doria said something, Meghan gave her the death stare. I haven't gone looking for the video but at this point I wonder what the hell is going on.



I think there’s some truth to this; Doria has never seemed happy to be in her daughter’s presence.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh...I just read that apparently Meghan shut Doria up the same way she shuts up Harry when she took her along to an event (was it that community kitchen?). Doria said something, Meghan gave her the death stare. *I haven't gone looking for the video but at this point I wonder what the hell is going on.*



Everyone fears the insane. They cooperate because they're afraid not to!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think he can be stripped of the Prince, can he? They can only take away the dukedom.


He's already been stripped of his clothing on his own accord, and more recently, his manhood and dignity by his conniving wife.  What's left but the "Prince" to strip?


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> _Altered_ photocopies


Redacted and "subtly" having "Duchess of Sussex" inserted for credit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Haha touche!!  Everyone else has the right to get offended, yet dress up like Leprechauns on St. Patrick's Day and drink Guiness, wear lederhosen for Oktoberfest and act like drunk fools, and have taco trucks on Cinco de Mayo and have margaritas.    Double standards drive me to Meghan levels of insanity.



That reminds me of the time I - a foodwriter by profession - had the audacity to enter a discussion about my national cuisine saying it's not all pork legs and sauerkraut (just as lederhosen and dirndl isn't our national costume, it's the costume of Bavaria, one of 16 states!), and got yelled at because wouldn't you know, all the food specialists had travelled to Germany once and couldn't fine a single good meal and had to resort to Lebanese restaurants (which left me SO confused as this is so random. We don't have a big Lebanese community at all. Maybe they confused Berlin with Paris?). While I didn't feel culturally appropriated I surely rolled my eyes hard


----------



## chicinthecity777

Poor Omid, already been Markled!


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Poor Omid, already been Markled!



LOL!  If you're stupid enough to think you'll last as a "BFF" of Meghan's, you deserve everything you get.

How old is Scobie?  18?  His picture looks ridiculously young.  "I've had conversations with most senior members of the RF over the years" my a$$.  Maybe in his head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!  If you're stupid enough to think you'll last as a "BFF" of Meghan's, you deserve everything you get.
> 
> How old is Scobie?  18?  His picture looks ridiculously young.  "I've had conversations with most senior members of the RF over the years" my a$$.



He's 39, turning 40 in July.


----------



## mdcx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's 39, turning 40 in July.


He's done some unusual things to his face it seems. He really looks 20.


----------



## mdcx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh...I just read that apparently Meghan shut Doria up the same way she shuts up Harry when she took her along to an event (was it that community kitchen?). Doria said something, Meghan gave her the death stare. I haven't gone looking for the video but at this point I wonder what the hell is going on.


It seems obvious to me that Doria is on the MM payroll, as long as she behaves.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That reminds me of the time I - a foodwriter by profession - had the audacity to enter a discussion about my national cuisine saying it's not all pork legs and sauerkraut (just as lederhosen and dirndl isn't our national costume, it's the costume of Bavaria, one of 16 states!), and got yelled at because wouldn't you know, all the food specialists had travelled to Germany once and couldn't fine a single good meal and had to resort to Lebanese restaurants (which left me SO confused as this is so random. We don't have a big Lebanese community at all. Maybe they confused Berlin with Paris?). While I didn't feel culturally appropriated I surely rolled my eyes hard



The world is full of know-it-alls. It never occurs to any of them that in reality they DO NOT KNOW IT ALL.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I think she'll be a friend as long as she's useful and right now both Gayle and Oprah are very useful.
> 
> Think of it, *Omid Scobie has been pushed aside in favor of a new, famous mouthpiece, Gayle King!!*


Never!!!! Loyal Scoobie will always be there for MM. "_I’m loyal. And no matter how many times my loyalty has been abused..._" Omib dedicates this quote to MM!


----------



## rose60610

limom said:


> Woke screaming banshee says it all, doesn’t it?



I meant it in a nice way


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's 39, turning 40 in July.


I really don’t like him now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> He's done some unusual things to his face it seems. He really looks 20.



I bet he’s been doing fillers for years.


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> This is so sad. The end of any chance of a reconciliation imo. How could Harry stoop to this level...


I used to listen to Gayle on talk radio.  she seems to really love her kids.  so how could she not care that Harry is hurting his family this way?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Join me on the Alec Baldwin thread.


I went to Baldwin's thread a few days ago to check on Hilaria La Española, but didn't find much movement there. Here there is always something going on. See what I mean? 











						Harry and Meghan blow apart hope of peace by discussing private talks
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have triggered an icy response from Buckingham Palace after sharing private details of a phone call between Harry, Prince Charles and Prince Williams with a TV host.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> I meant it in a nice way



I know


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Poor Omid, already been Markled!



Poor guy, he sounds so delusional.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Poor guy, he sounds so delusional.



Pretty safe bet considering


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Poor guy, he sounds so delusional.


Like attracts like.


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> ahem...........you all DO know that banshees are an Irish folk legend.
> Just want to make sure that my grandparents culture isn't being inappropriately appropriated



You're right, I apologize  . FYI The Chicago River got dyed green again this year. Oh well, hides the dead bodies better. DH is full Italian, from Chicago. You wouldn't believe how many people (outside Chicago) assume he's affiliated with The Mob (he isn't), they either tease or flat out ask him in seriousness. He did grow up in a neighborhood where FBI agents often took down license plate #'s of cars parked at mob funerals. When he was about 8, an agent asked him about the various cars and he told him "That's 'Mr. Moretti's' car, he lives over there, that's Mrs. Garcetti's car, she lives over there, etc" then the agent would scratch off the numbers on his list. DH  did know of a lot of mob families, and steered clear.
Two years ago we were in Dublin, taking a tour of the Jameson's Distillery (great tour, well done), the group we were in all introduced themselves and where they were from. When we said "Chicago", the Australian couple behind us whispered "Gangsters!"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Never!!!! Loyal Scoobie will always be there for MM. "_I’m loyal. And no matter how many times my loyalty has been abused..._" Omib dedicates this quote to MM!


He sounds like a stalker!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> You're right, I apologize  . FYI The Chicago River got dyed green again this year. Oh well, hides the dead bodies better. DH is full Italian, from Chicago. You wouldn't believe how many people (outside Chicago) assume he's affiliated with The Mob (he isn't), they either tease or flat out ask him in seriousness. He did grow up in a neighborhood where FBI agents often took down license plate #'s of cars parked at mob funerals. When he was about 8, an agent asked him about the various cars and he told him "That's 'Mr. Moretti's' car, he lives over there, that's Mrs. Garcetti's car, she lives over there, etc" then the agent would scratch off the numbers on his list. DH  did know of a lot of mob families, and steered clear.
> Two years ago we were in Dublin, taking a tour of the Jameson's Distillery (great tour, well done), the group we were in all introduced themselves and where they were from. When we said "Chicago", *the Australian couple behind us whispered "Gangsters!*"


That's rude!  I would've turned around and said, "Yep.  I'd be quiet if you know what's good for you!"


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Like attracts like.


I would say that MM & OS are a match made in heaven! Age, plastic surgeries... perfect soulmates. Should we start a GoFundMe to buy him a royal title?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Never!!!! Loyal Scoobie will always be there for MM. "_I’m loyal. And no matter how many times my loyalty has been abused..._" Omib dedicates this quote to MM!



Awww...for better or worse.


----------



## mdcx

I say to my husband now and then "I wonder what Meghan will do next?" Didn't expect her to share the Harry/William convo with Gayle, but it seems now there is no bottom. So, what next? Perhaps she starts releasing some of her collateral, excuse me, "memories" of her time in the UK?


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I say to my husband now and then "I wonder what Meghan will do next?" Didn't expect her to share the Harry/William convo with Gayle, but it seems now there is no bottom. So, what next? Perhaps she starts releasing some of her collateral, excuse me, "memories" of her time in the UK?


LOL, the BRF should merch this:  #WWMDN (What will Meghan do next?)


----------



## jennlt

marietouchet said:


> just dawned on me, G only tells the HM side of the story ie the part interesting to her US audience, she does not report the other story from across the pond
> 
> I missed this bit in the Gayle recap from this morning
> 
> King also revealed that “no one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet or at this particular time,” and that both Harry and Meghan “want to move forward” with Harry’s family, despite their frustration over the royals failing to quell racist stories in the tabloids about Markle. “The family has to acknowledge that there are issues, and right now, no one is acknowledging, _Houston, we have a problem! _That’s all they really want. They want a conversation.”
> 
> more demands, the BRF must acknowledge issues,  remember the unilateral Megxit manifesto ? I guess W words about the family and race were not well received...
> 
> and what racist story has been in the tabloids last week ? In the last week, the story was the interview, and the HM point of view ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King Has an Update on Meghan and Harry and the Royals and It’s Not Great
> 
> 
> “No one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet or at this particular time.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vulture.com



Why would anyone in the royal family be willing to talk to H&M when they know the conversation will be broadcast on TV by Gayle? And it would almost certainly be told from H & M's point of view rather than an unbiased, journalistic, factual perspective?
Also, if H & M want to "move forward", they should be the ones to initiate a conversation rather than perpetuate their victimhood by saying "no one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet..." Phone lines work in both directions in Montecito, don't they? Or did they have to go with a low cost phone plan that only allows incoming calls because Charles "cut them off financially"?
Their disingenuousness beggars belief.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I have a real dumb question, seriously : If Harry got stripped of his title as "Prince", is Archie still eligible to become a Prince when Charles ascends to the throne? In my google search I just got info that didn't answer that question. So I thought I'd ask the royal watchers here  .



Actually, that's a good and not straight forward question, my guess is it would have to also be discussed in Parliament (prob. same time as H's title)


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think he can be stripped of the Prince, can he? They can only take away the dukedom.



It would need to be taken to the Houses of Parliament (Commons and then Lords)


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> The same college student who wouldn't think twice about swilling green beer, listening to U2 and eating corned beef and cabbage when it ought to be Harp or Guinness, ceilidh music, and bangers and mash
> 
> not that there is anything wrong with listening to U2........Joshua Tree is one of my desert island albums



Hold on and back-up. *Green* beer?


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> That's rude!  I would've turned around and said, "Yep.  I'd be quiet if you know what's good for you!"



Ha! We often meet a number of Australians when we go to Hawaii and they seem pretty mellow to us. Of course, that's what Hawaii does to people . One time at check-in at a nice hotel in Paris, the desk clerk went "Chicago! Capone! Bang Bang!" I should have followed your advice and demanded an upgrade with steely eyes and a death glare .


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> Hold on and back-up. *Green* beer?



I wish I were kidding, but sadly I'm not


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Prince Charles Quit Talking To Harry After Sussexes Frequently Asked For Money: Sources


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prince Charles Quit Talking To Harry After Sussexes Frequently Asked For Money: Sources


I believe this fully.


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prince Charles Quit Talking To Harry After Sussexes Frequently Asked For Money: Sources


Quelle surprise!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I bet he’s been doing fillers for years.



or it's a 20 year old photo


----------



## mdcx

I saw a suggestion in the Daily Mail comments that William took that phone call with Harry as a kind of test, to see if the contents of the call would be leaked to the media afterwards. And yes, they were. The steel trapdoors will be shut permanently now I would think.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I went to Baldwin's thread a few days ago to check on Hilaria La Española, but didn't find much movement there. Here there is always something going on. See what I mean?
> View attachment 5024832
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan blow apart hope of peace by discussing private talks
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have triggered an icy response from Buckingham Palace after sharing private details of a phone call between Harry, Prince Charles and Prince Williams with a TV host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





mdcx said:


> I saw a suggestion in the Daily Mail comments that William took that phone call with Harry as a kind of test, to see if the contents of the call would be leaked to the media afterwards. And yes, they were. The steel trapdoors will be shut permanently now I would think.



Bye bye Harry


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> This is very interesting. Four professionals in the arena of military, interrogators, government, etc. share their dispassionate view on our  topic with body language. Top 4 experts in the world. Highly qualified.



This was so interesting, thanks for posting the video @Lodpah  I popped on my headphones, poured a large glass of wine and watched the entire thing! I am fascinated by all things psychology, so this video was a treat 





bag-mania said:


> I doubt Michelle ***** really wanted to be sucked into the H&M train wreck. I think her comment was about as diplomatic as she could possibly have made it.
> 
> *Michelle ***** Reacts To Meghan Markle & Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview: ‘I Just Pray That There Is Forgiveness’*
> Mario noted Michelle’s connection to Meghan Markle and asked her thoughts on the fallout of Meghan and Prince Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which the couple made troubling claims about their time as senior royals. Michelle, who Meghan interviewed for British Vogue in 2019, sent well wishes for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to find closure that works best for them and their future as they continue navigating their rift with the monarchy.
> 
> “My hope is that, when I think about what they’re going through, I think about the importance of family and I just pray that there is forgiveness and there is clarity and love and resolve at some point in time,” Michelle said of Meghan and Harry. “Because there’s nothing more important than family.”
> 
> https://www.accessonline.com/articl...terview-i-just-pray-that-there-is-forgiveness


Loved Michelle's response. I bet MM hates it and is having a meltdown after reading it, because to a narc this will feel like a punch in the face






chicinthecity777 said:


> *ITV edit “seriously inaccurate and misleading” section of Markle interview*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ITV edit "seriously inaccurate and misleading" section of Markle interview
> 
> 
> The British broadcaster of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s cushy interview with ultra-rich American celeb Oprah Winfrey, ITV, has promised to remove a number of manipulated headlines from the broadcast which alleged to show racism in the British press. The decision follows a complaint made to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> foxhole.news


Seriously ITV? Bit late for that, don't ya think?






CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa are they playing at?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ms King, who attended Meghan and Harry's wedding in May 2018, claimed Prince Harry also had a conversation with his father Prince Charles.
> 
> Appearing on CBS This Morning, she said: "I am not trying to break news but I did actually call them to see how they were feeling and it's true, Harry has talked to his brother and his father too.
> 
> "The word I was given was that those conversations were not productive."
> 
> However, she added, the royals "are glad they at least started a conversation."
> 
> Ms King also said: "And I think what it is still upsetting to them is that the palace keeps saying they want to work it out privately and yet they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still, no one in the Royal Family has talked to Meghan yet at this particular time and I think it is frustrating for them to see there is a racial conversation about the Royal Family when all they wanted all along for the royals to intervene and tell the press to stop with the unfair inaccurate false stories that have a racial slant.
> 
> "And until you can't acknowledge that I think it's going to be difficult to move forward, but they both want to move forward with this and they both want healing in this family, at the end of the day this is Harry's family."
> More...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and William finally speak after Meghan interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William spoke for the first time since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah was broadcasted - but their talks were "unproductive", a friend of Meghan Markle has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk








Gayle dear, this is the British Royal Family not the Kardashians. Show some respect and stop stirring the pot like this is the new season of KUWTK. You are not a Royal Correspondent and you are reporting on info that is fed from pathological liars as fact, so shut up.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe MM and Oprah are secretly soulmates.



Interesting...








QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's 39, turning 40 in July.


He's 39/40?!


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> I wish I were kidding, but sadly I'm not


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I saw a suggestion in the Daily Mail comments that William took that phone call with Harry as a kind of test, to see if the contents of the call would be leaked to the media afterwards. And yes, they were. The steel trapdoors will be shut permanently now I would think.


The drawbridge is closed.    I bet they'd love to shove Meg into the moat!


----------



## bisousx

mdcx said:


> He's done some unusual things to his face it seems. He really looks 20.



Not to be snarky but his undereye area looks overfilled with.. well, filler. He doesn’t look young at all IMHO, instead looks like someone trying to look young.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

poopsie said:


> Well.............can't WAIT to see how you all celebrate tomorrow sans "cultural appropriation" or racist stereotypes



I don’t celebrate St.P’s day even if my 17% Irish DNA and my like for The Pogues might give me some leeway


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Didn't Di blow off her bid for an interview? Think I read that here somewhere












						Princess Diana’s Chef, Darren McGrady, Dishes On Her Eating Habits & How She Duped Oprah - Chef Darren McGrady | The Royal Chef
					

Posted on The Huffington Post by Rebecca Adams. (View original article here.) “They were the happiest times at Kensington,” Darren McGrady remembered about the four years he worked as Princess Diana’s personal chef at Kensington Palace. McGrady had worked for Queen Elizabeth II in Buckingham...




					theroyalchef.com
				



_When it came to her house guests, Diana didn’t want anyone to miss out on the decadent staples of McGrady’s cooking just because she was watching her fat intake. In fact, while eating lunch with Oprah Winfrey, another famous dieter, Diana managed to pull a fast one on the television host as the two dined on McGrady’s tomato mousse. After a few mouthfuls, Oprah put down her spoon and said, “Diana, how do you stay so slim eating rich food like this?” The princess replied, “I just eat small portions and work out.” That wasn’t quite true, though — Diana had McGrady serve her a fat-free version of his tomato mousse, while Oprah was eating the full-fat dish chock full of mayonnaise, sour cream and heavy cream. “Diana never did tell her the truth,” McGrady said._






Spoiler: Tomato mousse recipe



Chilled Tomato and Dill Mousse With Lobster
Makes six servings.
Ingredients:
1/2 teaspoon vegetable oil
1 pound ripe tomatoes, chopped
3 tablespoons finely minced onion
1/2 cup mayonnaise
1/2 cup sour cream
1/4 cup heavy cream
1 tablespoon tomato paste
salt and freshly ground pepper
1 small bunch fresh dill, finely chopped
1 1/2 packets unflavored gelatin
1 lemon, halved
6 (7-ounce) lobster tails, steamed and split down the center
1/4 cup extra virgin olive oil
1 bunch fresh chives, chopped
3 bunches watercress, washed and stems removed
Method:
1. Lightly brush six small ramekins with the vegetable oil and set aside.
2. In a food processor, puree the tomatoes with the chopped onion. Strain the pulp into a bowl, pressing on the tomatoes to push as much as possible through the sieve into the bowl. In s a separate bowl, combine the mayonnaise, sour cream, heavy cream and tomato paste. Fold into the tomato/onion puree. Add a pinch of salt and pepper and the finely chopped dill. Stir to combine.
3. Place the gelatin into a small saucepan, and moisten it with the juice of 1/2 of the lemon. If the lemon doesn’t have a lot of juice, you may need to add up to a tablespoon of water. Reserve the remaining 1/2 lemon for the lobster vinaigrette. Melt the gelatin over a very low heat until it dissolves. Let it cool a moment, and then pour the gelatin over a very low heat until it dissolves. Let it cool a moment, and then pour the gelatin into the tomato mousse, mixing as you pour. Taste for salt and pepper.
4. Pour the finished mixture into the ramekins and refrigerate for at least one hour. Just before serving, run a small knife around the edge of the mold, dip the ramekin into a bowl of hot water to soften the gelatin, and turn out the mousse onto a plate.
5. Toss the split lobster tails with the olive oil, remaining lemon juice, salt, pepper and chopped chives. Nestle the lobster on a bed of watercress right next to the tomato mousse


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


>




IKR but better I guess than black and tans.


----------



## Lounorada

bisousx said:


> Not to be snarky but his undereye area looks overfilled with.. well, filler. He doesn’t look young at all IMHO, instead looks like someone trying to look young.


I agree, I spy lots of filler too. He looks young(ish) in those tiny thumbnail sized pics I always see of him, but I can only imagine what a larger, close-up picture would reveal  I really don't want to know/see TBH.


----------



## artax two

poopsie said:


> Well.............can't WAIT to see how you all celebrate tomorrow sans "cultural appropriation" or racist stereotypes


Well if a Boondock Saints 1 and 2 marathon is cultural appropriation, guilty as charged


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prince Charles Quit Talking To Harry After Sussexes Frequently Asked For Money: Sources



Great article! This explains Harry's comments about the last call not been productive, there was no wire transfer after it.


----------



## Chagall

Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.


I found the French much nice even when I attempted my high school level basic French.  They'd often graciously switch to English, probably to void my grating their ears with my awful accent.


----------



## artax two

Chagall said:


> Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.


Seems like there used to be a saying..something like "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"......or something like that


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I would say that *MM & OS are a match made in heaven*! Age, plastic surgeries... perfect soulmates. Should we start a GoFundMe to buy him a royal title?


Wrong location if you know what I mean. (_Wink, wink, wink)_ Do fire and brimstone ring a bell?


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> Phone lines work in both directions in Montecito, don't they? Or did they have to go with a low cost phone plan that only allows incoming calls because Charles "cut them off financially"?
> Their disingenuousness beggars belief.



They have trouble remembering how to use the phone. Just like they apparently forgot how to use it when Meghan had suicidal thoughts. If they had remembered they wouldn’t have to rely on other family members to find a therapist for them and they could do it themselves, you know, like how every other adult in the world takes personal responsibility for their lives.


----------



## Chanbal

The number of people feeling nauseous with MM&H keeps increasing.... 

MERCY MUROKI *Meghan’s claim that Archie didn’t get a title because of his skin colour is total BS*

*"MERCY MUROKI smiles as she recalls how her first school in Kenya had no electricity and a pit latrine for a toilet.*

But now, after arriving on these shores aged five, becoming homeless and giving birth as a single mum, the 25-year-old is close to completing her masters degree at Oxford.

And she has little sympathy for Harry and Meghan’s complaints either. “I’ve never felt like I’m a victim,” she tells me.

“And so when I’ve seen that narrative being imposed on me because I’m a certain colour or because I’m a woman, I just don’t agree.

“What has annoyed me recently is well-meaning white liberals having a condescending attitude because they think I’m oppressed and I’m saying, ‘No, I’m not’.

*“The things the Sussexes say sometimes are fully cringe. I listened to their podcast and it made me feel nauseous.”*









						Meghan's claim Archie didn't get a title because of his skin colour is total BS
					

MERCY MUROKI smiles as she recalls how her first school in Kenya had no electricity and a pit latrine for a toilet. But now, after arriving on these shores aged five, becoming homeless and giving b…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

This is old news for us, but the choice of words in the title is fun. 






Spoiler: old news on private MM












						Meghan gets TV pal to reveal ‘unproductive’ Harry talks with Charles and Wills
					

MEGHAN and Harry sparked Palace fury last night after details of private peace talks with Charles and William were leaked to a prime-time US TV show. Gayle King, a pal of privacy-conscious Meghan, …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## haute okole

bisousx said:


> Not to be snarky but his undereye area looks overfilled with.. well, filler. He doesn’t look young at all IMHO, instead looks like someone trying to look young.


Maybe it is Coke Bloat or maybe he is just drinking too much.  In any event, after all this drama, he grosses me out.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's 39, turning 40 in July.



That means he’s a couple of weeks older than Meghan. Do we know how she met him? Now I’m imagining they went to school together.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chagall said:


> Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.


Love that guy!


----------



## floatinglili

Chagall said:


> That’s silly. If POC straighten their hair we don’t say it is cultural appropriation.



Ive seen Nordic blonde insta models dragged horrifically for daring to braid their hair in traditional European styles?!

It seems that for many US based activists (no doubt of all ethnic backgrounds themselves), if a white-looking woman arranges her hair in anything other than House On The Prairie plaits, she is out of bounds?

I often find the conversation about cultural appropriation tends to go towards the quite frighteningly blinkered, controlling and yes racist, gotta be honest. 

As I said previously, it sometimes feels like the whole world’s public discourse has turned into a very earnest, activist second year uni tutorial session lol.  

Please don’t flame me!  
im a bit scared of this topic and yes it’s OT as well. It’s fine to delete if necessary. For the sake of the trolled Nordic blonde just wanted to get that off my chest oops.


----------



## floatinglili

Hermes Zen said:


> Like Bo Derek's back in the day?



Well I was thinking dreadlocks and way way before Bo Derek but I think you knew that and are trolling me??

If you got a beef with Bo Derek’s stylists better take it up with her.  ??

Also better complain to all the many women in Bali who make a living from plaiting tourists of all ethnicities in that style while you are at it?


----------



## gracekelly

A few  things for a Tuesday.

When Archie was born, they said they did not want a title for him.  So they are now contradicting themselves? Singing a whole other tune and  they never came out at the time and said they wanted him to be a Prince.  When is Oprah/Gayle going to address this? There are archives full of them stating that they didn't want a title for him, so how do you explain that?  Just by ignoring it?

Since when does the Queen or the monarchy control the press?  The answer is that they don't.  The Sussex went after ANL when they didn't like the coverage they were getting about her father and the letter, so let them handle that again.  

What is this sending third parties to do your dirty work?  Your "friends" who keep stating that they have spoken to you and this is what you think by relaying it to the world via their mouth.  Janina, Gayle and Scobie.  Oh and let's not forget that train wreck Jamila.  Gayle is now a mouthpiece and a  press officer for the Sussex?  Her role is to call the Royal Family out on the carpet because they are not doing what the Sussex want them to do?  Careful Gayle or you will be markled along with the rest of the crew.

Is CBS loving the ratings or are they just afraid of what Oprah might say if one of their correspondents disagreed with her and Gayle. They can't keep throwing racism about people who disagree and can prove that certain things said were absolute falsehoods.  How about those doctored newpaper headlines. Care to comment on that OpGayle? (BTW, to my way of thinking Oprah and Gayle are one and the same person.)  You know what they say about absolute power, it corrupts absolutely.


----------



## floatinglili

bisousx said:


> Thank you for saying this.


I agree with the sentiment but who gate - keeps the gate keepers? Representation within every community is problematic. Often it is related to class, gender, nepotism or other issues. 
People are individuals not members of a coralled voting bloc. For the most part they should be able to do as they wish.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Well then the BRF must have crossed her, because she is out for blood.


She wanted to interview Prince Charles several years ago and he said no.  Is that enough reason?


----------



## floatinglili

purseinsanity said:


> That's rude!  I would've turned around and said, "Yep.  I'd be quiet if you know what's good for you!"


Lol tbh the Australians were quite likely to be joking. And if you had turned around like that it is likely they would have appreciated the extention of the joke haha.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chagall said:


> Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.



For starters, I'm of Chinese descent and I don't consider all the things mentioned above to be cultural appropriation (I know you didn't say so but we know some people would have the opposite opinion). Some of us are simply xenophiles and/or polyglots. I'm certainly one, having being born, raised and lived in a very multiracial and multicultural country all my life (until my move to a different country). I'm grateful for growing up in such an environment because it turned me into a far more open-minded and tolerant person. 

Respectfully, I personally feel that a large group of people these days are overly sensitive. As soon as someone says/does something that's against the group's beliefs or perceptions, the group would ostracize the person instead of simply agreeing to disagree. I find such behavior i.e. the cancel culture to be extremely disturbing. 

I believe in respect but some people want nothing more than to pick everything apart and turn it into something that it's not. I don't know about the rest of you but living in today's world is mentally exhausting


----------



## purseinsanity

floatinglili said:


> Lol tbh the Australians were quite likely to be joking. And if you had turned around like that it is likely they would have appreciated the extention of the joke haha.


Probably.  I'd actually never respond like that in public, LOL.  I usually think of a retort five days later,


----------



## EverSoElusive

floatinglili said:


> Lol tbh the Australians were quite likely to be joking. And if you had turned around like that it is likely they would have appreciated the extention of the joke haha.



I second this. I've lots of Australian friends and visited Australia annually. One thing for sure, they love to joke and they are cheeky. It might take some getting used to if one is unfamiliar with Australians' sense of humor


----------



## lalame

Chagall said:


> Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.



There's nothing wrong with speaking a new language... I wouldn't call it emulating someone though. To me that's the same as studying a different culture... you're putting in the work to get to know that culture and there's respect in that.


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> I second this. I've lots of Australian friends and visited Australia annually. One thing for sure, they love to joke and they are cheeky. It might take some getting used to if one is unfamiliar with Australians' sense of humor



yes - true.  I am Australian and that would have been said as a joke (most likely).


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> For starters, I'm of Chinese descent and I don't consider all the things mentioned above to be cultural appropriation (I know you didn't say so but we know some people would have the opposite opinion). Some of us are simply xenophiles and/or polyglots. I'm certainly one, having being born, raised and lived in a very multiracial and multicultural country all my life (until my move to a different country). I'm grateful for growing up in such an environment because it turned me into a far more open-minded and tolerant person.
> 
> Respectfully, I personally feel that a large group of people these days are overly sensitive. As soon as someone says/does something that's against the group's beliefs or perceptions, the group would ostracize the person instead of simply agreeing to disagree. I find such behavior i.e. the cancel culture to be extremely disturbing.
> 
> I believe in respect but some people want nothing more than to pick everything apart and turn it into something that it's not. I don't know about the rest of you but living in today's world is mentally exhausting



One of the reason's it is so exhausting is that with cancel culture, a person is forced to rethink everything that comes out of their mouth for fear of being cancelled, called racist and/or ostracized.  Funny how with all progressive liberals running the asylum that we are actually edging much closer to the Thought Police.  Actually, the Thought Police are here and Harry and Meghan are paid up dues paying members.


----------



## lalame

My thought on cancel culture is... whatever goes. If you don't want to financially support someone who has views counter to yours, don't do it. If enough enough of us don't like buying newspapers with M+H stories, are we "canceling" the newspapers? No, we're just taking our money and attention somewhere else. Fair enough to me. If someone feels like they need to change their beliefs to avoid being "canceled," they must find more benefit to doing that than the reverse. Guess they didn't feel that strongly about it in the first place.

Edit to add.. I do agree it's getting OTT with people jumping to conclusions though. I take racism pretty seriously and it's crazy to see people flippantly accusing others of racism when it might be simple ignorance, miscommunication, different culture, etc.


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> This appears to suggest that Oprah & Gayle are very invested in helping MM on her pursuit against the BRF.
> 
> *Grim-faced Prince William emerges hours after Meghan Markle's friend revealed his 'unproductive phone call with Harry': Gayle King says couple told her they want royals to speak out against 'racist press' and claim they can prove everything*
> Prince William was photographed looking glum while driving in London today after Meghan Markle's friend Gayle King revealed Prince Harry had spoken to him and their father Charles for the first time following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The CBS presenter, who attended Meghan's $500,000 baby shower in 2019, said she spoke to the Sussexes who told her that Harry had talked to the Duke of Cambridge and Prince of Wales over the weekend.
> 
> But she said the conversations were 'not productive' and the Sussexes were keen for the 'royals to intervene and tell the Press to stop with the unfair, inaccurate, false stories that definitely have a racial slant'.
> 
> Ms King, 66, who is also close friends with Oprah, failed to give any examples of the stories she was referring to, but added that Meghan has 'documents to back up everything that she said on Oprah's interview'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Harry 'speak for first time since Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Gayle King, who is close friends with Oprah, revealed on CBS This Morning today that Harry had spoken to the Duke of Cambridge and his father Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Another article based on someone’s driving face!  These are too far fetched to me, as I commented in the W&K thread.  No one drives around with an idiotic smile on their face.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> She wanted to interview Prince Charles several years ago and he said no.  Is that enough reason?



There are other celebrities who have declined an interview and she didn’t go on a mission to destroy them. I think Oprah has been giving Meghan advice ever since the wedding. At some point she crossed the line from being a dispassionate observer and she became personally invested in the Meghan and Harry story. My gut tells me it’s an ego trip for her to see how much havoc her show created for the BRF.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> For starters, I'm of Chinese descent and I don't consider all the things mentioned above to be cultural appropriation (I know you didn't say so but we know some people would have the opposite opinion). Some of us are simply xenophiles and/or polyglots. I'm certainly one, having being born, raised and lived in a very multiracial and multicultural country all my life (until my move to a different country). I'm grateful for growing up in such an environment because it turned me into a far more open-minded and tolerant person.
> 
> Respectfully, I personally feel that a large group of people these days are overly sensitive. As soon as someone says/does something that's against the group's beliefs or perceptions, the group would ostracize the person instead of simply agreeing to disagree. I find such behavior i.e. the cancel culture to be extremely disturbing.
> 
> I believe in respect but some people want nothing more than to pick everything apart and turn it into something that it's not. I don't know about the rest of you but living in today's world is mentally exhausting


Well said!  ITA!


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is on the case, QE has nothing to worry about.  

*Piers Morgan calls on Britons to 'stand up for our Queen' as he lays into Harry and Meghan for trying to paint the royals as 'a bunch of heartless racists'*
Piers Morgan has called on Britons to 'stand up for our Queen' while accusing Harry and Meghan of leading a campaign to paint the Royal Family as a 'bunch of heartless racists'.

The former GMB host took to Twitter to slam the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a week after resigning from his presenter role for refusing to apologise for comments he made about the couple's controversial interview with Oprah.

He took aim at the couple again last night, writing: *'There's a very deliberate & malicious campaign being perpetrated by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to smear, defame and trash Britain, our Monarchy & the Royal Family as a bunch of heartless racists. It's disgusting.*

'Time to stand up for our Queen.'









						Piers Morgan calls on Britons to 'stand up for our Queen'
					

Piers Morgan took to Twitter to slam the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a week after resigning from his presenter role on Good Morning Britain.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## haute okole

floatinglili said:


> Ive seen Nordic blonde insta models dragged horrifically for daring to braid their hair in traditional European styles?!
> 
> It seems that for many US based activists (no doubt of all ethnic backgrounds themselves), if a white-looking woman arranges her hair in anything other than House On The Prairie plaits, she is out of bounds?
> 
> I often find the conversation about cultural appropriation tends to go towards the quite frighteningly blinkered, controlling and yes racist, gotta be honest.
> 
> As I said previously, it sometimes feels like the whole world’s public discourse has turned into a very earnest, activist second year uni tutorial session lol.
> 
> Please don’t flame me!
> im a bit scared of this topic and yes it’s OT as well. It’s fine to delete if necessary. For the sake of the trolled Nordic blonde just wanted to get that off my chest oops.


I tell my kids that there is a new term being thrown around called “Woke Supremacy”.  As a person of color, I appreciate the current empathy, but some people are taking it too far.  Cultural appropriation and cancel culture are a bridge too far.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> One of the reason's it is so exhausting is that with cancel culture, a person is forced to rethink everything that comes out of their mouth for fear of being cancelled, called racist and/or ostracized.  Funny how with all progressive liberals running the asylum that we are actually edging much closer to the Thought Police.  Actually, the Thought Police are here and Harry and Meghan are paid up dues paying members.



 
Love love this post!
My thoughts may change when and if OW, GK, H&M provide new *facts* with documentation.  
Just because they say something is true does not make it so.  Didn’t we all learn that in pre-k? Surely MI6 (?) is actively listening to H&M calls. If they weren’t before today’s news, I’m guessing they are now.


----------



## Annawakes

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners?
> 
> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?


Love this.  “Woke screaming banshees”   This is gold!!  Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Piers is on the case, QE has nothing to worry about.
> 
> *Piers Morgan calls on Britons to 'stand up for our Queen' as he lays into Harry and Meghan for trying to paint the royals as 'a bunch of heartless racists'*
> Piers Morgan has called on Britons to 'stand up for our Queen' while accusing Harry and Meghan of leading a campaign to paint the Royal Family as a 'bunch of heartless racists'.
> 
> The former GMB host took to Twitter to slam the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a week after resigning from his presenter role for refusing to apologise for comments he made about the couple's controversial interview with Oprah.
> 
> He took aim at the couple again last night, writing: *'There's a very deliberate & malicious campaign being perpetrated by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to smear, defame and trash Britain, our Monarchy & the Royal Family as a bunch of heartless racists. It's disgusting.*
> 
> 'Time to stand up for our Queen.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan calls on Britons to 'stand up for our Queen'
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan took to Twitter to slam the Duke and Duchess of Sussex a week after resigning from his presenter role on Good Morning Britain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



He can take the heat. So glad he is in the kitchen


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> One of the reason's it is so exhausting is that with cancel culture, a person is forced to rethink everything that comes out of their mouth for fear of being cancelled, called racist and/or ostracized.  Funny how with all progressive liberals running the asylum that we are actually edging much closer to the Thought Police.  Actually, the Thought Police are here and Harry and Meghan are paid up dues paying members.



Let me just say, it's crazy the amount of apologies that are all over the internet nowadays because a public figure or corporation is bullied into it. Also, whenever an issue is brought up, every public figure or corporation has to come out and is forced to take a stand or they will be deemed disrespectful, racist, sexist etc. 

Frankly, if someone or a corporation has a stand, that's great but one shouldn't be compelled to spell it out. Actions speak louder than words! 

I'm tired of seeing political or social elements when I go shopping with all these posters saying a certain thing that has nothing to do with my shopping. I don't need extra seriousness and stress when I shop, eat or have fun somewhere, you know?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> One of the reason's it is so exhausting is that with cancel culture, a person is forced to rethink everything that comes out of their mouth for fear of being cancelled, called racist and/or ostracized.  Funny how with all progressive liberals running the asylum that we are actually edging much closer to the Thought Police.  Actually, the Thought Police are here and Harry and Meghan are paid up dues paying members.


Absolutely!  I find it annoying that if someone says anything that's not deemed "okay", they're automatically ostracized and basically forced to publicly apologize and eat crow.  It's basically an online public lynching.  I don't feel like most of these apologies are truthful  anyway, and I'm tired of reading how they'll better educate themselves, blah blah blah.  Fact is, there are about 7 billion people on the planet, and there's no way every single one of us will agree on every single thing.  And not everyone is going to like every other person walking the earth just because we're told to.  There are people I don't like from every single race and gender, including my own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> Another article based on someone’s driving face!  These are too far fetched to me, as I commented in the W&K thread.  No one drives around with an idiotic smile on their face.



Since the last round of sour H&M driving faces, I’ve been working with hubs on his driving face. He is not amused.
Today he finally said we look like idiots with these grins, then finished with ‘why is anyone taking our picture while we are driving’. 
My work continues


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since the last round of sour H&M driving faces, I’ve been working with hubs on his driving face. He is not amused.
> Today he finally said we look like idiots with these grins. My work continues


LOLOL!  I need to make sure I stop picking my nose.



(I'm joking!)

...kind of.


----------



## purseinsanity

haute okole said:


> I tell my kids that there is a new term being thrown around called *“Woke Supremacy”*.  As a person of color, I appreciate the current empathy, but some people are taking it too far.  Cultural appropriation and cancel culture are a bridge too far.


Love this!  I 100% agree with you.


----------



## floatinglili

The natural way of humanity is to share, to learn, to advance and extend. Your example fo the Mexican grandmother struck a chord with me, because so often in history women have created the base culture that men (and their families, to be fair) then commercialise or profit from. the running joke about Shakespeare’s wife writing some of the work etc.
But such is the way of humanity - to take, to improve, or just to change what has gone before.
Also as every modern sculptor learns, collecting found objects and presenting them in a different context, creates new work and new ways of looking and thinking at things.

Beyoncé is an interesting study in this new language and conversation of cultural appropriation because she has been so outspoken and political herself at times.
knowing her activist interests I was astonished when she chose to pose as an Italian style Mary Mother of Jesus to celebrate a pregnancy. It seemed a really overt case of appropriation for commercial reasons and I wondered how the activist crew would process it. But there was no critique whatsoever, for better or worse.

*edited sorry initially referred to Mary companion of Jesus


QueenofWrapDress said:


> You can. Where it gets sh*tty is when the white (and probably male) celebrity chef gets screen time with his famous tamales while the Mexican grandmother that's been doing them for 50 years gets ignored in the narrative, or people pay big bucks for an Italian meal but expect tacos or pho to be cheap.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL!  I need to make sure I stop picking my nose.
> 
> 
> 
> (I'm joking!)
> 
> ...kind of.



Nose picking while driving should be your signature look. Cringe might plagiarize that look because she can never be original


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Nose picking while driving should be your signature look. Cringe might plagiarize that look because she can never be original



It could only be an improvement for both of them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> It could only be an improvement for both of them
> View attachment 5024978



Goodness gracious! I bet she would have liked that picture to be scrubbed off the internet


----------



## bisousx

floatinglili said:


> I agree with the sentiment but who gate - keeps the gate keepers? Representation within every community is problematic. Often it is related to class, gender, nepotism or other issues.
> People are individuals not members of a coralled voting bloc. For the most part they should be able to do as they wish.



I don’t know how to multiquote so for reference, I agreed with @limom’s sentiment about letting POC speak for themselves. I am beyond tired of woke Caucasian / majority folks of today trying to tell POC what we should think, feel or be offended at. Yes, I believe there are offensive cultural appropriations out there, racism and microaggressions that have been a part of our society and went unaddressed for years. I’m grateful that racism is being addressed these days because growing up, there seemed to be nobody who cared when we (the POC in my middle & high schools) were getting assaulted, jeered at or mistreated.

I’m also skeptical of the loud banshee screaming young wokers today, like _thank you for caring -  do you care because it’s trendy to be woke?_  Where were you 20 years ago? I’m genuinely confused. There’s also this mindset of squeezing blood out of turnips, where people are so focused on finding negativity at every turn - cancel culture leaves no room for honest discussion, education and learning. It seems like people are joining in on the woke culture because it makes them feel better about themselves, but in reality wokeness doesn’t actually add value to anyone’s lives or improve conditions for POC. That I’ve seen, anyways.

FWIW, I appreciate those on this thread who are admitting they don’t know what it feels like to be a POC or don’t understand - that’s totally OK imho. What I don’t appreciate is having a non-POC tell me what to think, that certain groups need “re education” or who to vote for.. it happens all the time and it’s the most racist thing I’ve experienced to date.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Bo had cornrows (I think or maybe they are boxer braids) with beads attached. This is another hairstyle associated with black hair. It’s done by braiding the hair. It’s thought to not actually be a good style for white hair as it puts pressure on it.
> 
> Dreads are different because they are created by matting rather than braiding the hair. It is associated with the Rastafarian religion and with Reggae culture. Bob Marley, for example, wore dreads.


I tried to google it and the pics looked similar to me but I'm not familiar with the styles. Thanks for the education!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Has anyone else seen or posted this IG post on the Wokey Pokeys? Not sure how to post the clickable frame post like you guys do  Someone please teach me!

Anyone needs a good barfing? See the link below.

Barf inducing

ETA: Figured it out


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C on rage, enviousness, delusion and culture appropriation...
I didn't know that MM was a practitioner of self hypnosis.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Lady C on rage, enviousness, delusion and culture appropriation...
> I didn't know that MM was a practitioner of self hypnosis.





She must have been walking around hypnotized and that's why she says crazy things


----------



## Lodpah

I think their finances might not be as great as we think:

Mortgage plus taxes, insurance
Maintenance 
Maids/gardeners/nannies
Taxes/ health insurance for staff
Security
Food/Utilities 
PR
Expensive clothing
Transportation 

This is all about money. Forcing the BRF by being nasty until they cave in.

Think about it, their outlay is probably over a 300K a month, plus lawyers they have.
PR is not cheap. And it’s tax season.


----------



## bisousx

Lodpah said:


> I think their finances might not be as great as we think:
> 
> Mortgage plus taxes, insurance
> Maintenance
> Maids/gardeners/nannies
> Taxes/ health insurance for staff
> Security
> Food/Utilities
> PR
> Expensive clothing
> Transportation
> 
> This is all about money. Forcing the BRF by being nasty until they cave in.
> 
> Think about it, their outlay is probably over a 300K a month, plus lawyers they have.
> PR is not cheap. And it’s tax season.



IIRC, wasn’t there chatter of Meghan and Harry blackmailing the BRF during their Megxit negotiations?

It looks like H&M have an entire game plan of nasty strings to pull - from Megxit, to the tell-all book, to threats of selling video footage to Netflix, to Oprah, now mudslinging in the media using celebrities as mouthpieces... something tells me they have more up their sleeve.


----------



## mellibelly

Lounorada said:


> I agree, I spy lots of filler too. He looks young(ish) in those tiny thumbnail sized pics I always see of him, but I can only imagine what a larger, close-up picture would reveal  I really don't want to know/see TBH.



I googled  he also has lip fillers and really obvious veneers. I wish I could unsee


----------



## Lodpah

bisousx said:


> IIRC, wasn’t there chatter of Meghan and Harry blackmailing the BRF during their Megxit negotiations?
> 
> It looks like H&M have an entire game plan of nasty strings to pull - from Megxit, to the tell-all book, to threats of selling video footage to Netflix, to Oprah, now mudslinging in the media using celebrities as mouthpieces... something tells me they have more up their sleeve.


Let them. By now, most people have had time to digest what they have spilled. Reasonable people will have the mindset that two grown adults still at the teat albeit daddy’s teats, will be turned off, or turned off.

The celebrities backing them up arejust mouthpieces. I won’t be surprised if they’ve been asked to weigh in some support.

I think the support for them is exaggerated thus the media blitz. It’s advertising. Like advertise something and spend millions or billions of dollars to push their product but if the product is not good, eventually the money is trimmed back or the product is scrapped.

This interview backfired and it’s a media blitz.

No major advertisers bought into the show.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Absolutely!  I find it annoying that if someone says anything that's not deemed "okay", they're automatically ostracized and basically forced to publicly apologize and eat crow.  It's basically an online public lynching.  I don't feel like most of these apologies are truthful  anyway, and I'm tired of reading how they'll better educate themselves, blah blah blah.  Fact is, there are about 7 billion people on the planet, and there's no way every single one of us will agree on every single thing.  And not everyone is going to like every other person walking the earth just because we're told to.  There are people I don't like from every single race and gender, including my own.


Yes yes yes!  I am so sick of all this bullying  People are being forced into saying things just to be politically correct. I don’t believe  their apology anyway and sometimes they just sound like hypocrites  What happened to free speech and having an opinion?  This is going to be a very boring vanilla world if people aren’t allowed to say what they think even  if it is obnoxious and sometimes downright rude lol!


----------



## limom

EverSoElusive said:


> For starters, I'm of Chinese descent and I don't consider all the things mentioned above to be cultural appropriation (I know you didn't say so but we know some people would have the opposite opinion). Some of us are simply xenophiles and/or polyglots. I'm certainly one, having being born, raised and lived in a very multiracial and multicultural country all my life (until my move to a different country). I'm grateful for growing up in such an environment because it turned me into a far more open-minded and tolerant person.
> 
> Respectfully, I personally feel that a large group of people these days are overly sensitive. As soon as someone says/does something that's against the group's beliefs or perceptions, the group would ostracize the person instead of simply agreeing to disagree. I find such behavior i.e. the cancel culture to be extremely disturbing.
> 
> I believe in respect but some people want nothing more than to pick everything apart and turn it into something that it's not. I don't know about the rest of you but living in today's world is mentally exhausting


It is a generational issue, imho.
My feelings are it is the best policy to refrain from hurting another person feeling.
For example using the word “Oriental“ is not appropriate. The right designation is Asian. It is not hard for me to make the change,
My 85 MIL is still using that term but of course she is Chinese. So it is her prerogative.
I agree that we are living in stressful times. Change is hard.


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> Yes yes yes!  I am so sick of all this bullying  People are being forced into saying things just to be politically correct. I don’t believe  their apology anyway and sometimes they just sound like hypocrites  What happened to free speech and having an opinion?  This is going to be a very boring vanilla world if people aren’t allowed to say what they think even  if it is obnoxious and sometimes downright rude lol!


Meh, if I hurt someone what is the big deal to apologize and say sorry?


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> I think their finances might not be as great as we think:
> 
> Mortgage plus taxes, insurance
> Maintenance
> Maids/gardeners/nannies
> Taxes/ health insurance for staff
> Security
> Food/Utilities
> PR
> Expensive clothing
> Transportation
> 
> This is all about money. Forcing the BRF by being nasty until they cave in.
> 
> Think about it, their outlay is probably over a 300K a month, plus lawyers they have.
> PR is not cheap. And it’s tax season.


It’s definitely about money. So much for financial independence when you are begging dad to pay your bills. I think they are strapped and had no clue what it was going to cost when they bought that place.   The PR costs must be astronomical.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> Meh, if I hurt someone what is the big deal to apologize and say sorry?


Apologies are great if you really mean them otherwise it is just lip flapping and in some cases, tap dancing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> Apologies are great if you really mean them otherwise it is just lip flapping and in some cases, tap dancing.


Tap dancing?
It is part of being civil, imho.
I wronged you, I apologize and say sorry.
And we can all move along, no?


----------



## pukasonqo

Hermes Zen said:


> I tried to google it and the pics looked similar to me but I'm not familiar with the styles. Thanks for the education!



Actually they have found mummies in Peru with braided hair and I don’t mean 2 or 3 braids but multiple ones
I always thought it strange as indigenous people’s hair is waterfall straight but might be a way of keeping it clean, the mummies were found both in the Coast and in the Anded


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> It’s definitely about money. So much for financial independence when you are begging dad to pay your bills. I think they are strapped and had no clue what it was going to cost when they bought that place.   The PR costs must be astronomical.


A quick cursory on Google is up to 50K a month but I don’t know how many PR forms they have on retainer.


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> I think their finances might not be as great as we think:
> 
> Mortgage plus taxes, insurance
> Maintenance
> Maids/gardeners/nannies
> Taxes/ health insurance for staff
> Security
> Food/Utilities
> PR
> Expensive clothing
> Transportation
> 
> This is all about money. Forcing the BRF by being nasty until they cave in.
> 
> Think about it, their outlay is probably over a 300K a month, plus lawyers they have.
> PR is not cheap. And it’s tax season.



I'm never going to feel sorry for them in any way relating to money. I bet they're comfortable and make money in ways we don't even know about yet, like private speeches. Celebrities have been busy with corporate paid engagements during COVID! But they don't strike me as too comfy to get security comped by Bank of Dad either.


----------



## Chanbal

M. McCain was all team MM after Oprah's interview, is she changing her mind?

"_Meghan McCain discussed the departure of Piers Morgan from Good Morning Britain after he faced criticisms and complaints about his comments on Meghan Markle. However, Ms McCain suggested the events which followed Mr Morgan's exit highlighted a big hole in the Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey during which she said that she did not follow newspapers reports about herself. Meghan Markle claimed that she hears about her media coverage from friends which Ms McCain said is at odds with her formal complaint to ITV over Mr Morgan's comments._"









						US commentator reveals discrepancy in Meghan Markle interview
					

AMERICAN columnist and political commentator Meghan McCain picked up one contradiction from Meghan Markle's interview which only came to light after the Duchess of Sussex submitted a press complaint.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I'm never going to feel sorry for them in any way relating to money. I bet they're comfortable and make money in ways we don't even know about yet, like private speeches. Celebrities have been busy with corporate paid engagements during COVID! But they don't strike me as too comfy to get security comped by Bank of Dad either.


They have plenty of resources, but they seem to want revenge:

“_They're now in a different place they're now in a position of making a bucket load of money. 

“They're in a beautiful house it seems incredible that they will have anything to complain about.”

Ms Levin replied: “Yeah, and they've got one child and another on the way which is always a huge blessing. 

“The thing is that they’re absolutely not happy because they want revenge and they're bitter and they want to destroy the people who for some reason has put them where they are."









						'They've got so much!' But Meghan Markle and Prince Harry still want 'revenge' on royals
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle are "not happy" because they are seeking revenge on the Royal Family and are "bitter", a royal biographer claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## mdcx

Apparently this is Meghan's favorite royal commentator Omid Scobie before and after:


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> I'm never going to feel sorry for them in any way relating to money. I bet they're comfortable and make money in ways we don't even know about yet, like private speeches. Celebrities have been busy with corporate paid engagements during COVID! But they don't strike me as too comfy to get security comped by Bank of Dad either.


Yep. Imagine their stress having to keep that lifestyle of paying PR to keep them relevant.


----------



## mdcx

Some vintage Meg also:


----------



## Helventara

bisousx said:


> I don’t know how to multiquote so for reference, I agreed with @limom’s sentiment about letting POC speak for themselves. I am beyond tired of woke Caucasian / majority folks of today trying to tell POC what we should think, feel or be offended at. Yes, I believe there are offensive cultural appropriations out there, racism and microaggressions that have been a part of our society and went unaddressed for years. I’m grateful that racism is being addressed these days because growing up, there seemed to be nobody who cared when we (the POC in my middle & high schools) were getting assaulted, jeered at or mistreated.
> 
> I’m also skeptical of the loud banshee screaming young wokers today, like _thank you for caring -  do you care because it’s trendy to be woke?_  Where were you 20 years ago? I’m genuinely confused. There’s also this mindset of squeezing blood out of turnips, where people are so focused on finding negativity at every turn - cancel culture leaves no room for honest discussion, education and learning. It seems like people are joining in on the woke culture because it makes them feel better about themselves, but in reality wokeness doesn’t actually add value to anyone’s lives or improve conditions for POC. That I’ve seen, anyways.
> 
> FWIW, I appreciate those on this thread who are admitting they don’t know what it feels like to be a POC or don’t understand - that’s totally OK imho. What I don’t appreciate is having a non-POC tell me what to think, that certain groups need “re education” or who to vote for.. it happens all the time and it’s the most racist thing I’ve experienced to date.



thank you for saying this. As a POC, this is my sentiment too. They appear to fight for MY cause but it’s just covert racism:  telling ME that my culture is wrong, it’s optically bad, WE should be offended, etc etc.


----------



## csshopper

Boggles the mind to think Harry would have expected a phone call to elicit "So nice to hear from you" from his father or brother after the way he attacked them and Kate in the Interview. 

The longer MM and H's new mouthpiece Gayle keeps stringing things along, the longer it gives people time to figure out all the half truths, outright lies and muddied allegations they made in the Interview. Meghan McCain and some of the other new voices that have been heard indicate some reassessment. And Meghan must be furious at MO's response about the importance of family and healing.

It does't do Oprah any good either, more and more commentary on how she let the untruths go unchallenged, If this was her "best interview ever"  in her opinion and spouted by Gayle, she needs to hang it up and find something else to do. This was messy, poorly researched and her pandering approach was a turn off. Oprah's realllllly unattractive, gaping mouth, long pause reaction to one of Meghan's outrageous comments left me waiting for a Director on set to call "Cut!"

The two minute video version of the Interview is the best.....remember "drive safe" "drive safe" "drive safe"

P. S. Some days Scobie looks like he's wearing a little too much eye liner and did he have eyebrow implants? Some days it looks like the caterpillar brows are trying to crawl off his forehead. Find him difficult to look at, he's so impressed with himself.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> Tap dancing?
> It is part of being civil, imho.
> I wronged you, I apologize and say sorry.
> And we can all move along, no?


Tap dancing means the person is frantically trying to make things better because  they have to. For instance an employee apologizing profusely even if they shouldn’t have to  so they can keep their job.


----------



## Hermes Zen

pukasonqo said:


> Actually they have found mummies in Peru with braided hair and I don’t mean 2 or 3 braids but multiple ones
> I always thought it strange as indigenous people’s hair is waterfall straight but might be a way of keeping it clean, the mummies were found both in the Coast and in the Anded


Thanks for sharing!  That's amazing.


----------



## lazeny

I was not a fan of these 2. Meghan seem disingenuous and incredibly petty.  But I do feel for Meghan after she gave birth to Archie. As a SAHM who suffers from PPD/PPA, the need to end my life was so strong it terrified me to seek help. I have access and support for mental health.

For Meghan, and some celebrity moms and moms who have a very public profile, I imagine it's dialed up to 11. 

Meghan will always be compared to Kate, such is the nature of the lives they chose. Kate is like one of those genetically gifted women who quickly bounces back to pre-pregnancy body. And Meghan took longer to bounce back and it doesn't help that she has terrible style.

Pregnancy and motherhood suits Kate very well. She positively glows and seems natural with children. Meghan looked awkward.

These things, when we are compared to other mom's makes PPD/PPA worse.

Meghan while in BRF has access to resources that can help her. Harry seems supportive but we all know he's dense and out of touch.

Now Meghan is pregnant again. But instead of celebrating the upcoming baby they seem to be stuck in drama. I have no doubt she may experience another bout of PPD after the 2nd child.


----------



## needlv

Does anyone see the irony of leaking the “not productive” phrase through Gayle?  Didn’t MM cut off her own father for talking to the press?

And to complain that no one has spoken to MM... I mean she hasn’t spoken to her own father after he leaked to the press...  why would they bother speaking to either of them if it ends up discussed on American morning breakfast shows?

IMO, the interview reset the relationship and was done for revenge because their business venture “Sussex royal” and requests for money were refused.  

Future Discussions should be kept to a minimum - casual and light, discussing business obligations (eg Diana memorial), minor enquires after health and how kids are doing.  And refusing their requests for money.  I personally would record the conversations... just in case.  But otherwise I would significantly reduce the calls and keep it to say, birthdays and Christmas.

H and MM are feeding negatively off each other.  It’s best the family keeps their distance (and silence!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

csshopper said:


> Boggles the mind to think Harry would have expected a phone call to elicit "So nice to hear from you" from his father or brother after the way he attacked them and Kate in the Interview.
> 
> The longer MM and H's new mouthpiece Gayle keeps stringing things along, the longer it gives people time to figure out all the half truths, outright lies and muddied allegations they made in the Interview. Meghan McCain and some of the other new voices that have been heard indicate some reassessment. And Meghan must be furious at MO's response about the importance of family and healing.
> 
> It does't do Oprah any good either, more and more commentary on how she let the untruths go unchallenged, If this was her "best interview ever"  in her opinion and spouted by Gayle, she needs to hang it up and find something else to do. This was messy, poorly researched and her pandering approach was a turn off. Oprah's realllllly unattractive, gaping mouth, long pause reaction to one of Meghan's outrageous comments left me waiting for a Director on set to call "Cut!"
> 
> The two minute video version of the Interview is the best.....remember "drive safe" "drive safe" "drive safe"
> 
> P. S. Some days Scobie looks like he's wearing a little too much eye liner and did he have eyebrow implants? Some days it looks like the caterpillar brows are trying to crawl off his forehead. Find him difficult to look at, he's so impressed with himself.


I think Meghan drove the interview and like most of her behaviour, I think the motivation was either leverage or payback.
Increasingly I think her "acting out" at Wimbledon was a way to payback the BRF for some perceived mistreatment.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> For the hyper cultural appropriation activists, are we allowed to dine in restaurants that serve food normally found in only certain countries that we don't come from? (I read somewhere that even the term "ethnic restaurant" is racist.) I mean, if I'm not Mexican, am  I allowed to eat tacos? If an owner of a Mexican restaurant is Mexican himself and does not care what nationality I am and is happy to sell me his food to make a profit, am I in potential danger of being accosted by an entitled woke college student who knows zero about economics for business owners?
> 
> If I wanted to wear an Indian sari because I think they're beautiful (I think they're very beautiful), is it wrong? If so, why do P'sOTUS, FL'sOTUS and Royalty occasionally wear clothes of the respective cultures they visit? Who keeps the woke screaming banshees away if it's wrong?


Well it’s actually a bigger & more complicated thing than that.

Sometimes people are just ignorant and completely misrepresent things. I rolled my eyes into my skull when MM said to her Christian (apparently) self her Armani dress had a Buddhist meaning - no dummy no. 

On a small business level many POC businesses need to sell to White consumers as well. However there are some things a business might not be willing to sell or give outside of the community - like religious items- it does depend. I know that in the Jewish community people can be unwilling to sell religious clothing items to people they don’t know as Jewish.

The other thing is, too much popularity can actually harm POC businesses because bigger businesses move in when they see a profit & bastardise the product in the process. Rather than buying a Chinese silk dress from a small business it is tempting just to get a polyester one for half price from a fast fashion company. Of course the other thing is trendy soon becomes passé and no one wants to touch it - so they also lose business from that. Look how there was an enormous trend for  noodle bars but now everyone is going carb free and they are suffering.

 To some extent this is just the business life cycle but the issue of bigger companies taking your USP & over-saturating it is particularly prevalent in culturally specific businesses.

As to getting given cultural gifts by people you should treat them with respect whether you are a diplomat or otherwise. And of course you can buy what you want. I suppose some people would be salved by you explaining you got it as a gift or you have a deep interest in Chinese silk and bought it from a Chinese-owned business. But ultimately you can’t please everyone in life & they have a right to their opinion. 
The thing is the ‘banshees’ being excessive don’t mean there aren’t deeper issues at play.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, when will the US require that its broadcasters are ”legally-bound to be non-partisan”?
Seems like now is a very good time.  H&M have proven how propaganda has taken over our airwaves.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That reminds me of the time I - a foodwriter by profession - had the audacity to enter a discussion about my national cuisine saying it's not all pork legs and sauerkraut (just as lederhosen and dirndl isn't our national costume, it's the costume of Bavaria, one of 16 states!), and got yelled at because wouldn't you know, all the food specialists had travelled to Germany once and couldn't fine a single good meal and had to resort to Lebanese restaurants (which left me SO confused as this is so random. We don't have a big Lebanese community at all. Maybe they confused Berlin with Paris?). While I didn't feel culturally appropriated I surely rolled my eyes hard


What are they talking about anyway? Sauerkraut is great. 

I think a lot of countries’ best dishes aren’t widely known in general. On the strip you gotta sell what works for the tourists & usually a kind of cheap version at that.


----------



## Chagall

lalame said:


> There's nothing wrong with speaking a new language... I wouldn't call it emulating someone though. To me that's the same as studying a different culture... you're putting in the work to get to know that culture and there's respect in that.


Well I think we are really splitting hairs here. You have no idea what’s going on in the head of someone simply liking and copying another culture style eg hair. it goes on all the time in all peoples and most are not offended. I simply used language as an example. Whatever you look for you find, sometimes it’s there, often it isn’t. Anyway OT.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> It is a generational issue, imho.
> My feelings are it is the best policy to refrain from hurting another person feeling.
> For example using the word “Oriental“ is not appropriate. The right designation is Asian. It is not hard for me to make the change,
> My 85 MIL is still using that term but of course she is Chinese. So it is her prerogative.
> I agree that we are living in stressful times. Change is hard.



My issue with these ‘labelling’ insults etc is that so often they seem to be based on fashion as appraised by a new generation.

for example, I didn’t not know that ‘homo’ as a shortening for homosexual is a grave insult now. I picked up recently that in fact it is.
I mean yes I thought it was a word that is generally over casual but I didn’t know it was a downright diss.
perhaps because I myself come from australian character where we shorten everything?

‘Gay’ is the favoured word of the day but it is still used in other ways in songs that my grandmother loved to play and sing in the pianola.
I mean who can keep up?? I don’t want to insult anyone and I don’t want to ‘out’ myself as a raging bigot either. sometimes a word is just (yesterday’s) word??

Favourite Russian* saying:
‘Pray to God but keep rowing towards the shore’
*I do not know if this is actually Russian


----------



## jelliedfeels

.


bag-mania said:


> I bet he’s been doing fillers for years.


Yes I imagine having a completely expressionless face is actually an advantage with some of the stories he must hear.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, the BRF should merch this:  #WWMDN (What will Meghan do next?)


Oh boy would that be a sore spot after the Sussex royal debacle


Chagall said:


> Well I don’t get it. There is a young man on Youtube who is very adept at learning languages. He can speak mandarin, furonese and several other dialects. He loves Chinese food and goes to China town in NYC frequently. He goes into a restaurant and speaks fluent Chinese. All the patrons and staff of the restaurant LOVE it. They break out in applause and give him the thumbs up. Most cultures are flattered when someone emulates them.


I think this is a false comparison. Language isn’t really something you can buy & sell and it always changes depending on who is using it. People are concerned about the bastardisation of customs and items. So the ST Patrick’s day is a valid point - it is extremely divorced from the customs in Ireland & can perpetuate a stereotype about the Irish being drunks. The thing is most Americans probably have a little Irish heritage - at least enough to justify their interests & they do have a valid point that immigrant customs can evolve separate to the homeland customs. Nonetheless, to actually Irish people it seems a little strange. 

 As different cultures settle into the mainstream I can see say a Mexican heritage person looking at St Patrick’s day and thinking “I hope Cinco de Mayo doesn’t get hallmarked.”

Side note - I would die of embarrassment if someone started applauding me for speaking a language personally.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh boy would that be a sore spot after the Sussex royal debacle
> 
> I think this is a false comparison. Language isn’t really something you can buy & sell and it always changes depending on who is using it. People are concerned about the bastardisation of customs and items. So the ST Patrick’s day is a valid point - it is extremely divorced from the customs in Ireland & can perpetuate a stereotype about the Irish being drunks. The thing is most Americans probably have a little Irish heritage - at least enough to justify their interests & they do have a valid point that immigrant customs can evolve separate to the homeland customs. Nonetheless, to actually Irish people it seems a little strange.
> 
> As different cultures settle into the mainstream I can see say a Mexican heritage person looking at St Patrick’s day and thinking “I hope Cinco de Mayo doesn’t get hallmarked.”
> 
> Side note - I would die of embarrassment if someone started applauding me for speaking a language personally.


I really don't get the big St Patrick's Day thing in America.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everyone speaking a bit of the Irish today


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> My thought on cancel culture is... whatever goes. If you don't want to financially support someone who has views counter to yours, don't do it. If enough enough of us don't like buying newspapers with M+H stories, are we "canceling" the newspapers? No, we're just taking our money and attention somewhere else. Fair enough to me. If someone feels like they need to change their beliefs to avoid being "canceled," they must find more benefit to doing that than the reverse. Guess they didn't feel that strongly about it in the first place.
> 
> Edit to add.. I do agree it's getting OTT with people jumping to conclusions though. I take racism pretty seriously and it's crazy to see people flippantly accusing others of racism when it might be simple ignorance, miscommunication, different culture, etc.


As you say there’s nothing wrong with voting with your wallet. To that extent cancelling can work quite well and existed long before it was called cancelling.

The real reason people have an issue is that ‘cancelling’ is not equal opportunities affair. It is much easier to ‘cancel’ those who are famous but not super wealthy. It is even easier to cancel those who aren’t either.

but then it was always thus and I dunno what we can do about it



Hermes Zen said:


> I tried to google it and the pics looked similar to me but I'm not familiar with the styles. Thanks for the education!


Yes they can look similar. I’m by no means an expert but glad I could be of help.

add on - I actually first learnt about the cornrows in white hair thing when my school was full of jokes about David Beckham’s cornrows back in the day.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lounorada said:


> I agree, I spy lots of filler too. He looks young(ish) in those tiny thumbnail sized pics I always see of him, but I can only imagine what a larger, close-up picture would reveal  I really don't want to know/see TBH.


Yep! To me Omid looks like a robot whose flesh, skin & hair are made of plastic. Tons of make-up too! Not a good look IMO.

Saddest thing is he still thinks MM is a royal!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> I really don't get the big St Patrick's Day thing in America.


I think, to grossly stereotype, that Americans just like having holiday celebrations.
They do celebrate more holidays than we Brits do.  Lots of Americans also have ‘fall’ decorations and ‘spring’ decorations & things like that.

As I said a lot of Americans are big on their Irish heritage too & I think it’s just evolved from that. You do get parades in Irish areas of the UK too like Liverpool (and of course there’s the whole religious divide which means parades could be very politicised but that’s OT)
 Then, as popular holidays often do, they got very commercial along the way.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> M. McCain was all team MM after Oprah's interview, is she changing her mind?
> 
> "_Meghan McCain discussed the departure of Piers Morgan from Good Morning Britain after he faced criticisms and complaints about his comments on Meghan Markle. However, Ms McCain suggested the events which followed Mr Morgan's exit highlighted a big hole in the Duchess of Sussex's interview with Oprah Winfrey during which she said that she did not follow newspapers reports about herself. Meghan Markle claimed that she hears about her media coverage from friends which Ms McCain said is at odds with her formal complaint to ITV over Mr Morgan's comments._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US commentator reveals discrepancy in Meghan Markle interview
> 
> 
> AMERICAN columnist and political commentator Meghan McCain picked up one contradiction from Meghan Markle's interview which only came to light after the Duchess of Sussex submitted a press complaint.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


She’s always been a bandwagon jumper IMHO. (She was patron saint of drag queens a year or so ago too.)
Now it’s dawned on her that H&M don’t play well to her conservative audience & she wants to stay friendly with Piers so of course she’s going to change their mind.


----------



## Chagall

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh boy would that be a sore spot after the Sussex royal debacle
> 
> I think this is a false comparison. Language isn’t really something you can buy & sell and it always changes depending on who is using it. People are concerned about the bastardisation of customs and items. So the ST Patrick’s day is a valid point - it is extremely divorced from the customs in Ireland & can perpetuate a stereotype about the Irish being drunks. The thing is most Americans probably have a little Irish heritage - at least enough to justify their interests & they do have a valid point that immigrant customs can evolve separate to the homeland customs. Nonetheless, to actually Irish people it seems a little strange.
> 
> As different cultures settle into the mainstream I can see say a Mexican heritage person looking at St Patrick’s day and thinking “I hope Cinco de Mayo doesn’t get hallmarked.”
> 
> Side note - I would die of embarrassment if someone started applauding me for speaking a language personally.


Yes I would die of embarrassment also, he is extremely outgoing and gregarious. Not the point I was making.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> I think, to grossly stereotype, that Americans just like having holiday celebrations.
> They do celebrate more holidays than we Brits do.  Lots of Americans also have ‘fall’ decorations and ‘spring’ decorations & things like that.
> 
> As I said a lot of Americans are big on their Irish heritage too & I think it’s just evolved from that. You do get parades in Irish areas of the UK too like Liverpool (and of course there’s the whole religious divide which means parades could be very politicised but that’s OT)
> Then, as popular holidays often do, they got very commercial along the way.


Oh I know, but i still don't get it tbh! Lol, how many people know that, in actual fact, St Patrick was possibly Welsh? Also, a Welsh man discovered America 900 years ago, so they say


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am dying to know what she did in the UK and why it specifically had to be a rich, famous, BRITISH man. Maybe she was targeting Harry all along...but could she really hope to get that lucky?



There's an interview many, many pages back in this thread, given by Meghan to a British journalist (I can't remember her name nor the paper she worked for) before she ever met Harry. The journalist said Meghan's agent pestered her for an interview with Meghan which she declined several times, since Meghan was practically unknown in the UK at the time. In the end she gave in and granted the interview in some roof top hotel in London, I can't remember where. Meghan told her she loooved British men and asked her whether Ashley Cole   would be a good choice......I'm sure many of you remember the interview.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> My issue with these ‘labelling’ insults etc is that so often they seem to be based on fashion as appraised by a new generation.
> 
> for example, I didn’t not know that ‘homo’ as a shortening for homosexual is a grave insult now. I picked up recently that in fact it is.
> I mean yes I thought it was a word that is generally over casual but I didn’t know it was a downright diss.
> perhaps because I myself come from australian character where we shorten everything?
> 
> ‘Gay’ is the favoured word of the day but it is still used in other ways in songs that my grandmother loved to play and sing in the pianola.
> I mean who can keep up?? I don’t want to insult anyone and I don’t want to ‘out’ myself as a raging bigot either. sometimes a word is just (yesterday’s) word??
> 
> Favourite Russian* saying:
> ‘Pray to God but keep rowing towards the shore’
> *I do not know if this is actually Russian


So true. 
On the other hand, it is easy enough to adopt a language that does not offend people, imho.
All bets are off after 80.


----------



## needlv

argh... Omid strikes again.  What a twerp.









						Team Meghan cry double standards in new feud with Royals
					

The Sussexes had insisted that their explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey would be their 'final word' on royal affairs but warfare erupted again after the couple briefed CBS host Ms King.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

duna said:


> There's an interview many, many pages back in this thread, given by Meghan to a British journalist (I can't remember her name nor the paper she worked for) before she ever met Harry. The journalist said Meghan's agent pestered her for an interview with Meghan which she declined several times, since Meghan was practically unknown in the UK at the time. In the end she gave in and granted the interview in some roof top hotel in London, I can't remember where. Meghan told her she loooved British men and asked her whether Ashley Cole   would be a good choice......I'm sure many of you remember the interview.


imagine if she had become a WAG  she’d be trying to topple Victoria Beckham instead


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chagall said:


> Yes I would die of embarrassment also, he is extremely outgoing and gregarious. Not the point I was making.


I didn’t want to be rude about this guy. I’m sure he’s lovely and I am about as initially affable as a giant squid- people are different. 
I still think learning a language is not usually seen as an example of cultural appropriation because it shows a desire to understand and engage whereas cultural appropriation is associated with ignorance & making something meaningful into a passing trend or whim. 
For example id say MM claiming her designer dress is Buddhist symbolism is appropriation because a) it obviously isn’t and b) she clearly has no interest in engaging with Buddhism long term & she treated their religion & culture like a trendy catchphrase.


----------



## RachelCohen808

I just wanted to point out that Gale has shifted the claim from 'the Royal family is racist' to 'the British press is racist' instead. So I think the conversation was in fact productive at least for the Royal family and H&M had to rethink their claims of racism (which I think all along were really vague) and cannot sell them anymore. At this stage it's all a PR game and let's not forget that H&M left the Royal family right before the pandemic and pretty much lost the whole year. Remember their photos for Memorial Day in LA and other similar attempts which looked pretty much the same as the official Royal family engagements. So I assume at first they followed the idea of being 'progressive royals' but they attracted even more criticism for that so decided to go full in with the new aggressive approach. I do agree with the majority of people saying its a money thing. They wanted to be one of the billionaire power couples but the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire is enormous.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> That means he’s a couple of weeks older than Meghan. Do we know how she met him? Now I’m imagining they went to school together.


Maybe they met at the Botox spa?


----------



## Chagall

jelliedfeels said:


> I didn’t want to be rude about this guy. I’m sure he’s lovely and I am about as initially affable as a giant squid- people are different.
> I still think learning a language is not usually seen as an example of cultural appropriation because it shows a desire to understand and engage whereas cultural appropriation is associated with ignorance & making something meaningful into a passing trend or whim.
> For example id say MM claiming her designer dress is Buddhist symbolism is appropriation because a) it obviously isn’t and b) she clearly has no interest in engaging with Buddhism long term & she treated their religion & culture like a trendy catchphrase.


Haha don’t bring MM into this. I’m just saying that people who adopt different styles and cultures often do do it thoughtfully and in full support of whatever ethnic group they are emulating (for want of a better word). You are right, some jump on every style they like (eg wearing dreads if they are not of that ethnic group) without any thought to what it might mean to that group. I personally would not be offended but all are entitled to their own feelings.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> There are other celebrities who have declined an interview and she didn’t go on a mission to destroy them. I think Oprah has been giving Meghan advice ever since the wedding. At some point she crossed the line from being a dispassionate observer and she became personally invested in the Meghan and Harry story. My gut tells me it’s an ego trip for her to see how much havoc her show created for the BRF.



Not only that, they have business dealings.


----------



## 1LV

mdcx said:


> Apparently this is Meghan's favorite royal commentator Omid Scobie before and after:
> View attachment 5025063


Omg.  Surely not.  I’m all for enhancement, but ”over the top” would be an understatement!


----------



## Allisonfaye

floatinglili said:


> My issue with these ‘labelling’ insults etc is that so often they seem to be based on fashion as appraised by a new generation.
> 
> for example, I didn’t not know that ‘homo’ as a shortening for homosexual is a grave insult now. I picked up recently that in fact it is.
> I mean yes I thought it was a word that is generally over casual but I didn’t know it was a downright diss.
> perhaps because I myself come from australian character where we shorten everything?
> 
> ‘Gay’ is the favoured word of the day but it is still used in other ways in songs that my grandmother loved to play and sing in the pianola.
> I mean who can keep up?? I don’t want to insult anyone and I don’t want to ‘out’ myself as a raging bigot either. sometimes a word is just (yesterday’s) word??
> 
> Favourite Russian* saying:
> ‘Pray to God but keep rowing towards the shore’
> *I do not know if this is actually Russian



My theory is that they keep changing the words so they can easily identify the Woke. If you don't use the correct word du jour, you must be reeducated.


----------



## Roxanna

pukasonqo said:


> Actually they have found mummies in Peru with braided hair and I don’t mean 2 or 3 braids but multiple ones
> I always thought it strange as indigenous people’s hair is waterfall straight but might be a way of keeping it clean, the mummies were found both in the Coast and in the Anded


Well,  there are national tradition of braiding women's hair in Central Asia  that goes centuries back. They still do them up to now. If you google  Uzbek braids you'd get lots of pics.  It's just their national way of wearing their hair  with 40 braids and they look like very normal Caucasian albeit mostly not nordic looking  blond. It makes me wonder what reaction pics of them would cause from  "woke " activists.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Sharont2305 said:


> I really don't get the big St Patrick's Day thing in America.



An excuse to drink and party...just like Cinco De Mayo.... people need a reason to drink and party.


----------



## Chagall

First Oprah getting involved and now her side-kick Gale. Why are they sticking their noses in where they have no legitimate reason to be. Even if H/M wanted to be interviewed she Oprah should have declined, and Gayle could have stayed out of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I really don't get the big St Patrick's Day thing in America.



There are many Irish descendants living in the US. The cities where St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated the most are the ones which have the largest populations of them, like New York and Boston.

For most Americans it’s just a fun holiday. And it’s a good excuse for drinking.


----------



## limom

Chagall said:


> First Oprah getting involved and now her side-kick Gale. Why are they sticking their noses in where they have no legitimate reason to be. Even if H/M wanted to be interviewed she Oprah should have declined, and Gayle could have stayed out of it.


Oprah is launching a new interview show on Discovery+.
This was a big get and I see nothing wrong with her interviewing H/M
As far as Gayle, JCMH called her??????
They obviously want and need the attention. Oprah may as well get the check...


----------



## bag-mania

Is this article an exaggeration or were some UK citizens appalled that in the US we have commercials for drugs? I admit I’m used to them now, but even I have to laugh when the side effects of the drug take longer to talk about than the benefits of taking it.   









						UK viewers horrified by US drug ads during Harry and Meghan interview
					

They dubbed it an “unhinged” exposé on pharmaceutical industry.




					www.google.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Is this article an exaggeration or were some UK citizens appalled that in the US we have commercials for drugs? I admit I’m used to them now, but even I have to laugh when the side effects of the drug take longer to talk about than the benefits of taking it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UK viewers horrified by US drug ads during Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> They dubbed it an “unhinged” exposé on pharmaceutical industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Prescription drugs can't do commercials in the UK. So no we are not used to it and I shall not further comment on this practice.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

limom said:


> Because you are in the majority.
> This subject gets really touchy and personal.What is cultural appropriation is best answered by those who are slighted.
> It is inappropriate for those who are not POC to speak for those who are, imho.


Actually, white people of European descent make up only around 10 percent of the world's population, which makes them a minority- not the majority.
European culture is the most appropriated culture of all.

Now, twist that.


----------



## papertiger

Allisonfaye said:


> My theory is that they keep changing the words so they can easily identify the Woke. If you don't use the correct word du jour, you must be *reeducated.*



I've been reading legal docs so I read *redacted*. I guess in this case it works the same way


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> There are many Irish descendants living in the US. The cities where St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated the most are the ones which have the largest populations of them, like New York and Boston.
> 
> For most Americans it’s just a fun holiday. And it’s a good excuse for drinking.


It's marketing. Hallmark makes a killing off Valentine's Day. Bars, pubs and breweries make a mint off St. Patrick's Day. I'm sure 99% of people don't know who/what they're "celebrating"


----------



## Chagall

limom said:


> Oprah is launching a new interview show on Discovery+.
> This was a big get and I see nothing wrong with her interviewing H/M
> As far as Gayle, JCMH called her??????
> They obviously want and need the attention. Oprah may as well get the check...


It was probably good promo for Oprah but she hardly needs the money at this point. Seeing she is also close to retirement she could afford in all aspects to be more discriminating in her choices. But maybe she never viewed them as many on this thread do.


----------



## kemilia

poopsie said:


> I wish I were kidding, but sadly I'm not


Come on---it's tradition! 

Also putting green food coloring into a coke--can't see it until you take a swig and your teeth are green (ah, memories of old St Patrick's Day pranks ...)


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> I don’t celebrate St.P’s day even if my 17% Irish DNA and my like for The Pogues might give me some leeway


I'm half Irish and I don't celebrate it either....so many commercialized holidays.....good excuse for everyone to go to bars and drink green beer


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> A few  things for a Tuesday.
> 
> When Archie was born, they said they did not want a title for him.  So they are now contradicting themselves? Singing a whole other tune and  they never came out at the time and said they wanted him to be a Prince.  When is Oprah/Gayle going to address this? There are archives full of them stating that they didn't want a title for him, so how do you explain that?  Just by ignoring it?
> 
> Since when does the Queen or the monarchy control the press?  The answer is that they don't.  The Sussex went after ANL when they didn't like the coverage they were getting about her father and the letter, so let them handle that again.
> 
> What is this sending third parties to do your dirty work?  Your "friends" who keep stating that they have spoken to you and this is what you think by relaying it to the world via their mouth.  Janina, Gayle and Scobie.  Oh and let's not forget that train wreck Jamila.  Gayle is now a mouthpiece and a  press officer for the Sussex?  Her role is to call the Royal Family out on the carpet because they are not doing what the Sussex want them to do?  Careful Gayle or you will be markled along with the rest of the crew.
> 
> Is CBS loving the ratings or are they just afraid of what Oprah might say if one of their correspondents disagreed with her and Gayle. They can't keep throwing racism about people who disagree and can prove that certain things said were absolute falsehoods.  How about those doctored newpaper headlines. Care to comment on that OpGayle? (BTW, to my way of thinking Oprah and Gayle are one and the same person.)  You know what they say about absolute power, it corrupts absolutely.


Gayle got a huge boost (and pay raise) after the R Kelly interview.  she was referred to a CBS's "crown jewel"
IMO she's damaging her credibility but I'm sure there are many who agree with her so....


----------



## jelliedfeels

kemilia said:


> Come on---it's tradition!
> 
> Also putting green food coloring into a coke--can't see it until you take a swig and your teeth are green (ah, memories of old St Patrick's Day pranks ...)


That’s a pretty funny prank.  I’ve never heard of that.


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> I think their finances might not be as great as we think:
> 
> Mortgage plus taxes, insurance
> Maintenance
> Maids/gardeners/nannies
> Taxes/ health insurance for staff
> Security
> Food/Utilities
> PR
> Expensive clothing
> Transportation
> 
> This is all about money. Forcing the BRF by being nasty until they cave in.
> 
> Think about it, their outlay is probably over a 300K a month, plus lawyers they have.
> PR is not cheap. And it’s tax season.


I think you are being generous assuming "health insurance for staff" is a thing for H&M.


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> Well I was thinking dreadlocks and way way before Bo Derek but I think you knew that and are trolling me??
> 
> If you got a beef with Bo Derek’s stylists better take it up with her.  ??
> 
> Also better complain to all the many women in Bali who make a living from plaiting tourists of all ethnicities in that style while you are at it?





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, white people of European descent make up only around 10 percent of the world's population, which makes them a minority- not the majority.
> European culture is the most appropriated culture of all.
> 
> Now, twist that.




IMHO think you might be reading negative intentions into things where none was meant.

anyway I saw an independent article which put a ridiculous for a pro-Meghan spin on what Michelle said the other day by conflating two interviews she did! You can’t make it up!
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...elle-*****-meghan-markle-racism-b1818297.html


----------



## Chagall

Lodpah said:


> I think their finances might not be as great as we think:
> 
> Mortgage plus taxes, insurance
> Maintenance
> Maids/gardeners/nannies
> Taxes/ health insurance for staff
> Security
> Food/Utilities
> PR
> Expensive clothing
> Transportation
> 
> This is all about money. Forcing the BRF by being nasty until they cave in.
> 
> Think about it, their outlay is probably over a 300K a month, plus lawyers they have.
> PR is not cheap. And it’s tax season.


People have a tendency to live up to their income. A lot of people have a big income but don’t have much money left over once their huge expenses are paid for.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chagall said:


> People have a tendency to live up to their income. A lot of people have a big income but don’t have much money left over once their huge expenses are paid for.



So true, but I'm laughing coz we're on tPF


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> IMHO think you might be reading negative intentions into things where none was meant.
> 
> anyway I saw an independent article which put a ridiculous for a pro-Meghan spin on what Michelle said the other day by conflating two interviews she did! You can’t make it up!
> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...elle-*****-meghan-markle-racism-b1818297.html


You can no longer treat The Independent as a credible publication any more. It's so biased! Its name is just ironic!


----------



## Chagall

Chanbal said:


> They have plenty of resources, but they seem to want revenge:
> 
> “_They're now in a different place they're now in a position of making a bucket load of money.
> 
> “They're in a beautiful house it seems incredible that they will have anything to complain about.”
> 
> Ms Levin replied: “Yeah, and they've got one child and another on the way which is always a huge blessing.
> 
> “The thing is that they’re absolutely not happy because they want revenge and they're bitter and they want to destroy the people who for some reason has put them where they are."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'They've got so much!' But Meghan Markle and Prince Harry still want 'revenge' on royals
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle are "not happy" because they are seeking revenge on the Royal Family and are "bitter", a royal biographer claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


What in the world do they seek revenge for. What more could that family have done for them.


----------



## Lounorada

EverSoElusive said:


> Has anyone else seen or posted this IG post on the Wokey Pokeys? Not sure how to post the clickable frame post like you guys do  Someone please teach me!
> 
> Anyone needs a good barfing? See the link below.
> 
> Barf inducing
> 
> ETA: Figured it out








mellibelly said:


> I googled  he also has lip fillers and really obvious veneers. I wish I could unsee





mdcx said:


> Apparently this is Meghan's favorite royal commentator Omid Scobie before and after:
> View attachment 5025063





That's the same guy?! WTF! He went and bought a _whole _new face.


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> Actually they have found mummies in Peru with braided hair and I don’t mean 2 or 3 braids but multiple ones
> I always thought it strange as indigenous people’s hair is waterfall straight but might be a way of keeping it clean, the mummies were found both in the Coast and in the Anded


maybe it was for practical purposes, to keep their hair out of the way when they worked.  One of my pet peeves is female characters on TV like police, doctors, etc. who are working with long hair hanging loosely down.  that just isn't realistic to me.  I have long hair that I wear down when I go out but when I'm home it's up in a pony.  I can't be cooking, exercising etc with that hair in my way.


----------



## Chagall

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, white people of European descent make up only around 10 percent of the world's population, which makes them a minority- not the majority.
> European culture is the most appropriated culture of all.
> 
> Now, twist that.


So true. Maybe we should be royally p*#%*d off about it. You are stealing our culture.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chagall said:


> People have a tendency to live up to their income. A lot of people have a big income but don’t have much money left over once their huge expenses are paid for.


Amen to that. I am such a spendthrift it takes a lot of effort to save anything!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I really don't get the big St Patrick's Day thing in America.


Americans use any excuse to celebrate.....Halloween used to be for kids - now it's an excuse for adults to dress up in costumes and go to a party....Valentines Day is a big deal....Mother's day....I could go on


----------



## bag-mania

Chagall said:


> What in the world do they seek revenge for. What more could that family have done for them.



Meghan wanted to be able to do whatever she pleased without answering to anyone else. She wanted “protection” which means she wanted the BRF to try to control the media and squash any negative stories. She probably wanted them to sue the Daily Mail for her so they didn’t have to use any of their own money.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Omg.  Surely not.  I’m all for enhancement, but ”over the top” would be an understatement!


looks like a different person


----------



## lalame

Chagall said:


> Well I think we are really splitting hairs here. You have no idea what’s going on in the head of someone simply liking and copying another culture style eg hair. it goes on all the time in all peoples and most are not offended. I simply used language as an example. Whatever you look for you find, sometimes it’s there, often it isn’t. Anyway OT.



I think intention plays a role in how something is received but I don't think it's the only thing. I'm sure M doesn't INTEND to do things that disgust you... but here this thread is.  My big thing is context. I don't jump to conclusions but if people do something with love in their hearts that's offensive... of course I'm still offended. But my reaction is obviously very different vs if it was someone doing something offensive on purpose. I cut people some slack and I think we all need to take a breather sometimes with jumping at offense quickly.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> First Oprah getting involved and now her side-kick Gale. Why are they sticking their noses in where they have no legitimate reason to be. Even if H/M wanted to be interviewed she Oprah should have declined, and Gayle could have stayed out of it.


it seems pretty clear to me that this interview was intended to support and promote Meghan and H.  Never intended to be unbiased.  They are "friends".  Oprah went to their wedding.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> Apparently this is Meghan's favorite royal commentator Omid Scobie before and after:
> View attachment 5025063



That’s some change. Is Omid trying to make himself look like Meghan?

Conversely, is Meghan trying to make herself look like him? She’s been having some work done too.


----------



## Chagall

jelliedfeels said:


> Amen to that. I am such a spendthrift it takes a lot of effort to save anything!


Oh I’m very frugal. As long as I get my Hermes fixes now and then.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> That’s some change. Is Omid trying to make himself look like Meghan?
> 
> Conversely, is Meghan trying to make herself look like him?


It’s the face/off reboot no one asked for! 
I think we all know which ones is the villain!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That’s some change. Is Omid trying to make himself look like Meghan?
> 
> Conversely, is Meghan trying to make herself look like him? She’s been having some work done too.


of course these are just two pictures but based on these in addition to looking very young he appears to have transformed from a brown person to white


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> She’s always been a bandwagon jumper IMHO. (She was patron saint of drag queens a year or so ago too.)
> Now it’s dawned on her that H&M don’t play well to her conservative audience & she wants to stay friendly with Piers so of course she’s going to change their mind.


I watched a video after Oprah's interview in which M. McCain was 100% blindly supportive of MM, it was rather ridiculous imo. I believe @sdkitty watched it, too. The all video was disappointing due to the participants' lack of knowledge and questioning... After what happened to Piers, I wonder if she made an effort to read a few articles on the subject and is now slightly changing her opinion.


----------



## Chagall

bag-mania said:


> Is this article an exaggeration or were some UK citizens appalled that in the US we have commercials for drugs? I admit I’m used to them now, but even I have to laugh when the side effects of the drug take longer to talk about than the benefits of taking it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UK viewers horrified by US drug ads during Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> They dubbed it an “unhinged” exposé on pharmaceutical industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


One of the statements on drug side effects is ‘may cause death’.


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> Oprah is launching a new interview show on Discovery+.
> This was a big get and I see nothing wrong with her interviewing H/M
> *As far as Gayle, JCMH called her??????*
> They obviously want and need the attention. Oprah may as well get the check...


According to Gayle, she called the house to check on MM&H after the interview.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> of course these are just two pictures but based on these in addition to looking very young he appears to have transformed from a brown person to white


Cultural appropriation much???


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> That’s some change. Is Omid trying to make himself look like Meghan?
> 
> Conversely, is Meghan trying to make herself look like him? She’s been having some work done too.



Scobie just needs some hair extensions now


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I watched a video after Oprah's interview in which M. McCain was 100% blindly supportive of MM, it was rather ridiculous imo. I believe @sdkitty watched it, too. The all video was disappointing due to the participants' lack of knowledge and questioning... After what happened to Piers, I wonder if she made an effort to read a few articles on the subject and is now slightly changing her opinion.



And there’s the biggest problem with the US press (maybe the worldwide press). They don’t take the time to do the research anymore. They all pick up each other’s reports and assume someone else did the work and fact checked.

I prefer to believe this is what’s happening instead of the other alternative, that they don’t care about facts and they just promote the agenda they prefer.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Is this article an exaggeration or were some UK citizens appalled that in the US we have commercials for drugs? I admit I’m used to them now, but even I have to laugh when the side effects of the drug take longer to talk about than the benefits of taking it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UK viewers horrified by US drug ads during Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> They dubbed it an “unhinged” exposé on pharmaceutical industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Why were there so many drug ads during this TV interview? Was it because they were predicting what kind of audience it would draw or were they predicting the effects of the interview would have on the audience?


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> There's an interview many, many pages back in this thread, given by Meghan to a British journalist (I can't remember her name nor the paper she worked for) before she ever met Harry. The journalist said Meghan's agent pestered her for an interview with Meghan which she declined several times, since Meghan was practically unknown in the UK at the time. In the end she gave in and granted the interview in some roof top hotel in London, I can't remember where. Meghan told her she loooved British men and asked her whether Ashley Cole   would be a good choice......I'm sure many of you remember the interview.


I remember to have read about her interest on British men. Was this one of the articles?









						Meghan Markle Caught Lying? Ashley Cole Didn't Pursue Royal Despite Her Claims
					

Meghan Markle caught in a lie? Find out all about it here.




					www.latintimes.com


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Why were there so many drug ads during this TV interview? Was it because they were predicting what kind of audience it would draw or were they predicting the effects of the interview would have on the audience?


I didn't watch the commercials....was Khloe K on there with her anti-depressant ad?


----------



## kemilia

chicinthecity777 said:


> Why were there so many drug ads during this TV interview? Was it because they were predicting what kind of audience it would draw or were they predicting the effects of the interview would have on the audience?


I thought ads were sole based on what the audience would be--day-time shows have lots of baby diaper ads and laundry soaps. While I didn't watch the interview, from what I've read here, the ads were the gastrointestinal sort. So what demo goes with that?


----------



## duna

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, white people of European descent make up only around 10 percent of the world's population, which makes them a minority- not the majority.
> *European culture is the most appropriated culture of all.*
> 
> Now, twist that.



Yes, being a European I've been thinking this to myself aswell.... most cultures all over the world wear "European" style clothes, but nobody seems to care.....


----------



## jennlt

kemilia said:


> I think you are being generous assuming "health insurance for staff" is a thing for H&M.


Who needs health insurance when H & M can just ask the staff if they're okay


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Why were there so many drug ads during this TV interview? Was it because they were predicting what kind of audience it would draw or were they predicting the effects of the interview would have on the audience?



Now you made me look up which drugs were advertised.

They were:
Skyrizi = plaque psoriasis
Kisqali = breast cancer
Jardiance = Type 2 diabetes


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I remember to have read about her interest on British men. Was this one of the articles?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Caught Lying? Ashley Cole Didn't Pursue Royal Despite Her Claims
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle caught in a lie? Find out all about it here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latintimes.com



No this isn't the article I meant: I don't know if Ashley Cole was ever interested in her but she certainly was interested in him! When Meghan asked the journalist about AC she dropped the hint that he wasn't that great......


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

duna said:


> There's an interview many, many pages back in this thread, given by Meghan to a British journalist (I can't remember her name nor the paper she worked for) before she ever met Harry. The journalist said Meghan's agent pestered her for an interview with Meghan which she declined several times, since Meghan was practically unknown in the UK at the time. In the end she gave in and granted the interview in some roof top hotel in London, I can't remember where. Meghan told her she loooved British men and asked her whether Ashley Cole   would be a good choice......I'm sure many of you remember the interview.



Setting her sights really low if she was after Ashley Cole!


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> According to Gayle, she called the house to check on MM&H after the interview.


Thanks for the correction. All I could think about is how there was a house call.
WW mislead me. At the  10 minutes mark


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> No this isn't the article I meant: I don't know if Ashley Cole was ever interested in her but she certainly was interested in him! When Meghan asked the journalist about AC she dropped the hint that he wasn't that great......


As in not rich enough.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch the commercials....was Khloe K on there with her anti-depressant ad?


Seeing her give me a migraine!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Chagall said:


> What in the world do they seek revenge for. What more could that family have done for them.



I've said all along they were out to damage the monarchy.  Why?  Harry wasn't born first.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> looks like a different person


Entirely.  When I see that much work done, especially by 40, I’m inclined to believe there’s more than the physical aspect the person is unhappy with.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> There are many Irish descendants living in the US. The cities where St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated the most are the ones which have the largest populations of them, like New York and Boston.
> 
> For most Americans it’s just a fun holiday. And it’s a good excuse for drinking.


I miss St. Patrick's Day in Boston, it was a lot of fun. The Black Rose bar used to be very popular on that day.


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Actually, white people of European descent make up only around 10 percent of the world's population, which makes them a minority- not the majority.
> European culture is the most appropriated culture of all.
> 
> Now, twist that.


You make a good point!


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> Meh, if I hurt someone what is the big deal to apologize and say sorry?


It's not.  It should be sincere, that's all, not forced in order to save face to the woke ones.


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> No this isn't the article I meant: I don't know if Ashley Cole was ever interested in her but she certainly was interested in him! When Meghan asked the journalist about AC she dropped the hint that he wasn't that great......


I searched her name together with Ashley Cole and several articles came up. It looks like it was a popular issue at some point.


----------



## Chanbal

This supports what other members have said. Gayle King is MM's mouthpiece!!!



And of course!!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I watched a video after Oprah's interview in which M. McCain was 100% blindly supportive of MM, it was rather ridiculous imo. I believe @sdkitty watched it, too. The all video was disappointing due to the participants' lack of knowledge and questioning... After what happened to Piers, I wonder if she made an effort to read a few articles on the subject and is now slightly changing her opinion.


yes, all of the view co-hosts were totally pro-H&M.  I expected it from Sunny but not necessarily from All of the rest of them.  Meghan is a strange one.  I find her better and more knowledgeable than that shrill goody-goody Hasselbeck.  but sometimes she says ignorant things.  and she wants to present as a serious ********** pundit while at the same time going on WWHL with Andy Cohen and gushing over him and the housewives.
Shallow observation - her makeup during the pandemic has often been over the top.  someone should tell her to tone it down a bit.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> This supports what other members have said. Gayle King is MM's mouthpiece!!!
> 
> View attachment 5025648
> 
> And of course!!!!!
> View attachment 5025650



So they were going to make the family look bad a week after Philip dies instead of before?


----------



## Chanbal

Kate and Will's message on St. Patrick's Day, Kate looks a little tired and sad on the video. I bet that MM crying issue has been very hurtful to her. As someone said, MM & H "_are stabbing a knife through the heart of the monarchy_" 










						Philip Schofield suggests Harry and Meghan have 'made their point'
					

The 58-year-old released his pent-up frustration during a segment about how the couple had complained to US TV host Gayle King that senior royals are still yet to speak to Meghan.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: St. Patrick's Day Video


----------



## Lodpah

Gayle King seems to be the leaked source or “friend” who tells the tabloid things. I imagine she’s on speed dial every single time the duo want want say something, I mean they have to have the last word. They have nothing to do but scan the news about them, it seems.
The above statement is so irrelevant irs getting to be a joke and oh so tiring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Kate and Will's message on St. Patrick's Day, Kate looks a little tired and sad on the video. I bet that MM crying issue has been very hurtful to her. As someone said, MM & H "_are stabbing a knife through the heart of the monarchy_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Philip Schofield suggests Harry and Meghan have 'made their point'
> 
> 
> The 58-year-old released his pent-up frustration during a segment about how the couple had complained to US TV host Gayle King that senior royals are still yet to speak to Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: St. Patrick's Day Video




He was pretty sympathetic to them before, right after the interview aired... how much good will are they willing to lose?


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Is this article an exaggeration or were some UK citizens appalled that in the US we have commercials for drugs? I admit I’m used to them now, but even I have to laugh when the side effects of the drug take longer to talk about than the benefits of taking it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UK viewers horrified by US drug ads during Harry and Meghan interview
> 
> 
> They dubbed it an “unhinged” exposé on pharmaceutical industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



OMG! They remind me of this old Rosanne Rosannadanna skit.....


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> And there’s the biggest problem with the US press (maybe the worldwide press). They don’t take the time to do the research anymore. They all pick up each other’s reports and assume someone else did the work and fact checked.
> 
> I prefer to believe this is what’s happening instead of the other alternative, that they don’t care about facts and they just promote the agenda they prefer.



Have you seen any of those montages where the local news all repeats the same phrases at news stations across the country because they are clearly getting their script from the main office?


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Have you seen any of those montages where the local news all repeats the same phrases at news stations across the country because they are clearly getting their script from the main office?



Yes, it must be a cost-cutting plan for the affiliates so they can get away with employing fewer reporters.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch the commercials....was Khloe K on there with her anti-depressant ad?


I didn't watch it, just read the article. 



kemilia said:


> I thought ads were sole based on what the audience would be--day-time shows have lots of baby diaper ads and laundry soaps. While I didn't watch the interview, from what I've read here, the ads were the gastrointestinal sort. So what demo goes with that?





bag-mania said:


> Now you made me look up which drugs were advertised.
> 
> They were:
> Skyrizi = plaque psoriasis
> Kisqali = breast cancer
> Jardiance = Type 2 diabetes


Interesting! No drugs for diarrhoea? Acid heartburn? Constipation? A missed opportunity IMO!


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Yes, it must be a cost-cutting plan for the affiliates so they can get away with employing fewer reporters.



You are kinder than me on the motives.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> You are kinder than me on the motives.



Okay, they are forcing the networks' news agendas on their local affiliates. There, are you happy now?


----------



## lanasyogamama

this seems like such a downgrade for Gayle, truly.


----------



## rose60610

The way M&H insert themselves into everything and anything, why no comments from them about Prince Philip? No "Happy that Grandpa is back home"? No "Glad to see Grandfather is getting better"?  No Archewell donation to the hospitals that treated Philip? 

It's great to see Philip leave the hospital shortly after the disaster interview. Even at 99 he is stronger than the two ingrates. I don't get why Harry was supposedly quarantining in case he "had to leave suddenly" to see his grandfather who was critical. At about the same time as his quarantine, Ginge and Cringe had already pulled the pin out of the grenade with Oprah before the show aired. What two-faced snivelly rotten ba$tards. Since Ginge didn't go, the BRF probably figured that some bombshells were going to drop and Ginge wasn't man enough to see his grandfather, preferring to cash in instead of showing any compassion. It's profitable to sell your family down the river, even the one that gave you EVERYTHING. Since M&H find the BRF soooo objectionable, isn't it only right to reimburse them for the cost of the wedding? Oh wait, Meghan said the wedding was us plebes, so that makes it unnecessary to pay for it. Oooooh, that's why they supposedly had their little secret lovefest nuptials before the big wedding. And none of the quitting the family business was premeditated. Uh huh. Harry is probably being drained dry as we speak. After Meghan is through forcing Harry to pimp his family for every nickel, Harry won't see any of the $$. No family, no $, Harry will be a Prince without a kingdom. Oh shucks!


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I didn't watch it, just read the article.
> *Interesting! No drugs for diarrhoea? Acid heartburn? Constipation? A missed opportunity IMO*!



Add nausea - actually, I think that I mean *ad nauseam *


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Yes, it must be a cost-cutting plan for the affiliates so they can get away with employing fewer reporters.



I think this is part of it but when you think about the money-losing news/media "business," most profitability comes from clicks and visits... if you just repeat someone else's coverage on your own platforms, you get paid without having to do any of that work. Imagine what that does to profitability - lower labor costs, higher revenue with little work. It's probably interns and junior staff getting peanuts to repackage stories into bite sized pieces over and over again. Then they can focus the labor costs on a fewer number of actual reports/journalists/writers.


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Because you are in the majority.
> This subject gets really touchy and personal.What is cultural appropriation is best answered by those who are slighted.
> It is inappropriate for those who are not POC to speak for those who are, imho.


A lot of the storms in tea cups happen when people decide to take offence on behalf of those who supposedly should be slighted. I thought the stupidest incident was when that pseudo-white Chinese boy accused the white girl in the Chinese dress of cultural appropriation. That dress is something cheap made for the tourists and available in every Chinatown.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> P. S. Some days Scobie looks like he's wearing a little too much eye liner and* did he have eyebrow implants?* Some days it looks like the caterpillar brows are trying to crawl off his forehead. Find him difficult to look at, he's so impressed with himself.


Speaking of eyebrow implants, is there such a thing?

I noticed Meg used to have kind of sparse eyebrows.  I have sparse eyebrows too and have to pencil in to make them look fuller _without_ having them look like pencil lines, or worse, the thick kind you see on Instagram that are fully shadowed in. 

So what did Meg do to have fuller brows, especially in towards her nose, where they naturally stop short.  Just regular brow products?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This supports what other members have said. Gayle King is MM's mouthpiece!!!
> 
> View attachment 5025648
> 
> And of course!!!!!
> View attachment 5025650



Ok, do they want an extra cookie for showing a minimum of decency or what? I'm not impressed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This supports what other members have said. Gayle King is MM's mouthpiece!!!
> 
> View attachment 5025648
> 
> And of course!!!!!
> View attachment 5025650


Interesting that they claim this once Phillip walks out of the hospital


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of eyebrow implants, is there such a thing?
> 
> I noticed Meg used to have kind of sparse eyebrows.  I have sparse eyebrows too and have to pencil in to make them look fuller _without_ having them look like pencil lines, or worse, the thick kind you see on Instagram that are fully shadowed in.
> 
> So what did Meg do to have fuller brows, especially in towards her nose, where they naturally stop short.  Just regular brow products?
> 
> View attachment 5025750
> View attachment 5025753


Microblading?


----------



## limom

xincinsin said:


> A lot of the storms in tea cups happen when people decide to take offence on behalf of those who supposedly should be slighted. I thought the stupidest incident was when that pseudo-white Chinese boy accused the white girl in the Chinese dress of cultural appropriation. That dress is something cheap made for the tourists and available in every Chinatown.


Huh?
How can one be a pseudo-white Chinese boy?


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> OMG! They remind me of this old Rosanne Rosannadanna skit.....



We come full circle back to Rosannadannadanna


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, do they want an extra cookie for showing a minimum of decency or what? I'm not impressed.


Yes.  They want an Archwell cookie


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Cavalier Girl said:


> I've said all along they were out to damage the monarchy.  Why?  Harry wasn't born first.


I've said it before, Harry wanted to avenge Diana's death because in his mind the Queen and TRF were responsible for her death.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of eyebrow implants, is there such a thing?
> 
> I noticed Meg used to have kind of sparse eyebrows.  I have sparse eyebrows too and have to pencil in to make them look fuller _without_ having them look like pencil lines, or worse, the thick kind you see on Instagram that are fully shadowed in.
> 
> So what did Meg do to have fuller brows, especially in towards her nose, where they naturally stop short.  Just regular brow products?
> 
> View attachment 5025750
> View attachment 5025753


I'm no expert but to me the basic shape is still there and has been filled in esp at the tail end....could me makeup or "permanent makeup" (tatoos?)


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> We come full circle back to Rosannadannadanna


I never tire of her


----------



## purseinsanity

I find it interesting that "Royal Correspondent" Scobie is partial to the *Suckssexes*, who are no longer senior members of the "Royal" Family.


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of eyebrow implants, is there such a thing?
> 
> I noticed Meg used to have kind of sparse eyebrows.  I have sparse eyebrows too and have to pencil in to make them look fuller _without_ having them look like pencil lines, or worse, the thick kind you see on Instagram that are fully shadowed in.
> 
> So what did Meg do to have fuller brows, especially in towards her nose, where they naturally stop short.  Just regular brow products?
> 
> View attachment 5025750
> View attachment 5025753


Jayne1,  
I was being snarky about eyebrow transplants on Scoobie, but I have eyebrow issues too. Don't want to get OT, but if anyone has a brief bit of advice they could tuck in a post it would be appreciated.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm no expert but to me the basic shape is still there and has been filled in esp at the tail end....could me makeup or "permanent makeup" (tatoos?)


Yeah, but not the part that goes in towards her nose.  

Apparently a longer brow that starts closer to the nose makes the nose look smaller and if the brow hairs aren't there, we have to pencil or shade in, which to me, always looks like lines of pencil on the skin.

Not sure how these celebrities make it look like hair... if there is no hair there.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I find it interesting that "Royal Correspondent" Scobie is partial to the Suckssexes, who are no longer senior members of the "Royal" Family.


  "Suckssexes" needs more than the usual "Like" options!  Great one purseinsanity!


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Jayne1,
> I was being snarky about eyebrow transplants on Scoobie, but I have eyebrow issues too. Don't want to get OT, but if anyone has a brief bit of advice they could tuck in a post it would be appreciated.


I was hoping there was such a thing!  lol


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Jayne1,
> I was being snarky about eyebrow transplants on Scoobie, but I have eyebrow issues too. Don't want to get OT, but if anyone has a brief bit of advice they could tuck in a post it would be appreciated.


LOL, for all the hair on my head, my eyebrows have never grown back from over plucking in college.  I just had microblading done!  It takes a minute to get used to.  My daughter's first comment?  "You look like Angry Birds!", but after a couple weeks, I'm loving them.  My SIL's mother was musing aloud one day why her eyebrows, which she also overplucked, never grew back, but her grey chin hairs return over and over and over again.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> "Suckssexes" needs more than the usual "Like" options!  Great one purseinsanity!


I was trying hard to figure out how to spell it so it doesn't sound like "SuccessSex"


----------



## Chanbal

"_Palace staff are said to be armed with "harrowing stories" in relation to bullying allegations made against Meghan, a royal insider previously told The Times._

"*The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell,*" _they claimed._"









						Meghan Markle ‘bullying’ caused ‘stress and trauma’ at Palace, insider claims
					

MEGHAN Markle’s alleged bullying reportedly “real stress and trauma” at the Palace, a royal insider has claimed. An insider claims her behaviour took a “human toll” on…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

csshopper said:


> Jayne1,
> I was being snarky about eyebrow transplants on Scoobie, but I have eyebrow issues too. Don't want to get OT, but if anyone has a brief bit of advice they could tuck in a post it would be appreciated.


Hello, just wanted to let you know that if you look up Wayne Goss on YouTube his latest video is him showing how to use an eyebrow pencil and gel to fill in your brows. He gives some very good advice. Lisa Eldridge is another makeup artist I follow.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> That means he’s a couple of weeks older than Meghan. Do we know how she met him? Now I’m imagining they went to school together.


They are connected through Soho House, no?
I thought it was rumoured that Omid used to date Markus Anderson.


bag-mania said:


> There are other celebrities who have declined an interview and she didn’t go on a mission to destroy them. I think Oprah has been giving Meghan advice ever since the wedding. At some point she crossed the line from being a dispassionate observer and she became personally invested in the Meghan and Harry story. My gut tells me it’s an ego trip for her to see how much havoc her show created for the BRF.


I'm not so sure about the ego trip, perhaps a more meaningful personal connection.  Did Meghan and Harry ever officially release the names of Archie's Godparent's?
*just sayin'


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of eyebrow implants, is there such a thing?
> 
> I noticed Meg used to have kind of sparse eyebrows.  I have sparse eyebrows too and have to pencil in to make them look fuller _without_ having them look like pencil lines, or worse, the thick kind you see on Instagram that are fully shadowed in.
> 
> So what did Meg do to have fuller brows, especially in towards her nose, where they naturally stop short.  Just regular brow products?
> 
> View attachment 5025750
> View attachment 5025753


I knew you can get them tattooed in but apparently you can have scalp hair transplanted in there as well.
I don’t know if she had anything done. It’s possible they just got thicker after puberty or she used to pluck them to death in the 90s.


----------



## Chanbal

H, mental health expert and businessman... 










						Part of Harry and Meghan interview was to plug Apple mental health doc
					

Part of Harry and Meghan's deal to do their two-hour bombshell interview with Oprah was to plug his upcoming Apple TV documentary on mental health,




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

bisousx said:


> I don’t know how to multiquote so for reference, I agreed with @limom’s sentiment about letting POC speak for themselves. I am beyond tired of woke Caucasian / majority folks of today trying to tell POC what we should think, feel or be offended at. Yes, I believe there are offensive cultural appropriations out there, racism and microaggressions that have been a part of our society and went unaddressed for years. I’m grateful that racism is being addressed these days because growing up, there seemed to be nobody who cared when we (the POC in my middle & high schools) were getting assaulted, jeered at or mistreated.
> 
> I’m also skeptical of the loud banshee screaming young wokers today, like _thank you for caring -  do you care because it’s trendy to be woke?_  Where were you 20 years ago? I’m genuinely confused. There’s also this mindset of squeezing blood out of turnips, where people are so focused on finding negativity at every turn - cancel culture leaves no room for honest discussion, education and learning. It seems like people are joining in on the woke culture because it makes them feel better about themselves, but in reality wokeness doesn’t actually add value to anyone’s lives or improve conditions for POC. That I’ve seen, anyways.
> 
> FWIW, I appreciate those on this thread who are admitting they don’t know what it feels like to be a POC or don’t understand - that’s totally OK imho. What I don’t appreciate is having a non-POC tell me what to think, that certain groups need “re education” or who to vote for.. it happens all the time and it’s the most racist thing I’ve experienced to date.












Argh! Sorry y’all. I tried to edit the double-quote and I ended up f’ing the whole gif up.


----------



## Chanbal

No surprises here!










						Meghan 'would have known why Archie didn't get title' - claims are 'misleading'
					

In her interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan Markle spoke about how her son Archie wasn't given a HRH, claiming there were conversations around the colour of his skin when she was pregnant




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Her stans of course will never acknowledge it, but the Interview, _the on and on flow of post  Interview  comments from Gayle and Scoobie_ (sounds like a cartoon show on kiddie TV) is bullying.......just what they have been accused of while in the Palace.


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> Goodness gracious! I bet she would have liked that picture to be scrubbed off the internet


It's too bad (for her) that she's burned all those bridges, for there'll be no more scrubbing anything off the internet for her again - no matter how embarrassing or far back in time.
I picture the Queen sitting behind a desk somewhere in Buckingham Palace with her face lit partially by a small desk lamp speaking into a secured line "release the photos now" 


limom said:


> Meh, if I hurt someone what is the big deal to apologize and say sorry?


No. Sorry doll. You _must_ be cancelled immediately, read for filth, and publicly humiliated on social media for any misstep you make.  Any apology from you is not to be assumed as genuine.  You will be required to attend insensitivity (re)training.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Kate and Will's message on St. Patrick's Day, Kate looks a little tired and sad on the video. I bet that MM crying issue has been very hurtful to her. As someone said, MM & H "_are stabbing a knife through the heart of the monarchy_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Philip Schofield suggests Harry and Meghan have 'made their point'
> 
> 
> The 58-year-old released his pent-up frustration during a segment about how the couple had complained to US TV host Gayle King that senior royals are still yet to speak to Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: St. Patrick's Day Video




In reading this article, in particular this part:

*'And she is known to have kept a diary during her time within in the royal family this would be bombshell stuff if she was to go and release it, I've already said that if they don't get their way if they're not satisfied with the conversations taking place in house

'Then it could be a situation where they will be releasing diaries, releasing a tell-all documentary on Netflix nothing is off-limits at the moment and we're talking about every twist and turn at the moment'.'*

I firmly believe she kept a diary, a very inaccurate diary to be pulled out at some point as a weapon. To take anything she has written in her 'diary' as what happened at the time IMO as anything but fiction would be beyond naïve.  I even wouldn't put it past her to have rewritten it in the last year putting her own twisted spin on things. Also I say shame on Oprah and Gail for putting out this was an interview and not what it really was, the Harkles looking for attention while whining and lying. IMO of course  .


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> I think, to grossly stereotype, that Americans just like having holiday celebrations.
> They do celebrate more holidays than we Brits do.  Lots of Americans also have ‘fall’ decorations and ‘spring’ decorations & things like that.
> 
> As I said a lot of Americans are big on their Irish heritage too & I think it’s just evolved from that. You do get parades in Irish areas of the UK too like Liverpool (and of course there’s the whole religious divide which means parades could be very politicised but that’s OT)
> Then, as popular holidays often do, they got very commercial along the way.



There's only one month without a holiday, Hallmark or otherwise and that is August

I'm only second generation removed from the auld sod. Grandparents came over in the later 1800's. Most of my uncles were born before 1900, my Dad in 1905. I only knew one uncle and an aunt, the rest were long gone by the time I arrived. Nobody ever mentioned family history. Like many Gen2 I had to learn about my heritage myself. So I read the histories, wore an armband for Bobby Sands, went to the fairs, got the obligatory Celtic tat, learned ceilidhe dancing and started to learn Gaelic. 

So, for me to be Team Queen in all this certainly says something about how far the Harkles have pushed their s#!t.


----------



## V0N1B2

duna said:


> There's an interview many, many pages back in this thread, given by Meghan to a British journalist (I can't remember her name nor the paper she worked for) before she ever met Harry. The journalist said Meghan's agent pestered her for an interview with Meghan which she declined several times, since Meghan was practically unknown in the UK at the time. In the end she gave in and granted the interview in some roof top hotel in London, I can't remember where. Meghan told her she loooved British men and asked her whether Ashley Cole   would be a good choice......I'm sure many of you remember the interview.


Yeah, the "interview lunch" was with Lizzie Cundy.  If you search for her name with Meghan's you'll find the original article.  Here's an excerpt (found on mercurynews.com):

“She told me she wanted to be on an English reality TV show and that she wanted an English boyfriend,” British TV presenter Lizzie Cundy told the Daily Mail.  Cundy said she and Meghan met at a 2013 charity gala, the same year that the “Suits” actress ended her two-year marriage to producer Trevor Engelson.  “Do you know any famous guys?” Cundy said Meghan told her, according to both the Daily Mail and The Sun. “I’m single and I really love English men.”  Cundy said Meghan also explained that she “could only be in ‘Suits’ for so long and that Hollywood was a really brutal place. She had not made a breakthrough, and said she would feel at home in London.”  Cundy said Meghan set her sights on the TV show “Made in Chelsea,” a series that chronicles the lives of affluent young people living in London. Meghan wanted to be part of the Chelsea crowd, both on screen and off, Cundy said.  “She worked hard to get in with that crowd,” Cundy added. Through these circles, she eventually became acquainted with people who were friends with Harry, according to the Daily Mail.




chicinthecity777 said:


> Why were there so many drug ads during this TV interview? Was it because they were predicting what kind of audience it would draw or were they predicting the effects of the interview would have on the audience?


That's all there is on US commercials. Advertisements for Drugs, Stuffed-crust pizza and other assorted artery-clogging garbage, sprinkled with a few personal injury litigation, car & truck, and insurance commercials.


----------



## V0N1B2

Allisonfaye said:


> Have you seen any of those montages where the local news all repeats the same phrases at news stations across the country because they are clearly getting their script from the main office?


Well, when only a few corporations control like 90% of the US media it's easy to tow the party line so to speak. They set the narrative and the stations are required to present them to the public. (ex: Sinclair Media)
It's the same in Canada - BellMedia and Rogers own pretty much ALL of the Canadian information networks, be they television, print media or radio.



lanasyogamama said:


> this seems like such a downgrade for Gayle, truly.


I dunno... I don't have cable so admittedly I don't watch Gayle King but I had never heard of her until she became inseparable from Oprah on that road trip they did several years back.
I guess I just see her as a "news presenter" as they call them in the UK, or a talk show correspondent.  It's not like she was ever a hard-hitting journalist reporting from the front lines in Afghanistan or anything, right?  I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't expect much from her.


----------



## poopsie

Allisonfaye said:


> An excuse to drink and party...just like Cinco De Mayo.... people need a reason to drink and party.



Any day that ended in Y worked for me


----------



## LibbyRuth

bellecate said:


> In reading this article, in particular this part:
> 
> *'And she is known to have kept a diary during her time within in the royal family this would be bombshell stuff if she was to go and release it, I've already said that if they don't get their way if they're not satisfied with the conversations taking place in house
> 
> 'Then it could be a situation where they will be releasing diaries, releasing a tell-all documentary on Netflix nothing is off-limits at the moment and we're talking about every twist and turn at the moment'.'*
> 
> I firmly believe she kept a diary, a very inaccurate diary to be pulled out at some point as a weapon. To take anything she has written in her 'diary' as what happened at the time IMO as anything but fiction would be beyond naïve.  I even wouldn't put it past her to have rewritten it in the last year putting her own twisted spin on things. Also I say shame on Oprah and Gail for putting out this was an interview and not what it really was, the Harkles looking for attention while whining and lying. IMO of course  .



So basically, they are doing what they complain about Meghan's family doing, right?  They are sharing personal family conversations, just as they got upset at Meghan's father and sister for doing.  They are letting it be known they have receipts and can share them - but objected when Meghan's father shared a letter he got from her. Meghan lets it be known she's got diaries and could write a tell all - just like Samantha did. Are Meghan's father and sister the test balloon to help Harry and Meghan figure out the best ways to exploit family drama?


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Apple TV and H’s show — no way I could ever trust anything he says about mental health. H&M have lost all credibility on this topic. OW, too.  

Briefing war???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> They are connected through Soho House, no?
> I thought it was rumoured that Omid used to date Markus Anderson.



Fascinating! Here’s what I found from Quora last year, but the woman’s claims make sense.

*How much involvement does Marcus Anderson have in the book Finding Freedom about Meghan and Harry?*
Markus Anderson is an interesting man. He rose from being a waiter at Soho House to being a Global Ambassador, and by the time Meghan Markle moved to Toronto to act in Suits, she was a member of Soho House in Toronto. How did Meghan pay the fee to join Soho is an unanswered question, but there is no question that she met Markus in 2012, and they formed a fast friendship.









Admittedly, Markus asked Meghan if he could introduce her to Prince Harry of the royal family in Britain fame. She readily agreed, and a meeting occurred. What happened after isn’t certain, but we do know Markus and Meghan formed an alliance of sorts and went to the Invictus Games in 2016 when it was held in Toronto. They crashed box seats and were escorted out, but they are a determined pair, and they landed a spot in Prince Harry’s special suite on the very last night of the Games.








Anyone who gazes at photos of Meghan and Markus see their chemistry. It’s palpable, even on film. Yes, they are the closest of friends, and together, the master networker, that’s Markus, and the master manipulator, that’s Meghan, created a formidable pair. Meghan wanted to be a royal and rich, just like her idol, Princess Diana. Markus knows what happened. Markus has even lived with the duchess and duke, though not in London, but in Canada, and some believe Markus is in Perry’s home with Megs, Harry, Doria and Archie.








Markus told Omid Scobie, a Meghan devotee and aspiring writer of royals, to closely follow Meghan in her days after her marriage to Harry. Markus and Scobie became an item, but I’ve heard Markus isn’t gay, like Scobie. He operates under the fallacy of being gay, when he’s bisexual, so that explains the crackling sexual chemistry, and the wanting look Meghan gives to Markus alone.








As to the book, it’s an open secret that Meghan worked on it, and she allowed Scobie access her life, a behind-the-scenes look at Meghan’s royal life (which wasn’t very royal, since she only attended 72 engagements, and some she left incredibly early). Markus likely helped write the book about the royals who felt enslaved to luxury; he knows the subject of Meghan so very well, and while he was seeing Scobie, Markus could direct his boyfriend author where to look for answers.




Markus is at the center of Meghan’s world. Not Harry. Harry is along for Meghan’s wild ride to freedom and hopefully, in her mind, untold wealth and fame to rival Diana’s. Markus can only do so much. He cannot make Meghan what she isn’t, and that’s empathic, honest, caring and wanting to legitimately change this world for good. Diana wanted that. Meghan doesn’t possess the empathy, and thus, cannot become another Diana. Or Diana 2.0. Meghan is not capable, but the book is going to try and get her there. Will we buy it?


----------



## poopsie

jennlt said:


> Who needs health insurance when H & M can just ask the staff if they're okay




Meh-----just sign them up for O**** Care


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> "_Palace staff are said to be armed with "harrowing stories" in relation to bullying allegations made against Meghan, a royal insider previously told The Times._
> 
> "*The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell,*" _they claimed._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘bullying’ caused ‘stress and trauma’ at Palace, insider claims
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle’s alleged bullying reportedly “real stress and trauma” at the Palace, a royal insider has claimed. An insider claims her behaviour took a “human toll” on…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Interesting evolution in wording of this story

The original Times story was about Palace employees coming out and telling their truths ( I love that turn of phrase). Presumably, by doing so, they violated their NDAs. Some are currently employed, others are not. *Individuals talked to the press. 

IT WAS NOT A (SANCIONED) LEAK FROM THE PALACES. *It was individuals, just an HM are now individuals ....

The above article says the info came from a *"palace insider"* leading it was a *leak*, but honestly any of the past and present employees might be considered insiders.

*So, the current story is not A LIE but the choice of words will sell lots of copies. 

THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE* of the inflammatory UK tabloids, M's complaint that she wants BP to shut down, M also wants BP to stop leaking as might be presumed 

But seriously over the choice of a word or two, there is much worse in internet journalism and blogs


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, for all the hair on my head, my eyebrows have never grown back from over plucking in college.  I just had microblading done!  It takes a minute to get used to.  My daughter's first comment?  "You look like Angry Birds!", but after a couple weeks, I'm loving them.  My SIL's mother was musing aloud one day why her eyebrows, which she also overplucked, never grew back, but her grey chin hairs return over and over and over again.



Turns out all that nasty estrogen was good for some things after all.


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> Meh-----just sign them up for O**** Care



Maybe they can even score a subsidy...


----------



## Jayne1

Mendocino said:


> Hello, just wanted to let you know that if you look up Wayne Goss on YouTube his latest video is him showing how to use an eyebrow pencil and gel to fill in your brows. He gives some very good advice. Lisa Eldridge is another makeup artist I follow.


I've seen them all, but just as you can't make a moustache look like anything other than shadow and pencil above a man's lip, it's not a natural look to use pencil or shadow on your hairless skin to simulate brow hair.

I'm talking in real life, in natural light, not an influencer using face tune.  You really don't see sharp detail _especially_ on Lisa Eldridge's videos.   


jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t know if she had anything done. It’s possible they just got thicker after puberty or she used to pluck them to death in the 90s.


Well, she must be blessed, as are all celebrities who grow so much prettier over the years.


----------



## bellecate

LibbyRuth said:


> So basically, they are doing what they complain about Meghan's family doing, right?  They are sharing personal family conversations, just as they got upset at Meghan's father and sister for doing.  They are letting it be known they have receipts and can share them - but objected when Meghan's father shared a letter he got from her. Meghan lets it be known she's got diaries and could write a tell all - just like Samantha did. Are Meghan's father and sister the test balloon to help Harry and Meghan figure out the best ways to exploit family drama?



As far as I know all her father did when they wrote him off while he was in the hospital with heart problems was have his picture taken being measured for a suit for the wedding and reading through a book on England. The letter was after they had cut ties with him. Was there something else he had done that made him so horrid they dropped him that I missed?  
I believe M had planned on dropping him from her first date so she could maintain her new history as told to JCMH(but remember I'm a born prince) by her.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if they will be able to keep protecting him from MM&H's revenge act. It's a lot on QE's shoulders.










						Prince Philip 'protected' from Meghan and Harry fall out while in hospital
					

Royal expert Katie Nicholl claims the Royal Family kept Prince Philip protected against much of the drama surrounding Meghan Markle and Harry's Oprah Winfrey interview as he recovers from illness




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

A copycat of MM&H in California!!!


----------



## lalame

LibbyRuth said:


> So basically, they are doing what they complain about Meghan's family doing, right?  They are sharing personal family conversations, just as they got upset at Meghan's father and sister for doing.  They are letting it be known they have receipts and can share them - but objected when Meghan's father shared a letter he got from her. Meghan lets it be known she's got diaries and could write a tell all - just like Samantha did. Are Meghan's father and sister the test balloon to help Harry and Meghan figure out the best ways to exploit family drama?



100%. I don't like what the dad and Samantha were doing but I have a hard time feeling sympathy for Meghan now, looking back. She's cut from the same cloth and it highlights her hypocrisy here. She called her dad's actions a "betrayal"... wonder what she thinks this looks like.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> As far as I know all her father did when they wrote him off while he was in the hospital with heart problems was have his picture taken being measured for a suit for the wedding and reading through a book on England. The letter was after they had cut ties with him. Was there something else he had done that made him so horrid they dropped him that I missed?
> I believe M had planned on dropping him from her first date so she could maintain her new history as told to JCMH(but remember I'm a born prince) by her.



I must say, the entire H&M wedding story seems so complicated. So many questions, so much happened that does not seem ‘right’. That is how it always is with H&M. There’s always _something_ a bit ‘off’, a bit ‘odd’, unusual, shady. 

Even this OW/GK story.  What _is _the truth?  We know it is not what they say. Exactly _what_ are they hiding?  I feel we are a few weeks away from knowing all the facts, but who knows?  Lots of hidden agendas, lots of rumors. One of the latest - if the palace forces H&M out, will the palace have to pay H&M a severance package?  That could explain why the palace has moved so slowly.  If H&M go voluntarily, there is no pay-out. Hmmmm.


----------



## carmen56

If William, Charles and HMTQ have any sense, they should record any future calls to Harry, or calls from him.


----------



## lalame

bellecate said:


> As far as I know all her father did when they wrote him off while he was in the hospital with heart problems was have his picture taken being measured for a suit for the wedding and reading through a book on England. The letter was after they had cut ties with him. Was there something else he had done that made him so horrid they dropped him that I missed?
> I believe M had planned on dropping him from her first date so she could maintain her new history as told to JCMH(but remember I'm a born prince) by her.



Wasn't he doing interviews about her and sharing childhood photos with the media? I thought THAT was the catalyst for cutting ties and thus sending the letter. I wasn't paying attention when it all went down but that what I thought.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers's replacement on GMB uses similar terms as MM&H and sounds like a Californian therapist. 

"_ITV presenter Ben Shephard was mocked by his Good Morning Britain co-hosts today for urging the Royal Family and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to 'share their truth' and 'hopefully start healing' after their private talks were leaked. 

Shephard, who added that it was important for all parties 'to be honest with each other', was accused by Susanna Reid of 'sounding like a Californian therapist' while Ranvir Singh joked that he needed to get his 'teeth whitened'. 

The terms used by Shephard have strong similarities to those of Meghan and Harry during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, which first aired on CBS on March 7, and then on ITV the following night.

*There goes another 100,000 viewers! *_"   









						Ben Shephard urges royals to 'share their truth' with Harry and Meghan
					

Ben Shephard was accused by his fellow Good Morning Britain host Susanna Reid of 'sounding like a Californian therapist' while Ranvir Singh joked that he needed to get his 'teeth whitened'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Have you seen any of those montages where the local news all repeats the same phrases at news stations across the country because they are clearly getting their script from the main office?



Case in point, CBS put out one of those packaged segments about Sharon Osbourne today. They are stopping production on The Talk for another week. Some dude from NPR was talking about how racially insensitive Sharon was for supporting Piers and not believing Meghan’s claims. To top off the segment, there are now reportedly other accusations popping up about past racist comments from Sharon. I just finished watching this on the CBS affiliate here in Baltimore.

Look for Sharon to be fired or forced to quit very soon. That’ll teach her to have an opinion that isn’t the same as what has been deemed correct by the network.

Cancel culture is real.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Case in point, CBS put out one of those packaged segments about Sharon Osbourne today. They are stopping production on The Talk for another week. Some dude from NPR was talking about how racially insensitive Sharon was for supporting Piers and not believing Meghan’s claims. To top off the segment, there are now reportedly other accusations popping up about past racist comments from Sharon. I just finished watching this on the CBS affiliate here in Baltimore.
> 
> Look for Sharon to be fired or forced to quit very soon. That’ll teach her to have an opinion that isn’t the same as what has been deemed correct by the network.
> 
> Cancel culture is real.



Trying to avoid the political aspects, but the French do not want it!  Macron recently slammed American universities for the ’fracture and divide‘ thinking.  This is exactly what H&M are doing. Fracture and divide.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Well, when only a few corporations control like 90% of the US media it's easy to tow the party line so to speak. They set the narrative and the stations are required to present them to the public. (ex: Sinclair Media)
> It's the same in Canada - BellMedia and Rogers own pretty much ALL of the Canadian information networks, be they television, print media or radio.
> 
> 
> I dunno... I don't have cable so admittedly I don't watch Gayle King but I had never heard of her until she became inseparable from Oprah on that road trip they did several years back.
> I guess I just see her as a "news presenter" as they call them in the UK, or a talk show correspondent.  It's not like she was ever a hard-hitting journalist reporting from the front lines in Afghanistan or anything, right?  I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't expect much from her.


Oh, she and Oprah have been besties since their 20's....for many years that was (as far as I know) Gayle's main claim to fame.  she had done local news but she was nowhere near Oprah's status.  but oprah took her everywhere.  they talked every day.  now she is successful in her own right (not Oprah level but very successful).  and she's acting like a fangirl.  disappointing.


----------



## Lodpah

Maybe Marcus is her Camilla?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> I must say, the entire H&M wedding story seems so complicated. So many questions, so much happened that does not seem ‘right’. That is how it always is with H&M. There’s always _something_ a bit ‘off’, a bit ‘odd’, unusual, shady.
> 
> Even this OW/GK story.  What _is _the truth?  We know it is not what they say. Exactly _what_ are they hiding?  I feel we are a few weeks away from knowing all the facts, but who knows?  Lots of hidden agendas, lots of rumors.


That's how I feel about the top secret birth of Archie. lol


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Case in point, CBS put out one of those packaged segments about Sharon Osbourne today. They are stopping production on The Talk for another week. Some dude from NPR was talking about how racially insensitive Sharon was for supporting Piers and not believing Meghan’s claims. To top off the segment, there are now reportedly other accusations popping up about past racist comments from Sharon. I just finished watching this on the CBS affiliate here in Baltimore.
> 
> Look for Sharon to be fired or forced to quit very soon. That’ll teach her to have an opinion that isn’t the same as what has been deemed correct by the network.
> 
> Cancel culture is real.



I feel badly for Sharon. She is very opinionated and somewhat unfiltered. She also calls people out on their BS. That’s never been a secret and I’m sure a big part of why she was hired for The Talk. Very unfair to use that against her simply because her opinion differs.

Every time anyone says anything negative about MM, or questions anything MM has ever said, this is the default response:




While I don’t doubt or debunk that MM had a few racist things published in the media, she is hardcore bandwagoning on the WOC wave and using this as her leverage to get sympathy, fans, support, etc. A very carefully timed and calculated move on her part.

For someone who just wanted peace and privacy, she sure has opened one hell of a Pandora’s box of attention - both good for her personal agenda and bad in that $hite’s going to come out that she wouldnt have to answer to if she just kept her mouth shut. I really can’t wait for her little “victory moment” to be over and these two dwindle into obscurity.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lalame said:


> He was pretty sympathetic to them before, right after the interview aired... how much good will are they willing to lose?


O M G. The Sussexes made Philip Schofield semi shout "Shut up!" on national TV  

Yes, he was very sympathetic in his first comments on their interview. 


I'm just sensing a plot here. Maybe we're all being played and Meghan was hired by the queen to wreak her havoc and in so doing, make the BRF receive eternal empathy and goodwill from their subjects.


----------



## melissatrv

what the flying.....has this been posted yet?  As my father used to say, there is a sucker born every minute!









						GoFundMe to pay off Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s mortgage goes bust
					

A GoFundMe page set up to pay off the mortgage on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s $14.6 million California estate has gone bust — after raising a measly $110, a report says. Anastasia Hanson, 56, …




					nypost.com


----------



## Allisonfaye

melissatrv said:


> what the flying.....has this been posted yet?  As my father used to say, there is a sucker born every minute!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GoFundMe to pay off Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s mortgage goes bust
> 
> 
> A GoFundMe page set up to pay off the mortgage on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s $14.6 million California estate has gone bust — after raising a measly $110, a report says. Anastasia Hanson, 56, …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



So it wasn't $110 MILLION like it was being reported but $110?


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> *There's only one month without a holiday, Hallmark or otherwise and that is August*
> 
> I'm only second generation removed from the auld sod. Grandparents came over in the later 1800's. Most of my uncles were born before 1900, my Dad in 1905. I only knew one uncle and an aunt, the rest were long gone by the time I arrived. Nobody ever mentioned family history. Like many Gen2 I had to learn about my heritage myself. So I read the histories, wore an armband for Bobby Sands, went to the fairs, got the obligatory Celtic tat, learned ceilidhe dancing and started to learn Gaelic.
> 
> So, for me to be Team Queen in all this certainly says something about how far the Harkles have pushed their s#!t.



Oh, come on now!  Do you really mean to tell me you forgot all the specials days you are blatantly overlooking in August? 

*International Forgiveness Day* (first Sunday in August...ahem, MEG pay attention!), August 5th is *National Underwear Day*, August 7 is *National Clown Day*, and my personal favorite, August 3 which is *Grab Some Nuts Day* (I hope they mean the edible kind, otherwise Meg celebrates this every day), are just to name a few!!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *How much involvement does Marcus Anderson have in the book Finding Freedom about Meghan and Harry?*
> Markus Anderson is an interesting man. He rose from being a waiter at Soho House to being a Global Ambassador, and by the time Meghan Markle moved to Toronto to act in Suits, she was a member of Soho House in Toronto. *How did Meghan pay the fee to join Soho is an unanswered question, but there is no question that she met Markus in 2012, and they formed a fast friendship.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Markus is at the center of Meghan’s world. Not Harry. Harry is along for Meghan’s wild ride to freedom and hopefully, in her mind, untold wealth and fame to rival Diana’s. Markus can only do so much. He cannot make Meghan what she isn’t, and that’s empathic, honest, caring and wanting to legitimately change this world for good. Diana wanted that. Meghan doesn’t possess the empathy, and thus, cannot become another Diana. Or Diana 2.0. Meghan is not capable, but the book is going to try and get her there. Will we buy it?


Hmmm, maybe yachts pay well?  

She looks stoned in the last picture.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Maybe Marcus is her Camilla?


Nah, Marcus is more like her tampon.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trying to avoid the political aspects, but the French do not want it!  *Macron recently slammed American universities for the ’fracture and divide‘ thinking.  This is exactly what H&M are doing. Fracture and divide.*


Yes, yes, yes!!  My son is currently in college at a very well known university in the US.  He is taking a Sports Psychology class.  He (being half white) routinely calls me, completely frustrated, saying it has NOTHING to do with sports psychology, but is basically a podium for the professor to constantly talk about how evil white men are, constantly promote wokeism, and promote every extreme liberal agenda he can.  He also bashes the military (my husband is a veteran) and says anyone patriotic to the US is nuts.  And of course, if anyone dares speak up, they get a zero on the assignment.  My son is very proud of my husband's work in the Navy, and quite patriotic for a teenager.  He also looks completely white, and is a male, so he says he feels berated on a daily basis.  

I guess the Sorbonne it is for my daughter!


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> So it wasn't $110 MILLION like it was being reported but $110?


This is way this fundraiser is now closed. MM & H's can't be linked to anything below several millions.


----------



## Lodpah

No


purseinsanity said:


> Nah, Marcus is more like her tampon.


Now, now. . . she does not bleed. She’s super woman, a saint who is so pure and untouchable. We’re just mere mortals.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Nah, Marcus is more like her tampon.
> [/Q
> This should be multiple quotes for your last four postings, but I am laughing too hard to concentrate on how to do it. You are on a roll today!
> 
> Using a Markle maneuver I am admittedly going to plagiarize: " I can't stoaaaaahp!!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity




----------



## purseinsanity

.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, come on now!  Do you really mean to tell me you forgot all the specials days you are blatantly overlooking in August?
> 
> *International Forgiveness Day* (first Sunday in August...ahem, MEG pay attention!), August 5th is *National Underwear Day*, August 7 is *National Clown Day*, and my personal favorite, August 3 which is *Grab Some Nuts Day* (I hope they mean the edible kind, otherwise Meg celebrates this every day), are just to name a few!!


In some European countries almost all days in August are holidays. I wonder when will be able to travel again...


----------



## Chagall

lalame said:


> I think intention plays a role in how something is received but I don't think it's the only thing. I'm sure M doesn't INTEND to do things that disgust you... but here this thread is.  My big thing is context. I don't jump to conclusions but if people do something with love in their hearts that's offensive... of course I'm still offended. But my reaction is obviously very different vs if it was someone doing something offensive on purpose. I cut people some slack and I think we all need to take a breather sometimes with jumping at offense quickly.


It’s funny, I’m not a big Oprah fan but something she said way back when I used to watch her stuck in my head. She said, “I think we take things the way they were intended”. I really believe that. Someone may do something that offends you but somehow you instinctively know if the offence was intentional or not.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, yes, yes!!  My son is currently in college at a very well known university in the US.  He is taking a Sports Psychology class.  He (being half white) routinely calls me, completely frustrated, saying it has NOTHING to do with sports psychology, but is basically a podium for the professor to constantly talk about how evil white men are, constantly promote wokeism, and promote every extreme liberal agenda he can.  And of course, if anyone dares speak up, they get a zero on the assignment.  I guess the Sorbonne it is for my daughter!


The above is unfortunately true in several major US universities. It's sad to see the lack of common sense... Sorbonne is a great choice for your daughter. We have friends and family that studied there from my parents' generation and they often spoke fondly about those years. Paris, who doesn't love Paris? I can't wait to be able to pack and get on a plane...


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Huh?
> How can one be a pseudo-white Chinese boy?


While he was busy tearing down the white girl wearing a Chinese dress, others checked out his social media presence and pointed out that everything he wore in his photos was from non-Chinese, mainly white, cultures. Plus he had made racist comments online before. So some factions accused him of appropriating Western clothes as well as Western woke attitudes regarding culture. There was also an interesting spread of opinion regarding the whole episode: polls done in China didn't show much outrage, polls done in the US showed significantly more agreement with the guy, and some Asians in the US remarked online that the Chinese in China just didn't understand how bad it was for non-POC to wear another culture's apparel. Whatever, that guy got his 15 mins of fame or infamy which in my opinion was his aim all along. Culture guardian he is not.

One sarcastic comment about him went:
"Personally I admire Jeremy Lam. He’s brought together people of all races, colors and creeds to talk about what an ******* he is. He’s a uniter, not a divider."


----------



## bag-mania

Update on the Sharon Osbourne story. Since it was the Harry and Meghan interview that prompted it I think it’s appropriate to put it here.

*Sharon Osbourne felt like a 'sacrificial lamb' in 'The Talk' dispute*
Sharon Osbourne says she'd like to turn her argument on "The Talk" into a teachable moment.

"I very much want to listen to the youth," Osbourne told "Entertainment Tonight" in an exclusive interview which aired Tuesday. "Do I have my finger on the pulse of what's going on, with the Black situation in this country? No."

The co-host is currently fighting back against accusations she has used racist and homophobic language while speaking about her former colleagues on the CBS talk show.

The accusations were made Tuesday in a story written by journalist Yashar Ali, citing former "Talk" co-host Leah Remini, who spoke on the record in the piece, and a number of unnamed sources.

CNN has not independently verified the claims. A spokesperson for Remini confirmed the accuracy of her statements as reported by Ali and declined further comment when connected by CNN.

"The only thing worse than a disgruntled former employee is a disgruntled former talk show host," Osbourne's spokesperson Howard Bragman said in a statement to CNN in response to the allegations raised in Ali's report. "For 11 years Sharon has been kind, collegial and friendly with her hosts as evidenced by throwing them parties, inviting them to her home in the UK and other gestures of kindness too many to name. Sharon is disappointed but unfazed and hardly surprised by the lies, the recasting of history and the bitterness coming out at this moment."

The allegations became public just as the CBS daytime talk show had gone on a brief hiatus following a heated debate last week between co-hosts Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood regarding Osbourne's support of her longtime friend, Piers Morgan.

The "Entertainment Tonight" interview appears to have occurred before Ali's story was published and Osbourne -- who apologized on Twitter after her dust up with Underwood -- talked about feeling blindsided during the now famous run in.

“Sheryl turns around and asks me this question and....she was reading it off a card. It wasn't on my cards," Osbourne said. "And then [another co-host] Elaine [Welteroth]'s reading her questions and I'm like, 'I've been set up.' They're setting me up. My anger was like, 'I cannot believe this, I'm your sacrificial lamb.'"

Osbourne said moments before the show began one of the show runners asked if she would mind answering questions about Morgan and how she would feel if "maybe one of [the women] doesn't agree with you." Osbourne said she responded, "I'll answer whatever they want me to answer."

Underwood and Welteroth are both Black. Osbourne said she's tried to apologize to Underwood, who Osbourne said she has "nothing but respect and so much affection for," but has not gotten a response.

"I am not a racist and if you can't have a go at your friend who happens to be Black, does that make me racist because I said certain things to my friend, but I said them on camera?" Osbourne said. "I will keep on apologizing to Sheryl, even if I decide not to go back, I will still keep apologizing to Sheryl."

CNN has reached out to Underwood and Welteroth for comment. CNN also has reached out to CBS for comment on Osbourne's claims of feeling set up.

"The Talk," which also includes co-host Carrie Ann Inaba and Amanda Kloots, is currently on production hiatus "as we continue to review these issues," CBS said. Osbourne told "Entertainment Tonight" she is unsure as to whether she will return to the show.









						Sharon Osbourne felt like a 'sacrificial lamb' in 'The Talk' dispute
					

Sharon Osbourne says she'd like to turn her argument on "The Talk" into a teachable moment.




					www.google.com


----------



## Chanbal

This article is about the collapse of Ralph & Russo, who made MM's engagement dress. I only post this here because of the pictures of the dresses and respective price tags. Poor Charles he had to pay for the most expensive dress.  











						How DID the seams come apart on the A-listers' favourite UK label?
					

With a clientele that reads like a who's who of A-listers, assorted members of international royalty and VIPs, Ralph & Russo's status in the hallowed ranks of high fashion is well established.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

So I was listening to American news through a radio app I use and there was an ad for NPR's New York radio hour podcast. The voiceover went like this:

Oprah Winfrey's interview with Meghan and Harry, the Duchess and Duke of Sussex, was riveting celebrity television, but it may also be a significant turning point in the history of the British royal family.... The interview also touched on racism and mental health, issues that are familiar to many families. *"In the future, we will look to this interview as a real touchstone marking the change of who it is we see as authorities of their own experience," *says Doreen St. Félix....

What in the fresh lettuce hell is this word salad bullsh!t?
*"In the future, we will look to this interview as a real touchstone marking the change of who it is we see as authorities of their own experience,"*
What is an authority of my own experience?
Any translators in the house?

On another note, Oprah has long been a word salad spinner.  I remember watching her show back in the day after it became more touchy-feely and new age, and she'd be blathering on about something and I was always like... whaaaa? dafuq is she even saying?


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, yes, yes!!  My son is currently in college at a very well known university in the US.  He is taking a Sports Psychology class.  He (being half white) routinely calls me, completely frustrated, saying it has NOTHING to do with sports psychology, but is basically a podium for the professor to constantly talk about how evil white men are, constantly promote wokeism, and promote every extreme liberal agenda he can.  He also bashes the military (my husband is a veteran) and says anyone patriotic to the US is nuts.  And of course, if anyone dares speak up, they get a zero on the assignment.  My son is very proud of my husband's work in the Navy, and quite patriotic for a teenager.  He also looks completely white, and is a male, so he says he feels berated on a daily basis.
> 
> I guess the Sorbonne it is for my daughter!



I went to a state university in the mid 70's.
My Classical Social Theory prof dropped acid in class and used Herman Hesse novels for our books
My Sex in Contemporary Society prof was a former Hitler Youth
My Criminology and Penology prof was super impressed with my year end paper (that I wrote in one night) where I used the Dylan song Hurricane as the subject material

So it seems that our bastions of higher education have always had their issues

just curious as to the race/gender of your son's prof. That is abuse that would NOT be tolerated if the shoe was on the other foot


----------



## KellyObsessed

Do you mean The Bob Dylan song; Hurricane? 



poopsie said:


> I went to a state university in the mid 70's.
> My Classical Social Theory prof dropped acid in class and used Herman Hesse novels for our books
> My Sex in Contemporary Society prof was a former Hitler Youth
> My Criminology and Penology prof was super impressed with my year end paper (that I wrote in one night) where I used the Springsteen song Hurricane as the subject material
> 
> So it seems that our bastions of higher education have always had their issues
> 
> just curious as to the race/gender of your son's prof. That is abuse that would NOT be tolerated if the shoe was on the other foot


----------



## lalame

I went to one of the most liberal colleges in the US but never really felt like the teachers were promoting a specific political agenda. They go off course sometimes on various topics, but nothing that seemed like indoctrination so interesting to hear people's experiences.


----------



## poopsie

KellyObsessed said:


> Do you mean The Bob Dylan song; Hurricane?



LOL
Yes. It had just come out recently and should be credited to Bob not Bruce.
BRB

Thank you 

Sheesh I AM getting old


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> The interview also touched on racism and mental health, issues that are familiar to many families. *"In the future, we will look to this interview as a real touchstone marking the change of who it is we see as authorities of their own experience," *says Doreen St. Félix....
> 
> What in the fresh lettuce hell is this word salad bullsh!t?
> *"In the future, we will look to this interview as a real touchstone marking the change of who it is we see as authorities of their own experience,"*
> What is an authority of my own experience?
> Any translators in the house?
> 
> On another note, Oprah has long been a word salad spinner.  I remember watching her show back in the day after it became more touchy-feely and new age, and she'd be blathering on about something and I was always like... whaaaa? dafuq is she even saying?



Wow, that is worthy of Meghan herself! Apparently coherent thought is for Boomers.

That lovely, indecipherable line of word salad was written by a 28-year-old working for the _New Yorker_ as their TV critic.
From her rather short and possibly self-placed Wikipedia listing: *Doreen St. Félix* (born 1992) is an Haitian-American writer. She is a staff writer for The New Yorker and was formerly editor-at-large for Lenny Letter, a newsletter from Lena Dunhamand Jenni Konner.


----------



## poopsie




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This Aussie journalist has a way with words...  




"Alan Jones, a Sky News Australia journalist, could not hide his disgust at the Duchess of Sussex's antics and launched into a vicious attack on her and Prince Harry.

He  told his Sky News Australia audience in his programme last week: "I am sure there were many people reaching for the chuck bucket over this Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.

"If these two had any public support left, which I doubt - it was all lost today."

The former Australian national rugby team coach criticised Meghan's refusal to name the alleged Royal member who had made the comments about Archie's skin colour.

Mr Jones said: "The Meghan Markle way you see.

"Condemn everyone name no one - the tactic of an unworthy person."

He went on to suggest that Harry had been duped and blinded by the artful intrigues of his wife, saying:
"Prince Harry would appear as long gone captured by the untruths spread by Ms Markle and the victimhood she professes to endure."

The Sky News presenter was equally critical of the couple's decision to marry in secret three days before the televised wedding.

"That about sums it up doesn't it," he said. "The wedding was a fake - the lady's a fake."

Mr Jones suggested that the Duchess of Sussex should spend some time with Princess Anne, who would no doubt put her on the straight and narrow.

"Princess Anne is the one who would sort out Meghan Markle in colourful language too I can tell you," the former rugby coach claimed.

He added: "Since her 18th birthday Princess Anne has uncomplainingly carried out over 20,000 engagements."

The Aussie commentator finally concluded his monologue by expressing his sympathies for the Queen and Prince Philip.

He said: "An outstanding and popular monarch who's 94, her husband in hospital as he approaches his 100th birthday and they have to cop this dishonest contrived and made up nonsense."

The lady is a fake!


----------



## KellyObsessed

poopsie said:


> LOL
> Yes. It had just come out recently and should be credited to Bob not Bruce.
> BRB
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Sheesh I AM getting old


 I am too, but being from Toronto there was so much news about Hurricane Carter living (and unfortunately dying of cancer) in Toronto.    Plus I did attend the "Rolling Thunder Revue" concert at Maple Leaf Gardens in 1975 and Bob Dylan sang this song.


----------



## lalame

Wow I actually heard Gayle talking about that conversation with M+H. I thought at first, was it the media spinning it... but no, she really said Harry and his brother and father had "unproductive" conversations!! Doesn't Harry understand that the press frenzy that drove Diana to her death wasn't stoked by who she was but the DRAMA that swirled her marriage for years? Stop the drama!! Keep it shut for everyone's sake.


----------



## scarlet555

Allisonfaye said:


> So it wasn't $110 MILLION like it was being reported but $110?



Collecting money for millionaires is ... SICK


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> This Aussie journalist has a way with words...
> 
> View attachment 5026371
> 
> 
> "Alan Jones, a Sky News Australia journalist, could not hide his disgust at the Duchess of Sussex's antics and launched into a vicious attack on her and Prince Harry.
> 
> He  told his Sky News Australia audience in his programme last week: "I am sure there were many people reaching for the chuck bucket over this Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> 
> "If these two had any public support left, which I doubt - it was all lost today."
> 
> The former Australian national rugby team coach criticised Meghan's refusal to name the alleged Royal member who had made the comments about Archie's skin colour.
> 
> Mr Jones said: "The Meghan Markle way you see.
> 
> "Condemn everyone name no one - the tactic of an unworthy person."
> 
> He went on to suggest that Harry had been duped and blinded by the artful intrigues of his wife, saying:
> "Prince Harry would appear as long gone captured by the untruths spread by Ms Markle and the victimhood she professes to endure."
> 
> The Sky News presenter was equally critical of the couple's decision to marry in secret three days before the televised wedding.
> 
> "That about sums it up doesn't it," he said. "The wedding was a fake - the lady's a fake."
> 
> Mr Jones suggested that the Duchess of Sussex should spend some time with Princess Anne, who would no doubt put her on the straight and narrow.
> 
> "Princess Anne is the one who would sort out Meghan Markle in colourful language too I can tell you," the former rugby coach claimed.
> 
> He added: "Since her 18th birthday Princess Anne has uncomplainingly carried out over 20,000 engagements."
> 
> The Aussie commentator finally concluded his monologue by expressing his sympathies for the Queen and Prince Philip.
> 
> He said: "An outstanding and popular monarch who's 94, her husband in hospital as he approaches his 100th birthday and they have to cop this dishonest contrived and made up nonsense."
> 
> The lady is a fake!



”Meghan-accused of being Unworthy,Fake’-  Everyday on this thread...


----------



## needlv

lalame said:


> Wow I actually heard Gayle talking about that conversation with M+H. I thought at first, was it the media spinning it... but no, she really said Harry and his brother and father had "unproductive" conversations!! Doesn't Harry understand that the press frenzy that drove Diana to her death wasn't stoked by who she was but the DRAMA that swirled her marriage for years? Stop the drama!! Keep it shut for everyone's sake.



well if it was a test by PC and/or William to see if it would leak to the media, H and MM failed with Gayle telling everyone on TV.  So ... If I were PC or William, I wouldn’t call for a long time unless absolutely necessary ... and even then would keep conversation to a minimum (and record the calls).


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> Wow, that is worthy of Meghan herself! Apparently coherent thought is for Boomers.
> 
> That lovely, indecipherable line of word salad was written by a 28-year-old working for the _New Yorker_ as their TV critic.
> From her rather short and possibly self-placed Wikipedia listing: *Doreen St. Félix* (born 1992) is an Haitian-American writer. She is a staff writer for The New Yorker and was formerly editor-at-large for Lenny Letter, a newsletter from Lena Dunhamand Jenni Konner.



She wrote for Lena Dunham’s newsletter lmao! That explains SO much!!! She learned from the patron saint of navel gazing.

I’ve just about had it with the Woke Olympics. Apparently Pepe Le Pew was cancelled because he promotes “rape culture”. A cartoon skunk. I want off this ride


----------



## lalame

needlv said:


> well if it was a test by PC and/or William to see if it would leak to the media, H and MM failed with Gayle telling everyone on TV.  So ... If I were PC or William, I wouldn’t call for a long time unless absolutely necessary ... and even then would keep conversation to a minimum (and record the calls).



Oh I would've started recording all conversations with those two long ago! Always have a witness in the room or on the line.


----------



## gracekelly

When I was in middle school in the 7th grade, our English teacher made us write concise paragraphs as an exercise.  Eventually we learned how to write an introductory paragraph and then a summary paragraph.  A lesson that stood me quite well later when writing papers.  What are they teaching people these days?  They throw a bunch of words on a page and think it makes them look erudite.   Nope! Total nonsense and the reader is left scratching their head.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Wow I actually heard Gayle talking about that conversation with M+H. I thought at first, was it the media spinning it... but no, she really said Harry and his brother and father had "unproductive" conversations!! Doesn't Harry understand that the press frenzy that drove Diana to her death wasn't stoked by who she was but the DRAMA that swirled her marriage for years? Stop the drama!! Keep it shut for everyone's sake.



The essential point that Harry has missed is that family conversations are supposed to be just that, family conversation and not to be shared with people on the outside.  This is just another illustration that not only do the Sussex not understand the true meaning of privacy, they certainly don't even attempt it despite all their moaning that it is what they really want.  Seriously,  I don't think there is anyone left on the planet who believes that about them as they are running to the paps and the media every chance they get.


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> I went to one of the most liberal colleges in the US but never really felt like the teachers were promoting a specific political agenda. They go off course sometimes on various topics, but nothing that seemed like indoctrination so interesting to hear people's experiences.



IIRC, we’re around the same age and I feel the same way about my own college experience. On the other hand, I have heard that it is much different with the younger generation. I’ve heard specific examples where the teachers nowadays have erased parts of history such as the reasons behind the Vietnam War and replaced it with their own woke theories, which is deeply offensive to me and what our families have gone through..


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> This article is about the collapse of Ralph & Russo, who made MM's engagement dress. I only post this here because of the pictures of the dresses and respective price tags. Poor Charles he had to pay for the most expensive dress.
> View attachment 5026250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How DID the seams come apart on the A-listers' favourite UK label?
> 
> 
> With a clientele that reads like a who's who of A-listers, assorted members of international royalty and VIPs, Ralph & Russo's status in the hallowed ranks of high fashion is well established.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Looking back, I would say this dress purchase at £56,000 (USD$78,000) caused a fair bit of drama in the Palace.
An obscene amount to spend on a gown probably worn once imo.


----------



## Lodpah

MM adoring gazes for Prince William. I can’t figure out how to do just one pic


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Looking back, I would say this dress purchase at £56,000 (USD$78,000) caused a fair bit of drama in the Palace.
> An obscene amount to spend on a gown probably worn once imo.


There is a certain mindset with some people regarding newfound money.  They think that there is a bottomless pit of it and that they can spend it recklessly.  She was also doing this deliberately.  Some of those expensive dresses were questionable and they didn't even fit and she didn't care.  In her mind, if it was expensive then it had to be good.  There are plenty of designer things that are not tasteful or pretty,


----------



## CarryOn2020

“Condemn everyone, name no one - the tactic of an unworthy person."
Australian Sky News journalist, Alan Jones


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## viciel

bellecate said:


> In reading this article, in particular this part:
> 
> *'And she is known to have kept a diary during her time within in the royal family this would be bombshell stuff if she was to go and release it, I've already said that if they don't get their way if they're not satisfied with the conversations taking place in house
> 
> 'Then it could be a situation where they will be releasing diaries, releasing a tell-all documentary on Netflix nothing is off-limits at the moment and we're talking about every twist and turn at the moment'.'*
> 
> I firmly believe she kept a diary, a very inaccurate diary to be pulled out at some point as a weapon. To take anything she has written in her 'diary' as what happened at the time IMO as anything but fiction would be beyond naïve.  I even wouldn't put it past her to have rewritten it in the last year putting her own twisted spin on things. Also I say shame on Oprah and Gail for putting out this was an interview and not what it really was, the Harkles looking for attention while whining and lying. IMO of course  .



Two words.

Gone Girl.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> I've seen them all, but just as you can't make a moustache look like anything other than shadow and pencil above a man's lip, it's not a natural look to use pencil or shadow on your hairless skin to simulate brow hair.
> 
> I'm talking in real life, in natural light, not an influencer using face tune.  You really don't see sharp detail _especially_ on Lisa Eldridge's videos.
> 
> Well, she must be blessed, as are all celebrities who grow so much prettier over the years.


Hahaha you make a good point. If you’ve already allegedly  had your eyes/nose/fillers/ Botox/boob job why not have eyebrows done too!
I know a couple of people who’ve had micro blading and once the colour settles it looks good. But it looks like you can get a hair transplant too - dunno anyone who’s done it though.

edit- I forgot her lips - there’s a lot to allegedly remember!


----------



## jelliedfeels

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> O M G. The Sussexes made Philip Schofield semi shout "Shut up!" on national TV
> 
> Yes, he was very sympathetic in his first comments on their interview.
> 
> 
> I'm just sensing a plot here. Maybe we're all being played and Meghan was hired by the queen to wreak her havoc and in so doing, make the BRF receive eternal empathy and goodwill from their subjects.


You know there’s something in that .


----------



## Lodpah

poopsie said:


> Well once they took down Dr Seuss it was game on


They take Dr. Seuss down but Cardi B’s song about women’s P..., is ok. Why do I think the more they push for women’s rights the more it goes backwards?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This article is about the collapse of Ralph & Russo, who made MM's engagement dress. I only post this here because of the pictures of the dresses and respective price tags. Poor Charles he had to pay for the most expensive dress.
> View attachment 5026250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How DID the seams come apart on the A-listers' favourite UK label?
> 
> 
> With a clientele that reads like a who's who of A-listers, assorted members of international royalty and VIPs, Ralph & Russo's status in the hallowed ranks of high fashion is well established.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’m surprised they lasted this long tbh. Half their stuff looks like Rodarte but twice the price and the other half looks like Barbie dresses. It was only the  kardashians keeping them going. I  thought it was funny she wore a glitter barbie ballgown that looked like a kylie Jenner met ball castoff- it was not a classy look for a daytime photo shoot.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*ABIGAIL VAN BUREN ("Dear Abby") advice columnist* 
"The best index to a person's character is (a) how he treats people who can't do him any good, and (b) how he treats people who can't fight back."



			Character Above All:  Character Quotes


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Wow, that is worthy of Meghan herself! Apparently coherent thought is for Boomers.
> 
> That lovely, indecipherable line of word salad was written by a 28-year-old working for the _New Yorker_ as their TV critic.
> From her rather short and possibly self-placed Wikipedia listing: *Doreen St. Félix* (born 1992) is an Haitian-American writer. She is a staff writer for The New Yorker and was formerly editor-at-large for Lenny Letter, a newsletter from Lena Dunhamand Jenni Konner.


Let’s not stereotype people’s intellect based on age. 
As we’ve consistently pointed out H&M and Omid have not got wiser despite coming up for 40.


----------



## mellibelly

mdcx said:


> Looking back, I would say this dress purchase at £56,000 (USD$78,000) caused a fair bit of drama in the Palace.
> An obscene amount to spend on a gown probably worn once imo.



To be honest I’d never heard of the brand before MM wore that dress. She really destroys everything she touches


----------



## jelliedfeels

mdcx said:


> Looking back, I would say this dress purchase at £56,000 (USD$78,000) caused a fair bit of drama in the Palace.
> An obscene amount to spend on a gown probably worn once imo.


It did but it sort of got buried under the love wave she got. In retrospect it was a sign.

I know some people here hate the green outfit but I think that navy glitter barbie goes to the prom in TK Maxx clearance look was the worst.
(Though the wedding dress & the dreaded kaftan were pretty bad.)

add on- I guess we now know why her clothes don’t fit. She’s already cursed her dresser out of the room before they have a chance to finish.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> MM adoring gazes for Prince William. I can’t figure out how to do just one pic
> 
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026463
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026463


But...but... I thought he was an evil tyrant?


----------



## Lodpah

This article has totally taken MO’s intentions the wrong way. Calling the BRF as pettiness against Netflix Mogus H& M.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/royal-high-michelle-*****-weighs-130000273.html


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> In reading this article, in particular this part:
> 
> *'And she is known to have kept a diary during her time within in the royal family this would be bombshell stuff if she was to go and release it, I've already said that if they don't get their way if they're not satisfied with the conversations taking place in house
> 
> 'Then it could be a situation where they will be releasing diaries, releasing a tell-all documentary on Netflix nothing is off-limits at the moment and we're talking about every twist and turn at the moment'.'*
> 
> I firmly believe she kept a diary, a very inaccurate diary to be pulled out at some point as a weapon. To take anything she has written in her 'diary' as what happened at the time IMO as anything but fiction would be beyond naïve.  I even wouldn't put it past her to have rewritten it in the last year putting her own twisted spin on things. Also I say shame on Oprah and Gail for putting out this was an interview and not what it really was, the Harkles looking for attention while whining and lying. IMO of course  .



Publish and be damned! 

You know s/he are going to do it someday, sometime. let them use all their ammunition until _everyone's_ sick of them.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Publish and be damned!
> 
> You know s/he are going to do it someday, sometime. let them use all their ammunition until _everyone's_ sick of them.


How much bull does she have? She was not there for long. Lol. 18 months vs. 1000 year reign of the monarchy.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm, maybe yachts pay well?
> 
> She looks stoned in the last picture.


Even stoned, our topic can find the lens!


----------



## Lodpah

Heeeeee . . . just did a move . . . gotta go to the Cartier forum . . . hubby said he's getting me a bracelet for my birthday . . . brb.  I already know what I want


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

papertiger said:


> Publish and be damned!
> 
> You know s/he are going to do it someday, sometime. let them use all their ammunition until _everyone's_ sick of them.


I’m thinking the diaries are going to be used for their season on The Crown with Netflix . I’m betting that’s how they got their contract with them.


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> I’m thinking the diaries are going to be used for their season on The Crown with Netflix . I’m betting that’s how they got their contract with them.



Well then the deal has already been done. Unredeemable position IMO


----------



## chicinthecity777

viciel said:


> Two words.
> 
> Gone Girl.


Spooky! We just watched Gone Girl again a couple of days ago and she reminded me so much of MM!


----------



## Lodpah

chicinthecity777 said:


> Spooky! We just watched Gone Girl again a couple of days ago and she reminded me so much of MM!


Wow, I'm on a binge watching Mentalist and there's an episode called "Russet Potatoes". I think I know where MM came up with her word salad, N.L.P. and maybe that's how she hypnotized Harry, maybe . . maybe. N.L.P.  It all makes sense lol. 

Season One, Episode 18.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> As in not rich enough.



Probably, lol, and a womanizer!


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> This Aussie journalist has a way with words...
> 
> View attachment 5026371
> 
> 
> "Alan Jones, a Sky News Australia journalist, could not hide his disgust at the Duchess of Sussex's antics and launched into a vicious attack on her and Prince Harry.
> 
> He  told his Sky News Australia audience in his programme last week: "I am sure there were many people reaching for the chuck bucket over this Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> 
> "If these two had any public support left, which I doubt - it was all lost today."
> 
> The former Australian national rugby team coach criticised Meghan's refusal to name the alleged Royal member who had made the comments about Archie's skin colour.
> 
> Mr Jones said: "The Meghan Markle way you see.
> 
> "Condemn everyone name no one - the tactic of an unworthy person."
> 
> He went on to suggest that Harry had been duped and blinded by the artful intrigues of his wife, saying:
> "Prince Harry would appear as long gone captured by the untruths spread by Ms Markle and the victimhood she professes to endure."
> 
> The Sky News presenter was equally critical of the couple's decision to marry in secret three days before the televised wedding.
> 
> "That about sums it up doesn't it," he said. "The wedding was a fake - the lady's a fake."
> 
> Mr Jones suggested that the Duchess of Sussex should spend some time with Princess Anne, who would no doubt put her on the straight and narrow.
> 
> "Princess Anne is the one who would sort out Meghan Markle in colourful language too I can tell you," the former rugby coach claimed.
> 
> He added: "Since her 18th birthday Princess Anne has uncomplainingly carried out over 20,000 engagements."
> 
> The Aussie commentator finally concluded his monologue by expressing his sympathies for the Queen and Prince Philip.
> 
> He said: "An outstanding and popular monarch who's 94, her husband in hospital as he approaches his 100th birthday and they have to cop this dishonest contrived and made up nonsense."
> 
> The lady is a fake!


Alan Jones is the lowest form of “journalism”, he is a shock jockey better known for demanding that the PM of NZ, Jacinda Arden, should have a sock shoved down her throat by our useless PM Scott Morrison
He is sexist, racist, right wing and an embarrassement


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> It's not like she was ever a hard-hitting journalist reporting from the front lines in Afghanistan or anything, right?



But we can't all be war correspondents! That's actually nothing I'd hold against her. I do hold against her that she doesn't feel fact checking is a thing and that she apparently has no problem spreading obvious lies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> So basically, they are doing what they complain about Meghan's family doing, right?  They are sharing personal family conversations, just as they got upset at Meghan's father and sister for doing.  They are letting it be known they have receipts and can share them - but objected when Meghan's father shared a letter he got from her. Meghan lets it be known she's got diaries and could write a tell all - just like Samantha did. Are Meghan's father and sister the test balloon to help Harry and Meghan figure out the best ways to exploit family drama?



The thing is...how much actual dirt does she really have? Not only do I think the Windsors are that horrible of a family, she was a royal for a hot minute and senior royals weren't trusting her early on. I doubt she has the juicy stuff. Then again...it's all about storytelling, right?


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> Spooky! We just watched Gone Girl again a couple of days ago and she reminded me so much of MM!



Is this the film with Rosamund Pike and Ben Affleck? It was rather scary, I remember....


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Lodpah said:


> MM adoring gazes for Prince William. I can’t figure out how to do just one pic
> 
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026463
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026463


Meghan would have scraped off Harry from under her stilettos like he was just another Corgi tu**rd left in the BP gardens if there'd been even a smidgen of a hint of William possibly succumbing to her woke charms.


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...how much actual dirt does she really have? Not only do I think the Windsors are that horrible of a family, she was a royal for a hot minute and senior royals weren't trusting her early on. I doubt she has the juicy stuff. Then again...it's all about storytelling, right?



Well as we saw in the Oprah interview, she considers things to be dirt which others consider common knowledge.  She can write an entire book of "Guys, you'll never believe this, but the BRF puts a great deal of weight into birth order, and ranks people by it!"


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> Is this the film with Rosamund Pike and Ben Affleck? It was rather scary, I remember....


Yes. It's based on a book and I read the book before watching the movie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> Alan Jones is the lowest form of “journalism”, he is a shock jockey better known for demanding that the PM of NZ, Jacinda Arden, should have a sock shoved down her throat by our useless PM Scott Morrison
> He is sexist, racist, right wing and an embarrassement



I used a quote from the article. I don’t know the guy, have never seen nor heard his shows. The quote, tho, does capture H&M’s methods.


----------



## lulilu

Lodpah said:


> Even stoned, our topic can find the lens!



She never fails to find the camera lens does she? Even in candid photos she is seen looking into the lens.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> This article is about the collapse of Ralph & Russo, who made MM's engagement dress. I only post this here because of the pictures of the dresses and respective price tags. Poor Charles he had to pay for the most expensive dress.
> View attachment 5026250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How DID the seams come apart on the A-listers' favourite UK label?
> 
> 
> With a clientele that reads like a who's who of A-listers, assorted members of international royalty and VIPs, Ralph & Russo's status in the hallowed ranks of high fashion is well established.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



OMG! With the current exchange rate it would have made that engagement dress over $70k! That said, I doubt Charles or anyone paid or it. I bet the just lent it to her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> I went to a state university in the mid 70's.
> My Classical Social Theory prof dropped acid in class and used Herman Hesse novels for our books
> My Sex in Contemporary Society prof was a former Hitler Youth
> My Criminology and Penology prof was super impressed with my year end paper (that I wrote in one night) where I used the Dylan song Hurricane as the subject material
> 
> So it seems that our bastions of higher education have always had their issues
> 
> just curious as to the race/gender of your son's prof. That is abuse that would NOT be tolerated if the shoe was on the other foot



This is certainly not unique to THAT college. Kids with differing views have to lie on their applications just to get into colleges in the first place. It's disgraceful.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Can we stay on the topic of H&M please? And no political comments please!


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> I went to a state university in the mid 70's.
> My Classical Social Theory prof dropped acid in class and used Herman Hesse novels for our books
> My Sex in Contemporary Society prof was a former Hitler Youth
> My Criminology and Penology prof was super impressed with my year end paper (that I wrote in one night) where I used the Dylan song Hurricane as the subject material
> 
> So it seems that our bastions of higher education have always had their issues
> 
> *just curious as to the race/gender of your son's prof. That is abuse that would NOT be tolerated if the shoe was on the other foot *



Exactly!  That behavior has zero place in a teaching situation.  It's nothing new though, because a few of my son's high school teachers was spouting the same kind of nonsense.

The professor is a white male!  It actually doesn't surprise me.  I don't think I'll ever forget the video online of an ultra liberal, white male yelling at a black female wearing a M*G* hat that she's "not black enough".  I appreciate people waking up to racism, but give me a break!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Case in point, CBS put out one of those packaged segments about Sharon Osbourne today. They are stopping production on The Talk for another week. Some dude from NPR was talking about how racially insensitive Sharon was for supporting Piers and not believing Meghan’s claims. To top off the segment, there are now reportedly other accusations popping up about past racist comments from Sharon. I just finished watching this on the CBS affiliate here in Baltimore.
> 
> Look for Sharon to be fired or forced to quit very soon. That’ll teach her to have an opinion that isn’t the same as what has been deemed correct by the network.
> 
> Cancel culture is real.



It might have been posted somewhere in the 6 pages I have yet to read, but apparently years ago Sharon said "Meghan is not black". Well...she isn't, is she? She is a white-passing, mixed raced woman who presented herself as Caucasian until the WOC card became useful to her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This article is about the collapse of Ralph & Russo, who made MM's engagement dress. I only post this here because of the pictures of the dresses and respective price tags. Poor Charles he had to pay for the most expensive dress.
> View attachment 5026250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How DID the seams come apart on the A-listers' favourite UK label?
> 
> 
> With a clientele that reads like a who's who of A-listers, assorted members of international royalty and VIPs, Ralph & Russo's status in the hallowed ranks of high fashion is well established.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



When she picked that dress it should have been a huge red flag IMO. Kate, Eugenie, Beatrice all wore dresses that cost a few hundred bucks (plus I don't think they had this huge professional production for their engagement pics anyway), but the starlet just HAD to go all out.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When she picked that dress it should have been a huge red flag IMO. Kate, Eugenie, Beatrice all wore dresses that cost a few hundred bucks, but the starlet just HAD to go all out.


And Royal Family really don't do over the top expensive couture type of clothing. They are very aware of the implications and never to flaunt their wealth. But of course MM couldn't understand it either. SMH!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> And Royal Family really don't do over the top expensive couture type of clothing. They are very aware of the implications and never to flaunt their wealth. But of course MM couldn't understand it either. SMH!



Yeah, she had to rub it in (what exactly...that she was spending her FIL's money?) which I thought was so distasteful (or as Lady CC would say, vulgar). 

I also remember when the first critical articles of her spending habits came up someone dug out a picture of Kate at a state function claiming her outfit was worth millions to prove Meghan was once again treated unfairly. What the sugar forgot to consider: Kate's outfit was worth millions because she was wearing the Nizam of Hyderabad necklace, which had not been purchased for her but been lent by the Queen, who received it as a wedding gift.


----------



## lulilu

This thread moves so quickly as it is, can we please limit posts to HM and the RF?


----------



## floatinglili

CarryOn2020 said:


> I used a quote from the article. I don’t know the guy, have never seen nor heard his shows. The quote, tho, does capture H&M’s methods.


Don’t lose any sleep CarryOn, the clip was awesome  - and even better printed out as a written article. Alan Jones is an incredibly successful journalist with a huge following. The left love to hate him, largely because of the huge audience engagement he commands. The shall we say ‘intense’ description of the man (don’t know how to post the earlier article?) was a good match for the very worst of Jones, Jones can hector with the best of them but unlike many ranters he’s often quite entertaining as he does so. He’s got a brain, and a heart. He’s not (just) a raving idiot. But his tough talk is what the ppl love.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Update on the Sharon Osbourne story. Since it was the Harry and Meghan interview that prompted it I think it’s appropriate to put it here.
> 
> *Sharon Osbourne felt like a 'sacrificial lamb' in 'The Talk' dispute*
> Sharon Osbourne says she'd like to turn her argument on "The Talk" into a teachable moment.
> 
> "I very much want to listen to the youth," Osbourne told "Entertainment Tonight" in an exclusive interview which aired Tuesday. "Do I have my finger on the pulse of what's going on, with the Black situation in this country? No."
> 
> The co-host is currently fighting back against accusations she has used racist and homophobic language while speaking about her former colleagues on the CBS talk show.
> 
> The accusations were made Tuesday in a story written by journalist Yashar Ali, citing former "Talk" co-host Leah Remini, who spoke on the record in the piece, and a number of unnamed sources.
> 
> CNN has not independently verified the claims. A spokesperson for Remini confirmed the accuracy of her statements as reported by Ali and declined further comment when connected by CNN.
> 
> "The only thing worse than a disgruntled former employee is a disgruntled former talk show host," Osbourne's spokesperson Howard Bragman said in a statement to CNN in response to the allegations raised in Ali's report. "For 11 years Sharon has been kind, collegial and friendly with her hosts as evidenced by throwing them parties, inviting them to her home in the UK and other gestures of kindness too many to name. Sharon is disappointed but unfazed and hardly surprised by the lies, the recasting of history and the bitterness coming out at this moment."
> 
> The allegations became public just as the CBS daytime talk show had gone on a brief hiatus following a heated debate last week between co-hosts Osbourne and Sheryl Underwood regarding Osbourne's support of her longtime friend, Piers Morgan.
> 
> The "Entertainment Tonight" interview appears to have occurred before Ali's story was published and Osbourne -- who apologized on Twitter after her dust up with Underwood -- talked about feeling blindsided during the now famous run in.
> 
> “Sheryl turns around and asks me this question and....she was reading it off a card. It wasn't on my cards," Osbourne said. "And then [another co-host] Elaine [Welteroth]'s reading her questions and I'm like, 'I've been set up.' They're setting me up. My anger was like, 'I cannot believe this, I'm your sacrificial lamb.'"
> 
> Osbourne said moments before the show began one of the show runners asked if she would mind answering questions about Morgan and how she would feel if "maybe one of [the women] doesn't agree with you." Osbourne said she responded, "I'll answer whatever they want me to answer."
> 
> Underwood and Welteroth are both Black. Osbourne said she's tried to apologize to Underwood, who Osbourne said she has "nothing but respect and so much affection for," but has not gotten a response.
> 
> "I am not a racist and if you can't have a go at your friend who happens to be Black, does that make me racist because I said certain things to my friend, but I said them on camera?" Osbourne said. "I will keep on apologizing to Sheryl, even if I decide not to go back, I will still keep apologizing to Sheryl."
> 
> CNN has reached out to Underwood and Welteroth for comment. CNN also has reached out to CBS for comment on Osbourne's claims of feeling set up.
> 
> "The Talk," which also includes co-host Carrie Ann Inaba and Amanda Kloots, is currently on production hiatus "as we continue to review these issues," CBS said. Osbourne told "Entertainment Tonight" she is unsure as to whether she will return to the show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne felt like a 'sacrificial lamb' in 'The Talk' dispute
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne says she'd like to turn her argument on "The Talk" into a teachable moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


so this show is (at least partially) about women giving their opinions and now sharon is being skewered for hers?  feels uncomfortable to me.  Cheryl, as I recall, years ago was strictly there for comic relief.  In more recent years, she talks about serious subjects.  that's fine but is she turning on her "friend"?  I know nothing about the other co-host who was involved.


----------



## bag-mania

From Piers Morgan:


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so this show is (at least partially) about women giving their opinions and now sharon is being skewered for hers?  feels uncomfortable to me.  Cheryl, as I recall, years ago was strictly there for comic relief.  In more recent years, she talks about serious subjects.  that's fine but is she turning on her "friend"?  I know nothing about the other co-host who was involved.



It sure sounds like it was a set up by the showrunners to create drama and maybe to get rid of Sharon. Kind of a devious way to dispose of an older cast member but then show business is a dirty business.


----------



## floatinglili

Have we seen this yet?








						Meghan Markle lookalike fears for future after Oprah interview
					

Sarah Mhlanga, 38, who lives in North West England, told Closer magazine she gets messages saying she's 'attention-seeking' and worries people won't want to hire her.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





*Who'd be a Meghan Markle lookalike? Woman who makes up to £300 per appearance fears she may have to quit because 'hurtful' trolls use her 'as a punchbag' to abuse Duchess*
While her work has been on hold due to the pandemic, Sarah now fears she may have to quit her lucrative career when lockdown eases, fearing that people won't want to hire her.

'There are some people who feel like [Meghan is] waging a war on the royals, and people can't access Meghan so they're using me as their punchbag,' Sarah told Closer magazine.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> She wrote for Lena Dunham’s newsletter lmao! That explains SO much!!! She learned from the patron saint of navel gazing.
> *
> I’ve just about had it with the Woke Olympics.* *Apparently Pepe Le Pew was cancelled because he promotes “rape culture”. A cartoon skunk*. I want off this ride


Yep!  Proof that people have too much time on their hands, if they're going to start analyzing and critiquing cartoons.  In the US, they're cancelling Dr. Seuss, Mark Twain, anything and everything that is deemed "racist".  I don't understand why it's okay to apply today's standards to times past.  I think people are under the delusion that instead of learning from past mistakes, you can just wipe out history and pretend things didn't happen, and suddenly everything will be perfect.


----------



## bag-mania

floatinglili said:


> Have we seen this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle lookalike fears for future after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Sarah Mhlanga, 38, who lives in North West England, told Closer magazine she gets messages saying she's 'attention-seeking' and worries people won't want to hire her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who'd be a Meghan Markle lookalike? Woman who makes up to £300 per appearance fears she may have to quit because 'hurtful' trolls use her 'as a punchbag' to abuse Duchess*
> While her work has been on hold due to the pandemic, Sarah now fears she may have to quit her lucrative career when lockdown eases, fearing that people won't want to hire her.
> 
> 'There are some people who feel like [Meghan is] waging a war on the royals, and people can't access Meghan so they're using me as their punchbag,' Sarah told Closer magazine.



She should move to the US. There would be fans hiring her to come to their kids' birthday parties.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> When I was in middle school in the 7th grade, our English teacher made us write concise paragraphs as an exercise.  Eventually we learned how to write an introductory paragraph and then a summary paragraph.  A lesson that stood me quite well later when writing papers.  What are they teaching people these days?  They throw a bunch of words on a page and think it makes them look erudite.   Nope! Total nonsense and the reader is left scratching their head.


Me too.  I'm actually shocked at the lack of writing skills taught in schools now.  I had to teach my children cursive, because their schools consider it "out of date".  From the lack of proper spelling and grammar, I surmise that those are considered out of date as well, since apparently emojis and texting abbreviations are now considered appropriate grammar.  English is not my first language.  If I can do it, I would hope native English speakers would be taught the basics!  (Sorry, spelling errors are a pet peeve of mine!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

floatinglili said:


> *Who'd be a Meghan Markle lookalike? Woman who makes up to £300 per appearance fears she may have to quit because 'hurtful' trolls use her 'as a punchbag' to abuse Duchess*



What did she do before 2018? Just go back to that.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> IIRC, we’re around the same age and I feel the same way about my own college experience. On the other hand, I have heard that it is much different with the younger generation. I’ve heard specific examples where the teachers nowadays have erased parts of history such as the reasons behind the Vietnam War and replaced it with their own woke theories, which is deeply offensive to me and what our families have gone through..


Schools have always been liberal and progressive, but it's gone off the deep end.  I don't recall my university days this radical either, but from what I'm seeing with my son, they're ignoring major events in history and spinning it to all be about how evil the US is.  I can understand that from a foreign nation, but schools in the US actually teaching that?  It's mind boggling.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> MM adoring gazes for Prince William. I can’t figure out how to do just one pic
> 
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026463
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026463


I think she hates Kate because William is really the one she wants!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I used a quote from the article. I don’t know the guy, have never seen nor heard his shows. The quote, tho, does capture H&M’s methods.


I feel uncomfortable that I'm agreeing with people like this on the subject of H&M


----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> Looking back, I would say this dress purchase at £56,000 (USD$78,000) caused a fair bit of drama in the Palace.
> An obscene amount to spend on a gown probably worn once imo.


How entitled can one feel to choose such an expensive dress to announce an engagement, particularly when someone else is paying for it. It has been disclosed that Charles paid for her clothing.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> MM adoring gazes for Prince William. I can’t figure out how to do just one pic
> 
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026463
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026462
> View attachment 5026464
> View attachment 5026463


 I wonder if someone was after the future king at some point.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> How entitled can one feel to choose such an expensive dress to announce an engagement, particularly when someone else is paying for it. It has been disclosed that Charles paid for her clothing.


seems odd that he would be paying before they were married


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I think she hates Kate because William is really the one she wants!



I think she hates William now too because he saw right through her almost from the start.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It might have been posted somewhere in the 6 pages I have yet to read, but apparently years ago Sharon said "Meghan is not black". Well...she isn't, is she? She is a white-passing, mixed raced woman who presented herself as Caucasian until the WOC card became useful to her.


Yes about that... Just to bring me up to speed, I remember hearing she put Caucasian/white on some acting applications but is that scrubbed from internet/unproveable now or does any one have sources? 

I do remember reading an essay MM herself wrote where she was saying she would go for black, biracial white and Latin roles & I remember thinking it was a bit ironic she wants people to recognise her biraciality as important but she has no problem with trying to nick parts from latinas like there isn’t something important  about their cultures.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> seems odd that he would be paying before they were married


She certainly made him pay once they were


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Yep!  Proof that people have too much time on their hands, if they're going to start analyzing and critiquing cartoons.  In the US, they're cancelling Dr. Seuss, Mark Twain, anything and everything that is deemed "racist".  I don't understand why it's okay to apply today's standards to times past.  I think people are under the delusion that instead of learning from past mistakes, you can just wipe out history and pretend things didn't happen, and suddenly everything will be perfect.



It is a modern-day witch hunt and very Orwellian. At the moment people are being punished for what is perceived as being "wrong thinking" by losing their jobs and livelihood. Who know how far it will go? Maybe in another 10–20 years those people will be hauled off to re-education camps to "cure" their individual and disparate thinking.

ETA: Can you tell I've watched a number of movies and read books in the dystopian genre?


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure. I remember reading a lenghty article about David Bowie's taste for 15yo groupies back in the day and someone saying "In the 70s there was virtually no discussion of how this was harmful" or something like this. So I don't think you can really hold it against an author who was a the height of his fame in the 1950s that some of his books are nowadays seen as problematic.



I was being facetious. I'm waiting for some wokers to say something along the the lines of "Michelangelo looked at somebody wrong in the 1500's and all his works including the Sistine Chapel must be destroyed", or "Picasso might have been guilty of #MeToo transgressions, so all those hundred million+ dollar paintings must be taken out of museums and if YOU own one, well, now it's worthless", or some other famous artist never painted a POC so they're obviously racist.  But now we even have wokers who say even if a caucasian and a POC marry, the caucasian can still be racist or it's because the caucasian wanted a legal slave. There's a lot of eye rolling statements made, the problem is, some of them teach in prestigious universities and get grants for spewing their wokeness. Meghan would approve. She's so horrified that she chose to marry into a family with a colonialist past. Oh wait! SHE DIDN'T KNOW about that past, remember ? But she liberated Harry from that horrific family of his and now they're pimping the whole BFR for every nickel. The Woke Way!


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> Have we seen this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle lookalike fears for future after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Sarah Mhlanga, 38, who lives in North West England, told Closer magazine she gets messages saying she's 'attention-seeking' and worries people won't want to hire her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Who'd be a Meghan Markle lookalike? Woman who makes up to £300 per appearance fears she may have to quit because 'hurtful' trolls use her 'as a punchbag' to abuse Duchess*
> While her work has been on hold due to the pandemic, Sarah now fears she may have to quit her lucrative career when lockdown eases, fearing that people won't want to hire her.
> 
> 'There are some people who feel like [Meghan is] waging a war on the royals, and people can't access Meghan so they're using me as their punchbag,' Sarah told Closer magazine.


I feel a little sorry for them but show business is always precarious even for the very talented. 
It always amazes me how little lookalikes seem to resemble the stars. 
I am now wondering whether I can get work as a MM/Cher/Danny de Vito lookalike since it seems all you need is the right hair colour.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> It is a modern-day witch hunt and very Orwellian. At the moment people are being punished for what is perceived as being "wrong thinking" by losing their jobs and livelihood. Who know how far it will go? Maybe in another 10–20 years those people will be hauled off to re-education camps to "cure" their individual and disparate thinking.
> 
> ETA: Can you tell I've watched a number of movies and read books in the dystopian genre?



I want to be able to pick out my own Gulag job, like folding blankets. But they'll probably make me feed the rescue chickens .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I want to be able to pick out my own Gulag job, like folding blankets. But they'll probably make me feed the rescue chickens .



Hey, I'd love the chicken feeding job, at least it's outdoors in the fresh air. I'd probably get the job teaching the calligraphy class.

Those inspirational messages on bananas aren't going to write themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It might have been posted somewhere in the 6 pages I have yet to read, but apparently years ago Sharon said "Meghan is not black". Well...she isn't, is she? She is a white-passing, mixed raced woman who presented herself as Caucasian until the WOC card became useful to her.


boom....you nailed it


----------



## Swanky

There's way too many off topic posts for me to sit down and devote the time to sift through pages of it right now.  Please keep this thread ON TOPIC, no politics ever and respectful of others opinions.  Again, NO POLITICS pulllllleazzzze.


----------



## Chanbal

QUOTE="limom, post: 34415944, member: 204857"]
La Sorbonne? In France?
[/QUOTE]
I believe La Sorbonne (University of Paris), founded in the 13th century, has ceased its operations, but Sorbonne Université was recently established by the merge of Paris-Sorbonne University and other institutions. And as I said, who doesn't love Paris?


----------



## floatinglili

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes about that... Just to bring me up to speed, I remember hearing she put Caucasian/white on some acting applications but is that scrubbed from internet/unproveable now or does any one have sources?


Yes there were screenshots of ‘actors guild(?)’ type forms with her details and ethnicity given as ‘Caucasian’ given on this thread. Good luck finding them now though! Take a month off work to sift through the backlog and please, report back.


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> this seems like such a downgrade for Gayle, truly.



Being a Brit I had never heard of this awful woman until being an Elvis fan I watched Oprah visit Graceland to interview Lisa Marie Presley - she had this awful mouthy pushy woman with her I assumed she was her PA - Lisa went up in my estimation by being so gracious to them even though both spent some time accusing Elvis of being racist as his cooks were woc - Elvis bought those ladies their houses outright and cars etc he didn’t treat them like servants - they mothered him and cooked his fav meals and kept his secrets like family would


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> It is a modern-day witch hunt and very Orwellian. At the moment people are being punished for what is perceived as being "wrong thinking" by losing their jobs and livelihood. Who know how far it will go? Maybe in another 10–20 years those people will be hauled off to re-education camps to "cure" their individual and disparate thinking.
> 
> ETA: Can you tell I've watched a number of movies and read books in the dystopian genre?



10-20 years? You know they were already talking about 're-educating' wrong thinkers, right?


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes about that... Just to bring me up to speed, I remember hearing she put Caucasian/white on some acting applications but is that scrubbed from internet/unproveable now or does any one have sources?
> 
> I do remember reading an essay MM herself wrote where she was saying she would go for *black, biracial white and Latin roles* & I remember thinking it was a bit ironic she wants people to recognise her biraciality as important but she has no problem with trying to nick parts from latinas like there isn’t something important about their cultures.



This is a whoooolllee thing these days. i think this is just something biracial people had to do... Lots of actors, like Olivia Munn, have talked about how they're never white enough for the white roles or ethnic enough for the other side so they have to cast a wider net in case it works. And lately there has been a lot of backlash around white-mixed biracial actors playing fully ethnic roles because people feel it is part of whitewashing. Honestly it's a lot... I don't know what I think about it either but I can't really fault M here.


----------



## Chanbal

floatinglili said:


> Yes there were screenshots of ‘actors guild(?)’ type forms with her details and ethnicity given as ‘Caucasian’ given on this thread. Good luck finding them now though! Take a month off work to sift through the backlog and please, report back.


Your previous message might have been deleted, because I couldn't see the screenshots.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> 10-20 years? You know they were already talking about 're-educating' wrong thinkers, right?



They are not particularly organized and they don't have a cohesive message that all of the "correct thinkers" can agree on, that will buy some time.


----------



## Kansashalo

This thread....lol


----------



## xeyes

purseinsanity said:


> I think she hates Kate because William is really the one she wants!





bag-mania said:


> I think she hates William now too because he saw right through her almost from the start.



Back in the day, there was a persistent rumor that part of the reason that the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother hated Edward VIII and Wallis so much was that she'd been aiming to land him, not his brother, and Edward made it clear that he wasn't interested. Who knows how much truth there was to it (if any), but it would explain a lot. She hated Edward for the rejection, and Wallis for having what she couldn't get. (Along with the whole hey-now-your-husband-has-to-deal-with-being-king thing of course.)

So, for anybody who likes comparisons between Meghan and Wallis, there's a fun one.


----------



## floatinglili

Chanbal said:


> Your previous message might have been deleted, because I couldn't see the screenshots.




Oops it seems Michelle ***** can be quoted in her opinion on MM but the much maligned former President cannot - sorry -  it was a funny story that has appeared in the most serious broadsheet in Australia. He hilariously stated that he hoped MM did run, the broader story explores the  persistent rumours of her cultivating political ambitions. I posted two screen shot snippets of a much larger story, got deleted. Sorry.
Don Jnr said Harry looked like a hostage in the video, which was also a funny quote.


----------



## Chanbal

"_Piers Morgan has slammed American broadcaster Gayle King for acting as a 'PR mouthpiece' for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to 'facilitate their ongoing public trashing of our Royal Family'.

The former Good Morning Britain host told the CBS This Morning presenter last night to do her 'job as a journalist and ask them about all the lies they told' in their interview with Oprah Winfrey after it aired on March 7._"









						Piers Morgan criticises Gayle King for comments on Harry and Meghan
					

Former Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan told CBS This Morning presenter Gayle King last night to do her 'job as a journalist and ask them about all the lies they told' in their Oprah interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> From Piers Morgan:
> 
> View attachment 5026674



So sad that someone has to say this.
And so sad that it's Piers that's the one to say it!!!
He is not a favorite of mine at ALL, I rather dislike him if anything, but not as much as Cringe and Ginge that is.  Of all people to disbelieve, these two idiots rank high, that's not to say she was not a victimized for her heritage, which it comes to no surprise to me anyways... Unfortunately have to quote from a unpopular comedian that also I do not care for Bill Burr-when he sarcastically stereotyped and said something to the effect:  'people that live in the old castle are racist?'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

floatinglili said:


> Yes there were screenshots of ‘actors guild(?)’ type forms with her details and ethnicity given as ‘Caucasian’ given on this thread. Good luck finding them now though! Take a month off work to sift through the backlog and please, report back.



Again, not up to speed, as I HAD to sleep, but are we talking about Cringe?  As I suspected using what benefits her, she isn't lying, she is 'half' Caucasian, technically and she can always say, there was no mix race option, and blame it on the actors guild for lack of diverse answers... violin playing in the background.... many do this, because, you may have heard, Hollywood has the same problems as the BRF...


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> "_Piers Morgan has slammed American broadcaster Gayle King for acting as a 'PR mouthpiece' for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to 'facilitate their ongoing public trashing of our Royal Family'.
> 
> The former Good Morning Britain host told the CBS This Morning presenter last night to do her 'job as a journalist and ask them about all the lies they told' in their interview with Oprah Winfrey after it aired on March 7._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan criticises Gayle King for comments on Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Former Good Morning Britain host Piers Morgan told CBS This Morning presenter Gayle King last night to do her 'job as a journalist and ask them about all the lies they told' in their Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yes be a journalist, even the national enquirer does a better job than her...


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> This is a whoooolllee thing these days. i think this is just something biracial people had to do... Lots of actors, like Olivia Munn, have talked about how they're never white enough for the white roles or ethnic enough for the other side so they have to cast a wider net in case it works. And lately there has been a lot of backlash around white-mixed biracial actors playing fully ethnic roles because people feel it is part of whitewashing. Honestly it's a lot... I don't know what I think about it either but I can't really fault M here.


To be clear I do think that she’s got a point there is value in blind casting and I get that if you are biracial it’s hard to find biracial roles. I think anyone biracial should go for the roles of both their backgrounds. To be clear it’s going for the Latin roles I find a bit- hypocritical I guess. It just seems a bit dismissive of  Latin cultures and their uniqueness to assume you can just embody it.
 I guess questionable casting choices are just a big problem in Hollywood full stop.


----------



## marietouchet

xeyes said:


> Back in the day, there was a persistent rumor that part of the reason that the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother hated Edward VIII and Wallis so much was that she'd been aiming to land him, not his brother, and Edward made it clear that he wasn't interested. Who knows how much truth there was to it (if any), but it would explain a lot. She hated Edward for the rejection, and Wallis for having what she couldn't get. (Along with the whole hey-now-your-husband-has-to-deal-with-being-king thing of course.)
> 
> So, for anybody who likes comparisons between Meghan and Wallis, there's a fun one.


Many stories about the Queen Mum and Edward VIII eg failed romance (true?). The most credible is she blamed E for the stress on her husband to reign, her husband died young, stammered, cancer, not well etc
There always was a story in the press about the different fashion sense of the Queen Mum (not so skinny, lots of feathers and lace) and Wallis (skinny Paris couture). That was in the press but no idea if the two women cared about that personally.
There was also BRF/Duke of Windsor stress due to his sympathies for the regime in Germany - that the UK fought in WWII. that is one of the precedents for the BRF having nothing to do with politics.


----------



## Chanbal

"*PRINCE William is “worried” that private conversations with his brother will be “plastered over American TV”, a source has revealed. *

Meanwhile, a family friend said the Sussexes “want to keep fuelling” the story - despite the Royal Family being preoccupied with Prince Philip’s health." 









						Prince William 'worried private chat with Harry will be 'plastered on US TV'
					

PRINCE William is “worried” that private conversations with his brother will be “plastered over American TV”, a source has revealed.  It comes after Meghan Markle’s broadcaster pal Gayle King …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## floatinglili

scarlet555 said:


> Again, not up to speed, as I HAD to sleep, but are we talking about Cringe?  As I suspected using what benefits her, she isn't lying, she is 'half' Caucasian, technically and she can always say, there was no mix race option, and blame it on the actors guild for lack of diverse answers... violin playing in the background.... many do this, because, you may have heard, Hollywood has the same problems as the BRF...



There is so much to unpack there but I wonder if she got in touch with her African American side when she stepped on British soil. We have discussed how horrifically snobby and mean the aristocrat ‘humour’ can be - also great marketing in her new role, particularly for the American market.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

elvisfan4life said:


> Being a Brit I had never heard of this awful woman until being an Elvis fan I watched Oprah visit Graceland to interview Lisa Marie Presley - she had this awful mouthy pushy woman with her I assumed she was her PA - Lisa went up in my estimation by being so gracious to them even though both spent some time accusing Elvis of being racist as his cooks were woc - Elvis bought those ladies their houses outright and cars etc he didn’t treat them like servants - they mothered him and cooked his fav meals and kept his secrets like family would


Elvis refused to do shows at segregated venues in the US until his black back up singer ladies, the Sweet Inspirations, were allowed to enter the venues through the same doors as he did.

_Elvis Presley was the sweetest, most humble and nicest man you'd want to know. _- Muhammad Ali 
_Elvis... was such a beautiful man. I don't care what nobody say, I knew Elvis._ - James Brown

Oprah and Gayle are turning out to be quite a pair of flame fanners.


----------



## marietouchet

floatinglili said:


> There is so much to unpack there but I wonder if she got in touch with her African American side when she stepped on British soil. We have discussed how horrifically snobby and mean the aristocrat ‘humour’ can be - also great marketing in her new role, particularly for the American market.


Well, the UK sense of humour is different but, IMHO, it is universally caustic (no one target, everyone is targeted). 

Your point is excellent though, when she did start to cultivate her African American side? I think that was recent, not from birth ??? I dont think she cultivated that during her 6 years in Canada? 

I have kind of understood her relations with dad's side of the family - bad.  But, her mom  and maternal side remain a mystery to me esp since MM chose to live with her dad about ages 10-18, but had been with mom after divorce ages 6-10.


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


> She never fails to find the camera lens does she? Even in candid photos she is seen looking into the lens.


Hmmm. They have at least 16 mirrors in their pretend castle in Montecito, figuring at least 1 per bathroom. Wonder how many additional ones hang throughout the place so she can constantly admire herself?


----------



## rose60610

5000?


----------



## queennadine

bag-mania said:


> There are many Irish descendants living in the US. The cities where St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated the most are the ones which have the largest populations of them, like New York and Boston.
> 
> For most Americans it’s just a fun holiday. And it’s a good excuse for drinking.



For practicing Catholics, it IS a feast day as well


----------



## mellibelly

rose60610 said:


> She's so horrified that she chose to marry into a family with a colonialist past. Oh wait! SHE DIDN'T KNOW about that past, remember ? But she liberated Harry from that horrific family of his and now they're pimping the whole BFR for every nickel. The Woke Way!



Cringe had no problem spending that colonialist money for her ugly Ralph & Russo engagement dress. Kate’s Issa dress was a million times better and only a couple hundred dollars. It’s like she finally had the means to buy her Oscars dream dress.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> This article is about the collapse of Ralph & Russo, who made MM's engagement dress. I only post this here because of the pictures of the dresses and respective price tags. Poor Charles he had to pay for the most expensive dress.
> View attachment 5026250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How DID the seams come apart on the A-listers' favourite UK label?
> 
> 
> With a clientele that reads like a who's who of A-listers, assorted members of international royalty and VIPs, Ralph & Russo's status in the hallowed ranks of high fashion is well established.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




I've seen better stuff on Project Runway..............................JUNIORS


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> QUOTE="limom, post: 34415944, member: 204857"]
> La Sorbonne? In France?


I believe La Sorbonne (University of Paris), founded in the 13th century, has ceased its operations, but Sorbonne Université was recently established by the merge of Paris-Sorbonne University and other institutions. And as I said, who doesn't love Paris? 
[/QUOTE]
My alma mater La Sorbonne nouvelle!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> "*PRINCE William is “worried” that private conversations with his brother will be “plastered over American TV”, a source has revealed. *
> 
> Meanwhile, a family friend said the Sussexes “want to keep fuelling” the story - despite the Royal Family being preoccupied with Prince Philip’s health."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William 'worried private chat with Harry will be 'plastered on US TV'
> 
> 
> PRINCE William is “worried” that private conversations with his brother will be “plastered over American TV”, a source has revealed.  It comes after Meghan Markle’s broadcaster pal Gayle King …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



He should be worried. Harry and Meghan have proven they cannot be trusted. I bet William was extremely careful about what he said, but still nobody wants their conversations blasted out for media consumption.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

pukasonqo said:


> Alan Jones is the lowest form of “journalism”, he is a shock jockey better known for demanding that the PM of NZ, Jacinda Arden, should have a sock shoved down her throat by our useless PM Scott Morrison
> He is sexist, racist, right wing and an embarrassement



He may very well be all those things, but that doesn't mean he can't be right. I don't know the man but I certainly think his opinion of MM is spot on. 
Same with Piers. First time I ever saw him was Susan Boyle's audition. I only know what I see here and so far he has been spot on.


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meghan would have scraped off Harry from under her stilettos like he was just another Corgi tu**rd left in the BP gardens if there'd been even a smidgen of a hint of William possibly succumbing to her woke charms.


You KNOW that is right!


----------



## elvisfan4life

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Elvis refused to do shows at segregated venues in the US until his black back up singer ladies, the Sweet Inspirations, were allowed to enter the venues through the same doors as he did.
> 
> _Elvis Presley was the sweetest, most humble and nicest man you'd want to know. _- Muhammad Ali
> _Elvis... was such a beautiful man. I don't care what nobody say, I knew Elvis._ - James Brown
> 
> Oprah and Gayle are turning out to be quite a pair of flame fanners.



Yes all of those - he threatened to pull out of a massive concert if the sweet inspirations weren’t treated like the rest of his entourage and Sammy Davis jnr said Elvis was the first white man who truly treated him like a brother and equal


----------



## mellibelly

floatinglili said:


> Have we seen this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle lookalike fears for future after Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Sarah Mhlanga, 38, who lives in North West England, told Closer magazine she gets messages saying she's 'attention-seeking' and worries people won't want to hire her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hilarious that “the No 1 Meghan lookalike in the UK” is a white woman


----------



## bellecate

Just saw this on my Twitter feed:
*MEGHAN Markle was behind a devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas Markle, bombshell court papers
 have claimed.*
Meghan Markle was behind devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas, court papers claim – The Sun


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Just saw this on my Twitter feed:
> *MEGHAN Markle was behind a devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas Markle, bombshell court papers
> have claimed.*
> Meghan Markle was behind devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas, court papers claim – The Sun


I'm shocked!  Ferklempt!  Clutching my pearls!


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> He should be worried. Harry and Meghan have proven they cannot be trusted. I bet William was extremely careful about what he said, but still nobody wants their conversations blasted out for media consumption.



William should send Archie a panini press...see if Gayle reports it


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Just saw this on my Twitter feed:
> *MEGHAN Markle was behind a devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas Markle, bombshell court papers
> have claimed.*
> Meghan Markle was behind devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas, court papers claim – The Sun


I wonder if this is related to information about TM that Lady C received from I believe someone close to MM. Lady C didn't believe the provided info, and didn't include it in her book. @QueenofWrapDress , do you recall this? In any event, this is so sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Just saw this on my Twitter feed:
> *MEGHAN Markle was behind a devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas Markle, bombshell court papers
> have claimed.*
> Meghan Markle was behind devastating smear campaign against her frail dad Thomas, court papers claim – The Sun



I'm not surprised she did it, but surprised it is coming out now. And I'll be disgusted how many people will find excuses for her once again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this is related to information about TM that Lady C received from I believe someone close to MM. Lady C didn't believe the provided info, and didn't include it in her book. @QueenofWrapDress , do you recall this? In any event, this is so sad.



I do! I couldn't believe anyone would stoop so low. I'm very interested to see if anything comes out of that new claim. Team Thomas because MM's alleged part in this is disgusting.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not surprised she did it, but surprised it is coming out now. And I'll be disgusted how many people will find excuses for her once again.


It is a 2020 article, but this should be further investigated imo.


----------



## mdcx

Allisonfaye said:


> OMG! With the current exchange rate it would have made that engagement dress over $70k! That said, I doubt Charles or anyone paid or it. I bet the just lent it to her.


My understanding is she was not allowed to do that type of transaction as a Royal- borrowing expensive designer items in exchange for coverage. Things needed to be paid for in full. One of the things that “annoyed” her.
ETA the Palace signing off on the engagement made her Royal from that point on, practically speaking, imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It is a 2020 article, but this should be further investigated imo.



Too bad. If it hasn't been invastigated until now, it probably was burried properly and won't really resurface. The internet doesn't forget, but it's also flooded.


----------



## rose60610

mellibelly said:


> Cringe had no problem spending that colonialist money for her ugly Ralph & Russo engagement dress. Kate’s Issa dress was a million times better and only a couple hundred dollars. It’s like she finally had the means to buy her Oscars dream dress.



Agreed. And marrying into the BRF put her on a far bigger stage than winning Best Picture. It was only natural for her to screw that up.


----------



## Chanbal

" The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project, which has used an almost identical 'A' and 'W' emblem for three years.

But Dmitry Pryanishnikov, chief executive of Am Werdertor's parent company Allea Group, was unconcerned by the similarities today when he said: 'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.'"









						Property boss laughs off claims Harry and Meghan 'plagiarised' logo
					

EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

This thread is on fire - pandemic be damned!!


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5027146
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project, which has used an almost identical 'A' and 'W' emblem for three years.
> 
> But Dmitry Pryanishnikov, chief executive of Am Werdertor's parent company Allea Group, was unconcerned by the similarities today when he said: 'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Property boss laughs off claims Harry and Meghan 'plagiarised' logo
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Oh Dmitry, please SUE!


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I'm actually shocked at the lack of writing skills taught in schools now. I had to teach my children cursive, because their schools consider it "out of date".



I guess that depends on the school district; my little sister is 18 (similar age to your son) and she was taught cursive in her NYC public schools.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

floatinglili said:


> Yes there were screenshots of ‘actors guild(?)’ type forms with her details and ethnicity given as ‘Caucasian’ given on this thread. Good luck finding them now though! Take a month off work to sift through the backlog and please, report back.


Yes! And listed as a super model.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> He may very well be all those things, but that doesn't mean he can't be right. I don't know the man but I certainly think his opinion of MM is spot on.
> Same with Piers. First time I ever saw him was Susan Boyle's audition. I only know what I see here and so far he has been spot on.



My friend is a journalist and worked for him when he was an editor on Fleet St. He is _not_ a nice man, and he was probably hurt by MM's behaviour (although he's done worse) but I still think he's right in his opinion of H&M. A lot of people think the same but dare not say, his 'revenge' just means that he goes for it.


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> Oh Dmitry, please SUE!


Likely if he doesn't at some point down the road they will to have him stop using it.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5027146
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project, which has used an almost identical 'A' and 'W' emblem for three years.
> 
> But Dmitry Pryanishnikov, chief executive of Am Werdertor's parent company Allea Group, was unconcerned by the similarities today when he said: 'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Property boss laughs off claims Harry and Meghan 'plagiarised' logo
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Re: plagiarisim, nothing seems to be off limits for these two---especially Meghan.  Between dressing like Diana or Wallis, requoting others without attribution, imitating the wreath laying at that cemetery in LA,  and now the Archewell logo (and I'm sure I'm missing some other episodes), it seems never-ending.  Don't they have an original thought in their heads?


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> William should send Archie a *panini press*...see if Gayle reports it


I need to check Urban Dictionary to see what that really means!


----------



## purseinsanity

kipp said:


> B
> 
> Re: plagiarisim, nothing seems to be off limits for these two---especially Meghan.  Between dressing like Diana or Wallis, requoting others without attribution, imitating the wreath laying at that cemetery in LA,  and now the Archewell logo (and I'm sure I'm missing some other episodes), it seems never-ending.  *Don't they have an original thought in their heads?*


----------



## poopsie

kipp said:


> B
> 
> Re: plagiarisim, nothing seems to be off limits for these two---especially Meghan.  Between dressing like Diana or Wallis, requoting others without attribution, imitating the wreath laying at that cemetery in LA,  and now the Archewell logo (and I'm sure I'm missing some other episodes), it seems never-ending.  *Don't they have an original thought in their heads?*



Look at the entertainment industry in recent years. How many remakes, sequels, prequels, spin-offs, franchising there have been


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> When I was in middle school in the 7th grade, our English teacher made us write concise paragraphs as an exercise.  Eventually we learned how to write an introductory paragraph and then a summary paragraph.  A lesson that stood me quite well later when writing papers.  What are they teaching people these days?  They throw a bunch of words on a page and think it makes them look erudite.   Nope! Total nonsense and the reader is left scratching their head.


They have spelling checkers to do the heavy lifting that you had to learn


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> I need to check Urban Dictionary to see what that really means!


OMG. I just checked and h3ll NO. You do NOT want to know.  Yuck!!!’


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I think she hates William now too because he saw right through her almost from the start.


Absolutely!


----------



## Chanbal

QE is likely not only sad but very worried about H. He seems to be a very unstable man. 

"The Queen is 'sad but not angry' after Harry and Meghan's bombshell Oprah interview where they accused a senior royal of racism, according to insiders.

Now, sources say the Queen was not angered by the interview and instead has privately pledged to stand by Harry.

An insider told the Sun: 'She is not angry, she is just sad. They have always worried about him (Harry) and the Queen feels very protective about him.

'They always tried to support him when Meghan came along. They all worried less about him when Meghan was on the scene as he seemed so happy.'

It comes after Prince William said the royals are 'not a racist family' with the Queen ordering a private family investigation into the claims.

The Queen ordered a private family investigation into the claims which included accusations a unnamed member of the family raised 'concerns' about the skin colour of their children.

Buckingham Palace did not comment."









						Queen 'is sad, not angry' after Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview
					

The shocking interview saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussex claim a royal had raised concerns about their son Archie's skin colour.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> QE is likely not only sad but very worried about H. He seems to be a very unstable man.
> 
> "The Queen is 'sad but not angry' after Harry and Meghan's bombshell Oprah interview where they accused a senior royal of racism, according to insiders.
> 
> Now, sources say the Queen was not angered by the interview and instead has privately pledged to stand by Harry.
> 
> An insider told the Sun: 'She is not angry, she is just sad. They have always worried about him (Harry) and the Queen feels very protective about him.
> 
> 'They always tried to support him when Meghan came along. They all worried less about him when Meghan was on the scene as he seemed so happy.'
> 
> It comes after Prince William said the royals are 'not a racist family' with the Queen ordering a private family investigation into the claims.
> 
> The Queen ordered a private family investigation into the claims which included accusations a unnamed member of the family raised 'concerns' about the skin colour of their children.
> 
> Buckingham Palace did not comment."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen 'is sad, not angry' after Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The shocking interview saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussex claim a royal had raised concerns about their son Archie's skin colour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Rehab>Separation>Divorce. Soon.  It is the Hwood pattern, no?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> QE is likely not only sad but very worried about H. He seems to be a very unstable man.
> 
> "The Queen is 'sad but not angry' after Harry and Meghan's bombshell Oprah interview where they accused a senior royal of racism, according to insiders.
> 
> Now, sources say the Queen was not angered by the interview and instead has privately pledged to stand by Harry.
> 
> An insider told the Sun: 'She is not angry, she is just sad. They have always worried about him (Harry) and the Queen feels very protective about him.
> 
> 'They always tried to support him when Meghan came along. They all worried less about him when Meghan was on the scene as he seemed so happy.'
> 
> It comes after Prince William said the royals are 'not a racist family' with the Queen ordering a private family investigation into the claims.
> 
> The Queen ordered a private family investigation into the claims which included accusations a unnamed member of the family raised 'concerns' about the skin colour of their children.
> 
> Buckingham Palace did not comment."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen 'is sad, not angry' after Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The shocking interview saw the Duke and Duchess of Sussex claim a royal had raised concerns about their son Archie's skin colour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


From “insiders”, what does that mean ? Which side ? Officially sanctioned leak or what ?
what is the difference between sources and insiders ? 
picking nits ...
MM did complain about leaks ... 
I hate the lack of clarity


----------



## CarryOn2020

ITV just is not willing to play!  Pffft, says CBS.


_A CBS report has accused the UK press of having a “blatant” racial element in its Meghan coverage as it declined to amend a montage of “racist” headlines used in its Oprah interview.

ITV, however, has removed five headlines from the montage in the version of the interview which it broadcast and which is still available on the ITV Player._
www.pressgazette.co.uk/cbs-report-accuses-uk-tabloids-of-blatant-racial-element-as-it-refuses-to-alter-meghan-headlines-montage/


----------



## Chanbal

*Phillip Schofield takes ANOTHER swipe at Meghan Markle amid rumours she's set to go into politics... *

_'I love that this idea of Meghan as the next president has really ramped up in the aftermath of the Oprah interview', said Camilla. 

'It had always been suggested she had political ambitions. 

'2024 may be a little bit too soon, when you consider she's pregnant with her next child and may have family matters closer to hand, but that is certainly a presidential race I would want to watch.   

*'But also, doesn't she want a quiet, private life?', asked Phil.*_









						Phillip Schofield appears to dig at Meghan Markle on This Morning
					

This Morning host Philip Schofield, 58, appeared to take a dig at Meghan Markle for the second day running, saying that reported political ambitions contradict her desire for privacy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

look what is playing out in that famous hard news magazine Harpers Bazaar 
Data was collected in 2016, long before most of us tightened up our privacy on the Internet, we were all sitting ducks then 

PS latest research shows Instagram and Facebook to be the worst apps when it comes to sharing your data



Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Respond to The Sun Private Investigator









						Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Condemn “Predatory Practices” After Tabloid Pays for “Illegal” Private Data
					

The Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper hired a private investigator to “spy” on Meghan and her family, illegally obtaining social security details and cellphone numbers.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> look what is playing out in that famous hard news magazine Harpers Bazaar
> Data was collected in 2016, long before most of us tightened up our privacy on the Internet, we were all sitting ducks then
> 
> PS latest research shows Instagram and Facebook to be the worst apps when it comes to sharing your data
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Respond to The Sun Private Investigator
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Condemn “Predatory Practices” After Tabloid Pays for “Illegal” Private Data
> 
> 
> The Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper hired a private investigator to “spy” on Meghan and her family, illegally obtaining social security details and cellphone numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



Written by Omid, that always-on-it reporter.   If by 2016, people did not know they were being tracked [and still are], then, maybe they should avoid the internet? If by 2016 a prince of the realm did not know he was being tracked, then maybe he should give up his place in line. If by 2106 a “world famous” Hwood actress did not know she would be tracked, then maybe she should get off the stage?

ETA:  quote from article- Spokesperson would be Omid, the author of the article 
_Responding to the discovery, a spokesperson for the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com that the couple are “grateful” that the newspapers’ information gathering is being brought to light. “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships,” the representative said in a statement. “They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before.”_


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> look what is playing out in that famous hard news magazine Harpers Bazaar
> Data was collected in 2016, long before most of us tightened up our privacy on the Internet, we were all sitting ducks then
> 
> PS latest research shows Instagram and Facebook to be the worst apps when it comes to sharing your data
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Respond to The Sun Private Investigator
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Condemn “Predatory Practices” After Tabloid Pays for “Illegal” Private Data
> 
> 
> The Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper hired a private investigator to “spy” on Meghan and her family, illegally obtaining social security details and cellphone numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



I've copied and pasted here S. Omid's article for the ones that do not want to click on it! How do we know if this Daniel Danno is not being paid by someone to speak to NYT?



_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have stepped forward to condemn “predatory practices” that exist in the British media today, after an investigative report revealed that The Sun tabloid once hired a private investigator to “spy” on Duchess Meghan and her family.

Byline Investigates, a crowd-funded outlet which aims to expose illegal newsroom practices often not covered by the mainstream media, released a report accusing the newspaper of hiring a U.S.-based private investigator to “mine” huge amounts of data on Meghan Markle, her parents, family members, business associates, and her ex-husband.

In the exposé, the website revealed that The Sun’s U.S. editor hired the PI in late October 2016, immediately after it was revealed that Meghan was dating Prince Harry. Among the personal details provided to the newspaper (invoiced at $2,055), were home addresses, cellphone numbers, Social Security numbers, license plate details, and much more.

It was shortly after the 90-page dossier was passed over to The Sun that the U.K. tabloid ran a number of exclusive items on the then-Suits actress, including details of text messages and the first in a series of paid interviews with her half sister, Samantha Markle.

Responding to the discovery, a spokesperson for the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com that the couple are “grateful” that the newspapers’ information gathering is being brought to light. “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships,” the representative said in a statement. “They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before.”

*Private investigator Daniel “Danno” Portley-Hanks told The New York Times about his freelance work for The Sun—who are also currently at the center of an unrelated phone-hacking legal case launched by Prince Harry in 2019. The L.A.-based detective revealed that it was his data that put The Sun “onto the trail” of Meghan’s father, Thomas Markle, as well as specialist reporters staking out addresses in the U.S.*

In his interview, Portley-Hanks acknowledges that handing over such personal details was a violation of the law, which only allows licensed private investigators to access details such as social security numbers for civil and criminal cases.

*“[The Sun] sent me a letter I had to sign that said I wouldn’t use any illegal methods to locate people or do background checks,” Portley-Hanks told The New York Times. *“Then the reporters came back to me and said, ‘But if you want to get work, keep doing what you’ve been doing,’ with a nod and a wink.” *He added that he is remorseful for his actions and willing to speak with the Sussexes’ lawyers.*

News Group Newspapers, which publishes The Sun, told BBC News in a statement that the paper did not request any social security numbers or use them for any purpose, adding “[Mr. Portley-Hanks] was instructed clearly in writing to act lawfully and he signed a legal undertaking that he would do so.” BAZAAR.com has reached out for comment.

The Sun’s publisher (formerly known as News International) has been linked to hundreds of allegations of unlawful information gathering since the 1990s, many of which are still ongoing legal cases today. A phone hacking scandal lead to The Sun’s sister title, The News of the World, being forced to close in 2011. The following year, owner Rupert Murdoch and a number of journalists and editors were summoned to give evidence at the Leveson Inquiry, a landmark judicial public inquiry into the culture, practices, and ethics of the British press_.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Me too.  I'm actually shocked at the lack of writing skills taught in schools now.  I had to teach my children cursive, because their schools consider it "out of date".  From the lack of proper spelling and grammar, I surmise that those are considered out of date as well, since apparently emojis and texting abbreviations are now considered appropriate grammar.  English is not my first language.  If I can do it, I would hope native English speakers would be taught the basics!  (Sorry, spelling errors are a pet peeve of mine!)




We've gone from teaching Latin and Greek in high school to teaching remedial English in college. 

Even Meghan wasn't taught about British history as she studied International Relations at Northwestern  , or so she tells us, as she "didn't know about Britain's colonial past"  .


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5027146
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project, which has used an almost identical 'A' and 'W' emblem for three years.
> 
> But Dmitry Pryanishnikov, chief executive of Am Werdertor's parent company Allea Group, was unconcerned by the similarities today when he said: 'Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.'"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Property boss laughs off claims Harry and Meghan 'plagiarised' logo
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were accused on social media of copying their new logo design from the Am Werdertor project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It is a stupid logo for their foundation anyway. It makes sense for Am Werdertor because “AW” is their company’s initials.

Harry and Meghan’s foundation is called Archewell, not Arch Well. What kind of idiot makes a monogram by using the second syllable of a one word name? Is this the graphic equivalent of word salad?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Written by Omid, that always-on-it reporter.   If by 2016, people did not know they were being tracked [and still are], then, maybe they should avoid the internet? If by 2016 a prince of the realm did not know he was being tracked, then maybe he should give up his place in line. If by 2106 a “world famous” Hwood actress did not know she would be tracked, then maybe she should get off the stage?
> 
> ETA:  quote from article- Spokesperson would be Omid, the author of the article
> _Responding to the discovery, a spokesperson for the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com that the couple are “grateful” that the newspapers’ information gathering is being brought to light. “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships,” the representative said in a statement. “They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before.”_


It looks like MM&H are using US newspapers/magazines to fight against the UK Press. How do we know if D. Danno is not being paid to disclose this type of information to the NYT? We have no idea if this is true...
"_He added that he is remorseful for his actions and willing to speak with the Sussexes’ lawyers._"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I've copied and pasted here S. Omid's article for the ones that do not want to click on it! How do we know if this Daniel Danno is not being paid by someone to speak to NYT?



According to IMDB, Daniel Danno Portley-Hanks has multiple arrests. Considering who the owners of both publications are, little of this is surprising IMO. The only surprising thing is that H&M say they weren’t aware.  >>>Not buying that one at all. <<<


_For a period of the time that Danno was incarcerated, it was in the co-ed federal prison in Pleasanton, California. Danno was the first (and for a long time, the only) male prisoner in the prison._
www.imdb.com/name/nm0360017/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm


Spoiler: Danno 



Dan "Danno" Hanks, has a seven-page rap sheet showing more than fifty arrests and three terms in state and federal prisons.

The youngest of ten children, he took to the night streets as a teenager, to avoid the advances of a sexually abusive stepfather. In 1976, while imprisoned at San Quentin, he witnessed a fatal stabbing in the chow line. Two inmates were arguing whether or not one character was sleeping with another on an afternoon soap. Upon his release, he discovered he could make more money and stay out of jail by working the other side of the law - as a private investigator and a Confidential Informant for the DEA & FBI.

For a period of the time that Danno was incarcerated, it was in the co-ed federal prison in Pleasanton, California. Danno was the first (and for a long time, the only) male prisoner in the prison. He wrote a short story "Prisoner in Paradise", which is being turned into a series for HBO by George Gallo & Howard Deutch.

Danno teamed up with Fred Valis after his release from prison and the two of them formed Backstreet Investigations. Danno has since been responsible for solving more than a thousand theft, fraud, and drug cases. After working with Fred Valis for 25 years, he obtained a certificate of Rehablitation and was granted his own private investigator's license. Shortly after his long time partner, Fred Valis passed away, leaving Danno to carry on the Backstreet Investigations legacy alone.

Danno has worked as a story consultant to writer George Gallo & a technical advisor on police & crime dramas. He can be seen as a regular commentator on "Geraldo at Large".

He still does investigation work for the entertainment community & the news media.



www.businessinsider.in/thelife/news/a-private-investigator-says-the-sun-paid-him-to-dig-up-private-information-on-meghan-markle-and-her-family/articleshow/81579336.cms


Spoiler: Seedy world of PI’s?



*A private investigator says The Sun paid him to dig up private information on Meghan Markle and her family*

The Sun hired a private investigator to access information about Meghan Markle.
Daniel Portley-Hanks says he gave the outlet her phone number, address, and Social Security number.
Prince Harry recently sued The Sun's publisher over separate phone-hacking claims.
Famous private investigator Daniel "Danno" Portley-Hanks was hired by a UK tabloid to dig up personal information about Meghan Markle and her family when she first started dating Prince Harry.

A representative for News Group Newspapers, the publisher of The Sun, confirmed to Insider that the UK tabloid paid Portley-Hanks, a private investigator from the US, for information on Markle in 2016.

Portley-Hanks gave The Sun a "comprehensive report" on Markle, as reported by the BBC, which contained her Social Security number, phone numbers - including her cell phone number - and addresses.It also reportedly included information on Markle's family members, her ex-husband, and an ex-boyfriend.






Meghan Markle.Max Mumby/ Indigo/ Getty Images.
The New York Times reported that Portley-Hanks used the service TLOxp to find the information he needed, which is legal to use. However, he later broke US privacy statutes by sharing the information he found with publications, according to The Times.

The Sun appeared to use the information from the report for a series of stories published in 2016 that seemed to share intimate details of the couple's relationship. For instance, the publication seemingly used the report to write a story about Harry sending texts to Meghan before their first date in 2016.
Advertisement

The Times also reported that Portley-Hanks' investigation led The Sun to track Markle's father, who later leaked private letters from his daughter to UK tabloids.

In a statement provided to Insider, News Group Newspapers said it did not request Markle's Social Security number, and it contradicted reporting from Byline and The Times that said Portley-Hanks was paid $2,055 for his services."In 2016, The Sun made a legitimate request of Mr. Hanks to research contact details and addresses for Meghan Markle and possible relatives using legal databases which he had a license to use," the statement said. "He was paid $250."
"Mr. Hanks was not tasked to do anything illegal or breach any privacy laws - indeed he was instructed clearly in writing to act lawfully and he signed a legal undertaking that he would do so," the statement continued. "The information he provided could not and did not raise any concerns that he had used illegal practices to obtain the information."

"At no time did The Sun request the Social Security number of Meghan Markle, nor use the information he provided for any unlawful practice," the statement from News Group Newspapers also said. "The Sun abides by all laws and regulations and maintains strict protocols in relation to the obtaining of information from third parties. Strict compliance is in place to cover all our reporting."

On Thursday, Markle and Harry condemned "predatory practices" of some investigative reporting in a statement to Insider.





Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in December 2017.Chris Jackson/Getty Images
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships," the statement read.

"They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before," the statement went on to say.

Prince Harry filed a lawsuit against The Sun over phone-hacking claims in 2019, and he and Markle have both spoken about the harassment and racism Markle has experienced at the hands of the British media.The news comes amid tension between the Sussexes and the rest of the royal family following their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
During the interview, Markle revealed she was having suicidal thoughts but wasn't allowed to get help during her time as a senior member of the royal family, and Harry said his father "stopped taking" his phone calls before the couple announced their step back from royal duties.

Daniel Portley-Hanks did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It is a stupid logo for their foundation anyway. It makes sense for Am Werdertor because “AW” is their company’s initials.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s foundation is called Archewell, not Arch Well. What kind of idiot makes a monogram by using the second syllable of a one word name? Is this the graphic equivalent of word salad?



Are we certain AW is not for Anna Wintour?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It is a stupid logo for their foundation anyway. It makes sense for Am Werdertor because “AW” is their company’s initials.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s foundation is called Archewell, not Arch Well. What kind of idiot makes a monogram by using the second syllable of a one word name? Is this the graphic equivalent of word salad?



The kid’s name is Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. So, they really can’t claim the company is named for him.


----------



## bag-mania

The _Atlantic_ had this article today. It started out rather pro-Meghan but it veered off of that path after awhile. It is long but I am copying in the relevant points.

*Meghan Markle Didn’t Do the Work*
Part of Meghan’s problem was her naïveté about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture.
...
The interview began with the two women sitting across from each other under a pergola, making a convincing appearance of not knowing each other very well, even though they have a history. Oprah befriended Meghan early on, and saw the ways that she and Harry were suffering. Long before Harry and Meghan left England, Oprah and Harry had begun working together on a docuseries about mental health. So Meghan felt very safe—and was very safe—talking with Oprah and, in her measured and calculated way, plunging the knife into her in-laws’ hearts.

The problems had begun about six months after the wedding; that was when things began to turn, when the tabloids decided to create a narrative. They had written that shortly before the wedding, Meghan had made Prince William’s wife, Kate, cry in a dustup over flower-girl dresses, but that wasn’t at all what had happened! Not at all! What had happened was that Kate had made _Meghan_ cry about the flower-girl dresses. But Kate had made things right. Kate had behaved the way Meghan would have behaved if she had been in the wrong—although she had in no way been in the wrong—by apologizing and sending flowers. The palace should have protected her; the palace should have made a correction. But it had done nothing. The palace was willing to lie to protect others in the family, but not “to tell the truth to protect” Meghan and Harry.

Meghan suggested during the two-hour interview that one of the chief acts of cruelty perpetrated against the couple had been the palace’s refusal to “protect” them from the lies of the press. It did not seem to occur to her that the palace has no ability to protect its members from the tabloids, and that a story as inconsequential as tears shed over a flower girl’s dress was best starved of oxygen, not inflamed by correction. Diana was killed because the palace couldn’t control the tabloid press, and Prince Andrew had to be taken out of rotation because the papers kept the story of his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein alive week after week.

With the calumny of the flower-girl dresses cleared up, it was time to roll a piece of previously recorded tape, featuring Meghan, Harry, and Oprah squeezed into the young couple’s chicken coop, which is populated with “rescue chickens.” (Meghan: “I just love rescuing.”) What was the best thing about their new life? Oprah asked from inside the coop.  The chance “to live authentically,” Meghan said, as though she and Harry were mucking out stables in Hertfordshire, not tending to rescue chickens on a $15 million estate. “It’s so basic,” she continued, “but it’s really fulfilling. Just getting back down to basics.”

Cut to the pergola. The couple’s case against the Crown was that the Royal Family had not protected them from the tabloids, had stopped paying Harry—had “cut me off,” he said, in the particular expression of shocked trust-funders the world over whenever Daddy decides: enough!—and had not provided any help when Meghan found herself so unhappy that she was having suicidal thoughts. The parents were also shocked by apparent concerns about how dark their future babies would be—a revolting development, but hardly a surprising one.

Part of Meghan’s problem, it turned out, was her naïveté about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture. What was she, Meghan Markle, a simple girl from Los Angeles, to have understood about such an institution as the British? How was she to know that Her Royal Highness Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith was in any way different from the Lady of Gaga? One wonders whether her study of foreign service and international relations, her internship at the American embassy in Argentina, and her work with the UN might have clued her in to the fact that a whole world exists beyond the Jamba Juice on La Brea and the set of _Deal or No Deal_, on which she had once been one of the beautiful “suitcase girls.” Apparently, they had not.

She told Oprah that she had never even Googled her future husband’s name—a remark that united the viewing world in hilarity, time zone by time zone. It was an assertion that strained credulity, but it was necessary to her contention that she’d had no idea that the Windsors had not, as we now say, “done the work” when it came to exploring their own racial biases. Had she herself done some work by punching her beloved’s name into a search engine, she would have understood that she was not marrying the most racially conscious person on the planet. She would have seen pictures of him dressed as a Nazi at a costume party (his great-granduncle—briefly Edward VIII—had palled around with Adolf Hitler) and a videotape of him introducing a fellow cadet as “our little Paki friend.” The Palace said that “Prince Harry used the term without any malice and as a nickname about a highly popular member of his platoon.” But the palace had no good explanation for why Harry introduced another cadet in the video by saying, “It’s Dan the Man. **** me, you look like a raghead.”


B it was Markle’s piety regarding the British Commonwealth and her possible relationship to it that revealed the essential incoherence of her case against the monarchy. For some reason she seemed to think that representing the British monarchy to the countries it had colonized was valorous. This group of countries, she told Oprah, is “60, 70 percent ... people of color.” Absolutely true. But what force brought these nations together? And why is this institution, composed of 54 countries, headed by—of all people—the Queen of England?

The English relationship to the “commonwealth” is a natural (or unnatural) connection to the British empire. Overwhelmingly, these are the countries that were colonized, exploited, and subjected to ruinous campaigns of violence and ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the British in the name not merely of country, but of the specific family Meghan chose to join. And her desire had been to become a special emissary to this confederation of countries as a representative of the Crown, as a standard bearer of a foreign power historically responsible for many of the specific miseries that exist in these places to this very day. Britain’s eager participation in the notorious “Scramble for Africa” is directly responsible for the exploitation of natural resources in many parts of that continent. And that’s the team she wanted to represent? Meghan Markle: defender of the Queen’s “realms and territories.”


The best thing the Royal Family could do for the former colonies would be to send money and stay away.

This matter had been left unaddressed by the time Harry arrived under the pergola—a bit flushed, obviously pained, and by no means as comfortable with the complicated new narrative as was his wife—and started answering questions. He revealed that he is estranged from his father, who at some point stopped taking his calls; that he loves his brother to bits, but that this relationship is also strained; that his adored grandmother had disinvited him and Meghan to lunch; and that when Netflix approached the couple with a deal, it was a stroke of luck, because “we hadn’t thought about it.” When they arrived in Los Angeles, cut off financially and stranded with only the funds left to Harry by his mother (and Meghan’s money from her television work), they had been forced to huddle like refugees in Tyler Perry’s mansion, allowing the superstar to pay for their security.

But more than any of this—more than Diana’s sad life and tragic death, more than Meghan’s disappointment at discovering that the Windsors aren’t devotees of critical race theory, more than the rescue chickens and the Spotify deal and even the Montecito mansion—the main takeaway from Oprah’s interview with Meghan and Harry was that it was spectacular television. Minute-for-minute excellent television. Oprah is one of the most famous people in the world; Meghan is an enormous celebrity. They both looked beautiful, and the setting was a garden of such exquisiteness that most of us will never lay eyes on its likeness outside of television or the movies. But what they were doing was talking about something most women have talked about with other women: in-law problems. They were on the grounds of an estate, but they could have been on the sidelines of a T-ball game or at a girls’ night out, or waiting for the subway. The father-in-law was a prick; the brother’s wife was a real pain and hadn’t done anything to reduce bridal anxieties before the wedding; the grandmother was a doll, but too easily exploited by the nursing-home staff. They were loaded, but they had cut off a favored son when he’d most needed the money. Meghan had, in fact, realized the highest aspiration of many married people: She had convinced her spouse that his entire family was a bunch of losers. (Harry, on life before meeting Meghan: “I was trapped, but I didn’t know I was trapped.”) She had plucked him out of its bosom and made herself and their child his only true family. She was—depending on your point of view—either a virago or an icon.


Nothing is as galvanizing and unifying as an episode of appointment television in which a hugely famous female broadcaster delivers an exclusive interview with another hugely famous celebrity who is in the midst of what is essentially a personal drama.

I was reminded of Diane Sawyer’s 1995 interview with Lisa Marie Presley and Michael Jackson soon after the pair’s marriage, an event that had closely followed accusations that he was a child molester. Had she been worried about the charges? Asked him about the charges before marrying him?

“I’ve seen these children. They don’t let him go to the bathroom without running in there with him.”

And of Barbara Walters’s 1999 interviewwith Monica Lewinsky. Why had she flashed her thong at Bill *******?

“It was saying, ‘I’m interested, too. I’ll play.’”

And Emily Maitlis’s 2020 interview with Prince Andrew. Why had he stayed in Jeffrey Epstein’s mansion after Epstein had been implicated in a massive sex-trafficking scheme?

“My judgment was probably colored by my tendency to be too honorable.”

These were questions about marriage and crimes against women and sex between powerful men and impressionable young women. They were conversations among famous people, but they were also conversations among all of us: the world’s women. They took the most elemental and baleful female conditions—sex and marriage, motherhood, and the ever-present threat of sexual danger—and transformed them into glossy television events. They gave us the kinds of details in which women—even the most intellectual and high-minded women—take an enduring interest, and they gave us an instant way to talk about them with one another.

I had an unpleasant medical procedure a few days after the Oprah special, but I was so focused on my nurse’s opinion of the show (surprisingly anti-Meghan) that I hardly noticed the pain. I had forced my sons and husband to watch the interview with me, and when Oprah reminded Meghan that when you marry a person, you are also marrying that person’s family, I cried out, “That’s right!” The things women care about will always be with us, and the way women work through them is not to drop ordnance on Afghanistan. It’s to find one another, put on the kettle or open the wine, and talk.

At the end of the interview, Harry sat beside Meghan, still looking a bit stunned, a bit unsure what was happening to him in this new life. Looking, in fact, a bit like a rescue chicken. Oprah asked him if Meghan had “saved him.”

“Yeah, she did,” he said. “Without question, she saved me.”

Meghan reached out her hand and touched his arm, stopping him from going on.

“I would … I would …” she said, trying to locate the right note, trying perhaps to avoid the impression that her husband was one more chicken in her coop. _She_hadn’t done the rescuing, she said—Harry had. It was Harry who had “certainly saved my life and saved all of us.”

And Harry sat there beside her, 7,000 miles from home, in the land of rich Californians and Meyer lemons and eucalyptus trees trailing Spanish moss. He had plighted his troth to this unexpected and very beautiful woman; he had hurt his grandmother, and alienated his father and his only brother. He had thought that having Bishop Michael Bruce Curry deliver the homily at his wedding would reverse a thousand years of English racial attitudes, but he had been wrong about that.* He was a combat veteran, a prince, the grandson, great-grandson, and great-great-grandson of English monarchs, and now he was going to have to think up some podcasts.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The problems had begun about six months after the wedding;



Oh no, honey, no no,  problems began long before that.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I've copied and pasted here S. Omid's article for the ones that do not want to click on it! How do we know if this Daniel Danno is not being paid by someone to speak to NYT?
> 
> View attachment 5027411
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have stepped forward to condemn “predatory practices” that exist in the British media today, after an investigative report revealed that The Sun tabloid once hired a private investigator to “spy” on Duchess Meghan and her family.
> 
> Byline Investigates, a crowd-funded outlet which aims to expose illegal newsroom practices often not covered by the mainstream media, released a report accusing the newspaper of hiring a U.S.-based private investigator to “mine” huge amounts of data on Meghan Markle, her parents, family members, business associates, and her ex-husband.
> 
> In the exposé, the website revealed that The Sun’s U.S. editor hired the PI in late October 2016, immediately after it was revealed that Meghan was dating Prince Harry. Among the personal details provided to the newspaper (invoiced at $2,055), were home addresses, cellphone numbers, Social Security numbers, license plate details, and much more.
> 
> It was shortly after the 90-page dossier was passed over to The Sun that the U.K. tabloid ran a number of exclusive items on the then-Suits actress, including details of text messages and the first in a series of paid interviews with her half sister, Samantha Markle.
> 
> Responding to the discovery, a spokesperson for the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com that the couple are “grateful” that the newspapers’ information gathering is being brought to light. “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships,” the representative said in a statement. “They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before.”
> 
> *Private investigator Daniel “Danno” Portley-Hanks told The New York Times about his freelance work for The Sun—who are also currently at the center of an unrelated phone-hacking legal case launched by Prince Harry in 2019. The L.A.-based detective revealed that it was his data that put The Sun “onto the trail” of Meghan’s father, Thomas Markle, as well as specialist reporters staking out addresses in the U.S.*
> 
> In his interview, Portley-Hanks acknowledges that handing over such personal details was a violation of the law, which only allows licensed private investigators to access details such as social security numbers for civil and criminal cases.
> 
> *“[The Sun] sent me a letter I had to sign that said I wouldn’t use any illegal methods to locate people or do background checks,” Portley-Hanks told The New York Times. *“Then the reporters came back to me and said, ‘But if you want to get work, keep doing what you’ve been doing,’ with a nod and a wink.” *He added that he is remorseful for his actions and willing to speak with the Sussexes’ lawyers.*
> 
> News Group Newspapers, which publishes The Sun, told BBC News in a statement that the paper did not request any social security numbers or use them for any purpose, adding “[Mr. Portley-Hanks] was instructed clearly in writing to act lawfully and he signed a legal undertaking that he would do so.” BAZAAR.com has reached out for comment.
> 
> The Sun’s publisher (formerly known as News International) has been linked to hundreds of allegations of unlawful information gathering since the 1990s, many of which are still ongoing legal cases today. A phone hacking scandal lead to The Sun’s sister title, The News of the World, being forced to close in 2011. The following year, owner Rupert Murdoch and a number of journalists and editors were summoned to give evidence at the Leveson Inquiry, a landmark judicial public inquiry into the culture, practices, and ethics of the British press_.


I am gobsmacked they are whining about 2016 stuff, 6 years ago
ps zuckerberg already explained all that nonsense to congress lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## viciel

The issue with Harry having to think up some podcasts is that he is now force to have to use his brain, the guy's never done anything. Isn't he in his 30s? I mean, what self-respecting 30+ year old would complain about being "cut off" while sitting in a mansion, really? I'm super disappointed that no US press has blatantly pointed THAT out. Grow a pair Harry! Archie is innocent, for now, and I've seen it time and time again, growing up in an environment with parents like that, the Firm is better off just cut them all off now, nothing good will come of this. Even if Harry and Meghan gets a divorce, it will just be another spectacle, and Harry will be in his 40s and still living off his family without a purpose in life. I have zero sympathy for someone like him, he annoys me. Meghan will be fine, has she landed on American Vogue yet? Anna Wintour, don't let me down now. Don't you dare put her on. Be a true Brit please!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh no, honey, no no,  problems began long before that.



The author picked up on a lot but not close to everything. I left out the first half of the article because it was almost entirely about Diana.


----------



## viciel

viciel said:


> The issue with Harry having to think up some podcasts is that he is now force to have to use his brain, the guy's never done anything. Isn't he in his 30s? I mean, what self-respecting 30+ year old would complain about being "cut off" while sitting in a mansion, really? He needed security? Should have stayed in his nest. I'm super disappointed that no US press has blatantly pointed THAT out. Grow a pair Harry! Why are people allowed to make their own choices but refuse to accept the consequences that come with them? This country has lost its marbles and these people do not understand the meaning of personal responsibility - blame everyone else for everything under the sun. Archie is innocent, for now, and I've seen it time and time again, growing up in an environment with parents like that, the Firm is better off just cut them all off now, nothing good will come of this. Even if Harry and Meghan gets a divorce, it will just be another spectacle, and Harry will be in his 40s and still living off his family without a purpose in life. I have zero sympathy for someone like him, he annoys me. Meghan will be fine, has she landed on American Vogue yet? Anna Wintour, don't let me down now. Don't you dare put her on. Be a true Brit please!


----------



## rose60610

We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.


----------



## viciel

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.



Yes, this! Thank you! We all know who's getting a Razzie this year for their "excellent" acting - the only acting award she'll ever even get close to touching. Gosh, where can I buy a shirt that says TeamBRF?


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Written by Omid, that always-on-it reporter.   If by 2016, people did not know they were being tracked [and still are], then, maybe they should avoid the internet? If by 2016 a prince of the realm did not know he was being tracked, then maybe he should give up his place in line. If by 2106 a “world famous” Hwood actress did not know she would be tracked, then maybe she should get off the stage?
> 
> ETA:  quote from article- Spokesperson would be Omid, the author of the article
> _Responding to the discovery, a spokesperson for the Sussexes tells BAZAAR.com that the couple are “grateful” that the newspapers’ information gathering is being brought to light. *“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex feel that today is an important moment of reflection for the media industry and society at large, as this investigative report shows that the predatory practices of days past are still ongoing, reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships,” the representative said in a statement. “They are grateful to those working in media who stand for upholding the values of journalism, which are needed now more than ever before.”*_



 

Well she IS an expert when it comes to "reaping irreversible damage for families and relationships" 
The last sentence is so laughable. They are grateful to those who are blindly promoting their agenda. Anyone in the media who actually DID uphold the "values of journalism" would be hearing from their attorneys tout de suite


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.



There are some who never outgrow the teenage mentality.  

Besides, didn’t I read somewhere that Meghan was a young mother? Maybe that was just her friends.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> There are some who never outgrow the teenage mentality.
> 
> Besides, didn’t I read somewhere that Meghan was a young mother? Maybe that was just her friends.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rehab>Separation>Divorce. Soon.  It is the Hwood pattern, no?



If MM has kept diaries and emails on the RF, then she must be keeping them for H too... their divorce is going to be epic!!!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.



Source? The new editor resigned. Can you share where you saw they are ceasing publication?


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t see them divorcing. They’re like the Wallis and Edward. I’m sure “people” are taking notice. Who would want them?


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Source? The new editor resigned. Can you share where you saw they are ceasing publication?



They stopped the print edition in 2017.  They are online only now. Article from 2017:








						Report: Condé Nast Is Closing Teen Vogue
					

Imposing hiring freeze on all its magazines, including Vanity Fair and New Yorker.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




The current kerfuffle:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-new-editor-apologized-personally-staff.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I don’t see them divorcing. They’re like the Wallis and Edward. I’m sure “people” are taking notice. Who would want them?



IMO it could go either way, most likely an open marriage.  Rumors say a deal is being worked out - the Palace buys H&M’s titles and H leaves succession line-up. Rumors are they are desperate for cash. So, a buy-out makes sense.  Some Euro royal families have done this, so it isn’t that unusual.  The big issue will be his citizenship and US taxes. That could get tricky.  Just like Wallis and Ed, they have made a mess of things.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> They stopped the print edition in 2017.  They are online only now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Report: Condé Nast Is Closing Teen Vogue
> 
> 
> Imposing hiring freeze on all its magazines, including Vanity Fair and New Yorker.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The current kerfuffle:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...e-new-editor-apologized-personally-staff.html



Right. I believe rose60610 misread or misunderstood the current news, as far as I know they did not announce anything else today.


----------



## Chanbal

*JAN MOIR: I've admired US media queens Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King for years, but NOT now they've cloaked themselves as superhero apologists for Meghan and Harry*
Are we all watching The Oprah and Gayle Show? Pass me the popcorn, I don't want to miss a minute.

Not only are Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King close friends, they are two of the most powerful media figures in the U.S. 

Oprah is a billionaire business and entertainment mogul, while Gayle is an award-winning journalist and host of the CBS This Morning Show.

I have admired them both for years. Until now.

For the two women have assigned themselves strange new roles, far beyond their remit as supposedly objective journalists.

*Without so much as a curtsey or even a fleeting grasp of British history, the pair have cloaked themselves as superhero cheerleaders, apologists, spokespeople, champions and chief supporters of and for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.*

How did we get here, to this treacly plateau of puff after every little Harry and Meghan huff? 

First with Oprah's CBS TV special, in which the chat-show veteran allowed the Sussexes to unfurl their moany banner of 'truth' without correction or intervention, even when being pelted by inconsistencies and inaccuracies.

Now TV host Gayle has picked up the baton to propound the Sussexian view of events; a version which always puts H&M as the innocents at the mercy of cruel forces trying to deprive them of their titles, money and prestige.

This week, Gayle seems to have become their unofficial mouthpiece, revealing on her show that talks between Prince Harry and his father and brother had been 'unproductive'. 

Also that Prince Harry had a deal with CBS to pull the interview should his grandfather Prince Philip die during the Sussex publicity campaign.

Can that possibly be true? Sorry, kids. Oprah and Gayle don't have time to check that kind of detail. Let's move on.

So unflinching is their devotion to Harry and Meghan, one has to wonder how deeply both women are involved in the lives of the Sussexes.

*From early meetings at Kensington Palace to wedding and baby shower invitations, Oprah and Gayle have been at every unfolding chapter of the Megxit story.*

Oprah even seemed to facilitate the Sussexes' temporary move to her friend Tyler Perry's house in Los Angeles.* And the couple, plus baby Archie, stayed with her at one point — *and now they are neighbours in Montecito. Cosy!

*Perhaps Oprah — and Gayle — are so protective because it is they who are the geese who laid the royal golden eggs, and they'll protect their investment at all costs, even if that cost is the truth.

For example, the doctored montage of newspaper headlines shown during the Oprah interview were meant to suggest the British Press (hurrah!) were racist and anti-Meghan. *

Yet many of these headlines were edited or taken out of context, while others were from non-British titles. Yet CBS (boo!) will not remove them, for reasons that are unclear. Or are they? 

This week, Miss King took the tiny opportunity to sneer at anti-Meghanist Piers Morgan. She claimed he was 'sacked' from his Good Morning Britain show after 57,000 complaints to Ofcom.

This followed Morgan saying he did not believe anything the Duchess of Sussex said, particularly not her assertions that in 2019 she thought about killing herself (and therefore her unborn baby, too).

Who can know of the sorrow that engulfs the troubled mind? 

Yet surely one can sympathise with the Duchess's predicament while still understanding that it is important to note and report that Morgan, in fact, resigned from GMB — and more than 200,000 people have signed a petition begging him to stay.

Yet all this was ignored by Miss King; dismissed as inconvenient truths which do not tally with the cherished Sussex- centric narrative.

Meanwhile, it does not take a huge stretch of the imagination to understand how Oprah and Meghan came to bond in such a powerful way.

*Oprah is blessed with great personal warmth, but is also tough and controlling, with a notorious reputation for cutting off those who cross her or displease her. Sounds familiar?

She also believes it is important for people to tell their own story, which is ironic, given that she is know to have made her own employees sign draconian Non-Disclosure Agreements, preventing them from ever talking about working with her.

Were they silent — or silenced? Both, actually. And how.*

Over the decades, Oprah became famous for the choreographed voyeurism of her talk shows. It was only later that she moved into celebrity interviews, and her 1993 sit down with Michael Jackson was a classic.
'I've had very little plastic surgery,' he told her, and insisted he was a normal guy who loved his girlfriend, Brooke Shields. Oprah sympathised with his complaints about 'cruel' tabloid speculation — much of which later turned out to be true.

In the end, *I find it really disappointing that Oprah and Gayle, these two trailblazing, amazing women seem so ready to trash a royal family and an entire nation on the say-so of two aggrieved and entitled people who happen to be their pals.*

Especially as I once met Oprah — and interviewed her myself. I remember her warmth, her commanding presence, her boyfriend, Stedman, hovering in the background like a butler.

Also her admission that she stockpiled her favourite shampoos, knickers and fluffy bath towels, presumably because she grew up in poverty and had nothing nice of her own.

But most of all I remember her belief that people found appearing on her chat shows very cathartic, because it was sometimes easier to say something in public than it was face to face.

'And once you have said your piece to 20 million people, there is no going back,' she added.

Indeed.

We don't have anything or anyone in the UK quite like Oprah or Gayle. Oprah, in particular, is one of the most powerful cultural figures in America. Her influence and reach are phenomenal. She is an American icon, the pope of popular culture.

If you receive her blessing, then you have got it made. And right now Meghan and Harry are visibly reborn, as they luxuriate in the warmth of her benevolence and power. 

But for how long can this love-in continue? It won't last for ever — and what then?

Mouthpieces for MM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I believe she's wearing one of those moon things. Look at the white shirt, plus she has an undercover on but the color of her moon bump is showing. On the first picture you see where the lining of the moon bump curls up and pushed up. Also note how she's sitting. I've been pregnant six times (lost 2 pregnancies) and no way in heck can anyone sit like that (but then maybe some) but clearly you see the outline on the first picture.


----------



## Chanbal

Not good enough for Ms. Markle!   

*"MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry COULD have given son Archie a prestigious title but chose not to, it's claimed.*
_
Experts say the couple had the chance to take advantage of a long-standing royal tradition to allow their son to become the *Earl of Dumbarton*.

“In accordance with the 1917 order, Archie could now use his father's title of the Earl of Dumbarton and could be referred to as *Lord Dumbarton*.

It was previously thought his parents were involved in talks about what he would be called with claims they didn't want him to have a title to allow him to lead a more "normal" life.

However, in their shock interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan revealed they did want him to have a title for security reasons.

She went on to suggest Archie wasn't made a prince after "concerns and conversations" about "how dark" his skin would be when he was born._"









						Meg & Harry COULD have given Archie Earl of Dumbarton title - but didn't want to
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry COULD have given son Archie a prestigious title but chose not to, it’s claimed. Experts say the couple had the chance to take advantage of a long-standing royal…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

I just learned the Queen had a special lipstick made for her coronation. This article goes into the details and shows how meticulous the planning was. Every little thing mattered. Compare that level of precision to H&M‘s sloppy clothing which reflects their sloppy attitude.

H admitted to OW they did not plan their endgame. IMO the endgame says all we need to know about a person.
Rest assured, QE has this endgame well-planned. That is a tremendous comfort after a pandemic. Endgame, think endgame.






						Cosmetics and Skin: Coronation Cosmetics
					

The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II took place in 1953. Planning for the event took place over 16 months, so there was plenty of time to make sure that the Queens makeup was in order



					www.cosmeticsandskin.com
				





Spoiler: coronation lipstick



*Coronation Cosmetics*
The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II took place in Westminster Abbey on 2nd June, 1953. The event was broadcast by the BBC for black and white television and recorded on colour film. As an experiment, parts of the procession were also televised in colour but the transmission was only viewed publicly by the children and staff of the Hospital for Sick Children in Great Ormonde Street, London.
Planning for the event took over 16 months, so there was plenty of time to make sure that everything was in order, including the make-up the Queen and her Ladies-in-Waiting were to wear on the day. This was entrusted to Thelma Holland, the director of the London salon of Cyclax, a an English cosmetic company founded in 1897. The Queen’s hair was dressed by her personal hairdresser, Mr. Jules Henri Joerin of the London firm Emile.
*Thelma Holland and Cyclax*
Thelma Holland, nee Besant, was born in Melbourne. After receiving Cyclax training in London in 1934, she returned to Australia and travelled the country as a demonstrator for Cyclax before returning to London in 1940 to join the London salon in South Molton Street.
In 1943, Thelma approached Queen Elizabeth – later the Queen Mother – about providing cosmetic advice to the two young princesses, Elizabeth and Margaret Rose. When the Queen agreed, Thelma became the cosmetician and beauty adviser to the royal household and was entrusted with the royal complexion.
See also: Cyclax
The relationship between Queen Elizabeth II and Cyclax was a good fit. The ‘English rose look’ that Cyclax promoted suited Elizabeth’s skin colouring perfectly. With her dark brows, blue eyes and clear, creamy skin, she did not need to use a lot of make-up and generally limited herself to a powder base, a little face powder and a pink-toned lipstick.


> Elizabeth follows the rule of understatement in makeup says Mrs. Holland—A safe rule for everyone. She has flawless skin and doesn’t need to plaster it with heavy foundation tints. In general she likes pinky tones in lipstick and cosmetics, having learned early on in life that pink is the most flattering tone for practically all women.
> She does not go in for heavy eye makeup, since her lashes and brows are naturally dark and well shaped, and her blue eyes are one of her most attractive feature.
> (Milwaukee Sentinel, 1957, p. 38)


*Coronation make-up*
Six months of testing and preparation went into developing the Queen’s make-up for the Coronation. A number of considerations had to be taken into account when determining the make-up Elizabeth would wear on the day.
Elizabeth had to look her best for the crowds that lined the streets to see the state procession but also had to photograph well for black-and-white television and colour film. In addition, the make-up had to perform in three types of lighting: the artificial light of Westminster Abbey; the interior of the state coach; and instances of full daylight. As there was only one break in the ceremony – just before the Queen returned to the palace – the make-up also had to remain in place for up to four hours without retouching – the Abbey service alone ran for just over three hours – and for most of the day without being reapplied.
As well as Elizabeth’s preference for minimal make-up, there was another reason for keeping things simple. The Coronation was a religious event with one part, the anointing, considered so sacrosanct that it was not filmed or broadcast. Given this, the Queen considered that make-up should be kept to the minimum required for broadcasting and filming.


> The Queen’s feeling is that the Coronation is a deeply religious ceremony. She wants to be herself … None of this movie star stuff — although she appreciates that some special touches are necessary for photographic purposes.
> (St. Petersburg Times, Florida, June 2, 1953, p. 30)


This simplicity also extended to Elizabeth’s hair style. Mr. Henri Joerin, the royal hairdresser from 1939-1969, believed that “simplicity and good taste should be the keynote of all good hairdressing” (Sydney Morning Herald, 1953, p. 9). It was a good policy as it meant that official photographs of the Queen would be less likely to date. It also suited the Coronation requirement that the Queen’s hair be set to accomodate the two different crowns she would wear during the ceremony – the St. Edward’s Crown and the Imperial State Crown – as well as the ‘Diamond Diadem’ she wore from the Palace to the Abbey.
Considering the length of the ceremony and the state processions before and after the service, it was agreed that Elizabeth would wear a liquid foundation as it would last longer than a cream. Given the Cyclax range at the time this would suggest that the Queen used Cyclax GlamOtint covered with a light dusting of Cyclax powder.
*Colour*
As well as the considerations of skin tone, lighting and film type, the colours used in Elizabeth’s make-up had to tone with the Coronation regalia, some of which – like the Robe of State – were a rich red.




Above: 1953 Embroidering the Queen’s Robe of State. It was 5.5 metres (6 yards) long, made from pure silk and gold thread embroidered by the Royal School of Needlework, Kensington. The velvet used in the robe was hand-woven from silk grown on an English silk-farm situated in Lullingstone Castle, Kent. Silk from the farm had previously been used in the Coronation robes of George VI in 1937, and in the train of Elizabeth’s wedding dress in 1947. The Kentish farm would later go on to make silk for Lady Diana’s wedding veil in 1981.
Taking into account the colours of the assorted Hartnell designed gowns that Elizabeth wore and her natural skin tone, it was decided to use a peach-tinted, liquid foundation with a lipstick described either as ‘pink to red’ or as a ‘deep, ruby red with soft undertones’. After the Coronation, Cyclax released a make-up range ‘designed for the Coronation year’ — ‘Pink Velvet’ GlamOtint Foundation, ‘Pink Velvet’ Powder, ‘Crown Jewel’ Lipstick and ‘Crown Jewel’ Rouge.
Elizabeth’s maids of honour were also assisted with their make-up. Some had their eyebrows darkened and all wore lipstick to ensure they looked their best when filmed.
Looking at photographs of the event it is clear that the Queen and Thelma Holland chose well. The Cyclax make-up held up for the entire ceremony and the Queen looked radiant for the whole day.
Updated: 26th December 2018
*Sources*
Arlott, J., Snagge, J., & Wollaston, G. W. (1953). _Elizabeth crowned Queen. The pictorial record of the Coronation_. Sydney: Daily Telegraph.
Elizabeth will wear little makeup, but this must last for many hours. (1953, June 2). _St. Petersburg Times_, Florida, p. 30.
Follow the Queen’s beauty tips, beauty expert says. (1957, August 21). _The Milwaukee Sentinel_, p. 38.
_The Queen. The Coronation. 1953_. (1953). London: Keliher, Hudson & Kearns, Limited.
Queen Elizabeth to get proper lipstick shade. (1953, May 28). _Evening News_, p. 7.
Queen’s hairdresser is in the Gothic. (1953, December 3). _Sydney Morning Herald_, p 9.
Queen’s lipstick important factor in Coronation plans. (1953, May 27). _The Progress-Index_, p. 22.
Too much adornment mars attractiveness. (1957, July 7). _The Kansas City Times_, p. 57.




1953 Queen Elizabeth II with the George IV State Diadem or ‘Diamond Diadem’ on her head. She does not seem to be wearing any eye make-up.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> I believe she's wearing one of those moon things. Look at the white shirt, plus she has an undercover on but the color of her moon bump is showing. On the first picture you see where the lining of the moon bump curls up and pushed up. Also note how she's sitting.



Well, apparently many pregnant women (and mothers) sympathize with her.









						‘I Just Wanted To Disappear’: Women Saw Themselves in Meghan’s Pregnancy Struggle (Published 2021)
					

A wave of responses from women who have experienced depression and suicidal thoughts is shedding light on the stark differences between how pregnancy is perceived and lived.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> Well, apparently many pregnant women (and mothers) apparently sympathize with her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘I Just Wanted To Disappear’: Women Saw Themselves in Meghan’s Pregnancy Struggle (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> A wave of responses from women who have experienced depression and suicidal thoughts is shedding light on the stark differences between how pregnancy is perceived and lived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Hmmmm . . . I'm not sure of your point. I was highlighting the "moon bump." Posting those pics have absolutely nothing to do with pregnancy depression. I wonder how those alleged abused and victimized women feel right now tho, the ones she allegedly abused.

And hell yeah, being pregnant can be fun times, hellish times, emotions out of whack, you name it. One day you love chicken, the next nine months you can't stand chicken, one day you crave 7-11 hot dogs with chili for every meal, then the drop happens, you hate it. 

I know all about being pregnant lol.


----------



## Lodpah

Matt Taylor
·
Tue

Former Corporal at Royal Marines (1999–2009)
She’s definitely a bunny boiler alright!


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> The _Atlantic_ had this article today. It started out rather pro-Meghan but it veered off of that path after awhile. It is long but I am copying in the relevant points.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Didn’t Do the Work*
> Part of Meghan’s problem was her naïveté about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture.
> ...
> The interview began with the two women sitting across from each other under a pergola, making a convincing appearance of not knowing each other very well, even though they have a history. Oprah befriended Meghan early on, and saw the ways that she and Harry were suffering. Long before Harry and Meghan left England, Oprah and Harry had begun working together on a docuseries about mental health. So Meghan felt very safe—and was very safe—talking with Oprah and, in her measured and calculated way, plunging the knife into her in-laws’ hearts.
> 
> The problems had begun about six months after the wedding; that was when things began to turn, when the tabloids decided to create a narrative. They had written that shortly before the wedding, Meghan had made Prince William’s wife, Kate, cry in a dustup over flower-girl dresses, but that wasn’t at all what had happened! Not at all! What had happened was that Kate had made _Meghan_ cry about the flower-girl dresses. But Kate had made things right. Kate had behaved the way Meghan would have behaved if she had been in the wrong—although she had in no way been in the wrong—by apologizing and sending flowers. The palace should have protected her; the palace should have made a correction. But it had done nothing. The palace was willing to lie to protect others in the family, but not “to tell the truth to protect” Meghan and Harry.
> 
> Meghan suggested during the two-hour interview that one of the chief acts of cruelty perpetrated against the couple had been the palace’s refusal to “protect” them from the lies of the press. It did not seem to occur to her that the palace has no ability to protect its members from the tabloids, and that a story as inconsequential as tears shed over a flower girl’s dress was best starved of oxygen, not inflamed by correction. Diana was killed because the palace couldn’t control the tabloid press, and Prince Andrew had to be taken out of rotation because the papers kept the story of his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein alive week after week.
> 
> With the calumny of the flower-girl dresses cleared up, it was time to roll a piece of previously recorded tape, featuring Meghan, Harry, and Oprah squeezed into the young couple’s chicken coop, which is populated with “rescue chickens.” (Meghan: “I just love rescuing.”) What was the best thing about their new life? Oprah asked from inside the coop.  The chance “to live authentically,” Meghan said, as though she and Harry were mucking out stables in Hertfordshire, not tending to rescue chickens on a $15 million estate. “It’s so basic,” she continued, “but it’s really fulfilling. Just getting back down to basics.”
> 
> Cut to the pergola. The couple’s case against the Crown was that the Royal Family had not protected them from the tabloids, had stopped paying Harry—had “cut me off,” he said, in the particular expression of shocked trust-funders the world over whenever Daddy decides: enough!—and had not provided any help when Meghan found herself so unhappy that she was having suicidal thoughts. The parents were also shocked by apparent concerns about how dark their future babies would be—a revolting development, but hardly a surprising one.
> 
> Part of Meghan’s problem, it turned out, was her naïveté about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture. What was she, Meghan Markle, a simple girl from Los Angeles, to have understood about such an institution as the British? How was she to know that Her Royal Highness Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith was in any way different from the Lady of Gaga? One wonders whether her study of foreign service and international relations, her internship at the American embassy in Argentina, and her work with the UN might have clued her in to the fact that a whole world exists beyond the Jamba Juice on La Brea and the set of _Deal or No Deal_, on which she had once been one of the beautiful “suitcase girls.” Apparently, they had not.
> 
> She told Oprah that she had never even Googled her future husband’s name—a remark that united the viewing world in hilarity, time zone by time zone. It was an assertion that strained credulity, but it was necessary to her contention that she’d had no idea that the Windsors had not, as we now say, “done the work” when it came to exploring their own racial biases. Had she herself done some work by punching her beloved’s name into a search engine, she would have understood that she was not marrying the most racially conscious person on the planet. She would have seen pictures of him dressed as a Nazi at a costume party (his great-granduncle—briefly Edward VIII—had palled around with Adolf Hitler) and a videotape of him introducing a fellow cadet as “our little Paki friend.” The Palace said that “Prince Harry used the term without any malice and as a nickname about a highly popular member of his platoon.” But the palace had no good explanation for why Harry introduced another cadet in the video by saying, “It’s Dan the Man. **** me, you look like a raghead.”
> 
> 
> B it was Markle’s piety regarding the British Commonwealth and her possible relationship to it that revealed the essential incoherence of her case against the monarchy. For some reason she seemed to think that representing the British monarchy to the countries it had colonized was valorous. This group of countries, she told Oprah, is “60, 70 percent ... people of color.” Absolutely true. But what force brought these nations together? And why is this institution, composed of 54 countries, headed by—of all people—the Queen of England?
> 
> The English relationship to the “commonwealth” is a natural (or unnatural) connection to the British empire. Overwhelmingly, these are the countries that were colonized, exploited, and subjected to ruinous campaigns of violence and ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the British in the name not merely of country, but of the specific family Meghan chose to join. And her desire had been to become a special emissary to this confederation of countries as a representative of the Crown, as a standard bearer of a foreign power historically responsible for many of the specific miseries that exist in these places to this very day. Britain’s eager participation in the notorious “Scramble for Africa” is directly responsible for the exploitation of natural resources in many parts of that continent. And that’s the team she wanted to represent? Meghan Markle: defender of the Queen’s “realms and territories.”
> 
> 
> The best thing the Royal Family could do for the former colonies would be to send money and stay away.
> 
> This matter had been left unaddressed by the time Harry arrived under the pergola—a bit flushed, obviously pained, and by no means as comfortable with the complicated new narrative as was his wife—and started answering questions. He revealed that he is estranged from his father, who at some point stopped taking his calls; that he loves his brother to bits, but that this relationship is also strained; that his adored grandmother had disinvited him and Meghan to lunch; and that when Netflix approached the couple with a deal, it was a stroke of luck, because “we hadn’t thought about it.” When they arrived in Los Angeles, cut off financially and stranded with only the funds left to Harry by his mother (and Meghan’s money from her television work), they had been forced to huddle like refugees in Tyler Perry’s mansion, allowing the superstar to pay for their security.
> 
> But more than any of this—more than Diana’s sad life and tragic death, more than Meghan’s disappointment at discovering that the Windsors aren’t devotees of critical race theory, more than the rescue chickens and the Spotify deal and even the Montecito mansion—the main takeaway from Oprah’s interview with Meghan and Harry was that it was spectacular television. Minute-for-minute excellent television. Oprah is one of the most famous people in the world; Meghan is an enormous celebrity. They both looked beautiful, and the setting was a garden of such exquisiteness that most of us will never lay eyes on its likeness outside of television or the movies. But what they were doing was talking about something most women have talked about with other women: in-law problems. They were on the grounds of an estate, but they could have been on the sidelines of a T-ball game or at a girls’ night out, or waiting for the subway. The father-in-law was a prick; the brother’s wife was a real pain and hadn’t done anything to reduce bridal anxieties before the wedding; the grandmother was a doll, but too easily exploited by the nursing-home staff. They were loaded, but they had cut off a favored son when he’d most needed the money. Meghan had, in fact, realized the highest aspiration of many married people: She had convinced her spouse that his entire family was a bunch of losers. (Harry, on life before meeting Meghan: “I was trapped, but I didn’t know I was trapped.”) She had plucked him out of its bosom and made herself and their child his only true family. She was—depending on your point of view—either a virago or an icon.
> 
> 
> Nothing is as galvanizing and unifying as an episode of appointment television in which a hugely famous female broadcaster delivers an exclusive interview with another hugely famous celebrity who is in the midst of what is essentially a personal drama.
> 
> I was reminded of Diane Sawyer’s 1995 interview with Lisa Marie Presley and Michael Jackson soon after the pair’s marriage, an event that had closely followed accusations that he was a child molester. Had she been worried about the charges? Asked him about the charges before marrying him?
> 
> “I’ve seen these children. They don’t let him go to the bathroom without running in there with him.”
> 
> And of Barbara Walters’s 1999 interviewwith Monica Lewinsky. Why had she flashed her thong at Bill *******?
> 
> “It was saying, ‘I’m interested, too. I’ll play.’”
> 
> And Emily Maitlis’s 2020 interview with Prince Andrew. Why had he stayed in Jeffrey Epstein’s mansion after Epstein had been implicated in a massive sex-trafficking scheme?
> 
> “My judgment was probably colored by my tendency to be too honorable.”
> 
> These were questions about marriage and crimes against women and sex between powerful men and impressionable young women. They were conversations among famous people, but they were also conversations among all of us: the world’s women. They took the most elemental and baleful female conditions—sex and marriage, motherhood, and the ever-present threat of sexual danger—and transformed them into glossy television events. They gave us the kinds of details in which women—even the most intellectual and high-minded women—take an enduring interest, and they gave us an instant way to talk about them with one another.
> 
> I had an unpleasant medical procedure a few days after the Oprah special, but I was so focused on my nurse’s opinion of the show (surprisingly anti-Meghan) that I hardly noticed the pain. I had forced my sons and husband to watch the interview with me, and when Oprah reminded Meghan that when you marry a person, you are also marrying that person’s family, I cried out, “That’s right!” The things women care about will always be with us, and the way women work through them is not to drop ordnance on Afghanistan. It’s to find one another, put on the kettle or open the wine, and talk.
> 
> At the end of the interview, Harry sat beside Meghan, still looking a bit stunned, a bit unsure what was happening to him in this new life. Looking, in fact, a bit like a rescue chicken. Oprah asked him if Meghan had “saved him.”
> 
> “Yeah, she did,” he said. “Without question, she saved me.”
> 
> Meghan reached out her hand and touched his arm, stopping him from going on.
> 
> “I would … I would …” she said, trying to locate the right note, trying perhaps to avoid the impression that her husband was one more chicken in her coop. _She_hadn’t done the rescuing, she said—Harry had. It was Harry who had “certainly saved my life and saved all of us.”
> 
> And Harry sat there beside her, 7,000 miles from home, in the land of rich Californians and Meyer lemons and eucalyptus trees trailing Spanish moss. He had plighted his troth to this unexpected and very beautiful woman; he had hurt his grandmother, and alienated his father and his only brother. He had thought that having Bishop Michael Bruce Curry deliver the homily at his wedding would reverse a thousand years of English racial attitudes, but he had been wrong about that.* He was a combat veteran, a prince, the grandson, great-grandson, and great-great-grandson of English monarchs, and now he was going to have to think up some podcasts.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


----------



## mdcx

Lodpah said:


> Matt Taylor
> ·
> Tue
> 
> Former Corporal at Royal Marines (1999–2009)
> She’s definitely a bunny boiler alright!


It's a Lifetime Movie in the making: "She Was My New Wife, And My Dead Mother"!


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Matt Taylor
> ·
> Tue
> 
> Former Corporal at Royal Marines (1999–2009)
> She’s definitely a bunny boiler alright!


Thank you. 
I've always wondered why she wore that ill-fitting green outfit that brought out her inner unattractiveness.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bunny boiler — haaaa!

When I first saw MM in those outfits, I did not make the Diana connection.  The connection was not immediately apparent, so why do it [other than the psycho-thing]. Sure, Kate did wear similar colors as Diana (the polka-dot hospital dress, etc.) which were usually immediately noticeable. Still it never really felt staged or fake, mostly because Kate dressed like that prior to marriage. MM’s style changed after the marriage - and not in a good way. Now, it just looks tired - green jacket, black pants, black dress.  Oh wait, maybe that is her point. She is exhausted?










						Here's Every Time Kate Middleton Gave Us Major Princess Diana Style Vibes
					

The Duchess of Cambridge often pays subtle sartorial tribute to her late mother-in-law.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				






Lodpah said:


> Matt Taylor
> ·
> Tue
> 
> Former Corporal at Royal Marines (1999–2009)
> She’s definitely a bunny boiler alright!


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.



I read Vogue Italia, French Vogue and British Vogue from before I could actually read words (all those pretty pictures). Even before the Net, there was never been a point to _Teen_ Vogue, 

Meanwhile 'grown-up' British Vogue has descended into reading and looking like Teen Vogue so I'm sure MM will always be very welcome.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> There are some who never outgrow the teenage mentality.
> 
> Besides, didn’t I read somewhere that Meghan was a young mother? Maybe that was just her friends.



I don't think that M ever got the idea it was the_ mothers_ that 'young' refers to within the phrase, not the children (in which case all mothers would be young mothers). It's just more nonsense that no one ever looks behind - say it and it makes it true, "_my_ truth".


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I think she hates Kate because William is really the one she wants!


Also, if things were slightly different Meghan would have had the ring. After their Mum died William chose her Cartier watch as a keepsake, Harry chose the engagement ring. I've hear two stories about this, one that they came to an agreement that whoever got engaged first would use the engagement ring, or two, once things got serious between William and Catherine Harry gave the ring to William as he thought it would be nice to see the ring on a future Queen (as it was originally intended)
My bet is that Meghan was fuming when she heard that.


----------



## mdcx

Sharont2305 said:


> Also, if things were slightly different Meghan would have had the ring. After their Mum died William chose her Cartier watch as a keepsake, Harry chose the engagement ring. I've hear two stories about this, one that they came to an agreement that whoever got engaged first would use the engagement ring, or two, once things got serious between William and Catherine Harry gave the ring to William as he thought it would be nice to see the ring on a future Queen (as it was originally intended)
> My bet is that Meghan was fuming when she heard that.


Harry genuinely loved Kate imo. Obviously Kate's warm, close family would have been really appealing to both Harry and William. I'm sure Harry felt it was totally the right thing to do and a real mark of respect to Kate too. Such a shame that it has all fallen apart.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bunny boiler — haaaa!
> 
> When I first saw MM in those outfits, I did not make the Diana connection.  The connection was not immediately apparent, so why do it [other than the psycho-thing]. Sure, Kate did wear similar colors as Diana (the polka-dot hospital dress, etc.) which were usually immediately noticeable. Still it never really felt staged or fake, mostly because Kate dressed like that prior to marriage. MM’s style changed after the marriage - and not in a good way. Now, it just looks tired - green jacket, black pants, black dress.  Oh wait, maybe that is her point. She is exhausted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's Every Time Kate Middleton Gave Us Major Princess Diana Style Vibes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge often pays subtle sartorial tribute to her late mother-in-law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Except for no. 5 they’re really reaching,


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.



Hu? So why that huge kerfuffle about their new editor-in-chief resigning before she even started because she tweeted out racists tweets 10 years ago at age 17? (and I will say, I looked them up, they are stupid sh*t a teenager would say and I feel if one had wanted to one would have taken her apology from years ago and run with that instead)


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> It is a stupid logo for their foundation anyway. It makes sense for Am Werdertor because “AW” is their company’s initials.
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s foundation is called Archewell, not Arch Well. What kind of idiot makes a monogram by using the second syllable of a one word name? Is this the graphic equivalent of word salad?


Yeah it’s a super ugly logo. As you say it doesn’t work as a monogram and it looks weirdly stretched too. 
I don’t understand why you’d have that name and not have an upward arrow logo. It designs itself. Especially as these brain-boxes were meant to be referencing ‘Arche’ in Ancient Greek.

I guess the temptation to have a M, even upside down as a W, was too strong.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> The _Atlantic_ had this article today. It started out rather pro-Meghan but it veered off of that path after awhile. It is long but I am copying in the relevant points.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Didn’t Do the Work*
> Part of Meghan’s problem was her naïveté about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture.
> ...
> The interview began with the two women sitting across from each other under a pergola, making a convincing appearance of not knowing each other very well, even though they have a history. Oprah befriended Meghan early on, and saw the ways that she and Harry were suffering. Long before Harry and Meghan left England, Oprah and Harry had begun working together on a docuseries about mental health. So Meghan felt very safe—and was very safe—talking with Oprah and, in her measured and calculated way, plunging the knife into her in-laws’ hearts.
> 
> The problems had begun about six months after the wedding; that was when things began to turn, when the tabloids decided to create a narrative. They had written that shortly before the wedding, Meghan had made Prince William’s wife, Kate, cry in a dustup over flower-girl dresses, but that wasn’t at all what had happened! Not at all! What had happened was that Kate had made _Meghan_ cry about the flower-girl dresses. But Kate had made things right. Kate had behaved the way Meghan would have behaved if she had been in the wrong—although she had in no way been in the wrong—by apologizing and sending flowers. The palace should have protected her; the palace should have made a correction. But it had done nothing. The palace was willing to lie to protect others in the family, but not “to tell the truth to protect” Meghan and Harry.
> 
> Meghan suggested during the two-hour interview that one of the chief acts of cruelty perpetrated against the couple had been the palace’s refusal to “protect” them from the lies of the press. It did not seem to occur to her that the palace has no ability to protect its members from the tabloids, and that a story as inconsequential as tears shed over a flower girl’s dress was best starved of oxygen, not inflamed by correction. Diana was killed because the palace couldn’t control the tabloid press, and Prince Andrew had to be taken out of rotation because the papers kept the story of his involvement with Jeffrey Epstein alive week after week.
> 
> With the calumny of the flower-girl dresses cleared up, it was time to roll a piece of previously recorded tape, featuring Meghan, Harry, and Oprah squeezed into the young couple’s chicken coop, which is populated with “rescue chickens.” (Meghan: “I just love rescuing.”) What was the best thing about their new life? Oprah asked from inside the coop.  The chance “to live authentically,” Meghan said, as though she and Harry were mucking out stables in Hertfordshire, not tending to rescue chickens on a $15 million estate. “It’s so basic,” she continued, “but it’s really fulfilling. Just getting back down to basics.”
> 
> Cut to the pergola. The couple’s case against the Crown was that the Royal Family had not protected them from the tabloids, had stopped paying Harry—had “cut me off,” he said, in the particular expression of shocked trust-funders the world over whenever Daddy decides: enough!—and had not provided any help when Meghan found herself so unhappy that she was having suicidal thoughts. The parents were also shocked by apparent concerns about how dark their future babies would be—a revolting development, but hardly a surprising one.
> 
> Part of Meghan’s problem, it turned out, was her naïveté about the workings of the Royal Family, which she had assumed would be similar to the workings of celebrity culture. What was she, Meghan Markle, a simple girl from Los Angeles, to have understood about such an institution as the British? How was she to know that Her Royal Highness Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith was in any way different from the Lady of Gaga? One wonders whether her study of foreign service and international relations, her internship at the American embassy in Argentina, and her work with the UN might have clued her in to the fact that a whole world exists beyond the Jamba Juice on La Brea and the set of _Deal or No Deal_, on which she had once been one of the beautiful “suitcase girls.” Apparently, they had not.
> 
> She told Oprah that she had never even Googled her future husband’s name—a remark that united the viewing world in hilarity, time zone by time zone. It was an assertion that strained credulity, but it was necessary to her contention that she’d had no idea that the Windsors had not, as we now say, “done the work” when it came to exploring their own racial biases. Had she herself done some work by punching her beloved’s name into a search engine, she would have understood that she was not marrying the most racially conscious person on the planet. She would have seen pictures of him dressed as a Nazi at a costume party (his great-granduncle—briefly Edward VIII—had palled around with Adolf Hitler) and a videotape of him introducing a fellow cadet as “our little Paki friend.” The Palace said that “Prince Harry used the term without any malice and as a nickname about a highly popular member of his platoon.” But the palace had no good explanation for why Harry introduced another cadet in the video by saying, “It’s Dan the Man. **** me, you look like a raghead.”
> 
> 
> B it was Markle’s piety regarding the British Commonwealth and her possible relationship to it that revealed the essential incoherence of her case against the monarchy. For some reason she seemed to think that representing the British monarchy to the countries it had colonized was valorous. This group of countries, she told Oprah, is “60, 70 percent ... people of color.” Absolutely true. But what force brought these nations together? And why is this institution, composed of 54 countries, headed by—of all people—the Queen of England?
> 
> The English relationship to the “commonwealth” is a natural (or unnatural) connection to the British empire. Overwhelmingly, these are the countries that were colonized, exploited, and subjected to ruinous campaigns of violence and ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the British in the name not merely of country, but of the specific family Meghan chose to join. And her desire had been to become a special emissary to this confederation of countries as a representative of the Crown, as a standard bearer of a foreign power historically responsible for many of the specific miseries that exist in these places to this very day. Britain’s eager participation in the notorious “Scramble for Africa” is directly responsible for the exploitation of natural resources in many parts of that continent. And that’s the team she wanted to represent? Meghan Markle: defender of the Queen’s “realms and territories.”
> 
> 
> The best thing the Royal Family could do for the former colonies would be to send money and stay away.
> 
> This matter had been left unaddressed by the time Harry arrived under the pergola—a bit flushed, obviously pained, and by no means as comfortable with the complicated new narrative as was his wife—and started answering questions. He revealed that he is estranged from his father, who at some point stopped taking his calls; that he loves his brother to bits, but that this relationship is also strained; that his adored grandmother had disinvited him and Meghan to lunch; and that when Netflix approached the couple with a deal, it was a stroke of luck, because “we hadn’t thought about it.” When they arrived in Los Angeles, cut off financially and stranded with only the funds left to Harry by his mother (and Meghan’s money from her television work), they had been forced to huddle like refugees in Tyler Perry’s mansion, allowing the superstar to pay for their security.
> 
> But more than any of this—more than Diana’s sad life and tragic death, more than Meghan’s disappointment at discovering that the Windsors aren’t devotees of critical race theory, more than the rescue chickens and the Spotify deal and even the Montecito mansion—the main takeaway from Oprah’s interview with Meghan and Harry was that it was spectacular television. Minute-for-minute excellent television. Oprah is one of the most famous people in the world; Meghan is an enormous celebrity. They both looked beautiful, and the setting was a garden of such exquisiteness that most of us will never lay eyes on its likeness outside of television or the movies. But what they were doing was talking about something most women have talked about with other women: in-law problems. They were on the grounds of an estate, but they could have been on the sidelines of a T-ball game or at a girls’ night out, or waiting for the subway. The father-in-law was a prick; the brother’s wife was a real pain and hadn’t done anything to reduce bridal anxieties before the wedding; the grandmother was a doll, but too easily exploited by the nursing-home staff. They were loaded, but they had cut off a favored son when he’d most needed the money. Meghan had, in fact, realized the highest aspiration of many married people: She had convinced her spouse that his entire family was a bunch of losers. (Harry, on life before meeting Meghan: “I was trapped, but I didn’t know I was trapped.”) She had plucked him out of its bosom and made herself and their child his only true family. She was—depending on your point of view—either a virago or an icon.
> 
> 
> Nothing is as galvanizing and unifying as an episode of appointment television in which a hugely famous female broadcaster delivers an exclusive interview with another hugely famous celebrity who is in the midst of what is essentially a personal drama.
> 
> I was reminded of Diane Sawyer’s 1995 interview with Lisa Marie Presley and Michael Jackson soon after the pair’s marriage, an event that had closely followed accusations that he was a child molester. Had she been worried about the charges? Asked him about the charges before marrying him?
> 
> “I’ve seen these children. They don’t let him go to the bathroom without running in there with him.”
> 
> And of Barbara Walters’s 1999 interviewwith Monica Lewinsky. Why had she flashed her thong at Bill *******?
> 
> “It was saying, ‘I’m interested, too. I’ll play.’”
> 
> And Emily Maitlis’s 2020 interview with Prince Andrew. Why had he stayed in Jeffrey Epstein’s mansion after Epstein had been implicated in a massive sex-trafficking scheme?
> 
> “My judgment was probably colored by my tendency to be too honorable.”
> 
> These were questions about marriage and crimes against women and sex between powerful men and impressionable young women. They were conversations among famous people, but they were also conversations among all of us: the world’s women. They took the most elemental and baleful female conditions—sex and marriage, motherhood, and the ever-present threat of sexual danger—and transformed them into glossy television events. They gave us the kinds of details in which women—even the most intellectual and high-minded women—take an enduring interest, and they gave us an instant way to talk about them with one another.
> 
> I had an unpleasant medical procedure a few days after the Oprah special, but I was so focused on my nurse’s opinion of the show (surprisingly anti-Meghan) that I hardly noticed the pain. I had forced my sons and husband to watch the interview with me, and when Oprah reminded Meghan that when you marry a person, you are also marrying that person’s family, I cried out, “That’s right!” The things women care about will always be with us, and the way women work through them is not to drop ordnance on Afghanistan. It’s to find one another, put on the kettle or open the wine, and talk.
> 
> At the end of the interview, Harry sat beside Meghan, still looking a bit stunned, a bit unsure what was happening to him in this new life. Looking, in fact, a bit like a rescue chicken. Oprah asked him if Meghan had “saved him.”
> 
> “Yeah, she did,” he said. “Without question, she saved me.”
> 
> Meghan reached out her hand and touched his arm, stopping him from going on.
> 
> “I would … I would …” she said, trying to locate the right note, trying perhaps to avoid the impression that her husband was one more chicken in her coop. _She_hadn’t done the rescuing, she said—Harry had. It was Harry who had “certainly saved my life and saved all of us.”
> 
> And Harry sat there beside her, 7,000 miles from home, in the land of rich Californians and Meyer lemons and eucalyptus trees trailing Spanish moss. He had plighted his troth to this unexpected and very beautiful woman; he had hurt his grandmother, and alienated his father and his only brother. He had thought that having Bishop Michael Bruce Curry deliver the homily at his wedding would reverse a thousand years of English racial attitudes, but he had been wrong about that.* He was a combat veteran, a prince, the grandson, great-grandson, and great-great-grandson of English monarchs, and now he was going to have to think up some podcasts.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


It’s very funny.  I love Harry as a rescue chicken.  Of course it doesn’t have the space to really thrash out the commonwealth stuff and I find it a bit of a rough reading but I think her opinion on it is pretty valid.
It’s a great narrative of a rise & fall isn’t it? H&M were given a golden opportunity to become royal darlings, then the golden opportunity to make a noble statement of the value of equality over inherited privilege & they absolutely bottled both!


----------



## CarryOn2020

If we had not had a pandemic, would they have been a success? I think not.
May, 2018 - married
October, 2018 - Tour #1 (Australia) & pregnant
May, 2019 - baby born
September, 2019 - Tour #2 (South Africa)
January, 2020 - exit


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.


Eh? I had not heard that. I’ve only heard the incoming editor resigned due to her past tweets. 


Lodpah said:


> I believe she's wearing one of those moon things. Look at the white shirt, plus she has an undercover on but the color of her moon bump is showing. On the first picture you see where the lining of the moon bump curls up and pushed up. Also note how she's sitting. I've been pregnant six times (lost 2 pregnancies) and no way in heck can anyone sit like that (but then maybe some) but clearly you see the outline on the first picture.


I’m sorry for your losses but congratulations on your lovely children.

MM said she was due in late summer so I think I am roughly the same stage of pregnancy as she is.

I don’t really buy the moon bump story BUT I have to say I don’t have as big a belly as she does in pic two and that I wouldn’t be able to squat for a minute on camera right now.

But then I don’t know whether that’s just because I’ve gained the COVID pounds and I don’t have a live-in personal trainer like she probably does haha.

NB I would also like to add that as I am pregnant like MM you all have to be VERY NICE to ME at all times or else. Regardless of whether I am constantly saying controversial things about all of you & generally stirring the pot.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bunny boiler — haaaa!
> 
> When I first saw MM in those outfits, I did not make the Diana connection.  The connection was not immediately apparent, so why do it [other than the psycho-thing]. Sure, Kate did wear similar colors as Diana (the polka-dot hospital dress, etc.) which were usually immediately noticeable. Still it never really felt staged or fake, mostly because Kate dressed like that prior to marriage. MM’s style changed after the marriage - and not in a good way. Now, it just looks tired - green jacket, black pants, black dress.  Oh wait, maybe that is her point. She is exhausted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's Every Time Kate Middleton Gave Us Major Princess Diana Style Vibes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge often pays subtle sartorial tribute to her late mother-in-law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I think a lot of these are pretty big stretches for both KM & MM but then again we can’t forget that there’s a lot of personal branding going on with the royal family.


papertiger said:


> I read Vogue Italia, French Vogue and British Vogue from before I could actually read words (all those pretty pictures). Even before the Net, there was never been a point to _Teen_ Vogue,
> 
> Meanwhile 'grown-up' British Vogue has descended into reading and looking like Teen Vogue so I'm sure MM will always be very welcome.


This is OT. I have loved Vogue for a long time too. I feel like British Vogue has struggled to have a clear identity for the last decade at least. The thing that really grinds my gears is how bad the photography has got. Out of focus faces. Fewer styled shoots. Obvious photoshopping. Don’t they realise it’s a visual magazine and a lot of people buy it because they want physical images?

Conversely I think I see what the USP of teen vogue is - the more clickbait/social media where vogue US is a bit more traditional

Back to MM, I’d actually encourage her to try for a column at teen vogue, hopefully she’ll be able to spout her opinions in a safely contained environment rather than them being spread everywhere on the news. And the editor can hack out what might get them sued.

edit- wanted to clarify my opinions a little. I should get back to work


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> I think a lot of these are pretty big stretches for both KM & MM but then again we can’t forget that there’s a lot of personal branding going on with the royal family.
> 
> This is OT. I have loved Vogue for a long time too. I feel like British Vogue has struggled to have a clear identity for the last decade at least. The thing that really grinds my gears is how bad the photography has got. Out of focus faces. Fewer styled shoots. Obvious photoshopping. Don’t they realise it’s a visual magazine and a lot of people buy it because they want physical images?
> 
> Conversely I think I see what the USP of teen vogue is - the more clickbait wing where vogue US is a bit more traditional.
> 
> Back to MM, I’d actually encourage her to try for a column at teen vogue, hopefully she’ll be able to spout her opinions but the editors can hack out whatever may get them sued .


I think Vogue and Teem Vogue were too busy jumping on the next bandwagon they forgot they were a FASHION magazine!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> I believe she's wearing one of those moon things. Look at the white shirt, plus she has an undercover on but the color of her moon bump is showing. On the first picture you see where the lining of the moon bump curls up and pushed up. Also note how she's sitting. I've been pregnant six times (lost 2 pregnancies) and no way in heck can anyone sit like that (but then maybe some) but clearly you see the outline on the first picture.



Are you sure she didn't just start a high waisted pregnancy jeans/pants trend?   She's a trendsetter and we're all just unsuspecting sheeps or rescue chickens!

Happy National Poultry Day


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> I read Vogue Italia, French Vogue and British Vogue from before I could actually read words (all those pretty pictures). Even before the Net, there was never been a point to _Teen_ Vogue,
> 
> Meanwhile 'grown-up' British Vogue has descended into reading and looking like Teen Vogue so I'm sure MM will always be very welcome.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? So why that huge kerfuffle about their new editor-in-chief resigning before she even started because she tweeted out racists tweets 10 years ago at age 17? (and I will say, I looked them up, they are stupid sh*t a teenager would say and I feel if one had wanted to one would have taken her apology from years ago and run with that instead)





jelliedfeels said:


> Conversely I think I see what the USP of teen vogue is - the more clickbait/social media/pwing where vogue US is a bit more traditional.





chicinthecity777 said:


> I think Vogue and Teem Vogue were too busy jumping on the next bandwagon they forgot they were a FASHION magazine!



I realize this is such a silly small OT item but this is part of why I stopped reading and posting here and am really annoyed at myself that I tried again. Someone posts something as true, which in this case is most definitely not, and everyone repeats and runs with it as if it’s fact. I believe the poster may have me on her ignore list so she can’t see that she was confused and mistaken about current events. Teen Vogue is not closing. Again not really consequential to this thread but a great example of why citing sources is really helpful. If facts and truth are important. Which I realize is not all that much fun on any gossip thread


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think Vogue and Teem Vogue were too busy jumping on the next bandwagon they forgot they were a FASHION magazine!


It’s all very Andi in devil wears Prada isn’t it? The vogue writers think fashion is silly and beneath them & wish they were politicos instead. But rather than learning something new they’re trying to change what vogue is.

Now I think about it, that’s very how H&M seem to think about the royal hierarchy and decorum.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize this is such a silly small OT item but this is part of why I stopped reading and posting here and am really annoyed at myself that I tried again. Someone posts something as true, which in this case is most definitely not, and everyone repeats and runs with it as if it’s fact. I believe the poster may have me on her ignore list so she can’t see that she was confused and mistaken about current events. Teen Vogue is not closing. Again not really consequential to this thread but a great example of why citing sources is really helpful. If facts and truth are important. Which I realize is not all that much fun on any gossip thread


We know none of them are closing. A couple of people have mentioned it by now.
We’re just talking about our opinions on the vogue franchise in general which fair enough is OT. Sorry if this has upset you but I don’t really get why. 

Edit missed the on.


----------



## Jktgal

Did someone post already? It was on Piers Morgan insta


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

jelliedfeels said:


> We know none of them are closing. A couple of people have mentioned it by now.
> We’re just talking about our opinions on the vogue franchise in general which fair enough is OT. Sorry if this has upset you but I don’t really get why.
> 
> Edit missed the on.



Yes so sorry I quoted you by accident and actually tried to go back and edit but am on my iPad so it’s challenging! I understand you were just expressing your opinion. I was referring to the original post and then continued repetition of the unfounded rumor which just seemed to be a case of confusion. Have at it for Vogue, Teen Vogue etc! As to why this upsets me...I think you are from the UK so perhaps may not understand the extent to which the US has been impacted by the alternative facts culture. It has caused great pain here and with COVID has literally become a life and death issue. Again not fun or even appropriate for a gossip thread so I will stop posting (x2 lol)! Apologies again for quoting you I’m still not sure how that happened!


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Yes so sorry I quoted you by accident and actually tried to go back and edit but am on my iPad so it’s challenging! I understand you were just expressing your opinion. I was referring to the original post and then continued repetition of the unfounded rumor which just seemed to be a case of confusion. Have at it for Vogue, Teen Vogue etc! As to why this upsets me...I think you are from the UK so perhaps may not understand the extent to which the US has been impacted by the alternative facts culture. It has caused great pain here and with COVID has literally become a life and death issue. Again not fun or even appropriate for a gossip thread so I will stop posting (x2 lol)! Apologies again for quoting you I’m still not sure how that happened!


I’m sorry for jumping in. I’m always reposting and half posting things myself.
It is a very dark time for the news. While I think we are a bit better off in the UK, it is important to always be vigilant on sources. 
Hope you stay if you find the thread fun.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> look what is playing out in that famous hard news magazine Harpers Bazaar
> Data was collected in 2016, long before most of us tightened up our privacy on the Internet, we were all sitting ducks then
> 
> PS latest research shows Instagram and Facebook to be the worst apps when it comes to sharing your data
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Respond to The Sun Private Investigator
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Condemn “Predatory Practices” After Tabloid Pays for “Illegal” Private Data
> 
> 
> The Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper hired a private investigator to “spy” on Meghan and her family, illegally obtaining social security details and cellphone numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I guess part of my point is that M&H were not targeted in 2016, we all were/are 

Ex one reason I hate sharing photos, is that I take the time to strip the metadata, you dont need to know that I am posting from the lavatory in the Metropolitan Museum LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Yes so sorry I quoted you by accident and actually tried to go back and edit but am on my iPad so it’s challenging! I understand you were just expressing your opinion. I was referring to the original post and then continued repetition of the unfounded rumor which just seemed to be a case of confusion. Have at it for Vogue, Teen Vogue etc! As to why this upsets me...I think you are from the UK so perhaps may not understand the extent to which the US has been impacted by the alternative facts culture. It has caused great pain here and with COVID has literally become a life and death issue. Again not fun or even appropriate for a gossip thread so I will stop posting (x2 lol)! Apologies again for quoting you I’m still not sure how that happened!


quote by accident, I do it too, there is something about editor here, quote something, take a bit to think what to say, and the quote is recorded in your draft post, if you change your mind, it is tedious to delete from say, an ipad


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Yes so sorry I quoted you by accident and actually tried to go back and edit but am on my iPad so it’s challenging! I understand you were just expressing your opinion. I was referring to the original post and then continued repetition of the unfounded rumor which just seemed to be a case of confusion. Have at it for Vogue, Teen Vogue etc! As to why this upsets me...I think you are from the UK so perhaps may not understand the extent to which the US has been impacted by the alternative facts culture. It has caused great pain here and with COVID has literally become a life and death issue. Again not fun or even appropriate for a gossip thread so I will stop posting (x2 lol)! Apologies again for quoting you I’m still not sure how that happened!



I'm not sure what the issue is. We regularly discuss publications, media slants in the coverage of H&M. 

Print Teen Vogue ceased 2017 

MM was written about in Teen Vogue online 10 March '21.  

'Grown-up' British Vogue is also not OT as MM has been a guest co-editor Sept '19.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we had not had a pandemic, would they have been a success? I think not.
> May, 2018 - married
> October, 2018 - Tour #1 (Australia) & pregnant
> May, 2019 - baby born
> September, 2019 - Tour #2 (South Africa)
> January, 2020 - exit


Agree, it is coming out drip by drip that M never felt at home in the UK, the exit was posited from day 1.


----------



## chicinthecity777

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize this is such a silly small OT item but this is part of why I stopped reading and posting here and am really annoyed at myself that I tried again. Someone posts something as true, which in this case is most definitely not, and everyone repeats and runs with it as if it’s fact. I believe the poster may have me on her ignore list so she can’t see that she was confused and mistaken about current events. Teen Vogue is not closing. Again not really consequential to this thread but a great example of why citing sources is really helpful. If facts and truth are important. Which I realize is not all that much fun on any gossip thread


My post was not related to the Teen Vogue closing. It was just a general comment. I do not care about it closing or not.


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> We know none of them are closing. A couple of people have mentioned it by now.
> *We’re just talking about our opinions on the vogue franchise in general which fair enough is OT*. Sorry if this has upset you but I don’t really get why.
> 
> Edit missed the on.


This!


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? So why that huge kerfuffle about their new editor-in-chief resigning before she even started because she tweeted out racists tweets 10 years ago at age 17? (and I will say, I looked them up, they are stupid sh*t a teenager would say and I feel if one had wanted to one would have taken her apology from years ago and run with that instead)



From WSJ: 

Ms. McCammond is the latest person passing through the revolving leadership door at Teen Vogue—albeit she moved more briskly than the rest. Back in 2017, the magazine announced the end of its print edition. Should she be the only person to apologize in this drama?

OK. So it ceased printing in 2017 and it's the short-lived E-in-C that got cut. 

Oh the irony of so much *drama *with *Teen *Vogue! I'd never heard of it or the resignation of a new e-in-c due to tweets.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> look what is playing out in that famous hard news magazine Harpers Bazaar
> Data was collected in 2016, long before most of us tightened up our privacy on the Internet, we were all sitting ducks then
> 
> PS latest research shows Instagram and Facebook to be the worst apps when it comes to sharing your data
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Respond to The Sun Private Investigator
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Condemn “Predatory Practices” After Tabloid Pays for “Illegal” Private Data
> 
> 
> The Rupert Murdoch-owned newspaper hired a private investigator to “spy” on Meghan and her family, illegally obtaining social security details and cellphone numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


who cares?


			https://i.gifer.com/K81j.gif


----------



## xeyes

bag-mania said:


> The _Atlantic_ had this article today. It started out rather pro-Meghan but it veered off of that path after awhile. It is long but I am copying in the relevant points.
> 
> The English relationship to the “commonwealth” is a natural (or unnatural) connection to the British empire. Overwhelmingly, these are the countries that were colonized, exploited, and subjected to ruinous campaigns of violence and ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the British in the name not merely of country, but of the specific family Meghan chose to join. And her desire had been to become a special emissary to this confederation of countries as a representative of the Crown, as a standard bearer of a foreign power historically responsible for many of the specific miseries that exist in these places to this very day. Britain’s eager participation in the notorious “Scramble for Africa” is directly responsible for the exploitation of natural resources in many parts of that continent. And that’s the team she wanted to represent? Meghan Markle: defender of the Queen’s “realms and territories.”
> 
> The best thing the Royal Family could do for the former colonies would be to send money and stay away.



Well, THERE’s the problem in a nutshell. Meghan doesn’t want to represent the Commonwealth - she wants to _be in_ the Commonwealth. Just send money and stay away, right?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Sorry I was literally just trying to correct this post but I think since I’m on an ignore list (and my iPad) something went terribly terribly wrong  



> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.




No drama, I don’t care about Teen Vogue, or any Vogue, and again apologies to any posters who were inadvertently included, no offense intended I promise!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *JAN MOIR: I've admired US media queens Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King for years, but NOT now they've cloaked themselves as superhero apologists for Meghan and Harry*
> Are we all watching The Oprah and Gayle Show? Pass me the popcorn, I don't want to miss a minute.
> 
> Not only are Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King close friends, they are two of the most powerful media figures in the U.S.
> 
> Oprah is a billionaire business and entertainment mogul, while Gayle is an award-winning journalist and host of the CBS This Morning Show.
> 
> I have admired them both for years. Until now.
> 
> For the two women have assigned themselves strange new roles, far beyond their remit as supposedly objective journalists.
> 
> *Without so much as a curtsey or even a fleeting grasp of British history, the pair have cloaked themselves as superhero cheerleaders, apologists, spokespeople, champions and chief supporters of and for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.*
> 
> How did we get here, to this treacly plateau of puff after every little Harry and Meghan huff?
> 
> First with Oprah's CBS TV special, in which the chat-show veteran allowed the Sussexes to unfurl their moany banner of 'truth' without correction or intervention, even when being pelted by inconsistencies and inaccuracies.
> 
> Now TV host Gayle has picked up the baton to propound the Sussexian view of events; a version which always puts H&M as the innocents at the mercy of cruel forces trying to deprive them of their titles, money and prestige.
> 
> This week, Gayle seems to have become their unofficial mouthpiece, revealing on her show that talks between Prince Harry and his father and brother had been 'unproductive'.
> 
> Also that Prince Harry had a deal with CBS to pull the interview should his grandfather Prince Philip die during the Sussex publicity campaign.
> 
> Can that possibly be true? Sorry, kids. Oprah and Gayle don't have time to check that kind of detail. Let's move on.
> 
> So unflinching is their devotion to Harry and Meghan, one has to wonder how deeply both women are involved in the lives of the Sussexes.
> 
> *From early meetings at Kensington Palace to wedding and baby shower invitations, Oprah and Gayle have been at every unfolding chapter of the Megxit story.*
> 
> Oprah even seemed to facilitate the Sussexes' temporary move to her friend Tyler Perry's house in Los Angeles.* And the couple, plus baby Archie, stayed with her at one point — *and now they are neighbours in Montecito. Cosy!
> 
> *Perhaps Oprah — and Gayle — are so protective because it is they who are the geese who laid the royal golden eggs, and they'll protect their investment at all costs, even if that cost is the truth.
> 
> For example, the doctored montage of newspaper headlines shown during the Oprah interview were meant to suggest the British Press (hurrah!) were racist and anti-Meghan. *
> 
> Yet many of these headlines were edited or taken out of context, while others were from non-British titles. Yet CBS (boo!) will not remove them, for reasons that are unclear. Or are they?
> 
> This week, Miss King took the tiny opportunity to sneer at anti-Meghanist Piers Morgan. She claimed he was 'sacked' from his Good Morning Britain show after 57,000 complaints to Ofcom.
> 
> This followed Morgan saying he did not believe anything the Duchess of Sussex said, particularly not her assertions that in 2019 she thought about killing herself (and therefore her unborn baby, too).
> 
> Who can know of the sorrow that engulfs the troubled mind?
> 
> Yet surely one can sympathise with the Duchess's predicament while still understanding that it is important to note and report that Morgan, in fact, resigned from GMB — and more than 200,000 people have signed a petition begging him to stay.
> 
> Yet all this was ignored by Miss King; dismissed as inconvenient truths which do not tally with the cherished Sussex- centric narrative.
> 
> Meanwhile, it does not take a huge stretch of the imagination to understand how Oprah and Meghan came to bond in such a powerful way.
> 
> *Oprah is blessed with great personal warmth, but is also tough and controlling, with a notorious reputation for cutting off those who cross her or displease her. Sounds familiar?
> 
> She also believes it is important for people to tell their own story, which is ironic, given that she is know to have made her own employees sign draconian Non-Disclosure Agreements, preventing them from ever talking about working with her.
> 
> Were they silent — or silenced? Both, actually. And how.*
> 
> Over the decades, Oprah became famous for the choreographed voyeurism of her talk shows. It was only later that she moved into celebrity interviews, and her 1993 sit down with Michael Jackson was a classic.
> 'I've had very little plastic surgery,' he told her, and insisted he was a normal guy who loved his girlfriend, Brooke Shields. Oprah sympathised with his complaints about 'cruel' tabloid speculation — much of which later turned out to be true.
> 
> In the end, *I find it really disappointing that Oprah and Gayle, these two trailblazing, amazing women seem so ready to trash a royal family and an entire nation on the say-so of two aggrieved and entitled people who happen to be their pals.*
> 
> Especially as I once met Oprah — and interviewed her myself. I remember her warmth, her commanding presence, her boyfriend, Stedman, hovering in the background like a butler.
> 
> Also her admission that she stockpiled her favourite shampoos, knickers and fluffy bath towels, presumably because she grew up in poverty and had nothing nice of her own.
> 
> But most of all I remember her belief that people found appearing on her chat shows very cathartic, because it was sometimes easier to say something in public than it was face to face.
> 
> 'And once you have said your piece to 20 million people, there is no going back,' she added.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> We don't have anything or anyone in the UK quite like Oprah or Gayle. Oprah, in particular, is one of the most powerful cultural figures in America. Her influence and reach are phenomenal. She is an American icon, the pope of popular culture.
> 
> If you receive her blessing, then you have got it made. And right now Meghan and Harry are visibly reborn, as they luxuriate in the warmth of her benevolence and power.
> 
> But for how long can this love-in continue? It won't last for ever — and what then?
> 
> Mouthpieces for MM


I hope Oprah and Gayle read this....If I had a twitter account, I'd post there.  but I don't and I'm not gonna start just to say something to Oprah or Gayle which they probably wouldn't read.


----------



## Sharont2305

Papers today printing pictures like this and noting it's possible significance. For those that didn't know, William and Catherine visited an Ambulance Station yesterday.


----------



## rose60610

About 30? pages ago on this thread, someone mentioned that August is the only month in the U.S. without a (major) holiday. Then someone pointed out things like "National Semi-Colon Day" or such. I didn't realize that August 4th is Meghan's birthday. If she becomes President   it could become a federal holiday. We could celebrate it by wearing ill-fitting clothes and feeling sorry for ourselves while drinking $130 bottles of Tignanello.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we had not had a pandemic, would they have been a success? I think not.
> May, 2018 - married
> October, 2018 - Tour #1 (Australia) & pregnant
> May, 2019 - baby born
> September, 2019 - Tour #2 (South Africa)
> January, 2020 - exit



I will make the case that they still aren't a success. Are they famous? Definitely. Do they have popularity? Yes, but with the caveat that it comes from misguided feelings of unfairness and sympathy from people who want to believe these two are better people than they are.

Can anyone think of another famous figure who enjoyed sustained fame and popularity due to pity? None comes to my mind. That's why they won't have what it takes to keep the momentum going.


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


> Papers today printing pictures like this and noting it's possible significance. For those that didn't know, William and Catherine visited an Ambulance Station yesterday.
> 
> View attachment 5027964



That's a classy royal appearance.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> MM said she was due in late summer so I think I am roughly the same stage of pregnancy as she is.
> 
> I don’t really buy the moon bump story BUT I have to say I don’t have as big a belly as she does in pic two and that I wouldn’t be able to squat for a minute on camera right now.



Congratulations, you must be very happy.

I don't know what to think about the moon bump, there isn't much evidence on the subject. 

Though, if she was being truthful on the due date in late summer, the size of the bump is intriguing. The interview was recorded in February, does this mean that she was only about 4 months pregnant at the time of the interview?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry seen for the first time since explosive Oprah interview
					

The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million LA mansion and hit the road on  an expensive electric bike followed by a security team in a car.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Though,* if she* *was being truthful* on the due date in late summer, the size of the bump is intriguing. The interview was recorded in February, does this mean that she was only about 4 months pregnant at the time of the interview?



Since everything out of this woman’s mouth is a lie, I’m gonna go with, nah. Or maybe we should just call it “her truth”.
To me, ‘late summer’ is mid to late August (IMO), so that would have made her ~2mo pregnant at the time of the interview. So she’s either wearing the wrong size moonbump or she lying - again. 
I’m sure come hell or high water she’ll be delivering baby Diana on July 1st, 2021 on what would have been her dead MIL’s 60th birthday. It’ll be like a miracle and such a !surprise!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry seen for the first time since explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million LA mansion and hit the road on  an expensive electric bike followed by a security team in a car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ah, the life of a Hollywood royal. Thank goodness he has a security team to follow him while he exercises on an electric bike.

The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million mansion and hit the road on an expensive electric bike *followed by a security team in a 4x4* as he pedalled through Montecito, California.

Harry, wearing New Balance trainers, a hooded top, £62 Adidas sweatpants, The Mission Continues veterans' association cap, sunglasses and mask, looked serious while racing through LA traffic as the Oprah interview continues to make headlines around the globe.


----------



## TimeToShop

Chanbal said:


> Congratulations, you must be very happy.
> 
> I don't know what to think about the moon bump, there isn't much evidence on the subject.
> 
> Though, if she was being truthful on the due date in late summer, the size of the bump is intriguing. The interview was recorded in February, does this mean that she was only about 4 months pregnant at the time of the interview?



I still think she’s going to do what she can to have that baby on July 1, Diana’s birthday. Although that would throw a wrench in H’s plan to go back for the statue unveiling. But it would be her way of controlling him so he couldn’t go back.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Ah, the life of a Hollywood royal. Thank goodness he has a security team to follow him while he exercises on an electric bike.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million mansion and hit the road on an expensive electric bike *followed by a security team in a 4x4* as he pedalled through Montecito, California.
> 
> Harry, wearing New Balance trainers, a hooded top, £62 Adidas sweatpants, The Mission Continues veterans' association cap, sunglasses and mask, looked serious while racing through LA traffic as the Oprah interview continues to make headlines around the globe.


Wow, that outfit was merched with the lightning quickness! I guess that’s why Meghan had to stay home - to upload the details of his kit  
Thank goodness he was able to ride his bike in solitude and unrecognized, I’m sure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here (from the comment section of Harry's outing):



> William vs. Harry: What a difference marrying the right woman makes...as opposed to marrying a succubus intent on destroying you and everything you ever loved.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Wow, that outfit was merched with the lightning quickness! I guess that’s why Meghan had to stay home - to upload the details of his kit
> Thank goodness he was able to ride his bike in solitude and unrecognized, I’m sure.



Harry, from prince to fashion pimp. In the meantime Sharon Osbourne is getting death threats from loons for daring to criticize them.









						Sharon Osbourne Getting Death Threats Since 'Talk' Racism Dispute, Hires Security
					

Sharon Osbourne's hired private security due to death threats she's received over "The Talk" dispute.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## csshopper

V0N1B2 said:


> Wow, that outfit was merched with the lightning quickness! I guess that’s why Meghan had to stay home - to upload the details of his kit
> Thank goodness he was able to ride his bike in solitude and unrecognized, I’m sure.



???? Checks in the mail from Adidas? Stay tuned for bike brand and maybe even make and model of the security vehicle.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry seen for the first time since explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million LA mansion and hit the road on  an expensive electric bike followed by a security team in a car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I see his mask game is as botched as the rest of his life.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> ???? Checks in the mail from Adidas? Stay tuned for bike brand and maybe even make and model of the security vehicle.


Mask not covering nose so why even wear it? 

I don't know the Cali rules but people where I live (Chicago-land) don't wear masks while bicycling but maybe different rules. And my neighbor retro-fitted his plain old bicycle with an electric motor over the winter, didn't cost all that much. It runs out of juice though so he has to pedal home when he rides it.


----------



## rose60610

A healthy 36 year old on an electric bike? (cough cough) The only adjective for the bike was "expensive". I guess the brand wasn't willing to shell out. If Harry pedaled a Trek bike maybe Trek would pay? But then he'd have to pedal and exert himself, OMG. But he's here in America, where he and Meghan get over 150 million in deals and buy a mansion, while he feeds rescue chickens and rides electric bikes. And still want us to feel sorry for them.


----------



## Chagall

The entire situation with Gayle and Oprah is nauseating IMO. I wonder how zealous their support would be for MM if she were not half black. What if she had been a WASP (sorry to offend but am so very weary of political correctness) with a disability of some kind or some reason to have a hard time with the press. If they had decided to blow jolly old England would G and O give them the same foaming at the mouth pushy support? I doubt it. Being WOC they have a vested interest here, and are pushing their own agenda.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bunny boiler — haaaa!
> 
> When I first saw MM in those outfits, I did not make the Diana connection.  The connection was not immediately apparent, so why do it [other than the psycho-thing]. Sure, Kate did wear similar colors as Diana (the polka-dot hospital dress, etc.) which were usually immediately noticeable. Still it never really felt staged or fake, mostly because Kate dressed like that prior to marriage. MM’s style changed after the marriage - and not in a good way. Now, it just looks tired - green jacket, black pants, black dress.  Oh wait, maybe that is her point. She is exhausted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's Every Time Kate Middleton Gave Us Major Princess Diana Style Vibes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge often pays subtle sartorial tribute to her late mother-in-law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com





CarryOn2020 said:


> Bunny boiler — haaaa!
> 
> When I first saw MM in those outfits, I did not make the Diana connection.  The connection was not immediately apparent, so why do it [other than the psycho-thing]. Sure, Kate did wear similar colors as Diana (the polka-dot hospital dress, etc.) which were usually immediately noticeable. Still it never really felt staged or fake, mostly because Kate dressed like that prior to marriage. MM’s style changed after the marriage - and not in a good way. Now, it just looks tired - green jacket, black pants, black dress.  Oh wait, maybe that is her point. She is exhausted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's Every Time Kate Middleton Gave Us Major Princess Diana Style Vibes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge often pays subtle sartorial tribute to her late mother-in-law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


In the Harpers Bazaar article the only similarity I see in almost all the outfits is they are the same colour, not the same shade but just colour. In some it was just one aspect, a touch of lace, both coats, one shouldered, floral etc. While in Mrs Harkles case it is well seen they are copied to achieve the same look.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Ah, the life of a Hollywood royal. Thank goodness he has a security team to follow him while he exercises on an electric bike.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million mansion and hit the road on an expensive electric bike *followed by a security team in a 4x4* as he pedalled through Montecito, California.
> 
> Harry, wearing New Balance trainers, a hooded top, £62 Adidas sweatpants, The Mission Continues veterans' association cap, sunglasses and mask, looked serious while racing through LA traffic as the Oprah interview continues to make headlines around the globe.


Gosh it’s all so embarrassing


----------



## marietouchet

Guess there is not much reason for the American contingent of the BRF to go to Europe this year 

Trooping the Colour will not go ahead as normal this year | Tatler










						A downsized Trooping the Colour has taken place at Windsor Castle
					

For the second year running, the Queen’s official birthday parade was not held in central London




					www.tatler.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Gosh it’s all so embarrassing



You know I don't think he is intelligent enough to be embarrassed. If he was smart there would have been warning sirens going off in his head long ago. Instead he is a born-follower who needs someone else to guide him. 

My sister actually likes them despite (or perhaps because of) my strong feelings on the matter.  But even she said after the Oprah interview, "I hope he still thinks she's worth it in 20 years." I will be surprised if he still thinks she was worth it in five years.


----------



## Sharont2305

Are elective cesareans allowed in the States if there's no complications? As in, can a pregnant woman decide on the date herself as long as its over a certain amount of weeks gestation? Hope that makes sense?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Congratulations, you must be very happy.
> 
> I don't know what to think about the moon bump, there isn't much evidence on the subject.
> 
> Though, if she was being truthful on the due date in late summer, the size of the bump is intriguing. The interview was recorded in February, does this mean that she was only about 4 months pregnant at the time of the interview?


Thank you! Yes we are delighted.

 I took it to mean late august myself - by February she’d be about at 13week scan - I guess if she’s due in July she’d be about 4months.
I do see people saying they want a July birth for maximum drama -who knows- they do love drama. 
It does vary and if she’s petite she’d show earlier but it is still quite big. 
Conspiracy hat on- she’s making her bump look bigger because she doesn’t want people thinking she just got fatter


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Are elective cesareans allowed in the States if there's no complications? As in, can a pregnant woman decide on the date herself as long as its over a certain amount of weeks gestation? Hope that makes sense?



I believe it is allowed within reason. If you are wondering whether they will schedule the baby to be "born" on Diana's birthday, I'm way ahead of you. If the baby is due anywhere close and it is safe, I would expect them to do just that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry seen for the first time since explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million LA mansion and hit the road on  an expensive electric bike followed by a security team in a car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This house changes in price every article 
I know it’s a hard time for the housing market but still... 
He’s taken the security detail just in case some latter-day Dick Turpin appears and asks him for the money from his ‘public’ wedding back.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I believe it is allowed within reason. If you are wondering whether they will schedule the baby to be "born" on Diana's birthday, I'm way ahead of you. If the baby is due anywhere close and it is safe, I would expect them to do just that.


This is exactly why I asked, lol.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry seen for the first time since explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million LA mansion and hit the road on  an expensive electric bike followed by a security team in a car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sooo funny. One of the comments was: why is Harry wearing a mask just over his mouth (and not his nose too).  Is it to prevent him from saying something stupid?


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: H’s bike ride
On a sunny day, does he really need a sweater/jacket? Or is he wearing Kevlar underneath? 
Is the security car slowing down traffic in order to follow him? If so, that is some huge self-importance.


----------



## bellecate

Aimee3 said:


> Sooo funny. One of the comments was: why is Harry wearing a mask just over his mouth (and not his nose too).  Is it to prevent him from saying something stupid?


Stupid or more importantly unauthorized by the Mrs.


----------



## lulu212121

V0N1B2 said:


> Since everything out of this woman’s mouth is a lie, I’m gonna go with, nah. Or maybe we should just call it “her truth”.
> To me, ‘late summer’ is mid to late August (IMO), so that would have made her ~2mo pregnant at the time of the interview. So she’s either wearing the wrong size moonbump or she lying - again.
> I’m sure come hell or high water she’ll be delivering baby Diana on July 1st, 2021 on what would have been her dead MIL’s 60th birthday. It’ll be like a miracle and such a !surprise!


I think so, too. Now has been Harry has a reason to not go to the unveiling of his mother's statue.


----------



## Lodpah

lulu212121 said:


> I think so, too. Now has been Harry has a reason to not go to the unveiling of his mother's statue.


Kinda creepy to plan your baby’s birth around someone who died a tragic birth. Creepy.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> Hmmmm . . . I'm not sure of your point. I was highlighting the "moon bump." Posting those pics have absolutely nothing to do with pregnancy depression. I wonder how those alleged abused and victimized women feel right now tho, the ones she allegedly abused.
> 
> And hell yeah, being pregnant can be fun times, hellish times, emotions out of whack, you name it. One day you love chicken, the next nine months you can't stand chicken, one day you crave 7-11 hot dogs with chili for every meal, then the drop happens, you hate it.
> 
> I know all about being pregnant lol.



My point was that even though we joke around about her 'moon bump' and faux pregnancy, there are many women who apparently believe she was/is truly pregnant and sympathize with her.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Sharont2305 said:


> Are elective cesareans allowed in the States if there's no complications? As in, can a pregnant woman decide on the date herself as long as its over a certain amount of weeks gestation? Hope that makes sense?



Yes, its allowed if a woman has previously delivered by cesarean, is a high risk pregnancy, or a victim of sexual trauma who doesn't want to go the vaginal route.


----------



## TC1

Aimee3 said:


> Sooo funny. One of the comments was: why is Harry wearing a mask just over his mouth (and not his nose too).  Is it to prevent him from saying something stupid?


Can't be recognized by the paps you called with a mask covering your WHOLE face


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: H’s bike ride
> On a sunny day, does he really need a sweater/jacket? Or is he wearing Kevlar underneath?
> Is the security car slowing down traffic in order to follow him? If so, that is some huge self-importance.


Why is he on a bike in open traffic to begin with? If "exercise" was the objective he has 7 acres of property behind walls and fences on which to hike.....oh, but wait.... the paps would not see it, and we would miss the opportunity to acknowledge how important he is to merit security, which of course, he is paying for. Poor lad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> We should console Meghan as she must be in mourning over the announcement that Teen Vogue will no longer be published. Conde Nast announced the fatal decision today  . And can someone remind Meghan that she's nearly 40 and not THAT relatable to teen-agers?  On another note, teen-agers are often 13 going on 25, so it's no wonder Teen Vogue folded.


She may be nearly 40, but she acts like an immature, vapid, insecure, destructive, jealous, zit-faced teenager, always complaining, "Poor me, I need so much (money, PS, money, PS, money); Mommy and Daddy just don't understand me! I just want it all or I'll kill myself."


----------



## Sharont2305

kkfiregirl said:


> Yes, its allowed if a woman has previously delivered by cesarean, is a high risk pregnancy, or a victim of sexual trauma who doesn't want to go the vaginal route.


Its like that here in the UK, what I meant was can you choose a date because you want that baby on that particular date?


----------



## queennadine

He looks like such a tool riding that bike with a mask on.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chagall said:


> The entire situation with Gayle and Oprah is nauseating IMO. I wonder how zealous their support would be for MM if she were not half black. What if she had been a WASP (sorry to offend but am so very weary of political correctness) with a disability of some kind or some reason to have a hard time with the press. If they had decided to blow jolly old England would G and O give them the same foaming at the mouth pushy support? I doubt it. Being WOC they have a vested interest here, and are pushing their own agenda.


I dunno, I don’t think it’s to do with race. I think it’s in part wanting to make a point for the American way over the antiquated British but also, more importantly, getting the  prestige and money from being the no 1 reporter inside the hot story. 

From what I’ve read OW really wanted to link with Diana but D wasn’t having it. Then Fergie failed to launch. I think she sees the potential for the big story she couldn’t get the other times and this is going to be her triumphant swansong simple as.


----------



## piperdog

bag-mania said:


> Wow, that is worthy of Meghan herself! Apparently coherent thought is for Boomers.
> 
> That lovely, indecipherable line of word salad was written by a 28-year-old working for the _New Yorker_ as their TV critic.
> From her rather short and possibly self-placed Wikipedia listing: *Doreen St. Félix* (born 1992) is an Haitian-American writer. She is a staff writer for The New Yorker and was formerly editor-at-large for Lenny Letter, a newsletter from Lena Dunhamand Jenni Konner.


Plenty of Gen Xers can still think coherently! Or at least this one does, and has no interest in taking MeGain's master class on narcissism, grifting, and trashing your family with half-truths and outright fabrications.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Why is he on a bike in open traffic to begin with? If "exercise" was the objective he has 7 acres of property behind walls and fences on which to hike.....oh, but wait.... the paps would not see it, and we would miss the opportunity to acknowledge how important he is to merit security, which of course, he is paying for. Poor lad.


DH used to bike for exercise and had to go MILES to get a good workout, was gone HOURS


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Its like that here in the UK, what I meant was can you choose a date because you want that baby on that particular date?


A private doctor ($$$$$) will arrange his schedule to meet your whim


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I dunno, I don’t think it’s to do with race. I think it’s in part wanting to make a point for the American way over the antiquated British but also, more importantly, getting the  prestige and money from being the no 1 reporter inside the hot story.
> 
> From what I’ve read OW really wanted to link with Diana but D wasn’t having it. Then Fergie failed to launch. I think she sees the potential for the big story she couldn’t get the other times and this is going to be her triumphant swansong simple as.



I don’t think you can discount the racial factor. It was the main focus of the two hour special. That they had to leave England because of racism by the British press. That Harry’s family member (whoever that was) wondered about the baby’s skin tone. That Meghan says Archie would have been given a prince title if he had been completely white. Everything kept coming back to race.


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> Harry, wearing New Balance trainers, a hooded top, £62 Adidas sweatpants, The Mission Continues veterans' association cap, sunglasses and mask, looked serious while racing through LA traffic as the Oprah interview continues to make headlines around the globe.





V0N1B2 said:


> Wow, that outfit was merched with the lightning quickness! I guess that’s why Meghan had to stay home - to upload the details of his kit
> Thank goodness he was able to ride his bike in solitude and unrecognized, I’m sure.





jelliedfeels said:


> Gosh it’s all so embarrassing


The don't have the morals to be embarrassed.  It's a disgrace.



Sharont2305 said:


> Are elective cesareans allowed in the States if there's no complications? As in, can a pregnant woman decide on the date herself as long as its over a certain amount of weeks gestation? Hope that makes sense?





bag-mania said:


> I believe it is allowed within reason. If you are wondering whether they will schedule the baby to be "born" on Diana's birthday, I'm way ahead of you. If the baby is due anywhere close and it is safe, I would expect them to do just that.


Hollywood stars have been doing it for years, to minimize the "damage" to their figures caused by the pregnancy.

It is really infuriating that her sob stories are accepted and reported as true.  One story she recently told involved her and H attending some sort of performance where they sat in a box.  She claimed that she was really too mentally ill/upset to want to go but, being the brave girl she is, she attended.  She claimed that every time the lights dimmed for the show to proceed, she "sobbed" like a baby.  Then, when the lights came up, she smiled like a trooper for everyone to see.  Interesting, her makeup remained pristine, and her face was entirely devoid of any evidence of tears.  Why doesn't anyone challenge this cr*p?


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> Why is he on a bike in open traffic to begin with? If "exercise" was the objective he has 7 acres of property behind walls and fences on which to hike.....oh, but wait.... the paps would not see it, and we would miss the opportunity to acknowledge how important he is to merit security, which of course, he is paying for. Poor lad.



You can't push the merch behind walls!  Unless you drag a camera crew into cemetery or something. And I thought Harry was heavy duty into yoga. Seriously, don't you think he misses horses and polo? They should get Archie a pony.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> A private doctor ($$$$$) will arrange his schedule to meet your whim


July 1st it is then


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> The don't have the morals to be embarrassed.  It's a disgrace.
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood stars have been doing it for years, to minimize the "damage" to their figures caused by the pregnancy.
> 
> It is really infuriating that her sob stories are accepted and reported as true.  One story she recently told involved her and H attending some sort of performance where they sat in a box.  She claimed that she was really too mentally ill/upset to want to go but, being the brave girl she is, she attended.  She claimed that every time the lights dimmed for the show to proceed, she "sobbed" like a baby.  Then, when the lights came up, she smiled like a trooper for everyone to see.  Interesting, her makeup remained pristine, and her face was entirely devoid of any evidence of tears.  Why doesn't anyone challenge this cr*p?


And there were many people surrounding them, in their box and in the boxes either side of their box.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think you can discount the racial factor. It was the main focus of the two hour special. That they had to leave England because of racism by the British press. That Harry’s family member (whoever that was) wondered about the baby’s tone. That Meghan says Archie would have been given a prince title if he had been completely white. Everything kept coming back to race.


Kind of agree ...* the interview has MORPHED into a 2 hr discussion of race*, esp after Gayle's comments

*Was it that to begin with* ? Hmmmm ... I dont  remember ... maybe ....

Ex the baby's tone - if you listen to the EXACT words in the interview - H mentioned ONE incident when M was not present - M used the plural, as if there were multiple incidents, hinting that she may have been present ... , I remember that H and M's versions did not agree exactly ...

Yes, the tabloids were unsympathetic to her, agree. But, did MH explicitly say this was due to race in the interview? I dont remember ...


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think you can discount the racial factor. It was the main focus of the two hour special. That they had to leave England because of racism by the British press. That Harry’s family member (whoever that was) wondered about the baby’s skin tone. That Meghan says Archie would have been given a prince title if he had been completely white. Everything kept coming back to race.


No I think it’s a big part of MM’s story   - there’s no denying that.
 But I don’t think the racial justice angle is OW’s focus.
OW would’ve loved and wanted the scoop even if she was another white Aristo like Diana was because she went so hard before.
 It does have all the makings of a classic- the evil establishment vs the triumph of the little woman! The fashions! The chance to weigh-in incoherently on mental health issues! Perhaps even a patented diet


----------



## Allisonfaye

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Source? The new editor resigned. Can you share where you saw they are ceasing publication?



Seems odd she would 'resign' on her first day on the job. Apparently there was a dust up over some tweets from like 12 years ago?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Unless his security in the 4x4 are driving an electric vehicle, that little outing isn't very environmentally friendly.  I'm guessing living on a huge estate, flying private and now being followed by security has kinda blown his eco platform out the window.  People in glass houses.........


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Yes, the tabloids were unsympathetic to her, agree. But, did MH explicitly say this was due to race in the interview? I dont remember ...



I cannot recall either. I suppose it's a good thing I didn't commit a lot of memory to that show. Maybe someone else remembers. When the montage of doctored tabloid headlines was put on the screen, what did Oprah say about them?


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> I believe she's wearing one of those moon things. Look at the white shirt, plus she has an undercover on but the color of her moon bump is showing. On the first picture you see where the lining of the moon bump curls up and pushed up. Also note how she's sitting. I've been pregnant six times (lost 2 pregnancies) and no way in heck can anyone sit like that (but then maybe some) but clearly you see the outline on the first picture.


Well I love a good conspiracy theory and I would bet money she had a moon bump last time.

This time though, didn't she look kinda swollen the way a pregnant woman does, in her pigeon poop dress?  I thought so.

But in these photos you've reminded me, she doesn't look pregnant at all, just padded in the middle.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> July 1st it is then



They should factor in the surrogate's schedule. She might have plans to do something else that day.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> They should factor in the surrogate's schedule. She might have plans to do something else that day.



Or she might go into labor before the 1st.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Sharont2305 said:


> Its like that here in the UK, what I meant was can you choose a date because you want that baby on that particular date?



Yes, you can choose the date as long as it’s within 2-3 weeks of your due date.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Or she might go into labor before the 1st.



*8 pm on June 30th.* Harry: _Come on, just keep her in there for a little while longer. Cross your legs or something, woman!_


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> *8 pm on June 30th.* Harry: _Come on, just keep her in there for a little while longer. Cross your legs or something, woman!_



I’ll bet he phones the doctor to ask for advice on slowing down labor


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I’ll bet he phones the doctor to ask for advice on slowing down labor



This will be Harry and Meghan on a Zoom call to the surrogate at the hospital   
Harry: _You will get a $20,000 bonus if you can hold on and give birth on July 1._
Meghan: _Don't you ruin this for me! I never get anything I want!_


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> *8 pm on June 30th.* Harry: _Come on, just keep her in there for a little while longer. Cross your legs or something, woman!_


Well if it’s 8pm California time on June 30th, it’s already July 1 in London so they’d just fudge the time/date so baby is born July 1 somewhere on earth!


----------



## Aimee3

Jayne1 said:


> Well I love a good conspiracy theory and I would bet money she had a moon bump last time.
> 
> This time though, didn't she look kinda swollen the way a pregnant woman does, in her pigeon poop dress?  I thought so.
> 
> But in these photos you've reminded me, she doesn't look pregnant at all, just padded in the middle.


I don’t think MM’s swollen face looked like pregnancy swollen. Looked more like a lot of facial fillers to me!  In MM’s older photos she had lots of angles and cheekbones but now it’s all filled in.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Well if it’s 8pm California time on June 30th, it’s already July 1 in London so they’d just fudge the time/date so baby is born July 1 somewhere on earth!



True. They may lie anyway, give or take a few weeks. Why would they start telling the truth now?


----------



## kkfiregirl

Aimee3 said:


> I don’t think MM’s swollen face looked like pregnancy swollen. Looked more like a lot of facial fillers to me!  In MM’s older photos she had lots of angles and cheekbones but now it’s all filled in.



Agree. I wonder if it’s common to be swollen before the third trimester.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> True. They may lie anyway, give or take a few weeks. Why would they start telling the truth now?



Poor Diana would have to grow up with two birthdays; the real one and the one that mommy and daddy created.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Poor Diana would have to grow up with two birthdays; the real one and the one that mommy and daddy created.



Well, it's not like she would know. They aren't about to 'fess up to the kid about that.

The only reason I think they might not go with scheduling the birth on Diana's birthday is because Meghan is a narcissist. All this time she has been pushing the narrative that SHE is the new Diana. She won't want any of that glorious attention being pulled away from her, especially by her own daughter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> The only reason I think they might not go with scheduling the birth on Diana's birthday is because Meghan is a narcissist. All this time she has been pushing the narrative that SHE is the new Diana. She won't want any of that glorious attention being pulled away from her, especially by her own daughter.



That’s true and it’s not like she can further cement her grip on Harry with that birth, so what’s in it for her?

I guess it would upstage Will and Kate; they were not special enough to have a child born on Di’s birthday.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> They should factor in the surrogate's schedule. She might have plans to do something else that day.


She wouldn’t dare!!!


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Ah, the life of a Hollywood royal. Thank goodness he has a security team to follow him while he exercises on an electric bike.
> 
> Harry, wearing New Balance trainers, a hooded top, £62 Adidas sweatpants, The Mission Continues veterans' association cap, sunglasses and mask, looked serious *while racing through LA traffic *as the Oprah interview continues to make headlines around the globe.



Oh FFS Montecito is 90 miles away from LA


----------



## Chagall

jelliedfeels said:


> I dunno, I don’t think it’s to do with race. I think it’s in part wanting to make a point for the American way over the antiquated British but also, more importantly, getting the  prestige and money from being the no 1 reporter inside the hot story.
> 
> From what I’ve read OW really wanted to link with Diana but D wasn’t having it. Then Fergie failed to launch. I think she sees the potential for the big story she couldn’t get the other times and this is going to be her triumphant swansong simple as.


Probably all of what you mentioned. However I think it unlikely their interest would be as intense if it was a non POC. Someone in a wheelchair like Samantha Markle who had snagged Haz. The Fergie and Diana failures would remain the same. Would they be helping Samantha with all that being said.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I guess it would upstage Will and Kate; they were not special enough to have a child born on Di’s birthday.



It would be a huge F*CK YOU to Charles. Between that and the statue unveiling ceremony this summer, it really rubs in all of the love and deference directed towards the ghost of the woman he didn't want.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Oh FFS Montecito is 90 miles away from LA



Hush now. DM wants us to believe it is a 15 minute bike ride from their house to downtown Hollywood.


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Oh FFS Montecito is 90 miles away from LA


My pet peeve also, LA sprawls over a huge area but not THAT much up the Pacific Coast, plus, if he was riding in his neighborhood speeding would not be likely. The roads up there are not highways.


----------



## Chanbal

MM missed the auction... 



_"The artwork was created by Pigcasso in just a few minutes. The masterpiece is only one of the hundreds painted by the four-year-old porcine prodigy - who was saved from the slaughterhouse as a baby by owner, Joanne Lefson. "That painting was totally Prince Harry and was brought for a good price from a Spanish collector who is a big Pigcasso fan."_









						Prince Harry portrait sold for £2,350 - and you won't believe who the artist is
					

A PAINTING of Prince Harry has sold for more than £2,000 – and you won’t believe who the artist is. The artwork, which was created by a talented painting PIG called Pigcasso in just a f…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM missed the auction...
> 
> View attachment 5028333
> 
> _"The artwork was created by Pigcasso in just a few minutes. The masterpiece is only one of the hundreds painted by the four-year-old porcine prodigy - who was saved from the slaughterhouse as a baby by owner, Joanne Lefson. "That painting was totally Prince Harry and was brought for a good price from a Spanish collector who is a big Pigcasso fan."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry portrait sold for £2,350 - and you won't believe who the artist is
> 
> 
> A PAINTING of Prince Harry has sold for more than £2,000 – and you won’t believe who the artist is. The artwork, which was created by a talented painting PIG called Pigcasso in just a f…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



I'm sure Meghan will greatly appreciate that it was a RESCUE pig who created it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

V0N1B2 said:


> Since everything out of this woman’s mouth is a lie, I’m gonna go with, nah. Or maybe we should just call it “her truth”.
> To me, ‘late summer’ is mid to late August (IMO), so that would have made her ~2mo pregnant at the time of the interview. So she’s either wearing the wrong size moonbump or she lying - again.
> I’m sure come hell or high water she’ll be delivering baby Diana on July 1st, 2021 on what would have been her dead MIL’s 60th birthday. It’ll be like a miracle and such a !surprise!



I have never met a pregnant woman yet who, when asked her due date, replied with a season instead of a month.


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> Agree. I wonder if it’s common to be swollen before the third trimester.


Swollen can be a sign of preeclampsia but weight gain is different from being swollen. With preeclampsia and toximia which I had the water is noticeable in the skin when they press it.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Allisonfaye said:


> I have never met a pregnant woman yet who, when asked her due date, replied with a season instead of a month.



Haha, I think she's copying Kate's pregnancy announcements - the palace would always announce the season, but not the exact date.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> My pet peeve also, LA sprawls over a huge area but not THAT much up the Pacific Coast, plus, if he was riding in his neighborhood speeding would not be likely. *The roads up there are not highways*.




That's what I thought.
I used to work in Santa Barbara for a time but commuted from Ventura County. That was about 30 years ago (there was still a stoplight on the 101) but I recall the area east of the 101 as being very hilly. I never took the time to detour to check out the area of Montecito but I would imagine some of those roads could be pretty steep. There could also be blind turns so I really don't blame him for having a vehicle run interference for him. I was almost hit once riding around here so I started riding on the sidewalk where I could. Until the day I was hit by a driver pulling out of a driveway. No more bike riding for me. I hate _driving_ anymore. Too many unlicensed uninsured texting idjits.


----------



## Sharont2305

kkfiregirl said:


> That’s true and it’s not like she can further cement her grip on Harry with that birth, so what’s in it for her?
> 
> I guess it would upstage Will and Kate; they were not special enough to have a child born on Di’s birthday.


But Kate has two future Kings.  Wife of and mother of.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> But Kate has two future Kings.  Wife of and mother of.



And don't forget favorite daughter-in-law status from the most imminent king.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kkfiregirl said:


> Or she might go into labor before the 1st.


Then she will stand on her head and press her knees together until the 1st.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> And don't forget favorite daughter-in-law status from the most imminent king.



Not anymore! She's been outed as a meanie who made Meg cry.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Not anymore! She's been outed as a meanie who made Meg cry.



Oh, I was talking about Kate! I bet Meghan is dead to him these days.

ETA: Sorry I read this as being Meghan the first time. This thread is moving so damn fast I'm trying to fit it in with my work and I'm not reading it correctly.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Sorry I read this as being Meghan the first time. This thread is moving so damn fast I'm trying to fit it in with my work and I'm not reading it correctly.



haha, that's okay, I have the same problem


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Its like that here in the UK, what I meant was can you choose a date because you want that baby on that particular date?



It's probably the same as anywhere, depends if there's a free slot in the doctor's schedule. Unless you want something outrageous like a month out from your due date.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> It is really infuriating that her sob stories are accepted and reported as true.  One story she recently told involved her and H attending some sort of performance where they sat in a box.  She claimed that she was really too mentally ill/upset to want to go but, being the brave girl she is, she attended.  She claimed that every time the lights dimmed for the show to proceed, she "sobbed" like a baby.  Then, when the lights came up, she smiled like a trooper for everyone to see.  Interesting, her makeup remained pristine, and her face was entirely devoid of any evidence of tears.  Why doesn't anyone challenge this cr*p?



Royal Albert Hall...where she sat down before anyone else sat (believe it or not, the hateful Brits were giving the troublesome two standing ovations that night), then wanted to make H sit too but at that point he still had some manners and refused.




Besides the obvious you stated...has nobody questioned the idiotic claim they "made" her go? She was pregnant at the time, she had the excuse to not go anywhere at her fingertips.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's probably the same as anywhere, depends if there's a free slot in the doctor's schedule. Unless you want something outrageous like a month out from your due date.


With our NHS you wouldn't get a choice, unless it's detrimental to your or the baby's health. Not sure if you can do it if you paid privately.


----------



## lanasyogamama

As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Royal Albert Hall...where she sat down before anyone else sat (believe it or not, the hateful Brits were giving the troublesome two standing ovations that night), then wanted to make H sit too but at that point he still had some manners and refused.
> 
> View attachment 5028415
> 
> 
> Besides the obvious you stated...has nobody questioned the idiotic claim they "made" her go? She was pregnant at the time, she had the excuse to not go anywhere at her fingertips.



It looks like Harry is trying to pry off his wedding band in that photo.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


We’ve all been there. Stay strong and good luck!


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> It looks like Harry is trying to pry off his wedding band in that photos.



LOL is he even _wearing_ one?


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> LOL is he even _wearing_ one?



I think so or at least he _should be_.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It looks like Harry is trying to pry off his wedding band in that photos.



I can absolutely believe she created drama before they left just looking at his face. I do not believe for a minute it was genuine, though...she just had found another one of his buttons.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> I think so or at least he _should be_.



Us royals don't wear wedding bands.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> Us royals don't wear wedding bands.



He does, and in other pics from that night you can see it.


----------



## bisousx

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.



Whatever it was, I hope you feel better and have a better week ahead of you


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can absolutely believe she created drama before they left just looking at his face. I do not believe for a minute it was genuine, though...she just had found another one of his buttons.



He was a disobedient boy and she had to jerk his chain to get him back in line. He needed to learn that "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" isn't just words, it is a lifestyle!


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> MM missed the auction...
> 
> View attachment 5028333
> 
> _"The artwork was created by Pigcasso in just a few minutes. The masterpiece is only one of the hundreds painted by the four-year-old porcine prodigy - who was saved from the slaughterhouse as a baby by owner, Joanne Lefson. "That painting was totally Prince Harry and was brought for a good price from a Spanish collector who is a big Pigcasso fan."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry portrait sold for £2,350 - and you won't believe who the artist is
> 
> 
> A PAINTING of Prince Harry has sold for more than £2,000 – and you won’t believe who the artist is. The artwork, which was created by a talented painting PIG called Pigcasso in just a f…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Pigcasso. OMG
#dead


----------



## Jayne1

lulilu said:


> It is really infuriating that her sob stories are accepted and reported as true.  One story she recently told involved her and H attending some sort of performance where they sat in a box.  She claimed that she was really too mentally ill/upset to want to go but, being the brave girl she is, she attended.  She claimed that every time the lights dimmed for the show to proceed, she "sobbed" like a baby.  Then, when the lights came up, she smiled like a trooper for everyone to see.  Interesting, her makeup remained pristine, and her face was entirely devoid of any evidence of tears.  Why doesn't anyone challenge this cr*p?


I still say she was panicking and wondering if she could pull off the surrogate giving birth in a secret place, at a secret time, and having everyone believe it was Meg doing so. Reality was creeping in. That's what was keeping her up at night.

I agree about the story you mentioned above. No one challenges her stories.


----------



## pukasonqo

kkfiregirl said:


> Us royals don't wear wedding bands.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Royal Albert Hall...where she sat down before anyone else sat (believe it or not, the hateful Brits were giving the troublesome two standing ovations that night), then wanted to make H sit too but at that point he still had some manners and refused.
> 
> View attachment 5028415
> 
> 
> Besides the obvious you stated...has nobody questioned the idiotic claim they "made" her go? She was pregnant at the time, she had the excuse to not go anywhere at her fingertips.


It looks more like Harry was the one in tears.


----------



## Chagall

jelliedfeels said:


> Eh? I had not heard that. I’ve only heard the incoming editor resigned due to her past tweets.
> 
> I’m sorry for your losses but congratulations on your lovely children.
> 
> MM said she was due in late summer so I think I am roughly the same stage of pregnancy as she is.
> 
> I don’t really buy the moon bump story BUT I have to say I don’t have as big a belly as she does in pic two and that I wouldn’t be able to squat for a minute on camera right now.
> 
> But then I don’t know whether that’s just because I’ve gained the COVID pounds and I don’t have a live-in personal trainer like she probably does haha.
> 
> NB I would also like to add that as I am pregnant like MM you all have to be VERY NICE to ME at all times or else. Regardless of whether I am constantly saying controversial things about all of you & generally stirring the pot.


I just saw this. So sorry we had our little debate earlier. Everything you said is 100% correct.I will agree with everything you say from now on, and a huge congratulations.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.



Sorry to hear; I hope your weekend is relaxing/rejuvenating.


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


Hope you feel better..


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> He was a disobedient boy and she had to jerk his chain to get him back in line. He needed to learn that "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets" isn't just words, it is a lifestyle!


Oh he is trapped?


----------



## mdcx

Regards the elective c-section, I have read that some people choose(pay) to get baby delivered early because apparently the last few weeks of pregnancy are the ones that wreak the most havoc on your figure? Perhaps it means regarding stretch marks or something. 

H looks like Mummy dressed him in his brand new fancy biking clothes and he got pushed out the door for exercise.


----------



## gracekelly

Saw the article and picture on the DM commenting on how Kate looks down on her latest  appearance.  I starting shouting at the computer screen " don't pay attention to that b*i*t*c*h*!  Smile! That is the best way to combat her!"


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Regards the elective c-section, I have read that some people choose(pay) to get baby delivered early because apparently the last few weeks of pregnancy are the ones that wreak the most havoc on your figure? Perhaps it means regarding stretch marks or something.
> 
> H looks like Mummy dressed him in his brand new fancy biking clothes and he got pushed out the door for exercise.


She thinks he went to bike for exercise. It is really a junk food run.  Twinkies, anything with sugar, he's not picky,  for him and Archie.


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> Oh he is trapped?


Yes, and he's just been informed that it will take many "creative activations" in the form of private jets and borrowed mansions to free him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry seen for the first time since explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex left his wife Meghan and son Archie at their £10million LA mansion and hit the road on  an expensive electric bike followed by a security team in a car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


if he wants privacy why not exercise on his estate?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> if he wants privacy why not exercise on his estate?


He might be taken for an intruder *lolololol*

ETA:  no paps!


----------



## Chanbal

Poor couple, they really don't look happy!  I finally grasped their concept of financial independence. It's to be free to cash in on royal titles and connections while someone else pays the bills (eg. security). It's amazing the useful information one can learn just by observing them. 

_"Speaking to 7News, Mr Myers said: "There is now way back for Harry and Meghan now.

"I think there is an awful lot of damage done from this interview.

"There were reputations that were absolutely destroyed.

"It's an absolutely extraordinary turn of events and *I didn't think they looked even that happy*._"









						Meghan and Harry 'not even that happy' in new life
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been warned their chances of returning to the Royal Family are "destroyed" by one expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I think there is absolutely no doubt that H&M were in cahoots with Oprah and out to smear the BRF with racism accusations. It's the currently preferred and most effective currency of stigmatisation and blackmail. When they realised it backfired on them all, they sent out Gayle to spin it as a desperate cry for help from H&M to the BRF, against the horrid British press, who as we all know, treat everyone else with silk gloves. Especially ethnic celeb Brits and royalty 

I like this segment because Harry gets his fair and well deserved share here.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> *"In the future, we will look to this interview as a real touchstone marking the change of who it is we see as authorities of their own experience," *says Doreen St. Félix....
> 
> What in the fresh lettuce hell is this word salad bullsh!t?
> *"In the future, we will look to this interview as a real touchstone marking the change of who it is we see as authorities of their own experience,"*
> What is an authority of my own experience?
> Any translators in the house?


Da fuq?






gracekelly said:


> The essential point that Harry has missed is that family conversations are supposed to be just that, family conversation and not to be shared with people on the outside.  This is just another illustration that not only do the Sussex not understand the true meaning of privacy, they certainly don't even attempt it despite all their moaning that it is what they really want.  Seriously,  I don't think there is anyone left on the planet who believes that about them as they are running to the paps and the media every chance they get.









Chanbal said:


> *Oprah is blessed with great personal warmth, but is also tough and controlling, with a notorious reputation for cutting off those who cross her or displease her. Sounds familiar?
> 
> She also believes it is important for people to tell their own story, which is ironic, given that she is know to have made her own employees sign draconian Non-Disclosure Agreements, preventing them from ever talking about working with her.*
> 
> In the end, *I find it really disappointing that Oprah and Gayle, these two trailblazing, amazing women seem so ready to trash a royal family and an entire nation on the say-so of two aggrieved and entitled people who happen to be their pals.*









Chanbal said:


> MM missed the auction...
> 
> View attachment 5028333
> 
> _"The artwork was created by Pigcasso in just a few minutes. The masterpiece is only one of the hundreds painted by the four-year-old porcine prodigy - who was saved from the slaughterhouse as a baby by owner, Joanne Lefson. "That painting was totally Prince Harry and was brought for a good price from a Spanish collector who is a big Pigcasso fan."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry portrait sold for £2,350 - and you won't believe who the artist is
> 
> 
> A PAINTING of Prince Harry has sold for more than £2,000 – and you won’t believe who the artist is. The artwork, which was created by a talented painting PIG called Pigcasso in just a f…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk












lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


I understand and you are definitely not alone in feeling overwhelmed like that, i've have had a similar moment myself recently  Better to let it out than keep it bottled up, even if that's in the middle of Whole Foods  Hope you're feeling like your usual self soon


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, poor MM&H, that much wished/demanded allowance from the BRF is shrinking... 

"_The Royal Family currently receives 25 per cent of the Crown Estate's profits. They previously received 15 per cent but it was increased to pay for a huge programme of refurbishments at Buckingham Palace.

The Queen faces a substantial 'pay cut' as ministers look to rein in spending on the monarchy after Covid, according to courtiers.  

Government officials are in talks with the Palace about a new financial settlement for the Royal Family, insiders claim.

'Her Majesty is very much aware of the hardships people have been through during the pandemic and is happy to play her part in cutting costs._" 









						Will the Queen have to rein in costs to cover a Covid 'pay cut'?
					

British Government officials are in talks with the Palace about a new financial settlement for the Royal Family, insiders claim.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Kansashalo

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.



Hope your week ended on a good note.  I've been there before except it was in a TJ Maxx.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Kind of agree ...* the interview has MORPHED into a 2 hr discussion of race*, esp after Gayle's comments
> 
> *Was it that to begin with* ? Hmmmm ... I dont  remember ... maybe ....
> 
> Ex the baby's tone - if you listen to the EXACT words in the interview - H mentioned ONE incident when M was not present - M used the plural, as if there were multiple incidents, hinting that she may have been present ... , I remember that H and M's versions did not agree exactly ...
> 
> Yes, the tabloids were unsympathetic to her, agree. But, did MH explicitly say this was due to race in the interview? I dont remember ...


Interesting update to this from Lady Colin’s book but this will have to wait til I am at real computer not ipad
Harry was complaining about racial discrimination against M in 2016 , one week after their dating became public knowledge !!!!
Lady Colin C called it in her 2020 book, she saw the race card being played


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


I'm very sorry for the tough week. Hope things are better now. Have a good weekend.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Oops, poor MM&H, that much wished/demanded allowance from the BRF is shrinking...
> 
> "_The Royal Family currently receives 25 per cent of the Crown Estate's profits. They previously received 15 per cent but it was increased to pay for a huge programme of refurbishments at Buckingham Palace.
> 
> The Queen faces a substantial 'pay cut' as ministers look to rein in spending on the monarchy after Covid, according to courtiers.
> 
> Government officials are in talks with the Palace about a new financial settlement for the Royal Family, insiders claim.
> 
> 'Her Majesty is very much aware of the hardships people have been through during the pandemic and is happy to play her part in cutting costs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will the Queen have to rein in costs to cover a Covid 'pay cut'?
> 
> 
> British Government officials are in talks with the Palace about a new financial settlement for the Royal Family, insiders claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Somehow I don't think her pay cut will have quite the effect ours did


----------



## lanasyogamama

You guys are all so sweet, I’ll be fine. 

And let’s face it, what could I possibly have gone through compared to MM?!


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.


Sending good vibes


----------



## mdcx

lanasyogamama said:


> You guys are all so sweet, I’ll be fine.
> 
> And let’s face it, what could I possibly have gone through compared to MM?!


I frequently express my gratitude to the universe for messy Meghan and Harry because all the snark about it online really helped me get through this past year!


----------



## jennlt

marietouchet said:


> Sending good vibes


+1


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> if he wants privacy why not exercise on his estate?



Maybe he needed a little time to himself. Well, himself and his discreet security detail.

Being around regular Meghan must be stressful. Imagine what it’s like being around pregnant Meghan!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> As someone who cried their way through Whole Foods today (tough week) I had to keep my sunglasses on and be thankful for my mask to not look ridiculous.



Be well, hope you're feeling better. While this goes without saying, you'll always be better than our two infamous whiny ingrates and have a million times more class.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Somehow I don't think her pay cut will have quite the effect ours did


Just to make you feel better, the amount of the pay cut is going to be a lot bigger than ours.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Maybe he needed a little time to himself. Well, himself and his discreet security detail.
> 
> Being around regular Meghan must be stressful. Imagine what it’s like being around pregnant Meghan!


Now you are making me feel sorry for JCMH. He needs a good book!



Spoiler: Weekend reading for JCMH





Amazon #1 Bestseller


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> She thinks he went to bike for exercise. It is really a junk food run.  Twinkies, anything with sugar, he's not picky,  for him and Archie.



Exercise? On an ELECTRIC bike?     I can see Harry going for Twinkies and Ding Dongs (you are what you eat), and polishing them off with a Ya-Hoo soda.  If he really wanted exercise, why doesn't he take his rescue chickens for a walk? He could practice his woe-is-me speeches on them. But then they might turn on him and start pecking him to death.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Maybe he needed a little time to himself. Well, himself and his discreet security detail.
> 
> Being around regular Meghan must be stressful. Imagine what it’s like being around pregnant Meghan!


IF she’s really pregnant!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spring is on the way Wishing all a beautiful weekend


----------



## EverSoElusive

My 10-year green card was just approved recently and it got me wondering if
Harry is still present and living in the US legally  If he's not, he should be deported back to the arms of the BRF seeing how Wokey Pokey won't let him return to the UK willingly and holds him hostage in a different bathroom everyday after each carefully coordinated brand promotional electric bike ride


----------



## Jktgal

Chanbal said:


> _'Her Majesty is very much aware of the hardships people have been through during the pandemic and is happy to play her part in cutting costs._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will the Queen have to rein in costs to cover a Covid 'pay cut'?
> 
> 
> British Government officials are in talks with the Palace about a new financial settlement for the Royal Family, insiders claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's a major cut, definitely, around $32m/year if income from the crown estate profits remain the same (which it probably wouldn't since tourism revenues might make up a large part of it). Interesting.


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> My 10-year green card was just approved



Congratulations!!


----------



## LittleStar88

*Prince Harry invokes his mother's memory in foreword to new book for bereaved children of frontline workers









						Prince Harry invokes his mother's memory in foreword to new book for bereaved children of frontline workers
					

Prince Harry has revealed how the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, affected him in a new book to support grieving children and young people who have lost loved ones in the pandemic.




					www.cnn.com
				



*
London (CNN)Prince Harry has revealed how the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, affected him in a new book to support grieving children and young people who have lost loved ones in the pandemic. 
To mark the UK's day of reflection next Tuesday on the anniversary of the first national lockdown, the Duke of Sussex has written the foreword for "Hospital by the Hill," a book project from the Hampshire child bereavement support charity, Simon Says.
It follows the story of a young person coping with the death of their mother, who had been working in a local hospital on the frontline of the coronavirus crisis. 
"If you are reading this book, it's because you've lost your parent or a loved one, and while I wish I was able to hug you right now, I hope this story is able to provide you comfort in knowing that you're not alone," Harry's message begins. 

He then draws on his own experience with bereavement at a young age, and reflects on how it made him feel. 
"When I was a young boy I lost my mum. At the time I didn't want to believe it or accept it, and it left a huge hole inside of me. I know how you feel, and I want to assure you that over time that hole will be filled with so much love and support," Harry continues. 
"We all cope with loss in a different way, but when a parent goes to heaven, I was told their spirit, their love and the memories of them do not. They are always with you and you can hold onto them forever. I find this to be true."
The prince ends the introduction by sharing his understanding of loneliness and grief, telling readers that the "feeling will pass." 
"And I will make a promise to you -- you will feel better and stronger once you are ready to talk about how it makes you feel."

Princess Diana was killed in a car crash in Paris in 1997 alongside her partner, Dodi Fayed, and driver, Henri Paul, as their vehicle was being chased by paparazzi on motorcycles. 
Harry is expected to join his brother, William, in July when a statue of Diana is installed at Kensington Gardens in London. The sculpture was commissioned by the Duke of Cambridge and Duke of Sussex and is set to be unveiled on what would have been the Princess of Wales' 60th birthday.
It will be the first time the pair have seen each other since Harry moved to California with his family. Harry recently referenced a rift with William in his sit-down with Oprah.
Both Harry and his brother William have previously revealed their own mental health struggles in the wake of their mother's death. Speaking in a 2019 BBC documentary, the Duke of Cambridge said he felt "pain like no other" after her death and encouraged people to be more open with their personal feelings and struggles.
"I think when you are bereaved at a very young age -- any time really, but particularly at a young age, I can resonate closely to that -- you feel pain like no other pain, and you know that in your life it's going to be very difficult to come across something that's going to be even worse pain than that," William said.

Harry told a British newspaper podcast in 2017 that he sought counseling to deal with his grief after his brother suggested he seek professional help. 
"I can safely say that losing my mum at the age of 12 and therefore shutting down all of my emotions for the last 20 years has had a quite serious effect on not only my personal life but also my work as well," Harry said. "Then I started to have a few conversations and then, all of a sudden, all of this grief that I'd never processed came to the forefront. I was like, 'There's actually a lot of stuff here I need to deal with.'"
Simon Says founder Sally Stanley said the idea for a new book to help bereaved children of key workers emerged last spring. 
Stanley said the death of a loved one is "difficult at any time in the life of a child or young person" but the measures introduced to combat the virus "make it much harder for them to say goodbye in the way that we are used to."


"I hope that this book will help children and young people to remember their special person whose work was to help others," she added. 
Author Chris Connaughton said he felt "privileged" for the opportunity to write the book and tackle such emotional issues for young people. 
"I wanted it to provide a connection, support and hope through the hard and horrible times of bereavement," he said.

He added that it was an honor to have Prince Harry's support for the project "and share his open, heartfelt and honest words with kids across the country." 
The book, which will be available to any young person in the UK who has been affected by the death of a key worker, highlights the services available from three bereavement organizations -- Simon Says, Child Bereavement UK and Winston's Wish.


----------



## gracekelly

I know this is going to sound hard, but at his age, Harry needs to get past this and still needs mental help.  Of course this may just be his schtick now and he can't do anything else except bring her into everything he does.  There is too much wallowing in self pity for me.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> My 10-year green card was just approved recently and it got me wondering if
> Harry is still present and living in the US legally  *If he's not, he should be deported back to the arms of the BRF* seeing how Wokey Pokey won't let him return to the UK willingly and holds him hostage in a different bathroom everyday after each carefully coordinated brand promotional electric bike ride


Congratulations on your green card. 
It would be nice to send these troublemakers back to the BRF, but I'm afraid they are not welcome there anymore. 



Earlier this week, Ofcom announced it had received over 4,000 complaints about the interview - but would not reveal the nature of the complaints.

According to Press Gazette, newspaper and TV journalists were among those who made a complaint to the regulator.

One journalist described the programme as a “two-hour PR puff” - and criticised ITV for airing the chat without providing a right of reply to those who the Sussexes criticised.

Their complaint read: “Over the two-hour broadcast, Ms Markle made slanderous comments about the Royal family, inaccurate allegations about the UK media – one-third of the  headlines shown in a montage were from out of the UK – and false statements re Archie not having a title.

“Who did you give a right of reply to and when? The programme was a PR puff for the couple. ITV should have fact-checked – did it re the ‘wedding’ days before?

“Did it ask the Royal family, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Markles, newspaper companies for a response? If so, when? If not, why?”

The journalist added: “It was an unbalanced piece of theatre. You allowed incorrect statements such as the title to be broadcast without checking.

*“Very sloppy standards of journalism shown by ITV and CBS.”*









						Meg & Harry chat slammed as 'unbalanced piece of theatre' in Ofcom complaints
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle’s Oprah interview has been slammed as an “unbalanced piece of theatre” after receiving 4,398 Ofcom complaints.  The chat, which was watched by 12.4million viewer…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jktgal said:


> It's a major cut, definitely, around *$32m/year* if income from the crown estate profits remain the same (which it probably wouldn't since tourism revenues might make up a large part of it). Interesting.


Phone call to BP:
Harry: Granny I need money asap.
HMQ: Sorry, you ungrateful little twat, but I gave your allowance back to the UK taxpayers. Get your green card and then good luck with trying to collect from your Uncle Sam.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> Congratulations!!
> 
> View attachment 5028883



Thank you so much


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Congratulations on your green card.
> It would be nice to send these troublemakers back to the BRF, but I'm afraid they are not welcome there anymore.
> View attachment 5028829
> 
> 
> Earlier this week, Ofcom announced it had received over 4,000 complaints about the interview - but would not reveal the nature of the complaints.
> 
> According to Press Gazette, newspaper and TV journalists were among those who made a complaint to the regulator.
> 
> One journalist described the programme as a “two-hour PR puff” - and criticised ITV for airing the chat without providing a right of reply to those who the Sussexes criticised.
> 
> Their complaint read: “Over the two-hour broadcast, Ms Markle made slanderous comments about the Royal family, inaccurate allegations about the UK media – one-third of the  headlines shown in a montage were from out of the UK – and false statements re Archie not having a title.
> 
> “Who did you give a right of reply to and when? The programme was a PR puff for the couple. ITV should have fact-checked – did it re the ‘wedding’ days before?
> 
> “Did it ask the Royal family, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Markles, newspaper companies for a response? If so, when? If not, why?”
> 
> The journalist added: “It was an unbalanced piece of theatre. You allowed incorrect statements such as the title to be broadcast without checking.
> 
> *“Very sloppy standards of journalism shown by ITV and CBS.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg & Harry chat slammed as 'unbalanced piece of theatre' in Ofcom complaints
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle’s Oprah interview has been slammed as an “unbalanced piece of theatre” after receiving 4,398 Ofcom complaints.  The chat, which was watched by 12.4million viewer…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Appreciate the kind words


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> My 10-year green card was just approved recently and it got me wondering if
> *Harry is still present and living in the US legally  If he's not, he should be deported *back to the arms of the BRF seeing how Wokey Pokey won't let him return to the UK willingly and holds him hostage in a different bathroom everyday after each carefully coordinated brand promotional electric bike ride



Pffffttttt................California is a sanctuary state. Couple that with the current PTB and he isn't going anywhere


----------



## CarryOn2020

Congratulations @EverSoElusive 


So, last year T&C says H won’t seek US citizenship or green card. Hmmm.  Link and story in spoiler.
One more question OW should have asked.



Spoiler: Citizenship?












						Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.
					

The Duke may still apply for a visa.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




*Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.*
*The Duke may still apply for a visa.*
By Chloe Foussianes
Apr 6, 2020





Samir HusseinGetty Images
Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and Archie are currently residing in Los Angeles. For the latter two, this is an easy proposition, as both are U.S. citizens; for British-born Harry, however, it's more complicated.
The Duke of Sussex has a few options he could pursue, if he and his family are hoping to settle in America for the long haul. However, two paths he won't take, according to a new report in the _Times_, are permanent residency and citizenship—both of which he is eligible for, as a spouse of a U.S. citizen.
As a royal source told the publication, "the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point."




Harry speaks at the Endeavour Fund Awards, one of the final engagements he and Meghan attended as a working royal couple.
WPA PoolGetty Images
Still, there are other ways through which Harry could legally live and work in the States. One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement." As Parisa Karaahmet, a partner at immigration law firm Fragomen, recently told _Town & Country_, "It is quite common for individuals to apply for O-1 classification if they can show that they rise to a very high level of accomplishment in their fields."
Harry would have to identify the field in which he's excelled—likely philanthropy, or something similar—and be sponsored by an organization that planned to work with him. "The drawback of the O-1 is it does have to be renewed periodically and it requires him to continue that relationship with that organization," Karaahmet said.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> My 10-year green card was just approved recently and it got me wondering if
> Harry is still present and living in the US legally  If he's not, he should be deported back to the arms of the BRF seeing how Wokey Pokey won't let him return to the UK willingly and holds him hostage in a different bathroom everyday after each carefully coordinated brand promotional electric bike ride


Congrats to you!  Glad you are here!


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> Pffffttttt................California is a sanctuary state. Couple that with the current PTB and he isn't going anywhere



While I completely forgotten about CA being a sanctuary state, I was poking fun at Harry  It's quite unfortunate that he's estranged from the BRF, people who are his family members and having his back through every f*uck-up when he was a young lad, before Wokey Pokey came along. Someday, he might just regret having burned the bridges with QEII, PC and W&K


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Congratulations @EverSoElusive
> 
> 
> So, last year T&C says H won’t seek US citizenship or green card. Hmmm.  Link and story in spoiler.
> One more question OW should have asked.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Citizenship?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.
> 
> 
> The Duke may still apply for a visa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.*
> *The Duke may still apply for a visa.*
> By Chloe Foussianes
> Apr 6, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samir HusseinGetty Images
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and Archie are currently residing in Los Angeles. For the latter two, this is an easy proposition, as both are U.S. citizens; for British-born Harry, however, it's more complicated.
> The Duke of Sussex has a few options he could pursue, if he and his family are hoping to settle in America for the long haul. However, two paths he won't take, according to a new report in the _Times_, are permanent residency and citizenship—both of which he is eligible for, as a spouse of a U.S. citizen.
> As a royal source told the publication, "the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry speaks at the Endeavour Fund Awards, one of the final engagements he and Meghan attended as a working royal couple.
> WPA PoolGetty Images
> Still, there are other ways through which Harry could legally live and work in the States. One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement." As Parisa Karaahmet, a partner at immigration law firm Fragomen, recently told _Town & Country_, "It is quite common for individuals to apply for O-1 classification if they can show that they rise to a very high level of accomplishment in their fields."
> Harry would have to identify the field in which he's excelled—likely philanthropy, or something similar—and be sponsored by an organization that planned to work with him. "The drawback of the O-1 is it does have to be renewed periodically and it requires him to continue that relationship with that organization," Karaahmet said.


"_O-1 visa—a path designed for individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement_"

He needs a very creative immigration lawyer.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Congratulations @EverSoElusive
> 
> 
> So, last year T&C says H won’t seek US citizenship or green card. Hmmm.  Link and story in spoiler.
> One more question OW should have asked.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Citizenship?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.
> 
> 
> The Duke may still apply for a visa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.*
> *The Duke may still apply for a visa.*
> By Chloe Foussianes
> Apr 6, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samir HusseinGetty Images
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and Archie are currently residing in Los Angeles. For the latter two, this is an easy proposition, as both are U.S. citizens; for British-born Harry, however, it's more complicated.
> The Duke of Sussex has a few options he could pursue, if he and his family are hoping to settle in America for the long haul. However, two paths he won't take, according to a new report in the _Times_, are permanent residency and citizenship—both of which he is eligible for, as a spouse of a U.S. citizen.
> As a royal source told the publication, "the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry speaks at the Endeavour Fund Awards, one of the final engagements he and Meghan attended as a working royal couple.
> WPA PoolGetty Images
> Still, there are other ways through which Harry could legally live and work in the States. One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement." As Parisa Karaahmet, a partner at immigration law firm Fragomen, recently told _Town & Country_, "It is quite common for individuals to apply for O-1 classification if they can show that they rise to a very high level of accomplishment in their fields."
> Harry would have to identify the field in which he's excelled—likely philanthropy, or something similar—and be sponsored by an organization that planned to work with him. "The drawback of the O-1 is it does have to be renewed periodically and it requires him to continue that relationship with that organization," Karaahmet said.




*One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement."*

Harry has "extraordinary ability or achievement"? What exactly is it - being a spoiled English prince?      With immigration, the burden on proof is on the petitioner or applicant depending on the type of petition or form filed. Good luck with finding strong evidence to help with that 

Frankly, there's nothing wrong with him filing for a GC as a US citizen spouse and if his intention is to live in the US full time. Being a GC holder does not require him to pledge his allegiance to the US anyways. 

As for US citizenship, I totally get why he wouldn't want to go for it despite the UK allowing dual citizenships. For one, he is a British Prince and his grandmother is the Head of State and it might somehow feel like he is betraying her and the country. Also, what business does a real prince have, in becoming another country's citizen, when he should have stayed in the UK to serve the people of his country? 

Regardless of which immigration path he chooses to Cringe's delight, I just think it should be 100% by the book without any potential special treatment from the US government due to his princely status. Immigration is a costly and long process for regular folks like me. I was so, so stoked when my 10-year GC was approved in record time (106 days though most have to wait at least 6 months to 1.5 years or more for an approval) without another interview with USCIS.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Congrats to you!  Glad you are here!




Thank you, thank you  I've been having a splendid time here. With the money spent on the 10-year GC, I now have to figure out if I want to spend more money to file for citizenship in Q1 2022 under the 3-year rule as a US citizen spouse or just milk my GC till it hits the 9th/10th year  

Only reason why I'm even thinking about the 3-year rule is because it might be better to do so with the current administration's immigration ruling. Other than that, I simply don't find any immediate need since I can live with my husband and work here legally with the GC


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> *One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement."*
> 
> Harry has "extraordinary ability or achievement"? What exactly is it - being a spoiled English prince?      With immigration, the burden on proof is on the petitioner or applicant depending on the type of petition or form filed. Good luck with finding strong evidence to help with that
> 
> Frankly, there's nothing wrong with him filing for a GC as a US citizen spouse and if his intention is to live in the US full time. Being a GC holder does not require him to pledge his allegiance to the US anyways.
> 
> As for US citizenship, I totally get why he wouldn't want to go for it despite the UK allowing dual citizenships. For one, he is a British Prince and his grandmother is the Head of State and it might somehow feel like he is betraying her and the country. Also, what business does a real prince have, in becoming another country's citizen, when he should have stayed in the UK to serve the people of his country?
> 
> Regardless of which immigration path he chooses to Cringe's delight, I just think it should be 100% by the book without any potential special treatment from the US government due to his princely status. Immigration is a costly and long process for regular folks like me. I was so, so stoked when my 10-year GC was approved in record time (106 days though most have to wait at least 6 months to 1.5 years or more for an approval) without another interview with USCIS.


We all know he doesn’t want to start paying US taxes (or taxes at all) & not using his title so I don’t think he wants it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> We all know he doesn’t want to start paying US taxes (or taxes at all) & not using his title so I don’t think he wants it.



Since we have zero idea what US immigration status is allowing him to live and work in the US, I'll just state a few things in general.

If he came to the US using a B-1/B-2 tourism/business visit visa OR through the VWP (without filing to adjust his non-immigrant status to a permanent resident), Harry cannot stay full time/long term and work in the US at all, generally speaking. That's 100% illegal, but as @poopsie pointed out, CA is a sanctuary state. 

Also, under normal circumstances and if we don't take the sanctuary state status into consideration, one cannot live nor work in the US without the appropriate non-immigrant visa (this is issued by a US embassy or consulate) or Employment Authorization (this is issued by USCIS) or GC (this is issued by USCIS). If one works or has businesses established on the US soil, they are subjected to taxes, whether or not they like it regardless of amount earned. Americans living and working abroad are still taxed by the IRS what more someone (citizen or not) who's physically in the US. Tax evasion is a federal offense in the US. Maybe Cringe never told Harry 

This is exactly why I'm very curious about Harry's actual immigration status in the US. And with all the money that they are presumably making with the Netflix and Spotify deals, it's so illegal if they aren't paying their taxes. I hope someone is looking into them for real


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> "_O-1 visa—a path designed for individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement_"
> 
> He needs a very creative immigration lawyer.


There was a photo several pages back of Mrs D T***p gazing soulfully at Harry. I'm sure this "super model" can recommend a verrrrrrry creative immigration lawyer and give him tips on how to be coy for years, 5 years at least, about application details.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Just to make you feel better, the amount of the pay cut is going to be a lot bigger than ours.



That's for sure, her pay cut is going to be more than what we actually get paid, probably combined together.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I know this is going to sound hard, but at his age, Harry needs to get past this and still needs mental help.  Of course this may just be his schtick now and he can't do anything else except bring her into everything he does.  There is too much wallowing in self pity for me.



What else has he got besides 3 titles, millions in the bank, HUGE house, pretty wife and potentially 2 lovey children ?


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> What else has he got besides 3 titles, millions in the bank, HUGE house, pretty wife and potentially 2 lovey children ?



16 bathrooms (I don't know the actual number but we'll go with this) and rescue chickens


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> *One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement."*
> 
> Harry has "extraordinary ability or achievement"? What exactly is it - being a spoiled English prince?     With immigration, the burden on proof is on the petitioner or applicant depending on the type of petition or form filed. Good luck with finding strong evidence to help with that
> 
> Frankly, there's nothing wrong with him filing for a GC as a US citizen spouse and if his intention is to live in the US full time. Being a GC holder does not require him to pledge his allegiance to the US anyways.
> 
> As for US citizenship, I totally get why he wouldn't want to go for it despite the UK allowing dual citizenships. For one, he is a British Prince and his grandmother is the Head of State and it might somehow feel like he is betraying her and the country. Also, what business does a real prince have, in becoming another country's citizen, when he should have stayed in the UK to serve the people of his country?
> 
> Regardless of which immigration path he chooses to Cringe's delight, I just think it should be 100% by the book without any potential special treatment from the US government due to his princely status. Immigration is a costly and long process for regular folks like me. I was so, so stoked when my 10-year GC was approved in record time (106 days though most have to wait at least 6 months to 1.5 years or more for an approval) without another interview with USCIS.



Not to mention giving that status to a Prince, in line to the British throne, honouring royalty from a country that the US fought  hard to gain Independence from in _only_ 1776. 

If I was American and I heard about this, I'd be fighting a new American Revolutionary War.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> 16 bathrooms (I don't know the actual number but we'll go with this) and rescue chickens



After 10 we give up counting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> *One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement."*
> 
> Harry has "extraordinary ability or achievement"? What exactly is it - being a spoiled English prince?      With immigration, the burden on proof is on the petitioner or applicant depending on the type of petition or form filed. Good luck with finding strong evidence to help with that
> 
> Frankly, there's nothing wrong with him filing for a GC as a US citizen spouse and if his intention is to live in the US full time. Being a GC holder does not require him to pledge his allegiance to the US anyways.
> 
> As for US citizenship, I totally get why he wouldn't want to go for it despite the UK allowing dual citizenships. For one, *he is a British Prince and his grandmother is the Head of State and it might somehow feel like he is betraying her and the country.* Also, what business does a real prince have, in becoming another country's citizen, when he should have stayed in the UK to serve the people of his country?
> 
> Regardless of which immigration path he chooses to Cringe's delight, I just think it should be 100% by the book without any potential special treatment from the US government due to his princely status. Immigration is a costly and long process for regular folks like me. I was so, so stoked when my 10-year GC was approved in record time (106 days though most have to wait at least 6 months to 1.5 years or more for an approval) without another interview with USCIS.


He's already doing this, lol


----------



## RachelCohen808

EverSoElusive said:


> My 10-year green card was just approved recently and it got me wondering if
> Harry is still present and living in the US legally  If he's not, he should be deported back to the arms of the BRF seeing how Wokey Pokey won't let him return to the UK willingly and holds him hostage in a different bathroom everyday after each carefully coordinated brand promotional electric bike ride



He might have a diplomatic passport. I could not find online if the Royal family travels on regular passports or diplomatic ones except that the Queen does not need a passport at all. But there is still a possibility he has a diplomatic passport which allows the holder to travel and stay in foreign countries freely. One of my clients at work was a member of the Saudi Royal family and she had a diplomatic passport. However, I do not know how common it is among the European royalty to hold a diplomatic travelling document.


----------



## chicinthecity777

EverSoElusive said:


> Since we have zero idea what US immigration status is allowing him to live and work in the US, I'll just state a few things in general.
> 
> If he came to the US using a B-1/B-2 tourism/business visit visa OR through the VWP (without filing to adjust his non-immigrant status to a permanent resident), Harry cannot stay full time/long term and work in the US at all, generally speaking. That's 100% illegal, but as @poopsie pointed out, CA is a sanctuary state.
> 
> Also, under normal circumstances and if we don't take the sanctuary state status into consideration, one cannot live nor work in the US without the appropriate non-immigrant visa (this is issued by a US embassy or consulate) or Employment Authorization (this is issued by USCIS) or GC (this is issued by USCIS). If one works or has businesses established on the US soil, they are subjected to taxes, whether or not they like it regardless of amount earned. Americans living and working abroad are still taxed by the IRS what more someone (citizen or not) who's physically in the US. Tax evasion is a federal offense in the US. Maybe Cringe never told Harry
> 
> This is exactly why I'm very curious about Harry's actual immigration status in the US. And with all the money that they are presumably making with the Netflix and Spotify deals, it's so illegal if they aren't paying their taxes. I hope someone is looking into them for real


Harry is a spouse of a U.S citizen! He is sponsored by MM. He doesn't need other special ability visa or etc.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Maybe he needed a little time to himself. Well, himself and his discreet security detail.
> 
> Being around regular Meghan must be stressful. Imagine what it’s like being around pregnant Meghan!





Chanbal said:


> Now you are making me feel sorry for JCMH. He needs a good book!



And a panic room to barricade himself in so he can read it


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Congratulations @EverSoElusive
> 
> 
> So, last year T&C says H won’t seek US citizenship or green card. Hmmm.  Link and story in spoiler.
> One more question OW should have asked.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Citizenship?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.
> 
> 
> The Duke may still apply for a visa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.*
> *The Duke may still apply for a visa.*
> By Chloe Foussianes
> Apr 6, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samir HusseinGetty Images
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and Archie are currently residing in Los Angeles. For the latter two, this is an easy proposition, as both are U.S. citizens; for British-born Harry, however, it's more complicated.
> The Duke of Sussex has a few options he could pursue, if he and his family are hoping to settle in America for the long haul. However, two paths he won't take, according to a new report in the _Times_, are permanent residency and citizenship—both of which he is eligible for, as a spouse of a U.S. citizen.
> As a royal source told the publication, "the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry speaks at the Endeavour Fund Awards, one of the final engagements he and Meghan attended as a working royal couple.
> WPA PoolGetty Images
> Still, there are other ways through which Harry could legally live and work in the States. One possibility that's often floated is the O-1 visa—a path designed for "individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement." As Parisa Karaahmet, a partner at immigration law firm Fragomen, recently told _Town & Country_, "It is quite common for individuals to apply for O-1 classification if they can show that they rise to a very high level of accomplishment in their fields."
> Harry would have to identify the field in which he's excelled—likely philanthropy, or something similar—and be sponsored by an organization that planned to work with him. "The drawback of the O-1 is it does have to be renewed periodically and it requires him to continue that relationship with that organization," Karaahmet said.


Maybe his plan is to get a travel VISA so he can escape from the Missus’ clutches once it expires and hightail it back to the UK


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Interesting update to this from Lady Colin’s book but this will have to wait til I am at real computer not ipad
> Harry was complaining about racial discrimination against M in 2016 , one week after their dating became public knowledge !!!!
> Lady Colin C called it in her 2020 book, she saw the race card being played


Let me try to share the stuff from Lady Colin Campbell LCC, will make several posts of it ...
and since I quote , let me say that the book is available through SCRIBD, a subscription service for book reading

1. Harry issued a manifesto the the press ONE WEEK after it was revealed in Oct 2016 ! That he was dating MM


‘Since he was young, Prince Harry has been very aware of the warmth that has been extended to him by members of the public. He feels lucky to have so many people supporting him and knows what a fortunate and privileged life he leads.

  ‘He is also aware that there is significant curiosity about his private life. He has never been comfortable with this, but has tried to develop a thick skin about the level of media interest that comes with it. He has rarely taken formal action on the very regular publication of fictional stories that are written about him and he has worked hard to develop a professional relationship with the media, focused on his work and the issues he cares about.

of the game”. He strongly disagrees. This is not a game - it is her life and his.

‘He has asked for this statement to be issued in the hopes that those in the press who have been driving this story can pause and reflect before any further damage is done. He knows that it is unusual to issue a statement like this, but hopes that fairminded people will understand why he has felt it necessary to speak publicly.’

Excerpt from: "Meghan and Harry: The Real Story" by Lady Colin Campbell. Scribd.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Read this book on Scribd: https://www.scribd.com/book/469068348


[...]

Excerpt from: "Meghan and Harry: The Real Story" by Lady Colin Campbell. Scribd.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Read this book on Scribd: https://www.scribd.com/book/469068348


----------



## marietouchet

LCC published her book in 2020, and here is her analysis of the manifesto, she may have written this ca 2019 , a while ago 

This statement was a masterstroke. Not only did Harry breach boundaries, but he also waded in to protect Meghan in a way he had never done with Chelsy Davy or Cressida Bonas, both of whom had had to endure years of press attention with never a word from him to protect them. This revealed that Meghan was in a class of her own. The statement also showed both of them in the most positive of lights, garnering them sympathy from the legions of romantics and admirers who were rooting them on to long- term happiness. Furthermore, it stymied further enquiry. In so doing, it muzzled not only unfair critics but also fair ones, who could thereafter be unfairly accused of racism if they did not back off. It brilliantly confused the role of valid enquirer with the trolls, by the expedient of apportioning equal blame between those who write valid stories and those who use the internet as a forum to vent their dubious opinions.
[...]

Excerpt from: "Meghan and Harry: The Real Story" by Lady Colin Campbell. Scribd.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Read this book on Scribd: https://www.scribd.com/book/469068348

sorry scribd is only allowing bits and bobs of the text .... I hope the links are useful


----------



## marietouchet

Anyway in Oct 2016, H complained about racism, press, trolls, security eg for Doria
and he brought up racism which ”stymied further inquiry” as LCC. The manifesto, by playing the race card, blunted all discussion.
so, this has been going on since Oct 2016 .... long before bullying allegations, but an amazingly short time after they started dating racism came up


----------



## EverSoElusive

RachelCohen808 said:


> He might have a diplomatic passport. I could not find online if the Royal family travels on regular passports or diplomatic ones except that the Queen does not need a passport at all. But there is still a possibility he has a diplomatic passport which allows the holder to travel and stay in foreign countries freely. One of my clients at work was a member of the Saudi Royal family and she had a diplomatic passport. However, I do not know how common it is among the European royalty to hold a diplomatic travelling document.



This is possible but I wonder can one with a diplomatic passport work, run a business etc freely (edit to add the word freely)?


----------



## rose60610

chicinthecity777 said:


> Harry is a spouse of a U.S citizen! He is sponsored by MM. He doesn't need other special ability visa or etc.



He's sponsored by MM with strings attached (more like a 112 pound spiked choke chain)--as long as he agrees to bash and throw his own family under the bus on TV with Oprah, and agrees he was trapped until Meghan came along, Meghan won't accuse HIM of racism and worse. There's no depths she won't stoop to. She's probably got his eyeballs controlled so he can't blink "rescue me" code messages after he got reprogrammed in a government black site.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> We all know he doesn’t want to start paying US taxes (or taxes at all) & not using his title so I don’t think he wants it.


he doesn't pay income tax in the US?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Anyway in Oct 2016, H complained about racism, press, trolls, security eg for Doria
> and he brought up racism which ”stymied further inquiry” as LCC. The manifesto, by playing the race card, blunted all discussion.
> so, this has been going on since Oct 2016 .... long before bullying allegations, but an amazingly short time after they started dating racism came up



The agenda was clear from the beginning.  It has not changed. Surely, QE understands the need to resolve the situation ASAP.  It’s a bit unfair to push it all to the next heir. She still has the strongest cards to play.


----------



## Chanbal

Disclosure: The article is on the subject of this thread, but I'm not familiar with J Clarkson. He doesn't predict a very bright future for MM within 5 years. 



WHAT a weird time we had after Princess Harry was interviewed in America by that strange bouffant woman in leather wellies.

*It was especially weird for me because, for the first time ever, I found myself in full agreement with both Nigel Farage AND Piers Morgan.*

Mind you, after his row with that embryonic weatherman, Piers did go on to say that Meghan had done enormous damage to the Royal Family, which meant I could go back to disagreeing with him.

Yes, she is much revered by the young and the stupid who believe that her brand of simpering victimhood will one day bring down the monarchy, but it won’t.

Over the years, kings have been beheaded and queens have executed their sisters.

There have been affairs, abdications, bug-eyed princes who claimed they could not sweat and the catastrophic It’s A Royal Knockout, which was hosted by the kiddy fiddler, Stuart Hall.

The monarchy has survived it all.

It even managed to survive George III, who was so mad, he once spoke nonsense for 58 hours straight. This is a man who let America have its independence, and who once shook hands with a tree believing it to be the King of Prussia.

And if the British monarchy can soldier on through that, I’m fairly sure it’ll be able to weather the banal musings of a silly little cable TV actress.

Her interview has already been kicked into the long grass by other, more important stories such as Boris Johnson’s plan to introduce more environmentally friendly buses.

But even if she rears back at us, like Glenn Close out of that bath, it won’t be for long because *this is a woman who, so far, has reportedly fallen out with her father, her sister, her ex, her brother-in-law, her sister-in-law, her mother-in-law and, *probably everyone in the entire world with an IQ of more than 32.

I would not be surprised if, one day, an inappropriate text will be uncovered, or she’ll say something misjudged, and she will become just another Gerald Ratner. And even if she is able to maintain the act, her fans will grow up and become accountants and land- scape gardeners and plasterers and then they’ll realise that we need a monarch.

...

Markle’s toast, and within five years, I suspect she’ll be posing for photographs, on her own outside the Taj Mahal or sitting on the back of a playboy’s yacht in the Med, and poor old Piers will realise that he lost his job over absolutely nothing at all.










						Affairs, madness and It's A Royal Knockout... royals survive it all
					

WHAT a weird time we had after Princess Harry was interviewed in America by that strange bouffant woman in leather wellies. It was especially weird for me because, for the first time ever, I found …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## duna

Jeremy Clarkson used to do Top Gear, a British TV program about cars. My DH used to watch it and he seemed a nice guy.


----------



## kemilia

Kansashalo said:


> Hope your week ended on a good note.  I've been there before except it was in a TJ Maxx.


Oh No! TJ Maxx is my happy place--we have a good one, a Home Goods store included. Cannot cry there--the aisles are too darn narrow, no place to hide out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> Jeremy Clarkson used to do Top Gear, a British TV program about cars. My DH used to watch it and he seemed a nice guy.



  worse than Piers IMO

Doesn't mean he's always wrong, but he is a nasty piece of unconstructed-male brute.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@RachelCohen808
He might have a diplomatic passport. 

@chicinthecity777 
Harry is a spouse of a U.S citizen! He is sponsored by MM. He doesn't need other special ability visa or etc. 

To get a diplomatic passport, doesn't one have to be appointed by and represent a head of state and/or government?  At the moment, Harry appears to represent only his boss Meghan and last I've heard she isn't head of state, at least not yet!


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> You guys are all so sweet, I’ll be fine.
> 
> And let’s face it, what could I possibly have gone through compared to MM?!


Uh, their "problems" more than likely pale in comparison to whatever happened to you. But then maybe one of their 48 bathrooms has a slow draining tub problem ... 

You take care of you--we need you here!!


----------



## byzina

rose60610 said:


> A healthy 36 year old on an electric bike? (cough cough) The only adjective for the bike was "expensive". I guess the brand wasn't willing to shell out. If Harry pedaled a Trek bike maybe Trek would pay? But then he'd have to pedal and exert himself, OMG. But he's here in America, where he and Meghan get over 150 million in deals and buy a mansion, while he feeds rescue chickens and rides electric bikes. And still want us to feel sorry for them.



Well, to be fair, I was a little bit surprised that they called the bike 'expensive' in the article. DM writes that it's a RadCity Step-Thru 3 for $1,499 which can be expensive for many people but it is not really expensive in terms of electric bikes. I mean, some friends of mine whose hobby is riding pay far more for their bikes. And they have quite ordinary jobs.


----------



## RachelCohen808

Maggie Muggins said:


> @RachelCohen808
> He might have a diplomatic passport.
> 
> @chicinthecity777
> Harry is a spouse of a U.S citizen! He is sponsored by MM. He doesn't need other special ability visa or etc.
> 
> To get a diplomatic passport, doesn't one have to be appointed by and represent a head of state and/or government?  At the moment, Harry appears to represent only his boss Meghan and last I've heard she isn't head of state, at least not yet!


Technically yes, it's either a member of a diplomatic mission or someone on official government business. However, some royal families have diplomatic passports. I guess it is different for Saudi since the royal family there is an active head of the state. I also just read online that the Danish royal family has diplomatic passports. British royal family clearly enjoys special treatment when it comes to  visas/travelling. For instance, Meghan as a non-EU national (they got married before Brexit) had to apply for a fiance visa which is notorious for long processing times, high fees, additional fees to pay for the NHS. For the visa to be granted applicants are required to prove that they are in a genuine relationship with the British citizen which means to include photos and text messages as your supporting documents. I do not think that they went through the process the way other people had to since it was reported that they received a visa within hours as opposed to the applicants who wait up to 9 months for the decision. So it is still possible for all members of the Royal family to possess a diplomatic passport.


----------



## floatinglili

papertiger said:


> worse than Piers IMO
> 
> Doesn't mean he's always wrong, but he is a nasty piece of unconstructed-male brute.


That’s what makes him funny ... 
He was involved in a scandal involving punching a producer but he hasn’t been specifically targeted by the cancel brigade has he?
please don’t answer that lol unless it specifically outrageous I don’t want to know, I feel worn out by the outrage.
Except for the Harkle outrage that is


----------



## EverSoElusive

chicinthecity777 said:


> Harry is a spouse of a U.S citizen! He is sponsored by MM. He doesn't need other special ability visa or etc.



The O-1 visa was only questioned and commented on because it was mentioned in a linked article  He definitely doesn't need it if he is petitioned by a US citizen spouse. However, the same linked article speculated that Harry doesn't want to go for US GC and citizenship so the only thing left is some sort of non-immigrant visa or perhaps a diplomatic passport if it exists for Harry.

Now even when a foreigner is petitioned by a US citizen spouse, there are still US immigration steps in place. I am familiar with it because I've experienced it personally 

Just to share with all, here are the steps to be taken if a US citizen spouse petitioned while the spouse is overseas (whether they live there together or not):

US citizen spouse files for I-130.
Once I-130 is approved, foreign spouse will attend an immigrant visa CR-1/IR-1 interview at the US embassy or consulate where he/she is located. CR-1 is given if marriage is less than 2 years and IR-1 if marriage is more than 2 years.
Once CR-1/IR-1 is approved and visa in passport, foreign spouse travels to the US.
At the US POE, CR-1/IR-1 holder will receive a temporary I-551 stamp pending physical GC getting mailed out to them.
When the card comes, CR-1 holder's GC is only valid for 2 years (called Conditional GC) while IR-1 holder's GC is valid for 10 years. Both allow the foreign spouse to work or engaged in business activities all the same.
This step is only meant for CR-1 holder with a Conditional GC. Foreign spouse will need to file I-751 90 days preceding the Conditional GC's expiration date, no earlier or later, to remove the conditions on their Conditional GC, which will result in an 18-month status extension letter followed by a 10-year GC (some get called for an interview, some don't). From filing time to approval for a 10-year GC, depending on which service center the case file is assigned to, it could take as little as 6 months to 1.5 years, sometimes far longer. Sometimes the I-751 may still be pending and the window to apply for citizenship has opened under the 3-year rule as a US citizen's spouse. If I-751 is not filed to remove the conditions on the Conditional GC in a timely manner, one can be placed in removal proceedings.
This step is for Conditional GC only. When a Conditional GC holder has stayed married with the same US spouse (who petitioned the original I-130) AND the 3rd year as a permanent resident is coming up, foreign spouse can choose to file for citizenship OR continue to wait for I-751 to be approved (if it hasn't) OR use the 10-year GC (file I-90 to renew every 10 years until one decides to file for citizenship). A lot of times, it's just easier to file for citizenship under the 5-year rule as less proof of relationship (EDIT: to remove redundant word) is needed.
On the other hand, if a foreign spouse travels to the US with just a B-1/B-2 visa or VWP/ESTA, once foreign spouse decides to stay long term, the US citizen spouse will file I-130 while the foreign spouse will file I-485 to adjust status from a non-immigrant to a permanent resident. If this route is taken, they need to prove that foreign spouse didn't enter the US on a tourist visa or VWP/ESTA with the intent to stay (because it's actually illegal). Before the I-485 is approved, the foreign spouse cannot work nor conduct any business at all, doesn't matter if petitioned by a US citizen spouse or not. With this route, it is guaranteed that you will get an interview for an approval or denial for the I-485. If approved, of course that means you'll get a GC. This is not a 1-month process. It generally takes at least more than 6 months to get to the approval or denial stage but typically a longer time, say 12 to 14 months.

All that is how it actually works for everyday people but if a diplomatic passport is indeed in play, things will probably be different and Harry probably won't even need to be petitioned by a US citizen spouse.

The whole 'sponsored by a US citizen spouse' business is not as simple as I personally would have liked it to be. It is a long painstaking process not to mention how costly it is to the general population that's not making a lot of money annually.

Phew! This took me a long time to type because I did it on my phone from the time I woke up to getting ready for lunch, eating lunch and waiting for some coffee now


----------



## EverSoElusive

justwatchin said:


> Maybe his plan is to get a travel VISA so he can escape from the Missus’ clutches once it expires and hightail it back to the UK



UK citizens only need an ESTA to come to the US, with each stay only lasts for a maximum of 90 days


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> worse than Piers IMO
> 
> Doesn't mean he's always wrong, but he is a nasty piece of unconstructed-male brute.


True.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Disclosure: The article is on the subject of this thread, but I'm not familiar with J Clarkson. He doesn't predict a very bright future for MM within 5 years.
> View attachment 5029275
> 
> 
> WHAT a weird time we had after Princess Harry was interviewed in America by that strange bouffant woman in leather wellies.
> 
> *It was especially weird for me because, for the first time ever, I found myself in full agreement with both Nigel Farage AND Piers Morgan.*
> 
> Mind you, after his row with that embryonic weatherman, Piers did go on to say that Meghan had done enormous damage to the Royal Family, which meant I could go back to disagreeing with him.
> 
> Yes, she is much revered by the young and the stupid who believe that her brand of simpering victimhood will one day bring down the monarchy, but it won’t.
> 
> Over the years, kings have been beheaded and queens have executed their sisters.
> 
> There have been affairs, abdications, bug-eyed princes who claimed they could not sweat and the catastrophic It’s A Royal Knockout, which was hosted by the kiddy fiddler, Stuart Hall.
> 
> The monarchy has survived it all.
> 
> It even managed to survive George III, who was so mad, he once spoke nonsense for 58 hours straight. This is a man who let America have its independence, and who once shook hands with a tree believing it to be the King of Prussia.
> 
> And if the British monarchy can soldier on through that, I’m fairly sure it’ll be able to weather the banal musings of a silly little cable TV actress.
> 
> Her interview has already been kicked into the long grass by other, more important stories such as Boris Johnson’s plan to introduce more environmentally friendly buses.
> 
> But even if she rears back at us, like Glenn Close out of that bath, it won’t be for long because *this is a woman who, so far, has reportedly fallen out with her father, her sister, her ex, her brother-in-law, her sister-in-law, her mother-in-law and, *probably everyone in the entire world with an IQ of more than 32.
> 
> I would not be surprised if, one day, an inappropriate text will be uncovered, or she’ll say something misjudged, and she will become just another Gerald Ratner. And even if she is able to maintain the act, her fans will grow up and become accountants and land- scape gardeners and plasterers and then they’ll realise that we need a monarch.
> 
> ...
> 
> Markle’s toast, and within five years, I suspect she’ll be posing for photographs, on her own outside the Taj Mahal or sitting on the back of a playboy’s yacht in the Med, and poor old Piers will realise that he lost his job over absolutely nothing at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Affairs, madness and It's A Royal Knockout... royals survive it all
> 
> 
> WHAT a weird time we had after Princess Harry was interviewed in America by that strange bouffant woman in leather wellies. It was especially weird for me because, for the first time ever, I found …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



" banal musings of a silly little cable TV actress."  I can hear her screams all the way up here in Canada!


----------



## eunaddict

xeyes said:


> Back in the day, there was a persistent rumor that part of the reason that the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother hated Edward VIII and Wallis so much was that she'd been aiming to land him, not his brother, and Edward made it clear that he wasn't interested. Who knows how much truth there was to it (if any), but it would explain a lot. She hated Edward for the rejection, and Wallis for having what she couldn't get. (Along with the whole hey-now-your-husband-has-to-deal-with-being-king thing of course.)
> 
> So, for anybody who likes comparisons between Meghan and Wallis, there's a fun one.



That rumour makes absolutely no sense. If she had wanted the man-who-would-be-king (Ed), why was she so upset when her husband then became king...? From what I understood, she'd always been more about the sense of duty aspect of the job (she's supposedly the one who instilled in QE2 the value of duty) and hated that Edward gave it all up for a woman and thereby forcing her husband into a role that he had never wanted.

MM would be thrilled if Will and Kate decided to abdicate lol.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> worse than Piers IMO
> 
> Doesn't mean he's always wrong, but he is a nasty piece of unconstructed-male brute.



Really? I only saw him on Top Gear and he seemed rather funny....


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t know who he is but he’s not wrong.

“Yes, she is much revered by the young and the stupid who believe that her brand of simpering victimhood will one day bring down the monarchy, but it won’t.”


----------



## RueMonge

Allisonfaye said:


> I have never met a pregnant woman yet who, when asked her due date, replied with a season instead of a month.


Well I did, when I got pregnant before the wedding and didn’t want to fess up to acquaintances.


----------



## carmen56

duna said:


> Really? I only saw him on Top Gear and he seemed rather funny....



Jeremy Clarkson is like Marmite - you either love him or hate him.  Personally, I like him but I know a lot of people don’t.  Each to their own, eh?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> " banal musings of a silly little cable TV actress."  I can hear her screams all the way up here in Canada!


He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.


----------



## lulilu

Just reading some articles "analyzing" Harry's demeanor in various settings, e.g., near Kate after the tiff with Meghan.  He has the petulant, pouting attitude of a teenage girl.  That's the kind of stuff my girl friends did when we were freshman in high school.  He hasn't matured at all.


----------



## Madrose

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.



Princess Diana famously posed solo in front of the Taj Mahal.


----------



## Jktgal

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.


I think what he is saying is her trajectory is taking her to a future like Diana's.


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> Really? I only saw him on Top Gear and he seemed rather funny....



Sometimes it takes someone who is 'very sure of themselves' to say what a lot of other people are thinking


----------



## elvisfan4life

jennlt said:


> And a panic room to barricade himself in so he can read it


More like colour it in


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> Just reading some articles "analyzing" Harry's demeanor in various settings, e.g., near Kate after the tiff with Meghan.  He has the petulant, pouting attitude of a teenage girl.  That's the kind of stuff my girl friends did when we were freshman in high school.  He hasn't matured at all.



Having taught many a teenage boy, Harry looks exactly like one of those when they called out for plagiarism, profess their innocence in the face of computer software, the Internet and experts, and_ still_ feel hard done by and are going to have to 'take it further'  .


----------



## lalame

I keep seeing these articles about intruders at their home. Now I think this is horrible of course, for anyone, period. But there's definitely a certain irony in leaving one of the most secure homes in the world, with 24/7 security, and now griping about not being able to afford private security for their home in LA.  Whyyyy did they think it was a good idea to do this?


----------



## rose60610

byzina said:


> Well, to be fair, I was a little bit surprised that they called the bike 'expensive' in the article. DM writes that it's a RadCity Step-Thru 3 for $1,499 which can be expensive for many people but it is not really expensive in terms of electric bikes. I mean, some friends of mine whose hobby is riding pay far more for their bikes. And they have quite ordinary jobs.



 Interesting!  Maybe Meghan "allowed" him to TRY OUT an electric bike but didn't want to shell out for the most expensive one until Harry knew he could handle one.  Were there training  wheels on it?  He should have a basket on the handle bars so he can take some rescue chickens along for a ride!


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know who he is but he’s not wrong.
> 
> “Yes, she is much revered by the young and the stupid who believe that her brand of simpering victimhood will one day bring down the monarchy, but it won’t.”



His mother made the first ever Paddington bear - the author of the book bought it and wrote the book about it the rest is history - he had written lots of funny books about being a typical middle aged middle class man


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.



Diana famously posed there on her own when her marriage was in trouble


----------



## kkfiregirl

rose60610 said:


> He should have a basket on the handle bars so he can take some rescue chickens along for a ride!



And don’t forget the seat on the back for little Archie, so he can experience bike rides H never did as a child


----------



## kkfiregirl

lulilu said:


> Just reading some articles "analyzing" Harry's demeanor in various settings, e.g., near Kate after the tiff with Meghan.  He has the petulant, pouting attitude of a teenage girl.  That's the kind of stuff my girl friends did when we were freshman in high school.  He hasn't matured at all.



I think it’s because they both experienced some sort of trauma or life upheaval as adolescents. 

_“Though narcissists can behave like adults much of the time, when they feel embarrassed, ignored or inferior they may revert to a childlike state, acting like children during the terrible twos.”_

“_In a way, this regression makes sense. Narcissistic personality disorder or a narcissistic style often develops due to early trauma or family influences that can leave aspects of a person stuck at an emotionally young age.”_

Source: 








						12 Ways Narcissists Behave Like Children
					

Narcissists' behaviors can be mystifying and maddening if you expect them to behave like adults. In truth, narcissists often act like kids in the "terrible twos."




					psychcentral.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.


Diana posing alone in front of the Taj Mahal.
Diana post separation


----------



## tiktok

This is such a great point: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...and-meghan-if-you-want-to-hang-with-a-listers

“...they may have catastrophically miscalculated reverting to Meghan’s Suits-level fame strategy (Push. Publicise. Repeat.). When (oh, the irony!) the royal family’s oft-maligned, tightly buttoned “never explain, never complain” reserve would have far better endeared them to the elite circles they wish to join.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Diana famously posed there on her own when her marriage was in trouble


On a tour with her husband who was 400 miles away


----------



## gracekelly

Harry was trying out the bike?  Had no experience on it and he wasn’t wearing a helmet?  Obviously merching as the helmet would obscure his identity and it make for a good pap picture


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> This is such a great point: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...and-meghan-if-you-want-to-hang-with-a-listers
> 
> “...they may have catastrophically miscalculated reverting to Meghan’s Suits-level fame strategy (Push. Publicise. Repeat.). When (oh, the irony!) the royal family’s oft-maligned, tightly buttoned “never explain, never complain” reserve would have far better endeared them to the elite circles they wish to join.”


Their lack of discretion during Oprah's interview made them personae non gratae in many circles imo. Who would want to invite MM&H and risk being publicly bad-mouthed?


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Harry was trying out the bike?  Had no experience on it and he wasn’t wearing a helmet?  Obviously merching as the helmet would obscure his identity and it make for a good pap picture



18 and up don't have to wear helmets when riding a bicycle in California. Now if hog ridin Harry ever upgrades to a REAL motorcycle he will be required to wear one


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Their lack of discretion during Oprah's interview made them personae non gratae in many circles imo. Who would want to invite MM&H and risk being publicly bad-mouthed?




But if you _don't_ invite them you're a racist hater. 
They really have carved some niche for themselves, haven't they


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> But if you _don't_ invite them you're a racist hater.
> They really have carved some niche for themselves, haven't they



I think the smart celebrities will be willing to take that chance. After all, you can’t be blamed for not inviting someone you don’t know. All the Hollywood elite needs to do is keep them at arm’s length and never get to know them.


----------



## RachelCohen808

Chanbal said:


> Their lack of discretion during Oprah's interview made them personae non gratae in many circles imo. Who would want to invite MM&H and risk being publicly bad-mouthed?


This video from US Open when Meghan is desperately trying to get attention from Serena's mom and being ignored pretty much sums up their future interactions with the super elites


----------



## Jayne1

Madrose said:


> Princess Diana famously posed solo in front of the Taj Mahal.


Yes, Diana was very manipulative with the media and getting everyone's attention and sympathy.

But it's not as if Charles wasn't with her on the trip. He had a curriculum to follow, meeting business leaders, making speeches and launching a new charity. So she sat on a bench by herself, in front of the Taj Mahal, wearing a bright red and purple outfit which contrasted nicely with the white mausoleum and blue sky.

Harry better watch out.  Meg knows how to play the victim card just as well as Diana. He better not get on her bad side.


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.



Diana posed there alone when she and Charles visited India - it’s supposed to be a romantic spot for couples to pose.  Diana was making the point that Charles had preferred to go off and do something else.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I keep seeing these articles about intruders at their home. Now I think this is horrible of course, for anyone, period. But there's definitely a certain irony in leaving one of the most secure homes in the world, with 24/7 security, and now griping about not being able to afford private security for their home in LA.  Whyyyy did they think it was a good idea to do this?



Oh it wasn't their original plan. They were confident they could bully Charles into paying, but he surprised them.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, Diana was very manipulative with the media and getting everyone's attention and sympathy.
> 
> But it's not as if Charles wasn't with her on the trip. He had a curriculum to follow, meeting business leaders, making speeches and launching a new charity. So she sat on a bench by herself, in front of the Taj Mahal, wearing a bright red and purple outfit which contrasted nicely with the white mausoleum and blue sky.
> 
> Harry better watch out.  Meg knows how to play the victim card just as well as Diana. He better not get on her bad side.



Meghan could very well be President---President of the Vindictive Victim Card Commonwealth. The main difference between Diana and Meghan is that people genuinely LIKED Diana because she came off as kind, warm, and somewhat shy. We quibble about her here, but she was hugely popular. Charles did himself no favors by being a dolt, so when Diana complained she got sympathy. But I don't recall Diana wallowing in self-pity 24/7 and saying nothing else. When Harry slammed his own family with Oprah, he lost any sympathy people may have had for him. All Ginge and Cringe do is whine. Who in Hollywood would even care to hang out with them? They're depressing and pathetic!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Over on the Wills and Kate thread is a very interesting article about William's last ten years. Makes you wonder, why did one brother do everything right and one, well, didn't? It's not the system's fault William fought with claws and teeth to be allowed to hold an ordinary job as a pilot for years way into his marriage while Harry preferred to go to Disney launches.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> The main difference between Diana and Meghan is that people genuinely LIKED Diana because she came off as kind, warm, and somewhat shy.



I'm not Diana's biggest fan, but there is no doubt in my mind the BRF really wronged that 19yo child she was.


----------



## mdcx

duna said:


> Jeremy Clarkson used to do Top Gear, a British TV program about cars. My DH used to watch it and he seemed a nice guy.


His ex wife has a rather different view.


----------



## Jayne1

carmen56 said:


> Diana posed there alone when she and Charles visited India - it’s supposed to be a romantic spot for couples to pose.  Diana was making the point that Charles had preferred to go off and do something else.


It wasn't scheduled as a romantic holiday though. It was a business trip, a royal tour of India. He was taking part in trade talks that day. Sounds boring doesn't it. Giving a speech to businessmen, part of his royal duties, the drudgery part of a senior working royal.

The boring kind of royal duty that H&M didn't want to do.

Here's another shot of Diana that day, in India. She was a very savvy woman, knowing just how to get across her sympathetic message to the public.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.


Famous pic of sad Diana outside the Taj Mahal jumps to mind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Watching Lady C's latest video, I'm starting to love that woman. "GRANITE is softer than me when I am crossed."


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> The agenda was clear from the beginning.  It has not changed. Surely, QE understands the need to resolve the situation ASAP.  It’s a bit unfair to push it all to the next heir. She still has the strongest cards to play.


QE2 is nobody’s fool and not a soft person. I’m not saying she isn’t kind, but she’s not ‘soft’. If she says she is saddened by what H/M went through, I can guarantee that is not all she is feeling. She is only human and has to be very angry at her grandson’s betrayal, and the duplicity of his wife. The one with the agenda to destroy her and all she stands for. I don’t know what will unfold but watch out Hazzy and the one who thinks she’s invincible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

28:37...someone allegedly working for Givenchy wrote in spilling the beans about a certain bridezilla.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Woah...apparently Meghan didn't want the Cambridge kids in her wedding party, but was made to include them. Not sure why someone working at Givenchy would know that, though. Also...guess who apparently paid for the dress. Hint: not Meghan. The woman also enlightens us why that dress was such an ill-fitting number: apparently it was thrown together last minute because Ms. Markle changed her mind a million times on the design. Last but not least: she claims Meghan slapped one of the seamstresses during one of her fittings 

Alright, last edit: I sincerely hope how Meghan treated Charlotte is made up because WTFFF. That said, didn't one of her siblings say to not leave her alone with children? Which sounded odd and over the top at the time?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments section:



> Hello from Santa Barbara, Ca! I’ve seen the grotesque couple driving around with a car full of security. Let me tell you, it’s not needed. No one here is chasing them. I’ve seen Ellen without security at the stores, Oprah in Downtown Santa Barbara without security. They look like normal people and don’t stand out. Being surrounded by security makes you stand out from the crowd. Most people wish those people would go because they ruin the atmosphere in a peaceful city.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Woah...apparently Meghan didn't want the Cambridge kids in her wedding party, but was made to include them. Not sure why someone working at Givenchy would know that, though. Also...guess who apparently paid for the dress. Hint: not Meghan. The woman also enlightens us why that dress was such an ill-fitting number: apparently it was thrown together last minute because Ms. Markle changed her mind a million times on the design. Last but not least: she claims Meghan slapped one of the seamstresses during one of her fittings
> 
> Alright, last edit: I sincerely hope how Meghan treated Charlotte is made up because WTFFF. That said, didn't one of her siblings say to not leave her alone with children? Which sounded odd and over the top at the time?



I can't remember if Givenchy made the bridesmaid dresses or if they were by different designer but maybe it came during fittings and design as each dress would of been bespoke to each child.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> I can't remember if Givenchy made the bridesmaid dresses or if they were by different designer but maybe it came during fittings and design as each dress would of been bespoke to each child.



I had to google, but yeah, Clare Waight Keller designed them.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Woah...apparently Meghan didn't want the Cambridge kids in her wedding party, but was made to include them. Not sure why someone working at Givenchy would know that, though. Also...guess who apparently paid for the dress. Hint: not Meghan. The woman also enlightens us why that dress was such an ill-fitting number: apparently it was thrown together last minute because Ms. Markle changed her mind a million times on the design. Last but not least: she claims Meghan slapped one of the seamstresses during one of her fittings
> 
> Alright, last edit: I sincerely hope how Meghan treated Charlotte is made up because WTFFF. That said, didn't one of her siblings say to not leave her alone with children? Which sounded odd and over the top at the time?



This was on a blog three days ago.  See here to read it yourself.


----------



## RachelCohen808

I thought the dress was ill-fitted because it was the exact copy of the dress designed and worn by the Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. As well as the veil. I guess Meghan wanted to make a statement with it but did not consider how different it will look on her body.


----------



## kkfiregirl

RachelCohen808 said:


> I thought the dress was ill fitted because it was the exact copy of the dress designed and worn by the Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. As well as the veil. I guess Meghan wanted to make a statement with it.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5029975



Wow, so you mean Meghan wasn’t the _FIRST_ black woman to marry European royalty??!! The way she kept going on about being an inspiration to black girls, I thought for sure she was the first.


----------



## CeeJay

Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!


----------



## kipp

RachelCohen808 said:


> I thought the dress was ill fitted because it was the exact copy of the dress designed and worn by the Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. As well as the veil. I guess Meghan wanted to make a statement with it.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5029975


What was I saying about plagiarism?  We can add this to the list.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!



We've missed your comments. Get well soon!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> This was on a blog three days ago.  See here to read it yourself.




Thank you, I sometimes type out the best pieces of Lady CC's videos for people who don't want to watch, but that was entirely too long. Also, Maria = the Cambridges' nanny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Nasty *****iness in an environment where Meghan probably thought it would never dare be reported fits her character;

But, part of this narrative seems doubtful: Meghan's veil was featured in articles as it included hand embroidered flowers of all the national flowers of the Commonwealth, so the comment about Clare trying to get Meghan "to try a more understated veil" doesn't make sense to me. A separate group, if I remember correctly were given responsibility for sewing it?

Edited to thank QueenofWrapDresses for identifying "Maria." I missed that connection when I read it. That Meghan did this in front of Maria as a witness makes it even worse, I think it was deliberate so it would get back to Catherine and make her upset. HORRID HORRID and she was only getting started.....


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> This was on a blog three days ago.  See here to read it yourself.




Wow, I'm almost speechless.     If this is true, this woman is completely crazy. It's very possible that she didn't want Charlotte and George participating on her wedding. Will told H that he shouldn't rush into marriage, and we know what happens to people that go against what MM wants.

Interesting that the word "coddle" is also used here. According to a previous article, she allegedly said “_it's not my job to coddle people_” after bullying her aids.

Ivy Mulroney's description as a bully should not come as a big surprise. Kids often copy their parents.


----------



## jennlt

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!


Take care of yourself and get well soon!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!


my achy bones send good vibes to yours


----------



## Annawakes

I’m not surprised she was so mean to little Charlotte.  Charlotte is a blood princess, she was *born* a princess, so that already makes her light years ahead of her status-wise.  Awful.  Awful. Awful.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Wow, I'm almost speechless.     If this is true, this woman is completely crazy. It's very possible that she didn't want Charlotte and George participating on her wedding. Will told H that he shouldn't rush into marriage, and we know what happens to people that go against what MM wants.
> 
> Interesting that the word "coddle" is also used here. According to a previous article, she allegedly said “_it's not my job to coddle people_” after bullying her aids.
> 
> Ivy Mulroney's description as a bully should not come as a big surprise. Kids often copy their parents.


I am horrified at the allegation that Charlotte was bullied by adults, kids are off limits


----------



## mdcx

needlv said:


> This was on a blog three days ago.  See here to read it yourself.



This is so sad. Any mother would be deeply concerned and offended that someone treated their child this way, and in front of so many people. Really shows she has no scruples. I feel for all the seamstresses. They would work for/with extremely wealthy clients all the time, and this is probably some of the worst behaviour they have witnessed.


----------



## kkfiregirl

mdcx said:


> This is so sad. Any mother would be deeply concerned and offended that someone treated their child this way, and in front of so many people. Really shows she has no scruples. I feel for all the seamstresses. They would work for/with extremely wealthy clients all the time, and this is probably some of the worst behaviour they have witnessed.



Agreed. I hope this isn’t true; it sounds a bit too far-fetched and unbelievable to be true. Perhaps there are some true aspects? I mean Charlotte was 3 at the time of the alleged incident - so basically a baby. I just find it hard to believe that someone would be so cruel to an innocent babe.


----------



## mdcx

They do say that wealth magnifies your existing character, personality etc, so this is probably just the uber version of the Meghan she has been all along.
The vibe of nasty snobbishness and condescension/contempt because she is prettier, thinner, more famous, more wealthy is pretty strong. It emanates from Jess Mulroney as well. 
I do wonder if a lot of it is classism on Meghan's part. Being perfectly groomed and with perfect teeth/hair/clothes/skin etc is not standard in the UK, even among aristos, the wealthy, those working in the Palace, ateliers etc. 
I get the impression Meghan only offers good behaviour to those who meet her exacting standards of appearance, grooming, wealth etc and/or who have something she wants. Whereas Kate would have treated them all with utmost respect, no matter how they looked or spoke etc.

The above is another reason in my opinion why she wanted her dad to not be part of the picture.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!



Do get well soon!  Glad you're back to lend assistance to our constructive criticisms of H&M. If only they'd listen! Here we are, trying to help, and they just ignore us and continue to destroy themselves.  If they listened to us, people would actually like them. But you can't help those who don't want it. But hey, we're only do-gooders who want to help


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!


Missed you and your clever wit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Queen plans *diversity drive*: Royals will boost existing programmes as Harry and Meghan's accusations of racism are blamed for 'unproductive' peace talks with William and Charles

The Queen will be appointing a diversity tsar to modernise the Monarchy
Palace will 'seek independent views' to help improve approach to diversity
Move is part of a major drive encompassing Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9384685/Queen-plans-diversity-drive.html​



One source said: ‘Philip has told the Queen that he should just be driven off to the Chapel in Windsor in the back of a Land Rover. No fanfare. No fuss.’ There is likely to be plenty more fuss emanating from the Sussexes’ £11 million Montecito mansion, however.

But Her Majesty, a dedicated card player, knows the rules of patience – and will not allow Harry and Meghan to derail the Monarchy she has worked so hard to maintain. 






Spoiler: Diversity drive



The Queen is to appoint a diversity tsar to modernise the Monarchy, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Sources say the proposed move is an acknowledgment that 'more needs to be done' to champion minorities' rights and follows the explosive claims made by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of institutional racism.

As part of a major drive encompassing Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace, aides will undertake a 'listen and learn' exercise over the coming weeks which will involve speaking to a range of businesses and individuals about how the Monarchy can improve representation.

Plans seen by this newspaper detail how the Palace will 'seek independent views' to help assess and improve the approach to diversity – including ethnic minorities, the disabled and the gay and trans communities.
The potential recruitment of a diversity chief to champion reform is also set out.

A Royal source said: 'This is an issue which has been taken very seriously across the Households.

'We have the policies, procedures and programmes in place but we haven't seen the progress we would like and accept more needs to be done. We can always improve.

'We are not afraid to look at new ways of approaching it. The work to do this has been under way for some time now and comes with the full support of the family.'

The project has been given fresh impetus as Harry and Meghan appear to step up their battle with the Royal Family over racism.

In their interview with Oprah Winfrey, they claimed a family member asked how dark their son Archie's skin might be – although their accounts differed as to whether the alleged comment was made before or during pregnancy.

Ms Winfrey responded: 'Because they were concerned that if he were too brown, that that would be a problem? Are you saying that?'

Meghan replied: 'I wasn't able to follow up with why, but if that's the assumption you're making, I think that feels like a pretty safe one.'

Article continues...


----------



## xeyes

eunaddict said:


> That rumour makes absolutely no sense. If she had wanted the man-who-would-be-king (Ed), why was she so upset when her husband then became king...? From what I understood, she'd always been more about the sense of duty aspect of the job (she's supposedly the one who instilled in QE2 the value of duty) and hated that Edward gave it all up for a woman and thereby forcing her husband into a role that he had never wanted.
> 
> MM would be thrilled if Will and Kate decided to abdicate lol.



i think the idea behind the rumor may have been that it may not have been entirely about being queen for her - she may have been more attracted to Edward VIII instead of his brother initially, and resented his rejection of her. By the time of the abdication, she was in a happy marriage with Bertie, and, even though she became queen, as you said, she hated what becoming King would do to her husband, and blamed David for it, as well as for his dereliction of duty. That dereliction not only would have gone against her own sense of duty, but caused problems for the monarchy that she and Bertie had to deal with for a long time. So, she would have had a number of things to hold against him. (She _really _didn’t like Wallis, too.)

I’m neither her defender nor her detractor, though - just passing on some old dirt.


----------



## viciel

Harry resents Charles, always has and always will. His resentment towards his father is partly due to him blaming Charles for Diana's death, and partly due to his having to be financially supported by Charles. Harry enjoys the privilege and the life Charles' money can buy yet cannot help but recognize deep down that his resentment alone is not enough to stop him from cutting Charles off.

Meghan is controlling, her posture and gestures in all the interviews make that very clear. She is able to manipulate Harry due to his mental vulnerability.

Harry married Meghan because Meghan represents his mum. He was too young to protect Diana, so Meghan is his Diana. Harry is a boy, through and through, and that was all the window Meghan needed to seize the opportunity. None of his previous girlfriends were able fulfill the role of his mum for him. Harry is "protecting" Meghan because she represents Diana.

Chelsy Davy was just like Harry, and Cressida Bonas was too clever to realize Harry would never be a man. Everyone else in between were all flings. Why would anyone take you seriously if all you ever have been is a party boy that wanders through life aimlessly? You are the company you keep. And anyone smart enough to see through you would not stick around long enough, they won't bother, they'd have better self respect.

Harry is a hostage, but he is in the predicament he's in due to his own doing. They will never divorce. She will always be the driving force of everything they do. He will continue to be miserable and will never see it as his own doing or Meghan's - none of them do. Meghan will blame everyone else for her "problems" because she's a narcissist. Harry will blame everyone else (except Meghan) for his "problems" because he's a follower and will follow down whichever path his wife leads.

This is only going to worsen if The Firm continues to coddle them. Drawing boundaries and refusing to engage is the only way to stop the abuse. What Harry and Meghan are doing is abuse. It's gaslighting and it's abuse.


----------



## Jayne1

viciel said:


> Harry married Meghan because Meghan represents his mum. He was too young to protect Diana, so Meghan is his Diana. Harry is a boy, through and through, and that was all the window Meghan needed to seize the opportunity. None of his previous girlfriends were able fulfill the role of his mum for him. Harry is "protecting" Meghan because she represents Diana.
> 
> Chelsy Davy was just like Harry, and Cressida Bonas was too clever to realize Harry would never be a man. Everyone else in between were all flings. Why would anyone take you seriously if all you ever have been is a party boy that wanders through life aimlessly? You are the company you keep. And anyone smart enough to see through you would not stick around long enough, they won't bother, they'd have better self respect.
> 
> Harry is a hostage, but he is in the predicament he's in due to his own doing. They will never divorce. She will always be the driving force of everything they do. He will continue to be miserable and will never see it as his own doing or Meghan's - none of them do. Meghan will blame everyone else for her "problems" because she's a narcissist. Harry will blame everyone else (except Meghan) for his "problems" because he's a follower and will follow down whichever path his wife leads.
> 
> This is only going to worsen if The Firm continues to coddle them. Drawing boundaries and refusing to engage is the only way to stop the abuse. What Harry and Meghan are doing is abuse. It's gaslighting and it's abuse.


That's quite brilliant!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

RachelCohen808 said:


> I thought the dress was ill-fitted because it was the exact copy of the dress designed and worn by the Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. As well as the veil. I guess Meghan wanted to make a statement with it but did not consider how different it will look on her body.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5029975


Wow they do look very similar. Even the flowers from this distance. I expected better from CWK.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. I have had to skip over 100 pages, just haven't been online as much thanks to my stinkin' body's joints and broken bones!


Im sorry to hear that. Hope you feel better soon


----------



## Roxanna

I wonder if  incidents  with Princess Charlotte happened at the time when press was full of  adoration of her?  I might be wrong, but I think   it was about the same time If so it makes things even more horrible.  It seems like M was competing with child.


----------



## kkfiregirl

I just re-read the entire dress fitting thing, and ... I don’t believe the part about MM being mean to Charlotte. If Charlotte’s nanny was present, why couldn’t she speak up or step outside to call Charlotte’s parents? I just find it hard to believe that the nanny would allow MM to mock Charlotte for crying. 

I do believe the portions about MM being mean/rude to the Givenchy staff, but to be mean to her SIL’s child in front of her nanny and others? I don’t think she is insane or an idiot, so that part seems exaggerated to me. 

Anyway, this story was relayed to anonymous by her cousin who wasn’t even present herself when everything supposedly went down, which leads me to believe that the story isn’t entirely accurate.


----------



## Chanbal

QE is the boss, she is the one that runs the monarchy and not the 'men in suits' as MM&H implied during their interview... 

"_*Her Majesty will not allow Prince Harry and Meghan to derail the Monarchy*_

*The Queen is not some sort of puppet.*_ The Queen is the Monarch. The head of the Monarchy. The head of the Royal Family. Her Majesty is the institution. It’s not run by a sinister organisation, which is what the Sussexes seemed to be suggesting.’ The Sussexes went out of their way during their Oprah interview not to criticise the Queen personally. 

Indeed, they repeatedly told warm anecdotes about her. Cynics have suggested that this may have been because they were well aware how their popularity had plummeted in Britain and how much further it would fall if they disrespected the Queen. Regardless, the damage had been done. 

It didn’t help either that they had already said – in what was seen as a challenge to a staid, unreformed Monarchy – that they themselves would ‘carve out a progressive new role within this institution’. _

*William is increasingly acting as The Firm’s ‘gatekeeper’ – a role previously performed by Prince Philip.*"









						Palace aide rubbishes Harry and Meghan's claim about who runs Monarchy
					

In response to Harry and Meghan's incendiary and hurtful accusations - addressed to a global TV audience of millions - the Queen has responded with a show of force.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

double post


----------



## Annawakes

kkfiregirl said:


> I just re-read the entire dress fitting thing, and ... I don’t believe the part about MM being mean to Charlotte. If Charlotte’s nanny was present, why couldn’t she speak up or step outside to call Charlotte’s parents? I just find it hard to believe that the nanny would allow MM to mock Charlotte for crying.
> 
> I do believe the portions about MM being mean/rude to the Givenchy staff, but to be mean to her SIL’s child in front of her nanny and others? I don’t think she is insane or an idiot, so that part seems exaggerated to me.
> 
> Anyway, this story was relayed to anonymous by her cousin who wasn’t even present herself when everything supposedly went down, which leads me to believe that the story isn’t entirely accurate.


My guess is that Charlotte’s nanny probably wasn’t allowed to speak to MM, being “the help”.  Or if she was, I’m fairly certain MM wouldn’t have listened to her, to “stop” mocking Charlotte.  Doesn’t seem like she would listen to “the help”.

I think the nanny (Maria) told Catherine the first chance she got, which is when Catherine confronted MM about it. And then MM made her cry. I’m guessing tears of fury, not of sadness.

I think MM would absolutely be mean to whoever she wants to be mean to, because it’s HER wedding, and besides, who would contradict HER truth?


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Anyway, this story was relayed to anonymous by her cousin who wasn’t even present herself when everything supposedly went down, which leads me to believe that the story isn’t entirely accurate.



Yeah, I’m skeptical. I can imagine Meghan being a bridezilla for sure but that story is too outrageous. The anonymous source could have made it all up or greatly exaggerated it.
(Kind of like Meghan does herself.)


----------



## kkfiregirl

Annawakes said:


> My guess is that Charlotte’s nanny probably wasn’t allowed to speak to MM, being “the help”.  Or if she was, I’m fairly certain MM wouldn’t have listened to her, to “stop” mocking Charlotte.  Doesn’t seem like she would listen to “the help”.
> 
> I think the nanny (Maria) told Catherine the first chance she got, which is when Catherine confronted MM about it. And then MM made her cry. I’m guessing tears of fury, not of sadness.
> 
> I think MM would absolutely be mean to whoever she wants to be mean to, because it’s HER wedding, and besides, who would contradict HER truth?



Yes, but surely the nanny can use her cell phone to call Charlotte’s parents? MM’s behavior as described in the post sounds abusive- I don’t see how a nanny could allow the child she cares for to be abused by anyone.

I do think Meghan was very mean and behaved badly, I’m just not sure I believe she was cruel to Charlotte in the manner described.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We will never know the details, except someone cried, flowers were sent, apologies made, story over — until MM told the world...which proves she is indeed a bully. Enough said.  These family squabbles are not unusual, especially around a wedding. What separates the “wheat from the chaff” is making it all public.  Now, ITV wants to air the ‘unseen’ footage.  More venom from H&M. The world moves forward while they stay stuck in their past.









						William is still 'very upset' after Harry and Meghan's interview
					

Prince William is 'very upset' by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey and comments made by Prince Harry that his brother was 'trapped' were 'way off the mark', a source said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, ITV wants to air the ‘unseen’ footage. More venom from H&M. The world moves forward while they stay stuck in their past.



My guess is that they want to air the unseen footage to blackmail Charles for money.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a shocking article.. 



"_The ad promoting Scientology’s own TV channel ran during the US broadcast of the interview on Sunday evening on CBS, which saw Meghan and Harry accuse the Royal Family of racism and poor treatment.

Detractors of the church say it smacks of “tremendous hypocrisy” given widespread claims of abuses within the religion and allegations of anti-black racism against late Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard._









						Oprah Winfrey under fire over Scientology ad during Harry and Meghan interview
					

OPRAH Winfrey has been blasted by critics of Scientology after an advert for the controversial church aired during her interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The ad promoting Scientology’s …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## lulilu

jelliedfeels said:


> Wow they do look very similar. Even the flowers from this distance. I expected better from CWK.



I am kind of gobsmacked that MM's dress is identical.  No imagination at all.  So pathetic.




kkfiregirl said:


> I just re-read the entire dress fitting thing, and ... I don’t believe the part about MM being mean to Charlotte. If Charlotte’s nanny was present, why couldn’t she speak up or step outside to call Charlotte’s parents? I just find it hard to believe that the nanny would allow MM to mock Charlotte for crying.
> I do believe the portions about MM being mean/rude to the Givenchy staff, but to be mean to her SIL’s child in front of her nanny and others? I don’t think she is insane or an idiot, so that part seems exaggerated to me.
> Anyway, this story was relayed to anonymous by her cousin who wasn’t even present herself when everything supposedly went down, which leads me to believe that the story isn’t entirely accurate.





Annawakes said:


> My guess is that Charlotte’s nanny probably wasn’t allowed to speak to MM, being “the help”.  Or if she was, I’m fairly certain MM wouldn’t have listened to her, to “stop” mocking Charlotte.  Doesn’t seem like she would listen to “the help”.
> I think the nanny (Maria) told Catherine the first chance she got, which is when Catherine confronted MM about it. And then MM made her cry. I’m guessing tears of fury, not of sadness.
> I think MM would absolutely be mean to whoever she wants to be mean to, because it’s HER wedding, and besides, who would contradict HER truth?



I would not be surprised if this is largely true.  Wasn't there a story that Meghan was rude to one of Catherine's staff and Catherine called her on it?  That could be Maria if Maria made any effort to protect Charlotte.  And I agree that Maria would not feel she was in a position to correct Meghan or interfere overtly at the time. She would likely report to Catherine instead.

i always thought the flower girls with bare legs and shoes was odd.  Looked uncomfortable and not well done at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a shocking article..
> View attachment 5030244




OW & GK have really lost respect and credibility with this interview. Sure, they may have gained $$$ but we all know _that_ saying, ‘the path to hell...’. Now, the rumors are Brittany Spears wants OW to interview her. Haaaa, tabloidTV has found a home. 

ETA:  Meanwhile, the monarchy continues to go forward with style and grace


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW & GK have really lost respect and credibility with this interview. Sure, they may have gained $$$ but we all know _that_ saying, ‘the path to hell...’. Now, the rumors are Brittany Spears want OW to interview her. Haaaa, tabloidTV has found a home.
> 
> ETA:  Meanwhile, the monarchy continues to go forward


OW & GK have plenty of money, they didn't need to go so low. I believe they lost the admiration of many...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

I don’t have any problems whatsoever believing that Maria was not able to talk back, intervene or even contact Kate via phone while these hurtful interactions were unfolding. 
This is not some moneyed-middle-class household we are talking about, this is a formal aristocratic household, a vestige from the days when the aristocrats owned basically everything and the common workers were looked upon as almost a different group of creatures altogether (think ‘Pygmalion’) 
The remnant class system mentality even amongst quite ordinary British can be a shock to those not born there.
The free flow between people is not at all the same and the urge to avoid creating a scene in the moment would be primary motivation numero uno. 
Having the help intervene in the moment by talking back to Meg Markles would have been enough to have her risk being sacked IMO.


----------



## drifter

don't know if this has been mentioned before but there's a thread saying that the celebrity subforum, in particular this thread is so cruel.  In case we get cancelled here, just wanna say that I enjoyed all the witty and informative comments here.


----------



## pukasonqo

drifter said:


> don't know if this has been mentioned before but there's a thread saying that the celebrity subforum, in particular this thread is so cruel.  In case we get cancelled here, just wanna say that I enjoyed all the witty and informative comments here.


Everybody has a right to voice their opinion, for some this threat seems aggressive, for others is amusing
The poster probably didn’t feel that her POV would be heard or she would be judged harshly so I see why she needed to post her view
BTW, do you realise that the thread is on a subforum to which not many posters have access to so there is no much point on raising the matter here except to raise speculation


----------



## poopsie

pukasonqo said:


> Everybody has a right to voice their opinion, for some this threat seems aggressive, for others is amusing
> The poster probably didn’t feel that her POV would be heard or she would be judged harshly so I see why she needed to post her view
> *BTW, do you realise that the thread is on a subforum to which not many posters have access to so there is no much point on raising the matter here* except to raise speculation



This


----------



## poopsie

Nothing, really, just some minor


----------



## papertiger

Slightly horrified by latest gossip re the fittings for the the wedding (Lady C reports and Tweet). Exaggerated or not, kinda adding-up for me.

Dedicated to MM and her Bridezilla moments and beyond




BTW, I also love that Lady C commented that Scobie = Head of Ministry for Propaganda. Perfect!


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> Everybody has a right to voice their opinion, for some this threat seems aggressive, for others is amusing
> The poster probably didn’t feel that her POV would be heard or she would be judged harshly so I see why she needed to post her view
> *BTW, do you realise that the thread is on a subforum to which not many posters have access to so there is no much point on raising the matter here except to raise speculation*



I’m puzzled.  Doesn’t everyone have access to this thread?


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Considering where Meghan and Prince Harry wish to end up, are they blowing it big-time? In the commotion over who the Sussexes are upsetting (royal family, British press, British public, and the real victim in all this, Piers Morgan’s wife, who has him back, cluttering up the kitchen in the morning), are we forgetting that the couple may have become *too noisy and leaky* for the scrupulously private mega A-list ranks they evidently yearn to join?_

The serious issues of race and mental health have been much discussed. But let’s look at this through the lens of the type of celebrity and status the Sussexes appear to be aiming for. First, that interview, where Oprah Winfrey was allowed to bash away at the Sussex piñata for headline-generating goodies. Now the leak from Oprah’s mate, Gayle King – about the couple’s “non-productive” talks with Prince William – presumed to emanate from Meghan.
So, from speaking their truth to leaking their truth? That was quick. Is this a good look for the “global philanthropy”-minded couple? Put it this way: has Michelle ***** ever sat on a TV sofa *****ing about her sister-in-law?

Supporters and detractors alike perceive the Oprah interview as the Sussexes’ golden ticket into the US elite, but it’s not as simple as that. While it’s accepted that such behaviour is offensive to the royals, it’s forgotten that it’s also the antithesis of how the mega-rich, uber-influential, notoriously private elite conduct themselves. The Sussexes aren’t going after standard-issue celebrity: one doubts their game plan is to end up on Dancing with the Stars. This is about the higher echelons of fame, at least Beyoncé/Clooney level, maybe *****/Gates, considering those philanthropic impulses, a bit of swishing around with earnestly normcore billionaires or trillionaires, tech moguls and the like.

Anyone who’s ever fleetingly ventured into such elite orbits will tell you that they’re a discreet breed, living in micro-managed worlds, operating a strict privacy-first code. Getting close to them is like pushing through plasma. If they give out personal information, it’s in a tightly disciplined way. These people are unlikely to feel true kinship with people who give explosive gut-spilling interviews, never mind leak private family conversations to showbiz journalists.

In such rarefied circles, the Sussexes simply don’t fit in. Whatever supportive platitudes are spouted, in private, eyebrows may be being raised at the oversharing.

I wish the couple only well, because – chrissakes! – why not? However, they may have catastrophically miscalculated reverting to Meghan’s Suits-level fame strategy (Push. Publicise. Repeat.). When (oh, the irony!) the royal family’s oft-maligned, tightly buttoned “never explain, never complain” reserve would have far better endeared them to the elite circles they wish to join. They say you should dress for the job you want, and perhaps, exposure-wise, the Sussexes should have maintained self-control for the social position they want. It’s a bit late now.










						Will Harry and Meghan learn the A-list art of saying nothing at all? | Barbara Ellen
					

To join Clooney, Gates, Beyoncé and co, the royal couple might need a little discretion




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not a fan of MM. I didn't understand his reference to the Taj Mahal (posing for photographs outside of it). I wonder if this is supposed to mean something.



Probably because there's a famous photo of Diana sitting on her own looking at the Taj Mahal....


----------



## duna

mdcx said:


> His ex wife has a rather different view.



I don't know anything about his private life....I'm sure she has, like most ex wives, lol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> But, part of this narrative seems doubtful: Meghan's veil was featured in articles as it included hand embroidered flowers of all the national flowers of the Commonwealth, so the comment about Clare trying to get Meghan "to try a more understated veil" doesn't make sense to me. A separate group, if I remember correctly were given responsibility for sewing it?



Yes, but wouldn't they talk about the wedding look as a whole, even if the making of the veil was being outsourced? Plus, understated could have meant "You don't need it trailing 20 foots behind you or cover your at least once divorced face", not "Let's forego the embroidery". But that said, we have no way of knowing if this is all true or someone decided "If the Sussexes can lie, so can we" (not accusing the BRF, apparently a lot of monarchy supporters are extremely upset about the Sussexes' shenaningans). It just sounds an awful lot like what we've learned of Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Interesting that the word "coddle" is also used here. According to a previous article, she allegedly said “_it's not my job to coddle people_” after bullying her aids.



I immediately picked up on this too!


----------



## duna

duna said:


> Probably because there's a famous photo of Diana sitting on her own looking at the Taj Mahal....



Oops, sorry , I see this has been answered several times already:  I can't keep up with this thread, it's too fast, lol!


----------



## needlv

Has anyone seen the Clooneys comment on the interview circus with MM&H?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen the Clooneys comment on the interview circus with MM&H?



I have not...care to quote or link?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

So. In the OW interview, MM says she was told to be 50% less. Such an odd comment. Wonder if this is what was said originally:

from 2018:
_Daily Mail continued, noting that Meghan's fashion "boldness" has been causing a bit of a stir among the House of Windsor. "*Meghan is being told she needs to start dressing less like a Hollywood star and more like a Royal*," sources from a Kensington Palace fashion team confessed to The Mail on Sunday. Can this poor gal catch a break!?_









						Everything We Know About the Royal Wedding, So Far
					

With the May 19th royal wedding fast approaching, here's everything we know about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's nuptials




					www.brides.com


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have not...care to quote or link?


I haven’t seen any statement... I think the silence may be saying something...


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Considering where Meghan and Prince Harry wish to end up, are they blowing it big-time? In the commotion over who the Sussexes are upsetting (royal family, British press, British public, and the real victim in all this, Piers Morgan’s wife, who has him back, cluttering up the kitchen in the morning), are we forgetting that the couple may have become *too noisy and leaky* for the scrupulously private mega A-list ranks they evidently yearn to join?_
> 
> The serious issues of race and mental health have been much discussed. But let’s look at this through the lens of the type of celebrity and status the Sussexes appear to be aiming for. First, that interview, where Oprah Winfrey was allowed to bash away at the Sussex piñata for headline-generating goodies. Now the leak from Oprah’s mate, Gayle King – about the couple’s “non-productive” talks with Prince William – presumed to emanate from Meghan.
> So, from speaking their truth to leaking their truth? That was quick. Is this a good look for the “global philanthropy”-minded couple? Put it this way: has Michelle ***** ever sat on a TV sofa *****ing about her sister-in-law?
> 
> Supporters and detractors alike perceive the Oprah interview as the Sussexes’ golden ticket into the US elite, but it’s not as simple as that. While it’s accepted that such behaviour is offensive to the royals, it’s forgotten that it’s also the antithesis of how the mega-rich, uber-influential, notoriously private elite conduct themselves. The Sussexes aren’t going after standard-issue celebrity: one doubts their game plan is to end up on Dancing with the Stars. This is about the higher echelons of fame, at least Beyoncé/Clooney level, maybe *****/Gates, considering those philanthropic impulses, a bit of swishing around with earnestly normcore billionaires or trillionaires, tech moguls and the like.
> 
> Anyone who’s ever fleetingly ventured into such elite orbits will tell you that they’re a discreet breed, living in micro-managed worlds, operating a strict privacy-first code. Getting close to them is like pushing through plasma. If they give out personal information, it’s in a tightly disciplined way. These people are unlikely to feel true kinship with people who give explosive gut-spilling interviews, never mind leak private family conversations to showbiz journalists.
> 
> In such rarefied circles, the Sussexes simply don’t fit in. Whatever supportive platitudes are spouted, in private, eyebrows may be being raised at the oversharing.
> 
> I wish the couple only well, because – chrissakes! – why not? However, they may have catastrophically miscalculated reverting to Meghan’s Suits-level fame strategy (Push. Publicise. Repeat.). When (oh, the irony!) the royal family’s oft-maligned, tightly buttoned “never explain, never complain” reserve would have far better endeared them to the elite circles they wish to join. They say you should dress for the job you want, and perhaps, exposure-wise, the Sussexes should have maintained self-control for the social position they want. It’s a bit late now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Harry and Meghan learn the A-list art of saying nothing at all? | Barbara Ellen
> 
> 
> To join Clooney, Gates, Beyoncé and co, the royal couple might need a little discretion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



I'm amazed it takes these 'opinion pieces' journos so long to get round to what we said <<<<<<<< w a a a yyyyyyyy back on this thread.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> I haven’t seen any statement... I think the silence may be saying something...



Amal is a lawyer/barrister.

That's all I need to say


----------



## needlv

Nice commentary by the spectator (Australia).  https://spectator.com.au/2021/03/daughter-in-law-from-hell/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I haven’t seen any statement... I think the silence may be saying something...



Ah ok. I haven't seen anything either...but I thought a few weeks ago Amal saw the reading on the wall early on and removed herself from the situation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear.  She did it to herself, friends, she did it to herself.








						A handy guide to Marklism | The Spectator Australia
					

Many of us have been watching in in awe at the profound impact that Meghan and Harry’s Oprah interview has had on the fight against endemic injustice.There has been an outpouring of empathy for the…




					spectator.com.au
				







Spoiler: Marklisms



*A handy guide to Marklism*
Andy Shaw





Many of us have been watching in in awe at the profound impact that Meghan and Harry’s Oprah interview has had on the fight against endemic injustice.There has been an outpouring of empathy for the royal Duchess’s suffering at the hands of the British. Not only has she had to live through the public spectacle of a royal wedding, she has had to endure the indignity of public scrutiny every time she wishes to travel by private jet. This is not how a victim should be treated. The Duchess has harnessed a wave of American support and challenged one of the oldest institutions on earth. She shows us that the world can be turned upside down when the power of suffering is successfully harnessed.

Such was the emotive power of her interview that a presidential bid is now being mooted for Markle. What would President Markle bring to America? Here are the five tenets of Marklism:

*Find your voice*
The Duchess is living proof that now is the time to find your inner victim and unleash her/him/they for the greater good. There is an oppressed person within all of us, just waiting to get out. Your subjugation may be latent and inert, but with hard work you can nurture it into an effective victim identity. Look to Meghan for your inspiration. If a Duchess can identify her inner victim there is hope for the rest of us.

*Be inspired*
You may find it hard to uncover your own personal oppression, but you can find inspiration in historical figures. Imagine yourself in the shoes of Emmeline Pankhurst or Rosa Parks and re-enact their struggles in your mind. If you find that reading books or studying history is too difficult, simply turn on the telly and watch some cartoons. This is how Meghan discovered the oppression-busting idol, the Little Mermaid. Although the Little Mermaid wasn’t forced to sit at the back of a bus, face workplace discrimination or denied the vote, she did struggle to confine herself to gender-species norms as a semi aquatic being. Mermaids have always suffered from the unwarranted lust of imperial sailors. They are directly linked to colonial oppression.

*Speak your truth*
Once you have developed your victim identity, it will be time for you to ‘speak your truth’. This announces your presence to the world and ensures that, not only will you be listened to, but you will also be believed. Your truth may diverge from real events, but you will be judged by your skill in narrative construction, rather than the presentation of facts. Next time your boss accuses you of bullying behaviour at work, try harnessing the power of story to reclaim the narrative. As Meghan has shown, life is about the stories we tell ourselves.

*Play your part*
Remember that ‘your truth’ can only become ‘our truth’ if we have an emotional connection with your reality. Just like Meghan, you must learn your lines, but it is equally important to emote. Try tilting your head to the side, widening your watery eyes and presenting your ‘I know .. I know .. I couldn’t believe it either’ face. Ask a friend to nod supportively as you elucidate your pain.

*Feel your power*
Do not waste time demonstrating that you are a kind, compassionate human being. Simply state that you are these things. Do not accept duties that are not enhancing to your own sense of self worth. If cutting ribbons is too burdensome, do not be afraid to cut ties with family instead. The past is only there to constrain you. Like Meghan you should not waste time pondering the reason why you have the platform that you do.  Remember, power has shifted to those who pretend that they are powerless. Meghan shows us that being silenced is better than being silent.


----------



## needlv

Oh my - you have to see this website... 









						Harry for VP
					

United by love. United by truth. 	                                                                                Meghan always says 'kindness is the truth from which beauty stands tall' - Stand with Harry. Be Beauty.




					www.harryforpresident.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Oh my - you have to see this website...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry for VP
> 
> 
> United by love. United by truth. 	                                                                                Meghan always says 'kindness is the truth from which beauty stands tall' - Stand with Harry. Be Beauty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harryforpresident.com



Hilarious  Soap Oprah, indeed








						Spoof website jokes Harry 'running for vice presidency' with Meghan
					

A SPOOF website promoting Prince Harry for vice president has been set up – with the Duke’s campaign credits including ‘saying things’ and ‘listening to Meghan’.…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




A SPOOF website promoting Prince Harry for vice president has been set up - with the Duke's campaign credits including 'saying things' and 'listening to Meghan'.

The tongue-in-cheek 'H for Vice President' comes off the back of another spoof website on a mock presidency bid by Meghan Markle and encourages voters to #StandWithHarry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spectator Australia nails it   








						The Stoics would have had little sympathy for Meghan | The Spectator Australia
					

Meghan Markle seems to see herself as a ‘victim’. Had she called herself a victima in Rome, it would have been a matter of some surprise, since the ancients used that image solely with…




					spectator.com.au
				




_Meghan Markle seems to see herself as a ‘victim’. Had she called herself a victima in Rome, it would have been a matter of some surprise, since the ancients used that image solely with reference to animals for sacrifice. But our ‘victim’ is used as if one genuinely were as helpless as a victima.

Ancients would have none of that. In place of our ‘victimhood’, they used words like ‘wronged, betrayed, worsted, dishonoured, neglected, injured’. Even the classical terms for ‘suffer’ meant at root ‘undergoing/enduring an experience’ of some sort. Ancients, then, were not for relapsing into supine self-pity, but for taking action against the humans who had wronged them. The soap-Oprah interview certainly did that._


----------



## Jktgal

I didn't know that there is an Australian version of The Spectator. How fun.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A bonanza for H&M opinion pieces today.  Spoiler - it is not looking good for them.









						Happy Harry, the hog-whimpering pheasant bagger, has been denuked
					

QUENTIN LETTS: He has been turned into a preachy wokester who now lives in Los Angeles amid the facelifts and shrivelled dewlaps of celebritydom.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Spoiler: Unsubscribe, indeed



*Happy Harry, the hog-whimpering pheasant bagger, has been denuked*
Not since Saul of Tarsus walked to Damascus has there been such a conversion. Prince Harry, freest of spirits, a rip-snorting, hog-whimpering, pheasant-bagger, has been pasteurised. Denuked. Colonised.

He has been turned into a preachy wokester who now lives in Los Angeles amid the facelifts and shrivelled dewlaps of celebritydom.

Poor lad. Might he and the pup Archie not soon start an escape committee?

Original Harry was full of beans. Original Harry was the non- intellectual one with the wooden rifle and kid’s soldier uniform, a full head of red hair and a sporran of oats.

We ached for him when his mother died in 1997 and, days short of his 13th birthday, he had to walk behind her horse-drawn coffin.

Harry joined the Army and occasionally succumbed to barracks language. Against the wishes of some courtiers, he went to Afghanistan and fought for Grandmother and country.

He could strip a machine-gun and fly a helicopter. He could gallop on a polo pony. He was a blood and a blade. Harry was good for morale.

All that has gone.

It happened after his marriage to Meghan Markle, divorced, American TV actress, professional emoter. She was a small notch above Harry intellectually but they seemed a good match. Some sneered that it would never last. I confess, I liked Meghan.
As a couple they looked pretty sporty. But when the Sussexes began married life, it was soon apparent that the new duchess was going to be indignantly American in her approach.

She expected others to bend to her aesthetic. She was appalled when her synthetic effusions were not applauded.
The daughter-in-law of the heir to the Throne was playing the victim card. Courtiers apparently failed to make the right noises. Rancour mushroomed. There were allegations of snubs and rudeness to Meghan by other Royals.
Families can be like that: an omitted compliment soon becomes a vicious slur, at least in the imagination of a newcomer.
There were hints of anti-American and anti-black prejudice.

Maybe Meghan was tricky. Then came the lectures about climate change and mental health. Once-carefree Harry, Captain of Burps, kept furrowing his brow, though not because he was suppressing another belch. He was frowning because he wanted us to know it wasn’t easy.

Life was hard. He, in his princely cocoon, felt our pain.

The climate-change homilies were particularly hard to swallow because the couple continued to use private jets. They said they would be dumping their Royal connections, yet called their new website Sussexroyal.com.
They promoted ********ic engagement – recording a get-out-the-vote video which was pretty clearly a ‘vote for *****’ message – yet their own prominence flowed entirely from the non-********ic institution of the British Monarchy.
They posed as saints of self-denial and said they were going to try to become financially independent while they were splurging vast sums on a new house in California. They attacked the Press for intrusion yet were more than happy when cameras caught them giving food to the needy.

Did Herself co-operate with Finding Freedom, that fawning biography about her and Harry? How did that sit with her demands for privacy?

She and Harry announced they had ‘chosen to make a transition’ and would be ‘carving out a new role’.
This was alongside a statement that the Duke would be retaining the rank of Major and the honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander and Squadron Leader.

For Remembrance Day 2020, British congregations stood in the rain at local war memorials to remember the fallen. Meghan and Harry tried to muscle in on things by making a staged visit to a graveyard in California.

It was all about them. Look at us in our masks, grief as a fashion choice, adopting a pose for our own self-glorification.
The stunt backfired. Meghan’s response was to hire two more PR advisers. More manipulation. More messaging. 

*The nation pressed ‘unsubscribe’.*


----------



## DeMonica

csshopper said:


> Nasty *****iness in an environment where Meghan probably thought it would never dare be reported fits her character;
> 
> But, part of this narrative seems doubtful: Meghan's veil was featured in articles as it included hand embroidered flowers of all the national flowers of the Commonwealth, so the comment about Clare trying to get Meghan "to try a more understated veil" doesn't make sense to me. A separate group, if I remember correctly were given responsibility for sewing it?
> 
> Edited to thank QueenofWrapDresses for identifying "Maria." I missed that connection when I read it. That Meghan did this in front of Maria as a witness makes it even worse, I think it was deliberate so it would get back to Catherine and make her upset. HORRID HORRID and she was only getting started.....


That's what I thought when I read the part of the comment on veil. However, IIRC Catherine had had several dresses ready for her wedding to switch, if the press would have found out  about the design of "the dress No1". She might have had an alternate veil, too. Meghan might have done the same. So she had probably more than one to choose from. Yet, it's shocking to see that almost identical wedding dress, though. Copying gone too far.
Actually, it's hard to imagine that someone who's supposed to be an educated grown-up would behave so childish and entitled, so not classy, but after reading in DM how they had treated the wedding choir I might have to believe in the comment.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> So. In the OW interview, MM says she was told to be 50% less. Such an odd comment. Wonder if this is what was said originally:
> 
> from 2018:
> _Daily Mail continued, noting that Meghan's fashion "boldness" has been causing a bit of a stir among the House of Windsor. "*Meghan is being told she needs to start dressing less like a Hollywood star and more like a Royal*," sources from a Kensington Palace fashion team confessed to The Mail on Sunday. Can this poor gal catch a break!?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything We Know About the Royal Wedding, So Far
> 
> 
> With the May 19th royal wedding fast approaching, here's everything we know about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's nuptials
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brides.com


Yes this article is a bit silly.
I’m all for unconventional wedding dresses and personal weddings (I had an unconventional wedding myself), but if they got the state to pay and made it a national occasion then they should’ve followed royal protocol.
I don’t get to wear my hair down in the army.

The really awful wedding dress was that giant meringue that Diana wore. I feel like they wanted to try & age a her up a bit.


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Considering where Meghan and Prince Harry wish to end up, are they blowing it big-time? In the commotion over who the Sussexes are upsetting (royal family, British press, British public, and the real victim in all this, Piers Morgan’s wife, who has him back, cluttering up the kitchen in the morning), are we forgetting that the couple may have become *too noisy and leaky* for the scrupulously private mega A-list ranks they evidently yearn to join?_
> 
> The serious issues of race and mental health have been much discussed. But let’s look at this through the lens of the type of celebrity and status the Sussexes appear to be aiming for. First, that interview, where Oprah Winfrey was allowed to bash away at the Sussex piñata for headline-generating goodies. Now the leak from Oprah’s mate, Gayle King – about the couple’s “non-productive” talks with Prince William – presumed to emanate from Meghan.
> So, from speaking their truth to leaking their truth? That was quick. Is this a good look for the “global philanthropy”-minded couple? Put it this way: has Michelle ***** ever sat on a TV sofa *****ing about her sister-in-law?
> 
> Supporters and detractors alike perceive the Oprah interview as the Sussexes’ golden ticket into the US elite, but it’s not as simple as that. While it’s accepted that such behaviour is offensive to the royals, it’s forgotten that it’s also the antithesis of how the mega-rich, uber-influential, notoriously private elite conduct themselves. The Sussexes aren’t going after standard-issue celebrity: one doubts their game plan is to end up on Dancing with the Stars. This is about the higher echelons of fame, at least Beyoncé/Clooney level, maybe *****/Gates, considering those philanthropic impulses, a bit of swishing around with earnestly normcore billionaires or trillionaires, tech moguls and the like.
> 
> Anyone who’s ever fleetingly ventured into such elite orbits will tell you that they’re a discreet breed, living in micro-managed worlds, operating a strict privacy-first code. Getting close to them is like pushing through plasma. If they give out personal information, it’s in a tightly disciplined way. These people are unlikely to feel true kinship with people who give explosive gut-spilling interviews, never mind leak private family conversations to showbiz journalists.
> 
> In such rarefied circles, the Sussexes simply don’t fit in. Whatever supportive platitudes are spouted, in private, eyebrows may be being raised at the oversharing.
> 
> I wish the couple only well, because – chrissakes! – why not? However, they may have catastrophically miscalculated reverting to Meghan’s Suits-level fame strategy (Push. Publicise. Repeat.). When (oh, the irony!) the royal family’s oft-maligned, tightly buttoned “never explain, never complain” reserve would have far better endeared them to the elite circles they wish to join. They say you should dress for the job you want, and perhaps, exposure-wise, the Sussexes should have maintained self-control for the social position they want. It’s a bit late now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Harry and Meghan learn the A-list art of saying nothing at all? | Barbara Ellen
> 
> 
> To join Clooney, Gates, Beyoncé and co, the royal couple might need a little discretion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


IMO the journalist nailed it perfectly. The Oprah interview was a deluxe version of The Jeremy Kyle Show with a minor difference: the party whom the insults were hurled at decided not to stoop so low to attend and be part of yelling match or fist fight. They (Meg&Co.) might have hoped differently but this interview is more likely to get them invitations to Dancing with the Stars or something in that vein than to help them to be taken seriously by major players in the political elite or nobility. If I were them,  I wouldn't trust Meg&Co in any respect for sure.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## viciel

Jayne1 said:


> That's quite brilliant!


Thank you, your resident therapist at your service


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes this article is a bit silly.
> I’m all for unconventional wedding dresses and personal weddings (I had an unconventional wedding myself), but if they got the state to pay and made it a national occasion then they should’ve followed royal protocol.
> I don’t get to wear my hair down in the army.
> 
> The really awful wedding dress was that giant meringue that Diana wore. I feel like they wanted to try & age a her up a bit.



IMO MM misrepresented to Oprah what the Palace spokesperson said. It wasn’t that she should be 50% less than who she is, rather she should dress less Hwood and more Royal. Either she deliberately misrepresented it to Oprah or she completely misunderstood what the Palace was saying. Since she was a working Royal, the palace has every right to expect an employee to follow a dress code. It was nothing to do with her race or ethnicity.


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> I have never met a pregnant woman yet who, when asked her due date, replied with a season instead of a month.


She will use "privacy" as the reason for being vague, being that they are so obsessed with their version of privacy. It's all race, freedom and privacy for this duo.


----------



## sdkitty

RachelCohen808 said:


> I thought the dress was ill-fitted because it was the exact copy of the dress designed and worn by the Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. As well as the veil. I guess Meghan wanted to make a statement with it but did not consider how different it will look on her body.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5029975


could this be coincidence?


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> Oh my - you have to see this website...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry for VP
> 
> 
> United by love. United by truth. 	                                                                                Meghan always says 'kindness is the truth from which beauty stands tall' - Stand with Harry. Be Beauty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harryforpresident.com


I replied to the site that he is ineligible , not born in US, the same rule that thwarted Scharwenegger’s run for presidency
thank goodness for the Constitution


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO MM misrepresented to Oprah what the Palace spokesperson said. It wasn’t that she should be 50% less than who she is, rather she should dress less Hwood and more Royal. Either she deliberately misrepresented it to Oprah or she completely misunderstood what the Palace was saying. Since she was a working Royal, the palace has every right to expect an employee to follow a dress code. It was nothing to do with her race or ethnicity.


Just another concession the BRF made to her - white
And her incessant bateau-neckline, shoulder-baring dresses


----------



## sdkitty

I guess H will never stop talking about his mother's death and the impact it had on him.  Now he has written the forward to a children's book.  It is really starting to seem like they are using Diana.  Sad.








						Prince Harry Writes About Losing His Mum In Foreword To Children's Book
					

The new book tells the story of a child whose mother died during the coronavirus pandemic.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I guess H will never stop talking about his mother's death and the impact it had on him.  Now he has written the forward to a children's book.  It is really starting to seem like they are using Diana.  Sad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Writes About Losing His Mum In Foreword To Children's Book
> 
> 
> The new book tells the story of a child whose mother died during the coronavirus pandemic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


I don’t want to judge anyone’s pain but I do question whether he is an appropriate role model for bereaved children.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Nice commentary by the spectator (Australia).  https://spectator.com.au/2021/03/daughter-in-law-from-hell/


This line in the comments rang true for me. They need to snare a paying audience for their podcasts.
_"The whole interview was aimed not at a Commonwealth audience, but at an (understandably clueless about the monarchy) US audience who the couple presumably hope will fund them from now on."_


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear.  She did it to herself, friends, she did it to herself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A handy guide to Marklism | The Spectator Australia
> 
> 
> Many of us have been watching in in awe at the profound impact that Meghan and Harry’s Oprah interview has had on the fight against endemic injustice.There has been an outpouring of empathy for the…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectator.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Marklisms
> 
> 
> 
> *A handy guide to Marklism*
> Andy Shaw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many of us have been watching in in awe at the profound impact that Meghan and Harry’s Oprah interview has had on the fight against endemic injustice.There has been an outpouring of empathy for the royal Duchess’s suffering at the hands of the British. Not only has she had to live through the public spectacle of a royal wedding, she has had to endure the indignity of public scrutiny every time she wishes to travel by private jet. This is not how a victim should be treated. The Duchess has harnessed a wave of American support and challenged one of the oldest institutions on earth. She shows us that the world can be turned upside down when the power of suffering is successfully harnessed.
> 
> Such was the emotive power of her interview that a presidential bid is now being mooted for Markle. What would President Markle bring to America? Here are the five tenets of Marklism:
> 
> *Find your voice*
> The Duchess is living proof that now is the time to find your inner victim and unleash her/him/they for the greater good. There is an oppressed person within all of us, just waiting to get out. Your subjugation may be latent and inert, but with hard work you can nurture it into an effective victim identity. Look to Meghan for your inspiration. If a Duchess can identify her inner victim there is hope for the rest of us.
> 
> *Be inspired*
> You may find it hard to uncover your own personal oppression, but you can find inspiration in historical figures. Imagine yourself in the shoes of Emmeline Pankhurst or Rosa Parks and re-enact their struggles in your mind. If you find that reading books or studying history is too difficult, simply turn on the telly and watch some cartoons. This is how Meghan discovered the oppression-busting idol, the Little Mermaid. Although the Little Mermaid wasn’t forced to sit at the back of a bus, face workplace discrimination or denied the vote, she did struggle to confine herself to gender-species norms as a semi aquatic being. Mermaids have always suffered from the unwarranted lust of imperial sailors. They are directly linked to colonial oppression.
> 
> *Speak your truth*
> Once you have developed your victim identity, it will be time for you to ‘speak your truth’. This announces your presence to the world and ensures that, not only will you be listened to, but you will also be believed. Your truth may diverge from real events, but you will be judged by your skill in narrative construction, rather than the presentation of facts. Next time your boss accuses you of bullying behaviour at work, try harnessing the power of story to reclaim the narrative. As Meghan has shown, life is about the stories we tell ourselves.
> 
> *Play your part*
> Remember that ‘your truth’ can only become ‘our truth’ if we have an emotional connection with your reality. Just like Meghan, you must learn your lines, but it is equally important to emote. Try tilting your head to the side, widening your watery eyes and presenting your ‘I know .. I know .. I couldn’t believe it either’ face. Ask a friend to nod supportively as you elucidate your pain.
> 
> *Feel your power*
> Do not waste time demonstrating that you are a kind, compassionate human being. Simply state that you are these things. Do not accept duties that are not enhancing to your own sense of self worth. If cutting ribbons is too burdensome, do not be afraid to cut ties with family instead. The past is only there to constrain you. Like Meghan you should not waste time pondering the reason why you have the platform that you do.  Remember, power has shifted to those who pretend that they are powerless. Meghan shows us that being silenced is better than being silent.



Love that illustration of Meghan as the Little Mermaid. That must be Markus Anderson next to her as Sebastian, the one who helped her land her prince.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO MM misrepresented to Oprah what the Palace spokesperson said. It wasn’t that she should be 50% less than who she is, rather she should dress less Hwood and more Royal. Either she deliberately misrepresented it to Oprah or she completely misunderstood what the Palace was saying. Since she was a working Royal, the palace has every right to expect an employee to follow a dress code. It was nothing to do with her race or ethnicity.



I’m sure the change to the wording was deliberate because anyone could understand that she would need to dress less “Hollywood” in her new role. That would be a request with which she would be reasonably expected to comply. But claiming she was told to be “50% less” implied that Meghan’s natural, wonderful bright light so overshadowed everyone else that she needed to scale back so as to not outshine them. Meghan and Oprah made it sound like everyone was threatened by Meghan’s popularity, once more petting Meghan’s ginormous ego.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO MM misrepresented to Oprah what the Palace spokesperson said. It wasn’t that she should be 50% less than who she is, *rather she should dress less Hwood and more Royal. *Either she deliberately misrepresented it to Oprah or she completely misunderstood what the Palace was saying. Since she was a working Royal, the palace has every right to expect an employee to follow a dress code. It was nothing to do with her race or ethnicity.



 I wondered if that was actually a subtle British way (and far too subtle for M) of asking her to be *less extravagent cost wise *with her wardrobe and to reign the spending in? I think it is understood that our female royals will have a substantial number of bespoke designer items in their wardrobe but in her early years Kate wore a lot of (albeit top end) high street outfits and has clearly been slowly building up a collection of peices over the last decade that now we see being reworn. No one expects a female royal to turn up to a state banquet in jeans or on an offical tour or to a formal function etc. - that would be disrespectful to the hosts and the UK, but the day-job outfits are usually more *financially modest. *We regularly see Kate/Sophie in British High Street labels, CP Victoria in H&M, Queen Letizia in Zara etc. Even though Charles paid the clothing allowance from Duchy funds, the optics of excessive spending reflecs badly on the BRF with the public.

My Irish husband would describe her as Flaithiuil ( pronounced Fla-hool ) which translates as generous, except in usage it is not complimentary and is used to mean somone who is generous with another's money - not their own !


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> could this be coincidence?



How could the glaring similarity of two wedding dresses for royal WOC possibly be a coincidence?  Are you giving benefit of doubt to be nice? Of all the assistants/consultants/hired help/etc, SOMEBODY had to know about other royal wedding dresses out there. But Meghan didn't care. SHE wanted the copycat style and co-opt it as her own, with the Commonwealth flowers veil to make it look soooo different    .   Of course, then she had to dress funereal for Oprah's interview to symbolize all the SUFFERING she went through. Considering some of the blistering posts on other websites about M&H, we base our observations on their own words, actions, photos, and weigh others' POV.  One wonders if William can do anything to put a stop on M&H's ambitions to morph and monetize Diana into their own money printing machine. It's disgraceful to see Diana used in that way.  QEII and Philip must realize that when they're dead, M&H will do everything to monetize THEIR images for $. M&H LOVE promoting dead people (but only if they make $ from it)--such as posing in cemeteries to publicity. It's difficult for dead people to complain, no wonder they're common targets for M&H.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO MM misrepresented to Oprah what the Palace spokesperson said. It wasn’t that she should be 50% less than who she is, rather she should dress less Hwood and more Royal. Either she deliberately misrepresented it to Oprah or she completely misunderstood what the Palace was saying. Since she was a working Royal, the palace has every right to expect an employee to follow a dress code. It was nothing to do with her race or ethnicity.



I wonder if the spokesperson asked MM for her cooperation in spending 50% less in clothing. Her bills were astronomical, and of course, they were all sent to the Palace for payment...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> How could the glaring similarity of two wedding dresses for royal WOC possibly be a coincidence?  Are you giving benefit of doubt to be nice? Of all the assistants/consultants/hired help/etc, SOMEBODY had to know about other royal wedding dresses out there. But Meghan didn't care. SHE wanted the copycat style and co-opt it as her own, with the Commonwealth flowers veil to make it look soooo different    .   Of course, then she had to dress funereal for Oprah's interview to symbolize all the SUFFERING she went through. Considering some of the blistering posts on other websites about M&H, we base our observations on their own words, actions, photos, and weigh others' POV.  One wonders if William can do anything to put a stop on M&H's ambitions to morph and monetize Diana into their own money printing machine. It's daything to monetize THEIR images for $. M&H LOVE promoting dead people (but only if they make $ from igt)--such as posing in cemeteries to publicity. It's difficult for dead people to complain, no wonder they're common targets for M&H.


agree, the similarities with the other wedding gown are glaring...and the other bride was also a WOC....but how was this not pointed out before?  I mean the flowers and everything seemed to have been copied....surely she (with help) could have come up with something tht wasn't a direct copy

guess I was wondering how she got away with it....but wait - she gets away with everything in the US media.  and we are the mean girls


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> It's difficult for dead people to complain, no wonder they're common targets for M&H.


Off topic, but death is often seen through a strange lens by egoistic people. About 15 years ago, when author Cassandra Clare was being pilloried online for plagiarism, one of the authors from whom she borrowed wholesale was the late Roger Zelazny. When it was pointed out that he was dead and could not demand justice himself, her toxic fans screamed that if his work was so important to him, he should rise from the dead.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> agree, the similarities with the other wedding gown are glaring...and the other bride was also a WOC....but how was this not pointed out before?  I mean the flowers and everything seemed to have been copied....surely she (with help) could have come up with something tht wasn't a direct copy
> 
> guess I was wondering how she got away with it....but wait - she gets away with everything in the US media.  and we are the mean girls


It is simply that the style is popular.
Nothing more, imho.
The second person’s dress fit so much nicely.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> It is simply that the style is popular.
> Nothing more, imho.
> The second person’s dress fit so much nicely.


well if if was coincidence it was very unfortunate - having the style of dress and also the flowers being basically the same - and other other person also being a royal WOC


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



This won the award!  MM&H have been cashing in on everything from titles to skin color, it is disgusting and sad imo!


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> well if if was coincidence it was very unfortunate - having the style of dress and also the flowers being basically the same - and other other person also being a royal WOC


Who married first?
This industry is so trend driven.
When I look back to all the weddings I have gone before COVID. All the brides are copycats 
The only time, I see a difference is when the Bride is an original or much older or is limited for modesty reasons. YMMV of course


----------



## RachelCohen808

sdkitty said:


> agree, the similarities with the other wedding gown are glaring...and the other bride was also a WOC....but how was this not pointed out before?  I mean the flowers and everything seemed to have been copied....surely she (with help) could have come up with something tht wasn't a direct copy
> 
> guess I was wondering how she got away with it....but wait - she gets away with everything in the US media.  and we are the mean girls


There were speculations that the dresses are very similar but they were shut down very quickly maybe by the Palace's PR team. Plus several progressive bloggers such as Diet Prada defended Meghan and Givenchy designer Clare saying that the dress is a direct reference to the one created by Hubert Givenchy himself for Audrey Hepburn. I personally think that Angela's dress was the main inspiration and was supposed to be a statement. Angela is Parsons School of Design graduate and designed the dress herself back in 2000.


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Who married first?
> This industry is so trend driven.
> When I look back to all the weddings I have gone before COVID. All the brides are copycats
> The only time, I see a difference is when the Bride is an original or much older or is limited for modesty reasons. YMMV of course


Princess Angela married in Jan 2000. She was a designer and the dress was her own creation.

If the blog account is true about MM demanding incessant changes to the wedding dress, it might be that Princess Angela's dress was one of the inspirations, and after many many many changes, MM's dress morphed into a copy of the inspiration.


----------



## limom

RachelCohen808 said:


> There were speculations that the dresses are very similar but they were shut down very quickly maybe by the Palace's PR team. Plus several progressive bloggers such as Diet Prada defended Meghan and Givenchy designer Clare saying that the dress is a direct reference to the one created by Hubert Givenchy himself for Audrey Hepburn. I personally think that Angela's dress was the main inspiration and was supposed to be a statement. Angela is Parsons School of Design graduate and designed the dress herself back in 2000.
> View attachment 5030563


Is it really that much of an issue that’s MM was inspired by Angela or Clare?
Did MM address the issue herself?


----------



## limom

xincinsin said:


> Princess Angela married in Jan 2000. She was a designer and the dress was her own creation.
> 
> If the blog account is true about MM demanding incessant changes to the wedding dress, it might be that Princess Angela's dress was one of the inspirations, and after many many many changes, MM's dress morphed into a copy of the inspiration.


Thank you.
Princesse Angela wore it best, imho.


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Thank you.
> Princesse Angela wore it best, imho.


Agree. She looked really good in it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

RachelCohen808 said:


> There were speculations that the dresses are very similar but they were shut down very quickly maybe by the Palace's PR team. Plus several progressive bloggers such as Diet Prada defended Meghan and Givenchy designer Clare saying that the dress is a direct reference to the one created by Hubert Givenchy himself for Audrey Hepburn. I personally think that Angela's dress was the main inspiration and was supposed to be a statement. Angela is Parsons School of Design graduate and designed the dress herself back in 2000.
> View attachment 5030563


Wow this looks amazing. That hat under the veil and the heavily embossed silk 

I agree that Angela did a far better job of doing a modern take on the style. Im sure as she’s a parsons grad she must know all about Givenchy but it wasn’t derivative. It also makes more of a statement in 2000- the era of the strapless tulle and diamanté W dress.

I must confess I was a little disappointed by MM’s wedding dress. I would have thought CWK would go for something a bit more structured and sculptural. I didn’t see what the point of going to Givenchy was  it so plain and ill fitted.
I must confess, my nostalgia for CWK at Givenchy wants to believe that the dress was rushed and adapted till the last minute & not what she designed at all.

edit I put ‘to’ not ‘till’ &I know that’ll drive me crazy

edit edit I cannot type today- at all!


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Is it really that much of an issue that’s MM was inspired by Angela or Clare?
> Did MM address the issue herself?


Perhaps it only became an issue when the designer harped on how the design evolved from her "hours of conversation, meetings together, and research" with MM. *Totally original design* is the undertone I'm getting. Personally, I'm wondering if MM's fickleness or indecisiveness made it so difficult for Givenchy that they slyly slipped her a design which she had praised before for its "purity and simplicity" and then let her think that it was her own brainchild. If MM thought she was the greatest living fashion mind, it's no wonder that she ended up with a dress that wore her. (I find it strange to choose a fabric so stiff that you need to cut the dress too large so that you can move and sit in it. And no, she didn't look "sleek".) Keller's account of the creation process claims that it went swimmingly smooth.









						Clare Waight Keller Reminisces About Designing Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress
					

“Through hours of conversation, meetings together, and research, slowly all the pieces of that story came together.”




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				











						The Story of Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress
					

Eight face-to-face meetings, three months to make the dress, 500 hours spent on the veil and much more.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## kemilia

RachelCohen808 said:


> This video from US Open when Meghan is desperately trying to get attention from Serena's mom and being ignored pretty much sums up their future interactions with the super elites



Never saw this cli before, super awkward


----------



## limom

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps it only became an issue when the designer harped on how the design evolved from her "hours of conversation, meetings together, and research" with MM. *Totally original design* is the undertone I'm getting. Personally, I'm wondering if MM's fickleness or indecisiveness made it so difficult for Givenchy that they slyly slipped her a design which she had praised before for its "purity and simplicity" and then let her think that it was her own brainchild. If MM thought she was the greatest living fashion mind, it's no wonder that she ended up with a dress that wore her. (I find it strange to choose a fabric so stiff that you need to cut the dress too large so that you can move and sit in it. And no, she didn't look "sleek".) Keller's account of the creation process claims that it went swimmingly smooth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clare Waight Keller Reminisces About Designing Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress
> 
> 
> “Through hours of conversation, meetings together, and research, slowly all the pieces of that story came together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Story of Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress
> 
> 
> Eight face-to-face meetings, three months to make the dress, 500 hours spent on the veil and much more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


When all is said and done, MM looks like a fashion victim at her own wedding, imho.
Much Like the fabled Diana.
Here we go, history repeats itself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Good for both of them!  











						Centrepoint boss says he's never seen racism from Prince William
					

Centrepoint's Chief Executive Officer Seyi Obakin has worked with the Duke of Cambridge for 12 years and insisted in an interview with The Telegraph he's 'never seen a hint of racism'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hilarious  *Soap Oprah, indeed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoof website jokes Harry 'running for vice presidency' with Meghan
> 
> 
> A SPOOF website promoting Prince Harry for vice president has been set up – with the Duke’s campaign credits including ‘saying things’ and ‘listening to Meghan’.…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A SPOOF website promoting Prince Harry for vice president has been set up - with the Duke's campaign credits including 'saying things' and 'listening to Meghan'.
> 
> The tongue-in-cheek 'H for Vice President' comes off the back of another spoof website on a mock presidency bid by Meghan Markle and encourages voters to #StandWithHarry.



Several years ago one of our European friends was helping me with my computer. He suggested I download the Oprah browser. It took me a minute to realize he was saying Opera with a long O. 
My first thought was damn----b!tch has her own BROWSER now???????????


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Off topic, but death is often seen through a strange lens by egoistic people. About 15 years ago, when author Cassandra Clare was being pilloried online for plagiarism, one of the authors from whom she borrowed wholesale was the late Roger Zelazny. When it was pointed out that he was dead and could not demand justice himself, her toxic fans screamed that if his work was so important to him, he should rise from the dead.



Those toxic fans sound SO WOKE!  The woke crowd's hypocrisy knows no bounds. It's all about FEELINGS! And when you offend a woker, they'll tie themselves in pretzel knots to defend the indefensible. So I guess it's WOKE to use dead people to advance yourself since it is up to their estates to sue. Remember how Meghan spoke "nicely" of the Queen with Oprah? Of course she did!  Because when the *94 year old* Queen dies, it'll be easier to CASH IN with a likable figure!  I'd like to see Charles, Anne, Edward, William, and even Andrew unleash fury with knives out for M&H WHEN they'll inevitably try to make $ off deceased QEII.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> agree, the similarities with the other wedding gown are glaring...and the other bride was also a WOC....but how was this not pointed out before?  I mean the flowers and everything seemed to have been copied....surely she (with help) could have come up with something tht wasn't a direct copy
> 
> guess I was wondering how she got away with it....but wait - she gets away with everything in the US media.  and we are the mean girls



Exactly! But for Meghan to come up with anything original, she'd have risk taking blame if it didn't turn out. And you think she's going to do that? If a copy didn't turn out, then it'll always be the OTHER PERSON'S fault.  Nothing is EVER Meghan's fault! And the way the U.S. media protect her is absolutely astounding. They're terrified and gutless to criticize her, and she knows it. All she has to do is accuse a media giant of racism if they criticize her and her sugars will believe her.


----------



## marietouchet

OLK, I am obsessed with Harry's  Oct 2016 ultimatum to the press ... sent out by BP, and unusual for the time

https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry 

It includes the terms SOCIAL MEDIA TROLL,  RACISM, SEXISM. SAFETY, DEFAMATORY, ILLEGAL, DAMAGE ... all of which became themes in the INTERVIEW.  The only new interview topic was suicide, but that was hinted at by use of the word DAMAGE

As Lady Colin Campbell analysed, the use of the term RACISIM blunted any later replies.  (Anyone contravening the ultimatum would be labeled racist.. and ignored.)

Yes, there was negative press later eg diva behavior for wedding dress,  tiaragate, flowergirl dress crying episode, M tossed out of garden party at BP etc.  

*Did these come out at the time or after the fact ??? I mostly cannot remember ..  *

I do recall the garden party ... people did note her early departure from the party, but, at the time, there was no explanation given, recently, the videos have been scrutinized and the ejection by Charles is for all to see. 

So, I hypothesize that the LCC is correct, M got a pass, at the time for a lot of misbehaving


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We've missed your comments. Get well soon!


Aw, thanks .. yes, going through a lot of 'woe' at present (stinkin' arthritis) but trying to stay positive and hydrated !


----------



## marietouchet

Similarity of wedding dresses ... hmmm

there were a lot of opinionated cooks in the kitchen on the dress - Meghan, Jessica Mulrooney - her  long-distance Canadian stylist without a lot of BRF experience but who got lots of press due to connection with MM, and Claire Keller - the Givenchy chief designer , also with a rep for diva-ness.

The recent Lady Colin story is that M kept changing her mind on the dress, til the last minute, so similarity to other dresses may not have been noticed in the mess.

And there was a lot of controversy on the dress - the cost (paid by Charles), the WHITE color, and low-cut (for the Queen and Church of England) bateau-neckline, so,  maybe M chose to put her energy into standing her ground on those battles


----------



## plastic-fish

Sharont2305 said:


> Of course the new baby will be called Diana, have to one up William and Catherine for choosing it as ONLY a middle name for Charlotte. As the only granddaughter (thus far) her parents knew how much she will be compared to Diana as she grows up without saddling her with her name too. Also, when Charles becomes King, this new little girl will be known as Princess Diana just like grandma, even though Diana was never Princess Diana officially. Charlotte will still have the upper hand though as she is a Princess from birth, not when Grandpa becomes King.


Do you think MM will induce the birth or have a c-section on July 1st, Diana‘s birthday? The baby is due ‘this summer’ according to the interview, they were specifically vague about a date. I’m sorry, I hate saying this but would we be surprised? Super newsworthy if the baby was born on Di’s bday.

edit: sorry, this was stated elsewhere, trying to catch up on the conversation...


----------



## Aimee3

I thought MM’s wedding dress was boring.  The style did nothing for her and the material was so plain with no embellishments.  Diana’s dress while very dated now was at least something to talk about (had everything but the kitchen sink goi g on lol) but Diana’s dress did influence wedding dress styles for a while.


----------



## plastic-fish

V0N1B2 said:


> Since everything out of this woman’s mouth is a lie, I’m gonna go with, nah. Or maybe we should just call it “her truth”.
> To me, ‘late summer’ is mid to late August (IMO), so that would have made her ~2mo pregnant at the time of the interview. So she’s either wearing the wrong size moonbump or she lying - again.
> I’m sure come hell or high water she’ll be delivering baby Diana on July 1st, 2021 on what would have been her dead MIL’s 60th birthday. It’ll be like a miracle and such a !surprise!


My thoughts exactly! Induced labour, c-section on July 1st, wouldn’t surprise any of us here...


----------



## poopsie

Di's dress was very much of the time. 
Gunne Sax, prairie, New Romantic ruffles were everywhere


----------



## CeeJay

floatinglili said:


> I don’t have any problems whatsoever believing that Maria was not able to talk back, intervene or even contact Kate via phone while these hurtful interactions were unfolding.
> This is not some moneyed-middle-class household we are talking about, this is a formal aristocratic household, a vestige from the days when the aristocrats owned basically everything and the common workers were looked upon as almost a different group of creatures altogether (think ‘Pygmalion’)
> The remnant class system mentality even amongst quite ordinary British can be a shock to those not born there.
> The free flow between people is not at all the same and the urge to avoid creating a scene in the moment would be primary motivation numero uno.
> Having the help intervene in the moment by talking back to Meg Markles would have been enough to have her risk being sacked IMO.


*This 100%+++ *.. can't even say how many of my London colleagues spoke very badly about the "class" system; heck - one of them said that the minute he opened his mouth and the toffs heard a cockney accent, poof .. he would disappear!!!  Even in the business place, this guy was a freakin' mathematical genius and yet when he had to present to "the board" (all aristos), they would really give him the business and basically do the "oh - pish, posh".  So, being American and not the meek and mild type, I was asked to present our findings as well as 'next actions' to the board.  Well, I could have cared less about these folks and what they thought of me, and I made that VERY CLEAR in the first 15 minutes (you always have to let them know QUICKLY .. who is the BOSS .. and that was ME)!!!  From that point on, I was the one who was "on point" .. not that I cared, but I saw firsthand what those folks had to go through .. and honestly, it made perfect sense to me why they felt the way they did .. not really a pleasant experience to be honest!


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Sooo funny. One of the comments was: why is Harry wearing a mask just over his mouth (and not his nose too).  Is it to prevent him from saying something stupid?


Too late for that!


----------



## purseinsanity

Took three days off for my mother's birthday and I'm about 40 pages behind!  
It's fun catching up!  Missed you all!


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Its like that here in the UK, what I meant was can you choose a date because you want that baby on that particular date?


I think it somewhat depends on the doctor and the hospital.  It's not as lenient as Brazil, where I've read 70%+ of deliveries are elective C sections!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Well I love a good conspiracy theory and I would bet money she had a moon bump last time.
> 
> This time though, didn't she look kinda swollen the way a pregnant woman does, in her pigeon poop dress?  I thought so.
> *
> But in these photos you've reminded me, she doesn't look pregnant at all, just padded in the middle.*


And not just that, but if she's due "in summertime" and the interview was in February, HTF would her bump be large enough to be just under her breasts?  Makes no sense.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> I’ll bet he phones the doctor to ask for advice on slowing down labor


Definitely no sex!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Swollen can be a sign of preeclampsia but weight gain is different from being swollen. With preeclampsia and toximia which I had the water is noticeable in the skin when they press it.


Yes, but preeclampsia doesn't start until 20 weeks.  She's probably like 12 weeks when interviewed!  I think it's Botox and all kinds of fillers.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Pigcasso. OMG
> #dead


I wonder how the pig decides it's Harry he's going to paint?


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Took three days off for my mother's birthday and I'm about 40 pages behind!
> It's fun catching up!  Missed you all!


Missed your wit


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Took three days off for my mother's birthday and I'm about 40 pages behind!
> It's fun catching up!  Missed you all!


Likewise, took some time off and then I see that I was 100+ pages behind .. YIKES!!!

The more I think about it, who would have thought (_when we were first 'introduced' to the Meghan & Harry "love story" - and actually all thought "how wonderful"_) .. that this *FIASCO* would generate this thread where it moves like the speed of the bullet train!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Likewise, took some time off and then I see that I was 100+ pages behind .. YIKES!!!
> 
> The more I think about it, who would have thought (_when we were first 'introduced' to the Meghan & Harry "love story" - and actually all thought "how wonderful"_) .. that this *FIASCO* would generate this thread where it moves like the speed of the bullet train!!!


if they'd stop with their antics we wouldn't have much to talk about.  But no.....


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> "_O-1 visa—a path designed for individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement_"
> 
> He needs a very creative immigration lawyer.


I'm sure he picked a lawyer with "creative activations".


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Missed your wit


Awww thank you!


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I keep seeing these articles about intruders at their home. Now I think this is horrible of course, for anyone, period. But there's definitely a certain irony in leaving one of the most secure homes in the world, with 24/7 security, and now griping about not being able to afford private security for their home in LA.  Whyyyy did they think it was a good idea to do this?


I'm such a doubting Thomas, that I wouldn't find it hard to believe that they're making up these stories to try to guilt Charles into paying for more "security".


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> This was on a blog three days ago.  See here to read it yourself.



I don't know for sure, but my gut feeling tells me this is all true.  The only thing that is Class A about Meghan, is that she is a Class A B*t*h!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Wow, I'm almost speechless.     If this is true, this woman is completely crazy. It's very possible that she didn't want Charlotte and George participating on her wedding. Will told H that he shouldn't rush into marriage, and we know what happens to people that go against what MM wants.
> 
> Interesting that the word "coddle" is also used here. According to a previous article, she allegedly said “_it's not my job to coddle people_” after bullying her aids.
> *
> Ivy Mulroney's description as a bully should not come as a big surprise. Kids often copy their parents.*


1000000%


----------



## Aimee3

What better way to hurt Kate, than to abuse little Charlotte?  I can’t believe nobody stopped MM?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm such a doubting Thomas, that I wouldn't find it hard to believe that they're making up these stories to try to guilt Charles into paying for more "security".



I tend to think they aren’t trying to guilt Charles. They must know by now that they’ve burned that bridge to ashes. They are making a big play for sympathy but I think they’re trying to get sympathy here in the US.

Maybe they are trying to work another lucrative business deal and want to show they need a lot of money because they are so popular and “in demand,”even by the nutcases who wander onto their estate.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I tend to think they aren’t trying to guilt Charles. They must know by now that they’ve burned that bridge to ashes. They are making a big play for sympathy but I think they’re trying to get sympathy here in the US.
> 
> Maybe they are trying to work another lucrative business deal and want to show they need a lot of money because they are so popular and “in demand,”even by the nutcases who wander onto their estate.


If I recall correctly, Charles refuted what Harry said in regards to them being "cut off" financially!  Also, read another article that also disputed Harry's claims, noting that their "verbiage" was likely referring to the fact that they no longer receive any monies from the Sovereign Grant (_since they are no longer "Royals" per se_).  Oh *BOO-HOO-HOO* .. didn't you both say "*we want to be financially independent*"??? .. oh yes, right .. because you figured your could utilize your "Royal Titles" to make $$$!  The two of them, *SHARP AS SPOONS*!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Took three days off for my mother's birthday and I'm about 40 pages behind!
> It's fun catching up!  Missed you all!



Happy birthday to mama! Did you buy her some new Pond’s cold cream?


----------



## kkfiregirl

Aimee3 said:


> What better way to hurt Kate, than to abuse little Charlotte?  I can’t believe nobody stopped MM?



I agree, I can’t believe the nanny wouldn’t risk “getting sacked” to stop MM’s horrific behavior.


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> Happy birthday to mama! Did you buy her some new Pond’s cold cream?


Thank you!  And oh my, you have an amazing memory! 
I did not...she is already well stocked.


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> I thought MM’s wedding dress was boring.  The style did nothing for her and the material was so plain with no embellishments.  Diana’s dress while very dated now was at least something to talk about (had everything but the kitchen sink goi g on lol) but Diana’s dress did influence wedding dress styles for a while.


Diana's dress was perfectly trendy. I loved it as young girl, but I loved Laura Ashley then, too.  
IMO Meghan dress was a bit too simple. I thought that maybe she wanted to counteract the HW actress label with going for something unadorned and plain. Now my feeling is it's more likely that she went for something safe, hoping that if it had worked for Angela Brown it would work for her, too. Honestly, I'm surprised that she went with Givenchy. I would have chosen a British fashion house or an American designer. She might have ended up with a fresher, more exciting design.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 28:37...someone allegedly working for Givenchy wrote in spilling the beans about a certain bridezilla.



If any of this is true, I'm beginning to feel almost appalled at the queen and the rest of the senior BRF who all allowed this middle aged mean girl to go on wreaking havoc on their family members including tiny tots like Charlotte, and "their" people and country, with her bullying despite what they saw going on. They gave in to her and Harry's blackmail antics. Probably because they were afraid of exactly what happened anyway after the Oprah interview. 


marietouchet said:


> Similarity of wedding dresses ... hmmm
> 
> there were a lot of opinionated cooks in the kitchen on the dress - Meghan, Jessica Mulrooney - her  long-distance Canadian stylist without a lot of BRF experience but who got lots of press due to connection with MM, and Claire Keller - the Givenchy chief designer , also with a rep for diva-ness.
> 
> The recent Lady Colin story is that M kept changing her mind on the dress, til the last minute, so similarity to other dresses may not have been noticed in the mess.
> 
> And there was a lot of controversy on the dress - the cost (paid by Charles), the WHITE color, and low-cut (for the Queen and Church of England) bateau-neckline, so,  maybe M chose to put her energy into standing her ground on those battles


Am I not remembering this correctly, but aren't the royal brides supposed to pay for their own wedding dresses? Didn't Kate's parents pay for hers? I'm sure I read it here or somewhere similar. Does anybody know?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps it only became an issue when the designer harped on how the design evolved from her "hours of conversation, meetings together, and research" with MM. *Totally original design* is the undertone I'm getting. Personally, I'm wondering if MM's fickleness or indecisiveness made it so difficult for Givenchy that they slyly slipped her a design which she had praised before for its "purity and simplicity" and then let her think that it was her own brainchild. If MM thought she was the greatest living fashion mind, it's no wonder that she ended up with a dress that wore her. (I find it strange to choose a fabric so stiff that you need to cut the dress too large so that you can move and sit in it. And no, she didn't look "sleek".) Keller's account of the creation process claims that it went swimmingly smooth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clare Waight Keller Reminisces About Designing Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress
> 
> 
> “Through hours of conversation, meetings together, and research, slowly all the pieces of that story came together.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Story of Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress
> 
> 
> Eight face-to-face meetings, three months to make the dress, 500 hours spent on the veil and much more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



This article was written in Nov., 2017.  A simple google search pulled it up.  Guessing anyone could have found it.








						A Mixed-Race Royal Couple? It Wouldn’t Be the First (Published 2017)
					

Black women have become royals for years and years, unbeknown to many.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## lulu212121

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If any of this is true, I'm beginning to feel almost appalled at the queen and the rest of the senior BRF who all allowed this middle aged mean girl to go on wreaking havoc on their family members including tiny tots like Charlotte, and "their" people and country, with her bullying despite what they saw going on. They gave in to her and Harry's blackmail antics. Probably because they were afraid of exactly what happened anyway after the Oprah interview.
> 
> Am I not remembering this correctly, but aren't the royal brides supposed to pay for their own wedding dresses? Didn't Kate's parents pay for hers? I'm sure I read it here or somewhere similar. Does anybody know?


Very good points! It does give me hesitation towards the Queen and Charles if this is true. I have to admit I want to like the Queen in all this, but there's a lot of things coming out from different directions that I'm sure were brought to their attention.

I too recall Kate's dress payment drama. Her family did pay for the dress and I think there was something else. Rehearsal?

Here's an explanation of costs paid by the Middelton's.









						Royal Wedding: Kate Middleton's Family Chips In but Security Most Costly
					

Rumors about Kate Middleton's royal wedding dress designer, the cake -- or cakes -- food and decorations will soon be put to rest. But what might never be known is the precise cost of the whole affair, with estimates ranging from $16 million to $64 million and security accounting for the bulk of it.




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## Chanbal

MM&H's explanation of Queen and Monarchy didn't get an A+. They got a little confused because they were disinvited for tea. MM who says she is regularly calling QE could get some lessons from her. 

"_And of the many woes circulating at Windsor, the paper's Kate Mansey wrote: *"They are also concerned by one particularly dangerous accusation that has, so far, been little-noticed. 

"This was the insinuation by the Sussexes to Oprah that there is some sort of distinction between the Queen – whom they have been at pains to say is blameless – and the institution of Monarchy itself."*

Her comments came after Meghan and Harry revealed the Queen once suddenly changed her mind after inviting Harry and Meghan to tea.

Prince Harry told Oprah: "We asked if we could come to see her. 'Come up to Sandringham.

'Love to have a chat. Come for tea. Why don’t you stay for dinner? It’s going to be a long drive and you’re gonna be exhausted.' We’d love that."

But he then added: "The moment we landed in the UK, I got a message… from the Queen’s private secretary basically saying, please pass along to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex that he cannot come to Norfolk.

"The Queen is busy. She’s busy all week."

*Harry went on to claim the Queen had received "really bad" advice from courtiers, suggesting the Queen had no free will and was dictated to by courtiers.*

Oprah asked: "Doesn’t the Queen get to do what the Queen wants to do?"

And Harry replied: "No. When you’re head of The Firm, there are people around you that give you advice. 

"What has also made me really sad is some of that advice has been really bad."

*But others claim the suggestion that the Queen has little control is untrue.*

One source told the Mail on Sunday: "Her Majesty can do – and does do – what she chooses. 

"The Queen is not some sort of puppet. The Queen is the Monarch. The head of the Monarchy. The head of the Royal Family.

*"Her Majesty is the institution. It’s not run by a sinister organisation, which is what the Sussexes seemed to be suggesting."*

During the Oprah interview, Meghan and Harry were careful not to criticise the Queen and could not have been more gushing towards her.

Meghan revealed she regularly phones the monarch "just to check in" and said the Queen shared her blanket with her on their first official engagement together._"









						Meg & Harry made ‘particularly dangerous’ ALLEGATION about Queen in Oprah chat
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry made a “particularly dangerous” allegation about the Queen during their bombshell Oprah interview, it has been claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex sug…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

One more lie that OW & GK did not correct. Always fact-check. 










						Proof Meghan and Harry did NOT have a secret early wedding
					

The Duchess of Sussex claimed that the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby married her and Harry three days before their wedding at Windsor Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: obviously confused



*Proof Meghan and Harry did NOT have a secret early wedding*
Harry and Meghan's claim that they wed in secret has been blown apart by their own marriage certificate. 

In their bombshell interview with Oprah, the Duchess of Sussex claimed that the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby married her and Harry three days before their wedding. 

However, the General Register Office has now revealed the couple's wedding certificate for the first time, proving they did get married on May 19, 2018 in a lavish ceremony at Windsor Castle after all.  

The official who drew up the licence says Meghan is 'obviously confused' and 'clearly misinformed' over the wedding. 
Stephen Borton, former chief clerk at the Faculty Office, told The Sun: 'They did not marry three days earlier in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

The Special Licence I helped draw up enabled them to marry at St George's Chapel in Windsor and what happened there on 19 May 2018 and was seen by millions around the world was the official wedding as recognised by the Church of England and the law.

'What I suspect they did was exchange some simple vows they had perhaps written themselves, and which is fashionable, and said that in front of the Archbishop — or, and more likely, it was a simple rehearsal.'

Meghan told Oprah on the show: 'You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that.'

She said the couple asked the Archbishop to marry them in private at Nottingham Cottage — their home in the grounds of Kensington Palace. 

The account has now been dismissed by Mr Borton who said they couldn't have gotten married in the grounds of Nottingham Cottage as it is not an authorised venue. 

He added that there were not enough witnesses to make it a valid ceremony. 

Mr Borton also said: 'In order for them to be married a Special Licence was drawn up and the wording from Her Majesty the Queen authorising the wedding and the official venue was recorded.'

He said that the £325 fee normally paid for couples to have a Special Licence was waived for the couple.

The wedding certificate confirmed the ceremony took place at Windsor Castle with the witnesses recorded as  Prince Charles and Meghan's mother Doria Ragland.  

A spokesman for the Archbishop said he would not be commenting on personal or pastoral matters.

Rev Mark Edwards, a C of E priest from Newcastle, said: 'When I called Lambeth Palace to ask about this I was told Justin doesn't do private weddings. Meghan doesn't understand.

'But the fact that the Archbishop has not commented publicly needs to be addressed.'  

It comes after the Rev Mark Edwards decided to look into Meghan's claims.

He said he decided to do so because during the Covid outbreak he has been inundated with requests for private weddings which he has been forced to decline.

Rev Edwards, the vicar at St Matthew's Church, in Dinnington, and St Cuthbert's Church, in Brunswick, Newcastle upon Tyne, said he was told by a Lambeth Palace staff member that, 'Justin does not do private weddings. Meghan is an American, she does not understand'.

He says the claim has caused confusion among clergy and couples anxious to tie the knot and is asking Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby to clarify the situation.


----------



## lallybelle

Above was point I was making on another platform. They kept trying to distance directly attacking QE, with all of this "they" nonsense. QE IS the Monarchy. So they were  very much attacking her as well, she is not a puppet.


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If any of this is true, I'm beginning to feel almost appalled at the queen and the rest of the senior BRF who all allowed this middle aged mean girl to go on wreaking havoc on their family members including tiny tots like Charlotte, and "their" people and country, with her bullying despite what they saw going on. They gave in to her and Harry's blackmail antics. Probably because they were afraid of exactly what happened anyway after the Oprah interview.





lulu212121 said:


> I too recall Kate's dress payment drama. Her family did pay for the dress and I think there was something else. Rehearsal?
> Here's an explanation of costs paid by the Middelton's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Wedding: Kate Middleton's Family Chips In but Security Most Costly
> 
> 
> Rumors about Kate Middleton's royal wedding dress designer, the cake -- or cakes -- food and decorations will soon be put to rest. But what might never be known is the precise cost of the whole affair, with estimates ranging from $16 million to $64 million and security accounting for the bulk of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com


I read somewhere that the BRF went ahead with the wedding because they were afraid to be called racists if they would try to stop it. I believe MM would have found a way to call them racists as she did during Oprah's interview. 

It was nice that the Middletons paid for Kate's wedding dress. MM had enough money to pay for a wedding dress. It's ridiculous to choose highly expensive outfits and have the father in-law pay for them.


----------



## gracekelly

I wonder if the wedding dress would have turned out better if Meghan had been forced to pay for it herself.  Perhaps there would not have been all the last minute changes to it, which resulted in it looking ill fitting and poorly designed.   I certainly do not believe that the fee requested for that dress reflects just that dress alone.  I think it reflects all the wasted staff hours spent on creating things that Meghan rejected and/or kept changing.  She wasn't destitute and should have paid for it herself.  Prince Charles bent over backwards to be nice and it certainly was not appreciated.  The end result did nothing for Claire Waight Keller's reputation and certainly put her more at risk for her job with Givenchy.  I think it made her a laughingstock within the design community.

I am now pretty much of the opinion that Meghan Markle went into this marriage with a game plan and that plan included using complaints of racism for whatever  transpired that she did not like or agree with and she continues to do this even now that they have left England and separated themselves.  It was a very convenient accusation to use and became more so after BLM.  She doesn't appear to be the sort of person who considers whether this was a fair thing to do.  As long as it suited her to gain what she wanted, she would use it.  Harry played right into her hands regarding this and it wasn't difficult as he is an angry man.  She is using his anger against his family and even his mother for dying in the  fashion that  she did.  Constantly bringing up Diana keeps the wound fresh.  Why Harry is so angry would keep a therapist busy for a long time.  I think he rather enjoys his anger and uses it as his raison d'etre, so I doubt that he will ever want to get rid of it.  It has never occurred to him that he should thank them for saving him from the multiple embarrassments in his life that he walked himself into.  The question is if they will sever him completely and never again help him, or will take him back when this latest embarrassment finishes him.  It's a soap opera folks!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that the BRF went ahead with the wedding because they were afraid to be called racists if they would try to stop it. I believe MM would have found a way to call them racists as she did during Oprah's interview.


Yet there were numerous blind items that she named a walking away  price, but they wouldn't meet it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Quick question — we, along with numerous other sites, have documented the lies/half-truths/deceptions from the OW interview.
Why are H&M, OW, GK *silent* on these issues?  Why is no one calling for them to explain themselves?


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> Yet there were numerous blind items that she named a walking away  price, but they wouldn't meet it.



It may have been a RF strategy to wait 3-5 years for divorce... particularly if the $$ amount is too much.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

I've been wondering and maybe someone knows if H&MM has a prenup or equivalent in England. Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere in this thread.  I would hope there is to protect his mother's inheritance but never read about one or maybe there's something else that's in place for royals?  Would H receive anything when, I hate even thinking of this and hope this is years out, the Queen passes? Would H possibly inherit anything? MM must have thought about this. If they were to divorce and there's no prenup, she'd get a fortune and money for the children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did Meghan Markle Sign a Prenup Agreement Before Marrying Prince Harry?
					

Find out if Meghan Markle signed a prenup before marrying into the royal family.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



*British royals don’t have prenups*

Many people assume that Meghan and Harry would be all over a prenup based on what happened with Charles and Diana’s divorce. Sources like Cosmo have recently analyzed this subject and noted one important aspect: Prenups aren’t really legally binding in the U.K.
While there was an agreement made between Charles and Diana in the 1990s, it wasn’t based on any prior signed agreement. As a result, no royal has signed a prenup, ever. Neither Kate Middleton and Prince William signed a prenup, nor did Meghan and Harry.
The legal definition behind this says because the queen owns all the palaces and other residences, there isn’t any concern about having to divide up properties. Issues like compensation or child custody would technically be handled by an outside court, making things slightly less complicated.
Since dividing property is far more complicated, you can see why the royals are probably happy the courts haven’t made divorces overly complex.

Another article involving Eugenie: https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a22799218/royal-family-prenups/
_In this case, the Queen is, well, king. All of the royal family's assets belong to the royal family itself as an entity rather than to individual members of the family. With Queen Elizabeth at the helm, all royal property and resources are under her domain. Since Princess Eugenie's wealth is technicallyin royal trusts, the Queen's power overrules that of a prenup._


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did Meghan Markle Sign a Prenup Agreement Before Marrying Prince Harry?
> 
> 
> Find out if Meghan Markle signed a prenup before marrying into the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *British royals don’t have prenups*
> 
> Many people assume that Meghan and Harry would be all over a prenup based on what happened with Charles and Diana’s divorce. Sources like Cosmo have recently analyzed this subject and noted one important aspect: Prenups aren’t really legally binding in the U.K.
> While there was an agreement made between Charles and Diana in the 1990s, it wasn’t based on any prior signed agreement. As a result, no royal has signed a prenup, ever. Neither Kate Middleton and Prince William signed a prenup, nor did Meghan and Harry.
> The legal definition behind this says because the queen owns all the palaces and other residences, there isn’t any concern about having to divide up properties. Issues like compensation or child custody would technically be handled by an outside court, making things slightly less complicated.
> Since dividing property is far more complicated, you can see why the royals are probably happy the courts haven’t made divorces overly complex.


Thank you for the article!   So MM gets at least half of H's inheritance. She'll make out and get continued monetary support for the kids if they are to divorce. Again thanks.


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> Thank you for the article!   So MM gets at least half of H's inheritance. She'll make out and get continued monetary support for the kids if they are to divorce. Again thanks.


Since it’s unlikely she will return to GB I think that in California whatever he owned pre marriage he keeps but that spousal alimony will be huge as she can  say she’s accustomed to that lifestyle, not to mention child support.


----------



## Annawakes

Yeah, she’s basically set for life whether she stays married or not.  Which is why it’s so confounding why she doesn’t just keep quiet and live her life already. Like, what more do you want?!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> Since it’s unlikely she will return to GB I think that in California whatever he owned pre marriage he keeps but that spousal alimony will be huge as she can  say she’s accustomed to that lifestyle, not to mention child support.


Thank you! If there was a sound emoji here I'd be growling ...  Sorry to the fans of MM. I don't mean to get anyone upset but I think she's conniving.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why are H&M, OW, GK *silent* on these issues?  Why is no one calling for them to explain themselves?


That's what happens when you're so revered, called the queen... you stop listening to people. Her head is too big to bother with accusations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m guessing _his_ money is in Royal trusts which the Queen oversees.  Neither Sarah nor Diana left with large sums of $$$, comparatively. Sure millions, just not billions. Both ended up living in Royal properties.  Child support may not be an issue if the children are educated in the UK, as is tradition.

Bottom line - marrying a Royal is not a ‘get rich quick’ marriage.
If money is all she’s after, she would have done better with a hedge-fund guy or other billionaires.  Much easier ways to do it.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *I wonder if the wedding dress would have turned out better if Meghan had been forced to pay for it herself. * Perhaps there would not have been all the last minute changes to it, which resulted in it looking ill fitting and poorly designed.   I certainly do not believe that the fee requested for that dress reflects just that dress alone.  I think it reflects all the wasted staff hours spent on creating things that Meghan rejected and/or kept changing.  She wasn't destitute and should have paid for it herself.  Prince Charles bent over backwards to be nice and it certainly was not appreciated.  The end result did nothing for Claire Waight Keller's reputation and certainly put her more at risk for her job with Givenchy.  I think it made her a laughingstock within the design community.
> 
> I am now pretty much of the opinion that Meghan Markle went into this marriage with a game plan and that plan *included using complaints of racism *for whatever  transpired that she did not like or agree with and she continues to do this even now that they have left England and separated themselves.  It was a very convenient accusation to use and became more so after BLM.  *She doesn't appear to be the sort of person who considers whether this was a fair thing to do.*  As long as it suited her to gain what she wanted, she would use it.  Harry played right into her hands regarding this and it wasn't difficult as he is an angry man.  She is using his anger against his family and even his mother for dying in the  fashion that  she did.  Constantly bringing up Diana keeps the wound fresh.  Why Harry is so angry would keep a therapist busy for a long time.  I think he rather enjoys his anger and uses it as his raison d'etre, so I doubt that he will ever want to get rid of it.  It has never occurred to him that he should thank them for saving him from the multiple embarrassments in his life that he walked himself into.  *The question is if they will sever him completely and never again help him, or will take him back when this latest embarrassment finishes him.  It's a soap opera folks!*


My 2 cents: If MM had to pay for the dress, the number of alterations would have been drastically reduced. I also believe that she was prepared to complain about racism when things wouldn't go her way. The word fair for her means getting what she wants. She doesn't care that her father spent most of his money with her,  and her siblings got a lot less. Her sister suffers from MS, but she doesn't show any compassion for her. If MM would get rid of H as she did with previous husband(s), I believe the BRF would take him back. He would take a vow of silence and join Randy Andy. As long as she lowers her political ambitions and doesn't interfere with freedom of speech, it's a soap opera.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m guessing _his_ money is in Royal trusts which the Queen oversees.  Neither Sarah nor Diana left with large sums of $$$, comparatively. Sure millions, just not billions. Both ended up living in Royal properties.  Child support may not be an issue if the children are educated in the UK, as is tradition.
> 
> Bottom line - marrying a Royal is not a ‘get rich quick’ marriage.
> If money is all she’s after, she would have done better with a hedge-fund guy or other billionaires.  Much easier ways to do it.


For a decadent actress, she did very well. If the circulating info is true, the $14.5M -16 toilet mansion is already in her name. Diana's jewelry, the infamous $1M earrings, and whatever more she brought with her from the UK... The kids future allowances, interviews, book deals.. It's not like divorcing J Bezos, but it's not bad at all.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I tend to think they aren’t trying to guilt Charles. They must know by now that they’ve burned that bridge to ashes. They are making a big play for sympathy but I think they’re trying to get sympathy here in the US.
> 
> Maybe they are trying to work another lucrative business deal and want to show they need a lot of money because they are so popular and “in demand,”even by the nutcases who wander onto their estate.


Part of me envisions the


Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that the BRF went ahead with the wedding because they were afraid to be called racists if they would try to stop it. I believe MM would have found a way to call them racists as she did during Oprah's interview.
> 
> It was nice that the Middletons paid for Kate's wedding dress. MM had enough money to pay for a wedding dress. It's ridiculous to choose highly expensive outfits and have the father in-law pay for them.


In retrospect, I think she was testing the water with her dress picks.
I’m sure at least one advisor told her KM, B, Z and E usually wore British high street in public (accessorised with millions worth in family jewels) and wouldn’t she like a look at the John Lewis website? 

MM wanted to establish whether they’d accommodate her being favoured or whether they would cut her loose. Either way, she was going to get paid.

This is the most cynical reasoning behind doubting the racism rumours but I’m going to say it anyway. If they didn’t want a biracial bride, well, they are one of the most powerful families on earth. Why wouldn’t they just have her deported back to the US or tell Harry ‘NO actresses. Now marry this nice marchioness, now!’
It’s not like there’s no precedent for royals pushing arranged marriages on people.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> I've been wondering and maybe someone knows if H&MM has a prenup or equivalent in England. Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere in this thread.  I would hope there is to protect his mother's inheritance but never read about one or maybe there's something else that's in place for royals?  Would H receive anything when, I hate even thinking of this and hope this is years out, the Queen passes? Would H possibly inherit anything? MM must have thought about this. If they were to divorce and there's no prenup, she'd get a fortune and money for the children.


While Prenups do exist in the U.K. I have read that they are not often recognised or upheld in court.

However, I would be surprised if Harry’s assets are actually accessible or even legally ‘his’.
His inheritance from Diana and queen mum are his to lose, I think, but he’s burning through them anyway.  
I’m sure they’ll take him back, they’ve always been too soft with their bad apples - why change now?


----------



## mdcx

Annawakes said:


> Yeah, she’s basically set for life whether she stays married or not.  Which is why it’s so confounding why she doesn’t just keep quiet and live her life already. Like, what more do you want?!


Yes! There have been so many opportunities for her to gracefully live in luxury, even if she chose to not be a working royal anymore. They could have stayed in the UK and just lived their lives ala Beatrice and Eugenie. They could have gone to Africa or Canada etc and taken a couple of years break somewhere nice and private. Even the move to the US could have been handled properly and resulted in them living a nice life still on good terms with the rest of the BRF. So, obviously a financially comfortable life and fame are not enough for Meghan. There is another goal she is after.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> While Prenups do exist in the U.K. I have read that they are not often recognised or upheld in court.
> 
> However, I would be surprised if Harry’s assets are actually accessible or even legally ‘his’.
> His inheritance from Diana and queen mum are his to lose, I think, but he’s burning through them anyway.
> I’m sure they’ll take him back, they’ve always been too soft with their bad apples - why change now?


I agree. They would take him back feeling sorry for him as a broken kin after MM is done. Thanks for your thoughts.


----------



## papertiger

I believe the CM Givenchy dress for MM was fairly close to the original 1967 version. Edited to say I prefer the single centre seam and empire of the older version, the panels and shaping look more less couture and are not a good choice for someone who is short-waisted.

View attachment 5030979



sdkitty said:


> agree, the similarities with the other wedding gown are glaring...and the other bride was also a WOC....but how was this not pointed out before?  I mean the flowers and everything seemed to have been copied....surely she (with help) could have come up with something tht wasn't a direct copy
> 
> guess I was wondering how she got away with it....but wait - she gets away with everything in the US media.  and we are the mean girls



It was mentioned - by us on this thread. The media is way behind because they just browse each other.

I think _the_ (or both) dresses have something of Givenchy's 1967 wedding dress about them. Of course the neckline has been cut wider (as on a dress Audrey modelled in the mid-1950s, but that also had a romantic tutu skirt) and MM's was pure white.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> *This 100%+++ *.. can't even say how many of my London colleagues spoke very badly about the "class" system; heck - one of them said that the minute he opened his mouth and the toffs heard a cockney accent, poof .. he would disappear!!!  Even in the business place, this guy was a freakin' mathematical genius and yet when he had to present to "the board" (all aristos), they would really give him the business and basically do the "oh - pish, posh".  So, being American and not the meek and mild type, I was asked to present our findings as well as 'next actions' to the board.  Well, I could have cared less about these folks and what they thought of me, and I made that VERY CLEAR in the first 15 minutes (you always have to let them know QUICKLY .. who is the BOSS .. and that was ME)!!!  From that point on, I was the one who was "on point" .. not that I cared, but I saw firsthand what those folks had to go through .. and honestly, it made perfect sense to me why they felt the way they did .. not really a pleasant experience to be honest!



The working classes usually get on well with the toffs and vice versa, _everybody_ hates the middle-classes, mostly themselves. It is pretty much a crime to be aspirational in the UK.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Yeah, she’s basically set for life whether she stays married or not.  Which is why it’s so confounding why she doesn’t just keep quiet and live her life already. Like, what more do you want?!



Everything.


----------



## poopsie

I knew this would happen.
On my tablet was an advert for the Washington Post, the title of which is A Transgender Girl's Struggle To Find Her Voice.
Used to be when someone "lost their voice" they merely had laryngitis


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Haha that’s probably why the RF said she should continue on with her acting career.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Hermes Zen said:


> I've been wondering and maybe someone knows if H&MM has a prenup or equivalent in England. Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere in this thread.  I would hope there is to protect his mother's inheritance but never read about one or maybe there's something else that's in place for royals?  Would H receive anything when, I hate even thinking of this and hope this is years out, the Queen passes? Would H possibly inherit anything? MM must have thought about this. If they were to divorce and there's no prenup, she'd get a fortune and money for the children.


*Pre-up is not enforceable in the UK. However, things don't just split in the middle. It really depends on the case and the judge will have the final say in how assets will be distributed. *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Meghan revealed she regularly phones the monarch "just to check in" and said the Queen shared her blanket with her on their first official engagement together._"



I'm sure these phonecalls take place in her head only, just like lunch with Michelle *****. She just trusts the Queen won't put out a statement saying otherwise.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yet there were numerous blind items that she named a walking away  price, but they wouldn't meet it.



Oh my. If true I bet they regret dearly they didn't just throw money after the problem. That said, back then they thought she was good for Harry. They love him, he is their Achilles' heel.

ETA: I still think she was after more than just money, though.


----------



## needlv

Omid warns (/stoops to blackmail) unless they (MM) get what they want...  Note it references H but that could be MM deflecting blame as the narc she is...









						Prince Harry to use 'unprecedented' media tactic to pressure royals
					

THE ROYAL FAMILY is concerned by Prince Harry's unprecedented decisions to leak information about the Palace without its approval, as the rift between the two sides continues to escalate.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## RAINDANCE

chicinthecity777 said:


> *Pre-up is not enforceable in the UK. However, things don't just split in the middle. It really depends on the case and the judge will have the final say in how assets will be distributed. *



Anyone here remember the mess Jerry Hall found herself in when divorcing Mick? If I recall correctly their exchange of vows in Bali (I think?) was not a proper legal marriage. I was therefore surprised that our already twice married bride (with her army of lawyers on retainer) was suggesting the wedding rehearsal was a real marriage.  I am however disgusted that the Archbishop/Church of England has not issued a proper statement correcting her assertion.


----------



## RAINDANCE

needlv said:


> Omid warns (/stoops to blackmail) unless they (MM) get what they want...  Note it references H but that could be MM deflecting blame as the narc she is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to use 'unprecedented' media tactic to pressure royals
> 
> 
> THE ROYAL FAMILY is concerned by Prince Harry's unprecedented decisions to leak information about the Palace without its approval, as the rift between the two sides continues to escalate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



 But does anyone know what they want. And does anyone CARE what they want.
The husband keeps saying - Harry's number 6 , he's irrelevant!


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is from Twitter. It says they married on the 19th May.


----------



## RAINDANCE

chicinthecity777 said:


> I came across this on Twitter.
> View attachment 5031293



The GRO (General Register Office) released it - the official body that registers all births, marriages and deaths.  
In my last job we often needed to get Official Copies of GRO documents* but I can't recall this morning what permissions you need if it is not your own record. Notwithstanding that, note the irony that the document continues the historical practice of naming the father of the bride and groom. 

* it is illegal in the UK to photocopy crown copyright documents.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Omid warns (/stoops to blackmail) unless they (MM) get what they want...  Note it references H but that could be MM deflecting blame as the narc she is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to use 'unprecedented' media tactic to pressure royals
> 
> 
> THE ROYAL FAMILY is concerned by Prince Harry's unprecedented decisions to leak information about the Palace without its approval, as the rift between the two sides continues to escalate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



See, we already knew it. 

Meanwhile the World is not holding its breath with anticipation since we are all trying to deal with this pesky little global pandemic thing and desperately trying to hold on to our jobs.


----------



## jelliedfeels

RAINDANCE said:


> Anyone here remember the mess Jerry Hall found herself in when divorcing Mick? If I recall correctly their exchange of vows in Bali (I think?) was not a proper legal marriage. I was therefore surprised that our already twice married bride (with her army of lawyers on retainer) was suggesting the wedding rehearsal was a real marriage.  I am however disgusted that the Archbishop/Church of England has not issued a proper statement correcting her assertion.


I’m sure she realises that it’s not real till you sign on the dotted line. I’d say that’s a central tenet of her identity.
She was just trying to rub it in people’s faces how little their hospitality and generosity meant to them.[/QUOTE]


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> See, we already knew it.
> 
> Meanwhile the World is not holding its breath with anticipation since we are all trying to deal with this pesky little global pandemic thing and desperately trying to hold on to our jobs.


Perhaps demands are being made now because of an impending bullying investigation ... which is not going to leave either of them in a good light.  He’s famous for shouting “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets”.  So the investigation should look at his behaviour too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. If true I bet they regret dearly they didn't just throw money after the problem. That said, back then they thought she was good for Harry. They love him, he is their Achilles' heel.
> 
> ETA: I still think she was after more than just money, though.


I agree they thought she was a PR master stroke. Maybe they even bought into her philanthropist hype a little. They’d also had great success with letting Will marry a commoner.

I bet they are regretting not sticking her on the next flight to LA and Harry on a lads trip to Amsterdam.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that the BRF went ahead with the wedding because they were afraid to be called racists if they would try to stop it. I believe MM would have found a way to call them racists as she did during Oprah's interview.
> 
> It was nice that the Middletons paid for Kate's wedding dress. MM had enough money to pay for a wedding dress. It's ridiculous to choose highly expensive outfits and have the father in-law pay for them.





lulu212121 said:


> Very good points! It does give me hesitation towards the Queen and Charles if this is true. I have to admit I want to like the Queen in all this, but there's a lot of things coming out from different directions that I'm sure were brought to their attention.
> 
> I too recall Kate's dress payment drama. Her family did pay for the dress and I think there was something else. Rehearsal?
> 
> Here's an explanation of costs paid by the Middelton's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Wedding: Kate Middleton's Family Chips In but Security Most Costly
> 
> 
> Rumors about Kate Middleton's royal wedding dress designer, the cake -- or cakes -- food and decorations will soon be put to rest. But what might never be known is the precise cost of the whole affair, with estimates ranging from $16 million to $64 million and security accounting for the bulk of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com


Thank you, lulu212121 and Chanbal, such a wealth of information on this thread and tPF generally. It just looks like the BRF bent and broke a lot of their regulations and old traditions, that everyone else has to abide by, to accommodate and cater to H&M:s every whim. By doing so the BRF has put a lot at risk.

It'd all be very ridiculous if it wasn't for the fact that it's so obviously a smear campaign not just against the BRF but against Britain and British culture, to further any existing divides and cause more societal chaos. Oprah and Gayle, and their backers whoever they are but I have my suspicions, going all in with the racism accusations on national TV confirms this to me. Or, the BRF were just extremely unlucky to get roped in by a scorched earth narc using every trick in the woke arsenal to destroy it all if she can't have it all. 

I think it's both.

A cat probably called Meghan


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> Everything.



My personal view is that both Harry and Meghan are addicts and fueling each others' obsessions and illnesses.

Harry - We know Diane was troubled when she was a teenager and later suffered from and acknowledged her bulimia. We know Margaret was a heavy drinker. So addiction issues existed in both sides of his family. I believe Harry is obsessed with the press and has a drink issue. Look at the photos of him at church the day after the Marines concert - he looks like he has the hangover from hell and that's not the only photo. At the wedding in Jamaica too, he looks wrecked. I read two separate articles in January 2020 from two people in the Royal press pack, both of whom confirmed Harry was very carefully handled for his appearances and was known to follow his media coverage with barely disguised dislike becoming increasing hostile after meeting his current wife. He is a seething mass of contradictory resentments - at being #2, at having a life planned out for him, at not having a life planned out for him etc. I think whilst Meghan gets lots of blame Harry is complicit and without his palace handlers it is becoming apparent just how adrift (from reality, responsibility, accountability and finances) he really is. I don't however pick up financial obsession or greed from Harry directly. 
I suspect the first thing he's really had truly for himself is becoming a dad and that he loves it and now views his family as the most important thing in his life. Which in itself is laudable and I am happy for him but his behavior and actions I find unacceptable. I measure people on their actions not intentions. He has himself behaved in a manner, and allowed behavior, that is disrespectful, self absorbed, entitled, mean, spiteful and in some assertions made, plainly incorrect.

Meghan - I believe she is addicted to the attention and obsessed with money.  Meghan seems incapable of letting things go. Does or has she called the press, as was confirmed that Diana did, to photograph her when out and about? - I don't know, but she has repeatedly engaged with the press via her spokesperson Scobie and other friends at every opportunity. The scary thing is that there is no clear end point - what are they trying to achieve ? If she needs attention like a drug, she needs to keep fueling the media to get a fix and then there is no end point. 
Pages ago when M's sister's book was being discussed somebody (sorry can't attribute it just now) posted an excerpt where Samantha expresses disappointment that M was not more like the Markles. Samantha did not elaborate but I wonder if she meant financially giving and generous? I really pick up that there is not enough money and they need more. Another trait of addiction being that there is never enough ! 

Much was made of the no title for Archie (we want to be normal not formal) at the time of his birth and also small families dig at William but I suspect Harry is so enamored of being a dad that they decided on another baby and I see nothing wrong in that. I bet Harry is one of those dads that does all the childcare and would do, whoever he had married. I can't buy into the surrogacy fake bump rumors but I believe that as soon as they knew (chose?) a girl the title issue came into focus. And it is this that will be Meghan's meal ticket for life. What better way to remain in the headlines than being Princess Diana II 's mother. It would be very ironic though if Baby#2 is not IVF gender selected and it's a boy ! I wonder if they will be as equally precious about privacy and photos if it's a girl ?

Oh what is all this crap about the BRF didn't stop the media ! Err Harry we're in the UK - free press and all that - not  China, Russia, N Korea. 

I am sorry this post is so long. Have I exceed my word count yet - Didn't realise I had so much to get off my chest ! 

In my personal opinion the photo of QE2, Prince Philip, Doria, Harry, Meghan and baby Archie was the most iconic photo of the decade and the greatest tragedy is that Harry walked out when there was so much opportunity open and available to them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

There is another court hearing about Markle v.s. Main on Sunday today and they were arguing about how long and what font MoS should be running the apology to MM for. Apparently MM's lawyer asked it to be run for 6 months! And the judge said 6 days. But this is all subject to MoS submitting their appeal to the Court of Appeal.


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> There is another court hearing about Markle v.s. Main on Sunday today and they were arguing about how long and what font MoS should be running the apology to MM for. Apparently MM's lawyer asked it to be run for 6 months! And the judge said 6 days. But this is all subject to MoS submitting their appeal to the Court of Appeal.


What is the most sarcastic font choice do you think?
My vote is for a calligraphy style font that renders it unreadable.


----------



## RAINDANCE

chicinthecity777 said:


> There is another court hearing about Markle v.s. Main on Sunday today and they were arguing about how long and what font MoS should be running the apology to MM for. Apparently MM's lawyer asked it to be run for 6 months! And the judge said 6 days. But this is all subject to MoS submitting their appeal to the Court of Appeal.



Exactly the same duration as an ordinary person - one day !


----------



## Chagall

papertiger said:


> I believe the CM Givenchy dress for MM was fairly close to the original 1967 version. Edited to say I prefer the single centre seam and empire of the older version, the panels and shaping look more less couture and are not a good choice for someone who is short-waisted.
> 
> View attachment 5030979
> 
> 
> 
> It was mentioned - by us on this thread. The media is way behind because they just browse each other.
> 
> I think _the_ (or both) dresses have something of Givenchy's 1967 wedding dress about them. Of course the neckline has been cut wider (as on a dress Audrey modelled in the mid-1950s, but that also had a romantic tutu skirt) and MM's was pure white.
> 
> View attachment 5031272
> 
> 
> View attachment 5031273
> 
> 
> View attachment 5031274


I think MM’s wedding dress was absolutely beautiful. It was so minimalist and tasteful. It a shame that the fit wasn’t better.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> I think MM’s wedding dress was absolutely beautiful. It was so minimalist and tasteful. It a shame that the fit wasn’t better.


I agree with you. Also, that dress needed that tiara and veil and the tiara and veil needed that dress.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree with you. Also, that dress needed that tiara and veil and the tiara and veil needed that dress.


You don’t think an emerald tiara would have fit better?


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> What is the most sarcastic font choice do you think?
> My vote is for a calligraphy style font that renders it unreadable.


If it was up to me, I'd print all evidence of debunking her lies in the same page!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why are H&M, OW, GK *silent* on these issues?  *Why is no one calling for them to explain themselves?*



Who would dare do that? Oprah and Gayle are revered by many and the backlash of calling them out would be career suicide. In the US it’s just not that important a story. The rest of the press is perfectly happy to leave the story exactly as it was presented.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Yet there were numerous blind items that she named a walking away  price, but they wouldn't meet it.



This makes it sound like Harry had no say in the matter. After that interview we cannot pretend that Harry is some mindless dupe who was somehow conned into it by Meghan and he’s a prisoner living an unhappy life. He CHOSE her. He wanted to marry her. I seriously doubt Meghan ever had any conversation with his family where he wasn’t right there beside her.

No, he is a 100% active participant in what happened, then and now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Who would dare do that? Oprah and Gayle are revered by many and the backlash of calling them out would be career suicide. In the US it’s just not that important a story. The rest of the press is perfectly happy to leave the story exactly as it was presented.



Sad for the truth,  I believe you are correct. The US has other more important concerns. Plus, no one wants the grief, right now. It will take a UK paper to hold them accountable.

ETA:  100% Harry is the active participant from day 1. I still wonder if the BRF will try to buy back the titles and the succession line-up. Money can be a great motivator


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  100% Harry is the active participant from day 1. I still wonder if the BRF will try to buy back the titles and the succession line-up. Money can be a great motivator



Buying them off would be sinking down to their level. I don’t think that will happen, at least not while the Queen is still in charge.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> I agree. They would take him back feeling sorry for him as a broken kin after MM is done. Thanks for your thoughts.



Oh, I wouldn’t be so sure about that. His betrayal to them is very close to being unforgivable. He pretty much pissed all over the institution and the people that gave him everything he is in life. And he is still doing it. He insinuated at least one family member is blatantly racist and left everyone questioning who it might be.

Even if you love a family member dearly, you have to know when to say enough is enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if they’ll use 8 point


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I wouldn’t be so sure about that. His betrayal to them is very close to being unforgivable. He pretty much pissed all over the institution and the people that gave him everything he is in life. And he is still doing it. He insinuated at least one family member is blatantly racist and left everyone questioning who it might be.
> 
> Even if you love a family member dearly, you have to know when to say enough is enough.



I doubt he wants to go back. If [big if] they divorce or go their separate ways [aka, open marriage], my guess he would head to South Africa. His mom’s brother is there, he loves the country, it all makes sense. The tricky thing will be preventing him from being a distraction. As much as he says he hates the media, he does love stealing his father and brother’s limelight.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sad for the truth,  I believe you are correct. The US has other more important concerns. Plus, no one wants the grief, right now. It will take a UK paper to hold them accountable.
> 
> ETA:  100% Harry is the active participant from day 1. I still wonder if the BRF will try to buy back the titles and the succession line-up. Money can be a great motivator





bag-mania said:


> Buying them off would be sinking down to their level. I don’t think that will happen, at least not while the Queen is still in charge.



The Express article posted by @needlv stating that H "_threatens to use 'unprecedented' pressure tactic_" until he gets whatever he wants, sounds like extortion to me. 

It is often said that paying is unlikely to stop a blackmailer's demands. While the latter may be an exaggeration, this is not only a family matter... the BRF needs to work with professionals trained to deal with this type of situations imo.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I wouldn’t be so sure about that. His betrayal to them is very close to being unforgivable. He pretty much pissed all over the institution and the people that gave him everything he is in life. And he is still doing it. He insinuated at least one family member is blatantly racist and left everyone questioning who it might be.
> 
> Even if you love a family member dearly, you have to know when to say enough is enough.



'Loose cannon' with military medals - not a good look, terrible sound.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> I doubt he wants to go back. If [big if] they divorce or go their separate ways [aka, open marriage], my guess he would head to South Africa. His mom’s brother is there, he loves the country, it all makes sense. The tricky thing will be preventing him from being a distraction. As much as he says he hates the media, he does love stealing his father and brother’s limelight.


I don't know Kate and William, but I don't think William will ever forgive Harry for subjecting his wife and kids to this. As someone wrote earlier, kids are off limits. William went through everything Harry did, and probably worse as he apparently was his mother's much too young confidante and emotional caretaker. Like a lot of (sometimes only slighter) older children who often have to bear the brunt of their family's dysfunction.

There are so many kids in this world, rich and poor, who suffer the most horrendous abuse by their families, of whom many still manage to survive and quietly and with dignity make it against their lousy odds. But Harry? What a deceitful, entitled and pathetic pathetic twat who found his perfect match in Meghan. They disgust me on a newfound level. I feel truly sorry for their children.


----------



## Chanbal

Mr. Scoobie's new role... 


_"Royal author Omid Scobie suggested Prince Harry could continue with his tactics after private conversations between the Duke of Sussex and Prince William and Prince Charles were shared with Gayle King, with the talks branded "not productive".

Mr Scobie told ABC's royal podcast The HeirPod that there could be more damaging reports in US media

Mr Scobie suggested these moves may continue "if we are seeing a resistance from the Palace towards addressing the issues".

He added: "This tactic may not go away for some time._”









						Prince Harry’s pressure 'tactics' may not stop - 'Spiteful!'
					

BRITONS have reacted furiously after reports that Prince Harry would not change his pressure "tactic" to leak information - as the row between the Sussexes and Buckingham Palace reaches boiling point.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## limom

At what age is a Royal male supposed to have his crap together?
IIRC, Charles was a late bloomer.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It is often said that paying is unlikely to stop a blackmailer's demands. While the latter may be an exaggeration, this is not only a family matter... the BRF needs to work with professionals trained to deal with this type of situations imo.



The thing about blackmail is once you pay it, your blackmailer will continue to come back for more every time he/she needs money. If they want it to end then stop paying and let the chips fall where they may. If the family has horrible skeletons in their closet then this is the time to come clean.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I believe the CM Givenchy dress for MM was fairly close to the original 1967 version. Edited to say I prefer the single centre seam and empire of the older version, the panels and shaping look more less couture and are not a good choice for someone who is short-waisted.
> 
> View attachment 5030979
> 
> 
> 
> It was mentioned - by us on this thread. The media is way behind because they just browse each other.
> 
> I think _the_ (or both) dresses have something of Givenchy's 1967 wedding dress about them. Of course the neckline has been cut wider (as on a dress Audrey modelled in the mid-1950s, but that also had a romantic tutu skirt) and MM's was pure white.
> 
> View attachment 5031272
> 
> 
> View attachment 5031273
> 
> 
> View attachment 5031274



The top picture of the original almost reminds me of The Flying Nun!


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Omid warns (/stoops to blackmail) unless they (MM) get what they want...  Note it references H but that could be MM deflecting blame as the narc she is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to use 'unprecedented' media tactic to pressure royals
> 
> 
> THE ROYAL FAMILY is concerned by Prince Harry's unprecedented decisions to leak information about the Palace without its approval, as the rift between the two sides continues to escalate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


This to me screams that these two deserve each other.  If someone is going to resort to blackmailing his own family, which upon his entire identity and value is based on, he is nothing but a scum bag.  If I was the BRF, I'd cut him loose and never look back.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> What is the most sarcastic font choice do you think?
> *My vote is for a calligraphy style font that renders it unreadable*.


Plus it would give homage to Meghan, which clearly is what she would love


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The Express article posted by @needlv stating that H "_threatens to use 'unprecedented' pressure tactic_" until he gets whatever he wants, sounds like extortion to me.
> 
> It is often said that paying is unlikely to stop a blackmailer's demands. While the latter may be an exaggeration, this is not only a family matter...* the BRF needs to work with professionals trained to deal with this type of situations imo.*


I originally would have said they need to work with hostage negotiators to pry Harry away, LOL.  Now, they need to work with professionals trained in working with terrorists!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I originally would have said they need to work with hostage negotiators to pry Harry away, LOL.  Now, they need to work with professionals trained in working with terrorists!



OMG yes.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Who would dare do that? Oprah and Gayle are revered by many and the backlash of calling them out would be career suicide. In the US it’s just not that important a story. The rest of the press is perfectly happy to leave the story exactly as it was presented.


And the focus in the US has shifted away from one minority to another
M’s minority group was last week


----------



## marietouchet

The threats of publication ... 
So out of Diana’s book, she published her thoughts via Morton book
All that got her was a separation, it would take the Bashir interview for the divorce to happen 
The question is whether those were her intended goals, at the time, she said she did not want a divorce... 
what are H&M’s goals ? I cannot figure that out 
they seem to have been lax about Spotify and Netflix productions , while embroiled everywhere


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> You don’t think an emerald tiara would have fit better?


Ha ha, no!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> I doubt he wants to go back. If [big if] they divorce or go their separate ways [aka, open marriage], my guess he would head to South Africa. His mom’s brother is there, he loves the country, it all makes sense. The tricky thing will be preventing him from being a distraction. As much as he says he hates the media, he does love stealing his father and brother’s limelight.


His mums brother isn't in South Africa, he's s at Althorp.


----------



## scarlet555

I am sure all the hollywood and all the people with the right mind know what loose cannons these two are...  Duke and Duchess of Loose Cannons is a rightful name of theirs... they may get 'fake' support to avoid being called racist...


----------



## bag-mania

They take a risk at this point by continuing to cry victim. By the end of the Oprah interview they acted like everything was right with them now, they are going to make it on their own! They are doing streamers!

If they keep harassing the BRF it should be obvious even to their most avid supporters that it is Harry and Meghan who just can’t let go. It’s hard to work up sympathy for people who refuse to move on, especially after they made such a big deal telling Oprah and the world about how happy they are now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Page Six reported that H&M's chief of staff was leaving her role after a year. But the link to the article has been taken down.

Articles from other publications are still there:









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Archewell foundation director leaves
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's Archewell chief of staff has left her role after one year.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Another one bites the dust 




The Telegraph
*Duke and Duchess of Sussex's chief of staff steps down*

Camilla Tominey
Mon, 22 March 2021, 3:17 pm







Catherine St-Laurent took on the role with the couple in April last year - News Scans
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's chief of staff has stepped down after less than a year in the role.
Catherine St-Laurent, who previously held senior roles at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, started working for Harry and Meghan in April 2020. As well as acting as the couple's chief of staff, she was also the executive director of their non-profit organisation, Archewell Foundation.
A spokesman for the Sussexes confirmed that the Montreal-born mother-of-two will transition to an "advisory" role and be replaced by James Holt, the couple's UK spokesman.
It comes after Harry and Meghan appointed Ben Browning as Archewell's head of content to "work closely with Netflix and Spotify", with whom the couple signed multi-million dollar deals last year.
It means the two most powerful people in the Sussexes' top team are now both white males, despite the couple having voiced their concerns about a lack of diversity in the Royal family. A statement issued on behalf of Archewell made clear that it would also be advised by Invisible Hand, "a female-led, diverse team" based in New York and run by Genevieve Roth.
Toya Holness, the global press secretary for Archewell, said: "Archewell is incredibly pleased to welcome Ben, Genevieve and the Invisible Hand team to the organisation.
"Along with the appointment of James Holt as executive director of Archewell Foundation, they join a rapidly expanding team that's deeply dedicated to advancing systemic cultural change and supporting compassionate communities across the world."
The Sussexes said last year that they were 'proud to be joined by Catherine St Laurent in this next chapter with us' - Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP
Announcing Ms St-Laurent’s appointment 11 months ago, the Sussexes said: "We are proud to be joined by Catherine St-Laurent in this next chapter with us.
"Her leadership and proven track record working within two organisations that have tremendous impact in the world – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Pivotal Ventures – makes her an incredible asset, and we're excited to have her on our team."
A source told The Telegraph: "Catherine was a great hire for Harry and Meghan. She is a Canadian who has worked for Bill and Melinda Gates. She's very bubbly and a big personality. She was the bright hope to run their organisation, so this is surprising news. They do not have a big team out in LA, so this is going to be a blow."
It is thought Ms St-Laurent will also be launching her own social impact firm, which will work closely with Archewell.
While in the UK, the couple lost a string of employees, including Meghan's personal assistant, Melissa Toubati, and their senior communications officer, Amy Pickerill, alongside Samantha Cohen, their private secretary.
Last month, it was reported that complaints of alleged bullying within Harry and Meghan's former office at Kensington Palace had been made to Buckingham Palace, although none of the complainants were named.
The palace's human resources department is now looking into the allegations, which the Sussexes have vehemently denied and described as a "calculated smear campaign" to deflect from their tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they’ll use 8 point



I volunteer to write the apology.


----------



## Aimee3

H&M have proven themselves to be such liars and hypocrites at this point I wouldn’t believe anything that comes out of their mouths.  I don’t think the RF has anything to worry about in a tell-all.  They couldn’t even get it straight between them re the question on the baby’s skin tone.  M said it was when she was pregnant but that Harry told her, and H said the question came up before they got married.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't know Kate and William, but I don't think William will ever forgive Harry for subjecting his wife and kids to this. As someone wrote earlier, kids are off limits. *William went through everything Harry did, and probably worse as he apparently was his mother's much too young confidante and emotional caretaker.* Like a lot of (sometimes only slighter) older children who often have to bear the brunt of their family's dysfunction.
> 
> There are so many kids in this world, rich and poor, who suffer the most horrendous abuse by their families, of whom many still manage to survive and quietly and with dignity make it against their lousy odds. But Harry? What a deceitful, entitled and pathetic pathetic twat who found his perfect match in Meghan. They disgust me on a newfound level. I feel truly sorry for their children.


*The Queen invited Prince William for private ‘quietly intimate’ lunches so he wouldn’t ‘crack up’ like Princess Diana, Ingrid Seward claims.*
Article

And from what I've read from other sources as well, HMQ counseled William during his lunch breaks while he attended Eton and later as well to help him cope with his feelings/emotions and to prepare him for his future role as king.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t figure out if that woman was demoted or just changed roles.


----------



## Annawakes

Maggie Muggins said:


> *The Queen invited Prince William for private ‘quietly intimate’ lunches so he wouldn’t ‘crack up’ like Princess Diana, Ingrid Seward claims.*
> Article
> 
> And from what I've read from other sources as well, HMQ counseled William during his lunch breaks while he attended Eton and later as well to help him cope with his feelings/emotions and to prepare him for his future role as king.


I see Yet another reason for H to be jealous of W.  H didn’t get private lunches with the Queen did he?


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t figure out if that woman was demoted or just changed roles.



Usually means left or was fired and just given 'advisory' role to save face for both parties (that can already been written within a golden handshake as part of a leaving strategy). 

Staff leaving outright after a short time looks bad for H&M atm anyway.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Who would dare do that? Oprah and Gayle are revered by many and the backlash of calling them out would be career suicide. In the US it’s just not that important a story. *The rest of the press is perfectly happy to leave the story exactly as it was presented.*



ITA. It was a gossipy and interesting interview but it doesn't really rise to the same level of seriousness that would cause people here to really demand more transparency. Do you demand transparency when Andy Cohen interviews the housewives lmao. Sadly for Oprah but this took on the same level of catty gossip when they moved onto the family dirty laundry instead of keeping on more serious topics.


----------



## scarlet555

Maggie Muggins said:


> I volunteer to write the apology.
> View attachment 5031657


 
I'd like to edit it for you, or we all can ...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Usually means left or was fired and just given 'advisory' role to save face for both parties (that can already been written within a golden handshake as part of a leaving strategy).
> 
> *Staff leaving outright after a short time looks bad for H&M atm anyway.*


If I worked for someone like M or JCMH, who tried to defame, slander or malign a highly respected person such as HMQ, I don't think I'd want to be associated with them either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Quick question — we, along with numerous other sites, have documented the lies/half-truths/deceptions from the OW interview.
> Why are H&M, OW, GK *silent* on these issues?  Why is no one calling for them to explain themselves?


This is *my opinion* .. first of all, they are both WOC's as well, and I think if another news institution were to go about and ask them exactly that, there would be a firestorm of racist comments .. "_how dare they? .. I've gone through the same thing .. YOU (other institution) don't understand ..._"


----------



## sdkitty

since the queen doesn't have her own thread, I'm posting this sweet story about her new puppies here








						Queen Elizabeth Honors Her History With Names For Her New Puppies
					

Meet Fergus and Muick.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Annawakes said:


> I see Yet another reason for H to be jealous of W.  H didn’t get private lunches with the Queen did he?


I'm also interested in this. Wasn't it reported that Harry had a very close relationship with the queen pre Meghan? If so, they must have spent time together just like William and the queen?


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm also interested in this. Wasn't it reported that Harry had a very close relationship with the queen pre Meghan? If so, they must have spent time together just like William and the queen?



We can assume that at times the Queen has had private lunches/meetings with ALL of her grandchildren. But we aren't going to hear about it in the news because that is her personal business and she isn't going to announce it to the press.


----------



## csshopper

The most effective way to handle MM and H would be  for the media to totally ignore them. It will not happen, but would take away what they want most, attention. If  Scoobie, Gayle  etc were talking into a vacuum, it would send a powerful message. MM and H are like two toddlers waging massive tantrums, and need a “time out”.
edited to clarify


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> We can assume that at times the Queen has had private lunches/meetings with ALL of her grandchildren. But we aren't going to hear about it in the news because that is her personal business and she isn't going to announce it to the press.


ITA. It has been stated that HMQ, as granny, welcomed all her grandchildren. Looking at her relationship with William, Beatrice and Eugenie, one could assume that Harry was as loved, welcomed and counseled by the Queen, but I think he was reluctant to accept advice as seen by his OTT childish and stupid actions and tantrums.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Another one bites the dust
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Telegraph
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex's chief of staff steps down*
> 
> Camilla Tominey
> Mon, 22 March 2021, 3:17 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catherine St-Laurent took on the role with the couple in April last year - News Scans
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's chief of staff has stepped down after less than a year in the role.
> Catherine St-Laurent, who previously held senior roles at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, started working for Harry and Meghan in April 2020. As well as acting as the couple's chief of staff, she was also the executive director of their non-profit organisation, Archewell Foundation.
> A spokesman for the Sussexes confirmed that the Montreal-born mother-of-two will transition to an "advisory" role and be replaced by James Holt, the couple's UK spokesman.
> It comes after Harry and Meghan appointed Ben Browning as Archewell's head of content to "work closely with Netflix and Spotify", with whom the couple signed multi-million dollar deals last year.
> It means the two most powerful people in the Sussexes' top team are now both white males, despite the couple having voiced their concerns about a lack of diversity in the Royal family. A statement issued on behalf of Archewell made clear that it would also be advised by Invisible Hand, "a female-led, diverse team" based in New York and run by Genevieve Roth.
> Toya Holness, the global press secretary for Archewell, said: "Archewell is incredibly pleased to welcome Ben, Genevieve and the Invisible Hand team to the organisation.
> "Along with the appointment of James Holt as executive director of Archewell Foundation, they join a rapidly expanding team that's deeply dedicated to advancing systemic cultural change and supporting compassionate communities across the world."
> The Sussexes said last year that they were 'proud to be joined by Catherine St Laurent in this next chapter with us' - Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP
> Announcing Ms St-Laurent’s appointment 11 months ago, the Sussexes said: "We are proud to be joined by Catherine St-Laurent in this next chapter with us.
> "Her leadership and proven track record working within two organisations that have tremendous impact in the world – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Pivotal Ventures – makes her an incredible asset, and we're excited to have her on our team."
> A source told The Telegraph: "Catherine was a great hire for Harry and Meghan. She is a Canadian who has worked for Bill and Melinda Gates. She's very bubbly and a big personality. She was the bright hope to run their organisation, so this is surprising news. They do not have a big team out in LA, so this is going to be a blow."
> It is thought Ms St-Laurent will also be launching her own social impact firm, which will work closely with Archewell.
> While in the UK, the couple lost a string of employees, including Meghan's personal assistant, Melissa Toubati, and their senior communications officer, Amy Pickerill, alongside Samantha Cohen, their private secretary.
> Last month, it was reported that complaints of alleged bullying within Harry and Meghan's former office at Kensington Palace had been made to Buckingham Palace, although none of the complainants were named.
> The palace's human resources department is now looking into the allegations, which the Sussexes have vehemently denied and described as a "calculated smear campaign" to deflect from their tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey.


All these talented people being completely wasted by this pair of grifters. CSL must have got bored after doing nothing but updating their profile picture for a year.


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> Omid warns (/stoops to blackmail) unless they (MM) get what they want...  Note it references H but that could be MM deflecting blame as the narc she is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to use 'unprecedented' media tactic to pressure royals
> 
> 
> THE ROYAL FAMILY is concerned by Prince Harry's unprecedented decisions to leak information about the Palace without its approval, as the rift between the two sides continues to escalate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


This is *TRULY pathetic*, and the term '*BLACKMAIL*' is 100% accurate!  I'm pissed off that ABC continues to use Omid as their "_Royal Correspondent_" as he is ANYTHING but, he is H&M's "mouthpiece".  While the Palace may not talk to him, unfortunately .. H&M are going to use him to get their sh!t out and continue to lie, lie & lie!  I used to like Harry, but now? .. I'm actually hating him as much as his NARC wife.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> We can assume that at times the Queen has had private lunches/meetings with ALL of her grandchildren. But we aren't going to hear about it in the news because that is her personal business and she isn't going to announce it to the press.


Probably true, but she or someone else announced her meetings with William which made me wonder if there had been similar articles about her and Harry. 

I loved my grandmother so I have a soft spot for grannies generally. I felt very protective of my grandmother, especially as she got older and frail. I'm just shaking my head at how Harry could do this to his own grandmother who he claims to love. Is she just collateral damage to his and Meghan's mad LA dash to freedom? And what about his ailing grandfather? 

You'd have to be a cold s**od to do something like what Harry has done. I wonder if he has any regrets by now.


----------



## Hermes Zen

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is from Twitter. It says they married on the 19th May.
> 
> View attachment 5031293


Thanks for sharing this!  When I saw Thomas Markle noted, I thought  for him ... he's badly treated but he's down in history for his daughter's marriage to the prince.  I wonder if MM cringes over the thought she couldn't have him removed from her marriage certificate. Sorry being bad, I feel sorry for him so this was a happy moment.


----------



## gracekelly

It is a head scratching moment to think that the Sussex and Oprah believed that their word would be taken as gold regarding the 3 day prior wedding story.  They didn't think that people would fact check?  Not know the UK rules regarding wedding venues?  Is that really underestimating the intelligence of the public or overriding arrogance?  I think both.  I am very curious to see how the family is going to deal with this.  The great PR for Prince William has gone into overdrive, but I think they will need to do more than that.  

The blackmail angle of the Sussex threatening to leak tidbits about the family is so flagrant.  You can bet that the gossip lovers will be first on line to read it, but at the same time they won't be thinking too much of the Sussex for leaking it.  Scobie has no clue how bad being the mouthpiece of the Sussex has made him appear.  He thinks he is right on top of things.  By the time this whole thing is finished, he will be lucky to report on lost dogs.


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> While Prenups do exist in the U.K. I have read that they are not often recognised or upheld in court.
> 
> However, I would be surprised if Harry’s assets are actually accessible or even legally ‘his’.
> His inheritance from Diana and queen mum are his to lose, I think, but he’s burning through them anyway.
> I’m sure they’ll take him back, they’ve always been too soft with their bad apples - why change now?


David wasn't taken back. There are many similarities between H&D beyond marrying American divorcees and being fond of Nazis. They might take H back, though. I wonder how long this marriage will last. I think she's already set for life financially, she's got the fame or infamy, so H served his purpose and would be reduced to background props for the rest of their marriage. I wonder how long it's going to last. I think he will be discarded rather sooner than later.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I loved my grandmother so I have a soft spot for grannies generally. I felt very protective of my grandmother, especially as she got older and frail. I'm just shaking my head at how Harry could do this to his own grandmother who he claims to love. Is she just collateral damage to his and Meghan's mad LA dash to freedom? And what about his ailing grandfather?
> 
> You'd have to be a cold s**od to do something like what Harry has done. I wonder if he has any regrets by now.



I'm sure in Harry's feeble little mind he thinks that he was being protective of his grandmother by calling Gayle the next day to make sure it was known that it was neither the Queen nor Philip who allegedly asked about the baby's skin tone. Like that tiny effort makes a difference in the greater scheme of things.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Another one bites the dust
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Telegraph
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex's chief of staff steps down*
> 
> Camilla Tominey
> Mon, 22 March 2021, 3:17 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catherine St-Laurent took on the role with the couple in April last year - News Scans
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's chief of staff has stepped down after less than a year in the role.
> Catherine St-Laurent, who previously held senior roles at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, started working for Harry and Meghan in April 2020. As well as acting as the couple's chief of staff, she was also the executive director of their non-profit organisation, Archewell Foundation.
> A spokesman for the Sussexes confirmed that the Montreal-born mother-of-two will transition to an "advisory" role and be replaced by James Holt, the couple's UK spokesman.
> It comes after Harry and Meghan appointed Ben Browning as Archewell's head of content to "work closely with Netflix and Spotify", with whom the couple signed multi-million dollar deals last year.
> It means the two most powerful people in the Sussexes' top team are now both white males, despite the couple having voiced their concerns about a lack of diversity in the Royal family. A statement issued on behalf of Archewell made clear that it would also be advised by Invisible Hand, "a female-led, diverse team" based in New York and run by Genevieve Roth.
> Toya Holness, the global press secretary for Archewell, said: "Archewell is incredibly pleased to welcome Ben, Genevieve and the Invisible Hand team to the organisation.
> "Along with the appointment of James Holt as executive director of Archewell Foundation, they join a rapidly expanding team that's deeply dedicated to advancing systemic cultural change and supporting compassionate communities across the world."
> The Sussexes said last year that they were 'proud to be joined by Catherine St Laurent in this next chapter with us' - Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP
> Announcing Ms St-Laurent’s appointment 11 months ago, the Sussexes said: "We are proud to be joined by Catherine St-Laurent in this next chapter with us.
> "Her leadership and proven track record working within two organisations that have tremendous impact in the world – the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Pivotal Ventures – makes her an incredible asset, and we're excited to have her on our team."
> A source told The Telegraph: "Catherine was a great hire for Harry and Meghan. She is a Canadian who has worked for Bill and Melinda Gates. She's very bubbly and a big personality. She was the bright hope to run their organisation, so this is surprising news. They do not have a big team out in LA, so this is going to be a blow."
> It is thought Ms St-Laurent will also be launching her own social impact firm, which will work closely with Archewell.
> While in the UK, the couple lost a string of employees, including Meghan's personal assistant, Melissa Toubati, and their senior communications officer, Amy Pickerill, alongside Samantha Cohen, their private secretary.
> Last month, it was reported that complaints of alleged bullying within Harry and Meghan's former office at Kensington Palace had been made to Buckingham Palace, although none of the complainants were named.
> The palace's human resources department is now looking into the allegations, which the Sussexes have vehemently denied and described as a "calculated smear campaign" to deflect from their tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey.


Let's face it Meghan: you can point fingers all you want, but if people keep leaving you, YOU might be the problem.


----------



## lallybelle

Sorry if this was already discussed, but I heard story today that the Queen maybe be planning to appoint a "diversity officer". I figure why not? It's a good thing anyway and it takes away any ammo from H&M claiming they didn't take it seriously etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t figure out if that woman was demoted or just changed roles.


Or hightailed it out of there as fast as she could!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Let's face it Meghan: you can point fingers all you want, but if people keep leaving you, YOU might be the problem.



NEVER!!! It is always someone else who is to blame. Clearly this woman was incompetent and it was Meghan who sadly had to let her go (but only after giving her numerous chances).


----------



## Milosmum0307

bag-mania said:


> They take a risk at this point by continuing to cry victim. By the end of the Oprah interview they acted like everything was right with them now, they are going to make it on their own! They are doing streamers!



Nothing inspires me more than two wealthy, well-connected, middle-aged adults finding a way to goshdarnit make it on their own!  Someone please cue the theme song for the Mary Tyler Moore show.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. It has been stated that HMQ, as granny, welcomed all her grandchildren. Looking at her relationship with William, Beatrice and Eugenie, one could assume that Harry was as loved, welcomed and counseled by the Queen, but I think he was reluctant to accept advice as seen by his OTT childish and stupid actions and tantrums.


Supposedly .. the rumor back in the day was that Harry was the favorite grandchild (_especially of Philip's_) because of his antics (_being funny I guess_) .. hmmm, how things have changed!  Alas, I think they coddled him too much given the situation with Diana and her death.


----------



## poopsie

Milosmum0307 said:


> Nothing inspires me more than two wealthy, well-connected, middle-aged adults finding a way to goshdarnit make it on their own!  Someone please cue the theme song for the Mary Tyler Moore show.



Welcome back!


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> All these talented people being completely wasted by this pair of grifters. CSL must have got bored after doing nothing but updating their profile picture for a year.


Thanks for the article 
this is huge , St Laurent had worked for Melinda Gates and that added a veneer of authentic philanthropy to H&M, can’t believe they let her go


----------



## Chanbal

A fun comment from PETRONELLA WYATT asking Will to stop reaching out to his haunted brother: 

"...*Not until the parched California hills freeze over will there be a reconciliation between you and the Prince of Sighs and Mother Teresa of Montecito.*
_
*DELUSIONAL NARCISSIST*
Meghan had already caused “irreversible damage” to her own family, by snubbing her half-sister, Samantha Markle, and first alienating then discarding her poor father.

Now, with the steeliness of a gangland hitman, she has turned her sights on the most famous family in the world.

She had done nothing to deserve this fame, apart from persuading an impressionable prince to fall for her charms.

And like all delusional narcissists, she felt not a jot of gratitude or loyalty to her benefactress.

Now the Queen can give her nothing she wants or needs, her Majesty has been discarded like a pair of worn-out Louboutins.

*Could it be that Herself aspires to create an alternative royal family in the United States?
To set herself up, not so much as a People’s Princess, but as a queen over the water?*

It would not be beyond Meg and Haz to start a sort of monarchy of the downtrodden, a protectorate of victims of sexism, racism, British newspaperism and other unbearable oppressions.

Thus, Meghan’s strategy depends on the Sussexes being against the Royal Family and its core values of duty and its hereditary principle.

*As Prince William must realise, painful though it is to this increasingly impressive young man, a reconciliation just ain’t going to happen.*

Remember that Meghan and her haunted hubby have accused the Windsors of racism.

How would their new, ethnic minority fan base feel if such a crime was forgiven?

...
*Meghan is a Mean Girl and on this, recollections don’t vary.*_"









						William, stop 'reaching out' to Harry and Meghan — nothing is sacred to them
					

“FURIOUS” is not an adjective one would normally associate with the Duke of Cambridge. But, oh brother. The dice have been rolled and Wills has found himself on the receiving end of a pair of snak…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Chanbal 
What a gem. Wish I could  1000%


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sad for the truth,  I believe you are correct. The US has other more important concerns. Plus, no one wants the grief, right now. It will take a UK paper to hold them accountable.
> 
> ETA:  100% Harry is the active participant from day 1. I still wonder if the BRF will try to buy back the titles and the succession line-up. Money can be a great motivator


Not just the US. I think even the UK has more important concerns. I'm sure the BRF has seen better days, but otherwise they are acting as usual. It's just unfortunate that they have this snotty, demanding, pissed off prince who's complaining about his misfortune that he has to use his inheritance to pay for his bills and that evil Firm, which happens to be his own family, refuse to dance to his tune and finance his lavish lifestyle. He does it when people are struggling with covid, becoming unemployed and nobody knows when it would end.  It shows perfectly how feebleminded and ignorant he is.
I don't think that confronting H&M or Oprah would be a wise idea. It's not the BRF style anyway. IMO sooner or later things would come up Eg. the marriage certificate which make a confrontation absolutely unnecessary because it will be pretty obvious that most things told in that interview happen to be fabrications of MM and her fab team. It's not the only thread where MM's dirty deeds are discussed and probably some will see print if there's nobody to kill those stories. The backlash has started already. I have a feeling that the BRF is no longer very interested to keep MM's reputation intact.


----------



## gracekelly

I'm getting the "they are not really so close vibes" between Harry and Granny.  It is like people telling the tabs how much in love they are and then file for divorce 2 weeks later or the house that appears in the shelter mag as the couple's "forever" home and that is on the market 2 weeks later.  Harry  couldn't get it out fast enough that Gran and PP were not the ones to mention skin color.  His pea sized brain realized that he was dead meat if he didn't come out and say it straight away.


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Thanks for the article
> this is huge , St Laurent had worked for Melinda Gates and that added a veneer of authentic philanthropy to H&M, can’t believe they let her go


I would bet SHE (St Laurent) left them.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> I would bet SHE (St Laurent) left them.


I think she saw that they were not sincere and nothing, but attention whores.  She knew Bill and Melinda, and they were NOT Bill and Melinda.


----------



## needlv

I think they are seriously living beyond their means and they need money.  The interview would have given them some $$ but the amount spent on the mortgage, staff, cars etc would far exceed what they can sustain.

  H and MM did have a “non productive” call during which they (IMHO) asked for money and security and an apology... but were told no.  So now there is the nuclear option of telling more - leaked by MM to Omid as another warning... and making it sound like H is the one pressing the button.  Pretty stupid and smacks of desperation.

it also indicates the Netflix and Spotify deals are dependent on content which has not materialised... and they would need $$ upfront to start any productions.

Whatever comes out next will obviously hurt the RF more.  After it comes out, The Queen needs to ask the UK parliament to remove H and MM‘s titles and their line in succession.  And while they are at it, remove “Prince” Andrew...


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Harry  couldn't get it out fast enough that Gran and PP were not the ones to mention skin color.  His pea sized brain realized that he was dead meat if he didn't come out and say it straight away.



I got the feeling that Harry had no idea that Meghan had exaggerated the whole “what will the baby’s skin tone be?” story from apparently one incident that he acknowledged to her making it sound like it had been discussed multiple times.

The fact that the interview featured Meghan alone and Harry was brought in the last hour as an afterthought proves Oprah intended it to be entirely one-sided, pro-Meghan before it began. Harry didn’t get a moment alone to say anything. He was merely an accessory.


----------



## Chloe302225

The comments on the very pro-Meghan JJ post is interesting, I think a lot more people are picking up on their B.S.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TimeToShop

purseinsanity said:


> Or hightailed it out of there as fast as she could!



Or she saw what sketchy plans they had and didn’t want to be the fall woman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> The comments on the very pro-Meghan JJ post is interesting, I think a lot more people are picking up on their B.S.



Excellent 
I clicked the link. Here is the article:
*Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Rep Again Reveals the Truth About That 'Secret Wedding'*
One of the most-talked about moments of *Meghan Markle*‘s interview with *Oprah Winfrey* was when she claimed that she secretly got married to *Prince Harry* in a private ceremony days before their televised wedding.

“You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. The vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury,” she said.

The validity of that secret ceremony was brought into question because many people did not believe that it was actually a legal ceremony. In the U.K., there must be a minimum of two witnesses for a legal marriage to take place.

The couple’s rep spoke out days later and confirmed their legal wedding was on May 19, the day of their televised wedding at Windsor Castle.

Now, a new statement has been provided from *Harry* and *Meghan*‘s representatives.








The rep told The Daily Beast that “the couple exchanged personal vows a few days before their official/legal wedding on May 19.”

While the private ceremony might have been a spiritual wedding for the couple, it did not constitute a legal marriage.

A former clerk at the Faculty Office in the UK also told _The Sun_ this week, “I’m sorry, but Meghan is obviously confused and clearly misinformed. They did not marry three days earlier in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Special License I helped draw up enabled them to marry at St George’s Chapel in Windsor and what happened there on 19 May 2018 and was seen by millions around the world was the official wedding as recognized by the Church of England and the law.”

=====
this comment sums it up — not much sympathy for the private-not-so-private twosome:
_The whole interview was full of loops. And as for the crisis management team, they are fine since, as u can see here, most of the british, who are the ones that matter, thought so badly of them, and they addressed the matter properly like all families should. Also, dont get it... they said that they were embaressed to say she was mentally ill to the family and also said that they didnt help?! How would they if maybe things werent as clear as they thought it was?
===
This is why they left Monarchy, they are so aware and obssesed with the tabloids and gossip, they wanted to release statement to argue every gossip, and respond every single time, this what they call having a Voice _


----------



## scarlet555

Chloe302225 said:


> The comments on the very pro-Meghan JJ post is interesting, I think a lot more people are picking up on their B.S.




About time... wake up everyone!!


----------



## lalame

This is no knock at all to St. Laurent - she seems like a normal, accomplished person - but I was surprised to read she was a Communications person at Gates. Her replacements are a Publicist and Producer (???). It's kind of bizarre that M+H and even W+K actually are hiring Communications people to run foundations. I can understand W+K because there's probably a huge apparatus already to handle the actual philanthropic and grantmaking stuff they do but... why would M+H use Communications people to lead a new foundation? Seems like they're setting it up to be all talk, no substance.


----------



## bag-mania

It must be so exhausting for their reps to constantly have to make up excuses to cover up for Meghan’s lies. How many times have they trotted out the old standby, “it was a misunderstanding.”


----------



## Jktgal

Technically their main activity has been monetizing their image - that they embody this and that (compassion, kindness, diversity, etc. you name it the word salad flavor of the day). So it makes sense they think people who could help them best are comms experts.


----------



## lalame

Jktgal said:


> Technically their main activity has been monetizing their image - that they embody this and that (compassion, kindness, diversity, etc. you name it the word salad flavor of the day). So it makes sense they think people who could help them best are comms experts.



I used to work for a foundation so I find it very odd. I mean, odd-not-odd, IYKWIM.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chloe302225 said:


> The comments on the very pro-Meghan JJ post is interesting, I think a lot more people are picking up on their B.S.



Maybe MM wanted to marry before the big wedding because she sensed H was getting cold feet and she wanted to seal the deal.


----------



## Chanbal

Do not know who Petra Ecclestone is, but she is right on the interviews! 



"_She's only just moved back into her £16 million Los Angeles mansion after relocating to Monaco for a few months, but Petra Ecclestone, youngest daughter of F1 billionaire Bernie, is already having a dig at fellow California residents, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

'I always tried to stand up for her,' says the heiress, 32, of former actress Meghan Markle. 

'Harry and Meghan did have the freedom to leave [the Royal Family] if they really didn't want that life.

But, on the other hand, _*they said they wanted privacy and they didn't want to be famous and they didn't want to do interviews — but all they've done since is basically do interviews.*'"









						Petra Ecclestone in privacy swipe at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE:Petra Ecclestone, youngest daughter of F1 billionaire Bernie, is already having a dig at fellow California residents, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Maybe MM wanted to marry before the big wedding because she sensed H was getting cold feet and she wanted to seal the deal.



Agree.
See, the timeline is important.  3 days prior sticks out as significant. Behind the scenes, the crescendo to the event must have been enormous. They did their private, spiritual ceremony 3 days prior. Thomas’s call was 3 days prior. Doria hadn’t arrived. 

What else happened?


Old article:








						Meghan Markle’s Mom Doria Ragland Has Not Yet Arrived in London for the Royal Wedding
					

She is to meet the Queen when she does arrive.




					www.elle.com
				



_Update, May 15: Despite reports that Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland arrived for the royal wedding last week, she still remains in Los Angeles, at least as of yesterday. Ragland was photographed going to yoga and later walking her dogs, according to TMZ and LaineyGossip. At this point, it's unclear whether Meghan's father Thomas will be going to the wedding, and Ragland is a frontrunner to walk Meghan down the aisle should he not be able._


----------



## kkfiregirl

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You'd have to be a cold s**od to do something like what Harry has done. I wonder if he has any regrets by now.



I don’t think he has any regrets yet; he does not possess enough self-awareness to realize what he’s done so soon after the event, however, he WILL have regrets later on, for sure.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One more lie/misrepresentation/deception/ooops -









						Meghan Markle’s 2014 blog post seemingly debunks claim she knew nothing of royal life
					

Meghan Markle — who claimed to Oprah Winfrey last week that she never thought what it would be like to marry a prince — blogged about dreaming of becoming a princess seven years ago, a new report s…




					pagesix.com
				




Which is it? Ariel or She-RA?  The children need to know!  In the OW interview, she compared herself to Ariel, the mermaid.
From M’s blog, the Tig — pre-wedding:
_
“Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014, while commenting on the “pomp” surrounding Britain’s Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding three years earlier, according to the Sun on Sunday.
“For those of you unfamiliar with the ‘80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength,” Markle said in her since-nixed blog.
“We’re definitely not talking about Cinderella here,” said Markle, who married Prince Harry, William’s brother, in May 2018.
“Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate,” Markle mused._


Spoiler: She-RA?



*Meghan Markle’s 2014 blog post seemingly debunks claim she knew nothing of royal life*
By Kate Sheehy




Meghan Markle — who claimed to Oprah Winfrey last week that she never thought what it would be like to marry a prince — blogged about dreaming of becoming a princess seven years ago, a new report says.

“Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014, while commenting on the “pomp” surrounding Britain’s Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding three years earlier, according to the Sun on Sunday.

“For those of you unfamiliar with the ‘80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength,” Markle said in her since-nixed blog.

“We’re definitely not talking about Cinderella here,” said Markle, who married Prince Harry, William’s brother, in May 2018.

“Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate,” Markle mused.

The 39-year-old former actress — who recounted to Winfrey how Middleton allegedly made her cry before her wedding to Harry — also claimed in the explosive TV chat that she basically had no clue about the British royal family before marrying into it.


----------



## bag-mania

Even TMZ felt they had to report the non-early-wedding story and they have been very pro-Meghan and Harry. Their last sentence proves that.   


Of course, there were already clues Meghan's claim was a bit of a stretch. As we reported ... the Church of England's own rules contradict what Meghan had said -- their doctrine states the couple must do the deed (their vows) in a place of worship (unless otherwise accounted for with a special license) and in the presence of 2 witnesses.

So, unless Harry and Meghan are holding onto some other marriage certificate ... it doesn't seem like they got married the way she remembers it.

More importantly, this makes zero difference -- whenever it happened, they're married.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> His mums brother isn't in South Africa, he's s at Althorp.



Apologies, and thank you. I did not realize he had left SA.  I guess the divorce was expensive.
Turns out he even sold Tarrytone, where Diana visited a few months before her death. 









						Princess Diana's former holiday home goes up for sale
					

Tarrystone Estate, Earl Spencer's former South African home where Princess Diana stayed shortly before her death in 1997, is up for sale




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I'm getting the "they are not really so close vibes" between Harry and Granny.  It is like people telling the tabs how much in love they are and then file for divorce 2 weeks later or the house that appears in the shelter mag as the couple's "forever" home and that is on the market 2 weeks later.  Harry  couldn't get it out fast enough that Gran and PP were not the ones to mention skin color.  His pea sized brain realized that he was dead meat if he didn't come out and say it straight away.



The interview was a big mistake for MM&H imo. As someone else said, the only winner of this type of interviews in the interviewer. It looks like Oprah made about $9M with it, not bad at all! 

MM&H exposed themselves in a terrible light. Even if one believes that she was a victim of a one-time racist remark, isn't she a strong woman? If at one point she was suicidal, is H so weak that couldn't find help for his wife? Then they showed to the entire world that their connections to the BRF are almost non-existent. However, those connections are what makes them 'valuable'... They are not interesting people. On the top of everything, they showed that they can't be trusted. They turned themselves into personae non gratae.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@bag-mania & @CarryOn2020 
Great news.  Love it when their lies are debunked.
So, I'll say it again with glee, "The chickens are coming home to roost!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The interview was a big mistake for MM&H imo. As someone else said, the only winner of this type of interviews in the interviewer. It looks like Oprah made about $9M with it, not bad at all!
> 
> MM&H exposed themselves in a terrible light. Even if one believes that she was a victim of a one-time racist remark, isn't she a strong woman? If at one point she was suicidal, is H so weak that couldn't find help for his wife? Then they showed to the entire world that their connections to the BRF are almost non-existent. However, those connections are what makes them 'valuable'... They are not interesting people. On the top of everything, they showed that they can't be trusted. They turned themselves into personae non gratae.



_I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014
 _


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> @bag-mania & @CarryOn2020
> Great news.  Love it when their lies are debunked.
> So, I'll say it again with glee, "The chickens are coming home to roost!"


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I got the feeling that Harry had no idea that Meghan had exaggerated the whole “what will the baby’s skin tone be?” story from apparently one incident that he acknowledged to her making it sound like it had been discussed multiple times.*
> 
> The fact that the interview featured Meghan alone and Harry was brought in the last hour as an afterthought proves Oprah intended it to be entirely one-sided, pro-Meghan before it began. Harry didn’t get a moment alone to say anything. He was merely an accessory.


Yes, H sounded like he didn't know what to say. He contradicted MM when he said that the comment was prior to their wedding and about kids in general. It was not about Archie...  I agree, Oprah gave MM an opportunity to play solo her victim cards.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more lie/misrepresentation/deception/ooops -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s 2014 blog post seemingly debunks claim she knew nothing of royal life
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle — who claimed to Oprah Winfrey last week that she never thought what it would be like to marry a prince — blogged about dreaming of becoming a princess seven years ago, a new report s…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is it? Ariel or She-RA?  The children need to know!  In the OW interview, she compared herself to Ariel, the mermaid.
> From M’s blog, the Tig — pre-wedding:
> 
> _“Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014, while commenting on the “pomp” surrounding Britain’s Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding three years earlier, according to the Sun on Sunday.
> “For those of you unfamiliar with the ‘80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength,” Markle said in her since-nixed blog.
> “We’re definitely not talking about Cinderella here,” said Markle, who married Prince Harry, William’s brother, in May 2018.
> “Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate,” Markle mused._
> 
> 
> Spoiler: She-RA?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s 2014 blog post seemingly debunks claim she knew nothing of royal life*
> By Kate Sheehy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle — who claimed to Oprah Winfrey last week that she never thought what it would be like to marry a prince — blogged about dreaming of becoming a princess seven years ago, a new report says.
> 
> “Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014, while commenting on the “pomp” surrounding Britain’s Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding three years earlier, according to the Sun on Sunday.
> 
> “For those of you unfamiliar with the ‘80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength,” Markle said in her since-nixed blog.
> 
> “We’re definitely not talking about Cinderella here,” said Markle, who married Prince Harry, William’s brother, in May 2018.
> 
> “Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate,” Markle mused.
> 
> The 39-year-old former actress — who recounted to Winfrey how Middleton allegedly made her cry before her wedding to Harry — also claimed in the explosive TV chat that she basically had no clue about the British royal family before marrying into it.


She had it out for Kate waaaaay before has been Harry. Wow!!!


----------



## Jayne1

RAINDANCE said:


> Anyone here remember the mess Jerry Hall found herself in when divorcing Mick? If I recall correctly their exchange of vows in Bali (I think?) was not a proper legal marriage. I was therefore surprised that our already twice married bride (with her army of lawyers on retainer) was suggesting the wedding rehearsal was a real marriage.  I am however disgusted that the Archbishop/Church of England has not issued a proper statement correcting her assertion.


I thought he did.

Who was it who said they just didn't realize it was a rehearsal?


----------



## purseinsanity

lulu212121 said:


> She had it out for Kate waaaaay before has been Harry. Wow!!!


She's been dreaming of being Kate for years, and having William!


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Who would dare do that? Oprah and Gayle are revered by many and the backlash of calling them out would be career suicide. In the US it’s just not that important a story. The rest of the press is perfectly happy to leave the story exactly as it was presented.


O has to be one of the worst interviewers ever. She asks the "hard" question, which the celebrity is prepared for, and O
nods her head when she hears the prepared answer and moves on.

How in the world did she get such a good reputation as an interviewer when all she gets is excuses and lies?


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> His mums brother isn't in South Africa, he's s at Althorp.


He was in South Africa for many years -- why did he move back, do you know?


----------



## muddledmint

scarlet555 said:


> About time... wake up everyone!!


Yes! The most annoying thing about this interview is not the lies themselves but how American media and people fell for it so hard. Comments like these are restoring my faith (just a little) in American intelligence.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I got the feeling that Harry had no idea that Meghan had exaggerated the whole “what will the baby’s skin tone be?” story from apparently one incident that he acknowledged to her making it sound like it had been discussed multiple times.
> 
> The fact that the interview featured Meghan alone and Harry was brought in the last hour as an afterthought proves Oprah intended it to be entirely one-sided, pro-Meghan before it began. Harry didn’t get a moment alone to say anything. He was merely an accessory.


Meghan and Oprah had an agenda  Apparently they didn’t completely 
clue Harry into it.  She turned him into her plus one while at the same time riding  on his name and connections. Neat trick. The hand on the arm and back, forcing herself in front of him time and again. Harry was the trained circus animal.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> He was in South Africa for many years -- why did he move back, do you know?


He divorced his first wife who he parked down there with the children. Those children grew up and went to school there. He probably came back to run Althorp and make money. Oh and get remarried two more times and have more kids.


----------



## needlv

More plates heard breaking in Montecito today after seeing this story....








						Kate Middleton given a special title inspired by Princess Diana
					

KATE MIDDLETON has been given a nickname that has a special connection to Princess Diana.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> He divorced his first wife who he parked down there with the children. Those children grew up and went to school there. He probably came back to run Althorp and make money. Oh and get remarried two more times and have more kids.


He’s been married so many times. I wonder what his problem is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Jayne1  it could be this:
Article from 2019








						Diana’s brother Earl Spencer ‘was a worthless husband’
					

DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES'S brother Earl Spencer was accused of being a "worthless" husband and father yesterday. The three-times married aristocrat, 54, had a "bad reputation" according to documents published in the High Court. The papers contain allegations that his extra-marital affairs were...




					www.express.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Trouble



*Princess Diana’s brother Earl Spencer ‘was a worthless husband’*
*DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES'S brother Earl Spencer was accused of being a "worthless" husband and father yesterday. The three-times married aristocrat, 54, had a "bad reputation" according to documents published in the High Court. The papers contain allegations that his extra-marital affairs were "not contestable" and that he refused to put Diana up after her divorce.*
By Cyril Dixon
PUBLISHED: 09:08, Thu, Feb 7, 2019 | UPDATED: 16:16, Fri, Feb 8, 2019
*Royal Wedding: Earl Spencer chats with Oprah Winfrey*
Earl Spencer, a father-of-seven and uncle of Princes William and Harry, issued a writ against his former lawyers, Schillings (a firm), claiming they bungled part of a libel action he brought against a newspaper 10 years ago by failing to secure an agreement not to re-publish an allegation.
But the law firm claims a number of the allegations made against him were "substantially justified".
One is that he refused to offer Diana a roof over her head at the family estate – Althorp House in Northamptonshire – after her split from Charles.
Schillings will also argue it could have been proven he had several affairs while married to his first wife Victoria Lockwood.
It is another controversial episode in the life of the earl, famous for his attack on the Royal family in a speech at Diana's funeral 22 years ago.
His writ alleges that because the libel action was not pursued properly, the newspaper was able to repeat some of the damaging claims seven years later.
But in its defence document Schillings argues that he agreed to settle the action after its lawyers advised him more damaging information might be produced.




Earl Spencer, then Viscount Althorp, and his first wife Victoria Lockwood (Image: Tim Graham/Getty)
They argue that if he had pursued the 2010 claim, it could have "caused further and greater reputational damage" when the newspaper's legal team brought "damaging evidence to prove the allegations".
It adds: "The claimant's reputation as a husband and father was so bad as to be worthless." And it says the offending article contained "criticisms of the claimant which were either not contested or not contestable".
They included: "That he had several adulterous relationships during his marriage to his first wife."
The hearing is due to begin later this year.
Schillings said "Schillings (a firm) does not comment on clients or former client matters.




The marriage of Viscount Althorp and Victoria Lockwood (Image: Tim Graham/Getty )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> _I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014
> _


That article was so rude about KM.  Implying she was weak and milquetoast just like the tabloids used to. Funny MM doesn’t snt worry about negative press depictions of others. 
It’s also one of many smoking guns that she knew exactly what she was getting into.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. It has been stated that HMQ, as granny, welcomed all her grandchildren. Looking at her relationship with William, Beatrice and Eugenie, one could assume that Harry was as loved, welcomed and counseled by the Queen, but I think he was reluctant to accept advice as seen by his OTT childish and stupid actions and tantrums.


Yes, and now spends a lot of time, pre Covid, with the youngest grandchildren, Louise and James. I think she has treated all her grandchildren the same, it's just that possibly she has had slightly different conversations with William, Granny talk and Monarch in waiting talk.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> She's been dreaming of being Kate for years, and having William!


She’d probably make him have a hair transplant before he could be seen in LA with her though


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure in Harry's feeble little mind he thinks that he was being protective of his grandmother by calling Gayle the next day to make sure it was known that it was neither the Queen nor Philip who allegedly asked about the baby's skin tone. Like that tiny effort makes a difference in the greater scheme of things.


He could have also told them to edit that bit out.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> He was in South Africa for many years -- why did he move back, do you know?


Divorce from his first wife I think. He was in SA at the time of Diana's death.
On this third marriage now with seven children including a Louis who is the heir apparent and a daughter called Charlotte Diana.


On 16 September 1989, Spencer, then known by the courtesy title of Viscount Althorp, married Victoria Lockwood (born 20 November 1965). Spencer and Lockwood, who had moved to Cape Town, South Africa, were divorced on 3 December 1997. Diana's death occurred while the divorce case was in progress; shortly after his divorce, Spencer moved back to the United Kingdom. The Earl has four children by Victoria Lockwood, three daughters and one son
Lady Kitty Spencer (born 28 December 1990)
Lady Eliza Spencer (born 10 July 1992)
Lady Amelia Spencer (born 10 July 1992) engaged to Greg Mallett, nephew of the former South African national rugby coach, Nick Mallett.
Louis Spencer, Viscount Althorp (born 14 March 1994); heir apparent to the earldom.

On 15 December 2001, he married Caroline Freud (née Hutton; born 16 October 1966), former wife of Matthew Freud. They separated in 2007 and later divorced. They have two children
The Honorable Edmund Spencer (born 6 October 2003)
Lady Lara Spencer (born 16 March 2006)

On 18 June 2011 at Althorp, Spencer married Karen Gordon (née Villeneuve; born 30 November 1972), a Canadian philanthropist, the founder and chief executive of Whole Child International, a charity based in Los Angeles that works to improve the lot of orphaned, abandoned, or abused children.They have one child together:
Lady Charlotte Diana Spencer (born 30 July 2012)


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> More plates heard breaking in Montecito today after seeing this story....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton given a special title inspired by Princess Diana
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON has been given a nickname that has a special connection to Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


She deserves it. I hope those plates breaking are not Hermes plates given as gifts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, and now spends a lot of time, pre Covid, with the youngest grandchildren, Louise and James. I think she has treated all her grandchildren the same, it's just that possibly she has had slightly different conversations with William, Granny talk and Monarch in waiting talk.


Yeah I’m sure William was treated preferentially in terms of prestige and possessions because that’s primogeniture in a nutshell. But he  and his family are also very heavily scrutinised and he’s been micromanaged since he was a young boy. 
Harry gets a lot more freedom as ‘spares’ do but he wants to have his cake and eat it.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> She’d probably make him have a hair transplant before he could be seen in LA with her though


Or be really cool and shave it all off!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lulu212121 said:


> She had it out for Kate waaaaay before has been Harry. Wow!!!


Hahahahahahaha it’s such a hilarious article and so so telling. Especially considering how H&-M insisted on having just as big a wedding as K&M with all the awful ‘pomp.’ I think the actual she-ra and wife would be happy with a registry office and a pub reception


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> She deserves it. I hope those plates breaking are not Hermes plates given as gifts.


Hell, no!  She'll save the Hermes ones to resell to get MORE MORE MORE!!


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> This is no knock at all to St. Laurent - she seems like a normal, accomplished person - but I was surprised to read she was a Communications person at Gates. Her replacements are a Publicist and Producer (???). It's kind of bizarre that M+H and even W+K actually are hiring Communications people to run foundations. I can understand W+K because there's probably a huge apparatus already to handle the actual philanthropic and grantmaking stuff they do but... why would M+H use Communications people to lead a new foundation? *Seems like they're setting it up to be all talk, no substance.*



I don't think that's their intention, it's just H&M have no idea what substance is. 

They hire the same as an official royal court because they believe they _are_ one. 

Really, since all they do is put out gossip, issue legal actions and help flog some iffy products/output all they really need is a litigation lawyer and a sophomore/second year intern.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Even TMZ felt they had to report the non-early-wedding story and they have been very pro-Meghan and Harry. Their last sentence proves that.
> 
> 
> Of course, there were already clues Meghan's claim was a bit of a stretch. As we reported ... the Church of England's own rules contradict what Meghan had said -- their doctrine states the couple must do the deed (their vows) in a place of worship (unless otherwise accounted for with a special license) and in the presence of 2 witnesses.
> 
> So, unless Harry and Meghan are holding onto some other marriage certificate ... it doesn't seem like they got married the way she remembers it.
> 
> More importantly, this makes zero difference -- whenever it happened, they're married.



Apart from is wasn't a "stretch", it was a lie. I knew it the minute she said it, we already knew the date off the W. Cert. 

It was also a stupid lie. I mean why would you even think of saying _such_ a stupid thing? Are they both jointly psychotic? They are living in each other's mad-world. 

Those two are not safe to go out, let alone be role models (unless you think you're mermaid or the Man in the Iron Mask).


----------



## jelliedfeels

TimeToShop said:


> Or she saw what sketchy plans they had and didn’t want to be the fall woman.


Yes I have no doubt once the charity commission caught up with them they would have had no problem sticking CSL’s head on the block.


----------



## jelliedfeels

DeMonica said:


> Not just the US. I think even the UK has more important concerns. I'm sure the BRF has seen better days, but otherwise they are acting as usual. It's just unfortunate that they have this snotty, demanding, pissed off prince who's complaining about his misfortune that he has to use his inheritance to pay for his bills and that evil Firm, which happens to be his own family, refuse to dance to his tune and finance his lavish lifestyle. He does it when people are struggling with covid, becoming unemployed and nobody knows when it would end.  It shows perfectly how feebleminded and ignorant he is.
> I don't think that confronting H&M or Oprah would be a wise idea. It's not the BRF style anyway. IMO sooner or later things would come up Eg. the marriage certificate which make a confrontation absolutely unnecessary because it will be pretty obvious that most things told in that interview happen to be fabrications of MM and her fab team. It's not the only thread where MM's dirty deeds are discussed and probably some will see print if there's nobody to kill those stories. The backlash has started already. I have a feeling that the BRF is no longer very interested to keep MM's reputation intact.


Yes I think they were sheltering them a bit beforehand. Haha I bet the Mail is absolutely fuming they couldn’t have the trial now no one in the palace is  leaning on justice Warby to wrap things up anymore   

edit I put Welby not Warby! Though it seems like he’s very keen to lie low and placate H&M too


----------



## xincinsin

The Daily Beast (described as a "high-end tabloid") is claiming that UK media fact-checking the interview are just trying to distract from the racism claims - that smacks of implying guilt for the racism allegations: _"British media are zeroing in on inaccuracies in the Oprah interview to undermine the much more serious allegations of racism."_









						Meghan Markle ‘Didn’t Understand’ Wedding Rules Because ‘She Is American,’ Archbishop’s Office Told Vicar
					

British media are zeroing in on inaccuracies in the Oprah interview to undermine the much more serious allegations of racism. The legal status of their “backyard” wedding is one.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




I would have thought the other way: if they are lying about small matters, then it casts doubt on their claims about weightier matters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Which is it? Ariel or She-RA?  The children need to know!  In the OW interview, she compared herself to Ariel, the mermaid.



I feel the Little Mermaid character that fits her most ist Vanessa - sly, with an agenda, ruthless, hiding her real ugly self. But what do I know.


----------



## jelliedfeels

DeMonica said:


> David wasn't taken back. There are many similarities between H&D beyond marrying American divorcees and being fond of Nazis. They might take H back, though. I wonder how long this marriage will last. I think she's already set for life financially, she's got the fame or infamy, so H served his purpose and would be reduced to background props for the rest of their marriage. I wonder how long it's going to last. I think he will be discarded rather sooner than later.


Sorry if this is OT
Is David aka Edward the 8th? 
I think they did shelter Edward and Wallis an enormous amount  considering they were treacherous Nazi sympathisers. He was govenor of the Bahamas for most of WW2 after being disgraced in the military for his fascism. He was far from out on the streets.
 I’d say those press images  of Prince redacted riding with the queen after the Epstein accusations and their unwillingness to say anything against him or even admit he may be willing to testify show they are still sheltering their bad seeds against all logic.

Harry has done practically nothing compared to those two so I think they’d have him back tomorrow tbh. I’m sorry this isn’t what we want and it goes against this image of the strong queen but I’m just going off what I see.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> The Daily Beast (described as a "high-end tabloid") is claiming that UK media fact-checking the interview are just trying to distract from the racism claims - that smacks of implying guilt for the racism allegations: _"British media are zeroing in on inaccuracies in the Oprah interview to undermine the much more serious allegations of racism."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘Didn’t Understand’ Wedding Rules Because ‘She Is American,’ Archbishop’s Office Told Vicar
> 
> 
> British media are zeroing in on inaccuracies in the Oprah interview to undermine the much more serious allegations of racism. The legal status of their “backyard” wedding is one.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would have thought the other way: if they are lying about small matters, then it casts doubt on their claims about weightier matters.


I guess the daily beast doesn’t care to mention that the press have also refuted the claims of press racism and put forward evidence that the articles shown were tampered with as well


----------



## needlv

The Mexit review was supposed to occur at the 12 month point and BP did revoke patronage’s a week or so ago... but was that the final Mexit review or just partial?  Could BP conduct a further review and release info on 31 March??


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> It must be so exhausting for their reps to constantly have to make up excuses to cover up for Meghan’s lies. How many times have they trotted out the old standby, “it was a misunderstanding.”


Yeah, it was just a "varied recollection" all right!


----------



## needlv

Ha!  No idea who this person is but he called it...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DM comment section:



> Not long ago the Harkles would have lost their heads, not just their minds. Maybe the RF should have kept some traditions. Just sayin'.


----------



## RachelCohen808

Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Jayne1 said:


> I thought he did.
> 
> Who was it who said they just didn't realize it was a rehearsal?



I stand corrected 

Initially it was a member of the CofE clergy who questioned the validity of Meghan's claim but you are correct -  _Stephen Borton, the former chief clerk at the Faculty Office, told The Sun that Meghan “is obviously confused and clearly misinformed”._

*The Faculty Office of the Archbishop of Canterbury *(to use the full title) has three functions which are described in this website:

the issue of Special Marriage Licences 
the regulation of the Notarial profession and
the legal work for the awarding by the Archbishop of “Lambeth” Degrees.
And so is the correct body to address the claim ! 

I think I was expecting a formal release from the Archbishop/Lambeth Palace.


----------



## chicinthecity777

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



She's never going to be a great actress that's for sure!


----------



## chicinthecity777

More details of staff leaving current H&M's organisations.








						Meghan and Harry’s Archewell foundation director leaves after only a YEAR
					

MEGHAN’S chief of staff has quit after less than a year — the latest of 13 key aides to leave the Sussexes. Her long-serving agent has also left while the PR team has been sidelined, it has emerged…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Here's today's comic relief. I thought it was rather fitting to this thread. Congratulations to the British queen on her new puppies. 
Dogs make everything better


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> More details of staff leaving current H&M's organisations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s Archewell foundation director leaves after only a YEAR
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S chief of staff has quit after less than a year — the latest of 13 key aides to leave the Sussexes. Her long-serving agent has also left while the PR team has been sidelined, it has emerged…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



So many, so many people leaving. Why? 
Is there just no work?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.




She also has that thing when in the presence of males to spray them with cuteness and charm. Or what she thinks is cuteness and charm anyway.


----------



## chicinthecity777

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



We need a "retch" reaction to this performance!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> So many, so many people leaving. Why?
> Is there just no work?


We will never know why but what we do know is the common denominators in this are H&M!


----------



## queennadine

lulu212121 said:


> She had it out for Kate waaaaay before has been Harry. Wow!!!



“...endless conversation about Princess Kate.”
That tells you _everything_ about how MM felt about Kate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sooooo, Piers was right. 
More puzzled than ever with this ‘confession’:









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle admit they DIDN'T marry before wedding
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (pictured) confessed the ceremony with the Archbishop of Canterbury in Kensington Palace saw them just 'privately exchange personal vows'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## drifter

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



So which is the real her???  I couldn't finish watching this interview.  Cringe.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seriously????









						Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
					






					www.betterup.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com



Yeah, shame he couldn't help his own wife!

10+ years ago, I had a breakdown due to my mum's illness. I was able to get help within days in the UK, both via my private health insurance and via our NHS. But H&M while easily found their own private doctor, couldn't find help for her mental illness. right!


----------



## CarryOn2020

FYI: Kate is wearing a gorgeous coat today


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com



I'm finding this whole trajectory baffling. Has he forgotten that he's a literal Prince?
How has he demoted himself in this way? 
I'm not just referring to this specific title of 'Chief Impact Officer' but his overall behaviour this entire time. What on earth does he think he's playing at?! He's a literal blood royal and he's behaving like a social media influencer trying to make it big and secure their next freebie/newspaper article/event invitation/sponsorship deal.


----------



## lulilu

What exactly do HM want from BRF?  They are threatening to release more damaging info unless their demands are met?  What exactly?  A confession of racism?  An admission of all of HM allegations?  How exactly would that take place?


----------



## chicinthecity777

jblended said:


> I'm finding this whole trajectory baffling. Has he forgotten that he's a literal Prince?
> How has he demoted himself in this way?
> I'm not just referring to this specific title of 'Chief Impact Officer' but his overall behaviour this entire time. What on earth does he think he's playing at?! He's a literal blood royal and he's behaving like a social media influencer trying to make it big and secure their next freebie/newspaper article/event invitation/sponsorship deal.


Literally from high class to no class in a very short period of time! Well done!


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com




Is there even such a thing as Chief Impact Officer?  Since he is utterly talentless, are they now making up positions and titles for him?


----------



## jblended

lulilu said:


> Is there even such a thing as Chief Impact Officer?


Titles like this crack me up! I know of a spin class that gives their head instructor the title of 'Chief Ride Officer' (perhaps that's the next step in Harry's career ladder?) 

Man, to think how I looked up to him when he created Sentebale! How far he has fallen...


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> Is there even such a thing as Chief Impact Officer?  Since he is utterly talentless, are they now making up positions and titles for him?


Of course it was a made-up role for him! I have to laugh at that organisation's creativity! It baffles me why they would want to be associated with a guy who couldn't even help his own wife, let alone others! He couldn't get over his own issues for all these years on! Laughable!


----------



## chicinthecity777

jblended said:


> Titles like this crack me up! I know of a spin class that gives their head instructor the title of 'Chief Ride Officer' (perhaps that's the next step in Harry's career ladder?)
> 
> Man, to think how I looked up to him when he created Sentebale! How far he has fallen...


I know a school building care-taker is called "chief facility coordinator"!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

drifter said:


> So which is the real her???  I couldn't finish watching this interview.  Cringe.



Who was it who called her a shapeshifter? Lodpah? While this usually refers to something else (think werewolf), maybe that's her identity...she doesn't have one.

What comes to my mind is Runaway Bride, when Richard Gere asks every single one of Julia Roberts' ex-fiancés how she likes her eggs, and all of them answer something different, but add "Just like me". Meghan Markle is what the person she wants to manipulate wants to see in that very moment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com




So whom will he hire to do a job for him he himself isn't qualified to do?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> So many, so many people leaving. Why?
> Is there just no work?



Or too much?


----------



## papertiger

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.




OMG she's insufferably full-on 'actress' here. I find myself literally backing away, e_xhausting! _

At least she seemed proud of her father (naturally, when she could use him to big herself up).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was just popping into the Wills and Kate thread...these two keep on shining, and even moreso in comparison. I wonder if the troublesome two realize they make them look even better with their antics and mud throwing that just stains themselves. I'm sure even people who initially were meh about W&K have come to appriate them big time.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com



That’s not a flattering photo at all.
He looks like rab c nesbitt mid rant (see below)


	

		
			
		

		
	
Rab, I hear, has just been made chief dynamic czar for Alcoholics Anonymous.

add on- I think Rab would do a much better job in coaching people through their problems and being coherent in his arguments then Harry and this is a show that almost got pulled from the air because people couldn’t understand what R was saying


----------



## Annawakes

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



Yikes.  She looks like a nervous wreck.  I stopped watching after a minute too.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who was it who called her a shapeshifter? Lodpah? While this usually refers to something else (think werewolf), maybe that's her identity...she doesn't have one.
> 
> What comes to my mind is Runaway Bride, when Richard Gere asks every single one of Julia Roberts' ex-fiancés how she likes her eggs, and all of them answer something different, but add "Just like me". Meghan Markle is what the person she wants to manipulate wants to see in that very moment.



Chameleon might be more accurate. Meghan doesn't actually become someone else. She pretends to be whatever will achieve her goal in that moment but it is all only on the surface.


----------



## queennadine

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



So after watching this, I noticed she does that thing where she essentially imitates the person she’s speaking with to create a false sense of kinship/familiarity. She also sounds incredibly pompous.


----------



## Chanbal

lulilu said:


> What exactly do HM want from BRF?  They are threatening to release more damaging info unless their demands are met?  What exactly?  A confession of racism?  An admission of all of HM allegations?  How exactly would that take place?


Money, a lot of money?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Chameleon might be more accurate. Meghan doesn't actually become someone else. She pretends to be whatever will achieve her goal in that moment but it is all only on the surface.



True!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

queennadine said:


> So after watching this, I noticed she does that thing where she essentially imitates the person she’s speaking with to create a false sense of kinship/familiarity. She also sounds incredibly pompous.



I refused to watch the video but liked your posting anyway because I've seen enough short clips to know it's true haha.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com




Additional info on the Duke's new job. He is a new leader at Better Up, but won't lead anybody... 

*Prince Harry gets a real job: Duke to become 'Chief Impact Officer' for San Francisco-based mental health coaching start-up Better Up that works with US giants from Hilton to Chevron*

*The Duke was unveiled Tuesday morning as the chief impact officer at BetterUp, a $1.73billion startup*
*The role will see him weigh in on product strategy and charitable contributions but he won't manage a team *
*BetterUp's boss has refused to say what the prince is being paid, but insists he is perfect for the 'meaty' role *
*CEO Alexi Robichaux declined to say how much the royal will be paid. They were introduced through friends*
Harry, who has served in the British Army but has no corporate experience, will not manage any employees but will be expected to appear at special company events and spend time at the company's San Francisco for meetings once Covid restrictions are lifted.

*Explaining why he has taken the job, Harry told the Wall Street Journal in a suitably corporate response:* 'I intend to help create impact in people's lives. Proactive coaching provides endless possibilities for personal development, increased awareness, and an all-round better life'.

He added: 'This is about acknowledging that it isn't so much what is wrong with us, but more about what has happened to us over the course of life. Often because of societal barriers, financial difficulty, or stigma, too many people aren't able to focus on their mental health until they're forced to. I want us to move away from the idea that you have to feel broken before reaching out for help'. 

...
The tech firm that works with corporate giants including Facebook, Google, Snap Inc, NASA, Hilton and Warner Brothers. There will be some raised eyebrows because Harry has spoken widely on the need to protect the environment, but BetterUp has also worked with oil giant Chevron.

A bizarre list of values on BetterUp's website including: 'courage, playfulness, empathy, craftspersonship, grit and zest'

*MailOnline understands that Google offered leadership coaching to staff through Better Up in 2020. Access to the app, including virtual classes, costs $3,600 per person for 12 months membership.  










						Prince Harry gets job at San Francisco-based mental health firm
					

The Duke of Sussex was unveiled on Tuesday morning as the Chief Impact Officer at BetterUp, whose CEO Alexi Robichaux has declined to say how much the royal will be paid.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm still so confused about that "Three days before our wedding, we got married." Just...why? Why not say "We exchanged private vows just for us before the big shebang"? Even I, the die hard Meghan critic, wouldn't have found anything wrong with that. Just like  I wouldn't have found anything wrong with getting engaged in Africa and keeping quiet for a bit until the big announcement, or having Archie and keeping low for a day or two...but I take issue with fabricating a whole elaborate story around an engagement chicken that apparently never happened, or putting out a statement MM was in labour when she'd already delivered. She really is a compulsive liar.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> His mums brother isn't in South Africa, he's s at Althorp.


i read the Spencer nieces - Kitty etc - still have homes in South Africa. So, maybe Diana's brother still does too ?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Usually means left or was fired and just given 'advisory' role to save face for both parties (that can already been written within a golden handshake as part of a leaving strategy).
> 
> Staff leaving outright after a short time looks bad for H&M atm anyway.


Agree the press release was face saving for all involved 
Advisory role usually means the exc-employee will take calls for a while to help transtition the replacement 
Ex employee may be still drawing a salary for a while ... St Laurent was a higher up and surely granted this privilege


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So whom will he hire to do a job for him he himself isn't qualified to do?


We could be here an entire second discussing his qualifications for the job. 

I wonder who was the 'friend' that got him this new job? Oprah? Was all that conversation about Cringe's mental health, during Oprah's interview, free PR for Ginge's new job? We live in very weird times, Ginge was not able to get help for Cringe in the UK, but he is now a subject leader in the US.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think she saw that they were not sincere and nothing, but attention whores.  She knew Bill and Melinda, and they were NOT Bill and Melinda.


Oh, you mean they are highly intelligent, very wealthy and sincere philanthropists?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still so confused about that "Three days before our wedding, we got married." Just...why? Why not say "We exchanged private vows just for us before the big shebang"? Even I, the die hard Meghan critic, wouldn't have found anything wrong with that. Just like  I wouldn't have found anything wrong with getting engaged in Africa and keeping quiet for a bit until the big announcement, or having Archie and keeping low for a day or two...but I take issue with fabricating a whole elaborate story around an engagement chicken that apparently never happened, or putting out a statement MM was in labour when she'd already delivered. She really is a compulsive liar.


AGREE there is something dreadfully STRANGE/ODD about the early marriage story ... *How could she think she could drag the Archbishop of Canterbury and the whole Church of England into the fantasy ?*

These things can be checked .. and someone has checked her invention .. 

IMHO this is one of the best, most egregious, concrete examples of a fabrication that has been TOTALLY discredited. 

No one really knows the truth of tiaragate - happened behind the scenes - I give all sides the benefit of the doubt on that one. So maybe MM did cry .... a tear or two ... but this is a fabrication, there was no formal legally binding wedding 3 days earlier


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> What exactly do HM want from BRF?  They are threatening to release more damaging info unless their demands are met?  What exactly?  A confession of racism?  An admission of all of HM allegations?  How exactly would that take place?


MM will write book during maternity leave


----------



## bag-mania

Huh. The guy who didn't know how to get his suicidal pregnant wife any mental health therapy is handed an exec position for a mental health startup. Seems legit.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent
> I clicked the link. Here is the article:
> *Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Rep Again Reveals the Truth About That 'Secret Wedding'*
> One of the most-talked about moments of *Meghan Markle*‘s interview with *Oprah Winfrey* was when she claimed that she secretly got married to *Prince Harry* in a private ceremony days before their televised wedding.
> 
> “You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. The vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury,” she said.
> 
> The validity of that secret ceremony was brought into question because many people did not believe that it was actually a legal ceremony. In the U.K., there must be a minimum of two witnesses for a legal marriage to take place.
> 
> The couple’s rep spoke out days later and confirmed their legal wedding was on May 19, the day of their televised wedding at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Now, a new statement has been provided from *Harry* and *Meghan*‘s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The rep told The Daily Beast that “the couple exchanged personal vows a few days before their official/legal wedding on May 19.”
> 
> While the private ceremony might have been a spiritual wedding for the couple, it did not constitute a legal marriage.
> 
> A former clerk at the Faculty Office in the UK also told _The Sun_ this week, “I’m sorry, but Meghan is obviously confused and clearly misinformed. They did not marry three days earlier in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Special License I helped draw up enabled them to marry at St George’s Chapel in Windsor and what happened there on 19 May 2018 and was seen by millions around the world was the official wedding as recognized by the Church of England and the law.”
> 
> =====
> this comment sums it up — not much sympathy for the private-not-so-private twosome:
> _The whole interview was full of loops. And as for the crisis management team, they are fine since, as u can see here, most of the british, who are the ones that matter, thought so badly of them, and they addressed the matter properly like all families should. Also, dont get it... they said that they were embaressed to say she was mentally ill to the family and also said that they didnt help?! How would they if maybe things werent as clear as they thought it was?
> ===
> This is why they left Monarchy, they are so aware and obssesed with the tabloids and gossip, they wanted to release statement to argue every gossip, and respond every single time, this what they call having a Voice _


so they took up the Bishops time for their little ceremony?  and they (who want their privacy) are concerned enough about this story to actually give an explanation to the Daily Beast?  Uugh - they need to go away.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The interview was a big mistake for MM&H imo. As someone else said, the only winner of this type of interviews in the interviewer. It looks like Oprah made about $9M with it, not bad at all!
> 
> MM&H exposed themselves in a terrible light. Even if one believes that she was a victim of a one-time racist remark, isn't she a strong woman? If at one point she was suicidal, is H so weak that couldn't find help for his wife? Then they showed to the entire world that their connections to the BRF are almost non-existent. However, those connections are what makes them 'valuable'... They are not interesting people. On the top of everything, they showed that they can't be trusted. They turned themselves into personae non gratae.


I'm sorry to say that while I agree with you about them, it seems here in the states - if you listen to our media, esp TV - they are popular and most people think Harry did the right thing rescuing his Wife from the evil monarchy


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *
> View attachment 5032662
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry gets job at San Francisco-based mental health firm
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was unveiled on Tuesday morning as the Chief Impact Officer at BetterUp, whose CEO Alexi Robichaux has declined to say how much the royal will be paid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Never mind QEII or the Palace UK HQ, I think BetterUp could do with a Diversity Officer! 
Stereotypes = roles


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry to say that while I agree with you about them, it seems here in the states - if you listen to our media, esp TV - they are popular and most people think Harry did the right thing rescuing his Wife from the evil monarchy


I've noticed if I channel surf through CNN, they are fixated on the racist thing. How racist the BRF is. The big bad racist BRF. Ironic isn't it, coming from Americans.

We are not perfect here in Canada, but our issues aren't as intense and our media is so much more balanced about Meg.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Never mind QEII or the Palace UK HQ, I think BetterUp could do with a Diversity Officer!
> Stereotypes = roles
> 
> View attachment 5032690




They may already have one, even if that person isn't pictured. A large section of their web site devoted to diversity training.









						Diversity and Inclusion Coaching | BetterUp®
					

BetterUp® diversity and inclusion coaching powers belonging. Create a culture of inclusion while taking diversity deeper than demographics.




					www.betterup.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Slightly OT, but Youtube suggested to me Katherine McPhee singing while David Foster played the piano. Two observations: 1. she really has a beautiful voice. 2. man, that guy is OLD.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Huh. The guy who didn't know how to get his suicidal pregnant wife any mental health therapy is handed an exec position for a mental health startup. Seems legit.



These two REALLY don't understand irony


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> They may already have one, even if that person isn't pictured. A large section of their web site devoted to diversity training.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diversity and Inclusion Coaching | BetterUp®
> 
> 
> BetterUp® diversity and inclusion coaching powers belonging. Create a culture of inclusion while taking diversity deeper than demographics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com



Except it's not exactly working. 

Why is JCMH in a leadership role at all?


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I've noticed if I channel surf through CNN, they are fixated on the racist thing. How racist the BRF is. The big bad racist BRF. Ironic isn't it, coming from Americans.
> 
> We are not perfect here in Canada, but our issues aren't as intense and our media is so much more balanced about Meg.



CNN's focus is on promoting agendas these days. To them the Meghan and Harry story makes for good television about how they overcame racist culture and that's that. Facts and truth are meaningless, it's all about the narrative, THEIR TRUTH.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Except it's not exactly working.
> 
> Why is JCMH in a leadership role at all?



Good question. Sounds like a startup with too much money that needed a celebrity name to become known and to give it "credibility."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

papertiger said:


> OMG she's insufferably full-on 'actress' here. I find myself literally backing away, e_xhausting! _
> 
> At least she seemed proud of her father (naturally, when she could use him to big herself up).



She couldn't keep her armpits off the sofa!  And she seemed weirdly complimented by the interviewer's flirtatious vibe; I agree, it was too much, but I watched it all in 40 seconds


----------



## Jayne1

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



Super skinny and on something?  That's what it looks like compared to how she behaves now.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Never mind QEII or the Palace UK HQ, I think BetterUp could do with a Diversity Officer!
> Stereotypes = roles
> 
> View attachment 5032690


I am being naughty by saying this .... my bad ... 
these days it is terribly fashionable to put POC as the first requirement for a job
some must consider red heads to be minorities


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Good question. Sounds like a startup with too much money that needed a celebrity name to become known and to give it "credibility."



I'd like to see the HR files on Harry - does he have a right to work in the US (or anywhere)?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> OMG she's insufferably full-on 'actress' here. I find myself literally backing away, e_xhausting! _
> 
> At least she seemed proud of her father (naturally, when she could use him to big herself up).


I could not sit through the whole thing.  notice the legs are on full display.  guess she thinks they are an asset.  imagine any paralegals out there were not glad to hear their job is "lowly"


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Super skinny and on something?  That's what it looks like compared to how she behaves now.



That popped into my mind. _Unusually_ animated - and I can be hyper!


----------



## sdkitty

someone said Harry doesn't have to pay taxes in US...according to this, he will 








						Prince Harry 'faces tax bill without break from Los Angeles mansion'
					

Prince Harry has been in the US for at least 151 days after moving to Los Angeles with his wife Meghan and their baby son Archie in early May. If he reaches 183 days he is legally liable to pay taxes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## RueMonge

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who was it who called her a shapeshifter? Lodpah? While this usually refers to something else (think werewolf), maybe that's her identity...she doesn't have one.
> 
> What comes to my mind is Runaway Bride, when Richard Gere asks every single one of Julia Roberts' ex-fiancés how she likes her eggs, and all of them answer something different, but add "Just like me". Meghan Markle is what the person she wants to manipulate wants to see in that very moment.


Except Julia Roberts didn’t seem to be doing it calculatingly on purpose.


----------



## muddledmint

Jayne1 said:


> I've noticed if I channel surf through CNN, they are fixated on the racist thing. How racist the BRF is. The big bad racist BRF. Ironic isn't it, coming from Americans.
> 
> We are not perfect here in Canada, but our issues aren't as intense and our media is so much more balanced about Meg.


Soooooo ironic.


----------



## muddledmint

jblended said:


> I'm finding this whole trajectory baffling. Has he forgotten that he's a literal Prince?
> How has he demoted himself in this way?
> I'm not just referring to this specific title of 'Chief Impact Officer' but his overall behaviour this entire time. What on earth does he think he's playing at?! He's a literal blood royal and he's behaving like a social media influencer trying to make it big and secure their next freebie/newspaper article/event invitation/sponsorship deal.


He has to #hustle now that daddy cut him off


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> someone said Harry doesn't have to pay taxes in US...according to this, he will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'faces tax bill without break from Los Angeles mansion'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been in the US for at least 151 days after moving to Los Angeles with his wife Meghan and their baby son Archie in early May. If he reaches 183 days he is legally liable to pay taxes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


welcome to America!!


----------



## Sharont2305

Today has been declared a Day of National Reflection here in the UK, one year since we went into our first lockdown. 
The Queen has spoken
Prince Charles has spoken
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have done their bit. 
The Prime Minister is speaking now
We've had a minutes silence earlier
All major landmarks will be lit blue at 8pm and people are encouraged to go outside at that time to shine a light into the sky. 
Harry, we know you haven't been here in over a year (as far as we know) but this is bad timing yet again.


----------



## Chloe302225

Sharont2305 said:


> Today has been declared a Day of National Reflection here in the UK, one year since we went into our first lockdown.
> The Queen has spoken
> Prince Charles has spoken
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have done their bit.
> The Prime Minister is speaking now
> We've had a minutes silence earlier
> All major landmarks will be lit blue at 8pm and people are encouraged to go outside at that time to shine a light into the sky.
> Harry, we know you haven't been here in over a year (as far as we know) but this is bad timing yet again.



I got a feeling they don't include him in the family group text and calender. It makes it hard for the poor boy to plan around certain things.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely this announcement of Hazzie is not an effort to upstage the other new appointment - William made Lord High Commissioner by Queen for second year.  








						Prince William appointed Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland 2021
					

The Queen has approved that Prince William be appointed as Her Majesty’s Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 2021.




					www.gov.uk
				




Agree this seems like a Silicon Valley start-up group. BetterUp may be a worthwhile organization, but appointing H after the disastrous OW interview requires that the judgment of anyone connected to them is seriously questioned. Disastrous interview for many reasons, mostly due to the deceptions/lies/etc.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Additional info on the Duke's new job. He is a new leader at Better Up, but won't lead anybody...
> 
> *Prince Harry gets a real job: Duke to become 'Chief Impact Officer' for San Francisco-based mental health coaching start-up Better Up that works with US giants from Hilton to Chevron*
> 
> *The Duke was unveiled Tuesday morning as the chief impact officer at BetterUp, a $1.73billion startup*
> *The role will see him weigh in on product strategy and charitable contributions but he won't manage a team *
> *BetterUp's boss has refused to say what the prince is being paid, but insists he is perfect for the 'meaty' role *
> *CEO Alexi Robichaux declined to say how much the royal will be paid. They were introduced through friends*
> Harry, who has served in the British Army but has no corporate experience, will not manage any employees but will be expected to appear at special company events and spend time at the company's San Francisco for meetings once Covid restrictions are lifted.
> 
> *Explaining why he has taken the job, Harry told the Wall Street Journal in a suitably corporate response:* 'I intend to help create impact in people's lives. Proactive coaching provides endless possibilities for personal development, increased awareness, and an all-round better life'.
> 
> He added: 'This is about acknowledging that it isn't so much what is wrong with us, but more about what has happened to us over the course of life. Often because of societal barriers, financial difficulty, or stigma, too many people aren't able to focus on their mental health until they're forced to. I want us to move away from the idea that you have to feel broken before reaching out for help'.
> 
> ...
> The tech firm that works with corporate giants including Facebook, Google, Snap Inc, NASA, Hilton and Warner Brothers. There will be some raised eyebrows because Harry has spoken widely on the need to protect the environment, but BetterUp has also worked with oil giant Chevron.
> 
> A bizarre list of values on BetterUp's website including: 'courage, playfulness, empathy, craftspersonship, grit and zest'
> 
> *MailOnline understands that Google offered leadership coaching to staff through Better Up in 2020. Access to the app, including virtual classes, costs $3,600 per person for 12 months membership.
> View attachment 5032662
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry gets job at San Francisco-based mental health firm
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was unveiled on Tuesday morning as the Chief Impact Officer at BetterUp, whose CEO Alexi Robichaux has declined to say how much the royal will be paid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



What will he do at this mental health firm, the guinea pig? With all HIS mental health issues.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## threadbender

Does this mean he has a green card? Or, will his "salary" be a "donation" to his foundation?


----------



## sdkitty

threadbender said:


> Does this mean he has a green card? Or, will his "salary" be a "donation" to his foundation?


interesting question
according to this, he won't apply for a green card








						Prince Harry Reportedly Won't Seek U.S. Citizenship or a Green Card While Living in L.A.
					

The Duke may still apply for a visa.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still so confused about that "Three days before our wedding, we got married." Just...why? Why not say "We exchanged private vows just for us before the big shebang"? Even I, the die hard Meghan critic, wouldn't have found anything wrong with that. Just like  I wouldn't have found anything wrong with getting engaged in Africa and keeping quiet for a bit until the big announcement, or having Archie and keeping low for a day or two...but I take issue with fabricating a whole elaborate story around an engagement chicken that apparently never happened, or putting out a statement MM was in labour when she'd already delivered. She really is a compulsive liar.


Having grown up with a compulsive liar for a father I still don't understand the reasoning behind it.  He would tell a lie when the truth was a better option and upon the second telling it seemed he would actually believe it. One thing I did learn, you can't believe a word that comes out of their mouth. Totally see this in Meghan. She could get her Princess title, the *Princess of Liars*.

Just want to add I love that they call the Duchess of Cambridge the *Children's Princess*.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still so confused about that "Three days before our wedding, we got married." Just...why? Why not say "We exchanged private vows just for us before the big shebang"? Even I, the die hard Meghan critic, wouldn't have found anything wrong with that. Just like  I wouldn't have found anything wrong with getting engaged in Africa and keeping quiet for a bit until the big announcement, or having Archie and keeping low for a day or two...but I take issue with fabricating a whole elaborate story around an engagement chicken that apparently never happened, or putting out a statement MM was in labour when she'd already delivered. She really is a compulsive liar.



I think we are observing someone who is so used to making up her background stories and never getting caught that she blanked out on this one. She probably felt comfortable knowing Oprah was being 100% supportive and she went on a tangent into full fantasy mode. She forgot that other people, who have no reason to believe her without question, would watch it.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I'd like to see the HR files on Harry - does he have a right to work in the US (or anywhere)?



Well, if it helps I doubt it is a real job, like one where he performs daily tasks that require him to devote a large portion of his day to it. It is more likely a symbolic title where he will attend an occasional Zoom call now and then.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

This should be Meghan Markle's theme song. Maybe not all the lyrics, but most of them.

*Bryan Adams Lyrics*

*"I'm A Liar"*

maybe i told you right from the start
you can have me
but you can't have my heart
it's easy enough to say but i couldn't care less
ya i mighta told you you were on my mind
guess i talked a pretty good line
but hey i can talk all day
but i just can't confess

that i'm a liar
i'm a victim of desire
i'm a moth into the fire
i'm over my head - forget what i said
tell ya i'm a liar
i'm just walking on the wire
i couldn't get much higher
i'm over my head - forget what i said
baby i'm a liar

when i told you i was hard to pin down
ya know i was just messin around
guess you know bynow that's just my way
and if you want some storeis - well i got a few
but hey - this is the truth i swear to you
how many more times do you want me to say...

if i told ya to go away
baby you can't believe a thing i say
listen....


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> MM will write book during maternity leave



MM makes a yearly SPLASH in the news - 2020 was the year of Finding Freedom / Omid book, 2021 is the year of the interview, 2022 will be the year of the autobiography


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Never mind QEII or the Palace UK HQ, I think BetterUp could do with a Diversity Officer!
> Stereotypes = roles
> 
> View attachment 5032690



to be fair, it is pretty diverse for a tech company. There are many woman and minorities listed on the leadership page.


----------



## csshopper

The video was "interesting", the long silent segment at the end was the best part. Meghan's google eyed flirtatious bit reminded me of the picture of her in the white dress hanging all over Harry like a star struck teen-ager when their engagement was announced. I remember being shocked to find out how old she was. She's had that "schtick" down pat for years.

 Re: Harry's new Security Funding Source: _Better Up_,  based on the "About Us" segment of their website, is well financed and among its 29 members of the Management Team there are stacks of advanced degrees and years of experience in their fields. What pops out after reading the vitae is that Harry comes with a Title (ironically one of the Team's first name is "Duke") and for marketing purposes is a potential asset. As "Harry Windsor" he never would have made it in this company. Conversation with him over the water cooler in the break room would not be an option, being dense as a brick, intellectually, he is not in their league. The 29 member company leadership  team is evenly split M/F (14/15),  based solely on appearance/surname, which is not always indicative, there are 6 minority members, again split M/F (3/3)._ Better Up_ describes itself as, _"We are a team of behavioral scientists, talent management strategists, and consumer product experts who share a passion for helping people become the best version of themselves."_

As others have said, it seems horribly ironic, which would be totally lost on the Earl of DUMBarton, that he who can't figure out things in real life is joining a company whose services he NEEDS, not that he's able to provide to others, even his wife.

I apologize if you have just had something to eat or drink prior to reading this, because the following quote from Harry's blurb on the web site of his new employer is vomit inducing. Among other things it describes his role in Archewell which he claims *"is united behind the deeply held belief that compassion is the defining cultural force of the 21st century." R-e-a-l-l-y.........*


----------



## lalame

I wonder if Harry’s new gig means he’s abandoning the joint effort he was doing with W+K.... Otherwise why not just invest more time into that?


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> to be fair, it is pretty diverse for a tech company. There are many woman and minorities listed on the leadership page.



Line them up to their roles. All but one is a match to stereotypes (and that one is not the (un)Happy Prince)


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Line them up to their roles. All but one is a match to stereotypes (and that one is not the (un)Happy Prince)



there’s like 30 people listed on the leadership team... you think all of them except Harry line up to stereotypes? But what does that mean anyway... what stereotypes


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Well, if it helps I doubt it is a real job, like one where he performs daily tasks that require him to devote a large portion of his day to it. It is more likely a symbolic title where he will attend an occasional Zoom call now and then.



I wonder if the IRS will/won't have it down as a real job - or just another front


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Well, if it helps I doubt it is a real job, like one where he performs daily tasks that require him to devote a large portion of his day to it. It is more likely a symbolic title where he will attend an occasional Zoom call now and then.


They’re just pony trotting him out. After all H&M are merely entertainment right now. They are tragic comedy of royal proportions. We have a real life royal drama play in motion.


----------



## lalame

Chief impact officer is a real job I’ve seen but the way they describe it seems more like a board member or something... someone who might network and get them more business or wow potential customers rather than actually doing work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> What exactly do HM want from BRF?  They are threatening to release more damaging info unless their demands are met?  What exactly?  A confession of racism?  An admission of all of HM allegations?  How exactly would that take place?


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I wonder if the IRS will/won't have it down as a real job - or just another front



I'd like to believe the IRS will give them a close look but who knows these days? 

Between this job and Meghan possibly writing an autobiography, I bet the execs at Spotify and Netflix are banging their heads against the wall wondering when they are going to make time to come up with some podcast content and TV shows.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lalame said:


> Chief impact officer is a real job I’ve seen but the way they describe it seems more like a board member or something... someone who might network and get them more business or wow potential customers rather than actually doing work.


Poor Harry! Even his "real" job is not a real job!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry to say that while I agree with you about them, it seems here in the states - if you listen to our media, esp TV - they are popular and most people think Harry did the right thing rescuing his Wife from the evil monarchy


They seem to have an efficient PR agency and well connected new friends like OW and GK. A noisy crowd that contributes little or no real value to others imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing it means he will get a cut for anyone he ‘signs’ up - kinda like a commission, because the article says he will not work with actual teams.

Whatever good this group does will be overshadowed by including a Prince who lies to a global audience.  Funny how timing works out. Yesterday the official wedding report was issued, proving their lie. Today he is announced as ‘Chief Impact Officer’. Someone has a wicked sense of humor 

Reading between the lines, seems the CEO is having buyer’s remorse? 
From the WSJ article @Chanbal posted -
_The Duke of Sussex is going to work for the *unicorn employee coaching and mental health startup *in his latest foray into business_

_“It’s a meaningful and meaty role,” said BetterUp CEO Alexi Robichaux, who said he was introduced to Prince Harry through a *mutual friend and began conversations with him last fall.*

The chief impact officer position is *relatively rare in the corporate world,* although some companies, including Salesforce.com Inc., have it. The title is *more common in the nonprofit realm at organizations such as Amnesty International USA and the United Way*.

Mr. Robichaux *declined to comment on how Prince Harry would be compensated and didn’t share details of his employment agreement*, saying that he would be joining the company’s leadership team as an “officer of the corporation.” Prince Harry won’t manage employees or have direct reports, but he is likely to spend some time in the company’s San Francisco headquarters once it is safe to do so, and to participate in all-hands meetings, Mr. Robichaux said. He is also *expected to appear at special company events.*_


----------



## gracekelly

No real apology from the Harkles for deliberately misleading  viewers about the 3 day prior wedding. They should be shamed of themselves. 

Harry has come full circle. Remember the speech to JPMorgan execs last year?  He will be a motivational speaker of woke word salad to people eminently more  educated and qualified than himself.  He will be on a dog and pony show circuit going out to various companies. This doesn’t have to be an after dinner/lunch speech. It could be a Zoom or at the company headquarters.   He will read what is put in front of him, but don’t ask him any questions because he won’t be able to answer anything as his puppet master may not be present.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry could be on the board of this company and get a nice piece of change for it, but it won’t pay the mortgage. Plenty of well know former big business and political types make nice retirement money this way, but it won’t fund the kind of lifestyle that Meghan wants.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps Disney is the ‘mutual friend’?
The CEO’s bio - 

So I deferred admission for a year and wound up finding a job at Disney in an internal consulting group.


----------



## purseinsanity

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



I couldn't even watch this whole thing.  She literally makes my skin crawl.  She flirts with any man she thinks can help her, doesn't she?  I found it interesting how she sits, with her arm back on the chair, almost like she's opening herself up, literally, to Craig.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Here's today's comic relief. I thought it was rather fitting to this thread. Congratulations to the British queen on her new puppies.
> Dogs make everything better
> View attachment 5032453


Thank you for this.  It's only noon and I've already had a horrendous day at work, so this was much needed!


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> Is there even such a thing as Chief Impact Officer?  Since he is utterly talentless, are they now making up positions and titles for him?


Meghan should be Chief BS Officer.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> there’s like 30 people listed on the leadership team... you think all of them except Harry line up to stereotypes? But what does that mean anyway... what stereotypes



You are asking me to do what I don't believe in - it's what H&M believe in "no old white guys"

If you look at leadership 30 https://www.betterup.com/en-us/about-us/leadership-team

The leadership is still hierarchical in order, i.e their 'leadership' page is_ their_ truth, not the truth. In my organisation we have lots of people who are called 'leaders', vice-leaders, Assistant-vice-leaders but there's still one man who really counts and makes all the decisions.

Betterup leadership team page:

Top row 3 guys have the most space i.e bigger pictures = Founders/CEO and a Prince/Duke 

Traditional: They have more space like First Class on a plane. Physiologically, the bigger their picture, the more important they look and ultimately are because that's what are shared understanding of space makes us believe.
Contemporary: They share the same page as lower orders to shut 'woke' people up (sending them back to sleep) into only reading 'Our Leadership' and seeing a mixed and diverse 'leadership' with a fairly even distribution of M/F faces. Everyone looks faces/pics first and only reads text if they are interested in a particular person. In order to surmise the signified strict hierarchy of the company you'd have to analyse more carefully:

Next, 4 in rows (making the top row the most important i.e. the real leaders)
The roles are downgrade towards the bottom
*3 on the top and 5 Chiefs and one President = 9 and only 2 are women *
The women are head of what they're usually head of Products and Marketing.

Then the 'leadership' goes _down _to VPs / Directors / Head
*Bottom 3 rows = 10 employees, 8 are women, 2 men. 
All below-VP roles are women. *

Just in case you think the 3 on the top have bigger pics because there's only 3 and is a design issue, the 2 women on the bottom row have the same size pics as everyone else.

That's only one way of analysing. Diversity officers are like marketing, they only present things better to a 'woke' crowd that are already there.


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> He has to #hustle now that daddy cut him off


I can't WAIT until he does the Lisa Rinna and starts hawking Depends!!  His Corden interview showed he can't hold his bladder.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


> I got a feeling they don't include him in the family group text and calender. It makes it hard for the poor boy to plan around certain things.


They were probably trying to avoid him looking like an idiot by shining a blue light on himself, since he considers himself a national monument.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Poor Harry! Even his "real" job is not a real job!



He wouldn't know a real job if it came up to him and went BOOM!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

More info on this startup — Article from 2019:









						A $100M Bet That Online Coaching Can Make a Better Manager
					

BetterUp wants to bring data to human resources, and create more fulfilled employees.




					www.wired.com
				




_So let’s say you believe that a new generation of workers is more interested than prior ones in finding meaning at their jobs. Why would a company care? After all, from one point of view (as a pretty good TV show put it), that’s what the money’s for. But maybe free snacks, good leave policies, and the ability to work from home are all just table stakes in the competition for talent. Maybe companies have to do more. The attraction to coaching, if there is one, might be the application of shiny new technological innovations to what used to be called Human Resources. “In just about every company, you don’t have the financial, analytic, and technology resources to do cutting-edge work in the people field,” says Laszlo Bock, who spearheaded a data-driven HR push at Google and then left to found Humu, which aims at improving employee happiness and retention not through coaching but through sentiment analysis and behavioral psychology. “So they go to third parties to get insight—*Silicon Valley fairy dust*.”


BetterUp’s folks say their fairy dust actually makes people fly. Metaphorically, that is—where “fly” means “increased productivity, better retention, higher job satisfaction.”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> You are asking me to do what I don't believe in - it's what H&M believe in "no old white guys"
> 
> If you look at leadership 30 https://www.betterup.com/en-us/about-us/leadership-team
> 
> The leadership is still hierarchical in order, i.e their 'leadership' page is_ their_ truth, not the truth. In my organisation we have lots of people who are called 'leaders', vice-leaders, Assistant-vice-leaders but there's still one man who really counts and makes all the decisions.
> 
> Betterup leadership team page:
> 
> Top row 3 guys have the most space i.e bigger pictures = Founders/CEO and a Prince/Duke
> 
> Traditional: They have more space like First Class on a plane. Physiologically, the bigger their picture, the more important they look and ultimately are because that's what are shared understanding of space makes us believe.
> Contemporary: They share the same page as lower orders to shut 'woke' people up (sending them back to sleep) into only reading 'Our Leadership' and seeing a mixed and diverse 'leadership' with a fairly even distribution of M/F faces. Everyone looks faces/pics first and only reads text if they are interested in a particular person. In order to surmise the signified strict hierarchy of the company you'd have to analyse more carefully:
> 
> Next, 4 in rows (making the top row the most important i.e. the real leaders)
> The roles are downgrade towards the bottom
> *3 on the top and 5 Chiefs and one President = 9 and only 2 are women *
> The women are head of what they're usually head of Products and Marketing.
> 
> Then the 'leadership' goes _down _to VPs / Directors / Head
> *Bottom 3 rows = 10 employees, 8 are women, 2 men.
> All below-VP roles are women. *
> 
> Just in case you think the 3 on the top have bigger pics because there's only 3 and is a design issue, the 2 women on the bottom row have the same size pics as everyone else.
> 
> That's only one way of analysing. Diversity officers are like marketing, they only present things better to a 'woke' crowd that are already there.



From the Wired article, 2019:
So now BetterUp is developing into a major player in the coaching and executive education world, alongside names like Patina and Lee Hecht Harrison. With its 200 employees and 1,000 coaches—*all contractors*—BetterUp serves almost 100 clients, a third of them in the Fortune 1000. That’s big.


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## CarryOn2020

I can’t stop laughing at this  

More from the 2019 Wired article:
_I’m no kind of perfect employee, but I find a lot of personal meaning in journalism, for all the cliché-but-true reasons. But I also know it’ll never make me rich. It’s hard not to see this linking of coaching-to-fulfillment-to-profit as a kind of a professionalized prosperity gospel. Not everyone leaves a job and goes on a vision quest. Even fewer come back with both a mission and a pitch deck, and end up with $100 million in funding.

ETA: _B-Up also coached Fbook employees. Oh these millennials, mercy.








						Companies like Facebook and LinkedIn are paying for employees to get on-the-clock 'life coaching'
					

BetterUp provides a unique hybrid of therapy and executive coaching to employees of tech companies in Silicon Valley.




					www.businessinsider.com
				




I’ll see myself out now. Peace.


----------



## Hermes Zen

chicinthecity777 said:


> More details of staff leaving current H&M's organisations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s Archewell foundation director leaves after only a YEAR
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S chief of staff has quit after less than a year — the latest of 13 key aides to leave the Sussexes. Her long-serving agent has also left while the PR team has been sidelined, it has emerged…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I have pages to go to catch up. So if someone else already posted this, please ignore mine.

From LinkedIn.  Ms. St-Laurent is going to partner with Rebecca Rottenberg Goldman ... 

'I am also excited to share that I am partnering with the tremendously talented Rebecca Rottenberg Goldman, recently Co-Founder, Interim CEO & COO of TIME'S UP, to stand up a new social impact consulting firm.

Over the last two decades, our combined experience has led us to work directly with some of the most well-known and admired business leaders and culture creators of our times including the likes of Melinda Gates, Katie McGrath and J.J. Abrams, and most recently The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. 

We're looking forward to collaborating with clients to create personalized, original philanthropic strategies that will realize their vision to transform the world.'


----------



## queennadine

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan should be Chief BS Officer.



Anyone can be Chief _______ (insert whatever trendy "crisis" America is in right now) Officer.

They're mostly a bunch of clowns, IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I couldn't even watch this whole thing.  She literally makes my skin crawl.  She flirts with any man she thinks can help her, doesn't she?  I found it interesting how she sits, with her arm back on the chair, almost like she's opening herself up, literally, to Craig.



I am starting to see why Lady CC's favourite description of her is "vulgar".


----------



## Chanbal

Demanding bosses! I wonder what other functions the #13 aid (to leave MM&H) had to fulfill outside of her job spec. 

"_MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry's chief of staff "wanted out" after "having to fulfil more work than her job spec", it was claimed today._"









						Meg & Harry chief of staff 'wanted out' after 'having to work outside job spec'
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s chief of staff “wanted out” after “having to fulfil more work than her job spec”, it was claimed today. Catherine St-Laurent left…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you for this.  It's only noon and I've already had a horrendous day at work, so this was much needed!


Hope tomorrow is better  You bring a lot of laughter relief to this thread as well, so thank you too!


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Mr. Robichaux *declined to comment on how Prince Harry would be compensated and didn’t share details of his employment agreement*, saying that he would be joining the company’s leadership team as an “officer of the corporation.” Prince Harry won’t manage employees or have direct reports, but he is likely to spend some time in the company’s San Francisco headquarters once it is safe to do so, and to participate in all-hands meetings, Mr. Robichaux said. He is also *expected to appear at special company events.*


So they're going to be trotting him out like a show pony or a trained bear at the circus when they have special events?  For the delight of the unwashed masses?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh, the sugars going wild on Twitter. "So what if they said private vows three days before the wedding, what's the big deal?" Let me think hard for a second...that she didn't frame it like this? 

My favourite: "Meghan said it was a private exchange of vows, it's Oprah who edited it, she is the snake!" Lord send help.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

ouiouilexiaussi said:


> I think I got the just of this thread: anything that comes out of Meghan or Harry’s mouth is a lie and the royal family is faultless for their departure. *shrugs*
> 
> I haven’t much else to say on the matter; TBH I’d rather discuss bags and jewelry. Lol



Yeah I find this thread pretty damn depressing.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> You are asking me to do what I don't believe in - it's what H&M believe in "no old white guys"
> 
> If you look at leadership 30 https://www.betterup.com/en-us/about-us/leadership-team
> 
> The leadership is still hierarchical in order, i.e their 'leadership' page is_ their_ truth, not the truth. In my organisation we have lots of people who are called 'leaders', vice-leaders, Assistant-vice-leaders but there's still one man who really counts and makes all the decisions.
> 
> Betterup leadership team page:
> 
> Top row 3 guys have the most space i.e bigger pictures = Founders/CEO and a Prince/Duke
> 
> Traditional: They have more space like First Class on a plane. Physiologically, the bigger their picture, the more important they look and ultimately are because that's what are shared understanding of space makes us believe.
> Contemporary: They share the same page as lower orders to shut 'woke' people up (sending them back to sleep) into only reading 'Our Leadership' and seeing a mixed and diverse 'leadership' with a fairly even distribution of M/F faces. Everyone looks faces/pics first and only reads text if they are interested in a particular person. In order to surmise the signified strict hierarchy of the company you'd have to analyse more carefully:
> 
> Next, 4 in rows (making the top row the most important i.e. the real leaders)
> The roles are downgrade towards the bottom
> *3 on the top and 5 Chiefs and one President = 9 and only 2 are women *
> The women are head of what they're usually head of Products and Marketing.
> 
> Then the 'leadership' goes _down _to VPs / Directors / Head
> *Bottom 3 rows = 10 employees, 8 are women, 2 men.
> All below-VP roles are women. *
> 
> Just in case you think the 3 on the top have bigger pics because there's only 3 and is a design issue, the 2 women on the bottom row have the same size pics as everyone else.
> 
> That's only one way of analysing. Diversity officers are like marketing, they only present things better to a 'woke' crowd that are already there.



I think you're right that they aren't AS diverse as could possibly be, but that's why companies have diversity positions... they recognize the problem and are trying to solve it. Of course companies find solving it isn't as easy as just bringing in warm bodies in the right colors. The stereotypes you're pointing out about roles though are a bit lost on me as these days, I don't think it's true that women are usually heads of products or marketing. In Silicon Valley, product is usually headed by men as they tend to be closer to engineering roles. And CMO positions are fairly even these days between men and women. But it is interesting to hear a different perspective.


----------



## csshopper

jennlt said:


> So they're going to be trotting him out like a show pony or a trained bear at the circus when they have special events?  For the delight of the unwashed masses?


I think they may need to be selective, there will be companies/potential clients in some countries I suspect who would not welcome Harry. Too many people are fed up, the comments in the DM about this new job reflect the disgust for him has not abated.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can’t stop laughing at this
> 
> More from the 2019 Wired article:
> _I’m no kind of perfect employee, but I find a lot of personal meaning in journalism, for all the cliché-but-true reasons. But I also know it’ll never make me rich. It’s hard not to see this linking of coaching-to-fulfillment-to-profit as a kind of a professionalized prosperity gospel. Not everyone leaves a job and goes on a vision quest. Even fewer come back with both a mission and a pitch deck, and end up with $100 million in funding.
> 
> ETA: _B-Up also coached Fbook employees. Oh these millennials, mercy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Companies like Facebook and LinkedIn are paying for employees to get on-the-clock 'life coaching'
> 
> 
> BetterUp provides a unique hybrid of therapy and executive coaching to employees of tech companies in Silicon Valley.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’ll see myself out now. Peace.



I really don't see how this company is going to make Harry big money. There are sooooo many of them and frankly many fizzle out. I have never heard of this company but I'd bet they make most of their money with the executive coaching. That seems to be going strong among exec perks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am starting to see why Lady CC's favourite description of her is "vulgar".


That was the word that came to my mind when I saw some pictures & videos...


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> No real apology from the Harkles for deliberately misleading  viewers about the 3 day prior wedding. They should be shamed of themselves.
> 
> Harry has come full circle. Remember the speech to JPMorgan execs last year?  He will be a motivational speaker of woke word salad to people eminently more  educated and qualified than himself.  He will be on a dog and pony show circuit going out to various companies. This doesn’t have to be an after dinner/lunch speech. It could be a Zoom or at the company headquarters.   He will read what is put in front of him, but don’t ask him any questions because he won’t be able to answer anything as his puppet master may not be present.


GMTA - I posted some of the same thoughts before I got to your post and I (obviously) agree 100%!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you for this.  It's only noon and I've already had a horrendous day at work, so this was much needed!


Whatever it is, keep in mind the sun will come out again tomorrow. In the meantime, make sure you enjoy this afternoon.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I really don't see how this company is going to make Harry big money. There are sooooo many of them and frankly many fizzle out. I have never heard of this company but I'd bet they make most of their money with the executive coaching. That seems to be going strong among exec perks.



They probably aren't giving him big money but having a job, even if it's only a figure head job, gives the illusion that Harry is trying to be a productive member of society. _It's good PR for both parties._


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Huh. The guy who didn't know how to get his suicidal pregnant wife any mental health therapy is handed an exec position for a mental health startup. Seems legit.


☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️ Absolutely


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the Wired article, 2019:
> So now BetterUp is developing into a major player in the coaching and executive education world, alongside names like Patina and Lee Hecht Harrison. With its 200 employees and 1,000 coaches—*all contractors*—BetterUp serves almost 100 clients, a third of them in the Fortune 1000. That’s big.



I'd love to know how BetterUp's employees and coaches feel about this new executive. Everyone else at the company most likely attended university for four to six years and then worked long hours to achieve their titles and Harry just gets handed a plum job. That's got to be a blow to their employees' morale and general mental health!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> They probably aren't giving him big money but having a job, even if it's only a figure head job, gives the illusion that Harry is trying to be a productive member of society. _It's good PR for both parties._



You're so right.... just look at how many of us learned about this company for the first time because of this!


----------



## Chanbal

@poopsie, @purseinsanity, etc.  How is your packing going?  I'm ready to move to a far away  with limited internet access. 

"... _it was claimed the duchess could follow prominent actor Arnold Schwar***egger into politics after holding a secret meeting with a top De**crat.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex risked a row in Britain by spending an hour chatting to the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som.

*But in California*, where the couple are living, *politicians are hoping the former actress will follow the “well-worn path” of Arnie into politics.*

Mike Trujillo, a prominent Dem***tic strategist, last month told The Times: *"She’s doing everything that’s appropriate *and allowed given her new position but she’s definitely putting her toe in the water.

“And once your toe is in the water your whole foot is in and next thing you know you are knee-deep and then you are fully in.”

*Mr Trujillo believes Meghan's foundation for mental health services and pledge to raise awareness of “racial and economic justice in the tech sector” could provide the jumping off point for a career in politics.*

This includes the couple inviting politician and activist Stacey Abrams - credited with helping Joe B**** win in Georgia - to speak on their Spotify podcast._"

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14428...ce-harry-link-woman-hillary-*******-campaign/


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> I'd love to know how BetterUp's employees and coaches feel about this new executive. Everyone else at the company most likely attended university for four to six years and then worked long hours to achieve their titles and Harry just gets handed a plum job. That's got to be great for their employees' morale and general mental health!


No kidding.  It will just reinforce to them that status (birth), wealth and skin color can supersede real ability and education.  Bravo Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> @poopsie, @purseinsanity, etc.  How is your packing going?  I'm ready to move to a far away  with limited internet access.
> 
> "... _it was claimed the duchess could follow prominent actor Arnold Schwar***egger into politics after holding a secret meeting with a top De**crat.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex risked a row in Britain by spending an hour chatting to the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som.
> 
> *But in California*, where the couple are living, *politicians are hoping the former actress will follow the “well-worn path” of Arnie into politics.*
> 
> Mike Trujillo, a prominent Dem***tic strategist, last month told The Times: *"She’s doing everything that’s appropriate *and allowed given her new position but she’s definitely putting her toe in the water.
> 
> “And once your toe is in the water your whole foot is in and next thing you know you are knee-deep and then you are fully in.”
> 
> *Mr Trujillo believes Meghan's foundation for mental health services and pledge to raise awareness of “racial and economic justice in the tech sector” could provide the jumping off point for a career in politics.*
> 
> This includes the couple inviting politician and activist Stacey Abrams - credited with helping Joe B**** win in Georgia - to speak on their Spotify podcast._"
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14428...ce-harry-link-woman-hillary-*******-campaign/


Gosh I really hope she runs for something so they can go full force on her background, obfuscations and lies.  The tabs will show no mercy.

ETA: Anyone seen Corey?


----------



## lalame

Ugh such good points about the privilege. You'd think with all their yapping about privilege they'd traffic less in theirs. But what else do they have... it's the only reason they even have the platform. It's an annoying cycle and I want to escape!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @poopsie, @purseinsanity, etc.  How is your packing going?  I'm ready to move to a far away  with limited internet access.
> 
> "... _it was claimed the duchess could follow prominent actor Arnold Schwar***egger into politics after holding a secret meeting with a top De**crat.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex risked a row in Britain by spending an hour chatting to the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som.
> 
> *But in California*, where the couple are living, *politicians are hoping the former actress will follow the “well-worn path” of Arnie into politics.*
> 
> Mike Trujillo, a prominent Dem***tic strategist, last month told The Times: *"She’s doing everything that’s appropriate *and allowed given her new position but she’s definitely putting her toe in the water.
> 
> “And once your toe is in the water your whole foot is in and next thing you know you are knee-deep and then you are fully in.”
> 
> *Mr Trujillo believes Meghan's foundation for mental health services and pledge to raise awareness of “racial and economic justice in the tech sector” could provide the jumping off point for a career in politics.*
> 
> This includes the couple inviting politician and activist Stacey Abrams - credited with helping Joe B**** win in Georgia - to speak on their Spotify podcast._"
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14428...ce-harry-link-woman-hillary-*******-campaign/



Wait.
Send the Scooobie van to my place. I’m packed, ready to go, drop the pedal. 

Please, let her run. Him, too.  The more they try, the more they fail.  I’m not a campaign manager, but the opposition research will be very easy.  They lied. Multiple times.  Yes, she should run for whatevs.  

RE: BetterUp.  I think it has been around for a few years, so ’start-up’ may be a misnomer. The idea of on-line coaching has been with us for awhile now. Most people dread sitting through those ‘sessions’, mainly because there is so very little substance. This company could be looking for its ‘second wind’  or another bottle of fairy dust (see Wired article, 2019).  Its narrative certainly will see an uptick in its search metrics with the news of its new Chief Impact Officer.  [oh no, the word salad has infiltrated my brain].


----------



## marietouchet

Deep thought ...
Chief Impact Officer that makes him a CIO
NO CIO is taken for Chief Information Officer, so, I guess H does not get to abbreviate


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who they are:








						BetterUp Office Photos
					

18 BetterUp office photos. A free inside look at BetterUp offices and culture posted anonymously by employees.




					www.glassdoor.ie
				











						Introducing BetterUp, and Why Everyone Needs a Coach in Their Corner
					

Work is no longer “just a job.”  We’re investing more of ourselves into our work than ever before, and we’re sacrificing a lot in exchange along the way.




					www.betterup.com
				



So pre-Covid.
==============
The new office:








						Co-Working Volatility Is Making the Office Market More Precarious
					

Vacancies are starting to soar, as many companies work remotely.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> I'd like to believe the IRS will give them a close look but who knows these days?
> 
> Between this job and Meghan possibly writing an autobiography, I bet the execs at Spotify and Netflix are banging their heads against the wall wondering when they are going to make time to come up with some podcast content and TV shows.



I read somewhere that the IRS is understaffed these days, so they aren't doing nearly as many audits as they should be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Two people who can not keep a job and can not keep employees - they need the coaching.


----------



## queennadine

gracekelly said:


> No kidding.  It will just reinforce to them that status (birth), wealth and skin color can supersede real ability and education.  Bravo Harry.





lalame said:


> Ugh such good points about the privilege. You'd think with all their yapping about privilege they'd traffic less in theirs. But what else do they have... it's the only reason they even have the platform. It's an annoying cycle and I want to escape!


Gosh I miss the days when people were hired/promoted based on merit.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan should be Chief BS Officer.



That should go quite nicely with her BS college degree.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the Wired article, 2019:
> So now BetterUp is developing into a major player in the coaching and executive education world, alongside names like Patina and Lee Hecht Harrison. With its 200 employees and 1,000 coaches—*all contractors*—BetterUp serves almost 100 clients, a third of them in the Fortune 1000. That’s big.


Hmmm
200 employees and 1000 coaches, the coaches are not employees, sounds like Mary Kay to me ... the lady who sold you the makeup is not an employee
and MK arguably has 1000s of clients , honestly is MK still in business ? they used to give out pink Cadillacs to top sellers (TRUE)
with all that of skepticism, I cannot explain why BetterUP has a market value of over $1B
I keep confusing the name with the term Batter Up

PS maybe H will get a family care cost break as part of the perks of the job ... his wife said she needed help ... on national TV


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I couldn't even watch this whole thing.  She literally makes my skin crawl.  She flirts with any man she thinks can help her, doesn't she?  I found it interesting how she sits, with her arm back on the chair, almost like she's opening herself up, literally, to Craig.



Well now that you bring up body language, it seems as though Craig is being flirtatious, but he's closed off his body by crossing his arms across his body for more than 1/2 of the interview. hmmm...


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm
> 200 employees and 1000 coaches, the coaches are not employees, sounds like Mary Kay to me ... the lady who sold you the makeup is not an employee



It's the gig economy... very trendy these days but there's some backlash about it. It's Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, GrubHub, Amazon deliveries, Youtube content creators, etc.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Jktgal said:


> Two people who can not keep a job and can not keep employees - they need the coaching.



Right? You can't even run your own life, how can you tell me how to manage mine?


----------



## lalame

Can everyone just agree to NO more celebrity politicians? For God's sake at least Arnold had experience building a successful career and business ventures before politics.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Can everyone just agree to NO more celebrity politicians? For God's sake at least Arnold had experience building a successful career and business ventures before politics.



Don't worry. Meghan seems to have a long history of starting projects and then losing interest and leaving them unfinished. In fact you could make the case that the only project we know for sure she's followed through on was marrying Harry.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Don't worry. Meghan seems to have a long history of starting projects and then losing interest and leaving them unfinished. In fact you could make the case that the only project we know for sure she's followed through on was marrying Harry.



I'm sure she believes that she is _rehabilitating_ him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm
> 200 employees and 1000 coaches, the coaches are not employees, sounds like Mary Kay to me ... the lady who sold you the makeup is not an employee
> and MK arguably has 1000s of clients , honestly is MK still in business ? they used to give out pink Cadillacs to top sellers TRUE)
> with all that of skepticism, I cannot explain why BetterUP has a market value of over $1B
> I keep confusing the name with the term Batter Up
> 
> PS maybe H will get a family care cost break as part of the perks of the job ... his wife said she needed help ... on national TV



From the 2019 Wired article - he does raise some solid questions:
_Not everyone leaves a job and goes on a vision quest. Even fewer come back with both a mission and a pitch deck, and end up with $100 million in funding._

‘Vision quest’ refers to the CEO’s Camino de Santiago trek.


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> No kidding.  It will just reinforce to them that status (birth), wealth and skin color can supersede real ability and education.  Bravo Harry.



Yes, it really is who you know and not what you know.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Don't worry. Meghan seems to have a long history of starting projects and then losing interest and leaving them unfinished. In fact you could make the case that the only project we know for sure she's followed through on was marrying Harry.


They just didn't offer her enough money to walk away.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I'm sure she believes that she is _rehabilitating_ him.



She RESCUED him, like the dogs and chickens.


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> So they're going to be trotting him out like a show pony or a trained bear at the circus when they have special events?  For the delight of the unwashed masses?



That's _exactly_ what they're going to do. Not just to the unwashed masses but also for VVIPs who're impressed by a title (or two) and will pay the extra (bit like the pop stars that get $1M to play for whoever's daughter's 10th bday party). 

Shame he's not as pretty as a show pony or as well trained as those poor bears.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Gosh I really hope she runs for something so they can go full force on her background, obfuscations and lies.  The tabs will show no mercy.
> 
> ETA: Anyone seen Corey?


I wish I could share your optimism. The media has been very selective about checking backgrounds, lies...


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> Well, if it helps I doubt it is a real job, like one where he performs daily tasks that require him to devote a large portion of his day to it. It is more likely a symbolic title where he will attend an occasional Zoom call now and then.


I agree.  I wonder what it is like to get paid big $$$ for an occasional zoom call, to say things like how important mental health is and other word salad.  Things anybody could say.  What is he even qualified to say?  Whereas the rest of us work much our entire lives developing real marketable skills, and actually, you know, *work*.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent
> I clicked the link. Here is the article:
> *Meghan Markle & Prince Harry's Rep Again Reveals the Truth About That 'Secret Wedding'*
> One of the most-talked about moments of *Meghan Markle*‘s interview with *Oprah Winfrey* was when she claimed that she secretly got married to *Prince Harry* in a private ceremony days before their televised wedding.
> 
> “You know, three days before our wedding, we got married. No one knows that. The vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury,” she said.
> 
> The validity of that secret ceremony was brought into question because many people did not believe that it was actually a legal ceremony. In the U.K., there must be a minimum of two witnesses for a legal marriage to take place.
> 
> The couple’s rep spoke out days later and confirmed their legal wedding was on May 19, the day of their televised wedding at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Now, a new statement has been provided from *Harry* and *Meghan*‘s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The rep told The Daily Beast that “the couple exchanged personal vows a few days before their official/legal wedding on May 19.”
> 
> While the private ceremony might have been a spiritual wedding for the couple, it did not constitute a legal marriage.
> 
> A former clerk at the Faculty Office in the UK also told _The Sun_ this week, “I’m sorry, but Meghan is obviously confused and clearly misinformed. They did not marry three days earlier in front of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Special License I helped draw up enabled them to marry at St George’s Chapel in Windsor and what happened there on 19 May 2018 and was seen by millions around the world was the official wedding as recognized by the Church of England and the law.”
> 
> =====
> this comment sums it up — not much sympathy for the private-not-so-private twosome:
> _The whole interview was full of loops. And as for the crisis management team, they are fine since, as u can see here, most of the british, who are the ones that matter, thought so badly of them, and they addressed the matter properly like all families should. Also, dont get it... they said that they were embaressed to say she was mentally ill to the family and also said that they didnt help?! How would they if maybe things werent as clear as they thought it was?
> ===
> This is why they left Monarchy, they are so aware and obssesed with the tabloids and gossip, they wanted to release statement to argue every gossip, and respond every single time, this what they call having a Voice _


So, in other words .. *she LIED*, how SHOCKED am I [*NOT one bit*] ?!?!?!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait.
> Send the Scooobie van to my place. I’m packed, ready to go, drop the pedal.
> 
> Please, let her run. Him, too.  The more they try, the more they fail.  I’m not a campaign manager, but the opposition research will be very easy.  They lied. Multiple times.  Yes, she should run for whatevs.
> 
> RE: BetterUp.  I think it has been around for a few years, so ’start-up’ may be a misnomer. The idea of on-line coaching has been with us for awhile now. Most people dread sitting through those ‘sessions’, mainly because there is so very little substance. This company could be looking for its ‘second wind’  or another bottle of fairy dust (see Wired article, 2019).  Its narrative certainly will see an uptick in its search metrics with the news of its new Chief Impact Officer.  [oh no, the word salad has infiltrated my brain].


Will do.  The way this couple moves, we may not have much time.


----------



## lalame

Annawakes said:


> I agree.  I wonder what it is like to get paid big $$$ for an occasional zoom call, to say things like how important mental health is and other word salad.  Things anybody could say.  What is he even qualified to say?  Whereas the rest of us work much our entire lives developing real marketable skills, and actually, you know, *work*.



I would love to know what his compensation arrangement is.......... 

Also VERY curious whether they offered him the title or if he negotiated for it. I remember when I worked for a startup and it was a "make your own title" thing because the company was small enough... I wasn't shameless enough to pick a self-important and aggrandizing title that was misleading for my experience level. Cringe.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lalame said:


> I would love to know what his compensation arrangement is..........
> 
> Also VERY curious whether they offered him the title or if he negotiated for it. I remember when I worked for a startup and it was a "make your own title" thing because the company was small enough... I wasn't shameless enough to pick a self-important and aggrandizing title that was misleading for my experience level. Cringe.



I think he and MM _collaborated_ on choosing the job title.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This article lists the investors:








						Better up: The $1.73bn Silicon Valley start-up with Tinder-style app
					

Better Up was founded in 2013 by two USC graduates (pictured, the CEO) and its clients include big tech companies such as Facebook, Google, Airbnb and LinkedIn.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Investors



*From a former NBA player and an Olympic snowboarder to billion-dollar venture capitalist firms, who are the investors in BetterUp?*
NBA All-Star Pau Gasol
The 7 ft 1 in Spanish basketball player, 40, was in the NBA before moving back to his homeland to shoot hoops for FC Barcelona.
He is a big believer in investing in new technology for the sports industry to keep growing. He is worth £47million. He has written a guide for Better Up on how he keeps his mind in check while performing in top flight sports matches.
He listed: keep your head in the game, visualise your success, make mental health a priority, build a foundation of confidence from within and winning as a team.




NBA All-Star Pau Gasol is pictured earlier this month. 7 ft 1 in Spanish basketball player, 40, was in the NBA before moving back to his homeland to shoot hoops for FC Barcelona
He said of his time at the LA Lakers: 'Practising mindfulness helped me get comfortable with uncertainty and keep my head in the game.
'I've learned how to let go of the things that are outside of my control and focus on staying in flow.
'Throughout the uncertainty of this past year, mindfulness has helped me stay focused on what's important to me so I can get through the tough times.'
Olympic snowboarder Shaun White
American snowboarder Shaun White, 34, is one of the most decorated in his sport in the world, having three Olympic gold to his name.
He has another high-profile sports star to invest in Better Up, sacrificing some of his £43million fortune.
In a live virtual event with the firm he discussed reaching the top of his sport and how he continues to develop himself and 'inspire millions of people globally'.




American snowboarder Shaun White (pictured on Sunday), 34, is one of the most decorated in his sport in the world, having three Olympic gold to his name
Lightspeed Venture Partners
Lightspeed Venture Partners is a global venture capital firm focusing on multi-stage investments in the enterprise technology, consumer, and health sectors.
It has a broad portfolio of more than 400 firms it has backed, including Snapchat, Affirm and MuleSoft.
The company - which has about £10billion in assets - invests across the world, including advisers in Silicon Valley, Israel, India, China, Europe, and Southeast Asia.
Threshold Ventures
Capital market company Threshold Ventures is based in Silicon Valley and says on its website it backs 'disruptive companies across each threshold of transformative growth'.
The firm, founded in 1985 and has £16million in revenue, says it 'aspires to be founders' trusted partners and their first call when they come to a fork-in-the-road decision'.
It invests capital but says more importantly it invests itself in support of the companies it works with 'because we believe that great companies are built by people'.
Plus Capital
Plus Capital proudly boasts it is the 'only venture infrastructure trusted by elited artists, athletes and their teams to invest in'.
Based in Marina del Rey, California, the eight-year-old company says it is a 'full-service venture advisory firm for celebrities'.
The firm's LinkedIn page says: 'We work with top-tier celebrities and their teams across entertainment, sports, and more to facilitate investments and equity-based partnerships in transformative businesses.
'By placing our celebrities with top entrepreneurs and venture-backed companies, we can help accelerate growth through financial and/or sweat equity - turning celebrities' influence into financial returns.'
Salesforce Ventures
San Francisco-based Salesforce Ventures works with more than 400 companies in 24 countries across the world.
Earlier this month it reported a $2.17billion annual gain from its investments in other tech firms.
And then just days later it racked in more cash with another huge exit. Other gains were made last year when it sold its 2.8 million Zoom shares - which rocketed in price due to people's reliance on it during the Covid crisis.
Sapphire Ventures
Sapphire Ventures is another Silicon Valley-based venture capital company that invests in tech firms.
Sapphire Ventures has invested in more than 130 companies across 10 countries and says it has 'financed over 120 start-ups, including 23 IPOs and 42 acquisitions since 2011'.
The firm has total assets worth $5.7 billion.
Mubadala Capital
Mubadala Capital is based in Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates and was only founded in 2011.
It started life as the financial investment arm of Mubadala Investment Company - one of the world's leading sovereign wealth funds, with over $232 billion of assets.
It invests across the capital structure in both private and public securities, either directly or through third-party managed funds.
Its website says it 'aims to maintain a well-diversified portfolio that generates superior risk-adjusted returns on behalf of its shareholder and investors'.
Freestyle Capital
San Francisco-based Freestyle Capital is a venture capital firm focused on early stage investments in technology, financial technology, media, telecommunications, internet software and consumer and web-based technology companies.
The firm was founded in 2009 by Josh Felser and Dave Samuel who started out by making angel investments with their own money.
Some of those investments include CoTweet, Get Satisfaction and CrowdFlower. In 2011, Freestyle announced a formal fund of $27 million. In 2012, SalesForce bought portfolio company GoInstant for more than $70 million.
Crosslink Capital
Leading early-stage venture capital firm Crosslink Capital is an asset management business that continues into the public equity market for fast-growing companies.
It has over $2billion in assets under management that it invests in consumer and enterprise businesses.
The San Francisco-based company was started in 1989 by Seymour Franklin Kaufman and Michael Joseph Stark.
Tenaya Capital
Tenaya Capital is another venture capital firm - but has offices in Portola Valley, California as well as Wellesley, Massachusetts.
It was founded in 1995 as Lehman Brothers Venture Partners, before Tenaya split to become an independent firm in 2009 following Lehman's bankruptcy  
It has $1 billion of committed capital and currently has about $750 million under management.


----------



## Lodpah

I find it ironic that he got a job while probably hiring others to do the same thing with his deals.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I wish I could share your optimism. The media has been very selective about checking backgrounds, lies...


No worries!  The Daily Mail will take care of it!


----------



## gracekelly

SARAH VINE: How can we believe Meghan if she was wrong about wedding?
					

SARAH VINE: Truth, we are told, is central to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Indeed, it was supposedly the desire for truth that drove them to give that interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





SARAH VINE: If Meghan Markle was wrong about the wedding, how can we believe anything else in her Oprah interview?


Thanks Sarah!  This is what we have been saying all along.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the CEO of B-Up is Alexi R.  His brother is Andreas Robichaux, an actor.


----------



## 1LV

jennlt said:


> So they're going to be trotting him out like a show pony or a trained bear at the circus when they have special events?  For the delight of the unwashed masses?


Exactly.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> @poopsie, @purseinsanity, etc.  How is your packing going?  I'm ready to move to a far away  with limited internet access.
> 
> "... _it was claimed the duchess could follow prominent actor Arnold Schwar***egger into politics after holding a secret meeting with a top De**crat.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex risked a row in Britain by spending an hour chatting to *the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som.*
> 
> *But in California*, where the couple are living, *politicians are hoping the former actress will follow the “well-worn path” of Arnie into politics.*
> 
> Mike Trujillo, a prominent Dem***tic strategist, last month told The Times: *"She’s doing everything that’s appropriate *and allowed given her new position but she’s definitely putting her toe in the water.
> 
> “And once your toe is in the water your whole foot is in and next thing you know you are knee-deep and then you are fully in.”
> 
> *Mr Trujillo believes Meghan's foundation for mental health services and pledge to raise awareness of “racial and economic justice in the tech sector” could provide the jumping off point for a career in politics.*
> 
> This includes the couple inviting politician and activist Stacey Abrams - credited with helping Joe B**** win in Georgia - to speak on their Spotify podcast._"
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14428...ce-harry-link-woman-hillary-*******-campaign/




_*the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som. *_
Oh please.
He is facing the very real threat of being recalled. And he is going to take time to help someone else? She'd be better off finding a Willie Brown type to help advance her budding political career.
I'm starting downsizing already. I can retire in Nov and then i really can say adios to this @#%^&^$ state where I just paid $3.86 CASH for self serve uber cheapo gas. It's not even the 'summer blend' yet. Coupled with our city moving homeless American citizens out of shelter so they can make room for non-American citizens.....well, Meggie Pie is welcome to it all. IDK how many 16 bath mansions she would have access to in Sacramento or does she think Gov Moonbeam's gazillion dollar bullet train boondoggle will build a line for her down in Montecito?


----------



## csshopper

Every time I see "Chief Impact Officer" my mind involuntarily inserts another adjective and Harry is the "Chief _Negative_ Impact Officer".  It could be a marketing tool, send him out, he messes up, he goes home to roost with the chickens, and a real BetterUp employee with knowledge and experience steps in to get the client's needs taken care of.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I wish I could share your optimism. The media has been very selective about checking backgrounds, lies...



Especially in California


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Yeah I find this thread pretty damn depressing.


I find the jewelry threads pretty depressing - tens of thousands of $ for flimsy lookalike thrinkets when Syrians die from hunger and the cold. Amazingly I don't feel that depressed in the tens of thousand $ bag threads 




Signed,
Your Chief Calligrapher


----------



## rose60610

About 12 pages back Harry's job description was listed. It was basically "show up at events and spend time at meetings".  Wha? A goldfish could do that. I expect Harry will be exhausted at the end of each day and demand less hours with higher pay. Is he taking the job so BetterUp provides his security and M&H can cut down on THAT bill? If anyone were to threaten Meghan, all she'd have to do is open her mouth and start talking. Anybody would flee from that.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry to say that while I agree with you about them, it seems here in the states - if you listen to our media, esp TV - they are popular and most people think Harry did the right thing rescuing his Wife from the evil monarchy


I thought that was the most nauseating part of the interview: when they indulged in that pity fest cooing at each other for rescuing themselves. Harry didn't know he was trapped till MM told him, and then they heroically rescued each other. I was expecting them to both turn to OW and declare that she then rescued them from poverty when they landed in the States with only the clothes on their backs (money in the bank doesn't count since they weren't planning on spending it).


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> _*the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som. *_
> Oh please.
> He is facing the very real threat of being recalled. And he is going to take time to help someone else? She'd be better off finding a Willie Brown type to help advance her budding political career.
> I'm starting downsizing already. I can retire in Nov and then i really can say adios to this @#%^&^$ state where I just paid $3.86 CASH for self serve uber cheapo gas. It's not even the 'summer blend' yet. Coupled with our city moving homeless American citizens out of shelter so they can make room for non-American citizens.....well, Meggie Pie is welcome to it all. IDK how many 16 bath mansions she would have access to in Sacramento or does she think Gov Moonbeam's gazillion dollar bullet train boondoggle will build a line for her down in Montecito?



I hear you! The situation is chaotic... I'm just waiting for COVID to get better controlled.


----------



## Chanbal

JCMH's job description. I wonder if the BRF vouched for the trust requirement.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> The Daily Beast (described as a "high-end tabloid") is claiming that UK media fact-checking the interview are just trying to distract from the racism claims - that smacks of implying guilt for the racism allegations: _"British media are zeroing in on inaccuracies in the Oprah interview to undermine the much more serious allegations of racism."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘Didn’t Understand’ Wedding Rules Because ‘She Is American,’ Archbishop’s Office Told Vicar
> 
> 
> British media are zeroing in on inaccuracies in the Oprah interview to undermine the much more serious allegations of racism. The legal status of their “backyard” wedding is one.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would have thought the other way: if they are lying about small matters, then it casts doubt on their claims about weightier matters.


This just frosts my cookies .. so, anyone, anything .. that "questions" her comments are automatically going to be assumed to be racist(s)?????  Seriously?  So we are all "supposed to" take what she says as the absolute truth or we will be called racist .. wow!


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> This just frosts my cookies .. so, anyone, anything .. that "questions" her comments are automatically going to be assumed to be racist(s)?????  Seriously?  So we are all "supposed to" take what she says as the absolute truth or we will be called racist .. wow!


So far.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Every time I see "Chief Impact Officer" my mind involuntarily inserts another adjective and Harry is the "Chief _Negative_ Impact Officer".  It could be a marketing tool, send him out, he messes up, he goes home to roost with the chickens, and a real BetterUp employee with knowledge and experience steps in to get the client's needs taken care of.


I'm thinking Chief Markling Officer.  They should put a
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 on his Zoom talks


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if the wedding dress would have turned out better if Meghan had been forced to pay for it herself.  Perhaps there would not have been all the last minute changes to it, which resulted in it looking ill fitting and poorly designed.   I certainly do not believe that the fee requested for that dress reflects just that dress alone.  I think it reflects all the wasted staff hours spent on creating things that Meghan rejected and/or kept changing.  She wasn't destitute and should have paid for it herself.  Prince Charles bent over backwards to be nice and it certainly was not appreciated.  The end result did nothing for Claire Waight Keller's reputation and certainly put her more at risk for her job with Givenchy.  I think it made her a laughingstock within the design community.
> 
> I am now pretty much of the opinion that Meghan Markle went into this marriage with a game plan and that plan included using complaints of racism for whatever  transpired that she did not like or agree with and she continues to do this even now that they have left England and separated themselves.  It was a very convenient accusation to use and became more so after BLM.  She doesn't appear to be the sort of person who considers whether this was a fair thing to do.  As long as it suited her to gain what she wanted, she would use it.  Harry played right into her hands regarding this and it wasn't difficult as he is an angry man.  She is using his anger against his family and even his mother for dying in the  fashion that  she did.  Constantly bringing up Diana keeps the wound fresh.  Why Harry is so angry would keep a therapist busy for a long time.  I think he rather enjoys his anger and uses it as his raison d'etre, so I doubt that he will ever want to get rid of it.  It has never occurred to him that he should thank them for saving him from the multiple embarrassments in his life that he walked himself into.  The question is if they will sever him completely and never again help him, or will take him back when this latest embarrassment finishes him.  It's a soap opera folks!



I would guess his anger has to do with being #2.


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the news of the day: not everybody likes BetterUp's new mascot! 




"..._ the news did not sit right with some people, who took to Twitter to voice their *concerns the Duke may not be appropriately prepared for the role’s responsibilities.*

Some critics accused BetterUp of trying to raise its profile by hiring a former senior working royal.

One person said: *“Really appreciate that he found a job, but let’s see, no university degree, no corp working experience and yet he scored a C-suite job title?*

“Big question mark on BetterUp.

“*Unless they’re just looking for a mascot.*”

Another Twitter user added: “‘Silicon Valley mental health startups’ absolutely should not exist._"









						Harry lands Silicon Valley job as 'chief impact officer' after quitting Royals
					

PRINCE Harry has bagged a job as the “chief impact officer” at a Silicon Valley startup. The Duke of Sussex said he wanted to “create impact” after being named as part of th…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @poopsie, @purseinsanity, etc.  How is your packing going?  I'm ready to move to a far away  with limited internet access.
> 
> "... _it was claimed the duchess could follow prominent actor Arnold Schwar***egger into politics after holding a secret meeting with a top De**crat.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex risked a row in Britain by spending an hour chatting to the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som.
> 
> *But in California*, where the couple are living, *politicians are hoping the former actress will follow the “well-worn path” of Arnie into politics.*
> 
> Mike Trujillo, a prominent Dem***tic strategist, last month told The Times: *"She’s doing everything that’s appropriate *and allowed given her new position but she’s definitely putting her toe in the water.
> 
> “And once your toe is in the water your whole foot is in and next thing you know you are knee-deep and then you are fully in.”
> 
> *Mr Trujillo believes Meghan's foundation for mental health services and pledge to raise awareness of “racial and economic justice in the tech sector” could provide the jumping off point for a career in politics.*
> 
> This includes the couple inviting politician and activist Stacey Abrams - credited with helping Joe B**** win in Georgia - to speak on their Spotify podcast._"
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14428...ce-harry-link-woman-hillary-*******-campaign/


Wouldn't it be fun to all move together to an Island of Common Sense?  Anyone with decency and common sense is welcome!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Demanding bosses! I wonder what other functions the #13 aid (to leave MM&H) had to fulfill outside of her job spec.
> 
> "_MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry's chief of staff "wanted out" after "having to fulfil more work than her job spec", it was claimed today._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg & Harry chief of staff 'wanted out' after 'having to work outside job spec'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s chief of staff “wanted out” after “having to fulfil more work than her job spec”, it was claimed today. Catherine St-Laurent left…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


"More work than her job spec"?  It wouldn't surprise me if Meg demanded she clean all 16 toilets.  That's a lot of $hit


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Still on the news of the day: not everybody likes BetterUp's new mascot!
> 
> View attachment 5033084
> 
> 
> "..._ the news did not sit right with some people, who took to Twitter to voice their *concerns the Duke may not be appropriately prepared for the role’s responsibilities.*
> 
> Some critics accused BetterUp of trying to raise its profile by hiring a former senior working royal.
> 
> One person said: *“Really appreciate that he found a job, but let’s see, no university degree, no corp working experience and yet he scored a C-suite job title?*
> 
> “Big question mark on BetterUp.
> 
> “*Unless they’re just looking for a mascot.*”
> 
> Another Twitter user added: “‘Silicon Valley mental health startups’ absolutely should not exist._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry lands Silicon Valley job as 'chief impact officer' after quitting Royals
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has bagged a job as the “chief impact officer” at a Silicon Valley startup. The Duke of Sussex said he wanted to “create impact” after being named as part of th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



If they are looking for a puppet for manipulate to people. they picked the right guy...I mean puppet.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Hope tomorrow is better  You bring a lot of laughter relief to this thread as well, so thank you too!


Aww thank you!


----------



## lulu212121

Has been Harry is not getting many favorable reviews at the WSJ. I logged into my account and saw they really ran with this "story". Seems many people are on to them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

This is Harry in his Chief Impact Officer outfit.


----------



## melissatrv

papertiger said:


> Never mind QEII or the Palace UK HQ, I think BetterUp could do with a Diversity Officer!
> Stereotypes = roles
> 
> View attachment 5032690



LOL exactly about the Diversity Officer.   Chief Impact Officer????!!!!!   This is a BS title even as far as startups go - right up there with Chief Happiness Officer.  Wonder if Meghan took the the B&W photo


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> _*the influential California Governor, Gavin Ne*som. *_
> Oh please.
> *He is facing the very real threat of being recalled. And he is going to take time to help someone else? She'd be better off finding a Willie Brown type to help advance her budding political career.*
> I'm starting downsizing already. I can retire in Nov and then i really can say adios to this @#%^&^$ state where I just paid $3.86 CASH for self serve uber cheapo gas. It's not even the 'summer blend' yet. Coupled with our city moving homeless American citizens out of shelter so they can make room for non-American citizens.....well, Meggie Pie is welcome to it all. IDK how many 16 bath mansions she would have access to in Sacramento or does she think Gov Moonbeam's gazillion dollar bullet train boondoggle will build a line for her down in Montecito?


Yep.  She can sleep her way to the top.

...Oops, sorry.  She already has.


----------



## muddledmint

lulu212121 said:


> Has been Harry is not getting many favorable reviews at the WSJ. I logged into my account and saw they really ran with this "story". Seems many people are on to them.


It’s a conservative paper, generally most critical coverage of them in the us is from conservative leaning media


----------



## Chanbal

On bullying & narcissism


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> "More work than her job spec"?  It wouldn't surprise me if Meg demanded she clean all 16 toilets.  That's a lot of $hit


It crossed my mind.


----------



## V0N1B2

Well ladies...my faith in humanity was restored today when my 83 year old patient came into my office today ranting about Meghan. First she stayed off talking about the US prez doing something or another about infrastructure or something, when she does this nice segue and says “and Meghan wants to be president” and I’m like... what? 






Then she proceeds to tell me all about how she’s a narcissist and Lady C said this and Lady C said that, and how Meghan just uses people and throws them away and basically every single thing we’ve been talking about here for like ever. I was thinking this lovely elderly lady was a TPF member but no, I asked where she got all this info and she said, well Lady C of course! She has a YouTube channel you know!
OMG I almost died. All I could think was YESSSSS!


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> If they are looking for a puppet for manipulate to people. they picked the right guy...I mean puppet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5033093


Hiring this dim wit to run a mental crisis says it all . . . doesn’t he seem to have serious mental health issues? I imagine this company’s credibility just went down the drain.


----------



## LittleStar88

Naming Harry as Chief Impact Officer is a clever business strategy to continue to secure more funding and also leverage him to get business/contracts. Silicon Valley companies eat this stuff up. Especially right now with diversity being a big initiative thing in the Valley right now.

I can see them using him to speak at companies’ corporate meetings. Someone else will give him the key talking points and he will just be the talking head. And since video is so widely-embraced, he can do it all from the comfort of his home and not travel.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Hiring this dim wit to run a mental crisis says it all . . . doesn’t he seem to have serious mental health issues? I imagine this company’s credibility just went down the drain.


No doubt, they think they are brilliant by hiring him.  He is so eminently qualified for a job (any job) with his stellar academic record and work ethic.  I hope they film him at a business meeting and then put it on a comedy channel.  He will be nothing but a poster boy, which is a good thing for him because they won't ask him to think.

Stealing this comment from another poster on another site. 

My role as Chief Impact officer will be impactful, because I hope to impact other people greatly!


----------



## needlv

Meh... good on him for getting a job with no qualifications other than his title.  At least earning money this way is much better than selling family secrets to Oprah or threatening to use that as leverage...

Zara Philips - I think - has a job on a board of directors for a company (which I cannot recall the name).  So I don’t think the RF would object to Harry’s appointment either....


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, the sugars going wild on Twitter. "So what if they said private vows three days before the wedding, what's the big deal?" Let me think hard for a second...that she didn't frame it like this?
> 
> My favourite: "Meghan said it was a private exchange of vows, it's Oprah who edited it, she is the snake!" *Lord send help.*


----------



## poopsie

double post


----------



## Hermes Zen

LittleStar88 said:


> Naming Harry as Chief Impact Officer is a clever business strategy to continue to secure more funding and also leverage him to get business/contracts. Silicon Valley companies eat this stuff up. Especially right now with diversity being a big initiative thing in the Valley right now.
> 
> I can see them using him to speak at companies’ corporate meetings. Someone else will give him the key talking points and he will just be the talking head. And since video is so widely-embraced, he can do it all from the comfort of his home and not travel.



I agree with you! I'm a strategist. Sound like you may be also.  Although I'm NOT a fan of H getting this position because he doesn't have the proper qualifications, but I can see why BetterUp hired him. H is getting a lot of notice, yes some negative, but there's many who believe in his and M's narrative. Celebrities, politicians, Hollywood types, others etc etc. H will bring the spotlight to BetterUp and they take it from there. As you said he could be their "talking head". It's good timing for BetterUp. To bad they didn't bring in a more qualified person.


----------



## scarlet555

lulu212121 said:


> Has been Harry is not getting many favorable reviews at the WSJ. I logged into my account and saw they really ran with this "story". Seems many people are on to them.


Hallelujah...  
had she come back alone Cringe may have gotten more roles and a better pity party train...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hey Team,
A couple of things before we begin another productive day of positive light-shining.
— Full disclosure: ”Brand Consultant Siobhan Sharpe from PR agency ‘Perfect Curve’“ called. After we closely reviewed the B-Up offerings, I signed my husband up for 3 training sessions with the Hazzie. To be fair, during this lockdown, I have noticed some of his behaviors that need improvement. A lot of potentially significant potential to change the construct of the metrics.  I am certain a few minutes with the Hazzie ought to fix it. I like to think of it as the Grand Reset.

— B-Up, B best, B me. Please, could the next slogan writer kindly use proper grammar? Or just put the words in an order that makes logical sense? The world is watching. Thanks bunches for your unparalleled devotion. Together, we will make it better.

Cheers 


Yeah, no, cool








						The 20 most nonsensical quotes from the W1A team
					

As cult BBC meta-satire W1A returns to screens - here are some of the most hilarious (and baffling) examples of office wisdom.




					inews.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

RachelCohen808 said:


> Apologies if this was posted here before. This is an interview Meghan did with Craig Ferguson back in the day before meeting Harry. What strikes me is that if I saw both Oprah's interview and this one at the same time I would have never guessed this is the same person. All I can see is that M has a tendency to overact.



Yikes


rose60610 said:


> About 12 pages back Harry's job description was listed. It was basically "show up at events and spend time at meetings".  Wha? A goldfish could do that. I expect Harry will be exhausted at the end of each day and demand less hours with higher pay. Is he taking the job so BetterUp provides his security and M&H can cut down on THAT bill? If anyone were to threaten Meghan, all she'd have to do is open her mouth and start talking. Anybody would flee from that.


Hang on a minute. 
 Turning up at events, greeting and endorsing your company.... isn’t that a bit like the demeaning and intolerable servitude he had to force himself to do as a royal prince?

How funny he doesn’t find it painful to force a smile when he’s meeting tech CEOs rather than the stinking peasants.


----------



## lalame

LittleStar88 said:


> Naming Harry as Chief Impact Officer is a clever business strategy to continue to secure more funding and also leverage him to get business/contracts. Silicon Valley companies eat this stuff up. Especially right now with diversity being a big initiative thing in the Valley right now.
> 
> I can see them using him to speak at companies’ corporate meetings. Someone else will give him the key talking points and he will just be the talking head. And since video is so widely-embraced, he can do it all from the comfort of his home and not travel.



lmao how does harry fall under diversity? diversity by proxy? i think this was all a big coordinated campaign to set him and meghan up for big press with the interview so they could ride the wave with all these commercial arrangements. i'm just waiting for m to announce some new venture herself any day now.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Yikes
> 
> Hang on a minute.
> Turning up at events, greeting and endorsing your company.... isn’t that a bit like the demeaning and intolerable servitude he had to force himself to do as a royal prince?
> 
> How funny he doesn’t find it painful to force a smile when he’s meeting tech CEOs rather than the stinking peasants.



That's all he can do, apparently... The BRF or British public weren't deserving but the almighty dollar corporate America is?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> I find the jewelry threads pretty depressing - tens of thousands of $ for flimsy lookalike thrinkets when Syrians die from hunger and the cold. Amazingly I don't feel that depressed in the tens of thousand $ bag threads
> 
> View attachment 5033059
> 
> 
> Signed,
> Your Chief Calligrapher


I agree, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

But... I think it’s a very valid point that there are plenty of people who consider buying all designer goods to be snobby and selfish and wonder why we aren’t putting our money to more charitable use so arguably everyone on purse forum is guilty of upsetting others.
(And that’s not even mentioning how much heat can rise in an unpopular opinion thread.)

I think it’s a bit weird this thread keeps getting singled out for being uniquely mean-spirited too when a) there’s clearly a lot of jokes and b) basically half the threads are roasting the celebs anyway. I mean has anyone seen the reality tv threads?

Finally, there’s the old chestnut. Don’t like? Dont read. I don’t go on the  thread of a bag I don’t like and tell them they have no taste.


----------



## Sharont2305

This "back yard" she's talking about where they supposedly got married (or garden as we Brits call them, back yards are different here) I'd like to know where this is as they were living at Nottingham Cottage at the time, slap bang within the buildings of Kensington Palace, it doesn't seem to have a garden. 
It wasn't announced till November of that same year that they were moving into Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> This "back yard" she's talking about where they supposedly got married (or garden as we Brits call them, back yards are different here) I'd like to know where this is as they were living at Nottingham Cottage at the time, slap bang within the buildings of Kensington Palace, it doesn't seem to have a garden.
> It wasn't announced till November of that same year that they were moving into Frogmore Cottage.


Fictional marriage in fictional back yard - very Hollywood


----------



## Lodpah

Came across this and can't vouch for the veracity of it but it sure sounds like MM style . . . revenge.

Is this why the Archbishop was Markled?
Last week, it was suggested to me that Meghan Markle lied about the Archbishop of Canterbury marrying them in a private ceremony three days before the wedding, to get her own back on him!
How true this account is, I’m not sure? I would say it’s about 80% accurate because it came from a trusted journalist who works closely with the Royal Family.
After the wedding ceremony (the real one - not the one three days earlier) the Archbishop of Canterbury had his say. It is clear, he would not have uttered a word without Royal support.
Apparently, he told Meghan Markle that Bishop Curry’s full-throated diatribe which lasted 13 minutes was an embarrassment to the Royal Family. “A Gospel singing, happy-clappy ceremony was not appropriate for a royal Wedding in St George’s Chapel, and an embarrassment to the Royal Family.”





The look on the faces of the Royals was there for all to see. They were bemused, and struggled to keep their laughs hidden from the TV cameras.




















We can only guess how Meghan Markle reacted to the Archbishop’s reprimand. From what we now know about her, I would imagine Meghan Markle accused him of being racist.
She knew that if she lied to Oprah Winfrey about the Archbishop Justin Welby marrying them before the big day, it would make life difficult for him. But she could have had no idea how much it would have hurt him.
Markle has caused him to become a gibbering wreck! The Archbishop has been hiding away, refusing to speak to the Press, and refusing to put the record straight. The phones at his Lambeth Palace residence have been on lockdown. He has refused to answer emails. Posts on the Archbishop’s facebook page have been deleted. He has refused calls for him to appear on BBC news programmes to clear the air.
Yesterday saw the first eight years completed in his role as the Archbishop of Canterbury, and it was the first time he has had to employ staff at the Lambeth Palaces offices to shield him from the Press. Meghan Markle has dropped him from a great height, and he doesn’t know how to cope with it. It is something he has never had to deal with before.




People are now saying the Archbishop of Canterbury is refusing to tell the truth! He has been accused of hiding behind his altar, and calls for him to resign are resounding around the Church of England. The Church that Her Majesty the Queen is the head of. A double hit from Markle!
It would appear that nobody is safe when Ms Markle decides it’s pay-back time. The list is lengthening by the hour! Her own family, the Queen, Prince William, Catherine, Prince Charles, the Press, Piers Morgan, and now the Archbishop of Canterbury – all have felt the full force of the spiteful actress.
I have a feeling Harry has no idea what’s coming his way!


----------



## Jktgal

jelliedfeels said:


> I think it’s a bit weird this thread keeps getting singled out...



Exactly. I've never seen anyone coming to the bag/jewelry threads telling people off for being selfish, materialistic people. Yet people seem to think it's acceptable to come here and and name call.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing the Archbishop of Canterbury is made of the ‘ sterner stuff ‘ and will weather this nonsense.
His Twitter feed looks to be mentally sound. That said, H&M have a lot of Karma headed their way 







Lodpah said:


> Came across this and can't vouch for the veracity of it but it sure sounds like MM style . . . revenge.
> 
> Is this why the Archbishop was Markled?
> Last week, it was suggested to me that Meghan Markle lied about the Archbishop of Canterbury marrying them in a private ceremony three days before the wedding, to get her own back on him!
> How true this account is, I’m not sure? I would say it’s about 80% accurate because it came from a trusted journalist who works closely with the Royal Family.
> After the wedding ceremony (the real one - not the one three days earlier) the Archbishop of Canterbury had his say. It is clear, he would not have uttered a word without Royal support.
> Apparently, he told Meghan Markle that Bishop Curry’s full-throated diatribe which lasted 13 minutes was an embarrassment to the Royal Family. “A Gospel singing, happy-clappy ceremony was not appropriate for a royal Wedding in St George’s Chapel, and an embarrassment to the Royal Family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The look on the faces of the Royals was there for all to see. They were bemused, and struggled to keep their laughs hidden from the TV cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can only guess how Meghan Markle reacted to the Archbishop’s reprimand. From what we now know about her, I would imagine Meghan Markle accused him of being racist.
> She knew that if she lied to Oprah Winfrey about the Archbishop Justin Welby marrying them before the big day, it would make life difficult for him. But she could have had no idea how much it would have hurt him.
> Markle has caused him to become a gibbering wreck! The Archbishop has been hiding away, refusing to speak to the Press, and refusing to put the record straight. The phones at his Lambeth Palace residence have been on lockdown. He has refused to answer emails. Posts on the Archbishop’s facebook page have been deleted. He has refused calls for him to appear on BBC news programmes to clear the air.
> Yesterday saw the first eight years completed in his role as the Archbishop of Canterbury, and it was the first time he has had to employ staff at the Lambeth Palaces offices to shield him from the Press. Meghan Markle has dropped him from a great height, and he doesn’t know how to cope with it. It is something he has never had to deal with before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People are now saying the Archbishop of Canterbury is refusing to tell the truth! He has been accused of hiding behind his altar, and calls for him to resign are resounding around the Church of England. The Church that Her Majesty the Queen is the head of. A double hit from Markle!
> It would appear that nobody is safe when Ms Markle decides it’s pay-back time. The list is lengthening by the hour! Her own family, the Queen, Prince William, Catherine, Prince Charles, the Press, Piers Morgan, and now the Archbishop of Canterbury – all have felt the full force of the spiteful actress.
> I have a feeling Harry has no idea what’s coming his way!


----------



## Lodpah

I still can't get over a 50 million dollar wedding on the backs of hard working people. I can see those billionaires who earned their way in live paying for their kids' weddings but these two? It's hard to wrap my head around it. Their constant pointing to charity and this and that but to spend 50 million dollars?


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Hang on a minute.
> Turning up at events, greeting and endorsing your company.... isn’t that a bit like the demeaning and intolerable servitude he had to force himself to do as a royal prince?


Good point. Or he can send out the template daily schedule: "Harry will work from early in the morning until late in the evening. He will make many calls and have many meetings."


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> Came across this and can't vouch for the veracity of it but it sure sounds like MM style . . . revenge.
> 
> Is this why the Archbishop was Markled?
> Last week, it was suggested to me that Meghan Markle lied about the Archbishop of Canterbury marrying them in a private ceremony three days before the wedding, to get her own back on him!
> How true this account is, I’m not sure? I would say it’s about 80% accurate because it came from a trusted journalist who works closely with the Royal Family.
> After the wedding ceremony (the real one - not the one three days earlier) the Archbishop of Canterbury had his say. It is clear, he would not have uttered a word without Royal support.
> Apparently, he told Meghan Markle that Bishop Curry’s full-throated diatribe which lasted 13 minutes was an embarrassment to the Royal Family. “A Gospel singing, happy-clappy ceremony was not appropriate for a royal Wedding in St George’s Chapel, and an embarrassment to the Royal Family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The look on the faces of the Royals was there for all to see. They were bemused, and struggled to keep their laughs hidden from the TV cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can only guess how Meghan Markle reacted to the Archbishop’s reprimand. From what we now know about her, I would imagine Meghan Markle accused him of being racist.
> She knew that if she lied to Oprah Winfrey about the Archbishop Justin Welby marrying them before the big day, it would make life difficult for him. But she could have had no idea how much it would have hurt him.
> Markle has caused him to become a gibbering wreck! The Archbishop has been hiding away, refusing to speak to the Press, and refusing to put the record straight. The phones at his Lambeth Palace residence have been on lockdown. He has refused to answer emails. Posts on the Archbishop’s facebook page have been deleted. He has refused calls for him to appear on BBC news programmes to clear the air.
> Yesterday saw the first eight years completed in his role as the Archbishop of Canterbury, and it was the first time he has had to employ staff at the Lambeth Palaces offices to shield him from the Press. Meghan Markle has dropped him from a great height, and he doesn’t know how to cope with it. It is something he has never had to deal with before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People are now saying the Archbishop of Canterbury is refusing to tell the truth! He has been accused of hiding behind his altar, and calls for him to resign are resounding around the Church of England. The Church that Her Majesty the Queen is the head of. A double hit from Markle!
> It would appear that nobody is safe when Ms Markle decides it’s pay-back time. The list is lengthening by the hour! Her own family, the Queen, Prince William, Catherine, Prince Charles, the Press, Piers Morgan, and now the Archbishop of Canterbury – all have felt the full force of the spiteful actress.
> I have a feeling Harry has no idea what’s coming his way!


Delete if OT 
If Welby did say that about Curry then I think he was in the wrong. He shouldn’t be passing judgement on what is an appropriate style of Christian worship on the grounds of ‘taste’.

Moreover. if he thinks it’s an issue he surely he would have taken it up with Curry at the rehearsal or even after the ceremony as an issue between professionals not the ‘clients’ - H&M. I don’t get why he’d think he needs to ‘reprimand Markle’.

I hope it isn’t true of the royals breaking composure as they would be very ill-suited for their diplomatic service if they can’t keep a straight face during a ceremony.
I generally think that candid camera can be very deceptive. A lot of the nicest people I know look super grumpy in unexpected shots!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Zara and Mike — it’s a boy!  








						Zara Tindall gives birth to a baby boy!
					

Zara Tindall has given birth to a baby boy, her husband Mike Tindall has confirmed on his podcast. The couple are already parents to daughters Mia, seven, and Lena, two.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> On bullying & narcissism




I watched this in one go yesterday as it was not so long like the last ones, and I found her analysis very interesting. Also, if these people writing in didn't make their stories up...OMG.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Jktgal said:


> Exactly. I've never seen anyone coming to the bag/jewelry threads telling people off for being selfish, materialistic people. Yet people seem to think it's acceptable to come here and and name call.



The Childfree by Choice and Loving It thread has similar issues


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> This "back yard" she's talking about where they supposedly got married (or garden as we Brits call them, back yards are different here) I'd like to know where this is as they were living at Nottingham Cottage at the time, slap bang within the buildings of Kensington Palace, it doesn't seem to have a garden.
> It wasn't announced till November of that same year that they were moving into Frogmore Cottage.



But didn't they put out Harry picked the flowers for her bridal bouquet the morning of the wedding (!) in the NotCot garden? I seem to remember something like this. In a very lucky circumstance Diana's favourite flowers happen to grow there *coughs*


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing the Archbishop of Canterbury is made of the ‘ sterner stuff ‘ and will weather this nonsense.
> His Twitter feed looks to be mentally sound. That said, *H&M have a lot of Karma headed their way *




Live by the sword...........die by the sword


----------



## Lodpah

Keep these two words below in mind. It's from a from a website that people anonymously send in details that knew/know our topic. As to the truthfulness of it I don't know but they seem to know minute details. Don't really want to post a link as it's too wild and crazy. Goes all the way back to 2016/2017. One of the most outrageous things said that after that Inskip wedding something happened at "Arthur's" house that our topic took pics of her beloved in a compromising position. I wonder if that's why he looks so grumpy all the time ever since. He's probably trapped but not with the BRF (I think he's just as vicious as she is tho). 

Arthur's House
Heavy Lifting


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Zara and Mike — it’s a boy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zara Tindall gives birth to a baby boy!
> 
> 
> Zara Tindall has given birth to a baby boy, her husband Mike Tindall has confirmed on his podcast. The couple are already parents to daughters Mia, seven, and Lena, two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



OMG what a crazy story!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But didn't they put out Harry picked the flowers for her bridal bouquet the morning of the wedding (!) in the NotCot garden? I seem to remember something like this. In a very lucky circumstance Diana's favourite flowers happen to grow there *coughs*



Yep, he picked them:








						Meghan Markle's Stunning Bouquet Was a Tribute to Diana
					

See all the photos of the blooms, which Prince Harry picked himself.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




The all white collection of flowers features blooms that Prince Harry pickedincluding Forget-Me-Nots which were Diana, Princess of Wales’s favorite flower, sweet peas, lily of the valley, astilbe, jasmine, and astrantia. 

It also includes a sprig of myrtle, a royal tradition which dates back to the wedding of Queen Victoria's daughter, Princess Victoria. Myrtle symbolizes hope and love, making it a fitting addition to any bride's bouquet, royal or not.

*More from Town & Country*
Darren Walker and Ava DuVernay
"Many Royal Brides across the generations have chosen to carry a sprig of Myrtle, which represents love, in their bouquets," reads a recent tweet from the royal family's official account from earlier in the month. "This tradition dates back to the wedding of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert’s eldest daughter."

London-based florist Philippa Craddock worked with both Harry and Meghan on all the flowers for their wedding celebration, and she reportedly used "branches of beech, birch and hornbeam, along with white garden roses, peonies and foxgloves,” in her arrangements. 

Like Meghan, Duchess Kate, honored Princess Diana with her bouquet back in 2011, with beautiful lily of the valley.
Perhaps they were all inspired by Princess Grace of Monaco, who started the trend when she carried a small bunch of lily of the valley atop a prayer-book down the aisle in place of an oversized bouquet during her 1956 wedding to Monaco's Prince Rainier.

The lack of color in Meghan’s bouquet is to be expected. According to British florist Jane Packer, royal bouquets tend to be all-white.

“Brides often have to be gently guided towards the right sort of flowers that will accentuate rather than distract from their gown, yet are bold enough to be seen at a large-scale ceremony – and won’t begin to wilt as soon as they are cut,” she told the _Telegraph_ in advance of Will and Kate's wedding. “Protocol dictates that for an occasion such as this, the bouquet will be all-white.”

Following their weddings, it is also customary for royal brides to leave their bouquets on the grave of the unknown warrior in Westminster Abbey, a somber tradition that was started by the Queen Mum in 1923, who left her flowers on the memorial in honor of her brother Fergus, who was killed in World War I in 1915.

While Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will be married at St. George's Chapel, not Westminster Abbey, she will likely still send her bouquet to the church, following in the footsteps of Sophie Rhys-Jones, who wed Prince Edward at the Chapel back in 1999.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Zara and Mike — it’s a boy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zara Tindall gives birth to a baby boy!
> 
> 
> Zara Tindall has given birth to a baby boy, her husband Mike Tindall has confirmed on his podcast. The couple are already parents to daughters Mia, seven, and Lena, two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Lovely news, now top that experience Meghan, at least you have 16 bathrooms to choose from!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am starting to see why Lady CC's favourite description of her is "vulgar".





Chanbal said:


> That was the word that came to my mind when I saw some pictures & videos...


Also "uncouth" springs to mind recently!


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> Yikes
> 
> Hang on a minute.
> Turning up at events, greeting and endorsing your company.... isn’t that a bit like the demeaning and intolerable servitude he had to force himself to do as a royal prince?
> 
> How funny he doesn’t find it painful to force a smile when he’s meeting tech CEOs rather than the stinking peasants.



Hahaha! He will probably be asked to hand out some awards at some point, too.


----------



## 0yiAbi99

Lodpah said:


> Came across this and can't vouch for the veracity of it but it sure sounds like MM style . . . revenge.
> 
> Is this why the Archbishop was Markled?
> Last week, it was suggested to me that Meghan Markle lied about the Archbishop of Canterbury marrying them in a private ceremony three days before the wedding, to get her own back on him!
> How true this account is, I’m not sure? I would say it’s about 80% accurate because it came from a trusted journalist who works closely with the Royal Family.
> After the wedding ceremony (the real one - not the one three days earlier) the Archbishop of Canterbury had his say. It is clear, he would not have uttered a word without Royal support.
> Apparently, he told Meghan Markle that Bishop Curry’s full-throated diatribe which lasted 13 minutes was an embarrassment to the Royal Family. “A Gospel singing, happy-clappy ceremony was not appropriate for a royal Wedding in St George’s Chapel, and an embarrassment to the Royal Family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The look on the faces of the Royals was there for all to see. They were bemused, and struggled to keep their laughs hidden from the TV cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can only guess how Meghan Markle reacted to the Archbishop’s reprimand. From what we now know about her, I would imagine Meghan Markle accused him of being racist.
> She knew that if she lied to Oprah Winfrey about the Archbishop Justin Welby marrying them before the big day, it would make life difficult for him. But she could have had no idea how much it would have hurt him.
> Markle has caused him to become a gibbering wreck! The Archbishop has been hiding away, refusing to speak to the Press, and refusing to put the record straight. The phones at his Lambeth Palace residence have been on lockdown. He has refused to answer emails. Posts on the Archbishop’s facebook page have been deleted. He has refused calls for him to appear on BBC news programmes to clear the air.
> Yesterday saw the first eight years completed in his role as the Archbishop of Canterbury, and it was the first time he has had to employ staff at the Lambeth Palaces offices to shield him from the Press. Meghan Markle has dropped him from a great height, and he doesn’t know how to cope with it. It is something he has never had to deal with before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People are now saying the Archbishop of Canterbury is refusing to tell the truth! He has been accused of hiding behind his altar, and calls for him to resign are resounding around the Church of England. The Church that Her Majesty the Queen is the head of. A double hit from Markle!
> It would appear that nobody is safe when Ms Markle decides it’s pay-back time. The list is lengthening by the hour! Her own family, the Queen, Prince William, Catherine, Prince Charles, the Press, Piers Morgan, and now the Archbishop of Canterbury – all have felt the full force of the spiteful actress.
> I have a feeling Harry has no idea what’s coming his way!


This is disgusting and IT IS racist. You have a bunch of white aristocratics laughing at a spirited black preacher. this isn’t amusing in the least and the fact that you do tells a lot about you.


----------



## limom

0yiAbi99 said:


> This is disgusting and IT IS racist. You have a bunch of white aristocratics laughing at a spirited black preacher. this isn’t amusing in the least and the fact that you do tells a lot about you.


I am racist then because his over the top preaching made me laugh.
I mean, come on. It was straight out of TP movie.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> I am racist then because his over the top preaching made me laugh.
> I mean, come on. It was straight out of TP movie.


I am afraid everything is racist these days...


----------



## chicinthecity777

Looks like I can no longer upload images... anybody else have the same issue?


----------



## drifter

Would be interesting if those body language experts who reviewed the Oprah interview would review the Craig Ferguson one.  I'm really curious!  Chief Impact Officer - why does this sound like they think he's an idiot and are using him?  I truly doubt they are paying him 7 figures.


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777




----------



## jennlt

Hermes Zen said:


> I agree with you! I'm a strategist. Sound like you may be also.  Although I'm NOT a fan of H getting this position because he doesn't have the proper qualifications, but I can see why BetterUp hired him. H is getting a lot of notice, yes some negative, but there's many who believe in his and M's narrative. Celebrities, politicians, Hollywood types, others etc etc. H will bring the spotlight to BetterUp and they take it from there. As you said he could be their "talking head". It's good timing for BetterUp. To bad they didn't bring in a more qualified person.



I think Wall St. has a healthy skepticism of gimmicky hires because CNBC's Josh Brown had less than flattering things to say about Spotify after H & M's deal with them. I'm paraphrasing but he said he wouldn't recommend investing in Spotify because they had made some incredibly expensive, questionable deals with unproven, unqualified people. He implied that Spotify might be making decisions out of desperation to keep the stock price rising.
If BetterUp doesn't see a swift, significant revenue increase, I have a feeling Harry's contract will be quietly allowed to expire. Silicon Valley and it's venture capitalists are not a patient group.


----------



## marietouchet

H's recent work is kids book and BetterUp

Interesting he is doing things apart from his wife


----------



## Chanbal

With so many Americans losing jobs, JCMH "_*has announced another new job today - his second in 48 hours - as a celebrity commissioner for an American study into the 'avalanche of misinformation' in the digital world funded by a controversial billionaire.*_"

"_The commission is funded by billionaire Craig Newmark, who founded the Craigslist, a classified adverts website branded a 'cesspool of crime' after it emerged hundreds of crimes were facilitated as a result of contact via the site, including women exploited in a growing 'sex for rent' scandal during the coronavirus pandemic_. 

_According to CNN, joining Harry on the panel will be former Texas congressman Will Hurd, Sue Gordon, the former principal deputy director of national intelligence in the US, and Kathryn Murdoch, the co-founder and president of Quadrivium and daughter-in-law of billionaire media mogul Rupert. 

Harry's role as a 'philanthropic leader' is part-time, and will involve regular meetings. 

Harry's new role came after Associated Newspapers, owner of the Daily Mail and MailOnline, wrote to Viacom CBS calling for a 'seriously inaccurate and misleading' montage of British newspapers to be removed from the Oprah interview programme broadcast just over a fortnight ago_."









						Prince Harry joins Rupert Murdoch's daughter-in-law at Aspen Institute
					

The Duke of Sussex is joining the Aspen Institute's new Commission on Information Disorder along with Kathryn Murdoch, the wife of Rupert Murdoch's son James.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _* - as a celebrity commissioner *_



And this is the best he can get? With all of his well-connected friends?  Part-time gigs, a little here, a little there, nothing substantive?
Wonder if an announcement concerning his title and succession is forthcoming. Hmmm.

ETA: Watch closely. He is following Wallis & Ed’s path.


----------



## sdkitty

lulu212121 said:


> Has been Harry is not getting many favorable reviews at the WSJ. I logged into my account and saw they really ran with this "story". Seems many people are on to them.


are you able to copy and paste it?


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> lmao how does harry fall under diversity? diversity by proxy? i think this was all a big coordinated campaign to set him and meghan up for big press with the interview so they could ride the wave with all these commercial arrangements. i'm just waiting for m to announce some new venture herself any day now.


she's pregnant right now but she is not gonna  stay in the background


----------



## Chanbal

Piers lost his job because he didn't apologize to MM... 










						Piers Morgan shares exactly 'what went down' with GMB exit
					

PIERS MORGAN has opened up once again about his exit from Good Morning Britain to clarify what really happened.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Harry brings “diversity” to Better Up because 1.He is the ONLY Team member who has no References to education and qualifying degrees to list under his name, 2. He is attached by birth to a Queen and numerous nobility. 3. He’s the only Ginger, a minority, and, finally, 4. He has his very own in house 24/7 word salad spinner available to him to monitor his career with the company to let him know if he’s being “trapped” and needs to try to destroy them before “Bexting” and moving on.


----------



## Chanbal

I believe many here agree with KATE NICHOLSON on:

*Meghan and Harry ‘don’t fit in’ with Ob**as and Clooneys: ‘Eyebrows raised at oversharing’*
MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey suggests they will not "fit in" with Hollywood's elite circle of celebrity couples such as the Ob**as, Clooneys and Gates, a commentator claimed.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-*****-michelle-gates-beyonce-oversharing-spt


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> The Childfree by Choice and Loving It thread has similar issues


but we have the "honor" of being discussed on threads in other subforums


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> With so many Americans losing jobs, JCMH "_*has announced another new job today - his second in 48 hours - as a celebrity commissioner for an American study into the 'avalanche of misinformation' in the digital world funded by a controversial billionaire.*_"
> 
> "_The commission is funded by billionaire Craig Newmark, who founded the Craigslist, a classified adverts website branded a 'cesspool of crime' after it emerged hundreds of crimes were facilitated as a result of contact via the site, including women exploited in a growing 'sex for rent' scandal during the coronavirus pandemic_.
> 
> _According to CNN, joining Harry on the panel will be former Texas congressman Will Hurd, Sue Gordon, the former principal deputy director of national intelligence in the US, and Kathryn Murdoch, the co-founder and president of Quadrivium and daughter-in-law of billionaire media mogul Rupert.
> 
> Harry's role as a 'philanthropic leader' is part-time, and will involve regular meetings.
> 
> Harry's new role came after Associated Newspapers, owner of the Daily Mail and MailOnline, wrote to Viacom CBS calling for a 'seriously inaccurate and misleading' montage of British newspapers to be removed from the Oprah interview programme broadcast just over a fortnight ago_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry joins Rupert Murdoch's daughter-in-law at Aspen Institute
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is joining the Aspen Institute's new Commission on Information Disorder along with Kathryn Murdoch, the wife of Rupert Murdoch's son James.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Harry's role is to use his name.....he doesn't need to do anything else...maybe show up at a meeting


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Harry's role is to use his name.....he doesn't need to do anything else...maybe show up at a meeting


Very woke indeed!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am starting to see why Lady CC's favourite description of her is "vulgar".



Vulgar is a word that really needs to come back into fashion. I never hear anyone under 80 using it but it is perfect for the H&M situation.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> I am afraid everything is racist these days...


Madam, this thread is full of


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Vulgar is a word that really needs to come back into fashion. I never hear anyone under 80 using it but it is perfect for the H&M situation.


It describes those two to a tee.
tacky works too.


----------



## Genie27

How many jobs will poor H have to take on to keep a mansion roof over his family’s head, fresh organic vegan food on the table and rescue chickens in the coop? 

A measly million here, 500k there, discounted real estate deals, no mental health insurance or security, having to show up to business events and meetings - it is just so damn hard to make an independent living.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Vulgar is a word that really needs to come back into fashion. I never hear anyone under 80 using it but it is perfect for the H&M situation.


Ha, ha, I see that I sound over 80 to you! Well, I'm not and I use the word.


----------



## bag-mania

Genie27 said:


> How many jobs will poor H have to take on to keep a roof over his family’s head, fresh organic vegan food on the table and rescue chickens in the coop?
> 
> A measly million here, 500k there, discounted real estate deals, no mental health insurance or security, having to show up to business events and meetings - it is just so damn hard to make an independent living.



As long as he pays his taxes I'm fine with him dabbling in "work" to see what it is like. What will piss me off is if he gets paid in donations to his money-laundering foundation so that they can skirt around their tax responsibility.


----------



## LittleStar88

Genie27 said:


> How many jobs will poor H have to take on to keep a mansion roof over his family’s head, fresh organic vegan food on the table and rescue chickens in the coop?
> 
> A measly million here, 500k there, discounted real estate deals, no mental health insurance or security, having to show up to business events and meetings - it is just so damn hard to make an independent living.



They can always eat the chickens when times are lean.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Well ladies...my faith in humanity was restored today when my 83 year old patient came into my office today ranting about Meghan. First she stayed off talking about the US prez doing something or another about infrastructure or something, when she does this nice segue and says “and Meghan wants to be president” and I’m like... what?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then she proceeds to tell me all about how she’s a narcissist and Lady C said this and Lady C said that, and how Meghan just uses people and throws them away and basically every single thing we’ve been talking about here for like ever. I was thinking this lovely elderly lady was a TPF member but no, I asked where she got all this info and she said, well Lady C of course! She has a YouTube channel you know!
> OMG I almost died. All I could think was YESSSSS!


LOL love it!  But she's 83...the older generation has common sense!  It's the younger ones that scare me


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Ha, ha, I see that I sound over 80 to you! Well, I'm not and I use the word.



No offense intended, Chanbal! I think the last time I used "vulgar" in a sentence was when I was correcting my dog because he was shoving his nose into another dog's crotch.


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> Ha, ha, I see that I sound over 80 to you! Well, I'm not and I use the word.


Same here. I swear.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As long as they give up titles and succession, they can be as vulgar and tacky as they like. The danger with the gruesome two is that they will pull rank if something awful should happen. They need to relinquish all ties, cut the cord, live happily ever after [cough cough].

Right now, he is only getting hired for his Royal connections. He offers little else. The fact that he has not relinquished the succession tells me he would play that card in an instant. I could be wrong, I have not read or seen anything that says otherwise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

His brand is Royal.
Remove that and no one will care how vulgar he is.  IMO

Again, the irony. He is the one spreading the misinformation/lies. Now he is going to lecture us???!!!  Ewww.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> His brand is Royal.
> Remove that and no one will care how vulgar he is.  IMO



I look at it another way. If they remove the titles it leaves the BRF open to yet another year of the "Harry and Meghan wallowing in their self-pity and victimhood" show. Harry is getting these job offers from sympathetic people who believe they have been wronged and there's no reason to hand them more fuel.


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Came across this and can't vouch for the veracity of it but it sure sounds like MM style . . . revenge.
> 
> Is this why the Archbishop was Markled?
> Last week, it was suggested to me that Meghan Markle lied about the Archbishop of Canterbury marrying them in a private ceremony three days before the wedding, to get her own back on him!
> How true this account is, I’m not sure? I would say it’s about 80% accurate because it came from a trusted journalist who works closely with the Royal Family.
> After the wedding ceremony (the real one - not the one three days earlier) the Archbishop of Canterbury had his say. It is clear, he would not have uttered a word without Royal support.
> Apparently, he told Meghan Markle that Bishop Curry’s full-throated diatribe which lasted 13 minutes was an embarrassment to the Royal Family. “A Gospel singing, happy-clappy ceremony was not appropriate for a royal Wedding in St George’s Chapel, and an embarrassment to the Royal Family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The look on the faces of the Royals was there for all to see. They were bemused, and struggled to keep their laughs hidden from the TV cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can only guess how Meghan Markle reacted to the Archbishop’s reprimand. From what we now know about her, I would imagine Meghan Markle accused him of being racist.
> She knew that if she lied to Oprah Winfrey about the Archbishop Justin Welby marrying them before the big day, it would make life difficult for him. But she could have had no idea how much it would have hurt him.
> Markle has caused him to become a gibbering wreck! The Archbishop has been hiding away, refusing to speak to the Press, and refusing to put the record straight. The phones at his Lambeth Palace residence have been on lockdown. He has refused to answer emails. Posts on the Archbishop’s facebook page have been deleted. He has refused calls for him to appear on BBC news programmes to clear the air.
> Yesterday saw the first eight years completed in his role as the Archbishop of Canterbury, and it was the first time he has had to employ staff at the Lambeth Palaces offices to shield him from the Press. Meghan Markle has dropped him from a great height, and he doesn’t know how to cope with it. It is something he has never had to deal with before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People are now saying the Archbishop of Canterbury is refusing to tell the truth! He has been accused of hiding behind his altar, and calls for him to resign are resounding around the Church of England. The Church that Her Majesty the Queen is the head of. A double hit from Markle!
> It would appear that nobody is safe when Ms Markle decides it’s pay-back time. The list is lengthening by the hour! Her own family, the Queen, Prince William, Catherine, Prince Charles, the Press, Piers Morgan, and now the Archbishop of Canterbury – all have felt the full force of the spiteful actress.
> I have a feeling Harry has no idea what’s coming his way!


makes sense, there was an interview with the choir , not bishop, and the choir said BP kept telling them to shorten their songs, and of course, the subtext was the racism of BP


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I look at it another way. If they remove the titles it leaves the BRF open to yet another year of the "Harry and Meghan wallowing in their self-pity and victimhood" show. Harry is getting these job offers from sympathetic people who believe they have been wronged and there's no reason to hand them more fuel.



Are they sympathetic or are they monetizing him?  When he doesn’t deliver the connections, the companies won’t be interested.  IMO his experience will be similar to Sarah’s and the Duke of Windsor‘s. Lots of initial interest, then it falls off. He must deliver at the highest level. Anything less, it’s over. One surly answer to the inane questions [as he is known to do], one frowny face, one hypocritical move - no one will care. To an extent, America‘s corporate world has much tougher standards than the BRF.  Without his Palace minders, will he measure up?


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they sympathetic or are they monetizing him?  When he doesn’t deliver the connections, the companies won’t be interested.  IMO his experience will be similar to Sarah’s and the Duke of Windsor‘s. Lots of initial interest, then it falls off. He must deliver at the highest level. Anything less, it’s over. One surly answer to the inane questions [as he is known to do], one frowny face, one hypocritical move - no one will care. To an extent, America‘s corporate world has much tougher standards than the BRF.  Without his Palace minders, will he measure up?


Well, he can then be the spokesperson for hairclub  for men... he more than qualifies.
Then Just for men....


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they sympathetic or are they monetizing him?  When he doesn’t deliver the connections, the companies won’t be interested.  IMO his experience will be similar to Sarah’s and the Duke of Windsor‘s. Lots of initial interest, then it falls off. He must deliver at the highest level. Anything less, it’s over. One surly answer to the inane questions [as he is known to do], one frowny face, one hypocritical move - no one will care. To an extent, America‘s corporate world has much tougher standards than the BRF.  Without his Palace minders, will he measure up?



I think it is both. They can be sympathetic while still capitalizing on Harry being popular at the moment. It is such a touchy-feely premise for a company it fits right in with Harry and Meghan's way of thinking. Let's hold the company you work for responsible for making sure you have personal fulfillment! What is your workplace doing to keep you happy?

In the current- and post-Covid environment, many companies had to make major cuts and the employees who are left are lucky to have jobs. The idea of companies spending tens of thousands of dollars for encouraging lectures seems wasteful and out-of-touch under the circumstances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lofty goals, well-known billionaire/millionaire club, lots of ideas, very political  — he is one of 15, led by 3 others. 









						Aspen Institute Commission on Information Disorder Announces Full Member List and Planning Roadmap - The Aspen Institute
					

Katie Couric, Chris Krebs, and Rashad Robinson to co-chair six-month study on combating America’s urgent mis- and disinformation challenge alongside high-level government, civil society, and technology experts.




					www.aspeninstitute.org
				





Spoiler: Information Disorder



Washington, DC, March 24, 2021 — Amid rising challenges to truth, journalism, and democracy, the Aspen Institute will host an intensive, six-month commission bringing together experts and vital perspectives from government, media, civil society, and the private sector to deliver recommendations for how the country can respond to this modern-day crisis of faith in key institutions. Developed and hosted by the Aspen Digital program, the “Commission on Information Disorder” will be co-chaired by three leading public figures, each with unique perspectives on society’s urgent mis- and disinformation challenge: renowned journalist Katie Couric; cybersecurity expert Chris Krebs, the founding director of DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA); and racial equity leader Rashad Robinson, the president of Color Of Change.

*The three co-chairs will be joined by 15 commissioners from across the political spectrum, including national security leader Sue Gordon, the former principal deputy director of national intelligence; elected officials Aaron Ford, Nevada’s attorney general, and former Texas congressman Will Hurd; threat researchers and academics Yasmin Green of Jigsaw,Herb Lin of Stanford University, and Kate Starbird of the University of Washington; technology thinkers Safiya Umoja Noble of the UCLA Center for Critical Internet Inquiry, Deb Roy of the MIT Center for Constructive Communication and Cortico, and Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory; civil society and media leaders Jameel Jaffer of Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, Garry Kasparov of Renew Democracy Initiative, and Amanda Zamora of The 19th; as well as philanthropic leaders Marla Blow, incoming president of the Skoll Foundation, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, co-founder of Archewell, and Kathryn Murdoch, co-founder and president of Quadrivium.*

Short biographies of the commission members are included below.

“In today’s media landscape, consumers face a constant barrage of content that reinforces their established viewpoints. Powered by algorithms and shared ideologies, people often get affirmation instead of information, where facts are manipulated if not completely ignored,” Couric says. “This ‘truth decay’ is a tremendous threat, not only to a well informed electorate, but to democracy itself. With commentary increasingly replacing reporting, polarization has deepened and trust in media has declined. It’s critically important that we figure out how our industry can be part of the solution, and I hope to bring that perspective as co-chair of the Aspen Commission on Information Disorder.”

Through its work, the Commission will wrestle with the impact and problem of mis- and disinformation across all aspects of modern society, from the 2020 election and vaccine safety, to the ongoing risk to communities of color, to threats from state and non-state actors. The effort grew out of a need identified by the Aspen Cybersecurity Group, the institute’s public-private forum on technology threats. Representing the Cyber Group on the Commission will be Gordon, Green, Hurd, Krebs, Lin, and Stamos. The Commission is fully funded by Craig Newmark Philanthropies, the giving organization of the founder of craigslist, who is also a member of the Cyber Group.

Starting in April, the Commission will meet regularly over the next six months. It will also host a series of briefings from a range of experts to understand the scope of the problem and identify the gaps that exist in the ability of government, the tech platforms, and civil society to address what First Draft Co-Founder Claire Wardle has termed “information disorder.” These briefings will cover the history, rise, and current threat of disinformation; the intersection of disinformation and marginalized communities; the challenge of civic education and literacy; the societal decline of trust in institutions; the First Amendment and the effects of Section 230; and the growing challenge of mis- and disinformation campaigns against private industry and companies; among other core topics. The expert briefings will be recorded and made available to the public through the Commission website, along with the reading materials provided to commissioners.

In addition, the Commission will establish a Technology Advisory Committee to provide expert advice and consultation to members over the course of their deliberations.

“The information crisis is a racial justice issue and addressing it requires not only an understanding of how it impacts marginalized communities, but a commitment to systemic change and rewriting the rules that have harmed our communities for far too long,” Robinson says. “Disinformation and the proliferation of online hate groups not only harms Black people and communities of color as we’ve seen from the 2020 election, COVID-19, and the fight for safety and justice in communities around the country — it impacts our democracy and threatens everyone. We need corporations, government, and regulatory agencies to protect civil rights on all the major tech platforms, and make the digital landscape a safer place for all communities.”

Approximately 60 days after its inaugural meeting, the Commission will publish an interim report that surveys and frames the information disorder problem, and prioritizes the most critical and urgent issues that must be addressed. It will then participate in a series of working groups and structured conversations to determine:


The most effective policy solutions and stakeholders to address those most damaging near-term disinformation threats
The lawful and ethical means by which the federal government can promote fact-based information to counter the most dangerous disinformation campaigns
How government, private industry, and civil society can work together in the short term to help protect underrepresented groups, and engage disaffected populations who have lost faith in evidence-based reality
The longer-term, more foundational challenges that will require deeper societal engagement to address
“This information crisis undermines confidence in our ********ic institutions and strikes right at the foundation of society. State and non-state actors alike are driving wedges into what are otherwise normal differences of opinion and creating destabilizing chasms in public trust. It’s going to require a multi-pronged whole-of-society approach to both disrupt the supply of toxic information, while understanding and addressing the factors that are driving demand for mis- and disinformation,” Krebs says. “Everyone has a role to play, from elected officials and civic leaders to academic researchers and corporate executives. Our co-chairs and commissioners bring a diversity of viewpoints, matched with an unwavering commitment to truth and finding tangible solutions to help stop the spread of disinformation in a meaningful and equitable way.”

At the conclusion of its work in the fall, the Commission will publish a set of actionable solutions to the pressing issues it previously identified, as well as a set of recommendations for the longer term.

Those interested in learning more about the Commission on Information Disorder are invited to visit its website at AspenInfoCommission.org.


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lofty goals, well-known billionaire/millionaire club, lots of ideas, very political  — he is one of 15, led by 3 others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aspen Institute Commission on Information Disorder Announces Full Member List and Planning Roadmap - The Aspen Institute
> 
> 
> Katie Couric, Chris Krebs, and Rashad Robinson to co-chair six-month study on combating America’s urgent mis- and disinformation challenge alongside high-level government, civil society, and technology experts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aspeninstitute.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Information Disorder
> 
> 
> 
> Washington, DC, March 24, 2021 — Amid rising challenges to truth, journalism, and democracy, the Aspen Institute will host an intensive, six-month commission bringing together experts and vital perspectives from government, media, civil society, and the private sector to deliver recommendations for how the country can respond to this modern-day crisis of faith in key institutions. Developed and hosted by the Aspen Digital program, the “Commission on Information Disorder” will be co-chaired by three leading public figures, each with unique perspectives on society’s urgent mis- and disinformation challenge: renowned journalist Katie Couric; cybersecurity expert Chris Krebs, the founding director of DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA); and racial equity leader Rashad Robinson, the president of Color Of Change.
> 
> *The three co-chairs will be joined by 15 commissioners from across the political spectrum, including national security leader Sue Gordon, the former principal deputy director of national intelligence; elected officials Aaron Ford, Nevada’s attorney general, and former Texas congressman Will Hurd; threat researchers and academics Yasmin Green of Jigsaw,Herb Lin of Stanford University, and Kate Starbird of the University of Washington; technology thinkers Safiya Umoja Noble of the UCLA Center for Critical Internet Inquiry, Deb Roy of the MIT Center for Constructive Communication and Cortico, and Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory; civil society and media leaders Jameel Jaffer of Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, Garry Kasparov of Renew Democracy Initiative, and Amanda Zamora of The 19th; as well as philanthropic leaders Marla Blow, incoming president of the Skoll Foundation, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, co-founder of Archewell, and Kathryn Murdoch, co-founder and president of Quadrivium.*
> 
> Short biographies of the commission members are included below.
> 
> “In today’s media landscape, consumers face a constant barrage of content that reinforces their established viewpoints. Powered by algorithms and shared ideologies, people often get affirmation instead of information, where facts are manipulated if not completely ignored,” Couric says. “This ‘truth decay’ is a tremendous threat, not only to a well informed electorate, but to democracy itself. With commentary increasingly replacing reporting, polarization has deepened and trust in media has declined. It’s critically important that we figure out how our industry can be part of the solution, and I hope to bring that perspective as co-chair of the Aspen Commission on Information Disorder.”
> 
> Through its work, the Commission will wrestle with the impact and problem of mis- and disinformation across all aspects of modern society, from the 2020 election and vaccine safety, to the ongoing risk to communities of color, to threats from state and non-state actors. The effort grew out of a need identified by the Aspen Cybersecurity Group, the institute’s public-private forum on technology threats. Representing the Cyber Group on the Commission will be Gordon, Green, Hurd, Krebs, Lin, and Stamos. The Commission is fully funded by Craig Newmark Philanthropies, the giving organization of the founder of craigslist, who is also a member of the Cyber Group.
> 
> Starting in April, the Commission will meet regularly over the next six months. It will also host a series of briefings from a range of experts to understand the scope of the problem and identify the gaps that exist in the ability of government, the tech platforms, and civil society to address what First Draft Co-Founder Claire Wardle has termed “information disorder.” These briefings will cover the history, rise, and current threat of disinformation; the intersection of disinformation and marginalized communities; the challenge of civic education and literacy; the societal decline of trust in institutions; the First Amendment and the effects of Section 230; and the growing challenge of mis- and disinformation campaigns against private industry and companies; among other core topics. The expert briefings will be recorded and made available to the public through the Commission website, along with the reading materials provided to commissioners.
> 
> In addition, the Commission will establish a Technology Advisory Committee to provide expert advice and consultation to members over the course of their deliberations.
> 
> “The information crisis is a racial justice issue and addressing it requires not only an understanding of how it impacts marginalized communities, but a commitment to systemic change and rewriting the rules that have harmed our communities for far too long,” Robinson says. “Disinformation and the proliferation of online hate groups not only harms Black people and communities of color as we’ve seen from the 2020 election, COVID-19, and the fight for safety and justice in communities around the country — it impacts our democracy and threatens everyone. We need corporations, government, and regulatory agencies to protect civil rights on all the major tech platforms, and make the digital landscape a safer place for all communities.”
> 
> Approximately 60 days after its inaugural meeting, the Commission will publish an interim report that surveys and frames the information disorder problem, and prioritizes the most critical and urgent issues that must be addressed. It will then participate in a series of working groups and structured conversations to determine:
> 
> 
> The most effective policy solutions and stakeholders to address those most damaging near-term disinformation threats
> The lawful and ethical means by which the federal government can promote fact-based information to counter the most dangerous disinformation campaigns
> How government, private industry, and civil society can work together in the short term to help protect underrepresented groups, and engage disaffected populations who have lost faith in evidence-based reality
> The longer-term, more foundational challenges that will require deeper societal engagement to address
> “This information crisis undermines confidence in our ********ic institutions and strikes right at the foundation of society. State and non-state actors alike are driving wedges into what are otherwise normal differences of opinion and creating destabilizing chasms in public trust. It’s going to require a multi-pronged whole-of-society approach to both disrupt the supply of toxic information, while understanding and addressing the factors that are driving demand for mis- and disinformation,” Krebs says. “Everyone has a role to play, from elected officials and civic leaders to academic researchers and corporate executives. Our co-chairs and commissioners bring a diversity of viewpoints, matched with an unwavering commitment to truth and finding tangible solutions to help stop the spread of disinformation in a meaningful and equitable way.”
> 
> At the conclusion of its work in the fall, the Commission will publish a set of actionable solutions to the pressing issues it previously identified, as well as a set of recommendations for the longer term.
> 
> Those interested in learning more about the Commission on Information Disorder are invited to visit its website at AspenInfoCommission.org.


How ironic that Harry is on this commission: 
"“In today’s media landscape, consumers face a constant barrage of content that reinforces their established viewpoints. Powered by algorithms and shared ideologies, people often get affirmation instead of information, where* facts are manipulated* if not completely ignored,” Couric says. "


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> In the current- and post-Covid environment, many companies had to make major cuts and the employees who are left are lucky to have jobs. The idea of companies spending tens of thousands of dollars for encouraging lectures seems wasteful and out-of-touch under the circumstances.



These types of benefits are getting really popular for whatever reason. But their target market is the kind of company that splashes on free meals, snacks, massages, gym equipment, etc to employees anyway.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> If they are looking for a puppet for manipulate to people. they picked the right guy...I mean puppet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5033093


Looks like the middle rod goes right through his bollocks area. Just goes to show that his gonads are really missing or that the missus has castrated him.

EDT correct spelling
Puppet on a String Lyrics


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5033562


And we know that he is JCMH! The hypocrisy of this couple knows no bounds.


----------



## lalame

funny you should post that.. I just had to look again at the leadership page of betterup and the hierarchy is totally whacked with Harry where he is. Chief impact officer, presumably a new role, above chief product officer or CFO? WTF?


----------



## Aimee3

Apparently Harry’s been “working” there for several months.  When he mentioned to Oprah he’s been cut off financially from his father, would’ve been a nice spot to mention he has found a job and plug BetterUp.  But of course he didn’t because that would take away from their pity party.  Besides what is chief impact anyway? 
All the people on the page are “chief” of something.


----------



## Chloe302225

Prince Charles wanted to release 'point by point' response to claims
					

Speaking to ET, Katie Nicholl noted that Prince Charles and Prince were 'keen to correct some' of the allegations made against the Royal Family by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently Harry’s been “working” there for several months.  When he mentioned to Oprah he’s been cut off financially from his father, would’ve been a nice spot to mention he has found a job and plug BetterUp.  But of course he didn’t because that would take away from their pity party.  Besides what is chief impact anyway?
> All the people on the page are “chief” of something.



The page actually is pretty long and lists about 30 people but the top 5ish people have "Chief ___" title... that part is normal. Chief Impact Officer, as far as I've seen in other companies, normally is the person in charge of the philanthropic funds of the company... deciding which non-profits are granted money, how it's reported, operationalized (eg how can employees donate through the company or track volunteer hours). Not all companies have this and sometimes it's tucked under HR but it's not that unusual in this area to have one. That being said this does NOT sound like what Harry's doing so that lends to the.. inflated title just so you can network for us theory.


----------



## Lodpah

Jktgal said:


> I find the jewelry threads pretty depressing - tens of thousands of $ for flimsy lookalike thrinkets when Syrians die from hunger and the cold. Amazingly I don't feel that depressed in the tens of thousand $ bag threads
> 
> View attachment 5033059
> 
> 
> Signed,
> Your Chief Calligrapher


Girl, you just made me feel guilty. No Chanel for me then. Alright (I get it).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> *Vulgar* is a word that really needs to come back into fashion. I never hear anyone under 80 using it but it is perfect for the H&M situation.


Hope I don't disappoint anyone, but I'm only 74 years young and have   described events, situations and people as vulgar for a long as I can remember. And, this couple is definitely vulgar.


----------



## bisousx

Chief Impact Officer = Everybody Gets A Trophy title?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> With so many Americans losing jobs, JCMH "_*has announced another new job today - his second in 48 hours - as a celebrity commissioner for an American study into the 'avalanche of misinformation' in the digital world funded by a controversial billionaire.*_"
> 
> "_The commission is funded by billionaire Craig Newmark, who founded the Craigslist, a classified adverts website branded a 'cesspool of crime' after it emerged hundreds of crimes were facilitated as a result of contact via the site, including women exploited in a growing 'sex for rent' scandal during the coronavirus pandemic_.
> 
> _According to CNN, joining Harry on the panel will be former Texas congressman Will Hurd, Sue Gordon, the former principal deputy director of national intelligence in the US, and Kathryn Murdoch, the co-founder and president of Quadrivium and daughter-in-law of billionaire media mogul Rupert.
> 
> Harry's role as a 'philanthropic leader' is part-time, and will involve regular meetings.
> 
> Harry's new role came after Associated Newspapers, owner of the Daily Mail and MailOnline, wrote to Viacom CBS calling for a 'seriously inaccurate and misleading' montage of British newspapers to be removed from the Oprah interview programme broadcast just over a fortnight ago_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry joins Rupert Murdoch's daughter-in-law at Aspen Institute
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is joining the Aspen Institute's new Commission on Information Disorder along with Kathryn Murdoch, the wife of Rupert Murdoch's son James.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I've missed so much by being at work LOL

O.M.G. That JCMH has been chosen to do _that _is hilarious!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5033562



Who is the third? Anne's children don't have a title, Edward's children are still minors.

ETA: my bad, Harry. Somehow it still doesn't register as real work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lofty goals, well-known billionaire/millionaire club, lots of ideas, very political  — he is one of 15, led by 3 others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aspen Institute Commission on Information Disorder Announces Full Member List and Planning Roadmap - The Aspen Institute
> 
> 
> Katie Couric, Chris Krebs, and Rashad Robinson to co-chair six-month study on combating America’s urgent mis- and disinformation challenge alongside high-level government, civil society, and technology experts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aspeninstitute.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Information Disorder
> 
> 
> 
> Washington, DC, March 24, 2021 — Amid rising challenges to truth, journalism, and democracy, the Aspen Institute will host an intensive, six-month commission bringing together experts and vital perspectives from government, media, civil society, and the private sector to deliver recommendations for how the country can respond to this modern-day crisis of faith in key institutions. Developed and hosted by the Aspen Digital program, the “Commission on Information Disorder” will be co-chaired by three leading public figures, each with unique perspectives on society’s urgent mis- and disinformation challenge: renowned journalist Katie Couric; cybersecurity expert Chris Krebs, the founding director of DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA); and racial equity leader Rashad Robinson, the president of Color Of Change.
> 
> *The three co-chairs will be joined by 15 commissioners from across the political spectrum, including national security leader Sue Gordon, the former principal deputy director of national intelligence; elected officials Aaron Ford, Nevada’s attorney general, and former Texas congressman Will Hurd; threat researchers and academics Yasmin Green of Jigsaw,Herb Lin of Stanford University, and Kate Starbird of the University of Washington; technology thinkers Safiya Umoja Noble of the UCLA Center for Critical Internet Inquiry, Deb Roy of the MIT Center for Constructive Communication and Cortico, and Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory; civil society and media leaders Jameel Jaffer of Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, Garry Kasparov of Renew Democracy Initiative, and Amanda Zamora of The 19th; as well as philanthropic leaders Marla Blow, incoming president of the Skoll Foundation, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, co-founder of Archewell, and Kathryn Murdoch, co-founder and president of Quadrivium.*
> 
> Short biographies of the commission members are included below.
> 
> “In today’s media landscape, consumers face a constant barrage of content that reinforces their established viewpoints. Powered by algorithms and shared ideologies, people often get affirmation instead of information, where facts are manipulated if not completely ignored,” Couric says. “This ‘truth decay’ is a tremendous threat, not only to a well informed electorate, but to democracy itself. With commentary increasingly replacing reporting, polarization has deepened and trust in media has declined. It’s critically important that we figure out how our industry can be part of the solution, and I hope to bring that perspective as co-chair of the Aspen Commission on Information Disorder.”
> 
> Through its work, the Commission will wrestle with the impact and problem of mis- and disinformation across all aspects of modern society, from the 2020 election and vaccine safety, to the ongoing risk to communities of color, to threats from state and non-state actors. The effort grew out of a need identified by the Aspen Cybersecurity Group, the institute’s public-private forum on technology threats. Representing the Cyber Group on the Commission will be Gordon, Green, Hurd, Krebs, Lin, and Stamos. The Commission is fully funded by Craig Newmark Philanthropies, the giving organization of the founder of craigslist, who is also a member of the Cyber Group.
> 
> Starting in April, the Commission will meet regularly over the next six months. It will also host a series of briefings from a range of experts to understand the scope of the problem and identify the gaps that exist in the ability of government, the tech platforms, and civil society to address what First Draft Co-Founder Claire Wardle has termed “information disorder.” These briefings will cover the history, rise, and current threat of disinformation; the intersection of disinformation and marginalized communities; the challenge of civic education and literacy; the societal decline of trust in institutions; the First Amendment and the effects of Section 230; and the growing challenge of mis- and disinformation campaigns against private industry and companies; among other core topics. The expert briefings will be recorded and made available to the public through the Commission website, along with the reading materials provided to commissioners.
> 
> In addition, the Commission will establish a Technology Advisory Committee to provide expert advice and consultation to members over the course of their deliberations.
> 
> “The information crisis is a racial justice issue and addressing it requires not only an understanding of how it impacts marginalized communities, but a commitment to systemic change and rewriting the rules that have harmed our communities for far too long,” Robinson says. “Disinformation and the proliferation of online hate groups not only harms Black people and communities of color as we’ve seen from the 2020 election, COVID-19, and the fight for safety and justice in communities around the country — it impacts our democracy and threatens everyone. We need corporations, government, and regulatory agencies to protect civil rights on all the major tech platforms, and make the digital landscape a safer place for all communities.”
> 
> Approximately 60 days after its inaugural meeting, the Commission will publish an interim report that surveys and frames the information disorder problem, and prioritizes the most critical and urgent issues that must be addressed. It will then participate in a series of working groups and structured conversations to determine:
> 
> 
> The most effective policy solutions and stakeholders to address those most damaging near-term disinformation threats
> The lawful and ethical means by which the federal government can promote fact-based information to counter the most dangerous disinformation campaigns
> How government, private industry, and civil society can work together in the short term to help protect underrepresented groups, and engage disaffected populations who have lost faith in evidence-based reality
> The longer-term, more foundational challenges that will require deeper societal engagement to address
> “This information crisis undermines confidence in our ********ic institutions and strikes right at the foundation of society. State and non-state actors alike are driving wedges into what are otherwise normal differences of opinion and creating destabilizing chasms in public trust. It’s going to require a multi-pronged whole-of-society approach to both disrupt the supply of toxic information, while understanding and addressing the factors that are driving demand for mis- and disinformation,” Krebs says. “Everyone has a role to play, from elected officials and civic leaders to academic researchers and corporate executives. Our co-chairs and commissioners bring a diversity of viewpoints, matched with an unwavering commitment to truth and finding tangible solutions to help stop the spread of disinformation in a meaningful and equitable way.”
> 
> At the conclusion of its work in the fall, the Commission will publish a set of actionable solutions to the pressing issues it previously identified, as well as a set of recommendations for the longer term.
> 
> Those interested in learning more about the Commission on Information Disorder are invited to visit its website at AspenInfoCommission.org.



This will have to be on reading to do list - I need to eat first


----------



## scarlet555

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5033562



Such an embarrassment for Americans who are trying to sell his name, this man is just a mascot as mentioned... what has this man accomplished besides getting married to a famewhore and social climber?  Seriously...  I means congrats to her, but not to him... so far I see nothing but a famewhore  complaining about how everyone has wronged her and not wanting to put her crown down.  I want to hear her talk about her husband's racial remarks and costumes, if she wants to talk about race.
These two have no humility, no shame...


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I've missed so much by being at work LOL
> 
> O.M.G. That JCMH has been chosen to do _that _is hilarious!


This gets the prize for the week as the funniest information ever!  Right, all those celebs who pay press agents to say ridiculous  things about them now want to correct the record because they look like idiots.   Most of them are idiots so not much to correct.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently Harry’s been “working” there for several months.  When he mentioned to Oprah he’s been cut off financially from his father, would’ve been a nice spot to mention he has found a job and plug BetterUp.  But of course he didn’t because that would take away from their pity party.  Besides what is chief impact anyway?
> All the people on the page are “chief” of something.


Is he counting his being advised by a coach as working?  Maybe any kind of thinking is considering work by him. Deciding which In’ n Out burger to choose is work. Hmmm....double double with onions or without?  Grilled onions or not grilled. Where my coach!  I need help!


----------



## gracekelly

scarlet555 said:


> Such an embarrassment for Americans who are trying to sell his name, this man is just a mascot as mentioned... what has this man accomplished besides getting married to a famewhore and social climber?  Seriously...  I means congrats to her, but not to him... so far I see nothing but a famewhore  complaining about how everyone has wronged her and not wanting to put her crown down.  I want to hear her talk about her husband's racial remarks and costumes, if she wants to talk about race.
> These two have no humility, no shame...


I don’t think this is an embarrassment for Americans. It‘s an embarrassment for Brits as one of their royal family is trading on his title. He uses the title to sell himself and she uses racism in such a way that if you question  anything she does or says, you must be racist. What a lovely couple for any country  be proud of. Not.


----------



## lalame

Embarrassment for humanity, honestly! Really says so much about our celebrity-obsessed culture and how nepotism is feeding into it.


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> H's recent work is kids book and BetterUp
> 
> Interesting he is doing things apart from his wife



It is interesting that he is being _allowed_ to do things apart from said wife


----------



## queennadine

bag-mania said:


> I look at it another way. If they remove the titles it leaves the BRF open to yet another year of the "Harry and Meghan wallowing in their self-pity and victimhood" show. Harry is getting these job offers from sympathetic people who believe they have been wronged and there's no reason to hand them more fuel.


Nope, the BRF just needs to rip the bandaid off. Yes, MM and JCMH will have another couple of weeks of publicity if their titles are stripped, but there will be another Victim du Jour soon enough and then people will forget about them. The sooner the better, IMO. These two are manipulative, ill-intentioned, and undeserving of their titles.


----------



## tiktok

The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...




					blindgossip.com
				




This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion.

They don’t always get what they want, though!

Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was _not_ their first choice!

We don’t know exactly how many companies they approached, but here is some insight about one of the approaches.



> This all went down about three or four months ago.
> It seems like they were initially pitching as a couple, but the company was not interested in her at all, only him, so she dropped out of the picture.


Ouch.


> It was also unclear what he wanted. At first they didn’t know if he was looking for a job, a green card, or an entree into the tech industry. They already have celebrity spokespeople, so that was another option.


This particular company is in the healthcare/tech industry and already has a couple of well-known celebrities as spokespeople.

Our celebrity was looking for something else.


> It turns out he was just looking for a huge payday. The pitch was that they could use his name and title to help the founders raise money. He is really interested in tech and he wanted some sort of C-level position or a seat on the board, but mostly he wanted equity. His team was throwing around all sorts of crazy numbers, like 10%.


...


----------



## bag-mania

*Major Paparazzi Agency Bankrupted by Meghan Markle Legal Battle*

*Splash News & Picture Agency, which has been fighting the duchess in a privacy case, has also been a notable name for suing celebrities for posting images of themselves on social media.*

Splash News & Picture Agency, a prominent paparazzi shop, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. A global pandemic that had stars staying indoors is partly to blame, but also notable is Splash's legal adventures over the years both as a plaintiff suing celebrities for posting copyrighted images of themselves as well as its status as a defendant in a privacy action brought by Meghan Markle. Having difficulty navigating the financial situation, Splash reports having defaulted on a loan now worth nearly $1 million and is seeking the protection of a Nevada bankruptcy court.

"Splash’s financial problems stem from three sources," states Splash president Emma Curzon in a declaration submitted as part of the bankruptcy. "As a consequence of the global pandemic the availability of celebrity images has declined and budgets within media companies have been cut to reflect wider macro-economic challenges. This situation has been exacerbated by two ongoing litigation cases and the costs of defending these cases."

One of the two cases is Splash's battle with Markle over photos taking during a "private family outing" in a park in Canada. While the BBC and other press outlets reported a settlement in December — a Splash spokesperson said at the time that going forward, "it will not take unauthorized photographs of the family of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" — the case may not be fully resolved.

"The case involves free speech related issues under United Kingdom law and, unfortunately, has proven to be too unbearably expensive for Splash to continue its defense," said Curzon. "Furthermore, if the plaintiffs were to prevail in that case it would likely result in a large attorney fee award against Splash. Notwithstanding the merits of the case the company has sought to settle this matter but has been unable to agree [on] a financial settlement within its resources."

As for the other case in which Splash finds itself a defendant, it's with the company's former account manager Esmeralda Servin, who says she was repeatedly subjected to sexist remarks at the company. Servin also says she was terminated after raising other concerns ranging from illegal bidding to the lack of transparency over its commission structure.  Curzon tells the bankruptcy court that its insurance coverage might not cover the liability and that its defense fees were also proving financially burdensome.

As Splash fought for free speech with Markle, it pursued many celebrities in court. In fact, the agency was one of the pioneers in actions against famous individuals for posting images of themselves. One NFL star even claimed extortion. Others who have been on the defending side of a copyright case versus Splash include Jennifer Lopez, Jessica Simpson, Liam Hemsworth and Nicki Minaj.

According to bankruptcy papers, copyright infringements brought in a little more than $118,000 in 2020 but just $21,000 last year. That was nowhere close to covering expenses, especially in light of the pandemic and the Markle and Servin suits. "Attorney bills have drained, and continue to drain, cash from the business," says Curzon.

Splash reports Deasil Limited as a secured creditor with a blanket lien on substantially all of its assets. With approximately $972,000 owed to Deasil, the paparazzi agency has now filed for Chapter 11.









						Major Paparazzi Agency Bankrupted by Meghan Markle Legal Battle
					

Splash News & Picture Agency, which has been fighting the duchess in a privacy case, has also been a notable name for suing celebrities for posting images of themselves on social media.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## LittleStar88

tiktok said:


> The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion.
> 
> They don’t always get what they want, though!
> 
> Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was _not_ their first choice!
> 
> We don’t know exactly how many companies they approached, but here is some insight about one of the approaches.
> 
> 
> Ouch.
> 
> This particular company is in the healthcare/tech industry and already has a couple of well-known celebrities as spokespeople.
> 
> Our celebrity was looking for something else.
> 
> ...



Yup. Basically that’s all he has to sell himself with. In tech the vast majority of execs who speak in public have everything written for them, but they’re also extremely particular about those talking points. It’s a collaboration with most of the grunt work done by a team based on exec’s vision, and approved and finalized by the exec.

I don’t see Harry being able to guide a team on vision and strategy. I said before he’s a talking head - it will take a group of people to orchestrate everything, then rehearse it with Harry until he gets it right. He just shows up and says what he’s told to say. In exchange he sells his name/title/likeness for the company’s benefit.

Elon Musk is crazy genius level and the exception to the above. He’s got no time for this kind of nonsense.


----------



## scarlet555

tiktok said:


> The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion.
> 
> They don’t always get what they want, though!
> 
> Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was _not_ their first choice!
> 
> We don’t know exactly how many companies they approached, but here is some insight about one of the approaches.
> 
> 
> Ouch.
> 
> This particular company is in the healthcare/tech industry and already has a couple of well-known celebrities as spokespeople.
> 
> Our celebrity was looking for something else.
> 
> ...



Clarity... they don't want to include her... shocking!  I know it's gossip website... people are thinking it... not a shocker to TPF obviously, what we've been saying all along...


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Vulgar is a word that really needs to come back into fashion. I never hear anyone under 80 using it but it is perfect for the H&M situation.


Two of my favorite words are "vulgar" and "posh"


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bisousx said:


> Chief Impact Officer = Everybody Gets A Trophy title?


Exactly!


----------



## lalame

tiktok said:


> The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion.
> 
> They don’t always get what they want, though!
> 
> Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was _not_ their first choice!
> 
> We don’t know exactly how many companies they approached, but here is some insight about one of the approaches.
> 
> 
> Ouch.
> 
> This particular company is in the healthcare/tech industry and already has a couple of well-known celebrities as spokespeople.
> 
> Our celebrity was looking for something else.
> 
> ...



OMG! Spill it sis.  This is the most unblind blind item I've ever read. It's clearly them. And none of it is surprising!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry is a member of the gig economy!


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> I think it is both. They can be sympathetic while still capitalizing on Harry being popular at the moment. It is such a touchy-feely premise for a company it fits right in with Harry and Meghan's way of thinking. Let's hold the company you work for responsible for making sure you have personal fulfillment! What is your workplace doing to keep you happy?
> 
> In the current- and post-Covid environment, many companies had to make major cuts and the employees who are left are lucky to have jobs. The idea of companies spending tens of thousands of dollars for encouraging lectures seems wasteful and out-of-touch under the circumstances.


I really really really want to think companies wouldn't subscribe to this bs but with today's 'normal' companies may be scrambling to hire so they fit into the wokeness.


----------



## lalame

It doesn't get more "influencer" than royalty I suppose.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> *Major Paparazzi Agency Bankrupted by Meghan Markle Legal Battle*
> 
> *Splash News & Picture Agency, which has been fighting the duchess in a privacy case, has also been a notable name for suing celebrities for posting images of themselves on social media.*
> 
> Splash News & Picture Agency, a prominent paparazzi shop, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. A global pandemic that had stars staying indoors is partly to blame, but also notable is Splash's legal adventures over the years both as a plaintiff suing celebrities for posting copyrighted images of themselves as well as its status as a defendant in a privacy action brought by Meghan Markle. Having difficulty navigating the financial situation, Splash reports having defaulted on a loan now worth nearly $1 million and is seeking the protection of a Nevada bankruptcy court.
> 
> "Splash’s financial problems stem from three sources," states Splash president Emma Curzon in a declaration submitted as part of the bankruptcy. "As a consequence of the global pandemic the availability of celebrity images has declined and budgets within media companies have been cut to reflect wider macro-economic challenges. This situation has been exacerbated by two ongoing litigation cases and the costs of defending these cases."
> 
> One of the two cases is Splash's battle with Markle over photos taking during a "private family outing" in a park in Canada. While the BBC and other press outlets reported a settlement in December — a Splash spokesperson said at the time that going forward, "it will not take unauthorized photographs of the family of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" — the case may not be fully resolved.
> 
> "The case involves free speech related issues under United Kingdom law and, unfortunately, has proven to be too unbearably expensive for Splash to continue its defense," said Curzon. "Furthermore, if the plaintiffs were to prevail in that case it would likely result in a large attorney fee award against Splash. Notwithstanding the merits of the case the company has sought to settle this matter but has been unable to agree [on] a financial settlement within its resources."
> 
> As for the other case in which Splash finds itself a defendant, it's with the company's former account manager Esmeralda Servin, who says she was repeatedly subjected to sexist remarks at the company. Servin also says she was terminated after raising other concerns ranging from illegal bidding to the lack of transparency over its commission structure.  Curzon tells the bankruptcy court that its insurance coverage might not cover the liability and that its defense fees were also proving financially burdensome.
> 
> As Splash fought for free speech with Markle, it pursued many celebrities in court. In fact, the agency was one of the pioneers in actions against famous individuals for posting images of themselves. One NFL star even claimed extortion. Others who have been on the defending side of a copyright case versus Splash include Jennifer Lopez, Jessica Simpson, Liam Hemsworth and Nicki Minaj.
> 
> According to bankruptcy papers, copyright infringements brought in a little more than $118,000 in 2020 but just $21,000 last year. That was nowhere close to covering expenses, especially in light of the pandemic and the Markle and Servin suits. "Attorney bills have drained, and continue to drain, cash from the business," says Curzon.
> 
> Splash reports Deasil Limited as a secured creditor with a blanket lien on substantially all of its assets. With approximately $972,000 owed to Deasil, the paparazzi agency has now filed for Chapter 11.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Major Paparazzi Agency Bankrupted by Meghan Markle Legal Battle
> 
> 
> Splash News & Picture Agency, which has been fighting the duchess in a privacy case, has also been a notable name for suing celebrities for posting images of themselves on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


If I were Meg, I would think I could do just about anything. Successfully.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our Leadership Team | BetterUp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.betterup.com



BARF .. but, anyone else see what I saw?!?! .. "*CIO*"   *-AND- *  look at those big "corporations"?!?! .. y'all want to bet that Hap-Hazza will have the opportunity to be a [*STUPID*] 'speaker' at one of these corporate events .. and what will he dredge up (_yet again_)??? .. yup, likely the death of his Mother Diana.  Seriously .. how many times are these two going to drag that poor woman's name up time and time again .. simply to make $$$ out of her?!?! .. *THAT IS DISGUSTING* and Harry especially, should be ASHAMED of himself (_I would totally expect it from_ *Megalo-maniac-Meghan*)!


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think this is an embarrassment for Americans. It‘s an embarrassment for Brits as one of their royal family is trading on his title. He uses the title to sell himself and she uses racism in such a way that if you question  anything she does or says, you must be racist. What a lovely couple for any country  be proud of. Not.



No embarrassment to us anymore he has gone never to return not our problem anymore


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> If I were Meg, I would think I could do just about anything. Successfully.



So it would seem. She has won more battles than she has lost.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> BARF .. but, anyone else see what I saw?!?! .. "*CIO*"   *-AND- *  look at those big "corporations"?!?! .. y'all want to bet that Hap-Hazza will have the opportunity to be a [*STUPID*] 'speaker' at one of these corporate events .. and what will he dredge up (_yet again_)??? .. yup, likely the death of his Mother Diana.  Seriously .. how many times are these two going to drag that poor woman's name up time and time again .. simply to make $$$ out of her?!?! .. *THAT IS DISGUSTING* and Harry especially, should be ASHAMED of himself (_I would totally expect it from_ *Megalo-maniac-Meghan*)!





When can we see his TED talk on product strategy?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Two of my favorite words are "vulgar" and "posh"


And so vulgar to try and act posh when you are obviously not. N'est ce pas?


----------



## gracekelly

@papertiger I am responding to your video post even though it has disappeared. It was nice to see the "man in the street POV "which was full of common sense and thought.  I like to think that many people are thinking and saying the same things.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> When can we see his TED talk on product strategy?



Ha!  Mickey Mouse could explain the theory of relativity better than Harry giving a TED talk on product strategy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Is he counting his being advised by a coach as working?  Maybe any kind of thinking is considering work by him. Deciding which In’ n Out burger to choose is work. Hmmm....double double with onions or without?  Grilled onions or not grilled. Where my coach!  I need help!


The problem is he doesn't think. During his whole life, he's never had to think or make any decisions. The palace courtiers and his army handlers/buddies did all the thinking for him. He never had to choose what clothes including what knickers to wear for any and all occasions except for the Nazi uniform that he blamed on William. BUT, he knew how to fall out of bars drunk, use "special and fond nicknames" for minorities, host naked parties and cast aspersions at his family. The only change in his life now is a new handler, who's a spiteful and vengeful famewhore.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

chicinthecity777 said:


> Looks like I can no longer upload images... anybody else have the same issue?


I can't open many of your pics but I thought it's because of my browser.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh, gag. There is going to be yet another Lifetime movie made about them. I fear for the state of the world we live in. Surely this must be a sign of an impending apocalypse.

*Lifetime Is Making a Movie About Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Royal Exit *
*It's called Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace. I'm screaming.*
_Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will do a (fictional) deep dive into the couple’s break from the royal family. Per Lifetime’s press release, the movie will “reveal what really happened inside the palace that drove Harry and Meghan to leave everything behind in order to make a future for themselves and their son, Archie. The movie will detail Meghan’s growing isolation and sadness, their disappointment that ‘The Firm’ was not defending them against the press’s attacks, and Harry’s fear that history would repeat itself and he would not be able to protect his wife and son from the same forces that caused his mother’s untimely death.”

The release continues, “_Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will also reveal the private family feuds between Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan, and Harry with Will and Charles, that led to the ultimate break from the royal ties.” Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.

We’ll update this post when casting information and the first trailer is available.









						See Who’s Playing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in the New Lifetime Movie
					

"Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace" will air this fall.




					www.glamour.com


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> @papertiger I am responding to your video post even though it has disappeared. It was nice to see the "man in the street POV "which was full of common sense and thought.  I like to think that many people are thinking and saying the same things.



I took it out because although I like him, the channel is political


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Major Paparazzi Agency Bankrupted by Meghan Markle Legal Battle*
> 
> *Splash News & Picture Agency, which has been fighting the duchess in a privacy case, has also been a notable name for suing celebrities for posting images of themselves on social media.*
> 
> Splash News & Picture Agency, a prominent paparazzi shop, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. A global pandemic that had stars staying indoors is partly to blame, but also notable is Splash's legal adventures over the years both as a plaintiff suing celebrities for posting copyrighted images of themselves as well as its status as a defendant in a privacy action brought by Meghan Markle. Having difficulty navigating the financial situation, Splash reports having defaulted on a loan now worth nearly $1 million and is seeking the protection of a Nevada bankruptcy court.
> 
> "Splash’s financial problems stem from three sources," states Splash president Emma Curzon in a declaration submitted as part of the bankruptcy. "As a consequence of the global pandemic the availability of celebrity images has declined and budgets within media companies have been cut to reflect wider macro-economic challenges. This situation has been exacerbated by two ongoing litigation cases and the costs of defending these cases."
> 
> One of the two cases is Splash's battle with Markle over photos taking during a "private family outing" in a park in Canada. While the BBC and other press outlets reported a settlement in December — a Splash spokesperson said at the time that going forward, "it will not take unauthorized photographs of the family of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex" — the case may not be fully resolved.
> 
> "The case involves free speech related issues under United Kingdom law and, unfortunately, has proven to be too unbearably expensive for Splash to continue its defense," said Curzon. "Furthermore, if the plaintiffs were to prevail in that case it would likely result in a large attorney fee award against Splash. Notwithstanding the merits of the case the company has sought to settle this matter but has been unable to agree [on] a financial settlement within its resources."
> 
> As for the other case in which Splash finds itself a defendant, it's with the company's former account manager Esmeralda Servin, who says she was repeatedly subjected to sexist remarks at the company. Servin also says she was terminated after raising other concerns ranging from illegal bidding to the lack of transparency over its commission structure.  Curzon tells the bankruptcy court that its insurance coverage might not cover the liability and that its defense fees were also proving financially burdensome.
> 
> As Splash fought for free speech with Markle, it pursued many celebrities in court. In fact, the agency was one of the pioneers in actions against famous individuals for posting images of themselves. One NFL star even claimed extortion. Others who have been on the defending side of a copyright case versus Splash include Jennifer Lopez, Jessica Simpson, Liam Hemsworth and Nicki Minaj.
> 
> According to bankruptcy papers, copyright infringements brought in a little more than $118,000 in 2020 but just $21,000 last year. That was nowhere close to covering expenses, especially in light of the pandemic and the Markle and Servin suits. "Attorney bills have drained, and continue to drain, cash from the business," says Curzon.
> 
> Splash reports Deasil Limited as a secured creditor with a blanket lien on substantially all of its assets. With approximately $972,000 owed to Deasil, the paparazzi agency has now filed for Chapter 11.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Major Paparazzi Agency Bankrupted by Meghan Markle Legal Battle
> 
> 
> Splash News & Picture Agency, which has been fighting the duchess in a privacy case, has also been a notable name for suing celebrities for posting images of themselves on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


"As Splash fought for free speech with Markle...._Notwithstanding the merits of the case the company has sought to settle this matter but has been unable to agree [on] a financial settlement within its resources._"

How much money were they trying to get from Splash? 
More people linked to MM&H losing their jobs, and JCMH probably making millions using a royal title as qualification. How can one support this?


----------



## RueMonge

Chloe302225 said:


> View attachment 5033562


Good for Eugenie


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Oh, gag. There is going to be yet another Lifetime movie made about them. I fear for the state of the world we live in. Surely this must be a sign of an impending apocalypse.
> 
> *Lifetime Is Making a Movie About Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Royal Exit *
> *It's called Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace. I'm screaming.*
> _Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will do a (fictional) deep dive into the couple’s break from the royal family. Per Lifetime’s press release, the movie will “reveal what really happened inside the palace that drove Harry and Meghan to leave everything behind in order to make a future for themselves and their son, Archie. The movie will detail Meghan’s growing isolation and sadness, their disappointment that ‘The Firm’ was not defending them against the press’s attacks, and Harry’s fear that history would repeat itself and he would not be able to protect his wife and son from the same forces that caused his mother’s untimely death.”
> 
> The release continues, “_Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will also reveal the private family feuds between Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan, and Harry with Will and Charles, that led to the ultimate break from the royal ties.” Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.
> 
> We’ll update this post when casting information and the first trailer is available.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Who’s Playing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in the New Lifetime Movie
> 
> 
> "Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace" will air this fall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com



Pfffftttttttt.................we're talking LIFETIME here. With their demographics they'd just be preaching to the choir anyway


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> "As Splash fought for free speech with Markle...._Notwithstanding the merits of the case the company has sought to settle this matter but has been unable to agree [on] a financial settlement within its resources._"
> 
> How much money were they trying to get from Splash?
> *More people linked to MM&H losing their jobs, and JCMH probably making millions using a royal title as qualification. How can one support this? *



Because it's being done with compassion................right?


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Pfffftttttttt.................we're talking LIFETIME here. With their demographics they'd just be preaching to the choir anyway



True, but it would be even more people believing fiction was fact. Wonder how they’ll show Meghan feeling suicidal but doing nothing except sending emails to the palace telling them to do something about it.


----------



## Lodpah

I think they’re going to have money problems or heading there now. With their house hold expenses, plus all the people they employ. If Mike Tyson can blow 300 million to piss and 50 Cent 50 million these two are almost there I presume.

Their attention span to whatever flavor of the moment they cling to and abandon just as fast is clearly evident.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> True, but it would be even more people believing fiction was fact. Wonder how they’ll show Meghan feeling suicidal but doing nothing except sending emails to the palace telling them to do something about it.



Those peeps are going to believe that anyway. The prince charming happily ever after is Lifetime's schtick. 
The ONLY time I EVER tuned into Lifetime is when Project Runway left Bravo and wound up there. The differences in outlook and outcomes was immediately noticeable. i mean Wretchen over Mondo?????? Hello??????


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I think they’re going to have money problems or heading there now. With their house hold expenses, plus all the people they employ. If Mike Tyson can blow 300 million to piss and 50 Cent 50 million these two are almost there I presume.
> 
> Their attention span to whatever flavor of the moment they cling to and abandon just as fast is clearly evident.



They loved getting that Netflix money but they won’t like that they’ve got to spend it to hire all the people they need to create shows for them.

Oh, why won’t someone just give them millions of dollars for doing nothing? That’s what they really want.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Oh, gag. There is going to be yet another Lifetime movie made about them. I fear for the state of the world we live in. Surely this must be a sign of an impending apocalypse.
> 
> *Lifetime Is Making a Movie About Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Royal Exit *
> *It's called Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace. I'm screaming.*
> _Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will do a (fictional) deep dive into the couple’s break from the royal family. Per Lifetime’s press release, the movie will “reveal what really happened inside the palace that drove Harry and Meghan to leave everything behind in order to make a future for themselves and their son, Archie. The movie will detail Meghan’s growing isolation and sadness, their disappointment that ‘The Firm’ was not defending them against the press’s attacks, and Harry’s fear that history would repeat itself and he would not be able to protect his wife and son from the same forces that caused his mother’s untimely death.”
> 
> The release continues, “_Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will also reveal the private family feuds between Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan, and Harry with Will and Charles, that led to the ultimate break from the royal ties.” Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.
> 
> We’ll update this post when casting information and the first trailer is available.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Who’s Playing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in the New Lifetime Movie
> 
> 
> "Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace" will air this fall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com


Wait, you mean MM is not going to play herself. A role she could be very dramatic in.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> They loved getting that Netflix money but they won’t like that they’ve got to spend it to hire all the people they need to create shows for them.
> 
> Oh, why won’t someone just give them millions of dollars for doing nothing? That’s what they really want.


I don’t know if they got it upfront tho. They have to produce. I don’t think it’s the true amount. It’s like saying this thing is worth 100 million when in actuality it was only 50 million. No one has disputed it either. I think it’s grossly inflated.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Oh, gag. There is going to be yet another Lifetime movie made about them. I fear for the state of the world we live in. Surely this must be a sign of an impending apocalypse.
> 
> *Lifetime Is Making a Movie About Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Royal Exit *
> *It's called Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace. I'm screaming.*
> _Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will do a (fictional) deep dive into the couple’s break from the royal family. Per Lifetime’s press release, the movie will “reveal what really happened inside the palace that drove Harry and Meghan to leave everything behind in order to make a future for themselves and their son, Archie. The movie will detail Meghan’s growing isolation and sadness, their disappointment that ‘The Firm’ was not defending them against the press’s attacks, and Harry’s fear that history would repeat itself and he would not be able to protect his wife and son from the same forces that caused his mother’s untimely death.”
> 
> The release continues, “_Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ will also reveal the private family feuds between Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan, and Harry with Will and Charles, that led to the ultimate break from the royal ties.” Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.
> 
> We’ll update this post when casting information and the first trailer is available.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Who’s Playing Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in the New Lifetime Movie
> 
> 
> "Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace" will air this fall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com



What irks me about this is not the fact that it is going to be a slanted crapoid movie, we expect that.  Does anyone expect a disclaimer at the start or end of the movie that it is a work of fiction loosely based on actual facts?  What irks me is that Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor is so easily ready to impugn his family even more, if that was possible, after the TV interview.  On the surface, I know he hates his family and has deep anger towards them, but my inner self has trouble believing that given all that they went out of their way to do for him, rightly or wrongly, that he could feel this way.  Only a really damaged individual would do this.  Why do I think that he wanted NF to do this story on a future chapter of The Crown, but he was too impatient to wait.  Actually both of them are too impatient and they  think that by the time The Crown would get to their story, the fire about them would have cooled down considerably.  

As @Maggie Muggins  pointed out, Harry does not think and he will continue to attach his name to so many things that if his participation had any meaning at all, the significance of it will have eroded it into nothingness.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Girl, you just made me feel guilty. No Chanel for me then. Alright (I get it).


Several years ago, someone went on one of the luxury brand threads to demand support for a class action suit against that brand. IIRC, the basis of the suit was that the brand was unfairly priced to prevent hoi polloi from acquiring its products. It was surreal...


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> Several years ago, someone went on one of the luxury brand threads to demand support for a class action suit against that brand. IIRC, the basis of the suit was that the brand was unfairly priced to prevent hoi polloi from acquiring its products. It was surreal...



meh-------they were just ahead of the wave! The "everyone deserves everything" movement has really taken off


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Several years ago, someone went on one of the luxury brand threads to demand support for a class action suit against that brand. IIRC, the basis of the suit was that the brand was unfairly priced to prevent hoi polloi from acquiring its products. It was surreal...


That’s crazy! I find that most people who yell the loudest the minute you confront them they slink away like little mouse. Been there done that. I refuse to be told what I can buy or what I can’t buy.


----------



## LittleStar88

bellecate said:


> Wait, you mean MM is not going to play herself. A role she could be very dramatic in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5034054


Someone on Quora did a side by side comparison of her emoting face during her wedding on one of her tv roles and her wedding. The same facial features. It was creepy as all get out.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5034054


It's the same exact expression, LOL.  They could just use a cardboard cutout.


----------



## Chloe302225

When your life has been so dramatic that you get not 1 but 2 Lifetime movies written about you in as many years, it should clue you in how things are going. But with these I bet they will see it as an honour.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5034054


@LittleStar88  You're braver than I am for looking at all those faces.

I find them so


----------



## poopsie

Re the Lifetime thing:
_Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ _will do a (fictional) deep dive into the couple’s break from the royal family. Per Lifetime’s press release, the movie will “reveal what really happened inside the palace that drove Harry and Meghan to leave everything behind in order to make a future for themselves and their son, Archie. The movie will detail Meghan’s growing isolation and sadness, their disappointment that ‘The Firm’ was not defending them against the press’s attacks, and Harry’s fear that history would repeat itself and he would not be able to protect his wife and son from the same forces that caused his mother’s untimely death.”_

So, basically, just a rehash of the Oprah interview

_The release continues, “Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace will also reveal the private family feuds between Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan, and Harry with Will and Charles, that led to the ultimate break from the royal ties.” *Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.*_

Otherwise known as Meghan's Truth
_
We’ll update this post when casting information and the first trailer is available. _

We'll update the post when Meghan doesn't pass the audition, doesn't like how things are portrayed, threatens to sue us for everything under the sun and the project is scrapped, most likely inviting yet _another _law suit. Please stay tuned


----------



## V0N1B2

Lodpah said:


> That’s crazy!... I refuse to be told what I can buy or what I can’t buy.


Or whom I am “allowed” to support. Black White Male Female Fat Skinny Rich Poor Tall Short Swedish Chinese... I don’t give a good goddamn who or what you are, I will not be told I must support all women because we both have a vagina. Or we’re of the same race/ethnicity. I’m tired of being told to be kind. I’ll be kind when you’ve done or experienced something that deserves kindness. Until then, f*ck right off. 
Too many snowflakes, man.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think this is an embarrassment for Americans. It‘s an embarrassment for Brits as one of their royal family is trading on his title. He uses the title to sell himself and she uses racism in such a way that if you question  anything she does or says, you must be racist. What a lovely couple for any country  be proud of. Not.





elvisfan4life said:


> No embarrassment to us anymore he has gone never to return not our problem anymore



My 2 cents: This is a huge embarrassment for all of us. 
This is unfortunately an embarrassment for Americans, we are allowing them to use royal titles and victim cards to get jobs and deals that others a lot more qualified can't even dream of getting... Something is very wrong...

Having said that, the BRF gave them the duke/duchess titles and let them grow out of control, so they have a responsibility to fix this situation as much as they can. If MM&H go ahead with the movie about their life in the UK and megxit, I bet it will be a big embarrassment for the BRF and Brits in general.


----------



## V0N1B2

Sorry for being so blunt, dolls. I’m just tired of these two shysters. 
Here’s a cute panda for you:


----------



## poopsie

V0N1B2 said:


> Sorry for being so blunt, dolls. I’m just tired of these two shysters.
> Here’s a cute panda for you:



I thought maybe you were over on that other thread in that other forum


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They loved getting that Netflix money but they won’t like that they’ve got to spend it to hire all the people they need to create shows for them.
> *Oh, why won’t someone just give them millions of dollars for doing nothing? That’s what they really want.*


I believe he got something along these lines with his 'Chief Impact Officer' mascot position.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Or whom I am “allowed” to support. Black White Male Female Fat Skinny Rich Poor Tall Short Swedish Chinese... I don’t give a good goddamn who or what you are, I will not be told I must support all women because we both have a vagina. Or we’re of the same race/ethnicity. I’m tired of being told to be kind. I’ll be kind when you’ve done or experienced something that deserves kindness. Until then, f*ck right off.
> Too many snowflakes, man.


Yes!  I'm so sick and tired of identity politics.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> Sorry for being so blunt, dolls. I’m just tired of these two shysters.
> Here’s a cute panda for you:


I would totally watch a Lifetime movie about a panda 

ETA Now I'm wondering if MM's ever darker eye make-up is an attempt at subliminal influence - panda eyes?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I don’t know if they got it upfront tho. They have to produce. I don’t think it’s the true amount. It’s like saying this thing is worth 100 million when in actuality it was only 50 million. No one has disputed it either. I think it’s grossly inflated.



It wouldn’t be out of the question for them to have negotiated for a cash advance from Netflix at the time the contract was signed. Not sure how accurate this is but I found this about one of their projects.

One of Meghan and Harry's first projects will be an animated series focused on inspiring women, which is already in development, the outlet reports.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It wouldn’t be out of the question for them to have negotiated for a cash advance from Netflix at the time the contract was signed. Not sure how accurate this is but I found this about one of their projects.
> *
> One of Meghan and Harry's first projects will be an animated series focused on inspiring women, which is already in development, the outlet reports.*


An animated series?  Like She-Ra and the Little Mermaid??


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> It wouldn’t be out of the question for them to have negotiated for a cash advance from Netflix at the time the contract was signed. Not sure how accurate this is but I found this about one of their projects.
> 
> *One of Meghan and Harry's first projects will be an animated series focused on inspiring women, which is already in development, the outlet reports*.



Riiiiiight..........................cos nothing says empowerment and inspiration to grown azz women like a cartoon
Wanna bet she does the voice?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> When your life has been so dramatic that you get not 1 but 2 Lifetime movies written about you in as many years, it should clue you in how things are going. But with these I bet they will see it as an honour.



It’s worse than that. This will be the *third* Lifetime movie about them.

From _Variety_:
The new film is the follow-up to Lifetime’s 2018 entry “Harry & Meghan,” which chronicled the newlyweds’ love story, and 2019’s “Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal,” which looked at their experiences inside the Royal Family during their first year of marriage.

Lifetime is now billing the three movies as their “Harry & Meghan” movie franchise trilogy. Casting is currently underway for the “Escaping the Palace,” and production will begin this spring, with an airdate eyed for fall.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Or whom I am “allowed” to support. Black White Male Female Fat Skinny Rich Poor Tall Short Swedish Chinese... I don’t give a good goddamn who or what you are, I will not be told I must support all women because we both have a vagina. Or we’re of the same race/ethnicity. I’m tired of being told to be kind. I’ll be kind when you’ve done or experienced something that deserves kindness. Until then, f*ck right off.
> Too many snowflakes, man.



I remember growing up and being told what really mattered was the kind of person you are on the inside. It seems the current generation is being told to see it the other way around. Who you are on the outside is your defining identity.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Riiiiiight..........................cos nothing says empowerment and inspiration to grown azz women like a cartoon
> Wanna bet she does the voice?


Well, "you do know she does voice overs"?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I remember growing up and being told what really mattered was the kind of person you are on the inside. It seems the current generation is being told to see it the other way around. Who you are on the outside is your defining identity.


The problem is, they all look the same.  Like blow up dolls.


----------



## Hermes Zen

My DH told me about this .. sharing ... not sure if this is acceptable to share, please delete if it isn't. Thank you.



> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-prince-harry-genevieve-roth
> 
> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry hire strategist who said all White people are 'rife with internalized racism'*


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> My DH told me about this .. sharing ... not sure if this is acceptable to share, please delete if it isn't. Thank you.



I was just coming here to post this. TMZ has a similar article. Sounds like just the kind of inflammatory individual they would get hooked up with.









						Harry & Meghan Strategist Believes All White People Have 'Internalized Racism'
					

Harry and Meghan's new strategist believes all white people are internally racist in some ways.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5034054


Variations on a theme, she has no range, top right picture is  from the Inskip wedding she crashed and is probably the most ”real”. In some she just looks constipated.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5034054



I got an article to go with your pictures! 



"_US-based royal commentator Marlene Koenig argued the feeling in America is very much in support of Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle. Following the Oprah Winfrey interview, Ms Koenig insisted there is a feeling of sympathy and empathy towards the Duchess for how she has been treated while in the UK. During an interview with Express.co.uk, Ms Koenig argued US fans are also hotly anticipating Meghan and Prince Harry's next steps in California._"









						'You hurt our girl!' Meghan Markle's US fans rallying behind Duchess
					

MEGHAN MARKLE fans are rallying behind the Duchess of Sussex after she opened up about her treatment as a working member of the Royal Family, according to an expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

Oh FFS
Meghan is half WHITE
her father's side of the family is WHITE
her husband and his family are all WHITE
if anyone is racist it is H&M

could this strategist be @purseinsanity son's prof?


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Oh FFS
> Meghan is half WHITE
> her father's side of the family is WHITE
> her husband and his family are all WHITE
> if anyone is racist it is H&M
> 
> could this strategist be @purseinsanity son's prof?


Her mother has probably white ancestors, and MM is likely >1/2 white. 
Statements like "_all white people are internally racists_" are inflammatory and favor racism imo. This makes me sad!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Riiiiiight..........................cos nothing says empowerment and inspiration to grown azz women like a cartoon
> *Wanna bet she does the voice?*



I’m betting she’ll have an entire episode made about herself. It will air after the one about Rosa Parks but before the one about Ruth Bader Ginsburg.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> The problem is he doesn't think. *During his whole life, he's never had to think or make any decisions*. The palace courtiers and his army handlers/buddies did all the thinking for him. He never had to choose what clothes including what knickers to wear for any and all occasions except for the Nazi uniform that he blamed on William. BUT, he knew how to fall out of bars drunk, use "special and fond nicknames" for minorities, host naked parties and cast aspersions at his family. The only change in his life now is a new handler, who's a spiteful and vengeful famewhore.



THIS! Exactly. I see it in the kids of helicopter parents. The HP do absolutely everything for their kids, even their homework, so the kids never risk any kind of failure. They grow up to be totally worthless, spoiled, dependent and incapable of conversation. Harry had servants to pick up after him, etc. If it wasn't for his family, he wouldn't have gotten any jobs, let alone contracts from Netflix and whatever.  Harry basically married a helicopter wife. I have to wonder if she went to the BetterUp interview with him. Nah, she arranged the whole thing and probably threatened to sue if they didn't hire Harry.


----------



## needlv

I may be tempted to read this...









						Feared celeb biographer Tom Bower to pen tell-all book about Meghan Markle
					

MEGHAN Markle is to have a tell-all book written about her by Tom Bower, one of the planet’s most feared celebrity biographers. Tom Bower, the man behind Simon Cowell, Philip Green and Bernie…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Another job for H?  Maybe start with the misinformation in the Oprah interview or spread by their PR...









						Harry land another new role to tackle 'misinformation' on social media
					

PRINCE Harry revealed a second new job yesterday — in a statement full of baffling business jargon. The Duke will investigate the spread of fake news for the Commission on Information Disorder.  R…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I may be tempted to read this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feared celeb biographer Tom Bower to pen tell-all book about Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is to have a tell-all book written about her by Tom Bower, one of the planet’s most feared celebrity biographers. Tom Bower, the man behind Simon Cowell, Philip Green and Bernie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Is MM paying for this book? Is this book going to work as a 'background check' for someone interested in a career in the political arena?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Maybe they invited Harry to the Aspen event to talk about the dangers of lying in the digital age, since they are so easily refuted. For show and tell he could use the stack of photos readily available on line of him riding in a child seat on the back of Charles’ bike, in spite of claiming he never was able to do that.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sound like H had used BetterUp before being offered his new position ...

'Harry also said he had personally benefited from coaching provided by BetterUp. 
"I've personally found working with a BetterUp coach to be invaluable. I was matched with a truly awesome coach who has given me sound advice and a fresh perspective," Harry said in the blog post.'



> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/23/tech/prince-harry-betterup-tech-startup/index.html
> 
> *Prince Harry lands new job as a tech executive*


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Is MM paying for this book? Is this book going to work as a 'background check' for someone interested in a career in the political arena?



Ooh. I can’t wait. Scandalicious!


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> My DH told me about this .. sharing ... not sure if this is acceptable to share, please delete if it isn't. Thank you.


"ALL" white people?  Well, if that's not racially profiling, what is?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I got an article to go with your pictures!
> 
> View attachment 5034179
> 
> "_US-based royal commentator Marlene Koenig argued the feeling in America is very much in support of Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle. Following the Oprah Winfrey interview, Ms Koenig insisted there is a feeling of sympathy and empathy towards the Duchess for how she has been treated while in the UK. During an interview with Express.co.uk, Ms Koenig argued _*US fans are also hotly anticipating Meghan and Prince Harry's next steps in California."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'You hurt our girl!' Meghan Markle's US fans rallying behind Duchess
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE fans are rallying behind the Duchess of Sussex after she opened up about her treatment as a working member of the Royal Family, according to an expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



YET ANOTHER reason I need to leave California.  This list is apparently endless


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Oh FFS
> Meghan is half WHITE
> her father's side of the family is WHITE
> her husband and his family are all WHITE
> if anyone is racist it is H&M
> 
> could this strategist be @purseinsanity son's prof?


Ok, I am amazed by those of you that remember my ramblings about Pond's and my son.


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> YET ANOTHER reason I need to leave California.  This list is apparently endless


Yes! Come join me. I already did!


----------



## floatinglili

bag-mania said:


> So it would seem. She has won more battles than she has lost.


Winning battles but losing the war I think


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I’m betting she’ll have an entire episode made about herself. It will air after the one about *Rosa Parks* but before the one about *Ruth Bader Ginsburg.*


Great women, who lucky for us, with Meg being biracial and all, will have the depth and range to play both.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Ok, I am amazed by those of you that remember my ramblings about Pond's and my son.



You told about your son's whack job professor. I told DH about it, "Well, that's what we're dealing with these days!" he said. He knows other wokers just like that nut job too  (the prof, not your son  )


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> You told about your son's whack job professor. I told DH about it, "Well, that's what we're dealing with these days!" he said. He knows other wokers just like that nut job too  (the prof, not your son  )


I know, but this thread moves so fast I can never remember who said what!  Your memories are impressive.  Maybe I'm getting old and demented


----------



## purseinsanity

Princess Eugenie Shares Adorable New Photos of Baby August (in His Monogrammed Sweater!)
					

Princess Eugenie shared two new photos of her son August on Instagram




					people.com
				




They look genuinely happy, and she already looks more comfortable holding her 6 week old than you know who.


----------



## haute okole

papertiger said:


> When can we see his TED talk on product strategy?



Ridiculous, the lunatics are running the asylum.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: This is a huge embarrassment for all of us.
> This is unfortunately an embarrassment for Americans, we are allowing them to use royal titles and victim cards to get jobs and deals that others a lot more qualified can't even dream of getting... Something is very wrong...
> 
> Having said that, the BRF gave them the duke/duchess titles and let them grow out of control, so they have a responsibility to fix this situation as much as they can. If MM&H go ahead with the movie about their life in the UK and megxit, I bet it will be a big embarrassment for the BRF and Brits in general.




I agree. The BRF’s silence is making those two sully the BRF. It’s getting to be not royalty but being reduced to a clown show. I hope the Queen does something.

Who the hell do these two think that we have royalty in our country? 

There’s so many more qualified people to shepherd those companies but at this point I’m sure the toxic duo have diminished those companies’ reputation.


----------



## Lodpah

So have these two hired any high powered educated POC? I know maybe why MM won’t? Cause they won’t take shxx from her. They will put MM in her place and tell her to talk to the hand. 

Seriously. She’s afraid to do that is what I think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Re the Lifetime thing:
> _*Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.*_
> *Otherwise known as Meghan's Truth*



Forever after known as Meghan's Law


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> I may be tempted to read this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feared celeb biographer Tom Bower to pen tell-all book about Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is to have a tell-all book written about her by Tom Bower, one of the planet’s most feared celebrity biographers. Tom Bower, the man behind Simon Cowell, Philip Green and Bernie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



She's made herself a sitting duck. 

There'll never be an end to the lawsuits, Meghan's Law


----------



## elvisfan4life

poopsie said:


> Re the Lifetime thing:
> _Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace_ _will do a (fictional) deep dive into the couple’s break from the royal family. Per Lifetime’s press release, the movie will “reveal what really happened inside the palace that drove Harry and Meghan to leave everything behind in order to make a future for themselves and their son, Archie. The movie will detail Meghan’s growing isolation and sadness, their disappointment that ‘The Firm’ was not defending them against the press’s attacks, and Harry’s fear that history would repeat itself and he would not be able to protect his wife and son from the same forces that caused his mother’s untimely death.”_
> 
> So, basically, just a rehash of the Oprah interview
> 
> _The release continues, “Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace will also reveal the private family feuds between Will and Harry, Kate and Meghan, and Harry with Will and Charles, that led to the ultimate break from the royal ties.” *Of course, keep in mind this is a fictional portrayal of the events.*_
> 
> Otherwise known as Meghan's Truth
> _
> We’ll update this post when casting information and the first trailer is available. _
> 
> We'll update the post when Meghan doesn't pass the audition, doesn't like how things are portrayed, threatens to sue us for everything under the sun and the project is scrapped, most likely inviting yet _another _law suit. Please stay tuned



How can you deep dive into two of the shallowest people alive ?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: This is a huge embarrassment for all of us.
> This is unfortunately an embarrassment for Americans, we are allowing them to use royal titles and victim cards to get jobs and deals that others a lot more qualified can't even dream of getting... Something is very wrong...
> 
> Having said that, the BRF gave them the duke/duchess titles and let them grow out of control, so they have a responsibility to fix this situation as much as they can. If MM&H go ahead with the movie about their life in the UK and megxit, I bet it will be a big embarrassment for the BRF and Brits in general.



Nope we won’t watch it or care they have gone and we are happy - the door back in is firmly closed- there is far less coverage of them here except in the trashy media which fortunately only a small part of the population tunes into for us oldies mainstream media will ignore them as they do most showbiz trash  - the Royals will close ranks and move on they won’t lower themselves to her tactics - next up Phillips 100 birthday


----------



## chicinthecity777

elvisfan4life said:


> No embarrassment to us anymore he has gone never to return not our problem anymore


Exactly! He's in the states now with his American wife and American main stream media is eating all their crap!


----------



## justwatchin

needlv said:


> I may be tempted to read this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feared celeb biographer Tom Bower to pen tell-all book about Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is to have a tell-all book written about her by Tom Bower, one of the planet’s most feared celebrity biographers. Tom Bower, the man behind Simon Cowell, Philip Green and Bernie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I imagine her lawyers are already gearing up for the lawsuit.


----------



## justwatchin

Hermes Zen said:


> Sound like H had used BetterUp before being offered his new position ...
> 
> 'Harry also said he had personally benefited from coaching provided by BetterUp.
> "I've personally found working with a BetterUp coach to be invaluable. I was matched with a truly awesome coach who has given me sound advice and a fresh perspective," Harry said in the blog post.'


His coach basically told him what to do whatever Meghan said.


----------



## justwatchin

This thread moves at a crazy pace so I'll just throw all of this out here...

*The Oprah Interview*-anyone not wearing blinders could see this was no more than a celebrity puff piece (and really Oprah was the only celebrity), not a piece on inequality and/or racism. If that was what O was going for, then she could have done a special about racism, inequality, etc all over the world with people of color, celebrity or not. It wasn't. Why? Because no one was going to watch that. It made her money, it made CBS money, and possibly some money for H&M (not sure I believe they weren't paid. So, yeah let's trot out some actress that married a royal so she can talk about her hardship for what 2-3 years with her million+ dollar/pounds lifestyle? And let's keep her really "white" spouse of HUGE privilege in the background because he may say something to muck it up. This couple is NOT experiencing hardship; smart people know that. But it served its' purpose and got the press H&M wanted.
*ARCHWELL Foundation*-"uplift, unite with compassion"-a vague mission statement for a non-profit, with no real purpose-not a surprise this is a non-profit.
*NETFLIX*-they will be an installment on The Crown series-wait and see.
*BETTERUP*-so this company is what? A company that gets hired by bigger companies to coach their employees to be better employees? Sounds a lot like what Tony Robbins did with his motivational speaking 20+ years ago. And bless H's little heart for thinking he got a real job.
I don't see this as an embarrassment for the U.S. We don't have control over who gives them jobs.

Every one of these companies that have hired them are doing it because they see money in it. H&M do it because they need/want money. Are they using their titles, yep. Because without them, neither would have gotten their foot in the door. It is always for profit. The celebrities that came out in support of M, doing it to stay in the public eye; throw a crumb out on Instagram or a tweet for the topic of the day and try to stay relevant. Her enraged/outraged fans (and did she have any before her marriage?) will continue to support her until someone better comes along. 

I need some coffee.....sigh


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't understand why this thread has turned into a embarrassment battle between 2 nations?  
I didn't start it!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Having said that, the BRF gave them the duke/duchess titles and let them grow out of control, so they have a responsibility to fix this situation as much as they can. If MM&H go ahead with the movie about their life in the UK and megxit, I bet it will be a big embarrassment for the BRF and Brits in general.


The Queen had to give them titles at the time, this is the tradition. If she didn't, she would be accused of racism no doubt.
Like I said before many times, it's NOT up to the Queen to simply remove their titles. The parliament needs to set a motion to do it. Given the country is still battling a pandemic, economic ruins etc, do you really think anybody in the parliament would pay attention to those 2 clowns? There are far more important things!
By the end of the day, a runaway Prince and his wife are really not that important part of our country!


----------



## elvisfan4life

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't understand why this thread has turned into a embarrassment battle between 2 nations?
> I didn't start it!



Lol I don’t think it has - we aren’t having another War of Independence here it just amuses me when US members talk about how the Royal family need to act - the Royal family don’t need to change a thing and certainly not to start act like US celebrities - not Will they


----------



## elvisfan4life

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Queen had to give them titles at the time, this is the tradition. If she didn't, she would be accused of racism no doubt.
> Like I said before many times, it's NOT up to the Queen to simply remove their titles. The parliament needs to set a motion to do it. Given the country is still battling a pandemic, economic ruins etc, do you really think anybody in the parliament would pay attention to those 2 clowns? There are far more important things!
> By the end of the day, a runaway Prince and his wife are really not that important part of our country!



BRF won’t pander to them nor should they - we have moved on - we have a new royal greatgrandchild who we will be allowed to see , who will play normally with his cousins and be a real part of the Firm/ Family from day 1  -Ginge and Cringe could have learnt a lot from  Zara and Mike on how to live happily within the firm but do your own thing and have a happy normal life - the pics of the Queen with her great grandkids are some of the most heartwarming royal pics I have ever seen ditto seeing the Few pics of the Princess Royal Anne with her grandchildren behaving informally are just wonderful


----------



## limom

elvisfan4life said:


> Lol I don’t think it has - we aren’t having another War of Independence here it just amuses me when US members talk about how the Royal family need to act - the Royal family don’t need to change a thing and certainly not to start act like US celebrities - not Will they


Meh. The RF is constantly changing. They have to. It is either adapt or perish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> The Queen had to give them titles at the time, this is the tradition. If she didn't, she would be accused of racism no doubt.
> Like I said before many times, it's NOT up to the Queen to simply remove their titles. The parliament needs to set a motion to do it. Given the country is still battling a pandemic, economic ruins etc, do you really think anybody in the parliament would pay attention to those 2 clowns? There are far more important things!
> By the end of the day, a runaway Prince and his wife are really not that important part of our country!



Of course, you are correct.  My point all along has been, is, and will be that H&M should abdicate. He can remove himself from the line-up. So, why doesn’t he?  Because his Royal status is money in his pocket. It is his brand. Once the gigs dry up in the US, he will leave.

Just an FYI - no one should guage someone‘s likeability by their media coverage. For most people here, the goal is to stay out of the media.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> Meh. The RF is constantly changing. They have to. It is either adapt or perish.


That's for BRF and the British People to decide and nobody else!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, you are correct.  My point all along has been, is, and will be that H&M should abdicate. *He can remove himself from the line-up. So, why doesn’t he? * Because his Royal status is money in his pocket. It is his brand. Once the gigs dry up in the US, he will leave.
> 
> Just an FYI - no one should guage someone‘s likeability by their media coverage. For most people here, the goal is to stay out of the media.


Agreed! If those 2 have any principle or decency, they would have denounce the titles, Harry would have removed himself from the line of succession. But they won't because those are the only things they have to make them something!


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> That's for BRF and the British People to decide and nobody else!


Of course.  But there is no denying that the RF has changed throughout the years.
Otoh, it is hard to be alone....


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> makes sense, there was an interview with the choir , not bishop, and the choir said BP kept telling them to shorten their songs, and of course, the subtext was the racism of BP


And now that I think of it ...  the Church of England is pretty inclusive but yes, gospel music is not very COE, plainsong yes, gospel hmmm
And yes the service was televised and there must have been some schedule for the benefit of the television networks , so, the service, breakfast, photos could have been a complicated nightmare for the wedding planners, so stick to the schedule would have been the mantra of the day - nothing inflammatory about that, just a fact for any BIG wedding


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> Of course.  But there is no denying that the RF has changed throughout the years.
> Otoh, it is hard to be alone....


And there is movement afoot, and progress
1. The government is considering changing inheritance for the titles eg duchies, marquisats etc to ditch male primogeniture and allow women to inherit. 
2. The BRF changed rules of succession, Charlotte comes after George and before Louis whilst Anne was always after her brothers. That change was a decade ago or so
3. Much chat about what to do with the House of Lords, abolish ?
4. The BRF budget keeps getting cut every year. The Buck house renovation budget was cut. The income from the Duchy of Cornwall ditto.
And as we know, H was cut off by Charles long before we knew of it, and H lost his taxpayer funded security too.
Yes, C gets income from Cornwall, but it is negotiated with the government to pay for BRF expenses while on the job ie not for non working royals like H, Eugenie and Beatrice.
The UK is working on these issues.
IMHO the Sovereign Grant (budget) is a major tool the government uses to work with/control the BRF. All terribly quiet though. 
And yes, Andrew still remains an open issue but then progress in the US with Ghislaine is at a snail's pace mostly limited to her wanting bail and having it constantly denied.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> Nope we won’t watch it or care they have gone and we are happy - the door back in is firmly closed- there is far less coverage of them here except in the trashy media which fortunately only a small part of the population tunes into for us oldies mainstream media will ignore them as they do most showbiz trash  - the Royals will close ranks and move on they won’t lower themselves to her tactics - next up Phillips 100 birthday





chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly! He's in the states now with his American wife and American main stream media is eating all their crap!



Good for you! 

Unfortunately, American media is not letting us forget these two... Her political ambitions are even worse than that.  All this wouldn't have been possible without those UK royal titles. So fellow Californian (and non-Californian) members, are you done packing? Would you prefer Buckingham, Kensington, Windsor...? I believe the BRF will take us all as compensation for pain and suffering...  Though, that  with limited internet access is very appealing.


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> Good for you!
> 
> Unfortunately, American media is not letting us forget these two... Her political ambitions are even worse than that.  All this wouldn't have been possible without those UK royal titles. So fellow Californian (and non-Californian) members, are you done packing? Would you prefer Buckingham, Kensington, Windsor...? I believe the BRF will take us all as compensation for pain and suffering...  Though, that  with limited internet access is very appealing.


Is there a title involved?
Baroness Limom and I might consider....
Of course, add on wintering in Nice and you got a deal.


----------



## Chanbal

SM makes a valid point! 

*Meghan Markle's half-sister Samantha claims Harry is in 'no position' to 'fight misinformation' at Aspen Institute until he 'gets a grip on what truth is' after Oprah interview









						Samantha Markle says Harry in 'no position' to 'fight misinformation'
					

Samantha, 56, has provided evidence disproving the Duchess of Sussex's claims she had not seen her for 19 years and that she only changed her surname to Markle after she met Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Good for you!
> 
> Unfortunately, American media is not letting us forget these two... Her political ambitions are even worse than that.  All this wouldn't have been possible without those UK royal titles. So fellow Californian (and non-Californian) members, are you done packing? Would you prefer Buckingham, Kensington, Windsor...? I believe the BRF will take us all as compensation for pain and suffering...  Though, that  with limited internet access is very appealing.



I am so ready to leave California! These two are just one more reason to go elsewhere. I’m happy to take Frogmore and wouldn’t complain about any aspect of being there!

The news is so saturated with love for them right now.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Good for you!
> 
> Unfortunately, American media is not letting us forget these two... *Her political ambitions* are even worse than that.  All this wouldn't have been possible without those UK royal titles. So fellow Californian (and non-Californian) members, are you done packing? Would you prefer Buckingham, Kensington, Windsor...? I believe the BRF will take us all as compensation for pain and suffering...  Though, that  with limited internet access is very appealing.



Meghan has her political strategy all planned. Any criticism will be met with charges of "Misogyny!" and "Racism!" and she'll ignore any questions that call for a concrete response. Or she'll word salad her way out. She opted out of the royal life because smiling at events was too hard yet she wants to run for office   .   Well, it's not OUR job to coddle them (her)...hmmmm...where have I heard that.... .


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> Is there a title involved?
> Baroness Limom and I might consider....
> Of course, add on wintering in Nice and you got a deal.



I don't see why not...

In the meantime,  Lady Limom  or Lady LittleStar88 (@LittleStar88) will do!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I remember growing up and being told what really mattered was the kind of person you are on the inside. It seems the current generation is being told to see it the other way around. Who you are on the outside is your defining identity.


yes - there is a thread here on the PF where a pretty 17-year-old is asking advice on her neck cords and complaining she has an overbite (which she does not).....sad


----------



## CarryOn2020

I was under the impression the titles were not to be used.  Also, they were not supposed to embarrass the BRF, correct?
Some of the people involved in these businesses definitely have baggage that some would call embarrassing. Maybe, fingers crossed, the BRF is negotiating a deal to get the gruesome two to renounce succession and titles.

Remember, the media loves to prop up celebs just so they can knock them down. If the media loves someone, it’s a clue there could be trouble.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I was just coming here to post this. TMZ has a similar article. Sounds like just the kind of inflammatory individual they would get hooked up with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan Strategist Believes All White People Have 'Internalized Racism'
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's new strategist believes all white people are internally racist in some ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


If they think they are going to get elected to public office, they are deaming IMO.  Of course, Harry can't but Meghan is totally unqualified and I don't think her stans are a big enough number to elect her.  But if she gets almost every WOC, I guess it could be possible.  Or maybe they could be thinking of getting involved in some other way.  Uugh.  go away


----------



## CarryOn2020

This guy has a point.  Omid is baiting people. That can’t be a good sign.


----------



## carmen56

Can’t wait for Tom Bower’s book.  I hope he dishes all the dirt on Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If they think they are going to get elected to public office, they are deaming IMO.  Of course, Harry can't but Meghan is totally unqualified and I don't think her stans are a big enough number to elect her.  But if she gets almost every WOC, I guess it could be possible.  Or maybe they could be thinking of getting involved in some other way.  Uugh.  go away



I don't see it happening in a sane world, but these days... If she has the US press backing her up the way they have so far, anything is possible. They wouldn't report her flubs, they would prop her up whenever possible, they would relentlessly criticize her opponent, and that's how we'd get a Meghan Markle in office.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> If they think they are going to get elected to public office, they are deaming IMO.  Of course, Harry can't but Meghan is totally unqualified and I don't think her stans are a big enough number to elect her.  But if she gets almost every WOC, I guess it could be possible.  Or maybe they could be thinking of getting involved in some other way.  Uugh.  go away


I don’t even think she could get elected as President of SAG-AFTRA.
Plus Until, she herself announces an interest ala Le Rock, I am


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> I don't see it happening in a sane world, but these days... If she has the US press backing her up the way they have so far, anything is possible. They wouldn't report her flubs, they would prop her up whenever possible, they would relentlessly criticize her opponent, and that's how we'd get a Meghan Markle in office.


Oh please, being a proficient liar is a requirement.


----------



## rose60610

The main reason Meghan would want to run for a fed level office is because they have access to lots of insider information they can use to invest, and know what legislation will affect various companies. Sure, they're not supposed to,  but come on, DC is graft city. Meghan is all about the $$. Compassion? Hah! Don't let those rescue chickens fool you.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> The main reason Meghan would want to run for a fed level office is because they have access to lots of insider information they can use to invest, and know what legislation will affect various companies. Sure, they're not supposed to,  but come on, DC is graft city. Meghan is all about the $$. Compassion? Hah! Don't let those rescue chickens fool you.


maybe but I think fame and adulation are as desirable to her as money


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't understand why this thread has turned into a embarrassment battle between 2 nations?
> I didn't start it!


These two are like hot potatoes.  We are tossing them back and forth!  Or want to, since no one really wants them


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, you are correct.  My point all along has been, is, and will be that *H&M should abdicate*. He can remove himself from the line-up. So, why doesn’t he?  Because his Royal status is money in his pocket. It is his brand. Once the gigs dry up in the US, he will leave.
> 
> Just an FYI - no one should guage someone‘s likeability by their media coverage. For most people here, the goal is to stay out of the media.


Please, Harry isn’t important enough to abdicate; a monarch abdicates. H is comparable to a small cog on a wheel in the machinery. However he can and should renounce his titles, style, rights and position in the line of succession. But he won’t easily give up because of his king size ego, puffed up self worth, dreams of big $$$ and his new motto, ‘Meghan accipit quod vult Meghan.’ Sorry, most mottos are in Latin, although now that I think about it, H is way to dense to learn a second language... My bad, I’ve read that he can now speak Southern Californian...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe but I think fame and adulation are as desirable to her as money



Being president is hard work and it is extremely _stressful_. This is the same woman who had to leave a country because being a duchess was too hard and she didn't like what the press was saying. She thought about killing herself when she was pregnant. Meghan is more fragile than an eggshell.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Being president is hard work and it is extremely _stressful_. This is the same woman who *had to leave a country *because being a duchess was too hard and she didn't like what the press was saying. *She thought about killing herself when she was pregnant*. Meghan is more fragile than an eggshell.



Except she's also a pathological liar, mentally unbalanced and changes her tune more regularly than Spotify. 

She's 'whatever' - whatever gets her 'there'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Please, Harry isn’t important enough to abdicate; a monarch abdicates. H is comparable to a small cog on a wheel in the machinery. However he can and should renounce his titles, style, rights and position in the line of succession. But he won’t easily give up because of his king size ego, puffed up self worth, dreams of big $$$ and his new motto, ‘Meghan accipit quod vult Meghan.’ Sorry, most mottos are in Latin, although now that I think about it, H is way to dense to learn a second language... My bad, I’ve read that he can now speak Southern Californian...



Yes, you are correct. I should have used _renounce. _ Although he is certainly a small cog, he is capitalizing off the titles. Take those away, H&M will be personae non gratae.  They are then free to live as vulgar and tacky as they like.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Being president is hard work and it is extremely _stressful_. This is the same woman who had to leave a country because being a duchess was too hard and she didn't like what the press was saying. She thought about killing herself when she was pregnant. Meghan is more fragile than an eggshell.


But it would be such gripping drama! Can't you just picture it? Harry would return from wherever he goes as the First Husband, only to find his angel sobbing under the Resolute Desk after a hard day's waffling (if JFK's kids could fit under it, the fragile flower can definitely get in). Cue more heartfelt interviews and another Lifetime movie.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Except she's also a pathological liar, mentally unbalanced and changes her tune more regularly than Spotify.
> 
> She's 'whatever' - whatever gets her 'there'.



Yes, but thanks to Oprah she has admitted these things publicly. They may be lies but they are on the record. Does anyone want to vote for a potentially suicidal person to run the country? Mental illness isn't anything to be ashamed of but it sure isn't something to be worn as a badge of honor either.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is everyone enjoying the Spotify podcast? LOLZ


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Yes, but thanks to Oprah she has admitted these things publicly. They may be lies but they are on the record. Does anyone want to vote for a potentially suicidal person to run the country? Mental illness isn't anything to be ashamed of but it sure isn't something to be worn as a badge of honor either.



There is just the little thing that really gives me the creeps, that she would have killed her un-born baby too. I'm pro-choice and I still find that HORRIFIC.

I know that when one is feeling suicidal reason doesn't come into it, but seriously, that's a consideration.

Britney is basically under house arrest and MM is (thought to be) running for President


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Is everyone enjoying the Spotify podcast? LOLZ



Dana Carvey’s are Fantastic!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Yes, but thanks to Oprah she has admitted these things publicly. They may be lies but they are on the record. Does anyone want to vote for a potentially suicidal person to run the country? Mental illness isn't anything to be ashamed of but it sure isn't something to be worn as a badge of honor either.


If you don't elect her, she will accuse you of racism and bullying the mentally fragile. Suitability, ability and capability will be pooh-poohed and drowned in diversity/inclusion word salad. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. It might become her tagline if she can convince the American people that she will ensure restoration of former greatness (plagiarism is an artform she has mastered).


----------



## Aminamina

My 6,5 years old son loves playing his online games. He’s like a little pro. Every now and then he asks me to buy him some boosters to beat obstacles but...I teach him to be patient, try harder, be persistent and use his brain to beat them on his own. Now, these two H&M are definitely the sort of lousy talentless players who can’t make any step on their own buy BUY they way ALL the way. There is no way more certain to get bankrupt. Morally and financially


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> If you don't elect her, she will accuse you of racism and bullying the mentally fragile. Suitability, ability and capability will be pooh-poohed and drowned in diversity/inclusion word salad. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. It might become her tagline if she can convince the American people that she will ensure restoration of former greatness (plagiarism is an artform she has mastered).



It will be interesting to see how far she can ride the "pity me, I'm a victim, everyone is racist" train. If she runs for office and she gets in the way of a more media-favored candidate, watch how quickly the US press turns on her and uses their fangs. She is a press darling until she is displaced by someone new.


----------



## lulilu

needlv said:


> Meh... good on him for getting a job with no qualifications other than his title.  At least earning money this way is much better than selling family secrets to Oprah or threatening to use that as leverage...
> Zara Philips - I think - has a job on a board of directors for a company (which I cannot recall the name).  So I don’t think the RF would object to Harry’s appointment either....



This is not merely a BoD job like many retired politicians get to pad their retirement benefits.  They are trotted out at shareholders meetings and there are no job requirements other than attending Board meetings.  This is a C position job.  For which he is clearly unqualified.



marietouchet said:


> makes sense, there was an interview with the choir , not bishop, and the choir said BP kept telling them to shorten their songs, and of course, the subtext was the racism of BP



I read that 1) Charles hired the choir; and 2) HM changed the choir's songs many many times before the wedding, NOT the BP.



chicinthecity777 said:


> Agreed! If those 2 have any principle or decency, they would have denounce the titles, Harry would have removed himself from the line of succession. But they won't because those are the only things they have to make them something!



Agree.  If he can't put DoS in large letters under his name on the corporate photo chart, they won't want him as he'd have no/minimal value to the company, which hired him because he is DoS.


----------



## jennlt

carmen56 said:


> Can’t wait for Tom Bower’s book.  I hope he dishes all the dirt on Meghan.


I have a feeling he'll need a bulldozer because there's no dish big enough for all that dirt


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> This guy has a point.  Omid is baiting people. That can’t be a good sign.



Regarding Omid Scobie - Oh, good, another angry drama queen writing about an angry drama queen.


----------



## lalame

lulilu said:


> This is not merely a BoD job like many retired politicians get to pad their retirement benefits.  They are trotted out at shareholders meetings and there are no job requirements other than attending Board meetings.  This is a C position job.  For which he is clearly unqualified.



The only thing I'd disagree with in what you said is a BoD IS normally made up with extremely qualified people. The job requirement is extraordinary resources they'll provide the executive team - whether that's expertise or money or access. Boards are usually filled with ex-politicians (access/expertise), ex-Csuite (expertise), or just plain rich people (money). Harry is even less qualified to be on a Board than he is this C-level position, and I think he's extraordinarily underqualified for that. 

There are legitimate Chief Impact Officers out there. It's a real job, not a made up job like his is.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don't see it happening in a sane world, but these days... If she has the US press backing her up the way they have so far, anything is possible. They wouldn't report her flubs, they would prop her up whenever possible, they would relentlessly criticize her opponent, and that's how we'd get a Meghan Markle in office.


Your assessment is unfortunately very good! Excellent!


----------



## mellibelly

Well, well, well. Seems CNN is finally catching up to the truth.

Critics point out inconsistencies in Sussex's Oprah interview


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> There is just the little thing that really gives me the creeps, that she would have killed her un-born baby too. I'm pro-choice and I still find that HORRIFIC.
> 
> I know that when one is feeling suicidal reason doesn't come into it, but seriously, that's a consideration.
> 
> Britney is basically under house arrest and MM is (thought to be) running for President


i remember when the same story was revealed about Diana when carrying William - that was in the Morton book which Morton ghost wrote for Diana
I had EXACTLY the same reaction


----------



## mellibelly

If MM believes she’s qualified to run for president, she really is the raging narcissist we all think her to be. She’s not even equipped to be mayor of Montecito!


----------



## Chloe302225

mellibelly said:


> If MM believes she’s qualified to run for president, she really is the raging narcissist we all think her to be. She’s not even equipped to be mayor of Montecito!


 Don't throw dirt on the reputation of the person who has that job; you mean she isn't even qualified to run a bake sale to raise funds for Archewell.


----------



## xincinsin

Chloe302225 said:


> Don't throw dirt on the reputation of the person who has that job; you mean she isn't even qualified to run a bake sale to raise funds for Archewell.


She does claim to have won Harry's heart with a roasted chicken (now we know why they rescued all those chickens)


----------



## mellibelly

Not throwing dirt at all. If she was serious about politics she could start at city council, she is in no way qualified to be mayor, senator, governor, president. And yes, as you said, not even qualified to run a bake sale.


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C on MM&H's audience (American)...they are after megabucks! Will & Kate can take the UK, but MM&H can take the world! Their initiatives are money enterprises, JCMH's new jobs, and more... Enjoy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Well, well, well. Seems CNN is finally catching up to the truth.
> 
> Critics point out inconsistencies in Sussex's Oprah interview




It is one drop in the swimming pool of good press for Meghan, but I'll take it. Even our fearful-of-being-called-racist media can rationalize pointing out her most egregious lies.


----------



## Yanca

Hazza and Meghain are working non -stop with the PR drip. Their faithful number one mouthpiece/ fierce protector Omid is hard at work, he is such a race baiting hateful person. IF Hazza and Meghain want to have all these jobs, good for them, but quit attacking the BRF and the British Press while doing it,  because they are not as easily convinced by the US Media. I don't even want to read about them anymore and yet  they are everywhere,  you don't have to google their name and their mugs are plastered on almost all sites,- The 13,000 donations - which I read was from the cookbook she wrote the foreword on- it's not even her recipes so whay is it considered her donation??  the news that they congratulated Zara Philipps on her new baby boy- i honestly it seemed that they are afraid to have a day go by that they are not in the news.


----------



## marietouchet

Yanca said:


> Hazza and Meghain are working non -stop with the PR drip. Their faithful number one mouthpiece/ fierce protector Omid is hard at work, he is such a race baiting hateful person. IF Hazza and Meghain want to have all these jobs, good for them, but quit attacking the BRF and the British Press while doing it,  because they are not as easily convinced by the US Media. I don't even want to read about them anymore and yet  they are everywhere,  you don't have to google their name and their mugs are plastered on almost all sites,- The 13,000 donations - which I read was from the cookbook she wrote the foreword on- it's not even her recipes so whay is it considered her donation??  the news that they congratulated Zara Philipps on her new baby boy- i honestly it seemed that they are afraid to have a day go by that they are not in the news.


Read somewhere ... cannot remember where so I can give credit ... 

It has been suggested that the recent week of drips is intended to bury the story about St Laurent leaving after less than a year.  It was noted these new jobs have been there for a bit, and announcements were not made at the time of appointment, but   just after the story of losing more staff

And of course ST Laurent waited til after Oprah to exit, she has a new  job lined up - that must have been in the works for some months


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> This guy has a point.  Omid is baiting people. That can’t be a good sign.




NAGL (what Omid said). NAGL at all. Makes you wonder what they say about Harry's family behind closed doors.


----------



## marietouchet

mellibelly said:


> Not throwing dirt at all. If she was serious about politics she could start at city council, she is in no way qualified to be mayor, senator, governor, president. And yes, as you said, not even qualified to run a bake sale.


about bake sale kinds of things and recipes 

another story from a source that I am sadly unable to credit ...

people have suddenly noticed that she wrote only the 3 page intro to HER Grenfell tower cookbook


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> Is everyone enjoying the Spotify podcast? LOLZ



okay, who came up with the word 'podcast'? What does the word 'pod' have to do with anything remotely connected to digital audio files? Digicast or audiocast ok. But _podcast_?
All I think of are pod people........nomadic parasitical extraterrestrials.


----------



## poopsie

mellibelly said:


> Well, well, well. Seems CNN is finally catching up to the truth.
> 
> Critics point out inconsistencies in Sussex's Oprah interview




THE truth? Not Meghan's truth?
I wouldn't count on CNN being able to catch their breath let alone THE truth


----------



## chicinthecity777

Already posted! 

*








						Prince Harry and Meghan: Critics point out inconsistencies in Sussex's Oprah interview  - CNN Video
					

Whether or not you support the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, it's hard to argue against profound issues raised by their interview with Oprah Winfrey, especially around suicide prevention and confronting racism. But critics of the couple are pointing to inconsistencies in the tell-all interview...




					amp.cnn.com
				



*


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> THE truth? Not Meghan's truth?
> I wouldn't count on CNN being able to catch their breath let alone THE truth



It's a very tentative start. It's only one somewhat questioning segment compared to the dozens of gushing, complimentary ones they have done about them.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> Well, well, well. Seems CNN is finally catching up to the truth.
> 
> Critics point out inconsistencies in Sussex's Oprah interview



Took them long enough.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> If MM believes she’s qualified to run for president, she really is the raging narcissist we all think her to be. She’s not even equipped to be *mayor of Montecito*!


Oh God, please don't give her any ideas!


----------



## 1LV

elvisfan4life said:


> No embarrassment to us anymore he has gone never to return not our problem anymore


Brag, brag, brag.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> about bake sale kinds of things and recipes
> 
> another story from a source that I am sadly unable to credit ...
> 
> people have suddenly noticed that she wrote only the 3 page intro to HER Grenfell tower cookbook


Were all three pages in giant font about how to roast a chicken?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!


----------



## csshopper

jennlt said:


> I have a feeling he'll need a bulldozer because there's no dish big enough for all that dirt



Re: Tom Bower's book yet to be written: Would love to know if the rumors MM injured sorority pledges while she was at Northwestern by using Super Glue instead of eyelash glue are really true? Like so much of her life, circumstances are Murky Markle: she left Northwestern before graduation, the national Sorority was mostly silent, and very circumspect in issuing only a brief statement of congratulations about her becoming a Duchess. Although a small group of sorority sisters/stans did attend the wedding, all other statements from the sorority sounded like muzzled, party line "keep a lid on it" kind of thing.

Further, this preceded her trying to join the Diplomatic service, but she (and she has admitted this) couldn't pass the exam, so  Daddy twisted the arm of his brother, who had connections, and he twisted the arm of the US Ambassador to Argentina and MM ended up working there. But, another rumor that's out there is she departed  after having an affair with a married Attache at the American Embassy. Meghan's recollection of this was:

_Speaking to Vogue in 2013, Markle told the magazine how at the age of 20, and reportedly short of credits to complete her junior year, she successfully applied for an internship at the US embassy in Buenos Aires 'for a few months'._

Waiting for Tom Bower.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, there is some interesting body language I hadn't noticed before. I didn't catch it until the second time I watched the CNN segment (it is at about the 1 minute mark). When Meghan says they got married three days early Harry is looking right at her. As Oprah turns in her chair to look at Harry for his reaction, he immediately turns his head and looks at the ground and he keeps his head down for the entire "backyard wedding" story. He absolutely will NOT meet Oprah's eye. 

I think that was one lie he didn't know was coming. He was terrified Oprah was going to ask _him_ to elaborate on it and he didn't know what to do so he looked away until Oprah returned her focus to Meghan.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> people have suddenly noticed that she wrote only the 3 page intro to HER Grenfell tower cookbook


Seriously, I couldn't believe it was called *MM's cookbook* every time it was discussed and no one corrected the error. She also appears on the cover. 
	

		
			
		

		
	




Book Title: TOGETHER Our Community Cookbook


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Okay, there is some interesting body language I hadn't noticed before. I didn't catch it until the second time I watched the CNN segment (it is at about the 1 minute mark). When Meghan says they got married three days early Harry is looking right at her. As Oprah turns in her chair to look at Harry for his reaction, he immediately turns his head and looks at the ground and he keeps his head down for the entire "backyard wedding" story. He absolutely will NOT meet Oprah's eye.
> 
> I think that was one lie he didn't know was coming. He was terrified Oprah was going to ask _him_ to elaborate on it and he didn't know what to do so he looked away until Oprah returned her focus to Meghan.


GOOD CATCH bag-mania!


----------



## Sol Ryan

chicinthecity777 said:


> Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!




self-awareness... hahaha... omg...


----------



## poopsie

The jokes just write themselves, don't they?


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!




Meh, I bet he didn't even write that. It was probably some nameless staff member. It doesn't have enough convoluted words to be Meghan but then Twitter does have a character limit.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> okay, who came up with the word 'podcast'? What does the word *'pod'* have to do with anything remotely connected to digital audio files? Digicast or audiocast ok. But _podcast_?
> All I think of are pod people........nomadic parasitical extraterrestrials.


Pod is a whale family as in...
 We are beluga, we are pod, we're 200,000 strong.
 We're coming to reclaim our domain.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Meh, I bet he didn't even write that. It was probably some nameless staff member. It doesn't have enough convoluted words to be Meghan but then Twitter does have a character limit.


This is Daily Mail's tweet quoting him. "His" actual note may be longer. 

I changed my mind about embarrassment! I am having 2nd hand embarrassent on behalf of Harry and the company who hired this clown! Any sensible person with a real job can see that this is so BAD!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> okay, who came up with the word 'podcast'? What does the word 'pod' have to do with anything remotely connected to digital audio files? Digicast or audiocast ok. But _podcast_?
> All I think of are pod people........nomadic parasitical extraterrestrials.



LOL. It was a combination of iPod and broadcast. It made more sense back when the term was coined and everyone had an iPod.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Took them long enough.


And it will likely not last!   



purseinsanity said:


> Oh God, please don't give her any ideas!


Mayor of Montecito is far below her aspirations.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!




I wonder if MM's loyal servant, Omid wrote this for him.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if MM's loyal servant, Omid wrote this for him.


Might be too well written to be by Omid! Based on the limited extracts of Finding Freebies I read, he's a terrible writer!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Aminamina said:


> My 6,5 years old son loves playing his online games. He’s like a little pro. Every now and then he asks me to buy him some boosters to beat obstacles but...I teach him to be patient, try harder, be persistent and use his brain to beat them on his own. Now, these two H&M are definitely the sort of lousy talentless players who can’t make any step on their own buy BUY they way ALL the way. There is no way more certain to get bankrupt. Morally and financially


Then your son is far more mature at six years old than the middle-aged Sussexes will ever be  I just love to point out their actual ages because their sycophantic fans keep pretending like H&M are some sort of high school innocents, just setting out in the adult world and it's INANE!!!

Neither one of them seems to have ever done much of an effort in their life without their respective dads- and various other discarded men in M:s case- shelling out for booster after booster for their ungrateful spawn.  

I think that H&M are truly and utterly gobsmacked at the whole of humanity not scrambling to coddle them and cater to their every whim.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> She does claim to have won Harry's heart with a roasted chicken (now we know why they rescued all those chickens)



We later learned - because these people overshare - she won him over with peeing in the woods. I wish I was joking.


----------



## csshopper

chicinthecity777 said:


> Might be too well written to be by Omid! Based on the limited extracts of Finding Freebies I read, he's a terrible writer!


The Company might be smart enough to have staff with education and experience ghost write for him, but then again, they were dumb enough to hire him so maybe not?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> people have suddenly noticed that she wrote only the 3 page intro to HER Grenfell tower cookbook



Is this news? I'm not being snarky, but I always knew she didn't write that book, that is a was a community project. Did the sugars really miss that? 

Also, may I say I couldn't bring myself to buy it (although it was cheap) because it had her face plastered on the title page, but gladly shelled out for the one Wills wrote the foreword for (but missed to bring up at any chance to paint himself like a saint) even though it was twice as expensive (but very, very well made with interesting contributors)?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!




Ok, he's starting to annoy me. How about he starts coping with his mother's death 24 years ago, because I guess that is what life has thrown at him. Self-awareness my a*s.


----------



## Aminamina

Ok, Ok. All bets are off. Kanye vs Meghan! Run! Why not - Ukraine has a clown elected for the president ruining country. US, I love this country - do resist Crap.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Further, this preceded her trying to join the Diplomatic service, but she (and she has admitted this) couldn't pass the exam, so  Daddy twisted the arm of his brother, who had connections, and he twisted the arm of the US Ambassador to Argentina and MM ended up working there. But, another rumor that's out there is she departed  after having an affair with a married Attache at the American Embassy. Meghan's recollection of this was:
> 
> _Speaking to Vogue in 2013, Markle told the magazine how at the age of 20, and reportedly short of credits to complete her junior year, she successfully applied for an internship at the US embassy in Buenos Aires 'for a few months'._



Recolletions might have varied for a long time.


----------



## Chanbal

On JCMH joining the Aspen Institute and statement announcing his new role: 

"._..commentator James Max hit out, insisting Harry and his wife Meghan Markle were the "*masters of spin and misinformation*".

Mr Max read aloud the statement announcing the Duke's new role...

Mr Max was stark in his assessment of the statement. He said: "*What a load of nonsense*._"











						Prince Harry and Meghan skewered over Duke's new job -'Master of spin'
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle been accused of being the "masters of spin" following the announcement of one of the Duke of Sussex's new jobs.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Harry is attempting to be the new age Joseph  Goebbels Chief Impact Officer of Woke Information. He isn't silver tongued enough, but the idiots will listen to him.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, he's starting to annoy me. How about he starts coping with his mother's death 24 years ago, because I guess that is what life has thrown at him. Self-awareness my a*s.


I'm starting to wonder if he thinks he can talk about the trauma of losing his mother for the rest of his life


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> LOL. It was a combination of iPod and broadcast. It made more sense back when the term was coined and *everyone had an iPod*.



There it is. Not a member of the Apple world order.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> There it is. Not a member of the Apple world order.



I was assimilated by Apple two decades ago and I have never looked back!


----------



## rose60610

If Harry's message is to "cope with whatever life throws at you" then why the hell do you need any kind of coach?  Just cope!  Harry couldn't even cope with being born a royal and inheriting many millions.  He was trapped!  If coping comes in the form of a spoiled drama queen who calls your family racist and claims they make her suicidal, I'd throw his advice down the garbage disposal. And people pay for this?


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> If Harry's message is to "cope with whatever life throws at you" then why the hell do you need any kind of coach?  Just cope!  Harry couldn't even cope with being born a royal and inheriting many millions.  He was trapped!  If coping comes in the form of a spoiled drama queen who calls your family racist and claims they make her suicidal, I'd throw his advice down the garbage disposal. And people pay for this?



Well we can all see how well he has coped with losing his mother


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I'm starting to wonder if he thinks he can talk about the trauma of losing him mother for the rest of his life



He's well on his way!  As long as Dead Diana pays the bills! Even Dead Diana will get Markled when she can't be milked any longer.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!



The last thing I need (and I'm assuming those with mental health issues need) is a morally corrupt, mentally ill "prince" tossing word salad and preaching from his Netflix built ButterUp pulpit.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I was assimilated by Apple two decades ago and I have never looked back!



Can't help myself..................I have always swam against the tide


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Well we can all see how well he has coped with losing his mother


His message sounds more like, "Suck it up!".  Something he himself couldn't stomach.  Dumba$$.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We later learned - because these people overshare - she won him over with peeing in the woods. I wish I was joking.


What's the Urban Dictionary meaning for "Peeing in the Woods"?  I'm starting to think they really meant a Golden Shower.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Harry is attempting to be the new age Joseph  Goebbels Chief Impact Officer of Woke Information. He isn't silver tongued enough, but the idiots will listen to him.



 They aren't even _trying_ to hide who they think are to blame for everything


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> His message sounds more like, "Suck it up!".  Something he himself couldn't stomach.  Dumba$$.



You mean it isn't his job to coddle them?


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> He's well on his way!  As long as Dead Diana pays the bills! Even Dead Diana will get Markled when she can't be milked any longer.


I'm so sick of these schmucks!  Yes, Harry, your mother died when you were 12.  I'm very sorry that happened.  But how many people around the world grow up without a parent?  Whether lost due to trauma, murder, accident, suicide, sickness, war, etc., young children lose one or both of their parents every day.  They don't have the whole world mourning for them.  Most don't have the luxury of EVERYTHING else this dim wit did.  She died a quarter of a century ago.  Stop milking her memory you nit wit.


----------



## Lodpah

I want to write to these organizations and ask them why? Why are they making a mockery of something so serious by hiring unqualified and dim witted person to be a part of their board? An article today in a news article that workers are not getting the help they need mental wise.

Sorry but they think his name makes him an expert? This is a joke and we are in a different dimension like Chuck Missler said. There’s a fourth dimension that these stupid corporate people who fall for these tricksters live in. 

May their endeavors fail.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> His message sounds more like, "Suck it up!".  Something he himself couldn't stomach.  Dumba$$.



He is an expert in hypocrisy. Makes you wonder if he learned his skills from Meghan or if he was always that way.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> What's the Urban Dictionary meaning for "Peeing in the Woods"?  I'm starting to think they really meant a Golden Shower.


OK now, calm down  Everything is lewd in the UD version. I'm sure there's even an obscene interpretation for baby pandas rolling down hills


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Slightly OT, but Youtube suggested to me Katherine McPhee singing while David Foster played the piano. Two observations: 1. she really has a beautiful voice. 2. man, that guy is OLD.


HA!! .. couldn't agree with you more!!!  Add on top of that (him being OLD), is that he's a real a$$hole (I think it was in this thread that I told the story about my friend's party [the release of her husband's album as he was a musician in a very popular band] .. where David just couldn't STAND that he was not the center of attention and thus, decided to go up to the Piano .. bark to everyone to "shut the F up" .. and then proceed to play as though it was HIS party and could have cared less about anyone there .. but HIMSELF).  To this day, if you even dare to mention his name to my friend, she starts to spew her hatred of him!


----------



## gracekelly

JAN MOIR: Prince Harry has perfect CV for a Mickey Mouse executive!
					

JAN MOIR: Now that the shutters have slammed down on the Bank of Dad and with the MumCash reserves down to the last £20 million or so, Prince Harry has had to take drastic action.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




From the article:  

Perhaps his first task as Fake News Commissioner will be an investigation into himself, in which he will find himself wanting, and send himself a stern memo.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Well we can all see how well he has coped with losing his mother


People cope in different ways, JCMH monetized his feelings!


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> This was on a blog three days ago.  See here to read it yourself.









RachelCohen808 said:


> I thought the dress was ill-fitted because it was the exact copy of the dress designed and worn by the Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. As well as the veil. I guess Meghan wanted to make a statement with it but did not consider how different it will look on her body.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5029975








That's a lot of similarities- dress, bouquet, veil & tiara and the way they are styled.
MM really hasn't a single original bone in her body. Princess 
Angela looked fantastic. Although, it makes all the difference when your wedding dress is perfectly fitted and your husband looks genuinely happy to have just gotten married to you. 
JCMH looks so uncomfortable in that picture, in fact I thought most of the pics from their w.day he looked uncomfortable and not very happy.





papertiger said:


> I believe the CM Givenchy dress for MM was fairly close to the original 1967 version. Edited to say I prefer the single centre seam and empire of the older version, the panels and shaping look more less couture and are not a good choice for someone who is short-waisted.
> 
> View attachment 5030979
> 
> 
> 
> It was mentioned - by us on this thread. The media is way behind because they just browse each other.
> 
> I think _the_ (or both) dresses have something of Givenchy's 1967 wedding dress about them. Of course the neckline has been cut wider (as on a dress Audrey modelled in the mid-1950s, but that also had a romantic tutu skirt) and MM's was pure white.
> 
> View attachment 5031272
> 
> 
> View attachment 5031273
> 
> 
> View attachment 5031274


Ugh, every time I see pics of MM's dress I cringe. The tailoring was so bad, just looking at the hem which looks like it was roughly tucked under and pinned. Half of the hem looks like it's falling down. Don't get me started on the thick, heavy fabric which always reminds me of neoprene/the kind of fabric on a scuba wetsuit... it doesn't sit well on the body as a dress. Just, no.
But Audrey... that dress, that waist! 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they’ll use 8 point







So, hold up. Where did this order for the MOS to publish an apology to MM in it's paper come from? Was it all demanded from her side or was it part of the ruling by the judge with nothing to do with MM and she just got greedy by asking for it to be the size of the original story about her letter?





Chanbal said:


> A fun comment from PETRONELLA WYATT asking Will to stop reaching out to his haunted brother:
> 
> "...*Not until the parched California hills freeze over will there be a reconciliation between you and the Prince of Sighs and Mother Teresa of Montecito.*
> 
> _*DELUSIONAL NARCISSIST*
> Meghan had already caused “irreversible damage” to her own family, by snubbing her half-sister, Samantha Markle, and first alienating then discarding her poor father.
> 
> Now, with the steeliness of a gangland hitman, she has turned her sights on the most famous family in the world.
> 
> She had done nothing to deserve this fame, apart from persuading an impressionable prince to fall for her charms.
> 
> And like all delusional narcissists, she felt not a jot of gratitude or loyalty to her benefactress.
> 
> Now the Queen can give her nothing she wants or needs, her Majesty has been discarded like a pair of worn-out Louboutins.
> 
> *Could it be that Herself aspires to create an alternative royal family in the United States?
> To set herself up, not so much as a People’s Princess, but as a queen over the water?*
> 
> It would not be beyond Meg and Haz to start a sort of monarchy of the downtrodden, a protectorate of victims of sexism, racism, British newspaperism and other unbearable oppressions.
> 
> Thus, Meghan’s strategy depends on the Sussexes being against the Royal Family and its core values of duty and its hereditary principle.
> 
> *As Prince William must realise, painful though it is to this increasingly impressive young man, a reconciliation just ain’t going to happen.*
> 
> Remember that Meghan and her haunted hubby have accused the Windsors of racism.
> 
> How would their new, ethnic minority fan base feel if such a crime was forgiven?
> 
> ...
> *Meghan is a Mean Girl and on this, recollections don’t vary.*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William, stop 'reaching out' to Harry and Meghan — nothing is sacred to them
> 
> 
> “FURIOUS” is not an adjective one would normally associate with the Duke of Cambridge. But, oh brother. The dice have been rolled and Wills has found himself on the receiving end of a pair of snak…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


*Mother Teresa of Montecito*








CarryOn2020 said:


> One more lie/misrepresentation/deception/ooops -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s 2014 blog post seemingly debunks claim she knew nothing of royal life
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle — who claimed to Oprah Winfrey last week that she never thought what it would be like to marry a prince — blogged about dreaming of becoming a princess seven years ago, a new report s…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is it? Ariel or She-RA?  The children need to know!  In the OW interview, she compared herself to Ariel, the mermaid.
> From M’s blog, the Tig — pre-wedding:
> 
> _“Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014, while commenting on the “pomp” surrounding Britain’s Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding three years earlier, according to the Sun on Sunday.
> “For those of you unfamiliar with the ‘80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength,” Markle said in her since-nixed blog.
> “We’re definitely not talking about Cinderella here,” said Markle, who married Prince Harry, William’s brother, in May 2018.
> “Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate,” Markle mused._
> 
> 
> Spoiler: She-RA?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s 2014 blog post seemingly debunks claim she knew nothing of royal life*
> By Kate Sheehy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle — who claimed to Oprah Winfrey last week that she never thought what it would be like to marry a prince — blogged about dreaming of becoming a princess seven years ago, a new report says.
> 
> “Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power,’’ wrote the now-Duchess of Sussex in 2014, while commenting on the “pomp” surrounding Britain’s Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding three years earlier, according to the Sun on Sunday.
> 
> “For those of you unfamiliar with the ‘80s cartoon reference, She-Ra is the twin sister of He-Man and a sword-wielding royal rebel known for her strength,” Markle said in her since-nixed blog.
> 
> “We’re definitely not talking about Cinderella here,” said Markle, who married Prince Harry, William’s brother, in May 2018.
> 
> “Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate,” Markle mused.
> 
> The 39-year-old former actress — who recounted to Winfrey how Middleton allegedly made her cry before her wedding to Harry — also claimed in the explosive TV chat that she basically had no clue about the British royal family before marrying into it.


_“Little girls dream of being princesses."_


Don't ever speak for _all _little girls, speak for yourself Rachel. 
There's nothing quite like a huge stereotype to make you roll your eyes into oblivion.
I for one dreamt of being many things as a little girl, the biggest dream of mine was to be a racing car driver (F1 driver to be specific), I also wanted to be a superhero like Batman, a firefighter etc... but not one of my dreams involved me wanting to be a princess, that would have been a nightmare to me.


----------



## lalame

JCMCIO?


----------



## Chanbal

BREAKING NEWS: The very successful business man, JCMH will work from home! 

"_The Duke of Sussex__, 36, will initially work from home as “chief impact officer” at mental health firm BetterUp.

He will also be spared a daily commute for his other new role, a part-time position probing fake news.

Toilet breaks can be taken in one of the mansion’s 16 bathrooms and his lunch hour spent in five acres of land._"











						Prince Harry will be confined to sprawling US mansion as he starts new career
					

PRINCE Harry is set to start his new career confined to his sprawling US mansion. The Duke of Sussex, 36, will initially work from home as “chief impact officer” at mental health firm BetterUp.  R…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Please, Harry isn’t important enough to abdicate; a monarch abdicates. H is comparable to a small cog on a wheel in the machinery. However he can and should renounce his titles, style, rights and position in the line of succession. But he won’t easily give up because of his king size ego, puffed up self worth, dreams of big $$$ and his new motto, ‘Meghan accipit quod vult Meghan.’ Sorry, most mottos are in Latin, although now that I think about it, H is way to dense to learn a second language... My bad, I’ve read that he can now speak Southern Californian...


Good effort.  He was a weak student, and it's showing. He's the least educated one of the grown up royal grandchildren.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Re: Tom Bower's book yet to be written: Would love to know if the rumors MM injured sorority pledges while she was at Northwestern by using Super Glue instead of eyelash glue are really true? Like so much of her life, circumstances are Murky Markle: *she left Northwestern before graduation*, the national Sorority was mostly silent, and very circumspect in issuing only a brief statement of congratulations about her becoming a Duchess. Although a small group of sorority sisters/stans did attend the wedding, all other statements from the sorority sounded like muzzled, party line "keep a lid on it" kind of thing.


She didn't graduate? But there was so much noise about her double major, how highly educated she is and didn't she say in an interview that she thought she was destined for the diplomatic service?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> BREAKING NEWS: The very successful business man, JCMH will work from home!
> 
> "_The Duke of Sussex__, 36, will initially work from home as “chief impact officer” at mental health firm BetterUp.
> 
> He will also be spared a daily commute for his other new role, a part-time position probing fake news.
> 
> Toilet breaks can be taken in one of the mansion’s 16 bathrooms and his lunch hour spent in five acres of land._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will be confined to sprawling US mansion as he starts new career
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry is set to start his new career confined to his sprawling US mansion. The Duke of Sussex, 36, will initially work from home as “chief impact officer” at mental health firm BetterUp.  R…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



In other words under Meghan's thumb
I wonder if he has an e collar to keep him on the grounds


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> I couldn't even watch this whole thing.  She literally makes my skin crawl.  She flirts with any man she thinks can help her, doesn't she?  I found it interesting how she sits, with her arm back on the chair, almost like she's opening herself up, literally, to Craig.



The thing about CF is, he was never really listening to her. His show was about him doing his shtick and mostly the celebs would just sit back and laugh at him (because he was so funny). But she keeps trying to keep up with him. I lasted 4 minutes.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> I really don't see how this company is going to make Harry big money. There are sooooo many of them and frankly many fizzle out. I have never heard of this company but I'd bet they make most of their money with the executive coaching. That seems to be going strong among exec perks.



My best friend does this and business is booming. The funny thing is, she tells me about her high level clients and most of them are too f-up for her to do much of anything to change them. But she gets paid mucho dinero to do it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

jennlt said:


> I'd love to know how BetterUp's employees and coaches feel about this new executive. Everyone else at the company most likely attended university for four to six years and then worked long hours to achieve their titles and Harry just gets handed a plum job. That's got to be a blow to their employees' morale and general mental health!



That is happening quite a bit in corporate America right now. They have to hire an unqualified person for the plum position and then hire another person to actually do the job they are hired for.


----------



## Allisonfaye

kkfiregirl said:


> Well now that you bring up body language, it seems as though Craig is being flirtatious, but he's closed off his body by crossing his arms across his body for more than 1/2 of the interview. hmmm...



As I said, he's not really interested in what she is saying....


----------



## lalame

jennlt said:


> I'd love to know how BetterUp's employees and coaches feel about this new executive. Everyone else at the company most likely attended university for four to six years and then worked long hours to achieve their titles and Harry just gets handed a plum job. That's got to be a blow to their employees' morale and general mental health!



ITA with you. Celebrity spokesperson is one thing, but a C-level appointment is OTT nepotism. Especially in technology, the job market is very competitive and there are a lot of highly-skilled, mission-driven people here who are more qualified. But I hope everyone can see the company is basically purchasing PR and nothing more.


----------



## needlv

New blind gossip post is interesting.  Maybe H is given shares as part of compensation so if it lists or sells he gets $$$









						The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> My best friend does this and business is booming. The funny thing is, she tells me about her high level clients and most of them are too f-up for her to do much of anything to change them. But she gets paid mucho dinero to do it.


It's a very profitable business. The company I'm with gets a new official company culture (slogan, catch phrases, training, the works!) with every new CEO and sometimes every new head of HR. They are all trying to leave a legacy. The last round, they made the C-suite conduct some of the training to convince us they would "walk the talk". There was a lot of discussion in the lower ranks as to whose talk you should sign up for because some of the C-suite were obviously just going through the motions.

Harry can trot out his mother and his coping mechanisms for years because nothing grabs the heartstrings and gives listeners a sense of superiority as much as a god-honest Duke telling you: "I know how you feel, I'm coping with it too, learn from my failure!"


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> ITA with you. Celebrity spokesperson is one thing, but a C-level appointment is OTT nepotism. Especially in technology, the job market is very competitive and there are a lot of highly-skilled, mission-driven people here who are more qualified. But I hope everyone can see the company is basically purchasing PR and nothing more.


In addition to purchasing PR, this might be a favor they are doing to someone else... I wonder who got JCMH this job.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> New blind gossip post is interesting.  Maybe H is given shares as part of compensation so if it lists or sells he gets $$$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


"_*So our celebrity would be Elon Musk without the education*.

Or the experience.

Or the entrepreneurial vision.

Or the business savvy.

Or the work ethic._"

Or the IQ!


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> New blind gossip post is interesting.  Maybe H is given shares as part of compensation so if it lists or sells he gets $$$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



Have you read the comments? Everyone who posted doesn’t like him/them. It makes me happy to know we aren’t the only ones who see through the phoniness.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> She didn't graduate? But there was so much noise about her double major, how highly educated she is and didn't she say in an interview that she thought she was destined for the diplomatic service?!


She was granted a Degree in 2003. It’s not clear if she returned to the campus following Argentina, or did extension classes. Sorry I should have been more clear.


----------



## needlv

Oh my goodness - I laughed so hard- check this out!  He is trying to be PR for the royal family!


----------



## Chanbal

Wills beats Mike Tyson and Jason Statham to be named world's sexiest bald man
					

PRINCE William has been named as the world’s sexiest bald man. The 38-year-old Duke has been described as “sexy” a whopping 17.6million times online in blogs, reports and pages found in Google sear…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Have you read the comments? Everyone who posted doesn’t like him/them. It makes me happy to know we aren’t the only ones who see through the phoniness.


This comment was interesting: if they split, MM could use ignorance of Harry's past as her excuse - because, you know, she didn't google him or know anything about him or his family before they got hitched in the backyard  Trevor must be thanking his lucky stars.

_Milady FURIOUS: has to unchain PH from radiator to go to impactful job. PH now free to buy his own dog biscuits to eat. Chain of events unleashed, culminating in PH going to live by Adele’s heating system. PH’s racial infractions suddenly “discovered” by M, who didn’t previously know (doesn’t read press, knew nothing of RF etc). Divorce! _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Ugh.  The more JCMH talks about mental health, the more it minimizes what W&K are trying to do.  Why couldn’t he have found a different thing?  Ugh.


----------



## LittleStar88

Annawakes said:


> Ugh.  The more JCMH talks about mental health, the more it minimizes what W&K are trying to do.  Why couldn’t he have found a different thing?  Ugh.



H&M look like sad copycats. Or like when little kids try to mimic someone they see on TV.


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> Says the person who can't even hold a job as being a Prince!



At this point I am 70% convinced he’s trolling. I can’t believe even a dummy would be this unaware of the irony.

That’s such an insulting thing to say to people who don’t have the freedom he does (aka the vast majority of the world.) I just think back to the days of smirking in a nazi costume and it all fits.

Edited for coherence


----------



## jelliedfeels

Deleted


----------



## Chanbal

"_Speaking to BBC World News, Prince Albert II of Monaco said he found the Sussexes’ “public display of dissatisfaction” inappropriate...

Prince Albert said: "It’s a difficult world out there, and I hope that *he can have the judgement and wisdom to make the right choices*_*.*”











						Prince Albert II of Monaco says Oprah interview 'did bother me'
					

PRINCE ALBERT II of Monaco criticised Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, claiming their allegations did not need to be "laid out in the public sphere".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5035336
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wills beats Mike Tyson and Jason Statham to be named world's sexiest bald man
> 
> 
> PRINCE William has been named as the world’s sexiest bald man. The 38-year-old Duke has been described as “sexy” a whopping 17.6million times online in blogs, reports and pages found in Google sear…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Sorry OT
But actual convicted rapist Mike Tyson  is considered an appropriate choice for a ‘sexiest man’ list - that’s horrific


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bothers me, too. Thank you, Prince Albert, for speaking up. Thank you, @Chanbal, for this article.
‘More from the article:





_Speaking to BBC World News, Prince Albert II of Monaco said he found the Sussexes’ “public display of dissatisfaction” inappropriate.
He said: "It’s very difficult to be in someone’s place. I can understand the pressure that they were under."

However the royal said he thinks “*these types of conversations should be held within the intimate quarters of the family*”.

Prince Albert explained *how “it doesn’t really have to be laid out in the public sphere like that."*

He continued: "It did bother me a little bit._


----------



## CarryOn2020

MailPlus calling for OW and CBS to investigate ‘the inconvenient truth’ and offers ’analysis’ of Hazzie’s jobs:









						How ‘two jobs’ Harry is STILL getting the Royal Family worked up
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## limom

Prince Albert was bothered?
Well, I am pretty sure his illegitimate children were bothered by his refusal to acknowledge them.
Even though all of Monaco knew about them, shoot all of France knew too!
Maybe he is still mad at Stephanie for exposing his azz...
Wasn't Charlene also complaining that the family took  her passport???
Anyways, he should worry about his messy family


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Prince Albert was bothered?
> Well, I am pretty sure his illegitimate children were bothered by his refusal to acknowledge them.
> Even though all of Monaco knew about them, shoot all of France knew too!
> Maybe he is still mad at Stephanie for exposing his azz...
> Wasn't Charlene also complaining that the family took  her passport???
> Anyways, he should worry about his messy family


This thread is so good. You learn all the royal scandals on it. 
Do you think he might be sneak-shaming his ex for going public?


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> This thread is so good. You learn all the royal scandals on it.
> Do you think he might be sneak-shaming his ex for going public?


I am not in his head. But he is super messy and his sister Stephanie is the Queen of messiness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5035407



That got delivered as push news to my phone this morning. I think that's probably the stand of many, many influential people, the other ones are just not speaking out (speaking up?). Too bad it has to be a royal with a pretty, uh, interesting family as well.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> I am not in his head. But he is super messy and his sister Stephanie is the Queen of messiness.


Yes it’s one of the never-ending amusing ironies of society that royalty and the nobility at large are held as paragons of decorum and etiquette yet plenty of them engage in the kind of behaviour that can only be described as vulgar and rough.  

The idol  has clay feet I guess.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That got delivered as push news to my phone this morning. I think that's probably the stand of many, many influential people, the other ones are just not speaking out (speaking up?). Good for Albert.


The way, his family treated Stephanie and Grace, he has zero room to talk.  
I shall wait for the explosion of unknown gossip coming his way...
And there is a ton.


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes it’s one of the never-ending amusing ironies of society that royalty and the nobility at large are held as paragons of decorum and etiquette yet plenty of them engage in the kind of behaviour that can only be described as vulgar and rough.
> 
> The idol  has clay feet I guess.


The thing is the Grimaldi were very protected but since it is a tiny area, everybody knew their business.
They are just as trashy as everybody else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> I am not in his head. But he is super messy and his sister Stephanie is the Queen of messiness.


 
IMO  I hear regret in his comments. He watched his older sister spill her life to the media, then his, then Steph, other royal families, etc. He knows, he knows all the reasons why spilling one’s life to the media is fraught with peril.    He knows.

H&M need to hear those messages. Sure sure, the media will pretend support and encourage H&M to spill more dirt. At the end of the day, they will go on to the next story. H&M can never “ un-say “ what they’ve said. Privacy is indeed all there is. He knows because he has no privacy.  Wonder when Felipe and Willem will send a message — maybe they will keep it private.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> The way, his family treated Stephanie and Grace, he has zero room to talk.
> I shall wait for the explosion of unknown gossip coming his way...
> And there is a ton.



Yeah, I edited my post. Though I am too young to be able to have paid attention what they did to them, I was born around Grace's death (in fact, what did they do to Stephanie?).


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO  I hear regret in his comments. He watched his older sister spill her life to the media, then his, then Steph, other royal families, etc. He knows, he knows all the reasons why spilling one’s life to the media is fraught with peril.    He knows.
> 
> H&M need to hear those messages. Sure sure, the media will pretend support and encourage H&M to spill more dirt. At the end of the day, they will go on to the next story. H&M can never “ un-say “ what they’ve said. Privacy is indeed all there is. He knows because* he has no privacy*.  Wonder when Felipe and Willem will send a message — maybe they will keep it private.


Albert has plenty of privacy when he choose to do his escapades. His subjects are super, hyper protective of the family.
 So why make a public announcement?
He us messy like the rest of us, that is why.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I edited my post. Though I am too young to be able to have paid attention what they did to them, I was born around Grace's death (in fact, what did they do to Stephanie?).


While Prince Albert was just as wild as his sister, her life was exposed constantly.
It is strange for him to speak so publicly about another Royal Family.
Was he asked to or is he just as messy as the rest of us?


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> While Prince Albert was just as wild as his sister, her life was exposed constantly.
> It is strange for him to speak so publicly about another Royal Family.
> Was he asked to or is he just as messy as the rest of us?



Appearing on the *BBC World News* in a rare interview, host Yalda Hakim asked the royal for his reaction.








						Prince Albert of Monaco shares his reaction to Prince Harry's Oprah interview
					

Prince Albert of Monaco was asked for his reaction to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




Here’s the interview:     Tried to link the video, but it did not work   The interview is a 1 minute clip on the BBC  News Europe site.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Appearing on the *BBC World News* in a rare interview, host Yalda Hakim asked the royal for his reaction.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Albert of Monaco shares his reaction to Prince Harry's Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Prince Albert of Monaco was asked for his reaction to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Why did he chose to do this interview?
Anyways, he looks handsome as an older man..


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> Why did he chose to do this interview?
> Anyways, he looks handsome as an older man..



‘No idea.

Here‘s the interview:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Why did he chose to do this interview?
> Anyways, he looks handsome as an older man..



I don't think it was an interview solely to comment on Harry and Meghan. It's just the snippet the media decided to run with.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whatever the intention was, this is indeed the story of the day!  Thank you, @Chanbal


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> JAN MOIR: Prince Harry has perfect CV for a Mickey Mouse executive!
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Now that the shutters have slammed down on the Bank of Dad and with the MumCash reserves down to the last £20 million or so, Prince Harry has had to take drastic action.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the article:
> Perhaps his first task as Fake News Commissioner will be an investigation into himself, in which he will find himself wanting, and send himself a stern memo.





needlv said:


> New blind gossip post is interesting.  Maybe H is given shares as part of compensation so if it lists or sells he gets $$$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The New Elon Musk - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This couple has been sniffing around for months now for ways to score big paydays that can be publicly presented under the thinnest veneer of compassion. They don’t always get what they want, though! Interestingly, we just found out the latest gig that the husband scored was not...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



The Jan Moir article for the DM is brilliant.  She takes JCMH down, peg by peg.

The blind gossip article gives me some satisfaction -- he was trolling for C level jobs AND part ownership in some company, and was roundly rejected.  At least one company had the brains to see he was worthless and the audacity of the PR people promoting him.


----------



## limom

lulilu said:


> The Jan Moir article for the DM is brilliant.  She takes JCMH down, peg by peg.
> 
> The blind gossip article gives me some satisfaction -- he was trolling for C level jobs AND part ownership in some company, and was roundly rejected.  At least one company had the brains to see he was worthless and the audacity of the PR people promoting him.


Do you think he made a financial investment to the healthcare Tupperware firm?
His deal reminded me of a certain Wall Street firm...


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> The Jan Moir article for the DM is brilliant.  She takes JCMH down, peg by peg.
> 
> The blind gossip article gives me some satisfaction -- he was trolling for C level jobs AND part ownership in some company, and was roundly rejected.  At least one company had the brains to see he was worthless and the audacity of the PR people promoting him.


It was said before, he gets a salary from these "jobs" I assume, then they then pay others to work on the projects with Netflix and Spotify? And get paid by the content? What? A bloody sh1t show! Just exactly what DO they actually do to generate revenue? Their outgoing must be huge! A C-level job at a start-up will not pay that lifestyle. 

Have they released another podcast yet? They can't keep on using Archie!


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was said before, he gets a salary from these "jobs" I assume, then they then pay others to work on the projects with Netflix and Spotify? And get paid by the content? What? A bloody sh1t show! Just exactly what DO they actually do to generate revenue? Their outgoing must be huge! A C-level job at a start-up will not pay that lifestyle.
> 
> Have they released another podcast yet? They can't keep on using Archie!


From Prince to hustler.
Do you have to pay to listen to the podcast?


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> From Prince to hustler.
> Do you have to pay to listen to the podcast?


I think you need to be a paid subscriber to Spotify.


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> I think you need to be a paid subscriber to Spotify.


Thanks.
Will wait for the bootleg file.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> The Jan Moir article for the DM is brilliant.  She takes JCMH down, peg by peg.



I enjoy her articles tremendously, she's sharp and witty.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> Thanks.
> Will wait for the bootleg file.


Enjoy! I could never listen to them! I would gag so much!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe they made such a big deal of announcing a podcast and made 1/2 hour episode in November, and nothing since. 

Also, I have a feeling their “uplifting” programming is going to be such a snooze fest. People go to Netflix to be entertained, not to be preached at.


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> Pfffftttttttt.................we're talking LIFETIME here. With their demographics they'd just be preaching to the choir anyway



...and on Lifetime, they would have to make the end that someone tries to kill MM and she fights with them and they fall over a large balcony.....


----------



## jelliedfeels

Allisonfaye said:


> ...and on Lifetime, they would have to make the end that someone tries to kill MM and she fights with them and they fall over a large balcony.....


I don’t get the lifetime channel but I  get the strong impression every film is a super-cheap version of  ‘single white female.’
Therefore, I’m predicting it’ll be Mate Kiddleton wild with jealousy of perfect  MM and in secret collusion with the hosiery industry who tries to hurl MM from the balcony.
Edit - remembered Americans don’t say tights. One must be accurate in our biographical masterpiece!


----------



## jennlt

limom said:


> I am not in his head. But he is super messy and his sister Stephanie is the Queen of messiness.


Meghan's doing her best to take that title away from Stephanie.


----------



## Chanbal

Do you think the donation check is inside the cake? 

*Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month




*



Spoiler: Cake photo-op article












						Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
					

World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> I remember growing up and being told what really mattered was the kind of person you are on the inside. It seems the current generation is being told to see it the other way around. Who you are on the outside is your defining identity.



....content of one's character and all....


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


 
This article illustrates perfectly just how cash-strapped they are


----------



## lanasyogamama

This woman would not say God Bless you after you sneeze without alerting the evil press.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That’s hilarious! It’s the most bizarre act of cheap-skating I’ve seen in ages. That cake will serve five or six people max. I bet she shipped it on saver-rate UPS and it’s stale as anything. 
Why not pay a caterer to make a 50 person bake if you are dead set on a cake? Or even send a cheque! 

Most food charities I know aren’t even allowed to distribute homemade food anyway. 

Also women’s history= cake baking?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Mighty big of her.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t believe they made such a big deal of announcing a podcast and made 1/2 hour episode in November, and nothing since.
> 
> Also, I have a feeling their “uplifting” programming is going to be such a snooze fest. People go to Netflix to be entertained, not to be preached at.


Honestly they have been busy on the lawsuit , interview, pregnancy


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


We need gag alerts for articles like this!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I cannot begin to imagine the carbon footprint of this dessert.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## drifter

lol this singaporean influencer who's no stranger to controversy made a reaction video to the Oprah interview.  
link


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s hilarious! It’s the most bizarre act of cheap-skating I’ve seen in ages. That cake will serve five or six people max. I bet she shipped it on saver-rate UPS and it’s stale as anything.
> Why not pay a caterer to make a 50 person bake if you are dead set on a cake? Or even send a cheque!
> 
> Most food charities I know aren’t even allowed to distribute homemade food anyway.
> 
> Also women’s history= cake baking?



Meghan is so friggin' tone deaf. Maybe the organization can put the cake on eBay and make money selling it to one of her stans. There's bound to be someone willing to fork over big bucks for a "genuine" Meghan cake. And yes, I put genuine in quotes because I don't believe there's a chance in hell she baked it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Question, who needs a cake (allegedly) baked by an ex-actress & failed princess? Not me! What does it even achieve? They really do think they are dogs' bolloxs, don't they?


----------



## bag-mania

I bet a lemon and olive oil cake tastes like pretentious crap. Since the group says they are working with Archewell I hope H&M sent them MONEY to buy ACTUAL FOOD to help people.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA!! .. couldn't agree with you more!!!  Add on top of that (him being OLD), is that he's a real a$$hole (I think it was in this thread that I told the story about my friend's party [the release of her husband's album as he was a musician in a very popular band] .. where David just couldn't STAND that he was not the center of attention and thus, decided to go up to the Piano .. bark to everyone to "shut the F up" .. and then proceed to play as though it was HIS party and could have cared less about anyone there .. but HIMSELF).  To this day, if you even dare to mention his name to my friend, she starts to spew her hatred of him!


he seems kind of smarmy to me and his wife seems like a phony who obvioiusly married him for money....at least they do have music in common I guess.  but in terms of physical beauty (if that matters) I think Yolanda has it all over her


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Let them eat cake?  

"Lemons from her garden". Ffs.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Honestly they have been busy on the lawsuit , interview, pregnancy



...hiring people, firing people, feeding chickens, roasting chickens


----------



## jblended

I wish I'd come up with this myself, but I saw a comment ealrier that said "The Harry formerly known as Prince" and I spat out my tea! 
I can't for the life of me find where I read it, but kudos to the genius who came up with that! Brilliant and oh so true!


----------



## Annawakes

What is it with her and lemons?  The cake, the dress.

that doesn’t even sound good- lemon and olive oil cake? I made lemon thyme chicken tenders last night and used those same ingredients.

who says she didn’t have one of her staff make it?  And besides, during covid times it’s not very wise to send unwrapped, homemade items to anybody.  Geez.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I was going to say what the heck is lemon and olive oil cake? Sounds  is it from "her" cookbook? She can add "failed cook" on her CV too!


----------



## lalame

Okay now I REALLY gotta disagree with you ladies because olive oil cake is DELICIOUS!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Olive oil cakes are a thing, they stem - obviously - from the Mediterranean. I'm not a huge fan because I feel no matter how great your EVOO is the finished cake will have this savory aftertaste I don't want in my sweets, but eh, I also don't like the texture of semolina cakes but they have a huge fanbase. I do like herbs in dessert though (because someone mentioned thyme) - basil is divine in sweet preparations.

The rest, though...I have no strength to pour out the snark (but yes, all of this from media whore to no way she baked it to women's history month and kitchen work), I just read that German health experts are prepared to see up to 100000 (no, that's not a type) new cases per day soon and our minister of health expects our health system to break down sometime in April. But at least they loosened up the lockdown! WTF am I witnessing.


----------



## chicinthecity777

It's not just any olive oil cake I am having a problem with, it's the *LEMON* olive oil cake! Sounds like an very odd combination! But i must admit i don't actually eat cake normally so i am biased.


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> I wish I'd come up with this myself, but I saw a comment ealrier that said "The Harry formerly known as Prince" and I spat out my tea!
> I can't for the life of me find where I read it, but kudos to the genius who came up with that! Brilliant and oh so true!



Can't remember where I read, maybe a comment on Lady CC's vid (?) but somebody else wrote  it first. 

They wrote if Harry had been a painter he could be the 'Artist Formally Known as Prince' 

Unfortunately for us (UK) he still is a damn Prince!


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Can't remember where I read, maybe a comment on Lady CC's vid (?) but somebody else wrote  it first.
> 
> They wrote if Harry had been a painter he could be the 'Artist Formally Known as Prince'
> 
> *Unfortunately for us (UK) he still is a damn Prince! *


So bloody annoying!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Olive oil cakes are a thing, they stem - obviously - from the Mediterranean. I'm not a huge fan because I feel no matter how great your EVOO is the finished cake will have this savory aftertaste I don't want in my sweets, but eh, I also don't like the texture of semolina cakes but they have a huge fanbase. I do like herbs in dessert though (because someone mentioned thyme) - basil is divine in sweet preparations.
> 
> The rest, though...I have no strength to pour out the snark (but yes, all of this from media whore to no way she baked it to women's history month and kitchen work), I just read that German health experts are prepared to see up to 100000 (no, that's not a type) new cases per day soon and our minister of health expects our health system to break down sometime in April. But at least they loosened up the lockdown! WTF am I witnessing.



I immediately thought of polenta cake. I don't mind polenta made with onions and real stock.

I don't like most sweet cakes so if she sent me, I'd send it back 'return to sender'. 

Send me me a bar of dark chocolate and I'll be your friend for life though  (Anyone grow cocoa beans in their garden?)


----------



## Chanbal

Lemon and olive cake sounds like an interesting combination to me, but I wonder how long it took for the cake to arrive in Chicago.  

Slow News Day so far... 

2018 was a big year for MM!

"_Recently unearthed footage from a royal engagement in 2018 appears to show a "tense" exchange between Harry and William - suggesting the moment the rift started to emerge.

Commenting on this, the body language expert said: "When the *two brothers sit together with Meghan in the middle we are shown what look like ignore signals*, with both looking away to either side._"











						Royal feud: Moment Harry and William's relationship breaks down– VIDEO
					

PRINCE HARRY'S rift with his older brother Prince William has been rumoured for years but an expert looking at newly examined royal footage has pinpointed the exact moment the pair's relationship started to deteriorate.




					www.express.co.uk
				




We are being reassured (again!) that MM&H are here to stay...

"_LA-based branding expert Eric Schiffer has said the couple will seek to avoid returning to UK soil.

He told Entertainment Daily: *"They’re going to be in America for some time*.

“Going back to England at this point would be a painful pariah-like experience._”











						Meghan and Harry set to stay in US to avoid 'pariah-like' return
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are set to stay in the US "for some time", an expert has claimed, who points out the couple wants to avoid a "pariah-like" return to the UK.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I immediately thought of polenta cake. I don't mind polenta made with onions and real stock.
> 
> I don't like most sweet cakes so if she sent me, I'd send it back 'return to sender'.
> 
> Send me me a bar of dark chocolate and I'll be your friend for life though  (Anyone grow cocoa beans in their garden?)



If you were in the US, I would recommend the Godiva Chocolate Cake from Cheesecake Factory!


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> ...hiring people, firing people, feeding chickens, roasting chickens


...making waffles, waffling about their "truth"


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Olive oil cakes are a thing, they stem - obviously - from the Mediterranean. I'm not a huge fan because I feel no matter how great your EVOO is the finished cake will have this savory aftertaste I don't want in my sweets, but eh, I also don't like the texture of semolina cakes but they have a huge fanbase. I do like herbs in dessert though (because someone mentioned thyme) - basil is divine in sweet preparations.
> 
> The rest, though...I have no strength to pour out the snark (but yes, all of this from media whore to no way she baked it to women's history month and kitchen work), I just read that German health experts are prepared to see up to 100000 (no, that's not a type) new cases per day soon and our minister of health expects our health system to break down sometime in April. But at least they loosened up the lockdown! WTF am I witnessing.



I'm so sorry to hear this; our cases are rising too, after a plateau of several weeks. At this rate, we'll be wearing masks for years. Stay healthy, y'all!


----------



## Chanbal

Does the Palace still need more evidence? 

"_*Palace officials will be watching Prince Harry's new roles 'very, very closely' to see if they go against the agreement with The Queen that he would not trade off his Royal status,'* a royal expert has claimed.

Speaking on this week's edition of True Royalty TV's weekly programme The Royal Beat, Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers discusses Prince Harry's new role as Chief Impact Officer at US coaching firm BetterUP.

'There is the argument that if he is "Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex" in all the published materials for [the firm], is that trading off the royal brand which they said they wouldn't do to uphold the values of The Queen?' he explains._"










						Palace officials will watch Prince Harry's new roles 'very closely'
					

Speaking on this week's edition of The Royal Beat, Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers discusses Prince Harry's new role as Chief Impact Officer at US coaching firm BetterUP.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Does the Palace still need more evidence?
> 
> "_*Palace officials will be watching Prince Harry's new roles 'very, very closely' to see if they go against the agreement with The Queen that he would not trade off his Royal status,'* a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> Speaking on this week's edition of True Royalty TV's weekly programme The Royal Beat, Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers discusses Prince Harry's new role as Chief Impact Officer at US coaching firm BetterUP.
> 
> 'There is the argument that if he is "Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex" in all the published materials for [the firm], is that trading off the royal brand which they said they wouldn't do to uphold the values of The Queen?' he explains._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace officials will watch Prince Harry's new roles 'very closely'
> 
> 
> Speaking on this week's edition of The Royal Beat, Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers discusses Prince Harry's new role as Chief Impact Officer at US coaching firm BetterUP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Do they really think he'd have a c-suite title without the other title? It seems so obvious.


----------



## duna

chicinthecity777 said:


> It's not just any olive oil cake I am having a problem with, it's the *LEMON* olive oil cake! Sounds like an very odd combination! But i must admit i don't actually eat cake normally so i am biased.



Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> If you were in the US, I would recommend the Godiva Chocolate Cake from Cheesecake Factory!



I so miss going out and just pay someone to drop a full plate in front of me *sigh*


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the cake sounds good! But not from her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!



I wished I had a lemon tree! I make a French inspired lemon cake with lemon zest, lemon syrup AND lemon glaze...and it has crème fraîche.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the cake sounds good! But not from her.



Yeah. At this point it's hard to like anything they do.


----------



## bag-mania

jblended said:


> I wish I'd come up with this myself, but I saw a comment ealrier that said *"The Harry formerly known as Prince"* and I spat out my tea!
> I can't for the life of me find where I read it, but kudos to the genius who came up with that! Brilliant and oh so true!



It was in the comments for the Blind Item about the New Elon Musk.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> At this point I am 70% convinced he’s trolling. I can’t believe even a dummy would be this unaware of the irony.
> 
> That’s such an insulting thing to say to people who don’t have the freedom he does (aka the vast majority of the world.) I just think back to the days of smirking in a nazi costume and it all fits.
> 
> Edited for coherence


I don't think he's trolling...he is just smug and dim IMO


----------



## maris.crane

I mean, I think the gesture sounds nice... (and I think, contrary to some, genuine) but wouldn’t it be smarter to contract a female-owned business in town locally to bake a fresh cake on behalf of Archewell?

Two birds one stone. They’d be supporting women entrepreneurs and giving a treat/thank you to women who work hard.

I’ll be unpopular and say while I love lemon curd and tart, this cake does not appeal to me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!



I'm sure the California lemons are fine and whoever baked it probably used olive oil from Italy. 

Even if the cake was delicious it was still an empty gesture. If they had made a truly impactful donation THAT would certainly have been mentioned. They probably bought a couple dozen sandwiches for the volunteers.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> It was in the comments for the Blind Item about the New Elon Musk.



Thank you   XXXX! Knew I read it in comments somewhere


----------



## lulu212121

Maybe she was watching PBS recently? America's Test Kitchen did this same cake. 

Never an original idea come from either of them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure the California lemons are fine and whoever baked it probably used olive oil from Italy.
> 
> Even if the cake was delicious it was still an empty gesture. If they had made a truly impactful donation THAT would certainly have been mentioned. They probably bought a couple dozen sandwiches for the volunteers.


I don’t think they did, because surely that would’ve made the headline.
I think it was just stale cake in a box with a note with their new logo and a highly artistic signature.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes it’s one of the never-ending amusing ironies of society that royalty and the nobility at large are held as paragons of decorum and etiquette yet plenty of them engage in the kind of behaviour that can only be described as vulgar and rough.
> 
> The idol  has clay feet I guess.


Yes, it is one of life's ironies that some people in power, be it royals, prime ministers, presidents, generals, dictators, church officials, teachers, parents, etc. commit atrocities. Because of the recognition, admiration, adulation and hero worshipping accorded to them, they think they are entitled and infallible.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, it is one of life's ironies that some people in power, be it royals, prime ministers, presidents, generals, dictators, church officials, teachers, parents, etc. commit atrocities. Because of the recognition, admiration, adulation and hero worshipping accorded to them, they think they are entitled and infallible.


Well I’d say that’s a little bleaker than one of life’s ironies. I was thinking more getting naked in Vegas or cheating on your wife levels of iniquity.


----------



## chicinthecity777

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!


Good for you! Like I said, I don't eat cakes.


----------



## haute okole

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the cake sounds good! But not from her.


How about some Inspirational Meghan Bananas?
	

		
			
		

		
	


View attachment 5035907


----------



## gracekelly

The problem with the cake is that it took her so long to write the calligraphy note that by the time it was shipped, it was already stale!  The olive oil in the cake went rancid!


@duna  In Ca and I have a Meyer lemon tree and it is wonderful!  Makes great lemonade, salad dressing  and lemon cake.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> _“Little girls dream of being princesses."_
> View attachment 5035165
> 
> *Don't ever speak for all little girls, speak for yourself Rachel.*
> There's nothing quite like a huge stereotype to make you roll your eyes into oblivion.
> *I for one dreamt of being many things as a little girl, the biggest dream of mine was to be a racing car driver (F1 driver to be specific), I also wanted to be a superhero like Batman, a firefighter etc... but not one of my dreams involved me wanting to be a princess, that would have been a nightmare to me.*


Haha, YES!  So much for "empowering women".  Reducing all little girls to dreaming about princesses.  Give me a break.  I didn't even dream about my future wedding, TBH, or even my future hubby.  I was too focused on accomplishing things for myself.  If my daughter learns nothing else from me, I hope she at least learns to be self sufficient and always stand on her own two feet, and stand up for herself.


----------



## lalame

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!



Delicious... the climate is similar to mediterranean so we get quite good wines and olive oils here.  Her lemons are probably Meyer Lemons, which are pretty common backyard trees. I have a giant tree myself.


----------



## jennlt

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes it’s one of the never-ending amusing ironies of society that royalty and the nobility at large are held as paragons of decorum and etiquette yet plenty of them engage in the kind of behaviour that can only be described as vulgar and rough.
> 
> The idol  has clay feet I guess.





Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, it is one of life's ironies that some people in power, be it royals, prime ministers, presidents, generals, dictators, church officials, teachers, parents, etc. commit atrocities. Because of the recognition, admiration, adulation and hero worshipping accorded to them, they think they are entitled and infallible.





jelliedfeels said:


> Well I’d say that’s a little bleaker than one of life’s ironies. I was thinking more getting naked in Vegas or cheating on your wife levels of iniquity.


Maybe they pick their wedgies in public or clean their ears with the car keys? Or steal their co-worker's lunch from the break room?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5035336
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wills beats Mike Tyson and Jason Statham to be named world's sexiest bald man
> 
> 
> PRINCE William has been named as the world’s sexiest bald man. The 38-year-old Duke has been described as “sexy” a whopping 17.6million times online in blogs, reports and pages found in Google sear…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Do we now suspect Harry will shave his head?  Or better yet, carve a message into his hair to try to compete?


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We later learned - because these people overshare - she won him over with peeing in the woods. I wish I was joking.


He didn't set the bar too high, did he? Then an average homeless woman could have won his heart - I'm sure that a project of turning one of them a proper princess would have had  better prospect of success than with MM. (I wonder why she uses her middle name. Is it because of the other MM, Marilyn Monroe?)
On Ginger as mental health hero: This quote is ridiculous if we consider who said it. He had a history of NOT coping with his mental and emotional baggage, and he doesn't give the impression of a mentally healthy person nowadays, either. "Those who can't do, teach" (Woody Allen) - IMO that sums it up perfectly. I just wonder if the one he's currently displaying is the best version of him when facing (self-made) difficulties, how awful he would be when his "worst" version surfaces or when he has to tackle real obstacles? I wish I was paid so well as him for doing things I have no qualifications or aptitude for.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Ugh.  The more JCMH talks about mental health, the more it minimizes what W&K are trying to do.  Why couldn’t he have found a different thing?  Ugh.


Because neither he nor Meg have an ounce of creativity in them.  They ride everyone else's coattails and yell louder to try to make it seem like they came up with every idea known to humanity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5035407
> 
> "_Speaking to BBC World News, Prince Albert II of Monaco said he found the Sussexes’ “public display of dissatisfaction” inappropriate...
> 
> Prince Albert said: "It’s a difficult world out there, and I hope that *he can have the judgement and wisdom to make the right choices*_*.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Albert II of Monaco says Oprah interview 'did bother me'
> 
> 
> PRINCE ALBERT II of Monaco criticised Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, claiming their allegations did not need to be "laid out in the public sphere".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



It's too late for that, Albert!


----------



## jelliedfeels

jennlt said:


> Maybe they pick their wedgies in public or clean their ears with the car keys? Or steal their co-worker's lunch from the break room?


H&M certainly air their other dirty laundry in public so the wedgies are a possibility. Not to be vulgar!

I also think they steal more than sandwiches from anyone who comes near them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Haha, YES!  So much for "empowering women".  Reducing all little girls to dreaming about princesses.  Give me a break.  I didn't even dream about my future wedding, TBH, or even my future hubby.  I was too focused on accomplishing things for myself.  If my daughter learns nothing else from me, I hope she at least learns to be self sufficient and always stand on her own two feet, and stand up for herself.


Yeah it’s so cringe-inducing isn’t it?
I hate all this princess and wedding c**p that gets dumped on girls.
Aside from the fact it hardly encourages work or financial ambitions: we shouldn’t be implying they need to get a man and get married to be happy.


----------



## Lodpah

I was reading about Eve the rapper who married a British billionaire. Talk about easing into her role so classy. Maybe MM is SO new to being so famous she just can’t figure it out.


----------



## jennlt

jelliedfeels said:


> H&M certainly air their other dirty laundry in public so the wedgies are a possibility. Not to be vulgar!
> 
> I also think they steal more than sandwiches from anyone who comes near them.


I was just trying to lighten the mood a little but you make some very salient points


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *



I hope she washed her hands after peeing in the woods before making this cake!


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!



Very similar to Italy! We import large amounts of olive oil from Europe, including from Italy. I never noticed any significant difference in the lemons as well. 

I miss Italy. I was supposed to spend some time in Italy last summer, and I'm starting to doubt that I will make it there this year.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> What is it with her and lemons?  The cake, the dress.
> 
> that doesn’t even sound good- lemon and olive oil cake? I made lemon thyme chicken tenders last night and used those same ingredients.
> 
> who says she didn’t have one of her staff make it?  And besides, during covid times it’s not very wise to send unwrapped, homemade items to anybody.  Geez.


Her motto is, "When life gives you lemons...make lemon cake!"   She probably used the most sour ones.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> Maybe they pick their wedgies in public or clean their ears with the car keys? Or steal their co-worker's lunch from the break room?


Sorry if I was too blunt or forceful. Maybe I was annoyed because of two incidents that recently occurred in my home country, Canada. The last two Chief of the Defence Staff of the Canadian Armed Forces have been accused of sexual misconduct. General JV retired Jan 14th 2021 and then Admiral AM was appointed only to retire February 24, 2021 after similar accusations. We learned that Gen JV was quietly being investigated for years before it became public knowledge and that he had quashed at least one investigation. And, I know these so-called 'incidents' occur elsewhere.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I so miss going out and just pay someone to drop a full plate in front of me *sigh*


I hear you! I'm trying to stay optimistic, but...


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Very similar to Italy! We import large amounts of olive oil from Europe, including from Italy. I never noticed any significant difference in the lemons as well.
> *
> I miss Italy. I was supposed to spend some time in Italy last summer, and I'm starting to doubt that I will make it there this year.*


Me too!


----------



## purseinsanity

maris.crane said:


> I mean, I think the gesture sounds nice... (and I think, contrary to some, genuine) but wouldn’t it be smarter to contract a female-owned business in town locally to bake a fresh cake on behalf of Archewell?
> *
> Two birds one stone. They’d be supporting women entrepreneurs and giving a treat/thank you to women who work hard.*
> 
> I’ll be unpopular and say while I love lemon curd and tart, this cake does not appeal to me


This!  I love lemon tart.  I've never tried olive oil/lemon cake, sounds odd, but so did zucchini bread before I tried it LOL.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure the California lemons are fine and whoever baked it probably used olive oil from Italy.
> 
> Even if the cake was delicious it was still an empty gesture. If they had made a truly impactful donation THAT would certainly have been mentioned. *They probably bought a couple dozen sandwiches for the volunteers.*


There was no mention to sandwiches, just the cake. Though, I wonder if they also mailed the cake stand for the picture.


----------



## bag-mania

Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.   

*How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.


----------



## maris.crane

purseinsanity said:


> This!  I love lemon tart.  I've never tried olive oil/lemon cake, sounds odd, but so did zucchini bread before I tried it LOL.



Zuchinni bread is now on my list 
Swear, though, as soon as this border is open I’m going somewhere with a Trader Joe’s on stocking up on their jarred curd!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I hope she washed her hands after peeing in the woods before making this cake!


The cake may have been thrown in the trash after the picture...


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Me too!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

limom said:


> *While Prince Albert was just as wild as his sister, her life was exposed constantly.*
> It is strange for him to speak so publicly about another Royal Family.
> Was he asked to or is he just as messy as the rest of us?


I'm not condoning this behaviour, but this is a "normal" occurance for royalty. To shield the heir, they leave the spare(s) accessible to the media. Same thing happened in Norway; Haakon went to a California Uni, while his sister, Märtha Louise was pursued and harassed by the media. Same reasons how Princess Margaret's foibles were exposed to the media.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read that German health experts are prepared to see up to 100000 (no, that's not a type) new cases per day soon and our minister of health expects our health system to break down sometime in April. But at least they loosened up the lockdown! WTF am I witnessing.



It's like a slow motion version of The Stand


----------



## poopsie

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!



I would LOVE some pure authentic Italian olive oil. Most of the oil in stores here is from olives from multiple countries
There are citrus trees all over California. I have a squat ugly lemon tree that puts out tons of the best lemons!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.


This sounds like some activity where the participants sit in a circle and talk about their daily affirmations.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.



Maybe we could all send them some suggestions..............


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> This sounds like some activity where the participants sit in a circle and talk about their daily affirmations.



I immediately thought of this.


----------



## DeMonica

limom said:


> Prince Albert was bothered?
> Well, I am pretty sure his illegitimate children were bothered by his refusal to acknowledge them.
> Even though all of Monaco knew about them, shoot all of France knew too!
> Maybe he is still mad at Stephanie for exposing his azz...
> Wasn't Charlene also complaining that the family took  her passport???
> Anyways, he should worry about his messy family


OT: Charlene does look trapped.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or *describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.*


Oh, the irony!    I think Meg should start off the circle discussion.


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> OT: Charlene does look trapped.


Does she ever.  Didn't she shave half her head recently?  Maybe she wanted to be the sexiest bald person around.


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> While Prince Albert was just as wild as his sister, her life was exposed constantly.
> It is strange for him to speak so publicly about another Royal Family.
> Was he asked to or is he just as messy as the rest of us?


Yes Caroline and Stephanie have been more in the tabloids than Albert
but, honestly, women get a raw deal, it is hard to hide pregnancies and shotgun marriages unless you move to ... say the Arctic for a year ...
No one noticed Albert’s first two kids, whose moms were hidden out of the picture while he was not hidden
his kids were not reported in Paris Match until after the death of Rainier
but yes, why did Albert comment ? Ditto for archduke Karl of Austria ...


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm not condoning this behaviour, but this is a "normal" occurance for royalty. To shield the heir, they leave the spare(s) accessible to the media. Same thing happened in Norway; Haakon went to a California Uni, while his sister, Märtha Louise was pursued and harassed by the media. Same reasons how Princess Margaret's foibles were exposed to the media.


yes, the men, including Albert and Haakon went to the US for college
i think Victoria went to NY to get away from the press during her eating struggles
nowadays, the heirs are being routinely sent overseas , Leonor will go to Wales next year, as did Elisabeth of Belgium
arguably, the spares like Margaret and Harry chose to be very visible, M went to lots of openings and H had friends with cameras in Las Vegas, this pair also did not benefit from being tucked away for four years at a university


----------



## DeMonica

lulilu said:


> The Jan Moir article for the DM is brilliant.  She takes JCMH down, peg by peg.
> 
> The blind gossip article gives me some satisfaction -- he was trolling for C level jobs AND part ownership in some company, and was roundly rejected.  At least one company had the brains to see he was worthless and the audacity of the PR people promoting him.


The DM article is hilarious. The Barista part made me LOL.
I felt embarrassed even reading the blind. He must have made a complete idiot of himself which is, well, not surprising and shows how detached he is from reality. You can forgive him being blind because he never had to compete in the job market being who he is. he was used to get what he wanted. I'm very surprised, though, that his people thought that he would have a realistic chance to nail a C-level job without any education and experience or vision. A name alone obviously isn't enough to open every door. I think he should consider himself lucky that anyone is interested in him other than teleshop or a celebrity "reality" show.


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> While Prince Albert was just as wild as his sister, her life was exposed constantly.
> It is strange for him to speak so publicly about another Royal Family.
> Was he asked to or is he just as messy as the rest of us?


The article gives some details qv.  
Interview was not about H&M per se, Albert was asked about them and he chose to answer.  At first he said something like it must be difficult for them ... then said it bothered him - his truth - that the subject matter was not handled behind closed doors. 
Albert did not dispute any claims, rather he winced that the topic was (deliberately) handled in a TV interview


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

jennlt said:


> I was just trying to lighten the mood a little but you make some very salient points


I think you’ve cracked the code. I  reckon that benefits of working at archewell include free access to the communal fridge (please note that using the communal fridge may lead to seizure of your sandwiches so we can gift them to veterans as a purely altruistic gesture.)   
You will all also get unlimited talking tos on ‘how to develop fortitude and grit’ from well-known grifter sorry grafter Prince Harry. 


bag-mania said:


> Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.


I’m not telling them that! Next thing I know they’ll arrive for a photo op to claim they did it and I’m all out of message bananas and lemons!


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> It was said before, he gets a salary from these "jobs" I assume, then they then pay others to work on the projects with Netflix and Spotify? And get paid by the content? What? A bloody sh1t show! Just exactly what DO they actually do to generate revenue? Their outgoing must be huge! A C-level job at a start-up will not pay that lifestyle.
> 
> Have they released another podcast yet? They can't keep on using Archie!



One article suggested that he was given stock options as payment which is typical for someone expected to help promote the business, the options are only worth something if the company grows

His expenses might get paid ... depends on how big a posse he travels with 

I remember seeing a show about the planning for Met Gala. Kerfuffle because Rihanna, who performed that year, had a huge retinue, they showed the Wintour aide who had to explain this to the boss, I can’t forget her words “that is how she (Rihanna) rolls”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.



I might write in. "One way I feel connected with my family: I don't publicly drag them on Oprah, spreading lies so thin that everyone with half a brain sees right through them."


----------



## bag-mania

Basically Archewell exists as a foundation to sell the idea of _compassion_. Because obviously H&M are the very first to ever think that people being nice to each other is a good thing. How original! How innovative! Where do I send my check?


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Basically Archewell exists as a foundation to sell the idea of _compassion_. Because obviously H&M are the very first to ever think that people being nice to each other is a good thing. How original! How innovative! Where do I send my check?


To Thomas Markle?


----------



## DeMonica

purseinsanity said:


> Haha, YES!  So much for "empowering women".  Reducing all little girls to dreaming about princesses.  Give me a break.  I didn't even dream about my future wedding, TBH, or even my future hubby.  I was too focused on accomplishing things for myself.  If my daughter learns nothing else from me, I hope she at least learns to be self sufficient and always stand on her own two feet, and stand up for herself.


I always found wedding gowns, elegant dresses (which I never wear)  fascinating  (still do) and dreamt about being a mom. Still, I would never ever have picked a Disney princess as role model. I wanted to be a Jedi knight! Then a Sith lord - but I failed.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> The cake may have been thrown in the trash after the picture...


They didn't look too thrilled on the picture. So it's possible. Maybe they had expected a significant donation...


----------



## Annawakes

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!


Care to share your recipe?  I’m interested!


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.


Oh hahaha.  I bet they use the responses to steal ideas on what to do next.  As long as it doesn’t cost them too much money


----------



## csshopper

They are INSUFFERABLE. Taking up bandwidth with another "Do as we say, Not as we do" sermon to the lowly, in their estimation, masses. 

Think I'll log on and tell them I activate compassion by monitoring your behaviors and acting exactly contrary to them. Works every time.


----------



## DeMonica

purseinsanity said:


> Does she ever.  Didn't she shave half her head recently?  Maybe she wanted to be the sexiest bald person around.


Or just had enough. Britney comes to my mind, but hopefully I'm wrong. She looks miserable most of the time.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Basically Archewell exists as a foundation to sell the idea of _compassion_. Because obviously H&M are the very first to ever think that people being nice to each other is a good thing. How original! How innovative! Where do I send my check?


When you send your check, don't forget to make it out to cash.


----------



## Chanbal

DeMonica said:


> They didn't look too thrilled on the picture. So it's possible. Maybe they had expected a significant donation...


The ladies were likely just following instructions. I bet the cake (or whatever they donate) comes with a set of instructions for the picture and respective press release.


----------



## xeyes

Annawakes said:


> What is it with her and lemons?  The cake, the dress.



Dunno about the cake, but as for the dress, she’s just trying to be compliant with California’s hazardous-materials labeling laws. (i.e., she’s a “lemon” and she knows it. Like a bad car.)

Really, it’s refreshing to see such an honest self-assessment from her.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> They didn't look too thrilled on the picture. So it's possible. Maybe they had expected a significant donation...



They look tired. You know, the way people look when they actually work for a living.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like this is the story of the day!  

"_Meghan’s estranged father wrote a handwritten letter to the US chat show host and personally delivered it to her home in California. Pictures have emerged of the 76-year-old handing a note to a security guard outside Oprah’s California mansion.

He is seen wearing a face mask, shirt, hoodie and chinos, as he completed a journey of more than 500 miles from his home in El Rosario, Mexico.

Oprah lives just a few minutes from Meghan and Harry in the A-list hotspot of Montecito.

A source told The Sun: “Thomas delivered a letter to Oprah asking her to contact him so he could tell his side of the story.

“This was not a note to Meghan and Harry, it was meant for Oprah_."









						Thomas Markle hand-delivers letter to Oprah Winfrey
					

THOMAS MARKLE has demanded an interview with Oprah Winfrey to set the record straight about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It looks like this is the story of the day!
> 
> "_Meghan’s estranged father wrote a handwritten letter to the US chat show host and personally delivered it to her home in California. Pictures have emerged of the 76-year-old handing a note to a security guard outside Oprah’s California mansion.
> 
> He is seen wearing a face mask, shirt, hoodie and chinos, as he completed a journey of more than 500 miles from his home in El Rosario, Mexico.
> 
> Oprah lives just a few minutes from Meghan and Harry in the A-list hotspot of Montecito.
> 
> A source told The Sun: “Thomas delivered a letter to Oprah asking her to contact him so he could tell his side of the story.
> 
> “This was not a note to Meghan and Harry, it was meant for Oprah_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle hand-delivers letter to Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has demanded an interview with Oprah Winfrey to set the record straight about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Oprah won’t interview him. She didn’t work so hard to build up Meghan to have her Daddy reveal any inconvenient truths. Thomas’ truth and his voice doesn’t matter to her.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Basically Archewell exists as a foundation to sell the idea of _compassion_. Because obviously H&M are the very first to ever think that people being nice to each other is a good thing. How original! How innovative! Where do I send my check?



Not sending a check, but I'll mail them some orange scones baked using oranges from our garden.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oprah won’t interview him. She didn’t work so hard to build up Meghan to have her Daddy reveal any inconvenient truths. Thomas’ truth and his voice doesn’t matter to her.


Poor Thomas, he is wasting his time. Though, DM could publish his letter and a nice article about how he was 'snubbed'...


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> It looks like this is the story of the day!
> 
> "_Meghan’s estranged father wrote a handwritten letter to the US chat show host and personally delivered it to her home in California. Pictures have emerged of the 76-year-old handing a note to a security guard outside Oprah’s California mansion.
> 
> He is seen wearing a face mask, shirt, hoodie and chinos, as he completed a journey of more than 500 miles from his home in El Rosario, Mexico.
> 
> Oprah lives just a few minutes from Meghan and Harry in the A-list hotspot of Montecito.
> 
> A source told The Sun: “Thomas delivered a letter to Oprah asking her to contact him so he could tell his side of the story.
> 
> “This was not a note to Meghan and Harry, it was meant for Oprah_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle hand-delivers letter to Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has demanded an interview with Oprah Winfrey to set the record straight about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Sometimes I feel bad for him and then sometimes I think the Markles are a family full of narcs. So many people in one clan obsessed with telling the world their truths


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Poor Thomas, he is wasting his time. Though, DM could publish his letter and a nice article about how he was 'snubbed'...



He so did *not* travel to OW’s house and not stop by H&M’s. I suspect Doria played a part in this drama. IMO


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Sometimes I feel bad for him and then sometimes I think the Markles are a family full of narcs. So many people in one clan obsessed with telling the world their truths


I also thought about that, but from what I read, this is a man that lived always a very private life. He worked hard to provide a great education for his daughter, and then be treated so disrespectfully. He must be very hurt.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> I also thought about that, but from what I read, this is a man that lived always a very private life. He worked hard to provide a great education for his daughter, and then be treated so disrespectfully. He must be very hurt.



You can do all of above and still be a narc. It shouldn’t be forgotten that he was invited to the royal wedding and fell out with his daughter because he staged a photoshoot with the paparazzi. Now he’s dropping off a note literally at Oprah‘s house. Cringe. I wonder if it’s handwritten


----------



## Lodpah

Won’t it be cool if we all baked goods and sent them in to Archewell as donations? It works for them. I’ll send donuts.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Oprah won’t interview him. She didn’t work so hard to build up Meghan to have her Daddy reveal any inconvenient truths. Thomas’ truth and his voice doesn’t matter to her.


And his "activations" aren't nearly as "creative" or profitable as Meghan's so no groundswell of compassion for him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Photos by BackGrid.  Suspicious?









						Meghan's dad delivers letter to Oprah asking to be interviewed by her
					

THOMAS Markle has hand delivered a letter to Oprah Winfrey – asking her to interview HIM about his relationship with estranged daughter Meghan. The lighting director, 76, drove up to the chat show …




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like this is the story of the day!
> 
> "_Meghan’s estranged father wrote a handwritten letter to the US chat show host and personally delivered it to her home in California. Pictures have emerged of the 76-year-old handing a note to a security guard outside Oprah’s California mansion.
> 
> He is seen wearing a face mask, shirt, hoodie and chinos, as he completed a journey of more than 500 miles from his home in El Rosario, Mexico.
> 
> Oprah lives just a few minutes from Meghan and Harry in the A-list hotspot of Montecito.
> 
> A source told The Sun: “Thomas delivered a letter to Oprah asking her to contact him so he could tell his side of the story.
> 
> “This was not a note to Meghan and Harry, it was meant for Oprah_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle hand-delivers letter to Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has demanded an interview with Oprah Winfrey to set the record straight about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Can't work my mind around the weird contradiction between the "begging" in the headline and the "demanding" in the first sentence.



Lodpah said:


> Won’t it be cool if we all baked goods and sent them in to Archewell as donations? It works for them. I’ll send donuts.


I'm in! My muffins will have to travel around 9000 miles, but it's for a good cause  
Maybe the Singapore influencer will contribute something too, then the carbon miles may look better


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Can't work my mind around the weird contradiction between the "begging" in the headline and the "demanding" in the first sentence.
> 
> 
> I'm in! My muffins will have to travel around 9000 miles, but it's for a good cause
> Maybe the Singapore influencer will contribute something too, then the carbon miles may look better



The Sun‘s headline says “asking”


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> You can do all of above and still be a narc. It shouldn’t be forgotten that he was invited to the royal wedding and fell out with his daughter because he staged a photoshoot with the paparazzi. Now he’s dropping off a note literally at Oprah‘s house. Cringe. I wonder if it’s handwritten


It's possible, but I don't think he his a narcissist. He put his daughter's interests always ahead of himself, he spent most of his money on her education. He raised 3 kids almost as a single parent. 

He has been described as shy and kind person that doesn't like the limelight. After MM association to H, he found himself on several newspapers. Many of those articles were negative,  including the publication of Harry's comments that the BRF was the family that MM never had... The staged photo-op was his attempt to be seen in a more favorable light, but it was a mistake.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photos by BackGrid.  Suspicious?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's dad delivers letter to Oprah asking to be interviewed by her
> 
> 
> THOMAS Markle has hand delivered a letter to Oprah Winfrey – asking her to interview HIM about his relationship with estranged daughter Meghan. The lighting director, 76, drove up to the chat show …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



They buy photos from paparazzi. Likely all arranged to prove it happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I just read that Sharon Osbourne is not coming back to The Talk. I never watched the show but she was the last of the original hosts and the latest collateral damage from the Oprah interview.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry if I was too blunt or forceful. Maybe I was annoyed because of two incidents that recently occurred in my home country, Canada. The last two Chief of the Defence Staff of the Canadian Armed Forces have been accused of sexual misconduct. General JV retired Jan 14th 2021 and then Admiral AM was appointed only to retire February 24, 2021 after similar accusations. We learned that Gen JV was quietly being investigated for years before it became public knowledge and that he had quashed at least one investigation. And, I know these so-called 'incidents' occur elsewhere.


It's an awful fact that many of us, including myself, have experienced inappropriate behavior (yes, I'm being euphemistic) at some point in our lives. It's hard to believe that this behavior continues in the 21st century but I hope that it will soon be relegated to the past. How wonderful would it be if the girls of today could grow up to be women who are not molested, not accosted and not afraid?


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Can't work my mind around the weird contradiction between the "begging" in the headline and the "demanding" in the first sentence.
> 
> 
> I'm in! My muffins will have to travel around 9000 miles, but it's for a good cause
> Maybe the Singapore influencer will contribute something too, then the carbon miles may look better


Re begging versus demanding ... 
you are another fusssbudget (like me) agonizing over the incorrect vocabulary of these internet accounts ... LOL a two peas in a pod


----------



## marietouchet

bisousx said:


> You can do all of above and still be a narc. It shouldn’t be forgotten that he was invited to the royal wedding and fell out with his daughter because he staged a photoshoot with the paparazzi. Now he’s dropping off a note literally at Oprah‘s house. Cringe. I wonder if it’s handwritten


Ok team , who among us is a graphology expert ? we are a multi talented team ....


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> When you send your check, don't forget to make it out to cash.


Archewell, so far reminds me of the foundation run by a previous president , wife and daughter 
Travel expenses were paid to Haiti and it was not like Haiti got rebuilt


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> It's possible, but I don't think he his a narcissist. He put his daughter's interests always ahead of himself, he spent most of his money on her education. He raised 3 kids almost as a single parent.
> 
> He has been described as shy and kind person that doesn't like the limelight. After MM association to H, he found himself on several newspapers. Many of those articles were negative,  including the publication of Harry's comments that the BRF was the family that MM never had... The staged photo-op was his attempt to be seen in a more favorable light, but it was a mistake.


I feel bad for him. Yeah he made mistakes but so what? It was not egregious mistake. She can turn this around, call him up, they can both clear the air, lay out boundaries and forgive each other. 

If she does not, she might really regret it one day when he’s gone. 

This can stop the drama in public. I’m starting to think she had silenced her mother from talking so if she can do this to her father, imagine what she’s doing to her mother.


----------



## jblended

bag-mania said:


> It was in the comments for the Blind Item about the New Elon Musk.


That's it! Thank you!


----------



## gracekelly

[QUOTE="Lodpah, post: 34435452, member: 561605"

This can stop the drama in public. *I’m starting to think she had silenced her mother from talking so if she can do this to her father, imagine what she’s doing to her mother.*
[/QUOTE]
I think you are on to something here.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone! 

*How Prince Harry got his new job*

So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer? 

Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world. 

What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role? 

Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Not sending a check, but I'll mail them some orange scones baked using oranges from our garden.



You're too kind.  I'd send some fresh "packages" after I walk my dogs.    I'll even express them!  To MM and JCMH I mean.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> You can do all of above and still be a narc. It shouldn’t be forgotten that he was invited to the royal wedding and fell out with his daughter because he staged a photoshoot with the paparazzi. Now he’s dropping off a note literally at Oprah‘s house. Cringe. I* wonder if it’s handwritten *


It's calligraphy.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone!
> 
> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer?
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were *organically* having these conversations how the mission of *BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp*. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to *not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential*. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, *it's who he is as a person*. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a *daydream* that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like *him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health*. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html


Jeez Louise, all this word salad makes my head hurt.  I think of myself as fairly intelligent and have read all kinds of textbooks with bigger words than these, but I can't get through these paragraphs of crap without getting a headache and having to read it several times to wrap my mind around what is being said.  Harry is a leading force in the world for mental health?  Does his "mental illness presence" suddenly make him an expert for the masses?  And wow, if the only qualification for getting a "C level" position is "who we are as people", all of us should be CEOs.  Or excuse me, CIO.


----------



## lalame

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone!
> 
> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer?
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html



Cringe.... so basically the title is BS and the first and foremost value he brings is being born a prince. Excuse me, a prince who wants to make a positive impact in the world. Not to be confused with princes who want to have a negative impact in the world.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@purseinsanity
Some key words to remember:
Organically.  Conversations.   Mission.   Mental health.  Performance.    Realize your potential.   Accountable.   Global impact.
Expanding our global community.    Global community.   Influence.   Product experience.
Partner with companies globally.    Expand impact around the world [globally?].    Service.   Positive impact.   Incredible track record.
Opportunity.   Leading forces in the world.

New to the team:  Daydream

Word salad is much too kind.  In my day, it was called the BS Grinder.  Everyone had one     GIGO:  garbage in, garbage out.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> Okay now I REALLY gotta disagree with you ladies because olive oil cake is DELICIOUS!


I agree, I would eat the crap out of meghan’s cake! It looks delicious. But sending her cake 2000 miles is akin to her banana messages. What the heck. All her service is just for show, no substance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muddledmint

papertiger said:


> I immediately thought of polenta cake. I don't mind polenta made with onions and real stock.
> 
> I don't like most sweet cakes so if she sent me, I'd send it back 'return to sender'.
> 
> Send me me a bar of dark chocolate and I'll be your friend for life though  (Anyone grow cocoa beans in their garden?)


Mmm polenta cake sounds delicious too. Is that like cornbread kinda?


----------



## xincinsin

I had five olive oil cake recipe suggestions on my Google feed today  I didn't even Google for it once. The Markle effect is frightening.


----------



## zen1965

marietouchet said:


> Archewell, so far reminds me of the foundation run by a previous president , wife and daughter
> Travel expenses were paid to Haiti and it was not like Haiti got rebuilt


There was a major earthquake in Haiti in 2010 with 200,000 dead. It was a major humanitarian disaster. And there was an immense need for rehabilitation.
(Did you by any chance mix up Haiti (Caribbean ) and Tahiti (South Pacific)?)


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> Mmm polenta cake sounds delicious too. Is that like cornbread kinda?



I would say yes, but I've never had cornbread


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> I would say yes, but I've never had cornbread


PM me your address, I will mail you a box of Jiffy mix.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> It looks like this is the story of the day!
> 
> "_Meghan’s estranged father wrote a handwritten letter to the US chat show host and personally delivered it to her home in California. Pictures have emerged of the 76-year-old handing a note to a security guard outside Oprah’s California mansion.
> 
> He is seen wearing a face mask, shirt, hoodie and chinos, as he completed a journey of more than 500 miles from his home in El Rosario, Mexico.
> 
> Oprah lives just a few minutes from Meghan and Harry in the A-list hotspot of Montecito.
> 
> A source told The Sun: “Thomas delivered a letter to Oprah asking her to contact him so he could tell his side of the story.
> 
> “This was not a note to Meghan and Harry, it was meant for Oprah_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle hand-delivers letter to Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has demanded an interview with Oprah Winfrey to set the record straight about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Handwritten note- is calligraphy genetic now?

It’s all so weird and sad that this family are so at odds about something so trivial.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Handwritten note- is calligraphy genetic now?
> 
> It’s all so weird and sad that this family are so at odds about something so trivial.



This story seems so random and odd. Doria, possibly with OW’s help, set this up IMO. Does OW really want people showing up at her door? Highly doubt it.  3 - 2 - 1 for the big reunion and healing show. Yes, we are being played.


----------



## muddledmint

papertiger said:


> I would say yes, but I've never had cornbread


 Mmm cornbread is so good, especially the crispier edges. Is it not a normal food where you’re from? I don’t eat it often but it’s common in the US. I googled polenta cake and it does seem like a more refined cornbread. Yum!


----------



## Jktgal

"Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health."
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html

Whose hugs alone cured his wife of suicidal thoughts.


----------



## duna

Annawakes said:


> Care to share your recipe?  I’m interested!



Hi, sure, I'll PM you as it's off topic for this thread: if anyone else wants the recipe just let me know!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Camilla Tominey in today's telegraph.
Its lengthy but very 


*Harry, Meghan and me: my truth as a royal reporter*
I've covered elections and extremism, but nothing compares to the vitriol I've received since I started writing about the Sussexes

ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR27 March 2021 • 6:00am

Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan

It is probably worth mentioning from the outset that I never, ever, planned to become a royal reporter. I mean, who does? It’s one of those ridiculous jobs most people fall into completely by accident.
I certainly wasn’t coveting the position when I first found out how bonkers the beat could be after covering Charles and Camilla’s wedding in 2005. Desperate for ‘a line’ on what went on at the reception, journalists were reduced to flagging down passing cars in Windsor High Street and interrogating the likes of Stephen Fry about whether they’d had the salmon or the chicken.
Watergate, this wasn’t.
Yet when my former editor called me into his office shortly afterwards and offered me the royal job ‘because you’re called Camilla and you dress nicely’, who was I to refuse?
Having planned to get married myself that summer, and start a family soon afterwards, I looked to the likes of Jennie Bond and Penny Junor and figured it would be a good patch for a working mother as well as being one I could grow old with. Unlike show business, when celebrities are ‘in’ one minute and ‘out’ the next, the royals would stay the same, making it easier to build – and keep – contacts.

So if you’d told me that 16 years later, I would find myself at the centre of a media storm over a royal interview with Oprah Winfrey, I’d have probably laughed in your face. First of all, only royals like Fergie do interviews with Oprah. And since when did journalists become the story?

Yet as I have experienced since the arrival of Meghan Markle on the royal scene in 2016 – a move that roughly coincided with Twitter doubling its 140-character limitation to 280 – royal reporters like me now find themselves in the line of fire like never before.
We are used to the likes of Kate Adie coming under attack in the Middle East, but now it is the correspondents who write up events like Trooping the Colour and the Royal Windsor Horse Show having to take cover from the keyboard warriors supposedly defending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s ‘truth’.
Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan. But even I have been taken aback by the vitriol on social media in the wake of the couple’s televised two-hour talk-a-thon, in which they branded both the Royal family and the British press racist while complaining about their ‘almost unsurvivable’ multimillionaire lives at the hands of the evil monarchy. And all while the rest of the UK were losing their loved ones and livelihoods in a global pandemic.

Having covered Brexit, general elections and stories about Islamic extremism, I’ve grown used to being sprayed with viral vomit on a fairly regular basis, but when you’ve got complete strangers trolling your best friend’s Instagram feed by association? That’s Britney Spears levels of toxic.
Having a hind thicker than a rhino’s, it wasn’t the repeated references to my being ‘a total c—’ that particularly bothered me, nor even the suggestion that I should have my three children put up for adoption. At one point someone even said it would be a good idea for me to drink myself to death like my mother, about whose chronic alcoholism I have written extensively.
No, what really got me was the appalling spelling and grammar. I mean, if you’re going to hurl insults, at least have the decency to get my name right.
Yet in order to understand just how it has come to pass that so-called #SussexSquaders think nothing of branding all royal correspondents ‘white supremacists’ regardless of who they write for, or sending hate mail to our email addresses, offices – and in some cases, even our homes – it’s worth briefly going to back to when I first broke the story that Prince Harry was dating an American actor in the Sunday Express on 31 October 2016. Headlined: ‘Royal world exclusive: Harry’s secret romance with TV star’, the splash revealed how the popular prince was ‘secretly dating a stunning US actress, model and human rights campaigner’.
Despite my now apparently being on a par with the Ku Klux Klan for failing to acknowledge Meghan as the next messiah, it was actually not until the fifteenth paragraph of that original article that the ‘confident and intelligent’ Northwestern University graduate was described as ‘the daughter of an African-American mother and a father of Dutch and Irish descent’.
Call me superficial, but I was genuinely far more interested in the fact that Harry ‘I-come-with-baggage’ Wales was dating a former ‘briefcase girl’ from the US version of Deal or No Deal than the colour of her skin. A ginger prince punching well above his weight? This was the stuff of tabloid dreams. Little did I know then that covering the trials and tribulations of these two lovebirds would turn into such a nightmare.
The online hostility began bubbling up about eight days after that first story, when Harry’s then communications secretary Jason Knauf issued an ‘unprecedented’ statement accusing the media of ‘crossing a line’.
‘His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment’, it read, referencing a ‘smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments’. Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, had apparently been besieged by photographers, while bribes had been offered to Meghan’s ex-boyfriend along with ‘the bombardment of nearly every friend, coworker, and loved one in her life’.

Suffice to say, I did feel a bit guilty. Although I hadn’t written anything remotely racist or sexist, I had started the ball rolling for headlines like the MailOnline’s ‘(Almost) straight outta Compton’ (referencing a song by hip-hop group NWA about gang violence and Meghan’s upbringing in the nearby LA district of Crenshaw), along with her ‘exotic’ DNA (which I subsequently called out, including on This Morning in the wake of ‘Megxit’ in January last year).
Omid Scobie, co-author of Finding Freedom, a highly favourable account of the Sussexes’ departure from the Royal family, written with their cooperation last summer, would later insist that the couple knew the story of their relationship was coming out and were well prepared for it.
I can tell you categorically that they weren’t, since I did not even put a call into Kensington Palace before we went to press for fear of it being leaked. (I did later discuss this with Harry, when I covered his trip to the Caribbean in November 2016, and to be fair he was pretty philosophical, agreeing it would have come out sooner or later. But that was before the former Army Captain decided to well and truly shoot the messenger, latterly telling journalists covering the newly-weds’ tax-payer-funded October 2018 tour of Australia and the south Pacific: ‘Thanks for coming, even though you weren’t invited.’)
The royal press pack is the group of dedicated writers who cover all the official engagements and tours on a rota system, in exchange for not bothering the royals as they go about their private business. It was a shame this ragtag bunch, of which I am an associate member, was never personally introduced to Meghan when the couple got engaged in November 2017.
I still have fond memories of a then Kate Middleton, upon her engagement to Prince William in November 2010, showing me her huge sapphire and diamond ring following a press conference at St James’s Palace with the words, ‘It was William’s mother’s so it is very special.’
I replied that she might want to consider buying ‘one of those expanding accordion style file holders’ to organise all her wedding paperwork. (Reader, I had given birth to my second child less than four months earlier and was still lactating.)
Not meeting Meghan did not stop royal commentators like me writing reams about her being ‘a breath of fresh air’ and telling practically every TV show I appeared on that she was the ‘best thing to have happened to the Royal Family in years’.

As the world followed the joyous news of the Windsors’ resident strip billiards star having finally found ‘the one’, the couple enjoyed overwhelmingly positive press culminating in their fairy-tale wedding in May 2018, which we headlined ‘So in love’ above a picture of the bride and groom kissing. I tweeted the wedding front page, along with the original story breaking the news of their relationship with the words, ‘Job done’. Yet, as Meghan would later point out in a glossy Santa Barbara garden, that was by far the end of the story.
According to the Duchess’s testimony before a global audience of millions, the seeds for their royal departure were actually sown by an article I wrote in November 2018 suggesting she made Kate cry during a bridesmaid’s dress fitting for Princess Charlotte.
Claiming the ‘reverse happened’, the former Suits star railed, ‘A few days before the wedding she was upset about something, pertaining to, yes, the issue was correct, about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.’
She then went on to criticise the palace for failing to correct the story – suggesting that royal aides had hung her out to dry to protect the Duchess of Cambridge.
All of which left me in a bit of a sticky situation. As I told Phillip Schofield on This Morning the following day, ‘I don’t write things I don’t believe to be true and that haven’t been really well sourced.’
Having seemingly been completely bowled over by Meghan’s version of events, Schofe then went for the jugular: ‘I have to say, though, that’s all addressed in that interview, isn’t it, because she [Meghan] couldn’t understand why nobody stood up for her?’

Yet someone had stood up for her, on that very same This Morning sofa: me.
As I told Phil and Holly on 14 January 2019, as more reports of ‘Duchess Difficult’ started to emerge, ‘I think she [Meghan] is doing really well, she looks amazing, she speaks well. She has played a blinder.’
So you’ll forgive me if I can’t quite understand why Meghan didn’t feel the need to correct this supposedly glaring error once she had her own dedicated head of communications from March 2019 – or indeed when she ‘collaborated’ with Scobie, who concluded in his bestselling hagiography that ‘no one cried’?
Moreover, how did the Duchess know a postnatal Kate wasn’t ‘left in tears’? And if she doesn’t know, what hope has the average troll observing events through the prism of their own deep-rooted insecurities?
It appears the actual truth ceases to matter once sides have been taken in the unedifying Team Meghan versus Team Kate battle that has divided the internet.
Make no mistake, there are abject morons at both extremes spewing the sort of bile that, ironically, makes most of the media coverage of Harry and Meghan look like a 1970s edition of Jackie magazine.
It perhaps didn’t help my case that the day before the interview was aired in the US, I had written a lengthy piece carefully weighing up the evidence behind allegations of ‘outrageous bullying’ that had been levelled against Meghan during what proved to be a miserable 20 months in the Royal family for all concerned.
The messages – to my Twitter feed, my email, my website and official Facebook page – ranged from the threatening, to the typical tropes about media ‘scum’ and the downright bizarre. Some accused me of being in cahoots with Carole Middleton, with whom I have never interacted, unless you count a last-minute Party Pieces purchase in a desperate moment of poor parental planning.

Another frequent barb was questioning why the press wasn’t writing about that ‘pedo’ [sic] Prince Andrew instead – seemingly oblivious to the fact that no one would know about the Duke of York’s links to Jeffrey Epstein if it wasn’t for the acres of coverage devoted to the story by us royal hacks over recent years.
It didn’t matter that I had repeatedly torn the Queen’s second, and, some say, favourite son to pieces for everything from his propensity to take his golf clubs on foreign tours to that disastrous Newsnight interview.
Contrary to the ‘invisible contract’ Harry claims the palace has with the press, royal coverage works roughly like this: good royal deeds = good publicity. Bad royal deeds = bad publicity. We effectively act as a critical friend, working on behalf of a public that rightly expects the royals to take the work – but not themselves – seriously.
So when a royal couple preaches about climate change before taking four private jets in 11 days, it is par for the course for a royal scribe to point out the inconsistency of that message. None of it is ever personal, as evidenced by the fact that practically every member of the monarchy has come in for flak over the years.
If Oprah wasn’t willing to point out the discrepancies in Harry and Meghan’s testimony, surely it is beholden on royal reporters to question how the Duchess had managed to undertake four foreign holidays in the six months after her wedding, in addition to official tours to Italy, Canada, and Amsterdam, as well as embarking on a lengthy honeymoon, if she had ‘turned over’ her passport?
While no one would wish to undermine the extent of her mental health problems, could it really be true that she only left the house twice in four months when she managed to cram in 73 days’ worth of engagements, according to the Court Circular, in the 17 months between her wedding and the couple’s departure to Canada?

And what of the ‘racist’ headlines flashed up during the interview purporting to be from the British press, when more than a third were actually taken from independent blogs and the foreign media? The UK media abides by the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s Code of Conduct ‘to avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race’, as well as by rigorous defamation laws. And rightly so – the British press doesn’t always get it right. But social media is the Wild West by comparison, publishing vile slurs on a daily basis with impunity.
Some therefore find it strange that such a litigious couple would claim to have been ‘silenced’ when they have made so many complaints, including resorting to legal action, over stories they claim not to have even read. There is something similarly contradictory about a couple accusing the tabloids of lacking self-reflection while refusing to take any blame at all – for anything.
In any normal world, informed writing on such matters would be classed as fair comment, but not, seemingly, on Twitter where those completely lacking any objectivity whatsoever are only too willing to virtue signal and manoeuvre.
As the trolling reached fever pitch in the aftermath of the interview, veteran royal reporter Robert Jobson of the Evening Standard called me. ‘Don’t respond to these freaks,’ he advised. ‘It’s getting nasty out there. Watch your back!’
Yet despite my general sense of bewilderment at the menacing Megbots, I can’t say it didn’t appal me to discover a close friend had received online abuse, purely by dint of being my mate. After discussing the lengths the troll must have gone to to track her down, she asked me, ‘Do you ever worry someone might do something awful to you?’ Er, not until now, no.
Of course it’s upsetting, even for a cynical old-timer like me. Worse still are people who actually know me casting aspersions on my profession on social media. Often these are the same charlatans who would think nothing of sidling up to me for the latest gossip on the Royal family, while publicly pretending that reading any such coverage is completely beneath them.
Most pernicious of all though – not least after Piers Morgan’s departure from Good Morning Britain following a complaint to ITV and Ofcom from the Duchess – is the corrosive effect this whole hullabaloo is having on freedom of speech. When you’ve got a former actor effectively editing a British breakfast show from an £11 million Montecito mansion, what next?
I cannot help but think we are in danger of setting race relations back 30 years if people are seriously suggesting that any criticism of Meghan is racially motivated. It’s the hypocrisy that gets me. When Priti Patel was accused of bullying, the very same people who willingly hung the Home Secretary out to dry are now the ones defending Meghan against such claims, saying they have been levelled at her simply because she is ‘a strong woman of colour’.
Of course journalists should take responsibility for everything they report and be held to account for it – but Harry and Meghan do not have a monopoly on the truth simply because the close friend and neighbour who interviewed them in return for £7 million from CBS took what they said as gospel.
If she isn’t willing to probe the disparity between Meghan saying someone questioned the colour of Archie’s skin when she was pregnant, and Harry suggesting it happened before they were even married, then someone must. There’s a name for such scrutiny. It’s called journalism.

The public reserves the right to make up its own mind – with the help of the watchful eye of a free and fair press. But that press can never be free or fair if journalists do not feel they can report without fear or favour. I’m lucky that a lot of the criticism I face is more than balanced out by hugely supportive members of the public and online community who either agree – or respect the right to disagree. Along with the hate mail, I have had many thoughtful and eloquent missives, including those that good naturedly challenge what I have written in the paper or said on TV, which have genuinely given me pause for thought.
I am more than happy to enter into constructive discourse with these correspondents, who are frankly sometimes the only people who keep me on Twitter. I mean, let’s face it, I wouldn’t be anywhere near the bloody thing if this wasn’t my day job.
With the National Union of Journalists this month declaring that harassment and abuse had ‘become normalised’ within the industry, never have members of Britain’s press needed more courage. As Winston Churchill famously said, ‘You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.’
Who would have thought that the preservation of the fundamental freedoms that we hold so dear should partially rest on the shoulders of those who follow around a 94-year-old woman and her family for a living?
If I’d known then what I know now, would I still have written the bridesmaid’s dress story?
Yes – doubtlessly reflecting sisterly sobs all round. But after two decades in this business, I am clear-eyed enough to know this for certain: whatever I had written, it would still have ended in tears.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Its lengthy but a very interesting read.


----------



## eunaddict

Quora is a gem.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One intrepid journalist reviews the B-Up coaching app —
The full article is behind a paywall, so I’ve posted parts of it here:








						What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app
					

BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				






Spoiler: 1 $e$$ion



*What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app*
*BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?*
By Laurence Dodds, US Technology Reporter, San Francisco24 March 2021 • 11:25am





BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app has hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer". Among its clients are Facebook and Nasa

What's your Growth Mindset power level? Mine is at 85 out of 100. It's my best quality, handily beating my Empathy score of 68 and my Cognitive ability of 55. My other statistics could do with some work: Self-Awareness 35, Nutrition 31 and Physical Activity a risible 14. These ratings might sound like character statistics from some office-themed Dungeons and Dragons game. In fact, they are the measure of my workplace personality according to BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app that has just hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer".

BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at $1.7bn (£1.2bn) in a $125m investment round led by Iconiq, an "ultra-secretive" and prestigious wealth management firm said to handle Mark Zuckerberg's fortune. Its pitch: to use artificial intelligence (AI) to deliver personalised coaching sessions designed to nourish "the whole person", to the benefit of both workers and employers.

So what can you learn about yourself from Prince Harry's new gig? I summoned up my self-improvement mindset and attempted to find out.

*Mental fitness vs mental health*
Given the Prince's words, it may surprise you to learn that BetterUp is *not a mental health app* – at least not for individual users. Instead, it is wholly focused on performance and wellbeing at work, and seems designed primarily for corporate use as an employee benefit (which can include a "mental fitness" service called Care).

This is less Californian mysticism and meditation than high-flying Business Wellness, with TED talks about "empowerment" and "strategic planning" and a personality assessment that frames your high scores as "strengths" and your weaknesses as "development areas".

When entering your details, job title is a mandatory field – not that it would necessarily be very useful in Silicon Valley, where business cards might bear sobriquets such as "hacker", a "ninja", a "Jedi", a "Sherpa", a "wizard" or even "security princess" (no relation).
In the past, BetterUp only sold its services to companies with more than 10,000 employees, with past clients including Facebook, LinkedIn, Salesforce, Logitech. Nasa and the US Federal Aviation Administration. Today lone individuals can try it too, getting one free coaching session before being asked to subscribe – and so I jumped in.

My first speed bump appeared within a few minutes. BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach. The company makes much of its AI algorithms, which it claims can match coaches to clients with "over 97pc accuracy".
Yet at this stage there was no explicit mention of mental health and no place to note disabilities such as ADHD and autism. Consequently, none of the three coaches offered by the app –  and there seems to be no way forward without picking one  – listed expertise on those topics, at least beyond general allusions to "health and wellness", "mindfulness" and "stress".

BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach:

For many users, this is a potential dealbreaker: a coach who does not understand your specific disabilities is unlikely to be as helpful as one who does, and at worst might be a hindrance. I requested more options via a manual email form and got similar options again, albeit with a little more "wellness".

It makes for a rather more common problem than the one faced by Prince Harry himself, who found that BetterUp's questions did not easily fit with his history as a working royal.

*Perhaps the limitation exists to avoid being classified as a healthcare app, which in the US comes with heavy regulations. *BetterUp's website is at pains to distinguish coaching from therapy, and to note that its services are not eligible for healthcare tax breaks. Still, it's not what I would call "whole person".

What you do get, once you're in, is a mixture of goal-setting tool, educational library and gamified life tracker. The first assignment is a 157-part "whole person model assessment", which asks about everything from your feelings towards your colleagues through your sleeping habits to your out-of-work friendships.

Do you surround yourself with people you can depend on? (Yes. I mean, I think so.) Do you often criticise yourself? (No, and it's disgusting.) How much attention do you pay to the ingredients in your food? (Less than I should!) Do you gravitate towards tasks that push you outside your comfort zone? (What do you think this is?)

*How much will it cost?*

My first free coaching session was helpful, if short. A respect for the process prevents me from saying too much. Still, as I went through the various questions and exercises, I could feel green shoots of productive self-examination begin to break soil.
The problem is, can they survive here? The company says users will get real results after multiple sessions, but it is strikingly opaque about how much this will cost.

Neither in the app itself nor on BetterUp's website could I find any up-front information about subscription pricing. Coaches on the business review site Glassdoor described it as paying "very little", "below average coaching rates" and "almost no pay". A request for comment with my journalist's hat was not immediately answered.

Only after my first session did I receive an SMS message. "Congrats, Laurence!" it said. "This is a tremendous milestone. The next step is to subscribe..." The price was eye-watering: _*$499*_ (£364) per month, reduced with a discount for my "early interest" to $249 per month until the end of 2021.

Perhaps that kind of money flies from the purse of a Google or Facebook engineer as easily as a swallow from a barn ceiling. Many, however, would struggle to justify it simply for the sake of sharpening their careers, however dazzling the insights.
Personally, I felt as if I had been coaxed into investing in the system, getting used to it, setting goals and developing hopes – and even, albeit briefly, making a connection with my coach – only to be hit shortly afterwards with a fairly large request wrapped in an empty compliment. Was my whole person nourished by this? My whole foot.

Clearly, coaching is an investment, and I don't begrudge an expert their due. Still, those of us not sixth in line to the throne of the United Kingdom would appreciate some "honest feedback" about the size of that investment from the start. Might I suggest a TED talk that I found in the BetterUp app? The title is "Know your worth, and then ask for it".
_This article was updated at 6am on Thursday, March 25 to incorporate an account of BetterUp's coaching and prices._



ETA: Personally, I would rather buy an Hermes scarf each month than pay for this app.


----------



## jelliedfeels

eunaddict said:


> Quora is a gem.
> View attachment 5036612


That’s from the private eye a delightfully old-school Brit satire magazine. 








						Private Eye Magazine | Official Site - the UK's number one best-selling news and current affairs magazine, edited by Ian Hislop
					

MONE DENIES INVOLVEMENT WITH HER FAMILY



					www.private-eye.co.uk
				



I’ll keep a look out for further gems as I don’t think it’s published anywhere else.


muddledmint said:


> Mmm cornbread is so good, especially the crispier edges. Is it not a normal food where you’re from? I don’t eat it often but it’s common in the US. I googled polenta cake and it does seem like a more refined cornbread. Yum!


I believe they are similar but it’s a different kind of corn. I love Southern food but because blue corn isn’t available here I will have to just live with my cornbread being a heresy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> One intrepid journalist reviews the B-Up coaching app —
> The full article is behind a paywall, so I’ve posted parts of it here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app
> 
> 
> BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 1 $e$$ion
> 
> 
> 
> *What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app*
> *BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?*
> By Laurence Dodds, US Technology Reporter, San Francisco24 March 2021 • 11:25am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app has hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer". Among its clients are Facebook and Nasa
> 
> What's your Growth Mindset power level? Mine is at 85 out of 100. It's my best quality, handily beating my Empathy score of 68 and my Cognitive ability of 55. My other statistics could do with some work: Self-Awareness 35, Nutrition 31 and Physical Activity a risible 14. These ratings might sound like character statistics from some office-themed Dungeons and Dragons game. In fact, they are the measure of my workplace personality according to BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app that has just hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer".
> 
> BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at $1.7bn (£1.2bn) in a $125m investment round led by Iconiq, an "ultra-secretive" and prestigious wealth management firm said to handle Mark Zuckerberg's fortune. Its pitch: to use artificial intelligence (AI) to deliver personalised coaching sessions designed to nourish "the whole person", to the benefit of both workers and employers.
> 
> So what can you learn about yourself from Prince Harry's new gig? I summoned up my self-improvement mindset and attempted to find out.
> 
> *Mental fitness vs mental health*
> Given the Prince's words, it may surprise you to learn that BetterUp is *not a mental health app* – at least not for individual users. Instead, it is wholly focused on performance and wellbeing at work, and seems designed primarily for corporate use as an employee benefit (which can include a "mental fitness" service called Care).
> 
> This is less Californian mysticism and meditation than high-flying Business Wellness, with TED talks about "empowerment" and "strategic planning" and a personality assessment that frames your high scores as "strengths" and your weaknesses as "development areas".
> 
> When entering your details, job title is a mandatory field – not that it would necessarily be very useful in Silicon Valley, where business cards might bear sobriquets such as "hacker", a "ninja", a "Jedi", a "Sherpa", a "wizard" or even "security princess" (no relation).
> In the past, BetterUp only sold its services to companies with more than 10,000 employees, with past clients including Facebook, LinkedIn, Salesforce, Logitech. Nasa and the US Federal Aviation Administration. Today lone individuals can try it too, getting one free coaching session before being asked to subscribe – and so I jumped in.
> 
> My first speed bump appeared within a few minutes. BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach. The company makes much of its AI algorithms, which it claims can match coaches to clients with "over 97pc accuracy".
> Yet at this stage there was no explicit mention of mental health and no place to note disabilities such as ADHD and autism. Consequently, none of the three coaches offered by the app –  and there seems to be no way forward without picking one  – listed expertise on those topics, at least beyond general allusions to "health and wellness", "mindfulness" and "stress".
> 
> BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach:
> 
> For many users, this is a potential dealbreaker: a coach who does not understand your specific disabilities is unlikely to be as helpful as one who does, and at worst might be a hindrance. I requested more options via a manual email form and got similar options again, albeit with a little more "wellness".
> 
> It makes for a rather more common problem than the one faced by Prince Harry himself, who found that BetterUp's questions did not easily fit with his history as a working royal.
> 
> *Perhaps the limitation exists to avoid being classified as a healthcare app, which in the US comes with heavy regulations. *BetterUp's website is at pains to distinguish coaching from therapy, and to note that its services are not eligible for healthcare tax breaks. Still, it's not what I would call "whole person".
> 
> What you do get, once you're in, is a mixture of goal-setting tool, educational library and gamified life tracker. The first assignment is a 157-part "whole person model assessment", which asks about everything from your feelings towards your colleagues through your sleeping habits to your out-of-work friendships.
> 
> Do you surround yourself with people you can depend on? (Yes. I mean, I think so.) Do you often criticise yourself? (No, and it's disgusting.) How much attention do you pay to the ingredients in your food? (Less than I should!) Do you gravitate towards tasks that push you outside your comfort zone? (What do you think this is?)
> 
> *How much will it cost?*
> 
> My first free coaching session was helpful, if short. A respect for the process prevents me from saying too much. Still, as I went through the various questions and exercises, I could feel green shoots of productive self-examination begin to break soil.
> The problem is, can they survive here? The company says users will get real results after multiple sessions, but it is strikingly opaque about how much this will cost.
> 
> Neither in the app itself nor on BetterUp's website could I find any up-front information about subscription pricing. Coaches on the business review site Glassdoor described it as paying "very little", "below average coaching rates" and "almost no pay". A request for comment with my journalist's hat was not immediately answered.
> 
> Only after my first session did I receive an SMS message. "Congrats, Laurence!" it said. "This is a tremendous milestone. The next step is to subscribe..." The price was eye-watering: _*$499*_ (£364) per month, reduced with a discount for my "early interest" to $249 per month until the end of 2021.
> 
> Perhaps that kind of money flies from the purse of a Google or Facebook engineer as easily as a swallow from a barn ceiling. Many, however, would struggle to justify it simply for the sake of sharpening their careers, however dazzling the insights.
> Personally, I felt as if I had been coaxed into investing in the system, getting used to it, setting goals and developing hopes – and even, albeit briefly, making a connection with my coach – only to be hit shortly afterwards with a fairly large request wrapped in an empty compliment. Was my whole person nourished by this? My whole foot.
> 
> Clearly, coaching is an investment, and I don't begrudge an expert their due. Still, those of us not sixth in line to the throne of the United Kingdom would appreciate some "honest feedback" about the size of that investment from the start. Might I suggest a TED talk that I found in the BetterUp app? The title is "Know your worth, and then ask for it".
> _This article was updated at 6am on Thursday, March 25 to incorporate an account of BetterUp's coaching and prices._
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Personally, I would rather buy an Hermes scarf each month than pay for this app.


Good luck finding a company sending you an Hermes care package.
Why would a company sign for this kind of service?
the liabilities are enormous.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> One intrepid journalist reviews the B-Up coaching app —
> *ETA: Personally, I would rather buy an Hermes scarf each month than pay for this app.*



Great comparison. Me too!


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you missed this hilarious story about strangers bonding over a couch email. This is why TPF is so important, especially now. Being here is so much healthier than any faux-mental health app. Thank you, Vald, Meg and all of our outstanding posters. 









						Group of strangers bond over reply-all email informing them about their delayed couches
					

Recipients became invested in finding one woman a date after she mentioned she was single and looking




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## elvisfan4life

muddledmint said:


> Mmm cornbread is so good, especially the crispier edges. Is it not a normal food where you’re from? I don’t eat it often but it’s common in the US. I googled polenta cake and it does seem like a more refined cornbread. Yum!



We can’t get the proper flour to make cornbread here on the uk polenta is the nearest but it tastes nothing like - I love cornbread and catfish and hush puppies I’m in the wrong country !!!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

This


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> They look tired. You know, the way people look when they actually work for a living.


That's possible, too. I'm sure they they work hard. I tip my hat to them because a noble thing to do. Whatever happened, unfortunately, this cake failed to put smile on their faces.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

marietouchet said:


> Archewell, so far reminds me of the foundation run by a previous president , wife and daughter
> Travel expenses were paid to Haiti and it was not like Haiti got rebuilt





zen1965 said:


> There was a major earthquake in Haiti in 2010 with 200,000 dead. It was a major humanitarian disaster. And there was an immense need for rehabilitation.
> (Did you by any chance mix up Haiti (Caribbean ) and Tahiti (South Pacific)?)



It’s true...I heard they planned it in the basement of the pizza parlor...funded by Soros...while creating counterfeit birth certificates!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone!
> 
> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer?
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html


Gag alert big time! This guy is an idiot!


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> Gag alert big time! This guy is an idiot!


They all sound dumb.
But hey, if they find their niche. Good for them!
Power to the morons.


----------



## chicinthecity777

limom said:


> They all sound dumb.
> But hey, if they find their niche. Good for them!
> Power to the morons.


Yes! As the saying goes, nobody ever went broke by under estimating public taste!


----------



## marietouchet

zen1965 said:


> There was a major earthquake in Haiti in 2010 with 200,000 dead. It was a major humanitarian disaster. And there was an immense need for rehabilitation.
> (Did you by any chance mix up Haiti (Caribbean ) and Tahiti (South Pacific)?)


No, Haiti was correct, the charitable org has been criticized for not delivering anything tangible after all the photo ops despite the obvious need


----------



## chicinthecity777

Are these the racist British media at work or more law suits in the works???


----------



## limom

chicinthecity777 said:


> Are these the racist British media at work or more law suits in the works???



They can Sue the National Enquirer.(US paper)
They are on the verge of bankruptcy, anyways.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

marietouchet said:


> No, Haiti was correct, the charitable org has been criticized for not delivering anything tangible after all the photo ops despite the obvious need



Not the place for a political discussion but it's helpful to fact check before sharing accusations as truth. I am happy to pm you if you're interested in learning more.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone!
> 
> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer?
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html


This is the PR story, I wonder about the real story on how he got the job.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Handwritten note- is calligraphy genetic now?
> 
> It’s all so weird and sad that this family are so at odds about something so trivial.


Probably they were able to see a handwritten note (by magnifying a picture), then the journalist used his/her creative mind...


----------



## bisousx

jelliedfeels said:


> Handwritten note- is calligraphy genetic now?
> 
> It’s all so weird and sad that this family are so at odds about something so trivial.



Very weird. It’s a family full of narcissists at war with each other, craving the spotlight and the need to constantly set the record straight. Not sure about stone cold Doria, but one thing is for sure - those two raised the national treasure that is Meghan Markle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Maybe the Singapore influencer will contribute something too, then the carbon miles may look better



I only quickly looked into her video, but that girl was on fire.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photos by BackGrid.  Suspicious?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's dad delivers letter to Oprah asking to be interviewed by her
> 
> 
> THOMAS Markle has hand delivered a letter to Oprah Winfrey – asking her to interview HIM about his relationship with estranged daughter Meghan. The lighting director, 76, drove up to the chat show …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


how would he know where Oprah lives?  why did he bring photogs with him?  maybe the apple didn't fall that far from the tree


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Hi, sure, I'll PM you as it's off topic for this thread: if anyone else wants the recipe just let me know!



Yes please!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Cringe.... so basically the title is BS and the first and foremost value he brings is being born a prince. Excuse me, a prince who wants to make a positive impact in the world. Not to be confused with princes who want to have a negative impact in the world.


you forgot a prince who wants to make a positive impact on the world and whose mother died when he was just a young boy


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I would say yes, but I've never had cornbread


that's interesting
it's very common here in the US


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> how would he know where Oprah lives?  why did he bring photogs with him?  maybe the apple didn't fall that far from the tree



Doria knows.  It may well be a set-up by OW to plug the H&M  ‘reunion/healing‘ show.  I know, I know, I’m a cynic.

RE: how he got the job - try Google on the chief‘s name.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Having a hind thicker than a rhino’s, it wasn’t the repeated references to my being ‘a total c—’ that particularly bothered me, nor even the suggestion that I should have my three children put up for adoption. At one point someone even said it would be a good idea for me to drink myself to death like my mother, about whose chronic alcoholism I have written extensively.



If only the sugars listened to H & M's cries for compassion! What kind of a*shole would even entertain typing out something like this.



> No, what really got me was the appalling spelling and grammar. I mean, if you’re going to hurl insults, at least have the decency to get my name right.



Alright, count me as a fan haha.


----------



## xincinsin

I'm having cognitive dissonance.
MM claims she was trapped, unable to leave the house for coffee with her mum, silenced, her passport taken away.
MM is also said to have quietly gone to help with cooking for the Grenville victims, and she zipped off for a baby shower in her home country.
I'm starting to think that Harry married more than one woman. Perhaps in grand Hollywood tradition, he married the Three Faces of Eve, and whatever is done or said each day depends on which personality woke up that day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Despite my now apparently being on a par with the Ku Klux Klan for failing to acknowledge Meghan as the next messiah, it was actually not until the fifteenth paragraph of that original article that the ‘confident and intelligent’ Northwestern University graduate was described as ‘the daughter of an African-American mother and a father of Dutch and Irish descent’.
> Call me superficial, but I was genuinely far more interested in the fact that Harry ‘I-come-with-baggage’ Wales was dating a former ‘briefcase girl’ from the US version of Deal or No Deal than the colour of her skin. A ginger prince punching well above his weight?



Not sure a former briefcase girl is well above a British prince's weight, though.



> ‘His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment’, it read, referencing a ‘smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments’. Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, had apparently been besieged by photographers, while bribes had been offered to Meghan’s ex-boyfriend along with ‘the bombardment of nearly every friend, coworker, and loved one in her life’.



I'll openly admit I didn't follow their story at all back then...but knowing what I know now I would bet money it was Meghan kicking up a fuss, not the media being actually abusive. She saw her chance and ran with it. Plus, may I remind all of us that rumours were swirling back then who really leaked it to the press to create facts? Right. That would have been Duchess Disney.



> Omid Scobie, co-author of Finding Freedom, a highly favourable account of the Sussexes’ departure from the Royal family, written with their cooperation last summer, would later insist that the couple knew the story of their relationship was coming out and were well prepared for it.
> I can tell you categorically that they weren’t, since I did not even put a call into Kensington Palace before we went to press for fear of it being leaked.



Why. So. Many. Lies.



> But that was before the former Army Captain decided to well and truly shoot the messenger, latterly telling journalists covering the newly-weds’ tax-payer-funded October 2018 tour of Australia and the south Pacific: *‘Thanks for coming, even though you weren’t invited.’*



WTF?



> The royal press pack is the group of dedicated writers who cover all the official engagements and tours on a rota system, in exchange for not bothering the royals as they go about their private business. It was a shame this ragtag bunch, of which I am an associate member, was never personally introduced to Meghan when the couple got engaged in November 2017.
> I still have fond memories of a then Kate Middleton, upon her engagement to Prince William in November 2010, showing me her huge sapphire and diamond ring following a press conference at St James’s Palace with the words, ‘It was William’s mother’s so it is very special.’



That is interesting, don't you think? Meghan is not press shy. She just was never interested in winning over the UK press.



> According to the Duchess’s testimony before a global audience of millions, the seeds for their royal departure were actually sown by an article I wrote in November 2018 suggesting she made Kate cry during a bridesmaid’s dress fitting for Princess Charlotte.
> Claiming the ‘reverse happened’, the former Suits star railed, ‘A few days before the wedding she was upset about something, pertaining to, yes, the issue was correct, about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.’
> She then went on to criticise the palace for failing to correct the story – suggesting that royal aides had hung her out to dry to protect the Duchess of Cambridge.
> All of which left me in a bit of a sticky situation. As I told Phillip Schofield on This Morning the following day, *‘I don’t write things I don’t believe to be true and that haven’t been really well sourced.’*



This coming from an award winning journalist. I believe her.



> Another frequent barb was questioning why the press wasn’t writing about that ‘pedo’ [sic] Prince Andrew instead – seemingly oblivious to the fact that no one would know about the Duke of York’s links to Jeffrey Epstein if it wasn’t for the acres of coverage devoted to the story by us royal hacks over recent years.



Well.



> Contrary to the ‘invisible contract’ Harry claims the palace has with the press, royal coverage works roughly like this: good royal deeds = good publicity. Bad royal deeds = bad publicity. We effectively act as a critical friend, working on behalf of a public that rightly expects the royals to take the work – but not themselves – seriously.
> So when a royal couple preaches about climate change before taking four private jets in 11 days, it is par for the course for a royal scribe to point out the inconsistency of that message. None of it is ever personal, as evidenced by the fact that practically every member of the monarchy has come in for flak over the years.







> If Oprah wasn’t willing to point out the discrepancies in Harry and Meghan’s testimony, surely it is beholden on royal reporters to question how the Duchess had managed to undertake four foreign holidays in the six months after her wedding, in addition to official tours to Italy, Canada, and Amsterdam, as well as embarking on a lengthy honeymoon, if she had ‘turned over’ her passport?
> While no one would wish to undermine the extent of her mental health problems, could it really be true that she only left the house twice in four months when she managed to cram in 73 days’ worth of engagements, according to the Court Circular, in the 17 months between her wedding and the couple’s departure to Canada?







> Most pernicious of all though – not least after Piers Morgan’s departure from Good Morning Britain following a complaint to ITV and Ofcom from the Duchess – is the corrosive effect this whole hullabaloo is having on freedom of speech. When you’ve got a former actor effectively editing a British breakfast show from an £11 million Montecito mansion, what next?



Indeed!



> Of course journalists should take responsibility for everything they report and be held to account for it – but Harry and Meghan do not have a monopoly on the truth simply because the close friend and neighbour who interviewed them in return for £7 million from CBS took what they said as gospel.
> If she isn’t willing to probe the disparity between Meghan saying someone questioned the colour of Archie’s skin when she was pregnant, and Harry suggesting it happened before they were even married, then someone must. *There’s a name for such scrutiny. It’s called journalism.*



Where's the clapping emojiy when you need one!


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just fyi that foundation was never intended to fund research or grants. But you're right, president and cancer charity are all over google, here's an original source settlement so you know it's not biased.



Yes - like Archewell, its mission is a huge nothing burger and accomplishes nothing except padding the pockets of its execs.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Everyone, while it’s really interesting hearing about politicians and COVID I’m very wary of the thread getting in trouble.

NB I do not consider lemon and polenta cake recipes off topic because we are clearly all taking inspiration from the great MM


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I just read that Sharon Osbourne is not coming back to The Talk. I never watched the show but she was the last of the original hosts and the latest collateral damage from the Oprah interview.


now this is just not right to me
they are saying sharon used offensive language toward sara gilbert.  I don't watch that show every day but I did see sara's last episode and they were loving each other.  talking about how wonderful it was that sara had been to sharon's home many times, etc.  
If CBS did set sharon up by giving her co-hosts ammo and not warning her, first of all I'd be surprised at Cheryl's participation.  but this would seem to be grounds for a lawsuit.









						Sharon Osbourne No Longer On 'The Talk'
					

CBS said that Osbourne's behavior toward her co-hosts during the March 10 episode "did not align with our values for a respectful workplace.”




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## rose60610

bisousx said:


> Yes - like Archewell, its mission is a huge nothing burger and accomplishes nothing except padding the pockets of its execs.



The mission of Archewell is to purchase Sharpies, inspirational bananas, lemons, olive oil, ill fitting clothes, rescue chickens and electric bikes.  Fortunately for Meghan and Harry, tone deafness doesn't cost anything or Archewell would have a zero balance.  My guess, Meghan's rescue chickens eat A LOT, so they can explain away millions in laundered cash used to purchase organic vegan chicken feed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

A solid explanation of H&M’s finances — 
TLDR, they are very wealthy millionaires.








						Prince Harry and Meghan: Where do they get their money?
					

The Duke and Duchess are releasing a new documentary as part of a lucrative deal with Netflix



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone!
> 
> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer?
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html


Thanks @Hermes Zen 
This is not a slight at you, but for the word salad BS in the article.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A must read to show how we are manipulated by H&M [as if you didn’t know] 









						Meghan Markle: Charity kept donation secret until Oprah interview
					

Himmah says the charity "needed to show solidarity" with the Duchess of Sussex.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Spot on, Richard.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> A must read to show how we are manipulated by H&M [as if you didn’t know]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: Charity kept donation secret until Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Himmah says the charity "needed to show solidarity" with the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


How did the Charity legally keep that donation a secret? I would think it would have to be reported to the tax authorities? 
I don't think this looks good for the charity as far as transparency goes.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> A solid explanation of H&M’s finances —
> TLDR, they are very wealthy millionaires.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan: Where do they get their money?
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess are releasing a new documentary as part of a lucrative deal with Netflix
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



 Of course! And anyone who's gullible enough to believe M&H sought out the Netflix and other deals to fund their security "because they were financially cut off" needs their head examined.  M&H were "financially cut off" because THEY wanted to be financially independent. And OF COURSE they whine about being "cut off", as though they have no idea what "independent" means. And if they're going to whine about the high cost of their security, maybe they could start by S-ingTFU once in a while and downsizing their 7 acre estate. Attempting to disguise their Ponzi scheme by claiming they suffered as members of the BRF reeks of amateur desperation to feed their sugars a bunch of crap in hopes they'll believe it.  I've never seen anyone demand pity like these two. When will they ever get tired of feeling sorry for themselves?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Probably they were able to see a handwritten note (by magnifying a picture), then the journalist used his/her creative mind...


Or by X-ray vision.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone visited the Archewell site? So help me, this is what comes up if you click on "Get Involved." Oh, the irony! That last sentence is totally unlike Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> We want to hear from you. Tell us about how you or somebody you know acted with compassion in the last year. Or describe when you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance.



Why does this make me think that they are out of ideas and trying to steal from the lowly peasants, only to repackage and peddle them as their own ideas on how to be compassionate? And seriously though, why care about what regular folks have been doing to show compassion to others when there's still no proof that the Maleficent of Montecito shown any to TMarkle? 

It is tragic when some people take every opportunity to shove themselves into the spotlight to showcase their interest, kindness and compassion towards outsiders but they are so very nasty to their own family. I still cannot fathom any of that. 

I'm waiting to witness a messy divorce, with popcorn in hand already. Maybe it won't happen but if it does, Wokey Pokey will milk Harry dry, with zero scruples.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> A must read to show how we are manipulated by H&M [as if you didn’t know]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: Charity kept donation secret until Oprah interview
> 
> 
> Himmah says the charity "needed to show solidarity" with the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


It's not her own money FFS! The money went out from the foundation, probably donated by others to the foundation! Let's look at the books of these foundations! Let's wait for the result of charity commission's investigation!!!


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> This is the PR story, I wonder about the real story on how he got the job.


Harry probably put an ad on Craigslist "Will trade royal title/PR for meaningless but woke tech title and lots of money"


----------



## Chanbal

RAINDANCE said:


> Camilla Tominey in today's telegraph.
> Its lengthy but very
> 
> 
> *Harry, Meghan and me: my truth as a royal reporter*
> I've covered elections and extremism, but nothing compares to the vitriol I've received since I started writing about the Sussexes
> 
> ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR27 March 2021 • 6:00am
> 
> Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan
> 
> It is probably worth mentioning from the outset that I never, ever, planned to become a royal reporter. I mean, who does? It’s one of those ridiculous jobs most people fall into completely by accident.
> I certainly wasn’t coveting the position when I first found out how bonkers the beat could be after covering Charles and Camilla’s wedding in 2005. Desperate for ‘a line’ on what went on at the reception, journalists were reduced to flagging down passing cars in Windsor High Street and interrogating the likes of Stephen Fry about whether they’d had the salmon or the chicken.
> Watergate, this wasn’t.
> Yet when my former editor called me into his office shortly afterwards and offered me the royal job ‘because you’re called Camilla and you dress nicely’, who was I to refuse?
> Having planned to get married myself that summer, and start a family soon afterwards, I looked to the likes of Jennie Bond and Penny Junor and figured it would be a good patch for a working mother as well as being one I could grow old with. Unlike show business, when celebrities are ‘in’ one minute and ‘out’ the next, the royals would stay the same, making it easier to build – and keep – contacts.
> 
> So if you’d told me that 16 years later, I would find myself at the centre of a media storm over a royal interview with Oprah Winfrey, I’d have probably laughed in your face. First of all, only royals like Fergie do interviews with Oprah. And since when did journalists become the story?
> 
> Yet as I have experienced since the arrival of Meghan Markle on the royal scene in 2016 – a move that roughly coincided with Twitter doubling its 140-character limitation to 280 – royal reporters like me now find themselves in the line of fire like never before.
> We are used to the likes of Kate Adie coming under attack in the Middle East, but now it is the correspondents who write up events like Trooping the Colour and the Royal Windsor Horse Show having to take cover from the keyboard warriors supposedly defending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s ‘truth’.
> Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan. But even I have been taken aback by the vitriol on social media in the wake of the couple’s televised two-hour talk-a-thon, in which they branded both the Royal family and the British press racist while complaining about their ‘almost unsurvivable’ multimillionaire lives at the hands of the evil monarchy. And all while the rest of the UK were losing their loved ones and livelihoods in a global pandemic.
> 
> Having covered Brexit, general elections and stories about Islamic extremism, I’ve grown used to being sprayed with viral vomit on a fairly regular basis, but when you’ve got complete strangers trolling your best friend’s Instagram feed by association? That’s Britney Spears levels of toxic.
> Having a hind thicker than a rhino’s, it wasn’t the repeated references to my being ‘a total c—’ that particularly bothered me, nor even the suggestion that I should have my three children put up for adoption. At one point someone even said it would be a good idea for me to drink myself to death like my mother, about whose chronic alcoholism I have written extensively.
> No, what really got me was the appalling spelling and grammar. I mean, if you’re going to hurl insults, at least have the decency to get my name right.
> Yet in order to understand just how it has come to pass that so-called #SussexSquaders think nothing of branding all royal correspondents ‘white supremacists’ regardless of who they write for, or sending hate mail to our email addresses, offices – and in some cases, even our homes – it’s worth briefly going to back to when I first broke the story that Prince Harry was dating an American actor in the Sunday Express on 31 October 2016. Headlined: ‘Royal world exclusive: Harry’s secret romance with TV star’, the splash revealed how the popular prince was ‘secretly dating a stunning US actress, model and human rights campaigner’.
> Despite my now apparently being on a par with the Ku Klux Klan for failing to acknowledge Meghan as the next messiah, it was actually not until the fifteenth paragraph of that original article that the ‘confident and intelligent’ Northwestern University graduate was described as ‘the daughter of an African-American mother and a father of Dutch and Irish descent’.
> Call me superficial, but I was genuinely far more interested in the fact that Harry ‘I-come-with-baggage’ Wales was dating a former ‘briefcase girl’ from the US version of Deal or No Deal than the colour of her skin. A ginger prince punching well above his weight? This was the stuff of tabloid dreams. Little did I know then that covering the trials and tribulations of these two lovebirds would turn into such a nightmare.
> The online hostility began bubbling up about eight days after that first story, when Harry’s then communications secretary Jason Knauf issued an ‘unprecedented’ statement accusing the media of ‘crossing a line’.
> ‘His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment’, it read, referencing a ‘smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments’. Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, had apparently been besieged by photographers, while bribes had been offered to Meghan’s ex-boyfriend along with ‘the bombardment of nearly every friend, coworker, and loved one in her life’.
> 
> Suffice to say, I did feel a bit guilty. Although I hadn’t written anything remotely racist or sexist, I had started the ball rolling for headlines like the MailOnline’s ‘(Almost) straight outta Compton’ (referencing a song by hip-hop group NWA about gang violence and Meghan’s upbringing in the nearby LA district of Crenshaw), along with her ‘exotic’ DNA (which I subsequently called out, including on This Morning in the wake of ‘Megxit’ in January last year).
> Omid Scobie, co-author of Finding Freedom, a highly favourable account of the Sussexes’ departure from the Royal family, written with their cooperation last summer, would later insist that the couple knew the story of their relationship was coming out and were well prepared for it.
> I can tell you categorically that they weren’t, since I did not even put a call into Kensington Palace before we went to press for fear of it being leaked. (I did later discuss this with Harry, when I covered his trip to the Caribbean in November 2016, and to be fair he was pretty philosophical, agreeing it would have come out sooner or later. But that was before the former Army Captain decided to well and truly shoot the messenger, latterly telling journalists covering the newly-weds’ tax-payer-funded October 2018 tour of Australia and the south Pacific: ‘Thanks for coming, even though you weren’t invited.’)
> The royal press pack is the group of dedicated writers who cover all the official engagements and tours on a rota system, in exchange for not bothering the royals as they go about their private business. It was a shame this ragtag bunch, of which I am an associate member, was never personally introduced to Meghan when the couple got engaged in November 2017.
> I still have fond memories of a then Kate Middleton, upon her engagement to Prince William in November 2010, showing me her huge sapphire and diamond ring following a press conference at St James’s Palace with the words, ‘It was William’s mother’s so it is very special.’
> I replied that she might want to consider buying ‘one of those expanding accordion style file holders’ to organise all her wedding paperwork. (Reader, I had given birth to my second child less than four months earlier and was still lactating.)
> Not meeting Meghan did not stop royal commentators like me writing reams about her being ‘a breath of fresh air’ and telling practically every TV show I appeared on that she was the ‘best thing to have happened to the Royal Family in years’.
> 
> As the world followed the joyous news of the Windsors’ resident strip billiards star having finally found ‘the one’, the couple enjoyed overwhelmingly positive press culminating in their fairy-tale wedding in May 2018, which we headlined ‘So in love’ above a picture of the bride and groom kissing. I tweeted the wedding front page, along with the original story breaking the news of their relationship with the words, ‘Job done’. Yet, as Meghan would later point out in a glossy Santa Barbara garden, that was by far the end of the story.
> According to the Duchess’s testimony before a global audience of millions, the seeds for their royal departure were actually sown by an article I wrote in November 2018 suggesting she made Kate cry during a bridesmaid’s dress fitting for Princess Charlotte.
> Claiming the ‘reverse happened’, the former Suits star railed, ‘A few days before the wedding she was upset about something, pertaining to, yes, the issue was correct, about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.’
> She then went on to criticise the palace for failing to correct the story – suggesting that royal aides had hung her out to dry to protect the Duchess of Cambridge.
> All of which left me in a bit of a sticky situation. As I told Phillip Schofield on This Morning the following day, ‘I don’t write things I don’t believe to be true and that haven’t been really well sourced.’
> Having seemingly been completely bowled over by Meghan’s version of events, Schofe then went for the jugular: ‘I have to say, though, that’s all addressed in that interview, isn’t it, because she [Meghan] couldn’t understand why nobody stood up for her?’
> 
> Yet someone had stood up for her, on that very same This Morning sofa: me.
> As I told Phil and Holly on 14 January 2019, as more reports of ‘Duchess Difficult’ started to emerge, ‘I think she [Meghan] is doing really well, she looks amazing, she speaks well. She has played a blinder.’
> So you’ll forgive me if I can’t quite understand why Meghan didn’t feel the need to correct this supposedly glaring error once she had her own dedicated head of communications from March 2019 – or indeed when she ‘collaborated’ with Scobie, who concluded in his bestselling hagiography that ‘no one cried’?
> Moreover, how did the Duchess know a postnatal Kate wasn’t ‘left in tears’? And if she doesn’t know, what hope has the average troll observing events through the prism of their own deep-rooted insecurities?
> It appears the actual truth ceases to matter once sides have been taken in the unedifying Team Meghan versus Team Kate battle that has divided the internet.
> Make no mistake, there are abject morons at both extremes spewing the sort of bile that, ironically, makes most of the media coverage of Harry and Meghan look like a 1970s edition of Jackie magazine.
> It perhaps didn’t help my case that the day before the interview was aired in the US, I had written a lengthy piece carefully weighing up the evidence behind allegations of ‘outrageous bullying’ that had been levelled against Meghan during what proved to be a miserable 20 months in the Royal family for all concerned.
> The messages – to my Twitter feed, my email, my website and official Facebook page – ranged from the threatening, to the typical tropes about media ‘scum’ and the downright bizarre. Some accused me of being in cahoots with Carole Middleton, with whom I have never interacted, unless you count a last-minute Party Pieces purchase in a desperate moment of poor parental planning.
> 
> Another frequent barb was questioning why the press wasn’t writing about that ‘pedo’ [sic] Prince Andrew instead – seemingly oblivious to the fact that no one would know about the Duke of York’s links to Jeffrey Epstein if it wasn’t for the acres of coverage devoted to the story by us royal hacks over recent years.
> It didn’t matter that I had repeatedly torn the Queen’s second, and, some say, favourite son to pieces for everything from his propensity to take his golf clubs on foreign tours to that disastrous Newsnight interview.
> Contrary to the ‘invisible contract’ Harry claims the palace has with the press, royal coverage works roughly like this: good royal deeds = good publicity. Bad royal deeds = bad publicity. We effectively act as a critical friend, working on behalf of a public that rightly expects the royals to take the work – but not themselves – seriously.
> So when a royal couple preaches about climate change before taking four private jets in 11 days, it is par for the course for a royal scribe to point out the inconsistency of that message. None of it is ever personal, as evidenced by the fact that practically every member of the monarchy has come in for flak over the years.
> If Oprah wasn’t willing to point out the discrepancies in Harry and Meghan’s testimony, surely it is beholden on royal reporters to question how the Duchess had managed to undertake four foreign holidays in the six months after her wedding, in addition to official tours to Italy, Canada, and Amsterdam, as well as embarking on a lengthy honeymoon, if she had ‘turned over’ her passport?
> While no one would wish to undermine the extent of her mental health problems, could it really be true that she only left the house twice in four months when she managed to cram in 73 days’ worth of engagements, according to the Court Circular, in the 17 months between her wedding and the couple’s departure to Canada?
> 
> And what of the ‘racist’ headlines flashed up during the interview purporting to be from the British press, when more than a third were actually taken from independent blogs and the foreign media? The UK media abides by the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s Code of Conduct ‘to avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race’, as well as by rigorous defamation laws. And rightly so – the British press doesn’t always get it right. But social media is the Wild West by comparison, publishing vile slurs on a daily basis with impunity.
> Some therefore find it strange that such a litigious couple would claim to have been ‘silenced’ when they have made so many complaints, including resorting to legal action, over stories they claim not to have even read. There is something similarly contradictory about a couple accusing the tabloids of lacking self-reflection while refusing to take any blame at all – for anything.
> In any normal world, informed writing on such matters would be classed as fair comment, but not, seemingly, on Twitter where those completely lacking any objectivity whatsoever are only too willing to virtue signal and manoeuvre.
> As the trolling reached fever pitch in the aftermath of the interview, veteran royal reporter Robert Jobson of the Evening Standard called me. ‘Don’t respond to these freaks,’ he advised. ‘It’s getting nasty out there. Watch your back!’
> Yet despite my general sense of bewilderment at the menacing Megbots, I can’t say it didn’t appal me to discover a close friend had received online abuse, purely by dint of being my mate. After discussing the lengths the troll must have gone to to track her down, she asked me, ‘Do you ever worry someone might do something awful to you?’ Er, not until now, no.
> Of course it’s upsetting, even for a cynical old-timer like me. Worse still are people who actually know me casting aspersions on my profession on social media. Often these are the same charlatans who would think nothing of sidling up to me for the latest gossip on the Royal family, while publicly pretending that reading any such coverage is completely beneath them.
> Most pernicious of all though – not least after Piers Morgan’s departure from Good Morning Britain following a complaint to ITV and Ofcom from the Duchess – is the corrosive effect this whole hullabaloo is having on freedom of speech. When you’ve got a former actor effectively editing a British breakfast show from an £11 million Montecito mansion, what next?
> I cannot help but think we are in danger of setting race relations back 30 years if people are seriously suggesting that any criticism of Meghan is racially motivated. It’s the hypocrisy that gets me. When Priti Patel was accused of bullying, the very same people who willingly hung the Home Secretary out to dry are now the ones defending Meghan against such claims, saying they have been levelled at her simply because she is ‘a strong woman of colour’.
> Of course journalists should take responsibility for everything they report and be held to account for it – but Harry and Meghan do not have a monopoly on the truth simply because the close friend and neighbour who interviewed them in return for £7 million from CBS took what they said as gospel.
> If she isn’t willing to probe the disparity between Meghan saying someone questioned the colour of Archie’s skin when she was pregnant, and Harry suggesting it happened before they were even married, then someone must. There’s a name for such scrutiny. It’s called journalism.
> 
> The public reserves the right to make up its own mind – with the help of the watchful eye of a free and fair press. But that press can never be free or fair if journalists do not feel they can report without fear or favour. I’m lucky that a lot of the criticism I face is more than balanced out by hugely supportive members of the public and online community who either agree – or respect the right to disagree. Along with the hate mail, I have had many thoughtful and eloquent missives, including those that good naturedly challenge what I have written in the paper or said on TV, which have genuinely given me pause for thought.
> I am more than happy to enter into constructive discourse with these correspondents, who are frankly sometimes the only people who keep me on Twitter. I mean, let’s face it, I wouldn’t be anywhere near the bloody thing if this wasn’t my day job.
> With the National Union of Journalists this month declaring that harassment and abuse had ‘become normalised’ within the industry, never have members of Britain’s press needed more courage. As Winston Churchill famously said, ‘You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.’
> Who would have thought that the preservation of the fundamental freedoms that we hold so dear should partially rest on the shoulders of those who follow around a 94-year-old woman and her family for a living?
> If I’d known then what I know now, would I still have written the bridesmaid’s dress story?
> Yes – doubtlessly reflecting sisterly sobs all round. But after two decades in this business, I am clear-eyed enough to know this for certain: whatever I had written, it would still have ended in tears.


This is a great article, thank you for posting it. Yes,"_I cannot help but think we are in danger of setting race relations back 30 years if people are seriously suggesting that any criticism of Meghan is racially motivated. It’s the hypocrisy that gets me._"


----------



## chicinthecity777

Interesting take by a young mixed race girl.


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> Okay now I REALLY gotta disagree with you ladies because olive oil cake is DELICIOUS!



I’m late to this cake discussion but I love lemon olive oil cake too! I bake it in a loaf pan so it’s more like lemon pound cake. The olive oil is a substitute for butter since I don’t do dairy. It’s not savory at all and you can’t really taste the oil. I live in California and the thought of fedexing a cake like my kitchen is some kind of exclusive bakery with demand all over the country is obnoxious. Especially since the recipient is a charity and they need *MONEY*.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lulu212121 said:


> How did the Charity legally keep that donation a secret? I would think it would have to be reported to the tax authorities?
> I don't think this looks good for the charity as far as transparency goes.


I think he means they didn’t make a press release about it and announce their names until they wanted to ‘make a statement’ after the broadcast. His first instinct was right - the charity is soured by the association. 

It’s just a stupid idea to portray it as an announcement of solidarity anyway. I’m sure there’s plenty of POC in other charitable grant organisations like the nation Lottery but they don’t feel the need to make every donation into a ‘social statement.’


H&M could also always have given the donation anonymously of course to prevent the embarrassment.

edit for clarity and I think Himmah isn’t a grant organisation from what I can see


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting take by a young mixed race girl.



Of course I agree with what she said. She’s also really clear and good on camera. Good for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> I think he means they didn’t make a press release about it and announce their names until they wanted to ‘make a statement’ after the broadcast. His first instinct was right - the charity is soured by the association.
> It’s just a stupid idea to portray it as an announcement of solidarity anyway. I’m sure there’s plenty of POC in other charitable grant organisations like the nation Lottery (Or Himmah itself by the sound of it) but they don’t need to make every donation into a ‘social statement.
> *H&M could also always have given the donation anonymously of course to prevent the embarrassment.*



But we'd miss out on the compassionate creative activations that anonymity hides from view, and we all know that embarrassing themselves is what Harry and Meghan do best.  By the way, word salad goes great with lemon olive oil cake. So does crow eaten with silver spoons.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> now this is just not right to me
> they are saying sharon used offensive language toward sara gilbert.  I don't watch that show every day but I did see sara's last episode and they were loving each other.  talking about how wonderful it was that sara had been to sharon's home many times, etc.
> If CBS did set sharon up by giving her co-hosts ammo and not warning her, first of all I'd be surprised at Cheryl's participation.  but this would seem to be grounds for a lawsuit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne No Longer On 'The Talk'
> 
> 
> CBS said that Osbourne's behavior toward her co-hosts during the March 10 episode "did not align with our values for a respectful workplace.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Maybe it was a set up to get rid of the oldest host on the show. Let’s see if they replace her with someone young and woke. CBS is making it clear which direction they are heading.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> It's possible, but I don't think he his a narcissist. He put his daughter's interests always ahead of himself, he spent most of his money on her education. He raised 3 kids almost as a single parent.
> 
> He has been described as shy and kind person that doesn't like the limelight. After MM association to H, he found himself on several newspapers. Many of those articles were negative,  including the publication of Harry's comments that the BRF was the family that MM never had... The staged photo-op was his attempt to be seen in a more favorable light, but it was a mistake.


I don't think he's a narcissist, either, just because he wanted a minute in the limelight or making a buck or two after investing so much in our beloved Duchess. It was just an unfortunate photo-op, not a tell-all book. It seems that his millionaire daughter didn't care much for his father who doesn't seem to be a wealthy man.  I think Megs' snubbing his father has started long before the wedding. In a normal family in-laws meet at least at the engagement party or preferably before. Megs didn't have time to visit dad with his ginger fiancé or money to buy the old guy a ticket to meet her new family-to-be somewhere else in those years leading up to their engagement or after but before the wedding.


----------



## limom

mellibelly said:


> I’m late to this cake discussion but I love lemon olive oil cake too! I bake it in a loaf pan so it’s more like lemon pound cake. The olive oil is a substitute for butter since I don’t do dairy. It’s not savory at all and you can’t really taste the oil. I live in California and the thought of fedexing a cake like my kitchen is some kind of exclusive bakery with demand all over the country is obnoxious. Especially since the recipient is a charity and they need *MONEY*.


What type of Olive oil do you use?
Her type of charity is stupid. She is not a PTA mom raising funds for the school.
SEND A check.
I just read an article how we need to make cash donation non taboo.


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it was a set up to get rid of the oldest host on the show. Let’s see if they replace her with someone young and woke. CBS is making it clear which direction they are heading.


Sharon was a vile and crass woman. Please do not feel sorry for her.
She got a huge check to leave CBS.
I vote for Bridgit as a replacement.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this hilarious story about strangers bonding over a couch email. This is why TPF is so important, especially now. Being here is so much healthier than any faux-mental health app. Thank you, Vald, Meg and all of our outstanding posters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Group of strangers bond over reply-all email informing them about their delayed couches
> 
> 
> Recipients became invested in finding one woman a date after she mentioned she was single and looking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk



I met my separated at birth sister from another mother on the Animal forum here  
And lots of other posters from all over who I would love to meet up with some day


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it was a set up to get rid of the oldest host on the show. Let’s see if they replace her with someone young and woke. CBS is making it clear which direction they are heading.


Exactly.  That's why Kathie Lee Gifford was shown the door.  All the stations want a younger viewer.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If only the sugars listened to H & M's cries for compassion! What kind of a*shole would even entertain typing out something like this.
> 
> 
> 
> Alright, count me as a fan haha.



I was hooked at "viral vomit"


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  That's why Kathie Lee Gifford was shown the door.  All the stations want a younger viewer.


You really think so?
CBS demographics are older.
And they have two 60 plus anchors in the morning.
I don’t see it.


----------



## bisousx

DeMonica said:


> I don't think he's a narcissist, either, just because he wanted a minute in the limelight or making a buck or two after investing so much in our beloved Duchess. It was just an unfortunate photo-op, not a tell-all book. It seems that his millionaire daughter didn't care much for his father who doesn't seem to be a wealthy man.  I think Megs' snubbing his father has started long before the wedding. In a normal family in-laws meet at least at the engagement party or preferably before. Megs didn't have time to visit dad with his ginger fiancé or money to buy the old guy a ticket to meet her new family-to-be somewhere else in those years leading up to their engagement or after but before the wedding.



We really need to separate Thomas’ good deeds as a parent from his personality traits and recent actions. You’re _supposed_ to pay for your offspring’s college education (if you can). It’s notable and generous, but providing for your child isn’t relevant when you’re talking about his personality. He has an obvious need to be in the spotlight and refute every little bit of gossip - if I give Thomas a further thought, it’s pretty obvious where Meghan and Samantha get this trait from. And let’s be real, who besides a narc has the audacity to walk up to a billionaire’s house to hand deliver a handwritten note (Thomas) or fly to the UK and show up at the palace to publicly bash her half sister (Samantha)?


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> You really think so?
> CBS demographics are older.
> And they have two 60 plus anchors in the morning.
> I don’t see it.


Gayle is on CBS if I remember .... Her age is irrelevant since she brings other demographics into play


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Gayle is on CBS ? Her age is irrelevant since she brings other demographics into play


Anthony is over 60 as well and a lovely white male.
Anyways....


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> We really need to separate Thomas’ good deeds as a parent from his personality traits and recent actions. You’re _supposed_ to pay for your offspring’s college education (if you can). It’s notable and generous, but providing for your child isn’t relevant when you’re talking about his personality. He has an obvious need to be in the spotlight and refute every little bit of gossip - if I give Thomas a further thought, it’s pretty obvious where Meghan and Samantha get this trait from. And let’s be real, who besides a narc has the audacity to walk up to a billionaire’s house to hand deliver a handwritten note (Thomas) or fly to the UK and show up at the palace to publicly bash her half sister (Samantha)?



ITA with you. I think Thomas made abysmal choices and he at least has admitted it. I think he should do what Meghan and Harry ALSO should do: STFU in public about your private family relationships. It's a joke that he walked up to Oprah's home to hand deliver a note lol... clearly a press move. Has anyone seen one of those homes? Gated with long driveway... who are you "hand delivering" it to? It's not like they have a quaint little mailbox at the front like normal homes.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Good luck finding a company sending you an Hermes care package.
> Why would a company sign for this kind of service?
> the liabilities are enormous.



It's kind of a social experiment to offer out of the box benefits these days. They've gotten quite popular over the last decade but I think the tide is turning on them in terms of how effective they are for the cost.


----------



## Aminamina

Thomas walking up to Oprah’s with a handwritten letter is genius. “Keeping up with the Markles” is writing itself. It’s like Thomas emphasized M&H level. He is no way “beneath“ them and their sh-t stinks. Hey, Oprah, why don’t you show your compassion to this obviously hurt elder father, eh? He obviously doesn’t want to be silenced


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> It's kind of a social experiment to offer out of the box benefits these days. They've gotten quite popular over the last decade but I think the tide is turning on them in terms of how effective they are for the cost.


I know I got Patagonia, wine, cooking lesson but Hermes?
Nope


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> I met my separated at birth sister from another mother on the Animal forum here
> And lots of other posters from all over who I would love to meet up with some day


We will eventually. 
Keep in mind that we are relocating to one of the BRF's palaces soon.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

What do you think it going on here? Please add your own dialogue.

I'll start with: Your Majesty, would you like me to swat that little twit?


----------



## Chanbal

Aminamina said:


> Thomas walking up to Oprah’s with a handwritten letter is genius. “Keeping up with the Markles” is writing itself. It’s like Thomas emphasized M&H level. He is no way “beneath“ them and their sh-t stinks. Hey, Oprah, why don’t you show your compassion to this obviously hurt elder father, eh? He obviously doesn’t want to be silenced


I'm starting to agree with @CarryOn2020 that we are being played here. Let's wait and see...


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> You really think so?
> CBS demographics are older.
> And they have two 60 plus anchors in the morning.
> I don’t see it.


That is exactly the point.  They know that they are stuck with an older audience and want to get a younger audience and the only way to do that is have younger people on the show.  Sharon has a long history of having a tart tongue and they wanted to get away from that as well.  They will find a "woke" person who will bring more diversity to the show.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> What do you think it going on here? Please add your own dialogue.
> 
> I'll start with: Your Majesty, would you like me to swat that little twit?
> View attachment 5037178


TQ to equerry:  Can't you do something to shut her up?  Is she on drugs?


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> What do you think it going on here? Please add your own dialogue.
> 
> I'll start with: Your Majesty, would you like me to swat that little twit?
> View attachment 5037178


 I must not cry in public, but, OMG,  what has Harry gotten himself into? Why can't she STFU?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to agree with @CarryOn2020 that we are being played here. Let's wait and see...


A person suggested a very very long time ago that the entire  affair of the letter was a set up.  What is in it for him?  Why should he do this?  Unless he is getting money  from her, I don't see why he would play along.  On the other hand....I definitely see ANL/MoS/DM  putting him up to going to Oprah's estate to hand over the letter.  Scratch hard enough and I doubt he drove the 250 miles up from Mexico.  ANL would have no problem using him as their tool to get back at MM considering that she is besting them in the lawsuit.  Of course they would be paying him as I don't think he would be willing to do this for free.  Oprah will be thinking long and hard about getting herself involved in this.  If she did, it would be to support MM and eviscerate TM.  It wouldn't get great ratings, so I doubt she would do this.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> that's interesting
> it's very common here in the US


There are similar recipes where corn is grown.eg. Eastern Europe.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I think we are observing someone who is so used to making up her background stories and never getting caught that she blanked out on this one. She probably felt comfortable knowing Oprah was being 100% supportive and she went on a tangent into full fantasy mode. She forgot that other people, who have no reason to believe her without question, would watch it.


*THIS .. 100%++++ times!!!  *

So .. get this .. my friend (_who knew Meghan during her High School years_), just told me the other day that they (_her son - who was Meghan's counterpart in their Senior play -- and the rest of the family_) had *NO IDEA* that Meghan was mix-raced!  Yup - you heard that right; she was not playing the 'WOC' card at that time and since they never met Doria (_she never attended any of the plays or other events_), they had NO idea until Meghan was engaged to Harry! .. talk about unbelievable, right???  It somewhat supports the rumor that Meghan also wasn't always honest with the casting people - vis-a-vis, that she was a WOC as opposed to being Caucasian!  While my friend was also very supportive of Meghan re: engagement & marriage to Harry, now?!?! .. she is as disgusted as the rest of us are!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> What do you think it going on here? Please add your own dialogue.
> 
> I'll start with: Your Majesty, would you like me to swat that little twit?
> View attachment 5037178



She is such a weirdo. She's been caught on tape on numerous occasions talking to people who don't pay her any attention and once or twice talking to herself (because the person had already walked away).


----------



## limom

gracekelly said:


> That is exactly the point.  They know that they are stuck with an older audience and want to get a younger audience and the only way to do that is have younger people on the show.  Sharon has a long history of having a tart tongue and they wanted to get away from that as well.  They will find a "woke" person who will bring more diversity to the show.


With Les out, it was only a matter of time.
Her younger daughter tested for many shows and she was also hateful.
I can’t imagine CBS being able to switch demo. Where is big pharma going to advertise?
Maybe MM can try her hand as a talk show host.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> With Les out, it was only a matter of time.
> Her younger daughter tested for many shows and she was also hateful.
> I can’t imagine CBS being able to switch demo. Where is big pharma going to advertise?
> Maybe MM can try her hand as a talk show host.



Show title:  Tossing the Salad with Meg!


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Show title:  Tossing the Salad with Meg!



Im guessing that’s why Harry likes her so much.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  That's why Kathie Lee Gifford was shown the door.  All the stations want a younger viewer.


Got Kathie lee Gifford confused with Kathy Griffin for a moment. I thought she’d be great.


lalame said:


> It's kind of a social experiment to offer out of the box benefits these days. They've gotten quite popular over the last decade but I think the tide is turning on them in terms of how effective they are for the cost.


I don’t like them I think it’s just a way for management to invade privacy and I think it’s extremely dubious they are presenting this as mental health help when they don’t seem to have any medical expertise


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Got Kathie lee Gifford confused with Kathy Griffin for a moment. I thought she’d be great.
> 
> I don’t like them I think it’s just a way for management to invade privacy and I think it’s extremely dubious they are presenting this as mental health help when they don’t seem to have any medical expertise


Me neither.
Give me the cash and let me decide on whom can help me get better.
Kathie Lee Gifford retired from NBC to pursue other projects in Nashville.
You want her or Kathie Griffin for the job?
KG will not be hired for a while, imho. At least at NBC and CNN, she burned too many bridges.

Ultimately, we will be graced with MM on network TV. Maybe she can do a cartoon Princess project?


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Im guessing that’s why Harry likes her so much.



The Urban Dictionary strikes again.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Show title:  Tossing the Salad with Meg!


Gross! Checked Urban Dictionary and just about puked my dinner.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> I know I got Patagonia, wine, cooking lesson but Hermes?
> Nope



Lol I was talking about the coaching benefits! But... let's just say Hermes tennis shoes were eligible for our wellness reimbursement at work.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Me neither.
> Give me the cash and let me decide on whom can help me get better.
> Kathie Lee Gifford retired from NBC to pursue other projects in Nashville.
> You want her or Kathie Griffin for the job?
> KG will not be hired for a while, imho. At least at NBC and CNN, she burned too many bridges.
> 
> Ultimately, we will be graced with MM on network TV. Maybe she can do a cartoon Princess project?


I know so little of these shows.I only know KG from her stuff with Joan rivers but I was thinking she might be weirdly mesmerising on daytime telly like Joan was on QVC. I do know Joan also had a show at one point.  
Tbh now I’ve googled her I don’t actually know who KLG is. Sorry KLG. 

All in all, it feels like these companies with ‘benefits’ want to avoid giving two benefits at all costs - a pay rise and a decent limit on working hours.

I would maybe take wine and Hermes in lieu of cash. And Patagonia of course, provided we’re talking about the gorgeous region not the sportswear.

I don’t need Harry to tell me how to get ahead in life as it’s a bit late to rearrange my birth at this point.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I know so little of these shows.I only know KG from her stuff with Joan rivers but I was thinking she might be weirdly mesmerising on daytime telly like Joan was on QVC. I do know Joan also had a show at one point.
> Tbh now I’ve googled her I don’t actually know who KLG is. Sorry KLG.
> 
> All in all, it feels like these companies with ‘benefits’ want to avoid giving two benefits at all costs - a pay rise and a decent limit on working hours.
> 
> I would maybe take wine and Hermes in lieu of cash. And Patagonia of course, provided we’re talking about the gorgeous region not the sportswear.
> 
> I don’t need Harry to tell me how to get ahead in life as it’s a bit late to rearrange my birth at this point.


griffin is a comic....these shows - even the fluffy ones - feel like they have to have serious conversations these days


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, well ,,, what next?









						The lurid script of Harry and Meghan's pal
					

The Hollywood producer hired as the new boss of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's film production company owns the rights to a movie which claims Diana was 'murdered' by the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

Haha OT but I was searching TPF for a different issue and the results surfaced old posts made in this thread from 2019... so funny to see quite a few of you posters were team Meghan. It's already been said here but still surprising to see.


----------



## gracekelly

PIERS MORGAN: Writing for first time about dramatic exit from GMB
					

MONDAY, MARCH 8: Got to the Good Morning Britain studios at 4am to watch Oprah Winfrey's much-hyped interview with Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, writes PIERS MORGAN




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




It's a long read.  Piers had a right to his opinion and I for one, didn't disagree with him. 

 The thing that bothers me about the Sharon Osbourne debacle is that  she had the right to stand for a friend and to have her own opinions.  I thought that was what that show was all about, i.e. differing  opinions and discussions of same.   We have turned into a society that has to tiptoe around in fear of having an opinion that other people might not like?  People are getting cancelled left and right and losing jobs over something they might have said in passing several years ago. Thinking differently is a bad thing?   People do change, and an opinion held years ago may have morphed   into something entirely different in the present.  If they want to apologize for the previous opinion, fine, and if they don't and stick to their opinion, fine, and it isn't for us to string them up because we disagree with them.  Did George Orwell have a crystal ball?  Are we all subject to the Thought Police now?  I hope not.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Haha OT but I was searching TPF for a different issue and the results surfaced old posts made in this thread from 2019... so funny to see quite a few of you posters were team Meghan. It's already been said here but still surprising to see.


I believe that the majority of us, myself included, wished her well at the start.  It didn't take long for the tiger to show the stripes.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Haha OT but I was searching TPF for a different issue and the results surfaced old posts made in this thread from 2019... so funny to see quite a few of you posters were team Meghan. It's already been said here but still surprising to see.



Yep, so many of us bought into the love story we were sold. Then we gave her the benefit of the doubt for awhile when the first few sketchy stories came out and things didn’t seem to be adding up. It was definitely a process.


----------



## DeMonica

bisousx said:


> We really need to separate Thomas’ good deeds as a parent from his personality traits and recent actions. You’re _supposed_ to pay for your offspring’s college education (if you can). It’s notable and generous, but providing for your child isn’t relevant when you’re talking about his personality. He has an obvious need to be in the spotlight and refute every little bit of gossip - if I give Thomas a further thought, it’s pretty obvious where Meghan and Samantha get this trait from. And let’s be real, who besides a narc has the audacity to walk up to a billionaire’s house to hand deliver a handwritten note (Thomas) or fly to the UK and show up at the palace to publicly bash her half sister (Samantha)?


We disagree on this. I don't think that parents are supposed to pay your tuition - it's nice if they do, but first and foremost you should find the way to finance your studies. There are student loans, scholarships to help you, and you can find a job to earn your tuition. TM could have spent his money differently if he chose to.
I think that public smear fest was started by Meg&Co not TM. Yes, that paparazzi thing was a mistake, but Megs should have let it slide, especially because of the heart attack. I'm not surprised that he felt hurt. Probably visiting him and discussing how to proceed in person would have been a better idea than making a big fuss about it and refusing to communicate with him except that letter which he eventually shared with the press. I think Meg&Co had mistreated him and he became a loose cannon. He may not be a model father - all of his children turned out to be selfish opportunists - or particularly smart, but IMO his daughter(s)'s behaviour pushed him who are unquestionable narcissist(s).
On another note: I'm still surprised that the BRF hasn't done anything to tackle the Markles somehow before hand. Didn't they check that family? They must have seen what kind of in-laws they would be getting.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *THIS .. 100%++++ times!!!  *
> 
> So .. get this .. my friend (_who knew Meghan during her High School years_), just told me the other day that they (_her son - who was Meghan's counterpart in their Senior play -- and the rest of the family_) had *NO IDEA* that Meghan was mix-raced!  Yup - you heard that right; she was not playing the 'WOC' card at that time and since they never met Doria (_she never attended any of the plays or other events_), they had NO idea until Meghan was engaged to Harry! .. talk about unbelievable, right???  It somewhat supports the rumor that Meghan also wasn't always honest with the casting people - vis-a-vis, that she was a WOC as opposed to being Caucasian!  While my friend was also very supportive of Meghan re: engagement & marriage to Harry, now?!?! .. she is as disgusted as the rest of us are!


This is the reason why she lived with her white father.  I always thought so.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> Haha OT but I was searching TPF for a different issue and the results surfaced old posts made in this thread from 2019... so funny to see quite a few of you posters were team Meghan. It's already been said here but still surprising to see.


I was one of them. Since then she has shown her true colours.


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> PIERS MORGAN: Writing for first time about dramatic exit from GMB
> 
> 
> MONDAY, MARCH 8: Got to the Good Morning Britain studios at 4am to watch Oprah Winfrey's much-hyped interview with Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, writes PIERS MORGAN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a long read.  Piers had a right to his opinion and I for one, didn't disagree with him.
> 
> The thing that bothers me about the Sharon Osbourne debacle is that  she had the right to stand for a friend and to have her own opinions.  I thought that was what that show was all about, i.e. differing  opinions and discussions of same.   We have turned into a society that has to tiptoe around in fear of having an opinion that other people might not like?  People are getting cancelled left and right and losing jobs over something they might have said in passing several years ago. Thinking differently is a bad thing?   People do change, and an opinion held years ago may have morphed   into something entirely different in the present.  If they want to apologize for the previous opinion, fine, and if they don't and stick to their opinion, fine, and it isn't for us to string them up because we disagree with them.  Did George Orwell have a crystal ball?  Are we all subject to the Thought Police now?  I hope not.


I thought Sharon’s ‘leaving’ was due her calling Julie Chen and Sara Gilbert derogatory racial and homophobic terms, on top of her opinion and her conversation with Sheryl which opened a can of worms with Leah  Remini ousting her along with many others through the years-if so it was different than just saying 1st amendment and right to speech... I could be wrong


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> PIERS MORGAN: Writing for first time about dramatic exit from GMB
> 
> 
> MONDAY, MARCH 8: Got to the Good Morning Britain studios at 4am to watch Oprah Winfrey's much-hyped interview with Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, writes PIERS MORGAN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a long read.  Piers had a right to his opinion and I for one, didn't disagree with him.
> 
> The thing that bothers me about the Sharon Osbourne debacle is that  she had the right to stand for a friend and to have her own opinions.  I thought that was what that show was all about, i.e. differing  opinions and discussions of same.   We have turned into a society that has to tiptoe around in fear of having an opinion that other people might not like?  People are getting cancelled left and right and losing jobs over something they might have said in passing several years ago. Thinking differently is a bad thing?   People do change, and an opinion held years ago may have morphed   into something entirely different in the present.  If they want to apologize for the previous opinion, fine, and if they don't and stick to their opinion, fine, and it isn't for us to string them up because we disagree with them.  Did George Orwell have a crystal ball?  Are we all subject to the Thought Police now?  I hope not.


ITA with you on the freedom of speech. There isn't much room for independent thinking. I don't know if Orwell had a crystal ball or just knew how life was in the Stalin era, albeit fascism was pretty similar, too. Unfortunately, history keeps on repeating itself.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> What do you think it going on here? Please add your own dialogue.
> 
> I'll start with: Your Majesty, would you like me to swat that little twit?
> View attachment 5037178


I'm not inspired today, so I'll attempt body language instead. 
MM is lecturing QE, and QE is avoiding to engage by pretending to be distracted with her eye. QE is not pleased by whatever absurd MM is saying. The situation is so ridiculous that the gentleman on MM's right side is trying to hide his smile. The gentleman on QE's left side is almost deaf, so he is not believing in the little he is able to hear.


----------



## gracekelly

scarlet555 said:


> I thought Sharon’s ‘leaving’ was due her calling Julie Chen and Sara Gilbert derogatory racial and homophobic terms, on top of her opinion and her conversation with Sheryl which opened a can of worms with Leah  Remini ousting her along with many others through the years-if so it was different than just saying 1st amendment and right to speech... I could be wrong


Bottom line was they didn't like her.  They probably wanted to get rid of her for a while, and this gave them the excuse they needed.  This probably was more a decision from the producers than the women on the show.


----------



## Toby93

limom said:


> I am racist then because his over the top preaching made me laugh.
> I mean, come on. It was straight out of TP movie.


I watched it and cringed - this was a royal wedding in England.  Not the time nor place for this....


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> I was one of them. Since then she has shown her true colours.



me too!


----------



## Lounorada

justwatchin said:


> I imagine her lawyers are already gearing up for the lawsuit.


Their lawyers must be on edge 24/7





Chanbal said:


> Do you think the donation check is inside the cake?
> 
> *Revealed: Meghan Markle sent a home-baked olive oil cake made with lemons from her garden to World Central Kitchen 2,100 miles away in Chicago to honour Women's History Month
> 
> View attachment 5035641
> 
> View attachment 5035642
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Cake photo-op article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle baked a lemon olive oil cake for World Central Kitchen
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen took to Twitter and shared a snap of their employees gathering around a lemon olive oil cake baked by Meghan Markle, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Sending a cake 2,000 miles across the country to a charity is just  While it's thoughtful idea to give the hardworkers of the charity a well-earned treat, could she not have found a local bakery in the area to support and make a cake(s) for the workers at the charity? It would have been nice to support local instead of creating a huge carbon footprint for a f**king dessert. Also, i'm sure a generous money donation with the cake would have been even better. For those thinking 'we don't know if a donation was made or not', well I think we do know as this couple can barely sneeze without informing the media.
I'm guessing they were told to mention MM made it and used her own lemons...









Hermes Zen said:


> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with *his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world.* Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html







_"...his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world."_
This guy is sounds like such an idiot, no wonder he's interested in wOrKiNg with JCMH. He wasn't genuine, sincere and being of service to the Queen when he quit his 'job' claiming he wanted privacy but instead ran for Hollywood and has done nothing since then but talk sh*t about his family and act like an attention seeking fool alongside his wife.




RAINDANCE said:


> *Harry, Meghan and me: my truth as a royal reporter*
> I've covered elections and extremism, but nothing compares to the vitriol I've received since I started writing about the Sussexes
> 
> ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR27 March 2021 • 6:00am
> 
> Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan
> 
> It is probably worth mentioning from the outset that I never, ever, planned to become a royal reporter. I mean, who does? It’s one of those ridiculous jobs most people fall into completely by accident.
> I certainly wasn’t coveting the position when I first found out how bonkers the beat could be after covering Charles and Camilla’s wedding in 2005. Desperate for ‘a line’ on what went on at the reception, journalists were reduced to flagging down passing cars in Windsor High Street and interrogating the likes of Stephen Fry about whether they’d had the salmon or the chicken.
> Watergate, this wasn’t.
> Yet when my former editor called me into his office shortly afterwards and offered me the royal job ‘because you’re called Camilla and you dress nicely’, who was I to refuse?
> Having planned to get married myself that summer, and start a family soon afterwards, I looked to the likes of Jennie Bond and Penny Junor and figured it would be a good patch for a working mother as well as being one I could grow old with. Unlike show business, when celebrities are ‘in’ one minute and ‘out’ the next, the royals would stay the same, making it easier to build – and keep – contacts.
> 
> So if you’d told me that 16 years later, I would find myself at the centre of a media storm over a royal interview with Oprah Winfrey, I’d have probably laughed in your face. First of all, only royals like Fergie do interviews with Oprah. And since when did journalists become the story?
> 
> Yet as I have experienced since the arrival of Meghan Markle on the royal scene in 2016 – a move that roughly coincided with Twitter doubling its 140-character limitation to 280 – royal reporters like me now find themselves in the line of fire like never before.
> We are used to the likes of Kate Adie coming under attack in the Middle East, but now it is the correspondents who write up events like Trooping the Colour and the Royal Windsor Horse Show having to take cover from the keyboard warriors supposedly defending the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s ‘truth’.
> Accusations of racism have long been levelled against anyone who has dared to write less than undiluted praise of Harry and Meghan. But even I have been taken aback by the vitriol on social media in the wake of the couple’s televised two-hour talk-a-thon, in which they branded both the Royal family and the British press racist while complaining about their ‘almost unsurvivable’ multimillionaire lives at the hands of the evil monarchy. And all while the rest of the UK were losing their loved ones and livelihoods in a global pandemic.
> 
> Having covered Brexit, general elections and stories about Islamic extremism, I’ve grown used to being sprayed with viral vomit on a fairly regular basis, but when you’ve got complete strangers trolling your best friend’s Instagram feed by association? That’s Britney Spears levels of toxic.
> Having a hind thicker than a rhino’s, it wasn’t the repeated references to my being ‘a total c—’ that particularly bothered me, nor even the suggestion that I should have my three children put up for adoption. At one point someone even said it would be a good idea for me to drink myself to death like my mother, about whose chronic alcoholism I have written extensively.
> No, what really got me was the appalling spelling and grammar. I mean, if you’re going to hurl insults, at least have the decency to get my name right.
> Yet in order to understand just how it has come to pass that so-called #SussexSquaders think nothing of branding all royal correspondents ‘white supremacists’ regardless of who they write for, or sending hate mail to our email addresses, offices – and in some cases, even our homes – it’s worth briefly going to back to when I first broke the story that Prince Harry was dating an American actor in the Sunday Express on 31 October 2016. Headlined: ‘Royal world exclusive: Harry’s secret romance with TV star’, the splash revealed how the popular prince was ‘secretly dating a stunning US actress, model and human rights campaigner’.
> Despite my now apparently being on a par with the Ku Klux Klan for failing to acknowledge Meghan as the next messiah, it was actually not until the fifteenth paragraph of that original article that the ‘confident and intelligent’ Northwestern University graduate was described as ‘the daughter of an African-American mother and a father of Dutch and Irish descent’.
> Call me superficial, but I was genuinely far more interested in the fact that Harry ‘I-come-with-baggage’ Wales was dating a former ‘briefcase girl’ from the US version of Deal or No Deal than the colour of her skin. A ginger prince punching well above his weight? This was the stuff of tabloid dreams. Little did I know then that covering the trials and tribulations of these two lovebirds would turn into such a nightmare.
> The online hostility began bubbling up about eight days after that first story, when Harry’s then communications secretary Jason Knauf issued an ‘unprecedented’ statement accusing the media of ‘crossing a line’.
> ‘His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment’, it read, referencing a ‘smear on the front page of a national newspaper; the racial undertones of comment pieces; and the outright sexism and racism of social media trolls and web article comments’. Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, had apparently been besieged by photographers, while bribes had been offered to Meghan’s ex-boyfriend along with ‘the bombardment of nearly every friend, coworker, and loved one in her life’.
> 
> Suffice to say, I did feel a bit guilty. Although I hadn’t written anything remotely racist or sexist, I had started the ball rolling for headlines like the MailOnline’s ‘(Almost) straight outta Compton’ (referencing a song by hip-hop group NWA about gang violence and Meghan’s upbringing in the nearby LA district of Crenshaw), along with her ‘exotic’ DNA (which I subsequently called out, including on This Morning in the wake of ‘Megxit’ in January last year).
> Omid Scobie, co-author of Finding Freedom, a highly favourable account of the Sussexes’ departure from the Royal family, written with their cooperation last summer, would later insist that the couple knew the story of their relationship was coming out and were well prepared for it.
> I can tell you categorically that they weren’t, since I did not even put a call into Kensington Palace before we went to press for fear of it being leaked. (I did later discuss this with Harry, when I covered his trip to the Caribbean in November 2016, and to be fair he was pretty philosophical, agreeing it would have come out sooner or later. But that was before the former Army Captain decided to well and truly shoot the messenger, latterly telling journalists covering the newly-weds’ tax-payer-funded October 2018 tour of Australia and the south Pacific: ‘Thanks for coming, even though you weren’t invited.’)
> The royal press pack is the group of dedicated writers who cover all the official engagements and tours on a rota system, in exchange for not bothering the royals as they go about their private business. It was a shame this ragtag bunch, of which I am an associate member, was never personally introduced to Meghan when the couple got engaged in November 2017.
> I still have fond memories of a then Kate Middleton, upon her engagement to Prince William in November 2010, showing me her huge sapphire and diamond ring following a press conference at St James’s Palace with the words, ‘It was William’s mother’s so it is very special.’
> I replied that she might want to consider buying ‘one of those expanding accordion style file holders’ to organise all her wedding paperwork. (Reader, I had given birth to my second child less than four months earlier and was still lactating.)
> Not meeting Meghan did not stop royal commentators like me writing reams about her being ‘a breath of fresh air’ and telling practically every TV show I appeared on that she was the ‘best thing to have happened to the Royal Family in years’.
> 
> As the world followed the joyous news of the Windsors’ resident strip billiards star having finally found ‘the one’, the couple enjoyed overwhelmingly positive press culminating in their fairy-tale wedding in May 2018, which we headlined ‘So in love’ above a picture of the bride and groom kissing. I tweeted the wedding front page, along with the original story breaking the news of their relationship with the words, ‘Job done’. Yet, as Meghan would later point out in a glossy Santa Barbara garden, that was by far the end of the story.
> According to the Duchess’s testimony before a global audience of millions, the seeds for their royal departure were actually sown by an article I wrote in November 2018 suggesting she made Kate cry during a bridesmaid’s dress fitting for Princess Charlotte.
> Claiming the ‘reverse happened’, the former Suits star railed, ‘A few days before the wedding she was upset about something, pertaining to, yes, the issue was correct, about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.’
> She then went on to criticise the palace for failing to correct the story – suggesting that royal aides had hung her out to dry to protect the Duchess of Cambridge.
> All of which left me in a bit of a sticky situation. As I told Phillip Schofield on This Morning the following day, ‘I don’t write things I don’t believe to be true and that haven’t been really well sourced.’
> Having seemingly been completely bowled over by Meghan’s version of events, Schofe then went for the jugular: ‘I have to say, though, that’s all addressed in that interview, isn’t it, because she [Meghan] couldn’t understand why nobody stood up for her?’
> 
> Yet someone had stood up for her, on that very same This Morning sofa: me.
> As I told Phil and Holly on 14 January 2019, as more reports of ‘Duchess Difficult’ started to emerge, ‘I think she [Meghan] is doing really well, she looks amazing, she speaks well. She has played a blinder.’
> So you’ll forgive me if I can’t quite understand why Meghan didn’t feel the need to correct this supposedly glaring error once she had her own dedicated head of communications from March 2019 – or indeed when she ‘collaborated’ with Scobie, who concluded in his bestselling hagiography that ‘no one cried’?
> Moreover, how did the Duchess know a postnatal Kate wasn’t ‘left in tears’? And if she doesn’t know, what hope has the average troll observing events through the prism of their own deep-rooted insecurities?
> It appears the actual truth ceases to matter once sides have been taken in the unedifying Team Meghan versus Team Kate battle that has divided the internet.
> Make no mistake, there are abject morons at both extremes spewing the sort of bile that, ironically, makes most of the media coverage of Harry and Meghan look like a 1970s edition of Jackie magazine.
> It perhaps didn’t help my case that the day before the interview was aired in the US, I had written a lengthy piece carefully weighing up the evidence behind allegations of ‘outrageous bullying’ that had been levelled against Meghan during what proved to be a miserable 20 months in the Royal family for all concerned.
> The messages – to my Twitter feed, my email, my website and official Facebook page – ranged from the threatening, to the typical tropes about media ‘scum’ and the downright bizarre. Some accused me of being in cahoots with Carole Middleton, with whom I have never interacted, unless you count a last-minute Party Pieces purchase in a desperate moment of poor parental planning.
> 
> Another frequent barb was questioning why the press wasn’t writing about that ‘pedo’ [sic] Prince Andrew instead – seemingly oblivious to the fact that no one would know about the Duke of York’s links to Jeffrey Epstein if it wasn’t for the acres of coverage devoted to the story by us royal hacks over recent years.
> It didn’t matter that I had repeatedly torn the Queen’s second, and, some say, favourite son to pieces for everything from his propensity to take his golf clubs on foreign tours to that disastrous Newsnight interview.
> Contrary to the ‘invisible contract’ Harry claims the palace has with the press, royal coverage works roughly like this: good royal deeds = good publicity. Bad royal deeds = bad publicity. We effectively act as a critical friend, working on behalf of a public that rightly expects the royals to take the work – but not themselves – seriously.
> So when a royal couple preaches about climate change before taking four private jets in 11 days, it is par for the course for a royal scribe to point out the inconsistency of that message. None of it is ever personal, as evidenced by the fact that practically every member of the monarchy has come in for flak over the years.
> If Oprah wasn’t willing to point out the discrepancies in Harry and Meghan’s testimony, surely it is beholden on royal reporters to question how the Duchess had managed to undertake four foreign holidays in the six months after her wedding, in addition to official tours to Italy, Canada, and Amsterdam, as well as embarking on a lengthy honeymoon, if she had ‘turned over’ her passport?
> While no one would wish to undermine the extent of her mental health problems, could it really be true that she only left the house twice in four months when she managed to cram in 73 days’ worth of engagements, according to the Court Circular, in the 17 months between her wedding and the couple’s departure to Canada?
> 
> And what of the ‘racist’ headlines flashed up during the interview purporting to be from the British press, when more than a third were actually taken from independent blogs and the foreign media? The UK media abides by the Independent Press Standards Organisation’s Code of Conduct ‘to avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race’, as well as by rigorous defamation laws. And rightly so – the British press doesn’t always get it right. But social media is the Wild West by comparison, publishing vile slurs on a daily basis with impunity.
> Some therefore find it strange that such a litigious couple would claim to have been ‘silenced’ when they have made so many complaints, including resorting to legal action, over stories they claim not to have even read. There is something similarly contradictory about a couple accusing the tabloids of lacking self-reflection while refusing to take any blame at all – for anything.
> In any normal world, informed writing on such matters would be classed as fair comment, but not, seemingly, on Twitter where those completely lacking any objectivity whatsoever are only too willing to virtue signal and manoeuvre.
> As the trolling reached fever pitch in the aftermath of the interview, veteran royal reporter Robert Jobson of the Evening Standard called me. ‘Don’t respond to these freaks,’ he advised. ‘It’s getting nasty out there. Watch your back!’
> Yet despite my general sense of bewilderment at the menacing Megbots, I can’t say it didn’t appal me to discover a close friend had received online abuse, purely by dint of being my mate. After discussing the lengths the troll must have gone to to track her down, she asked me, ‘Do you ever worry someone might do something awful to you?’ Er, not until now, no.
> Of course it’s upsetting, even for a cynical old-timer like me. Worse still are people who actually know me casting aspersions on my profession on social media. Often these are the same charlatans who would think nothing of sidling up to me for the latest gossip on the Royal family, while publicly pretending that reading any such coverage is completely beneath them.
> Most pernicious of all though – not least after Piers Morgan’s departure from Good Morning Britain following a complaint to ITV and Ofcom from the Duchess – is the corrosive effect this whole hullabaloo is having on freedom of speech. When you’ve got a former actor effectively editing a British breakfast show from an £11 million Montecito mansion, what next?
> I cannot help but think we are in danger of setting race relations back 30 years if people are seriously suggesting that any criticism of Meghan is racially motivated. It’s the hypocrisy that gets me. When Priti Patel was accused of bullying, the very same people who willingly hung the Home Secretary out to dry are now the ones defending Meghan against such claims, saying they have been levelled at her simply because she is ‘a strong woman of colour’.
> Of course journalists should take responsibility for everything they report and be held to account for it – but Harry and Meghan do not have a monopoly on the truth simply because the close friend and neighbour who interviewed them in return for £7 million from CBS took what they said as gospel.
> If she isn’t willing to probe the disparity between Meghan saying someone questioned the colour of Archie’s skin when she was pregnant, and Harry suggesting it happened before they were even married, then someone must. There’s a name for such scrutiny. It’s called journalism.
> 
> The public reserves the right to make up its own mind – with the help of the watchful eye of a free and fair press. But that press can never be free or fair if journalists do not feel they can report without fear or favour. I’m lucky that a lot of the criticism I face is more than balanced out by hugely supportive members of the public and online community who either agree – or respect the right to disagree. Along with the hate mail, I have had many thoughtful and eloquent missives, including those that good naturedly challenge what I have written in the paper or said on TV, which have genuinely given me pause for thought.
> I am more than happy to enter into constructive discourse with these correspondents, who are frankly sometimes the only people who keep me on Twitter. I mean, let’s face it, I wouldn’t be anywhere near the bloody thing if this wasn’t my day job.
> With the National Union of Journalists this month declaring that harassment and abuse had ‘become normalised’ within the industry, never have members of Britain’s press needed more courage. As Winston Churchill famously said, ‘You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.’
> Who would have thought that the preservation of the fundamental freedoms that we hold so dear should partially rest on the shoulders of those who follow around a 94-year-old woman and her family for a living?
> If I’d known then what I know now, would I still have written the bridesmaid’s dress story?
> Yes – doubtlessly reflecting sisterly sobs all round. But after two decades in this business, I am clear-eyed enough to know this for certain: whatever I had written, it would still have ended in tears.


Great article, thanks for posting!






eunaddict said:


> Quora is a gem.
> View attachment 5036612









CarryOn2020 said:


> One intrepid journalist reviews the B-Up coaching app —
> The full article is behind a paywall, so I’ve posted parts of it here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app
> 
> 
> BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 1 $e$$ion
> 
> 
> 
> *What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app*
> *BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?*
> By Laurence Dodds, US Technology Reporter, San Francisco24 March 2021 • 11:25am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app has hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer". Among its clients are Facebook and Nasa
> 
> What's your Growth Mindset power level? Mine is at 85 out of 100. It's my best quality, handily beating my Empathy score of 68 and my Cognitive ability of 55. My other statistics could do with some work: Self-Awareness 35, Nutrition 31 and Physical Activity a risible 14. These ratings might sound like character statistics from some office-themed Dungeons and Dragons game. In fact, they are the measure of my workplace personality according to BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app that has just hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer".
> 
> BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at $1.7bn (£1.2bn) in a $125m investment round led by Iconiq, an "ultra-secretive" and prestigious wealth management firm said to handle Mark Zuckerberg's fortune. Its pitch: to use artificial intelligence (AI) to deliver personalised coaching sessions designed to nourish "the whole person", to the benefit of both workers and employers.
> 
> So what can you learn about yourself from Prince Harry's new gig? I summoned up my self-improvement mindset and attempted to find out.
> 
> *Mental fitness vs mental health*
> Given the Prince's words, it may surprise you to learn that BetterUp is *not a mental health app* – at least not for individual users. Instead, it is wholly focused on performance and wellbeing at work, and seems designed primarily for corporate use as an employee benefit (which can include a "mental fitness" service called Care).
> 
> This is less Californian mysticism and meditation than high-flying Business Wellness, with TED talks about "empowerment" and "strategic planning" and a personality assessment that frames your high scores as "strengths" and your weaknesses as "development areas".
> 
> When entering your details, job title is a mandatory field – not that it would necessarily be very useful in Silicon Valley, where business cards might bear sobriquets such as "hacker", a "ninja", a "Jedi", a "Sherpa", a "wizard" or even "security princess" (no relation).
> In the past, BetterUp only sold its services to companies with more than 10,000 employees, with past clients including Facebook, LinkedIn, Salesforce, Logitech. Nasa and the US Federal Aviation Administration. Today lone individuals can try it too, getting one free coaching session before being asked to subscribe – and so I jumped in.
> 
> My first speed bump appeared within a few minutes. BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach. The company makes much of its AI algorithms, which it claims can match coaches to clients with "over 97pc accuracy".
> Yet at this stage there was no explicit mention of mental health and no place to note disabilities such as ADHD and autism. Consequently, none of the three coaches offered by the app –  and there seems to be no way forward without picking one  – listed expertise on those topics, at least beyond general allusions to "health and wellness", "mindfulness" and "stress".
> 
> BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach:
> 
> For many users, this is a potential dealbreaker: a coach who does not understand your specific disabilities is unlikely to be as helpful as one who does, and at worst might be a hindrance. I requested more options via a manual email form and got similar options again, albeit with a little more "wellness".
> 
> It makes for a rather more common problem than the one faced by Prince Harry himself, who found that BetterUp's questions did not easily fit with his history as a working royal.
> 
> *Perhaps the limitation exists to avoid being classified as a healthcare app, which in the US comes with heavy regulations. *BetterUp's website is at pains to distinguish coaching from therapy, and to note that its services are not eligible for healthcare tax breaks. Still, it's not what I would call "whole person".
> 
> What you do get, once you're in, is a mixture of goal-setting tool, educational library and gamified life tracker. The first assignment is a 157-part "whole person model assessment", which asks about everything from your feelings towards your colleagues through your sleeping habits to your out-of-work friendships.
> 
> Do you surround yourself with people you can depend on? (Yes. I mean, I think so.) Do you often criticise yourself? (No, and it's disgusting.) How much attention do you pay to the ingredients in your food? (Less than I should!) Do you gravitate towards tasks that push you outside your comfort zone? (What do you think this is?)
> 
> *How much will it cost?*
> 
> My first free coaching session was helpful, if short. A respect for the process prevents me from saying too much. Still, as I went through the various questions and exercises, I could feel green shoots of productive self-examination begin to break soil.
> The problem is, can they survive here? The company says users will get real results after multiple sessions, but it is strikingly opaque about how much this will cost.
> 
> Neither in the app itself nor on BetterUp's website could I find any up-front information about subscription pricing. Coaches on the business review site Glassdoor described it as paying "very little", "below average coaching rates" and "almost no pay". A request for comment with my journalist's hat was not immediately answered.
> 
> Only after my first session did I receive an SMS message. "Congrats, Laurence!" it said. "This is a tremendous milestone. The next step is to subscribe..." The price was eye-watering: _*$499*_ (£364) per month, reduced with a discount for my "early interest" to $249 per month until the end of 2021.
> 
> Perhaps that kind of money flies from the purse of a Google or Facebook engineer as easily as a swallow from a barn ceiling. Many, however, would struggle to justify it simply for the sake of sharpening their careers, however dazzling the insights.
> Personally, I felt as if I had been coaxed into investing in the system, getting used to it, setting goals and developing hopes – and even, albeit briefly, making a connection with my coach – only to be hit shortly afterwards with a fairly large request wrapped in an empty compliment. Was my whole person nourished by this? My whole foot.
> 
> Clearly, coaching is an investment, and I don't begrudge an expert their due. Still, those of us not sixth in line to the throne of the United Kingdom would appreciate some "honest feedback" about the size of that investment from the start. Might I suggest a TED talk that I found in the BetterUp app? The title is "Know your worth, and then ask for it".
> _This article was updated at 6am on Thursday, March 25 to incorporate an account of BetterUp's coaching and prices._
> 
> 
> ETA: Personally, I would rather buy an Hermes scarf each month than pay for this app.


$499 a month for this?!!








EverSoElusive said:


> Why does this make me think that they are out of ideas and trying to steal from the lowly peasants, only to repackage and peddle them as their own ideas on how to be compassionate? And seriously though, why care about what regular folks have been doing to show compassion to others when there's still no proof that the *Maleficent of Montecito* shown any to TMarkle?
> 
> It is tragic when some people take every opportunity to shove themselves into the spotlight to showcase their interest, kindness and compassion towards outsiders but they are so very nasty to their own family. I still cannot fathom any of that.
> 
> I'm waiting to witness a messy divorce, with popcorn in hand already. Maybe it won't happen but if it does, Wokey Pokey will milk Harry dry, with zero scruples.


_"Maleficent of Montecito"_


----------



## lanasyogamama

Google “vera obidos cornbread” for my favorite cornbread recipe! I prefer fine cornmeal to coarse.  

I wonder if Archie will go to preschool at age 3?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Saw this on another site  - This article is from 2015 so it is understandable that we forgot about it. Note the author [hint: Omid]:









						Angelina Jolie: Brad Pitt and I Were Already Married Before Our Wedding!
					

Angelina Jolie revealed in a new interview that she and Brad Pitt were already married before their formal wedding ceremony last summer -- details!




					www.usmagazine.com
				




ETA: yes, I still believe we are being played

ETA2:  didn’t Angelina have a ‘falling out’ with her dad?


----------



## Chanbal

Kate's uncle on Oprah' interview:

"_Gary Goldsmith, the brother of Kate's mum Carole, said *he doesn't "believe a word" of what Meghan said* during her explosive interview with Oprah....

Speaking for the first time since the allegations aired, Gary, 55, told The Mail on Sunday: "I’ve known Kate since she was born and she doesn’t have a mean bone in her body. It’s just simply not in her nature.

"She’s even lovelier on the inside than on the outside.* If anyone had a hissy fit, it must have been Meghan."
*
He added: "Kate would have been trying to make the peace. I would fight for Kate’s honour until the day I die. She is the most spectacular person I’ve ever met._"









						Kate Middleton's uncle defends her saying 'I don't believe she made Meghan cry' after explosive Oprah interview
					

KATE Middleton’s uncle has defended his niece from claims she made Meghan Markle cry, saying “it’s simply not in her nature”. Gary Goldsmith, the brother of Kate’s mum…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Saw this on another site  - This article is from 2015 so it is understandable that we forgot about it. Note the author [hint: Omid]:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Angelina Jolie: Brad Pitt and I Were Already Married Before Our Wedding!
> 
> 
> Angelina Jolie revealed in a new interview that she and Brad Pitt were already married before their formal wedding ceremony last summer -- details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: yes, I still believe we are being played
> 
> ETA2:  didn’t Angelina have a ‘falling out’ with her dad?



This is pretty common for international weddings, and in some cases required to be legally married. I doubt that would be the case for M+H though obviously.


----------



## lalame

I think another poster here said it before but I don't get the hullabaloo about who made who cry. Bridezilla, emotional pregnant lady... either scenario pretty common IMO. Nothing to even be ashamed of anymore, as long as the one person makes it right with the other.


----------



## rhyvin

I'm surprised that Meghan stated she was scared to come forward to the BRF about mental health issues. Harry, William and Kate created Heads Together specifically to de-stigmatize mental health issues


----------



## Chanbal

Nice that QE is getting support. After Oprah, what are MM&H going to do next? 

"_The Queen has been deluged with hundreds of letters of support and encouragement in the wake of the Meghan and Harry interview...

Every day, sacks full of post are delivered to Windsor Castle where the Queen has been in lockdown with the Duke of Edinburgh...

The Queen's 83-year-old lady- in-waiting Dame Mary Morrison replies to every letter, with the help of other Palace aides, including fellow ladies-in-waiting"_









						Queen deluged with support in wake of Meghan and Harry interview
					

Every day, sacks full of post are delivered to Windsor Castle where the Queen has been in lockdown with the Duke of Edinburgh since his release from hospital.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think another poster here said it before but I don't get the hullabaloo about who made who cry. Bridezilla, emotional pregnant lady... either scenario pretty common IMO. Nothing to even be ashamed of anymore, as long as the one person makes it right with the other.



In order to get $$$, H&M *need* the ‘victim narrative’, so we get the crying hullabaloo. They also *need* the ‘do good’ narrative, thus the lemon cake story.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CeeJay said:


> *THIS .. 100%++++ times!!!  *
> 
> So .. get this .. my friend (_who knew Meghan during her High School years_), just told me the other day that they (_her son - who was Meghan's counterpart in their Senior play -- and the rest of the family_) had *NO IDEA* that Meghan was mix-raced!  Yup - you heard that right; she was not playing the 'WOC' card at that time and since they never met Doria (_she never attended any of the plays or other events_), they had NO idea until Meghan was engaged to Harry! .. talk about unbelievable, right???  It somewhat supports the rumor that Meghan also wasn't always honest with the casting people - vis-a-vis, that she was a WOC as opposed to being Caucasian!  While my friend was also very supportive of Meghan re: engagement & marriage to Harry, now?!?! .. she is as disgusted as the rest of us are!



I am glad you pointed this out. Not surprised. I can kind of relate. I had mentioned in a prior post that I was half asian and look totally caucasian. People don't believe me when I told them that I as asian. Was born after WWII and so I grew up as caucasian as protection against racism. There may be posters here who would not agree with this but I can accept that. As I got way into my adulthood I learned to get it but felt more comfortable to come out and say I was asian. I've always been proud of my asian heritage and would share even as a small child but learned the hard way and was called nasty names.  Just last week I was sad from the news of more asian hate and I was in a meeting where we discussed this. I shared I was half asian and everyone looked with surprise over zoom. I cried for two days because it just brought back such bad memories that I had not thought about since the 90's. I think more actors like MM and others who might have gotten away with being caucasian for so many years now will say their are not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is such a weirdo. She's been caught on tape on numerous occasions talking to people who don't pay her any attention and once or twice talking to herself (because the person had already walked away).



EXACTLY!! I love that QEII doesn't pretend to be "enchanted" with the new granddaughter-in-law, but looks rather disgusted and exasperated, while at the same time knowing she's on camera for everyone to see. And Meghan keeps going on like a blathering idiot assuming The Queen feels obligated to listen to her rotted word salad.


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> Bottom line was they didn't like her.  They probably wanted to get rid of her for a while, and this gave them the excuse they needed.  This probably was more a decision from the producers than the women on the show.



True, they wanted her out, it wasn’t hard...


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> Kate's uncle on Oprah' interview:
> 
> "_Gary Goldsmith, the brother of Kate's mum Carole, said *he doesn't "believe a word" of what Meghan said* during her explosive interview with Oprah....
> 
> Speaking for the first time since the allegations aired, Gary, 55, told The Mail on Sunday: "I’ve known Kate since she was born and she doesn’t have a mean bone in her body. It’s just simply not in her nature.
> 
> "She’s even lovelier on the inside than on the outside.* If anyone had a hissy fit, it must have been Meghan."*
> 
> He added: "Kate would have been trying to make the peace. I would fight for Kate’s honour until the day I die. She is the most spectacular person I’ve ever met._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's uncle defends her saying 'I don't believe she made Meghan cry' after explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> KATE Middleton’s uncle has defended his niece from claims she made Meghan Markle cry, saying “it’s simply not in her nature”. Gary Goldsmith, the brother of Kate’s mum…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



hmmm, a family member vouching for Kate... no words from Cringes family in support of her lies??? Shocking... (eye rolling)


----------



## bag-mania

rhyvin said:


> I'm surprised that Meghan stated she was scared to come forward to the BRF about mental health issues. Harry, William and Kate created Heads Together specifically to de-stigmatize mental health issues



Yes and that was back in 2016, pre-Meghan. As near as I can tell Meghan never attended any of the Heads Together events with Harry even after they were married. She didn’t like anything that Harry did with William and Kate.


----------



## Chanbal

_Angela Levin, who has written a biography about the Duke, heavily condemned these remarks on Twitter.
She wrote: "Harry's first comment for his new job is to tell all to get 'the best version of yourself'.
"*Having got what he wanted he comes across as resentful, bitter and shrunken* rather than the charismatic intuitive fun loving guy he used to be_."









						Royal Family news: Harry branded 'resentful, bitter' over new plea
					

PRINCE HARRY has been branded "resentful, bitter and shrunken" by a royal expert, after the Duke issued a plea to the public.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> hmmm, a family member vouching for Kate... no words from Cringes family in support of her lies??? Shocking... (eye rolling)



That uncle who helped MM getting an internship in Argentina may also want to give his input on MM:


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Saw this on another site  - This article is from 2015 so it is understandable that we forgot about it. Note the author [hint: Omid]:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Angelina Jolie: Brad Pitt and I Were Already Married Before Our Wedding!
> 
> 
> Angelina Jolie revealed in a new interview that she and Brad Pitt were already married before their formal wedding ceremony last summer -- details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: yes, I still believe we are being played
> 
> ETA2:  didn’t Angelina have a ‘falling out’ with her dad?


Omgeeeeee, can’t she have even one original thought?!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> PIERS MORGAN: Writing for first time about dramatic exit from GMB
> 
> 
> MONDAY, MARCH 8: Got to the Good Morning Britain studios at 4am to watch Oprah Winfrey's much-hyped interview with Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, writes PIERS MORGAN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a long read.  Piers had a right to his opinion and I for one, didn't disagree with him.
> 
> The thing that bothers me about the Sharon Osbourne debacle is that  she had the right to stand for a friend and to have her own opinions.  I thought that was what that show was all about, i.e. differing  opinions and discussions of same.   *We have turned into a society that has to tiptoe around in fear of having an opinion that other people might not like? * People are getting cancelled left and right and losing jobs over something they might have said in passing several years ago. Thinking differently is a bad thing?   People do change, and an opinion held years ago may have morphed   into something entirely different in the present.  If they want to apologize for the previous opinion, fine, and if they don't and stick to their opinion, fine, and it isn't for us to string them up because we disagree with them.  Did George Orwell have a crystal ball?  Are we all subject to the Thought Police now?  I hope not.


People are becoming afraid of expressing their opinions, because they can be misinterpreted. I've seen people being investigated because of a simple comment taken out of context... Kindness is being replaced by lack of common sense.  

I finally had a chance to read Piers's article. Alex Beresford's personal attack was uncalled for, but not surprising in this current world we live in... "_I wasn't going to sit there and take it from one of my own team, especially someone who I've gone out of my way to help whenever he's asked me for advice about his career_".


----------



## Chanbal

On the apology statement which is on hold, and more...


----------



## Jktgal

0yiAbi99 said:


> This is disgusting and IT IS racist. You have a bunch of white aristocratics laughing at a spirited black preacher. this isn’t amusing in the least and the fact that you do tells a lot about you.



Harry and Meghan also laughed during the sermon, so they must be disgusting and racists to.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Saw this on another site  - This article is from 2015 so it is understandable that we forgot about it. Note the author [hint: Omid]:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Angelina Jolie: Brad Pitt and I Were Already Married Before Our Wedding!
> 
> 
> Angelina Jolie revealed in a new interview that she and Brad Pitt were already married before their formal wedding ceremony last summer -- details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: yes, I still believe we are being played
> 
> ETA2:  didn’t Angelina have a ‘falling out’ with her dad?


I feel like she liked throwing in the low key private marriage element because so many celebs did it. Her ‘friend’ Beyoncé got married in secret too. Thing  is UK marriage laws are very different so she was completely shown up. 
Yeah, I think from what I know of Ang she was fairly estranged from her dad after his parents split during  her infancy  - so, from what I can see, it’s a bit different from the Markles. Also, say what you want about Ang she’s always been honest about her baggage.
Also I don’t care how a celeb gets married because I didn’t pay for it 


Toby93 said:


> I watched it and cringed - this was a royal wedding in England.  Not the time nor place for this....


I disagree, I think that the UK is very keen to be seen as a tolerant and multicultural place and the royal family were very keen to show this during the wedding. If anything, the cynic in me thinks that all parties involved wanted to play up MM’s black identity way beyond what’s typical of her actual personality.


----------



## jelliedfeels

DeMonica said:


> ITA with you on the freedom of speech. There isn't much room for independent thinking. I don't know if Orwell had a crystal ball or just knew how life was in the Stalin era, albeit fascism was pretty similar, too. Unfortunately, history keeps on repeating itself.


Thank you! OT but it is a pet peeve of mine when people talk about Orwell and completely miss out the context of 20th century totalitarianism.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I feel like she liked throwing in the low key private marriage element because so many celebs did it. Her ‘friend’ Beyoncé got married in secret too. Thing  is UK marriage laws are very different so she was completely shown up.
> Yeah, I think from what I know of Ang she was fairly estranged from her dad after his parents split during  her infancy  - so, from what I can see, it’s a bit different from the Markles. Also, say what you want about Ang she’s always been honest about her baggage.
> Also I don’t care how a celeb gets married because I didn’t pay for it




Agree, celebs love the ‘private ceremony’.  What makes H&M’s story so very odd, beyond the legal issues, is that Omid wrote the Jolie-Pitt article. He also wrote the FF biography. It is such an odd coincidence IMO. Wonder if he suggested the idea to MM?


----------



## Jktgal

limom said:


> I am racist then because his over the top preaching made me laugh.
> I mean, come on. It was straight out of TP movie.



I'd say it's more culture shock. I'd attended a few black baptist church services in Manhattan and I probably exhibited total shock the first time - of the sermon and of the fact everyone in the choir sounded like Whitney Houston  I probably looked as baffled when I attended an Anglican service in New England for its zzzz factor.

The thing with this show of black representation in the wedding is it's pure entertainment. She didn't have any of her black relatives at the wedding but flew in a bunch of black strangers?? I enjoyed the service, the music, but that was the moment my spidey sense tingled...


----------



## Jktgal

rhyvin said:


> I'm surprised that Meghan stated she was scared to come forward to the BRF about mental health issues. Harry, William and Kate created Heads Together specifically to de-stigmatize mental health issues



She launched Shout, a mental health outline that "aims to help people experiencing problems - from suicidal thoughts to bullying and relationship issues - move from "crisis to calm".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Me neither.
> Give me the cash and let me decide on whom can help me get better.
> Kathie Lee Gifford retired from NBC to pursue other projects in Nashville.
> You want her or Kathie Griffin for the job?
> KG will not be hired for a while, imho. At least at NBC and CNN, she burned too many bridges.
> 
> Ultimately, we will be graced with MM on network TV. Maybe she can do a cartoon Princess project?


I think a MM she-ra princess knock-off would be an endless source of inadvertent comedy for us (and it’s such an original idea too ) so I am in favour of it.

Problem is, I think if H&M team don’t have the perseverance to make a second episode of a podcast- I don’t think they could muster the planning and effort needed to make animation.

I think it’ll be po- faced and heavily edited documentaries. That’s if anything does come out of them- I’m not optimistic.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> I am glad you pointed this out. Not surprised. I can kind of relate. I had mentioned in a prior post that I was half asian and look totally caucasian. People don't believe me when I told them that I as asian. Was born after WWII and so I grew up as caucasian as protection against racism. There may be posters here who would not agree with this but I can accept that. As I got way into my adulthood I learned to get it but felt more comfortable to come out and say I was asian. I've always been proud of my asian heritage and would share even as a small child but learned the hard way and was called nasty names.  Just last week I was sad from the news of more asian hate and I was in a meeting where we discussed this. I shared I was half asian and everyone looked with surprise over zoom. I cried for two days because it just brought back such bad memories that I had not thought about since the 90's. I think more actors like MM and others who might have gotten away with being caucasian for so many years now will say their are not.


Stay strong. Coming to terms with the past is a marathon not a sprint.

Hopefully things are getting better for acceptance.

Goodness knows what a total opportunist like MM may have said at any given time.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Stay strong. Coming to terms with the past is a marathon not a sprint.
> 
> Hopefully things are getting better for acceptance.
> 
> Goodness knows what a total opportunist like MM may have said at any given time.


Thank you for the encouragement.


----------



## gelbergirl

Jktgal said:


> She launched Shout, a mental health outline that "aims to help people experiencing problems - from suicidal thoughts to bullying and relationship issues - move from "crisis to calm".
> 
> 
> View attachment 5037585



Yeah, I remember that.  It was a big deal as it was Senior Members of the BRF discussing mental health.
 JCMH and M conveniently forget.


----------



## gelbergirl

rhyvin said:


> I'm surprised that Meghan stated she was scared to come forward to the BRF about mental health issues. Harry, William and Kate created Heads Together specifically to de-stigmatize mental health issues



That smiley with the question marks comes in handy in this thread.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> On another note: I'm still surprised that the BRF hasn't done anything to tackle the Markles somehow before hand. Didn't they check that family? They must have seen what kind of in-laws they would be getting.



I can't remember where I read it, but it was along the lines of "Palace was completely overwhelmed with Meghan's viciousness and bullying of staff as nobody in that palace had ever behaved like this and they were not sure how to respond". Maybe they were completely blindsighted because the Middletons are the model in-laws...quiet, keep a low profile, don't talk to the press, don't feel the need to stand in the spotlight. 

I said it back then when Archie was introduced to the Queen and Philip and they had Doria in tow for the press photos...have you ever seen the Middletons insert themselves like this (not blaming Doria though...we know whose idea that was)?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> This is the reason why she lived with her white father.  I always thought so.



He also had the Hollywood connections.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Kate's uncle on Oprah' interview:
> 
> "_Gary Goldsmith, the brother of Kate's mum Carole, said *he doesn't "believe a word" of what Meghan said* during her explosive interview with Oprah....
> 
> Speaking for the first time since the allegations aired, Gary, 55, told The Mail on Sunday: "I’ve known Kate since she was born and she doesn’t have a mean bone in her body. It’s just simply not in her nature.
> 
> "She’s even lovelier on the inside than on the outside.* If anyone had a hissy fit, it must have been Meghan."*
> 
> He added: "Kate would have been trying to make the peace. I would fight for Kate’s honour until the day I die. She is the most spectacular person I’ve ever met._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's uncle defends her saying 'I don't believe she made Meghan cry' after explosive Oprah interview
> 
> 
> KATE Middleton’s uncle has defended his niece from claims she made Meghan Markle cry, saying “it’s simply not in her nature”. Gary Goldsmith, the brother of Kate’s mum…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



While I'm inclined to believe him, Uncle Gary is maybe not the person you want to have speaking up for you *ggg*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I am glad you pointed this out. Not surprised. I can kind of relate. I had mentioned in a prior post that I was half asian and look totally caucasian. People don't believe me when I told them that I as asian. Was born after WWII and so I grew up as caucasian as protection against racism. There may be posters here who would not agree with this but I can accept that. As I got way into my adulthood I learned to get it but felt more comfortable to come out and say I was asian. I've always been proud of my asian heritage and would share even as a small child but learned the hard way and was called nasty names.  Just last week I was sad from the news of more asian hate and I was in a meeting where we discussed this. I shared I was half asian and everyone looked with surprise over zoom. I cried for two days because it just brought back such bad memories that I had not thought about since the 90's. I think more actors like MM and others who might have gotten away with being caucasian for so many years now will say their are not.



I'm so sorry you had these experiences *hugs*

I'll admit I'm technically mixed race too (though not black), but I look completely white, I've never met my non-white family (my father passed away a long time ago), and I was born and raised in a completely white environment. I don't walk around and volunteer the info because it rarely crosses my mind and is really no big part of my identity. The difference between your choice, mine and MM's is that the way she went about it was as opportunistic as everything else she does. I have never in my life experienced someone who is alway, always looking to turn something into an advantage for her whatever the cost. Plus, the WOC activist shtick is just not as genuine, let alone impressive, when you spent your teenage and young adult years walking around claiming to be Italian (again, she can never find the right balance...there's a difference in not talking about your mother's side vs. making up a whole new ethnicity. Thomas is not Italian).


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so sorry you had these experiences *hugs*
> 
> I'll admit I'm technically mixed race too (though not black), but I look completely white, I've never met my non-white family (my father passed away a long time ago), and I was born and raised in a completely white environment. I don't walk around and volunteer the info because it rarely crosses my mind and is really no big part of my identity. The difference between your choice, mine and MM's is that the way she went about it was as opportunistic as everything else she does. I have never in my life experienced someone who is alway, always looking to turn something into an advantage for her whatever the cost. Plus, the WOC activist shtick is just not as genuine, let alone impressive, when you spent your teenage and young adult years walking around claiming to be Italian (again, she can never find the right balance...there's a difference in not talking about your mother's side vs. making up a whole new ethnicity. Thomas is not Italian).


Did she say that she was Italian?
She looks biracial to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> Did she say that she was Italian?
> She looks biracial to me.



She let people _think_ she was Italian. Old article -








						Classmates thought Meghan Markle was Italian until they met her mother
					

Meghan Markle will become the latest biracial woman - and Hollywood actress - to join European royalty on May 19, when she marries Harry in St. George's chapel at Windsor Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> I am glad you pointed this out. Not surprised. I can kind of relate. I had mentioned in a prior post that I was half asian and look totally caucasian. People don't believe me when I told them that I as asian. Was born after WWII and so I grew up as caucasian as protection against racism. There may be posters here who would not agree with this but I can accept that. As I got way into my adulthood I learned to get it but felt more comfortable to come out and say I was asian. I've always been proud of my asian heritage and would share even as a small child but learned the hard way and was called nasty names.  Just last week I was sad from the news of more asian hate and I was in a meeting where we discussed this. I shared I was half asian and everyone looked with surprise over zoom. I cried for two days because it just brought back such bad memories that I had not thought about since the 90's. I think more actors like MM and others who might have gotten away with being caucasian for so many years now will say their are not.



I, too, am sorry this happened to you and anyone else. As many have said, we must do better and we must do more.
This is why H&M are so irritating. Have they led by example? No.  They have the microphone with the funds, and use it only to complain.  Stop the lectures and set an example.



			https://www.niche.com/places-to-live/montecito-santa-barbara-ca/residents/


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> She let people _think_ she was Italian. Old article -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Classmates thought Meghan Markle was Italian until they met her mother
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will become the latest biracial woman - and Hollywood actress - to join European royalty on May 19, when she marries Harry in St. George's chapel at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don’t read the article the same way. She cant help what other people thought about her.
If she was truly trying to pass, her mother would not have gone to the school, imho.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I agree I don't read it that way...it sounds like they made that assumption based on her skin color...?

_'Everyone thought [Meghan] was Italian because she was so light skinned,' a former teacher at the school told Morton. 'Then we met her mother and realized she was biracial.'_

It doesn't seem like she was speaking in an Italian accent and asking the English word for cucumber  

Like the way people made assumptions about her mother based on her color...

_[Doria] was also unhappy living in a predominantly white neighborhood where people thought she was the nanny, Morton writes, adding that Doria was stopped by neighbors who asked where Meghan's mother lived._

According to this article in 2015 MM identified herself as half black and half white...









						Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
					

'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman




					www.elle.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> I don’t read the article the same way. She cant help what other people thought about her.
> If she was truly trying to pass, her mother would not have gone to the school, imho.



True, I posted the link to show where the _Italian_ comments came from. I don’t know why a teacher would think that — the teacher would have access to the demographics, no? I have no knowledge of her claims. For me, the interesting part of the article is that it took Thomas and Doria 5 years to divorce. Wonder if that is even true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, I posted the link to show where the _Italian_ comments came from. I don’t know why a teacher would think that — the teacher would have access to the demographics, no? I have no knowledge of her claims. For me, the interesting part of the article is that it took Thomas and Doria 5 years to divorce. Wonder if that is even true.


Because the teacher is ignorant, ymmv
I don’t know if at the time, catholic schools kept that type of data.
Plus teachers do not have typically access to this data.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> Because the teacher is ignorant, ymmv
> I don’t know if at the time, catholic schools kept that type of data.
> Plus teachers do not have typically access to this data.



By 1996, in the US, schools and teachers were aware of racial inequalities and issues. I don’t know about private Catholic schools, public schools required and emphasized diversity training. In most areas, teachers who resisted were asked to leave.  LA riots happened in 1992. People were aware.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> By 1996, in the US, schools and teachers were aware of racial inequalities and issues. I don’t know about private Catholic schools, public schools required and emphasized diversity training. In most areas, teachers who resisted were asked to leave.  LA riots happened in 1992. People were aware.



Just last month, on Long Island.








						Black boy, 11, forced to kneel and apologize by white headmaster who called it the ‘African way’
					

Trisha Paul said her son is still reeling from the humiliating incident — and the family suspects he was treated more harshly because he’s Black.




					www.nydailynews.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

ymmv, ignorant teachers and people are everywhere.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> ymmv, ignorant teachers and people are everywhere.


Agreed completely.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> _[Doria] was also unhappy living in a predominantly white neighborhood where people thought she was the nanny, Morton writes, adding that Doria was stopped by neighbors who asked where Meghan's mother lived._



I'm not saying this doesn't happen to people, I'm just wondering: don't people talk to their neighbours? (besides asking impertinent questions, that is) My neighbours know my brother's gf who only visits once in a blue moon, but maybe we're a nosy bunch.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not saying this doesn't happen to people, I'm just wondering: don't people talk to their neighbours? (besides asking impertinent questions, that is) My neighbours know my brother's gf who only visits once in a blue moon, but maybe we're a nosy bunch.


MM was living with her dad. Doria was getting her degree somewhere else.
It can easily happen.
In fact, one of my college girlfriend was also biracial (AA mother, German father). We only saw the mother once as she lived in a different state than her two daughters.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> MM was living with her dad. Doria was getting her degree somewhere else.
> It can easily happen.
> In fact, one of my college girlfriend was also biracial (AA mother, German father). We only saw the mother once as she lived in a different state than her two daughters.



I guess some things that are just minor annoyances for me have more weight when you're a POC who experiences microagressions on a daily basis.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I guess some things that are just minor annoyances for me have more weight when you're a POC who experiences microagressions on a daily basis.



That's exactly it. I just wish we could all have more patience and empathy for each other...understanding everyone carries different experiences and perspectives.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Like the way people made assumptions about her mother based on her color...
> 
> _[Doria] was also unhappy living in a predominantly white neighborhood where people thought she was the nanny, Morton writes, adding that Doria was stopped by neighbors who asked where Meghan's mother lived._


There are similar assumptions everywhere.
One of my friends (Chinese) is married to an Italian. Her children look Italian. She regularly gets mistaken for their Filipino nanny and so dresses to the nines in expensive designer wear to try to counter this assumption. I wanted to tell her that perhaps it was the way she spoke English - with an accent that reminded me of the many Filipinos who work in Singapore.

I once queued up behind two young white boys at the supermarket. The cashier automatically assumed that I was their domestic servant. The boys paid for their snacks, and she handed me their change. When I didn't take it immediately, she snarled in annoyance at this dimwitted servant girl. So I took the money. There was a pregnant pause as the boys and I stared at each other. I handed over the money, and then went off in search of my friend the chief cashier to report the incident.


----------



## limom

xincinsin said:


> There are similar assumptions everywhere.
> One of my friends (Chinese) is married to an Italian. Her children look Italian. She regularly gets mistaken for their Filipino nanny and so dresses to the nines in expensive designer wear to try to counter this assumption. I wanted to tell her that perhaps it was the way she spoke English - with an accent that reminded me of the many Filipinos who work in Singapore.
> 
> I once queued up behind two young white boys at the supermarket. The cashier automatically assumed that I was their domestic servant. The boys paid for their snacks, and she handed me their change. When I didn't take it immediately, she snarled in annoyance at this dimwitted servant girl. So I took the money. There was a pregnant pause as the boys and I stared at each other. I handled over the money, and then went off in search of my friend the chief cashier to report the incident.


True, jerks are everywhere!
so glad you reported the person.


----------



## xincinsin

This guy sounds reasonable when he reminds people that the Oprah interview was just Hollywood-style reality.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This is the reason why she lived with her white father.  I always thought so.


and I wonder if it was the reason why doria never showed up at her events - she was asked to stay away?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> and I wonder if it was the reason why doria never showed up at her events - she was asked to stay away?


For all we know:
A. Doria was busy with her education.
B. Doria and Thomas had a difficult divorce with restraining orders involved.
I find it very hard to believe that in the late 1990, a mother would consent to stay away from her child.
We were not in the Stella Dallas era.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> For all we know:
> A. Doria was busy with her education.
> B. Doria and Thomas had a difficult divorce with restraining orders involved.
> I find it very hard to believe that in the late 1990, a mother would consent to stay away from her child.
> We were not in the Stella Dallas era.


LOL
hard to say.....Meghan was proud of her black heritage at the time of her wedding but didn't seem to be so much when she was younger.....@CeeJay  said her friends had no idea she wasn't white


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Roxanna

Well, I guess her teacher assumption did not come out of thin air considering  this old article.  As it was stated that through her father she has connection to Malta. Megan looked lovely then.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.eo...efore-seen-photos-from-her-2015-trip-to-malta


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> She launched Shout, a mental health outline that "aims to help people experiencing problems - from suicidal thoughts to bullying and relationship issues - move from "crisis to calm".
> 
> 
> View attachment 5037585





gelbergirl said:


> Yeah, I remember that.  It was a big deal as it was Senior Members of the BRF discussing mental health.
> JCMH and M conveniently forget.



That article came out just a few days after Archie was born. IF Meghan was involved with Shout it is proof she would have known exactly how to get help for herself (not that I believe her story) and she wouldn’t need to be sending emails expecting other people to find a therapist for her. Now I suppose it’s possible Meghan wasn’t really involved with Shout since it seems she didn’t do much while she was pregnant.

It pisses me off that the press can’t be bothered to do their damn jobs and look into the facts. Meghan made wild, damaging accusations in the interview without providing names, dates, or ANY relevant details. Yet most of the media blindly accepted and believed her stories because they are so afraid of being accused of being racists if they question it.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> hard to say.....Meghan was proud of her black heritage at the time of her wedding but didn't seem to be so much when she was younger.....@ceejay said her friends had no idea she wasn't white


 One of my friend had a Vietnamese grandmother, I had no idea until I visited her home.
 I dated a happa, I had no clue either.
Now, do I think that MM was particularly pro black as a teenager? probably not.
I still do not think this was a conspiracy however.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> hard to say.....Meghan was proud of her black heritage at the time of her wedding but didn't seem to be so much when she was younger.....@ceejay said her friends had no idea she wasn't white



I don't think ceejay's friend's son went to high school with her...I thought they did a play together... didn't she go to Immaculate Heart which is an all girls school?


----------



## limom

Roxanna said:


> Well, I guess her teacher assumption did not come out of thin air considering  this old article.  As it was stated that through her father she has connection to Malta. Megan looked lovely then.
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.eo...efore-seen-photos-from-her-2015-trip-to-malta


Did she say her father ancestor was born in Malta?
As a colonizer or as a native?
Plus Malta is not in Italy, is it?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That article came out just a few days after Archie was born. IF Meghan was involved with Shout it is proof she would have known exactly how to get help for herself (not that I believe her story) and she wouldn’t need to be sending emails expecting other people to find a therapist for her. Now I suppose it’s possible Meghan wasn’t really involved with Shout since it seems she didn’t do much while she was pregnant.
> 
> It pisses me off that the press can’t be bothered to do their damn jobs and look into the facts. Meghan made wild, damaging accusations in the interview without providing names, dates, or ANY relevant details. Yet most of the media blindly accepted and believed her stories because they are so afraid of being accused of being racists if they question it.


yes, pretty much all american media (esp tv) is totally pro-H&M.  I was watching (while getting dressed) an episode of The Talk from before the Oprah interview.  they were talking about the accusations of bullying by Meghan and they were all saying how it was lies and how hard it would be to be poor Meghan having these untrue things said about you.  basically saying that the palace was putting out lies because they were concerned about what H&M would be saying to Oprah.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don't think ceejay's friend's son went to high school with her...I thought they did a play together... didn't she go to Immaculate Heart which is an all girls school?


yes Immaculate Heart sounds right...but I thought the story from @CeeJay was from when Meghan was that age?


----------



## Chanbal

Oops!   
"_One of Meghan's British friends fell out with her because Meghan was writing all these messages with loads of emojis. The friend dictated a WhatsApp voice note saying, 'God, Meghan is so annoying with all her emojis, she keeps sending me all these emojis'.

'But then the friend sent the voice memo to Meghan herself by accident instead of sending it to a mutual friend._"









						TALK OF THE TOWN: Meghan left furious at the pal who hated her emojis
					

TALK OF THE TOWN: Imagine compounding the horror by recording an uncomplimentary voice note about the Duchess of Sussex - and then pinging it to her phone by mistake.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, pretty much all american media (esp tv) is totally pro-H&M.  I was watching (while getting dressed) an episode of The Talk from before the Oprah interview.  they were talking about the accusations of bullying by Meghan and they were all saying how it was lies and how hard it would be to be poor Meghan having these untrue things said about you.  basically saying that the palace was putting out lies because they were concerned about what H&M would be saying to Oprah.



Yes and I expect that from a daytime show like The Talk where the hosts are basically just women tossing around their opinions. Nobody should expect them to be fully informed about anything.

What gets me is when the news people do the same thing. They should know better. And if they believed in integrity and presenting the truth, they should pursue it more.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Doesn't sound like Doria was hidden at all...

_"The clip, filmed by Thomas in the summer of 1999, shows the future Duchess of Sussex making her way through a crowd of students towards her father, who she greets with a loving ‘hi daddy’ before tightly hugging a proud Doria.

Doria is then seen warmly embracing her daughter’s drama teacher Gigi Perreau, the 1940s film star who is credited as Meghan’s first acting mentor."_






						Meghan Markle is seen happily greeting mother Doria and father Thomas in school video | Express Digest
					

Express Digest is a giant collection of the best news and interesting links on the web!




					expressdigest.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes and I expect that from a daytime show like The Talk where the hosts are basically just women tossing around their opinions. Nobody should expect them to be fully informed about anything.
> 
> What gets me is when the news people do the same thing. They should know better. And if they believed in integrity and presenting the truth, they should pursue it more.


these shows - starting with The View which was the first - are supposed to be from different points of view - women of varying ages, etc.  And The View does have different opinions - but not on this couple.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


> Oops!
> "_One of Meghan's British friends fell out with her because Meghan was writing all these messages with loads of emojis. The friend dictated a WhatsApp voice note saying, 'God, Meghan is so annoying with all her emojis, she keeps sending me all these emojis'.
> 
> 'But then the friend sent the voice memo to Meghan herself by accident instead of sending it to a mutual friend._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TALK OF THE TOWN: Meghan left furious at the pal who hated her emojis
> 
> 
> TALK OF THE TOWN: Imagine compounding the horror by recording an uncomplimentary voice note about the Duchess of Sussex - and then pinging it to her phone by mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



OMG that's such a fear of mine!!! I was on a Zoom call yesterday and someone kept private chatting me and I was so nervous to respond because I was sure I was going to forget to check and reply to the entire group!


----------



## Roxanna

limom said:


> Did she say her father ancestor was born in Malta?
> As a colonizer or as a native?
> Plus Malta is not in Italy, is it?


 well she went there because of her ancestry.
It's stated there that it was her father's heritage,  as well as Irish, from Belfast. Malta is between Sicily and the North African coast,  and besides native language Italian is commonly spoken language there,  granted there is lots of connections with Moor people,  but there was no indication that her father is of mixed heritage too. Besides that Malta was populated for quite some time and its hard to say who exactly it was colonised by. Unless Meghan would claim Phoenician ancestry too.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> OMG that's such a fear of mine!!! I was on a Zoom call yesterday and someone kept private chatting me and I was so nervous to respond because I was sure I was going to forget to check and reply to the entire group!


a friend of mine who is a realtor sent a text message to me and I started seeing a bunch of people responding.  she had accidentally done a group text


----------



## limom

Roxanna said:


> well she went there because of her ancestry.
> It's stated there that it was her father's heritage,  as well as Irish, from Belfast. Malta is between Sicily and the North African coast,  and besides native language Italian is commonly spoken language there,  granted there is lots of connections with Moor people,  but there was no indication that her father is of mixed heritage too. Besides that Malta was populated for quite some time and its hard to say who exactly it was colonised by. Unless Meghan would claim Phoenician ancestry too.


So does Thomas have an Italian ancestor By the name of Mary Bird?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Malta been an independent country since 1964. Following 150 years as a British colony, Malta gained state independency in 1964, became a republic in 1974 and later part of the European Union in 2004


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so sorry you had these experiences *hugs*
> 
> I'll admit I'm technically mixed race too (though not black), but I look completely white, I've never met my non-white family (my father passed away a long time ago), and I was born and raised in a completely white environment. I don't walk around and volunteer the info because it rarely crosses my mind and is really no big part of my identity. The difference between your choice, mine and MM's is that the way she went about it was as opportunistic as everything else she does. I have never in my life experienced someone who is alway, always looking to turn something into an advantage for her whatever the cost. Plus, the WOC activist shtick is just not as genuine, let alone impressive, when you spent your teenage and young adult years walking around claiming to be Italian (again, she can never find the right balance...there's a difference in not talking about your mother's side vs. making up a whole new ethnicity. Thomas is not Italian).


----------



## kemilia

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't think I saw this posted yet. Thought it had some interest info. I pasted some of it below. Have a great weekend everyone!
> 
> *How Prince Harry got his new job*
> 
> So explain Prince Harry's role. What is a chief impact officer?
> 
> Robichaux: We came to the title together. We were organically having these conversations how the mission of BetterUp is bigger than BetterUp. He's been doing this work in his own life for years. We can change the global dialogue to not think of mental health as the absence of mental illness, but to think about mental health as performance and realizing your potential. That is a huge global impact that BetterUp can be part of. He can keep us accountable and also accelerate that by expanding our global community, reach, and influencing everything from our product experience to helping partner with companies and organizations globally to expand our impact around the world.
> 
> What was it about his experience and CV that makes you believe he is the right person for this role?
> 
> Robichaux: First and foremost, it's who he is as a person. I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world. Secondly, he's done the work, from Heads Together to the Invictus games. He has an incredible track record related to advancing this mission of mental fitness. Long before we had the opportunity meeting him, I had always had a daydream that maybe we would be fortunate enough to work with someone like him, who's been one of the leading forces in the world for mental health. We could not have thought of someone better for this role and we're thrilled to work with him.
> 
> https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/24/investing/chatterley-first-move-prince-harry-betterup/index.html


Instead of seeing "Betterup" my eyes see either "Butterup" or "Buttercup".


----------



## Allisonfaye

haute okole said:


> How about some Inspirational Meghan Bananas?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5035906
> View attachment 5035907
> 
> 
> View attachment 5035925



Oh, for f*$)'s sake. Are you KIDDING?


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> The problem with the cake is that it took her so long to write the calligraphy note that by the time it was shipped, it was already stale!  The olive oil in the cake went rancid!
> 
> 
> @duna  In Ca and I have a Meyer lemon tree and it is wonderful!  Makes great lemonade, salad dressing  and lemon cake.



I love Meyer lemons but I had a lemon tree next to my vacation home that somehow attracts something called fruit rats and they got into my house which was a nightmare to handle from 2000 miles away.


----------



## haute okole

Allisonfaye said:


> Oh, for f*$)'s sake. Are you KIDDING?


The worst part of it was these inspiration bananas were for sex workers,  not kindergartners.  So tone deaf.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> I think another poster here said it before but I don't get the hullabaloo about who made who cry. Bridezilla, emotional pregnant lady... either scenario pretty common IMO. Nothing to even be ashamed of anymore, as long as the one person makes it right with the other.


I've read (DM?) that Kate had bought flowers and gone to visit M as a bid for peace, but M slammed the door in Kate's face. Classy!


----------



## bisousx

DeMonica said:


> I've read (DM?) that Kate had bought flowers and gone to visit M as a bid for peace, but M slammed the door in Kate's face. Classy!



This version of the story was confirmed in Meghan’s own tell-all, Finding Freedom - then repeated in Cosmo and Vanity Fair, among other outlets. Not sure why Meghan felt admitting her lack of grace and eternal victimhood would be flattering for her image.

Personally, I’d be thrilled and accepting if any of the beezies in my life apologized for misunderstandings with flowers  


*Kate Middleton Once Offered Meghan Markle Flowers as a Peace Offering, but It Was Too Little, Too Late*
_
Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”_









						Meghan Reportedly Rejected Flowers From Kate During Their (*Breathes Heavy Sigh*) Royal Feud
					

Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

mm


----------



## jelliedfeels

bisousx said:


> This version of the story was confirmed in Meghan’s own tell-all, Finding Freedom - then repeated in Cosmo and Vanity Fair, among other outlets. Not sure why Meghan felt admitting her lack of grace and eternal victimhood would be flattering for her image.
> 
> Personally, I’d be thrilled and accepting if any of the beezies in my life apologized for misunderstandings with flowers
> 
> 
> *Kate Middleton Once Offered Meghan Markle Flowers as a Peace Offering, but It Was Too Little, Too Late*
> 
> _Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Reportedly Rejected Flowers From Kate During Their (*Breathes Heavy Sigh*) Royal Feud
> 
> 
> Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


This is really becoming the Rashomon of MM stories isn’t it? Except incredibly tedious.

It makes me embarrassed that any woman would spend so much time rehashing this banal and demeaning ‘catfight’ in public.

Also yes. I’d be delighted to get flowers. Sometimes it’s an absolute slog getting someone to even apologise even when you already have done.

further add on- isn’t giving the flowers back In someone’s face an old rom com cliche? It certainly sounds veeeery dramatic.

Perhaps Kate picked up the flowers at the supermarket and MM assumed everyone else gets proper floristry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes Immaculate Heart sounds right...but I thought the story from @CeeJay was from when Meghan was that age?



She was also friends with some Persian guy who was later on TV as a teenager (I remember because he revealed another unsettling incident). Maybe the girls' and boys' school did projects and stuff together?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This is really becoming the Rashomon of MM stories isn’t it? Except incredibly tedious.
> 
> It makes me embarrassed that any woman would spend so much time rehashing this banal and demeaning ‘catfight’ in public.
> 
> Also yes. I’d be delighted to get flowers. Sometimes it’s an absolute slog getting someone to even apologise even when you already have done.
> 
> further add on- isn’t giving the flowers back In someone’s face an old rom com cliche? It certainly sounds veeeery dramatic.
> 
> Perhaps Kate picked up the flowers at the supermarket and MM assumed everyone else gets proper floristry.



I received a bouquet last year from a business contact for a mistake they'd made. Stupid me put them out on my desk and sent a thank you note when now I know I should have stomped on it and send it back on their dime. Oh well...live and learn!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was also friends with some Persian guy who was later on TV as a teenager (I remember because he revealed another unsettling incident). Maybe the girls' and boys' school did projects and stuff together?


Yeah they might have had a joint drama club so the younger, prettier boys didn’t have to go full Shakespeare.

What was his unsettling story? Just for gossip’s sake.


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> This is really becoming the Rashomon of MM stories isn’t it? Except incredibly tedious.
> 
> It makes me *embarrassed that any woman would spend so much time rehashing this banal and demeaning ‘catfight’ in public.*
> 
> Also yes. I’d be delighted to get flowers. Sometimes it’s an absolute slog getting someone to even apologise even when you already have done.
> 
> further add on- isn’t giving the flowers back In someone’s face an old rom com cliche? It certainly sounds veeeery dramatic.
> 
> Perhaps Kate picked up the flowers at the supermarket and MM assumed everyone else gets proper floristry.



Right. But since this is Meghan we're talking about, no one is surprised!


----------



## Allisonfaye

marietouchet said:


> Archewell, so far reminds me of the foundation run by a previous president , wife and daughter
> Travel expenses were paid to Haiti and it was not like Haiti got rebuilt



I called an accountant once to look for ways to reduce our significant tax bill. He told me all the usual stuff....401ks, donations, etc and then told me I could start a foundation.....You basically put the money into it tax free and then you get to decide how it's spent. I didn't do it because at the time, I understood your actually had to use the money for charity but I have since learned that this is how the big players play the game...with a foundation. Highly paid employees that are often family members, large travel expenses. It's pretty disgusting that taxpayer foot the bill for these shenanigans.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> I feel bad for him. Yeah he made mistakes but so what? It was not egregious mistake. She can turn this around, call him up, they can both clear the air, lay out boundaries and forgive each other.
> 
> If she does not, she might really regret it one day when he’s gone.



I doubt it. Sociopaths don't generally regret their actions or feel remorse for their behavior.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I received a bouquet last year from a business contact for a mistake they'd made. Stupid me put them out on my desk and sent a thank you note when now I know I should have stomped on it and send it back on their dime. Oh well...live and learn!


Just think, you too could have had a Netflix contract!
Perhaps she could start with a series on modern etiquette.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah they might have had a joint drama club so the younger, prettier boys didn’t have to go full Shakespeare.
> 
> What was his unsettling story? Just for gossip’s sake.



She sat down on his lap, brought her face within an inch of his and whispered in Persian - which he never knew she spoke, my take: she doesn't, she just looked up that phrase specifically - "You are so beautiful", then got up and walked away. 

It's not per se super scandalous, it just shows she was already a master manipulator at age 16 and set out to wrap random male victims around her finger. When I remember myself at 16, I was too shy to talk to anyone, let alone pull stuff like this, so this was rather unsettling to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Right. But since this is Meghan we're talking about, no one is surprised!



She really seems to lack any understanding how certain stories make herself look bad instead of the person she is trying to blame.


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> I called an accountant once to look for ways to reduce our significant tax bill. He told me all the usual stuff....401ks, donations, etc and then told me I could start a foundation.....You basically put the money into it tax free and then you get to decide how it's spent. I didn't do it because at the time, I understood your actually had to use the money for charity but I have since learned that this is how the big players play the game...with a foundation. Highly paid employees that are often family members, large travel expenses. It's pretty disgusting that taxpayer foot the bill for these shenanigans.



Yep. It's hilarious to read about some of these billionaires who say "My kids aren't going to inherit very much of my estate"  but they're on the Board of the family foundations  .  At huge salaries. For sitting on their a$$es while lawyers tell them where and how much to donate of Ma-Ma and Da-Da's money.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She sat down on his lap, brought her face within an inch of his and whispered in Persian - which he never knew she spoke, my take: she doesn't, she just looked up that phrase specifically - "You are so beautiful", then got up and walked away.
> 
> It's not per se super scandalous, it just shows she was already a master manipulator at age 16 and set out to wrap random male victims around her finger. When I remember myself at 16, I was too shy to talk to anyone, let alone pull stuff like this, so this was rather unsettling to me.


Yeah it’s a bit Pepe le pew school of seduction even at my ripe old age.

I wonder what she said on Harry’s knee or whether she just hummed ‘candle in the wind’ in her black off the shoulder mini dress and gently wafted penhalgions bluebell at him.


----------



## lulilu

I read on twitter that HM wanted to advise the RBF on how to diversify their staff.  Declined.









						Harry and Meghan snubbed: Queen to reject Sussexes' offer
					

THE QUEEN and other members of the Royal Family have rejected Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's offer to advise the Palace on how to become a more diverse workplace.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She sat down on his lap, brought her face within an inch of his and whispered in Persian - which he never knew she spoke, my take: she doesn't, she just looked up that phrase specifically - "You are so beautiful", then got up and walked away.
> 
> It's not per se super scandalous, it just shows she was already a master manipulator at age 16 and set out to wrap random male victims around her finger. When I remember myself at 16, I was too shy to talk to anyone, let alone pull stuff like this, so this was rather unsettling to me.



She is disgusting and vile.


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry can no longer find links to articles read ...very interesting food for thought 

Times op-ed about discrimination against "ugly" people, yes people favor those that conform to our own (arbitrary) ideals of beauty. I like blondes, you like brunettes, that kind of thing but also unattractiveness eg large nose. And the cottage industry of fixing everything these days ... 

William has been voted the sexiest bald man on the planet ... hmmm ... is he getting special treatment ??? or special recognition ??


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> This guy sounds reasonable when he reminds people that the Oprah interview was just Hollywood-style reality.



OMGOSH !!  LOVE LOVE LOVE his message!  SPOT ON!


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah it’s a bit Pepe le pew school of seduction even at my ripe old age.
> 
> I wonder what she said on Harry’s knee or whether she just hummed ‘candle in the wind’ in her black off the shoulder mini dress and gently wafted penhalgions bluebell at him.


She went and peed in the woods, remember? He was smitten and knew "she was the one." Ironic, now they go through life p-----g on other people at every opportunity.


----------



## poopsie

lulilu said:


> She is disgusting and vile.



And vulgar


----------



## 1LV

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah it’s a bit Pepe le pew school of seduction even at my ripe old age.
> 
> I wonder what she said on Harry’s knee or *whether she just hummed ‘candle in the wind*’ in her black off the shoulder mini dress and gently wafted penhalgions bluebell at him.


Ewwwww!  That is sick!! Funny as hell though.


----------



## jennlt

lulilu said:


> I read on twitter that HM wanted to advise the RBF on how to diversify their staff.  Declined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan snubbed: Queen to reject Sussexes' offer
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN and other members of the Royal Family have rejected Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's offer to advise the Palace on how to become a more diverse workplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Is it hubris, chutzpah, hallucinogenics or a combination of all three? Who the heck do they think they are?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Roxanna said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.eo...efore-seen-photos-from-her-2015-trip-to-malta


OMG, then by comparison, there is hope for all religious females, who aspire to someday become Priest, Bishop, Cardinal and Popess. Travel to Vatican City, discover you catholic roots and pose for pictures wearing the Papal Regalia including the Papal Mitre so this male dominated institution will welcome you with open arms, because all you need is a good photoshoot to prove your mettle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> One of my friend had a Vietnamese grandmother, I had no idea until I visited her home.
> I dated a happa, I had no clue either.
> Now, do I think that MM was particularly pro black as a teenager? probably not.
> I still do not think this was a conspiracy however.


I think what gets me is she is milking her blackness to the max now that it's benefitting her.  but when it was more beneficial to appear white or ambiguous, she didn't acknowledge her blackness - or she played it down.  I guess she just has good timing.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> This version of the story was confirmed in Meghan’s own tell-all, Finding Freedom - then repeated in Cosmo and Vanity Fair, among other outlets. Not sure why Meghan felt admitting her lack of grace and eternal victimhood would be flattering for her image.
> 
> Personally, I’d be thrilled and accepting if any of the beezies in my life apologized for misunderstandings with flowers
> 
> 
> *Kate Middleton Once Offered Meghan Markle Flowers as a Peace Offering, but It Was Too Little, Too Late*
> 
> _Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Reportedly Rejected Flowers From Kate During Their (*Breathes Heavy Sigh*) Royal Feud
> 
> 
> Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com



To be fair to M, she did say during the Oprah interview too that Kate brought her flowers and apologized - and she thought she did all the right things and all was forgiven.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Interesting, went cold-turkey from digital since whenever ~ a few weeks, months? lol ~ so have been MIA, anyway...

No-one reads Yahoo News but Google News is running this bit from Prince Albert, who is no stranger to drama but has ALWAYS KEPT THE FRICKEN LID ON THE POT!

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/prince-albert-calls-meghan-markle-124800199.html

Apologies if this is re-post, with Grifters-R-Us nothing much changes


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> William has been voted the sexiest bald man on the planet ... hmmm ... is he getting special treatment ??? or special recognition ??


Sorry, my all-time favourite is Yul Brynner and I don't think we're ever too old to appreciate a gorgeous man. Sigh! From the King and I.


	

		
			
		

		
	
Enjoy!


----------



## bellecate

bisousx said:


> This version of the story was confirmed in Meghan’s own tell-all, Finding Freedom - then repeated in Cosmo and Vanity Fair, among other outlets. Not sure why Meghan felt admitting her lack of grace and eternal victimhood would be flattering for her image.
> 
> Personally, I’d be thrilled and accepting if any of the beezies in my life apologized for misunderstandings with flowers
> 
> 
> *Kate Middleton Once Offered Meghan Markle Flowers as a Peace Offering, but It Was Too Little, Too Late*
> 
> _Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Reportedly Rejected Flowers From Kate During Their (*Breathes Heavy Sigh*) Royal Feud
> 
> 
> Per Vanity Fair, Meghan “told Kate in no uncertain terms that flowers were not enough.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


I thought I’d read that the flowers and the peace offering came about after MM had a hissy fit because Kate went shopping and didn’t invite her along. ( Which she would have had needed to decline anyway because of the whole ‘not allowed to go anywhere’ thing.)


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, my all-time favourite is Yul Brynner and I don't think we're ever too old to appreciate a gorgeous man. Sigh! From the King and I.
> View attachment 5038125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy!



He was one of my first crushes!


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Is it hubris, chutzpah, hallucinogenics or a combination of all three? Who the heck do they think they are?


the arrogance is stunning


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> She let people _think_ she was Italian. Old article -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Classmates thought Meghan Markle was Italian until they met her mother
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will become the latest biracial woman - and Hollywood actress - to join European royalty on May 19, when she marries Harry in St. George's chapel at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Funny article considering her claims that she didn't know anything about the BRF.  She was more like a Diana stan. 



Chanbal said:


> People are becoming afraid of expressing their opinions, because they can be misinterpreted. I've seen people being investigated because of a simple comment taken out of context... Kindness is being replaced by lack of common sense.
> 
> I finally had a chance to read Piers's article. Alex Beresford's personal attack was uncalled for, but not surprising in this current world we live in... "_I wasn't going to sit there and take it from one of my own team, especially someone who I've gone out of my way to help whenever he's asked me for advice about his career_".


PM was duped. AB had been called in (according to PM) to give his perspective as a biracial man, but instead of doing that he launched that very calculated personal attack on PM. IMO PM is no angel but he was deliberately provoked by AB. OT: Someone should explain to AB what diabolical means.


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> To be fair to M, she did say during the Oprah interview too that Kate brought her flowers and apologized - and she thought she did all the right things and all was forgiven.



All that says to me is MM had time to think about what a nutjob she sounded like in the book, and retell the story in front of Oprah. I’d give MM the benefit if she didn’t spell out her feelings about Kate and those flowers in that book...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> I thought I’d read that the flowers and the peace offering came about after MM had a hissy fit because Kate went shopping and didn’t invite her along. ( Which she would have had needed to decline anyway because of the whole ‘not allowed to go anywhere’ thing.)


Yes, I've read the same thing, but knowing MM, there could be several versions of the story or it/they may be outright fabrication(s) of her overly vivid imagination.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Sorry can no longer find links to articles read ...very interesting food for thought
> 
> Times op-ed about discrimination against "ugly" people, yes people favor those that conform to our own (arbitrary) ideals of beauty. I like blondes, you like brunettes, that kind of thing but also unattractiveness eg large nose. And the cottage industry of fixing everything these days ...
> 
> William has been voted the sexiest bald man on the planet ... hmmm ... is he getting special treatment ??? or special recognition ??


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I think what gets me is she is milking her blackness to the max now that it's benefitting her.  but when it was more beneficial to appear white or ambiguous, she didn't acknowledge her blackness - or she played it down.  I guess she just has good timing.



Sometimes it's a survival tactic (specifically in youth). I don't know what her experience was actually like but I have empathy on this issue because of my experience. When I was younger, I wished deeply I wasn't a POC... the bullying, judgments, little microaggressions were very difficult to deal with on top of all the other typical teenage issues. It's very alienating to be a minority within a group. It wasn't until I went to college, much bigger environment, more people, more "mes", more "others," that I finally felt comfortable embracing my culture. So it could've been she grew to accept it slowly and, especially these days, actually get some benefit out of it.

If it's true that she wasn't especially close to her mom growing up, and presumably not her mom's family either, then that could've added to feeling more one side culturally.


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't remember where I read it, but it was along the lines of "Palace was completely overwhelmed with Meghan's viciousness and bullying of staff as nobody in that palace had ever behaved like this and they were not sure how to respond". Maybe they were completely blindsighted because the Middletons are the model in-laws...quiet, keep a low profile, don't talk to the press, don't feel the need to stand in the spotlight.
> 
> I said it back then when Archie was introduced to the Queen and Philip and they had Doria in tow for the press photos...have you ever seen the Middletons insert themselves like this (not blaming Doria though...we know whose idea that was)?


You might be right. Most of the royal in-laws (including ex-in-laws) had been non-problematic. Who would expect such in-laws? Or a granddaughter-in-law who more alienates her own family than makes them behave correctly? Maybe they crossed their fingers and hoped for the best. They were wrong.


----------



## limom

DeMonica said:


> You might be right. Most of the royal in-laws (including ex-in-laws) had been non-problematic. Who would expect such in-laws? Or a granddaughter-in-law who more alienates her own family than makes them behave correctly? Maybe they crossed their fingers and hoped for the best. They were wrong.


This woman was non problematic?


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I really don't see how this company is going to make Harry big money. There are sooooo many of them and frankly many fizzle out. I have never heard of this company but I'd bet they make most of their money with the *executive coaching*. That seems to be going strong among exec perks.


Okay .. but what exactly do they coach the executives on? .. what? .. making even more money and screwing over their employees?, taking more benefits away stating that they are "perks" that have to be paid for?  From what I've seen in the Financial Services world, these sessions don't do sh1t .. these people (_at least most of them_) got there for a reason; either they are hard-core and just want more & more money  -OR-  they are there because they 'knew' someone.  Bottom line, if you don't play in the sandbox with these folks and/or don't agree with them (_and state as such_), then you might as well kiss your job away .. I should know because I *WAS* that Executive who did fight for my people, who did fight to (try) to stop them from making more $$$ on people who were already down & out (_having declared bankruptcy and then trying to buy their assets at pennies on the dollar just to resell them at a much higher cost_) .. seriously? .. I doubt very, very much that these "coaching" sessions make any difference to *these* folks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> This woman was non problematic?
> View attachment 5038150



No, but she is also not an in-law in the sense we were using it (as in, the family of the person marrying into the RF)


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, but she is also not an in-law in the sense we were using it (as in, the family of the person marrying into the RF)


My mistake. Although her daddy was quite the man 








						How Queen 'simply could not stand' Sarah Ferguson's father
					

SARAH FERGUSON remains close to Queen Elizabeth II despite her 1996 divorce form Prince Andrew – but, at Princess Eugenie’s 1990 christening it emerged that Her Majesty could not “stand the sight” of the Duchess of York’s father.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## DeMonica

xincinsin said:


> There are similar assumptions everywhere.
> One of my friends (Chinese) is married to an Italian. Her children look Italian. She regularly gets mistaken for their Filipino nanny and so dresses to the nines in expensive designer wear to try to counter this assumption. I wanted to tell her that perhaps it was the way she spoke English - with an accent that reminded me of the many Filipinos who work in Singapore.
> 
> I once queued up behind two young white boys at the supermarket. The cashier automatically assumed that I was their domestic servant. The boys paid for their snacks, and she handed me their change. When I didn't take it immediately, she snarled in annoyance at this dimwitted servant girl. So I took the money. There was a pregnant pause as the boys and I stared at each other. I handed over the money, and then went off in search of my friend the chief cashier to report the incident.


People assume - often wrongly. I'm a Caucasian with light complexion who travelled a lot, lived in several countries, even on several continents. I have experienced and seen a lot. Sometimes it's funny to be mistaken for something you are not, but, believe me, it's oftentimes a painful experience.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. but what exactly do they coach the executives on? .. what? .. making even more money and screwing over their employees?, taking more benefits away stating that they are "perks" that have to be paid for?  From what I've seen in the Financial Services world, these sessions don't do sh1t .. these people (_at least most of them_) got there for a reason; either they are hard-core and just want more & more money  -OR-  they are there because they 'knew' someone.  Bottom line, if you don't play in the sandbox with these folks and/or don't agree with them (_and state as such_), then you might as well kiss your job away .. I should know because I *WAS* that Executive who did fight for my people, who did fight to (try) to stop them from making more $$$ on people who were already down & out (_having declared bankruptcy and then trying to buy their assets at pennies on the dollar just to resell them at a much higher cost_) .. seriously? .. I doubt very, very much that these "coaching" sessions make any difference to *these* folks.



Totally! I’m in tech and these kinds of things are always included in all-day trainings and such. These sessions give the execs their feel-good moment they get to pat themselves on the back for and they go right back to old behavior the next day.


----------



## lalame

The executive coaching I've seen has been very individualized and covers things like how to present better, handle conflict resolution, continue moving up the ladder, address any HR issues. It depends on what the perceived obstacle is in that person continuing to move up.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't really have an issue with MM identifying as white or black or whatever. Or anybody who's mixed race to identify with whatever they feel they are affiliated with. I think it's their right. My problem with MM is her (and Harry's) lies, hypocrisy and tone deafness! Like I said before, I do believe they have ton of mental health issues and need ton of therapy!


----------



## xincinsin

bisousx said:


> All that says to me is MM had time to think about what a nutjob she sounded like in the book, and retell the story in front of Oprah. I’d give MM the benefit if she didn’t spell out her feelings about Kate and those flowers in that book...


It's plausible deniability. She did claim that she didn't contribute to the book, it wasn't authorised, so she left an escape hatch: Omid got it wrong... and she is a victim again.

Kind of gobsmacked by Vanity Fair's gushing over her baking prowess again, especially the part where she "casually" threw together the banana bread while pregnant. That magazine really kowtows to her. Don't they know that a great many women work while pregnant and don't have a retinue of staffers picking up after them?
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...ty-womens-history-month-world-central-kitchen 

I don't get the Himmah donation story. If the funds for the donation came from the Royal Foundation, why is Director Sajid Mohammad announcing that it was a donation from MM? He says the donation was made in August, but the Harkles had already executed Plan Megxit in March 2020.


----------



## Lounorada

lulilu said:


> I read on twitter that HM wanted to advise the RBF on how to diversify their staff.  Declined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan snubbed: Queen to reject Sussexes' offer
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN and other members of the Royal Family have rejected Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's offer to advise the Palace on how to become a more diverse workplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



The Queen's response to that:


----------



## lulu212121

limom said:


> This woman was non problematic?
> View attachment 5038150


She did say "most"!


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> View attachment 5038140


Travolta was also on that list, and so was Vladimir Putin. IMO Wills is handsome, but looked much better with hair. I would have put Alexander Skarsgard's younger brother, Gustaf on the list, too.


----------



## Annawakes

Yeah, Putin?  Ew.


----------



## lalame

Growing up I thought Wills was the much more attractive brother... then it became Harry... I think Harry is probably a little more attractive to me now just on a looks basis. Wonder what the future holds...


----------



## Annawakes

Neither one of them look all that great to me.  Wills definitely married up in the looks department lol.  Harry?  Eh.  I’d say he and MM are about evenly matched, looks-wise.


----------



## lalame

I didn't think Kate was SUPER attractive (but obviously still attractive) early on their relationship but she aged so well. I mean, not that she doesn't have wrinkles but her facial features just settled very well with losing fat in all the right areas iykwim. I thought they were evenly matched at first but now I think he definitely married up. I mean few men are evenly matched with Kate IMO. She's crazy gorgeous for a normal woman without plastic surgery.

I think Harry married up looks-wise, especially now as he is losing his hair. But I think M is gorgeous and have before she fell out of favor with me.


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t know but her looks change all the time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

That looks really photoshopped and unfortunately so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I didn't think Kate was SUPER attractive (but obviously still attractive) early on their relationship but she aged so well. I mean, not that she doesn't have wrinkles but her facial features just settled very well with losing fat in all the right areas iykwim. I thought they were evenly matched at first but now I think he definitely married up. I mean few men are evenly matched with Kate IMO. She's crazy gorgeous for a normal woman without plastic surgery.



Jup, 10 years ago I thought she was pretty but plain. But she grew so much...into her role, her looks, her personal style.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan is still beautiful but it’s obvious she’s been having work done. Her eyes looked different in the Oprah interview than they did a year or two ago. Plastic surgery is certainly expected for a celebrity woman, particularly an actress, in California. Nothing unusual there.


----------



## Chanbal

MM has been praised for making friends 'so easily':   

*"JOHN HUMPHRYS took a blunt swipe at Meghan Markle for "squeezing Oprah Winfrey" onto the royal wedding list despite allegedly only "meeting her once" before.*
_
During the 77-year-old’s journalistic career, he was known for his tough interviews and regular calls for the monarchy to be abolished. Humphrys has taken issue with a number of royals over the years, most recently attacking Meghan and Prince Harry...

He said it was “a shame” Meghan’s father Thomas Markle Sr “was unable to go to” the couple’s wedding.

Humphrys wrote: “I suppose not everyone can be there”, because weddings are “so expensive and all that”.

He continued: “Remind me how much it cost... £32million, was it?” Just as well the taxpayer was footing the bill, eh?”

Meghan and Harry’s wedding was attended by 600 people, a smaller number were invited to the ceremony in St George’s chapel.

Among the guest list were James Corden, George and Amal Clooney, Idris Elba and a roster of A-list celebrities.

Humphrys, who was frustrated by one specific guest, fumed: “You did manage to squeeze your old friend Oprah onto the invitation list. 

“I say 'old friend' but I believe you'd met her only once before the wedding.”
_
*Humphrys sarcastically remarked “how fortunate” Meghan was “to make friends so easily*.”









						John Humphrys' swipe at Meghan for 'squeezing Oprah' on wedding list
					

JOHN HUMPHRYS took a blunt swipe at Meghan Markle for "squeezing Oprah Winfrey" onto the royal wedding list despite allegedly only "meeting her once" before.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> MM has been praised for making friends 'so easily':
> 
> *"JOHN HUMPHRYS took a blunt swipe at Meghan Markle for "squeezing Oprah Winfrey" onto the royal wedding list despite allegedly only "meeting her once" before.*
> 
> _During the 77-year-old’s journalistic career, he was known for his tough interviews and regular calls for the monarchy to be abolished. Humphrys has taken issue with a number of royals over the years, most recently attacking Meghan and Prince Harry...
> 
> He said it was “a shame” Meghan’s father Thomas Markle Sr “was unable to go to” the couple’s wedding.
> 
> Humphrys wrote: “I suppose not everyone can be there”, because weddings are “so expensive and all that”.
> 
> He continued: “Remind me how much it cost... £32million, was it?” Just as well the taxpayer was footing the bill, eh?”
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s wedding was attended by 600 people, a smaller number were invited to the ceremony in St George’s chapel.
> 
> Among the guest list were James Corden, George and Amal Clooney, Idris Elba and a roster of A-list celebrities.
> 
> Humphrys, who was frustrated by one specific guest, fumed: “You did manage to squeeze your old friend Oprah onto the invitation list.
> 
> “I say 'old friend' but I believe you'd met her only once before the wedding.”_
> 
> *Humphrys sarcastically remarked “how fortunate” Meghan was “to make friends so easily*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> John Humphrys' swipe at Meghan for 'squeezing Oprah' on wedding list
> 
> 
> JOHN HUMPHRYS took a blunt swipe at Meghan Markle for "squeezing Oprah Winfrey" onto the royal wedding list despite allegedly only "meeting her once" before.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


She had an unfair advantage: who would say No to the invite? The total dearth of her own relatives was quite breath-taking - woman grew up in a vacuum? OTOH were any of her relatives invited to her first wedding which ran for 4 days?


----------



## Chanbal

This is crazy! 

"_*Piers Morgan said a sick troll threatened to murder him in front of his three sons after he accused Meghan Markle of lying during her TV tell-all.*..

“But my three sons told me they too are all being targeted, and sent me screenshots of venomous abuse and threats of violence towards them,” he wrote of adult sons Spencer, Albert and Stanley.

“One troll vowed to murder me in front of them, and added: ‘When your dad dies, the world will have a party,'” he recalled.

The threats “made my stomach churn, especially as police are already investigating a death threat made to me and my eldest boy Spencer last month,” he wrote_."









						Piers Morgan says a troll threatened to murder him over Meghan Markle comments
					

“One troll vowed to murder me in front of them, and added: ‘When your dad dies, the world will have a party.'”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> She had an unfair advantage: who would say No to the invite? The total dearth of her own relatives was quite breath-taking - woman grew up in a vacuum? OTOH were any of her relatives invited to her first wedding which ran for 4 days?



From what I read, both parents attended her previous wedding. I believe the sister didn't go because of her limitations, beaches are difficult for wheelchair users.  

A royal wedding is not a common wedding, and both Ragland and Markle family members were apparently expecting to be invited, but MM opted for inviting famous strangers...


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Meghan is still beautiful but it’s obvious she’s been having work done. Her eyes looked different in the Oprah interview than they did a year or two ago. Plastic surgery is certainly expected for a celebrity woman, particularly an actress, in California. Nothing unusual there.



I hope she knows when to stop.... it's not a good look outside of the Ladies Who Lunch crowd. Her prev PS was very subtle... looked great. If I see her lips and cheek bones 3x like Chrissy Teigen I'll


----------



## poopsie

Lounorada said:


> The Queen's response to that:
> 
> View attachment 5038196
> 
> View attachment 5038198



Awwwww...............is that Jessica Walter? 
We just lost her the other day


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> This woman was non problematic?
> View attachment 5038150


I wasn’t around for this, but I mean... look at who she married.
Perhaps they thought that it would be a King Kong fights Godzilla to save the city sort of thing.


lalame said:


> Sometimes it's a survival tactic (specifically in youth). I don't know what her experience was actually like but I have empathy on this issue because of my experience. When I was younger, I wished deeply I wasn't a POC... the bullying, judgments, little microaggressions were very difficult to deal with on top of all the other typical teenage issues. It's very alienating to be a minority within a group. It wasn't until I went to college, much bigger environment, more people, more "mes", more "others," that I finally felt comfortable embracing my culture. So it could've been she grew to accept it slowly and, especially these days, actually get some benefit out of it.
> 
> If it's true that she wasn't especially close to her mom growing up, and presumably not her mom's family either, then that could've added to feeling more one side culturally.


First things first, I’m sorry these things happened to you and I’m glad you feel better. 

With MM, I do want to empathise and have had similar experiences but the problem is, given her track record of exploiting and lying about sensitive issues to gain publicity and sympathy,
it is the boy who cried wolf for me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

K


xincinsin said:


> It's plausible deniability. She did claim that she didn't contribute to the book, it wasn't authorised, so she left an escape hatch: Omid got it wrong... and she is a victim again.
> 
> Kind of gobsmacked by Vanity Fair's gushing over her baking prowess again, especially the part where she "casually" threw together the banana bread while pregnant. That magazine really kowtows to her. Don't they know that a great many women work while pregnant and don't have a retinue of staffers picking up after them?
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...ty-womens-history-month-world-central-kitchen
> 
> I don't get the Himmah donation story. If the funds for the donation came from the Royal Foundation, why is Director Sajid Mohammad announcing that it was a donation from MM? He says the donation was made in August, but the Harkles had already executed Plan Megxit in March 2020.


On the Himmah note, I bet world kitchen would be a little annoyed to find out a similar charity got 10k and they got a stale cake.

Isn’t it interesting that when they were oppressed royals they were giving away thousands to charity but now they are independent millionaire entrepreneurs the charities are getting cakes and sandwiches?


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> K
> 
> On the Himmah note, I bet world kitchen would be a little annoyed to find out a similar charity got 10k and they got a stale cake.
> 
> Isn’t it interesting that when they were oppressed royals they were giving away thousands to charity but now they are independent millionaire entrepreneurs the charities are getting cakes and sandwiches?



H&M rule #1: always spend other people’s money [OPM], never our own.
H&M rule #2: see #1


----------



## Corneto

lalame said:


> The executive coaching I've seen has been very individualized and covers things like how to present better, handle conflict resolution, continue moving up the ladder, address any HR issues. It depends on what the perceived obstacle is in that person continuing to move up.


Thank you from all the trained, educated and effective coaches out here. I am one of them. And I assure you that I (and many others) are appalled that the Duke has been thrust out there as some kind of spokesperson for any aspect of this topic which, BTW is about mental health treatment - not executive (or any other type) of coaching.
To paint this profession as some kind of empty add-on for the C-suite, simply because BetterUp made a disastrous publicity play, skirts really close to the “cancel” mentality so rampant across so many topics these days.
‘Let’s not get so caught up in this manufactured melodrama that we start to exhibit the attributes of the protagonists.
’


’


----------



## duna

DeMonica said:


> People assume - often wrongly. I'm a Caucasian with light complexion who travelled a lot, lived in several countries, even on several continents. I have experienced and seen a lot. Sometimes it's funny to be mistaken for something you are not, but, believe me, it's oftentimes a painful experience.



This reminds me of when I was a teenager in Italy (I'm half British and half Italian and have lived in both countries) with my 2 Italian cousins, we were all 3 blond with blue eyes. Strangers would always mistake us for tourists and speak to us in terrible english and ask us where we were from


----------



## limom

Corneto said:


> Thank you from all the trained, educated and effective coaches out here. I am one of them. And I assure you that I (and many others) are appalled that the Duke has been thrust out there as some kind of spokesperson for any aspect of this topic which, BTW is about mental health treatment - not executive (or any other type) of coaching.
> To paint this profession as some kind of empty add-on for the C-suite, simply because BetterUp made a disastrous publicity play, skirts really close to the “cancel” mentality so rampant across so many topics these days.
> ‘Let’s not get so caught up in this manufactured melodrama that we start to exhibit the attributes of the protagonists.
> ’
> 
> 
> ’


There is no cancelling in Corporate America atm.
As a sales pro, I am always amazed at what firms would attempt to increase profitability and performance.
Some approaches work, some don’t.
What is your domain of expertise?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> On the Himmah note, I bet world kitchen would be a little annoyed to find out a similar charity got 10k and they got a stale cake.
> 
> Isn’t it interesting that when they were oppressed royals they were giving away thousands to charity but now they are independent millionaire entrepreneurs the charities are getting cakes and sandwiches?


Since these women are obviously helping the needy, perhaps MM was imitating Marie Antoinette with her famous quote, "Let them eat cake."


----------



## Jktgal

Corneto said:


> ...because BetterUp made a disastrous publicity play, skirts really close to the “cancel” mentality so rampant across so many topics these days.



It's good to have an industry insider to hear how they feel about this appointment. Another rationale to doing with royalties - they take away resources from the real professionals and deemed superfluous.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> these shows - starting with The View which was the first - are supposed to be from different points of view - women of varying ages, etc.  And The View does have different opinions - but not on this couple.



I haven't watched The View probably since Walters left but what I see is that it is 4 people with one view that gang on up one person with another view who really is more of a moderate that the other view.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> I haven't watched The View probably since Walters left but what I see is that it is 4 people with one view that gang on up one person with another view who really is more of a moderate that the other view.


Friday is the only day, worth watching.
I tape and FF as they are still  able to get the best guests.
They might get the first live interview of the wonder couple.


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> I haven't watched The View probably since Walters left but what I see is that it is 4 people with one view that gang on up one person with another view who really is more of a moderate that the other view.


I rarely watch the View except at manicurists where it is on anyway (not that I have had my nails done in a while...). It reminds me of all the US football (not soccer) commentators. They are presented four at a time on the screen all talking at the same time, cant understand a word


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

limom said:


> This woman was non problematic?
> View attachment 5038150


Comparatively 


I'll give props to both her and her randy ex though, both their daughters seem very well adjusted and have, as far as I can remember, never brought any shame on the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Friday is the only day, worth watching.
> I tape and FF as they are still  able to get the best guests.
> They might get the first live interview of the wonder couple.


Anna Navarro is often on Fridays.  I like her.  She's smart, well informed with a sense of humor.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Anna Navarro is often on Fridays.  I like her.  She's smart, well informed with a sense of humor.


Yep
the interview..


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy!
> 
> "_*Piers Morgan said a sick troll threatened to murder him in front of his three sons after he accused Meghan Markle of lying during her TV tell-all.*..
> 
> “But my three sons told me they too are all being targeted, and sent me screenshots of venomous abuse and threats of violence towards them,” he wrote of adult sons Spencer, Albert and Stanley.
> 
> “One troll vowed to murder me in front of them, and added: ‘When your dad dies, the world will have a party,'” he recalled.
> 
> The threats “made my stomach churn, especially as police are already investigating a death threat made to me and my eldest boy Spencer last month,” he wrote_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan says a troll threatened to murder him over Meghan Markle comments
> 
> 
> “One troll vowed to murder me in front of them, and added: ‘When your dad dies, the world will have a party.'”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Hmm. Meghan is a huge liar. Fact. Piers calls her out and HE gets death threats, probably from her sugars? I guess they don't follow the MM mantra of *COMPASSION. *Maybe Harry could farm out some lifestyle coaches for those who want to kill Piers in front of his own children, and find some alternative creative activations as outlets for their anger. Let me guess: they're "fighting" for unity and compassion.


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> I haven't watched The View probably since Walters left but what I see is that it is 4 people with one view that gang on up one person with another view who really is more of a moderate that the other view.



I don't have the stomach to watch that show. I see snippets of it once in a rare while. From what I gather they're a bunch of grossly overpaid idiotic shrieking hypocritical screeching shrews who think they're important. No wonder they love Meghan Markle.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Friday is the only day, worth watching.
> I tape and FF as they are still  able to get the best guests.
> They might get the first live interview of the wonder couple.


it would be pointless for them to go on the view (or pointless to watch)....the "ladies" have already said they all support H&M so it would be another Oprah-like propaganda show


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> it would be pointless for them to go on the view (or pointless to watch)....the "ladies" have already said they all support H&M so it would be another Oprah-like propaganda show


It depends. If they have anything to sell, you’d better believe that they will show up there, imho.
And sometimes, live, one gets a true show of one’s personality..


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> It depends. If they have anything to sell, you’d better believe that they will show up there, imho.
> And sometimes, live, one gets a true show of one’s personality..


well I'm quite sure they would be spoon fed friendly questions and the "ladies" would be making negative comments about the RF  so.....nothing to lose IMO
Unless Anna has something new to say - but probably not on this topic.  Meghan is holding the WOC card and it's getting them every benefit of the doubt


----------



## Chanbal

Don't know who this person is, but he doesn't sound polite.  

"_D.B. Woodside told Entertainment Tonight that Meghan Markle is strong and resilient and backed her to come out on top in her feud with the Royal Family. The former Suits actor stated the Royal Family need to back off and apologise to the Duchess of Sussex.

Mr Woodside said: "Listen, the thing about her is she is strong and she is resilient.

"If they think that this kind of stuff is going to knock her off her game for very long, they picked the wrong woman to mess with.

"She is the wrong woman to mess with, they need to back up.

"[They need to] *back off and apologise because she is not the one.*_"









						'Wrong woman to mess with!' Royals warned apologise to Meghan Markle
					

THE Royal Family has been told to apologise to Meghan Markle and warned not to "mess with" the Duchess of Sussex by a former Suits actor.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if she is a member here. 

"_Media in the US has generally been very sympathetic to the Sussexes, compared to the UK where the reaction has been mixed. However, one American wrote into a British royal podcast to explain that the US public have actually noticed there are “lots of holes” in Meghan and Harry’s story. They added that their “poor little rich couple” narrative during a pandemic is “ridiculous”...
_
*She claimed that most of the people she knows in the US are not as pro-Sussex as the media seems to be.*"









						Meghan and Harry’s interview seen as ‘ridiculous’ by American people
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey was praised by the American press  but US citizens are generally less convinced, a fascinating comment suggests.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2013,   








						Prince Harry: I've killed in Afghanistan. But Dad wants me to act like a prince
					

At end of four-month tour, Captain Wales describes his time at Camp Bastion and frustration with sections of the media




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Don't know who this person is, but he doesn't sound polite.
> 
> "_D.B. Woodside told Entertainment Tonight that Meghan Markle is strong and resilient and backed her to come out on top in her feud with the Royal Family. The former Suits actor stated the Royal Family need to back off and apologise to the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Mr Woodside said: "Listen, the thing about her is she is strong and she is resilient.
> 
> "If they think that this kind of stuff is going to knock her off her game for very long, they picked the wrong woman to mess with.
> 
> "She is the wrong woman to mess with, they need to back up.
> 
> "[They need to] *back off and apologise because she is not the one.*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Wrong woman to mess with!' Royals warned apologise to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been told to apologise to Meghan Markle and warned not to "mess with" the Duchess of Sussex by a former Suits actor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


So is she a woman warrior or a wounded bird?  Or whatever the *situation calls for?

*change “situation” to “audience“.


----------



## Chanbal

The title says almost everything! 


_According to royal expert, Katie Nicholl, the pair want to be involved in discussions around improving diversity within the royal institution. However, commenting on the Express.co.uk story, readers reacted with fury over the offer and praised the Queen for snubbing the Sussexes. One person said: "*So kind of them to offer their inexperience.*"
...
"*Are they looking for a way back into free everything*?"

Another said: "I nearly fell off me chair laughing! *Who are they to 'advise' anyone?*_"









						'Gobsmacked!' Britons furious after Meghan and Harry offer of advice
					

BRITONS have reacted with fury following Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's offer to advise the Royal Family.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> @OriginalBalenciaga @sdkitty @SomethingGoodCanWork
> Perhaps  post #54,391 brings clarity?


Interesting....keeps talking about "lads".....as we've been saying he's a man-boy


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Interesting....keeps talking about "lads".....as we've been saying he's a man-boy



So much revealed about him in this clip.
Lads — As if that makes it all ok.  Odd.  He lashes out at the media with his usual hateful words. Somehow he thinks it is ok for him to speak hateful words, but no one else?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *I wonder if she is a member here.*
> 
> "_Media in the US has generally been very sympathetic to the Sussexes, compared to the UK where the reaction has been mixed. However, one American wrote into a British royal podcast to explain that the US public have actually noticed there are “lots of holes” in Meghan and Harry’s story. They added that their “poor little rich couple” narrative during a pandemic is “ridiculous”..._
> 
> *She claimed that most of the people she knows in the US are not as pro-Sussex as the media seems to be.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s interview seen as ‘ridiculous’ by American people
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey was praised by the American press  but US citizens are generally less convinced, a fascinating comment suggests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



If not, she should be. She'd fit right in.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Yep
> the interview..



This is great.
Host - no one hates Diana.
Lady Colin is typing....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Latest Harry Markle — all about the titles, etc.

Ouch, blush, blank blankety media :
_Since then, some less informed Americans believed the tale of woe that the Sussexes gave to OW that was full of misinformation and disinformation, but the tide is turning as media outlets who backed them realized they looked a bit stupid when they didn’t check some basic facts. Most people know that you can’t get married without witnesses, and that the title of prince is for male children and grandchildren of the Monarch only. Thus, MM was bleating falsehoods, and used the race card to stir up a fake story to garner sympathy and victim points_









						31 March, 2021 ~ The Sussex Review
					

Staunch monarchists have waited for 31 March, 2021 to arrive as they trust in Her Majesty to do the right thing on the official date for the Sussex review. Unfortunately, I don’t share their …




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Don't know who this person is, but he doesn't sound polite.
> 
> "_D.B. Woodside told Entertainment Tonight that Meghan Markle is strong and resilient and backed her to come out on top in her feud with the Royal Family. The former Suits actor stated the Royal Family need to back off and apologise to the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Mr Woodside said: "Listen, the thing about her is she is strong and she is resilient.
> 
> "If they think that this kind of stuff is going to knock her off her game for very long, they picked the wrong woman to mess with.
> 
> "She is the wrong woman to mess with, they need to back up.
> 
> "[They need to] *back off and apologise because she is not the one.*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Wrong woman to mess with!' Royals warned apologise to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been told to apologise to Meghan Markle and warned not to "mess with" the Duchess of Sussex by a former Suits actor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Is this guy’s USP being ‘sassy’? Because he’s not very good at it. 
What a bizarre thing to say. Why would an incredibly powerful institution be intimidated by even the most empowered LA actress?
Also apologise for what? They haven’t said anything negative about her to my knowledge?


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Don't know who this person is, but he doesn't sound polite.
> 
> "_D.B. Woodside told Entertainment Tonight that Meghan Markle is strong and resilient and backed her to come out on top in her feud with the Royal Family. The former Suits actor stated the Royal Family need to back off and apologise to the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Mr Woodside said: "Listen, the thing about her is she is strong and she is resilient.
> 
> "If they think that this kind of stuff is going to knock her off her game for very long, they picked the wrong woman to mess with.
> 
> "She is the wrong woman to mess with, they need to back up.
> 
> "[They need to] *back off and apologise because she is not the one.*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Wrong woman to mess with!' Royals warned apologise to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been told to apologise to Meghan Markle and warned not to "mess with" the Duchess of Sussex by a former Suits actor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Some no name actor trying to get his name in print.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Latest Harry Markle — all about the titles, etc.
> 
> Ouch, blush, blank blankety media :
> _Since then, some less informed Americans believed the tale of woe that the Sussexes gave to OW that was full of misinformation and disinformation, but the tide is turning as media outlets who backed them realized they looked a bit stupid when they didn’t check some basic facts. Most people know that you can’t get married without witnesses, and that the title of prince is for male children and grandchildren of the Monarch only. Thus, MM was bleating falsehoods, and used the race card to stir up a fake story to garner sympathy and victim points_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 31 March, 2021 ~ The Sussex Review
> 
> 
> Staunch monarchists have waited for 31 March, 2021 to arrive as they trust in Her Majesty to do the right thing on the official date for the Sussex review. Unfortunately, I don’t share their …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com


JCMH and MM sliced and diced with precision. 

 the  album of MM pictures at the very bottom of this article are fascinating. When the mask slips there is a not nice person underneath, maybe the bondage one explains the hold over Harry and the one of her smoking looks like it could have been taken on a yacht.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *Don't know who this person is*, but he doesn't sound polite.
> 
> "_D.B. Woodside told Entertainment Tonight that Meghan Markle is strong and resilient and backed her to come out on top in her feud with the Royal Family. The former Suits actor stated the Royal Family need to back off and apologise to the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Mr Woodside said: "Listen, the thing about her is she is strong and she is resilient.
> 
> "If they think that this kind of stuff is going to knock her off her game for very long, they picked the wrong woman to mess with.
> 
> "She is the wrong woman to mess with, they need to back up.
> 
> "[They need to] *back off and apologise because she is not the one.*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Wrong woman to mess with!' Royals warned apologise to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been told to apologise to Meghan Markle and warned not to "mess with" the Duchess of Sussex by a former Suits actor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



He's a middle-aged character actor who appeared on several episodes of _Suits_. You might have seen him on other shows, he used to be on _24, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, _and_ Lucifer. _


----------



## Aminamina

lalame said:


> To be fair to M, she did say during the Oprah interview too that Kate brought her flowers and apologized - and she thought she did all the right things and all was forgiven.


Right. There’s no noble cell in her.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Latest Harry Markle — all about the titles, etc.
> 
> Ouch, blush, blank blankety media :
> _Since then, some less informed Americans believed the tale of woe that the Sussexes gave to OW that was full of misinformation and disinformation, but the tide is turning as media outlets who backed them realized they looked a bit stupid when they didn’t check some basic facts. Most people know that you can’t get married without witnesses, and that the title of prince is for male children and grandchildren of the Monarch only. Thus, MM was bleating falsehoods, and used the race card to stir up a fake story to garner sympathy and victim points_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 31 March, 2021 ~ The Sussex Review
> 
> 
> Staunch monarchists have waited for 31 March, 2021 to arrive as they trust in Her Majesty to do the right thing on the official date for the Sussex review. Unfortunately, I don’t share their …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com



The author or authors of this article wrote a very good review on MM&H, hope the Palace got a copy of it. This statement makes total sense: 
"_The removal of dukedom of Sussex is a key element in restoring the faith of the People, and while some say it doesn’t matter because the titles are tainted, the problem is that they are still used in a fashion that indicates that they represent the UK. Those ties need to be severed, and while the dukedom exists, it still allows them some status in the UK. Again, their behaviour has been seditious and traitorous, and the paltry attempt to try and say they support The Queen (while stabbing everyone else in the back) was nothing more than a word salad disclaimer. That is reason enough to remove the titles, besides the obvious monetization of them._"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This is great.
> Host - no one hates Diana.
> Lady Colin is typing....



I don't think she hates her. She has lots of good things to say about her, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if she is a member here.
> 
> "_Media in the US has generally been very sympathetic to the Sussexes, compared to the UK where the reaction has been mixed. However, one American wrote into a British royal podcast to explain that the US public have actually noticed there are “lots of holes” in Meghan and Harry’s story. They added that their “poor little rich couple” narrative during a pandemic is “ridiculous”..._
> 
> *She claimed that most of the people she knows in the US are not as pro-Sussex as the media seems to be.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s interview seen as ‘ridiculous’ by American people
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey was praised by the American press  but US citizens are generally less convinced, a fascinating comment suggests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Most of us don't care that much! She is NOT our Marmite.


----------



## Annawakes

Just curious, do other people (outside of this thread) use the term “word salad”?  I thought that was something coined by our illustrious tpf members!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think she hates her. She has lots of good things to say about her, too.


I know, I just couldn’t resist the joke 


Annawakes said:


> Just curious, do other people (outside of this thread) use the term “word salad”?  I thought that was something coined by our illustrious tpf members!


No, unfortunately not, it’s quite a widely used term in English and there is a very similar idiom in German.


----------



## bisousx

Annawakes said:


> Just curious, do other people (outside of this thread) use the term “word salad”?  I thought that was something coined by our illustrious tpf members!



I first learned about the word here on TPF, but it is a real term describing a real epidemic among millennials who want to sound more sophisticated than they are. If I see the words “ethereal”, “reimagining” or “multifaceted”, the salad is off to a good start.


----------



## poopsie

duna said:


> This reminds me of when I was a teenager in Italy (I'm half British and half Italian and have lived in both countries) with my 2 Italian cousins, we were all 3 blond with blue eyes. Strangers would always mistake us for tourists and speak to us in terrible english and ask us where we were from



Back in the early 80's I used to spend a few months every year in Vallarta. Everyone thought I was Cuban. I have sun kissed brunette hair and blue eyes. Granted I was very tan in those days.  My Spanish is a mix of border and book. Tried to tell them I had no Cuba in me, but I was always La Cubana. 
better than being called pinche gringa guera


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they sympathetic or are they monetizing him?  When he doesn’t deliver the connections, the companies won’t be interested.  IMO his experience will be similar to Sarah’s and the Duke of Windsor‘s. Lots of initial interest, then it falls off. He must deliver at the highest level. Anything less, it’s over. One surly answer to the inane questions [as he is known to do], one frowny face, one hypocritical move - no one will care. To an extent, America‘s corporate world has much tougher standards than the BRF.  Without his Palace minders, will he measure up?


*THIS, THIS, THIS* .. a true story back in my Bain Management Consulting company days .. when they hired a former Heisman Trophy winner, a man who ran for State Senator (_in  NJ - he didn't win_), but "*supposedly*" had *MANY*, *MANY *connections at the highest level.  When I met him personally (_since I was asked to build him a - yeah, get this .. a "Calendar System" since he had appointment after appointment at 15-minute increments_), I could *NOT believe how utterly STUPID* this man was .. WOW!!!!  I knew at that time, that the company had made a HUGE mistake because this guy had ZERO ideas on how to "build" a business .. he was just a schmoozer .. that's it!!  Well, sure enough, after a year (_and mind you - this guy was making some serious $$$$$_), the CEO said "_enough - he's got to go_".  Well, as you might suspect .. the guy had a contract that was iron-clad, and he walked away with a severance payment of millions of dollars .. mind you, the rest of us (_having just gone through a major 30% layoff_) .. were just sick to our stomach.  Having a "name" or "title" means *NOTHING *.. and you are so right in that if he doesn't actually *KNOW HOW* to bring in the muckie-mucks .. he will be as useless as this guy was and will be told to 'walk-away' (_quietly of course_)!!


----------



## Corneto

limom said:


> There is no cancelling in Corporate America atm.
> As a sales pro, I am always amazed at what firms would attempt to increase profitability and performance.
> Some approaches work, some don’t.
> What is your domain of expertise?


Hi -
Sorry for the delay in responding.
Until recently, my work focused on what you'd consider "standard" coaching, primarily targeting individuals in organizations that had been tagged as "high potential" or a part of another leadership development program. It had all the usual and customary elements (communication style, conflict management, negotiation and delegation,  managing former peers, etc) as well as behavioral coaching around areas like time management (including work life balance). Most heavily since COVID, managing/setting boundaries since for so many work is at home and *WOMEN* are finding themselves being expected to be all things to all people - this is a new area for "coaching" but incorporates many of the same negotiation, communication and delegation skills we used to only talk about relative to the job.

On the Executive side, it's a whole different story. The majority of my practice is in the Diversity and Inclusion space and you'd be amazed at some of the conversations these CEO's are now being _*forced *_to have around topics like real life racism, discrimination of all types and equity on the ground - not just on their websites. As such, while the traditional executive level topics including (the elusive) presence, influence and persuasion, etc. are still in demand, there's a much broader (and almost comically urgent) market for coaching on how to even *discuss *the social and political issues they can no longer avoid. So coaching about anti-racism, addressing power and privilege, cross cultural competency (or how to engage with people who are not_ just like you_) and board engagement strategies are hot topics.

While some of these trends certainly veer away from the historical concept of a coach - primarily focused on skill building rather than more behavioral topics, none of this comes near to giving guidance on authentic mental health issues. I wouldn't dream of it. I do however maintain contact with those I know who are qualified to offer this type of counsel - and I'll readily refer them if that's the type of help they need. It's one of those unwritten rules to maintain that boundary between you and your coaching clients, particularly in areas of depression and anxiety that go beyond the usual "stress management" type guidance used in the coaching context.

Well this got long. lol. But thanks for asking. Hope this helps clarify and give some perspective on why this whole BetterUp thing grinds my guts.


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Just curious, do other people (outside of this thread) use the term “word salad”?  I thought that was something coined by our illustrious tpf members!


Yes. I have seen it on other sites and even a journalist or two using it as well. Did they copy us? Lol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Have we discussed this?

Queen to 'reach out' to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to discuss Archie's royal title

I am honestly reading this as them laying the bait / trying to put pressure on the BRF to act because I really don't think the Queen could even entertain the thought without losing a massive chunk of respect.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *THIS, THIS, THIS* .. a true story back in my Bain Management Consulting company days .. when they hired a former Heisman Trophy winner, a man who ran for State Senator (_in  NJ - he didn't win_), but "*supposedly*" had *MANY*, *MANY *connections at the highest level.  When I met him personally (_since I was asked to build him a - yeah, get this .. a "Calendar System" since he had appointment after appointment at 15-minute increments_), I could *NOT believe how utterly STUPID* this man was .. WOW!!!!  I knew at that time, that the company had made a HUGE mistake because this guy had ZERO ideas on how to "build" a business .. he was just a schmoozer .. that's it!!  Well, sure enough, after a year (_and mind you - this guy was making some serious $$$$$_), the CEO said "_enough - he's got to go_".  Well, as you might suspect .. the guy had a contract that was iron-clad, and he walked away with a severance payment of millions of dollars .. mind you, the rest of us (_having just gone through a major 30% layoff_) .. were just sick to our stomach.  Having a "name" or "title" means *NOTHING *.. and you are so right in that if he doesn't actually *KNOW HOW* to bring in the muckie-mucks .. he will be as useless as this guy was and will be told to 'walk-away' (_quietly of course_)!!


I don’t even think Harry is smart enough or clever enough to schmooze.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we discussed this?
> 
> Queen to 'reach out' to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to discuss Archie's royal title
> 
> I am honestly reading this as them laying the bait / trying to put pressure on the BRF to act because I really don't think the Queen could even entertain the thought without losing a massive chunk of respect.


All she could say is that if they want him to have a title, the reality is that it is already there for him to use,i.e. Earl of Dumbarton.  I do agree that this could just be a Harkle plant.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I don’t even think Harry is smart enough or clever enough to schmooze.



We saw an example of Harry's schmoozing ability back in 2019 at the Lion King premiere when he was trying to pimp out Meghan for voiceover work. This was well before they told anyone they were jumping ship but it is so obvious now they were already trying hard to score some cash.

Harry: You do know she does voiceovers?
Bob Igor: Oh really? Ah...
Harry: Did you know that?
Bob Igor: I did not know that... (Looking away)
Harry: You seem surprised! She's really interested.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we discussed this?
> 
> Queen to 'reach out' to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to discuss Archie's royal title
> 
> I am honestly reading this as them laying the bait / trying to put pressure on the BRF to act because I really don't think the Queen could even entertain the thought without losing a massive chunk of respect.



I don't think The Queen would be obligated one iota to reach out to the grifters who claimed they wanted "independence". Being that there is a process already in place, this is totally unnecessary. Didn't M&H claim they didn't want Archie to have a title? Then M turns around and said it was because of racism that Archie doesn't have a title NOW. These two liars must be stopped. They embarrass themselves by being so stupid, greedy and anything but compassionate.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> We saw an example of Harry's schmoozing ability back in 2019 at the Lion King premiere when he was trying to pimp out Meghan for voiceover work. This was well before they told anyone they were jumping ship but it is so obvious now they were already trying hard to score some cash.
> 
> Harry: You do know she does voiceovers?
> Bob Igor: Oh really? Ah...
> Harry: Did you know that?
> Bob Igor: I did not know that... (Looking away)
> Harry: You seem surprised! She's really interested.



Right. It was painful to watch. Then M's "performance" at the Disney elephant voiceover job was pathetic. I don't hear about any Hollywood A-Listers begging her to be in any movie. Surprise!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we discussed this?
> 
> Queen to 'reach out' to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to discuss Archie's royal title
> 
> I am honestly reading this as them laying the bait / trying to put pressure on the BRF to act because I really don't think the Queen could even entertain the thought without losing a massive chunk of respect.


maybe she has to explain the whole rules/tradition to them since they don't seem to understand


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> We saw an example of Harry's schmoozing ability back in 2019 at the Lion King premiere when he was trying to pimp out Meghan for voiceover work. This was well before they told anyone they were jumping ship but it is so obvious now they were already trying hard to score some cash.
> 
> Harry: You do know she does voiceovers?
> Bob Igor: Oh really? Ah...
> Harry: Did you know that?
> Bob Igor: I did not know that... (Looking away)
> Harry: You seem surprised! She's really interested.


but she got the job, right?


----------



## Chanbal

MM has not always been divisive: 

"_JEREMY CLARKSON messaged his "old foe" Piers Morgan with words of support, following the latter's disbelief over Meghan Markle's mental health claims during a segment of Good Morning Britain resulted in him abruptly handing in his resignation to ITV._

_Now the former Good Morning Britain host has revealed how his former nemesis, sent him a touching message of support after he was told to “apologise” or quit his role on ITV,  after he publicly stated he disbelieved Meghan Markle’s claims during an interview with Oprah Winfrey about the__ Royal Family._"









						Jeremy Clarkson’s text to Piers Morgan after Meghan Markle row erupted 'I'm on your side'
					

JEREMY CLARKSON messaged his "old foe" Piers Morgan with words of support, following the latter's disbelief over Meghan Markle's mental health claims during a segment of Good Morning Britain resulted in him abruptly handing in his resignation to ITV.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but she got the job, right?



She did. She got one gig narrating a nature documentary. Disney hasn't exactly been knocking down her door to do more for them. Didn't her agent try to get her a role in a Marvel movie? There is no way _that_ was going to happen.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lulilu said:


> I read on twitter that HM wanted to advise the RBF on how to diversify their staff.  Declined.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan snubbed: Queen to reject Sussexes' offer
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN and other members of the Royal Family have rejected Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's offer to advise the Palace on how to become a more diverse workplace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



They have some nerve. Not news to anyone. I know the queen wants to tell her to 'bugger off' I think, is the phrase they use in UK?


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Oh FFS
> Meghan is half WHITE
> her father's side of the family is WHITE
> her husband and his family are all WHITE
> if anyone is racist it is H&M
> 
> could this strategist be @purseinsanity son's prof?


.. and let us not forget, all of her *THREE HUSBANDS* were .. [wait for it] .. *WHITE*!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 There is a link on the article you have posted with a petition to remove MM&H's titles. Some of comments are from the US, and as far as I understood, these comments (petition) are sent quarterly to QE. There is one (at least) that uses the expression “_Rent a Royal_” related to JCMH's new jobs.  









						PETITION ~ A Message To Her Majesty, The Queen, Regarding The Removal Of The Titles Associated With The Dukedom Of Sussex.
					

This is a petition, for the People, by the People to request that Your Majesty considers the following in the best interests of the nation, and …




					harrymarkle.substack.com


----------



## Jayne1

poopsie said:


> Oh FFS
> Meghan is half WHITE
> her father's side of the family is WHITE
> her husband and his family are all WHITE
> if anyone is racist it is H&M
> 
> could this strategist be @purseinsanity son's prof?


I thought she was 1/4 because her mom is half?  Where did I read that and where did I read about O's one drop rule.  It was here, wasn't it?


limom said:


> Yep
> the interview..



Very very funny!


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2013,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: I've killed in Afghanistan. But Dad wants me to act like a prince
> 
> 
> At end of four-month tour, Captain Wales describes his time at Camp Bastion and frustration with sections of the media
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


When I read this it's obvious that HE's trapped in a life he's not comfortable with, capable to live in,  hasn't got the right personality for - a life that he would never choose for himself or should have been chosen for him. I'm _almost_ sorry for him. Probably he fit in the rich party crowd well, and felt happy in the army, but this prince thing was/is obviously not his forte. Yet, he's not brave enough to stand up an leave it ALL behind. He's too greedy and coddled to do it. Yes, he's entitled to his privacy and be himself. The only problem with it is that he seems to like the perks that come with the job (Prince), and he couldn't seem to grasp then nor now, that he's entitled to receive those perks only if he does the job because the money, the relatively care free life is provided for him as Prince Henry, son of the heir apparent, not for Harry Wales or Mountbatten-Windsor, the private person by the British taxpayers. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Latest Harry Markle — all about the titles, etc.
> 
> Ouch, blush, blank blankety media :
> _Since then, some less informed Americans believed the tale of woe that the Sussexes gave to OW that was full of misinformation and disinformation, but the tide is turning as media outlets who backed them realized they looked a bit stupid when they didn’t check some basic facts. Most people know that you can’t get married without witnesses, and that the title of prince is for male children and grandchildren of the Monarch only. Thus, MM was bleating falsehoods, and used the race card to stir up a fake story to garner sympathy and victim points_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 31 March, 2021 ~ The Sussex Review
> 
> 
> Staunch monarchists have waited for 31 March, 2021 to arrive as they trust in Her Majesty to do the right thing on the official date for the Sussex review. Unfortunately, I don’t share their …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com


It was a bit long, but spot on. This whole Oprah interview and the circus around it didn't just smear the reputation of the BRF but of the whole UK and it's a crime against freedom of speech. I know the BRF can be blamed for many thing but this time they seem to be getting the beating for nothing. I understand that MM would do everything to keep her name in the media, and as a narcissist no price is too high to get her closer to her aim - which is probably world domination, but it's beyond my comprehension how Harry can assist to this, to drag his family and his country through the mud for the folly of a woman and his revenge. 
I love history. IMO what he does would have been considered high treason in Middle Ages.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 There is a link on the article you have posted with a petition to remove MM&H's titles. Some of comments are from the US, and as far as I understood, these comments (petition) are sent quarterly to QE. There is one (at least) that uses the expression “_Rent a Royal_” related to JCMH's new jobs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PETITION ~ A Message To Her Majesty, The Queen, Regarding The Removal Of The Titles Associated With The Dukedom Of Sussex.
> 
> 
> This is a petition, for the People, by the People to request that Your Majesty considers the following in the best interests of the nation, and …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.substack.com


Sooner or later they will end up on Cameo. If the price is right....


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> Just curious, do other people (outside of this thread) use the term “word salad”?  I thought that was something coined by our illustrious tpf members!


Great question
i love the folks in this thread - curious


----------



## Lounorada

poopsie said:


> Awwwww...............is that Jessica Walter?
> We just lost her the other day


Ohhh nooo, that's so sad  I hadn't heard about her passing Yep, that's her in the gif.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> She did. She got one gig narrating a nature documentary. Disney hasn't exactly been knocking down her door to do more for them. Didn't her agent try to get her a role in a Marvel movie? There is no way _that_ was going to happen.


You have to admit that with all the role-playing she is doing now, her acting skills are improving. Just a few expressions used repeatedly, but hey, she's got a lot of people convinced! She has got the starry-eyed look down pat, and her "I can't believe this is happening to ME" expression is brainwashing a lot of people who don't parse what she says.

I've been watching Leilani of Barbados do exactly that: parse the interview.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm gonna leave this here, just in case the trapped Duke claims he never got to play or hang out with a dog when he was a child, much like he never went on a bike ride with his parents


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we discussed this?
> 
> Queen to 'reach out' to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to discuss Archie's royal title
> 
> I am honestly reading this as them laying the bait / trying to put pressure on the BRF to act because I really don't think the Queen could even entertain the thought without losing a massive chunk of respect.


Yes, I read this as another Markle paid announcement hoping to get some pick ups to try a make it something. Reading this back it’s as close to a ‘word salad’ sentence that hopefully I’ll ever get.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm gonna leave this here, just in case the trapped Duke claims he never got to play or hang out with a dog when he was a child, much like he never went on a bike ride with his parents



Love this! We should post more pics of what Harry's childhood was really like, before they deconstruct it and rebuild it in her image as she has redone hers (only child? no family? whut?)

I barfed when I was watching a Youtube video uploaded by The List (US-based) which described MM as a highly sought-after actress. Are they serious?  (A great many comments shared my disbelief)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

From Jan 2020

Thomas Markle shares photos and video of Meghan's childhood










						Thomas Markle opens up Meghan's childhood with trove of unseen photos
					

The 75-year-old described his love and pride after the birth of his daughter in August 1981 and opened his extraordinary family album for Britain's Channel 5 film watched by 1.2million people.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

At supermarket check stands and news outlets this week in the US, tabloid coverage of the "privacy seeking" Sussexes.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> You have to admit that with all the role-playing she is doing now, her acting skills are improving. Just a few expressions used repeatedly, but hey, she's got a lot of people convinced! She has got the starry-eyed look down pat, and her "I can't believe this is happening to ME" expression is brainwashing a lot of people who don't parse what she says.
> 
> I've been watching Leilani of Barbados do exactly that: parse the interview.



It's a great video, it's good that people are not ignoring MM&H's lies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Love this! We should post more pics of what Harry's childhood was really like, before they deconstruct it and rebuild it in her image as she has redone hers (only child? no family? whut?)
> 
> I barfed when I was watching a Youtube video uploaded by The List (US-based) which described MM as a highly sought-after actress. Are they serious?  (A great many comments shared my disbelief)


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> Love this! We should post more pics of what Harry's childhood was really like, before they deconstruct it and rebuild it in her image as she has redone hers (only child? no family? whut?)
> 
> I barfed when I was watching a Youtube video uploaded by The List (US-based) which described MM as a highly sought-after actress. Are they serious?  (A great many comments shared my disbelief)


----------



## bellecate




----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> From Jan 2020
> 
> Thomas Markle shares photos and video of Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle opens up Meghan's childhood with trove of unseen photos
> 
> 
> The 75-year-old described his love and pride after the birth of his daughter in August 1981 and opened his extraordinary family album for Britain's Channel 5 film watched by 1.2million people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wow, I've never seen this article before. Do you know when this 90-minute bombshell documentary is going to be released?


----------



## lalame

I was so confused by Harry saying during that interview he couldn't just ride bikes with his dad when he was younger.... all that land, multiple estates... how can the boy have been deprived of bike riding if he wanted it?   Was he talking about city bike riding? Who really does that with a young child anyway?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I was so confused by Harry saying during that interview he couldn't just ride bikes with his dad when he was younger.... all that land, multiple estates... how can the boy have been deprived of bike riding if he wanted it?   Was he talking about city bike riding? Who really does that with a young child anyway?




Maybe he meant electric bikes, like his new one.  He probably hated pedaling





						History of Electric Bicycle - E-bike Facts
					






					www.bicyclehistory.net


----------



## Chanbal

This is an interesting article. I copied and pasted part of it, but you may want to read the all thing. 

*How ITV tried to gag me on Meghan too: Our brilliant new columnist, DAN WOOTTON - the man who broke Megxit – on why the woke threat to free speech is the biggest issue of our time*

They might be pitted against each other in an increasingly divisive culture war, but Meghan Markle and Sharon Osbourne are ruthless Hollywood figures cut from the same cloth.

Shrewd, truth-twisting and wickedly ambitious, they are both prickly towards even the most loyal staff members and dispatch of anyone who crosses them with a brutality that Henry VIII would have envied...

But despite my personal feelings, I defend with a passion the right for both Meghan and Sharon to loudly voice their opinions, which should play an important role in our public discourse over the thorny social issues that are, very sadly, starting to divide us.

*So why is it only one of these women has been the victim of cancel culture for their widely publicised (and widely criticised) comments broadcast on the woke US network CBS?*

Meghan was allowed to share her 'truth', as she branded it, to Oprah Winfrey without even the slightest hint of scrutiny. That's despite the fact she unleashed a dossier of ludicrous claims that defied long-dated royal protocols, historical fact and basic believability, according to many staff members I've spoken to who lived through her tumultuous two years as a member of the Royal Family.

Sharon, meanwhile, was instantly damned to the modern-day torture of public cancellation for merely raising the possibility that her close friend Piers Morgan may well have more insight as to whether Meghan was indeed telling the truth.

One of the biggest threats facing democracy in 2021 is a craven desire to shut down voices who are brave enough to speak out against liberal groupthink on controversial issues.

*But that's the way Harry, Meghan and their breed of intolerant woketopians operate: Be kind to everyone... unless they say something with which you disagree. At that point, they want you erased from the mainstream media and polite society.*

Which is more than a little ironic given that, if those rules applied to royals, Harry would have been cancelled years ago for past indiscretions including wearing a Nazi uniform to a dress up party and calling an army colleague the P word.

Despite his history, *Harry and his wife attempt to silence critics, even if that includes throwing around spurious accusations of racism, sexism or any other ism that might cause someone damage.*

I've seen it up close. Over many years I broke a raft of completely true but arguably damaging stories about Harry and Meghan's battle with the Royal Family. A couple of them became so infamous they're now referred to by royal watchers simply as Tiaragate and Megxit.

So my views on Harry and Meghan are anchored in lengthy and in-depth reporting. Naturally they evolved as I learned of questionable behaviour towards their family members and staff, not to mention their non-stop preaching that wasn't backed up by their own actions.

*But, like my MailOnline colleague Piers Morgan, one of the reasons I quit ITV Daytime in November 2019, after ten years as a presenter on GMTV, Daybreak and the Lorraine show, was the pressure to tone down criticism of the Sussexes.*

There would be hushed conversations with executives outside the ITV studio at Television Centre that always started with something like: '*Dan, we're under a lot of pressure. Do you think you could just be glowing about Harry and Meghan today?*'

My answer was always the same: 'If you want me to cover the story, I will do so truthfully. I have no problem with Harry or Meghan. In fact, when they do something good, I will champion it.'

Don't forget, the day before their wedding I was sent to Windsor by ITV to fly the Union Jack flag, where I excitedly heralded Meghan's arrival as a landmark moment for the monarchy.

*Harry and Meghan like to suggest they support new voices in the media and public life, but in fact they're typical of the establishment and the elite: Using connections that come with Harry's royal blood and Meghan's telly fame, including ITV big wigs via their news presenter BFF Tom Bradby, to scare critics into silence.*

I'm the opposite. I want people with whom I disagree to be given platforms to express their views, however ridiculous.

My belief is that the more people hear from the likes of Harry and Meghan, and allies including Gayle King and Owen Jones, the more honest and hardworking folk realise they're talking privileged nonsense.

The type of privileged nonsense that allows them to take private jet flights to destinations around the world while telling us mere mortals to stop going on holiday once a year with our family to cut our carbon emissions.

*But my fear is that free speech advocates like me are losing the battle.*
....

*The Sussex Squad Twitter mob has been coming for CNN's royal correspondent Max Foster for broadcasting a balanced report on US television questioning some of the more dubious claims in the Oprah interview.*
...
*Believing that Meghan isn't a very nice person who told a load of porkie pies to Oprah doesn't make you racist.*

Believing we must question the most draconian restrictions to our freedom and liberty since World War Two doesn't make you a murderer.

*If we don't continue the fight to speak freely and criticise equally, then the battle for free speech could be put back a generation. It's too important to stay silent.*









						DAN WOOTTON: How ITV tried to gag me on Meghan Markle too
					

One of the biggest threats facing democracy in 2021 is a craven desire to shut down voices who are brave enough to speak out against liberal groupthink on controversial issues, writes DAN WOOTTON.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

Annawakes said:


> Just curious, do other people (outside of this thread) use the term “word salad”?  I thought that was something coined by our illustrious tpf members!


I learned it here and I do now!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I was so confused by Harry saying during that interview he couldn't just ride bikes with his dad when he was younger.... all that land, multiple estates... how can the boy have been deprived of bike riding if he wanted it?   Was he talking about city bike riding? Who really does that with a young child anyway?



Harry forgot that he has always been a public figure and has been photographed since he was a baby. He thought he could tell lies with the same carefree abandon as his wife and nobody would be the wiser.


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> To be fair to M, she did say during the Oprah interview too that Kate brought her flowers and apologized - and she thought she did all the right things and all was forgiven.



She omitted that she did not accept the flowers and slammed the door and trashed the flowers.  Lies as usual.



bag-mania said:


> We saw an example of Harry's schmoozing ability back in 2019 at the Lion King premiere when he was trying to pimp out Meghan for voiceover work. This was well before they told anyone they were jumping ship but it is so obvious now they were already trying hard to score some cash.
> Harry: You do know she does voiceovers?
> Bob Igor: Oh really? Ah...
> Harry: Did you know that?
> Bob Igor: I did not know that... (Looking away)
> Harry: You seem surprised! She's really interested.



I read in the DM but can't find it, that H is trying to pimp out M now as being brilliant and worthy of some kinds of jobs.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe he meant electric bikes, like his new one.  He probably hated pedaling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> History of Electric Bicycle - E-bike Facts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bicyclehistory.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5039317


Is Harry so above us all that he goes outside with his big nose uncovered by his mask?!?   Another Do as he says, not as he does?


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Harry forgot that he has always been a public figure and has been photographed since he was a baby. He thought he could tell lies with the same carefree abandon as his wife and nobody would be the wiser.


He is an idiot, caught up in the idea that he is HRH Harry -- no one would dare contradict him.  He lives in fantasy land, where he is the constant victim of the press. to whom he is eternally rude.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

lulilu said:


> She omitted that she did not accept the flowers and slammed the door and trashed the flowers.  Lies as usual.
> 
> 
> 
> I read in the DM but can't find it, that H is trying to pimp out M now as being brilliant and worthy of some kinds of jobs.



I am going to be honest. I am not buying into that as gospel. Until I see it confirmed somewhere, I am not convinced. I am not saying it DIDN'T happen. But I am a huge believer in not believing everything I read on the internet. If a reliable source confirms it, I might believe it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> She did. She got one gig narrating a nature documentary. Disney hasn't exactly been knocking down her door to do more for them. Didn't her agent try to get her a role in a Marvel movie? There is no way _that_ was going to happen.


All the sound engineers and editors claimed on Disney’s dental from their constant teeth grinding. 

Then, weirdly enough, no one wanted to watch a documentary with MM narrating it.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting title! 












						Meghan Markle's 'dossier of ludicrous claims' dismantled
					

MEGHAN Markle "unleashed a dossier of ludicrous claims" in her and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, according to a royal commentator.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> From Jan 2020
> 
> Thomas Markle shares photos and video of Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle opens up Meghan's childhood with trove of unseen photos
> 
> 
> The 75-year-old described his love and pride after the birth of his daughter in August 1981 and opened his extraordinary family album for Britain's Channel 5 film watched by 1.2million people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


From the article: "Mr Markle says Meghan's childhood years were 'the happiest of my life' as he shared dozens of pictures of her key moments including on the day she entered the world and as father and daughter bonded while he changed her nappies in the following days."

Hey, TM how do your other children feel after hearing this comment? Makes me very, very happy that your not my father.


----------



## kemilia

xincinsin said:


> You have to admit that with all the role-playing she is doing now, her acting skills are improving. Just a few expressions used repeatedly, but hey, she's got a lot of people convinced! She has got the starry-eyed look down pat, and her "I can't believe this is happening to ME" expression is brainwashing a lot of people who don't parse what she says.
> 
> I've been watching Leilani of Barbados do exactly that: parse the interview.



Excellent American accent!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah. I’m no MM fan but “it’s time to take care of Daddy” is gross.


----------



## bisousx

Maggie Muggins said:


> From the article: "Mr Markle says Meghan's childhood years were 'the happiest of my life' as he shared dozens of pictures of her key moments including on the day she entered the world and as father and daughter bonded while he changed her nappies in the following days."
> 
> Hey, TM how do your other children feel after hearing this comment? Makes me very, very happy that your not my father.



Yep. There’s something very wrong with the media’s most prominent Markles.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I was so confused by Harry saying during that interview he couldn't just ride bikes with his dad when he was younger.... all that land, multiple estates... how can the boy have been deprived of bike riding if he wanted it?   Was he talking about city bike riding? Who really does that with a young child anyway?


He probably meant he didn't have the opportunity to bike ride when his time was taken up with playing polo, travelling to exotic locations, ski trips to Klosters, Switzerland, summering at Balmoral and so on.

You get the idea.


----------



## kemilia

marietouchet said:


> From Jan 2020
> 
> Thomas Markle shares photos and video of Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle opens up Meghan's childhood with trove of unseen photos
> 
> 
> The 75-year-old described his love and pride after the birth of his daughter in August 1981 and opened his extraordinary family album for Britain's Channel 5 film watched by 1.2million people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She isn't going to be happy about these.


----------



## kemilia

Jktgal said:


> I learned it here and I do now!


I use the term all the time now, and so does my BF.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

kemilia said:


> She isn't going to be happy about these.



When is she happy about anything anyways.


----------



## haute okole

kemilia said:


> I use the term all the time now, and so does my BF.


After scanning that DailyMail article, it is apparent that the apple does not fall far from the tree.  No wonder Meghan is such a vengeful, disloyal creature.  When and if Harry begins to lose his luster, and I predict this will happen after the 10 year mark in California as she is entitled to half of everything they earn and she realizes that Harry is intellectually inferior and not that cute, Harry may be on the losing end of some very familiar and predictable behavior.  Ask any LA divorce attorney.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I was so confused by Harry saying during that interview he couldn't just ride bikes with his dad when he was younger.... all that land, multiple estates... how can the boy have been deprived of bike riding if he wanted it?   Was he talking about city bike riding? Who really does that with a young child anyway?


they need to be more mindful of all the people in the world who are FAR less privileged than they are.....like hungry people, people driven from their homes by war and terrorism....I don't have any energy to feel sorry for these two.  Yes, it was very sad that he lost his mother but there are babies dying from hunger.  and these two want to present themselves as humanitarians while whining about racism and loss of mom.....

and people are buying this crap


----------



## csshopper

The more time that elapses since the Interview, the more the evidence of H and M's distortions and lies piles up. Among the latest:

*Princess Diana's biographer Andrew Morton says royals have a 'history' of seeking help for mental health issues dating back to Princess Margaret and is 'baffled' by Meghan Markle's claim that she couldn't get support*

*Andrew Morton says the Queen sought professional help during Annus horribilis*
*Princess Margaret reportedly underwent psychological counselling in the 1970s*
*Diana's biographer called Meghan's admission 'very sad' and he was 'baffled' *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wrong link!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There is is...I don't even know what to say.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am really, really not an activist. I support my causes, but I don't usually go around screeching about them. But as a journalist myself, albeit in a less controversial field, I really feel the urge to loudly advocate for freedom of press right now. It is completely unacceptable that a mediocre ex-actress and her vicious army of lunatics try to silence everyone who doesn't sugarcoat it for them. 

And what's even more baffling to me: how come big parts of the media landscape seem to support her? WTF is happening.


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am really, really not an activist. I support my causes, but I don't usually go around screeching about them. But as a journalist myself, albeit in a less controversial field, I really feel the urge to loudly advocate for freedom of press right now. It is completely unacceptable that a mediocre ex-actress and her vicious army of lunatics try to silence everyone who doesn't sugarcoat it for them.
> 
> And what's even more baffling to me: how come big parts of the media landscape seem to support her? WTF is happening.


Are you a tabloid writer?
This is whom her beef is with.
She is not coming after Der Spiegel.


----------



## rose60610

Is this timeline correct? Meghan and Harry date. Harry attends wedding in Jamaica. (Did he bring Meghan along or did she crash it?) Regardless, he was bored with her. She dripped all over him. They date some more, she moves in, she goes through all the motions and "works" as royals do and seemed enthralled with it all. They marry. Then Meghan claims she became suicidal. She and Harry claim they want to be independent and split to Canada/California. 

Question: How can one work so hard to claw one's way into the BRF, willingly dumps her acting career to do it, and then claim she's driven to suicide within months? Makes no sense. I think she was out of her depth and by then Idiot Ginger was forced to cover for her and Archie. She tries to mask her stupidity by telling Oprah her royal life was a nightmare. Meghan has to realize by now that if she splits with Harry, she will be on the Psycho Alert List of bachelors everywhere. Looks like Harry is stuck with her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Are you a tabloid writer?
> This is whom her beef is with.
> She is not coming after Der Spiegel.



I already explained I'm not personally affected. But also, that's a weird stand to take, isn't it? "It's not me, so whatever". And by the way, Tominey is an award winning journalist, an editor of The Telegraph - which is a broadsheet, not a tabloid if we want to be specific, and also not exactly a gossip rag -, and also covers politics, so your assessment might need finetuning


----------



## limom

rose60610 said:


> Is this timeline correct? Meghan and Harry date. Harry attends wedding in Jamaica. (Did he bring Meghan along or did she crash it?) Regardless, he was bored with her. She dripped all over him. They date some more, she moves in, she goes through all the motions and "works" as royals do and seemed enthralled with it all. They marry. Then Meghan claims she became suicidal. She and Harry claim they want to be independent and split to Canada/California.
> 
> Question: How can one work so hard to claw one's way into the BRF, willingly dumps her acting career to do it, and then claim she's driven to suicide within months? Makes no sense. I think she was out of her depth and by then Idiot Ginger was forced to cover for her and Archie. She tries to mask her stupidity by telling Oprah her royal life was a nightmare. Meghan has to realize by now that if she splits with Harry, she will be on the Psycho Alert List of bachelors everywhere. Looks like Harry is stuck with her.


hustling backward.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I already explained I'm not personally affected. But also, that's a weird stand to take, isn't it? "It's not me, so whatever". And by the way, Tominey is an award winning journalist, an editor of The Telegraph - which is a broadsheet, not a tabloid if we want to be specific, and also not exactly a gossip rag -, and also covers politics, so your assessment might need finetuning


Fine tuning or not. She has problems with tabloid writing.
 And she seems to be winning so far.
If She prevails against the Inquirer, it will be justice for all the Bull crap, they put America thru.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Question: How can one work so hard to claw one's way into the BRF, willingly dumps her acting career to do it, and then claim she's driven to suicide within months? Makes no sense. I think she was out of her depth and by then Idiot Ginger was forced to cover for her and Archie. She tries to mask her stupidity by telling Oprah her royal life was a nightmare. Meghan has to realize by now that if she splits with Harry, she will be on the Psycho Alert List of bachelors everywhere. Looks like Harry is stuck with her.



I really think she misjudged the BRF. She thought she could either a) wrap them around her finger after spraying them with her toxic charm or b) walk all over them with Harry's help. She completely didn't expect them to not give in to her every whim, and I think she also was surprised to learn Harry wasn't all that in term of his status within the family.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There is is...I don't even know what to say.



I used the  emoji, but I wanted to use this  instead. These people are sick!



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am really, really not an activist. I support my causes, but I don't usually go around screeching about them. But as a journalist myself, albeit in a less controversial field, I really feel the urge to loudly advocate for freedom of press right now. It is completely unacceptable that a mediocre ex-actress and her vicious army of lunatics try to silence everyone who doesn't sugarcoat it for them.
> 
> And what's even more baffling to me: how come big parts of the media landscape seem to support her? WTF is happening.


I hear you! In today DM's article by DAN WOOTTON, he wrote about the Sussex Squad Twitter mob and their attacks on CNN's royal correspondent Max Foster. CNN has been pro-MM 99%, and the only time they questioned some of MM's falsehoods... This is very dangerous!


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> Actually I make a very good sponge cake which has also olive oil and grated lemon rind from MY LEMON TREES  , I'm not kidding! I do live in Italy though, where olive oil and lemons are everywhere. I have no idea what CA olive oil and lemons are like!


While I have an Olive tree in my front yard, it doesn't really bear 'fruit' per se, but our Neighbors have a Lemon tree which is fantastic and they are big & juicy lemons.  All that being said, if one was truly a good cook, you would NEVER, EVER use Olive Oil from the US; it has to be from Europe and most likely Italy (my favorite Olive Oil comes from Umbria)!!!  

I have made Olive Cake several times and it is quite good in the summertime as it is a super-moist cake and with the Lemons, it is really a great dessert.  Sometimes, I have made a lemon glaze which I put on top, but not too much because I really don't like super sweet desserts!


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am really, really not an activist. I support my causes, but I don't usually go around screeching about them. But as a journalist myself, albeit in a less controversial field, I really feel the urge to loudly advocate for freedom of press right now. It is completely unacceptable that a mediocre ex-actress and *her vicious army of lunatics try to silence everyone who doesn't sugarcoat it for them.*
> 
> And what's even more baffling to me: how come *big parts of the media landscape* seem to *support* her? WTF is happening.



WELCOME TO WOKE CULTURE! FREEDOM FOR ME BUT NOT FOR THEE!  Wokers are allowed to get away with crap that they'll skewer YOU for. Wokers' lies are totally fine, but they can't take what they dish out. The media are complicit in this mess. The media went to great lengths to protect Meghan and all was lovey dovey fine until....a few dared to question the Great Woke One. American media are spineless and embarrassing when it comes to hard reporting. The media deserve to get sued when they report false narratives, but Meghan has to prove she was unfairly criticized. She may have won some suits, I don't see those wins as any big deal, and more and more the public see her for the loser/whiner/liar/schemer/psycho that she is. 

You can sue somebody all day long, it's the verdicts that matter. Shortly, being sued by Meghan will be a badge of honor for media. I'm surprised they blew the lid on her lie about getting married three days before the big wedding. Her "aura" is cracking, I say let the media open the floodgates on all her lies. Maybe that will get her to finally shut up.


----------



## Chanbal

Very interesting! It is about Princess Anne and some of the allegations during Oprah's interview...  It looks like Princess Anne was opposed to the addition of MM to the royal family, she anticipated trouble... It was apparently about culture, and not color.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> Is this timeline correct? Meghan and Harry date. Harry attends wedding in Jamaica. (Did he bring Meghan along or did she crash it?) Regardless, he was bored with her. She dripped all over him. They date some more, she moves in, she goes through all the motions and "works" as royals do and seemed enthralled with it all. They marry. Then Meghan claims she became suicidal. She and Harry claim they want to be independent and split to Canada/California.
> 
> Question: How can one work so hard to claw one's way into the BRF, willingly dumps her acting career to do it, and then claim she's driven to suicide within months? Makes no sense. I think she was out of her depth and by then Idiot Ginger was forced to cover for her and Archie. She tries to mask her stupidity by telling Oprah her royal life was a nightmare. Meghan has to realize by now that if she splits with Harry, she will be on the Psycho Alert List of bachelors everywhere. Looks like Harry is stuck with her.


I think she thought she was all that and a bag of chips so as the narcissist she believed the world would revolve around her on that crystal cake stand and command and like most self entitled kids who don't get their way she seeks revenge. She's vengeful, hateful, stirs up trouble, divisive and lies.  There's an old saying, pride comes before the fall.  She, to me, seems like a bully. 

This was supposedly scrubbed off the internet but it's still on. I don't know if its her but many have said it was her blog. She's like fatal attraction, and that woman in the movie The Hand That Rocks the Cradle.  Harry should be very scared but then again, he's a dimwitted never grown up boy/man who seems to have a fetish for his mother (which I find very vomit inducing) through MM. 









						Blog Archives
					

So I have been crazy busy recently (hence the lack of posting). I have been doing photoshoots, interviews, TV appearances, screenings, working and this weekend, despite it being a religious holiday...



					workingactress.weebly.com


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> While I have an Olive tree in my front yard, it doesn't really bear 'fruit' per se, but our Neighbors have a Lemon tree which is fantastic and they are big & juicy lemons.  All that being said, if one was truly a good cook, you would NEVER, EVER use Olive Oil from the US; it has to be from Europe and most likely Italy (my favorite Olive Oil comes from Umbria)!!!
> 
> I have made Olive Cake several times and it is quite good in the summertime as it is a super-moist cake and with the Lemons, it is really a great dessert.  Sometimes, I have made a lemon glaze which I put on top, but not too much because I really don't like super sweet desserts!



Sounds delicious. I wonder how it'd turn out using oranges, blood oranges, or limes? On a totally different note, another great moist cake is apple/bourbon. I've heard that a lot of "Italian" olive oil is indeed shipped from Italy, but manufactured using oil from Greece and other countries. On the other hand, I don't see much difference in a few different degrees of latitude/longitude when it comes to oil, but that's to my very untrained oil palate. Wine, however.........I lerve sangiovese but will never buy Tignanello due to MM!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I think she thought she was all that and a bag of chips so as the narcissist she believed the world would revolve around her on that crystal cake stand and command and like most self entitled kids who don't get their way she seeks revenge. She's vengeful, hateful, stirs up trouble, divisive and lies.  There's an old saying, pride comes before the fall.  She, to me, seems like a bully.
> 
> This was supposedly scrubbed off the internet but it's still on. I don't know if its her but many have said it was her blog. She's like fatal attraction, and that woman in the movie The Hand That Rocks the Cradle.  Harry should be very scared but then again, he's a dimwitted never grown up boy/man who seems to have a fetish for his mother (which I find very vomit inducing) through MM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blog Archives
> 
> 
> So I have been crazy busy recently (hence the lack of posting). I have been doing photoshoots, interviews, TV appearances, screenings, working and this weekend, despite it being a religious holiday...
> 
> 
> 
> workingactress.weebly.com



I'm going to say that that blog was not Meghan's. I can't see her ever writing about feeling bad about a project wrapping up and losing touch with the people involved. Quite the opposite in fact, Meghan would be one of the people who would stop taking the calls of someone like that. Beside, that person said "_and I was ready *to give up everything in England* to lead this new life_."  As far as I know Meghan has never lived in England before she met Harry, has she?


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There is is...I don't even know what to say.



Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I'm going to say that that blog was not Meghan's. I can't see her ever writing about feeling bad about a project wrapping up and losing touch with the people involved. Quite the opposite in fact, Meghan would be one of the people who would stop taking the calls of someone like that. Beside, that person said "_and I was ready *to give up everything in England* to lead this new life_."  As far as I know Meghan has never lived in England before she met Harry, has she?


Not sure if it's her.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> they need to be more mindful of all the people in the world who are FAR less privileged than they are.....like hungry people, people driven from their homes by war and terrorism....I don't have any energy to feel sorry for these two.  Yes, it was very sad that he lost his mother but there are babies dying from hunger.  and these two want to present themselves as humanitarians while whining about racism and loss of mom.....
> 
> and people are buying this crap



ITA. This is my biggest issue with them. I don't believe a lot of what tabloids reported about her but the info they are putting out themselves is very off-putting. They should rightfully be called out for their extreme privilege and sense of entitlement.


----------



## bellecate

kemilia said:


> She isn't going to be happy about these.


Just think of her lost revenue for selling them herself.


----------



## lalame

I was reading the Twitter replies on Camilla's post and... wow, so much hate. To be fair I also think the same of some anti-Meghan comments I see on DM. It's incredible. Some of the things said, I just can't imagine saying to anyone. If M and H really want world peace or whatever it is, they really should work on finding the best way to end this mess. A tell all, surprise surprise, was NOT it.


----------



## Aminamina

lalame said:


> Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.


ITA. I even started writing a post saying the same but deleted it - makes no sense for these two lack any decency we’d be calling to...I imagine Cringe is dancing to the gypsy music in ecstasy
ETA: I feel for the good people of Sussex who have to be associated with “the Sussexes” and pardon me “Sussex squad” oy. They have a holy right to request the Queen to strip H&M of the titles they mix with mud.


----------



## Chanbal

Who are the royal sources? Any guesses? 

"_The Duchess of Sussex is expecting her daughter in early summer, royal sources tell us, and the baby will be the first-ever royal to be born in the US.

The birth of the baby girl — who will become princess when her grandfather Prince Charles eventually ascends the throne — could not be more different from that of her brother.

Meghan Markle is planning a home birth for her second child with Prince Harry at their sprawling Montecito estate._"









						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry planning home birth for second child
					

She is set to welcome a baby girl at their sprawling Montecito estate.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> @purseinsanity
> Some key words to remember:
> *Organically*.  Conversations.   Mission.   Mental health.  Performance.    Realize your potential.   Accountable.   Global impact.
> Expanding our global community.    Global community.   Influence.   Product experience.
> Partner with companies globally.    Expand impact around the world [globally?].    Service.   Positive impact.   Incredible track record.
> Opportunity.   Leading forces in the world.
> 
> New to the team:  Daydream
> 
> Word salad is much too kind.  In my day, it was called the BS Grinder.  Everyone had one     GIGO:  garbage in, garbage out.
> 
> View attachment 5036480


You got further than I did; the minute I saw the word "organically" .. my mind shut off and my eyes went to the next post.  Can't even say how much I loathe this woke word salad BS, and you are absolutely right re: GIGO (same in my day so we must be around the same age)!!


----------



## DeMonica

limom said:


> Are you a tabloid writer?
> This is whom her beef is with.
> She is not coming after Der Spiegel.


Who else would write about them other than the tabloid journalist? I think the ripples caused by this interview raised important questions which go beyond the framework of tabloid journalism, so sooner or later the aftermath would be discussed by journalist covering politics or social issues, too.


----------



## bag-mania

Guess who was crashing Zoom mentoring sessions for teenagers this week and then reporting it straight to _People_?

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring*

Meghan and Harry "saw her potential in a few short minutes," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE
When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen!

To celebrate International Women's Day and Women's History Month, Meghan and Harry encouraged others to "unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion," with suggestions on their Archewell Foundation website. One idea was to "tutor a teenage girl who is navigating high school on her computer" — which Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, took on firsthand.

Through volunteer organization L.A. Works and the "I Have a Dream" Foundation, which works to ensure children have the opportunity to pursue higher education, Meghan and Harry were set up with a teenage girl — who recognized her mentors right away!

"She had this moment of surprise and excitement when she got on the phone with the Duke and Duchess," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE. "She knew of them, she knew a lot — she had been following Meghan's story quite a bit, so she was very excited that she had the opportunity to speak with them."

Brutchey says that the young woman was "really moved" by Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom."

"It was really significant for her because they saw her potential in a few short minutes, which actually really undid some damage that had been previously caused by a former teacher's doubt," she explains. "It was just amazing how they were able to connect and how their compassion, in just a short conversation, really made an impact and is going to forever inspire her."

The teenager's chat with Meghan and Harry went beyond just schoolwork.

"The conversation that they had was really about how do you overcome challenges in your life? And how do you stay true to your values? Things that are so relatable to young girls but also so public in what the Duke and Duchess have gone through," Brutchey says.

Meghan and Harry noticed that the young woman had sunflowers in her room. In a sweet gesture after their call, they sent her sunflowers as well as an encouraging note.

L.A. Works connects volunteers in California with a range of issues, from animal welfare and senior services to homelessness and the arts. But anyone can follow in Meghan and Harry's footsteps and make a difference, even amid the COVID-19 crisis.

"Mentoring has been one of the most meaningful ways for volunteers to give back, especially during this pandemic. Mentors play a huge role in inspiring young minds and helping kids realize their potential," Brutchey says. "Having The Duke and Duchess share their compassion and wisdom with a young girl from the I Have a Dream Foundation helped to spark a new confidence in her and reminds all of us that it only takes a few minutes to change a person's life forever."









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring
					

When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen




					people.com


----------



## bag-mania

We should ponder what it must be like to be mentored by Meghan and Harry about such topics as "how do you stay true to your values?"


----------



## DeMonica

rose60610 said:


> Sounds delicious. I wonder how it'd turn out using oranges, blood oranges, or limes? On a totally different note, another great moist cake is apple/bourbon. I've heard that a lot of "Italian" olive oil is indeed shipped from Italy, but manufactured using oil from Greece and other countries. On the other hand, I don't see much difference in a few different degrees of latitude/longitude when it comes to oil, but that's to my very untrained oil palate. Wine, however.........I lerve sangiovese but will never buy Tignanello due to MM!


IMO it's a good idea to try it with other citrus fruits, too. I think better quality olive oils also list the origin of the oil. I like Greek olive oil, too. Personally, I'd prefer to use canola or grapeseed oil when baking.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Guess who was crashing Zoom mentoring sessions for teenagers this week and then reporting it straight to _People_?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring*
> 
> Meghan and Harry "saw her potential in a few short minutes," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE
> When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen!
> 
> To celebrate International Women's Day and Women's History Month, Meghan and Harry encouraged others to "unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion," with suggestions on their Archewell Foundation website. One idea was to "tutor a teenage girl who is navigating high school on her computer" — which Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, took on firsthand.
> 
> Through volunteer organization L.A. Works and the "I Have a Dream" Foundation, which works to ensure children have the opportunity to pursue higher education, Meghan and Harry were set up with a teenage girl — who recognized her mentors right away!
> 
> "She had this moment of surprise and excitement when she got on the phone with the Duke and Duchess," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE. "She knew of them, she knew a lot — she had been following Meghan's story quite a bit, so she was very excited that she had the opportunity to speak with them."
> 
> Brutchey says that the young woman was "really moved" by Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom."
> 
> "It was really significant for her because they saw her potential in a few short minutes, which actually really undid some damage that had been previously caused by a former teacher's doubt," she explains. "It was just amazing how they were able to connect and how their compassion, in just a short conversation, really made an impact and is going to forever inspire her."
> 
> The teenager's chat with Meghan and Harry went beyond just schoolwork.
> 
> "The conversation that they had was really about how do you overcome challenges in your life? And how do you stay true to your values? Things that are so relatable to young girls but also so public in what the Duke and Duchess have gone through," Brutchey says.
> 
> Meghan and Harry noticed that the young woman had sunflowers in her room. In a sweet gesture after their call, they sent her sunflowers as well as an encouraging note.
> 
> L.A. Works connects volunteers in California with a range of issues, from animal welfare and senior services to homelessness and the arts. But anyone can follow in Meghan and Harry's footsteps and make a difference, even amid the COVID-19 crisis.
> 
> "Mentoring has been one of the most meaningful ways for volunteers to give back, especially during this pandemic. Mentors play a huge role in inspiring young minds and helping kids realize their potential," Brutchey says. "Having The Duke and Duchess share their compassion and wisdom with a young girl from the I Have a Dream Foundation helped to spark a new confidence in her and reminds all of us that it only takes a few minutes to change a person's life forever."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring
> 
> 
> When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I'm sorry @bag-mania, but I need   to 'like' your post!

"_Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom._" 

"_Meghan and Harry noticed that the young woman had sunflowers in her room. In a sweet gesture after their call, they sent her sunflowers as well as an encouraging note._" If she had already sunflowers, why send her more? Lack of originality?


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.


No decent or noble person would consent harassment, death threats to people or their loved ones even when the harassed people have different opinions.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> "_Meghan and Harry noticed that the young woman had sunflowers in her room. In a sweet gesture after their call, they sent her sunflowers as well as an encouraging note._" *If she had already sunflowers, why send her more? *Lack of originality?



Because obviously sunflowers is going to be that girl's identity.  

You know, like how they know absolutely nothing about her but they grabbed on to one tiny detail they noticed so they could use it to look like they really connected and care about her as an individual. She is now officially the "sunflower girl" to them.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Because obviously sunflowers is going to be that girl's identity.
> 
> You know, like how they know absolutely nothing about her but they grabbed on to one tiny detail they noticed so they could use it to look like they really connected and care about her as an individual. She is now officially the "sunflower girl" to them.


So they think they are little gods that their presence is enough to lift the spirit s of someone they don’t know. Compassion my arse. If they show compassion then I can believe it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Guess who was crashing Zoom mentoring sessions for teenagers this week and then reporting it straight to _People_?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring*
> 
> Meghan and Harry "saw her potential in a few short minutes," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE
> When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen!
> 
> To celebrate International Women's Day and Women's History Month, Meghan and Harry encouraged others to "unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion," with suggestions on their Archewell Foundation website. One idea was to "tutor a teenage girl who is navigating high school on her computer" — which Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, took on firsthand.
> 
> Through volunteer organization L.A. Works and the "I Have a Dream" Foundation, which works to ensure children have the opportunity to pursue higher education, Meghan and Harry were set up with a teenage girl — who recognized her mentors right away!
> 
> "She had this moment of surprise and excitement when she got on the phone with the Duke and Duchess," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE. "She knew of them, she knew a lot — she had been following Meghan's story quite a bit, so she was very excited that she had the opportunity to speak with them."
> 
> Brutchey says that the young woman was "really moved" by* Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom."*
> 
> "It was really significant for her because they saw her potential in a few short minutes, which actually really undid some damage that had been previously caused by a former teacher's doubt," she explains. "It was just amazing how they were able to connect and how their compassion, in just a short conversation, really made an impact and is going to forever inspire her."
> 
> The teenager's chat with Meghan and Harry went beyond just schoolwork.
> 
> "The conversation that they had was really about how do you overcome challenges in your life? And how do you stay true to your values? Things that are so relatable to young girls but also so public in what the Duke and Duchess have gone through," Brutchey says.
> 
> Meghan and Harry noticed that the young woman had sunflowers in her room. In a sweet gesture after their call, they sent her sunflowers as well as an encouraging note.
> 
> L.A. Works connects volunteers in California with a range of issues, from animal welfare and senior services to homelessness and the arts. But anyone can follow in Meghan and Harry's footsteps and make a difference, even amid the COVID-19 crisis.
> 
> "Mentoring has been one of the most meaningful ways for volunteers to give back, especially during this pandemic. Mentors play a huge role in inspiring young minds and helping kids realize their potential," Brutchey says. "Having The Duke and Duchess share their compassion and wisdom with a young girl from the I Have a Dream Foundation helped to spark a new confidence in her and reminds all of us that it only takes a few minutes to change a person's life forever."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring
> 
> 
> When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom." Really? They wouldn't know these values if they fell over them. A few minutes on Zoom apparently did magic and they were able to asses the girl's capabilities and future potentials, then healed her emotional scars. So lovely! What a pity that they were unable to use their magic healing power in their own family. I'd be interested in the race of this young girl.  Sorry, it's just so hard not to be sarcastic. 



Chanbal said:


> Who are the royal sources? Any guesses?
> 
> "_The Duchess of Sussex is expecting her daughter in early summer, royal sources tell us, and the baby will be the first-ever royal to be born in the US.
> 
> The birth of the baby girl — who will become princess when her grandfather Prince Charles eventually ascends the throne — could not be more different from that of her brother.
> 
> Meghan Markle is planning a home birth for her second child with Prince Harry at their sprawling Montecito estate._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry planning home birth for second child
> 
> 
> She is set to welcome a baby girl at their sprawling Montecito estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Good luck! This time they pay the bills so they can do what they choose. Can a foreign born royal inherit the throne?

Completely OT: What happened with M's hair on those pics at the Petition site? Extensions or a wig?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> So they think they are little gods that their presence is enough to lift the spirit s of someone they don’t know. Compassion my arse. If they show compassion then I can believe it.



They are all about inspiring others, don’t you know? Never mind that this particular girl was almost certainly hand-picked by the group for this honor. There is no chance they would risk putting them through to a kid who wasn’t prepped, had never heard of them, or worse, didn’t like them.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.


That would be the compassionate thing to do.


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Are you a tabloid writer?
> This is whom her beef is with.
> She is not coming after Der Spiegel.


I think she is building her way up to it.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Because obviously sunflowers is going to be that girl's identity.
> 
> You know, like how they know absolutely nothing about her but they grabbed on to one tiny detail they noticed so they could use it to look like they really connected and care about her as an individual. She is now officially the "sunflower girl" to them.


Shall we be thankful that it was sunflowers?  Just imagine if she had a slice of cake or a glass of lemonade...


----------



## jennlt

I think BetterUp may not have noticed that they tweeted a diagram of all the reasons why they shouldn't have hired Harry


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> @purseinsanity
> Some key words to remember:
> Organically.  Conversations.   Mission.   Mental health.  Performance.    Realize your potential.   Accountable.   Global impact.
> Expanding our global community.    Global community.   Influence.   Product experience.
> Partner with companies globally.    Expand impact around the world [globally?].    Service.   Positive impact.   Incredible track record.
> Opportunity.   Leading forces in the world.
> 
> New to the team:  Daydream
> 
> Word salad is much too kind.  In my day, it was called the BS Grinder.  Everyone had one     GIGO:  garbage in, garbage out.
> 
> View attachment 5036480



Lol guys, most of these are normal words and terms. Don't blame them if someone strings them together in an odd way.


----------



## Allisonfaye

kemilia said:


> She isn't going to be happy about these.



Ok, I wasn't going to look but now I am....


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> She isn't going to be happy about these.



Oh, I want this to be true so badly but I bet it won’t be shown in the US.

A source told MailOnline: ‘Talks are ongoing with the major networks in the US – once a deal is done the film could be shown within days, depending on whether they want to change their schedule’.


----------



## xincinsin

haute okole said:


> After scanning that DailyMail article, it is apparent that the apple does not fall far from the tree.  No wonder Meghan is such a vengeful, disloyal creature.  When and if Harry begins to lose his luster, and I predict this will happen after the 10 year mark in California as she is entitled to half of everything they earn and she realizes that Harry is intellectually inferior and *not that cute*, Harry may be on the losing end of some very familiar and predictable behavior.  Ask any LA divorce attorney.


Ahhh, cute ... reminds me of a sarcastic montage someone once did of MM. Either during the courtship or the early months of marriage, or maybe both, MM was fond of sticking out her tongue during impromptu photo ops. IIRC it was said she was trying to act young and cute, and to appear flirtatious.


----------



## Chanbal

Breaking the silence after 3 weeks, "_the Archbishop of Canterbury has rejected the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's claim that he married them at a secret ceremony before their Windsor Castle wedding_." 




Spoiler: The real wedding! 












						'Harry and Meghan's legal wedding was on Saturday, Justin Welby says
					

The Archbishop of Canterbury has rejected the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's claim that he married them at a secret ceremony before their Windsor Castle wedding




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Who are the royal sources? Any guesses?
> 
> "_The Duchess of Sussex is expecting her daughter in early summer, royal sources tell us, and the baby will be the first-ever royal to be born in the US.
> 
> The birth of the baby girl — who will become princess when her grandfather Prince Charles eventually ascends the throne — could not be more different from that of her brother.
> 
> Meghan Markle is planning a home birth for her second child with Prince Harry at their sprawling Montecito estate._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry planning home birth for second child
> 
> 
> She is set to welcome a baby girl at their sprawling Montecito estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


A home birth...that sounds about right...no need to pretend to sneak off to a secret hospital to give birth or remove the moon bump


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Breaking the silence after 3 weeks, "_the Archbishop of Canterbury has rejected the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's claim that he married them at a secret ceremony before their Windsor Castle wedding_."
> View attachment 5040026
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The real wedding!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan's legal wedding was on Saturday, Justin Welby says
> 
> 
> The Archbishop of Canterbury has rejected the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's claim that he married them at a secret ceremony before their Windsor Castle wedding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I hope their rabid fans don’t start sending threats to the Archbishop for telling the truth.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I hope their rabid fans don’t start sending threats to the Archbishop for telling the truth.


Of course they will. His truth, the truth, or any truth is not her truth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> I hope their rabid fans don’t start sending threats to the Archbishop for telling the truth.



X


----------



## needlv

justwatchin said:


> A home birth...that sounds about right...no need to pretend to sneak off to a secret hospital to give birth or remove the moon bump


Oh please - it’s so she can show up Zara’s story of having just given birth at home because of no time to get to the hospital.  MM is so pathetic she has to “do better” than any PR coming from the RF...


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.


And it is what makes them such huge hypocrites. They claim to fight against such abuses, yet through their silence tacitly endorse what their vile stans are doing, I can almost see MM's smug, smarmy smile behind this.


----------



## Annawakes

I feel like she could name her daughter.....Lemon.  Like Lemon Breeland in the Hart of Dixie tv show.  Maybe all of these lemons are a hint.  Lemon Diana.  That’s it


----------



## Annawakes

I mean....now that she’s “landed” in Hollywood, they’re probably going to choose a Hollywood-y name for the baby right?  Gwyneth’s daughter Apple comes to mind


----------



## Jayne1

Giving birth at home - why so secretive, I wonder.

I know women who have done it, but at Meg's age, isn't it more risky?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Very interesting! It is about Princess Anne and some of the allegations during Oprah's interview...  It looks like Princess Anne was opposed to the addition of MM to the royal family, she anticipated trouble... It was apparently about culture, and not color.



My problem with all this speculation is it gives H&M’s story the credence of it actually happening whereas as far as I’m concerned if a pair of proven liars have contradicted themselves on when was said and how often it was said and they won’t name who said it: then it most probably didn’t happen. Also this speculating just tars innocent people’s names - like a witch hunt. 

Its kind of funny that the more pro-royal people are rewriting history a little too - that the smart royals saw through MM from the beginning and Anne is the logical choice for Lady CC’s Cassandra as she’s widely seen as the most competent of the Queen’s kids.

 I’m not sure that happened tbh. I think the party line was they wanted to get Harry settled down and they thought MM was the golden goose of racial equality PR and no one on the inner circle would dare risk saying anything that could be misinterpreted by the media.

The exception of this is that princess Michael woman but she’s very much a troll on the outside circle I’d say.


----------



## xincinsin

I like this video.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> My problem with all this speculation is it gives H&M’s story the credence of it actually happening whereas as far as I’m concerned if a pair of proven liars have contradicted themselves on when was said and how often it was said and they won’t name who said it: then it most probably didn’t happen. Also this speculating just tars innocent people’s names - like a witch hunt.
> 
> Its kind of funny that the more pro-royal people are rewriting history a little too - that the smart royals saw through MM from the beginning and Anne is the logical choice for Lady CC’s Cassandra as she’s widely seen as the most competent of the Queen’s kids.
> 
> I’m not sure that happened tbh. I think the party line was they wanted to get Harry settled down and they thought MM was the golden goose of racial equality PR and no one on the inner circle would dare risk saying anything that could be misinterpreted by the media.
> 
> The exception of this is that princess Michael woman but she’s very much a troll on the outside circle I’d say.


The curse of hindsight. 

I'm more of the view that MM ran the long con, and the BRF wanted to believe that she would be good for Harry. 

Maybe MM even deluded herself. I had a colleague like her, who couldn't believe that we didn't consider him the best thing on earth. Every time he made a mistake, it was someone else's fault, he was being bullied, it was unfair. MM plays the race card, this guy played the gay card. If you told him he needed to improve, he would say you were picking on him because you were jealous, you were victimizing him because he was gay. Errr, no, we are pointing out what went wrong because you were inefficient.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Guess who was crashing Zoom mentoring sessions for teenagers this week and then reporting it straight to _People_?
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring*
> 
> Meghan and Harry "saw her potential in a few short minutes," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE
> When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen!
> 
> To celebrate International Women's Day and Women's History Month, Meghan and Harry encouraged others to "unleash a groundswell of real acts of compassion," with suggestions on their Archewell Foundation website. One idea was to "tutor a teenage girl who is navigating high school on her computer" — which Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, took on firsthand.
> 
> Through volunteer organization L.A. Works and the "I Have a Dream" Foundation, which works to ensure children have the opportunity to pursue higher education, Meghan and Harry were set up with a teenage girl — who recognized her mentors right away!
> 
> "She had this moment of surprise and excitement when she got on the phone with the Duke and Duchess," L.A. Works Executive Director Deborah Brutchey tells PEOPLE. "She knew of them, she knew a lot — she had been following Meghan's story quite a bit, so she was very excited that she had the opportunity to speak with them."
> 
> Brutchey says that the young woman was "really moved" by Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom."
> 
> "It was really significant for her because they saw her potential in a few short minutes, which actually really undid some damage that had been previously caused by a former teacher's doubt," she explains. "It was just amazing how they were able to connect and how their compassion, in just a short conversation, really made an impact and is going to forever inspire her."
> 
> The teenager's chat with Meghan and Harry went beyond just schoolwork.
> 
> "The conversation that they had was really about how do you overcome challenges in your life? And how do you stay true to your values? Things that are so relatable to young girls but also so public in what the Duke and Duchess have gone through," Brutchey says.
> 
> Meghan and Harry noticed that the young woman had sunflowers in her room. In a sweet gesture after their call, they sent her sunflowers as well as an encouraging note.
> 
> L.A. Works connects volunteers in California with a range of issues, from animal welfare and senior services to homelessness and the arts. But anyone can follow in Meghan and Harry's footsteps and make a difference, even amid the COVID-19 crisis.
> 
> "Mentoring has been one of the most meaningful ways for volunteers to give back, especially during this pandemic. Mentors play a huge role in inspiring young minds and helping kids realize their potential," Brutchey says. "Having The Duke and Duchess share their compassion and wisdom with a young girl from the I Have a Dream Foundation helped to spark a new confidence in her and reminds all of us that it only takes a few minutes to change a person's life forever."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Surprise Teen in Zoom Mentoring Session — and Send a Gift for Spring
> 
> 
> When a teenage girl signed on to a virtual mentoring session, she was surprised to see Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on her screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Mentoring a la Markle.
Girl “I’m arguing with my parents. They say I can’t have driving lessons till I finish my exams and they wouldn’t let me go to Lee’s party. It’s not fair! I know it’s not a big deal but I really want to be independent.”

H&M “Not a big deal? These people sound almost as evil as the press! You are probably the most persecuted person in the world after us. We suggest you demand all of your inheritance millions now, move across the world and do a series of tell-alls about what oppressors they are.”

girl “oh ok. That’s a bit different from what my big brother said. He said they are just being protective and if I study I’ll get a car for my birthday.”

H&M “A big brother?!! No! No! He’s undoubtedly even worse than your parents!”


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> Giving birth at home - why so secretive, I wonder.
> 
> I know women who have done it, but at Meg's age, isn't it more risky?



I would think so too... but the home birth thing seems to be really popular among the 30s "organic everything" set these days. Even Hillary Duff did a water birth in-home. With all that money, I'd be in the nicest suite in the nicest hospital with the most expensive doula money can buy!


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Mentoring a la Markle.
> Girl “I’m arguing with my parents. They say I can’t have driving lessons till I finish my exams and they wouldn’t let me go to Lee’s party. It’s not fair! I know it’s not a big deal but I really want to be independent.”
> 
> H&M “Not a big deal? These people sound almost as evil as the press! You are probably the most persecuted person in the world after us. We suggest you demand all of your inheritance millions now, move across the world and do a series of tell-all’s about what oppressors they are.”
> 
> girl “oh ok. That’s a bit different from what my big brother said. He said they are just being protective and if I study I’ll get a car for my birthday.”
> 
> H&M “A big brother?!! No! No! He’s undoubtedly even worse than your parents!”



Famous people really do get a pat on the back for just about anything these days. From article: "L.A. Works connects volunteers in California with a range of issues, from animal welfare and senior services to homelessness and the arts. But anyone can follow in Meghan and Harry's footsteps and make a difference, even amid the COVID-19 crisis." Normal people volunteer all the time... and they also have Zoom meetings all the time too. Is it REALLY volunteering if it's PR for your brand???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> This was supposedly scrubbed off the internet but it's still on. I don't know if its her but many have said it was her blog. She's like fatal attraction, and that woman in the movie The Hand That Rocks the Cradle.  Harry should be very scared but then again, he's a dimwitted never grown up boy/man who seems to have a fetish for his mother (which I find very vomit inducing) through MM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blog Archives
> 
> 
> So I have been crazy busy recently (hence the lack of posting). I have been doing photoshoots, interviews, TV appearances, screenings, working and this weekend, despite it being a religious holiday...
> 
> 
> 
> workingactress.weebly.com



Was that the anonymous blog where she sang an ode to her boobs? Was that before or after the boob job, and before or after the implant removal?


----------



## duna

CeeJay said:


> While I have an Olive tree in my front yard, it doesn't really bear 'fruit' per se, but our Neighbors have a Lemon tree which is fantastic and they are big & juicy lemons.  All that being said, if one was truly a good cook, you would NEVER, EVER use Olive Oil from the US; it has to be from Europe and most likely Italy (my favorite Olive Oil comes from Umbria)!!!
> 
> I have made Olive Cake several times and it is quite good in the summertime as it is a super-moist cake and with the Lemons, it is really a great dessert.  Sometimes, I have made a lemon glaze which I put on top, but not too much because I really don't like super sweet desserts!



ITA, olive oil from Umbria is my absolute favourite aswell!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Sounds delicious. I wonder how it'd turn out using oranges, blood oranges, or limes?



I think that will be fine. You can also use mandarin oranges / clementines.



bag-mania said:


> I'm going to say that that blog was not Meghan's. I can't see her ever writing about feeling bad about a project wrapping up and losing touch with the people involved. Quite the opposite in fact, Meghan would be one of the people who would stop taking the calls of someone like that. Beside, that person said "_and I was ready *to give up everything in England* to lead this new life_."  As far as I know Meghan has never lived in England before she met Harry, has she?



Good points. Then again, maybe she was just, uh, visualizing her new life. We already know Meghan and truth have a complicated relationship.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.



They hunted down her best friend on social media and harrassed her too. They are completely out of control.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There is is...I don't even know what to say.




This is absolutely disgusting  ! These people are behaving in the same exact way for which they attack journalists. These people should get their heads examined, together with their idols, H&M!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> ITA, olive oil from Umbria is my absolute favourite aswell!



I used to order from an organic Tuscan farm, it was the best. Then my mother made friends with some expat in Greece and buys her oil by the canister. I think I'll go back to the Italian oil though as this specific oil is really no bueno. I can use it for cooking but not for salads because it's so harsh on the tongue.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They hunted down her best friend on social media and harrassed her too. They are completely out of control.



Doesn't Twitter have a hateful conduct policy? I don't do social media outside of tpf but don't most platforms have some guidelines in place that might apply to woke liberals and not just 'unpopular' opinions?


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> Sounds delicious. I wonder how it'd turn out using oranges, blood oranges, or limes? On a totally different note, another great moist cake is apple/bourbon. I've heard that a lot of "Italian" olive oil is indeed shipped from Italy, but manufactured using oil from Greece and other countries. On the other hand, I don't see much difference in a few different degrees of latitude/longitude when it comes to oil, but that's to my very untrained oil palate. Wine, however.........I lerve sangiovese but will never buy Tignanello due to MM!



You'd be surprised at the difference in olive oils we have only within Italy. Oil from Liguria (Genoa region) is very light tasting, I don't like it, the central regions of Italy are the best IMO, especially Tuscany and Umbria. In the southern regions, like Puglia, oil is very strong tasting, I don't like that either. The taste of oil depends on the soil and temperature of the area, colder areas have lighter tasting oil while in hotter areas the oil tastes stronger.


----------



## limom

duna said:


> You'd be surprised at the difference in olive oils we have only within Italy. Oil from Liguria (Genoa region) is very light tasting, I don't like it, the central regions of Italy are the best IMO, especially Tuscany and Umbria. In the southern regions, like Puglia, oil is very strong tasting, I don't like that either. The taste of oil depends on the soil and temperature of the area, colder areas have lighter tasting oil while in hotter areas the oil tastes stronger.


Are fruits of different species or are there different processes?
It is difficult in the US to get quality, verified olive oils as there are so many scams.
I buy Californian and it is decent, imo.


----------



## duna

limom said:


> Are fruits of different species or are they different processes?
> It is difficult in the US to get quality, verified olive oils as there are so many scams.
> I buy Californian and it is decent, imo.



No, not different species of olives just different soils and climates : within Italy we have different climates, the north being much colder than the south.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Meghan and Harry REALLY should put out a statement calling off their squad from harassing people like this. I found this journalist pretty reasonable in interviews so it's a shame. Talk about them on forums, tweet about them, whatever... but geez to actually incite a mob to take them down is a bit much. This is the face of bullying.



Bullying is running rampant now. You should see the threads on our local elections. It's unbelievable.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> Bullying is running rampant now. You should see the threads on our local elections. It's unbelievable.


And the pandemic made everything worst, imho.
There was a sign by my local preschool BE KIND.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> We should ponder what it must be like to be mentored by Meghan and Harry about such topics as "how do you stay true to your values?"



Topics might include but not be limited to: 

How to extort money from someone by claiming racism.
How to get rich in Hollywood with no talent or marketable skills whatsoever after leaving as a B list actor.


----------



## kemilia

limom said:


> Are fruits of different species or are there different processes?
> It is difficult in the US to get quality, verified olive oils as there are so many scams.
> I buy Californian and it is decent, imo.


We only by Cali olive oil now after reading articles about imported oils not being pure olive oil, at one point (maybe even now) there were FDA issues. We have found a favorite and we stay with it, and we go through a lot of olive oil.

A neighbor of mine has a family olive grove/farm (whatever they are called) out in California and goes out there each year to help out (has this crazy big RV he and his wife drive). Last year they had to bury a lot of unusable olives due to some bad issues--fungus, insects, I don't know what and he said that was the hardest work he'd ever done. He loves the olives!


----------



## kemilia

Allisonfaye said:


> Bullying is running rampant now. You should see the threads on our local elections. It's unbelievable.


Totally agree. There is a Village Board election going on in our town right now (I am running for a low-level position and have kept quiet because I don't want the sh*t thrown at me too). I asked another candidate if this is how it always is, since I have never been a FB user, and she said nope, it is way worse now, crazy unsubstantiated "facts" just are unreal, and sadly believed by the masses.


----------



## limom

kemilia said:


> Totally agree. There is a Village Board election going on in our town right now (I am running for a low-level position and have kept quiet because I don't want the sh*t thrown at me too). I asked another candidate if this is how it always is, since I have never been a FB user, and she said nope, it is way worse now, crazy unsubstantiated "facts" just are unreal, and sadly believed by the masses.


Congrats and good luck with your run


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Who are the royal sources? Any guesses?
> 
> "_The Duchess of Sussex is expecting her daughter in early summer, royal sources tell us, and the baby will be the first-ever royal to be born in the US.
> 
> The birth of the baby girl — who will become princess when her grandfather Prince Charles eventually ascends the throne — could not be more different from that of her brother.
> 
> Meghan Markle is planning a home birth for her second child with Prince Harry at their sprawling Montecito estate._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry planning home birth for second child
> 
> 
> She is set to welcome a baby girl at their sprawling Montecito estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> One intrepid journalist reviews the B-Up coaching app —
> The full article is behind a paywall, so I’ve posted parts of it here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app
> 
> 
> BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 1 $e$$ion
> 
> 
> 
> *What I learned from using Prince Harry’s BetterUp coaching app*
> *BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at £1.2bn, but can it live up to the hype?*
> By Laurence Dodds, US Technology Reporter, San Francisco24 March 2021 • 11:25am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app has hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer". Among its clients are Facebook and Nasa
> 
> What's your Growth Mindset power level? Mine is at 85 out of 100. It's my best quality, handily beating my Empathy score of 68 and my Cognitive ability of 55. My other statistics could do with some work: Self-Awareness 35, Nutrition 31 and Physical Activity a risible 14. These ratings might sound like character statistics from some office-themed Dungeons and Dragons game. In fact, they are the measure of my workplace personality according to BetterUp, the San-Francisco-based life coaching app that has just hired Prince Harry as its first "chief impact officer".
> 
> BetterUp has an impressive Silicon Valley pedigree, having just been valued at $1.7bn (£1.2bn) in a $125m investment round led by Iconiq, an "ultra-secretive" and prestigious wealth management firm said to handle Mark Zuckerberg's fortune. Its pitch: to use artificial intelligence (AI) to deliver personalised coaching sessions designed to nourish "the whole person", to the benefit of both workers and employers.
> 
> So what can you learn about yourself from Prince Harry's new gig? I summoned up my self-improvement mindset and attempted to find out.
> 
> *Mental fitness vs mental health*
> Given the Prince's words, it may surprise you to learn that BetterUp is *not a mental health app* – at least not for individual users. Instead, it is wholly focused on performance and wellbeing at work, and seems designed primarily for corporate use as an employee benefit (which can include a "mental fitness" service called Care).
> 
> This is less Californian mysticism and meditation than high-flying Business Wellness, with TED talks about "empowerment" and "strategic planning" and a personality assessment that frames your high scores as "strengths" and your weaknesses as "development areas".
> 
> When entering your details, job title is a mandatory field – not that it would necessarily be very useful in Silicon Valley, where business cards might bear sobriquets such as "hacker", a "ninja", a "Jedi", a "Sherpa", a "wizard" or even "security princess" (no relation).
> In the past, BetterUp only sold its services to companies with more than 10,000 employees, with past clients including Facebook, LinkedIn, Salesforce, Logitech. Nasa and the US Federal Aviation Administration. Today lone individuals can try it too, getting one free coaching session before being asked to subscribe – and so I jumped in.
> 
> My first speed bump appeared within a few minutes. BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach. The company makes much of its AI algorithms, which it claims can match coaches to clients with "over 97pc accuracy".
> Yet at this stage there was no explicit mention of mental health and no place to note disabilities such as ADHD and autism. Consequently, none of the three coaches offered by the app –  and there seems to be no way forward without picking one  – listed expertise on those topics, at least beyond general allusions to "health and wellness", "mindfulness" and "stress".
> 
> BetterUp begins with a brief set of questions designed to match you with a coach:
> 
> For many users, this is a potential dealbreaker: a coach who does not understand your specific disabilities is unlikely to be as helpful as one who does, and at worst might be a hindrance. I requested more options via a manual email form and got similar options again, albeit with a little more "wellness".
> 
> It makes for a rather more common problem than the one faced by Prince Harry himself, who found that BetterUp's questions did not easily fit with his history as a working royal.
> 
> *Perhaps the limitation exists to avoid being classified as a healthcare app, which in the US comes with heavy regulations. *BetterUp's website is at pains to distinguish coaching from therapy, and to note that its services are not eligible for healthcare tax breaks. Still, it's not what I would call "whole person".
> 
> What you do get, once you're in, is a mixture of goal-setting tool, educational library and gamified life tracker. The first assignment is a 157-part "whole person model assessment", which asks about everything from your feelings towards your colleagues through your sleeping habits to your out-of-work friendships.
> 
> Do you surround yourself with people you can depend on? (Yes. I mean, I think so.) Do you often criticise yourself? (No, and it's disgusting.) How much attention do you pay to the ingredients in your food? (Less than I should!) Do you gravitate towards tasks that push you outside your comfort zone? (What do you think this is?)
> 
> *How much will it cost?*
> 
> My first free coaching session was helpful, if short. A respect for the process prevents me from saying too much. Still, as I went through the various questions and exercises, I could feel green shoots of productive self-examination begin to break soil.
> The problem is, can they survive here? The company says users will get real results after multiple sessions, but it is strikingly opaque about how much this will cost.
> 
> Neither in the app itself nor on BetterUp's website could I find any up-front information about subscription pricing. Coaches on the business review site Glassdoor described it as paying "very little", "below average coaching rates" and "almost no pay". A request for comment with my journalist's hat was not immediately answered.
> 
> Only after my first session did I receive an SMS message. "Congrats, Laurence!" it said. "This is a tremendous milestone. The next step is to subscribe..." The price was eye-watering: _*$499*_ (£364) per month, reduced with a discount for my "early interest" to $249 per month until the end of 2021.
> 
> Perhaps that kind of money flies from the purse of a Google or Facebook engineer as easily as a swallow from a barn ceiling. Many, however, would struggle to justify it simply for the sake of sharpening their careers, however dazzling the insights.
> Personally, I felt as if I had been coaxed into investing in the system, getting used to it, setting goals and developing hopes – and even, albeit briefly, making a connection with my coach – only to be hit shortly afterwards with a fairly large request wrapped in an empty compliment. Was my whole person nourished by this? My whole foot.
> 
> Clearly, coaching is an investment, and I don't begrudge an expert their due. Still, those of us not sixth in line to the throne of the United Kingdom would appreciate some "honest feedback" about the size of that investment from the start. Might I suggest a TED talk that I found in the BetterUp app? The title is "Know your worth, and then ask for it".
> _This article was updated at 6am on Thursday, March 25 to incorporate an account of BetterUp's coaching and prices._
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Personally, I would rather buy an Hermes scarf each month than pay for this app.


I mean seriously, who wouldn’t?!!?  (And this is coming from someone who has loads of boxes of unused Hermes scarves !)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Wrong.








						Which Americans were born with royal titles?
					

With the news that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expecting their second child, we are looking at royals who were born as US citizens. We know all about the Americans who married into royal fam…




					royalcentral.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

poopsie said:


> Doesn't Twitter have a hateful conduct policy? I don't do social media outside of tpf but don't most platforms have some guidelines in place that might apply to woke liberals and not just 'unpopular' opinions?



Nope. Generally those people are given a pass. Did you see what Kathie Griffin posted and SHE still has an account.


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> I mean seriously, who wouldn’t?!!?  (And this is coming from someone who has loads of boxes of unused Hermes scarves !)


I take an in house hair stylist, masseuse and make up artist Daily like Anna Wintour.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Are these the racist British media at work or more law suits in the works???



We’ve been saying this about Meghan for months...manipulative, narcissistic, etc.!  We are now the experts!


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Meghan and Harry's "compassion, humility and wisdom." Really? They wouldn't know these values if they fell over them. A few minutes on Zoom apparently did magic and they were able to asses the girl's capabilities and future potentials, then healed her emotional scars. So lovely! What a pity that they were unable to use their magic healing power in their own family. I'd be interested in the race of this young girl.  Sorry, it's just so hard not to be sarcastic.
> 
> 
> Good luck! This time they pay the bills so they can do what they choose. Can a foreign born royal inherit the throne?
> 
> Completely OT: What happened with M's hair on those pics at the Petition site? Extensions or a wig?


wow, like a fairy godmother....magic....they don't plan to actually mentor the girl?  just one conversation and everything is fixed?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Giving birth at home - why so secretive, I wonder.
> 
> I know women who have done it, but at Meg's age, isn't it more risky?


well, with their money they can easily have a doctor there, rather than a mid-wife (if they choose to)....still not at a hospital but anyway....


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Jayne1 said:


> Giving birth at home - why so secretive, I wonder.
> 
> I know women who have done it, but at Meg's age, isn't it more risky?



I mean, I'm not even a celebrity and I'd love to give birth at home if I had the money to get proper care. 

With their money, they can literally set up an entire operating theatre in their home if they need it. So much better than being in a sterile hospital with whatever nurses and doctors show up that day. Not to mention, from their point of view, worries about who is going to talk to the press.

I personally would love to have more control over the entire situation rather than being beholden to chance! Don't really think this is a fair criticism.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> well, with their money they can easily have a doctor there, rather than a mid-wife (if they choose to)....still not at a hospital but anyway....


It is a huge risk still.
Unless they have an OR and and ER and nicu. Who knows with those two?


----------



## limom

OogleAtLuxury said:


> I mean, I'm not even a celebrity and I'd love to give birth at home if I had the money to get proper care.
> 
> With their money, they can literally set up an entire operating theatre in their home if they need it. So much better than being in a sterile hospital with whatever nurses and doctors show up that day. Not to mention, from their point of view, worries about who is going to talk to the press.
> 
> I personally would love to have more control over the entire situation rather than being beholden to chance! Don't really think this is a fair criticism.


Oh please, she is going to squat and pop the baby, She will be born in the bushes or chicken coop!


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

limom said:


> Oh please, she is going to squat and pop the baby will be born in the bushes or chicken coop!



Right, so she can try the natural way but still have all the resources at the ready in the case of complications. That's my point.


----------



## limom

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Right, so she can try the natural way but still have all the resources at the ready in the case of complications. That's my point.


I agree with you. 
The last part was a sarcastic joke


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I feel like she could name her daughter.....Lemon.  Like Lemon Breeland in the Hart of Dixie tv show.  Maybe all of these lemons are a hint.  Lemon Diana.  That’s it



I'd be surprised if they called their daughter Lemon. In the US "lemon" is a slang term for a defective car. That would be a horrible connotation for a little girl.

Besides if they named their kid after fruit you know they would pick something that was super trendy, like Pomelo or Chayote.


----------



## bag-mania

When you "give birth at home" you don't have to go through the rigmarole of pretending to rush to the hospital for the paparazzi. You can relax at home and wait until the nice, clean, healthy baby is delivered to you after the surrogate went through the 12 hours of labor at the hospital.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A recap of Archie’s birth - always rumors, always drama


*Meghan Markle Gave Birth to Her Son Archie in a Hospital, Despite Rumors of a Home Birth*
*Little Archie's birth certificate confirms that he was delivered at Portland Hospital in London.*
By Caroline Hallemann
May 17, 2019
Watch: Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Introduce Their Baby to the...
Weeks before the royal baby was born, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle announced that they intended to keep plans surrounding their child's birth private. 
"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are very grateful for the goodwill they have received from people throughout the United Kingdom and around the world as they prepare to welcome their baby," reads the statement released by Buckingham Palace. 
"Their Royal Highnesses have taken a personal decision to keep the plans around the arrival of their baby private. The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family."


Notably, it was never announced _where_ Meghan planned to give birth. This was a major change from the Duchess of Cambridge's birth plans. For each of her three children, the media was notified weeks in advance that she would be giving birth at the Lindo Wing in London's St Mary's Hospital, where Princess Diana had also delivered. In contrast, Meghan was rumored to want a home birth, harkening back to a much older royal tradition (all four of the Queen's children were born at home), though that was never officially confirmed.

Today, with the publication of Archie's birth certificate, it is confirmed that Meghan gave birth at Portland Hospital in London.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
Previously, several publications had reporting that Meghan's son was born in a hospital. _The Daily Mail_'s Rebecca English first broke the news that Meghan had given birth in a hospital on May 6, reporting that the Duchess "was whisked off amid such secrecy that even senior royals weren't told."

"It is not known whether Meghan, 37, was induced but sources say she remained there overnight before her baby was born at 5.26am on Monday morning, with an elated Prince Harry at her side," English reported. 

By the time the royal family announced the arrival of the royal baby, Meghan and Harry were back at Frogmore Cottage, their new home in Windsor.

"The Duchess’s mother, Doria Ragland, who is overjoyed by the arrival of her first grandchild, is with Their Royal Highnesses at Frogmore Cottage," reads the announcement. Naturally, that wording caused some speculation regarding whether or not Meghan had given birth at home. 

The fact that the bulletin officially announcing the royal baby's birth, which sat on an easel in front of Buckingham Palace, did not include the names of the doctors who attended to the birth, also prompted questions. 

And _The Sun_'s royal correspondent Emily Andrews seemed to suggest that palace aides were unclear in how they addressed the situation.

"We were led to believe by palace aides that baby Sussex was born at Frogmore Cottage, but in fact he arrived at private London hospital the Portland," she wrote on Twitter. "All other details still the same! Can’t wait to see a picture of him on Wednesday with his proud parents!"

More:  https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...-baby-archie-harrison-hospital-birth-details/


----------



## scarlet555

rumors about where Arche was born?  maybe no one knew cuz cringe didn't want people to know where surrogate was... cringe would have made a royal announcement where she was going to give birth, she thrives on the publicity and hospital staff would have complained about her royal pain in the @ss behavior through rumors also, there is always rumors about her attitude no matter where she goes...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

not sure if this has already been posted








						Britain’s Top Bishop Ends the Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Backyard Wedding Debate
					

The leader of the Anglican church says he would have committed a criminal offence had he participated in a sham televised wedding.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this for H&M?

Leader of landmark race review warns people should not throw out accusations of institutional racism 'willy-nilly' after probe found no evidence and concluded Britain is a 'model to the world' on diversity

Dr Tony Sewell said people deploy the term too readily as a catch-all phrase 
He argued that institutional racism should be limited to 'deep-seated' biases 
Matthew Ryder QC said the report had 'glaring' problems in its conclusions  









						Race review author says people say institutional racism 'willy-nilly'
					

Dr Tony Sewell said many people  deploy the term too readily as a catch-all phrase - and that they 'don't even know what they're talking about'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I'd be surprised if they called their daughter Lemon. In the US "lemon" is a slang term for a defective car. That would be a horrible connotation for a little girl.
> 
> Besides if they named their kid after fruit you know they would pick something that was super trendy, like Pomelo or Chayote.


If it were a boy, he'd be named after the latest superfood Jackfruit! 

Pomelo - untrendy people will keep thinking her parents misspelled Pamela


----------



## zen1965

^^


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> hospital staff would have complained about her royal pain in the @ss behavior through rumors also, there is always rumors about her attitude no matter where she goes...



You know, I really don't think she faked the pregnancy though I cannot explain e.g. the everchanging bump, but that is a really good point. But maybe the hospital keeps a really tight grip on it's employees so no rumours leave the house.


----------



## bellecate

lalame said:


> I would think so too... but the home birth thing seems to be really popular among the 30s "organic everything" set these days. Even Hillary Duff did a water birth in-home. With all that money, I'd be in the nicest suite in the nicest hospital with the most expensive doula money can buy!



She better hope then that the baby is born 'on time' otherwise she will no longer fit among the *30s "organic everything" set *and be thrust into that *40's *crowd.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I agree with all the postings on the up side (evading paparazzi, comfort at home etc) of them having the baby at home. I'd add, their mansion will go up in value as a place where a 'royal' was born.  $$$$


----------



## RAINDANCE

Paddypower are giving odd of 7 to 1 for Diana as the name of the baby.
Contemplating a tenner.
My personal guess is that they will go for a hyphenated double name.
That way they can use Diana but claim a modern twist.

Diana - Rose
Diana - Louise
Diana - Mae / Diana - May 
Diana - Jane
Diana - Marie
Diana - Jade
Diana - Rae

Was Archie Harrison meant to be Archie Harry's son ?
Is there an equivalent for daughter ?

I really can't make any of the other female family names work with Diana.
It doesn't lend itself to an easy combination to my ear.
Think we can rule out Diana-Kate


----------



## limom

Diana Doria. Aka as Deedee


----------



## DeMonica

jennlt said:


> I think BetterUp may not have noticed that they tweeted a diagram of all the reasons why they shouldn't have hired Harry
> 
> 
> View attachment 5039973


*Hear and appreciate where people are coming from:* We love you all and we love diversity - as long as you think like us and act as told. If not you are a racist, sexist and all-round horrible person. We encountered a few worthless journos like that and got them sacked. They deserved it - they didn't appreciated Meghan.
*Voice ready to recognize people for their work:* my brother relentlessly fulfilled his obligations and substituted for dad and granny when needed, didn't make any drama about going through covid, but he's mean person and his mean wife made mine cry (or the opposite? Who cares?), so deserves whatever comes him or the wife - he didn't like Meghan enough. 
*Heart full of empathy:* my grandpa is almost 100 and in a serious condition, not to mention grandma, who's 95 and worried sick about grandpa and the country, but let's drag their name through the mud now. Never a better time to do it. If they kick the bucket, (my dad will be king and my child finally end up being a prince), they deserve it - they didn't obey with Meghan's request.
*Vision you're willing and able to share:* Megs should be queen - because what Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Peasant, learn to curtsy, even better: kneel!
*Open arms to build relationship and invite participation: *Everyone- technically anyone - is welcome, who helps us getting more media coverage, making a penny or one step further on our way to dominate the world. Although: if you don't dance to our tune we will cut ties with your right away and erase you from our lives. It happened to our relatives, but they deserved it - they didn't obey Meghan.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> Lol guys, most of these are normal words and terms. Don't blame them if someone strings them together in an odd way.


It's true. It's the way these words and terms used. I'm a woman and equal rights are obviously important to me, but whenever I hear "empowering women" I just throw up a little.


----------



## rose60610

Diana Banana?  (In calligraphy of course)


----------



## DeMonica

Jayne1 said:


> Giving birth at home - why so secretive, I wonder.
> 
> I know women who have done it, but at Meg's age, isn't it more risky?


It is definitely risky, but probably because of 1. Zara 2. Doria (this is what a daughter of a yoga instructor would do) she'd like to do it in theory. I think that in practice she'll go to a luxury hospital and deliver the baby there like last time claiming emergency. I don't think that they would spend the money (their money this time, not the British taxpayers) to turn the mansion into a hospital, but the home birth in the mansion looks cool in the paper.


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, I really don't think she faked the pregnancy though I cannot explain e.g. the everchanging bump, but that is a really good point. But maybe the hospital keeps a really tight grip on it's employees so no rumours leave the house.


After that Australian radio prank which had happened during Kate Middleton's first pregnancy and then the nurse committed suicide,  the hospital probably issues strict orders to maintain secrecy. I'm sure they treat many celebrity patients at Royal Portland, therefore privacy must be extremely important.


----------



## DeMonica

limom said:


> Diana Doria. Aka as Deedee


That's a good bet. 
Or something flowery: Poppy - and it's also the State Flower of California
Or something new-age: Unity or the like
Or maybe after a famous black lady: Michelle


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

Poppy is a lovely name. If the girl is a redhead even better.


----------



## Chanbal

Recollections may vary...

"_Daily Express royal editor Richard Palmer wrote: “We’ve covered this story in print today too, although to be fair the Archbishop is only saying on the record what senior figures in the Church of England and the Sussexes were saying on March 8: there was no wedding three days earlier.”

He added: “*Numerous claims were made by Harry and Meghan in the Oprah interview that don’t appear to be based on fact but this is perhaps the clearest example of recollections varying*_.”









						Meghan Markle interview ‘doesn’t appear to be based on fact’
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey "doesn't appear to be based on fact", a royal expert has pointed out.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow.  Picking on Anne is never advisable -
_Meghan and Harry have used that genuine concern of a loving aunt, knowing that because she is down to earth, experienced, modest, intelligent and sensible, and that *you cannot make a sow's ear into a silk purse*. _









						Lady Colin Campbell claims Princess Anne is royal accused of racism
					

Socialite Lady Colin Campbell has claimed the Queen's daughter Princess Anne is the royal Meghan and Harry accused of racism in their bombshell interview with Oprah




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_The Duke added of the Press: ‘Unfortunately, if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society.’_

Who is he to say what the rest of society thinks????!!!!!  99.9% of us can distinguish between media and reality. 
Always the pompous a$$.


----------



## Chanbal

LADY Colin Campbell has sensationally claimed she knows which member of the Royal Family was accused of racism by Meghan Markle.

*But the controversial author, who is known for her outspoken opinions, insisted the race row is a "misunderstanding".*

She claimed in the tell-all chat that a conversation had been had with Prince Harry and a "family" member about "how dark" their unborn son's skin would be.

But the 39-year-old declined to say who had started those conversations, saying it would be "damaging" for them.

Prince Harry also said he would "never share" the full details of the discussion.

However, he claimed he had been asked at the start of his relationship with Meghan how dark the skin colour of their children might be.

Oprah Winfrey later revealed it was not the Queen or Prince Philip who made the comment.

Now, Lady C, who has appeared on a string of reality TV shows and is famed for her eccentricity, has claimed she knows who has been accused of making the comment.

Making the unconfirmed comments in a YouTube video, the controversial royal commentator said: “I know who it is - I’ve known for a little while who it is.”

*She later insisted the race row, which has plunged the Royal Family into crisis, was taken out of context, claiming: "There were no concerns about Meghan’s colour."*

Citing a member of the Royal circle, she said the person had been "rightly concerned".

*She claimed: "Not because of Meghan’s colour, but because of Meghan’s inability and determination to remain unable to appreciate the cultural differences and to actually have respect for the institution in to which she was marrying, and the family in which she was marrying."*

In the lengthy clip, shared with her 77,000 subscribers, Lady C claimed the objections over Meghan had been on the ground of "character" and "personality".

She added: "(The Royal Family member) did not think Harry should marry Meghan Markle and thought that everybody going along with it was making a great mistake."

Clarifying what she meant by "the wrong sort of American" Lady C went on to explain that Meghan is a "cool Californian babe" who believes "all of life's problems can be solved with a trip to the beach and avocado".

The Royal Family has not commented on who the Royal Family member Meghan and Harry were referring to in their Oprah chat - but have said they are dealing with the matter "privately".











						Royal biographer Lady C claims she knows royal who Meghan accused of 'racism'
					

LADY Colin Campbell has sensationally claimed she knows which member of the Royal Family was accused of racism by Meghan Markle. But the controversial author, who is known for her outspoken opinion…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

This is hilarious! _Vanity Fair_ is saying Meghan and Harry are going to take "proper time off" after the birth of the baby. How is that even possible? Don't you have to actually work before you can take time off? I hope the fools at BetterUp, Aspen Foundation, Spotify, and of course, Netflix, are starting to figure out what a bad deal they made if they think they can get any work out of these two spoiled, lazy grifters.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Both Plan on “Proper Time Off” After Their Baby’s Birth*
*Reportedly planning a home birth in Montecito, the Sussexes will take time to bond as a family of four. *
After scrapping plans for a home birth for baby *Archie, Meghan Markle*  and *Prince Harry* are now planning to deliver their second child, a girl, at their home in Montecito. Sources have also told _Vanity Fair_ that the Sussexes both plan to take leave following the birth, so that they can spend proper time together as a family.

_Page Six_ first reported the new plans for a home birth, with a source saying of Meghan, “She has a beautiful home in California, it's a beautiful setting to give birth to her baby girl.” Before Archie’s birth in 2019, there were plans in place for a birthing pool at Meghan and Harry’s home at Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. But when the baby was a week overdue, they scrapped the plan in favor of a safer hospital birth; Archie was born at London’s Portland Hospital on May 6. It is understood that Meghan’s labor with Archie was fairly straightforward, which means there should be no issue with planning a home birth for their daughter.

Meghan’s representatives did not comment on P_age Six_ report, but sources close to the couple confirmed that they plan to take both paternity and maternity leave when their little girl arrives. “They will both take some proper time off,” a friend said. “It will be the summer and they want to make sure they both take their leave so they have some real quality time together once the baby arrives.”

When Archie was born, Harry’s paternity leave was cut short just days after the birth when he flew to the Netherlands for a work commitment, while Meghan was hard at work during her pregnancy and after Archie’s birth, editing an issue of British _Vogue_ and designing a capsule collection for Smart Works.

The new Sussex baby, whom Harry and Meghan have said will be their last, will become eighth in line to the throne, after *Prince Charles, Prince William*, William's three children *George, Charlotte,* and *Louis*, *Prince Harry,* and Archie. Meghan and Harry’s daughter will also be the first royal baby born in America— which means, in theory, she could even be eligible to be president someday.

The timing of the baby’s arrival, who is due in the summer, could affect whether Harry is back in the UK for the unveiling of the Diana statue in July at Kensington Palace. Sources close to Harry say he is determined to be by his brother’s side for the occasion, but that it will depend on when their daughter is born and Covid travel restrictions.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Both Plan on “Proper Time Off” After Their Baby’s Birth
					

Reportedly planning a home birth in Montecito, the Sussexes will take time to bond as a family of four.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## csshopper

Got curious about how Birth Certificates for Non Hospital Deliveries are handled here in CA. Very interesting, and MM and her handbag husband may be shocked to realize the level of detail that is mandated and that if the Midwife is not registered (thinking her Mom?), one of them is going to have to trot down to the local office and do the birth registration, photo ID required, just like the plebes, no Royal scribes to dispatch to do the paper work. If there is a surrogate involved, they have a whole other set of issues to deal with. In most cases this all would be so mundane and automatic, but given the games they like to play, it's nice to know there is a legal transparency involved in a California Birth Certificate that applies to everyone. 

The packet containing a pamphlet and work sheets,
*Out of Hospital Birth Packet*
https://cchealth.org/vital-registration/pdf/Out-of-Hospital-Birth-Packet.pdf - Cached - Similar pages
Information to Help Register Out-of-*Hospital Births* ... The *California* Department of Public Health-Vital Records (CDPH-VR) ... Share the worksheet with the parent (*s*) of the child so they can help gather ... *Birth* name of Parent Giving *Birth* (fields 9A, 9B, 9C, on child's *birth* certificate), *unless a certified copy of a surrogate court.

Fact 2: Pregnancy of the Person Giving Birth*
To substantiate the pregnancy of the person giving birth, the parents may provide a pregnancy test verification form or a letter that meets all of the following conditions:
• From a physician, professionally licensed midwife, or clinic.
• Written on the doctor, midwife, or clinic official letterhead (not on a prescription
pad).
• Signed (not stamped) by the doctor, midwife, or clinic representative or nurse. • Contains the current issued professional license number of the physician or midwife who signed the letter.
The pregnancy test verification form or letter must include all of the following information:
• The name of person giving birth.
• The date when the person giving birth was first seen by the doctor or midwife
(this date may be after the date of birth).
• The results of the person giving birth’s prenatal or postpartum exams or
pregnancy tests.
• The date of the person giving birth’s last menstrual period.
• The date the baby was born, or was expected to be born (due date).

*Who is required to register out-of-hospital births?*
When a baby is born outside a hospital, the physician or certified nurse midwife/licensed midwife who attended the birth is responsible for registering the birth with the local registrar in the county where the birth occurred (HSC 102415)._ If the out-of-hospital birth was not attended by a physician or professionally licensed midwife, either one of the parents is responsible for registering the birth._

By law the birth must be registered within 10 days.

The birth certificate is a legal document.
An amendment form is required to make corrections to the birth certificate.
The birth certificate will become a two-page document if an amendment is requested after the
original has been processed.
Many changes on the birth certificate require the applicant to go to court for a court order,
including reversing the order of last names (surnames).
Parents may have problems receiving benefits, traveling on an airline, or obtaining a passport
or Social Security number for their child if the birth certificate is not true and correct.
It can take several weeks to apply an amendment. The processing time for amendments can
be located on the California Department of Public Health-Vital Records website.


----------



## Allisonfaye

OogleAtLuxury said:


> I mean, I'm not even a celebrity and I'd love to give birth at home if I had the money to get proper care.
> 
> With their money, they can literally set up an entire operating theatre in their home if they need it. So much better than being in a sterile hospital with whatever nurses and doctors show up that day. Not to mention, from their point of view, worries about who is going to talk to the press.
> 
> I personally would love to have more control over the entire situation rather than being beholden to chance! Don't really think this is a fair criticism.



If you were having surgery, you would most likely want a sterile environment. I know I would.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Got curious about how Birth Certificates for Non Hospital Deliveries are handled here in CA. Very interesting, and MM and her handbag husband may be shocked to realize the level of detail that is mandated and that if the Midwife is not registered (thinking her Mom?), one of them is going to have to trot down to the local office and do the birth registration, photo ID required, just like the plebes, no Royal scribes to dispatch to do the paper work. If there is a surrogate involved, they have a whole other set of issues to deal with. In most cases this all would be so mundane and automatic, but given the games they like to play, it's nice to know there is a legal transparency involved in a California Birth Certificate that applies to everyone.
> 
> The packet containing a pamphlet and work sheets,
> *Out of Hospital Birth Packet*
> https://cchealth.org/vital-registration/pdf/Out-of-Hospital-Birth-Packet.pdf - Cached - Similar pages
> Information to Help Register Out-of-*Hospital Births* ... The *California* Department of Public Health-Vital Records (CDPH-VR) ... Share the worksheet with the parent (*s*) of the child so they can help gather ... *Birth* name of Parent Giving *Birth* (fields 9A, 9B, 9C, on child's *birth* certificate), *unless a certified copy of a surrogate court.
> 
> Fact 2: Pregnancy of the Person Giving Birth*
> To substantiate the pregnancy of the person giving birth, the parents may provide a pregnancy test verification form or a letter that meets all of the following conditions:
> • From a physician, professionally licensed midwife, or clinic.
> • Written on the doctor, midwife, or clinic official letterhead (not on a prescription
> pad).
> • Signed (not stamped) by the doctor, midwife, or clinic representative or nurse. • Contains the current issued professional license number of the physician or midwife who signed the letter.
> The pregnancy test verification form or letter must include all of the following information:
> • The name of person giving birth.
> • The date when the person giving birth was first seen by the doctor or midwife
> (this date may be after the date of birth).
> • The results of the person giving birth’s prenatal or postpartum exams or
> pregnancy tests.
> • The date of the person giving birth’s last menstrual period.
> • The date the baby was born, or was expected to be born (due date).
> 
> *Who is required to register out-of-hospital births?*
> When a baby is born outside a hospital, the physician or certified nurse midwife/licensed midwife who attended the birth is responsible for registering the birth with the local registrar in the county where the birth occurred (HSC 102415)._ If the out-of-hospital birth was not attended by a physician or professionally licensed midwife, either one of the parents is responsible for registering the birth._
> 
> By law the birth must be registered within 10 days.
> 
> The birth certificate is a legal document.
> An amendment form is required to make corrections to the birth certificate.
> The birth certificate will become a two-page document if an amendment is requested after the
> original has been processed.
> Many changes on the birth certificate require the applicant to go to court for a court order,
> including reversing the order of last names (surnames).
> Parents may have problems receiving benefits, traveling on an airline, or obtaining a passport
> or Social Security number for their child if the birth certificate is not true and correct.
> It can take several weeks to apply an amendment. The processing time for amendments can
> be located on the California Department of Public Health-Vital Records website.



Now you know they have a legal team who have been working on their behalf, suing the tabloids, setting up business contracts with gullible companies, creating a tax shelter, etc. They will have one of those lawyers do the paperwork and filing, no matter how, when, and where the baby arrives.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I'd be surprised if they called their daughter Lemon. In the US "lemon" is a slang term for a defective car. That would be a horrible connotation for a little girl.
> 
> Besides if they named their kid after fruit you know they would pick something that was super trendy, like Pomelo or Chayote.



Chayote would be a _great_ name for a Hilaria/Alec offspring!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Chayote would be a _great_ name for a Hilaria/Alec offspring!



At their rate of baby-making I'm sure they will eventually get around to it.


----------



## lalame

I don't think they're THAT kind of rich that they could have a whole hospital room/OR set up in their home just for this birth. That's like a billionaire-level lifestyle.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> This is hilarious! _Vanity Fair_ is saying Meghan and Harry are going to take "proper time off" after the birth of the baby. How is that even possible? Don't you have to actually work before you can take time off? I hope the fools at BetterUp, Aspen Foundation, Spotify, and of course, Netflix, are starting to figure out what a bad deal they made if they think they can get any work out of these two spoiled, lazy grifters.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Both Plan on “Proper Time Off” After Their Baby’s Birth*
> *Reportedly planning a home birth in Montecito, the Sussexes will take time to bond as a family of four. *
> After scrapping plans for a home birth for baby *Archie, Meghan Markle*  and *Prince Harry* are now planning to deliver their second child, a girl, at their home in Montecito. Sources have also told _Vanity Fair_ that the Sussexes both plan to take leave following the birth, so that they can spend proper time together as a family.
> 
> _Page Six_ first reported the new plans for a home birth, with a source saying of Meghan, “She has a beautiful home in California, it's a beautiful setting to give birth to her baby girl.” Before Archie’s birth in 2019, there were plans in place for a birthing pool at Meghan and Harry’s home at Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. But when the baby was a week overdue, they scrapped the plan in favor of a safer hospital birth; Archie was born at London’s Portland Hospital on May 6. It is understood that Meghan’s labor with Archie was fairly straightforward, which means there should be no issue with planning a home birth for their daughter.
> 
> Meghan’s representatives did not comment on P_age Six_ report, but sources close to the couple confirmed that they plan to take both paternity and maternity leave when their little girl arrives. “They will both take some proper time off,” a friend said. “It will be the summer and they want to make sure they both take their leave so they have some real quality time together once the baby arrives.”
> 
> When Archie was born, Harry’s paternity leave was cut short just days after the birth when he flew to the Netherlands for a work commitment, while Meghan was hard at work during her pregnancy and after Archie’s birth, editing an issue of British _Vogue_ and designing a capsule collection for Smart Works.
> 
> The new Sussex baby, whom Harry and Meghan have said will be their last, will become eighth in line to the throne, after *Prince Charles, Prince William*, William's three children *George, Charlotte,* and *Louis*, *Prince Harry,* and Archie. Meghan and Harry’s daughter will also be the first royal baby born in America— which means, in theory, she could even be eligible to be president someday.
> 
> The timing of the baby’s arrival, who is due in the summer, could affect whether Harry is back in the UK for the unveiling of the Diana statue in July at Kensington Palace. Sources close to Harry say he is determined to be by his brother’s side for the occasion, but that it will depend on when their daughter is born and Covid travel restrictions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Both Plan on “Proper Time Off” After Their Baby’s Birth
> 
> 
> Reportedly planning a home birth in Montecito, the Sussexes will take time to bond as a family of four.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



This is just embarrassing. An article about their relaxing time off work, in their beautiful home, in a beautiful setting.... unlike last time when she was busy after birth working on her (voluntary commitment) VOGUE ISSUE??? I swear if I see one more article taking pains to point out their "beautiful Montecito home"... and these are the same people complaining about getting cut off from daddy pocketbook? Barf.


----------



## Jayne1

This secrecy with the two births is so odd.  It's almost like they have something to hide.


----------



## Lodpah

I saw a video of the trooping of the color when MM tried to slink her way to be close to the Queen and Princess Anne stepped in front of her. I guess there’s a protocol for these type of things. So it makes sense that MM would go after Princess Anne but MM does not know how tough PA is. I mean remember her kidnapppng when she outsmarted the kidnapper. It’s the quiet ones you gotta fear or respect.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Although I might be wrong but I think they would bring in a boutique/concierge ob/gyn physician for the birth at home.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Although I might be wrong but I think they would bring in a boutique/concierge ob/gyn physician for the birth at home.


yes, they are at a level where health insurance doesn't matter that much they can pay cash
Which of course is true of psychiatric help too...could have called someone and paid cash when she was falling apart - allegedly


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> I don't think they're THAT kind of rich that they could have a whole hospital room/OR set up in their home just for this birth. That's like a billionaire-level lifestyle.


Their home is 13 miles from a hospital, Cottage Health, in Santa Barbara. From what I read on line, Midwives use this hospital for back up, if possible, if there are medical complications in the birth.


----------



## lalame

Hermes Zen said:


> Although I might be wrong but I think they would bring in a boutique/concierge ob/gyn physician for the birth at home.



Home calls are definitely a thing but I think the concern here is with risky births, if something goes wrong the doctor isn't really going to make any surgical interventions in a private home.  But for all I know, she lives 5 mins away from a hospital and all will be well.


----------



## bag-mania

E! had this about Meghan's lie (or _fib_ as they call it) about the wedding. While all three hosts are mostly defending her, they acknowledge that it wasn't true. It isn't much, but at least shows like this are beginning to ask questions.






						Celebrity Videos, Red Carpet Videos, Movie Trailers - E! Online
					

See hot celebrity videos, E! News Now clips, interviews, movie premiers, exclusives, and more!




					www.eonline.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> E! had this about Meghan's lie (or _fib_ as they call it) about the wedding. While all three hosts are mostly defending her, they acknowledge that it wasn't true. It isn't much, but at least shows like this are beginning to ask questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Celebrity Videos, Red Carpet Videos, Movie Trailers - E! Online
> 
> 
> See hot celebrity videos, E! News Now clips, interviews, movie premiers, exclusives, and more!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


uugh....I got as far as her saying "this thing, this spectacle is for the world"....couldn't watch any more.....I don't know her but she just seems like such a phony to me


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> uugh....I got as far as her saying "this thing, this spectacle is for the world"....couldn't watch any more.....I don't know her but she just seems like such a phony to me



I get what she's saying, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the point she's making... but she really does have a way of making anything sound so sanctimonious. A NORMAL way of saying this would be... "The wedding was so lovely and I'm glad people enjoyed it as much as we did. We actually exchanged our vows privately the night before too."


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I get what she's saying, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the point she's making... but she really does have a way of making anything sound so sanctimonious. A NORMAL way of saying this would be... "The wedding was so lovely and I'm glad people enjoyed it as much as we did. We actually exchanged our vows privately the night before too."


you said it much better
but regardless, I think she wanted the big spectacle, the long veil, the carriage....all of it.  no one forced it on her.  now it was for the world.  gimme a break


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> uugh....I got as far as her saying "this thing, this spectacle is for the world"....couldn't watch any more.....I don't know her but she just seems like such a phony to me



 We've got to have more fortitude than that, sdkitty. We're watching a raving egomaniac with a persecution complex. She's not going to come across as modest or charming.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> you said it much better
> but regardless, I think she wanted the big spectacle, the long veil, the carriage....all of it.  no one forced it on her.  now it was for the world.  gimme a break



I know, she really does have a way of making everything sound so "us vs them," like she was dragged into it kicking and screaming. Even if she hated the experience, the gracious thing to do would be to respect that this was a big celebrated event for many people (esp taxpayers).


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> you said it much better
> but regardless, I think she wanted the big spectacle, the long veil, the carriage....all of it.  no one forced it on her.  now it was for the world.  gimme a break



Can you imagine? There would have been absolute hell to pay if she didn't get the full princess experience for her wedding. Oprah would have gotten an earful if Meghan felt the wedding had been cheapened in any way.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> We've got to have more fortitude than that, sdkitty. We're watching a raving egomaniac with a persecution complex. She's not going to come across as modest or charming.


but I don't have to listen to her


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> You are asking me to do what I don't believe in - it's what H&M believe in "no old white guys"
> 
> If you look at leadership 30 https://www.betterup.com/en-us/about-us/leadership-team
> 
> The leadership is still hierarchical in order, i.e their 'leadership' page is_ their_ truth, not the truth. In my organisation we have lots of people who are called 'leaders', vice-leaders, Assistant-vice-leaders but there's still one man who really counts and makes all the decisions.
> 
> Betterup leadership team page:
> 
> Top row 3 guys have the most space i.e bigger pictures = Founders/CEO and a Prince/Duke
> 
> Traditional: They have more space like First Class on a plane. Physiologically, the bigger their picture, the more important they look and ultimately are because that's what are shared understanding of space makes us believe.
> Contemporary: They share the same page as lower orders to shut 'woke' people up (sending them back to sleep) into only reading 'Our Leadership' and seeing a mixed and diverse 'leadership' with a fairly even distribution of M/F faces. Everyone looks faces/pics first and only reads text if they are interested in a particular person. In order to surmise the signified strict hierarchy of the company you'd have to analyse more carefully:
> 
> Next, 4 in rows (making the top row the most important i.e. the real leaders)
> The roles are downgrade towards the bottom
> *3 on the top and 5 Chiefs and one President = 9 and only 2 are women *
> The women are head of what they're usually head of Products and Marketing.
> 
> Then the 'leadership' goes _down _to VPs / Directors / Head
> *Bottom 3 rows = 10 employees, 8 are women, 2 men.
> All below-VP roles are women. *
> 
> Just in case you think the 3 on the top have bigger pics because there's only 3 and is a design issue, the 2 women on the bottom row have the same size pics as everyone else.
> 
> That's only one way of analysing. Diversity officers are like marketing, they only present things better to a 'woke' crowd that are already there.



13 miles is a long way if there is an actual medical emergency during the birth. Seconds can count.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry @papertiger, I somehow quoted the wrong post!


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Home calls are definitely a thing but I think the concern here is with risky births, if something goes wrong the doctor isn't really going to make any surgical interventions in a private home.  But for all I know, she lives 5 mins away from a hospital and all will be well.


Is there an heliport on the property?
She probably has the best birth plan available anyways.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine? There would have been absolute hell to pay if she didn't get the full princess experience for her wedding. Oprah would have gotten an earful if Meghan felt the wedding had been cheapened in any way.


And IMHO an issue is that the gratuitous wedding that did not count in her eyes was at taxpayer expense and she was silly enough to say it was not the real deal 
silly is not good


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

WHEN will H wake the f@$! UP?!?  My blood pressure is rising!  I should give this a break and go back to H thread ... but my DH rather that I not.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> you said it much better
> but regardless, I think she wanted the big spectacle, the long veil, the carriage....all of it.  no one forced it on her.  now it was for the world.  gimme a break


Yes and because it was for the world, it had to cost _precisely_ as much as Will & Kate's wedding with the stipulation that the amount be adjusted for inflation. She's so generous with other people's money.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> And IMHO an issue is that the gratuitous wedding that did not count in her eyes was at taxpayer expense and she was silly enough to say it was not the real deal
> silly is not good



Meghan is pandering to a different audience these days. She wants everyone to believe she didn't really care about that fancy, insanely expensive royal ceremony. Why, all she wanted was to marry the man she loved, who just happened to be a prince, not that she ever looked him up online or anything!


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry if this was already posted, the archbishop felt the need to weigh in on this one, a very calculated announcement 


Harry and Meghan did not get married in secret, says archbishop






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Meghan is pandering to a different audience these days. She wants everyone to believe she didn't really care about that fancy, insanely expensive royal ceremony. Why, all she wanted was to marry the man she loved, who just happened to be a prince, not that she ever looked him up online or anything!


LOL
I told you there was an actress appearing on The View (can't remember her name right now) who basically said that.....she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince....she was dead serious

edit - believe it was Yvette Nicole Brown


----------



## marietouchet

Did I miss it while out today ? Did y all cover Lady Colin Campbell   and Pss Anne ?

Lady Colin Campbell claims Princess Anne is royal accused of racism









						Lady Colin Campbell claims Princess Anne is royal accused of racism
					

Socialite Lady Colin Campbell has claimed the Queen's daughter Princess Anne is the royal Meghan and Harry accused of racism in their bombshell interview with Oprah




					mol.im
				





sorry, I pasted the wrong link at first,  and it is too hard to edit out now , sorry, the wrong link is below

Harry and Meghan did not get married in secret, says archbishop






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I get what she's saying, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the point she's making... but she really does have a way of making anything sound so sanctimonious. A NORMAL way of saying this would be... "The wedding was so lovely and I'm glad people enjoyed it as much as we did. We actually exchanged our vows privately the night before too."



She didn't have to have the big expensive wedding (that she/he didn't pay for) with the 2 long, _white_, designer dresses, choir, the veil, tiara, the flower girls, pages, millions spent on security etc. To me, we paid for pictures for (her) future use.

As someone who already married twice, she and her 'privacy obsessed' JCMH, no spring chickens, could have easily gone the little chapel route with just Doria, Charles + family and the Queen + family. I can promise you _no one _in the UK would have minded. 

The tax-paying British people didn't force an obscenely big _white_ wedding on them, _they_ told _us_ that's what they/we were getting.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> She didn't have to have the big expensive wedding (that she/he didn't pay for) with the 2 long, _white_, designer dresses, choir, the veil, tiara, the flower girls, pages, millions spent on security etc. To me, we paid for pictures for (her) future use.
> 
> As someone who already married twice, she and her 'privacy obsessed' JCMH, no spring chickens, could have easily gone the little chapel route with just Doria, Charles + family and the Queen + family. I can promise you _no one _in the UK would have minded.
> 
> The tax-paying British people didn't force an obscenely big _white_ wedding on them, _they_ told _us_ that's what they/we were getting.



Good point.... just curious, were Andrew, Edward, and Anne's weddings also as big at the time? Or was theirs particularly big for a non-monarch/heir?


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> WHEN will H wake the f@$! UP?!?  My blood pressure is rising!  I should give this a break and go back to H thread ... but my DH rather that I not.


haha, I've saved some money with this thread.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Did I miss it while out today ? Did y all cover Lady Colin Campbell   and Pss Anne ?
> 
> Harry and Meghan did not get married in secret, says archbishop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


Didn't see much discussion on Princess Anne. I watched Lady C's video yesterday, and today I saw a couple of articles about it. From what I understood, Princess Anne attempted to discourage H from marrying MM. I don't think she would care about the color of the kids, but she apparently questioned whether MM would be a good fit in the family.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> I don't think they're THAT kind of rich that they could have a whole hospital room/OR set up in their home just for this birth. That's like a billionaire-level lifestyle.


It's not necessarily that expensive - although very costly and it would be silly to create one for just a single occasion - but the success of the potential operation isn't the only concern. There can be unexpected problems with the baby, too, they have to prepare for that - so they would need a kind of neonatal unit, as well.


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Sorry if this was already posted, the archbishop felt the need to weigh in on this one, a very calculated announcement
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan did not get married in secret, says archbishop
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



Oh man did you read the comments? There's one person who is absolutely insistent they were married based on some technicality. She replied to many comments by defending them. People are so invested in this. Personally, I don't care if they did or didn't really but it seems their actual bishop (?) and PR person confirmed it was just a vow exchange.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> I told you there was an actress appearing on The View (can't remember her name right now) who basically said that.....she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince....she was dead serious



There are many people who want to believe everything Meghan says. It’s interesting to see what they will overlook or make excuses to justify.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Good point.... just curious, were Andrew, Edward, and Anne's weddings also as big at the time? Or was theirs particularly big for a non-monarch/heir?



Not old enough to remember Anne's. I've seen pics of the dress which I love (but am in a group of one). 

Although young, I remember Andrew's, which was only a big deal because by that time, the RF had figured weddings made monarchists and silly people like the monarchy more.

Edward's can't remember at all. Maybe I was doing something really important like homework or riding my bike in the park  

I can understand Charles and Wills having a big British wedding (for first weddings) but all the spares should fly off to an insignificant island and and have bargain beach weddings with minimum fuss, paid for by the bride's family as is traditional if young, or the couple if a working couple.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> you said it much better
> but regardless, I think she wanted the big spectacle, the long veil, the carriage....all of it.  no one forced it on her.  now it was for the world.  gimme a break


Exactly. Nobody forced it on her her. She sounds as if they did a favour to the world when they submitted themselves to this 30-million-pound extravaganza. If she wanted a quiet and intimate wedding I'm sure her request would have been granted and probably the taxpayers could do without a lavish ceremony and HW guest list.  Prince Edward had a much smaller and not state wedding - and he's a son of the ruling monarch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

They could've pulled a Beatrice... her wedding was lovely, private, intimate, and seemed very authentic.


----------



## Chanbal

I have good news, baby Diana will be able to keep her gifts!I wonder where MM has a gift registry... Cartier? VCA? A sweet Alhambra necklace for mother and daughter would be nice. Or would she prefer a Kelly mini handbag?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I have good news, baby Diana will be able to keep her gifts!I wonder where MM has a gift registry... Cartier? VCA? A sweet Alhambra necklace for mother and daughter would be nice. Or would she prefer a Kelly mini handbag?
> 
> View attachment 5041036


We have reached a new level of ridiculousness, who in the H cares and, other than the monumentally narcissistic mother to be, would have spent a nano second on this conundrum, "do we gift" "do we not gift" "do we contribute to her Security Fund" "buy her a proper English Pram?" or so she can compete with Charlotte "do we buy a pony?'


----------



## DeMonica

papertiger said:


> Not old enough to remember Anne's. I've seen pics of the dress which I love (but am in a group of one).
> 
> Although young, I remember Andrew's, which was only a big deal because by that time, the RF had figured weddings made monarchists and silly people like the monarchy more.
> 
> Edward's can't remember at all. Maybe I was doing something really important like homework or riding my bike in the park
> 
> I can understand Charles and Wills having a big British wedding (for first weddings) but all the spares should fly off to an insignificant island and and have bargain beach weddings with minimum fuss, paid for by the bride's family as is traditional if young, or the couple if a working couple.


IMO Princess Anne had a lovely dress according to the pix but, of course, that was a very different era. IIRC Andrew's wedding was similar scale to Charles's. Edward's was kind of special , because my friend used to work for a company which did business with Sophie's father and certain people knew him personally, so it was not six but rather sixteen degrees of separation, but still... 

ITA about Harry's wedding. He's not the heir's heir but the heir's spare, but the RF probably made a big deal about it because they hadn't want to be accused of racism which happened anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> We have reached a new level of ridiculousness, who in the H cares and, other than the monumentally narcissistic mother to be, would have spent a nano second on this conundrum, "do we gift" "do we not gift" "do we contribute to her Security Fund" "buy her a proper English Pram?" or so she can compete with Charlotte "do we buy a pony?'


Pure entertainment until we can resume our travels... 

I think the "monumentally narcissistic mother to be" would prefer a big fat check. I wonder if Oprah and Gayle are going to be godmothers.


----------



## Allisonfaye

jennlt said:


> Yes and because it was for the world, it had to cost _precisely_ as much as Will & Kate's wedding with the stipulation that the amount be adjusted for inflation. She's so generous with other people's money.



Most woke people are.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> There are many people who want to believe everything Meghan says. It’s interesting to see what they will overlook or make excuses to justify.



Did MM seriously think that was a small enough claim that people would let it pass?


----------



## scarlet555

Hermes Zen said:


> WHEN will H wake the f@$! UP?!?  My blood pressure is rising!  I should give this a break and go back to H thread ... but my DH rather that I not.



Impatiently waiting...


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Not old enough to remember Anne's. I've seen pics of the dress which I love (but am in a group of one).
> 
> Although young, I remember Andrew's, which was only a big deal because by that time, the RF had figured weddings made monarchists and silly people like the monarchy more.
> 
> Edward's can't remember at all. Maybe I was doing something really important like homework or riding my bike in the park
> 
> I can understand Charles and Wills having a big British wedding (for first weddings) but all the spares should fly off to an insignificant island and and have bargain beach weddings with minimum fuss, paid for by the bride's family as is traditional if young, or the couple if a working couple.


Showing my age ... I think those mentioned were at the Abbey not Windsor, so diff ambience, no lush long walk for guests
i remember them being big tourist trap moments, tea towels etc
receptions were at Buck House so photos had incredible backdrops and were not in black and white
London is better equipped with police and carriages so logistics were perhaps easier
lots of guests at all the weddings
i don’t think any of them were formal weddings ie ladies in floor length dresses like they did for Victoria of Sweden about 10 years ago
and none of those weddings of the spares had many royal guests ie kings, queens , whereas in The Scandinavian countries all the monarch,s. Hildren have lots of foreign royal cousins, which is not so in the UK


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> We have reached a new level of ridiculousness, who in the H cares and, other than the monumentally narcissistic mother to be, would have spent a nano second on this conundrum, "do we gift" "do we not gift" "do we contribute to her Security Fund" "buy her a proper English Pram?" or so she can compete with Charlotte "do we buy a pony?'


Don’t buy any Cartier watches, baby Diana already has one from MM


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> This is just embarrassing. An article about their relaxing time off work, in their beautiful home, in a beautiful setting.... unlike last time when she was busy after birth working on her (voluntary commitment) VOGUE ISSUE??? I swear if I see one more article taking pains to point out their "beautiful Montecito home"... and these are the same people complaining about getting cut off from daddy pocketbook? Barf.


They live a clickbait lifestyle.

I'm wondering against whom they are comparing themselves that they feel so unjustly deprived. Surely it isn't PC and W whom they have compassionately lumped in the trapped category. And they don't think highly of the rest of his family who actually have to do the work which they found so onerous. So are they aspiring to be like Paris Hilton - famous for being famous?


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I don't think they're THAT kind of rich that they could have a whole hospital room/OR set up in their home just for this birth. That's like a billionaire-level lifestyle.


You just rent the equipment.  Plenty of surgi-centers went out of business and you can get things at a reasonable rental.

NYC cab drivers/policemen and firemen deliver babies on the fly.  You don't need a sterile environment to have a baby.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> haha, I've saved some money with this thread.


I'm back ... HAHAHA  me too, twins!  That's why DH wants me to stay here as long as I can!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> You just rent the equipment.  Plenty of surgi-centers went out of business and you can get things at a reasonable rental.
> 
> NYC cab drivers/policemen and firemen deliver babies on the fly.  You don't need a sterile environment to have a baby.


Yup Zara had hers on bathroom floor she could not get to hospital fast enough and midwife was nearby


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> Don’t buy any Cartier watches, baby Diana already has one from MM



Hah! The baby could have led a royal lifestyle. But even THAT isn't good enough. Sadly, MM prefers her kids grow up feeling like they are total hapless victims. That they are worse off than most other children in the world. But thank goodness MM RESCUED her whole family from the BRF PRISON TRAP! Remember, Harry stated his whole family is TRAPPED!  M&H *escaped *the horrors of royal life to purchase a mega mansion with 18 bathrooms so their family could live a "normal" life!   Any chance the BRF could rescue M&H's kids from their wacko parents?  Isn't it noteworthy that even rescue chickens are in need of another rescue? Would that would make them rescue squared chickens?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

All you need to know about the secret wedding!


*Meghan pledged to love and honour. And then Harry vowed to obey. *









						The pics that 'prove' Archbishop was Elvis at Harry and Meghan's secret wedding
					

MEGHAN and Harry look blissfully in love as the Archbishop of Canterbury performs a ceremony for their secret vows — dressed as ELVIS. Meghan said on their Oprah Winfrey interview last month that J…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> All you need to know about the secret wedding!
> View attachment 5041135
> 
> *Meghan pledged to love and honour. And then Harry vowed to obey. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pics that 'prove' Archbishop was Elvis at Harry and Meghan's secret wedding
> 
> 
> MEGHAN and Harry look blissfully in love as the Archbishop of Canterbury performs a ceremony for their secret vows — dressed as ELVIS. Meghan said on their Oprah Winfrey interview last month that J…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Is this a joke?


----------



## rose60610

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm back ... HAHAHA  me too, twins!  That's why DH wants me to stay here as long as I can!



You're welcome here!  Request a Kiwi Evelyn from the Faubourg Mother Ship so Hermes doesn't put out an APB on you .  They'll never make it in Kiwi. Or at least I hope not  .


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Is this a joke?


It's already April Fools' Day in the UK.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Did MM seriously think that was a small enough claim that people would let it pass?



She is so used to everyone  believing everything she says, no matter how outrageous, she overstepped on that one. Look at how the US media believed (or at least is pretending to believe) every single thing she said to Oprah. I doubt she thought the archbishop would comment on the wedding so she would be safe. She can’t very well call him a liar so this is one case where Meghan has to keep her trap shut.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> You just rent the equipment.  Plenty of surgi-centers went out of business and you can get things at a reasonable rental.
> 
> NYC cab drivers/policemen and firemen deliver babies on the fly.  You don't need a sterile environment to have a baby.



That seems pretty next level to make up a whole surgical room in your home... I can't think of any celebrity who has actually gone that far. I don't they will really do that... I can see her doing a kiddie pool birth.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> That seems pretty next level to make up a whole surgical room in your home... I can't think of any celebrity who has actually gone that far. I don't they will really do that... I can see her doing a kiddie pool birth.


I see her going to the hospital on the advice of her physician.  All this other stuff is just fodder for her sugars and to keep up interest in her.  She was giving out the same line when she was pregnant with Archie.  Quiet music, scented candles, home birth etc.  None of it happened.  She was so secretive she didn't even disclose when she went into the hospital or give out the info that the child had been born.  She mistakes PR chaos for cleverness.  Nope, it's just chaos.  I don't think that anyone actually cares at this point and perhaps that is the fuel for all the lip flapping.


----------



## mdcx

Given Meghan's age, I would be pretty surprised if she was encouraged to give birth at home. My age was one of the reasons I chose to give birth in a major hospital and I was younger than her. If you need an emergency c section or anything else crops up, being at home is fairly risky. Obviously those risks increase with maternal age.
Given their wealth etc, accessing a private hospital birthing suite that was as luxurious as a hotel would be a snap imo. Or is this all about making sure no stories about the birth are leaked to the media?


----------



## lalame

I would be way nervous to give birth at home if I were her. I wouldn't be surprised if her first was a c-section and the secrecy was to give her some recovery time. But... some women are super passionate in these parts to give birth as naturally as possible.


----------



## bag-mania

The birth-at-home story could be a ruse, a way to keep the paps from monitoring the hospitals when the time is near. She wouldn’t want an unflattering photo taken. Since nobody took any photos of her at the hospital last summer during her alleged miscarriage, she is anticipating more attention than she’s likely to get. Many more famous celebs than Meghan have given birth without any fanfare.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> They could've pulled a Beatrice... her wedding was lovely, private, intimate, and seemed very authentic.


I loved the dress she borrowed from her grandma.


----------



## EverSoElusive

limom said:


> Diana Doria. Aka as Deedee



Diana Doria's nickname, Deedee reminds me of Dee Dee Blanchard, and that's a really bad thing   I think Me-gain can do a reboot of The Act with her playing Dee Dee Blanchard while the poor baby can be Gypsy Rose Blanchard 



Chanbal said:


> I have good news, baby Diana will be able to keep her gifts!I wonder where MM has a gift registry... Cartier? VCA? A sweet Alhambra necklace for mother and daughter would be nice. Or would she prefer a Kelly mini handbag?
> 
> View attachment 5041036



Dang! These chicken rescuers are so thirsty  If they want to exercise compassion, here's an idea: don't flaunt and don't advertise. There are plenty of regular folks out there who are struggling and cannot afford proper necessities for their newborns and/or existing kids


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine? There would have been absolute hell to pay if she didn't get the full princess experience for her wedding. Oprah would have gotten an earful if Meghan felt the wedding had been cheapened in any way.


Yet, she cheapened it by saying they married 3 days earlier.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Showing my age ... I think those mentioned were at the Abbey not Windsor, so diff ambience, no lush long walk for guests
> i remember them being big tourist trap moments, tea towels etc
> receptions were at Buck House so photos had incredible backdrops and were not in black and white
> London is better equipped with police and carriages so logistics were perhaps easier
> lots of guests at all the weddings
> i don’t think any of them were formal weddings ie ladies in floor length dresses like they did for Victoria of Sweden about 10 years ago
> and none of those weddings of the spares had many royal guests ie kings, queens , whereas in The Scandinavian countries all the monarch,s. Hildren have lots of foreign royal cousins, which is not so in the UK


Princess Anne and Prince Andrews weddings were at Westminster Abbey, Prince Edward got married at Windsor.


----------



## jelliedfeels

In the UK there’s actually a bit of a push for people to use birthing centres (which have facilities for water birth/most painkillers but no surgery set-up)  or to have babies at home to ease pressure on NHS.

Every pregnancy is different but I don’t think giving birth at home is  dangerous. I know people who have done it with ease. The problem comes if they suddenly have to get you into hospital for complications. I don’t know how it is in US but you do have to be assessed for suitability a home birth/birth centre in the UK.

Like Hermeszen I think there’s probably some sort of boutique service you can hire to do home births in the fancier parts of US.

What I do know is that H&M  are going to wax lyrical about how much better it was than the dank hole of a maternity ward that they were forced to use the last time  and that the midwives better ask if MM is ok every 5 seconds or so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow.  Picking on Anne is never advisable -
> _Meghan and Harry have used that genuine concern of a loving aunt, knowing that because she is down to earth, experienced, modest, intelligent and sensible, and that *you cannot make a sow's ear into a silk purse*. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Colin Campbell claims Princess Anne is royal accused of racism
> 
> 
> Socialite Lady Colin Campbell has claimed the Queen's daughter Princess Anne is the royal Meghan and Harry accused of racism in their bombshell interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Duke added of the Press: ‘Unfortunately, if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society.’_
> 
> Who is he to say what the rest of society thinks????!!!!!  99.9% of us can distinguish between media and reality.
> Always the pompous a$$.


I don’t like what Lady CC is doing here either though. She’s making assertions from hearsay which could be quite damaging for Anne’s reputation and putting them forward as fact. Dare I say it, she’s being as bad as MM herself in the first place.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Good point.... just curious, were Andrew, Edward, and Anne's weddings also as big at the time? Or was theirs particularly big for a non-monarch/heir?


Well it’s hard to get financial stats on some of these earlier royal weddings 
But in terms of scale/public private actually a bit of a mix.
A**** and Anne had televised weddings but Edward’s was private.
All three had their honeymoons on royal properties- A&A went on the royal yacht and E went to balmoral.
They all got married in church as you’d imagine.
Anne and Sophie wore dresses designed by obscure royal couturiers  from what I can see. Fergie wore a dress by Lindka Cierach who I don’t know either.

I wouldn’t say any of these were cheap dos but I would not be surprised to hear that when adjusted for inflation W and H’s marriages were the most expensive.

I think the cheapest royal weddings are probably W&H’s cousins: they don’t seem to be on the same scale.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Oh man did you read the comments? There's one person who is absolutely insistent they were married based on some technicality. She replied to many comments by defending them. People are so invested in this. Personally, I don't care if they did or didn't really but it seems their actual bishop (?) and PR person confirmed it was just a vow exchange.
> 
> View attachment 5041019


Yeah what disgusted of TW is saying is completely wrong. 
Colaw marriages are not the same as legally binding marriages. You need to register a marriage certificate with a registrar and witnesses to be legally married you can declare yourselves to be married and to have said vows but it’s not legally binding.

moreover, royal marriages actually have more regulations to be legally married rather than fewer. This was instituted in 1772 to protect stupid rich princes from wily actresses.
It means that marriages are only recognised if they are previously consented to by the monarch and can be vetoed even after a ceremony has taken place.

George the fourth married a Catholic called Maria fitzherbert at her house while still a Prince and his father declared this marriage non-existent afterwards. This was to protect the line as you couldn’t marry a Catholic at this point without leaving the line of succession.

Ergo, even if they got married at any other point without the queen’s consent, she could declare the marriage noneexistent or remove him from the line. So, as per usual, it’s just more lies from H&M.

When you think about it, why would a family so keen to protect their wealth and bloodline not have this kind of regulation? That’d be dumb.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> That seems pretty next level to make up a whole surgical room in your home... I can't think of any celebrity who has actually gone that far. I don't they will really do that... I can see her doing a kiddie pool birth.


I don’t see a water birth for her. Can you imagine if those ratty extensions got wet? She’d defenestrate the nearest doula.


----------



## RAINDANCE

LittleStar88 said:


> Is this a joke?


It's April 1st


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Duke added of the Press: ‘*Unfortunately, if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society.’*_
> 
> Who is he to say what the rest of society thinks????!!!!!  99.9% of us can distinguish between media and reality.
> Always the pompous a$$.



Biased????? BIASED???
Someone who represents the woke liberal left is complaining about a BIASED press!?!?  :
I.just.can't.


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> Not old enough to remember Anne's. I've seen pics of the dress which I love (but am in a group of one).]
> I like wedding dress#1 but #2 is a no.
> It fitted perfectly, and I am a sucker for medieval theme.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yeah I think it suits her as her hair is sort of Tudor-like and it shows her personality.


----------



## needlv

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t like what Lady CC is doing here either though. She’s making assertions from hearsay which could be quite damaging for Anne’s reputation and putting them forward as fact. Dare I say it, she’s being as bad as MM herself in the first place.


Is it possible the PR for the RF allowed this leak to take some heat off Charles?


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Is it possible the PR for the RF allowed this leak to take some heat off Charles?


Maybe but I think it’s ill advised if so. It’s not going to change anyone’s opinion who lady CC speculates either way. People who think the royals had racist intentions are still going to think they are all prejudiced they aren’t suddenly going to believe that Anne said something and it was misinterpreted just because it’s Anne.

if you ask me all it’s doing is joining the witch hunt and showing there’s some truth in some claims I would have dismissed as unsubstantiated.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Well it’s hard to get financial stats on some of these earlier royal weddings
> But in terms of scale/public private actually a bit of a mix.
> A**** and Anne had televised weddings but Edward’s was private.
> All three had their honeymoons on royal properties- A&A went on the royal yacht and E went to balmoral.
> They all got married in church as you’d imagine.
> Anne and Sophie wore dresses designed by obscure royal couturiers  from what I can see. Fergie wore a dress by Lindka Cierach who I don’t know either.
> 
> I wouldn’t say any of these were cheap dos but I would not be surprised to hear that when adjusted for inflation W and H’s marriages were the most expensive.
> 
> I think the cheapest royal weddings are probably W&H’s cousins: they don’t seem to be on the same scale.


Edwards was televised.
As far as the other cousins weddings go, you can ad Eugenie's wedding as an expensive one too... an Beatrice's would have been on the scale of Eugenie's too had it not been for Covid. The other two cousins who are married had more private weddings as they are private citizens, not paid for by us tax payers (but Peter sold himself to Hello magazine.)


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Edwards was televised.
> As far as the other cousins weddings go, you can ad Eugenie's wedding as an expensive one too... an Beatrice's would have been on the scale of Eugenie's too had it not been for Covid. The other two cousins who are married had more private weddings as they are private citizens, not paid for by us tax payers (but Peter sold himself to Hello magazine.)


Oh my mistake, I was getting confused between televised and private weddings. Realisticallt it’s all a bit of a waste of money to me.


----------



## duna

lalame said:


> Good point.... just curious, were Andrew, Edward, and Anne's weddings also as big at the time? Or was theirs particularly big for a non-monarch/heir?



Yes they were.... I remember Anne's wedding in 1973 as I was living in the UK at the time and I watched it with my mum and grandparents. I thought Mark Phillips was so handsome!! Then, after seing the big Charles/Diana wedding I also saw Andrew's and Sarah's wedding in 1986. I don't think I saw Edward's wedding, it's the one I remember the least. They were all in Westminster Abbey anyway.

P:S: Edward's wedding was at Windsor not at the Abbey.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I say, please, take the time off *n.o.w.*









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will take time off' when daughter born
					

Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, 'will both take some proper time off,' after the birth of their daughter in the summer, a source has claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, well...




April Fool


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

We now know why they hired JCMH for an executive position.





						Why the Bad Boss Gets the Job | Maryland Smith
					

New research shows the “dark” personality traits that make a boss bad may be the reason they got the job in the first place.




					www.rhsmith.umd.edu


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> I say, please, take the time off *n.o.w.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will take time off' when daughter born
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, 'will both take some proper time off,' after the birth of their daughter in the summer, a source has claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


These two are an HR nightmare. One week after they are “hired” they announce they will soon be taking maternity and paternity leave.

Followed by a long vacation to recover from the trials and tribulations of having to order the nannies around. That should take them into next summer long vacation nicely.

In case we forget how hard they “worked” while she was pregnant with A and soon after: (from the article)

_Prince Harry's paternity leave was cut short when Archie was born on 6 May 2019, because just three days after the birth the royal flew to the Netherlands to launch next year's Invictus Games.

There, the royal was showered with presents meant for his infant son, donned a special 'I am daddy' jacket during a bike ride, and was given a baby grow by Princess Margriet, before being met with laughter from the crowd after modelling it against his own body.

Meanwhile, throughout her pregnancy and after the birth, Meghan, 39, was busy editing an issue of British Vogue and designing a capsule collection for Smart Works._


----------



## Genie27

How much maternity and paternity leave does one get in CA? I always figured that Canada and the UK get far more parental leave than the US.
Will they insist on following British custom and law?

I don’t think the Employment benefits, if any, will cover more than an hour’s worth of security.


----------



## needlv

Why do articles insist they need quality time together?  Is this to cover for them starting to see cracks in the marriage???


----------



## rose60610

What would Harry be taking paternity leave FROM? Feeding rescue chickens and riding his electric bike? Even his new loopy "job" is basically a no-show job (lots of those here in Chicago) except to be present at meetings.


----------



## limom

Perhaps, they BOTH want to bond with their daughter J/S








						Bonding Leave for the Birth of a Child
					

Find out how Paid Family Leave can be used to support you and your new baby.




					paidfamilyleave.ny.gov


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Got curious about how Birth Certificates for Non Hospital Deliveries are handled here in CA. Very interesting, and MM and her handbag husband may be shocked to realize the level of detail that is mandated and that if the Midwife is not registered (*thinking her Mom?*), one of them is going to have to trot down to the local office and do the birth registration, photo ID required, just like the plebes, no Royal scribes to dispatch to do the paper work.



Why would anyone in their right mind have a baby delivered by their non-midwife mother, unless they're stuck in a snowstorm?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I get what she's saying, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the point she's making... but she really does have a way of making anything sound so sanctimonious. A NORMAL way of saying this would be... "The wedding was so lovely and I'm glad people enjoyed it as much as we did. We actually exchanged our vows privately the night before too."



THIS. She blatantly lied, she knew what she was saying. All to get more attention. And the way she spoke about the wedding, spectacle and all is so insulting. THEY wanted the big spectacle and insisted it was as grand as the heir to the throne's nuptials.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Oh man did you read the comments? There's one person who is absolutely insistent they were married based on some technicality. She replied to many comments by defending them. People are so invested in this. Personally, I don't care if they did or didn't really but it seems their actual bishop (?) and PR person confirmed it was just a vow exchange.
> 
> View attachment 5041019



Nice try. The UK doesn't recognize common law marriages, HTH.


----------



## lulilu

gracekelly said:


> You just rent the equipment.  Plenty of surgi-centers went out of business and you can get things at a reasonable rental.
> NYC cab drivers/policemen and firemen deliver babies on the fly.  You don't need a sterile environment to have a baby.



Unless an emergency Csection is required.  My friend's wife was big on midwives and was having her baby at a midwife center across from a hospital.  She needed an emergency Csection and they were literally running to the hospital via an underground connecting tunnel.  Both almost died.




mdcx said:


> Given Meghan's age, I would be pretty surprised if she was encouraged to give birth at home. My age was one of the reasons I chose to give birth in a major hospital and I was younger than her. If you need an emergency c section or anything else crops up, being at home is fairly risky. Obviously those risks increase with maternal age.
> Given their wealth etc, accessing a private hospital birthing suite that was as luxurious as a hotel would be a snap imo. Or is this all about making sure no stories about the birth are leaked to the media?



Agree.  This is all nonsense for publicity or for more nefarious reasons like confusing the press/public like the first birth.




CarryOn2020 said:


> I say, please, take the time off *n.o.w.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will take time off' when daughter born
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, 'will both take some proper time off,' after the birth of their daughter in the summer, a source has claimed, speaking to Vanity Fair's Katie Nicholl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They are the type of people who need a vacation from a vacation. What exactly is MM doing now?  or H really as he has no real job to go to.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> THIS. She blatantly lied, she knew what she was saying. All to get more attention. And the way she spoke about the wedding, spectacle and all is so insulting. THEY wanted the big spectacle and insisted it was as grand as the heir to the throne's nuptials.


I makes me mad that the Archbishop waited 3 weeks to tell the truth.  And despite some suggestions, there was no truthful way to say they married/exchanged vows etc three days before without implying they had married, which of course, is a blatant lie.


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> You just rent the equipment.  Plenty of surgi-centers went out of business and you can get things at a reasonable rental.
> 
> NYC cab drivers/policemen and firemen deliver babies on the fly.  You don't need a sterile environment to have a baby.



I think people were meaning that due to her age, she might end up with an emergency C-section and therefore would want an OR.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> That seems pretty next level to make up a whole surgical room in your home... I can't think of any celebrity who has actually gone that far. I don't they will really do that... I can see her doing a kiddie pool birth.



The Shah of Persia. Not kidding *ggg*


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Princess Anne and Prince Andrews weddings were at Westminster Abbey, Prince Edward got married at Windsor.


Yes, and Andrew may have been at St Paul's - smaller than the Abbey - but still in London. It suddenly came to me lkast night that they used St Pauls for the lesser weddings only Charles got the Abbey and a full array of diplomatic/political guests

But they were children of the reigning monarch, H is only a grandkid and other grandkids got married very modestly eg Peter and Zara were married in Scotland - long before Bea's superlatively understated (due to issues with Andrew and COVID) ceremony this year


----------



## Clearblueskies

marietouchet said:


> Yes, and Andrew may have been at St Paul's - smaller than the Abbey - but still in London. It suddenly came to me lkast night that they used St Pauls for the lesser weddings only Charles got the Abbey and a full array of diplomatic/political guests
> 
> But they were children of the reigning monarch, H is only a grandkid and other grandkids got married very modestly eg Peter and Zara were married in Scotland - long before Bea's superlatively understated (due to issues with Andrew and COVID) ceremony this year


Charles and Diana were married in St Pauls cathedral


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> In the UK there’s actually a bit of a push for people to use birthing centres (which have facilities for water birth/most painkillers but no surgery set-up)  or to have babies at home to ease pressure on NHS.
> 
> Every pregnancy is different but I don’t think giving birth at home is  dangerous. I know people who have done it with ease. The problem comes if they suddenly have to get you into hospital for complications. I don’t know how it is in US but you do have to be assessed for suitability a home birth/birth centre in the UK.
> 
> Like Hermeszen I think there’s probably some sort of boutique service you can hire to do home births in the fancier parts of US.
> 
> What I do know is that H&M  are going to wax lyrical about how much better it was than the dank hole of a maternity ward that they were forced to use the last time  and that the midwives better ask if MM is ok every 5 seconds or so.



Mama Doctor Jones, Youtube OB/GYN had a very interesting video on this. I don't know about the UK obviously, but in Germany not only is midwife a highly specialized job, it's also legally so that you NEED a midwife present for a birth at the hospital or birthing center, but not necessarily a physician.

In the US however it is indeed more dangerous to have a homebirth because training and certification varies wildly for midwives, you could get someone with a master's degree in midwifery or someone who took a 3-months-class. 

Also, everything is fine until there's an emergency. When your placenta rips off and you bleed out or the baby's oxygen or heart rate drops severely, 20 mins to the hospital can be 20 mins too long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Delete


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t like what Lady CC is doing here either though. She’s making assertions from hearsay which could be quite damaging for Anne’s reputation and putting them forward as fact. Dare I say it, she’s being as bad as MM herself in the first place.



Not defending Lady C, since I don't know what's happening behind the scenes. However, she seems to imply that the information about PA being against the wedding was about to become public, and therefore, she was 'allowed' to talk about it.

It's possible that someone wants to put a stop to MM&H's interpretations of cultural differences. Lady C makes it clear that the reasons PA was allegedly against the wedding had nothing to do with the color of the kids, which is very believable. PA had probably access to plenty of information about MM to think that she was not a great fit in the family.

Whoever MM is trying to accuse of racism would likely prefer to have things clarified. This is a very serious accusation and there was a major contradiction in what MM and H said on the subject, so it's very possible this is one more falsehood like the wedding story.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Yes, and Andrew may have been at St Paul's - smaller than the Abbey - but still in London. It suddenly came to me lkast night that they used St Pauls for the lesser weddings only Charles got the Abbey and a full array of diplomatic/political guests
> 
> But they were children of the reigning monarch, H is only a grandkid and other grandkids got married very modestly eg Peter and Zara were married in Scotland - long before Bea's superlatively understated (due to issues with Andrew and COVID) ceremony this year


Andrew got married at Westminster Abbey. 
Peter got married at Windsor, same Chapel as Harry, Edward and Eugenie. 
Charles was St Paul's Cathedral


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> April Fool



Nice try PM!


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> Yes, and Andrew may have been at St Paul's - smaller than the Abbey - but still in London. It suddenly came to me lkast night that they used St Pauls for the lesser weddings only Charles got the Abbey and a full array of diplomatic/political guests
> 
> But they were children of the reigning monarch, H is only a grandkid and other grandkids got married very modestly eg Peter and Zara were married in Scotland - long before Bea's superlatively understated (due to issues with Andrew and COVID) ceremony this year



Anne and Andrew were definately married at Westminster Abbey. Charles and Diana were married at St Paul's because it's *bigger* than the Abbey.


----------



## CarryOn2020

UK Royal weddings by date:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_royal_weddings#United_Kingdom_2


20 November 1947: Princess Elizabeth, elder daughter and successor of King George VI, was married to Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten at *Westminster Abbey*.
6 May 1960: Princess Margaret, younger daughter of King George VI, was married to Antony Armstrong-Jones at *Westminster Abbey*.


14 November 1973: *Princess Anne, only daughter of Queen Elizabeth II, was married to Captain Mark Phillips at **Westminster Abbey**.*
29 July 1981: *Charles, Prince of Wales, eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II and heir apparent, was married to Lady Diana Spencer at **St Paul's Cathedral**.*
23 July 1986*: Prince Andrew, Duke of York, second son of Queen Elizabeth II, was married to Sarah Ferguson at **Westminster Abbey**.*
12 December 1992*: Anne, Princess Royal only daughter of Queen Elizabeth II was married to  Commander Timothy Laurence at **Crathie Kirk*
19 June 1999*: Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, youngest son of Queen Elizabeth II, was married to Sophie Rhys-Jones at St George's Chapel, **Windsor Castle**.*
9 April 2005*: Charles, Prince of Wales, eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II and heir apparent, was married to Camilla Parker Bowles at **Windsor Guildhall**.*
29 April 2011*: Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, second grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, elder son of Charles, Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, was married to Catherine Middleton at **Westminster Abbey**.*
19 May 2018*: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, third grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, younger son of Charles, Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, was married to Meghan Markle at St George's Chapel, **Windsor Castle**.*
12 October 2018*: Princess Eugenie of York, third granddaughter of Queen Elizabeth II, younger daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York and Sarah Ferguson, was married to Jack Brooksbank at St George's Chapel, **Windsor Castle**.*
17 July 2020:* Princess Beatrice of York, granddaughter of Queen Elizabeth II, eldest daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York and Sarah Ferguson, was married to Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi at the Royal Chapel of All Saints at** Royal Lodge, Windsor**.*


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> I have good news, baby Diana will be able to keep her gifts!I wonder where MM has a gift registry... Cartier? VCA? A sweet Alhambra necklace for mother and daughter would be nice. Or would she prefer a Kelly mini handbag?
> 
> View attachment 5041036


Thank God.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry! 


"_Speaking to talkRADIO, Ms Levin said: "What is very embarrassing is for him the Archbishop of Canterbury that he had to come out and say, he didn't want to but other senior clergy wouldn't let him get away with it because they kept saying it wasn't true and it couldn't happen.

"*How humiliating to create a scene of victimhood, you drag in the Archbishop of Canterbury to say something*.

"I think that's appalling.

"It's even more appalling in my view that Harry didn't say much because Meghan wouldn't let him get a word in edgeways_."









						Meghan 'humiliated' the Archbishop! Harry attacked for 'endorsing' her
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been accused of "humiliating" the Archbishop of Canterbury after claims she married Prince Harry three days before the ceremony.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## kemilia

DeMonica said:


> It's true. It's the way these words and terms used. I'm a woman and equal rights are obviously important to me, but *whenever I hear "empowering women" I just throw up a little.*


Glad to know that I am not the only one--thank you!


----------



## kemilia

RAINDANCE said:


> Paddypower are giving odd of 7 to 1 for Diana as the name of the baby.
> Contemplating a tenner.
> My personal guess is that they will go for a hyphenated double name.
> That way they can use Diana but claim a modern twist.
> 
> Diana - Rose
> Diana - Louise
> Diana - Mae / Diana - May
> Diana - Jane
> Diana - Marie
> Diana - Jade
> Diana - Rae
> 
> Was Archie Harrison meant to be Archie Harry's son ?
> Is there an equivalent for daughter ?
> 
> I really can't make any of the other female family names work with Diana.
> It doesn't lend itself to an easy combination to my ear.
> Think we can rule out Diana-Kate


I remember reading a long time ago that Diana was considering the name Rose if Harry had been a girl. 

My bet is on this, and maybe Rose-Doria (it does sound nice).


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> This secrecy with the two births is so odd.  It's almost like they have something to hide.


She loves drama and the spotlight, and all this birth secrecy provides it. 
I don't know what she will do once the world tires of their nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

I hope this is an April Fools' Day joke! 


Tom Bower told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Meghan Markle is now known worldwide as a result of her interview with Oprah Winfrey. The biographer added that the Duchess of Sussex has taken the first step towards a successful political career in the US but at the expense of the Royal Family.

Mr Bower said: "*She has got the right basis for it because she is ambitious and has a lot to say.*

"I think her problem, first of all, is her sensitivity to criticism among other things.

"In the end, I think what she has managed to do with the Oprah Winfrey interview which trashed the Royal Family [is give herself] a global profile.

"*She is now known across the world at the expense of the Royal Family.*

"*That is the first step to a political career and she has done that very successfully."*

He added: "She will have to build a team, she will have to get policies on China, trade, immigration, the economy and all the rest of it.

"But she is able to do that, she has got the money she has got presences, she is in the right place to do it in California."









						Meghan Markle launched 'global profile' in 'trashing' the Royal Family
					

MEGHAN MARKLE launched a global profile by "trashing" the Royal Family during her explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, according to a royal biographer.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

limom said:


> Perhaps, they BOTH want to bond with their daughter J/S
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonding Leave for the Birth of a Child
> 
> 
> Find out how Paid Family Leave can be used to support you and your new baby.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> paidfamilyleave.ny.gov


Wow, a WHOLE 12 weeks! Mon dieu, y'all Americans are so progressive. 
/sarcasm


----------



## limom

V0N1B2 said:


> Wow, a WHOLE 12 weeks! Mon dieu, y'all Americans are so progressive.
> /sarcasm


This is progressive New York, babe


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> They could've pulled a Beatrice... her wedding was lovely, private, intimate, and seemed very authentic.


they wanted the big wedding....the spectacle....the American biracial actress nabbing the prince - fairytale.  now she's saying it was for everyone else. yeah right


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would anyone in their right mind have a baby delivered by their non-midwife mother, unless they're stuck in a snowstorm?


Furthermore, why would anyone even think Doria _wants_ to deliver Meghan's baby?
The media/PR is really trying to push this narrative of her & her mum being soooo close. LOL
Doria didn't even go to her own daughter's baby shower.  She showed up for an official photo when Merchie was born and skedaddled back home.  Anyone who reads/posts over on LSA has seen the receipts of Doria papped in California just days before and after the birth.
IMO, they're nowhere near as chummy as they'd like you to believe.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> I see her going to the hospital on the advice of her physician.  All this other stuff is just fodder for her sugars and to keep up interest in her.  She was giving out the same line when she was pregnant with Archie.  Quiet music, scented candles, home birth etc.  None of it happened.  She was so secretive she didn't even disclose when she went into the hospital or give out the info that the child had been born.  She mistakes PR chaos for cleverness.  Nope, it's just chaos.  I don't think that anyone actually cares at this point and perhaps that is the fuel for all the lip flapping.


She needs publicity and it's a relatively safe subject. I think she's trying to divert the attention from those refuted "fibs" to the baby theme. It will be a luxury birthing suite.


----------



## limom

Is there going to be a baby shower for Mini Megan/Diana?


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I makes me mad that the Archbishop waited 3 weeks to tell the truth.  And despite some suggestions, there was no truthful way to say they married/exchanged vows etc three days before without implying they had married, which of course, is a blatant lie.



I can't blame the archbishop for holding off and not wanting to get involved. It seems like many people who have the misfortune of getting sucked into the Meghan and Harry sh*t show end up with their own lives and reputations getting damaged.


----------



## bisousx

V0N1B2 said:


> Furthermore, why would anyone even think Doria _wants_ to deliver Meghan's baby?
> The media/PR is really trying to push this narrative of her & her mum being soooo close. LOL
> Doria didn't even go to her own daughter's baby shower.  She showed up for an official photo when Merchie was born and skedaddled back home.  Anyone who reads/posts over on LSA has seen the receipts of Doria papped in California just days before and after the birth.
> IMO, they're nowhere near as chummy as they'd like you to believe.



Merchie


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would anyone in their right mind have a baby delivered by their non-midwife mother, unless they're stuck in a snowstorm?


Maybe because the "right mind" of the person supposedly considering it is already writing the endless headlines for volumes of articles that will forever follow the Princess throughout life:  "The Princess of Sussex, who is being married in the midst of a meadow on the grounds of her parents magnificent mansion in Montecito, was delivered here twenty something years ago when her Maternal Grandmother Doria served as her Mother Meghan's midwife during a blissful birth."  

Edited to "crown" the coming baby "The Princess of _Sussex._"


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> In the UK there’s actually a bit of a push for people to use birthing centres (which have facilities for water birth/most painkillers but no surgery set-up)  or to have babies at home to ease pressure on NHS.
> 
> Every pregnancy is different but I don’t think giving birth at home is  dangerous. I know people who have done it with ease. The problem comes if they suddenly have to get you into hospital for complications. I don’t know how it is in US but you do have to be assessed for suitability a home birth/birth centre in the UK.
> 
> Like Hermeszen I think there’s probably some sort of boutique service you can hire to do home births in the fancier parts of US.
> 
> What I do know is that H&M  are going to wax lyrical about how much better it was than the dank hole of a maternity ward that they were forced to use the last time  and that the midwives better ask if MM is ok every 5 seconds or so.


Every pregnancy is different, indeed. Some women can give birth to babies at the riverbank without any complication. However: giving birth is not safe at home. There are so many unforeseeable complication for the mother and the baby. It's just going to get worse because women are giving birth later, there are more mothers with medical conditions, high risk pregnant mothers and multiple pregnancies.


----------



## lulilu

Lady C talking about how Princess Anne was vocally against HM wedding -- didn't someone mention that Anne is the trustee of the Queen Mother's Trust?  The trust that leaves many millions to H and W?  I read recently that Anne raised the age of distribution to 45.  Maybe H is more than a little mad and wants his money.

Edited to add:  I saw a headline that H denies he is getting QM's money but I didn't bother reading it.  Too much of them in one day unsettles my stomach.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I hope this is an April Fools' Day joke!
> View attachment 5041551
> 
> Tom Bower told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Meghan Markle is now known worldwide as a result of her interview with Oprah Winfrey. The biographer added that the Duchess of Sussex has taken the first step towards a successful political career in the US but at the expense of the Royal Family.
> 
> Mr Bower said: "*She has got the right basis for it because she is ambitious and has a lot to say.*
> 
> "I think her problem, first of all, is her sensitivity to criticism among other things.
> 
> "In the end, I think what she has managed to do with the Oprah Winfrey interview which trashed the Royal Family [is give herself] a global profile.
> 
> "*She is now known across the world at the expense of the Royal Family.*
> 
> "*That is the first step to a political career and she has done that very successfully."*
> 
> He added: "She will have to build a team, she will have to get policies on China, trade, immigration, the economy and all the rest of it.
> 
> "But she is able to do that, she has got the money she has got presences, she is in the right place to do it in California."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle launched 'global profile' in 'trashing' the Royal Family
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE launched a global profile by "trashing" the Royal Family during her explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, according to a royal biographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


There are so many reasons this made me laugh in derision, will avoid the political part of it except to say (1) there is a WOC prominently placed in our government who is not going to disappear to make room for Meghan, (2)  Meghan's motivation to be President is only because she was finally forced to recognize she will never be a Queen and she's not up to the job, (3) what in heck is she going to do with her "baggage" Harry? Prop him in the corner of the Blue Room in the White House to be wound up and trotted out for official functions? Or she could name him Ambassador to Great Britain and he'd have an excuse to go home. (4) having routed the British from Washington a long long time ago, even bottom rung British Royalty will not be welcome for free lodging in the White House, besides it doesn't have enough bathrooms to meet their needs and would be a "come down".

Will not even get started on her lack of suitability and credentials......


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Maybe because the "right mind" of the person supposedly considering it is already writing the endless headlines for volumes of articles that will forever follow the Princess throughout life:  "The Princess of Wales, who is being married in the midst of a meadow on the grounds of her parents magnificent mansion in Montecito, was delivered here twenty something years ago when her Maternal Grandmother Doria served as her Mother Meghan's midwife during a blissful birth."



That kid will never be Princess of Wales unless she marries her first cousin George, though.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That kid will never be Princess of Wales unless she marries her first cousin George, though.


I thought about that title but didn't know what to call her. If her Grandfather Charles makes her a Princess, what would she be? How do they decide on the names? 
Need help from our resident experts and I'll edit my Post.


----------



## bag-mania

What is it going to be like for a little girl growing up with a princess title in the US? That title doesn't mean anything here other than being seen as a cool novelty. If she goes to school (and isn't homeschooled by tutors) nobody can force her classmates to call her princess. Nobody is ever going to curtsy to her. She is going to be told from birth she is special but any perks she gets out of it would be at the whim of those offering them, she isn't going to be automatically granted them. It is going to be confusing for 'lil Diana.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> Furthermore, why would anyone even think Doria _wants_ to deliver Meghan's baby?
> The media/PR is really trying to push this narrative of her & her mum being soooo close. LOL
> Doria didn't even go to her own daughter's baby shower.  She showed up for an official photo when Merchie was born and skedaddled back home.  Anyone who reads/posts over on LSA has seen the receipts of Doria papped in California just days before and after the birth.
> IMO, they're nowhere near as chummy as they'd like you to believe.


Oh really. That’s so interesting about the baby shower.  I don’t really get them but I would definitely think it’s the kind of thing you invite your mum and any sisters to. I know NY is really far from LA but I just assumed she’d held it in the US (to show off) to be nearer friends and family.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh really. That’s so interesting about the baby shower.  I don’t really get them but I would definitely think it’s the kind of thing you invite your mum and any sisters to. I know NY is really far from LA but I just assumed she’d held it in the US (to show off) to be nearer friends and family.


I suspect some of the celeb friends were people she only knew casually....but they were celebs


----------



## Aimee3

Call me a cynic but I don’t believe for one second MM is having a home birth nor a drug free birth.  Doubt she can handle any pain.  (Neither could I, so I get that part) Now her surrogate is most likely having the home birth in montecito where they can ferry her onto the property in secrecy and dispose of her the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RueMonge

DeMonica said:


> Every pregnancy is different, indeed. Some women can give birth to babies at the riverbank without any complication. However: giving birth is not safe at home. There are so many unforeseeable complication for the mother and the baby. It's just going to get worse because women are giving birth later, there are more mothers with medical conditions, high risk pregnant mothers and multiple pregnancies.



I agree, every pregnancy is different. But a homebirth can be just as safe or safer than a hospital birth with a low risk pregnancy and proper prenatal care and evaluation. Especially now considering covid risk in hospitals along with your everyday risk of picking up something else. Naturally your midwife has a back up doctor and hospital all set up ahead of time. I had number four at home and it was so wonderful to roll over and call the midwife when I went into labor and just stay in bed. 

No comment, however on MM and JCMH birth shenanigans.


----------



## Allisonfaye

csshopper said:


> to meet their needs and would be a "come down".
> 
> Will not even get started on her lack of suitability and credentials......



I think we know that ship has sailed and doesn't matter anymore.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> I thought about that title but didn't know what to call her. If her Grandfather Charles makes her a Princess, what would she be? How do they decide on the names?
> Need help from our resident experts and I'll edit my Post.


I'd imagine it will be Princess (??) of Sussex. And Prince Archie of Sussex.


----------



## limom

Many people have two showers and more, one at work, one for family and on and on...


----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> My bet is on this, and maybe Rose-Doria (it does sound nice).


Why would she name the baby after the mother who was barely there.

It would be like naming the baby after its nanny since that seems to be Doria’s job.


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> Call me a cynic but I don’t believe for one second MM is having a home birth nor a drug free birth.  Doubt she can handle any pain.  (Neither could I, so I get that part) Now her surrogate is most likely having the home birth in montecito where they can ferry her onto the property in secrecy and dispose of her the same.


Yes, initially I thought she was pregnant this time, but I’m back to being skeptical. No way would she give birth at home.


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, initially I thought she was pregnant this time, but I’m back to being skeptical. No way would she give birth at home.


 having a secret surrogate is the new scandal for celebs.
There are pics of a so called baby moon in the chicken coop already....


----------



## bag-mania

Let's look back to late December when this photo was taken outside of an office building in Beverly Hills. Has anyone changed their mind about what was happening here? Meghan was all covered up and didn't want anyone to see her. She was wearing a heavy winter jacket and a cap on a warm 70 degree day.

Guesses:
1) Was she already pregnant and showing?
2) Was Meghan getting IVF on that visit?
3) Were she and Harry there to meet the surrogate?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I thought about that title but didn't know what to call her. If her Grandfather Charles makes her a Princess, what would she be? How do they decide on the names?
> Need help from our resident experts and I'll edit my Post.



I thiiink (but I'll admit I'm no pro on British titles) she would be Her Royal Highness Princess X of Sussex.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Let's look back to late December when this photo was taken outside of an office building in Beverly Hills. Has anyone changed their mind about what was happening here? Meghan was all covered up and didn't want anyone to see her. She was wearing a heavy winter jacket and a cap on a warm 70 degree day.
> 
> Guesses:
> 1) Was she already pregnant and showing?
> 2) Was Meghan getting IVF on that visit?
> 3) Were she and Harry there to meet the surrogate?
> 
> View attachment 5041858



Look closely at their faces. They may have had some treatments, but it does not explain the winter coat.








						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Stroll Around Beverly Hills
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their posh Montecito estate for even posher Bev Hills, and they went pretty much unnoticed.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look closely at their faces. They may have had some treatments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Stroll Around Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their posh Montecito estate for even posher Bev Hills, and they went pretty much unnoticed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



Perhaps, I can't tell. Harry looks the same as always to me and Meghan is so covered up it's impossible to say.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look closely at their faces. They may have had some treatments, but it *does not explain the winter coat*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Stroll Around Beverly Hills
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left their posh Montecito estate for even posher Bev Hills, and they went pretty much unnoticed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


The winter coat was to get attention and make people think she was pregnant. IMO


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> I saw a video of the trooping of the color when MM tried to slink her way to be close to the Queen and Princess Anne stepped in front of her. I guess there’s a protocol for these type of things. So it makes sense that MM would go after Princess Anne but MM does not know how tough PA is. I mean remember her kidnapppng when she outsmarted the kidnapper. It’s the quiet ones you gotta fear or respect.



Lol the Princess Royal is not quiet!!! She is more than a match for cringe any day


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> She didn't have to have the big expensive wedding (that she/he didn't pay for) with the 2 long, _white_, designer dresses, choir, the veil, tiara, the flower girls, pages, millions spent on security etc. To me, we paid for pictures for (her) future use.
> 
> As someone who already married twice, she and her 'privacy obsessed' JCMH, no spring chickens, could have easily gone the little chapel route with just Doria, Charles + family and the Queen + family. I can promise you _no one _in the UK would have minded.
> 
> The tax-paying British people didn't force an obscenely big _white_ wedding on them, _they_ told _us_ that's what they/we were getting.



And the air freshener


----------



## elvisfan4life

lalame said:


> Good point.... just curious, were Andrew, Edward, and Anne's weddings also as big at the time? Or was theirs particularly big for a non-monarch/heir?



Andrew’s was as he had a bigger chip on his shoulder about being the spare than even ginge - Anne had the works as she was the first of the queens children to marry but kept it more low key as is typical of her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> UK Royal weddings by date:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_royal_weddings#United_Kingdom_2
> 
> 
> 20 November 1947: Princess Elizabeth, elder daughter and successor of King George VI, was married to Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten at *Westminster Abbey*.
> 6 May 1960: Princess Margaret, younger daughter of King George VI, was married to Antony Armstrong-Jones at *Westminster Abbey*.
> 
> 
> 14 November 1973: *Princess Anne, only daughter of Queen Elizabeth II, was married to Captain Mark Phillips at **Westminster Abbey**.*
> 29 July 1981: *Charles, Prince of Wales, eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II and heir apparent, was married to Lady Diana Spencer at **St Paul's Cathedral**.*
> 23 July 1986*: Prince Andrew, Duke of York, second son of Queen Elizabeth II, was married to Sarah Ferguson at **Westminster Abbey**.*
> 12 December 1992*: Anne, Princess Royal only daughter of Queen Elizabeth II was married to  Commander Timothy Laurence at **Crathie Kirk*
> 19 June 1999*: Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, youngest son of Queen Elizabeth II, was married to Sophie Rhys-Jones at St George's Chapel, **Windsor Castle**.*
> 9 April 2005*: Charles, Prince of Wales, eldest son of Queen Elizabeth II and heir apparent, was married to Camilla Parker Bowles at **Windsor Guildhall**.*
> 29 April 2011*: Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, second grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, elder son of Charles, Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, was married to Catherine Middleton at **Westminster Abbey**.*
> 19 May 2018*: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, third grandson of Queen Elizabeth II, younger son of Charles, Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer, was married to Meghan Markle at St George's Chapel, **Windsor Castle**.*
> 12 October 2018*: Princess Eugenie of York, third granddaughter of Queen Elizabeth II, younger daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York and Sarah Ferguson, was married to Jack Brooksbank at St George's Chapel, **Windsor Castle**.*
> 17 July 2020:* Princess Beatrice of York, granddaughter of Queen Elizabeth II, eldest daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York and Sarah Ferguson, was married to Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi at the Royal Chapel of All Saints at** Royal Lodge, Windsor**.*



Tim Lawrence the Princess royals current husband is a lovely man I sat next to him at a dinner event once and he absolutely charming witty and very normal


----------



## bellecate

Apparently People Magazine have some exclusive pictures of JCMH at the beach with their dog Pula yesterday. Sans MM.


----------



## limom

Another rescue dog


----------



## lalame

Genie27 said:


> How much maternity and paternity leave does one get in CA? I always figured that Canada and the UK get far more parental leave than the US.
> Will they insist on following British custom and law?
> 
> I don’t think the Employment benefits, if any, will cover more than an hour’s worth of security.



in CA the mandate is 12 weeks but for most working people, it depends on their employer. Some employers are more generous, like Netflix does 12 months, and others not so much but 12 is the floor in CA. Once I had to turn down a job because they gave only 2 weeks paid maternity. That state only mandated leave, not full payment during leave.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Gee, that pic looks professional to me.


----------



## bag-mania

They want to make sure we know JCMH looks relaxed.   

"He looked totally at ease," a source tells PEOPLE. "He has a great relationship with his dog, walking it off-leash. He looked just like a Montecito local just doing his thing — very relaxed walking barefoot."


----------



## Chanbal

People seem happy for MM&H, but would like to know 'a break from what?' 

"_One person wrote: "Taking time off, well that means taking time off from, I don't really know because neither of them work."

Another person said: "What a joke, time off from what?"

A third wrote: "They must be exhausted after the one podcast they've thrown out!"

Other users welcomed the news, and said they're looking forward to a break.

One person said: "Yay Harry and Megs are planning to take a break this summer from their campaign to destroy @RoyalFamily and @KensingtonRoyal.

"The rest of us will get a break from their whining!"

Another user wrote: "Does this mean the world is going to have a few days of peace without having to read about their constant whining & manufactured lies?" 

A third person said: "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are planning on taking 'time off' after their child's birth.

"And by time off I guess that means from dissing the royal family._"









						Meghan and Harry's plan to take 'time off' backfires as fans rejoice
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's plan to take "some time off" has been heavily mocked by royal fans, with many stating they are looking forward to a "break from their whining".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Apparently People Magazine have some exclusive pictures of JCMH at the beach with their dog Pula yesterday. Sans MM.
> View attachment 5041912


really?  they are supposed to be philanthropists?  and want privacy? why are the posing for People magazine?


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Apparently People Magazine have some exclusive pictures of JCMH at the beach with their dog Pula yesterday. Sans MM.
> View attachment 5041912


I wonder if he is getting paid for those pictures. His trip to the beach was published elsewhere without pictures. 









						Prince Harry spends Megxit anniversary on beach in California
					

PRINCE Harry put the royal drama of the last year behind him as he was spotted enjoying a trip to the beach in California on the anniversary of Megxit.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

The People photos:


Spoiler: Beach baby



*Prince Harry Is in Beach Mode as He Plays Fetch with Dog Pula in California: See the Photos!*
Stephanie Petit
April 01, 2021 01:30 PM
Prince Harry looks perfectly at home in California.
The Duke of Sussex hit the beach in Santa Barbara on Wednesday with his and Meghan Markle's black Labrador rescue, Pula. Harry — dressed casually in sunglasses, a backwards baseball cap, white T-shirt and shorts — dipped his feet in the ocean while he threw balls for Pula to fetch with the help of a throwing stick.
"He looked totally at ease," a source tells PEOPLE. "He has a great relationship with his dog, walking it off-leash. He looked just like a Montecito local just doing his thing — very relaxed walking barefoot."






Prince Harry
| Credit: GAC/MEGA




Prince Harry
| Credit: GAC/MEGA




Prince Harry
| Credit: GAC/MEGA
Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, welcomed Pula into their home shortly after their May 2018 wedding, joining Meghan's rescue beagle Guy. And the dog's name has special meaning — Pula is the official currency of Botswana, the country in Africa where Harry took Meghan when they first started dating. Pula means "rain" in Setswana — and since rain is very scarce in Botswana, it's considered valuable and a blessing.




Prince Harry
| Credit: GAC/MEGA
Pula also made an appearance during Meghan and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired early last month. The couple shared a new video of their family — including son Archie, who will turn 2 in May — enjoying time at the beach.

The black-and-white clip showed Meghan tossing a ball for her dogs, and Archie could be seen carrying a stick and approaching his father's feet as Harry proudly filmed.




Meghan Markle and Archie
| Credit: CBS

During the Oprah interview, Meghan and Harry, who announced they are expecting a baby girl this summer, opened up about their move to Santa Barbara and how it has benefitted Archie.
"To have outdoor space where I can go for walks with Archie and we go for walks as a family and with the dogs. You know, we go on hikes or go down to the beach, which is so close," Harry said.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> really?  they are supposed to be philanthropists?  and want privacy? why are the posing for People magazine?



They or their publicists made a deal with _People_ for "exclusives."


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They or their publicists made a deal with _People_ for "exclusives."


this must something like the wedding - it's for "us" not for them.  Ha


----------



## Jayne1

Shot at close range.  Not grainy at all.  He was posing like a Kardashian.


----------



## limom

Why are they showing the baby in black and white?
Is it extra for color pics?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Class...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Shot at close range.  Not grainy at all.  He was posing like a Kardashian.


if he had more sense, he'd be embarassed


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> this must something like the wedding - it's for "us" not for them.  Ha



Clearly Harry is still ticked off about his brother being named the sexiest bald man a few days ago. So he has started his campaign to be named the sexiest-dog-walking-on-beach man.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The birth-at-home story could be a ruse, a way to keep the paps from monitoring the hospitals when the time is near. She wouldn’t want an unflattering photo taken. Since nobody took any photos of her at the hospital last summer during her alleged miscarriage, she is anticipating more attention than she’s likely to get. Many more famous celebs than Meghan have given birth without any fanfare.


The paps were hanging outside of Frogmore back with Archie and they saw nothing, which fueled the idea that they weren't even living there at the time.  The same thing could happen this time.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Yet, she cheapened it by saying they married 3 days earlier.


I also think she insulted Prince Charles and The Queen.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Gee, that pic looks professional to me.


Photo credited to a Pap company/website MEGA. MEGA has a tab where tips can be submitted to them by anyone. Handy, isn't it?

Timing is all: Yesterday was the anniversary of the original Megxit review, The Queen was pictured at an official function with smiles and a cheerful demeanor, beautifully garbed in a colorful spring like coat/hat not looking like she was sitting in Windsor pining away at her Grandson and his treacherous Wife's leaving and betrayal. The epitome of "Keep Calm and Carry On". 

Since the Sussexes' surely monitor the Media relative to Granny, probably decided they needed an in-your-face-everything-is-fabulous- in-our-new-without you-California-life so Harry got dispatched to the beach for a typical Cali photo shoot. Having determined Meghan is toxic in the UK, she got left at home. 

Am I cynical and suspicious of all they do at this point, you betcha!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Let's look back to late December when this photo was taken outside of an office building in Beverly Hills. Has anyone changed their mind about what was happening here? Meghan was all covered up and didn't want anyone to see her. She was wearing a heavy winter jacket and a cap on a warm 70 degree day.
> 
> Guesses:
> 1) Was she already pregnant and showing?
> 2) Was Meghan getting IVF on that visit?
> 3) Were she and Harry there to meet the surrogate?
> 
> View attachment 5041858


She wanted everyone to guess if she was pregnant.  She has done similar before and it is really old.  Write some new material Meghan.


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> Lol the Princess Royal is not quiet!!! She is more than a match for cringe any day


PA told them there was no need to reinvent the wheel.  That caused the breakage of at least one set of dishes and put her on the Markle Hit List.  PA can sweep the floor with both of the Sussex and anyone else.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She wanted everyone to guess if she was pregnant.  She has done similar before and it is really old.  Write some new material Meghan.


who cares?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I can't blame the archbishop for holding off and not wanting to get involved. It seems like many people who have the misfortune of getting sucked into the Meghan and Harry sh*t show end up with their own lives and reputations getting damaged.


And that is why he should have corrected this ASAP.  It wasn't until TQ called him up and told him to do it, that it was done.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> And that is why he should have corrected this ASAP.  It wasn't until TQ called him up and told him to do it, that it was done.



He would have been attacked if he had done that. The media would have played it like he couldn't wait to call Meghan a liar and it was all a misunderstanding, blah, blah blah.


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> *All in all, it feels like these companies with ‘benefits’ want to avoid giving two benefits at all costs - a pay rise and a decent limit on working hours.*


*THIS 100% *.. Corporate America keeps on taking away the 'real' benefits .. like Paid-time-off, Health Insurance .. the 2 things that the employees TRULY need especially when they are working 60+ hours per week (_I worked 80 hours per week - every doggone week_)! Forget pay-raises and bonuses?!?! .. HA, only the executives get the decent bonuses and just last year, all the employees got *ZERO* pay-raises and *ZERO *bonuses (_which many rely on - I know I did_)!  Then, on top of it all .. stock options?!?! .. HA .. even if you get any, they are deferred stock .. heck, I was laid off in 2016 and I still can't access that stock!!! 

Last but not least is my favorite [*NOT*] .. where you put in all this time, you have all this experience .. but once your "total compensation" (_length of service + Age + Salary + Benefits_) gets too high?!?! .. you get the *LAID-OFF BOOT* .. how nice (_the only good thing about being on the early "waves" of layoffs is that the severance packages are much better .. nowadays, they SUCK_)!!  Try getting a job when you are in your later years; regardless of your experience and what value-add you can provide, most of Corporate America wants young + cheap and then they make you work your a$$ off!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> He would have been attacked if he had done that. The media would have played it like he couldn't wait to call Meghan a liar and it was all a misunderstanding, blah, blah blah.


I think it could have been said diplomatically.  The grey men at BP could have helped him out.  I am sure Welby has people on the payroll who do this sort of thing as well.  Letting it go for so long just fueled speculation.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> PIERS MORGAN: Writing for first time about dramatic exit from GMB
> 
> 
> MONDAY, MARCH 8: Got to the Good Morning Britain studios at 4am to watch Oprah Winfrey's much-hyped interview with Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, writes PIERS MORGAN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a long read.  Piers had a right to his opinion and I for one, didn't disagree with him.
> 
> The thing that bothers me about the Sharon Osbourne debacle is that  she had the right to stand for a friend and to have her own opinions.  I thought that was what that show was all about, i.e. differing  opinions and discussions of same.   We have turned into a society that has to tiptoe around in fear of having an opinion that other people might not like?  People are getting cancelled left and right and losing jobs over something they might have said in passing several years ago. Thinking differently is a bad thing?   People do change, and an opinion held years ago may have morphed   into something entirely different in the present.  If they want to apologize for the previous opinion, fine, and if they don't and stick to their opinion, fine, and it isn't for us to string them up because we disagree with them.  Did George Orwell have a crystal ball?  Are we all subject to the Thought Police now?  I hope not.


As per usual @gracekelly , could not agree with you more .. and funny that you brought up a book that I think about TOO often nowadays - George Orwell's "1984".  I have had a love/hate relationship with Piers Morgan (_given his support of 'certain' people_), but you are absolutely right .. HE HAS A RIGHT TO HIS OPINION!!!  Same for Sharon Osborne; she stuck up for a friend of hers .. and then all of a sudden, it becomes about her and what may have been said in the past (_do we know this for sure_)????  Sadly, I think all of us at one time or the other blurbed out something inappropriate, so then years later we are going to hurl into a state of miasma??/


----------



## limom

CeeJay said:


> As per usual @gracekelly , could not agree with you more .. and funny that you brought up a book that I think about TOO often nowadays - George Orwell's "1984".  I have had a love/hate relationship with Piers Morgan (_given his support of 'certain' people_), but you are absolutely right .. HE HAS A RIGHT TO HIS OPINION!!!  Same for Sharon Osborne; she stuck up for a friend of hers .. and then all of a sudden, it becomes about her and what may have been said in the past (_do we know this for sure_)????  Sadly, I think all of us at one time or the other blurbed out something inappropriate, so then years later we are going to hurl into a state of miasma??/


Piers Morgan certainly has a right to his opinion and his employer has a right to fire him as well.
Who wants to listen to his rants so early in the morning?
He was fired from CNN as well as he could not deliver ratings.
This has nothing to do with the thoughts police, imho.


----------



## Aimee3

Since Harry bemoans the *non* fact that he never bicycled with his parents, why didn’t Harry take Archie to the beach?!?  They keep that child cooped up like a non free range rescue chicken!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

ITV had the right to push out whomever they wanted, but in the end they only hurt themselves by doing it. 

*Good Morning Britain loses another 100,000 viewers as ratings drop AGAIN this week after Piers Morgan quit show*
*GOOD Morning Britain has lost another 100,000 viewers after Piers Morgan quit the show.*

Ratings plunged again this week after the controversial broadcaster abruptly threw in the towel following a row over Meghan Markle's Oprah Winfrey interview.

The news and chat show saw 1million people tuning in on March 29th, compared to 1.1million on on the same day (March 22nd) last week.

However, they reached their lowest viewing figures on March 17th, when ratings crashed to 800,000.

That day marked a 40 per cent loss of its audience following Piers' departure nine days earlier.

In contrast, on the day he stormed off air (March 8th) the ITV show overtook BBC Breakfast in the ratings war for the first time.

Piers even celebrated as Good Morning Britain took the lion's share with an impressive 1.29 million people watching the show.

But the TV star is now looking on the bright side of his Good Morning Britain exit, and spending more time with his family.

He's also kept his friendships with his GMB colleagues, who sent him birthday gifts yesterday.

The star celebrated turning 56 years old by drinking booze and eating cake in his garden with his children.

He admitted that he was thrilled to not have to get up early for work on a breakfast show tomorrow morning as he showed off his swag on Instagram.

Piers' celebration comes just days after the star said that all of the GMB team apart from Alex Beresford had reached out to him after he sensationally quit the ITV show earlier this month.

He'd locked horns with Alex live on air as they debated the Meghan Markle Oprah interview, with Piers storming off set before quitting the programme entirely just hours later.

The star wrote on Sunday: "I've had nice messages from all the other GMB presenters, apart from Alex Beresford, and many of the wonderful production team, from camera operators and producers to make-up artists.

"Some really moved me."

Alex did not acknowledge the jab as he took to Instagram later that day, brushing off the ongoing saga as he wrote: "Bless up yourselves on what looks like a grey Sunday.

"Remember the sun still rises and sets so beautifully some place in the world everyday."









						Good Morning Britain loses another 100,000 viewers as ratings drop AGAIN this week after Piers Morgan quit show
					

GOOD Morning Britain has lost another 100,000 viewers after Piers Morgan quit the show. Ratings plunged again this week after the controversial broadcaster abruptly threw in the towel following a r…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## limom

I stand with Alex!


----------



## lalame

I didn't really like Piers but I think they did him dirty by pushing him out over the Meghan issue. He should be able to disagree with any reporting or really anyone... and while I think he was totally unprofessional during that segment due to his temper, they didn't make it about his overall temperament. They made it about disbelieving Meghan.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> I didn't really like Piers but I think they did him dirty by pushing him out over the Meghan issue. He should be able to disagree with any reporting or really anyone... and while I think he was totally unprofessional during that segment due to his temper, they didn't make it about his overall temperament. They made it about disbelieving Meghan.


Oh well.
If he loses his mind like this on the air, I can only imagine what he is like behind the scenes.
It is like Matt Lauer, he was a jerk all along and then one day, he was let go....
Is ITV the Fox News of GB?


----------



## bag-mania

limom said:


> Oh well.
> If he loses his mind like this on the air, I can only imagine what he is like behind the scenes.
> It is like Matt Lauer, he was a jerk all along and then one day, he was let go....
> Is ITV the Fox News of GB?



ITV is a regular TV network founded back in the ‘50s. It is not a cable channel. I believe it would be more equivalent to a CBS or NBC here.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> They want to make sure we know JCMH looks relaxed.
> 
> "He looked totally at ease," a source tells PEOPLE. "He has a great relationship with his dog, walking it off-leash. He looked just like a Montecito local just doing his thing — very relaxed walking barefoot."


Somewhere down the road, this will be spun into a story about how H can't even walk the dog like a regular Montecito bloke, without the paps trailing him. And MM didn't have the mental fortitude to accompany him. She is "trapped in her mansion", forced to select a bathroom in which to give birth because they are being harassed non-stop.


----------



## Chanbal

“Harpo will not change the montage.” 











						Oprah refuses Mail demand to amend 'faked' Meghan Markle headlines
					

Associated Newspapers has accused Harpo Productions of betraying viewers' trust by broadcasting "faked" Meghan Markle headlines in its interview.




					www.pressgazette.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

This accident was mentioned in one of Lady C's videos. While Kate was worried, MM found it laughable.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> This accident was mentioned in one of Lady C's videos. While Kate was worried, MM found it laughable.
> View attachment 5042305


This is so WRONG!  It shows MM's true colors! @&%&$!!


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Let's look back to late December when this photo was taken outside of an office building in Beverly Hills. Has anyone changed their mind about what was happening here? Meghan was all covered up and didn't want anyone to see her. She was wearing a heavy winter jacket and a cap on a warm 70 degree day.
> 
> Guesses:
> 1) Was she already pregnant and showing?
> 2) Was Meghan getting IVF on that visit?
> 3) Were she and Harry there to meet the surrogate?
> 
> View attachment 5041858



She was playing at her usual games.  There is no way she had a tummy she had to hide at that point.  She plays mind games with her "fans."  And thinks she's so smart about it.



limom said:


> Why are they showing the baby in black and white?
> Is it extra for color pics?



They love how artistic they are in posting photos.  A la the wedding photos.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> This accident was mentioned in one of Lady C's videos. While Kate was worried, MM found it laughable.
> View attachment 5042305


She's not the only one laughing - H is grinning as well


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> She's not the only one laughing - H is grinning as well


We should see the whole photo, not just this cropped portion.

Edit: just watched the clip of Lord Guthrie's fall from the horse. It wasn't anything like a pratfall. To give MM the benefit of the doubt, she was probably bored stiff like she was at PC's party and wasn't even paying attention to the parade. Maybe she was whispering sweet nothings to Harry, so they were having a good time.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> They want to make sure we know JCMH looks relaxed.
> 
> "He looked totally at ease," a source tells PEOPLE. "He has a great relationship with his dog, walking it off-leash. He looked just like a Montecito local just doing his thing — very relaxed walking barefoot."


Well you know the old saying and I think in this case it applies to the media: you can’t be in awe and reasonable at the same time.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> I stand with Alex!


I’m with him in that I’m anti-PM for the most part and he seems nice  but I do think him and Susanne Reid are both the ‘straight men’ and they both need someone a bit more energetic to play off.
There’s lots of people out there who could do what Piers does with less controversy, they need to pull the trigger on the new ‘star player’ or they are going to plummet.


----------



## needlv

The body language behaviour panel has a follow up on H and MM.  it’s 30 min watch and they do discuss the racism comment, whether MM is being truthful based on her body language.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I don’t think the coat thing is that unusual. I wear a puffer myself sometimes when it’s in the 60s, which turns into 70s, and I’m still out and about in it. This IS the land of Ugg boots in 80 degree weather after all.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> ITV had the right to push out whomever they wanted, but in the end they only hurt themselves by doing it.
> 
> *Good Morning Britain loses another 100,000 viewers as ratings drop AGAIN this week after Piers Morgan quit show*
> *GOOD Morning Britain has lost another 100,000 viewers after Piers Morgan quit the show.*
> 
> Ratings plunged again this week after the controversial broadcaster abruptly threw in the towel following a row over Meghan Markle's Oprah Winfrey interview.
> 
> The news and chat show saw 1million people tuning in on March 29th, compared to 1.1million on on the same day (March 22nd) last week.
> 
> However, they reached their lowest viewing figures on March 17th, when ratings crashed to 800,000.
> 
> That day marked a 40 per cent loss of its audience following Piers' departure nine days earlier.
> 
> In contrast, on the day he stormed off air (March 8th) the ITV show overtook BBC Breakfast in the ratings war for the first time.
> 
> Piers even celebrated as Good Morning Britain took the lion's share with an impressive 1.29 million people watching the show.
> 
> But the TV star is now looking on the bright side of his Good Morning Britain exit, and spending more time with his family.
> 
> He's also kept his friendships with his GMB colleagues, who sent him birthday gifts yesterday.
> 
> The star celebrated turning 56 years old by drinking booze and eating cake in his garden with his children.
> 
> He admitted that he was thrilled to not have to get up early for work on a breakfast show tomorrow morning as he showed off his swag on Instagram.
> 
> Piers' celebration comes just days after the star said that all of the GMB team apart from Alex Beresford had reached out to him after he sensationally quit the ITV show earlier this month.
> 
> He'd locked horns with Alex live on air as they debated the Meghan Markle Oprah interview, with Piers storming off set before quitting the programme entirely just hours later.
> 
> The star wrote on Sunday: "I've had nice messages from all the other GMB presenters, apart from Alex Beresford, and many of the wonderful production team, from camera operators and producers to make-up artists.
> 
> "Some really moved me."
> 
> Alex did not acknowledge the jab as he took to Instagram later that day, brushing off the ongoing saga as he wrote: "Bless up yourselves on what looks like a grey Sunday.
> 
> "Remember the sun still rises and sets so beautifully some place in the world everyday."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good Morning Britain loses another 100,000 viewers as ratings drop AGAIN this week after Piers Morgan quit show
> 
> 
> GOOD Morning Britain has lost another 100,000 viewers after Piers Morgan quit the show. Ratings plunged again this week after the controversial broadcaster abruptly threw in the towel following a r…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



Alex who???? Non entity of all non entities he isn’t even a decent weatherman let alone a presenter


----------



## justwatchin

xincinsin said:


> Somewhere down the road, this will be spun into a story about how H can't even walk the dog like a regular Montecito bloke, without the paps trailing him. And MM didn't have the mental fortitude to accompany him. She is "trapped in her mansion", forced to select a bathroom in which to give birth because they are being harassed non-stop.


And they will be forced to flee to another country! Let me help them pack


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh really. That’s so interesting about the baby shower.  I don’t really get them but I would definitely think it’s the kind of thing you invite your mum and any sisters to. I know NY is really far from LA but I just assumed she’d held it in the US (to show off) to be nearer friends and family.


She wasn't supposed to have one at all in the UK. I think Doria wasn't invited and she hardly have any true friends, other than celebrity acquaintances she would call friends.


----------



## DeMonica

RueMonge said:


> I agree, every pregnancy is different. But a homebirth can be just as safe or safer than a hospital birth with a low risk pregnancy and proper prenatal care and evaluation. Especially now considering covid risk in hospitals along with your everyday risk of picking up something else. Naturally your midwife has a back up doctor and hospital all set up ahead of time. I had number four at home and it was so wonderful to roll over and call the midwife when I went into labor and just stay in bed.
> 
> No comment, however on MM and JCMH birth shenanigans.


I don't think that homebirth can be ever as safe as a hospital birth - even during covid - unless you give birth in a third world hospital which is not the case this time. She's in the high risk category already because of her age and I don't know about the rest of her medical history, though.  Congratulation to you and I wish you and the baby good health.


----------



## limom

elvisfan4life said:


> Alex who???? Non entity of all non entities he isn’t even a decent weatherman let alone a presenter


They said the same about Al Rocker and yet, here he is...


----------



## limom

justwatchin said:


> And they will be forced to flee to another country! Let me help them pack


My vote is for Florida.


----------



## needlv

Interesting that in all of the revelations that MM made during the Oprah interview she did not address the rumours of her using a surrogate for Archie.  That was a huge rumour at the time and she said nothing about it in the two hours??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This accident was mentioned in one of Lady C's videos. While Kate was worried, MM found it laughable.
> View attachment 5042305



She is seriously a disgusting human being, and I am not sure how anyone can ignore all those red flags and marry her anyway.


----------



## papertiger

limom said:


> My vote is for Florida.



Anywhere but the UK.

We are thankful for their continued good health and happiness away from our hideous shores and dysfunctional families and institutions, sooooo glad they prefer the US where there's no racism, paps, families are consistently pleasant to each other and everyone is looked after equally regarding mental health.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Interesting that in all of the revelations that MM made during the Oprah interview she did not address the rumours of her using a surrogate for Archie.  That was a huge rumour at the time and she said nothing about it in the two hours??



The 'interview' was a PR stunt.

Advertorial for the masses with adverts in-between. It should have come with a disclaimer.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don’t think the coat thing is that unusual. I wear a puffer myself sometimes when it’s in the 60s, which turns into 70s, and I’m still out and about in it. This IS the land of Ugg boots in 80 degree weather after all.



Those photos were taken only three weeks after the bombshell “I had a miscarriage” story appeared in the _New York Times_. She was still riding an enormous wave of sympathy from that. If the timing revealed later is true, she was already pregnant when the story came out but she didn’t want it to be known because it would lessen the impact. Harry was wearing a T-shirt and she was bundled up. I think she was getting a followup check up from IVF or as was mentioned earlier possibly an appointment for cosmetic work.

This is was what was said about the visit at the time: At one point in the afternoon, they entered a large building that holds multiple businesses, including a popular medical spa.


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is seriously a disgusting human being, and I am not sure how anyone can ignore all those red flags and marry her anyway.


 Harry is laughing as well, they are perfect togheter.


----------



## Chanbal

The title shouldn't surprise anyone that reads this thread! 











						Meghan Markle appeared to lead 'normal life' during her time as royal
					

Speaking on Royally Obsessed podcast,  Andrew Morton claimed friends told him they saw the Duchess of Sussex, 39, and about with friends during her time in the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that watched some of Lady C's videos, this is old news! 



"_*In a morning show interview on Friday, she claimed Princess Anne 'wasn't alluding to the colour of this child' but rather Meghan's 'unsuitable' character' and alleged 'constant use of the race card'.*

'Meghan weaponises colour with everything,' Lady Campbell told the Today programme. 

'You see, as long as she plays the colour card, she gets a free pass to behave as badly and as freely as she would like.

'She has no boundaries and as long as she plays the colour card, it is open season.'

Lady Campbell said that Meghan's colour 'was the one thing that she had going in her favour'.

'Had Meghan been white, there is no way that marriage would have proceeded, because Meghan's past was rather too chequered, and Meghan's personality was very abrasive,' she said.

'The one thing that Meghan had going in her favour was that she was mixed race.'

Today host Leila McKinnon then asked Lady Campbell if she believed Meghan had a hard time with the press.

'She was absolutely attacked,' McKinnon said.

Lady Campbell replied: 'Meghan was attacked the way everybody else is attacked  who is in the public eye in Britain.' 

'Meghan had a very easy ride of it, but Meghan is a born complainer, and a drama queen.'

McKinnon said it appeared Lady Campbell had a 'case of the Piers Morgans here', 

She was refering to the long-time critic of Meghan who last month quit Good Morning Britain after an argument over whether her claims in the Oprah interview should be believed.

'Is your intense dislike for any reason? Have you met Meghan?' McKinnon questioned. 

Lady Campbell replied: 'I've not met Meghan and I don't want to meet Meghan,' she said. 

'If you are a proper biographer, you don't have to meet the subject of your biography.'

McKinnon disagreed, replying: 'Well, my dear, maybe if you haven't met Meghan, you perhaps don't know exactly what she is like and you are just hearing what you are hearing from sources with their own agendas?' 

The Today hosts also asked Lady Campbell whether Princess Anne had spoken to the couple.

She replied: '*My understanding is that nobody in the Royal Family is very pleased with the fact that any time they say anything to Harry, it ends up on American television via one of Oprah's friends. *

'So, you know, put your self in the shoes of the Royal Family. 

'Any family does not want its dirty linen washed in public. Nor do they want to be unfairly accused of prejudices that they do not have because an ambitious girl has married into the family."_



Spoiler: All article here! 












						Royal 'expert' shocks Today host with comments about Meghan Markle
					

Lady Colin Campbell, 71, appeared on the show on Good Friday, after dropping bombshell allegations that Princess Anne was the senior royal who made comments about Archie's skin colour.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

It’s not advised to have Botox if pregnant nor breast feeding.  I’m not sure about having fillers while pregnant, but it appears she’s had a lot of fillers in the Oprah interview.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> It’s not advised to have Botox if pregnant nor breast feeding.  I’m not sure about having fillers while pregnant, but it appears she’s had a lot of fillers in the Oprah interview.



This is why the “surrogate” rumors persist.

ETA: well, one reason


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This accident was mentioned in one of Lady C's videos. While Kate was worried, MM found it laughable.
> View attachment 5042305


I'm no fan of Meghan but while this photo may look like she's laughing, I don't think you can tell for sure


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don’t think the coat thing is that unusual. I wear a puffer myself sometimes when it’s in the 60s, which turns into 70s, and I’m still out and about in it. This IS the land of Ugg boots in 80 degree weather after all.


I don't like Ugg boots and I like it even less when people wear ugg slippers out and about or PJ's.  Sorry OT


----------



## DeMonica

limom said:


> Piers Morgan certainly has a right to his opinion and his employer has a right to fire him as well.
> Who wants to listen to his rants so early in the morning?
> He was fired from CNN as well as he could not deliver ratings.
> This has nothing to do with the thoughts police, imho.


It wasn't mandatory to listen to PA's rants, since there are other morning shows to watch. Still, there were  more than a  million viewers who obviously liked what he did on the show, and now they're switching to other channels.  His wording, although honest,  was  unprofessional, so was his leaving (I can accept he did it instead of saying something even worse), but it was unfair to sack him. Maybe, ITV bosses had an agenda. Alex was equally unprofessional. The way he provoked him and reacted to PM's leaving the studio, was just as bad as PM.


----------



## limom

Meh, there are professional standards one has to adhere every where.
He broke the rules.
Maybe, he has some type of burn out?


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> I'm no fan of Meghan but while this photo may look like she's laughing, I don't think you can tell for sure


ITA, sometimes people's expressions are not well captured, this photo is not telling...


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> Since Harry bemoans the *non* fact that he never bicycled with his parents, why didn’t Harry take Archie to the beach?!?  They keep that child cooped up like a non free range rescue chicken!


Maybe they want to sell exclusive Archie's birthday photos for a big sum, so they keep that poor child securely locked up because an ordinary pap stroll would ruin the business.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Maybe they want to sell exclusive Archie's birthday photos for a big sum, so they keep that poor child securely locked up because an ordinary pap stroll would ruin the business.


yep, I think they want to control the pics of him to get max value....maybe some people are fascinated to see the child but not me.  He looks like a pretty ordinary white toddler from what I can see.


----------



## marietouchet

Arguably this article is off topic but I always want to know more about topics and my eye was drawn to the blurb “I was being groomed by ... a narcissist “, so this is one woman’s account of being a victim of a narcissist , interesting read











						“Predatory Men With a Taste for Teenagers” Joyce Maynard on the Chilling Parallels Between Woody Allen and J.D. Salinger
					

The novelist, who had a relationship with Salinger when she was 18 and he was 53, on the Allen v. Farrow documentary—and what happens when women tell the truth.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I'm no fan of Meghan but while this photo may look like she's laughing, I don't think you can tell for sure



ETA: @Chanbal is correct. MM looks like she is laughing, H appears to grimace and Kate looks concerned.


----------



## marietouchet

Clearblueskies said:


> Charles and Diana were married in St Pauls cathedral


I mananged to get all the churches wrong ... silly me ... but I do remember they were all ginormous houses of worship with piles of guests


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'm no fan of Meghan but while this photo may look like she's laughing, I don't think you can tell for sure



The horror vs. laugh issue was brought up in one of the Lady C's videos, see below (around the 2nd half). I posted one picture, but there are probably more ...


----------



## kemilia

DeMonica said:


> Maybe they want to sell exclusive Archie's birthday photos for a big sum, so they keep that poor child securely locked up because an ordinary pap stroll would ruin the business.


Never seeing all 3 of them as a family is odd to me. Especially the pregnancy announcement pic--just H&M and no little Archie? 

I doubt we will see pics of the new baby. Unless ...


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Never seeing all 3 of them as a family is odd to me. Especially the pregnancy announcement pic--just H&M and no little Archie?
> 
> I doubt we will see pics of the new baby. Unless ...


unless People gives them a big fat check?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think you are right.  MM wore the pink CHerrera in 2018.  The guard fell in 2019 when MM wore the navy Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lip-reader reveals what Meghan said on Palace balcony at Trooping the Colour
> 
> 
> A LIP-READING expert reveals what she believes Meghan told Prince Harry on the Buckingham Palace balcony. Markle, 36, looked pretty in pink during her first balcony appearance at the end of Saturda…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears at Queen's Trooping the Colour parade
> 
> 
> The Queen, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were seen with rest of the key royals at Trooping the Colour, a ceremony which saw 1,400 soldiers, 200 horses and 400 musicians parade to mark the sovereign's official birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: here’s the video  -  this photo could be from around the 10:10 mark, but I am no expert



I'm not questioning whether MM was laughing or not, just reporting on what I learned from Lady C's video. Marshall Guthrie was thrown from the horse in 2018, not 2019. The year of the pink outfit.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! 











						Meghan Markle under pressure as new Piers Morgan interview to air
					

MEGHAN MARKLE faces further criticism from Piers Morgan in the coming days, as he gives his first TV interview since quitting GMB.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The horror vs. laugh issue was brought up in one of the Lady C's videos, see below (around the 2nd half). I posted one picture, but there are probably more ...




The discussion begins around the 19:00 mark.
You are correct @Chanbal. Humble apologies for doubting your expertise.
 thanks, I needed a good slap   I’ll see myself out.


MM attended in 2018 and 2019. Each time a guard fell off a horse.
I’m not saying she is a jinx, just stating an interesting fact.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> Never seeing all 3 of them as a family is odd to me. Especially the pregnancy announcement pic--just H&M and no little Archie?
> 
> I doubt we will see pics of the new baby. Unless ...



Archie was with them in the tree photo.












						The New Trailer for Harry & Meghan's Netflix Program Features Rare Photos of the Couple
					

The documentary is set to premiere later this month.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## csshopper

Lady C goes on line and to Good Morning Britain with a story the Princess Royal was the source of what was a misinterpretation of a statement about "culture", being restated as "color" by Harry and Meghan. Thus, calling them out on their claims of racism.

Two days later the smear campaign against Anne appears to be underway.

The story is true, happened in 1989, and has been included in documentaries and articles since then. It involved her affair with her current husband while still married to her former. Love letters were stolen from her briefcase.

Obviously she has gone on with her life since then, weathered any storm over it and it's "old news". She is one of the most respected Royals, a tireless working member of "The Firm" and must really pizz Harry and Meghan off because she saw through Meghan from the beginning.

*Royal cover-up: Neighbours kept Anne’s 'dangerous liaison' with Queen's servant secret*
*PRINCESS ANNE's "dangerous liaison" with the Queen's servant was kept secret by his neighbours, according to contemporary royal reporters.*
By Abbie Llewelyn
PUBLISHED: 16:19, Fri, Apr 2, 2021 | UPDATED: 17:05, Fri, Apr 2, 2021

This rehash surely intended to hopefully blunt Anne has Scoobie and Sunshine Sachs written all over it: "according to contemporary royal reporters."


----------



## Allisonfaye

DeMonica said:


> It wasn't mandatory to listen to PA's rants, since there are other morning shows to watch. Still, there were  more than a  million viewers who obviously liked what he did on the show, and now they're switching to other channels.  His wording, although honest,  was  unprofessional, so was his leaving (I can accept he did it instead of saying something even worse), but it was unfair to sack him. Maybe, ITV bosses had an agenda. Alex was equally unprofessional. The way he provoked him and reacted to PM's leaving the studio, was just as bad as PM.



I am not following it all that closely but I got the feeling he was told to apologize or back off what he said and he quit.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The discussion begins around the 19:00 mark.
> You are correct @Chanbal. Humble apologies for doubting your expertise.
> thanks, I needed a good slap   I’ll see myself out.
> 
> 
> MM attended in 2018 and 2019. Each time a guard fell off a horse.
> I’m not saying she is a jinx, just stating an interesting fact.


 No need to apologize. If she was laughing at the accident, as some people think she was, I feel sorry for her 'victims'.

No idea if H is a victim or not, but a 'lost soul'??? 












						Queen has 'infinite patience' with Harry due to her history with her sister
					

HER Majesty has “infinite patience” with her “lost soul” Prince Harry because of her history with her sister Margaret. The Queen understands what it’s like being the s…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Clearly Harry is still ticked off about his brother being named the sexiest bald man a few days ago. So he has started his campaign to be named the sexiest-dog-walking-on-beach man.


Or he could try winning as sexiest-dog-walking-on-beach bum or bumpkin or idiot or traitor or liar. He'd have a better chance of winning a title that reflects his true character.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> It’s not advised to have Botox if pregnant nor breast feeding.  I’m not sure about having fillers while pregnant, but it appears she’s had a lot of fillers in the Oprah interview.


Yeah apparently you shouldn’t even use retinol or get peels. My skin has gone crazy. 

A lot of cosmetic drs won’t do fillers while pregnant but I’m sure someone willing can be found, especially in LA!

There’s been loads of allegations of the kardashians and others having work done during Pregnancy. I wouldn’t be that surprised if they were all at it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Anywhere but the UK.
> 
> We are thankful for their continued good health and happiness away from our hideous shores and dysfunctional families and institutions, sooooo glad they prefer the US where there's no racism, paps, families are consistently pleasant to each other and everyone is looked after equally regarding mental health.


Yes and they say Americans don’t understand irony!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> And that is why he should have corrected this ASAP.  It wasn't until TQ called him up and told him to do it, that it was done.


He could have been deferring/consulting to/with HM as she is head of the Church of England and his boss.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bubablu said:


> Harry is laughing as well, they are perfect togheter.



I didn't see this as laughing, I am too lazy to look up the English word for it, but have you never seen people baring their teeth while watching a tense situation? Looked like this to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is the dog’s toy plastic?
Cuz Hazzie has a serious _thang_ about ‘the plastic’, just FYI:

From 2019:
_Harry's good friend Nacho Figueras recently shared a bit about their travels together as members of the same polo club with CBS News. In the interview, Figueras revealed that Harry has a particular pet peeve with hotels using wasteful plastic products.

"He was there and we were at the hotel where we spent the night before the game," Figueras said. "He talked to a person and said, 'This morning I got my coffee and I saw that you have a plastic thing on the coffee. And then I also sent my shirt and I got my shirt in a big plastic bag.'

The prince then added, "Can we please not use the plastic?"

Figueras continued in his interview, "So that's this guy, okay. I don't like to talk about that at all, that's who he is. That's who they are. No plastic."

Prince Harry has a long history of being an environmentalist, just like his father Prince Charles. As Marie Claire noted, in a recent interview Harry even revealed that he was teased as a kid for his love of Mother Earth._









						Prince Harry has one simple request when he stays at a hotel
					

The Duke of Sussex is often seen jet-setting around the globe for royal engagements — but there's one requirement he has for the hotels he stays at.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

I wouldn’t worry too much over Piers M, he’s rumoured to be in with Andrew Neil’s news project. They talk a bit about it at the end of this clip:


I do think ITV will need a new anchor soon though, ratings are terrible when there’s an interim period for any show.

Oh @limom to clarify what ITV’s tone is, I’d say it’s demographic is middle aged and older (though some of their reality shows have a younger fan base). It’s a commercial channel which isn’t that political in its programming. The news programming is pretty mainstream and middle ground, slightly conservative maybe. The vast majority of its programming is comfy, lower budget drama, lifestyle and reality shows. It’s very middle of the road.

I wouldn’t say it’s like fox. I get the impression we don’t really have a channel like Fox News. Sky news might get a little dicey from what I’ve seen but I don’t have sky so I dunno.

Edit - I forgot to say. The thing itv that has made which is absolutely brilliant and we should give them props for are the David suchet poirot series and some of the marples- amazing stuff.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is the dog’s toy plastic?



Don't know, but speaking from experience with a dog who chews up everything the best dog toys are latex.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is the dog’s toy plastic?
> Cuz Hazzie has a serious _thang_ about ‘the plastic’, just FYI:



Allow me to field any dog-related questions. 

It looked like a Chuckit. It's basically a long plastic handle that you use to launch tennis balls for your dog to fetch. It's for people who can't throw worth a damn and you don't want your dog to look at you all disappointed when you can only throw a ball 20 ft. I'm looking at you, Harry!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Allow me to field any dog-related questions.
> 
> It looked like a Chuckit. It's basically a long plastic handle that you use to launch tennis balls for your dog to fetch. It's for people who can't throw worth a damn and you don't want your dog to look at you all disappointed when you can only throw a ball 20 ft. I'm looking at you, Harry!



Eeeeek.  This may push Hazzie over the edge.  He cannot handle ‘the plastic’ (joke intended).


----------



## RueMonge

DeMonica said:


> I don't think that homebirth can be ever as safe as a hospital birth - even during covid - unless you give birth in a third world hospital which is not the case this time. She's in the high risk category already because of her age and I don't know about the rest of her medical history, though.  Congratulation to you and I wish you and the baby good health.


Thank, he is 21 and robust. I was 42 at birth.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Archie was with them in the tree photo.
> 
> View attachment 5042862
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The New Trailer for Harry & Meghan's Netflix Program Features Rare Photos of the Couple
> 
> 
> The documentary is set to premiere later this month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


That's her 9 month bump.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Archie was with them in the tree photo.
> 
> View attachment 5042862
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The New Trailer for Harry & Meghan's Netflix Program Features Rare Photos of the Couple
> 
> 
> The documentary is set to premiere later this month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


But the only face anyone can see is that of the Shady Lady of Montecito.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And one more. But they didn't have a plan, at all.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And this is how American tourists walking around the Balmoral area asked the Queen if she'd ever met, well, the Queen. She was inkognito! Love the pics!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chloe302225 said:


>



Wonder if the Queen is wearing one of her Hermes scarves?  Lovely no matter which designer. If you celebrate Easter or not, Happy Easter weekend all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Wonder if the Queen is wearing one of her Hermes scarves?  Lovely no matter which designer. If you celebrate Easter or not, Happy Easter weekend all.



Thank you, Happy Holidays to you too! At this point, still stuck at home, it's all about making more food than I can possibly eat, and eating more of it than would be wise.


----------



## Lodpah

Jayne1 said:


> That's her 9 month bump.


I find it amusing that her kid and Harry’s faces are covered while hers are not.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't see this as laughing, I am too lazy to look up the English word for it, but have you never seen people baring their teeth while watching a tense situation? Looked like this to me.


 Grimace


----------



## mdcx

Genie27 said:


> How much maternity and paternity leave does one get in CA? I always figured that Canada and the UK get far more parental leave than the US.
> Will they insist on following British custom and law?
> 
> I don’t think the Employment benefits, if any, will cover more than an hour’s worth of security.


My understanding was in the US, you need to be back at work within 6 weeks of birth or risk losing yr job. It may differ state to state. A bit barbaric compared to rest of world imo.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you, Happy Holidays to you too! At this point, still stuck at home, it's all about making more food than I can possibly eat, and eating more of it than would be wise.


We both will be stuck at home but in our minds together.  That goes to all those that can't quite get out yet until it's safe. Cheers to that ... and I don't drink but I will have a glass to celebrate the freedom to leave the house when I want!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

bellecate said:


> Apparently People Magazine have some exclusive pictures of JCMH at the beach with their dog Pula yesterday. Sans MM.
> View attachment 5041912


I truly hope H is slathered in sunscreen. Without his usual BRF advisors around to tell him what to do, I fear he is not though.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well.




They tried to get in on the cash grab immediately. "Oh, look! We can be rich and famous! Let's bail! KTHXBYE!"


----------



## Jayne1

Doesn't look like a grimace... She's using her whole hand to cover a big smile.


----------



## mdcx

CeeJay said:


> *THIS 100% *.. Corporate America keeps on taking away the 'real' benefits .. like Paid-time-off, Health Insurance .. the 2 things that the employees TRULY need especially when they are working 60+ hours per week (_I worked 80 hours per week - every doggone week_)! Forget pay-raises and bonuses?!?! .. HA, only the executives get the decent bonuses and just last year, all the employees got *ZERO* pay-raises and *ZERO *bonuses (_which many rely on - I know I did_)!  Then, on top of it all .. stock options?!?! .. HA .. even if you get any, they are deferred stock .. heck, I was laid off in 2016 and I still can't access that stock!!!
> 
> Last but not least is my favorite [*NOT*] .. where you put in all this time, you have all this experience .. but once your "total compensation" (_length of service + Age + Salary + Benefits_) gets too high?!?! .. you get the *LAID-OFF BOOT* .. how nice (_the only good thing about being on the early "waves" of layoffs is that the severance packages are much better .. nowadays, they SUCK_)!!  Try getting a job when you are in your later years; regardless of your experience and what value-add you can provide, most of Corporate America wants young + cheap and then they make you work your a$$ off!


I love your posts, and I always imagine you looking like a regal Tilda Swinton or Andrea Riseborough


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well.



Is there any lie left unbusted by now?....Probably it won't shake the faith of the sugars, though.


----------



## CeeJay

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don't think ceejay's friend's son went to high school with her...I thought they did a play together... didn't she go to Immaculate Heart which is an all girls school?


This was discussed AGES ago @OriginalBalenciaga ; no - he did not go to Immaculate Heart .. he went to the corresponding Boy's school, but the two schools oftentimes joined hands re: parties (proms) and definitely in the Arts.  He was the male lead to Meghan being the lead in their joint *school's* plays


----------



## mdcx

Toby93 said:


> She's not the only one laughing - H is grinning as well


Thats a British grimace of shock/horror ala “oh my good man, bloody hell, and in public too, get up, get up, phew, he’s alright!” not a smile at all imo.


----------



## mdcx

needlv said:


> Interesting that in all of the revelations that MM made during the Oprah interview she did not address the rumours of her using a surrogate for Archie.  That was a huge rumour at the time and she said nothing about it in the two hours??


O only asked softball questions. All would have been preapproved.


----------



## CeeJay

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Doesn't sound like Doria was hidden at all...
> 
> _"The clip, filmed by Thomas in the summer of 1999, shows the future Duchess of Sussex making her way through a crowd of students towards her father, who she greets with a loving ‘hi daddy’ before tightly hugging a proud Doria.
> 
> Doria is then seen warmly embracing her daughter’s drama teacher Gigi Perreau, the 1940s film star who is credited as Meghan’s first acting mentor."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is seen happily greeting mother Doria and father Thomas in school video | Express Digest
> 
> 
> Express Digest is a giant collection of the best news and interesting links on the web!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> expressdigest.com


.. and if you read the article, it says "her last day of High School" and given that my friend's son did not attend Immaculate High School, then they are still true in regards to what they have said .. that they never saw or met Doria at any of the plays or other joint activities.  Meghan had always wanted to be an actress and started very early taking various classes even before Immaculate, so it's also possible that Doria knew this lady from previous years .. not sure.  

If what I wrote bothers you, then please feel free to put me on IGNORE but I'm not going to be silenced either.  Thanks ..


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you, Happy Holidays to you too! At this point, still stuck at home, it's all about making more food than I can possibly eat, and eating more of it than would be wise.


It sounds eerily similar to my Easter. Happy Holidays to you all!


----------



## CeeJay

limom said:


> Did she say her father ancestor was born in Malta?
> As a colonizer or as a native?
> Plus Malta is not in Italy, is it?


No .. Malta and Italy are separate countries ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

mdcx said:


> Thats a British grimace of shock/horror ala “oh my good man, bloody hell, and in public too, get up, get up, phew, he’s alright!” not a smile at all imo.



For me, the issue with this photo shows how out-of-touch the gruesome twosome is.  The look on Kate’s face is clearly one of concern. H&M, it is questionable - a snicker? a laugh? a grimace?  In any case, neither one gives a look of concern.


----------



## DeMonica

Hermes Zen said:


> We both will be stuck at home but in our minds together.  That goes to all those that can't quite get out yet until it's safe. Cheers to that ... and I don't drink but I will have a glass to celebrate the freedom to leave the house when I want!


I got my shots, so I should feel a little safer but I don't.


----------



## zinacef

Lodpah said:


> I find it amusing that her kid and Harry’s faces are covered while hers are not.


Well! She’s a professional american actress who’s face can launch a thousand —- ships(?), projects, causes, wokefulness(?) and best of all compassion on them doe eyes!


----------



## LittleStar88

zinacef said:


> Well! She’s a professional american actress who’s face can launch a thousand —- ships(?), projects, causes, wokefulness(?) *TRAINWRECKS* and best of all compassion on them doe eyes!



Fixed!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

DeMonica said:


> I got my shots, so I should feel a little safer but I don't.


I'm getting my first tomorrow. Can't wait. I totally will feel the same after I have both.  We must still be safe afterwards and when we feel comfortable going out.


----------



## DeMonica

CeeJay said:


> No .. Malta and Italy are separate countries ..


They are. Actually that ancestor who ended up in Malta had bee a English soldier who served six years there. His Irish wife gave birth to a girl called Mary in Malta who is the great-great grandmother to Thomas Markle. So there's no ethnic Maltese in her family line.


----------



## DeMonica

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm getting my first tomorrow. Can't wait. I totally will feel the same after I have both.  We must still be safe afterwards and when we feel comfortable going out.


You'll be ok. Which one are you getting? Albeit, it doesn't matter, the most important is to get it. Unfortunately, we can still be infected, but it hopefully saves us from the serious complications.


----------



## Hermes Zen

DeMonica said:


> You'll be ok. Which one are you getting? Albeit, it doesn't matter, the most important is to get it. Unfortunately, we can still be infected, but it hopefully saves us from the serious complications.


Moderna. I totally agree with you.   Thanks!


----------



## DeMonica

Hermes Zen said:


> Moderna. I totally agree with you.   Thanks!


Lucky you!  I wanted that one, but I got AstraZeneca. Beggars can't be choosers.


----------



## Chanbal

"_I can disclose that the group’s chief executive, Nicola Brentnall, has left her role amid claims that she was too much of a ‘cheerleader’ for the California-based Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Brentnall is also said to have caused anger by her involvement in Harry and Meghan’s infamous video chat last summer when they linked the Queen’s beloved Commonwealth to slavery._"









						Prince Harry and Meghan cheerleader Nicola Brentnall quits her role
					

EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Nicola Brentnall is also said to have caused anger by her involvement in Harry and Meghan's video chat last summer when they linked the Queen's Commonwealth to slavery.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> "_I can disclose that the group’s chief executive, Nicola Brentnall, has left her role amid claims that she was too much of a ‘cheerleader’ for the California-based Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Brentnall is also said to have caused anger by her involvement in Harry and Meghan’s infamous video chat last summer when they linked the Queen’s beloved Commonwealth to slavery._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan cheerleader Nicola Brentnall quits her role
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Nicola Brentnall is also said to have caused anger by her involvement in Harry and Meghan's video chat last summer when they linked the Queen's Commonwealth to slavery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Maybe she'll move on to Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe she'll move on to Montecito.



It’s perfect timing. Meghan and Harry’s chief of staff just quit. Maybe this woman wants the job.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe she'll move on to Montecito.


They have plenty of space and are not short of restrooms.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CeeJay said:


> This was discussed AGES ago @OriginalBalenciaga ; no - he did not go to Immaculate Heart .. he went to the corresponding Boy's school, but the two schools oftentimes joined hands re: parties (proms) and definitely in the Arts.  He was the male lead to Meghan being the lead in their joint *school's* plays





CeeJay said:


> .. and if you read the article, it says "her last day of High School" and given that my friend's son did not attend Immaculate High School, then they are still true in regards to what they have said .. that they never saw or met Doria at any of the plays or other joint activities.  Meghan had always wanted to be an actress and started very early taking various classes even before Immaculate, so it's also possible that Doria knew this lady from previous years .. not sure.
> 
> If what I wrote bothers you, then please feel free to put me on IGNORE but I'm not going to be silenced either.  Thanks ..



I’m not sure why you’re so upset with me? That’s literally what I wrote... that they didn’t go to school together they did a play together. I was explaining to the poster who was confused. Why would I ignore or try to silence you? I have no idea why you feel the need to attack me when I was only trying to help clarify


----------



## lalame

mdcx said:


> My understanding was in the US, you need to be back at work within 6 weeks of birth or risk losing yr job. It may differ state to state. A bit barbaric compared to rest of world imo.



Among white collar employees, the employer's policies matter more than state. They choose how long you can take leave fully or partially paid. But most, if not all, states set a minimum (some are pathetic minimums). Part-time service workers are usually SOL unless they have particularly generous employers.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hopefully Haz isn’t taking advice from Gwynneth Paltrow on how to apply SPF.


----------



## bag-mania

Gayle King was working hard for them again.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> Gayle King was working hard for them again.
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


 
is this another warning that they aren’t speaking?  MM must be desperate if the RF is freezing her and H out....  not that I blame the RF for that at all!!!!

Who would want to speak to them - when Gayle tells everyone the content of the conversation  from MM’s point of view?  And Gayle says “MM has receipts” so the RF is probably very concerned about MM recording the conversations...

in other news does this mean Omid has been downgraded?  He was MM’s mouthpiece and that seems to be Gayle now!


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> in other news does this mean Omid has been downgraded?  He was MM’s mouthpiece and that seems to be Gayle now!



They’ll always have room for a major buttkisser like Scobie. I still wonder what Gayle is getting out of it. I mean she’s a guest on another show and she’s still talking about Meghan and Harry a month after Oprah’s show. Doesn’t she have anything interesting about herself she would like to promote or discuss?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DeMonica said:


> Lucky you!  I wanted that one, but I got AstraZeneca, instead. Beggars can't be choosers.


There, I fixed that. You're not a beggar. I know it's just an expression, but still...


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And one more. But they didn't have a plan, at all.



It’s all coming out now. Quibbli lol. I’m astounded to find out that H&M didn’t get Lana turnered at the soda fountain like they said. 
I thought they were two crazy in love  kids living the American dream.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> is this another warning that they aren’t speaking?  MM must be desperate if the RF is freezing her and H out....  not that I blame the RF for that at all!!!!
> 
> Who would want to speak to them - when Gayle tells everyone the content of the conversation  from MM’s point of view?  And Gayle says “MM has receipts” so the RF is probably very concerned about MM recording the conversations...
> 
> in other news does this mean Omid has been downgraded?  He was MM’s mouthpiece and that seems to be Gayle now!


Yeah Omid is only called in for low level stuff as he’s been marked with finding freedom and he may be completely markled.

That’s unless he’s being groomed to take MM’s place as H’s partner once the doppelgänger process is complete. He will wake up the morning to find Harry stamping on unfitted givenchy to make it appropriately crinkled and slipping the finest gold vermeil Insta jewellery on his wiry fingers. It’ll be just like Vertigo.

I can’t help wonder whether, even if I didn’t consider H&M to be a pet peeve, whether a prestigious journalist might have better things to do in the latter days of a global crisis and the beginning of a new presidency than stirring a Family gossip pot? Is there really nothing more pressing for her attentions?


----------



## limom

bag-mania said:


> They’ll always have room for a major buttkisser like Scobie. I still wonder what Gayle is getting out of it. I mean she’s a guest on another show and she’s still talking about Meghan and Harry a month after Oprah’s show. Doesn’t she have anything interesting about herself she would like to promote or discuss?


I am expecting another CBS Harkle product.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't see this as laughing, I am too lazy to look up the English word for it, but have you never seen people baring their teeth while watching a tense situation? Looked like this to me.


More a grimace to me, like a "yikes!" moment.


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> I am expecting another CBS Harkle product.


 H&M interview 2- editing boogaloo
Starring:
Mercy the chicken

sponsored by moonbump and family lawyers4u


----------



## xincinsin

I am non-American. Can someone explain more about Oprah Winfrey to me? I've Googled her and read the wiki entries. So I get that her talk shows are characterised by a touchy-feely confessional format. 

Has it always been based more on the interviewee's opinion (her truth) rather than objectivity? Has Winfrey always played Mother Confessor rather than journalist? I'm wondering if we should have even expected truth during this interview or if it follows a pattern of talkshow sensationalism.


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> I am expecting another CBS Harkle product.


Outtakes ...


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I am non-American. Can someone explain more about Oprah Winfrey to me? I've Googled her and read the wiki entries. So I get that her talk shows are characterised by a touchy-feely confessional format.
> 
> Has it always been based more on the interviewee's opinion (her truth) rather than objectivity? Has Winfrey always played Mother Confessor rather than journalist? I'm wondering if we should have even expected truth during this interview or if it follows a pattern of talkshow sensationalism.


I think you have Oprah perfectly
She is not a hard news style interviewer


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oprah gets a pass for giving some questionable people a platform, namely Jenny McCarthy and Dr. Oz


----------



## limom

lanasyogamama said:


> Oprah gets a pass for giving some questionable people a platform, namely Jenny McCarthy and Dr. Oz


How about Dr Phil?


----------



## lanasyogamama

limom said:


> How about Dr Phil?


Yep, him too


----------



## scarlet555

xincinsin said:


> I am non-American. Can someone explain more about Oprah Winfrey to me? I've Googled her and read the wiki entries. So I get that her talk shows are characterised by a touchy-feely confessional format.
> 
> Has it always been based more on the interviewee's opinion (her truth) rather than objectivity? Has Winfrey always played Mother Confessor rather than journalist? I'm wondering if we should have even expected truth during this interview or if it follows a pattern of talkshow sensationalism.



I saw her octomom interview and was disgusted by the interview where they ask and want Octomom to admit and say that she regretted having her kids...something to that effect I felt they were straight bullying and mean girls interviewing octomom-since then and with this interview-since then I never cared for her, not that I did prior but she was just a mean girl bully to me  and goes with the trend of the moment that will get big bucks and ratings as is obvious with cringe


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow.  This article is pre-H&M.
Oct., 2020








						Oprah Says This Was the Worst Guest She Ever Had — Best Life
					

According to Oprah, the worst guest on her show was a self-promoting lawyer. Oprah also says she's not a fan of the long storyteller or self aggrandizer.




					bestlifeonline.com
				




ETA:  this article explains some negative experiences with OW’s show.  I’m guessing H&M may feel this way, too, at some point.








						Why Being On Oprah Was The Worst Day of My Life - Cyber PR Music
					

Being on Oprah changed my perception of what I was doing for a living forever and marked the beginning of my long love affair with social media.




					www.cyberprmusic.com
				




ETA2:  another article from Feb, 2012 critiquing OW’s style of interviewing - more or less what we noticed with H&M’s,interview








						Oprah Winfrey and awful interviewing
					

Last night, while doing work, I had Oprah’s 2009 interview with Whitney Houston on as background noise. This is it, in case you’re curious … The 45-minute chat drove me crazy for …




					jeffpearlman.com
				




P.S.  Although these articles are not specifically about H&M, they do provide readers with another view of OW.  Since Gayle is not objective in any way, some balance is needed.  If they are inappropriately off-topic, please delete.


----------



## Chanbal

If all this is true, who are these people? 

"*PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told royal advisers "you can't stop us from doing what we want" in clashes a year before Megxit.*

Sources have claimed the pair were the ones calling the shots - after they told Oprah they didn't have a plan when they stepped down as senior royals.

They told the Telegraph: *“There was a constant dialogue from the couple along the lines of: 'Why can’t we do this? You can’t stop us from doing what we want to do'*.

“*They were calling the shots and would be the ones instructing the press office on what line to put out.*”

It comes after reports the couple were in talks with a billion-dollar US streaming service a year before they formally cut ties with the royal family.

According to claims, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were discussing projects with Quibi in 2019 before they stepped down as working royals in early 2020.

Quibi was a subscription-based streaming platform which ran roughly seven to ten minute long videos.

It had been tipped to become a rival to YouTube - but it closed down just six months after its launch.

According to reports, the discussions with Quibi had caused tensions with Palace staff - and the couple were accused of “cashing in” their royal titles.

*A royal source added: “A lot of it was orchestrated by Meghan’s people in America. It was a bit of a secret squirrel.”*

*'CALLING THE SHOTS'*

It has also been suggested Harry attended a meeting with James Holt, the director of Archewell, the couples non-profit organisation, in London in January last year.

The couple then announced in April they planned to launched the foundation named after their son.

Later in the year the pair also signed a $112million deal with Netflix and a £30million contract with Spotify.

During their interview with Oprah, Harry claimed he'd had to sign the deals as he'd been effectively "cut off" by the Royal Family when he and Meghan stepped away.

*Another insider told how aides were left thrown when Meghan went to a baby shower thrown for her in New York, leaving all palace staff at home.*

They said: "That was a bit of a headache, not least because no one from the palace was there to oversee what was happening.

“The American lot were the ones dealing with the baby shower.”

*It has been claimed **Meghan stayed in touch with a trusted team of four Hollywood advisers during her time in the UK.*

*Multiple sources say Meghan would regularly hop on confrence calls to America, with her lawyer Rick Genow, business manager Andrew Meyer and talent agent Nick Collins.

And according to The Telegraph Keleigh Thomas Morgan of PR firm Sunshine Sachs remained part of her inner circle, masterminding the couple’s first charitable foundation, Sussex Royal.*









						Meghan and Harry told royal advisers 'You can’t stop us doing what we want'
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told royal advisers “you can’t stop us from doing what we want” in clashes a year before Megxit. Sources have claimed the pair were the o…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

don't know if this has been posted.  Gayle King acting as their mouthpiece on Drew Barrymore show

I think what is still upsetting to them is the palace keep saying they want to work it out privately, but yet, they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still,” King said, mentioning that “no one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet ― or at this particular time.”

Gayle King Shares New Insights On Prince Harry And Meghan Markle's Bombshell Oprah Interview (yahoo.com)


----------



## CarryOn2020

At this point, unless H&M tell us exactly which stories are false and why,  I will continue to believe the Palace on this topic.
H&M = zero credibility

ETA: GK says they have ‘receipts’ but shows us nothing.  GK says H&M _only_ wanted a conversation about racism in UK = BS.  So many more effective ways they could have accomplished that without attacking people. Again, H&M = zero credibility


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I am non-American. Can someone explain more about Oprah Winfrey to me? I've Googled her and read the wiki entries. So I get that her talk shows are characterised by a touchy-feely confessional format.
> 
> Has it always been based more on the interviewee's opinion (her truth) rather than objectivity? Has Winfrey always played Mother Confessor rather than journalist? I'm wondering if we should have even expected truth during this interview or if it follows a pattern of talkshow sensationalism.



My mother watched her in the '80s. 

Her programmes started off as those 'freak'-shows where the audience is horrified/entertained by/make-fun of the people they invite on to demonise. 

Then she went all celeb interviews, wright-loss-eat-this/look younger-as-you-grow-older and book lists 

Her recent online youtube segments are a joke.

Now, I guess she's back to the freak-shows and dysfunctional family stuff for our 'there but by the grace of the Lord go I' entertainment


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Oprah gets a pass for giving some questionable people a platform, namely Jenny McCarthy and Dr. Oz


she gave jenny mccarthy a platform?  you mean she had her on the show and listed to anti-vacc talk?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> she gave jenny mccarthy a platform?  you mean she had her on the show and listed to anti-vacc talk?


When I think about all the people that she launched, does she get her 5% or is it more?
Regarding Jenny, her rival Bwabwa got her.
Actually according to the slate article first came O then B.
Same with iyanla, BW got her and then O got her back to place her on OWN. (I. had to first grovel to O)
OW also makes millions on the self help circuit...
Basically, she is always working and have other people working for her.


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> I am non-American. Can someone explain more about Oprah Winfrey to me? I've Googled her and read the wiki entries. So I get that her talk shows are characterised by a touchy-feely confessional format.
> 
> Has it always been based more on the interviewee's opinion (her truth) rather than objectivity? Has Winfrey always played Mother Confessor rather than journalist? I'm wondering if we should have even expected truth during this interview or if it follows a pattern of talkshow sensationalism.



She’s not really a journalist. Yes, she was a talk show host. If she were a section in a newspaper, she would be the Features section not the news. What she’s known for is finding interesting people and getting them to speak candidly to make for a juicy/fun interview. I think of it like late night talk show except catering to a feel-good soccer mom audience. You wouldn’t expect kimmel or corden to give a hard hitting interview so... yeah.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> she gave jenny mccarthy a platform?  you mean she had her on the show and listed to anti-vacc talk?


Yes.








						Why is Oprah Winfrey promoting vaccine skeptic Jenny McCarthy?
					

Chastising a celebrity is an exercise in futility. You feel like a kitten being held by the scruff of its neck, scrabbling wildly in the air without...




					slate.com


----------



## Coconuts40

xincinsin said:


> I am non-American. Can someone explain more about Oprah Winfrey to me? I've Googled her and read the wiki entries. So I get that her talk shows are characterised by a touchy-feely confessional format.
> 
> Has it always been based more on the interviewee's opinion (her truth) rather than objectivity? Has Winfrey always played Mother Confessor rather than journalist? I'm wondering if we should have even expected truth during this interview or if it follows a pattern of talkshow sensationalism.



I watched Oprah Winfrey from her very first show. Yup, very first.  I used to be a die hard fan of hers.  She brought important topics to the forefront including racism, all forms of abuse, and was vulnerable due to her honesty about her past sexual abuse/weight struggles, etc....  This made her very relatable to so many.  She had a way of asking questions that made those being interviewed feel comfortable enough to open up.   She is not perfect, no one is, and has made many mistakes in her interviewing.  I agree that Dr. Oz, and even Dr. Phil are big flops in my eyes.  Dr Phil used to be good, but lately his shows are horrible.

I have to say, I lost major respect for her after the MM interview.  It was one-sided and not journalism in the traditional sense.  It was biased with a lack of research behind it.  But after all, this was meant to be Meghan's platform to tell her 'truth'.  But the way her and even Gayle King are going about being the spokespeople for MM is just completely unprofessional especially when it remains biased.  in my opinion, they need to back off if they want to maintain some sort of journalism integrity (but might be too late).


----------



## csshopper

Oprah sold her OWN company to a larger group and she is now one option on a Subscription Streaming service called "discovery +". Her program is called "Super Soul". She also does Twitter etc.  Made me gag, but on another site her program was described as Oprah having "soulversations" with her guests. Pryanka Chapra was her first guest in this new series.

*About the Show*
*Super Soul*

Emmy-winning Super Soul features all-new, intimate conversations between Oprah Winfrey and thought leaders, spiritual teachers, celebrities and authors -- designed to inspire and explore well-being and a more whole, conscious life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now that the Quiby story proves another lie by H&M, who will spill ‘the truth’ about this interview first?
Will it be H&M saying she manipulated us? Or will it be OW saying H&M pushed her?
 OR will there be a showdown-not-a-real-showdown on CBS?


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is Oprah Winfrey promoting vaccine skeptic Jenny McCarthy?
> 
> 
> Chastising a celebrity is an exercise in futility. You feel like a kitten being held by the scruff of its neck, scrabbling wildly in the air without...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com


this is a very old article....she was with jim carey and has since married danny wahlberg....wonder is this collaboration actually happened.....seems Oprah is smarter than that


----------



## csshopper

And on and on it goes:
*'Time to hear MY truth': Piers Morgan vows to reveal his side of the story regarding Meghan Markle row and his GMB exit in an explosive TV special*

*The TV host, 56, left GMB after saying he 'didn't believe a word' of Meghan's shocking accusations towards the Royal family during her Oprah interview *
*Piers also walked off set in March before his exit after clashing with weatherman Alex Beresford where he challenged his comments *
*The TV star is now getting ready to set the record straight on Fox Nation's Tucker Carlson Today show on Monday *
*Piers has vowed to reveal what he calls 'MY truth' in a one-hour TV special *
*It comes after the presenter shared his own reflections on the events of that fateful week in a piece for the Mail On Sunday last weekend *


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> this is a very old article....she was with jim carey and has since married danny wahlberg....wonder is this collaboration actually happened.....seems Oprah is smarter than that


Sorry to burst your bubble 








						Q&A with Jenny McCarthy
					

Jenny McCarthy answers your questions about parenting a child with autism.




					www.oprah.com


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Sorry to burst your bubble
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Q&A with Jenny McCarthy
> 
> 
> Jenny McCarthy answers your questions about parenting a child with autism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprah.com


OK.....I'll have to admit I don't like Jenny McCarthy....she seems like a dumb slut to me.  But I could be wrong.  She does have an autistic son.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> OK.....I'll have to admit I don't like Jenny McCarthy....she seems like a dumb slut to me.  But I could be wrong.  She does have an autistic son.


She does have a son with Autism. However, pushing the non vaccine agenda is not doing anyone any favor.
Some kids are born atypical. There are many reasons, but vaccination is not the cause of autism or any other disease. Kwim?
I know that she has a channel on Sirius, maybe she changed her tune. I don’t know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> OK.....I'll have to admit I don't like Jenny McCarthy....she seems like a dumb slut to me.  But I could be wrong.  She does have an autistic son.


A dumb slut? Dumb - possibly. But, slut? I'm sorry but that's an inappropriate word choice.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> She does have a son with Autism. However, pushing the non vaccine agenda is not doing anyone any favor.
> Some kids are born atypical. There are many reasons, but vaccination is not the cause of autism or any other disease. Kwim?
> I know that she has a channel on Sirius, maybe she changed her tune. I don’t know.


I doubt she's changed her tune.
In addition to the autism thing, she pissed me off when she bad mouthed barbara walters.  Now barbara isn't a perfect person but she is due some respect for being a pioneer in broadcasting.  and giving that slut a job.  so disrespecting her in her old age is just wrong IMO.  If you want to make fun of your former boss, do it in private.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Have we discussed this yet? 



Apparently he managed to snag an O-1 visa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we discussed this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently he managed to snag an O-1 visa.




*This* is why his title needs to be removed. He will milk for all it’s worth and then some.  It fuels his sense of entitlement. Such a jerk.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *It has been claimed **Meghan stayed in touch with a trusted team of four Hollywood advisers during her time in the UK.*
> 
> *Multiple sources say Meghan would regularly hop on confrence calls to America, with her lawyer Rick Genow, business manager Andrew Meyer and talent agent Nick Collins.
> 
> And according to The Telegraph Keleigh Thomas Morgan of PR firm Sunshine Sachs remained part of her inner circle, masterminding the couple’s first charitable foundation, Sussex Royal.*



Too bad they couldn't make her a star before she met Harry, hu? And also had difficulties making her appear more likeable during her short stunt as a royal.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now that the Quiby story proves another lie by H&M, who will spill ‘the truth’ about this interview first?
> Will it be H&M saying she manipulated us? Or will it be OW saying H&M pushed her?
> OR will there be a showdown-not-a-real-showdown on CBS?



If I had the energy I'd watch the Interview to try and find anything in it that WAS truthful. At this point it would be a very short list, assuming, of course, the gender of the baby is accurate and they do house chickens on their property.

The more we learn the more Oprah and Gayle and CBS are looking foolish, unprofessional, and bullying in promoting this program as "Truths". What are their motives in perpetrating this side show? Conversely the Queen, who probably would have loved to have bellowed "LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE" was grace under pressure with her "recollections may vary" and has, imo, emerged on top. In the end I do not think Oprah, Gayle and Meghan will be a match for the Queen, the Princess Royal and Kate.


----------



## elvisfan4life

We had a programme last night on the royal train and it reminded me how the Queen went out of her way to take Meghan under her wing on a trip before her marriage Kate got no such treatment though she had been around for ten years before she married into the firm that’s what makes my blood boil Meghan was treated so favourably but it still didn’t please her


----------



## LittleStar88

Dr. Phil got his TV start because of Oprah. That says it all.

She has never been a journalist in my eyes, but rather a TV expose show interview style/personality. More about ratings and controversy and not objective journalism.

She managed to make truckloads of money off of her decades-long career. So long as she is getting paid I don’t think she cares much. Smart businesswoman but definitely not a journalist.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> If all this is true, who are these people?
> 
> "*PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told royal advisers "you can't stop us from doing what we want" in clashes a year before Megxit.*
> 
> Sources have claimed the pair were the ones calling the shots - after they told Oprah they didn't have a plan when they stepped down as senior royals.
> 
> They told the Telegraph: *“There was a constant dialogue from the couple along the lines of: 'Why can’t we do this? You can’t stop us from doing what we want to do'*.
> 
> “*They were calling the shots and would be the ones instructing the press office on what line to put out.*”
> 
> It comes after reports the couple were in talks with a billion-dollar US streaming service a year before they formally cut ties with the royal family.
> 
> According to claims, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were discussing projects with Quibi in 2019 before they stepped down as working royals in early 2020.
> 
> Quibi was a subscription-based streaming platform which ran roughly seven to ten minute long videos.
> 
> It had been tipped to become a rival to YouTube - but it closed down just six months after its launch.
> 
> According to reports, the discussions with Quibi had caused tensions with Palace staff - and the couple were accused of “cashing in” their royal titles.
> 
> *A royal source added: “A lot of it was orchestrated by Meghan’s people in America. It was a bit of a secret squirrel.”*
> 
> *'CALLING THE SHOTS'*
> 
> It has also been suggested Harry attended a meeting with James Holt, the director of Archewell, the couples non-profit organisation, in London in January last year.
> 
> The couple then announced in April they planned to launched the foundation named after their son.
> 
> Later in the year the pair also signed a $112million deal with Netflix and a £30million contract with Spotify.
> 
> During their interview with Oprah, Harry claimed he'd had to sign the deals as he'd been effectively "cut off" by the Royal Family when he and Meghan stepped away.
> 
> *Another insider told how aides were left thrown when Meghan went to a baby shower thrown for her in New York, leaving all palace staff at home.*
> 
> They said: "That was a bit of a headache, not least because no one from the palace was there to oversee what was happening.
> 
> “The American lot were the ones dealing with the baby shower.”
> 
> *It has been claimed **Meghan stayed in touch with a trusted team of four Hollywood advisers during her time in the UK.*
> 
> *Multiple sources say Meghan would regularly hop on confrence calls to America, with her lawyer Rick Genow, business manager Andrew Meyer and talent agent Nick Collins.
> 
> And according to The Telegraph Keleigh Thomas Morgan of PR firm Sunshine Sachs remained part of her inner circle, masterminding the couple’s first charitable foundation, Sussex Royal.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry told royal advisers 'You can’t stop us doing what we want'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told royal advisers “you can’t stop us from doing what we want” in clashes a year before Megxit. Sources have claimed the pair were the o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


About time people coming out with this, tpf detectives knew this all along...


----------



## muddledmint

Annawakes said:


> I feel like she could name her daughter.....Lemon.  Like Lemon Breeland in the Hart of Dixie tv show.  Maybe all of these lemons are a hint.  Lemon Diana.  That’s it


I’ve always hated the name Archie. It’s like naming your son Billy. Or Steve. Or Vince.


----------



## Lodpah

scarlet555 said:


> I saw her octomom interview and was disgusted by the interview where they ask and want Octomom to admit and say that she regretted having her kids...something to that effect I felt they were straight bullying and mean girls interviewing octomom-since then and with this interview-since then I never cared for her, not that I did prior but she was just a mean girl bully to me  and goes with the trend of the moment that will get big bucks and ratings as is obvious with cringe



Man, Nadya Suleman has gained my respect tremendously. She initially wanted to be private but apparently a nurse from the hospital leaked the info. She then went on to questionable stuff until she realized she didn’t want that limelight. She went on to earn a degree and is raising her kids amazingly. Her kids are respectful and she is raising them vegan. They’re clean and do well in school. That’s a hero if there ever was one. She, like many, make mistakes but she’s owned up to them and although it might be irresponsible to have that many kids they’re here now do she does the best she can. I think she’s fabulous abc could have exploited them by having a reality show she chose not to.  On her documentaries people have changed their tune on the comments and have apologized to her.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> A dumb slut? Dumb - possibly. But, slut? I'm sorry but that's an inappropriate word choice.


sorry but I don't think she makes any secret of represeting herself as sexy.....alluding to her and her husband's sex life, etc.
slut may be harsh but so was her making fun of Barbara W in her old age when shes not around (or able) to defend herself


----------



## muddledmint

RAINDANCE said:


> Was Archie Harrison meant to be Archie Harry's son ?
> Is there an equivalent for daughter ?



Meghandottir


----------



## jelliedfeels

scarlet555 said:


> I saw her octomom interview and was disgusted by the interview where they ask and want Octomom to admit and say that she regretted having her kids...something to that effect I felt they were straight bullying and mean girls interviewing octomom-since then and with this interview-since then I never cared for her, not that I did prior but she was just a mean girl bully to me  and goes with the trend of the moment that will get big bucks and ratings as is obvious with cringe


That’s horrible. No child should feel unwanted. It’s wrong to put that out there in public. 


limom said:


> She does have a son with Autism. However, pushing the non vaccine agenda is not doing anyone any favor.
> Some kids are born atypical. There are many reasons, but vaccination is not the cause of autism or any other disease. Kwim?
> I know that she has a channel on Sirius, maybe she changed her tune. I don’t know.


This is OT but a lot of celebs care a lot more about cosying up with autism speaks, who have friends in very high places it seems, than they do about what actually autistic people think about autism.
Oprah apparently never misses a chance to cosy up to a bigwig, so she’s going to do as much as she can without losing her more moderate audience.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad they couldn't make her a star before she met Harry, hu? And also had difficulties making her appear more likeable during her short stunt as a royal.


Even the top people at de beers would have problems polishing her into a diamond.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

muddledmint said:


> I’ve always hated the name Archie. It’s like naming your son Billy. Or Steve. Or Vince.



The only Archie I ever knew of was Archie Bunker


----------



## jelliedfeels

muddledmint said:


> Meghandottir


That sounds like something from finnegan’s wake. 

On the name thing, if she’s already had the watch engraved from MM to MM surely the girl has got to be an M too?

mercy?
Meana (Meg + Diana)?
Moria?
Mission?

(Their surname is technically M-W so they can just add that. Weird she foresaw that happening.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

This - Archie, Veronica and Betty (?)


----------



## jelliedfeels

muddledmint said:


> I’ve always hated the name Archie. It’s like naming your son Billy. Or Steve. Or Vince.


It’s reeaaaallly popular for little boys in the UK at the moment. My kids know at least 4/5 Archies 
And they tend to be just Archie not Archibald. Seems to have come out of nowhere.


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s reeaaaallly popular for little boys in the UK at the moment. My kids know at least 4/5 Archies
> And they tend to be just Archie not Archibald. Seems to have come out of nowhere.


The names that are popular right now are mostly


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> That sounds like something from finnegan’s wake.
> 
> On the name thing, if she’s already had the watch engraved from MM to MM surely the girl has got to be an M too?
> 
> mercy?
> Meana (Meg + Diana)?
> Moria?
> Mission?
> 
> (Their surname is technically M-W so they can just add that. Weird she foresaw that happening.)


Oh wait, it should be Meghansdottir. Not Meghandottir. It’s an Icelandic thing


----------



## pukasonqo

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s reeaaaallly popular for little boys in the UK at the moment. My kids know at least 4/5 Archies
> And they tend to be just Archie not Archibald. Seems to have come out of nowhere.



My son went to primary school with a Scottish Archie, not Archibald or Archimedes just Archie


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> That sounds like something from finnegan’s wake.
> 
> On the name thing, if she’s already had the watch engraved from MM to MM surely the girl has got to be an M too?
> 
> mercy?
> Meana (Meg + Diana)?
> Moria?
> Mission?
> 
> (Their surname is technically M-W so they can just add that. Weird she foresaw that happening.)


MerryMary?


----------



## LittleStar88

What about Archnemesis?


----------



## jennlt

jelliedfeels said:


> That sounds like something from finnegan’s wake.
> 
> On the name thing, if she’s already had the watch engraved from MM to MM surely the girl has got to be an M too?
> 
> mercy?
> Meana (Meg + Diana)?
> Moria?
> Mission?
> 
> (Their surname is technically M-W so they can just add that. Weird she foresaw that happening.)



Mini Me(ghan)


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> The only Archie I ever knew of was Archie Bunker
> 
> View attachment 5044165


Archie's Pub on the East End of London or Whitechapel.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> That sounds like something from finnegan’s wake.
> 
> On the name thing, if she’s already had the watch engraved from MM to MM surely the girl has got to be an M too?
> 
> mercy?
> Meana (Meg + Diana)?
> Moria?
> Mission?
> 
> (Their surname is technically M-W so they can just add that. Weird she foresaw that happening.)


Meadow
Morganna
Megawatt

Meg. great and mighty, pearl ... ...
Mega. gentle, mild, peaceful ... ...
Megaera. pearl ... of Old Greek origin ... ...
Megan. great and mighty, pearl ... used chiefly in the English, Irish, and ... ...
Megane. great and mighty, pearl ... used predominantly in the French language and ... ...
Meganira. great and mighty ... ...

Check out that last one Meganira!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> don't know if this has been posted.  Gayle King acting as their mouthpiece on Drew Barrymore show
> 
> I think what is still upsetting to them is the palace keep saying they want to work it out privately, but yet, they believe these false stories are coming out that are very disparaging against Meghan still,” King said, mentioning that “no one in the royal family has talked to Meghan yet ― or at this particular time.”
> 
> Gayle King Shares New Insights On Prince Harry And Meghan Markle's Bombshell Oprah Interview (yahoo.com)


I think Gayle King is Oprah's puppet.  I see strings attached to her whenever I see her picture.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> That sounds like something from finnegan’s wake.
> 
> On the name thing, if she’s already had the watch engraved from MM to MM surely the girl has got to be an M too?
> 
> mercy?
> Meana (Meg + Diana)?
> Moria?
> Mission?
> 
> (Their surname is technically M-W so they can just add that. Weird she foresaw that happening.)



Seeing that the watch was engraved from her to her it doesn't matter what the girl's name will be. Just another prop.


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> There, I fixed that. You're not a beggar. I know it's just an expression, but still...


No, I'm not but I'm heading there if nothing happens soon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think Gayle King is Oprah's puppet.  I see strings attached to her whenever I see her picture.


they are very close.  and when gayle wasn't so successful she got to go to great places with Oprah, received huge gifts as Oprah's BFF(she and O both got expensive cars from tyler perry - something like a Rolls or Bentley)..so it might be fair to assume she is beholding to O


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DeMonica said:


> No, I'm not but I'm heading there if nothing happens soon.


Sorry, this damn pandemic has caused so many problems for so many innocent people, who just wanted to live a normal life... work, play, love, learn and build a decent future. Please have faith that together we will overcome all these problems.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So tiresome with these two:








						Meghan Markle coffee firm bought oat milk from 'police state' Xinjiang
					

A coffee company financially backed by the Duchess of Sussex has imported an ingredient from a Chinese supplier based in a brutal police state where an alleged genocide is taking place.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Announced last November, so unrelated to the H&M debacle:
Article from Nov., 2020








						Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year
					

The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying the concept of reconciliation in either Cambridge or the United States.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_The Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year for 'reflection, prayer, and spiritual renewal,' Lambeth Palace has confirmed.

Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying in either Cambridge or the United States. 

He will be examining the concept of reconciliation – one of the personal priorities of his ministry – during this time._


----------



## rhyvin

jennlt said:


> Mini Me(ghan)


made me think of this video:


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Announced last November, so unrelated to the H&M debacle:
> Article from Nov., 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year
> 
> 
> The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying the concept of reconciliation in either Cambridge or the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year for 'reflection, prayer, and spiritual renewal,' Lambeth Palace has confirmed.
> 
> Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying in either Cambridge or the United States.
> 
> He will be examining the concept of reconciliation – one of the personal priorities of his ministry – during this time._


Oh cool!  The United States.  He is staying with the Harkles and  babysitting Archie in California, harvesting word salad, and praying for Harry's allowance to be reinstated?


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, this damn pandemic has caused so many problems for so many innocent people, who just wanted to live a normal life... work, play, love, learn and build a decent future. Please have faith that together we will overcome all these problems.


Thank you very much! You are absolutely right. I can't wait this nightmare to end.


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Announced last November, so unrelated to the H&M debacle:
> Article from Nov., 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year
> 
> 
> The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying the concept of reconciliation in either Cambridge or the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year for 'reflection, prayer, and spiritual renewal,' Lambeth Palace has confirmed.
> 
> Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying in either Cambridge or the United States.
> 
> *He will be examining the concept of reconciliation – one of the personal priorities of his ministry – during this time.*_


He has his work cut out for him.


----------



## bag-mania

*Here’s what it’s like when Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, invests in your startup*
Hannah Mendoza knew that December would be a big month for her startup. To get ready, the cofounder and CEO of Clevr Blends, a four-person company that makes instant oat-milk lattes, upgraded to a bigger production facility, hired four people to her fulfillment staff, and warned her ingredient suppliers they might be seeing higher demand soon. 

But nothing could truly prepare Mendoza and the Clevr team for what it would be like when Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, invested in their company. 

“We knew this was going to be a big moment for us, but we didn’t predict it was going to be as big as it was,” says Mendoza in one of her first interviews since _Fortune _reported the duchess’s investment late last year. “We were on a really strong growth trajectory, especially for a bootstrapped brand, and it really put fuel on the fire.”


Clevr, which sells $28 bags of coffee, chai, matcha, and turmeric-flavored powdered instant lattes, had been steadily serving a customer base of wellness fans eager to replace a traditional caffeine boost with adaptogen-infused beverages. After the duchess’s investment, the brand suddenly began reaching new audiences, like “schoolteachers, shift workers, and busy moms” who learned about the product via Meghan. The company had to adjust its usually speedy next-day shipping to a temporary monthlong waitlist. 

The business is now in a unique position. The company has one of the most powerful—but quiet—brand ambassadors in the world. Meghan isn’t supporting the company in a traditional way, by making media appearances or participating in social media advertising; Clevr hasn’t once mentioned the duchess directly on its Instagram account or website. (The closest the duchess has come to social media marketing is sharing Clevr gift baskets with Oprah Winfrey and Spanx founder Sara Blakely, who let their own followers know the lattes were from Meghan.) Instead, simply having Meghan—who can sell out an item of clothing just by wearing it once—as an investor is enough to change the company’s trajectory. 

“We’re very grass-roots, where we started from, and I never in a million years would have thought things like this would be happening,” says Mendoza.

*From coffee bar to CPG*
Clevr started as a pop-up coffee bar that traveled up and down the California coast in 2017. With cofounder and COO Roger Coppola, Mendoza served up lattes made with popular wellness ingredients like adaptogens (plant-based additions said to support bodily homeostasis and reduce stress). But Mendoza, who grew up in the U.K. and moved to California when she was 18, wanted to get Clevr’s drinks to more than just the Californians already seeking them out, who had an abundance of wellness options at their fingertips. “How do we make this feel more accessible to folks that might only have 30 seconds in the morning?” Mendoza remembers asking. 

In her Santa Barbara home kitchen, Mendoza started to fiddle with ingredients like lion’s mane (a mushroom said to support memory function); ashwagandha (a root said to reduce stress); and reishi (a mushroom said to calm the nervous system). For a year, she refined the combinations of coffee, chai, matcha, herbs, and mushrooms until she had formulated at-home versions of the drinks she’d been selling from a traveling coffee bar. The current version of the business launched in 2019. 

Mendoza, 29, got interested in consumer packaged goods when she worked for Imlak’esh Organics, a Santa Barbara–based company selling “superfoods” like goji berries and spirulina powder. Her passion—and her location—turned out to be the perfect combination. The Duchess of Sussex has long been interested in wellness; before she married Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, and joined the royal family, she often wrote about wellness topics on a now-shuttered blog called The Tig. And after stepping back from their official roles as working members of the royal family in early 2020, Harry and Los Angeles native Meghan moved to Montecito, right next door to Mendoza and Clevr in Southern California.


Somehow, a bag of Clevr’s golden latte, or turmeric, flavor got in front of Meghan. She tried the product, loved it, and reached out to the company to see how she could get involved. “There was a genuine connection with the brand and with the product, and that’s always how the best relationships start,” says Mendoza. 

Mendoza and a spokesperson for Meghan both declined to share more information about the duchess’s backing of the company; the size of her investment is still undisclosed. When she announced her investment, Meghan emphasized her interest in both the product and in supporting female-founded businesses, which received only 2.2% of venture capital funding in 2020. (Mixed-gender founding teams like Clevr’s got 12% of VC dollars.) 

“This investment is in support of a passionate female entrepreneur who prioritizes building community alongside her business,” the duchess said in a statement at the time. “I’m proud to invest in Hannah’s commitment to sourcing ethical ingredients and creating a product that I personally love and [that] has a holistic approach to wellness. I believe in her, and I believe in her company.”


*Investor, adviser, and mentor*
Although the details of Meghan’s involvement with Clevr are relatively sparse, Mendoza says that the duchess has become an important adviser and mentor. 

“Having the duchess as a mentor and an adviser has been amazing,” says Mendoza. “She’s so smart, she’s so passionate, and she has such a good heart. Having her as an adviser has been one of the most incredible things to come out of all of this.” 

This is new territory for both Meghan and for Clevr. While this is the duchess’s first startup investment to be made public, it was also the first time Clevr took on investor backing of any kind. “Having other folks that are now really invested in what we’re doing means that we’re just getting so many more outside opinions from people who have really strong experiences,” Mendoza says. “We’re able to go beyond the echo chamber of our core team and have other folks saying, ‘Why are you not doing that?’ or ‘Let’s look at this with this lens.'”


With Meghan’s support, Clevr is pursuing a bolder vision, trading packing orders at 2 a.m. for strategizing potential retail launches (right now, the lattes are sold only direct-to-consumer and on shelves at California’s Erewhon Market), new flavors, and international growth. At this inflection point, too, the brand decided to implement a long-desired giveback program, donating 1% of revenue to food-justice causes. “As a young and somewhat utopian founder, I wanted to do all these things. From the very moment we launched, I wanted to have the most transparent sourcing, have an incredible giveback program,” Mendoza says. “Sometimes, patience is necessary. And we were finally at a point where it could start to make a difference.” 

Since she grew up in the U.K., Mendoza had a better idea than some California founders might of what it would mean for the duchess to support her company—and how it would differ from any other kind of celebrity endorsement. Meghan’s investment received wide coverage in the U.K. press, including a tongue-in-cheek piece in the _Guardian_asking if the “superlattes” were “a lot of Californian nonsense.” Says Mendoza, “I felt the same way about California when I was growing up, and then I ended up moving here—so don’t knock it ’til you try it.”

With her investment in Clevr, Meghan has hinted that she’s interested in backing other female-founded businesses in the future as she continues to build her work in the private sector (the Sussexes’ other ventures include deals with Netflix and Spotify). For now, her interest in Clevr has exploded the possibilities available to this company.

“I’m just really grateful,” Mendoza says, “to be part of this narrative of savvy female investors investing in female founders.”









						Here's what it's like when Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex invests in your startup
					

Hannah Mendoza, the CEO of Clevr Blends, says interest has exploded since the Duchess of Sussex backed her instant-latte startup in 2020.




					www.google.com


----------



## needlv

I wonder when it dawned on MM... that Harry wasn’t as rich as she thought... and money is tied up in family trusts that other members of the RF control???









						Harry and Meghan faced uncertain financial future
					

Growing up in the royal family might sound lovely and grand — imagine Everest-like cream teas appearing like clockwork; being able to borrow Romanov jewels to play dress ups — but the reality is much more grim.




					www.news.com.au


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> *Here’s what it’s like when Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, invests in your startup*
> Hannah Mendoza knew that December would be a big month for her startup. To get ready, the cofounder and CEO of Clevr Blends, a four-person company that makes instant oat-milk lattes, upgraded to a bigger production facility, hired four people to her fulfillment staff, and warned her ingredient suppliers they might be seeing higher demand soon.
> 
> But nothing could truly prepare Mendoza and the Clevr team for what it would be like when Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, invested in their company.
> 
> “We knew this was going to be a big moment for us, but we didn’t predict it was going to be as big as it was,” says Mendoza in one of her first interviews since _Fortune _reported the duchess’s investment late last year. “We were on a really strong growth trajectory, especially for a bootstrapped brand, and it really put fuel on the fire.”
> 
> 
> Clevr, which sells $28 bags of coffee, chai, matcha, and turmeric-flavored powdered instant lattes, had been steadily serving a customer base of wellness fans eager to replace a traditional caffeine boost with adaptogen-infused beverages. After the duchess’s investment, the brand suddenly began reaching new audiences, like “schoolteachers, shift workers, and busy moms” who learned about the product via Meghan. The company had to adjust its usually speedy next-day shipping to a temporary monthlong waitlist.
> 
> The business is now in a unique position. The company has one of the most powerful—but quiet—brand ambassadors in the world. Meghan isn’t supporting the company in a traditional way, by making media appearances or participating in social media advertising; Clevr hasn’t once mentioned the duchess directly on its Instagram account or website. (The closest the duchess has come to social media marketing is sharing Clevr gift baskets with Oprah Winfrey and Spanx founder Sara Blakely, who let their own followers know the lattes were from Meghan.) Instead, simply having Meghan—who can sell out an item of clothing just by wearing it once—as an investor is enough to change the company’s trajectory.
> 
> “We’re very grass-roots, where we started from, and I never in a million years would have thought things like this would be happening,” says Mendoza.
> 
> *From coffee bar to CPG*
> Clevr started as a pop-up coffee bar that traveled up and down the California coast in 2017. With cofounder and COO Roger Coppola, Mendoza served up lattes made with popular wellness ingredients like adaptogens (plant-based additions said to support bodily homeostasis and reduce stress). But Mendoza, who grew up in the U.K. and moved to California when she was 18, wanted to get Clevr’s drinks to more than just the Californians already seeking them out, who had an abundance of wellness options at their fingertips. “How do we make this feel more accessible to folks that might only have 30 seconds in the morning?” Mendoza remembers asking.
> 
> In her Santa Barbara home kitchen, Mendoza started to fiddle with ingredients like lion’s mane (a mushroom said to support memory function); ashwagandha (a root said to reduce stress); and reishi (a mushroom said to calm the nervous system). For a year, she refined the combinations of coffee, chai, matcha, herbs, and mushrooms until she had formulated at-home versions of the drinks she’d been selling from a traveling coffee bar. The current version of the business launched in 2019.
> 
> Mendoza, 29, got interested in consumer packaged goods when she worked for Imlak’esh Organics, a Santa Barbara–based company selling “superfoods” like goji berries and spirulina powder. Her passion—and her location—turned out to be the perfect combination. The Duchess of Sussex has long been interested in wellness; before she married Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, and joined the royal family, she often wrote about wellness topics on a now-shuttered blog called The Tig. And after stepping back from their official roles as working members of the royal family in early 2020, Harry and Los Angeles native Meghan moved to Montecito, right next door to Mendoza and Clevr in Southern California.
> 
> 
> Somehow, a bag of Clevr’s golden latte, or turmeric, flavor got in front of Meghan. She tried the product, loved it, and reached out to the company to see how she could get involved. “There was a genuine connection with the brand and with the product, and that’s always how the best relationships start,” says Mendoza.
> 
> Mendoza and a spokesperson for Meghan both declined to share more information about the duchess’s backing of the company; the size of her investment is still undisclosed. When she announced her investment, Meghan emphasized her interest in both the product and in supporting female-founded businesses, which received only 2.2% of venture capital funding in 2020. (Mixed-gender founding teams like Clevr’s got 12% of VC dollars.)
> 
> “This investment is in support of a passionate female entrepreneur who prioritizes building community alongside her business,” the duchess said in a statement at the time. “I’m proud to invest in Hannah’s commitment to sourcing ethical ingredients and creating a product that I personally love and [that] has a holistic approach to wellness. I believe in her, and I believe in her company.”
> 
> 
> *Investor, adviser, and mentor*
> Although the details of Meghan’s involvement with Clevr are relatively sparse, Mendoza says that the duchess has become an important adviser and mentor.
> 
> “Having the duchess as a mentor and an adviser has been amazing,” says Mendoza. “She’s so smart, she’s so passionate, and she has such a good heart. Having her as an adviser has been one of the most incredible things to come out of all of this.”
> 
> This is new territory for both Meghan and for Clevr. While this is the duchess’s first startup investment to be made public, it was also the first time Clevr took on investor backing of any kind. “Having other folks that are now really invested in what we’re doing means that we’re just getting so many more outside opinions from people who have really strong experiences,” Mendoza says. “We’re able to go beyond the echo chamber of our core team and have other folks saying, ‘Why are you not doing that?’ or ‘Let’s look at this with this lens.'”
> 
> 
> With Meghan’s support, Clevr is pursuing a bolder vision, trading packing orders at 2 a.m. for strategizing potential retail launches (right now, the lattes are sold only direct-to-consumer and on shelves at California’s Erewhon Market), new flavors, and international growth. At this inflection point, too, the brand decided to implement a long-desired giveback program, donating 1% of revenue to food-justice causes. “As a young and somewhat utopian founder, I wanted to do all these things. From the very moment we launched, I wanted to have the most transparent sourcing, have an incredible giveback program,” Mendoza says. “Sometimes, patience is necessary. And we were finally at a point where it could start to make a difference.”
> 
> Since she grew up in the U.K., Mendoza had a better idea than some California founders might of what it would mean for the duchess to support her company—and how it would differ from any other kind of celebrity endorsement. Meghan’s investment received wide coverage in the U.K. press, including a tongue-in-cheek piece in the _Guardian_asking if the “superlattes” were “a lot of Californian nonsense.” Says Mendoza, “I felt the same way about California when I was growing up, and then I ended up moving here—so don’t knock it ’til you try it.”
> 
> With her investment in Clevr, Meghan has hinted that she’s interested in backing other female-founded businesses in the future as she continues to build her work in the private sector (the Sussexes’ other ventures include deals with Netflix and Spotify). For now, her interest in Clevr has exploded the possibilities available to this company.
> 
> “I’m just really grateful,” Mendoza says, “to be part of this narrative of savvy female investors investing in female founders.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's what it's like when Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex invests in your startup
> 
> 
> Hannah Mendoza, the CEO of Clevr Blends, says interest has exploded since the Duchess of Sussex backed her instant-latte startup in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


"powerful but *quiet* brand ambassador"?
I tend to see MM going the Kardashian route as an influencer, relying on scandal and spectacle to "subtly" push her agenda.


----------



## Lodpah

The more they try to convince the public (you know as to garner more interest from companies) I think the more their fortune is dwindling. It's really a classic move.


----------



## floatinglili

mdcx said:


> Thats a British grimace of shock/horror ala “oh my good man, bloody hell, and in public too, get up, get up, phew, he’s alright!” not a smile at all imo.


I interpreted Harry’s expression as his concerted effort not to be caught on camera smiling/ laughing. MM obviously found the sudden loss of dignity funny. As humour is infectious, particularly amongst close companions, JCMH had to make an effort not to tune into her wavelength and laugh as well. IMHO.


----------



## roundandround

muddledmint said:


> Meghandottir



Thanks for giving me a big laugh on this Easter morning I'm not a poster on this thread, but comes every now and then and read all your comments. Thanks ladies, Happy Easter everyone!


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> This does not make sense. Why would he not apply for a spousal visa?
> Are the O visa processEd faster?


For prestige? The video said O visas were for people who were top of their field, and speculated that Harry used a loophole: instead of offering proof that he was top of his field, he may have got prominent people (OW?) to vouch for him instead.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, this damn pandemic has caused so many problems for so many innocent people, who just wanted to live a normal life... work, play, love, learn and build a decent future. Please have faith that together we will overcome all these problems.



+100

Wishing all, whatever your faith or non faith, a happy Easter.


----------



## RAINDANCE

needlv said:


> I wonder when it dawned on MM... that Harry wasn’t as rich as she thought... and money is tied up in family trusts that other members of the RF control???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan faced uncertain financial future
> 
> 
> Growing up in the royal family might sound lovely and grand — imagine Everest-like cream teas appearing like clockwork; being able to borrow Romanov jewels to play dress ups — but the reality is much more grim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



And it is this, and only this, that gives any credence to Meghan's claim she did not know who Harry was !


----------



## limom

RAINDANCE said:


> +100
> 
> Wishing all, whatever your faith or non faith, a happy Easter.


Happy Easter!


----------



## limom

xincinsin said:


> For prestige? The video said O visas were for people who were top of their field, and speculated that Harry used a loophole: instead of offering proof that he was top of his field, he may have got prominent people (OW?) to vouch for him instead.


The O visa are valid for only three years.
The spousal visa leads to a green card and eventually citizenship if wanted.
I don’t see the prestige angle whatsoever.
He is a prince


----------



## CarryOn2020

May the miracle of Easter bring you renewed hope, faith, love, and joy.


----------



## 1LV

RAINDANCE said:


> +100
> 
> Wishing all, whatever your faith or non faith, a happy Easter.


Thank you so much, and wishing you the same!


----------



## mia55

needlv said:


> I wonder when it dawned on MM... that Harry wasn’t as rich as she thought... and money is tied up in family trusts that other members of the RF control???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan faced uncertain financial future
> 
> 
> Growing up in the royal family might sound lovely and grand — imagine Everest-like cream teas appearing like clockwork; being able to borrow Romanov jewels to play dress ups — but the reality is much more grim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



If that’s the case and they’re better off than being a royal, why they’re crying so much about being cut off financially? This articles tries to paint them in a good picture where they have all the money with no boring stuff to do.

But the interview and other media tactics show that they’re begging money from the BRF and throwing a fit when denied. It seems like their plan of being the richest people in the world is backfiring and the only way they can stay in news is to bring RF in the conversation, else no one is entertaining them.

I hope they learn their lesson and bring some class in their actions. They act like a small reality TV celebrity.


----------



## LittleStar88

DH (he knows little to nothing about MM other than he can’t stand her) saw this image as part of a story about these two clowns and says, “Really, Harry? A briefcase girl was the best you could do?”. He was legitimately horrified that he married a briefcase girl


----------



## lulilu

limom said:


> This does not make sense. Why would he not apply for a spousal visa?
> Are the O visa processEd faster?


Spousal visa can take much longer.  



xincinsin said:


> For prestige? The video said O visas were for people who were top of their field, and speculated that Harry used a loophole: instead of offering proof that he was top of his field, he may have got prominent people (OW?) to vouch for him instead.



He is essentially getting a celebrity visa.  Singers and other performers get one.  He has nothing to offer the US, which is really the basis of this visa.  smdh



LittleStar88 said:


> DH (he knows little to nothing about MM other than he can’t stand her) saw this image as part of a story about these two clowns and says, “Really, Harry? A briefcase girl was the best you could do?”. He was legitimately horrified that he married a briefcase girl
> 
> View attachment 5044788



Is this not the most unflattering photo?  Could her mouth get any bigger?


----------



## LittleStar88

lulilu said:


> Is this not the most unflattering photo?  Could her mouth get any bigger?



I’m sure it does!


----------



## Chanbal

The new JCMH? 


"_I must admit, the more this whole Harry and Meghan saga unfolds, the more I'm starting to think it's all just one hugely delayed act of teenage rebellion. A trustafarian tantrum of truly epic proportions...

Throw off the shackles of tradition, break free from the straitjacket of expectation. Or in Harry's case, indulge in endless hand-wringing and mea culpas, and tell Granny where to stick her crown. In rejecting his home, his family and his country, Harry believes that he is embracing a more 'authentic' experience in America, one that, ultimately, will make him a better human being.

Except he hasn't, really, has he? Because, in truth, he's left behind none of the trappings of privilege. And the 'authenticity' is just a veneer. The reality is he's leveraged every last ounce of his status to the maximum, using it to obtain lucrative contracts with Netflix, Spotify and others. He lives in a home as lavish as any he grew up in, and he still rubs shoulders with royalty, albeit of the Hollywood kind. All while expecting us to think he's somehow 'keeping it real'.

The joy of the old Harry is that he was never that self-conscious wannabe pretending to be something he wasn't. Yes, he was a honking Sloane and a bit of a prat at times – but he was at least unselfconsciously himself, and that is why we loved him so much, for all his faults.

This fellow on the beach: I've no idea who he is. And the sad part is that neither, I suspect, does he._"









						SARAH VINE: Does Prince Harry even know who he is anymore?
					

The joy of the old Harry is that he was never that self-conscious wannabe pretending to be something he wasn't WRITES SARAH VINE




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Latte Trouble? 

*"MEGHAN Markle has backed a coffee firm who bought oat milk from a company based in China's "police state" Xinjiang province, it has been claimed.*

_*It comes after human rights groups urged western companies to cut ties with the region* because of the genocide of the minority Muslim Uighur community.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14541923/meghan-markle-coffee-firm-xinjiang-province/#
An estimated one million Uighurs and other minority groups have been detained in Chinese prison camps since 2015.

People have been subjected to torture, sterilization and political indoctrination in addition to forced labor as part of a brutal assimilation campaign in a region with a Han Chinese majority.

There have also been reports of forced birth control.

But according to the Mail on Sunday, Meghan last year invested in Clevr Blends which bought nearly 19 tons of oat milk powder from a company in Urmqi, the capital of Xinjiang...

Clevr Blends, which sells instant oat-milk lattes, costing £20 for a packet with 14 servings, was founded by Hannah Mendoza and Roger Coppola in California, in 2019._

*Its website states that "ethics are always at the forefront of our product", adding: “We prioritise working with smaller, family run ingredient suppliers or those with more transparent supply chains*."









						Meghan coffee firm bought milk from company in China's 'police state'
					

MEGHAN Markle has backed a coffee firm who bought oat milk from a company based in China’s “police state” Xinjiang province, it has been claimed. It comes after human rights group…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DeMonica said:


> Thank you very much! You are absolutely right. I can't wait this nightmare to end.


You're very welcome.  Yes, it will be great to hear how we all survive this nightmare.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The new JCMH?
> 
> "_I must admit, the more this whole Harry and Meghan saga unfolds, the more I'm starting to think it's all just one hugely *delayed act of teenage rebellion. A trustafarian tantrum of truly epic proportions...*_



She must read TPF 

Latte trouble, indeed!  Notice the COO is named Roger Coppola. Wonder if he is connected to that other Cali Coppola family? Ya kno, the ones in movies?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> She must read TPF
> 
> Latte trouble, indeed!  Notice the COO is named Roger Coppola. Wonder if he is connected to that other Cali Coppola family? Ya kno, the ones in movies?


he doesn't seem to be related to the show biz coppolas....here's a profile.  they seem to be making lots of money, opening stores, etc.
Product is for rich or upper middle class people IMO.  I'm not gonna spend that kind of money for coffee when regular coffee - if not a "health food"  is just fine
So I guess Meghan's goal was more to help this woman (or couple) as opposed to being charitable








						Who is the woman behind the wellness brand backed by Meghan Markle?
					

The Duchess of Sussex has invested in ‘woman-led mission-driven wellness company.' What we know about its founder…




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5044788





lulilu said:


> Is this not the most unflattering photo?  Could her mouth get any bigger?


It's a very good portrayal of MM's true character and substance: BIG MOUTH


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> he doesn't seem to be related to the show biz coppolas....here's a profile.  they seem to be making lots of money, opening stores, etc.
> Product is for rich or upper middle class people IMO.  I'm not gonna spend that kind of money for coffee when regular coffee - if not a "health food"  is just fine
> So I guess Meghan's goal was more to help this woman (or couple) as opposed to being charitable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is the woman behind the wellness brand backed by Meghan Markle?
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has invested in ‘woman-led mission-driven wellness company.' What we know about its founder…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk



Lattes aren‘t my drink, so I have passed on it. Now, that we know about this unpleasant connection to torture, I am glad I did. This company will need to find other suppliers ASAP.  H&M’s silence is deafening.

ETA:  if I am reading the article correctly, it doesn’t say Rog is _not _one of ‘those’ Coppola’s. When OW announced the gift, I looked for something that would say he is not one. I couldn’t find anything.  It seems much too co-inky-dink to me.


----------



## csshopper

Will be interesting to see what kind of word salad MM tosses to get around this in light of recent revelations about the company she is touting. And what it might do to the Oprah relationship since Oprah is collateral damage being photographed with the gift basket from her neighbor M? My bad, but I am enjoying seeing the sanctimonious M and O looking very very foolish.

Meghan's quote: “This investment is in support of a passionate female entrepreneur who prioritizes building community alongside her business,” the duchess said in a statement at the time. _“I’m proud to invest in Hannah’s commitment to sourcing ethical ingredients and creating a product that I personally love and [that] has a holistic approach to wellness_. I believe in her, and I believe in her company.”


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Will be interesting to see what kind of word salad MM tosses to get around this in light of recent revelations about the company she is touting. And what it might do to the Oprah relationship since Oprah is collateral damage being photographed with the gift basket from her neighbor M? My bad, but I am enjoying seeing the sanctimonious M and O looking very very foolish.
> 
> Meghan's quote: “This investment is in support of a passionate female entrepreneur who prioritizes building community alongside her business,” the duchess said in a statement at the time. _“I’m proud to invest in Hannah’s commitment to sourcing ethical ingredients and creating a product that I personally love and [that] has a holistic approach to wellness_. I believe in her, and I believe in her company.”


sanctimonious is a good word for M


----------



## maris.crane

Obviously, this is bad - and all of us should try and be ethical consumers.

But I wonder how many of the general public who’d complain about this, would have also ordered from Prime every other day during the pandemic and access online services through their iPhone/iPad/iMACs.

_Every_ business and corporate has something shady going on. Of course they should be held accountable, but I can absolutely believe Meghan did not know. There have been corporates who’ve been found working at-arms-length with a regime (hi, SNC-Lavalin) or selling to sanctioned individuals and countries (Amazon); it sucks but it’s an unfortunate risk we have in a globalist world.

I can absolutely believe Meghan did not know. However: I also think she needs to come out ahead of the story being picked up by more serious journalists, sincerely apologize, and find an appropriate NGO to donate to, and maybe donate the same amount of funds she invested into this business to an NGO.

Edited because grammar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> *Hannah’s commitment to sourcing ethical ingredients and creating a product that I personally love and [that] has a holistic approach to wellness. I believe in her, and I believe in her company.”*



*This* is why people mock celebs. So fake.
The ‘we didn’t know’ excuse will not work either. If anyone believed H&M’s bs before, they should seriously question it now. Torture, these people support torture.  We see you, H&M and OW.

ETA: One thing for a corporation to cry ‘we didn’t know‘.  For a celeb, it just makes them look stupid, especially considering all their other missteps. Do the research, do the homework. Be smart and quit lecturing the rest of us.  IMO this is not about being an ethical consumer. This is about a celeb misusing his/her celebrity in order to profit. Ewww.


----------



## maris.crane

If anything, I think it’s WORSE when big corps make these missteps as they have the capital to invest in technology & people to avoid these missteps; a start up of five people... not so much.

I can absolutely believe Meghan and Harry were told that this business was employing women and supporting all these agricultural initiatives without saying operations were in the Uyghur regions of China. Of course, it would be on them to do their own due diligence, and sincerely apologize, but this is not the first business to fail in this regard, and it won’t be the last.


----------



## 1LV

MM & PeeWee did as much due diligence on this as the “news” outlets in the US do on them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has  this company made a comment about this?  Have they apologized? Explained what changes they will make? Destroyed their supply?  If the big bad corporations have to do all of that, then so should the little ones.  The little ones along with the celebs get themselves into trouble with their sanctimonious promos.  It isn’t about health/wellness/mind-body/whatevs. It is simply about profit. We know, we know.

This is 2021. We expect better. We expect honesty. Classic hoist by their own petard. IMO

ETA:  None of the 5 know how to use the Google?  Wow.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has  this company made a comment about this?  Have they apologized? Explained what changes they will make? Destroyed their supply?  If the big bad corporations have to do all of that, then so should the little ones.  The little ones along with the celebs get themselves into trouble with their sanctimonious promos.  It isn’t about health/wellness/mind-body/whatevs. It is simply about profit. We know, we know.
> 
> This is 2021. We expect better. We expect honesty. Classic hoist by their own petard. IMO
> 
> ETA:  None of the 5 know how to use the Google?  Wow.


I looked to see if they have responded.  the only reports I saw seemed to be from tabloids.  someone please correct me if I'm wrong


----------



## sdkitty

I can't read this whole store as I'm not a member but I find the idea of them taking time off work kinda humorous.








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Prepare to Have Their Second Child Their Way
					

Post-birth, Meghan and Harry will “take some proper time off,” a friend told Vanity Fair. The couple want to have “some real quality time together once the baby arrives.”



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Announced last November, so unrelated to the H&M debacle:
> Article from Nov., 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year
> 
> 
> The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying the concept of reconciliation in either Cambridge or the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Archbishop of Canterbury will take a three-month sabbatical next year for 'reflection, prayer, and spiritual renewal,' Lambeth Palace has confirmed.
> 
> Justin Welby is expected to be away from May to July 2021, studying in either Cambridge or the United States.
> 
> He will be examining the concept of reconciliation – one of the personal priorities of his ministry – during this time._


A sabbatical? He hasn’t exactly had much work this last


LittleStar88 said:


> DH (he knows little to nothing about MM other than he can’t stand her) saw this image as part of a story about these two clowns and says, “Really, Harry? A briefcase girl was the best you could do?”. He was legitimately horrified that he married a briefcase girl
> 
> View attachment 5044788


aw I’m sure there’s some lovely briefcase girls.

They couldn’t find anyone to marry him in their royal/Aristo circles and given he’s a prince and aristos love to upgrade so they must have suspected there was something off...


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Growing up I thought Wills was the much more attractive brother... then it became Harry... I think Harry is probably a little more attractive to me now just on a looks basis. Wonder what the future holds...


at the time of diana's death Will was beautiful....he didn't age that great. for awhile I thought H was more attractive.  now his personality has spoiled that for me and I prefer Will again


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Latte Trouble?
> 
> *"MEGHAN Markle has backed a coffee firm who bought oat milk from a company based in China's "police state" Xinjiang province, it has been claimed.*
> 
> _*It comes after human rights groups urged western companies to cut ties with the region* because of the genocide of the minority Muslim Uighur community.
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14541923/meghan-markle-coffee-firm-xinjiang-province/#
> An estimated one million Uighurs and other minority groups have been detained in Chinese prison camps since 2015.
> 
> People have been subjected to torture, sterilization and political indoctrination in addition to forced labor as part of a brutal assimilation campaign in a region with a Han Chinese majority.
> 
> There have also been reports of forced birth control.
> 
> But according to the Mail on Sunday, Meghan last year invested in Clevr Blends which bought nearly 19 tons of oat milk powder from a company in Urmqi, the capital of Xinjiang...
> 
> Clevr Blends, which sells instant oat-milk lattes, costing £20 for a packet with 14 servings, was founded by Hannah Mendoza and Roger Coppola in California, in 2019._
> 
> *Its website states that "ethics are always at the forefront of our product", adding: “We prioritise working with smaller, family run ingredient suppliers or those with more transparent supply chains*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan coffee firm bought milk from company in China's 'police state'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has backed a coffee firm who bought oat milk from a company based in China’s “police state” Xinjiang province, it has been claimed. It comes after human rights group…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I don’t know whether MM would know that much about the supply line as an investor/ambassador and, granted, I’m not in the coffee business so maybe I don’t know how it is. 

However, I do question how a company can boast their ethical credentials and then think the most environmentally ethical thing to do is to fly OATS, which are a common grain and are most certainly grown and processed in the US, in from China. I can understand air miles on coffee beans or tea but OATS?????

Pure greenwashing so they can get slave labour prices for their premium ‘ethical’ product by the sounds of things.


----------



## csshopper

maris.crane said:


> If anything, I think it’s WORSE when big corps make these missteps as they have the capital to invest in technology & people to avoid these missteps; a start up of five people... not so much.
> 
> I can absolutely believe Meghan and Harry were told that this business was employing women and supporting all these agricultural initiatives without saying operations were in the Uyghur regions of China. Of course, it would be on them to do their own due diligence, and sincerely apologize, but this is not the first business to fail in this regard, and it won’t be the last.


Meghan invested in this company and, according to the article about the company founder, has given them a big boost. With that comes responsibility. If a person endorses a product, know all about it before you encourage people to spend their money on it. My issue with Meghan is her hubris, that if SHE says it's great, then it obviously must be something the whole world has been waiting for. It's not like Meghan is working full time, homeschooling several children, and juggling making it in a pandemic world with an out of work spouse......she has time, her husband has time and they have staff. A quick message to someone "I'm thinking about buying into this, would you check it out for me, please?" would be the least I would expect.

China as a supplier is a red flag and has been for years:

*Toxic Toothpaste Made in China Is Found in U.S. - The New ...*
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/us/02toothpaste.html - Cached - Similar pages
2 Jun 2007 *...* Consumers were advised yesterday to discard all *toothpaste* made in *China* after federal health officials said they *found Chinese*-made ...*FDA Bans Toothpaste From China - ABC News*
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=4507395&page=1 - 307k - Cached - Similar pages
23 Mar 2008 *...* *Chinese toothpaste* makes up about $3.3 million of the $2 billion *U.S.* ... The FDA has seized *tainted toothpaste* at a DollarPlus store in Miami, Fla., ... and FDA inspectors also *found* product at a distribution center," Autor said.

A Google search shows ongoing issues of Chinese imports of tainted candy containing melamine, tainted dog food, tainted fish and one specific to California: 

In July 2007, the California Department of Health issued a caution to grocery stores and consumers after abnormally high levels of the pesticide aldicarb sulfoxide were found on ginger imported from China. According to the FDA, exposure to aldicarb sulfoxide can cause "flu-like symptoms," including nausea, headache, and blurred vision, while higher levels can cause, among other things, excessive sweating, salivation, and twitching.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## maris.crane

csshopper said:


> Meghan invested in this company and, according to the article about the company founder, has given them a big boost. With that comes responsibility. If a person endorses a product, know all about it before you encourage people to spend their money on it. My issue with Meghan is her hubris, that if SHE says it's great, then it obviously must be something the whole world has been waiting for. It's not like Meghan is working full time, homeschooling several children, and juggling making it in a pandemic world with an out of work spouse......she has time, her husband has time and they have staff. A quick message to someone "I'm thinking about buying into this, would you check it out for me, please?" would be the least I would expect.
> 
> China as a supplier is a red flag and has been for years:
> 
> *Toxic Toothpaste Made in China Is Found in U.S. - The New ...*
> https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/us/02toothpaste.html - Cached - Similar pages
> 2 Jun 2007 *...* Consumers were advised yesterday to discard all *toothpaste* made in *China* after federal health officials said they *found Chinese*-made ...*FDA Bans Toothpaste From China - ABC News*
> https://abcnews.go.com/Health/Healthday/story?id=4507395&page=1 - 307k - Cached - Similar pages
> 23 Mar 2008 *...* *Chinese toothpaste* makes up about $3.3 million of the $2 billion *U.S.* ... The FDA has seized *tainted toothpaste* at a DollarPlus store in Miami, Fla., ... and FDA inspectors also *found* product at a distribution center," Autor said.
> 
> A Google search shows ongoing issues of Chinese imports of tainted candy containing melamine, tainted dog food, tainted fish and one specific to California:
> 
> In July 2007, the California Department of Health issued a caution to grocery stores and consumers after abnormally high levels of the pesticide aldicarb sulfoxide were found on ginger imported from China. According to the FDA, exposure to aldicarb sulfoxide can cause "flu-like symptoms," including nausea, headache, and blurred vision, while higher levels can cause, among other things, excessive sweating, salivation, and twitching.



As I said: I think H&M have to apologize on this one and get ahead of this story. But if a giant corporate  can miss things, (or turn a blind eye), I can absolutely believe it can happen with a start up (or that the investors in said start up we’re not given a full picture.)

However: I do think this article is also the definition of selective outrage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: start-up?   Nah, I am not willing to give H&M, OW or the company a pass.  Plenty of people were involved in this. OW has a team - what is their excuse?   The A list celebs know how important credibility and integrity are.  Lose the public trust and it is game over.


----------



## Jktgal

maris.crane said:


> _Every_ business and corporate has something shady going on.



But they don't claim ethics as the forefront of their business. 

It won't be very long before they get mixed up with someone of Epstein proportions.


----------



## maris.crane

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: start-up?   Nah, I am not willing to give H&M, OW or the company a pass.  Plenty of people were involved in this. OW has a team - what is their excuse?   The A list celebs know how important credibility and integrity are.  Lose the public trust and it is game over.



And people will probably choose not to buy the oat milk latte packets.

I find the idea of a dried latte rather gross, anyways.


----------



## maris.crane

Jktgal said:


> But they don't claim ethics as the forefront of their business.
> 
> It won't be very long before they get mixed up with someone of Epstein proportions.



Well, we can come back to this in 5 years.


----------



## Jktgal

jelliedfeels said:


> However, I do question how a company can boast their ethical credentials and then think the most environmentally ethical thing to do is to fly OATS, which are a common grain and are most certainly grown and processed in the US, in from China. I can understand air miles on coffee beans or tea but OATS?????



Aah but are the oats in USA sown by virgins dressed in silk made from silkworm fed on _organic_ mulberry leaves??


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> Aah but are the oats in USA sown by virgins dressed in silk made from silkworm fed on _organic_ mulberry leaves??


It’d be nice if they were at the price charged!  

I was unlikely to buy this product in the first place as it sounds  but I do try and buy fairly traded and ethical stuff where possible so it does grind my gears when these companies make such dodgy decisions and essentially lie to the consumer.

It makes me feel like I should just not bother.


----------



## Allisonfaye

maris.crane said:


> _Every_ business and corporate has something shady going on.



People who believe this kind of thing hate capitalism. Capitalism has lifted way more people out of poverty around the world than any other system. 

My husband works in accounting at a major corporation and they bend over backwards to do things ethically.


----------



## maris.crane

Allisonfaye said:


> People who believe this kind of thing hate capitalism. Capitalism has lifted way more people out of poverty around the world than any other system.
> 
> My husband works in accounting at a major corporation and they bend over backwards to do things ethically.



I’m actually not against capitalism.
But I’m also not of the belief that selective outrage really does much (which I think the original article in The Sun was.)


----------



## csshopper

maris.crane said:


> And people will probably choose not to buy the oat milk latte packets.
> 
> I find the idea of a dried latte rather gross, anyways.


Me too, I like my Quaker Oats in a bowl, with a side of brewed coffee made with 100% coffee beans.


----------



## maris.crane

csshopper said:


> Me too, I like my Quaker Oats in a bowl, with a side of brewed coffee made with 100% coffee beans.



YOOOOO. Quaker instant - Maple Spice - add raisins.


----------



## sdkitty

maris.crane said:


> As I said: I think H&M have to apologize on this one and get ahead of this story. But if a giant corporate  can miss things, (or turn a blind eye), I can absolutely believe it can happen with a start up (or that the investors in said start up we’re not given a full picture.)
> 
> However: I do think this article is also the definition of selective outrage.


If the mainstream media doesn't pick up on this story, they can probably stay quiet IMO


----------



## purseinsanity

Or she can copy Drew Barrymore and name her daughter Olive.  Also an homage to her famous cake.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I would think so too... but the home birth thing seems to be really popular among the 30s "organic everything" set these days. Even Hillary Duff did a water birth in-home. With all that money, I'd be in the nicest suite in the nicest hospital with the most expensive doula money can buy!


Especially in the Wokedom Kingdom of California, all the celebrities seem to be promoting home births.  I'm with you.  Just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's safe!  Death is natural too.  People can do whatever they want, but I personally wouldn't risk my child's life being naked in a field in some old wooden tub with the sun on my back.  I guess I'm not a hippie.


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> Paddypower are giving odd of 7 to 1 for Diana as the name of the baby.
> Contemplating a tenner.
> My personal guess is that they will go for a hyphenated double name.
> That way they can use Diana but claim a modern twist.
> 
> Diana - Rose
> Diana - Louise
> Diana - Mae / Diana - May
> Diana - Jane
> Diana - Marie
> Diana - Jade
> Diana - Rae
> 
> Was Archie Harrison meant to be Archie Harry's son ?
> Is there an equivalent for daughter ?
> 
> I really can't make any of the other female family names work with Diana.
> It doesn't lend itself to an easy combination to my ear.
> Think we can rule out Diana-Kate


They can pretend to be Icelandic and name her Diana Meghansdottir.    I mean, Harry's not that important anyway, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> If you were having surgery, you would most likely want a sterile environment. I know I would.


Yep.  I don't think it's possible to just "set up an OR" in the US either.  At least not a legal one.  Hospitals and surgery centers have to go through rigorous testing by all the necessary parties, especially in CA, to be approved to have surgical procedures done.  Unless you have some quack there.


----------



## rose60610

Since Harry stated that the BRF is "trapped" and "they're all trapped", why doesn't he renounce his title? Why does he even want to be affiliated with an institution where "everyone is trapped", yes, a rhetorical question. If Meghan REALLY wanted to be taken seriously, why didn't she insist on being stripped of her title, since she got it from the stodgy racist mean ol' rotten BRF where everyone is "trapped"? I mean, Harry said she "rescued" him, right? From the simple fact they say nothing about giving up their titles, their accusations of the BRF are garbage, IMO. For Oprah not to follow up on it also makes that whole interview reek. They thrive on lies and tearing people apart.


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> It’d be nice if they were at the price charged!
> 
> I was unlikely to buy this product in the first place as it sounds  but I do try and buy fairly traded and ethical stuff where possible so it does grind my gears when these companies make such dodgy decisions and essentially lie to the consumer.
> 
> It makes me feel like I should just not bother.


I’m cynical but yeah you should probably not bother!


----------



## muddledmint

Allisonfaye said:


> People who believe this kind of thing hate capitalism. Capitalism has lifted way more people out of poverty around the world than any other system.
> 
> My husband works in accounting at a major corporation and they bend over backwards to do things ethically.


I am 100% for capitalism, but the US hasn’t been a purely capitalist, free market country for decades if not longer. Not only do we have the governmental social safety net programs, subsidies for farms etc and protectionism, we also have a rigged system with a small group of big corporations and super wealthy people having outsize influence and advantages. Your husband’s major corporation might be ethically following all the rules, but the rules are rigged.

Editing to add that I don’t necessarily think any other system is better than what we have, although there is a LOT of room for improvement in the US. I think pure capitalism is something to strive for but probably not fully attainable in the modern world.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Since Harry stated that the BRF is "trapped" and "they're all trapped", why doesn't he renounce his title? Why does he even want to be affiliated with an institution where "everyone is trapped", yes, a rhetorical question. If Meghan REALLY wanted to be taken seriously, why didn't she insist on being stripped of her title, since she got it from the stodgy racist mean ol' rotten BRF where everyone is "trapped"? I mean, Harry said she "rescued" him, right? From the simple fact they say nothing about giving up their titles, their accusations of the BRF are garbage, IMO. For Oprah not to follow up on it also makes that whole interview reek. They thrive on lies and tearing people apart.



Harry and Meghan are nothing without their titles and they know it. They will never give them up willingly. The very last thing they want is to be seen as being normal people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Since Harry stated that the BRF is "trapped" and "they're all trapped", why doesn't he renounce his title? Why does he even want to be affiliated with an institution where "everyone is trapped", yes, a rhetorical question. If Meghan REALLY wanted to be taken seriously, why didn't she insist on being stripped of her title, since she got it from the stodgy racist mean ol' rotten BRF where everyone is "trapped"? I mean, Harry said she "rescued" him, right? From the simple fact they say nothing about giving up their titles, their accusations of the BRF are garbage, IMO. For Oprah not to follow up on it also makes that whole interview reek. They thrive on lies and tearing people apart.



H&M enjoy being treated as royalty. They get most of the perks without the chore of shaking strangers’ hands. He will never give up his succession or his titles. As someone on another site pointed out, the drunken Prince Ernst August of Hanover still has his titles, even HRH. It is why Caroline stays married to him even though there have been issues.








						A German prince is suing his 'ungrateful' son for selling ancestral castle for €1
					

Ernst August Sr, Prince of Hanover, claims that his son went behind his back to seize control of his estates




					www.theartnewspaper.com
				




ETA: I could be wrong, the Duke of Windsor abdicated only because the Palace made him. It was not his wish to give it all up.


----------



## purseinsanity

Reminds me of Star Wars and Princess Leia.


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> Every pregnancy is different, indeed. Some women can give birth to babies at the riverbank without any complication. However: giving birth is not safe at home. There are so many unforeseeable complication for the mother and the baby. It's just going to get worse because women are giving birth later, there are more mothers with medical conditions, high risk pregnant mothers and multiple pregnancies.


It was not even a hundred and fifty years ago that women died during child birth at incredibly scary rates.  The advancement of antibiotics, blood transfusions, and emergency C sections has greatly reduced that risk, but there are still scary complications that can occur.  I once had a professor who called pregnancy the "biggest malignancy" of all, because he said it stressed a woman's body beyond belief.  It's so true.  Especially in the US, where every pregnancy and baby is expected to be perfect, and malpractice suits against OBGYNs are at an insane price, it astonishes me that more women want to give birth at home.  If Meghan is even pregnant, and if she did have an IVF pregnancy, I don't understand taking the chance with a high risk pregnancy.  I think she's full of it as usual.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> What is it going to be like for a little girl growing up with a princess title in the US? That title doesn't mean anything here other than being seen as a cool novelty. If she goes to school (and isn't homeschooled by tutors) nobody can force her classmates to call her princess. Nobody is ever going to curtsy to her. She is going to be told from birth she is special but any perks she gets out of it would be at the whim of those offering them, she isn't going to be automatically granted them. It is going to be confusing for 'lil Diana.


Lil Diana will be taught that she's a victim of racism and people aren't kneeling and curtsying to her because they aren't woke enough. She will be taught to never take "No" for an answer, and to word salad lie through her teeth to get her way, no matter what.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> It was not even a hundred and fifty years ago that women died during child birth at incredibly scary rates.  The advancement of antibiotics, blood transfusions, and emergency C sections has greatly reduced that risk, but there are still scary complications that can occur.  I once had a professor who called pregnancy the "biggest malignancy" of all, because he said it stressed a woman's body beyond belief.  It's so true.  Especially in the US, where every pregnancy and baby is expected to be perfect, and malpractice suits against OBGYNs are at an insane price, it astonishes me that more women want to give birth at home.  If Meghan is even pregnant, and if she did have an IVF pregnancy, I don't understand taking the chance with a high risk pregnancy.  I think she's full of it as usual.



She may be trying to throw off the paps, the prying eyes and the intrusive questions. In the end, it may be an effective strategy unless they care about the truth [which we know they do not]. If it keeps them out of the news, I am all for it. A lot less drama is a welcomed relief.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> She's not the only one laughing - H is grinning as well


Yep, noticed that.  Like really does attract like.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Lil Diana will be taught that she's a victim of racism



Why not? It's working for mom.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> The 'interview' was a PR stunt.
> 
> Advertorial for the masses with adverts in-between. *It should have come with a disclaimer.*


LOL it really should have!  "The following program and opinions depicted in this interview are not based on fact, and are loosely interpreted to fit the narrative of the interviewees"


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah apparently you shouldn’t even use retinol or get peels. My skin has gone crazy.
> 
> A lot of cosmetic drs won’t do fillers while pregnant but I’m sure someone willing can be found, especially in LA!
> 
> There’s been loads of allegations of the kardashians and others having work done during Pregnancy. I wouldn’t be that surprised if they were all at it.


I remember Khloe Kardashian's lips were GINORMOUS and she claimed it was from her pregnancy.  Give me a break.  To the extent she had it, maybe if she was allergic to her pregnancy and had angioedema because of it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Why not? It's working for mom.


Mom will be her biggest teacher of course.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> If the mainstream media doesn't pick up on this story, they can probably stay quiet IMO


Gayle King AKA MM buddy, will, I am sure LOL, be doing an expose on topic during her morning show


----------



## purseinsanity

zinacef said:


> Well! She’s a professional american actress who’s face can launch a thousand —- ships(?), projects, causes, wokefulness(?) and best of all compassion on them doe eyes!


Oh Lord, please don't give her any ideas of comparing herself to Helen of Troy!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *And according to The Telegraph Keleigh Thomas Morgan of PR firm Sunshine Sachs remained part of her inner circle, masterminding the couple’s first charitable foundation, Sussex Royal.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry told royal advisers 'You can’t stop us doing what we want'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told royal advisers “you can’t stop us from doing what we want” in clashes a year before Megxit. Sources have claimed the pair were the o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I swear "Sunshine Sachs" sounds like a stripper name.


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> Oh wait, it should be Meghansdottir. Not Meghandottir. It’s an Icelandic thing


LOL posted my comment before reading yours!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Since Harry stated that the BRF is "trapped" and "they're all trapped", why doesn't he renounce his title? Why does he even want to be affiliated with an institution where "everyone is trapped", yes, a rhetorical question. If Meghan REALLY wanted to be taken seriously, why didn't she insist on being stripped of her title, since she got it from the stodgy racist mean ol' rotten BRF where everyone is "trapped"? I mean, Harry said she "rescued" him, right? From the simple fact they say nothing about giving up their titles, their accusations of the BRF are garbage, IMO. For Oprah not to follow up on it also makes that whole interview reek. They thrive on lies and tearing people apart.


He wants to be "Just Harry". I have not seen her wanting to be "Just Meghan". Most of the PR-type stories about her repeatedly mention that she is the duchess or the DoS. They should just give up their titles if they are so bent on slamming the monarchy.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> DH (he knows little to nothing about MM other than he can’t stand her) saw this image as part of a story about these two clowns and says, “Really, Harry? A briefcase girl was the best you could do?”. He was legitimately horrified that he married a briefcase girl
> 
> View attachment 5044788


LOLOL.  What an appropriate picture.  MM will do anything for $5.  Even her "excitement" is so phony in this picture.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> He wants to be "Just Harry". I have not seen her wanting to be "Just Meghan". Most of the PR-type stories about her repeatedly mention that she is the duchess or the DoS. They should just give up their titles if they are so bent on slamming the monarchy.



‘And yet, he uses his full title on the BetterUp website. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. Full title. 
It is his brand. He will never part with it.  Was it the OW interview where he claimed he was surprised that he, a prince, would lose security?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘And yet, he uses his full title on the BetterUp website. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. Full title.
> It is his brand. He will never part with it.  Was it the OW interview where he claimed he was surprised that he, a prince, would lose security?


When entitlement masquerades as birthright.
MM reminds me of the concubines of Imperial China. They desperately wanted to bear the Emperor a son, so that they could latch onto that to gain power.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘And yet, he uses his full title on the BetterUp website. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. Full title.
> It is his brand. He will never part with it.  Was it the OW interview where he claimed he was surprised that he, a prince, would lose security?



Well, the reason BetterUp is paying him is for the use of his title so it’s not like he has the option to refuse (not that he wanted to).


----------



## Lake Effect

muddledmint said:


> Meghandottir


Lol, I wonder how Iceland feels about that!


----------



## Chanbal

Hope you are all enjoying a nice Easter Sunday. Surprised that this has not been posted here yet!   



Speaking to Palace Confidential on MailPlus, Mr Eden said: "A very good source said even after Meghan had started going out with Prince Harry she had said that her ultimate ambition was to be president.

"It seems to be increasingly likely and what a fascinating prospect it would be."









						Meghan Markle said 'ultimate ambition is to be President'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE told a close friend her "ultimate ambition" is to be US President while she was dating Prince Harry, an insider has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Or she can copy Drew Barrymore and name her daughter Olive.  Also an homage to her famous cake.



Since Olive is taken, maybe Cringe should just settle for Lemon   And then the whole family can start a lemon kingdom in Montecito, peddling lemons and lemon products everyday for the rest of their lives. They can sell organic lemonades and organic lemon roasted rescued chicken


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> It was not even a hundred and fifty years ago that women died during child birth at incredibly scary rates.



They still do in the US, which ranks last in maternal mortality among industrialized countries.

Even more so for WOC, a black mother with a college education is at 60 percent greater risk for maternal death than a white or Latina woman with less than a high school education.


----------



## floatinglili

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They still do in the US, which ranks last in maternal mortality among industrialized countries.
> 
> Even more so for WOC, a black mother with a college education is at 60 percent greater risk for maternal death than a white or Latina woman with less than a high school education.


I’m not from the US. Are US WOC less likely to access prenatal care than other women? Are they more likely to live in more isolated areas than other women? Or is this a reflection of high costs of medical care / insurance issues? 
I had a very young hippie friend (not WOC and not US) who naively ignored all prenatal care (involved in environmental campaigning) and turned up at an isolated country nursing post (ie one nurse in call) midway through her first labour. Turns out the baby was breech and the poor girl gave birth in the back of a rushing ambulance bouncing along the country roads towards a country hospital, to the tune of the emergency siren! Still
Gives me the shudders just thinking about it. She lived.


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone post this yet? One of Meghan’s childhood boyfriends is a performance artist and he’s talking to the press about his impressions of her relationship with her father. Funny that the ex doesn’t really say anything about Meghan herself but only focuses on her dad. This reeks of being a staged article from her publicists.

*Meghan Markle’s Relationship With Dad Thomas Markle Was Always ‘Complicated,’ Childhood Boyfriend Says*
Tale as old as time. Meghan Markle‘s ups and downs with her father, Thomas Markle, aren’t a new development — according to an old flame.

“I knew her dad growing up as kids,” Joshua Silverstein, an ex-boyfriend of the 39-year-old Suits alum, told Us Weeklyexclusively on Monday, March 29. “I didn’t see him often … but I did know that Meghan’s relationship with her dad was complicated and I understood that as most teenager-to-parent relationships are.”

Silverstein noted that he had a closer connection to Doria Ragland, the duchess’ mom, who split from the 76-year-old lighting director in 1987. However, he was still able to notice the “challenging” dynamic between Meghan and her dad amid her parents’ separation.

“Being there when Meghan’s parents were divorced at that time … it’s hard raising your kids without the secondary parent,” the Braid Theater performance artist told Us. “It’s all challenging. I don’t think there was anything specifically surprising to find out at that time because there were a lot of people that I knew [who] had challenging relationships with their parents. But I did know about it.”

While he admitted that he “couldn’t speak to the specificity of what Meghan went through” with Thomas, Silverstein recalled having “very cordial” interactions with the Daytime Emmy winner. Their relationship as father and daughter “might have been strained” at the time as a result of the divorce — and Silverstein has been saddened to watch them grow more distant.

“I think at the end of the day, we’re all human beings and we all have to create boundaries with people that we may not want to create boundaries with … but at the end of the day, you have to do what’s best for you and your family,” Silverstein, who is directing a virtual summer session at Cazadero Performing Arts Family Camp, continued. “If that means creating a boundary with your parents, sometimes that’s what you have to do.”









						Meghan Markle's History With Her Dad Is 'Complicated,' Childhood BF Says
					

Meghan Markle's childhood boyfriend Joshua Silverstein saw a 'challenging' dynamic between her and her father — exclusive




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

Dad can definitely be clumsy, but I think he did his best for his spoilt daughter. 
MM is an example of exactly what not to do when it comes to personal and family relationships. 
It is astonishing to me that she is given an international platform to lecture the rest of us on ‘forgiveness’ , ‘connection’ and ‘kindness’ ... these are cynical buzzwords used by her to polish a recently-acquired Ariel crown to monetise a national tradition she publicly attacks!
Time to bake another cake MM ... could she be any more condescending, damaging and grasping?


----------



## xincinsin

" While he admitted that he “couldn’t speak to the *specificity* of what Meghan went through” with Thomas "
This is what characterises news and info about MM - no specifics. By surrounding herself with nebulous drama and flooding her past with amnesiac mystery, she can twist and turn everything, and that which she cannot subvert, she cries victim.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I remember Khloe Kardashian's lips were GINORMOUS and she claimed it was from her pregnancy.  Give me a break.  To the extent she had it, maybe if she was allergic to her pregnancy and had angioedema because of it!


Khloe  hurries out of the cosmetic surgeon’s office.
Spots friend and covers just filled lips with hand.
K “Oh no! There must have been some shellfish in that salad. Oh no my lips! My allergy!”
“I didn’t know you were allergic. Didn’t you order lobster the other day?”
“I mean my pregnancy allergy! So insensitive!”



bag-mania said:


> Did anyone post this yet? One of Meghan’s childhood boyfriends is a performance artist and he’s talking to the press about his impressions of her relationship with her father. Funny that the ex doesn’t really say anything about Meghan herself but only focuses on her dad. This reeks of being a staged article from her publicists.
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s Relationship With Dad Thomas Markle Was Always ‘Complicated,’ Childhood Boyfriend Says*
> Tale as old as time. Meghan Markle‘s ups and downs with her father, Thomas Markle, aren’t a new development — according to an old flame.
> 
> “I knew her dad growing up as kids,” Joshua Silverstein, an ex-boyfriend of the 39-year-old Suits alum, told Us Weeklyexclusively on Monday, March 29. “I didn’t see him often … but I did know that Meghan’s relationship with her dad was complicated and I understood that as most teenager-to-parent relationships are.”
> 
> Silverstein noted that he had a closer connection to Doria Ragland, the duchess’ mom, who split from the 76-year-old lighting director in 1987. However, he was still able to notice the “challenging” dynamic between Meghan and her dad amid her parents’ separation.
> 
> “Being there when Meghan’s parents were divorced at that time … it’s hard raising your kids without the secondary parent,” the Braid Theater performance artist told Us. “It’s all challenging. I don’t think there was anything specifically surprising to find out at that time because there were a lot of people that I knew [who] had challenging relationships with their parents. But I did know about it.”
> 
> While he admitted that he “couldn’t speak to the specificity of what Meghan went through” with Thomas, Silverstein recalled having “very cordial” interactions with the Daytime Emmy winner. Their relationship as father and daughter “might have been strained” at the time as a result of the divorce — and Silverstein has been saddened to watch them grow more distant.
> 
> “I think at the end of the day, we’re all human beings and we all have to create boundaries with people that we may not want to create boundaries with … but at the end of the day, you have to do what’s best for you and your family,” Silverstein, who is directing a virtual summer session at Cazadero Performing Arts Family Camp, continued. “If that means creating a boundary with your parents, sometimes that’s what you have to do.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's History With Her Dad Is 'Complicated,' Childhood BF Says
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's childhood boyfriend Joshua Silverstein saw a 'challenging' dynamic between her and her father — exclusive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


Judging purely from appearances, I have a hard time believing that Joshua S ever dated any woman!  

it’s amazing how all these nobodies are suddenly super close with her. Weird they weren’t at the wedding eh?


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> The 'interview' was a PR stunt.
> 
> Advertorial for the masses with adverts in-between. It should have come with a disclaimer.
> 
> LOL it really should have!  "The following program and opinions depicted in this interview are not based on fact, and are loosely interpreted to fit the narrative of the interviewees"



I was thinking more along the lines of: 

"Unless otherwise indicated, all the names, characters, businesses, places, events and incidents in this interview are either the product of the interviewees' imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.."

or, of course the much more succinct  "...recollections my vary"


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They still do in the US, which ranks last in maternal mortality among industrialized countries.
> 
> Even more so for WOC, a black mother with a college education is at 60 percent greater risk for maternal death than a white or Latina woman with less than a high school education.


This sounds like a bit of a misleading statistics problem.
The CDC says on average, 700 women die in child birth every year. Now that’s out of a female population of 166.7million. So let’s just keep those numbers in mind. We are actually talking about a really small number of women. It’s still tragic for the people involved but it’s important not to over-sensationalise.

From this, If black women are roughly 6.5% of the US population but obviously only a fraction of that is giving birth in a given year and then a further fraction of that is college educated - it should become apparent that only a very small number of college educated black women need to die in childbirth over the years for them to be disproportionately over represented in the Maternal mortality rate.

It should be noted that the data is being organised by race but not other factors which might be more significant.

It is not taking into account: maternal age, previous health conditions, pregnancy-related conditions, obesity, location, financial status and cultural and religious difference.

I’m also pretty cynical that education level is that good a measure of maternal safety. A 400lb college graduate has a much higher risk of deaththan most 160lb uneducated women.

To be clear, I’m not saying there couldn’t be factors of racial bias, I am just saying that some of these statistics aren’t conclusive proof on their own. One of the problems, in general, with measuring issues about numerical minorities against a numerical majority is always that the minority becomes disproportionately represented on very little data.

edit- clarification of what I mean by MMR.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *"MEGHAN Markle has backed a coffee firm who bought oat milk from a company based in China's "police state" Xinjiang province, it has been claimed.*



Maybe the oatmilk was borrowed, too.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

floatinglili said:


> I’m not from the US. Are US WOC less likely to access prenatal care than other women? Are they more likely to live in more isolated areas than other women? Or is this a reflection of high costs of medical care / insurance issues?
> I had a very young hippie friend (not WOC and not US) who naively ignored all prenatal care (involved in environmental campaigning) and turned up at an isolated country nursing post (ie one nurse in call) midway through her first labour. Turns out the baby was breech and the poor girl gave birth in the back of a rushing ambulance bouncing along the country roads towards a country hospital, to the tune of the emergency siren! Still
> Gives me the shudders just thinking about it. She lived.



I’m so glad your friend is okay!

There are so many reasons, if you’re interested this article examines the issue in depth...









						America is Failing its Black Mothers
					

For decades, Harvard Chan alumni have shed light on high maternal mortality rates in African American women. Finally, policymakers are beginning to pay attention.




					www.hsph.harvard.edu
				







jelliedfeels said:


> This sounds like a bit of a misleading statistics problem.
> The CDC says on average, 700 women die in child birth every year. Now that’s out of a female population of 166.7million. So let’s just keep those numbers in mind. We are actually talking about a really small number of women. It’s still tragic for the people involved but it’s important not to over-sensationalise.
> 
> From this, If black women are roughly 6.5% of the US population but obviously only a fraction of that is giving birth in a given year and then a further fraction of that is college educated - it should become apparent that only a very small number of college educated black women need to die in childbirth over the years for them to be disproportionately over represented in the Maternal mortality rate.
> 
> It should be noted that the data is being organised by race but not other factors which might be more significant.
> 
> It is not taking into account: maternal age, previous health conditions, pregnancy-related conditions, obesity, location, financial status and cultural and religious difference.
> 
> I’m also pretty cynical that education level is that good a measure of maternal safety. A 400lb college graduate has a much higher risk of deaththan most 160lb uneducated women.
> 
> To be clear, I’m not saying there couldn’t be factors of racial bias, I am just saying that some of these statistics aren’t conclusive proof on their own. One of the problems, in general, with measuring issues about numerical minorities against a numerical majority is always that the minority becomes disproportionately represented on very little data.
> 
> edit- clarification of what I mean by MMR.



I think this is probably too OT to continue here but I’m happy to pm any of the very many reputable studies regarding disparities in healthcare for POC and WOC in particular.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Unless I am misunderstanding your points, it seems like this is a strong case for MM to have a hospital birth.






						The Issue
					

303,000 women die around the world as a result of complications of pregnancy and childbirth, every year. Why is this happening?




					everymothercounts.org


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Unless I am misunderstanding your points, it seems like this is a strong case for MM to have a hospital birth.


MM would consider herself an outlier, I am sure.


----------



## floatinglili

CarryOn2020 said:


> Unless I am misunderstanding your points, it seems like this is a strong case for MM to have a hospital birth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Issue
> 
> 
> 303,000 women die around the world as a result of complications of pregnancy and childbirth, every year. Why is this happening?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> everymothercounts.org


OT but 
Tbh even in systems with good medical services  the horror stories are everywhere. A workmate of mine only had one child after her uterus inverted during the birth.  A workmate of my mum’s bled out when I was a teenager, leaving her husband a widower with a child. 
In the old days women were encouraged not to discuss it for fear of turning off the younger girls. In our new technological age, the genie is not going back into the bottle! And in my view that’s probably a good thing. Most of us have no more idea of pain than a toothache in general life.
Hubby is NOT PC and says the safest way to give birth would be a planned Caesarian with a well rested doctor in a well equipped hospital. But that is a VERY unfashionable view. I was astonished when he told me this during my first pregnancy - but I have to say I had a LOT more time for his perspective after my first (drug-free and completely natural) birthing experience. My Goodness.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m so glad your friend is okay!
> 
> There are so many reasons, if you’re interested this article examines the issue in depth...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> America is Failing its Black Mothers
> 
> 
> For decades, Harvard Chan alumni have shed light on high maternal mortality rates in African American women. Finally, policymakers are beginning to pay attention.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hsph.harvard.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think this is probably too OT to continue here but I’m happy to pm any of the very many reputable studies regarding disparities in healthcare for POC and WOC in particular.


Please do pm me the resources as I am very happy to learn more and this is OT. I just found that the evidence presented by what we were discussing did not justify the conclusion but I am by no means an expert on the US healthcare system.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> As someone on another site pointed out, the drunken Prince Ernst August of Hanover still has his titles, even HRH.



But who would strip him? He's the head of the House of Hanover.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO maternal health is very much on topic. By announcing her home birth, MM has pushed this topic front and center. Wonder why H&M aren‘t shining their light on this important topic? [rhetorical ?]. The website, everymothercounts.org,  seems to clearly explain the issues and where the world is on this topic.  This topic is much more helpful than the LatteLunacy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But who would strip him? He's the head of the House of Hanover.



When Caroline became involved with him, I thought his past was interesting. Then, more details spilled out.  He is quite the character.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Silverstein noted that he had a closer connection to Doria Ragland, the duchess’ mom, who split from the 76-year-old lighting director in 1987. However, he was still able to notice the “challenging” dynamic between Meghan and her dad amid her parents’ separation.



Yeah, right. AS IF.



> While he admitted that he “couldn’t speak to the specificity of what Meghan went through” with Thomas, Silverstein recalled having “very cordial” interactions with the Daytime Emmy winner. Their relationship as father and daughter “might have been strained” at the time as a result of the divorce — and Silverstein has been saddened to watch them grow more distant.



Yet she chose to live with him instead of St. Doria? Please. We're being sold a narrative once again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Oh Lord, please don't give her any ideas of comparing herself to Helen of Troy!


Something to cheer you up .. the Trojans lost the war


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> OT but
> Tbh even in systems with good medical services  the horror stories are everywhere. A workmate of mine only had one child after her uterus inverted during the birth.  A workmate of my mum’s bled out when I was a teenager, leaving her husband a widower with a child.
> In the old days women were encouraged not to discuss it for fear of turning off the younger girls. In our new technological age, the genie is not going back into the bottle! And in my view that’s probably a good thing. Most of us have no more idea of pain than a toothache in general life.
> Hubby is NOT PC and says the safest way to give birth would be a planned Caesarian with a well rested doctor in a well equipped hospital. But that is a VERY unfashionable view. I was astonished when he told me this during my first pregnancy - but I have to say I had a LOT more time for his perspective after my first (drug-free and completely natural) birthing experience. My Goodness.


This is OT but it’s my understanding that caesarean is always more dangerous than a v birth because of the risk of infection/complications of invasive surgery. A lot of maternal deaths in the developed world are from complications from Caesarean section. Though actually, that could be a bit of a chicken/egg problem in this as arguably non-elective caesareans are performed because the mother and/or child is at risk and elective caesareans are more likely to be approved if the woman is in an at-risk category.

Back to H&M, I think that it is quite likely they are doing all this to throw off the paparazzi and of course, to get attention.   

I am really coming round to Mercy Diana Mountbatten Windsor as the baby’s name for the sake of maximum irony.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But who would strip him? He's the head of the House of Hanover.


Apparently a lot of people have, at least during his party days  

Yes, he’s got himself a nice little niche there, the right of kings goes back to Gilgamesh and all that.


----------



## bag-mania

Debating about the safety of home birth is not worth the effort. Meghan has lied about nearly everything else, why wouldn’t she be lying about this?

All we can be sure of is there will be a baby girl born. We will be told it was at home. We will be told Meghan gave birth to that baby. Take both of those claims with a grain of salt.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> When Caroline became involved with him, I thought his past was interesting. Then, more details spilled out.  He is quite the character.


Girlfriend never got over Stefano who had the unfortunate malchance to die young and when they were totally in love.
Caroline is not the best judge of character, imo.


----------



## muddledmint

Queen told Meghan she could keep acting but she 'didn't give it enough thought'
					

Meghan Markle gave up her career, including a lead role on Suits, when things got serious with Prince Harry, however Andrew Morton claims the Queen told her she could carry on rather than becoming a full-time royal




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




Remember how offended Harry seemed during the Oprah interview at the very idea that Meghan keep working?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are all enjoying a nice Easter Sunday. Surprised that this has not been posted here yet!
> 
> View attachment 5045328
> 
> Speaking to Palace Confidential on MailPlus, Mr Eden said: "A very good source said even after Meghan had started going out with Prince Harry she had said that her ultimate ambition was to be president.
> 
> "It seems to be increasingly likely and what a fascinating prospect it would be."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle said 'ultimate ambition is to be President'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE told a close friend her "ultimate ambition" is to be US President while she was dating Prince Harry, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


ludicrous!


----------



## sdkitty

I don't know how many here remember singer Ricki Lee Jones but she's written a memoir and was being interviewed on NPR.  She said fame didn't bring any happiness whatsoever.  I also recall George Harrison saying the Beatles found that having tons of money at a very young age didn't bring happiness.
I wonder if Meghan, who seems so hungry for wealth and fame, is experiencing feelings like this.
That could explain her alleged depression but I still don't buy that she need the HR dept at the palace to get her treatment.


----------



## lalame

I don't believe any of the rumors that she actually plans to run for president. File that under too ludicrous to be true.


----------



## xincinsin

Interesting couple of comments on Reddit. I was wondering what critical race theory was, not sure if this should be taken with a few grains of salt.

"Harry should probably had made sure she was aware of what she was getting into and what she could be expecting."

"I’m pretty sure that he did let her know... seems to me that she doesn’t care and couldn’t resist using the race card to shame HRH. Mainly because that is what people like her do. They are trained to see everything in terms of race in order to get what they want.

_*Critical race theory says that if there is a difference in outcomes then it is because of racism. There cannot be another reason.*_ The truth does not matter because CRT is a rigid ideology that does not accept that there can be any explanation other than racism...

All she cared about was Will and Kate’s kid is a prince and he is white... mine and Harry’s kid is not a prince so it MUST BE because he is part black.

This is CRT in a nutshell.

The 1917 letter doesn’t matter in terms of this because that letter is the product of a systemically racist institution anyway... and the proof that the institution was racist in 1917 is because her kid isn’t a prince in 2021.

I wish I was joking but this is the logic that undergirds this ideology..."


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe the oatmilk was borrowed, too.


I don’t even buy garlic from China. Why would anyone buy oats from there? There’s an awesome documentary about some farming practices in China that you would literally gag. No thanks but I guess it’s use cheap and potentially unsafe products, use a celebrity and raise the prices 1000%. No thank you.


----------



## DeMonica

rose60610 said:


> Since Harry stated that the BRF is "trapped" and "they're all trapped", why doesn't he renounce his title? Why does he even want to be affiliated with an institution where "everyone is trapped", yes, a rhetorical question. If Meghan REALLY wanted to be taken seriously, why didn't she insist on being stripped of her title, since she got it from the stodgy racist mean ol' rotten BRF where everyone is "trapped"? I mean, Harry said she "rescued" him, right? From the simple fact they say nothing about giving up their titles, their accusations of the BRF are garbage, IMO. For Oprah not to follow up on it also makes that whole interview reek. They thrive on lies and tearing people apart.


Valid questions. Just to add to list: If they want to be financially independent why they keep on whining about cut off by Charles? Why do they want an institution, which they detest and want to cut ties with, to pay for their security and living costs? Why does JCMH need a palace to raise his kid who supposed to have a "normal" childhood? Is it his idea how every day people live?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Debating about the safety of home birth is not worth the effort. Meghan has lied about nearly everything else, why wouldn’t she be lying about this?
> 
> All we can be sure of is there will be a baby girl born. We will be told it was at home. We will be told Meghan gave birth to that baby. Take both of those claims with a grain of salt.


Exactly. The surrogate is probably giving birth in a hospital while Meg waits at home for the news.


----------



## csshopper

DeMonica said:


> Valid questions. Just to add to list: If they want to be financially independent why they keep on whining about cut off by Charles? Why do they want an institution, which they detest and want to cut ties with, to pay for their security and living costs? Why does JCMH need a palace to raise his kid who supposed to have a "normal" childhood? Is it his idea how every day people live?


DeMonica- if only Oprah had the insights you have and had asked some of the "real' questions that need to be asked. Can you imagine the squirming in their chairs and the word salad spinning that would have happened?


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> Valid questions. Just to add to list: If they want to be financially independent why they keep on whining about cut off by Charles? Why do they want an institution, which they detest and want to cut ties with, to pay for their security and living costs? Why does JCMH need a palace to raise his kid who supposed to have a "normal" childhood? Is it his idea how every day people live?



Maybe "every day people" in the .01%   - those are probably the only people on his radar anyway


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how many here remember singer Ricki Lee Jones but she's written a memoir and was being interviewed on NPR.  She said fame didn't bring any happiness whatsoever.  I also recall George Harrison saying the Beatles found that having tons of money at a very young age didn't bring happiness.
> I wonder if Meghan, who seems so hungry for wealth and fame, is experiencing feelings like this.
> That could explain her alleged depression but I still don't buy that she need the HR dept at the palace to get her treatment.


Well, maybe, but not at a very young age that’s for sure  

We all know that depression isn’t a logical disease and god knows even someone with no previous problems can suddenly come down with pregnancy and post-natal depression. It is just hard to believe someone who only ever seems to bring up these issues to play the blame game.


----------



## A1aGypsy

@OriginalBalenciaga  I think the disparity in health care and treatment that WOC and Indigenous women receive is very much on topic. I don’t think people realize just how much conscious and subconscious bias occurs and how quickly their needs and concerns can be dismissed, even by female doctors and doctors of colour. 

Further, out and out poor treatment and refusal of treatment due to racism is very much alive and well. So many people want to think that these things are relics of the past but video phones have captured evidence that suggest the opposite is true. 

There truly are very important conversations that H&M could be having and issues they could be highlighting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Well, maybe, but not at a very young age that’s for sure
> 
> We all know that depression isn’t a logical disease and god knows even someone with no previous problems can suddenly come down with pregnancy and post-natal depression. It is just hard to believe someone who only ever seems to bring up these issues to play the blame game.



She was 37 years old when Archie was born. She is a divorced, college-educated woman who has traveled and lived abroad. While depression is most definitely not a logical illness, it is most definitely *not* logical to think a woman of her background and with her resources would not know who to call.  I do not believe he did not know. The story lacks credibility on so many levels.  By floating these BS stories, H&M are playing games with everyone. Gotta remember to not take their bait.


----------



## bubablu

LittleStar88 said:


> DH (he knows little to nothing about MM other than he can’t stand her) saw this image as part of a story about these two clowns and says, “Really, Harry? A briefcase girl was the best you could do?”. He was legitimately horrified that he married a briefcase girl
> 
> View attachment 5044788


I don't know if she would have been more happy with an husband like Manny Khoshbin, the one that her colleague on Deal or no deal Leyla Milani landed. Much more money for sure, but not so much fame and drama.


----------



## limom

bubablu said:


> I don't know if she would have been more happy with an husband like Manny Khoshbin, the one that her colleague on Deal or no deal Leyla Milani landed. Much more money for sure, but not so much fame and drama.


Manny money is funny. And I can’t imagine MM fitting into an Iranian family.
Those mothers are fierce


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Something to cheer you up .. the Trojans lost the war


Yes, but by some accounts, Helen came away unscathed!


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Exactly. The surrogate is probably giving birth in a hospital while Meg waits at home for the news.


...As she waits at home in an outdoor wooden tub with the sun on her back at the precise moment the child is born.      Maybe at times she will hop out to pee in the nearby woods to turn Harry on again?


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> Manny money is funny. And I can’t imagine MM fitting into an Iranian family.
> Those mothers are fierce


Manny has a sketchy past as well.  He had a DUI that killed someone that was subsequently scrubbed from the internet, for starters.  You can't scrub out newspaper articles though.


----------



## LittleStar88

bubablu said:


> I don't know if she would have been more happy with an husband like Manny Khoshbin, the one that her colleague on Deal or no deal Leyla Milani landed. Much more money for sure, but not so much fame and drama.



I'm guessing Harry works well. She wants someone who could elevate her and whom she can manipulate and boss around easily. Harry seems to fit the bill.


----------



## muddledmint

xincinsin said:


> Interesting couple of comments on Reddit. I was wondering what critical race theory was, not sure if this should be taken with a few grains of salt.
> 
> "Harry should probably had made sure she was aware of what she was getting into and what she could be expecting."
> 
> "I’m pretty sure that he did let her know... seems to me that she doesn’t care and couldn’t resist using the race card to shame HRH. Mainly because that is what people like her do. They are trained to see everything in terms of race in order to get what they want.
> 
> _*Critical race theory says that if there is a difference in outcomes then it is because of racism. There cannot be another reason.*_ The truth does not matter because CRT is a rigid ideology that does not accept that there can be any explanation other than racism...
> 
> All she cared about was Will and Kate’s kid is a prince and he is white... mine and Harry’s kid is not a prince so it MUST BE because he is part black.
> 
> This is CRT in a nutshell.
> 
> The 1917 letter doesn’t matter in terms of this because that letter is the product of a systemically racist institution anyway... and the proof that the institution was racist in 1917 is because her kid isn’t a prince in 2021.
> 
> I wish I was joking but this is the logic that undergirds this ideology..."



Meghan is too old to be a product of critical race theory 
She’s late gen x/early millennial. They didn’t teach that kind of nonsense in schools back then. If anything, she is just using it for her own advantage to ride the woke wave, but she’s not a real indoctrinee.


----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> @OriginalBalenciaga  I think the disparity in health care and treatment that WOC and Indigenous women receive is very much on topic. I don’t think people realize just how much conscious and subconscious bias occurs and how quickly their needs and concerns can be dismissed, even by female doctors and doctors of colour.
> 
> Further, out and out poor treatment and refusal of treatment due to racism is very much alive and well. So many people want to think that these things are relics of the past but video phones have captured evidence that suggest the opposite is true.
> 
> *There truly are very important conversations that H&M could be having and issues they could be highlighting.*


These are very serious issues and more conversations are needed to address them. However, these conversations need to done by people with credibility, common sense and a genuine interest in making things better. 

People like MM&H who play victim cards while living in multi-million dollar mansions only delay progress. They had an incredible opportunity to contribute to important issues as part of the royal family, but they could't deal with the fact that they were not the 'first couple'. After Oprah's interview, they lost all  credibility imo.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, but by some accounts, Helen came away unscathed!


Yeah and she was from Sparta, but anything to cheer up the team ...


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> ludicrous!


The thought of MM being a candidate for president is ridiculous. Though, there is possibly a grain of truth in the rumor, we know of a certain video call with Gavin Newsom.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we go -








						Piers Morgan says he was RIGHT not to believe a word Meghan said
					

Piers Morgan sat down for his own tell-all with Fox News host Tucker Carlson aired Monday, where he vowed to reveal 'MY truth' about the controversy surrounding his criticism of Meghan and Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Will H&M or OW respond? GK?



Spoiler: Lies, lies, and more lies! How many lies? 17



Speaking to Carlson on his Fox Nation show on Monday, Morgan doubled down on his original comments. 

'What I was witnessing was the most extraordinarily disingenuous smear, hit job, on the Royal family, on the Queen, on the monarchy, and frankly on Britain, my country,' he said.

'I went on air on Monday morning with full bells on and said quite clearly that I didn't believe what Meghan Markle was saying. Here we are a month later and frankly, I've had plenty of time to think about this - I still don't believe any of what they were saying.

'Seventeen different claims by the pair of them have now been proven to be either completely untrue, or massively exaggerated, or unprovable. I don't understand why I should have to believe people who are not telling the truth.'

In the Oprah interview Meghan had claimed that she was denied access to mental health care when she was feeling suicidal because she was told it 'wouldn't look good for the institution'. Morgan on Monday demanded that the duchess substantiate that claim by revealing who allegedly denied her care.  

'You're accusing two people in the palace of being unspeakably cruel simply to protect the brand of the Royal family, if that is true let's have the names of these people and let's go to them and ask them is this true,' he said.

'"Did you tell a suicidal woman, who told you she was suicidal, not to get help?" - because I find that impossible to believe.'
Morgan also took aim at the racism allegations and reminded that Harry himself was forced to apologize after using a racial slur against a Pakistani army officer in 2006.

Speaking to Oprah, Meghan alleged that someone in 'The Firm' expressed 'concerns' about 'how dark' Archie's skin would be before he was born because she is mixed-race and Harry is white.

Morgan asserted that Meghan was 'accusing the Queen and the Monarchy and the institution as being racist' - adding: 'We don't know the context, we don't know what was said.'

Morgan said the question about Archie's skin color could have been 'innocent' if it was based on mere curiosity. He acknowledged, however, that if the question were 'loaded with a sense of derogatory tone or concern, then it becomes racism'.

He further said that Meghan's suggestion that Archie was barred from becoming a prince because of concerns about his skin color was 'completely untrue'.

'It's not just a sense of her lived experience being untrue, it is factually incorrect. That boy was never going to be a prince until Prince Charles, Harry's father, becomes king on the death of the Queen,' Morgan said.

'And that's gonna happen whatever the skin color of Archie's mother, that's set-in-stone - it's been the case for 100 years.

'So for Meghan Markle to try and create a story that says that the decision to not make Archie the title of prince was based on his skin color is a lie.'

Morgan said he couldn't be sure whether Meghan was 'deliberately lying' or 'completely untrue' - but said he does not care. 

'It's not really about Meghan Markle -she's a delusional duchess who wants to make millions off the royals while trashing family - It's really about free speech,' he said.

'What happened to me is happening all over Britain and America - I can take it, but there are many people who don't have our platform who are being wiped out, lives destroyed, careers ended for ridiculous things.'

more on the DM site


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like I missed this interview. Hope I can find it on YouTube. 











						Piers Morgan brands Prince Harry a 'whiny brat' in furious rant
					

PIERS MORGAN has branded Prince Harry a "whiny brat" in a furious rant as he joined Tucker Carlson on FOX News to discuss his exit from Good Morning Britain, as the presenter fumed at the Duke of Sussex for "crying his dad won't fund him financially" in his interview with Oprah Winfrey...




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> She was 37 years old when Archie was born. She is a divorced, college-educated woman who has traveled and lived abroad. While depression is most definitely not a logical illness, it is most definitely *not* logical to think a woman of her background and with her resources would not know who to call.  I do not believe he did not know. The story lacks credibility on so many levels.  By floating these BS stories, H&M are playing games with everyone. Gotta remember to not take their bait.



It's possible she suffered postpartum depression but I agree with all of your points.


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> Meghan is too old to be a product of critical race theory
> She’s late gen x/early millennial. They didn’t teach that kind of nonsense in schools back then. If anything, she is just using it for her own advantage to ride the woke wave, but she’s not a real indoctrinee.



It was taught in universities in the 2000s for sure. 

It's now essentialist to the point where only differences are discussed based on Barbie logic (identity based on appearance) never commonalities. It's also US-centric (Dr. Derek Gay) in different parts of the world people with similar appearances have very different opportunities/cultures/experiences. CRT is in itself an exported imperial doctrine.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It looks like I missed this interview. Hope I can find it on YouTube.
> View attachment 5046024
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan brands Prince Harry a 'whiny brat' in furious rant
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN has branded Prince Harry a "whiny brat" in a furious rant as he joined Tucker Carlson on FOX News to discuss his exit from Good Morning Britain, as the presenter fumed at the Duke of Sussex for "crying his dad won't fund him financially" in his interview with Oprah Winfrey...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan says he was RIGHT not to believe a word Meghan said
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan sat down for his own tell-all with Fox News host Tucker Carlson aired Monday, where he vowed to reveal 'MY truth' about the controversy surrounding his criticism of Meghan and Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will H&M or OW respond? GK?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Lies, lies, and more lies! How many lies? 17
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking to Carlson on his Fox Nation show on Monday, Morgan doubled down on his original comments.
> 
> 'What I was witnessing was the most extraordinarily disingenuous smear, hit job, on the Royal family, on the Queen, on the monarchy, and frankly on Britain, my country,' he said.
> 
> 'I went on air on Monday morning with full bells on and said quite clearly that I didn't believe what Meghan Markle was saying. Here we are a month later and frankly, I've had plenty of time to think about this - I still don't believe any of what they were saying.
> 
> 'Seventeen different claims by the pair of them have now been proven to be either completely untrue, or massively exaggerated, or unprovable. I don't understand why I should have to believe people who are not telling the truth.'
> 
> In the Oprah interview Meghan had claimed that she was denied access to mental health care when she was feeling suicidal because she was told it 'wouldn't look good for the institution'. Morgan on Monday demanded that the duchess substantiate that claim by revealing who allegedly denied her care.
> 
> 'You're accusing two people in the palace of being unspeakably cruel simply to protect the brand of the Royal family, if that is true let's have the names of these people and let's go to them and ask them is this true,' he said.
> 
> '"Did you tell a suicidal woman, who told you she was suicidal, not to get help?" - because I find that impossible to believe.'
> Morgan also took aim at the racism allegations and reminded that Harry himself was forced to apologize after using a racial slur against a Pakistani army officer in 2006.
> 
> Speaking to Oprah, Meghan alleged that someone in 'The Firm' expressed 'concerns' about 'how dark' Archie's skin would be before he was born because she is mixed-race and Harry is white.
> 
> Morgan asserted that Meghan was 'accusing the Queen and the Monarchy and the institution as being racist' - adding: 'We don't know the context, we don't know what was said.'
> 
> Morgan said the question about Archie's skin color could have been 'innocent' if it was based on mere curiosity. He acknowledged, however, that if the question were 'loaded with a sense of derogatory tone or concern, then it becomes racism'.
> 
> He further said that Meghan's suggestion that Archie was barred from becoming a prince because of concerns about his skin color was 'completely untrue'.
> 
> 'It's not just a sense of her lived experience being untrue, it is factually incorrect. That boy was never going to be a prince until Prince Charles, Harry's father, becomes king on the death of the Queen,' Morgan said.
> 
> 'And that's gonna happen whatever the skin color of Archie's mother, that's set-in-stone - it's been the case for 100 years.
> 
> 'So for Meghan Markle to try and create a story that says that the decision to not make Archie the title of prince was based on his skin color is a lie.'
> 
> Morgan said he couldn't be sure whether Meghan was 'deliberately lying' or 'completely untrue' - but said he does not care.
> 
> 'It's not really about Meghan Markle -she's a delusional duchess who wants to make millions off the royals while trashing family - It's really about free speech,' he said.
> 
> 'What happened to me is happening all over Britain and America - I can take it, but there are many people who don't have our platform who are being wiped out, lives destroyed, careers ended for ridiculous things.'
> 
> more on the DM site



It kills me I agree with PM & Fox. 

But we knew before even they did so they are really agreeing with us


----------



## lalame

Maybe I missed it but... what does Meghan have to do with critical race theory in the first place?


----------



## muddledmint

papertiger said:


> It was taught in universities in the 2000s for sure.
> 
> It's now essentialist to the point where only differences are discussed based on Barbie logic (identity based on appearance) never commonalities. It's also US-centric (Dr. Derek Gay) in different parts of the world people with similar appearances have very different opportunities/cultures/experiences. CRT is in itself an exported imperial doctrine.


I was talking about school as in elementary/middle/high school, and it definitely was NOT a thing back then in the 80s and 90s. Also I’m skeptical about it being mainstream in colleges as well in the early 2000s. Maybe it depended on your major. Meghan graduated in what, 2003? College was very different back then.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> Maybe I missed it but... what does Meghan have to do with critical race theory in the first place?


Someone posted something about Reddit posts on Meghan and how she sees race as the reason for everything


----------



## Allisonfaye

Does anyone notice how Harry rarely smiles? I was just reading a story about the RF in the Will and Kate thread and there is a picture of him as a kid and he is not smiling.


----------



## CeeJay

DeMonica said:


> I call Hazza's comment here .. TOTAL BS!!!  A former London colleague of mine was in Afghanistan at the same time as Harry and he told us that Harry got the 'royal' treatment!  As a matter of fact, the nickname "Hazza" was given to Harry during his time in Afghanistan .. what an a$$ he is (lies just like his wife - they truly are a perfect match)!!


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan says he was RIGHT not to believe a word Meghan said
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan sat down for his own tell-all with Fox News host Tucker Carlson aired Monday, where he vowed to reveal 'MY truth' about the controversy surrounding his criticism of Meghan and Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will H&M or OW respond? GK?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Lies, lies, and more lies! How many lies? 17
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking to Carlson on his Fox Nation show on Monday, Morgan doubled down on his original comments.
> 
> 'What I was witnessing was the most extraordinarily disingenuous smear, hit job, on the Royal family, on the Queen, on the monarchy, and frankly on Britain, my country,' he said.
> 
> 'I went on air on Monday morning with full bells on and said quite clearly that I didn't believe what Meghan Markle was saying. Here we are a month later and frankly, I've had plenty of time to think about this - I still don't believe any of what they were saying.
> 
> 'Seventeen different claims by the pair of them have now been proven to be either completely untrue, or massively exaggerated, or unprovable. I don't understand why I should have to believe people who are not telling the truth.'
> 
> In the Oprah interview Meghan had claimed that she was denied access to mental health care when she was feeling suicidal because she was told it 'wouldn't look good for the institution'. Morgan on Monday demanded that the duchess substantiate that claim by revealing who allegedly denied her care.
> 
> 'You're accusing two people in the palace of being unspeakably cruel simply to protect the brand of the Royal family, if that is true let's have the names of these people and let's go to them and ask them is this true,' he said.
> 
> '"Did you tell a suicidal woman, who told you she was suicidal, not to get help?" - because I find that impossible to believe.'
> Morgan also took aim at the racism allegations and reminded that Harry himself was forced to apologize after using a racial slur against a Pakistani army officer in 2006.
> 
> Speaking to Oprah, Meghan alleged that someone in 'The Firm' expressed 'concerns' about 'how dark' Archie's skin would be before he was born because she is mixed-race and Harry is white.
> 
> Morgan asserted that Meghan was 'accusing the Queen and the Monarchy and the institution as being racist' - adding: 'We don't know the context, we don't know what was said.'
> 
> Morgan said the question about Archie's skin color could have been 'innocent' if it was based on mere curiosity. He acknowledged, however, that if the question were 'loaded with a sense of derogatory tone or concern, then it becomes racism'.
> 
> He further said that Meghan's suggestion that Archie was barred from becoming a prince because of concerns about his skin color was 'completely untrue'.
> 
> 'It's not just a sense of her lived experience being untrue, it is factually incorrect. That boy was never going to be a prince until Prince Charles, Harry's father, becomes king on the death of the Queen,' Morgan said.
> 
> 'And that's gonna happen whatever the skin color of Archie's mother, that's set-in-stone - it's been the case for 100 years.
> 
> 'So for Meghan Markle to try and create a story that says that the decision to not make Archie the title of prince was based on his skin color is a lie.'
> 
> Morgan said he couldn't be sure whether Meghan was 'deliberately lying' or 'completely untrue' - but said he does not care.
> 
> 'It's not really about Meghan Markle -she's a delusional duchess who wants to make millions off the royals while trashing family - It's really about free speech,' he said.
> 
> 'What happened to me is happening all over Britain and America - I can take it, but there are many people who don't have our platform who are being wiped out, lives destroyed, careers ended for ridiculous things.'
> 
> more on the DM site



I really hate agreeing with Piers...  except: the remarks about baby's skin color can be offensive even if it's out of curiosity- I can see that as microaggression...  easily-just my opinion-which can be erased if inappropriate... by the mods.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She was 37 years old when Archie was born. She is a divorced, college-educated woman who has traveled and lived abroad. While depression is most definitely not a logical illness, it is most definitely *not* logical to think a woman of her background and with her resources would not know who to call.  I do not believe he did not know. The story lacks credibility on so many levels.  By floating these BS stories, H&M are playing games with everyone. Gotta remember to not take their bait.


She managed to say no to using the Royal Ob/Gyn which would have cost nothing, and find a new OB and a hospital, which ended up costing a great deal.  She could have found help at any time.


----------



## lalame

scarlet555 said:


> I really hate agreeing with Piers...  except: the remarks about baby's skin color can be offensive even if it's out of curiosity- I can see that as microaggression...  easily-just my opinion-which can be erased if inappropriate... by the mods.



I wouldn't be offended, depending on the context, but I can see how someone can be. But the way you handle it should depend on the context, IMO... I'm sure we've all made some gaffes that offended or irritated someone else and you were corrected gently and everyone walked away knowing no offense was intended. My question is... did they jump to the conclusion that offense was intentional and decide to just blast them publicly? Because the way they alleged it was a full on "my family is racist and wronged me." Not to mention... what was the actual context?? I can see a number of ways that topic could be racist and a number of ways it could be innocent.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> I wouldn't be offended, depending on the context, but I can see how someone can be. But the way you handle it should depend on the context, IMO... I'm sure we've all made some gaffes that offended or irritated someone else and you were corrected gently and everyone walked away knowing no offense was intended. My question is... did they jump to the conclusion that offense was intentional and decide to just blast them publicly? Because the way they alleged it was a full on "my family is racist and wronged me." Not to mention... what was the actual context?? I can see a number of ways that topic could be racist and a number of ways it could be innocent.


I totally agree. Yes, it could have been racist and I definitely could see how they might take offense at that question. Or not, depending on the context! However, Meghan and Harry are trying to sell a whole narrative that the royal family is unsurvivably cruel and racist and insinuating that they (and particularly Archie) are being treated differently because of race and using this unverified and inconsistently reported anecdote as the proof. She implied during the Oprah interview that the only reason Archie was not given a prince title is because of his skin color, based on this one incident. Because they are victims, ya know?!!


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> I wouldn't be offended, depending on the context, but I can see how someone can be. But the way you handle it should depend on the context, IMO... I'm sure we've all made some gaffes that offended or irritated someone else and you were corrected gently and everyone walked away knowing no offense was intended. My question is... did they jump to the conclusion that offense was intentional and decide to just blast them publicly? Because the way they alleged it was a full on "my family is racist and wronged me." Not to mention... what was the actual context?? I can see a number of ways that topic could be racist and a number of ways it could be innocent.



I think had it been my husband's family....and I was going on TV for the world to see, I might have given them the benefit of the doubt and not thrown them under the bus. But I personally think she had/has a bigger agenda. There wasn't much bigger of a bomb she could have lobbed at them. She burned the bridge and for what?


----------



## lalame

If they went full-on bridge-burning and totally leaned into this "my family is evil" narrative I could at least understand. There are genuinely racist people out there who don't deserve any of your time! But... they didn't do that. They said on one hand, the family is racist, but on the other hand, "they cut us off financially" "dad stopped taking my calls" "i love them to bits"... this is not a coherent story. Are they racist or not?! If not, WTF did you feel the need to blast them in this highly suggestive way in a highly public manner? If they are, WTF do you still want to take their money, nurture the relationship, and compliment them at the same time?


----------



## lalame

I can only imagine the family members and staff who busted their butts trying to recover his image after all his stupid racist episodes growing up... only to now be thrown under the bus as if he's some race hero. Oh, brother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> If they went full-on bridge-burning and totally leaned into this "my family is evil" narrative I could at least understand. There are genuinely racist people out there who don't deserve any of your time! But... they didn't do that. They said on one hand, the family is racist, but on the other hand, "they cut us off financially" "dad stopped taking my calls" "i love them to bits"... this is not a coherent story. Are they racist or not?! If not, WTF did you feel the need to blast them in this highly suggestive way in a highly public manner? If they are, WTF do you still want to take their money, nurture the relationship, and compliment them at the same time?


They want to take their money because they are both entitled and Harry is lazy, imo.
Plus they are both nuts. It is hopeless to look for any rational thoughts..


----------



## scarlet555

I feel these two pulled the race card when nothing else worked to get Royal Financial Aid-agreed with the above who said, why do you want anything to do with those racist A-hole and their money?  Now they are in revenge mode apparently...


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> If they went full-on bridge-burning and totally leaned into this "my family is evil" narrative I could at least understand. There are genuinely racist people out there who don't deserve any of your time! But... they didn't do that. They said on one hand, the family is racist, but on the other hand, "they cut us off financially" "dad stopped taking my calls" "i love them to bits"... this is not a coherent story. Are they racist or not?! If not, WTF did you feel the need to blast them in this highly suggestive way in a highly public manner? If they are, WTF do you still want to take their money, nurture the relationship, and compliment them at the same time?



I totally agree with you here. If they claim his family is racist, then why did they not burn bridges before and leave? He said the comment was made when they were dating, so she knew of this well before entering the family. If my boyfriends family had something like that, and in a racist tone, implying that they didn't want a dark skinned person in the family, I would break up with that person, I wouldn't marry them. In all honesty if I was dating a white dude (and I was thinking of marrying him) then I would imagine and think about what our children would like (I'm Indian), so the context is important. But like I said, if the guys family had implied they didn't want a dark grandson, nephew etc then I would think they are racist and I would not be comfortable in marrying into the family. 

Meghan cut her dad off because he snagged pap photos and he kept talking to the press. So why have they not done that with the royal family if they claim they are racist? I think it's because they want the titles and money that comes with being a royal. They were not financially cut off, they made a statement to say they wanted to be financially independent. I don't understand why they need security, because they are not that well known outside of the UK. Princess Diana was known all over the world, whereas these two aren't as well known in my opinion. 

On a side note, they shouldn't be addressed as Duke or Duchess or Prince in the US. I won't bore you with a history lesson, but titles are very much against the American constitution. There is no class system (like the UK) in the US. Also she is not a Princess, she is a Duchess when living in commonwealth countries. She said that she has been a Princess, but her title is a Duchess only (through marriage). You can only be a princess through birth (in the UK).


----------



## limom

Wasn’t Diana, Princess of Wales?


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I totally agree with you here. If they claim his family is racist, then why did they not burn bridges before and leave? He said the comment was made when they were dating, so she knew of this well before entering the family. If my boyfriends family had something like that, and in a racist tone, implying that they didn't want a dark skinned person in the family, I would break up with that person, I wouldn't marry them. In all honesty if I was dating a white dude (and I was thinking of marrying him) then I would imagine and think about what our children would like (I'm Indian), so the context is important. But like I said, if the guys family had implied they didn't want a dark grandson, nephew etc then I would think they are racist and I would not be comfortable in marrying into the family.
> 
> Meghan cut her dad off because he snagged pap photos and he kept talking to the press. So why have they not done that with the royal family if they claim they are racist? I think it's because they want the titles and money that comes with being a royal. They were not financially cut off, they made a statement to say they wanted to be financially independent. I don't understand why they need security, because they are not that well known outside of the UK. Princess Diana was known all over the world, whereas these two aren't as well known in my opinion.
> 
> On a side note, they shouldn't be addressed as Duke or Duchess or Prince in the US. I won't bore you with a history lesson, but titles are very much against the American constitution. There is no class system (like the UK) in the US. Also she is not a Princess, she is a Duchess when living in commonwealth countries. She said that she has been a Princess, but her title is a Duchess only (through marriage). You can only be a princess through birth (in the UK).



Great insights... the only thing I might disagree on is I'd probably still give the guy a chance if his family were racist - he didn't get to pick them - BUT I certainly would keep my distance from them, not try to cozy up to them publicly when it benefitted me only to throw them under the bus... again when it benefitted me. I would expect that my husband would do the same! Not stir up drama.


----------



## muddledmint

Shopaholic2021 said:


> On a side note, they shouldn't be addressed as Duke or Duchess or Prince in the US. I won't bore you with a history lesson, but titles are very much against the American constitution. There is no class system (like the UK) in the US. Also she is not a Princess, she is a Duchess when living in commonwealth countries. She said that she has been a Princess, but her title is a Duchess only (through marriage). You can only be a princess through birth (in the UK).


I did not know that! So was princess of Wales not actually Diana’s title?


----------



## CarryOn2020

"As Meghan is not of royal blood herself, she takes her title from her husband, and if she were not a royal duchess, she would be Princess Henry of Wales.”








						Is Meghan Markle Still a Princess After Quitting Royal Family?
					

The Duchess of Sussex cannot call herself Princess Meghan, but she is a princess, and stepping back from royal duties does not change that, experts tell Newsweek.




					www.newsweek.com
				













						Meghan, Duchess of Sussex - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_Meghan became a princess of the United Kingdom upon her marriage to Prince Harry, entitled to the style of Royal Highness. After her marriage, she was styled "Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex". She also holds the titles of Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel. She is the first person to hold the title "Duchess of Sussex".  Following the Duke and Duchess's decision to step back from royal duties in 2020, the couple agreed not to use the style of "Royal Highness" in practice, but still technically retain the style._


----------



## Shopaholic2021

limom said:


> Wasn’t Diana, Princess of Wales?



I think that was a public thing, because she was so well liked they called her that, but technically she wasn't a princess, she was the duchess of wales. Like Kate is the Duchess of Cambridge, but not a Princess since she was not born into the royal family. I checked the royal website, and Diana has the title Princess on there which is confusing. They might have given her the title after divorce? I'm confused with that, since Kate isn't a princess, and neither are any of the women married to a royal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana was called 'Princess Diana' then why Kate is not Princess Kate?
					

Even though Kate’s mother-in-law was legendary ‘Princess Diana’, she is not a princess just because she married her son, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge.




					www.republicworld.com
				



To become a Princess, one has to be born into the Royal Family such as Prince William and Kate’s daughter, Princess Charlotte of Cambridge.

Officially, neither Diana was a Princess. Reportedly, Diana Spencer did not become a princess when she married Prince Charles. Metro reported that Diana became ‘Her Royal Highness The Princess Of Wales’ when she married Prince Charles of Wales. She was also known as Diana, Princess of Wales. She did have 'princess' in her full name, but it was never the formal title because it would require ‘princess’ to come first followed by her first names such as Princess Charlotte or Princess Anne who is the second child and only daughter of the Queen and Prince Philip.

It was basically the public that began referring to Princess of Wales as “Princess Diana”. As per the Metro report, Diana herself had pointed out that the title was not technically correct. Now, even though one has to be born into the royal family to be called ‘princess’, any daughters that Prince Harry and Meghan have in the future won’t automatically have the royal title. Implying, that they would be a lord or a lady but not a prince or princess. The same analogy applies to Prince William’s children but reportedly Queen decreed that George, Charlotte, and Louis got their titles as HRHs.


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> I really hate agreeing with Piers...  except: the remarks about baby's skin color can be offensive even if it's out of curiosity- I can see that as microaggression...  easily-just my opinion-which can be erased if inappropriate... by the mods.


I'm starting to question if a conversation about the color of the kids ever happened. We already know that it was not about Archie as MM implied. It looks like that a concerned relative was against the wedding. It could very well be that differences in culture were conveniently translated later by MM&H into differences in color.

MM brought up the subject about Archie's color, and H later contradicted her by saying that was a conversation prior to the wedding... He looked surprised and was trying to come up with an answer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

'This Is Us' Season 5, Episode 12: These 2 Sneak Peeks Paint a Heartbreaking Story for Jack and Miguel
					

'This Is Us' Season 5 Episode 12 goes into more detail about Jack and Miguel's friendship when Rebecca came along. 2 sneak peeks offer clues.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



*Was Princess Diana a duchess?*
Technically speaking, Princess Diana was a duchess. However, her Princess of Wales title was much more prominent in comparison. In the royal family, dukedoms are the highest ranking titles offered to sons and grandsons of the monarch. That said, the Prince and Princess of Wales title is an exception to that rule (which is why Prince Charles also goes by Prince of Wales).

The Prince of Wales is a ceremonial title granted to the heir apparent to the King or Queen of England. And, Prince Charles has held that title since 1958. Males in the British royal family pass their titles on to their wives and children. So Diana Spencer became Diana, Princess of Wales upon marriage to Prince Charles in 1981.
In addition to becoming Princess of Wales on her wedding day, Diana also became the Duchess of Cornwall, per Prince Charles’s dukedom. Much like Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cornwall is a special dukedom granted to the eldest son of the reigning monarch (aka, heir apparent). And, although most men receive their peerage upon marriage or majority, Prince Charles earned his dukedom on February 6, 1952, when he was just three years old.

Royal family members have more than one official royal title. And, upon marriage or majority, they typically receive a title for each country in the United Kingdom. These countries include Britain, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Although, as the queen’s eldest son, Prince Charles did not wait to get married or reach majority for his official titles.
In Britain, Prince Charles goes by Charles, Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall. So, Princess Diana was Diana, Princess of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall. However, in Scotland, he goes by Duke of Rothesay, so Diana was Duchess of Rothesay.
With that said, Princess Diana mostly went by her British royal title, which was Her Royal Highness Diana, Princess of Wales. That said, after she and Prince Charles divorced in 1996, Diana lost her Her Royal Highness status. However, she kept her princess title. Her official royal title Diana, Princess of Wales until her death in 1997.
*Camilla Parker Bowles royal titles*
As Prince Charles’s second wife, Camilla Parker Bowles has many of the same official royal titles as Princess Diana — including, Princess of Wales. However, she goes by Duchess of Cornwall instead of Princess of Wales, out of respect for the late princess.


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> Wasn’t Diana, Princess of Wales?


When Charles becomes king, I think Kate becomes Princess of Wales.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Great insights... the only thing I might disagree on is I'd probably still give the guy a chance if his family were racist - he didn't get to pick them - BUT I certainly would keep my distance from them, not try to cozy up to them publicly when it benefitted me only to throw them under the bus... again when it benefitted me. I would expect that my husband would do the same! Not stir up drama.



I do agree that it wouldn't be the guys fault if his family was racist, but then I would expect him to intervene if I was going to become a part of his life. There would have to have been some sort of discussion within the family about race, and how it made me feel etc. Its not something that I could ignore, and especially since Harry is close to his family. Just after they got engaged Meghan joined the whole family for Christmas at Sandringham and Harry said that the Royal family was 'the family that Meghan never had'. That was kind of insulting to her parents in my opinion as its well known her father contributed a lot to her upbringing. 

Harry has dressed up as a Nazi at a party before and was called out on it, and was forced to make an apology since it obviously looked bad. I personally find that unforgivable, since the Nazis were pure evil. Also who in the world makes these costumes?! He has also been called out for calling one of his fellow army officers a 'Paki' which is a derogative term.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> When Charles becomes king, I think Kate becomes Princess of Wales.



‘You are correct









						Kate Middleton all set to be next Princess of Wales after Princess Diana
					

After Princess Diana, her daughter-in-law Kate Middleton is gearing up to take over the title of Princess of Wales.After Prince William goes from the second in line to the throne to being the heir...




					www.thenews.com.pk
				




_After Princess Diana, her daughter-in-law Kate Middleton is gearing up to take over the title of Princess of Wales.

After Prince William goes from the second in line to the throne to being the heir apparent, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will take over the titles of Prince and Princess of Wales. 

This will happen when Prince Charles, who has been the next in line for the past 69 years, will inherit the crown from his mother Queen Elizabeth II. 

The British monarchy has seen 26 princes of Wales in its history with the Duke of Cornwall holding the title for the longest time. 

However, after he takes over the throne, William and Kate’s titles and roles will also shift._


----------



## Chanbal

Another video on Pier's interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to question if a conversation about the color of the kids ever happened. We already know that it was not about Archie as MM implied. It looks like that a concerned relative was against the wedding. It could very well be that differences in culture were conveniently translated later by MM&H into differences in color.
> 
> MM brought up the subject about Archie's color, and H later contradicted her by saying that was a conversation prior to the wedding... He looked surprised and was trying to come up with an answer.



Also, she said that they got married 3 days before the televised wedding, which has been confirmed as false by the arch bishop. She said they said the vows to each other in the garden behind their home with the arch bishop officiating. She actually said 'none knows this but we got married 3 days before the ceremony'. In reality they didn't have to have the grand televised wedding, since Harry is not in line to the throne. I'm not sure if Prince Andrew had such a grand wedding or even if it was televised. I know that Princess Eugiene didn't have a live televised wedding, it was shown after the ceremony on the news.

Also I get the feeling she is using race to get her way, since nothing else seems to be working. Racism is real and does exist, and it can have a devastating effect on peoples lives so I found the interview partially triggering. The mention of suicide should have had a trigger too in my opinion. She had likened her stay in the royal household as being like in covid lockdown, which was a horrible comparison, as so many people are suffering in these covid lockdowns. She had her baby shower abroad, she went to see her friend Serena Williams play, she went on countless holidays with Harry, she was by all means not locked up.


----------



## gracekelly

limom said:


> Wasn’t Diana, Princess of Wales?


Yes, and it needs to be written properly as you have done, Diana, Princess of Wales.  The problem was that people and the media called her Princess Diana, which was incorrect.  She was also Lady Diana, properly put.


----------



## needlv

With Piers Morgan having lambasted MM and H on fox today ... how long will we have to wait for MM to release a scathing reply? 

any bets on who will be first... Omid, Gayle or sunshine Sachs statement???

edit to add: will MM also complain to Fox about Piers? (Like she did to ITV?)


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to question if a conversation about the color of the kids ever happened. We already know that it was not about Archie as MM implied. It looks like that a concerned relative was against the wedding. It could very well be that differences in culture were conveniently translated later by MM&H into differences in color.
> 
> MM brought up the subject about Archie's color, and H later contradicted her by saying that was a conversation prior to the wedding... He looked surprised and was trying to come up with an answer.


If it was a discussion about cultural differences, then I'd say it was warranted since, in hindsight, she didn't fit in. The BRF likely has a lot of experience with gold diggers and they scrutinize all the love-at-first-sight cases. In MM's case, she was mutton behaving as lamb and her act-cute behaviour probably wasn't impressing the stiff-upper-lips.

One of my friends (Chinese) dated a black British man who was previously married to a white woman and had a biracial son. She speculated on what her kids would look like if she married him and how different a Chinese-black biracial child would look compared with a black-white biracial child. Not saying she was the norm, but there can be many reasons why people discuss the colour of a child.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> With Piers Morgan having lambasted MM and H on fox today ... how long will we have to wait for MM to release a scathing reply?
> 
> any bets on who will be first... Omid, Gayle or sunshine Sachs statement???
> 
> edit to add: will MM also complain to Fox about Piers? (Like she did to ITV?)



I am sure something is being prepared. Meghan doesn’t have it in her to just ignore bad press and let it go away.

My guess is we’ll get a smear campaign against Piers with people suddenly popping out of the woodwork and making wild accusations about who knows what.


----------



## floatinglili

scarlet555 said:


> I really hate agreeing with Piers...  except: the remarks about baby's skin color can be offensive even if it's out of curiosity- I can see that as microaggression...  easily-just my opinion-which can be erased if inappropriate... by the mods.


I gotta be honest, this is the BRF we are talking about - historically top of the pile as a direct result of not just micro aggressions but aggressions against their own ppl and others, over many hundreds of years. 
Micro aggressions (snobby, judging gate-keeping comments) against long-serving common girlfriends, lesser duchesses, middle class politicians and newly arrived American actresses would be a stock in trade surely, as an essential protective element of the class system.


----------



## bellecate

Allisonfaye said:


> I think had it been my husband's family....and I was going on TV for the world to see, I might have given them the benefit of the doubt and not thrown them under the bus. But I personally think she had/has a bigger agenda. There wasn't much bigger of a bomb she could have lobbed at them. *She burned the bridge and for what*?


Keeps JCMH tied much more firmly to her if he isn't able to go back to the family after all the lies.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> I am sure something is being prepared. Meghan doesn’t have it in her to just ignore bad press and let it go away.
> 
> My guess is we’ll get a smear campaign against Piers with people suddenly popping out of the woodwork and making wild accusations about who knows what.



I think this is was the major reason for the fall out. Meghan's bad press was something that she couldn't handle, and she didn't think that it was possible that there may be people who don't like or agree with her. The press had been horrible at times and there were random stories printed, but on the whole I think the public liked her and were supportive of them as a couple. And I didn't believe the stories printed, as I'm sure a lot of people with a few brain cells can tell when people make things up to sell papers. So I was actually quite supportive and on there side. It went bad when the hypocrisy started showing (there were incidences of them jetting all over the place while preaching about the environment and sustainability).

There seems to be a big divide on this issue, and it is divide on political lines which I see through the media. CNN and the liberals seems very sympathetic to them and are ignoring the blatant lies and false information they are spreading, which ironically they are campaigning against. So they're essentially hypocrites again. 

Her admission of being suicidal and not getting help from her aides or her hubby is quite shocking. Harry is involved heavily with mental health charities and he has been to therapy, as did Diana, so its not something unusual for the Royal family. I wish she had spoke more about this, and that Oprah asked Harry why he didn't get his wife help. She also would be seeing a physician at the time because she was pregnant and she could have asked him/her for help or referral. There are so many holes.


----------



## tiktok

floatinglili said:


> not just micro aggressions but aggressions against their own ppl and others, over many hundreds of years.
> Micro aggressions (snobby, judging gate-keeping comments) against long-serving common girlfriends,



Yup, the BRF could be an archaic institution built on years of aggression, discrimination, classicism and abuse at its worst forms; the institution could have no place based on the values of a 21st century modern society. And at the same time Harry and Meghan could be spoiled brats and professional victims who want to have their cake and eat it too, take advantage of the huge piles of money and the celebrity status afforded them solely due to their connection to this institution, while badmouthing everyone who doesn't worship them and spreading lies and misinformation.

The problem in today's media is that both things can't be true at the same time - you have to take sides, and people tend to take the side of the "victim of racism", which Meghan knows VERY well and uses to her advantage.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> Keeps JCMH tied much more firmly to her if he isn't able to go back to the family after all the lies.


No wonder he had to spend time with the chickens while she wiped away a tear or two confessing the horrors of a life in designer wear. By the time her henchmen unlocked the Chick Inn, she had already done most of the demolition. H was trotted out as a tool of affirmation for whatever she said (whether or not he heard it) and for her to slickly shift the responsibility of the Megxit as she trilled about how he saved them all (thus casting him as a Christ-like figure, and polishing his halo for the subsequent job announcements).


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I am sure something is being prepared. Meghan doesn’t have it in her to just ignore bad press and let it go away.
> 
> My guess is we’ll get a smear campaign against Piers with people suddenly popping out of the woodwork and making wild accusations about who knows what.



Oprah's interview was well advertised, but I wonder how Pier's interview was noticed here in the US.

It is available on foxnation.com, but it looks like we may be able to watch it on youtube in a few minutes.


----------



## maris.crane

Tucker’s a clown.


----------



## DeMonica

floatinglili said:


> OT but
> Tbh even in systems with good medical services  the horror stories are everywhere. A workmate of mine only had one child after her uterus inverted during the birth.  A workmate of my mum’s bled out when I was a teenager, leaving her husband a widower with a child.
> In the old days women were encouraged not to discuss it for fear of turning off the younger girls. In our new technological age, the genie is not going back into the bottle! And in my view that’s probably a good thing. Most of us have no more idea of pain than a toothache in general life.
> Hubby is NOT PC and says the safest way to give birth would be a planned Caesarian with a well rested doctor in a well equipped hospital. But that is a VERY unfashionable view. I was astonished when he told me this during my first pregnancy - but I have to say I had a LOT more time for his perspective after my first (drug-free and completely natural) birthing experience. My Goodness.


A properly educated, prepared, experienced and well rested doctor working with a midwife with the same qualities in a well equipped hospital would be my best bet who can make the best choices for each individual case, be it vaginal birth or C-section. My late father was a ob/gyn.


----------



## Lodpah

Queen 'told Meghan she did not have to give up acting or embrace royal duties' when she married Prince Harry
					

The Duchess of Sussex was told by the Queen that she was not obliged to be a full-time member of the Royal Family when she married Prince Harry and was free to keep acting, a royal biographer has claimed. The Duchess revealed to Oprah Winfrey in a blockbuster interview last month that she was...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## mellibelly

muddledmint said:


> I was talking about school as in elementary/middle/high school, and it definitely was NOT a thing back then in the 80s and 90s. Also I’m skeptical about it being mainstream in colleges as well in the early 2000s. Maybe it depended on your major. Meghan graduated in what, 2003? College was very different back then.



I’m Meghan’s age, what’s considered Xennial or the Oregon Trail Generation, between Gen X and Millenial. Race and gender was heavily discussed when I was in high school/college in California in the 90’s and early 2000’s. We debated affirmative action in high school, it was a hot button issue, as was access to public schools for children considered “illegal”. I took gender and cultural studies in the University of California system. I was an international relations major (LOL) before switching to architecture, but I continued taking those classes because I found them interesting. Maybe in some parts of the US this wasn’t mainstream education but in culturally diverse California it was always present.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

muddledmint said:


> Queen told Meghan she could keep acting but she 'didn't give it enough thought'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave up her career, including a lead role on Suits, when things got serious with Prince Harry, however Andrew Morton claims the Queen told her she could carry on rather than becoming a full-time royal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remember how offended Harry seemed during the Oprah interview at the very idea that Meghan keep working?


_However Morton believes that Meghan and Harry didn't give the options enough thought, deciding instead to become full time working royals._
Harry is not known for giving things enough thought - see. Nazi costume, and "I call the shots" Meagain probably never thought she should have.
On a different note: I wonder if she attacked the crockery when she had seen those photos with her (hmmmm let's try to be polite here) funny looking hair.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> I’m Meghan’s age, what’s considered Xennial or the Oregon Trail Generation, between Gen X and Millenial. Race and gender was heavily discussed when I was in high school/college in California in the 90’s and early 2000’s. We debated affirmative action in high school, it was a hot button issue, as was access to public schools for children considered “illegal”. I took gender and cultural studies in the University of California system. I was an international relations major (LOL) before switching to architecture, but I continued taking those classes because I found them interesting. Maybe in some parts of the US this wasn’t mainstream education but in culturally diverse California it was always present.


What did you study in international relations?
There was disbelief that Meghan, with a degree in International Relations, could profess ignorance of the British monarchy. Not sure what to make of this. I come from a very small country, so for my countrymen, when we discuss anything international, it really does mean looking beyond our borders. But for large countries which already have so much going on within their own borders, "international relations" might very well be very country-centric with not a lot of emphasis on the international part. For example, in a lecture about the US and its relationship with the UK, the lecturer might talk mainly about the UK as seen from the US standpoint, and say very little about the UK itself. (Not excusing MM's supposed "naivete", seeming lack of curiosity about the world and inability to google Harry and oats.)


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think that was a public thing, because she was so well liked they called her that, but technically she wasn't a princess, she was the duchess of wales. Like Kate is the Duchess of Cambridge, but not a Princess since she was not born into the royal family. I checked the royal website, and Diana has the title Princess on there which is confusing. They might have given her the title after divorce? I'm confused with that, since Kate isn't a princess, and neither are any of the women married to a royal.


It’s just branding I think. They know who their best seller still is. 

Technically she might have lost her title when they divorced but they aren’t going to be ungracious given she died so tragically and she still gets bums on seats.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think that was a public thing, because she was so well liked they called her that, but technically she wasn't a princess, she was the duchess of wales. Like Kate is the Duchess of Cambridge, but not a Princess since she was not born into the royal family. I checked the royal website, and Diana has the title Princess on there which is confusing. They might have given her the title after divorce? I'm confused with that, since Kate isn't a princess, and neither are any of the women married to a royal.


The eldest child of the reigning royal gets the title Prince/princess of Wales - it’s an additional honorary title  like  le dauphin was in France. Whoever marries the P of Wales is entirely to the title HRH Dave/davina the x of Wales too. However if they are the eldest grandchild of the monarch they  get the HRH d of Cambridge instead until the queen dies and they move up the ladder.  
As I’ve said Diana prob wasn’t a princess anymore when she died but they know their branding.

I mean no one cares what Fergie is technically called


----------



## RAINDANCE

DeMonica said:


> _However Morton believes that Meghan and Harry didn't give the options enough thought, deciding instead to become full time working royals._
> Harry is not known for giving things enough thought - see. Nazi costume, and "I call the shots" Meagain probably never thought she should have.
> On a different note: I wonder if she attacked the crockery when she had seen those photos with her (hmmmm let's try to be polite here) funny looking hair.



I don't see Meghan as a strategic thinker. I don't doubt she is bright*, although to borrow an expression the husband uses, she is _not as bright as she thinks she is_ ! Meghan strikes me as someone who _has_ to be current all the time - latest fashion, latest trends, latest issues etc - and that is a sign of underlying insecurity - about not getting it (whatever "it" is )"right" or being left behind. 
When they had Archie, the trend was "we're too posh for formal titles"/ "we want our child to have a normal life" not unlike the Tindalls. There was however much coverage in the UK press at that time, April 2019, that Archie could have  been give the Dumbarton title and why he was not a prince. I believe it was most likely the backlash here in the UK regarding stripping them of the Sussex titles, not just the HRH, that made them realise just how important the titles actually are. As well as the prospect of Mother Diana, of course.

* His other one is "bright_ enough_" Damned by faint praise - I would say it's a very British backhander but he's Irish !


----------



## muddledmint

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana was called 'Princess Diana' then why Kate is not Princess Kate?
> 
> 
> Even though Kate’s mother-in-law was legendary ‘Princess Diana’, she is not a princess just because she married her son, Prince William, Duke of Cambridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.republicworld.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To become a Princess, one has to be born into the Royal Family such as Prince William and Kate’s daughter, Princess Charlotte of Cambridge.
> 
> Officially, neither Diana was a Princess. Reportedly, Diana Spencer did not become a princess when she married Prince Charles. Metro reported that Diana became ‘Her Royal Highness The Princess Of Wales’ when she married Prince Charles of Wales. She was also known as Diana, Princess of Wales. She did have 'princess' in her full name, but it was never the formal title because it would require ‘princess’ to come first followed by her first names such as Princess Charlotte or Princess Anne who is the second child and only daughter of the Queen and Prince Philip.
> 
> It was basically the public that began referring to Princess of Wales as “Princess Diana”. As per the Metro report, Diana herself had pointed out that the title was not technically correct. Now, even though one has to be born into the royal family to be called ‘princess’, any daughters that Prince Harry and Meghan have in the future won’t automatically have the royal title. Implying, that they would be a lord or a lady but not a prince or princess. The same analogy applies to Prince William’s children but reportedly Queen decreed that George, Charlotte, and Louis got their titles as HRHs.


Very complicated! But that explains princess Michael, which I always wondered about but not enough to actually google! So that also explains why princess Beatrice and princess Eugenie are higher ranking than Kate


----------



## muddledmint

mellibelly said:


> I’m Meghan’s age, what’s considered Xennial or the Oregon Trail Generation, between Gen X and Millenial. Race and gender was heavily discussed when I was in high school/college in California in the 90’s and early 2000’s. We debated affirmative action in high school, it was a hot button issue, as was access to public schools for children considered “illegal”. I took gender and cultural studies in the University of California system. I was an international relations major (LOL) before switching to architecture, but I continued taking those classes because I found them interesting. Maybe in some parts of the US this wasn’t mainstream education but in culturally diverse California it was always present.


Yes, I am also not too far off the same age, and we did have race education exactly as you say. That is VASTLY different from the critical race theory of today. Interestingly, all of the race stuff for me was before college. In college, I can really only recall taking one class that really discussed race issues and that was on the sociology of fear. I remember women’s rights/feminism being a much more common topic, but perhaps that is dependent on the classes you chose.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> *I am sure something is being prepared. Meghan doesn’t have it in her to just ignore bad press and let it go away.*
> 
> My guess is we’ll get a smear campaign against Piers with people suddenly popping out of the woodwork and making wild accusations about who knows what.


I’m thinking bed rest.  “_See what you did, Piers!”_


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> What did you study in international relations?
> There was disbelief that Meghan, with a degree in International Relations, could profess ignorance of the British monarchy. Not sure what to make of this. I come from a very small country, so for my countrymen, when we discuss anything international, it really does mean looking beyond our borders. But for large countries which already have so much going on within their own borders, "international relations" might very well be very country-centric with not a lot of emphasis on the international part. For example, in a lecture about the US and its relationship with the UK, the lecturer might talk mainly about the UK as seen from the US standpoint, and say very little about the UK itself. (Not excusing MM's supposed "naivete", seeming lack of curiosity about the world and inability to google Harry and oats.)



She must have forgotten about this trip.


----------



## Allisonfaye

mellibelly said:


> I’m Meghan’s age, what’s considered Xennial or the Oregon Trail Generation, between Gen X and Millenial. Race and gender was heavily discussed when I was in high school/college in California in the 90’s and early 2000’s. We debated affirmative action in high school, it was a hot button issue, as was access to public schools for children considered “illegal”. I took gender and cultural studies in the University of California system. I was an international relations major (LOL) before switching to architecture, but I continued taking those classes because I found them interesting. Maybe in some parts of the US this wasn’t mainstream education but in culturally diverse California it was always present.



It's there. Believe me. We learned a great deal about specifically what was being taught to our children during Zoom learning. That's why you are seeing school board elections across the country turning very nasty.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> I did not know that! So was princess of Wales not actually Diana’s title?



Yes, but she was not Princess Diana like Charlotte is Princess Charlotte. In Meghan's case, she is Princess Henry, but that title is actually inferior to the Duchess title.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think that was a public thing, because she was so well liked they called her that, but technically she wasn't a princess, she was the duchess of wales.



Yeah, no. Wales is not a dukedom. Her title was Diana, Princess of Wales as opposed to Princess Diana. Charles would be Prince Charles whether he was the Prince of Wales or not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I'm confused with that, since Kate isn't a princess, and neither are any of the women married to a royal.



She's Princess William, she will be Princess of Wales, and her occupation on her kids' birth certificates is Princess of the United Kingdom. The Princess [husband's name] is just inferior to the Duchess title. The Prince / Princess of Wales is on another level.


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> I don’t even buy garlic from China. Why would anyone buy oats from there? There’s an awesome documentary about some farming practices in China that you would literally gag. No thanks but I guess it’s use cheap and potentially unsafe products, use a celebrity and raise the prices 1000%. No thank you.


We do not buy any food from China. We try to buy local as much as we can--we read labels.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> The eldest child of the reigning royal gets the title Prince/princess of Wales - it’s an additional honorary title  like  le dauphin was in France.



The heir apparent does. The Queen was never Princess of WAles as she only was the heir presumptive in case her parents had a son. Had Charles died childless Andrew would have been Prince of Wales. 

Not sure how it is nowadays as the Queen tweeked succession for Charlotte.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have to share this: A German magazine has an article up today claiming that after the Oprah interview Harry is expecting an apology from the palace.

...

Let. That. Sink. In. 

AFTER THE OPRAH INTERVIEW HARRY IS THE ONE EXPECTING AN APOLOGY. 

Apparently the original article with a source close to the Sussexes is from US Weekly, I'll see if I can find it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think that was a public thing, because she was so well liked they called her that, but technically she wasn't a princess, she was the duchess of wales. Like Kate is the Duchess of Cambridge, but not a Princess since she was not born into the royal family. I checked the royal website, and Diana has the title Princess on there which is confusing. They might have given her the title after divorce? I'm confused with that, since Kate isn't a princess, and neither are any of the women married to a royal.



Diana had several titles:
*before* marriage to Charles - Lady Diana Spencer
*during* marriage to Charles -
_Her Royal Highness The Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay, Countess of Carrick, Baroness of Renfrew, Lady of the Isles, Princess of Scotland_
*after* marriage to Charles: she lost the HRH
_Princess of Wales _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Couldn't find the US Weekly piece, but The Express and The Mirror both picked it up.

Prince Harry 'wants apology' from royals over Meghan Markle and 'won't back down' - expert

Honestly, what's that guy smoking.


----------



## Chanbal

Unless one has access to fox nation, it's seems to be impossible to watch the full interview. 










						Piers Morgan slams Meghan and Harry's 17 untruths and exaggerations
					

Piers Morgan on Monday asserted that 17 claims made by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in their bombshell Oprah interview have since been proved to be false, exaggerated or are unverifiable.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Couldn't find the US Weekly piece, but The Express and The Mirror both picked it up.
> 
> Prince Harry 'wants apology' from royals over Meghan Markle and 'won't back down' - expert
> 
> Honestly, what's that guy smoking.



Harry's sanctimonious indignation has given me a good laugh today   Silly boy, he's like an angry toddler having a temper tantrum.


----------



## Allisonfaye

maris.crane said:


> Tucker’s a clown.



How so?


----------



## Aimee3

Just because Harry wants an apology from the royals doesn’t mean he will get one.  Besides, he and MM were the ones blabbing on Oprah, not the royal family.  What could the royals have to apologize for except perhaps for Harry’s lack of brain cells?   He’s really delusional!


----------



## Chanbal

The problem has always been related to the number of restrooms. 

Even before this, pressure had grown between Harry and William after the elder brother had "offended" him by calling Meghan "this girl".

This came when William appeared to offer his support, telling Harry: "Don't feel you need to rush this."

*Tom Quinn, a royal author, speaking to Channel 5's documentary, 'Meghan & Harry: Two Troubled Years' suggested the real animosity came after the couple moved into Nottingham Cottage in Kensington Palace.

Mr Quinn said: "Nottingham Cottage is in the grounds of Kensington Palace, and it's quite small.*

"It's tiny compared to the enormous double apartment that Kate and William have.

"It was being pointed out to them in no uncertain terms that they weren't in the first division, because that place is held by William and Kate.

"Inevitably that led to friction.

*He pinpointed the new residence - a small home - compared to William and Kate's - a large apartment - as having "led to friction".*









						Meghan's issue with Kate and William traced back to old dispute
					

MEGHAN MARKLE's issue with Kate, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William can be traced back to her and Prince Harry's stint at Nottingham Cottage within Kensington Palace, a royal author claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

_Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on their royal titles?_ 

At the present time, the 'yes' votes are close to 100% 









						POLL: Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on royal titles?
					

PIERS Morgan has accused Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of cashing in on their titles to start an independent life in the United States.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## limom

I am not watching those two jacka$$es.
For those who care


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> _Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on their royal titles?_
> 
> At the present time, the 'yes' votes are close to 100%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> POLL: Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on royal titles?
> 
> 
> PIERS Morgan has accused Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of cashing in on their titles to start an independent life in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Added my vote. Why would the 3% not think so??


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> With Piers Morgan having lambasted MM and H on fox today ... how long will we have to wait for MM to release a scathing reply?
> 
> any bets on who will be first... Omid, Gayle or sunshine Sachs statement???
> 
> edit to add: will MM also complain to Fox about Piers? (Like she did to ITV?)


Gayle needs to get out of this mess.....she should think about her credibility as a news person (even if she's not hard news)


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The problem has always been related to the number of restrooms.
> 
> Even before this, pressure had grown between Harry and William after the elder brother had "offended" him by calling Meghan "this girl".
> 
> This came when William appeared to offer his support, telling Harry: "Don't feel you need to rush this."
> 
> *Tom Quinn, a royal author, speaking to Channel 5's documentary, 'Meghan & Harry: Two Troubled Years' suggested the real animosity came after the couple moved into Nottingham Cottage in Kensington Palace.
> 
> Mr Quinn said: "Nottingham Cottage is in the grounds of Kensington Palace, and it's quite small.*
> 
> "It's tiny compared to the enormous double apartment that Kate and William have.
> 
> "It was being pointed out to them in no uncertain terms that they weren't in the first division, because that place is held by William and Kate.
> 
> "Inevitably that led to friction.
> 
> *He pinpointed the new residence - a small home - compared to William and Kate's - a large apartment - as having "led to friction".*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's issue with Kate and William traced back to old dispute
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's issue with Kate, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William can be traced back to her and Prince Harry's stint at Nottingham Cottage within Kensington Palace, a royal author claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Does this tie in to that other story about how MM wanted to be given a wing of Kensington Palace and was most miffed when her wishes were denied? _What Meghan wants..._


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> If it was a discussion about cultural differences, then I'd say it was warranted since, in hindsight, she didn't fit in. The BRF likely has a lot of experience with gold diggers and they scrutinize all the love-at-first-sight cases. In MM's case, she was mutton behaving as lamb and her act-cute behaviour probably wasn't impressing the stiff-upper-lips.
> 
> One of my friends (Chinese) dated a black British man who was previously married to a white woman and had a biracial son. She speculated on what her kids would look like if she married him and how different a Chinese-black biracial child would look compared with a black-white biracial child. Not saying she was the norm, but there can be many reasons why people discuss the colour of a child.


love that mutton behaving as a lamb analagy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Prince Harry And Meghan Markle's First Netflix Series Is On Its Way
					

The Duke of Sussex said he "couldn’t be more excited for the journey ahead" with his new show, called “Heart of Invictus.”




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## LittleStar88

Icyjade said:


> Added my vote. Why would the 3% not think so??



3% must be the stans. Those folks hardcore believe H&M are entitled to their every whim and fancy.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle's First Netflix Series Is On Its Way
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said he "couldn’t be more excited for the journey ahead" with his new show, called “Heart of Invictus.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5046632


agree.....fits their image but not interesting to me as entertainment


----------



## CarryOn2020

Posted lovely article about W&K here by mistake. Moved to their thread.  Apologies


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the article about Nottingham Cottage leading to friction because she had to realize she'd always walk behind Kate:



> "In Meghan's world, if you're determined enough, you can get to the top."
> 
> "But Meghan can't, she can't get to the top whatever she does."



The thing is...before Meghan met Harry she had unsuccessfully tried to reach "the top" for decades, and it just didn't happen for her. She never used her degree, had a supporting role in a cable series, was no big Hollywood star nor known for her outstanding philantrophy. Where does the freaking entitlement come from?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the article about Nottingham Cottage leading to friction because she had to realize she'd always walk behind Kate:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is...before Meghan met Harry she had unsuccessfully tried to reach "the top" for decades, and it just didn't happen for her. She never used her degree, had a supporting role in a cable series, was no big Hollywood star nor known for her outstanding philantrophy. Where does the freaking entitlement come from?


comes from her head?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the article about Nottingham Cottage leading to friction because she had to realized she'd always walk behind Kate:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is...before Meghan met Harry she had unsuccessfully tried to reach "the top" for decades, and it just didn't happen for her. She never used her degree, had a supporting role in a cable series, was no big Hollywood star nor known for her outstanding philantrophy. Where does the freaking entitlement come from?



Just a guess - her mother.
One of the articles posted here quoted TM as saying D struggled with developing a positive relationship with his 2 kids from his first marriage, especially after MM was born. He said it was not what she signed up for.  Whoa. She knew his situation before marrying  him, no?  Sure, it isn’t uncommon to have those issues, still, IMO that is a clue.


----------



## maris.crane

Allisonfaye said:


> How so?



Well, his curriculum vitae speaks for itself. I'm not going to derail this into a political discussion, which is where it would invariably go.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Couldn't find the US Weekly piece, but The Express and The Mirror both picked it up.
> 
> Prince Harry 'wants apology' from royals over Meghan Markle and 'won't back down' - expert
> 
> Honestly, what's that guy smoking.



Two words for Harry, and the second one is ‘off.’


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry and Meghan Markle secure first Netflix show about Invictus Games
					

The programme, Heart of Invictus, will follow competitors around the world training for the Games at The Hague which had been expected to take place in 2020 but were delayed until 2022.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I feel like this takes away from all the good work he did over the years, and just makes it look like he is promoting himself.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Couldn't find the US Weekly piece, but The Express and The Mirror both picked it up.
> 
> Prince Harry 'wants apology' from royals over Meghan Markle and 'won't back down' - expert
> 
> Honestly, what's that guy smoking.


he's acting like an AH


----------



## CarryOn2020

I know he does not write the headlines, still the show should promote these athletes, not him.  
Terrible timing to associate his name with a good program. 









						Harry and Meghan Markle secure first Netflix show about Invictus Games
					

The programme, Heart of Invictus, will follow competitors around the world training for the Games at The Hague which had been expected to take place in 2020 but were delayed until 2022.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

maris.crane said:


> Well, his curriculum vitae speaks for itself. I'm not going to derail this into a political discussion, which is where it would invariably go.


 
Then why make the comment at all?


----------



## maris.crane

Anywho... not worth going back and forth on this one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

x


QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the article about Nottingham Cottage leading to friction because she had to realize she'd always walk behind Kate:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is...before Meghan met Harry she had unsuccessfully tried to reach "the top" for decades, and it just didn't happen for her. She never used her degree, had a supporting role in a cable series, was no big Hollywood star nor known for her outstanding philantrophy. Where does the freaking entitlement come from?


Yeah talk about self-mythologising. I don’t think she was even top-billed on   Suits.  

But it feeds the party line that the crusty Brits were horrified by her can-do American spirit (the same woman who bailed in under two years and  turned down the option of continuing her career - I guess she’d already reached the pinnacle of acting. )

OT but I can’t stand this ‘productive’ attitude that you have to be ‘top’ of everything to achieve something.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> comes from her head?


I read an innuendo into this because my mind is in the gutter 

Yeah I think it’s just her personality and it sounds like she was spoilt as kid which never helps.


----------



## rose60610

Harry's expectation of an apology from HIS family is the ultimate bridge burner. Does he have any friends left from his military days or are they not famous enough for Meghan to want to have any association with them?  Why don't we ever hear of any celebrities visiting H&M covered up in masks? The only people H&M talk to are ones they can make $$ off of. Where are all the A-lister celebrity buddies lining up to bask in Meghan's greatness?


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry and Meghan Markle secure first Netflix show about Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The programme, Heart of Invictus, will follow competitors around the world training for the Games at The Hague which had been expected to take place in 2020 but were delayed until 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like this takes away from all the good work he did over the years, and just makes it look like he is promoting himself.


Completely agree with this. I could be wrong, but I don’t recall him talking about either of his original charities during any of his interviews about his future plans. It’s bizarre he hasn’t tried to plug them to this new US audience and lots of potential donors if he cares so much about them. 
In fact, if I recall they said they had ‘no plan’ once they’d moved to LA.

I did bet if they ever produced anything it’d be a documentary as they are cheap and easy to edit positively. 

Sounds like they just sent a camera crew round to take credit for other people’s hard work.


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> I am not watching those two jacka$$es.
> For those who care



Thanks for posting the video. Piers M basically made his points about the importance of freedom of speech and respecting others' opinions. 

If he ends up in the US, the 'duchess of privacy' may not be pleased.


----------



## Allisonfaye

maris.crane said:


> Anywho... not worth going back and forth on this one.



Yeah, I get it. Throw out comments like those and then when anyone calls you on it, you say not worth it. My sister does the same thing. Ironic that she is a capitalism hater.


----------



## poopsie

kemilia said:


> We do not buy any food from China. We try to buy local as much as we can--*we read labels.*



LOL I went to the .99 Store and bought a shedload of those little hand held magnifying glasses and put one in each purse, the car etc. Being vegan I read every word. It's gotten better with the "contains milk eggs" at the bottom of the ingredient list but I also look at sugar and sodium verrrrrry carefully.


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Couldn't find the US Weekly piece, but The Express and The Mirror both picked it up.
> 
> Prince Harry 'wants apology' from royals over Meghan Markle and 'won't back down' - expert
> 
> Honestly, what's that guy smoking.



Let’s hope he holds his breath while waiting for that apology !!!! He is a disgrace


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Let’s hope he holds his breath while waiting for that apology !!!! He is a disgrace



Don't you love how the people who demand apologies are always the ones everyone else is mad at? He and Meghan are so full of self-righteousness at this point they cannot see themselves objectively. They don't understand how they made mistakes and have overstepped in their demands. I think it is part of Meghan's plan to finally sever whatever ties Harry has left with his relatives.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Completely agree with this. I could be wrong, but I don’t recall him talking about either of his original charities during any of his interviews about his future plans. It’s bizarre he hasn’t tried to plug them to this new US audience and lots of potential donors if he cares so much about them.
> In fact, if I recall they said they had ‘no plan’ once they’d moved to LA.
> 
> I did bet if they ever produced anything it’d be a documentary as they are cheap and easy to edit positively.
> 
> Sounds like they just sent a camera crew round to take credit for other people’s hard work.



He is in the USA now. 
We have our own wounded veterans in need of serious care and financial assistance as well as some fun times. 
‘Good to know H&M’s loyalties are with the UK.


----------



## Katel




----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is in the USA now.
> We have our own wounded veterans in need of serious care and financial assistance as well as some fun times.
> ‘Good to know H&M’s loyalties are with the UK.


Yes, this is very true.  I would imagine someone with his resources who was passionate about veteran rehabilitation might want to team up with an American vet charity or even set up a US chapter of invictus but I doubt that’ll happen.

Cynical me doesn’t think his heart is in the UK. I think the reality is he’s got a skilled team of people back in the palace’s employ who have it written into their contracts that they run invictus and stay quiet as H takes credit for it and he’s happy to carry on claiming it as his own though he probably has very little to do with any of it.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is in the USA now.
> We have our own wounded veterans in need of serious care and financial assistance as well as some fun times.
> ‘Good to know H&M’s loyalties are with the UK.



Harry and Meghan promised inspirational content when they signed with Netflix. The Invictus Games documentary is exactly what I expected. It makes Netflix look caring by putting shows like that on while they rake in billions on their, um, less educational programming.


----------



## csshopper

Icyjade said:


> Added my vote. Why would the 3% not think so??


Maybe because they are the people out of work, dodging the Virus, or suffering from Covid, with no heat and little food, children without proper nutrition or clothing and Meghan and Harry are on another planet and completely off their radar? Not being snarky, but for many people these two are totally irrelevant.


----------



## Aimee3

I was surprised to hear during that interview that MM claims she gave up everything (her life, her career, etc) for Harry and then we find out that the queen was fine with MM continuing to be an “actress”!  Sounds like MM knew her career wasn’t really going all that great and wasn’t all that much to give up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Allisonfaye said:


> Yeah, I get it. Throw out comments like those and then when anyone calls you on it, you say not worth it. My sister does the same thing. Ironic that she is a capitalism hater.


I personally think he’s cute . . . and I’m not apologizing. So there. I’m agreeing with you BTW.


----------



## elvisfan4life

I was bored with the gruesome twosome a long time ago


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Completely agree with this. I could be wrong, but I don’t recall him talking about either of his original charities during any of his interviews about his future plans. It’s bizarre he hasn’t tried to plug them to this new US audience and lots of potential donors if he cares so much about them.
> In fact, if I recall they said they had ‘no plan’ once they’d moved to LA.
> 
> I did bet if they ever produced anything it’d be a documentary as they are cheap and easy to edit positively.
> 
> Sounds like they just sent a camera crew round to take credit for other people’s hard work.


This's the group who's big function he dissed so he and Meeeeegan could meet up with a Disney exec and ask for work for her. Maybe he thinks will make them like him again.....


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> *Harry and Meghan Markle secure first Netflix show about Invictus Games*
> 
> *I feel like this takes away from all the good work he did over the years, and just makes it look like he is promoting himself.*
> 
> Completely agree with this. I could be wrong, but I don’t recall him talking about either of his original charities during any of his interviews about his future plans.
> *Sounds like they just sent a camera crew round to take credit for other people’s hard work.*



DH will be looking for a credit then as he worked with JCMH on the Games.

If not, he'll be expecting a public apology .


----------



## 1LV

Aimee3 said:


> I was surprised to hear during that interview that MM claims she gave up everything (her life, her career, etc) for Harry and then we find out that the queen was fine with MM continuing to be an “actress”!  Sounds like MM knew her career wasn’t really going all that great and wasn’t all that much to give up.


I’m wondering if MM wasn‘t PO’d that she wasn’t considered above it all in spite of marrying a prince, and never expected to be given the green light to continue with her - ahem - career.  Maybe the queen called her bluff.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is in the USA now.
> We have our own wounded veterans in need of serious care and financial assistance as well as some fun times.
> ‘Good to know H&M’s loyalties are with the UK.



Hypocrisy and irony has no bounds as far as these two go. 

H&M have no loyalty to anyone but themselves


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the article about Nottingham Cottage leading to friction because she had to realize she'd always walk behind Kate:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is...before Meghan met Harry she had unsuccessfully tried to reach "the top" for decades, and it just didn't happen for her. She never used her degree, had a supporting role in a cable series, was no big Hollywood star nor known for her outstanding philantrophy. Where does the freaking entitlement come from?


My guess MM since young wanted more and along the way she was able to achieve more from her father/his connections, prior marriage, her acting jobs (although didn't get that far before retiring but that was because she married a Prince). In a short period she achieved a lot. Not a fan of H anymore but he was world known and a catch for her (although she would have wanted Prince William if he wasn't already married ... status, age and future King. Who knows she may have targeted Prince Charles if he was available). But Harry is the next best thing for MM.  Look at all the perks she had by marrying him.  She wouldn't have gotten it without him. I bet she makes him call for favors because when he says 'this is Harry or Prince Harry' there's a better chance the victim (oh sorry)/friend would come through for them. I have a feeling she nagged at Harry about the tiny cottage at Kensington Palace was not fair since W&K had a huge place to live and sent H to do the talking just like Megxit, otherwise more stressful talks with him. This will be his life until he can't take it any more ... wonder how long that will take if ever?

I also wonder if OW & GK are getting any pressure from fans and non-fans.  If there were, would O & G slowly back off from M&H?

OMGOSH I can't believe my attitude towards M&H have changed since started reading about them.  So bad bad of me ...


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> DH will be looking for a credit then as he worked with JCMH on the Games.
> 
> If not, he'll be expecting a public apology .



If he's like his wife, the show will be presented as if Harry created and did all the work for the Games by himself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> My guess MM since young wanted more and along the way she was able to achieve more from her father/his connections, prior marriage, her acting jobs (although didn't get that far before retiring but that was because she married a Prince). In a short period she achieved a lot. Not a fan of H anymore but he was world known and a catch for her (although she would have wanted Prince William if he wasn't already married ... status, age and future King. Who knows she may have targeted Prince Charles if he was available). But Harry is the next best thing for MM.  Look at all the perks she had by marrying him.  She wouldn't have gotten it without him. I bet she makes him call for favors because when he says 'this is Harry or Prince Harry' there's a better chance the victim (oh sorry)/friend would come through for them. I have a feeling she nagged at Harry about the tiny cottage at Kensington Palace was not fair since W&K had a huge place to live and sent H to do the talking just like Megxit, otherwise more stressful talks with him. This will be his life until he can't take it any more ... wonder how long that will take if ever?
> 
> I also wonder if OW & GK are getting any pressure from fans and non-fans.  If there were, would O & G slowly back off from M&H?
> 
> OMGOSH I can't believe my attitude towards M&H have changed since started reading about them.  So bad bad of me ...



The truth, the one and only truth,  always wins.
Welcome!


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> My guess *MM since young wanted more *and along the way she was able to achieve more from her father/his connections, prior marriage, her acting jobs (although didn't get that far before retiring but that was because she married a Prince). In a short period she achieved a lot. Not a fan of H anymore but he was world known and a catch for her (although she would have wanted Prince William if he wasn't already married ... status, age and future King. Who knows she may have targeted Prince Charles if he was available). But Harry is the next best thing for MM.  Look at all the perks she had by marrying him.  She wouldn't have gotten it without him. I bet she makes him call for favors because when he says 'this is Harry or Prince Harry' there's a better chance the victim (oh sorry)/friend would come through for them. I have a feeling she nagged at Harry about the tiny cottage at Kensington Palace was not fair since W&K had a huge place to live and sent H to do the talking just like Megxit, otherwise more stressful talks with him. This will be his life until he can't take it any more ... wonder how long that will take if ever?
> 
> I also wonder if OW & GK are getting any pressure from fans and non-fans.  If there were, would O & G slowly back off from M&H?
> 
> OMGOSH I can't believe my attitude towards M&H have changed since started reading about them.  So bad bad of me ...



Of course she did. She always wants more. Didn't you see the movie?


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> My guess MM since young wanted more and along the way she was able to achieve more from her father/his connections, prior marriage, her acting jobs (although didn't get that far before retiring but that was because she married a Prince). In a short period she achieved a lot. Not a fan of H anymore but he was world known and a catch for her (although she would have wanted Prince William if he wasn't already married ... status, age and future King. Who knows she may have targeted Prince Charles if he was available). But Harry is the next best thing for MM.  Look at all the perks she had by marrying him.  She wouldn't have gotten it without him. I bet she makes him call for favors because when he says 'this is Harry or Prince Harry' there's a better chance the victim (oh sorry)/friend would come through for them. I have a feeling she nagged at Harry about the tiny cottage at Kensington Palace was not fair since W&K had a huge place to live and sent H to do the talking just like Megxit, otherwise more stressful talks with him. This will be his life until he can't take it any more ... wonder how long that will take if ever?
> 
> I also wonder if OW & GK are getting any pressure from fans and non-fans.  If there were, would O & G slowly back off from M&H?
> 
> OMGOSH I can't believe my attitude towards M&H have changed since started reading about them.  So bad bad of me ...



You mean basically she's nuts, but pulled-off one narcissistic (auto-correct kept changing to 'narcotic' LOL) fantasy so now she actually thinks she's Devine. 

 she's nuts.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> If he's like his wife, the show will be presented as if Harry created and did all the work for the Games by himself.



I'm sure it will, no doubt about it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Of course she did. She always wants more. Didn't you see the movie?
> 
> View attachment 5047023



 No I didn't.   Maybe I should go watch it.   Thanks!


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> No I didn't.  Maybe I should go watch it.   Thanks!



Oh, everyone should see The Little Mermaid. Meghan compares herself to Ariel but I think those of us here know she's actually Ursula/Vanessa.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> Yeah, I get it. Throw out comments like those and then when anyone calls you on it, you say not worth it. My sister does the same thing. Ironic that she is a capitalism hater.


May I suggest family therapy.


Lodpah said:


> I personally think he’s cute . . . and I’m not apologizing. So there. I’m agreeing with you BTW.


Come on now, cute, cute?
Come to my house and I will introduce you to my gigantic 4K tv. That man is not cute. He looks like any overgrown frat boy.
I see tens of them, food shopping everyday.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> May I suggest family therapy.
> 
> Come on now, cute, cute?
> Come to my house and I will introduce you to my gigantic 4K tv. That man is not cute. He looks like any overgrown frat boy.
> I see tens of them, food shopping everyday.


Girl, no one tells me who I think is cute or who I think is attractive. I think he’s good looking. I also think George Clooney is a babe. I like them neat and durable looking. So yeah beauty is in the eye of the beholder lol. Forgot Eddie Van Halen was a total babe. Forgot Aviici. He was a dream boat.


----------



## Annawakes

Lodpah said:


> I like them neat and durable looking. So yeah beauty is in the eye of the beholder lol.


I agree.  BTW, what do you mean by “durable” looking?


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes, this is very true.  I would imagine someone with his resources who was passionate about veteran rehabilitation might want to team up with an American vet charity or even set up a US chapter of invictus but I doubt that’ll happen.
> 
> Cynical me doesn’t think his heart is in the UK. I think the reality is he’s got a skilled team of people back in the palace’s employ who have it written into their contracts that they run invictus and stay quiet as H takes credit for it and he’s happy to carry on claiming it as his own though he probably has very little to do with any of it.


seems to me as much as M thinks of herself, they know (or their advisors know) the real value is in Harry's royalty, hence the first Netflix production is about something related to him, not her


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> DH will be looking for a credit then as he worked with JCMH on the Games.
> 
> If not, he'll be expecting a public apology .


That’s really interesting! Are you allowed to say what he did?


Aimee3 said:


> I was surprised to hear during that interview that MM claims she gave up everything (her life, her career, etc) for Harry and then we find out that the queen was fine with MM continuing to be an “actress”!  Sounds like MM knew her career wasn’t really going all that great and wasn’t all that much to give up.


We all know that the 40s are the wilderness years for a lot of looks-based actresses. I think she was happy to find an excuse to bow out. Also she loves the drama that she was forced to quit her passion like Grace Kelly was.

She wouldn’t have been the first working actress in the family either.
Sophia Winkleman was in a British sitcom called peep show and other shows while married to the 51st in line (so admittedly not the inner circle but still there’s a precedent.)


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Girl, no one tells me who I think is cute or who I think is attractive. I think he’s good looking. I also think George Clooney is a babe. I like them neat and durable looking. So yeah beauty is in the eye of the beholder lol. Forgot Eddie Van Halen was a total babe. Forgot Aviici. He was a dream boat.


I'm having trouble keeping up....if you think Harry is cute, I don't agree but I do agree on Clooney


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I'm having trouble keeping up....if you think Harry is cute, I don't agree but I do agree on Clooney


No I don’t think Harry is cute. I get a vibe of bad hygiene from him. He’s a mess and reminds me of a man who needs a teat to cling too. I also wanted to add that I’m repulsed by Harry because you can clearly see he’s been totally emasculated by his wife. He has no balls. I mean the mere thought of him makes me want to puke Linda Blair vomit as he comes across as a grown man who’s actually an infant.


----------



## Lodpah

Annawakes said:


> I agree.  BTW, what do you mean by “durable” looking?


Lol they look solid, can’t explain it! EVH a total hottie with confidence and that smile.


----------



## Jayne1

Katel said:


>



She's the best.  Many have started copying her, but no one is as good.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> seems to me as much as M thinks of herself, they know (or their advisors know) the real value is in Harry's royalty, hence the first Netflix production is about something related to him, not her


If I’m being really cynical, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were already shooting an invictus games documentary while he was still a working royal to promote the golden couple .
Then COVID and the flight from Frogmore happened and they just reshot a bit and repackaged it for the new ‘archewell’ label as he probably has the rights to it.
Problem is, it sounds like a really tedious show so I’m not sure I want to see if I’m right


----------



## LittleStar88

elvisfan4life said:


> I was bored with the gruesome twosome a long time ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5046968



Well, if they had just shuffled off into a life of privacy like they promised (threatened) to do, then they wouldn't have to worry about this.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> If I’m being really cynical, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were already shooting an invictus games documentary while he was still a working royal to promote the golden couple .
> Then COVID and the flight from Frogmore happened and they just reshot a bit and repackaged it for the new ‘archewell’ label as he probably has the rights to it.
> Problem is, it sounds like a really tedious show so I’m not sure I want to see if I’m right



For all we know 95% of Harry's part in the show is off-screen narration. If that's the case he could literally phone it in. Meghan must be jealous that Harry is the one who is getting voiceover work.


----------



## Jktgal

Thanks @Katel and @lanasyogamama, I've been waiting for a meggie markle and she delivered. Wow she's got a lovely singing voice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> This's the group who's big function he dissed so he and Meeeeegan could meet up with a Disney exec and ask for work for her. Maybe he thinks will make them like him again.....



Is it? I thought that was a veteran's event for the Royal Marines. You know, the one he was Captain General of.


----------



## Jayne1

I watch Netflix for modern prestige crime dramas, preferably international (the UK has some really good ones) or a great comedy (no more Derry Girls?_)_ but I'm not tuning in to watch some dry, politically correct documentary that M&H will be forced to produce.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I watch Netflix for modern prestige crime dramas, preferably international (the UK has some really good ones) or a great comedy (no more Derry Girls?_)_ but I'm not tuning in to watch some dry, politically correct documentary that M&H will be forced to produce.


I can't really see anyone watching this other than their stans


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Her admission of being suicidal and not getting help from her aides or her hubby is quite shocking....I wish she had spoke more about this, and that Oprah asked Harry why he didn't get his wife help.



Because the kind of suicidal thoughts she had were the ones that could be solved with cuddles...


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Girl, no one tells me who I think is cute or who I think is attractive. I think he’s good looking. I also think George Clooney is a babe. I like them neat and durable looking. So yeah beauty is in the eye of the beholder lol. Forgot Eddie Van Halen was a total babe. Forgot Aviici. He was a dream boat.


Ok then
You would do well in my neck of the wood. Many men look like him.
In fact, most men look like him.
I don’t see it. But hey, if you like him, I love it.


----------



## Lodpah

I said I think he’s cute no





limom said:


> Ok then
> You would do well in my neck of the wood. Many men look like him.
> In fact, most men look like him.
> I don’t see it. But hey, if you like him, I love it.



I said I think he’s cute not necessarily like him. Plus the cameras add weight so he probably looks better in person


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> I said I think he’s cute no
> 
> I said I think he’s cute not necessarily like him. Plus the cameras add weight so he probably looks better in person


Solid, durable?
I swear the neighborhood landscaper is a doppelgänger for Carson. Except with a great body.

You sure?


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s really interesting! Are you allowed to say what he did?
> 
> We all know that the 40s are the wilderness years for a lot of looks-based actresses. I think she was happy to find an excuse to bow out. Also she loves the drama that she was forced to quit her passion like Grace Kelly was.
> 
> She wouldn’t have been the first working actress in the family either.
> Sophia Winkleman was in a British sitcom called peep show and other shows while married to the 51st in line (so admittedly not the inner circle but still there’s a precedent.)


Grace Kelly was a Big Star.....Meghan was a D-list (or Z list) actress....didn't give up much of anything really.  Think about it - Grace was world famous (and had lots of A-list lovers before the prince).  Meghan was a supporting actress on a basic cable TV show.  Most people never heard of her until she landed H.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Piers Morgan says he's had messages from Royal Family
					

Piers Morgan has revealed that he had messages on behalf of members of the Royal Family in the wake of Harry and Meghan's Oprah Winfrey interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

Dehydrated!


----------



## CarryOn2020

For the record:


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it? I thought that was a veteran's event for the Royal Marines. You know, the one he was Captain General of.


Queen,   Yes, you're  absolutely right it was the Royal Marines. Thanks for clarifying.

I confused it with the incident described in this article, which interestingly makes it seem clear that Harry is using his Netflix documentary to mend some fences.

*Source is News Australia, September 10, 2020:*

"Now, for the first time ever, dark clouds have been cast over the royal’s involvement with the charity, with news breaking over the weekend that a celebrity-stuffed Invictus Games fundraiser slated to be held in LA next year and set to be broadcast on Amazon Prime, had “been cancelled abruptly after their Netflix deal”.

According to the Sunday Times: “Officials at the foundation, of which Harry is patron, were “stunned” after a lawyer for the Sussexes contacted them shortly before the Netflix deal was announced last week, pulling the plug on the project, citing a “conflict” over a planned deal with a rival streaming service.

A source involved in the year-long planning told the paper: “It’s very bad form and everyone at Invictus is gutted. Harry said yes to doing this last year and everything was still moving forwards until a few weeks ago.

“This was going to be a big moment for Invictus where the pot is pretty empty, and it has left them in the lurch. Harry needs to pull his finger out to find another way to raise funds for them.”


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s really interesting! Are you allowed to say what he did?



Broadcasting side


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> No I don’t think Harry is cute. I get a vibe of bad hygiene from him. He’s a mess and reminds me of a man who needs a teat to cling too. I also wanted to add that I’m repulsed by Harry because you can clearly see he’s been totally emasculated by his wife. He has no balls. I mean the mere thought of him makes me want to puke Linda Blair vomit as he comes across as a grown man who’s actually an infant.


I think H is a case of arrested development - so it was easy for her to take his balls


----------



## CarryOn2020

Eeeeek! 31%. Can they recover?
Full story is behind a paywall, but here’s the yahoo part:









						Netflix Lost 31% of Market Share in the Last Year as Streaming Rivals Gained Ground | Charts
					

After a year in which streaming became even more important to millions of Americans, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic, Netflix still dominates the streaming universe in the U.S. But new data shared by Ampere Analysis with TheWrap shows that while Netflix holds 20% of the U.S. streaming market...




					www.yahoo.com
				



After a year in which streaming became even more important to millions of Americans, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic, Netflix still dominates the streaming universe in the U.S. But new data shared by Ampere Analysis with TheWrap shows that while Netflix holds 20% of the U.S. streaming market, its dominance over the rest of the streaming landscape has shrunk from 29% — a drop of nearly one third– as more services enter the market. Here’s a snapshot of the top streaming services in the U.S. and how their market share stacks up compared to the same time last year: Also Read: Inside Hollywood's Rush to Cash in on NFTs A few points worth mentioning: • Netflix’s U.S. market share has taken a hit in the last year — even as it added a company-record 36.58 million new accounts globally in 2020. Netflix’s U.S. market share has been sliced from 29% to 20% since the start of 2020; that’s a 31% drop in the last year. • In January, Netflix reported that it had 73.94 million subscribers in both the U.S. and Canada (Netflix always reports the two markets together); an estimated 7 million of those subscribers come from north of...

Read original story Netflix Lost 31% of Market Share in the Last Year as Streaming Rivals Gained Ground | Charts At TheWrap


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> I'm having trouble keeping up....if you think Harry is cute, I don't agree but I do agree on Clooney



I think she was referring to Tucker.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I think H is a case of arrested development - so it was easy for her to take his balls


Henceforth I shall refer to him as Prince Harry the Emasculated. She probably fired his ball cleaners so that she could take it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> Dehydrated!


All you gotta do is hydrate and I heard lemonade is good. Just don’t pee in the woods cause the crocodiles might bite you.


----------



## Lodpah

Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.
> [/QUOTE
> Please don’t go there. But no as far as I’m concerned.


----------



## lalame

Is Invictus Games very well-known? It wasn't on my radar at all so I'm surprised Netflix would want to do a documentary on it. Not that I don't think it's a noble cause (I actually don't even know much about it).


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Is Invictus Games very well-known? It wasn't on my radar at all so I'm surprised Netflix would want to do a documentary on it. Not that I don't think it's a noble cause (I actually don't even know much about it).



Netflix has a contract with H&M to take something. Who knows what other ideas they may have pitched to Netflix that were rejected?


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> _Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on their royal titles?_
> 
> At the present time, the 'yes' votes are close to 100%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> POLL: Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on royal titles?
> 
> 
> PIERS Morgan has accused Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of cashing in on their titles to start an independent life in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I can't even believe this is a serious question.

Do the Kardashians love fame? Does Johnny Depp need substance abuse counseling? Do you agree Jay Z has a LOT of money?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.



Maybe it’s the job, maybe it’s the family, maybe it’s the clothes, but QE’s sons have not aged well.
William and Harry look to be following that same path. IMO Harry looks too scruffy and untidy. William was adorable as a teen, lost his cuteness in his late 20s, now is getting it back. He wears his clothes well, doesn’t complain, speaks with authority.  Hazzie, not so much.

ETA: just look at the latest post in the W&K thread. W, the heartthrob, has returned


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> seems to me as much as M thinks of herself, they know (or their advisors know) the real value is in Harry's royalty, hence the first Netflix production is about something related to him, not her


Also, self-defense and market testing move. I only see Harry enthusing about it. If it bombs, she can easily distance herself.



Jktgal said:


> Because the kind of suicidal thoughts she had were the ones that could be solved with cuddles...


Reminds me of my colleagues who are moaning, "I'm going to die if I don't get a holiday soon."



Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.


When he was a youngster riding on that long-forgotten bike.


----------



## limom

They are tall and royal


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe it’s the job, maybe it’s the family, maybe it’s the clothes, but QE’s sons have not aged well.
> William and Harry look to be following that same path. IMO Harry looks too scruffy and untidy. William was adorable as a teen, lost his cuteness in his late 20s, now is getting it back. He wears his clothes well, doesn’t complain, speaks with authority.  Hazzie, not so much.
> 
> ETA: just look at the latest post in the W&K thread. W, the heartthrob, has returned


Just checked it out, must visit there more often, they are like a breath of fresh air versus the Duke and Duchess of Sullen.


----------



## lalame

Purely on looks, I rate Harry and Wills both about a 7 on the attractiveness scale.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> Purely on looks, I rate Harry and Wills both about a 7 on the attractiveness scale.


Will is slightly better looking than Harry, imo..


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Purely on looks, I rate Harry and Wills both about a 7 on the attractiveness scale.



Hazzie = 4 or 5, bad attitude, scruffy hair and beard, sloppy posture, wrinkled clothes, his shoes!!, etc.
William = 8+, possible 9.  Once he is crowned King of the realm, he may be a 10. Too soon to tell.


----------



## lalame

9?!?!? Okay I had a major crush on him in my younger years but 9 is probably the highest he's ever been rated in his life lol.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> 9?!?!? Okay I had a major crush on him in my younger years but 9 is probably the highest he's ever been rated in his life lol.



I was feeling generous. A solid 8, then.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> Will is slightly better looking than Harry, imo..



To be fair it's probably more like Harry 7, Wills 7.5. This is my state of mind pre-Megxit so it's as pure as can be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Aimee3 said:


> I was surprised to hear during that interview that MM claims she gave up everything (her life, her career, etc) for Harry and then we find out that the queen was fine with MM continuing to be an “actress”!  Sounds like MM knew her career wasn’t really going all that great and wasn’t all that much to give up.



I agree with this. She was given the option to continue working and it was recommended that she do so (this is what Harry said someone in the palace recommended). I think Prince Charles and the Queen really wanted a 'slimed' down working royal family. This may be due to financial reasons. Princess Eugiene and Princess Beatrice both hold full time jobs and don't have any royal  income/stipend. Their parents wanted them to have official royal duties but they were told no. Realistically if you're not in line to the throne you really should be working and maybe supporting the family when needed. I think they both wanted a easy life, attending functions and charity events and being paid for it.


----------



## lalame

^ this was a huge oversight by Harry to admit that - or actually truthful of him for once. It was a GLARING contradiction to me too.


----------



## csshopper

Also, the BRF may have sensed there could be trouble ahead with her and thought if she were still working she might have less time to work on "modernizing" the Monarchy. Which is what she and Harry announced early on they intended to do. It was at that point, I said to myself, 1.who in the H--- do they think they are to decide they need to change the Monarchy  and 2. Oh, Oh, this is not going to go well.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Also, the BRF may have sensed there could be trouble ahead with her and thought if she were still working she might have less time to work on "modernizing" the Monarchy. Which is what she and Harry announced early on they intended to do. It was at that point, I said to myself, 1.who in the H--- do they think they are to decide they need to change the Monarchy  and 2. Oh, Oh, this is not going to go well.


Their idea of "modernisation" was probably along the lines of making it more Hollywood. She may have harboured dreams of becoming the power behind the throne.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

xincinsin said:


> Their idea of "modernisation" was probably along the lines of making it more Hollywood. She may have harboured dreams of becoming the power behind the throne.



I think the idea of modernizing or reforming the Royal family is an oxymoron. How can something so archaic, which profited off the death and stealing from indigenous people become 'modern'. The Americans didn't want to be ruled by a monarchy, they believed all men are borns equal. The concept of class and monarchy really goes against the American way of life.


----------



## needlv

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think the idea of modernizing or reforming the Royal family is an oxymoron. How can something so archaic, which profited off the death and stealing from indigenous people become 'modern'. The Americans didn't want to be ruled by a monarchy, they believed all men are borns equal. The concept of class and monarchy really goes against this concept.


Correct - so by modernising, MM wanted to remove the hierarchy - no more “W&K go first”, she and H getting same $$ and treatment as W &K - same size houses and number of staff etc.  equal footing on choice what charities / issues to support and no need to curtsey to anyone!!

For her, it’s all about $$.  And when finding out the money is in family trusts that gold diggers can’t access, she schemed with her American advisors ( lawyer, agent, PR etc) to merch the titles and use the name “Sussex Royal” on everything from kids clothes to tea towels whilst keeping all the profits (and maybe slicing a little off to her “foundation”)


----------



## needlv

GMB gets markled!!!








						Good Morning Britain drops below a million viewers as ratings plummet
					

GOOD Morning Britain has lost more than one million viewers since Piers Morgan sensationally quit. The ITV programme sunk to 0.86m and even then that was in the last five minutes as it crossed over…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bisousx

needlv said:


> Correct - so by modernising, MM wanted to remove the hierarchy - no more “W&K go first”, she and H getting same $$ and treatment as W &K - same size houses and number of staff etc.  equal footing on choice what charities / issues to support and no need to curtsey to anyone!!
> 
> For her, it’s all about $$.  *And when finding out the money is in family trusts that gold diggers can’t access*, she schemed with her American advisors ( lawyer, agent, PR etc) to merch the titles and use the name “Sussex Royal” on everything from kids clothes to tea towels whilst keeping all the profits (and maybe slicing a little off to her “foundation”)



Imagine a livid MM when she found out auntie Anne raised the beneficiary age to 45. Thus realizing she’d have endure her sad sap of a husband _that much longer _to reach the pot of gold


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.


No! Although I think most babies/toddlers are cute, there are too many pics of Harry with his tongue sticking out to like them. Presumably with good parenting one eventually outgrows their childish foolishness, but although he physically aged, he never matured. During his teen and early adult years, it seemed as if he was trying to make William appear as silly, inane and stupid as he was himself. IMO, he is so jealous of William that I find it impossible see anything 'cute' about him.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Correct - so by modernising, MM wanted to remove the hierarchy - no more “W&K go first”, she and H getting same $$ and treatment as W &K - same size houses and number of staff etc.  equal footing on choice what charities / issues to support and no need to curtsey to anyone!!
> 
> For her, it’s all about $$.  And when finding out the money is in family trusts that gold diggers can’t access, she schemed with her American advisors ( lawyer, agent, PR etc) to merch the titles and use the name “Sussex Royal” on everything from kids clothes to tea towels whilst keeping all the profits (and maybe slicing a little off to her “foundation”)


Did she monetize her wedding photos? I remember seeing in one of the articles posted here that she pledged the profits from the photos to a charity. She owns the copyright? I thought it would belong to the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> For the record:
> View attachment 5047160


Whoever made that list was very generous to MM. My disproven list would have been bigger. There are plenty of pictures showing MM walking in London, traveling abroad. According to a Charles's friend, there are bank statements showing wire transfers to the US. Who believes that MM didn't do a thorough research on the BRF? There is a picture of her in front of Buckingham Palace, and friends stating that she read books about Diana...


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.


I don't!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I was feeling generous. A solid 8, then.


Keep the 9, I'm with you!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> ^ this was a huge oversight by Harry to admit that - or actually truthful of him for once. It was a GLARING contradiction to me too.


 He never had any intention to say that the BRF encouraged MM to keep her job. It doesn't support her claims! When he realized, the toothpaste was already out of the tube.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> Did she monetize her wedding photos? I remember seeing in one of the articles posted here that she pledged the profits from the photos to a charity. She owns the copyright? I thought it would belong to the BRF.



I can’t recall her monetising that but she did monetise other things through Instagram... was it called Meghans Mirror or something?  She would merch out jewellery that she was wearing and wear things from her “friends” etc.  

I would be ok with her doing that if she were married to anyone else but royalty.  That’s what celebs do - pimp out products, get free stuff etc.  but she was supposed to be a ROYAL not a celeb...  

Honestly the Queen knows she is using those titles to get $$ now.  The ethics around this are complicated... and the Queen should remove the titles and ask parliament for removal of H in the line of succession.  Or change the rules like Sweden did - a much slimmer monarchy, no one can be in the line of succession unless educated in Sweden etc.  limit who gets titles etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

I used to think he was cute, but now knowing that he’s such a whiney, entitled headcase...NOPE.


----------



## bisousx

Harry was hot (to me) in his wild days. He looked like a naughty guy you’d take for a spin after meeting randomly in Vegas and then never speak to again. Or so I’ve read about, somewhere in a book  I’m  disappointed he turned out to be mopey and pathetic.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> Harry was hot (to me) in his wild days. He looked like a naughty guy you’d take for a spin after meeting randomly in Vegas and then never speak to again. Or so I’ve read about, somewhere in a book  I’m  disappointed he turned out to be mopey and pathetic.



Lol, speaking from experience??? That was too specific.


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> Lol, speaking from experience??? That was too specific.



Nah, but if it ever happened, I would’ve spilled all of the tea already! #TPFexclusive #hotoffthepress


----------



## Chanbal

"Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.

*Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."









						Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
					

MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5047288
> 
> "Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.
> 
> *Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
> 
> 
> MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I once read a book called Statistics Can Lie. This is a great example. Only the bits that can be hyped are announced. I want to know if 23% favoured Harry and 22% favoured William, whom did the other 55% favour? MM?


----------



## lalame

I also read a statistic.... brains don't fully develop until age 25.  

Okay, not so much a statistic as a fact haha


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> I once read a book called Statistics Can Lie. This is a great example. Only the bits that can be hyped are announced. I want to know if 23% favoured Harry and 22% favoured William, whom did the other 55% favour? MM?



There are three kinds of lies: lies........damned lies.........and STATISTICS


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> Grace Kelly was a Big Star.....Meghan was a D-list (or Z list) actress....didn't give up much of anything really.  Think about it - Grace was world famous (and had lots of A-list lovers before the prince).  Meghan was a supporting actress on a basic cable TV show.  Most people never heard of her until she landed H.


Yes what I mean is that her PR just loves to invite the comparison: the idea she’s a talented American girl like Grace who was crushed and deprived under the stuffy royal system.
I don’t think it works at all because Gk was a star, Hitchcock’s muse, an Oscar winner and an outstanding natural beauty whereas MM can’t play a 1 dimensional love interest on cable and she’s had too much bad surgery IMHO. 
I don’t think LA lacks actors of MM’s calibre.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eeeeek! 31%. Can they recover?
> Full story is behind a paywall, but here’s the yahoo part:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Lost 31% of Market Share in the Last Year as Streaming Rivals Gained Ground | Charts
> 
> 
> After a year in which streaming became even more important to millions of Americans, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic, Netflix still dominates the streaming universe in the U.S. But new data shared by Ampere Analysis with TheWrap shows that while Netflix holds 20% of the U.S. streaming market...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a year in which streaming became even more important to millions of Americans, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic, Netflix still dominates the streaming universe in the U.S. But new data shared by Ampere Analysis with TheWrap shows that while Netflix holds 20% of the U.S. streaming market, its dominance over the rest of the streaming landscape has shrunk from 29% — a drop of nearly one third– as more services enter the market. Here’s a snapshot of the top streaming services in the U.S. and how their market share stacks up compared to the same time last year: Also Read: Inside Hollywood's Rush to Cash in on NFTs A few points worth mentioning: • Netflix’s U.S. market share has taken a hit in the last year — even as it added a company-record 36.58 million new accounts globally in 2020. Netflix’s U.S. market share has been sliced from 29% to 20% since the start of 2020; that’s a 31% drop in the last year. • In January, Netflix reported that it had 73.94 million subscribers in both the U.S. and Canada (Netflix always reports the two markets together); an estimated 7 million of those subscribers come from north of...
> 
> Read original story Netflix Lost 31% of Market Share in the Last Year as Streaming Rivals Gained Ground | Charts At TheWrap


Wow. That’s really bad in a year when everyone was at home  watching TV.
don’t worry guys that one documentary will save the day.


csshopper said:


> Queen,   Yes, you're  absolutely right it was the Royal Marines. Thanks for clarifying.
> 
> I confused it with the incident described in this article, which interestingly makes it seem clear that Harry is using his Netflix documentary to mend some fences.
> 
> *Source is News Australia, September 10, 2020:*
> 
> "Now, for the first time ever, dark clouds have been cast over the royal’s involvement with the charity, with news breaking over the weekend that a celebrity-stuffed Invictus Games fundraiser slated to be held in LA next year and set to be broadcast on Amazon Prime, had “been cancelled abruptly after their Netflix deal”.
> 
> According to the Sunday Times: “Officials at the foundation, of which Harry is patron, were “stunned” after a lawyer for the Sussexes contacted them shortly before the Netflix deal was announced last week, pulling the plug on the project, citing a “conflict” over a planned deal with a rival streaming service.
> 
> A source involved in the year-long planning told the paper: “It’s very bad form and everyone at Invictus is gutted. Harry said yes to doing this last year and everything was still moving forwards until a few weeks ago.
> 
> “This was going to be a big moment for Invictus where the pot is pretty empty, and it has left them in the lurch. Harry needs to pull his finger out to find another way to raise funds for them.”


Aha, the smoking gun! If they already cancelled a prime documentary then they are definitely just going to staple together that old footage and do a V/O or talking head.
The BRF are always making these promo docs like the notorious H&M African tour edition so I wouldn’t be surprised if the only reason they can cobble this together is because the palace already did most of the work for them


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> Dehydrated!


Harry’s skin? Or has no one fed those poor chickens all week?


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Broadcasting side


Interesting. So did he get to meet the dishonourable schoolboy himself? Did H actually get involved?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Interesting. So did he get to meet the dishonourable schoolboy himself? Did H actually get involved?



They meet before shooting. 

H mostly gets told what to do and say, but he still has to agree to it.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5047288
> 
> "Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.
> 
> *Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
> 
> 
> MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




How many 18-24 y o read the the Daily Mirror?

They must be rarer than a day's work in H&M's house


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5047288
> 
> "Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.
> 
> *Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
> 
> 
> MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



1500 people out of 66 million. How conclusive  
I can also see people saying it because they don’t approve of primogeniture.

Also pet peeve but I hate when people use ‘millennial’ and ‘boomer’ as catchall terms when they refer to specific generations. millennials are in their 30s now, they aren’t what they mean by young people.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> 1500 people out of 66 million. How conclusive
> I can also see people saying it because they don’t approve of primogeniture.
> 
> Also pet peeve but I hate when people use ‘millennial’ and ‘boomer’ as catchall terms when they refer to specific generations. millennials are in their 30s now, they probably aren’t what they mean by young people.



The survey was "1,590 adults between March 31 and April 1" in total for all ages and only one day

I doesn't say how many of those were/say they were 18-24. It could have been one person.

Since it also says they "weighted" the survey to represent the UK's population, this could have skewed the data ridiculously.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> They meet before shooting.
> 
> H mostly gets told what to do and say, but he still has to agree to it.


Interesting. I don’t blame him for scripting Harry - we’ve seen what happens when he can speak for himself


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Interesting. I don’t blame him for scripting Harry - we’ve seen what happens when he can speak for himself



I can't tell you his role or it will give you his title but DH doesn't work on scripts.

There were key phrases written but mostly, those that do give certain points that H will cover and he'll then put them in his own words. Kind of cue card situation.

Other international events for huge business are usually far more scripted, even CEOs, word for word and captions written ahead.

H is by no means a professional actor but he has had public speaker training (I know, hard to believe). I believe, the difference is, he's OK when he believes in something (like the Invictus Games) but lately he's grasping at straws, he knows he doesn't know much about the subjects he's talking about, it's very much 'man down pub' spouting-off and winging it.

Both H&M have clay feet. This is why no interviewer could never ask searching questions and they'd never put themselves in such a position, the whole OW 'interview' was a H&M X OW production/advert.

edited to correcting the auto-correct


----------



## needlv

Oooohhh....

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="und" dir="ltr">???? <a href="https://t.co/2lYqTiIELE">https://t.co/2lYqTiIELE</a></p>&mdash; Angela Levin (@angelalevin1) <a href="">April 6, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is tragically ridiculous.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

How can someone who claims to have been financially cut off and needing a regular income for security start a foundation? Surely they should be working to provide for their family given the circumstances. I thought foundations and charities are set up by those who are financially settled ie Bill gates etc. 

On a side note I didn't realize that some of these charities and foundations pay the staff a extortionate amount of money, and sometimes the 'staff' can be those who created it, ie the founders of the charities. It is so messed up. I don't feel comfortable donating to charities knowing that most of the money will not even go to those in need.


----------



## Allisonfaye

limom said:


> Will is slightly better looking than Harry, imo..



Agree but I guess they both have Charles beat.


----------



## limom

Allisonfaye said:


> Agree but I guess they both have Charles beat.


By far. 
Those Spencer genes did the trick, especially with Will.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Shopaholic2021 said:


> On a side note I didn't realize that some of these charities and foundations pay the staff a extortionate amount of money, and sometimes the 'staff' can be those who created it, ie the founders of the charities. It is so messed up. I don't feel comfortable donating to charities knowing that most of the money will not even go to those in need.



Completely agree with this. I now give a side eye to every organization that asks for money, even those kids on cable with the blankets and the animal ones on late night TV. They spend an ENORMOUS amount of $$ on advertising.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think the idea of modernizing or reforming the Royal family is an oxymoron. How can something so archaic, which profited off the death and stealing from indigenous people become 'modern'. The Americans didn't want to be ruled by a monarchy, they believed all men are borns equal. The concept of class and monarchy really goes against the American way of life.



Maybe so, but it's definitely evolved to the point where America has a ruling class, especially in Big Tech.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5047288
> 
> "Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.
> 
> *Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
> 
> 
> MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




Oh, for god's sake.


----------



## 1LV

Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.


I did back in the day.  He’s starting to look like a caricature of himself though.  Not aging well in my opinion.


----------



## queennadine

papertiger said:


> The survey was "1,590 adults between March 31 and April 1" in total for all ages and only one day
> 
> I doesn't say how many of those were/say they were 18-24. It could have been one person.
> 
> Since it also says they "weighted" the survey to represent the UK's population, this could have skewed the data ridiculously.


Maybe those asked on April 1 thought it was an April Fool’s joke?


----------



## Aimee3

needlv said:


> Oooohhh....
> 
> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="und" dir="ltr">???? <a href="https://t.co/2lYqTiIELE">https://t.co/2lYqTiIELE</a></p>&mdash; Angela Levin (@angelalevin1) <a href="">April 6, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>



Is it so damn difficult to choose and attach the correct baby moon pillow?  Clearly once you use the biggest one you don’t switch back to a smaller size bump.  It’s not rocket science.  She must have some brain cells still working!


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> now this is just not right to me
> they are saying sharon used offensive language toward sara gilbert.  I don't watch that show every day but I did see sara's last episode and they were loving each other.  talking about how wonderful it was that sara had been to sharon's home many times, etc.
> If CBS did set sharon up by giving her co-hosts ammo and not warning her, first of all I'd be surprised at Cheryl's participation.  but this would seem to be grounds for a lawsuit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne No Longer On 'The Talk'
> 
> 
> CBS said that Osbourne's behavior toward her co-hosts during the March 10 episode "did not align with our values for a respectful workplace.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Sheryl Underwood's comments seem like a whole lot of nothing to me
did someone write this word salad for her podcast?
‘The Talk’s Sheryl Underwood Responds To Co-Host Sharon Osbourne’s Exit: “She Had To Do The Best For Her Life” (yahoo.com)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Sheryl Underwood's comments seem like a whole lot of nothing to me
> did someone write this word salad for her podcast?
> ‘The Talk’s Sheryl Underwood Responds To Co-Host Sharon Osbourne’s Exit: “She Had To Do The Best For Her Life” (yahoo.com)


I actually think that Sheryl was quite diplomatic.
What else is she going to say?
Sharon is a cut throat cow?


----------



## CarryOn2020

*The Transatlantic War of the Windsors — choose your side*
     
  
DAN WOOTTON: Prince William ends his 20-year friendship with ITV's Tom Bradby over him siding with his brother Harry and becoming a mouthpiece for his and Meghan's gripes about the Royals

Two-decades long friendship between Prince William and Tom Bradby is now over, say senior royal sources
Duke of Cambridge has been left annoyed that the high-profile presenter has sided with his brother Harry
Communications between Duke of Sussex in California and Bradby in London have become commonplace
But in contrast, William is said to no longer trust the high profile journalist who was once a close confidante









						Prince William 'ends his 20-year friendship' with ITV's Tom Bradby
					

EXCLUSIVE: William has been left annoyed that Tom Bradby has sided with his brother Prince Harry and sister-in-law Meghan in the increasingly bitter war of the Windsors, writes DAN WOOTTON.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> I can't really see anyone watching this other than their stans


Back to in the invictus Netflix doco for a moment, there will be a lot riding on the success of this programme for the rehabilitation of their reps. 
In my view the programme will be inspirational because the people that will feature in the programme will be so worthy. It annoys me to see this gruesome twosome riding on the coat tails of these athletes and military service personnel. The fact that an Amazon fundraising deal had to be scuttled for the sake of the Harkles new Netflix commercial ambitions  says everything to me about what horrible users they are.
Thankfully this is basically the last shot in their cannon. Hopefully after the smoke has cleared they realise there are no more favours to call in or arms to twist. 
The sooner they are done and fade away to thirsty, irrelevant, tedious infamy the better the world shall be.


----------



## limom

What is the Amazon deal that you are referring to?


----------



## Chanbal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> How can someone who claims to have been financially cut off and needing a regular income for security start a foundation? Surely they should be working to provide for their family given the circumstances. I thought foundations and charities are set up by those who are financially settled ie Bill gates etc.
> 
> On a side note I didn't realize that some of these charities and foundations pay the staff a extortionate amount of money, and sometimes the 'staff' can be those who created it, ie the founders of the charities. It is so messed up. I don't feel comfortable donating to charities knowing that most of the money will not even go to those in need.


I hear you! The duke and duchess's activities in the US have made me a lot more careful with donations. This is not good because there are many people in need of help.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> What is the Amazon deal that you are referring to?


The Amazon tv Invictus fundraiser which was in the works prior to the Netflix arrangement. It was mentioned earlier in this thread.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> What is the Amazon deal that you are referring to?


I think someone posted the story in this thread recently


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I think someone posted the story in this thread recently


Hint ? Cliff notes?


----------



## floatinglili

Redirect Notice


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Hint ? Cliff notes?


post number 55,179


----------



## floatinglili

Maybe the original fundraiser plan was just too ambitious?? I’m guessing the original star power touted for the fundraiser wanted to distance from them or the whole idea was just too expensive (ie the talent wanted commercial rates). I can also see that covid would have required a different format.

ETA I’m guessing Harry was inspired to create a US version of the British Royal Variety fundraiser? Where they arrive to a standing audience in their tiara’d finery? Tbh not sure it would really translate to the US in any case. But surely the experts could have come up with something suitable, Invictus having taken up the idea. 

Invictus needs a new patron.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> They want to make sure we know JCMH looks relaxed.
> "He looked totally at ease," a source tells PEOPLE. "He has a great relationship with his dog, walking it off-leash. He looked just like a Montecito local just doing his thing — very relaxed walking barefoot."









Chanbal said:


> The title shouldn't surprise anyone that reads this thread!
> View attachment 5042635
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appeared to lead 'normal life' during her time as royal
> 
> 
> Speaking on Royally Obsessed podcast,  Andrew Morton claimed friends told him they saw the Duchess of Sussex, 39, and about with friends during her time in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk










QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we discussed this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently he managed to snag an O-1 visa.



An O-1 visa? For JCMH??!! SMH.
_



			"The O-1 nonimmigrant visa is for the individual who possesses extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or who has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry and has been recognized nationally or internationally for those achievements."
		
Click to expand...

_I'm fairly sure he wouldn't even be able to spell extraordinary.






QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have to share this: A German magazine has an article up today claiming that after the Oprah interview Harry is expecting an apology from the palace.
> 
> ...
> 
> Let. That. Sink. In.
> 
> AFTER THE OPRAH INTERVIEW HARRY IS THE ONE EXPECTING AN APOLOGY.
> 
> Apparently the original article with a source close to the Sussexes is from US Weekly, I'll see if I can find it.


JCMH waiting for his aPoLoGy...


----------



## Chanbal

Poor H, it looks like he may have a long wait ahead of him.   











						POLL: Do you agree Harry and Meghan are cashing in on royal titles?
					

PRINCE Harry wants the Queen to apologise to Meghan Markle for her treatment during her time as a senior royal.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5047288
> 
> "Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.
> 
> *Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
> 
> 
> MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Interesting how the Mirror's headline differs from that of the source's. To paraphrase someone, how to "fudge" with statistics. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-ne...2.1683582434.1617809711-1224059837.1616507638


----------



## limom

The invictus foundation seems to be behind the move


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> Maybe the original fundraiser plan was just too ambitious?? I’m guessing the original star power touted for the fundraiser wanted to distance from them or the whole idea was just too expensive (ie the talent wanted commercial rates). I can also see that covid would have required a different format.
> 
> ETA I’m guessing Harry was inspired to create a US version of the British Royal Variety fundraiser? Where they arrive to a standing audience in their tiara’d finery? Tbh not sure it would really translate to the US in any case. But surely the experts could have come up with something suitable, Invictus having taken up the idea.
> 
> Invictus needs a new patron.


Amazon and netflix might have been fundraising for the British/commonwealth markets.

Not quite clear if the LA games were with British for British.
Or international games.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> The invictus foundation seems to be behind the move



Let me guess the famous Harkles Netflix deal was actually all about Invictus? 
I’m glad the cause is going to get a benefit  - and let’s face it Netflix is in a roll with the success of seaspiracy - but let us not pretend the scuttling of the Amazon fundraiser and the signing of the Netflix deal was all about the poors...


----------



## limom

I would rather support those...








						Veterans and Military Service Members : Charity Navigator
					

Support a highly rated organization helping veterans, active or injured military personnel and their families.




					www.charitynavigator.org


----------



## 1LV

Has MM refuted any of Piers Morgan’s allegations made during his Fox News interview?  It doesn’t appear that the major US networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) are questioning or calling him out either.  Maybe I missed it.  Just wondering.


----------



## Jktgal

In terms of surveys, a sample size of 1,600 of 66million is pretty good if the sampling frame is good. Since it's weighted (more samples from larger population groups) then it's actually more precise (couldn't open article so don't know what they reported as margin of error).  I can see how younger people prefer Harry. It's consistent with another poll a few weeks back about % people who disbelieved the claims in the interview (older population).


----------



## limom

1LV said:


> Has MM refuted any of Piers Morgan’s allegations made during his Fox News interview?  It doesn’t appear that the major US networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) are questioning or calling him out either.  Maybe I missed it.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> I would rather support those...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Veterans and Military Service Members : Charity Navigator
> 
> 
> Support a highly rated organization helping veterans, active or injured military personnel and their families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.charitynavigator.org


Veterans truly need support in many and varied ways, and Invictus is a great cause. 
I am annoyed that the Harkles can use this worthy charity for their own ends.
It’s like a ‘trickle-down’ theory of charity economics ... very irritating!! 
it is as previous posters have said - they are cut orf and so should be attending to their own living situation rather than establishing foundations etc. 
They put these charities in a difficult position as they seem to be benefiting directly from charitable efforts.


----------



## 1LV

limom said:


>



Hmmm.  It just seems odd to me that MM has been silent about the Carlson Tucker interview.  No lawsuits.  No display of indignation.  No tears or tantrums.  In other words, none of the usual.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> Veterans truly need support in many and varied ways, and Invictus is a great cause.
> I am annoyed that the Harkles can use this worthy charity for their own ends.
> It’s like a ‘trickle-down’ theory of charity economics ... very irritating!!
> it is as previous posters have said - they are cut orf and so should be attending to their own living situation rather than establishing foundations etc.
> They put these charities in a difficult position as they seem to be benefiting directly from charitable efforts.


Trickle down theory Of charity economics aka Con charity.


1LV said:


> Hmmm.  It just seems odd to me that MM has been silent about the Carlson Tucker interview.  No lawsuits.  No display of indignation.  No tears or tantrums.  In other words, none of the usual.


Give her time.
Is Piers coming back statewide?


----------



## 1LV

limom said:


> Trickle down theory Of charity economics aka Con charity.
> 
> Give her time.
> Is Piers coming back statewide?


No idea if he’s coming back.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that like a good bargain, MM&H are on sale! 

"_The limited-edition royal wedding figure of Prince Harry and Ms Meghan Markle commemorates this historic marriage in May 2018.

Modelled by renowned figure sculptor, Neil Welch, the piece celebrates a captivating moment as the happy couple leave Windsor Chapel holding hands.

Royal Doulton was selling the limited edition figurines commemorating the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding for £199. But the ceramics maker is now trying to offload them for a reduced price of £146.25._"











						Meghan and Harry humiliated as wedding figurines slashed in price
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry wedding figurines have had their prices slashed after failing to sell.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> Hmmm.  It just seems odd to me that MM has been silent about the Carlson Tucker interview.  No lawsuits.  No display of indignation.  No tears or tantrums.  In other words, none of the usual.


There wasn't much advertisement on the interview, so MM may not want to call attention to it. 
However, Piers should keep his eyes wide open, MM will not forget...


----------



## marietouchet

Been thinking back to when they signed the deal with the laundry list of things they would like to cover (in the future)

Invictus is is a topic where H has actually been noticeably involved (past accomplishments, credibility).  So, I thought it was a no-brainer sure-thing topic for a NETFLIX show. I do think the loss of the military positions/honours hinders the effort rather than helps it.

Other topics are more of a reach . They do not maybe have established credibility on internet bullying (esp after claims MM was herself a bully in the UK).  Mental health - hmmmm - did the Oprah interview help to establish their street cred, or diminish it? Home videos (from the UK) - ooooohhh - controversial 

So, yeah they need to score a home run on Invictus to help them bootstrap themselves into pushing other agendas.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> There wasn't much advertisement on the interview, so MM may not want to call attention to it.
> However, Piers should keep his eyes wide open, MM will not forget...



Completely agree.  Keep quiet and hope it goes away.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that like a good bargain, MM&H are on sale!
> 
> "_The limited-edition royal wedding figure of Prince Harry and Ms Meghan Markle commemorates this historic marriage in May 2018.
> 
> Modelled by renowned figure sculptor, Neil Welch, the piece celebrates a captivating moment as the happy couple leave Windsor Chapel holding hands.
> 
> Royal Doulton was selling the limited edition figurines commemorating the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding for £199. But the ceramics maker is now trying to offload them for a reduced price of £146.25._"
> 
> View attachment 5047779
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry humiliated as wedding figurines slashed in price
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry wedding figurines have had their prices slashed after failing to sell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



maybe they'll end up at the 99 cents store


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree with this. She was given the option to continue working and it was recommended that she do so (this is what Harry said someone in the palace recommended). I think Prince Charles and the Queen really wanted a 'slimed' down working royal family. This may be due to financial reasons. Princess Eugiene and Princess Beatrice both hold full time jobs and don't have any royal  income/stipend. Their parents wanted them to have official royal duties but they were told no. Realistically if you're not in line to the throne you really should be working and maybe supporting the family when needed. I think they both wanted a easy life, attending functions and charity events and being paid for it.



Andrew wanted to marry a soft porn actress before he married Fergie the firm didn’t want to make the same mistake again with Harry - Andrew was the queens fav but she still wouldn’t let him marry Koo Stark - he never got over that


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> maybe they'll end up at the 99 cents store


If they are lucky!


----------



## limom

Those Royal boys sure love American women


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> Sheryl Underwood's comments seem like a whole lot of nothing to me
> did someone write this word salad for her podcast?
> ‘The Talk’s Sheryl Underwood Responds To Co-Host Sharon Osbourne’s Exit: “She Had To Do The Best For Her Life” (yahoo.com)


I don't understand what Sheryl is doing.  She said Sharon never reached out to her and made an elaborate finger gesture though her phone as proof.

Sharon, no dummy, provided all the texts she did send and there were many. Major grovelling too. Apologies and emotional statements about how she cares for Sheryl... and Sheryl is still acting like the injured party?

Was she an injured party?  All Sharon did was stand by her good friend who doesn't believe a word out of MM's mouth.  (And neither do we.)


----------



## limom

Jayne1 said:


> I don't understand what Sheryl is doing.  She said Sharon never reached out to her and made an elaborate finger gesture though her phone as proof.
> 
> Sharon, no dummy, provided all the texts she did send and there were many. Major grovelling too. Apologies and emotional statements about how she cares for Sheryl... and Sheryl is still acting like the injured party?
> 
> Was she an injured party?  All Sharon did was stand by her good friend who doesn't believe a word out of MM's mouth.  (And neither do we.)


Sheryl is protecting her paycheck, she has a sister to take care of.
Sharon is benched for now.
It is in Sharon’s best interest to ride this situation....
Her PR firm is misguiding her...
She hired Bragman 
Her approach is not going to work...


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> Other topics are more of a reach . *They do not maybe have established credibility on internet bullying (esp after claims MM was herself a bully in the UK).*  Mental health - hmmmm - did the Oprah interview help to establish their street cred, or diminish it? Home videos (from the UK) - ooooohhh - controversial
> 
> So, yeah they need to score a home run on Invictus to help them bootstrap themselves into pushing other agendas.


Oh I think they have plenty of experience with internet bullying
Look how they let the Sussex Squad run amok. That gives them plenty of credibility in their chosen circle


----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> The invictus foundation seems to be behind the move



To be skeptical, they are a royal charity with a possibly no longer royal patron who is making himself unpopular in their home country. 
They are coming out of a crisis and probably need more money than ever to keep going.

I feel like any publicity is good publicity for them. 
Especially if the alternative is any existing footage rotting on a hard drive somewhere.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that like a good bargain, MM&H are on sale!
> 
> "_The limited-edition royal wedding figure of Prince Harry and Ms Meghan Markle commemorates this historic marriage in May 2018.
> 
> Modelled by renowned figure sculptor, Neil Welch, the piece celebrates a captivating moment as the happy couple leave Windsor Chapel holding hands.
> 
> Royal Doulton was selling the limited edition figurines commemorating the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding for £199. But the ceramics maker is now trying to offload them for a reduced price of £146.25._"
> 
> View attachment 5047779
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry humiliated as wedding figurines slashed in price
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry wedding figurines have had their prices slashed after failing to sell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Royal Doulton are clearly being shady here!
One of their biggest lines is pretty lady figurines - it must be entirely purposeful that the MM model looks like Mr Bean in a wig.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


>




Don't usually agree with BillyB, but he is correct on this, IMO.  Enough of the culture that cancels people who disagree. You get to be you and I get to be me. You’re ok, I’m ok [an excellent book].  We all do not need to believe the same thing. It should be ok, even applauded, for having differing opinions. As long as everyone is civil and respectful, even the ‘best’ families have differing opinions - that’s what makes the holidays so much fun


----------



## Maggie Muggins

limom said:


> Those Royal boys sure love American women


3 egoists (Eddy VIII, Andy, Harry) + 3 egoists (Wallis, Koo, MM) = 6 egoists 
	

		
			
		

		
	




ET correct name


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Royal Doulton are clearly being shady here!
> One of their biggest lines is pretty lady figurines - it must be entirely purposeful that the MM model looks like Mr Bean in a wig.


IMO she looks fine. It is Harry that RD took liberties on — they cleaned up his scruffy hair.
The wax museum made them both look freakish.








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Wax Figures Removed from Madame Tussauds Royal Family Display
					

Madame Tussauds London unveiled their wax figure of Meghan Markle just ahead of her May 2018 wedding to Prince Harry




					people.com
				




ETA:  Look what RD did to Diana - ewww


----------



## 1LV

jelliedfeels said:


> Royal Doulton are clearly being shady here!
> One of their biggest lines is pretty lady figurines - it must be entirely purposeful that the MM model looks like Mr Bean in a wig.


Literally laughed out loud!  That is hilarious!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO she looks fine. It is Harry that RD took liberties on — they cleaned up his scruffy hair.
> The wax museum made them both look freakish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Wax Figures Removed from Madame Tussauds Royal Family Display
> 
> 
> Madame Tussauds London unveiled their wax figure of Meghan Markle just ahead of her May 2018 wedding to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  Look what RD did to Diana - ewww
> View attachment 5047932


Ok this makes me think r doulton are either secret anti-monarchists or trolls. Party on royal doulton. 

I don’t know, I think they are really good likenesses.  Tussaud’s got the thousand yard stares and the empty almost rictus smiles.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don't usually agree with BillyB, but he is correct on this, IMO.  Enough of the culture that cancels people who disagree. You get to be you and I get to be me. You’re ok, I’m ok [an excellent book].  We all do not need to believe the same thing. It should be ok, even applauded, for having differing opinions. As long as everyone is civil and respectful, even the ‘best’ families have differing opinions - that’s what makes the holidays so much fun


I am ok, you are ok but please move on with the time.
Cancel culture is there for a reason  remember Casel?
It is not ok to call human beings monkeys.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> I am ok, you are ok but please move on with the time.
> Cancel culture is there for a reason  remember Casel?
> It is not ok to call human beings monkeys.
> Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.


You don’t punish millions of people for the acts of the ignorant. You go after those people. We do that in the military, one messes up in basic training, you punish the whole squad or platoon. It works for the military it provides cohesiveness plus they’re a life of its own but to punish the entire US population then no. 

Fire the torpedos full speed ahead and be damned who gets in the way. Too many collateral damage culturally and FA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

1LV said:


> Hmmm.  It just seems odd to me that MM has been silent about the Carlson Tucker interview.  No lawsuits.  No display of indignation.  No tears or tantrums.  In other words, none of the usual.


Not too quick, not too quick! Most likely she’s called the Fox News CEO demanding —- anything. you know, they deal with Things on personal level and the Netflix + Invictus news is on so she has to prioritize their press exposure. But it’s on th works.


----------



## Lodpah

Because their names are attached to these charities I will never give a penny. As shady as these two are how will I know I’m not funding their lifestyle? I need to check out charity navigator and see where they rank, how much goes to the charity, etc. Besides there are many veteran organizations that do a good job locally.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok this makes me think r doulton are either secret anti-monarchists or trolls. Party on royal doulton.
> 
> I don’t know, I think they are really good likenesses.  Tussaud’s got the thousand yard stares and the empty almost rictus smiles.


I think the wax museum should have pretended they were candles and melted them...............

Poor Rowen Atkinson deserves better.   MM as "Mr. Bean in a wig" is a hoot!


----------



## Lodpah

Archewell Inc. | Charity Navigator Profile
					

Archewell Inc. is a Charitable Organization headquartered in Beverly Hills, CA.




					www.charitynavigator.org
				




If this is their charity then H to the N.


----------



## xeyes

queennadine said:


> Maybe those asked on April 1 thought it was an April Fool’s joke?



Somehow, it seems that maybe, just _maybe_, April Fools’ Day might not be the _best_ time to ask for truthful (and unverifiable) responses to a survey on a less-than-critical topic...



csshopper said:


> I think the wax museum should have pretended they were candles and melted them...............



Like candles in the wind, even. Megsy could be even_ more _like Diana!


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> DOES anyone think Harry is cute? Just curious.



Physically-definitely not. Plus there's the "stupid/gullible/naive" factor that comes with growing up surrounded by servants and security that hinders self-reliance and coping skills. William, on the other hand, gives the impression he's nobody's fool and seems capable on his own despite the same upbringing. Harry ignored obvious red flags and advice. Meghan played/plays him for the fool that he is and is laughing all the way to his bank account. She discarded her own family like garbage and got Harry to do the same. She breeds for meal tickets and fame then trashes the source of money and fame. They deserve each other.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> he's acting like an AH


He's not that good an actor.  He IS an AHole.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The truth, the one and only truth,  always wins.
> Welcome!


I thought "love always wins".


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> I agree.  BTW, what do you mean by “durable” looking?


Harry takes a licking, and keeps on ticking.


----------



## Chanbal

Is JCMH going to monetize the Invictus Games? 

"_Lowri Turner told Channel 5's Jeremy Vine programme that she felt uncomfortable at the thought of Prince Harry monetising the Invictus Games... 

Ms Turner said: *"The money that he is going to be paid for this both as a presenter and as an executive producer, is that going back into the foundation of the Invictus Games or are they making a profit?*

"In which case [that would be] monetising the Invictus Games, I am quite uncomfortable with [that]."

"Although, *he has only got £30 million left and he needs the money*._"









						Prince Harry warned against 'monetising' Invictus Games for Netflix
					

PRINCE HARRY has been warned against monetising the Invictus Games following the announcement that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will produce a series on the competition for Netflix.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Henceforth I shall refer to him as Prince Harry the Emasculated. She probably fired his ball cleaners so that she could take it.


We can "Just Call Him Harry the Eunuch".  JCHHE.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Is JCMH going to monetize the Invictus Games?
> 
> "_Lowri Turner told Channel 5's Jeremy Vine programme that she felt uncomfortable at the thought of Prince Harry monetising the Invictus Games...
> 
> Ms Turner said: *"The money that he is going to be paid for this both as a presenter and as an executive producer, is that going back into the foundation of the Invictus Games or are they making a profit?*
> 
> "In which case [that would be] monetising the Invictus Games, I am quite uncomfortable with [that]."
> 
> "Although, *he has only got £30 million left and he needs the money*._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry warned against 'monetising' Invictus Games for Netflix
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has been warned against monetising the Invictus Games following the announcement that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will produce a series on the competition for Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I, too, am uncomfortable with H&M making any kind of a profit from these games.  How is that even legal?  







						Frequently asked questions – Invictus Games Foundation
					






					invictusgamesfoundation.org
				



I need a translation, please:

How is the Invictus Games Foundation funded?
The Foundation is part-funded by the organising committee responsible for hosting an Invictus Games. With the decision to move to two years, combined with an increased recognition of the impact and scope of the potential for the Foundation to do even more, internationally, in between Games time, a new model was undertaken. The employment of a Development Director in early 2019 enabled a continued focus on seeking out meaningful corporate and charitable partnerships that support our work internationally.
Where we offer fundraising opportunities directly for the Foundation, we seek to do so in tandem with our organisation partners, or by providing recovery opportunities for our beneficiaries through sporting endeavours, such as members of the international WIS community running marathons, or taking part in Ride London.

I’ve heard about the Warrior Games – is this the same event?
The Warrior Games is an existing domestic event in the US. HRH The Duke of Sussex was inspired by the Warrior Games on his visit to Colorado in 2013 and wanted to bring an international version of the event to the UK.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> We can "Just Call Him Harry the Eunuch".  JCHHE.


I originally put that word in but didn’t want to offend true Eunuchs as they perform very important positions in some societies.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> I thought "love always wins".


Yes! They love. Love of money is the root of all evil. Quoting an ancient book. They do love for sure.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> The wax museum made them both look freakish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Wax Figures Removed from Madame Tussauds Royal Family Display
> 
> 
> Madame Tussauds London unveiled their wax figure of Meghan Markle just ahead of her May 2018 wedding to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


They look like a couple of shady characters about to offer you a deal you simply can't afford to miss!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> They look like a couple of shady characters about to offer you a deal you simply can't afford to miss!!
> 
> View attachment 5048222
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> |



Introducing the Gruesome Twosome! The museum saw through them from Day 1  
[maybe this will convince Hazzie to stop putting his hand in his suit jacket]


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Introducing the Gruesome Twosome! The museum saw through them from Day 1
> [maybe this will convince Hazzie to stop putting his hand in his suit jacket]


Maybe Harry is holding up a moon bump with that hand.  Learned it from MM!


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Introducing the Gruesome Twosome! The museum saw through them from Day 1
> [maybe this will convince Hazzie to stop putting his hand in his suit jacket]



they need to update MM’s wax model - her face has changed via more plastic surgery...


----------



## Lodpah

Maggie Muggins said:


> They look like a couple of shady characters about to offer you a deal you simply can't afford to miss!!
> 
> View attachment 5048222


Yep those “friends” who invite you to their house for dinner but it’s actually for an MLM. They look constipated.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> they need to update MM’s wax model - her face has changed via more plastic surgery...


Yes, but they perfectly captured her creepy robotic fake smile!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Introducing the Gruesome Twosome! The museum saw through them from Day 1
> [maybe this will convince Hazzie to stop putting his hand in his suit jacket]


I never understood the Napoleon-esque hand in his jacket.  Does he have an itch?  Is he missing a finger and hiding it?  WTF?


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Maybe Harry is holding up a moon bump with that hand.  Learned it from MM!


He's more likely holding up his beer gut.  MM has enough moon bumps to cover for them both!


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> maybe they'll end up at the 99 cents store



When they're on sale for .99 I'll buy the whole lot and send them to Meghan, BRAGGING about the Great Deal I got on them and request that she and Harry sign them for me!


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> When they're on sale for .99 I'll buy the whole lot and send them to Meghan, BRAGGING about the Great Deal I got on them and request her and Harry to sign them for me!


I have a big backyard with lots of wild birds. Jus saying.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> When they're on sale for .99 I'll buy the whole lot and send them to Meghan, BRAGGING about the Great Deal I got on them and request her and Harry to sign them for me!


It's a limited edition of 1000 pieces, would you buy about 990 pieces? They may charge a fee for signing the pieces.


----------



## V0N1B2

Maggie Muggins said:


> They look like a couple of shady characters about to offer you a deal you simply can't afford to miss!!
> 
> View attachment 5048222


Mme Tussaud's managed to put Meghan in a dress that *gasp* actually fits!
*And without that visible strapless bra she's so fond of.

It's a miracle - and the last time you'll ever see it


----------



## Chanbal

Another lawsuit? 

"_*Angela Levin says the Duchess of Sussex will hit back *in the “verbal boxing match” after the former Good Morning Britain presenter’s hour-long Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson...

Now Ms Levin, author of Harry: Conversations with the Prince, says *Piers could have a similar lawsuit on his hands soon - as she believes Meghan “will fight back.*

So they’ll carry on bashing away, and I imagine she has lawyers working out a sentence or verb or something that piers said that they could jump on...

*She's got a very very aggressive legal team and I always think it's amazing what these lawyers can come up with.*

“I think Piers is a brave man but let's wait and see_"









						Meghan 'will fight back' against Piers Morgan's slurs in 'verbal boxing match'
					

MEGHAN Markle “will fight back” against Piers Morgan’s slurs, a royal biographer has claimed. Angela Levin says the Duchess of Sussex will hit back in the “verbal boxing match” after the former Goo…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

Golly. Does she never get tired of “fighting back”?  I thought she didn’t read anything about herself.  I’m tired just thinking about her rage.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> It's a limited edition of 1000 pieces, would you buy about 990 pieces? They may charge a fee for signing the pieces.



Great point. So in my request I should say: "Would you and Harry be so kind as to autograph each one with a big Sharpie so I can resell them at a big profit to the Raindrops and donate the money to Archewell?    (The sugars would be stupid enough to buy them at $50. With shipping costs I could clear $47 apiece. 47 X 990 = $46,530. To hell with Archewell. Think of all the ill fitting clothes and rescue chickens I could buy!)


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Great point. So in my request I should say: "Would you and Harry be so kind as to autograph each one with a big Sharpie so I can resell them at a big profit to the Raindrops and donate the money to Archewell?    (The sugars would be stupid enough to buy them at $50. With shipping costs I could clear $47 apiece. 47 X 990 = $46,530. To hell with Archewell. Think of all the ill fitting clothes and rescue chickens I could buy!)


haha, not bad. I suggest sending one to Oprah for free advertising. You may end up selling some pieces to her fan club for a bigger profit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Annawakes said:


> Golly. Does she never get tired of “fighting back”?  I thought she didn’t read anything about herself.  I’m tired just thinking about her rage.


Piers wants her to sue because he wont settle and will force her to testify... which would be awful for MM - being cross examined... and no RF to protect her....

edit to add... can’t wait for the lawsuit... it would be a huge spectacle.


----------



## floatinglili

limom said:


> I am ok, you are ok but please move on with the time.
> Cancel culture is there for a reason  remember Casel?
> It is not ok to call human beings monkeys.
> Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.


Will never agree with cancel culture. It is the work of mobs.  Of course, incompetence in a role is another issue. Although there are many incompetent people carrying on in very highly paid positions so ...hey it’s an imperfect world.


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Piers wants her to sue because he wont settle and will force her to testify... which would be awful for MM - being cross examined... and no RF to protect her....
> 
> edit to add... can’t wait for the lawsuit... it would be a huge spectacle.


Something to look forward to!


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> When they're on sale for .99 I'll buy the whole lot and send them to Meghan, BRAGGING about the Great Deal I got on them and request that she and Harry sign them for me!



I wouldn't waste your money - or time


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> haha, not bad. I suggest sending one to Oprah for free advertising. You may end up selling some pieces to her fan club for a bigger profit.



She can put it on a top 10 things for your home club list - maybe this is the boon we need for UK's Royal Doulton


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> Will never agree with cancel culture. It is the work of mobs.  Of course, incompetence in a role is another issue. Although there are many incompetent people carrying on in very highly paid positions so ...hey it’s an imperfect world.


What does being abusive toward others bring to any society?
Cancel culture is about making people accountable for their speech and/or actions.
For example in this thread, some users are saying that they will not use any products promoted by H and M, aren’t they effectively trying to cancel the couple?
Or is cancel culture only when it reflects certain political views?
I say cancel and counter cancel!


----------



## floatinglili

It’s a question of degrees I guess. 
I don’t appreciate the impact cancel culture is having on arts or on relatively powerless individuals. A lot of it is not especially nuanced or even well informed.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> It’s a question of degrees I guess.
> I don’t appreciate the impact cancel culture is having on arts or on relatively powerless individuals. A lot of it is not especially nuanced or even well informed.


Example, por favor?
Are you referring to people cancelling artists for their political views? Or because in the public eyes their art suck?
A while back while at the head of Dior, Galliano was cancelled for his antisemitic rants, he disappeared for a while and is now the head of Maison Margiela.
Cancelling does not have to be permanent.
However,  John does not have the right either to be insensitive and hateful toward other human beings.
Just my two cents.


----------



## floatinglili

Redirect Notice


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> Redirect Notice


Are you against the People protesting?
Are you mad that the Boston museum cancelled the exhibit?


----------



## queennadine

IMO there’s a difference between cancel culture and boycotting.

Cancel culture = I don’t like you so I don’t want you to be able to make money, have a voice, or exist professionally.

Boycotting = I don’t like you so I just won’t give you my money.


----------



## queennadine

limom said:


> Are you against the People protesting?
> Are you mad that the Boston museum cancelled the exhibit?



I’m fine with people protesting. But the museum shouldn’t have shut down the event. Had this been 5 years later,  the museum may have gotten looted and burnt to the ground so maybe they should consider themselves fortunate.


----------



## floatinglili

I’m not really on this chat to justify my opinions to you.  sorry. In my view my own opinions are reasonably held. But on the flip side I’m really not hauling you to account to justify your opinions either. So there’s that. You asked for an example of cancel culture impacting culture in a way I see as detrimental, and out of an excess of goodwill I provided one to you. If you are interested you can follow up with further inquiry or do your own research.  


limom said:


> Are you against the People protesting?
> Are you mad that the Boston museum cancelled the exhibit?


----------



## limom

queennadine said:


> IMO there’s a difference between cancel culture and boycotting.
> 
> Cancel culture = I don’t like you so I don’t want you to be able to make money, have a voice, or exist professionally.
> 
> Boycotting = I don’t like you so I just won’t give you my money.


Were you ok with Galliano “cancellation”?


----------



## floatinglili

None of your business


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> I’m not really on this chat to justify my opinions to you.  sorry. In my view my own opinions are reasonably held. But on the flip side I’m really not hauling you to account to justify your opinions either. So there’s that. You asked for an example of cancel culture impacting culture in a way I see as detrimental, and out of an excess of goodwill I provided one to you. If you are interested you can follow up with further inquiry or do your own research.


I am  genuinely interested in your POV 
 Anyways, this is totally off topic.
Let’s cancel this entire conversation.


----------



## limom

floatinglili said:


> None of your business


Ok then.


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> Another lawsuit?
> 
> "_*Angela Levin says the Duchess of Sussex will hit back *in the “verbal boxing match” after the former Good Morning Britain presenter’s hour-long Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson...
> 
> Now Ms Levin, author of Harry: Conversations with the Prince, says *Piers could have a similar lawsuit on his hands soon - as she believes Meghan “will fight back.*
> 
> So they’ll carry on bashing away, and I imagine she has lawyers working out a sentence or verb or something that piers said that they could jump on...
> 
> *She's got a very very aggressive legal team and I always think it's amazing what these lawyers can come up with.*
> 
> “I think Piers is a brave man but let's wait and see_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'will fight back' against Piers Morgan's slurs in 'verbal boxing match'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle “will fight back” against Piers Morgan’s slurs, a royal biographer has claimed. Angela Levin says the Duchess of Sussex will hit back in the “verbal boxing match” after the former Goo…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Told you so—- silence for few days=prepping


----------



## papertiger

zinacef said:


> Told you so—- silence for few days=*prepping*



Do you mean - consulting lawyer/astrology charts?


----------



## zinacef

papertiger said:


> Do you mean - consulting lawyer/astrology charts?


Astrology charts!  Timing has to be just right


----------



## Jktgal

Cancel cullture and the whole wokeness issue is so first world problems. Society so homogenous that there is no tolerance. In a highly diverse society intolerance is not an option. Diversity is a strength. Unless it involves a crime deal with it and grow a spine.


----------



## Chanbal

It's a long article. If MM goes after Piers (lawsuit), she will be forced to clarify her insinuations, and she may not want that...

*'As a British taxpayer I don't want to pay for a racist': Piers Morgan renews call for Meghan and Harry to name the Royal who they claim questioned 'how dark' Archie's skin would be*

_'Was there a problem about the skin color of this child in the eyes of the Royal? If it were, if this is how it was done, then I want to know who that Royal is because I'm paying for them as a British taxpayer. I don't want to be paying for a racist.'...

Morgan also predicted a frosty reunion of Harry and his brother Prince William when they meet this summer to mark their late mother Princess Diana's 60th birthday. 

'I can't see how they can stand next to each other, William and Harry, after what's happened,' he said...

*William was said to be furious that Harry had discussed their private call with a journalist, and has told those around him that he can no longer trust his brother.*

He is said to be desperate to give his side of the story, but, constrained by his role and by not wanting to further upset his grandmother and father, unable to do so. 

Bush also asked Morgan who he thinks the public has sided with in the wake of the interview, Harry and Meghan or the Palace.  

Morgan didn't mince words, saying: 'The Queen is immeasurably more popular, she's been on the throne for 68 years. 

'*Meghan and Harry are now just a pair of celebrity hucksters trading off their royal titles to sign massive deals with Netflix, Spotify, and so on whilst also saying they hate the institution of the royals and the monarchy... but not enough to give up the royal titles which are making them all this money. I think that's rank hypocrisy.*'

At the end of the interview Bush questioned where Morgan's career is headed after he resigned from Good Morning Britain last month amid criticism over his comments about the Oprah interview. 

Asked if he has plans to work with Fox News - after sitting down with one of the network's top hosts Tucker Carlson for his first post-GMB-exit interview earlier this week -  Morgan said: 'No - but you never know what may happen.'

'I've been gratified by the number of job offers I've had from Britain and America. I'm considering a number of them,' he added.

'I'm going to take my time and then hopefully come back with something fun, exciting, and my message *to the cancel culture mob is: "I wouldn't celebrate too long. I don't think I'll be canceled much longer.*_*"*









						Piers Morgan calls for Meghan and Harry to name 'racist' Royal
					

Piers Morgan, DailyMail.com's Editor-at-Large, made his latest demand for an identification in the second half of his two-part interview with Extra 's Billy Bush aired Wednesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Open letter from *DAN WOOTTON *to Will: 

Dear William,

Sometimes you have to accept there's only so much you can do for a sibling.

For 20 years, after those tragic events in 1997, you were a rock for your brother – the only other human being he could entirely open up to and trust.

Your father was often absent and distant. Given the deep-rooted bitterness you and Harry both feel about the way Charles treated your mother, the paternal relationship was understandably strained for many years.

As a result, *you often took on the combined role of Harry's surrogate dad, chief-of-staff and best friend*.

It wasn't always easy. Especially as scandal followed scandal for your brother – the drugs, the Nazi uniform, the drunken altercations, the racist language in the army and the strip poker incident in Las Vegas.

But *you always kept the faith, with calm and wise counsel behind-the-scenes, imploring harsher members of your family to give Harry the chance to grow up while making mistakes*.

*It was you who convinced Harry to seek professional help to deal with his mental health* problems sparked by the death of Diana. He first saw a counsellor after you reassured him by saying: 'Look, you really need to deal with this. It is not normal to think that nothing has affected you.'

When your wife Kate entered the scene, she immediately bonded with your brother too, becoming a trusted companion and then a work colleague.

Your bold and brave charity initiatives as a trio revitalised a tired and fading monarchy, providing some much-needed hope that young people would keep the faith with the Crown.

*In that context, it is completely understandable that when a fame and power-hungry American actress entered the scene and stole your brother's heart, you asked some difficult questions about the courtship.

No one with any sense blames you for gently querying whether Harry should take some time before he married someone so apparently prepared to give up her career and life in the US to enter the British Royal Family.*

Many of your early fears have tragically come to fruition.

*Your guidance encouraging Harry to take it slow and not rush into any hasty decisions was rooted in love and concern, certainly nothing to do with racism.*

Despite these initial skirmishes, you put that nagging feeling in the back of your head that something wasn't right about your brother's new partner to one side and prioritised making Meghan feel welcome in the dysfunctional and odd Royal Family.

*She was invited to spend Christmas with you and Kate at your Anmer Hall residence in Norfolk, a decision you supported even though it went against royal protocol.*

Discussions soon started about Meghan taking a leading role in your beloved Royal Foundation – the Fab Four was born.

But no matter how hard you and Kate tried, it soon became clear that Meghan had not moved to London to quietly settle into life as a community-focussed royal.

I remember from my reporting at the time that Kate was not happy with the way Meghan spoke to staff at Kensington Palace. Your wife rightly raised the issue and it caused tension.

The infamous bridesmaid dress fitting and Meghan's failure to accept Kate's apology for whatever did or did not happen made things worse.

You were also dragged into the sensitive row over which items from the Royal Collection – including tiaras worn by your mother – would be loaned to Meghan.

In the end, following discussions with the Queen's dresser Angela Kelly, it was down to your grandmother to make the tough call to Prince Harry that made clear, given the royal pecking order, Meghan couldn't always get what she wanted.

But the damage was done.

Y*ou and Kate had tried everything, but fundamentally Harry and Meghan had made a decision that they didn't want to be on your side. Their narrative as victims of the system was firmly set in their heads.*

They were increasingly angry you wouldn't back them in petty battles with the media. Your advisers were, entirely appropriately, beginning the long and sensitive journey of preparing you to be king, and didn't think your public input would be helpful.

The final straw for you came with the way Harry and Meghan behaved over the Megxit debacle.

You are right to feel it's unforgivable that they twice tried to publicly jump your grandmother – now 94 – into giving into their ludicrous demands.

The phone calls largely stopped, Harry and Meghan left the country and very open wounds remain.

Before that despicable Oprah Winfrey interview, where they accused your family of racism, you had hoped that matters could be resolved privately over time. The Windsor way, you might say.

There was the possibility of a fruitful reunion to unveil the long-awaited statue of your late mother later this year.

But sadly, it's now reached the point where you can no longer trust your brother or his wife, largely down to their ongoing manipulation of the American media.

Private conversations with family members have twice been twisted and dissected for US TV personalities Oprah and Gayle King, both friends of Meghan.

*You've rightly ended your two-decades long friendship with the ITV News presenter Tom Bradby, who you believe has taken sides by becoming a media mouthpiece for Harry and Meghan.

The Sussexes have declared war and are not attempting to start any form of healthy discussion.

History will show the problem was with Meghan, not you. She has fallen out with most of her close relatives – including her father and half-sister – and no old friends were on the guest list for her wedding.*

Her friends are in showbiz now. They're ready to exploit her for their own gains, be it by securing TV interviews or advancing divisive identity politics.

By contrast, you are going to be king. Your priority is to keep the monarchy popular, not give in to your brother's petulant tantrums and delusions.

*Bowing down to Harry and Meghan is no longer the right thing to do and that's why you were correct to publicly state at the first available opportunity that 'we're very much not a racist family'.

Many old friends of Harry I have spoken to are convinced he will come back to you and Great Britain, but it's going to take him some time to work out the mistakes he's made and how he's let you down.*

Until that time, there is nothing more you can do. Harry knows you love him and that you'll do anything for him if he's in serious trouble.

It's painful. But the time has come to stop appeasing your brother. *He'll soon learn millions of dollars and a Californian mansion don't compare to the unconditional and unwavering love of your blood relatives.*









						DAN WOOTTON writes an open letter to Prince William
					

Your guidance encouraging Harry to take it slow and not rush into any hasty decisions was rooted in love and concern, certainly nothing to do with racism, DAN WOOTTON tells William.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

MM might threaten PM and even sue him, but drop the suit at the last minute by claiming the high ground (she forgives him - what an angel). Or she might "magnanimously" offer him an out-of-court settlement after she has dragged it out long enough. If she learns from the ex-Prez, she could try to prolong the process and see who has deeper pockets and can last longer. A game of legal chicken...


----------



## AnsavdW

Haha, I love this thread! So fun to read.


----------



## limom




----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> View attachment 5048660


I watched that while on maternity leave. On Monday, someone opened fire on another person. On Wednesday, the plot had not progressed to the point when the bullet struck its intended victim. (Don't scold me for watching drivel - this was before I had multi-channel cable TV  )


----------



## CarryOn2020

9 times, is anywhere safe?


Harry and Meghan call police to their £11million California mansion nine times including for a trespasser TWICE at Christmas

The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls 
They were listed as phone requests, alarm activations and property crimes
One man was alleged to have trespassed in the early hours of Christmas Eve









						Police called to Harry and Meghan's mansion nine times in nine months
					

Since Harry and Meghan moved in to their Montecito home with Archie in July last year, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

xincinsin said:


> I watched that while on maternity leave. On Monday, someone opened fire on another person. On Wednesday, the plot had not progressed to the point when the bullet struck its intended victim. (Don't scold me for watching drivel - this was before I had multi-channel cable TV  )



Back in the day, I used to watch all the ABC soaps as many of us did. But then the nighttime soaps came on and they moved so much faster that it ruined the day time soaps for me because they moved sooooo slowly. It would literally take months or even years for someone to find out some big secret or some couple to get together....


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> 9 times, is anywhere safe?
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan call police to their £11million California mansion nine times including for a trespasser TWICE at Christmas
> 
> The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls
> They were listed as phone requests, alarm activations and property crimes
> One man was alleged to have trespassed in the early hours of Christmas Eve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Police called to Harry and Meghan's mansion nine times in nine months
> 
> 
> Since Harry and Meghan moved in to their Montecito home with Archie in July last year, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Why do wealthy people with their own security personnel have to call the police so much?  Are their own security people not up to the task? Or are M&H too cheap to pay for their own security and just call the police every ten minutes?  What happened to the trespasser?  Are these trumped up "calls" just for more publicity in an attempt to "prove" that they're victims targeted by crazies? Maybe as an attempt to guilt Charles into paying for their security? How about buying ten Rottweilers (oops, poor rescue chickens). Maybe train the rescue chickens to attack intruders. Now THAT would be an interesting Netflix doc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

rose60610 said:


> Why do wealthy people with their own security personnel have to call the police so much?  Are their own security people not up to the task? Or are M&H too cheap to pay for their own security and just call the police every ten minutes?  What happened to the trespasser?  Are these trumped up "calls" just for more publicity in an attempt to "prove" that they're victims targeted by crazies? Maybe as an attempt to guilt Charles into paying for their security? How about buying ten Rottweilers (oops, poor rescue chickens). Maybe train the rescue chickens to attack intruders. Now THAT would be an interesting Netflix doc.


Often time the “alarm activation” is the owner forgetting there is an alarm, and opening a door or window without turning the alarm off.
Oh I know what happened.  MM got up early morning to go pee in the woods and forgot to deactivate the alarm!


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> Another lawsuit?
> 
> "_*Angela Levin says the Duchess of Sussex will hit back *in the “verbal boxing match” after the former Good Morning Britain presenter’s hour-long Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson...
> 
> Now Ms Levin, author of Harry: Conversations with the Prince, says *Piers could have a similar lawsuit on his hands soon - as she believes Meghan “will fight back.*
> 
> So they’ll carry on bashing away, and I imagine she has lawyers working out a sentence or verb or something that piers said that they could jump on...
> 
> *She's got a very very aggressive legal team and I always think it's amazing what these lawyers can come up with.*
> 
> “I think Piers is a brave man but let's wait and see_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'will fight back' against Piers Morgan's slurs in 'verbal boxing match'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle “will fight back” against Piers Morgan’s slurs, a royal biographer has claimed. Angela Levin says the Duchess of Sussex will hit back in the “verbal boxing match” after the former Goo…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Ugh, someone please post the GoFundMe for Pier’s legal fees if it comes to that. I’ll donate because.. free speech.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> 9 times, is anywhere safe?
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan call police to their £11million California mansion nine times including for a trespasser TWICE at Christmas
> 
> The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls
> They were listed as phone requests, alarm activations and property crimes
> One man was alleged to have trespassed in the early hours of Christmas Eve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Police called to Harry and Meghan's mansion nine times in nine months
> 
> 
> Since Harry and Meghan moved in to their Montecito home with Archie in July last year, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can't wait to see how long before they jump on the defund the police bandwagon.


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> Often time the “alarm activation” is the owner forgetting there is an alarm, and opening a door or window without turning the alarm off.
> Oh I know what happened.  MM got up early morning to go pee in the woods and forgot to deactivate the alarm!



Alarm activations typically have a code one can use to instruct the alarm company to call off police. If a criminal is forcing you to cancel of course you give a false code, or if you can't remember the code on a "false alarm" the police are still sent. We're given three "free" false alarms a year, after that you pay $300 for each false alarm call. Given where Meghan lives the false alarm calls should be much more expensive. Funny how having to pay money forces one to activate some brains.


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> Can't wait to see how long before they jump on the defund the police bandwagon.



I was thinking the exact same thing!


----------



## marietouchet

I looked it up ... the Paralympics came up on the news (when the discussion was the upcoming Olympics in China). Unable to find out if the Paralympics are sponsored by the same group as the Olympics, maybe not ?

Curious I looked up the Special Olympics - intellectual disabilities, Paralympics - 6 categories of disabilities and Invictus Games - military personnel serving or veteran. 

Interesting - there is some overlap - one might compete in more than 1 of these events. Conversely, the 3 groups are competing for some of the same sponsors.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> * Are these trumped up "calls" just for more publicity in an attempt to "prove" that they're victims targeted by crazies? Maybe as an attempt to guilt Charles into paying for their security? *How about buying ten Rottweilers (oops, poor rescue chickens). Maybe train the rescue chickens to attack intruders. Now THAT would be an interesting Netflix doc.



 

Nailed. We only get news from these 2 when they want something.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Physically-definitely not. Plus there's the "stupid/gullible/naive" factor that comes with growing up surrounded by servants and security that hinders self-reliance and coping skills. William, on the other hand, gives the impression he's nobody's fool and seems capable on his own despite the same upbringing. Harry ignored obvious red flags and advice. Meghan played/plays him for the fool that he is and is laughing all the way to his bank account. She discarded her own family like garbage and got Harry to do the same. She breeds for meal tickets and fame then trashes the source of money and fame. They deserve each other.


I used to think he was cute in his own way but no more.....all I see now is an angry man-boy  - not attractive


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Piers wants her to sue because he wont settle and will force her to testify... which would be awful for MM - being cross examined... and no RF to protect her....
> 
> edit to add... can’t wait for the lawsuit... it would be a huge spectacle.



It there is a lawsuit, it absolutely must be in the US. It would make a magnificent celebrity trial! 

I can already imagine how Meghan's courtroom sketches would look.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> It there is a lawsuit, it absolutely must be in the US. It would make a magnificent celebrity trial!
> 
> I can already imagine how Meghan's courtroom sketches would look.



Meghan's hair always looks better when it's illustrated. Wasn't OJ's trial shown on TV? That was in CA. Laws vary state by state and sometimes it's up to the judge to allow or refuse use of cameras in court.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Meghan's hair always looks better when it's illustrated. *Wasn't OJ's trial shown on TV? *That was in CA. Laws vary state by state and sometimes it's up to the judge to allow or refuse use of cameras in court.



Yes, and it was must-see daytime viewing for months, the highest rated trial in TV history.


----------



## floatinglili

bag-mania said:


> Yes, and it was must-see daytime viewing for months, the highest rated trial in TV history.


OMG I hope the Harkles don’t secretly read this thread!! There’ll be a show trial Meghan vs piers coming up on Netflix now you’ve mentioned that!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I would watch this trial.  Maybe we could vote on the prosecuting attorney.  No to Marcia Clark.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I would watch this trial.  Maybe we could vote on the prosecuting attorney.  No to Marcia Clark.


I have to admit I'd be more interested in this than their propaganda


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> Why do wealthy people with their own security personnel have to call the police so much?  Are their own security people not up to the task? Or are M&H too cheap to pay for their own security and just call the police every ten minutes?  What happened to the trespasser?  Are these trumped up "calls" just for more publicity in an attempt to "prove" that they're victims targeted by crazies? Maybe as an attempt to guilt Charles into paying for their security? How about buying ten Rottweilers (oops, poor rescue chickens). Maybe train the rescue chickens to attack intruders. Now THAT would be an interesting Netflix doc.



There have been several cases of break ins at celebrities homes in LA recently. Kendall Jenner is another one and she definitely pays top dollar for private security I'm sure. I think unfortunately it just happens. Really unfortunate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

limom said:


> Were you ok with Galliano “cancellation”?


I don’t know anything about it.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> What does being abusive toward others bring to any society?
> Cancel culture is about making people accountable for their speech and/or actions.
> For example in this thread, some users are saying that they will not use any products promoted by H and M, aren’t they effectively trying to cancel the couple?
> Or is cancel culture only when it reflects certain political views?
> I say cancel and counter cancel!


Limon I enjoy your point of views. The reason for me that cancel culture is bad is that for me as long as human beings are in this planet we will all never align to be programmed to behave homogeneously.

Just because I don’t like something or criticize someone or something does not make me a racist. We are wired that way. Choices are a beautiful thing. 

Debates are good and healthy and disagreements can also be healthy it’s what makes us human and that is true diversity. 

Look at Thailand if you say something negative about their king you go to jail. Some countries don’t have women’s rights but we can denounce it in the comfort of our homes far away but will it make a difference what we say? No it won’t. This universe is huge and the ability to say what we want is a gift. No matter how bad it is. Being silenced is not a good thing. 

I would hate to go to a party and every one is like me. No uniqueness, no change to challenge my beliefs or thoughts I’d be nothing than a robot. 

If you have an open mind and just for opposing view insight I’d recommend n
No Safe Spaces on Amazon Prime.

Peace!


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> There have been several cases of break ins at celebrities homes in LA recently. Kendall Jenner is another one and she definitely pays top dollar for private security I'm sure. I think unfortunately it just happens. Really unfortunate.



You're right. In Jenner's case it'd almost have to be an inside job considering what she spends, I heard the Jenners pay over 300K monthly. When high profile people get murdered, sometimes it's because somebody's paid off their bodyguard(s). In M&H's case, I have ZERO sympathy that the BRF isn't footing their bill since M&H slandered them on TV for the world to see. Let's say that M&H actually told Oprah a few things that were true. Why wouldn't Harry have called somebody on the carpet to defend his wife? If they're ballsy enough to slander the BRF on TV now, where were the gonads at the time these alleged events occurred? Makes no sense. NONE.


----------



## lalame

limom said:


> What does being abusive toward others bring to any society?
> Cancel culture is about making people accountable for their speech and/or actions.
> *For example in this thread, some users are saying that they will not use any products promoted by H and M, aren’t they effectively trying to cancel the couple?*
> Or is cancel culture only when it reflects certain political views?
> I say cancel and counter cancel!



I agree with you here, I think it's just different sides of the same coin - and I don't necessarily think it's wrong either way even though that's not how I would do it all the time. Lots of people said they'd cancel their Netflix or Spotify subscription just because they contracted with M+H. At the end of the day I think high profile people/companies like Meghan or Piers even are fair game since they put themselves out there and should accept they'll be criticized freely. These people make A LOT of money just for having an opinion. The public giveth and it taketh.  Fame is not stable or even logical.

I think it goes too far with private individuals though... boycotting is OK, but cancel culture sometimes takes a "you'll never redeem yourself so just cease to exist" flavor that I think can be morally toxic.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> You're right. In Jenner's case it'd almost have to be an inside job considering what she spends, I heard the Jenners pay over 300K monthly. When high profile people get murdered, sometimes it's because somebody's paid off their bodyguard(s). In M&H's case, I have ZERO sympathy that the BRF isn't footing their bill since M&H slandered them on TV for the world to see. Let's say that M&H actually told Oprah a few things that were true. Why wouldn't Harry have called somebody on the carpet to defend his wife? If they're ballsy enough to slander the BRF on TV now, where were the gonads at the time these alleged events occurred? Makes no sense. NONE.


I
Agree.


----------



## lalame

rose60610 said:


> You're right. In Jenner's case it'd almost have to be an inside job considering what she spends, I heard the Jenners pay over 300K monthly. When high profile people get murdered, sometimes it's because somebody's paid off their bodyguard(s). In M&H's case, I have ZERO sympathy that the BRF isn't footing their bill since M&H slandered them on TV for the world to see. Let's say that M&H actually told Oprah a few things that were true. Why wouldn't Harry have called somebody on the carpet to defend his wife? If they're ballsy enough to slander the BRF on TV now, where were the gonads at the time these alleged events occurred? Makes no sense. NONE.



I have some sympathy for anyone who gets violated BUT in M+H case it's a little unusual... most celebrities don't have a huge security apparatus available to them, including multiple. huge. gated. properties policed by layers of public and private security.  They're realizing if they want to be a normal celebrity... welcome to a normal celebrity's problems.


----------



## rose60610

Cancel culture fans are more often than not huge hypocrites. There are countless times a mob attacks XYZ over whatever, then are mysteriously silent if ABC does the same thing or worse.


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> I have some sympathy for anyone who gets violated BUT in M+H case it's a little unusual... most celebrities don't have a huge security apparatus available to them, including multiple. huge. gated. properties policed by layers of public and private security.  They're realizing *if they want to be a normal celebrity... welcome to a normal celebrity's problems.*



100%


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> I would watch this trial.  Maybe we could vote on the prosecuting attorney.  No to Marcia Clark.



I hope there will not be a trial. A trial would cause us to spend more time reading this thread than we already do


----------



## Jayne1

limom said:


> For example in this thread, some users are saying that they will not use any products promoted by H and M, aren’t they effectively trying to cancel the couple?
> Or is cancel culture only when it reflects certain political views?


No matter how much I admire a person/celebrity, once they get paid to advertise and try to sell me a product, I refuse to buy it.

In fact, I won't watch their videos or like their Instagrams for the post.

Anyone else like me?


----------



## bisousx

Jayne1 said:


> No matter how much I admire a person/celebrity, once they get paid to advertise and try to sell me a product, I refuse to buy it.
> 
> In fact, I won't watch their videos or like their Instagrams for the post.
> 
> Anyone else like me?



Celebrity or influencer endorsement makes me NOT want to buy a product.

Not out of spite for the celeb, I simply distrust the product because of the endorsement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> Celebrity or influencer endorsement makes me NOT want to buy a product.
> 
> Not out of spite for the celeb, I simply distrust the product because of the endorsement.



Celebs are endorsing for $$$$. 
That changes everything.


----------



## bag-mania

I roll my eyes whenever I hear people say they are boycotting a product/company. Inevitably it turns out to be something they never used anyway. They aren't making a sacrifice or a big social statement when they weren't a client to begin with.


----------



## lalame

Jayne1 said:


> No matter how much I admire a person/celebrity, once they get paid to advertise and try to sell me a product, I refuse to buy it.
> 
> In fact, I won't watch their videos or like their Instagrams for the post.
> 
> Anyone else like me?



I think it's just so hard to do this in practice these days... every brand/product has some celebrity advertising. You probably wouldn't even be on TPF because every brand on here pays celebrities to advertise them!

But if you mean you never buy things solely because of a celebrity advertisement, I agree with you. Sometimes influencers do make me want to buy something but to me it's more of a mannequin situation rather than I'm buying it because of their clout.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bisousx said:


> Celebrity or influencer endorsement makes me NOT want to buy a product.
> 
> Not out of spite for the celeb, I simply distrust the product because of the endorsement.



I can’t say that... there’s a celebrity who’s endorsing a medicine that is an absolute game changer in my life and I just have to deal... went from 18 migraines a month to 3 if that tells ya who it is...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

limom said:


> Cancel culture is about making people accountable for their speech and/or actions.



It really is not, it is about an exaggerated reaction to a real or perceived offense.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It really is not, it is about an exaggerated reaction to a real or perceived offense.



This is a perfect distillation of what cancel culture is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some boycotts are absolutely worth it and effective.
The one in 1769 over taxation without representation, ahem (British Parliament), was indeed important. Kudos to the those who spoke up.









						No taxation without representation - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It really is not, it is about an exaggerated reaction to a real or perceived offense.



Almost all of these ’cancels’ have been well-funded by a group with a strong political agenda. IMO that is dishonest.
Tell us who is supporting this cancel-call, then we can form our opinions. Telling me what to think, that smacks of propaganda and a bunch of other ugly words and tactics.  This is what H&M have done with their ‘lectures’.  The hypocrisy catches them every time. Not very clevr, is it?


----------



## Lodpah

bisousx said:


> Celebrity or influencer endorsement makes me NOT want to buy a product.
> 
> Not out of spite for the celeb, I simply distrust the product because of the endorsement.


I like George Clooney but don’t buy his tequila. There are better ones out there. Small companies who make better tequila.


----------



## lalame

I don't even know how cancel culture applies to Piers' situation anyway. His company asked him to do something he didn't want to do so he resigned instead... he still has a big following on his personal platforms... and he's still doing interviews and getting job offers. He'll probably be back on another show just as quickly. Where is the cancellation?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I don't even know how cancel culture applies to Piers' situation anyway. His company asked him to do something he didn't want to do so he resigned instead... he still has a big following on his personal platforms... and he's still doing interviews and getting job offers. He'll probably be back on another show just as quickly. Where is the cancellation?



MM called his bosses and told them to fire Piers.
IMO that is not really a ‘cancel’ issue as much as an abuse of power.  It is possible the bosses thought MM would lead a boycott against them if they did not fire Piers. Corporate leaders need to be stronger, don‘t give in to the threats.  Since lots of money is behind the threats, corporate leaders have a difficult time standing up to these bullies.  The daily onslaught of accusations is becoming tiresome, so, maybe, we are nearing the end - or the beginning of something new and wonderful   Peace.

ETA: H&M do seem to be on the phone a lot.  Wonder why they couldn’t call for help for MM? Hmmmm.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't even know how cancel culture applies to Piers' situation anyway. His company asked him to do something he didn't want to do so he resigned instead... he still has a big following on his personal platforms... and he's still doing interviews and getting job offers. He'll probably be back on another show just as quickly. Where is the cancellation?



I can see where he would think it was. His job as a morning talk show host was to express his beliefs. He did that. Meghan complained. His bosses wanted him to apologize and he had no intention of doing that. If he hadn't quit it's likely he would have been fired. Whether he resigned or was fired the message within the entertainment industry is the same. "We don't like what you said so you can't be here anymore. Not unless you grovel profusely and show proper remorse for having an opinion that strayed from the network message."


----------



## rose60610

We'll never see it, but wouldn't it be poetic justice if Charles or Kate listed a series of Meghan's impolite drama queen actions behind the scenes? Regardless, I think more people side with the BRF vs Meghan and Harry's 200th pity party.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I can see where he would think it was. His job as a morning talk show host was to express his beliefs. He did that. Meghan complained. His bosses wanted him to apologize and he had no intention of doing that. If he hadn't quit it's likely he would have been fired. Whether he resigned or was fired the message within the entertainment industry is the same. "We don't like what you said so you can't be here anymore. Not unless you grovel profusely and show proper remorse for having an opinion that strayed from the network message."



I don't think his job as a morning talk show host entitles him to say ANYTHING (unless that's the policy of the network)... at the end of the day he's an employee, and you're only as good as how well you serve your employer. If for whatever reason they didn't like what he was saying, heck even his style, I don't call that cancellation for them to fire him. He seemed to be mistaken about the policy of his employer. 

Take any other analogy... if Tucker Carlson woke up one day and started stanning leftist policies, he won't be long for that network either.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> 9 times, is anywhere safe?
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan call police to their £11million California mansion nine times including for a trespasser TWICE at Christmas
> 
> The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls
> They were listed as phone requests, alarm activations and property crimes
> One man was alleged to have trespassed in the early hours of Christmas Eve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Police called to Harry and Meghan's mansion nine times in nine months
> 
> 
> Since Harry and Meghan moved in to their Montecito home with Archie in July last year, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That house is decreasing in value with every article  I assume the chickens have already destroyed the garden at the very least.

Also isn’t amazing that in a gated community of celebrities they alone are apparently drawing all the attention?


rose60610 said:


> Why do wealthy people with their own security personnel have to call the police so much?  Are their own security people not up to the task? Or are M&H too cheap to pay for their own security and just call the police every ten minutes?  What happened to the trespasser?  Are these trumped up "calls" just for more publicity in an attempt to "prove" that they're victims targeted by crazies? Maybe as an attempt to guilt Charles into paying for their security? How about buying ten Rottweilers (oops, poor rescue chickens). Maybe train the rescue chickens to attack intruders. Now THAT would be an interesting Netflix doc.


That would be great - definite duck dynasty vibe.
Perhaps the dog whisperer could come in and help them teach the Rottweilers and the chickens to get along while making some ham-fisted analogies to tolerance. 

I am sure most bouncers are perfectly capable of frogmarching one lone man out the gates so I don’t get it either. unfortunately, many celebrities have to deal with invasive behaviour at some point and their staff know exactly what to do. I’d assume most celebs don’t call the police for things their security handles. So yeah probably just want the attention.


----------



## VickyB

limom said:


> View attachment 5048660


ha! Watching it right now!


----------



## lalame

I also don't think Meghan has enough clout to call up a network boss and make them fire someone. Not she herself. She can't even get tabloids to stop reporting negative stories on her. But the TOPIC of M+H right now is kind of radioactive so they probably felt the social pressure to fire him. I wouldn't have made that choice, but that's kind of their choice as a business.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Alarm activations typically have a code one can use to instruct the alarm company to call off police. If a criminal is forcing you to cancel of course you give a false code, or if you can't remember the code on a "false alarm" the police are still sent. We're given three "free" false alarms a year, after that you pay $300 for each false alarm call. Given where Meghan lives the false alarm calls should be much more expensive. Funny how having to pay money forces one to activate some brains.


A small price to pay for that sweet, sweet publicity.


Sol Ryan said:


> I can’t say that... there’s a celebrity who’s endorsing a medicine that is an absolute game changer in my life and I just have to deal... went from 18 migraines a month to 3 if that tells ya who it is...


Glad your situation has improved- migraines are the worst!


----------



## Jayne1

bisousx said:


> Celebrity or influencer endorsement makes me NOT want to buy a product.
> 
> Not out of spite for the celeb, I simply distrust the product because of the endorsement.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Celebs are endorsing for $$$$.
> That changes everything.


Exactly. Money changes everything and I now distrust the celeb and the product.


lalame said:


> I don't even know how cancel culture applies to Piers' situation anyway. His company asked him to do something he didn't want to do so he resigned instead... he still has a big following on his personal platforms... and he's still doing interviews and getting job offers. He'll probably be back on another show just as quickly. Where is the cancellation?


Big corporations hate controversy. They want to appear like they are taking the situation seriously so everyone can move on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> I would watch this trial.  Maybe we could vote on the prosecuting attorney.  No to Marcia Clark.


Isn't Kim Kardashian a lawyer yet?

Tho I think Meghan will want to keep it all in the family - she can hire Dr. Phil to help with jury selection and preparation for her trial, just like Oprah did back when she went to court with those Texas ranchers.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't think his job as a morning talk show host entitles him to say ANYTHING (unless that's the policy of the network)... at the end of the day he's an employee, and you're only as good as how well you serve your employer. If for whatever reason they didn't like what he was saying, heck even his style, I don't call that cancellation for them to fire him. He seemed to be mistaken about the policy of his employer.



It may not be an entitlement, but until this incident it was apparently an expectation. As near as I can tell he served his employers well. Ratings for the show have plummeted since he left. So it appears it is those who run the show and make the decisions who are not serving the show's best interests.



lalame said:


> Take any other analogy... if Tucker Carlson woke up one day and started stanning leftist policies, he won't be long for that network either.



Well, Tucker used to have a show on CNN for five years and also had a show on MSNBC for three years. That was back in the early 2000s before news networks went to an all "one view" outlook.


----------



## floatinglili

lalame said:


> I also don't think Meghan has enough clout to call up a network boss and make them fire someone. Not she herself. She can't even get tabloids to stop reporting negative stories on her. But the TOPIC of M+H right now is kind of radioactive so they probably felt the social pressure to fire him. I wouldn't have made that choice, but that's kind of their choice as a business.


Criticism of MM is being conflated with racism which is a sackable offence. Also the people who fly a flag for mental health were outraged at his Questioning of her account so a double bunger.
I think this situation can be seen as an example of cancel culture, but Piers has been strong enough to fight it off.


----------



## TC1

Lodpah said:


> I like George Clooney but don’t buy his tequila. There are better ones out there. Small companies who make better tequila.


Agreed, but George sold that company for a billion in 2017 anyhow. So whatever you buy, he's made his $$$ already.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> No matter how much I admire a person/celebrity, once they get paid to advertise and try to sell me a product, I refuse to buy it.
> 
> In fact, I won't watch their videos or like their Instagrams for the post.
> 
> Anyone else like me?





We also have to be careful where algorithms lead. It's like being followed and then someone showing you a diary you never kept. I never type in M or H's name on Google etc because software knows what you searched but never why. All of a sudden I'm  a H&M lover, a royalist, obsessively interested in 'Princess Diana's' death, a (fake)woke Millennial and a conspiracy theorist.

On FB they have me down as a muscular gay gay (from the ads they stalk me with) and YouTube is convinced I'm French.


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> Criticism of MM is being conflated with racism which is a sackable offence. Also the people who fly a flag for mental health, so a double bunger.
> I think this situation can be seen as an example of cancel culture, but Piers has been strong enough to fight it off.



Piers knows that in the UK at least, H&M have very few fans.  He has positioned himself as leading the charge against 2 very unpopular figures.


----------



## poopsie

It's like on all my streaming platforms where they love to show me alllllllll these shows I might like based on my viewing history. Never ONCE have they got one right.


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> I can’t say that... there’s a celebrity who’s endorsing a medicine that is an absolute game changer in my life and I just have to deal... went from 18 migraines a month to 3 if that tells ya who it is...



I don't know who that is but as a fellow M&M (migraine and Meghan sufferer) I am so pleased for you. Tuesday, I vomited all morning on nothing, in pain and couldn't eat a thing 'till 7pm after pain killers. The whole day (and a very rare holiday) ruined.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Agreed, but George sold that company for a billion in 2017 anyhow. So whatever you buy, he's made his $$$ already.



George Clooney got a bit of bad press last year. It was discovered that the coffee company he shills for, Nespresso, has coffee suppliers who use child labor on their farms. I'm surprised it wasn't a bigger story but George is a powerful name and he's made a lot of money from Nespresso. Still, it is funny to imagine Amal confronting him in court about human rights violations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I don't know who that is but as a fellow M&M (migraine and Meghan sufferer) I am so pleased for you. Tuesday, I vomited all morning on nothing, in pain and couldn't eat a thing 'till 7pm after pain killers. The whole day (and a very rare holiday) ruined.



Be well, dear ones. Sending healing thoughts to you and all.      
It is ok and, actually, very refreshing to forget about H&M for awhile. Guaranteed they spend less than zero time thinking about us.  Life goes on.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> It's like on all my streaming platforms where they love to show me alllllllll these shows I might like based on my viewing history. Never ONCE have they got one right.



That's also because they have to push the products they are paid most for on you too. But totally, DH is German so once he watches a German series, even if it's set in the future, it's back to ze war (WWII) for every film, doc and series. Watch a film that just happens to have a gay couple and the platform has 'outed' you. 

Never watch an H&M Netflix/Amazon series even for research, they will never let you go. 

I guess this is why they make the search functions so useless. Can't search? get stuck with the rubbish they want you to watch.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> It may not be an entitlement, but until this incident it was apparently an expectation. As near as I can tell he served his employers well. Ratings for the show have plummeted since he left. So it appears it is those who run the show and make the decisions who are not serving the show's best interests.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Tucker used to have a show on CNN for five years and also had a show on MSNBC for three years. That was back in the early 2000s before news networks went to an all "one view" outlook.



It could very well be a bad business decision on their part to push him out. One man's trash is another man's treasure. But I still wouldn't call that cancelling him because he WILL be another man's treasure. You serve your employer well... until you suddenly do something they don't like and then you don't serve them well anymore.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Be well, dear ones. Sending healing thoughts to you and all.
> It is ok and, actually, very refreshing to forget about H&M for awhile. Guaranteed they spend less than zero time thinking about us.  Life goes on.


----------



## floatinglili

lalame said:


> It could very well be a bad business decision on their part to push him out. One man's trash is another man's treasure. But I still wouldn't call that cancelling him because he WILL be another man's treasure. You serve your employer well... until you suddenly do something they don't like and then you don't serve them well anymore.



What is serving an employer well though? The programme where he critiqued the Harkle interview was a very high rating programme. Serving the employer. And yet rather than be patted on the back he was put in a position he thought was untenable. Cancel culture is not at all aligned with capitalism, although cancel activists do try to weaponise capitalism.

Edited sorry I have fat fingers and do all this on my phone so usually make mistakes.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> 9 times, is anywhere safe?
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan call police to their £11million California mansion nine times including for a trespasser TWICE at Christmas
> 
> The Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls
> They were listed as phone requests, alarm activations and property crimes
> One man was alleged to have trespassed in the early hours of Christmas Eve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Police called to Harry and Meghan's mansion nine times in nine months
> 
> 
> Since Harry and Meghan moved in to their Montecito home with Archie in July last year, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office has responded to nine calls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They may have a faulty alarm. One of my neighbors' alarm was always going on by itself, several visits from security people until the alarm was fixed or replaced.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> They may have a faulty alarm



They spent all their money buying the house, so they didn’t have any left over for a proper security alarm.


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> I don't know who that is but as a fellow M&M (migraine and Meghan sufferer) I am so pleased for you. Tuesday, I vomited all morning on nothing, in pain and couldn't eat a thing 'till 7pm after pain killers. The whole day (and a very rare holiday) ruined.



I am so sorry to see that. I’ve missed so many days of work for migraines. Every time I had a day off, guaranteed I’d be hugging the toilet and hiding from light to the point I‘ve stopped taking leave. It just wasn’t worth wasting it. I’d rather work than have a migraine. Year before last, I went on staycation and had 5 migraines in 8 days. Even with my meds, I’m still scared to take a day off, it’s usually when I’ll have a headache. But I take three different meds (a monthly shot, a nightly pill and a rescue med for when I get as soon a headache starts (Kardashian Migraine Med bah!)) and we knocked it down to pretty much three headaches a month... that’s almost bearable...


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> They spent all their money buying the house, so they didn’t have any left over for a proper security alarm.



The security system is sending Pula and Guy outside to bark at intruders. Those two have to earn their milk bones!


----------



## Lodpah

TC1 said:


> Agreed, but George sold that company for a billion in 2017 anyhow. So whatever you buy, he's made his $$$ already.


Tru dat. My point was I don’t get swayed by a celebrity endorsement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> I am so sorry to see that. I’ve missed so many days of work for migraines. Every time I had a day off, guaranteed I’d be hugging the toilet and hiding from light to the point I‘ve stopped taking leave. It just wasn’t worth wasting it. I’d rather work than have a migraine. Year before last, I went on staycation and had 5 migraines in 8 days. Even with my meds, I’m still scared to take a day off, it’s usually when I’ll have a headache. But I take three different meds (a monthly shot, a nightly pill and a rescue med for when I get as soon a headache starts (Kardashian Migraine Med bah!)) and we knocked it down to pretty much three headaches a month... that’s almost bearable...



Do you sleep in on those off days? Some peoples' migraines react badly to any disruption of their sleep pattern, even it it means that extra hour in the morning! 

I'm so lucky I've grown out my horrible teenage migraines, I now get mild ones only a few times a year.


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> I hope there will not be a trial. A trial would cause us to spend more time reading this thread than we already do


Excellent point! Though, this thread has been very entertaining during COVID. 

We also learned interesting things here. After observing some of the spending habits and hypocrisy of MM&H, I have no intention of donating to Archew*ll or sponsoring their activities. It has nothing to do with cancel culture, it is pure common sense!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I am so sorry to see that. I’ve missed so many days of work for migraines. Every time I had a day off, guaranteed I’d be hugging the toilet and hiding from light to the point I‘ve stopped taking leave. It just wasn’t worth wasting it. I’d rather work than have a migraine. Year before last, I went on staycation and had 5 migraines in 8 days. Even with my meds, I’m still scared to take a day off, it’s usually when I’ll have a headache. But I take three different meds (a monthly shot, a nightly pill and a rescue med for when I get as soon a headache starts (Kardashian Migraine Med bah!)) and we knocked it down to pretty much three headaches a month... that’s almost bearable...



Hoping it continues to improve


----------



## lalame

floatinglili said:


> What is serving an employer well though? The programme where he critiqued the Harkle interview was a very high rating programme. Serving the employer. And yet rather than be patted on the back he was put in a position he thought was untenable. Cancel culture is not at all aligned with capitalism, although cancel activists do try to weaponise capitalism.
> 
> Edited sorry I have fat fingers and do all this on my phone so usually make mistakes.



Serving an employer well = whatever makes the employer happy, which isn't always necessarily about money. I mean if you offer to give the CEO of ITV $10k if he lets you spit on him, he's not gonna be like "I'm a capitalist and I like money so anything goes!" I think these principles apply to anyone...

Directors hire actors to act but if they don't like the performance, the actor gets fired.
Sales people get hired to sell but if they're not doing it the company-sanctioned way, the seller gets fired.
Talk show hosts get hired to have interesting ideas, but when that idea is counter to what the network wants they get fired. 

I don't really call that cancel culture... it's just not a good fit.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I can’t say that... there’s a celebrity who’s endorsing a medicine that is an absolute game changer in my life and I just have to deal... went from 18 migraines a month to 3 if that tells ya who it is...


don't like those commercials but if it's helping you that's great....and you didn't buy it cause she said so, right?
Did it make your boobs look like hers?


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> We also have to be careful where algorithms lead. It's like being followed and then someone showing you a diary you never kept. I never type in M or H's name on Google etc because software knows what you searched but never why. All of a sudden I  a H&M lover, a royalist, obsessively interested in 'Princess Diana's' death, a (fake)woke Millennial and a conspiracy theorist.


That's a good point.  Must remember that.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> don't like those commercials but if it's helping you that's great....and you didn't buy it cause she said so, right?
> Did it make your boobs look like hers?


Looking at the unfiltered picture of her in a bikini that accidentally got posted on line the other day, and freaked her out, the real boobs don't look exactly like the ones often featured in her photoshopped pictures.  

Back to M and H. Playing the victim card over security, as in the horrid RF took away our money, M and H need to revisit history. In 1982 an intruder breached the Queen's bedroom while she occupied it, she handled it. In 1974 there was an attempt to highjack Princess Anne's vehicle. The attempted kidnapper shot 3 people before trying to pull her from the car, telling her to get out. She cooly told him "Not bloody likely". Kind of timely to revisit this. Don't mess with the Queen or the Princess Royal .


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> What does being abusive toward others bring to any society?
> Cancel culture is about making people accountable for their speech and/or actions.
> For example in this thread, some users are saying that they will not use any products promoted by H and M, aren’t they effectively trying to cancel the couple?
> Or is cancel culture only when it reflects certain political views?
> I say cancel and counter cancel!


I wouldn't boycott a product because of some celebrity's endorsement, but I would definitely be extra vigilant in my research if that product was using the celebrity's image or reputation as "proof" that it works. 

For instance, if MM acted as a "normal" mum and endorsed a brand of blender for baby food and it so happened that I needed a new blender, I'd check the reviews and buy it not because she endorsed it but because real normal mums were also praising it. 

If she said an anti-depression medical product worked or that Northwestern had a great International Relations programme, I'd be sceptical due to her reputation and history. 

If she was endorsing her security contractor, I'd probably say No Way because in the back of my mind, I'd be suspecting she was doing it in exchange for free security services


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> We also have to be careful where algorithms lead. It's like being followed and then someone showing you a diary you never kept. I never type in M or H's name on Google etc because software knows what you searched but never why. All of a sudden I'm  a H&M lover, a royalist, obsessively interested in 'Princess Diana's' death, a (fake)woke Millennial and a conspiracy theorist.
> 
> On FB they have me down as a muscular gay gay (from the ads they stalk me with) and YouTube is convinced I'm French.


A reporter wrote about this echo chamber effect during the last elections in my country. He realized that all his news feeds were morphing to show him only articles which the algorithm assessed had agreed with whatever viewpoint was reflected in previous searches he had done.


----------



## Allisonfaye

nm


----------



## CarryOn2020

Global Reset :  One world, one view, no dissent. My way or the highway. [probably why MM has difficulty retaining staff]  
Call centers want employees who recite the manual, never stray from the script.
The morning talk shows all sing the similar songs - keep it peppy, keep it light, everyone agrees.

Confident, secure employers want free thinkers with problem solving skills because not every situation/problem is in the manual.
Looking forward to the day those employers can return!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Allisonfaye said:


> Well, I can tell you that I had a choice between two airlines when I booked a flight today. I declined to choose the one that said they will now hire their pilots because of their skin color. Also, I was thinking about buying a new car in the next few years...would strongly consider buying the same brand I have now. But now I won't because they came out against Georgia recently.


I love your answer. I’m a minority and I want someone who is the most capable to do the job. All these AAs are setting us minorities back to dark ages. I hate that they think we are stupid not to have ids. Where on earth can you do anything without an ID. I’ll be going to LV next month. I think I’ll trot on over to TSA and say I have no ID. How dare they ask for it. I’ll scream racists and call the papers. That’s when all the hypocrites will come out and say well that’s different.” 

I wish they would stop. We are not disabled, not stupid, we just want to be judged by the content of our characters, at least I do.

ETA: No, I’m not a minority call me a human being.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?






						Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, are H&M still members?


*Analysts believe its members-only model will prove popular as people emerge from the travel and stay-at-home restrictions *









						Soho House secretly files for IPO on NYSE with value of over $3b
					

Soho House, a favored hangout for A-listers including Kourtney Kardashian and Taylor Swift, right, has secretly filed papers to list on the NYSE. Its valuation is expected to top $3billion.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> I love your answer. I’m a minority and I want someone who is the most capable to do the job.* All these AAs are setting us minorities back to dark ages. I hate t*hat they think we are stupid not to have ids. Where on earth can you do anything without an ID. I’ll be going to LV next month. I think I’ll trot on over to TSA and say I have no ID. How dare they ask for it. I’ll scream racists and call the papers. That’s when all the hypocrites will come out and say well that’s different.”
> 
> I wish they would stop. We are not disabled, not stupid, we just want to be judged by the content of our characters, at least I do.
> 
> ETA: No, I’m not a minority call me a human being.


What are AAs in this context?


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> What are AAs in this context?


Affirmative Action. A horrible thing for minorities. It categorizes us as “different” and not capable of succeeding on our own merits.


----------



## limom

Lodpah said:


> Affirmative Action. A horrible thing for minorities. It categorizes us as “different” and not capable of succeeding on our own merits.



Clint Eastwood was so hot back then, who would have known he would speak to an empty chair, many years later?


----------



## lalame

How does AA even work in the case of pilots? They still have to pass federally regulated training and testing, right? There's 2 flavors that I have seen of this issue... 1. company just puts more effort into recruiting in more diverse places (eg add HBCUs into the mix) without lowering any standards for anyone, 2. literally lower testing thresholds. I don't see how #2 could apply here.

But now we're really getting off the reservation.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> Affirmative Action. A horrible thing for minorities.



White people benefit from affirmative action too; i.e., white women in college admissions.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Wow. Saying the quiet part out loud.


----------



## limom

lalame said:


> How does AA even work in the case of pilots? They still have to pass federally regulated training and testing, right? There's 2 flavors that I have seen of this issue... 1. company just puts more effort into recruiting in more diverse places (eg add HBCUs into the mix) without lowering any standards for anyone, 2. literally lower testing thresholds. I don't see how #2 could apply here.
> 
> But now we're really getting off the reservation.


Is this what is being referred to?








						'Diversifying the cockpit:' United Airlines recruiting 5K pilots for new flight school; half will be women, people of color
					

United Airlines is accepting applications for its flight school, United Aviate Academy.




					abc7chicago.com


----------



## floatinglili

lalame said:


> Serving an employer well = whatever makes the employer happy, which isn't always necessarily about money. I mean if you offer to give the CEO of ITV $10k if he lets you spit on him, he's not gonna be like "I'm a capitalist and I like money so anything goes!" I think these principles apply to anyone...
> 
> Directors hire actors to act but if they don't like the performance, the actor gets fired.
> Sales people get hired to sell but if they're not doing it the company-sanctioned way, the seller gets fired.
> Talk show hosts get hired to have interesting ideas, but when that idea is counter to what the network wants they get fired.
> 
> I don't really call that cancel culture... it's just not a good fit.


If we can’t agree on what fits the definition of cancel culture well it might be difficult to have a conversation about cancel culture in this format. However I will respond even though yes we are wandering OT. 
One could be forgiven for thinking that ‘the interests  of the employer’ primarily revolve around doing the specific job well as measured by its commercial success. However as our culture as become more involved in political identity politics the remit of the employer seems to spread. Normally left wing pressure groups are anxious to curtail the rights of the employer, particularly when it comes to the control of political expression. 
In this new age though, activists seem to happy to pressure employers along political lines regardless of the job-specific skills of their employee, and happy to have the employer pressure the employees (presumably for fear of the company being targeted negatively by activists). 
This pressure goes both ways - employers and managers have also fallen on their sword because they cling to unfashionable beliefs about touchstone cancel culture issues such as unconscious bias. 
And then we have the employers who positively throw themselves into fashionable social identity political campaigns and, certain they have the moral high ground, force their employees to reflect this position as well. Qantas, Australia’s premier air company, had their employees wear paraphernalia (issued as part of their uniform ) supporting the positive vote on adding gay unions to the country’s historical marriage definition, in the lead up to the National referendum on the matter. Not so long ago such political involvement amd pressure from the employer regarding a personal vote would have been condemned. Now in some workplaces it seems we all must wear out heart on our sleeve (and in the case of Qantas employees, literally). 
I understand that in the US it is quite common to make your vote or political preferences public, forced as you are to register with a particular party, but for many of us living elsewhere it is a huge cultural change. These things used to to be held as very private. And certainly none of an employers central business when it comes to hiring and firing. Cancel culture and social media has changed the landscape.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Why do I have a feeling the posters supporting Piers Morgan and raging against cancel culture had no problem whatsoever with Colin Kaepernick losing his job.


----------



## kkfiregirl

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Why do I have a feeling the posters supporting Piers Morgan and raging against cancel culture had no problem whatsoever with Colin Kaepernick losing his job.



https://effectiviology.com/false-equivalence/ and https://newslit.org/tips-tools/news-lit-tip-false-equivalence/


----------



## LittleStar88

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Why do I have a feeling the posters supporting Piers Morgan and raging against cancel culture had no problem whatsoever with Colin Kaepernick losing his job.



He lost his job because he wasn’t a good QB. The kneeling thing became a sideshow distraction and one more reason to release him. I’m all for him speaking to his mind but not on the field and not offending fans who watch for the game, not politics/social issues.

Don’t forget those inappropriate socks he wore... Pigs with police hats.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

kkfiregirl said:


> https://effectiviology.com/false-equivalence/ and https://newslit.org/tips-tools/news-lit-tip-false-equivalence/



Please explain the false equivalence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Please explain the false equivalence.



You're making assumptions about people; a person could believe that Piers Morgan shouldn't be canceled AND that Colin Kaepernick shouldn't have lost his job for his protests on the field. It seems like you're implying that to support PM and hate cancel culture makes a person racist, and thus, that person would have no problem with CK (a black man) losing his job despite supporting white people who engaged in similar behavior.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t tend to get into these kinds of discussions but I guess I just struggle with the idea of a position on human rights being a “personal vote” when the person voting isn’t the one who’s rights are being denied.


----------



## LittleStar88

kkfiregirl said:


> You're making assumptions about people; a person could believe that Piers Morgan shouldn't be canceled AND that Colin Kaepernick shouldn't have lost his job for his protests on the field. It seems like you're implying that to support PM and hate cancel culture makes a person racist, and thus, that person would have no problem with CK (a black man) losing his job despite supporting white people who engaged in similar behavior.



What PM and CK did to cause them to lose their jobs are two wildly different things. I don’t even see the similarity attempt other than they stated opinions (about unrelated topics).


----------



## Lodpah

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Why do I have a feeling the posters supporting Piers Morgan and raging against cancel culture had no problem whatsoever with Colin Kaepernick losing his job.


If I pulled something like that at my work and we have diversified clients and it offends them I would be fired. They even have policies I had to read to say that when I’m at work I do the company’s work. Anything beyond that it’s outside my down time but even with social media I can be fired. Hope that answers your question.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do you sleep in on those off days? Some peoples' migraines react badly to any disruption of their sleep pattern, even it it means that extra hour in the morning!
> 
> I'm so lucky I've grown out my horrible teenage migraines, I now get mild ones only a few times a year.



Congrats! A good chunk of mine is probably stress and that I don’t have any consistency in when I sleep. I take care of a relative and work full time and my life goes around them and work shift work. If I get 4 hours of sleep that’s a win. it’s a mess. 



sdkitty said:


> don't like those commercials but if it's helping you that's great....and you didn't buy it cause she said so, right?
> Did it make your boobs look like hers?



I hate those commercials... I really wish she wasn’t associated with meds I need, but it does knock out my headaches Most of the time. Did nothing to help my girls...thank goodness for Victoria’s Secret...


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Confident, secure employers want free thinkers with problem solving skills because not every situation/problem is in the manual.
> Looking forward to the day those employers can return!



Sheeple are real. I inherited a team with members who had been with the company for at least 2 decades. They were very shocked when I told them that part of their performance grading would be based on critical thinking and their interaction with people outside our unit (we were in support services). All their years in the company, they were just toeing the company line and buttering up the boss.


----------



## floatinglili

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Why do I have a feeling the posters supporting Piers Morgan and raging against cancel culture had no problem whatsoever with Colin Kaepernick losing his job.


I don’t know who Colin kaepernick is, but I am very familiar with the concept that a comment or a position on one subject is ‘revealing’ of the dark inner (racist) recesses of that person’s mind. I resist very strongly that reductive - and let’s be honest, disrespectful - type of thinking. Honest conversation and exchange of ideas means people must be engaged with honestly. Complex issues should be judged piece by piece as the nuance of each situation is likely different, if we are to have a deep thinking amd honest culture. I am not a ‘type’ any more than you are, and like you I would resist a reductive smear. Tbh this type of tribalism and stereotyping is why good mannered society once avoided discussion of politics in polite society.


----------



## Chanbal

The all thing is turning into a comedy. 

"_The Archbishop of Canterbury last night sparked a major backlash after he said being a royal is like serving 'life without parole' amid the fallout from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's exit from the Firm.

Justin Welby, the outspoken head of the Church of England, was accused of being 'singularly inappropriate' and 'jumping on a woke bandwagon' after appearing to throw his weight behind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who quit royal duties and moved to California last year to strike out on their own. 

Royal experts have now accused the archbishop of trying to make amends with Team Sussex as he told the Financial Times: *'It's life without parole, isn't it?* If you go back to the 1930s, Edward VIII - he was still a celeb and followed everywhere once he'd abdicated. We expect them to be superhuman._"









						Justin Welby: Being in Royal Family is like 'life without parole'
					

Justin Welby, the Church of England's most senior clergyman, said the public have unrealistic expectations when it comes to the royals as he claimed: 'We expect them to be superhuman'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

floatinglili said:


> If we can’t agree on what fits the definition of cancel culture well it might be difficult to have a conversation about cancel culture in this format. However I will respond even though yes we are wandering OT.
> One could be forgiven for thinking that ‘the interests  of the employer’ primarily revolve around doing the specific job well as measured by its commercial success. However as our culture as become more involved in political identity politics the remit of the employer seems to spread. Normally left wing pressure groups are anxious to curtail the rights of the employer, particularly when it comes to the control of political expression.
> In this new age though, activists seem to happy to pressure employers along political lines regardless of the job-specific skills of their employee, and happy to have the employer pressure the employees (presumably for fear of the company being targeted negatively by activists).
> This pressure goes both ways - employers and managers have also fallen on their sword because they cling to unfashionable beliefs about touchstone cancel culture issues such as unconscious bias.
> And then we have the employers who positively throw themselves into fashionable social identity political campaigns and, certain they have the moral high ground, force their employees to reflect this position as well. Qantas, Australia’s premier air company, had their employees wear paraphernalia (issued as part of their uniform ) supporting the positive vote on adding gay unions to the country’s historical marriage definition, in the lead up to the National referendum on the matter. Not so long ago such political involvement amd pressure from the employer regarding a personal vote would have been condemned. Now in some workplaces it seems we all must wear out heart on our sleeve (and in the case of Qantas employees, literally).
> I understand that in the US it is quite common to make your vote or political preferences public, forced as you are to register with a particular party, but for many of us living elsewhere it is a huge cultural change. These things used to to be held as very private. And certainly none of an employers central business when it comes to hiring and firing. Cancel culture and social media has changed the landscape.



I'm just going to keep the focus on Piers as I don't think a bigger "politics in the workplace" discussion is necessarily related (at least that's not what I'm trying to make any point on)... I question Piers calling it being canceled for being fired for expressing an opinion different than his employers' in a public forum. Do I think it was justified that he was fired? Well, I wouldn't have made that decision myself if I were his boss but I just don't see how that falls under the definition of getting canceled. He's done interviews and op eds in major publications since, his personal following is still quite high, and he's said himself he's onto his next job soon so where was the cancelation?

People do get fired all the time for doing whatever their employer thinks is against their ethos. They might have wrong, misguided, etc. opinions on that but at the end of the day, a business owner does get to tell his employees how to behave on the job. If it's against the employee's beliefs, then I don't think the employee is getting canceled by being fired or willingly leaving onto his next job that ideally would support his beliefs.


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> If I pulled something like that at my work and we have diversified clients and it offends them I would be fired. They even have policies I had to read to say that when I’m at work I do the company’s work. Anything beyond that it’s outside my down time but even with social media I can be fired. Hope that answers your question.



This is exactly how I felt about Piers.... what he said apparently was not on-brand, in agreement with, or pleasing to his employers so they pushed him out. Again, I wouldn't have made that choice myself in his case, but this IS what happens in any employer-employee relationship. Different people just might have different tolerances for what is fireable.


----------



## maris.crane

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Why do I have a feeling the posters supporting Piers Morgan and raging against cancel culture had no problem whatsoever with Colin Kaepernick losing his job.



What’s hilarious is Piers’ isn’t even really cancelled; he lost one of his jobs maybe partially due to viewer complaints and MM’s phone call; but it doesn’t take into account that it would’ve also been incredibly tone deaf to keep him on the plum AM programme while the same network (from what I’ve read) touted mental health initiatives.  He still has his role at the Daily Mail & I could definitely see him hired if the Murdoch’s boot up another channel. 

I do hate that he’s been let go/walked out/forced out/fired because unfortunately, I think he’s been martyred at this point when he’s really a terrible journalist anyway. The man was bound to flunk out at some point, anyhow - this just happened to be that point. 

I disagree that there is no place for cancel culture - there are people who absolutely deserve to be cancelled. Kendo should’ve removed Kat Von D from the makeup lines long before they did; and Robert Kennedy Jr. probably should be forced to stay off Instagram, too. Both of them are probably extreme cases; but I don’t love when anyone speaks in absolutes; either for letting everyone be allowed to say whatever they want regardless of how hurtful/offensive/misleading the point, or saying that there is no place for cancel culture either.


----------



## lalame

ITA with you @maris.crane. Maybe my issue is the definition of cancel culture has really evolved, from what I can see, from someone being completely blacklisted socially, financially, reputationally, basically ruined for a harmless gaffe or prior minor offense.... to someone just losing a job or relationship under normal circumstances.


----------



## lalame

And of course... if you disagree with how ITV behaved, it's fair game to stop watching.  It works both ways. And I wouldn't call that cancelling them either. If anyone offends their cash cow, fair game to lose said cash cow.


----------



## kkfiregirl

LittleStar88 said:


> What PM and CK did to cause them to lose their jobs are two wildly different things. I don’t even see the similarity attempt other than they stated opinions (about unrelated topics).



I didn’t follow the CK thing too closely, so I always thought he lost his job because of the kneeling protests- didn’t know about the quarterback stuff & the sock thing was terrible!


----------



## scarlet555

Hmmm... what’s going on here...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Let's get back to observing the many great qualities of Meghan and Harry. If we can think of any.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The all thing is turning into a comedy.
> 
> "_The Archbishop of Canterbury last night sparked a major backlash after he said being a royal is like serving 'life without parole' amid the fallout from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's exit from the Firm.
> 
> Justin Welby, the outspoken head of the Church of England, was accused of being 'singularly inappropriate' and 'jumping on a woke bandwagon' after appearing to throw his weight behind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who quit royal duties and moved to California last year to strike out on their own.
> 
> Royal experts have now accused the archbishop of trying to make amends with Team Sussex as he told the Financial Times: *'It's life without parole, isn't it?* If you go back to the 1930s, Edward VIII - he was still a celeb and followed everywhere once he'd abdicated. We expect them to be superhuman._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Justin Welby: Being in Royal Family is like 'life without parole'
> 
> 
> Justin Welby, the Church of England's most senior clergyman, said the public have unrealistic expectations when it comes to the royals as he claimed: 'We expect them to be superhuman'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


No wonder he didn't speak up earlier regarding the secret backyard marriage ceremony. Poor bloke is still suffering from foot in mouth disease.


----------



## cat1234

I’m surprised this thread so quiet.


----------



## KellyObsessed

I hope Harry will fly back to attend his grandfather's funeral.  I'm sure he wished he had the chance to say goodbye.     Prince Philips's death has to be devastating for Queen Elizabeth, no matter how expected it was.  He almost made it to 100 and he would have received a congratulatory message from Her Majesty.


----------



## mdcx

RIP Prince Phillip.
I am seeing several comments that Prince Phillip specifically barred Meghan from attending his funeral, the same way he barred Fergie. He planned out his funeral during the last year.
Devastating for the BRF and so horrible to have that Oprah interview so fresh.


----------



## Jayne1

Are there any Covid restrictions now for travellers to the UK, or in this case specifically London?

Can Harry fly right in without any quarantine?


----------



## csshopper

cat1234 said:


> I’m surprised this thread so quiet.


I haven’t been able to load the pages for about the last 12 hours. Glad it’s back!


----------



## Sharont2305

I believe it'll be a private funeral, Prince Philip's wishes, held at St George's Chapel, Windsor.
Under Covid rules, as of this coming Monday only 30 people can attend a funeral.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> I haven’t been able to load the pages for about the last 12 hours. Glad it’s back!


Same here.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

RIP to Prince Philip, my heart is with her majesty. We need her to stay strong at times like this.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## youngster

Very sorry to hear about Prince Philip, how very sad for the Queen.  

I wonder how quickly Harry and MM will make this all about them?  How they couldn't travel to the UK to say goodbye, that they deeply regret not being there, how close Harry was to his grandfather, etc.  Or, perhaps if they are not allowed to attend the funeral due to covid and quarantine restrictions or even Prince Philip's own decision, they'll head down the victim road of how awful it was that they were snubbed and not invited.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

cat1234 said:


> I’m surprised this thread so quiet.



There was a technical glitch, it wouldn't load for hours.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm surprised at myself how sad the news of Philip's passing have made me. My heart breaks for the Queen.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm surprised at myself how sad the news of Philip's passing have made me. My heart breaks for the Queen.



Me, too. She must be so beside herself with grief. I can't even imagine her pain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## byzina

Prince Philip had class. He has lived a great life.


----------



## lanasyogamama

How sad. RIP Prince Philip


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> I wonder how quickly Harry and MM will make this all about them?  How they couldn't travel to the UK to say goodbye, that they deeply regret not being there, how close Harry was to his grandfather, etc.  Or, perhaps if they are not allowed to attend the funeral due to covid and quarantine restrictions or even Prince Philip's own decision, they'll head down the victim road of how awful it was that they were snubbed and not invited.


My thoughts exactly. Harry might even dig up an old photo from his forgotten childhood, while MM will spin some tale about how kind Philip was to her - the dead can't tell her off if she fabricates it from thin air.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dear Aunt Lilibet,

We have been deeply saddened by the news of the passing of our dear Uncle Philip.

In these painful moments, we want to convey our deepest condolences on behalf of the Government and the Spanish people, as well as all our closeness and support.

We will never forget the occasions we were able to share with him and the legacy of service and dedication to the Crown and the United Kingdom that he has always played by your side.

Our thoughts and prayers are with your majesty and with the entire family.

With all our love and affection, Felipe and Letizia."

https://www.vanitatis.elc...elegrama-lilibet_3027704/


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Archewell has no mention.
Cannot find  H&M’s official Twitter.  Are they using Kensington Royal now?  Hmmm.


----------



## xincinsin

I hope MM will not try to copy Diana's Dearest Pa letters and do a Dearest Grandpa. It would be gruesome.









						Obituary: HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
					

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, won widespread respect for his steadfast and constant support of the Queen.



					www.bbc.com
				





_In 2007, letters between the duke and the princess were published in an attempt to refute claims that he had been hostile to his daughter-in-law.
Dubbed the Dearest Pa letters, they showed he had been a source of great support to Diana, a fact underlined by the warm tones in which she wrote to him._


----------



## Chanbal

Very sorry. RIP Philip! 


The Queen today announced with 'deep sorrow' the death of her husband Prince Philip at the age of 99, her 'strength and guide' throughout their 73-year marriage and her 69-year reign.

The Duke of Edinburgh spent his final days at Windsor Castle with his wife, who he lovingly called Lilibet throughout their long life together, after a 28-night stay in hospital having been admitted in mid-February for an infection and a pre-existing heart condition.

Her Majesty announced her husband's death at midday as the Union Flag was lowered to half-mast outside Buckingham Palace and on public buildings across the UK and Commonwealth, while members of the public hugged and wiped away tears as they laid flowers in his memory - and messages of love and support for the Queen and her family.

A state funeral including a flotilla of boats on the Thames to mark his life looks impossible due to covid restrictions, but the Duke was said to have disliked the idea because he 'didn't want the fuss'. Details will emerge in the next few days, with the plan nicknamed 'Operation Forth Bridge', but the public have already been urged to stay away to avoid spreading Covid-19.









						Prince Philip dies aged 99 after life of service to Queen and country
					

The Duke of Edinburgh was at Windsor Castle with his wife after a 28-night stay in hospital having been admitted in mid-February for an infection and a pre-existing heart condition.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## cafecreme15

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm surprised at myself how sad the news of Philip's passing have made me. My heart breaks for the Queen.





LittleStar88 said:


> Me, too. She must be so beside herself with grief. I can't even imagine her pain.


My heart breaks for the Queen. I was just thinking how Philip was probably one of the last (if not the last) person alive who clearly remembers the Queen's father and other beloved family members in her life who have since long passed away. So his loss is probably doubly hard - losing a beloved husband in and of himself, plus one of her last links to her young adulthood.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The all thing is turning into a comedy.
> 
> "_The Archbishop of Canterbury last night sparked a major backlash after he said being a royal is like serving 'life without parole' amid the fallout from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's exit from the Firm.
> 
> Justin Welby, the outspoken head of the Church of England, was accused of being 'singularly inappropriate' and 'jumping on a woke bandwagon' after appearing to throw his weight behind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who quit royal duties and moved to California last year to strike out on their own.
> 
> Royal experts have now accused the archbishop of trying to make amends with Team Sussex as he told the Financial Times: *'It's life without parole, isn't it?* If you go back to the 1930s, Edward VIII - he was still a celeb and followed everywhere once he'd abdicated. We expect them to be superhuman._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Justin Welby: Being in Royal Family is like 'life without parole'
> 
> 
> Justin Welby, the Church of England's most senior clergyman, said the public have unrealistic expectations when it comes to the royals as he claimed: 'We expect them to be superhuman'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Talk about a bizarre viewpoint. QE is the leader of his religion as one of her duties. Is he saying the church he manages is forcing some kind of penal servitude upon her and her family?
Also, not to get too political but when did Welby last visit a prison? I wouldn’t say the similarities are springing out to me.



cat1234 said:


> I’m surprised this thread so quiet.


I was trying to get on it for hours and the page wouldn’t load. I assumed it was overloaded because of the news but maybe they just can’t get on


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I hope MM will not try to copy Diana's Dearest Pa letters and do a Dearest Grandpa. It would be gruesome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obituary: HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
> 
> 
> Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, won widespread respect for his steadfast and constant support of the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _In 2007, letters between the duke and the princess were published in an attempt to refute claims that he had been hostile to his daughter-in-law.
> Dubbed the Dearest Pa letters, they showed he had been a source of great support to Diana, a fact underlined by the warm tones in which she wrote to him._



Even as grasping and greedy for attention as she is, Meghan has nothing to back up a letter like that. She didn't stick around long enough to get to know him. She was there for 18 months and she was planning their departure almost from the Day 1. Diana was there for years and actually knew Philip. Of course in the wacky fantasy world of Meghan's head maybe she believes Philip admired her and they had a close relationship.


----------



## Clearblueskies

cafecreme15 said:


> My heart breaks for the Queen. I was just thinking how Philip was probably one of the last (if not the last) person alive who clearly remembers the Queen's father and other beloved family members in her life who have since long passed away. So his los sis probably doubly hard - losing a beloved husband in and of himself, plus one of her last links to her young adulthood.


I feel sad too.  I think one of the hardest parts of living to a great age must be losing your contemporaries and those memories you shared with them.  I felt teary at the news, even though it’s not unexpected.  I’m so sorry for the Queen, she will miss him dreadfully.


----------



## jelliedfeels

RIP Prince Philip. He had a good innings.


----------



## cafecreme15

Clearblueskies said:


> I feel sad too.  I think one of the hardest parts of living to a great age must be losing your contemporaries and those memories you shared with them.  I felt teary at the news, even though it’s not unexpected.  I’m so sorry for the Queen, she will miss him dreadfully.


Completely agreed. It must be terribly lonely to live to a great age, even if one is lucky enough to be surrounded by other, younger family members.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Even as grasping and greedy for attention as she is, Meghan has nothing to back up a letter like that. She didn't stick around long enough to get to know him. She was there for 18 months and she was planning their departure almost from the Day 1. Diana was there for years and actually knew Philip. Of course in the wacky fantasy world of Meghan's head maybe she believes Philip admired her and they had a close relationship.


I bet they actually only met less than 10 times. I don't even think she's met Charles, Camilla, William and Catherine much more than that tbh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

xincinsin said:


> My thoughts exactly. Harry might even dig up an old photo from his forgotten childhood, while MM will spin some tale about how kind Philip was to her - the dead can't tell her off if she fabricates it from thin air.


Nah, it'll just make it easier for them to conveniently mention that it was in fact Gramps Phil who made the baby skin colour comment. Easier to throw a dead man under the bus than get into a scuffle with Cast Iron Anne.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder what is going on in that big 'ol mansion in Montecito this morning? Is Harry taking time to grieve? Personally, I think they called an emergency meeting with their PR teams and they are in the war room strategizing their next move.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Nah, it'll just make it easier for them to conveniently mention that it was in fact Gramps Phil who made the baby skin colour comment. Easier to throw a dead man under the bus than get into a scuffle with Cast Iron Anne.


they already said (thorugh Oprah?) it wasn't the queen or Phllip - leaving everyone to think it might be his father or his brother


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Thanks Omid, we knew that already.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what is going on in that big 'ol mansion in Montecito this morning? Is Harry taking time to grieve? Personally, I think they called an emergency meeting with their PR teams and they are in the war room strategizing their next move.


I hate to make this man's death about Harry but anyway - one the one hand I can't see him not attending the funeral.  however, if it's true that Meghan is banned, he will likely be loyal to his Wife.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today is the 16th wedding anniversary for the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall.








						Prince Charles and Camilla's wedding anniversary will be forever bittersweet as falls on same day Prince Philip died
					

Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall's wedding anniversary date will be forever bittersweet – find out why




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I hate to make this man's death about Harry but anyway - one the one hand I can't see him not attending the funeral.  however, if it's true that Meghan is banned, he will likely be loyal to his Wife.


We really do not need or want her brand of drama at a solemn occasion.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I hate to make this man's death about Harry but anyway - one the one hand I can't see him not attending the funeral.  however, if it's true that Meghan is banned, he will likely be loyal to his Wife.


He should come back, I think he will regret it if he doesn't. I really hope she doesn't, I don't think I could see her all mournful holding her bump.


----------



## cafecreme15

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today is the 16th wedding anniversary for the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Camilla's wedding anniversary will be forever bittersweet as falls on same day Prince Philip died
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall's wedding anniversary date will be forever bittersweet – find out why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Ugh, how sad for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He set the standard high.








						Prince Philip struggled at royal wedding due to cracked rib
					

Despite recovering from his hip operation, it has been reported that Prince Philip struggled at the royal wedding after cracking a rib




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



perhaps this was an omen?


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> He should come back, I think he will regret it if he doesn't. I really hope she doesn't, I don't think I could see her all mournful holding her bump.


I agree
do you think it's true that Philip made a plan for his funeral and deliberately banned her?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> I love your answer. I’m a minority and I want someone who is the most capable to do the job. All these AAs are setting us minorities back to dark ages. I hate that they think we are stupid not to have ids. Where on earth can you do anything without an ID. I’ll be going to LV next month. I think I’ll trot on over to TSA and say I have no ID. How dare they ask for it. I’ll scream racists and call the papers. That’s when all the hypocrites will come out and say well that’s different.”
> 
> I wish they would stop. We are not disabled, not stupid, we just want to be judged by the content of our characters, at least I do.
> 
> ETA: No, I’m not a minority call me a human being.



I took mine down. But I LOVE YOUR REPLY.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> Nah, it'll just make it easier for them to conveniently mention that it was in fact Gramps Phil who made the baby skin colour comment. Easier to throw a dead man under the bus than get into a scuffle with Cast Iron Anne.


Wow that is dark. It is a possibility.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> Affirmative Action. A horrible thing for minorities. It categorizes us as “different” and not capable of succeeding on our own merits.




I still remember the first time I heard about AA and it struck me as unfair even then. The old two wrongs thing and all. I had this older black friend that I worked with. He was about 20 years older than me and had grown kids in their early 20's. We used to go to lunch and he told me how he told his kids that no matter how hard they work, they might not make it because they are black. I told him then and I still believe it that he was setting them up to hate white people. But the fact was, we were still friends and we could have those discussions. I don't live near him anymore and it's been a long time since I have seen him. I wonder what he would say about things now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I hate to make this man's death about Harry but anyway - one the one hand I can't see him not attending the funeral.  however, if it's true that Meghan is banned, he will likely be loyal to his Wife.



Meghan is a coward at heart and she won't put herself in a situation where she doesn't have total control and there might be a confrontation. You can bet her team is hard at work coming up with excuses for her not being there that strike just the right tone of sadness and regret. Something about her pregnancy and the risk of Covid seems the most likely excuse. Harry has to go to the funeral or he will look like the biggest douchebag on earth. Meghan will leave him flapping out in the wind to face the family she helped him alienate all alone.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> He should come back, I think he will regret it if he doesn't. I really hope she doesn't, I don't think I could see her all mournful holding her bump.


She will stay home stating it is not safe for her to travel.  I hope we are spared comments from her about how much she loved him.   The grandfather she never had.

Im happy that he didn’t pass on at the hospital and was at home for all the family to say goodbye to him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I agree
> do you think it's true that Philip made a plan for his funeral and deliberately banned her?


I think there would definitely have been a consultation about his funeral wishes because of his age and his seniority. It’s fair enough if he didn’t want her or anyone else at his funeral if it as private event.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If [big if] Hazzie goes, I do hope the Palace gives him a list of You-will:
You will wear a dark suit and you will do the following:
1. You will walk in___
2. You will stand behind ___
3. You will not speak to ___
4. You will ___
The first time he slips up, they need to send packing. The first time.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Very sorry to hear about Prince Philip, how very sad for the Queen.
> 
> I wonder how quickly Harry and MM will make this all about them?  How they couldn't travel to the UK to say goodbye, that they deeply regret not being there, how close Harry was to his grandfather, etc.  Or, perhaps if they are not allowed to attend the funeral due to covid and quarantine restrictions or even Prince Philip's own decision, they'll head down the victim road of how awful it was that they were snubbed and not invited.


You know they will try. Heaven forbid that they are not the victims of his death.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I think there would definitely have been a consultation about his funeral wishes because of his age and his seniority. It’s fair enough if he didn’t want her or anyone else at his funeral if it as private event.


yes, it is fair enough but so far, H has been loyal to his Wife.....I hope he goes to the funeral and I hope Meghan doesn't go as that could be a distraction.  Last thing the queen needs at this very sad time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tears.


----------



## lalame

I don't think she'll be able to fly even if she wanted to go so definitely don't think that's happening. I imagine he'll go but that will be one hell of an awkward reunion.


----------



## 1LV

Harry had every opportunity to visit his grandfather before now, and he chose not to.  He chose not to.  He’s a pile of rained on dog $hi+.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> She will stay home stating it is not safe for her to travel.  I hope we are spared comments from her about how much she loved him.   The grandfather she never had.
> 
> Im happy that he didn’t pass on at the hospital and was at home for all the family to say goodbye to him.


No one, under Covid rules, would have been allowed there. I too am glad he was home.


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> Harry had every opportunity to visit his grandfather before now, and he chose not to.  He chose not to.  He’s a pile of rained on dog $hi+.


He would not have been allowed to visit. Still a lot of Covid restrictions here.


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> I am so sorry to see that. I’ve missed so many days of work for migraines. Every time I had a day off, guaranteed I’d be hugging the toilet and hiding from light to the point I‘ve stopped taking leave. It just wasn’t worth wasting it. I’d rather work than have a migraine. Year before last, I went on staycation and had 5 migraines in 8 days. Even with my meds, I’m still scared to take a day off, it’s usually when I’ll have a headache. But I take three different meds (a monthly shot, a nightly pill and a rescue med for when I get as soon a headache starts (Kardashian Migraine Med bah!)) and we knocked it down to pretty much three headaches a month... that’s almost bearable...



I haven't had access to tPF all day due to tech problems, I didn't mean not to respond to you sooner. 

It sounded terrifying and relentless, I am so pleased you found something that worked and has cut down these instances. 

Mine are due most likely to teeth grinding in my sleep, a habit I can't seem to give up. I wear a guard to protect my teeth. Not only has it worn my teeth down, but due to the muscular tension around my jaw and neck contributes to the morning migraines.


----------



## lulu212121

1LV said:


> Harry had every opportunity to visit his grandfather before now, and he chose not to.  He chose not to.  He’s a pile of rained on dog $hi+.


This!!!!!! 
Showing up now at the funeral doesn't make him look better.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Harry had every opportunity to visit his grandfather before now, and he chose not to.  He chose not to.  He’s a pile of rained on dog $hi+.



I wonder if Harry called him or his grandmother at all during the past year. That would have been the expected method of contact during the pandemic. When Philip was in the hospital last month and it was clear that the end was getting close, that was the time for Harry to swallow his pride and reach out. Somehow I doubt he was man enough to do it.


----------



## lulu212121

Sharont2305 said:


> He would not have been allowed to visit. Still a lot of Covid restrictions here.


I don't believe that! Im sure exceptions would have been made for him. 

My daughter's friend married a Scottish man this past December, while he's waiting to get immigration sorted she has been able to visit him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Now that I think about it, Prince Philip was brought back to Windsor so he could die in the peace and comfort of his family. Harry was surely told he didn’t have long. He didn’t move his a.s.s. to go back to see him  No words for that. Plenty of private planes for hire. Maybe he was waiting for his father to pay for it.


----------



## Aimee3

Who needs Harry at the funeral to add more misery to the event. A funeral is difficult enough for those close to the deceased.  No one needs to deal with Harry too at the same time.  The funeral should be about PP not Harry.  Also it annoys me that Harry didn’t go see PP when he was alive.  Is he really going to stretch the rules and go back for the funeral?  Too little too late in my opinion.


----------



## elvisfan4life

cat1234 said:


> I’m surprised this thread so quiet.



I haven’t been able to log in all day - the news on Prince Philip came out here around midday I hope the gruesome twosome are happy with themselves and I hope they don’t try to come back to the uk there would be riots


----------



## elvisfan4life

mdcx said:


> RIP Prince Phillip.
> I am seeing several comments that Prince Phillip specifically barred Meghan from attending his funeral, the same way he barred Fergie. He planned out his funeral during the last year.
> Devastating for the BRF and so horrible to have that Oprah interview so fresh.



I hope he has -  well done Prince Phillip !! you never worried about saying what you think how wonderful to let Meghan know the truth about your feelings that she prevented you from saying to her face -even after your death  you win RIP sir and thank you for your service


----------



## LittleStar88

It would be most respectful for Harry to stay home and mourn from one of his 16 bathrooms. They don't need the spectacle/distraction at the service.

I would bet money that MM would not attend even if she wasn't pregnant.

I do bet there will be some orchestrated photo op for them related to the passing.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> I haven’t been able to load the pages for about the last 12 hours. Glad it’s back!


 Me too


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> Are there any Covid restrictions now for travellers to the UK, or in this case specifically London?
> 
> Can Harry fly right in without any quarantine?



He should stay away and show respect how too faced would it be to fly in now


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> I believe it'll be a private funeral, Prince Philip's wishes, held at St George's Chapel, Windsor.
> Under Covid rules, as of this coming Monday only 30 people can attend a funeral.
> 
> View attachment 5049557



These notices have now been removed from all the royal palaces as crowds were gathering and leaving flowers - the royal family have now specifically asked people not to - to obey covid regulations and for that reason there will be no lying in state or state funeral - very sad


----------



## elvisfan4life

youngster said:


> Very sorry to hear about Prince Philip, how very sad for the Queen.
> 
> I wonder how quickly Harry and MM will make this all about them?  How they couldn't travel to the UK to say goodbye, that they deeply regret not being there, how close Harry was to his grandfather, etc.  Or, perhaps if they are not allowed to attend the funeral due to covid and quarantine restrictions or even Prince Philip's own decision, they'll head down the victim road of how awful it was that they were snubbed and not invited.



The mood in the uk would not be good if they showed up


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Dear Aunt Lilibet,
> 
> We have been deeply saddened by the news of the passing of our dear Uncle Philip.
> 
> In these painful moments, we want to convey our deepest condolences on behalf of the Government and the Spanish people, as well as all our closeness and support.
> 
> We will never forget the occasions we were able to share with him and the legacy of service and dedication to the Crown and the United Kingdom that he has always played by your side.
> 
> Our thoughts and prayers are with your majesty and with the entire family.
> 
> With all our love and affection, Felipe and Letizia."
> 
> https://www.vanitatis.elc...elegrama-lilibet_3027704/


 This particular tribute set me off crying again so personal


----------



## CarryOn2020

Have the gruesome two posted anything? Any comments?  On any site?


----------



## elvisfan4life

xincinsin said:


> We really do not need or want her brand of drama at a solemn occasion.


 We don’t want her or him full stop let alone them coming crying crocodile tears


----------



## elvisfan4life

jelliedfeels said:


> I think there would definitely have been a consultation about his funeral wishes because of his age and his seniority. It’s fair enough if he didn’t want her or anyone else at his funeral if it as private event.



The official plans for the funeral of both the Queen and Prince Philip have known for many years and Philip made his wishes very clear


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Harry called him or his grandmother at all during the past year. That would have been the expected method of contact during the pandemic. When Philip was in the hospital last month and it was clear that the end was getting close, that was the time for Harry to swallow his pride and reach out. Somehow I doubt he was man enough to do it.



On the James Corden interview, H mocked the way Philip hung up. Sure, he said it for the laugh, but why say it at all.  
A cheap laugh at an older man’s expense.





__





						Prince Harry Shares the Hilarious Way Prince Philip Ends Zoom Calls
					

During a chat with James Corden, Harry revealed that he has Zoomed his grandparents “a few times” since he and Meghan moved to the US.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> What did you study in international relations?
> There was disbelief that Meghan, with a degree in International Relations, could profess ignorance of the British monarchy. Not sure what to make of this. I come from a very small country, so for my countrymen, when we discuss anything international, it really does mean looking beyond our borders. But for large countries which already have so much going on within their own borders, "international relations" might very well be very country-centric with not a lot of emphasis on the international part. For example, in a lecture about the US and its relationship with the UK, the lecturer might talk mainly about the UK as seen from the US standpoint, and say very little about the UK itself. (Not excusing MM's supposed "naivete", seeming lack of curiosity about the world and inability to google Harry and oats.)



Sorry for my late reply. Yes that always bothered me about MM having an IR degree and claiming ignorance of the monarchy. International Relations is a very diverse major...covering world history, political science, economics, foreign language and then domestic subjects like American Studies. She’s so full of sh!t. As I said, I’m her age and I can tell you exactly where I was when I found out Princess Diana died. Our generation was raised with the British royal family/Princess Di tabloid obsession of the 80’s and 90’s. 
MM is a lying liar who lies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

According to the headlines H "prepares to fly back to Britain"

Hope he's taken Covid precautions


----------



## Tonimichelle

elvisfan4life said:


> This particular tribute set me off crying again so personal


Me too


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> You know they will try. Heaven forbid that they are not the victims of his death.


Would they be tone-deaf enough to strike a note of joy because he has escaped the dreadful torture of being in the BRF?


----------



## papertiger

Very bad form to have given PP so much stress when he was ill. 









						Prince Philip had to endure Covid and Megxit during his last months
					

Prince Philip's final year was marred by the bitter fallout from his 'favourite' prince Harry and Meghan Markle's decision to quit Royal family and air their grievances against the family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I don't think she'll be able to fly even if she wanted to go so definitely don't think that's happening. I imagine he'll go but that will be one hell of an awkward reunion.


Usually pregnant ladies are clear to fly during the 2nd trimester, but with her bump changing size miraculously, I can't even guess what stage she is at. Maybe 4th trimester...


----------



## zinacef

Damage has been done and it will be very awkward for everybody during the funeral. I’m sure Harry is devastated—- despite of it all that was his beloved grand papa. He just gonna have to go even though it will be a lukewarm and guarded ”visit” for him. He is now an outsider.


----------



## lalame

mellibelly said:


> Everyone our aged was raised with the British royal family/Princess Di tabloid obsession of the 80’s and 90’s.
> MM is a lying liar who lies.



I'm around her age and I wasn't. I never really heard anyone talk about them growing up, aside from that one day Diana passed away which was on all the news for hours. I got interested in the BRF later but none of my friends had/have any interest. The only people who will talk to me about them are on TPF lol. 

I don't think she NEVER googled him but just saying, not EVERYONE grew up obsessed with the BRF.


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> Usually pregnant ladies are clear to fly during the 2nd trimester, but with her bump changing size miraculously, I can't even guess what stage she is at. Maybe 4th trimester...



She looked IMMINENT in that one b&w photo.


----------



## elvisfan4life

The news today floored me - even though he had been in hospital for so long recently  I thought it was a precaution and he would be here for his 100th birthday in a  few weeks  and was so looking forward to the Queen personally giving him the telegram/ card with a kiss - the clip today of her coronation where Philip swears loyalty to her on his knees and then kisses her cheek made me sob uncontrollably such a lifetime they have had together - it must make being alone now so hard for our beautiful Queen  - I called my 88 year old mother and she was in tears remembering how she felt when my father passed  - our entire nation needs to let the Queen know how much we love her and are collectively putting our arms round her now despite royal etiquette forbidding that in reality


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Now that I think about it, Prince Philip was brought back to Windsor so he could die in the peace and comfort of his family. Harry was surely told he didn’t have long. He didn’t move his a.s.s. to go back to see him  No words for that. Plenty of private planes for hire. Maybe he was waiting for his father to pay for it.


He spent his airfare allowance on sending that olive oil cake.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I'm around her age and I wasn't. I never really heard anyone talk about them growing up, aside from that one day Diana passed away which was on all the news for hours. I got interested in the BRF later but none of my friends had/have any interest. The only people who will talk to me about them are on TPF lol.
> 
> I don't think she NEVER googled him but just saying, not EVERYONE grew up obsessed with the BRF.



Not really about being “obsessed”.
She visited BP, big smile on the BP gate.  Back in the day when Diana was most popular, nearly every magazine at the grocery store check-out counter had Diana’s photo on the cover. The boys were included, too.  So, her claim is simply false, as is most of her nonsense.  Any comment from the gruesome two?  Any comment from them about the clevr brand support of torture? GK? OW? Anything? from anyone? wow.


----------



## Sharont2305

lulu212121 said:


> I don't believe that! Im sure exceptions would have been made for him.
> 
> My daughter's friend married a Scottish man this past December, while he's waiting to get immigration sorted she has been able to visit him.


I don't think exceptions would have been made, these rules stand for everyone in this country Royal or not.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think exceptions would have been made, these rules stand for everyone in this country Royal or not.





Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think exceptions would have been made, these rules stand for everyone in this country Royal or not.



Charles was allowed to visit when other families could not visit relatives before the rules changed recently


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not really about being “obsessed”.
> She visited BP, big smile on the BP gate.  Back in the day when Diana was most popular, nearly every magazine at the grocery store check-out counter had Diana’s photo on the cover. The boys were included, too.  So, her claim is simply false, as is most of her nonsense.  Any comment from the gruesome two?  Any comment from them about the clevr brand support of torture? GK? OW? Anything? from anyone? wow.



I have a photo of me in front of BP like that too.    It was a really common itinerary for high school summer euro trips from EF Tours (didn't even go in and didn't learn a thing about British history that day). I agree they were everywhere on tabloids but I don't think it's a given most people actually followed along. There are plenty of people who don't follow along even today as adults.

I'm just making a general comment about the level of interest in BRF. It's not really that high in the US. Goes back to what I've been saying re: everyone here not understanding the Meghan sympathy in the US. People don't care enough to look that hard into it. They're pretty faces and they say provocative things... that's the only thing really keeping them in public interest these days.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> She looked IMMINENT in that one b&w photo.


The bump looked IMMOBILE in that lying down pic. I found it unreal. My bump sort of wodged down when I lay flat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

elvisfan4life said:


> the royal family have now specifically asked people not to - to obey covid regulations and for that reason there will be no lying in state or state funeral - very sad


His wishes were for  a small military type funeral.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Just sh*t up Scobie. We don't need you of all people to report on Philip.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Usually pregnant ladies are clear to fly during the 2nd trimester, but with her bump changing size miraculously, I can't even guess what stage she is at. Maybe 4th trimester...


IF she did go, she would probably select the 9 mo size moon bump, even if months away from the due date, so she could ask the cabin attendants (assuming they flew commercial for a change) for a seat belt extender while in flight. This would of course lead to headlines world wide about her sacrifice in comfort to attend the funeral. 

If the Covid restriction limiting mourners to a group of 30 is enforced, there is also the angle that she graciously stepped aside so someone else could have her spot. I'm sure Sunshine Sachs is in overdrive writing a script to hand off to the merry markle manipulator mouthpieces- Scooby-Opray-Gayle-Tom Bradby to save face.

Karma that it has leaked Phillip apparently cut her out. She must be grinding her teeth that what one news source labeled as the last published picture of the Queen and the Duke is the one of them enjoying their Anniversary card handmade by the Cambridge children. 

Wonder if she has a notebook where she lists all her supposed victimizations so they can be trotted out and exploited when needed?


----------



## elle woods

What an articulately written post paying tribute to the late Duke on Instagram. I couldn't help but think of JCMH and MM while reading the highlighted portions (sorry it isn't straight, very tough to do on a phone)


----------



## kemilia

xincinsin said:


> Usually pregnant ladies are clear to fly during the 2nd trimester, but with her bump changing size miraculously, I can't even guess what stage she is at. Maybe 4th trimester...


Her fancy celeb-heavy NYC shower was towards the end of Feb and the invisible moon-bump child was born first week of May--she had no problems flying then.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Charles was allowed to visit when other families could not visit relatives before the rules changed recently


That's true, but I dont think it would've been extended to grandchildren in Harry's case. 
People still haven't seen their parents or grandparents in 12 months. I've only seen my parents once, when the rules were relaxed at Christmas.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I think I have to stay away from this thread for a while.  With the death of Prince Philip so fresh, I just want to smack both of them, and Andrew, too.  Prince Philip put country and duty before all else, and those twits couldn't  manage to to remain decent, even when life was handed to them on silver platters.  I'm done.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Harry had every opportunity to visit his grandfather before now, and he chose not to.  He chose not to.  He’s a pile of rained on dog $hi+.



I just can't imagine. My grandfather was gravely ill for six months before he died, and we fought over who could go see him which day. Even when he spent weeks at a clinic which was a  2 1/2 hours drive away someone went up there daily. Shame on you, Harry. These are the grandparents who for the first time ever abanoned public duty to be there for you and Wills when your mother died. I hope the regrets haunt you.


----------



## Sharont2305

elle woods said:


> What an articulately written post paying tribute to the late Duke on Instagram. I couldn't help but think of JCMH and MM while reading the highlighted portions (sorry it isn't straight, very tough to do on a phone)


Beautiful post.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just sh*t up Scobie. We don't need you of all people to report on Philip.


Pathetic coat tail riding creep, and transparent attempt to lay the groundwork for the announcement his b**** boss will not be attending.


----------



## lalame

If Harry wasn't going to visit them before/after the big interview as a courtesy to smooth things over..... I'm not that surprised he wasn't going to visit grandpa due to his poor health. Even with all the money he could need. Sad.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Sharont2305 said:


> He would not have been allowed to visit. Still a lot of Covid restrictions here.



To travel to England he would have had to take a covid test before departure and then self isolated for 14 days. This was the rule from about May 2020-December 2020. And recently it has been 5 days self isolation if you take an extra covid test after arriving, so realistically he could have visited his grandfather. In the Oprah interview Meghan did say she called the Queen personally when Prince Philliph was ill, and they both seemed to state they have a good relationship with the Queen and the Prince. 

If it was my grandfather I would have travelled (I live in USA and am a UK citizen, so same as Harry). I guess it depends on how close you are to your family.


----------



## maris.crane

lalame said:


> *I have a photo of me in front of BP like that too. *   It was a really common itinerary for high school summer euro trips from EF Tours (didn't even go in and didn't learn a thing about British history that day). I agree they were everywhere on tabloids but I don't think it's a given most people actually followed along. There are plenty of people who don't follow along even today as adults.



This. Except I was in 2nd grade. With my parents. And Hamley's (sp?) was much more exciting than BP with their large display of Spice Girls merchandise.

I sort of remember vaguely, where I was when Princess Diana died (or when my mom told me.) But honestly, my recollections of her was that she was a pretty lady with short blonde hair and she wore nice clothes (obviously, I know now she did a lot of important things like de-stigmatizing HIV, bring attention to land-mines, child hunger, etc.) Admittedly, I wasn't really up on the news cycle back in elementary school.



> I'm just making a general comment about the level of interest in BRF. *It's not really that high in the US. *Goes back to what I've been saying re: everyone here not understanding the Meghan sympathy in the US. People don't care enough to look that hard into it. *They're pretty faces and they say provocative things... that's the only thing really keeping them in public interest these days.*



I don't think it's really that high here in Canada, either IMHO (and admittedly, we're still nebulously tied to the BRF). The interview came when there wasn't a whole lot of new filming going on and a lack of new shows and blockbuster film releases. The soft-ball interview was the most exciting thing I'd watched in MONTHS.

On topic: RIP Prince Philip. What a life to have lived at 99; and it's always heart-warming in today's day and age to hear about a couple who's been married for that amount of time.

_Edited because I'm not sure if I used drudge correctly._


----------



## xincinsin

The Archewell Tribute. Aiming for solemn but I think they fell short and it just sounds template.








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Prince Philip's Death
					

The Duke and Duchess paid tribute to Harry's grandfather with a statement posted to Archewell's site.




					www.elle.com


----------



## mellibelly

Lodpah said:


> No I don’t think Harry is cute. *I get a vibe of bad hygiene from him.*


This made me laugh so hard!!
Agreed, stunted-man-child vibes are not attractive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

xincinsin said:


> The Archewell Tribute. Aiming for solemn but I think they fell short and it just sounds template.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Prince Philip's Death
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess paid tribute to Harry's grandfather with a statement posted to Archewell's site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



What a cold statement from them......Felipe's and Letizia's message to the Queen was much warmer! These two are a real disgrace.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> What a cold statement from them......Felipe's and Letizia's message to the Queen was much warmer! These two are a real disgrace.



It certainly is dispassionate. It is an appropriate message for a deceased dignitary but not for one who also happened to be a close relative.


----------



## lalame

I think it's sad for the family that he passed away BUT I always say in situations like this to loved ones: don't be too sad for those who lived such a long, happy, fruitful life. He did so much, had such an impact, and that's all anyone can hope to get out of life. So I see death as more of a well-deserved rest than a tragedy... let's celebrate his life instead of making him a victim of death.


----------



## lulu212121

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think exceptions would have been made, these rules stand for everyone in this country Royal or not.


She was able to make the trip! She's a teacher and he's completing his program for computer programming there in Scotland. She had to be tested before leaving and upon arrival. She said it was easier for her to travel there vs him here because he's still waiting for his visa. These are 23 year old young adults, they definitely don't have the financial means that has been Harry has.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think it's sad for the family that he passed away BUT I always say in situations like this to loved ones: don't be too sad for those who lived such a long, happy, fruitful life. He did so much, had such an impact, and that's all anyone can hope to get out of life. So I see death as more of a well-deserved rest than a tragedy... let's celebrate his life instead of making him a victim of death.



Rest assured that _celebration_ will indeed happen, certainly not in the first 24 hrs. Please. There is a proper time for everything.
Now is the time to mourn, show respect and honor a great man.


----------



## lalame

Looking at the tribute on the Archwell site, I can't imagine this is all they'll say. Highly suspect we'll see a statement put out shortly or even an op ed - the latter being OTT but you know.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rest assured that _celebration_ will indeed happen, certainly not in the first 24 hrs. Please.
> Now is the time to show respect and to honor a great man.



You're right, the more appropriate word is honor. Not celebrate.


----------



## carebearz

Is William Hill taking bets on how many days or hours it will take for H&M to turn the media spotlight back on them again? 

I hope Philip maintained his dry sense of humour till the very end and left them £1 in his will.


----------



## Sharont2305

lulu212121 said:


> She was able to make the trip! She's a teacher and he's completing his program for computer programming there in Scotland. She had to be tested before leaving and upon arrival. She said it was easier for her to travel there vs him here because he's still waiting for his visa. These are 23 year old young adults, they definitely don't have the financial means that has been Harry has.


My point was he wouldn't have been able to see his grandfather due to Covid rules. I'm aware of the travel thing and yes, he could've made it here but to see him, no. Why him above his children and other grandchildren?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Looking at the tribute on the Archwell site, I can't imagine this is all they'll say. Highly suspect we'll see a statement put out shortly or even an op ed - the latter being OTT but you know.



I'm sure they are mixing up a fresh batch of word salad as we speak. That first message is a placeholder since it would be shameful for them to have gone several hours and not say _anything_.


----------



## V0N1B2

Didn’t I read in this thread back in Feb/Mar that Harry was isolating to prepare for a short-notice emergency trip back to the UK when Philip first fell ill? But then there he was sitting there like a zombie with Oprah and the chickens and out riding his electric bike.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> What a cold statement from them......Felipe's and Letizia's message to the Queen was much warmer! These two are a real disgrace.



I know I could google but I've been sick for over a week and lack the patience. How was Sophia related to Philip...first cousins?


----------



## csshopper

The Sussex "tribute" left me flabbergasted, so cold and unfeeling, no words of support for his Grandmother. Sounds like words spoken at a retirement party when someone has worked at a company 30 years and gets a gold watch on the way out the door.
They will never recognize the irony of  only highlighting his service, when they are so completely at odds with the depth and breadth of Prince Phillip's service as compared to the depth and breadth of their _self s_ervice. There is no love coming through in this message.  

There is a word, sometimes used, but saved for the worst of the worst, by my grandmother, whose British roots ran deep, that fits Harry. He is  a "toe rag" British slang for a contemptible or despicable person.


----------



## Hermes Zen

RIP Prince Phillip.  Sincerest condolences to the Queen and the Royal Family.  A very sad day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I just saw that Prince Philip passed away. God save the Queen. I pray for strength for her, her family and the UK and her people. I pray that God protect her and surrounds her with mighty angels that keep keep evil doers away from her.


----------



## Lodpah

I think after reading BO and MO’s tribute this woman better tread carefully how she handles this. MO has more reach and more people respect her than a suitcase wench.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know I could google but I've been sick for over a week and lack the patience. How was Sophia related to Philip...first cousins?


Here you go and hope you feel better!

*Headline got cut off but this is how Queen Elizabeth is related to Spain's King Felipe*

One is the longest reigning monarch in Europe, the other is the newest king on the continent. But while their reigns started sixty years apart, Elizabeth II and Felipe VI have a linked history with roots in centuries past. The pair share several blood lines with ties to two of the most famous matchmakers in royal history. Here are the different ways Elizabeth II and Felipe VI get to call each other cousin.

*The Victorian Side*

The queen who dominated the 19th century is an ancestor of both the British and Spanish monarchs and one of them has a double tie to the woman who gave her name to an era. Both Felipe VI and Elizabeth II are descendants of Queen Victoria through their fathers. The Queen is the great, great, granddaughter of the woman she replaced as longest reigning monarch in British history. She is descended from Victoria’s eldest son, King Edward VII.

Felipe VI also has a paternal line going all the way back to the great queen. His father, Juan Carlos I of Spain, is the grandson of Queen Ena of Spain who started life as Princess Victoria Eugenie of Battenberg, the only daughter of Queen Victoria’s youngest child, Princess Beatrice.



But Felipe also has a link to Victoria’s firstborn, too. His mother, Queen Sofia, was the daughter of King Paul of Greece who himself was a grandson of Victoria, Princess Royal and the eldest of Victoria and Albert’s nine children. Her marriage, in 1858, to the future Emperor Frederick III of Germany, produced eight children. The eldest of those became Emperor Wilhelm II whose only daughter, Victoria Louise, married Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover. Their only daughter, Frederica, married King Paul of Greece thus providing a double link to Queen Victoria for Felipe VI of Spain.

*The Danish Dimension*

Victoria earned herself the nickname of ‘Grandmother of Europe’ thanks to the matchmaking that saw her descendants marry into many of the continent’s ruling houses. But another 19th century royal who never expected to rule was giving her a run for her money when it came to sharing genes. King Christian IX of Denmark was no slouch when it came to arranging royal weddings and, as a result, we find him in the family trees of both Elizabeth II and Felipe VI.

He is a great, great grandfather of the Queen through his daughter, Alexandra. She married Queen Victoria’s eldest son, the future Edward VII, in March 1863, just months before her father became King of Denmark. Their second son, King George V, was the grandfather of Elizabeth II.



Felipe’s link to Christian is again two fold and once more comes via his mother, Sofia. Christian IX’s second son, George, became King of Greece and was the paternal grandfather of Sofia’s father, King Paul. And Christian’s youngest daughter, Princess Thyra, was the paternal grandmother of Sofia’s mother, Frederica. 

Those are the stand out royal links between these two monarchs although the complicated bloodlines of Europe’s ruling houses mean connections between all of today’s regal families are multiple. If you want to find out more about how royal houses across Europe are linked to one another, Royal Central’s Assistant Editor Moniek Bloks has written a book about Carolina of Orange-Nassau, ancestress of many modern kings, queens, princes and princesses which is available worldwide!


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> I think after reading BO and MO’s tribute this woman better tread carefully how she handles this. MO has more reach and more people respect her than a suitcase wench.


LOVE the "suitcase wench" You've nailed it again Lodpah!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Thank you! Silly me thinking it was a *simple* family connection!


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5049836
> 
> 
> Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.


I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet. 
I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5049836
> 
> 
> Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.


They are so image-conscious. They probably thought this was stylish and elegant white-on-black, forgetting that there should be some heart  in this tribute.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know I could google but I've been sick for over a week and lack the patience. How was Sophia related to Philip...first cousins?


Second cousins, I think - I tried to work it out but someone can correct me if wrong.
Sophia is the sister of exiled Greek King Constantine II 
Prince Philip's father Prince Andrew was the brother of King Constantine I
King Constantine I ws Sophia's grandfather and Philip's uncle


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5049836
> 
> 
> Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.


It shows her depravity and lack of any compassion for family. Harry is in Stockholm Syndrome mode so he will do whatever his captor says. She is so vile and he is too. Reading accolades from dignified and well respected people probably pissed them off.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Now that I think about it, Prince Philip was brought back to Windsor so he could die in the peace and comfort of his family. Harry was surely told he didn’t have long. He didn’t move his a.s.s. to go back to see him  No words for that. Plenty of private planes for hire. Maybe he was waiting for his father to pay for it.


I believe you are right. He would have had time to quarantine the required 14 days. He’s just a petulant and ugly hearted Ahab.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.



You are probably right. It just sounds cold as ice. But yes, I'll admit had they gone all out I'd for sure thought they were not being genuine.

ETA: I completely missed the last sentence. Is this woman for real? What is she implying?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> It shows her depravity and lack of any compassion for family. Harry is in Stockholm Syndrome mode so he will do whatever his captor says. She is so vile and he is too. Reading accolades from dignified and well respected people probably pissed them off.



Even DT sent in a way better statement.


----------



## Lodpah

Yikes comments from other people on other sites don’t want them attending the funeral as she might be concealing microphones and cameras to record the BRF during these most sensitive times for Netflix fodder.


----------



## haute okole

Allisonfaye said:


> I still remember the first time I heard about AA and it struck me as unfair even then. The old two wrongs thing and all. I had this older black friend that I worked with. He was about 20 years older than me and had grown kids in their early 20's. We used to go to lunch and he told me how he told his kids that no matter how hard they work, they might not make it because they are black. I told him then and I still believe it that he was setting them up to hate white people. But the fact was, we were still friends and we could have those discussions. I don't live near him anymore and it's been a long time since I have seen him. I wonder what he would say about things now.


I know this is not the place or time but I respectfully disagree.  My father, a Filipino by birth, would never have been appointed by President Carter in the mid-1970’s if it were not for Carter’s desire to bring diversity to the Diplomatic Corp.  Historically, the top tiers of the Foreign Service were reserved for politically very well connected, deep pocketed families.  In some cases, Affirmative Action openEd doors to highly qualified candidates that historically would never have had the chance.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Here you go and hope you feel better!
> 
> *Headline got cut off but this is how Queen Elizabeth is related to Spain's King Felipe*
> 
> One is the longest reigning monarch in Europe, the other is the newest king on the continent. But while their reigns started sixty years apart, Elizabeth II and Felipe VI have a linked history with roots in centuries past. The pair share several blood lines with ties to two of the most famous matchmakers in royal history. Here are the different ways Elizabeth II and Felipe VI get to call each other cousin.
> 
> *The Victorian Side*
> 
> The queen who dominated the 19th century is an ancestor of both the British and Spanish monarchs and one of them has a double tie to the woman who gave her name to an era. Both Felipe VI and Elizabeth II are descendants of Queen Victoria through their fathers. The Queen is the great, great, granddaughter of the woman she replaced as longest reigning monarch in British history. She is descended from Victoria’s eldest son, King Edward VII.
> 
> Felipe VI also has a paternal line going all the way back to the great queen. His father, Juan Carlos I of Spain, is the grandson of Queen Ena of Spain who started life as Princess Victoria Eugenie of Battenberg, the only daughter of Queen Victoria’s youngest child, Princess Beatrice.
> 
> 
> 
> But Felipe also has a link to Victoria’s firstborn, too. His mother, Queen Sofia, was the daughter of King Paul of Greece who himself was a grandson of Victoria, Princess Royal and the eldest of Victoria and Albert’s nine children. Her marriage, in 1858, to the future Emperor Frederick III of Germany, produced eight children. The eldest of those became Emperor Wilhelm II whose only daughter, Victoria Louise, married Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover. Their only daughter, Frederica, married King Paul of Greece thus providing a double link to Queen Victoria for Felipe VI of Spain.
> 
> *The Danish Dimension*
> 
> Victoria earned herself the nickname of ‘Grandmother of Europe’ thanks to the matchmaking that saw her descendants marry into many of the continent’s ruling houses. But another 19th century royal who never expected to rule was giving her a run for her money when it came to sharing genes. King Christian IX of Denmark was no slouch when it came to arranging royal weddings and, as a result, we find him in the family trees of both Elizabeth II and Felipe VI.
> 
> He is a great, great grandfather of the Queen through his daughter, Alexandra. She married Queen Victoria’s eldest son, the future Edward VII, in March 1863, just months before her father became King of Denmark. Their second son, King George V, was the grandfather of Elizabeth II.
> 
> 
> 
> Felipe’s link to Christian is again two fold and once more comes via his mother, Sofia. Christian IX’s second son, George, became King of Greece and was the paternal grandfather of Sofia’s father, King Paul. And Christian’s youngest daughter, Princess Thyra, was the paternal grandmother of Sofia’s mother, Frederica.
> 
> Those are the stand out royal links between these two monarchs although the complicated bloodlines of Europe’s ruling houses mean connections between all of today’s regal families are multiple. If you want to find out more about how royal houses across Europe are linked to one another, Royal Central’s Assistant Editor Moniek Bloks has written a book about Carolina of Orange-Nassau, ancestress of many modern kings, queens, princes and princesses which is available worldwide!


In other words -- inbreeding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

This will be a good excuse for Harry to fly private.

He should be ashamed to return, given the interview, lying and complaining that he did, but let's see what he does.  And how the public reacts.


----------



## Clearblueskies

[QUOTE="QueenofWrapDress, post: 34462682, member: 689
You are probably right. It just sounds cold as ice. But yes, I'll admit had they gone all out I'd for sure thought they were not being genuine.

ETA: I completely missed the last sentence. Is this woman for real? What is she implying?
[/QUOTE]
The story wasn’t big enough - she had to come up with some sensationalist angle I imagine.  Disgusted me.


----------



## Aimee3

I imagine Harry’s too scared and cowardly to return for the funeral.  Most likely no one wants him there anyway. I’m sure MM’s pregnancy will be a convenient excuse.  She’ll have break thru bleeding or something requiring bed rest etc. Anything so H doesn’t go.


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> I'm around her age and I wasn't. I never really heard anyone talk about them growing up, aside from that one day Diana passed away which was on all the news for hours. I got interested in the BRF later but none of my friends had/have any interest. The only people who will talk to me about them are on TPF lol.
> 
> I don't think she NEVER googled him but just saying, not EVERYONE grew up obsessed with the BRF.



I didn’t grow up obsessed with them, I was a kid in suburban Southern California. But they were pervasive in our media, there was no escaping it. The covers of tabloids, People magazine at the grocery store & waiting rooms, Entertainment Tonight. This was pop culture for Meghan. She didn’t have to research to know all about them. I promise I never read a biography on Princess Di like she did


----------



## mellibelly

It’s so sad. I’m imagining Hags wondering if Philip left them any cash.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> He would not have been allowed to visit. Still a lot of Covid restrictions here.


Well maybe he couldn’t visit in hospital but PP returned about a week or more ago now. I think his family would most likely have been keen for him to visit at home, especially if (as some have speculated) it was known that PP was about to go.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Usually pregnant ladies are clear to fly during the 2nd trimester, but with her bump changing size miraculously, I can't even guess what stage she is at. Maybe 4th trimester...


I know right. Maybe if her baggage was overweight she could pull a couple out her luggage, stuff em up her dress & officially declare she’s now having octuplets. 

I was just thinking the same thing as I flew short haul at 6 months last time.  But we all know that M has the most  dramatic pregnancy of all time  so she’ll undoubtedly have a 100 unnamed conditions which in no way show in her looks or physique (apart from looking a bit like fillers) which prevent her from flying.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.



Gayle needs to stay out of it. It is almost a conflict of interest to have her report on the BRF since she publicly came out as Team Meghan and she has displayed her biases for all to see. That said, I think she stumbled over her words. She may have been trying to find out whether he'd had a new health issue, but still it was clumsy and unprofessional.


----------



## creme fraiche

I found the Harke's message regarding the DoE to be off key.  First, "thank you for your service" - WTF?  Cold, impersonal, and more suited to a message an employer gives to a long time employee at a farewell meeting.  This was supposed to be a beloved grandfather FFS - a nice photo would have personalised things.  Also, the irritating misuse of ellipses gets on my nerve.


----------



## youngster

duna said:


> What a cold statement from them......Felipe's and Letizia's message to the Queen was much warmer! These two are a real disgrace.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.



_"Thank you for your service.  You will be greatly missed."  _

Jaw dropping "tribute" from the Sussex duo. What they wrote is something you say to your butler on his last day on the job, not about your beloved grandfather who stood by the Queen for more than 70 years.  Awful.


----------



## RAINDANCE

A very sad day indeed. I have personally felt deeply upset. Prince Philip looked so poorly when he left hospital; I was glad he was able to be at home at the end and I hope he was not in any great pain in his last few weeks. My thoughts are with the Queen and Royal Family.

Prince Philip was remarkable man - I hope in the days to follow we hear more of the organisations and interests he was involved with, much of it done without any fanfare.

It feels a personal loss because the very great age of the Duke and the Queen mean that for many of us in the UK, we know no different to their being our Head of State and Consort. My late father was of the same generation and today feels as though the last of the men that I grew up with have now gone.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.


That is disgusting. Did she think they euthanized him. Her brains are where she sits.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> _"Thank you for your service.  You will be greatly missed."  _
> 
> Jaw dropping "tribute" from the Sussex duo. What they wrote is something you say to your butler on his last day on the job, not about your beloved grandfather who was stood by the Queen for more than 70 years.  Awful.


That “thank you”  phrase is a knee jerk phrase that is uttered to all people in the armed services.   They are beyond despicable.


----------



## RAINDANCE

youngster said:


> _"Thank you for your service.  You will be greatly missed."  _
> 
> Jaw dropping "tribute" from the Sussex duo. What they wrote is something you say to your butler on his last day on the job, not about your beloved grandfather who was stood by the Queen for more than 70 years.  Awful.



I've seen people write more heartfelt message to their dead pet than this.


----------



## Lodpah

RAINDANCE said:


> A very sad day indeed. I have personally felt deeply upset. Prince Philip looked so poorly when he left hospital; I was glad he was able to be at home at the end and I hope he was not in any great pain in his last few weeks. My thoughts are with the Queen and Royal Family.
> 
> Prince Philip was remarkable man - I hope in the days to follow we hear more of the organisations and interests he was involved with, much of it done without any fanfare.
> 
> It feels a personal loss because the very great age of the Duke and the Queen mean that for many of us in the UK, we know no different to their being our Head of State and Consort. My late father was of the same generation and today feels as though the last of the men that I grew up with have now gone.


He was definitely of the greatest generation. A man’s man, stoic, stern, durable, try loyal to his wife and country.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Well maybe he couldn’t visit in hospital but PP returned about a week or more ago now. I think his family would most likely have been keen for him to visit at home, especially if (as some have speculated) it was known that PP was about to go.


Its been confirmed that the family haven't seen him for months due to the restrictions. It's been on one of the TV channels, can't remember which one, it's wall to wall coverage on all terrestrial channels at the moment


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> The Archewell Tribute. Aiming for solemn but I think they fell short and it just sounds template.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Prince Philip's Death
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess paid tribute to Harry's grandfather with a statement posted to Archewell's site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


Incredibly telling first photo choice isn’t it? Harry cropped from frame. Philip is slightly out of focus. Why the only person looking at the camera is Meghan.... fancy that. 
Good old Elle printing it out the incredibly long and poignant message in full so we don’t have to go on the dreaded site:
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex changed the homepage of their non-profit Archewell's site to pay tribute to Philip's life. “In loving memory of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh 1921-2021. Thank you for your service... You will be greatly missed.”

so I think that’s the sort of memorial I would post in an official capacity for a work colleague.

It says a lot when you compare it to the purple prose they write about themselves and their cause celebres.


----------



## bag-mania

creme fraiche said:


> Also, the irritating misuse of ellipses gets on my nerve.



YES! I hate to bash the millennials but how hard is it to write such a simple message correctly? An ellipsis means there is part of the message missing and they treat it here like it is a graphic element. Supposedly their team is made up of college graduates.


----------



## Rouge H

RIP, you had an amazing life❤️


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> I haven't had access to tPF all day due to tech problems, I didn't mean not to respond to you sooner.
> 
> It sounded terrifying and relentless, I am so pleased you found something that worked and has cut down these instances.
> 
> Mine are due most likely to teeth grinding in my sleep, a habit I can't seem to give up. I wear a guard to protect my teeth. Not only has it worn my teeth down, but due to the muscular tension around my jaw and neck contributes to the morning migraines.



Oh that’s awful.  I have a mouth guard but I can’t sleep with it very long. It drives me nuts, but I have to use it when I’m stressed or I’ll clench till I crack my teeth. We’re still working on stress management lol.

 I hope you are able to get relief. 
This thread moves so fast. Sorry for the slow response.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Incredibly telling first photo choice isn’t it? Harry cropped from frame. Philip is slightly out of focus. Why the only person looking at the camera is Meghan.... fancy that.



At least they managed to capture a moment where she didn't stick out her tongue like 3yo Charlotte.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

RAINDANCE said:


> I've seen people write more heartfelt message to their dead pet than this.


Yes, but we consider our pets beloved members of our family, whereas JCMH & Megain don't understand what *selfless* love is. Otherwise, how could Harry so publicly attack the family he professes to love. I feel so sorry for HM having to deal with such a wayward grandchild after the loss of her beloved Philip.


----------



## elvisfan4life

creme fraiche said:


> I found the Harke's message regarding the DoE to be off key.  First, "thank you for your service" - WTF?  Cold, impersonal, and more suited to a message an employer gives to a long time employee at a farewell meeting.  This was supposed to be a beloved grandfather FFS - a nice photo would have personalised things.  Also, the irritating misuse of ellipses gets on my nerve.



The Uk media have been advised there will be no further public messages from any of the senior royals - there are pre recorded comments from Anne and Edward about their father which have just been released - as part of the funerals plans these had been made some time ago - so we won’t be hearing from Charles or William maybe Harry was aware of the plan and has for once stood up to Meghan and decided to toe the line - maybe guilt has kicked in


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.


What is the insinuation there? Is she trying to ask if he was murdered? I’m confused.

I don’t know, I think they are so gushing normally and Harry talks so much about losing Diana that I feel putting a short statement seems more purposeful than it would with a more reserved person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> The Uk media have been advised there will be no further public messages from any of the senior royals - there are pre recorded comments from Anne and Edward about their father which have just been released - as part of the funerals plans these had been made some time ago - do we won’t be hearing from Charles or William maybe Harry was aware of the plan and has for once stood up to Meghan and decided to toe the line - maybe guilt has kicked in



Hope you are correct. The photo on their site looks like it is all about Meeeeeegz
ETA:  the Archewell site is just the message, no photo.  Guess Elle goofed.


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> A very sad day indeed. I have personally felt deeply upset. Prince Philip looked so poorly when he left hospital; I was glad he was able to be at home at the end and I hope he was not in any great pain in his last few weeks. My thoughts are with the Queen and Royal Family.
> 
> Prince Philip was remarkable man - I hope in the days to follow we hear more of the organisations and interests he was involved with, much of it done without any fanfare.
> 
> It feels a personal loss because the very great age of the Duke and the Queen mean that for many of us in the UK, we know no different to their being our Head of State and Consort. My late father was of the same generation and today feels as though the last of the men that I grew up with have now gone.



Beautifully said I feel just the same


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least they managed to capture a moment where she didn't stick out her tongue like 3yo Charlotte.



Or this - those evil eyes


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope you are correct. The photo on their site looks like it is all about Meeeeeegz
> ETA:  the Archewell site is just the message, no photo.  Guess Elle goofed.
> View attachment 5049943



Sadly could be because they just want to be seen as senior royals rather than respect and following royal instructions - we shall see


----------



## elvisfan4life

This pic is doing the rounds on uk social media


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> YES! I hate to bash the millennials but how hard is it to write such a simple message correctly? An ellipsis means there is part of the message missing and they treat it here like it is a graphic element. Supposedly their team is made up of college graduates.


I think you may be doing the team a disservice.
For all we know they may have been omitting parts of H&M’s original message because it makes them look even worse than the current message does....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I think you may be doing the team a disservice.
> For all we know they may have been omitting parts of H&M’s original message because it makes them look even worse than the current message does....



You think there may have been more? Something along the lines of "how inconsiderate it was for Philip to die when we were about to announce our latest lawsuit, this time against Piers Morgan and now we have to wait!"


----------



## lanasyogamama

BO’s message is so classy, really puts a spotlight on how flat the Harkle’s is.


----------



## Lodpah

elvisfan4life said:


> This pic is doing the rounds on uk social media
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5049949


I’m sorry but I find it mirrors her soul. There’s just something so innately evil about her. It’s irrational even to me. 

I can’t pin it down. It’s like total repulse  (not on her physical looks) but her soul. 

I have never come across any one like her through the web or in person. It’s like a dark entity has taken over her. I know too dramatic but it is what it is.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder if we will get "pap shots" of Harry getting on a private plane with Meghan at the foot of the steps crying, being the brave wife she is. Have to outdo a newly engaged Diana crying when Charles went off on a tour of Australia.


----------



## Lodpah

haute okole said:


> I know this is not the place or time but I respectfully disagree.  My father, a Filipino by birth, would never have been appointed by President Carter in the mid-1970’s if it were not for Carter’s desire to bring diversity to the Diplomatic Corp.  Historically, the top tiers of the Foreign Service were reserved for politically very well connected, deep pocketed families.  In some cases, Affirmative Action openEd doors to highly qualified candidates that historically would never have had the chance.


I’m sure your father is super talented but AA has been abused. I’m sure glad he was recognized.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope you are correct. The photo on their site looks like it is all about Meeeeeegz
> ETA:  the Archewell site is just the message, no photo.  Guess Elle goofed.
> View attachment 5049943


Sorry I think I misled you there. Elle featured that photo.
 I want to give them credit that it was a perceptive choice of theirs to go for a photo of grandfather and grandchild where the latter was conspicuous in his absence and his wife is dominating the frame.


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> I imagine Harry’s too scared and cowardly to return for the funeral.  Most likely no one wants him there anyway. I’m sure MM’s pregnancy will be a convenient excuse.  She’ll have break thru bleeding or something requiring bed rest etc. Anything so H doesn’t go.


The surrogate is going into labour as we speak. It will have to be a long one.

Apparently the date for the funeral is the morning of Saturday, April 17th, so they have time before going into labour, now that I think about it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

elvisfan4life said:


> This pic is doing the rounds on uk social media
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5049949


This is horrible, and wrong IMO


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> You think there may have been more? Something along the lines of "how inconsiderate it was for Philip to die when we were about to announce our latest lawsuit, this time against Piers Morgan and now we have to wait!"


If she wants to file another lawsuit it should be against the person who convinced her the brown turd hat was a good look.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is from a former royal chef, I thought it was really sweet.


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> A very sad day indeed. I have personally felt deeply upset. Prince Philip looked so poorly when he left hospital; I was glad he was able to be at home at the end and I hope he was not in any great pain in his last few weeks. My thoughts are with the Queen and Royal Family.
> 
> Prince Philip was remarkable man - I hope in the days to follow we hear more of the organisations and interests he was involved with, much of it done without any fanfare.
> 
> It feels a personal loss because the very great age of the Duke and the Queen mean that for many of us in the UK, we know no different to their being our Head of State and Consort. My late father was of the same generation and today feels as though the last of the men that I grew up with have now gone.


Exactly!  I feel just the same, it’s a very sad day.  I’ve been thinking about when we were kids and everyone was doing their Duke of Edinburgh award stuff.  They were happy times.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> You think there may have been more? Something along the lines of "how inconsiderate it was for Philip to die when we were about to announce our latest lawsuit, this time against Piers Morgan and now we have to wait!"



“Thank you for your serviceable allowance which has allowed us to reside at just above ‘merely existing’.  Your money and you will be greatly missed.”


----------



## Annawakes

My opinion re: the harkles’ tribute “thanking” Prince Philip for his service:

Once again they’re showing us that they think they’re more important than they really are.   They don’t have the stature nor the qualifications to thank PP for his service.  It’s like me thanking the company president or CEO when he retires.  It’s not my place to do that.  Their inflated sense of self shows again.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Even as grasping and greedy for attention as she is, Meghan has nothing to back up a letter like that. *She didn't stick around long enough to get to know him. She was there for 18 months and she was planning their departure almost from the Day 1*. Diana was there for years and actually knew Philip. Of course in the wacky fantasy world of Meghan's head maybe she believes Philip admired her and they had a close relationship.



I don't think this would stop her one bit. Meghan is the ultimate fake. Leave it to her to sob on how sad she is and regrets she was driven out despite working so hard and trying to be perfect for her new family. Philip gives her the perfect opportunity for more creative activations and word salad idiocy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hey everyone! The BRF just started an online book of condolence if you are interested to submit a personal message


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Philip was a member of the Greatest Generation (people born from 1901 to 1927). He will be greatly missed. 












						Queen shares poignant photo of 'beloved' Prince Philip as she pays tribute
					

THE QUEEN has shared a poignant photo of Prince Philip as she spoke of “deep sorrow” in a tribute to her “beloved” husband. The Duke of Edinburgh, who had been married …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

*FRENCH satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked outrage online after posting a highly offensive cartoon in response to Prince Philip's death.*_ “The Harry & Meghan Tribute to Prince Philip.”_









						Disgust as Charlie Hebdo cruelly mocks Prince Philip's death
					

FRENCH satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked outrage online after posting a highly offensive cartoon in response to Prince Philip's death.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## byzina

creme fraiche said:


> I found the Harke's message regarding the DoE to be off key.  First, "thank you for your service" - WTF?  Cold, impersonal, and more suited to a message an employer gives to a long time employee at a farewell meeting.  This was supposed to be a beloved grandfather FFS - a nice photo would have personalised things.  Also, the irritating misuse of ellipses gets on my nerve.



This is what struck me most of all - it is an appropriate phrase said by the employer. Or the one who has a higher rank or position. The Queen could say it to anyone who has served to the country. JCMH or his wife are not the people who can assess or give marks to Price Philip's service.


----------



## rose60610

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> I just read that *Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.*  Honestly these people are such harpies.



You're effing kidding me? You mean vs Covid as the cause?  PP was 99.  If GK insinuated that he died of something other than natural causes or Covid, then she should be fired and attacked by the Mob. Poetic justice. Some people can get away with ANYTHING and that's why their stupidity is safe and intact.


----------



## Chanbal

_His funeral will be a small family service at St George's Chapel in the grounds of Windsor Castle before the duke is buried in Frogmore Gardens, where Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were laid to rest. The date has not been set officially, but sources claim it could be on Saturday, April 17._









						Prince Philip dies aged 99 after life of service to Queen and country
					

The Duke of Edinburgh was at Windsor Castle with his wife after a 28-night stay in hospital having been admitted in mid-February for an infection and a pre-existing heart condition.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Shopaholic2021

rose60610 said:


> You're effing kidding me? You mean vs Covid as the cause?  PP was 99.  If GK insinuated that he died of something other than natural causes or Covid, then she should be fired and attacked by the Mob. Poetic justice. Some people can get away with ANYTHING and that's why their stupidity is safe and intact.



I feel the way things are going in society, if you are not white, then you can get away with saying whatever you want. If you're white they you have to think carefully otherwise you risk being branded a racist and cancelled. (This is coming from someone who is 100% colored, ie non-white).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I feel the way things are going in society, if you are not white, then you can get away with saying whatever you want. If you're white they you have to think carefully otherwise you risk being branded a racist and cancelled. (This is coming from someone who is 100% colored, ie non-white).


 Groupthink


----------



## WillstarveforLV

RAINDANCE said:


> Second cousins, I think - I tried to work it out but someone can correct me if wrong.
> Sophia is the sister of exiled Greek King Constantine II
> Prince Philip's father Prince Andrew was the brother of King Constantine I
> King Constantine I ws Sophia's grandfather and Philip's uncle


you got it right !


----------



## Hermes Zen

When I woke up this morning my DH said 'I'm sorry to give you sad news ... that Prince Philip passed away.' I froze and started to ball and scream cuss words at H&M!!  Every other minute between balling I cussed at the top of my lungs some more. Needless to say my DH slowly backed away. I'm still  

One of my first thoughts was how extremely sad the Queen must be and I worry for her. Being so close and many years together, this tragedy is very worrisome. I send a million wishes of strength and condolences to the Queen! AND H better not show his face at the funeral or I may start throwing things. Seriously, please give the extra strength she needs through these sad times. 

DH and I visited London for the first time in June of 2019. We pressed our faces to the gates of Buckingham Palace like tourists and toured Windsor Castle. Our hearts were filled with love for the Royal Family in particulate for the Queen and Prince Philip.

Read the obituary and wow wow wow what an incredible accomplished life Prince Philip had. Please rest in peace Prince Philip.


----------



## melissatrv

I heard that they staff kept as much as possible of the H&M interview fiasco from him.  In a life of service it would be shame for him to take his last bow thinking these 2 idiots ruined all he and the Queen worked for.  

RIP


----------



## gelbergirl

Thank you for your service.

did they hire an intern to do PR???!!!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> What a cold statement from them......Felipe's and Letizia's message to the Queen was much warmer! These two are a real disgrace.


wow, that could be from a stranger


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.


what?  what was Gayle thinking?  assisted suicide?  very inappropriate.  Wow


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Gayle needs to stay out of it. It is almost a conflict of interest to have her report on the BRF since she publicly came out as Team Meghan and she has displayed her biases for all to see. That said, I think she stumbled over her words. She may have been trying to find out whether he'd had a new health issue, but still it was clumsy and unprofessional.


no excuse for that coming from the "crown jewel" of CBS news


----------



## sdkitty

elvisfan4life said:


> This pic is doing the rounds on uk social media
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5049949


I don't like her but that's tasteless


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> no excuse for that coming from the "crown jewel" of CBS news



Is there video?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *FRENCH satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked outrage online after posting a highly offensive cartoon in response to Prince Philip's death.*_ “The Harry & Meghan Tribute to Prince Philip.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disgust as Charlie Hebdo cruelly mocks Prince Philip's death
> 
> 
> FRENCH satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked outrage online after posting a highly offensive cartoon in response to Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


maybe I'm dumb but I don't get why the cartoon is racist....I just see a grinning woman


----------



## CarryOn2020

No surprise here - his staff loved him 









						Why Prince Philip is the Royal Staff's Favorite Prince
					

Why is Prince Philip the royal staff's favorite prince?




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## Lodpah

Operation Forth Bridge. That’s so appropriate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

10 more reasons to love him:
From 2107:








						10 reasons we'll miss Prince Philip's legendary royal engagements - The Gentleman's Journal
					

As the Duke of Edinburgh announces he will stop his public appearances come autumn, we lament the gaffes that could have been...




					www.thegentlemansjournal.com


----------



## sdkitty

sounds like Gayle was just chattering away without thinking before she spoke...still no excuse for it








						Gayle King attacked for questioning how Prince Philip died
					

US journalist Gayle King has received criticism online following Prince Philip's death as she questioned if he passed of "natural causes".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bagshopr

I agree, what in the world is racist about the cartoon?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> sounds like Gayle was just chattering away without thinking before she spoke...still no excuse for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King attacked for questioning how Prince Philip died
> 
> 
> US journalist Gayle King has received criticism online following Prince Philip's death as she questioned if he passed of "natural causes".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Time for her to be ‘cancelled’


----------



## bellecate

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey everyone! The BRF just started an online book of condolence if you are interested to submit a personal message


Thank you for the link.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm dumb but I don't get why the cartoon is racist....I just see a grinning woman


sdkitty,
  What is shown here is literally not the whole picture. I read on one of the British press sites, maybe Express or Sun? that Meghan is depicted with a string of bananas around her waist.  

Edited to add: this is ugly, but can't be blamed on the RF or the British press, this is a French "satire" magazine.


----------



## needlv

I think H will go back for the private funeral.  But due to COVID rules maybe HMTQ should ask him to quarantine in the Tower of London!


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> sdkitty,
> What is shown here is literally not the whole picture. I read on one of the British press sites, maybe Express or Sun? that Meghan is depicted with a string of bananas around her waist.
> 
> Edited to add: this is ugly, but can't be blamed on the RF or the British press, this is a French "satire" magazine.


thank you for the explanation.....yes poor taste by a French publication


----------



## justwatchin

melissatrv said:


> I heard that they staff kept as much as possible of the H&M interview fiasco from him.  In a life of service it would be shame for him to take his last bow thinking these 2 idiots ruined all he and the Queen worked for.
> 
> RIP
> 
> View attachment 5050105


That is a wonderful photo; like he’s just moving on.


----------



## Rouge H

sdkitty said:


> I don't like her but that's tasteless



Agree, would love to biatch slap her for the utmost disrespect.


----------



## jennlt

jelliedfeels said:


> Incredibly telling first photo choice isn’t it? Harry cropped from frame. Philip is slightly out of focus. Why the only person looking at the camera is Meghan.... fancy that.
> Good old Elle printing it out the incredibly long and poignant message in full so we don’t have to go on the dreaded site:
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex changed the homepage of their non-profit Archewell's site to pay tribute to Philip's life. “In loving memory of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh 1921-2021. Thank you for your service... You will be greatly missed.”
> 
> so I think that’s the sort of memorial I would post in an official capacity for a work colleague.
> 
> It says a lot when you compare it to the purple prose they write about themselves and their cause celebres.
> 
> View attachment 5049923


At least _Elle _magazine picked a fantastic photo of Kate. She looks gorgeous; polished and present in the moment rather than seeking and smirking at the camera.
RIP Prince Philip


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

Regards the connections between the Spanish royals and Prince Phillip - basically all of the European royals are related in some way, then there are all the other countries who have married in. Another reason why going up against QEII as Meghan seems to have, is mind bogglingly stupid. QEIIs reach is enormous.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Philip was a member of the Greatest Generation (people born from 1901 to 1927). He will be greatly missed.
> 
> View attachment 5049671
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen shares poignant photo of 'beloved' Prince Philip as she pays tribute
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN has shared a poignant photo of Prince Philip as she spoke of “deep sorrow” in a tribute to her “beloved” husband. The Duke of Edinburgh, who had been married …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



My Dad was born in 1905. Went through the Depression and was 36 years old when Pearl Harbor happened. He didn't hesitate to enlist. At barely 5 feet tall his rifle was almost as big as he was. Never bragged or complained. They truly were the greatest generation.


----------



## mdcx

Perhaps Meghan is starting to understand that there is more to the BRF than just silly rules. People actually love and respect QEII and feel genuine sadness for her at this time. Its not some faceless corporation.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> sounds like Gayle was just chattering away without thinking before she spoke...still no excuse for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King attacked for questioning how Prince Philip died
> 
> 
> US journalist Gayle King has received criticism online following Prince Philip's death as she questioned if he passed of "natural causes".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



He probably watched the Oprah interview and it was enough to break his heart.


----------



## CarryOn2020

22,191 solo engagements in 70 years - now _that_ is real service
I stan, as the woke crowd says









						Prince Philip: 99 years, 143 countries and one very famous wife
					

He was the man beside Queen Elizabeth II - and arguably the world's most famous husband.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I don't understand Gayle's reasoning for questioning how the Prince died, how was that relevant? What is relevant, is that the Queen has lost her rock, he husband of 73 years! How about talking about the countless engagements he has undertaken, or the Duke of Edinburgh award which is a fantastic scheme aimed at developing skills in the youth. So what if he died of covid, or a heart attack etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## chaneljewel

sdkitty said:


> sounds like Gayle was just chattering away without thinking before she spoke...still no excuse for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King attacked for questioning how Prince Philip died
> 
> 
> US journalist Gayle King has received criticism online following Prince Philip's death as she questioned if he passed of "natural causes".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Exactly why I don’t listen to anything she says.


----------



## rose60610

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't understand *Gayle's reasoning* for questioning how the Prince died, how was that relevant? What is relevant, is that the Queen has lost her rock, he husband of 73 years! How about talking about the countless engagements he has undertaken, or the Duke of Edinburgh award which is a fantastic scheme aimed at developing skills in the youth. So what if he died of covid, or a heart attack etc.



Reasoning? Idiots and self im-paaahw-tant people don't need reasoning. They know people kiss their butts and circle the wagons to protect them!  Slamming a 99 year old dead man who gave his life to public service when his body is still warm reeks of idiocy and entitlement knowing her employer wouldn't DARE reprimand her, much less fire her. As to the critics who love highlighting Philip's slips and rumored transgressions, I'd like to see THEM reach age 99 in oh-so-holier-than-thou-righteousness-and-perfection without a hint of fault. Then they're welcome to go home and eff themselves.


----------



## lalame

I don't think Gayle was slamming Philip or meant disrespect, I think she just made a nosey and stupid comment. I'm not defending it, it was stupid, but I just didn't see any ill-will in it towards him. Not thinking before speaking was a good way to put it.


----------



## scarlet555

mdcx said:


> *Perhaps Meghan is starting to understand* that there is more to the BRF than just silly rules. People actually love and respect QEII and feel genuine sadness for her at this time. Its not some faceless corporation.



I missed something?  What makes you say this?


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> I missed something?  What makes you say this?



I understood the post to mean that MM would read PP’s tributes and realize how important service, royalty and loyalty are.
Maybe it’s just wishful thinking. She is 40 yrs old so admitting her comments and life choices are wrong may be expecting too much.  
It is the “triumph of hope over experience” [Oscar Wilde].


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry 'speaks to Charles, Beatrice and Eugenie'
					

In a post on their Archwell website, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex paid tribute to his grandfather with the two line message: 'Thank you for your services... You will be greatly missed.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Prince Harry 'speaks to Charles, Beatrice and Eugenie as he plans to return to Britain but pregnant Meghan Markle will stay in California' after they pay tribute to Prince Philip on Archewell website saying: 'Thank you for your service'*

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex posted a two line message following news of the Duke of Edinburgh's death*
*Prince Harry has not been back to the UK since March 2020 and was last pictured with Philip on May 8, 2019*
*Source today told Dailymail.com that Harry would 'do his utmost' to return to Britain for grandfather's funeral*
*May be permitted to use a diplomatic exemption to waive quarantine rules applying to flights from the USA *


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> I'm around her age and I wasn't. I never really heard anyone talk about them growing up, aside from that one day Diana passed away which was on all the news for hours. I got interested in the BRF later but none of my friends had/have any interest. The only people who will talk to me about them are on TPF lol.
> 
> I don't think she NEVER googled him but just saying, not EVERYONE grew up obsessed with the BRF.



Hours? It was 24/7 coverage for weeks when she was killed.


----------



## chaneljewel

I truly don’t care about what Harry will do.  It’s not about him.  It’s about the Queen and the loss of her beloved Phillip.  The BRF should be the focus of this sad time and Harry should only be in the back ground. I know that it’s his grandfather,  but he’s still not the focus.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Allisonfaye said:


> Hours? It was 24/7 coverage for weeks when she was killed.



Weeks, really, even in the US? I don't doubt you but I guess that shows you how tuned in I was about the BRF then (not much).


----------



## EverSoElusive

A collection of condolence messages from various royal houses and politicians    More heartfelt than whatever that's put out by the Ungratefuls.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This breaks my heart


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> sdkitty,
> What is shown here is literally not the whole picture. I read on one of the British press sites, maybe Express or Sun? that Meghan is depicted with a string of bananas around her waist.
> 
> Edited to add: this is ugly, but can't be blamed on the RF or the British press, this is a French "satire" magazine.


I wonder if the string of bananas were a reference to MM writing messages on bananas during a charity visit...


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the string of bananas were a reference to MM writing messages on bananas during a charity visit...



ohhhh, that would make so much sense. otherwise i was genuinely confused why there would be bananas there? and what the racist connotation was? bananas grow everywhere...


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Weeks, really, even in the US? I don't doubt you but I guess that shows you how tuned in I was about the BRF then (not much).



The early days of the 24-hour cable news cycle back then meant that a story as notable as Diana’s death ran nonstop. I remember being awake late that night watching the coverage of the accident from that tunnel in Paris. When she died there were tributes for weeks. And there was the funeral. Then there was the accident investigation that took months before it was resolved. It was a huge story.


----------



## Chanbal

"_Prince William will be supported by wife Kate Middleton’s family at his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — where he’ll come face-to-face with his brother, Prince Harry, for the first time in more than a year, Page Six is told.

Carole and Michael Middleton, are due to attend the service for the Duke of Edinburgh, who died at age 99 on Friday.

t’s particularly important for William to have their support as he is said by royal sources to be “heartbroken” after Harry laid bare their rift during a blockbuster interview with Oprah Winfrey last_"









						Prince William will be supported by Kate’s family at Philip’s funeral
					

Kate Middleton’s parents are due to attend Prince Philip’s funeral service.




					pagesix.com


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> The early days of the 24-hour cable news cycle back then meant that a story as notable as Diana’s death ran nonstop. I remember being awake late that night watching the coverage of the accident from that tunnel in Paris. When she died there were tributes for weeks. And there was the funeral. Then there was the accident investigation that took months before it was resolved. It was a huge story.


Right.  And it feels like we‘ve never really stopped hearing about her life and death.  I don’t mean that in a snarky way.


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> "_Prince William will be supported by wife Kate Middleton’s family at his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — where he’ll come face-to-face with his brother, Prince Harry, for the first time in more than a year, Page Six is told.
> 
> Carole and Michael Middleton, are due to attend the service for the Duke of Edinburgh, who died at age 99 on Friday.
> 
> t’s particularly important for William to have their support as he is said by royal sources to be “heartbroken” after Harry laid bare their rift during a blockbuster interview with Oprah Winfrey last_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William will be supported by Kate’s family at Philip’s funeral
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton’s parents are due to attend Prince Philip’s funeral service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Williams wise choice in marrying Kate just becomes more and more obvious. The Middletons are like family now and really support him.


----------



## floatinglili

csshopper said:


> sdkitty,
> What is shown here is literally not the whole picture. I read on one of the British press sites, maybe Express or Sun? that Meghan is depicted with a string of bananas around her waist.
> 
> Edited to add: this is ugly, but can't be blamed on the RF or the British press, this is a French "satire" magazine.



A la Josephine baker? 









						Josephine Baker - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the string of bananas were a reference to MM writing messages on bananas during a charity visit...



No it was a racist image. It shows Prince Harry doing a Nazi salut and Meghan is naked with bananas around her waist, which I think is meant in an offensive and racist tone. Charlie Hebdo has a long history of being racist and controversial. It is supposed to be a funny magazine but in reality it fails miserably. They also did a cover with Queen Elizabeth putting her foot on Meghans neck in the same way George Floyd was restrained. I wonder if anyone will take legal action against this? The magazine is truly distasteful. I am all for free speech and they have done some covers which I agree with but they've taken it too far recently, they have no limits.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> sounds like Gayle was just chattering away without thinking before she spoke...still no excuse for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King attacked for questioning how Prince Philip died
> 
> 
> US journalist Gayle King has received criticism online following Prince Philip's death as she questioned if he passed of "natural causes".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The Birth of A Million Conspiracy Theories
I can do fiction too. In Chinese imperial court intrigue tales, the would-be usurper murders someone as a test case. If she succeeds, then she starts picking off the ones in line for the throne till someone, say 6th in line  , gets to be Emperor. Just saying...



QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least they managed to capture a moment where she didn't stick out her tongue like 3yo Charlotte.


I googled Markle tongue once - there were so many images that it must be a reflex action for her whenever she sees a camera.



Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if we will get "pap shots" of Harry getting on a private plane with Meghan at the foot of the steps crying, being the brave wife she is. Have to outdo a newly engaged Diana crying when Charles went off on a tour of Australia.


 but highly likely.



lalame said:


> ohhhh, that would make so much sense. otherwise i was genuinely confused why there would be bananas there? and what the racist connotation was? bananas grow everywhere...


The inspirational message bananas were wacky.

Anyone thinks the Harkles will cash in on Philip's good mojo and name the bump Diana Philippa?


----------



## floatinglili

She is dressed as Josephine Baker. 
Take that as you will. 
The French killed their aristocrats they have a long history of viciously rubbishing authority


----------



## redney

chanbal said:
			
		

> I wonder if the string of bananas were a reference to MM writing messages on bananas during a charity visit...





lalame said:


> ohhhh, that would make so much sense. otherwise i was genuinely confused why there would be bananas there? and what the racist connotation was? bananas grow everywhere...



No it has nothing to do with her banana messages.  In the description of the cartoon, it says Meghan is drawn naked with a string of bananas tied at her waist, implying various things: (1) she is a naked, primitive monkey or (2) a member of a tribe, usually thought to be primitive and usually thought to be on the African continent, whose women do not clothe their bare breasts which connotes her as a Black person, or (3) mimicking Josephine Baker's costume, as a Black performer during a time period where Black performers were mocked - each with a racist meaning. It's similar in meaning to the tweet that came out around Archie's birth depicting him as a monkey, for which the person who tweeted it, a BBC presenter, was fired.

ETA: I missed the post above where @Shopaholic2021 posted the cartoon in its entirety.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Anyone thinks the Harkles will cash in on Philip's good mojo and name the bump Diana Philippa?



Not a chance. I think Philip’s death is a real inconvenience to them, particularly to Meghan. There will be no such special tribute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Williams wise choice in marrying Kate just becomes more and more obvious. The Middletons are like family now and really support him.


Aren't they great people!  Carole will body check anyone who gets near them lol! Very impressed that they are invited given the small total number of people allowed.

All the tributes are so heartfelt and beautifully written.  In non Covid times, they would all be present to pay their respects.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> 22,191 solo engagements in 70 years - now _that_ is real service
> I stan, as the woke crowd says
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip: 99 years, 143 countries and one very famous wife
> 
> 
> He was the man beside Queen Elizabeth II - and arguably the world's most famous husband.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


My DH was stupefied by this.  Just add them to all the ones he did with TQ!  Princess Anne inherited the workhorse gene from him.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> It would be most respectful for Harry to stay home and mourn from one of his 16 bathrooms. They don't need the spectacle/distraction at the service.
> 
> I would bet money that MM would not attend even if she wasn't pregnant.
> 
> I do bet there will be some orchestrated photo op for them related to the passing.


They'll stage a photo op with a "heavily pregnant" Meghan and JCMH laying a wreath at the grave of some man named Phillip.


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> This particular tribute set me off crying again so personal


That was very sweet.  I know all the royal families are related, but I need to look up exactly how the Spanish and BRF are tied.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> *FRENCH satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked outrage online after posting a highly offensive cartoon in response to Prince Philip's death.*_ “The Harry & Meghan Tribute to Prince Philip.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disgust as Charlie Hebdo cruelly mocks Prince Philip's death
> 
> 
> FRENCH satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo sparked outrage online after posting a highly offensive cartoon in response to Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I don't like Meghan, but even I thought this was offensive.  It is offensive in a way  that has nothing to do with PP's death.  I realize they just go for the sensational, but they do go too far at times.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Re: *MM dressed as Josephine Baker*.
Josephine Baker was an African-American entertainer who worked in France during the 1920's.
From Wiki:
"In Paris, she became an instant success for her erotic dancing, and for appearing practically nude onstage. After a successful tour of Europe, she broke her contract and returned to France in 1926 to star at the Folies Bergère, setting the standard for her future acts."
" Baker performed the "Danse Sauvage" wearing a costume consisting of a skirt made of a string of artificial bananas. Her success coincided (1925) with the Exposition des Arts Décoratifs, which gave birth to the term "Art Deco", and also with a renewal of interest in non-Western forms of art, including African. Baker represented one aspect of this fashion."

Josephine Baker wearing her costume


----------



## floatinglili

redney said:


> No it has nothing to do with her banana messages.  In the description of the cartoon, it says Meghan is drawn naked with a string of bananas tied at her waist, implying various things: (1) she is a naked, primitive monkey or (2) a member of a tribe, usually thought to be primitive and usually thought to be on the African continent, whose women do not clothe their bare breasts which connotes her as a Black person, or (3) mimicking Josephine Baker's costume, as a Black performer during a time period where Black performers were mocked - each with a racist meaning. It's similar in meaning to the tweet that came out around Archie's birth depicting him as a monkey, for which the person who tweeted it, a BBC presenter, was fired.
> 
> ETA: I missed the post above where @Shopaholic2021 posted the cartoon in its entirety.



Sorry I did post above but it was a bit out of context because I didn’t directly address the posts discussing the cartoons. She is literally dressed in Josephine Baker’s costume.
ETA: sorry Maggie didn’t see your post


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> No it was a racist image. It shows Prince Harry doing a Nazi salut and Meghan is naked with bananas around her waist, which I think is meant in an offensive and racist tone. *Charlie Hebdo has a long history of being racist and controversial.* It is supposed to be a funny magazine but in reality it fails miserably. They also did a cover with Queen Elizabeth putting her foot on Meghans neck in the same way George Floyd was restrained. I wonder if anyone will take legal action against this? The magazine is truly distasteful. I am all for free speech and they have done some covers which I agree with but they've taken it too far recently, they have no limits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050416
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050407



What is odd is the description of the magazine in Wikipedia says they are “anti-racist.” From the first paragraph about it:

*Charlie Hebdo* (French pronunciation: [ʃaʁli ɛbdo]; French for Charlie Weekly) is a French satirical weekly magazine, featuring cartoons, reports, polemics, and jokes. Stridently non-conformist in tone, the publication has been described as Anti-racist, sceptical, secular, and within the tradition of left-wing radicalism.






						Charlie Hebdo - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> The Archewell Tribute. *Aiming for solemn but I think they fell short and it just sounds template.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Break Silence on Prince Philip's Death
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess paid tribute to Harry's grandfather with a statement posted to Archewell's site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


ITA!  "Thank you for your service"..._that's_ what one writes about his recently deceased grandfather?  I say that to men and women in uniform when I see them at the airport!  That's something you say to someone you don't know.  That's about as heartfelt as gum on my shoe.


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> What is odd is the description of the magazine in Wikipedia says they are “anti-racist.” From the first paragraph about it:
> 
> *Charlie Hebdo* (French pronunciation: [ʃaʁli ɛbdo]; French for Charlie Weekly) is a French satirical weekly magazine, featuring cartoons, reports, polemics, and jokes. Stridently non-conformist in tone, the publication has been described as Anti-racist, sceptical, secular, and within the tradition of left-wing radicalism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charlie Hebdo - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


If you follow the footnote on Anti-racist, it leads to a 2013 article (updated in 2015) in _Le Monde_ in which the magazine writes to defend itself: https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/articl...lie-hebdo-n-est-pas-raciste_3516646_3232.html

*No, "Charlie Hebdo" is not racist!*
*TRIBUNE*
. Charb

Publishing director "Charlie Hebdo"

Fabrice Nicolino

Journalist

"We will continue to laugh at priests, rabbis and imams". The weekly defends its right to criticize all religions, but rejects accusations of racism.

Posted on November 20, 2013 at 8:26 a.m. - Updated on January 07, 2015 at 1:59 p.m.   Time to5 min read







The cartoonist Charb, in the premises of Charlie Hebdo, in September 2012. AFP / FRED DUFOUR
_*After accusations of racism launched against*_* Charlie Hebdo *_*in 2013,*_* Le Monde *_*published a column by Charb and Fabrice Nicolino.*

Charlie,_ our _Charlie Hebdo_ has guts and heart ache. Because now an incredible slander is circulating in larger and larger circles, which is reported to us every day. _Charlie Hebdo_ would have become a racist sheet.

One day, an Arab taxi driver demands that one of the newspaper's collaborators, recognized by him, get off immediately, on the grounds of cartoons mocking the Muslim religion . Another day, an interlocutor refuses an interview for the reason that he _"does not speak to a newspaper about big racists". _And, when the villainous _Minute_ attacks, as we know Christiane Taubira , there are imbeciles, even in the televisions, to attach the covers of our newspaper to those of this racist cloth.

*WITCH TRIAL*

But where has the moral conscience gone, if all villainies become so ordinary? We are almost ashamed to remember that anti-racism and the passion for equality between all humans are and will remain the founding pact of _Charlie Hebdo._

Of course, the witchcraft trial that so many weak minds bring us can only be conducted in secret, far from the light, in the absence of any defense. Because reading our newspaper is the definitive proof of what we are saying here. Those who dare to say the opposite do not read us, and are content to revel in an abominable rumor.

For the others, who still respect elementary values, here is our story in a few sentences. Created after the ban of _Hara Kiri weekly_ by the ridiculous Gaullist power of 1970, _Charlie Hebdo_ is the son of May 68, of freedom, of insolence, and of personalities as clearly situated as Cavanna, Cabu, Wolinski, Reiser, Gébé, Delfeil de Ton ...

Who would dare to put them on trial in retrospect? The _Charlie Hebdo_ of the 1970s will have helped to form the critical mind of a generation. While certainly making fun of the powers and the powerful. Laughing, and sometimes full-throated, at the misfortunes of the world, but always, always, always defending the human person and the universal values associated with him.

One of the tragedies of the slanderers is that Cavanna, Cabu, Wolinski are still there, faithful to the post every week, without having ever denied an ounce of their past. Unlike so many others, who have had the time, in forty years, to change their social costume several times, Charlie's team continues on the same path.

We laugh, we criticize, we still dream of the same things. This is not betraying a secret: the current team is divided between supporters of the left, the extreme left, anarchy and ecology. Not all of them vote, but all of them cracked the champagne when Nicolas Sarkozy was beaten in May 2012.

*WE CHOSEN OUR CAMP*

None of us would dream of defending the right, which we will fight to the end. As for fascisms, as for fascism, we obviously consider this breed as a definitive enemy, which has never been deprived of dragging us before the courts.

So open this journal! Jean-Yves Camus follows there with the rigor that we know him the activity of the extreme right. Laurent Léger reveals the turpitudes of the networks so extensive of corruption. Bernard Maris dissects the economy and capitalism like no other. Patrick Pelloux gently recounts the horrors of hospital emergencies. Gérard Biard scrapes against sexism and advertising. Zineb el Rhazoui criticizes - yes, and in a beautiful way - the unbearable manifestations of certain Islamism. Fabrice Nicolino looks at the world as a radical ecologist, but a humanist. Sigolène Vinson details the absurd daily life of so many courts. Luce Lapin defends with boundless stubbornness the animals, those who are largely absent from the debate. Antonio Fischetti tells the story of science, the sciences with humor and impertinence. Philippe Lançon proclaims the victory of literature on television every week. And then all the others! As for the designers, who does not know their line?

From Charb to Riss, from Luz to Willem, from Riad Sattouf to Tignous, via Honoré, Catherine and of course Wolin and Cabu, they make those who have not given up being free laugh every week.

Where would the alleged racists be hidden? We are not afraid to admit that we are lifelong anti-racist activists. Without necessarily having a card, we have chosen our side in this area, and will obviously never change. If by the extraordinary - but it will not happen - a racist word or drawing were to be published in our weekly, we would leave it instantly, and with a bang. Still happy !

It remains in these conditions to understand why. Why is this crazy idea spreading like a contagious disease? We would be Islamophobic, say our defamers. Which, in their newspeak, means racism. Where we see how much regression has won over so many minds.

The front page of "Charlie Hebdo" from September 19th. Several American media have refused to broadcast the images of the newspaper's cartoons. CHARLIE WEEKLY
*WE WILL CONTINUE, OF COURSE*

Forty years ago, conspiring, loathing, even conching religions was a must. Whoever intended to criticize the progress of the world could not fail to question the great powers of the principal clergy. But to follow some, it is true more and more numerous, it would be necessary today to be silent.

It is still happening that _Charlie_ devotes so many of his cover designs to papists. But the Muslim religion, a flag imposed on countless peoples of the planet, as far as Indonesia, should be spared. Why the hell? What is the relationship, other than ideological, essentialist at heart, between being Arab for example and belonging to Islam?

We refuse to hide behind our little finger, and we will continue, of course. Even if it is less easy than in 1970, we will continue to laugh at parish priests, rabbis and imams, whether we like it or not. Are we in the minority? Maybe, but proud of our traditions anyway. And that those who claim and will claim tomorrow that _Charlie_ is a racist at least have the courage to say it out loud, and under their name. We will know what to answer them.

> The _entire Charlie Hebdo editorial team joins the authors of this forum._

. Charb (Publishing Director "Charlie Hebdo") and Fabrice Nicolino (Journalist)


----------



## floatinglili

It’s not odd for Charlie Hebdo to claim a mantle of left wing radicalism. They come from a different left wing background, tradition and sensibility from the US!! 

With Charlie Hebdo a degree of cultural literacy is required to read the cartoon, and there are multi faceted readings.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Here you go and hope you feel better!
> 
> *Headline got cut off but this is how Queen Elizabeth is related to Spain's King Felipe*
> 
> One is the longest reigning monarch in Europe, the other is the newest king on the continent. But while their reigns started sixty years apart, Elizabeth II and Felipe VI have a linked history with roots in centuries past. The pair share several blood lines with ties to two of the most famous matchmakers in royal history. Here are the different ways Elizabeth II and Felipe VI get to call each other cousin.
> 
> *The Victorian Side*
> 
> The queen who dominated the 19th century is an ancestor of both the British and Spanish monarchs and one of them has a double tie to the woman who gave her name to an era. Both Felipe VI and Elizabeth II are descendants of Queen Victoria through their fathers. The Queen is the great, great, granddaughter of the woman she replaced as longest reigning monarch in British history. She is descended from Victoria’s eldest son, King Edward VII.
> 
> Felipe VI also has a paternal line going all the way back to the great queen. His father, Juan Carlos I of Spain, is the grandson of Queen Ena of Spain who started life as Princess Victoria Eugenie of Battenberg, the only daughter of Queen Victoria’s youngest child, Princess Beatrice.
> 
> 
> 
> But Felipe also has a link to Victoria’s firstborn, too. His mother, Queen Sofia, was the daughter of King Paul of Greece who himself was a grandson of Victoria, Princess Royal and the eldest of Victoria and Albert’s nine children. Her marriage, in 1858, to the future Emperor Frederick III of Germany, produced eight children. The eldest of those became Emperor Wilhelm II whose only daughter, Victoria Louise, married Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover. Their only daughter, Frederica, married King Paul of Greece thus providing a double link to Queen Victoria for Felipe VI of Spain.
> 
> *The Danish Dimension*
> 
> Victoria earned herself the nickname of ‘Grandmother of Europe’ thanks to the matchmaking that saw her descendants marry into many of the continent’s ruling houses. But another 19th century royal who never expected to rule was giving her a run for her money when it came to sharing genes. King Christian IX of Denmark was no slouch when it came to arranging royal weddings and, as a result, we find him in the family trees of both Elizabeth II and Felipe VI.
> 
> He is a great, great grandfather of the Queen through his daughter, Alexandra. She married Queen Victoria’s eldest son, the future Edward VII, in March 1863, just months before her father became King of Denmark. Their second son, King George V, was the grandfather of Elizabeth II.
> 
> 
> 
> Felipe’s link to Christian is again two fold and once more comes via his mother, Sofia. Christian IX’s second son, George, became King of Greece and was the paternal grandfather of Sofia’s father, King Paul. And Christian’s youngest daughter, Princess Thyra, was the paternal grandmother of Sofia’s mother, Frederica.
> 
> Those are the stand out royal links between these two monarchs although the complicated bloodlines of Europe’s ruling houses mean connections between all of today’s regal families are multiple. If you want to find out more about how royal houses across Europe are linked to one another, Royal Central’s Assistant Editor Moniek Bloks has written a book about Carolina of Orange-Nassau, ancestress of many modern kings, queens, princes and princesses which is available worldwide!


Thank you!


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> I just read that *Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.  Honestly these people are such harpies.*


Huh?  Vs what Gayle?  Are you going to insinuate someone in the BRF murdered him?


----------



## floatinglili

I am actually really concerned about the incredible reductionism that is going on in public debate these days. Charlie Hebdo is a blast from the past in that it assumes a degree of knowledge and background from those that engage with its material. 
Our global, socially connected world is looking increasingly simplistic, samey and shallow. Our intellectual environment turning into a knee-jerk shopping mall.


----------



## Jayne1

So Harry will show up next week, the day of the funeral and then be off, I guess?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> So Harry will show up next week, the day of the funeral and then be off, I guess?


likely. MM will be texting him like a maniac - "Leave, now, as fast as you can!" - to ensure he won't have feelings to stay with the Royal Family for any longer than she would like!


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> The Uk media have been advised there will be no further public messages from any of the senior royals - there are pre recorded comments from Anne and Edward about their father which have just been released - as part of the funerals plans these had been made some time ago - so we won’t be hearing from Charles or William maybe Harry was aware of the plan and has for once stood up to Meghan and decided to toe the line - maybe guilt has kicked in


But Harry "stepped back from being a senior royal" (as every damn article in People has to restate over and over and over again).  He probably can't come up with a complete sentence on his own.


----------



## redney

floatinglili said:


> I am actually really concerned about the incredible reductionism that is going on in public debate these days. Charlie Hebdo is a blast from the past in that it assumes a degree of knowledge and background from those that engage with its material.
> Our global, socially connected world is looking increasingly simplistic, samey and shallow. Our intellectual environment turning into a knee-jerk shopping mall.


I suppose there still exist opportunities for public debate, but those are few and far between, and not typically on social media or a purse forum. No offense intended, just different audiences with different areas of interest.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> This is from a former royal chef, I thought it was really sweet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050017


Even a former chef conveys more love and respect in his message than these two a$$es.


----------



## eunaddict

Thought better about dissing a (potentially) grieving family. 

But seriously, this just brings to the forefront my biggest pet peeve with these two (given that my grandmother is around QE2's age as well). They *KNEW* honour, dedication to service and upholding the British monarchy as an institution were the most important things (aside from family) in QE2 and PP's life, and still with both grandparents in the mid-late 90s, they STILL thought it was a genius idea to throw all their toys out of the pram and move to the other side of the world; to flee from service instead of embracing it (or at least making a show of trying to whilst gran and gramps were still around).

Bleargh. Talk is so cheap. Thanking someone for a lifetime of service while you've spent the better parts of the last 5 years running from it is just...gross.


----------



## Chanbal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> No it was a racist image. It shows Prince Harry doing a Nazi salut and Meghan is naked with bananas around her waist, which I think is meant in an offensive and racist tone. Charlie Hebdo has a long history of being racist and controversial. It is supposed to be a funny magazine but in reality it fails miserably. They also did a cover with Queen Elizabeth putting her foot on Meghans neck in the same way George Floyd was restrained. I wonder if anyone will take legal action against this? The magazine is truly distasteful. I am all for free speech and they have done some covers which I agree with but they've taken it too far recently, they have no limits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050416
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050407





redney said:


> No it has nothing to do with her banana messages.  In the description of the cartoon, it says Meghan is drawn naked with a string of bananas tied at her waist, implying various things: (1) she is a naked, primitive monkey or (2) a member of a tribe, usually thought to be primitive and usually thought to be on the African continent, whose women do not clothe their bare breasts which connotes her as a Black person, or (3) mimicking Josephine Baker's costume, as a Black performer during a time period where Black performers were mocked - each with a racist meaning. It's similar in meaning to the tweet that came out around Archie's birth depicting him as a monkey, for which the person who tweeted it, a BBC presenter, was fired.
> 
> ETA: I missed the post above where @Shopaholic2021 posted the cartoon in its entirety.


They are certainly poor taste cartoons, not funny at all!


----------



## lalame

Wow, those cartoons. Okay. I don't really know what to make of the Josephine Baker thing... what is the basis for the comparison between these 2 women? I'm obviously missing the cultural context here.


----------



## needlv

The message on archewell is cold and possible passive aggressive...  the statements from various world leaders including two past USA presidents is far better.  

Clearly H and MM fell out of favour from PP but their condolence statement shows a thoughtlessness and/or coldness.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry 'speaks to Charles, Beatrice and Eugenie'
> 
> 
> In a post on their Archwell website, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex paid tribute to his grandfather with the two line message: 'Thank you for your services... You will be greatly missed.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry 'speaks to Charles, Beatrice and Eugenie as he plans to return to Britain but pregnant Meghan Markle will stay in California' after they pay tribute to Prince Philip on Archewell website saying: 'Thank you for your service'*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex posted a two line message following news of the Duke of Edinburgh's death*
> *Prince Harry has not been back to the UK since March 2020 and was last pictured with Philip on May 8, 2019*
> *Source today told Dailymail.com that Harry would 'do his utmost' to return to Britain for grandfather's funeral*
> *May be permitted to use a diplomatic exemption to waive quarantine rules applying to flights from the USA *


"Diplomatic exemption"?  Why?  He's not in any official role.  And saying he'd "do his utmost", as almost like giving him a way out.


----------



## bisousx

I thought the statement was passive aggressive and subsequently disrespectful for a family member. It spells out that Prince Philip was a stranger to them.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry 'speaks to Charles, Beatrice and Eugenie'
> 
> 
> In a post on their Archwell website, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex paid tribute to his grandfather with the two line message: 'Thank you for your services... You will be greatly missed.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry 'speaks to Charles, Beatrice and Eugenie as he plans to return to Britain but pregnant Meghan Markle will stay in California' after they pay tribute to Prince Philip on Archewell website saying: 'Thank you for your service'*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex posted a two line message following news of the Duke of Edinburgh's death*
> *Prince Harry has not been back to the UK since March 2020 and was last pictured with Philip on May 8, 2019*
> *Source today told Dailymail.com that Harry would 'do his utmost' to return to Britain for grandfather's funeral*
> *May be permitted to use a diplomatic exemption to waive quarantine rules applying to flights from the USA *


Whatever Harry, Cringe will only make it worse so she can stay home... I don’t think anyone wants to see her from the family anyway after going on O to take her revenge knowing Prince Phillip was severely ill and could possibly die at any time...


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't like Meghan, but even I thought this was offensive.  It is offensive in a way  that has nothing to do with PP's death.  I realize they just go for the sensational, but they do go too far at times.


I thought the same, offensive and tasteless!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I don't like Meghan, but even I thought this was offensive.  It is offensive in a way  that has nothing to do with PP's death.  I realize they just go for the sensational, but they do go too far at times.


ITA.  I can't stand Meghan, but I thought it was an odd thing to publish, and not sure what in the world this had to do with PP's death.


----------



## floatinglili

redney said:


> I suppose there still exist opportunities for public debate, but those are few and far between, and not typically on social media or a purse forum. No offense intended, just different audiences with different areas of interest.


I thought social media was meant to encourage a flowering of diversity of thought not reduce us to international ground beef lol. (Or as we say I. my country ‘mince’ lol). 



lalame said:


> Wow, those cartoons. Okay. I don't really know what to make of the Josephine Baker thing... what is the basis for the comparison between these 2 women? I'm obviously missing the cultural context here.


Okay I’m no expert whatsoever but perhaps I can brainstorm with you. 
Josephine Baker was a dancer and entertainer. Originally from the US and moved permanently to France. 
She performed nude among many other roles in her lifetime, amd is celebrated in French history. 
 Do you position her as good time girl willing to sell her sexual beauty and maybe even favours (hey she was in the follies) to a paying audience? 
Do you see her as a faker of ethnic costume, prepared to ship her ‘exotic’ heritage for a buck? 
Do you see her as a woman prepared to drop her original loyalties and go to any lengths to achieve her goals? 
Or do you see her as a mover and shaker (literally) that is changing the face of culture with her titillating and unexpected exposures?? 
I mean the cartoon’s not a crazy starting point. 
Unless the French had it wrong all along and Josephine Baker should be cancelled ...


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> The message on archewell is cold and possible passive aggressive...  the statements from various world leaders including two past USA presidents is far better.
> 
> *Clearly H and MM fell out of favour from PP but their condolence statement shows a thoughtlessness and/or coldness.*



You know he had to have seen right through her from the beginning. She must have HATED him. The cold statement on Archewell is surely preferable to what she REALLY wanted to say-------she is likely doing all she can to hide her glee.
As for Harry.......who knows. It is obvious now that an elaborate facade was  created for him. It surely makes me look at everything in a new light. Did he really get on with and love _anyone_ in the family? Or was it all a sham.
Whatever. All I can say is PP and QE did more in ONE YEAR than those two will EVER 'accomplish' in a lifetime


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I can't stand Meghan, but I thought it was an odd thing to publish, and not sure what in the world this had to do with PP's death.


IMO, it is depicting how they behaved so disrespectfully towards the BRF. Harry is executing a Nazi salute probably referencing his wearing a Nazi uniform, that showed little respect for the BRF's valiant efforts during WWII. Meghan wearing the banana costume is explained in my previous post. Both Meghan and Josephine Baker are African-American entertainers. I think  they might be comparing how both women used bananas: JB for a costume & MM to write messages to sex workers.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Re: *MM dressed as Josephine Baker*.
> Josephine Baker was an African-American entertainer who worked in France during the 1920's.
> From Wiki:
> "In Paris, she became an instant success for her erotic dancing, and for appearing practically nude onstage. After a successful tour of Europe, she broke her contract and returned to France in 1926 to star at the Folies Bergère, setting the standard for her future acts."
> " Baker performed the "Danse Sauvage" wearing a costume consisting of a skirt made of a string of artificial bananas. Her success coincided (1925) with the Exposition des Arts Décoratifs, which gave birth to the term "Art Deco", and also with a renewal of interest in non-Western forms of art, including African. Baker represented one aspect of this fashion."
> 
> Josephine Baker wearing her costume


----------



## lalame

floatinglili said:


> I thought social media was meant to encourage a flowering of diversity of thought not reduce us to international ground beef lol. (Or as we say I. my country ‘mince’ lol).
> 
> 
> Okay I’m no expert whatsoever but perhaps I can brainstorm with you.
> Josephine Baker was a dancer and entertainer. Originally from the US and moved permanently to France.
> She performed nude among many other roles in her lifetime, amd is celebrated in French history.
> Do you position her as good time girl willing to sell her sexual beauty and maybe even favours (hey she was in the follies) to a paying audience?
> Do you see her as a faker of ethnic costume, prepared to ship her exotic heritage for a buck?
> Do you see her as a woman prepared to drop her original loyalties and go to any lengths to achieve her goals?
> Or do you see her as a mover and shaker (literally) that is changing the face of culture with her titillating and unexpected exposures??
> I mean the cartoon’s not a crazy starting point.
> Unless the French had it wrong all along and Josephine Baker should be cancelled ...



I really don't know how to square away those negative descriptors with a person who is celebrated (Josephine I mean). I just don't get it. If anyone sees a French perspective on it, I'd like to know if there is a common understanding of this that's obvious to them.   At the simplest level I see them portraying M as a more French-relevant famous black entertainer but I don't then understand why it's such an uncomplimentary caricature if Josephine is celebrated. Is it just akin to say depicting white American actress A in Marilyn Monroe garb because it's an easy caricature? I have only questions, no answers, so anyone feel free to correct me.


----------



## eunaddict

Also, please don't let them get away with pretending to suddenly develop the trademark "stiff upper lip" attitude.

(Not sure who I'm pleading to, but eh.)

ANNND again, it's only about what he wants. I do hope his presence gives QE2 comfort (and I also hope the senior HRHs finally do that review).


----------



## jblended

needlv said:


> The message on archewell is cold and possible passive aggressive...  the statements from various world leaders including two past USA presidents is far better.
> 
> Clearly H and MM fell out of favour from PP but their condolence statement shows a thoughtlessness and/or coldness.


I was genuinely astonished at their message. I shouldn't have been, I suppose, but it really took me aback. It is easily the only one that has been released that feels impersonal... Like they just said _something_ because they must. It's utterly baffling that Harry would not write something himself, something personal and expressing the appropriate level of love and respect.
I thought I couldn't be further disappointed, but he has outdone himself this time. It's just cold, as you have perfectly put it.


----------



## lalame

She does seem to be quite a positive person in history? Maybe it's just a comparison due to the civil rights activist + Black entertainer thing. And... I get how the "signature" for both could be seen as the bananas - those charity bananas.


----------



## Chanbal

Why would JCMH be asked to record a testimonial to be played at the funeral if he is planning to be there? If H is expected to take a private jet, it would be relatively safe for MM to make the trip. However, it would perhaps be better if they both stay at home and Harry emails his testimonial... After their interview when Philip was in the hospital, they are likely not very welcomed in the UK.

"_PRINCE HARRY__ may be allowed to use a diplomatic exemption to avoid the normal Covid quarantine when he jets to the UK from the US to attend Prince Philip's funeral, according to reports.

*The Duke of Sussex is widely expected to make the 5,460-mile journey by private jet ahead of the ceremonial funeral for his grandfather.*

While the full details of the funeral arrangements have yet to be released by Buckingham Palace, leaked information on the Government's website suggests the ceremony will take place next Saturday.

Harry, 36, is not expected to be joined by Meghan, 39, when he flies in for the sombre affair as she is heavily pregnant with their second baby, a girl.

*PRINCE HARRY*_* was asked by Prince Philip to record a testimonial to be played at his funeral, it has been claimed."*









						Royal Family LIVE: Prince Harry shamed as expert unveils 'final straw' - Queen targeted
					

PRINCE WILLIAM was incredibly patient with his younger brother Prince Harry, an expert has said, but the Duke of Sussex's demands of the Queen proved to be the final straw".




					www.express.co.uk
				



:


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Wow, those cartoons. Okay. I don't really know what to make of the Josephine Baker thing... what is the basis for the comparison between these 2 women? I'm obviously missing the cultural context here.


Aaah . . . The French. They’re the only ones who can take pieces of leather and make women and some men collectively lose it by paying 1000s for it. 

There’s a secret joke in the military tho. The only time you see the French marching forward is in a parade. Ok, I’ll give them some credit. My son served two tours with the FFL in Sudan and he said they were fearless. They do all the dirty dirty work.


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> Why would JCMH be asked to record a testimonial to be played at the funeral if he is planning to be there? If H is expected to take a private jet, it would be relatively safe for MM to make the trip. However, it would perhaps be better if they both stay at home and Harry emails his testimonial... After their interview when Philip was in the hospital, they are likely not very welcomed in the UK.
> 
> "_PRINCE HARRY__ may be allowed to use a diplomatic exemption to avoid the normal Covid quarantine when he jets to the UK from the US to attend Prince Philip's funeral, according to reports.
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex is widely expected to make the 5,460-mile journey by private jet ahead of the ceremonial funeral for his grandfather.*
> 
> While the full details of the funeral arrangements have yet to be released by Buckingham Palace, leaked information on the Government's website suggests the ceremony will take place next Saturday.
> 
> Harry, 36, is not expected to be joined by Meghan, 39, when he flies in for the sombre affair as she is heavily pregnant with their second baby, a girl.
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY*_* was asked by Prince Philip to record a testimonial to be played at his funeral, it has been claimed."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family LIVE: Prince Harry shamed as expert unveils 'final straw' - Queen targeted
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM was incredibly patient with his younger brother Prince Harry, an expert has said, but the Duke of Sussex's demands of the Queen proved to be the final straw".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :


I would guess this was in anticipation of a total Covid lockdown where H could not travel to the UK even on private jet. I wonder if when this video was arranged, it was made clear to H&M that M was not invited to the funeral.


----------



## Lodpah

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, it is depicting how they behaved so disrespectfully towards the BRF. Harry is executing a Nazi salute probably referencing his wearing a Nazi uniform, that showed little respect for the BRF's valiant efforts during WWII. Meghan wearing the banana costume is explained in my previous post. Both Meghan and Josephine Baker are African-American entertainers. I think  they might be comparing how both women used bananas: JB for a costume & MM to write messages to sex workers.


Their founder and others literally died for the freedom to write satire. There’s an excellent documentary on Netflix about him. Like George Carlin, you know? When we used to be able to do that? Your assessment is right on.


----------



## floatinglili

lalame said:


> I really don't know how to square away those negative descriptors with a person who is celebrated (Josephine I mean). I just don't get it. If anyone sees a French perspective on it, I'd like to know if there is a common understanding of this that's obvious to them.   At the simplest level I see them portraying M as a more French-relevant famous black entertainer but I don't then understand why it's such an uncomplimentary caricature if Josephine is celebrated. Is it just akin to say depicting white American actress A in Marilyn Monroe garb because it's an easy caricature? I have only questions, no answers, so anyone feel free to correct me.


I’m sure Baker wasn’t wearing her naked banana costume at the time she was spying or being celebrated for her civil activism. It was a phase of her life, part of her rise. She performed naked. 
Marilyn Monroe is a reasonable comparison. Her image could be used as an example of femme fatale, the other women, the Norma Jean sexualised teen, tragic heroine used and abused. Or a comedian, Golden Years Hollywood, woman charting her own course  etc. And each image would probably come with a different iconic costume.


----------



## mdcx

I didn't realise that Prince Phillip’s three living sisters were not invited to his wedding in 1947 due to their connections to Germany and the Nazi party. PP made huge sacrifices, so the self-pity and woe is us storyline of H&M really must have stuck in his craw.


----------



## pukasonqo

lalame said:


> ohhhh, that would make so much sense. otherwise i was genuinely confused why there would be bananas there? and what the racist connotation was? bananas grow everywhere...


Josephine Baker was an African American well known dancer, acivist and member of the French Resistance she lived in Paris and was famous (or infamous) for wearing a banana skirt for performing









						Biography: Josephine Baker
					

World renowned performer, World War II spy, and activist are few of the titles used to describe Josephine Baker.




					www.womenshistory.org
				






			Redirect Notice


----------



## floatinglili

Hey the other thing about the cartoon is that Harry wasn’t a real Nazi (just a ****) and MM isn’t a real Josephine Baker either haha


----------



## Hermes Zen

mellibelly said:


> It’s so sad. I’m imagining Hags wondering if Philip left them any cash.


I agree. I thought the same thing this morning and I could see M wringing her hands hoping!


----------



## muddledmint

Allisonfaye said:


> Yeah, I get it. Throw out comments like those and then when anyone calls you on it, you say not worth it. My sister does the same thing. Ironic that she is a capitalism hater.


Is this still about tucker? How did you get to capitalism from that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

eunaddict said:


> Also, please don't let them get away with pretending to suddenly develop the trademark "stiff upper lip" attitude.
> 
> (Not sure who I'm pleading to, but eh.)
> 
> ANNND again, it's only about what he wants. I do hope his presence gives QE2 comfort (and I also hope the senior HRHs finally do that review).
> 
> View attachment 5050468


I've  become so cynical about H my first thoughts when reading the headline was 1. he was hitting Charles up for the $ to charter a private jet and 2. he was trying to find a place to bunk so contacted the two cousins with whom he supposedly still has a good relationship. I would hope the Brookbanks would tell him "Sorry, no room at Frogmore for you, had your chance and blew it. Maybe the Mayfair has a room you could reserve."


----------



## mdcx

csshopper said:


> I've  become so cynical about H my first thoughts when reading the headline was 1. he was hitting Charles up for the $ to charter a private jet and 2. he was trying to find a place to bunk so contacted the two cousins with whom he supposedly still has a good relationship. I would hope the Brookbanks would tell him "Sorry, no room at Frogmore for you, had your chance and blew it. Maybe the Mayfair has a room you could reserve."


No one in the family would feel comfortable in any unguarded interactions with Harry imo, knowing that everything they say/do would be reported back to MM. So yes, unlikely any invitations to stay are being offered.


----------



## poopsie

How sharper than a serpents tooth........................


----------



## muddledmint

papertiger said:


> I haven't had access to tPF all day due to tech problems, I didn't mean not to respond to you sooner.
> 
> It sounded terrifying and relentless, I am so pleased you found something that worked and has cut down these instances.
> 
> Mine are due most likely to teeth grinding in my sleep, a habit I can't seem to give up. I wear a guard to protect my teeth. Not only has it worn my teeth down, but due to the muscular tension around my jaw and neck contributes to the morning migraines.


Have you tried Botox for your masseters? It helped me immensely


----------



## elvisfan4life

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I feel the way things are going in society, if you are not white, then you can get away with saying whatever you want. If you're white they you have to think carefully otherwise you risk being branded a racist and cancelled. (This is coming from someone who is 100% colored, ie non-white).



Well said I completely agree old people are scared to open their mouths these days


----------



## elvisfan4life

bellecate said:


> Thank you for the link.



Let’s move comments about Philip to the nice couples thread and not give the gruesome twosome any oxygen here


----------



## floatinglili

elvisfan4life said:


> Well said I completely agree old people are scared to open their mouths these days


It’s about keeping up with fashion. I mean centre parts are back in as well. Now that’s scary! My daughter said side parts made me look out of touch and old lmao. 
So back to 70s Marcia hair we go!! 
Ours is not to reason why....


----------



## doni

Charlie Hebdo’s cartoon is nasty, because that is what they do, nasty cartoons. Nothing exceptional about it.
I do find it odd that there is more scandal about Meghan being depicted in a Josephine Baker outfit, than about Harry being depicted as a nazi (and the twisted reference to Prince Philip in there).
I think the cartoon was trying to juxtapose Harry’s past (nazi costume, racist behaviour etc), with Meghan’s influence, thus comparing her with Baker who  fought nazism and dedicated her later life to civil rights and social activism. But maybe I am being nice?

I was surprised by the coldness of the statement to mark Prince Philip’s passing. Specially compared to some others, such as the former US President.

Also that Harry is so adamant to be back for the funeral, when he knew Philip was unwell all year, and at that age, and a visit was never suggested...
Maybe he is expecting pomp and ceremony? Will he change his mind now that it has been announced there will be very little of that?


----------



## Sharont2305

bisousx said:


> I thought the statement was passive aggressive and subsequently disrespectful for a family member. It spells out that Prince Philip was a stranger to them.


To Meghan he was so that post was sufficient for her


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Wow, those cartoons. Okay. I don't really know what to make of the Josephine Baker thing... what is the basis for the comparison between these 2 women? I'm obviously missing the cultural context here.


Well I interpreted it as:
JB was a legendary vedette and the costume would be immediately recognisable to a French audience.
I think the implication is on one level that it’s obviously an inappropriate costume to wear to a funeral.
I mean if we are really reading into it, he’s wearing a nazi outfit and JB was a resistance agent so the further implication might be she is his downfall


----------



## floatinglili

^^fun read! That they are very bad match for each other haha


----------



## floatinglili

Careful ladies. You will be quoted alongside your pseudonym next - could it be daily telegraph has read this thread?


----------



## elvisfan4life

My other half remarked last night ( having ignored the wall to wall coverage all day by choice ) that his understanding of the markle “thank you for your service “ was a continuation of her previous spat with the royal family and similar to the “service is universal “ comment  she made - I think a lot of us in the uk feel the same


----------



## limom

jelliedfeels said:


> Well I interpreted it as:
> JB was a legendary vedette and the costume would be immediately recognisable to a French audience.
> I think the implication is on one level that it’s obviously an inappropriate costume to wear to a funeral.
> I mean if we are really reading into it, he’s wearing a nazi outfit and JB was a resistance agent so the further implication might be she is his downfall


MM is no JB.
Anyways.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Anyway I’m done with this thread I’m going to post about PP on the W&K thread from now on


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> I thought social media was meant to encourage a flowering of diversity of thought not reduce us to international ground beef lol. (Or as we say I. my country ‘mince’ lol).
> 
> 
> Okay I’m no expert whatsoever but perhaps I can brainstorm with you.
> Josephine Baker was a dancer and entertainer. Originally from the US and moved permanently to France.
> She performed nude among many other roles in her lifetime, amd is celebrated in French history.
> Do you position her as good time girl willing to sell her sexual beauty and maybe even favours (hey she was in the follies) to a paying audience?
> Do you see her as a faker of ethnic costume, prepared to ship her ‘exotic’ heritage for a buck?
> Do you see her as a woman prepared to drop her original loyalties and go to any lengths to achieve her goals?
> Or do you see her as a mover and shaker (literally) that is changing the face of culture with her titillating and unexpected exposures??
> I mean the cartoon’s not a crazy starting point.
> Unless the French had it wrong all along and Josephine Baker should be cancelled ...



The difference between M and Baker, is that Baker was a multi-talented performer, an activist and truth-teller. An international superstar, and she made it on her own - despite everything.

Josephine made Europe her home because she didn't face the same level of racism, bias and lawful segregation that she suffered in the US and that she spoke of. Later in her life she adopted children from all over the world (eat your heart out Angelina) to show that without favour all people could live/love together as a family, a real rainbow family. In later life she continued working just to support her family.

Her celebrated dance act was among many of the time (1920s) that used dance acts to provide suggestive entertainment, but through their huge fame challenged the status quo of women's propriety that in turn allowed women to become artists in their own right and not as part of a mechanical chorus line-up. They also were hugely influence on the culture of the day, they gave the 'jazz age' a stylised look and global reach.

Though the costume looks like a caricature at first glance, Baker subverted the implied sexist and racist connotations of the banana costume with her dance. It is uncomfortable to view in the 21 century as it is a version of blackface. It could also be said that for an American to dressing in an approximation of 'African' (in that vague way that outsiders lump together the many countries of an entire continent) is a form of cultural appropriation. However, that costume also is a visual representation of what Baker was told she was almost everyday.  Ultimately, it's one of many depictions of women as exotic creatures derived from men's fantasy, and mostly an excuse to see skin.

Re the CH cartoon:
The couple's costumes together. Both H&M are playing dress-up, and that their respective costumes are bluffs and double-bluffs, infinite-bluffs layers and layers deep.

H is dressed-up as a Nazi whilst married to a WOC, but does that mean he isn't a Nazi? And so on...

M, an ex-entertainer is wearing Baker's costume, dressing herself as a fantasy WOC, and as a fantasy that she is some sort of activist (as Baker was). But can you want to be married to someone who wears a Nazi uniform as an anti-racist/ WOC? And so on...

I just thought I'd add the...whenever


----------



## duna

RAINDANCE said:


> A very sad day indeed. I have personally felt deeply upset. Prince Philip looked so poorly when he left hospital; I was glad he was able to be at home at the end and I hope he was not in any great pain in his last few weeks. My thoughts are with the Queen and Royal Family.
> 
> Prince Philip was remarkable man - I hope in the days to follow we hear more of the organisations and interests he was involved with, much of it done without any fanfare.
> 
> It feels a personal loss because the very great age of the Duke and the Queen mean that for many of us in the UK, we know no different to their being our Head of State and Consort. My late father was of the same generation and today feels as though the last of the men that I grew up with have now gone.



My feelings exactly. I'm 63 and born and brought up in England with a British mother and Italian father. The Queen and DoE have always been there as far back as I can remember. They are my parents' generation and I feel a great emptiness inside


----------



## CarryOn2020

eunaddict said:


> Also, please don't let them get away with pretending to suddenly develop the trademark "stiff upper lip" attitude.
> 
> (Not sure who I'm pleading to, but eh.)
> 
> ANNND again, it's only about what he wants. I do hope his presence gives QE2 comfort (and I also hope the senior HRHs finally do that review).
> 
> View attachment 5050468



IMO Harry just wants to be where the crowd is.  Sure, sure, PP is his grandfather, but he is not a source of comfort for the family. He brings tension and judgment, not peace and love. Now is not the time for his thirst for attention. He can mourn by himself.  Imo


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, it is depicting how they behaved so disrespectfully towards the BRF. Harry is executing a Nazi salute probably referencing his wearing a Nazi uniform, that showed little respect for the BRF's valiant efforts during WWII. Meghan wearing the banana costume is explained in my previous post. Both Meghan and Josephine Baker are African-American entertainers. I think  they might be comparing how both women used bananas: JB for a costume & MM to write messages to sex workers.



I forgot about those bananas. 

How could I forget about those damn bananas?


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I really don't know how to square away those negative descriptors with a person who is celebrated (Josephine I mean). I just don't get it. If anyone sees a French perspective on it, I'd like to know if there is a common understanding of this that's obvious to them.   At the simplest level I see them portraying M as a more French-relevant famous black entertainer but I don't then understand why it's such an uncomplimentary caricature if Josephine is celebrated. Is it just akin to say depicting white American actress A in Marilyn Monroe garb because it's an easy caricature? I have only questions, no answers, so anyone feel free to correct me.



I suppose in the same way we can celebrate the actress Hattie McDaniel (Maid 'Mammy' in _Gone with the Wind _1939) without the maid's uniform. 

I guess it's also (about) bananas.


----------



## Missydora

If I was the queen I wouldn't even bother invite Harry to the funeral.  The pair don't respect or care for them.  They are just a pair of bitter calculating back stabbers.  No shame. Should be sorry for what they did to them.    Especially now since maybe they can see how selfish they were.  It was totally inappropriate to have done what they did.. gawd knows how the royal staff manage to conceal the news from him when he was out of hostpital.  It must have been hard for all concerned not to let him know what was going on..  really shows how selfish they are only think on themselves and their own agenda rather than showing   more compassion and empathy to someone who is on deaths door. Would be a insult to have him at a funeral because he never cared on him in his hours of need. Decided to kick him even more when he was down.


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> I was genuinely astonished at their message. I shouldn't have been, I suppose, but it really took me aback. It is easily the only one that has been released that feels impersonal... Like they just said _something_ because they must. It's utterly baffling that Harry would not write something himself, something personal and expressing the appropriate level of love and respect.
> I thought I couldn't be further disappointed, but he has outdone himself this time. It's just cold, as you have perfectly put it.



I think it's just odd...and poor show. 

I mean, who are they hiring for PR (presumably at great expense)? 

Someone should be fired


----------



## RAINDANCE

elvisfan4life said:


> My other half remarked last night ( having ignored the wall to wall coverage all day by choice ) that his understanding of the markle “thank you for your service “ was a continuation of her previous spat with the royal family and similar to the “service is universal “ comment  she made - I think a lot of us in the uk feel the same



I agree - It was petty and so, so unnecessary. Why not just say he was greatly loved and will be sorely missed ?

Harry now finds himself in a no man's land of his own construction. Not part of even the "outer firm", he is no longer represented by the official Palace announcements where they incorporate the wider family but has no real independent platform of his own.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Missydora said:


> If I was the queen I wouldn't even bother invite Harry to the funeral.  The pair don't respect or care for them.  They are just a pair of bitter calculating back stabbers.  No shame. Should be sorry for what they did to them.    Especially now since maybe they can see how selfish they were.  It was totally inappropriate to have done what they did.. gawd knows how the royal staff manage to conceal the news from him when he was out of hostpital.  It must have been hard for all concerned not to let him know what was going on..  really shows how selfish they are only think on themselves and their own agenda rather than showing   more compassion and empathy to someone who is on deaths door. Would be a insult to have him at a funeral because he never cared on him in his hours of need. Decided to kick him even more when he was down.


How can they trust Harry to respect the privacy of the funeral and family mourning?  Will it all be blurted out in another tell-all?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Would it not be hilarious if Prince Philip has decreed that, rather like the "no children at the wedding" edicts of today, that there be no grandchildren at the funeral 

I would far rather see his valet and private secretary and a few other of his close personal team attend rather than any of the grandchildren's spouses. As well as as the Dukes of Kent, Gloucester and Princess Alexandria - the lifelong friends and cousins of the Queen and Duke.

I am sure an exception on the numbers could be made but I don't think the Queen will want to waiver from current UK guidelines so it will be 30 in accordance with the revised guidelines for UK funerals. And hopefully a massive Remembrance Service later in the year full of European and other royalty and a representative from every one of the 800 organisations that he was connected with.


----------



## needlv

RAINDANCE said:


> I agree - It was petty and so, so unnecessary. Why not just say he was greatly loved and will be sorely missed ?
> 
> Harry now finds himself in a no man's land of his own construction. Not part of even the "outer firm", he is no longer represented by the official Palace announcements where they incorporate the wider family but has no real independent platform of his own.



their statement is so cold... it seriously undermines their branding around “compassion”...  what idiots.  They Must be blinded by their anger, bitterness and revenge not to see how this will affect how others perceive their foundation built around “compassion”.


----------



## jblended

papertiger said:


> The difference between M and Baker, is that Baker was a multi-talented performer, an activist and truth-teller. An international superstar, and she made it on her own - despite everything.
> 
> Josephine made Europe her home because she didn't face the same level of racism, bias and lawful segregation that she suffered in the US and that she spoke of. Later in her life she adopted children from all over the world (eat your heart out Angelina) to show that without favour all people could live/love together as a family, a real rainbow family. In later life she continued working just to support her family.
> 
> Her celebrated dance act was among many of the time (1920s) that used dance acts to provide suggestive entertainment, but through their huge fame challenged the status quo of women's propriety that in turn allowed women to become artists in their own right and not as part of a mechanical chorus line-up. They also were hugely influence on the culture of the day, they gave the 'jazz age' a stylised look and global reach.
> 
> Though the costume looks like a caricature at first glance, Baker subverted the implied sexist and racist connotations of the banana costume with her dance. It is uncomfortable to view in the 21 century as it is a version of blackface. It could also be said that for an American to dressing in an approximation of 'African' (in that vague way that outsiders lump together the many countries of an entire continent) is a form of cultural appropriation. However, that costume also is a visual representation of what Baker was told she was almost everyday.  Ultimately, it's one of many depictions of women as exotic creatures derived from men's fantasy, and mostly an excuse to see skin.
> 
> Re the CH cartoon:
> The couple's costumes together. Both H&M are playing dress-up, and that their respective costumes are bluffs and double-bluffs, infinite-bluffs layers and layers deep.
> 
> H is dressed-up as a Nazi whilst married to a WOC, but does that mean he isn't a Nazi? And so on...
> 
> M, an ex-entertainer is wearing Baker's costume, dressing herself as a fantasy WOC, and as a fantasy that she is some sort of activist (as Baker was). But can you want to be married to someone who wears a Nazi uniform as an anti-racist/ WOC? And so on...
> 
> I just thought I'd add the...whenever


You just connected so many of the puzzle pieces for me. Brilliant explanation and background! Thank you! 


Missydora said:


> If I was the queen I wouldn't even bother invite Harry to the funeral. The pair don't respect or care for them.


And risk being branded racist again? Her Majesty has to keep taking the high road or else she's playing right into their narrative that other royals get preferential treatment.


----------



## floatinglili

papertiger said:


> The difference between M and Baker, is that Baker was a multi-talented performer, an activist and truth-teller. An international superstar, and she made it on her own - despite everything.
> 
> Josephine made Europe her home because she didn't face the same level of racism, bias and lawful segregation that she suffered in the US and that she spoke of. Later in her life she adopted children from all over the world (eat your heart out Angelina) to show that without favour all people could live/love together as a family, a real rainbow family. In later life she continued working just to support her family.
> 
> Her celebrated dance act was among many of the time (1920s) that used dance acts to provide suggestive entertainment, but through their huge fame challenged the status quo of women's propriety that in turn allowed women to become artists in their own right and not as part of a mechanical chorus line-up. They also were hugely influence on the culture of the day, they gave the 'jazz age' a stylised look and global reach.
> 
> Though the costume looks like a caricature at first glance, Baker subverted the implied sexist and racist connotations of the banana costume with her dance. It is uncomfortable to view in the 21 century as it is a version of blackface. It could also be said that for an American to dressing in an approximation of 'African' (in that vague way that outsiders lump together the many countries of an entire continent) is a form of cultural appropriation. However, that costume also is a visual representation of what Baker was told she was almost everyday.  Ultimately, it's one of many depictions of women as exotic creatures derived from men's fantasy, and mostly an excuse to see skin.
> 
> Re the CH cartoon:
> The couple's costumes together. Both H&M are playing dress-up, and that their respective costumes are bluffs and double-bluffs, infinite-bluffs layers and layers deep.
> 
> H is dressed-up as a Nazi whilst married to a WOC, but does that mean he isn't a Nazi? And so on...
> 
> M, an ex-entertainer is wearing Baker's costume, dressing herself as a fantasy WOC, and as a fantasy that she is some sort of activist (as Baker was). But can you want to be married to someone who wears a Nazi uniform as an anti-racist/ WOC? And so on...
> 
> I just thought I'd add the...whenever


Absolutely love this. Explains everything perfectly and in detail.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Whatever. Take several seats, please.


----------



## xincinsin

gelbergirl said:


> Thank you for your service.
> 
> did they hire an intern to do PR???!!!!!!


They will just conveniently excuse the callous message on how they are American and don't understand how to mourn the "British" way. Same as how she couldn't figure out when she got married.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

As far as the cartoon, the brillance of it all is that you see what you want/need to see.


----------



## bag-mania

I think the cartoonist wanted to show the disrespect of Harry and Meghan. Harry is giving his grandfather a Nazi salute and Meghan is literally dancing on his grave. Whether Charlie Hebdo believes that disrespect is deserved, I have no idea.


----------



## CarryOn2020

limom said:


> As far as the cartoon, the brillance of it all is that you see what you want/need to see.



That is true of almost everything in life. We all see a glass.  Is it 1/2 full or 1/2 empty?  ymmv.


----------



## 1LV

Harry is returning to the UK?  Good for you, Harry.  Just in the nick of time.  

oh, wait...


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Harry is returning to the UK?  Good for you, Harry.  Just in the nick of time.
> 
> oh, wait...



I won’t fully believe it until I see him getting off the plane. I don’t think he wants to go and if he can weasel out of it I think he will try.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I won’t fully believe it until I see him getting off the plane. I don’t think he wants to go and if he can weasel out of it I think he will try.


Completely agree with you.


----------



## Tootsie17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5049836
> 
> 
> Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.


From interpreting this statement, I do believe Prince Phillip let H&M know how he felt about them and as always, M had to get that last parting shot in.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I feel the way things are going in society, if you are not white, then you can get away with saying whatever you want. If you're white they you have to think carefully otherwise you risk being branded a racist and cancelled. (This is coming from someone who is 100% colored, ie non-white).


I didn't think anyone said "colored" these days.  Is that expression back?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> No surprise here - his staff loved him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Philip is the Royal Staff's Favorite Prince
> 
> 
> Why is Prince Philip the royal staff's favorite prince?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com


that says a lot.....a person who is kind to staff means more than one who is sucking up to people who are more powerful than himself


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't think Gayle was slamming Philip or meant disrespect, I think she just made a nosey and stupid comment. I'm not defending it, it was stupid, but I just didn't see any ill-will in it towards him. Not thinking before speaking was a good way to put it.


Gayle must be self-flaggelating after seeing the Obamas tribute to Phillip.....think about it Gayle.  You look the fool.  And this is coming from a person who likes Gayle.  I wouldn't say I'm a fan but I have found her likeable.  She needs to apologie for that huge gaffe.


----------



## Icyjade

elvisfan4life said:


> My other half remarked last night ( having ignored the wall to wall coverage all day by choice ) that his understanding of the markle “thank you for your service “ was a continuation of her previous spat with the royal family and similar to the “service is universal “ comment  she made - I think a lot of us in the uk feel the same



My opinion of the couple just went down a few notches after seeing their message. It’s petty, and frankly rude. Who would even leave such a message for a colleague or staff not to mention that he’s their family.


----------



## bisousx

Lodpah said:


> Aaah . . . The French. They’re the only ones who can take pieces of leather and make women and some men collectively lose it by paying 1000s for it.
> 
> There’s a secret joke in the military tho. *The only time you see the French marching forward is in a parade. *Ok, I’ll give them some credit. My son served two tours with the FFL in Sudan and he said they were fearless. They do all the dirty dirty work.



My hubby is French and burst out laughing when I told him this. He said, “yup.. for Bastille day.”


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I think the cartoonist wanted to show the disrespect of Harry and Meghan. Harry is giving his grandfather a Nazi salute and Meghan is literally dancing on his grave. Whether Charlie Hebdo believes that disrespect is deserved, I have no idea.


Well their attitude is strongly anti-monarchy and the comedy style is pointed & extremely irreverent. They are French after all.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> My other half remarked last night ( having ignored the wall to wall coverage all day by choice ) that his understanding of the markle “thank you for your service “ was a continuation of her previous spat with the royal family and similar to the “service is universal “ comment  she made - I think a lot of us in the uk feel the same


Their "service is universal" comment came also to my mind when I saw the "thank you for your service" statement, poor taste imo. I wonder if MM was asked not to attend the funeral, and this was her response.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why would JCMH be asked to record a testimonial to be played at the funeral if he is planning to be there? If H is expected to take a private jet, it would be relatively safe for MM to make the trip. However, it would perhaps be better if they both stay at home and Harry emails his testimonial... After their interview when Philip was in the hospital, they are likely not very welcomed in the UK.
> 
> "_PRINCE HARRY__ may be allowed to use a diplomatic exemption to avoid the normal Covid quarantine when he jets to the UK from the US to attend Prince Philip's funeral, according to reports.
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex is widely expected to make the 5,460-mile journey by private jet ahead of the ceremonial funeral for his grandfather.*
> 
> While the full details of the funeral arrangements have yet to be released by Buckingham Palace, leaked information on the Government's website suggests the ceremony will take place next Saturday.
> 
> Harry, 36, is not expected to be joined by Meghan, 39, when he flies in for the sombre affair as she is heavily pregnant with their second baby, a girl.
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY*_* was asked by Prince Philip to record a testimonial to be played at his funeral, it has been claimed."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family LIVE: Prince Harry shamed as expert unveils 'final straw' - Queen targeted
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM was incredibly patient with his younger brother Prince Harry, an expert has said, but the Duke of Sussex's demands of the Queen proved to be the final straw".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :



And slowly but surely, we get the truth.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Love Of My Life

bag-mania said:


> I won’t fully believe it until I see him getting off the plane. I don’t think he wants to go and if he can weasel out of it I think he will try.



It will be interesting to observe the body language of the members of the Royal family
during all of this..
Personally, their message was disrespectful, coldhearted, shallow & inappropriate & is reflective of both
 of their characters
Harry has commented that his grandmother is very special to him.. SHe has a great sense of humor
& they adore each other. Some way to show your "love" with a statement that was put out.


----------



## rose60610

lalame said:


> I don't think Gayle was slamming Philip or meant disrespect, I think she just made a nosey and stupid comment. I'm not defending it, it was stupid, but I just didn't see any ill-will in it towards him. Not thinking before speaking was a good way to put it.



We see all the time somebody who says something stupid without ill-will. It's up to the mob to be judge and jury as to who gets a pass and who must be cancelled. Gayle knows she'll always get a pass so she's safe in blurting stupid or outrageous things. If you have anything controversial to say, get Gayle to say it because nothing will ever happen to her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Goals for all of us:









						Inspiration to us all: Prince Philip could sail a yacht and fly a jet
					

ANNE DE COURCY: From the moment the Queen, as a prim young girl of 13, was shown around the Royal Naval College at Dartmouth by a dashing 18-year-old cadet, no other man really counted.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kemilia

jelliedfeels said:


> Incredibly telling first photo choice isn’t it? Harry cropped from frame. Philip is slightly out of focus. Why the only person looking at the camera is Meghan.... fancy that.
> Good old Elle printing it out the incredibly long and poignant message in full so we don’t have to go on the dreaded site:
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex changed the homepage of their non-profit Archewell's site to pay tribute to Philip's life. “In loving memory of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh 1921-2021. Thank you for your service... You will be greatly missed.”
> 
> so I think that’s the sort of memorial I would post in an official capacity for a work colleague.
> 
> It says a lot when you compare it to the purple prose they write about themselves and their cause celebres.
> 
> View attachment 5049923
> 
> [/QUOTE/]
> She put more emotion on her darn bananas.
> These 2 are just awful.


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> I didn't think anyone said "colored" these days.  Is that expression back?


Boom! Or do you mean ‘is that expression safe?’
Luckily the woman uttering this incredible curse- shame word was describing herself as she chose, in words she herself chose. That could provide her with an escape clause. Or maybe not. Perhaps she’s not from the great US of A and the conversation is not dialled up to 11 where she happily lives? 
Good luck to all those who innocently use old-fashioned words. I hope you all escape the career destroying shame of Twitter fury. In the famous words of fashion maven Heidi Klum on Project Runway...One day you’re in... and the next day, you’re out.


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> My hubby is French and burst out laughing when I told him this. He said, “yup.. for Bastille day.”



Fair enough actually.

H & M remind me a bit of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette   (except they were not born/brought-up in the 18th C so have no excuse for their utter selfishness). How ironic they plot to bring down the British monarchy with their false airs and gracelessness. 

I remember so many happy Bastille days in Nice. 

The one year I was not in that side of the English Channel/La Manche was 2016  I hope we can _all_ march and be at one with France in memory of that hideous night.


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> Boom! Or do you mean ‘is that expression safe?’
> Luckily the woman uttering this incredible curse- shame word was describing herself as she chose, in words she herself chose. That could provide her with an escape clause. Or maybe not. Perhaps she’s not from the great US of A and the conversation is not dialled up to 11 where she happily lives?
> Good luck to all those who innocently use old-fashioned words. I hope you all escape the career destroying shame of Twitter fury. In the famous words of fashion maven Heidi Klum on Project Runway...One day you’re in... and the next day, you’re out.


interesting point....maybe expressions that aren't acceptable here in the US are OK in other countries


----------



## floatinglili

Perhaps Harry is literally having a meltdown. I’m not sure he should be blamed for this impersonal tribute. 
He is unsupported, alone except for his grasping, gaslighting wife and is literally a Prince without a realm. 
Who is to say he is not absolutely collapsing under the strain of all this. Tbh I could feel quite sorry for him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> This breaks my heart



It makes me a bit sick to see Andrew’s extremely dubious face in among them though.


----------



## scarlet555

Love Of My Life said:


> It will be interesting to observe the body language of the members of the Royal family
> during all of this..
> Personally, their message was disrespectful, coldhearted, shallow & inappropriate & is reflective of both
> of their characters
> Harry has commented that his grandmother is very special to him.. SHe has a great sense of humor
> & they adore each other. Some way to show your "love" with a statement that was put out.


Their message was horribly cold and disrespectful for cringe and Harry who have nonsensical world salad illness in most of their PR stunts about all the problems of the world and are empathetic to so many causes, their message was a straight arrow to the heart of the BRF.  Had they not been in the news so much about and announced all their cries to help the homeless and the injustices of the world as they saw fit, their messages could have been considered somehow lame but neutral.


----------



## jennlt

needlv said:


> their statement is so cold... it seriously undermines their branding around “compassion”...  what idiots.  They Must be blinded by their anger, bitterness and revenge not to see how this will affect how others perceive their foundation built around “compassion”.



 And what happened to "love always wins" ? Does that only apply when it's H & M who are winning? What did they have to lose by writing a message of love and affection for H's grandfather? They're so tightly wrapped in their victimhood that it's become a straitjacket and they are incapable of extending loving, affectionate sympathy to their own grieving family. 

The weight of all their hypocrisy must be soul-crushing. Or it would be if they hadn't already sold their souls to the highest bidder.


----------



## Chanbal

Beautiful picture and message!



"_The tweet reads: "He has, quite simply, been my strength and stay all these years, and I, and his whole family, and this and many other countries, owe him a debt greater than he would ever claim, or we shall ever know.

The tribute was retweeted by Kate, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William's Kensington Royal account minutes after it was first shared_."









						Royal Family breaks silence following Prince Philip death
					

THE QUEEN broke her silence and paid tribute to Prince Philip in a heartfelt tweet following his death on Friday.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chagall

Charlie Hebdo is a satirical magazine. Frankly who cares if they offend, that’s what they do. What does concern me is the stress PH will cause his grandmother if he follows through with his plan to attend PP’s funeral. What with everything he and MM have done to the BRF, and then following up with the OW interview, his presence would definitely cause distress to QE2.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> Their "service is universal" comment came also to my mind when I saw the "thank you for your service" statement, poor taste imo. I wonder if MM was asked not to attend the funeral, and this was her response.



The 'service is universal' comment was very childish in my opinion, and I think they need a reality check if they think they are humanitarians. I remember when they gave a interview on their tour of South Africa just after Archie was born and Harry complained that bright photographer lights give him flashbacks and anxiety as it reminds him of his mothers death and Meghan complained that no one asked how she was despite just giving birth. Meghan also complained that it was not good enough to just survive something, you must be able to thrive, and although this is true, she said this while visiting some of the poorest areas in South Africa, were survival is so difficult. 

I don't think the BRF would exclude MM from the funeral because then they would risk being labelled as racists. Hopefully she chooses not to attend, especially since she claims the family have not treated her well. If MM ever needed an example of how someone in her position should behave then Prince Philip is a good example. He would always be two steps behind the queen, never demand X, Y or Z, and he was always supporting her. There was no bitterness or resentment for this either. 

Side note: How is it that Harry was able to live and work in USA? You need a green card or visa to work in America and although his wife is American, there is a long application with wait times and different paperwork. The spouse (MM) would also have to prove that she can support the applicant financially too. I can't see him being eligible for a work visa since he doesn't have any extraordinary skills and he only just recently got a job. Americans do not tend to give preferential treatment with immigration (and rightly so), so I wonder if he was living illegally in USA?


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Charlie Hebdo is a satirical magazine. Frankly who cares if they offend, that’s what they do. What does concern me is the stress PH will cause his grandmother if he follows through with his plan to attend PP’s funeral. What with everything he and MM have done to the BRF, and then following up with the OW interview, his presence would definitely cause distress to QE2.


I was watching a report on Phillip's life and death on Amanpour & Co.  There was mention that some people thought it would be inappropriate to give H special permission to travel to the funeral as he isn't a working royal


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Not a chance. *I think Philip’s death is a real inconvenience to them, particularly to Meghan. *There will be no such special tribute.



I agree with you. It results in enormous sympathy for the Queen, as it should.  Coming not too long after their Oprah interview, people have to wonder what impact that had on Philip and his health and mental state in his last days and that is most definitely not a positive for Harry/MM, the impression that they turned on a very elderly gentleman and made his final days difficult and unhappy and possibly gave him that last push into the grave.  I know I read that they tried to keep the details from Philip but I doubt they could.  All he had to do was look at a paper or have the TV turned on.

I can only imagine that none of the family really wants Harry at the funeral, maybe not even the Queen, but they may be forced to include him so that he doesn't go whining to the press.  If he does go, the body language and facial expressions will be interesting to say the least.


----------



## chaneljewel

Harry just needs to stay in the states.  He had sufficient opportunity to visit his grandfather while he was alive, knowing about his grandfather’s failing health. I’m sure his grandfather was hurt by Harry’s lack of concern to see him alive.  To go to the funeral would only be for show.  If I thought him going to the funeral would mend the family issues then I might be alright with it; however, Harry has been brainwashed enough by M to be sure that never happens.


----------



## Chanbal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> *I don't think the BRF would exclude MM from the funeral because then they would risk being labelled as racists.* Hopefully she chooses not to attend, especially since she claims the family have not treated her well. If MM ever needed an example of how someone in her position should behave then Prince Philip is a good example. He would always be two steps behind the queen, never demand X, Y or Z, and he was always supporting her. There was no bitterness or resentment for this either.
> 
> Side note: How is it that Harry was able to live and work in USA? You need a green card or visa to work in America and although his wife is American, there is a long application with wait times and different paperwork. The spouse (MM) would also have to prove that she can support the applicant financially too. I can't see him being eligible for a work visa since he doesn't have any extraordinary skills and he only just recently got a job. Americans do not tend to give preferential treatment with immigration (and rightly so), so I wonder if he was living illegally in USA?


MM already called them racists. I can see prince Philip not wanting to have her attending his funeral. It's time for people do whatever they think it's right without being afraid of being labeled. After the lack of respect she showed to the BRF during Oprah's interview, the right thing is asking her to stay at home imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I could be wrong, my understanding is the service will be no press. All of it will be held in Windsor grounds, so the photos may just be cars coming and going. I agree Hazzie should stay home. His presence will be disruptive for many reasons.

The photos from the beach trip show he is not quarantining alone. Again, stay home.

ETA: scaffolding? Why?








						Who will attend Philip's funeral? Dilemma over 30-person Covid rule
					

The Queen will only be able to invite 30 people to the ceremony at St George's Chapel in the grounds of Windsor Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## redney

papertiger said:


> The difference between M and Baker, is that Baker was a multi-talented performer, an activist and truth-teller. An international superstar, and she made it on her own - despite everything.
> 
> Josephine made Europe her home because she didn't face the same level of racism, bias and lawful segregation that she suffered in the US and that she spoke of. Later in her life she adopted children from all over the world (eat your heart out Angelina) to show that without favour all people could live/love together as a family, a real rainbow family. In later life she continued working just to support her family.
> 
> Her celebrated dance act was among many of the time (1920s) that used dance acts to provide suggestive entertainment, but through their huge fame challenged the status quo of women's propriety that in turn allowed women to become artists in their own right and not as part of a mechanical chorus line-up. They also were hugely influence on the culture of the day, they gave the 'jazz age' a stylised look and global reach.
> 
> Though the costume looks like a caricature at first glance, Baker subverted the implied sexist and racist connotations of the banana costume with her dance. It is uncomfortable to view in the 21 century as it is a version of blackface. It could also be said that for an American to dressing in an approximation of 'African' (in that vague way that outsiders lump together the many countries of an entire continent) is a form of cultural appropriation. However, that costume also is a visual representation of what Baker was told she was almost everyday.  Ultimately, it's one of many depictions of women as exotic creatures derived from men's fantasy, and mostly an excuse to see skin.
> 
> Re the CH cartoon:
> The couple's costumes together. Both H&M are playing dress-up, and that their respective costumes are bluffs and double-bluffs, infinite-bluffs layers and layers deep.
> 
> H is dressed-up as a Nazi whilst married to a WOC, but does that mean he isn't a Nazi? And so on...
> 
> M, an ex-entertainer is wearing Baker's costume, dressing herself as a fantasy WOC, and as a fantasy that she is some sort of activist (as Baker was). But can you want to be married to someone who wears a Nazi uniform as an anti-racist/ WOC? And so on...
> 
> I just thought I'd add the...whenever


Yes! Perfect explanation, thank you!


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> I was watching an report on Phillip's life and death on Amanpour & Co.  There was mention that some people thought it would be inappropriate to give H special permission to travel to the funeral as he isn't a working royal


I agree, I don’t think he has earned that privilege, or any other special treatment.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> MM already called them racists. I can see prince Philip not wanting to have her attending his funeral. *It's time for people do whatever they think it's right without being afraid of being labeled. *After the lack of respect she showed to the BRF during Oprah's interview, the right thing is asking her to stay at home imo.



Agreed. There's fear of being labeled, but then there's fear of being fired from your job, even if the "offended" have to hunt down where you work and "turn you in".  I say fight fire with fire. It's time for the chronically offended to be shown the door at their jobs since chronic complainers surely have plenty of their own caustic statements printed in social media. 

I don't know to what extent this is true: a retiring CEO commenter in the NYT claimed that an FBI agent who does background checks on FBI applicants and for other high profile company positions said that 90% of applicants are disqualified based on something they said on social media, even going back ten years or more.


----------



## floatinglili

jelliedfeels said:


> It makes me a bit sick to see Andrew’s extremely dubious face in among them though.


Yes perhaps Andrew should have been out of order / last in line for the photos and no direct quote, just ‘expressed great sadness’.


----------



## mellibelly

floatinglili said:


> Boom! Or do you mean ‘is that expression safe?’
> Luckily the woman uttering this incredible curse- shame word was describing herself as she chose, in words she herself chose. That could provide her with an escape clause. Or maybe not. Perhaps she’s not from the great US of A and the conversation is not dialled up to 11 where she happily lives?
> Good luck to all those who innocently use old-fashioned words. I hope you all escape the career destroying shame of Twitter fury. In the famous words of fashion maven Heidi Klum on Project Runway...One day you’re in... and the next day, you’re out.


So true! My Chinese mother refers to herself as Oriental. I cringe every time I hear it, but she was taught that word when she learned English in Hong Kong in the 1960’s. It’s no big deal to her. Her choice.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

limom said:


> As far as the cartoon, the brillance of it all is that you see what you want/need to see.


Same for this cover, where HMQ is kneeling on MM's neck bringing to mind what happened to George Floyd.
As for the captions: "Pourquoi Meghan a quitté Buckingham" translates to "Why Meghan left Buckingham."  MM's answer in the bubble, "Parce que je ne pouvais plus respirer" translates to "Because I couldn't breathe anymore."
IMO, the comparison means that in MM's mind, what happens to her is as oppressive as the atrocities that have befallen others. She likes to exaggerate her importance in the scheme of things.


----------



## floatinglili

mellibelly said:


> So true! My Chinese mother refers to herself as Oriental. I cringe every time I hear it, but she was taught that word when she learned English in Hong Kong in the 1960’s. It’s no big deal to her. Her choice.


I love your story and I love how the word Oriental’ rolls of the tongue so prettily. 
I like old words, they add so much variety and interest to our language. There is always much more to them than just a nasty bit, especially if they were used in normal parlance. In many cases I’m not so sure what was the nasty bit, I just know the word is now very firmly frowned upon, and one must keep up. 
Fairy penguins are now ‘Little Penguins’ and ‘Fairy’ is not to cross our lips - who decided this? Why is ‘Fairy’ wrong, and morally wrong? Because it diminishes the little penguin apparently. The Little Penguin was still beautiful and special either way.


----------



## limom

@Lodpah 
Really?
Was it mentioned that the Duke was a polyglot?
in French, his delivery was on point.
Very sarcastic.


----------



## bisousx

papertiger said:


> The difference between M and Baker, is that Baker was a multi-talented performer, an activist and truth-teller. An international superstar, and she made it on her own - despite everything.
> 
> Josephine made Europe her home because she didn't face the same level of racism, bias and lawful segregation that she suffered in the US and that she spoke of. Later in her life she adopted children from all over the world (eat your heart out Angelina) to show that without favour all people could live/love together as a family, a real rainbow family. In later life she continued working just to support her family.
> 
> Her celebrated dance act was among many of the time (1920s) that used dance acts to provide suggestive entertainment, but through their huge fame challenged the status quo of women's propriety that in turn allowed women to become artists in their own right and not as part of a mechanical chorus line-up. They also were hugely influence on the culture of the day, they gave the 'jazz age' a stylised look and global reach.
> 
> Though the costume looks like a caricature at first glance, Baker subverted the implied sexist and racist connotations of the banana costume with her dance. It is uncomfortable to view in the 21 century as it is a version of blackface. It could also be said that for an American to dressing in an approximation of 'African' (in that vague way that outsiders lump together the many countries of an entire continent) is a form of cultural appropriation. However, that costume also is a visual representation of what Baker was told she was almost everyday.  Ultimately, it's one of many depictions of women as exotic creatures derived from men's fantasy, and mostly an excuse to see skin.
> 
> Re the CH cartoon:
> The couple's costumes together. Both H&M are playing dress-up, and that their respective costumes are bluffs and double-bluffs, infinite-bluffs layers and layers deep.
> 
> H is dressed-up as a Nazi whilst married to a WOC, but does that mean he isn't a Nazi? And so on...
> 
> M, an ex-entertainer is wearing Baker's costume, dressing herself as a fantasy WOC, and as a fantasy that she is some sort of activist (as Baker was). But can you want to be married to someone who wears a Nazi uniform as an anti-racist/ WOC? And so on...
> 
> I just thought I'd add the...whenever



This was an intriguing, thought-provoking post and I appreciate you taking the time to explain


----------



## bisousx

floatinglili said:


> I love your story and I love how the word Oriental’ rolls of the tongue so prettily.
> I like old words, they add so much variety and interest to our language. There is always much more to them than just a nasty bit, especially if they were used in normal parlance. In many cases I’m not so sure what was the nasty bit, I just know the word is now very firmly frowned upon, and one must keep up.
> Fairy penguins are now ‘Little Penguins’ and ‘Fairy’ is not to cross our lips - who decided this? Why is ‘Fairy’ wrong, and morally wrong? Because it diminishes the little penguin apparently. The Little Penguin was still beautiful and special either way.



I’m an Asian-American millennial and have no problem with the word Oriental either. Although it’s so wokefensive to say Oriental now that I don’t hear it anymore except by older gen Asian relatives when referring to our own kind.

I don’t care how many woke Caucasians try to convince me that the Oriental word is comparing a human being to a rug  The delicate dance of life, which will be soon be forgotten, is about understanding and determining other people’s motivations behind their choice of words.. not the actual word. Some words which many don’t even find offensive or hurtful in the slightest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.

LMAO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.
> 
> LMAO.


 She didn't get it because she didn't ask for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.
> 
> LMAO.



Their PR in action.  Nothing but lies.

As for PP’s languages, mercy, a quick google tells us he spoke English, French and German.  The answers are out there -








						How Many Languages Does Prince Philip Speak?
					

Many members of the royal family — including Prince Philip — are multilingual. How many languages does Prince Philip speak? Find out, here.




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Funeral details:


----------



## floatinglili

Interesting article on Unherd, lays out a lot of details on Phillip’s life. 
An excerpt: 

Philip, Prince of Nowhere - by Ed West

‘ The world that Philip was born into was a far more violent and dangerous place than ours. In the year he was born, Irish rebels were still fighting Black and Tans; over the course of 12 months the Spanish and Japanese prime ministers were assassinated, there was a coup in Portugal and race riots in the United States. Germany was rocked by violence from the far-Left and far-Right, while in Italy a brutal new political movement, the Fascists, secured 30 seats in parliament, led by a trashy journalist called Benito Mussolini.

The worst violence, however, took place in Greece and Turkey. Following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, what remained of Turkey was marked for permanent enfeeblement by the Allies. But much to everyone’s surprise the country’s force were roused by the brilliant officer Mustafa Kemal, who led the Turks to victory. Constantinople was lost to Christendom for good and thousands of years of Hellenic culture was put to the flames in Smyrna.
The Greek royal family, north German imports shipped in during the 19th century, bore much of the popular anger for this disaster. King Constantine fled to Italy, and his brother Andrew was arrested and only escaped execution through the intervention of his relative Britain’s George V. Andrew’s wife Alice, their four daughters and infant son Philip fled to France, completely impoverished but with the one possession that ensures that aristocrats are never truly poor: connections.’









						Philip, Prince of Nowhere
					

The ultimate outsider somehow became the figurehead of Britishness




					unherd.com


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.
> 
> LMAO.


Let's hope Harry decides to stay with her and save everyone the stress.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> I won’t fully believe it until I see him getting off the plane. I don’t think he wants to go and if he can weasel out of it I think he will try.


I would not be surprised if one of his new “friends with money” loans their private jet so he can sneak in to the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Let's hope Harry decides to stay with her and save everyone the stress.



Yeah. I don't know, I am still sad we couldn't have a proper funeral and wake for my parents' neighbour and friend of 30 years a year later, so I know how rituals can be healing...but to be honest, not seeing his dying grandfather and instead smearing his family on international TV is so far out there from any understanding and sympathy I might have had for him that at this point I feel tough luck if he doesn't get closure. My own grandfather died 10+ years ago and Philip dying brought it all to head again, yet that little brat lets his wife squeeze his balls to death at best and is the biggest a*shole there is at worst.


----------



## rose60610

justwatchin said:


> I would not be surprised if one of his new “friends with money” loans their private jet so he can sneak in to the UK.



Oprah has a plane. So do George Clooney and Serena Williams. The besties. Just sayin'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Oprah has a plane. So do George Clooney and Serena Williams. The besties. Just sayin'.



The Clooneys have been VERY quiet for a while. I feel they might have markled the Markles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If the [a-hole] insists on attending, then please do not allow him to sit with the Senior Royals. Charles will need some backbone to enforce this.  Kate should not have to sit next to him.  No military uniforms either.  Since he is a solo attendee, let him walk in with Prince Andrew.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Let's hope Harry decides to stay with her and save everyone the stress.



I am hoping he goes if only to have the long overdue face-to-face talk with his father,  brother, and perhaps even his grandmother. He owes them an explanation for why he turned on them but I doubt he has the courage to do it.

Frankly, I don’t think Meghan will allow him to go. If he is out of her sight there’s a chance that someone else may be able to influence him. She must maintain a tight hold on his chain.


----------



## lulilu

As The Post revealed, Harry’s heavily pregnant wife had been keen to join him.
Despite making “every effort” to accompany her husband, Markle — who is expecting a baby girl in the early summer — did not receive medical clearance to fly from her doctor, sources revealed.


I love how she is always "heavily pregnant."  smdh  She lies so much.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry goes, won't they have to divide up some of their security detail? Meghan is SOOOO important that she can't possible be left with less security personnel. Poor thing.


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> I love your story and I love how the word Oriental’ rolls of the tongue so prettily.
> I like old words, they add so much variety and interest to our language. There is always much more to them than just a nasty bit, especially if they were used in normal parlance. In many cases I’m not so sure what was the nasty bit, I just know the word is now very firmly frowned upon, and one must keep up.
> Fairy penguins are now ‘Little Penguins’ and ‘Fairy’ is not to cross our lips - who decided this? Why is ‘Fairy’ wrong, and morally wrong? Because it diminishes the little penguin apparently. The Little Penguin was still beautiful and special either way.



Having had a great-uncle who joked about being 'a fairy', IMO, it's up to those who are affected by these terms to eschew or embrace them. As a burly, ex-merchant seaman, the only job he could get after serving time and hard labour in prison for being gay (in his teens) the privilege to call himself whatever was his. A sentence cost his entire family their opportunity to emigrate to Canada too. 

So long as none of us feel defined by terms that seek to demean us or subvert those that do until they are meaningless, then fine. 

Words are only meaningful if we all _share _the perceived understanding of a prescribed meaning. I have never heard of fairy/little penguins but PC acts often offer sanctuary to bullies that corrupt our language. To change the name of the penguin draws attention to the offensiveness of a corrupted word. 

BTW, I believe in fairies, of both genders. 

'Oriental' became outmoded after Siad's work on _Orientalism_ (1978) because it became a catch-all word for exoticism/non-white. Siad was not from what was originally called 'the Orient' in Asia but Middle-Eastern, the term extended to everyone 'other'/non-European. 

In the UK 'Asian' has traditionally been used generically to describe people from the Indian Subcontinent and not people who are from or whose background is from other places. Therefore, until quite recently in the UK, people from S.E Asia are often not called generically 'Asians' as they are in the US. Both 'oriental' and 'asian' even now do not always determine what someone actually is but are descriptive terms for their appearance and both can be equally offensive. 100 years ago in the UK, the census records made all Poles, Hungarians, Georgians, Latvians and so on into 'Russians', quite a few descendants of these Eastern European people have no idea that their families never came from Russia at all. 

I think Meghan has the right to determine what she is, black, white, both, biracial or WOC. I think where it gets concerning is that when people determine themselves subjectively it can also be a catch-all and generic, subjective descriptive notion of identity rather than _the_ truth. 

However, we can't take away that like other men and women that can 'pass' is the pressure from 'all sides' at any given time and that is not only difficult, but also due to language and meaning changes (post Siad's Orientalism and renaming little penguins) looking back at words from the past have to be taken in context of (that) time. Re-writing or redacting history to suit our woke sensibilities and/or canceling people for not using more fashionable/up to the minute words is a) wrong and b) self-righteous. Imperialism was/is always self-righteous self-centred, even when it's so-called woke.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I am hoping he goes if only to have the long overdue face-to-face talk with his father,  brother, and perhaps even his grandmother. He owes them an explanation for why he turned on them but I doubt he has the courage to do it.
> 
> Frankly, I don’t think Meghan will allow him to go. If he is out of her sight there’s a chance that someone else may be able to influence him. She must maintain a tight hold on his chain.



He doesn’t think he did anything wrong though. He doesn’t understand that Queen and Country are the same thing. He thinks The Queen and his Grandmother are somehow different sides of a coin, he can insult the Monarchy and not insult the his Gramdmother. I don’t get it... it’s like some how playing peekaboo as a kid confused him...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.
> 
> LMAO.


Yeah right, more like "I don't want her here"


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> He doesn’t think he did anything wrong though. He doesn’t understand that Queen and Country are the same thing. He thinks The Queen and his Grandmother are somehow different sides of a coin, he can insult the Monarchy and not insult the his Gramdmother. I don’t get it... it’s like some how playing peekaboo as a kid confused him...



He presumably learned from the time he was a young child what it meant to be in the Monarchy. He was trained for it his entire life.

Meghan was able to persuade him that there was another way. They could still have all the money and status and perks, but they wouldn’t have to put in the royal service work and they wouldn’t have to answer to anyone else. They could just be famous and adored! That must have sounded like a good deal to Harry and he went for it.


----------



## maris.crane

muddledmint said:


> Is this still about tucker? How did you get to capitalism from that?



PBI: It was in regards to a previous comment I made regarding corporations getting caught operating in sanctioned jurisdictions. I probably should’ve said ‘many’ rather than ‘every’, but it was one comment that was ran with. It’s all the more off-base an accusation given whom pays my bills (a corporation) and the fact I’m sitting here on a handbag forum. As far as I know, both LVMH and the Kering Group are large multi-national conglomerates, too. I can’t be _that_ anti-capitalism.

On the Tucker thing: no one can convince me the algorithm isn’t a thing, though, when unfortunate for me, my YouTube suggestions included a few bizarro Tucker rants last night  I watched one on our Canadian quarantine measures, and was reminded why I called him a clown up-thread.


----------



## rose60610

Maybe Meghan is begging him to go so he can try to talk Charles into GIVING him some security agents to take home. That and drooling at the thought of a will being read so he can collect some more dough. It's always about the dough, and trashing the BRF is worth a lot of dough.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Hmm, so she can fly internationally when she had her baby shower when she was over 6 months pregnant and right now I would predict she is just under 6 months pregnant since she is due to give birth in early summer. Her baby shower was 2 days and there was a private jet arranged for by Amal Clooney. I wonder why all her famous friends can't help now . I think she is probably ashamed of the interview, and I would be very surprised if she set foot on British soil again. I don't think the Brits would welcome her warmly.


----------



## Sharont2305

https://t.co/a2j40JxbjA


----------



## youngster

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Hmm, so she can fly internationally when she had her baby shower when she was over 6 months pregnant and right now I would predict she is just under 6 months pregnant since she is due to give birth in early summer. Her baby shower was 2 days and there was a private jet arranged for by Amal Clooney. I wonder why all her famous friends can't help now . I think she is probably ashamed of the interview, and I would be very surprised if she set foot on British soil again. I don't think the Brits would welcome her warmly.



I doubt she is ashamed of the interview, not at this point. It got her attention and some immediate sympathy from the twitterati. The only regret she might have is that she didn't wait to do the interview until after Philip passed away perhaps.  She might be feeling a bit nervous though, now that Philip has died and that she and Harry clearly added to his pain, and the Queen's, at the end of Philip's life. Hence, her ducking the funeral. She doesn't want to face any of them. I'm not sure Harry wants to face them either but the Queen might have told him to attend and might also intend to speak to him privately. 

Only time will tell how they feel about giving that interview down the road.  Harry might look back and regret it deeply if he matures at all.  MM, I think is one of those people who thinks she is never wrong and everything she does is perfectly reasonable and justifiable.  She'll justify that interview until she's 99 herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think she is probably ashamed of the interview, and I would be very surprised if she set foot on British soil again. I don't think the Brits would welcome her warmly.



She is unable to feel shame or regret, but I absolutely agree she doesn't want to face the backlash.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> It makes me a bit sick to see Andrew’s extremely dubious face in among them though.



I don't care for Andrew but I appreciate the good things that Prince Philip's children had to say about him and the good memories that they shared with him


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I doubt she is ashamed of the interview, not at this point. It got her attention and some immediate sympathy from the twitterati. The only regret she might have is that she didn't wait to do the interview until after Philip passed away perhaps.  She might be feeling a bit nervous though, now that Philip has died and that she and Harry clearly added to his pain, and the Queen's, at the end of Philip's life. Hence, her ducking the funeral. She doesn't want to face any of them. I'm not sure Harry wants to face them either but the Queen might have told him to attend and might also intend to speak to him privately.
> 
> Only time will tell how they feel about giving that interview down the road.  Harry might look back and regret it deeply if he matures at all.  MM, I think is one of those people who thinks she is never wrong and everything she does is perfectly reasonable and justifiable.  She'll justify that interview until she's 99 herself.



H&M have no regrets. They are still in their defiant phase. They thrive on the drama. 
Fingers crossed, the whole UK boos Hazzie. No mercy to this attention w$ore.


----------



## gelbergirl

rose60610 said:


> Maybe Meghan is begging him to go so he can try to talk Charles into GIVING him some security agents to take home. That and drooling at the thought of a will being read so he can collect some more dough. It's always about the dough, and trashing the BRF is worth a lot of dough.



I think JCMH will attend the funeral and be sent on his way.
No way does the RF want to socialize with him.


----------



## mellibelly

floatinglili said:


> I love your story and I love how the word Oriental’ rolls of the tongue so prettily.
> I like old words, they add so much variety and interest to our language. There is always much more to them than just a nasty bit, especially if they were used in normal parlance. In many cases I’m not so sure what was the nasty bit, I just know the word is now very firmly frowned upon, and one must keep up.
> Fairy penguins are now ‘Little Penguins’ and ‘Fairy’ is not to cross our lips - who decided this? Why is ‘Fairy’ wrong, and morally wrong? Because it diminishes the little penguin apparently. The Little Penguin was still beautiful and special either way.


As a grown ass woman who loves fairies and has a fairy house in her garden, this makes me



bisousx said:


> I’m an Asian-American millennial and have no problem with the word Oriental either. Although it’s so wokefensive to say Oriental now that I don’t hear it anymore except by older gen Asian relatives when referring to our own kind.
> 
> I don’t care how many woke Caucasians try to convince me that the Oriental word is comparing a human being to a rug  The delicate dance of life, which will be soon be forgotten, is about understanding and determining other people’s motivations behind their choice of words.. not the actual word. Some words which many don’t even find offensive or hurtful in the slightest.


Absolutely. I’m Xennial and we were taught Oriental is for vases and rugs, not people. I tried correcting my mother on her use of the word and realized how presumptuous and know it all I sounded. I’ve never experienced a fraction of the racism and xenophobia she has as an immigrant and older woman, who the hell am I to correct her? Interestingly, Gen Z finds it offensive to call a rug Oriental now. Ok woke white kids

Apologies if I’m getting too off topic from Ginge and Cringe, but I had an interesting convo with my bf last night. Her British friend who is half black/half white refers to herself as mulatto. She’s in her 40’s. Now that is a term you don’t hear anymore in the US


----------



## Love Of My Life

youngster said:


> I doubt she is ashamed of the interview, not at this point. It got her attention and some immediate sympathy from the twitterati. The only regret she might have is that she didn't wait to do the interview until after Philip passed away perhaps.  She might be feeling a bit nervous though, now that Philip has died and that she and Harry clearly added to his pain, and the Queen's, at the end of Philip's life. Hence, her ducking the funeral. She doesn't want to face any of them. I'm not sure Harry wants to face them either but the Queen might have told him to attend and might also intend to speak to him privately.
> 
> Only time will tell how they feel about giving that interview down the road.  Harry might look back and regret it deeply if he matures at all.  MM, I think is one of those people who thinks she is never wrong and everything she does is perfectly reasonable and justifiable.  She'll justify that interview until she's 99 herself.



I think that Meghan knew exactly what she was doing. It was all about "her", will continue to
be about "her" & her disdain for the BRF is front & center & quite undeserving, IMO
Her lack of sensitivity to Price Philip health issues speaks loud & clear..
Harry just might wake up one day & realize the price he likely will pay for her unprecedented behavior
If Diana was alive today, I wonder how she would feel about all of this. She raised those boys to
be there for each other. Not seeing that..


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Harry said he thought history would repeating itself with Meghan because she is popular and is taking the limelight away from the Cambridges and so the Royal family is trying to spread rumors and false information to smear them, like they did with Diana because she was becoming more popular than Charles. That was a tasteless and completely false deduction on his behalf which was probably fed to him by his wife. Meghan is NOTHING like Diana.

There were reports that she divorced her husband through a text or email and sent the ring back in the post after her career took off and they had been together for 7 years. The ex-husband has never talked to the media, but it would be interesting to see what actually happened since she has not disputed this story and it makes her seem cold and calculating.


----------



## Tootsie17

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Hmm, so she can fly internationally when she had her baby shower when she was over 6 months pregnant and right now I would predict she is just under 6 months pregnant since she is due to give birth in early summer. Her baby shower was 2 days and there was a private jet arranged for by Amal Clooney. I wonder why all her famous friends can't help now . I think she is probably ashamed of the interview, and I would be very surprised if she set foot on British soil again. I don't think the Brits would welcome her warmly.


You are probably right, but I bet the narcissist in her is dying for a chance to shine in the spot light.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

justwatchin said:


> I would not be surprised if one of his new “friends with money” loans their private jet so he can sneak in to the UK.


Maybe he could ask Oprah for hers, she "owes" them, she may even want to ride along.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Funeral details:
> View attachment 5050963


We’ll be able to see all the awkward body language between Harry and the fam if it’s televised. I’m curious the most of how William and Harry will interact.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

csshopper said:


> Maybe he could ask Oprah for hers, she "owes" them, she may even want to ride along.



Remember when Meghan complained that she was not allowed to do an interview with Oprah as directed but the palace? Yet she took great pains to berate and exclude her father from her life after he staged some pap photos and did interviews? How is that any different to what the palace did to her? Her father paid for private education and her contributed to her college education. She lied when she did a speech in Fiji, she claimed that she knew how hard it was to go through school as she had to take on jobs and apply for scholarships, when in reality her parents helped too, specifically her father. She neglected to mention this.


----------



## papertiger

From the Guardian 




The Guardian
*Harry could face quarantine to attend Prince Philip’s funeral*

Ben Quinn
Sat, 10 April 2021, 10:53 am







Photograph: Lefteris Pitarakis/AP
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex face the prospect of at least five days in quarantine if they return to the UK for Harry’s grandfather’s funeral, unless they get an exemption – though the couple have yet to publicly indicate whether they will attend.
As Meghan is pregnant with the couple’s second child and is due to give birth during the summer, some commentators said it was more likely that Harry would make the journey from California, where they live, alone for the service for Prince Philip.
A return to the UK would be his first since the couple spoke candidly in a US TV interview about their experience of royal life and said racism was a large part of the reason why they had chosen to leave Britain.
They said a member of the royal family had talked about how “dark” their son Archie’s skin would be. The interviewer Oprah Winfrey revealed after the broadcast that Prince Harry had said the family member who made racist comments about his then unborn child was not the Queen or Philip.
Angela Levin, a royal biographer whose books include one about Harry, and who has been critical of the couple’s interview with Winfrey, said she believed the prince would want to come to the funeral, but she thought it was unlikely Meghan would join him in the UK on account of her pregnancy.
Under the current government regulations, anyone travelling to England must quarantine in the place they are staying or in a managed quarantine hotel for 10 days. Visitors must also get two coronavirus tests after they arrive in England.
The self-isolation period can be reduced through the “test to release” scheme, when a traveller pays for a private Covid test at least five days after arrival. If the private test is negative then a traveller can stop self-isolating as soon as they get the result.
Given his status as a member of the royal family travelling to support the Queen, there is speculation that Harry might be considered exempt from travel restrictions.
Some exemptions apply to members of diplomatic missions and consular posts in the UK, and officers, servants or representatives of international organisations, among others. They and members of their family do not need to quarantine in a managed quarantine hotel and are not subject to mandatory testing. However, for public health reasons they are “strongly encouraged” to complete tests on days two and eight after arrival.
Meanwhile, eyebrows were raised on Friday after a broadcaster on the US network Fox News attempted to link the Sussexes’ interview to the death of Prince Philip. A host on Fox and Friends, Brian Kilmeade, claimed their recent public comments had “evidently” added to the 99-year-old’s “stress”, prompting ire on social media where many pointed out the duke’s advanced age.
Meghan referred to the couple’s concerns for Philip’s health in the interview with Winfrey. “This morning I woke up earlier than [Harry] and saw a note from someone on our team in the UK saying that the Duke of Edinburgh had gone to the hospital,” she said. “But I just picked up the phone and I called the Queen just to check in. That’s what we do, being able to default to not having to every moment go: ‘Is that appropriate?’”
Harry and Meghan, who live in Montecito, south California, with their one-year-old son, are not expected to make any comment on Friday. Harry had been due back in the UK on 1 July for the unveiling of a statue of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> I doubt she is ashamed of the interview, not at this point. It got her attention and some immediate sympathy from the twitterati. The only regret she might have is that she didn't wait to do the interview until after Philip passed away perhaps.  She might be feeling a bit nervous though, now that Philip has died and that she and Harry clearly added to his pain, and the Queen's, at the end of Philip's life. Hence, her ducking the funeral. She doesn't want to face any of them. I'm not sure Harry wants to face them either but the Queen might have told him to attend and might also intend to speak to him privately.
> 
> Only time will tell how they feel about giving that interview down the road.  Harry might look back and regret it deeply if he matures at all.  MM, I think is one of those people who thinks she is never wrong and everything she does is perfectly reasonable and justifiable.  She'll justify that interview until she's 99 herself.



Meanwhile there will be two children being raised by a mean, spiteful, controlling, narcissistic, pathologically lying mother, who may someday decide they don't need that baggage, and leave her to fend for herself. The emasculated father in this scenario is not worth mentioning.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Hmm, so she can fly internationally when she had her baby shower when she was over 6 months pregnant and right now I would predict she is just under 6 months pregnant since she is due to give birth in early summer. Her baby shower was 2 days and there was a private jet arranged for by Amal Clooney. I wonder why all her famous friends can't help now . I think she is probably ashamed of the interview, and I would be very surprised if she set foot on British soil again. I don't think the Brits would welcome her warmly.


Oh, I don't think she ashamed of the interview
But she and Harry might know she's not welcome there.  I would hope she would have the grace to tell him he should go and show his respects.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> We’ll be able to see all the awkward body language between Harry and the fam if it’s televised. I’m curious the most of how William and Harry will interact.



Yes, other than QE, the BRF does not hide its body language.  Just keep him away from Kate. She has put up with enough. I’m really surprised William has not put a foot down - hope he makes certain the seating chart is appropriate.  As much as I would like to see the Cambridge children, they do not need to be around toxic H.  

Charles did not look well in the video. He’s hunched, probably fighting back tears, speaking carefully and slowly.  
Guessing behind the scenes there is quite a bit of chaos.  Meanwhile Edward looked strong.  Go figure.


----------



## Handbag1234

I would love to hear what Prince Anne has to say to JCMH. She is her fathers daughter. Or maybe he should be afraid of what she doesn’t say..... 

MM may regret taking on Princess Anne if the reports of the attempted abduction of Anne in her youth are anything to go by.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, other than QE, the BRF does not hide its body language.  Just keep him away from Kate. She has put up with enough. I’m really surprised William has not put a foot down - hope he makes certain the seating chart is appropriate.  As much as I would like to see the Cambridge children, they do not need to be around toxic H.
> 
> Charles did not look well in the video. He’s hunched, probably fighting back tears, speaking carefully and slowly.
> Guessing behind the scenes there is quite a bit of chaos.  Meanwhile Edward looked strong.  Go figure.


Charles has a lot more to worry about than Edward.....feeling sad about his father, worrying about how long the queen will live and when it will be his time to take the throne, worrying about H showing up and what trouble that could cause.


----------



## lalame

floatinglili said:


> I love your story and I love how the word Oriental’ rolls of the tongue so prettily.
> I like old words, they add so much variety and interest to our language. There is always much more to them than just a nasty bit, especially if they were used in normal parlance. In many cases I’m not so sure what was the nasty bit, I just know the word is now very firmly frowned upon, and one must keep up.
> Fairy penguins are now ‘Little Penguins’ and ‘Fairy’ is not to cross our lips - who decided this? Why is ‘Fairy’ wrong, and morally wrong? Because it diminishes the little penguin apparently. The Little Penguin was still beautiful and special either way.



Words are only offensive because of some cultural connotation (which would be different in different cultures). Oriental, to me as a millennial, has no offensive connotation because it’s never been used against me in an offensive way that made me feel bad. But it seems to have had that connotation before, just like terms like “colored people” or worse, so I don’t use it partly out of respect to that but also because norms change and this is a very old fashioned word to use for people vs objects. Its not uncommon to hear among older Asian women because it might just be the word they learned while learning English way back when.

I didn’t know fairy was controversial though.. is this in the US? Just never heard that.


----------



## lalame

I think it was a good decision for Meghan not to come. Given how strongly one way or the other people feel about her I think having her there will just distract from the main cause. The news cycle blows up with adoration or hate whenever she makes an appearance.


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> Words are only offensive because of some cultural connotation (which would be different in different cultures). Oriental, to me as a millennial, has no offensive connotation because it’s never been used against me in an offensive way that made me feel bad. But it seems to have had that connotation before, just like terms like “colored people” or worse, so I don’t use it partly out of respect to that but also because norms change and this is a very old fashioned word to use for people vs objects. Its not uncommon to hear among older Asian women because it might just be the word they learned while learning English way back when.
> 
> I didn’t know fairy was controversial though.. is this in the US? Just never heard that.


I'm in the US and this is the first I've heard of any controversy or negative connotations around the word "fairy." It's been slang for a gay man for quite some time, but in that context I've only heard it referencing a gay man by gay men themselves.


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> I think it was a good decision for Meghan not to come. Given how strongly one way or the other people feel about her I think having her there will just distract from the main cause. The news cycle blows up with adoration or hate whenever she makes an appearance.


I don't think it was her decision, or that of her doctor, to make.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Words are only offensive because of some cultural connotation (which would be different in different cultures). Oriental, to me as a millennial, has no offensive connotation because it’s never been used against me in an offensive way that made me feel bad. But it seems to have had that connotation before, just like terms like “colored people” or worse, so I don’t use it partly out of respect to that but also because norms change and this is a very old fashioned word to use for people vs objects. Its not uncommon to hear among older Asian women because it might just be the word they learned while learning English way back when.
> 
> I didn’t know fairy was controversial though.. is this in the US? Just never heard that.


I can understand using "fairy" to identify a gay man is offensive.  but using fairy in the context of it's original meaning - fairy tale or whatever?  that's not OK now?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handbag1234 said:


> I would love to hear what Prince Anne has to say to JCMH. She is her fathers daughter. Or maybe he should be afraid of what she doesn’t say.....
> 
> MM may regret taking on Princess Anne if the reports of the attempted abduction of Anne in her youth are anything to go by.



But she also lost her father and may not be in the mood to scold the black sheep at the funeral. I know I wouldn't be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I can understand using "fairy" to identify a gay man is offensive.  but using fairy in the context of it's original meaning - fairy tale or whatever?  that's not OK now?



I don’t think that’s true.... Disney still uses it. I don’t know what happened with the penguins but I don’t think that sentiment is widespread.


----------



## lalame

redney said:


> I don't think it was her decision, or that of her doctor, to make.



You mean you think the family asked her not to come? This wouldn’t surprise me...


----------



## Chloe302225

lalame said:


> You mean you think the family asked her not to come? This wouldn’t surprise me...



It has been rumored that Phillip did not want her to attend and told them as much. I think this is their way of saving face about her lack of appearance at the funeral


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> _Meghan referred to the couple’s concerns for Philip’s health in the interview with Winfrey. “This morning I woke up earlier than [Harry] and saw a note from someone on our team in the UK saying that the Duke of Edinburgh had gone to the hospital,” she said. “*But I just picked up the phone and I called the Queen just to check in. That’s what we do, being able to default to not having to every moment go: ‘Is that appropriate?*’”_



What she doesn't mention is whether the Queen took her call.  Another failure to follow up by OW.  MM might have "picked up the phone" and called the Queen but I really doubt she actually spoke to her.  The Queen is a busy, still working woman with numerous daily obligations plus her husband in the hospital.  Can't imagine she dropped everything to take MM's call lol.


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> You mean you think the family asked her not to come? This wouldn’t surprise me...


I think she, or Harry was told that it would be better if she didn't come.


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> You mean you think the family asked her not to come? This wouldn’t surprise me...


Absolutely. It's been speculated PP himself directed this when planning for his funeral arrangements.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> From the Guardian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Guardian
> *Harry could face quarantine to attend Prince Philip’s funeral*
> 
> Ben Quinn
> Sat, 10 April 2021, 10:53 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photograph: Lefteris Pitarakis/AP
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex face the prospect of at least five days in quarantine if they return to the UK for Harry’s grandfather’s funeral, unless they get an exemption – though the couple have yet to publicly indicate whether they will attend.
> As Meghan is pregnant with the couple’s second child and is due to give birth during the summer, some commentators said it was more likely that Harry would make the journey from California, where they live, alone for the service for Prince Philip.
> A return to the UK would be his first since the couple spoke candidly in a US TV interview about their experience of royal life and said racism was a large part of the reason why they had chosen to leave Britain.
> They said a member of the royal family had talked about how “dark” their son Archie’s skin would be. The interviewer Oprah Winfrey revealed after the broadcast that Prince Harry had said the family member who made racist comments about his then unborn child was not the Queen or Philip.
> Angela Levin, a royal biographer whose books include one about Harry, and who has been critical of the couple’s interview with Winfrey, said she believed the prince would want to come to the funeral, but she thought it was unlikely Meghan would join him in the UK on account of her pregnancy.
> Under the current government regulations, anyone travelling to England must quarantine in the place they are staying or in a managed quarantine hotel for 10 days. Visitors must also get two coronavirus tests after they arrive in England.
> The self-isolation period can be reduced through the “test to release” scheme, when a traveller pays for a private Covid test at least five days after arrival. If the private test is negative then a traveller can stop self-isolating as soon as they get the result.
> Given his status as a member of the royal family travelling to support the Queen, there is speculation that Harry might be considered exempt from travel restrictions.
> Some exemptions apply to members of diplomatic missions and consular posts in the UK, and officers, servants or representatives of international organisations, among others. They and members of their family do not need to quarantine in a managed quarantine hotel and are not subject to mandatory testing. However, for public health reasons they are “strongly encouraged” to complete tests on days two and eight after arrival.
> Meanwhile, eyebrows were raised on Friday after a broadcaster on the US network Fox News attempted to link the Sussexes’ interview to the death of Prince Philip. A host on Fox and Friends, Brian Kilmeade, claimed their recent public comments had “evidently” added to the 99-year-old’s “stress”, prompting ire on social media where many pointed out the duke’s advanced age.
> Meghan referred to the couple’s concerns for Philip’s health in the interview with Winfrey. “This morning I woke up earlier than [Harry] and saw a note from someone on our team in the UK saying that the Duke of Edinburgh had gone to the hospital,” she said. “But I just picked up the phone and I called the Queen just to check in. That’s what we do, being able to default to not having to every moment go: ‘Is that appropriate?’”
> Harry and Meghan, who live in Montecito, south California, with their one-year-old son, are not expected to make any comment on Friday. Harry had been due back in the UK on 1 July for the unveiling of a statue of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.


Geez 5 days, what agony, last time I checked H didn’t have the busiest schedule in the world.


----------



## 1LV

lalame said:


> You mean you think the family asked her not to come? This wouldn’t surprise me...


I think if the family had asked her not to come we would have heard all about it by now.  Scoobie would be announcing it far and wide.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Only 30 are allowed to attend - the 4 children with 3 spouses and 8 grandchildren makes 15 so it is unlikely -other than Kate -who will be Queen one day -that the spouses of the other 7 grandchildren will be invited anyway -the great grandchildren are all too young and the Queen will want her lifelong companions of her and Philips age  particularly her cousins and their spouses like the duke and duchess of Kent Princess Alexandria etc even Boris hasn’t got a place - Meghan isnt on the invite list imo


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she, or Harry was told that it would be better if she didn't come.


She didn’t make the cut


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> What she doesn't mention is whether the Queen took her call.  Another failure to follow up by OW.  MM might have "picked up the phone" and called the Queen but I really doubt she actually spoke to her.  The Queen is a busy, still working woman with numerous daily obligations plus her husband in the hospital.  Can't imagine she dropped everything to take MM's call lol.



Yeah this is a weird thing for her to say. It sounds like “we quit so the rules wouldn’t apply to us.” I mean I think we all know that’s what happened but the optics of this are bad to me.


----------



## Lodpah

limom said:


> @Lodpah
> Really?
> Was it mentioned that the Duke was a polyglot?
> in French, his delivery was on point.
> Very sarcastic.


I’m lost. Which post are you referring to?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

elvisfan4life said:


> Or this - those evil eyes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5049942


Straight out of the narc's Lookbook. Of course I don't know Kate, but I honestly feel sorry for her, because I think she's had to endure a lot, to keep up BRF appearances and that has probably taken its toll.



Chanbal said:


> Their "service is universal" comment came also to my mind when I saw the "thank you for your service" statement, poor taste imo. I wonder if MM was asked not to attend the funeral, and this was her response.


I think you are spot on, she's probably been made persona non grata. And finally!!! This has been hugely frustrating to follow. 

It's probably due to covid restrictions and her being pregnant as well, to be fair, but I can't believe the BRF would welcome the drama of her being there showcasing her in ever various degrees burgeoning stomach while pulling that nauseating innocent doe-eyed little girl woe is me shtick.

I thought about the service being universal statement too. I mean, who writes all of those dots after "thank you for your service"? THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE... The only thing missing is this emoji  No chance this wasn't with intent. A GROUNDSWELL of intent.

Philip was a hugely accomplished man. In comparison, the insignificance of the likes of H&M is even more glaring.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Straight out of the narc's Lookbook. Of course I don't know Kate, but I honestly feel sorry for her, because I think she's had to endure a lot, to keep up BRF appearances and that has probably taken its toll.
> 
> 
> I think you are spot on, she's probably been made persona non grata. And finally!!! This has been hugely frustrating to follow.
> 
> It's probably due to covid restrictions and her being pregnant as well, to be fair, but I can't believe the BRF would welcome the drama of her being there showcasing her in ever various degrees burgeoning stomach while pulling that nauseating innocent doe-eyed little girl woe is me shtick.
> 
> I thought about the service being universal statement too. I mean, who writes all of those dots after "thank you for your service"? THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE... The only thing missing is this emoji  No chance this wasn't with intent. A GROUNDSWELL of intent.
> 
> Philip was a hugely accomplished man. In comparison, the insignificance of the likes of H&M is even more glaring.



_TpF H&M writers,_

Thank you for your service...you are greatly appreciated.  

​
ETA:  see,  it feels hollow.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

maris.crane said:


> PBI: It was in regards to a previous comment I made regarding corporations getting caught operating in sanctioned jurisdictions. I probably should’ve said ‘many’ rather than ‘every’, but it was one comment that was ran with. It’s all the more off-base an accusation given whom pays my bills (a corporation) and the fact I’m sitting here on a handbag forum. As far as I know, both LVMH and the Kering Group are large multi-national conglomerates, too. I can’t be _that_ anti-capitalism.
> 
> On the Tucker thing: no one can convince me the algorithm isn’t a thing, though, when unfortunate for me, my YouTube suggestions included a few bizarro Tucker rants last night  I watched one on our Canadian quarantine measures, and was reminded why I called him a clown up-thread.


Me thinks some of you doth protest too much  Just admit it, Tucker is handsome, clever and has the best man giggle in TV history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

The ironic thing about that whole Meghan-Kate thing is I actually did feel sympathy towards Meghan to have to sit back while a story that wasn't true kept circulating, but then she went around and did the same to Kate. I really think the truth of that crying story must have been somewhere in the middle. I don't believe either of them pulled a diva move and made the other cry, especially as there were witnesses and if it had been THAT ugly it would've leaked.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Absolutely. I’m Xennial and we were taught Oriental is for vases and rugs, not people. I tried correcting my mother on her use of the word and realized how presumptuous and know it all I sounded. I’ve never experienced a fraction of the racism and xenophobia she has as an immigrant and older woman, who the hell am I to correct her? Interestingly, Gen Z finds it offensive to call a rug Oriental now. Ok woke white kids



As someone who is probably at least 20 years older than you, I can guarantee that Oriental was never used as a racial slur when I was growing up in the US in the 70s. It was used in the way Asian is used today.

I work in the academic publishing industry and I can tell you university journals are constantly changing which words are considered acceptable. When I started in the business “African-American” was the preferred term. But today “Black” with a capital B is preferred in most of the journals I work on. Yet in the very same article if someone is referred to as “white” is always done in lowercase. One way is an identity and the other way is a description. That’s academia for you.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Only 30 are allowed to attend - the 4 children with 3 spouses and 8 grandchildren makes 15 so it is unlikely -other than Kate -who will be Queen one day -that the spouses of the other 7 grandchildren will be invited anyway -the great grandchildren are all too young and the Queen will want her lifelong companions of her and Philips age  particularly her cousins and their spouses like the duke and duchess of Kent Princess Alexandria etc even Boris hasn’t got a place - Meghan isnt on the invite list imo


Agree about the great grandchildren, the spouses of the grandchildren will be there, only 6 out of 8 of them are married.
ETA Peter Philips is separated, maybe Autumn will accompany him


----------



## Laila619

I don’t believe for one second that Megs ”didn’t get medical clearance“ to fly for the funeral. BS. She just doesn’t have the courage to face everyone, especially William who has had her number from the beginning. If she weren’t pregnant, she would still come up with a different excuse to not attend.


----------



## maris.crane

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Me thinks some of you doth protest too much  Just admit it, Tucker is handsome, clever and has the best man giggle in TV history.



Nah, we coo’. When it comes to looks on American network TV, Jake Tapper is much more my type. And Anderson has the ground covered on the giggles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> The ironic thing about that whole Meghan-Kate thing is I actually did feel sympathy towards Meghan to have to sit back while a story that wasn't true kept circulating, but then she went around and did the same to Kate. I really think the truth of that crying story must have been somewhere in the middle. I don't believe either of them pulled a diva move and made the other cry, especially as there were witnesses and if it had been THAT ugly it would've leaked.



But it leaked almost immediately, didn't it? The version where Kate cried.


----------



## redney

maris.crane said:


> Nah, we coo’. When it comes to looks on American network TV, Jake Tapper is much more my type. And Anderson has the ground covered on the giggles.


Anderson has the best giggle!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Agree about the great grandchildren, the spouses of the grandchildren will be there, only 6 out of 8 of them are married.



Isn't Anne's son divorced?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the Harkles rushed to get a statement out, and now regret not putting more thought into it.


----------



## redney

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the Harkles rises to get a statement out, and now regret not putting more thought into it.


MM regrets nothing. She is always right, remember?


----------



## Lodpah

muddledmint said:


> Have you tried Botox for your masseters? It helped me immensely


My friend swears by Botox for migraines.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But it leaked almost immediately, didn't it? The version where Kate cried.



But that version doesn't seem to be true... I find it hard to believe Meghan would go on tv and say something SO completely untrue that no one else would correct it - they corrected a lot of other stuff she said. So I don't think the truth is that Meghan or Kate dramatically made the other cry as it's been made to appear.


----------



## Lodpah

floatinglili said:


> It’s about keeping up with fashion. I mean centre parts are back in as well. Now that’s scary! My daughter said side parts made me look out of touch and old lmao.
> So back to 70s Marcia hair we go!!
> Ours is not to reason why....


Girl, I still wear panty hose if that makes sense to anyone  especially when I don’t have time to shave my legs lol.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> From the Guardian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Guardian
> *Harry could face quarantine to attend Prince Philip’s funeral*
> 
> Ben Quinn
> Sat, 10 April 2021, 10:53 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photograph: Lefteris Pitarakis/AP
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex face the prospect of at least five days in quarantine if they return to the UK for Harry’s grandfather’s funeral, unless they get an exemption – though the couple have yet to publicly indicate whether they will attend.
> As Meghan is pregnant with the couple’s second child and is due to give birth during the summer, some commentators said it was more likely that Harry would make the journey from California, where they live, alone for the service for Prince Philip.
> A return to the UK would be his first since the couple spoke candidly in a US TV interview about their experience of royal life and said racism was a large part of the reason why they had chosen to leave Britain.
> They said a member of the royal family had talked about how “dark” their son Archie’s skin would be. The interviewer Oprah Winfrey revealed after the broadcast that Prince Harry had said the family member who made racist comments about his then unborn child was not the Queen or Philip.
> Angela Levin, a royal biographer whose books include one about Harry, and who has been critical of the couple’s interview with Winfrey, said she believed the prince would want to come to the funeral, but she thought it was unlikely Meghan would join him in the UK on account of her pregnancy.
> Under the current government regulations, anyone travelling to England must quarantine in the place they are staying or in a managed quarantine hotel for 10 days. Visitors must also get two coronavirus tests after they arrive in England.
> The self-isolation period can be reduced through the “test to release” scheme, when a traveller pays for a private Covid test at least five days after arrival. If the private test is negative then a traveller can stop self-isolating as soon as they get the result.
> Given his status as a member of the royal family travelling to support the Queen, there is speculation that Harry might be considered exempt from travel restrictions.
> Some exemptions apply to members of diplomatic missions and consular posts in the UK, and officers, servants or representatives of international organisations, among others. They and members of their family do not need to quarantine in a managed quarantine hotel and are not subject to mandatory testing. However, for public health reasons they are “strongly encouraged” to complete tests on days two and eight after arrival.
> Meanwhile, eyebrows were raised on Friday after a broadcaster on the US network Fox News attempted to link the Sussexes’ interview to the death of Prince Philip. A host on Fox and Friends, Brian Kilmeade, claimed their recent public comments had “evidently” added to the 99-year-old’s “stress”, prompting ire on social media where many pointed out the duke’s advanced age.
> Meghan referred to the couple’s concerns for Philip’s health in the interview with Winfrey. “This morning I woke up earlier than [Harry] and saw a note from someone on our team in the UK saying that the Duke of Edinburgh had gone to the hospital,” she said. “But I just picked up the phone and I called the Queen just to check in. That’s what we do, being able to default to not having to every moment go: ‘Is that appropriate?’”
> Harry and Meghan, who live in Montecito, south California, with their one-year-old son, are not expected to make any comment on Friday. Harry had been due back in the UK on 1 July for the unveiling of a statue of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.



As we’ve seen, USA reporters lack intelligence and finesse. GK mentioned the ‘natural causes’ question first, then Kilmeade brought up the stress of the interview. Seems they wanted the story to shift to these shores. Happily, the internet will not let that happen.

Prince Philip deserves better.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> As someone who is probably at least 20 years older than you, I can guarantee that Oriental was never used as a racial slur when I was growing up in the US in the 70s. It was used in the way Asian is used today.
> 
> I work in the academic publishing industry and I can tell you university journals are constantly changing which words are considered acceptable. When I started in the business “African-American” was the preferred term. But today “Black” with a capital B is preferred in most of the journals I work on. Yet in the very same article if someone is referred to as “white” is always done in lowercase. One way is an identity and the other way is a description. That’s academia for you.



I think it's more about the nature of how Oriental was used even earlier than the 70s. I don't think it's a term that's used derogatively towards Asians, but it's more that it was used to describe objects, literature, themes, etc non-people. And I think that's the correct way of using it... by applying it to people it's just kind of awkward. Like in my example, colored - you can describe objects as colored but when you describe people like that it implies they're not the "norm." And of course that one very much was used derogatively while Oriental wasn't but it's the same idea of describing people the way you do things. All of this is kind of academic, though. In reality, I wouldn't be offended if called Oriental but I just wouldn't call someone else that myself because it's not not normally used that way in the US. I understand it is more common in Europe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

OT but I think this fairy penguin controversy sounds a bit overcooked to me.
The penguin’s taxonomic name is eudyptula minor so it’s always been called little penguin (literally little good little diver)  as a scientific name. Fairy penguin is the regional Australian name.
 It’s not uncommon for animals to have a scientific name and a colloquial name and it can lead to confusion- especially given scientists are always discovering different sub-species or that their classification is wrong
TLDR I can see why ornithologists might be advising for uniformity of names without it having anything to do with offending gay people. 

also it does seem a little unlikely given the word fairy is in common usage anyway.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I can't stand Meghan, but I thought it was an odd thing to publish, and not sure what in the world this had to do with PP's death.


Correct me if I’m wrong the timing is off but could this have been writes while ago and it so happens to correlate with PP death? Regardless, it’s the wrong time to do it.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> I think it's more about the nature of how Oriental was used even earlier than the 70s. I don't think it's a term that's used derogatively towards Asians, but it's more that it was used to describe objects, literature, themes, etc non-people. And I think that's the correct way of using it... by applying it to people it's just kind of awkward. Like in my example, colored - you can describe objects as colored but when you describe people like that it implies they're not the "norm." And of course that one very much was used derogatively while Oriental wasn't but it's the same idea of describing people the way you do things. All of this is kind of academic, though. In reality, I wouldn't be offended if called Oriental but I just wouldn't call someone else that myself because it's not not normally used that way in the US. I understand it is more common in Europe.


Exactly. Isn’t there a company called Oriental Trading Company? I find the word exotic, mysterious and quite sexy if used in the right context. My family is quite the United Nations of people, Japanese, Black, Caucasian, Islanders, and when we get together the food is amazing.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan's interpretation: Thank you for your service *...* _(what we really mean is we were successful at framing you (and your family) as a rotten racist mean old man and we're glad you're dead especially since you were alive long enough for us to trash the BRF for lots of dough) You will be greatly missed._


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ok I know this is only tangentially on topic.


----------



## chaneljewel

lulilu said:


> As The Post revealed, Harry’s heavily pregnant wife had been keen to join him.
> Despite making “every effort” to accompany her husband, Markle — who is expecting a baby girl in the early summer — did not receive medical clearance to fly from her doctor, sources revealed.
> 
> 
> I love how she is always "heavily pregnant."  smdh  She lies so much.


And what is “heavily pregnant”???   You’re pregnant...this number of weeks...she always has to have an exaggeration.


----------



## lalame

lanasyogamama said:


> Ok I know this is only tangentially on topic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5051261



Oprah's biggest contribution this year was inspiring all these memes.


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> I find it hard to believe Meghan would go on tv and say something SO completely untrue that no one else would correct it - they corrected a lot of other stuff she said.


What? Meghan? Meghan Markle? The Duchess of Sussex? She wouldn't LIE on TV?
What alternative reality upside-down world did I wake up in today?


----------



## lalame

V0N1B2 said:


> What? Meghan? Meghan Markle? The Duchess of Sussex? She wouldn't LIE on TV?
> What alternative reality upside-down world did I wake up in today?



No, I don't believe she'd lie on something so black-and-white *and not be corrected*. She was corrected on everything else so I'm inclined to think this one is true.


----------



## papertiger

chaneljewel said:


> And what is “heavily pregnant”???   You’re pregnant...this number of weeks...she always has to have an exaggeration.



There is no Moonbump big enough to announce _the_ Princess Diana II


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Girl, I still wear panty hose if that makes sense to anyone  especially when I don’t have time to shave my legs lol.



Just saying, they're back in, especially if you wear short shorts


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> But that version doesn't seem to be true... I find it hard to believe Meghan would go on tv and say something SO completely untrue that no one else would correct it - they corrected a lot of other stuff she said. So I don't think the truth is that Meghan or Kate dramatically made the other cry as it's been made to appear.



What's truth got to do with anything?

So long as one has a voice...one will darn well use it. Every opportunity. Let others worry what it means/meant.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

The Kate making Meghan cry was apparently related to Princess Charlottes dress which needed re-fitting. Meghan explained that "Kate had only just given birth to her third child, Prince Louis, and was feeling quite emotional". And as Meghan complained how people didn't ask how she was after giving birth, she must have been able to sympathize with Kates mental state. So I don't understand why she had to bring it up, especially as Kate recognized she was wrong, apologized and got her flowers. There really wasn't any need to correct the press because I don't think most people cared and I don't think that really affected her reputation. Also, we don't specifically know what Kate said to Meghan that made her cry because it would take a lot more than being scolded to make me cry.


----------



## byzina

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't understand Gayle's reasoning for questioning how the Prince died, how was that relevant? What is relevant, is that the Queen has lost her rock, he husband of 73 years! How about talking about the countless engagements he has undertaken, or the Duke of Edinburgh award which is a fantastic scheme aimed at developing skills in the youth. So what if he died of covid, or a heart attack etc.



Probably Gayle felt sad that she couldn't get extra attention from publicising some spicy details this time. So she made up the agenda herself. 



Sharont2305 said:


> I think she, or Harry was told that it would be better if she didn't come.



I think Meghan left Britain to never come back again. She would use every pretext not to go there now or later.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

byzina said:


> I think Meghan left Britain to never come back again. She would use every pretext not to go there now or later.



I don't think she would be welcome either. I cannot believe she is 40 years old and behaves like this. I honestly think she thought she would be walking into some sort of Disney film when she got married. She loved the comparison to The little mermaid which just shows you how little she knows about the BRF, even after 4 years of marriage. Her claim of ignorance on the BRF is bad since they choose to be working royals she should have done her research.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Side note: How is it that Harry was able to live and work in USA? You need a green card or visa to work in America and although his wife is American, there is a long application with wait times and different paperwork. The spouse (MM) would also have to prove that she can support the applicant financially too. I can't see him being eligible for a work visa since he doesn't have any extraordinary skills and he only just recently got a job. Americans do not tend to give preferential treatment with immigration (and rightly so), so I wonder if he was living illegally in USA?



I personally spoke about the spousal visa/green card process on this thread many pages ago. Subsequent to my comment, someone else posted an external source saying that Harry was granted O-1 visa, which is only valid for 3 years and requires a re-petition by an employer. Not sure if he really did get an O-1 and how feasible it is for him to live in the US long term that way without being a permanent resident.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> No, I don't believe she'd lie on something so black-and-white *and not be corrected*. She was corrected on everything else so I'm inclined to think this one is true.



But mostly not by the palace, by people who did the math with information that could be sourced. They obviously wouldn't have been at her bridal fitting. Not trying to change your mind BTW, just patching up the pieces for myself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I honestly think she thought she would be walking into some sort of Disney film when she got married.



I remember an article by one of the reputable British journalists...was it Jan Moir by any chance? Anyway, the article had a passage that said Meghan was expecting to cruise around London in a golden carriage, and I guess that kind of sums up her attitude.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Kate making Meghan cry was apparently related to Princess Charlottes dress which needed re-fitting. Meghan explained that "Kate had only just given birth to her third child, Prince Louis, and was feeling quite emotional". And as Meghan complained how people didn't ask how she was after giving birth, she must have been able to sympathize with Kates mental state. So I don't understand why she had to bring it up, especially as Kate recognized she was wrong, apologized and got her flowers. There really wasn't any need to correct the press because I don't think most people cared and I don't think that really affected her reputation. Also, we don't specifically know what Kate said to Meghan that made her cry because it would take a lot more than being scolded to make me cry.



That was my point, that she didn't need to bring it up because she was essentially putting that spotlight on Kate who couldn't comment publically - the same situation M was complaining about being in. I would think if it was completely untrue, someone would've spoken out to correct it (via leak even) because it DID drag Kate into the drama of the interview. I have to imagine some people present were loyal/close to Kate and would want to correct anything wildly untrue. i would love to know the full story of this one.


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> As someone who is probably at least 20 years older than you, I can guarantee that Oriental was never used as a racial slur when I was growing up in the US in the 70s. It was used in the way Asian is used today.


In continental Europe, oriental was not equivalent to Asian, but used for those from what we call the Far East: Chinese, Korean, Japanase... Asian is wider, including all Caucasian Asians: Central Asia, Indians...

Because this is OT, I will make an IT question, to any English native speaker... Those suspensive points after service... What on earth... are they supposed to mean...?


----------



## floatinglili

lalame said:


> Words are only offensive because of some cultural connotation (which would be different in different cultures). Oriental, to me as a millennial, has no offensive connotation because it’s never been used against me in an offensive way that made me feel bad. But it seems to have had that connotation before, just like terms like “colored people” or worse, so I don’t use it partly out of respect to that but also because norms change and this is a very old fashioned word to use for people vs objects. Its not uncommon to hear among older Asian women because it might just be the word they learned while learning English way back when.
> 
> I didn’t know fairy was controversial though.. is this in the US? Just never heard that.


Language does constantly reinvent itself. Sometimes I wish the old words could be retained as a less accurate, but historical and inoffensive usage, as they were first conceived to be. I guess in terms of personal usage, for some people and some communities they do. As our social space becomes more international (thanks internet) there is quite a bit of homogenisation going on. My children will often refer to cookies and candy rather than the traditional terms of biscuits and lollies, for example. (Something some older people find very annoying if not offensive lol). 
As for fairy vs little penguins this is Australia - we are quite environmentally minded and wildlife preservation and welfare is important to us. I guess the drive to change the usage was initiated by elements within the scientific community. I’m not sure whether they have been completely successful in stamping out the use of ‘fairy’ partly because the name is quite magical and evocative (from my memory of reading material about the change, the fantasy of ‘fairy’ was the problem they had with it - not positioning  the animal’s struggles and realities seriously enough). When I was at a National park display for these penguins a few years ago I was corrected quite pointedly and severely by guides when I used the wrong term. I was embarrassed lol.


----------



## floatinglili

Lodpah said:


> Girl, I still wear panty hose if that makes sense to anyone  especially when I don’t have time to shave my legs lol.


I love this. I am inspired by Saint Laurent - I want to rock that sexy retro black pantyhose look this upcoming winter! And yes the models are often photographed pairing their pantyhose with open toed sandals!! 
Positively rock chic scandalous!!


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> No, I don't believe she'd lie on something so black-and-white *and not be corrected*. She was corrected on everything else so I'm inclined to think this one is true.



I think it’s more that they don’t want to sink down to tit-for-tat childish accusations. Who made who cry? is a silly, petty argument that any rational woman could put behind her after three years. It was a minor topic in the interview when compared to the racist accusations and innuendo.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Kate making Meghan cry was apparently related to Princess Charlottes dress which needed re-fitting. Meghan explained that "Kate had only just given birth to her third child, Prince Louis, and was feeling quite emotional". And as Meghan complained how people didn't ask how she was after giving birth, she must have been able to sympathize with Kates mental state. So I don't understand why she had to bring it up, especially as Kate recognized she was wrong, apologized and got her flowers. There really wasn't any need to correct the press because I don't think most people cared and I don't think that really affected her reputation. Also, we don't specifically know what Kate said to Meghan that made her cry because it would take a lot more than being scolded to make me cry.


Ive always found this story so bizarre for several reasons.
1. On international women’s day no less, we have a story of two powerful women rowing about clothes several years ago- how empowering! 
2. If MM was hounded by a brutal press she should have better ammo than this banal story. Guess CBS hadn’t photoshopped the headlines in time.
3.If K is indeed a mean girl who spitefully made M cry- why give her the satisfaction of knowing you are dwelling on it years later?


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> In continental Europe, oriental was not equivalent to Asian, but used for those from what we call the Far East: Chinese, Korean, Japanase... Asian is wider, including all Caucasian Asians: Central Asia, Indians...
> 
> Because this is OT, I will make an IT question, to any English native speaker... Those suspensive points after service... What on earth... are they supposed to mean...?



@bagmania, I tried to be helpful regarding the British v US common usage of the words 'Oriental' and 'Asian'  #55,829 of this thread: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/page-3722 Sorry, it was a long post.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.
> 
> LMAO.



Rubbish.  She knows damn well that she would not be welcome.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Ive always found this story so bizarre for several reasons.
> 1. On international women’s day no less, we have a story of two powerful women rowing about clothes several years ago- how empowering!
> 2. If MM was hounded by a brutal press she should have better ammo than this banal story. Guess CBS hadn’t photoshopped the headlines in time.
> 3.If K is indeed a mean girl who spitefully made M cry- why give her the satisfaction of knowing you are dwelling on it years later?



M can_ not_ be seen (esp by herself) as the mean girl bully in any way.

This would give credence to the allegations of her bullying staff whilst in the UK.

IMO, that is why she had to turn the tables on a woman who she knew would be advised by her staff and elders not to dwell, explain or complain in return.

The whole thing was petty. It was a wedding, and bridezilla had a spat with her SIL2B. Get over yourself love.


----------



## bag-mania

doni said:


> Because this is OT, I will make an IT question, to any English native speaker... Those suspensive points after service... What on earth... are they supposed to mean...?



It is an ellipsis and Harry and Meghan are using it incorrectly by both definitions for its use.

Ellipsis
a) the omission of one or more words that are obviously understood but that must be supplied to make a construction grammatically complete. b) a sudden leap from one topic to another.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

doni said:


> In continental Europe, oriental was not equivalent to Asian, but used for those from what we call the Far East: Chinese, Korean, Japanase... Asian is wider, including all Caucasian Asians: Central Asia, Indians...



This is true, as a Brit I was crucified for saying Oriental race in America. In the UK Asian means Indian subcontinent and we use Oriental as Japan, China, South Korea etc.


----------



## carmen56

bag-mania said:


> I am hoping he goes if only to have the long overdue face-to-face talk with his father,  brother, and perhaps even his grandmother. He owes them an explanation for why he turned on them but I doubt he has the courage to do it.
> 
> Frankly, I don’t think Meghan will allow him to go. If he is out of her sight there’s a chance that someone else may be able to influence him. She must maintain a tight hold on his chain.



I’m hoping that Bea, Eug or Zara will have a word and try to talk some sense into Harry.  Perhaps some time away from M might do him good.  He won’t have to listen to her whispering poison into his ear 24/7.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This is true, as a Brit I was crucified for saying Oriental race in America. In the UK Asian means Indian subcontinent and we use Oriental as Japan, China, South Korea etc.



That is the way it used to be in the US only a few decades ago. (Sorry someone slammed you.)


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't Anne's son divorced?


Separated or divorced, I remembered afterwards and edited my post. I'm sure she will be there


----------



## Hermes Zen

bisousx said:


> My hubby is French and burst out laughing when I told him this. He said, “yup.. for Bastille day.”



I read your post and lodpah's to my hubby and he burst out laughing also. So thank you both for that!  

I'm trying to convince him to read this thread. He would get so much out of it. He seems to enjoy all the ones I do share with him.  I'm starting to be a little surprised how much he already knows since he's never been one who follows celebrities and such.  I guess you can't get away from some of it via news and other sources!   I have a feeling he's leaning towards my suggestion ... will see !  I wish I had the popcorn eating emoji! 

Now back to catching up with more thread pages!


----------



## Lodpah

floatinglili said:


> I love this. I am inspired by Saint Laurent - I want to rock that sexy retro black pantyhose look this upcoming winter! And yes the models are often photographed pairing their pantyhose with open toed sandals!!
> Positively rock chic scandalous!!


Lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This is true, as a Brit I was crucified for saying Oriental race in America. In the UK Asian means Indian subcontinent and we use Oriental as Japan, China, South Korea etc.



Funnily, in Germany Oriental refers to the Near and Middle East, while the Far East and most parts of South East Asia are Asian, while India with Pakistan seems to stand kind of for itself.


----------



## jelliedfeels

doni said:


> In continental Europe, oriental was not equivalent to Asian, but used for those from what we call the Far East: Chinese, Korean, Japanase... Asian is wider, including all Caucasian Asians: Central Asia, Indians...
> 
> Because this is OT, I will make an IT question, to any English native speaker... Those suspensive points after service... What on earth... are they supposed to mean...?


We were joking about this before.
the ellipsis aka ... is used to emphasise an omission in the text.
It is also used as a rhetorical or ironic device to highlight a point by its very omission.

I think archewell may have thought they were pause indicators like dashes -  but it ends up looking like in between the two vaguely nice things H&M managed to say, they said a load of horrible stuff that the team omitted.

It is a funny thing about languages, it always strikes me as odd that  ‘China’ is a perfectly acceptable adjective in Spanish for an Asian person but it would be offensive to use ‘Chinese’ as a generic term for Asians in English.

I sometimes think Asian is a bit vague given it is the biggest continent. I do use Desi sometimes but it’s not that well-known.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Yeah this is a weird thing for her to say. It sounds like “we quit so the rules wouldn’t apply to us.” I mean I think we all know that’s what happened but the optics of this are bad to me.



Exactly. MM's attitude was "we quit so we don't have to observe any of the rules and protocols that everyone else has to observe in our dealings with the Queen."  Makes zero sense.  The same protocols are still in place.  So, MM might pick up the phone and call the Queen but the usual person probably answered, took a message, and said the Queen would be informed of the call and call her back, or not. I'm betting on "not".


----------



## zinacef

bisousx said:


> I’m an Asian-American millennial and have no problem with the word Oriental either. Although it’s so wokefensive to say Oriental now that I don’t hear it anymore except by older gen Asian relatives when referring to our own kind.
> 
> I don’t care how many woke Caucasians try to convince me that the Oriental word is comparing a human being to a rug  The delicate dance of life, which will be soon be forgotten, is about understanding and determining other people’s motivations behind their choice of words.. not the actual word. Some words which many don’t even find offensive or hurtful in the slightest.


a little out of topic also, when my daughter played in HS band, there’s a big percentage of Asian-American members. A band director from an international award winning HS band actually asked why there is so much “Orientals “ in our band. Our director was actually deeply offended and corrected that these are not furnitures or rugs these are talented children. My daughter does not take offense at all, we usually just shrugged it off and let our music speak. both play violin and a wind instrument.


----------



## sdkitty

Laila619 said:


> I don’t believe for one second that Megs ”didn’t get medical clearance“ to fly for the funeral. BS. She just doesn’t have the courage to face everyone, especially William who has had her number from the beginning. If she weren’t pregnant, she would still come up with a different excuse to not attend.


regardless of the excuse it's best that she stay home


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think archewell may have thought they were pause indicators like dashes -  but it ends up looking like in between *the two vaguely nice things* H&M managed to say, they said a load of horrible stuff that the team omitted.



That's the best description. Vaguely nice.


----------



## limom

@Lodpah 
To answer your question, I was referring to the Parade joke.
The diners sound amazing.

To get back to MM, she made the right choice staying here.
Also why would Harry need more than a three years visa?
The way, those two move around. Three years from now, they might be on Mars.


----------



## zinacef

lulilu said:


> As The Post revealed, Harry’s heavily pregnant wife had been keen to join him.
> Despite making “every effort” to accompany her husband, Markle — who is expecting a baby girl in the early summer — did not receive medical clearance to fly from her doctor, sources revealed.
> 
> 
> I love how she is always "heavily pregnant."  smdh  She lies so much.


I’m sure she’s stewing on that word ” heavily” right now but since she doesn’t read anything about her she’ll never know— but Gayle and Omid does. So let’s see on Monday morning what Gayle says.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Kate making Meghan cry was apparently related to Princess Charlottes dress which needed re-fitting. Meghan explained that "Kate had only just given birth to her third child, Prince Louis, and was feeling quite emotional". And as Meghan complained how people didn't ask how she was after giving birth, she must have been able to sympathize with Kates mental state. So I don't understand why she had to bring it up, especially as Kate recognized she was wrong, apologized and got her flowers. There really wasn't any need to correct the press because I don't think most people cared and I don't think that really affected her reputation. Also, we don't specifically know what Kate said to Meghan that made her cry because it would take a lot more than being scolded to make me cry.


Meghan may have been so wound up with the wedding plans that "making her cry" wouldn't take much....could be that she did cry but it wasn't proportional to whatever Kate said or did


----------



## Lodpah

zinacef said:


> I’m sure she’s stewing on that word ” heavily” right now but since she doesn’t read anything about her she’ll never know— but Gayle and Omid does. So let’s see on Monday morning what Gayle says.


Strange word, heavily pregnant. Every woman refers to either first trimester, second trimester or by the months.


----------



## CarryOn2020

doni said:


> In continental Europe, oriental was not equivalent to Asian, but used for those from what we call the Far East: Chinese, Korean, Japanase... Asian is wider, including all Caucasian Asians: Central Asia, Indians...
> 
> Because this is OT, I will make an IT question, to any English native speaker... Those suspensive points after service... What on earth... are they supposed to mean...?











						All About Ellipses ...
					

It's time to stop calling them 'dot dot dot'




					www.merriam-webster.com
				




Ellipses - 9, yes, 9 uses:


Spoiler: ... 9 uses ... 



*All About Ellipses*
*It's time to stop calling them 'dot dot dot'*
. . .

You see those dots? All three together constitute an ellipsis. The plural form of the word is _ellipses_, as in "a writer who uses a lot of ellipses." They also go by the following names: _ellipsis points_, _points of ellipsis_, _suspension points_. We're opting for _ellipsis points_ here, just to make things crystal clear. (And since we're aiming for clarity here, we'll also point out that _ellipse_ is a different word, though, we're sorry, it's sometimes used to mean _ellipsis_.)






Some thoughts on ellipses are coming…
Ellipsis points are periods in groups of usually three, or sometimes four. They signal either that something has been omitted from quoted text, or that a speaker or writer has paused or trailed off in speech or thought.

That's the basics. Now we'll dig in to how they're used.

1) Ellipsis points indicate the omission of one or more words within a quoted sentence, as in the following example from the Preamble of the U. S. Constitution. Note that they are usually preceded and followed by a space:



> "We the People of the United States ... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."


2) Ellipsis points are usually not used to indicate the omission of words that precede the quoted portion. However, in some formal contexts, especially when the quotation is introduced by a colon, ellipsis points are used.



> Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address ends with a stirring call for national resolve that "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
> Its final words define the war's purpose in ********ic terms: "... that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."


Ellipsis points following quoted material are omitted when the quoted material forms an integral part of a larger sentence.



> She maintained that it was inconsistent with "government of the people, by the people, for the people."


3) Punctuation used in the original that falls on either side of the ellipsis points is often omitted, but it may be retained if it helps clarify the sentence structure.



> "Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation ... can long endure."
> "We the People of the United States, in Order to ... establish Justice, ... and secure the Blessings of Liberty ..., do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."


If the omitted part includes the end of a sentence, a four-dot ellipsis may be used, with the first dot being, in truth, a period that follows immediately after the last word.



> As the Declaration of Independence asserts, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.... That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ..."


4) If the last words of a quoted sentence are omitted and the original sentence ends with punctuation other than a period, the end punctuation often follows the ellipsis points, especially if it helps clarify the quotation.



> Workshop attendees are presented with a series of questions beginning "What advice would you offer someone who has experienced ...?"


5) When ellipsis points are used to indicate that a quotation has been intentionally left unfinished, the terminal period is omitted. No space separates the last ellipsis point and the quotation mark.



> The paragraph beginning "Recent developments suggest ..." should be deleted.


6) A line of ellipsis points indicates that one or more lines have been omitted from a poem, as in the following example from Walt Whitman's "When I Heard the Learn'd Astronomer." The length of the line usually matches the length of the line above.



> When I heard the learn'd astronomer,
> .............................................................
> How soon unaccountable I became tired and sick,
> Till rising and gliding out I wander'd off by myself,
> In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
> Look'd up in perfect silence at the stars.


7) Ellipsis points are used to indicate faltering speech, especially if the faltering involves a long pause or a sentence that trails off or is intentionally left unfinished. Generally, no other terminal punctuation is used.



> The speaker seemed uncertain. "Well, that's true ... but even so ... I think we can do better."
> "Despite these uncertainties, we believe we can do it, but ...."
> "I mean ..." he said, "like ... How?"


8) Ellipsis points are sometimes used informally as a stylistic device to catch a reader's attention, often replacing a dash or colon.



> They think that nothing can go wrong ... but it does.


9) In newspaper and magazine columns consisting of social notes, local events listings, or short items of celebrity news, ellipsis points often take the place of paragraphing to separate the items.



> Congratulations to Debra Morricone, our up-and-coming singing star, for her full scholarship to the Juilliard School this fall! ... And kudos to Paul Chartier for his winning All-State trumpet performance last Friday in Baltimore! ... Look for wit and sparkling melody when the Lions mount their annual Gilbert & Sullivan show at Syms Auditorium. This year it's ...


Ellipsis points are similarly used in informal personal correspondence in place of periods or paragraphing.



> We'll be away for the weekend and then back to work Monday ... You're welcome to come for the graduation party at the end of the month.


And there you have it. Now, go forth and with a new command of ellipsis points and a new sense of confidence when you need to collect your thoughts on the page ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> My friend swears by Botox for migraines.


One of the few treatments that help my daughter with severity, lessens the intensity but not with all of them unfortunately.


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> In continental Europe, oriental was not equivalent to Asian, but used for those from what we call the Far East: Chinese, Korean, Japanase... Asian is wider, including all Caucasian Asians: Central Asia, Indians...
> 
> Because this is OT, I will make an IT question, to any English native speaker... Those suspensive points after service... What on earth... are they supposed to mean...?


someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I think most Americans use the word Asian to describe Japanese, Korean, Chinese but not Indians or caucasian Asians (even though technically they too may be Asian)


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> I’m hoping that Bea, Eug or Zara will have a word and try to talk some sense into Harry.  Perhaps some time away from M might do him good.  He won’t have to listen to her whispering poison into his ear 24/7.


good luck with that - I don't think Meghan's spell is going to be broken just because she isn't physically present for a couple of days.
I'd be more into the idea of Anne telling him off


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funnily, in Germany Oriental refers to the Near and Middle East, while the Far East and most parts of South East Asia are Asian, while India with Pakistan seems to stand kind of for itself.


You from Germany? I used to be stationed in a small town called Kornwestheim. They did not know what to make of me. They thought I was an exotic oriental and so had a “great” time being fawned over by the blue eyes and blonde hair German boys. Loved Germany lol.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> You know he had to have seen right through her from the beginning. She must have HATED him. *The cold statement on Archewell is surely preferable to what she REALLY wanted to say-------she is likely doing all she can to hide her glee.*
> As for Harry.......who knows. It is obvious now that an elaborate facade was  created for him. It surely makes me look at everything in a new light. Did he really get on with and love _anyone_ in the family? Or was it all a sham.
> Whatever. All I can say is PP and QE did more in ONE YEAR than those two will EVER 'accomplish' in a lifetime


ITA.  That's why the meme going around of her kneeling with a smile next to PP's grave is not that shocking to me, as I feel she internally is ecstatic that the behind the scenes strongest member of the family is gone.  I don't think he cared for MM, and was likely not shy to admit it, whereas the Queen seems to have a soft spot for her idiot grandson and is willing to overlook quite a bit of their antics.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> My hubby is French and burst out laughing when I told him this. He said, “yup.. for Bastille day.”



Your hubby is French? Ask him what his interpretation of the Hebdo cartoon was!!


----------



## purseinsanity

chaneljewel said:


> And what is “heavily pregnant”???   You’re pregnant...this number of weeks...she always has to have an exaggeration.


I take it to mean that at any given moment, she could pop a squat and bring forth the newest savior to us all.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> good luck with that - I don't think Meghan's spell is going to be broken just because she isn't physically present for a couple of days.
> I'd be more into the idea of Anne telling him off


He's going to have his cell phone with him 24/7 set to "vibrate" and she is going to be "massaging"  him with texts constantly as a reminder that SHE who is OMNIPOTENT is with him ALWAYS. Hope he's careful which pocket he stashes it in, all that vibration could lead to embarrassment.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> It is an ellipsis and Harry and Meghan are using it incorrectly by both definitions for its use.
> 
> Ellipsis
> a) the omission of one or more words that are obviously understood but that must be supplied to make a construction grammatically complete. b) a sudden leap from one topic to another.



I'll add one more "urban dictionary"-esque common use for the ellipses, and my favorite: Denoting voice pausing or trailing off during speech in a suggestive or suspenseful manner.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> You from Germany? I used to be stationed in a small town called Kornwestheim. They did not know what to make of me. They thought I was an exotic oriental and so had a “great” time being fawned over by the blue eyes and blonde hair German boys. Loved Germany lol.



Yes, but another state more to the west


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I think most Americans use the word Asian to describe Japanese, Korean, Chinese but not Indians or caucasian Asians (even though technically they too may be Asian)



I find this to be true too and it's always a bit funny to hear my UK coworkers refer to Indians as "Asians."


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> Your hubby is French? Ask him what his interpretation of the Hebdo cartoon was!!



Oh Lort, I was not trying to reveal to him how much time I spend on TPF... or the topic of H&M, for that matter   but now that you asked - I can’t find a full photo of the cartoon. It’s cropped on Google. Can someone PM it to me?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Taking a pregnant pause from catchup reading ...

I wish H would not go to the funeral due to many concerns but one in particular I have not read (maybe I missed it or haven't got to it yet) if H has had both vaccinations. I did read earlier this year (?) that he was thinking of quarantining in case he needed to travel back to London but then as we all know he's been with Oprah and out and about.  I wouldn't want to chance him being a carrier and infect the RF. Maybe I'm over reacting?

He might want to go to 'show' the world that he cared for his grandfather (I'm hopeful he really did) although he didn't do that in his loveless posting yesterday. But also, he's probably going to hit up his Father and the Queen for money and to see if anything was left for him.  Would not surprise me. Giving them a sob story about the police having to come out to his Montecito Palace 9 times so far. Time to get the family when they are in mourning.

Also, does his title change and he moves up to 5th in succession now?  MM is probably bending his ear to go and find out !!  I need to be educated on this.  Thanks.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> No it was a racist image. It shows Prince Harry doing a Nazi salut and Meghan is naked with bananas around her waist, which I think is meant in an offensive and racist tone. Charlie Hebdo has a long history of being racist and controversial. It is supposed to be a funny magazine but in reality it fails miserably. They also did a cover with Queen Elizabeth putting her foot on Meghans neck in the same way George Floyd was restrained. I wonder if anyone will take legal action against this? The magazine is truly distasteful. I am all for free speech and they have done some covers which I agree with but they've taken it too far recently, they have no limits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050416
> 
> 
> View attachment 5050407



Quoting this for you to ask hubby, @bisousx ...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Hermes Zen said:


> Taking a pregnant pause from catchup reading ...
> 
> I wish H would not go to the funeral due to many concerns but one in particular I have not read (maybe I missed it or haven't got to it yet) if H has had both vaccinations. I did read earlier this year (?) that he was thinking of quarantining in case he needed to travel back to London but then as we all know he's been with Oprah and out and about.  I wouldn't want to chance him being a carrier and infect the RF. Maybe I'm over reacting?
> 
> He might want to go to 'show' the world that he cared for his grandfather (I'm hopeful he really did) although he didn't do that in his loveless posting yesterday. But also, he's probably going to hit up his Father and the Queen for money and to see if anything was left for him.  Would not surprise me. Giving them a sob story about the police having to come out to his Montecito Palace 9 times so far. Time to get the family when they are in mourning.
> 
> Also, does his title change and he moves up to 5th in succession now?  MM is probably bending his ear to go and find out !!  I need to be educated on this.  Thanks.


No, Philip wasn’t in the line of succession


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> How can they trust Harry to respect the privacy of the funeral and family mourning?  Will it all be blurted out in another tell-all?


With secret videotaping too!


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Taking a pregnant pause from catchup reading ...
> 
> I wish H would not go to the funeral due to many concerns but one in particular I have not read (maybe I missed it or haven't got to it yet) if H has had both vaccinations. I did read earlier this year (?) that he was thinking of quarantining in case he needed to travel back to London but then as we all know he's been with Oprah and out and about.  I wouldn't want to chance him being a carrier and infect the RF. Maybe I'm over reacting?
> 
> He might want to go to 'show' the world that he cared for his grandfather (I'm hopeful he really did) although he didn't do that in his loveless posting yesterday. But also, he's probably going to hit up his Father and the Queen for money and to see if anything was left for him.  Would not surprise me. Giving them a sob story about the police having to come out to his Montecito Palace 9 times so far. Time to get the family when they are in mourning.
> 
> Also, does his title change and he moves up to 5th in succession now?  MM is probably bending his ear to go and find out !!  I need to be educated on this.  Thanks.


at his age he wouldn't qualify for vaccination in CA - unless he got some special privilege


----------



## Lodpah

Creepy. 









						3 Songs You’ll Never Hear The Same Way Again After Meghan Markle Spilled the Tea with Oprah - E! Online
					

You've likely heard these songs by Taylor Swift, Bridgit Mendler and Bruno Mars before, but prepare to listen to them in a whole new way after Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.eonline.com


----------



## purseinsanity

floatinglili said:


> Perhaps Harry is literally having a meltdown. I’m not sure he should be blamed for this impersonal tribute.
> He is unsupported, alone except for his grasping, gaslighting wife and is literally a Prince without a realm.
> Who is to say he is not absolutely collapsing under the strain of all this. Tbh I could feel quite sorry for him.


Not to be ruthless, but I don't feel sorry for him at all.  Not one iota.  He made his bed, now he can lie in it.  He's not a child.  He just behaves as a spoiled one.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Clearblueskies said:


> No, Philip wasn’t in the line of succession


Thanks for letting me know!  Oh yes forgot.  Whew!


----------



## Handbag1234

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But she also lost her father and may not be in the mood to scold the black sheep at the funeral. I know I wouldn't be.


True- but she is made of metal, so if there is a statement to be made and a line drawn in the sand, I’m sure Anne will do it on behalf of herself and the royal family. JCMH is no match for Anne. I wouldn’t take her on!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Also, does his title change and he moves up to 5th in succession now?  MM is probably bending his ear to go and find out !!  I need to be educated on this.  Thanks.



No, Philip didn't hold a place in the line of succession. He'll move up once Charles becomes king - if the Cambridges are done having kids that is.


----------



## csshopper

Remember a few weeks ago when Prince Charles was seen departing the hospital after he had visited Prince Phillip and Charles looked tearful? This article in the DM seems to explain why. Charles can take comfort in the relationship he and his father had achieved in their later years and Philip probably took comfort  in knowing he could count on his son, especially in carrying on support of his beloved Lilibet.

*Philip's last message to Charles: ROBERT JOBSON reveals bedside heart-to-heart*
With his life drawing to a close, a frail Duke of Edinburgh had just three important things to say when he asked to see his eldest son in hospital a few weeks ago. In an emotional bedside conversation, the Duke advised Prince Charles on caring for the Queen when he was gone, and on how Charles should lead the Royal Family through the years ahead.

And, fully aware he was unlikely to recover after weeks in hospital, the 99-year-old expressed a wish to go finally home, a Palace source revealed. He wanted to die in his own bed, behind the walls of Windsor Castle.

This heart-to-heart marked not just the ending of a long and successful era, a changing of the guard, but a much-changed relationship between father and son, too.

For after a lifetime of well-publicised disagreement, it is understood that the Duke and Charles have found much common ground in recent years, and particularly in the past few months.

ETA: It's a lengthy article with many interesting details I hadn't read previously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Not to be ruthless, but I don't feel sorry for him at all.  Not one iota.  He made his bed, now he can lie in it.  He's not a child.  He just behaves as a spoiled one.



I have my weak moments, but generally that's the place I'm at too. He's greatly enraged me with his treatment of his dying grandfather.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Side note: How is it that Harry was able to live and work in USA? You need a green card or visa to work in America and although his wife is American, there is a long application with wait times and different paperwork. The spouse (MM) would also have to prove that she can support the applicant financially too. I can't see him being eligible for a work visa since he doesn't have any extraordinary skills and he only just recently got a job. Americans do not tend to give preferential treatment with immigration (and rightly so), *so I wonder if he was living illegally in USA?*


Well, he's conveniently living in a sanctuary state, so it doesn't matter!  Maybe he'll claim he's penniless and needs stimulus checks and MediCal for his poor wife's pregnancy??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> With his life drawing to a close, a frail Duke of Edinburgh had just three important things to say when he asked to see his eldest son in hospital a few weeks ago. In an emotional bedside conversation, the Duke advised Prince Charles on caring for the Queen when he was gone, and on how Charles should lead the Royal Family through the years ahead.
> 
> And, fully aware he was unlikely to recover after weeks in hospital, the 99-year-old expressed a wish to go finally home, a Palace source revealed. He wanted to die in his own bed, behind the walls of Windsor Castle.



It makes all sense now. I thought he was on the way to recovery when in fact he came home to die in peace. But also, I wonder how come Gayle didn't shout it from the rooftops, or did they not tell Harry? Or did he in fact find a few crumbs of decency in his coat pockets?


----------



## Lodpah

Handbag1234 said:


> True- but she is made of metal, so if there is a statement to be made and a line drawn in the sand, I’m sure Anne will do it on behalf of herself and the royal family. JCMH is no match for Anne. I wouldn’t take her on!


True. If at any time familial anger/hurts come out it's at funerals. Like HermesZen said I believe Harry is trotting there for the reading of the will, nothing more, nothing less. Also, it seems that the media is usurping PP's achievements by pressing on about these two. 

I hope Princess Anne rips him a new one and I hope she says exactly what's on her mind.  He has been throwing flames at them  protected by the vast expanse of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. In person, not so much. 

Captain General of the Royal Marines, my ass! These guys don't need no emasculated "leader" they need a _*real man*_ who can make decisions, strong and in control, not a PW jerk of a coward. They used to "frag" those types of guys, as horrible as it was, but he's precisely the type of guy who would get his men killed in combat. We called these type of guys "ate the F up."


----------



## Chanbal

Source: Yahoo

MM's PR is working hard; it's all over the news that MM was advised by her physician not to travel. An original way to inform that she didn't make the shortlist for the funeral.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HuffPost reports that Meghan didn't get medical clearance to travel.
> 
> LMAO.


Oh, wow!  I'm shocked, absolutely SHOCKED!  

Said no one ever.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5051395
> 
> Source: Yahoo
> 
> MM's PR is working hard; it's all over the news that MM was advised by her physician not to travel. An original way to inform that she didn't make the shortlist for the funeral.


I'm so happy she was cleared to fly for her previous baby shower, when she was most likely further along.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> Remember a few weeks ago when Prince Charles was seen departing the hospital after he had visited Prince Phillip and Charles looked tearful? This article in the DM seems to explain why. Charles can take comfort in the relationship he and his father had achieved in their later years and Philip probably took comfort  in knowing he could count on his son, especially in carrying on support of his beloved Lilibet.
> 
> *Philip's last message to Charles: ROBERT JOBSON reveals bedside heart-to-heart*
> With his life drawing to a close, a frail Duke of Edinburgh had just three important things to say when he asked to see his eldest son in hospital a few weeks ago. In an emotional bedside conversation, the Duke advised Prince Charles on caring for the Queen when he was gone, and on how Charles should lead the Royal Family through the years ahead.
> 
> And, fully aware he was unlikely to recover after weeks in hospital, the 99-year-old expressed a wish to go finally home, a Palace source revealed. He wanted to die in his own bed, behind the walls of Windsor Castle.
> 
> This heart-to-heart marked not just the ending of a long and successful era, a changing of the guard, but a much-changed relationship between father and son, too.
> 
> For after a lifetime of well-publicised disagreement, it is understood that the Duke and Charles have found much common ground in recent years, and particularly in the past few months.
> 
> ETA: It's a lengthy article with many interesting details I hadn't read previously.


Heart breaking. Do you have the link? I want to read it. Thanks.


----------



## purseinsanity

justwatchin said:


> I would not be surprised if one of his new “friends with money” loans their private jet so he can sneak in to the UK.


Yep, but so sad they couldn't offer one when PP was sick.  You know, so Harry could visit and show how much he cared.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> With secret videotaping too!


For Netflix!


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> As The Post revealed, Harry’s heavily pregnant wife had been keen to join him.
> Despite making “every effort” to accompany her husband, Markle — who is expecting a baby girl in the early summer — did not receive medical clearance to fly from her doctor, sources revealed.
> 
> 
> I love how she is always "heavily pregnant."  smdh  She lies so much.


LOL I said several pages back a "heavily pregnant" Meghan and Harry would lie a wreath at a grave of some guy named Phillip.  Is MM plagiarizing me??


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> For Netflix!


Yep.  Gotta earn that 150 million somehow!


----------



## Lodpah

Remember when MM invited Reese Witherspoon to her wedding and RW declined? I believe she invited RW because of RW adoration of Kate.  Well done. RW. 









						Kate Middleton's humorous side revealed after sharing jokes with Reese Witherspoon
					

The Duchess of Cambridge impressed the Hollywood actress with her jokes, personality and royal dedication




					www.womanandhome.com


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, but so sad they couldn't offer one when PP was sick.  You know, so Harry could visit and show how much he cared.


Oh he showed how much he cared.


----------



## Love Of My Life

The Royals have an image  that they present to the world as dysfunctional as it can be at times.
I doubt if they will express this for the world to see their displeasure with Harry.
This is & should be about Prince Phillip.. Meaghan won't steal the spotlight as
BRF is on to her.. and whatever comes her way she is deserving of
I doubt Harry comprehends the full impact of the comments & decisions he has
made with Meaghan who I believe has lost much of her "sparkle"...


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Hmm, so she can fly internationally when she had her baby shower when she was over 6 months pregnant and right now I would predict she is just under 6 months pregnant since she is due to give birth in early summer. Her baby shower was 2 days and there was a private jet arranged for by Amal Clooney. I wonder why all her famous friends can't help now . *I think she is probably ashamed of the interview*, and I would be very surprised if she set foot on British soil again. I don't think the Brits would welcome her warmly.


I don't think Meghan is ashamed of anything, ever.  I could pick any one of the multitude of disgusting things she's done and be mortified at myself, but I don't think she has the section of the brain that actually processes true "compassion".  She just has the part of the brain that can say and spell the word.


----------



## CarryOn2020

zinacef said:


> a little out of topic also, when my daughter played in HS band, there’s a big percentage of Asian-American members. A band director from an international award winning HS band actually asked why there is so much “Orientals “ in our band. Our director was actually deeply offended and corrected that these are not furnitures or rugs these are talented children. My daughter does not take offense at all, we usually just shrugged it off and let our music speak. both play violin and a wind instrument.



if QE did not take H’s calls, why would she take MM’s?   She would not. Another H&M bs story


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@Lodpah

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...SON-reveals-bedside-heart-heart.html#comments


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> https://t.co/a2j40JxbjA


Thank you so much for sharing this link!  It's fascinating to read.  I found this particularly noteworthy, written by a twitter user:

Harry Cole

@MrHarryCole
·
11h

“if you want to see how Britain has changed in half a century, put Prince Philip next to Prince Harry and compare and contrast.”


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Excuse this OT post BUT so many of you seem to suffer from *migraines, bruxism etc *so I want to share what I just PM:ed a poster here. I didn't want to go OT and TMI, but I would feel bad not to share this as it's helping me, and nothing else has:

For migraine, bruxism, apnea and similar problems please look into Stasha Gominak. She's a US neurologist specialising in sleep disorders and working specifically with vitamins D and B with great success. In short the theory is that we need D to sleep so the body can use B to heal and repair and this can only be done when we are in deep sleep. If we are too low in D we can not achieve enough deep sleep, i e the body can not repair itself and so our aches and physical problems continue. Apnea, headaches, bruxism etc are according to Gominak often symptoms of this system having broken down.









						Getting Started With RightSleep® - RightSleep®
					

What is the RightSleep® Program, and How Do I Get Started? RightSleep® is an educational program that uses over-the-counter vitamins and changes in behavior to improve or normalize your sleep. It has worked successfully in over 5000 patients, with all types of sleep disorders, from apnea to...




					drgominak.com
				




I've had bruxism -> headaches for days from this for years. I've taken liposomal D periodically but it wasn't until I by chance added B that I noticed the surprising difference in my sleep, much improved energy levels when waking up and lack of morning headaches from grinding my teeth. And then I discovered Stasha's many interviews on YT where she explains her method. The only thing you need to buy is vitamins and maybe go do a test to check your D levels. 

(Also check gallbladder. If the gallbladder is not working properly due to being congested, it apparently presses on a nerve which causes headaches from a point in the neck streaming out to the top of the head and then the other way down to the right shoulder blade and can even travel down the back in to the leg. Losing lockdown weight and drinking fresh veggie/apple juice helped me with this.)


----------



## A1aGypsy

Lodpah said:


> Remember when MM invited Reese Witherspoon to her wedding and RW declined? I believe she invited RW because of RW adoration of Kate.  Well done. RW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's humorous side revealed after sharing jokes with Reese Witherspoon
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge impressed the Hollywood actress with her jokes, personality and royal dedication
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com




I have never seen this alleged outside of this thread. At the time of the wedding RW was giving interviews about how much she loved them and royal weddings and was also in London right before the wedding and buying MMH merch so I find it odd that she would refuse an invite....


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Lodpah said:


> Remember when MM invited Reese Witherspoon to her wedding and RW declined? I believe she invited RW because of RW adoration of Kate.  Well done. RW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton's humorous side revealed after sharing jokes with Reese Witherspoon
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge impressed the Hollywood actress with her jokes, personality and royal dedication
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com



There were a whole bunch of famous people invited that I am sure she didn't know (or knew only as acquaintances) that were invited. For example George Clooney admitted he and Amal didn't know Meghan or Harry. It's weird that they attended given they don't them. I would feel so weird attending a wedding when I don't know the Bride or Groom or am related in some way to them. Oprah didn't really know Meghan either, but Oprah attended as she is massively fascinated by the royal family. She wanted to interview Diana but was told no. I get the feeling that Americans don't truly understand what the royal family is, just like I'm sure the Brits may have stereotype views on the Americans.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

maris.crane said:


> Nah, we coo’. When it comes to looks on American network TV, Jake Tapper is much more my type. And Anderson has the ground covered on the giggles.


I don't watch Tucker or Anderson, so I'll have to take your word for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love Of My Life said:


> The Royals have an image  that they present to the world as dysfunctional as it can be at times.
> I doubt if they will express this for the world to see their displeasure with Harry.
> This is & should be about Prince Phillip.. Meaghan won't steal the spotlight as
> BRF is on to her.. and whatever comes her way she is deserving of
> I doubt Harry comprehends the full impact of the comments & decisions he has
> made with Meaghan who I believe has lost much of her "sparkle"...



If he is unhappy about his clothes [no uniform], seating position, walking behind W&K, he will pout, misbehave during the ceremony. Just as he did he last time they were all together.  I hope he opts out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> There were a whole bunch of famous people invited that I am sure she didn't know (or knew only as acquaintances) that were invited. For example George Clooney admitted he and Amal didn't know Meghan or Harry. It's weird that they attended given they don't them. I would feel so weird attending a wedding when I don't know the Bride or Groom or am related in some way to them. Oprah didn't really know Meghan either, but Oprah attended as she is massively fascinated by the royal family. She wanted to interview Diana but was told no. I get the feeling that Americans don't truly understand what the royal family is, just like I'm sure the Brits may have stereotype views on the Americans.



Remember OW did interview Sarah, so she may feel very much like an insider.


----------



## purseinsanity

floatinglili said:


> It’s about keeping up with fashion. I mean centre parts are back in as well. Now that’s scary! *My daughter said side parts made me look out of touch and old lmao.*
> So back to 70s Marcia hair we go!!
> Ours is not to reason why....


My daughter literally said the same thing to me today!  Told me I'd look much better with my hair parted in the middle.  I asked her, "Like Marcia Brady??".  Her response was, "WHO??".  Tells me "everyone on TikTok looks better with a middle part".


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5051395
> 
> Source: Yahoo
> 
> MM's PR is working hard; it's all over the news that MM was advised by her physician not to travel. An original way to inform that she didn't make the shortlist for the funeral.


My thought was, the article didn't mention it's probably a VooDoo doctor and he lives out back behind the chicken coop.

 Across the Pond, huge sighs of relief can be heard throughout the Kingdom that she is staying home.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, Philip didn't hold a place in the line of succession. He'll move up once Charles becomes king - if the Cambridges are done having kids that is.


Thanks!! I hope the Cambridges for more children!  They are so cute too!


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Heart breaking. Do you have the link? I want to read it. Thanks.


It's a lovely read, made me tearful. Helped remind me there is much more to this family than the toxic H and M.


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...OBERT-JOBSON-reveals-bedside-heart-heart.html


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This is true, as a Brit I was crucified for saying Oriental race in America. In the UK Asian means Indian subcontinent and we use Oriental as Japan, China, South Korea etc.


In the US, there's usually a specific category for applications, medical forms etc: Asian/Asian Indian.  Kind of like an elephant, LOL.  I have many friends that are "Asian" as well as "Asian Indian", and most of the Indians say they don't call themselves simply "Asian" in the US, because most people don't assume that includes Indians even though India is in Asia.


----------



## bellecate

jelliedfeels said:


> Ive always found this story so bizarre for several reasons.
> 1. On international women’s day no less,* we have a story of two powerful women rowing about clothes several years ago*- how empowering!
> 2. If MM was hounded by a brutal press she should have better ammo than this banal story. Guess CBS hadn’t photoshopped the headlines in time.
> 3.If K is indeed a mean girl who spitefully made M cry- why give her the satisfaction of knowing you are dwelling on it years later?


 I don't see two powerful women rowing about clothes. I have never seen anything Kate has said or written about this. All I've ever seen/heard is one spiteful women whining about it, constantly.


----------



## csshopper

csshopper said:


> It's a lovely read, made me tearful. Helped remind me there is much more to this family than the toxic H and M.


CarryOn2020, thanks for covering for me and posting the link for Lodpah. I was out walking the dog and she encountered so many friends along the way it took awhile,


----------



## Hermes Zen

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Harry said he thought history would repeating itself with Meghan because she is popular and is taking the limelight away from the Cambridges and so the Royal family is trying to spread rumors and false information to smear them, like they did with Diana because she was becoming more popular than Charles. That was a tasteless and completely false deduction on his behalf which was probably fed to him by his wife. Meghan is NOTHING like Diana.
> 
> There were reports that she divorced her husband through a text or email and sent the ring back in the post after her career took off and they had been together for 7 years. The ex-husband has never talked to the media, but it would be interesting to see what actually happened since she has not disputed this story and it makes her seem cold and calculating.


I am 1000% in agreement with you and would also LOVE to hear M's ex tell his side of the story!  Think either he's a gentleman or fear of being sued by M.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Exactly. MM's attitude was "we quit so we don't have to observe any of the rules and protocols that everyone else has to observe in our dealings with the Queen."  Makes zero sense.  The same protocols are still in place.  So, MM might pick up the phone and call the Queen but the usual person probably answered, took a message, and said the Queen would be informed of the call and call her back, or not. I'm betting on "not".



What? You mean that the Queen is not waiting, phone in hand, baited breath, just waiting, just in case either 1 of  those 2 may possibly enquire into the health of her husband. 

Phone rings:
Aid: It's your private line Marm, a reversed charges call (call collect) from California, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
QEII: I'm working. Ask them to call back after tea at 5pm, would you please.
Aid: Yes Marm, exits
Aid reenters
Aid: The Duke is_ insisting_ Marm
QEII: Covid pandemic, Brexit, unemployment, demonstrations and my husband is seriously ill. JCMH will have to call back_ if_ and when I have time at 5pm.
Aid: Yes Marm, exits 
Aid reenters 
Aid: The Duchess of Sussex is threatening to sue if you don't take the call Marm.
Muick (corgi pup) bounces round QEII legs
QEII: Please tell the Duchess to send our love to Harry and Archie. Thank you, that will be all.
Aid: Yes Marm.  Exits


----------



## Toby93

Lodpah said:


> True. If at any time familial anger/hurts come out it's at funerals. Like HermesZen said I believe Harry is trotting there for the reading of the will, nothing more, nothing less. Also, it seems that the media is usurping PP's achievements by pressing on about these two.
> 
> I hope Princess Anne rips him a new one and I hope she says exactly what's on her mind.  He has been throwing flames at them  protected by the vast expanse of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. In person, not so much.
> 
> Captain General of the Royal Marines, my ass! These guys don't need no emasculated "leader" they need a _*real man*_ who can make decisions, strong and in control, not a PW jerk of a coward. They used to "frag" those types of guys, as horrible as it was, but he's precisely the type of guy who would get his men killed in combat. We called these type of guys "ate the F up."


I am not sure if there would be a reading of the will?  All of his estate would go to his wife.  When the Queen passes on, then there will be a will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sign the Petition
					

A statue of Prince Philip




					www.change.org


----------



## Maggie Muggins

floatinglili said:


> It’s about keeping up with fashion. I mean *centre parts *are back in as well. Now that’s scary! My daughter said side parts made me look out of touch and old lmao.
> So back to 70s Marcia hair we go!!
> Ours is not to reason why....


Well, I don't like MM's centre part and the loose side strands when her hair is in a bun. I'd love to sneak up behind her and snip them off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Toby93 said:


> I am not sure if there would be a reading of the will?  All of his estate would go to his wife.  When the Queen passes on, then there will be a will.


Wasn't too sure myself if the UK has different probate etiquettes.


----------



## muddledmint

Lodpah said:


> My friend swears by Botox for migraines.


I’m in the process of trying to get Botox for migraines as well! Insurance is difficult though.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Why would everything automatically go to the Queen?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Funeral details - apologies if already posted:









						The Funeral of The Duke of Edinburgh
					

The Duke of Edinburgh’s Funeral was a “Ceremonial Royal Funeral”, the same as that of Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. It was not a “State Funeral” - something that is generally reserved for Monarchs. The Dean of Windsor conducted the Funeral Service and the Archbishop of Canterbury pronounced...




					www.royal.uk


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5047288
> 
> "Young Britons believe the Duke of Sussex should take the throne when the Queen dies despite the controversy he has caused in regard to the Royal Family. A survey run on the Daily Mirror through Deltapoll was answered by 1,590 people from across the country, many of whom were in favour of Harry over his brother Prince William and father, Prince Charles.
> 
> *Harry beat out his brother William 23 percent to 22 percent among the 18 to 24 year olds who participated in the poll*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Young Britons want Harry to be King over Prince Charles - poll
> 
> 
> MILLENNIALS think Prince Harry should become the next monarch when the Queen's reign ends, according to a new poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



18-24 yr olds? Nothing more to say






jelliedfeels said:


> Royal Doulton are clearly being shady here!
> One of their biggest lines is pretty lady figurines - it must be entirely purposeful that *the MM model looks like Mr Bean in a wig*.









csshopper said:


> The Sussex "tribute" left me flabbergasted, so cold and unfeeling, no words of support for his Grandmother. Sounds like words spoken at a retirement party when someone has worked at a company 30 years and gets a gold watch on the way out the door.
> They will never recognize the irony of  only highlighting his service, when they are so completely at odds with the depth and breadth of Prince Phillip's service as compared to the depth and breadth of their _self s_ervice. There is no love coming through in this message.
> 
> *There is a word, sometimes used, but saved for the worst of the worst, by my grandmother, whose British roots ran deep, that fits Harry. He is  a "toe rag" British slang for a contemptible or despicable person.*


Or as my dad (who is British, from London) calls JCMH, a pillock. I've also heard him call him a wazzock, they pretty much mean the same thing but great words nonetheless, very fitting 
I prefer to call him a Gobshite, which is what my irish mom calls JCMH  Gobshite is a great word!









QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5049836
> 
> 
> Is this a joke? All those Twitter messages of complete strangers (minus the ones from ugly nutjobs) are more heartfelt than that.





That's it?! I've shown more compassion and love towards strangers.
Where's the rest of the message? Did their internet connection cut off half way through loading it? Did their keyboard break mid-way through typing the message? Are they just a pair of self-centered, cold-hearted, childish, petty fools who couldn't be bothered to make the effort to write a meaningful message of love towards a family members passing?
Yes they probably spoke privately to the RF about this, but everyone else put out public messages and these two love the attention too much not to. Surprised they made so little effort, but then narcs don't enjoy the focus being on someone else so, not surprised.




Clearblueskies said:


> I’m no fan of the Markles but I think is a no win situation for them.  I’m glad they didn’t gush.  This is sufficient and I hope H&M and their enablers keep quiet.
> *I just read that Gayle King asked on her TV show whether Philips death was really of natural causes.*  Honestly these people are such harpies.


Seriously? This bish 












eunaddict said:


> Talk is so cheap. Thanking someone for a lifetime of service while you've spent the better parts of the last 5 years running from it is just...gross.


This.


----------



## bisousx

muddledmint said:


> I’m in the process of trying to get Botox for migraines as well! Insurance is difficult though.



omg, will you please share if you’re successful at getting Botox covered by insurance? I have migraines in multiple parts of my face!


----------



## Aimee3

OT but we have been discussing migraines so I thought I’d add my 2 cents.  I saw a nutritionist (but not about my migraines) and after following her advice on eating healthy, I was shocked to discover the migraines disappeared!  So maybe something you are eating or not eating can trigger them.
Back to Harry...I really think he will come up with some excuse and not go back to the UK.  Heavily pregnant MM or the surrogate will have a fake emergency and of course Harry will have to be the man and stay to protect his new family.


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> He's going to have his cell phone with him 24/7 set to "vibrate" and she is going to be "massaging"  him with texts constantly as a reminder that SHE who is OMNIPOTENT is with him ALWAYS. Hope he's careful which pocket he stashes it in, all that vibration could lead to embarrassment.



AND if I may add, M will be tracking his phone!


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> True. If at any time familial anger/hurts come out it's at funerals. Like HermesZen said I believe Harry is trotting there for the reading of the will, nothing more, nothing less. Also, it seems that the media is usurping PP's achievements by pressing on about these two.


The will and the photo ops! 

And the planes belong to MM's "BFF", not Harry's, or at least to those whom she is assiduously cultivating as BFF.


----------



## xincinsin

This is a hilarious pointless piece of pseudo journalism. It claims that MM immortalized Philip in Archie's name. And after you plough through paragraphs of inconsequential blah blah, it turns out that Mountbatten is part of the kid's surname  








						Meghan's immortalised tribute to Prince Philip in Archie's name
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's naming of their son Archie left an immortalised tribute to the late Prince Philip.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> There were a whole bunch of famous people invited that I am sure she didn't know (or knew only as acquaintances) that were invited. For example George Clooney admitted he and Amal didn't know Meghan or Harry. It's weird that they attended given they don't them. I would feel so weird attending a wedding when I don't know the Bride or Groom or am related in some way to them. Oprah didn't really know Meghan either, but Oprah attended as she is massively fascinated by the royal family. She wanted to interview Diana but was told no. I get the feeling that Americans don't truly understand what the royal family is, just like I'm sure the Brits may have stereotype views on the Americans.



I think it's a networking thing for people in these circles. It happens with norms too... I remember once I went to a friend's wedding whose mother was a federal judge. There were mayors, senators, lots of random political folks who didn't know the family well but were on the periphery enough to make the rounds for networking.


----------



## Annawakes

To me “heavily pregnant” is a way of making it sound like she’s about to pop any second.  Which is like, completely untrue.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I'm so happy she was cleared to fly for her previous baby shower, when she was most likely further along.


The obstetricians in the US are likely more strict, but it's so nice that she shared the information with the entire world. Do you think they would clear her to fly if there is an inheritance to be claimed?


----------



## Icyjade

Shopaholic2021 said:


> George Clooney admitted he and Amal didn't know Meghan or Harry. It's weird that they attended given they don't them.



I’m glad they attended! Amal was gorgeous!


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> The obstetricians in the US are likely more strict, but it's so nice that she shared the information with the entire world. Do you think they would clear her to fly if there is an inheritance to be claimed?



Sure... so she’s too heavily pregnant to fly for the funeral but it didn’t stop her from flying to the US for the baby shower...

*cough* hypocrite *cough*

This one, 7th month








						Here's What We Know About Meghan Markle's $200,000 Baby Shower
					

The star-studded party included a cotton candy machine and Away luggage for all the guests.




					www.allure.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

The satire continues... I did laugh at this one.








						Meghan Markle claims Prince Philip had a small private burial three days ago
					

Meghan Markle has shocked royal watchers across the world, after telling her good friend Oprah that Prince Philip was actually buried in a small private burial three days ago.




					newsthump.com


----------



## melissatrv

Wow, the timing of this worked out perfectly for Meghan not to attend.   Even Harry if he says he has to stay with her.  They are both cowards.


----------



## poopsie

Icyjade said:


> Sure... so she’s too heavily pregnant to fly for the funeral but it didn’t stop her from flying to the US for the baby shower...
> 
> *cough* hypocrite *cough*
> 
> This one, 7th month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's What We Know About Meghan Markle's $200,000 Baby Shower
> 
> 
> The star-studded party included a cotton candy machine and Away luggage for all the guests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.allure.com




Yes, but we are a few years down the road now and this pregnancy is a GERIATRIC one


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> This is a hilarious pointless piece of pseudo journalism. It claims that MM immortalized Philip in Archie's name. And after you plough through paragraphs of inconsequential blah blah, it turns out that Mountbatten is part of the kid's surname
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's immortalised tribute to Prince Philip in Archie's name
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's naming of their son Archie left an immortalised tribute to the late Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Oh they are really reaching with that. You know whose name is a tribute? William, the actual heir to the throne. His full name has Philip as part of it.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> The satire continues... I did laugh at this one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle claims Prince Philip had a small private burial three days ago
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has shocked royal watchers across the world, after telling her good friend Oprah that Prince Philip was actually buried in a small private burial three days ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> newsthump.com


Perfect smirk photo to go with it. And love the affronted end of the tale 
If she wasn't heavily pregnant, she would have dug the hole herself - being that she is so handy with easing herself in the wild.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> This is a hilarious pointless piece of pseudo journalism. It claims that MM immortalized Philip in Archie's name. And after you plough through paragraphs of inconsequential blah blah, it turns out that Mountbatten is part of the kid's surname
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's immortalised tribute to Prince Philip in Archie's name
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's naming of their son Archie left an immortalised tribute to the late Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I’m sure he (PP) was thrilled.
eye roll


----------



## Shopaholic2021

poopsie said:


> Yes, but we are a few years down the road now and this pregnancy is a GERIATRIC one



It's funny how she was able to see her doc in less than 24 hours after his death was announced. Trying to get an appointment with the OBGYN that quick isn't common unless she has a concierge doctor. And the only medical reason for not flying would be preeclampsia but she could easily borrow Oprahs jet and take a doctor on the flight with her. When you are rich and famous there are many ways around such things. When something is so important to a person, they always find a way.


----------



## bag-mania

I am relieved Harry and Meghan are going with the “heavily pregnant” excuse for her not attending. If they didn’t have that excuse they would have to make up something else. Maybe it would be about how it wasn’t safe for her to go back because it is such a racist environment.


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if this has already been shared here. I'm still trying to catch up on the many posts of the last days.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> The obstetricians in the US are likely more strict, but it's so nice that she shared the information with the entire world. Do you think they would clear her to fly if there is an inheritance to be claimed?



Then the story line would be "Meghan's doctor was in err, she isn't as far along as originally thought. She's cleared to fly!"


----------



## c18027

lalame said:


> I really don't know how to square away those negative descriptors with a person who is celebrated (Josephine I mean). I just don't get it. If anyone sees a French perspective on it, I'd like to know if there is a common understanding of this that's obvious to them.   At the simplest level I see them portraying M as a more French-relevant famous black entertainer but I don't then understand why it's such an uncomplimentary caricature if Josephine is celebrated. Is it just akin to say depicting white American actress A in Marilyn Monroe garb because it's an easy caricature? I have only questions, no answers, so anyone feel free to correct me.



IMO, this cartoon is skewering Meghan for how she views herself — as a much loved entertainer, humanitarian, and WOC. But in reality, others (or at least Charlie Hebdo), see her as a grotesque poseur.


----------



## queennadine

If a “normal” person wouldn’t be able to attend their grandfather’s funeral in the UK currently, then Harry shouldn’t be able to either. Especially because I’m sure he’s a big proponent of Covid restrictions.

I DETEST that certain groups of people are exempt from restrictions or flagrantly violate them. It’s the biggest BS in the world and I. Am. Over. It.


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> Your hubby is French? Ask him what his interpretation of the Hebdo cartoon was!!



I showed him the 2 Hebdo cartoons and he said nothing, didn’t even raise an eyebrow. When asked if he knows the current situation with H&M, he said no and chided me about how he only reads real news. 
We had a long-ish convo about the publication. According to him, Charlie isn’t supposed to be this provocative magazine with articles of substance (I thought maybe it was like Playboy, where you’re drawn in by the nudes, then the articles within are interesting). He compared Charlie to the Onion, or Babylon Bee, and said these cartoons are just supposed to be funny and humor has no borders.
Then, I wanted to know how Charlie has gone on this long with so many scandalous covers (esp after that horrid terrorist attack at their HQ). He says the French are staunch defenders of free speech and this is why Charlie still exists/is popular no matter how offensive it might look to someone else.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry, persona non grata in the UK:

_At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.

Brexit leader _Nigel Farage yanked up his welcome mat in a tweet slamming Harry and wife Meghan Markle for their terse statement on the death of Prince Philip_ Friday at age 99.

“For a couple that do public emotion as a career, this third person and one sentence statement shows their contempt for this great man and the monarchy,” Farage tweeted Friday.

“*The British public will not welcome Harry and Meghan back, even for the funeral*,” he added.

Buckingham Palace confirmed Saturday that Prince Harry, 36, will indeed make the trip home for the first time in a little more than a year to attend Prince Philip’s funeral — and that Markle won’t be with him.
_
*The heavily pregnant Markle, 39, who is due to give birth to the couple’s daughter this summer, will stay home in California on her doctor’s advice — even though she flew to New York for a baby shower while seven months pregnant with son Archie in February 2019*.









						Brits won’t welcome Prince Harry home, says Brexit leader Nigel Farage
					

At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

One of Philip's paintings: the Queen at breakfast










						Revealed: how retirement brought the no-nonsense Duke of Edinburgh the simple pleasures he craved
					

He had spent most of his adult life cosseted in palaces and castles, but craved modesty and simplicity, and in retirement Prince Philip finally, briefly, got his own way. His private nirvana was the quiet, peaceful home he made for himself at Wood Farm on the Sandringham Estate, where he could...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> I showed him the 2 Hebdo cartoons and he said nothing, didn’t even raise an eyebrow. When asked if he knows the current situation with H&M, he said no and chided me about how he only reads real news.
> We had a long-ish convo about the publication. *According to him, Charlie isn’t supposed to be this provocative magazine with articles of substance* (I thought maybe it was like Playboy, where you’re drawn in by the nudes, then the articles within are interesting). He compared Charlie to the Onion, or Babylon Bee, and said these cartoons are just supposed to be funny and humor has no borders.
> Then, I wanted to know how Charlie has gone on this long with so many scandalous covers (esp after that horrid terrorist attack at their HQ). He says the French are staunch defenders of free speech and this is why Charlie still exists/is popular no matter how offensive it might look to someone else.



Glad to know that the cartoons aren’t supposed to have some deep, intellectual meaning that we missed.


----------



## needlv

Does anyone know the protocol for what H should be wearing at the funeral?  Eg would Charles and William be in military uniform and H not allowed to (and has to wear a suit?). Or is H still allowed to wear a uniform because he served?

H wearing a suit whilst walking behind Will and Charles in uniform would also send a message...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Oh they are really reaching with that. You know whose name is a tribute? William, the actual heir to the throne. His full name has Philip as part of it.


So is Prince Charles Philip Arthur George.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Then the story line would be "Meghan's doctor was in err, she isn't as far along as originally thought. *She's cleared to fly*!"


On her broomstick?


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> On her broomstick?



If there was cash to be doled out at a reading of the will Meghan would hire out a speedboat to get there if she couldn't fly. If there were valuable collectibles to be doled out she'd get there to resell them to the highest bidder.


----------



## Icyjade

Was chatting with my husband and he said that maybe she will announce a few months later that she wanted to go to the funeral but the BRF stopped her from attending because they are racists...


----------



## rose60610

Icyjade said:


> Was chatting with my husband and he said that maybe she will announce a few months later that she wanted to go to the funeral but the BRF stopped her from attending because they are racists...



Ewww, I must agree. It's right up her alley and modus operandi. We should be expecting that. She doesn't care if she offends the Queen and the rest.  At that point the Crown should retaliate with a full court press and drag Meghan through the mud. If the BRF is truly racist, then why would Harry attend? His balls are in Meghan's clenched fists.


----------



## Icyjade

rose60610 said:


> His balls are in Meghan's clenched fists.



what balls?


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> Harry, persona non grata in the UK:
> 
> _At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.
> 
> Brexit leader _Nigel Farage yanked up his welcome mat in a tweet slamming Harry and wife Meghan Markle for their terse statement on the death of Prince Philip_Friday at age 99.
> 
> “For a couple that do public emotion as a career, this third person and one sentence statement shows their contempt for this great man and the monarchy,” Farage tweeted Friday.
> 
> “*The British public will not welcome Harry and Meghan back, even for the funeral*,” he added.
> 
> Buckingham Palace confirmed Saturday that Prince Harry, 36, will indeed make the trip home for the first time in a little more than a year to attend Prince Philip’s funeral — and that Markle won’t be with him._
> 
> *The heavily pregnant Markle, 39, who is due to give birth to the couple’s daughter this summer, will stay home in California on her doctor’s advice — even though she flew to New York for a baby shower while seven months pregnant with son Archie in February 2019*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brits won’t welcome Prince Harry home, says Brexit leader Nigel Farage
> 
> 
> At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I love this: “a couple that do public emotion as a career”


----------



## Clearblueskies

bellecate said:


> I don't see two powerful women rowing about clothes. I have never seen anything Kate has said or written about this. All I've ever seen/heard is one spiteful women whining about it, constantly.


I think Meghan is the only person I’ve ever heard of saying Kate did anything unkind. 



needlv said:


> Does anyone know the protocol for what H should be wearing at the funeral?  Eg would Charles and William be in military uniform and H not allowed to (and has to wear a suit?). Or is H still allowed to wear a uniform because he served?
> 
> H wearing a suit whilst walking behind Will and Charles in uniform would also send a message...


H doesn’t hold any military rank anymore, so he should be in a suit not in uniform.  He would be allowed to wear his medals.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The obstetricians in the US are likely more strict, but it's so nice that she shared the information with the entire world. Do you think they would clear her to fly if there is an inheritance to be claimed?


But of course!!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> It's funny how she was able to see her doc in less than 24 hours after his death was announced. Trying to get an appointment with the OBGYN that quick isn't common unless she has a concierge doctor. And the only medical reason for not flying would be preeclampsia but she could easily borrow Oprahs jet and take a doctor on the flight with her. When you are rich and famous there are many ways around such things. When something is so important to a person, they always find a way.


Well if she were to *ahem start bleeding* she wouldn’t be cleared to fly either.  I’m waiting for Wednesday or so for her to have preterm contractions or vaginal bleeding which will require Harry to do the chivalrous thing and rush to his heavily pregnant wife’s hospital bedside so he can comfort her with cuddles.  
I just threw up a little in my mouth as I wrote that


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> Harry, persona non grata in the UK:
> 
> _At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.
> 
> Brexit leader _Nigel Farage yanked up his welcome mat in a tweet slamming Harry and wife Meghan Markle for their terse statement on the death of Prince Philip_Friday at age 99.
> 
> “For a couple that do public emotion as a career, this third person and one sentence statement shows their contempt for this great man and the monarchy,” Farage tweeted Friday.
> 
> “*The British public will not welcome Harry and Meghan back, even for the funeral*,” he added.
> 
> Buckingham Palace confirmed Saturday that Prince Harry, 36, will indeed make the trip home for the first time in a little more than a year to attend Prince Philip’s funeral — and that Markle won’t be with him._
> 
> *The heavily pregnant Markle, 39, who is due to give birth to the couple’s daughter this summer, will stay home in California on her doctor’s advice — even though she flew to New York for a baby shower while seven months pregnant with son Archie in February 2019*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brits won’t welcome Prince Harry home, says Brexit leader Nigel Farage
> 
> 
> At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


About 50 million of us agree


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> About 50 million of us agree



Even if it's the only time agreeing with Nigel Farage


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> at his age he wouldn't qualify for vaccination in CA - unless he got some special privilege


His entire existence is special privilege.
I’m sure they will have both had one if they want it.
Some quack will say he has an anxiety disorder that means he needs it sooner or that his red hair means he has an ultra sensitive nervous system


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> If a “normal” person wouldn’t be able to attend their grandfather’s funeral in the UK currently, then Harry shouldn’t be able to either. Especially because I’m sure he’s a big proponent of Covid restrictions.
> 
> I DETEST that certain groups of people are exempt from restrictions or flagrantly violate them. It’s the biggest BS in the world and I. Am. Over. It.


The rules are up to 30 people can attend a funeral here. No rules will be broken. 
He wouldn't have been able to visit his grandparents, just like everyone else.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Well if she were to *ahem start bleeding* she wouldn’t be cleared to fly either.  I’m waiting for Wednesday or so for her to have preterm contractions or vaginal bleeding which will require Harry to do the chivalrous thing and rush to his heavily pregnant wife’s hospital bedside so he can comfort her with cuddles.
> I just threw up a little in my mouth as I wrote that


You forgot "whilst clinging on to my first born"


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> Creepy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3 Songs You’ll Never Hear The Same Way Again After Meghan Markle Spilled the Tea with Oprah - E! Online
> 
> 
> You've likely heard these songs by Taylor Swift, Bridgit Mendler and Bruno Mars before, but prepare to listen to them in a whole new way after Meghan Markle's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


To me the similarity to a taylor swift song just shows how riddled with clichés the H&M narrative is.
Also did click through to this hilariously petty incident. I can see M doing this to K at the coronation 








						Mrs. World Caroline Jurie Gives Up Crown Following Arrest For Pageant Incident - E! Online
					

Mrs. World Caroline Jurie surrendered her crown in a recorded statement addressing her onstage incident with Mrs. Sri Lanka World winner Pushpika De Silva.




					www.eonline.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> My daughter literally said the same thing to me today!  Told me I'd look much better with my hair parted in the middle.  I asked her, "Like Marcia Brady??".  Her response was, "WHO??".  Tells me "everyone on TikTok looks better with a middle part".


I’ve always had a middle part - I didn’t realise it was a thing to have one. 


bellecate said:


> I don't see two powerful women rowing about clothes. I have never seen anything Kate has said or written about this. All I've ever seen/heard is one spiteful women whining about it, constantly.


Yeah I know Kate hasn’t said anything. I’m talking about what  the inciting incident is reported as being. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> A statue of Prince Philip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.change.org


Please no, as a Brit, I think the last thing we need is to pay for London to have yet another statue of questionable artistic merit. 

The thought of the Diana statue
already makes me cringe. Isn’t that bizarro set up in the Harrods stairwell enough? At least Al Fayad only paid for that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

A1aGypsy said:


> Why would everything automatically go to the Queen?


She’s his spouse that is your automatic next of kin in British law unless your will says different.

I think people are just joking around about drama cliches. I would assume that Prince Philip’s money was the Royal estate and the Queen’s money anyway.
he probably has a will for personal possessions but the money would be QEs.


Chanbal said:


> The obstetricians in the US are likely more strict, but it's so nice that she shared the information with the entire world. Do you think they would clear her to fly if there is an inheritance to be claimed?


I think the opposite. I think a lot of LA doctors will tell you whatever gets them paid whereas the British docs would be answerable to both the royals and NICE if anything went wrong.

I mean to be fair to her, a couple of years have passed and possibly she has age-related complications now she’s 40+ but she’d rather die than tell us that I’m sure.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Harry, persona non grata in the UK:
> 
> _At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.
> 
> Brexit leader _Nigel Farage yanked up his welcome mat in a tweet slamming Harry and wife Meghan Markle for their terse statement on the death of Prince Philip_Friday at age 99.
> 
> “For a couple that do public emotion as a career, this third person and one sentence statement shows their contempt for this great man and the monarchy,” Farage tweeted Friday.
> 
> “*The British public will not welcome Harry and Meghan back, even for the funeral*,” he added.
> 
> Buckingham Palace confirmed Saturday that Prince Harry, 36, will indeed make the trip home for the first time in a little more than a year to attend Prince Philip’s funeral — and that Markle won’t be with him._
> 
> *The heavily pregnant Markle, 39, who is due to give birth to the couple’s daughter this summer, will stay home in California on her doctor’s advice — even though she flew to New York for a baby shower while seven months pregnant with son Archie in February 2019*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brits won’t welcome Prince Harry home, says Brexit leader Nigel Farage
> 
> 
> At least one Brit doesn’t think Prince Harry should rush home for his beloved grandfather’s funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Nigel Farage, are you on this forum cribbing ideas and are you a Chanel, Hermes or LV man?

I’ve found him he’s - etrusquetan&matchingbirkin


----------



## periogirl28

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve always had a middle part - I didn’t realise it was a thing to have one.
> 
> Yeah I know Kate hasn’t said anything. I’m talking about what  the inciting incident is reported as being.
> 
> Please no, as a Brit, I think the last thing we need is to pay for London to have yet another statue of questionable artistic merit.
> 
> The thought of the Diana statue
> already makes me cringe. Isn’t that bizarro set up in the Harrods stairwell enough? At least Al Fayad only paid for that.


Slightly/Very off topic, but happy to say bizarre set up in Harrod’s has been removed for quite a while.


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> Even if it's the only time agreeing with Nigel Farage


Exactly I will even agree with him on this one


----------



## eunaddict

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Hmm, so she can fly internationally when she had her baby shower when she was over 6 months pregnant and right now I would predict she is just under 6 months pregnant since she is due to give birth in early summer.



Because she's lying/has lied about her due date.

Early summer to her is probably like....May.


----------



## Aimee3

I forget where I read it, but apparently PP specifically said Fergie should not be allowed to attend his funeral.  So I wouldn’t be surprised if during his last few days, he also said MM shouldn’t be there either.


----------



## floatinglili

Surprisingly touching story here - unfortunately behind a paywall but I will paste an excerpt: 

Secret love story the public never saw
- by Anne  Barrowclough

‘Patricia Mountbatten, the couple’s mutual cousin, told biographer Sally Bedell Jones; “Philip had a capacity for love which was waiting to be unlocked.”’

- he gave up smoking on the day of his wedding? I Stan. 






						NoCookies | The Australian
					






					www.theaustralian.com.au


----------



## Icyjade

Aimee3 said:


> So I wouldn’t be surprised if during his last few days, he also said MM shouldn’t be there either.



Wouldn’t be surprised either but then someone will make it all about her race instead of her “lovable” personality.

Why are the US papers saying it’s a “touching tribute to Prince Philip” by H&M and why aren’t there more journalists pointing out the double standards in attending a family member’s funeral vs a baby shower??

Why does it irritate me so much??


----------



## Shopaholic2021

jelliedfeels said:


> automatic next of kin in British law unless your will says different.



This reminds me why wills are so important. I am sure he would have left a will if he wanted to divide up his personal assets (which probably was not a lot as he was married at 26 and did not have his own fortune when married). He essentially was a life long public servant without a monetary income. His day to day expenses would have been covered by the sovereign grant but there would have been no salary paid to him. The queen has private income/money through her mother. The Queen mother did leave behind a small fortune to all her grandchildren and great grandchildren. Harry uses the money he inherited from the Queen mother to buy his home (along with the money Diana received from the divorce which was left to Harry and William).


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

floatinglili said:


> Surprisingly touching story here - unfortunately behind a paywall but I will paste an excerpt:
> 
> Secret love story the public never saw
> - by Anne  Barrowclough
> 
> ‘Patricia Mountbatten, the couple’s mutual cousin, told biographer Sally Bedell Jones; “Philip had a capacity for love which was waiting to be unlocked.”’
> 
> - he gave up smoking on the day of his wedding? I Stan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NoCookies | The Australian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theaustralian.com.au


 I'm not crying! You all are crying!


----------



## queennadine

Sharont2305 said:


> The rules are up to 30 people can attend a funeral here. No rules will be broken.
> He wouldn't have been able to visit his grandparents, just like everyone else.


I meant more in terms of flying there, getting out of quarantine and/or testing requirements, that sort of thing.
Edited to add: had he remained in the UK, he surely could have visited his grandparents at their home.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> I meant more in terms of flying there, getting out of quarantine and/or testing requirements, that sort of thing.
> Edited to add: had he remained in the UK, he surely could have visited his grandparents at their home.


The restrictions have been very strict here, he wouldn’t have been allowed to visit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Well, I don't like MM's centre part and the loose side strands when her hair is in a bun. I'd love to sneak up behind her and snip them off.



The tendrils drive me nuts, and I wear loose strands around my face with updos too. Hers start at an entirely wrong place for their length in the middle of her forehead, hanging down her face. That look is no bueno.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Yes, but we are a few years down the road now and this pregnancy is a GERIATRIC one



The first one was too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Oh they are really reaching with that. You know whose name is a tribute? William, the actual heir to the throne. His full name has Philip as part of it.



Or Eugenie's baby. I sometimes wonder how people feel not ashamed dedicating a whole article to something that's completely nonsense.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The tendrils drive me nuts, and I wear loose strands around my face with updos too. Hers start at an entirely wrong place for their length in the middle of her forehead, hanging down her face. That look is no bueno.


Perhaps they are chin straps in case of high winds?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“For a couple that do public emotion as a career, this third person and one sentence statement shows their contempt for this great man and the monarchy,” Farage tweeted Friday._



I hate to agree with Farage of all people, but...yes.

*



			The heavily pregnant Markle, 39, who is due to give birth to the couple’s daughter this summer, will stay home in California on her doctor’s advice — even though she flew to New York for a baby shower while seven months pregnant with son Archie in February 2019
		
Click to expand...

*
And I'll admit I enjoy the dig at the end.


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> I meant more in terms of flying there, getting out of quarantine and/or testing requirements, that sort of thing.
> Edited to add: had he remained in the UK, he surely could have visited his grandparents at their home.


No he wouldn't have been able to visit them at home either under Covid rules. Not allowed to be in anyone else's house.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The tendrils drive me nuts, and I wear loose strands around my face with updos too. Hers start at an entirely wrong place for their length in the middle of her forehead, hanging down her face. That look is no bueno.


I read somewhere that she styles herself, although I think if she hired image consultants, she would be losing staff at an even faster rate. It's her smudgy eye shadow that gets me. You can barely see her eyes - must be camo for nipping into the woods. Plus it disguises the lack of tear tracks as she discreetly wept in front of Oprah.


----------



## A1aGypsy

jelliedfeels said:


> She’s his spouse that is your automatic next of kin in British law unless your will says different.



Fair, but I’m sure he had a will. I mean, I’m in the weeds here but I’m sure he came into the marriage with something that he never had to spend and probably inherited along the way. I wouldn’t be surprised if he has something and has divided it in a particular way.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Wouldn’t be surprised either but then someone will make it all about her race instead of her “lovable” personality.
> 
> Why are the US papers saying it’s a “touching tribute to Prince Philip” by H&M and why aren’t there more journalists pointing out the double standards in attending a family member’s funeral vs a baby shower??
> 
> Why does it irritate me so much??



Because the US media these days is made up of celebrity-worshipping puppets.


----------



## pixiejenna

I'm tired of seeing articles saying that Megan isn't going to the funeral because of doctors orders. She's not allowed to go per his instructions. Even in death she's got to put a spin on it.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> Because the US media these days is made up of celebrity-worshipping puppets.



The US media is very very polarizing. I noticed that CNN didn't look at all the holes in the interview and sympathized with the race angle Meghan had taken. A lot of celebrities did the same. It's the new 'woke' culture. Daily mail and Fox news went the opposite way. It's really hard to find a media outlet that can be objective and look at facts rather that spin things towards their agenda. I still read some UK newspapers and the BBC.

I think of myself as a feminist and anti-racist, but I saw many holes in the interview and I think she is using race to get people to sympathize with her. Thats her ***** card if things don't go her way. She has never once mentioned it before. And Harry mentioned that the BRF are the family she never had, and now they are bashing that family because they don't get to be the centre of attention.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The US media is very very polarizing. I noticed that CNN didn't look at all the holes in the interview and sympathized with the race angle Meghan had taken. A lot of celebrities did the same. It's the new 'woke' culture. Daily mail and Fox news went the opposite way. It's really hard to find a media outlet that can be objective and look at facts rather that spin things towards their agenda. I still read some UK newspapers and the BBC.
> 
> I think of myself as a feminist and anti-racist, but I saw many holes in the interview and I think she is using race to get people to sympathize with her. Thats her ***** card if things don't go her way. She has never once mentioned it before. And Harry mentioned that the BRF are the family she never had, and now they are bashing that family because they don't get to be the centre of attention.



We lost any dispassionate objectivity back when newspeople went from being reporters to being journalists. Once you give an individual the authority to project their personal spin as being "the news" you lose reliability and trustworthiness. Everything is an agenda now.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Weeks, really, even in the US? I don't doubt you but I guess that shows you how tuned in I was about the BRF then (not much).



I was quite sick of it by about a week in. It was different too because although we had cable, we didn't have Prime or Netflix. The alternatives were limited.


----------



## Chanbal

I would say unapologetic over Oprah's interview!

*PRINCE Harry risks being "permanently divorced" from the Royal Family if he returns to the UK unapologetic over Megxit, a royal biographer has warned.*









						Harry risks 'permanent divorce' if he returns to UK unapologetic, expert warns
					

PRINCE Harry risks being “permanently divorced” from the Royal Family if he returns to the UK unapologetic over Megxit, a royal biographer has warned. The Duke of Sussex is due to atten…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




The Palace is still making excuses for MM, I hope they know what they are doing.

"_Meanwhile, a Senior Palace Official and Buckingham Palace spokesman__ said that Meghan made "every effort" to travel to the UK for Prince Philip's funeral but doctors told her not to fly.

The Duchess is heavily pregnant with her second child - and so will not be able to make it to the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral service at St George's Chapel in Windsor Castle next Saturday._"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## floatinglili

bag-mania said:


> We lost any dispassionate objectivity back when newspeople went from being reporters to being journalists. Once you give an individual the authority to project their personal spin as being "the news" you lose reliability and trustworthiness. Everything is an agenda now.


Interesting that you can track the change in coverage over time. 
As I recall, isn’t an ‘American-style’ in written journalism meant to be describe a style that is wordy, with long winded sentences, use of first person, and their descriptive impressions, magazine style / editorial. ? 
Or as we would succinctly put it: ‘personal spin’. 
The power of the personality seems more important in US journalism.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> No he wouldn't have been able to visit them at home either under Covid rules. Not allowed to be in anyone else's house.


 I wish my neighbours complied !!! Sadly they never have like so many others


----------



## rose60610

U.S. journalism has become raw sewage. Everyone is trying to "outwoke" each other, looking like fools and idiots in the process. And if you criticize a "journalist" then YOU are accused of "attacking freedom of the press" as though YOU are the one in the wrong while they get free rein to spew lies and spin. Meghan cries "victim" and the media rush to kiss her a$$ and make ZERO effort to investigate her claims.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> I wish my neighbours complied !!! Sadly they never have like so many others


Same with my neighbours, rules don't appear to mean much to some. Makes me angry.


----------



## queennadine

Clearblueskies said:


> The restrictions have been very strict here, he wouldn’t have been allowed to visit.





Sharont2305 said:


> No he wouldn't have been able to visit them at home either under Covid rules. Not allowed to be in anyone else's house.


Not to get too OT, but the government can’t legally enforce that. If someone wants to see their grandkids at their home, they have every right to do so. We don’t derive our rights from government.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Same with my neighbours, rules don't appear to mean much to some. Makes me angry.



Seems we all have these neighbours! We can go into other people's homes at a very reduced rate (I think, like one person at a time?), yet there are my ex-neighbours posting their 20+ people dinner parties on their WhatsApp-Status. I'm not that kind of person but I swear did they still live here (or I knew their new address) I'd call authorities because I am sick and tired of being stuck inside the house and would like this freaking pandemic to end at some point.


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> As The Post revealed, Harry’s heavily pregnant wife had been keen to join him.
> Despite making “every effort” to accompany her husband, Markle — who is expecting a baby girl in the early summer — did not receive medical clearance to fly from her doctor, sources reveal
> 
> 
> I love how she is always "heavily pregnant."  smdh  She lies so much.


So celeb-heavy baby shower--yes! Funeral of husband's grandfather and Prince Consort of the Queen--nope.

She is as chicken as those legs of hers, bawk bawk.


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> Not to get too OT, but the government can’t legally enforce that. If someone wants to see their grandkids at their home, they have every right to do so. We don’t derive our rights from government.


Yes they can.  Covid regs are law here   Why are you arguing??  Different countries have different rules.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> So celeb-heavy baby shower--yes! Funeral of husband's grandfather and Prince Consort of the Queen--nope.
> 
> She is as chicken as those legs of hers, bawk bawk.


much as I dislike her, she would be a distraction if she went....so whatever the excuse or reason, best that she stay home


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> Not to get too OT, but the government can’t legally enforce that. If someone wants to see their grandkids at their home, they have every right to do so. We don’t derive our rights from government.


Tell that to the people who haven't seen their grandparents, parents and grandkids for 12 months. It's the law here. 
Myself, the only time I've seen my parents properly in the last year was just before Christmas when the rules were relaxed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, she would be a distraction if she went....so whatever the excuse or reason, best that she stay home



I agree. I must say I would have had mad respect had she put out a statement stating that due to the current disharmony with the family she thinks it's best to stay home and let Harry attend, but of course that would require self-reflection and honesty, two qualities she doesn't possess and that don't go with her narrative of being best buddy with the Queen.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree. I must say I would have had mad respect had she put out a statement stating that due to the current disharmony with the family she thinks it's best to stay home and let Harry attend, but of course that would require self-reflection and honesty, two qualities she doesn't possess and that don't go with her narrative of being best buddy with the Queen.


the disharmony she and her husband caused? fat chance.  and again, much as I dislike her, its a no-win situation for her so best she stay quiet at her mansion in CA


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Tell that to the people who haven't seen their grandparents, parents and grandkids for 12 months. It's the law here.
> Myself, the only time I've seen my parents properly in the last year was just before Christmas when the rules were relaxed.


I have friends I haven’t seen in over a year


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> current disharmony with the family



She would most likely blame the disharmony on the BRF, not on herself. She believes she and Harry and the stars, specially she is, because she is bi-racial, and she is 'woke' and she will 'modernize' the 'firm'. I would be mad angry if someone called my family the 'firm' or a 'institution' because at the end of the day they are a family, and this was a family matter that didn't really need to be published. I had more respect and sympathy for them before the interview.


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Wouldn’t be surprised either but then someone will make it all about her race instead of her “lovable” personality.
> 
> Why are the US papers saying it’s a “touching tribute to Prince Philip” by H&M and why aren’t there more journalists pointing out the double standards in attending a family member’s funeral vs a baby shower??
> *
> Why does it irritate me so much??*


Probably because you are a decent human being and have compassion!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Tell that to the people who haven't seen their grandparents, parents and grandkids for 12 months. It's the law here.
> Myself, the only time I've seen my parents properly in the last year was just before Christmas when the rules were relaxed.


Same here haven’t seen my mum for 14 months to try and keep her safe - every time I get ready to see her these law breaking idiots cause another wave worse than the last - I’d like to see them locked up


----------



## EverSoElusive

Clearblueskies said:


> I have friends I haven’t seen in over a year



I feel for you. I haven't seen my family and friends back home in 4 years. I was going to fly back to SE Asia last year then COVID-19 hit  Hopefully we all get to see our family and friends in person soon


----------



## jelliedfeels

Guys there’s a whole section of TPF for Covid chat. Can we please just stay on topic?


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Guys there’s a whole section of TPF for Covid chat. Can we please just stay on topic?


Discussing Prince Philip is off topic.  Leave the it to the mods.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Guys there’s a whole section of TPF for Covid chat. Can we please just stay on topic?


Yes, but the point of the chat is to remind people that Harry would not have been able to see his grandfather had he decided to come back over the last few months. That rule applies to everyone. 
Anyway, back on topic, I'm glad he is coming back and glad his wife isn't.


----------



## xincinsin

My news feed is full of stories about Prince Philip, DMX, Myanmar and this:








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Use This $8 Tennis Ball Launcher to Play Fetch with Their Pups
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry use the Chuckit ball launcher to play fetch with their dogs. Shop the dog ball launcher on Amazon for less than $10




					people.com
				



Such a face palm moment


----------



## Shopaholic2021

He needs to leave today in order to arrive on Monday in the UK and then do the COVID test on Friday in order to attend the funeral on Saturday. He also needs to have taken a COVID test before departing. I'm not sure if they're making exceptions for attending funerals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> My news feed is full of stories about Prince Philip, DMX, Myanmar and this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Use This $8 Tennis Ball Launcher to Play Fetch with Their Pups
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry use the Chuckit ball launcher to play fetch with their dogs. Shop the dog ball launcher on Amazon for less than $10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Such a face palm moment


Although made in USA, chuck-it is made of the plastic.  Hazzie detests plastic.








						CHUCKIT! Classic Launcher Dog Toy, Color Varies, Original - Chewy.com
					

Buy Chuckit! Classic Launcher Dog Toy, Color Varies, Original at Chewy.com. FREE shipping and the BEST customer service!




					www.chewy.com
				





ETA: Yes, yes, rest assured, every exception will be made for the entitled Prince to attend this funeral. The reconciliation moment must happen!  This distraction is one more reason to dislike this attention-w$ore.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, she would be a distraction if she went....so whatever the excuse or reason, best that she stay home


I agree. The Queen and the Fam have enough to deal with. 

Ginge should stay away also but that would be super bad optics. He better not wear one of his uniforms or medals--you don't belong anymore, Harry, you don't belong.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> I agree. The Queen and the Fam have enough to deal with.
> 
> Ginge should stay away also but that would be super bad optics. He better not wear one of his uniforms or medals--you don't belong anymore, Harry, you don't belong.


He will be able to wear his medals as an ex service personnel but not the honorary ones he may have held. No uniform though but he can wear the blazer of the regiment he served in just like any other ex Army person.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although made in USA, chuck-it is made of the plastic.  Hazzie detests plastic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CHUCKIT! Classic Launcher Dog Toy, Color Varies, Original - Chewy.com
> 
> 
> Buy Chuckit! Classic Launcher Dog Toy, Color Varies, Original at Chewy.com. FREE shipping and the BEST customer service!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chewy.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Yes, yes, rest assured, every exception will be made for the entitled Prince to attend this funeral. The reconciliation moment must happen!  This distraction is one more reason to dislike this attention-w$ore.


He hates plastic unless it’s got an affiliate link back to him.
Fairly sure all that Sussex royal junk he was planning on flogging wasn’t plastic free either


----------



## rose60610

A "CHUCKIT" ?   Hmmm. Can we manufacture a giant CHUCKIT to launch Meghan out of the United States?  That would be a "creative activation" I could live with.


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> A "CHUCKIT" ?   Hmmm. Can we manufacture a giant CHUCKIT to launch Meghan out of the United States?  That would be a "creative activation" I could live with.


“Chuck-it” would be a good name for the bucket we all need.  Someone missed a trick there.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I would say unapologetic over Oprah's interview!
> 
> *PRINCE Harry risks being "permanently divorced" from the Royal Family if he returns to the UK unapologetic over Megxit, a royal biographer has warned.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry risks 'permanent divorce' if he returns to UK unapologetic, expert warns
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry risks being “permanently divorced” from the Royal Family if he returns to the UK unapologetic over Megxit, a royal biographer has warned. The Duke of Sussex is due to atten…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palace is still making excuses for MM, I hope they know what they are doing.
> 
> "_Meanwhile, a Senior Palace Official and Buckingham Palace spokesman__ said that Meghan made "every effort" to travel to the UK for Prince Philip's funeral but doctors told her not to fly.
> 
> The Duchess is heavily pregnant with her second child - and so will not be able to make it to the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral service at St George's Chapel in Windsor Castle next Saturday._"



They're just quoting what's already out/the official line and being diplomatic


----------



## papertiger

floatinglili said:


> Interesting that you can track the change in coverage over time.
> As I recall, isn’t an ‘American-style’ in written journalism meant to be describe a style that is wordy, with long winded sentences, use of first person, and their descriptive impressions, magazine style / editorial. ?
> Or as we would succinctly put it: ‘personal spin’.
> The power of the personality seems more important in US journalism.



Opinion pieces seems to have been replaced by a personality pieces. 

Even opinion pieces/articles/interviews used to hit the ground with a few facts now and again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

Shopaholic2021 said:


> He needs to leave today in order to arrive on Monday in the UK and then do the COVID test on Friday in order to attend the funeral on Saturday. He also needs to have taken a COVID test before departing. I'm not sure if they're making exceptions for attending funerals.




Are the photographers or TMZ set up at LAX???  We need to know.


----------



## lalame

floatinglili said:


> Interesting that you can track the change in coverage over time.
> As I recall, isn’t an ‘American-style’ in written journalism meant to be describe a style that is wordy, with long winded sentences, use of first person, and their descriptive impressions, magazine style / editorial. ?
> Or as we would succinctly put it: ‘personal spin’.
> The power of the personality seems more important in US journalism.



I don’t think that writing style is necessarily ”American-style” but it’s important to recognize the difference between journalism and op Ed/features type of writing which is big here. The money-making culture is big in the US so industry easily goes to what gets the most clicks, engagement, viewers, etc. Sometimes it’s a person and sometimes it’s a topic. And many people here do enjoy watching someone just give their experiences or beliefs so the networks do that too - like Anderson Cooper 360 or Tucker Carlson’s show. Those aren’t really considered news segments, just like Oprah isn’t really considered a journalist. And they tend to stick to the lines that are popular with their audiences. To get real unfiltered news, i wouldn’t look at a morning show, a talk show, a personality-driven show, or most of cable news. That’s more like nightly news... but that gets awfully boring too.


----------



## csshopper

gelbergirl said:


> Are the photographers or TMZ set up at LAX???  We need to know.


Read last night paps are monitoring a private jet owned by the CEO of some touch-freely company parked at a nearby airport. Since I read this before falling asleep, details are sketchy


----------



## csshopper

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm not crying! You all are crying!


Thank you for sharing this! Hard to type with Kleenex clutched in one hand.

What a lovely revelation. No wonder she was able to “keep calm and carry on” knowing this unabashedly adoring man literally “had her back”, two steps behind. I bet as she held his hand through his last days it was the dashing young naval officer she married who she saw before her.

Had to get more Kleenex reading Sophie Wessex comment about Phillip’s passing, “his death was so gentle, it’s just like someone took him by the hand and off he went.”

Sophie is another classy lady, when you think collectively about the women in the RF, Meghan really is the outlier.


----------



## gelbergirl

csshopper said:


> Read last night paps are monitoring a private jet owned by the CEO of some touch-freely company parked at a nearby airport. Since I read this before falling asleep, details are sketchy



Sounds about right.  That's what these two are now, sketchy.
No more pomp and circumstance.


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> I don’t think that writing style is necessarily ”American-style” but it’s important to recognize the difference between journalism and op Ed/features type of writing which is big here. The money-making culture is big in the US so industry easily goes to what gets the most clicks, engagement, viewers, etc. Sometimes it’s a person and sometimes it’s a topic. And many people here do enjoy watching someone just give their experiences or beliefs so the networks do that too - like Anderson Cooper 360 or Tucker Carlson’s show. Those aren’t really considered news segments, just like Oprah isn’t really considered a journalist. And they tend to stick to the lines that are popular with their audiences. To get real unfiltered news, i wouldn’t look at a morning show, a talk show, a personality-driven show, or most of cable news. That’s more like nightly news... but that gets awfully boring too.


I don't believe any televised news is without bias or beyond the focus of the money-making enterprise its heads expect.

I like the news wire services (AP, Reuters, Bloomberg), The Economist, The Atlantic, Politico, Axios, some writers on Vox and the NYT, WaPo. Occasionally will check out how news topics are spun by the left/center/right on AllSides: https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news

But shows like ABC's Good Morning America? Nope.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I still think there is a good chance he doesn’t go. The wording of the notice “H is planning to attend” seemed odd.


----------



## Chagall

rose60610 said:


> A "CHUCKIT" ?   Hmmm. Can we manufacture a giant CHUCKIT to launch Meghan out of the United States?  That would be a "creative activation" I could live with.


Yes by all means ‘launch’ her but not back in our direction.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

A1aGypsy said:


> I still think there is a good chance he doesn’t go. The wording of the notice “H is planning to attend” seemed odd.



Thats what I was thinking, all the announcements say that he planning to go, rather than he has left.


----------



## Chanbal

Pregnant Meghan Markle is the new designation for the duchess 


_*Philip’s funeral will be broadcast to the nation on TV next Saturday, with Charles leading a procession to the chapel at Windsor Castle*

Boris Johnson will not attend the service to allow another member of the family to go in his place.

And pregnant Meghan Markle remains at home in LA after medics said she shouldn't travel - although Prince Harry will return for the service._









						Queen to choose 30 attendees for Philip's funeral due to Covid
					

JUST 30 people will be allowed to attend Prince Philip’s funeral as a result of tough coronavirus restrictions. And while close members of the family will be in attendance, it’s likely …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Thats what I was thinking, all the announcements say that he planning to go, rather than he has left.



I feel like the paps are letting us down. Where is TMZ?  Come on, hustle, get that million dollar shot. How difficult is it?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the disharmony she and her husband caused? fat chance.  and again, much as I dislike her, its a no-win situation for her so best she stay quiet at her mansion in CA



She’ll stay home but what are the chances of her staying quiet? I fully expect she’ll wait a couple months and then release a story about how much she really wanted to go to the funeral but the mean old BRF didn’t make her feel welcome. Boo hoo.


----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> I still think there is a good chance he doesn’t go. The wording of the notice “H is planning to attend” seemed odd.



He will attend according to this video.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Chanbal said:


> He will attend according to this video.




They only know what they have been told. I hope he does but it was an odd turn of phrase for BP to use.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

redney said:


> I don't believe any televised news is without bias or beyond the focus of the money-making enterprise its heads expect.
> 
> I like the news wire services (AP, Reuters, Bloomberg), The Economist, The Atlantic, Politico, Axios, some writers on Vox and the NYT, WaPo. Occasionally will check out how news topics are spun by the left/center/right on AllSides: https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news
> 
> But shows like ABC's Good Morning America? Nope.


I switched to online news after getting tired of reporter's voice changing in pitch depending on the tenor of the each article being read. Once I appropriated Joe Friday's motto, "Just the facts, Ma'am," there was no going back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

csshopper said:


> Thank you for sharing this! Hard to type with Kleenex clutched in one hand.
> 
> What a lovely revelation. No wonder she was able to “keep calm and carry on” knowing this unabashedly adoring man literally “had her back”, two steps behind. I bet as she held his hand through his last days it was the dashing young naval officer she married who she saw before her.
> 
> Had to get more Kleenex reading Sophie Wessex comment about Phillip’s passing, “his death was so gentle, it’s just like someone took him by the hand and off he went.”
> 
> Sophie is another classy lady, when you think collectively about the women in the RF, Meghan really is the outlier.


Thank you, csshopper, but it was *floatinglili *who posted that link, I just reacted. Very moving to read what he wrote about his wife, I agree


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I think Prince William was right to question Harry on his quick engagement and marriage to Meghan. I get the feeling she didn't try to understand how the BRF are and the family dynamics. All families operate differently, some are traditional, some as liberal, some have no boundaries etc. For me, getting to know the family dynamics is so important, and I think Meghan didn't care, she just wanted to get married and have her way. In the interview Harry said he was trapped but he didn't know it, until Meghan came along, which sounds like she manipulated him into thinking this. How can you happy and content for over 30 years and suddenly after getting married realize you're trapped within your family? He has had other girlfriends, and none of them have complained about this, only press intrusion, which all spouses and other halves have had to deal with.


----------



## lalame

redney said:


> I don't believe any televised news is without bias or beyond the focus of the money-making enterprise its heads expect.
> 
> I like the news wire services (AP, Reuters, Bloomberg), The Economist, The Atlantic, Politico, Axios, some writers on Vox and the NYT, WaPo. Occasionally will check out how news topics are spun by the left/center/right on AllSides: https://www.allsides.com/unbiased-balanced-news
> 
> But shows like ABC's Good Morning America? Nope.



I agree that anytime you have a person writing something, there's no way to be entirely bias-free. But with nightly news, that's where you get the straight "XYZ house was burglarized tonight." type of info. It's not that exciting and of course they just don't make that much money compared to Fox, CNN, etc. The media services you mentioned I would consider highly biased, though, and generally left-leaning. One always has to find the baseline and form your own opinions.

All that being said, I think it would be awfully boring if all media was wired like the news agencies. The coverage of Prince Philip's death would basically be a 5 minute thing - "he passed at X time, Y location, and the funeral's planned here." So people who don't like PP wouldn't complain that it's too positive, people who like him wouldn't complain that it's not enough, etc etc. I think we all want SOME creative license... you just have to be clear that you're looking in the right place for what you're looking for.


----------



## Lodpah

Some people are just so cancel culture. I mean what the hell do they have to be offended by next:



			https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.billboard.com/amp/articles/news/9554744/lana-del-rey-prince-philip-queen-elizabeth-photos-backlash


----------



## Lodpah

I’m not going to post the link but there’s a news article saying H&M are a new religion. Please! I imagine H&M are quite pleased with themselves as to their Love Always Wins which to their understanding is destruction and chaos if no one bows at the altar of their greatness. Yeah, let them have their fame and glory but those things wither. They’ve sold their souls.


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> Pregnant Meghan Markle is the new designation for the duchess
> View attachment 5052089
> 
> _*Philip’s funeral will be broadcast to the nation on TV next Saturday, with Charles leading a procession to the chapel at Windsor Castle*
> 
> Boris Johnson will not attend the service to allow another member of the family to go in his place.
> 
> And pregnant Meghan Markle remains at home in LA after medics said she shouldn't travel - although Prince Harry will return for the service._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen to choose 30 attendees for Philip's funeral due to Covid
> 
> 
> JUST 30 people will be allowed to attend Prince Philip’s funeral as a result of tough coronavirus restrictions. And while close members of the family will be in attendance, it’s likely …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Despite the tragedy of a worldwide pandemic,  I am very interested in a royal family funeral where only 30 are able to attend.
This might even be a better tv event than Westminster Abbey packed to the gills


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

queennadine said:


> If a “normal” person wouldn’t be able to attend their grandfather’s funeral in the UK currently, then Harry shouldn’t be able to either. Especially because I’m sure he’s a big proponent of Covid restrictions.
> 
> I DETEST that certain groups of people are exempt from restrictions or flagrantly violate them. It’s the biggest BS in the world and I. Am. Over. It.


I agree with you.

The Orwellian style abuse many ordinary families, due to covid restrictions, have been forced to suffer through under similar circumstances while the elite mask less AND free from police intervention party and vacation on like it's 2019, is heartbreaking and not fit for our supposedly civilised societies.


----------



## lalame

Does anyone else suspect H and probably M are already vaccinated? There have been ad hoc opportunities for people their age in the area. Not to mention, if you believe Law & Order Organized Crime, the wealthy are having high end vaccination parties.


----------



## poopsie

Chagall said:


> Yes by all means ‘launch’ her but not back in our direction.



How far is Chunga Changa?


----------



## maris.crane

Lodpah said:


> Some people are just so cancel culture. I mean what the hell do they have to be offended by next:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.billboard.com/amp/articles/news/9554744/lana-del-rey-prince-philip-queen-elizabeth-photos-backlash



Well, if you read the article - no lies were told by her stans. There were comments made by some in the post about Philip & Elizabeth being related... and they were related. However distantly. Maybe it’s in poor taste to mention Philip’s gaffes and relatives-marrying-relatives in the Royal families, right now when the man’s barely cold in the ground, but this is a bunch of much ado about nothing if people believe Lana is being cancelled for this.

Besides, LDR is already on thin ice due to a previous poorly articulated post she made on Insta. You post something publicly, you open it up to the public form. When she gets dropped from her label or Spotify, maybe then we can call this ‘cancelling.’


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think Prince William was right to question Harry on his quick engagement and marriage to Meghan. I get the feeling she didn't try to understand how the BRF are and the family dynamics. All families operate differently, some are traditional, some as liberal, some have no boundaries etc. For me, getting to know the family dynamics is so important, and I think Meghan didn't care, she just wanted to get married and have her way. In the interview Harry said he was trapped but he didn't know it, until Meghan came along, which sounds like she manipulated him into thinking this. How can you happy and content for over 30 years and suddenly after getting married realize you're trapped within your family? He has had other girlfriends, and none of them have complained about this, only press intrusion, which all spouses and other halves have had to deal with.


Yeah to me, it sounds like something someone who’s been indoctrinated into a cult would say.
“I was so unhappy and I didn’t even know it. Once I surrendered all my money and freedom to the will of great one she showed me the true way. I’ve cut off all my friends and family because they don’t love me like she does and don’t want what’s best for me. I’m soooo happy.” 
Watch out for him wearing a black tracksuit and Nike decades. Seems like he’s already had his castration.

Come to think of it, he does always seem to wear the same outfit... perhaps they are going for grey j crew suits and bare feet at cult HQ this time round,


----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> They only know what they have been told. I hope he does but it was an odd turn of phrase for BP to use.


H and pregnant MM already thanked prince Philip for his service, so they may think they are done... It would be relatively easy to have a nurse traveling with pregnant MM, and there are plenty of hospitals in the UK in case pregnant MM would need medical assistance. However, according to pregnant MM's PR machine, a trip in the comfort of a private jet is not advised for pregnant MM. So today's official version is that he is attending, but pregnant MM is not. We will have to wait to see what pregnant MM decides.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> I agree that anytime you have a person writing something, there's no way to be entirely bias-free. But with nightly news, that's where you get the straight "XYZ house was burglarized tonight." type of info. It's not that exciting and of course they just don't make that much money compared to Fox, CNN, etc. The media services you mentioned I would consider highly biased, though, and generally left-leaning. One always has to find the baseline and form your own opinions.


You think local nightly tv news is not biased? The choice of what to report and descriptions of what happened can be very biased. Even if they are just stating “facts.” It’s no different from print media.


----------



## queennadine

Clearblueskies said:


> Yes they can.  Covid regs are law here   Why are you arguing??  Different countries have different rules.


My intent isn't to argue. Someone (maybe several people?) posted that Harry might defy quarantine rules by flying private, for example. We know that he doesn't think the rules apply to him. I absolutely think he would have found a way to visit his grandfather had he not moved away. Charles just visited the Queen. The PM broke those rules this past week. They didn't get hauled off to the slammer. Just sayin'. Those "laws" are meant for everyone except the elite, like it or not.


----------



## muddledmint

Clearblueskies said:


> Yes they can.  Covid regs are law here   Why are you arguing??  Different countries have different rules.


Maybe this is a difference between American and British culture? All I know is Americans don’t necessarily respect or follow laws if there are no consequences or if they feel strongly opposed to them. This has been made very clear during covid times.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

maris.crane said:


> Well, if you read the article - no lies were told by her stans. There were comments made by some in the post about Philip & Elizabeth being related... and they were related. However distantly.



What these people are actually saying is that they are cousins, though. The way this term is used in everyday language, it usually refers to people whose parents are actual siblings, not to people who share great-great-grandparents. So it annoys me too because I hate how people are bending truth and facts to either fit their narrative or to throw mud.


----------



## Yanca

Present and past living  Ex US Presidents, Various World Leaders, Prime ministers, The Pope have paid tribute to "THE Prince Philip, my favorites so far are  the ones from  President O, Australian PM Scott Morrison and  President T. It really showed the impact and importance of the Queen and Prince Philip in the World.  Megain must be livid with all these attentions and thinking how about my Oprah Interview? and all my sitcom friends who have spoken for me .  Princess Anne said he lived a life well live, a life of service freely given"
I hope that Prince Philip funeral will not be overshadowed by Prince Hazbeen and Megain schemes and attention seeking ways and PR drip,  this is not about them, but the life of a Great Man and the Queens loyal Consort.


----------



## maris.crane

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What these people are actually saying is that they are cousins, though. The way this term is used in everyday language, it usually refers to people whose parents are actual siblings, not to people who share great-great-grandparents. So it annoys me too because I hate how people are bending truth and facts to either fit their narrative or to throw mud.



Certainly - it’s in poor taste to focus on this man’s ills, especially when he’s been dead... what 72 hours?

But wailing that is proof positive of ‘cancel culture!!!’ downright bizarre.


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> Well if she were to *ahem start bleeding* she wouldn’t be cleared to fly either.  I’m waiting for Wednesday or so for her to have preterm contractions or vaginal bleeding which will require Harry to do the chivalrous thing and rush to his heavily pregnant wife’s hospital bedside so he can comfort her with cuddles.
> I just threw up a little in my mouth as I wrote that


NO, he will “cradle” her. Remember?


----------



## Clearblueskies

muddledmint said:


> Maybe this is a difference between American and British culture? All I know is Americans don’t necessarily respect or follow laws if there are no consequences or if they feel strongly opposed to them. This has been made very clear during covid times.


I think it’s that many people on this forum assume everyones American and/or that everyone should want to do it their way.  It ain’t so.


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> My intent isn't to argue. Someone (maybe several people?) posted that Harry might defy quarantine rules by flying private, for example. We know that he doesn't think the rules apply to him. I absolutely think he would have found a way to visit his grandfather had he not moved away. Charles just visited the Queen. The PM broke those rules this past week. They didn't get hauled off to the slammer. Just sayin'. Those "laws" are meant for everyone except the elite, like it or not.


The current rules do allow people to travel to a funeral.  They have to quarantine, take a test, etc etc etc.


----------



## csshopper

floatinglili said:


> Surprisingly touching story here - unfortunately behind a paywall but I will paste an excerpt:
> 
> Secret love story the public never saw
> - by Anne  Barrowclough
> 
> ‘Patricia Mountbatten, the couple’s mutual cousin, told biographer Sally Bedell Jones; “Philip had a capacity for love which was waiting to be unlocked.”’
> 
> - he gave up smoking on the day of his wedding? I Stan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NoCookies | The Australian
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theaustralian.com.au


Coming back to say "thank you for posting this". I linked my original post thanking you to SomethingGoodCanWork with a wrong click on the keyboard.


----------



## lalame

muddledmint said:


> You think local nightly tv news is not biased? The choice of what to report and descriptions of what happened can be very biased. Even if they are just stating “facts.” It’s no different from print media.



I'm not saying it's entirely unbiased - I did say any show where it's scripted or written by a person, it's not possible to avoid some prioritization or bias. But it's much less biased than personality-driven shows... we don't watch to hear what that particular person thinks about things, but about what's going on. It's all about degrees.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> H and pregnant MM already thanked prince Philip for his service, so they may think they are done... It would be relatively easy to have a nurse traveling with *heavily *pregnant MM, and there are plenty of hospitals in the UK in case *heavily* pregnant MM would need medical assistance. However, according to *heavily* pregnant MM's PR machine, a trip in the comfort of a private jet is not advised for *heavily* pregnant MM. So today's official version is that he is attending, but *heavily* pregnant MM is not. We will have to wait to see what *heavily* pregnant MM decides.


Fixed that for you.


----------



## Sharont2305

queennadine said:


> My intent isn't to argue. Someone (maybe several people?) posted that Harry might defy quarantine rules by flying private, for example. We know that he doesn't think the rules apply to him. I absolutely think he would have found a way to visit his grandfather had he not moved away. Charles just visited the Queen. The PM broke those rules this past week. They didn't get hauled off to the slammer. Just sayin'. Those "laws" are meant for everyone except the elite, like it or not.


His other grandchildren and children weren't allowed to visit, why would he be allowed?


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Because the US media these days is made up of celebrity-worshipping puppets.



THIS!  ... I think that's how it's done, never done THIS! before.  THIS!! THIS!!  I totally agree!


----------



## V0N1B2

queennadine said:


> My intent isn't to argue. Someone (maybe several people?) posted that Harry might defy quarantine rules by flying private, for example. We know that he doesn't think the rules apply to him. I absolutely think he would have found a way to visit his grandfather had he not moved away. Charles just visited the Queen. The PM broke those rules this past week. They didn't get hauled off to the slammer. Just sayin'. Those "laws" are meant for everyone except the elite, like it or not.


Of course he would have. There was no reason Harry couldn't have flown to the UK when his grandfather was first reported to be ill. He is a subject of the British Empire and still a citizen, holding a UK passport. I don't believe he can be denied entry into the country in which he holds citizenship.
He didn't even have to break any official rules.  Book a flight to Heathrow, quarantine for 14 days and then go about his business. Seriously, who do you think was on those thousands and thousands of planes landing at LHR over the last month? They weren't empty planes. Even Prince Charles flew to Greece last month and managed to be allowed back into the country, did he not? John Kerry just returned from a trip to London, not to mention a meeting with Charles at Clarence House. I think we all know that Meghan would not have allowed him to be away from Montecito that long.  Besides, who would feed and nurture the chickens and sit there looking like a dolt on national TV with their bestie Oprah?
Regardless, I hope he regrets it for the rest of his life, and the guilt eats away at him for an eternity. Maybe it'll be a lesson on compassion he can teach his children in the future if Meghan allows him visitation rights after the divorce.
He's a sack of sh!t - I think that something everyone can agree on.


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince Philip: How can Prince Harry attend the funeral?
					

The Duke of Sussex has returned to the UK for the first time since "stepping back" from royal duties.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The US media is very very polarizing. I noticed that CNN didn't look at all the holes in the interview and sympathized with the race angle Meghan had taken. A lot of celebrities did the same. It's the new 'woke' culture. Daily mail and Fox news went the opposite way. It's really hard to find a media outlet that can be objective and look at facts rather that spin things towards their agenda. I still read some UK newspapers and the BBC.
> 
> I think of myself as a feminist and anti-racist, but I saw many holes in the interview and I think she is using race to get people to sympathize with her. Thats her ***** card if things don't go her way. She has never once mentioned it before. And Harry mentioned that the BRF are the family she never had, and now they are bashing that family because they don't get to be the centre of attention.



THIS!!  THIS !!


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Of course he would have. There was no reason Harry couldn't have flown to the UK when his grandfather was first reported to be ill. He is a subject of the British Empire and still a citizen, holding a UK passport. I don't believe he can be denied entry into the country in which he holds citizenship.
> He didn't even have to break any official rules.  Book a flight to Heathrow, quarantine for 14 days and then go about his business. Seriously, who do you think was on those thousands and thousands of planes landing at LHR over the last month? They weren't empty planes. Even Prince Charles flew to Greece last month and managed to be allowed back into the country, did he not? John Kerry just returned from a trip to London, not to mention a meeting with Charles at Clarence House. I think we all know that Meghan would not have allowed him to be away from Montecito that long.  Besides, who would feed and nurture the chickens and sit there looking like a dolt on national TV with their bestie Oprah?
> Regardless, I hope he regrets it for the rest of his life, and the guilt eats away at him for an eternity. Maybe it'll be a lesson on compassion he can teach his children in the future if Meghan allows him visitation rights after the divorce.
> He's a sack of sh!t - I think that something everyone can agree on.


Amen!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

Sharont2305 said:


> His other grandchildren and children weren't allowed to visit, why would he be allowed?


On what basis were they not allowed to visit? The current rules saying you must not meet indoors with anybody you do not live with? Because that was broken by Charles and the Queen a day or two ago. So if some people can break rules one day, why can't others break them another day?
Anyway, I'm done talking about Covid restrictions. Not much of an issue where I live, thankfully.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

muddledmint said:


> Americans don’t necessarily respect or follow laws



American's are very sensitive to their freedom which may be due to the past (fighting for freedom from the British etc), so they don't like to be told what to do, and I think a lot of American's may feel that the covid restrictions/rules are a violation of their freedom. And there has been a degree of politicalization of the pandemic too which hasn't helped.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Just got a news flash that Harry has landed back in the UK giving him the necessary 5 days quarantine. Wonder where he will do that though  ? I wonder if he's expecting a flunky to organise his suit.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> I'm not saying it's entirely unbiased - I did say any show where it's scripted or written by a person, it's not possible to avoid some prioritization or bias. But it's much less biased than personality-driven shows... we don't watch to hear what that particular person thinks about things, but about what's going on. It's all about degrees.


Actually, bias in this type of news might have an even more insidious and powerful effect than outright opinion commentary. People are lulled into thinking it’s factual and objective. This is just one example, but when the news is constantly covering rising crime in certain neighborhoods and with certain types of perpetrators and certain other types of victims, and especially if they use certain pejorative terms like hoodies or gangs or whatever, this can make people have subconscious feelings of fear, blame, and disgust. This can subtly affect people who pride themselves on being non racist and liberal and abhor Fox News etc.


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> NO, he will “cradle” her. Remember?


You are right.  My apologies.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

muddledmint said:


> NO, he will “cradle” her. Remember?



She was applauded for her Op-ed on her miscarriage. She claimed it was to help others going through the same thing and also to break the stigma, which I found odd since I see no stigma attached to having a miscarriage. Miscarriages are very common, especially early on, that's why most people wait 12 weeks before announcing pregnancy. It was such a dramatic piece of writing


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think Prince William was right to question Harry on his quick engagement and marriage to Meghan. I get the feeling she didn't try to understand how the BRF are and the family dynamics. All families operate differently, some are traditional, some as liberal, some have no boundaries etc. For me, getting to know the family dynamics is so important, and I think Meghan didn't care, she just wanted to get married and have her way. In the interview Harry said he was trapped but he didn't know it, until Meghan came along, which sounds like she manipulated him into thinking this. How can you happy and content for over 30 years and suddenly after getting married realize you're trapped within your family? He has had other girlfriends, and none of them have complained about this, only press intrusion, which all spouses and other halves have had to deal with.


Harry is trapped all right, but not in the way he thinks.  It's not the BRF he's trapped into, it's Markledom.


----------



## bellecate

Took this piece form




__





						Latest UK and World News, Sport and Comment - Express.co.uk
					

Latest news, showbiz, sport, comment, lifestyle, city, video and pictures from the Daily Express and Sunday Express newspapers and Express.co.uk




					www.express.co.uk
				




"The Duke of Sussex is entitled to attend his grandfather's funeral due to a provision in the law that allows mourners to leave quarantine on "compassionate" grounds.
The palace confirmed on Saturday the duke would be making the journey, although Meghan - who is heavily pregnant with their second child - has been advised against flying.
It is understood he will be following all procedure to ensure he complies with Covid regulations.
But as the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral is due to take place next Saturday, Harry will not have time to complete the quarantine period.

The rules, however, do allow a person to temporarily leave their place of quarantine on compassionate grounds - which includes funerals."


----------



## Shopaholic2021

RAINDANCE said:


> Just got a news flash that Harry has landed back in the UK giving him the necessary 5 days quarantine. Wonder where he will do that though  ? I wonder if he's expecting a flunky to organise his suit.



I wonder if he went private given he is so passionate about climate change and sustainability , or was he forced to go private because of security risk.


----------



## lalame

muddledmint said:


> Actually, bias in this type of news might have an even more insidious and powerful effect than outright opinion commentary. People are lulled into thinking it’s factual and objective. This is just one example, but when the news is constantly covering rising crime in certain neighborhoods and with certain types of perpetrators and certain other types of victims, and especially if they use certain pejorative terms like hoodies or gangs or whatever, this can make people have subconscious feelings of fear, blame, and disgust. This can subtly affect people who pride themselves on being non racist and liberal and abhor Fox News etc.



You're not wrong, but I still think it's inherently less biased than a show for example built on literally the ideas or personality of a person like Oprah or Tucker Carlson. I like some of those too - there's a time and place for everything - but it's impossible not to be constantly aware that they are obviously choosing what to talk about, it's their specific ideas on it, etc.

At the end of the day... what do you do? Avoid ALL news or media? Only believe what you personally witness? No, the only thing you can do is consume a combination of shows/mags that you think give you the clearest picture. None is perfect... and of course, the viewer has his/her own bias too which may add to how they absorb the info in the first place.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> She was applauded for her Op-ed on her miscarriage. She claimed it was to help others going through the same thing and also to break the stigma, which I found odd since I see no stigma attached to having a miscarriage. Miscarriages are very common, especially early on, that's why most people wait 12 weeks before announcing pregnancy. It was such a dramatic piece of writing



I think there's still a stigma attached to miscarriages. Just because they're common doesn't mean there's no stigma... lots of common things still have a negative stigma. I was just talking to my friends this morning that even c-sections have way too much stigma attached, and that's the most common surgical practice for women (in the US at least).


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Of course he would have. There was no reason Harry couldn't have flown to the UK when his grandfather was first reported to be ill. He is a subject of the British Empire and still a citizen, holding a UK passport. I don't believe he can be denied entry into the country in which he holds citizenship.
> He didn't even have to break any official rules.  Book a flight to Heathrow, quarantine for 14 days and then go about his business. Seriously, who do you think was on those thousands and thousands of planes landing at LHR over the last month? They weren't empty planes. Even Prince Charles flew to Greece last month and managed to be allowed back into the country, did he not? John Kerry just returned from a trip to London, not to mention a meeting with Charles at Clarence House. I think we all know that Meghan would not have allowed him to be away from Montecito that long.  Besides, who would feed and nurture the chickens and sit there looking like a dolt on national TV with their bestie Oprah?
> Regardless, I hope he regrets it for the rest of his life, and the guilt eats away at him for an eternity. Maybe it'll be a lesson on compassion he can teach his children in the future if Meghan allows him visitation rights after the divorce.
> He's a sack of sh!t - I think that something everyone can agree on.


ITA!  He's been gone from the UK since last March.  He couldn't spare a couple weeks from his word salad duties and chickens, and throwing balls to his pup on the beach to go visit his elderly grandparents that he had such a "close bond" with?  Puh-leeze.  I'm no royal, but if I had his time and luxury and an ailing grandparent, you can bet my bottom dollar I'd have found a way to visit.  These two are FOS.  (Full of $hit.)


----------



## muddledmint

Shopaholic2021 said:


> American's are very sensitive to their freedom which may be due to the past (fighting for freedom from the British etc), so they don't like to be told what to do, and I think a lot of American's may feel that the covid restrictions/rules are a violation of their freedom. And there has been a degree of politicalization of the pandemic too which hasn't helped.


On the one hand, it’s good to question things and not follow blindly. On the other hand, are Americans being dumb and sheeplike to have certain set in stone views just because they belong to one party or the other? The protest against wearing masks, for example, is not really about freedom, it’s about political tribalism. It’s just another manifestation of following blindly without reason. To bring this back to Meghan and Harry, it is completely ridiculous that to a large degree only conservatives have critical commentary on the Oprah interview, while liberal media is ignoring all the inconsistencies and praising her for being an anti racist hero taking on the evil British royal family. Everyone is being sheep.


----------



## pukasonqo

As somebody pointed out MM is having a “geriatric” pregnancy which has its own risks so it is very likely she wouldn’t be cleared to travel
When I was pregnant w my son I had to provide a medical certificate clearing me to fly (1 1/2 hrs) from Sydney to Queensland as I was over 6 months pregnant
So yup, it is considered risky to travel by plane when pregnant and as we age the risks increase (although I was 26 at the time)


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Does anyone else suspect H and probably M are already vaccinated? There have been ad hoc opportunities for people their age in the area. Not to mention, if you believe Law & Order Organized Crime, the wealthy are having high end vaccination parties.



I’d be shocked if they were not vaccinated. Oprah has gone on record as saying she only left her estate twice last year after the restrictions began, once for a mammogram and once for a necessary doctor’s appointment. She made Stedman quarantine for two weeks in another building on the property when he came back from a trip.

I know they sat six feet apart during the interview but they were much closer walking unmasked around the chicken coop. There is no way in hell Oprah didn’t make sure Meghan and Harry were vaccinated. She’s their freakin’ fairy godmother after all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

muddledmint said:


> Actually, bias in this type of news might have an even more insidious and powerful effect than outright opinion commentary. People are lulled into thinking it’s factual and objective. This is just one example, but when the news is constantly covering rising crime in certain neighborhoods and with certain types of perpetrators and certain other types of victims, and especially if they use certain pejorative terms like hoodies or gangs or whatever, this can make people have subconscious feelings of fear, blame, and disgust. This can subtly affect people who pride themselves on being non racist and liberal and abhor Fox News etc.


Is this the purseforum or did I wander onto 4chan or Breitbart?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

muddledmint said:


> it is completely ridiculous that to a large degree only conservatives have critical commentary on the Oprah interview, while liberal media is ignoring all the inconsistencies and praising her for being an anti racist hero taking on the evil British royal family. Everyone is being sheep.



This is what I noticed too, everything is turning political.


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> I think there's still a stigma attached to miscarriages. Just because they're common doesn't mean there's no stigma... lots of common things still have a negative stigma. I was just talking to my friends this morning that even c-sections have way too much stigma attached, and that's the most common surgical practice for women (in the US at least).


I think the stigma is not necessarily over having a miscarriage, but instead more for talking about it publicly and showing “excessive” grief over it. The stigma is that miscarriages are a private matter, sort of like dirty laundry, and not a subject for airing in polite society. It’s a bit old fashioned and misogynistic.


----------



## Lodpah

maris.crane said:


> Well, if you read the article - no lies were told by her stans. There were comments made by some in the post about Philip & Elizabeth being related... and they were related. However distantly. Maybe it’s in poor taste to mention Philip’s gaffes and relatives-marrying-relatives in the Royal families, right now when the man’s barely cold in the ground, but this is a bunch of much ado about nothing if people believe Lana is being cancelled for this.
> 
> Besides, LDR is already on thin ice due to a previous poorly articulated post she made on Insta. You post something publicly, you open it up to the public form. When she gets dropped from her label or Spotify, maybe then we can call this ‘cancelling.’
> 
> I’m not sure.


----------



## Lodpah

All the balcony pics are the 2016 ones without MM on all the news I’ve seen that’s being regurgitated.


----------



## lalame

muddledmint said:


> I think the stigma is not necessarily over having a miscarriage, but instead more for talking about it publicly and showing “excessive” grief over it. The stigma is that miscarriages are a private matter, sort of like dirty laundry, and not a subject for airing in polite society. It’s a bit old fashioned and misogynistic.



Yes, totally agree, that's what I meant... the stigma isn't against moms but about the issue of having a miscarriage in general. It's very much "that thing we don't talk about" - even if the parents DO want to talk about it. So in that way I think M did make a statement by putting it out there in such a public way... like what Angelina Jolie did with breast cancer or Katie Couric did with colonoscopies. I have a hard time criticizing what she said however I do think it's pretty misguided to blast private news out there and then keep lamenting lack of privacy.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Yes, totally agree, that's what I meant... the stigma isn't against moms but about the issue of having a miscarriage in general. It's very much "that thing we don't talk about" - even if the parents DO want to talk about it. So in that way I think M did make a statement by putting it out there in such a public way... like what Angelina Jolie did with breast cancer or Katie Couric did with colonoscopies. I have a hard time criticizing what she said however I do think it's pretty misguided to blast private news out there and then keep lamenting lack of privacy.



To me it felt like a very dramatic article, rather than a candid article. I did not get the impression that she wrote it to help others, but more to bring attention on her. I could be wrong, but the details in the article were very dramatic and it felt like I was reading a piece from a fiction novel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Still no photos, just eyewitness accounts. The ‘heavily pregnant‘ one is not with him:









						Harry returns to UK for Philip's funeral without pregnant wife Meghan
					

Eyewitnesses reportedly saw the Duke of Sussex disembark a BA flight from Los Angeles to the west London airport at around 1.15pm on Sunday while wearing chinos, a jacket and black face mask.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Where *are *the paps?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Where *are *the paps?


All scared of pregnant MM.


----------



## bag-mania

muddledmint said:


> I think the stigma is not necessarily over having a miscarriage, but instead more for talking about it publicly and showing “excessive” grief over it. The stigma is that miscarriages are a private matter, sort of like dirty laundry, and not a subject for airing in polite society. It’s a bit old fashioned and misogynistic.



Since we live in the era of social media oversharing, what does a woman get out of putting her miscarriage details  out there for public consumption? Most rational people are already sad when a friend or family member goes through it. Maybe I’m jaded but when a celebrity publicly does her miscarriage story I think she is looking for attention and sympathy first and foremost.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> Yes, totally agree, that's what I meant... the stigma isn't against moms but about the issue of having a miscarriage in general. It's very much "that thing we don't talk about" - even if the parents DO want to talk about it. So in that way I think M did make a statement by putting it out there in such a public way... like what Angelina Jolie did with breast cancer or Katie Couric did with colonoscopies. I have a hard time criticizing what she said however I do think it's pretty misguided to blast private news out there and then keep lamenting lack of privacy.


The problem I had with MM's situation was that as usual, she was jumping on the band wagon after multiple other celebrities talked about their miscarriages.  It's like she has to stick her foot in there, "Look at me!  Look at me!"  I still highly doubt this even occurred, as I don't put it past her.  She throws out things that if questioned (miscarriage, suicide, racism), the questioner looks like a jerk, and she claims to things that are not able to be disputed, since the BRF won't comment, and her OBGYN can not legally call her out.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> To me it felt like a very dramatic article, rather than a candid article. I did not get the impression that she wrote it to help others, but more to bring attention on her. I could be wrong, but the details in the article were very dramatic and it felt like I was reading a piece from a fiction novel.



I didn't even read it so I can't argue with you there.  I can't stand reading their stuff.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> To me it felt like a very dramatic article, rather than a candid article. I did not get the impression that she wrote it to help others, but more to bring attention on her. I could be wrong, *but the details in the article were very dramatic and it felt like I was reading a piece from a fiction novel.*


I believe she plagiarized portions of it!


----------



## muddledmint

lalame said:


> You're not wrong, but I still think it's inherently less biased than a show for example built on literally the ideas or personality of a person like Oprah or Tucker Carlson. I like some of those too - there's a time and place for everything - but it's impossible not to be constantly aware that they are obviously choosing what to talk about, it's their specific ideas on it, etc.
> 
> At the end of the day... what do you do? Avoid ALL news or media? Only believe what you personally witness? No, the only thing you can do is consume a combination of shows/mags that you think give you the clearest picture. None is perfect... and of course, the viewer has his/her own bias too which may add to how they absorb the info in the first place.


I guess you have to choose what sources to consume. At it’s worst this can turn into an echo chamber of people preaching to the choir. Or try consume some of everything and try to digest it down to what you think is the truth. It wouldn’t be as much of a problem if kids were still taught to have independent, critical minds, but that no longer seems to be the priority of education nowadays. I sound like an old fogey and not a millennial, lol.


----------



## lalame

I'm watching the Hulu documentary on WeWork now and it's just so apparent that there's a huge Cult of Personality problem in the US. Maybe other places too, but I can't speak to that. But just like with Adam Neumann, I think once you touch a certain level of skepticism then the entire media and public opinion will change really fast against that person. We haven't gotten there yet with H+M but I do see some signs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

We should be discussing where the paps are, no?  Hazzie is in the UK. Photos, we need photos.

@Chanbal  she will forever be known as the ‘heavily pregnant’ one, along with green ensemble.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Since we live in the era of social media oversharing, what does a woman get out of putting her miscarriage details  out there for public consumption? Most rational people are already sad when a friend or family member goes through it. Maybe I’m jaded but when a celebrity publicly does her miscarriage story I think she is looking for attention and sympathy first and foremost.



Especially when she drew, uhm, _inspiration_ from both a movie and a memoir.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> We should be discussing where the paps are, no?  Hazzie is in the UK. Photos, we need photos.
> 
> Sunshine Sachs must have dropped the hammer on him and he flew commercial, not private.
> Speculation is they made room for him at Kensington Palace, I think he should have been told to pitch a tent.
> 
> *Prince Harry returns to UK for Prince Philip's funeral without pregnant wife Meghan Markle as he is spotted at Heathrow after taking British Airways flight from Los Angeles*
> 
> *Prince Harry was spotted at London Heathrow Airport on Sunday at 1.15pm without Meghan Markle*
> *Duke of Sussex was seen disembarking a BA flight from LA to the west London airport in black face mask *
> *Meghan reportedly wanted to join Harry for Philip's funeral but was discouraged by her physician    *
> *Philip died peacefully in his sleep at Windsor Castle on Friday, two months before his 100th birthday*


----------



## RAINDANCE

Yanca said:


> Present and past living  Ex US Presidents, Various World Leaders, Prime ministers, The Pope have paid tribute to "THE Prince Philip, my favorites so far are  the ones from  President O, Australian PM Scott Morrison and  President T. It really showed the impact and importance of the Queen and Prince Philip in the World.  Megain must be livid with all these attentions and thinking how about my Oprah Interview? and all my sitcom friends who have spoken for me .  Princess Anne said he lived a life well live, a life of service freely given"
> I hope that Prince Philip funeral will not be overshadowed by Prince Hazbeen and Megain schemes and attention seeking ways and PR drip,  this is not about them, but the life of a Great Man and the Queens loyal Consort.


Wonderfully expressed. The O"s message, and that of the  King of Spain were particularly moving. 
There are 195 independent countries in the world and I would imagine that virtually all paid their respects using more than 2 short sentences.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has this been posted?


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Still no photos, just eyewitness accounts. The ‘heavily pregnant‘ one is not with him:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry returns to UK for Philip's funeral without pregnant wife Meghan
> 
> 
> Eyewitnesses reportedly saw the Duke of Sussex disembark a BA flight from Los Angeles to the west London airport at around 1.15pm on Sunday while wearing chinos, a jacket and black face mask.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where *are *the paps?


There could be a press blackout agreed to ensure reporting related to H&M does not overshadow this week, which is an official period of mourning. Similar to the agreements which exist generally 're. Pap photos of the children.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?



Love the Meghan "Pinocchio" Markle, LOL!  Although I could justify calling her Meghan "Geppetto" Markle as well, since she took Harry from a wooden, brainless figure into one who thinks he's a real man!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?




Well, that explains which royals have been reaching out and with which kind of support, because I just couldn't see William texting "Well done, Piers!", even if he secretly thought so.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Yes, totally agree, that's what I meant... the stigma isn't against moms but about the issue of having a miscarriage in general. It's very much "that thing we don't talk about" - even if the parents DO want to talk about it. So in that way I think M did make a statement by putting it out there in such a public way... like what Angelina Jolie did with breast cancer or Katie Couric did with colonoscopies. I have a hard time criticizing what she said however I do think it's pretty misguided to blast private news out there and then keep lamenting lack of privacy.


If paraphrasing the scene from steel magnolias in detail is going to be the new norm for talking about a sensitive issue maybe it remaining a stigma is the best answer.

But seriously. Slightly OT but I’m sort of against this idea that celebrities speaking out to ‘raise awareness’ is always a good thing.

1. Their lives are so rarefied that they can’t really empathise. MM never had to worry about trying to negotiate for compassionate leave during a busy time or anything like that.

2. They aren’t experts in the field and they can give some pretty bad advice even with the best of intentions. I’m certain H&M lectures about mental health are actually doing more harm than good because they don’t give any relevant information about the recovery process at all - they just focus on the drama and the trauma.
Often the thing that makes a celeb story compelling isn’t the best example of what to do in the situation.

3. There are several conditions where it’s suspected that exposure to media coverage of the problem aggravates it. eating disorders are a good example of this. It has been suggested that even coverage of anorexia which aimed to prevent the condition and encourage healthy habits actually stimulates harmful behaviour in anorexics. 
4. Linked to this, if someone is just reading a celeb forum or a mag or whatever for news on a star I can see why it might give them worse ptsd flashbacks if they suddenly see them talking about the trauma in question than if they have had a chance to prepare themselves. I just don’t think the frothy avenues of celeb chat are always a good place for these weighty issues.


----------



## Lodpah

RAINDANCE said:


> There could be a press blackout agreed to ensure reporting related to H&M does not overshadow this week, which is an official period of mourning. Similar to the agreements which exist generally 're. Pap photos of the children.


Yep, I read there's a black out on these tow so that these two don't overshadow the funeral. Also read that as royals their background on their "tribute" should have been black, not brown. If MM and Harry are throwing shade at the BRF and any connotations are suggested, then I think these two are worse than I thought, like stratosphere worse, not ignorant worse.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> If paraphrasing the scene from steel magnolias in detail is going to be the new norm for talking about a sensitive issue maybe it remaining a stigma is the best answer.
> 
> But seriously. Slightly OT but I’m sort of against this idea that celebrities speaking out to ‘raise awareness’ is always a good thing.
> 
> 1. Their lives are so rarefied that they can’t really empathise. MM never had to worry about trying to negotiate for compassionate leave during a busy time or anything like that.
> 
> 2. They aren’t experts in the field and they can give some pretty bad advice even with the best of intentions. I’m certain H&M lectures about mental health are actually doing more harm than good because they don’t give any relevant information about the recovery process at all - they just focus on the drama and the trauma.
> Often the thing that makes a celeb story compelling isn’t the best example of what to do in the situation.
> 
> 3. There are several conditions where it’s suspected that exposure to media coverage of the problem aggravates it. eating disorders are a good example of this. It has been suggested that even coverage of anorexia which aimed to prevent the condition and encourage healthy habits actually stimulates harmful behaviour in anorexics.
> 4. Linked to this, if someone is just reading a celeb forum or a mag or whatever for news on a star I can see why it might give them worse ptsd flashbacks if they suddenly see them talking about the trauma in question than if they have had a chance to prepare themselves. I just don’t think the frothy avenues of celeb chat are always a good place for these weighty issues.



I think the problem is there's so much info out there, it doesn't always reach people. For example of course plenty of normal women or doctors have written about their experiences with miscarriages or breast cancer etc., but they don't really make the news so unless you seek it out you just don't learn about them. I never even thought about colonoscopies before Katie Couric made a big thing of it. Did I take it to be medical advice or think I could get the same level of care she did? No, but I learned something about my health and I think that's a net benefit to me and I imagine other people like me.

You're right that there are a lot of risks of misinformation - like Gwyneth Paltrow is a big offender - but that goes to how you're writing/displaying your experience. No guarantees if it's a celeb or normal person.

I'm not defending M's op-ed specifically as I didn't read it, so I'm just commenting on the overall topic of miscarriage stigma or celebrity op-eds on health issues.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@CarryOn2020 
@Chanbal  she will forever be known as the ‘heavily pregnant’ one, along with green ensemble.   

Here we go, I hope this works. 



ET fix quotes


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Chanbal  she will forever be known as the ‘heavily pregnant’ one, along with green ensemble.


Here we go, I hope this works. 
View attachment 5052270

Thanks to you, I'll be needing Depends years before I anticipated!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DP


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Here we go, I hope this works.
> View attachment 5052270


Thanks to you, I'll be needing Depends years before I anticipated!  
[/QUOTE]
Sometimes they go on sale at the stores!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

You know what my problem with this thread is?  I'm running out of adjectives to describe the stupidity and annoying aspects of these two, without being crude.

Yes, that's right.  So far, I've been nice.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Thanks to you, I'll be needing Depends years before I anticipated!
> Sometimes they go on sale at the stores!


Hopefully they have double coupons too.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, that explains which royals have been reaching out and with which kind of support, because I just couldn't see William texting "Well done, Piers!", even if he secretly thought so.


We all know Fergie knows which side her bread is buttered after it didn’t work in LA last time  


lalame said:


> I think the problem is there's so much info out there, it doesn't always reach people. For example of course plenty of normal women or doctors have written about their experiences with miscarriages or breast cancer etc., but they don't really make the news so unless you seek it out you just don't learn about them. I never even thought about colonoscopies before Katie Couric made a big thing of it. Did I take it to be medical advice or think I could get the same level of care she did? No, but I learned something about my health and I think that's a net benefit to me and I imagine other people like me.
> 
> You're right that there are a lot of risks of misinformation - like Gwyneth Paltrow is a big offender - but that goes to how you're writing/displaying your experience. No guarantees if it's a celeb or normal person.
> 
> I'm not defending M's op-ed specifically as I didn't read it, so I'm just commenting on the overall topic of miscarriage stigma or celebrity op-eds on health issues.


Well I think colonoscopies are a little different to mental health issues because learning about a colonoscopy isn’t going to aggravate either a healthy or diseased....area. 
It seems more and more to me like that is not true of mental health issues and that bad advice and/or unrealistic expectations do make mental disorders worse and that we should be much more careful with how we raise awareness of them.

I don’t think you are defending MM don’t worry!
we must be a healthy bunch as the sugars are in short supply!

edit- removed an example I think is too upsetting and irrelevant to thread.


----------



## csshopper

Published in an article today, a life long friend shared this quote from Prince Phillip, " 'It's a big mistake to think about yourself. No one is interested in you in the long run. Don't court popularity. It doesn't last. Remember that the attention comes because of the position you are privileged to hold, not because of who you are. If you think it's all about you, you'll never be happy'."

Seventy years ago when I was in elementary school if we were caught misbehaving we had to write "I will not-----(whatever it was)" 100 times on paper or, if it was really bad, on a special section of the blackboard for a public shaming of sorts. 

Fast forward: Someone should invade the Montecito Chateau and in glorious calligraphy inscribe this over the mirrors in all 16 bathrooms so it could never be missed and Meghan would have to read it multiple times daily. An "in your face" reminder to  the Duchess of Dubious Fame, any attention you get is all through your husband by right of his birth. It may come to pass,  "no one will be interested in you in the long run."


----------



## CobaltBlu

Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.  

Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.  

In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!   

I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store. 

Humbly yours, CB


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB


welcome back
I'm sure someone can give you bullet points but the short version is H is going to the funeral and M is staying at the mansion due to being very pregnant


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Published in an article today, a life long friend shared this quote from Prince Phillip, " 'It's a big mistake to think about yourself. No one is interested in you in the long run. Don't court popularity. It doesn't last. Remember that the attention comes because of the position you are privileged to hold, not because of who you are. If you think it's all about you, you'll never be happy'."



Hmmm this made me think about how M+H named their foundation after their child, versus the other royal foundations which have roles or issues in their title. Maybe one manifestation of this difference in philosophies? LMK if I'm wrong and there are exceptions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> welcome back
> I'm sure someone can give you bullet points but the short version is H is going to the funeral and M is staying at the mansion due to being very   *Heavily* pregnant



Fixed it for ya


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB



Congratulations on your new house!!!   How exciting!

Bullet points?  Ok, here goes:

1.) Meghan is heavily pregnant so "not permitted" to fly to PP's funeral
2.) Haz just landed in London for said funeral
3.) Meghan is heavily pregnant
4.) COVID restrictions have been discussed ad nauseam 
5.) Meghan is heavily pregnant
6.) Fergie is rooting for Piers
7.) Meghan is heavily pregnant
8.) Meghan is heavily pregnant

I think you're all caught up!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fixed it for ya


LOL
I stand corrected


----------



## CarryOn2020

I do hope UK tv and radio are blasting away at Hazzie, in that understated way only the Brits can do.  He needs to know how important it is for all of us that he behaves appropriately and leaves W&K alone. Also, we have had enough of the gruesome twosome. 
 









						No uniform for Prince Harry at the funeral of his grandfather
					

Prince Harry is unlikely to wear a military uniform at his grandfather's funeral. He was stripped of his role as Captain General of the Royal Marines after deciding to quit royal duties last year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

Shopaholic2021 said:


> He needs to leave today in order to arrive on Monday in the UK and then do the COVID test on Friday in order to attend the funeral on Saturday. He also needs to have taken a COVID test before departing. I'm not sure if they're making exceptions for attending funerals.


Agree ... I'd wish they would have taken two tests upon departure, two when needed and two before funeral with the longest swab pole stick found ... to be sure there's no false negatives.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> welcome back
> I'm sure someone can give you bullet points but the short version is H is going to the funeral and M is staying at the mansion due to being *not welcome*


Another tweak!


----------



## bellecate

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB


Welcome back.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree ... I'd wish they would have taken two tests upon departure, two when needed and two before funeral with the longest swab pole stick found ... to be sure there's no false negatives.


I think after all Haz has done, he deserves to have the new "rectal swab" done instead.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> I think after all Haz has done, he deserves to have the new "rectal swab" done instead.


THIS!!!  Agree!


----------



## bag-mania

I just saw on the NBC evening news that Harry was believed to be on his way to the UK. Has it been confirmed that he was already there?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I just saw on the NBC evening news that Harry was believed to be on his way to the UK. Has it been confirmed that he was already there?


Yep:









						Prince Harry Arrives in the U.K. Two Days After Grandfather Prince Philip's Death
					

Meghan Markle, who is expecting her second child, a girl, with Prince Harry, will not be attending Prince Philip's funeral on April 17




					people.com


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> @CarryOn2020
> @Chanbal  she will forever be known as the ‘heavily pregnant’ one, along with green ensemble.
> 
> Here we go, I hope this works.
> View attachment 5052270
> 
> 
> ET fix quotes



Bwahahahaaaa!

every time I see this pic of her in this green getup...


----------



## Annawakes

I hope the paps leave H alone, not a photo nor a question or comment.  I hope they all just freeze him out and pretend like he’s not even there.  Everyone knows he doesn’t want to be there anyway.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Bwahahahaaaa!
> 
> every time I see this pic of her in this green getup...
> 
> View attachment 5052290


Depends is going to make a fortune off me!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> I hope the paps leave H alone, not a photo nor a question or comment.  I hope they all just freeze him out and pretend like he’s not even there.  Everyone knows he doesn’t want to be there anyway.



I hope NottCot is inundated with plastic flowers, his fave


----------



## jennlt

poopsie said:


> How far is Chunga Changa?


Just be careful where you aim that giant Chuckit. I wouldn't want any of the penguins to get hurt. Especially since she's "heavily pregnant"; she could really do some damage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Philip's reaction to THAT interview? 'Madness! No good will come of it'   

By Gyles Brandreth for The Daily Mail










						GYLES BRANDRETH says Duke of Edinburgh sympathised with Harry
					

Prince Philip thought Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey was 'madness' and 'no good would come of it', it has emerged. He also regretted his grandson's decision to move to US.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

RAINDANCE said:


> Just got a news flash that Harry has landed back in the UK giving him the necessary 5 days quarantine. Wonder where he will do that though  ? I wonder if he's expecting a flunky to organise his suit.



 I imagine he'll be quarantining in the doghouse.


----------



## needlv

So... my thought was correct.  Charles and William in military uniform, whilst H and Andrew in normal suit.  What a visual representation of “you are out because of your behaviour”









						Prince Harry and Andrew 'to wear suits to funeral while brothers don uniforms'
					

Prince Harry was stripped of his role as Captain General of the Royal Marines earlier this year when he said he would not be resuming royal duties, while Andrew stepped back from public life "for the forseeable future" over his links to paedophile pal Jeffrey Epstein




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Katel

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB


Congrats doll and welcome back! I pop in and out and I think this sums up recent activities nicely  (Hat tip to @Maggie Muggins ):


----------



## Katel

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB


Plus the OW brouhaha and Piers / Sharon O being drawn and quartered for having their own opinions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

No wonder we are exhausted. This past 2 months have been DramaDramaMego-HazzieDrama. 
Let’s wish for a quiet week, so we have strength for Saturday.  Well, we can wish.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> No wonder we are exhausted. This past 2 months have been DramaDramaMego-HazzieDrama.
> Let’s wish for a quiet week, so we have strength for Saturday.  Well, we can wish.



good plan, I cleared my schedule for Saturday as well!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

Commentary: Harry and Meghan are made for Hollywood, not royalty
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made themselves out to be hapless victims of The Firm, but it all seems part of their game plan towards next-level stardom, says writer Tracy Lee.




					www.channelnewsasia.com
				




The writer can be a TPF member! Absolutely welcome her


----------



## Suncatcher

Well well, no private jet for Harry. Guess they can’t be living that large after all ... or bum off their friends in higher places!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> Commentary: Harry and Meghan are made for Hollywood, not royalty
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made themselves out to be hapless victims of The Firm, but it all seems part of their game plan towards next-level stardom, says writer Tracy Lee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.channelnewsasia.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The writer can be a TPF member! Absolutely welcome her



   Well said!
_They’re the complete opposite of what the Queen and royalty have always represented: Elegance, restraint, respect, stoicism, resilience, sacrifice, duty, and class.

Come to think of it, Hollywood can have them._


----------



## 1LV

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree ... I'd wish they would have taken two tests upon departure, two when needed and two before funeral with the longest swab pole stick found ... to be sure there's no false negatives.


Luckily for him it’s a Covid test and not an IQ test, or he’d still be in Montecito.


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Commentary: Harry and Meghan are made for Hollywood, not royalty
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made themselves out to be hapless victims of The Firm, but it all seems part of their game plan towards next-level stardom, says writer Tracy Lee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.channelnewsasia.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The writer can be a TPF member! Absolutely welcome her


Haha, yes.  Maybe she's plagiarizing all of us.    
I disagree a touch: they aren't made for true, old Hollywood either, as both are talentless.  The only Hollywood like qualities they have are using others as a means to an end, and constant self promotion.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> You know what my problem with this thread is?  I'm running out of adjectives to describe the stupidity and annoying aspects of these two, without being crude.
> 
> Yes, that's right.  So far, I've been nice.



Yes, we've noticed. You should start to express how you REALLY feel and stop holding out on us! Really, it's OK!  All this while we've all been giving Meghan the benefit of doubt but she's jumped the shark a mile high. No more Mister Nice Guy from us!


----------



## rose60610

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB



Welcome back! Congratulations on your move. M&H are still dumb as rocks. There. You're all caught up!


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Oh they are really reaching with that. You know whose name is a tribute? William, the actual heir to the throne. His full name has Philip as part of it.



It's a reach for another reason.

QE2 and PP agreed (after his famous "I'm just an amoeba" comment) that direct descendents not in direct line to the throne - ie. those styled as HRHs and Prince and Princesses, and those who will not marry out will bear the Mountbatten-Windsor name. And if they need a last name for documents, as males in the family, they can use the Mountbatten-Windsor name as well - eg. when William and Kate sued the French press for those photos.

IIRC, that's also why Prince Andrew and Edward both have Mountbatten-Windsor as last name.

They were just following the family agreement and styling since Archie isn't a HRH nor was he given the title of Prince, it was never really MM's decision.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> Hmmm this made me think about how M+H named their foundation after their child, versus the other royal foundations which have roles or issues in their title. Maybe one manifestation of this difference in philosophies? LMK if I'm wrong and there are exceptions.


We will need to rethink the names for Bump #2. Something that would look good translated into yet another foundation name, probably set up for mental health. Diana Eudaimonia?


----------



## scarlet555

I am sure Cringe is pissed she couldn’t go to England to parade her baby bump, real or not...


----------



## EverSoElusive

scarlet555 said:


> I am sure Cringe is pissed she couldn’t go to England to parade her baby bump, real or not...



And the incessant cradling like we dunno she's carrying a moon bump


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh yes, she is indeed pissed.  In addition to photos, could the press/paps please tell us how much luggage he showed up with?
Just  the backpack = he goes back Saturday.
1 bag = he is planning on staying a week or so
Many more than 1 = trouble in paradise?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> We will need to rethink the names for Bump #2. Something that would look good translated into yet another foundation name, probably set up for mental health. Diana Eudaimonia?


Hopeswell Faithful Diana Meghansdottir Mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> Well my lovelies, I am 300 pages behind.  We have been involved in a pretty big move to our new house (NOT in Montecito!!)  We do not have 16 bathrooms (but we do have a lot).  So I have not had even a moment to check in here.
> 
> Besides the passing of Phillip (RIP), is there a kind soul who can give me some bullet points on these two knuckleheads?  I havent seen the news much, and not been here since the last week in March, maybe earlier.
> 
> In the meantime I shall be reading in reverse to try to catch up.  Do not think you have not been missed!!!
> 
> I would be ever so grateful (not like SOME PEOPLE) and perhaps there will be a tiara or Dame-hood in store.
> 
> Humbly yours, CB


Very easy! Harry will attend Philip's funeral on Saturday. Pregnant MM's PR team informed that pregnant MM was advised not to travel. The funeral will be attended by 30 people and pregnant MM didn't make the shortlist. However, pregnant MM and Ginger paid tribute to Prince Philip on their Archew*ll website with a "Thank you for your service." Pregnant MM is heavily pregnant. I believe this covers almost everything.


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> I am sure Cringe is pissed she couldn’t go to England to parade her baby bump, real or not...



I bet she is anxiously texting him every 10 minutes. She must be beside herself without Harry right there to cater to her neediness.

Don’t be surprised if we hear about more “security issues” and visits to the mansion from the police this week. She’s going to want some attention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I bet she is anxiously texting him every 10 minutes. She must be beside herself without Harry right there to cater to her neediness.
> 
> Don’t be surprised if we hear about more “security issues” and visits to the mansion from the police this week. She’s going to want some attention.


I'm still anticipating a rushed trip to the hospital due to "concerns" about her heavy pregnancy.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Haha, yes.  Maybe she's plagiarizing all of us.
> I disagree a touch: they aren't made for true, old Hollywood either, as both are talentless.  The only Hollywood like qualities they have are using others as a means to an end, and constant self promotion.


Once a briefcase girl, always a briefcase girl.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Philip's reaction to THAT interview? 'Madness! No good will come of it'
> 
> By Gyles Brandreth for The Daily Mail
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GYLES BRANDRETH says Duke of Edinburgh sympathised with Harry
> 
> 
> Prince Philip thought Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey was 'madness' and 'no good would come of it', it has emerged. He also regretted his grandson's decision to move to US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I wonder how much Philip knew about the interview. 

"_There are reports that he [Philip] was enraged after the interview and the fallout from the interview with Oprah Winfrey, so here he is trying to recover and then he gets hit with that_,"









						'Fox & Friends' host links Prince Philip's death to Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah
					

The "Fox & Friends" host said that Meghan and Harry's interview "definitely" added to Prince Philip's stress.




					www.insider.com


----------



## Chanbal

gelbergirl said:


> good plan, I cleared my schedule for Saturday as well!


I have a previous commitment on Saturday, but I'll join here as soon as I can.


----------



## Chanbal

Suncatcher said:


> Well well, no private jet for Harry. Guess they can’t be living that large after all ... or bum off their friends in higher places!


It would probably be embarrassing arriving in the UK in Oprah's private jet. Also, if he wants to beg for more money, he can't show that they are living large.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I bet she is anxiously texting him every 10 minutes. She must be beside herself without Harry right there to cater to her neediness.
> 
> Don’t be surprised if we hear about more “security issues” and visits to the mansion from the police this week. She’s going to want some attention.


Remember what happened last time Harry flew to England and left her alone: the walking in the trails of Saanich with that doll hanging off her, staring straight into the pap cameras grinning like a loon.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Remember what happened last time Harry flew to England and left her alone: the walking in the trails of Saanich with that doll hanging off her, staring straight into the pap cameras grinning like a loon.



Yes. And then didn’t she have Harry sue that photographer?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Does anyone know if we can and how to watch Saturday's funeral service from the states? I didn't find any info when I searched. I'd like to watch or record if I'm not up. TIA


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh yes, she is indeed pissed.  In addition to photos, could the press/paps please tell us how much luggage he showed up with?
> Just  the backpack = he goes back Saturday.
> 1 bag = he is planning on staying a week or so
> Many more than 1 = *trouble in paradise*?



insert evil laugh, as shameless as these two....


----------



## Chanbal

Conversations are supposed to be on the passing of prince Philip, I wonder how H will convey pregnant MM's wishes about security, titles...  

_Now, The Sun reports that the Royal Family has ordered a truce over the contents of the sensational interview to concentrate instead on honouring Prince Philip.

An insider was reported to have said: “Family conversations now will be on the passing of Prince Philip — and nothing else.

“The Queen has declared royal mourning for two weeks so it’s quite clear that is the focus._
https://www.lowermybills.com/lendin...SOLb8e-y89ebW1SWgCJsCPamJUyCwvT0o89SopM39pKFi








						Royals 'order truce' over Oprah chat and will 'focus on honouring Prince Philip'
					

Earlier it was reported that royal biographer Penny Junor had said the sombre event on Saturday could be the Duke of Sussex's chance to repair the damage from the interview




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

Now that I've caught up reading about 'pregnant M' 'heavily pregnant M' not allowed to fly to attend the funeral. I'm wondering if M&H are concerned with stress she would have being there and possibly have people booo-ing and shouting at her and the stress of facing the family and so on, would potentially cause her to have complications especially if she did miscarried last year. I've been wondering this even before now if the backlash of the interview would cause her problems.  If I was her, I'd be worried.  Maybe they talked to her doctor about this and the doc agreed she should not go.  They just generalized the reason is not to fly/travel.  Anyway my two cents.

ALSO I read in prior post that there is blackout to not report on H while there, makes total sense. However, I hope there's people lined up wherever he travels in London shouting at him so he knows how they really feel first hand !   I do that every time I see his photo now.


----------



## mdcx

H won't be able to help himself being petulant around William, Kate etc is my prediction. Meghan will have him primed up to take offense at the slightest thing they say or do.


----------



## mdcx

V0N1B2 said:


> Remember what happened last time Harry flew to England and left her alone: the walking in the trails of Saanich with that doll hanging off her, staring straight into the pap cameras grinning like a loon.


Yes! She will be up to somethng no doubt. A bump clutching pap stroll lunch on Saturday with Harry's real father, David Foster and his thirsty wife Katharine McPhee?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> ALSO I read in prior post that there is blackout to not report on H while there, makes total sense. However, I hope there's people lined up wherever he travels in London shouting at him so he knows how they really feel first hand !  *I do that every time I see his photo now*.


Hey, I'm with you here. Hubby thinks I'm going senile because I tell people off on my PC and especially the ugly duo.


----------



## Rouge H

Hermes Zen said:


> Does anyone know if we can and how to watch Saturday's funeral service from the states? I didn't find any info when I searched. I'd like to watch or record if I'm not up. TIA



ABC 9am eastern will cover the service.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hey, I'm with you here. Hubby thinks I'm going senile because I tell people off on my PC and especially the ugly duo.



My hubby too!  He gives me a side eye wondering if I'm okay and next rolling eyes when he looks on my pc screen to see what I'm reading.  LOL  Cheers to us.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Rouge H said:


> ABC 9am eastern will cover the service.


THANK YOU!!!


----------



## Straight-Laced

"Keep-buggering-on" versus emotional incontinence!  

Douglas Murray (a Brit) on Prince Philip and others in The Australian today :

*Prince Philip: A life worth honouring; his duty discharged*
At the coronation service in 1953 the first person to swear allegiance to the newly crowned Queen Elizabeth II was her husband, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. In that vow, made kneeling before the new sovereign, he swore: “To become your liege man of life and limb, and of earthly worship; and faith and truth I will bear unto you, to live and die, against all manner of folks.”

The language may sound archaic now, as it did then, and the principles and duties the oath speaks to may sound more archaic still. And yet it is a testimony to the character of the duke that it was an oath he held to, honoured and otherwise discharged over the course of a life of public service, which only ended with his death on Friday.

There is, of course, no special surprise when a person dies at the age of 99. But there is perhaps some surprise at the outpouring of feeling that has greeted the duke’s death. Though the royal family asked people not to leave flowers outside the palaces, a steady stream of people has been queuing at COVID-safe distances outside the palaces in Britain to pay respects. And, in truth, this should not be a surprise. The duke was admired in his life, and is perhaps openly admired still more now, for a number of reasons.

Some of these are to do with his most obvious accomplishments. In recent days he has been praised once more for his service in World War II and for his bravery at sea, which saw him mentioned in dispatches. Elsewhere the heads of charities into which he poured his energies have praised his foresight as an environmentalist, his passion as a motivator of young people through his awards scheme, and for many other facets of his public life. Elsewhere, people have noted the challenges of his early life. But, in fact, outpouring of feeling has two main sources.

The first is the knowledge that for 73 years of marriage, and almost seven decades while his wife was on the throne, Prince Philip fulfilled his duty to the Queen just as she fulfilled her duty to the publics of Great Britain and the Commonwealth. It was on her 21st birthday that the Queen made her first great oath of allegiance to the people. On that occasion she said, “I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service.” For her whole life she has fulfilled that oath through unrelenting, faultless public service.

She has seen her country through the end of empire and the beginning of the Commonwealth, through massive societal and political change, all of which would have seemed more worrying than they were had one figure not always been there to provide continuity and assurance. Whether the Queen would have been able to do this without such a man as Philip at her side is theoretical. Because he always was by her side, and remained so until the end. Many people feel deep gratitude for a life of such devotion.

But the other reason the duke’s death has provoked such feeling is perhaps simply because of the sort of man he was, added with a fear that they don’t make them like that anymore.

It was always easy to parody the sort of man he was. For instance, he was regularly chewed over in the media for his alleged gaffes. In fact, most of these alleged missteps were very funny at their best and never anything worse than an expression of plain speaking. Walking ramrod straight of back even into his 10th decade it was easy also to dismiss him as an exemplar of an “unfeeling” older generation. When Tony Abbott nominated the duke for a Knighthood of the Order of Australia in the last decade, such criticisms of the duke poured out. “Anachronistic” was one of the words critics used most about the duke and the knighthood. And yet now we have had a few years to observe what comes after such “anachronisms” we may well miss them.

Is it better to have the attitudes of the Duke of Edinburgh, with his uncomplaining, keep-buggering-on attitude toward life? Or is it better to have the emotional resilience of certain other people who have married into the royal family of late?

Last year, even before her disgraceful interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan Markle told an interviewer: “I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip. I tried. I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging. I’ve said for a long time to ‘H’ — that’s what I call (Harry) — it’s not enough to just survive something, right? Like, that’s not the point of life.”

According to that particular branch of the royal family the point of life is to move to California, cash in your connections, make podcasts and do voice-overs for Netflix series. The Duchess of Sussex was 38 years old when she expounded that world view. An age by which Prince Philip had survived the revolutions of his childhood, the battles of World War II and years of public service. At the same age Meghan had survived seven seasons of Suits.

Was it fun, all that unveiling of plaques, making endless small talk with strangers and otherwise seeing through the relative drudgery of actual royal life? Almost certainly not, though it clearly had its moments. But Prince Philip never complained. He never announced that he needed more “me time”, or wished to “thrive” more, or any of the other emotional incontinence that has flooded through our societies in recent decades. He recognised that in life there are things more important than your personal ease and that one of those things is public service. Especially in the service of one of the greatest and oldest institutions.

So it is right that people pay tribute to the departed prince. But it is also a good time to wonder whether the qualities he embodied might be better recognised, remembered and perhaps even emulated now that the liege man has gone.


----------



## mellibelly

They Knew The End Was Here - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] We have one very interesting piece of information to convey regarding the passing of this iconic figure. All of his descendants were told over a month ago that this was the end. Again, all of them were told. Over a month ago. There was no pretence within the family that he was...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## xincinsin

" emotional incontinence " Bravo!!!!

Also verbal diarrhoea.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It would probably be embarrassing arriving in the UK in Oprah's private jet. Also, if he wants to beg for more money, he can't show that they are living large.


Gasp.  Maybe he even flew coach to show his destitution!  (Quelle horreur!!).


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hey, I'm with you here. Hubby thinks I'm going senile because I tell people off on my PC and especially the ugly duo.


My husband has never ever followed the royals and in general has no clue whatsoever about any of them.  I tried to watch The Crown with him and he got bored and didn’t want to finish the series which is so unlike him (same man who actually watched all of Fargo, for example).  He has no idea who is the father, Prince Charles or William for example.  I’ve apparently left up this thread on our computer quite a bit lately.  He must’ve been reading the screens because he’s started asking me who exactly is Meghan Markle and she sounds absolutely horrible , and that he hopes Harry wakes up one day and realizes what an a$$ he’s been


----------



## Hermes Zen

I don't believe I saw this posted yet. Apparently no private plane to London for H. He took a British Airways flight from Los Angeles and was taken away in a black range rover after deplaned. Went into some detail from moment he left his home. Enjoy.



> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eral-without-pregnant-wife-Meghan-Markle.html


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> We will need to rethink the names for Bump #2. Something that would look good translated into yet another foundation name, probably set up for mental health. Diana Eudaimonia?


I wish! We all know they’ve never read a word of philosophy. 



Hermes Zen said:


> My hubby too!  He gives me a side eye wondering if I'm okay and next rolling eyes when he looks on my pc screen to see what I'm reading.  LOL  Cheers to us.


My OH loves making p*litics memes and debating on Twitter so he can’t talk at all. 
Cheers to us indeed!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Hermes Zen said:


> My hubby too!  He gives me a side eye wondering if I'm okay and next rolling eyes when he looks on my pc screen to see what I'm reading.  LOL  Cheers to us.



Mine too - Harry and Megan _again_ ? he says over my shoulder.
Sending you tea and biscuits to keep your strength up while you speed read and catch up.


----------



## Lodpah

The fact if true, shoes MM’s influence in Hapless Harry. A father she threw away and convinced Harry to throw away his grandfather. See the trend?

To those two: quoting John Gotti:
Titles don’t honor the men, it’s men who honor the titles. Lol.


----------



## gelbergirl

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't believe I saw this posted yet. Apparently no private plane to London for H. He took a British Airways flight from Los Angeles and was taken away in a black range rover after deplaned. Went into some detail from moment he left his home. Enjoy.



how'd he get thru the LAX without the paps seeing him I wonder


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> I bet she is anxiously texting him every 10 minutes. She must be beside herself without Harry right there to cater to her neediness.
> 
> Don’t be surprised if we hear about more “security issues” and visits to the mansion from the police this week. She’s going to want some attention.


I’m sure he was given strict instructions to keep his phone on and record everything. They’ll need it for the next tv interview and for their season of The Crown.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Found this gem in an article about Philip:



> In a personal statement, she made it clear that Harry and Meghan would always be close members of her family, and she went out of her way to praise her American granddaughter-in-law, but, so far as the Crown was concerned, she was equally clear: *she wasn't going to have a couple of freelance royals roaming the world doing their own thing in any sense in her name.*



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...h-sympathised-Harry-Meghan-thought-wrong.html


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> Depends is going to make a fortune off me!


You need to go revisit this SATC episode


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the same article: 



> Prince Philip believed in progress and accepted change. His cousin, Ivar Mountbatten — the son of Philip's friend and contemporary, his first choice as best man, David Milford Haven — became the first member of the Royal Family to marry someone of the same sex. 'Whatever makes them happy,' said Prince Philip.



Those stuck up, backwards, intolerant and hateful royals, hu?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Conversations are supposed to be on the passing of prince Philip, I wonder how H will convey pregnant MM's wishes about security, titles...
> 
> _Now, The Sun reports that the Royal Family has ordered a truce over the contents of the sensational interview to concentrate instead on honouring Prince Philip.
> 
> An insider was reported to have said: “Family conversations now will be on the passing of Prince Philip — and nothing else.
> 
> “The Queen has declared royal mourning for two weeks so it’s quite clear that is the focus._
> https://www.lowermybills.com/lendin...SOLb8e-y89ebW1SWgCJsCPamJUyCwvT0o89SopM39pKFi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royals 'order truce' over Oprah chat and will 'focus on honouring Prince Philip'
> 
> 
> Earlier it was reported that royal biographer Penny Junor had said the sombre event on Saturday could be the Duke of Sussex's chance to repair the damage from the interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Wonder if William finally stepped in and put a stop to this ‘healing the rift’ nonsense. All of the media reports that this would be a chance for Harry to explain the interview, heal the rifts, etc. - all of those reports really upset me. Nooo, the focus should be on Prince Philip. This was the main reason I thought H should stay away.  Since he is so starved for attention, he will make this about him. I do hope no one takes his calls. Quarantining may make that easier. QE should not see him until he has had multiple tests — nasal, oral, blood, and a$$.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if William finally stepped in and put a stop to this ‘healing the rift’ nonsense. All of the media reports that this would be a chance for Harry to explain the interview, heal the rifts, etc. - all of those reports really upset me. Nooo, the focus should be on Prince Philip. This was the main reason I thought H should stay away.  Since he is so starved for attention, he will make this about him. I do hope no one takes his calls. Quarantining may make that easier. QE should not see him until he has had multiple tests — nasal, oral, blood, and a$$.


If the blind item posted by mellibelly above is true, that H&M knew that Phillip was dying when they did the Oprah interview, they are beyond despicable- as is Oprah. F***g parasites.


----------



## floatinglili

The Aussie media LOVES a good gotcha moment and this was the beginning of the end for Abbott blood was in the air. Seemed a bit silly at the time to me... but then so much of politics is a bit silly. Or would be, if all these games didn’t cost us anything. 

“Final chapter in saga of Abbott’s knighthood for Philip will play out at funeral
- by Bevan Shields
London: Six years ago almost to the day, the Queen and Prince Philip shuffled into the White Drawing Room of Windsor Castle to open a small rectangular box recently arrived from Australia.

The event didn’t attract anywhere near as much attention as the decision by Tony Abbott three months earlier that had triggered the special delivery.

The box contained the Insignia of a Knight of the Order of Australia, which was duly presented following Abbott’s surprise move on Australia Day 2015 to award Philip the country’s highest honour.

Abbott said at the time that the Duke of Edinburgh had been “a great servant of Australia” and noted Malcolm Fraser had also handed the award to Prince Charles in 1981.

But the devoted monarchist’s best intentions were a political disaster. Abbott was widely mocked by colleagues who suspected the furore might be the beginning of the end of his leadership. They were right: Abbott was gone by September that year.

But in a final twist to the saga, the insignia presented to Philip at Windsor Castle that day six years ago will now take pride of place at his funeral on Saturday.









						Final chapter in saga of Abbott’s knighthood for Philip will play out at funeral
					

The former prime minister is unrepentant for awarding Prince Philip an Australian knighthood, an honour that will take pride of place on the altar of St George’s Chapel this Saturday.




					www.smh.com.au


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, maybe they didn't tell Oprah. Also it's not Oprah's grandfather. The Markles on the other hand...I will be blocked if I type out what I really think. OMG.


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> Remember what happened last time Harry flew to England and left her alone: the walking in the trails of Saanich with that doll hanging off her, staring straight into the pap cameras *grinning like a loon*.





The loons are shocked and insulted.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if William finally stepped in and put a stop to this ‘healing the rift’ nonsense. All of the media reports that this would be a chance for Harry to explain the interview, heal the rifts, etc. - all of those reports really upset me. Nooo, the focus should be on Prince Philip. This was the main reason I thought H should stay away.  Since he is so starved for attention, he will make this about him. I do hope no one takes his calls. Quarantining may make that easier. QE should not see him until he has had multiple tests — nasal, oral, blood, and a$$.


Gosh I know that the medical profession has to do some difficult  things but surely there are limits. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if William finally stepped in and put a stop to this ‘healing the rift’ nonsense. All of the media reports that this would be a chance for Harry to explain the interview, heal the rifts, etc. - all of those reports really upset me. Nooo, the focus should be on Prince Philip. This was the main reason I thought H should stay away.  Since he is so starved for attention, he will make this about him. I do hope no one takes his calls. Quarantining may make that easier. QE should not see him until he has had multiple tests — nasal, oral, blood, and a$$.


I think all this division in the family is ultimately destructive but I do agree it’s not the right time to start trying to make up.
 That said, I don’t quite believe this story or that Harry realises he’s gone too far.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Meghan's Oprah interview (and I say that because, let's face it, it was _her_ interview, not theirs) was viewed globally by 49 million according to one of the reports up thread.

I do not understand how the statistics are calculated but bear with me and let's do some sums !

49 million sounds a lot, yet W&K's wedding peaked at 26m in the UK alone (so IRO 35% of the total UK population of £67m) The global audience figure is not clear but one estimate I saw was up to 160m TV viewers _plus_ 72m live streams.

Diana's funeral had a UK live audience of an astounding 32.1 million people. It's listed as the second most watched special event ever, following just behind the 1966 World Cup final that pulled in 32.3 million sports (UK football/soccer) fans. Overall, it's estimated that 2 BILLION people watched the funeral worldwide. With the world population being 5.894 billion in 1997, that means more than a third of the planet tuned to say their goodbyes to the English icon.

According to the Uk's Office of National Statistics September 2020 estimates, there were only 39,500 individuals over the age of 98 at the end of 2019. That means less than 0.06 % of the UK population were older than Prince Philip at that time. His passing is not just the death of Queen Elizabeth's consort but symbolically also the swansong for the end of a generation world wide, and his funeral will be one of those era-defining events.

Two billion viewers worldwide across all platforms - it's quite possible.

I sincerely hope that Harry does not sulk and scowl his way through the ceremony.

Personally I think it is right he is there, although I hope his quarantine this week affords him some time for personal reflection.

But I would really quite like to see him in the line up _behind_ his older cousins Peter Phillips and Zara Tindall, just to underline where he now stands in the pecking order of the wider royal family ie. Number 4 grandchild !


----------



## queennadine

mellibelly said:


> They Knew The End Was Here - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] We have one very interesting piece of information to convey regarding the passing of this iconic figure. All of his descendants were told over a month ago that this was the end. Again, all of them were told. Over a month ago. There was no pretence within the family that he was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


If this is true, absolutely disgusting on their part. And of course his descendants were able to visit him in his final days.


----------



## Sharont2305

No words


----------



## sdkitty

Rouge H said:


> ABC 9am eastern will cover the service.


thanks.....I'll try to record so even if I am up I can wait and skip commercials


----------



## lanasyogamama

What a tribute! Makes the “service is universal!” nonsense even more disgusting. 


Also, where will Harry stay week?


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> What a tribute! Makes the “service is universal!” nonsense even more disgusting.
> 
> 
> Also, where will Harry stay week?


He’s reported to be at Nottingham cottage.  It would make a sensible choice.


----------



## RAINDANCE

lanasyogamama said:


> What a tribute! Makes the “service is universal!” nonsense even more disgusting.
> 
> 
> Also, where will Harry stay week?



Apparently in Notts Cottage - somewhat ironic !


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> If this is true, absolutely disgusting on their part. And of course his descendants were able to visit him in his final days.


I don't think it matters whether this is technically true.  To me, it was pretty obvious that Phillip would probably pass within a short time.


mellibelly said:


> They Knew The End Was Here - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] We have one very interesting piece of information to convey regarding the passing of this iconic figure. All of his descendants were told over a month ago that this was the end. Again, all of them were told. Over a month ago. There was no pretence within the family that he was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


I don't think it matters whether this is technically true or not.  I seems to me it was pretty obvious that Phillip was nearing the end.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, maybe they didn't tell Oprah. Also it's not Oprah's grandfather. The Markles on the other hand...I will be blocked if I type out what I really think. OMG.


Could be, but then Oprah should have done her research. Or one of all those staffers she employs. Opiranha didn't care and she had a personal agenda. And H&M made their self serving agenda a means to that end. A 99-year old in hospital should give any decent person pause. Even a so called journalist.


I can't type how I truly feel either. This brings back bad memories for me concerning a much loved old family member of mine. A relative acted in such an impudent manner I will never forgive them. One thing they said literally made my hair stand on end from my head down to my arms! I don't think I've ever felt such disgust and anger all at the same time. Decency in the face of life's hardships is not a universal trait or sentiment.


----------



## Sharont2305

From Harry


----------



## RAINDANCE

*Statement from Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex:*

“My grandfather was a man of service, honour and great humour. He was authentically himself, with a seriously sharp wit, and could hold the attention of any room due to his charm—and also because you never knew what he might say next. 

He will be remembered as the longest reigning consort to the Monarch, a decorated serviceman, a Prince and a Duke. But to me, like many of you who have lost a loved one or grandparent over the pain of this past year, he was my grandpa: master of the barbecue, legend of banter, and cheeky right ‘til the end.

He has been a rock for Her Majesty The Queen with unparalleled devotion, by her side for 73 years of marriage, and while I could go on, I know that right now he would say to all of us, beer in hand, ‘Oh do get on with it!’ 

So, on that note, Grandpa, thank you for your service, your dedication to Granny, and for always being yourself. You will be sorely missed, but always remembered—by the nation and the world. Meghan, Archie, and I (as well as your future great-granddaughter) will always hold a special place for you in our hearts.”

‘Per Mare, Per Terram’


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry


Reads like a correction.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I don't think it matters whether this is technically true.  To me, it was pretty obvious that Phillip would probably pass within a short time.
> 
> I don't think it matters whether this is technically true or not.  I seems to me it was pretty obvious that Phillip was nearing the end.


Seriously, a 99 year old who spent a month in the hospital? Cmon. Of course they knew.


----------



## lanasyogamama

His statement reads like a compilation of the statements we’ve read in the last few days.


----------



## RAINDANCE

...over the pain of this past year ...

in English please ????

and don't get me started on , before "and ...


----------



## jelliedfeels

RAINDANCE said:


> Meghan's Oprah interview (and I say that because, let's face it, it was _her_ interview, not theirs) was viewed globally by 49 million according to one of the reports up thread.
> 
> I do not understand how the statistics are calculated but bear with me and let's do some sums !
> 
> 49 million sounds a lot, yet W&K's wedding peaked at 26m in the UK alone (so IRO 35% of the total UK population of £67m) The global audience figure is not clear but one estimate I saw was up to 160m TV viewers _plus_ 72m live streams.
> 
> Diana's funeral had a UK live audience of an astounding 32.1 million people. It's listed as the second most watched special event ever, following just behind the 1966 World Cup final that pulled in 32.3 million sports (UK football/soccer) fans. Overall, it's estimated that 2 BILLION people watched the funeral worldwide. With the world population being 5.894 billion in 1997, that means more than a third of the planet tuned to say their goodbyes to the English icon.
> 
> According to the Uk's Office of National Statistics September 2020 estimates, there were only 39,500 individuals over the age of 98 at the end of 2019. That means less than 0.06 % of the UK population were older than Prince Philip at that time. His passing is not just the death of Queen Elizabeth's consort but symbolically also the swansong for the end of a generation world wide, and his funeral will be one of those era-defining events.
> 
> Two billion viewers worldwide across all platforms - it's quite possible.
> 
> I sincerely hope that Harry does not sulk and scowl his way through the ceremony.
> 
> Personally I think it is right he is there, although I hope his quarantine this week affords him some time for personal reflection.
> 
> But I would really quite like to see him in the line up _behind_ his older cousins Peter Phillips and Zara Tindall, just to underline where he now stands in the pecking order of the wider royal family ie. Number 4 grandchild !


Oh my days OW and netflix would be fuming. Tbh 49 mill seems pretty lousy to me. ITV got 12 mill in the UK and they are definitely smarting as they can get those kind of numbers for much less than a million quid  
I strongly suspect even these dumb execs are realising they’ve backed a turkey.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I can't type how I truly feel either. This brings back bad memories for me concerning a much loved old family member of mine.



Yeah. I've been really emotional ever since the news broke and I think it's because of my own sad memories. And I have simply not a dustspeck of understanding for Harry's behaviour towards his dying grandfather. None.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry



Yeah, and see how you thanked Grandpa.


----------



## rose60610

gelbergirl said:


> how'd he get thru the LAX without the paps seeing him I wonder



Right. Everybody expects him in ratty grey polos so he must have dressed like a prince to go unrecognized.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Right. Everybody expects him in ratty grey polos so he must have dressed like a prince to go unrecognized.


hmm....I suppose it could be that he left from someplace like Orange county and got a connection in NY....if he was worried about paps
But Orange county is a smaller A/P so I don't know how many cities they fly to


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chrissy Teigan said there is TSA a few miles outside LAX that celebs get to use.


----------



## byzina

lanasyogamama said:


> Seriously, a 99 year old who spent a month in the hospital? Cmon. Of course they knew.



I don't doubt it for a second. Even if there was a slight chance of recovery, the risk was the highest at 99. Meghan rushed over the ocean to watch Serena's match, they flew all over the world. If Harry had wanted to see his grandfather, we would have come and spent 2 weeks of quarantine instead of fighting publicly with his relatives. Despite COVID, people are actually flying all over the world when they need. All my friends do and they even don't take business.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Parliament has been recalled early, and MPs are paying tribute to Prince Philip till 10pm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Gasp.  Maybe he even flew coach to show his destitution!  (Quelle horreur!!).


haha, don't push it! BA first class is already enough destitution for Ginger.


----------



## byzina

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry



Still sounds more like a newspaper obituary, 'will be remembered as the longest reigning consort to the Monarch' and again 'thank you for your service' but in an extended way. Probably they inserted this extended version of the phrase because of the criticism.


----------



## RAINDANCE

byzina said:


> Still sounds more like a newspaper obituary, 'will be remembered as the longest reigning consort to the Monarch' and again 'thank you for your service' but in an extended way. Probably they inserted this extended version of the phrase because of the criticism.



Comment on the Mail ( I know, I know but still )
_Meghan is gifted in many ways!! The gift of writing condolences and ending it's all about me!! Good job Megs, there's a writing job waiting for you at the Daily Mail!_


----------



## lanasyogamama

Can you imagine if he showed up on a huge jet that said “LIVE YOUR BEST LIFE!!!!” with Oprah’s face on the side?


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> *Statement from Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex:*
> 
> “My grandfather was a man of service, honour and great humour. He was authentically himself, with a seriously sharp wit, and could hold the attention of any room due to his charm—and also because you never knew what he might say next.
> 
> He will be remembered as the longest reigning consort to the Monarch, a decorated serviceman, a Prince and a Duke. But to me, like many of you who have lost a loved one or grandparent over the pain of this past year, he was my grandpa: master of the barbecue, legend of banter, and cheeky right ‘til the end.
> 
> He has been a rock for Her Majesty The Queen with unparalleled devotion, by her side for 73 years of marriage, and while I could go on, I know that right now he would say to all of us, beer in hand, ‘Oh do get on with it!’
> 
> So, on that note, Grandpa, thank you for your service, your dedication to Granny, and for always being yourself. You will be sorely missed, but always remembered—by the nation and the world. Meghan, Archie, and I (as well as your future great-granddaughter) will always hold a special place for you in our hearts.”
> 
> ‘Per Mare, Per Terram’



#$%^&, Harry has no clue what his grandfather was about. Everyone experiences grief differently, but this shows how childish he really is.   I will restrain myself from picking apart the whole thing and just focus on the parentheses. He really doesn’t know how to punctuate or use the phrase ‘as well as’.  Sad, just sad.






						Article of the week: The correct use of as well as | English Language Help Desk
					






					site.uit.no
				



_‘As well as‘ cannot be used to mean and. The expression X as well as Y  means not only Y but also X (note that X and Y are reversed). While and simply conjoins two (or more) expressions, as well as places unequal emphasis on the two expressions — the expression preceding as well as carries a stronger emphasis than the expression following it._


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> My husband has never ever followed the royals and in general has no clue whatsoever about any of them.  I tried to watch The Crown with him and he got bored and didn’t want to finish the series which is so unlike him (same man who actually watched all of Fargo, for example).  He has no idea who is the father, Prince Charles or William for example.  I’ve apparently left up this thread on our computer quite a bit lately.  He must’ve been reading the screens because he’s started asking me who exactly is Meghan Markle and she sounds absolutely horrible , and that he hopes Harry wakes up one day and realizes what an a$$ he’s been


Showed my husband clips of Oprah's interview, and his comment was "such a royal waste of time".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry


Harry the Hypocrite,
So, Meghan let you off your leash so you could go 'home' to ask the BP PR teams to write a decent statement for you. Must feel like being back in school, where apparently the teachers did your homework and exams for you because you can't think for yourself! You're an absolute disgrace to your family and you'll never come close to being even 1% the man your grandpa was. Just go back to your master so you can 'survive and thrive'. 

ET correct spelling


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> #$%^&, Harry has no clue what his grandfather was about.  I will restrain myself from picking apart the whole thing and just focus on the parentheses. He really doesn’t know how to punctuate or use the phrase ‘as well as’.  Sad, just sad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article of the week: The correct use of as well as | English Language Help Desk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> site.uit.no
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _‘As well as‘ cannot be used to mean and. The expression X asubt  well as Y  means not only Y but also X (note that X and Y are reversed). While and simply conjoins two (or more) expressions, as well as places unequal emphasis on the two expressions — the expression preceding as well as carries a stronger emphasis than the expression following it._


I doubt he wrote it himself.  and if he did, I'm sure it was edited by M or some staff person


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> No words



Wow, this is beautiful!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry


Is this the work of a PR-team?


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> No words



Now THAT is a statement from a grandson who loved his grandfather.

I also love the subtle digs such as how "his wife had so many years to get to know him and the kindness he showed her", and how he was able to spend time with his great grandchildren.  Well played, William.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry


Too little, too late Bozo.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Too little, too late Bozo.


I don't think he's the brightest bulb - just takes orders from his Wife


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> His statement reads like a compilation of the statements we’ve read in the last few days.


More plagiarism LOL!


----------



## jelliedfeels

byzina said:


> Still sounds more like a newspaper obituary, 'will be remembered as the longest reigning consort to the Monarch' and again 'thank you for your service' but in an extended way. Probably they inserted this extended version of the phrase because of the criticism.


Yes lord knows I primarily remember my own late grandad as the consort of my grandma 
bit of a weird officious phrasing.

I wouldn’t judge him at all if he had made it clear he actually had a difficult relationship with his grandfather/family and will never be as fulsome in his grief because that’s their private business but it’s this flip-flopping between being a bit distant and professional in the statements, while telling us you had to leave the family for your mental health  while in the same interview insisting you all get on and everything is peachy.

not to mention trying to get money from them the whole time.
Hypocrites. We’ve  said it a million times now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is this the work of a PR-team?


Well, he certainly didn't put all that together himself!    Meghan must have word salad-ed and plagiarized others' sentiments and stripper Sunshine Sachs did the rest.


----------



## marietouchet

Vaguely off topic ...LOOKING FOR A GOOD SHOW TO MARATHON ???? 

I tried this show some years ago, lost interest, it dates to 2014 so not directly about H&M, but deals with all things tangential to our heroes and is SOOOOO relevant TODAY

We have covered so many topics these last years here - diversity, social media, the UK sense of humor, difficult interviews, word salads, royalty, the UK press 
I found a show that touches on all of these - W1A (That is the title) with Hugh Bonneville on NETFLIX
This is a COMEDY and laughter is priceless, it is about how the BBC deals with all of those topics

ROTFL 

HINT turn on closed captions if you are not used to Welsh and Cornish accents


----------



## csshopper

Harry’s team panicked at the backlash from the cold and slyly contemptuous  Archewell post.“Thank you for your service” “You will be greatly missed”

The timing of Harry’s follow up damage control message seems to have come after he was loosed from his handler’s leash. Interesting timing. His conclusion that his grandfather would be saying to “get on with it” is used as their self serving rationale for trashing the family regardless of circumstances and a license to continue.

William’s tribute made me cry. 

Hope I’m correct it’s also a message to Mr and Mrs Markle, “Catherine and I will continue to support the Queen...”    Unsaid, unlike the two of you, and look out our tolerance for your crap is nearing the breaking point.


----------



## youngster

gelbergirl said:


> how'd he get thru the LAX without the paps seeing him I wonder



There is a special VIP terminal at LAX that he likely used. It costs several thousand dollars per trip and there is an annual membership fee as well but only the best for Harry after all.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> There is a special VIP terminal at LAX that he likely used. It costs several thousand dollars per trip and there is an annual membership fee as well but only the best for Harry after all.


I dunno, I prefer to think of it as the best thing for Philip.  The less fuss about Harry, the fewer pictures of him etc etc - the better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Harry’s team panicked at the backlash from the cold and slyly contemptuous  Archewell post.“Thank you for your service” “You will be greatly missed”
> 
> The timing of Harry’s follow up damage control message seems to have come after he was loosed from his handler’s leash. Interesting timing.



Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.


Definitely, and that is how it should be. It's all about the pecking order. Once Charles spoke, the other children spoke. Once William spoke, I'm sure we'll hear from the other grandchildren soon.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.


Could be, if so, good on them to make certain the future king had precedence. Thank god the line of succession is what it is. Prayers for William and George having long, healthy lives.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.



I was wondering that... his 'statement' didn't seem as self serving as it usually does is why... but I did only read it once  because didn't want to encounter word salad bs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

At first, I thought H was trying to upstage W&K. Richard Palmer says the 2 statements were coordinated.
‘Some comments:


----------



## sdkitty

Gayle King doesn't seem to have found it necessary to apologize for her gaffe.  Maybe because all the criticism of her came from the right?  I'm disappointed in her.  Just when she had become a legit "news" person and not just O's BFF.

editing - the story ran on MSN.com which isn't right wing media
guess she figures it'll die on its own


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> Is this the work of a PR-team?



Not a British one that's for sure. Megan's finger prints are all over it amending Harry's draft would be my guess.
Punctuation is terrible. I can't decide if there is a proof reading error in the second paragraph or just nonsense word salad.

I know Harry is trying to be hip and young but he's 37 this year. 
IMO " .. cheeky right 'til the end" is so, so patronising.

I notice baby Didi Meghansdottir got a mention too, just in case we had forgotten Megan is heavily, heavily pregnant.
I vehemently hate that thing of creating a personality before a baby is born. I am so very superstitions about that. (A secretary of mine had to have an induced stillbirth at nearly 8 months. Beyond heartbreaking.)

I want to be compassionate to Harry but he's not making it easy.
The reason why he was so beloved in the UK was because we felt for that boy, not even in his teens, and his enormous loss when Diana died and no one, I feel, will not recognise how much a role his grandparents have played in filling that void. Specifically, Prince Phillip with his similar shared experience of growing up without a mother present in his life.

I will attribute this sloppy tribute to jet-lag.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> At first, I thought H was trying to upstage W&K. Richard Palmer says the 2 statements were coordinated.
> ‘Some comments:
> View attachment 5052853



I like that Megnuts & Harriet #TeamQueen person. Everything that needs to be said squeezed into one username.


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> Not a British one that's for sure. Megan's finger prints are all over it amending Harry's draft would be my guess.
> Punctuation is terrible. I can't decide if there is a proof reading error in the second paragraph or just nonsense word salad.
> 
> I know Harry is trying to be hip and young but he's 37 this year.
> IMO " .. cheeky right 'til the end" is so, so patronising.
> 
> I notice baby Didi Meghansdottir got a mention too, just in case we had forgotten Megan is heavily, heavily pregnant.
> I vehemently hate that thing of creating a personality before a baby is born. I am so very superstitions about that. (A secretary of mine had to have an induced stillbirth at nearly 8 months. Beyond heartbreaking.)
> 
> I want to be compassionate to Harry but he's not making it easy.
> The reason why he was so beloved in the UK was because we felt for that boy, not even in his teens, and his enormous loss when Diana died and no one, I feel, will not recognise how much a role his grandparents have played in filling that void. Specifically, Prince Phillip with his similar shared experience of growing up without a mother present in his life.
> 
> I will attribute this sloppy tribute to jet-lag.


It just doesn’t sound like Harry.  Or British.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I want to be compassionate to Harry but he's not making it easy.



I don't. Not anymore. I might feel a bit of compassion after the dust has settled and Duchess Disney is being especially lunatic, but for now I am so...personally offended by Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> It just doesn’t sound like Harry.  Or British.


Don't forget he's now "American" and had taken up American slang months ago.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Straight-Laced said:


> "Keep-buggering-on" versus emotional incontinence!
> 
> Douglas Murray (a Brit) on Prince Philip and others in The Australian today :
> 
> *Prince Philip: A life worth honouring; his duty discharged*
> At the coronation service in 1953 the first person to swear allegiance to the newly crowned Queen Elizabeth II was her husband, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. In that vow, made kneeling before the new sovereign, he swore: “To become your liege man of life and limb, and of earthly worship; and faith and truth I will bear unto you, to live and die, against all manner of folks.”
> 
> The language may sound archaic now, as it did then, and the principles and duties the oath speaks to may sound more archaic still. And yet it is a testimony to the character of the duke that it was an oath he held to, honoured and otherwise discharged over the course of a life of public service, which only ended with his death on Friday.
> 
> There is, of course, no special surprise when a person dies at the age of 99. But there is perhaps some surprise at the outpouring of feeling that has greeted the duke’s death. Though the royal family asked people not to leave flowers outside the palaces, a steady stream of people has been queuing at COVID-safe distances outside the palaces in Britain to pay respects. And, in truth, this should not be a surprise. The duke was admired in his life, and is perhaps openly admired still more now, for a number of reasons.
> 
> Some of these are to do with his most obvious accomplishments. In recent days he has been praised once more for his service in World War II and for his bravery at sea, which saw him mentioned in dispatches. Elsewhere the heads of charities into which he poured his energies have praised his foresight as an environmentalist, his passion as a motivator of young people through his awards scheme, and for many other facets of his public life. Elsewhere, people have noted the challenges of his early life. But, in fact, outpouring of feeling has two main sources.
> 
> The first is the knowledge that for 73 years of marriage, and almost seven decades while his wife was on the throne, Prince Philip fulfilled his duty to the Queen just as she fulfilled her duty to the publics of Great Britain and the Commonwealth. It was on her 21st birthday that the Queen made her first great oath of allegiance to the people. On that occasion she said, “I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service.” For her whole life she has fulfilled that oath through unrelenting, faultless public service.
> 
> She has seen her country through the end of empire and the beginning of the Commonwealth, through massive societal and political change, all of which would have seemed more worrying than they were had one figure not always been there to provide continuity and assurance. Whether the Queen would have been able to do this without such a man as Philip at her side is theoretical. Because he always was by her side, and remained so until the end. Many people feel deep gratitude for a life of such devotion.
> 
> But the other reason the duke’s death has provoked such feeling is perhaps simply because of the sort of man he was, added with a fear that they don’t make them like that anymore.
> 
> It was always easy to parody the sort of man he was. For instance, he was regularly chewed over in the media for his alleged gaffes. In fact, most of these alleged missteps were very funny at their best and never anything worse than an expression of plain speaking. Walking ramrod straight of back even into his 10th decade it was easy also to dismiss him as an exemplar of an “unfeeling” older generation. When Tony Abbott nominated the duke for a Knighthood of the Order of Australia in the last decade, such criticisms of the duke poured out. “Anachronistic” was one of the words critics used most about the duke and the knighthood. And yet now we have had a few years to observe what comes after such “anachronisms” we may well miss them.
> 
> Is it better to have the attitudes of the Duke of Edinburgh, with his uncomplaining, keep-buggering-on attitude toward life? Or is it better to have the emotional resilience of certain other people who have married into the royal family of late?
> 
> Last year, even before her disgraceful interview with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan Markle told an interviewer: “I really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip. I tried. I really tried. But I think what that does internally is probably really damaging. I’ve said for a long time to ‘H’ — that’s what I call (Harry) — it’s not enough to just survive something, right? Like, that’s not the point of life.”
> 
> According to that particular branch of the royal family the point of life is to move to California, cash in your connections, make podcasts and do voice-overs for Netflix series. The Duchess of Sussex was 38 years old when she expounded that world view. An age by which Prince Philip had survived the revolutions of his childhood, the battles of World War II and years of public service. At the same age Meghan had survived seven seasons of Suits.
> 
> Was it fun, all that unveiling of plaques, making endless small talk with strangers and otherwise seeing through the relative drudgery of actual royal life? Almost certainly not, though it clearly had its moments. But Prince Philip never complained. He never announced that he needed more “me time”, or wished to “thrive” more, or any of the other emotional incontinence that has flooded through our societies in recent decades. He recognised that in life there are things more important than your personal ease and that one of those things is public service. Especially in the service of one of the greatest and oldest institutions.
> 
> So it is right that people pay tribute to the departed prince. But it is also a good time to wonder whether the qualities he embodied might be better recognised, remembered and perhaps even emulated now that the liege man has gone.





Clearblueskies said:


> He’s reported to be at Nottingham cottage.  It would make a sensible choice.


nope he is at their Windsor residence must have chucked Eugenia out and he has issued a gushing down to earth tribute no doubt written by him and markle to appeal to the younger generation-  Shame it was ruined by the picture of him arriving smirking in the back of a car as he was driven away from the plane and makes me feel sick - just appalling - missed the whole tone of things guess it all went over his stupid head


----------



## CarryOn2020

According to the rules of grammar, whoever comes after ‘as well as‘ is considered of lesser importance than whoever came before.  The use of parentheses diminishes the person even more. So, in one swipe, H, as well as M, has diminished his unborn child...twice. Wow.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry


Too little too late missing the mood completely


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> nope he is at frogmore and hiss issued a gushing down to earth tribute no doubt written by him and marker to appeal to the younger generation Shane it was ruined by the picture of him arriving smirking in the back of a car as he was driven away from the plane



‘I missed this. Please post link.  Thank you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Specifically, Prince Phillip with his similar shared experience of growing up without a mother present in his life.



I just learned from Lady CC that not only was he basically left an orphan with his mother admitted to a mental hospital and his father riding into the sunset with his mistress: the man who basically raised him, Lord Mountbatten's (and his mother's) older brother, the Marquess of Milford Haven, died of bone cancer, which is when Lord Mountbatten stepped in to be a father figure to Philip and his cousin. And then his sister's tragic death. This man has had so many losses and still somehow thrived, not just survived.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> Is this the work of a PR-team?


If so I would sack them it’s pitiful misses the mark in every way


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Now THAT is a statement from a grandson who loved his grandfather.
> 
> I also love the subtle digs such as how "his wife had so many years to get to know him and the kindness he showed her", and how he was able to spend time with his great grandchildren.  Well played, William.


Yup loved that - no reconciliation wanted go team Kate and will- Harry just go away and don’t come back


----------



## CarryOn2020

DM is on fire:








						Prince William pays tribute to Philip with moving statement
					

The Duke of Cambridge also released a new photograph, taken by his wife Kate, of a then two-year-old Prince George with his great-grandfather on the Sandringham Estate in Norfolk in 2015.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.


They orchestrate as you put it the order - it is royal protocol - but not the content


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> nope he is at frogmore and hiss issued a gushing down to earth tribute no doubt written by him and marker to appeal to the younger generation Shane it was ruined by the picture of him arriving smirking in the back of a car as he was driven away from the plane


If it's the picture I've seen I think that might be an old one. He'd have to have been wearing a mask.


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> Not a British one that's for sure. Megan's finger prints are all over it amending Harry's draft would be my guess.
> Punctuation is terrible. I can't decide if there is a proof reading error in the second paragraph or just nonsense word salad.
> 
> I know Harry is trying to be hip and young but he's 37 this year.
> IMO " .. cheeky right 'til the end" is so, so patronising.
> 
> I notice baby Didi Meghansdottir got a mention too, just in case we had forgotten Megan is heavily, heavily pregnant.
> I vehemently hate that thing of creating a personality before a baby is born. I am so very superstitions about that. (A secretary of mine had to have an induced stillbirth at nearly 8 months. Beyond heartbreaking.)
> 
> I want to be compassionate to Harry but he's not making it easy.
> The reason why he was so beloved in the UK was because we felt for that boy, not even in his teens, and his enormous loss when Diana died and no one, I feel, will not recognise how much a role his grandparents have played in filling that void. Specifically, Prince Phillip with his similar shared experience of growing up without a mother present in his life.
> 
> I will attribute this sloppy tribute to jet-lag.



I attribute it to a stupid spoilt man child and his awful wife


----------



## CarryOn2020

*OMG!  *
Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:









						Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
					

Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*


WOW! 
So, the doctor excuse was another lie. 
_Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!*
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*


Cruel and demented - she does need help


----------



## elvisfan4life

Harry location - and that is enough of him and her for me I’m off to the Kate and will thread to discuss Phillip not here


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!*
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._



I don't know how her massive ego doesn't snap her neck.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!*
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


She just can’t keep quiet


----------



## justwatchin

lanasyogamama said:


> Chrissy Teigan said there is TSA a few miles outside LAX that celebs get to use.


Well of course there is...ugh....celebs can’t be bothered by the common folk


----------



## justwatchin

Clearblueskies said:


> She just can’t keep quiet


Or make it about her...unbelievable


----------



## gelbergirl

Are we having a special viewing thread on Saturday for Prince Philip funeral or do we meet here?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Geez, the one time his sullen sad default expression would have made sense, he has his wife’s inappropriate smirk on!


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just learned from Lady CC that not only was he basically left an orphan with his mother admitted to a mental hospital and his father riding into the sunset with his mistress: the man who basically raised him, Lord Mountbatten's (and his mother's) older brother, the Marquess of Milford Haven, died of bone cancer, which is when Lord Mountbatten stepped in to be a father figure to Philip and his cousin. And then his sister's tragic death. This man has had so many losses and still somehow thrived, not just survived.



If you think about it, Philip and Elizabeth are a reverse fairy tale. She was the beautiful princess and he the penniless and stateless Naval officer. He joined the Navy after Gordononstoun because he had nowhere else to go. His sisters were by then married to German nobility. 

QWD - If you can access it - I think you are in Germany ? - the full obituary in the Telegraph is just awesome.

I do so hope that the current Earl Mountbatten and his wife Penny are at the funeral. Penny Knatchbull is a very old friend of Prince Phillip and his carriage driving companion. The Mountbatten's too have had their share of tragedy. I can still remember the news when Lord Mountbatten was killed.

It rather puts " I cut my father off because he sold some photos of himself to a news paper " into perspective in respect of life's losses survived and surmounted.


----------



## Clearblueskies

justwatchin said:


> Or make it about her...unbelievable


It is unbelievable.  She’s “willing to forgive and move on”  Really?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


Holy $hit Meghan, just STFU already.  No one gives a damn about you right now.  You'd be the center of attention because you're an attention whore and do everything to try to get eyes on you!
What happened to her "doctor didn't authorize her to fly" BS?  Lies, lies, lies.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._



DOESNT WANT TO BE THE CENTER OF ATTENTION?  When?  What?  BS!!!  Oh Cringe... you are always cringey...


----------



## CobaltBlu

Ladies, thank you so much for the updates on the Heavily Pregnant One.   
I am still gobsmacked at her complete lack of self awareness. 

All these tributes and stories about Philip are so interesting. 
Like many of you, I am reflecting on loss as well. Very sad.  I am sad for HRH QE2


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> Harry location - and that is enough of him and her for me I’m off to the Kate and will thread to discuss Phillip not here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5052887
> View attachment 5052888
> View attachment 5052887
> View attachment 5052888



‘Thanks so much for posting this. Much appreciation for your thoughtfulness.

_The Telegraph’s _obituary is well worth a read, even if it is behind a paywall. It had me in tears.
A  snippet:
_The man who was so often presented as an ignorant philistine took immense pains to be well informed. In 1990 his biographer, Tim Heald, counted 8,385 volumes in his private library at Buckingham Palace – 560 books on birds, 456 on religion, 352 on the Navy and ships, and no fewer than 209 books of poetry. Prose fiction did not feature so largely, apart from tales of adventure and daring.

There was also a surprising sensitivity and humility lurking beneath the gruffness. Aged 21, he wrote to a relation: “I know you will never think very much of me. I am rude and unmannerly and I say many things out of turn which I realise afterwards must have hurt someone. Then I am filled with remorse and try to put matters right.”
 _


----------



## rose60610

Finally dawned on me. First hint of M&H's "stepping down" from royal duties was when Drama Duchess didn't adopt a British accent a la Madonna right away. Had they planned on staying, Meghan would have tried to out-Brit the Brits on the accent within two weeks of being in London. Which of course she would have failed abysmally. But of course, Harry has adopted an American accent already. Suuuuuure...


----------



## Clearblueskies

I think Meghan’s going bonkers stewing in Montecito.  The thought of Harry back here and out of hand clutching distance is seriously stressing her out.  She has to remind everyone she’s central to everything that’s happening as well as being *heavily pregnant. * 

“Meghan doesn’t want to be the centre of attention” she says in another sneakily released chunk of grubby PR - what a nasty piece of work


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> It is unbelievable.  She’s “willing to forgive and move on”  Really?



You know, I was focussing my anger over Philip's treatment on Harry, but I think I have room for one more


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

OK, I'm sorry. For Meghan to announce now, of all times, she didn't go because she'd have stolen the spotlight, proves she is truly psychotic IMO. What a hateful bish. People who gave her the benefit of doubt before and are still stans after that, should be put on a Stupid People Registry .


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._



This article made me almost 

"_Meghan said it's during these times when family should come together, put their differences aside and unite as one. She said this is what Prince Philip would want and that *she's willing to forgive* and move forward,' they said_*.*" 

MM calls the BRF oppressors and racists, and she is willing to forgive.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


special bond....oh really?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This article made me almost
> 
> "_Meghan said it's during these times when family should come together, put their differences aside and unite as one. She said this is what Prince Philip would want and that *she's willing to forgive* and move forward,' they said_*.*"
> 
> MM calls the BRF oppressors and racists, and she is willing to forgive.


what?  willing to forgive who?
can't she shut up for a couple of days?


----------



## csshopper

The yogurt I ate for breakfast is curdling in my stomach, but not to make this about me    I shall go straight to the cause of it, Harry the Handbag and Meghan the Media Ho. Barely more than 24 hours since he departed California, unfortunately on a Round Trip Ticket, she is grabbing for internet space doing exactly opposite of what she was supposedly trying to do, not call attention to herself.

He's actually worse, it's a close call, but I give him the edge. This, from his tribute to his grandfather, has to be the MOST TONE DEAF comment made to date, claiming Phillip was  "cheeky right 'til the end". NO, you stupid, vapid, sniveling twerp (like others I'm out of enough adjectives), he was NOT "cheeky to the end" and if you had asked for your balls back so you could travel to have seen him before he died, even if through a hospital window if necessary, you would have known he was on death's door. 28 days in hospital for a man who railed against such requirements should have been one clue, being notified outright the end was near should have certainly penetrated your numbskull, but with a dead heart and no soul, the brain does not engage easily.

What really flames me (can you tell?) is this comes following a beautiful and moving statement from the Countess of Essex about Phillip's death being "gentle, it's just like someone took him by the hand and off he went". The flippant, absolutely insulting under the circumstances, assessment from his toe rag of a grandson says so much about Harry's lack of recognition of how out of touch he realllllly is.

It feels good to be able to vent to people who understand. The other day when tpf was inaccessible due to technical issues, I was surprised to realize how unsettling it was. Missed everyone and the conversations.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> This article made me almost
> 
> "_Meghan said it's during these times when family should come together, put their differences aside and unite as one. She said this is what Prince Philip would want and that *she's willing to forgive* and move forward,' they said_*.*"
> 
> MM calls the BRF oppressors and racists, and she is willing to forgive.



I take that as a psychotic at work.


----------



## sdkitty

I hope by the time events like the Oscars are back to normal with the red carpet, etc, everyone will have grown bored with them and she will not get her dream come true of being included with the Hollywood elite.
Becoming world famous and then having to stay at home and wear a mask must be so frustrating for this hungry woman


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like H and pregnant MM 'broke protocol' with their statement on Archew*ll.

"_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who made a set of astonishing claims about the royals in their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview, issued a brief statement on their Archewell website on Friday after the Duke of Edinburgh's death was announced. But Harry and Meghan's message has not helped the situation with the royals, according to a royal insider.

The source told The Daily Telegraph: “*There’s a natural order here and they just ignored it by putting their own statement out, without telling anyone, before the Prince of Wales had even issued a response*.

"Quite a few people read it and thought: 'Is that all they’ve got to say?_'”









						Harry & Meghan's attacked for Philip statement - couple 'ignored' rule
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle's statement after Prince Philip's death has not helped tensions with the Royal Family, it has been claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> The yogurt I ate for breakfast is curdling in my stomach, but not to make this about me    I shall go straight to the cause of it, Harry the Handbag and Meghan the Media Ho. Barely more than 24 hours since he departed California, unfortunately on a Round Trip Ticket, she is grabbing for internet space doing exactly opposite of what she was supposedly trying to do, not call attention to herself.
> 
> He's actually worse, it's a close call, but I give him the edge. This, from his tribute to his grandfather, has to be the MOST TONE DEAF comment made to date, claiming Phillip was  "cheeky right 'til the end". NO, you stupid, vapid, sniveling twerp (like others I'm out of enough adjectives), he was NOT "cheeky to the end" and if you had asked for your balls back so you could travel to have seen him before he died, even if through a hospital window if necessary, you would have known he was on death's door. 28 days in hospital for a man who railed against such requirements should have been one clue, being notified outright the end was near should have certainly penetrated your numbskull, but with a dead heart and no soul, the brain does not engage easily.
> 
> What really flames me (can you tell?) is this comes following a beautiful and moving statement from the Countess of Essex about Phillip's death being "gentle, it's just like someone took him by the hand and off he went". The flippant, absolutely insulting under the circumstances, assessment from his toe rag of a grandson says so much about Harry's lack of recognition of how out of touch he realllllly is.
> 
> It feels good to be able to vent to people who understand. The other day when tpf was inaccessible due to technical issues, I was surprised to realize how unsettling it was. Missed everyone and the conversations.



You said it so much better than I could.
I go from angry, annoyed, screaming at the computer, _unsettled_ panic when TPF was down to crying over these beautiful tributes. I’m reading the free Kindle book by Nigel Cawthorne, _I know I’m rude, but it’s fun.  _It’s touching and shows a triumphant spirit. He was such blessing to the world.

See, Philip could say things like that about himself and we can all chuckle because ... *his actions spoke louder than his words*. And his actions were kind, thoughtful and caring.  He never smacked a polo ball into a group of reporters, he never stumbled out of the clubs, he never threw stink bombs at a wedding reception, never stripped a guy naked, never publicly accused his family of nasty things,  etc. Sure, he fussed and fumed about various incompetence but he respected the person’s dignity. Definitely something for us to aspire to.


----------



## Sharont2305

I bet the time difference between her and Harry is killing her.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> what?  willing to forgive who?
> can't she shut up for a couple of days?



I hope Charles will not be afraid of being called racist (again) and goes ahead with his old proposal of a 'slimmed-down monarchy'.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Guys, the article clearly says it's quoting unnamed "friends" (i.e., not real people) of Meghan. It's not like she came out and made a statement to the press...


----------



## CarryOn2020

I hope that Harry continues to show his a$$ and they kick him out of the country before the funeral.
He is already trying to nip at William with the tributes. Just enough already. 

From the DM:
_At a time when the relationship between the brothers is strained, William released his official memorial via Buckingham Palace but Harry used the Archewell charity he set up with his wife Meghan in California 30 minutes later._


----------



## sdkitty

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Guys, the article clearly says it's quoting unnamed "friends" (i.e., not real people) of Meghan. It's not like she came out and made a statement to the press...


if they are friends its the same thing....if they're making it up that's different


----------



## Chanbal

The BRF is likely trying hard to accommodate the husband of the pregnantMM!

*THE Queen will have to decide whether Prince Harry can use his 'HRH' title in the order of service for Prince Philip's funeral after an agreement made during Megxit.*









						Queen will 'decide whether Prince Harry can use HRH titles' in funeral order
					

THE Queen will have to decide whether Prince Harry can use his ‘HRH’ title in the order of service for Prince Philip’s funeral after an agreement made during Megxit. Harry could t…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




*UNITED FRONT Prince Harry and Prince William ‘will wear the same suits’ for Philip’s funeral to avoid rift, royal expert says*









						Harry & Wills 'will dress the same' for funeral to avoid rift, expert says
					

PRINCE William and Prince Harry will wear the same suits for their grandfather’s funeral on Saturday to avoid a “rift”, a royal expert has said. The Duke of Sussex is expected to …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Guys, the article clearly says it's quoting unnamed "friends" (i.e., not real people) of Meghan. It's not like she came out and made a statement to the press...


Meghan’s been using this tactic since 2018   If these *friends that aren’t. cough. Meghan Markle* weren’t behaving at her behest, she’s had plenty of time to tell them to stop....or sue, of course.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From Cawthorne’s book - Prince Philip knew, he knew people. 
_What kept him going is a a sense of duty–a thing that Prince Philip exemplifies. In 1992, he told the Independent on Sunday: ‘Everyone has to have a sense of duty. A duty to society, to their family. I mean, you name it. If you haven’t got a sense of duty you get the sort of community we have now. Look around: mugging and drugs and abuse, intellectual abuse, intellectual mugging.’ _


----------



## mellibelly

sdkitty said:


> special bond....oh really?


----------



## Lodpah

She’s despicable. Let’s see what she does on the day of the funeral. It will be epic. Maybe that’s the day she goes into Braxton Hicks contractions and then it was a false alarm but then the news will run with it. 

I imagine MO and BO are astounded by this.


----------



## Chanbal

This made Yahoo 'front page' today. Surprised that the pregnant MM's PR-machine didn't filter this yet.


He added: “*I know from someone close to him that he thought Meghan and Harry’s interview with Oprah Winfrey was ‘madness’ and ‘no good would come of it.’* 









						Prince Philip Thought Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s Oprah Interview Was ‘Madness’
					

ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP via Getty ImagesPrince Philip thought Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey was “madness” and that “no good would come of it,” his official biographer has said.Gyles Brandreth, a long standing friend of the Duke of Edinburgh, who died aged 99 last week, is the only...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## scarlet555

Chloe302225 said:


>




Why does everyone look so authentic except for Cringe?   She's(Cringe) an actress too!


----------



## Chloe302225

The comments under the very pro MM+H post are really showing how more people seem to be finally seeing the 2 grifters for what they are.


----------



## Jayne1

RAINDANCE said:


> He joined the Navy after Gordononstoun because he had nowhere else to go. His sisters were by then married to German nobility.


That's putting it kindly. His four sisters all married German princes and all were very sympathetic to the Nazis. 

Only Philip didn't marry a Nazi.


----------



## RAINDANCE

rose60610 said:


> OK, I'm sorry. For Meghan to announce now, of all times, she didn't go because she'd have stolen the spotlight, proves she is truly psychotic IMO. What a hateful bish. People who gave her the benefit of doubt before and are still stans after that, should be put on a Stupid People Registry .



I am beyond speechless at this.

At the mere fact of allowing a press release at all - WTF ? Who in their right mind would think that's ok.  A normal person would have shut down any potential reporting with an anodine " Please respect our privacy at this time" quote.
I cannot for the life of me think what this achieves other than to further infuriatre the BRF.

Who the F..K does she think she is ? She's #6's first wife. That's all.

She's out of control.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry


I think his font, font colour and background colour choice just gave me dyslexia.



CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


Wow is this embarrassing. It’s a funeral. They aren’t glamorous pap events with a red carpet pose off. 

I can’t help wondering whether the friend is actually not that friendly towards her with an insinuation like that.
“Honestly Meghan everyone will think you are so humble for saying you don’t want to the fiercest hottie at the funeral, though of course you would be.” 

That smile in the car is like something a columbo villain would do the moment Peter Faulk walked out the room. Jeez.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This article made me almost
> 
> "_Meghan said it's during these times when family should come together, put their differences aside and unite as one. She said this is what Prince Philip would want and that *she's willing to forgive* and move forward,' they said_*.*"
> 
> MM calls the BRF oppressors and racists, and she is willing to forgive.



This. P. O. S. I am struggling to find words. He's barely cold and not even buried and she makes it all about her once again. How dare she is "willing to forgive".


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

sdkitty said:


> if they are friends its the same thing....if they're making it up that's different



If they truly are friends, I highly doubt the "friend" would be speaking to tabloid (that historically been very unkind to MM) about her anyway. So, I think it's safe to say that either their source is made up or this person is not a friend of MM. The entire British Monarchy and MM are screwed up, no doubt, but it's also important for people to have critical thinking skills to filter out so much of the garbage that's online today


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like H and pregnant MM 'broke protocol' with their statement on Archew*ll.
> 
> "_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who made a set of astonishing claims about the royals in their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview, issued a brief statement on their Archewell website on Friday after the Duke of Edinburgh's death was announced. But Harry and Meghan's message has not helped the situation with the royals, according to a royal insider.
> 
> The source told The Daily Telegraph: “*There’s a natural order here and they just ignored it by putting their own statement out, without telling anyone, before the Prince of Wales had even issued a response*._



Come on now, Meghan let us all know protocol doesn't apply to them anymore since they left. Why would they wait for Charles, the new head of the family...respect is a foreign word to them.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> The BRF is likely trying hard to accommodate the husband of the pregnantMM!
> 
> *THE Queen will have to decide whether Prince Harry can use his 'HRH' title in the order of service for Prince Philip's funeral after an agreement made during Megxit.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen will 'decide whether Prince Harry can use HRH titles' in funeral order
> 
> 
> THE Queen will have to decide whether Prince Harry can use his ‘HRH’ title in the order of service for Prince Philip’s funeral after an agreement made during Megxit. Harry could t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *UNITED FRONT Prince Harry and Prince William ‘will wear the same suits’ for Philip’s funeral to avoid rift, royal expert says*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Wills 'will dress the same' for funeral to avoid rift, expert says
> 
> 
> PRINCE William and Prince Harry will wear the same suits for their grandfather’s funeral on Saturday to avoid a “rift”, a royal expert has said. The Duke of Sussex is expected to …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Sad that Harry is not man enough to know his place. I guess he is years behind and is of the mindset that instead of earning his way he’s got to have a participation trophy too. 

I mean he’s an adult and behaves this way? He’s a sick and disgusting man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

scarlet555 said:


> DOESNT WANT TO BE THE CENTER OF ATTENTION?  When?  What?  BS!!!  Oh Cringe... you are always cringey...


The mere fact that it's worded "doesn't want to be the center of attention" as in assuming that _she_ naturally would be the center of attention, is such textbook narc hubris and contempt for others. If _that_ statement doesn't make everyone's narc-dar go off, nothing will.

Like purseinsanity posted, just SHUT UP, Meghan. And send her smirking hubby packing, Will.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Guys, the article clearly says it's quoting unnamed "friends" (i.e., not real people) of Meghan. It's not like she came out and made a statement to the press...



True, but also those stories rarely come out of thin air as in, there's not a DM reporter typing away whatever he made up just a minute ago. I am pretty convinced this is what Team Meghan drip-fed, especially as they never realize when their statements make her look even worse instead of angelic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The BRF is likely trying hard to accommodate the husband of the pregnantMM!



As they've done from the moment the demon spawn laid eyes on Harry, and see how they are being thanked.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


Didn’t someone call that last thing  a bit ago? That she’d claim they had this special bond because of Diana and the ‘dearest pa’ ’letters?
She’s so two-faced no wonder she needs that heavy ass wig. Her head must be like Janus or another similar word.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CobaltBlu said:


> Ladies, thank you so much for the updates on the Heavily Pregnant One.
> *I am still gobsmacked at her complete lack of self awareness.*
> 
> All these tributes and stories about Philip are so interesting.
> Like many of you, I am reflecting on loss as well. Very sad.  I am sad for HRH QE2



 +100
and by contrast the except posted by Carryon2020 which made me cry, again.

_There was also a surprising sensitivity and humility lurking beneath the gruffness. Aged 21, he wrote to a relation: “I know you will never think very much of me. I am rude and unmannerly and I say many things out of turn which I realise afterwards must have hurt someone. Then I am filled with remorse and try to put matters right._


----------



## mellibelly

Nutmeg will treat her own father this way. Ignore him in life, release some bs cold word salad statement when he dies, then attend his funeral with a psychotic smirk. I didn’t think it was possible to hate these two even more, but here we are


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Who the F..K does she think she is ? She's #6's first wife. That's all.



She might as well be his only wife. Even if she divorces him, what sane woman would want to take on this wreck of a man?


----------



## Chloe302225

OogleAtLuxury said:


> If they truly are friends, I highly doubt the "friend" would be speaking to tabloid (that historically been very unkind to MM) about her anyway. So, I think it's safe to say that either their source is made up or this person is not a friend of MM. The entire British Monarchy and MM are screwed up, no doubt, but it's also important for people to have critical thinking skills to filter out so much of the garbage that's online today



You mean like how her friends did not speak to Omid Scobie or People Magazine?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think his font, font colour and background colour choice just gave me dyslexia.
> 
> 
> Wow is this embarrassing. It’s a funeral. They aren’t glamorous pap events with a red carpet pose off.
> 
> I can’t help wondering whether the friend is actually not that friendly towards her with an insinuation like that.
> “Honestly Meghan everyone will think you are so humble for saying you don’t want to the fiercest hottie at the funeral, though of course you would be.”
> 
> That smile in the car is like something a columbo villain would do the moment Peter Faulk walked out the room. Jeez.
> View attachment 5052990



I thought in the smaller pic he was grinning, but the big one it seems like he's about to cry.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> I think his font, font colour and background colour choice just gave me dyslexia.
> 
> 
> Wow is this embarrassing. It’s a funeral. They aren’t glamorous pap events with a red carpet pose off.
> 
> I can’t help wondering whether the friend is actually not that friendly towards her with an insinuation like that.
> “Honestly Meghan everyone will think you are so humble for saying you don’t want to the fiercest hottie at the funeral, though of course you would be.”
> 
> That smile in the car is like something a columbo villain would do the moment Peter Faulk walked out the room. Jeez.
> View attachment 5052990


Re: the photo And leaning forward to make certain he can be clearly visible. His resident media coach back in CA must be so proud, or maybe she's on speaker phone in his lap giving him direction, or maybe he is secretly celebrating she is not there to claw her way into center shot for the supposedly loathed paps.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Finally dawned on me. First hint of M&H's "stepping down" from royal duties was when Drama Duchess didn't adopt a British accent a la Madonna right away. Had they planned on staying, Meghan would have tried to out-Brit the Brits on the accent within two weeks of being in London. Which of course she would have failed abysmally. But of course, Harry has adopted an American accent already. Suuuuuure...


When you are being out-acted by Madonna...


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Chloe302225 said:


> You mean like how her friends did not speak to Omid Scobie or People Magazine?



??? Daily Mail has been nothing but awful things to say about Meghan. People Magazine has a bunch of pro-Meghan feel good articles. How do you not see the difference between those two things...?


----------



## Lodpah

OogleAtLuxury said:


> ??? Daily Mail has been nothing but awful things to say about Meghan. People Magazine has a bunch of pro-Meghan feel good articles. How do you not see the difference between those two things...?


What has she done to merit anything worthy to report? Delivering sandwiches, word salad, platitudes? Her worth is tied up in a man she married. 
And don’t come at me as racist. My girls are biracial.


----------



## Chloe302225

OogleAtLuxury said:


> ??? Daily Mail has been nothing but awful things to say about Meghan. People Magazine has a bunch of pro-Meghan feel good articles. How do you not see the difference between those two things...?



The DM as of late has mostly negative things to say but it did not start like that but my main point was that her friends have in fact on multiple occasions spoken to the press to express her opinion and still do so. The fact that it is People and not the DM means she knows which media outlets are willing to print exactly what she wants.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She might as well be his only wife. Even if she divorces him, what sane woman would want to take on this wreck of a man?


One of her stans?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The BRF is likely trying hard to accommodate the husband of the pregnantMM!
> 
> *THE Queen will have to decide whether Prince Harry can use his 'HRH' title in the order of service for Prince Philip's funeral after an agreement made during Megxit.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen will 'decide whether Prince Harry can use HRH titles' in funeral order
> 
> 
> THE Queen will have to decide whether Prince Harry can use his ‘HRH’ title in the order of service for Prince Philip’s funeral after an agreement made during Megxit. Harry could t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *UNITED FRONT Prince Harry and Prince William ‘will wear the same suits’ for Philip’s funeral to avoid rift, royal expert says*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Wills 'will dress the same' for funeral to avoid rift, expert says
> 
> 
> PRINCE William and Prince Harry will wear the same suits for their grandfather’s funeral on Saturday to avoid a “rift”, a royal expert has said. The Duke of Sussex is expected to …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


They should wear exactly the same black j crew suit but William should be given a massive crown with lots of diamonds and emeralds and a matching sceptre the moment they enter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OogleAtLuxury said:


> ??? Daily Mail has been nothing but awful things to say about Meghan. People Magazine has a bunch of pro-Meghan feel good articles. How do you not see the difference between those two things...?



DM didn't run the story exclusively though. It is not unlikely it was fed to a magazine they are more cordial with first.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OogleAtLuxury said:


> ??? Daily Mail has been nothing but awful things to say about Meghan. People Magazine has a bunch of pro-Meghan feel good articles. How do you not see the difference between those two things...?



‘Wow. The truth is out there, but not in those 2 magazines/tabloids. I post DM articles not because I believe the articles but because it is a healthy anecdote to all the sugary crap posted by the sycophantic US press. Since H&M sue the DM, we know they dislike it. We also know from the lawsuits that most stories are correct. Additionally, we read the comments. The DM commenters are far more interesting than the People ones. Still, before making up my mind, I do the real research. I make the effort to be informed with the truth, nothing but the truth.  Not H&M truth, not OW’s truth, the truth.

I thought your comment about MM’s friends was meant to be sarcastic. We all know she doesn’t have any real friends, just the Hwood pretenders.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

QueenofWrapDress said:


> DM didn't run the story exclusively though. It is not unlikely it was fed to a magazine they are more cordial with first.



I don't see any magazines that are kind to Meghan running the story. Just the usual suspects that print nothing but unkind things about her.



Lodpah said:


> What has she done to merit anything worthy to report? Delivering sandwiches, word salad, platitudes? Her worth is tied up in a man she married.
> And don’t come at me as racist. My girls are biracial.



I have never called anyone racist, nor did I say that Meghan is worthy of reporting. I'm American, so I think this obsession with the British Royal family is a little silly altogether.

I think you're willfully misinterpreting what I said. My point was that (a) Meghan did not come out and make some kind of dramatic statement to the press. So, to say that she's trying to take the limelight away from Prince Philip is misguided. and (b) The idea that a "friend" who's actually a confidant of Meghan and/or Harry speaking to the DailyMail is ludicrous. If they had any kind of real relationship, that person would absolutely not speak to a tabloid that purposefully misinterprets things to paint Meghan in the worst light. So, it's possible that the tabloid either got the quote from someone who claims to be their friend but actually has a very distant relationship with them OR they just made up the quote. 

The point was that Meghan has not caused this media storm around her.


----------



## Lodpah

You all think Harry will stay for the Queen’s birthday?


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._



To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively. I don't know what she should do in this situation.

If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.

If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."

How do you guys think she should've handled it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> You all think Harry will stay for the Queen’s birthday?


Nooooo. QE will lose points if she allows him to push his way in.  Doesn’t he have a heavily pregnant woman to get back to?


----------



## Lodpah

OogleAtLuxury said:


> I don't see any magazines that are kind to Meghan running the story. Just the usual suspects that print nothing but unkind things about her.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never called anyone racist, nor did I say that Meghan is worthy of reporting. I'm American, so I think this obsession with the British Royal family is a little silly altogether.
> 
> I think you're willfully misinterpreting what I said. My point was that (a) Meghan did not come out and make some kind of dramatic statement to the press. So, to say that she's trying to take the limelight away from Prince Philip is misguided. and (b) The idea that a "friend" who's actually a confidant of Meghan and/or Harry speaking to the DailyMail is ludicrous. If they had any kind of real relationship, that person would absolutely not speak to a tabloid that purposefully misinterprets things to paint Meghan in the worst light. So, it's possible that the tabloid either got the quote from someone who claims to be their friend but actually has a very distant relationship with them OR they just made up the quote.
> 
> The point was that Meghan has not caused this media storm around her.


You explained it well but Meghan has a history of suing so I doubt the paper will run it without some sort of fact checking when it comes to her. There was an article many pages back and online  about how PR firms feed exactly what the client wants to the papers. I call her a vexatious litigant at this point so many papers will either gush about her and the papers who fact check her. 

She’s really not newsworthy so she has her PR firm send feeds. That’s what I read and it makes sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> How do you guys think she should've handled it?



I personally think the statement "She's not allowed to travel per her physicians" combined with Harry's statement would have been sufficient. Did I buy the excuse? No, but silence is golden and I'll give them that, it was the easiest way to save face.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively. I don't know what she should do in this situation.
> 
> If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.
> 
> If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."
> 
> How do you guys think she should've handled it?


I think she should take the upper lip and be silence as a support to the Queen and say nothing at this point. They’re grieving. Being respectful is a virtue. There’s a time and place to say something. That’s what I think.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lalame said:


> To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively. I don't know what she should do in this situation.
> 
> If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.
> 
> If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."
> 
> How do you guys think she should've handled it?


Not directed at you, lalame, but she could FFS just have shut up for a week and let her dear hubby's grandfather have his final moment of recognition after almost a century of duty and service to his country. Both she and Harry said quite enough with their first statement.


----------



## kipp

rose60610 said:


> OK, I'm sorry. For Meghan to announce now, of all times, she didn't go because she'd have stolen the spotlight, proves she is truly psychotic IMO. What a hateful bish. People who gave her the benefit of doubt before and are still stans after that, should be put on a Stupid People Registry .


Moreover, with "friends" who announce this on behalf of Meghan, who needs enemies?


----------



## Clearblueskies

What jumps out at me is that all the tributes, shared by heads of state, other royals, people in the street, whoever, are all about Philip.  They talk about his qualities, the kind things he did that no one knew about and his sense of duty and love.  

One person only is wittering on about herself - Meghan.  So far (because I’m sure there’ll be more) there’s why she’s not coming (mark 1), why she’s not coming (marks 2 and 2a) and now her “special bond” with the man she barely had time to know before sprinting off to Canada and photo ops unlimited.


----------



## CarryOn2020

540 pages of print.  *This man is loved*.
Let’s focus on that and that alone.  Let the jealous joy-stealers pi$$ off.








						UK newspapers dedicated more than 500 print pages to Prince Philip within three days of duke's death
					

The UK media dedicated more than 540 pages of print coverage to the death of Prince Philip over three days, Press Gazette analysis has found.




					www.pressgazette.co.uk


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively. I don't know what she should do in this situation.
> 
> If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.
> 
> If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."
> 
> How do you guys think she should've handled it?


She should have stayed silent after the Dr won’t allow travelling statement.  There was no need to say anything else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

When you guys say "her and Harry's statement," are you referring to that little tribute on Archewell? If anything I was side-eyeing that the most, since it hardly said anything... but maybe I missed a more substantive statement?

Edit: N/M, I see it now in post below.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> From Harry



Thank you Sharont2305 for sharing both Prince William's instagram posting and this from H.

While reading this my thought was ... WOW what a huge difference between Prince William's and H ... A difference between a future King and an unqualified wannabe king.  I'm with much pride for Prince W and K!


----------



## Lodpah

Ok please forgive me. I read a comment somewhere. When Talon took Harry to California she checked him into “Hotel California”. For those too young to know what it means it’s a song the Eagles wrote a long time ago. Once you check in you can never check out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Thank you Sharont2305 for sharing both Prince William's instagram posting and this from H.
> 
> While reading this my thought was ... WOW what a huge difference between Prince William's and H ... A difference between a future King and an unqualified wannabe king.  I'm with much pride for Prince W and K!



H posted his 30 minutes after William. He could have chosen to revise


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 540 pages of print.  *This man is loved*.
> Let’s focus on that and that alone.  Let the jealous joy-stealers pi$$ off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UK newspapers dedicated more than 500 print pages to Prince Philip within three days of duke's death
> 
> 
> The UK media dedicated more than 540 pages of print coverage to the death of Prince Philip over three days, Press Gazette analysis has found.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pressgazette.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5053121
> 
> 
> View attachment 5053141



Honestly right now the other thread is much better for my soul. No weird media stunts, just a collection of the nice and amazing things people did (e.g. the Bhutanese royal family put up an altar and King and Queen personally lit 1000 butter lamps in Philip's honour) / had to say. It is weirdly comforting.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *It looks like H and pregnant MM 'broke protocol' with their statement on Archew*ll.*
> 
> "_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who made a set of astonishing claims about the royals in their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview, issued a brief statement on their Archewell website on Friday after the Duke of Edinburgh's death was announced. But Harry and Meghan's message has not helped the situation with the royals, according to a royal insider.
> 
> The source told The Daily Telegraph: “*There’s a natural order here and they just ignored it by putting their own statement out, without telling anyone, before the Prince of Wales had even issued a response*.
> 
> "Quite a few people read it and thought: 'Is that all they’ve got to say?_'”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan's attacked for Philip statement - couple 'ignored' rule
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle's statement after Prince Philip's death has not helped tensions with the Royal Family, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



What's new??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Ok please forgive me. I read a comment somewhere. When Talon took Harry to California she checked him into “Hotel California”. For those too young to know what it means it’s a song the Eagles wrote a long time ago. Once you check in you can never check out.



You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave!


----------



## lalame

Hmm, quite a difference between the two statements. It's impossible to ignore some pointed implications in there about how his grandfather's best attribute was he valued duty to his country and crown and that they're (Wills/Kate) carrying on what he wanted the family to do - unlike some.

Harry's was for sure more personal, and maybe that is appropriate given he obviously is not carrying on Philip's vision of duty to crown. So all he can really speak from is the perspective of a grandson, and those personal moments. I could identify with this statement more, obviously, and maybe that is part of the point... Harry's distancing himself from the BRF lifestyle.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> H posted his 30 minutes after William. He could have chosen to revise


I think it was scheduled like that.


----------



## lalame

The two statements are so different that I wonder if it was planned jointly by their press offices on purpose. For the reason I mentioned... purposely distinguish the voice of the future king vs someone who has chosen to leave the royal establishment.

Do H+M even have a press office anymore in the UK?   Or is it all independent, led by Sunshine Sachs


----------



## Toks

OogleAtLuxury said:


> I don't see any magazines that are kind to Meghan running the story. Just the usual suspects that print nothing but unkind things about her.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never called anyone racist, nor did I say that Meghan is worthy of reporting. I'm American, so I think this obsession with the British Royal family is a little silly altogether.
> 
> I think you're willfully misinterpreting what I said. My point was that (a) Meghan did not come out and make some kind of dramatic statement to the press. So, to say that she's trying to take the limelight away from Prince Philip is misguided. and (b) The idea that a "friend" who's actually a confidant of Meghan and/or Harry speaking to the DailyMail is ludicrous. If they had any kind of real relationship, that person would absolutely not speak to a tabloid that purposefully misinterprets things to paint Meghan in the worst light. So, it's possible that the tabloid either got the quote from someone who claims to be their friend but actually has a very distant relationship with them OR they just made up the quote.
> 
> The point was that Meghan has not caused this media storm around her.





Lodpah said:


> What has she done to merit anything worthy to report? Delivering sandwiches, word salad, platitudes? Her worth is tied up in a man she married.
> And don’t come at me as racist. My girls are biracial.
> 
> TBH ever since she got involved with Harry, there’s been bad press. All these women here obviously with no lives all jealous of the fact that he bagged himself a mixed race woman and to top it all a successful actress, they even resorted to calling her a Z list actress. So much hatred and they run around saying they aren’t racists. One they don’t have jobs and two if I suffered miscarriage which I actually did in the past, I wouldn’t be getting on any plane at all. And three If I don’t get on with my in-laws which surprisingly I don’t I wouldn’t have anything to do with them except for the ones that care about me and I will show them love too. Cut the lady some slack. You’re all ladies here and yet you sprew so much hate. Whatever happened to women empowerment and women standing up for one another. Yet we type so much hatred here.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively. *I don't know what she should do in this situation.*
> 
> If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.
> 
> If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."
> 
> How do you guys think she should've handled it?


IMO, she should shut up, and stay away.  Period.  We don't need her thoughts, statements from Harry about how PP will always be in her heart and Archie's (the kid saw him what, once?), no statements about how she is graciously staying away to avoid the obvious public adoration that would come her way if she attended the funeral, etc., etc., etc.  Their rushed, emotionless initial statement was enough, and said plenty.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Showed my husband clips of Oprah's interview, and his comment was "such a royal waste of time".



From other postings and ours it sounds like our husbands think alike!   They should get together and maybe create their own thread to chat about how their spouses are doing on the Harry & Meghan thread ... hmmm mine is back at it again, mine is crying, hey mine is laughing, mine has collapsed onto the floor, I better go check on her.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave!


Sigh, thanks a lot @Lodpah and @QueenofWrapDress!  Now that song will be stuck in my head all day!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Do H+M even have a press office anymore in the UK?   Or is it all independent, led by Sunshine Sachs



I don't think so...Clarence House was handling their mail still, but that ended recently after the one year probation was up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't believe I saw this posted yet. Apparently no private plane to London for H. He took a British Airways flight from Los Angeles and was taken away in a black range rover after deplaned. Went into some detail from moment he left his home. Enjoy.



He wanted to be "Just Call Me Harry." Now he can experience flying like everyone else. Well, not like everyone, we have to assume he was still in first-class. No middle seat in coach for JCMH!


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively.* I don't know what she should do in this situation.*
> 
> If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.
> 
> If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."
> 
> How do you guys think she should've handled it?



SIT THE F&CK DOWN AND SHUT THE F&CK UP


sorry/not sorry for shouting so but my gawd is it so hard to say something simple from the heart and be done?


----------



## Lodpah

poopsie said:


> SIT THE F&CK DOWN AND SHUT THE F&CK UP


Say what you feel! Let it all out.


----------



## Jktgal

This thread is 
1 well ahead of tabloids,
2 don't believe any media PR
3 base opinions on people's actions rather than word salad

Actually, people pained probably has read TOO MUCH PR


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> To be fair though I don't think there's ANYTHING she or "friends" could say that would be received positively. I don't know what she should do in this situation.
> 
> If there were to be nothing said at all about her, people would be like "how can she not say anything, the silence is disrespectful compared to XYZ people, shows how much she cares" and speculate on why she wasn't coming.
> 
> If she makes any comment about whether she's coming or not and why, it's basically like "stfu it's not all about you, we don't believe you anyway."
> 
> How do you guys think she should've handled it?


Silence is golden. Anything coming from her, by her mouthpiece Scoobie, or from any of the ghost "friends" is like static on the radio, annoying as heck and you never seem to be able to get rid of it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> The two statements are so different that I wonder if it was planned jointly by their press offices on purpose. For the reason I mentioned... purposely distinguish the voice of the future king vs someone who has chosen to leave the royal establishment.
> 
> Do H+M even have a press office anymore in the UK?   Or is it all independent, led by Sunshine Sachs


Good question. I don’t fully know the 
 They don’t have a correspondence team to write letters anymore. Also a lot of the sunshine Sachs row was them no wanting palace representatives or the palace line.  

 That said, I think they probably have someone UK based on retainer to slip PR to the press, and Omid of course for lookalike appearances and they must have some communication with the palace for big stories like this. 

I think the palace can no longer advise them what to say but they can cite protocol and stuff like that.


----------



## poopsie

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Because it pops up on the front page of the PurseForum and it pained me to see such a blatant lack of a critical eye when reading tabloids... *We can't believe everything we read on the internet,* and I think it's important to encourage people to understand that. If we don't, then *we end up with people who do things that are harmful either to themselves or others (e.g., skip vaccines)*


Well, we can't believe everything we are told by TPTB either. 
I was 7 when Kennedy was shot. I don't believe a word of the Warren Commission Report. I'm not saying Oliver Stone is right either, but that the 'truth', for me, is somewhere in between. 
News coverage of the VN war----every night was the body count tally. Think those numbers were an accurate reflection of how things were going?
I took high school government class in summer school. We watched the Watergate hearings. Talk about some eye opening stuff! 
I can still see Christine Todd Whitman telling first responders/New Yorkers how the air quality was perfectly safe at Ground Zero. 
And you expect me to trust these people when they tell me something is perfectly safe?
I'll double mask till the cows come home if I have to.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think “wanting to forgive and move forward” is her way of trying to get back in with the BRF.  Either for press heavy moments like this (she was clearly NOT invited, and they will probably keep it that way going forward) or maybe she is starting to realize the life she thought she would have in California is not going to happen.

I’m glad that Harry is getting a break from her.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> *That smile in the car is like something a columbo villain would do the moment Peter Faulk walked out the room.* Jeez.
> View attachment 5052990



I love Columbo! This would be the look the villain gets when Peter Falk turns around in the doorway and says "just one more thing."


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> SIT THE F&CK DOWN AND SHUT THE F&CK UP
> 
> 
> sorry/not sorry for shouting so but my gawd is it so hard to say something simple from the heart and be done?


Not an exact quote but I immediately pictured this when I saw this post.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Well, we can't believe everything we are told by TPTB either.
> I was 7 when Kennedy was shot. I don't believe a word of the Warren Commission Report. I'm not saying Oliver Stone is right either, but that the 'truth', for me, is somewhere in between.
> News coverage of the VN war----every night was the body count tally. Think those numbers were an accurate reflection of how things were going?
> I took high school government class in summer school. We watched the Watergate hearings. Talk about some eye opening stuff!
> I can still see Christine Todd Whitman telling first responders/New Yorkers how the air quality was perfectly safe at Ground Zero.
> And you expect me to trust these people when they tell me something is perfectly safe?
> I'll double mask till the cows come home if I have to.



Hear! Hear!
Adding I will continue to social distance, so stay 10 feet away from me, please.


----------



## sdkitty

OogleAtLuxury said:


> I don't see any magazines that are kind to Meghan running the story. Just the usual suspects that print nothing but unkind things about her.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never called anyone racist, nor did I say that Meghan is worthy of reporting. I'm American, so I think this obsession with the British Royal family is a little silly altogether.
> 
> I think you're willfully misinterpreting what I said. My point was that (a) Meghan did not come out and make some kind of dramatic statement to the press. So, to say that she's trying to take the limelight away from Prince Philip is misguided. and (b) The idea that a "friend" who's actually a confidant of Meghan and/or Harry speaking to the DailyMail is ludicrous. If they had any kind of real relationship, that person would absolutely not speak to a tabloid that purposefully misinterprets things to paint Meghan in the worst light. So, it's possible that the tabloid either got the quote from someone who claims to be their friend but actually has a very distant relationship with them OR they just made up the quote.
> 
> The point was that Meghan has not caused this media storm around her.


but whoever came up with this probably thought it was a positive thing for Meghan


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> Not an exact quote but I immediately pictured this when I saw this post.




Oh I LOVE Ru


----------



## bag-mania

Here she is not wanting to make herself the center of attention so she has her PR reps do it for her instead.

*Meghan Markle Reportedly Spoke With The Queen To Share Condolences For Prince Philip*
On Saturday, a source told the outlet that “Meghan and Harry have already spoken to the Queen to express their sympathies.”

Publicly, the couple dedicated the homepage of their non-profit Archewell to Prince Philip on Friday. They shared a brief tribute to him which read, “In loving memory of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh 1921-2021. Thank you for your service... You will be greatly missed.”









						Meghan Markle Reportedly Spoke With the Queen to Share Condolences For Prince Philip
					

Meghan, who's far along in her pregnancy with her second child, was advised by her doctor not to travel to the U.K. for the funeral.




					www.elle.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I love Columbo! This would be the look the villain gets when Peter Falk turns around in the doorway and says "just one more thing."
> 
> View attachment 5053186


I love that.
“You see sir,  it bothers me, that a talented, busy guy like you with his own podcast and tv work would be so hung up on some titles that were purely honorary. So I don’t get why they keep insisting on referring to you as Prince when you’re in America anyway, can you think why that might be Mr Windsor?”
Harry




QueenofWrapDress said:


> You make a great point, and I appreciate you came here to educate (no snark, I mean it). I still have to disagree only because not only is what we're witnessing exactly Meghan's modus operandi, even as recent as a year ago we were dismissing a lot of things the tabloids wrote about her because it was just wild even for us harsh critics. Unfortunately we've since learned too many of these claims were true, after all. So I'm inclined to believe this is exactly what SS thought we should know about the situation.


You are far more regal in your reception of this comment than I, Queen of the wrap dress.


OogleAtLuxury said:


> Okay, this is insane. At best, this person made a typo and those of you who have commented are latching onto it like children. At worst, this person is a non-native English speaker and you're making fun of them for not knowing the specific idiom they're trying to use.


Look it’s established we’re nasty harridans. Please stop trying to improve us. 

I personally think it’s hilarious they came in guns blazing to insult everyone and made such an utter b*lls up of a simple phrase.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

Lodpah said:


> You all think Harry will stay for the Queen’s birthday?


No, he has to return to his heavily pregnant wife due to give birth between now and November.


----------



## Lodpah

zinacef said:


> No, he has to return to his heavily pregnant wife due to give birth between now and November.


I was eating cashews! Dang.


----------



## Yanca

I read somewhere that people are wondering what the Duchess of Montecito will do , not having the attention for a few days, and we have our answer today with the Media PR drip about her, not  wanting to grab the attention that's why she did not come for the funeral, I truly wonder who are these friends leaking the info? ( Scoobie or Gayle King?) It must have been a reality shock for her to realize the importance of Prince Philip and BRF to the world, from the tributes and statements from all the world, the words of some Hollywood "stars'  are so insignificant in the bigger picture.
I hope I don't get hate for this, but US media is one driving force why Meghan is so embolden with her antics, It seemed that almost all US based media  are pro Meghan and  one sided and are not willing to check the facts, or print the the other side facts and versions,  just because Meghan said so, so it must be, maybe it's the politiocal climate now in the US, and the cancel culture that everybody is afraid to say what they really mean for the fear of being fired, and the means of livelihood taken away.
I found this thread refreshing not because of the collective hate of the Disney Duchess but because most read her and sees her for what she is and not what she tries to potray, Had they really just want to live quietly in the US, they could, there are other foundations that don't drip feed what they do and what they give every single day. They arrange Pap shots, they  have scoobie on speed dial and they attack the instituition that gave them this platform .  They even could have lived in the UK  even after quitting, but that is now what Meghan have in mind, she wanted the hollywood lifestyle and  Disney Royalty version, and make lots of cash from their titles,  and she gets mad and when BRF said no and it's either in or out. Her Service is universal statement is petulant and uncalled for, she barely made two years in the  Royal family, and she is lecturing the Queen and the rest that Service is Universal, she does not have the grasp of the meaning of the word.  It would be nice for a change if she can keep her mouth shut for a few days  and follow the mourning in the UK, but of course  it's a wishful thinking.


----------



## bag-mania

I'd like to know what Harry is telling Eugenie this week. She is probably as close to a sympathetic ear as he's going to get and we still have no idea what she's thinking because she doesn't blab to the press (or hasn't in the past anyway).

I love how "heavily-pregnant" is now the #1 top description for Meghan!

*Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral*
Prince Harry reunited with his cousin Princess Eugenie after flying home to the UK for his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral, Page Six has confirmed.

Eugenie, 31, is the first member of the British royal family to see Harry, 36, in more than a year since he, his wife, Meghan Markle, and their son, Archie, stepped back from their royal roles and moved to California.

The princess is currently living at Frogmore Cottage, Harry and Meghan’s UK home, alongside her husband, Jack Brooksbank, and their newborn son, August.

It’s the first time that Harry will have met his first cousin once removed, who was born in February and has the middle name Philip in a nod to his great-grandfather.

It’s not yet known whether Harry will also get to meet his cousin Zara Tindall’s newborn son, Lucas, who was born last month and also got his middle name from the late Duke.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex offered up Frogmore, which lies in the grounds of Queen Elizabeth II’s Windsor estate, when Eugenie and Brooksbank, 31, found out they were expecting.

At the time, a source told us: “It’s fully equipped for a new family and new baby. It’s still Meghan and Harry’s UK residence, they’ll still stay there when they go back, but they’re delighted to be able to open up their home to Princess Eugenie and Jack as they start their own family.”

Harry and Markle renovated Frogmore to the tune of approximately $3 million in taxpayer funds, though they have announced plans to reimburse Britain for the cost. 

The couple lived in the cottage for less than six months before moving to Canada and then Montecito, California. 

Harry flew into London’s Heathrow Airport on Sunday and is currently quarantining at Frogmore in accordance with UK rules ahead of Philip’s funeral on Saturday.

Heavily pregnant Markle, who is expecting a baby girl in early summer, has been forced to stay at home in the US after taking medical advice — despite wanting to join her husband, as we revealed.

All eyes will be on Harry and his older brother, Prince William, on Saturday as they are seen in public together for the first time since the Commonwealth Service in March of last year, days before Harry and Markle, 39, left the UK.

Their reunion will come in the wake of Harry and Markle’s explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey in February, during which the “Suits” alum insisted that William’s wife, Kate Middleton, had made her cry during a bridesmaid dress fitting before her May 2018 wedding.

The couple also made allegations of racism within the royal family — and Harry said he believed that his father, Prince Charles, and William, 38, were “trapped” within their royal roles.

On Sunday, former British Prime Minister Sir John Major told the BBC that the funeral would be the perfect time to end the family rift.

Major — who was appointed a special guardian to the princes after their mother, Princess Diana, died in 1997 — told BBC One’s “Andrew Marr Show”: “The friction that we are told has arisen is a friction better ended as speedily as possible.”

He added: “They shared emotion. They share grief at the present time because of the death of their grandfather. I think [this] is an ideal opportunity. I hope very much that it is possible to mend any rifts that may exist.”

Philip died Friday at age 99.









						Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral
					

Eugenie is the first member of the royal family to see Harry in more than a year.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Here she is not wanting to make herself the center of attention so she has her PR reps do it for her instead.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reportedly Spoke With The Queen To Share Condolences For Prince Philip*
> On Saturday, a source told the outlet that “Meghan and Harry have already spoken to the Queen to express their sympathies.”
> 
> Publicly, the couple dedicated the homepage of their non-profit Archewell to Prince Philip on Friday. They shared a brief tribute to him which read, “In loving memory of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh 1921-2021. Thank you for your service... You will be greatly missed.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly Spoke With the Queen to Share Condolences For Prince Philip
> 
> 
> Meghan, who's far along in her pregnancy with her second child, was advised by her doctor not to travel to the U.K. for the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


Oh dear God, I’m actually starting to wish she was here, because then (_heavily pregnant) _Meg wouldn’t be able to keep up this stupid drip, drip, drip of fantasy nonsense from her wretched sources.  The woman is off her trolley.


----------



## csshopper

zinacef said:


> No, he has to return to his heavily pregnant wife due to give birth between now and November.


Timing is all and the surrogate is already booked for her next one, so need to birth the moon bump in a timely way.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'd like to know what Harry is telling Eugenie this week. She is probably as close to a sympathetic ear as he's going to get and we still have no idea what she's thinking because she doesn't blab to the press (or hasn't in the past anyway).
> 
> I love how "heavily-pregnant" is now the #1 top description for Meghan!
> 
> *Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral*
> Prince Harry reunited with his cousin Princess Eugenie after flying home to the UK for his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral, Page Six has confirmed.
> 
> Eugenie, 31, is the first member of the British royal family to see Harry, 36, in more than a year since he, his wife, Meghan Markle, and their son, Archie, stepped back from their royal roles and moved to California.
> 
> The princess is currently living at Frogmore Cottage, Harry and Meghan’s UK home, alongside her husband, Jack Brooksbank, and their newborn son, August.
> 
> It’s the first time that Harry will have met his first cousin once removed, who was born in February and has the middle name Philip in a nod to his great-grandfather.
> 
> It’s not yet known whether Harry will also get to meet his cousin Zara Tindall’s newborn son, Lucas, who was born last month and also got his middle name from the late Duke.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex offered up Frogmore, which lies in the grounds of Queen Elizabeth II’s Windsor estate, when Eugenie and Brooksbank, 31, found out they were expecting.
> 
> At the time, a source told us: “It’s fully equipped for a new family and new baby. It’s still Meghan and Harry’s UK residence, they’ll still stay there when they go back, but they’re delighted to be able to open up their home to Princess Eugenie and Jack as they start their own family.”
> 
> Harry and Markle renovated Frogmore to the tune of approximately $3 million in taxpayer funds, though they have announced plans to reimburse Britain for the cost.
> 
> The couple lived in the cottage for less than six months before moving to Canada and then Montecito, California.
> 
> Harry flew into London’s Heathrow Airport on Sunday and is currently quarantining at Frogmore in accordance with UK rules ahead of Philip’s funeral on Saturday.
> 
> Heavily pregnant Markle, who is expecting a baby girl in early summer, has been forced to stay at home in the US after taking medical advice — despite wanting to join her husband, as we revealed.
> 
> All eyes will be on Harry and his older brother, Prince William, on Saturday as they are seen in public together for the first time since the Commonwealth Service in March of last year, days before Harry and Markle, 39, left the UK.
> 
> Their reunion will come in the wake of Harry and Markle’s explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey in February, during which the “Suits” alum insisted that William’s wife, Kate Middleton, had made her cry during a bridesmaid dress fitting before her May 2018 wedding.
> 
> The couple also made allegations of racism within the royal family — and Harry said he believed that his father, Prince Charles, and William, 38, were “trapped” within their royal roles.
> 
> On Sunday, former British Prime Minister Sir John Major told the BBC that the funeral would be the perfect time to end the family rift.
> 
> Major — who was appointed a special guardian to the princes after their mother, Princess Diana, died in 1997 — told BBC One’s “Andrew Marr Show”: “The friction that we are told has arisen is a friction better ended as speedily as possible.”
> 
> He added: “They shared emotion. They share grief at the present time because of the death of their grandfather. I think [this] is an ideal opportunity. I hope very much that it is possible to mend any rifts that may exist.”
> 
> Philip died Friday at age 99.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral
> 
> 
> Eugenie is the first member of the royal family to see Harry in more than a year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


what crap


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Here she is not wanting to make herself the center of attention so she has her PR reps do it for her instead.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reportedly Spoke With The Queen To Share Condolences For Prince Philip*
> On Saturday, a source told the outlet that “Meghan and Harry have already spoken to the Queen to express their sympathies.”
> 
> Publicly, the couple dedicated the homepage of their non-profit Archewell to Prince Philip on Friday. They shared a brief tribute to him which read, “In loving memory of His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh 1921-2021. Thank you for your service... You will be greatly missed.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly Spoke With the Queen to Share Condolences For Prince Philip
> 
> 
> Meghan, who's far along in her pregnancy with her second child, was advised by her doctor not to travel to the U.K. for the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


The key word being "reportedly"


----------



## Jktgal

"He was authentically himself,..."

As opposed to not authentically himself? Or authentically not himself? This reeks of Meghanism - superfluous over nothing.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh dear God, I’m actually starting to wish she was here, because then (_heavily pregnant) _Meg wouldn’t be able to keep up this stupid drip, drip, drip of fantasy nonsense from her wretched sources.  The woman is off her trolley.



She is paying Sunshine Sachs big bucks to make sure she gets positive media placement every week. This is the same agency that was still placing stories about the damn wedding gown two years later. They aren't going to miss taking advantage of a golden opportunity like this.


----------



## Lodpah

Someone asked in an earlier post wondering what MM is doing while Harry is away. I think she’s pacing the cage. 


Pacing The Cage" Bruce Cockburn sung by Jimmy Buffet.



Sunset is an angel weeping
Holding out a bloody sword
No matter how I squint I cannot
Make out what it's pointing toward
Sometimes you feel like you've lived too long
Days drip slowly on the page
You catch yourself
Pacing the cage

I've proven who I am so many times
The magnetic strip's worn thin
And each time I was someone else
And everyone was taken in
Powers chatter in high places
Stir up eddies in the dust of rage
Set me to pacing the cage

I never knew what you all wanted
So I gave you everything
All that I could pillage
All the spells that I could sing
It's as if the thing were written
In the constitution of the age
Sooner or later
You'll wind up pacing the cage

Sometimes the best map will not guide you
You can't see what's 'round the bend
Sometimes the road leads through dark places
Sometimes the darkness is your friend
Today these eyes scan bleached-out land
For the coming of the outbound stage
Pacing the cage
Pacing the cage


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Queen will not be left to 'walk alone' following the death of her beloved husband of 73 years.

Senior royals are coming together to ensure the monarch is accompanied by a member of the family on future public engagements.

Those who will be seen at her side are the Prince of Wales, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the Earl and Countess of Wessex and Princess Anne.








						You'll never walk alone, Ma'am: Senior royals will be at Queen's side
					

Senior royals are coming together to ensure the monarch is accompanied by a member of the family on future public engagements.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral*



That doesn't even make sense. If he has to quarantine due to Covid, why would he do so with his cousin, her husband and _their new baby_? (besides, has it been confirmed they are living in Frogmore? Lady CC still insists her sources say they don't)


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


M & her friends must be on something!!!


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> OK, I'm sorry. For Meghan to announce now, of all times, she didn't go because she'd have stolen the spotlight, proves she is truly psychotic IMO. What a hateful bish. People who gave her the benefit of doubt before and are still stans after that, should be put on a Stupid People Registry .


Stupid people registry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't even make sense. If he has to quarantine due to Covid, why would he do so with his cousin, her husband and _their new baby_? (besides, has it been confirmed they are living in Frogmore? Lady CC still insists her sources say they don't)



No clue. As they say, the situation is fluid.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't even make sense. If he has to quarantine due to Covid, why would he do so with his cousin, her husband and _their new baby_? (besides, *has it been confirmed they are living in Frogmore? Lady CC still insists her sources say they don't*)



M&H were whining about privacy and using that as their excuse to abandon ship. Truth is, they had way more privacy had they stayed at Frogmore... As demonstrated by Eugenie & Jack.


----------



## creme fraiche

According to Giles Brandreth in his article in the DM, Prince Philip advised Kate Middleton “'If you believe the attention is for you personally,' he told me, 'you're going to end up in trouble. The attention is for your role, what you do, what you're supporting.

'It isn't for you as an individual. You are not a celebrity. You are representing the Royal Family. That's all.

'Don't look at the camera. The Queen never looks at the camera. Never.

'Look at who you're talking to. Look at what you've come to see. Diana looked at the camera.'”

i wonder if he gave the same advice to MM?  If he did, he was obviously ignored.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't even make sense. If he has to quarantine due to Covid, why would he do so with his cousin, her husband and _their new baby_? (besides, has it been confirmed they are living in Frogmore? Lady CC still insists her sources say they don't)



Are there self-contained staff quarters at Frogmore ? you know, for the for the security team.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> special bond....oh really?



I thought her "special bond" was the one she had with Super Glue and her sorority?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Queen will not be left to 'walk alone' following the death of her beloved husband of 73 years.
> 
> Senior royals are coming together to ensure the monarch is accompanied by a member of the family on future public engagements.
> 
> Those who will be seen at her side are the Prince of Wales, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the Earl and Countess of Wessex and Princess Anne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You'll never walk alone, Ma'am: Senior royals will be at Queen's side
> 
> 
> Senior royals are coming together to ensure the monarch is accompanied by a member of the family on future public engagements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5053250


If I'm going to worry about anyone being left alone, it won't be the Queen. The media is desperate for things to write about, don't you think?


lalame said:


> Does your friend live in a $14m home with lots of hired help? The chances of M looking after those chickens herself are about as high as her mowing the lawn herself.


Ha ha. So true. As if Meg cleans those chicken coops herself.


----------



## Jayne1

creme fraiche said:


> According to Giles Brandreth in his article in the DM, Prince Philip advised Kate Middleton “'If you believe the attention is for you personally,' he told me, 'you're going to end up in trouble. The attention is for your role, what you do, what you're supporting.
> 
> 'It isn't for you as an individual. You are not a celebrity. You are representing the Royal Family. That's all.
> 
> 'Don't look at the camera. The Queen never looks at the camera. Never.
> 
> 'Look at who you're talking to. Look at what you've come to see. Diana looked at the camera.'”
> 
> i wonder if he gave the same advice to MM?  If he did, he was obviously ignored.


Re: The attention is for your role.

I wrote about this before. Philip had a huge problem with Diana and Fergie because they wanted the attention on themselves. And were so good at getting it!  But Philip said they should be more like the Queen and not act like celebrities.  They didn't heed his advice though.


----------



## floatinglili

‘Cheeky ‘til the end’ - who are they KIDDING??? 
I think Harry had to have written this immature and insulting line, there is no way an employee would have written something so disrespectful about an elder.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Does your friend live in a $14m home with lots of hired help? The chances of M looking after those chickens herself are about as high as her mowing the lawn herself.


Or as high as her looking after her son.


----------



## Coconuts40

You'll never walk alone, Ma'am: Senior royals will be at Queen's side
					

Senior royals are coming together to ensure the monarch is accompanied by a member of the family on future public engagements.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I wonder how Harry is going to feel when he goes back home to California while he watches all the senior royals rallying around the Queen - and he's not part of it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> If I'm going to worry about anyone being left alone, it won't be the Queen. The media is desperate for things to write about, don't you think?
> 
> Ha ha. So true. As if Meg cleans those chicken coops herself.



IMO the loving tributes have caught some people off guard. They simply underestimated how much people respected PP and how much history PP’s life covered. Sure, sure the naysayers are vocal, too. That’s ok. Everyone will find his niche.  The worry for QE is that she is vulnerable to nefarious influences, especially now. Power tends to corrupt people. Some of those around her may not have her best interests at heart. We have all seen those movies before, read those books.  I like this particular article because of those photos. William looks strong, in charge. QE and PP look adorable.

In these last few days, I have learned so much about PP’s life — 100 years. Total respect.


----------



## lalame

Coconuts40 said:


> You'll never walk alone, Ma'am: Senior royals will be at Queen's side
> 
> 
> Senior royals are coming together to ensure the monarch is accompanied by a member of the family on future public engagements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder how Harry is going to feel when he goes back home to California while he watches all the senior royals rallying around the Queen - and he's not part of it.



Does this mean that those royals now have to shoulder additional commitments on top of the existing schedule they keep for their own projects/patronages?    Poor William and Kate especially - didn't they take the brunt of picking up H+M's work?


----------



## gracekelly

I have to agree that I am totally overwhelmed by the world wide response to his death.


----------



## pukasonqo

jelliedfeels said:


> I love that.
> “You see sir,  it bothers me, that a talented, busy guy like you with his own podcast and tv work would be so hung up on some titles that were purely honorary. So I don’t get why they keep insisting on referring to you as Prince when you’re in America anyway, can you think why that might be Mr Windsor?”
> Harry
> 
> 
> 
> You are far more regal in your reception of this comment than I, Queen of the wrap dress.
> 
> Look it’s established we’re nasty harridans. Please stop trying to improve us.
> 
> I personally think it’s hilarious they came in guns blazing to insult everyone and made such an utter b*lls up of a simple phrase.



English is my third language and I can see where the poster is coming from, I have an accent which gets picked on at least once a day by some well meaning Anglo speaker, I make grammatical errors (like “live” instead of “life”, “advice” when I meant “advise”) so yup, making a balls up of a single phrase does not reflect on the kind of person they are or their intelligence 
MM is a very polarising theme so we’ll get defenders or attackers depending which side of the fence they are sitting in
Me? I’ll watch the culebrón unfold, at the end of the day this is a gossip thread and I am sure nobody is heavily invested on it


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> In these last few days, I have learned so much about PP’s life — 100 years. Total respect.


I've been a royal watcher for many decades and they left out all the negative, as they should, since it's more respectful and not necessary to rehash at the moment.

But it seems the media either loves you or hates you, no inbetween.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

pukasonqo said:


> English is my third language and I can see where the poster is coming from, I have an accent which gets picked on at least once a day by some well meaning Anglo speaker, I make grammatical errors (like “live” instead of “life”, “advice” when I meant “advise”) so yup, making a balls up of a single phrase does not reflect on the kind of person they are or their intelligence
> MM is a very polarising theme so we’ll get defenders or attackers depending which side of the fence they are sitting in
> Me? I’ll watch the culebrón unfold, at the end of the day this is a gossip thread and I am sure nobody is heavily invested on it



Man, English is technically my first and I make a hash of it on the internet. If I’m at work, I might put in more effort... but yeah... Ipad screens are difficult to type on and autocorrect is not always your friend....


----------



## LittleStar88

Sol Ryan said:


> Man, English is technically my first and I make a hash of it on the internet. If I’m at work, I might put in more effort... but yeah... Ipad screens are difficult to type on and autocorrect is not always your friend....



English is my first language and iPad autocorrect sabotages me at every turn. Outside of work, I've sort of given up trying at this point!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I've been a royal watcher for many decades and they left out all the negative, as they should, since it's more respectful and not necessary to rehash at the moment.
> 
> But it seems the media either loves you or hates you, no inbetween.


My DH kept asking me if they had elevated him to sainthood yet, until he watched some documentaries, which left  him very impressed with PP.  I don't think that people realized how much PP did on his own.


----------



## gracekelly

pukasonqo said:


> English is my third language and I can see where the poster is coming from, I have an accent which gets picked on at least once a day by some well meaning Anglo speaker, I make grammatical errors (like “live” instead of “life”, “advice” when I meant “advise”) so yup, making a balls up of a single phrase does not reflect on the kind of person they are or their intelligence
> MM is a very polarising theme so we’ll get defenders or attackers depending which side of the fence they are sitting in
> Me? I’ll watch the culebrón unfold, at the end of the day this is a gossip thread and I am sure nobody is heavily invested on it


tPF is an international site.  I for one have always been impressed at the level of writing by non-English speakers. Lots better than many native English speakers lol!  I don't think it is polite to call people out on errors and they should be applauded for posting in a language that is not their own.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know how her massive ego doesn't snap her neck.


Or those ankles.


----------



## Lounorada

Icyjade said:


> Sure... so she’s too heavily pregnant to fly for the funeral but it didn’t stop her from flying to the US for the baby shower...
> 
> *cough* hypocrite *cough*
> 
> This one, 7th month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's What We Know About Meghan Markle's $200,000 Baby Shower
> 
> 
> The star-studded party included a cotton candy machine and Away luggage for all the guests.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.allure.com









V0N1B2 said:


> Of course he would have. There was no reason Harry couldn't have flown to the UK when his grandfather was first reported to be ill. He is a subject of the British Empire and still a citizen, holding a UK passport. I don't believe he can be denied entry into the country in which he holds citizenship.
> He didn't even have to break any official rules.  Book a flight to Heathrow, quarantine for 14 days and then go about his business. Seriously, who do you think was on those thousands and thousands of planes landing at LHR over the last month? They weren't empty planes. Even Prince Charles flew to Greece last month and managed to be allowed back into the country, did he not? John Kerry just returned from a trip to London, not to mention a meeting with Charles at Clarence House. I think we all know that Meghan would not have allowed him to be away from Montecito that long.  Besides, who would feed and nurture the chickens and sit there looking like a dolt on national TV with their bestie Oprah?
> Regardless, I hope he regrets it for the rest of his life, and the guilt eats away at him for an eternity. Maybe it'll be a lesson on compassion he can teach his children in the future if Meghan allows him visitation rights after the divorce.
> He's a sack of sh!t - I think that something everyone can agree on.


Yessssss to all of this @V0N1B2









Sharont2305 said:


> Oh my word



That's such a lovely statement and a gorgeous picture 




CarryOn2020 said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._









Chanbal said:


> *"Meghan said it's during these times when family should come together, put their differences aside and unite as one. She said this is what Prince Philip would want and that she's willing to forgive and move forward,' they said."*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@bag-mania 
I love Columbo! This would be the look the villain gets when Peter Falk turns around in the doorway and says "just one more thing." 

@jelliedfeels 
I love that.
“You see sir,  it bothers me, that a talented, busy guy like you with his own podcast and tv work would be so hung up on some titles that were purely honorary. So I don’t get why they keep insisting on referring to you as Prince when you’re in America anyway, can you think why that might be Mr Windsor?”
Harry


************
Bravo to both of you!  I can actually see and hear Columbo saying it, in my mind's eye.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> *Well, we can't believe everything we are told *by TPTB either.
> I was 7 when Kennedy was shot. I don't believe a word of the Warren Commission Report. I'm not saying Oliver Stone is right either, but that the 'truth', for me, is somewhere in between.
> News coverage of the VN war----every night was the body count tally. Think those numbers were an accurate reflection of how things were going?
> I took high school government class in summer school. We watched the Watergate hearings. Talk about some eye opening stuff!
> I can still see Christine Todd Whitman telling first responders/New Yorkers how the air quality was perfectly safe at Ground Zero.
> And you expect me to trust these people when they tell me something is perfectly safe?
> I'll double mask till the cows come home if I have to.


Yep!  How many medical miracles of years past and now banned because of health concerns?  I take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt and then do research for myself and come to my own conclusions.  And then I decide what is right for me, but don't preach to everyone else what they should be doing.  That's why I find hypocrites so freaking annoying.  They tell everyone else what to do, but do something else entirely for themselves, a la Meghan and Harry.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I love Columbo! This would be the look the villain gets when Peter Falk turns around in the doorway and says "just one more thing."
> 
> View attachment 5053186



He looks like he smelled his own fart, and realized how much it stinks!


----------



## haute okole

Good Lawd Ladies!  You have me in STITCHES!! So so wrong, but so damn funny. Thank you.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Yep!  How many medical miracles of years past and now banned because of health concerns?  I take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt and then do research for myself and come to my own conclusions.  And then I decide what is right for me, but don't preach to everyone else what they should be doing.  That's why I find hypocrites so freaking annoying.  They tell everyone else what to do, but do something else entirely for themselves, a la Meghan and Harry.



I swear every drug I have seen advertised on tv has gone on to be recalled and/or been a class action lawsuit. Not to mention that the possible side effects take 5 minutes to read and are often worse than whatever it is they were trying to 'cure'


----------



## floatinglili

*Prince Philip knew real suffering, unlike the Sussexes - by Brendan O’Neill*
There was a dark, sad irony to the Harry and Meghan circus that cast a shadow over the final months of Prince Philip’s life.
In this spat between the Duke and Duchess of Wokeness and the stiff, unfeeling and allegedly racist Firm whose clutches they escaped, Philip was always depicted as the regressive old guard. They are the hip, aware royals, in touch with their feelings and fluent in the California-speak of therapy culture and critical race theory.
Philip, in contrast, was the patriarch of the ancien regime, the embodiment of white privilege. He was, to use Simon Jenkins’s term, a “pale, stale male” — the worst thing you can be these days.
Sure, Harry denied that Philip was the mysterious royal who had queried what colour skin his and Meghan’s children would have. That allegation against an unnamed royal, made by Harry and Meghan in their two-hour confessional with Oprah Winfrey, made waves around the world.
And virtually everyone presumed it must have been Philip who said it. Even following Harry’s insistence that it wasn’t Philip or the Queen, I was constantly having chats or receiving text messages in which someone would say: “Of course it was Phil.” After all, he was the gaffe-prone duke, the royal with a penchant for speaking bluntly.
That these rumours swirled around Philip at the end of his life was not only unfair; Harry should be ashamed for putting his grandfather and grandmother through the wringer of global speculation as Philip was heading toward his final breath and the Queen was preparing for widowhood.
No, it was, as I say, ironic too. Because when it comes to being an outsider in the royal family, Philip knew so much more than Meghan ever could. Indeed, when it comes to personal suffering and even racial insults, Philip’s life was on a different plane to Meghan’s and Harry’s. This alleged figurehead of the old elite went through things that would make Oprah say more than: “What … WHAT?”

- full story here:





						NoCookies | The Australian
					






					www.theaustralian.com.au


----------



## gracekelly

Regarding the two statements from Harry:  Harry was given ample opportunity  go back to see Prince Philip  and he did not.  I wouldn’t give him the time of day   As far as his ever thirsty attention loving wife is concerned, there isn’t one true or genuine thing escaping from her mouth. The two of them have done nothing to honor either of their families. They are as worthless as rocks.  I am fully expecting daily word salad nonsense to be emanating from the hills of Montecito.


----------



## youngster

Both Prince Philip and Meghan Markle were outsiders who married into the royal family and there the similarity ends, though they both had family members that caused them great embarassment.  Philip was from the "no nonsense/get on with it" generation. He made a commitment to the Queen and to the nation and he kept that commitment for decades. He made over 22,000 appearances over his 70 years in public life, visited more than 140 countries, and gave 5,500 speeches.  Meghan made roughly 75 total personal appearances before throwing in the towel within a few months.  That contrast is so striking to me.


----------



## lanasyogamama

MM absolutely didn’t get or follow the “no looking into the camera” advice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Both Prince Philip and Meghan Markle were outsiders who married into the royal family and there the similarity ends.  Philip was from the "no nonsense/get on with it" generation. He made a commitment to the Queen and to the nation and he kept that commitment for decades. He made over 22,000 appearances over his 70 years in public life, visited more than 140 countries, and gave 5,500 speeches.  Meghan made roughly 75 total personal appearances before throwing in the towel within a few months.  That contrast is so striking to me.


He had it worse.  QE's family did not want him.  They probably considered him to be a second rate royal without a country.  He certainly had no money.  He had a terrible childhood being passed around from sister to sister and to boarding school.  His mother was schizophrenic.  Where did he father get off to?  I don't recall, but he wasn't around.  As it turned out he had inner strength and resilience that made him into a great man, but at the time, how would they really know? The only thing he had going for him was his uncle Lord Mountbatten.


----------



## eunaddict

purseinsanity said:


> Now THAT is a statement from a grandson who loved his grandfather.
> 
> I also love the subtle digs such as how "his wife had so many years to get to know him and the kindness he showed her", and how he was able to spend time with his great grandchildren.  Well played, William.



_I feel lucky to have not just had his example to guide me, but his enduring presence well into *my own adult life *– both through good times and *the hardest days*._

Adult life and hardest days. Do you see the damage you have caused, JCMH?


But that is such a sweet photo of George with his great-grandpa. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.



I mean we all know William probably listens to the palace about things like pecking order. But, Harry? My guess is, he saw William put out a statement and so he spent the 30 mins gap between William's statement and his crafting his own response then released it. I still think the original 2 liner is closer to his true feelings than the 2nd statement that went out, that one went out to compete with William's and to remind everyone that he is "still also military".

There is no WAY, he's still listening to courtiers (unless someone dangled money).


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I have to agree that I am totally overwhelmed by the world wide response to his death.


He was an admirable member of the greatest generation. I lost one recently, and have no words to express the pain.

However, I think Oprah's interview may have contributed in part to this world wide response. People are shocked by MM's accusations /insinuations and they want to demonstrate their support and respect to Prince Philip and the BRF.


----------



## queennadine

bag-mania said:


> I'd like to know what Harry is telling Eugenie this week. She is probably as close to a sympathetic ear as he's going to get and we still have no idea what she's thinking because she doesn't blab to the press (or hasn't in the past anyway).
> 
> I love how "heavily-pregnant" is now the #1 top description for Meghan!
> 
> *Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral*
> Prince Harry reunited with his cousin Princess Eugenie after flying home to the UK for his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral, Page Six has confirmed.
> 
> Eugenie, 31, is the first member of the British royal family to see Harry, 36, in more than a year since he, his wife, Meghan Markle, and their son, Archie, stepped back from their royal roles and moved to California.
> 
> The princess is currently living at Frogmore Cottage, Harry and Meghan’s UK home, alongside her husband, Jack Brooksbank, and their newborn son, August.
> 
> It’s the first time that Harry will have met his first cousin once removed, who was born in February and has the middle name Philip in a nod to his great-grandfather.
> 
> It’s not yet known whether Harry will also get to meet his cousin Zara Tindall’s newborn son, Lucas, who was born last month and also got his middle name from the late Duke.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex offered up Frogmore, which lies in the grounds of Queen Elizabeth II’s Windsor estate, when Eugenie and Brooksbank, 31, found out they were expecting.
> 
> At the time, a source told us: “It’s fully equipped for a new family and new baby. It’s still Meghan and Harry’s UK residence, they’ll still stay there when they go back, but they’re delighted to be able to open up their home to Princess Eugenie and Jack as they start their own family.”
> 
> Harry and Markle renovated Frogmore to the tune of approximately $3 million in taxpayer funds, though they have announced plans to reimburse Britain for the cost.
> 
> The couple lived in the cottage for less than six months before moving to Canada and then Montecito, California.
> 
> Harry flew into London’s Heathrow Airport on Sunday and is currently quarantining at Frogmore in accordance with UK rules ahead of Philip’s funeral on Saturday.
> 
> Heavily pregnant Markle, who is expecting a baby girl in early summer, has been forced to stay at home in the US after taking medical advice — despite wanting to join her husband, as we revealed.
> 
> All eyes will be on Harry and his older brother, Prince William, on Saturday as they are seen in public together for the first time since the Commonwealth Service in March of last year, days before Harry and Markle, 39, left the UK.
> 
> Their reunion will come in the wake of Harry and Markle’s explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey in February, during which the “Suits” alum insisted that William’s wife, Kate Middleton, had made her cry during a bridesmaid dress fitting before her May 2018 wedding.
> 
> The couple also made allegations of racism within the royal family — and Harry said he believed that his father, Prince Charles, and William, 38, were “trapped” within their royal roles.
> 
> On Sunday, former British Prime Minister Sir John Major told the BBC that the funeral would be the perfect time to end the family rift.
> 
> Major — who was appointed a special guardian to the princes after their mother, Princess Diana, died in 1997 — told BBC One’s “Andrew Marr Show”: “The friction that we are told has arisen is a friction better ended as speedily as possible.”
> 
> He added: “They shared emotion. They share grief at the present time because of the death of their grandfather. I think [this] is an ideal opportunity. I hope very much that it is possible to mend any rifts that may exist.”
> 
> Philip died Friday at age 99.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry reunites with cousin Eugenie before Prince Philip’s funeral
> 
> 
> Eugenie is the first member of the royal family to see Harry in more than a year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't even make sense. If he has to quarantine due to Covid, why would he do so with his cousin, her husband and _their new baby_? (besides, has it been confirmed they are living in Frogmore? Lady CC still insists her sources say they don't)


Well I’m simply SHOCKED that Harry isn’t actually quarantining and is mixing with people not of his own household upon landing even though there are supposed “rules” in place for all of the plebs in the U.K. 
SHOCKED.


----------



## rose60610

RAINDANCE said:


> Taking this in a potentially off topic direction but I thought looking after live chickens was a no no if pregnant ? This has been bothering me for weeks. I look after my neighbours chickens when she is away and she keeps a very clean coop but it's still full of chicken ****. I still can't fathom sitting in the coop to have a chat with somebody let alone do an interview whilst pregnant.
> 
> *pregnant women*_, *and* adults 65 years or older should not handle or touch chicks, ducklings, or other live *poultry*. in areas where *poultry* live or roam. Zoonotic diseases that backyard *poultry* may spread to humans include salmonellosis, campylobacteriosis, *and* avian influenza viruses_



Agreed. I just learned you can "rent" chickens. Our neighbors "rented" chicks for their kids and have to return them in two weeks. Like a library book.   I wouldn't doubt Meghan (or Oprah) rented them for the shoot. Makes Meghan look more "compassionate". She's the only person I know who has to purchase compassion.


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> Well I’m simply SHOCKED that Harry isn’t actually quarantining and is mixing with people not of his own household upon landing even though there are supposed “rules” in place for all of the plebs in the U.K.
> SHOCKED.



Rules? Don’t try to control Harry! He is not trapped anymore like the rest of his family. Meghan has shown him the way! Besides, we all know he and Meghan got vaccinated weeks before everyone else, what with them being so special and all.


----------



## Aimee3

I believe MM was banned from attending PP’s funeral so just ONE excuse to save face would’ve been enough from her; the one that said dr’s orders are she can’t travel.  But to add a second excuse about not attending because she didn’t want to take the attention away from PP etc?  She is completely delusional!  She’s not important and I doubt anyone would pay any attention to her, neither the royal family nor the UK subjects (unless to perhaps boo at her.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I believe MM was banned from attending PP’s funeral so just ONE excuse to save face would’ve been enough from her; the one that said dr’s orders are she can’t travel.  But to add a second excuse about not attending because she didn’t want to take the attention away from PP etc?  She is completely delusional!  She’s not important and I doubt anyone would pay any attention to her, neither the royal family nor the UK subjects (unless to perhaps boo at her.)



In the Dm article, she said Harry told her not to go  Next sentence said Doria told her not to go 
So, we have the Palace, the doctors, H, and D.   She should say TPF said “it’s a no go“.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> I believe MM was banned from attending PP’s funeral so just ONE excuse to save face would’ve been enough from her; the one that said dr’s orders are she can’t travel.  But to add a second excuse about not attending because she didn’t want to take the attention away from PP etc?  She is completely delusional!  She’s not important and I doubt anyone would pay any attention to her, neither the royal family nor the UK subjects (unless to perhaps boo at her.)


I think she made that statement about taking attention away from PP because she was not invited.  She had to hit back.  This is her biggest weakness.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to support him, but could it be the palace orchestrated who said what when? Because first it was the children speaking, then William, now Harry. Dunno.



I think that's likely. This is such a big event, I think he will have plugged into what the rest of the family were doing after that initial website post.


----------



## Icyjade

purseinsanity said:


> Now THAT is a statement from a grandson who loved his grandfather.
> 
> I also love the subtle digs such as how "his wife had so many years to get to know him and the kindness he showed her", and how he was able to spend time with his great grandchildren.  Well played, William.



Absolutely agree.

Harry’s statement felt contrived. William’s one heartfelt (plus clearly meant to dig at the couple lol).

I wonder if one day Harry will wake from the spell and realize what he really threw away. Not just the military titles that he apparently treasures so much. Sure, it’s a life of duty and no one will ever say going to open some school or whatever in crummy rainy British weather is fun. But it’s also a life of privilege to be in a position to be able to make a difference in someone’s life and not just pimp yourself out there to make money. Not to mention that he threw his (cough*racist*cough) family under the bus as well. Perhaps when MM decides that Harry is no longer useful to her. I’ll give it a few years seeing the pattern in her past friends/husband/family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ve already forgotten. Did H post his one liner website ‘tribute’ _before_ Charles spoke?
Again, a continual issue with H&M always trying to upstage the senior royals.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She might as well be his only wife. Even if she divorces him, what sane woman would want to take on this wreck of a man?





Lodpah said:


> One of her stans?


One commentator described him as resembling a rescue chicken. Didn't they say most everyone in Montecito has rescue chickens? Someone with a spare coop will take him in, no doubt


----------



## CarryOn2020

This.
From 2011-








						'Oprah Winfrey's my neighbour!' The 'chicken lady' who chats over the fence with the world's most famous chatshow host
					

Soon after moving into her dream home, a curious Oprah poked her head over the fence after spotting Penny feeding her pet chickens and when she said 'good morning' the grandmother nearly fainted in shock - her life have never been the same again.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Guys, the article clearly says it's quoting unnamed "friends" (i.e., not real people) of Meghan. It's not like she came out and made a statement to the press...


Her MO is to have unnamed friends giving PR juice to grab attention. We aren't going after her, so much as  because she is a one-trick pony when it comes to leaking info about how wonderful/deprived/depressed/victimized she is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Richard Kay on the tributes from Will and the pregnant woman's husband:

_With Harry in strict quarantine at his Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, after flying to London from Los Angeles, and William and Kate with their children at Anmer Hall, in Norfolk, for the Easter school holidays, the chances of the brothers meeting ahead of the funeral service look remote.

So the words they chose to remember the Duke of Edinburgh by will take on even greater significance.

Both included personal memories. William reminisced about his grandfather taking his children for horse-drawn rides – his statement was issued with a photograph of a two-year-old Prince George alongside Philip on his carriage at Sandringham – while Harry remembered him with a beer in hand. Both spoke with affection. Like the Queen, William is reticent and not given to expressing emotion in public. Harry, on the other hand, appears to pride himself on being open and even too emotional for some.

Thirty minutes separated the brothers' statements but the manner in which they were issued spoke volumes. William's came first, in line with royal precedent, and was released by Kensington Palace.

Harry, meanwhile, chose not to use the services of the Palace – a mistake surely – and instead gave it to his US-based Archewell Foundation to distribute. This might explain the corny Americanism that stood out in his choice of words.

It was not enough to describe his grandfather as 'a man of service, honour and great humour' but he added that Philip was 'authentically himself', a curiously modern expression for a 99-year-old man who made a virtue of his old-fashioned bluntness and was anything but politically correct.

But the focus, inevitably, will be on Harry's decision to include in his eulogy the official motto of the Royal Marines: *'Per Mare, Per Terram' – By Sea, By Land*.

On the surface, it was a fitting nod to Philip, Captain General of the Marines for 64 years, and whom Harry had succeeded. But by exiling himself from Royal Family duty, he'd had to surrender that role after barely 30 months. And the Marines are unlikely to forget his departure, even if they do forgive it. *Was this a cri de coeur about his sadness at losing that honorary title or even perhaps a coded appeal to be allowed to don the Marines uniform for one last time?*

The Philip whom Harry recalled was the 'master of the barbecue' and the 'legend of banter' who was 'cheeky right 'til the end', adding: 'I know that right now he would say to all of us, beer in hand, 'Oh do get on with it.'

*To William his 'mischievous' grandfather had been a presence in his life not just in the good times but also 'the hardest days', a reference almost certainly to the death of Diana when Philip did so much to console the 15-year-old in his grief.

He was grateful too for the kindness that his grandfather had shown Kate.

But in his remarks was there one icy barb directed at his brother? 'Catherine and I,' he wrote, 'will continue to do what he would have wanted and will support the Queen in the years ahead. I will miss my grandpa, but I know he would want us to get on with the job.'*

Harry by his actions and his self-imposed absence in California can, of course, do no such thing. But he did include his pregnant wife and son in his salute. 'Meghan, Archie and I (as well as your future great-granddaughter) will always hold a special place for you in our hearts.'

*Two brothers, two very different ways of marking their grandfather's life, but no sign of any healing comments to mend a heart-breaking rift.*_









						RICHARD KAY decodes Princes Harry and William's tributes to Philip
					

RICHARD KAY: At its heart, Saturday's funeral for Prince Philip at Windsor Castle is no more, and certainly no less, than what was always intended - the family farewell to an extraordinary man.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Piers Morgan on *Philip's 10-point guide to royal survival   









						PIERS: MORGAN: Philip's guide to royal survival should be his legacy
					

As his mourning family prepare to gather this Saturday to say goodbye to one of its greatest figures at his funeral, they would all do well to heed Prince Philip's advice.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> *OMG!  *
> Delusional, disrespectful, dumb a$$:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friends of Meghan say she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stayed back in California while Prince Harry flew to London because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral, her friends claim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Friends of Meghan Markle say the pregnant duchess remained in Montecito because she 'doesn't want to be the center of attention' at Prince Philip's funeral - but reveal she adored the duke and they had a 'special bond'*
> 
> 
> WOW!
> So, the doctor excuse was another lie.
> _Meghan said her main concern right now is supporting Harry. She said she left it up to him as to whether or not she would attend the funeral,' an insider with close ties to Meghan Markle tells DailyMail.com._


So it was Dr Doria who advised her not to travel! 

"_Stress is the last thing Meghan needs right now._" 3rd funniest line in the whole article, after the "centre of attraction" and "special bond". It's going to pop up again in some future interview about how the inconvenient death and funeral caused *her* stress.


----------



## Chanbal

H has to quarantine for 5 days, so he may not be able to meet his family until the funeral. 










						Prince Harry denied special diplomatic immunity for Philip funeral
					

PRINCE HARRY's arrival back into the UK has already presented logistical challenges for the Duke of Sussex, who will have to face them instead of gaining "diplomatic immunity", according to royal commentators.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think she made that statement about taking attention away from PP because she was not invited.  She had to hit back.  This is her biggest weakness.



I don’t think the BRF would come out and say she couldn’t come. That would just be begging for Oprah Interview #2 where Meghan could dab away a tear as she recounts how she was the only one excluded from the funeral when all she wanted to do was support her husband in his time of grief. No, she didn’t go because she couldn’t handle all the boos and glares (and that’s just from the family).


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the Dm article, she said Harry told her not to go  Next sentence said Doria told her not to go
> So, we have the Palace, the doctors, H, and D.   She should say TPF said “it’s a no go“.


It was God who told her not to go.  Divine intervention.   In reality, her own ego didn't want her to go.  She can't handle anything but adoration and worship, which she certainly wasn't going to get there.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve already forgotten. Did H post his one liner website ‘tribute’ _before_ Charles spoke?
> Again, a continual issue with H&M always trying to upstage the senior royals.


From elle magazine: "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have released a statement honoring Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, hours after the Palace announced Queen Elizabeth II's husband passed away peacefully at age 99 on Friday morning."

Charles' first comments, pre recorded came later in the day I think.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think the BRF would come out and say she couldn’t come. That would just be begging for Oprah Interview #2 where Meghan could dab away a tear as she recounts how she was the only one excluded from the funeral when all she wanted to do was support her husband in his time of grief. No, she didn’t go because she couldn’t handle all the boos and glares (and that’s just from the family).


That is not going to stop her from bawling as she confides to Oprah for the next multi-million dollar interview: "You know, just after Philip died, we got a message that I was not allowed to attend the funeral. No one knows that. They said that to me! The family that he never knew he needed! We shared a special bond! They were just jealous that I would be the centre of attention. It's so racist, right?"


----------



## Chanbal

I need a good 20 minute laugh!

"_Mr Brandreth said: “Prince Philip protected the Queen and made her laugh.

“Once, during one of the Jubilee tours, I was in the car immediately behind theirs and I watched Prince Philip telling the Queen a story.

“He kept her laughing for 20 minutes. It was a joy to behold._”









						Philip ‘protected the Queen’ and ‘kept her laughing for 20 minutes’
					

PRINCE Philip was a "fierce protector" of the Queen and has ensured throughout his life that he could "safeguard her person," a royal expert has said.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just curious — Where’s Chelsy?


----------



## rose60610

Meghan takes such delight in the deaths of the BRF that she can't wait for the next one to die so she can shed more crocodile tears that  can be traded for more $$$$$$ interviews.  I erased what I was going to add. It would have banished me from tPF.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just curious — Where’s Chelsy?


Is she still single?


----------



## poopsie

With only how many million views worldwide IDK how eager the network would be for part deux. 
I'd be willing to bet that there are that many people hitting on YouTube the day after the Super Bowl looking for all the commercials


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> From elle magazine: "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have released a statement honoring Harry's grandfather Prince Philip, hours after the Palace announced Queen Elizabeth II's husband passed away peacefully at age 99 on Friday morning."
> 
> Charles' first comments, pre recorded came later in the day I think.


Pre recorded months ago, along with Edward, and Anne . He also spoke on Saturday outside his Highgrove home.


----------



## creme fraiche

floatinglili said:


> ‘Cheeky ‘til the end’ - who are they KIDDING???
> I think Harry had to have written this immature and insulting line, there is no way an employee would have written something so disrespectful about an elder.



How would he know?  He was not around for PP's last year, nor could he get his butt over to the UK when he knew that his grandfather was dying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Finally remembered where I had read this item about the Royal Family reaction to the timing of Harry and Meghan's post on Archewell,  about Prince Phillip's death. It was in the Express:


"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who made a set of astonishing claims about the royals in their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview, issued a brief statement on their Archewell website on Friday after the Duke of Edinburgh's death was announced. But Harry and Meghan's message has not helped the situation with the royals, according to a royal insider.
The source told The Daily Telegraph: “There’s a natural order here and they just ignored it by putting their own statement out, without telling anyone, before the Prince of Wales had even issued a response.
"Quite a few people read it and thought: 'Is that all they’ve got to say?'”
Prince Charles spoke of his "dear Papa" from his Gloucestershire home on Saturday, before Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Prince Andrew made comments on Sunday.
Meghan and Harry's statement on Friday read: “In loving memory of His Royal Highness, the Duke of Edinburgh, 1921-2021. Thank you for your service… you will be greatly missed."


----------



## CarryOn2020

100% agree!

_Let's junk the introspective, social-media fuelled, self-pitying, self-centred, onanistic cult of victimhood. Let's dismiss the cancellation fascism, and the corporate cowardice and opportunism which underpins it, with ridicule and the contempt it deserves.

The mentally ill Twitterati even tried to destroy Britain's most-loved actor Sir David Jason over some harmless remarks dating back to . . . actually, who cares?

It's time to challenge the politically motivated, pant-wetting hysterics who pretend that Prince Philip's generation were all racist, sexist, homophobic bigots.

They weren't. Far from it. Philip, through his pioneering Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme, brought people of all faiths and colours together; played uncomplaining second fiddle to his wife and blessed his gay cousin's single-sex marriage

The greatest tribute we can pay to the Duke and his generation is to honour the freedoms they won through their sacrifices, to extract our heads from our own backsides and stop picking the fluff from our own navels.

To celebrate self-deprecation, the ability to laugh at ourselves and others — without fear of the 'hate crime' lynch mob._








						RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Prince Philip picture shows who we could be again
					

RICHARD LIITTLEJOHN: There was one picture in particular which stood out for me in the blanket coverage of the life and times of the Duke of Edinburgh.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Should we discuss the GP photo?


----------



## Clearblueskies

queennadine said:


> Well I’m simply SHOCKED that Harry isn’t actually quarantining and is mixing with people not of his own household upon landing even though there are supposed “rules” in place for all of the plebs in the U.K.
> SHOCKED.


He’s in quarantine, as we said.  I’m confused as to what bothers you so much about this, that you can’t let it go.  But since I’m fed up of you Britsplaining the covid rules here to me, I’m just going to put your posts on ignore.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> I need a good 20 minute laugh!
> 
> "_Mr Brandreth said: “Prince Philip protected the Queen and made her laugh.
> 
> “Once, during one of the Jubilee tours, I was in the car immediately behind theirs and I watched Prince Philip telling the Queen a story.
> 
> “He kept her laughing for 20 minutes. It was a joy to behold._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Philip ‘protected the Queen’ and ‘kept her laughing for 20 minutes’
> 
> 
> PRINCE Philip was a "fierce protector" of the Queen and has ensured throughout his life that he could "safeguard her person," a royal expert has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


A lot of the photos of them circulated since PP died show them laughing together, and the Queen looking really relaxed.  Lovely to see.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> He’s in quarantine, as we said.  I’m confused as to what bothers you so much about this, that you can’t let it go.  But since I’m fed up of you Britsplaining the covid rules here to me, I’m just going to put your posts on ignore.


Britsplaining. Brilliant.


----------



## jelliedfeels

jennlt said:


> I thought her "special bond" was the one she had with Super Glue and her sorority?


So dark. I cackled like the witch I am. 


pukasonqo said:


> English is my third language and I can see where the poster is coming from, I have an accent which gets picked on at least once a day by some well meaning Anglo speaker, I make grammatical errors (like “live” instead of “life”, “advice” when I meant “advise”) so yup, making a balls up of a single phrase does not reflect on the kind of person they are or their intelligence
> MM is a very polarising theme so we’ll get defenders or attackers depending which side of the fence they are sitting in
> Me? I’ll watch the culebrón unfold, at the end of the day this is a gossip thread and I am sure nobody is heavily invested on it


Look I don’t pick on anyone for spelling, grammar or having an accent  or any of it.
But it is just funny to me that someone comes in to insult people but according to this internet do-Gooder we are the ones being horrible for getting in a comeback or two. Id also like to point out it was @OogleAtLuxury themselves who was making assumptions about our critical thinking skills and politics based on us being on a gossip thread. I never said anything about Toks’ intelligence just that they were wasting their time.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> M & her friends must be on something!!!



...but they're all...young mothers!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh...UK is angry.



> If you see Harry, BOO HIM. Boo loudly. Stand up for the royal family and our country. He does not deserve our respect or deference... after all, he had none for Prince Philip.





> He got gr$$dy, and deserted the injured for a Disney premier, so he could get her some voiceover work. Now he's making money out of them by making a documentary for Netflix.     He'll likely attend the funeral on an open top bus and rap his way through hymns.





> The RF has stepped up - Harry has stepped down.


----------



## Jktgal

Yeah, last weekend my dad asked what time the funeral will be, he wanted to watch. I was shocked. I guess when you've been reading about someone for 70+ years you kinda feel you know them....


----------



## RAINDANCE

gracekelly said:


> I think she made that statement about taking attention away from PP because she was not invited.  She had to hit back.  This is her biggest weakness.



The pregnancy reason for absence is valid, simple and for all parties an elegant solution to a potentially problematic decision.
I concede we do not know if the revised excuses and additional reports from "friends" yesterday was sanctioned or just tabloid fodder but it put Meghan back in the news, _again. _My guess it was an in-house response to the criticisms about the baby shower travel.
Scobie was on again earlier today and thankfully underlying the party line. No clearance to fly by the doctors. 
Maybe Harry was told to get any rumours and detracting media coverage shut down ASAP.


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> Maybe Harry was told to get any rumours and detracting media coverage shut down ASAP.


I think you’re right.  We’ll soon find out anyway


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just curious — Where’s Chelsy?



I used to think that Chelsy will be Harry's Camilla and wife#2 (or maybe #3) but now I would not wish the bunny-boiler (or should that be chicken-boiler ) of Monticito on anyone as the husband's ex.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I used to think that Chelsy will be Harry's Camilla and wife#2 (or maybe #3) but now I would not wish the bunny-boiler (or should that be chicken-boiler ) of Monticito on anyone as the husband's ex.



Yeah. I've always said I don't want a man with kids not because the kids bother me but because I don't want to deal with an ex who's forever in our lives. Can you imagine dealing with an ex who is completely nuts, lacks any kind of human emotions, is a narcissist, compulsive liar and malignant? Just...back away slowly.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

pukasonqo said:


> English is my third language and I can see where the poster is coming from, I have an accent which gets picked on at least once a day by some well meaning Anglo speaker, I make grammatical errors (like “live” instead of “life”, “advice” when I meant “advise”) so yup, making a balls up of a single phrase does not reflect on the kind of person they are or their intelligence
> MM is a very polarising theme so we’ll get defenders or attackers depending which side of the fence they are sitting in
> Me? I’ll watch the culebrón unfold, at the end of the day this is a gossip thread and I am sure nobody is heavily invested on it


I agree, we shouldn't get on any high grammar horses. TPF is one of the most articulate forums across the board(s) on the internet. There are a lot of very well educated women and men on tPF, where ever they are from, and I applaud those whose first language is not English, for making the effort to write as well as they do. They shouldn't be chastised for making mistakes that are normal beginner mistakes. A lot of native English speakers make those mistakes- and worse- as well.

But pukasonqo, I think the problem here was that this particular poster came in too ablazin' and belittling and when you do that, you need to have your spell check in order. It's like when the grammar and spelling Stasi inclined, correct others they feel are not up to their particular grammatical par, with a post that hilariously also has a spelling mistake. It'd be too much to ask of others not to feel a bit of glee. Nobody here would have made fun of the poster's spelling/vocabulary if the poster had been just a bit more cordial and explained why the petulant twosome is worthy of our reconsideration.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Nobody here would have made fun of the poster's spelling/vocabulary if the poster had been just a bit more cordial and explained why the petulant twosome is worthy of our reconsideration.



This. I'm sure I've made spelling and grammar mistakes before and nobody felt the need to point it out to me at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I'm sure I've made spelling and grammar mistakes before and nobody felt the need to point it out to me at all.


I have to agree, I have made very glaring grammar issues and have never had. TPF’er correcting me or being unkind
@SomethingGoodCanWork, @Sol Ryan @gracekelly thank you
I hope I didn’t miss anyone!
As I said discussing MM is not easy, she does provoke many emotions


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. I've always said I don't want a man with kids not because the kids bother me but because I don't want to deal with an ex who's forever in our lives. Can you imagine dealing with an ex who is completely nuts, lacks any kind of human emotions, is a narcissist, compulsive liar and malignant? Just...back away slowly.



Back away slowly? Oh hails to the no---------RUN!!!!!! As fast as your feets will go


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I personally would find it hard to issue a statement on the death of a family member straight after it occurred. I think a lot of these statements may have been edited or vetted by the staff before it was published.


----------



## duna

pukasonqo said:


> As somebody pointed out MM is having a “geriatric” pregnancy which has its own risks so it is very likely she wouldn’t be cleared to travel
> When I was pregnant w my son I had to provide a medical certificate clearing me to fly (1 1/2 hrs) from Sydney to Queensland as I was over 6 months pregnant
> So yup, it is considered risky to travel by plane when pregnant and as we age the risks increase (although I was 26 at the time)



Maybe she was advised by her doctor not to fly, we will probably never know.... but Archie's pregnancy was geriatric aswell and M flew to the US, round about the same pregnancy period, for her baby shower with her VIP friends!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

duna said:


> Maybe she was advised by her doctor not to fly, we will probably never know.... but Archie's pregnancy was geriatric aswell and M flew to the US, round about the same pregnancy period, for her baby shower with her VIP friends!



Her friends apparently told reporters that she didn't want to be the centre of attention and that's why she didn't go. She also said she had a special bond with Prince Philip and that the Queen is understanding of why she cannot attend. Her mom, Doria didn't want her to go because it would cause too much stress while she is pregnant. Why could she have not said this to the press herself instead of getting friends to leak information?


----------



## LibbyRuth

duna said:


> Maybe she was advised by her doctor not to fly, we will probably never know.... but Archie's pregnancy was geriatric aswell and M flew to the US, round about the same pregnancy period, for her baby shower with her VIP friends!



She also has had a miscarriage between then and now.  That could change health conditions for her, as well as changing her willingness to accept risk.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> He’s in quarantine, as we said.  I’m confused as to what bothers you so much about this, that you can’t let it go.  But since I’m fed up of you Britsplaining the covid rules here to me, I’m just going to put your posts on ignore.


I believe the word you are looking for is Amerisplaining. (Correct me if I'm wrong,  queennadine, but you are American, aren't you? Not that it should matter.)

Encountering First Amendment based differing opinions on an American forum, what horror...


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh...UK is angry.



I would boo Harry, but not at a funeral.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Clearblueskies said:


> A lot of the photos of them circulated since PP died show them laughing together, and the Queen looking really relaxed.  Lovely to see.



5 years ago they visited my tiny home town and I love this pic of the Queen laughing at something Philip said to her


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh...UK is angry.



Very very angry


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> I would boo Harry, but not at a funeral.


 no I agree it would be so disrespectful to the Queen and Philip


----------



## RAINDANCE

elvisfan4life said:


> 5 years ago they visited my tiny home town and I love this pic of the Queen laughing at something Philip said to her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5053789


That must have been one of the last visits before the Duke retired. 
H&M's first official engagement was in my adopted home city. I did not go but there was a huge buzz and excitement in the city about it.


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> I have to agree, I have made very glaring grammar issues and have never had. TPF’er correcting me or being unkind
> @SomethingGoodCanWork, @Sol Ryan @gracekelly thank you
> I hope I didn’t miss anyone!
> As I said discussing MM is not easy, she does provoke many emotions


She triggers many negative emotions in me. I dealt with a narc like her for 5 years, the worst period in my working life. Almost quit my job by Year 3. He could have been her twin. He discarded colleagues at his previous workplace by the simple expedience of changing his mobile phone number. And he had a litany of excuses for everything wrong never being his fault. That "victim refrain" just got louder and louder. And he was plotting to abandon his parents by migrating to Canada. How do I know all this? Just like MM, he couldn't stfu. He had to tell us everything and seemed to think that we would praise him. Only good thing to come out from the 5 years of h*ll was developing a meditative ability to concentrate on my work and tune him out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I would boo Harry, but not at a funeral.



Yeah. It will just hurt the family.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. I just learned you can "rent" chickens. Our neighbors "rented" chicks for their kids and have to return them in two weeks. Like a library book.   I wouldn't doubt Meghan (or Oprah) rented them for the shoot. Makes Meghan look more "compassionate". She's the only person I know who has to purchase compassion.


Wow that’s amazing. Do you have to pay extra for the ragged ex-battery ones?
Maybe Harry could have a viable new career as a rescue chicken. 


RAINDANCE said:


> I used to think that Chelsy will be Harry's Camilla and wife#2 (or maybe #3) but now I would not wish the bunny-boiler (or should that be chicken-boiler ) of Monticito on anyone as the husband's ex.


Poor girl. She can do better than those sloppy seconds surely?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> That must have been one of the last visits before the Duke retired.
> H&M's first official engagement was in my adopted home city. I did not go but there was a huge buzz and excitement in the city about it.



Not far off they went to the giants causeway , on a steam train trip and to a distillery Phillip joked he was in heaven it was his ideal day with Irish banter thrown in and he didn’t want to go home - those words are in my heart


----------



## queennadine

Clearblueskies said:


> He’s in quarantine, as we said.  I’m confused as to what bothers you so much about this, that you can’t let it go.  But since I’m fed up of you Britsplaining the covid rules here to me, I’m just going to put your posts on ignore.


Omg...the story I quoted proves he’s NOT quarantining. He MET with Eugenie. Who is not from his household. So he’s broken TWO rules. And yes, it bothers me! We have people on here, and around the world, who haven’t see family and friends in over a year. You continue to cite these rules, but clearly there are different sets of rules for different classes of people. THAT’S what bothers me. But again, rules where I live and where I’m moving to are more relaxed so frankly, my life is essentially normal. But I’m bothered for those who continue to be strong-armed by overbearing governments. Thank God for both 1776 and that Ignore feature. 


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I believe the word you are looking for is Amerisplaining. (Correct me if I'm wrong,  queennadine, but you are American, aren't you? Not that it should matter.)
> 
> *Encountering First Amendment based differing opinions on an American forum, what horror...*


Haha, exactly!


----------



## limom

Aren’t they all vaccinated?
Harry qualified a while back.
Eugenie might qualify as well.


----------



## DrDior

Hello ... Canadian here. 

The First Amendment is irrelevant here because that’s not how the First Amendment works. It only applies to US governments and not to privately owned/operated spaces, which is why tPF can set its own rules on acceptable language and conduct. So, opinions here are not “First Amendment based”. They are just opinions.

Also, the Forum is run by Americans, presumably on servers hosted in the US, but it has long been an international site with international posters heavily contributing to the content and clicks that generate tPF revenue.

This lesson in U.S. Constitutional law brought to you by your friendly neighbors up north.


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Aren’t they all vaccinated?
> Harry qualified a while back.
> Eugenie might qualify as well.


Eugenie won't qualify yet, only today its been announced that over 45s are entitled to it. 
None of the grandchildren qualify as yet, unless they are in the vulnerable category. 
How would Harry qualify over in the US?


----------



## jelliedfeels

When it comes to more COVID chat... I plead the 5th and possibly the 8th


----------



## zinacef

duna said:


> Maybe she was advised by her doctor not to fly, we will probably never know.... but Archie's pregnancy was geriatric aswell and M flew to the US, round about the same pregnancy period, for her baby shower with her VIP friends!


key word —- private jet! Haz flew BA , I think! Heavily pregnant wife  cannot fly commercial, and with all the backlash they had over carbon foot print ,etc. nobody would be too excited to lend them their jet, I mean, where are the rich and accomplished women that sponsored her first baby shower —- crickets!  she got markled herself!


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> ‘Cheeky ‘til the end’ - who are they KIDDING???
> I think Harry had to have written this immature and insulting line, there is no way an employee would have written something so disrespectful about an elder.


yes, cheeky isn't a word commonly used by Americans so H probably came up with that


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> yes, cheeky isn't a word commonly used by Americans so H probably came up with that


Plus honour and humour were spelt the British way


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Eugenie won't qualify yet, only today its been announced that over 45s are entitled to it.
> None of the grandchildren qualify as yet, unless they are in the vulnerable category.
> How would Harry qualify over in the US?


A. Because of his job.
B. Because MM is a high risk pregnancy and/or one of his home worker is high risk.
C. Because Harry might have a medical reason.
So he fully qualifies for many reasons in California.

FYI:








						Vaccines
					

Get vaccinated – it’s safe, effective, and free. Vaccination is an important tool to end the COVID-19 pandemic. On this page: How to get vaccinated Who can get vaccinated How COVID-19 vaccines work Vaccines and variants Booster shots and additional doses Digital vaccine record Side effects...




					covid19.ca.gov


----------



## redney

I'm still not buying MM has any "friends" to state anything to the press.


----------



## bisousx

xincinsin said:


> She triggers many negative emotions in me. I dealt with a narc like her for 5 years, the worst period in my working life. Almost quit my job by Year 3. He could have been her twin. He discarded colleagues at his previous workplace by the simple expedience of changing his mobile phone number. And he had a litany of excuses for everything wrong never being his fault. That "victim refrain" just got louder and louder. And he was plotting to abandon his parents by migrating to Canada. How do I know all this? Just like MM, he couldn't stfu. He had to tell us everything and seemed to think that we would praise him. Only good thing to come out from the 5 years of h*ll was developing a meditative ability to concentrate on my work and tune him out.



Ditto. One of the main reasons I love this thread is from all the stories we have shared, because very few people understand what it’s like to have brushed with, worked or lived with a narc like MM. I appreciate the tpfers who have opened up and shared, helps me feel a little more understood and less lonely


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> A. Because of his job.
> B. Because MM is a high risk pregnancy and/or one of his home worker is high risk.
> C. Because Harry might have a medical reason.
> So he fully qualifies for many reasons in California.


Ah, right. Funny how different things are in different countries. Its very interesting. 
Incidentally, what job?


----------



## limom

bisousx said:


> Ditto. One of the main reasons I love this thread is from all the stories we have shared, because very few people understand what it’s like to have brushed with, worked or lived with a narc like MM. I appreciate the tpfers who have opened up and shared, helps me feel a little more understood and less lonely


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Ah, right. Funny how different things are in different countries. Its very interesting.
> Incidentally, what job?


Front line workers.
Communication workers..
It is very expansive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Front line workers.
> Communication workers..
> It is very expansive.


LOL, I meant what job does he have specifically that qualifies him. That's how I read your post, it looked specific to him


----------



## Chanbal

limom said:


> Aren’t they all vaccinated?
> Harry qualified a while back.
> Eugenie might qualify as well.


How would Harry qualify for the vaccine a while back? He is not over 65 as far as we know. Unless he works at a hospital or medical school, vaccines only became available for his age group a couple of days ago in California. I may be missing something here.


----------



## sdkitty

creme fraiche said:


> How would he know?  He was not around for PP's last year, nor could he get his butt over to the UK when he knew that his grandfather was dying.


I think Harry's grandfather would rather have seen him when he was alive.  Maybe his Wife didn't allow him to visit his ailing grandpa because Philip might have had some good advice for H.


----------



## rose60610

I want somebody to throw Meghan a baby shower on the east coast.  When there's $$$ gifts involved she wouldn't hesitate to fly her heavily pregnant self to a gift grab. She'd defend herself: "it's different, the flight isn't as long".


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I meant what job does he have specifically that qualifies him. That's how I read your post, it looked specific to him


My bad


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Her friends apparently told reporters that she didn't want to be the centre of attention and that's why she didn't go. She also said she had a special bond with Prince Philip and that the Queen is understanding of why she cannot attend. Her mom, Doria didn't want her to go because it would cause too much stress while she is pregnant. Why could she have not said this to the press herself instead of getting friends to leak information?


I'm pretty sure if these people are truly her "friends" they would have checked with her before saying anything to the press


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I want somebody to throw Meghan a baby shower on the east coast.  When there's $$$ gifts involved she wouldn't hesitate to fly her heavily pregnant self to a gift grab. She'd defend herself: "it's different, the flight isn't as long".


Oh, I don't think it was the gifts that made that shower so special for her.  It was the famous and powerful "friends" who attended


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> I want somebody to throw Meghan a baby shower on the east coast.  When there's $$$ gifts involved she wouldn't hesitate to fly her heavily pregnant self to a gift grab. She'd defend herself: "it's different, the flight isn't as long".


Perhaps that community kitchen charity in Chicago could return the favour and invite her round for homemade lemon cake 
Made with real lemons from their gardens


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I think Harry's grandfather would rather have seen him when he was alive.  Maybe his Wife didn't allow him to visit his ailing grandpa because Philip might have had some good advice for H.



Spot on.  Even on his death bed Philip's mental faculties were a million times sharper than Harry's ever will be. Now we have to rely on William to pound some sense into him. Charles? I'd like to think so, but....  I'd like to see Camilla come out swinging.


----------



## limom

Chanbal said:


> How would Harry qualify for the vaccine a while back? He is not over 65 as far as we know. Unless he works at a hospital or medical school, vaccines only became available for his age group a couple of days ago in California. I may be missing something here.


There is a quizz 








						Vaccines
					

Get vaccinated – it’s safe, effective, and free. Vaccination is an important tool to end the COVID-19 pandemic. On this page: How to get vaccinated Who can get vaccinated How COVID-19 vaccines work Vaccines and variants Booster shots and additional doses Digital vaccine record Side effects...




					covid19.ca.gov
				



You might qualify.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe Eugenie has been nominated for “Harry detail” and Skyped a visit with him.  Mainly to keep apprised of his moods and inclinations, etc  The “regular quarantine,  o special exemptions” phrase seems like a “you should have gotten here sooner” message to me.  Plus, I doubt anyone else wants to deal with him in their presence.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Aren’t they all vaccinated?
> Harry qualified a while back.
> Eugenie might qualify as well.


Harry isn't eligible in CA until later this week - from CA Public Health Dept:

*Updated March 25, 2021 to reflect:*

Beginning April 1, 2021, individuals age 50-64 years old will be eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
Beginning April 15, 2021, every Californian age 16 and older will become eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
COVID-19 vaccine clinic volunteers are eligible for vaccination if they complete at least one clinic shift and are approved by the clinic’s organizer.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> Maybe Eugenie has been nominated for “Harry detail” and Skyped a visit with him.  Mainly to keep apprised of his moods and inclinations, etc  The “regular quarantine,  o special exemptions” phrase seems like a “you should have gotten here sooner” message to me.  Plus, I doubt anyone else wants to deal with him in their presence.


I'd love Zara to be the one who deals with him.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Spot on.  Even on his death bed Philip's mental faculties were a million times sharper than Harry's ever will be. Now we have to rely on William to pound some sense into him. Charles? I'd like to think so, but....  I'd like to see Camilla come out swinging.


I don't think he would listen to William.  He already tried to tell H to slow down on the marriage plans, which was rejected.  Charles holds the purse strings so he might have some influence.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> I'm still not buying MM has any "friends" to state anything to the press.



It's Omid. Always Omid. All day, all night, 24/7. He is there to serve.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Harry isn't eligible in CA until later this week - from CA Public Health Dept:
> 
> *Updated March 25, 2021 to reflect:*
> 
> Beginning April 1, 2021, individuals age 50-64 years old will be eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
> Beginning April 15, 2021, every Californian age 16 and older will become eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
> COVID-19 vaccine clinic volunteers are eligible for vaccination if they complete at least one clinic shift and are approved by the clinic’s organizer.


Weren‘t there exemptions at the time?
IE his job and the medical situation at home?
Here in New York State, teenagers who worked in the public qualified before my AARP azz.
Anyone living with a vulnerable individual qualified as well.
Couldn’t it be the same for Harry?
He qualifies as of now.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't think he would listen to William.  He already tried to tell H to slow down on the marriage plans, which was rejected.  Charles holds the purse strings so he might have some influence.



I agree. I think they have a complicated sibling relationship. Part of Harry loves his brother, but another part of him despises William.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I agree. I think they have a complicated sibling relationship. Part of Harry loves his brother, but another part of him despises William.


and he is very loyal to his Wife!


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> How would Harry qualify for the vaccine a while back? He is not over 65 as far as we know. Unless he works at a hospital or medical school, vaccines only became available for his age group a couple of days ago in California. I may be missing something here.



I’m in CA. I’ve been offered the vaccine multiple times in the last 2 months. I suppose if you know someone or find some way to get it, it’s not hard to find at all.


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Weren‘t there exemptions at the time?
> IE his job and the medical situation at home?
> Here in New York State, teenagers who worked in the public qualified before my AARP azz.
> Anyone living with a vulnerable individual qualified as well.
> Couldn’t it be the same for Harry?
> He qualifies as of now.


If he really was given an Einstein visa, maybe he was eligible to jump queue - you know, preserve those precious genius cells of his.
Or he may have used Grandpa as his reason: I'm a-gonna have to jump on a plane any day now when he shuffles off this mortal coil, so I NEED this jab.


----------



## sdkitty

Rouge H said:


> ABC 9am eastern will cover the service.


the schedule on my tv screen doesn't show it but I set it to record for that time anyway....if I'm up at 6am I'll turn on the tv....I would think maybe CNN would carry it


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



she fits in......the other one does not.....too bad no one thought of that in advance.
Well, William did but H didn't want to hear it


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, cheeky isn't a word commonly used by Americans so H probably came up with that



Harry used to be described as 'cheeky'. 

It was a calculated ploy (along with their respective roles within the Marines) to emphasise parallels between grandfather and grandson, drawing from the good will that surrounds PP memory atm and bask in that reflected affection. 

  Just more spin.


----------



## xincinsin

Right on schedule, MM-friendly People has an article about PP's "bond" with Diana. That's the word of the day, to dovetail with the "friend-sponsored" MM's claim of a "special bond".









						Inside Prince Philip's Rocky Relationship with Princess Diana — and Their Personal Letters
					

The late Prince Philip had a complex relationship with his daughter-in-law, Princess Diana.




					people.com


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she fits in......the other one does not.....too bad no one though of that in advance.
> Well, William did but H didn't want to hear it



They did. 

Unfortunately H&M can't forget about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Harry used to be described as 'cheeky'.
> 
> It was a calculated ploy (along with their respective roles within the Marines) to emphasise parallels between grandfather and grandson, drawing from the good will that surrounds PP memory atm and bask in that reflected affection.
> 
> Just more spin.



Honestly, I read that Royal Marines motto not as a tribute to Philip but as an act of defiance, like he HAD to rub it in somehow he was connected too (or so he thinks).

But I was so extremely angry at Harry yesterday I thought it might be my overproductive mind. But when more people pick up on this I'm inclined to believe we're onto something.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> They did.
> 
> Unfortunately H&M can't forget about it.


only time will tell and I don't know them.  but I think Harry would be like a fish out of water in CA.  I think he will live to regret marrying her and leaving the RF.  Yes, the royals have their duties but he was a Big Somebody there.  Who is he now?  The woke husband of a former actress/WOC in CA with his pale redhead skin.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> I agree. I think they have a complicated sibling relationship. Part of Harry loves his brother, but another part of him despises William.



Harry said in the Oprah interview that him and his brother are on different paths. I was thinking duh, your brother will be king some day and you won't, so obviously you are on different paths. Realistically Harry and Meghan should understand that their children will have to have regular jobs so titles are not necessary. Prince Edward (the Queens youngest son and Harrys uncle) has two children and neither one of them has the HRH or Prince/Princess title for this specific reason. The parents stated that their children would have to work for a living in normal jobs and did not think the royal titles would be appropriate.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't think he would listen to William.  He already tried to tell H to slow down on the marriage plans, which was rejected.  Charles holds the purse strings so he might have some influence.





bag-mania said:


> I agree. I think they have a complicated sibling relationship. Part of Harry loves his brother, but another part of him despises William.


Part of him is likely jealous of his brother. If I were Will or Charles, I would keep my conversations with him polite, but brief and in the presence of witnesses. The last thing they want is to have MM's interpretations of conversations conveyed to Oprah, King or Omid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Harry said in the Oprah interview that him and his brother are on different paths. I was thinking duh, your brother will be king some day and you won't, so obviously you are on different paths. Realistically Harry and Meghan should understand that their children will have to have regular jobs so titles are not necessary. Prince Edward (the Queens youngest son and Harrys uncle) has two children and neither one of them has the HRH or Prince/Princess title for this specific reason. The parents stated that their children would have to work for a living in normal jobs and did not think the royal titles would be appropriate


He says that but he hasn’t come to terms with it - I think he’s terribly jealous of William and that’s the root of the problems between them.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Harry used to be described as 'cheeky'.
> 
> It was a calculated ploy (along with their respective roles within the Marines) to emphasise parallels between grandfather and grandson, drawing from the good will that surrounds PP memory atm and bask in that reflected affection.
> 
> Just more spin.



Everything they do turns out to be some scheme to promote themselves.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Part of him is likely jealous of his brother. If I were Will or Charles, I would keep my conversations with him polite, but brief and in the presence of witnesses. The last thing they want is to have MM's interpretations of conversations conveyed to Oprah, King or Omid.


 Snap! I agree, he broke trust with the RF in the Oprah interview. However many fences get repaired he’s not going to be trusted in the same way he was. He’s put himself on the outside.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Clearblueskies said:


> He says that but he hasn’t come to terms with it - I think he’s terribly jealous of William and that’s the root of the problems between them.



I think though it is because of MM. I don't think she truly understands how the BRF works, and that Harry and her are never going to the the stars, only supporting roles (which they left). I think Harry is deluded if he thinks BRF tried to spread gossip and squash their image because they were becoming more popular than W&K. That is H&M's claim.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I agree. I think they have a complicated sibling relationship. Part of Harry loves his brother, but another part of him despises William.


And a part of him is jealous of William aka "The Three Faces of Harry." Does he get up in the mornings wondering, "What role shall I play today, loving, hating or jealous of William?"

ETA @Chanbal Sorry, I just read your post now. Two great minds...


----------



## Sharont2305

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think though it is because of MM. I don't think she truly understands how the BRF works, and that Harry and her are never going to the the stars, only supporting roles (which they left). I think Harry is deluded if he thinks BRF tried to spread gossip and squash their image because they were becoming more popular than W&K. That is H&M's claim.


I think you're right. I've never believed that Harry has ever been jealous of William re his position. I think he's always enjoyed the "freedom" of being the second son whilst supporting the Monarchy in his own way. I truly believed that with whoever he ended up marrying, they would be a tremendous support to Charles as King and even more when William is King. 
Then Meghan happened.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> I agree. I think they have a complicated sibling relationship. Part of Harry loves his brother, but another part of him despises William.


I think he’s jealous of his brother, think he’s always been. Always waiting to try and one up him.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

DrDior said:


> Hello ... Canadian here.
> 
> The First Amendment is irrelevant here because that’s not how the First Amendment works. It only applies to US governments and not to privately owned/operated spaces, which is why tPF can set its own rules on acceptable language and conduct. So, opinions here are not “First Amendment based”. They are just opinions.
> 
> Also, the Forum is run by Americans, presumably on servers hosted in the US, but it has long been an international site with international posters heavily contributing to the content and clicks that generate tPF revenue.
> 
> This lesson in U.S. Constitutional law brought to you by your friendly neighbors up north.


I appreciate the abbreviated lesson and rightly stand corrected on the US Constitution. For now. Privately owned companies and public forums have effectively replaced the public square as main outlets for speech, political and other, and are justifiably edging closer to being covered by the First Amendment.

Amendments aside, my main point was of course that it is unpleasant to see someone's opinions (queennadine's in this case) being discarded on the basis of who they are and where they are from. Your opinion on international posters doesn't change the fact that tPF is an American site. Contributing here is quite voluntary no matter the PF revenue, which is frankly not my business, and neither alter the ownership nor where it's based.


----------



## Chanbal

MM doesn't want to be excluded from the attention that Prince Philip is receiving. Omid's 2 cents:




_Prince William's tribute to his grandfather Prince Philip was not 'a dig' at his younger brother and the siblings are 'unified' despite what it might look like to the outside world, Harry and Meghan's friend Omid Scobie claimed today.

Mr Scobie also insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention' and despite believing they 'had a special bond and she adored him.' 

Ms Markle has also said she is 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family despite telling Oprah they were racist towards Archie and ignored her claims she was suicidal, a friend exclusively told DailyMail.com._









						William's tribute to Philip was not a dig at Harry, says Omid Scobie
					

Mr Scobie insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> And a part of him is jealous of William aka "The Three Faces of Harry." Does he get up in the mornings wondering, "What role shall I play today, loving, hating or jealous of William?"
> 
> @Chanbal Sorry, I just read your post now. Two great minds...





bellecate said:


> I think he’s jealous of his brother, think he’s always been. Always waiting to try and one up him.



Harry is like the kid on a school sports team who is jealous of the best, most-popular player. Instead of enjoying the game and participating to make his own place on the team, he quits. If he cannot be #1 then it's not worth his time or effort.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM doesn't want to be excluded from the attention that Prince Philip is receiving. Omid's 2 cents:
> 
> View attachment 5054015
> 
> 
> _Prince William's tribute to his grandfather Prince Philip was not 'a dig' at his younger brother and the siblings are 'unified' despite what it might look like to the outside world, Harry and Meghan's friend Omid Scobie claimed today.
> 
> Mr Scobie also insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention' and despite believing they 'had a special bond and she adored him.'
> 
> Ms Markle has also said she is 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family despite telling Oprah they were racist towards Archie and ignored her claims she was suicidal, a friend exclusively told DailyMail.com._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William's tribute to Philip was not a dig at Harry, says Omid Scobie
> 
> 
> Mr Scobie insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Geez, Omid. With all the fillers and filters he uses there's no telling what he really looks like.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> MM doesn't want to be excluded from the attention that Prince Philip is receiving. Omid's 2 cents:
> 
> View attachment 5054015
> 
> 
> _Prince William's tribute to his grandfather Prince Philip was not 'a dig' at his younger brother and the siblings are 'unified' despite what it might look like to the outside world, Harry and Meghan's friend Omid Scobie claimed today.
> 
> Mr Scobie also insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention' and despite believing they 'had a special bond and she adored him.'
> 
> Ms Markle has also said she is 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family despite telling Oprah they were racist towards Archie and ignored her claims she was suicidal, a friend exclusively told DailyMail.com._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William's tribute to Philip was not a dig at Harry, says Omid Scobie
> 
> 
> Mr Scobie insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She's a regular saint  Meghan of Montecito


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Geez, Omid. With all the fillers and filters he uses there's no telling what he really looks like.



It’s good of Omid to put words in Wills’ mouth...smh


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> MM doesn't want to be excluded from the attention that Prince Philip is receiving. Omid's 2 cents:
> 
> View attachment 5054015
> 
> 
> _Prince William's tribute to his grandfather Prince Philip was not 'a dig' at his younger brother and the siblings are 'unified' despite what it might look like to the outside world, Harry and Meghan's friend Omid Scobie claimed today.
> 
> Mr Scobie also insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention' and despite believing they 'had a special bond and she adored him.'
> 
> Ms Markle has also said she is 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family despite telling Oprah they were racist towards Archie and ignored her claims she was suicidal, a friend exclusively told DailyMail.com._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William's tribute to Philip was not a dig at Harry, says Omid Scobie
> 
> 
> Mr Scobie insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Sounds like this idiot is on tPF, he denies or "explaines" all the things that have recently been posted here....


----------



## Chanbal

Love how Brits have polls for almost everything! 










						POLL: Should Royal Family apologise to Meghan Markle?
					

MEGHAN Markle is "willing to forgive" the Royal Family and "move forward", an insider has said - so should the royals apologise to the Duchess of Sussex to end the rift?




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> MM doesn't want to be excluded from the attention that Prince Philip is receiving. Omid's 2 cents:
> 
> View attachment 5054015
> 
> 
> _Prince William's tribute to his grandfather Prince Philip was not 'a dig' at his younger brother and the siblings are 'unified' despite what it might look like to the outside world, Harry and Meghan's friend Omid Scobie claimed today.
> 
> Mr Scobie also insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention' and despite believing they 'had a special bond and she adored him.'
> 
> Ms Markle has also said she is 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family despite telling Oprah they were racist towards Archie and ignored her claims she was suicidal, a friend exclusively told DailyMail.com._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William's tribute to Philip was not a dig at Harry, says Omid Scobie
> 
> 
> Mr Scobie insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The English in that second para is atrocious!


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Love how Brits have polls for almost everything!
> View attachment 5054022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> POLL: Should Royal Family apologise to Meghan Markle?
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is "willing to forgive" the Royal Family and "move forward", an insider has said - so should the royals apologise to the Duchess of Sussex to end the rift?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



....or maybe *she* should apologize to them????


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> Sounds like* this idiot is on tPF*, he denies or "explaines" all the things that have recently been posted here....



In that case, sorry about that filler comment, Omid! But seriously, man, ease up on the treatments. Once you go too far with them, your face will look like a cheap wax figurine for the rest of your life.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> MM doesn't want to be excluded from the attention that Prince Philip is receiving. Omid's 2 cents:
> 
> View attachment 5054015
> 
> 
> _Prince William's tribute to his grandfather Prince Philip was not 'a dig' at his younger brother and the siblings are 'unified' despite what it might look like to the outside world, Harry and Meghan's friend Omid Scobie claimed today.
> 
> Mr Scobie also insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention' and despite believing they 'had a special bond and she adored him.'
> 
> Ms Markle has also said she is 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family despite telling Oprah they were racist towards Archie and ignored her claims she was suicidal, a friend exclusively told DailyMail.com._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William's tribute to Philip was not a dig at Harry, says Omid Scobie
> 
> 
> Mr Scobie insisted that Meghan 'wanted' to attend the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor on Saturday amid claims in the US she skipped it to avoid being 'centre of attention'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Omidstupido belongs in the bag as in GIGO!


----------



## Mendocino

CarryOn2020 said:


> 540 pages of print.  *This man is loved*.
> Let’s focus on that and that alone.  Let the jealous joy-stealers pi$$ off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UK newspapers dedicated more than 500 print pages to Prince Philip within three days of duke's death
> 
> 
> The UK media dedicated more than 540 pages of print coverage to the death of Prince Philip over three days, Press Gazette analysis has found.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pressgazette.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5053121
> 
> 
> View attachment 5053141


The Daily Fail cover has brought tears to my eyes.


----------



## Clearblueskies

duna said:


> Sounds like this idiot is on tPF, he denies or "explaines" all the things that have recently been posted here....


I bet he is.  I expect he keeps tabs on all the popular sites for MM


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> ....or maybe *she* should apologize to them????


Who? The duchess? Mother Teresa of Montecito? Are you suggesting that she should apologize?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Who? The duchess? Mother Teresa of Montecito? Are you suggesting that she should apologize?



That would require Meghan admitting she was wrong about something and that will never happen. Would never even occur to her. No, apologies must be offered TO Meghan, preferably along with flowers like she claims Kate gave her. MEghan does not apologize!


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Part of him is likely jealous of his brother. If I were Will or Charles, I would keep my conversations with him polite, but brief and in the presence of witnesses. The last thing they want is to have MM's interpretations of conversations conveyed to Oprah, King or Omid.


good advice.  but I suppose no matter how careful they are, stories could be made up - or exaggerated


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> ....or maybe *she* should apologize to them????


She might do a backhanded apology to further martyr herself: "I'm sorry you think i'm unreasonable just because I am standing up for my son's birthright to have 24-hour taxpayer-funded security in a foreign country. I'm sorry you think I'm greedy just because I needed my freedom and I thought you would be more than happy to provide the cash to ensure that I can skive the rest of my life."


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly right now the other thread is much better for my soul. No weird media stunts, just a collection of the nice and amazing things people did (e.g. the Bhutanese royal family put up an altar and King and Queen personally lit 1000 butter lamps in Philip's honour) / had to say. It is weirdly comforting.


The Bhutanese tribute was beautifully done. I also was greatly comforted by the message the King and Queen of Spain sent to The Queen; I found it to be familial yet highly respectful at the same time.  

Charles, Diana and the boys used to spend vacations with the Spanish Royal Family when they were children, so King Felipe would no doubt have memories of William and Harry when they were very small. I wonder what Felipe thinks of Harry's actions. I don't think he would be impressed, and that is me using my backspace key multiple times as I want to keep my focus on Phillip and The Queen.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I think you're right. I've never believed that Harry has ever been jealous of William re his position. I think he's always enjoyed the "freedom" of being the second son whilst supporting the Monarchy in his own way. I truly believed that with whoever he ended up marrying, they would be a tremendous support to Charles as King and even more when William is King.
> Then Meghan happened.



I think he enjoyed it as a young man  ...and then he was expected to...grow-up  .

IMO, that's when M...landed on him   . ...Now he rather wished he was...centre stage  

...but everything he does is full of hot air and makes him look...stupid...and...lightweight


----------



## redney

Shopaholic2021] I think though it is because of MM. I don't think she truly understands how the BRF works said:


> I think you're right. I've never believed that Harry has ever been jealous of William re his position. I think he's always enjoyed the "freedom" of being the second son whilst supporting the Monarchy in his own way. I truly believed that with whoever he ended up marrying, they would be a tremendous support to Charles as King and even more when William is King.
> Then Meghan happened.


Has anyone watched the Netflix documentary "Elizabeth & Margaret"? I finished it last night - really interesting how it portrayed Margaret as # 2. She played a critical role as intimate support to her sister and, after some missteps in her personal life that threatened the integrity of her sister and the monarchy, how she came to realize, accept, and embrace the sacrifice of her own personal desires in order to serve and protect the monarchy.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> ...but everything he does is full of hot air *and makes him look...stupid...and...lightweight*



And douchey!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Love how Brits have polls for almost everything!
> View attachment 5054022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> POLL: Should Royal Family apologise to Meghan Markle?
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is "willing to forgive" the Royal Family and "move forward", an insider has said - so should the royals apologise to the Duchess of Sussex to end the rift?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



OBVIOUSLY 2% error for technical difficulties and spoilt papers

...and I didn't even get to have a voice and vote!_* GIVE ME MY VOICE!*_


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> And douchey!



The Douche of Sussex!

Apologies to all the good people of Sussex


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It is really tragic in a way. They could have gone on to do great things with all these ressources within the frame of the BRF, even Duchess Disney. Instead they chose to be egomaniac clowns.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> In that case, sorry about that filler comment, Omid! But seriously, man, ease up on the treatments. Once you go too far with them, your face will look like a cheap wax figurine for the rest of your life.



It's the 'beauty' filter

Hats off to him though, there's a man who doesn't need to have a wax model made of him at Madame Tussauds.


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Has anyone watched the Netflix documentary "Elizabeth & Margaret"? I finished it last night - really interesting how it portrayed Margaret as # 2. She played a critical role as intimate support to her sister and, after some missteps in her personal life that threatened the integrity of her sister and the monarchy, how she came to realize, accept, and embrace the sacrifice of her own personal desires in order to serve and protect the monarchy.



as my mother used to say, she grew to know which side her bread was buttered


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Mendocino

I'm confused. If one is quarantined how can they meet with anyone?


----------



## Sharont2305

Mendocino said:


> I'm confused. If one is quarantined how can they meet with anyone?


You can't. I really don't believe that story at all.


----------



## MommyDaze

sdkitty said:


> Harry isn't eligible in CA until later this week - from CA Public Health Dept:
> 
> *Updated March 25, 2021 to reflect:*
> 
> Beginning April 1, 2021, individuals age 50-64 years old will be eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
> Beginning April 15, 2021, every Californian age 16 and older will become eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
> COVID-19 vaccine clinic volunteers are eligible for vaccination if they complete at least one clinic shift and are approved by the clinic’s organizer.


This differs in local jurisdictions throughout the state. In our area it has been open to 16 and over since last week. I got my 16y.o. her first shot Friday through normal channels.


----------



## Annawakes

So, here are my recent thoughts.

I don’t really believe H has met with Eugenie.  I think that was a fake story.  If I were Eugenie with a new baby I wouldn’t let anybody from overseas near my baby or me, during quarantine.

I also don’t think H has been jealous of Will his whole life.  I think they had a great relationship growing up.  I think what changed was after W married Kate.  The three of them used to do events together, so happy.  I think it was around that time H started feeling dissatisfied, maybe?  As in, feeling like, where is my life going?  Who am I?  Am I really going to be the third wheel like this for the rest of my life?  While Will has complete clarity of his purpose, and his partner by his side?

I think it was around that time he started feeling jealous, like, where’s “my” Kate?  What’s “my” purpose?  Whereas before he was just happy partying along.

So, conditions were ripe for M to swoop in and tell him everything he wanted to hear.  She convinced him she’s into service, dedication, “hitting the ground running”.  He thought he found in her what W found in K.  And that he has a chance to make something for himself.  Too bad what he made wasn’t any good.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> It's the 'beauty' filter
> 
> Hats off to him though,* there's a man who doesn't need to have a wax model made of him at Madame Tussauds*.



@papertiger. you are on fire today!


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> @papertiger. you are on fire today!


----------



## chaneljewel

papertiger said:


> OBVIOUSLY 2% error for technical difficulties and spoilt papers
> 
> ...and I didn't even get to have a voice and vote!_* GIVE ME MY VOICE!*_


What a joke????   Apologize to M???  She’s the one who needs to humble herself to the BRF!!!!!!!


----------



## bisousx

Annawakes said:


> So, here are my recent thoughts.
> 
> I don’t really believe H has met with Eugenie.  I think that was a fake story.  If I were Eugenie with a new baby I wouldn’t let anybody from overseas near my baby or me, during quarantine.
> 
> I also don’t think H has been jealous of Will his whole life.  I think they had a great relationship growing up.  I think what changed was after W married Kate.  The three of them used to do events together, so happy.  I think it was around that time H started feeling dissatisfied, maybe?  As in, feeling like, where is my life going?  Who am I?  Am I really going to be the third wheel like this for the rest of my life?  While Will has complete clarity of his purpose, and his partner by his side?
> 
> I think it was around that time he started feeling jealous, like, where’s “my” Kate?  What’s “my” purpose?  Whereas before he was just happy partying along.
> 
> So, conditions were ripe for M to swoop in and tell him everything he wanted to hear.  She convinced him she’s into service, dedication, “hitting the ground running”.  He thought he found in her what W found in K.  And that he has a chance to make something for himself.  Too bad what he made wasn’t any good.



Makes sense to me.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Geez, Omid. With all the fillers and filters he uses there's no telling what he really looks like.


He seem to be "evolving" at the same time as Meghan, maybe they cut a deal with the plastic surgeon, "Refer a friend save 50% on your next procedure"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Rouge H

sdkitty said:


> the schedule on my tv screen doesn't show it but I set it to record for that time anyway....if I'm up at 6am I'll turn on the tv....I would think maybe CNN would carry it



When I was watching ABC evening news- David Muir announced coverage at 9am EST.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think though it is because of MM. I don't think she truly understands how the BRF works, and that Harry and her are never going to the the stars, only supporting roles (which they left). I think Harry is deluded if he thinks BRF tried to spread gossip and squash their image because they were becoming more popular than W&K. That is H&M's claim.





Sharont2305 said:


> I think you're right. I've never believed that Harry has ever been jealous of William re his position. I think he's always enjoyed the "freedom" of being the second son whilst supporting the Monarchy in his own way. I truly believed that with whoever he ended up marrying, they would be a tremendous support to Charles as King and even more when William is King.
> Then Meghan happened.



Popularity and wider appeal of another royal couple just adds to the overall sucess of the Monarchy. It's like sharing someone else's success or good fortune. It does not take away from one's own sucesses or achievements when others have good fortune. Yes, the "crown prince" couple are more important but it's not a competition.

IMO great care was taken with Harry being the spare: Queen Elizabeth has been here twice before with Princess Margaret and Prince Andrew and understands how difficult it can be to carve out a seperate identity and live a meaningful life as the spare.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> Harry isn't eligible in CA until later this week - from CA Public Health Dept:
> 
> *Updated March 25, 2021 to reflect:*
> 
> Beginning April 1, 2021, individuals age 50-64 years old will be eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
> Beginning April 15, 2021, every Californian age 16 and older will become eligible for COVID-19 vaccines.
> COVID-19 vaccine clinic volunteers are eligible for vaccination if they complete at least one clinic shift and are approved by the clinic’s organizer.



There are a lot of loopholes... not really loopholes, but I've seen many sites have spare vaccines and are taking people. Cal State LA last week for example was welcoming anyone and everyone to vaccinate. My boss who isn't eligible got it a few towns over today too. People like H+M will have assistants available to check round the clock for opportunities like that.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

RAINDANCE said:


> IMO great care was taken with Harry being the spare: Queen Elizabeth has been here twice before with Princess Margaret and Prince Andrew and understands how difficult it can be to carve out a seperate identity and live a meaningful life as the spare.



Why do you think Harry and Meghan left then? They complained about treatment from the palace and they felt they were not being protected like other royals citing possibly it was because of race. Harry and Meghan both said because they were more popular they were suppressed and vilified in the press with the help of the palace.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> There are a lot of loopholes... not really loopholes, but I've seen many sites have spare vaccines and are taking people. Cal State LA last week for example was welcoming anyone and everyone to vaccinate. My boss who isn't eligible got it a few towns over today too. People like H+M will have assistants available to check round the clock for opportunities like that.



My father and two brothers got the vaccine before they were both eligible in my state because of spare vaccines. In the US you can sometimes get the shot before you're eligible if you get lucky.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Why do you think Harry and Meghan left then? They complained about treatment from the palace and they felt they were not being protected like other royals citing possibly it was because of race. Harry and Meghan both said because they were more popular they were suppressed and vilified in the press with the help of the palace.



They left because the reality of royal life didn't fit with what Meghan expected for being married to a prince. She wanted the fame, the wealth, and the popularity. She thought it would be all photo ops and elite events featuring herself being adored. She didn't realize she would have to be answerable to others and that she could be reprimanded when she tried to one-up those higher up than her in the line. She couldn't do whatever she pleased so they left. She and Harry were incredibly popular for awhile and they were given the benefit of the doubt when things seemed off. Thankfully that popularity is slowly eroding away.


----------



## TC1

I'm sure if Charles was consulted he would have told H in no uncertain terms to leave MM at home. Can you imagine all the bump cradling and searching for cameras in the middle of this funeral? Yikes. 
The fact that she didn't want to make it about her..shows us that that's how she approaches any situation, putting herself first.


----------



## rose60610

I think the BRF feels either Harry is too damaged beyond repair and will tolerate his presence; or stage an intervention and attempt to deprogram him from Meghan while he's over there. Please, somebody, please wallop him good upside the head and scream "What were you thinking?!" He's either going to defend his psycho wife and tell them to go to hell, or confess that he and Archie are being held captive but the Netflix money makes it hard to leave.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> He seem to be "evolving" at the same time as Meghan, maybe they cut a deal with the plastic surgeon, "Refer a friend save 50% on your next procedure"



Groupon, perhaps?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I think the BRF feels either Harry is too damaged beyond repair and will tolerate his presence; *or stage an intervention *and attempt to deprogram him from Meghan while he's over there. Please, somebody, please wallop him good upside the head and scream "What were you thinking?!" He's either going to defend his psycho wife and tell them to go to hell, or confess that he and Archie are being held captive but the Netflix money makes it hard to leave.



I'd love to witness that intervention. I imagine the Queen looking Harry dead in the eye and asking "what were you thinking?" And Harry with Meghan on speed dial, saying "snookums, could you tell Gran what I was thinking?"

He has burned his bridges to ashes. They can't be expected to forgive and forget such a public betrayal. Harry took it too far.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> They left because the reality of royal life didn't fit with what Meghan expected for being married to a prince. She wanted the fame, the wealth, and the popularity. She thought it would be all photo ops and elite events featuring herself being adored. She didn't realize she would have to be answerable to others and that she could be reprimanded when she tried to one-up those higher up than her in the line. She couldn't do whatever she pleased so they left. She and Harry were incredibly popular for awhile and they were given the benefit of the doubt when things seemed off. Thankfully that popularity is slowly eroding away.


I don’t think Meghan was ever in it for the long term.  She was after the fame and association.


----------



## sdkitty

Not sure if I should go into this as I didn't watch the whole episode but I just watched about 20 minutes of the new episode of The Talk.  It's a special episode where they were talking about Sharon's departure and the episode that led up to it.  Basically they were having a conversation about race and particularly about black women.  Sharon's name was hardly mentioned and neither was Piers Morgan. 
Elaine Welteroth stated that WOC like her identify with Meghan and (paraphrasing) when you say something bad about Meghan or discount what she says, you are hurting all those WOC.
So there you have it.  Right or wrong Meghan has become some sort of symbol and people like some of us here who don't see her as the victim she claims to be are mean spirited and racist.  That is why (IMO) no one in the US media will question anything she says.
Cheryl was asked if she had any communication with Sharon and said she didn't, in part because there was an investigation going on. she said if she saw Sharon and Sharon greeted her warmly she would respond in kind.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Why do you think Harry and Meghan left then? They complained about treatment from the palace and they felt they were not being protected like other royals citing possibly it was because of race. Harry and Meghan both said because they were more popular they were suppressed and vilified in the press with the help of the palace.


IMO MM didn't fully understand, that the 'Prince of Wales' title meant 'heir to the throne' and that the position wasn't awarded through a popularity contest, where she and Harry could jump to the front of the line because she thought they were more popular than Charles and William. She wanted to become queen of England after HMQ. Can you imagine the reaction when her inflated ego grasped the reality that Harry was only #6. She chucked Plan A and skipped to Plan B, to use the RF as a stepping stone to fame and fortune.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t think Meghan was ever in it for the long term.  She was after the fame and association.



She thought they could have the best of both worlds, that they could still use the royal titles to promote themselves but that they wouldn't have to do any royal work. That they were not allowed to do that was a shock to both of them.


----------



## Mendocino

Chloe302225 said:


>






Sharont2305 said:


> You can't. I really don't believe that story at all.


Thank you, Sharon!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I agree, we shouldn't get on any high grammar horses. TPF is one of the most articulate forums across the board(s) on the internet. There are a lot of very well educated women and men on tPF, where ever they are from, and I applaud those whose first language is not English, for making the effort to write as well as they do. They shouldn't be chastised for making mistakes that are normal beginner mistakes. A lot of native English speakers make those mistakes- and worse- as well.
> 
> But pukasonqo, I think the problem here was that this particular poster came in too ablazin' and belittling and when you do that, you need to have your spell check in order. It's like when the grammar and spelling Stasi inclined, correct others they feel are not up to their particular grammatical par, with a post that hilariously also has a spelling mistake. It'd be too much to ask of others not to feel a bit of glee. Nobody here would have made fun of the poster's spelling/vocabulary if the poster had been just a bit more cordial and explained why the petulant twosome is worthy of our reconsideration.


Perfectly put!  English isn't my mother tongue, and I would never make fun of anyone's accent, grammar, spelling etc., (especially if their first language isn't English.  It does drive me crazy when native English speakers make more mistakes than I do, but I digress).  That poster came in to insult and put down those of us the poster didn't agree with.  If I feel "attacked", be prepared to get a response.  I'm not MO.  I don't necessarily go high when they go low.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t think Meghan was ever in it for the long term.  She was after the fame and association.



This was clear from the beginning. She invited people like George and Amal Clooney, who she doesn't know personally, yet did not invite her own family (neither her mother or fathers family were at the wedding). As far as I'm aware her mother was the only family member at the wedding. It could be that both sides are very toxic or she doesn't know them, but we know that she did spend time with her fathers side of the family and that her fathers brother helped her get a job in Argentina for the US government.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Ah, right. Funny how different things are in different countries. Its very interesting.
> Incidentally, what job?


I'm not sure what job Harry has that would've qualified him for a vaccine.  He's not a front line worker, or an educator (although he and Meghan preach enough to think they are!).  Having a geriatric pregnant wife doesn't jump the spouse to the front of the line either.  That said, California has been handing out vaccines pretty readily now, so maybe he got one that way.


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> There is a quizz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vaccines
> 
> 
> Get vaccinated – it’s safe, effective, and free. Vaccination is an important tool to end the COVID-19 pandemic. On this page: How to get vaccinated Who can get vaccinated How COVID-19 vaccines work Vaccines and variants Booster shots and additional doses Digital vaccine record Side effects...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> covid19.ca.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You might qualify.


Maybe the chickens help him qualify, being "agricultural" and all.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> I think he’s jealous of his brother, think he’s always been. Always waiting to try and one up him.


I think he may have been jealous a bit, but seemed to deal with it much better until Meghan came along.  She was the accelerant to the underlying ember that fueled the fire in him to suddenly forget everything he is.


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> Sounds like this idiot is on tPF, he denies or "explaines" all the things that have recently been posted here....


Maybe he's the one who told us all to get a live!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> She might do a backhanded apology to further martyr herself: "I'm sorry you think i'm unreasonable just because I am standing up for my son's birthright to have 24-hour taxpayer-funded security in a foreign country. I'm sorry you think I'm greedy just because I needed my freedom and I thought you would be more than happy to provide the cash to ensure that I can skive the rest of my life."


How about, "I'm sorry if you don't see my point of view, and my truth."


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> How about, "I'm sorry if you don't see my point of view, and my truth."



I wonder if MM asked the queen how she was doing while waiting for HM to apologize


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I think he may have been jealous a bit, but seemed to deal with it much better until Meghan came along.  She was the accelerant to the underlying ember that fueled the fire in him to suddenly forget everything he is.


but I don't think he can forget everything he is (or was)


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> I wonder if MM asked the queen how she was doing while waiting for HM to apologize



Good point... wonder if she asked Wills and Kate if they were OK after she put them on the spot during the interview.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO MM didn't fully understand, that the 'Prince of Wales' title meant 'heir to the throne' and that the position wasn't awarded through a popularity contest, where she and Harry could jump to the front of the line because she thought they were more popular than Charles and William. She wanted to become queen of England after HMQ. Can you imagine the reaction when her inflated ego grasped the reality that Harry was only #6. She chucked Plan A and skipped to Plan B, to use the RF as a stepping stone to fame and fortune.



He was never going to be the PoW..._ever _

H&M were a novelty as a couple around the time of the wedding, but_ never_ more popular than W&K since they had never established themselves. Too much drama very quickly and the UK doesn't like drama from the RF while it's happening, only mildly in retrospect We expect _noblesse oblige_ and maintain 'radio silence' on everything else.

We all had to learn kings, queens and intrigues in history lessons. It was very boring and had nothing directly to do with_ our _families or lives, but it was a good lesson in knowing/understanding one's class and place in the scheme of things.

The way history's taught at (British) public (private) school, you'd think that H would be one of the few people that'd actually pay attention and find it personally interesting and helpful for future life.

Obviously not  .


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> They left because the reality of royal life didn't fit with what Meghan expected for being married to a prince. She wanted the fame, the wealth, and the popularity. She thought it would be all photo ops and elite events featuring herself being adored. She didn't realize she would have to be answerable to others and that she could be reprimanded when she tried to one-up those higher up than her in the line. She couldn't do whatever she pleased so they left.* She and Harry were incredibly popular for awhile and they were given the benefit of the doubt when things seemed off. Thankfully that popularity is slowly eroding away.*



Prince Philip's biographer told Piers Morgan:
Philip's biographer and long-time friend, Gyles Brandreth, revealed: *'He said to me more than once: 'It's a big mistake to think about yourself. No one is interested in you in the long run. Don't court popularity. It doesn't last. Remember that the attention comes because of the position you are privileged to hold, not because of who you are. If you think it's all about you, you'll never be happy.' *

It's unfortunate that Harry never listened to this advice from his grandfather.


----------



## papertiger

Just for reference (because it may be different wherever you live):

In the UK, vaccine or no vaccine, makes no difference. 

Mask wearing, social distancing, quarantine and all restrictions still apply to social get togethers. 

If H went to meet E already he was breaking our Covid rules.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I think he may have been jealous a bit, but seemed to deal with it much better until Meghan came along.  She was the accelerant to the underlying ember that fueled the fire in him to suddenly forget everything he is.


Although he struggled? with drugs/alcohol/women, he seemed to enjoy the military ... until ... the big bad press found out and published stories about it. Then, he, of course, had to leave.  It is always the #$%& press’s fault.  Wonder if it ever occurs to him that someone from his side  leaked it to the press.  Ya kno, how Diana would tell her fave reporters where she would be and then, vociferously, complain about their presence.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> I think the BRF feels either Harry is too damaged beyond repair and will tolerate his presence; or stage an intervention and attempt to deprogram him from Meghan while he's over there. Please, somebody, please wallop him good upside the head and scream "What were you thinking?!" He's either going to defend his psycho wife and tell them to go to hell, or confess that he and Archie are being held captive but the Netflix money makes it hard to leave.


As we read on now, SAS has declined to go forth with Operation Over and Under California Skies due to the Navy Seal’s own planned Operation Claw Back requested by MM. The truth of the matter is the US and the UK don’t want to spend monies on a cause that is . . . really not a cause. You know? Like Operation Overlord. 

There was deal or no deal clause that each Special Forces had to open a suitcase with mission impossible instructions to determine whether the mission was to go forward or not, as we are allies after all, but the suitcases opened by each SF team the instructions were abort! Harry was deemed as not a high value asset and MM was valued as a ‘not necessary in theatre operations since she lost her operational rank a couple of years ago. And the Commander Harry had been relieved of his duties in the military.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> He was never going to be the PoW..._ever _
> 
> H&M were a novelty as a couple around the time of the wedding, but_ never_ more popular than W&K since they had never established themselves. Too much drama very quickly and the UK doesn't like drama from the RF while it's happening, only mildly in retrospect We expect _noblesse oblige_ and maintain 'radio silence' on everything else.
> 
> We all had to learn kings, queens and intrigues in history lessons. It was very boring and had nothing directly to do with_ our _families or lives, but it was a good lesson in knowing/understanding one's class and place in the scheme of things.
> 
> The way history's taught at (British) public (private) school, you'd think that H would be one of the few people that'd actually pay attention and find it personally interesting and helpful for future life.
> 
> Obviously not  .


Yes, I learned the same at an early age. I should've added that IMO, Harry didn't inform or teach MM anything about the RF and even if he had, MM would have paid little attention to it, thinking herself more knowledgeable. To be fair, she probably is more intelligent and cunning than Harry.

ET correct glaring grammatical error


----------



## DrDior

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> my main point was of course that it is unpleasant to see someone's opinions (queennadine's in this case) being discarded on the basis of who they are and where they are from. Your opinion on international posters doesn't change the fact that tPF is an American site. Contributing here is quite voluntary no matter the PF revenue, which is frankly not my business, and neither alter the ownership nor where it's based.



And yet, when you hoist the American flag, claim tPF as American territory and assert “rights“ to which you acknowledge you are not entitled under your own laws, you do the same thing — only in the reverse — by creating a space which feels unwelcoming for the international posters who contribute heavily to the social, financial and other health of this site. I’m surprised you can’t see that. But, as that seems to be the case, I’ll mosey along to more productive uses of time ... after all, Cartier doesn’t buy itself!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I'm sure if Charles was consulted he would have told H in no uncertain terms to leave MM at home. Can you imagine all the bump cradling and searching for cameras in the middle of this funeral? Yikes.
> The fact that she didn't want to make it about her..shows us that that's how she approaches any situation, putting herself first.



And don't forget that smug grin she tends to sport at the most sombre of occasions. Can you imagine trying to hold back tears and having to look at that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> They left because the reality of royal life didn't fit with what Meghan expected for being married to a prince. She wanted the fame, the wealth, and the popularity. She thought it would be all photo ops and elite events featuring herself being adored. She didn't realize she would have to be answerable to others and that she could be reprimanded when she tried to one-up those higher up than her in the line. She couldn't do whatever she pleased so they left. She and Harry were incredibly popular for awhile and they were given the benefit of the doubt when things seemed off. Thankfully that popularity is slowly eroding away.



This. Also, I won't bet money on it as I don't think I paid that much attention back then...but to me it seems she only decided the BRF was racist once her stans and the US press declared them so. That's when she decided it was a great idea and ran with it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

sdkitty said:


> only time will tell and I don't know them.  but I think Harry would be like a fish out of water in CA.  I think he will live to regret marrying her and leaving the RF.  Yes, the royals have their duties but he was a Big Somebody there.  Who is he now?  The woke husband of a former actress/WOC in CA with his pale redhead skin.



Totally agreed! I'm wondering if H will start realizing how he misses the life as a RF while there this week. I hope he does ... I say this in a nice way.  Even if he decides to divorce, H will have a spot in his heart for M because she is the mother of his children. I have heard that numerous times over the years from fathers that divorce.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I learned the same at an early age. I should've added that IMO, Harry didn't informed or taught MM anything about the RF and even if he had, MM would have paid little attention to it, thinking herself more knowledgeable. *To be fair, she probably is more intelligent and cunning than Harry.*



Although you are probably right, we could possibly say that 90% of the World's population. 

MM has street-smart charm, but she is not that intelligent or she wouldn't have married him. 

She thinks she's cunning because she can manipulate a stupid man, but so far, all I see is someone responding and reacting to events. A cunning person would keep schtum about how clever they are.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. Also, I won't bet money on it as I don't think I paid that much attention back then...but to me it seems she only decided the BRF was racist once her stans and the US press declared them so. That's when she decided it was a great idea and ran with it.



I think she saw a good opportunity to use the race card now because of the political climate in the US. It was perfect timing for her. If it truly was about race or mental health why not speak up after leaving? They had cut off all ties by that point, but they waited a long time (nearly a year) before saying all this.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Hermes Zen said:


> Totally agreed! I'm wondering if H will start realizing how he misses the life as a RF while there this week. I hope he does ... I say this in a nice way.  Even if he decides to divorce, H will have a spot in his heart for M because she is the mother of his children. I have heard that numerous times over the years from fathers that divorce.



I don't think he would ever divorce her. I think they have a very dependent and toxic relationship, and neither of them are conscious of this. Notice how she is always clutching his hard or holding his hand in a way that makes me think she is very clingy and needy emotionally. And I think he sees her as a maternal figure more than a wife, and he definitely has mental health issues which she exploits.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She thinks she's cunning because she can manipulate a stupid man, but so far, all I see is someone responding and reacting to events. A cunning person would keep schtum about how clever they are.



And plan ahead. She drives her malicious plans but she really fails to see the grand scheme of many things.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't think he would ever divorce her. I think they have a very dependent and toxic relationship, and neither of them are conscious of this. Notice how she is always clutching his hard or holding his hand in a way that makes me think she is very clingy and needy emotionally. And I think he sees her as a maternal figure more than a wife, and he definitely has mental health issues which she exploits.


Agree with you too. Or, they live separately. But if there is a remote chance of divorce .. wakes up ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s remember MM’s mother‘s role  in all this talk of the racism accusations.
IMO they won’t divorce but will do the open marriage. They get bored easily. 

eeek: glaring spelling typing error.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And plan ahead. She drives her malicious plans but she really fails to see the grand scheme of many things.



Yes, she has proven incapable of anticipating how her plans could possibly go awry. She has been caught flat-footed a number of times when things didn't happen the way she thought they would.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And plan ahead. She drives her malicious plans but she really fails to see the grand scheme of many things.



I think both of them have some vague romantic notion about being in the world of billionaire Ancient gods. I don't think either of them have a clue about the life they aspire to. Too much Disney and not enough history channel.

I think it said so much that she wanted to show-up at PC's 70th, got bored after the photo op, stuck out her tongue and generally behaved like a spoilt brat. That is not the mind-set of a World leader or very clever person.

He's a lightweight and she is too - they just have time on their hands, too much money (though not enough) and a never-ending supply of self-importance.

Edited to correct auto-correct.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And plan ahead. She drives her malicious plans but she really fails to see the grand scheme of many things.


As a narcissistic individual she lacks empathy and is unable to predict how her actions will be received - so she gets thrown by what to everyone else is a predictable reaction.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s remember MM’s mother‘s role  in all this talk of the racism accusations.
> IMO they won’t divorce but will do the open marriage. They get bored easily.
> 
> eeek: glaring spelling typing error.



M's too immature for an open marriage. An open marriage relies on discretion and no kiss and tells. 

She tells/shows everybody everything all the time, it's practically compulsive, and once he loses face he will be Mr. Angry Windsor forever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> I think both of them have some vague romantic notion about being in the world of billionaire Ancient gods. I don't think either of them have a clue about the life they aspire to. Too much Disney and not enough history channel.
> 
> I think it said so much that she wanted to show-up at PC's 70th, got bored after the photo op, stuck out her tongue and generally behaved like a split brat. That is not the mind-set of a World leader or very clever person.
> 
> He's a lightweight and she is too - they just have time on their hands, too much money (though not enough) and a never-ending supply of self-importance.


It doesn’t help that the goal keeps changing.  I’ve lost track of the number of projects and initiatives they’ve fanfared which we’ve not heard anything more from?


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> It doesn’t help that the goal keeps changing.  I’ve lost track of the number of projects and initiatives they’ve fanfared which we’ve not heard anything more from?



They are all expectations/harebrained schemes and no experience/tenacity.

Any sane person would know it takes training, hard work, time and patience to do anything worthwhile.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The SoHo house and Omid connections are complete turn-offs for me. 
We are told when in doubt about a person’s character, look at their friends.  Yeah, a complete turn-off.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> As we read on now, SAS has declined to go forth with Operation Over and Under California Skies due to the Navy Seal’s own planned Operation Claw Back requested by MM. The truth of the matter is the US and the UK don’t want to spend monies on a cause that is . . . really not a cause. You know? Like Operation Overlord.
> *
> There was deal or no deal clause* that each Special Forces had to open a suitcase with mission impossible instructions to determine whether the mission was to go forward or not, as we are allies after all, *but the suitcases opened by each SF team the instructions were abort*! Harry was deemed as not a high value asset and MM was valued as a ‘not necessary in theatre operations since she lost her operational rank a couple of years ago. And the Commander Harry had been relieved of his duties in the military.


I'll be the first to admit how juvenile I can be.  Your mention of deal or no deal and suitcases brings it full circle to MM as a suitcase girl, which made me giggle.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> They are all expectations/harebrained schemes and no experience/tenacity.
> 
> Any sane person would know it takes training, hard work, time and patience to do anything worthwhile.


And talent....

I think MM believes she can take a shortcut and acquire all that by association - by bracketing herself with MO for instance, or Amal.  In the same way 6 weeks as an intern in the embassy became a diplomatic career.  It’s all window dressing and no substance.  She reminds me of the talented Mr Ripley


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

DrDior said:


> And yet, when you hoist the American flag, claim tPF as American territory and assert “rights“ to which you acknowledge you are not entitled under your own laws, you do the same thing — only in the reverse — by creating a space which feels unwelcoming for the international posters who contribute heavily to the social, financial and other health of this site. I’m surprised you can’t see that. But, as that seems to be the case, I’ll mosey along to more productive uses of time ... after all, Cartier doesn’t buy itself!


"... more productive uses of time..." Am i detecting a bit of "unwelcoming"? 

You're giving me too much credit. I've never claimed tPF, nor hoisted the American flag per se, but I did swear allegiance to just that flag every single week morning for a couple of years of my life. I have no problem paying respect to what ever country I'm visiting or might be living in and I have lived in a few different ones since I was a child. It's just good manners to be respectful to the host. And to keep somewhat on topic, I think one of the main characters of this thread is a warning example of what can happen when you aren't.

As for "creating a space which feels unwelcoming for the international posters who contribute heavily to the social, financial and other health of this site", now you are just reaching. I love the fact that there are posters from all over the world here and because most of us are anonymous it makes for a very level playing field when discussing different topics. I may not like everyone's opinions just as everyone doesn't like mine, but that's not being unwelcoming, that's the nature of, I'm presuming, adults discussing.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> And talent....
> 
> I think MM believes she can take a shortcut and acquire all that by association - by bracketing herself with MO for instance, or Amal.  In the same way 6 weeks as an intern in the embassy became a diplomatic career.  It’s all window dressing and no substance.  She reminds me of the talented Mr Ripley


I hate to say it but when covid is over and things go back to normal we will see how far the duchess title gets her.  I wouldn't be surprised if we see her at big red carpet events


----------



## csshopper

Slightly tangential to all the good conversation above, but I don't think they do themselves any favors by using their mouthpieces, especially Scoobie, without giving more thought to the results. Scoobie's  grand pronouncements today explaining to the world from his perspective the meaning of William's tribute to his grandfather versus Harry's has I'm sure, not gone over well with William or other members of the RF. Nor should it. Meghan should have made her statement about doctor's advice and then shut up. Putting out all the other crap about not wanting to be a distraction just diminishes her more. Wonder if Harry has read the Poll about apologizing?


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "... more productive uses of time..." Am i detecting a bit of "unwelcoming"?
> 
> You're giving me too much credit. I've never claimed tPF, nor hoisted the American flag per se, but I did swear allegiance to just that flag every single week morning for a couple of years of my life. I have no problem paying respect to what ever country I'm visiting or might be living in and I have lived in a few different ones since I was a child. It's just good manners to be respectful to the host. And to keep somewhat on topic, I think one of the main characters of this thread is a warning example of what can happen when you aren't.
> 
> As for "creating a space which feels unwelcoming for the international posters who contribute heavily to the social, financial and other health of this site", now you are just reaching. I love the fact that there are posters from all over the world here and because most of us are anonymous it makes for a very level playing field when discussing different topics. I may not like everyone's opinions just as everyone doesn't like mine, but that's not being unwelcoming, that's the nature of, I'm presuming, adults discussing.


I like that there are people from all over the world here.  I wish everyone would have their country or state of origin on their avatars to remind us.
shopping for cartier is productive?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

csshopper said:


> Meghan should have made her statement about doctor's advice and then shut up. Putting out all the other crap about not wanting to be a distraction just diminishes her more.



Very true. If she didn't want to steal the spotlight away from the funeral she should have left it at 'the doctor did not clear me' and let it go. She must have been aware that people will say that she is lying, doesn't want to be there etc. She should have ignored it and supported her husband and the queen like other families do. The fact that she asked her friends to leak the real reason seems immature, and calculated to save face. 

These sorts of things happen in a lot of families. It can happen when one person inherits everything, so when there is family rifts for other reasons, this is not necessarily a unique situation.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan isn't done spouting off. We have about a week to go with Harry out of her clutches. She can't shut up. I'm convinced she's thought of numerous things to do/say when Harry would be out of the house for Philip's imminent demise. I give her 48 hours to sputter another inane comment, and she'll pull out some whoppers on the day of the funeral. The day after she'll be criticizing something about the funeral. She'll add "It broke my heart not to be able to be there to console the Queen". And the world will throw up.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Slightly tangential to all the good conversation above, but I don't think they do themselves any favors by using their mouthpieces, especially Scoobie, without giving more thought to the results. Scoobie's  grand pronouncements today explaining to the world from his perspective the meaning of William's tribute to his grandfather versus Harry's has I'm sure, not gone over well with William or other members of the RF. Nor should it. Meghan should have made her statement about doctor's advice and then shut up. Putting out all the other crap about not wanting to be a distraction just diminishes her more. Wonder if Harry has read the Poll about apologizing?



Scobie‘s title is “royal editor” so that’s how he gets away with discussing and interpreting the other Royals at will even though he has no actual contact. His career and livelihood depend on his interactions with Harry and Meghan, particularly with Meghan. Finding Freedom may not have been book of the year but he made lots of money from it. He owes them for what he has.


----------



## Tootsie17

bag-mania said:


> I'd love to witness that intervention. I imagine the Queen looking Harry dead in the eye and asking "what were you thinking?" And Harry with Meghan on speed dial, saying "snookums, could you tell Gran what I was thinking?"
> 
> He has burned his bridges to ashes. They can't be expected to forgive and forget such a public betrayal. Harry took it too far.


"snookums, could you tell Gran what I was thinking?" Good one bag-mania!


----------



## Aimee3

I’m expecting MM to be rushed to the hospital (clutching her first born’s hand) on Friday morning so that Harry gets on the first plane home thus avoiding the funeral and relatives (assuming he’s really quarantining) altogether. 
Did I read somewhere that William isn’t going to wear his military uniform so that unrepentant Harry won’t stand out alone in his regular suit, because Harry’s forbidden to wear his military uniform now???
Edited for typo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surprised?











						Prince Harry flying back to US shortly after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan
					

Meghan Markle was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders.




					pagesix.com
				






Spoiler: Hurry home



*Prince Harry flying back to US after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan*
By Sara Nathan





Prince Harry will fly back to the US shortly after his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — as he doesn’t want to be separated from his pregnant wife Meghan Markle for too long.

The Duke of Sussex does not plan to spend any great length of time in the UK after the service on Saturday.

His wife, who is expecting their baby daughter in the early summer, was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders. And we’re told Harry will be hurrying back to California to be reunited with Markle and their young son Archie.

Although it’s not known what visa Harry is on — or whether he has applied for his Green Card — according to current guidelines, he will have had to apply for a National Interest Exception to travel home for the funeral, a top immigration attorney told us. However, there are also exceptions made for those who married to US citizens.

He will also have to adhere to COVID rules when he returns to the US. Current guidelines state that all visitors to the country must provide a negative test taken within three days of travel.

It’s the first time that Harry has been back to the UK since he and Markle quit royal life last year. And it will be the first time that he has seen his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, his father Prince Charles, brother Prince William, sister-in-law Kate Middleton, and the rest of his family since March last year.

Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us. The fact she’s not there means that Harry has to face them all alone after the couple made bombshell claims about their split from the royal family to Oprah Winfrey last month.

During the interview, Harry told Winfrey that despite everything he still has great affection for his brother.

“As I said before, I love William to bits,” he said. “We’ve been through hell together and we have a shared experience, but we are on different paths.”

Harry is currently quarantining at the Sussexes’ Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, where his cousin Eugenie and her family are living. He flew in to London’s Heathrow Airport on a scheduled British Airways flight — accompanied by security — on Sunday.

A rep for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surprised?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flying back to US shortly after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hurry home
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry flying back to US after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan*
> By Sara Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will fly back to the US shortly after his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — as he doesn’t want to be separated from his pregnant wife Meghan Markle for too long.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex does not plan to spend any great length of time in the UK after the service on Saturday.
> 
> His wife, who is expecting their baby daughter in the early summer, was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders. And we’re told Harry will be hurrying back to California to be reunited with Markle and their young son Archie.
> 
> Although it’s not known what visa Harry is on — or whether he has applied for his Green Card — according to current guidelines, he will have had to apply for a National Interest Exception to travel home for the funeral, a top immigration attorney told us. However, there are also exceptions made for those who married to US citizens.
> 
> He will also have to adhere to COVID rules when he returns to the US. Current guidelines state that all visitors to the country must provide a negative test taken within three days of travel.
> 
> It’s the first time that Harry has been back to the UK since he and Markle quit royal life last year. And it will be the first time that he has seen his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, his father Prince Charles, brother Prince William, sister-in-law Kate Middleton, and the rest of his family since March last year.
> 
> Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us. The fact she’s not there means that Harry has to face them all alone after the couple made bombshell claims about their split from the royal family to Oprah Winfrey last month.
> 
> During the interview, Harry told Winfrey that despite everything he still has great affection for his brother.
> 
> “As I said before, I love William to bits,” he said. “We’ve been through hell together and we have a shared experience, but we are on different paths.”
> 
> Harry is currently quarantining at the Sussexes’ Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, where his cousin Eugenie and her family are living. He flew in to London’s Heathrow Airport on a scheduled British Airways flight — accompanied by security — on Sunday.
> 
> A rep for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment.



Kind of a non-story TBH... how long were people expecting him to stay?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think both of them have some vague romantic notion about being in the world of billionaire Ancient gods. I don't think either of them have a clue about the life they aspire to. Too much Disney and not enough history channel.
> 
> I think it said so much that she wanted to show-up at PC's 70th, got bored after the photo op, stuck out her tongue and generally behaved like a spoilt brat. That is not the mind-set of a World leader or very clever person.
> 
> He's a lightweight and she is too - they just have time on their hands, too much money (though not enough) and a never-ending supply of self-importance.
> 
> Edited to correct auto-correct.


Billionaire Ancient gods ... all I could think of ... the handbags of the gods ... somehow this seems vaguely relevant .... 









						Mysterious 'handbags of the gods' spotted in ancient sculptures
					

What could they mean?




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry will fly back to the US shortly after his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — as he doesn’t want to be separated from his *heavily pregnant wife* Meghan Markle for too long.


Fixed that. Good grief, it takes a while for these reporters to get with the program. We should start charging them for the editing.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surprised?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flying back to US shortly after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hurry home
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry flying back to US after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan*
> By Sara Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will fly back to the US shortly after his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — as he doesn’t want to be separated from his pregnant wife Meghan Markle for too long.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex does not plan to spend any great length of time in the UK after the service on Saturday.
> 
> His wife, who is expecting their baby daughter in the early summer, was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders. And we’re told Harry will be hurrying back to California to be reunited with Markle and their young son Archie.
> 
> Although it’s not known what visa Harry is on — or whether he has applied for his Green Card — according to current guidelines, he will have had to apply for a National Interest Exception to travel home for the funeral, a top immigration attorney told us. However, there are also exceptions made for those who married to US citizens.
> 
> He will also have to adhere to COVID rules when he returns to the US. Current guidelines state that all visitors to the country must provide a negative test taken within three days of travel.
> 
> It’s the first time that Harry has been back to the UK since he and Markle quit royal life last year. And it will be the first time that he has seen his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, his father Prince Charles, brother Prince William, sister-in-law Kate Middleton, and the rest of his family since March last year.
> 
> Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us. The fact she’s not there means that Harry has to face them all alone after the couple made bombshell claims about their split from the royal family to Oprah Winfrey last month.
> 
> During the interview, Harry told Winfrey that despite everything he still has great affection for his brother.
> 
> “As I said before, I love William to bits,” he said. “We’ve been through hell together and we have a shared experience, but we are on different paths.”
> 
> Harry is currently quarantining at the Sussexes’ Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, where his cousin Eugenie and her family are living. He flew in to London’s Heathrow Airport on a scheduled British Airways flight — accompanied by security — on Sunday.
> 
> A rep for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment.


Of all the things to show up under the article
Sponsored Stories: This 13 second trick will catch any liar


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I hate to say it but when covid is over and things go back to normal we will see how far the duchess title gets her.  I wouldn't be surprised if we see her at big red carpet events


I wouldn't like seeing the big red carpet events become too vulgar.


----------



## poopsie

Aimee3 said:


> I’m expecting MM to be rushed to the hospital (clutching her first born’s hand) on Friday morning so that Harry gets on the first plane home thus avoiding the funeral and relatives (assuming he’s really quarantining) altogether.
> Did I read somewhere that William isn’t going to wear his military uniform so that unrepentant Harry won’t stand out alone in his regular suit, because Harry’s forbidden to wear his military uniform now???
> Edited for typo



TBH I was actually surprised that he was even allowed to go in the first place. I have been thinking that it is a distinct possibility that he will somehow not make the funeral.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surprised?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flying back to US shortly after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hurry home
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry flying back to US after Philip’s funeral to be with Meghan*
> By Sara Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will fly back to the US shortly after his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral — as he doesn’t want to be separated from his pregnant wife Meghan Markle for too long.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex does not plan to spend any great length of time in the UK after the service on Saturday.
> 
> His wife, who is expecting their baby daughter in the early summer, was banned from accompanying him on doctor’s orders. And we’re told Harry will be hurrying back to California to be reunited with Markle and their young son Archie.
> 
> Although it’s not known what visa Harry is on — or whether he has applied for his Green Card — according to current guidelines, he will have had to apply for a National Interest Exception to travel home for the funeral, a top immigration attorney told us. However, there are also exceptions made for those who married to US citizens.
> 
> He will also have to adhere to COVID rules when he returns to the US. Current guidelines state that all visitors to the country must provide a negative test taken within three days of travel.
> 
> It’s the first time that Harry has been back to the UK since he and Markle quit royal life last year. And it will be the first time that he has seen his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, his father Prince Charles, brother Prince William, sister-in-law Kate Middleton, and the rest of his family since March last year.
> 
> Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us. The fact she’s not there means that Harry has to face them all alone after the couple made bombshell claims about their split from the royal family to Oprah Winfrey last month.
> 
> During the interview, Harry told Winfrey that despite everything he still has great affection for his brother.
> 
> “As I said before, I love William to bits,” he said. “We’ve been through hell together and we have a shared experience, but we are on different paths.”
> 
> Harry is currently quarantining at the Sussexes’ Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage, where his cousin Eugenie and her family are living. He flew in to London’s Heathrow Airport on a scheduled British Airways flight — accompanied by security — on Sunday.
> 
> A rep for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex declined to comment.


*
"Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us."*
What a load of crock.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> *"Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us."*
> What a load of crock.



Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
So she wouldn't be the center of attention?


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Billionaire Ancient gods ... all I could think of ... the handbags of the gods ... somehow this seems vaguely relevant ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mysterious 'handbags of the gods' spotted in ancient sculptures
> 
> 
> What could they mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk


LOL!  Interesting all the depicted handbags look the same!  The Billionaire Ancient Gods were imitating (plagiarizing like MM) does now.    
Michael Kors ancestors.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight
> So she wouldn't be the center of attention?


You know it!


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> *"Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us."*
> What a load of crock.


Oh, I totally believe it  It must be causing her a lot of stress to extend the leash. Much easier if she were there gripping his hand and signalling him by a firm pat on the hand to Be Quiet, or a quick pat on the back to Move Aside, or a firm grip on the arm to "STAY". Plus all those photo ops! She could have recycled the chicken poop dress as mourning wear.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Oh, I totally believe it  It must be causing her a lot of stress to extend the leash. Much easier *if she were there gripping his hand and signalling him by a firm pat on the hand to Be Quiet, or a quick pat on the back to Move Aside, or a firm grip on the arm to "STAY"*. Plus all those photo ops! She could have recycled the chicken poop dress as mourning wear.


I am impressed with Meghan's training skills.  She's got Harry trained much better than either of my collies!  Mine are house trained though; hopefully Harry with his 16 bathrooms is as well.  We know Meg likes to pee outside.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure what job Harry has that would've qualified him for a vaccine.  He's not a front line worker, or an educator (although he and Meghan preach enough to think they are!).  Having a geriatric pregnant wife doesn't jump the spouse to the front of the line either.  That said, California has been handing out vaccines pretty readily now, so maybe he got one that way.


As someone else mentioned, people with some pre-existing conditions (e.g. mental health disorders) qualified for the vaccine a while ago.


----------



## lanasyogamama

God forbid he spend a few days with his family.


----------



## Chanbal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> My father and two brothers got the vaccine before they were both eligible in my state because of spare vaccines. In the US you can sometimes get the shot before you're eligible if you get lucky.


Can you see the duke and the duchess waiting in the Covid vaccine 'leftovers' line?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> *"Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us."*
> What a load of crock.


We also need an emoji for ‘totally disgusted’.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Not really on topic but something that worries me is the children. I mean H&M's children will be able to watch and read all these things about their parents, same goes for the Cambridge children and I wonder if it will be traumatizing. I wonder how Harry and William feel as adults watching the Diana interview. Also H&M's children will most likely grow up in a completely different world now I guess, unless they go back to the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

Someone is asking the heavily pregnant one to be quiet. 


_Influential royal commentator Angela Levin sent the Duchess of Sussex the blunt message shortly after she announced she wouldn’t be attending the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral. Friends close to the actress-turned-royal told the Daily Mail that Meghan is "ready to forgive" the Royal Family over allegations of racism she and Prince Harry levelled against them during their explosive Oprah Winfrey interview last month.

They added that since the duke - who she allegedly “adored” - died last Friday the 39-year-old "wants to put their differences aside" and move forward.

It later emerged that the heavily pregnant Duchess will not return to the UK after medical assessments advised her not to fly.

She also doesn't want to become the "centre of attention", it is reported.

As the rumours swirled, Ms Levin, who wrote bestseller Harry: Conversations with the Prince about the former senior royal, tweeted her thoughts about the duchess.

She wrote: *“If Meghan didn't want to be ‘centre of attention at the funeral’, told ‘friends’ she ‘adored Prince Philip’ and that she was ready to ‘forgive the Royal Family’, she should be quiet.*

“Instead all three comments show her patronising and grandiose behaviour. I don't believe them.”

And mentioning about doctors advising her not to fly, she added: “Interesting that Meghan's doctor has advised her not to fly because of her ‘condition’ yet so far has been happy for her to have a baby at home.”

Her husband Prince Harry, 36, flew back to the UK from their bolthole in LA this week so he could pay his final respects to his grandfather on Saturday..._









						Meghan told to 'be quiet' after 'unbelievable' offer of forgiveness
					

MEGHAN Markle has been told to "be quiet" after making an "unbelievable" offer to forgive the Royal Family within days of Prince Philip's death.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Not really on topic but something that worries me is the children. I mean H&M's children will be able to watch and read all these things about their parents, same goes for the Cambridge children and I wonder if it will be traumatizing. I wonder how Harry and William feel as adults watching the Diana interview. Also H&M's children will most likely grow up in a completely different world now I guess, unless they go back to the UK.



I feel like it teaches them if you whine, complain, and pout enough everyone will give you your way. Spoiled, entitled brats.


Chanbal said:


> _Her husband Prince Harry, 36, flew back to the UK from their *bolthole* in LA this week so he could pay his final respects to his grandfather on Saturday..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan told to 'be quiet' after 'unbelievable' offer of forgiveness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has been told to "be quiet" after making an "unbelievable" offer to forgive the Royal Family within days of Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I read _bolthole_ as butthole


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Can you see the duke and the duchess waiting in the Covid vaccine 'leftovers' line?



There's not always a line... some places let you sign up online for appts for spares.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Someone is asking the heavily pregnant one to be quiet.
> View attachment 5054660
> 
> _Influential royal commentator Angela Levin sent the Duchess of Sussex the blunt message shortly after she announced she wouldn’t be attending the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral. Friends close to the actress-turned-royal told the Daily Mail that Meghan is "ready to forgive" the Royal Family over allegations of racism she and Prince Harry levelled against them during their explosive Oprah Winfrey interview last month.
> 
> They added that since the duke - who she allegedly “adored” - died last Friday the 39-year-old "wants to put their differences aside" and move forward.
> 
> It later emerged that the heavily pregnant Duchess will not return to the UK after medical assessments advised her not to fly.
> 
> She also doesn't want to become the "centre of attention", it is reported.
> 
> As the rumours swirled, Ms Levin, who wrote bestseller Harry: Conversations with the Prince about the former senior royal, tweeted her thoughts about the duchess.
> 
> She wrote: *“If Meghan didn't want to be ‘centre of attention at the funeral’, told ‘friends’ she ‘adored Prince Philip’ and that she was ready to ‘forgive the Royal Family’, she should be quiet.*
> 
> “Instead all three comments show her patronising and grandiose behaviour. I don't believe them.”
> 
> And mentioning about doctors advising her not to fly, she added: “Interesting that Meghan's doctor has advised her not to fly because of her ‘condition’ yet so far has been happy for her to have a baby at home.”
> 
> Her husband Prince Harry, 36, flew back to the UK from their bolthole in LA this week so he could pay his final respects to his grandfather on Saturday..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan told to 'be quiet' after 'unbelievable' offer of forgiveness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has been told to "be quiet" after making an "unbelievable" offer to forgive the Royal Family within days of Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



The GK call was a test. H&M failed.
This funeral is a test. It will show how sincere their apologies are and how willing they are to follow the rules now and in the future. Most of the world is predicting another failure.  Andrew is causing a ruckus over his funeral outfit.  All of these lower level royals are being tested. Who will measure up and who needs to be kept away?  Other than the senior royals, nothing is carved in stone. All options are on the table. Best to behave.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I read in the 'Finding freedom' book that Oprah befriended Doria and kept her safe from the paps in LA and the palace had some harsh words with her to make sure she was not exploiting her for an interview. Looks like Oprah plays the long game, and she was exploring the relationship to get an interview as has been proven.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> Not sure if I should go into this as I didn't watch the whole episode but I just watched about 20 minutes of the new episode of The Talk.  It's a special episode where they were talking about Sharon's departure and the episode that led up to it.  Basically they were having a conversation about race and particularly about black women.  Sharon's name was hardly mentioned and neither was Piers Morgan.
> Elaine Welteroth stated that WOC like her identify with Meghan and (paraphrasing) when you say something bad about Meghan or discount what she says, you are hurting all those WOC.
> So there you have it.  Right or wrong Meghan has become some sort of symbol and people like some of us here who don't see her as the victim she claims to be are mean spirited and racist.  That is why (IMO) no one in the US media will question anything she says.
> Cheryl was asked if she had any communication with Sharon and said she didn't, in part because there was an investigation going on. she said if she saw Sharon and Sharon greeted her warmly she would respond in kind.


I don't get it. Why do the WOC identify with Meghan? To be more precise, what does she symbolize that is particular to WOC, especially American WOC? Mental health, suicidal ideations, princess dreams, narcissism, all cut across racial lines. So it's really only the "being bullied for being (sort of) black" that they mindlessly identify with?



Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO MM didn't fully understand, that the 'Prince of Wales' title meant 'heir to the throne' and that the position wasn't awarded through a popularity contest, where she and Harry could jump to the front of the line because she thought they were more popular than Charles and William. *She wanted to become queen of England after HMQ*. Can you imagine the reaction when her inflated ego grasped the reality that Harry was only #6. She chucked Plan A and skipped to Plan B, to use the RF as a stepping stone to fame and fortune.


That would be too much work. I think she expected QE2 to simply recognize her immense talent and raise her to a position of power. Then she would just delegate the work and bask in the glory of being the right hand to the throne.

The narc I worked with couldn't understand why he wasn't being given perks & promotions just for existing. When he finally left, in his LinkedIn profile, he claimed he led projects he was only peripherally involved with, and took credit for even the department head's work. He told all his friends that his departure was due to personal differences and that the stupid cow in charge was picking on him. Sound familiar?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

MM was pregnant when she went on tour to zika ridden places (Fiji and pacific area I think). Doctors advice not to travel to these places when pregnant as if you contract the virus, the baby will be born with severe defects, yet they ignored the advised and decided to proceed.


----------



## Jktgal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Why do you think Harry and Meghan left then?



Because Meghan's goal is Hollywood. She never aimed to be successful in the job of princess - a public service job. She didn't prepare for it, followed its system, adhered to its structure, etc. It is quite clear based on reported actions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I read in the 'Finding freedom' book that Oprah befriended Doria and kept her safe from the paps in LA and the palace had some harsh words with her to make sure she was not exploiting her for an interview. Looks like Oprah plays the long game, and she was exploring the relationship to get an interview as has been proven.



The palace remembers when OW exploited Sarah.
She was the first to refer to “the Gray Men”.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I don't get it. Why do the WOC identify with Meghan? To be more precise, what does she symbolize that is particular to WOC, especially American WOC? Mental health, suicidal ideations, princess dreams, narcissism, all cut across racial lines. So it's really only the "being bullied for being (sort of) black" that they mindlessly identify with?
> 
> 
> That would be too much work. I think she expected QE2 to simply recognize her immense talent and raise her to a position of power. Then she would just delegate the work and bask in the glory of being the right hand to the throne.
> 
> The narc I worked with couldn't understand why he wasn't being given perks & promotions just for existing. When he finally left, in his LinkedIn profile, he claimed he led projects he was only peripherally involved with, and took credit for even the department head's work. He told all his friends that his departure was due to personal differences and that the stupid cow in charge was picking on him. Sound familiar?


I guess they don't see her as "sort of" black but as black so whatever is done to her is done to them (according to this woman)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM was pregnant when she went on tour to zika ridden places (Fiji and pacific area I think). Doctors advice not to travel to these places when pregnant as if you contract the virus, the baby will be born with severe defects, yet they ignored the advised and decided to proceed.



Not a problem when using a surrogate, right?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Mine are house trained though; hopefully Harry with his 16 bathrooms is as well.  *We know Meg likes to pee outside.*



She marks her territory in more ways than one. Harry is lucky he didn’t get doused before he got on the plane. **


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> We also need an emoji for ‘totally disgusted’.


Here, try these.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I guess they don't see her as "sort of" black but as black so whatever is done to her is done to them (according to this woman)



I would hate to feel that everybody within my race represented me. What a burden that would be. There are too many horrible people out there (of all races) to claim them solely based on what they look like.


----------



## rose60610

From a book I read a while back:
In Hollywood, it isn't about how well you marry, it's about how well you divorce. Men don't buy their wives furs to keep them warm, they buy them furs to keep them quiet. One woman remarried a few times, each time for a wealthier man, she was always screwing UP. Meghan fits the pattern.


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## Hermes Zen

Earlier today read some postings about H may or may not be jealous of W. It reminded me of an ariticle I read a couple years ago hearing that young William didn't want to be King and H would pipe up he would take the job.  I searched and found this recent article (below).

H might have been fine and willing for years to support W when the time came for W to become King. I have a feeling H shared that at one time W didn't want to be King and M put her magic on H that started to spin into a jealousy.


A couple lines from the article:

Mr Paxman recalled a conversation he had with the Princess of Wales shortly before she died in which she told him William often said he “didn’t really want to be King”.

Harry would apparently retort that if William did not want the job, he would take it.




> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...iam-king-meghan-markle-royal-family-oprah-spt
> 
> *Prince Harry said ‘I’ll be King’ after Prince William said he didn’t want throne*
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...iam-king-meghan-markle-royal-family-oprah-spt
> 
> *Prince Harry said ‘I’ll be King’ after Prince William said he didn’t want throne*
Click to expand...


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


>



Photos like this remind me of how much work MM has had on her face.  She has a totally different nose now....


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


>



Oooooh sure   M's probably been calling and texting H every minute nagging (texting version of hand grabbing and digging her nails into his hand) to get home!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Earlier today read some postings about H may or may not be jealous of W. It reminded me of an ariticle I read a couple years ago hearing that young William didn't want to be King and H would pipe up he would take the job.  I searched and found this recent article (below).
> 
> H might have been fine and willing for years to support W when the time came for W to become King. I have a feeling H shared that at one time W didn't want to be King and M put her magic on H that started to spin into a jealousy.
> 
> 
> A couple lines from the article:
> 
> Mr Paxman recalled a conversation he had with the Princess of Wales shortly before she died in which she told him William often said he “didn’t really want to be King”.
> 
> Harry would apparently retort that if William did not want the job, he would take it.



On a certain level, Diana traumatized her kids. The crying in the bathroom, the tell-all interviews, the alerting of the paps, the hating of their father,  and this which IMO pits one child against another, so unhealthy. She could have explained why William would not to be king. He explains it very well.

From the article:
_
“We talked about our children and she said William often told her that he didn’t really want to be King, and then Harry would say, ‘If you don’t want the job I’ll have it’.”

William seems to have accepted his future role now, although he told BBC News in 2019 that he is not eager to be King, *because it means his grandmother and father will have died.

He said: “I don’t lie awake waiting to be King, because sadly that means my family will have moved on and I don’t want that.”*

Harry has also changed his tune since they were children, saying in a 2017 interview with Newsweek: “Is there any one of the Royal Family who wants to be King or Queen?

“I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time.”_


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> There's not always a line... some places let you sign up online for appts for spares.


It was meant to be a joke.


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Photos like this remind me of how much work MM has had on her face.  She has a totally different nose now....



Nah. It's more like that's how ladies of Montecito do their makeup  Her face during Suits era was fine. Now she ruined it and turned herself into cat woman.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She marks her territory in more ways than one. Harry is lucky he didn’t get doused before he got on the plane. **


How do you know he didn't?    
Maybe that's the part we didn't hear...she not only peed in the woods, but he got a golden shower and that clinched it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> Oooooh sure   M's probably been calling and texting H every minute nagging (texting version of hand grabbing and digging her nails into his hand) to get home!



Since Harry is back in the UK sans Maleficent of Montecito, this is the best chance for the BRF to save him by chaining him and locking him up in a high tower


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I would hate to feel that everybody within my race represented me. What a burden that would be. There are too many horrible people out there (of all races) to claim them solely based on what they look like.


Yep.  I've never understood identity politics.


----------



## Sol Ryan

EverSoElusive said:


> Since Harry is back in the UK sans Maleficent of Montecito, this is the best chance for the BRF to save him by chaining him and locking him up in a high tower



Why would they want him?


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


>



Gag me with a spoon.  She acts like she's the only woman on earth to have had a miscarriage.  1 out of 4 Meghan.  Figure out the math.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Earlier today read some postings about H may or may not be jealous of W. It reminded me of an ariticle I read a couple years ago hearing that young William didn't want to be King and H would pipe up he would take the job.  I searched and found this recent article (below).
> 
> H might have been fine and willing for years to support W when the time came for W to become King. I have a feeling H shared that at one time W didn't want to be King and M put her magic on H that started to spin into a jealousy.
> 
> 
> A couple lines from the article:
> 
> Mr Paxman recalled a conversation he had with the Princess of Wales shortly before she died in which she told him William often said he “didn’t really want to be King”.
> 
> Harry would apparently retort that if William did not want the job, he would take it.


Sounds like the scene from The Crown, where Elizabeth asked them to have Margaret be able to be queen instead.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Gag me with a spoon.  She acts like she's the only woman on earth to have had a miscarriage.  1 out of 4 Meghan.  Figure out the math.



And now heavily pregnant  Very heavily in the face!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> And now heavily pregnant  Very heavily in the face!


She's got gloat bloat.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sol Ryan said:


> Why would they want him?



If anything, the BRF particularly the Queen has demonstrated blood is thicker than water time and time again. They are still keeping Andrew the perv so why not Haz the family shamer


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> She's got gloat bloat.



She needs some of these


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The GK call was a test. H&M failed.
> This funeral is a test. It will show how sincere their apologies are and how willing they are to follow the rules now and in the future. Most of the world is predicting another failure.  Andrew is causing a ruckus over his funeral outfit.  All of these lower level royals are being tested. Who will measure up and who needs to be kept away?  Other than the senior royals, nothing is carved in stone. All options are on the table. Best to behave.


The pregnant MM doesn't want to apologize (yet), and I wouldn't trust her apologies. The husband of the pregnant one is likely unhappy in California, but he is not ready to apologize yet. Randy Andy should stay quiet, unless he is able to clarify his participation on the Epstein scandal. In other words, it's time for Charles to start slimming down the the monarchy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

And now a California source is even speaking for the Queen?? Very interesting. 









						Queen Elizabeth 'Understands Why' Meghan Markle Can't Travel at the Moment, Says Source
					

After Prince Philip's death both Meghan and Harry "were in contact with the Queen," a source tells PEOPLE




					people.com


----------



## Annawakes

She really was much prettier around the time of the wedding and thereafter.  Not so now, in my opinion.  I hope she stops changing her face before it’s totally unrecognizable.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Probably the last time Harry had his balls and the only time Harry tried correcting Douchey Sussex. I'm not sure if she's really crying but I personally can tell she wasn't pleased with that pouty face when turning it around


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Gag me with a spoon.  She acts like she's the only woman on earth to have had a miscarriage.  1 out of 4 Meghan.  Figure out the math.


Here's an emoji to express yourself with.



And as an added bonus, here's an award for Meghan or Harry.


----------



## Jktgal

Meghan has more in common with Kate Middleton and her sister than 99.9% of women in the world. To make Meghan the poster child of sufferring is to belittle being a victim. What she whines about, many women would prefer, compared to what they undergo daily.


----------



## Sol Ryan

EverSoElusive said:


> If anything, the BRF particularly the Queen has demonstrated blood is thicker than water time and time again. They are still keeping Andrew the perv so why not Haz the family shamer



Yeah, but Harry doesn’t want to be there. Keeping him hostage in the tower is a waste of time. If he wants to come back thats another thing.... I doubt he’s been gone long enough to regret it and with all these stupid companies  throwing money at him for no reason, I doubt he will.  

Andrew needs to shut back up if he doesn’t want the family to dump him on the fbi’s doorstep. He needs to wear his suit and be happy and stop demanding to dress in a uniform. Poor behavior at your father’s funeral is a good way to get the family to turn on you... fun fact. Got me to turn on mine... tolerated them for 30 years until my dad’s funeral. Then their antics on the days leading up to his funeral and on what should have been a day for celebrating my dad were enough that I said I’m done. Somethings are unforgivable.


----------



## Chanbal

According to Lady C, Oprah's interview affected Prince Philip and the relationship between pregnant MM and JCMH.


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> Probably the last time Harry had his balls and the only time Harry tried correcting Douchey Sussex. I'm not sure if she's really crying but I personally can tell she wasn't pleased with that pouty face when turning it around




He was telling her to stop turning her back and face the front - as the national anthem was about to play and she would have had her back turned (talking to H)!!  The optics of an American having their back turned whilst their anthem is playing would be horrible...  But yes, she looks very upset at him...


----------



## lalame

TBH, that expression isn't that weird. You should see the expressions I shoot my husband when he says something that annoys me - which, believe me, happens pretty often as does the reverse.


----------



## creme fraiche

Clearblueskies said:


> I think MM believes she can take a shortcut and acquire all that by association - by bracketing herself with MO for instance, or Amal. In the same way 6 weeks as an intern in the embassy became a diplomatic career. It’s all window dressing and no substance. She reminds me of the talented *a talentless *Mr Ripley



Just had to fix that for you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> In that case, sorry about that filler comment, Omid! But seriously, man, ease up on the treatments. Once you go too far with them, your face will look like a cheap wax figurine for the rest of your life.


I am pretty certain he’s going to take MM’s place at some point.
They are getting more and more than indistinguishable. It’ll be the ‘single white female’ reboot. 
Now that I think about it, her dog has already disappeared....


sdkitty said:


> Not sure if I should go into this as I didn't watch the whole episode but I just watched about 20 minutes of the new episode of The Talk.  It's a special episode where they were talking about Sharon's departure and the episode that led up to it.  Basically they were having a conversation about race and particularly about black women.  Sharon's name was hardly mentioned and neither was Piers Morgan.
> Elaine Welteroth stated that WOC like her identify with Meghan and (paraphrasing) when you say something bad about Meghan or discount what she says, you are hurting all those WOC.
> So there you have it.  Right or wrong Meghan has become some sort of symbol and people like some of us here who don't see her as the victim she claims to be are mean spirited and racist.  That is why (IMO) no one in the US media will question anything she says.
> Cheryl was asked if she had any communication with Sharon and said she didn't, in part because there was an investigation going on. she said if she saw Sharon and Sharon greeted her warmly she would respond in kind.


If I were black I think I’d be pretty insulted that apparently this whiny, lying, gold-digging Z lister who enjoyed a life of unbelievable privilege and barely had a job in her life before that has been appointed as our representation but maybe that’s just me 


Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I learned the same at an early age. I should've added that IMO, Harry didn't inform or teach MM anything about the RF and even if he had, MM would have paid little attention to it, thinking herself more knowledgeable. To be fair, she probably is more intelligent and cunning than Harry.
> 
> ET correct glaring grammatical error


I think he probably gets routinely outsmarted by those rental chickens


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Billionaire Ancient gods ... all I could think of ... the handbags of the gods ... somehow this seems vaguely relevant ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mysterious 'handbags of the gods' spotted in ancient sculptures
> 
> 
> What could they mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk


Is that... is that a launer? (X files theme plays)


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Billionaire Ancient gods ... all I could think of ... the handbags of the gods ... somehow this seems vaguely relevant ....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mysterious 'handbags of the gods' spotted in ancient sculptures
> 
> 
> What could they mean?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk



OMG, we should have a thread devoted (sorry) to this. Who knew? 

Much more interesting than H&M really and how beautiful 

Yes, I checked the date posted was not 1 April


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't like seeing the big red carpet events become too vulgar.



Literally LOL


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> *"Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us."*
> What a load of crock.



Always a grain of truth > she most certainly _*wants desperately *_


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!  Interesting all the depicted handbags look the same!  The Billionaire Ancient Gods were imitating (plagiarizing like MM) does now.
> Michael Kors ancestors.



Just because it's designer... 

I can see MM in MK longterm when she hits the red carpet (as she must). 

I didn't buy a Gucci coat because of all the pics of MM wearing it 

Funny thing now M isn't wearing her Givenchy anymore a la trying to join the hoi polloi in terminally bland casualness and Armani maxis, I'm liking where the Givenchy aesthetic is heading for later this year. M was certainly the kiss of death to Clare Waight Keller's rein (who I thought was fab actually, sorry for her). 

Not sure if I'd do the braless-bra quite yet (need to get back to yoga) but you never know. MM sure won't be wearing it.


----------



## floatinglili

Just saw this headline -anyone for more details? Unfortunately this is hidden by a paywall for me.
timing is perfect


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> We also need an emoji for ‘totally disgusted’.





It just needs adding to the 'like' button so we can comment more easily.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I would hate to feel that everybody within my race represented me. What a burden that would be. There are too many horrible people out there (of all races) to claim them solely based on what they look like.



I'm embarrassed and immensely proud everyday in many ways and all the time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5054660



Tell it like it is, Angela.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Harry has also changed his tune since they were children, saying in a 2017 interview with Newsweek: “Is there any one of the Royal Family who wants to be King or Queen?
> 
> *“I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time.”*_



Yeah. That worked out great Harry, no?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> If anything, the BRF particularly the Queen has demonstrated blood is thicker than water time and time again. They are still keeping Andrew the perv so why not Haz the family shamer



At least Andrew knows how to shut up, a quality Harry has yet to develop.


----------



## Sharont2305

floatinglili said:


> Just saw this headline -anyone for more details? Unfortunately this is hidden by a paywall for me.
> timing is perfect
> View attachment 5054855


My guess is anytime between now and Saturday and because we know how dedicated and dutiful Harry is to service, we can see he is being the ultimate selfless person ever (cos Meghan told him) in coming back here to his grandfather's funeral instead of being with his heavily pregnant wife. 
And yes, I am being sarky!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Probably the last time Harry had his balls and the only time Harry tried correcting Douchey Sussex. I'm not sure if she's really crying but I personally can tell she wasn't pleased with that pouty face when turning it around




Oh I remember I loved that moment because she had been getting on my last nerve with her petulant, childish behaviour and her obsessive being all over Harry in public. The Cambridge children are not as bratty as this grown woman of nearly 40.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> According to Lady C, Oprah's interview affected Prince Philip and the relationship between pregnant MM and JCMH.




Interesting. I haven't watched yet but thought she meant the trouble they cause anyone else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Australian media doesn't seem to be especially fond of the Sussexes...Angela Levin found an ally in Sunrise TV host Edwina Bartholomew who lashed out LIVE ON AIR. Also, did that reporter in the UK end her reporting with a quiet "Really?"?


----------



## Sharont2305

The Queen has returned to royal duties, four days after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh, the Press Association reports. It says she hosted a ceremony marking the retirement of Earl Peel as her Lord Chamberlain.

Two words. Service and Duty.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> The Queen has returned to royal duties, four days after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh, the Press Association reports. It says she hosted a ceremony marking the retirement of Earl Peel as her Lord Chamberlain.
> 
> Two words. Service and Duty.



This woman is incredible. I just hope she doesn't do too much too early.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I like that there are people from all over the world here.  I wish everyone would have their country or state of origin on their avatars to remind us.
> shopping for cartier is productive?


I agree, it wouldn't be the same forum without it. 

I prefer to think of my search for and buying holy grail Bals (like the new Red Lipstick in my avi, I finally found after years of searching) as very productive  Are you saying it's not?! You sound eerily like my hubby   (Sorry for OT.)


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australian media doesn't seem to be especially fond of the Sussexes...Angela Levin found an ally in Sunrise TV host Edwina Bartholomew who lashed out LIVE ON AIR. Also, did that reporter in the UK end her reporting with a quiet "Really?"?



I think she was handing back to the host in the studio by saying Eddie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I think she was handing back to the host in the studio by saying Eddie.



Ah ok!


----------



## Lodpah

I’ll just leave this here. Dissect it as you see fit.

If there’s a sucker born every minute, it’s safe to assume that there’s one married every minute too.’
— The Moneyist


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM was pregnant when she went on tour to zika ridden places (Fiji and pacific area I think). Doctors advice not to travel to these places when pregnant as if you contract the virus, the baby will be born with severe defects, yet they ignored the advised and decided to proceed.


I think there is some doubt as to whether she really was pregnant or not, with Archie? That pic where she is squatting knees together in high heels while supposedly heavily pregnant really made me doubt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think there is some doubt as to whether she really was pregnant or not, with Archie? That pic where she is squatting knees together in high heels while supposedly heavily pregnant really made me doubt.



I thought the same until I saw a Vlogger on Youtube do the same only days before she gave birth. I know that one was indeed pregnant because she had early labour and filmed going to the hospital to get checked out and bared her belly slightly in the process haha.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> M's too immature for an open marriage. An open marriage relies on discretion and no kiss and tells.
> 
> She tells/shows everybody everything all the time, it's practically compulsive, and once he loses face he will be Mr. Angry Windsor forever.



I personally foresee a very nasty divorce.....


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought the same until I saw a Vlogger on Youtube do the same only days before she gave birth. I know that one was indeed pregnant because she had early labour and filmed going to the hospital to get checked out and bared her belly slightly in the process haha.


I should have understood as much. As where one of my pregnancies was so "heavily" I had to bring a b***y camping chair with me for short walks just to sit and rest on every 10 meters  the sainted yogini Meghan of Montecito probably delivered Archie in the one-legged crow pose


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> I personally foresee a very nasty divorce.....


Absolutely, no doubt about that. She won't go away quietly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I should have understood as much. As where one of my pregnancies was so "heavily" I had to bring a b***y camping chair with me for short walks just to sit and rest on every 10 meters  the sainted yogini Meghan of Montecito probably delivered Archie in the one-legged crow pose



I'm sure should I ever fall pregnant I'll balloon up like a walrus, and I will NOT be one of these moms who work out during the whole 40 weeks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, no doubt about that. She won't go away quietly.



She'll suck out Harry's insides, then spit out the dry crumbled hull like one of these spiders. And as much as I think he's a loser I know I'll feel for him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She'll suck out Harry's insides, then spit out the dry crumbled hull like one of these spiders. And as much as I think he's a loser I know I'll feel for him.


Problem is the fallout wouldn’t be on just H.  It’d be all over the damn place and drag everyone into it.  If she’s still chummy with Oprah by then we’ll be treated to back to back “exclusives”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I personally foresee a very nasty divorce.....



They both have unrealistic exceptions and are hypersensitive, not a good combo for a couple and not a good sign of longevity in a partnership IMO. 

Even Wallis was a pragmatist (as well as an opportunist).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> They both have unrealistic exceptions and are hypersensitive, not a good combo for a couple and not a good sign of longevity in a partnership IMO.
> 
> Even Wallis was a pragmatist (as well as an opportunist).



Too bad they had to drag two children into the drama. 

Speaking of Wallis, I had only ever seen pics of the severe middleaged woman. Watch my surprise when I found out young Wallis was a beauty.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad they had to drag two children into the drama.
> 
> Speaking of Wallis, I had only ever seen pics of the severe middleaged woman. Watch my surprise when I found out young Wallis was a beauty.



and _super_-stylish, something neither H or M will ever be. For Wallis' many faults she was never knowingly over/underdressed before or after 'David'.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Chanbal

The PR-machine is reminding people (Charles?) about security. I didn't click on the article, but I suppose it's about the possible faulty alarm system which was previously discussed here.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting. I haven't watched yet but thought she meant the trouble they cause anyone else.


It's about the trouble that they caused to prince Philip on the last weeks of his life (and the BRF), but she also seems to suggest that H was taken by surprise (and not pleased) by some of the pregnant MM revelations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's about the trouble that they caused to prince Philip on the last weeks of his life (and the BRF), but she also seems to suggest that H was taken by surprise (and not pleased) by some of the pregnant MM revelations.



Did MM make up [lie] those revelations?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> and _super_-stylish, something neither H or M will ever be. For Wallis' many faults she was never knowingly over/underdressed before or after 'David'.


And Wallis had the BEST jewels
In the end, the BRF bling is a collection of granny-style fuddy-duddy Victorian parures  originally worn 2 or 3 parures at a time in the more is better style - see any photos of Queen Alexandra and Mary in the their finery
Wallis did not get the historical stuff, hers was commissioned for her, contemporary, lots of color, Van Cleef and Cartier iconic designs
W gets an 11 for bling


----------



## Shopaholic2021

TW: mental health/suicide

I think at this point they are really doing a lot more harm than they are helping. Michelle ***** was articulate when she explained, "Public service is a bright, sharp, hot spotlight, and most people don't understand it, and nor should they. The thing that I always keep in mind is that none of this is about us in public service, it's about the people we serve."

Also they clearly have mental health issues, they've said so at the 2019 South African tour and then they said 2 years later at the Oprah interview. I really don't think they know very much about mental health or suicide. Having suicidal thoughts are serious and not something that just goes away when you're happy again, it needs to be investigated and dealt with. They have access to the best doctors in the world, there is a suicide prevention online forum, there are therapists, they all have to be confidential. It is a serious offense to break this confidentiality. Also Meghan was pregnant when she had those thoughts so she could have talked to the OBGYN about it and got a referral. Its also ironic that they have major ties to mental health charities.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> And Wallis had the BEST jewels
> In the end, the BRF bling is a collection of granny-style fuddy-duddy Victorian parures  originally worn 2 or 3 parures at a time in the more is better - see any photos of Queen Alexandra and Mary in the their finery
> Wallis did not get the historical stuff, hers was commissioned for her, contemporary, lots of color, Van Cleef and Cartier iconic designs
> W gets an 11 for bling



Point well taken, still I would love some of those ‘fuddy duddy’ blings.


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry if this has been discussed, I missed  the last 4792 posts lol, my bad

H is supposedly quarantining at Frogmore cottage - now the home of Eugenie & family - that does not sound right - I know Boris is easing restrictions but maybe not for foreign travelers

H is not part of E's bubble and she has an infant and has just given birth - E & H are still buddies, but I can understand her not wanting him with her due to COVID

IMHO, we have never gotten the full story on FC, does E really live there ? full time ? weekends only ? Doesnt her husband work in the city ?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did MM make up [lie] those revelations?


It's a possibility.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Point well taken, still I would love some of those ‘fuddy duddy’ blings.


Remember when QEII wore that the emerald parure - with the Greville necklace - around the time of the emeralds tiara kerfuffle coming out - HM was magnificent, such a classy (sorry I wish I had a better word) understated way to say I AM THE QUEEN - brilliant


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> I guess they don't see her as "sort of" black but as black so whatever is done to her is done to them (according to this woman)



That is a stupid way of thinking. I am a WOC and I can say that I don't identify with MM at all. Mainly because her father is white, and so she would have had some white privilege, along with the fact that she went to private schools all the way to college, all funded by her parents. I can understand if she had issues with identity and its quite possible she has experienced racism too. 


TW Racism 
I think those women on the talk show may have been triggered by some of the things MM said, rather that identifying with her. We are all unique human beings with individual experiences. Trauma is weird too, even when you think it's resolved, it can be triggered. Also racism can be very subtle and backhanded too. So I don't doubt that MM experienced racism, especially from the general public. I did one year clinical training in the south coast (Portsmouth, UK), and one of the patients refused to see me, they told the receptionist that they did not want a colored doctor. There was also a march happening outside the clinic one day and one of my colleagues told me to stay behind him as there were white supremacists marching around the town.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> There's not always a line... some places let you sign up online for appts for spares.


I have a feeling in Harry's case he probably knew someone who got him in....like it or not wealth has its privileges


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Someone is asking the heavily pregnant one to be quiet.
> View attachment 5054660
> 
> _Influential royal commentator Angela Levin sent the Duchess of Sussex the blunt message shortly after she announced she wouldn’t be attending the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral. Friends close to the actress-turned-royal told the Daily Mail that Meghan is "ready to forgive" the Royal Family over allegations of racism she and Prince Harry levelled against them during their explosive Oprah Winfrey interview last month.
> 
> They added that since the duke - who she allegedly “adored” - died last Friday the 39-year-old "wants to put their differences aside" and move forward.
> 
> It later emerged that the heavily pregnant Duchess will not return to the UK after medical assessments advised her not to fly.
> 
> She also doesn't want to become the "centre of attention", it is reported.
> 
> As the rumours swirled, Ms Levin, who wrote bestseller Harry: Conversations with the Prince about the former senior royal, tweeted her thoughts about the duchess.
> 
> She wrote: *“If Meghan didn't want to be ‘centre of attention at the funeral’, told ‘friends’ she ‘adored Prince Philip’ and that she was ready to ‘forgive the Royal Family’, she should be quiet.*
> 
> “Instead all three comments show her patronising and grandiose behaviour. I don't believe them.”
> 
> And mentioning about doctors advising her not to fly, she added: “Interesting that Meghan's doctor has advised her not to fly because of her ‘condition’ yet so far has been happy for her to have a baby at home.”
> 
> Her husband Prince Harry, 36, flew back to the UK from their bolthole in LA this week so he could pay his final respects to his grandfather on Saturday..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan told to 'be quiet' after 'unbelievable' offer of forgiveness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has been told to "be quiet" after making an "unbelievable" offer to forgive the Royal Family within days of Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


grandiose is a good word for her


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That is a stupid way of thinking. I am a WOC and I can say that I don't identify with MM at all. Mainly because her father is white, and so she would have had some white privilege, along with the fact that she went to private schools all the way to college, all funded by her parents. I can understand if she had issues with identity and its quite possible she has experienced racism too.
> 
> 
> TW Racism
> I think those women on the talk show may have been triggered by some of the things MM said, rather that identifying with her. We are all unique human beings with individual experiences. Trauma is weird too, even when you think it's resolved, it can be triggered. Also racism can be very subtle and backhanded too. So I don't doubt that MM experienced racism, especially from the general public. I did one year clinical training in the south coast (Portsmouth, UK), and one of the patients refused to see me, they told the receptionist that they did not want a colored doctor. There was also a march happening outside the clinic one day and one of my colleagues told me to stay behind him as there were white supremacists marching around the town.


I'm glad as a WOC you can see that while M may have been the "victim" of some racism - e.g., the British tabloids, she did not seem to struggle at all growing up as many (if not most) black girls do. And I've never heard her give any example or say she was the victim of racism before she married H (doesn't mean she didn't experience it but anyway)
 I'm white and while I acknowledge that just being white has given me privilege, she grew up in a higher income, higher class environment than I did.  Now some stan can come say I'm jealous of her


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> Photos like this remind me of how much work MM has had on her face.  She has a totally different nose now....


she still has the ski slope doesn't she?


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> And now a California source is even speaking for the Queen?? Very interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth 'Understands Why' Meghan Markle Can't Travel at the Moment, Says Source
> 
> 
> After Prince Philip's death both Meghan and Harry "were in contact with the Queen," a source tells PEOPLE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


what a bunch of crap....I couldn't finish it....why does Harry still have Frogmore?  He isn't a working royal and he never owned the home
He has his mansion.  Let him live there and if someday he wants to return to England he can make whatever living arrangements with the king when the time coms


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> what a bunch of crap....I couldn't finish it....why does Harry still have Frogmore?  He isn't a working royal and he never owned the home
> He has his mansion.  Let him live there and if someday he wants to return to England he can make whatever living arrangements with the king when the time coms



Harry wanted to keep Frogmore as a UK base for his family, but I don't know how much he will use it now. They apparently have a payment plan that covers the rent on the house as well as the 2.4 million renovation cost.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Gag me with a spoon.  She acts like she's the only woman on earth to have had a miscarriage.  1 out of 4 Meghan.  Figure out the math.


dont you get it?  she is speaking for all those other women who don't have a voice


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad they had to drag two children into the drama.



Unfortunately I foresee there being more drama as the children become adults. They will be demanding X, Y and Z from uncle William/ grandfather Charles depending on who is king at the time. 'We want our birthright, our titles and money'. Harry already complained that Charles isn't funding him and that means he doesn't care about his grandchildren and his children will latch on to this complaint.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Yeah, but Harry doesn’t want to be there. Keeping him hostage in the tower is a waste of time. If he wants to come back thats another thing.... I doubt he’s been gone long enough to regret it and with all these stupid companies  throwing money at him for no reason, I doubt he will.
> 
> Andrew needs to shut back up if he doesn’t want the family to dump him on the fbi’s doorstep. He needs to wear his suit and be happy and stop demanding to dress in a uniform. Poor behavior at your father’s funeral is a good way to get the family to turn on you... fun fact. Got me to turn on mine... tolerated them for 30 years until my dad’s funeral. Then their antics on the days leading up to his funeral and on what should have been a day for celebrating my dad were enough that I said I’m done. Somethings are unforgivable.


Harry grew up with everything provided for him.  Never had to think about money at all.  So would money now be a big motivator for him?  Of course he does need it now.  Maybe having left the RF has caused him to start thinking about money - and whining that his daddy isn't providing enough.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> The Queen has returned to royal duties, four days after the death of the Duke of Edinburgh, the Press Association reports. It says she hosted a ceremony marking the retirement of Earl Peel as her Lord Chamberlain.
> 
> Two words. Service and Duty.


that must have been important for her to do before her husband is buried


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I should have understood as much. As where one of my pregnancies was so "heavily" I had to bring a b***y camping chair with me for short walks just to sit and rest on every 10 meters  the sainted yogini Meghan of Montecito probably delivered Archie in the one-legged crow pose
> 
> View attachment 5054911


She and Hilarious Baldwin are master yogis that can do all kinds of poses while pregnant.  Hilarious posed on the stove once.  Quite sanitary.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, no doubt about that. She won't go away quietly.



Unless she is the one who decides to end it. Then it will be Harry who?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Unless she is the one who decides to end it. Then it will be Harry who?


I think if they divorce it will be her decision.....she has him under her control (plus there are the kids)


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> And Wallis had the BEST jewels
> In the end, the BRF bling is a collection of granny-style fuddy-duddy Victorian parures  originally worn 2 or 3 parures at a time in the more is better - see any photos of Queen Alexandra and Mary in the their finery
> Wallis did not get the historical stuff, hers was commissioned for her, contemporary, lots of color, Van Cleef and Cartier iconic designs
> W gets an 11 for bling



I wouldn't mind any of it TBH, I'll do fuddy-duddy if it's matched natural pearls, Russian emeralds or old/rose cut diamonds  

I need a Cartier fix myself man!!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Unless she is the one who decides to end it. Then it will be Harry who?


Even if she ends it, she still won't go away quietly.


----------



## DrDior

sdkitty said:


> shopping for cartier is productive?



Moreso than other uses of my time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Even if she ends it, she still won't go away *quietly*.



I don't think she knows the meaning of the word


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I like that there are people from all over the world here.  I wish everyone would have their country or state of origin on their avatars to remind us.
> *shopping for cartier is productive?*



What else is there?  

I broke my phone this afternoon so I guess it needs fixing, oh well...still, I'd much rather go to Cartier.


----------



## Chagall

DrDior said:


> And yet, when you hoist the American flag, claim tPF as American territory and assert “rights“ to which you acknowledge you are not entitled under your own laws, you do the same thing — only in the reverse — by creating a space which feels unwelcoming for the international posters who contribute heavily to the social, financial and other health of this site. I’m surprised you can’t see that. But, as that seems to be the case, I’ll mosey along to more productive uses of time ... after all, Cartier doesn’t buy itself!


I’ve been a member of TPF for eleven years. I’ve had people heartily agree and disagree with me. I never once thought it was because of my nationality. Am I missing something here. Maybe it all went over my head.  The fact it is a multi national site makes it interesting and informative.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Even if she ends it, she still won't go away quietly.



No, but she will lose some of that Kevlar protection she has been getting, particularly from the US media. "Harry And Meghan: The Brand" was sold to us based on their love story, their finding freedom, their humanitarianism. Bickering, battling, divorcing people are not popular and admired. Angelina Jolie took a huge hit to her popularity after the way she handled breaking up with Brad which she has never recovered from.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> No, but she will lose some of that Kevlar protection she has been getting, particularly from the US media. "Harry And Meghan: The Brand" was sold to us based on their love story, their finding freedom, their humanitarianism. Bickering, battling, divorcing people are not popular and admired. Angelina Jolie took a huge hit to her popularity after the way she handled breaking up with Brad which she has never recovered from.


true....but angie was (in some people's view, including mine) cruel to Brad, who is very popular and much more likeable than her
Now with Meghan, she might be able to be cruel and get away with it since she is a WOC and knows how to use that card very well


----------



## maris.crane

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Australian media doesn't seem to be especially fond of the Sussexes...Angela Levin found an ally in Sunrise TV host Edwina Bartholomew who lashed out LIVE ON AIR. Also, did that reporter in the UK end her reporting with a quiet "Really?"?




Admittedly, I can be a bit of an H&M apologist. BUT: Edwina was right on this one (i.e. let the BRF's statement be sufficient; and pipe down on this one.) 

I also think saying she lashed out is a bit much. O'Reilly screaming "well, do it LIVE!" was lashing; Edwina was pretty calm IMHO.


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> Harry grew up with everything provided for him.  Never had to think about money at all.  So would money now be a big motivator for him?  Of course he does need it now.  Maybe having left the RF has caused him to start thinking about money - and whining that his daddy isn't providing enough.



You’d think he would have thought about that before he left....


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> You’d think he would have thought about that before he left....


he probably never really had to think about much except maybe when he was in the military


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't mind any of it TBH, I'll do fuddy-duddy if it's matched natural pearls, Russian emeralds or old/rose cut diamonds
> 
> I need a Cartier fix myself man!!!!


I'm with you paper tiger, stones can always be reset.


----------



## Icyjade

Ok so I was curious who’s the guy who claims to speak for the RF... and google threw this up...




Wow. It’s like a whole different person... and he’s turned white. And then some MM pics also came up in the search






What’s the deal with her being a WOC “rep” but clearly making herself over to be more white?


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Ok so I was curious who’s the guy who claims to speak for the RF... and google threw this up...
> 
> View attachment 5055170
> 
> 
> Wow. It’s like a whole different person... and he’s turned white. And then some MM pics also came up in the search
> 
> View attachment 5055171
> 
> View attachment 5055172
> 
> 
> What’s the deal with her being a WOC “rep” but clearly making herself over to be more white?


she's having it both ways


----------



## Clearblueskies

Icyjade said:


> Ok so I was curious who’s the guy who claims to speak for the RF... and google threw this up...
> 
> View attachment 5055170
> 
> 
> Wow. It’s like a whole different person... and he’s turned white. And then some MM pics also came up in the search
> 
> View attachment 5055171
> 
> View attachment 5055172
> 
> 
> What’s the deal with her being a WOC “rep” but clearly making herself over to be more white?


It’s scobies eyebrows that get me, who would choose a pair of eyebrows like that?  Did he borrow the sharpie?


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> No, but she will lose some of that Kevlar protection she has been getting, particularly from the US media. "Harry And Meghan: The Brand" was sold to us based on their love story, their finding freedom, their humanitarianism. Bickering, battling, divorcing people are not popular and admired. Angelina Jolie took a huge hit to her popularity after the way she handled breaking up with Brad which she has never recovered from.



I think the bullying investigation will be huge and has the capability of damaging them immensely.  This is the sword hanging over MM and Harry's head right now just waiting to fall probably sometime early next year.  The investigation may reveal nothing more than a few blow ups with staff due to the stress of the wedding and MM's trying to adapt to life in the UK, or it could be much more than that.  Based on the constant staff turnover, it's likely the latter rather than the former.  People don't just walk away from prestigious jobs, especially ones they felt were of service to the Queen, unless the situation was really intolerable.  If Meghan and Harry are revealed to be volatile bullies who throw tea and intimidate their staff then all bets are off even in the U.S. media.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I think the bullying investigation will be huge and has the capability of damaging them immensely.  This is the sword hanging over MM and Harry's head right now just waiting to fall probably sometime early next year.  The investigation may reveal nothing more than a few blow ups with staff due to the stress of the wedding and MM's trying to adapt to life in the UK, or it could be much more than that.  Based on the constant staff turnover, it's likely the latter rather than the former.  People don't just walk away from prestigious jobs, especially ones they felt were of service to the Queen, unless the situation was really intolerable.  If Meghan and Harry are revealed to be volatile bullies who throw tea and intimidate their staff then all bets are off even in the U.S. media.



Hope you are right. I don't have much faith in the press. If they don't like a story's narrative then they just won't report it these days or else they might report it with a slant aimed at discrediting the investigation.


----------



## rose60610

Now that Meghan has turned Harry into toxic waste for the BRF, pimped him into huge Netflix/Spotify deals, and cranked out a couple of meal tickets, one of two things will happen. (1) They'll gin up the race and victims cards for all they're worth. If they pan out $$$-wise they'll continue. (2) If the public starts to turn on Harry and sees him for the used idiotic sap that he is, Meghan will attempt to move onto a mega-rich man. I'm thinking Kanye--another guy plagued with personal issues ripe for manipulating. Although he probably has lawyers who'll protect him from gold digger claws. I think even Kim K would swoop down and shut the books on that possibility. Unfortunately there are a lot of messed up people with mega money who might fall for Ms. Pity-Poor-Me. One day she'll realize that she isn't cute little yacht girl anymore, has two kids, and no longer a turn-on for the Russian billionaire set. She has to find a mentally damaged billionaire with stupid lawyers. Lightening doesn't strike twice. But she'll try. Until then, it's Dumb Bell Hazza.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Unfortunately, I don’t think the bullying investigation is going to end up being too damaging to MM.  Even if it were, I think the publicly released portions of it would be very carefully worded.  Very diplomatically worded.  There isn’t a lot of benefit to the RF to air all this dirty, historical laundry.  That’s not their way of doing things anyhow.  I don’t think anything really bad is going to be revealed, unfortunately.


----------



## Annawakes

Annawakes said:


> Unfortunately, I don’t think the bullying investigation is going to end up being too damaging to MM.  Even if it were, I think the publicly released portions of it would be very carefully worded.  Very diplomatically worded.  There isn’t a lot of benefit to the RF to air all this dirty, historical laundry.  That’s not their way of doing things anyhow.  I don’t think anything really bad is going to be revealed, unfortunately.


Oh but, I just had a thought.  Wouldn’t it be awesome if “sources” close to the palace “accidentally” leaked the full report?  Haha, take a page from MM where she uses her “friends” to leak stuff!


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Unfortunately, I don’t think the bullying investigation is going to end up being too damaging to MM.  Even if it were, I think the publicly released portions of it would be very carefully worded.  Very diplomatically worded.  There isn’t a lot of benefit to the RF to air all this dirty, historical laundry.  That’s not their way of doing things anyhow.  I don’t think anything really bad is going to be revealed, unfortunately.



Although it's the coverup that's being investigated not M's bullying. 

I don't think the Palace can afford accusations of another coverup, going through the motions or show trial.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Oh but, I just had a thought.  Wouldn’t it be awesome if “sources” close to the palace “accidentally” leaked the full report?  Haha, take a page from MM where she uses her “friends” to leak stuff!



I don't think it's a question of leaks. A Public Information's Act request should be sufficient.


----------



## csshopper

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s scobies eyebrows that get me, who would choose a pair of eyebrows like that?  Did he borrow the sharpie?


A few weeks ago (?) we speculated about his eyebrows being transplants and other possibilities. As I look at them again I'm wondering if he shaved his forehead and these are stick ons, like a toupee that he applies every morning?  I have trouble looking at him because my first thought is always "caterpillars."


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Hope you are right. I don't have much faith in the press. If they don't like a story's narrative then they just won't report it these days or else they might report it with a slant aimed at discrediting the investigation.



I think it may depend on the extent of the details revealed. I'm not sure if the Palace is legally obligated to release their full report or not. Maybe someone else here knows?  

If the Palace doesn't release the full report with all of their documentation, transcripts of interviews and witness statements but just comes out with a generic statement that there were troubling incidents but it's been made right with the employees involved then, yes, Harry and MM might get away relatively undamaged.  But, if the full report is released or major excerpts are made available and you see lots of petty, abusive behavior in great detail, well, it's hard to give someone a pass on that.  In addition, if some of the staff come forward and confirms and elaborates on their experiences, it's also very difficult to ignore that.

Both Oprah and Gayle will be shocked of course, _shocked_, that their dear friends ever engaged in such troubling behavior and they never saw any evidence of such behavior themselves!  Apparently neither of them have yet realized that your character isn't revealed by how you treat your famous, influential friends but rather how you treat ordinary people who work for you or perform some service for you.  Prince Philip knew that and his staff apparently loved him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe H has been ‘talked to‘ [warned] about the information that _could_ be released. A quid pro quo of sorts - do what we want or this gets released.  Could be why he is scurrying out immediately after the funeral. Of course, the heavily pregnant MM makes for a convenient excuse.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe H has been ‘talked to‘ [warned] about the information that _could_ be released. A quid pro quo of sorts - do what we want or this gets released.  Could be why he is scurrying out immediately after the funeral. Of course, the heavily pregnant MM makes for a convenient excuse.


I think he wants to get out of town as soon as the "protection" of participating in the funeral ends and he's bait for raucous  BOO's and probably some epithets flung his way.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think the bullying investigation will be huge and has the capability of damaging them immensely.  This is the sword hanging over MM and Harry's head right now just waiting to fall probably sometime early next year.  The investigation may reveal nothing more than a few blow ups with staff due to the stress of the wedding and MM's trying to adapt to life in the UK, or it could be much more than that.  Based on the constant staff turnover, it's likely the latter rather than the former.  People don't just walk away from prestigious jobs, especially ones they felt were of service to the Queen, unless the situation was really intolerable.  If Meghan and Harry are revealed to be volatile bullies who throw tea and intimidate their staff then all bets are off even in the U.S. media.


wish I could agree with you but I don't think US media will turn on them


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> Now with Meghan, she might be able to be cruel and get away with it since she is a WOC and knows how to use that card very well



I think she will use the race card forever now and this really annoys me because normal people who suffer true racism never get justice.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Now that Meghan has turned Harry into toxic waste for the BRF, pimped him into huge Netflix/Spotify deals, and cranked out a couple of meal tickets, one of two things will happen. (1) They'll gin up the race and victims cards for all they're worth. If they pan out $$$-wise they'll continue. (2) If the public starts to turn on Harry and sees him for the used idiotic sap that he is, Meghan will attempt to move onto a mega-rich man. I'm thinking Kanye--another guy plagued with personal issues ripe for manipulating. Although he probably has lawyers who'll protect him from gold digger claws. I think even Kim K would swoop down and shut the books on that possibility. Unfortunately there are a lot of messed up people with mega money who might fall for Ms. Pity-Poor-Me. One day she'll realize that she isn't cute little yacht girl anymore, has two kids, and no longer a turn-on for the Russian billionaire set. She has to find a mentally damaged billionaire with stupid lawyers. Lightening doesn't strike twice. But she'll try. Until then, it's Dumb Bell Hazza.


Oh my gosh. Meghan and Kanye. Now that’d be a reality show.
I don’t think Kanye would be the pushover Harry is. Kanye definitely has opinions.

The other thing is, Kanye is an accomplished artist, possibly a musical genius and I reckon MM likes feeling like the talented one -something she has with Harry of course.

Now, if we want to talk about the marriage of kindred spirits made for each other... MM belongs with either Teresa Caputo or Jada Pinkett Smith.

edit- capitalise surnames


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Icyjade said:


> What’s the deal with her being a WOC “rep” but clearly making herself over to be more white?



This is quite common with people of color, the fairer you are, the more attractive you are deemed. This is especially true in the South Asian population. Beyonce does the same, she is sometimes brown and other times more white which makes me think she possibly bleaches her skin. Michael Jackson may have bleached his skin.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Annawakes said:


> Unfortunately, I don’t think the bullying investigation is going to end up being too damaging to MM. Even if it were, I think the publicly released portions of it would be very carefully worded. Very diplomatically worded. There isn’t a lot of benefit to the RF to air all this dirty, historical laundry. That’s not their way of doing things anyhow. I don’t think anything really bad is going to be revealed, unfortunately.



MM's friend said that there were staff who were let go because they did inappropriate things and there are messages and texts to prove this. The friend said that they welcomed the investigation as it will show the staff were at fault. It is possible that a few staff may have not like MM and were inappropriate/rude etc, but they had a lot of staff leave in short space of time so that looks bad for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Those family pictures are too cute!


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## eunaddict

csshopper said:


> I think he wants to get out of town as soon as the "protection" of participating in the funeral ends and he's bait for raucous  BOO's and probably some epithets flung his way.



After the funeral is also probably when Charles, Will and other senior royals will attempt to broach the subject of the overdue re-assessment.

Of course he's going to flee before then.


----------



## CeeJay

Sorry I've been so absent as of late .. various health issues, getting older truly does SUCK!!!  Anyhow, just saw this and .. well, WOW!  I'm just lovin' Quora as of late .. because like us here, they are NOT complimentary to Meghan-a-lo-maniac!!! 
https://www.quora.com/Is-Harry-now-unhappy-with-Meghan


----------



## csshopper

eunaddict said:


> After the funeral is also probably when Charles, Will and other senior royals will attempt to broach the subject of the overdue re-assessment.
> 
> Of course he's going to flee before then.


Agree with you 100%. Plus I think having to quarantine has played to his advantage in avoiding difficult conversations that he does not want to have. Phone call with William has been mentioned, but that's different. A meeting face to face with the Queen, Charles, William and Harry would be a very different kind of of interaction.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Hello Again!!   So, just wanted to let you know that I copied some of the posts here that were specifically about HRH Prince Philip over to his thread: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-philip-duke-of-edinburgh.1041729/ 

These were mostly the initial announcements about his passing and various other specifically Philip-related posts. Those that focused on H&M did not move over, and I was not able to go through all of the pages after Saturday, because there are scads of them!

*So, the upshot is, please post news specifically about HRH Prince Philip, the funeral, etc. in his very own thread.*

If it is topically more about H&M (e.g., Harry Goes to the Funeral, or news of the Heavily Pregnant One), then this is the place for it.

Cheers, then, off you go!


----------



## CobaltBlu

Please stay on the topic of Meghan and Harry.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Sorry I've been so absent as of late .. various health issues, getting older truly does SUCK!!!  Anyhow, just saw this and .. well, WOW!  I'm just lovin' Quora as of late .. because like us here, they are NOT complimentary to Meghan-a-lo-maniac!!!
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Harry-now-unhappy-with-Meghan



Get well!  We need help venting over the Dim Duo, one of whom is HEAVILY pregnant. In case you haven't heard  . Each time I think she can't get any lower she reaches into her Stupid Barrel and pulls out something to fool us all.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did MM make up [lie] those revelations?



Were her lips moving?


----------



## poopsie

Clearblueskies said:


> Problem is the fallout wouldn’t be on just H.  It’d be all over the damn place and drag everyone into it.  If she’s still chummy with Oprah by then we’ll be treated to back to back “exclusives”



Pffffftttttttt.....Oprah would raise herself from the dead to cover that


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh. Meghan and Kanye. Now that’d be a reality show.
> I don’t think Kanye would be the pushover Harry is. Kanye definitely has opinions.
> 
> The other thing is, Kanye is an accomplished artist, possibly a musical genius and I reckon MM likes feeling like the talented one -something she has with Harry of course.
> 
> Now, if we want to talk about the marriage of kindred spirits made for each other... MM belongs with either Teresa Caputo or Jada Pinkett Smith.
> 
> edit- capitalise surnames



She would never go for Kanye. She needs to be able to control a man and Kanye is all over the place. He's too unpredictable and liable to blurt out all kinds of stuff about her. Besides, it's not like she will ever go to Wyoming so she's not likely to meet him.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> wish I could agree with you but I don't think US media will turn on them


 Well maybe they will.  To quote Heidi Klum “one day you’re in, and one day you’re out!”


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I should have understood as much. As where one of my pregnancies was so "heavily" I had to bring a b***y camping chair with me for short walks just to sit and rest on every 10 meters  the sainted yogini Meghan of Montecito probably delivered Archie in the one-legged crow pose
> 
> View attachment 5054911



Terrific 
Just _looking_ at that makes my joints creak. I wake up every morning with T Rex arms 
But, it might go a ways in explaining why he married her


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> The PR-machine is reminding people (Charles?) about security. I didn't click on the article, but I suppose it's about the possible faulty alarm system which was previously discussed here.
> View attachment 5055023



Could this be how she drags him home early. stay tuned


----------



## rose60610

The BRF probably wants Hazza out of the country so fast they'd resurrect the Concorde to get him back to Montecito ASAP.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> I don't think she knows the meaning of the word


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh. Meghan and Kanye. Now that’d be a reality show.
> I don’t think Kanye would be the pushover Harry is. Kanye definitely has opinions.
> 
> The other thing is, Kanye is an accomplished artist, possibly a musical genius and I reckon MM likes feeling like the talented one -something she has with Harry of course.
> 
> Now, if we want to talk about the marriage of kindred spirits made for each other... MM belongs with either Teresa Giudice or Jada Pinkett Smith.


edit- capitalise surnames
Edit edit I got my Teresas mixed up!  I was thinking of miss rhonj not the physic, tbh a lot of real housewives have a thing or two in common with MM


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> She would never go for Kanye. She needs to be able to control a man and Kanye is all over the place. He's too unpredictable and liable to blurt out all kinds of stuff about her. Besides, it's not like she will ever go to Wyoming so she's not likely to meet him.



And if I may add and please all don't hate me for saying this. K is not caucasian. M's only married white men as far as I know.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> And if I may add and please all don't hate me for saying this. K is not caucasian. M's only married white men as far as I know.


 I dunno I think status and money are all that MM finds attractive -  that and the reflection of herself in the man’s eyes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> And Wallis had the BEST jewels
> In the end, *the BRF bling is a collection of granny-style fuddy-duddy Victorian parures  originally worn 2 or 3 parures *at a time in the more is better style - see any photos of Queen Alexandra and Mary in the their finery
> Wallis did not get the historical stuff, hers was commissioned for her, contemporary, lots of color, Van Cleef and Cartier iconic designs
> W gets an 11 for bling



Woman, that personally offends me LOL (don't take me seriously) The Queen has been adding to the collection constantly through the years, be it through gifts or her own commissions (as did the Queens who came before her), so there's a lot more than just Victorian stuff. Also you can't wear several parures at once as they include a tiara *ggg*

Wallis' jewels are absolutely not my style, too loud, too bold, often times just too big, but I can totally appreciate both the craftmanship and her forward fashion sense. Also, didn't she leave the money that was made by selling her collection to science? That's awsome.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Sorry I've been so absent as of late .. various health issues, getting older truly does SUCK!!!  Anyhow, just saw this and .. well, WOW!  I'm just lovin' Quora as of late .. because like us here, they are NOT complimentary to Meghan-a-lo-maniac!!!
> https://www.quora.com/Is-Harry-now-unhappy-with-Meghan


welcome back ceejay....hope you're feeling better


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> And if I may add and please all don't hate me for saying this. K is not caucasian. M's only married white men as far as I know.


that may change now that she's found it so advantageous to be a WOC - and if she could attract a black man who was handsome and rich....don't think it would be Kanye....and (hope this is ok to say) IDK if she'd be the physical type for a black guy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

maris.crane said:


> Admittedly, I can be a bit of an H&M apologist. BUT: Edwina was right on this one (i.e. let the BRF's statement be sufficient; and pipe down on this one.)
> 
> I also think saying she lashed out is a bit much. O'Reilly screaming "well, do it LIVE!" was lashing; Edwina was pretty calm IMHO.



Do you have to be not calm to be lashing out? Serious question, I might not get all nuances of the word (but also, not the hill I want to die on, replace with any verb more fitting). I just thought it was interesting to use "shut up" live on air, when usually people seem to walk on eggshells when Meghan is concerned.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> If Meghan and Harry are revealed to be volatile bullies who throw tea and intimidate their staff then all bets are off even in the U.S. media.



I'm not so sure. US media and fan base have seen her do things they'd burn someone else at the stake for. They will find a way to spin it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> (2) If the public starts to turn on Harry and sees him for the used idiotic sap that he is, Meghan will attempt to move onto a mega-rich man. I'm thinking Kanye--another guy plagued with personal issues ripe for manipulating. Although he probably has lawyers who'll protect him from gold digger claws. I think even Kim K would swoop down and shut the books on that possibility.



I see two huge obstacles here: a) Kanye's black and b) the Kardashians. I can't see them stand by and watch a Meghan Markle destroy one of theirs, and honestly, if it's Meghan against the Kardashians my money is on Team Calabasas.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM's friend said that there were staff who were let go because they did inappropriate things and there are messages and texts to prove this. The friend said that they welcomed the investigation as it will show the staff were at fault. It is possible that a few staff may have not like MM and were inappropriate/rude etc, but they had a lot of staff leave in short space of time so that looks bad for them.



At this point I fully believe they insist MM has receipts hoping that will shut people up. They just don't expect anyone to go "Can I see, please?"


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> She would never go for Kanye. She needs to be able to control a man and Kanye is all over the place. He's too unpredictable and liable to blurt out all kinds of stuff about her. Besides, it's not like she will ever go to Wyoming so she's not likely to meet him.


You never know, if even Kanye and the ghastly J star are running out of money for California then I don’t think H&M’s one-documentary-a-year production company will keep them in 16bathrooms.

I do agree she’d be looking for another puppet & that is not Kanye’s MO.

I think she’d struggle to find another sucker that combines malleability, money, status and stupidity  like Harry. He really is the golden turkey.


----------



## maris.crane

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Do you have to be not calm to be lashing out? *Serious question, I might not get all nuances of the word (but also, not the hill I want to die on, replace with any verb more fitting). I just thought it was interesting to use "shut up" live on air, when usually people seem to walk on eggshells when Meghan is concerned.



I think so; I think lashing out to me means saying something with a bit of meanness on the side. The shut up was not a STFU! type of shut up IMO; more of a "Now is not the time, so be quiet!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

maris.crane said:


> I think so; I think lashing out to me means saying something with a bit of meanness on the side. The shut up was not a STFU! type of shut up IMO; more of a "Now is not the time, so be quiet!"



Oh ok, thank you. Next time I'll know


----------



## maris.crane

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh ok, thank you. Next time I'll know



I could be totally wrong


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chloe302225 said:


>



Looking at this beautiful picture of two loving grandparents surrounded by their great grandchildren, who are totally at ease and happy, oblivious to the world wide status of the two adults in the room, I'm struck by  how utterly selfish Meghan and Harry are to deny Archie an opportunity to be a part of this family. Harry, at least, should understand the importance of cousins, even with the fall out with family, we still read of repeated instances where he is supposedly in contact with his cousin Eugenie. Wake up man! Be an advocate for your child, tell his wretched mother to shape up, BetterUp inspirer, inspire yourself. Chickens are no replacement for cousins.


----------



## Chloe302225

I think a bit of unintentional shade was thrown by the family photos. All of them were taken at the same Balmoral where Meghan and Harry always had some excuse about why did not go (or wasn't invited) and also all the photos were taken by Kate. It seems she has taken the place of Margaret's husband as being the family's unofficial photographer


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Looking at this beautiful picture of two loving grandparents surrounded by their great grandchildren, who are totally at ease and happy, oblivious to the world wide status of the two adults in the room, I'm struck by  how utterly selfish Meghan and Harry are to deny Archie an opportunity to be a part of this family. Harry, at least, should understand the importance of cousins, even with the fall out with family, we still read of repeated instances where he is supposedly in contact with his cousin Eugenie. Wake up man! Be an advocate for your child, tell his wretched mother to shape up, BetterUp inspirer, inspire yourself. Chickens are no replacement for cousins.


After thinking that this was a beautiful, normal, personal family photo, I wondered if there was any personal photos of Archie with the Queen and Duke, or even ones with Prince Charles? Or the Cambridge children? Such a shame for Archie.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Looking at this beautiful picture of two loving grandparents surrounded by their great grandchildren, who are totally at ease and happy, oblivious to the world wide status of the two adults in the room, I'm struck by  how utterly selfish Meghan and Harry are to deny Archie an opportunity to be a part of this family. Harry, at least, should understand the importance of cousins, even with the fall out with family, we still read of repeated instances where he is supposedly in contact with his cousin Eugenie. Wake up man! Be an advocate for your child, tell his wretched mother to shape up, BetterUp inspirer, inspire yourself. *Chickens are no replacement for cousins.*



When I was  a kid I would have MUCH rather hung out with the chickens than the  cousins!


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> You never know, if even Kanye and the ghastly J star are running out of money for California then I don’t think H&M’s one-documentary-a-year production company will keep them in 16bathrooms.
> 
> I do agree she’d be looking for another puppet & that is not Kanye’s MO.
> 
> I think she’d struggle to find another sucker that combines malleability, money, status and stupidity  like Harry. He really is the golden turkey.


maybe her next one will be an older man like a david foster type


----------



## Chloe302225

They threw Harry a bone and included him in this slide show.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chloe302225 said:


> They threw Harry a bone and included him in this slide show.



In uniform. Ouch!


----------



## needlv

maris.crane said:


> I could be totally wrong



no you have the correct interpretation- she was meaning “stay quiet!”   (Ie.  this is NOT all about you Meghan!)

Aussies are known for being direct And calling it like it is.

Here is an Australian commentator giving his thoughts on H and MM.  start at one minute thirty mark where he absolutely roasts them...



i don’t necessarily always agree with this commentator... but he is right in this case.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sky News Australia hasn't held back lately. I don't know most of their commentators, reporters and hosts, but found myself nodding in agreement often.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> maybe her next one will be an older man like a david foster type


A sugar daddy (don't know what they call them now) so she doesn't have to return the rings COD.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> A sugar daddy (don't know what they call them now) so she doesn't have to return the rings COD.



Is "sugar daddy" outdated now? I can't keep up! Meghan would go for a wealthy man then explain she was "trapped" with Harry.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> A sugar daddy (don't know what they call them now) so she doesn't have to return the rings COD.



Sugar daddies usually like sugar babies - just saying'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> *Is "sugar daddy" outdated now?* I can't keep up! Meghan would go for a wealthy man then explain she was "trapped" with Harry.


I don't have a clue. I just know that the sins, indiscretions, etc. of yesteryear get repackaged and redefined every now and again so I don't keep up with with the new terminology. Besides I'm married (42 years this coming May) and since this one is already broken in, I think I'll just keep him.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Sugar daddies usually like sugar babies - just saying'



They don’t want a sugar broad?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Sugar daddies usually like sugar babies - just saying'


So what do you call older women that "date" men just for what they can get.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't have a clue. I just know that the sins, indiscretions, etc. of yesteryear get repackaged and redefined every now and again so I don't keep up with with the new terminology. Besides I'm married (42 years this coming May) and since this one is already broken in, I think I'll just keep him.



For the ladies, it is so much easier to keep him.  For the males, it is so much cheaper to keep her.
‘Wasn’t that a movie way back when?


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> So what do you call older women that "date" men just for what they can get.



Professional


----------



## Aimee3

Oh my, this thread just gets better and better!  Love you ladies! (Or is ladies not a woke enough word, and too gender specific these days?)
The recent discussion brings to mind something I read today . The word “mistress” is out and the woke words to replace it are companion and or friend which is too vague for me.  I’ll stick with mistress but I must confess I don’t know any so probably won’t have occasion to use any of those words in that sense.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Nobody wants a heavily pregnant sugar anything!!


----------



## gracekelly

None of the royals to wear military uniform at Prince Philips funeral
					

The Daily Mail understands that, in an unprecedented about-turn, a last minute decision, approved by the Queen, has been made that no royals will wear military uniform.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I just can't believe this!  Prince Philip wanted a funeral with a military edge to it.  The two brats of the family, Andrew and Harry have spoiled it for the rest.  I think this was a bad decision.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> So what do you call older women that "date" men just for what they can get.


Gold diggers


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> None of the royals to wear military uniform at Prince Philips funeral
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail understands that, in an unprecedented about-turn, a last minute decision, approved by the Queen, has been made that no royals will wear military uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't believe this!  Prince Philip wanted a funeral with a military edge to it.  The two brats of the family, Andrew and Harry have spoiled it for the rest.  I think this was a bad decision.


ITA.  Why punish the rest for the actions of a few bad seeds?  As much as I don't like Andrew, he served in the Navy and as far as I know, was not dishonorably discharged.  I don't care if he wore a uniform.  Harry willingly left.  I'm tired of them bending over backwards to "hand him an olive branch".  He doesn't deserve it.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> The word “mistress” is out and the woke words to replace it are companion and or friend which is too vague for me.  I’ll stick with mistress but I must confess I don’t know any so probably won’t have occasion to use any of those words in that sense.



Companion or Friend were words that were used to describe a woman who acted as a gay man’s beard back when homosexuality was concealed. I imagine the woke crowd doesn’t want to be called “mistress” because they don’t want it to sound like they are doing anything wrong by sleeping with a married man. Too bad. You can’t always have what you want.


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> Oh my, this thread just gets better and better!  Love you ladies! (Or is ladies not a woke enough word, and too gender specific these days?)
> The recent discussion brings to mind something I read today . The word “mistress” is out and the woke words to replace it are companion and or friend which is too vague for me.  I’ll stick with mistress but I must confess I don’t know any so probably won’t have occasion to use any of those words in that sense.



Right. "Friend"? "Companion"? Because "mistress" is out? Friends and companions typically aren't out banging married men. How about "slut"? "hussy"? "casting couch pro"? "extracurricular chum/pal/buddy"?  "trixie"? "surplus spouse"? "benefits no work"? "sucky ducky"?  I'll stick with mistress. Woke be damned.  What's next? "Fraud" replaced with "money manager"?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Nobody wants a heavily pregnant sugar anything!!



In theory there are  maiesiophiliacs. But I’ve never known or heard of anyone who admitted to being one.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> In theory there are  maiesiophiliacs. But I’ve never known or heard of anyone who admitted to being one.


The things I learn on this thread!  I had to look that word up.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Right. "Friend"? "Companion"? Because "mistress" is out? Friends and companions typically aren't out banging married men. How about "slut"? "hussy"? "casting couch pro"? "extracurricular chum/pal/buddy"?  "trixie"? "surplus spouse"? "benefits no work"? "sucky ducky"?  I'll stick with mistress. Woke be damned.  What's next? "Fraud" replaced with "money manager"?


LOL, in the wokeness of modern times, it's not ok to "slut shame", because you know, they are people too . Even destroying families, gold digging, and committing sin is no longer a reason "to judge", as everyone MUST be accepted and celebrated and given trophies for coming in 1000th place.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> The things I learn on this thread!  I had to look that word up.


Me too!


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> In theory there are  maiesiophiliacs. But I’ve never known or heard of anyone who admitted to being one.


 
Oh for heaven's sake, here's the homework: One who has a pregnancy fetishism, also known as maiesiophilia, is a sexual fetish for women who are or appear pregnant. Amongst those who have the fetish there are many subtle distinctions and sub-fetishes.

I like learning things but here you go throwing around fancy words, making us look things up. This thread is becoming work!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> In theory there are  maiesiophiliacs. But I’ve never known or heard of anyone who admitted to being one.


I once met a pregnant stripper who was about to pop.  "Heavily pregnant" I should say.  I was truly fascinated and asked her how in the world she was on the pole (I still can't even picture it), and if she still got good tips.  She told me she made more the further along she got than when she was in amazing pre pregnancy shape!  Who knew.  There's someone for every fetish I suppose!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Right. "Friend"? "Companion"? Because "mistress" is out? Friends and companions typically aren't out banging married men. How about "slut"? "hussy"? "casting couch pro"? "extracurricular chum/pal/buddy"?  "trixie"? "surplus spouse"? "benefits no work"? "sucky ducky"?  I'll stick with mistress. Woke be damned.  What's next? "Fraud" replaced with "money manager"?


Does anyone remember the old quote, "Oh my virgin ears!" but in this case it would be, "Oh my virgin eyes!"


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> So what do you call older women that "date" men just for what they can get.


The same thing you call younger women who “date” men just for what they can get.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I once met a pregnant stripper who was about to pop.  "Heavily pregnant" I should say.  I was truly fascinated and asked her how in the world she was on the pole (I still can't even picture it), and if she still got good tips.  She told me she made more the further along she got than when she was in amazing pre pregnancy shape!  Who knew.  There's someone for every fetish I suppose!



Your run-ins are definitely more interesting than mine. I feel bad for the lady but glad to hear she raked in the cash. I read a book by a proud stripper and I admire how she owned what she did. She didn't take crap from anybody and was no dummy. She took full advantage of the best money making opportunities (she went on a circuit of the richest clubs around the world) and invested a lot of the money. I thought "good for you".


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Oh for heaven's sake, here's the homework: One who has a pregnancy fetishism, also known as maiesiophilia, is a sexual fetish for women who are or appear pregnant. Amongst those who have the fetish there are many subtle distinctions and sub-fetishes.
> 
> I like learning things but here you go throwing around fancy words, making us look things up. This thread is becoming work!




Thank you for doing our homework!  We won’t tell the teacher. Now, about the essay - no pressure, but when can we expect it ?  
Of course, this is just between us. We don’t want to end up like those varsity parents


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Oh for heaven's sake, here's the homework: One who has a pregnancy fetishism, also known as maiesiophilia, is a sexual fetish for women who are or appear pregnant. Amongst those who have the fetish there are many subtle distinctions and sub-fetishes.
> 
> I like learning things but here you go throwing around fancy words, making us look things up. This thread is becoming work!


----------



## bag-mania

Off topic but for anyone who was too young to remember the death of Princess Diana there is a show on the Travel Channel tonight that will have a segment looking at the conspiracy theory surrounding it. The show is called Beyond the Unknown and it is on at 10 PM Eastern time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This seems to be spot on target:  








						Prince Philip 'was determined to save Charles and Diana's marriage'
					

GYLES BRANDRETH: One of the things that saddened the Queen and Prince Philip about Diana was not that she was popular, but that she allowed her popularity to go to her head.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Just a few days before the wedding, I’d met Prince Philip in the company of his Norfolk neighbour, Lord Howard of Rising.

Daringly, Lord Howard reminded him of the saying: ‘When a man marries his mistress, it creates a vacancy.’

The duke chuckled obligingly. ‘Don’t, please!’ he muttered._


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for doing our homework!  We won’t tell the teacher. Now, about the essay - no pressure, but when can we expect it ?
> Of course, this is just between us. We don’t want to end up like those varsity parents



Doesn't matter when the essay is, just plagiarize something! Meghan gets away with it all the time, and remember, the new woke way is DON'T JUDGE! We're VICTIMS who are too important to write up a bunch of tedious words. Besides, haven't schools done away with letter grades and pass/fail based on feelings? All you need to do is pout and look like you're about to cry. Snivel your nose and stare with puppy dog eyes. If you fail, set Twitter ablaze with a sob story, rack up the re-tweets, email the Dean and threaten to sue the school. You'll pass. And you're three credits closer to your Major in Creative Activations, and Minor in Compassionate Raindrops.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Off topic but for anyone who was too young to remember the death of Princess Diana there is a show on the Travel Channel tonight that will have a segment looking at the conspiracy theory surrounding it. The show is called Beyond the Unknown and it is on at 10 PM Eastern time.



Oh golly, we hate to be off topic. If they can make a conspiracy out of a drunk chauffeur they'd might as well throw a UFO into the mix. I hope Meghan doesn't watch it and demand that Harry return NOW.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Your run-ins are definitely more interesting than mine. I feel bad for the lady but glad to hear she raked in the cash. I read a book by a proud stripper and I admire how she owned what she did. She didn't take crap from anybody and was no dummy. She took full advantage of the best money making opportunities (she went on a circuit of the richest clubs around the world) and invested a lot of the money. I thought "good for you".


LOL, the older I get, I find myself striking up random conversations with people, often just by trying to make someone's day and giving them a compliment.  Many have fascinating stories to tell.  I always admire someone if they own what they do and don't act like a constant victim of their circumstances, whether it's a stripper, a janitor, a doctor, lawyer, pilot, lunch lady, whatever.  As much as I don't like people as a whole, individually, most are still decent people.


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> So what do you call older women that "date" men just for what they can get.


Meghan?


----------



## mdcx

Regards stripping, there are definitely young women who enter into with a very business oriented mindset. They see their body augmentations as investments to increase their income, and don't come across as victims at all - obviously not the case across the board. One is on YouTube - Cristina Villegas.
On topic - the funeral is drawing near. I do wonder what is cooking away in the mind of Miss Markle. Surely she will not be patiently sitting on her hands while the world's attention is elsewhere?


----------



## CarryOn2020

mdcx said:


> Regards stripping, there are definitely young women who enter into with a very business oriented mindset. They see their body augmentations as investments to increase their income, and don't come across as victims at all - obviously not the case across the board. One is on YouTube - Cristina Villegas.
> On topic - the funeral is drawing near. I do wonder what is cooking away in the mind of Miss Markle. Surely she will not be patiently sitting on her hands while the world's attention is elsewhere?



IMO after today’s headlines about the uniforms, it is Harry who may be plotting.  He is getting lots of negative press and very negative comments, rightly so.  I still have hope that his seat will be far in the back , with Uncle Andy. Best thing would be no photos of him at all. He will merch them, possibly in his infotainment show.


----------



## rose60610

mdcx said:


> Regards stripping, there are definitely young women who enter into with a very business oriented mindset. They see their body augmentations as investments to increase their income, and don't come across as victims at all - obviously not the case across the board. One is on YouTube - Cristina Villegas.
> On topic - the funeral is drawing near. I do wonder what is cooking away in the mind of Miss Markle. Surely she will not be patiently sitting on her hands while the world's attention is elsewhere?



Alllllrighty, I'm nobody's nanny, I have more concern over body builders who use steroids and weird drugs to transform their bodies. Steroids often lead to an early death. Anybody who makes $$$ I want to encourage them to invest as much as possible. 

If M or H have the gall to post any photos of Harry in tears at the funeral or anything like that, then that'll prove their I.Q.s together are less than half that of their damned rescue chickens.


----------



## eunaddict

gracekelly said:


> None of the royals to wear military uniform at Prince Philips funeral
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail understands that, in an unprecedented about-turn, a last minute decision, approved by the Queen, has been made that no royals will wear military uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't believe this!  Prince Philip wanted a funeral with a military edge to it.  The two brats of the family, Andrew and Harry have spoiled it for the rest.  I think this was a bad decision.



It's so sad that the BRF have to keep catering to the lowest common denominator. I had heard a couple of days ago that William volunteered not to wear a uniform to keep the peace with H, in the same way he decided not to walk in with the Queen and Charles at the Commonwealth service...to keep the peace.

I think at the bare minimum, Charles and Anne should be in uniform, especially since Anne took over as Captain General of the Royal Marines.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I don't think it's regret! 


According to one insider, Meghan and Harry have regrets over the timing of their interview with Oprah, which was released during Prince Philip's time in hospital. With the interview coming just weeks before Philip's death, Meghan and Harry told one source they had no control over the timing of the bombshell tell-all chat with the US icon. Although the interview was released during Philip's time in the King Edward VII Hospital, the pair insisted they had to do it. 

According to Heat Magazine, Meghan and Harry told the insider they "wished things could've been different".

The pair said: "They needed to have their say, and they couldn't see any other way to do it.

"Harry and Meghan's love and respect for Prince Philip and the Queen was never in doubt."

The source also claimed the pair hope to have better relationships with other royals further down the line in the future. 









						Insider claims Meghan and Harry feel bad for Oprah chat
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have regrets over their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, an insider has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lalame

It must be sooo awkward in that family right now. Can't imagine Wills, Charles, and Anne are thrilled about this choice either... just further fall out from these scandals they are the unwilling victims of.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Companion or Friend were words that were used to describe a woman who acted as a gay man’s beard back when homosexuality was concealed. I imagine the woke crowd doesn’t want to be called “mistress” because they don’t want it to sound like they are doing anything wrong by sleeping with a married man. Too bad. You can’t always have what you want.



As a member of the "woke crowd"  and a millennial, I have to say, we still generally use "mistress", I'd always thought companion or friend was used by the boomers and older from "polite society"...usually with a subtle nod or wink.

As in Mr X's "special companion/special lady friend" , was usually his mistress.

Also, we get so much blame for a lot of this "wokeness" but millennials are all like 25-40y/o now with full time jobs and taxes to pay; it's really not us on twitter and Tiktok or fangirling movements anymore....it's the Gen Zs.




Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's regret!
> View attachment 5055836
> 
> According to one insider, Meghan and Harry have *regrets over the timing of their interview with Oprah*, which was released during Prince Philip's time in hospital.



It is the timing they regret, because it makes them look bad. But also, best get all this out there so no one yells too hard at H.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> None of the royals to wear military uniform at Prince Philips funeral
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail understands that, in an unprecedented about-turn, a last minute decision, approved by the Queen, has been made that no royals will wear military uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't believe this!  Prince Philip wanted a funeral with a military edge to it.  The two brats of the family, Andrew and Harry have spoiled it for the rest.  I think this was a bad decision.


This title says everything, it's pathetic! 










						Queen bans military uniform for royals at Duke's funeral sparing Harry's blushes
					

THE Queen has spared Prince Harry’s blushes by ordering no royals wear military uniform for the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral, The Sun can reveal. The Duke of Sussex had faced the humiliating prospec…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's regret!
> View attachment 5055836
> 
> According to one insider, Meghan and Harry have regrets over the timing of their interview with Oprah, which was released during Prince Philip's time in hospital. With the interview coming just weeks before Philip's death, Meghan and Harry told one source they had no control over the timing of the bombshell tell-all chat with the US icon. Although the interview was released during Philip's time in the King Edward VII Hospital, the pair insisted they had to do it.
> 
> According to Heat Magazine, Meghan and Harry told the insider they "wished things could've been different".
> 
> The pair said: "They needed to have their say, and they couldn't see any other way to do it.
> 
> "Harry and Meghan's love and respect for Prince Philip and the Queen was never in doubt."
> 
> The source also claimed the pair hope to have better relationships with other royals further down the line in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Insider claims Meghan and Harry feel bad for Oprah chat
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have regrets over their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


This is such a joke, after Gayle kept saying that they were fully prepared to delay telecast if Prince Philip passed on before the slated day that the OW interview would be aired. The pair of ninnies is just playing the victim card again. Not their fault. No control. Don't blame me.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's regret!
> View attachment 5055836
> 
> According to one insider, Meghan and Harry have regrets over the timing of their interview with Oprah, which was released during Prince Philip's time in hospital. With the interview coming just weeks before Philip's death, Meghan and Harry told one source they had no control over the timing of the bombshell tell-all chat with the US icon. Although the interview was released during Philip's time in the King Edward VII Hospital, the pair insisted they had to do it.
> 
> According to Heat Magazine, Meghan and Harry told the insider they "wished things could've been different".
> 
> The pair said: "They needed to have their say, and they couldn't see any other way to do it.
> 
> "Harry and Meghan's love and respect for Prince Philip and the Queen was never in doubt."
> 
> The source also claimed the pair hope to have better relationships with other royals further down the line in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Insider claims Meghan and Harry feel bad for Oprah chat
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have regrets over their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Yeah right.... man... I almost said “And I’m the Queen of England” and then I remembered what thread I’m on.... smh....

What I’d give to be able to see what I’m typing... I don’t know what’s changed, but the keyboard over what I’m typing is driving me nuts.....


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> If M or H have the gall to post any photos of Harry in tears at the funeral or anything like that, then that'll prove their I.Q.s together are less than half that of their damned rescue chickens.


I don't think anyone will argue that they lack gall 
I fully expect a story on how MM broke down in the chicken coop or while clutching firstborn, as she viewed the funeral on the telly, especially when she spied H bravely holding back his tears


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> This is such a joke, after Gayle kept saying that they were fully prepared to delay telecast if Prince Philip passed on before the slated day that the OW interview would be aired. The pair of ninnies is just playing the victim card again. Not their fault. No control. Don't blame me.


ETA: does this mean they are slyly pointing the finger at Oprah?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

eunaddict said:


> As a member of the "woke crowd"  and a millennial, I have to say, we still generally use "mistress", I'd always thought companion or friend was used by the boomers and older from "polite society"...usually with a subtle nod or wink.
> 
> As in Mr X's "special companion" , was usually his mistress.



Lol thank you! I run with a pretty “woke” crowd and have never heard of a ban on the word mistress. Maybe the war on mistress is like the war on Christmas? (As in...nonexistent).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice what they are doing. Blaming OW, claiming to be helpless victims, professing love for QE and PP,,,,,,  
BUT *shifting the focus of the Phillip’s funeral to themselves. * Clever, aren’t they.  The daily drip feed will be how MM is so sad she cannot attend [but wanted to], how they continue to miss PP, how Arxie misses their daily zooms, how they both miss H so much, blah blah.  It’s all about _themthemthem_.

Time for UK tabloids(!) and newspapers to shout it out — the gruesome twosome is gross!


----------



## mdcx

xincinsin said:


> ETA: does this mean they are slyly pointing the finger at Oprah?


This is Meghan's exact m.o. If you engage with her, then at any moment she may turn on you and claim outrageous things, or ghost you, or just leverage her connection to you to get another step up the ladder. You would think her past performances would be fair warning to people like OW.


----------



## Chanbal

The pregnant MM's PR-machine is informing that Ginger misses Cringe. 



@sdkitty the green dress is for you.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The pregnant MM's PR-machine is informing that Ginger misses Cringe.
> View attachment 5055861
> 
> 
> @sdkitty the green dress is for you.


IOW, the remote control is functioning as planned.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  Why punish the rest for the actions of a few bad seeds?  As much as I don't like Andrew, he served in the Navy and as far as I know, was not dishonorably discharged.  I don't care if he wore a uniform.  Harry willingly left.  I'm tired of them bending over backwards to "hand him an olive branch".  He doesn't deserve it.


Harry doesn't deserve all these accommodations, but they are very small compared to having MM attending the funeral. I still think that pregnant MM was encouraged by the Palace to stay in California.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The pair said: "*They needed to have their say, and they couldn't see any other way to do it.*
> "Harry and Meghan's love and respect for Prince Philip and the Queen was never in doubt."


What a load of BS. This is a typical response from a teenager caught skipping school or whatever after you've treated them as a responsible individual. But, the comparison ends there. Harry and Meghan at age 36 and 39 respectively are adults and should admit they were wrong instead of trying to perpetuate a bunch of lies, 17 of which have already been debunked. The only love MM feels is self love as evidenced by the people she has markled over the years, father, sisters, ex husbands, etc.  And, MM, if you love and respect others, you don't badmouth them, especially your family for the whole world to hear. Both of you, MM and Harry have behave atrociously and you're the ones, who should get down on your knees to beg forgiveness. Maybe if you're lucky they will forgive you, but don't hold your breath, because if they feel as I do, you'd wait a long time on your knees before I'd even consider forgiving you.

ET to correct spelling


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Oh for sure M&H regrets it!! They didn't have any say in the timing my behind! I hope OW hears about this. Love to see something from O what she thinks! M&H regret it because they need to look good and play nice because they want something from C, the RF, from the Queen !! Wish there was a way for the Queen to reign 50 more years so M&H are ~90 yo and can't enjoy anything! Shame shame shame on H for causing such fuss so he doesn't look bad/blush, my behind!! I bet M is thinking, yes H keep this going! Made them give in to you!  We are getting our way!  More narrative for them for another time.   

My DH just came by and said I need to see my doctor to get anti-M pills.


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> The source also claimed the pair hope to have better relationships with other royals further down the line in the future.



Wow. It’s like giving someone a tight slap and then saying yeah I had to slap you but I hope to have a better relationship with you next time.

Umm... seriously how selfish and delusional can they be??


----------



## Prettyinpnknwht

EverSoElusive said:


> Probably the last time Harry had his balls and the only time Harry tried correcting Douchey Sussex. I'm not sure if she's really crying but I personally can tell she wasn't pleased with that pouty face when turning it around





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I remember I loved that moment because she had been getting on my last nerve with her petulant, childish behaviour and her obsessive being all over Harry in public. The Cambridge children are not as bratty as this grown woman of nearly 40.



I just can’t wait for this incident to be trotted out as evidence of “emotional abuse” and one of the causes of her suicidal thoughts in her first tell-all interview after they eventually split.  I mean, _how cruel _to correct her in public like a child instead of letting her do whatever the hell she wants like usual, and look at the rest of them ignoring her tears and continuing to watch everything else going on.  The nerve!!  _This is clearly A WOMAN IN PAIN!!!  _Someone should have stepped in to cradle her since apparently he was indisposed at the time.


----------



## Hermes Zen

First, I'm not a fan of M but it looked like she was extremely excited to be there (I know I would be) to enjoy the celebration and be in the royal spotlight.  She was talking to H with joy. Maybe even asking him questions about what was happening.  I don't know.  I felt a little sorry for her after H kept talking to her to turn around (I totally get why) and to see how she struggled to hold her tears back. I played that recording several times to see if I could read his lips and to see if I could see if she was crying. Nope. Wasn't able to.  Bad eyes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I see two huge obstacles here: a) Kanye's black and b) the Kardashians. I can't see them stand by and watch a Meghan Markle destroy one of theirs, and honestly, if it's Meghan against the Kardashians my money is on Team Calabasas.


I would not like to mess with the kardashians. Kris knows where the bodies are buried.



bag-mania said:


> In theory there are  maiesiophiliacs. But I’ve never known or heard of anyone who admitted to being one.


OT I do think pregnancy has a special beauty to it. 

The thing I find it incredible is a pregnant woman can muster up the energy to go dating but it does happen .

MM would be a real disappointment for a preg fetishist anyway when she reveals the moonbump or even forgets to wear it for the date


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I once met a pregnant stripper who was about to pop.  "Heavily pregnant" I should say.  I was truly fascinated and asked her how in the world she was on the pole (I still can't even picture it), and if she still got good tips.  She told me she made more the further along she got than when she was in amazing pre pregnancy shape!  Who knew.  There's someone for every fetish I suppose!


This doesn’t surprise me. As we’ve learnt from H&M’s relationship it’s much easier to get his money from looking maternal than from acting all sexy . If you throw making him feel guilty into the mix- big bank time.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's regret!
> View attachment 5055836
> 
> According to one insider, Meghan and Harry have regrets over the timing of their interview with Oprah, which was released during Prince Philip's time in hospital. With the interview coming just weeks before Philip's death, Meghan and Harry told one source they had no control over the timing of the bombshell tell-all chat with the US icon. Although the interview was released during Philip's time in the King Edward VII Hospital, the pair insisted they had to do it.
> 
> According to Heat Magazine, Meghan and Harry told the insider they "wished things could've been different".
> 
> The pair said: "They needed to have their say, and they couldn't see any other way to do it.
> 
> "Harry and Meghan's love and respect for Prince Philip and the Queen was never in doubt."
> 
> The source also claimed the pair hope to have better relationships with other royals further down the line in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Insider claims Meghan and Harry feel bad for Oprah chat
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have regrets over their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I know ITV most likely has regrets after the interview only got 12 mill and their morning ratings have been annihilated.  
Serves them right.

Obviously this is complete bull from H&M, if they were so keen on supporting their family why did they go on tv & spread a lot of rumours about them being racist and uncaring about depression ?


Chanbal said:


> Harry doesn't deserve all these accommodations, but they are very small compared to having MM attending the funeral. I still think that pregnant MM was encouraged by the Palace to stay in California.


Agreed a Jabba the Hutt-style dais would be needed for the ‘heavily pregnant’ megs at the very least.
Plus a dedicated ‘cry camera’ to try and prove she can act.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> First, I'm not a fan of M but it looked like she was extremely excited to be there (I know I would be) to enjoy the celebration and be in the royal spotlight.  She was talking to H with joy. Maybe even asking him questions about what was happening.  I don't know.  I felt a little sorry for her after H kept talking to her to turn around (I totally get why) and to see how she struggled to hold her tears back. I played that recording several times to see if I could read his lips and to see if I could see if she was crying. Nope. Wasn't able to.  Bad eyes.


But this was 2019. She wore a pink dress for 2018, and this navy blue for 2019. Unless she has already forgotten everything about Trooping the Colour 2018, there should be no cause for her to be over-excited about 2019 and asking H questions. (_Gee whiz, H_ [that's what I call him - H], _do you think someone will fall off the horse this time?_)

OTOH, I think it was just media nonsense. She probably just wanted to yak (attention-seeking) and H was telling her to keep her eyes forward because either the anthem was being played or the parade was starting. Something was definitely happening because everyone else was eyes forward. She looked to me like she was pouting and not holding back tears.


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> But this was 2019. She wore a pink dress for 2018, and this navy blue for 2019. Unless she has already forgotten everything about 2018, there should be no cause for her to be over-excited about 2019 and asking H questions. (_Gee whiz, H_ [that's what I call him - H], _do you think someone will fall off the horse this time?_)
> 
> OTOH, I think it was just media nonsense. She probably just wanted to yak (attention-seeking) and H was telling her to keep her eyes forward because either the anthem was being played or the parade was starting. Something was definitely happening because everyone else was eyes forward. She looked to me like she was pouting and not holding back tears.


Ohhh I see your point. Makes sense. Thanks for pointing out the dress/year. She should have already known how to act and what to do and not do.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Ohhh I see your point. Makes sense. Thanks for pointing out the dress/year. She should have already known how to act and what to do and not do.


I'll be charitable. When I had my first pregnancy, a great many well-meaning friends told me that child-bearing is proven to reduce brain mass by 10% (with friends like this... ). Maybe the Trooping the Colour memories were lost with Archie...


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> ETA: does this mean they are slyly pointing the finger at Oprah?



Slyly?

Slyly may be an understatement _and_ giving them too much credit. They're stupid if they're really putting this out.

No one forced them to say the things they did. There wasn't that much jump-cut editing. O asked the questions and H&M gave the answers. O didn't even cross-question. So how the interview "could have been different" is nonsense.

The interview could have been different if they hadn't given it.

They should to be careful. They can't play the same cards with Oprah, and OW is a powerful woman, a queen in her own way. These 2 are setting themselves up for a fall like a couple of reality-TV novices.


----------



## Clearblueskies

They’ll be doing Cameo vids before we know it


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Slyly?
> 
> Slyly may be an understatement _and_ giving them too much credit. They stupid if they're really putting this out.
> 
> No one forced them to say the things they did. There wasn't that much jump-cut editing. O asked the questions and H&M gave the answers. O didn't even cross-question. So how the interview "could have been different" is nonsense.
> 
> The interview could have been different if they hadn't given it.
> 
> They have to be careful. They can't play the same cards with Oprah, and OW is a powerful woman, a queen in her own way. These 2 are setting themselves up for a fall like a couple of reality-TV novices.



MM is backpeddling because they want to use the funeral to demand money, security and titles off family members who are grieving.  

it’s also clearly a PR move to deal with the backlash of them giving the interview whilst PP was in his last days ...  but I agree - it’s stupid to cross Oprah.


----------



## poopsie

[QUOTE


jelliedfeels said:


> I would not like to mess with the kardashians. *Kris knows where the bodies are buried.*



She probably put some of them there herself


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> MM is backpeddling because they want to use the funeral to demand money, security and titles off family members who are grieving.
> 
> it’s also clearly a PR move to deal with the backlash of them giving the interview whilst PP was in his last days ...  but I agree - it’s stupid to cross Oprah.


I think it’s simply that Meg realises she’s missing out on an event that’s being covered Absolutely Everywhere and she’s stuck in the mansion out of sight.  She won’t want to miss the next one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's regret!
> View attachment 5055836



What they regret is the backlash they for some reason didn't expect.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> MM is backpeddling because they want to use the funeral to demand money, security and titles off family members who are grieving.
> 
> it’s also clearly a PR move to deal with the backlash of them giving the interview whilst PP was in his last days ...  but I agree - it’s stupid to cross Oprah.



Good PR is about accurately predicting the reception of any product and/or comms. 

H&M backtrack over everything because _they _were the idiots who put whatever 'out there'. Everything backfires and  there's a backlash because they have no real values/ selfish motivation and are so out of touch with the public. 

There's no one they've dealt with and nothing the've done that they stand by. 

At this point everything they do is laughed at because it's like a comedy of errors. They don't even have the timing for farce, it's just all a mess.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Good PR is about accurately predicting the reception of any product and/or comms.
> 
> H&M backtrack over everything because _they _were the idiots who put whatever 'out there'. Everything backfires and  there's a backlash because they have no real values/ selfish motivation and are so out of touch with the public.
> 
> There's no one they've dealt with and nothing the've done that they stand by.
> 
> At this point everything they do is laughed at because it's like a comedy of errors. They don't even have the timing for farce, it's just all a mess.


 I 100% agree.  I read on another thread that MM and H‘s PR by sunshine Sachs is not 100% with them and that MM writes her own PR for some of the releases.  Because of this they have no clear strategy.  It’s all about MM “having the last word”.  Think about her disasters - “ the Queen doesn’t own the word royal“ ,  “service is universal”... etc etc.  it’s been one disaster after another.  Both have clearly refused to listen to advice and consequently we have the disaster in front of us.


----------



## gelbergirl

[


gracekelly said:


> None of the royals to wear military uniform at Prince Philips funeral
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail understands that, in an unprecedented about-turn, a last minute decision, approved by the Queen, has been made that no royals will wear military uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't believe this!  Prince Philip wanted a funeral with a military edge to it.  The two brats of the family, Andrew and Harry have spoiled it for the rest.  I think this was a bad decision.



I say they all put on the military uniforms, get on with it, and bury Philip.
I really don't mind.


----------



## Icyjade

Hermes Zen said:


> First, I'm not a fan of M but it looked like she was extremely excited to be there (I know I would be) to enjoy the celebration and be in the royal spotlight.  She was talking to H with joy. Maybe even asking him questions about what was happening.  I don't know.  I felt a little sorry for her after H kept talking to her to turn around (I totally get why) and to see how she struggled to hold her tears back. I played that recording several times to see if I could read his lips and to see if I could see if she was crying. Nope. Wasn't able to.  Bad eyes.











						Here’s Why Prince Harry Told Meghan Markle to “Turn Around” in That Viral Video
					

The footage was fully manipulated.




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Here’s Why Prince Harry Told Meghan Markle to “Turn Around” in That Viral Video
> 
> 
> The footage was fully manipulated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com



Not especially sure what Cosmo thinks the "unedited" video proves that the close-up didn't. He still has to tell her twice to turn around, and her face still looks pouty.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Sugar daddies usually like sugar babies - just saying'



Yep, not middle aged nutcases!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice what they are doing. Blaming OW, claiming to be helpless victims, professing love for QE and PP,,,,,,
> BUT *shifting the focus of the Phillip’s funeral to themselves. * Clever, aren’t they.  The daily drip feed will be how MM is so sad she cannot attend [but wanted to], how they continue to miss PP, how Arxie misses their daily zooms, how they both miss H so much, blah blah.  It’s all about _themthemthem_.
> 
> Time for UK tabloids(!) and newspapers to shout it out — the gruesome twosome is gross!


It's sickening  As is watching the BRF coddling Harry, extending him a whole *** olive grove by now. But they are also a regular (well, of sorts) family so I guess when it comes down to it, they handle these situations just as well or badly as we would do or have done.


----------



## lulilu

EverSoElusive said:


> Probably the last time Harry had his balls and the only time Harry tried correcting Douchey Sussex. I'm not sure if she's really crying but I personally can tell she wasn't pleased with that pouty face when turning it around





needlv said:


> He was telling her to stop turning her back and face the front - as the national anthem was about to play and she would have had her back turned (talking to H)!!  The optics of an American having their back turned whilst their anthem is playing would be horrible...  But yes, she looks very upset at him...





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I remember I loved that moment because she had been getting on my last nerve with her petulant, childish behaviour and her obsessive being all over Harry in public. The Cambridge children are not as bratty as this grown woman of nearly 40.





Hermes Zen said:


> First, I'm not a fan of M but it looked like she was extremely excited to be there (I know I would be) to enjoy the celebration and be in the royal spotlight.  She was talking to H with joy. Maybe even asking him questions about what was happening.  I don't know.  I felt a little sorry for her after H kept talking to her to turn around (I totally get why) and to see how she struggled to hold her tears back. I played that recording several times to see if I could read his lips and to see if I could see if she was crying. Nope. Wasn't able to.  Bad eyes.





xincinsin said:


> But this was 2019. She wore a pink dress for 2018, and this navy blue for 2019. Unless she has already forgotten everything about Trooping the Colour 2018, there should be no cause for her to be over-excited about 2019 and asking H questions. (_Gee whiz, H_ [that's what I call him - H], _do you think someone will fall off the horse this time?_)
> OTOH, I think it was just media nonsense. She probably just wanted to yak (attention-seeking) and H was telling her to keep her eyes forward because either the anthem was being played or the parade was starting. Something was definitely happening because everyone else was eyes forward. She looked to me like she was pouting and not holding back tears.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not especially sure what Cosmo thinks the "unedited" video proves that the close-up didn't. He still has to tell her twice to turn around, and her face still looks pouty.



IMO, the unedited video "explanation" is cr&p.  She clearly had tears in her eyes, not as a sentimental response to THE F*CKING GOD SAVE THE QUEEN playing, but because he told her off.  She, a grown member of the RF for over a year, doesn't have the sense of a child to know to show respect for the Queen?  Because she has no respect for the Queen, the RF or any of these events.  More important to chat with H and show how close they are.  The notion of her simply being "excited?"  What is she, 5?  This infuriates me.  It's just like complaining to H and demanding to leave after 15 minutes of being "bored" at PF's birthday.  What a selfish, self-centered b*tch.  She started out as one, and left the RF as one, and continues to jab at the RF as one.


----------



## lulilu

While I am ranting, I am so sick that the Queen bent to H and A's childish petulant demands to wear uniforms to which they are not entitled.  It was bad enough that William stepped up (like he did when he and Kate walked with HM instead of the Queen at that last event) and offered to wear a suit.  That was not enough.  Everyone has to wear a suit so H (and now A) don't have their feelings hurt.  smdh

I realize that she wants Phillip's funeral to be loving and serious, but these two need to be slapped down big time.  We all know they were and are the two brattiest children.  That they continue this unexcusable behavior, using PF's funeral as an opportunity to get their way, is inexcusable.  grrrrrrr


----------



## CarryOn2020

We have been told that Sarah is doing daily walks with QE at Windsor. 
 We know Andrew & Sarah live at Windsor.
We know Harry is staying on Windsor grounds.
Only 1 question — how much money has QE handed over to Harry?
I’ll say it again, she is really vulnerable right now.  Grief does strange things to people.


----------



## gelbergirl

Any moment now- Meghan takes a private walk & the paps snap a photo of her


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lulilu said:


> While I am ranting, I am so sick that the Queen bent to H and A's childish petulant demands to wear uniforms to which they are not entitled.  It was bad enough that William stepped up (like he did when he and Kate walked with HM instead of the Queen at that last event) and offered to wear a suit.  That was not enough.  Everyone has to wear a suit so H (and now A) don't have their feelings hurt.  smdh
> 
> I realize that she wants Phillip's funeral to be loving and serious, but these two need to be slapped down big time.  We all know they were and are the two brattiest children.  That they continue this unexcusable behavior, using PF's funeral as an opportunity to get their way, is inexcusable.  grrrrrrr





lulilu said:


> IMO, the unedited video "explanation" is cr&p.  She clearly had tears in her eyes, not as a sentimental response to THE F*CKING GOD SAVE THE QUEEN playing, but because he told her off.  She, a grown member of the RF for over a year, doesn't have the sense of a child to know to show respect for the Queen?  Because she has no respect for the Queen, the RF or any of these events.  More important to chat with H and show how close they are.  The notion of her simply being "excited?"  What is she, 5?  This infuriates me.  It's just like complaining to H and demanding to leave after 15 minutes of being "bored" at PF's birthday.  What a selfish, self-centered b*tch.  She started out as one, and left the RF as one, and continues to jab at the RF as one.


Yes, yes, yes and yes! The b***y nerve. Even if someone is family there is a line. I don't know how Will and Kate could stand to be in the same room with Harry.

I can't make up my mind if Meghan really is that emotionally unstable to react that way in public, or if it was just her usual emoting and overacting in the minutely calculated buildup to her coming role as the most victimised woman in history. It's probably both.


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> Any moment now- Meghan takes a private walk & the paps snap a photo of her


Oh definitely, I've been waiting for this. There is still time. The nearer in time to the funeral the better, for impact.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Sugar daddies usually like sugar babies - just saying'


If she squeezes Harry dry, she might do the cougar act for a while to satisfy her authentic dominatrix self. She definitely is way past the sugar baby stage unless she goes into the garage for a major overhaul and not just the current cosmetic repairs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> Any moment now- Meghan takes a private walk & the paps snap a photo of her



The situation is so serious it may require her delivering a dozen sandwiches to a shelter or some cute little hats to a kindergarten.


----------



## xincinsin

No walk in the park, but one of M's friends suddenly releases never-before-seen photo ... colour me surprised.









						Meghan Markle stars in never-before-seen photo prior to meeting Prince Harry
					

Meghan Markle appears in previously-unseen photo prior to meeting future husband Prince Harry




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xincinsin said:


> No walk in the park, but one of M's friends suddenly releases never-before-seen photo ... colour me surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stars in never-before-seen photo prior to meeting Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears in previously-unseen photo prior to meeting future husband Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


It's like they enjoy the taunting. And Phillip not even in his grave yet. 

Disgusting.


----------



## bag-mania

She can’t help herself. A narcissist has gotta go for that attention at all costs.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The pregnant MM's PR-machine is informing that Ginger misses Cringe.
> View attachment 5055861
> 
> 
> @sdkitty the green dress is for you.


People magazine makes me sick
the green outfit - they keep using that picture so I guess M must like it


----------



## lulilu

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's like they enjoy the taunting. And Phillip not even in his grave yet.
> Disgusting.





sdkitty said:


> People magazine makes me sick
> the green outfit - they keep using that picture so I guess M must like it



I will never again read (or give clicks to) People, Elle, Vanity Fair and all the other sycophants. (Not that I ever really read them.) Their fawning is making me sick.  Desperate for clicks.  I refuse to click on anything that relates to her.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> People magazine makes me sick
> the green outfit - they keep using that picture so I guess M must like it


The green outfit is horrible - but it's part of the Diana cosplay, esp since it harks back to D's maternity wear, so it's a powerful reminder to Harry of his need for a maternal totem.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I will never again read (or give clicks to) People, Elle, Vanity Fair and all the other sycophants. (Not that I ever really read them.) Their fawning is making me sick.  Desperate for clicks.  I refuse to click on anything that relates to her.


 - 
People magazine is just a bunch of pictures and puff pieces - something to pass the time in the doctors waiting room
VF at least has stories to read with some substance...never have read Elle


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> But this was 2019. She wore a pink dress for 2018, and this navy blue for 2019. Unless she has already forgotten everything about Trooping the Colour 2018, there should be no cause for her to be over-excited about 2019 and *asking H questions. (Gee whiz, H [that's what I call him - H], do you think someone will fall off the horse this time?)*
> 
> OTOH, I think it was just media nonsense. She probably just wanted to yak (attention-seeking) and H was telling her to keep her eyes forward because either the anthem was being played or the parade was starting. Something was definitely happening because everyone else was eyes forward. She looked to me like she was pouting and not holding back tears.


You call him "H"?  How dare you insult Hermes like that!


----------



## rose60610

Anyone guessing that Meghan will claim to have contractions 5 minutes after the funeral starts?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not especially sure what Cosmo thinks the "unedited" video proves that the close-up didn't. He still has to tell her twice to turn around, and her face still looks pouty.


And why does he have to "repeatedly" tell her to turn around?  Is she 2 years old?


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> You call him "H"?  How dare you insult Hermes like that!


Ooops ... 
From the lips of the Heavily Pregnant One in that Africa docu: "I've said for a long time to H—that’s what I call him"


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Anyone guessing that Meghan will claim to have contractions 5 minutes after the funeral starts?


Shhh.. brought on by the stress, you know. Probably very upset that no one has accepted her forgiveness and assured her that they are ready to move on.


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> While I am ranting, I am so sick that the Queen bent to H and A's childish petulant demands to wear uniforms to which they are not entitled.  It was bad enough that William stepped up (like he did when he and Kate walked with HM instead of the Queen at that last event) and offered to wear a suit.  That was not enough.  Everyone has to wear a suit so H (and now A) don't have their feelings hurt.  smdh
> 
> I realize that she wants Phillip's funeral to be loving and serious, but these two need to be slapped down big time.  We all know they were and are the two brattiest children.  That they continue this unexcusable behavior, using PF's funeral as an opportunity to get their way, is inexcusable.  grrrrrrr



I know but it's the only way not to breach protocol.

It's all about how history records, these men all want to appear heroes in the photos.

Civilians shouldn't wear uniforms they are not entitled to.

Andrew saw active service but at this point he should be wearing an invisibility cloak IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Slyly?
> 
> Slyly may be an understatement _and_ giving them too much credit. They're stupid if they're really putting this out.
> 
> No one forced them to say the things they did. There wasn't that much jump-cut editing. O asked the questions and H&M gave the answers. O didn't even cross-question. So how the interview "could have been different" is nonsense.
> 
> The interview could have been different if they hadn't given it.
> 
> They should to be careful. They can't play the same cards with Oprah, and OW is a powerful woman, a queen in her own way. These 2 are setting themselves up for a fall like a couple of reality-TV novices.


My 2 cents:

Even if they wanted, I don't think they could have avoided giving the interview. MM wanted her celebrity life and for that she had to be in the US. The interview was part of a 'deal' to help them relocate to the US imo. 

Having said that, I believe that MM wanted very much to give that interview. She is always despaired for her voice to be heard. They could certainly have given a totally different interview. I don't think they had the right or motives for exposing the BRF as oppressors and racists as they did. 

They are now apparently regretting the interview, because it didn't help them much achieving the A-list celebrity status that MM wants. They need to continue cashing in on titles and on the BRF connections to generate the kind of income and lifestyle they want. This is why they "_hope to have better relationships with other royals_".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Royal experts comments on Ginger and Randy Andy's '_shameful tantrums_':

It looks like Ginger wanted to wear the Blues and Royals uniform that he wore on his memorable wedding day ...









						Royal experts blast Prince Harry and Andrew's 'shameful tantrums'
					

Among the most scathing royal experts was Angela Levin, who said the Queen had 'got much, much more to cope with than deciding on what male family members should wear' for Prince Philip's funeral.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> 
> Even if they wanted, I don't think they could have avoided giving the interview. MM wanted her celebrity life and for that she had to be in the US. The interview was part of a 'deal' to help them relocate to the US imo.
> 
> Having said that, I believe that MM wanted very much to give that interview. She is always despaired for her voice to be heard. They could certainly have given a totally different interview. I don't think they had the right or motives for exposing the BRF as oppressors and racists as they did.
> 
> They are now apparently regretting the interview, because it didn't help them much achieving the A-list celebrity status that MM wants. They need to continue cashing in on titles and on the BRF connections to generate the kind of income and lifestyle they want. This is why they "_hope to have better relationships with other royals_".



IMO Promises were made, Doria was given “OW protection”, H&M were given free “Tyler housing and transportation“, guessing Netflix was an OW gift,  who knows what else was ‘arranged’ for them.  Time to pay the piper.  While working with H on the mental health doc,  OW realized H was a disaster on tv (maybe even in person), so she switched to plan b, the interview.  No one knows the role Doria has played in all of this. I suggest she has been extremely involved, either knowingly or unknowingly. Perhaps she has shared stories with OW and her team. Still, the cash cow was and is the BRF.  Clearly, OW wants to bring them down, but now she realizes a sit-down with QE won’t happen. Time to move on. The OW glow disappears. H&M get stuck with the muck they created.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> And why does he have to "repeatedly" tell her to turn around?  Is she 2 years old?


Arrested development-wise, what you say might not be far off


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What they regret is the backlash they for some reason didn't expect.


why did they have to tell their story to the world?  Oh, so the people who identify with her as a WOC can feel sympathetic for all the terrible sheet she went through and know that HR wouldn't help her?


----------



## Love Of My Life

sdkitty said:


> why did they have to tell their story to the world?  Oh, so the people who identify with her as a WOC can feel sympathetic for all the terrible sheet she went through and know that HR wouldn't help her?



Why is the question of the day?
Do they not have enough speculation around them?
I wonder if Harry really wanted to do this interview or if he was coerced into doing it.
At the very least, it did not behoove either one of them, IMO & Meghan is not sparkling
as she once did or at the level she may have anticipated
I feel sorry that they felt they had the need to "share their story with the world"
I expected more from Harry as he comments about the "press" relationship Princess
Diana had & it was so hurtful for so many years.. Well, he fell right into their hands
with this interview
Poor taste, poor judgment & just totally unnecessary to call attention to themselves in a very
undignified matter IMO...


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I haven't been this upset since Eddie and LeAnn tried to character assassinate Brandi, Halle's French baby daddy slammed the oh so beautiful head of Gabriel into a concrete driveway and Katie narrowly escaped with Suri from the evil scientologic clutches of Tom  Sorry, just trying to lighten it up a little.

I generally don't care about celebs or monarchies but some of these dysfunction and narc riddled dramas are epic, impossible to look away from and the H&M one fits right in.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> People magazine makes me sick
> the green outfit - they keep using that picture so I guess M must like it


What's with the green outfit? I guess I should know by know but I missed the details. Diana wore a similar green one while pregnant with Harry and now Meghan uses this to emotionally control her husband?


----------



## rose60610

If M&H "hope to have better relations with the royals", how did they assume that calling them "racists" and saying "they're all trapped" would assist in their quest to have "better relations"?  Would this be before or after the BRF would apologize to them? Oh wait, did Meghan say she "would forgive" them in advance so their apology wouldn't be necessary? Or did the BRF "apologize quietly three days ago" and we'll be told later? 
My guess--if Meghan can't make the BRF restore finances and security and become all cuddly and bubbly about them at the snap of the fingers, we'll get charges of racism and cruelty all over again. This bish is a sociopath IMO. And Harry is so stupid that he got in so deep before any bulbs went off. Many contracts these days have "morals" clauses, saying if the author/celebrity does or says something so controversial the payor is allowed to reneg on the deal. If M&H's popularity tanks, Netflix could tell them to take a hike. But slimy people are good at playing their aces. I could see M&H signing a deal only if the contract deleted a morals clause, after all, they're royalty! Knowing full well what they planned to blab in an interview and wanted to play both sides.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *They are now apparently regretting the interview, because it didn't help them much achieving the A-list celebrity status that MM wants. They need to continue cashing in on titles and on the BRF connections to generate the kind of income and lifestyle they want. This is why they "hope to have better relationships with other royals".*



Yes, exactly this.  The interview is done and over and they got sympathy from the twitterati and morning news shows but the news has moved on and Meghan wasn't offered the governorship of California and Parliament didn't abolish the monarchy as well as apologize to Meghan for not having her father, sister, and the UK tabloid press thrown in the Tower.

Instead, they have to deal with the backlash from their laundry list of half-truths, outright lies, delusions and pettiness along with the undeniable truth that they made Prince Philip's last days on earth more painful and unhappy than they needed to be.  Harry gets to live with that forever.  When he fully realizes that, he'll be in therapy for the rest of his life.

So, what does the future now look like for them?  Well, still no multi-million dollar paid speeches on tap, no red carpets to walk for quite awhile, their big tell-all interview/pity party done, the bullying investigation hanging over their heads.  Netflix and Spotify are going to want a return on the money they fronted them and want actual, high quality content produced with regularity which neither of them have any experience doing.  I'd be pretty stressed out if I were in their position.


----------



## TC1

Of course they want to have better relationships..if something happens to the Queen they'll need to be there for the spotlight. I know she seems in good health, but the loss of a soul mate can be difficult.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Anyone guessing that Meghan will claim to have contractions 5 minutes after the funeral starts?



Well, somebody may but it may not be M...


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Royal experts comments on Ginger and Randy Andy's '_shameful tantrums_':
> 
> It looks like Ginger wanted to wear the Blues and Royals uniform that he wore on his memorable wedding day ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal experts blast Prince Harry and Andrew's 'shameful tantrums'
> 
> 
> Among the most scathing royal experts was Angela Levin, who said the Queen had 'got much, much more to cope with than deciding on what male family members should wear' for Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can't they read their own rule books? 

Guess not.


----------



## jblended

youngster said:


> I'd be pretty stressed out if I were in their position.


I don't believe they have the necessary self-reflection to feel stressed out. They're exclusively focused on getting all that they feel entitled to, and are incapable of seeing the collateral damage (to themselves or others) caused by their selfish, greedy ways. You can't be stressed if you're blissfully unaware of just how much you're stuffing everything up.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

On second thought about who in the BRF should wear uniform or not, it seems like a wise decision that none of them do. Harry and Andrew are the only two that have seen active service. What ever else these two have done, it would have looked awkward. Well, more awkward than it will look anyway


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Will asked for space... 


_The once-close brothers will be separated by their cousin Peter Phillips as they walk in a line behind the Duke of Edinburgh's coffin on Saturday. The Duke of Cambridge will move ahead of the Duke of Sussex as the Royal Family arrives in pairs at St George's Chapel._









						William and Harry will not walk together for Philip's funeral
					

PRINCE William and Prince Harry will not walk shoulder to shoulder in Prince Philip's funeral procession.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Can someone explain the Windsor Castle thing to me? I thought only the queen could live there?

Seeing all the coverage on PP has really got me wondering how the Harkles could walk away from something so much bigger and more influential than Netflix and Spotify could ever be.

It’s awful that Harry has caused a huge fuss that his forced the queen to be thinking about the men’s wardrobe at the funeral so much this week.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Yes, exactly this.  The interview is done and over and they got sympathy from the twitterati and morning news shows but the news has moved on and Meghan wasn't offered the governorship of California and Parliament didn't abolish the monarchy as well as apologize to Meghan for not having her father, sister, and the UK tabloid press thrown in the Tower.
> 
> Instead, they have to deal with the backlash from their laundry list of half-truths, outright lies, delusions and pettiness along with the undeniable truth that they made Prince Philip's last days on earth more painful and unhappy than they needed to be.  Harry gets to live with that forever.  When he fully realizes that, he'll be in therapy for the rest of his life.
> 
> So, what does the future now look like for them?  Well, still no multi-million dollar paid speeches on tap, no red carpets to walk for quite awhile, their big tell-all interview/pity party done, the bullying investigation hanging over their heads.  Netflix and Spotify are going to want a return on the money they fronted them and want actual, high quality content produced with regularity which neither of them have any experience doing.  I'd be pretty stressed out if I were in their position.



Perfectly said!  

How sad that self entitlement still continues be supreme during this sad time.  That anyone was concerned with potential embarrassment for Harry is just ridiculous. After going on world television and trashing his family, they are worried about his being embarrassed?  It seems to me that he did a good job of doing that all by himself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: "At its heart, it is still a family event.









						Prince Philip funeral guest list confirmed: Who is going?
					

PRINCE PHILIP died at the age of 99 on Friday and his ceremonial funeral is scheduled for Saturday. The funeral's guest list has now been confirmed, so who is going to pay their respects to the Duke of Edinburgh?




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> No walk in the park, but one of M's friends suddenly releases never-before-seen photo ... colour me surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stars in never-before-seen photo prior to meeting Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears in previously-unseen photo prior to meeting future husband Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com



Who "stars" in a photo?
Someone who can't "star" in a movie---------_that's_ who


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Anyone guessing that Meghan will claim to have contractions 5 minutes after the funeral starts?



Not too late to start a pool, is it?


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Not too late to start a pool, is it?


At least false labor.


----------



## Chloe302225

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> On second thought about who in the BRF should wear uniform or not, it seems like a wise decision that none of them do. Harry and Andrew are the only two that have seen active service. What ever else these two have done, it would have looked awkward. Well, more awkward than it will look anyway



I think you mean Harry and Andrew were the only ones deployed to war but everyone else except Edward was active duty. William was a rescue pilot in the RAF for years.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *I wonder if Will asked for space...*
> View attachment 5056234
> 
> _The once-close brothers will be separated by their cousin Peter Phillips as they walk in a line behind the Duke of Edinburgh's coffin on Saturday. The Duke of Cambridge will move ahead of the Duke of Sussex as the Royal Family arrives in pairs at St George's Chapel._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Harry will not walk together for Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> PRINCE William and Prince Harry will not walk shoulder to shoulder in Prince Philip's funeral procession.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


If I was Will, I'd be at the point where I'd be grateful to have the entire Atlantic Ocean and the continental US separating me from my ungrateful ingrate of a brother!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Will asked for space...
> View attachment 5056234
> 
> _The once-close brothers will be separated by their cousin Peter Phillips as they walk in a line behind the Duke of Edinburgh's coffin on Saturday. The Duke of Cambridge will move ahead of the Duke of Sussex as the Royal Family arrives in pairs at St George's Chapel._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Harry will not walk together for Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> PRINCE William and Prince Harry will not walk shoulder to shoulder in Prince Philip's funeral procession.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



A very wise choice.  Relieved to know W&K won’t be positioned near toxic H.  Hope they don’t sit on the same row.
Guessing William figured out toxic H would merch any and everything.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Perfectly said!
> 
> How sad that self entitlement still continues be supreme during this sad time.  That anyone was concerned with potential embarrassment for Harry is just ridiculous. After going on world television and trashing his family, they are worried about his being embarrassed?  It seems to me that he did a good job of doing that all by himself.


I am seriously sick and tired of the BRF bending over backwards for this a$$hole.  He's the classic black sheep of the family whose horrible actions and behavior is constantly excused, entitled, and accommodated.  Speaking from experience, these people will continue to suck the others dry.  It's mentally and financially exhausting.  And also in my personal experience, it's the female head of the family who continues to enable (sorry QE!) in the hopes of keeping family unity, but all it does is make the others resentful.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: "At its heart, it is still a family event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip funeral guest list confirmed: Who is going?
> 
> 
> PRINCE PHILIP died at the age of 99 on Friday and his ceremonial funeral is scheduled for Saturday. The funeral's guest list has now been confirmed, so who is going to pay their respects to the Duke of Edinburgh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5056246



You-know-who probably regrets being left off this list, maybe even more than her fear of facing the family.  All that lovely attention going to other people.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I am seriously sick and tired of the BRF bending over backwards for this a$$hole.  He's the classic black sheep of the family whose horrible actions and behavior is constantly excused, entitled, and accommodated.  Speaking from experience, these people will continue to suck the others dry.  It's mentally and financially exhausting.  And also in my personal experience, it's the female head of the family who continues to enable (sorry QE!) in the hopes of keeping family unity, but all it does is make the others resentful.


family unity but also she has to walk a fine line....after what she went through when Diana died I'm sure she's very mindful of public reaction.  Now she has to worry about being perceived as a racist if H&M don't get their way.  even if many (or most) Brits are on her side, there are POC there - as in the US - who think Meghan is wonderful (and a victim)


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> A very wise choice.  Relieved to know W&K won’t be positioned near toxic H.  Hope they don’t sit on the same row.
> Guessing William figured out toxic H would merch any and everything.



I wonder if Will will ever allow himself or Kate to be seated or photographed next to Harry or MM again? Photographs are powerful and Harry needs those photos to show that he's still on the inside.  Will has the power, if he wants, to basically refuse to give him that. Charles does too, of course, but it's tougher for a father to do that to a son. Not so tough for a brother who thinks his younger brother has broken trust with him and I get the sense that Will has a serious backbone.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> No walk in the park, but one of M's friends suddenly releases never-before-seen photo ... colour me surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle stars in never-before-seen photo prior to meeting Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears in previously-unseen photo prior to meeting future husband Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


That was her Suits face, hasn't had it in so long.  Lorry Hill explained what she did, which was fascinating.



lulilu said:


> I will never again read (or give clicks to) People, Elle, Vanity Fair and all the other sycophants. (Not that I ever really read them.) Their fawning is making me sick.  Desperate for clicks.  I refuse to click on anything that relates to her.


Totally agree. People magazine used to be bad enough but I expected more from VF and Elle.


----------



## RAINDANCE

youngster said:


> I wonder if Will will ever allow himself or Kate to be seated or photographed next to Harry or MM again? Photographs are powerful and Harry needs those photos to show that he's still on the inside.  Will has the power, if he wants, to basically refuse to give him that. Charles does too, of course, but it's tougher for a father to do that to a son. Not so tough for a brother who thinks his younger brother has broken trust with him and *I get the sense that Will has a serious backbone*.



The Law of Unintended Consequences seems to follow H&M around like a storm cloud. 

William has risen to the challenges faced by the BRF over the pandemic and seems to have matured and become more assured of his role and responsibilities. I could now imagine William giving his version of the speech that QE11 made to the country when she was 21 pledging his service.  Ironically, this year has been a kingmaker for him. 

And sadly, not for Harry who seems even more directionless and angry than last January !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> You-know-who probably regrets being left off this list, maybe even more than her fear of facing the family.  All that lovely attention going to other people.



It would be a stretch for her acting ability to have to pretend to feel grief over the death of someone she didn’t care about.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Seeing all the coverage on PP has really got me wondering how the Harkles could walk away from something so much bigger and more influential than Netflix and Spotify could ever be.


She wanted the world to know her feelings and opinions (because she's so important) and couldn't really do that as a member of the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> A very wise choice.  Relieved to know W&K won’t be positioned near toxic H.  Hope they don’t sit on the same row.
> Guessing William figured out toxic H would merch any and everything.



Separating them serves the purpose of keeping Will from bodyslamming his brother into the wall. He seems calm and collected but I think Will feels things deeply. Harry is on his sh*t list and that won’t change any time soon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Andrew saw active service but at this point he should be wearing an invisibility cloak IMO.



Comment of the day and oh so true. We were only barely tolerating him because he seemed to have gotten the memo to sit back and be quiet. Not enjoying the recent entitlement.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> It would be a stretch for her acting ability to have to pretend to feel grief over the death of someone she didn’t care about.


Plus, inside the Chapel they'll all be wearing masks so we wouldn't be seeing her pouty sad face.


----------



## bellecate

youngster said:


> Yes, exactly this.  The interview is done and over and they got sympathy from the twitterati and morning news shows but the news has moved on and Meghan wasn't offered the governorship of California and Parliament didn't abolish the monarchy as well as apologize to Meghan for not having her father, sister, and the UK tabloid press thrown in the Tower.
> 
> Instead, they have to deal with the backlash from their laundry list of half-truths, outright lies, delusions and pettiness along with the undeniable truth that they made Prince Philip's last days on earth more painful and unhappy than they needed to be.  Harry gets to live with that forever.  When he fully realizes that, he'll be in therapy for the rest of his life.
> 
> So, what does the future now look like for them?  Well, still no multi-million dollar paid speeches on tap, no red carpets to walk for quite awhile, their big tell-all interview/pity party done, the bullying investigation hanging over their heads.  Netflix and Spotify are going to want a return on the money they fronted them and want actual, high quality content produced with regularity which neither of them have any experience doing.  I'd be pretty stressed out if I were in their position.


I think the only thing they are regretting is that the end result didn’t happen the way they saw it in their heads. The death of Prince Philip knocked their chat with Oprah right into the trash bin. Where it belonged.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It would be a stretch for her acting ability to have to pretend to feel grief over the death of someone she didn’t care about.



But can't she cry out of her right eye when told so?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Separating them serves the purpose of keeping Will from bodyslamming his brother into the wall. He seems calm and collected but I think Will feels things deeply. Harry is on his sh*t list and that won’t change any time soon.



He's also said to have a temper sometimes. If I were Harry I maybe would proceed with caution.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just catching up on press, Angela Levin hasn't got time for neither Meghan's antics nor Harry's and Andrew's temper tantrums AT ALL. This is probably how a lot of us are feeling.


----------



## Sharont2305

It'll be strange seeing Harry without her clinging onto him for dear life and directing him what to do with the pat on his back, pulling him to sit when he shouldn't be sitting. 
I wonder if she's had a voodoo doll of him especially made?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> maybe her next one will be an older man like a david foster type


Not that she wouldn't backstab her "best friend" Kathryn, but David has WAY TOO BIG of an EGO .. and remember, like the Meghan-a-lo-maniac, it is ALWAYS ABOUT HIM!!!!  The minute Yolanda got sick and couldn't wait on him hand & fist, boom .. she's out the door!  I also don't think he has the $$$ .. he has how many kids and ex-wives?


----------



## gelbergirl

Sharont2305 said:


> It'll be strange seeing Harry without her clinging onto him for dear life and directing him what to do with the pat on his back, pulling him to sit when he shouldn't be sitting.
> I wonder if she's had a voodoo doll of him especially made?



It's just like the old days when he was the 3rd wheel, except this time, he has to be separated.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> If I was Will, I'd be at the point where I'd be grateful to have the entire Atlantic Ocean and the continental US separating me from my ungrateful ingrate of a brother!


And his heavily pregnant wife


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> Mr Hunt also gave his view in a series of tweets, saying: 'Adapt to survive is a mantra that has, once again, served the royals well. Now, Harry won't be the loner in a suit and Andrew won't wear a uniform with extra lace. His attempts to accelerate his rehabilitation have stuttered.'
> 
> *''Uniform gate' might just prompt thoughtful royals to reflect on the mistakes they made when they removed Prince Harry's military appointments and shut the door on Harry and Meghan – rather than leaving it slightly ajar. *
> 
> 'It's striking that Andrew thought he could use his father's funeral to advance his rehabilitation and that it took the leak of news about his uniform choice, to stop him.'



Wait...the _Royals_ closed the door? From my little seat in the German countryside it looks like the Sussexes slammed the door into the BRF's face, just as the door Meghan slammed into Kate's face.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Plus, inside the Chapel they'll all be wearing masks so we wouldn't be seeing her pouty sad face.



Or Harry's pissy scowl. Well, that's one thing we can thank Covid for.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> Oh dear. Harry would have been the only Senior Royal not in uniform. It doesn't worry him that he's the only Senior Royal living in America.



Someone has a point.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone has a point.


And he's not worried he's an ex senior Royal


----------



## sdkitty

Meghan has apparently become some sort of symbol.  Today I was watching the view.  they were talking about a British TV show Idris Elba is on.  Someone from the network had said that his character wasn't authentically black enough.  so everyone comments and guess whose name comes up?  Someone (probably Sunny) cited Meghan as an example of racism in great britian.  
I think when she snagged Harry she probably thought this was her ticket to glamour and riches.  maybe it's turning out to be something else.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I think the only thing they are regretting is that the end result didn’t happen the way they saw it in their heads. *The death of Prince Philip knocked their chat with Oprah right into the trash bin. *Where it belonged.



Maybe in England, but not here. They got a month of high profile, positive attention from the U.S. media over that ridiculous interview. It was talked about constantly for about a week and they were mostly given a pass on their less-than-truthful statements. The fuss was finally dying down by the end of March. By comparison, Philip's death was reported along with a brief bio of his life on the day he died. On the day of his funeral there will be another report, then that's it. I'm hoping Oprah won't be releasing unaired excerpts throughout the next few months to stir things up again. She really seems determined to make something out of them.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chloe302225 said:


> I think you mean Harry and Andrew were the only ones deployed to war but everyone else except Edward was active duty. William was a rescue pilot in the RAF for years.


Yes, thank you, I meant that Harry and Andrew were deployed. But I think in the UK and the Commonwealth the term is active service, not active duty? Not good at military terminology, I just quoted from the Daily Express (or the Daily Mail?) who seem to have forgotten about William in that article, like I did.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Maybe in England, but not here. They got a month of high profile, positive attention from the U.S. media over that ridiculous interview. It was talked about constantly for about a week and they were mostly given a pass on their less-than-truthful statements. The fuss was finally dying down by the end of March. By comparison, Philip's death was reported along with a brief bio of his life on the day he died. On the day of his funeral there will be another report, then that's it. I'm hoping Oprah won't be releasing unaired excerpts throughout the next few months to stir things up again. She really seems determined to make something out of them.


It's interesting that O seems to want to support the victim narrative for Meghan.  Her own story is more like came up the hard way but survived and thrived and became very wealthy through hard work.  guess maybe she thinks that is what the future holds for Meghan too.  but Meghan did not come up the hard way at all.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...the _Royals_ closed the door? From my little seat in the German countryside it looks like the Sussexes slammed the door into the BRF's face, just as the door Meghan slammed into Kate's face.



Classic narcissist move!  I purposely mistreat another person, they react hurt, then I blame THEM for acting hurt! To pile on I pull out the race and victim cards and bawl to the world how I AM the victim of a racist rotten family that's given me untold millions in perks. All the while I preach "compassion" "love conquers all" "service is universal" and thank Prince Philip for his service.  But let's all come together now and get along, right? 

Apparently the BRF wan't "racist" while M&H were dating, right? M was welcomed warmly, unless she was acting for the cameras ( a la suitcase girl), but somehow the BRF became oh-so-racist after the marriage? Not buying it. If Harry doesn't come home with a big fat check from Philip's will, be prepared for more "the BRF is racist and mean but hopefully we can move forward with better relations".


----------



## gelbergirl

What happens at the Charles coronation?  Will they all have to wear specific clothing to make him feel comfortable?


----------



## Chanbal

News release from pregnant MM's PR-team (or from MM herself): the heavily pregnant woman is going on maternity leave and she is missing the funeral...  Please refresh my mind, maternity leave from where?


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> None of the royals to wear military uniform at Prince Philips funeral
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail understands that, in an unprecedented about-turn, a last minute decision, approved by the Queen, has been made that no royals will wear military uniform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't believe this!  Prince Philip wanted a funeral with a military edge to it.  The two brats of the family, Andrew and Harry have spoiled it for the rest.  I think this was a bad decision.


*I totally agree!!!* .. when they continue to appease the 2 brats, then well .. it just makes the brats continue to pull this type of sh!t knowing full well that they will get their way .. that is disappointing to me!  If it was me (_and yes - call me a biatch_) .. I would have said to Perv Andrew - "_tough nouggies, you're lucky you've been let out of your house_" and to Hap-Hazza "_you LEFT the family? .. remember, you don't have any Military Titles - remember? .. so a regular suit for you_"!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> News release from pregnant MM's PR-team (or from MM herself): the heavily pregnant woman is going on maternity leave and she is missing the funeral...  Please refresh my mind, maternity leave from where?
> View attachment 5056452



She doesn't work so every day is vacation to her. But since she's heavily-pregnant she can call it "maternity leave" for awhile to change things up.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> And his heavily pregnant wife


particularly, his heavily pregnant wife!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: "At its heart, it is still a family event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip funeral guest list confirmed: Who is going?
> 
> 
> PRINCE PHILIP died at the age of 99 on Friday and his ceremonial funeral is scheduled for Saturday. The funeral's guest list has now been confirmed, so who is going to pay their respects to the Duke of Edinburgh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5056246


Anyone seen the fumes of indignation rising rapidly from Montecito?! Andrew took her top spot  Kate looks lovely as ever.

Also, Edward and Sophie's children are


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> What happens at the Charles coronation?  Will they all have to wear specific clothing to make him feel comfortable?



Once the uniform controversy began, notice how Andrew quickly explained he would comply with the decisions. Never hear that from the toxic H.

Charles’s coronation? QE funeral? Each one will be a royal s$itshow. This stuff needs to worked out ASAP. QE let it go much too long.
This summer’s Diana statue show needs to be rethought.  H&M will merch it.  $$$$$$


----------



## rose60610

gelbergirl said:


> What happens at the Charles coronation?  Will they all have to wear specific clothing to make him feel comfortable?



By then maybe Archie and Diana Take#2 will be in a school play and Meghan won't be able to attend. Harry will attend wearing a grey polo with a Netflix logo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once the uniform controversy began, notice how Andrew quickly explained he would comply with the decisions. Never hear that from the toxic H.
> 
> Charles’s coronation? QE funeral? Each one will be a royal s$itshow. This stuff needs to worked out ASAP. *QE let it go much too long.*
> This summer’s Diana statue show needs to be rethought.  H&M will merch it.  $$$$$$



What can she do though? She can't stop him from being an @sshole, it's who he is. You might as well tell a fish not to swim!

It's possible she may call Harry in for a private conversation before he leaves. Will he listen? He might pretend to, but then revert to form when he gets home and he's in the presence of his boss.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Classic narcissist move!  I purposely mistreat another person, they react hurt, then I blame THEM for acting hurt! To pile on I pull out the race and victim cards and bawl to the world how I AM the victim of a racist rotten family that's given me untold millions in perks. All the while I preach "compassion" "love conquers all" "service is universal" and thank Prince Philip for his service.  But let's all come together now and get along, right?
> 
> Apparently the BRF wan't "racist" while M&H were dating, right? M was welcomed warmly, unless she was acting for the cameras ( a la suitcase girl), but somehow the BRF became oh-so-racist after the marriage? Not buying it. If Harry doesn't come home with a big fat check from Philip's will, be prepared for more "the BRF is racist and mean but hopefully we can move forward with better relations".


I know nothing about royals and their wills but I would think Phillip's money would stay with the queen and maybe he would leave some personal things to his kids?  That is pretty much the way it goes with non-royals, right?  the wife inherits and then when she dies the kids inherit what is left?


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once the uniform controversy began, notice how Andrew quickly explained he would comply with the decisions. Never hear that from the toxic H.
> 
> *Charles’s coronation? QE funeral?* Each one will be a royal s$itshow. This stuff needs to worked out ASAP. QE let it go much too long.
> This summer’s Diana statue show needs to be rethought.  H&M will merch it.  $$$$$$



I applaud your confidence that H&M will be still be married then.

But yes, the statue event could be tricky. How about getting Earl Spencer instead ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QE must tell the toxic H exactly how the coronation and her funeral will go — what he wears, where he sits, where he stays, what photos are permitted, etc.  Same for Andrew. It needs to be spelled out, put in writing and leaked to the press. Charles looks like he is really shaken by Phillip’s death and whatever else is happening behind Palace doors.  For him to be so publicly sad, it must not be good.

ETA: Phillip’s will — no idea if this will be made public. It could explain toxic H’s rapid departure.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She doesn't work so every day is vacation to her. But since she's heavily-pregnant she can call it "maternity leave" for awhile to change things up.


That reminds me of something my mom said about living her retirement community in FL.  She said every night is a Saturday night, i.e. you get dressed and go out to dinner or a movie or a show.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Ye gods how dense is this woman someone explain protocol and dignity to her or just shut her up please


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Anyone seen the fumes of indignation rising rapidly from Montecito?! Andrew took her top spot  Kate looks lovely as ever.
> 
> Also, Edward and Sophie's children are


I am glad they are going.  They are old enough to go and they had a relationship with the man.  I think they will really miss him, especial Lady Louise.  Plus I have the feeling that in future years, they will take on some senior royal duties.


----------



## Jayne1

gelbergirl said:


> What happens at the Charles coronation?  Will they all have to wear specific clothing to make him feel comfortable?


Exactly. They keep making exceptions for the whiny prince.

The last time, when they went back to the UK and everyone was solemn, except smiling Meg looking into the camera, didn't Will agree to walk into the chapel a certain way so as not to upset the petulant prince?

Now, it's no one wears a uniform because sulky Harry isn't.

I think they need to stop coddling him.


----------



## gracekelly

Is Meg going to take a shoe box and dig a little hole and say a prayer and pretend that PP is in the box?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC's newest. I was surprised to hear she is very, shall we say, critical of Doria without going into details. I mean, we've been saying pages and pages back while Doria seems to be quiet and dignifyed there might be more than meets the eye. 

She also had a very good laugh at "close bond with Philip"...she says he saw right through MM and MM hated him for it.


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> What happens at the Charles coronation?  Will they all have to wear specific clothing to make him feel comfortable?


I am hoping he is sent a hair shirt to wear.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> QE must tell the toxic H exactly how the coronation and her funeral will go — what he wears, where he sits, where he stays, what photos are permitted, etc.  Same for Andrew. It needs to be spelled out, put in writing and leaked to the press. Charles looks like he is really shaken by Phillip’s death and whatever else is happening behind Palace doors.  For him to be so publicly sad, it must not be good.
> 
> ETA: Phillip’s will — no idea if this will be made public. It could explain toxic H’s rapid departure.


I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest. I was surprised to hear she is very, shall we say, critical of Doria without going into details. I mean, we've been saying pages and pages back while Doria seems to be quiet and dignifyed there might be more than meets the eye.
> 
> She also had a very good laugh at "close bond with Philip"...she says he saw right through MM and MM hated him for it.



I made those assumptions about Doria early on, however, I changed my mind many months ago.  I now side-eye many things that went on.  I also don't feel that Meghan grew to be the person she is today without the help of her mother.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Ye gods how dense is this woman someone explain protocol and dignity to her or just shut her up please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5056503



You have to wonder about the people who write this dreck. Do they believe what they write or do they understand they are pumping out clickbait and that's their job?


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I know nothing about royals and their wills but I would think Phillip's money would stay with the queen and maybe he would leave some personal things to his kids?  That is pretty much the way it goes with non-royals, right?  the wife inherits and then when she dies the kids inherit what is left?


What money did he have?  His family had no money, just good connections.

Even Diana's cash was from Charles, who got it from the Queen to give to Diana as part of her divorce settlement.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.


That is true on a rational level, but I can tell you from personal experiences with people, that you never can tell how they will take it or even take being told their parent has not got long to live.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Ye gods how dense is this woman someone explain protocol and dignity to her or just shut her up please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5056503



OMFG. My blood pressure is going up.


----------



## Chanbal

Is she going to retrieve her falsehoods  and finally live a private life? Such commitment would be a nice way to mark PP's life. 


_But Buckingham Palace confirmed those who are unable to attend will make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life.
Meghan will also be able to watch the sombre proceedings through a special live stream._









						Pregnant Meghan will make 'private arrangements' to mark Philip's life
					

PREGNANT Meghan Markle will make “private arrangements” to remember Prince Philip after being unable to attend his funeral. The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has remained in the US on doctor&#…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> *I totally agree!!!* .. when they continue to appease the 2 brats, then well .. it just makes the brats continue to pull this type of sh!t knowing full well that they will get their way .. that is disappointing to me!  If it was me (_and yes - call me a biatch_) .. I would have said to Perv Andrew - "_tough nouggies, you're lucky you've been let out of your house_" and to Hap-Hazza "_you LEFT the family? .. remember, you don't have any Military Titles - remember? .. so a regular suit for you_"!!!


You are right, dear Bal queen. But I think mainly everyone (but Andrew and Harry) are trying to spare the queen. Like someone posted earlier, she's just lost her life partner of what, 70 years? She's over 90 years old and must be very vulnerable right now. I think the rest of the BRF are just trying to make it easy on her and all things considered, I think they are right.  

I just have a feeling that William will take charge of the BRF soon and Harry will have to toe whatever line William decides on.


Also, poor Archie who's being robbed of his birthright and relatives by his deluded and grandiose parents.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> What money did he have?  His family had no money, just good connections.
> 
> Even Diana's cash was from Charles, who got it from the Queen to give to Diana as part of her divorce settlement.


I think her parents and the courtiers didn't think much of his background in general. There are plenty of two bit princes floating around Europe. His family was dysfunctional and his mother had severe mental illness.  Future offspring, in this case an heir to the throne, are always thought about in planning a marriage.   Considering how wealthy the British Royal Family is and has been for a very long time, I don't think money entered into it at all.  Prince Albert didn't have a pot to pee in when he married Victoria.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.



He is not a young guy, he had Covid, this is very trying for him.  The enormity of it all is sinking in. 



_An emotional Prince Charles was in tears and looked to the heavens today as he and his wife Camilla inspected thousands of tributes left for his father Prince Philip who died aged 99 six days ago.

The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall were moved by the sea of bouquets, cards and other items left by the Duke of Edinburgh's mourners in the Royal Parks and at the gates of Buckingham Palace. _








						Charles and Camilla view Prince Philip tributes at Marlborough House
					

The flowers and condolence messages were moved from outside Buckingham Palace and within the Royal Parks to the nearby private gardens at Marlborough House in London.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Is she going to retrieve her falsehoods  and finally live a private life? Such commitment would be a nice way to mark PP's life.
> View attachment 5056505
> 
> _But Buckingham Palace confirmed those who are unable to attend will make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life.
> Meghan will also be able to watch the sombre proceedings through a special live stream._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan will make 'private arrangements' to mark Philip's life
> 
> 
> PREGNANT Meghan Markle will make “private arrangements” to remember Prince Philip after being unable to attend his funeral. The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has remained in the US on doctor&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Ha!  She will turn on BBC America like the rest of us peons.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Is Meg going to take a shoe box and dig a little hole and say a prayer and pretend that PP is in the box?



She and Archie will stand together and plant a little tree on their estate in honor of Philip. Oddly, someone will be right there to immortalize the solemn occasion with stylized black & white photos which will appear exclusively in _People_ or _Vanity Fair_ next week.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> I think the only thing they are regretting is that the end result didn’t happen the way they saw it in their heads. The death of Prince Philip knocked their chat with Oprah right into the trash bin. Where it belonged.


This is another case of horrible timing by MM and JCMH.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.



Have you not have losses? If I think back with a lot of mine I knew they were coming and yet they shook me to the core. Only because you see the ocean retract the tsunami won't be a pleasant experience.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> News release from pregnant MM's PR-team (or from MM herself): the heavily pregnant woman is going on maternity leave and she is missing the funeral...  Please refresh my mind, maternity leave from where?
> View attachment 5056452


Maybe she’ll take a break from herself.  (We can dream!!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

We all will _make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life _and live stream the funeral, too.
Girl needs to get over herself.  Boooo, hissss.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She and Archie will stand together and plant a little tree on their estate in honor of Philip. Oddly, someone will be right there to immortalize the solemn occasion with stylized black & white photos which will appear exclusively in _People_ or _Vanity Fair_ next week.


She can get another wear and a merch from the black dress with the bird poop on the shoulder.  She will dress Archie in a mini uniform with a sword. The chicken will parade out of the chicken house and stand at attention.  They will play taps and shoot of cap pistols in a salute.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> What money did he have?  His family had no money, just good connections.



He worked for what, 75 years of his life? Probably not for food and shelter. Plus, he authored more than ten books. I'm sure he has built a fortune by now (even if he didn't amass 800 millions like the Queen's estimated fortune). Even Kate's networth went up immensely within the last 10 years.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she’ll take a break from herself.  (We can dream!!)



We know that will never happen. She is obsessed with her favorite subject in the whole wide world, HERSELF!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have you not have losses? If I think back with a lot of mine I knew they were coming and yet they shook me to the core. Only because you see the ocean retract the tsunami won't be a pleasant experience.


Of course I have, I'm not trying to be insensitive..but geez, when someone passes at the age of 99 who has lived a life like PP's it's (usually) a great milestone and a celebration of life. He hasn't been well for years, it's not a surprise or shock. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> You have to wonder about the people who write this dreck. Do they believe what they write or do they understand they are pumping out clickbait and that's their job?



Imagine you get paid/incentivized for number of clicks... you're going to care more about quantity than quality unfortunately. It's probably some junior staffer making peanuts and just trying to hit his/her # goals.


----------



## Chanbal

DAN WOOTTON:  The tragic fallout of Harry and Andrew's poor choices
					

DAN WOOTTON: I'm not for a second comparing the predicament of Harry and Andrew - they are clearly very different. But the decisions both exiled princes have made come with clear consequences.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Imagine you get paid/incentivized for number of clicks... you're going to care more about quantity than quality unfortunately. *It's probably some junior staffer making peanuts and just trying to hit his/her # goals.*



Over the past couple of years I bet we've personally helped some of them make their rent.


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> Is she going to retrieve her falsehoods  and finally live a private life? Such commitment would be a nice way to mark PP's life.
> View attachment 5056505
> 
> _But Buckingham Palace confirmed those who are unable to attend will make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life.
> Meghan will also be able to watch the sombre proceedings through a special live stream._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan will make 'private arrangements' to mark Philip's life
> 
> 
> PREGNANT Meghan Markle will make “private arrangements” to remember Prince Philip after being unable to attend his funeral. The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has remained in the US on doctor&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk




does anyone care if/how MM remembers Price Philips's life??


----------



## gelbergirl

Serious question:
what would be the harm if Andrew and JCMH did throw on a military uniform for this event


----------



## lalame

TC1 said:


> Of course I have, I'm not trying to be insensitive..but geez, when someone passes at the age of 99 who has lived a life like PP's it's (usually) a great milestone and a celebration of life. He hasn't been well for years, it's not a surprise or shock. That's all I'm saying.



Maybe not a surprise, but probably still a shock...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> What can she do though? She can't stop him from being an @sshole, it's who he is. You might as well tell a fish not to swim!
> 
> It's possible she may call Harry in for a private conversation before he leaves. Will he listen? He might pretend to, but then revert to form when he gets home and he's in the presence of his boss.


This!!! We can assume that each time Harry pulled one of his stupid stunts (Nazi shirts, nude party, racist name calling, etc.) he was called in for a little chat and look how well that worked. He's just not functioning on all cylinders and as much as he likes to claim that reporters' camera flashes bring back memories of the drama surrounding Diana, he seems to court high profile good and bad events to ensure he faces those dreadful flashbulbs. He just doesn't listen to or follow helpful instructions. Don't you know, he's very important. He is after all Prince Harry, bad boy prince, Diana's son and Meghan's husband. Now he's on a short leash and willingly follows MM's bad advice.


----------



## lalame

gelbergirl said:


> Serious question:
> what would be the harm if Andrew and JCMH did throw on a military uniform for this event



This family is super serious on decorum, and besides just how THEY feel about it, it is also about respecting the rules/traditions of the military agencies.

Actually, maybe I misunderstood your question. Did you mean why not just wear normal-people military uniforms versus the special ones they wore due to their special titles? That's an interesting question... since Harry did actually serve, would he be able to wear his military uniform sort of like how normal people might wear them to weddings or special events?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. My blood pressure is going up.


H&M time out!

For you  Look at these two Kalahari lovelies and breathe slowly in and out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> does anyone care if/how MM remembers Price Philips's life??



She's probably burning a picture of his face in high res in her backyard.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Serious question:
> what would be the harm if Andrew and JCMH did throw on a military uniform for this event



As I understood it - but maybe someone else can chime in -, both don't hold the positions. Harry's uniforms were from his ceremonial positions he had to give up after Megxit, and Andrew wanted to come dressed in an admiral's uniform when he agreed to not be promoted until his name is cleared, so he doesn't hold the position yet.

Also, I was thinking while I read that - what exactly is he doing to clear his name? To the onlooker it really looks like he's just waiting quietly for the storm to pass.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> Of course I have, I'm not trying to be insensitive..but geez, when someone passes at the age of 99 who has lived a life like PP's it's (usually) a great milestone and a celebration of life. He hasn't been well for years, it's not a surprise or shock. That's all I'm saying.



No one is ever ’ready’ for the loss of life, no matter the age of the recently deceased.  Death catches us all by surprise.
First, mourn. Then, the celebration of life.  Grief goes in stages.








						The Stages of Grief: How to Understand Your Feelings
					

While everyone experiences grief differently, here’s a rough estimation of what to expect when going through a difficult life event.




					www.healthline.com
				




Phillip was not a ‘someone’. Phillip’s death is different from the regular person because of his wife and his life. She is the Queen. This will impact her health. It will also impact Charles’s health. When QE passes away, Charles will be king. That is a huge responsibility.  Sure, he has prepared for it his entire life, but it does not mean he is ready. His health is not perfect either. Same for Camilla.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> H&M time out!
> 
> For you  Look at these two Kalahari lovelies and breathe slowly in and out.
> View attachment 5056544



Thank you, that is such a beautiful picture.


----------



## RAINDANCE

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You are right, dear Bal queen. But I think mainly everyone (but Andrew and Harry) are trying to spare the queen. Like someone posted earlier, she's just lost her life partner of what, 70 years? She's over 90 years old and must be very vulnerable right now. I think the rest of the BRF are just trying to make it easy on her and all things considered, I think they are right.
> 
> I just have a feeling that William will take charge of the BRF soon and Harry will have to toe whatever line William decides on.
> 
> 
> Also, poor Archie who's being robbed of his birthright and relatives by his deluded and grandiose parents.


Like a few others I was angry when I read about the dress code, especially as PP wanted a military funeral but on consideration think it is the right call.

Edward rarely appears in full military garb and so it won't bother him. Anne and William are neither so egotistical that they personally will feel slighted by not wearing ceremonial dress uniform. I would have suggested suits with their respective medals for Andrew and Harry as is the right of all ordinary _former_ servicemen.

BUT whilst it, at first, appears that the senior royals are pandering to both Harry and Andrew, the Queen is IMO underlining her decison that Harry has forfeited his military patronages and the right to wear ceremonial dress uniform and that Andrew is very much still on gardening leave and has a similar forfeit. She's not going to intentionaly provide additional material for Harry to sell in the USA about being excluded or treated differently.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

RAINDANCE said:


> BUT whilst it, at first, appears that the senior royals are pandering to both Harry and Andrew, the Queen is IMO underlining her decison that Harry has forfeited his military patronages and the right to wear ceremonial dress uniform and that Andrew is very much still on gardening leave and has a similar forfeit. She's not going to intentionaly provide additional material for Harry to sell in the USA about being excluded or treated differently.


Once again, poor mistreated Harry.  The more they pander to him, the more he will feel justified in complaining.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest. I was surprised to hear she is very, shall we say, critical of Doria without going into details. I mean, we've been saying pages and pages back while Doria seems to be quiet and dignifyed there might be more than meets the eye.


I've been skeptical about Doria for some time. Here's a pic of Harry and Doria when they accompanied MM to "her" cookbook event.  Check out the undergarment malfunction. Like mother, like daughter comes to mind.


----------



## youngster

You know, I think this weekend will be a good reminder to Harry of all that he left behind. His grandfather, who chose the path of duty, is greatly mourned in a way that Harry will never be mourned.  All kinds of tributes pouring in over the past few days, from ordinary people around the world, including the one by London cab drivers lining the mall outside Buckingham Palace which I thought was quite amazing.  

Maybe it will give Harry some food for thought, that he too could have had a meaningful life in service to the Queen and then later to his father and then his brother.  Instead, he'll go back to his false friends on the California coast and try to figure out how to rake in tens of millions of dollars per year.  Maybe it won't seem quite as big of a lark as it once did. Maybe he'll see the real grief of his grandmother and father and brother and cousins and think twice before letting Meghan take a swipe at them in future.  One can only hope but I tend to be an optimist.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The arrangement speaks for itself.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is she going to retrieve her falsehoods  and finally live a private life? Such commitment would be a nice way to mark PP's life.
> View attachment 5056505
> 
> _But Buckingham Palace confirmed those who are unable to attend will make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life.
> Meghan will also be able to watch the sombre proceedings through a special live stream._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan will make 'private arrangements' to mark Philip's life
> 
> 
> PREGNANT Meghan Markle will make “private arrangements” to remember Prince Philip after being unable to attend his funeral. The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has remained in the US on doctor&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Oh please, his tailor, shoe maker and all the stable lads/lasses at Windsor knew him better than she did.


----------



## RAINDANCE

lalame said:


> This family is super serious on decorum, and besides just how THEY feel about it, it is also about respecting the rules/traditions of the military agencies.
> 
> Actually, maybe I misunderstood your question. Did you mean why not just wear normal-people military uniforms versus the special ones they wore due to their special titles? That's an interesting question... since Harry did actually serve, *would he be able to wear his military uniform* sort of like how normal people might wear them to weddings or special events?



No, It is my understaning that once you have left the Armed Forces, you can no longer wear your uniform as you are no longer a serving member but you can, of course, wear your medals. Andrew, William and Harry were all in the armed forces. Edward, Anne and Charles were not. All hold or held _honorary_ military positions entitleing them to wear the relevant ceremonial dress of the rank and regiment (or equivant) that they represent.

Probably the only one who could wear full dress unifom legitimately is Vice Admiral *Sir Timothy Laurence* !


----------



## gelbergirl

RAINDANCE said:


> Like a few others I was angry when I read about the dress code, especially as PP wanted a military funeral but on consideration think it is the right call.
> 
> Edward rarely appears in full military garb and so it won't bother him. Anne and William are neither so egotistical that they personally will feel slighted by not wearing ceremonial dress uniform. I would have suggested suits with their respective medals for Andrew and Harry as is the right of all ordinary _former_ servicemen.
> 
> BUT whilst it, at first, appears that the senior royals are pandering to both Harry and Andrew, the Queen is IMO underlining her decison that Harry has forfeited his military patronages and the right to wear ceremonial dress uniform and that *Andrew is very much still on gardening leave *and has a similar forfeit. *She's not going to intentionaly provide additional material for Harry to sell in the USA about being excluded or treated differently.*




Thank, I see, I love that woman, The Queen.
So smart.
God Save the Queen


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> You know, I think this weekend will be a good reminder to Harry of all that he left behind. His grandfather, who chose the path of duty, is greatly mourned in a way that Harry will never be mourned.  All kinds of tributes pouring in over the past few days, from ordinary people around the world, including the one by London cab drivers lining the mall outside Buckingham Palace which I thought was quite amazing.
> 
> Maybe it will give Harry some food for thought, that he too could have had a meaningful life in service to the Queen and then later to his father and then his brother.  Instead, he'll go back to his false friends on the California coast...


This


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> News release from pregnant MM's PR-team (or from MM herself): the heavily pregnant woman is going on maternity leave and she is missing the funeral...  Please refresh my mind, maternity leave from where?
> View attachment 5056452



Maternity leave from what? 

Did she fill out a form so she can hand over her rescue chicken chores? 

We can only hope she takes a break from filing law suits, issuing non-news stories, emailing impossible demands of her own staff in the small hours.


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> No, It is my understaning that once you have left the Armed Forces, you can no longer wear your uniform as you are no longer a serving member but you can, of course, wear your medals. Andrew, William and Harry were all in the armed forces. Edward, Anne and Charles were not. All hold or held _honorary_ military positions entitleing them to wear the relevant ceremonial dress of the rank and regiment (or equivant) that they represent.
> 
> Probably the only one who could wear full dress unifom legitimately is Vice Admiral *Sir Timothy Laurence* !


Charles served in the navy, and Edward had a (famously) brief career in the army.


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> You know, I think this weekend will be a good reminder to Harry of all that he left behind. His grandfather, who chose the path of duty, is greatly mourned in a way that Harry will never be mourned.  All kinds of tributes pouring in over the past few days, from ordinary people around the world, including the one by London cab drivers lining the mall outside Buckingham Palace which I thought was quite amazing.
> 
> Maybe it will give Harry some food for thought, that he too could have had a meaningful life in service to the Queen and then later to his father and then his brother.  Instead, he'll go back to his false friends on the California coast and try to figure out how to rake in tens of millions of dollars per year.  Maybe it won't seem quite as big of a lark as it once did. *Maybe he'll see the real grief of his grandmother and father and brother and cousins and think twice before letting Meghan take a swipe at them in future.*  One can only hope but I tend to be an optimist.



One would like to think so, right? As far as I'm concerned, Meghan is devoid of any sensibilities and will continue to go out of her way to lie and paint herself as the eternal victim. Harry is unable to think for himself and is probably glad to let Meghan make all his decisions. Whatever empathy he has for the BRF must be scoured clean by Meghan. If Harry ever stood up to her she'd scream "abuse" immediately and Harry would beg forgiveness.


----------



## rose60610

There have been a number of comments concerning The Queen and how she is vulnerable right now. I think she's always had a spine of steel and even in her own grief is fully capable of watching out for her own best interests. Even so, William might be watching Harry like a hawk or telling him not to even dare pulling some crap on Grandma. I'd like to think the whole royal family and staff are watching Harry like the traitor that he is, just waiting for him to pull something. I hope Harry lives with those vibes 24/7.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Clearblueskies said:


> Charles served in the navy, and Edward had a (famously) brief career in the army.


I knew about Edward (Royal Marines) but didn't include that as he withdrew within a matter of months and didn't complete the training.
It had however completely escaped my attention that Charles was in the Navy too - thank you for the correction !


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> No, It is my understaning that once you have left the Armed Forces, you can no longer wear your uniform as you are no longer a serving member but you can, of course, wear your medals. Andrew, William and Harry were all in the armed forces. Edward, Anne and Charles were not. All hold or held _honorary_ military positions entitleing them to wear the relevant ceremonial dress of the rank and regiment (or equivant) that they represent.
> 
> Probably the only one who could wear full dress unifom legitimately is Vice Admiral *Sir Timothy Laurence* !



I thought Charles did serve active duty, not just honorary positions. Is that incorrect?








						A Look Back at Prince Charles's Service in the Navy
					

The heir to the throne followed in his father's footsteps on the high seas.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> There have been a number of comments concerning The Queen and how she is vulnerable right now. I think she's always had a spine of steel and even in her own grief is fully capable of watching out for her own best interests. Even so, William might be watching Harry like a hawk or telling him not to even dare pulling some crap on Grandma. I'd like to think the whole royal family and staff are watching Harry like the traitor that he is, just waiting for him to pull something. I hope Harry lives with those vibes 24/7.


I don’t think she’s vulnerable in any way.  Grieving yes, vulnerable certainly not.  She’s a wise woman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

What happened with Edward's brief stint in the army?


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> There have been a number of comments concerning The Queen and how she is vulnerable right now. I think she's always had a spine of steel and even in her own grief is fully capable of watching out for her own best interests. Even so, William might be watching Harry like a hawk or telling him not to even dare pulling some crap on Grandma. I'd like to think the whole royal family and staff are watching Harry like the traitor that he is, just waiting for him to pull something. I hope Harry lives with those vibes 24/7.



Count me as one who believes QE and Charles are very fragile and vulnerable now.  They can be both wise and vulnerable, too. IMO


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought Charles did serve active duty, not just honorary positions. Is that incorrect?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Look Back at Prince Charles's Service in the Navy
> 
> 
> The heir to the throne followed in his father's footsteps on the high seas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



I'm too young to remember this. 
I do remember Edward getting pilloried in the press though when he left the marines.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> What happened with Edward's brief stint in the army?


It just wasn’t for him and he left.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> There have been a number of comments concerning The Queen and how she is vulnerable right now. I think she's always had a spine of steel and even in her own grief is fully capable of watching out for her own best interests. Even so, *William might be watching Harry like a hawk or telling him not to even dare pulling some crap on Grandma*. I'd like to think the whole royal family and staff are watching Harry like the traitor that he is, just waiting for him to pull something. I hope Harry lives with those vibes 24/7.



I think Will is protective of the Queen and his father (to a lesser degree). God help Harry if he upsets them because I bet William will be all over him. If this was a TV show and not real life I'd look for some black eyes and split lips in the procession.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Clearblueskies said:


> It just wasn’t for him and he left.


 Royal Marines - google it and read up on basic training, then go have a lie down


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> Royal Marines - google it and read up on basic training, then go have a lie down


I need a lie down just thinking about it


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> The arrangement speaks for itself.
> View attachment 5056561


I think it's true what some of you have speculated, William is done with Harry. This is very telling.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> ETA: does this mean they are slyly pointing the finger at Oprah?


Ooooooh ooooooh ooooooh - they better be VERY careful about that, because if you 'cross' Oprah??? .. you can kiss yourself goodbye related to anything in H'Wood (media, movies, etc.) .. but then again, I'm sure that Meghan-o-la-maniac likely thinks she's even better than 'O'!!!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Count me as one who believes QE and Charles are very fragile and vulnerable now.  They can be both wise and vulnerable, too. IMO


Of course she must be, they were together for 70 years. Part of why she was so strong was probably due to Phillip being there for her. He was her rock, wasn't he?


----------



## bellecate

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.


I think for some no matter how prepared you are for a loved ones death it can still come as a complete shock and be devastating.  I know it has been that way for me a few times.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooh ooooooh ooooooh - they better be VERY careful about that, because if you 'cross' Oprah??? .. you can kiss yourself goodbye related to anything in H'Wood (media, movies, etc.) .. but then again, I'm sure that Meghan-o-la-maniac likely thinks she's even better than 'O'!!!


Speaking of Oprah, this pic is maybe more suited for the Andrew thread but as she is Meghan and Harry's new bestest friend, it belongs here too, I think. This pic gives me the creeps.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> The arrangement speaks for itself.
> View attachment 5056561



I'm a big Princess Anne fan.
Glad she doesn't have to walk behind Charles or anything like that


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> She and Archie will stand together and plant a little tree on their estate in honor of Philip. Oddly, someone will be right there to immortalize the solemn occasion with stylized black & white photos which will appear exclusively in _People_ or _Vanity Fair_ next week.


Now you’ve done it, you’re giving her ideas.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

papertiger said:


> Andrew saw active service but at this point he should be wearing an invisibility cloak IMO.



Andrew needs to understand how lucky he is to not be wearing an orange jumpsuit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooh ooooooh ooooooh - they better be VERY careful about that, because if you 'cross' Oprah??? .. you can kiss yourself goodbye related to anything in H'Wood (media, movies, etc.) .. but then again, I'm sure that Meghan-o-la-maniac likely thinks she's even better than 'O'!!!


Are the gruesome twosome, gasp, putting Harry's deal with Oprah for a video deal in jeopardy with this strategy of denying all responsibility for the Interview? If they all go down in flames it would be spectacularly satisfying, and throw in Gayle the gaping mouthpiece for good measure.


----------



## papertiger

Cavalier Girl said:


> Andrew needs to understand how lucky he is to not be wearing an orange jumpsuit.


----------



## lalame

Cavalier Girl said:


> Andrew needs to understand how lucky he is to not be wearing an orange jumpsuit.



Now I'm just curious... are they orange in the UK too?


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest. I was surprised to hear she is very, shall we say, critical of Doria without going into details. I mean, we've been saying pages and pages back while Doria seems to be quiet and dignifyed there might be more than meets the eye.
> 
> She also had a very good laugh at "close bond with Philip"...she says he saw right through MM and MM hated him for it.



I really like her and watch her videos but boy she has a lot of commercials interrupting her talk.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's regret!
> *According to one insider, Meghan and Harry have regrets over the timing of their interview with Oprah, which was released during Prince Philip's time in hospital.* With the interview coming just weeks before Philip's death, *Meghan and Harry told one source they had no control over the timing of the bombshell tell-all chat *with the US icon. Although the interview was released during Philip's time in the King Edward VII Hospital, the pair insisted they had to do it.
> 
> According to Heat Magazine, Meghan and Harry told the insider they "wished things could've been different".
> 
> The pair said: "They needed to have their say, and they couldn't see any other way to do it.
> 
> "Harry and Meghan's love and respect for Prince Philip and the Queen was never in doubt."
> 
> The source also claimed the pair hope to have better relationships with other royals further down the line in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Insider claims Meghan and Harry feel bad for Oprah chat
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have regrets over their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, an insider has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


*LIES!!!!*
It's like they don't understand how time works. Vanity Fair published a story on March 17th, that their good friend Gayle King says Meghan & Harry had a contingency plan for the airing of the Oprah interview should PP's health take a turn for the worst. Yes, the interview had been filmed, but they absolutely had control of when it would be aired. Harry could have told them that the interview should air once PP was home and in moreover stable condition. 
Now they're like, oh poor little us, there was nothing we could do about it. SMDH


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I think her parents and the courtiers didn't think much of his background in general. There are plenty of two bit princes floating around Europe. His family was dysfunctional and his mother had severe mental illness.  Future offspring, in this case an heir to the throne, are always thought about in planning a marriage.   Considering how wealthy the British Royal Family is and has been for a very long time, I don't think money entered into it at all.  Prince Albert didn't have a pot to pee in when he married Victoria.


Yes, I agree.  I was responding to a poster wondering about his will and his money and I wondered if he really had any. 

I mean, did he need any?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I agree.  I was responding to a poster wondering about his will and his money and I wondered if he really had any.
> 
> I mean, did he need any?


Outside of some change to buy a newspaper, he probably didn't lol!


----------



## Aimee3

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.


It doesn’t matter how old or sick someone is when they die;  even if you are mentally prepared for it you still hold on to that glimmer of hope that the person will recover and survive.  You are never ready for it emotionally.


----------



## melissatrv

I agree with those who think the Queen is not vulnerable.  However, if the Queen died next week, I think the British monarchy itself is vulnerable.  If she lives another 10 years, she may have time to repair the damage Andrew and H&M have done.  But if she dies sooner rather than later, the institution could fall apart.  Never while she is alive though, the British people respect her too much.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> We all will _make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life _and live stream the funeral, too.
> Girl needs to get over herself.  Boooo, hissss.


Her "private arrangements" will be conspicuously photographed and given to People and all her minion publications to publish and glorify how wonderful it was she did anything.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> The arrangement speaks for itself.
> View attachment 5056561



I’m happy to see this! Harry doesn’t deserve to be on the same row as Prince William.

Prince Charles at least has all his siblings to help with all the matters. William only has... himself. It’s a betrayal of the highest degree for Harry to leave the BRF and attack the BRF at that, and if William is still upset, perfectly understandable. Hopefully by the time it comes the Cambridge children have grown up and can help their father.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Outside of some change to buy a newspaper, he probably didn't lol!


But remember, according to Harry, "We royals don't carry cash".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> I’m happy to see this! Harry doesn’t deserve to be on the same row as Prince William.
> 
> Prince Charles at least has all his siblings to help with all the matters. William only has... himself. It’s a betrayal of the highest degree for Harry to leave the BRF and attack the BRF at that, and if William is still upset, perfectly understandable. Hopefully by the time it comes the Cambridge children have grown up and can help their father.


William's cousins will rally around him when he becomes king and I think they are more reliable than Harry.


----------



## Annawakes

And William has Kate.  She truly is the best woman for him.


----------



## lalame

Icyjade said:


> I’m happy to see this! Harry doesn’t deserve to be on the same row as Prince William.
> 
> Prince Charles at least has all his siblings to help with all the matters. William only has... himself. It’s a betrayal of the highest degree for Harry to leave the BRF and attack the BRF at that, and if William is still upset, perfectly understandable. Hopefully by the time it comes the Cambridge children have grown up and can help their father.



When it comes to Harry attacking the BRF, unfortunately William wasn't alone there. I'm sure everyone rallied and consoled each other after that bomb lodged at their entire family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xeyes

V0N1B2 said:


> *LIES!!!!*
> It's like they don't understand how time works. Vanity Fair published a story on March 17th, that their good friend Gayle King says Meghan & Harry had a contingency plan for the airing of the Oprah interview should PP's health take a turn for the worst. Yes, the interview had been filmed, but they absolutely had control of when it would be aired. Harry could have told them that the interview should air once PP was home and in moreover stable condition.
> Now they're like, oh poor little us, there was nothing we could do about it. SMDH



Combined with the blind item posted the other day, we get the following sequence of events:

1) The family is informed of Philip’s imminent passing, including the, um, American branch.
2) Shortly after that (according to the blind item), Dumb & Dumber record their interview.
3) The interview airs. Havoc ensues.

D&D knew that the interview would be upsetting to his family - they wouldn’t have claimed to have plans to defer its airing if they didn’t. Yet, even though they claimed to have control over its airing, they let it air, causing even more pain for a family about to lose its patriarch.

If they really could have called it off, knowing that Philip was about to pass, then their deliberate failure to do so - in full knowledge of the damage it would cause to a family already anticipating a major loss - is truly terrible. The best possible interpretation for them would be that they lied about having control, and that‘s still not great.


----------



## lalame

Even if PP was the picture of good health when they recorded the interview.... he was clearly still a 99 year old man. And just like us, navigating a freaking pandemic and lots of political turmoil in the world. They must've known it would hit Granny and Grandpa the hardest emotionally as they're the epitome of people who just don't do that.

I also have a hard time believing they couldn't delay airing it once Philip went to the hospital. I get networks have schedules but surely their contract must've included some contingency plans. Or maybe their lawyers really are as sophomoric as that one Blind Item made it sound? Either way... they've made their bed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing Justin Welby and the toxic Harry will have a frosty greeting


From the DM:

*Philip's funeral next Saturday is expected to be officiated by Mr Welby and David Conner, the Dean of Windsor*


----------



## Icyjade

xeyes said:


> Combined with the blind item posted the other day, we get the following sequence of events:
> 
> 1) The family is informed of Philip’s imminent passing, including the, um, American branch.
> 2) Shortly after that (according to the blind item), Dumb & Dumber record their interview.
> 3) The interview airs. Havoc ensues.
> 
> D&D knew that the interview would be upsetting to his family - they wouldn’t have claimed to have plans to defer its airing if they didn’t. Yet, even though they claimed to have control over its airing, they let it air, causing even more pain for a family about to lose its patriarch.
> 
> If they really could have called it off, knowing that Philip was about to pass, then their deliberate failure to do so - in full knowledge of the damage it would cause to a family already anticipating a major loss - is truly terrible. The best possible interpretation for them would be that they lied about having control, and that‘s still not great.



Wonder if they did the interview anyway knowing what’s about to happen as they can’t possibly air an interview for a while after Prince Philip passed away. By then MM may no longer be pregnant and also they lose some talking points on whether it’s a girl or boy and also sympathy points for being preggy?


----------



## jennlt

Icyjade said:


> Wonder if they did the interview anyway knowing what’s about to happen as they can’t possibly air an interview for a while after Prince Philip passed away. By then MM may no longer be pregnant and also they lose some talking points on whether it’s a girl or boy and also sympathy points for being preggy?



After she is no longer the Heavily Pregnant One, she will still be a Young Mother.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> This is another case of horrible timing by MM and JCMH.



The story of their marriage.


----------



## lalame

Icyjade said:


> Wonder if they did the interview anyway knowing what’s about to happen as they can’t possibly air an interview for a while after Prince Philip passed away. By then MM may no longer be pregnant and also they lose some talking points on whether it’s a girl or boy and also sympathy points for being preggy?



Wow, that's diabolical. I guess there's no bad time (or good time) to air years' worth of grievances against your family publically.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> She and Archie will stand together and plant a little tree on their estate in honor of Philip. Oddly, someone will be right there to immortalize the solemn occasion with stylized black & white photos which will appear exclusively in _People_ or _Vanity Fair_ next week.


----------



## Icyjade

jennlt said:


> After she is no longer the Heavily Pregnant One, she will still be a Young Mother.



True... and anyone who criticizes her is a RACIST!!!


----------



## rose60610

One way Meghan could honor Philip is to make a big fat donation to one of HIS patronages. Not a lemon olive oil cake, not mittens, not bananas with Sharpie messages, not a covid appearance to grace with her pulled down mask,---a big fat ANONYMOUS donation to something near and dear to his heart. But we know that'll never happen. She'd go to a cemetery, find a grave of someone named Philip, put flowers by it and weep. Camera crew in tow.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Is she going to retrieve her falsehoods  and finally live a private life? Such commitment would be a nice way to mark PP's life.
> View attachment 5056505
> 
> _But Buckingham Palace confirmed those who are unable to attend will make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life.
> Meghan will also be able to watch the sombre proceedings through a special live stream._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan will make 'private arrangements' to mark Philip's life
> 
> 
> PREGNANT Meghan Markle will make “private arrangements” to remember Prince Philip after being unable to attend his funeral. The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has remained in the US on doctor&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Is the RF going to see her sipping on her wine grape juice and eating her party platter as she watches the sombre proceedings through a special live stream?    Doubt she will shed a tear!


----------



## Chanbal

*JAN MOIR *on the decision of not wearing military uniforms to the funeral:

_On a human level, one might have hoped these two ex-military men should be able to wear what they want to honour their grandfather and father. Yet to save the blushes of all, especially Harry, the Queen has ruled that senior royals will wear morning dress instead. No!

This decision might be circumspect, it might be pragmatic, even wise. But might it not be ultimately diminishing, too?

This kind of capitulation makes the Windsors seem porous and vulnerable, under siege from the wrecking ball of the Sussexes and the creeping predications of the woke mob.

Perhaps Harry and Meghan will see this banishment of military uniforms — this willingness to bend tradition to save face and keep Harry happy at all costs — as a personal triumph. Their modern will, their wish to be their authentic selves, conquered the stuffy rules of the Palace.

Only in years to come will the Windsors perhaps realise that, in a way, they were watching their own funeral, too._









						JAN MOIR: Without uniforms, the royal mystique becomes threadbare
					

JAN MOIR: There have been touching tributes from Prince Charles, tears from the Countess of Wessex, rosy family photographs from the Duchess of Cambridge.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## eunaddict

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.



I honestly think this must have also started the process whereby he must start thinking that his mother, QE2 isn't too far behind PP and will one day go as well. And as he and Will have always said, neither really want to ascend the throne because it means everyone else in front has passed on. 

I think it's sinking in.


----------



## catlover46

I’m new here but I had to block that gossip site “Celebitchy” because of the stanning of H&M plus all the ones who want the RF dissolved because of them.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Wonder if they did the interview anyway knowing what’s about to happen as they can’t possibly air an interview for a while after Prince Philip passed away. By then MM may no longer be pregnant and also they lose some talking points on whether it’s a girl or boy and also sympathy points for being preggy?



It isn’t in them to consider anyone else but themselves.

Honestly, I think the release of the Covid vaccines prompted the timing of the interview as much as anything else. They (particularly Meghan) must feel they lost a whole year of making money and schmoozing with other celebrities because of the virus. That interview was their way to get back on everyone’s radar just as prominent people are starting to come back out and elite venues will be reopening.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

catlover46 said:


> I’m new here but I had to block that gossip site “Celebitchy” because of the stanning of H&M plus all the ones who want the RF dissolved because of them.



Welcome to the thread, catlover46. You’ll find some kindred spirits here.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *JAN MOIR *on the decision of not wearing military uniforms to the funeral:
> 
> _On a human level, one might have hoped these two ex-military men should be able to wear what they want to honour their grandfather and father. Yet to save the blushes of all, especially Harry, the Queen has ruled that senior royals will wear morning dress instead. No!
> 
> This decision might be circumspect, it might be pragmatic, even wise. But might it not be ultimately diminishing, too?
> 
> This kind of capitulation makes the Windsors seem porous and vulnerable, under siege from the wrecking ball of the Sussexes and the creeping predications of the woke mob.
> 
> Perhaps Harry and Meghan will see this banishment of military uniforms — this willingness to bend tradition to save face and keep Harry happy at all costs — as a personal triumph. Their modern will, their wish to be their authentic selves, conquered the stuffy rules of the Palace.
> 
> Only in years to come will the Windsors perhaps realise that, in a way, they were watching their own funeral, too._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Without uniforms, the royal mystique becomes threadbare
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: There have been touching tributes from Prince Charles, tears from the Countess of Wessex, rosy family photographs from the Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Jan Moir Wikipedia
An opiniated ***** who sounds like an antimonarchist and probably likes the sound of her voice. Talk to me again after you've ruled England for 67 years with diplomacy and then watched your 99-year-old spouse die after years of faithful duty to Queen and Country.

ETA  @Chanbal this post is addressed to Jan Moir, not you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Jan Moir Wikipedia
> An opiniated ***** who sounds like an antimonarchist and probably likes the sound of her voice. Talk to me again after you've ruled England for 67 years with diplomacy and then watched your 99-year-old spouse die after years of faithful duty to Queen and Country.
> 
> ETA  @Chanbal this post is addressed to Jan Moir, not you!



_Only in years to come will the Windsors perhaps realise that, in a way, they were watching their own funeral, too._

As rude and inappropriate as that sounds, she’s right. This is indeed the end of an era. No one else will reign as long as QE or be a consort as long as Philip. Their long lives have provided continuity and stability. The torch has not completely passed to the next generation, but it feels close, almost too close. QE’s death will be tragic and even more heart wrenching. Still, no one in the foreseeable  future will come close to ruling as long as she has. So, with heartfelt sadness, there is a sense that something important has ended.

Charles may reign for a few years, William may have 30+ years, but no one will come close to 65 years of 22,219 solo engagements.
 

ETA: if you watch this, have plenty of tissues.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> I think Will is protective of the Queen and his father (to a lesser degree). God help Harry if he upsets them because I bet William will be all over him. If this was a TV show and not real life I'd look for some black eyes and split lips in the procession.



I was thinking the same thing!!  In fact when I watch the Saturday service, I'd hope to see H with a black eye covered with makeup. Thinking W smacked him one.


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Only in years to come will the Windsors perhaps realise that, in a way, they were watching their own funeral, too._
> 
> As rude and inappropriate as that sounds, she’s right. This is indeed the end of an era. No one else will reign as long as QE or be a consort as long as Philip. Their long lives have provided continuity and stability. The torch has not completely passed to the next generation, but it feels close, almost too close. QE’s death will be tragic and even more heart wrenching. Still, no one in the foreseeable  future will come close to ruling as long as she has. So, with heartfelt sadness, there is a sense that something important has ended.
> 
> Charles may reign for a few years, William may have 30+ years, but no one will come close to 65 years of 22,219 solo engagements.
> 
> 
> ETA: if you watch this, have plenty of tissues.




I don’t know if it’s the length of the reign so much as the era - the mystique around royalty and the reverence towards the position just isn’t really there anymore. I think we all respect QE because of the sacrifice she made and her dedication to the role but also the fact that for so many years of her life the world was different and she was more a symbol than a human being to many people.

In a more progressive society with the internet and social media, where Will and Kate are zooming with people, Harry is crying to Oprah and Andrew is revealed as an alleged pedophile, that reverence and mystique are a lot harder to maintain and they become more human than symbols. And then what’s so special about them?

I just think the monarchy is an archaic structure that would have a much harder time surviving in today’s world than it did in the world QE was born into. So in a way it’s not the monarch, it’s the world around them that determines their longevity.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> Meghan has apparently become some sort of symbol.  Today I was watching the view.  they were talking about a British TV show Idris Elba is on.  Someone from the network had said that his character wasn't authentically black enough.  so everyone comments and guess whose name comes up?  Someone (probably Sunny) cited Meghan as an example of racism in great britian.
> I think when she snagged Harry she probably thought this was her ticket to glamour and riches.  maybe it's turning out to be something else.











						Idris Elba’s Luther ‘doesn’t feel authentic’ as a Black lead, says BBC diversity chief
					

‘He doesn’t have any Black friends, he doesn’t eat any Caribbean food,’ said Miranda Wayland




					www.google.co.uk
				




OT but that Luther story really frustrated me  . She basically said he should be eating Caribbean food and have black friends. This is was coming from a diversity officer at the bbc about a bbc show no less

my objections are as follows:
1. It seems more stereotyping to have a list of behaviours ethnic people ought to do on screen than creative or helpful
2. Black people don’t necessarily have a connection with the Caribbean
3.  it’s a police procedural not a family drama
4. Luther is an enigmatic loner character! That’s the point!
5.  Does the bbc not remember when they gave mysterious Sherlock a family backstory in the last series of Sherlock and it absolutely sucked? Learn something from this!

TLDR - suits don’t know how to write tv stories but they think they do.


To bring it back to MM, she’s an interesting contrast given she so enjoys hanging out with her own black family and friends at her wedding and ever since...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Only in years to come will the Windsors perhaps realise that, in a way, they were watching their own funeral, too._
> 
> As rude and inappropriate as that sounds, she’s right. This is indeed the end of an era. No one else will reign as long as QE or be a consort as long as Philip. Their long lives have provided continuity and stability. The torch has not completely passed to the next generation, but it feels close, almost too close. QE’s death will be tragic and even more heart wrenching. Still, no one in the foreseeable  future will come close to ruling as long as she has. So, with heartfelt sadness, there is a sense that something important has ended.
> 
> Charles may reign for a few years, William may have 30+ years, but no one will come close to 65 years of 22,219 solo engagements.
> 
> 
> ETA: if you watch this, have plenty of tissues.



Maybe so, but it still annoying that anyone would choose this particular time to predict the end of the monarchy; they could have at least waited until after Prince Philip's funeral and burial.


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.


Sort  of agree with you - I mean we don’t know how the family feel personally but  I think the media circus around Prince Philip’s death is getting excessive and doesn’t really help anyone. 
personally I don’t think it’s insensitive to say you were mentally prepared for the death of an ill and elderly person- it is inevitable. 

I guess the thing is that Diana showed what a massive story a royal death can be and the press are running with it even if it’s not a comparable situation at all.


----------



## lalame

Maggie Muggins said:


> Jan Moir Wikipedia
> An opiniated ***** who sounds like an antimonarchist and probably likes the sound of her voice. Talk to me again after you've ruled England for 67 years with diplomacy and then watched your 99-year-old spouse die after years of faithful duty to Queen and Country.
> 
> ETA  @Chanbal this post is addressed to Jan Moir, not you!



I think the way she said it was unnecessarily insensitive, but she does have a point about these little compromises to brats like Harry or Andrew are kind of damaging to the image of royalty. I don't blame the BRF for how they're handling these really unfortunate scandals happening TO them... but isn't part of our collective anger about them due to how damaging they are to the institution? And that's probably part of the BRF's fear and anger too. So she's really just acknowledging that it DOES bring up these questions.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is not a young guy, he had Covid, this is very trying for him.  The enormity of it all is sinking in.
> 
> View attachment 5056521
> 
> _An emotional Prince Charles was in tears and looked to the heavens today as he and his wife Camilla inspected thousands of tributes left for his father Prince Philip who died aged 99 six days ago.
> 
> The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall were moved by the sea of bouquets, cards and other items left by the Duke of Edinburgh's mourners in the Royal Parks and at the gates of Buckingham Palace. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles and Camilla view Prince Philip tributes at Marlborough House
> 
> 
> The flowers and condolence messages were moved from outside Buckingham Palace and within the Royal Parks to the nearby private gardens at Marlborough House in London.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This is the kind of article that makes me think the press is being too invasive and excessive and trying to make this story into Diana #2. 
If Charles really is crying in the streets give the guy some privacy.

Also, I know I may get flamed for this, but what happened to the stiff upper lip? If you are breaking up over your 99year old dad dying you might not have the strength needed for national leadership.


----------



## Sol Ryan

jelliedfeels said:


> Idris Elba’s Luther ‘doesn’t feel authentic’ as a Black lead, says BBC diversity chief
> 
> 
> ‘He doesn’t have any Black friends, he doesn’t eat any Caribbean food,’ said Miranda Wayland
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OT but that Luther story really frustrated me  . She basically said he should be eating Caribbean food and have black friends. This is was coming from a diversity officer at the bbc about a bbc show no less
> 
> my objections are as follows:
> 1. It seems more stereotyping to have a list of behaviours ethnic people ought to do on screen than creative or helpful
> 2. Black people don’t necessarily have a connection with the Caribbean
> 3.  it’s a police procedural not a family drama
> 4. Luther is an enigmatic loner character! That’s the point!
> 5.  Does the bbc not remember when they gave mysterious Sherlock a family backstory in the last series of Sherlock and it absolutely sucked? Learn something from this!
> 
> TLDR - suits don’t know how to write tv stories but they think they do.
> 
> 
> To bring it back to MM, she’s an interesting contrast given she so enjoys hanging out with her own black family and friends at her wedding and ever since...



I still haven’t really forgiven Moffaat and Gatiss for the last season of Sherlock... I wear my Belstaff Milford with Pride... but man they made a hash of it.... Sherlock was my favorite TV show about my favorite literary character equal to Dorian Gray and that last season was trash.

Mind I’m sure Moffat and Gatiss don’t care what I think lol


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> This is the kind of article that makes me think the press is being too invasive and excessive and trying to make this story into Diana #2.
> If Charles really is crying in the streets give the guy some privacy.
> 
> Also, I know I may get flamed for this, but what happened to the stiff upper lip? If you are breaking up over your 99year old dad dying you might not have the strength needed for national leadership.



Wow, you're tough! Leaders are humans with emotions too, and I think it doesn't matter how old your father is when he passes... someone who has been a mainstay in your life for 72 years leaves a HUGE hole when he leaves. Don't confuse surprise for trauma... you can expect a loved one to die from cancer, but when it actually happens it's not like the all sadness suddenly goes away. It's usually amplified because this scary thing has actually finally come to pass. And not to mention, a foreseeable death is in no way less SAD than a surprise one - it is just less surprising.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Jan Moir Wikipedia
> An opiniated ***** who sounds like an antimonarchist and probably likes the sound of her voice. Talk to me again after you've ruled England for 67 years with diplomacy and then watched your 99-year-old spouse die after years of faithful duty to Queen and Country.
> 
> ETA  @Chanbal this post is addressed to Jan Moir, not you!


I usually like Moir's articles on Ginger and Cringe. In this article, Moir sounded more disappointed than critical. She respects and admires QE, but she is not happy with the continuous attempts 'to save the blushes' of Harry imo. MM&H continue cashing in on titles, and if not stopped, they will likely keep at damaging the monarchy. It's a tough situation.


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> Did you mean why not just wear normal-people military uniforms versus the special ones they wore due to their special titles? That's an interesting question... since Harry did actually serve, would he be able to wear his military uniform sort of like how normal people might wear them to weddings or special events?


No, even though he served in the Army, and Andrew in the Royal Navy, once you've left you can't wear the uniform. They can, however, wear a blazer with their regimental badge on it (and a beret with the badge too) 
Both of them are perfectly entitled to wear their own medals that they earned themselves, but none of the honorary ones.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought Charles did serve active duty, not just honorary positions. Is that incorrect?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Look Back at Prince Charles's Service in the Navy
> 
> 
> The heir to the throne followed in his father's footsteps on the high seas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Active duty here means go to war, he didn't, he did do active service, as in served in the Royal Navy. I'd forgotten that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think it's true what some of you have speculated, William is done with Harry. This is very telling.


Definitely, let's see what happens if William becomes King sooner than we think. 
Didn't Meghan (and Harry) think at all that it's William that holds all the cards re their money matters being that he will be in charge for probably a lot longer than Charles will. She should have got Catherine on side ASAP in my opinion and not make an enemy there.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gelbergirl said:


> Serious question:
> what would be the harm if Andrew and JCMH did throw on a military uniform for this event


This is a very good question.


lalame said:


> Wow, you're tough! Leaders are humans with emotions too, and I think it doesn't matter how old your father is when he passes... someone who has been a mainstay in your life for 72 years leaves a HUGE hole when he leaves. Don't confuse surprise for trauma... you can expect a loved one to die from cancer, but when it actually happens it's not like the all sadness suddenly goes away. It's usually amplified because this scary thing has actually finally come to pass. And not to mention, a foreseeable death is in no way less SAD than a surprise one - it is just less surprising.


I’m sorry but there’s no one way to grieve or react to death and that includes a reasoned reaction.  I also massively disagree with the idea that all deaths are equally sad. A quick death at the end of a long and fulfilling life should be celebrated as the ideal. It is nothing like the pain of a child dying and to me, it’s just cruel to act like it’s the same.

I am also being critical of the news cycle here as much as Charles himself. I find it performative and cruel that they are flogging his emotions here but I also find it unbecoming that he is playing into it. Isn’t the queen famous for her stoicism? That to me is more what the royals should be doing in public. What happens privately is none of my business.

I get that after Diana they were criticised for not being emotional enough and they are just following the PR but to me, it’s a step in a dangerous  direction. Just look at how Andrew is abusing the flush of positive publicity they are getting. 

By the way, I do get the irony that we were all criticising Harry’s statement for not being emotional enough but I think that there is a middle ground for public grief and we are at both extremes of the spectrum with thisdeath.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I can’t criticise Charles for shedding a tear after his fathers death, and especially after reading all those tributes.  I really don’t think it’s necessary for a long lens camera to peer into the car and highly blown up photos of it to be published.  I find it much too intrusive and I hope they don’t do this to the Queen on Saturday.
I remember when Britannia was scrapped the photographers were scrambling to catch a tear and all  when they caught one.  It was gross.
There’s been plenty of “they’re all cold and unfeeling” posted and now “they should be stoic” - sometimes you just can’t win 

ETA - at the end of the day it’s a real family not an act.  I look at my own family and it’s a long way from being drama free with the relatives


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> This is a very good question.
> 
> I’m sorry but there’s no one way to grieve or react to death and that includes a reasoned reaction.  I also massively disagree with the idea that all deaths are equally sad. A quick death at the end of a long and fulfilling life should be celebrated as the ideal. It is nothing like the pain of a child dying and to me, it’s just cruel to act like it’s the same.



You're absolutely right that there's no one way... but that's how I took your original post to mean, as if there was a ONE right way that any leader should behave in grief. Whether someone is steely or emotional, give them a break - both are valid. I criticize no one for shedding a tear or withholding it.

Of course PP's death is an ideal, after a long and fulfilling life - I said so myself a few posts back. But that doesn't mean it's any less SAD if it's expected. I'm not comparing the tragedy of one death over another... my point was it is no less sad if it's expected versus sudden. In your analogy, would you be any less sad if your child died by a months-long cancer or a sudden accident? You'd just be sad, period.


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> I can’t criticise Charles for shedding a tear after his fathers death, and especially after reading all those tributes.  I really don’t think it’s necessary for a long lens camera and highly blown up photos of it to be published.  I find it much too intrusive and I hope they don’t do this to the Queen on Saturday.
> I remember when Britannia was scrapped the photographers were scrambling to catch a tear and all  when they caught one.  It was gross.
> There’s been plenty of “they’re all cold and unfeeling” posted and now “they should be stoic” - sometimes you just can’t win



I agree, I mean how can one not shed a tear after reading loving tributes of someone you love who has passed. I think the long lens is intrusive but I suppose that's just a life in the public eye... I'm sure having to do this in public makes it all the more difficult.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> Is Meg going to take a shoe box and dig a little hole and say a prayer and pretend that PP is in the box?



I can’t even bear to think what that awful woman is planning -my god just how conceited and self centred is she that she has to attempt to draw every bit of attention away from the death and funeral of a 99yr old man who has dedicated his entire  life to his wife his Queen and his country? Who does she think she is ? I had never heard of her before she took up with Harry and never want to hear of her or him again


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest. I was surprised to hear she is very, shall we say, critical of Doria without going into details. I mean, we've been saying pages and pages back while Doria seems to be quiet and dignifyed there might be more than meets the eye.
> 
> She also had a very good laugh at "close bond with Philip"...she says he saw right through MM and MM hated him for it.




Philip could always spot a phony


----------



## elvisfan4life

TC1 said:


> I don't really know how Charles could be all that shaken. The man was 99 and in poor health for months. They knew it was coming, as did PP..hence all his wishes to be met in the world of Covid restrictions and all.



My father died of terminal cancer -when he was diagnosed I knew he had about 3 months - in the last week of his life  I knew it was going to happen any time but when he passed I still went into shock - nothing can prepare you and nothing takes away the grief when someone who you love and adore dies I fully understand how Charles feels you can see his grief etched on his face


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's also said to have a temper sometimes. If I were Harry I maybe would proceed with caution.



It’s big Mike Tindall and Zara he needs to worry about lol


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> I still haven’t really forgiven Moffaat and Gatiss for the last season of Sherlock... I wear my Belstaff Milford with Pride... but man they made a hash of it.... Sherlock was my favorite TV show about my favorite literary character equal to Dorian Gray and that last season was trash.
> 
> Mind I’m sure Moffat and Gatiss don’t care what I think lol


I hope they and the BBC do care that they killed the goose that was laying golden eggs (I know BC and MF wanted to le but I suppose like H&M they would argue ‘having their say’ than doing their job successfully.


lalame said:


> You're absolutely right that there's no one way... but that's how I took your original post to mean, as if there was a ONE right way that any leader should behave in grief. Whether someone is steely or emotional, give them a break - both are valid. I criticize no one for shedding a tear or withholding it.
> 
> Of course PP's death is an ideal, after a long and fulfilling life - I said so myself a few posts back. But that doesn't mean it's any less SAD if it's expected. I'm not comparing the tragedy of one death over another... my point was it is no less sad if it's expected versus sudden. In your analogy, would you be any less sad if your child died by a months-long cancer or a sudden accident? You'd just be sad, period.


My analogy is that a pensioner dying isn’t tragic because one of the aims of humanity is to live to old age and they got that. We will all die: all we can hope for is we get a decent span of life which is something many are deprived of.

I think asking whether a sudden or a slow tragedy is preferable is kind of tasteless to be honest and misrepresents my point.

I’m also talking about the royals’ public role and their PR relationship with the papers. To me, part of their job is to be stoic and unemotional and whenever they go out on public engagements that’s how they should be. The royal family sells itself on being the ‘stiff upper lip’. I can think of loads of professions where being too emotional at work is considered a detriment- do people really want pilots or doctors crying about their late parents while doing their job?

add on- I think any person being prepared for national leadership would get a mixed reception if they started crying and saturating the news cycle with stories of their recently deceased relative. The press are both an invasive force and a collaborative one for the royals- so while the long lens is tasteless the royals are also feeding them. My point is this isn’t really like our own private mourning for our own losses-  it’s more orchestrated than that.

edit edit- arguing against myself there’s a precedent against the stiff upper lip in Victoria’s mourning of Albert before Diana. But it wasn’t that positively received.


----------



## Lodpah

Reading the comments above, yes I do also it will be the end of an era when QE passes away but I also think Prince William be carry the banner forward, maybe more modern and will streamline the monarchy. I don’t think he suffers fools.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> The arrangement speaks for itself.
> View attachment 5056561



Seniors to the left of picture - also rans to the right


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> I hope they and the BBC do care that they killed the goose that was laying golden eggs (I know BC and MF wanted to le but I suppose like H&M they would argue ‘having their say’ than doing their job successfully.
> 
> My analogy is that a pensioner dying isn’t tragic because one of the aims of humanity is to live to old age and they got that. We will all die: all we can hope for is we get a decent span of life which is something many are deprived of.
> 
> I think asking whether a sudden or a slow tragedy is preferable is kind of tasteless to be honest and misrepresents my point.
> 
> I’m also talking about the royals’ public role and their PR relationship with the papers. To me, part of their job is to be stoic and unemotional and whenever they go out on public engagements that’s how they should be. The royal family sells itself on being the ‘stiff upper lip’. I can think of loads of professions where being too emotional at work is considered a detriment- do people really want pilots or doctors crying about their late parents while doing their job?


In the period immediately after the death and prior to the funeral they’d be on compassionate leave tho’


----------



## elvisfan4life

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think it's true what some of you have speculated, William is done with Harry. This is very telling.



Good for Will he knows the mood of the country then we are all done with Harry - the Queen and his father still love him warts and all which is understandable but no one else will ever forgive or forget


----------



## elvisfan4life

lalame said:


> Now I'm just curious... are they orange in the UK too?



No mainly grey sweat top and trousers no jumpsuits here orange or any other colour - We have a long list of things inmates can’t wear ie same colours as the prison officers but other than those they can wear their own clothes !!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

Too bad, this would have been a perfect smack in the face to Harry.  Still think the RF coddles him too much




Chanbal said:


> *JAN MOIR *on the decision of not wearing military uniforms to the funeral:
> 
> _On a human level, one might have hoped these two ex-military men should be able to wear what they want to honour their grandfather and father. Yet to save the blushes of all, especially Harry, the Queen has ruled that senior royals will wear morning dress instead. No!
> 
> This decision might be circumspect, it might be pragmatic, even wise. But might it not be ultimately diminishing, too?
> 
> This kind of capitulation makes the Windsors seem porous and vulnerable, under siege from the wrecking ball of the Sussexes and the creeping predications of the woke mob.
> 
> Perhaps Harry and Meghan will see this banishment of military uniforms — this willingness to bend tradition to save face and keep Harry happy at all costs — as a personal triumph. Their modern will, their wish to be their authentic selves, conquered the stuffy rules of the Palace.
> 
> Only in years to come will the Windsors perhaps realise that, in a way, they were watching their own funeral, too._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Without uniforms, the royal mystique becomes threadbare
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: There have been touching tributes from Prince Charles, tears from the Countess of Wessex, rosy family photographs from the Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> In the period immediately after the death and prior to the funeral they’d be on compassionate leave tho’


True.

I, for one, think it would be much healthier for everyone if the royals had compassionate leave including complete radio silence after their initial statements so they actually had some privacy. Then they could come back with a strong stoic face at the funeral and then go back to work. After all, compassionate leave comes with the proviso that you take time out and come back to work as normal. To be honest, I would be happier if they didn’t televise the funeral but I know a lot of people want to watch it.

However that’s not in the interests of   this whole torturous media relationship game and I do think Diana’s press circus has a massive part in this. It seems like it’s diminishing returns and that in the future if the royals aren’t constantly putting out interviews and crying when the queen dies they will somehow not be playing the news game.

It seems unhealthy to me and it isn’t the same as a private expression of grief: it’s a public/press interaction.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> True.
> 
> I, for one, think it would be much healthier for everyone if the royals had compassionate leave including complete radio silence after their initial statements so they actually had some privacy. Then they could come back with a strong stoic face at the funeral and then go back to work. After all, compassionate leave comes with the proviso that you take time out and come back to work as normal. To be honest, I would be happier if they didn’t televise the funeral but I know a lot of people want to watch it.
> 
> However that’s not in the interests of   this whole torturous media relationship game and I do think Diana’s press circus has a massive part in this. It seems like it’s diminishing returns and that in the future if the royals aren’t constantly putting out interviews and crying when the queen dies they will somehow not be playing the news game.
> 
> It seems unhealthy to me and it isn’t the same as a private expression of grief: it’s a public/press interaction.


I agree with much of what you’re saying here.  I think everyone’s been taken aback by the depth of feeling for the Duke though.  I know I have, I didn’t expect to be so moved by his death.

The balance between what’s public and private is skewed.  The 24 hour news beast needs food, and people like Media Meghan fuel demand for over intrusive coverage by constantly drip feeding details of their private lives for fame and money.
And even *normal* people share their private stuff far more than anyone ever used to.  I’m not on any other social media than tpf, but people post pictures of themselves gurning in the mirror in their underwear, and of pretty of much everything they’re up to for strangers to gawp at


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree with much of what you’re saying here.  I think everyone’s been taken aback by the depth of feeling for the Duke though.  I know I have, I didn’t expect to be so moved by his death.
> 
> The balance between what’s public and private is skewed.  The 24 hour news beast needs food, and people like Media Meghan fuel demand for over intrusive coverage by constantly drip feeding details of their private lives for fame and money.
> And even *normal* people share their private stuff far more than anyone ever used to.  I’m not on any other social media than tpf, but people post pictures of themselves gurning in the mirror in their underwear, and of pretty of much everything they’re up to for strangers to gawp at


Yes, the news world is definitely demanding more and more content but I think the royals should be a bit more wary about what they are putting out. 
I personally find the whole media flurry for Phillip a bit cynical from the press perspective- I think they are trying to get Diana # 2 but to me that was lightning in a bottle and as I said, I feel like they are just going to demand more and more emotion and spectacle when the next Royal dies and it seems unhealthy and performative.

To me, a big part of the royal public persona is their reticence. I think their press officers, at least, are hooked on the attention but it really isn’t in the ‘best interest of the brand’.  They need to give the royals a bit more space between their public and private lives or they are going to get oversaturated.

I also think it is extremely morally dubious that Andrew seems to be sliding back into the public eye on the good graces of mourning as I have said before and that needs to stop.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree with much of what you’re saying here.  I think everyone’s been taken aback by the depth of feeling for the Duke though.  I know I have, I didn’t expect to be so moved by his death.



This, I completely didn't expect how sad I'd be.

I see what jelliedfeels is saying and usually would agree, but in this case I also think it's fine: nobody broke down sobbing uncontrollably in front of the flowers, and it's not even been a week. I think after the funeral everyone will be as restrained as we're used to.


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> I don’t know if it’s the length of the reign so much as the era - the mystique around royalty and the reverence towards the position just isn’t really there anymore. I think we all respect QE because of the sacrifice she made and her dedication to the role but also the fact that for so many years of her life the world was different and she was more a symbol than a human being to many people.
> 
> In a more progressive society with the internet and social media, where Will and Kate are zooming with people, Harry is crying to Oprah and Andrew is revealed as an alleged pedophile, that reverence and mystique are a lot harder to maintain and they become more human than symbols. And then what’s so special about them?
> 
> I just think the monarchy is an archaic structure that would have a much harder time surviving in today’s world than it did in the world QE was born into. So in a way it’s not the monarch, it’s the world around them that determines their longevity.



On the other hand, look at MM's stans.

MM is no one, done less than nothing, crowned herself queen of the goody-2-shoes world without licence, full of her self-importance at every breath, and tells complete lie after lie...but still they put her on a pedestal, worship her, she can do no wrong.

Other clueless celebs too are held-up as role models.

Conclusion: people are still as stupid and gullible today as in feudal, Medieval times.

Thinking for oneself and knowing the difference between fact and fiction, reference books and cartoon movies, takes...a brain.

(I need to stop doing *... *now )


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe so, but it still annoying that anyone would choose this particular time to predict the end of the monarchy; they could have at least waited until after Prince Philip's funeral and burial.



They were in a hurry.

It would be worse to have put it out in the period of Royal mourning. That's probably going to be for the rest of this year.

Plus, it had to come before #8th inline makes her entrance (from wherever, whoever).


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Reading the comments above, yes I do also it will be the end of an era when QE passes away but I also think Prince William be carry the banner forward, maybe more modern and will streamline the monarchy. I don’t think he suffers fools.



As PoW?


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> Is she going to retrieve her falsehoods  and finally live a private life? Such commitment would be a nice way to mark PP's life.
> View attachment 5056505
> 
> _But Buckingham Palace confirmed those who are unable to attend will make "private arrangements" to mark Philip's life.
> Meghan will also be able to watch the sombre proceedings through a special live stream._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan will make 'private arrangements' to mark Philip's life
> 
> 
> PREGNANT Meghan Markle will make “private arrangements” to remember Prince Philip after being unable to attend his funeral. The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has remained in the US on doctor&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk





purseinsanity said:


> Her "private arrangements" will be conspicuously photographed and given to People and all her minion publications to publish and glorify how wonderful it was she did anything.



I wonder if her good friend Oprah and her mother will be by her side while she clutches her first born to her heart when they photograph it.




purseinsanity said:


> But remember, according to Harry, "We royals don't carry cash".



Actually, in his eloquent way, he said "US royals don't carry cash."  What a clown.


----------



## redney

elvisfan4life said:


> It’s big Mike Tindall and Zara he needs to worry about lol


My money's on Anne!


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> My money's on Anne!


Mine too.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> On the other hand, look at MM's stans.
> 
> MM is no one, done less than nothing, crowned herself queen of the goody-2-shoes world without licence, full of her self-importance at every breath, and tells complete lie after lie...but still they put her on a pedestal, worship her, she can do no wrong.
> 
> Other clueless celebs too are held-up as role models.
> 
> Conclusion: people are still as stupid and gullible today as in feudal, Medieval times.
> 
> Thinking for oneself and knowing the difference between fact and fiction, reference books and cartoon movies, takes...a brain.
> 
> (I need to stop doing *... *now )


I have thought the same since the days when Jane Fonda was a political know-it-all


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Idris Elba’s Luther ‘doesn’t feel authentic’ as a Black lead, says BBC diversity chief
> 
> 
> ‘He doesn’t have any Black friends, he doesn’t eat any Caribbean food,’ said Miranda Wayland
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OT but that Luther story really frustrated me  . She basically said he should be eating Caribbean food and have black friends. This is was coming from a diversity officer at the bbc about a bbc show no less
> 
> my objections are as follows:
> 1. It seems more stereotyping to have a list of behaviours ethnic people ought to do on screen than creative or helpful
> 2. Black people don’t necessarily have a connection with the Caribbean
> 3.  it’s a police procedural not a family drama
> 4. Luther is an enigmatic loner character! That’s the point!
> 5.  Does the bbc not remember when they gave mysterious Sherlock a family backstory in the last series of Sherlock and it absolutely sucked? Learn something from this!
> 
> TLDR - suits don’t know how to write tv stories but they think they do.
> 
> 
> To bring it back to MM, she’s an interesting contrast given she so enjoys hanging out with her own black family and friends at her wedding and ever since...


I haven't seen Luther but for what it's worth Whoopi Goldberg, who last time I checked was black, basically agrees with what you said


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, another journalist that may lose her job. 

_The panel were discussing a previously unseen photograph of the Queen and Prince Philip and their great-grandchildren, which was released earlier this week, following the Duke Of Edinburgh's death. 

But fans on the show were left unimpressed, when Julia, 52, said Meghan would take offence to the photo because Archie wasn't in it- despite the fact it was taken in 2018, before he was born. _









						This Morning viewers complain after Julia makes a dig at Meghan
					

This Morning viewers have complained to Ofcom after Talk Radio host Julia Hartley-Brewer took a swipe at Meghan Markle on Thursday's show.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

"_Harry and William blasted for 'sad, pathetic' feud..._". Ginger does the damage and then Will gets blasted... Ginger and Cringe were the ones giving a toxic interview, and it's unfair to include Will on this... 










						Harry and William 'sad, pathetic' feud blasted ahead of Philip funeral
					

PRINCE HARRY and Prince William have come under furious attack, with a radio presenter raging Prince Philip's funeral is "mired in the Royal Family's extraordinary propensity for petty squabbles".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I usually like Moir's articles on Ginger and Cringe. In this article, Moir sounded more disappointed than critical. She respects and admires QE, but she is not happy with the continuous attempts 'to save the blushes' of Harry imo. MM&H continue cashing in on titles, and if not stopped, they will likely keep at damaging the monarchy. It's a tough situation.



It's sounds like Moir is so impatient for H&M to get their comeuppance that she's taking it out on the Queen. The Queen is a smart lady and there is certainly more going on behind the scenes than we will ever know.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Jan Moir’s article - I thought her comment meant the end of an era of long reigns for the monarch. Certainly the monarchy will go forward. As we know from history, each reign is different. Charles’s reign will be much shorter than QE’s, his love story is different, the world’s issues will be different. IMO we mourn the loss of the man himself [_legend_], the loss of his contributions to society and the loss of one of the more successful royal houses. Of course QE has more years, but the transition is underway. Even tho it has been in process for a number of years, Philip’s death makes it all the more real. There can be no doubt, things will change.

RE: Charles’s tears - imo the shocking thing is that he let the public face slip. Remember he has been trained from birth to show minimal emotion, to keep his private thoughts private.  Although he has seen many of the world’s horrors and endured intrusive press before, this time it feels different. It’s personal. It hurts. Harry’s betrayals, covid, his great reset, his father’s passing, who knows what else has happened behind the gates.  This slip proves how taxing the last month, year, etc. has been on him.  I have no doubt he will ‘buck up’ and move onward.  Guessing there will some changes ahead in regards to press.

RE: William & Harry reunion - their ‘hug-it-out’ reunion tour can wait.  Now is not the time.  The Diana statue reveal should be postponed. Toxic Harry will push for it because he needs to finish the Nflix docudrama.  IMO William should un-involve himself. Take away the photo op$, let Diana rest in peace and move forward.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I have thought the same since the days when Jane Fonda was a political know-it-all



Almost any celeb.

On anything.

These 2 take it to a whole new level because they can't even focus on one field. They are experts on _everything._


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> "_Harry and William blasted for 'sad, pathetic' feud..._". Ginger does the damage and then Will gets blasted... Ginger and Cringe were the ones giving a toxic interview, and it's unfair to include Will on this...
> View attachment 5057073
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William 'sad, pathetic' feud blasted ahead of Philip funeral
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William have come under furious attack, with a radio presenter raging Prince Philip's funeral is "mired in the Royal Family's extraordinary propensity for petty squabbles".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Meh, he's a TV critic who posts inflammatory rhetoric on Twitter for clicks. Everybody has an opinion...


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Rita Panahi from Sky News in Australia is often entertaining and speaking sense. Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse... I'm sighing really really deeply here 

I now think we should all demand that any kind of private or public figure celebration, funeral whatever in Asia, Africa, Antarctica or wherever should here on after always be persecuted by any means necessary to safeguard that these are not attended by too many Asians, Africans or penguins but are always sufficiently racially (bio)diverse


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> "_Harry and William blasted for 'sad, pathetic' feud..._". Ginger does the damage and then Will gets blasted... Ginger and Cringe were the ones giving a toxic interview, and it's unfair to include Will on this...
> View attachment 5057073
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William 'sad, pathetic' feud blasted ahead of Philip funeral
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William have come under furious attack, with a radio presenter raging Prince Philip's funeral is "mired in the Royal Family's extraordinary propensity for petty squabbles".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I took it that they've been separated to avoid any possible unpleasantness or being caught in the same frame with displaying emotions to match. 

You know, like school when the teacher puts one little boy in one corner facing the wall, the other the same, opposite ends of the classroom. Royal equivalent to timeout/naughty-step and no one's allowed to look at them - at least together.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> "_Harry and William blasted for 'sad, pathetic' feud..._". Ginger does the damage and then Will gets blasted... Ginger and Cringe were the ones giving a toxic interview, and it's unfair to include Will on this...
> View attachment 5057073
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William 'sad, pathetic' feud blasted ahead of Philip funeral
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Prince William have come under furious attack, with a radio presenter raging Prince Philip's funeral is "mired in the Royal Family's extraordinary propensity for petty squabbles".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I can't believe I feel sorry for the heir to the heir but indeed, poor Will.


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Rita Panahi from Sky News in Australia is often entertaining and speaking sense. Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse... I'm sighing really really deeply here
> 
> I now think we should all demand that any kind of private or public figure celebration, funeral whatever in Asia, Africa, Antarctica or wherever should here on after always be persecuted by any means necessary to safeguard that these are not attended by too many Asians, Africans or penguins but are always sufficiently racially (bio)diverse




Visually diverse doesn't mean always mean diverse anyway. This form of US-centric crusading identity parade is about as imperialist as you can get. What would they have the Queen do, invite Doria over Anne? 

If it weren't for the 30 max people rule, I can guarantee there would have been heads of state and friends from all round the world, more diverse than the wokest musical festival.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It's sounds like Moir is so impatient for H&M to get their comeuppance that she's taking it out on the Queen. The Queen is a smart lady and there is certainly more going on behind the scenes than we will ever know.


She does sound impatient. After what Ginger and Cringe did, I can't blame her for wanting them to get their comeuppance sooner than later.  It's not an easy task for QE. It's also difficult for Charles and Will. It's impressive to see how much damage has been done since MM joined the BRF.


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Rita Panahi from Sky News in Australia is often entertaining and speaking sense. Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse... I'm sighing really really deeply here
> 
> I now think we should all demand that any kind of private or public figure celebration, funeral whatever in Asia, Africa, Antarctica or wherever should here on after always be persecuted by any means necessary to safeguard that these are not attended by too many Asians, Africans or penguins but are always sufficiently racially (bio)diverse




Just watched it all through. 

Interesting how the media don't know why Andrew and Harry are not allowed to wear their military uniforms. Journalists (or their researchers) don't seem to do any research anymore, and everyone has an opinion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse... I'm sighing really really deeply here



Wait, they didn't invite the black relatives Philip doesn't have? How rude.

Speaking of it, why has none of the sugars ever questioned Meghan's choice of wedding guests then?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Visually diverse doesn't mean always mean diverse anyway. This form of US-centric crusading identity parade is about as imperialist as you can get. *What would they have the Queen do, invite Doria over Anne?*
> 
> If it weren't for the 30 max people rule, I can guarantee there would have been heads of state and friends from all round the world, more diverse than the wokest musical festival.



I wouldn't be at all surprised. Some in the media find ways to insert race into every conversation, even when it doesn't really fit.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I can't believe I feel sorry for the heir to the heir but indeed, poor Will.


I'm guilty of not reading all the attachments in this thread so please forgive my ignorance.  but if it's a "private" (though televised) family funeral, aren't suits more appropriate than military uniforms anyway?  Do we know if there was really anyone who was wanting to wear their uniform?  or is this just basically the press reacting to the fact that they're not wearing uniforms and creating the drama around it?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised. Some in the media find ways to insert race into every conversation, even when it doesn't really fit.



Most in the media have no particular values, obviously it's a debate that generates clicks. That's all they care about.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Journalists (or their researchers) don't seem to do any research anymore, and everyone has an opinion.



That's forever my pet peeve. Do your f*cking job. My main gig is food writing and I sometimes feel I put more effort into researching dishes than some of my peers who cover current events and politics.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I took it that they've been separated to avoid any possible unpleasantness or being caught in the same frame with displaying emotions to match.
> 
> You know, like school when the teacher puts one little boy in one corner facing the wall, the other the same, opposite ends of the classroom. Royal equivalent to timeout/naughty-step and no one's allowed to look at them - at least together.



My take - William does not want to be merched. He knows this will end up in the Nflix docudrama. He wants no part of that.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, they didn't invite the black relatives Philip doesn't have? How rude.
> 
> Speaking of it, why has none of the sugars ever questioned Meghan's choice of wedding guests then?


bam
where were her black friends and relatives?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Almost any celeb.
> 
> On anything.
> 
> These 2 take it to a whole new level because they can't even focus on one field. They are experts on _everything._


Been thinking H&M and Prince Philip.  H&M - agree, experts on everything but also lecturers on everything one/should not do. 
PP - apparently an expert on nothing - since he was not known for thrusting his opinions on others, YET, PP was actually an expert on many topics (airplanes, ships, boats), but he was quiet about that and never preached. Thumbs up to him !


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I'm guilty of not reading all the attachments in this thread so please forgive my ignorance.  but if it's a "private" (though televised) family funeral, aren't suits more appropriate than military uniforms anyway?  Do we know if there was really anyone who was wanting to wear their uniform?  or is this just basically the press reacting to the fact that they're not wearing uniforms and creating the drama around it?



In this case it was part of PP's wishes and traditional.

The adoption of those entitled to wear military to wearing mourning suits mean the formality is slightly downgraded.

Kinda like white-tie to black-tie, not exactly the same (I just needed an example of still acceptable but entirely traditional at such an occasion).

The Palace staff would have been going over hundreds of archive precedents to find a solution. It's not a decision made at whim by just the Queen.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I'm guilty of not reading all the attachments in this thread so please forgive my ignorance.  but if it's a "private" (though televised) family funeral, aren't suits more appropriate than military uniforms anyway?  Do we know if there was really anyone who was wanting to wear their uniform?  or is this just basically the press reacting to the fact that they're not wearing uniforms and creating the drama around it?


I'm pretty sure I read that Harry wanted to wear the uniform he wore when marrying Meghan. Can't remember where I read it. Andrew was also quite keen to wear admiral garb. Maybe someone else knows better.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> *bam*
> where were her black friends and relatives?



I think you mean BAME(?)


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm pretty sure I read that Harry wanted to wear the uniform he wore when marrying Meghan. Can't remember where I read it. Andrew was also quite keen to wear admiral garb. Maybe someone else knows better.



He is no longer in the same position as when he married Meghan.

*He* 'stepped away' from Royal life. There were repercussions. Now let's see him live the life he chose.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm pretty sure I read that Harry wanted to wear the uniform he wore when marrying Meghan. Can't remember where I read it. Andrew was also quite keen to wear admiral garb. Maybe someone else knows better.



I read that, too.  Harry even had to ask QE’s permission to wear that uniform at his wedding. The beard was an issue.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> He is no longer in the same position as when he married Meghan.
> 
> *He* 'stepped away' from Royal life. There were repercussions. Now let's see him live it.


Yes, agree. But Harry himself seems oblivious to this.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> My take - William does not want to be merched. He knows this will end up in the Nflix docudrama. He wants no part of that.



Good point!


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Yes, agree. But Harry himself seems oblivious to this.



That's coz he's  and   and


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My take - William does not want to be merched. He knows this will end up in the Nflix docudrama. He wants no part of that.



It doesn't matter. Even if Will is extremely careful in his interactions with Harry this week, it will still end up being portrayed negatively. They have lied about so many other things. They will make up a juicy story for a Netflix show, whether it's their own or for a future season of The Crown.


----------



## Aimee3

Once a liar, always a liar.  I wouldn’t believe anything that comes out of H’s and M’s mouths.
It’s about 8 am in the non royals montecito castle...time for the bigger moon bump to have contractions.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm pretty sure I read that Harry wanted to wear the uniform he wore when marrying Meghan. Can't remember where I read it. Andrew was also quite keen to wear admiral garb. Maybe someone else knows better.


but are these truth or assumptions/speculation?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> but are these truth or assumptions/speculation?



it’s all in the Google. I read a similar article.

ETA: I would post the links, but my Google is filled with Prince Philip stories.  So many inspiring, uplifting messages from the man himself, I don’t have time to read them all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> let Diana rest in peace and move forward.


If only! And to think it's her own son monetizing her death. 


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse


What fresh hell is this? 
Do these people not understand genetics?


papertiger said:


> If it weren't for the 30 max people rule, I can guarantee there would have been heads of state and friends from all round the world, more diverse than the wokest musical festival.


This!!!!
And it wouldn't be tokenism, it would be genuine friends from literally every continent attending to pay their respects!


----------



## Traminer

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Rita Panahi from Sky News in Australia is often entertaining and speaking sense. Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse...



This is madness - with a method!


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> I think asking whether a sudden or a slow tragedy is preferable is kind of tasteless to be honest and misrepresents my point.
> 
> I’m also talking about the royals’ public role and their PR relationship with the papers. To me, part of their job is to be stoic and unemotional and whenever they go out on public engagements that’s how they should be. The royal family sells itself on being the ‘stiff upper lip’. I can think of loads of professions where being too emotional at work is considered a detriment- do people really want pilots or doctors crying about their late parents while doing their job?
> 
> add on- I think any person being prepared for national leadership would get a mixed reception if they started crying and saturating the news cycle with stories of their recently deceased relative. The press are both an invasive force and a collaborative one for the royals- so while the long lens is tasteless the royals are also feeding them. My point is this isn’t really like our own private mourning for our own losses-  it’s more orchestrated than that.



I wasn't saying ANY death is preferable, which I agree is tasteless. My point the entire time is all death is sad, though you kept pointing out some deaths are sadder... which true, but pointless to compare when one is still just sad all the same and understandable to shed tears (or not - however anyone processes it).

The PR bit, I didn't really have a comment on aside from saying to another poster yes, it sucks but I guess that's just a life in the public eye.

Maybe this is just a cultural difference, but no I don't really have any negative connotation about leaders being emotional in super trying times. I think at this point I've seen all our presidents have a tearful moment in public, except maybe our last. Obviously we don't see this man breaking down daily... he was caught off guard by a moment of emotion and, like you said, there were loads of cameras that happened to be there. The circumstances lead me to give him a break... he wasn't bawling during a major speech or other moment where one DOES need to keep composure. I understand it might be out of the norm for this family, but I didn't view it negatively and I hope it gives them some comfort to know that not everyone does.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Charles’s tears - imo the shocking thing is that he let the public face slip. Remember he has been trained from birth to show minimal emotion, to keep his private thoughts private.  Although he has seen many of the world’s horrors and endured intrusive press before, this time it feels different. It’s personal. It hurts. Harry’s betrayals, covid, his great reset, his father’s passing, who knows what else has happened behind the gates.  This slip proves how taxing the last month, year, etc. has been on him.  I have no doubt he will ‘buck up’ and move onward.  Guessing there will some changes ahead in regards to press.



Just anecdotally, I noticed people who have complicated histories with a loved one - like periods of resentment or struggle for approval - tend to be much more rocked by the loss. Like all the emotions just come to a head and there might be added regret or a feeling of missed opportunity. Do you think this might be the case for Charles and Philip?


----------



## Chanbal

On Ginger's plans to leave UK asap after the funeral:   










						Britons mock Prince Harry over leaving UK 'as soon as funeral over'
					

BRITONS have viciously mocked Prince Harry after a Royal Family expert claimed he would want to leave the UK and return to Meghan Markle in the US as immediately after Prince Philip's funeral.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Icyjade

Saw an outfit that Diana wore to a funeral. Now I cannot stop wondering if someone will cosplay her...


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, who is Peter Phillips? He has often been referred to as the Queen’s ‘favourite grandson’.








						Who is Peter Phillips? Wife and children of Prince William and Prince Harry's cousin
					

Peter Phillips is Prince William and Prince Harry's cousin - here is more about the Queen's grandson, including his wife and children.




					www.hitc.com


----------



## jblended

Icyjade said:


> Saw an outfit that Diana wore to a funeral. Now I cannot stop wondering if someone will cosplay her...


It has happened so often now that I have no doubt she will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> Saw an outfit that Diana wore to a funeral. Now I cannot stop wondering if someone will cosplay her...
> 
> View attachment 5057156



Tatler takes a look:









						A look back at Royal Mourning dress through the years
					

As Queen Elizabeth II’s family grieves the loss of the late monarch, revisit the history of Royal Mourning dress codes




					www.tatler.com
				




Wallis and QE look stunning, if that is appropriate

ETA: can anyone ID Wallis’s bag (asking for a friend, of course)?


----------



## marietouchet

Brilliant Your Majesty ... 
QEII spotted driving towards Frogmore Gardens with her puppies ..
surely, H will also be out for a socially distanced stroll around the same time ...
Genius way to help diffuse matters, hats off to you Ma’am


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Brilliant Your Majesty ...
> QEII spotted driving towards Frogmore Gardens with her puppies ..
> surely, H will also be out for a socially distanced stroll around the same time ...
> Genius way to help diffuse matters, hats off to you Ma’am



Oh nooooo, toxic Harry wants a photo op and $$$$

ETA: maybe he is threatening to leave unless he escorts her tomorrow.


----------



## Chanbal

What Ginger and Cringe did is rather unforgivable... 


_Royal expert Amanda Platell said Harry and William's relationship was once "an unbreakable bond" but she warned recent events have severely weakened relations.

She wrote in the Daily Mail: "Yet break that bond has.

"*It has been shattered by Harry's swift and unexpected departure from his royal duties to live in the US, and by the incendiary interview he and his wife gave to Oprah Winfrey in California as 'Grandpa' lay gravely ill in hospital.*"

The commentator said the funeral provides hope of reconciliation between the brothers but she isn't sure if forgiveness is really on the cards.

Ms Platell said: "There are those who feel William should even find it in himself to forgive Harry, to move on, to forget all the wild, unfounded accusations levelled at him, his wife and the rest of the Royal Family.

"Yet if I were William – who, let's not forget will one day become the Supreme Governor of the Church of England – I would have to ask myself: Can I really find it in myself to forgive Harry's betrayal? Are some wounds just too deep?"

*She said Harry was well aware stepping down as a senior royal would "burden" his older brother, but the Duke decided to put his own needs first.*

The commentator said: "*Harry knew he would be badly letting down his brother William – also father to a young family – increasing not just his burden of duty but also the sheer amount of public engagements he would have to carry out in Harry's absence.
"He knew he was breaking that bond with his brother, yet he did it anyway.*

"For, as Harry said in that interview, it was his new family – not the Royal Family – that now came first."

*While William was clearly incensed by the couple's accusation of racism within the Royal Family during their interview with Oprah, it was Meghan's attack on Kate that has signed the ultimate death knell on their relationship, according to the expert*.

She said: "Perhaps even more unforgivable is that Harry allowed his wife to traduce his sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, on more than one occasion.

"Those of us who have come to love and admire our future queen were furious.

"Imagine how betrayed her husband must have felt! Harry had committed an unpardonable sin allowing Kate to be attacked.

"For, make no mistake, there is seldom any forgiveness between brothers when the sisters-in-law fall out."

As a result, Ms Platell fears it may be "many, many years" before William and Kate can forgive the Sussexes.

Harry will reunite with the Royal Family on Saturday, to attend Prince Philip's funeral.

The televised ceremony is expected to be watched by millions around the world, as people pay their final respects to the late 99-year-old consort.

Many eyes will also be watching how Harry interacts with his family, for any signs of tension, even though the Firm is trying its utmost to ensure attention is not detracted from the Duke of Edinburgh._









						No going back: Prince Harry's rift with Prince William 'beyond repair'
					

PRINCE HARRY'S rift with older brother Prince William is "beyond repair" because the Duke of Sussex and Meghan Markle went too far in tainting the Royal Family, an expert has said.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> Even if PP was the picture of good health when they recorded the interview.... he was clearly still a 99 year old man. And just like us, navigating a freaking pandemic and lots of political turmoil in the world. They must've known it would hit Granny and Grandpa the hardest emotionally as they're the epitome of people who just don't do that.
> 
> I also have a hard time believing they couldn't delay airing it once Philip went to the hospital. I get networks have schedules but surely their contract must've included some contingency plans. Or maybe their lawyers really are as sophomoric as that one Blind Item made it sound? Either way... they've made their bed.


I think (in Meghan's mind), it had to coincide with International Women's Day. I don't think it had anything to do with the Commonwealth Day thing that was happening in the UK.  Or whatever event was happening in England that people thought she was trying to compete with.  Meghan wanted to share her truth as a WOMAN at a time when women were being celebrated and in the spotlight - even if only for a day or two.  It helped her narrative, IMO.  She needed to ride that wave of the woman who was wronged by an old stuffy archaic institution (that she willingly married into). It's my opinion that Oprah wanted that interview to air on that particular date so Meghan could be celebrated as a SURVIVOR. A strong powerful FEMALE voice. I am woman, hear me roar... I am strong, I am invincible, I am womaaaaaan!
Ah Helen Reddy. Memories.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> What Ginger and Cringe did is rather unforgivable...
> View attachment 5057178
> 
> _Royal expert Amanda Platell said Harry and William's relationship was once "an unbreakable bond" but she warned recent events have severely weakened relations.
> 
> She wrote in the Daily Mail: "Yet break that bond has.
> 
> "*It has been shattered by Harry's swift and unexpected departure from his royal duties to live in the US, and by the incendiary interview he and his wife gave to Oprah Winfrey in California as 'Grandpa' lay gravely ill in hospital.*"
> 
> The commentator said the funeral provides hope of reconciliation between the brothers but she isn't sure if forgiveness is really on the cards.
> 
> Ms Platell said: "There are those who feel William should even find it in himself to forgive Harry, to move on, to forget all the wild, unfounded accusations levelled at him, his wife and the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> "Yet if I were William – who, let's not forget will one day become the Supreme Governor of the Church of England – I would have to ask myself: Can I really find it in myself to forgive Harry's betrayal? Are some wounds just too deep?"
> 
> *She said Harry was well aware stepping down as a senior royal would "burden" his older brother, but the Duke decided to put his own needs first.*
> 
> The commentator said: "*Harry knew he would be badly letting down his brother William – also father to a young family – increasing not just his burden of duty but also the sheer amount of public engagements he would have to carry out in Harry's absence.
> "He knew he was breaking that bond with his brother, yet he did it anyway.*
> 
> "For, as Harry said in that interview, it was his new family – not the Royal Family – that now came first."
> 
> *While William was clearly incensed by the couple's accusation of racism within the Royal Family during their interview with Oprah, it was Meghan's attack on Kate that has signed the ultimate death knell on their relationship, according to the expert*.
> 
> She said: "Perhaps even more unforgivable is that Harry allowed his wife to traduce his sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, on more than one occasion.
> 
> "Those of us who have come to love and admire our future queen were furious.
> 
> "Imagine how betrayed her husband must have felt! Harry had committed an unpardonable sin allowing Kate to be attacked.
> 
> "For, make no mistake, there is seldom any forgiveness between brothers when the sisters-in-law fall out."
> 
> As a result, Ms Platell fears it may be "many, many years" before William and Kate can forgive the Sussexes.
> 
> Harry will reunite with the Royal Family on Saturday, to attend Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> The televised ceremony is expected to be watched by millions around the world, as people pay their final respects to the late 99-year-old consort.
> 
> Many eyes will also be watching how Harry interacts with his family, for any signs of tension, even though the Firm is trying its utmost to ensure attention is not detracted from the Duke of Edinburgh._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No going back: Prince Harry's rift with Prince William 'beyond repair'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY'S rift with older brother Prince William is "beyond repair" because the Duke of Sussex and Meghan Markle went too far in tainting the Royal Family, an expert has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



The only thing I take issue with here is it wasn't "Meghan's attack"... it was "Harry and Meghan's attack."


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Saw an outfit that Diana wore to a funeral. Now I cannot stop wondering if someone will cosplay her...
> 
> View attachment 5057156


It may require wearing a smaller bump.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Chanbal said:


> On Ginger's plans to leave UK asap after the funeral:
> View attachment 5057149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britons mock Prince Harry over leaving UK 'as soon as funeral over'
> 
> 
> BRITONS have viciously mocked Prince Harry after a Royal Family expert claimed he would want to leave the UK and return to Meghan Markle in the US as immediately after Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



And, don't let the door hit your a** on the way out!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> The only thing I take issue with here is it wasn't "Meghan's attack"... it was "Harry and Meghan's attack."


It was Ginger and Cringe's attack, but Cringe led the attack. It was Cringe who played the serious victim cards. Ginger joined her at the end, and willing or unwilling, confirmed the falsehoods. The journalist is blaming Ginger for that.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Brilliant Your Majesty ...
> QEII spotted driving towards Frogmore Gardens with her puppies ..
> surely, H will also be out for a socially distanced stroll around the same time ...
> Genius way to help diffuse matters, hats off to you Ma’am


I noticed someone was angry at this news - I get it ... HM should not be encouraging JCMH ... he should come to her ...
On the other hand, I choose to see the Queen's action as something she is doing for Philip, not for H


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I blame Harry for all of it.  If he truly was so dissatisfied with royal life, when he became engaged, he should have withdrawn at that time, moved to LA and gotten married there.  All the machinations simply weren't necessary.


----------



## Clearblueskies

marietouchet said:


> I noticed someone was angry at this news - I get it ... HM should not be encouraging JCMH ... he should come to her ...
> On the other hand, I choose to see the Queen's action as something she is doing for Philip, not for H


I think those pups are going to be a godsend to HM in the coming months and it’s great she’s getting out


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> Almost any celeb.
> 
> On anything.
> 
> These 2 take it to a whole new level because they can't even focus on one field. They are experts on _everything.  *and know nothing about anything. *_


Fixed that for you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I noticed someone was angry at this news - I get it ... HM should not be encouraging JCMH ... he should come to her ...
> On the other hand, I choose to see the Queen's action as something she is doing for Philip, not for H



I didn’t want to give the incorrect impression, so I changed it. Agree, it is wonderful to see QE out there with the corgis. Love the car coming out the gates. It looks likes she is on a mission.

I simply do not trust toxic Harry. He has proven he will take advantage of anyone. If she has someone with her, then ok. Maybe she is going to tell him off. Maybe she wants a walk in the garden. Either way fresh air is a positive sign.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest. I was surprised to hear she is very, shall we say, critical of Doria without going into details. I mean, we've been saying pages and pages back while Doria seems to be quiet and dignifyed there might be more than meets the eye.
> 
> She also had a very good laugh at "close bond with Philip"...she says he saw right through MM and MM hated him for it.



Lady C always in the know. Thank you. I liked this comment below from Crystal and so, I think I will refer to MM as simply "Harry's wife" or "Harry's heavily pregnant wife" or "she who must not be named" from now on to remove the spotlight from her.

*Crystal* 1 day ago
"A commenter suggested she will now be known as Harry's wife, we will not mention her name on social media again since she is so adamant to be the centre of attention, we will not let her. Pls spread the msg."

ET remove unnecessary link


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> On Ginger's plans to leave UK asap after the funeral:
> View attachment 5057149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britons mock Prince Harry over leaving UK 'as soon as funeral over'
> 
> 
> BRITONS have viciously mocked Prince Harry after a Royal Family expert claimed he would want to leave the UK and return to Meghan Markle in the US as immediately after Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


 Don’t let the door hit him too hard on his way out then lock and barricade it


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, who is Peter Phillips? He has often been referred to as the Queen’s ‘favourite grandson’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Peter Phillips? Wife and children of Prince William and Prince Harry's cousin
> 
> 
> Peter Phillips is Prince William and Prince Harry's cousin - here is more about the Queen's grandson, including his wife and children.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hitc.com


 Princess Anne’s son elder brother to Zara and the queens first born grandchild


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> On Ginger's plans to leave UK asap after the funeral:
> View attachment 5057149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britons mock Prince Harry over leaving UK 'as soon as funeral over'
> 
> 
> BRITONS have viciously mocked Prince Harry after a Royal Family expert claimed he would want to leave the UK and return to Meghan Markle in the US as immediately after Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



   Bye


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Cavalier Girl said:


> I blame Harry for all of it.  If he truly was so dissatisfied with royal life, when he became engaged, he should have withdrawn at that time, moved to LA and gotten married there.  All the machinations simply weren't necessary.



Harry did say towards the end of the Oprah interview that had he not been married to Meghan, he would not have left, and that Meghan helped him to see that he was trapped. I am not a mental health expert but that really does sound like manipulation on MM's part and possibly exploiting H's fragile mental health (I do think he is seriously vulnerable). Also they have lived very different lives before meeting, MM was married and divorced too, so she is very mature and I would expect more sensible.


----------



## bag-mania

Cavalier Girl said:


> I blame Harry for all of it.  If he truly was so dissatisfied with royal life, when he became engaged, he should have withdrawn at that time, moved to LA and gotten married there.  All the machinations simply weren't necessary.



I blame Harry for being a weak, stupid man whose ego exceeds his abilities. Meghan's Lady McBeth-style influence could never have succeeded if Harry wasn't so receptive to being manipulated.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Also they have lived very different lives before meeting, MM was married and divorced too, so she is very mature older and I would expect more sensible diabolical.



Here, I adjusted that for you.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Saw an outfit that Diana wore to a funeral. Now I cannot stop wondering if someone will cosplay her...
> 
> View attachment 5057156



I have a necklace like that my mother gave me (fresh water pearls, diamond pavé, with single featured ruby/sapphire/emerald on gold heart-shape clasp). 

On the positive, if M plays predicable, my necklace will hugely appreciate for the sugars but on the negative, I'll have to sell it as it will be unwearable for me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tatler takes a look:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A look back at Royal Mourning dress through the years
> 
> 
> As Queen Elizabeth II’s family grieves the loss of the late monarch, revisit the history of Royal Mourning dress codes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wallis and QE look stunning, if that is appropriate
> 
> ETA: can anyone ID Wallis’s bag (asking for a friend, of course)?
> View attachment 5057166



She only seem to carry Hermes at this point (1972). In every photo I've seen, only the reverse shows. You'd have to find a pic showing the front for a more positive ID.


----------



## Icyjade

papertiger said:


> I have a necklace like that my mother gave me (fresh water pearls, diamond pavé, with single featured ruby/sapphire/emerald on gold heart-shape clasp).
> 
> On the positive, if M plays predicable, my necklace will hugely appreciate for the sugars but on the negative, I'll have to sell it as it will be unwearable for me.



Let’s see if it happens... cosplay in some private ceremony, and with photo op for some stylised black and white pic. Glimmer of tears just enough to look stylishly sad but not to smudge the makeup. Oh... and clutching her firstborn.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> She only seem to carry Hermes at this point (1972). In every photo I've seen, only the reverse shows. You'd have to find a pic showing the front for a more positive ID.



Aaaah, I don’t recognize the logo, here we go:


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aaaah, I don’t recognize the logo, here we go:
> 
> View attachment 5057277



Great photo.

Could have been commissioned for her, looks like it could be their intwined E and W. In which case, a one-off


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Let’s see if it happens... cosplay in some private ceremony, and with photo op for some stylised black and white pic. Glimmer of tears just enough to look stylishly sad but not to smudge the makeup. Oh... and clutching her firstborn.



I'll be clasping my pearls in feigned surprise


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I have a necklace like that my mother gave me (fresh water pearls, diamond pavé, with single featured ruby/sapphire/emerald on gold heart-shape clasp).
> 
> On the positive, if M plays predicable, my necklace will hugely appreciate for the sugars but on the negative, I'll have to sell it as it will be unwearable for me.


watch out for PMs from @lemoncakes&deepfakes offering to take your jewellery *gratis* as a charitable donation


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> watch out for PMs from @lemoncakes&deepfakes offering to take your jewellery *gratis* as a charitable donation



She has about as much chance as ever getting her hands on the Vladimir tiara


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Great photo.
> 
> Could have been commissioned for her, looks like it could be their intwined E and W. In which case, a one-off
> 
> View attachment 5057295



Wow! Your skills are beyond compare
Found this on Pinterest


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow! Your skills are beyond compare
> Found this on Pinterest
> View attachment 5057300



 

H&M

W&E 

& / or

Hermes 

Nothing gets past us on this thread


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aaaah, I don’t recognize the logo, here we go:
> 
> View attachment 5057277


Hmm... those legs??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _She said: "Perhaps even more unforgivable is that Harry allowed his wife to traduce his sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, on more than one occasion._



Kate was like a sister to Harry. I recently came across a series of pictures from engagements and occasions they had together, and they seemed super close and always had fun. And to throw all this away for someone like MM.

Sorry to be crude, but I sure hope the sex is good.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Hmm... those legs??


Oooh, very familiar.   
More alike than I thought.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Rita Panahi from Sky News in Australia is often entertaining and speaking sense. Apparently a new grievance among the never-enough-wokesters is that the Phillip funeral attendants are not going to be sufficiently racially diverse... I'm sighing really really deeply here
> 
> I now think we should all demand that any kind of private or public figure celebration, funeral whatever in Asia, Africa, Antarctica or wherever should here on after always be persecuted by any means necessary to safeguard that these are not attended by too many Asians, Africans or penguins but are always sufficiently racially (bio)diverse




Would a cardboard cut-out be ok?


----------



## LittleStar88

Should be some interesting side chats about H & M...









						Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk' | CNN
					

Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.




					www.cnn.com
				




*Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk'*

 (CNN)Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
Osbourne will be speaking for the first time since her dramatic exit in Friday's episode of "Real Time with Bill Maher" on HBO.
Osbourne's departure came two weeks after an on-air confrontation with one of her co-hosts, Sheryl Underwood, over Osbourne's support for Piers Morgan, a longtime friend, after his negative remarks about Meghan Markle. 
In that episode, Osbourne pressed Underwood to show how Morgan had been racist. Following the episode, the show went on hiatus for two weeks. 

Morgan subsequently left his job on ITV's "Good Morning Britain."
Osbourne apologized on Twitter for getting "defensive" and said that she "felt blindsided." But shortly after, in an article by Yashar Ali, a number of unnamed sources accused Osbourne of using racist and homophobic language in the past when speaking about her colleagues. Former "Talk" co-host Leah Remini, spoke on the record in the piece.
CNN did not independently verify the claims, but a spokesperson for Remini confirmed the accuracy of her statements. Osbourne's spokesperson Howard Bragman disputed the allegations.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Should be some interesting side chats about H & M...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk' | CNN
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk'*
> 
> (CNN)Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
> Osbourne will be speaking for the first time since her dramatic exit in Friday's episode of "Real Time with Bill Maher" on HBO.
> Osbourne's departure came two weeks after an on-air confrontation with one of her co-hosts, Sheryl Underwood, over Osbourne's support for Piers Morgan, a longtime friend, after his negative remarks about Meghan Markle.
> In that episode, Osbourne pressed Underwood to show how Morgan had been racist. Following the episode, the show went on hiatus for two weeks.
> 
> Morgan subsequently left his job on ITV's "Good Morning Britain."
> Osbourne apologized on Twitter for getting "defensive" and said that she "felt blindsided." But shortly after, in an article by Yashar Ali, a number of unnamed sources accused Osbourne of using racist and homophobic language in the past when speaking about her colleagues. Former "Talk" co-host Leah Remini, spoke on the record in the piece.
> CNN did not independently verify the claims, but a spokesperson for Remini confirmed the accuracy of her statements. Osbourne's spokesperson Howard Bragman disputed the allegations.


Interesting forum for the interview - Maher is quite liberal..
Piers Morgan chose the Tucker Caqrlson show - a more conservative forum


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> Hmm... those legs??


Wallis incarnate.  Good call!


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Interesting forum for the interview - Maher is quite liberal..
> Piers Morgan chose the Tucker Caqrlson show - a more conservative forum


Liberal and she can say anything. No censoring herself. I'm interested!


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Interesting forum for the interview - Maher is quite liberal..
> Piers Morgan chose the Tucker Caqrlson show - a more conservative forum



I think Sharon is quite liberal herself, right? Maher makes sense since he's the king of saying outrageous things (sort of like Piers) and not believing in cancel culture so it should be a sympathetic crowd.


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I haven't been this upset since Eddie and LeAnn tried to character assassinate Brandi, Halle's French baby daddy slammed the oh so beautiful head of Gabriel into a concrete driveway and Katie narrowly escaped with Suri from the evil scientologic clutches of Tom  Sorry, just trying to lighten it up a little.
> 
> I generally don't care about celebs or monarchies but some of these dysfunction and narc riddled dramas are epic, impossible to look away from and the H&M one fits right in.


I just have to say this .. I've seen both Halle and Gabriel IRL .. and honestly, the person who took my breath away .. *Gabriel *.. OMG is that man SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO handsome!!!  It was in a (_unfortunately now closed due to this damn pandemic_) local (_kinda_) restaurant and the minute I walked in .. I saw this incredibly handsome man .. and THEN realized .. OMG, that's Gabriel (_and yes - he was with their daughter_)!!!  It's kind of funny because we sat at the table next to them and he realized that I knew who he was, but I'm very much about leaving those folks alone (_especially since he was with his daughter_) .. but I did ask him if I could go behind him to grab a newspaper and he was very nice.  When they left he said "_have a great day_ ..", he didn't have to say that, but I thought that was really nice and he seemed to be just great with their daughter .. so I NEVER bought that crap from Halle about how horrible he is/was!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LittleStar88 said:


> Should be some interesting side chats about H & M...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk' | CNN
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk'*
> 
> (CNN)Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
> Osbourne will be speaking for the first time since her dramatic exit in Friday's episode of "Real Time with Bill Maher" on HBO.
> Osbourne's departure came two weeks after an on-air confrontation with one of her co-hosts, Sheryl Underwood, over Osbourne's support for Piers Morgan, a longtime friend, after his negative remarks about Meghan Markle.
> In that episode, Osbourne pressed Underwood to show how Morgan had been racist. Following the episode, the show went on hiatus for two weeks.
> 
> Morgan subsequently left his job on ITV's "Good Morning Britain."
> Osbourne apologized on Twitter for getting "defensive" and said that she "felt blindsided." But shortly after, in an article by Yashar Ali, a number of unnamed sources accused Osbourne of using racist and homophobic language in the past when speaking about her colleagues. Former "Talk" co-host Leah Remini, spoke on the record in the piece.
> CNN did not independently verify the claims, but a spokesperson for Remini confirmed the accuracy of her statements. Osbourne's spokesperson Howard Bragman disputed the allegations.


She deserves to have her say. Not just because I'll always have a soft spot (ear : ) for her hubby  but because it's only decent and right that she should.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> I just have to say this .. I've seen both Halle and Gabriel IRL .. and honestly, the person who took my breath away .. *Gabriel *.. OMG is that man SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO handsome!!!  It was in a (_unfortunately now closed due to this damn pandemic_) local (_kinda_) restaurant and the minute I walked in .. I saw this incredibly handsome man .. and THEN realized .. OMG, that's Gabriel (_and yes - he was with their daughter_)!!!  It's kind of funny because we sat at the table next to them and he realized that I knew who he was, but I'm very much about leaving those folks alone (_especially since he was with his daughter_) .. but I did ask him if I could go behind him to grab a newspaper and he was very nice.  When they left he said "_have a great day_ ..", he didn't have to say that, but I thought that was really nice and he seemed to be just great with their daughter .. so I NEVER bought that crap from Halle about how horrible he is/was!


Were you carrying a Bal at the time?  You should have tried to sneak a mod pic!  Amazing story, CeeJay, but I guess that's just every day life in LA.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CeeJay said:


> I just have to say this .. I've seen both Halle and Gabriel IRL .. and honestly, the person who took my breath away .. *Gabriel *.. OMG is that man SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO handsome!!!  It was in a (_unfortunately now closed due to this damn pandemic_) local (_kinda_) restaurant and the minute I walked in .. I saw this incredibly handsome man .. and THEN realized .. OMG, that's Gabriel (_and yes - he was with their daughter_)!!!  It's kind of funny because we sat at the table next to them and he realized that I knew who he was, but I'm very much about leaving those folks alone (_especially since he was with his daughter_) .. but I did ask him if I could go behind him to grab a newspaper and he was very nice.  When they left he said "_have a great day_ ..", he didn't have to say that, but I thought that was really nice and he seemed to be just great with their daughter .. so I NEVER bought that crap from Halle about how horrible he is/was!


I hadn’t really heard about Halle Berry’s love life but she should sue her agent for abuse.
I don’t know tbh even Meghan Markle herself can make a good first impression  some of her faces have been really quite pretty too


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Liberal and she can say anything. No censoring herself. I'm interested!


Must chuckle a bit about Sharon ... eons ago before the earth cooled, when dinosaurs walked the planet ... I remember her hosting 3 years of tv show that tried to fix up Bret Michaels with the ultimate date/groupie (cant remember show name..), in 3 years he did not find a soul mate


----------



## marietouchet

lalame said:


> I think Sharon is quite liberal herself, right? Maher makes sense since he's the king of saying outrageous things (sort of like Piers) and not believing in cancel culture so it should be a sympathetic crowd.


Agree, I think the angle for selecting Maher is the opposition to the cancel-culture


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> bam
> where were her black friends and relatives?


It wouldn't surprise me if Meg claims the BRF is so racist, she wasn't allowed to invite her black family.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Been thinking H&M and Prince Philip.  H&M - agree, experts on everything but also lecturers on everything one/should not do.
> PP - apparently an expert on nothing - since he was not known for thrusting his opinions on others, YET, PP was actually an expert on many topics (airplanes, ships, boats), but he was quiet about that and never preached. Thumbs up to him !


They're classic "Jack of all trades, master of none", but I don't think MM and JCMH even know enough to be "Jack".  They're clinger ons.


----------



## V0N1B2

Lodpah said:


> Reading the comments above, yes I do also it will be the end of an era when QE passes away but I also think Prince William be carry the banner forward, maybe more modern and will streamline the monarchy. I don’t think he suffers fools.


This is why I laughed when Harry & Meghan (especially Meghan) thought they were going to somehow "Modernise the Monarchy". I always thought William and Kate already had a handle on it.
I mean if this isn't fun...


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Great photo.
> 
> Could have been commissioned for her, looks like it could be their intwined E and W. In which case, a one-off
> 
> View attachment 5057295


Funny how she put her initial first; Meg would be pleased!


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, if you ever want to go down a rabbit hole of delusion, take a gander at the Twitter feed of a Meghan and Harry stan.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> I just have to say this .. I've seen both Halle and Gabriel IRL .. and honestly, the person who took my breath away .. *Gabriel *.. OMG is that man SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO handsome!!!  It was in a (_unfortunately now closed due to this damn pandemic_) local (_kinda_) restaurant and the minute I walked in .. I saw this incredibly handsome man .. and THEN realized .. OMG, that's Gabriel (_and yes - he was with their daughter_)!!!  It's kind of funny because we sat at the table next to them and he realized that I knew who he was, but I'm very much about leaving those folks alone (_especially since he was with his daughter_) .. but I did ask him if I could go behind him to grab a newspaper and he was very nice.  When they left he said "_have a great day_ ..", he didn't have to say that, but I thought that was really nice and he seemed to be just great with their daughter .. so I NEVER bought that crap from Halle about how horrible he is/was!


I've never seen him in person, but based on his pictures, I could see why he was a model!  And it wasn't for the weird features they seem to glorify now either.  He's a classic beauty.  (I still find it annoying when I see men prettier than myself!  )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, if you ever want to go down a rabbit hole of delusion, take a gander at the Twitter feed of a Meghan and Harry stan.



It would be more fun to drink bleach while poking my own eyes out with a sharp stick so I will pass


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, if you ever want to go down a rabbit hole of delusion, take a gander at the Twitter feed of a Meghan and Harry stan.



I sometimes come across them and it makes me want to bash my own head in. So sadly I can't take one for the team here.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I just have to say this .. I've seen both Halle and Gabriel IRL .. and honestly, the person who took my breath away .. *Gabriel *.. OMG is that man SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO handsome!!!  It was in a (_unfortunately now closed due to this damn pandemic_) local (_kinda_) restaurant and the minute I walked in .. I saw this incredibly handsome man .. and THEN realized .. OMG, that's Gabriel (_and yes - he was with their daughter_)!!!  It's kind of funny because we sat at the table next to them and he realized that I knew who he was, but I'm very much about leaving those folks alone (_especially since he was with his daughter_) .. but I did ask him if I could go behind him to grab a newspaper and he was very nice.  When they left he said "_have a great day_ ..", he didn't have to say that, but I thought that was really nice and he seemed to be just great with their daughter .. so I NEVER bought that crap from Halle about how horrible he is/was!


I believe you when you say he was beautiful but more than Halle?  she is gorgeous IMO


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Bill Maher may be politically liberal but recent Real Time guests have included Kellyanne Conway and Megyn Kelly.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Should be some interesting side chats about H & M...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk' | CNN
> 
> 
> Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Sharon Osbourne to break her silence in first interview since exiting 'The Talk'*
> 
> (CNN)Sharon Osbourne will discuss her departure from CBS's "The Talk" in an interview set to air Friday.
> Osbourne will be speaking for the first time since her dramatic exit in Friday's episode of "Real Time with Bill Maher" on HBO.
> Osbourne's departure came two weeks after an on-air confrontation with one of her co-hosts, Sheryl Underwood, over Osbourne's support for Piers Morgan, a longtime friend, after his negative remarks about Meghan Markle.
> In that episode, Osbourne pressed Underwood to show how Morgan had been racist. Following the episode, the show went on hiatus for two weeks.
> 
> Morgan subsequently left his job on ITV's "Good Morning Britain."
> Osbourne apologized on Twitter for getting "defensive" and said that she "felt blindsided." But shortly after, in an article by Yashar Ali, a number of unnamed sources accused Osbourne of using racist and homophobic language in the past when speaking about her colleagues. Former "Talk" co-host Leah Remini, spoke on the record in the piece.
> CNN did not independently verify the claims, but a spokesperson for Remini confirmed the accuracy of her statements. Osbourne's spokesperson Howard Bragman disputed the allegations.


I don't usually watch his show but will check this out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jeremy Clarkson warned Meghan Markle and Prince Harry they 'will not have happy ending'



> "Meghan Markle will have grown up imagining that princesses live in fairy-tale castles and spend all day riding around on golden unicorns, smiling kindly at muddy plebs.
> 
> "So it will have come as a bit of a surprise when she became a British royal and found, that on a wet Tuesday morning, she’d have to go to Carlisle on something called 'a train', to open the civic centre’s new disabled ramp."
> 
> "So, she’s obviously decided that if she can’t dine on peach and peacock and have a couple of mermaids in the gin-filled swimming pool, she won’t be opening any new toilet blocks ever again.
> 
> "I won’t judge her for that. People are allowed to resign from jobs they don’t like."





> Despite his sympathetic view of Meghan last year, Mr Clarkson was more critical of the Duchess recently.
> He called her a "silly little cable TV actress" after Piers Morgan left ITV over his comments on the Duchess.
> 
> Mr Clarkson described Meghan as someone "much revered by the young and the stupid who believe that her brand of simpering victimhood will one day bring down the monarchy, but it won’t".
> 
> He added: “Trust me on this one. Markle’s toast, and within five years, I suspect she’ll be posing for photographs, on her own outside the Taj Mahal or sitting on the back of a playboy’s yacht in the Med, and poor old Piers will realise that he lost his job over absolutely nothing at all.”


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> This is why I laughed when Harry & Meghan (especially Meghan) thought they were going to somehow "Modernise the Monarchy". I always thought William and Kate already had a handle on it.
> I mean if this isn't fun...


Kate being so ladylike. I appreciate her more and more. One day she will be Queen of Canada and the entire Commonwealth and I'm happy I will like her, so thanks Meg.


----------



## sdkitty

or 


papertiger said:


> I think you mean BAME(?)


or boom...anyway.....you get what I was trying to say


----------



## papertiger

I couldn't help but compare the headlines today between the celebration and the indignation

*Separated at birth to be reunited 36 years later Vs separated at funeral 36 years after being introduced*











						Identical twins separated at birth reunited 36 years later
					

"It was the happiest moment of my life."




					www.goodmorningamerica.com


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I couldn't help but compare the headlines today between the celebration and the indignation
> 
> Separated at birth to be reunited 36 years later Vs separated at funeral 36 years after being introduced
> 
> View attachment 5057538
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Identical twins separated at birth reunited 36 years later
> 
> 
> "It was the happiest moment of my life."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodmorningamerica.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057539



yeah like this woman knows what the queen said....OK


----------



## sgj99

What time is this to begin being televised here tomorrow?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> or
> 
> or boom...anyway.....you get what I was trying to say



I was trying to be funny 

BAME is an acronym in the UK for for 'Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic'


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate was like a sister to Harry. I recently came across a series of pictures from engagements and occasions they had together, and they seemed super close and always had fun. And to throw all this away for someone like MM.
> 
> Sorry to be crude, but I sure hope the sex is good.


I hope it’s not and he got played. I no longer have any sympathy for JCMH.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I was trying to be funny
> 
> BAME is an acronym in the UK for for 'Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic'


didn't know that


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> What time is this to begin being televised here tomorrow?



It depends on what time zone you are in but it will start at around 9:30 AM Eastern Time. 

It will be televised on most US networks, including CBS, which will be hosted by Gayle King. You can't make this stuff up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> It wouldn't surprise me if Meg claims the BRF is so racist, she wasn't allowed to invite her black family.


I just felt through the ether someone taking notes in Montecito! Don't encourage her!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> It will be televised on most US networks, including CBS, which will be hosted by *Gayle King*. You can't make this stuff up.


I just had this really really awful thought, that made me puke a little in my mouth. 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 Since GK and Harry's heavily pregnant wife are buddies, would GK ask her to provide royal 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 commentary during the funeral. 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 I so hope not.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> It depends on what time zone you are in but it will start at around 9:30 AM Eastern Time.
> 
> It will be televised on most US networks, including CBS, which will be hosted by Gayle King. You can't make this stuff up.



 AWKWARD! I hope she has the good sense to report on it objectively and not go near the OW interview. Don't even think of mentioning M, Gayle.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I just had this really really awful thought, that made me puke a little in my mouth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057548
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since GK and Harry's heavily pregnant wife are buddies, would GK ask her to provide royal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057548
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> commentary during the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057548
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I so hope not.



I doubt it. While I wouldn't be shocked by anything at this point, I _think_ the network has more sense than to bring Meghan in OR to take focus away from a somber occasion like the funeral. That could only be perceived as a publicity stunt unbecoming of a news broadcast.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I just had this really really awful thought, that made me puke a little in my mouth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057548
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since GK and Harry's heavily pregnant wife are buddies, would GK ask her to provide royal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057548
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> commentary during the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5057548
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I so hope not.


One shouldn't give them ideas, but I'm glad that is already too late to arrange that!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> AWKWARD! I hope she has the good sense to report on it objectively and not go near the OW interview. Don't even think of mentioning M, Gayle.


Should we bet on it? I bet that she will mention M (several times).


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Should we bet on it? I bet that she will mention M (several times).



 I'm not taking THAT bet!


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article!

Five thousand miles away, how Meghan must be longing to be by Harry's side today of all days as he walks behind the coffin of his beloved grandfather.

How he, too, must wish that his wife — unable to fly as she's heavily pregnant with their second child — could be here to offer counsel and comfort as he grieves.

To help him navigate the desperately fractured Royal Family. To help heal the rift with his brother William, not to mention Kate.

The Duchess of Sussex will still take part in the mourning. She will reportedly make 'private arrangements' to honour Prince Philip during his funeral.

*Let's just hope that doesn't include sharing her innermost thoughts with Oprah Winfrey.*

This is a time for quiet reflection, not public declaration of the deep bond she claims she had with Prince Philip, who she had little time to get to know and probably met only a few times.

I hope for her sake she will let discretion be the better part of valour and not repeat her and Harry's very public Remembrance Day performance of last year, when they conducted their own 'private' service for the fallen in a Los Angeles military cemetery. He had been denied the 'right' for his wreath to be laid at the Cenotaph in absentia.

They have no royal rights now, they gave them up for a life of luxury not duty in LA.

*And I dearly hope Meghan will not have a celebrity photographer conveniently on hand — as the couple did on Remembrance Day — to capture her 'private' grief for the Duke and post it on their website.

Her 'private arrangements' should remain just that, private.*

Our thoughts are with Philip's close family, his children, his grandchildren and his Queen.

Is it too much to hope that, after the incendiary interview with Oprah that cast such a cloud over the Royal Family as the Duke died, the Duchess of Sussex has finally learned that silence can be golden?
...








						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Don't share your private thoughts with Oprah, Megs
					

AMANDA PLATELL: Five thousand miles away, how Meghan must be longing to be by Harry's side today of all days as he walks behind the coffin of his beloved grandfather.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> Lady C always in the know. Thank you. I liked this comment below from Crystal and so, I think I will refer to MM as simply "Harry's wife" or "Harry's heavily pregnant wife" or "she who must not be named" from now on to remove the spotlight from her.
> 
> *Crystal* 1 day ago
> "A commenter suggested she will now be known as Harry's wife, we will not mention her name on social media again since she is so adamant to be the centre of attention, we will not let her. Pls spread the msg."
> 
> ET remove unnecessary link



yes, Lady CC is so frequently astutely on the mark. In the video prior to this, she discussed “madness” - in the case of PP saying it was madness to release the OW interview - and Lady CC implied PP meant actual madness, not just an expression, saying that Phillip had dealt with madness with his mother, and going so far as to say the RF had an even more serious and difficult issue - as Harry is married to a mad woman - and it’s not just petulance and bad manners and that she’s American - but that she’s raving bonkers mad. They have to tread more carefully because of this (of course, this is a paraphrase and my interpretation).


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It depends on what time zone you are in but it will start at around 9:30 AM Eastern Time.
> 
> It will be televised on most US networks, including CBS, which will be hosted by Gayle King. You can't make this stuff up.



Thinking I will have the Hubbie dress as a full admiral for the service or maybe the bowler and raincoat.  
I will wear the green hornet ensemble.


----------



## Lodpah

Megan won’t be quiet tomorrow. It’s not in her nature. She has a voice now. When she was a z list actress she was ignored in Hollywood so now she has a “voice” and delusions of grandeur. It’s Hollywood she’s attacking not regular people.


----------



## queennadine

I forget, what is Lady CC’s connection to the BRF? Like how does she have insider info?


----------



## Hermes Zen

I think M will post a photo of her in black just before or directly after watching the live service feed. Also think her mother Doria and maybe even OW (being 'close friend' and neighbor) will be there but possibly not in view or in the photo.

After all H isn't there to hold her and ask how she's doing.


----------



## xincinsin

queennadine said:


> I forget, what is Lady CC’s connection to the BRF? Like how does she have insider info?


I've wondered about how much is truth and how much fantasy in her revelations. I doubt she has a direct connection to the royal family but she is probably plugged in to a great many gossip groups which have connections to the inner circles. 









						Who is Lady Colin Campbell and what is her accent?
					

Born in Jamaica and mistakenly raised as a boy until 11, the Diana biographer is proving divisive in the I’m A Celebrity jungle.




					www.google.com


----------



## bag-mania

As if having Gayle King anchoring CBS’ coverage of the funeral isn’t bad enough, Omid Scobie will be reporting live from Windsor for ABC.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> As if having Gayle King anchoring CBS’ coverage of the funeral isn’t bad enough, Omid Scobie will be reporting live from Windsor for ABC.


Double the number of mentions for the grieving heavily pregnant one.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

One of the things that MM complains about is not having a voice, and that now that she has left the royal family she has it back. And I think she fails to realize that she has a big voice being a part of the royal family and even now, whereas normal people don't. If she didn't marry Harry she would not have had a voice, she would not have been invited to any of the places she has been to. She owes a lot to the simple act of marrying into the royal family.


----------



## Icyjade

Hermes Zen said:


> I think M will post a photo of her in black just before or directly after watching the live service feed. Also think her mother Doria and maybe even OW (being 'close friend' and neighbor) will be there but possibly not in view or in the photo.
> 
> After all H isn't there to hold her and ask how she's doing.



With Archie cos it helps to have the royal great grandson in the pic.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Shopaholic2021 said:


> One of the things that MM complains about is not having a voice, and that now that she has left the royal family she has it back. And I think she fails to realize that she has a big voice being a part of the royal family and even now, whereas normal people don't. If she didn't marry Harry she would not have had a voice, she would not have been invited to any of the places she has been to. She owes a lot to the simple act of marrying into the royal family.


SPOT ON!


----------



## csshopper

What Meghan hasn't figured out is "having a voice" does not automatically mean you have an audience wanting to hear it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Icyjade said:


> With Archie cos it helps to have the royal great grandson in the pic.



Thanks for adding Archie!  You are absolutely correct ... if M is 'gracious' to include him since his grandparents and great-grandmother (and sadly great-grandfather Prince Phillip) haven't seen him ... for how long now?  I feel so sorry for Archie and his soon to be baby sister.  I doubt M will have them visit their grandparents and great-grandmother for a long time. I wish I am wrong!!  I've known women (probably men that have done this also) that used their children to get back at the grandparents.  That's sick and terribly sad !  

I should correct myself. LOL I got carried away.   They have seen Archie on zoom but the little guys like myself haven't seen a recent full face photo of little Archie. I'd love to see more of this little cutie.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> What Meghan hasn't figured out is "having a voice" does not automatically mean you have an audience wanting to hear it.


I believe she thinks she is a big enough draw that she can go solo and still be guaranteed an audience. Her stripper PR firm really sold her on that.


----------



## Icyjade

csshopper said:


> What Meghan hasn't figured out is "having a voice" does not automatically mean you have an audience wanting to hear it.



Am under the impression that the US market seems to like her. You know, the black card and all.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> I think M will post a photo of her in black just before or directly after watching the live service feed. Also think her mother Doria and maybe even OW (being 'close friend' and neighbor) will be there but possibly not in view or in the photo.
> 
> After all H isn't there to hold her and ask how she's doing.


I would not be surprised if either Gayle or Omid arranges a video feed and cuts over to MM's private mourning ceremony. (Meanwhile in California, the DoS, who shared a special bond with PP...) 

There are bound to be lots of voxpox interviewing other (genuine) mourners, so they can mask it with a veneer of legitimacy. And every time they take a shot of H, they will include an inset of M's photo to remind the audience that she couldn't make it to the funeral because of her gravid condition.


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan is sooo heavily pregnant she couldn't attend the funeral, why would she subject herself to commentating on the funeral as though she were announcing the Kentucky Derby (Queen ahead by two lengths, Prince Charles on the outside, Camilla in third, ahead of William and Kate by a nose, Kate looks strong, William is holding back preparing to make his move, Harry is trying to hang on...)? 

Wouldn't interjecting herself into such an event so fraught with emotion be risky (she REALLY loved PP  right?) since she is heavily pregnant? Oh wait, Meghan is allowed to be a total hypocrite and no one is allowed to call her on it.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Am under the impression that the US market seems to like her. You know, the black card and all.


I saw some articles headlining her as "our girl" and attacking the BRF for "hurting our girl". So the nationalistic card is in play too.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan is sooo heavily pregnant she couldn't attend the funeral, why would she subject herself to commentating on the funeral as though she were announcing the Kentucky Derby (Queen ahead by two lengths, Prince Charles on the outside, Camilla in third, ahead of William and Kate by a nose, Kate looks strong, William is holding back preparing to make his move, Harry is trying to hang on...)?
> 
> Wouldn't interjecting herself into such an event so fraught with emotion be risky (she REALLY loved PP  right?) since she is heavily pregnant? Oh wait, Meghan is allowed to be a total hypocrite and no one is allowed to call her on it.


No, she'll be on air saying 2.5 sentences, then be overcome with emotion, and Omid will solemnly cut back to studio.
ETA: I adore your Derby commentator remarks!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article!
> 
> *Let's just hope that doesn't include sharing her innermost thoughts with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> And I dearly hope Meghan will not have a celebrity photographer conveniently on hand — as the couple did on Remembrance Day — to capture her 'private' grief for the Duke and post it on their website.
> 
> Her 'private arrangements' should remain just that, private.*
> 
> Our thoughts are with Philip's close family, his children, his grandchildren and his Queen.
> 
> *Is it too much to hope that, after the incendiary interview with Oprah that cast such a cloud over the Royal Family as the Duke died, the Duchess of Sussex has finally learned that silence can be golden?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Don't share your private thoughts with Oprah, Megs
> 
> 
> AMANDA PLATELL: Five thousand miles away, how Meghan must be longing to be by Harry's side today of all days as he walks behind the coffin of his beloved grandfather.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yes, that is way too much to hope for!  Hell will freeze over before the Douchess of Sucksex learns that lesson.


----------



## Chanbal

How the grotesque and futile existence of Harry and The World’s Greatest Victim hurt PP. 


_So it is an irony befitting Shakespeare that the funeral of the Greek-born prince, who became the Duke of Edinburgh and the Queen’s strength and stay, should decide the fate of his grandson; the young man who so publicly abjured the country beloved to his heart, along with its mores and its heritage.

For it will be beside the coffin of Prince Philip that the Duke of Sussex, who returns to these islands as a foreigner, will take or reject the hand of reconciliation.

*Of all those in Harry’s family, it was Philip perhaps who found his departure from The Firm and the nation the most baffling and incomprehensible.

During the last year of the Duke’s life, he would refer to the Sussexes’ departure with bewilderment. Indeed, according to those who knew him, the high-profile circus act of Megxit hurt him like the bite of a tiger.*

These days, the word “honour” does not mean much. When one hears of the alleged honour of politicians or do-gooding celebrities, one naturally guffaws. *But Prince Philip was a man of honour to his core.*

We all know the Duke liked to swear a good deal, was sometimes rude and insensitive and had a keen eye for a pretty ankle.

No amount of varnishing could make him fit for adulation in the halls of political correctness, a position that Philip, thank God, would abhor with liberal use of the F-word.

But honour is a different kettle of royal fish, and his philosophy of life was to make the best of what had been dealt him.

*It was notable that Philip, whose youth had been very difficult indeed, never felt sorry for himself.

Even so, his self-control was sorely tested by his grandson and The World’s Greatest Victim. *Poor Philip. This was a man who had so carefully turned himself, for want of a better phrase, into the first gentleman of the land.

*His agony over Harry was the agony of someone of intensely patriotic and civilised feelings thrown into a situation of intolerable vulgarity, destructive alike to the peace and dignity of the family of which he was head in all but name.*

He said: ‘I didn’t like the Germans much’

His whole nature cried out against it; exasperated. For Harry had consciously rejected and reviled the very values by which he had charted his life.

Born Philippos of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, Prince of Greece and Denmark, the only son of Prince Andrew of Greece, the future Duke of Edinburgh was evacuated from his country hidden in a fruit box after the family were exiled by a revolutionary court.

A penniless prince without a throne, with a mentally ill mother and a father who relinquished his parental duties, his childhood was even more unstable than Harry’s.

There was nothing inevitable about Philip’s migration to the country that would take him to its heart.

He was sent to school in Paris, then briefly England, before attending the Schloss Salem School in Germany, a country where his sisters had married German aristocrats. This was in the 1930s, during the rise of Hitler.

Philip might have stayed there. Already handsome, he was also a member of a European royal house, albeit an impoverished one. A life of luxury without responsibility in German high society would have seemed to many an ingratiating proposition.
...

Neutral, aloof and seasoned, he developed inner integrity. *But in the last year of his life, it was Harry who shook him.

His much-loved grandson had repudiated England, and in doing so rejected everything Philip held dear, and, worse for this austere, unshowy man, he had rejected it for the hollow gaudiness of Hollywood and the celebrity circuit.*

One might say that much of the British nation has repudiated many of Philip’s values, particularly those of public service and quiet stoicism.

But it must have been bitter fruit indeed to have his grandson, to whom he had been so close, do the same. For Harry and Philip were very close.

Life gave them commonality; the loss of a parent, a love of the military, of conservation and the clean life of the outdoors.

*Harry’s existence in LA would have seemed one of grotesque futility, of money grubbing and backroom bartering, of becoming a sort of tawdry, bargain-basement prince.*

But fate stepped in, and the Duke of Sussex has a golden chance to make a gesture of contrition; to remember who he is and where he came from and what he has thrown away.

Philip’s funeral, as befits the private man, will be small and there will be plenty of opportunities for dignified and emollient words. Sadly, there is also potential for a further rift. *Let Harry think a little on his selfishness, the hurt he caused a Grand Old Man and how even cynics have recognised the passing of a Titan.*

I incline to believe that the inscrutable gods, carrying Prince Philip off when they did, were very kind to him. Had he lived, he would have become increasingly unhappy and confused by his helplessness.

Resting at last at Windsor, he will mingle for ever with the soil of England that he found so blessed._









						Prince Philip was shaken when grandson Harry rejected everything he held dear
					

HE chose England. So it is an irony befitting Shakespeare that the funeral of the Greek-born prince, who became the Duke of Edinburgh and the Queen’s strength and stay, should decide the fate of hi…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

_His much-loved grandson had repudiated England, and in doing so rejected everything Philip held dear, and, *worse for this austere, unshowy man, he had rejected it for the hollow gaudiness of Hollywood and the celebrity circuit.*_

Right there, ‘hollow gaudiness’ says it all.  Hollow indeed.




Chanbal said:


> How the grotesque and futile existence of Harry and The World’s Greatest Victim hurt PP.
> 
> _*Harry’s existence in LA would have seemed one of grotesque futility, of money grubbing and backroom bartering, of becoming a sort of tawdry, bargain-basement prince.*
> 
> But fate stepped in, and the Duke of Sussex has a golden chance to make a gesture of contrition; to remember who he is and where he came from and what he has thrown away.
> 
> Philip’s funeral, as befits the private man, will be small and there will be plenty of opportunities for dignified and emollient words. Sadly, there is also potential for a further rift. *Let Harry think a little on his selfishness, the hurt he caused a Grand Old Man and how even cynics have recognised the passing of a Titan.*
> 
> I incline to believe that the inscrutable gods, carrying Prince Philip off when they did, were very kind to him. Had he lived, he would have become increasingly unhappy and confused by his helplessness.
> 
> Resting at last at Windsor, he will mingle for ever with the soil of England that he found so blessed._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip was shaken when grandson Harry rejected everything he held dear
> 
> 
> HE chose England. So it is an irony befitting Shakespeare that the funeral of the Greek-born prince, who became the Duke of Edinburgh and the Queen’s strength and stay, should decide the fate of hi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

Kinda sad but spot on. Johannes Leak in The Australian newspaper today :


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> How the grotesque and futile existence of Harry and The World’s Greatest Victim hurt PP.
> View attachment 5057941
> 
> _So it is an irony befitting Shakespeare that the funeral of the Greek-born prince, who became the Duke of Edinburgh and the Queen’s strength and stay, should decide the fate of his grandson; the young man who so publicly abjured the country beloved to his heart, along with its mores and its heritage.
> 
> For it will be beside the coffin of Prince Philip that the Duke of Sussex, who returns to these islands as a foreigner, will take or reject the hand of reconciliation.
> 
> *Of all those in Harry’s family, it was Philip perhaps who found his departure from The Firm and the nation the most baffling and incomprehensible.
> 
> During the last year of the Duke’s life, he would refer to the Sussexes’ departure with bewilderment. Indeed, according to those who knew him, the high-profile circus act of Megxit hurt him like the bite of a tiger.*
> 
> These days, the word “honour” does not mean much. When one hears of the alleged honour of politicians or do-gooding celebrities, one naturally guffaws. *But Prince Philip was a man of honour to his core.*
> 
> We all know the Duke liked to swear a good deal, was sometimes rude and insensitive and had a keen eye for a pretty ankle.
> 
> No amount of varnishing could make him fit for adulation in the halls of political correctness, a position that Philip, thank God, would abhor with liberal use of the F-word.
> 
> But honour is a different kettle of royal fish, and his philosophy of life was to make the best of what had been dealt him.
> 
> *It was notable that Philip, whose youth had been very difficult indeed, never felt sorry for himself.
> 
> Even so, his self-control was sorely tested by his grandson and The World’s Greatest Victim. *Poor Philip. This was a man who had so carefully turned himself, for want of a better phrase, into the first gentleman of the land.
> 
> *His agony over Harry was the agony of someone of intensely patriotic and civilised feelings thrown into a situation of intolerable vulgarity, destructive alike to the peace and dignity of the family of which he was head in all but name.*
> 
> He said: ‘I didn’t like the Germans much’
> 
> His whole nature cried out against it; exasperated. For Harry had consciously rejected and reviled the very values by which he had charted his life.
> 
> Born Philippos of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, Prince of Greece and Denmark, the only son of Prince Andrew of Greece, the future Duke of Edinburgh was evacuated from his country hidden in a fruit box after the family were exiled by a revolutionary court.
> 
> A penniless prince without a throne, with a mentally ill mother and a father who relinquished his parental duties, his childhood was even more unstable than Harry’s.
> 
> There was nothing inevitable about Philip’s migration to the country that would take him to its heart.
> 
> He was sent to school in Paris, then briefly England, before attending the Schloss Salem School in Germany, a country where his sisters had married German aristocrats. This was in the 1930s, during the rise of Hitler.
> 
> Philip might have stayed there. Already handsome, he was also a member of a European royal house, albeit an impoverished one. A life of luxury without responsibility in German high society would have seemed to many an ingratiating proposition.
> ...
> 
> Neutral, aloof and seasoned, he developed inner integrity. *But in the last year of his life, it was Harry who shook him.
> 
> His much-loved grandson had repudiated England, and in doing so rejected everything Philip held dear, and, worse for this austere, unshowy man, he had rejected it for the hollow gaudiness of Hollywood and the celebrity circuit.*
> 
> One might say that much of the British nation has repudiated many of Philip’s values, particularly those of public service and quiet stoicism.
> 
> But it must have been bitter fruit indeed to have his grandson, to whom he had been so close, do the same. For Harry and Philip were very close.
> 
> Life gave them commonality; the loss of a parent, a love of the military, of conservation and the clean life of the outdoors.
> 
> *Harry’s existence in LA would have seemed one of grotesque futility, of money grubbing and backroom bartering, of becoming a sort of tawdry, bargain-basement prince.*
> 
> But fate stepped in, and the Duke of Sussex has a golden chance to make a gesture of contrition; to remember who he is and where he came from and what he has thrown away.
> 
> Philip’s funeral, as befits the private man, will be small and there will be plenty of opportunities for dignified and emollient words. Sadly, there is also potential for a further rift. *Let Harry think a little on his selfishness, the hurt he caused a Grand Old Man and how even cynics have recognised the passing of a Titan.*
> 
> I incline to believe that the inscrutable gods, carrying Prince Philip off when they did, were very kind to him. Had he lived, he would have become increasingly unhappy and confused by his helplessness.
> 
> Resting at last at Windsor, he will mingle for ever with the soil of England that he found so blessed._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip was shaken when grandson Harry rejected everything he held dear
> 
> 
> HE chose England. So it is an irony befitting Shakespeare that the funeral of the Greek-born prince, who became the Duke of Edinburgh and the Queen’s strength and stay, should decide the fate of hi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


The World's Greatest Victim - oh yes!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

A nation shares its queen's grief on Prince Philip's death, and PM Johnson shifts goalposts
					

The best international cartoons of the week, chosen by the editors at ThePrint.




					theprint.in


----------



## Lodpah

.


----------



## Hermes Zen

.


----------



## eunaddict

Jayne1 said:


> Kate being so ladylike. I appreciate her more and more. One day she will be Queen of Canada and the entire Commonwealth and I'm happy I will like her, so thanks Meg.



I thoroughly love the difference in personalities - Kate being ladylike and demure and William's next to her thinking "FINALLY, I get to burst out these moves!"

Urgh, they're adorable together.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I loved this documentary.  I remember Philip's part.
He acted like just another homeowner renovating albeit he had a castle and private chapel.


----------



## Sharont2305

Shopaholic2021 said:


> One of the things that MM complains about is not having a voice, and that now that she has left the royal family she has it back. And I think she fails to realize that she has a big voice being a part of the royal family and even now, whereas normal people don't. If she didn't marry Harry she would not have had a voice, she would not have been invited to any of the places she has been to. She owes a lot to the simple act of marrying into the royal family.


This, in spades. Also, the RF have an even bigger voice by not saying much at all. Just doing.


----------



## catlover46

For anyone who wants to avoid US networks,Sky News has a live stream on YouTube.


----------



## elvisfan4life

A real mark of respect would be to stop posting on this thread for the rest of the day RIP HRH Prince Philip


----------



## mdcx

I'm watching live. Royal blogger Ashley Pearson just spoke to tv here and conveyed that Kate and William have not visited with Harry since he arrived as the relationship is incredibly strained and William does not trust him basically. Also stated that the British public views Harry and Meghan with scorn.
Kate looking lovely:








						Prince Philip funeral: Mourners arrive as Queen bids farewell to him
					

Her Majesty looked grief-stricken and bowed her head in reverence as she accompanied her beloved  Philip's coffin on its final journey as their eldest son Prince Charles cried as he walked behind the casket.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gelbergirl

mdcx said:


> I'm watching live. Royal blogger Ashley Pearson just spoke to tv here and conveyed that Kate and William have not visited with Harry since he arrived as the relationship is incredibly strained and William does not trust him basically. Also stated that the British public views Harry and Meghan with scorn.
> Kate looking lovely:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip funeral: Mourners arrive as Queen bids farewell to him
> 
> 
> Her Majesty looked grief-stricken and bowed her head in reverence as she accompanied her beloved  Philip's coffin on its final journey as their eldest son Prince Charles cried as he walked behind the casket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



they are correct.
he can’t be trusted


----------



## catlover46

mdcx said:


> I'm watching live. Royal blogger Ashley Pearson just spoke to tv here and conveyed that Kate and William have not visited with Harry since he arrived as the relationship is incredibly strained and William does not trust him basically. Also stated that the British public views Harry and Meghan with scorn.
> Kate looking lovely:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip funeral: Mourners arrive as Queen bids farewell to him
> 
> 
> Her Majesty looked grief-stricken and bowed her head in reverence as she accompanied her beloved  Philip's coffin on its final journey as their eldest son Prince Charles cried as he walked behind the casket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


And that gossip site “celebitchy” I used to go on would say that the British public is racist. I don’t hate MM but I do think she’s a drama queen.


----------



## mdcx

It's the most beautiful day for the service. I do hope Harry manages to keep his nerve during the events. He must surely understand by now what a horrible mistake he and Meghan made with that interview.
Very moving that Kate is wearing the same pearls worn by Diana.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Someone on the BBC has just said that Meghan will be laying a wreath with a handwritten note on it. Please tell me where? Eye very much rolling here.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The ceremony is so beautiful. Is the coffin in that green truck?


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> The ceremony is so beautiful. Is the coffin in that green truck?


It will be on the Land Rover, yes


----------



## marietouchet

mdcx said:


> It's the most beautiful day for the service. I do hope Harry manages to keep his nerve during the events. He must surely understand by now what a horrible mistake he and Meghan made with that interview.
> Very moving that Kate is wearing the same pearls worn by Diana.
> 
> View attachment 5058082
> 
> 
> View attachment 5058083


The necklace is an incredible statement , I WILL be queen one day  ...
and tears in her eyes ... sad


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Someone on the BBC has just said that Meghan will be laying a wreath with a handwritten note on it. Please tell me where? Eye very much rolling here.


I’m watching on a Canadian network and they did show flowers with a white little note and said it was from Meghan and how unfortunate it was that she was so heavily pregnant and couldn’t be there.


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> *Someone on the BBC has just said that Meghan will be laying a wreath with a handwritten note on it*. Please tell me where? Eye very much rolling here.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I’m watching on a Canadian network and they did show flowers with a white little note and said it was from Meghan and how unfortunate it was that she was so heavily pregnant and couldn’t be there.



How many months pregnant do you have to be to qualify to be called heavily pregnant? I would think at least eight. Wonder when the baby actually  makes an appearance.


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I'm watching live. Royal blogger Ashley Pearson just spoke to tv here and conveyed that Kate and William have not visited with Harry since he arrived as the relationship is incredibly strained and William does not trust him basically. Also stated that the British public views Harry and Meghan with scorn.
> Kate looking lovely:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip funeral: Mourners arrive as Queen bids farewell to him
> 
> 
> Her Majesty looked grief-stricken and bowed her head in reverence as she accompanied her beloved  Philip's coffin on its final journey as their eldest son Prince Charles cried as he walked behind the casket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well, if he's supposed to be quarantining, they couldn't visit even if they had a burning desire (LOLOL) to?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> How many months pregnant do you have to be to qualify to be called heavily pregnant? I would think at least eight. Wonder when the baby actually  makes an appearance.


I think due to the size of Meghan's ego, she'd be "heavily pregnant" as soon as her egg (her??) was fertilized, whether in utero or in a petri dish.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is walking with William and Kate! That’s an interesting sign.


----------



## bag-mania

I would love to know what they are saying.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> How many months pregnant do you have to be to qualify to be called heavily pregnant? I would think at least eight. Wonder when the baby actually  makes an appearance.




Heavily pregnant is actually a faaaairly common phrase in the Commonwealth (and English speaking) countries, I'd heard it often growing up. AFAIK, it refers to 3rd trimester pregnancies.

--------

Also, the brothers are talking. And it looks like William and Kate waited for H. Interesting.


----------



## xeyes

Two things possbly of note:

1) The published order of walking into the chapel (here) was not the order used; inside the chapel, Harry walked behind his brother instead of diagonally opposite.

2) Harry, William and Catherine were walking together and talking as they exited the chapel.

Maybe nothing but maybe something.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> I’m watching on a Canadian network and they did show flowers with a white little note and said it was from Meghan and how unfortunate it was that she was so heavily pregnant and couldn’t be there.


  
Calligraphic note?


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> Heavily pregnant is actually a faaaairly common phrase in the Commonwealth (and English speaking) countries, I'd heard it often growing up. AFAIK, it refers to 3rd trimester pregnancies.
> 
> --------
> 
> Also, the brothers are talking. And it looks like William and Kate waited for H. Interesting.


but Meghan is American and I don't think heavily pregnant is commonly used here


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I would love to know what they are saying.


Will:  "You SOB, if you even make this about you and your stupid constant victim wife, I will crush you like a bug!"
Harry:  "What's that you say?  You WILL give me more money if I hold back my tears and not leave Meg's sincere note at the altar?"


----------



## Clearblueskies

Well I’m British and in my experience it’s only used to refer to women in the last 2-3 weeks of pregnancy.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> Harry is walking with William and Kate! That’s an interesting sign.



I noticed this too, and I think they're probably (hopefully) talking about their grandfather or the funeral. They look like they're getting along and grief can bring people closer together, however they have issues that will not resolve unless they have some deep conversations. I have seen grief bring people together in my family but as soon as things settle, the deeper issues arise again and its back to normal. I don't think using grief as a way to build bridges or bring people together is healthy.


----------



## eunaddict

sdkitty said:


> but Meghan is American and I don't think heavily pregnant is commonly used here



My assumption is that that line came from the palace...paraphrasing/covering for whatever excuse she came up with.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder what Harry was thinking when he paused slightly when walking past the vault and looked into it.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I noticed this too, and I think they're probably (hopefully) talking about their grandfather or the funeral. They look like they're getting along and grief can bring people closer together, however they have issues that will not resolve unless they have some deep conversations. I have seen grief bring people together in my family but as soon as things settle, the deeper issues arise again and its back to normal. I don't think using grief as a way to build bridges or bring people together is healthy.


could be they are just being polite....I don't think it necessarily signals anything significant is going to change


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Harry is walking with William and Kate! That’s an interesting sign.



They are probably being excruciatingly polite. They won't give Harry any reason to run to the press and whine about being snubbed by Will or Kate, so they gave him a minute of walking together.  They'll be adults and take the long view and the press will sigh happily that the brothers are taking a step towards repairing their relationship.  I still think that Will is no fool and won't ever trust Harry again.


----------



## jblended

Am I the only one thinking that they were told to walk out together for the optics? HMTQ would not want the focus to be on frosty brothers but on the family coming together and paying their respects.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder what Harry was thinking when he paused slightly when walking past the vault and looked into it.



Hopefully he was saying a silent goodbye to his grandfather.

He probably wasn’t apologizing to him for being his generation’s biggest f*ck up in the family.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder what Harry was thinking when he paused slightly when walking past the vault and looked into it.



I saw Princess Anne bowing to the altar on her way out,  then her husband, Harry instead turned away, maybe looking at the vault, as if he was ashamed to look at the altar....it made me sad.


----------



## Clearblueskies

It looked to me that Harry was determined to catch up with W&K.  
Whatever, they’ll be as polite as can be, and conscious of the cameras.  But damage is done and things will never be quite the same.  Harry insulted the Royal Family, and the British people in the worst way.


----------



## catlover46

Straight-Laced said:


> Long read in The Telegraph UK today.
> Some things in here that I hadn't heard before ... the Scotland tour where Palace PR 'body blocked' one of Meghan's former advisers because M didn't want to make eye contact with her ... ?!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm
> 
> 
> As the Sussexes tell-all to Oprah Winfrey, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *'She wanted drama': The inside story of the rift between Harry and Meghan and The Firm*
> As the Sussexes give their tell-all Oprah Winfrey interview, royal insiders reveal the 'other side of the story'
> 
> 
> There was something distinctly familiar about the Oprah Winfrey teaser in which Prince Harry declared: "My biggest concern was history repeating itself."
> 
> The words, due to be aired during the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes' tell-all interview on Sunday night, bore an uncanny resemblance to the statement released by Harry's communications secretary, Jason Knauf, in November 2016 after the Sunday Express had revealed that the Prince was dating the American actress.
> 
> Confirming that "his girlfriend Meghan Markle" had been "subject to a wave of abuse and harassment", the statement criticised the "racial undertones" of newspaper coverage, adding: "Prince Harry is worried about Ms Markle's safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. This is not a game – it is her life and his."
> 
> The unprecedented salvo created two important narratives around the former Suits star – it formally confirmed her status as the woman in Harry's life but also positioned her, in the eyes of the palace and the public, as the victim at the heart of a media "storm". As the statement suggested, a line had been "crossed".
> 
> 
> But the tirade "by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry" also put Mr Knauf in a compromising position. How was the former director of corporate affairs for the Royal Bank of Scotland going to be able to handle media relations for a couple when the Prince had so publicly made plain their deep hostility towards the press?
> 
> Almost exactly two years later, the 39-year-old spin doctor would submit a a bullying claim accusing Meghan of driving two personal assistants out of the household and undermining the confidence of a third staff member.
> 
> The Sussexes have denied that Harry pleaded with Mr Knauf not to pursue it, claiming the couple are the victims of a calculated smear campaign based on harmful misinformation. They said the Duchess was "saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma".
> 
> Those highlighting the "outrageous bullying" say they want to "tell the other side of the story" to the picture expected to be painted by the Duchess on the Oprah special of her "almost unsurvivable" time in the Royal family. "Anyone who is a victim can't bear to watch it," said one.
> 
> The couple's lawyers insist Buckingham Palace is manipulating the press to peddle a "wholly false narrative" –notwithstanding the fact that the complainants no longer work in the royal household and the lack of palace action has now prompted an internal inquiry.
> 
> 
> The Telegraph has spoken to a number of well-placed insiders who witnessed first-hand the turmoil within the royal household from Meghan's arrival as Prince Harry's girlfriend to the couple's decision to stand down as working royals last year.
> 
> All spoke on the condition of anonymity amid claims they had been operating in a "climate of fear", where employees were routinely "humiliated" in front of their peers and repeatedly subjected to "unreasonable demands" by both Meghan and Harry.
> 
> Unwilling to play a supporting role
> 
> It was not until October 2017, a year after Mr Knauf's unprecedented statement that Meghan gave an interview to Vanity Fair in which she declared of her relationship with Harry: "We're in love. I'm sure there will be a time when we will have to come forward and present ourselves and have stories to tell, but what I hope people will understand is that this is our time."
> 
> The public did not have to wait long. Just a month later, the couple announced their engagement with a photocall in the sunken garden at Kensington Palace and an interview with the BBC's Mishal Husain in which Harry described his fiancee as "another team player as part of the bigger team".
> 
> Yet behind palace gates, it was quickly becoming apparent that Meghan had no intention of she and Harry being seen as the "supporting act" to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, despite their seniority in the royal pecking order.
> 
> That Christmas, determined to walk side by side with William and Kate to Sandringham's St Mary Magdalene Church, rather than several steps behind, they were pictured together as the so-called "Fab Four".
> 
> The Cambridges invited the Sussexes to spend the festive period at their nearby bolthole, Anmer Hall, an experience Meghan spoke of fondly afterwards. "Meghan was very positive about it," said a former aide.
> 
> Two months later, the quartet appeared at their first official event together at the inaugural forum of their Royal Foundation – a highly choreographed event described by one royal insider as "designed to send a message that they would be working as a team. It was all very carefully rehearsed beforehand".
> 
> Disagreements with the Cambridges
> 
> After Meghan showcased her years of previous work with "larger NGOs and smaller grassroots organisations", both William and Harry acknowledged that working so closely with loved ones had led to "healthy disagreements" over how to best guide the foundation's work.
> 
> "Working as a family does have its challenges, of course it does," Harry said. "But we're stuck together for the rest of our lives."
> 
> By now, Kensington Palace staff had already become familiar with a mantra that would come to characterise the run-up to the Sussexes' wedding in May 2018.
> 
> "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets" may have been shouted by Prince Harry to Angela Kelly, the Queen's personal assistant, following a row over a tiara – but royal aides were already well acquainted with the importance of meeting the Duchess's exacting standards.
> 
> "Everyone wanted her to be happy because they knew that would make him happy," said one. "Do whatever it takes to make it work for Meghan was the mantra. We all cared deeply about Harry. Contrary to this idea that they weren't supported, we were going to great lengths to accommodate their needs."
> 
> 'We all cared deeply about Harry,' said one royal aide CREDIT: Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP
> 
> So much so that there was an extraordinary incident during the couple's first tour of Scotland when members of the palace PR team "body blocked" Meghan's former adviser Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne during a visit to an Edinburgh cafe in what one former aide described as "the most embarrassing moment of my professional career".
> 
> The Duchess had apparently expressed "a reluctance to make eye contact" with Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne, who was reduced to having to post an Instagram shot of her former close friend and client visiting the Social Bites cafe from a considerable distance. "Anyone from the past was a problem," observed the former aide.
> 
> Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne's name would later reappear in court documents accusing Meghan's close friend and stylist Jessica Mulroney of "putting pressure on her [Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne] to withdraw or change statements" she had made in an April 2018 interview with the Mail on Sunday.
> 
> The defence documents claimed the Sunday newspaper's features editor complained about the intervention to Mr Knauf, who allegedly responded by saying he would ensure "this does not happen again". In the piece, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne described Meghan as: "Picky, not only when it comes to her clothes but also her colleagues, instantly dismissing those who didn’t share her 'vision'."
> 
> Describing how the Duchess had "given me a bit of a difficult time" after meeting Harry, she added: "Meghan likes to move on".
> 
> When contacted by The Telegraph, Ms Nelthorpe-Cowne declined to comment on the incident.
> 
> 'Email bombardments'
> 
> As the world was gearing up for what the LA Times had billed as "a royal wedding for the 21st century", behind palace gates the atmosphere was becoming fraught.
> 
> Staff had grown used to "email bombardments" by Meghan and Harry, with one describing how "the last thing we'd do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we'd do in the morning is reply to their messages. Weekends, holidays – there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time".
> 
> Despite publicly claiming they largely ignored the press coverage, in reality the couple were often consumed by it. "They're both very thin-skinned," said one former employee.
> 
> Meghan's supporters say staff members "who preferred a more genteel pace" could not keep up with the Duchess's "American work ethic" – with one close friend now suggesting the criticism was racially motivated. "Find me a woman of colour in a senior position who has not been accused of being too angry, too scary, too whatever in the workplace," the friend said.
> 
> Yet it was not just palace employees who found themselves on the receiving end of "inescapable screaming and shouting".
> 
> Much has been written about the bridesmaids' dress fitting, first revealed in The Telegraph in November 2018, that left the Duchess of Cambridge in tears.
> 
> Contrary to subsequent reports that the row concerned Princess Charlotte's tights, what actually happened was that the dress itself did not fit Kate's then nearly three-year-old daughter. According to a well-placed source, "demands were made about when subsequent fittings would be, and Kate left sobbing".
> 
> While Meghan's allies suggest that Kate did not make enough of an effort to welcome her future sister-in-law into the royal fold, allies of the Cambridges suggest she "tried to arrange social things" and invited her to watch tennis together but "there was a sense that Meghan never really wanted to be friends".
> 
> Those inside the palace concede, however, that the Cambridges can "appear standoffish" and are "often out of contact for extended periods".
> 
> Another former royal aide claimed the Duke, particularly, appreciated the "deflection" from his own occasionally demanding behaviour. "Bullying is endemic across all the households," the former aide added.
> 
> "The Meghan thing is a disgrace, but it's not in isolation. They cut you out, undermine you, talk down to you. One minute you're in – the next you're persona non grata. Some staff have special protection. I've never witnessed behaviour like it before. I wish I'd never seen behind the curtain."
> 
> A reprimand from the Queen
> 
> One member of staff afforded "special protection" is Angela Kelly, who has served as the Queen's closest aide since 2002. Rumours of Meghan being dubbed "Duchess Difficult" began to surface around the time it emerged that the Liverpudlian docker's daughter had been given a tongue-lashing by Harry.
> 
> Yet what was never accurately reported around the time of "Tiaragate" was that far from being denied the item from the Crown Jewels she wanted, Meghan was in fact given her first choice.
> 
> The argument erupted after the Duchess demanded that Queen Mary's Diamond Bandeau Tiara be produced for an unscheduled hairdressing appointment.
> 
> "Angela told Harry it was priceless and couldn't suddenly be handed over at short notice. He was furious and shouted: 'What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.' Suffice to say it didn't go down too well." So badly, in fact, that the no-nonsense 53-year-old, who has her own fearsome reputation among colleagues, reported the incident to the Queen, prompting a grandmotherly telling off for Harry.
> 
> Little did the Prince know at the time that staff had also given him a nickname: "The hostage".
> 
> According to one person with first-hand knowledge of the events: "They insisted that they had the same inflation-adjusted budget for the wedding as William and Kate – she got the choir she wanted, the dress, the carriage procession, the tiara – she got everything she wanted but it still wasn't enough.
> 
> "She was constantly looking for reasons to say she had been deprived. Also, she wanted drama from the very beginning."
> 
> Although the couple wanted their spokespeople to deny it, a story about Meghan requesting air freshener to be sprayed around the "musty" St George's Chapel was true, according to multiple sources.
> 
> Even The Kingdom Choir did not get off lightly after the couple changed their song 12 times before they were happy with the arrangement of "Stand By Me". As choir member Karen Gibson revealed: "Gospel music is all about the cherries on top and it's not about stinting on anything. But we got word back that they wanted something a little less, so we did a second version which had an Etta James arrangement but again we had word back that it wasn't right."
> 
> The group was then asked to meet Harry and Meghan face to face, before the couple finally settled on an arrangement after 11 previous attempts.
> 
> "The wedding was hugely stressful for everyone involved in it," said one former aide. "Staff were spending most of their time having smooth things over with suppliers."
> 
> Tears before the big day
> 
> The "Markle Debacle", when Meghan's father Thomas pulled out of the wedding at the last minute, only added to the tension as royal aides scrambled to "rescue" the narrative around the "big day" by having the Prince of Wales step in to walk Meghan down the aisle.
> 
> Despite Meghan later claiming to ITV's Tom Bradby that "not many people have asked if I'm ok", royal insiders insist they "rallied around" the couple – who were both in tears at times.
> 
> The Most Rev Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who officiated the ceremony, is also understood to have given "psychological as well as spiritual" support. The principle leader of the Church of England caused hilarity among his staff by failing to recognise Ms Winfrey at the lunchtime reception at Windsor Castle, asking the US chat show host what she did for a living.
> 
> By the time the couple had returned from their honeymoon, relations between the Sussexes, the Cambridges and their staff became so bad that Harry and Meghan appeared reluctant to engage with anyone at the June 2018 leaving party for Miguel Head, William's former private secretary.
> 
> According to two separate sources, the couple "remained aloof" throughout the bash in the private garden at Kensington Palace. "It was a really convivial atmosphere with William giving a touching speech about Mig, but Harry and Meghan just remained on the outskirts and didn't mingle with anyone. They were the last to arrive and the first to leave."
> 
> Eyebrows were similarly raised when, having shared the news of her pregnancy at the Champagne reception following Princess Eugenie's wedding to Jack Brooksbank in October 2018, Meghan declined to attend the evening do. The bride was said to have been "upset" that Harry only "popped along for a drink without Meghan" – although they were due to fly to Australia for their first Commonwealth tour the day after.
> 
> During the 16-day tour, which also took in Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand, the couple appeared reluctant to engage with the press. Although Harry managed to be persuaded at one point to speak to reporters at the back of the plane, he told them: "Thanks for coming, even though you weren't invited."
> 
> Bullying claims emerge
> 
> On the same trip, it was claimed that Meghan had cut short a visit to a market in Fiji because she was concerned about the presence of a UN organisation promoting women, with which she had previously worked but now was no longer associated.
> 
> At the time, officials suggested that it was because it was humid and the crowd was oppressive in the market. After Meghan had been ushered away, a female member of her entourage was spotted sitting in an official car, looking extremely upset. Meghan's female personal protection officer left her post shortly afterwards.
> 
> Lawyers for the Duchess said she met other leaders from UN Women later on the tour and denied she left for the reason alleged.
> 
> Although Mr Knauf had not gone on the tour, he is thought to have been "deeply concerned" by reports of the couple's behaviour overseas.
> 
> "There was a sense that they were just refusing to take advice, and insisting on doing everything their way," said one royal source. "No one, from the most senior to the most junior employee, wasn't under constant attack," said another.
> 
> Matters came to a head in October 2018 following the departure of a second member of the Duchess's private office.
> 
> Mr Knauf emailed Simon Case, then William's private secretary and now the Cabinet Secretary, after conversations with Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR. Mr Case then forwarded it to Ms Carruthers, who is based at Clarence House.
> 
> The email read: "I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X* was totally unacceptable. The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence. We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y."
> 
> The email, which also expressed concern about the stress being experienced by Samantha Cohen, the couple's private secretary, concluded: "I questioned if the household's policy on harassment and bullying applies to principals."
> 
> While Mr Case was "very personally supportive" of the individual members of staff, Mr Knauf expressed his concern in the email that "nothing will be done". The palace is now holding an investigation, having been criticised for failing to act sooner.
> 
> It was not until a month later that it was reported that Melissa Toubati, the Duchess's former PA, had "quit suddenly", just six months into the job. The following month, it was announced that Ms Cohen would not stay in post after the Sussexes' baby was born.
> 
> 
> 
> The couple were apparently "furious" about reports of their high staff turnover, piling more pressure on their PR team to "try to turn negative headlines into positive ones".
> 
> According to one former employee: "What people fail to understand is Harry's hatred of the media is probably one of the most important things in his life. It is defining for him. So the narrative is always – it’s the press's fault, never theirs."
> 
> That Christmas, the Sussexes were once again photographed alongside the Cambridges on Dec 25 but opted to stay with the Queen at the "main house" rather than Anmer Hall.
> 
> It came after an awkward staff Christmas party in which "all mention of Melissa's name was banned", according to one royal insider. "It was as if she never existed." Some employees found it hard to reconcile the couple's erratic conduct with moments of genuine kindness, such as when Meghan would buy female staff members flowers or even jewellery.
> 
> Relations break down
> 
> By the New Year, relations within Kensington Palace had "irretrievably broken down," with Prince Harry no longer on speaking terms with Mr Knauf after he had failed to persuade him to drop the complaint against his wife. The Sussexes' lawyers deny any such conversation took place.
> 
> Sources close to the couple say Ms Toubati, who was asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, was sacked for misconduct, pointing out neither staff member made complaints of their own to HR. Ms Toubati's friends deny she was sacked for misconduct.
> 
> With Harry and Meghan already operating in a silo – and increasingly consulting the Duchess's US team of advisers rather than palace officials – a split of the two households at Kensington Palace appeared an inevitability.
> 
> It was around the time that the couple moved to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor in March 2019 that Amy Pickerill became the third of the Duchess's staff to leave her role, having served as her assistant private secretary since November 2017.
> 
> Mr Knauf also stepped down to work as senior adviser to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. He is now chief executive of the Cambridges' Royal Foundation. Friends say he "bitterly regrets" not warning Sara Latham, who was appointed as the Sussexes' director of communications in April 2019, how difficult working for the couple could be.
> 
> The American PR supremo, who used to advise the *******s, quickly worked this out for herself when the couple insisted on secrecy around son Archie's birth on May 6, while trying to maximise global coverage.
> 
> Around the same time it was falsely claimed that the Duchess had been prevented from doing an interview with CBS anchor Gayle King, Ms Winfrey's close friend. In fact, insiders say "the Duchess was calling shots throughout."
> 
> It came after Meghan had attended a high-profile baby shower in New York with Serena Williams and Amal Clooney, without being accompanied by any palace press officers. Concerns were raised behind palace gates when freebies started arriving at New York's Mark Hotel, causing consternation for staff back in the UK having to wrestle with the Royal family's strict rules on gifting.
> 
> Having courted controversy throughout the summer of 2019 for snubbing the Queen's invitation to Balmoral and taking four private jets in 11 days instead, relations with the media were at rock bottom at the start of the Sussexes' September tour to Africa.
> 
> Royal aides were then left dumbfounded when what had been a surprisingly successful 10-day trip with Archie was overshadowed by Meghan's interview with Mr Bradby, in which she revealed the "struggles" she had faced adapting to life in the Royal family.
> 
> Duke's fears for wife
> 
> It came as Harry released an attack on the tabloid press as the couple announced they would be suing the Mail on Sunday over the publication of a letter Meghan had written to her father.
> 
> In a highly personal and scathing statement, Harry said some newspapers had "vilified her almost daily for the past nine months" and claimed they had published "lie after lie" at Meghan's expense simply because she was out of public view on maternity leave.
> 
> Referencing his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, who died in a car crash in Paris while being pursued by the paparazzi, the Duke said: "Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."
> 
> The interview set the tone for their January 2020 announcement that they would be "stepping back as senior royals" to become "financially independent".
> 
> As the world gathers to watch the most highly anticipated royal television event since Diana's Panorama interview in 1995, it will be left to the viewers to decide which version of history represents the truth.


I know I’m quoting a month old post but maybe what the MM stans don’t get is that maybe the British public don’t care for her is not because of her race but because she’s most likely a demanding diva who thinks she’s better than everybody else. I bet any money that when H&M divorce, he and William will repair things.


----------



## rose60610

I wonder how furious Meghan is that Harry is speaking to William without her guidance. I think the chat is for optics sake. The "flowers"  that Meghan had should fittingly be fake and plastic to reflect her true personality and motives.


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> I’m watching on a Canadian network and they did show flowers with a white little note and said it was from Meghan and how unfortunate it was that she was so heavily pregnant and couldn’t be there.


On the network you were watching the coverge from, where abouts were the flowers with the white note placed that they showed, claiming they were from MM? I hope it wasn't the flowers that were on top of the coffin because they were from The Queen.


----------



## LittleStar88

The only things being said between Will, Kate, and Harry are things W&K are ok to have repeated to the press.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder what Harry was thinking when he paused slightly when walking past the vault and looked into it.


"Wow, I've been such as a$$hole and my wife is a conniving beeyotch."

LOLOL when hell freezes over!


----------



## periogirl28

My first and only pregnancy was at age 39 (geriatric!) and my doctor and airline (best in the world heh) cleared me to fly 3rd trimester 12 000 km home to deliver. Granted I had no  medical issues but still. I have no words and completely no respect for these two. Disregard. Ignore.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Don't know if people noticed but everyone was wearing their military medals, including disgraced Andrew and Harry.


----------



## Icyjade

catlover46 said:


> I bet any money that when H&M divorce, he and William will repair things.



Yeah I don’t think they will last too... will give them a few more years as they fade into obscurity and then MM will find some old billionaire and ditch H after raking his name through mud during the divorce, grab the kids and live her happy high life.


----------



## Sharont2305

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Don't know if people noticed but everyone was wearing their military medals, including disgraced Andrew and Harry.


Which they are entitled to wear, as they are personal ones not honorary ones.


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> The only things being said between Will, Kate, and Harry are things W&K are ok to have repeated to the press.



Exactly and it will always be this way going forward.  They'll treat Harry like a member of the press; they'll be polite and charming but watch every single word. I still say William will give Harry very few photo ops with himself and Kate going forward which, of course, should be pretty easy with Harry living in California.


----------



## rose60610

Ooh, Meghan is getting slammed on Fox by having sent a wreath of flowers, detailing everything about the wreath, the symbolism of flowers, the designers of the wreath, etc as though she's hawking the thing and trying to make this funeral about her. Ouch. She's such an effing selfish idiot.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

periogirl28 said:


> My first and only pregnancy was at age 39 (geriatric!) and my doctor and airline (best in the world heh) cleared me to fly 3rd trimester 12 000 km home to deliver. Granted I had no  medical issues but still. I have no words and completely no respect for these two. Disregard. Ignore.



I think a better PR excuse would have been that MM will not attend in order to allow someone else from the family to attend, as their is only a 30 limit. That would have made them look slightly better. 

I think it was weird that Beatrice and Eugiene's other halves came, they didn't know PP that well, in that they are very new members of the family, and it would have been better if some of PP's family could have come otherwise. Beatrice and Eugiene had the rest of the family for support, didn't really think the hubby's were essential for support. Beatrice's husband looked like he was enjoying himself when pictured in the car on the way to the funeral.


----------



## periogirl28

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think a better PR excuse would have been that MM will not attend in order to allow someone else from the family to attend, as their is only a 30 limit. That would have made them look slightly better.
> 
> I think it was weird that Beatrice and Eugiene's other halves came, they didn't know PP that well, in that they are very new members of the family, and it would have been better if some of PP's family could have come otherwise. Beatrice and Eugiene had the rest of the family for support, didn't really think the hubby's were essential for support. Beatrice's husband looked like he was enjoying himself when pictured in the car on the way to the funeral.


That would have been a very good statement, I agree.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And they merch....  and one-up the family. Undoubtedly, other sent wreaths, too.








						Prince Harry and Meghan send wreath and handwritten note for Prince Philip's funeral
					

The Duchess of Sussex has not been able to attend Prince Philip's funeral, but she sent a wreath and a handwritten note to be included in the service




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



She and her husband *Prince Harry* have also provided a wreath to be laid during the service at St George's Chapel in Windsor.

The wreath, which was accompanied by a handwritten note from the Duchess, is made up of a variety of locally sourced flowers. Harry and Meghan commissioned one of their favourite florists to make and design the wreath - Willow Crossley, who also did the flower arrangements for the couple's evening wedding reception in Frogmore Gardens in 2018, their son Archie's christening in 2019, and the launch event for the Hubb Community cookbook at Kensington Palace.

Harry and Meghan specifically asked for the wreath to include acanthus mollis (bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece to represent Prince Philip's heritage, and eryngium (sea holly) to represent the Royal Marines.

The wreath also features campanula to represent gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.


----------



## daisychainz

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think a better PR excuse would have been that MM will not attend in order to allow someone else from the family to attend, as their is only a 30 limit. That would have made them look slightly better.
> 
> I think it was weird that Beatrice and Eugiene's other halves came, they didn't know PP that well, in that they are very new members of the family, and it would have been better if some of PP's family could have come otherwise. Beatrice and Eugiene had the rest of the family for support, didn't really think the hubby's were essential for support. Beatrice's husband looked like he was enjoying himself when pictured in the car on the way to the funeral.


I thought this was odd, too. As such new members to the family, why were they there? Surely PP had other people through the years much more worthy of an invitation. If markle had wanted to come (or been invited?) she would have for sure been one of the 30 invites.


----------



## rose60610

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think a better PR excuse would have been that MM will not attend in order to allow someone else from the family to attend, as their is only a 30 limit. That would have made them look slightly better.
> 
> I think it was weird that Beatrice and Eugiene's other halves came, they didn't know PP that well, in that they are very new members of the family, and it would have been better if some of PP's family could have come otherwise. Beatrice and Eugiene had the rest of the family for support, didn't really think the hubby's were essential for support. Beatrice's husband looked like he was enjoying himself when pictured in the car on the way to the funeral.



Agreed. I'm wondering if the husbands were there as "place holders" to prevent ..... another from appearing at the last minute..... from attending.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I noticed that William tried to walk away from the church to put some distance between him self and his brother, but Kate moved more slowly behind him, waiting for Harry to catch up.  William basically slowed down to wait for Kate, who waited for Harry.  Kate s the bridge.

she also seemed to initiate and maintain the conversation until the brothers were both talking and then she surreptitiously fell in with Sophie and family, who were right behind them.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> And they merch....  and one-up the family. Undoubtedly, other sent wreaths, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan send wreath and handwritten note for Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has not been able to attend Prince Philip's funeral, but she sent a wreath and a handwritten note to be included in the service
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She and her husband *Prince Harry* have also provided a wreath to be laid during the service at St George's Chapel in Windsor.
> 
> The wreath, which was accompanied by a handwritten note from the Duchess, is made up of a variety of locally sourced flowers. Harry and Meghan commissioned one of their favourite florists to make and design the wreath - Willow Crossley, who also did the flower arrangements for the couple's evening wedding reception in Frogmore Gardens in 2018, their son Archie's christening in 2019, and the launch event for the Hubb Community cookbook at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Harry and Meghan specifically asked for the wreath to include acanthus mollis (bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece to represent Prince Philip's heritage, and eryngium (sea holly) to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula to represent gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.



How much you wanna bet there's going to be a plastic replica FOR SALE, proceeds going to Archewell? PUKE!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Wreath sent to funeral *shock horror* whatever next?
STFU Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QE did it better.  Check out the Prince Philip thread.


----------



## catlover46

Self delete


----------



## elvisfan4life

catlover46 said:


> I hope I’m wrong but I fear the Queen is going to follow PP this year



What an awful thing to say .. sometimes it is better not to say anything


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> I noticed that William tried to walk away from the church to put some distance between him self and his brother, but Kate moved more slowly behind him, waiting for Harry to catch up.  William basically slowed down to wait for Kate, who waited for Harry.  Kate s the bridge.
> 
> she also seemed to initiate and maintain the conversation until the brothers were both talking and then she surreptitiously fell in with Sophie and family, who were right behind them.


She was also engaging in conversation with Harry under the awning prior to walking up.


----------



## catlover46

elvisfan4life said:


> What an awful thing to say .. sometimes it is better not to say anything


I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

It was a beautiful service. When the lone bagpiper walked off I couldn't help crying a bit, it was almost other worldly. These things are so hard for everyone, royal and "commoner", and leave many of us with so many unanswered questions about existence overall, on a profound level. Life, death and the meaning of it all should be a subject in schools from day one. Maybe then we humans would have a little less infighting and a little more of cooperation and common goals.


----------



## TC1

catlover46 said:


> I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.


You are entitled to post whatever feelings you have. I've said the exact same, it's been a very difficult year and the loss of a soulmate can be very difficult...which can lead to a decline in health.
It was inappropriate for you to be chastised for a comment.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

catlover46 said:


> I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.


I didn't take what you posted as being wrong in any way. I'm sure it's a real worry for the rest of the BRF. It's not uncommon that it happens when couples are older.


----------



## rose60610

I think QEII is strong as an ox. Stronger than the rest of the family put together. Even in her heartbreak. She's lived through so much, I find that those who've lived through several tragedies and awful events (WWII, the bombings of WWII, her service in WWII, family divorces, IRA and other terrorist bombings, scandals, etc) are better equipped to handle other setbacks. And it isn't "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" because some people wither under pressures. When forced to lead through tough times, one develops an iron will. QEII is a very strong lady. I hope she lives to 105. If she does, my guess she'd still have a sharp mind. She never whines like her piss ant grandson and his entitled spoiled wife.


----------



## catlover46

TC1 said:


> You are entitled to post whatever feelings you have. I've said the exact same, it's been a very difficult year and the loss of a soulmate can be very difficult...which can lead to a decline in health.
> It was inappropriate for you to be chastised for a comment.


Thank you that’s what I meant


----------



## Love Of My Life

Just a comment... its a terrible time in the Queen's life at this moment.. she has lost her lifeline
& her husband of 73 years, friend, her go to, advisor & everything else a relationship of that length
of time brings
I only wish that H & M had given more thought to their decision of leaving & starting "anew"
Not seeing your grandchild & great grandchildren at a delicate time is very hurtful
& the bond that should be there isn't..
Facetime is wonderful but its not the same as holding, hugging, laughing & playing..
sorry it just isn't..
I don't think either H&M get the impact of their decisions. JMO


----------



## catlover46

rose60610 said:


> I think QEII is strong as an ox. Stronger than the rest of the family put together. Even in her heartbreak. She's lived through so much, I find that those who've lived through several tragedies and awful events (WWII, the bombings of WWII, her service in WWII, family divorces, IRA and other terrorist bombings, scandals, etc) are better equipped to handle other setbacks. And it isn't "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" because some people wither under pressures. When forced to lead through tough times, one develops an iron will. QEII is a very strong lady. I hope she lives to 105. If she does, my guess she'd still have a sharp mind. She never whines like her piss ant grandson and his entitled spoiled wife.


She reminds me of my maternal grandmother. In the span of 4-5 years when she was in her early 40’s she lost a daughter at birth, my grandfather, and her parents but she kept on going.


----------



## daisychainz

catlover46 said:


> I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.


I know you didn't either, don't worry, many of us understand your words.  It's very very common for older couples married that amount of years to follow one another in death. The stress on the heart is often too much  QE is a resilient woman, though!


----------



## chaneljewel

youngster said:


> Exactly and it will always be this way going forward.  They'll treat Harry like a member of the press; they'll be polite and charming but watch every single word. I still say William will give Harry very few photo ops with himself and Kate going forward which, of course, should be pretty easy with Harry living in California.


I think the same thing.   W and K will never tell H anything that can’t be heard by anyone.  H has completely destroyed their intimate conversations.  I wouldn’t trust him even breathing on me!!


----------



## rose60610

catlover46 said:


> Thank you that’s what I meant



It's true many spouses and other close relationships soon pass after another. I think it's also true that QEII is a very realistic person and knew this day would come and has been preparing herself over the years. Regardless, it's crushing, I know what you mean. But she's a strong lady and strikes me as one to be proud to move forward if only to set an example to others. She's always been about service.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chaneljewel

chaneljewel said:


> I think the same thing.   W and K will never tell H anything that can’t be heard by everyone.  H has completely destroyed their intimate conversations.  I wouldn’t trust him even breathing on me!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

catlover46 said:


> I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.


I know you didn’t, but to put it into context, Prince Philip and the Queen have been around all my life.  They were there before my parents!  I think it was Truman that was President when Elizabeth became Queen?  Imagine he was still your President.  The Queen is an extraordinary woman, it will be a very sad day when we lose her.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Maybe then we humans would have a little less infighting and a little more of cooperation and common goals.



I think this happens whenever something tragic happens but then we get back to normal life and we forget this. 

Covid is a good example, we will go back to normal and forget about the precautions and signs we should be looking for. When SARS 1 happened they banned wet food markets but 17 years later we have a major outbreak which could've been avoided.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I think QEII is strong as an ox. Stronger than the rest of the family put together. Even in her heartbreak. She's lived through so much, I find that those who've lived through several tragedies and awful events (WWII, the bombings of WWII, her service in WWII, family divorces, IRA and other terrorist bombings, scandals, etc) are better equipped to handle other setbacks. And it isn't "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" because some people wither under pressures. When forced to lead through tough times, one develops an iron will. QEII is a very strong lady. I hope she lives to 105. If she does, my guess she'd still have a sharp mind. She never whines like her piss ant grandson and his entitled spoiled wife.


she is strong but this has to be a huge blow for her.....I think she will go on for a while but who knows how long.  I imagine Charles is feeling maybe a bit apprehensive that his turn may be coming.  I saw video of the queen's coronation and she looked far from happy.  Of course, in her case, her father had just died at a young age.  but what do they say?  heavy is the head that wears the crown?


----------



## rose60610

catlover46 said:


> She reminds me of my maternal grandmother. In the span of 4-5 years when she was in her early 40’s she lost a daughter at birth, my grandfather, and her parents but she kept on going.



I'm sorry your grandmother had to go through that. Sounds like she and QEII were cut from the same cloth and could have been good friends. Strong and stoic!


----------



## sdkitty

chaneljewel said:


> I think the same thing.   W and K will never tell H anything that can’t be heard by anyone.  H has completely destroyed their intimate conversations.  I wouldn’t trust him even breathing on me!!


at least as long as he is married to M....could be some time in the future their relationship could be mended


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> And they merch....  and one-up the family. Undoubtedly, other sent wreaths, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan send wreath and handwritten note for Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has not been able to attend Prince Philip's funeral, but she sent a wreath and a handwritten note to be included in the service
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She and her husband *Prince Harry* have also provided a wreath to be laid during the service at St George's Chapel in Windsor.
> 
> The wreath, which was accompanied by a handwritten note from the Duchess, is made up of a variety of locally sourced flowers. Harry and Meghan commissioned one of their favourite florists to make and design the wreath - Willow Crossley, who also did the flower arrangements for the couple's evening wedding reception in Frogmore Gardens in 2018, their son Archie's christening in 2019, and the launch event for the Hubb Community cookbook at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Harry and Meghan specifically asked for the wreath to include acanthus mollis (bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece to represent Prince Philip's heritage, and eryngium (sea holly) to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula to represent gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.


Gag me.  Or rather, can someone PLEASE gag Meghan?


----------



## catlover46

Clearblueskies said:


> I know you didn’t, but to put it into context, Prince Philip and the Queen have been around all my life.  They were there before my parents!  I think it was Truman that was President when Elizabeth became Queen?  Imagine he was still your President.  The Queen is an extraordinary woman, it will be a very sad day when we lose her.


My mom was 9 when she became Queen .


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, after being surrounded by intelligent, elegant, dignified, respectful people for a week,  toxic Harry will return to his heavily pregnant wife.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, after being surrounded by intelligent, elegant, dignified, respectful people for a week,  toxic Harry will return to his heavily pregnant wife.


All good.  He can go back to feeding his rescue chickens and preaching to us all!  Can't wait.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> All good.  He can go back to feeding his rescue chickens and preaching to us all!  Can't wait.


I don't imagine he'll stick around for long.  Maybe he will try to get a meeting with Charles or the queen re his allowance or security costs for his son.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder at which point was he allowed to press record?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder at which point was he allowed to press record?


Indeed.  William couldn’t get away quick enough, he looked like he was reaching for a phantom scarf.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, after being surrounded by intelligent, elegant, dignified, respectful people for a week,  toxic Harry will return to his heavily pregnant wife.



You know she was in constant contact with him the entire week. In spite of what her minions in the press tell us, Harry didn’t have any time out of touch to “miss” her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Charles Spencer








						Charles Spencer breaks silence after Prince William and Prince Harry reunite at Prince Philip's funeral
					

Charles Spencer praises Prince Philip's funeral after watching his nephews Prince Harry and Prince William reunite on Saturday




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

catlover46 said:


> I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.



It is known occurrence. 
My mom went six weeks after my dad 
I'm sure the family will be extra vigilant


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seeing her today, she looks so frail.  
She can rest easy now, knowing she served her husband well.  With his high level of perfection, she followed his wishes.
God save the Queen.


----------



## csshopper

"The" wreath: Meghan and Harry have singlehandedly refuted an old cliche that "actions speak louder than words."  Their action in placing a wreath honoring Prince Phillip is too-little-too-late, too disingenuous, too hypocritical. Their words, which came across like a shout, in the Interview will live in infamy, can't be erased, can't be overcome. Yes, they claimed the Queen and Phillip were not suspects in any racial comments etc, but in vilifying the Royal Family as they did, they besmirched all the values the Queen and Prince Phillip stand/stood for.

Of course Catherine and William interacted with Harry, no matter their own personal feelings, it was a time and place that required the kind of behavior expected of a future King and Queen. They reacted in a way for the greater good and in respect for the Queen and Prince Phillip. Kate was impressive, I think she is going to a regal Queen who will rule beside William with a genuine love for her subjects and a sense of duty that will endear her to them.

I wonder if while participating in the service Harry felt any shame or regret for his selfish and hurtful actions and words since marrying M. If so, it will be short lived once he's back in her clutches.

I hope she's had a miserable day to reflect on all she has damaged and how different it could have been. Watching the group assembled for the funeral, I thought M could never do more than a half baked performance feigning grief in a situation like this as she lacks the heart and soul to understand and be able to experience the depth and breadth of love, of service, of selfless character represented there.

Edited to remove statement Harry had not nodded to the altar upon leaving the service, he did in fact do so.


----------



## jennalovesbags

csshopper said:


> "The" wreath: Meghan and Harry have singlehandedly refuted an old cliche that "actions speak louder than words."  Their action in placing a wreath honoring Prince Phillip is too-little-too-late, too disingenuous, too hypocritical. Their words, which came across like a shout, in the Interview will live in infamy, can't be erased, can't be overcome. Yes, they claimed the Queen and Phillip were not suspects in any racial comments etc, but in vilifying the Royal Family as they did, they besmirched all the values the Queen and Prince Phillip stand/stood for.
> 
> Of course Catherine and William interacted with Harry, no matter their own personal feelings, it was a time and place that required the kind of behavior expected of a future King and Queen. They reacted in a way for the greater good and in respect for the Queen and Prince Phillip. Kate was impressive, I think she is going to a regal Queen who will rule beside William with a genuine love for her subjects and a sense of duty that will endear her to them.
> 
> As someone has previously mentioned, Harry did not nod towards the altar as others did and I wonder if, maybe for a brief moment, he felt some shame for his actions and words since marrying M. If so, it will be short lived once he's back in her clutches.
> 
> I hope she's had a miserable day to reflect on all she has damaged and how different it could have been. Watching the group assembled for the funeral, I thought M could never do more than a half baked performance feigning grief in a situation like this as she lacks the heart and soul to understand and be able to experience the depth and breadth of love, of service, of selfless character represented there.



He did not do it in the same location as the others.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The world needs the Middleton Manners textbook, video, and classes. 
They know how to raise impressive adults.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> And they merch....  and one-up the family. Undoubtedly, other sent wreaths, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan send wreath and handwritten note for Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has not been able to attend Prince Philip's funeral, but she sent a wreath and a handwritten note to be included in the service
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She and her husband *Prince Harry* have also provided a wreath to be laid during the service at St George's Chapel in Windsor.
> 
> The wreath, which was accompanied by a handwritten note from the Duchess, is made up of a variety of locally sourced flowers. Harry and Meghan commissioned one of their favourite florists to make and design the wreath - Willow Crossley, who also did the flower arrangements for the couple's evening wedding reception in Frogmore Gardens in 2018, their son Archie's christening in 2019, and the launch event for the Hubb Community cookbook at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Harry and Meghan specifically asked for the wreath to include acanthus mollis (bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece to represent Prince Philip's heritage, and eryngium (sea holly) to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula to represent gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.





For a couple who plead for pRiVaCy and ran away from their royal duties for more PrIvAcY, they really have absolutely no understanding of the word. Not even a tiny bit.
If true, that sounds like a lovely wreath with all the flowers included that have meaningful representations to PP and his life, but there is no reason for any of us to know about it. A man has died, show some respect.
It's a funeral, family members & friends have wreaths made for their loved-one who has passed, that's pretty damn common and it's far from being worthy of reporting. It is not the time to be advertising the wreath _you _purchased and the florist _you _used.
The only wreath of importance that anyone needed to know about was the one that lay on top of the coffin, from The Queen to her beloved husband.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> but Meghan is American and I don't think heavily pregnant is commonly used here


Heavily pregnant to me, means she is in her last couple of weeks, which she clearly is not.  She was definitely not welcome nor wanted at the funeral, so this is a meaningless phrase to "explain" her absence.  I had to turn the TV off when the royal correspondent started talking about the flowers and card from her on the coffin


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> I had to turn the TV off when the royal correspondent started talking about the flowers and card from her on the coffin


Whaaaat? Someone actually said that? The flowers on the coffin were from her? There will be people that believe that, unfortunately.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Heavily pregnant to me, means she is in her last couple of weeks, which she clearly is not.  She was definitely not welcome nor wanted at the funeral, so this is a meaningless phrase to "explain" her absence.  I had to turn the TV off when the royal correspondent started talking about the flowers and card from her on the coffin



To me, heavily pregnant is a euphemism for _fat, _like_ major fat, _like_ gurrrrl, you are eating way too much, _like_ that is so not ‘baby weight’, _like_ Doc Martin says, it will be difficult to shift that weight once baby arrives, _like_ gross. _
There, I said it, been thinking it every time I’ve seen that phrase.

Doubt most men want their wives described that way. Guessing it was meant to throw massive shade 

ETA:  no offense intended, it is just what I hear with that phrase.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Lounorada said:


> If true, that sounds like a lovely wreath with all the flowers included that have meaningful representations to PP and his life, but there is no reason for any of us to know about it.



I agree. This was a lovely thing for them to do as the flowers had meaning and the note is personal, but leaking this to the press made it all about them and took attention away from PP. No one needed to know this.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree. This was a lovely thing for them to do as the flowers had meaning and the note is personal, but leaking this to the press made it all about them and took attention away from PP. *No one needed to know this.*


In reality, no one needs to know 99.9% of any of the information they constantly spew forth.  They are two of the biggest non entities ever.


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> Whaaaat? Someone actually said that? The flowers on the coffin were from her? There will be people that believe that, unfortunately.


No, that's inaccurate. The flowers on the coffin were from the Queen.








						The Queen’s secret message to beloved Prince Philip in funeral wreath revealed
					

The Queen's secret message to her beloved husband Prince Philip in his funeral wreath revealed




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree. This was a lovely thing for them to do as the flowers had meaning and the note is personal, but leaking this to the press made it all about them and took attention away from PP. No one needed to know this.



But, but... how can she get credit for it if she doesn’t tell everyone what she’s done?

This gesture was absolutely no different than them sending a few sandwiches to feed some local charity volunteers or sending an olive oil cake to the Chicago charity and then telling the media so they could be lauded about it for a week.


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> No, that's inaccurate. The flowers on the coffin were from the Queen.


I know, I was just replying to a post, I know full well those flowers were from The Queen. I just couldn't believe someone's actually said they were from Meghan!


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, I was just replying to a post, I know full well those flowers were from The Queen. I just couldn't believe someone's actually said they were from Meghan!


Apologies. I was thinking of the post to which you replied. This thread is moving quickly again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

catlover46 said:


> I didn’t mean it that way I’m sorry.



Thank you it did upset me I do think I know what you mean but really best kept to yourself


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> To me, heavily pregnant is a euphemism for _fat, _like_ major fat, _like_ gurrrrl, you are eating way too much, _like_ that is so not ‘baby weight’, _like_ Doc Martin says, it will be difficult to shift that weight once baby arrives, _like_ gross. _
> There, I said it, been thinking it every time I’ve seen that phrase.
> 
> Doubt most men want their wives described that way. Guessing it was meant to throw massive shade
> 
> ETA:  no offense intended, it is just what I hear with that phrase.


How dare you?!!  The camping chair I sat on every 10 meters on short walks during one of my pregnancies, and I, beg to *heavily* differ


----------



## bag-mania

I saw people posting on Twitter yesterday that Meghan never says anything and she always remains silent and yet she is criticized for talking by the mean ‘ol press. The delusion is real, folks.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> *"The" wreath: Meghan and Harry have singlehandedly refuted an old cliche that "actions speak louder than words."  Their action in placing a wreath honoring Prince Phillip is too-little-too-late, too disingenuous, too hypocritical.* Their words, which came across like a shout, in the Interview will live in infamy, can't be erased, can't be overcome. Yes, they claimed the Queen and Phillip were not suspects in any racial comments etc, but in vilifying the Royal Family as they did, they besmirched all the values the Queen and Prince Phillip stand/stood for.
> 
> Of course Catherine and William interacted with Harry, no matter their own personal feelings, it was a time and place that required the kind of behavior expected of a future King and Queen. They reacted in a way for the greater good and in respect for the Queen and Prince Phillip. Kate was impressive, I think she is going to a regal Queen who will rule beside William with a genuine love for her subjects and a sense of duty that will endear her to them.
> 
> As someone has previously mentioned, Harry did not nod towards the altar as others did and I wonder if, maybe for a brief moment, he felt some shame for his actions and words since marrying M. If so, it will be short lived once he's back in her clutches.
> 
> I hope she's had a miserable day to reflect on all she has damaged and how different it could have been. Watching the group assembled for the funeral, I thought M could never do more than a half baked performance feigning grief in a situation like this as she lacks the heart and soul to understand and be able to experience the depth and breadth of love, of service, of selfless character represented there.


This is the way I see Harry and his heavily pregnant wife because I just don't believe much of what they say.

Pinocchio and Pinochiette & Liars liars pants on fire


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is the way I see Harry and his heavily pregnant wife because I just don't believe much of what they say.
> 
> Pinocchio and Pinochiette & Liars liars pants on fire
> View attachment 5058342


The Royal Family will be plagued by these two for a long time, as parents they are sure to infect Archie and Diana2 with their lack of ethics and their whining victimhood.


----------



## JY89

Redirect Notice
		










						Meghan Markle 'ready to forgive' the Royal Family after Prince Philip’s death
					

Meghan Markle has stayed in the US with husband Prince Harry back in the country - reportedly due to medical assessments advising her not to fly and not to become the "centre of attention"




					www.google.co.uk
				




Seriously? Who does she even think she is? She’s way beyond low  if she can’t say anything nice or appropriate, best is to shut up really.


----------



## elvisfan4life

TC1 said:


> You are entitled to post whatever feelings you have. I've said the exact same, it's been a very difficult year and the loss of a soulmate can be very difficult...which can lead to a decline in health.
> It was inappropriate for you to be chastised for a comment.



How dare you I am also entitled to an opinion


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> The Royal Family will be plagued by these two for a long time, as parents they are sure to infect Archie and Diana2 with their lack of ethics and their whining victimhood.


You mean Diana Philippa?


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> I think QEII is strong as an ox. Stronger than the rest of the family put together. Even in her heartbreak. She's lived through so much, I find that those who've lived through several tragedies and awful events (WWII, the bombings of WWII, her service in WWII, family divorces, IRA and other terrorist bombings, scandals, etc) are better equipped to handle other setbacks. And it isn't "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" because some people wither under pressures. When forced to lead through tough times, one develops an iron will. QEII is a very strong lady. I hope she lives to 105. If she does, my guess she'd still have a sharp mind. She never whines like her piss ant grandson and his entitled spoiled wife.



She is but I saw her pain today she spent most of the service with her head deeply bowed so the world would not see her tears and her pain but I felt them with her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Gag me.  Or rather, can someone PLEASE gag Meghan?



I wonder what she wrote..."Don't worry, I forgive you"?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

elvisfan4life said:


> Thank you it did upset me I do think I know what you mean but really best kept to yourself


Dear elvisfan4life, I generally appreciate your sentiments but why are you telling catlover46 what she can and can not post? She's perfectly within her rights to post what she wants here as long as she keeps to general forum rules, as are we all. She does not need to aplogise to you, if anything I would have apologised to her if I were you.

Don't we have enough of thought and speech policing in our societies and public forums as it is? Also, catlover46:s message was emphatic, most of us understood this. S/he seems to be quite new here, may or may not have English as their first language and has not been disruptive in any way so deserves our respect.

I'm not telling anyone to do this, it's not my call, but I'm asking why if you do not like what someone is saying, why not just ignore, let it go or argue your case matter of fact?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Clearblueskies said:


> I know you didn’t, but to put it into context, Prince Philip and the Queen have been around all my life.  They were there before my parents!  I think it was Truman that was President when Elizabeth became Queen?  Imagine he was still your President.  The Queen is an extraordinary woman, it will be a very sad day when we lose her.



I think it’s a US V British thing again I would never dream of saying such a thing yet so many are agreeing


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think sometimes it can be difficult because some of us come from cultures where speaking things give them power.  So you have an immediate visceral reaction.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> "The" wreath: Meghan and Harry have singlehandedly refuted an old cliche that "actions speak louder than words."  Their action in placing a wreath honoring Prince Phillip is too-little-too-late, too disingenuous, too hypocritical. Their words, which came across like a shout, in the Interview will live in infamy, can't be erased, can't be overcome. Yes, they claimed the Queen and Phillip were not suspects in any racial comments etc, but in vilifying the Royal Family as they did, they besmirched all the values the Queen and Prince Phillip stand/stood for.
> 
> Of course Catherine and William interacted with Harry, no matter their own personal feelings, it was a time and place that required the kind of behavior expected of a future King and Queen. They reacted in a way for the greater good and in respect for the Queen and Prince Phillip. Kate was impressive, I think she is going to a regal Queen who will rule beside William with a genuine love for her subjects and a sense of duty that will endear her to them.
> 
> As someone has previously mentioned, Harry did not nod towards the altar as others did and I wonder if, maybe for a brief moment, he felt some shame for his actions and words since marrying M. If so, it will be short lived once he's back in her clutches.
> 
> I hope she's had a miserable day to reflect on all she has damaged and how different it could have been. Watching the group assembled for the funeral, I thought M could never do more than a half baked performance feigning grief in a situation like this as she lacks the heart and soul to understand and be able to experience the depth and breadth of love, of service, of selfless character represented there.



His lack of respect at the alter said it all he is not one of them anymore


----------



## JY89

Her statement that she’s “ready to forgive” just goes to show that she’s still insisting that she’s right and that the entire RF wronged her. Not even a bit of remorse.

I honestly do not think that she even cares about PP’s death. More like she’s worried about her own image and reputation. Her recent interview would backfired badly as oppose to the way she wanted it to be. She probably miscalculated her moves and did the interview at the perfect wrong time. Hence all these moves she’s making even during PP’s death. Still desperately taking that opportunity to make it to the headlines


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

A1aGypsy said:


> I think sometimes it can be difficult because some of us come from cultures where speaking things give them power.  So you have an immediate visceral reaction.



Yes I agree I am emotional today it reminded me of losing my father and the comment cut me like a knife


----------



## Sophisticatted

As Prince Philip said of the interview, “Nothing good will come of it.”


----------



## A1aGypsy

elvisfan4life said:


> Yes I agree I am emotional today it reminded me of losing my father and the comment cut me like a knife



The world certainly hangs heavy with layered emotion right now.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree. This was a lovely thing for them to do as the flowers had meaning and the note is personal, but *leaking this to the press made it all about them* and took attention away from PP. No one needed to know this.


There were at least half a dozen wreaths proppped up against the pews in the nave in the chapel. *It would be expected here that each family unit of the deceased gave a wreath.* H&M's wreath would have been one of those. Nothing special and different and very annoying that it is reported to look that way.
Wreaths from other European royalty and world leaders were displayed outside on a verge in the castle grounds.


----------



## Toby93

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, I was just replying to a post, I know full well those flowers were from The Queen. I just couldn't believe someone's actually said they were from Meghan!
> [/QUOTE
> I knew full well the flowers were from the Queen, but the card shoved in there was “a handwritten note from Meghan”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dear all,
Big hugs to all.  For all of us, this has been a deeply emotional funeral. For many reasons, these feelings have caught us all off-guard, ‘on the back foot’ [not sure if this a correct usage], thrown us off balance. No one, especially GK, has the ‘right‘ thing to say.  I appreciate everyone’s thoughts. We will get through this this. 


Around the 3:21:00 mark, watch toxic Harry look into the vault, then notice the Wessex family give him _the eye.  _No way did they want him waiting for W&K.  They were ready.


----------



## haute okole

elvisfan4life said:


> Yes I agree I am emotional today it reminded me of losing my father and the comment cut me like a knife


The last time I was at Windsor Castle, my baby sister had just passed away after a miraculous but hard fought 11 year  battle with Stage 4 Cancer.  The day my sister passed, her new passport had arrived in the mail. She was supposed to accompany us on our England visit.  Upon entering the Chapel,  to the left is the burial site of the Queen’s sister, Margaret.  I suddenly burst into sobs, went to the front of the Chapel, knelt, sobbed and cried as I spoke to my sister, who had passed only 8 weeks earlier.

Seeing Prince Charles’ knees almost give way behind his father’s coffin made me cry.

I am so so sorry about your Dad.  My Dad also passed, a year before my baby sister.  I know they say what does not kill you makes you stronger, but somehow, I am so deeply wounded by my loved ones losses.  I always will be.


----------



## Clearblueskies

haute okole said:


> The last time I was at Windsor Castle, my baby sister had just passed away after a miraculous but hard fought 11 year  battle with Stage 4 Cancer.  The day my sister passed, her new passport had arrived in the mail. She was supposed to accompany us on our England visit.  Upon entering the Chapel,  to the left is the burial site of the Queen’s sister, Margaret.  I suddenly burst into sobs, went to the front of the Chapel, knelt, sobbed and cried as I spoke to my sister, who had passed only 8 weeks earlier.
> 
> Seeing Prince Charles’ knees almost give way behind his father’s coffin made me cry.


I’m sorry, that’s so sad.
Seeing the RAF uniforms at the funeral today put a lump in my throat, because it always reminds me of my father whose career was in the RAF.


----------



## csshopper

haute okole said:


> The last time I was at Windsor Castle, my baby sister had just passed away after a miraculous but hard fought 11 year  battle with Stage 4 Cancer.  The day my sister passed, her new passport had arrived in the mail. She was supposed to accompany us on our England visit.  Upon entering the Chapel,  to the left is the burial site of the Queen’s sister, Margaret.  I suddenly burst into sobs, went to the front of the Chapel, knelt, sobbed and cried as I spoke to my sister, who had passed only 8 weeks earlier.
> 
> Seeing Prince Charles’ knees almost give way behind his father’s coffin made me cry.
> 
> haute oriole,
> At one point early on in the service a camera shot framed Charles and Camilla. One could see his emotion and in a very very brief instant her body shifted slightly closer to him. Although their hands could not be seen, the slight movement of her arm led me to think she had reached out for his hand, obscured from public notice by the pew. More tears. I know all the history, but I feel glad for him that he is spending his last years with a woman who loves him and from whom he can take comfort. Read recently, that although Phillip had tried to save Charles and Diana's marriage, and expressed he didn't understand how Charles could favor Camilla over her, his feelings for Camilla evolved over the years and she came to be loved and accepted.


----------



## elvisfan4life

haute okole said:


> The last time I was at Windsor Castle, my baby sister had just passed away after a miraculous but hard fought 11 year  battle with Stage 4 Cancer.  The day my sister passed, her new passport had arrived in the mail. She was supposed to accompany us on our England visit.  Upon entering the Chapel,  to the left is the burial site of the Queen’s sister, Margaret.  I suddenly burst into sobs, went to the front of the Chapel, knelt, sobbed and cried as I spoke to my sister, who had passed only 8 weeks earlier.
> 
> Seeing Prince Charles’ knees almost give way behind his father’s coffin made me cry.
> 
> I am so so sorry about your Dad.  My Dad also passed, a year before my baby sister.  I know they say what does not kill you makes you stronger, but somehow, I am and so deeply wounded by my loved ones losses.  I always will be.



It’s when it hits you suddenly out of the blue isn’t it - and no matter how much time has gone by it’s as crippling as the day it it happened I’m sending you huge hugs and thank you xx


----------



## CarryOn2020

Funeral, weddings, births always bring up the emotions from previous events. We re-experience the grief and the loss. I am so sorry we’ve had these painful losses.  Speaking as an older person, it does not get easier, we simply collect more baggage, then something happens that allows us to release it all. It is ok to cry, or not to. Time will heal these wounds. 

Charles may well have been experiencing some grief from Diana’s funeral, his grandmother’s, etc. Same for QE. Both have experienced numerous losses. We and they will recover.


----------



## csshopper

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think a better PR excuse would have been that MM will not attend in order to allow someone else from the family to attend, as their is only a 30 limit. That would have made them look slightly better.
> 
> I think it was weird that Beatrice and Eugiene's other halves came, they didn't know PP that well, in that they are very new members of the family, and it would have been better if some of PP's family could have come otherwise. Beatrice and Eugiene had the rest of the family for support, didn't really think the hubby's were essential for support. *Beatrice's husband looked like he was enjoying himself when pictured in the car on the way to the funeral.*


A caption under the photo on a website (DM maybe?) said it was taken en route to the funeral and he and Beatrice were so pleased to see people along the route.


----------



## chaneljewel

csshopper said:


> "The" wreath: Meghan and Harry have singlehandedly refuted an old cliche that "actions speak louder than words."  Their action in placing a wreath honoring Prince Phillip is too-little-too-late, too disingenuous, too hypocritical. Their words, which came across like a shout, in the Interview will live in infamy, can't be erased, can't be overcome. Yes, they claimed the Queen and Phillip were not suspects in any racial comments etc, but in vilifying the Royal Family as they did, they besmirched all the values the Queen and Prince Phillip stand/stood for.
> 
> Of course Catherine and William interacted with Harry, no matter their own personal feelings, it was a time and place that required the kind of behavior expected of a future King and Queen. They reacted in a way for the greater good and in respect for the Queen and Prince Phillip. Kate was impressive, I think she is going to a regal Queen who will rule beside William with a genuine love for her subjects and a sense of duty that will endear her to them.
> 
> I wonder if while participating in the service Harry felt any shame or regret for his selfish and hurtful actions and words since marrying M. If so, it will be short lived once he's back in her clutches.
> 
> I hope she's had a miserable day to reflect on all she has damaged and how different it could have been. Watching the group assembled for the funeral, I thought M could never do more than a half baked performance feigning grief in a situation like this as she lacks the heart and soul to understand and be able to experience the depth and breadth of love, of service, of selfless character represented there.
> 
> Edited to remove statement Harry had not nodded to the altar upon leaving the service, he did in fact do so.


Perfectly stated!


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> A caption under the photo on a website (DM maybe?) said it was taken en route to the funeral and he and Beatrice were so pleased to see people along the route.


He gave a deep head bow to QE.  He seems to have good manners.








						Princess Beatrice and Kate Middleton greet the Queen with deep curtsy at Prince Philip's funeral service
					

Princess Beatrice and the Duchess of Cambridge were among the royal ladies who gave a deep curtsy to the Queen as they prepared to enter St George's Chapel in Windsor for Prince Philip's funeral




					www.hellomagazine.com
				






Has toxic H left the country?


----------



## csshopper

Of course the Sussexes were the only ones who felt compelled to expound on the merits of their wreath. As this line up shows, other family members did not.

"A wreath from the couple was earlier left in St George's Chapel, Windsor, to mark their respects, sources told PA news agency.

Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their tribute - including Acanthus mollis (Bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece, to represent Philip's heritage, and Eryngium (sea holly), to represent the Royal Marines.

The wreath also features campanula for gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.






Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their wreath (second from right) - including Acanthus mollis and Eryngium. Pictured: Wreaths from members of the royal family lie against the pews during the funeral


CarryOn2020 said:


> He gave a deep head bow to QE.  He seems to have good manners.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice and Kate Middleton greet the Queen with deep curtsy at Prince Philip's funeral service
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice and the Duchess of Cambridge were among the royal ladies who gave a deep curtsy to the Queen as they prepared to enter St George's Chapel in Windsor for Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5058420
> 
> 
> Has toxic H left the country?


Look for a vapor trail in the sky.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh, so garishly vivid, it sticks out, seems disrespectful.

A handwritten note?? Guessing she used calligraphy and expressed  mailed it to Hazzie?




csshopper said:


> Of course the Sussexes were the only ones who felt compelled to expound on the merits of their wreath. As this line up shows, other family members did not.
> 
> "A wreath from the couple was earlier left in St George's Chapel, Windsor, to mark their respects, sources told PA news agency.
> 
> Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their tribute - including Acanthus mollis (Bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece, to represent Philip's heritage, and Eryngium (sea holly), to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula for gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their wreath (second from right) - including Acanthus mollis and Eryngium. Pictured: Wreaths from members of the royal family lie against the pews during the funeral
> 
> Look for a vapor trail in the sky.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Someone asked earlier why the husbands of Eugenie and Beatrice were present. Maybe this was Phillip's last wish, that he had decided who he wanted there? 

Or...

Am I the only one thinking that this was actually the BRF putting Harry and the heavily pregnant one in their place? Everyone except Andrew (divorced) and Ann's son (who I think is also divorced?) had their significant other with them. Significant others that have never brought shame on the BRF. I think this dig was- and was meant to be- felt all the way to Montecito


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think it proper to have spouses, regardless of how long they have been with the family.

I imagine Sarah was also expressly not permitted to attend. It will be interesting to see if she and Andrew remarry now.


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Someone asked earlier why the husbands of Eugenie and Beatrice were present. Maybe this was Phillip's last wish, that he had decided who he wanted there?
> 
> Or...
> 
> Am I the only one thinking that this was actually the BRF putting Harry and the heavily pregnant one in their place? Everyone except Andrew (divorced) and Ann's son (who I think is also divorced?) had their significant other with them. Significant others that have never brought shame on the BRF. I think this dig was- and was meant to be- felt all the way to Montecito


I think he did decide who he wanted there.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it proper to have spouses, regardless of how long they have been with the family.
> 
> I imagine Sarah was also expressly not permitted to attend. It will be interesting to see if she and Andrew remarry now.


Agree with the first part but I don't think Sarah's name would've come up as being on a list at all even if, say 60 people were allowed to attend.


----------



## lulilu

"Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"

The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.

I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.


----------



## zen1965

I am confused... The flowers AND the letter were from QEII.
A note by Meghan on the coffin would be inappropriate and an act of lunacy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.



Ohhh, call it Karma, call it fate, call it life, the lesson is coming and it’s a bit$ch.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.


I suspect that at the end PP had put her on his s*h*i*t list.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.


This is just fg vile. She's beyond redemption.


----------



## purseinsanity

haute okole said:


> The last time I was at Windsor Castle, my baby sister had just passed away after a miraculous but hard fought 11 year  battle with Stage 4 Cancer.  The day my sister passed, her new passport had arrived in the mail. She was supposed to accompany us on our England visit.  Upon entering the Chapel,  to the left is the burial site of the Queen’s sister, Margaret.  I suddenly burst into sobs, went to the front of the Chapel, knelt, sobbed and cried as I spoke to my sister, who had passed only 8 weeks earlier.
> 
> Seeing Prince Charles’ knees almost give way behind his father’s coffin made me cry.
> 
> I am so so sorry about your Dad.  My Dad also passed, a year before my baby sister.  I know they say what does not kill you makes you stronger, but somehow, I am so deeply wounded by my loved ones losses.  I always will be.


 Your post made me tear up.  I'm sorry for your loss.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Of course the Sussexes were the only ones who felt compelled to expound on the merits of their wreath. As this line up shows, other family members did not.
> 
> "A wreath from the couple was earlier left in St George's Chapel, Windsor, to mark their respects, sources told PA news agency.
> 
> Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their tribute - including Acanthus mollis (Bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece, to represent Philip's heritage, and Eryngium (sea holly), to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula for gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their wreath (second from right) - including Acanthus mollis and Eryngium. Pictured: Wreaths from members of the royal family lie against the pews during the funeral
> 
> Look for a vapor trail in the sky.



I want to be disgusted at their attention seeking ways, but I just don't have it in me today. Like for many others, this week has been emotionally draining for all our personal reasons and I'm exhausted.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry looked absolutely fake in his grief during the procession. He’s a sick muthaF. Wonder where the microphone was hidden broadcasting to his heavily pregnant wife. 

I say going forward they are irrelevant and anything that comes out of their press will be absolutely annihilated by the press except of course the paid PR press by them.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.


I do believe in karma, and I really hope karma kicks the $hit out of that piece of trash H married.  She's now claiming PP was her strongest relationship in the family?  Go f**k yourself Meghan.  And take Scumbag Scobie with you.


----------



## TC1

elvisfan4life said:


> How dare you I am also entitled to an opinion


You can have an opinion without being rude. I didn't even quote you. Please feel free to ignore my posts. I'm Canadian..she is my Queen as well..I would dream of telling another poster to keep to themselves or "how dare you" It's very disrespectful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: *‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’*"



Are you for real, Scobie. You are the lying mouthpiece of a lying liar. She was not close to the Queen, who's too busy to form close bonds with #6th's exhausting drama queen of a wife, and Philip saw right through her, advised Harry to not marry her and she hated him for it. Such a disgrace to still insist they were "close" just to stroke her ego and up her nonexistant importance. You know who were close? The Queen, Philip and Kate...another reason she'd probably murder her could she just dispose of the body without being caught.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ohhh, call it Karma, call it fate, call it life, the lesson is coming and it’s a bit$ch.



Can't wait.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I do believe in karma, and I really hope karma kicks the $hit out of that piece of trash H married.  She's now claiming PP was her strongest relationship in the family?  Go f**k yourself Meghan.  And take Scumbag Scobie with you.



You said it perfectly. I'm done being polite.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Harry looked absolutely fake in his grief during the procession. He’s a sick muthaF. Wonder where the microphone was hidden broadcasting to his heavily pregnant wife.
> 
> I say going forward they are irrelevant and anything that comes out of their press will be absolutely annihilated by the press except of course the paid PR press by them.


I probably shouldn't try to read other people's faces but I thought Anne looked genuinely grief stricken - not like she was thinking about her image or the cameras - just focusing on her father - compared to Andrew whose eyes were moving around


----------



## gelbergirl

the coffin was lowered into the vault.
Did anyone see this or was the camera panned away.
That would have been interesting.
I see he'll be moved one day from the Royal Vault at St George's Chapel to the final resting place with the Queen and her parents and Margaret.


----------



## TC1

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.


I'm sure it's hard for Megs to watch a family she just called racists grieve  so sad indeed.


----------



## Love Of My Life

TC1 said:


> I'm sure it's hard for Megs to watch a family she just called racists grieve  so sad indeed.



Ain't that the truth!!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Agree with the first part but I don't think Sarah's name would've come up as being on a list at all even if, say 60 people were allowed to attend.


That’s exactly what I was saying.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you for real, Scobie. You are the lying mouthpiece of a lying liar. She was not close to the Queen, who's too busy to form close bonds with #6th's exhausting drama queen of a wife, and Philip saw right through her, advised Harry to not marry her and she hated him for it. Such a disgrace to still insist they were "close" just to stroke her ego and up her nonexistant importance. You know who were close? The Queen, Philip and Kate...another reason she'd probably murder her could she just dispose of the body without being caught.


Add Sophie into that equation too, perfect daughter and granddaughter in laws.


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> the coffin was lowered into the vault.
> Did anyone see this or was the camera panned away.
> That would have been interesting.
> I see he'll be moved one day from the Royal Vault at St George's Chapel to the final resting place with the Queen and her parents and Margaret.


I think it was shown briefly being lowered twice then focused on other things that were going on, the trumpeters and the piper I think. But, yes, I saw it moving.


----------



## csshopper

zen1965 said:


> I am confused... The flowers AND the letter were from the QEII.
> A note by Meghan on the coffin would be inappropriate and an act of lunacy.


The bouquet on the coffin with a letter included was from the Queen.

Separately, and displayed leaning against a low wall by the pews,  a row of wreaths from family members. 
One of those was the Sussexes' wreath and, according to the information their publicist provided,  it included a letter done in calligraphy by Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Add Sophie into that equation too, perfect daughter and granddaughter in laws.



True, I didn't want to ignore her, I just picked Kate because of Harry's very pregnant wife's wellknown hatred for her. I don't think quiet Sophie who is older, keeps to herself and whose husband is further down the line is as threatening to the egomaniac.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> One of those was the Sussexes' wreath and, according to the information their publicist provided,  *it included a letter done in calligraphy *by Meghan.


----------



## xyzzy

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.



I think there might be a slight bit of truth in describing her relationship with them as the "strongest" . . . since they were probably the only ones with a strong enough stomach to spend more than 15 seconds in her presence.  It wouldn't surprise me if the Queen, if not Prince Philip, was the royal family member who spent the most time with her just to try to stifle her "woe is meeeeee, I'm Diana Jr." act--although I'm sure "close" is not how QEII would describe their relationship AT ALL.  That said, her "deep mourning" for her "special bond" with PP is absolutely still a steaming crock of horse poop, and Scobie ought to be ashamed of himself for even trying to pretend she's shedding tears over anything but the fact that she was unable to swan around clutching her moon bump for the TV cameras.


----------



## bag-mania

JY89 said:


> Her recent interview would backfired badly as oppose to the way she wanted it to be. She probably miscalculated her moves and did the interview at the perfect wrong time. Hence all these moves she’s making even during PP’s death. Still desperately taking that opportunity to make it to the headlines



I don’t even think the interview backfired. She got at least three weeks of uninterrupted positive press in the US and she didn’t pay a penny for it. In fact almost anyone who challenges the validity of her claims gets shut down in the media. It’s insane how many cheerleaders she has and for what? She smiles and makes politically correct statements. It shows how low we’ve sunk as a society that that’s all it takes to become a megacelebrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

periogirl28 said:


> My first and only pregnancy was at age 39 (geriatric!) and my doctor and airline (best in the world heh) cleared me to fly 3rd trimester 12 000 km home to deliver. Granted I had no  medical issues but still. I have no words and completely no respect for these two. Disregard. Ignore.


I think she was (diplomatically) discouraged by the Palace from attending the funeral. She wouldn't want to miss all the photo-ops.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I think it was shown briefly being lowered twice then focused on other things that were going on, the trumpeters and the piper I think. But, yes, I saw it moving.


Yes, I saw it also, but only by looking at the coffin in relationship to the altar behind it and how much of the altar was showing. It moved v e r y slowly as would be expected.


----------



## papertiger

haute okole said:


> The last time I was at Windsor Castle, my baby sister had just passed away after a miraculous but hard fought 11 year  battle with Stage 4 Cancer.  The day my sister passed, her new passport had arrived in the mail. She was supposed to accompany us on our England visit.  Upon entering the Chapel,  to the left is the burial site of the Queen’s sister, Margaret.  I suddenly burst into sobs, went to the front of the Chapel, knelt, sobbed and cried as I spoke to my sister, who had passed only 8 weeks earlier.
> 
> Seeing Prince Charles’ knees almost give way behind his father’s coffin made me cry.
> 
> I am so so sorry about your Dad.  My Dad also passed, a year before my baby sister.  I know they say what does not kill you makes you stronger, but somehow, I am so deeply wounded by my loved ones losses.  I always will be.



So sorry for you and everyone that this sad occasion is bringing-up so many difficult personal memories.


----------



## haute okole

csshopper said:


> Yes, I saw it also, but only by looking at the coffin in relationship to the altar behind it and how much of the altar was showing. It moved v e r y slowly as would be expected.


Ok, I am crying again.  I just watched the lowering of PP’s coffin on youtube.  So so moving.


----------



## Sharont2305

That's the worst bit of any cremation I've attended, seeing them being lowered (at our crematorium) goes through me. I was so relieved when they asked my hubby's family what did they want when we were discussing arrangements after my mum in laws passing and they agreed that everyone walking past the coffin on their way out was better.


----------



## Lounorada

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.



If this dimwit mouthpiece for MM doesn't shut-up & f**k off  He is as insufferable as his idol.







No one cares about how she is feeling today, this is not about her, not even slightly close to being about her.


----------



## papertiger

I think there is a lack of shared understanding within this thread on the speculation of the end of the reign of QEII. 

Firstly, she is THE monarch and her role was not dependant on Philip life/death. She still reigns as she always has done. Since Dec last year she is the longest reining monarch ever. 

The Queen is our (UK's) Monarch, our Head of State and therefore not our grandmother. Bringing up her death is actually a treasonable offence in the country she rules over and really should not be discussed at all if you don't wish to offend British monarchists. Commonwealth citizens may also feel similarly. 

You will have to forgive the noise of British + other people's jaw dropping to the floor because the Queen does not die, her crown just gets passed on. That's why it is said "The King is dead, long live the King"! at the monarch's passing.

It's understandable for other nations citizens to speculate and discuss her death because to them she perhaps looks like a fragile, older lady, reminiscent of their grandmother, looking somewhat small and alone today. 

I am not particularly a monarchist but can only imagine the sad counterfeit HoS that we'd employ in the Queen's place if there was a revolution, but even I raise my eyebrows every time someone mentions 'can't be long now', 'when the Queen goes' etc. 

Furthermore the PoW (Charles) will be King NOT William. No idea if Camilla will be Queen but Katherine will not be either for (hopefully) a long time. This is not chess, there is an order (hence #inline to the throne) and it's that order that _makes_ them Kings and Queens and not pawns (Hollywood celebs or suitcase girls) and to many people it really matters. 

I wish all the Royal family a long life.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lounorada said:


> If this dimwit mouthpiece for MM doesn't shut-up & f**k off  He is as insufferable as his idol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one cares about how she is feeling today, this is not about her, not even slightly close to being about her.


I'm more concerned about how his two youngest grandchildren, Louise and James, as well as all the great grandchildren are coping.


----------



## Rouge H

As I watched the funeral today part of me was wishing that Harry would come to his senses and realize this is who he is and where he belongs. I’m sad for him as I know he must feel torn.


----------



## Sharont2305

Rouge H said:


> As I watched the funeral today part of me was wishing that Harry would come to his senses and realize this is who he is and where he belongs. I’m sad for him as I know he must feel torn.


I was thinking that too.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> One of those was the Sussexes' wreath and, according to the information their publicist provided, it included a letter *done* in calligraphy by Meghan.



I misread as 'drone'. I think that's what you meant anyway  

The Queen's message was heartbreakingly perfect ("I love you") and not in calligraphy, just her own hand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I misread as 'drone'. I think that's what you meant anyway
> 
> The Queen's message was heartbreakingly perfect ("I love you") and not in calligraphy, just her own hand.
> 
> View attachment 5058505



Oh my heart.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I don’t even think the interview backfired. She got at least three weeks of uninterrupted positive press in the US and she didn’t pay a penny for it. In fact almost anyone who challenges the validity of her claims gets shut down in the media. It’s insane how many cheerleaders she has and for what? She smiles and makes politically correct statements. It shows how low we’ve sunk as a society that that’s all it takes to become a megacelebrity.


She's a Kardashian with smaller boobs wearing more modest clothing. Not worth as much as they are financially but she's working on this, just tells H, "go fetch" and he's on scent for the big bucks to keep her happy.


----------



## gracekelly

Watched the whole thing and it was amazing.  A beautiful send off for a great man.  Loved the piper at the end.  
Meghan's instructions to Harry about getting at least one shot of him with his brother and SIL was followed.  They will use the positive optics of this until people are as sick of seeing this as they are of the green frog dress.


----------



## Love Of My Life

Rouge H said:


> As I watched the funeral today part of me was wishing that Harry would come to his senses and realize this is who he is and where he belongs. I’m sad for him as I know he must feel torn.



I don't think H fully grasps the impact of his short term actions & what lies ahead for his future
Today he was where he belongs... he may have a wife but his family is smack in front of him...
And I reflect how Diana loved those 2 boys & to see them in this new "phase" of their lives
I doubt this is what Diana would have wanted...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> She's a Kardashian with smaller boobs wearing more modest clothing. Not worth as much as they are financially but she's working on this, just tells H, "go fetch" and he's on scent for the big bucks to keep her happy.



I feel that's an insult to the Kardashians...they aren't as malicious, and they have a huge sense of family.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my heart.



This made me tear-up (that, and the empty driving carriage, but different reasons). 

Isn't is wonderful to have a real love story that held strongly, over ups and downs, 73 years long?

When I think of all the pointless drama that is H&M, it really sets life in perspective. 

Gonna cry again now


----------



## zen1965

papertiger said:


> This made me tear-up (that, and the empty driving carriage, but different reasons).
> 
> Isn't is wonderful to have a real love story that held strongly, over ups and downs, 73 years long?
> 
> When I think of all the pointless drama that is H&M, it really sets life in perspective.
> 
> Gonna cry again now


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm more concerned about how his two youngest grandchildren, Louise and James, as well as all the great grandchildren are coping.


Exactly. The family and friends who actually loved PP, knew him well, cared about him and will feel his loss the most.
But what about these 'family & friends of PP' when MM has the media on speed-dial and her minions informing and updating them that _she _is the most important person grieving at the moment and we all must know about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> This made me tear-up (that, and the empty driving carriage, but different reasons).
> 
> Isn't is wonderful to have a real love story that held strongly, over ups and downs, 73 years long?
> 
> When I think of all the pointless drama that is H&M, it really sets life in perspective.
> 
> Gonna cry again now



This this this. ALL of this. I've been a weepy mess all day. 

Their love was the real thing, and it stood the test of time. And they didn't even have to blab to whatever magazine she gave that interview to how "I personally love a great love story", referring to her new relationship of what, six months?


----------



## Clearblueskies

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.


I find this extremely offensive.  Meghan Markle laying claim to the deceased on the day of the funeral?  She barely knew Philip.  I think they’ve now been gone from the UK longer than they were here.  Despite knowing he was nearing the end of his life she planned and performed an interview that caused speculation (because of his reputation for plain speaking) about whether Philip was the “racist” in the family, and poured her particular brand of narcissistic scorn on the “construction” that she chose to marry into - basically trashing his lifetimes work.  

Meanwhile she has a father of her own who hasn’t yet seen his 2 year old grandson.  “Sweet gestures” “special bond” is just gaslighting.  It disgusts me, it really does.


----------



## catlover46

gracekelly said:


> Watched the whole thing and it was amazing.  A beautiful send off for a great man.  Loved the piper at the end.
> Meghan's instructions to Harry about getting at least one shot of him with his brother and SIL was followed.  They will use the positive optics of this until people are as sick of seeing this as they are of the green frog dress.


I loved the simplicity of it. I’m glad they honored his wishes.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This this this. ALL of this. I've been a weepy mess all day.
> 
> Their love was the real thing, and it stood the test of time. And they didn't even have to blab to whatever magazine she gave that interview to how "*I personally love a great love story"*, referring to her new relationship of what, six months?



My personal favorite and I'm likely slightly mis-quoting as I won't go look up the exact words as they are so ridiculous: _this is greater than any fairy tale you've ever read._
I mean, who says something like that when discussing their relationship?   Meg, maybe we'll talk "fairy tale" if you manage to stay married to Harry for 73 years and haven't pushed him down a well.


----------



## gracekelly

Rouge H said:


> As I watched the funeral today part of me was wishing that Harry would come to his senses and realize this is who he is and where he belongs. I’m sad for him as I know he must feel torn.


I think he realized that he married a woman that didn't belong to this.  He should have thought about that a long time ago before running off with her in a snit.  I think that what he saw today, brought home to him what a little person he is in the scheme of things.  When he saw Philip's honors displayed at the altar, it should have rung a bell in his head about what a well lived life is about.  BTW, those weren't even all PP's honors.  Those were just the ones he chose to be displayed.  Lots more in the cupboard.  You could feel that all the military men there today were proud to have been chosen to do the honors.


----------



## Aimee3

How many times/minutes did Harry’s lying wife even spend with PP?  PP said to Harry “you step out with actresses, you don’t marry them”, and from that point on, I bet Harry’s wife was afraid of PP.  PP saw her for what she is.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> How many times/minutes did Harry’s lying wife even spend with PP?  PP said to Harry “you step out with actresses, you don’t marry them”, and from that point on, I bet Harry’s wife was afraid of PP.  PP saw her for what she is.


I doubt that he had time for false people.  Meg missed her chance by never going to the summer vacay at Balmoral and Christmas at Sandringham.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I think he realized that he married a woman that didn't belong to this.  He should have thought about that a long time ago before running off with her in a snit.  I think that what he saw today, brought home to him what a little person he is in the scheme of things.  When he saw Philip's honors displayed at the altar, it should have rung a bell in his head about what a well lived life is about.  BTW, those weren't even all PP's honors.  Those were just the ones he chose to be displayed.  Lots more in the cupboard.  You could feel that all the military men there today were proud to have been chosen to do the honors.



Wonder how he felt being around real men, men with their privates and dignity firmly in place? Women who are adults?


----------



## sgj99

I give the marriage maybe five more years.  She’ll either “trade up” or he’ll have reached his breaking point.  The sad thing is when this happens he has already burned too many bridges behind him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> the coffin was lowered into the vault.
> Did anyone see this or was the camera panned away.
> That would have been interesting.
> I see he'll be moved one day from the Royal Vault at St George's Chapel to the final resting place with the Queen and her parents and Margaret.



It’s here. It’s sad.     
around the 3:13:00 mark

ETA:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The whole video is super interesting with lots of history I didn't know, but the part that matters to this thread is from 47:48. So apparently Harry's showgirl's initial charm worked with both Prince Charles and the Queen, but Prince Philip and Princess Anne saw her coming from miles away as Lady CC puts it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I find this extremely offensive.  Meghan Markle laying claim to the deceased on the day of the funeral?  She barely knew Philip.  I think they’ve now been gone from the UK longer than they were here.  Despite knowing he was nearing the end of his life she planned and performed an interview that caused speculation (because of his reputation for plain speaking) about whether Philip was the “racist” in the family, and poured her particular brand of narcissistic scorn on the “construction” that she chose to marry into - basically trashing his lifetimes work.
> 
> Meanwhile she has a father of her own who hasn’t yet seen his 2 year old grandson.  “Sweet gestures” “special bond” is just gaslighting.  It disgusts me, it really does.



Extremely offensive puts it perfectly.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Toby93 & Sharont2305. Not sure who posted this statement. I'm not caught up yet and confused by this statement 'I knew full well the flowers were from the Queen, but the card shoved in there was “a handwritten note from Meghan'. Is this true that M's note was also in to Queen's flowers & note to Prince Philip?  I HOPE NOT !!   If it was, maybe H was looking into the vault to see if it was still there.    I hope when I catch up on this thread I will find out this isn't true.

Such an emotional and very sad day for the Queen, RF and the world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I doubt that he had time for false people.  Meg missed her chance by never going to the summer vacay at Balmoral and Christmas at Sandringham.



Besides that first Christmas when she held that invitation up like a trophy of course.


----------



## rose60610

Watch slimy M&H beg attempt to maneuver to see The Queen at Christmas. They are running out of time to gather fresh and updated post Prince Philip material for their Netflix contract. If they're told "there isn't room" of course it'll be proof the BRF is still racist and Meghan still has "work to do" but she'll "forgive them". 
And who are all the stans? Bots at work? If anyone believes M is a person of good character, then that helps explain why even serial killers in prison get whack job women who want to marry them. Some idiots just love or idolize people who are effing screwed up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Toby93 & Sharont2305. Not sure who posted this statement. I'm not caught up yet and confused by this statement 'I knew full well the flowers were from the Queen, but the card shoved in there was “a handwritten note from Meghan'. Is this true that M's note was also in to Queen's flowers & note to Prince Philip?  I HOPE NOT !!   If it was, maybe H was looking into the vault to see if it was still there.    I hope when I catch up on this thread I will find out this isn't true.
> 
> Such an emotional and very sad day for the Queen, RF and the world.



Naw, Duchess Disney's adorned note was on the Sussexes' wreath displayed with other wreaths from family members.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I think there is a lack of shared understanding within this thread on the speculation of the end of the reign of QEII.
> 
> Firstly, she is THE monarch and her role was not dependant on Philip life/death. She still reigns as she always has done. Since Dec last year she is the longest reining monarch ever.
> 
> The Queen is our (UK's) Monarch, our Head of State and therefore not our grandmother. Bringing up her death is actually a treasonable offence in the country she rules over and really should not be discussed at all if you don't wish to offend British monarchists. Commonwealth citizens may also feel similarly.
> 
> You will have to forgive the noise of British + other people's jaw dropping to the floor because the Queen does not die, her crown just gets passed on. That's why it is said "The King is dead, long live the King"! at the monarch's passing.
> 
> It's understandable for other nations citizens to speculate and discuss her death because to them she perhaps looks like a fragile, older lady, reminiscent of their grandmother, looking somewhat small and alone today.
> 
> I am not particularly a monarchist but can only imagine the sad counterfeit HoS that we'd employ in the Queen's place if there was a revolution, but even I raise my eyebrows every time someone mentions 'can't be long now', 'when the Queen goes' etc.
> 
> Furthermore the PoW (Charles) will be King NOT William. No idea if Camilla will be Queen but Katherine will not be either for (hopefully) a long time. This is not chess, there is an order (hence #inline to the throne) and it's that order that _makes_ them Kings and Queens and not pawns (Hollywood celebs or suitcase girls) and to many people it really matters.
> 
> I wish all the Royal family a long life.



I agree, since Americans have no idea what it is like to have a history beyond a few hundred years, we misunderstand the rules, the purpose. Whatever people think of the past, longevity says something important and worthy about the country and its citizens. After a year of massive losses, days like this prove why the monarchy must remain. Among other reasons, they show us how civilized people behave and grieve. QE said today was about family and unity. We witnessed exactly that, from all members. Thank you, QE, et al.
Complete respect.


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Toby93 & Sharont2305. Not sure who posted this statement. I'm not caught up yet and confused by this statement 'I knew full well the flowers were from the Queen, but the card shoved in there was “a handwritten note from Meghan'. Is this true that M's note was also in to Queen's flowers & note to Prince Philip?  I HOPE NOT !!   If it was, maybe H was looking into the vault to see if it was still there.    I hope when I catch up on this thread I will find out this isn't true.
> 
> Such an emotional and very sad day for the Queen, RF and the world.


The flowers on the casket were from TQ.  The note with those flowers was a note from TQ on her black bordered note card.  The wreath from the Sussex was placed with the others.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"The _complete_ detachment from reality *explicit gesture* is really something that's astonishing everybody."

Thanks for the laugh, Lady CC.


----------



## Chanbal

Was there any regret in Harry's heart? 


..._Over two decades on, and once again the brothers yesterday found themselves side by side in grief. Only this time, of course, there was no wise Duke of Edinburgh at their elbow. And the man who walked between them, Peter Phillips, was not there to provide moral support to two grief-stricken brothers, but to keep Diana’s feuding sons, once so close, firmly apart.

The enormity of the Queen’s loss was brought into sharp focus by the stark circumstances, dictated by Covid, that saw her sitting utterly alone in front of her husband’s coffin. She looked so small and so bleak, more like a little Italian widow than a Monarch, a great Queen who has outlived and outlasted them all. And in her moment of grief was reflected the experience of countless of her subjects, far too many of whom have had to say their farewells to loved ones in similarly solitary circumstances.

And yet, for all that yesterday’s service paid tribute to their long marriage and to the Duke’s ‘resolute faith and loyalty’ and ‘life of service’, for all that it was a reminder of the stirring power of faith and the pomp and majesty of the Monarchy, all set beneath a glorious blue April sky, the eye could not help being distracted, once again, by the those two brothers walking, once again, behind a coffin.

Prince William and Prince Harry, once inseparable, now at loggerheads. Strip away the titles and it could almost be an EastEnders storyline: Grant and Phil Mitchell (‘hold me back, Sharon!’), Cain and Abel – it’s the eternal struggle, just a different script.

Because let’s not forget: it was barely a few weeks ago that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex sat down in front of Oprah Winfrey and fed the Royal Family through a shredder. Even as Prince Philip was nearing the end – and they must have known it – they had no qualms about lobbing the most egregious accusations of racism and bullying over the pond, fuelling every absurd conspiracy theory under the sun and painting themselves, and Meghan in particular, as innocent victims of a vicious and ruthless regime. It was heartless and cruel, and calculated to wound. Which it did. Most notable was Meghan’s claim that the Duchess of Cambridge made her cry over the bridesmaid dresses for her wedding, and that a member of the family had made racist comments about the colour of Archie’s skin.

The whole family has been rocked by that interview, not least because since it was broadcast so much of what was said seems to have unravelled, including Meghan’s assertion that the Archbishop of Canterbury married them three days before the official wedding in their ‘back yard’ (I wonder whether that little embarrassment was mentioned after the service over the cucumber sandwiches).

But it is the character assassination of the Duchess of Cambridge that has angered senior Royals so much, not just because it is so deeply unfair and unrepresentative of her personality, but also because she and Harry used to be such close friends.

From William’s point of view, this attack on his wife feels like the ultimate betrayal, below the belt and unworthy of Harry.

And just as Harry has justified his recent decisions as necessary in order to protect his wife, so William has felt compelled to stand up for the woman he loves and who has been such a source of strength to him.

Never in his life has he experienced anything like this: William is not just grieving for the loss of his grandfather, but for the loss of the brother he once knew.

So no wonder poor Peter Phillips looked a tad nervous as they walked behind the coffin towards St George’s Chapel. Those must have been the longest eight minutes of his life, stuck between those two. William’s chiselled jaw visibly tense and his face flushed, Harry tight-lipped, occasionally sneaking a half sideways glance – unreciprocated – at his brother. As they walked to the stirring music of the military band, the roar of the guns and the tolling of bells, I couldn’t help wondering what was going through Harry’s mind. Was he wishing he was back home in Montecito, crystal-infused water-bottle and meditation manual in hand, or shopping for turmeric root in the organic market? Or was he perhaps feeling a little nostalgic for the last time he was at St George’s Chapel, at his wedding in May 2018. Wondering, perhaps, how it came to be that he should find himself there again just a few years later in such very different circumstances, a virtual exile in his own land, stripped of his beloved military affiliations and with a feud hanging over him and his family.

*A feud, let us not forget, entirely of his own making.*

As he listened to the spine-tingling singing, was there perhaps a tinge of regret in his heart? After all, this is the world Harry belongs to, this is who he is and who he should be. This is his birthright, these are his people, his history.

Was it really worth throwing all this away just to make dreary documentaries for Netflix?

Maybe in his mind it was. *Because unlike Prince Philip, Harry seems unable to appreciate what all of us, looking on yesterday, could clearly see: what a great privilege it is to be part of this world.* That however frustrating it can be at times, however tedious and difficult and limiting, being a member of the British Royal Family means being part of something timeless and magnificent, something bigger than any one person or ego.

*And yesterday in St George’s Chapel was a reminder of all that. How vulgar and vacuous by comparison to such quiet dignity that Oprah interview now seems, with its petty score-settling, self-serving hand-wringing and faux outrage.*

How one-dimensional and short-sighted compared to the great panorama of history, the great roll-call of duty and sacrifice before us in Windsor.

*And above all, how mean-spirited and wrong-headed the attack on the Duchess of Cambridge. Because the Princes who walked out of St George’s Chapel were very different in demeanour to the ones who walked in – and by all accounts it was Kate who broke the ice.

It was she with whom, after the service had concluded and the Queen had left the Chapel, Harry was seen conversing before walking ahead to join William. And she who, sensing a rapprochement, then fell back discreetly to allow the pair to exchange a few quiet words. So very typically Kate: an act of self-effacing kindness for the greater good.*

Who knows what was said; who knows where this leaves them. It hardly seems possible that in those few moments all the pain and betrayal of the past few weeks could have been erased.

But it is testimony to the Duchess of Cambridge’s incredible generosity of spirit that she should be the one to extend an olive branch, despite being very much the injured party.

If Harry has any sense left whatsoever, he may want to reflect on this fact, and consider himself very lucky to have such a kind and forgiving influence in his family.

He may want to look around and see that, OK, they may not be perfect; OK, they may not always have the right words or the wokest of sentiments; OK, they have their own troubles and tribulations; but his family love him very much, and are willing – even in the midst of their own grief – to show it.

*Time to wake up, Harry, and smell the oat chai latte.*_









						SARAH VINE: Was there perhaps a tinge of regret in Harry's heart?
					

SARAH VINE: The death of Prince Philip is a great sadness at a time of even greater sadness for so many. Yesterday's service at St George's Chapel exemplified the spirit of the late Duke.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lounorada

youngster said:


> My personal favorite and I'm likely slightly mis-quoting as I won't go look up the exact words as they are so ridiculous: _this is greater than any fairy tale you've ever read._
> I mean, who says something like that when discussing their relationship?   Meg, maybe we'll talk "fairy tale" if you manage to stay married to Harry for 73 years and haven't pushed him down a well.


And if you are going around saying that out loud about your own relationship (H&M), then it leads me to think your relationship actually _isn't _that great. 
Usually the couples who have those real fairytale-like relationships are modest people and don't have to declare it to anyone who will listen, it goes without saying.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lady Sarah was wearing her mother's diamond and pearl earrings. Her mother was QE’s sister, Princess Margaret.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> And they merch....  and one-up the family. Undoubtedly, other sent wreaths, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan send wreath and handwritten note for Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has not been able to attend Prince Philip's funeral, but she sent a wreath and a handwritten note to be included in the service
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She and her husband *Prince Harry* have also provided a wreath to be laid during the service at St George's Chapel in Windsor.
> 
> The wreath, which was accompanied by a handwritten note from the Duchess, is made up of a variety of locally sourced flowers. Harry and Meghan commissioned one of their favourite florists to make and design the wreath - Willow Crossley, who also did the flower arrangements for the couple's evening wedding reception in Frogmore Gardens in 2018, their son Archie's christening in 2019, and the launch event for the Hubb Community cookbook at Kensington Palace.
> 
> Harry and Meghan specifically asked for the wreath to include acanthus mollis (bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece to represent Prince Philip's heritage, and eryngium (sea holly) to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula to represent gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.


Leaves a bad taste in the mouth. This is the sort of press release that implies product placement and makes one suspect that Willow Crossley provided a freebie wreath in exchange for advertising.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel that's an insult to the Kardashians...they aren't as malicious, and they have a huge sense of family.


ITA.  It got to a point where I couldn't stand the Kardashians, but mostly just for the overexposure.  For all the values they have that I don't agree with at all, they've never claimed to be victims, holier than thou, preached to anyone on what to do, or pretended to be in it for anything other than the obvious.  They aren't hypocrites, and in Lisa Rinna's words, they "Own it".  On the surface at least, they present a very united front and seem to be very loyal to each other, a trait MM and JCMH can't seem to begin to comprehend.  What would be truly frightening is if MM hires Kris as her manager, because I will be the first to say that woman is a business mastermind and can sell ANYTHING.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> My personal favorite and I'm likely slightly mis-quoting as I won't go look up the exact words as they are so ridiculous: _this is greater than any fairy tale you've ever read._
> I mean, who says something like that when discussing their relationship?   *Meg, maybe we'll talk "fairy tale" if you manage to stay married to Harry for 73 years and haven't pushed him down a well.*


Shoot, I'll call it a successful fairy tale if they manage to stay married for 7.3 years!


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw, Duchess Disney's adorned note was on the Sussexes' wreath displayed with other wreaths from family members.


Glad to hear that the note was not hers.  The coverage on the Canadian TV stations were incorrect


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mdcx

duna said:


> I saw Princess Anne bowing to the altar on her way out,  then her husband, Harry instead turned away, maybe looking at the vault, as if he was ashamed to look at the altar....it made me sad.


I noticed that many of them deliberately and formally bowed at the altar. Harry seemed too informal throughout imo. The “chat” with Will and Kate at the end seemed orchestrated. Reminded me of this sandwich where Meghan was the one in need of public correction:


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides that first Christmas when she held that invitation up like a trophy of course.


Yes, but that was before she had the marriage in the bag


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> I saw Princess Anne bowing to the altar on her way out,  then her husband, Harry instead turned away, maybe looking at the vault, as if he was ashamed to look at the altar....it made me sad.



Harry did bow his head, but he did it before reaching the altar. Anne bows her head at the altar, her husband does the same. Harry sees them bow their heads, gets confused(?) and bows his head before reaching the altar. He looks into the vault. Notice how the Wessex family closely watch Harry. They were ready, ready for him to make a scene.
3:21:00 Mark.

ETA: looks like Andrew did not bow at the altar.  Hmmm.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> And if you are going around saying that out loud about your own relationship (H&M), then it leads me to think your relationship actually _isn't _that great.
> Usually the couples who have those real fairytale-like relationships are modest people and don't have to declare it to anyone who will listen, it goes without saying.


Yep.  Still waters run deep.  If you have to go around declaring, "I'm SO HAPPY" to anyone that'll listen, chances are, you aren't!


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry did bow his head, but he did it before reaching the altar. Anne bows her head at the altar, her husband does the same. Harry sees them bow their heads, gets confused(?) and bows his head before reaching the altar. He looks into the vault. Notice how the Wessex family closely watch Harry. They were ready, ready for him to make a scene.
> 3:21:00 Mark.
> 
> ETA: looks like Andrew did not bow at the altar.  Hmmm.


Andrew and Harry both seemed equally lost imo, eyes darting about, unsure what to do.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sorry had trouble with Gif. Please delete.


----------



## gracekelly

mdcx said:


> Andrew and Harry both seemed equally lost imo, eyes darting about, unsure what to do.


Considering that they were going to church with the family and TQ is head of the Church of England, one would think that they know they are supposed to show reverence at the altar by bowing their heads.  They are both philistines.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree, since Americans have no idea what it is like to have a history beyond a few hundred years, we misunderstand the rules, the purpose. Whatever people think of the past, longevity says something important and worthy about the country and its citizens. After a year of massive losses, days like this prove why the monarchy must remain. Among other reasons, they show us how civilized people behave and grieve. QE said today was about family and unity. We witnessed exactly that, from all members. Thank you, QE, et al.
> Complete respect.



100%.

I think we're often fascinated by the BRF, the pageantry, the palaces, the jewels, etc and as much as I can't fathom what it must be like to actually live it, one can't help but be reminded of its 1000 year history and its many protocols. And there are the scandals here and there and who knows what's been swept under some rugs the last 1000 years or so. But we're living in a time of social media and internet where words and rumors fly at warped speed. Today was a reminder that dignity and tradition can rule for at least part of a day, instead of the constant barrage of hyperventilating slobs who can't get enough of the sound of their own screaming voices pointing out Philip's "politically incorrect" statements over the last near century. One comment a reporter made that I liked was "Many people adored Philip because he was politically incorrect at times and held a stature that could not be canceled by Cancel Culture." 

Amen.

When songs like "WAP", for example, are admired by some of the same people who go into hysterics over somebody else's statements for being "politically incorrect", I'd just like to throw up.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Chanbal    Great article
_*"Time to wake up, Harry, and smell the oat chai latte."*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

This photo shows they were ready to intervene and to prevent any drama. The trust is absolutely gone. Mike, Zara, Anne, all keeping a careful eye and ear on the toxic H.











						Prince William and Kate stop to pay tribute to 'devoted' Prince Philip
					

PRINCE WILLIAM and Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge have issued a heartfelt tribute to Prince Philip just moments after his emotional funeral service concluded.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw, Duchess Disney's adorned note was on the Sussexes' wreath displayed with other wreaths from family members.



Thank you for clarifying for me. I am relieved !  I didn't see a note on their flower arrangement in front of the pew and read that one statement got me worried.


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> The flowers on the casket were from TQ.  The note with those flowers was a note from TQ on her black bordered note card.  The wreath from the Sussex was placed with the others.



Thank you !  I feel better now.


----------



## catlover46

xincinsin said:


> Leaves a bad taste in the mouth. This is the sort of press release that implies product placement and makes one suspect that Willow Crossley provided a freebie wreath in exchange for advertising.


That is so TACKY


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  It got to a point where I couldn't stand the Kardashians, but mostly just for the overexposure.  For all the values they have that I don't agree with at all, they've never claimed to be victims, holier than thou, preached to anyone on what to do, or pretended to be in it for anything other than the obvious.  They aren't hypocrites, and in Lisa Rinna's words, they "Own it".  On the surface at least, they present a very united front and seem to be very loyal to each other, a trait MM and JCMH can't seem to begin to comprehend.  What would be truly frightening is if MM hires Kris as her manager, because I will be the first to say that woman is a business mastermind and can sell ANYTHING.



And they don't try to be more or less than they are. For example, Kim has her social causes that create impact but she doesn't try to overplay it like she's Mother Teresa. The girls also extensively donate proceeds from clothing sales but you hardly hear about that either... in fact I just saw a headline about how Steph and Ayesha Curry's foundation have given 16 million meals to Oakland youth in just a year. Totally surprised me, even though I'm in the Bay Area, because they don't try to get it on every front page every step of the way. M+H really need to take a seat and learn about tasteful philanthropy.


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> This photo shows they were ready to intervene and to prevent any drama. The trust is absolutely gone. Mike, Zara, Anne, all keeping a careful eye and ear on the toxic H.
> 
> View attachment 5058574
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate stop to pay tribute to 'devoted' Prince Philip
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM and Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge have issued a heartfelt tribute to Prince Philip just moments after his emotional funeral service concluded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





lalame said:


> And they don't try to be more or less than they are. For example, Kim has her social causes that create impact but she doesn't try to overplay it like she's Mother Teresa. The girls also extensively donate proceeds from clothing sales but you hardly hear about that either... in fact I just saw a headline about how Steph and Ayesha Curry's foundation have given 16 million meals to Oakland youth in just a year. But you don't hear about it every single step of the way. M+H really need to take a seat and learn about tasteful philanthropy.


Tasteful philanthropy? M’s shrieks can be heard from here! How can it be philanthropy if nobody knows? Her tacky behaviour is such a stark contrast with Kate etc, all primed and ready to perform their duties at the service. 100% the core Royals were on deck to keep track of Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

mdcx said:


> I noticed that many of them deliberately and formally bowed at the altar. Harry seemed too informal throughout imo. The “chat” with Will and Kate at the end seemed orchestrated. Reminded me of this sandwich where Meghan was the one in need of public correction:
> View attachment 5058568


It is common protocol in the Church of England to bow to the altar when leaving , for anyone not just the BRF, but the BRF would be schooled in the strictest form of observance called High Church custom with all the bells and whistles


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  It got to a point where I couldn't stand the Kardashians, but mostly just for the overexposure.  For all the values they have that I don't agree with at all, they've never claimed to be victims, holier than thou, preached to anyone on what to do, or pretended to be in it for anything other than the obvious.  They aren't hypocrites, and in Lisa Rinna's words, they "Own it".  On the surface at least, they present a very united front and seem to be very loyal to each other, a trait MM and JCMH can't seem to begin to comprehend.  What would be truly frightening is if MM hires Kris as her manager, because I will be the first to say that woman is a business mastermind and can sell ANYTHING.


Don't want to get OT with the K's. I was attempting to comment on what I see as parallels with issue of megacelebrity:  the relentless self promotion and relentless use of media. Can't remember a day in the past few years where there wasn't some mention of family members in the media, maybe even on multiple platforms.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Lounorada said:


> And if you are going around saying that out loud about your own relationship (H&M), then it leads me to think your relationship actually _isn't _that great.
> Usually the couples who have those real fairytale-like relationships are modest people and don't have to declare it to anyone who will listen, it goes without saying.



This is so true and they've only been married for 4 years. I'm sure she thought her first marriage was a fairytale too, yet that ended quickly even though she had been dating the guy for 6 years before getting married. I think she thinks, it is a fairytale because Harry is a prince, which makes her a princess (aka little mermaid), therefore making it a 'fairytale'.


----------



## Hermes Nuttynut

deleted


----------



## lalame

So I'm finally getting around to watching coverage of the funeral and I caught this clip, where Gayle is covering it with ACTUAL experts. Whose smart decision was it for her to cover this... she clearly knows nothing about the people involved, the protocol, and serves more questions than answers... but still TRIES to sound like an authority just because of her new "friends." Take this family's name out of your damn mouth!!  I would post this in the PP thread but I'm trying not to sully that one with snark.



Ugh, and the gall. In one moment during that clip the British commentator says it's quite sad about people not being able to wear military garb. Gayle says, "IS it sad?" and the other woman has to school her. "Well, yes, because ..."


----------



## Aimee3

Maybe Harry's wife was jabbering in his ear while he was approaching the alter and he got confused
(henpecked?).  I couldn't see if he had an earpiece in his ear.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Anyone get annoyed at the Beyonce instagram post with Meghan dressed like a queen in 2019. She holds up the Brit award she won with the band mates from 2002. To me it just shows how little Americans know about the monarchy. It feels kinda treasonous since 5 people would have to die for Harry to become King, and her Queen consort by default. It felt like Beyonce was praising MM for marrying into the royal family, and to me marrying someone isn't an achievement, not matter who that person may be. It could have been a sign that Beyonce was showing support for MM because of tabloid backlash but I wouldn't have thought she would be aware of it in the US. In any case it seemed disrespectful to the current Queen and all those in line to the throne.


----------



## V0N1B2

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Anyone get annoyed at the Beyonce instagram post with Meghan dressed like a queen in 2019. She holds up the Brit award she won with the band mates from 2002. To me it just shows how little Americans know about the monarchy. It feels kinda treasonous since 5 people would have to die for Harry to become King, and her Queen consort by default. It felt like Beyonce was praising MM for marrying into the royal family, and to me marrying someone isn't an achievement, not matter who that person may be. It could have been a sign that Beyonce was showing support for MM because of tabloid backlash but I wouldn't have thought she would be aware of it in the US. In any case it seemed disrespectful to the current Queen and all those in line to the throne.


The only thing worse than the Meghan Markle stans is the Beyhive.
Those are some seriously delusional unhinged peeps.


----------



## lalame

Please be tolerant of us Americans... we mostly don't mean offense, and I think even as fans of the BRF we are fans in the same way we might be fans of anyone else - as in they are interesting to us, we like them, we want to learn more, but we don't have the same cultural reverence so we may not follow all the right mannerisms that may seem natural to you.  Some of us are stupider than others, though, so feel free to lambast them as needed.


----------



## ChanelFan29

I’m going to give the marriage 2-5 more years.  Statistically things are not good for second (or is this her third?) marriages lasting.  

Baby #2 will be here soon, there will be press coverage of that for a while.  I doubt there will be a third due to her age, unless they use a surrogate.  

By the time the attention from baby 2 wears off, I can see Megan start to think about checking out.


----------



## Jktgal

It's understandable (for me) if black American people disregard and even disrespect the British RF, for their ancestors were enslaved with support of the monarchy, no?


----------



## lalame

Jktgal said:


> It's understandable (for me) if black American people disregard and even disrespect the British RF, for their ancestors were enslaved with support of the monarchy, no?



I haven't heard this perspective shared by the black (American) community before.... I would think, erm, if we go down that road there are many people ahead in line of the BRF. The British abolished slavery much earlier than the Americans and didn't need to go to war to come to that conclusion.


----------



## needlv

MM is such an idiot. She trashed the RF in an interview fully expecting the world to have sympathy and back her, making her an elite celebrity Whereupon she can monetise herself, her titles making herself mega rich.  

All because their original plan of  flying back in to the Uk for important events (half in/ half out) but living in the USA a celebrity life - was denied.  So she wanted money, jewels and status but not having to do the work of meeting the commoners, opening ceremonies at small schools or nursing homes etc.

The funeral makes them both look classless and cheap.  PP’s legacy of duty and service is In stark contrast to MM’s snarky and H’s sulky behaviour and both of their petulant, childish actions in continuing to grab the attention.  MM gave up an opportunity of a lifetime... She has even denied Archie and Diana 2.0 from knowing their royal family.

Idiots.  The both of them.  I hope being in the UK, surrounded by the things he used to have - it has dawned on H exactly what he has done.

 She should not be allowed to return to the UK.  Even for other RF family members funerals, coronations or important historical events.


----------



## Jktgal

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.



Harry's wife is prone to superlatives. Nothing is not 'incredible', 'amazing', etc. What it actually means:
'Very close'  = I met them a few times
'Like family' = good for some $$ until another show up aka no money no honey.


----------



## catlover46

Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

A1aGypsy said:


> I think it proper to have spouses, regardless of how long they have been with the family.


They married into the family and this is an opportunity to understand context and traditions. Also, once you start choosing at cousin level it's hard, cause so many...


----------



## lalame

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



For me, maybe the seeds were planted during that walk in the park in Canada with M looking straight at the cameras. I justified it one way or another but after that I looked at everything with a more skeptical eye. I honestly don't even know if I "turned" on her... I don't hate everything about her or disbelieve EVERYTHING she says. I'll always think she's a beautiful girl and like her style. But the press saturation and their journey to become the Kardashians of Philanthropy have given me plenty to be negative about.


----------



## Icyjade

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



For me it was over time that made me dislike her so much but some standouts:
- her engagement pics and expensive designer dress (in contrast to Kate)
- the wedding where she invite celebs that she barely knew
- her growing collection of extremely expensive clothes (funded by the BRF)
- her whining during the Africa tour 
- her fake looking letter to her father (who writes in that sort of font???)
- her growing group of “friends” who leaked news to the media
- the never ending stream of support staff  who left her 
- megxit
- that awful interview 

Generally I don’t bother to dislike a celebrity you know? Not worth the effort in that sense. But it just all added up.


----------



## catlover46

Icyjade said:


> For me it was over time that made me dislike her so much but some standouts:
> - her engagement pics and expensive designer dress (in contrast to Kate)
> - the wedding where she invite celebs that she barely knew
> - her growing collection of extremely expensive clothes (funded by the BRF)
> - her whining during the Africa tour
> - her fake looking letter to her father (who writes in that sort of font???)
> - her growing group of “friends” who leaked news to the media
> - the never ending stream of support staff  who left her
> - megxit
> - that awful interview
> 
> Generally I don’t bother to dislike a celebrity you know? Not worth the effort in that sense. But it just all added up.


The celebs at her wedding bothered me in the sense that they invited them and not his cousins(the Queen’s first cousins families).


----------



## needlv

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



When she stood in front of the camera in Africa and said “no one asked if I am ok” - having visited the most impoverished people who don’t know where their next meal is coming from, and having visited a centre for women who suffered horrific violence.  All while wearing very expensive clothing during the tour.   i honestly could not believe it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Please don't forget to hydrate, hydrate, hydrate!  My DH had to remind me. I too have been crying and can't get through the whole funeral video yet. Taking in segments. I'll finish watching maybe tomorrow.


----------



## lalame

catlover46 said:


> The celebs at her wedding bothered me in the sense that they invited them and not his cousins(the Queen’s first cousins families).



I didn't even know this! Was this a big scandal at the time? I didn't really pay attention to M+H until all the drama.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Jktgal said:


> It's understandable (for me) if black American people disregard and even disrespect the British RF, for their ancestors were enslaved with support of the monarchy, no?



I think this would require a long history lesson. The BRF have profited off millions of people, of all races, colors and nationalities. 

And if Beyonce feels that the BRF has contributed or exploited black people, then why did she meet royalty (Prince Charles et al)? Why was there a blessing given for Harry to marry Meghan? Why did Meghan herself marry into a family that profited off the enslavement of millions (not just black people, literally all the races in the world were at some point exploited by the British I'm sure). The Queen has a  huge diamond from India called the Kohinor diamond, which was taken from Indian soil (along with other expensive things) and to this day has not returned it, but you don't see me disrespecting the Queen or her heirs.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I didn't even know this! Was this a big scandal at the time? I didn't really pay attention to M+H until all the drama.



This was not a scandal at the time, everyone (media and public) loved her, but I remember thinking it was odd that random famous people were invited given she isn't a A list celebrity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



I knew from the beginning this most likely would be a Wallis/Ed repeat.   A divorced, older, American woman from Hwood does not realize how different Royal life is from Hollywood life. Rita didn’t, Grace didn’t, Wallis didn’t [she wasn’t from Hwood tho].  A celebrity is not the same as royalty, not even close. Two completely different worlds, completely different world views, completely different rules.  I gave a side-eye to all the hype. It seemed excessive, seemed fake. The engagement interview was so unconvincing, so false. It didn’t take long for the rumors to be proven true. Lots of red flags.

ETA:  Due to lack of choice, I was a fan of the Suits show which is when I first saw her. The character was not likeable and seemed 1 dimensional. Then, she and Harry became involved which meant her Hallmark movies were replaying. They were awful. Again, 1 dimensional - get married, get rich.


----------



## missfiggy

Just an observation - at 7 months pregnant with baby 1 she flew to the US for a baby shower.
At 7 months pregnant with baby 2 she wouldn't/couldn't attend her husband's grandfather's funeral.
Hmmm......


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I had to turn the TV off when the royal correspondent started talking about the flowers and card from her on the coffin





Sharont2305 said:


> Whaaaat? Someone actually said that? The flowers on the coffin were from her?* There will be people that believe that, unfortunately.*


Unfortunate but true. Which is why I think she deliberately uttered all those falsehoods during the OW interview. Most people who view it then and in future are going to take it at face value and not wonder if she was lying.



lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘*She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. *It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"


Makes her sound like she was with the BRF for ages and she didn't do a hit-n-run job.



zen1965 said:


> I am confused... The flowers AND the letter were from QEII.
> A note by Meghan on the coffin would be inappropriate and an act of lunacy.


Hear, hear!



purseinsanity said:


> I do believe in karma, and I really hope karma kicks the $hit out of that piece of trash H married.  She's now claiming PP was her strongest relationship in the family?  Go f**k yourself Meghan.  And take Scumbag Scobie with you.


She is going to run out of adjectives soon if she is using them up on PP.



sgj99 said:


> I give the marriage maybe five more years.  She’ll either “trade up” or he’ll have reached his breaking point.  The sad thing is when this happens he has already burned too many bridges behind him.


It will be trade-up. He doesn't have the cash inflow to keep her in the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed. Grovelling slaves don't come cheap.



purseinsanity said:


> What would be truly frightening is if MM hires Kris as her manager, because I will be the first to say that woman is a business mastermind and can sell ANYTHING.


MM would probably sell in the US, but she is too toxic to sell global. And if Kris were to market her, she would expect MM to follow the game plan, and we all know how good the Greatest Victim is about following orders. And should she backstab the Kardashians, they will bury her... Come to think of it, that's a splendid idea!


----------



## xincinsin

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


Sorry! It wasn't anything like that for me. I just had a visceral dislike of her from the start. I thought she came across very fake and she had the most godawful fashion sense. I couldn't understand why people were raving over her but, as DS pointed out to me, I wasn't the one marrying her. The only thing I googled her for was the claim that she was a philanthropist because I didn't believe it.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

xincinsin said:


> Sorry! It wasn't anything like that for me. I just had a visceral dislike of her from the start. I thought she came across very fake and she had the most godawful fashion sense. I couldn't understand why people were raving over her but, as DS pointed out to me, I wasn't the one marrying her. The only thing I googled her for was the claim that she was a philanthropist because I didn't believe it.



I'm not a fan of her fashion style either, and its ironic that she has a fashion stylist best friend. She does wear significantly more expensive clothes compared to Kate too, so maybe she thing more $$$ = more style which is not how it works.


----------



## JY89

bag-mania said:


> I don’t even think the interview backfired. She got at least three weeks of uninterrupted positive press in the US and she didn’t pay a penny for it. In fact almost anyone who challenges the validity of her claims gets shut down in the media. It’s insane how many cheerleaders she has and for what? She smiles and makes politically correct statements. It shows how low we’ve sunk as a society that that’s all it takes to become a megacelebrity.


 
Yeah, you are right. She’s definitely striving on the overwhelming support she’s gaining from the states and even though she’s not as well received over in the UK media, there’s still loads of loyal supporters whom she swayed using all that race card/ victimising tactics which works out perfectly in her favour. How crazy that people and celebs are supporting/ defending her blindly and fearing of the effects of the cancel culture. “If you don’t support that means you are racist” mentality is pure madness leaving most without a voice.

Toxicity runs deep in the blood of a narcissist. Just when the RF are grieving over their loss, she expects to receive an apology so she can forgive them and “unite” as a family during this difficult time. (Oh, how magnanimous she is)   Anyway, the RF doesn’t need her forgiveness for something she lied about.

Amazing how entitled, selfish, ridiculous  and shameless she can be. Seems like she still hasn’t learn to settle private matters privately. Her desperate pathetic attention seeking self just need to release her “willingness to forgive” statement onto the news (through a “close friend”) during the death of PP to take on the stage is probably the most outrageous thing I’ve heard. Wonder what destructive move she’s gonna make next


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

missfiggy said:


> Just an observation - at 7 months pregnant with baby 1 she flew to the US for a baby shower.
> At 7 months pregnant with baby 2 she wouldn't/couldn't attend her husband's grandfather's funeral.
> Hmmm......



We can’t say she isn’t obvious about her priorities.


----------



## Jktgal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> And if Beyonce feels that the BRF has contributed or exploited black people, then why did she meet royalty (Prince Charles et al)?


That's the hipocrisy, isn't it? To act politically correct at times, and at other times to be exalting someone for their blackness for I doubt Beyonce will put up such pic if Harry's wife were white.


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> I give the marriage maybe five more years.  She’ll either “trade up” or he’ll have reached his breaking point.  The sad thing is when this happens he has already burned too many bridges behind him.



Oh I don’t believe she could trade up. How do you go higher than marrying a prince? A billionaire? Good luck finding one gullible enough not to see right through her. Most rich, famous men aren’t as simple or easy to manipulate as Harry.

She’s going to turn 40 this year and she’s obviously getting fillers and PS. She’s still beautiful but past her prime. I don’t doubt that she could snag herself another husband but she’s definitely not going to be trading up.


----------



## Chanbal

TOM BOWER on Harry's refusal to utter a public apology...  

*DELIBERATELY separated, the sight of Harry and William speaking to each other as they walked up the hill after the service has sparked speculation of a reconciliation.*

Clearly nervous as he walked out of St George’s Chapel, flapping the order of service on his leg, Harry’s darting eyes suggested uncertainty.

*To his good fortune, William and Kate did not isolate him despite the trashing he meted out on his family on US TV just six weeks ago.*

Only the coming days will reveal whether Harry is prepared to show honest remorse.

Undoubtedly, the sight of the Queen’s suffering during an emotional service for their beloved grandfather will have drawn the brothers and Kate together in the minutes after a draining spectacle.

It was in the same chapel where Harry got married in 2018. Knowing they were being filmed, William and Kate rightly avoided appearing churlish towards Harry.

Cynics may call it stage management. *The evidence suggests that after a year’s separation, Harry’s anger towards his family has not evaporated.*

The funeral is unlikely to have cured his antagonism.

Inevitably, during the service the TV cameras were directed to ration the shots of the two brothers.

Viewers were denied the chance to judge whether the splendour of British tradition had aroused any emotional conflicts within Harry.

*Realists will judge that his refusal so far to utter any public apology cannot be disguised by a short walk up the hill*.

Like all fallouts, the origins of Harry’s anger with William are richly disputed.

Disappointed royalists are puzzled why the brothers’ close embrace in the wake of their mother Princess Diana’s death has been wrecked.

*LOVE TURNED INTO POISON*

Why has their mutual love turned into poison?

Inevitably, many heap the blame on to Meghan.

But in truth, there were fractures between Harry and William that started more than 20 years ago.

Although united by the torture of the exposure of their parents’ serial adultery, their volatile childhood was complicated by their different destinies.

Identified as the future monarch, William was sometimes invited alone for Sunday lunch with the Queen in Windsor.

Walking across the Thames from Eton, the schoolboy was introduced by his grandmother to the secrets and magic of the world’s most enduring monarchy.

...

*Could Meghan, William asked, cope with the unnegotiable demands of royalty?*

Could Harry really be certain that the woke actress, who blessed the sun-kissed Pacific beaches, would happily enjoy rainy London?

Would the outspoken “progressive” American campaigner understand that after the marriage she was duty-bound to become neutral and serve the Queen?

Harry resented William’s doubts. Just weeks after the wedding, his undiluted grudge against his brother was reignited by Meghan’s anger with William and Kate.

*By November 2018, only six months after their wedding, Harry and Meghan resented being seen as minor royals while William and Kate were glorified.*

Many sympathised with Harry’s anger. The telltale signs were William and Kate not visiting Frogmore to see Archie until eight days after his birth.

After that the relations went downhill.

Simultaneously, the UK public’s love for the couple began to fray.

As a protective husband, Harry was outraged as stories emerged of Meghan making Kate cry, about the American’s staff resigning because of her alleged bullying.

*BITTER BATTLE*

*There were also stories of how the climate change campaigner jetted in private planes to parties across the world.*

Harry and Meghan believed William and Kate shared the public criticism.

*Like the media, William was puzzled by Harry and Meghan’s demand for privacy and then participating in publicised self-promoting features in glossy magazines.*

There was also engagement in a bitter battle with her US family.

*Provocatively, Meghan and Harry accused their critics of being racist.*

If the criticism did not stop, predicted ITV journalist Tom Bradby in 2019, the couple’s fast-developing relationship with Oprah Winfrey would lead to an explosive interview on the US CBS network.
The curtain-raiser was Harry’s stunning revelation in a TV interview with Bradby in October 2019.

“We are certainly on different paths,” he said about William.

That lit the fuse to their exit to California. *Angry by then with both William and Prince Charles, they plotted their TV interview with Oprah.

Effortlessly trashing the Royal Family, Meghan’s list of complaints has been by now widely ridiculed.*

*DEEPLY WOUNDING*
*Her claims about the date of their marriage and Archie being denied appointment as a prince at birth have been exposed as fabrications*.

Her accusation that the royals are racist and that Kate made her cry have proved deeply wounding.

Yet at the same time they were as heartfelt as Harry’s denunciation of Charles and his description of William being “trapped”.

Reconciliation is only possible if the Sussexes apologise.

Despite yesterday’s deeply moving funeral was the chat on the walk up the hill the first step towards a ceasefire or has Harry dug in his heels?

He did not seem to eagerly reunite with his family in Windsor.

The unanswered question is on what conditions will he return in July to stand with William to unveil Diana’s memorial in Kensington Palace.

*Will he seek reconciliation with his family or will the ceremony prove that he has permanently burnt his bridges?*

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14682046/prince-harry-william-feud-long-way/:Popcorn:


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> *This is so true and they've only been married for 4 years*. I'm sure she thought her first marriage was a fairytale too, yet that ended quickly even though she had been dating the guy for 6 years before getting married. I think she thinks, it is a fairytale because Harry is a prince, which makes her a princess (aka little mermaid), therefore making it a 'fairytale'.



Believe it or not they haven’t even been married for three years yet. Their third anniversary is next month. It just seems longer.


----------



## purseinsanity

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


Honestly, I'd never heard of her before she started dating Harry.  I'd never watched or heard of Suits, and I never watched Deal or No Deal, so I didn't really have any preconceived ideas.  Just like I had no opinion of Chelsy or his other blonde girlfriend, I had no preconceived notions about her.  The few pictures I saw, I thought she was very pretty.  I remembered reading about Harry's statement about leaving his girlfriend alone and mentioning racism.  I thought it a little odd to comment so early on a relationship, and I remember thinking, Oh God, they're mentioning racism already??  Then came the engagement announcement; to me, it seemed like she was more excited to be getting the attention from the cameras, than the fact that she was engaged.  She seemed to be acting and felt over the top.  It seemed very disingenuous and so different compared to when Will and Kate announced theirs.  Harry's hand into the front of his jacket annoyed me too, LOL.  Then the engagement interview which I could only stomach for a few minutes, because she seemed to want to take charge, where in comparison, Kate sort deferred to Will during theirs.  I was also a little annoyed that she seemed to be bucking tradition, whether it was her messy bun, lack of hose, or different nail polish.  Stupid little things over all, but seemed like she was rebelling at a very early stage.  It was just downhill from there.  Her personal family drama, the nasty stories I read about her using people to her advantage then dumping them, and her ridiculous interview in Africa that lacked any awareness of her surroundings.  Then the little rumors of her behavior.  She's just gotten worse and worse, and continues to somehow top herself in terms of overexposure.  As far as I'm concerned, she has not shown one ounce of any redeeming quality.


----------



## rhyvin

very interesting video about MM's narcissism


----------



## purseinsanity

rhyvin said:


> very interesting video about MM's narcissism



Love this!  And I must compliment us all here, as we've caught on to all of these traits of hers for many months now!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> Believe it or not they haven’t even been married for three years yet. Their third anniversary is next month. It just seems longer.



Thats a lot of drama for someone that's only been married 3 years. Damn!


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Thats a lot of drama for someone that's only been married 3 years. Damn!



The marriage has been drama right from the start. Even beforehand if you count such incidents as the “who made who cry before the wedding” episode.


----------



## lalame

It's insane to think that in just 3 years, she/they decided that life was so excruciating there was no way to give it more time. It felt like they condensed Charles and Diana's 15 years of drama, misery, and resentment into the 3 years.


----------



## creme fraiche

Jktgal said:


> It's understandable (for me) if black American people disregard and even disrespect the British RF, for their ancestors were enslaved with support of the monarchy, no?



the Atlantic slave trade is a horrible stain in history with ongoing repercussions today.  It is not a simple story and nobody comes off well.  The vast majority of people enslaved and sent to the Americas were enslaved by other Africans (still today it is estimated that 7 million Africans are enslaved within Africa !), and the largest number of enslaved Africans were brought over by the Portuguese, followed by the British then the French.  Britain cannot hold its head up high, but it was the second European country to abolish slavery After Denmark/Norway.


----------



## xincinsin

It must irk her terribly that the commoners  are posting candid snaps of PP and she doesn't have a single photo of him gazing adoringly at her/her bump or even a tale of sharing a blanket. She'll probably make something up about how he comforted her when she was feeling homesick. Trot it out when they make the inevitable big blast of a reunion when H touches down in California.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Around the 2:34:30 mark
Watch how toxic Harry cuts Lord Snowden off so H can end up behind William.  Anne’s husband motions for Snowden to walk in front of him.  I slowed down the video. It is no accident that he cut off Snowden.
Everyone faces forward except toxic H.


Then he cuts Snowden off.  
Unbelievable. QE gave specific instructions. He cannot even respect those.

I really hope William cancels the Diana statue show.  No one should see any more of this nonsense. Enough. Just enough.


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> It must irk her terribly that the commoners  are



... also gushing over how queenly Kate is and how beautiful she looked despite MM’s takedown of Kate during the interview


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Does anyone else love ex-Royal Chef Darren McGrady? I did, even before I saw his tweets calling out H+M... and they're pretty spot on!


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I want to be disgusted at their attention seeking ways, but I just don't have it in me today. Like for many others, this week has been emotionally draining for all our personal reasons and I'm exhausted.



Sending hugs


----------



## chaneljewel

lalame said:


> So I'm finally getting around to watching coverage of the funeral and I caught this clip, where Gayle is covering it with ACTUAL experts. Whose smart decision was it for her to cover this... she clearly knows nothing about the people involved, the protocol, and serves more questions than answers... but still TRIES to sound like an authority just because of her new "friends." Take this family's name out of your damn mouth!!  I would post this in the PP thread but I'm trying not to sully that one with snark.
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, and the gall. In one moment during that clip the British commentator says it's quite sad about people not being able to wear military garb. Gayle says, "IS it sad?" and the other woman has to school her. "Well, yes, because ..."



I couldn’t stand to watch/listen to Gayle King during the funeral.  She doesn’t know what she’s talking about most of the time and thinks her opinion is The Word.  Surprise, surprise that she’s buddies with H and M!  Watched it on Fox.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gelbergirl said:


> the coffin was lowered into the vault.
> Did anyone see this or was the camera panned away.
> That would have been interesting.
> I see he'll be moved one day from the Royal Vault at St George's Chapel to the final resting place with the Queen and her parents and Margaret.



Interesting? No Absolutely Not

Thankfully very little was seen and cameras panned away to the military band playing the last post - the Queen and family were given a private moment as the coffin was  finally lowered -which was as it should be -I am so grateful that it was not televised in detail for ghouls to pick over

Anne respectively going forward as she left to bow to her father and say her last goodbye was all we needed to see - and it brought home how Harry absolutely failed to do so - no respect at all  -but why would be after what he has done to the family? He ran across the steps to be behind his brother in the most astonishing display of disrespect I have ever seen was Meghan on an earpiece to him ?? Appalling - he needs to go away and stay away with his dreadful wife


----------



## elvisfan4life

Rouge H said:


> As I watched the funeral today part of me was wishing that Harry would come to his senses and realize this is who he is and where he belongs. I’m sad for him as I know he must feel torn.



I doubt it - what senses ? You only an intelligence and maturity he does not possess - he is happy in Hollywood getting all the attention he has ever craved with his fairytale princess


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> I misread as 'drone'. I think that's what you meant anyway
> 
> The Queen's message was heartbreakingly perfect ("I love you") and not in calligraphy, just her own hand.
> 
> View attachment 5058505



It says “ in loving memory Elizabeth “


----------



## jelliedfeels

daisychainz said:


> I thought this was odd, too. As such new members to the family, why were they there? Surely PP had other people through the years much more worthy of an invitation. If markle had wanted to come (or been invited?) she would have for sure been one of the 30 invites.


I think it makes sense. It’s awkward to try and rank someone’s friends whereas inviting the husbands shows equal  support for the marriages - it’s only circumstance they haven’t been married that long. Also the York girls would be really snubbed if neither their mum nor their men could attend and they were stuck with the nightmare dad.


jennalovesbags said:


> He did not do it in the same location as the others.


I assume he’s not a practising Anglican/Episcopalian (edit is this the same thing in America?)  anymore and his procedure is a bit rusty. I would be amazed if MM can remember anything from her five minute religious conversion. 

It has struck me as a little odd that marrying a Catholic essentially denigrates your rank but marrying someone who is clearly paying lip service to the CofE  doesn’t but I guess it’s just yet another in the line of concessions they made for Harry’s wife.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Aimee3 said:


> How many times/minutes did Harry’s lying wife even spend with PP?  PP said to Harry “you step out with actresses, you don’t marry them”, and from that point on, I bet Harry’s wife was afraid of PP.  PP saw her for what she is.



And Philip as ever was right

I haven’t watched it back but as the 3 became two to go up the steps into the chapel Harry appeared to almost run to cross over from where he should have stayed on the left and fell into step behind Will no doubt to get the photos he wants to sell - disgusting I felt sick at that point and couldnt look at the screen again if he was on it


----------



## CarryOn2020

The  BBC’s video shows the casket being lowered for a moment. I thought it was touching and added more gravitas. 

I’ve read many accounts that explain how H was fidgety, biting his lower lip, even tapping his leg with the program as he was exiting. Clearly, he was out of his element. H&M cannot compete at this high level of functioning with capable adults. He did bow his head but he did it too soon because he was confused. He followed what Anne who was at the altar did.

Based on H pushing Lord Snowden out of position, I do not believe that ‘the brothers have reconciled’.  His egregious behavior is on tape. Undoubtedly, William has seen it, called his father and vociferously complained.  Also, H is at Frogmore tonight. When does he leave?


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 2:34:30 mark
> Watch how toxic Harry cuts Lord Snowden off so H can end up behind William.  Anne’s husband motions for Snowden to walk in front of him.  I slowed down the video. It is no accident that he cut off Snowden.
> Everyone faces forward except toxic H.
> View attachment 5058735
> 
> Then he cuts Snowden off.
> Unbelievable. QE gave specific instructions. He cannot even respect those.
> 
> I really hope William cancels the Diana statue show.  No one should see any more of this nonsense. Enough. Just enough.




Glad someone else saw this made me feel sick my god how disrespectful


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> The  BBC’s video shows the casket being lowered for a moment. I thought it was touching and added more gravitas.
> 
> I’ve read many accounts that explain how H was fidgety, biting his lower lip, even tapping his leg with the program as he was exiting. Clearly, he was out of his element. H&M cannot compete at this high level of functioning with capable adults. He did bow his head but he did it too soon because he was confused. He followed what Anne who was at the altar did.
> 
> Based on H pushing Lord Snowden out of position, I do not believe that ‘the brothers have reconciled’.  His egregious behavior is on tape. Undoubtedly, William has seen it, called his father and vociferously complained.  Also, H is at Frogmore tonight. When does he leave?



Hopefully there is a flight today if not early tomorrow


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> Glad someone else saw this made me feel sick my god how disrespectful



Will be interesting if anyone tries to defend him now.
His actions are on tape. So disrespectful and rude.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5058321
> 
> For a couple who plead for pRiVaCy and ran away from their royal duties for more PrIvAcY, they really have absolutely no understanding of the word. Not even a tiny bit.
> If true, that sounds like a lovely wreath with all the flowers included that have meaningful representations to PP and his life, but there is no reason for any of us to know about it. A man has died, show some respect.
> It's a funeral, family members & friends have wreaths made for their loved-one who has passed, that's pretty damn common and it's far from being worthy of reporting. It is not the time to be advertising the wreath _you _purchased and the florist _you _used.
> The only wreath of importance that anyone needed to know about was the one that lay on top of the coffin, from The Queen to her beloved husband.


“Please pay attention to my incredibly  small act of kindness because it completely cancels out all the harm I’ve done!” - repeat ad nauseum.


csshopper said:


> Of course the Sussexes were the only ones who felt compelled to expound on the merits of their wreath. As this line up shows, other family members did not.
> 
> "A wreath from the couple was earlier left in St George's Chapel, Windsor, to mark their respects, sources told PA news agency.
> 
> Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their tribute - including Acanthus mollis (Bear's breeches), the national flower of Greece, to represent Philip's heritage, and Eryngium (sea holly), to represent the Royal Marines.
> 
> The wreath also features campanula for gratitude and everlasting love, rosemary to signify remembrance, lavender for devotion, and roses in honour of June being Philip's birth month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry personally chose the locally-sourced flowers for their wreath (second from right) - including Acanthus mollis and Eryngium. Pictured: Wreaths from members of the royal family lie against the pews during the funeral
> 
> Look for a vapor trail in the sky.


When  I read the description I thought - it’s purple? And it is very purple. Even more than I thought. That’s a regal colour I know but  I thought funeral wreathes were usually white? Does anyone know about this?


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will be interesting if anyone tries to defend him now.
> His actions are on tape. So disrespectful and rude.



I’m so glad someone else saw it happen - I was actually so stunned by it last night I wondered if in my Uber emotional state I have somehow imagined it but no I have just watched it again it’s like an overexcited child playing musical chairs !!!! Earl Snowden and Tim Laurence looked like they had to check their step or they would all have crashed into each other as they were walking slowly and solemnly


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 2:34:30 mark
> Watch how toxic Harry cuts Lord Snowden off so H can end up behind William.  Anne’s husband motions for Snowden to walk in front of him.  I slowed down the video. It is no accident that he cut off Snowden.
> Everyone faces forward except toxic H.
> View attachment 5058735
> 
> Then he cuts Snowden off.
> Unbelievable. QE gave specific instructions. He cannot even respect those.
> 
> I really hope William cancels the Diana statue show.  No one should see any more of this nonsense. Enough. Just enough.



Just shows there is no way H will ever give up his birthright (in the line of succession).  Even if he trashes the RF in an interview. He still wants HIS place.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

needlv said:


> Just shows there is no way H will ever give up his birthright (in the line of succession).  Even if he trashes the RF in an interview. He still wants HIS place.



The funeral procession was not in line of succession it was more personal


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Just shows there is no way H will ever give up his birthright (in the line of succession).  Even if he trashes the RF in an interview. He still wants HIS place.


He may _want_ it. After this stunt today, he will not get it. QE made an exception for him and Andrew with the uniforms. 
He disrespected her.
It is definitely personal now.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides that first Christmas when she held that invitation up like a trophy of course.


Yeah, then she realised British stately homes are freezing, the royals give each socks not emeralds as gifts, there’s hardly any paparand you have to go to church for hours.
Confronted by such unimaginable horror she said:
“ I want to make some new traditions like trying to get luxury sponsorships and selling every minutiae of our life to the highest bidder- I mean, hang out with my mom.”

Edit - paparazzi got completely misspelled there!


----------



## Hermes Zen

OMGOSH, I feel ill reading your posts about H pushing Lord Snowden out of position so he could be behind W. H is so childish! I hope the Queen and Charles hears about this!!  Saw h with wandering eyes while walking behind Prince Philip. What was he looking up at?!? Camera/media? The nervous tapping his leg with the service program as he looks into the vault!  I didn't see anyone else do that! Walking with W up the hill he looks towards W and raises his hand half way up and wiggles his fingers. Whats that all about?!? Was he waving at a child in the distance or making funny hand signals to W?  The camera panned out and I saw no one any where on that side of the road.  Did anyone else wonder what that was about?  With all the years of refinement and growing up royal, he is still a child ... a man child as others have posted!


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGOSH, I feel ill reading your posts about H pushing Lord Snowden out of position so he could be behind W. H is so childish! I hope the Queen and Charles hears about this!!  Saw h with wandering eyes while walking behind Prince Philip. What was he looking up at?!? Camera/media? The nervous tapping his leg with the service program as he looks into the vault!  I didn't see anyone else do that! Walking with W up the hill he looks towards W and raises his hand half way up and wiggles his fingers. Whats that all about?!? Was he waving at a child in the distance or making funny hand signals to W?  The camera panned out and I saw no one any where on that side of the road.  Did anyone else wonder what that was about?  With all the years of refinement and growing up royal, he is still a child ... a man child as others have posted!



Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  Or asking for forgiveness or approval???


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  Or asking for forgiveness or approval???



Or... he needs that “show of forgiveness” so that the public will think better of him. I just read that even in the USA the H&M approval ratings went down after the interview. Situation won’t improve unless the BRF shows sign of forgiveness... either that or he needs more materials for future interviews. Who knows, at this stage not thinking very well of him at all.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> It's understandable (for me) if black American people disregard and even disrespect the British RF, for their ancestors were enslaved with support of the monarchy, no?


I think POC  have their right to their opinion about the institution of monarchy same as anyone else does.

Arguably the commonwealth and governmental international aid are part of a programme of redress for British colonialism but it is perfectly valid to criticise this idea or elements of its implementation etc. I myself am ambiguous about parts of it. 

I don’t like it when people assume someone is racist or prejudiced in any way because they are posh/white/old or whatever. Equally, it is wrong when it is assumed  that someone is right/politically astute/has a certain political alignment because they are a minority. 
It strikes me this has happened a lot with the H&M debacle especially with media pundits.

edit- Wanted to clarify I think the partisanship is being encouraged by media specifically.


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  Or asking for forgiveness or approval???


I didn’t see this yesterday, as I was watching the soldiers negotiate the steps.  If I had to guess I’d say it was H pulling rank on the other 2, but it’s a very odd move and looks awkward.


----------



## zen1965

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


For me it was 1) her behaviour at Eugenie‘s wedding, 2) the coat flicking during her 1st pregnancy („Look at my bump!“), 3) the ITV interview. Plus the pushing and shoving of JCMH.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Anyone get annoyed at the Beyonce instagram post with Meghan dressed like a queen in 2019. She holds up the Brit award she won with the band mates from 2002. To me it just shows how little Americans know about the monarchy. It feels kinda treasonous since 5 people would have to die for Harry to become King, and her Queen consort by default.



I thought it was ridiculous especially as she's wearing a well-known tiara that belongs to the Spanish queen. I'm so done with people not doing their homework. I also rolled my eyes so hard when Pharrell Williams said something along the lines of her marriage was a milestone for "all of us" at that infamous Lion King premiere. Really?


----------



## needlv

Icyjade said:


> Or... he needs that “show of forgiveness” so that the public will think better of him. I just read that even in the USA the H&M approval ratings went down after the interview. Situation won’t improve unless the BRF shows sign of forgiveness... either that or he needs more materials for future interviews. Who knows, at this stage not thinking very well of him at all.



yes but seriously, what is left for H and MM to tell?  They called the RF, the UK media and the UK racists... raised the mental health issues that weren’t addressed...

So there is only the unseen Oprah footage, a baby reveal / marching of Archie...?  a tell all book?

the divorce interview? 

if they keep sinking lower - reality tv?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## Hermes Zen

After watching the funeral service I am left with wow. The Queen and Prince Philip is the worlds power couple! Both have accomplished and did so much for others and their country.  I was always impressed by the Queen. Now I have learned much more, unfortunately under sad circumstances. 

To bad some of this didn't rub off on M&H. Thankfully it did on W&K.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I haven't heard this perspective shared by the black (American) community before.... I would think, erm, if we go down that road there are many people ahead in line of the BRF. The British abolished slavery much earlier than the Americans and didn't need to go to war to come to that conclusion.



Yeah, I do think that argument is flawed on several levels.


----------



## elvisfan4life

needlv said:


> Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  Or asking for forgiveness or approval???



My exact thoughts he had been told to get the money shot


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Lounorada said:


> And if you are going around saying that out loud about your own relationship (H&M), then it leads me to think your relationship actually _isn't _that great.
> Usually the couples who have those real fairytale-like relationships are modest people and don't have to declare it to anyone who will listen, it goes without saying.


Exactly, now who in future will have another great love story? 
A- A couple where the female married into a job that dictates that your husband is senior to you but she will not allow that be so, will not let the male out of sight, constantly clinging on to him, directing him with taps on the back for her to go first and not listening to anyone about protocol as she knows best. 
Or
B- A couple who don't need to hold hands all the time to prove they love each other. A woman marrying into the family realising its a job as well as a marriage where her husband is the senior. She goes about her work with grace and dignity, observing all rules and protocol with a confidence that has grown over 10 years. A woman who respects her place and doesn't outshine her husband purposely. When together they are a team.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



I knew what kind of person she was after Harry infamously said "We'll be the family she never had" because I knew then and there what narrative she'd been feeding him. I didn't feel personally offended though until much later, but can't remember. I don't think it was THE event, but rather her impressive collection of missteps, diva behaviour, attention seeking and the respectless way she treats others, and Harry standing by and applauding her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


That’s a great question. I honestly didn’t give much thought to them and the royals at all. Then H&M announced they were leaving.

I was pleased for them initially. I think that it is time the royals cut some of their extended family expenses so this seemed to fit in nicely. Besides, Harry has never seemed well-suited to public life and I believed they wanted to go and live privately.

Then the lies and the defamation coupled with the most saccharine expressions of family unity started and I saw what a pair of hypocrites they are.

edit- superfluous ‘the’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> When she stood in front of the camera in Africa and said “no one asked if I am ok” - having visited the most impoverished people who don’t know where their next meal is coming from, and having visited a centre for women who suffered horrific violence.  *All while wearing very expensive clothing during the tour. *  i honestly could not believe it.



BUT taking off her engagement ring. Did she think someone would override her security details and rob her, or did she believe people were stupid enough to not know her OOTD was worth thousands?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> The celebs at her wedding bothered me in the sense that they invited them and not his cousins(the Queen’s first cousins families).



They did what? Is this true? (I'll probably find out as I read along, but if I read first and then start answering I'll never find anything back)


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


When I first saw photos of H&M attending some sports event, I didn't think anything really, good for them, not my business.

Then I saw that cringe and fake fest of an engagement interview and my narc-dar went off with bells on. I couldn't believe how so many here and elsewhere couldn't see this. All the gushing talk of How wonderful! that Harry was marrying "a person of colour" was also quite nauseating- and racist. This is Europe, after all. I thought the goal was to get over this kind of thinking and judge people based on their merit and actions, not their skin. This ridiculous notion of not being able to critique someone because of their skin colour or ethnicity due to fear of being branded racist, is exactly what has led to H&M being able to wreak so much woke havoc, both on a personal level for their families and publicly. It also doesn't add up, because Harry is undisputedly one of the most despised persons in the UK and elsewhere right now, despite his "white privilege".

There are at least three black women that I'm aware of, very successfully married into European aristocracy. In each case without any of the absurd, divisive and disrespectful antics displayed by H&M.

What cemented it for me was when H&M began using their "progressive"- and likewise glaringly hypocritical- agenda to upheaval the BRF and in so doing, British society. This was the last drop for me- and also when I realised, that this is not just about H&M, they have very serious, wealthy and well connected agenda driven backers.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> It says “ in loving memory Elizabeth “



Thank you


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> When  I read the description I thought - it’s purple? And it is very purple. Even more than I thought. That’s a regal colour I know but  I thought funeral wreathes were usually white? Does anyone know about this?



Don't know about the UK, but in Germany they can be literally any colour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  *Or asking for forgiveness or approval???*



While entering the chapel behind the coffin? Probably not.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> “Please pay attention to my incredibly  small act of kindness because it completely cancels out all the harm I’ve done!” - repeat ad nauseum.
> 
> When  I read the description I thought - it’s purple? And it is very purple. Even more than I thought. That’s a regal colour I know but  I thought funeral wreathes were usually white? Does anyone know about this?


This sent me scurrying to Debrett's for an answer.
"Choosing The Flowers
Family flowers may be in the form of a wreath or perhaps a cross, and the flowers of close family members are often placed on the coffin. If a non-family member does send flowers a simple bouquet, or flat spray, is more usual than a wreath. A large organisation may send a wreath. Colours are usually white or cream but if it was known that the person whose funeral it is loved, for example, pink, then choose accordingly."
I doubt MM knew PP well enough to say what was his fave colour. Perhaps the colour of the acanthus and sea holly prompted H&M to deliberately go purple to stand out from the sea of white (being that they love to be special, and they would need to differentiate their wreath to advertise the florist) ?


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Interesting? No Absolutely Not
> 
> Thankfully very little was seen and cameras panned away to the military band playing the last post - the Queen and family were given a private moment as the coffin was  finally lowered -which was as it should be -I am so grateful that it was not televised in detail for ghouls to pick over
> 
> Anne respectively going forward as she left to bow to her father and say her last goodbye was all we needed to see - and it brought home how Harry absolutely failed to do so - no respect at all  -but why would be after what he has done to the family? He ran across the steps to be behind his brother in the most astonishing display of disrespect I have ever seen was Meghan on an earpiece to him ?? Appalling - he needs to go away and stay away with his dreadful wife


Anne didn't bow her head to her father, she looked towards where her father was to her left then turned to her right to bow to the altar.


----------



## Clearblueskies

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


* Her behaviour in the engagement interview seemed very false to me - but I put it down to nerves.
* All the stuff with her father prior to wedding - who behaves like that??
* Bumpgate (& poor Eugenie)
* Clawgate
* All the unnecessary fuss around Archies birth
* The manifesto she wrote and plastered on Sussex Royal w/o informing the Queen.
She struck a false note from the beginning.  There were lies from the beginning, and much embellishment of unremarkable achievements.  Then things like the Grenfell cookbook somehow became Meghan’s cookbook. 

I could go on because there’s so much of it.  They’ll write a narcissist textbook about her one day.  She preaches compassion, and paints herself as a victim whilst encouraging her awful stans to bully and threaten anyone that dares to criticise her.  Its my hope the police start looking into those people.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think this would require a long history lesson. The BRF have profited off millions of people, of all races, colors and nationalities.
> 
> And if Beyonce feels that the BRF has contributed or exploited black people, then why did she meet royalty (Prince Charles et al)? Why was there a blessing given for Harry to marry Meghan? Why did Meghan herself marry into a family that profited off the enslavement of millions (not just black people, literally all the races in the world were at some point exploited by the British I'm sure). The Queen has a  huge diamond from India called the Kohinor diamond, which was taken from Indian soil (along with other expensive things) and to this day has not returned it, but you don't see me disrespecting the Queen or her heirs.


OT. I don’t disagree with repatriation in principle but it is a very complicated issue. Some would argue that pieces that were gifted, part of treaty negotiations (as the diamond itself was) or bought by private or public bodies have ceased to be owned by their country of origin. There is no question that Italy has no special claim to the paintings of Raphael, for example, they have been bought and traded many times over (even if some of those deals were undoubtedly murky and political)

The KIN would not be unique in being a Mughal jewel that is no longer  in the possession of India like Daria I noor which is in Iran. thehttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daria-i-Noor.

Also there’s the problem that other countries claim to be the descendants of the Mughal and true owners of the KIN. It might create a massive political problem to give it one over the other. This is a difficulty in antiquity in general.

Perhaps it’s a little jingoistic of me to point out but Britain didn’t manage to exploit every country of the world and that a lot of the damage was done by rival European countries.
We just get most of the attention because we happen to have colonised most of the now major world powers and because we actually acknowledge and redress it whereas some other European countries like to act like they never did anything


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> So I'm finally getting around to watching coverage of the funeral and I caught this clip, where Gayle is covering it with ACTUAL experts. Whose smart decision was it for her to cover this... she clearly knows nothing about the people involved, the protocol, and serves more questions than answers... but still TRIES to sound like an authority just because of her new "friends." Take this family's name out of your damn mouth!!  I would post this in the PP thread but I'm trying not to sully that one with snark.
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, and the gall. In one moment during that clip the British commentator says it's quite sad about people not being able to wear military garb. Gayle says, "IS it sad?" and the other woman has to school her. "Well, yes, because ..."





Ha ha, all the commentators had to get her back on topic or correct her as she pushed her 'own' agenda. She clearly knows nothing but happily the other commentators chosen were professional.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sharont2305 said:


> a woman marrying into the family realising its a job as well as a marriage where her husband is the senior.


Quoting myself but I meant that the man is senior in the job not the marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



As I've mentioned before in this thread I was all for her in the begining, what changed my opinion for ever was her whining during the Africa trip. In a continent where there is still widespread total poverty and thousands of children die of illness and starvation, for a hugely  previleged person to play the victim in such an environment is just disgusting! All the more so she being a POC!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

creme fraiche said:


> the Atlantic slave trade is a horrible stain in history with ongoing repercussions today.  It is not a simple story and nobody comes off well.  The vast majority of people enslaved and sent to the Americas were enslaved by other Africans (still today it is estimated that 7 million Africans are enslaved within Africa !), and the largest number of enslaved Africans were brought over by the Portuguese, followed by the British then the French.  Britain cannot hold its head up high, but it was the second European country to abolish slavery After Denmark/Norway.


I just want to add that I think the millions of Europeans, especially Slavic, that were captured and enslaved by Africans and muslims through the centuries deserve a mention too. Whole villages in Britain and the Faroe Islands for example, were abducted by Northern African slave traders. The Portuguese you mention were mainly Jewish. No peoples are walking away from this ugly human practice as innocents. 

The worst part, as you mentioned, is that slavery is still practiced today, in the Middle East and Africa. But somehow few seem to take notice or care. Perhaps it would be considered racist to do so.


----------



## papertiger

missfiggy said:


> Just an observation - at 7 months pregnant with baby 1 she flew to the US for a baby shower.
> At 7 months pregnant with baby 2 she wouldn't/couldn't attend her husband's grandfather's funeral.
> Hmmm......



Let's face it, it wasn't an option, the medical advice a curtain. 

Fine.

But that's why all the remote 'besty' yack yack. 

She wasn't allowed to fly not because of pregnancy, she just wasn't asked to the funeral. 

At this point Harry was lucky he was invited. Obviously, he didn't think so though by making such a fuss over his uniform. Still the same entitled "poster child for white privilege"* even among the most privileged.

*according to Sharon Osbourne


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 2:34:30 mark
> Watch how toxic Harry cuts Lord Snowden off so H can end up behind William.  Anne’s husband motions for Snowden to walk in front of him.  I slowed down the video. It is no accident that he cut off Snowden.
> Everyone faces forward except toxic H.
> View attachment 5058735
> 
> Then he cuts Snowden off.
> Unbelievable. QE gave specific instructions. He cannot even respect those.
> 
> I really hope William cancels the Diana statue show.  No one should see any more of this nonsense. Enough. Just enough.



But are you sure? Wasn't there some information how they'd walk one way in the procession and walk in different positions in the church? I think you posted something about this?

ETA: I'm only asking because if what you say is true, and I'm very inclined to believe it is, I'm running out of Beyond disgusting comments and :s on this thread.


----------



## papertiger

rhyvin said:


> very interesting video about MM's narcissism




OMG, I did not even know some of the grandiose, false claims she made in public. Wow.


----------



## Icyjade

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But are you sure? Wasn't there some information how they'd walk one way in the procession and walk in different positions in the church? I think you posted something about this?


Don’t think there is any protocol/order to follow _after_ the funeral. All the information is about _during_ the funeral.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> “Please pay attention to my incredibly  small act of kindness because it completely cancels out all the harm I’ve done!” - repeat ad nauseum.
> 
> When  I read the description I thought - it’s purple? And it is very purple. Even more than I thought. That’s a regal colour I know but  I thought funeral wreathes were usually white? Does anyone know about this?



Yes, usually all-white flowers, especially at formal Royal funerals, but there are plenty of exceptions even at CofE if the culture/family traditions are different. Not so here though. There would be a few raised eyebrows and mumblings over cucumber sandwiches.


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But are you sure? Wasn't there some information how they'd walk one way in the procession and walk in different positions in the church? I think you posted something


I agree with you.


----------



## Sharont2305

Icyjade said:


> Don’t think there is any protocol/order to follow _after_ the funeral. All the information is about _during_ the funeral.


This was during the funeral


----------



## Clearblueskies

What about Wimbledon?  That was fairly early on.  She had rows of seats cleared and accused some poor sap who was just taking a selfie of taking her photo and invading her personal space


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> OMG, I did not even know some of the grandiose, false claims she made in public. Wow.



I would give my right hand to know what's going on in Harry's head. If my partner spouted lies to make themselves look better than they are it would put me off big time, but to him this doesn't seem to be a big deal?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Yes, usually all-white flowers, especially at formal Royal funerals, but there are plenty of exceptions even at CofE if the culture/family traditions are different. Not so here though. There would be a few raised eyebrows and mumblings over cucumber sandwiches.



I mean, the need to stand out amongst all those boring, appropriate wreaths is real (and this coming from someone who doesn't think anything of colourful funeral wreaths, but you can be assured if I knew it's not the thing to do I'd order white or cream!).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> What about Wimbledon?  That was fairly early on.  She had rows of seats cleared and accused some poor sap who was just taking a selfie of taking her photo and invading her personal space



I've said it before, I'll say it again: drama queen had to have seats cleared (and she could have used the Royal Box had she just been dressed appropriately), #2, 3 and 4 in line together with the future queen could watch a soccer game mingling with the unwashed masses. Find the error.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, I'll say it again: drama queen had to have seats cleared (and she could have used the Royal Box had she just been dressed appropriately), #2, 3 and 4 in line together with the future queen could watch a soccer game mingling with the unwashed masses. Find the error.


It was a power display, and thankfully it backfired big style.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would give my right hand to know what's going on in Harry's head. If my partner spouted lies to make them look better than they are it would put me off big time, but to him this doesn't seem to be a big deal?



Are you suggesting there's something going on in JCMH's head other than a constant buzzing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would give my right hand to know what's going on in Harry's head. If my partner spouted lies to make them look better than they are it would put me off big time, but to him this doesn't seem to be a big deal?


He is in the narcissist's thrall. You have to live through it to know what it's like. The narc I worked with would be making the most outrageous claims and the entire office would tell me that I should forgive him because he was a "nice person". I was the only person glaring at him because my boss would go, "be a dear and clean up his mess, would you?" MM is definitely feeding H whoppers and he is believing her because she is his wife and surely would not deceive him (cue starry-eyed gazes).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Are you suggesting there's something going on in JCMH's head other than a constant buzzing?



My bad. You have a point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> He is in the narcissist's thrall. You have to live through it to know what it's like. The narc I worked with would be making the most outrageous claims and the entire office would tell me that I should forgive him because he was a "nice person". I was the only person glaring at him because my boss would go, "be a dear and clean up his mess, would you?" MM is definitely feeding H whoppers and he is believing her because she is his wife and surely would not deceive him (cue starry-eyed gazes).



Sadly I know too well what it's like having grown up with a narcisstic parent (who just yesterday had a full-on narcisstic tantrum over nothing really), but maybe that's my advantage as in I spot the signs quickly? Harry is certainly no match for this master manipulator, but I still wonder, does he never ever feel slight doubts?


----------



## Chagall

I would be very curious to know if MM was asked not to attend, or precluded from going due to her condition. As far as Harry having deep feelings of regret about what he has given up, I doubt it. I don’t think there is a lot of self reflection in Harry. He has shown himself not to be a particularly decent person.


----------



## JY89

needlv said:


> Just shows there is no way H will ever give up his birthright (in the line of succession).  Even if he trashes the RF in an interview. He still wants HIS place.



Honestly, I‘ve watched his interview with James Corden and he was actually careful with his words not to disrespect or harm his family members while focusing on the more positive side. He appeared relax and happy as well. However, the vibes I’ve gotten from Oprah interview was a huge turn from his interview with JC.

Therefore, I can only conclude that he’s going along with whatever Meghan wants so as to please and appease his pregnant wife (remember what Meghan wants Meghan gets? Lol). Not like he’s allowed to do much speaking during the interview anyway. Obviously, MM was in full control of it and he can only speak when she wants him to ( I’m sure many spotted how she stopped him from speaking by reaching out to him to signal that he should shut up ).

It was also apparent that he was highly uncomfortable on certain topics with a lot of fidgeting and looking away etc. A puppet fully controlled by MM and probably together with his resentment towards his family now makes him a very confused man child. He’s unhappy with his family but definitely still love them to certain degree that he doesn’t truly wanna break free from them.

Not like he’s left with much choices now when his beloved wife burnt almost every bridges possible in the most destructive way and it’s gonna be real hard to return to your family and friends when you turned your back against them. So no more options left but to continue staying on with his ever toxic wife.

And guess who wins? The drama narcissist queen of course


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Watching that narcissist video while cooking lunch...wait, so not only was it a school project her father helped her do, now we learn the company had changed the ad before she even got the chance to write in? After she basically made it sound like the President called her to congratulate her on her impact? You can't make that sh*t up. Oh well, she can.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> What about Wimbledon?  That was fairly early on.  She had rows of seats cleared and accused some poor sap who was just taking a selfie of taking her photo and invading her personal space


That's a classic  And classic narc, I believe.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> This sent me scurrying to Debrett's for an answer.
> "Choosing The Flowers
> Family flowers may be in the form of a wreath or perhaps a cross, and the flowers of close family members are often placed on the coffin. If a non-family member does send flowers a simple bouquet, or flat spray, is more usual than a wreath. A large organisation may send a wreath. Colours are usually white or cream but if it was known that the person whose funeral it is loved, for example, pink, then choose accordingly."
> I doubt MM knew PP well enough to say what was his fave colour. Perhaps the colour of the acanthus and sea holly prompted H&M to deliberately go purple to stand out from the sea of white (being that they love to be special, and they would need to differentiate their wreath to advertise the florist) ?





papertiger said:


> Yes, usually all-white flowers, especially at formal Royal funerals, but there are plenty of exceptions even at CofE if the culture/family traditions are different. Not so here though. There would be a few raised eyebrows and mumblings over cucumber sandwiches.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't know about the UK, but in Germany they can be literally any colour.


Thank you for the great answers.
I have seen a variety of funeral traditions  in my time but I sort of assumed the Royals would keep it white and traditional - so purple seemed a bit weird and boy was it purple.

@xincinsin it’s especially interesting what you say about institutions sending wreaths rather than individuals, does this mean the great institution of Archewell sent it I wonder  

Also, general observation, it’s interesting Meghan allegedly saw Kate giving her flowers after a minor row as a meaningless gesture but considers her own floral purchases(?) to be so extremely newsworthy.


----------



## JY89

needlv said:


> Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  Or asking for forgiveness or approval???



Harry asking for forgiveness? (*Meghan reaches hand out to remind him to shut up)

Well, his beloved wife made the first move of showing her magnanimous side by announcing that she’s WILLING TO FORGIVE the RF. In short, she’s telling everyone that she still stand on the fact that the interview was the correct thing to do and she is not sorry. She will not bow and it should be the reverse.

And if they ever decide to apologise, I’m wondering if she’s gonna do it publicly like on Oprah interview or isit gonna be in private?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Also, general observation, it’s interesting *Meghan* allegedly* saw* *Kate giving* her flowers after a minor row *as* a *meaningless* gesture but *considers *her* own* floral *purchases*(?) to be so *extremely newsworthy.*



I think you answered the question yourself  

It's as simple as that.


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> I think you answered the question yourself
> 
> It's as simple as that.


I think that Meghan also realised some time ago that when the time comes Kate gets to decide which tiara/jewels she would be allocated and has a simmering resentment about that.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Thank you for the great answers.
> I have seen a variety of funeral traditions  in my time but I sort of assumed the Royals would keep it white and traditional - so purple seemed a bit weird and boy was it purple.
> 
> @xincinsin it’s especially interesting what you say about institutions sending wreaths rather than individuals, does this mean the great institution of Archewell sent it I wonder
> 
> Also, general observation, it’s interesting Meghan allegedly saw Kate giving her flowers after a minor row as a meaningless gesture but considers her own floral purchases(?) to be so extremely newsworthy.


I've sent many wreaths on behalf of the company where I work. Usually I pick white or cream, with yellow, green or pink accents. Least objectionable choices in a multi-racial, multi-religious society. The purple options (orchids) are usually in the Christian wreaths here. 

I doubt that wreath had anything to do with Archewell. All the PR feeds made certain to give MM full credit. I don't think Archie even got a mention. If they had made public TQ's message, MM would probably have plagiarised that as proof of her great bond


----------



## xincinsin

If (when) the great divorce happens, does MM get to retain her title of DoS? Are there rules and regs for that? Or does the reigning monarch get to decide?


----------



## Icyjade

Sharont2305 said:


> This was during the funeral



Oh ya found it! I got confused


----------



## justwatchin

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGOSH, I feel ill reading your posts about H pushing Lord Snowden out of position so he could be behind W. H is so childish! I hope the Queen and Charles hears about this!!  Saw h with wandering eyes while walking behind Prince Philip. What was he looking up at?!? Camera/media? The nervous tapping his leg with the service program as he looks into the vault!  I didn't see anyone else do that! Walking with W up the hill he looks towards W and raises his hand half way up and wiggles his fingers. Whats that all about?!? Was he waving at a child in the distance or making funny hand signals to W?  The camera panned out and I saw no one any where on that side of the road.  Did anyone else wonder what that was about?  With all the years of refinement and growing up royal, he is still a child ... a man child as others have posted!


I saw that too and the only person I saw was a man on a rooftop that I assumed was a security officer. So if H was waving to him that was especially childish.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I think that Meghan also realised some time ago that when the time comes Kate gets to decide which tiara/jewels she would be allocated and has a simmering resentment about that.



Seriously?

Well, then she's even sillier/more ill than I could have imagined.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> If (when) the great divorce happens, does MM get to retain her title of DoS? Are there rules and regs for that? Or does the reigning monarch get to decide?



Customary for former wives of peers to keep title and lose HRH completely, so she'd presumably be 'Meghan, Duchess of Sussex' (unless she marries again).


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Well, then she's even sillier/more ill than I could have imagined.



MY apologies - this was badly express by me - this is my own speculation I am afraid, nothing I have seen written or reported.
I usually fact check myself. I should have written " I wonder if .....


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> MY apologies - this was badly express by me - this is my own speculation I am afraid, nothing I have seen written or reported.
> I usually fact check myself. I should have written " I wonder if .....



But in someways. It's the whole caboodle. Just that there's another woman, her perceived competition, who'll get more of 'the cake', more attention and go up in rank. 

Some people, even princess mermaids, are simply _never_ happy


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

RAINDANCE said:


> I think that Meghan also realised some time ago that when the time comes Kate gets to decide which tiara/jewels she would be allocated and has a simmering resentment about that.


"Simmering resentment"! The visuals I'm getting on this thread  The heavily (I start writing heavenly every time for some reason  ) pregnant one's behaviour sure indicates a huge capacity for resentful simmering.


----------



## Icyjade

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "Simmering resentment"! The visuals I'm getting on this thread  The heavily (I start writing heavenly every time for some reason  ) pregnant one's behaviour sure indicates a huge capacity for resentful simmering.



It’s a typical narcissistic tendency... I know some narcissists in real life and _everyone_ has done something wrong to them. And of course they are the best/have done no wrong.


----------



## drifter

papertiger said:


> But in someways. It's the whole caboodle. Just that there's another woman, her perceived competition, who'll get more of 'the cake', more attention and go up in rank.
> 
> Some people, even princess mermaids, are simply _never_ happy


the little mermaid sang this in the Disney movie:  "...I want more..."


----------



## catlover46

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They did what? Is this true? (I'll probably find out as I read along, but if I read first and then start answering I'll never find anything back)


The Duke of Gloucester, The Duke of Kent, Prince Michael of Kent and their spouses plus Princess Alexandra  were invited but their children weren’t.


----------



## eunaddict

lulilu said:


> "Meghan hasn’t had the same opportunity, but her friend and London-based journalist Omid Scobie said ‘her mind is very much on the situation over here’. Speaking to ABC, he said: ‘We know that she’s supporting Harry in this very difficult week for him, but she’ll also be sad because this is also the loss of a family member for her. ‘*She grew very close to the Queen and Prince Philip over the recent years. It was probably her strongest relationship within the family and those relations then get smaller this week*. It’ll be a sad day for her.’"
> 
> The nerve of her to claim she is grieving over the loss of a family member really makes me mad.
> 
> I wish I believed in karma.  Because she really deserves to be kicked in the *ss.




We all know this is untrue, if it were...SOMEONE would already have leaked family-styled photos of H&M with Prince Philip to the press +/- instagram (as opposed to photos from press calls/official events)...we've seen so many recently from all the other family members of PP with his family in private, but none from the American branch...Why? Probably because none exist.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> But are you sure? Wasn't there some information how they'd walk one way in the procession and walk in different positions in the church? I think you posted something about this?
> 
> ETA: I'm only asking because if what you say is true, and I'm very inclined to believe it is, I'm running out of Beyond disgusting comments and :s on this thread.



Yes, I am sure. Yes, there is a diagram of everyone’s position for walking behind the coffin. It covers before the church and inside the church. Harry chose *not* to follow it. He wanted to be behind William, so he could pretend there is reconciliation. Lord Snowden was caught unaware, Tim was annoyed, too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Customary for former wives of peers to keep title and lose HRH completely, so she'd presumably be 'Meghan, Duchess of Sussex' (unless she marries again).



What if HE marries again? Will there be two duchesses?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> The Duke of Gloucester, The Duke of Kent, Prince Michael of Kent and their spouses plus Princess Alexandra  were invited but their children weren’t.



Oh wow. Yet they were gracious to enough to invite them to Lady Gabriella's wedding (Prince Michael's daughter)...Meghan didn't attend as she had just given birth, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> We all know this is untrue, if it were...SOMEONE would already have leaked family-styled photos of H&M with Prince Philip to the press +/- instagram (as opposed to photos from press calls/official events)...we've seen so many recently from all the other family members of PP with his family in private, but none from the American branch...*Why? Probably because none exist.*



Jup.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All H had to do was step back while still facing front.  Instead he turns and walks in front of Snowden.
The plan, as approved by QE:



Notice H turns, next frame he walks in front of Lord Snowden. Peter is barely visible behind Edward. William must have been furious.




ETA:  the media needs to report this.  There is no doubt H refuses to follow the Queen’s command.  Time to cancel the statue reveal.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sadly I know too well what it's like having grown up with a narcisstic parent (who just yesterday had a full-on narcisstic tantrum over nothing really), but maybe that's my advantage as in I spot the signs quickly? Harry is certainly no match for this master manipulator, but I still wonder, does he never ever feel slight doubts?



She removed him from the environment of influence to the US, and isolated him. he may feel twinges after having been home this week.



Chagall said:


> I would be very curious to know if MM was asked not to attend, or precluded from going due to her condition. As far as Harry having deep feelings of regret about what he has given up, I doubt it. I don’t think there is a lot of self reflection in Harry. He has shown himself not to be a particularly decent person.



I’m speculating that she didn't Make the cut so she came up with the doctor excuse.

Also, he seems incredibly immature and emotionally stunted. In desperate need of a mom figure. Meghan has filled the mom role for him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I am sure. Yes, there is a diagram of everyone’s position for walking behind the coffin. It covers before the church and inside the church. Harry chose *not* to follow it. He wanted to be behind William, so he could pretend there is reconciliation. Lord Snowden was caught unaware, Tim was annoyed, too.


I just saw as IcyJade again posted the diagram you posted before the ceremony. Thank you for clarifying, Carry, I just wanted to be sure before I reacted. But honestly, I'm all out of  :s and :s and :s now.

I can not believe he did that, on such an occasion and against the expressed wishes of his grandparents. And it looked so contrived, like he was on a mission. A mission for Netflix dollars. What an absolute wh***e.


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> All H had to do was step back while still facing front.  Instead he turns and walks in front of Snowden.
> The plan, as approved by QE:
> View attachment 5058864
> 
> 
> Notice H turns, next frame he walks in front of Lord Snowden. Peter is barely visible behind Edward. William must have been furious.
> 
> View attachment 5058865
> 
> 
> ETA:  the media needs to report this.  There is no doubt H refuses to follow the Queen’s command.  Time to cancel the statue reveal.


I’m going to have to rewatch this part.
According to the diagram, all he had to do was take a step back.
He did a lot if movement to get where he went. Ugh.
Now, I wonder will the military dress come up again at TQ eventual funeral


----------



## Icyjade

LittleStar88 said:


> Also, he seems incredibly immature and emotionally stunted. In desperate need of a mom figure. Meghan has filled the mom role for him.



Not sure if this has been posted...


Made me laugh.

What does JCMH stand for?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> I’m going to have to rewatch this part.
> According to the diagram, all he had to do was take a step back.
> He did a lot if movement to get where he went. Ugh.
> Now, I wonder will the military dress come up again at TQ eventual funeral



In the BBC’s video on YouTube, it’s around the 2:34:30 mark


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What if HE marries again? Will there be two duchesses?



Interesting! 

The new wife's would be 'HRH 'X' Duchess of Sussex',  but I'm supposing only if he comes back to the fold because although he holds it, he's not supposed to use HRH.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I am sure. Yes, there is a diagram of everyone’s position for walking behind the coffin. It covers before the church and inside the church. Harry chose *not* to follow it. He wanted to be behind William, so he could pretend there is reconciliation. Lord Snowden was caught unaware, Tim was annoyed, too.



I’m amazed none of the press have picked up on this - it’s annoying they are reporting a healing between the brothers - I don’t think so hope Harry is already over the Atlantic


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> What does JCMH stand for?



Just Call Me Harry...he said that publicly at one of his last engagements if I remember correctly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> I’m amazed none of the press have picked up on this - it’s annoying they are reporting a healing between the brothers - I don’t think so hope Harry is already over the Atlantic



If I had Twitter, I would tweet it to the royal reporters. 
Maybe they are waiting for H to leave, let the Queen get some rest?   I am so disgusted about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Interesting!
> 
> The new wife's would be 'HRH 'X' Duchess of Sussex',  but I'm supposing only if he comes back to the fold because although he holds it, he's not supposed to use HRH.



It would be enough to keep me from marrying Harry (even if he was a great guy otherwise and not a bigger project than anything you see on Restoration Home) if I had to share a title with that woman.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Not sure if this has been posted...
> View attachment 5058875
> 
> Made me laugh.
> 
> What does JCMH stand for?



Did you check "Meghan Markle"? Can be used as noun and verb. The original definition was not so bad. Then it morphed into something very uncomplimentary. I'm amazed that she hasn't tried to wail about it as bullying/racism/sexism.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Icyjade said:


> It’s a typical narcissistic tendency... I know some narcissists in real life and _everyone_ has done something wrong to them. And of course they are the best/have done no wrong.


OT but I didn’t think I was a jade lover now your pic of your bangle is seriously tempting me.

MM seems more like a diagnosable narcissist every day. I was cynical at first as the term (like psychopath) gets thrown around so much in society but now.... 





drifter said:


> the little mermaid sang this in the Disney movie:  "...I want more..."


Never seen the little mermaid all the way through. Now I remember why, My mum thought Ariel was a massive whiner when I was a kid.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just Call Me Harry...he said that publicly at one of his last engagements if I remember correctly.


In one of his first paid post-Megxit gigs - Goldman Sachs, I think ? He said Just Call me Harry since the USA host (who introduced him) was not sure what to call him, ie HRH, Duke  etc.

It was at a time when use of the HRH was very tenuous but normally in the UK, it would be used. And of course, titles dont exist in the US. 

No one can remember the correct last name.   I would have to look it up to see if his last name is Windsor or Mountbatten-Windsor (or Windsor-Mountbatten). In the UK, he might also be called Harry Sussex just as Sophie is Sophie Wessex. But use of Sussex as last name is a UK-thing, it is not really his last name. Americans would not use that.

H was trying to appear like one of us, a non titled person, but of course, he kept on using Sussex Royal for quite come time, and the duke and duchess titles are still around to this day. It is not like he introduced himself as Mr First Name - Last Name.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think when at school and in the army he went by Wales as his last name, as did William. The last name of the House of Windsor is Mountbatten-Windsor, though. Archie's full name is Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, as they couldn't bear to use his courtesy title.


----------



## Jktgal

I haven't been watching Lady C'svideos as they are...longwinded? But the comments are always gold.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would be enough to keep me from marrying Harry (even if he was a great guy otherwise and not a bigger project than anything you see on Restoration Home) if I had to share a title with that woman.



Her children would always take precedence too (if the second marriage produced any).

Therefore, her son (Archie) would inherit everything upon JCMH's death (there's one I don't seem to mind speculating about ) and could/would/has right to toss you (and dependants) out of the family castle/manor/cottage on_ his _estate. It would _all _be his to do as he darn well pleases.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> In one of his first paid post-Megxit gigs - Goldman Sachs, I think ? He said Just Call me Harry since the USA host (who introduced him) was not sure what to call him, ie HRH, Duke  etc.
> 
> It was at a time when use of the HRH was very tenuous but normally in the UK, it would be used. And of course, titles dont exist in the US.
> 
> No one can remember the correct last name.   I would have to look it up to see if his last name is Windsor or Mountbatten-Windsor (or Windsor-Mountbatten). In the UK, he might also be called Harry Sussex just as Sophie is Sophie Wessex. But use of Sussex as last name is a UK-thing, it is not really his last name. Americans would not use that.
> 
> H was trying to appear like one of us, a non titled person, but of course, he kept on using Sussex Royal for quite come time, and the duke and duchess titles are still around to this day. It is not like he introduced himself as Mr First Name - Last Name.


Sophie's surname is Mountbatten-Windsor.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Did you check "Meghan Markle"? Can be used as noun and verb. The original definition was not so bad. Then it morphed into something very uncomplimentary. I'm amazed that she hasn't tried to wail about it as bullying/racism/sexism.



'Markled' has replaced 'ghosted' for quite a few in common usage in the UK


----------



## Chanbal

Will can't be blamed for asking for space, communicating preferentially with Ginger via text messages, and removing his mask when joined by H after the funeral... He is doing everything he can to avoid having his words 'translated' using MM's dictionary!  



_Sources have now told The Mail on Sunday that Harry has experienced 'a great deal of frostiness' from many of his relatives since arriving in Britain a week ago and self- isolating at Frogmore Cottage, the house given to him and Meghan as a wedding present by the Queen. 

*Princess Anne, Prince Edward and his wife Sophie failed to acknowledge Harry before or during yesterday's service, it was claimed. *

'*Ironically the only one who has expressed any sympathy towards him is Prince Andrew,' said one source.*

'He knows from Sarah Ferguson – and now first-hand – how it feels to be the outsider, which Harry very much is.

*'As far as the others are concerned, there is a deep sense of protection towards the Queen and resentment towards Harry. There is little sympathy for him after what he and Meghan said on Oprah.'*

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex accused the Royals of institutional racism during the bombshell 90-minute interview last month and claimed one member of the family – not the Queen or Prince Philip – questioned what colour their son Archie's skin would be. 

'They are still very upset,' the source added. 'They are putting on a united front for the Queen. They all think he has behaved appallingly.'
....

*However, it was reported last week that William had spoken briefly with his brother on the phone, although the source said communication had been 'more texts than calls'.*

Harry has spoken to his cousin Princess Eugenie who remains a steadfast friend. 'He is thought to have seen Eugenie, most likely outside since she's being strict with her new baby,' said the insider. *According to one report, William requested that Peter Phillips stand between him and Harry during the funeral cortege.*

...
William was initially ahead of his wife and brother but turned back towards them to speak to Kate while Harry exchanged pleasantries with the Dean.

*Harry then caught up with his brother and sister-in-law and they walked together for a while as William removed his face mask. *

Then, Kate stepped away to speak to the Countess of Wessex and her daughter Lady Louise – leaving the brothers alone. 

The brothers' discussion came following an impromptu decision by some of the Royal Family to walk back to the castle, despite state cars having been put on for them - and it gave the cameras a chance to see them talk. 
..._








						Prince William 'requested Peter Phillips stand between him and Harry'
					

The brothers were separated by their cousin as they walked behind Prince Philip's coffin while it made its way to St George's Chapel in Windsor yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## eunaddict

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.



It wasn't one thing, it was all the things.

Major milestones I remembered were

Wimbledon
Africa tour
News that all her staff kept quitting
EUGENIE. Seriously. What in the absolutely lack of social skills and manners was that nonsense?!
News that she wasn't letting him mingle with his old mates
And then there was that pre-marriage fight they had at his friend's wedding where she appeared to snap at wait staff and stuff like her friends talking about her "Sayonara Zara" party (and her friends thought it was a good thing to chat about to the press, like "Oh, how cute." but really, how out of touch....I also thought it was weird that she got signed on as a permanent cast member but SHE had to throw her own party...don't close friends and colleagues usually host promotion parties?)
And of course, the clinging, the doe-eyes and the constant whining.

GAH. I was honestly, so determined to like her when she first appeared.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments section of an article on W&K's anniversary:



> I still think Meghan had the ugliest and worst fitting wedding dress I've ever seen on any royal. Sorry, but true. *And that green outfit and hat she once wore was repulsive.*



WE ARE NOT ALONE.


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just Call Me Harry...he said that publicly at one of his last engagements if I remember correctly.



Thanks! I actually googled but couldn’t find. That’s how I stumbled on the urban dictionary 



xincinsin said:


> Did you check "Meghan Markle"? Can be used as noun and verb. The original definition was not so bad. Then it morphed into something very uncomplimentary. I'm amazed that she hasn't tried to wail about it as bullying/racism/sexism.



Just did! Here to share 





Markled made me laugh too.



jelliedfeels said:


> OT but I didn’t think I was a jade lover now your pic of your bangle is seriously tempting me.
> 
> MM seems more like a diagnosable narcissist every day. I was cynical at first as the term (like psychopath) gets thrown around so much in society but now....



ohhh have you seen jadeite “glow”? The top quality jadeite are stunning and very durable for daily wear too. Come join us in The Jade Thread!

Her history and behavior speaks for itself.


----------



## Chanbal

Confirmed why Will removed his face mask... no room for misinterpretations 









						William and Harry reunited in grief as they lay grandfather to rest
					

WITH the whole world watching, Princes William and Harry were yesterday reunited in grief as they laid their beloved grandfather to rest.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> I’m amazed none of the press have picked up on this - it’s annoying they are reporting a healing between the brothers - I don’t think so hope Harry is already over the Atlantic


He went back to Frogmore after the funeral...
"_Prince Harry returned to Frogmore Cottage after attending Prince Philip's funeral yesterday ahead of a walk with his father later today, reports claim._"









						Prince Harry returns to Frogmore Cottage after Prince Philip funeral
					

The Duke of Sussex broke his 10-day quarantine after travelling on Sunday from his home in LA for the funeral which was held at St George's Chapel in Windsor yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Harry may stay for a few more days until QE's birthday! 

_Prince Harry __is being urged to stay in the UK until at least Wednesday as a gesture to the Queen. The plea comes with the Queen set to celebrate her 95th birthday this coming Wednesday - the first during her reign without Prince Philip by her side. It remains unclear how long Prince Harry will stay in the UK following yesterday's funeral for Prince Philip.









						Harry urged not to leave UK just yet with poignant plea to stay for Queen's birthday
					

PRINCE HARRY is being urged to stay in the UK for at least another four days, with the Queen set to celebrate her first birthday during her reign without Prince Philip.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Since when was pregnant MM 'very close' to PP. 

*MEGHAN Markle's friend has said she "grew very close to Prince Philip over the years" and her "relations with the family will now be smaller" following his death.*

_Omid Scobie said the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral yesterday was "a sad day" for the Duchess of Sussex as she watched on from home in the US with Archie._









						Meghan's pal says she was 'very close to Philip' and 'relationship now smaller'
					

MEGHAN Markle’s friend has said she “grew very close to Prince Philip over the years” and her “relations with the family will now be smaller” following his death. Omid…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Harry may stay for a few more days until QE's birthday!
> 
> _Prince Harry __is being urged to stay in the UK until at least Wednesday as a gesture to the Queen. The plea comes with the Queen set to celebrate her 95th birthday this coming Wednesday - the first during her reign without Prince Philip by her side. It remains unclear how long Prince Harry will stay in the UK following yesterday's funeral for Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry urged not to leave UK just yet with poignant plea to stay for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is being urged to stay in the UK for at least another four days, with the Queen set to celebrate her first birthday during her reign without Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Who is doing the urging or pleading? Sounds very wishy washy. Probably a cooked-up story.


----------



## catlover46

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments section of an article on W&K's anniversary:
> 
> 
> 
> WE ARE NOT ALONE.


I’ve always wondered if the seamstresses were treated liked crap by her and it was ill fitting on purpose.


----------



## catlover46

Honest question-do you think with the way Harry was pretty much ignored by his family yesterday do you think him and Meaghan will be asked to not attend the Queen’s funeral and Charles’ coronation?


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Harry may stay for a few more days until QE's birthday!
> 
> _Prince Harry __is being urged to stay in the UK until at least Wednesday as a gesture to the Queen. The plea comes with the Queen set to celebrate her 95th birthday this coming Wednesday - the first during her reign without Prince Philip by her side. It remains unclear how long Prince Harry will stay in the UK following yesterday's funeral for Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry urged not to leave UK just yet with poignant plea to stay for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is being urged to stay in the UK for at least another four days, with the Queen set to celebrate her first birthday during her reign without Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If that’s true Megs must be furious!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Harry may stay for a few more days until QE's birthday!
> 
> _Prince Harry __is being urged to stay in the UK until at least Wednesday as a gesture to the Queen. The plea comes with the Queen set to celebrate her 95th birthday this coming Wednesday - the first during her reign without Prince Philip by her side. It remains unclear how long Prince Harry will stay in the UK following yesterday's funeral for Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry urged not to leave UK just yet with poignant plea to stay for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is being urged to stay in the UK for at least another four days, with the Queen set to celebrate her first birthday during her reign without Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



All the better to sign abdication renunciation papers, return medals, sign the loan payback docs, clean up his mess at Frogmore, etc.
‘Lots of little details to take care of, methinks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Since when was pregnant MM 'very close' to PP.
> 
> *MEGHAN Markle's friend has said she "grew very close to Prince Philip over the years" and her "relations with the family will now be smaller" following his death.*
> 
> _Omid Scobie said the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral yesterday was "a sad day" for the Duchess of Sussex as she watched on from home in the US with Archie._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's pal says she was 'very close to Philip' and 'relationship now smaller'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle’s friend has said she “grew very close to Prince Philip over the years” and her “relations with the family will now be smaller” following his death. Omid…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Yeah nah...not believing she was remotely “close” to Prince Philip at all. And what “over the years “? She wasn’t even in the family for that long. These planted stories just show her attempts to stay relevant and make it about her.


----------



## youngster

Gotta say, these two have the _worst_ timing.  I would love to ask Harry and MM for their opinions on the stock market so that I can do the _opposite_.

They leave the family in a huff a year ago, because they couldn't have their half-in/half-out life that _no one_ has ever been granted and were so caught up in their own drama that they neglected to give any consideration to the earliest reports on the pandemic.  So, instead of being seen pitching in during a year of crisis in the UK and building some goodwill, they sat in Vancouver and then in L.A. No red carpets, no millions per speech, no jetting around the U.S. to build their brand.  They wait a full year and do their big OW interview, trash the family with half-truths, pettiness and downright lies, only to have Prince Philip pass away a very short time later. This unleashes a massive groundswell of sympathy for the Queen, widespread blame for causing the Queen and Prince Philip grief in his last days, as well as non-stop coverage of the prince's life, reminding everyone that he was all about duty and commitment. Cap it off with perhaps the most magnificent public funeral of modern memory. So perfectly British and so perfectly done, making Harry look small in contrast to his grandfather and the differences in their choices so stark. The universe is sending them messages but these two aren't listening lol.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry did bow his head, but he did it before reaching the altar. Anne bows her head at the altar, her husband does the same. Harry sees them bow their heads, gets confused(?) and bows his head before reaching the altar. He looks into the vault. Notice how the Wessex family closely watch Harry. They were ready, ready for him to make a scene.
> 3:21:00 Mark.
> 
> ETA: looks like Andrew did not bow at the altar.  Hmmm.


is andrew another dim bulb?


----------



## Chanbal

justwatchin said:


> Yeah nah...not believing she was remotely “close” to Prince Philip at all. And what “over the years “? She wasn’t even in the family for that long. These planted stories just show her attempts to stay relevant and make it about her.


I think Prince Philip didn't want her at his funeral, but he can't deny whatever she says now. I wouldn't be surprised if she will try to cash in on her many (false) memories with him.


----------



## youngster

catlover46 said:


> Honest question-do you think with the way Harry was pretty much ignored by his family yesterday do you think him and Meaghan will be asked to not attend the Queen’s funeral and Charles’ coronation?



I think it will depend on how many years pass before that unfortunate event (hopefully many many years) and what their behavior is like from now until then.


----------



## Sharont2305

justwatchin said:


> Yeah nah...not believing she was remotely “close” to Prince Philip at all. And what “over the years “? She wasn’t even in the family for that long. These planted stories just show her attempts to stay relevant and make it about her.


My bet is that apart from being at Sandringham for two Christmases, her own wedding, Archies christening, she probably only met him less than five times in private.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on the evil eye he shoots at Anne, why would anyone want AngryBoy around?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> I’ve always wondered if the seamstresses were treated liked crap by her and it was ill fitting on purpose.



Funny that you would say that...I think the next comment to the one I quoted was "Well, if you shout at your seamstresses and hit one during your fitting, they send you off to your wedding in a ill-fitting dress". 

Lady CC had a video out a few weeks ago where someone whose cousin allegedly worked on the dress spilled the tea and it was NOT pretty. We can't know if it's true or made up, but it sounds an awful lot like Harry's wife. (her explanation for the poor fit was that Mighty Megs changed the design and details so many time that at some point they were short on time finishing that thing).


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> When she stood in front of the camera in Africa and said “no one asked if I am ok” - having visited the most impoverished people who don’t know where their next meal is coming from, and having visited a centre for women who suffered horrific violence.  All while wearing very expensive clothing during the tour.   i honestly could not believe it.


that did it for me too
just stupid......doing this while preaching to us how to think/behave


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> Honest question-do you think with the way Harry was pretty much ignored by his family yesterday do you think him and Meaghan will be asked to not attend the Queen’s funeral and Charles’ coronation?



Her, possibly. Him, don't see it yet, but who knows.


----------



## sdkitty

chaneljewel said:


> I couldn’t stand to watch/listen to Gayle King during the funeral.  She doesn’t know what she’s talking about most of the time and thinks her opinion is The Word.  Surprise, surprise that she’s buddies with H and M!  Watched it on Fox.


Gayle seems to use the folksy aspect of her personality a lot, while her former colleague, Norah O'Donnell was more serious. (I haven't really seen the CBS morning show since Norah left)
 It's worked for Gayle so far.  But I think she should start thinking before she speaks.


----------



## papertiger

catlover46 said:


> I’ve always wondered if the seamstresses were treated liked crap by her and it was ill fitting on purpose.



I actually bet the seamstress was horrified. 

MM probably pulled out the last stitches herself because she knew better.


----------



## xincinsin

catlover46 said:


> I’ve always wondered if the seamstresses were treated liked crap by her and it was ill fitting on purpose.


Even without the problem of abused seamstresses, the very idea of using a bonded silk so thick that she can't easily move in it sounds ridiculous. I had happy fantasies of her tripping and being unable to get up, just a beautiful vanilla swiss roll on the floor.



catlover46 said:


> Honest question-do you think with the way Harry was pretty much ignored by his family yesterday do you think him and Meaghan will be asked to not attend the Queen’s funeral and Charles’ coronation?


Meghan reminds me of that horror story of the bride who found her MIL trying on her wedding gown (reddit) - just to check if it fits, you know. She will probably want to test-drive the crown for size as a favour for PC with whom she has such a strong father-daughter bond that he paid for her ill-fitting haute couture.


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> For me it was 1) her behaviour at Eugenie‘s wedding, 2) the coat flicking during her 1st pregnancy („Look at my bump!“), 3) the ITV interview. Plus the pushing and shoving of JCMH.


oh yes, the tugging on harry and pushing herself in front of him was another big one for me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I actually bet the seamstress was horrified.
> 
> MM probably pulled out the last stitches herself because she knew better.



Yeah as much as they might have hated her, I can't see someone proud of their craft doing a poor job just to spite her when the dress was televised worldwide.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments section of an article on W&K's anniversary:
> 
> 
> 
> WE ARE NOT ALONE.



I don't understand how the wedding dress was so poorly fitted and her was disheveled. Whoever did the hair and dress fitting really should've been fired. Unless she wanted it that way?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, the need to stand out amongst all those boring, appropriate wreaths is real (and this coming from someone who doesn't think anything of colourful funeral wreaths, but you can be assured if I knew it's not the thing to do I'd order white or cream!).


wasn't the wreath from Will & Kate mostly purple?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I don't think MM would be barred from the funeral of close royal family members like the Queen, or the coronation of Prince Charles. Simple reason being that they will be accused of racism and it will look bad on them. They don't want another PR disaster like what happened with Diana. Harry has already alluded to the fact that the palace treats MM like they treated Diana. Which begs the question, if he thinks his own mother was treated so badly, why was he still engaging in royal 'duties' and why did he allow his wife near the family.


----------



## sdkitty

JY89 said:


> Harry asking for forgiveness? (*Meghan reaches hand out to remind him to shut up)
> 
> Well, his beloved wife made the first move of showing her magnanimous side by announcing that she’s WILLING TO FORGIVE the RF. In short, she’s telling everyone that she still stand on the fact that the interview was the correct thing to do and she is not sorry. She will not bow and it should be the reverse.
> 
> And if they ever decide to apologise, I’m wondering if she’s gonna do it publicly like on Oprah interview or isit gonna be in private?


the arrogance is staggering


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> wasn't the wreath from Will & Kate mostly purple?



I don't know which one was theirs, but the only purple one was from H & M.

As I said, I don't even see anything wrong with colourful wreaths AND I even thought theirs was pretty (and not that bright)...but their constant need to stand out and be different at the most inappropriate occasions is what gets me.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> All the better to sign abdication papers, return medals, sign the loan payback docs, clean up his mess at Frogmore, etc.
> ‘Lots of little details to take care of, methinks.



LOL 

I think you mean renounce his title(s) and any future claim for his/his future descendant's entitlement for the throne / and step out of the line of succession, but yes please. Do it, do it. We'll send him off our end, fired by cannon, back over the rainbow, landing in the Pacific Ocean to be with beloved (heavily pregnant) Ariel. 
Have the papers ready by tomorrow  

Unfortunately, I think the opposite will be true. The 'prince of white privilege' will only be loading his phone/notebook with more gossip to run off to MM with for her/their Netflix/Spotify/CBS series, and generally feeling more hard done by with every perceived slight. Just think hypersensitive and triple what's usually meant. Weds is too late.


----------



## xincinsin

Ugh! The Aussie channel which claimed Meghan wrote the note that was with the wreath on PP's coffin.









						9News - Latest news and headlines from Australia and the world
					

Latest news and headlines from Australia and the world




					www.9news.com.au


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Unfortunately, I think the opposite will be true. The 'prince of white privilege' will only be loading his phone/notebook with more gossip to run off to MM with for her/their Netflix/Spotify/CBS series, and generally feeling more hard done by with every perceived slight. Just think hypersensitive and triple what's usually meant. Weds is too late.



Just wait for complaints how the mourning Queen didn't ask how the heavily pregnant mermaid (would that be a manatee?) was that day.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Since H&M apparently have further plans to work with Netflix and most likely Oprah, I think it will probably depend on the content of these collaborations whether H and/or M will ever be asked to attend any more BRF functions. At least I hope so.

Living vicariously through and projecting on these royals is emotionally exhausting


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Ugh! The Aussie channel which claimed Meghan wrote the note that was with the wreath on PP's coffin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9News - Latest news and headlines from Australia and the world
> 
> 
> Latest news and headlines from Australia and the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.9news.com.au



Are they stupid? Why would #6 in line's wife's note be on the coffin when there's a widow, four children and eight grandchildren who could have left notes? Common sense is sparse these days.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Harry may stay for a few more days until QE's birthday!
> 
> _Prince Harry __is being urged to stay in the UK until at least Wednesday as a gesture to the Queen. The plea comes with the Queen set to celebrate her 95th birthday this coming Wednesday - the first during her reign without Prince Philip by her side. It remains unclear how long Prince Harry will stay in the UK following yesterday's funeral for Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry urged not to leave UK just yet with poignant plea to stay for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is being urged to stay in the UK for at least another four days, with the Queen set to celebrate her first birthday during her reign without Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I can't imagine there would be much of a birthday celebration so soon after burying her dear husband.  but still the family will want to acknowlege her I guess


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Interesting!
> 
> The new wife's would be 'HRH 'X' Duchess of Sussex',  but I'm supposing only if he comes back to the fold because although he holds it, he's not supposed to use HRH.


We have a contender for DoS v.2








						Woman in India catfished into thinking she was marrying Prince Harry
					

We all know Prince Harry is happily married to Meghan Markle with whom he’s expecting his second child.And yet, woman in India is reportedly suing the Duke of Sussex for not honouring a promise he made to marry her.If it sounds totally outlandish that’s because it is.  Lawyers believe Palwinder...




					www.indy100.com


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just wait for complaints how the mourning Queen didn't ask how the heavily pregnant mermaid (would that be a manatee?) was that day.



How dare you insult manatees!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> LOL
> 
> I think you mean *renounce* his title(s) and any future claim for his/his future descendant's entitlement for the throne / and step out of the line of succession, but yes please. Do it, do it. We'll send him off our end, fired by cannon, back over the rainbow, landing in the Pacific Ocean to be with beloved (heavily pregnant) Ariel.
> Have the papers ready by tomorrow



Fixed it, thank you. 
Seems I routinely mess this up.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know which one was theirs, but the only purple one was from H & M.
> 
> As I said, I don't even see anything wrong with colourful wreaths AND I even thought theirs was pretty (and not that bright)...but their constant need to stand out and be different at the most inappropriate occasions is what gets me.


guess I got confused.....don't like Meghan but I do like purple flowers


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## catlover46

I watched one of those Lady Campbell videos-Some of those YouTube commenters are racist as hell..both pro and anti H&M people.


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> “Please pay attention to my incredibly  small act of kindness because it completely cancels out all the harm I’ve done!” - repeat ad nauseum.
> 
> When  I read the description I thought - it’s purple? And it is very purple. Even more than I thought. That’s a regal colour I know but  I thought funeral wreathes were usually white? Does anyone know about this?



Of course Meghan's wreath is purple, she must have REFUSED to blend in with the proper white wreaths of tradition. Meghan demands to insert a WOKE element into Philip's funeral so that SHE gets attention. Obnoxious sociopath bish. Good thing she didn't attend or she'd have worn a red dress for more attention.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Something I don't understand is how she could fly back and forth many times to see Harry and how she was willing to give up her career to be a working member of the family (even though she was told she could continue acting) but she couldn't make it work with her first husband due to distance and wanting a career? Hmm, that makes me think she was willing to go all the way for Harry simply because he was a royal, but she wasn't able to do the same for a man she had been dating for over 6 years and was married to.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> Was H trying to get himself in the right photographic spot to merch later for Netflix?  Or asking for forgiveness or approval???



Harry was probably responding to the screaming from Montecito in his earpiece: "Cut him off NOW!"


----------



## TC1

xincinsin said:


> We have a contender for DoS v.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woman in India catfished into thinking she was marrying Prince Harry
> 
> 
> We all know Prince Harry is happily married to Meghan Markle with whom he’s expecting his second child.And yet, woman in India is reportedly suing the Duke of Sussex for not honouring a promise he made to marry her.If it sounds totally outlandish that’s because it is.  Lawyers believe Palwinder...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indy100.com


There was a whole reality show where ladies were in competetion to marry a Harry look alike. The producers kept trying to convince the ladies it was really Prince Harry. Several ladies had doubts, so they ended up bring in more people to convince the ladies it was really Prince Harry. It was called "I wanna marry Harry" it aired in 2014


----------



## haute okole

TC1 said:


> There was a whole reality show where ladies were in competetion to marry a Harry look alike. The producers kept trying to convince the ladies it was really Prince Harry. Several ladies had doubts, so they ended up bring in more people to convince the ladies it was really Prince Harry. It was called "I wanna marry Harry" it aired in 2014


That show was hilarious!  The girls were all American and the faux Harry was a British bicycle delivery person.  He was far sweeter than the one married to MeAgain gets whatever MeAgain wants.

Off topic:  There is a woman in Plano, Texas who was convinced she was engaged to Brad Pitt.  She actually had the nerve to SUE Brad Pitt for not being the catfish.  WTH!?


----------



## Clearblueskies

catlover46 said:


> Honest question-do you think with the way Harry was pretty much ignored by his family yesterday do you think him and Meaghan will be asked to not attend the Queen’s funeral and Charles’ coronation?


A more immediate question is what to do about baby Diana’s christening.  Where will they hold it?  And will William and/or Justin be washing their hair on that day??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> A more immediate question is what to do about baby Diana’s christening.  Where will they hold it?  And will William and/or Justin be washing their hair on that day??



William would probably rather contract Covid a second time before flying out to California to attend.


----------



## youngster

catlover46 said:


> I watched one of those Lady Campbell videos-Some of those YouTube commenters are racist as hell..both pro and anti H&M people.



A lot of those type of comments are fake, I think, both pro H&M and anti H&M posting opposite to what they really think to make "the other side" look bad.
Lady CC is hilarious though and she's been spot on right about a number of things.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will be interesting if anyone tries to defend him now.
> His actions are on tape. So disrespectful and rude.



They will.


Chagall said:


> I would be very curious to know if MM was asked not to attend, or precluded from going due to her condition. As far as Harry having deep feelings of regret about what he has given up, I doubt it. I don’t think there is a lot of self reflection in Harry. He has shown himself not to be a particularly decent person.



Trust me, if Meghan had been asked NOT to attend it would have been all over the news the first day. She would not have missed such an opportunity to cry racism and general meanness from the royal family. Frankly, I believe it is 50-50 she will still say something like that after Harry is safe back at home where he wouldn’t be expected to answer to his family in person for her behavior.


----------



## rose60610

Interesting question. #Diana's christening. In L.A. No doubt Hollywood A listers will be godparents, and a banquet held at a woke restaurant, every element of the ceremony will have a description and instructions how to buy replica merch. The christening CAN'T be in England with all those racist BRF members, right?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will be interesting if anyone tries to defend him now.
> His actions are on tape. So disrespectful and rude.


It's the kind of move Meghan has used, there is a good example in the video about her narcissism that someone posted. She is seen literally pushing Harry out of the way to get to someone she then hugs. I bet they set up chairs in the dining room and practiced how he could do it without bowling Lord Snowden over, which would have been much too obvious. 

This quote from bushy browed Scoooobie Dooooo almost resulted in vomit hitting the screen a few minutes ago: 

'I think everyone will be very happy with the input that* they've *had into all of this,' Scobie said.

'We've seen all of the family members involved in their own way throughout the week.

'We've also seen signs from those that haven't been able to attend.

*'Of course the Sussexes were represented in full at the funeral.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> A lot of those type of comments are fake, I think, both pro H&M and anti H&M posting opposite to what they really think to make "the other side" look bad.
> Lady CC is hilarious though and she's been spot on right about a number of things.



Speaking of Lady CC: in yesterday's video she claimed palace staff (without knowlegde or approval of the BRF) leaked the photos of Fergie's affair as a warning to Diana (as in "Look what happens when you're not protected anymore"). If true that is horrible


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> It's the kind of move Meghan has used, there is a good example in the video about her narcissism that someone posted. She is seen literally pushing Harry out of the way to get to someone she then hugs. I bet they set up chairs in the dining room and practiced how he could do it without bowling Lord Snowden over, which would have been much too obvious.
> 
> This quote from bushy browed Scoooobie Dooooo almost resulted in vomit hitting the screen a few minutes ago:
> 
> 'I think everyone will be very happy with the input that* they've *had into all of this,' Scobie said.
> 
> 'We've seen all of the family members involved in their own way throughout the week.
> 
> 'We've also seen signs from those that haven't been able to attend.
> 
> *'Of course the Sussexes were represented in full at the funeral.*



Anyone else want to leave a wrapped dead fish at Scobie's doorstep?


----------



## gelbergirl

I became agitated in my morning yoga class thinking about MM.
I interjected Prince Royal, Ann into my thoughts and calmed down.
She looked terrific yesterday, Prince Philip was already proud and he would have loved her walking.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of Lady CC: in yesterday's video she claimed palace staff (without knowlegde or approval of the BRF) leaked the photos of Fergie's affair as a *warning to Diana* (as in "Look what happens if you're not protected anymore"). If true that is horrible



as I recall, Diana was pretty freaked out over it, and took the warning seriously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> They will.



I'm not sure...the sugars seem to forget about MM's biggest accessoire most of the time. I understand, it's pretty easy as he usually only talks when she signals him to do so.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Of course Meghan's wreath is purple, she must have REFUSED to blend in with the proper white wreaths of tradition. Meghan demands to insert a WOKE element into Philip's funeral so that SHE gets attention. Obnoxious sociopath bish. Good thing she didn't attend or she'd have worn a red dress for more attention.


Bile Green - that's her colour



Shopaholic2021 said:


> Something I don't understand is how she could fly back and forth many times to see Harry and how she was willing to give up her career to be a working member of the family (even though she was told she could continue acting) but she couldn't make it work with her first husband due to distance and wanting a career? Hmm, that makes me think she was willing to go all the way for Harry simply because he was a royal, but she wasn't able to do the same for a man she had been dating for over 6 years and was married to.


Maybe Trevor had already served his purpose and could be markled. There was an article about him wanting to do a programme fictionalizing his life with MM, but she "persuaded" him to drop the idea.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xincinsin said:


> We have a contender for DoS v.2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woman in India catfished into thinking she was marrying Prince Harry
> 
> 
> We all know Prince Harry is happily married to Meghan Markle with whom he’s expecting his second child.And yet, woman in India is reportedly suing the Duke of Sussex for not honouring a promise he made to marry her.If it sounds totally outlandish that’s because it is.  Lawyers believe Palwinder...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indy100.com


I read about that. Judge who threw the case out was not impressed


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> This quote from bushy browed Scoooobie Dooooo almost resulted in vomit hitting the screen a few minutes ago:
> 
> 'I think everyone will be very happy with the input that* they've *had into all of this,' Scobie said.
> 
> 'We've seen all of the family members involved in their own way throughout the week.
> 
> 'We've also seen signs from those that haven't been able to attend.
> 
> *'Of course the Sussexes were represented in full at the funeral.*



I just...can't.

Ok, they can't get rid of Meghan, but maybe Scobie could mysteriously vanish and be found at a dungeon 100 years from now?


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> OT but I didn’t think I was a jade lover now your pic of your bangle is seriously tempting me.
> 
> MM seems more like a diagnosable narcissist every day. I was cynical at first as the term (like psychopath) gets thrown around so much in society but now....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never seen the little mermaid all the way through. Now I remember why,* My mum thought Ariel was a massive whiner* when I was a kid.



She was a bit but I think can be excused for it. Ariel was 16, not almost 40.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> It's the kind of move Meghan has used, there is a good example in the video about her narcissism that someone posted. She is seen literally pushing Harry out of the way to get to someone she then hugs. I bet they set up chairs in the dining room and practiced how he could do it without bowling Lord Snowden over, which would have been much too obvious.
> 
> This quote from bushy browed Scoooobie Dooooo almost resulted in vomit hitting the screen a few minutes ago:
> 
> 'I think everyone will be very happy with the input that* they've *had into all of this,' Scobie said.
> 
> 'We've seen all of the family members involved in their own way throughout the week.
> 
> 'We've also seen signs from those that haven't been able to attend.
> 
> *'Of course the Sussexes were represented in full at the funeral.*



I’ve only seen it from the top view. Would love to see exactly how close he came to physically pushing Lord Snowden. Both Tim and Snowden look stunned. This move was most certainly very obvious and very poor form. Since the line-up order was made so public, he must have known people would wonder how the order was messed up. He must have known there would be video evidence.

No excuse for such disgusting behavior.


----------



## carmen56

Clearblueskies said:


> A more immediate question is what to do about baby Diana’s christening.  Where will they hold it?  And will William and/or Justin be washing their hair on that day??



Thinking ahead some years, Markle is the kind of mother who would wear white to her own daughter’s wedding.  Can’t possibly be upstaged by someone younger and probably prettier!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve only seen it from the top view. Would love to see exactly how close he came to physically pushing Lord Snowden. Both Tim and Snowden look stunned. This move was most certainly very obvious and very poor form. Since the line-up order was made so public, he must have known people would wonder how the order was messed up. He must have known there would be video evidence.
> 
> No excuse for such disgusting behavior.



Did you all see a close-up? I went back to the chapel entrance on the BBC video but really had a hard time identifying people, let alone facial expressions, because the camera was so far away.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> If that’s true Megs must be furious!



Let’s see if he actually stays first. He won’t if Megs disapproves.


----------



## FashionLawyer92

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I just want to add that I think the millions of Europeans, especially Slavic, that were captured and enslaved by Africans and muslims through the centuries deserve a mention too. Whole villages in Britain and the Faroe Islands for example, were abducted by Northern African slave traders. The Portuguese you mention were mainly Jewish. No peoples are walking away from this ugly human practice as innocents.
> 
> The worst part, as you mentioned, is that slavery is still practiced today, in the Middle East and Africa. But somehow few seem to take notice or care. Perhaps it would be considered racist to do so.


I didn't even know about this


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Anyone else want to leave a wrapped dead fish at Scobie's doorstep?


Whales are particularly stinky, all that blubber decaying. And the size of the deposited item makes a nice comparison to the size of the lies this idiot spouts on a routine basis.


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> the royals give each socks not emeralds as gifts, there’s hardly any paparand you have to go to church for hours.


Hollywood celebs spend money on homes and jewels the way they think the royals do.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Will can't be blamed for asking for space, communicating preferentially with Ginger via text messages, and removing his mask when joined by H after the funeral... He is doing everything he can to avoid having his words 'translated' using MM's dictionary!
> 
> View attachment 5058916
> 
> _Sources have now told The Mail on Sunday that Harry has experienced 'a great deal of frostiness' from many of his relatives since arriving in Britain a week ago and self- isolating at Frogmore Cottage, the house given to him and Meghan as a wedding present by the Queen.
> 
> *Princess Anne, Prince Edward and his wife Sophie failed to acknowledge Harry before or during yesterday's service, it was claimed. *_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William 'requested Peter Phillips stand between him and Harry'
> 
> 
> The brothers were separated by their cousin as they walked behind Prince Philip's coffin while it made its way to St George's Chapel in Windsor yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If Lady CC was right that Anne was the one who brought up the baby's skin tone innocently, I can only imagine how she would be feeling about being near this boy right now. I've been in that position before, where you say something innocuous and the person you say it to plays it off as totally fine then turns around and spins it into a bunch of drama. It's infuriating. Luckily for me, I last encountered this behavior in high school.


----------



## catlover46

Jayne1 said:


> Hollywood celebs spend money on homes and jewels the way they think the royals do.


The BRF gives each other silly gag gifts lol








						The Royal Family Gift Exchange Is More Light-Hearted Than You'd Expect
					

The only requirement is a good sense of humor, really.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Question for the experts: I know that if HMQ removes their title of Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Harry's heavily pregnant wife becomes Princess Henry. If they divorce after the title change, would she be known as Meghan, Princess Henry?


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I just want to add that I think the millions of Europeans, especially Slavic, that were captured and enslaved by Africans and muslims through the centuries deserve a mention too. Whole villages in Britain and the Faroe Islands for example, were abducted by Northern African slave traders. The Portuguese you mention were mainly Jewish. No peoples are walking away from this ugly human practice as innocents.
> 
> The worst part, as you mentioned, is that slavery is still practiced today, in the Middle East and Africa. But somehow few seem to take notice or care. Perhaps it would be considered racist to do so.


The Portuguese Jewish were exceedingly limited, although as you are suggesting, still one of countless religious and ethnic groups around the world that participated in the slave trade. The agenda of the Nation of  Isl*m is not to be taken as gospel.


----------



## lalame

Something occurred to me, reading Darren McGrady say Princess Diana refused to give Oprah an interview but she did go with other British journalists. That was during Oprah's hay day... do you think Princess Di wanted to talk to British press because they'd have more context and understanding about life as a royal? It seems to me M and H chose Oprah specifically because she was (as Gayle demonstrated too) totally ignorant of BRF traditions, expectations, etc. so would be a sympathetic ear. They could've chosen any British or real journalist in the US to sit down with, but they didn't want to be challenged on the obvious holes in their story.


----------



## Jayne1

Jktgal said:


> I haven't been watching Lady C'svideos as they are...longwinded? But the comments are always gold.
> 
> View attachment 5058914


Yes, they are long-winded and so full of ads, but I still listen while doing something else. She seems to have people in the inner circle to spill the tea.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Something occurred to me, reading Darren McGrady say Princess Diana refused to give Oprah an interview but she did go with other British journalists. That was during Oprah's hay day... do you think Princess Di wanted to talk to British press because they'd have more context and understanding about life as a royal? It seems to me M and H chose Oprah specifically because she was (as Gayle demonstrated too) totally ignorant of BRF traditions, expectations, etc. so would be a sympathetic ear. They could've chosen any British or real journalist in the US to sit down with, but they didn't want to be challenged on the obvious holes in their story.


Makes sense.

I think Diana wanted to appeal to the UK, since she was living there and famously said, “I'd like to be the queen of people's hearts” while M&H want to appeal to those in the US, where they are intent on making themselves billionaires.


----------



## lalame

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The worst part, as you mentioned, is that slavery is still practiced today, in the Middle East and Africa. But somehow few seem to take notice or care. Perhaps it would be considered racist to do so.



I don't agree with this statement... there has been a lot of public attention on this. Blood Diamonds and Last King of Scotland are a few blockbuster/Oscar-winning movies I can think of immediately that have touched on these topics over the last few years. Not to mention the topic of female/girl enslavement in Darfur and some war-torn African areas, Taliban/ISIS-held areas, etc have been very public.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> A more immediate question is what to do about baby Diana’s christening.  Where will they hold it?  *And will William and/or Justin be washing their hair on that day??*



I most certainly will


----------



## lalame

Would they even have a christening? That's not very common in the US and M doesn't seem to me a bit religious at all.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Anyone else want to leave a wrapped dead fish at Scobie's doorstep?



Seems to be a sad waste of fish if you ask me


----------



## gelbergirl

lalame said:


> Would they even have a christening? That's not very common in the US and M doesn't seem to me a bit religious at all.



they christened Archie but no one knew about it as I recall


----------



## marietouchet

catlover46 said:


> Honest question...when did most people here turn on them? For me it was her obnoxious stans and that interview she gave for ITV.


Been following this thread since like Sep 2019, and for me, it has been a gradual evolution of opinion
I thought MM was doing fantastic to begin with - it went sour for me when she whined that no one asked about herself ...
Lots of people contributed articles and info here, and based on those, the H&M story did not check out (I hate to use the word lie, that is me...)
Finally, I deplored their playing the race card during the interview, not my thing, that was the final straw ...
Anyway, speaking only for myself, it took me about 2 years to go from enthusiastic to thinking they are not my cup of tea, I dont respect them anymore


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

FashionLawyer92 said:


> I didn't even know about this


Most don't. Just as we never talk about the 800-year long muslim enslavement and genocide of millions of hindus and sikhs in India, one of the bloodiest in history according to historians. I only learnt about this last year.

I just think that if we are going to have a reckoning of humanity's evils, it should be for everybody, not just a few to make divisive political and virtue signaling points out of.


----------



## RAINDANCE

lalame said:


> Would they even have a christening? That's not very common in the US and M doesn't seem to me a bit religious at all.


They may find themselves in the awkward situation of having no one in the UK willing to be a godparent.


----------



## Kevinaxx

Is it bad all the comments in this post made my heart warm and fuzzy?


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Question for the experts: I know that if HMQ removes their title of Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Harry's heavily pregnant wife becomes Princess Henry. If they divorce after the title change, would she be known as Meghan, Princess Henry?


Beats me ... 
In the case of Diana, she was supposed to be Princess of Wales ( no HRH) but people called her Princess Diana anyway (technically wrong...)
In Luxemburg, a prince divorced recently, and his commoner ex-wife lost her princess title, got some sort of word salad moniker that I cant remember - kind of a specially concocted new last name 
So, the post-divorce title for D did not work, and there could always be some special moniker concocted for M eg Meghan Sussex or she might go back to her maiden name , who knows, lots of possibilities

In the US, princess does not work, she needs a last name ... we dont have boxes for HRH, princess etc. But the press will call her whatever they want


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did you all see a close-up? I went back to the chapel entrance on the BBC video but really had a hard time identifying people, let alone facial expressions, because the camera was so far away.



Although the photo is blurry and from above, the names may help. Peter is difficult to see because he is shorter than Edward and on a lower step.


----------



## Kevinaxx

marietouchet said:


> Been following this thread since like Sep 2019, and for me, it has been as gradual evolution of opinion
> I thought MM was doing fantastic to begin with - it went sour for me when she whined that no one asked about herself ...
> Lots of people contributed articles and info here, and based on those, the H&M story did not check out (I hate to use the word lie, that is me...)
> Finally, I deplored their playing the race card during the interview, not my thing, that was the final straw ...
> Anyway, speaking only for myself, it took me about 2 years to go from enthusiastic to thinking they are not my cup of tea, I dont respect them anymore


I honestly thought she was so pretty (I mean still do) in the beginning but didn’t know much about her other than the whirlwind of a courting and also thought wow, an American marrying into royalty. How cool. Because doesn’t every little girl want to be a princess?

but the more I actually read, the more disgusted I am and I understand she might feel justified in her own way but imho when there are people out there living on less than $2 a day and you’re sitting pretty and high dripped in jewels that can feed a country for a year (considering they live on less $2 a day) it is just unacceptable.

and how many people have the opportunity and platform she has? So she can self promote and be poor ol’ me?

waste of space.


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> they christened Archie but no one knew about it as I recall


We did know about it beforehand , but they kept the names of the godparents secret


----------



## lalame

gelbergirl said:


> they christened Archie but no one knew about it as I recall



I figured that was because of BRF tradition, but since they left the institution to avoid following those traditions..... I  would give a real eyebrow raise if they ended up just doing all that crap anyway! Sort of like the Remembrance Day stunt...


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, now who in future will have another great love story?
> A- A couple where the female married into a job that dictates that your husband is senior to you but she will not allow that be so, will not let the male out of sight, constantly clinging on to him, directing him with taps on the back for her to go first and not listening to anyone about protocol as she knows best.
> Or
> B- A couple who don't need to hold hands all the time to prove they love each other. A woman marrying into the family realising its a job as well as a marriage where her husband is the senior. She goes about her work with grace and dignity, observing all rules and protocol with a confidence that has grown over 10 years. A woman who respects her place and doesn't outshine her husband purposely. When together they are a team.



B, B, B, B, B!!!


----------



## DrDior

Jayne1 said:


> The Portuguese Jewish were exceedingly limited, although as you are suggesting, still one of countless religious and ethnic groups around the world that participated in the slave trade. The agenda of the Nation of  Isl*m is not to be taken as gospel.



As I recall, the Portugese began forced conversions and torture of both Jewish citizens and Spanish Jewish refugees in the late 1400s, which led to a large exodus. We tried to visit the one main synagogue still in operation in Lisbon, but couldn’t get in due to security arrangements. Anti-semitism remains an issue.


----------



## youngster

Naming that little girl "Diana" would be a terrible burden for any child to bear so I hope somebody exercises some common sense and they use it as a middle name instead. I know, I know, it's a vain hope that either of them will behave with any common sense.  Maybe they will need the Queen's permission and she'll stop them. Of course, then they'd just go whining to the press that they aren't even allowed to name their own child.  So, the Queen and Charles may just say _whatever_, name her whatever you like, like they did with Archie.


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> They may find themselves in the awkward situation of having no one in the UK willing to be a godparent.


And technically they would have to go back to the UK to do so in the Church of England, there is a difference between the American Episcopal Church and the COE, not a huge deal, more of a technicality, but last time I looked QEII is head of the COE


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lalame said:


> I don't agree with this statement... there has been a lot of public attention on this. Blood Diamonds and Last King of Scotland are a few blockbuster/Oscar-winning movies I can think of immediately that have touched on these topics over the last few years. Not to mention the topic of female/girl enslavement in Darfur and some war-torn African areas, Taliban/ISIS-held areas, etc have been very public.


I'd very happy for me to be wrong and you to be right and I agree with what you say. My point was more that the radical progressives who seem to have infinite time and energy to be constantly vocal about their own real or perceived historic grievances, in my experience pay very little attention to actual existing modern ones.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Would they even have a christening? That's not very common in the US and M doesn't seem to me a bit religious at all.



Excuse the ignorance, but how are new members of the Christian denominations initiated then if not by christening?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> they christened Archie but no one knew about it as I recall



Everyone knew, and there were official pictures. They just kept quiet about the godparents.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Would they even have a christening? That's not very common in the US and M doesn't seem to me a bit religious at all.



Oh, they are a major big deal in the U.S, at least in my part of the U.S. out here in the west.  Huge church attendance on christening days.  Everybody loves them.  Big family parties afterwards.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although the photo is blurry and from above, the names may help. Peter is difficult to see because he is shorter than Edward and on a lower step.
> 
> View attachment 5059063



Thanks! It was easier from behind because of the glaring bald spot Harry has (I know Edward, Wills, Charles all have the same problem, but Harry's really shone brightly).


----------



## Silverplume

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought it was ridiculous especially as she's wearing a well-known tiara that belongs to the Spanish queen. I'm so done with people not doing their homework. I also rolled my eyes so hard when Pharrell Williams said something along the lines of her marriage was a milestone for "all of us" at that infamous Lion King premiere. Really?


Everything in your post came straight out of my head! How did you DO that??


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Excuse the ignorance, but how are new members of the Christian denominations initiated then if not by christening?



It seems to me that, these days (in the US), you just start going to a church and can call yourself a Christian. I don't know if this is proper but being christened or "born again" seems to be extremely rare, and only someone who was strongly religious would go through this protocol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "Simmering resentment"! The visuals I'm getting on this thread  The heavily (I start writing heavenly every time for some reason  ) pregnant one's behaviour sure indicates a huge capacity for resentful simmering.



She probably needs a really big cauldron for all that simmering resentment


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thanks! It was easier from behind because of the *glaring bald spot *Harry has (I know Edward, Wills, Charles all have the same problem, *but Harry's really shone brightly*).


And that's about all that can shine brightly when it comes to Harry!


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> Oh, they are a major big deal in the U.S, at least in my part of the U.S. out here in the west.  Huge church attendance on christening days.  Everybody loves them.  Big family parties afterwards.



Really? I have never even heard of someone having had a christening or doing one for their child. I'm also in the western US.  I was just looking this up and saw this stat on a BBC article:


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> The Portuguese Jewish were exceedingly limited, although as you are suggesting, still one of countless religious and ethnic groups around the world that participated in the slave trade. The agenda of the Nation of  Isl*m is not to be taken as gospel.


We'll have to disagree because according to historic records jews were heavily invested in the Atlantic slave trade. And even blacks owned black slaves in America. Slavery is quite the multicultural enterprise when you think of it.

I'm curious, why did you mention Nation of Islam? Was it some sort of derogatory remark? I'm wondering because I don't know a lot about them besides Malcom X being a member at one point and even if I don't agree with him on many points I have a high regard for him as a man of integrity, who could not be bought, who rightfully advocated for his people and I feel it was a tragedy for black people that he was taken out.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Would they even have a christening? That's not very common in the US and M doesn't seem to me a bit religious at all.


I think Christenings (and possibly parties associated with them) are still pretty common with Catholics in the US.  But I doubt M is Catholic.  She may not even go to church at all.  Not judging on that, just sayin.  My sister was raised Catholic and so was her husband but her husband became so bitter about his Catholic upbringing he didn't want his sons baptised.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just wait for complaints how the mourning Queen didn't ask how the heavily pregnant mermaid (would that be a manatee?) was that day.





Oh they are so much more beautiful, elegant and loveable than that plastic-filled, pass-around ‘princess’ ever has been


----------



## CeeJay

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Were you carrying a Bal at the time?  You should have tried to sneak a mod pic!  Amazing story, CeeJay, but I guess that's just every day life in LA.


It's pretty much all I carry, I believe it was my Black Caribou Flat Brass First .. just love that bag to death!!  Of course, as per usual, the HB had ZERO idea of who Gabriel was .. whenever I see a celebrity out here, I have to tell him who they are and oftentimes he says "who?" .. HA!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> It seems to me that, these days (in the US), you just start going to a church and can call yourself a Christian. I don't know if this is proper but being christened or "born again" seems to be extremely rare, and only someone who was strongly religious would go through this protocol.



Interesting. I think christenings of adults are on the fundamentalist side of things here too, but infants is pretty normal even for people who only go to church on the major holidays (that is for our two biggest denominations, Catholic and Protestant). ETA: of course I also live out in the woods.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I think Christenings (and possibly parties associated with them) are still pretty common with Catholics in the US.  But I doubt M is Catholic.  She may not even go to church at all.  Not judging on that, just sayin.  My sister was raised Catholic and so was her husband but her husband became so bitter about his Catholic upbringing he didn't want his sons baptised.



Well, she converted into the Church of England, so unless she's been busy converting back she is most certainly not Catholic


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> It seems to me that, these days (in the US), you just start going to a church and can call yourself a Christian. I don't know if this is proper but being christened or "born again" seems to be extremely rare, and only someone who was strongly religious would go through this protocol.


As an evangelical Christian we don’t do christenings to be born again. We just acknowledge a relationship and accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior but it’s a personal thing, and done quietly with Him and having a relationship with 
the risen Christ, but as a former Roman Catholic we have to be christened. 

Evangelicals don’t really acknowledge being religious as most don’t accept traditions. It’s simply a relationship. 

Not to say that some traditions are really nice to adhere to but religiosity, then no.

 I do like the CoE’s services tho and love to watch their ceremonies. 

Weddings tho like Prince Harry and MM are celebrated in churches as a tradition.

The Brits are so excellent in their singing hymns.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I believe you when you say he was beautiful but more than Halle?  she is gorgeous IMO


Yes .. when she doesn't have make-up on and IMO .. with her toxic personality, it takes away from her "beauty".  She has quite the reputation out here for being extremely difficult .. hence the reason why she has not had very successful marriages.  Yes, she likes to say it's the man's fault, he abused her .. blah, blah, blah .. but when EACH one seems to have the same problem?!?! .. you start to question "_hmmmm - could it be YOU_?" and that is what I've heard from some folks that have worked with her (_many in the beauty business who did her hair & make-up_).  He seemed very down-to-earth and truly a very loving father and that also makes him very attractive .. personality is a HUGE thing for me .. if you are a 'rotten' person?? .. then I don't care about your looks .. you're rotten (_hmmm - sound familiar Meghan-a-lomaniac_)?!?!


----------



## lalame

Has anyone seen M say or show any degree of religious affiliation? I just assumed she did all that stuff for H, who himself probably only did it because it's what the family expected him to do. I'd be very curious to know just how much they follow religious traditions now that there isn't a whole apparatus pushing them to.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> guess I got confused.....don't like Meghan but I do like purple flowers


I love purple too. They better not try and claim they ‘sparkled’ it.
I can just imagine MM proudly saying ‘I can’t believe I invented associating a Prince with purple’ 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> William would probably rather contract Covid a second time before flying out to California to attend.


It’s also the more environmentally friendly thing to do 


bag-mania said:


> She was a bit but I think can be excused for it. Ariel was 16, not almost 40.


almost?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Christening of infants bot CofE and RC is common here in the UK although may be less so than when I was a child as church attendance drops every decade.   Still very big in Ireland. We had some very big family parties and all five of DH's siblings  flew to the UK for DD and we used the 100 year old family christening gown ! The difficulty for H&M is that the Queen is the head of the Church of England.


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> Interesting question. #Diana's christening. In L.A. No doubt Hollywood A listers will be godparents, and a banquet held at a woke restaurant, every element of the ceremony will have a description and instructions how to buy replica merch. The christening CAN'T be in England with all those racist BRF members, right?



Lisa van der Pump can host it at one of her restaurants. Bring in some housewives, add alcohol, and let the brawls ensue. Hopefully it will be televised.

Because I feel like M will eventually fall into the Real Housewives franchise. About all she’s good for.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes .. when she doesn't have make-up on and IMO .. with her toxic personality, it takes away from her "beauty".  She has quite the reputation out here for being extremely difficult .. hence the reason why she has not had very successful marriages.  Yes, she likes to say it's the man's fault, he abused her .. blah, blah, blah .. but when EACH one seems to have the same problem?!?! .. you start to question "_hmmmm - could it be YOU_?" and that is what I've heard from some folks that have worked with her (_many in the beauty business who did her hair & make-up_).  He seemed very down-to-earth and truly a very loving father and that also makes him very attractive .. personality is a HUGE thing for me .. if you are a 'rotten' person?? .. then I don't care about your looks .. you're rotten (_hmmm - sound familiar Meghan-a-lomaniac_)?!?!


that's disappointing to hear about Halle
she's kinda my girl crush.....she seemed so fun when I saw her on WWHL but I guess all celebs (almost all) are charming when they're on TV


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think when at school and in the army he went by Wales as his last name, as did William. The last name of the House of Windsor is Mountbatten-Windsor, though. Archie's full name is Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, as they couldn't bear to use his courtesy title.


Agree he used Wales at the time since he did not personally have a title.

It is a UK thing ... it is popular to use the title name as a last name eg Harry Wales or Harry Sussex but the real last name is M-W. A last name is invariant, but the title as last name is confusing since men often change titles (they get promoted when daddy the duke dies  or when granny gives them a duchy).

M-W is currently the BRF last name, it changed in 1960 , I looked it up, that was before H, so his last name is M-W, as is Archie's last name.
Charles' last name is Windsor since he was born before the change... diff last name than his sons.

All of that is nitpicking though, what is the chance the US press will get it right ? Answer: zero. And H now lives in the US


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Something occurred to me, reading Darren McGrady say Princess Diana refused to give Oprah an interview but she did go with other British journalists. That was during Oprah's hay day... do you think Princess Di wanted to talk to British press because they'd have more context and understanding about life as a royal? It seems to me M and H chose Oprah specifically because she was (as Gayle demonstrated too) totally ignorant of BRF traditions, expectations, etc. so would be a sympathetic ear. They could've chosen any British or real journalist in the US to sit down with, but they didn't want to be challenged on the obvious holes in their story.



I think they chose Oprah because she had been courting them right from the start. Meghan knew Oprah would give her one-sided positive coverage. Meghan doesn’t take any risks.


----------



## gracekelly

Giving the pictures of Harry with the Cambs a second look, and  I think he was inserting himself.  I don't think that when the three were leaving that William was actually addressing Harry.  It looked like he was looking  over Harry and directly at Kate and speaking to her.  I am firmly convinced Harry used every opportunity to do as he was instructed beforehand, i.e. make it look like they were on friendly terms.  IMO there was nothing friendly about William's demeanor towards Harry.  The other family members kept a sharp eye on what was going on and were ready to intervene.  They would do this as much for William as  keeping  the peace during the funeral before and after.  Hurting the Cambs, The Queen and Prince Philip was as good as hurting any family member.  I think there was a game plan made beforehand and Sophie was designated as The Queen's chief watch dog over her.  Harry was a loaded bomb in the eyes of the others and there was no way to predict how he would act.


----------



## creme fraiche

carmen56 said:


> Thinking ahead some years, Markle is the kind of mother who would wear white to her own daughter’s wedding. Can’t possibly be upstaged by someone younger and probably prettier!



Worse still, Heaven help Archie's future wife - she will be the MIL from hell.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

DrDior said:


> As I recall, the Portugese began forced conversions and torture of both Jewish citizens and Spanish Jewish refugees in the late 1400s, which led to a large exodus. We tried to visit the one main synagogue still in operation in Lisbon, but couldn’t get in due to security arrangements. Anti-semitism remains an issue.


The catholic inquisitioners tortured and force converted everybody they could get their hands on. When they didn't burn them or drown them. Mainly European christians but also muslims, Africans, Asians, Peruvians, Mexicans and Goans and on and on, so no, no more anti-semitic than anti-everybody in general they deemed unrepentant heretics.


----------



## gelbergirl

creme fraiche said:


> Worse still, Heaven help Archie's future wife - she will be the MIL from hell.


I wouldn’t even enroll my kid in little Archie’s school, wouldn’t want my kid near hers , everyone would be wise to stay out of this Narcissist universe


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Really? I have never even heard of someone having had a christening or doing one for their child. I'm also in the western US.  I was just looking this up and saw this stat on a BBC article:



I am originally from So Cal, both DH and I have photos from our christenings kept by our parents.  We both have family christening gowns. Packed churches on christening days in the Catholic church where they'll do a half a dozen children at the same time.  You have to get there an hour early to guarantee seats for your extended family members lol.  Huge family party at our house afterwards.  We were not the exception either in our circle. This was standard.


----------



## bag-mania

creme fraiche said:


> Worse still, Heaven help Archie's future wife - she will be the MIL from hell.



It will serve her right if Archie marries a woman just like her. That’s family justice.


----------



## csshopper

It will be interesting to see how those people who live in Montecito, at the moment cannot even stand to type their names, use any pictures taken at the funeral.

Thinking about it, I don’t recall any signs of grieving from Ginge, discomfort, yes, but interpreted it being related to strained relations with family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> The catholic inquisitioners tortured and force converted everybody they could get their hands on. When they didn't burn them or drown them. Mainly European christians but also muslims, Africans, Asians, Peruvians, Mexicans and Goans and on and on, so no, no more anti-semitic than anti-everybody in general they deemed unrepentant heretics.



Not true. While the inquisition was mainly witch hunting in big parts of Europe, the Spanish and Portguese inquisition specifically had it out for Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims. That's actually well documented and to dismiss it like this is is simply wrong (and also, OT...we're probably lucky we've completely exhausted the mods with our extensive Philip coverage in this very thread. Rumour has it they hate coming here because we're just so much work for them )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It will serve her right if Archie marries a woman just like her. That’s family justice.



Yeah, but I'd hope that poor boy would find a sane woman who can make up for his undoubtedly complicated childhood.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I am originally from So Cal, both DH and I have photos from our christenings kept by our parents.  We both have family christening gowns. Packed churches on christening days in the Catholic church where they'll do a half a dozen children at the same time.  You have to get there an hour early to guarantee seats for your extended family members lol.  Huge family party at our house afterwards.  We were not the exception either in our circle. This was standard.



I grew up in LA. What's your age group? Did you grow up around a lot of catholics? I wonder if that has something to do with it. Like in that screenshot I posted, I think these traditions are becoming very rare, especially among millenial-aged or younger - and probably moreso in the US too since we have so many denominational faiths here that depart from orthodoxy (like evangelicals as Lodpah pointed out). I was even surprised to see the 1 in 10 children getting a christening stat, and suspect it has dwindled even more since 2011.


----------



## Aminamina

@creme fraiche
He can always Markle his mom


----------



## jelliedfeels

creme fraiche said:


> Worse still, Heaven help Archie's future wife - she will be the MIL from hell.


If he’s gay, she will be the most embarrassing hag of all time. Edie from AbFab to the power of a million.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not true. While the inquisition was mainly witch hunting in big parts of Europe, the Spanish and Portguese inquisition specifically had it out for Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims. That's actually well documented and to dismiss it like this is is simply wrong (and also, OT...we're probably lucky we've completely exhausted the mods with our extensive Philip coverage in this very thread. *Rumour has it they hate coming here because we're just so much work for them )*



They might need to hire a full time mod just for me.  But, honestly, the OT discussions are what make this thread much more interesting and lively.. I actually feel like I'm learning something whenever I come, not just doing a rage dump.


----------



## AB Negative

A Christening is a baptism that removes the original sin on the soul and initiates the child (or adult) into the Christian faith.  Being Born Again is different as a person acknowledges Christ as his personal Lord and Savior and thus Born Again in Christ.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I grew up in LA. What's your age group? Did you grow up around a lot of catholics? I wonder if that has something to do with it. Like in that screenshot I posted, I think these traditions are becoming very rare, especially among millenial-aged or younger - and probably moreso in the US too since we have so many denominational faiths here that depart from orthodoxy (like evangelicals as Lodpah pointed out). I was even surprised to see the 1 in 10 children getting a christening stat, and suspect it has dwindled even more since 2011.



Over 50 now, I'm originally from L.A. I have kids that are probably around your age lol!  Could be true that millennials aren't into it but I've been to a number of christenings even in the past 10 years. 

Sorry to all for going off topic, so here is what Will said to Harry per the lip readers in the UK:

_Experts claimed William said to Harry: “Yes it was great, wasn’t it?”
To which Harry replied: “It was as he wanted.”
What’s more, they claimed William later said to his younger brother: “Absolutely beautiful service, ah, the music.”_


----------



## lalame

It makes me wonder overall which BRF/British customs M actually DID like and carried with her when she moved back to the US. Or if she dumped everything culturally.


----------



## gelbergirl

bag-mania said:


> It will serve her right if Archie marries a woman just like her. That’s family justice.



Archie should grow up to become exactly like Harry & depart one day (for Canada or England)


----------



## Aimee3

gelbergirl said:


> Archie should grow up to become exactly like Harry & depart one day (for Canada or England)


By the time Archie grows up, maybe he’ll find Canada or England too close to MM and he’ll opt for the moon.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> It makes me wonder overall which BRF/British customs M actually DID like and carried with her when she moved back to the US. Or if she dumped everything culturally.



I honestly think she thought being royal is like a disney film. She claims she did not read about the family or traditions etc before marrying or even when dating. The best part for her is probably having a allowance for clothing, not having to worry about the mortgage or bills etc. 




youngster said:


> Over 50 now, I'm originally from L.A. I have kids that are probably around your age lol!  Could be true that millennials aren't into it but I've been to a number of christenings even in the past 10 years.
> 
> Sorry to all for going off topic, so here is what Will said to Harry per the lip readers in the UK:
> 
> _Experts claimed William said to Harry: “Yes it was great, wasn’t it?”
> To which Harry replied: “It was as he wanted.”
> What’s more, they claimed William later said to his younger brother: “Absolutely beautiful service, ah, the music.”_



Thats exactly what I thought they were talking about. I really don't think there will any sort of a close or intimate relationship between them anymore because of the Oprah interview. If I was William or Kate, I would not trust him or his wife, and I would keep the conversation neutral, only talk about things that I would be comfortable being in the public domain. Straight after the interview Gayle said that Harry had spoken to his brother and nothing productive happened, which further proves to me that H&M  cannot be trusted to keep things private. I think they used the US public/ celebs to back them up, hoping the royals would welcome them back because the US was so outraged.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I just wrote a long reply about MM’s religion and accidentally posted it in the wrong thread. How embarrassing.
Then I forgot to copy it  

Short version- finding freebies claims MM converted to Anglicanism before her engagement completely independent of her marital aims naturally. It also claims she used to lead a prayer circle on the suits set. One is to assume this was between rescuing strays and feeding the homeless.

Of course Meg had a week being Buddhist during her Armani phase but I can see how a religion that advocates the abandonment of material possessions was never going to fly.

She’s definitely not Catholic as the press would’ve had a field day as it’s been taboo for a British royal to marry a Catholic since Henry the eighth. (It does happen http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Michael_of_Kent)


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> They might need to hire a full time mod just for me.  But, honestly, the OT discussions are what make this thread much more interesting and lively.. I actually feel like I'm learning something whenever I come, not just doing a rage dump.


I agree.  There's only so much Markle judgement we can manage and off topic can be a very interesting lesson.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lalame said:


> If Lady CC was right that Anne was the one who brought up the baby's skin tone innocently, I can only imagine how she would be feeling about being near this boy right now. I've been in that position before, where you say something innocuous and the person you say it to plays it off as totally fine then turns around and spins it into a bunch of drama. It's infuriating. Luckily for me, I last encountered this behavior in high school.


I listened to Lady C's video. She explicitly states that Princess Anne was against H marrying M because she felt M would never fit in the RF, due to *her* *character* and nothing else. It had nothing to do with M's colour nor  any future child's colour. This happened before the marriage.
I have difficulty finding the video, but the following article corroborates Lady C's claim.

ET correct error

Article


----------



## JY89

justwatchin said:


> If that’s true Megs must be furious!



And here’s where her acting skills comes right into action. MM will probably start spinning up drama like “oh I think I’m having premature contractions” or “I’m feeling suicidal without Harry here to hold me like a baby” or “ I can’t cope alone Harry. The press are making (racial of course) attacks on me again and I don’t want to live anymore”

To let her pet out of the cage for a moment without her being in the limelight will probably drive her into labour way before the due date. Whether Harry is to stay for his granny birthday will speak volumes on the status of their relationship. But I’m sure MM will def try her very best to make sure Harry doesn’t stay as he needs to be by her side to ( you know, hold her?)


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Harry may stay for a few more days until QE's birthday!
> 
> _Prince Harry __is being urged to stay in the UK until at least Wednesday as a gesture to the Queen. The plea comes with the Queen set to celebrate her 95th birthday this coming Wednesday - the first during her reign without Prince Philip by her side. It remains unclear how long Prince Harry will stay in the UK following yesterday's funeral for Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry urged not to leave UK just yet with poignant plea to stay for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is being urged to stay in the UK for at least another four days, with the Queen set to celebrate her first birthday during her reign without Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If he has to be urged and pleaded with to do the right thing  he is beyond hope


----------



## poopsie

catlover46 said:


> Honest question-do you think with the way Harry was pretty much ignored by his family yesterday do you think him and Meaghan will be asked to not attend the Queen’s funeral and Charles’ coronation?


They'd most likely just show up anyway


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not true. While the inquisition was mainly witch hunting in big parts of Europe, the Spanish and Portguese inquisition specifically had it out for Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims. That's actually well documented and to dismiss it like this is is simply wrong (and also, OT...we're probably lucky we've completely exhausted the mods with our extensive Philip coverage in this very thread. Rumour has it they hate coming here because we're just so much work for them )


 Actually the Inquisition was present and active in my country (Peru) and did have autos da fe, they even burnt those who died under torture in effigy
The Spaniards were fixated in eradicating idolatry in their colonies so mostly native Peruvians and mestizos had the dubious pleasure of being their guests, they also targeted Jews and other religious minorities 
There is a museum in the original Inquisition HQ (once the Inquisition was abolished it was looted by the citizens), not sure if this still exists but apparently there was a huge crucifix with a movable head, the prisoner would be brought in front of it and a hidden monk would move its head to signal guilty or not
If you venture to the dungeons they feel oppressive and heavy with pain
Back to M & H


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> They might need to hire* a full time mod just for me*.  But, honestly, the OT discussions are what make this thread much more interesting and lively.. I actually feel like I'm learning something whenever I come, not just doing a rage dump.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not true. While the inquisition was mainly witch hunting in big parts of Europe, the Spanish and Portguese inquisition specifically had it out for Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims. That's actually well documented and to dismiss it like this is is simply wrong (and also, OT...we're probably lucky we've completely exhausted the mods with our extensive Philip coverage in this very thread. Rumour has it *they hate coming here* *because we're just so much work for them *)



I'll take take that as a compliment 
Please ignore that I'm one of the worst offenders, now back to topic you two naughty renegades


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Actually the Inquisition was present and active in my country (Peru) and did have autos da fe, they even burnt those who died under torture in effigy



Yes, I wasn't trying to imply it was only a Euro thing, I was trying to say while in other Euro countries (e.g. what is now Germany) the witch hunting (using that term broadly) was the focus of interest the Spanish inquisition holds a special position in their targeting of Jews and Muslims, if that makes sense. 

Honestly, I'm trying to be good but y'all are right, the OT is so tempting and interesting and probably better for our collective intelligence than our main topic haha.


----------



## papertiger

gelbergirl said:


> Archie should grow up to become exactly like Harry & depart one day (for Canada or England)



It'll be interesting to see where they send him to school. Big deal in both countries and all regards.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Short version- finding freebies claims MM converted to Anglicanism before her engagement completely independent of her marital aims naturally.



Sure. She just woke up one day and decided Anglicanism was exactly her thing. Please Omid, don't insult our intelligence like this.



> It also claims she used to lead a prayer circle on the suits set.



A...prayer circle. On the Suits set. Alright.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, I wasn't trying to imply it was only a Euro thing, I was trying to say while in other Euro countries (e.g. what is now Germany) the witch hunting (using that term broadly) was the focus of interest the Spanish inquisition holds a special position in their targeting of Jews and Muslims, if that makes sense.
> 
> Honestly, I'm trying to be good but y'all are right, the OT is so tempting and interesting and probably better for our collective intelligence than our main topic haha.


 I think the Inquisition adapted, the Jewish and Muslim population in the colonies was relatively small they had to find a new set of victims hence the idolatry extermination 
Actually now you have renewed my interest in History so I really have to thank you!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It'll be interesting to see where they send him to school. Big deal in both countries and all regards.



Might depend on who'll have custody by the time he's the right age.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure. She just woke up one day and decided Anglicanism was exactly her thing. Please Omid, don't insult our intelligence like this.
> 
> 
> 
> A...prayer circle. On the Suits set. Alright.



The new Mother Theresa... I wouldn’t have a problem with it if she didn’t broadcasted her new fling: stray dogs, rescue chickens, vegan, “activist”...many people do those things quietly
Now is religion...next?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> I think the Inquisition adapted, the Jewish and Muslim population in the colonies was relatively small they had to find a new set of victims hence the idolatry extermination
> Actually now you have renewed my interest in History so I really have to thank you!



I minored in Ancient American Studies while at university (an ecclectic mix of archaeology, history, linguistics, ethnology and anthropology of the Americas), when I read your post I thought I really should go read up on the topic, so returning the thanks!


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Might depend on who'll have custody by the time he's the right age.


Now that they are living in the USA, he should start pre school in September.


----------



## papertiger

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I honestly think she thought being royal is like a disney film. She claims she did not read about the family or traditions etc before marrying or even when dating. The best part for her is probably having a allowance for clothing, not having to worry about the mortgage or bills etc.
> 
> Thats exactly what I thought they were talking about. I really don't think there will any sort of a close or intimate relationship between them anymore because of the Oprah interview. If I was William or Kate, I would not trust him or his wife, and I would keep the conversation neutral, only talk about things that I would be comfortable being in the public domain. Straight after the interview Gayle said that Harry had spoken to his brother and nothing productive happened, which further proves to me that H&M  cannot be trusted to keep things private. I think they used the US public/ celebs to back them up, hoping the royals would welcome them back because the US was so outraged.



I also think she thought it would be like being a Disney princess. She wasn't prepared for her wardrobe bill to come under such close scrutiny. These days the prices of every last RTW item is all over the Net. The Queen's far more clever and has them custom made for her, pain of death (and removal of 'By Appointment') if any secrets are revealed.

My father used to do the spy-trick 'loaded gun' on friends he wasn't sure he could trust with secrets. He used to purposely tell an unlikely secret either true or false, swear them to silence, and then see if it came around in his circle as rumour.  With M, there's no need to worry, nothing's safe with her, and if she hasn't got anything on you, she'll just make it up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> The new Mother Theresa... I wouldn’t have a problem with it if she didn’t broadcasted her new fling: stray dogs, rescue chickens, vegan, “activist”...many people do those things quietly
> Now is religion...next?



I really can't hate on anyone for rescuing animals, it's just that everything she does is so pretentious and then she's just negligent enough you know she really doesn't give a sh*t. Like leaving one dog behind, letting the other one get into an accident that breaks two of his legs, spouting about veganism but roasting chicken for her invented engagement story...just why.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Now that they are living in the USA, he should start pre school in September.



I hope not! He’s not even 2 yet. They should let kids be kids. There’s plenty of time for school when he’s old enough to know what’s going on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Now that they are living in the USA, he should start pre school in September.



Does pre-school come before kindergarten in the US? Here it's the last year before elementary school (age 5 to 6). Kindergarten starts at 3.


----------



## Kevinaxx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does pre-school come before kindergarten in the US? Here it's the last year before elementary school (age 5 to 6). Kindergarten starts at 3.


Preschool starts before kindergarten. My nephew was in daycare when he was one, preschool at 3.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> It'll be interesting to see where they send him to school. Big deal in both countries and all regards.



It will be interesting. I think little Archie and the child that I predict they will name "Luna" since that is "moon" in Italian and Diana was the goddess of the moon and the hunt (but we won't dwell on the hunting part since it would give MM the vapors) will end up being home schooled with private tutors.  Security is so important after all.   I also predict that one of the two will end up graduating from USC Film School.  You heard it here first!  In 2021!  Hopefully, at least one of them rebels and decides they'd like to explore their British ancestry and makes the effort to go to school in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I also think she though it would be like being a Disney princess. I also think she wasn't prepared for her wardrobe bill to come under such close scrutiny. These days the prices of every last RTW item is all over the Net. The Queen's far more clever and has them custom made for her, pain of death (and removal of 'By Appointment' if any secrets are revealed).



The Queen's also not a wasteful shopaholic, nor is Kate. I am also seriously stunned how you could throw *someone else's* money out of the window with full hands like there's no tomorrow. That f*cking Dior pregnancy kaftan that was worn for two hours but cost a f*cking 90000 pounds! That's simply obscene.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. That Morocco trip was 3 days. Her wardrobe for that trip alone was estimated to be around 111000 pounds. Did I say obscene?


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> I think the Inquisition adapted, the Jewish and Muslim population in the colonies was relatively small they had to find a new set of victims hence the idolatry extermination
> Actually now you have renewed my interest in History so I really have to thank you!



Well, we can link all this to the 'complicated' religious life of MM (who apparently used to lead a prayer circle on Suits @jelliedfeels  -   ) now a convert to the Church of England, and the fact that H's gran is Head of that Church. An institution that came about because Pope Clement VII denied a divorce to Henry VIII and Catherine, Queen of England, who was also a Spanish Princess, daughter of Ferdinand II and Isabella of Spain. It was they that broke the Treaty of Granada, forced conversions and persecution of Muslims, Jews (and others) later known as the Spanish Inquisition.

So not too OT.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen's also not a wasteful shopaholic, nor is Kate. I am also seriously stunned how you could throw *someone else's* money out of the window with full hands like there's no tomorrow. That f*cking Dior pregnancy kaftan that was worn for two hours but cost a f*cking 90000 pounds! That's simply obscene.



I think she was trying very hard to be the new royal fashionista (as Diana had been). Totally backfired.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. That Morocco trip was 3 days. Her wardrobe for that trip alone was estimated to be around 111000 pounds. Did I say obscene?



Wow, even I would have difficulty spending that kind of spending for a 3 day trip. 

Maybe they were told-off about lavish expenditure. That would be another thing to make them full of 'seething resentment' and something they would never want to bring up.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> It will be interesting. I think little Archie and the child that I predict they will name "Luna" since that is "moon" in Italian and Diana was the goddess of the moon and the hunt (but we won't dwell on the hunting part since it would give MM the vapors) will end up being home schooled with private tutors.  Security is so important after all.   I also predict that one of the two will end up graduating from USC Film School.  You heard it here first!  In 2021!  Hopefully, at least one of them rebels and decides they'd like to explore their British ancestry and makes the effort to go to school in the UK.



1. You're too clever. H&M only do their research_ after_ they've made their minds up and stolen someone else's nickname. 
2. Luna is actually a really nice name (although the power of the moon scares me).
3. My bet s still on Diana. They both seem _obsessed_ with the fantasy version of his mother.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen's also not a wasteful shopaholic, nor is Kate. I am also seriously stunned how you could throw *someone else's* money out of the window with full hands like there's no tomorrow. That f*cking Dior pregnancy kaftan that was worn for two hours but cost a f*cking 90000 pounds! That's simply obscene.



OMG! That is crazy expensive, and that was paid for by the british tax payers! Kate is more frugal and diverse in what she wears. She does not wear high end designers for normal engagements. Only for some red carpet events does she wear high end designer, but even then, never that expensive. She also recycles a lot of her clothes. Markle never worse such expensive clothes before getting married.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> OMG! That is crazy expensive, and that was paid for by the british tax payers! Kate is more frugal and diverse in what she wears. She does not wear high end designers for normal engagements. Only for some red carpet events does she wear high end designer, but even then, never that expensive. She also recycles a lot of her clothes. Markle never worse such expensive clothes before getting married.



I love bringing this one up: Kate's engagement dress - ready  to wear for around 400 bucks. The divorcee's (not judging a divorce, but to drive the point home it wasn't even her first wedding) engagement dress - an inappropriate, sheer, full length evening gown for daytime photos that cost 25000 bucks. That extra 0 is not a typo. Honestly, everyone watching that one unfold should have been warned.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> 1. You're too clever. H&M only do their research_ after_ they've made their minds up and stolen someone else's nickname.
> 2. Luna is actually a really nice name (although the power of the moon scares me).
> 3. My bet s still on Diana. They both seem _obsessed_ with the fantasy version of his mother.



‘Thought I read somewhere that they were raising their kids the Hwood way - gender neutral. 
So, maybe just Lun (pronounced loon)?


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> Ugh! The Aussie channel which claimed Meghan wrote the note that was with the wreath on PP's coffin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9News - Latest news and headlines from Australia and the world
> 
> 
> Latest news and headlines from Australia and the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.9news.com.au


They say “the wreath laid *at * Prince Philips coffin” not on it.   I would have been surprised if they had gotten it wrong as I don’t believe they are Harry’s wife’s fans.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not true. While the inquisition was mainly witch hunting in big parts of Europe, the Spanish and Portguese inquisition specifically had it out for Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims. That's actually well documented and to dismiss it like this is is simply wrong (and also, OT...we're probably lucky we've completely exhausted the mods with our extensive Philip coverage in this very thread. Rumour has it they hate coming here because we're just so much work for them )


I have a feeling this thread is generating muchos clickos so no pain without a bit of gain, hopefully  

I'ts not correct to say I'm dismissing anyone. I'm trying to be objective. The inquisitors were no buts or ifs pro roman catholicism, and looking at statistics (as they are, considering their age) of those persecuted and killed proves the inquisitors were no more anti-semitic than they were anti-protestant. They literally were anti anyone not of their exact faith. Historians don't agree on the exact numbers but the number of Europeans killed by the inquisition naturally, due to location, hugely exceeds the number of jews killed. To add, there just weren't that many muslims left in Europe to persecute. The inquisition was definitely not mainly burning "witches" at stakes, it was a crusade against anyone in Europe that did not comply to roman catholicism. Many of these so called witches were simply protestants refusing to convert.

The albigensians in the south of France were killed in their thousands in the 12th and 13th century, a crusade ordered by pope Innocent III. Waldensians, hussites, huguenots, European protestants in current Netherlands and the Lollards in England, jews and muslims as well as other "heretics" were all treated abominably. Tens of thousands of protestants were slain during the Thirty Years' War in what is now Germany, when Ferdinand II tried to impose roman catholic absolutism.

I haven't even begun to look at the number of black slaves and native indians in America who suffered under exported inquisition.

It's not a Victimhood Olympics, the inquisition was sheer terror for every "wrong thinker".


----------



## Cavalier Girl

papertiger said:


> Well, we can link all this to the 'complicated' religious life of MM (who apparently used to lead a prayer circle on Suits @jelliedfeels  -   ) now a convert to the Church of England, and the fact that H's gran is Head of that Church. An institution that came about because Pope Clement VII denied a divorce to Henry VIII and Catherine, Queen of England, who was also a Spanish Princess, daughter of Ferdinand II and Isabella of Spain. It was they that broke the Treaty of Granada, forced conversions and persecution of Muslims, Jews (and others) later known as the Spanish Inquisition.
> 
> So not too OT.



Well done!!!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love bringing this one up: Kate's engagement dress - ready  to wear for around 400 bucks. The divorcee's (not judging a divorce, but to drive the point home it wasn't even her first wedding) engagement dress - an inappropriate, sheer, full length evening gown for daytime photos that cost 25000 bucks. That extra 0 is not a typo. Honestly, everyone watching that one unfold should have been warned.



Kate's style is very down to earth and affordable. She has been like that before getting married, even though she can afford high end designer clothes (her parents have a very successful business). Kate is restraint and you need to be, as the money given to them is from the British public so they will be rightly scrutinized, especially when times are hard, like with COVID. The money spent on the Dior dress could've been used to fund 3 nurses or a doctor, or two teachers annual salary. Meghans engagement dress was actually $75K (but this is from online research, could be wrong). I really liked that dress but it was a weird choice because it was an evening dress and the pictures where in the daytime and she didn't really match with Harry.

I am pro luxury spending, and I'm all about capitalism but when you're spending the nations money, you have to think more carefully. I think an expensive wedding dress is ok. I do find it harder to justify expensive clothing now, but that's more because of COVID.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen's also not a wasteful shopaholic, nor is Kate. I am also seriously stunned how you could throw *someone else's* money out of the window with full hands like there's no tomorrow. *That f*cking Dior pregnancy kaftan that was worn for two hours but cost a f*cking 90000 pounds!* That's simply obscene.


I'm very bad with exchange rates so I checked this on the Internet and just about choked on my food. That is 124,491.654 US Dollars. Nothing too good for Harry's heavily pregnant wife!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Meghans engagement dress was actually $75K (but this is from online research, could be wrong).



Even worse, by 3x  



> I am pro luxury spending, and I'm all about capitalism but when you're spending the nations money, you have to think more carefully.



I mean, nobody - and that includes me - expects a millionaire to live frugally. But there is a fine line between enjoying luxuries and grossly wasting money (that you didn't even earn because it was given to you by your father-in-law) like it grows on trees. Also, the other royals know better than to flaunt it while Harry's wife seemed to massively enjoy rubbing it into everyone's face. She even helped the scrutiny along by leaking the whereabouts of her own outfits, completely ignorant of how it would look.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm very bad with exchange rates so I checked this on the Internet and just about choked on my food. That is 124,491.654 US Dollars. Nothing too good for Harry's heavily pregnant wife!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5059229



You can buy a house with that. Or feed a lot of hungry children. Of course, she did deliver sandwiches that one time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does pre-school come before kindergarten in the US? Here it's the last year before elementary school (age 5 to 6). Kindergarten starts at 3.


Where I am, there are “classes” for infants and their parents or caregiver with music and movement.  Then starting at age 2, there’s pre (or maybe it’s called pre pre school) which can be anything from a couple of hours a day 2,3 or 5 days a week.  Then pre-school or nursery at ages 3 and 4 which could be more hours 3-5 days a week.  Kindergarten starts at age 5 and is usually a full day.  
i agrée it’d be nice to let children be children, but since everyone does this with their children, if your child is the only one staying home he has no one to play with.Depending on which pre school you send your child to, they can end up learning an incredible amount and having a wonderful time too.


----------



## V0N1B2

marietouchet said:


> And technically they would have to go back to the UK to do so in the Church of England, there is a difference between the American Episcopal Church and the COE, not a huge deal, more of a technicality, but last time I looked QEII is head of the COE


Oooh, do you not have Anglican Churches in the US? 
I did not know that (said with Oprah-like wonder and mouth agape)


----------



## CarryOn2020

This ought to be interesting -
_Princes Charles and William 'will lead summit within weeks to decide the entire Royal Family's future including how many members it will have and who will do what after Prince Philip's death and Megxit'_

_The two heirs will discuss with the Queen which members will be working Royals_
_Prince Philip's death raised questions over if his patronages should be passed on_
_Harry and Meghan's exit complicated matters by reducing the number of people_









						Charles and William 'lead summit within weeks to decide Royal future'
					

The Prince of Wales (pictured on Saturday) and Duke of Cambridge will reportedly plan with the Queen which members of 'The Firm' will be working Royals and what they should do.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

From the link above:
_Meanwhile Prince Edward and Sophie, Countess of Wessex are believed to be stepping into the void left by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's exit._

Edward and Sophie are a great choice.  They have been working away quietly for years.  Their daughter, Lady Louise, looks to be a very sweet young girl and she's becoming quite pretty.  Bea and Eugenie could help out as well perhaps.

_A source said: 'The question is whether you start off by deciding how many patronages and engagements there should be, and then work out how many people are needed to achieve them, or whether you decide how many people there should be, which will dictate how many engagements and patronages they can take on.'_


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> They say “the wreath laid *at * Prince Philips coffin” not on it.   I would have been surprised if they had gotten it wrong as I don’t believe they are Harry’s wife’s fans.


In news reporting, the commentator is supposed to match script to visuals. By talking about the note written by Meghan and simultaneously showing the note on the flowers on the coffin, the channel created a false connection between the two. I'm not laying it at the door of the commentators or even the correspondent in LA who seemed to take Scobie as her impeccable source (in a 2.5min clip, 1.5min was spent talking about the grieving mermaid). It is most likely some overzealous line producer in the production conty who decided to take the shot of the Queen's note while they were discussing MM's note. Mismatching words and pics is a big no-no, and news channels have been mocked and sued for these mistakes.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Something I don't understand is how she could fly back and forth many times to see Harry and how she was willing to give up her career to be a working member of the family (even though she was told she could continue acting) but she couldn't make it work with her first husband due to distance and wanting a career? Hmm, that makes me think she was willing to go all the way for Harry simply because he was a royal, but she wasn't able to do the same for a man she had been dating for over 6 years and was married to.



Trevor was the best husband she could get before she became “somebody.” Once she was on Suits and got a little taste of success she decided she could reach higher and Trevor was no longer useful. That’s when she started dating a celebrity chef.


----------



## marietouchet

V0N1B2 said:


> Oooh, do you not have Anglican Churches in the US?
> I did not know that (said with Oprah-like wonder and mouth agape)


i will make a word salad out of it if I try to explain the nuances between COE and American Episcoral Church, please refer to wiki, but the US Episcopal Church is part of the Anglican Communion , so the COE and US Episcopal Church are related, but  there are subtle differences eg role of the Queen
I would say approximately, based on family experiences in both churches, that the Episcopal Church is the US approximation of the COE


----------



## CarryOn2020

2019 work stats:


			https://writeroyalty.com/2019-by-the-numbers-royal-work-round-up-part-1/
		



Admittedly, much smaller when QE began, she used Philip, Margaret, Queen Mother, anyone else?


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm very bad with exchange rates so I checked this on the Internet and just about choked on my food. That is 124,491.654 US Dollars. Nothing too good for Harry's heavily pregnant wife!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5059229



Just think of all the rescue chickens, mittens, bananas with Sharpie written messages, olive oil lemon pound cakes, creative activations and raindrops one could buy with all that! Service, truly IS, universal......


----------



## V0N1B2

IIRC, wasn't the famous "pregnancy caftan" meant to be worn by Harry's wife to the Oscars that year? But she was later forbidden from attending and was summoned to Morocco on an official visit?  At least I think that was the rumour at the time.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Kate's style is very down to earth and affordable. She has been like that before getting married, even though she can afford high end designer clothes (her parents have a very successful business). Kate is restraint and you need to be, as the money given to them is from the British public so they will be rightly scrutinized, especially when times are hard, like with COVID. The money spent on the Dior dress could've been used to fund 3 nurses or a doctor, or two teachers annual salary. Meghans engagement dress was actually $75K (but this is from online research, could be wrong). I really liked that dress but it was a weird choice because it was an evening dress and the pictures where in the daytime and she didn't really match with Harry.
> 
> I am pro luxury spending, and I'm all about capitalism but when you're spending the nations money, you have to think more carefully. I think an expensive wedding dress is ok. I do find it harder to justify expensive clothing now, but that's more because of COVID.



Kate and Meghan are kind of the epitome of old money and new money - funny since Kate's parents were definitely new money.

Wasn't Meghan's Oprah dress super expensive too? Really NAGL as the Ginger One complains about being cut off from daddy's money.

And as has been pointed out, the main difference with Kate is she stuck around.. she's going to be recycling those clothes and getting a lot of use out of them for who knows how long. I didn't have any problem with M's clothing costs when I thought it would be the same... the fact she still sprung for the most expensive while knowing she probably wasn't going to stick in the job long is hugely unprofessional and tacky. She's lucky they're not as petty as me... I'd bill them back for it!


----------



## xincinsin

gelbergirl said:


> Archie should grow up to become exactly like Harry & depart one day (for Canada or England)


They can publish "Finding Freedom Again"



jelliedfeels said:


> Short version- finding freebies claims MM converted to Anglicanism before her engagement completely independent of her marital aims naturally. It also claims she used to lead a prayer circle on the suits set. One is to assume this was between rescuing strays and feeding the homeless.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> A...prayer circle. On the Suits set. Alright.


Perfectly possible - depending on what she was praying for   She might have decided to harness the power of group prayer to further her ambitions.



poopsie said:


> They'd most likely just show up anyway


Either way, the BRF loses because the Harkles have established a backstory of racism and bullying. Invite them and you invite drama. Stick them in the back and you'll be accused at bullying. Don't invite them and you are racist.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really can't hate on anyone for rescuing animals, it's just that everything she does is so pretentious and then she's just negligent enough you know she really doesn't give a sh*t. Like leaving one dog behind, letting the other one get into an accident that breaks two of his legs, spouting about veganism but roasting chicken for her invented engagement story...just why.


That's the thing about narcs: they always assume no one tracks what they are doing and they can flip flop their opinions without anyone noticing.



youngster said:


> It will be interesting. I think little Archie and the child that I predict they will name "Luna" since that is "moon" in Italian and Diana was the goddess of the moon and the hunt (but we won't dwell on the hunting part since it would give MM the vapors) will end up being home schooled with private tutors.  Security is so important after all.   I also predict that one of the two will end up graduating from USC Film School.  You heard it here first!  In 2021!  Hopefully, at least one of them rebels and decides they'd like to explore their British ancestry and makes the effort to go to school in the UK.


Luna ... lunacy... 
I'm betting on Diana because the Harkles aren't subtle (and it's better for marketing). If, by amazing chance, they decide not to be so in-your-face, perhaps Selena? Same moon associations. Artemis might be stretching it, but it does have the advantage of the letters AR which would dovetail with Archewell and Archie.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, nobody - and that includes me - expects a millionaire to live frugally. But there is a fine line between enjoying luxuries and grossly wasting money (that you didn't even earn because it was given to you by your father-in-law) like it grows on trees. Also, the other royals know better than to flaunt it* while Harry's wife seemed to massively enjoy rubbing it into everyone's face. She even helped the scrutiny along by leaking the whereabouts of her own outfits, completely ignorant of how it would look.*


As only a real class act braggart could behave. Although I kept hoping I was wrong, like so many others, I saw through her almost from the beginning. Then, with each subsequent event, it seemed as if she wanted to prove that we had been right all along. Go figure.


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Excuse the ignorance, but how are new members of the Christian denominations initiated then if not by christening?


I'm not an expert by any means, but we did have our DS christened/baptized into a Christian denomination - neither of which were our own since we we brought up in different denominations (both Christian btw). I don't know what happens if someone wants to convert to a Christian religion though - I should imagine there's some sort of protocol that has to be observed?


----------



## haute okole

lalame said:


> Kate and Meghan are kind of the epitome of old money and new money - funny since Kate's parents were definitely new money.
> 
> Wasn't Meghan's Oprah dress super expensive too? Really NAGL as the Ginger One complains about being cut off from daddy's money.
> 
> And as has been pointed out, the main difference with Kate is she stuck around.. she's going to be recycling those clothes and getting a lot of use out of them for who knows how long. I didn't have any problem with M's clothing costs when I thought it would be the same... the fact she still sprung for the most expensive while knowing she probably wasn't going to stick in the job long is hugely unprofessional and tacky. She's lucky they're not as petty as me... I'd bill them back for it!



MeAgain is your typical L.A. broke, classless wannabe Angelina, who hooked up with a Golden Goose and is now a classless Real Housewife.  Harry should be mindful of the rule, if she does it with you, she will do it to you.  While she has been with him, she has dumped or bad mouthed family members and clout chased.  She is counting down towards the 10 year anniversary and I bet she dumps pony-tailed Cali-Harry for someone else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Wasn't Meghan's Oprah dress super expensive too? Really NAGL as the Ginger One complains about being cut off from daddy's money.



The Armani dress she wore was $4,700, so not too expensive for a actress, but as you say H did complain about being cut off financially which was poor timing on his part. They have a habit of poor timing, just like when they complained about there problems while on tour in South Africa.


----------



## liliBuo

I have a feeling they'll call their daughter Spencer. It has the Diana reference and is gender nutral.


----------



## haute okole

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Armani dress she wore was $4,700, so not too expensive for a actress, but as you say H did complain about being cut off financially which was poor timing on his part. They have a habit of poor timing, just like when they complained about there problems while on tour in South Africa.


Shame on these two.  While Harry’s family were coming to terms with the idea that PP was terminal and decided to leave the hospital to die in his own home, MeAgain’s PR said that they were not deterred from airing the interview because of Prince Philip’s poor health.  And anyone who has been to Africa has some nerve feeling sorry for themselves in light of all the severe poverty that surrounded them.  Shame on Oprah and all the US press of admiring these selfish, out of touch grifters.


----------



## rose60610

Right. That Africa woe-is-me tale got to me. Meghan was going to have numerous opportunities to feel sorry for herself back in England, but she chose her mega-dollar trip to Africa to pull the "poor-me" pin out of the grenade. She had to have, and still does, the belief that the world revolves around HER and her precious little conveniently manufactured feelings. What's disturbing IMO is she's like a protagonist psycho in a thriller movie, only this is real life involving the *actual BRF *and presumably has demented sugars who don't get it.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I think she was trying very hard to be the new royal fashionista (as Diana had been). Totally backfired.


 She will never be able to compete with Kate or Sophie, elegant ladies with poise, bearing and sincerity that sets them apart. No amount of money can give Meghan class. I think the head shot photo of Kate in the car yesterday is stunningly beautiful and one that will be used often in the coming years. M probably has it on a dart board already.


----------



## Icyjade

I feel sorry for the kids already (Archie and the unborn girl)... it’s not easy to have a narc for their mother. JCMH chose her as his wife but the kids had no choice. And sadly they will be isolated in the US instead of having some loving influence from the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wait.  Whaaaaa?
 

_For Charles, as sad as his father's passing undoubtedly has been, the *priority now is the reintegration of Harry into royal life.*_









						RICHARD KAY: A funeral masterstroke by Charles that may reunite sons
					

RICHARD KAY: As the limousines drew up to take mourners from the porch of St George's Chapel back to Windsor Castle Prince Charles used the briefest of gestures to send them away.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm very bad with exchange rates so I checked this on the Internet and just about choked on my food. That is 124,491.654 US Dollars. Nothing too good for Harry's heavily pregnant wife!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5059229


Maggie, it takes a lot of yardage you know, she is after all "heavily pregnant"


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Most don't. Just as we never talk about the 800-year long muslim enslavement and genocide of millions of hindus and sikhs in India, one of the bloodiest in history according to historians. I only learnt about this last year.
> 
> *I just think that if we are going to have a reckoning of humanity's evils, it should be for everybody, not just a few to make divisive political and virtue signaling points out of.*


Yep.  Off topic, but the media only magnifies whatever issue it fancies at the moment.  I don't believe there are many races that have escaped unscathed.  When there's talk of reparations, I wonder when the Egyptians will pay the Jews for building the pyramids?  What about the slaves that built the Roman Colosseum?  I can go on and on and on.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> *Has anyone seen M say or show any degree of religious affiliation?* I just assumed she did all that stuff for H, who himself probably only did it because it's what the family expected him to do. I'd be very curious to know just how much they follow religious traditions now that there isn't a whole apparatus pushing them to.


I have!  She firmly and wholeheartedly belongs to the Church of Meghan.  All her stans do as well.


----------



## eunaddict

Cornflower Blue said:


> I'm not an expert by any means, but we did have our DS christened/baptized into a Christian denomination - neither of which were our own since we we brought up in different denominations (both Christian btw). I don't know what happens if someone wants to convert to a Christian religion though - I should imagine there's some sort of protocol that has to be observed?



@QueenofWrapDress

I imagine children born into Christian families get blessed/christened into the Church, for adults who join...I assume it's a prayer of accepting God, dedicating life to God (and/or Church) and then a baptism.

AFAIK, christening babies is an old, old tradition....babies often died young in the past and christening them as young as possible was a way to guarantee their soul passage to heaven. Now a days, not every denomination still does that, the churches I've attended seem to dedicate babies to God (parents promising to raise their child as best as they can as guided by faith)....and then it's up to the kiddos later to decide on stuff like accepting God and baptism.

But, my churches have always been much less formal and regimented than the CoE appears to be.


----------



## CarryOn2020

2 hours of talking???  Tell us more...


----------



## xincinsin

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Armani dress she wore was $4,700, so not too expensive *for a actress*, but as you say H did complain about being cut off financially which was poor timing on his part. They have a habit of poor timing, just like when they complained about there problems while on tour in South Africa.


What he meant was, the deprived wifey wanted the $47,000 dress and had to make do...
She doesn't want to be an actress any more. She just wants to act up.



haute okole said:


> MeAgain is your typical L.A. broke, classless wannabe Angelina, who hooked up with a Golden Goose and is now a classless Real Housewife.  Harry should be mindful of the rule, if she does it with you, she will do it to you.  While she has been with him, she has dumped or bad mouthed family members and clout chased.  She is counting down towards the 10 year anniversary and I bet she dumps pony-tailed Cali-Harry for someone else.


I need education. What happens at the 10-year mark on the sunkissed beaches? She gets to take him to the cleaners?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wowee!


----------



## Annawakes

Kinda OT question, but how come Sophie is a Countess and not a Duchess like the wives of Charles and Andrew?  Doesn’t Edward have a Duke title or no?  If not, how come?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Annawakes said:


> Kinda OT question, but how come Sophie is a Countess and not a Duchess like the wives of Charles and Andrew?  Doesn’t Edward have a Duke title or no?  If not, how come?


Found my answer on wiki:
“Before Edward's marriage in 1999, royal commentators conjectured that former royal dukedoms such as Cambridge or Sussex might be granted to him. Instead, the Palaceannounced the intention that Prince Edward would eventually be created Duke of Edinburgh, once that title had reverted to The Crown upon the death of both his parents.[81][c]

On his marriage in 1999, the prince was ennobled in keeping with tradition, however he was the first prince since the Tudors to be known as an earl rather than a duke (while reserving the rank of duke for the future).[82] The Sunday Telegraph reported that he was drawn to the Earldom of Wessex after watching the 1998 film Shakespeare in Love, in which a character with that title is played by Colin Firth.[83]

On 10 March 2019, on his 55th birthday, the Earl of Wessex was granted the additional title of Earl of Forfar for use in Scotland.”


----------



## haute okole

xincinsin said:


> What he meant was, the deprived wifey wanted the $47,000 dress and had to make do...
> She doesn't want to be an actress any more. She just wants to act up.
> 
> 
> I need education. What happens at the 10-year mark on the sunkissed beaches? She gets to take him to the cleaners?


In California, we have community property laws and everything they earn during the course of their marriage is split 50/50.  She was relatively broke compared to him, he poured his own money into the house they live in together, thereby commingling the funds. If there is NO prenuptial or post-nuptial agreement opting out of California community property laws, the 10 year mark is the time when if she were to divorce, she would be entitled to lifetime alimony, unless she remarries.   I am not entirely sure, but I also believe that the house is 50% hers too.  I don’t see her sticking around.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Wowee!
> 
> View attachment 5059352


I wonder if he is already tired of the pregnant MM and ready to stay indefinitely in the UK.


----------



## Kevinaxx

rose60610 said:


> Right. That Africa woe-is-me tale got to me. Meghan was going to have numerous opportunities to feel sorry for herself back in England, but she chose her mega-dollar trip to Africa to pull the "poor-me" pin out of the grenade. She had to have, and still does, the belief that the world revolves around HER and her precious little conveniently manufactured feelings. What's disturbing IMO is she's like a protagonist psycho in a thriller movie, only this is real life involving the *actual BRF *and presumably has demented sugars who don't get it.


You know the interesting thing is anyone who actually connects with the folks there know they don’t need a lot to be happy.  I mean it still sucks. I was there last year and as someone who grew up with modest means—their attitude relative to what they have puts me to shame.

and they’d never ask for money. I can’t wait to go back as human capital, as really that’s what they need.


----------



## lalame

haute okole said:


> In California, we have community property laws and everything they earn during the course of their marriage is split 50/50.  She was relatively broke compared to him, he poured his own money into the house they live in together, thereby commingling the funds. If there is NO prenuptial or post-nuptial agreement opting out of California community property laws, the 10 year mark is the time when if she were to divorce, she would be entitled to lifetime alimony, unless she remarries.   I am no entirely sure, but I also believe that the house is 50% hers too.  I don’t see her sticking around.



Or he would be entitled to lifetime alimony, depending on who made more money post-divorce.  This would be an interesting situation as, if they divorced, I imagine he'd run back to the BRF and I wonder what would be considered his "income" if he were to take up duties again.


----------



## Katel

sdkitty said:


> oh yes, the tugging on harry and pushing herself in front of him was another big one for me


^^This, plus swishing in from nowhere and insisting *she* must remake the entire Royal Family / Monarchy - it was old-fashioned, it needed to be updated - *she* was the only one who could do it!  
Pushy and revolting and tone deaf on so many levels.


----------



## lalame

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Most don't. Just as we never talk about the 800-year long muslim enslavement and genocide of millions of hindus and sikhs in India, one of the bloodiest in history according to historians. I only learnt about this last year.
> 
> I just think that if we are going to have a reckoning of humanity's evils, it should be for everybody, not just a few to make divisive political and virtue signaling points out of.





purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  Off topic, but the media only magnifies whatever issue it fancies at the moment.  I don't believe there are many races that have escaped unscathed.  When there's talk of reparations, I wonder when the Egyptians will pay the Jews for building the pyramids?  What about the slaves that built the Roman Colosseum?  I can go on and on and on.



One thing to keep in mind.... countries naturally are more fixated on their own history. So naturally here in the US, American slavery is a much more frequent topic than the plight or aggressions of other countries' histories. Doesn't mean they don't matter or we don't know about them... but it makes sense to me that you spend more time dealing with your own transgressions than others'. I mean, why would we (in US) talk about reparations to Roman slaves unless there was actually any update to it in Greece or old Roman territories... there is no vested interest there within this country. We're barely talking about reparations to our own people.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> And as has been pointed out, t*he main difference with Kate* is she stuck around.. she's going to be recycling those clothes and getting a lot of use out of them for who knows how long. I didn't have any problem with M's clothing costs when I thought it would be the same... the fact she still sprung for the most expensive while knowing she probably wasn't going to stick in the job long is hugely unprofessional and tacky. She's lucky they're not as petty as me... I'd bill them back for it!


Kate has good character and that is the main difference with pregnant MM imo.


----------



## Chanbal

QE's birthday or pregnant MM 

_Harry has no plans to stick around, however — and will fly home to California on Monday, sources told MailOnLine.

Page Six had first reported how the Duke of Sussex was planning a quick return to his Montecito mansion to not leave his pregnant wife and their son, Archie, two, alone for too long.









						Prince Harry expected to fly back to California on Monday
					

Prince Harry is expected to jet home to pregnant wife Meghan Markle on Monday after his whistle-stop UK trip for his grandfather’s funeral, according to a report.




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Is pregnant MM getting more money and titles? 

_Prince Harry and his brother Prince William spent two hours together behind closed doors after their grandfather’s funeral on Saturday amid their long-standing rift, a report said.

The warring brothers were joined by their father, Prince Charles, at Windsor Castle after the Royal family laid Prince Philip to rest, a source told The Sun.

*The communication between the three was described by a source as “unproductive,” but an insider told the news outlet that it could be seen as a step in the right direction amid the brotherly strife.*

The feud was heightened following Harry and his wife Meghan Markle’s bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview.

“It’s early days but you’d hope this is exactly the first step Philip would have wished for,” a source told the outlet of the family’s time together.

*“It is not known what was said behind closed doors and when the cameras were turned off, but it’s unfathomable to think Megxit and Oprah did not come up,” a source added.*_










						Prince Harry and  Prince William met privately for hours amid rift: report
					

The warring brothers were joined by their father, Prince Charles, at Windsor Castle after the Royal family laid Prince Philip to rest, a source told The Sun.




					pagesix.com


----------



## lalame

I really wonder just how pregnant she is when he can't even stay a few days.... is she really imminently due?? Or maybe it's just a convenient excuse for him not to deal with the fall-out of his actions in person.  It takes a big person to confront people he/she's wronged head on and talk through it. Harry never seemed that mature to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

haute okole said:


> MeAgain is your typical L.A. broke, classless wannabe Angelina, who hooked up with a Golden Goose and is now a classless Real Housewife.  Harry should be mindful of the rule, if she does it with you, she will do it to you.  While she has been with him, she has dumped or bad mouthed family members and clout chased.  *She is counting down towards the 10 year anniversary and I bet she dumps pony-tailed Cali-Harry for someone else.*


Haha you make an excellent point!  10 years til divorce is golden when living in CA!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really can't hate on anyone for rescuing animals, it's just that everything she does is so pretentious and then she's just negligent enough you know she really doesn't give a sh*t. Like leaving one dog behind, letting the other one get into an accident that breaks two of his legs, spouting about veganism but roasting chicken for her invented engagement story...just why.


She’s the Joan Crawford of the animal shelter if you ask me.
“Maybe I adopted you for a little publicity, Fido!”
I just sincerely hope she’s more maternal than she is animal-loving.

add On- I get the impression there’s less scarcity in other countries but there’s actually a dearth of family-suitable rescue dogs in the UK. So I do think it’s a bad thing to rescue dogs when you aren’t ready because you are taking away a desirable dog and then sending it back to the shelter a lot more jaded.


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> The new Mother Theresa... I wouldn’t have a problem with it if she didn’t broadcasted her new fling: stray dogs, rescue chickens, vegan, “activist”...many people do those things quietly
> Now is religion...next?


Well in the beginning she had a vested interest to proclaim her charity work and her Anglican Christianity to make her look like a more desirable bride. I’m not 100% but I don’t think any royal has married someone who doesn’t at least say they are a practising Christian and even Catholics  are second class to Anglicans in the system (though the no longer disinherit the royal.)

It does make me idly wonder what would happen if a royal wanted to marry someone of a different religion or an out Atheist nowadays. I would hope they would just let them get on with it. But I suspect, somewhat ironically, that religion would be a far more thorny issue than ethnicity in royal marriage.


----------



## JY89

haute okole said:


> MeAgain is your typical L.A. broke, classless wannabe Angelina, who hooked up with a Golden Goose and is now a classless Real Housewife.  Harry should be mindful of the rule, if she does it with you, she will do it to you.  While she has been with him, she has dumped or bad mouthed family members and clout chased.  She is counting down towards the 10 year anniversary and I bet she dumps pony-tailed Cali-Harry for someone else.




Can’t wait for the day he receives her wedding ring in the mail


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Confused?  Feel like we are being bombarded with fake-y fake word salads?
All of this within 72 hours:
first, the articles said he was leaving immediately after the service on Saturday
next, we hear he and Charles will look at the flowers on Sunday, then he’ll leave, then we hear there will be no walk
next, we hear he will leave on Monday
now, we hear it will be Wednesday, after the no-celebration birthday [not a party] party for QE
now, we also hear that Charles wants to ‘reintegrate H into the RF’, that the 3 talked for 2 hours on Saturday, then we hear nothing productive happened

‘What exactly are _they_ doing behind those palace walls?  At least, Kate looked like she is ready for Queen status, not sure about the rest. Maybe I’m missing something, please correct my errors. It has been exhausting keeping up the BRF this week.


----------



## csshopper

Katel said:


> ^^This, plus swishing in from nowhere and insisting *she* must remake the entire Royal Family / Monarchy - it was old-fashioned, it needed to be updated - *she* was the only one who could do it!
> Pushy and revolting and tone deaf on so many levels.


Yes! This was the first clue to me and made me rethink the gushy, coy, icky performance hanging all over H when they got engaged.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Confused?  Feel like we are being bombarded with fake-y fake word salads?
> All of this within 72 hours:
> first, the articles said he was leaving immediately after the service on Saturday
> next, we hear he and Charles will look at the flowers on Sunday, then he’ll leave, then we hear there will be no walk
> next, we hear he will leave on Monday
> now, we hear it will be Wednesday, after the no-celebration birthday [not a party] party for QE
> now, we also hear that Charles wants to ‘reintegrate H into the RF’, that the 3 talked for 2 hours on Saturday, then we hear nothing productive happened
> 
> ‘What exactly are _they_ doing behind those palace walls?  At least, Kate looked like she is ready for Queen status, not sure about the rest. Maybe I’m missing something, please correct my errors. It has been exhausting keeping up the BRF this week.



I don’t think any of it coming from the palace walls just yet.... :/


----------



## Sharont2305

liliBuo said:


> I have a feeling they'll call their daughter Spencer. It has the Diana reference and is gender nutral.


Or Frances, Diana's middle name and her Mother's name.


----------



## creme fraiche

pukasonqo said:


> The new Mother Theresa... I wouldn’t have a problem with it if she didn’t broadcasted her new fling: stray dogs, rescue chickens, vegan, “activist”...many people do those things quietly
> Now is religion...next?



It certainly is - Woke is her new religion, and she is a practicer of the evangelical branch of that religion.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> _*"It is not known what was said behind closed doors and when the cameras were turned off, but it’s unfathomable to think Megxit and Oprah did not come up,” a source added*_



Not to worry, but I'm sure we'll find out once Harry's back in CA what was said, especially if there's nothing favourable in it. I'm sure there'll be phone calls between certain people.


----------



## xincinsin

JY89 said:


> Can’t wait for the day he receives her wedding ring in the mail


Those rings are worth a lot more than her first set. I suspect she will keep them and just change the locks on the doors.
I hope H didn't give her a lot of the Diana jewellery because she will flaunt them.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> I suspect, somewhat ironically, that religion would be a far more thorny issue than ethnicity in royal marriage.


I'm not too sure about that tbh.
In her capacity as Queen of the United Kingdom, she is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Common, *Defender of the Faith*". Meaning the CofE. Prince Charles has let it be known he wants to be styled at his Coronation as *Defender of Faith. 

ETA *I'm not saying that ethnicity is or should be a thorny issue for marrying into the BRF, just that religion shouldn't be either.


----------



## needlv

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm not too sure about that tbh.
> In her capacity as Queen of the United Kingdom, she is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Common, *Defender of the Faith*". Meaning the CofE. Prince Charles has let it be known he wants to be styled at his Coronation as *Defender of Faith. *


as the monarch is the head of church of England (like the pope for Catholics) the monarch must be a Christian.  Having a different religion for their partner/ spouse would be complex - especially if they are in direct line of succession


----------



## Sol Ryan

I wonder what the Bereavement policy is for BetterUp....


----------



## xincinsin

Sol Ryan said:


> I wonder what the Bereavement policy is for BetterUp....


And does it segue right into paternity leave...


----------



## JY89

xincinsin said:


> Those rings are worth a lot more than her first set. I suspect she will keep them and just change the locks on the doors.
> I hope H didn't give her a lot of the Diana jewellery because she will flaunt them.



Haha thats true! Unless she meets a billionaire who’s able to get her a way bigger rock than the one H gave her.

Anyway, speaking of Diana’s jewellery, H gave her D’s Cartier tennis bracelet which she wore during the Oprah interview. The size of each stone was around one carat each.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> IIRC, wasn't the famous "pregnancy caftan" meant to be worn by Harry's wife to the Oscars that year? But she was later forbidden from attending and was summoned to Morocco on an official visit?  At least I think that was the rumour at the time.


Lol,  she wishes she was invited to the oscars   Maybe the daytime emmys. She wouldn’t worry about flying while pregnant or her carbon footprint to get to LA.


Sharont2305 said:


> I'm not too sure about that tbh.
> In her capacity as Queen of the United Kingdom, she is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Common, *Defender of the Faith*". Meaning the CofE. Prince Charles has let it be known he wants to be styled at his Coronation as *Defender of Faith.
> 
> ETA *I'm not saying that ethnicity is or should be a thorny issue for marrying into the BRF, just that religion shouldn't be either.


This is pure speculation but I think Charles has been flirting with Buddhism and they are trying to reign him in with this compromise of the vague name change. Also it’s a lot more PC. Of course he’d never say anything that could get him knocked out of next in line. (It seems like it’s really hard to get knocked out of succession these days though haha)

I don’t see why anyone other than the monarch has to be CofE personally because their current stance on other religions is all are equal and there’s lots of ways to heaven so why shouldn’t they go with that in practice?
I suspect that an atheist would get dumped though because they could find that a bit embarrassing.

I don’t think ethnicity was a negative issue in the BRF at all. If anything they were sold on the good PR.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This ought to be interesting -
> _Princes Charles and William 'will lead summit within weeks to decide the entire Royal Family's future including how many members it will have and who will do what after Prince Philip's death and Megxit'_
> 
> _The two heirs will discuss with the Queen which members will be working Royals_
> _Prince Philip's death raised questions over if his patronages should be passed on_
> _Harry and Meghan's exit complicated matters by reducing the number of people_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles and William 'lead summit within weeks to decide Royal future'
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales (pictured on Saturday) and Duke of Cambridge will reportedly plan with the Queen which members of 'The Firm' will be working Royals and what they should do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Y'all got that wrong. It will be the troublesome two who'll give their input and have a huge influence on proceedings.

Not. But wait for the press release.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2019 work stats:
> 
> 
> https://writeroyalty.com/2019-by-the-numbers-royal-work-round-up-part-1/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admittedly, much smaller when QE began, she used Philip, Margaret, Queen Mother, anyone else?



Her cousins have been working for the crown for decades, haven't they? (Duke of Kent, Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, Princess Alexandra)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait.  Whaaaaa?
> 
> 
> _For Charles, as sad as his father's passing undoubtedly has been, the *priority now is the reintegration of Harry into royal life.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: A funeral masterstroke by Charles that may reunite sons
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: As the limousines drew up to take mourners from the porch of St George's Chapel back to Windsor Castle Prince Charles used the briefest of gestures to send them away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Isn't that the guy again who always takes the Sussexes side? If so, whatever. He's a bit delusional.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> Kinda OT question, but how come Sophie is a Countess and not a Duchess like the wives of Charles and Andrew?  Doesn’t Edward have a Duke title or no?  If not, how come?



He asked to be Earl of Wessex but will be created Duke of Edinburgh (which went to Charles when Philip died) when it reverts to the crown (when Charles becomes king).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Deleted because I misread.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> Kate has good character and that is the main difference with pregnant MM imo.


Even babies and tiny tots can tell this difference between the two. M:s interaction with kids is painfully awkward to watch, kids outright ignore her feigned interest, while Kate is a baby whisperer extraordinaire who kids seem to take to directly because they probably sense she is genuine.


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Confused?  Feel like we are being bombarded with fake-y fake word salads?
> All of this within 72 hours:
> first, the articles said he was leaving immediately after the service on Saturday
> next, we hear he and Charles will look at the flowers on Sunday, then he’ll leave, then we hear there will be no walk
> next, we hear he will leave on Monday
> now, we hear it will be Wednesday, after the no-celebration birthday [not a party] party for QE
> now, we also hear that Charles wants to ‘reintegrate H into the RF’, that the 3 talked for 2 hours on Saturday, then we hear nothing productive happened
> 
> ‘What exactly are _they_ doing behind those palace walls?  At least, Kate looked like she is ready for Queen status, not sure about the rest. Maybe I’m missing something, please correct my errors. It has been exhausting keeping up the BRF this week.


Oprah must be salivating at this in hopes of a part 2 “special” just with Harry. Or maybe she’ll pass this on to her bestie Gayle and Harry will show up on morning tv.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting. I think christenings of adults are on the fundamentalist side of things here too, but infants is pretty normal even for people who only go to church on the major holidays (that is for our two biggest denominations, Catholic and Protestant). ETA: of course I also live out in the woods.



Here in Italy most people still christen their children even if they don't normally go to church. My grandchild, baby Diana, will be christened next Monday.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Is Harry back yet ?


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Is Harry back yet ?


God knows!


----------



## duna

I bet he'll fly back to the US before the Queen's birthday... M has probably warned him that if he dares stay in the UK any longer, he will be shut up in the chicken coop for a week!


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> I bet he'll fly back to the US before the Queen's birthday... M has probably warned him that if he dares stay in the UK any longer, he will be shut up in the chicken coop for a week!


I think the least he could do is stay till after her birthday, even if it's till the day after.


----------



## xincinsin

justwatchin said:


> Oprah must be salivating at this in hopes of a part 2 “special” just with Harry. Or maybe she’ll pass this on to her bestie Gayle and Harry will show up on morning tv.


I doubt MM will allow Harry a solo interview. It would invade her territory (OW is her friend, rather than his). She is the star, not him. And no matter how friendly an interviewer OW is, Harry is not a trained prevaricator like MM. He won't be able to control his petulance, whereas she can dab mournfully at her waterproof mascara, rail against injustice and seek repeated confirmation with her refrain "right? right? right?".


----------



## catlover46

jelliedfeels said:


> Well in the beginning she had a vested interest to proclaim her charity work and her Anglican Christianity to make her look like a more desirable bride. I’m not 100% but I don’t think any royal has married someone who doesn’t at least say they are a practising Christian and even Catholics  are second class to Anglicans in the system (though the no longer disinherit the royal.)
> 
> It does make me idly wonder what would happen if a royal wanted to marry someone of a different religion or an out Atheist nowadays. I would hope they would just let them get on with it. But I suspect, somewhat ironically, that religion would be a far more thorny issue than ethnicity in royal marriage.


Peter Phillips wife was a practicing Catholic who became COE and The Duchess of Kent converted to Catholicism in 1994 and her grandson, who will be the next Duke of Kent,is Catholic.


----------



## Chanbal

Pregnant MM's wreath was the only one with a PR news release. 

“_While Buckingham Palace has revealed a cavalcade of specifics about yesterday’s proceedings, everything from precise timings to where exactly Philips valets would be standing, *no particulars about the other eight wreaths that were placed in the chapel have been released.*
_
*“The appearance here is that even at this moment of mourning someone Sussex-adjacent has seen the wreath and Meghan’s note as an opportunity to drum up some good PR, hardly edifying stuff."*








						Prince Harry's wreath request rejected by Queen before Meghan backlash
					

PRINCE HARRY's request to have a wreath laid in London was rejected by the Royal Family before Meghan Markle's recent wreath backlash.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Someone is going to be upset by the title of this article. 











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to be 'ditched' by Charles
					

ANGELA LEVIN has said that Harry and Meghan could be ditched by Prince Charles in plans to slim down the monarchy to cut costs.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the least he could do is stay till after her birthday, even if it's till the day after.



You're thinking too logically. 

He's all about saving the planet . 
Why waste precious time being with his grandma if he's already in the UK, when could  jet-off immediately and Zoom Lizzie on Weds _en famille_ and broadcast it to the world by teatime (PST) via a 'friend'?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Someone is going to be upset by the title of this article.
> 
> View attachment 5059615
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to be 'ditched' by Charles
> 
> 
> ANGELA LEVIN has said that Harry and Meghan could be ditched by Prince Charles in plans to slim down the monarchy to cut costs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Thank you Lord


----------



## Chanbal

Is Ginger already on his flight back to the US?










						Prince Harry to 'leave in next 24 hours' as he skips Queen's birthday
					

PRINCE Harry is set to leave the UK before the Queen's birthday celebration this week but the Duke will see his grandmother before he goes, a royal editor revealed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Is Ginger already on his flight back to the US?
> View attachment 5059616
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to 'leave in next 24 hours' as he skips Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry is set to leave the UK before the Queen's birthday celebration this week but the Duke will see his grandmother before he goes, a royal editor revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



You'd think he might have learned a thing or two by ignoring his dying grandfather, but apparently not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. My grandma's 93rd birthday is today and we're handing out timeslots for two people at a time to abide by Covid rules. Mine's in 90 mins


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. My grandma's 93rd birthday is today and we're handing out timeslots for two people at a time to abide by Covid rules. Mine's in 90 mins


Have a lovely afternoon


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Have a lovely afternoon



Thank you! 45 mins, then it's the next round haha.


----------



## lulilu

ChanelFan29 said:


> I’m going to give the marriage 2-5 more years.  Statistically things are not good for second (or is this her third?) marriages lasting.
> 
> Baby #2 will be here soon, there will be press coverage of that for a while.  I doubt there will be a third due to her age, unless they use a surrogate.
> By the time the attention from baby 2 wears off, I can see Megan start to think about checking out.



I don't think baby 2 will get nearly the press that Archie got.  They were so obnoxious in refusing photos and the public can only get so excited to be denied and disappointed.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure. She just woke up one day and decided Anglicanism was exactly her thing. Please Omid, don't insult our intelligence like this.
> A...prayer circle. On the Suits set. Alright.



This whole prayer circle things remind me of the various times we've seen performing artists like Madonna and others, who get the crew and performers together for a prayer before the show.  Seems very fake.




lalame said:


> I really wonder just how pregnant she is when he can't even stay a few days.... is she really imminently due?? Or maybe it's just a convenient excuse for him not to deal with the fall-out of his actions in person.  It takes a big person to confront people he/she's wronged head on and talk through it. Harry never seemed that mature to me.



I really can't abide the excuse that he needs to get home because his wife is pregnant.  She is due in early summer?  How many weeks/months is that?  Is she the only woman in the world who has been pregnant while her DH/partner has been on business trips?  I thought she is supposed to be a modern woman?  Life goes on.  You are pregnant.  Big deal.  He can get home if (not likely) you go into labor at this point.  She won't have that baby any time soon, unless she is planning a performance.


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You'd think he might have learned a thing or two by ignoring his dying grandfather, but apparently not.



I'm sure he'll find an opportunity to tell Oprah that he was told not to stick around and feels like a total victim for it.

I mean, if she really did cancel lunch with him the last time he returned, it's quite possible he was told there was no need for him to stay.


----------



## bag-mania

creme fraiche said:


> It certainly is - Woke is her new religion, and she is a practicer of the evangelical branch of that religion.



More like a cult.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. My grandma's 93rd birthday is today and we're handing out timeslots for two people at a time to abide by Covid rules. Mine's in 90 mins


Happy Birthday to your grandma


----------



## Chanbal

Is this true?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Pregnant MM's wreath was the only one with a PR news release.
> 
> “_While Buckingham Palace has revealed a cavalcade of specifics about yesterday’s proceedings, everything from precise timings to where exactly Philips valets would be standing, *no particulars about the other eight wreaths that were placed in the chapel have been released.*_
> 
> *“The appearance here is that even at this moment of mourning someone Sussex-adjacent has seen the wreath and Meghan’s note as an opportunity to drum up some good PR, hardly edifying stuff."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's wreath request rejected by Queen before Meghan backlash
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY's request to have a wreath laid in London was rejected by the Royal Family before Meghan Markle's recent wreath backlash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


It is most irritating. When I google PP's funeral, the top hits are all mermaid-related.  Exactly whose funeral was this? I had the awful thought that her friends (sock puppets) would plagiarise Princess Margaret and claim that MM desired for her ashes in future to be placed between TQ and PP. Had to reset my imagination  

Any likelihood that she might try to curry favour with TQ and name the bump Diana Lilibet?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. My grandma's 93rd birthday is today and we're handing out timeslots for two people at a time to abide by Covid rules. Mine's in 90 mins


Happy birthday to your grandma!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am positive he will come up with some complaint about bot being treated right.


----------



## purseinsanity

JY89 said:


> Can’t wait for the day he receives her wedding ring in the mail


No way!  She will hawk that thing before she gives it back!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Someone is going to be upset by the title of this article.
> 
> View attachment 5059615
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to be 'ditched' by Charles
> 
> 
> ANGELA LEVIN has said that Harry and Meghan could be ditched by Prince Charles in plans to slim down the monarchy to cut costs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


This is the one headline I hope is actually true!  The whole china cabinet would be sent flying in that case.  Maybe even one or two of the 16+ sinks too?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. My grandma's 93rd birthday is today and we're handing out timeslots for two people at a time to abide by Covid rules. Mine's in 90 mins


Happy birthday to her!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is Ginger already on his flight back to the US?
> View attachment 5059616
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to 'leave in next 24 hours' as he skips Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry is set to leave the UK before the Queen's birthday celebration this week but the Duke will see his grandmother before he goes, a royal editor revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Harry would probably stay if HE got the gift of a few million pounds or so.


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> I really can't abide the excuse that he needs to get home because his wife is pregnant.  She is due in early summer?  How many weeks/months is that?  Is she the only woman in the world who has been pregnant while her DH/partner has been on business trips?  I thought she is supposed to be a modern woman?  Life goes on.  You are pregnant.  Big deal.  He can get home if (not likely) you go into labor at this point.  She won't have that baby any time soon, unless she is planning a performance.


Harry claims to love the military so much.  What about all of the people in the military who are absent and can't even see their child for a year after birth because they are on active duty?  Their heavily pregnant wives don't matter as much as Queen MeGain?


----------



## Chanbal

JCMH has protection while in the UK. Why would he bring a security team from California with him?


----------



## purseinsanity

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm sure he'll find an opportunity to tell Oprah that he was told not to stick around and feels like a total victim for it.
> 
> I mean, if she really did cancel lunch with him the last time he returned, it's quite possible he was told there was no need for him to stay.


He'll say his family was ignoring him during the funeral, he didn't feel welcome, even though he tried to get William's attention by sneaking up behind him in the procession, and he's devastated he's not getting a goodie bag from Granny's birthday, so what was the point of staying??


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the least he could do is stay till after her birthday, even if it's till the day after.



Yes, of course he should!


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I grew up in LA. What's your age group? Did you grow up around a lot of catholics? I wonder if that has something to do with it. Like in that screenshot I posted, I think these traditions are becoming very rare, especially among millenial-aged or younger - and probably moreso in the US too since we have so many denominational faiths here that depart from orthodoxy (like evangelicals as Lodpah pointed out). I was even surprised to see the 1 in 10 children getting a christening stat, and suspect it has dwindled even more since 2011.


there are a lot of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans here in So Cal.  I can't say for certain but I would bet a large percentage of them are Catholic and would Christen their babies.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> I wonder what the Bereavement policy is for BetterUp....





xincinsin said:


> And does it segue right into paternity leave...



I can't feel too sorry for any organization or company who were bamboozled by them and their phony promises. Those companies should have done their homework and investigated H&M themselves before signing contracts. It is appalling to musicians everywhere that they get pennies from Spotify while H&M get a multimillion dollar contract and they have only done a single episode in four months (which Spotify produced for them) with no sign of any others on the horizon.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really can't hate on anyone for rescuing animals, it's just that everything she does is so pretentious and then she's just negligent enough you know she really doesn't give a sh*t. Like leaving one dog behind, letting the other one get into an accident that breaks two of his legs, spouting about veganism but roasting chicken for her invented engagement story...just why.


right....and she had to say on the Oprah interview that the got her dog from a "kill" shelter.....just saying the dog was a rescue wasn't good enough.  I'm very pro-rescue and I'm glad when celebs rescue and talk about it.  but she had to take it a step further


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Is Harry back yet ?



I'm guessing his master has summoned him by now and he is on his way to be by her side and serve her.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> JCMH has protection while in the UK. Why would he bring a security team from California with him?
> View attachment 5059642



Meghan probably insisted on it. She was afraid the family would try to nab him for that intervention we keep predicting. 

The joke's on her. I don't think they want him back and she's stuck with him.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> OMG! That is crazy expensive, and that was paid for by the british tax payers! Kate is more frugal and diverse in what she wears. She does not wear high end designers for normal engagements. Only for some red carpet events does she wear high end designer, but even then, never that expensive. She also recycles a lot of her clothes. Markle never worse such expensive clothes before getting married.


when did she do that sayonara zara thing?  just looked it up.  it was pre-Harry.  so she felt rich apparently when she got her Suits job - not at the level of the RF of course.
I always thought throwing a party to give away your clothes which aren't good enough for you anymore seemed patronizing


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Meghan probably insisted on it. She was afraid the family would try to nab him for that intervention we keep predicting.
> 
> The joke's on her. I don't think they want him back and she's stuck with him.



The way this couple wastes money is !

Cringe will welcome Ginger back, he is still very important (useful) in her life... They have now so many stories to share about PP, pregnant MM's favorite royal.


----------



## Icyjade

I wonder if she’s mad that Kate got such glowing write-ups because she so graciously stepped back for the brothers to talk? The heavily pregnant one will surely throw a tantrum at JCMH for that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait.  Whaaaaa?
> 
> 
> _For Charles, as sad as his father's passing undoubtedly has been, the *priority now is the reintegration of Harry into royal life.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: A funeral masterstroke by Charles that may reunite sons
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: As the limousines drew up to take mourners from the porch of St George's Chapel back to Windsor Castle Prince Charles used the briefest of gestures to send them away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


bunch of speculative BS I think


----------



## Maggie Muggins

JY89 said:


> Can’t wait for the day he receives her wedding ring in the mail


I'd like to see H return to the UK to get detoxed and divorced and since he's a feminist, he could mail his wedding ring to his then ex wife.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> JCMH has protection while in the UK. Why would he bring a security team from California with him?
> View attachment 5059642


He needed protection because, horror of horrors, he took a commercial flight. Wonder why none of their A-listed celeb pals volunteered a private jet...

There was a Youtuber who proposed the theory that celebs who defended the OW interview were defending Oprah rather than the mermaid. MM merely reaped the benefit of the Oprah teflon shield.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> I wonder if she’s mad that Kate got such glowing write-ups because she so graciously stepped back for the brothers to talk? The heavily pregnant one will surely throw a tantrum at JCMH for that.



He will walk through the door and she'll meet him saying "why were you talking to that *****?"


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> I can't feel too sorry for any organization or company who were bamboozled by them and their phony promises. Those companies should have done their homework and investigated H&M themselves before signing contracts. It is appalling to musicians everywhere that they get pennies from Spotify while H&M get a multimillion dollar contract and they have only done a single episode in four months (which Spotify produced for them) with no sign of any others on the horizon.



I don’t feel bad for them. They made their bed and aligning themselves with a mental health “expert” who can’t even get his wife help tells me the whole company is incompetent. I just wonder if he’s being treated diff from other employees...

I mean, he had to tell us he has a job now...


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think Omid is drafting an article about how classy and elegant Meghan is right now?


----------



## eunaddict

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm not too sure about that tbh.
> In her capacity as Queen of the United Kingdom, she is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Common, *Defender of the Faith*". Meaning the CofE. Prince Charles has let it be known he wants to be styled at his Coronation as *Defender of Faith.
> 
> ETA *I'm not saying that ethnicity is or should be a thorny issue for marrying into the BRF, just that religion shouldn't be either.




Apparently, this has been a wildly misunderstood/misquoted point. He is STILL "Defender of the Faith", he just sees Christianity as supportive of other religions and faiths having the right to practice their faiths.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Omid is drafting an article about how classy and elegant Meghan is right now?


A retrospective photo montage culminating in a shot of her resplendently glowing in maternal ecstasy (backlight from window subtly suggesting a halo, curtains drawn to reveal the Garden of Eden, roses blooming just within view to suggest how the lady in the foreground is blossoming). In stylized black and white of course.


----------



## bag-mania

*Body language expert dissects royal family during Prince Philip’s funeral*

Body language expert Judi James insists she can read the royal family like a book after observing the grieving lot at Prince Philip’s funeral.

James believes that The Queen needed “reassurance” upon entering the chapel based on her literal hesitation to walk inside.

“The Queen provided the most memorable moments, in her isolation in the chapel where she sat with her head dipped so low that her face was completely covered from view by her hat,” James told The Daily Mail. “There was one moment when she paused and turned around before entering the chapel and it looked terribly poignant, almost as though she couldn’t face going in alone. She turned for what looked like reassurance that her party was behind her.”

Even while grieving, Queen Elizabeth II was considered “the most animated royal” in attendance, according to James.

“She talked in quite an animated way to her lady-in-waiting and to the bishop at the entrance to the chapel,” noted the pro.

Son and future King, Prince Charles, was the most outwardly emotional royal as he bid his father adieu.

James explained, “It was Charles showing the most open signs of what looked like uncontrollable grief with his eyes reddened and apparently wet with tears above his mask.”

Meanwhile, sons William and Harry reunited for the first time since Harry’s move to the states, a moment James believes signals a bright future for the reportedly feuding siblings.

“In a well-coordinated but also relatively natural-looking moment, Harry walked up behind William and Kate to then join them, walking between them and chatting to them both,’ explained the expert. 

“After a few seconds of what looked like natural and not self-conscious conversation Kate fell back, leaving the two brothers walking off, talking alone. It looked like a genuine moment of unity rather than something contrived for the cameras,” she added.

She claims Harry emitted a sense of “bravado” as he approached the chapel, which waned with every step he took.

“Walking beside Peter Philips and lined up with his brother William, Harry appeared to be performing the body language of subtle bravado, looking about and even chatting to some of the royals behind him, but looking less confident as he emerged to walk behind his grandfather’s coffin,” she insisted.

“While William strode looking straight ahead and giving nothing away in terms of any acknowledgement of his brother, Harry performed a couple of self-comfort rituals that hinted at levels of suppressed anxiety.”

Those rituals include “pulling at his waistcoat” and performing a “shoulder-roll in the actual chapel, a gesture that can imply someone is bracing themselves and trying to boost their own confidence.”









						Body language expert dissects royal family during Prince Philip’s funeral
					

Body language expert Judi James insists she can read the royal family like a book after observing the grieving lot at Prince Philip’s funeral. James believes that The Queen needed “reas…




					pagesix.com


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is this true?
> View attachment 5059632



I think she meant walking in the procession with the men. It seemed a very strange question to ask in the 21C considering her rank within the family, bodies she represents and the occasion. It would have been strange had she not walked. It's not _usual_ regards men/women, but then we haven't had a solemn, formal occasion like this since 1952 (minus Diana 1997). Needless comment. 

She also didn't know Andrew had served active service. He may be a tasteless scumbag, but it doesn't change his history, he went to war and in the frontline (the Falklands War). 

Every other comment showed lack of research.


----------



## bag-mania

*Lip readers decipher what Prince William said to Harry at Philip’s funeral*
Prince William told his brother, Prince Harry, during their grandfather’s funeral that the service “was great” — to which his sibling replied that “it was as he wanted it,” according to lip readers who analyzed the interaction.

The estranged brothers were seen amiably chatting for several minutes during the televised funeral for 99-year-old Prince Philip on Saturday and then spent a couple of hours together behind closed doors with their father, Prince Charles.

“Yes, it was great, wasn’t it,” the 38-year-old Duke of Cambridge reportedly told his 36-year-old brother once they both removed their masks, lip readers told UK newspaper Daily Express.

“It was as he wanted it,” the Duke of Sussex replied.

Interpreters said William later told Harry: “Absolutely beautiful service, ah, the music.”

William had personally asked not to walk side by side with his younger brother, leading the two to be separated by their cousin Peter Philips, son of Princess Anne.

That was just one example of “a great deal of frostiness” Harry faced during his first time home in the UK following the damning allegations Harry and wife Meghan Markle made against his family during their TV tell-all, sources told the Mail on Sunday.

Queen Elizabeth II’s daughter, Anne, and youngest son, Prince Edward, 57, failed to even acknowledge Harry before or during Saturday’s service, as did Edward’s wife, Sophie, the UK paper also claimed.

“It’s often said funerals are a time for reconciliation and that’s a scene a lot of people wanted to see, not least the family itself,” said ITN’s Tom Bradby, the Express reported.

“They were talking. They were possibly overcome by emotion. They were talking — and that’s got to be a very good sign. Let’s hope that they sort their recent troubles out because the Queen needs them both,” commentator Eve Pollard said, according to the outlet.









						Lip readers decipher what Prince William said to Harry at Philip’s funeral
					

Prince William told his brother, Prince Harry, during their grandfather’s funeral that the service “was great” — to which his sibling replied that “it was as he wanted it,” according to lip r…




					pagesix.com


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> JCMH has protection while in the UK. Why would he bring a security team from California with him?
> View attachment 5059642


He needed a security team on the plane to protect him from potentially having a seat mate like me next to him, one who would have given him a trans Atlantic earful about his odious behavior and that of his wife.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I think she meant walking in the procession with the men. It seemed a very strange question to ask in the 21C considering her rank within the family, bodies she represents and the occasion. It would have been strange had she not walked. It's not _usual_ regards men/women, but then we haven't had a solemn, formal occasion like this since 1952 (minus Diana 1997). Needless comment.
> 
> She also didn't know Andrew had served active service. He may be a tasteless scumbag, but it doesn't change his history, he went to war and in the frontline (the Falklands War).
> 
> Every other comment showed lack of research.


I was shocked by King's question. The lack of knowledge of some journalists (reporters/interviewers) matches the quality of their work.


----------



## Love Of My Life

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Omid is drafting an article about how classy and elegant Meghan is right now?



Her image has dramatically changed.. SHe will need all the help she can get & wherever it comes
from, so nothing would surprise me
CLassy & elegant are not two words that come to mind in describing Meghan & they would
be poorly received if chosen, JMO


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> He needed a security team on the plane to protect him from potentially having a seat mate like me next to him, one who would have given him a trans Atlantic earful about his odious behavior and that of his wife.



I bet he bought all of the seats in First Class specifically so that he _wouldn't_ have opinion-sharing seat mates.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Love Of My Life

Chanbal said:


> Is Ginger already on his flight back to the US?
> View attachment 5059616
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to 'leave in next 24 hours' as he skips Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry is set to leave the UK before the Queen's birthday celebration this week but the Duke will see his grandmother before he goes, a royal editor revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




It just says "so much"...leaving your grandmother at such a distressing time..just no words


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> I wonder what the Bereavement policy is for BetterUp....





xincinsin said:


> And does it segue right into paternity leave...



I wonder if he's on contract with them... I can't imagine that he's a full time, 40 hr a week employee.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I wonder if he's on contract with them... I can't imagine that he's a full time, 40 hr a week employee.


I'm guessing it is a milestone-based contract. You deliver X; I pay you Y. 
Also guessing that his 3-hour chat with his dad was "unproductive" in terms of generating new revenue streams, IOW, the guilt-tripping didn't work so the beau is returning to his, uhm, aquatic humanoid.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> He will walk through the door and she'll meet him saying "why were you talking to that *****?"


"Don't you know what she did!!??? To MEEEEE!"


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> when did she do that sayonara zara thing?  just looked it up.  it was pre-Harry.  so she felt rich apparently when she got her Suits job - not at the level of the RF of course.
> I always thought throwing a party to give away your clothes which aren't good enough for you anymore seemed patronizing


I agree, it's inane. Just donate the clothes already. 

I can't resist  The contrast between these two women is infinite. Here is the lovely Kate wearing what I would call a Balenciaga Apple green blazer _from Zara_ for this year's St.Patrick's Day. I read this blazer sold out in a blink.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Omid is drafting an article about how classy and elegant Meghan is right now?



Scobie will always sing her praises. Everything he has he owes to riding the Meghan train and he's not about to disembark anytime soon.

It occurs to me that most of the entertainment news, which Harry and Meghan fall under, in the US is written by young women in their 20s and 30s. That demographic also represents the vast majority of Meghan stans. When you understand that fact, it's no wonder everything always comes back to Meghan in every story about the royals.

Take this article in USAToday, written by a young woman with the help of two other young women. The first part talks about Harry and Will at the funeral but this writer cannot help herself from stanning for Meghan in the latter part of the article. It's always about Meghan to them! 

*Royal reunion: Will and Harry leave Prince Philip's funeral together, Meghan watches at home*
...
Meghan also set the record straight about a rumor that Meghan made soon-to-be sister-in-law Duchess Kate cry before her and Harry's 2018 wedding. Not only was it not true, Meghan said, but the opposite had happened.

"She made me cry. It hurt my feelings," she said, confirming that the subject was flower-girl dresses. "But it was a really hard week before the wedding. She was upset and apologized and brought flowers and wrote a note. I've forgiven her. What's hard to get over is that I was being blamed for something I didn't do but happened to me."

Meghan said didn't want to reveal too many details of the incident because Kate "is a good person" and she wanted to protect her privacy, but noted everyone in the palace knew it wasn't true.

"Why not say that?" Winfrey asked. "Good question," Meghan replied.









						Royal reunion: Will and Harry leave Prince Philip's funeral together, Meghan watches at home
					

Prince Harry and Will met for the first time in over a year at Prince Philip's funeral, after Harry expressed hope of healing a strained relationship.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## xincinsin

Love Of My Life said:


> Her image has dramatically changed.. SHe will need all the help she can get & wherever it comes
> from, so nothing would surprise me
> CLassy & elegant are not two words that come to mind in describing Meghan & they would
> be poorly received if chosen, JMO


Omid has not shown signs of intelligent life for some time. He is starting to resemble a Stepford wife.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> *Lip readers decipher what Prince William said to Harry at Philip’s funeral*
> Prince William told his brother, Prince Harry, during their grandfather’s funeral that the service “was great” — to which his sibling replied that “it was as he wanted it,” according to lip readers who analyzed the interaction.
> 
> The estranged brothers were seen amiably chatting for several minutes during the televised funeral for 99-year-old Prince Philip on Saturday and then spent a couple of hours together behind closed doors with their father, Prince Charles.
> 
> “Yes, it was great, wasn’t it,” the 38-year-old Duke of Cambridge reportedly told his 36-year-old brother once they both removed their masks, lip readers told UK newspaper Daily Express.
> 
> “It was as he wanted it,” the Duke of Sussex replied.
> 
> Interpreters said William later told Harry: “Absolutely beautiful service, ah, the music.”
> 
> William had personally asked not to walk side by side with his younger brother, leading the two to be separated by their cousin Peter Philips, son of Princess Anne.
> 
> That was just one example of “a great deal of frostiness” Harry faced during his first time home in the UK following the damning allegations Harry and wife Meghan Markle made against his family during their TV tell-all, sources told the Mail on Sunday.
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II’s daughter, Anne, and youngest son, Prince Edward, 57, failed to even acknowledge Harry before or during Saturday’s service, as did Edward’s wife, Sophie, the UK paper also claimed.
> 
> “It’s often said funerals are a time for reconciliation and that’s a scene a lot of people wanted to see, not least the family itself,” said ITN’s Tom Bradby, the Express reported.
> 
> “They were talking. They were possibly overcome by emotion. They were talking — and that’s got to be a very good sign. Let’s hope that they sort their recent troubles out because the Queen needs them both,” commentator Eve Pollard said, according to the outlet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lip readers decipher what Prince William said to Harry at Philip’s funeral
> 
> 
> Prince William told his brother, Prince Harry, during their grandfather’s funeral that the service “was great” — to which his sibling replied that “it was as he wanted it,” according to lip r…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I guess when you don't have facts speculation will have to do


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> *Body language expert dissects royal family during Prince Philip’s funeral*
> 
> Body language expert Judi James insists she can read the royal family like a book after observing the grieving lot at Prince Philip’s funeral.
> 
> James believes that The Queen needed “reassurance” upon entering the chapel based on her literal hesitation to walk inside.
> 
> “The Queen provided the most memorable moments, in her isolation in the chapel where she sat with her head dipped so low that her face was completely covered from view by her hat,” James told The Daily Mail. “There was one moment when she paused and turned around before entering the chapel and it looked terribly poignant, almost as though she couldn’t face going in alone. She turned for what looked like reassurance that her party was behind her.”
> 
> Even while grieving, Queen Elizabeth II was considered “the most animated royal” in attendance, according to James.
> 
> “She talked in quite an animated way to her lady-in-waiting and to the bishop at the entrance to the chapel,” noted the pro.
> 
> Son and future King, Prince Charles, was the most outwardly emotional royal as he bid his father adieu.
> 
> James explained, “It was Charles showing the most open signs of what looked like uncontrollable grief with his eyes reddened and apparently wet with tears above his mask.”
> 
> Meanwhile, sons William and Harry reunited for the first time since Harry’s move to the states, a moment James believes signals a bright future for the reportedly feuding siblings.
> 
> “In a well-coordinated but also relatively natural-looking moment, Harry walked up behind William and Kate to then join them, walking between them and chatting to them both,’ explained the expert.
> 
> “After a few seconds of what looked like natural and not self-conscious conversation Kate fell back, leaving the two brothers walking off, talking alone. It looked like a genuine moment of unity rather than something contrived for the cameras,” she added.
> 
> She claims Harry emitted a sense of “bravado” as he approached the chapel, which waned with every step he took.
> 
> “Walking beside Peter Philips and lined up with his brother William, Harry appeared to be performing the body language of subtle bravado, looking about and even chatting to some of the royals behind him, but looking less confident as he emerged to walk behind his grandfather’s coffin,” she insisted.
> 
> “While William strode looking straight ahead and giving nothing away in terms of any acknowledgement of his brother, Harry performed a couple of self-comfort rituals that hinted at levels of suppressed anxiety.”
> 
> Those rituals include “pulling at his waistcoat” and performing a “shoulder-roll in the actual chapel, a gesture that can imply someone is bracing themselves and trying to boost their own confidence.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Body language expert dissects royal family during Prince Philip’s funeral
> 
> 
> Body language expert Judi James insists she can read the royal family like a book after observing the grieving lot at Prince Philip’s funeral. James believes that The Queen needed “reas…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


_"Meanwhile, sons William and Harry reunited for the first time since Harry’s move to the states, a moment James believes signals a bright future for the reportedly feuding siblings." _

Is she channeling her kindred fabulating spirit, Omid Scobie?


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> _"Meanwhile, sons William and Harry reunited for the first time since Harry’s move to the states, a moment James believes signals a bright future for the reportedly feuding siblings." _
> 
> Is she channeling her kindred fabulating spirit, Omid Scobie?



Probably. You can tell how low the bar has been set when forced small talk qualifies as being a "bright future."


----------



## lalame

I don't believe the "Sayonara Zara" rumors. She was wearing H&M, Banana Republic, Jcrew, etc for a long time even after marrying.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> JCMH has protection while in the UK. Why would he bring a security team from California with him?



Because petty.


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> I think she meant walking in the procession with the men. It seemed a very strange question to ask in the 21C considering her rank within the family, bodies she represents and the occasion. It would have been strange had she not walked. It's not _usual_ regards men/women, but then we haven't had a solemn, formal occasion like this since 1952 (minus Diana 1997). Needless comment.
> 
> She also didn't know Andrew had served active service. He may be a tasteless scumbag, but it doesn't change his history, he went to war and in the frontline (the Falklands War).
> 
> Every other comment showed lack of research.


"Oh look, a wreath on the casket! with a hand written note - it *must* be Meghan's," as we know from her press release (hot off the email servers), she's the *only* one who had a close bond with the man, and sweetly sent a handwritten note with Harry. Such forethought, such sweetness. 

SMH at the jumping-to-stupid-conclusions lack of basic knowledge.



bag-mania said:


> “Yes, it was great, wasn’t it,” the 38-year-old Duke of Cambridge reportedly told his 36-year-old brother once they both removed their masks, lip readers told UK newspaper Daily Express.
> 
> “*It was as he wanted it,*” the Duke of Sussex replied.
> 
> Interpreters said William later told Harry: “Absolutely beautiful service, ah, the music.”


Do you all think he was referring to PPs banishment of MM from the funeral?

Go home, Harry.


----------



## Genie27

In terms of naming wee sprog #2, my money is now on Betty.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Meanwhile, sons William and Harry reunited for the first time since Harry’s move to the states, a moment James believes signals a bright future for the reportedly feuding siblings.



That "expert" just lost me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Does H have to quarantine again once he arrives back in the US before residing with his heavily pregnant wife?


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> “Yes, it was great, wasn’t it,” the 38-year-old Duke of Cambridge reportedly told his 36-year-old brother once they both removed their masks, lip readers told UK newspaper Daily Express.
> 
> *“It was as he wanted it,” the Duke of Sussex replied.*
> 
> Interpreters said William later told Harry: “Absolutely beautiful service, ah, the music.”



What faint praise from Harry, as in _none_, as if he was trying to downplay how extraordinary the day was and he wasn't moved at all by it.


----------



## csshopper

The body language "expert" needs to read the lip reader's report. The conversation between William and Harry could have been by any two blokes standing on a street corner or sitting on adjacent stools in the local pub. Nothing about it gave even a teensy hint that any meaningful connection is going to be reestablished any time soon, or ever.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Does H have to quarantine again once he arrives back in the US before residing with his heavily pregnant wife?



Maybe not, if both he and Meghan are fully vaccinated.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Maybe not, if both he and Meghan are fully vaccinated.


But there are reports of people getting COVID weeks after they were fully vaccinated.  The vaccines aren’t 100% guaranteed that you won’t get Covid, only 95%


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> But there are reports of people getting COVID weeks after they were fully vaccinated.  The vaccines aren’t 100% guaranteed that you won’t get Covid, only 95%



True but even that 5% are not getting it in a life-threatening way. In a house with 16-19 bathrooms they surely have room for some space apart if they want.


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> But there are reports of people getting COVID weeks after they were fully vaccinated.  The vaccines aren’t 100% guaranteed that you won’t get Covid, only 95%


They don't promise full protection. They just minimize the seriousness if you are vaccinated and catch Covid anyway.


----------



## haute okole

TC1 said:


> Does H have to quarantine again once he arrives back in the US before residing with his heavily pregnant wife?


He must have a negative COVID test result before getting in the plane back to CA.  After he arrives, he must test again 3-5 days after he lands and quarantine at home for 7 or 10 days depending if he has been vaccinated.  These are the rules for Santa Barbara.  He can go home to “heavily pregnant” MeAgain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Meghan also set the record straight about a rumor that Meghan made soon-to-be sister-in-law Duchess Kate cry before her and Harry's 2018 wedding. Not only was it not true, Meghan said, but the opposite had happened.
> 
> "She made me cry. It hurt my feelings," she said, confirming that the subject was flower-girl dresses. "But it was a really hard week before the wedding. She was upset and apologized and brought flowers and wrote a note. I've forgiven her. What's hard to get over is that I was being blamed for something I didn't do but happened to me."
> 
> Meghan said didn't want to reveal too many details of the incident because Kate "is a good person" and she wanted to protect her privacy, but noted everyone in the palace knew it wasn't true.
> 
> "Why not say that?" Winfrey asked. "Good question," Meghan replied.



Recollections may vary. I remember pretty clearly the palace, in an unprecedented move, put out a statement that simply said "That never happened."

But also, I'll bet money they put it out only because behind the scenes tantrums were thrown. I have no doubt if anyone cried it was Meghan's fault, not Kate's.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Omid is drafting an article about how classy and elegant Meghan is right now?


100%


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> In terms of naming wee sprog #2, my money is now on Betty.



Did you get that the right way round or did you mean to say you *bet on Money*?


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. My grandma's 93rd birthday is today and we're handing out timeslots for two people at a time to abide by Covid rules. Mine's in 90 mins



Happy 93rd Birthday to your Grandmother! I'm certain she will be so very happy to see you and others!  Cheers to her


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> Did you get that the right way round or did you mean to say you *bet on Money*?


Well, they could also pick Lizzie, Beth or Lisa, but Betty fits her Archie+Betty Arch-ew-ell theme.


----------



## bag-mania

I'm thinking they will use Diana or Elizabeth (or both!) as middle names and then pick a trendy first name for the little girl. 

Meghan will want credit for paying tribute to Harry's family without being stifled creatively in choosing her child's name.


----------



## poopsie

She could always choose to name the child eponymously


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Now I've heard everything.  I was watching an episode of the view which aired end of last week, before the funeral.  they were talking about Harry and Will not walking together, etc.
Meghan McCain, who I think it would be fair to say presents herself as a serious conservative woman (and commentator), daughter of an iconic US senator, said basically this.
She isn't interested in the RF.  She is more interested in American history.  However, we have an "American princess" and until the RF treats her right or makes up with her or whatever she won't like them.  I'm paraphrasing but the main thing was calling her a princess.  She never was a princess and this implies Meghan McCain is making Markle into some fairytale figure.
Shame on McCain.  She should be smarter than that.  Aren't we past making marrying well a huge accomplishment for women?
So there we have it I guess.  Most Americans if they are interested at all will be pro-Meghan no matter what she says or does.


----------



## catlover46

papertiger said:


> I think she meant walking in the procession with the men. It seemed a very strange question to ask in the 21C considering her rank within the family, bodies she represents and the occasion. It would have been strange had she not walked. It's not _usual_ regards men/women, but then we haven't had a solemn, formal occasion like this since 1952 (minus Diana 1997). Needless comment.
> 
> She also didn't know Andrew had served active service. He may be a tasteless scumbag, but it doesn't change his history, he went to war and in the frontline (the Falklands War).
> 
> Every other comment showed lack of research.


Don’t forget the Queen Mother’s Funeral in 2002 was a full royal funeral with the all the pomp and circumstance. Princes Charles,Phillip,Andrew walked behind the cortège in full military dress.


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> Now I've heard everything.  I was watching an episode of the view which aired end of last week, before the funeral.  they were talking about Harry and Will not walking together, etc.
> Meghan McCain, who I think it would be fair to say presents herself as a serious conservative woman (and commentator), daughter of an iconic US senator, said basically this.
> She isn't interested in the RF.  She is more interested in American history.  However, we have an "American princess" and until the RF treats her right or makes up with her or whatever she won't like them.  I'm paraphrasing but the main thing was calling her a princess.  She never was a princess and this implies Meghan McCain is making Markle into some fairytale figure.
> Shame on McCain.  She should be smarter than that.  Aren't we past making marrying well a huge accomplishment for women?
> So there we have it I guess.  Most Americans if they are interested at all will be pro-Meghan no matter what she says or does.


That’s the first I’ve heard of a conservative liking her. It’s mostly been the case here in the US that conservatives hate her and liberals love her. I’m liberal and don’t like her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gender neutral names, please.

The heavily pregnant MM will not pleased that he talked to _that woman_ (Kate) and that he came away penniless. Philip had millions. H was supposedly the favorite grandchild. Today we find out it is Lady Louise 

‘Andrew drives a $325,000 Bentley. Jealousy runs high in those Cali hills 

ETA: 
RE: “It was as he wanted it,” the Duke of Sussex replied.
‘Maybe I’m reading to much into it, I hear H saying,  Gramps got his way, why can’t I have mine?


----------



## sdkitty

catlover46 said:


> That’s the first I’ve heard of a conservative liking her. It’s mostly been the case here in the US that conservatives hate her and liberals love her. I’m liberal and don’t like her.


I'm with you - liberal (or moderate) and don't like her at all


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Now I've heard everything.  I was watching an episode of the view which aired end of last week, before the funeral.  they were talking about Harry and Will not walking together, etc.
> Meghan McCain, who I think it would be fair to say presents herself as a serious conservative woman (and commentator), daughter of an iconic US senator, said basically this.
> She isn't interested in the RF.  She is more interested in American history.  However, we have an "American princess" and until the RF treats her right or makes up with her or whatever she won't like them.  I'm paraphrasing but the main thing was calling her a princess.  She never was a princess and this implies Meghan McCain is making Markle into some fairytale figure.
> Shame on McCain.  She should be smarter than that.  Aren't we past making marrying well a huge accomplishment for women?
> So there we have it I guess.  Most Americans if they are interested at all will be pro-Meghan no matter what she says or does.



Chances are McCain doesn't know even 1/100th about MM that we know here. She is believing what she has heard from the US press. There is also the possibility she doesn't consider Meghan important enough to argue about with her very liberal View-mates, who I'm sure are extremely pro-Meghan. She may be saving her discussion battles for subjects she cares more about.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Chances are McCain doesn't know even 1/100th about MM that we know here. She is believing what she has heard from the US press. There is also the possibility she doesn't consider Meghan important enough to argue about with her very liberal View-mates, who I'm sure are extremely pro-Meghan. She may be saving her discussion battles for subjects she cares more about.


I don't know how much she knows but I don't think it's a case of her not wanting to argue.  she pretty much said "we all love Meghan"
I don't dislike McCain but she does get quite a bit of flack on social media for saying things that are inaccurate


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Now I've heard everything.  I was watching an episode of the view which aired end of last week, before the funeral.  they were talking about Harry and Will not walking together, etc.
> Meghan McCain, who I think it would be fair to say presents herself as a serious conservative woman (and commentator), daughter of an iconic US senator, said basically this.
> She isn't interested in the RF.  She is more interested in American history.  However, we have an "American princess" and until the RF treats her right or makes up with her or whatever she won't like them.  I'm paraphrasing but the main thing was calling her a princess.  She never was a princess and this implies Meghan McCain is making Markle into some fairytale figure.
> Shame on McCain.  She should be smarter than that.  Aren't we past making marrying well a huge accomplishment for women?
> So there we have it I guess.  Most Americans if they are interested at all will be pro-Meghan no matter what she says or does.



Hu? Wasn't she critizising her right after the interview aired? I'm pretty sure her father whom she seems to adore in a very juvenile manner, would not have stood for the bullsh*t Harry and his wife are pulling on their families. That man had principles.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Scobie will always sing her praises. Everything he has he owes to riding the Meghan train and he's not about to disembark anytime soon.
> 
> It occurs to me that most of the entertainment news, which Harry and Meghan fall under, in the US is written by young women in their 20s and 30s. That demographic also represents the vast majority of Meghan stans. When you understand that fact, it's no wonder everything always comes back to Meghan in every story about the royals.
> 
> Take this article in USAToday, written by a young woman with the help of two other young women. The first part talks about Harry and Will at the funeral but this writer cannot help herself from stanning for Meghan in the latter part of the article. It's always about Meghan to them!
> 
> *Royal reunion: Will and Harry leave Prince Philip's funeral together, Meghan watches at home*
> ...
> Meghan also set the record straight about a rumor that Meghan made soon-to-be sister-in-law Duchess Kate cry before her and Harry's 2018 wedding. Not only was it not true, Meghan said, but the opposite had happened.
> 
> "She made me cry. It hurt my feelings," she said, confirming that the subject was flower-girl dresses. "But it was a really hard week before the wedding. She was upset and apologized and brought flowers and wrote a note. I've forgiven her. What's hard to get over is that I was being blamed for something I didn't do but happened to me."
> 
> Meghan said didn't want to reveal too many details of the incident because Kate "is a good person" and she wanted to protect her privacy, but noted everyone in the palace knew it wasn't true.
> 
> "Why not say that?" Winfrey asked. "Good question," Meghan replied.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal reunion: Will and Harry leave Prince Philip's funeral together, Meghan watches at home
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Will met for the first time in over a year at Prince Philip's funeral, after Harry expressed hope of healing a strained relationship.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usatoday.com


We do need  or  for some articles, particularly for the ones released by the US Press (or pregnant MM PR machine).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, we were right. Gotta have witnesses now.

_But, in an unprecedented development that lays bare the depth of their rift, Charles and William preferred to meet with Harry together so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards._








						Prince Charles heads to his Welsh bolthole to privately grieve
					

DAN WOOTTON: Prince Charles has left for his cottage in Wales to privately grieve the loss of his father - following an extraordinary summit with Prince William and Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

No idea how much truth there is to this, but I heard that Megan McCain lived somewhere near Meghan and wants to be friends with her.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> As someone who is probably at least 20 years older than you, I can guarantee that Oriental was never used as a racial slur when I was growing up in the US in the 70s. It was used in the way Asian is used today.
> 
> I work in the academic publishing industry and I can tell you university journals are constantly changing which words are considered acceptable. When I started in the business “African-American” was the preferred term. But today “Black” with a capital B is preferred in most of the journals I work on. Yet in the very same article if someone is referred to as “white” is always done in lowercase. One way is an identity and the other way is a description. That’s academia for you.



My theory is that the nomenclature changes in order to identify the woke.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how much she knows but I don't think it's a case of her not wanting to argue.  she pretty much said "we all love Meghan"
> I don't dislike McCain but she does get quite a bit of flack on social media for saying things that are inaccurate



I've never much cared for her. She doesn't strike me as being particularly well-informed or intelligent. Which makes her perfect for The View when you think about it.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Now I've heard everything.  I was watching an episode of the view which aired end of last week, before the funeral.  they were talking about Harry and Will not walking together, etc.
> Meghan McCain, who I think it would be fair to say presents herself as a serious conservative woman (and commentator), daughter of an iconic US senator, said basically this.
> She isn't interested in the RF.  She is more interested in American history.  However, we have an "American princess" and until the RF treats her right or makes up with her or whatever she won't like them.  I'm paraphrasing but the main thing was calling her a princess.  She never was a princess and this implies Meghan McCain is making Markle into some fairytale figure.
> *Shame on McCain.  She should be smarter than that.  Aren't we past making marrying well a huge accomplishment for women?*
> So there we have it I guess.  Most Americans if they are interested at all will be pro-Meghan no matter what she says or does.


ITA, but I'm not surprised.  What gives her her credentials?  Basically being born as a McCain.  Not sure she'd have gotten this far without being the daughter of John, so that's not much better than marrying as an accomplishment either.  Plus, her name is also Meghan M, which already makes her annoying to me.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Wasn't she critizising her right after the interview aired? I'm pretty sure her father whom she seems to adore in a very juvenile manner, would not have stood for the bullsh*t Harry and his wife are pulling on their families. That man had principles.


all the "ladies" of the view have been pro-Markle every time the subject came up as far as I'm aware....a bit surprising because early on in the marriage or during the engagement Joy said something slightly critical but now all of them are aligned, including McCain


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> No idea how much truth there is to this, but I heard that Megan McCain lived somewhere near Meghan and wants to be friends with her.


I don't think so....she talks about living in DC and being from AZ...unless she's planning to move


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'm thinking they will use Diana or Elizabeth (or both!) as middle names and then pick a trendy first name for the little girl.
> 
> Meghan will want credit for paying tribute to Harry's family without being stifled creatively in choosing her child's name.


You are all forgetting Doria, why not?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> No idea how much truth there is to this, but I heard that Megan McCain lived somewhere near Meghan and wants to be friends with her.



Isn't The View filmed in New York City? I think McCain owns a house in LA but I don't think they'll be arranging playdates with the kids any time soon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, we were right. Gotta have witnesses now.
> 
> _But, in an unprecedented development that lays bare the depth of their rift, Charles and William preferred to meet with Harry together so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles heads to his Welsh bolthole to privately grieve
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Prince Charles has left for his cottage in Wales to privately grieve the loss of his father - following an extraordinary summit with Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I know we all hate Harry now - oh how furious I still am over how he treated Philip - but it is still so sad. A whole family broken up by a Queen of Deception and Manipulation. She swiftly identified their achilles heel...both Harry being the most vulnerable and this whole family both used to and determined to protect him.


----------



## Allisonfaye

jelliedfeels said:


> Ive always found this story so bizarre for several reasons.
> 1. On international women’s day no less, we have a story of two powerful women rowing about clothes several years ago- how empowering!
> 2. If MM was hounded by a brutal press she should have better ammo than this banal story. Guess CBS hadn’t photoshopped the headlines in time.
> 3.If K is indeed a mean girl who spitefully made M cry- why give her the satisfaction of knowing you are dwelling on it years later?



I didn't see that Kate said ANYTHING. Did I miss something?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> I didn't see that Kate said ANYTHING. Did I miss something?



She didn't. Someone did leak to the press, but I doubt it was authorized.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> Strange word, heavily pregnant. Every woman refers to either first trimester, second trimester or by the months.



It's to pursue the narrative that MM is some kind of victim.


----------



## lalame

Heavily pregnant is a pretty common term to me... it's a casual description for how someone looks/feels, not really a scientific term by any means.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know we all hate Harry now - oh how furious I still am over how he treated Philip - but it is still so sad. A whole family broken up by a Queen of Deception and Manipulation. She swiftly identified their achilles heel...both Harry being the most vulnerable and this whole family both used to and determined to protect him.



Harry, he was the one who orchestrated this family attack. He played her, IMO. I cannot give him a pass. Based on the funeral disrespect, he is not sorry, not at all. He will continue to screw his family. The difference now is that Charles gets it - finally.
At least, I hope so.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, we were right. Gotta have witnesses now.
> 
> _But, in an unprecedented development that lays bare the depth of their rift, Charles and William preferred to meet with Harry together so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles heads to his Welsh bolthole to privately grieve
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Prince Charles has left for his cottage in Wales to privately grieve the loss of his father - following an extraordinary summit with Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If only it were that simple. Even if they recorded the conversation if the Douchess of Stuff-it leaks an alternative version, don't you know whose version will get all the traction?


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> Did you get that the right way round or did you mean to say you *bet on Money*?



Or, Elizabeth so they can call her lilibet.  Elizabeth Diana or Diana Elizabeth?  These equate to Money in future narratives.


----------



## lalame

I would be taping every single conversation with H or M. In the UK is it legal to do this and not tell the person? I would absolutely be keeping that as a security measure... maybe a "close source" leaks it later at no fault of W/C.


----------



## Chanbal

catlover46 said:


> That’s the first I’ve heard of a conservative liking her. It’s mostly been the case here in the US that conservatives hate her and liberals love her. I’m liberal and don’t like her.


I think that M McCain is just publicizing that she is not racist. I respect people when they have courage to state their educated opinions, independently if they are conservative or liberals, and it's not the case of MMcC. Though, if she cares to educate herself (and change her position), she may lose her job.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> If only it were that simple. Even if they recorded the conversation if the Douchess of Stuff-it leaks an alternative version, don't you know whose version will get all the traction?



Once the tape is leaked, the noise stops and MM continues to look like a liar.  Notice how quiet it became when employees filed their claims? When the other lies were exposed?  Yes, MM knew she had gone too far. OW knew it, too. GK needs to wake up.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> I'm thinking they will use Diana or Elizabeth (or both!) as middle names and then pick a trendy first name for the little girl.
> 
> Meghan will want credit for paying tribute to Harry's family without being stifled creatively in choosing her child's name.



LOL I should have read through the thread before my last posting. I had the same thought.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I think that M McCain is just publicizing that she is not racist. I respect people when they have courage to state their educated opinions, independently if they are conservative or liberals, and it's not the case of MMcC. Though, if she cares to educate herself (and change her position), she may lose her job.



Was gonna say... She likely wants to keep her job so easier to passively agree.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Isn't The View filmed in New York City? I think McCain owns a house in LA but I don't think they'll be arranging playdates with the kids any time soon.


they're working from home for now and she said recently she lives in DC


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> ITA, but I'm not surprised.  What gives her her credentials?  Basically being born as a McCain.  Not sure she'd have gotten this far without being the daughter of John, so that's not much better than marrying as an accomplishment either.  Plus, her name is also Meghan M, which already makes her annoying to me.



That bugs me about most children of famous people who become successful. Very few of them would have made it on their own without the family name recognition.


----------



## rose60610

So is Harry returning today or staying for TQ's birthday?  It isn't as though her birthday was a total surprise, was it? Isn't it on the same day EVERY year? And Harry couldn't figure it out beforehand? Or is it cover for an excuse to stay longer after the funeral, testing the waters to be sure he wasn't pelted with rotten tomatoes first? The only time he's in the same room with his gonads is when he's with the Heavily Pregnant One.


----------



## bellecate

Love Of My Life said:


> It just says "so much"...leaving your grandmother at such a distressing time..just no words


Not sure that he would have been any comfort to his grandmother right now considering all the hurtful and idiotic stuff he has pulled.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> That bugs me about most children of famous people who become successful. Very few of them would have made it on their own without the family name recognition.


LOL I just posted something similar in the PP thread.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once the tape is leaked, the noise stops and MM continues to look like a liar.  Notice how quiet it became when employees filed their claims? When the other lies were exposed?  Yes, MM knew she had gone too far. OW knew it, too. GK needs to wake up.



It didn't really become quiet...............the noise was just deflected to another point. 
She will never concede and she will NEVER be quiet. She has reclaimed her stifled voice, dontcha know


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Was gonna say... She likely wants to keep her job so easier to passively agree.


sorry but she called her our American Princess....that seems to go beyond wanting to keep her job - more like a fangirl IMO


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> That bugs me about most children of famous people who become successful. Very few of them would have made it on their own without the family name recognition.



Generation loss


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I think that M McCain is just publicizing that she is not racist. I respect people when they have courage to state their educated opinions, independently if they are conservative or liberals, and it's not the case of MMcC. Though, if she cares to educate herself (and change her position), she may lose her job.


 
I'm not a huge fan of M McCain, but anyone on The View, as I understand, who doesn't worship Markle and JCMH is toast. So McCain isn't going to risk a Sharon Osborne experience and will lie to keep her cushy job. Though that's what's missing in the world today. If you have the guts to state you don't like XYZ you're going to get drawn and quartered by a hyperventilating frenzied mob who will make life hell for you.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> I'm not a huge fan of M McCain, but anyone on The View, as I understand, who doesn't worship Markle and JCMH is toast. So McCain isn't going to risk a Sharon Osborne experience and will lie to keep her cushy job. Though that's what's missing in the world today. If you have the guts to state you don't like XYZ you're going to get drawn and quartered by a hyperventilating frenzied mob who will make life hell for you.



Or they'll just whine on for 8 pages about how mean you are


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> sorry but she called her our American Princess....that seems to go beyond wanting to keep her job - more like a fangirl IMO



She may have the simplistic view of most Americans who don't know or care anything about British royalty. She thinks marrying a prince automatically means you become a princess.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Or, Elizabeth so they can call her lilibet.  Elizabeth Diana or Diana Elizabeth?  These equate to Money in future narratives.



Sticking my neck out her  : 

Diana Lillibet Phillipa Mountbatten-Windsor 

Di-Li-Phi for short


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> Sticking my neck out her  :
> 
> Diana Lillibet Phillipa Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> Di-Li-Phi for short


LOVE it papertiger!


----------



## Handbag1234

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, we were right. Gotta have witnesses now.
> 
> _But, in an unprecedented development that lays bare the depth of their rift, Charles and William preferred to meet with Harry together so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles heads to his Welsh bolthole to privately grieve
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Prince Charles has left for his cottage in Wales to privately grieve the loss of his father - following an extraordinary summit with Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I would have recorded the conversation and had a lawyer present to be safe. JCMH has burnt his bridges. His own father and brother don’t trust him. So much for honouring his mother’s legacy. Diana would be very sad that it’s come to this. Harry really is the ‘spare’ now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> That bugs me about most children of famous people who become successful. Very few of them would have made it on their own without the family name recognition.



Right. Journalists, actors, and models come to mind when having kids born with instant connections. Family businesses are a little different in the sense that if the next generation can keep a business going and growing they must have a little skill, but the hard groundwork and major risks were taken by the founders. It frosts me when business owners who become successful, who worked their *sses off and took on tons of risk are skewered by whiny jealous jerks. The same jealous jerks who are too gutless to take on risk and refuse to work beyond 9 to 5 M-F. Plenty of businesses fail despite hard work, but the sippy cup whiner crowd doesn't want to hear it.


----------



## Sharont2305

William and Catherine got there first remember.
Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Please help me get unstuck in my mind about the note M left for Prince Philip with her floral arrangement. Where does the note go? Do all the notes from floral/family members go to the Queen to read later?  Doubtful but wouldn't it be grand to hear a little about what M wrote?   I know from my own parents services I read and kept the notes/cards. TIA


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> William and Catherine got there first remember.
> Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.



Thank goodness for that. It doesn't mean H&M won't use those names too but at least it might make them pause before they do it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, we were right. Gotta have witnesses now.
> 
> _But, in an unprecedented development that lays bare the depth of their rift, Charles and William preferred to meet with Harry together so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles heads to his Welsh bolthole to privately grieve
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Prince Charles has left for his cottage in Wales to privately grieve the loss of his father - following an extraordinary summit with Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


JCMH can't be trusted. The first thing that came to my mind when Will removed his mask (after the funeral) was that he wanted to allow lip reading... The BRF doesn't want to give pregnant MM more opportunities for her to twist their words. 

Great that '_The Queen has made it clear to senior advisers that she is united with Charles and William, and was disappointed with aspects of Harry and Meghan's interview_.'


----------



## poopsie

Sharont2305 said:


> William and Catherine got there first remember.
> Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.



Pfffftttttt

remember SATC The Baby Shower episode? Shayla?
"It's my secret baby name that I made up when i was 11 years old for my daughter when I had her"

I can soooooo see that happening here


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> Please help me get unstuck in my mind about the note M left for Prince Philip with her floral arrangement. Where does the note go? *Do all the notes from floral/family members go to the Queen to read later?  Doubtful but wouldn't it be grand to hear a little about what M wrote?*   I know from my own parents services I read and kept the notes/cards. TIA


No need to wait for QE or the courtiers, Omid or King will likely release that info on behalf of pregnant MM. They will provide all the details about MM's generosity...


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> *William and Catherine got there first remember.*
> Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.


MM must be pi$$ed!!!!    
They honored Charles, QE AND Diana.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Right. Journalists, actors, and models come to mind when having kids born with instant connections. Family businesses are a little different in the sense that if the next generation can keep a business going and growing they must have a little skill, but the hard groundwork and major risks were taken by the founders. It frosts me when business owners who become successful, who worked their *sses off and took on tons of risk are skewered by whiny jealous jerks. The same jealous jerks who are too gutless to take on risk and refuse to work beyond 9 to 5 M-F. Plenty of businesses fail despite hard work, but the sippy cup whiner crowd doesn't want to hear it.



It used to be just the trust fund set that had that attitude. Now we have entire entitlement generations thanks to the participation trophy crowd.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lulilu said:


> I don't think baby 2 will get nearly the press that Archie got.  They were so obnoxious in refusing photos and the public can only get so excited to be denied and disappointed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This whole prayer circle things remind me of the various times we've seen performing artists like Madonna and others, who get the crew and performers together for a prayer before the show.  Seems very fake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really can't abide the excuse that he needs to get home because his wife is pregnant.  She is due in early summer?  How many weeks/months is that?  Is she the only woman in the world who has been pregnant while her DH/partner has been on business trips?  I thought she is supposed to be a modern woman?  Life goes on.  You are pregnant.  Big deal.  He can get home if (not likely) you go into labor at this point.  She won't have that baby any time soon, unless she is planning a performance.


Re MM and Madonna’s prayer circle - I also find it a bit presumptuous. If I was at something with a religious affiliation like a charity fundraiser at a church I wouldn’t object  but I think an individual asking you to do it in a secular space like at work is quite invasive and rude.

yeah the pregnancy thing is clearly an excuse. Keep him on a nice short leash. No independent thinking allowed.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> MM must be pi$$ed!!!!
> They honored Charles, QE AND Diana.


They honoured everybody, lol
Charlotte is Pippas middle name, and Elizabeth is also Catherine and her mother Carole's middle name.


----------



## CeeJay

I just can't seem to keep up with this thread anymore, but had to put this out there .. on Quora (another favorite place to read about H&M - and they can be even worse than us - HA)!!! .. Anyhow, seems that some 'words' have been going out in regards to the Netflix "arrangement" with H&M .. that Netflix is NOT happy with what they have come up with and that it "appears" that it's ALL ABOUT Meghan .. well, well, well .. quelle surprise - NOT!! 
https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-th...ith-and-are-thinking-of-ending-their-contract


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> I just can't seem to keep up with this thread anymore, but had to put this out there .. on Quora (another favorite place to read about H&M - and they can be even worse than us - HA)!!! .. Anyhow, seems that some 'words' have been going out in regards to the Netflix "arrangement" with H&M .. that Netflix is NOT happy with what they have come up with and that it "appears" that it's ALL ABOUT Meghan .. well, well, well .. quelle surprise - NOT!!
> https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-th...ith-and-are-thinking-of-ending-their-contract


At what point will Netflix be accused of being racist?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> At what point will Netflix be accused of being racist?


BRAVO!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I just can't seem to keep up with this thread anymore, but had to put this out there .. on Quora (another favorite place to read about H&M - and they can be even worse than us - HA)!!! .. Anyhow, seems that some 'words' have been going out in regards to the Netflix "arrangement" with H&M .. that Netflix is NOT happy with what they have come up with and that it "appears" that it's ALL ABOUT Meghan .. well, well, well .. quelle surprise - NOT!!
> https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-th...ith-and-are-thinking-of-ending-their-contract



What a surprise. I feel for poor duped Netflix. Not really.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> Does H have to quarantine again once he arrives back in the US before residing with his heavily pregnant wife?


Hopefully in some sort of cult- deprogramming facility for at least a year.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Was gonna say... She likely wants to keep her job so easier to passively agree.


It is sad that people are afraid to state their opinions. I expected more from M McCain, disappointing. I also expected more from Whoopi, she is smart, down to earth... She can't believe in all the BS coming from Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I just can't seem to keep up with this thread anymore, but had to put this out there .. on Quora (another favorite place to read about H&M - and they can be even worse than us - HA)!!! .. Anyhow, seems that some 'words' have been going out in regards to the Netflix "arrangement" with H&M .. that Netflix is NOT happy with what they have come up with and that it "appears" that it's ALL ABOUT Meghan .. well, well, well .. quelle surprise - NOT!!
> https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-th...ith-and-are-thinking-of-ending-their-contract



Imagine that. Two people who have absolutely zero experience and they cannot come up with a good idea for a TV show. Why it's almost as though being famous isn't enough to guarantee success. This is a shocker! 

I bet their new show turns out about as well as Homer's car design.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> At what point will Netflix be accused of being racist?



No, they won’t be. The O’s have a multi-year deal.
From 2018:








						Obamas Sign Multiyear Contract with Netflix
					

The high-profile deal may help the industry leader stand out against a growing list of rivals.




					www.investopedia.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how much she knows but I don't think it's a case of her not wanting to argue.  she pretty much said "we all love Meghan"
> I don't dislike McCain but she does get quite a bit of flack on social media for saying things that are inaccurate


Yes if she really said ‘we all love Meghan’ she should definitely get roasted for her flagrant inaccuracy   

perhaps someone should link her to this chamber of horrors.

I don’t really know her but it sounds
like she owes a lot to nepotism so perhaps we shouldn’t expect great intellect and political nuance. Much like with certain royals actually.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Imagine that. Two people who have absolutely zero experience and they cannot come up with a good idea for a TV show. Why it's almost as though being famous isn't enough to guarantee success. This is a shocker!
> 
> I bet their new show turns out about as well as Homer's car design.
> 
> View attachment 5060016
> View attachment 5060017


Wishful thinking! Pregnant MM and DH would be lucky if their show would turn as good as Homer's car design.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> William and Catherine got there first remember.
> Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.


Thank you for posting this, it made my day! Charlotte, because of the delightful personality she exhibits even at an early age,  is the one who deserves the honor of those two names.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> ITA, but I'm not surprised.  What gives her her credentials?  Basically being born as a McCain.  Not sure she'd have gotten this far without being the daughter of John, so that's not much better than marrying as an accomplishment either.  Plus, her name is also Meghan M, which already makes her annoying to me.


Meghan with a h really irrationally irritates me in general. It’s much more commonly spelt without in UK. Now that I am in the MM mire I will always think of the H version as the pretentious spelling.

Yeah it does sound like nepotism is central to her success. ( As it was for Markle) I believe she’s also married a rich media conservative so that probably helps her along too. (like M Markle)
I only heard about M McCain when there was a rupauls drag race controversy about some drag queens from the show  calling her ‘an honorary rugirl’ on the show and the fans were fuming!


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> I just can't seem to keep up with this thread anymore, but had to put this out there .. on Quora (another favorite place to read about H&M - and *they can be even worse than us* - HA)!!! .. Anyhow, seems that some 'words' have been going out in regards to the Netflix "arrangement" with H&M .. that Netflix is NOT happy with what they have come up with and that it "appears" that it's ALL ABOUT Meghan .. well, well, well .. quelle surprise - NOT!!
> https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-th...ith-and-are-thinking-of-ending-their-contract



I'm confused. We're not "bad", simply observant! We report, YOU decide. It's the M&H stans who are misguided, misinformed, and/or willingly blind. I think we're rather kind. I've seen Quora, it can be a little rough, but still nothing like what the Media in general have done with certain other people. We do a service here, educating M&H stans on the REAL circumstances of the Dim Duo's Delirious Demands. This nauseating couple's only purpose is to serve as a bad example. We're only trying to help.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> Thank you for posting this, it made my day! Charlotte, because of the delightful personality she exhibits even at an early age,  is the one who deserves the honor of those two names.



And, if I understand my line of succession correctly, it is Charlotte that is actually the "spare" now, right?  So, it's Charles, then William, then George, then Charlotte as the "spare" for George.  She's totally adorable.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Handbag1234 said:


> I would have recorded the conversation and had a lawyer present to be safe. JCMH has burnt his bridges. His own father and brother don’t trust him. So much for honouring his mother’s legacy. Diana would be very sad that it’s come to this.* Harry really is the ‘spare’ now.*


Not even close anymore! With three princes (Charles, William and George) in direct line now, Harry is totally redundant. And, there are enough aunts, uncles, nieces and nephews to form a protective guard around all the heirs.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Allisonfaye said:


> I didn't see that Kate said ANYTHING. Did I miss something?


My point was even MM’s version of events as given in the interview doesn’t reflect well on her (MM.)


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> sorry but she called her our American Princess....that seems to go beyond wanting to keep her job - more like a fangirl IMO



Or looking for a fame boost. Gross either way,


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry ‘won’t last,’ claims royal expert
					

Royal expert and author Lady Colin Campbell speaks to Cindy Adams about her thoughts in regard to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s future.




					pagesix.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't watched it yet, just leaving this here:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> That bugs me about most children of famous people who become successful. Very few of them would have made it on their own without the family name recognition.


OT - occasionally you get someone who is big enough or talented enough that you don’t really think about it anymore like I’d say Jamie Lee Curtis and Liza are but there’s an awful lot of incompetence. I find the worse is sometimes behind the camera in production and writing like the dreaded Alex Kurtzman. Of course, show ponies like them will never know the hard graft Meghan went through paying her college and supporting her acting career and securing Hollywood contacts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cindy is on fire 
@Chanbal  thanks so much 

The British do great funerals. Prince Philip’s farewellagain demonstrated the majesty of Her Majesty.

*One comment to me: “While invoking Jesus in his simple robe, the prelates flashed more gold braid and embroidery than Gucci couture.”*

Lady Colin Campbell writes about royalty. Books on Diana, and last year — in the UK and USA — her searing “Meghan and Harry: The Real Story” chopped Me-Me-Meghan. Sunday she told me from London: “She and Harry won’t last. Once she became the royal Duchess of Sussex, it was off with everyone’s head.

“Disconnected from reality, she lost it. She froths at the mouth when my name is mentioned. But nothing she can do because I made no legal mistakes. With all I stated about her — her background, how she learned about him — I am legally OK.

*“Since fallout from the Oprah piece, her name’s mud throughout the Commonwealth, even in the islands. This wrong-footed woman stated untruths. She couldn’t keep her mouth shut. *Knowing some statements could not be massaged into reality, Harry went along. Not pleased, he knew they were not true. They were not already married three days before the big wedding. There’s a difference between fact and fiction. He knows the difference in a real ceremony. As didthe Archbishop of Canterbury.”

Suppose he ever wishes to come back officially?

*“No matter how disagreeable, the Crown handles situations. They’ll wait until the situation crystallizes. For now dignity and politesse rule the situation. She’s picked America and a communal property state and has two children. She’s got him. Difficult for him to get out. He’s entrapped.

“Returning, London would act polite. Be received politely. Treated with respect. The Establishment, however, will treat him as a pariah.”*


*He’s entrapped.*
just when he thought he was out, trapped again!  Hahahahaha


----------



## Chloe302225

purseinsanity said:


> MM must be pi$$ed!!!!
> They honored Charles, QE AND Diana.



These names also do double duty as they also honour Kate's family. Charlotte is her sister Pippa' s  middle name and both Kate and her mother Carole have the middle name Elisabeth.

I saw someone mention Phillipa as way to honour Prince Phillip but I will take that one out of the running too because Pippa' s full first name is actually Phillipa. Pippa is just a nickname.


----------



## catlover46

Has anyone read Lady Campbell’s book on them and is it any good? It has a low rating on goodreads which I’m sure is due to their stans.


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> *"Markle had wanted desperately to join her husband and made every effort to get the trip signed off, sources told us."*









csshopper said:


> A few weeks ago (?) we speculated about his eyebrows being transplants and other possibilities. As I look at them again *I'm wondering if he shaved his forehead and these are stick ons, like a toupee that he applies every morning?*  I have trouble looking at him because my first thought is always "caterpillars."












csshopper said:


> What Meghan hasn't figured out is "having a voice" does not automatically mean you have an audience wanting to hear it.










lalame said:


> So I'm finally getting around to watching coverage of the funeral and I caught this clip, where Gayle is covering it with ACTUAL experts. Whose smart decision was it for her to cover this... she clearly knows nothing about the people involved, the protocol, and serves more questions than answers... but still TRIES to sound like an authority just because of her new "friends." Take this family's name out of your damn mouth!!  I would post this in the PP thread but I'm trying not to sully that one with snark.
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, and the gall. In one moment during that clip the British commentator says it's quite sad about people not being able to wear military garb. Gayle says, "IS it sad?" and the other woman has to school her. "Well, yes, because ..."





Gayle is utterly insufferable. The mere sight of her name makes me roll my eyes into another dimension.




Genie27 said:


> In terms of naming wee sprog #2, my money is now on Betty.





Chanbal said:


> You are all forgetting Doria, why not?


As a double grandmother tribute, I'm going with the name Diadora 
As a tribute to QEII i'm going with Eliza.

Although, I don't think MM would want to name her child in any way after anyone else because no one is worthy enough, she's a narc with an out-of-control ego. It's much more her/their style to choose a name that has no connection to the RF and is in someway a tribute to themselves, H&M.


----------



## zinacef

papertiger said:


> Sticking my neck out her  :
> 
> Diana Lillibet Phillipa Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> Di-Li-Phi for short


sounds like a promising name but what about Doria? I’m sure she will use her mom’s name so she will embody the full wokefulnes. “See, my mom is not even royalty but she’s the first POC to have major royal grandchildren” fits the agenda, promotes the brand.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Not even close anymore! With three princes (Charles, William and George) in direct line now, Harry is totally *redundant.* And, there are enough aunts, uncles, nieces and nephews to form a protective guard around all the heirs.


Yep!  I'd say *pointless, useless, and unnecessary   *


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5060072
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry ‘won’t last,’ claims royal expert
> 
> 
> Royal expert and author Lady Colin Campbell speaks to Cindy Adams about her thoughts in regard to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I swear, these people read tPF.  We should start our own rag, LOL!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't watched it yet, just leaving this here:



It sounds like the jealousy towards Kate started at the time of Kate's wedding. He shows some of MM's posts from that time and pictures from Kate's wedding reception and MM's wedding reception (Trevor E.) a few months later.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, these people read tPF.  We should start our own rag, LOL!


They definitely read tPF as well as other sites.  
Cindy really doesn't like the Harkles especially Meghan.  The woman has been around the block many times and has no fear stating her mind.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It sounds like the jealousy towards Kate started at the time of Kate's wedding. He shows some of MM's posts from that time and pictures from Kate's wedding reception and MM's wedding reception (Trevor E.) a few months later.
> View attachment 5060151


She hates Kate because she got what MM really wanted...Will.  Meghan had to settle for the dimwit spare, who's not even the spare any longer.


----------



## gracekelly

I don't see them picking a traditional name after their choice of Archie.  It will be something that pairs with Archie.  Since Archie sounds like the name of a guy who owns a pub, a barmaids name would be perfect.  Molly?  Maisie?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> She hates Kate because she got what MM really wanted...Will.  Meghan had to settle for the dimwit spare, who's not even the spare any longer.


Here is the thing about that.  When in her right mind could Meghan Markle ever have  thought that she would get the direct heir to the throne of England?  Is that a person who dwells in a fantasy life?  It was amazing enough that she managed to land a Prince.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I don't see them picking a traditional name after their choice of Archie.  It will be something that pairs with Archie.  Since Archie sounds like the name of a guy who owns a pub, a barmaids name would be perfect.  Molly?  Maisie?



Please, could it be Veronica?
pleasepleaseplease


----------



## Chanbal

catlover46 said:


> Has anyone read Lady Campbell’s book on them and is it any good? It has a low rating on goodreads which I’m sure is due to their stans.


I found the ebook on ebay for a couple of dollars when it came out  (posted the link here), so I had a chance to read parts of it. I believe Lady C tried to be fair and not too harsh towards MM... It's an interesting book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Here is the thing about that.  When in her right mind could Meghan Markle ever have  thought that she would get the direct heir to the throne of England?  Is that a person who dwells in a fantasy life?  It was amazing enough that she managed to land a Prince.


Will wouldn't be fit to be king, if he had chosen a person with MM's character to be his wife.


----------



## xincinsin

poopsie said:


> She could always choose to name the child eponymously


Prophetically too in that case - when you recall the engraving on the watch.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm being ignored here, nobody likes my suggestion: Doria Diana, DeeDee!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> It sounds like the jealousy towards Kate started at the time of Kate's wedding. He shows some of MM's posts from that time and pictures from Kate's wedding reception and MM's wedding reception (Trevor E.) a few months later.
> View attachment 5060151



Aaaaaannnnnnnnnndddddddddddddddd once again someone else wore it BETTER


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I'm being ignored here, nobody likes my suggestion: Doria Diana, DeeDee!


Diadora, Dorianna, Dorian?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Will wouldn't be fit to be king, if he had chosen a person with MM's character to be his wife.


Ain't that the truth.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Here is the thing about that.  When in her right mind could Meghan Markle ever have  thought that she would get the direct heir to the throne of England?  Is that a person who dwells in a fantasy life?  It was amazing enough that she managed to land a Prince.


I don't think Meghan is of right mind at all, therefore she has grandiose delusions of splendour.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Diadora, Dorianna, Dorian?


I hope not Dorian Gray, we already have MM!


----------



## Chanbal

Page six is not very favorable to the pregnant woman today!  

_"*One meaningful gesture Koenig said may have fallen flat*, however, stems from the wreath Meghan Markle sent for the ceremony, along with a handwritten card.

*The Duchess of Sussex, who’s expecting a baby girl, stayed home partly because she “did not want to be the center of attention” *on the somber occasion, according to reports.

*Instead, she sent along a wreath of locally sourced and highly symbolic flowers* — including blooms representing Prince Philip’s Greek heritage, birth month and more — *which were outlined in a press release, a move Keonig called “unusual.”*

“The royal family doesn’t usually say, ‘Well, this [wreath’s] from Charles, this one’s from Andrew, this one’s from Beatrice,” she told us. “I think it was a little bit drawing attention back to them rather than just not saying anything at all … *The original statement that her doctor advised her not to go, I think, was the best way to go*.”

Koenig added that “*the only wreath of interest was the one placed on the casket that was from Queen Elizabeth; tucked inside was a personal note from her*._

”_








						Royal historian on the Harry and Meghan gesture that may have fallen flat
					

Royal historian Marlene Koenig discusses all the symbolism seen at Prince Philip’s funeral on Saturday, from Kate Middleton’s jewelry to Meghan Markle’s wreath.




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Page six is not very favorable to the pregnant woman today!
> 
> _"*One meaningful gesture Koenig said may have fallen flat*, however, stems from the wreath Meghan Markle sent for the ceremony, along with a handwritten card.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex, who’s expecting a baby girl, stayed home partly because she “did not want to be the center of attention” *on the somber occasion, according to reports.
> 
> *Instead, she sent along a wreath of locally sourced and highly symbolic flowers* — including blooms representing Prince Philip’s Greek heritage, birth month and more — *which were outlined in a press release, a move Keonig called “unusual.”*
> 
> “The royal family doesn’t usually say, ‘Well, this [wreath’s] from Charles, this one’s from Andrew, this one’s from Beatrice,” she told us. “I think it was a little bit drawing attention back to them rather than just not saying anything at all … *The original statement that her doctor advised her not to go, I think, was the best way to go*.”
> 
> Koenig added that “*the only wreath of interest was the one placed on the casket that was from Queen Elizabeth; tucked inside was a personal note from her*._
> 
> ”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal historian on the Harry and Meghan gesture that may have fallen flat
> 
> 
> Royal historian Marlene Koenig discusses all the symbolism seen at Prince Philip’s funeral on Saturday, from Kate Middleton’s jewelry to Meghan Markle’s wreath.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I didn't even think about this... was there really a press release? I thought some random person happened to spot the wreath and card and reported it, not the Sussexes themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Page six is not very favorable to the pregnant woman today!
> 
> _"*One meaningful gesture Koenig said may have fallen flat*, however, stems from the wreath Meghan Markle sent for the ceremony, along with a handwritten card.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex, who’s expecting a baby girl, stayed home partly because she “did not want to be the center of attention” *on the somber occasion, according to reports.
> 
> *Instead, she sent along a wreath of locally sourced and highly symbolic flowers* — including blooms representing Prince Philip’s Greek heritage, birth month and more — *which were outlined in a press release, a move Keonig called “unusual.”*
> 
> “The royal family doesn’t usually say, ‘Well, this [wreath’s] from Charles, this one’s from Andrew, this one’s from Beatrice,” she told us. “I think it was a little bit drawing attention back to them rather than just not saying anything at all … *The original statement that her doctor advised her not to go, I think, was the best way to go*.”
> 
> Koenig added that “*the only wreath of interest was the one placed on the casket that was from Queen Elizabeth; tucked inside was a personal note from her*._
> 
> ”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal historian on the Harry and Meghan gesture that may have fallen flat
> 
> 
> Royal historian Marlene Koenig discusses all the symbolism seen at Prince Philip’s funeral on Saturday, from Kate Middleton’s jewelry to Meghan Markle’s wreath.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


This information appeared on various sites and all were very negative towards her. It was said that the release about the wreath info was transparently PR in every way.  For the Sussex and the florist.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I hope not Dorian Gray, we already have MM!


I think she will give the girl a boyish first name because she thinks it is cool and woke.  I recall that fad back in the 80's where girls were being named Tyler, Madison etc.  She will offset it with a female middle name.  Dorian Meghanita Mounbatten-Windsor.


----------



## Chanbal

Only in writing! 

_Prince Harry wrote his father a 'deeply personal' letter in which he promised to 'respect the institution' before he flew back to the UK for the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral. 

The Duke of Sussex, 36, penned the note to Prince Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' in the wake of his explosive Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle last month.

His decision to reach out to his father also came after he accused Prince Charles of refusing to take his calls.

However the Prince of Wales still remains 'very hurt' by Harry and Meghan's decision to take part in the controversial interview, which was aired while Prince Philip was in hospital, and the pair have not yet mended their fractured relationship.  

*In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told **The Mirror.*

*The Duke of Sussex, who decided to reach out to his father as he prepared to reunite with his family for the first time after stepping back as a senior royal, was 'forced to write letters' after a 'complete communication breakdown' with Prince Charles, sources claim.

A royal source told The Mirror: 'He wrote a deeply personal note to his dad to try and set things straight but tensions are still running high and things haven't exactly ironed out the way he had hoped.*

'There had been a kind of unspoken agreement between everyone to park whatever has been on each person's mind, and solely concentrate on supporting the Queen ahead of Prince Philip's funeral.  

'The feeling inside the camp was that it wasn't the time nor the place to go over things, especially at such an emotional time for everybody involved.'  

During his interview with Winfrey last month, Prince Harry said he felt 'very let down' by his father Prince Charles, accusing him of refusing to take his calls and then 'cutting him off' financially when he and his wife emigrated. 

Asked about his relationship with Prince Charles, Harry said they were now speaking again, adding: 'There's a lot to work through there, you know? I feel really let down, because he's been through something similar..._









						Prince Harry wrote father a 'deeply personal letter'
					

In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told The Mirror.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Only in writing!
> 
> _Prince Harry wrote his father a 'deeply personal' letter in which he promised to 'respect the institution' before he flew back to the UK for the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, penned the note to Prince Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' in the wake of his explosive Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle last month.
> 
> His decision to reach out to his father also came after he accused Prince Charles of refusing to take his calls.
> 
> However the Prince of Wales still remains 'very hurt' by Harry and Meghan's decision to take part in the controversial interview, which was aired while Prince Philip was in hospital, and the pair have not yet mended their fractured relationship.
> 
> *In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told **The Mirror.*
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex, who decided to reach out to his father as he prepared to reunite with his family for the first time after stepping back as a senior royal, was 'forced to write letters' after a 'complete communication breakdown' with Prince Charles, sources claim.
> 
> A royal source told The Mirror: 'He wrote a deeply personal note to his dad to try and set things straight but tensions are still running high and things haven't exactly ironed out the way he had hoped.*
> 
> 'There had been a kind of unspoken agreement between everyone to park whatever has been on each person's mind, and solely concentrate on supporting the Queen ahead of Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 'The feeling inside the camp was that it wasn't the time nor the place to go over things, especially at such an emotional time for everybody involved.'
> 
> During his interview with Winfrey last month, Prince Harry said he felt 'very let down' by his father Prince Charles, accusing him of refusing to take his calls and then 'cutting him off' financially when he and his wife emigrated.
> 
> Asked about his relationship with Prince Charles, Harry said they were now speaking again, adding: 'There's a lot to work through there, you know? I feel really let down, because he's been through something similar..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wrote father a 'deeply personal letter'
> 
> 
> In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


One of Meg's five friends will be leaking this shortly to People Magazine.  Can't wait. Hope Harry used spell check.  Just sayin'.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This information appeared on various sites and all were very negative towards her. It was said that the release about the wreath info was transparently PR in every way.  For the Sussex and the florist.


It's nice to see it on a US tabloid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Page six is not very favorable to the pregnant woman today!
> 
> _"*One meaningful gesture Koenig said may have fallen flat*, however, stems from the wreath Meghan Markle sent for the ceremony, along with a handwritten card.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex, who’s expecting a baby girl, stayed home partly because she “did not want to be the center of attention” *on the somber occasion, according to reports.
> 
> *Instead, she sent along a wreath of locally sourced and highly symbolic flowers* — including blooms representing Prince Philip’s Greek heritage, birth month and more — *which were outlined in a press release, a move Keonig called “unusual.”*
> 
> “The royal family doesn’t usually say, ‘Well, this [wreath’s] from Charles, this one’s from Andrew, this one’s from Beatrice,” she told us. “I think it was a little bit drawing attention back to them rather than just not saying anything at all … *The original statement that her doctor advised her not to go, I think, was the best way to go*.”
> 
> Koenig added that “*the only wreath of interest was the one placed on the casket that was from Queen Elizabeth; tucked inside was a personal note from her*._
> 
> ”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal historian on the Harry and Meghan gesture that may have fallen flat
> 
> 
> Royal historian Marlene Koenig discusses all the symbolism seen at Prince Philip’s funeral on Saturday, from Kate Middleton’s jewelry to Meghan Markle’s wreath.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Very kind of Koenig to say "_it was *a little bit* drawing attention back to them". _Drop the British understatement and tell it like it is: MM is a glory hound. She could have sent a wreath, even PR'd that she sent a wreath. She DID NOT need to give a cross section of wreath construction and remind the public of every time she used her favourite florist. I'm tempted to check out the florist now to see if there is any impact on her business reputation, positive or negative.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> One of Meg's five friends will be leaking this shortly to People Magazine.  Can't wait. *Hope Harry used spell check.  Just sayin'.*


No worries, he had only to copy the letter.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I didn't even think about this... was there really a press release? I thought some random person happened to spot the wreath and card and reported it, not the Sussexes themselves.


haha, a description of the flowers (and their meanings) was also provided...


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I didn't even think about this... was there really a press release? I thought some random person happened to spot the wreath and card and reported it, not the Sussexes themselves.





Chanbal said:


> haha, a description of the flowers (and their meanings) was also provided...


As well as their entire history of using this florist for their big events.
I checked out the florist and it appears that she is IG-famous. Doesn't look like she needs their help to get an iffy dose of royal patronage. Could be that the Harkles are trying to associate their brand with certain people to give the impression of them granting their own version of royal warrants.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> One of Meg's five friends will be leaking this shortly to People Magazine.  Can't wait. Hope Harry used spell check.  Just sayin'.


Dying to know who leaked the letter to the DAILY MAIL ! 
Surely, not H’s people , they don’t talk to the DM, and M’s lawsuit is still pending final resolution about publication of her private family letter  
and Charles has been busy , so his camp is not likely


----------



## xincinsin

Lounorada said:


> As a double grandmother tribute, I'm going with the name Diadora
> As a tribute to QEII i'm going with Eliza.
> 
> Although, I don't think MM would want to name her child in any way after anyone else because no one is worthy enough, she's a narc with an out-of-control ego. *It's much more her/their style to choose a name that has no connection to the RF and is in someway a tribute to themselves, H&M.*


Makes sense. Something non-traditional like Harriet Ariel? They might go one up on Charlotte and put in more middle names for monetizing purposes. And if some dim bulb hack bleats again that they immortalized PP in the surname, I might have to barf.


----------



## lalame

Was anyone else irked by Harry saying he was let down by his father because "he's been through something similar.. he knows what pain feels like"? Umm, after everything you've been through with mum you're pulling THIS card now... over Megxit? WTF did you go through with Megxit?


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't watched it yet, just leaving this here:



That was so interesting!  Lots of little details that he even marked with red!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Only in writing!
> 
> _*Prince Harry wrote his father a 'deeply personal' letter* in which he promised to 'respect the institution' before he flew back to the UK for the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, penned the note to Prince Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' in the wake of his explosive Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle last month.
> 
> His decision to reach out to his father also came after he accused Prince Charles of refusing to take his calls.
> 
> However the Prince of Wales still remains 'very hurt' by Harry and Meghan's decision to take part in the controversial interview, which was aired while Prince Philip was in hospital, and the pair have not yet mended their fractured relationship.
> 
> *In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told **The Mirror.*
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex, who decided to reach out to his father as he prepared to reunite with his family for the first time after stepping back as a senior royal, was 'forced to write letters' after a 'complete communication breakdown' with Prince Charles, sources claim.
> 
> A royal source told The Mirror: 'He wrote a deeply personal note to his dad to try and set things straight but tensions are still running high and things haven't exactly ironed out the way he had hoped.*
> 
> 'There had been a kind of unspoken agreement between everyone to park whatever has been on each person's mind, and solely concentrate on supporting the Queen ahead of Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 'The feeling inside the camp was that it wasn't the time nor the place to go over things, especially at such an emotional time for everybody involved.'
> 
> During his interview with Winfrey last month, Prince Harry said he felt 'very let down' by his father Prince Charles, accusing him of refusing to take his calls and then 'cutting him off' financially when he and his wife emigrated.
> 
> Asked about his relationship with Prince Charles, Harry said they were now speaking again, adding: 'There's a lot to work through there, you know? I feel really let down, because he's been through something similar..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wrote father a 'deeply personal letter'
> 
> 
> In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Dear Papa,
I'm deeply personally asking you for more money to cover all my deeply personal expenses. Thanks Dad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Only in writing!
> 
> _Prince Harry wrote his father a 'deeply personal' letter in which he promised to 'respect the institution' before he flew back to the UK for the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, penned the note to Prince Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' in the wake of his explosive Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle last month.
> 
> His decision to reach out to his father also came after he accused Prince Charles of refusing to take his calls.
> 
> However the Prince of Wales still remains 'very hurt' by Harry and Meghan's decision to take part in the controversial interview, which was aired while Prince Philip was in hospital, and the pair have not yet mended their fractured relationship.
> 
> *In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told **The Mirror.*
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex, who decided to reach out to his father as he prepared to reunite with his family for the first time after stepping back as a senior royal, was 'forced to write letters' after a 'complete communication breakdown' with Prince Charles, sources claim.
> 
> A royal source told The Mirror: 'He wrote a deeply personal note to his dad to try and set things straight but tensions are still running high and things haven't exactly ironed out the way he had hoped.*
> 
> 'There had been a kind of unspoken agreement between everyone to park whatever has been on each person's mind, and solely concentrate on supporting the Queen ahead of Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 'The feeling inside the camp was that it wasn't the time nor the place to go over things, especially at such an emotional time for everybody involved.'
> 
> During his interview with Winfrey last month, Prince Harry said he felt 'very let down' by his father Prince Charles, accusing him of refusing to take his calls and then 'cutting him off' financially when he and his wife emigrated.
> 
> Asked about his relationship with Prince Charles, Harry said they were now speaking again, adding: 'There's a lot to work through there, you know? I feel really let down, because he's been through something similar..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wrote father a 'deeply personal letter'
> 
> 
> In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Who told The Mirror about this letter? Hmmmm.  He wants to respect Philip, etc???  So he disrupts the order of entering the chapel???  Rrrright. The guy cannot be trusted.  Yeah, he is so sorry Philip’s inheritance did not go straight to him and that he has now been outed as *not* the favorite grandchild.

Has he left yet?









						Harry's 'deeply personal' note to 'very hurt' Charles before Philip's funeral'
					

EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry opened his heart to dad Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' and promised to 'respect the institution', the Mirror can reveal




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_The source said: “Harry didn’t expect everything to be completely back to normal but his feeling after seeing his family was there is a lot of ground to make up.
“Whether that is harder or easier to do on the other side of the world remains to be seen.
“There is a lot of distrust in the camp and everything is still very, very raw.”

One palace insider said Charles was hoping to see his son again after Philip's funeral but *Harry told him he wasn’t sticking around*.

Meghan, 39, is expecting their second child, a girl, within weeks and was advised not to travel to the UK for the funeral.

Meanwhile, Charles and William are said to be “completely focussed” on supporting the Queen as she continues to grieve for her husband of 73 years.
_


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Very kind of Koenig to say "_it was *a little bit* drawing attention back to them". _Drop the British understatement and tell it like it is: MM is a glory hound. She could have sent a wreath, even PR'd that she sent a wreath. She DID NOT need to give a cross section of wreath construction and remind the public of every time she used her favourite florist. I'm tempted to check out the florist now to see if there is any impact on her business reputation, positive or negative.





Chanbal said:


> haha, a description of the flowers (and their meanings) was also provided...



This was purely transactional IMO.  Meghan didn't pay a dime.  This is her usual MO.  Trade goods for publicity.  The florist may be well known, but making flowers for a royal to be sent to a royal is almost as good as a royal warrant.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who told The Mirror about this letter? Hmmmm.  He wants to respect Philip, etc???  So he disrupts the order of entering the chapel???  Rrrright. The guy cannot be trusted.  Yeah, he is so sorry Philip’s inheritance did not go straight to him and that he has now been outed as *not* the favorite grandchild.
> 
> Has he left yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's 'deeply personal' note to 'very hurt' Charles before Philip's funeral'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry opened his heart to dad Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' and promised to 'respect the institution', the Mirror can reveal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The source said: “Harry didn’t expect everything to be completely back to normal but his feeling after seeing his family was there is a lot of ground to make up.
> “Whether that is harder or easier to do on the other side of the world remains to be seen.
> “There is a lot of distrust in the camp and everything is still very, very raw.”
> 
> One palace insider said Charles was hoping to see his son again after Philip's funeral but *Harry told him he wasn’t sticking around*.
> 
> Meghan, 39, is expecting their second child, a girl, within weeks and was advised not to travel to the UK for the funeral.
> 
> Meanwhile, Charles and William are said to be “completely focussed” on supporting the Queen as she continues to grieve for her husband of 73 years.
> _


This sounds like Sussex PR to me.  Charles got out of town as fast as possible to his bolt hole.  He didn't want to deal with the aggravation known as Harry.  I think The Queen felt the same way and certainly the other family members weren't inviting him for tea.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> “There is a lot of distrust in the camp and everything is still very, very raw.”



Erm, that is to be expected if everything is blabbed to the press by “friends”. So disgusted by JCMH.


----------



## catlover46

Did he really think they were going to automatically forgive him when he went back there? He’s so tone deaf.

also if you want some laughs go read the website Celebitchy. That place has put ginge and cringe on a pedestal( they are full on stans) and have shaded the Queen,Charles,and William. They save their biggest shade for Kate though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> This sounds like Sussex PR to me.  Charles got out of town as fast as possible to his bolt hole.  He didn't want to deal with the aggravation known as Harry.  I think The Queen felt the same way and certainly the other family members weren't inviting him for tea.



Im sure Harry wrote it on carbon so we’ll get to see it when it leaks in “Embracing Freedom” by Omid..


----------



## Chanbal

Why to honor the head a family they accused of oppressors and racists?  


_A source close to the Duchess of Sussex previously told E! News that Meghan would have attended the funeral if she were not heavily pregnant.

The source added: “Meghan wishes she could have flown to the UK to support her husband but has been advised not to due to her pregnancy.

“She would have put all the family tension aside to be there with Harry.

“*Harry wants to make sure Meghan and the baby are healthy and not involved in stressful situations*.”_









						Meghan and Harry fans predict couple will name second baby Lily
					

ROYAL fans have predicted that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will name their second child Lily in a heartwarming tribute to Queen Elizabeth II.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## djfmn

gracekelly said:


> Diadora, Dorianna, Dorian?


Diadora is a great tennis, biking, rugby shoe company which is what they are known for. They also make sports and leisure clothes. It is an Italian company that was started in 1948 or so in Veneto Italy. Most people who follow sports will know the Diadora brand!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dido?  Dodi?  
Sigh, so many options.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Dido?  Dodi?
> Sigh, so many options.


Since MM and Prince Philip had such a "special bond" and MM "adored him", she could use also Philippine or Philippa.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who told The Mirror about this letter? Hmmmm.  He wants to respect Philip, etc???  So he disrupts the order of entering the chapel???  Rrrright. The guy cannot be trusted.  Yeah, he is so sorry Philip’s inheritance did not go straight to him and that he has now been outed as *not* the favorite grandchild.
> 
> Has he left yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's 'deeply personal' note to 'very hurt' Charles before Philip's funeral'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry opened his heart to dad Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' and promised to 'respect the institution', the Mirror can reveal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The source said: “Harry didn’t expect everything to be completely back to normal but his feeling after seeing his family was there is a lot of ground to make up.
> “Whether that is harder or easier to do on the other side of the world remains to be seen.
> “There is a lot of distrust in the camp and everything is still very, very raw.”
> 
> One palace insider said Charles was hoping to see his son again after Philip's funeral but *Harry told him he wasn’t sticking around*.
> 
> Meghan, 39, is expecting their second child, a girl, within weeks and was advised not to travel to the UK for the funeral.
> 
> Meanwhile, Charles and William are said to be “completely focussed” on supporting the Queen as she continues to grieve for her husband of 73 years.
> _


*Meghan, 39, is expecting their second child, a girl, within weeks and was advised not to travel to the UK for the funeral.*
So now she’s due within weeks?  She can’t even keep the month the child will be born straight.


----------



## youngster

catlover46 said:


> *Did he really think they were going to automatically forgive him when he went back there?* He’s so tone deaf.
> 
> also if you want some laughs go read the website Celebitchy. That place has put ginge and cringe on a pedestal( they are full on stans) and have shaded the Queen,Charles,and William. They save their biggest shade for Kate though.



I know, right?  How dim is he? I've never been a huge fan of Charles but the man is not a racist.  So many things he and MM said or implied were completely opposite to what Charles' believes and must have been deeply painful to him.  So, it sure seems like the two of them don't really have a firm grip on reality, other than the reality of the almighty dollar.  Trash your family on TV, cause grief to your dying grandfather, then expect to be welcomed back warmly?  One of the articles linked previously said that Harry and MM both had "_an inability to understand how things worked_."  So, either they are both truly stupid or they need serious help for cognitive dysfunction.  On the bright side, it must be so much nicer for everyone at the Palace now that they're gone.


----------



## rose60610

So Harry has to write a letter because NOBODY in the BRF wants to talk to him? That's rather telling. But of course you can't monetize a phone call or a conversation unless you record it.....  If Harry didn't dictate the letter exactly how Meghan said to, he's in trouble!  I'm sure it had some great phrases to use as blurbs for the Netflix promo.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> *Meghan, 39, is expecting their second child, a girl, within weeks and was advised not to travel to the UK for the funeral.*
> So now she’s due within weeks?  She can’t even keep the month the child will be born straight.


A news release informed that she will be on maternity leave next month. Omid didn't clarify yet if the maternity leave is from Netflix, Spotify...


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Dying to know who leaked the letter to the DAILY MAIL !
> Surely, not H’s people , they don’t talk to the DM, and M’s lawsuit is still pending final resolution about publication of her private family letter
> and Charles has been busy , so his camp is not likely



I doubt there exists a letter. It sounds like a fabricated tale from H&M’s PR staff to make it appear like Harry is reaching out and wanting to make peace. You know, bullsh*t so their stans keep believing Harry and Meghan are really trying when the rest of the family isn’t.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I know, right?  How dim is he? I've never been a huge fan of Charles but the man is not a racist.  So many things he and MM said or implied were completely opposite to what Charles' believes and must have been deeply painful to him.  So, it sure seems like the two of them don't really have a firm grip on reality, other than the reality of the almighty dollar.  Trash your family on TV, cause grief to your dying grandfather, then expect to be welcomed back warmly?  One of the articles linked previously said that Harry and MM both had "_an inability to understand how things worked_."  So, either they are both truly stupid or they need serious help for cognitive dysfunction.  On the bright side, it must be so much nicer for everyone at the Palace now that they're gone.


I don't believe MM was a victim of racism or didn't have access to mental health care within the BRF. Charles may have his limitations, but he seems to be a decent person.


----------



## xincinsin

djfmn said:


> Diadora is a great tennis, biking, rugby shoe company which is what they are known for. They also make sports and leisure clothes. It is an Italian company that was started in 1948 or so in Veneto Italy. Most people who follow sports will know the Diadora brand!!


I notice a distinct resemblance to a ball...
Well, if she does go for Diadora, at least she can't trademark it on clothing, stationery, photographs, educational and charitable endeavors, emotional support groups, newspaper and magazine: the range of items and activities for which they tried to trademark Sussex Royal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Read somewhere that she had asked to go to a spa so she could “rest and relax“. The palace checked and found out that in order to get free publicity, the spa was paying her.  They told her it was against policy to monetize the BRF in this way. Now, she is making these awful claims that the palace would not help her. This story makes sense, has the sound of truth. Her story sounds implausible. I believe the palace on this one.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I doubt there exists a letter. It sounds like a fabricated tale from H&M’s PR staff to make it appear like Harry is reaching out and wanting to make peace. You know, bullsh*t so their stans keep believing Harry and Meghan are really trying when the rest of the family isn’t.


According to DM, the letter outlined Ginger's reasons for leaving the BRF. I believe such letter might be real, MM&H are trying to collect evidence to support their claims. After Oprah's interview, I read somewhere that MM wrote to the Palace demanding them to confirm that Kate made her cry...


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> According to DM, the letter outlined Ginger's reasons for leaving the BRF. I believe such letter might be real, MM&H are trying to collect evidence to support their claims. After Oprah's interview, I read somewhere that MM wrote to the Palace demanding them to confirm that Kate made her cry...



What's the point...   they said plenty during the O interview. Bare your soul to a stranger on TV but communicate with your family via a letter? You've got it twisted, Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> According to DM, the letter outlined Ginger's reasons for leaving the BRF. I believe such letter might be real, MM&H are trying to collect evidence to support their claims. After Oprah's interview, I read somewhere that MM wrote to the Palace demanding them to confirm that Kate made her cry...


I thought her friends decried the "recollections may vary" response and claimed that MM had all the receipts to prove what she alleged.
BTW, why isn't it called "proof" or "evidence"? Is "receipts" a legal term or American usage?


----------



## gracekelly

The whole letter thing smells. Meghan repeats everything. She has no imagination. Harry writes a letter to his father the same way that Meghan wrote a letter her father. Yawn. Is it going to make an appearance someplace so Harry can sue?  She had her letter lawsuit and now he can have a letter lawsuit too.   How cute.   These public pleas for reconciliation are pathetic. Does he really believe that it all can go back as it was?


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> I thought her friends decried the "recollections may vary" response and claimed that MM had all the receipts to prove what she alleged.
> BTW, why isn't it called "proof" or "evidence"? Is "receipts" a legal terms or American usage?



"Receipts" is just a popular slang term now for proof/evidence.  Not sure where it came from.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Meghan with a h really irrationally irritates me in general. It’s much more commonly spelt without in UK. Now that I am in the MM mire I will always think of the H version as the pretentious spelling.
> 
> Yeah it does sound like nepotism is central to her success. ( As it was for Markle) I believe she’s also married a rich media conservative so that probably helps her along too. (like M Markle)
> I only heard about M McCain when there was a rupauls drag race controversy about some drag queens from the show  calling her ‘an honorary rugirl’ on the show and the fans were fuming!


Megan is a Welsh name so I'm pissed off it's her name even though its spelt differently. It's also pronounced differently the Welsh way.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Only in writing!
> 
> _Prince Harry wrote his father a 'deeply personal' letter in which he promised to 'respect the institution' before he flew back to the UK for the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, penned the note to Prince Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' in the wake of his explosive Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle last month.
> 
> His decision to reach out to his father also came after he accused Prince Charles of refusing to take his calls.
> 
> However the Prince of Wales still remains 'very hurt' by Harry and Meghan's decision to take part in the controversial interview, which was aired while Prince Philip was in hospital, and the pair have not yet mended their fractured relationship.
> 
> *In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told **The Mirror.*
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex, who decided to reach out to his father as he prepared to reunite with his family for the first time after stepping back as a senior royal, was 'forced to write letters' after a 'complete communication breakdown' with Prince Charles, sources claim.
> 
> A royal source told The Mirror: 'He wrote a deeply personal note to his dad to try and set things straight but tensions are still running high and things haven't exactly ironed out the way he had hoped.*
> 
> 'There had been a kind of unspoken agreement between everyone to park whatever has been on each person's mind, and solely concentrate on supporting the Queen ahead of Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 'The feeling inside the camp was that it wasn't the time nor the place to go over things, especially at such an emotional time for everybody involved.'
> 
> During his interview with Winfrey last month, Prince Harry said he felt 'very let down' by his father Prince Charles, accusing him of refusing to take his calls and then 'cutting him off' financially when he and his wife emigrated.
> 
> Asked about his relationship with Prince Charles, Harry said they were now speaking again, adding: 'There's a lot to work through there, you know? I feel really let down, because he's been through something similar..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wrote father a 'deeply personal letter'
> 
> 
> In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Bit late to respect the institution Harry. 
And no, Charles did not go through something similar.


----------



## jelliedfeels

catlover46 said:


> Has anyone read Lady Campbell’s book on them and is it any good? It has a low rating on goodreads which I’m sure is due to their stans.


I’ve read it and though I enjoyed it and I think she’s got the facts,  I found it in need of a good editing in all honesty. If you like her videos you will enjoy her writing style as it has a similar rhetorical quality. For some it is a bit slow-paced and you definitely know you are being persuaded. 

The thing that drove me nuts was there are a lot of historical allusions and a couple of them were incorrect: hence why I think I needed a good checking over.Also she does dig into Diana quite a bit which I found irrelevant and a bit mean.

Overall, I’d say it’s definitely superior to finding freebies (which is largely incoherent) but it’s not the definitive account by any means. I kind of feel like we should start on that. Writing circle anyone?


----------



## Sharont2305

Going back to the baby's name, if they went for Philippa and abbreviated it to Pippa, I wonder if Meghan knows of all the press/gossip surrounding William and Catherines wedding after Harry and Pippa walked together back down the aisle. Along with the fact that after W&K kissed on the balcony, William turned to Harry and said "your turn next"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Only in writing!
> 
> _Prince Harry wrote his father a 'deeply personal' letter in which he promised to 'respect the institution' before he flew back to the UK for the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, penned the note to Prince Charles after their relationship 'hit rock bottom' in the wake of his explosive Oprah Winfrey interview with Meghan Markle last month.
> 
> His decision to reach out to his father also came after he accused Prince Charles of refusing to take his calls.
> 
> However the Prince of Wales still remains 'very hurt' by Harry and Meghan's decision to take part in the controversial interview, which was aired while Prince Philip was in hospital, and the pair have not yet mended their fractured relationship.
> 
> *In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told **The Mirror.*
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex, who decided to reach out to his father as he prepared to reunite with his family for the first time after stepping back as a senior royal, was 'forced to write letters' after a 'complete communication breakdown' with Prince Charles, sources claim.
> 
> A royal source told The Mirror: 'He wrote a deeply personal note to his dad to try and set things straight but tensions are still running high and things haven't exactly ironed out the way he had hoped.*
> 
> 'There had been a kind of unspoken agreement between everyone to park whatever has been on each person's mind, and solely concentrate on supporting the Queen ahead of Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 'The feeling inside the camp was that it wasn't the time nor the place to go over things, especially at such an emotional time for everybody involved.'
> 
> During his interview with Winfrey last month, Prince Harry said he felt 'very let down' by his father Prince Charles, accusing him of refusing to take his calls and then 'cutting him off' financially when he and his wife emigrated.
> 
> Asked about his relationship with Prince Charles, Harry said they were now speaking again, adding: 'There's a lot to work through there, you know? I feel really let down, because he's been through something similar..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wrote father a 'deeply personal letter'
> 
> 
> In his letter, Prince Harry 'outlined his reasons for leaving' his position as a senior royal in order to emigrate to California and said he would 'respect the institution', sources told The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Was the letter written in calligraphy?  If so, “deeply personal” is likely not true.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Megan is a Welsh name so I'm pissed off it's her name even though its spelt differently. It's also pronounced differently the Welsh way.


How’s it pronounced in Welsh?


----------



## eunaddict

Letter writing is good for the palace, that way they can collect them as ammunition as necessary. Phone calls are personal and private but letters can be read and collected by courtiers, it sounds more personal but really, letters and emails are the way to go when you've stopped trusting the person on the other end of the correspondence. This way, nothing can be "claimed" that wasn't actually said and every word from the Royals can be vetted by the Palace before it gets mailed out to the American branch.


----------



## jelliedfeels

catlover46 said:


> Did he really think they were going to automatically forgive him when he went back there? He’s so tone deaf.
> 
> also if you want some laughs go read the website Celebitchy. That place has put ginge and cringe on a pedestal( they are full on stans) and have shaded the Queen,Charles,and William. They save their biggest shade for Kate though.


That says it all doesn’t it? Even if we imagine this couple are being bullied and ostracised by a prejudiced institution it should be immediately obvious the person who has the least influence is the other non-Windsor but of course it’s her because she’s so wildly jealous of MM’s style and beauty


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> How’s it pronounced in Welsh?











						MEgan pronunciation in Welsh
					

How to say MEgan in Welsh? Pronunciation of MEgan with 2 audio pronunciations, 1 meaning and more for MEgan.




					www.howtopronounce.com
				




Emphasis on a hard Me and a hard gan, if that makes sense.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> A news release informed that she will be on maternity leave next month. Omid didn't clarify yet if the maternity leave is from Netflix, Spotify...


How is May late summer? I think we’re going to have another 13lb ‘newborn’ on our hands like with Archie.  


purseinsanity said:


> How’s it pronounced in Welsh?


I’m not Welsh  but I’ve noticed Americans tend to say ‘may- gain’ (talk about nominative determinism) whereas we say ‘Meg - Anne’ in a more clipped way.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I don't believe MM was a victim of racism or didn't have access to mental health care within the BRF. Charles may have his limitations, but he seems to be a decent person.


Even if Charles were an absolutely evil supervillain - he never lived with them!

They are adults in a country with free healthcare, she was under supervision for her pregnancy (which includes discussions of postnatal depression) and there’s a little thing called the Hippocratic oath. Also Harry has been in therapy for years already? Why not just go to his? It makes absolutely no sense.

as to the racism thing it’s much harder to refute whether something was or wasn’t said- especially if you never say who said it and when which is the beauty of it for H&M


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> How is May late summer? I think we’re going to have another 13lb ‘newborn’ on our hands like with Archie.
> 
> I’m not Welsh  but I’ve noticed Americans tend to say ‘may- gain’ (talk about nominative determinism) whereas we say ‘Meg - Anne’ in a more clipped way.


Yeah, I've noticed that too. Even English and Welsh sound different. I'd say the English way was Megn.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

lalame said:


> "Receipts" is just a popular slang term now for proof/evidence.  Not sure where it came from.



Thank you for the explanation now what does Stan mean?


----------



## elvisfan4life

eunaddict said:


> Letter writing is good for the palace, that way they can collect them as ammunition as necessary. Phone calls are personal and private but letters can be read and collected by courtiers, it sounds more personal but really, letters and emails are the way to go when you've stopped trusting the person on the other end of the correspondence. This way, nothing can be "claimed" that wasn't actually said and every word from the Royals can be vetted by the Palace before it gets mailed out to the American branch.



Harry can actually write ?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Read somewhere that she had asked to go to a spa so she could “rest and relax“. The palace checked and found out that in order to get free publicity, the spa was paying her.  They told her it was against policy to monetize the BRF in this way. Now, she is making these awful claims that the palace would not help her. This story makes sense, has the sound of truth. Her story sounds implausible. I believe the palace on this one.


Love spas. Thought you can’t actually do jacuzzis and saunas when you’re pregnant though.
I do *almost* feel sorry for her when imagine a palace aide trying to sell MM on the Windsor way of relaxing...
“You don’t want to get paid to get a massage. You should go hiking in Balmoral with your in-laws after a quick budget flight. Shall I pack you a Barbour and a tartan scarf? It’ll be...bracing... “
MM seizes teapot.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> as to the racism thing it’s much harder to refute whether something was or wasn’t said- *especially if you never say who said it and when* which is the beauty of it for H&M


One commentator rightly pointed out that when you cast vague allegations like they do, you smear the whole family and give them no way to properly respond. I keep thinking MM attended some woke course on being the modern heroine/anti-hero/victim that suggested these nefarious strategies, because she is too bovine to have come up with it herself.


----------



## lalame

elvisfan4life said:


> Thank you for the explanation now what does Stan mean?



lol not sure if you’re serious, but it means a super fan (as noun or verb). Can be used positively or negatively but it originated from the Eminem song “Stan” which told the story of a mentally disturbed fan who was obsessed with Eminem.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Even if Charles were an absolutely evil supervillain - he never lived with them!
> 
> They are adults in a country with free healthcare, she was under supervision for her pregnancy (which includes discussions of postnatal depression) and there’s a little thing called the Hippocratic oath. Also Harry has been in therapy for years already? Why not just go to his? It makes absolutely no sense.
> 
> *as to the racism thing it’s much harder to refute whether something was or wasn’t said- especially if you never say who said it and when which is the beauty of it for H&M*



yeah if you’re serious about it then write an op Ed or put out a statement where you can actually treat it like serious subject matter... don’t just drop it casually into a conversation and not allow any follow up FFS.How are you going to make a bombshell accusation in like 2 sentences and just leave it there?


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> How is May late summer? I think we’re going to have another 13lb ‘newborn’ on our hands like with Archie.
> 
> I’m not Welsh  but I’ve noticed Americans tend to say ‘may- gain’ (talk about nominative determinism) whereas we say ‘Meg - Anne’ in a more clipped way.


 well, doesn't it kinda depend on where the American is from? We've got some pretty strong regional accents. Someone from the Bronx is not going to sound like someone from Bel Air who isn't going to sound like someone from Birmingham.  
I interned in New York one summer. My Midwest accent has been tempered by living so long on the West Coast. I was calling this fellow Mario------with the Mar pronounced like Marbles and an EEE OOO. Mar-E-O. He blew up at me one day shouting that his name was MARY-O. I guess I didn't help the situation by saying "oh-----like Jackie-O"


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> lol not sure if you’re serious, but it means a super fan (as noun or verb). Can be used positively or negatively but it originated from the Eminem song “Stan” which told the story of a mentally disturbed fan who was obsessed with Eminem.



meh------I had to look it up when I first heard it used. 
Now I can say I know one Eminem song


----------



## Sharont2305

poopsie said:


> well, doesn't it kinda depend on where the American is from? We've got some pretty strong regional accents. Someone from the Bronx is not going to sound like someone from Bel Air who isn't going to sound like someone from Birmingham.
> I interned in New York one summer. My Midwest accent has been tempered by living so long on the West Coast. I was calling this fellow Mario------with the Mar pronounced like Marbles and an EEE OOO. Mar-E-O. He blew up at me one day shouting that his name was MARY-O. I guess I didn't help the situation by saying "oh-----like Jackie-O"


I think, going by the way you've described it, I'd pronounce Mario the same way as you. The way the Italians say it.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> The whole letter thing smells. Meghan repeats everything. She has no imagination. Harry writes a letter to his father the same way that Meghan wrote a letter her father. Yawn. Is it going to make an appearance someplace so Harry can sue?  She had her letter lawsuit and now he can have a letter lawsuit too.   How cute.   These public pleas for reconciliation are pathetic. Does he really believe that it all can go back as it was?



its also strategy from the Harkles.  This plus the numerous “reconciliation“ stories which have leaked are probably from MM/H camp AND H desperate for photo/money shot with his brother at the funeral.

when the RF says “no” to the half in/half out strategy, requests for more money, titles and security which H is no doubt asking both PC and the Queen (if he gets access to her)  - THEN they can leak the letter contents (which will be one sided and glowing from MM’s point of view and how they were hard done by) and blame the palace for the leak.

I can see the press releases now from MM -  “see, we tried to reach out and reconcile but those racists weren’t interested in apologising to us For the hurt they caused us!!”

PC and the others would be well advised not to say anything other than polite chit chat.


----------



## poopsie

Sharont2305 said:


> I think, going by the way you've described it, I'd pronounce Mario the same way as you. The way the Italians say it.



I think it was  more to do with the New Yawk accent as I think he was Italian. None of the Hispanics I know with that name pronounce it that way either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *“No matter how disagreeable, the Crown handles situations. They’ll wait until the situation crystallizes. For now dignity and politesse rule the situation. She’s picked America and a communal property state and has two children. She’s got him. Difficult for him to get out. He’s entrapped.*



He's not though. He's not THAT rich and doesn't own real estate in the UK. I'm sure the BRF would throw money at the problem if he genuinely asked for help to leave. And I just watched a documentary how Jewish Orthodox women (in the US, not Israel!) lose their children after they leave the community because the husbands with the support of said community have the better lawyers, so I'm sure if he really wanted to a way could be found even for that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It sounds like the jealousy towards Kate started at the time of Kate's wedding. He shows some of MM's posts from that time and pictures from Kate's wedding reception and MM's wedding reception (Trevor E.) a few months later.
> View attachment 5060151



Dunno. The sparkly belts were bridal fashion for a while. 

(BTW I loved Kate's second outfit, especially the fuzzy cardigan)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> She hates Kate because she got what MM really wanted...Will.  Meghan had to settle for the dimwit spare, who's not even the spare any longer.



Do we really think she wanted William, though? I mean, he was married with two kids and one on the way at the time of the engagement, even delusional Meghan couldn't have hoped he'd drop everything and ride into the sunset. Also, Wills is not as gullible and easily manipulated as Harry. I'll agree though she wanted the position in the pecking order.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I didn't even think about this... was there really a press release? I thought some random person happened to spot the wreath and card and reported it, not the Sussexes themselves.



It was not on their website, but as usual all the details including the florist were given to the press to make an article out of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do we really think she wanted William, though? I mean, he was married with two kids and one on the way at the time of the engagement, even delusional Meghan couldn't have hoped he'd drop everything and ride into the sunset. Also, Wills is not as gullibel and easily manipulated as Harry. I'll agree though she wanted the position in the pecking order.



Because of her loving glances to William?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“She would have put all the family tension aside to be there with Harry._



So generous of her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Because of her loving glances to William?
> View attachment 5060384



Ah, that's just the narcissist spraying her fake charm generously on people. It still didn't work with him, though.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> You are all forgetting Doria, why not?


According to Lady CC, wasn't it Doria who taught Meghan not to give away the milk for free or whatever expression was used? In that case I don't think Doria will have a problem with having her name left out at all.

Now I've got Kelis' Milkshake stuck in my inner ears. _My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard, ... I could teach you, but I have to charge _


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Icyjade said:


> Because of her loving glances to William?
> View attachment 5060384


Another classic. She just can't help herself.


----------



## justwatchin

bellecate said:


> *Meghan, 39, is expecting their second child, a girl, within weeks and was advised not to travel to the UK for the funeral.*
> So now she’s due within weeks?  She can’t even keep the month the child will be born straight.


Well it’s hard to keep up 
when the appropriate moon bump is not in stock with Amazon


----------



## Icyjade

justwatchin said:


> Well it’s hard to keep up
> when the appropriate moon bump is not in stock with Amazon



I just learnt that fake bumps are a thing???


----------



## Clearblueskies

Icyjade said:


> I just learnt that fake bumps are a thing???
> 
> View attachment 5060429


Safe to say that’s the only piece of product placement $$$ MM won’t be indulging in


----------



## elvisfan4life

lalame said:


> lol not sure if you’re serious, but it means a super fan (as noun or verb). Can be used positively or negatively but it originated from the Eminem song “Stan” which told the story of a mentally disturbed fan who was obsessed with Eminem.



Thank you - I was perfectly serious I’m an older Brit - 99.99% of the so called celebs and their foreign language these days goes over and head where I’m happy for it to stay but i ways wondered who or what stans were so I’m a proud Elvis Stan


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Because of her loving glances to William?
> View attachment 5060384



See that's Harry being atypical of his class/breeding. H obviously loves the love-bombing.

Usually, the nicer you are to toffs, the more they despise and make fun of you.


----------



## needlv

Lol 









						Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
					

The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
> 
> 
> The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


TPF is so educational! I love Japan, and now I'm finally learning Japanese


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> "Receipts" is just a popular slang term now for proof/evidence.  Not sure where it came from.



It was from an interview with Whitney Houston years ago.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> It was from an interview with Whitney Houston years ago.




Now she had a VOICE! 

and about as good taste in men as H does in women


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lounorada said:


> And if you are going around saying that out loud about your own relationship (H&M), then it leads me to think your relationship actually _isn't _that great.
> Usually the couples who have those real fairytale-like relationships are modest people and don't have to declare it to anyone who will listen, it goes without saying.



So true. How many celebrities have we seen doing interviews about their amazing relationships only to split within a year?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Because of her loving glances to William?
> View attachment 5060384



Now that is a calculating look if ever I’ve seen one.


----------



## Annawakes

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
> 
> 
> The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Awesome hahahahah


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> So true. How many celebrities have we seen doing interviews about their amazing relationships only to split within a year?



It isn’t only celebrities. How many times do you see people on Facebook gushing about their wonderful marriage, bragging about their perfect children, going on about their amazing vacations and their luxurious new home? Only to find out later it was all grossly exaggerated if not downright false.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Oh I don’t believe she could trade up. How do you go higher than marrying a prince? A billionaire? Good luck finding one gullible enough not to see right through her. Most rich, famous men aren’t as simple or easy to manipulate as Harry.
> 
> She’s going to turn 40 this year and she’s obviously getting fillers and PS. She’s still beautiful but past her prime. I don’t doubt that she could snag herself another husband but she’s definitely not going to be trading up.



Isn't Jeff Bezos single now?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chimpo.  He really is one.


----------



## LittleStar88

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
> 
> 
> The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Bwahahahaaaa! That’s so funny!


----------



## Aimee3

lanasyogamama said:


> Chimpo.  He really is one.


A CHIMPO with no balls!


----------



## LittleStar88

Icyjade said:


> Because of her loving glances to William?
> View attachment 5060384



She’s got that Tyra Banks smizing game down!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jennit reminded me of something I posted long ago on another thread. If you have pets or just generally love animals, you'll understand why this first clip made me laugh hysterically. I'd like to think of this as somewhat on topic.

Presenting: Maybe not a horse fit for a queen, but the dog certainly is 


For the doubters


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Right. Journalists, actors, and models come to mind when having kids born with instant connections. Family businesses are a little different in the sense that if the next generation can keep a business going and growing they must have a little skill, but the hard groundwork and major risks were taken by the founders. It frosts me when business owners who become successful, who worked their *sses off and took on tons of risk are skewered by whiny jealous jerks. The same jealous jerks who are too gutless to take on risk and refuse to work beyond 9 to 5 M-F. Plenty of businesses fail despite hard work, but the sippy cup whiner crowd doesn't want to hear it.


_Sippy cup whiner crowd.  _Love it!


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> William and Catherine got there first remember.
> Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.


OOPS!  Never mind. Total mess up on my part.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Isn't Jeff Bezos single now?



LOL. Bezos is so far out of Meghan's reach. He has too many varied interests, too much going on in his life. He would never have time to focus solely on her and she desperately needs attention. 

Besides Bezos had to give 25% of his Amazon stock to his wife in the divorce. Even for a megamultibillionaire that's going to stick with him. He's already got his kids, he's not going to be anxious to get married again. I could see him dating around for fun for awhile but I don't think Meghan will get an invite.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> jennit reminded me of something I posted long ago on another thread. If you have pets or just generally love animals, you'll understand why this first clip made me laugh hysterically. I'd like to think of this as somewhat on topic.
> 
> Presenting: Maybe not a horse fit for a queen, but the dog certainly is
> 
> 
> For the doubters




That beats any of the dog and pony shows the Sussexes have put on. Literally.


----------



## Chanbal

Louise Roberts makes a good point!  Is he in the UK or CA?


_Speaking on the Australian morning show Sunrise, host David Koch said: "Prince Harry is reportedly considering staying in the UK for the Queen's 95th birthday this week.

"He now faces the dilemma of returning to be with his heavily pregnant wife, Meghan or spending more time patching up his relationship with senior royals."

TV presenter Matt Shirvington said: "For the sake of the Royal Family and harmony, just stay there Harry! Just for an extra couple of days."

Journalist Louise Roberts added: "*But is that what the Queen wants? Does she have the stomach for more discussion around this? Maybe she wants him to go*."









						Queen 'can't stomach more' drama! Upset monarch 'would want Harry to go' before birthday
					

THE QUEEN may "want Harry to go" back to America before her birthday, a journalist has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> LOL. Bezos is so far out of Meghan's reach. He has too many varied interests, too much going on in his life. He would never have time to focus solely on her and she desperately needs attention.
> 
> Besides Bezos had to give 25% of his Amazon stock to his wife in the divorce. Even for a megamultibillionaire that's going to stick with him. He's already got his kids, he's not going to be anxious to get married again. I could see him dating around for fun for awhile but I don't think Meghan will get an invite.



Totally. Bezos can pull someone half M's age and twice as hot as a fun diversion with no financial obligations. Why would he bother with her?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I don't see them picking a traditional name after their choice of Archie.  It will be something that pairs with Archie.  Since Archie sounds like the name of a guy who owns a pub, a barmaids name would be perfect.  Molly?  Maisie?


I hate to even bother to speculate on this but I'm thinking another name beginning with the letter A


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Here is the thing about that.  When in her right mind could Meghan Markle ever have  thought that she would get the direct heir to the throne of England?  Is that a person who dwells in a fantasy life?  It was amazing enough that she managed to land a Prince.


I think probably her greatest talent is networking.  She is obviously not a great actress, not a great philanthoprist, not a great beauty IMO.  but she managed to land the prince of the most prominent RF in the world via networking.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Prophetically too in that case - when you recall the engraving on the watch.


the watch was engraved from her to herself as I understand it


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Totally. Bezos can pull someone half M's age and twice as hot as a fun diversion with no financial obligations. Why would he bother with her?



Not to mention all of the drama which was taken to an international level. No sane man thinks to himself "I want to get myself a troublemaker who will alienate me from everyone I care about for my next wife!" The best Meghan might find for her next man would be a young social climber who wants to use _her._ That's why as long as she can maintain control over Harry she will hold on to him for dear life.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I hate to even bother to speculate on this but I'm thinking another name beginning with the letter A



Maybe it will be a name like Agatha or Agnes. They'll follow the trend of making old names fashionable again.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Going back to the baby's name, if they went for Philippa and abbreviated it to Pippa, I wonder if Meghan knows of all the press/gossip surrounding William and Catherines wedding after Harry and Pippa walked together back down the aisle. Along with the fact that after W&K kissed on the balcony, William turned to Harry and said "your turn next"


of course she wouldn't know......after all she knew practically nothing about the RF before her blind date with H


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> LOL. Bezos is so far out of Meghan's reach. He has too many varied interests, too much going on in his life. He would never have time to focus solely on her and she desperately needs attention.
> 
> Besides Bezos had to give 25% of his Amazon stock to his wife in the divorce. Even for a megamultibillionaire that's going to stick with him. He's already got his kids, he's not going to be anxious to get married again. I could see him dating around for fun for awhile but I don't think Meghan will get an invite.



Bezos didn't make his money by being dumb. MM's chances with him are zero, but a girl can dream!
The BRF would be so pleased, Bezos would get an invitation to Buckingham, Windsor, Balmoral... his choice!


----------



## catlover46

Chanbal said:


> Louise Roberts makes a good point!  Is he in the UK or CA?
> View attachment 5060542
> 
> _Speaking on the Australian morning show Sunrise, host David Koch said: "Prince Harry is reportedly considering staying in the UK for the Queen's 95th birthday this week.
> 
> "He now faces the dilemma of returning to be with his heavily pregnant wife, Meghan or spending more time patching up his relationship with senior royals."
> 
> TV presenter Matt Shirvington said: "For the sake of the Royal Family and harmony, just stay there Harry! Just for an extra couple of days."
> 
> Journalist Louise Roberts added: "*But is that what the Queen wants? Does she have the stomach for more discussion around this? Maybe she wants him to go*."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen 'can't stomach more' drama! Upset monarch 'would want Harry to go' before birthday
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN may "want Harry to go" back to America before her birthday, a journalist has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I wouldn’t be surprised if he hasn’t even talked to her since he went back and wasn’t invited to the reception afterwards.


----------



## bag-mania

So do we know where Harry is right now? Is he already back home?


----------



## Chanbal

catlover46 said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if he hasn’t even talked to her since he went back and wasn’t invited to the reception afterwards.


It was reported that the first time he saw the queen was at the funeral. I wonder if he is waiting for an audience with her. If he is not in California yet, he will likely stay for his chance at QE's birthday. Though, the queen may celebrate her birthday alone.









						Queen to go without annual flowers from Philip as monarch turns 95
					

QUEEN ELIZABETH II turns 95 today - meaning for the first time in more than 70 years, she will not receive the romantic annual gesture Prince Philip always arranged for her birthday.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> So true. How many celebrities have we seen doing interviews about their amazing relationships only to split within a year?


oh yes...pretty much every time I see one of these I wonder how long before they split.....it can be disappointing sometimes.  the one that made me kinda sad was susan sarandon and tim robbins after 20+ years.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t only celebrities. How many times do you see people on Facebook gushing about their wonderful marriage, bragging about their perfect children, going on about their amazing vacations and their luxurious new home? Only to find out later it was all grossly exaggerated if not downright false.


Heidi Klum and Seal used to renew their vows every year, then divorced


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I don't believe MM was a victim of racism or didn't have access to mental health care within the BRF. Charles may have his limitations, but he seems to be a decent person.



Exactly. How could somebody as brash as Meghan claim "she didn't have access to mental health care" when it didn't bother her ONE SINGLE bit to run away from The National's Dorfman Theatre with her ringless hands splayed across her thighs? Her "problems" started when she basically told the BRF to go to hell but expected them to pay all their expenses. She's an entitled spoiled sociopath. So now that she "escaped" the "entrapment" of the BRF and living in a 50 bathroom house in racist USA (her choice), is she spending ten hours a day in therapy to catch up?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> So do we know where Harry is right now? Is he already back home?


That is the question of the day. It will be more work for MM, the longer he stays in the UK...









						Royal Family: Meghan faces ‘dilemma’ over new ‘bombshell’
					

PRINCE HARRY will now feel "totally torn" about his and Meghan Markle's decision to step down from the Royal Family and move to California, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> That is the question of the day. It will be more work for MM, the longer he stays in the UK...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family: Meghan faces ‘dilemma’ over new ‘bombshell’
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY will now feel "totally torn" about his and Meghan Markle's decision to step down from the Royal Family and move to California, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



How long do the effects of Stockholm Syndrome last? Weeks? Months? A lifetime?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The damage done by Oprah's interview continues... 

"_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"









						Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
					

Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> well, doesn't it kinda depend on where the American is from? We've got some pretty strong regional accents. Someone from the Bronx is not going to sound like someone from Bel Air who isn't going to sound like someone from Birmingham.
> I interned in New York one summer. My Midwest accent has been tempered by living so long on the West Coast. I was calling this fellow Mario------with the Mar pronounced like Marbles and an EEE OOO. Mar-E-O. He blew up at me one day shouting that his name was MARY-O. I guess I didn't help the situation by saying "oh-----like Jackie-O"



Mary-o blew up when you dared pronounce "Mario" the traditional way? I think Mary-o has a fixation on drama. My real name is one that can be pronounced different ways and I realize that. It's never bothered me when people who don't know me say it differently from how I say it. Sounds like Mary-o has a problem. I wonder how he'd handle a list of truly complicated names.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> How long do the effects of Stockholm Syndrome last? Weeks? Months? A lifetime?


Great question, it may last a lifetime in JCMH's case.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> How long do the effects of Stockholm Syndrome last? Weeks? Months? A lifetime?



However long Meghan decides it should   .


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> LOL. Bezos is so far out of Meghan's reach. He has too many varied interests, too much going on in his life. He would never have time to focus solely on her and she desperately needs attention.
> 
> Besides Bezos had to give 25% of his Amazon stock to his wife in the divorce. Even for a megamultibillionaire that's going to stick with him. He's already got his kids, he's not going to be anxious to get married again. I could see him dating around for fun for awhile but I don't think Meghan will get an invite.



Even if she were ridiculously beautiful (and TBH she’s pretty generic Insta thot levels to me) I think he’s smart enough to know about dating crazy


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> Thank you for the explanation now what does Stan mean?


Stan = St(alker) (F)an


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh. If anyone wants to see how obsessively supportive members of the US press are towards Meghan, they need only read this _Vanity Fair_ article. It is too long to copy over but it makes numerous comparisons of Meghan to Diana, with a little bit of Kate thrown in. There are so many people credited as contributors to this one-sided adoration piece. Basically Harry and Meghan = Good, BRF = Bad. 









						The Royal Family’s Continental Rift
					

Two brothers, alike in dignity, among the British monarchy where we lay our scene, are grappling with ancient grudges. Will it—should it—be mended?




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Chanbal

MEG-A MISTAKE 









						Meg's pal branded 'sexist' after questioning why Anne walked by Phil's coffin
					

MEGHAN Markle’s pal Gayle King was branded “sexist” after questioning why Princess Anne was included in Prince Philip’s procession. The chat show host was leading coverage o…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do we really think she wanted William, though? I mean, he was married with two kids and one on the way at the time of the engagement, even delusional Meghan couldn't have hoped he'd drop everything and ride into the sunset. Also, Wills is not as gullible and easily manipulated as Harry. I'll agree though she wanted the position in the pecking order.


I meant she probably wanted Will before he got married and since that wasn't going to happen (that beeyotch Kate got him!), she settled for the spare.  I'm amazed she even pulled that off.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> According to Lady CC, wasn't it Doria who taught Meghan not to give away the milk for free or whatever expression was used? In that case I don't think Doria will have a problem with having her name left out at all.
> 
> *Now I've got Kelis' Milkshake stuck in my inner ears. *_*My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard, ... I could teach you, but I have to charge *_


UGH!  Now it's in my head!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> LOL. Bezos is so far out of Meghan's reach. He has too many varied interests, too much going on in his life. He would never have time to focus solely on her and she desperately needs attention.
> 
> Besides Bezos had to give 25% of his Amazon stock to his wife in the divorce. Even for a megamultibillionaire that's going to stick with him. He's already got his kids, he's not going to be anxious to get married again. I could see him dating around for fun for awhile but I don't think Meghan will get an invite.


He does, but I've seen so many times where rich men marry younger women (WTF I have no idea?).  I never understood why they'd risk their fortunes and their previous children's inheritances, but they do.  They're not immune to thinking with the wrong head.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Not to mention all of the drama which was taken to an international level. No sane man thinks to himself "I want to get myself a troublemaker who will alienate me from everyone I care about for my next wife!" The best Meghan might find for her next man would be a young social climber who wants to use _her._ That's why as long as she can maintain control over Harry she will hold on to him for dear life.


Nail on the head! 
I would be amazed if she could pull the coup again. Most people aren’t as thick as Harry, it’s public knowledge how indiscreet she is & that nose is on its last legs.
If she did end up going cougar we could see her on 90 day fiancé


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It was reported that the first time he saw the queen was at the funeral. I wonder if he is waiting for an audience with her. If he is not in California yet, he will likely stay for his chance at QE's birthday. Though, the queen may celebrate her birthday alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen to go without annual flowers from Philip as monarch turns 95
> 
> 
> QUEEN ELIZABETH II turns 95 today - meaning for the first time in more than 70 years, she will not receive the romantic annual gesture Prince Philip always arranged for her birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Wouldn't it be lovely if PP prearranged it?


----------



## rose60610

I thought Bezos' current girlfriend is nuts, there was a scandal involving her brother, he was accused of leaking nude photos of the pair. There was a lawsuit, the brother claims he wasn't the one who leaked. IDK how it ended or if it went to court yet. Even Bezos isn't immune to hooking up to a drama queen.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The damage done by Oprah's interview continues...
> 
> "_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


the RF has been there for hundreds of years....I doubt H&M will topple them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it will be a name like Agatha or Agnes. They'll follow the trend of making old names fashionable again.


Oh no don’t! I like those names! I think Agatha and Agnes are too close to accurate Ancient Greek for their tastes though 
If you want a nicely ironic Greek name how about ‘Agape’? It means ‘selfless love’ so very fitting  and also refers to the faces of people when H&M finish talking


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I meant she probably wanted Will before he got married and since that wasn't going to happen (that beeyotch Kate got him!), she settled for the spare.  I'm amazed she even pulled that off.



I still wonder who it was who put out the "Will is cheating on Kate with Rose" rumors. Now whether those rumors were true we will never know, but somebody had to arrange to leak them to the tabloids. The story broke in early 2019 when someone we know was sitting around heavily pregnant, bitter about her situation, and had the means and the motivation to try to hurt Kate and Will.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The damage done by Oprah's interview continues...
> 
> "_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Does Anna Pasternak consider herself a royal authority? Sounds more like verbal diarrhea to me so I skipped some paragraphs. She doesn't seem to understand how the BRF succession works as in they don't bypass one to get to the next heir unless one abdicates and I don't foresee Charles agreeing with her.

ETA: I don't believe that H's heavily pregnant wife can topple the 'antiquated monarchy' even though she's trying her utmost to succeed.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I thought Bezos' current girlfriend is nuts, there was a scandal involving her brother, he was accused of leaking nude photos of the pair. There was a lawsuit, the brother claims he wasn't the one who leaked. IDK how it ended or if it went to court yet. Even Bezos isn't immune to hooking up to a drama queen.



So there is hope for Meghan! I still think she's out of her league. She wants to be with someone who lets her call the shots (or at least believe she calls the shots) and that isn't going to be Bezos.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Does Anna Pasternak consider herself a royal authority? Sounds more like verbal diarrhea to me so I skipped some paragraphs. She doesn't seem to understand how the BRF succession works as in they don't bypass one to get to the next heir unless one abdicates and I don't foresee Charles agreeing with her.


right....more speculation....until we see something official from the RF everything is just that.  I got something from yahoo this morning saying H is heading back to CA and got no meeting with the queen but didn't seem to have anything fact based, just more speculation


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was not on their website, but as usual all the details including the florist were given to the press to make an article out of it.


Who else but the MeghanMarkleMouthpiece:

Meghan Markle’s friend has said that the Duchess of Sussex ‘did her bit’ for Prince Philip’s funeral by sending a handwritten card as well as a wreath. 

*Omid Scobie*, a friend of Meghan and Harry’s, made the comments on ABC’s podcast The HeirPod.  

Meghan Markle left a handwritten card on a wreath for the Duke of Edinburgh at St George’s Chapel on the day of his funeral.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The damage done by Oprah's interview continues...
> 
> "_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I feel these people are giving a wannabe way too much credit. She won't destroy an institution that's existed for a millenium.


----------



## rose60610

Archie and.......Aretha? That would bundle a lot of symbolism. Whatever the name of Diana Take #2, Meghan will claim the BRF doesn't like it and complain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I still wonder who it was who put out the "Will is cheating on Kate with Rose" rumors. Now whether those rumors were true we will never know, but somebody had to arrange to leak them to the tabloids. The story broke in early 2019 when someone we know was sitting around heavily pregnant, bitter about her situation, and had the means and the motivation to try to hurt Kate and Will.



I'm pretty convinced that a) that affair never happened and b) it was Meghan who came up with the rumour. I posted a longwinded transcript of a podcast that had convincing evidence some time ago. Of course my brain's a sieve so I can't remember the guy's name.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Bump #2 will probably be named Ariel, you know, to honour how her mother is the real life Little Mermaid who found her voice and prince


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm pretty convinced that a) that affair never happened and b) it was Meghan who came up with the rumour. I posted a longwinded transcript of a podcast that had convincing evidence some time ago. Of course my brain's a sieve so I can't remember the guy's name.



Whether the affair happened or not, it is certainly good reason for Will and Kate to never trust Meghan and Harry ever again. Of course the wild accusations Meghan casually tossed around in the Oprah interview without providing any names or specific details were one hundred times worse.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I hate to even bother to speculate on this but I'm thinking another name beginning with the letter A



How about "Wella"?  So they don't have to change the stationery at their Archwell scheme.  
Edited: spelling


----------



## Aimee3

csshopper said:


> Who else but the MeghanMarkleMouthpiece:
> 
> Meghan Markle’s friend has said that the Duchess of Sussex ‘did her bit’ for Prince Philip’s funeral by sending a handwritten card as well as a wreath.
> 
> *Omid Scobie*, a friend of Meghan and Harry’s, made the comments on ABC’s podcast The HeirPod.
> 
> Meghan Markle left a handwritten card on a wreath for the Duke of Edinburgh at St George’s Chapel on the day of his funeral.


Didn’t thousands of UK citizens do the same, granted maybe not a wreath, but flower bouquets left in tribute to PP?


----------



## csshopper

From Readers of the Express in today's edition:
*Britons furious at Meghan Markle 'PR stunt' claim over leaked details of funeral wreath*
*MEGHAN MARKLE has been accused of using Prince Philip's funeral as a publicity stunt as details of the wreath she sent were leaked to the press. While fans of the Duchess rallied behind her, others have lashed out at Meghan claiming she is "trying to stay in the limelight".*

They said: "Dear Ms Markle and your American PR team.
"Please take some time this week to observe our Royal ladies at HRH the Prince Philip's funeral.
"Watch and learn from their dignified, quiet grace and regal elegance as they perform their duties.






Meghan Markle attacked for leaking wreath details (Image: Getty)






"How to behave while you still hold the title of Duchess needs much improvement as do your manners."
Someone else lashed out at Meghan and her supporters claiming they have not "learnt the difference between royalty and celebrity".
The Express.co.uk reader said: "This is what Meghan and her supporters have to learn ... the royals do NOT publicise things like this ... they don't publicise what is in wreaths or who made it or what they write on cards unless that is the most important person i.e. The Queen.
"Meghan and her supporters haven't learnt the difference between royalty and celebrity.

Another said: "All that Meghan is doing is trying to stay in the limelight but she is wasting her time, everyone is fed up with her going on gobbing about a load of bull."

Someone else said Meghan has proven her heart is "empty and her gestures" are for publicity and nothing else.

They said: "Philip was sick and dying - did they stop the Oprah interview, in respect for him - NO.


----------



## rose60610

Kaka_bobo said:


> Bump #2 will probably be named Ariel, you know, to honour how her mother is the real life Little Mermaid who found her voice and prince



Perfect! and Meghan would expect Disney to be oh-so-grateful and beg her to star in lots of movies with A-listers. She's probably on the phone now trying to get through to COE Chapek to cut a deal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it will be a name like Agatha or Agnes. They'll follow the trend of making old names fashionable again.



Alice would be lovely


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Archie and.......Aretha? That would bundle a lot of symbolism. Whatever the name of Diana Take #2, Meghan will claim the BRF doesn't like it and complain.


I dare her to use the name of a black icon like Aretha


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Exactly. How could somebody as brash as Meghan claim "she didn't have access to mental health care" when it didn't bother her ONE SINGLE bit to run away from The National's Dorfman Theatre with her ringless hands splayed across her thighs? Her "problems" started when she basically told the BRF to go to hell but expected them to pay all their expenses. She's an entitled spoiled sociopath. So now that she "escaped" the "entrapment" of the BRF and living in a 50 bathroom house in racist USA (her choice), *is she spending ten hours a day in therapy to catch up?*



Why isn't she?

Hello!  I'd put her under medical observation given her self-proclaimed history.

Last time she was pregnant she felt moved to kill herself. It's not just her life. 

Mental illness doesn't just come and go when the person wants. _If _it was real _then_ and a huge deal she wasn't taken seriously, then _this _time around it should be dealt with intensively and by professionals.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Alice would be lovely



Or maybe Amelia or Audrey.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> the RF has been there for hundreds of years....I doubt H&M will topple them





Maggie Muggins said:


> Does Anna Pasternak consider herself a royal authority? Sounds more like verbal diarrhea to me so I skipped some paragraphs. She doesn't seem to understand how the BRF succession works as in they don't bypass one to get to the next heir unless one abdicates and I don't foresee Charles agreeing with her.
> 
> ETA: I don't believe that H's heavily pregnant wife can topple the 'antiquated monarchy' even though she's trying her utmost to succeed.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel these people are giving a wannabe way too much credit. She won't destroy an institution that's existed for a millenium.


Totally agree! Ginger and Cringe won't be able to destroy the monarchy, but they did serious damage and should be accountable for it.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The damage done by Oprah's interview continues...
> 
> "_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wills not ready. End of.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> The damage done by Oprah's interview continues...
> 
> "_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel these people are giving a wannabe way too much credit. She won't destroy an institution that's existed for a millenium.



I think the DM enjoys printing pieces like this because the comments section goes insane at the idea of some spoiled American being welcomed into the family who then proceeds to tell everyone they're doing it wrong.    

Ultimately, the decision doesn't rest with the ladies of The View or Gayle King or writers like this woman, it's up to the British people to decide how they want their government structured and discarding their constitutional monarchy with the Queen (or King) as head of state over an American drama duchess married to the ex-spare is highly unlikely.  Just my .02.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Alice would be lovely


Prince Philip's mother's name.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> So there is hope for Meghan! I still think she's out of her league. She wants to be with someone who lets her call the shots (or at least believe she calls the shots) and that isn't going to be Bezos.



The world is full of beautiful women of all ages and nationalities. Most men will be aware of M's rep now.

I wouldn't touch H with a barge poll either. The guy's 'no' right' in the head.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Or maybe Amelia or Audrey.


One thing we can count on, it will not be Anne.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Philip's mother's name.



I know and what a selfless, lovely lady she was.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> I think the DM enjoys printing pieces like this because the comments section goes insane at the idea of some spoiled American being welcomed into the family who then proceeds to tell everyone they're doing it wrong.
> 
> Ultimately, the decision doesn't rest with the ladies of The View or Gayle King or writers like this woman, it's up to the British people to decide how they want their government structured and discarding their constitutional monarchy with the Queen (or King) as head of state over an American drama duchess married to the ex-spare is highly unlikely.  Just my .02.


Isn’t Meg said to be sizing up the presidency?  I mean that prospect alone is enough to put anyone off voting for a republic IMO


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> The world is full of beautiful women of all ages and nationalities. Most men will be aware of M's rep now.
> 
> I wouldn't touch H with a barge poll either. The guy's 'no' right' in the head.


And whoever gets him next, she'll have to deal with that nut job Meg too.


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> Alice would be lovely



In memory of philips mother


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Has anyone seen M say or show any degree of religious affiliation? I just assumed she did all that stuff for H, who himself probably only did it because it's what the family expected him to do. I'd be very curious to know just how much they follow religious traditions now that there isn't a whole apparatus pushing them to.



Woke is their religion. (They aren't the only ones).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> But, honestly, the OT discussions are what make this thread much more interesting and lively..



I agree with this.


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> Isn’t Meg said to be sizing up the presidency?  I mean that prospect alone is enough to put anyone off voting for a republic IMO



True!  Ha! 

She'd last 5 minutes on the campaign trail in the U.S. (or in an actual interview with a respectable journalist).


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I dare her to use the name of a black icon like Aretha



Well, Aretha was known as QUEEN of Soul, so...it isn't completely out of the realm of possibilities.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

My guess for the name of the second spawn of Ms. Markle is Elizabeth Maya (as in Angelou) Alice.  Call name perhaps Emma or Maya.


----------



## poopsie

elvisfan4life said:


> Thank you - I was perfectly serious I’m an older Brit - 99.99% of the so called celebs and their foreign language these days goes over and head where I’m happy for it to stay but i ways wondered who or what stans were so I’m a proud Elvis Stan



Same here-----sans the Brit part
You should check out the video on Youtube. I LOVE Dido in it


----------



## poopsie

Allisonfaye said:


> So true. How many celebrities have we seen doing interviews about their amazing relationships only to split within a year?



Or when they do the vows renewal thing  You know somebody already has one foot out the door


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC has been working overtime lately.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I'm not a huge fan of M McCain, but anyone on The View, as I understand, who doesn't worship Markle and JCMH is toast. So McCain isn't going to risk a Sharon Osborne experience and will lie to keep her cushy job. Though that's what's missing in the world today. If you have the guts to state you don't like XYZ you're going to get drawn and quartered by a hyperventilating frenzied mob who will make life hell for you.


if I recall correctly they were talking about the RF in general and she brought up the "we have our own American princess" thing.....she was not put into a corner by any means


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> Chimpo.  He really is one.



more like CHUMPO if you ask me


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
> 
> 
> The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Cringe and Gringe can now be Chimpo and Bimbo.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Ugh. If anyone wants to see how obsessively supportive members of the US press are towards Meghan, they need only read this _Vanity Fair_ article. It is too long to copy over but it makes numerous comparisons of Meghan to Diana, with a little bit of Kate thrown in. There are so many people credited as contributors to this one-sided adoration piece. Basically Harry and Meghan = Good, BRF = Bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family’s Continental Rift
> 
> 
> Two brothers, alike in dignity, among the British monarchy where we lay our scene, are grappling with ancient grudges. Will it—should it—be mended?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



So glad that someone(s) putting their junior high English course to use by channeling Romeo and Juliet. Just wondering if they remember how it ends


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
> 
> 
> The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I haven't read the article BUT I know that Japanese word!


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> How long do the effects of Stockholm Syndrome last? Weeks? Months? A lifetime?



“I've said for a long time to H—that's what I call him—it's not enough to just survive something, right? That's not the point of life. You've got to thrive, you've got to feel happy.”
I really don’t think “H” is doing any thriving in the USA, or is happy. As we well know it’s only and all about H’s heavily pregnant, due to give birth March, April, May , June , July? wife.


----------



## CarryOn2020

has he left the UK yet?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC has been working overtime lately.



Thanks for posting Lady C's vid. I think her thoughts and impressions come close to what we have already expressed here about the dastardly duo and, I particularly like this conclusion, "There will be no reconciliation unless Meghan gets a personality transplant."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> “I've said for a long time to H—that's what I call him—it's not enough to just survive something, right? That's not the point of life. You've got to thrive, you've got to feel happy.”
> I really don’t think “H” is doing any thriving in the USA, or is happy. As we well know it’s only and all about H’s heavily pregnant, due to give birth March, April, May , June , July? wife.



I don't think he's happy either, but then I don't know that he's ever been all that happy. If he thought he was trapped before, he's truly stuck now. He _might_ be able to free himself from her if he gave her all of his money, but he would lose the kids for sure. They would always be bargaining chips. And of course whatever shreds of reputation he has left would be lost because you know she would spin it that a break up was all his fault and too many people mindlessly believe everything she says.


----------



## Hermes Zen

rose60610 said:


> Exactly. How could somebody as brash as Meghan claim "she didn't have access to mental health care" when it didn't bother her ONE SINGLE bit to run away from The National's Dorfman Theatre with her ringless hands splayed across her thighs? Her "problems" started when she basically told the BRF to go to hell but expected them to pay all their expenses. She's an entitled spoiled sociopath. So now that she "escaped" the "entrapment" of the BRF and living in a 50 bathroom house in racist USA (her choice), is she spending ten hours a day in therapy to catch up?



She's getting private therapy support from CHIMPO.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> So glad that someone(s) putting their junior high English course to use by channeling Romeo and Juliet. *Just wondering if they remember how it ends*



Get out of my head. I was recently thinking that these two cannot keep going on the way they have been. All of the pushing, all of the trying, all of the scheming. It's like the pressure of a volcano that's been building up and at some point it will burst. 

Not that I think there will be a Romeo and Juliet-type suicide thing (Meghan loves herself too much for that), but it just feels like the potential exists for something disastrous with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Get out of my head. I was recently thinking that these two cannot keep going on the way they have been. All of the pushing, all of the trying, all of the scheming. It's like the pressure of a volcano that's been building up and at some point it will burst.
> 
> Not that I think there will be a Romeo and Juliet-type suicide thing (Meghan loves herself too much for that), but it just feels like the potential exists for something disastrous with them.



It felt that way with Diana, too.  Nothing about her last months said peaceful or happy.  Blame the media, blame the RF, she usually looked stressed, even in those gorgeous locations.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> It felt that way with Diana, too.  Nothing about her last months said peaceful or happy.  Blame the media, blame the RF, she usually looked stressed, even in those gorgeous locations.



Sometimes she looked happy. She had a very nice vacation with the boys that summer. Unfortunately, it was cut short when Gianni Versace was murdered and she came back for the funeral/memorial.


----------



## youngster

Cavalier Girl said:


> My guess for the name of the second spawn of Ms. Markle is Elizabeth Maya (as in Angelou) Alice.  Call name perhaps Emma or Maya.



I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.


That's very interesting, personally I've never heard that before, thank you


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks for posting Lady C's vid. I think her thoughts and impressions come close to what we have already expressed here about the dastardly duo and, I particularly like this conclusion, "There will be no reconciliation unless Meghan gets a personality transplant."


haha, not so simple. If not compatible, it will be rejected fast.  Lady C is a big supporter of the BRF, she must have made MM's long shortlist to sue.


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> That's very interesting, personally I've never heard that before, thank you



It was years ago that I read this (and it could have been made up) but it does make some basic sense to me.  They leave noteworthy, important names to be used over again by future monarchs so they don't have a dozen Lady Victoria's or Princess Victoria's or Prince George's running about, other than the actual heir.  Same would go for the use of the name Elizabeth, I would imagine.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This may be helpful:
From 2018:








						How royal babies are named
					

Vogue looks into the traditions, rules and politics behind naming a new member of the royal family.




					www.vogue.com.au


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don't think he's happy either, but then I don't know that he's ever been all that happy. If he thought he was trapped before, he's truly stuck now. He _might_ be able to free himself from her if he gave her all of his money, but he would lose the kids for sure. They would always be bargaining chips. And of course whatever shreds of reputation he has left would be lost because you know she would spin it that a break up was all his fault and too many people mindlessly believe everything she says.


Unless Bezos falls for Cringe, which is close to impossible, Ginger is 100% trapped.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Unless Bezos falls for Cringe, which is close to impossible, Ginger is 100% trapped.



Between the narcissism and the codependency, I think they'll stay together.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> This may be helpful:
> From 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How royal babies are named
> 
> 
> Vogue looks into the traditions, rules and politics behind naming a new member of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com.au



Interesting! So, according to this article:
_The Queen is told of the name before it is announced, to be sure, but prior approval is not required. “We see, from the diversity of names among the Queen's descendants, that the Queen does seem willing to allow the descendants to choose their own names,” Harris says_


----------



## Hermes Zen

youngster said:


> I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.


Thanks for sharing, this is very interesting.  Wonder if it applies to non-royals who stepped down like M&H. They may not feel they need to follow since they are high and mighty non-royal?


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger (Ginger's camp/Cringe) made Page Six today again!!! 

_Prince Harry will fly home to the US without having “one-on-one” chats with either his father or brother — because neither trust him enough to speak with him alone, sources told Page Six...

Charles and William would only agree to talk to Harry if there were witnesses to what was said, because *the heir to the throne and his elder son feared that a twisted account might leak out from Harry’s camp*, the sources said._









						Prince Harry to return to US without speaking to Charles one-on-one
					

Prince Harry, Prince William and Prince Charles still have “a way to go” in mending their rift, a source told us after the royals reunited at Prince Philip’s funeral.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Thanks for sharing, this is very interesting.  Wonder if it applies to non-royals who stepped down like M&H. They may not feel they need to follow since they are high and mighty non-royal?



They haven't shown any propensity to request approval before, they aren't about to start now. Think of how many times they have blindsided the family in the past few years. If Meghan wants to name the baby Elizabeth Philippa you can be damn sure that nobody besides her will have any input (and that includes _you_, Harry).

Not that I think that will happen. She doesn't like them so there won't be any tributes.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> They haven't shown any propensity to request approval before, they aren't about to start now. Think of how many times they have blindsided the family in the past few years. If Meghan wants to name the baby Elizabeth Philippa you can be damn sure that nobody besides her will have any input (and that include _you_, Harry).


Exactly!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Ginger (Ginger's camp/Cringe) made Page Six today again!!!
> 
> _Prince Harry will fly home to the US without having “one-on-one” chats with either his father or brother — because neither trust him enough to speak with him alone, sources told Page Six...
> 
> Charles and William would only agree to talk to Harry if there were witnesses to what was said, because *the heir to the throne and his elder son feared that a twisted account might leak out from Harry’s camp*, the sources said._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to return to US without speaking to Charles one-on-one
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Prince William and Prince Charles still have “a way to go” in mending their rift, a source told us after the royals reunited at Prince Philip’s funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



They chose the perfect photo - kudos to Charlotte


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Not that I think that will happen. She doesn't like them so there won't be any tributes.



I don't think she likes any of them but at this point, one of the few tributes she can do to suck up to them again is naming her daughter after Diana and/or QE2 or squishing PP's name in there somehow.

It's not because she likes them, it's because she needs to reclaim SOME reputation to the public.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> They haven't shown any propensity to request approval before, they aren't about to start now. Think of how many times they have blindsided the family in the past few years. If Meghan wants to name the baby Elizabeth Philippa you can be damn sure that nobody besides her will have any input (and that includes _you_, Harry).
> 
> Not that I think that will happen. She doesn't like them so there won't be any tributes.


I dunno, she doesn't seem to want to release the Duchess of Sussex title too eagerly.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.


but those rules don't apply to Meghan....she must thrive


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> I don't think she likes any of them but at this point, one of the few tributes she can do to suck up to them again is naming her daughter after Diana and/or QE2 or squishing PP's name in there somehow.
> 
> It's not because she likes them, it's because she needs to reclaim SOME reputation to the public.



At this point I think any naming tributes would be perceived as a big f*ck you from the family. You can't go from publicly portraying the whole lot of them as being heartless, racist horrid people one month to honoring them by naming your baby after them the next.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> At this point I think any naming tributes would be perceived as a big f*ck you from the family. You can't go from publicly portraying the whole lot of them as being heartless, racist horrid people one month to honoring them by naming your baby after them the next.


probably right but I think Diana will be in there somewhere....Harry has gotten so much mileage out of his mother's death I think he will use this as another opportunity


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> probably right but I think Diana will be in there somewhere....Harry has gotten so much mileage out of his mother's death I think he will use this as another opportunity



I thought that too until it was pointed out that Diana is one of Charlotte's names. They still might use it, Harry loved his mother and Meghan wanted to _be_ his mother.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> They chose the perfect photo - kudos to Charlotte
> 
> View attachment 5060946



Charlotte is all of us.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charlotte is all of us.


she is just adorable


----------



## xeyes

Handbag1234 said:


> I would have recorded the conversation and had a lawyer present to be safe. JCMH has burnt his bridges. His own father and brother don’t trust him. So much for honouring his mother’s legacy. Diana would be very sad that it’s come to this. Harry really is the ‘spare’ now.



“Gone spare” more like.



Sharont2305 said:


> I think, going by the way you've described it, I'd pronounce Mario the same way as you. The way the Italians say it.



Anybody of a certain age who played NES games would pronounce it MAH-ree-o by default.



SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Another classic. She just can't help herself.



There’s that great acting talent in action!



needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's new 'CHIMPO' job title sparks hilarity in Japan
> 
> 
> The job title of Prince Harry's new role at startup BetterUp Inc., that some in the US are shortening to 'CHIMPO', has already drawn mockery at home in Britain for the silly-sounding phrase.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Seriously - we can’t make this stuff up!



bag-mania said:


> It isn’t only celebrities. How many times do you see people on Facebook gushing about their wonderful marriage, bragging about their perfect children, going on about their amazing vacations and their luxurious new home? Only to find out later it was all grossly exaggerated if not downright false.



in our house, we figure the more a couple talks about how wonderful their relationship is, the closer they are to splitting up. (Corollary - the bigger the wedding, the shorter the marriage.)



rose60610 said:


> Archie and.......Aretha? That would bundle a lot of symbolism. Whatever the name of Diana Take #2, Meghan will claim the BRF doesn't like it and complain.



‘Cuz all they want...is [more than] a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Halfway through Lady CC's video (I enjoy them, but they are sooo long) - she says she feels Harry was targeting Kate because he knew she'd receive him warmly and he needed some pictures for the US press that made him look like he wasn't a total pariah with the BRF.

I had given him the benefit of the doubt, e.g. maybe he did feel bad about how he allowed Meghan to drag her and did nothing to stand up for her and remembered how they'd been close...but if Lady CC is right and it was all a calculated move, my heart breaks a little for Kate because she seems like a genuinely sweet person and rumour has it she suffered greatly from the estrangement with Harry.


----------



## poopsie

youngster said:


> I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.



Can't get this song out of my head now............junior high music LOL


----------



## gracekelly

Daisy Diana.  DD for short.  
I agree, I don't think that she will want names that remind her of The Queen of Prince Philip.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Halfway through Lady CC's video (I enjoy them, but they are sooo long) - she says she feels Harry was targeting Kate because he knew she'd receive him warmly and he needed some pictures for the US press that made him look like he wasn't a total pariah with the BRF.
> 
> I had given him the benefit of the doubt, e.g. maybe he did feel bad about how he allowed Meghan to drag her and did nothing to stand up for her and remembered how they'd been close...but if Lady CC is right and it was all a calculated move, my heart breaks a little for Kate because she seems like a genuinely sweet person and rumour has it she suffered greatly from the estrangement with Harry.


It was very calculated and he knew that if he started talking to Kate, William would hang in there to make sure she was protected.  Honestly, I would have cut him down cold and ignored him totally, but that's just vindictive little me.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC has been working overtime lately.




Lady CC reminds me of those friends of your grandma that would give you the 'real' truth about life, the non-sugar-coated version.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> It felt that way with Diana, too.  Nothing about her last months said peaceful or happy.  Blame the media, blame the RF, she usually looked stressed, even in those gorgeous locations.


I think that was all Diana.  It was very self destructive of her to start a relationship with a man like Dodie.  He did not have a good reputation by any means and it was said that he used drugs.  She posed for pictures on the yacht that she should not have posed for considering her son would be King one day.  Very foolish woman who had a good heart, but made some silly mistakes.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Lady CC reminds me of those friends of your grandma that would give you the 'real' truth about life, the non-sugar-coated version.



Well it is Lady CC's truth. lol!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It was very calculated and he knew that if he started talking to Kate, William would hang in there to make sure she was protected.  Honestly, I would have cut him down cold and ignored him totally, but that's just vindictive little me.


I'm with  you....guess I'm vindictive too
My husband's mother sued him over his mother's will.  she lost.  She is dead to us.  But it's really easy since we were never really in communication with her anyway and she's on the opposite coast from us.


----------



## pukasonqo

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> TPF is so educational! I love Japan, and now I'm finally learning Japanese



So, officially he is now a dick


----------



## poopsie

poopsie said:


> Can't get this song out of my head now............junior high music LOL




Long ago, life was clean
Sex was bad, called obscene
And the rich were so mean
Stately homes for the Lords
Croquet lawns, village greens
Victoria was my queen
Victoria
Victoria
Victoria, 'toria
I was born, lucky me
In a land that I love
Though I'm poor, I am free
When I grow, I shall fight
For this land, I shall die
Let her sun never set
Victoria
Victoria
Victoria, 'toria
Victoria
Victoria
Victoria, 'toria
Land of hope and gloria
Land of my Victoria
Land of hope and gloria
Land of my Victoria
Victoria, 'toria
Victoria
Victoria
Victoria, 'toria
Canada to India
Australia to Cornwall
Singapore to Hong Kong
From the west to the east
From the rich to the poor
Victoria loved them all
Victoria
Victoria
Victoria, 'toria
Victoria
Victoria


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> According to DM, the letter outlined Ginger's reasons for leaving the BRF. I believe such letter might be real, MM&H are trying to collect evidence to support their claims. After Oprah's interview, I read somewhere that MM wrote to the Palace demanding them to confirm that Kate made her cry...



This is so weird. Why does he need to outline the reasons for leaving to his father, 1 year later. Surely this should have been a in depth conversation at the time and if Charles didn't want to listen or was not communicating, then you write things down and be done with it. I would not pick up calls from H if he was my child, after the bratty way he was demanding X Y and Z.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> So glad that someone(s) putting their junior high English course to use by channeling Romeo and Juliet. Just wondering if they remember how it ends



Juliet was a sheltered 14 y o

Romeo tried to be a peace maker

So no.

This is  not a Shakespearean tale based on an epic love story with a tragic and unjust end.

Theirs is more like Dynasty from the 1980s, a never-ending soap opera of vulgar excesses and petty jealousy that never ends...

TB Cont...


----------



## youngster

poopsie said:


> Can't get this song out of my head now............junior high music LOL




Now I can't get it out of my head lol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC is now dragging Omid's plastic face bwahaha (around the 40 mins mark).


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Oprah interview was a pretty dumb
> 
> 
> This is so weird. Why does he need to outline the reasons for leaving to his father, 1 year later. Surely this should have been a in depth conversation at the time and if Charles didn't want to listen or was not communicating, then you write things down and be done with it. I would not pick up calls from H if he was my child, after the bratty way he was demanding X Y and Z.


Meghan demanding confirmation that kate made her cry would be ridiculous
EVEN if she did cry it could easily have been an over-reaction to whatever was going on with the bridesmaids dress thing
I actually find this hard to believe.  she is arrogant but not totally stupid


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I think that was all Diana.  It was very self destructive of her to start a relationship with a man like Dodie.  He did not have a good reputation by any means and it was said that he used drugs.  She posed for pictures on the yacht that she should not have posed for considering her son would be King one day.  Very foolish woman who had a good heart, but made some silly mistakes.


Speaking of mistakes, she was only with Dodi because the heart surgeon boyfriend broke up with her and she was trying to make him jealous. So she notified the paps as to where she would be, posed on boats and... it all went wrong.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Chances are McCain doesn't know even 1/100th about MM that we know here. She is believing what she has heard from the US press. There is also the possibility she doesn't consider Meghan important enough to argue about with her very liberal View-mates, who I'm sure are extremely pro-Meghan. She may be saving her discussion battles for subjects she cares more about.


here ya go....if you're interested there are multiple times she has talked about the priness


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I thought that too until it was pointed out that Diana is one of Charlotte's names. They still might use it, Harry loved his mother and Meghan wanted to _be_ his mother.



Archie was Georges nickname apparently.

I don't think H&M have a very good record of their (non)consideration of plagiarism, if they want to call her Diana, they will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xeyes said:


> [...]
> ‘Cuz all they want...is [more than] a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T!






poopsie said:


> Can't get this song out of my head now............junior high music LOL



You two! I'm jumping out of my chair now shaking it out 

I used to have that Kinks record, found it in a second hand store. Maybe it's still among my other saved vinyls. Awesome!  Victoriaaah!!!


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.


I can see her doing that though out of spite.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> I can see her doing that though out of spite.


spite?  that sweet thing we saw on Oprah being spiteful?  surely you jest


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> _“*Harry wants to make sure Meghan and the baby are healthy and not involved in stressful situations*.”_





Seriously? Well, maybe he should start by telling his wife to stop putting herself and her baby into stressful situations by not treating people like sh*t, not seeking attention everywhere, not making terrible decisions, not lying 24/7 and not burning every path and bridge behind her as she stirs the pot.




xincinsin said:


> I notice a distinct resemblance to a ball...
> Well, if she does go for Diadora, at least she can't trademark it on clothing, stationery, photographs, educational and charitable endeavors, emotional support groups, newspaper and magazine: *the range of items and activities for which they tried to trademark Sussex Royal.*


I had completely forgotten about that. They are so insufferable.






Icyjade said:


> I just learnt that fake bumps are a thing???
> 
> View attachment 5060429


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> Juliet was a sheltered 14 y o
> 
> Romeo tried to be a peace maker
> 
> So no.
> 
> This is  not a Shakespearean tale based on an epic love story with a tragic and unjust end.
> 
> Theirs is more like Dynasty from the 1980s, a never-ending soap opera of vulgar excesses and petty jealousy that never ends...
> 
> TB Cont...



I was referring to the opening of the previously posted article
_*Two brothers, alike in dignity, among the British monarchy where we lay our scene*_, are grappling with ancient grudges. Will it—should it—be mended? 

That was all

I was obsessed with the Zeffrelli movie version when it came out. The costumes! LEN WHITING!!!!!  
Must have seen it a few dozen times


----------



## Aimee3

I know what they’ll name the baby!  Princess!  After the “p” from Philips name. I’ve actually heard of people with that name.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> here ya go....if you're interested there are multiple times she has talked about the priness




Oh man, I am not watching “Meghan on Meghan” without an alcoholic beverage in my hand.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I know what they’ll name the baby!  Princess!  After the “p” from Philips name. I’ve actually heard of people with that name.



Princess sounds like a name for one of their rescue dogs.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Princess sounds like a name for one of their rescue dogs.


don't forget rescued from a kill shelter


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> Oh man, I am not watching “Meghan on Meghan” without an alcoholic beverage in my hand.


   

(We desperately need more Like button emojis!)


----------



## ladyglen

who knew there was gossip on purse forum,

settles in with a cuppa


----------



## Sol Ryan

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This is so weird. Why does he need to outline the reasons for leaving to his father, 1 year later. Surely this should have been a in depth conversation at the time and if Charles didn't want to listen or was not communicating, then you write things down and be done with it. I would not pick up calls from H if he was my child, after the bratty way he was demanding X Y and Z.



Easy, so he can give the carbon to Omid to print and play victim again about how he tried to fix things and Will and Charles ganged up on him. Those meanies who won’t pay his bills even though he doesn’t want to work for the family and wants to play with James Corden and Oprah...

* fixed spelling.... man I can’t wait til I can see what I’m typing again....


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> At this point I think any naming tributes would be perceived as a big f*ck you from the family. You can't go from publicly portraying the whole lot of them as being heartless, racist horrid people one month to honoring them by naming your baby after them the next.



Except we're logical, she isn't. But also, even if it doesn't get her back in the good graces of the family, it will still get a lot of good press for her (and that's the bit about saving face in front of fans).


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Princess sounds like a name for one of their rescue dogs.



IKR
People across the street from me named their daughter Princess.


----------



## Hermes Zen

ladyglen said:


> who knew there was gossip on purse forum,
> 
> settles in with a cuppa


Welcome ladyglen!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You two! I'm jumping out of my chair now shaking it out
> 
> I used to have that Kinks record, found it in a second hand store. Maybe it's still among my other saved vinyls. Awesome!  Victoriaaah!!!



Love Ray Davies wit
Hard to believe he and Chrissy Hynde's daughter is almost 40 now


----------



## ladyglen

Hermes Zen said:


> Welcome ladyglen!


thanks 
have been calling H+M Duke/Duchess of Windsor 2.0 for many months , think on it


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> don't forget rescued from a kill shelter



Is there any other kind in Meghan’s world?

She rescues chickens from the kill shelter too, or as we commoners call it, the poultry processing plant.


----------



## eunaddict

sdkitty said:


> My husband's mother sued him over his mother's will.  she lost.  She is dead to us.



I am SO confused by this. I need coffee.


----------



## bag-mania

ladyglen said:


> who knew there was gossip on purse forum,
> 
> settles in with a cuppa



Welcome! You’ve got 3,800+ pages to catch up on. I hope you don’t have any plans for the next month or so.


----------



## ladyglen

bag-mania said:


> Welcome! You’ve got 3,800+ pages to catch up on. I hope you don’t have any plans for the next month or so.


hah, actually not!!!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> IKR
> People across the street from me named their daughter Princess.



That’s setting up their kid to be a spoiled brat right from the start.


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> You two! I'm jumping out of my chair now shaking it out
> 
> I used to have that Kinks record, found it in a second hand store. Maybe it's still among my other saved vinyls. Awesome!  Victoriaaah!!!



I didn't even know the Kink's version!

Try The Fall's version. To understand British class, I think someone really has to live here a while. Unless you're Harry of course, he doesn't seem to know what day it is, never  mind have any kind of knowledge/awareness.'We' can/like to mock our Royal family, but we also guard them against outsiders.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> IKR
> People across the street from me named their daughter Princess.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> I didn't even know the Kink's version!
> 
> Try The Fall's version. To understand British class, I think someone really has to live here a while. Unless you're Harry of course, he doesn't seem to know what day it is, never  mind have any kind of knowledge/awareness.'We' can/like to mock our Royal family, but we also guard them against outsiders.



This is how I discovered the original Kinks' version too!  I heard the Fall's version first. And yes, it's a mock/love affair


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Oh man, I am not watching “Meghan on Meghan” without an alcoholic beverage in my hand.



Or 2 or 3.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> That’s setting up their kid to be a spoiled brat right from the start.



IKR
When I first heard it I thought it was so odd because they are not native English speakers.
I asked if I misheard Princess for Princesa. Nope
Mostly I hear her called Tia
She does have some 'tude. But she also fancies herself a skate rat so go figure.
Kids


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’ll just release a statement saying that TRF doesn’t own the name Diana!


----------



## csshopper

A British friend says among her family and social groups a groundswell against Meghan and Harry continues to grow and may actually help the Monarchy. There is no way they want it to look like Meghan and Harry have "won".


----------



## Sophisticatted

Could the letter have been required for an invitation to the funeral?  No letter, no inclusion of Harry.

They’ve clearly held him at arms length since he arrived.  Quarantine at Frogmore, refusing to hang with him outside of funeral.  Charles getting the heck out of town and going into seclusion.  William and a Charles making it clear via press leaks that they will not meet with him without witnesses present, etc.

The BRF just made it LOUD & CLEAR that H&M are on the outs and the BRF is having no association with them whatsoever.  Try to merch off that! And just when whatsername was “ready to forgive”.  LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I do wonder is a removal of titles will be next.


----------



## ladyglen

gossip and fun aside, this is sad
Charles is 70 ish has 2 kids and is not speaking to one of them.   life is unpredictable


----------



## ladyglen

Sophisticatted said:


> I do wonder is a removal of titles will be next.


MM's can be taken, like Diana's was but Harry's? wouldn't he always be a Prince


----------



## Sophisticatted

He would.


----------



## ladyglen

Sophisticatted said:


> He would.


but not D o S,  I think but he'd Keep Prince Harry and ancillaries (if he has them ). Will probably has them all


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> I didn't even know the Kink's version!
> 
> Try The Fall's version. To understand British class, I think someone really has to live here a while. Unless you're Harry of course, he doesn't seem to know what day it is, never  mind have any kind of knowledge/awareness.'We' can/like to mock our Royal family, but we also guard them against outsiders.




I hadn't heard of them before. 
The Call, yes but not The Fall
Interesting version


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Halfway through Lady CC's video (I enjoy them, but they are sooo long) - she says she feels Harry was targeting Kate because he knew she'd receive him warmly and he needed some pictures for the US press that made him look like he wasn't a total pariah with the BRF.
> 
> I had given him the benefit of the doubt, e.g. maybe he did feel bad about how he allowed Meghan to drag her and did nothing to stand up for her and remembered how they'd been close...but if Lady CC is right and it was all a calculated move, my heart breaks a little for Kate because she seems like a genuinely sweet person and rumour has it she suffered greatly from the estrangement with Harry.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Halfway through Lady CC's video (I enjoy them, but they are sooo long) - she says she feels Harry was targeting Kate because he knew she'd receive him warmly and he needed some pictures for the US press that made him look like he wasn't a total pariah with the BRF.
> 
> I had given him the benefit of the doubt, e.g. maybe he did feel bad about how he allowed Meghan to drag her and did nothing to stand up for her and remembered how they'd been close...but if Lady CC is right and it was all a calculated move, my heart breaks a little for Kate because she seems like a genuinely sweet person and rumour has it she suffered greatly from the estrangement with Harry.



No, no no no, he was not at all sorry. He cut off Lord Snowden to change the walk-in order. Disrespectful to all involved. He glared at Princess Anne to such an extent Zara gave him a side-eye. His comment that Philip got the funeral he wanted, that shows how jealous Harry is of anyone getting what they want. if Philip got what he wanted, why can’t H get what he want$? Sheesh, dude, give it a rest. No, he is not sorry. My guess he will not apologize for MM either because he believes with his heart and soul he is helping W and Charles. Remember H sees W and Charles as the ‘trapped’ ones. He himself is the great untrapped one. 

Please, William, cancel this statue show. No one wants another tension-filled weekend. Enough.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> That’s setting up their kid to be a spoiled brat right from the start.


Like mother, like daughter!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Meghan demanding confirmation that kate made her cry would be ridiculous
> EVEN if she did cry it could easily have been an over-reaction to whatever was going on with the bridesmaids dress thing
> I actually find this hard to believe.  she is arrogant but not totally stupid


I can't get over that this who made who cry is a major issue.  More of an issue to me is if Meghan wasn't nice to a little girll (Charlotte)   who was probably excited at being part of the wedding.  Children don't shrug off mean behavior towards them  the same way an adult would.  Charlotte strikes me as a girl with a long memory.


----------



## queennadine

My guess for the baby girl’s name is Frances (Diana’s middle name), nn Frannie or Frankie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has H left the UK yet?


----------



## Chanbal

ladyglen said:


> who knew there was gossip on purse forum,
> 
> settles in with a cuppa


It is as addictive as VCA, Chanel... and it costs a lot less.


----------



## octopus17

I realize that Lady Colin Campbell has a lot to say about the situation, and her opinion may or may not be right, but quite frankly I went clean off her when on "I'm a Celebrity get me out of here", she got into it with Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet and called him an "oik" and also a "sh1t" and then said " You don't even have a good voice"...   And that's when I realized her judgement was decidedly dodgy, imo. I like her, but really, she didn't know what she was talking about, imo and it showed.

Edit, to add imo.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has H left the UK yet?


This is a golden question. At this point, he may stay for QE's birthday. He may need a few more photo-ops in the UK.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Cornflower Blue said:


> I realize that Lady Colin Campbell has a lot to say about the situation, and her opinion may or may not be right, but quite frankly I went clean off her when on "I'm a Celebrity get me out of here", she got into it with Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet and called him an "oik" and also a "sh1t" and then said " You don't even have a good voice"...   And that's when I realized her judgement was decidedly dodgy. I like her, but really, she didn't know what she was talking about and it showed.



Whoa.... I knew she was on I’m a Celeb.... but I did not know she besmirched Spandau Ballet!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> I don't believe the "Sayonara Zara" rumors. She was wearing H&M, Banana Republic, Jcrew, etc for a long time even after marrying.



I read about this a number of times.  Per her "friends."  I believe it.  Of course she took the opportunity to brag.




lalame said:


> Heavily pregnant is a pretty common term to me... it's a casual description for how someone looks/feels, not really a scientific term by any means.



I never heard the term in regular usage in the US.  Maybe in a romance novel.




papertiger said:


> Why isn't she?
> Hello!  I'd put her under medical observation given her self-proclaimed history.
> Last time she was pregnant she felt moved to kill herself. It's not just her life.
> Mental illness doesn't just come and go when the person wants. _If _it was real _then_ and a huge deal she wasn't taken seriously, then _this _time around it should be dealt with intensively and by professionals.



She was lying.  She never was suicidal.  It's a classic histrionic claim.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has H left the UK yet?


He may be waiting for an invitation!











						Royal Family: Meghan faces ‘dilemma’ over new ‘bombshell’
					

PRINCE HARRY will now feel "totally torn" about his and Meghan Markle's decision to step down from the Royal Family and move to California, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would have been disappointed in the RF if they didn’t stand up for themselves by not acting like everything is fine.


----------



## bag-mania

Cornflower Blue said:


> I realize that Lady Colin Campbell has a lot to say about the situation, and her opinion may or may not be right, but quite frankly I went clean off her when on "I'm a Celebrity get me out of here", she got into it with Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet and called him an "oik" and also a "sh1t" and then said " You don't even have a good voice"...   And that's when I realized her judgement was decidedly dodgy, imo. I like her, but really, she didn't know what she was talking about, imo and it showed.
> 
> Edit, to add imo.





Sol Ryan said:


> Whoa.... I knew she was on I’m a Celeb.... but I did not know she besmirched Spandau Ballet!



Isn’t most of what we see on reality shows actually scripted though? I wouldn’t be surprised if they wanted her to play up being the cranky old lady and told her to diss the others. Well-behaved, polite people don’t make for good television.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> This is a golden question. At this point, he may stay for QE's birthday. few *He may need a more photo-ops in the UK.*



With who? Are they planning on photoshopping the others in or something?


----------



## poopsie

lulilu said:


> She was lying.  She never was suicidal.  It's a classic histrionic claim.



From Synchronicity II
"Mother chants her litany of boredom and frustration but we know all her suicides are fake"


----------



## Aimee3

So is Prince Charles coming back for the queens birthday???


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Please, William, cancel this statue show. No one wants another tension-filled weekend. Enough.



I do! I’m not too proud to admit I am addicted to the drama. Will Harry go back and take credit for organizing the event even though he’s had nothing to do with it in over a year? Will he stay home and hold Meghan’s by then super-heavily pregnant hand? Will they adopt a rescue duck and name it’s pond after the new baby? I MUST KNOW!!


----------



## poopsie

Aimee3 said:


> So is Prince Charles coming back for the queens birthday???



I would certainly hope so.
I don't mean to be insensitive to his grief, I really don't but this is the future KING of the realm------ he needs to put his big boy pants on deal with it. Can you image TQ running off to a bolthole to grieve? I have never had much respect for Charles. Granted I only know what I have read so I'm quite sure I don't have the full picture of the man, but *if *what I have read would be considered putting his best foot forward then ummmmm........NO


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh, the rest is behind paywall. This is enough to get the gist, much as many here have predicted.
tPF rides again. 


_Netflix has reported a sharp slowdown in subscriber growth after the pandemic brought a surge in customer numbers last year and disrupted the production of its biggest shows.

The streaming group added fewer than four million new users in the latest quarter — two million shy of its own forecast — and cautioned that it will add one million in the next three months. The slowdown in Netflix subscribers could be regarded as the first signs of a reversal in the fortunes of the so-called Covid winner stocks.









						Netflix subscriptions slowdown is a big turn-off for investors
					

Netflix has reported a sharp slowdown in subscriber growth after the pandemic brought a surge in customer numbers last year and disrupted the production of its biggest shows.The streaming group added




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				



_


----------



## poopsie

Sol Ryan said:


> Whoa.... I knew she was on I’m a Celeb.... but I did not know she besmirched Spandau Ballet!



LMAO------- True was just on the radio. I kid you not
I'm back in the office and yelled out to the BF "is that Spandau Ballet?????" leaving him completely bemused at what all the fuss was about. LOL


----------



## Sol Ryan

poopsie said:


> LMAO------- True was just on the radio. I kid you not
> I'm back in the office and yelled out to the BF "is that Spandau Ballet?????" leaving him completely bemused at what all the fuss was about. LOL



I love that song....


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I would certainly hope so.
> I don't mean to be insensitive to his grief, I really don't but this is the future KING of the realm------ he needs to put his big boy pants on deal with it. Can you image TQ running off to a bolthole to grieve? I have never had much respect for Charles. Granted I only know what I have read so I'm quite sure I don't have the full picture of the man, but *if *what I have read would be considered putting his best foot forward then ummmmm........NO



One article said he goes annually to this town. Usually he does engagements there,  but technically the RF is mourning.


----------



## lanasyogamama

poopsie said:


> I would certainly hope so.
> I don't mean to be insensitive to his grief, I really don't but this is the future KING of the realm------ he needs to put his big boy pants on deal with it. Can you image TQ running off to a bolthole to grieve? I have never had much respect for Charles. Granted I only know what I have read so I'm quite sure I don't have the full picture of the man, but *if *what I have read would be considered putting his best foot forward then ummmmm........NO


I agree.  I went to my graduation ceremony for my master’s degree two days after burying my father and I wasn’t even 30 years old.  I knew it was what he would have wanted.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> One article said he goes annually to this town. Usually he does engagements there,  but technically the RF is mourning.



Yes, but this is not just some engagement. Yes, the RM is in mourning. 
But NOW is when he needs to step up and show what he is made of. Being in mourning should NOT mean being MIA. He is the man of the house now so to speak. Sadly I think he is a pale shadow of his father and the reason TQ has stayed on the throne far longer than she may have wanted. 
JMO, of course


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

It feels so strange that we haven't had anything but media questioning if H will stay for Queen's birthday or go back to California since the funeral service. We heard/read articles C, W & H may meet after the service, then C left the area etc etc.  I could be totally wrong but I sense C, W, H are/have met and possibly briefly with the Q. H will leave after her birthday lunch tomorrow. We won't know until the RF are ready to share.  H & M were made to be totally silent or no meeting, no $$$'s etc.  I wish H&M would stay quiet forever BUT we all know that ain't happening!


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> With who? Are they planning on photoshopping the others in or something?


Queen's corgis? I read that they were a gift from Randy Andy, the only royal apparently sympathetic to Ginger.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Forgot to say that I know they are in a two week mourning period and media was asked to respect that. BUT still strange no leaks.  It would be wonderful if this silence is because they are being respectful to the Queen.


----------



## xincinsin

Cornflower Blue said:


> I realize that Lady Colin Campbell has a lot to say about the situation, and her opinion may or may not be right, but quite frankly I went clean off her when on "I'm a Celebrity get me out of here", she got into it with Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet and called him an "oik" and also a "sh1t" and then said " You don't even have a good voice"...   And that's when I realized her judgement was decidedly dodgy, imo. I like her, but really, she didn't know what she was talking about, imo and it showed.
> 
> Edit, to add imo.


She has a decidedly chequered past. There was an interview I read somewhere that claimed her ex (Lord Colin Campbell) wished she would stop using his name but he has no way to stop her from doing so. She makes money off delivering gossip, so it stands to reason that what she is saying likely has a grain of truth. Also, she has bragged that she never says anything for which she can be sued, so speculation is in, but outright lies are out.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Queen's corgis? I read that they were a gift of Randy Andy, the only royal apparently sympathetic to Ginger.


Her previous corgis were so sweet in the Olympics filmlet. It must burn MM that her MIL's only turn as an actress was as a Bond girl and viewed by a global audience.


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree.  I went to my graduation ceremony for my master’s degree two days after burying my father and I wasn’t even 30 years old.  I knew it was what he would have wanted.


Likewise, I took my final law school exams starting two days after my dad's funeral.  Agree that's what he would have wanted as he wanted me to go to law school.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Queen's corgis? I read that they were a gift from Randy Andy, the only royal apparently sympathetic to Ginger.



Meh  I hope they pee on his leg


----------



## rose60610

Right. I get that Charles is grieving. TQ is definitely grieving, and as was said before, it's time Chuck take a page from the royal handbook, lead, and buck up. Even TQ handled a duty after Philip died. Cripes, Chuck, set an example for your country.


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> She has a decidedly chequered past. There was an interview I read somewhere that claimed her ex (Lord Colin Campbell) wished she would stop using his name but he has no way to stop her from doing so. She makes money off delivering gossip, so it stands to reason that what she is saying likely has a grain of truth. Also, she has bragged that she never says anything for which she can be sued, so speculation is in, but *outright lies are out.*



Small nuance... you can lie without much issue. You get in trouble when your lie is damaging enough to cause financial damages to the person you're lying about AND if you did it maliciously, knowing it was a lie. This opens the door to speculation that's unlikely but maybe you "believed it was true."


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Her previous corgis were so sweet in the Olympics filmlet. It must burn MM that her MIL's only turn as an actress was as a Bond girl and viewed by a global audience.



DH and I were in London shortly after the 2012 Olympics. I asked a tour guide about the corgis used in that filmlet. He stated those were not TQ's actual dogs, they were brought in for the shoot, trained to roll over on command. Fun fact!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

papertiger said:


> I'd put her under medical observation given her self-proclaimed history.
> 
> Last time she was pregnant she felt moved to kill herself. It's not just her life.
> 
> Mental illness doesn't just come and go when the person wants. _If _it was real _then_ and a huge deal she wasn't taken seriously, then _this _time around it should be dealt with intensively and by professionals.



My thoughts exactly when she proclaimed she was suicidal when pregnant, I was wondering why none had expressed concern after the interview about whether she had finally got help. Because feeling like you are suicidal is extremely dangerous, in that moment especially. Those thoughts will go away, but they will come back again depending on the triggers, that is something that must be sorted out otherwise you will face tragedy. The irony that the 4 of them support mental health charities, yet they can't sort themselves out. Mental health issues are very hard to solve too, and can take a long time to get to a stable position. Generally long term care is needed. True suicidal thoughts (as opposed to just depression) is very very serious and doesn't just go away when they antagonism is taken away. I get the impression she was feeling this way due to the bullying from the press and social media. In this case, it sounds more like depression and being in a dark place. It takes more than just pure bullying to commit suicide.


----------



## haute okole

Cali-Harry is back.  He probably could not wait to get back to growing his pony tail and smoking pot, since it is legal here.  Thefreshtoast.com : Does Prince Harry Smoke Weed?  Also, according to Thomas Markle, at MeAgain’s first wedding in Jamaica, her wedding gift bags included marijuana.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It looks as though Prince Harry has returned to the US to reunite with pregnant wife Meghan and their two-year-old son Archie, DailyMail.com can reveal.

The royal, 36, is believed to have flown into LAX on an American Airlines flight that arrived in Los Angeles shortly after 1.30pm local time.

His car was seen leaving the private terminal at LAX minutes after the plane landed and was spotted again arriving in Montecito at around 4pm.












						Prince Harry returns home to pregnant Meghan and Archie
					

It appears Prince Harry has returned to his home in Montecito, California, to reunite with pregnant wife Meghan and Archie after flying to London for Prince Philip's funeral.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: Now Charles and Will can come back to London without worrying over Harry’s set-ups. They can celebrate with QE and have a giggle at how H just doesn’t get it - he really is not welcome.  whew.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> DH and I were in London shortly after the 2012 Olympics. I asked a tour guide about the corgis used in that filmlet. He stated those were not TQ's actual dogs, they were brought in for the shoot, trained to roll over on command. Fun fact!


 the Daily Express said they were TQ's corgis and I was so  
DS has been trying to convince us to get a corgi after our last dog went off to the Great Blue Yonder.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I think the family is very careful with first names and permission has to be granted when you want to use a name of a Queen, King, or former Queen or King as a first name.  At least, that's my recollection.  Maybe our British members can set me straight if I'm incorrect?  I recall reading that while Queen Victoria named one of her own daughters "Victoria", and some of her daughters used the name "Victoria" for their daughters, no one in recent decades in the immediate family has been allowed to use "Victoria" as a first name for a child.  Her name is special, like Queen Elizabeth's is special, and reserved for future use by a future monarch.  So, use Elizabeth for a middle name, yes, but first name, probably not.  Again, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I recall reading an article a long time ago that discussed this.


Well, Meg probably feels since she is in the US, "Names are Universal".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It looks as though Prince Harry has returned to the US to reunite with *HEAVILY* pregnant wife Meghan and their two-year-old son Archie, DailyMail.com can reveal.



Fixed it for you!


----------



## Jayne1

Cornflower Blue said:


> I realize that Lady Colin Campbell has a lot to say about the situation, and her opinion may or may not be right, but quite frankly I went clean off her when on "I'm a Celebrity get me out of here", she got into it with Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet and called him an "oik" and also a "sh1t" and then said " You don't even have a good voice"...   And that's when I realized her judgement was decidedly dodgy, imo. I like her, but really, she didn't know what she was talking about, imo and it showed.
> 
> Edit, to add imo.


Tony Hadley can sing live. Can't say that for many singers in popular bands. 

Lady CC is a character, and I do think she has inside info, is obviously very intelligent, but I'll keep in mind what you said!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> They chose the perfect photo - kudos to Charlotte
> 
> View attachment 5060946


She looks like a bot.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It looks as though Prince Harry has returned to the US to reunite with pregnant wife Meghan and their two-year-old son Archie, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> The royal, 36, is believed to have flown into LAX on an American Airlines flight that arrived in Los Angeles shortly after 1.30pm local time.
> 
> His car was seen leaving the private terminal at LAX minutes after the plane landed and was spotted again arriving in Montecito at around 4pm.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5061157
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry returns home to pregnant Meghan and Archie
> 
> 
> It appears Prince Harry has returned to his home in Montecito, California, to reunite with pregnant wife Meghan and Archie after flying to London for Prince Philip's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Now Charles and Will can come back to London without worrying over Harry’s set-ups. They can celebrate with QE and have a giggle at how H just doesn’t get it - he really is not welcome.  whew.


I was going to post this  
Ginger didn't get an invite to QE's birthday lunch and was not able to get more photo-ops. Cringe will be upset.


----------



## lulilu

I read this on twitter:
"I noticed that, & as Lady Louise was leaving her pew Harry very rudely barged in front of her, Sophie looked at him with contempt. I bet he was in a rush to catch up with William & Catherine & be photographed with them."

If true, unbelievably rude.

ETA:  The poster also commented that H showed no true sadness or emotion.  Only signs of self -- how others were treating him, his position in the procession, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I was going to post this
> Ginger didn't get an invite to QE's birthday lunch and was not able to get more photo-ops. Cringe will be upset.



Nflix may want a refund


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> It looks as though Prince Harry has returned to the US to reunite with pregnant wife Meghan and their two-year-old son Archie, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> The royal, 36, is believed to have flown into LAX on an American Airlines flight that arrived in Los Angeles shortly after 1.30pm local time.
> ETA: *Now Charles and Will can come back to London without worrying over Harry’s set-ups.* They can celebrate with QE and have a giggle at how H just doesn’t get it - he really is not welcome.  whew.



Bad optics. PP *never* would have dodged a confrontation with one of his _children._


----------



## catlover46

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut oh, the rest is behind paywall. This is enough to get the gist, much as many here have predicted.
> tPF rides again.
> 
> 
> _Netflix has reported a sharp slowdown in subscriber growth after the pandemic brought a surge in customer numbers last year and disrupted the production of its biggest shows.
> 
> The streaming group added fewer than four million new users in the latest quarter — two million shy of its own forecast — and cautioned that it will add one million in the next three months. The slowdown in Netflix subscribers could be regarded as the first signs of a reversal in the fortunes of the so-called Covid winner stocks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix subscriptions slowdown is a big turn-off for investors
> 
> 
> Netflix has reported a sharp slowdown in subscriber growth after the pandemic brought a surge in customer numbers last year and disrupted the production of its biggest shows.The streaming group added
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If they had any smarts, they should’ve waited for HBO Max. It’s a big reason why netflix is losing subscribers.


----------



## Straight-Laced

lulilu said:


> I read this on twitter:
> "I noticed that, & as Lady Louise was leaving her pew Harry very rudely barged in front of her, Sophie looked at him with contempt. I bet he was in a rush to catch up with William & Catherine & be photographed with them."
> 
> If true, unbelievably rude.
> 
> ETA:  The poster also commented that H showed no true sadness or emotion.  Only signs of self -- how others were treating him, his position in the procession, etc.



Lady Louise is the future, Harry is the past. 
Buh-bye H


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Bad optics. PP *never* would have dodged a confrontation with one of his _children._



Agree.
Charles seems weaker because of the H&M mess. Although once we understand why C’s options are limited [H will always be a prince], then why bother ‘meeting about it’? Surely, H&M have been _told_ to stop the media blast, but can anyone really stop them? If they want to blabber away, they will. Other than money, there is not much leverage. IMO


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> I read this on twitter:
> "I noticed that, & as Lady Louise was leaving her pew Harry very rudely barged in front of her, Sophie looked at him with contempt. I bet he was in a rush to catch up with William & Catherine & be photographed with them."
> 
> If true, unbelievably rude.
> 
> ETA:  The poster also commented that H showed no true sadness or emotion.  Only signs of self -- how others were treating him, his position in the procession, etc.



He was supposed to exit before Lady Louise, so that was ok. The odd thing -  He looked like he was going to turn, walk toward William and exit with William. Remember he had successfully cut off Lord Snowden earlier.  Edward, Sophie, James and Louise stood firm, stared down his aggressive behavior.  It is all on video.  IMO, he looked high/drunk/on meds. In the church, he was fidgety, almost clumsy. I could be very wrong, could be seeing what I want to see, but he looked like he was crumbling under the pressure.  Everyone else exuded grace and calm, that beloved Royal behavior.


----------



## xincinsin

Maybe Little Bump will be named Royal - to rub it in that BRF has no monopoly over that word, not that the gracious Duke & Duchess of Sussex are petty of course  

Royal Princess Diana Doria Meghansdottir Mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are we really sure the guy in the suit is H?  Did he really fly all those hours in a _suit?  Sloppy gray shirt Harry? _

==========
What Philip’s loss means:


> _Few were more keenly aware of the fragility of monarchy than Philip … He saw thrones pushed over and dynasties collapse_


Charles needs to step up, sort out his personal issues, and stop playing politics.








						The Queen alone: how Prince Philip’s death will change the monarchy
					

With the poignant sight of the widowed Queen, the world glimpsed not just the era that is ending, but the one that is inevitably on its way




					www.theguardian.com
				





Spoiler: How Philip’s passing will change the monarchy



*The Queen alone: how Prince Philip’s death will change the monarchy*
*With the poignant sight of the widowed Queen, the world glimpsed not just the era that is ending, but the one that is inevitably on its way*
You could barely see her, but you could glimpse the future. Maybe it was the sepulchral gloom of the dark wooden stalls of St George’s chapel, or perhaps it was the restraint of a TV director keeping their distance, respecting the privacy of the moment, but the Queen was hardly visible in the live coverage of her late husband’s funeral on Saturday. Masked and in an unlit corner, the monarch was all but unseen.

When the camera did catch her, it made for a poignant sight: the widow alone, an image that “broke hearts around the world,” in the words of the Washington Post, but one that will resonate in the UK especially. Even the sternest ********** has long admitted that an extraordinary bond exists between Elizabeth and the people who have been her subjects for nearly seven decades. Now, if anything, that bond will be strengthened.

Part of it will be natural human sympathy for a woman deprived of the man she had known for 81 years, who had been her “strength and stay” for 73 years. Traditionally, a monarch is meant to inspire awe and deference in those she reigns over. Now there will be tenderness too.






The Queen sits alone in St George’s chapel during the funeral of Prince Philip, the man who had been by her side for 73 years. Photograph: Jonathan Brady/AP
Saturday’s funeral will have added another, more improbable, dimension to the relationship: an unlikely kind of solidarity. Like tens of thousands of others, the Queen was denied the traditional farewell for a loved one. Of course, by any normal standards, Prince Philip was buried with great ceremony. But it was not quite the funeral he or his wife had imagined: there were 30 guests, not 800. More importantly, like every other Briton who has suffered a loss this last year, the mourners had to sit apart and cover their faces. They could not sing. The widow had to sit alone, denied the consolation of touch.

In a country that despises double standards – one rule for them, another rule for us – the sight of the monarch abiding by the same regulations that have restricted everyone else in the UK, sharing their fate, will matter. The Queen learned that lesson long ago. She was 14 when her mother said, after Buckingham Palace was bombed in September 1940, that she “could look the East End in the face.”




> Few were more keenly aware of the fragility of monarchy than Philip … He saw thrones pushed over and dynasties collapse


And so the ties that bind Elizabeth to her subjects become stronger: next year she will mark her platinum jubilee, a milestone that has never been reached before. But in a few days, she will be 95 years old. Which means that Saturday’s hour of mourning in Windsor, like the eight days that preceded it, offered a glimpse not only of the era that is ending, but of the one that is, inevitably, on its way – the one in which the royal family will be without its oldest generation.

Some things will not change. The royal family proved again at the funeral that it bows to no one when it comes to the staging of ceremony. Covid was meant to have stripped the spectacle, but somehow the very austerity of the event only made it more beautiful. The monarchy probably has a fraction of the budget Netflix can splash on The Crown’s recreation of royal events, but it still knows how to put on a perfect show. The dipped heads of the guardsmen; the single wreath of white flowers; the four haunting voices of the choir; the silhouetted image of a sole piper, receding through an ancient doorway at the funeral’s close – it matched anything director Stephen Daldry and his Emmy-winning team could have come up with.

Similarly, the British monarchy will not lose its knack for compelling storylines. The drama of William and Harry walking behind the coffin of their grandfather, apparently needing to be separated by a cousin – only then to be seen chatting after the funeral – is an archetypal soap opera plot, brothers at odds if not at war, that could run for decades. There need be no worries on that score.

But the other signs will be more troubling for the palace, ones that go far beyond a record number that will already have caused worry: the 109,741 complaints to the BBC over its coverage of Philip’s death, with many irritated to miss EastEnders or the MasterChef final.





‘The drama of William and Harry walking behind the coffin of their grandfather … is an archetypal soap opera plot’. Photograph: Mark Large/AP
There are more serious concerns. Those with a closeup view testified that Prince Charles appeared to be broken-up by the death of his father, but he has stubbornly refused to arouse deep affection in the hearts of the public. Maybe that will come once he finally becomes king, but few would bet on it. Not least because the Prince of Wales has been unable to emulate the quality that is the foundation of his mother’s standing: her silence on nearly every question of controversy, a fastidious neutrality that has made her acceptable to almost everyone.

Behind him in the procession was his brother Andrew, shielded by his father’s coffin from the opprobrium that would on any other day surely greet his appearance in public. Anne is respected, Edward is inoffensive, William and Harry have their fans – but none have the stature of the man they buried. That’s partly because their military records are weaker than Philip’s was and partly for a reason that none of them can help: they do not have the connection to the second world war which serves as the bedrock event of modern Britain.

The Queen and her husband embodied that link. He fought for his country in the Royal Navy; she was on the balcony, in uniform, alongside Winston Churchill on VE Day. That has helped tie the monarchy to the country for the entire postwar era: witness the instant power of the Queen’s message in the first weeks of Covid, invoking a wartime anthem to say, “We will meet again.” The death of Prince Philip has loosened that connection; one day it will be gone.

It is not sacrilegious to talk like this, nor disrespectful of the prince himself. On the contrary, few were more keenly aware of the fragility of monarchy than him. His grandfather was the king of Greece, but his father was chased out of the country, banished for life. His great-aunt was murdered along with the Russian tsar in the bloodshed of the Bolshevik revolution. He saw once-solid thrones pushed over and long-rooted royal dynasties collapse.

The Queen herself hardly needs to be told that no law of nature says a monarchy must exist for ever. The defining fact of her own life may well be the abdication of her uncle, after serving just 325 days as King Edward VIII. She knows that royal stability and continuity are far from automatic, but take persistence, perseverance and deft personnel. She and her late husband fitted the bill perfectly. But from that couple, from that generation, there is now just her, alone.


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> I think the DM enjoys printing pieces like this because the comments section goes insane at the idea of some spoiled American being welcomed into the family who then proceeds to tell everyone they're doing it wrong.
> 
> Ultimately, the decision doesn't rest with the ladies of The View or Gayle King or writers like this woman, it's up to the British people to decide how they want their government structured and discarding their constitutional monarchy with the Queen (or King) as head of state over an American drama duchess married to the ex-spare is highly unlikely.  Just my .02.


Nail on the head. Click click click= money money money.
The royals especially are globally known, unlikely to sue and welcome publicity.


papertiger said:


> View attachment 5061023


Haha I like the irony that Prince was actually called Prince too.

personally I don’t find Prince/Princess/King/Queenie that weird. Lots of people are called things with a kind of assumption in it. Calling your daughter Bella doesn’t necessarily mean she’ll be beautiful- it just expresses how you feel.


----------



## Sharont2305

eunaddict said:


> It's not because she likes them, it's because she needs to reclaim SOME reputation to the public.


She THINKS she needs to reclaim SOME reputation to the public.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we really sure the guy in the suit is H?  Did he really fly all those hours in a _suit?  Sloppy gray shirt Harry? _
> 
> ==========
> What Philip’s loss means:
> 
> Charles needs to step up, sort out his personal issues, and stop playing politics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen alone: how Prince Philip’s death will change the monarchy
> 
> 
> With the poignant sight of the widowed Queen, the world glimpsed not just the era that is ending, but the one that is inevitably on its way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: How Philip’s passing will change the monarchy
> 
> 
> 
> *The Queen alone: how Prince Philip’s death will change the monarchy*
> *With the poignant sight of the widowed Queen, the world glimpsed not just the era that is ending, but the one that is inevitably on its way*
> You could barely see her, but you could glimpse the future. Maybe it was the sepulchral gloom of the dark wooden stalls of St George’s chapel, or perhaps it was the restraint of a TV director keeping their distance, respecting the privacy of the moment, but the Queen was hardly visible in the live coverage of her late husband’s funeral on Saturday. Masked and in an unlit corner, the monarch was all but unseen.
> 
> When the camera did catch her, it made for a poignant sight: the widow alone, an image that “broke hearts around the world,” in the words of the Washington Post, but one that will resonate in the UK especially. Even the sternest ********** has long admitted that an extraordinary bond exists between Elizabeth and the people who have been her subjects for nearly seven decades. Now, if anything, that bond will be strengthened.
> 
> Part of it will be natural human sympathy for a woman deprived of the man she had known for 81 years, who had been her “strength and stay” for 73 years. Traditionally, a monarch is meant to inspire awe and deference in those she reigns over. Now there will be tenderness too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen sits alone in St George’s chapel during the funeral of Prince Philip, the man who had been by her side for 73 years. Photograph: Jonathan Brady/AP
> Saturday’s funeral will have added another, more improbable, dimension to the relationship: an unlikely kind of solidarity. Like tens of thousands of others, the Queen was denied the traditional farewell for a loved one. Of course, by any normal standards, Prince Philip was buried with great ceremony. But it was not quite the funeral he or his wife had imagined: there were 30 guests, not 800. More importantly, like every other Briton who has suffered a loss this last year, the mourners had to sit apart and cover their faces. They could not sing. The widow had to sit alone, denied the consolation of touch.
> 
> In a country that despises double standards – one rule for them, another rule for us – the sight of the monarch abiding by the same regulations that have restricted everyone else in the UK, sharing their fate, will matter. The Queen learned that lesson long ago. She was 14 when her mother said, after Buckingham Palace was bombed in September 1940, that she “could look the East End in the face.”
> 
> 
> 
> And so the ties that bind Elizabeth to her subjects become stronger: next year she will mark her platinum jubilee, a milestone that has never been reached before. But in a few days, she will be 95 years old. Which means that Saturday’s hour of mourning in Windsor, like the eight days that preceded it, offered a glimpse not only of the era that is ending, but of the one that is, inevitably, on its way – the one in which the royal family will be without its oldest generation.
> 
> Some things will not change. The royal family proved again at the funeral that it bows to no one when it comes to the staging of ceremony. Covid was meant to have stripped the spectacle, but somehow the very austerity of the event only made it more beautiful. The monarchy probably has a fraction of the budget Netflix can splash on The Crown’s recreation of royal events, but it still knows how to put on a perfect show. The dipped heads of the guardsmen; the single wreath of white flowers; the four haunting voices of the choir; the silhouetted image of a sole piper, receding through an ancient doorway at the funeral’s close – it matched anything director Stephen Daldry and his Emmy-winning team could have come up with.
> 
> Similarly, the British monarchy will not lose its knack for compelling storylines. The drama of William and Harry walking behind the coffin of their grandfather, apparently needing to be separated by a cousin – only then to be seen chatting after the funeral – is an archetypal soap opera plot, brothers at odds if not at war, that could run for decades. There need be no worries on that score.
> 
> But the other signs will be more troubling for the palace, ones that go far beyond a record number that will already have caused worry: the 109,741 complaints to the BBC over its coverage of Philip’s death, with many irritated to miss EastEnders or the MasterChef final.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘The drama of William and Harry walking behind the coffin of their grandfather … is an archetypal soap opera plot’. Photograph: Mark Large/AP
> There are more serious concerns. Those with a closeup view testified that Prince Charles appeared to be broken-up by the death of his father, but he has stubbornly refused to arouse deep affection in the hearts of the public. Maybe that will come once he finally becomes king, but few would bet on it. Not least because the Prince of Wales has been unable to emulate the quality that is the foundation of his mother’s standing: her silence on nearly every question of controversy, a fastidious neutrality that has made her acceptable to almost everyone.
> 
> Behind him in the procession was his brother Andrew, shielded by his father’s coffin from the opprobrium that would on any other day surely greet his appearance in public. Anne is respected, Edward is inoffensive, William and Harry have their fans – but none have the stature of the man they buried. That’s partly because their military records are weaker than Philip’s was and partly for a reason that none of them can help: they do not have the connection to the second world war which serves as the bedrock event of modern Britain.
> 
> The Queen and her husband embodied that link. He fought for his country in the Royal Navy; she was on the balcony, in uniform, alongside Winston Churchill on VE Day. That has helped tie the monarchy to the country for the entire postwar era: witness the instant power of the Queen’s message in the first weeks of Covid, invoking a wartime anthem to say, “We will meet again.” The death of Prince Philip has loosened that connection; one day it will be gone.
> 
> It is not sacrilegious to talk like this, nor disrespectful of the prince himself. On the contrary, few were more keenly aware of the fragility of monarchy than him. His grandfather was the king of Greece, but his father was chased out of the country, banished for life. His great-aunt was murdered along with the Russian tsar in the bloodshed of the Bolshevik revolution. He saw once-solid thrones pushed over and long-rooted royal dynasties collapse.
> 
> The Queen herself hardly needs to be told that no law of nature says a monarchy must exist for ever. The defining fact of her own life may well be the abdication of her uncle, after serving just 325 days as King Edward VIII. She knows that royal stability and continuity are far from automatic, but take persistence, perseverance and deft personnel. She and her late husband fitted the bill perfectly. But from that couple, from that generation, there is now just her, alone.


This is an interesting article.
"_It is not sacrilegious to talk like this, nor disrespectful of the prince himself. On the contrary, *few were more keenly aware of the fragility of monarchy than him*..._"

Prince Philip must have been terribly upset by Oprah's interview. QE has probably refused to meet Harry, and as long as he is connected to Cringe, he will likely not be trusted.


"_the Duke of Edinburgh said, ‘*Don’t talk about yourself, nobody’s interested*_’.
“_And I know, because he told me, that he regretted in recent years that the way the Royal Family had become, they were portrayed as a bit of a soap opera, and that saddened him_.”










						Prince Philip 'saddened' as royals seen 'as a soap opera' amid Megxit
					

PRINCE PHILIP was "saddened" by how the Royal Family had been "portrayed as a bit of a soap opera" in the years before his death, according to his friend and royal biographer Gyles Brandreth.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cornflower Blue said:


> I realize that Lady Colin Campbell has a lot to say about the situation, and her opinion may or may not be right, but quite frankly I went clean off her when on "I'm a Celebrity get me out of here", she got into it with Tony Hadley of Spandau Ballet and called him an "oik" and also a "sh1t" and then said " You don't even have a good voice"...   And that's when I realized her judgement was decidedly dodgy, imo. I like her, but really, she didn't know what she was talking about, imo and it showed.
> 
> Edit, to add imo.


I didn’t see the show but it really was the place to see the celeb bust-ups! I’ve read her MM book and seen some of her MM videos and I can see that she’s probably a bit judgemental and snobby in person. 

I strongly suspects she calls people out for being social climbers sometimes because it’s true (like with MM) and sometimes because she’s afraid someone will say the same thing of her.
I found the way she handled the Andr*w thing to be pretty telling too. 

That class-loyalist  does make for a better royal insider though- I will give her that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I don't believe the "Sayonara Zara" rumors. She was wearing H&M, Banana Republic, Jcrew, etc for a long time even after marrying.


I don’t know if the rumours are true but the palace aides would definitely be encouraging her to dress in a relatable way. Same as they do with the other royal ladies.
Personally I don’t think fast fashion needs any more  free publicity and they should stick to dressmakers or heritage labels, but hey.

When MM got the chance she always insisted on designer and ugly it has to be noted. Like that Ralph Russo barbie goes to Mrs America nightmare and Dior’s patterned bedsheets. ( I suspect MGC was pulling a Tracey Emin’s ‘unmade bed’ on MM there.)

edit - NM


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I do! I’m not too proud to admit I am addicted to the drama. Will Harry go back and take credit for organizing the event even though he’s had nothing to do with it in over a year? Will he stay home and hold Meghan’s by then super-heavily pregnant hand? Will they adopt a rescue duck and name it’s pond after the new baby? I MUST KNOW!!


I need to see how tacky the statue is. Perhaps they should melt it down for scrap and take that stupid horse head in Marble Arch with it.
I haaaatttte so many of London’s giant ugly largely meaningless statues. It really is becoming the knockoff Pandora bracelet of Europe.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> He was supposed to exit before Lady Louise, so that was ok. The odd thing -  He looked like he was going to turn, walk toward William and exit with William. Remember he had successfully cut off Lord Snowden earlier.  Edward, Sophie, James and Louise stood firm, stared down his aggressive behavior.  It is all on video.  IMO, he looked high/drunk/on meds. In the church, he was fidgety, almost clumsy. I could be very wrong, could be seeing what I want to see, but he looked like he was crumbling under the pressure.  Everyone else exuded grace and calm, that beloved Royal behavior.


I'm being picky, it's Snowdon not Snowden.
*scooting off quickly   

Agree with everything you said, I think he was a wreck tbh. Probably as he knew he was going to be judged, quite rightly.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Nail on the head. Click click click= money money money.
> The royals especially are globally known, unlikely to sue and welcome publicity.
> 
> Haha I like the irony that Prince was actually called Prince too.
> 
> personally I don’t find Prince/Princess/King/Queenie that weird. Lots of people are called things with a kind of assumption in it. Calling your daughter Bella doesn’t necessarily mean she’ll be beautiful- it just expresses how you feel.



Queenie (UK) and Regina are actually old respected names.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> My thoughts exactly when she proclaimed she was suicidal when pregnant, I was wondering why none had expressed concern after the interview about whether she had finally got help. Because feeling like you are suicidal is extremely dangerous, in that moment especially. Those thoughts will go away, but they will come back again depending on the triggers, that is something that must be sorted out otherwise you will face tragedy. The irony that the 4 of them support mental health charities, yet they can't sort themselves out. Mental health issues are very hard to solve too, and can take a long time to get to a stable position. Generally long term care is needed. True suicidal thoughts (as opposed to just depression) is very very serious and doesn't just go away when they antagonism is taken away. I get the impression she was feeling this way due to the bullying from the press and social media. In this case, it sounds more like depression and being in a dark place. It takes more than just pure bullying to commit suicide.


Quite right. It’s a terrible example to people to say that making dramatic changes like a big move, leaving your job or cutting off your family will cure your mental illness. Especially if you never talk about therapy or medication. Also all this constant blaming others like mental illness follows cause&effect. I think their charities really need to think about whether any publicity is necessarily good publicity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> She was lying.  She never was suicidal.  It's a classic histrionic claim.



Hate to say it (because it ventures into victim blaming territory), but that's my experience too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Yes, but this is not just some engagement. Yes, the RM is in mourning.
> But NOW is when he needs to step up and show what he is made of. Being in mourning should NOT mean being MIA. He is the man of the house now so to speak. *Sadly I think he is a pale shadow of his father and the reason TQ has stayed on the throne far longer than she may have wanted.*
> JMO, of course



Monarchs rarely retire, though.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, no no no, he was not at all sorry. He cut off Lord Snowden to change the walk-in order. Disrespectful to all involved. He glared at Princess Anne to such an extent Zara gave him a side-eye. His comment that Philip got the funeral he wanted, that shows how jealous Harry is of anyone getting what they want. if Philip got what he wanted, why can’t H get what he want$? Sheesh, dude, give it a rest. No, he is not sorry. My guess he will not apologize for MM either because he believes with his heart and soul he is helping W and Charles. Remember H sees W and Charles as the ‘trapped’ ones. He himself is the great untrapped one.
> 
> Please, William, cancel this statue show. No one wants another tension-filled weekend. Enough.


He glared at Anne?!! Then he's braver stupider than I gave him credit for


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xincinsin said:


> Her previous corgis were so sweet in the Olympics filmlet. It must burn MM that her MIL's only turn as an actress was as a Bond girl and viewed by a global audience.


Now I'm confused. Was Camilla a Bond girl?!


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> Queenie (UK) and Regina are actually old respected names.


Princess Queenie 

Queenie always makes me think of the Blackadder series

A quote from this series ranked number three in a list of the top 25 television "putdowns" of the last 40 years by the _Radio Times_ magazine: "The eyes are open, the mouth moves, but Mr. Brain has long since departed, hasn't he, Percy?"


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

poopsie said:


> Meh  I hope they pee on his leg


 

Mods/admins, I really need a laughing so hard I cried emoji for this thread. I could make allusions to an emoji for laughing 'til I p*** myself emoji, but as we are all ladies and gents, I would never!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> I'm with  you....guess I'm vindictive too
> My husband's mother sued him over his mother's will.  she lost.  She is dead to us.  But it's really easy since we were never really in communication with her anyway and she's on the opposite coast from us.





eunaddict said:


> I am SO confused by this. I need coffee.


I think there's a grand for grandmother missing there, sdkitty?

I understand how you feel, sdkitty. I had a "family" member and her SO suddenly come rushing like they had fire up their ar***ses when a person I loved and took care of mostly by myself for a decade passed. They visited three times in 10 years. I still unapologetically hate them for how they behaved. Watching H&M behave this way to his grandparents is like emotional deja-vu except on a royal and wealthier level.


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Now I'm confused. Was Camilla a Bond girl?!


The Queen was!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

poopsie said:


> The Queen was!


She was? When?


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> DH and I were in London shortly after the 2012 Olympics. I asked a tour guide about the corgis used in that filmlet. He stated those were not TQ's actual dogs, they were brought in for the shoot, trained to roll over on command. Fun fact!


They did use the Queens real corgis.  There were 3 of them - I remember it being reported at the time, because it was part of the charm of it. And it came up again when one of them died not long ago.  Could be there was a stunt corgi too for the action scene.


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> She was? When?


2012
It was a short with Daniel Craig for the Olympics.


----------



## Sharont2305

poopsie said:


> 2012
> It was a short with Daniel Craig for the Olympics.


And it was brilliant! She had a cheeky twinkle in her eye addressing Mr Bond. Whoever thought of that, I think it was Danny Boyle, and to actually pull it off was genius. The ultimate Bond girl.


----------



## periogirl28

Sharont2305 said:


> And it was brilliant! She had a cheeky twinkle in her eye addressing Mr Bond. Whoever thought of that, I think it was Danny Boyle, and to actually pull it off was genius. The ultimate Bond girl.


Absolutely loved it. At first I couldn’t believe it really was the Queen.


----------



## ladyglen

Straight-Laced said:


> *Lady Louise is the future*, Harry is the past.
> Buh-bye H


love her, she is the image of Queen Mary


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, he looked high/drunk/on meds.



I've thought several times over the past year that he looks like he has a substance abuse problem, be it prescribed or not. And I don't mean that in an insulting way at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> personally I don’t find Prince/Princess/King/Queenie that weird. Lots of people are called things with a kind of assumption in it. Calling your daughter Bella doesn’t necessarily mean she’ll be beautiful- it just expresses how you feel.



I know a girl called Queenie, never heard the name before or after, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And it was brilliant! She had a cheeky twinkle in her eye addressing Mr Bond. Whoever thought of that, I think it was Danny Boyle, and to actually pull it off was genius. The ultimate Bond girl.



And she insisted to have a speaking role!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@SomethingGoodCanWork


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @SomethingGoodCanWork



Thank you! Never saw that. The Corgis were glorious as was the queen.

As for Daniel Craig, very handsome man, but I can never think of him anymore without this in my head. "He's no John Nettles!"


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> Princess Queenie
> 
> Queenie always makes me think of the Blackadder series
> 
> A quote from this series ranked number three in a list of the top 25 television "putdowns" of the last 40 years by the _Radio Times_ magazine: "The eyes are open, the mouth moves, but Mr. Brain has long since departed, hasn't he, Percy?"



Talking of which he is back home isn’t it can you keep him over there this time please our borders are firmly shut


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> And it was brilliant! She had a cheeky twinkle in her eye addressing Mr Bond. Whoever thought of that, I think it was Danny Boyle, and to actually pull it off was genius. The ultimate Bond girl.



I’m afraid Harry engineered it all before he was markled


----------



## xincinsin

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Now I'm confused. Was Camilla a Bond girl?!


Oops, sorry! It should have been Grand MIL (I blame it on my struggles with the new and horrendous finance system - I keep escaping to this thread to get away from the error messages  )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

I bet Meghan was interrogating Harry as to who said what, when and where before he was through the front door!


----------



## Rouge H

That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xincinsin said:


> Oops, sorry! It should have been Grand MIL (I blame it on my struggles with the new and horrendous finance system - I keep escaping to this thread to get away from the error messages  )


Others explained, I'd never seen that Olympics film  Camilla having a hidden past as a former Bond girl was a fascinating thought


----------



## CAH

Rouge H said:


> That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.


Maybe he politely was told it wasn't necessary for him to stay!


----------



## xincinsin

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Others explained, I'd never seen that Olympics film  Camilla having a hidden past as a former Bond girl was a fascinating thought


I was thrilled by the thought of a "stunt corgi"!
And I did think Camilla was quite easy on the eyes in her youth.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> His comment that Philip got the funeral he wanted, that shows how jealous Harry is of anyone getting what they want.


 
I thought Philip wanted them (those who were deserving of the honor) to wear their military uniforms for his funeral? Due to Harry's and Andrew's indiscretions, no one got to wear them, so it seems to me that Harry is the one who got what he wanted. If he couldn't wear one then he didn't want anyone wearing one. Prince Petty indeed.


On a related note, Netflix (NFLX) stock is down almost $50/share this morning due to their lack of new subscribers. I guess people aren't signing up in breathless anticipation of H&M's groundswelling creative activations and compassionate kindnesses of inspiring, epiphany-inducing, uplifting content *tosses word salad*


----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> I bet Meghan was interrogating Harry as to who said what, when and where before he was through the front door!


If he bought data on the flight, the haranguing never paused.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Rouge H said:


> That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.



I mean, the little sh*t couldn't be bothered to see his dying grandfather (as someone who sat for days next to mine until the very end, that's something I don't think I'll ever forget he did), so what do we expect. Also, my own 93yo grandmother is known for having told my sister, who can be a bit...exhausting, on numerous occasions that she (sister) better left now as she (grandma) was busy. Maybe the Queen was busy, too


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Others explained, I'd never seen that Olympics film  Camilla having a hidden past as a former Bond girl was a fascinating thought



I mean, from all we hear she was pretty fierce as a young woman!


----------



## RAINDANCE

elvisfan4life said:


> Talking of which he is back home isn’t it can you keep him over there this time please our borders are firmly shut



I'm in the UK. 
I do think Harry would be very wise to ensure an extended period of quiet in the media for the next few months and prior to any possible return to the UK for the statue unveiling. Unfortunately I don't see any evidence of wise counsel or likelihood of any let up in MM's self-promotional activities.


----------



## mia55

bag-mania said:


> I do! I’m not too proud to admit I am addicted to the drama. Will Harry go back and take credit for organizing the event even though he’s had nothing to do with it in over a year? Will he stay home and hold Meghan’s by then super-heavily pregnant hand? Will they adopt a rescue duck and name it’s pond after the new baby? I MUST KNOW!!



You’re my soul sister, I want to know all too


----------



## jennlt

Hermes Zen said:


> Forgot to say that I know they are in a two week mourning period and media was asked to respect that. BUT still strange no leaks.  It would be wonderful if this silence is because they are being respectful to the Queen.



And maybe Harry's wife has realized that a pregnant pause is a thing and has decided to take one. A *heavily* pregnant pause, of course.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jennlt said:


> I thought Philip wanted them (those who were deserving of the honor) to wear their military uniforms for his funeral? Due to Harry's and Andrew's indiscretions, no one got to wear them, so it seems to me that Harry is the one who got what he wanted. If he couldn't wear one then he didn't want anyone wearing one. Prince Petty indeed.
> 
> 
> On a related note, Netflix (NFLX) stock is down almost $50/share this morning due to their lack of new subscribers. I guess people aren't signing up in breathless anticipation of H&M's groundswelling creative activations and compassionate kindnesses of inspiring, epiphany-inducing, uplifting content *tosses word salad*


They've had some very questionable shows on lately, haven't they. Like the movie Cuties, about little girls twerking like they were adults. Or as Netflix preferred to describe it, an 11-year old girl "exploring her femininity" and "rebelling against her family after she meets a free spirited dance crew". Insane and deviant doesn't even begin to describe it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm very bad with exchange rates so I checked this on the Internet and just about choked on my food. That is 124,491.654 US Dollars. Nothing too good for Harry's heavily pregnant wife!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5059229



Thanks. I was wondering what the US cost would have been.


----------



## Chanbal

The duchess may not like the results of this research...  Her name doesn't seem to be on the list. 

_The Queen__ is a bigger ‘global brand’ than Beyoncé, Kim Kardashian, David and Victoria Beckham and Oprah Winfrey, new research claims.

The British Royal Family is said to be the world’s fifth biggest ‘corporate’ brand, ahead even of Nike, Coca-Cola, Microsoft and Disney.

The finding comes from research commissioned for a True Royalty TV documentary about the Queen to mark her 95th birthday today...

The research for the programme also found that *the Queen’s brand has remained steadily positive over recent history, despite the public relations fallouts from events such as the scandal surrounding Prince Andrew and the deteriorating relationship with Prince Harry and his and Meghan’s interview with Oprah Winfrey.

On each occasion, the Queen has taken the necessary steps to protect the brand* - whether through breaking with royal protocols to give Diana, Princess of Wales, a public funeral, to removing Prince Andrew from all duties, *or in her public reaction to Harry and Meghan’s allegations about racism in the Royal Family*._









						Queen is a bigger 'global brand' than Beyoncé, research claims
					

Research from Statista reveals that the Queen's personal brand is 16 times bigger than Beyoncé's brand, six times the size of Kim Kardashian and 23 times bigger than the Beckhams.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Sharont2305  humble apologies and thank you. Off to write Snowdon 100 times on the wall.  In my defense, shallow as it is, I just noticed the auto-correct changes -don to -den. WTH?  #%*#% auto-correct. 

QE - always on point, always leading the way


----------



## ladyglen

On a related note, Netflix (NFLX) stock is down almost $50/share this morning due to their lack of new subscribers. I guess people aren't signing up in breathless anticipation of H&M's groundswelling creative activations and compassionate kindnesses of inspiring, epiphany-inducing, uplifting content *tosses word salad*
[/QUOTE]
I saw that this morning,  I thought it was interesting,


----------



## Allisonfaye

lanasyogamama said:


> Wowee!
> 
> View attachment 5059352



Maybe they succeeded in a bit of deprogramming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

'She is wonderful and kind': Chrissy Teigen reveals Meghan Markle reached out to offer support when she learned model's son was stillborn following her own miscarriage

Of course she did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> Maybe they succeeded in a bit of deprogramming.



He's already back in the US.


----------



## Aimee3

Hmm MM used her heavy pregnancy to avoid admitting she was *not* invited to PP’s funeral and it appears to me that Harry used her heavy pregnancy to avoid admitting he was *not* invited to the queen’s birthday lunch and slithered home to MM.  How convenient for them.  Surprised we haven’t seen the heavily pregnant one out and about cradling the moon bump.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the CT article:



> *She said on Watch What Happens Live With Andy Cohen: 'She is really wonderful and so kind, and just as kind as everyone says she is.'*



Who exactly is everyone?

Also, Chrissy was a suitcase girl too?


----------



## Allisonfaye

lanasyogamama said:


> I am positive he will come up with some complaint about bot being treated right.



Once MM tells him what he should be mad about...


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Bad optics. PP *never* would have dodged a confrontation with one of his _children._



True, but Philip never had to be concerned that one of his children would run to Gayle King and Oprah and spill their “interpretation” of private conversations in an effort to smear the family. Charles has those real concerns. Harry has shown his loyalties reside with himself and Meghan only, and he cannot be trusted by the rest of the family.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Quite right. *It’s a terrible example to people to say that making dramatic changes like a big move, leaving your job or cutting off your family will cure your mental illness.* Especially if you never talk about therapy or medication. Also *all this constant blaming others* like mental illness follows cause&effect. I think their charities really need to think about whether any publicity is necessarily good publicity.



In this particular case those behaviors are examples of the symptoms of mental illness.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> They did use the Queens real corgis.  There were 3 of them - I remember it being reported at the time, because it was part of the charm of it. And it came up again when one of them died not long ago. * Could be there was a stunt corgi too for the action scene.*



If there is a job out there for trainers of stunt corgis, I want it!


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> I bet Meghan was interrogating Harry as to who said what, when and where before he was through the front door!



Well, she is supposed to be writing a book...


----------



## bag-mania

Rouge H said:


> That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.



He had to get back immediately to comfort the heavily pregnant one and spill everything that happened.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> He had to get back immediately to comfort the heavily pregnant one and spill everything that happened.


I don’t think he was wanted there


----------



## LittleStar88

ladyglen said:


> On a related note, Netflix (NFLX) stock is down almost $50/share this morning due to their lack of new subscribers. I guess people aren't signing up in breathless anticipation of H&M's groundswelling creative activations and compassionate kindnesses of inspiring, epiphany-inducing, uplifting content *tosses word salad*




That makes sense - they had a flood of subscribers over the pandemic so it makes sense that new subscribers would be slim at this point.

H&M's proposed material is not going to be a big exciting draw. New movies and series programs with big stars and/or enticing storylines will be.

For instance, when Stranger Things and Ozark come back I bet they will see a bit of an uptick. Once you have been to the end of Netflix and back, there's no need to keep the subscription until your favorite programs return.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> That makes sense - they had a flood of subscribers over the pandemic so it makes sense that new subscribers would be slim at this point.
> 
> H&M's proposed material is not going to be a big exciting draw. New movies and series programs with big stars and/or enticing storylines will be.
> 
> For instance, when Stranger Things and Ozark come back I bet they will see a bit of an uptick. Once you have been to the end of Netflix and back, there's no need to keep the subscription until your favorite programs return.



Is Ozark coming back?  Thought Nflix cancelled that show.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t think he was wanted there



He wasn't wanted, by anyone apparently. He would never see it but it illustrates how completely he has cut himself off, not just from family, but from friends as well. Had he kept in touch with some of his old friends maybe he could have met up again before returning home. He had nothing to keep him there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> In this particular case those behaviors are examples of the symptoms of mental illness.



For years, OW told us to eliminate the negative people in our lives. I think her line was, “if someone doesn’t treat you how you want them to, eliminate them.”   OW’s thinking was/is very popular with many people.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> True, but Philip never had to be concerned that one of his children would run to Gayle King and Oprah and spill their “interpretation” of private conversations in an effort to smear the family. Charles has those real concerns. Harry has shown his loyalties reside with himself and Meghan only, and he cannot be trusted by the rest of the family.


I have a family member, you cannot tell her anything, she blabs it all over the place and makes huge deals out of nothing
BUT there is no way to put things straight once the horse is out of the barn
So, I deal with her accordingly, say almost nothing and take the heat for not being a warm and communicative family member

I SO GET the problem that C & W have ... and I dont have the intrusion of press, which makes it worse, if Gayle says it, it must be true ...

Families are complicated in the best of circumstances


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think there's a grand for grandmother missing there, sdkitty?
> 
> I understand how you feel, sdkitty. I had a "family" member and her SO suddenly come rushing like they had fire up their ar***ses when a person I loved and took care of mostly by myself for a decade passed. They visited three times in 10 years. I still unapologetically hate them for how they behaved. Watching H&M behave this way to his grandparents is like emotional deja-vu except on a royal and wealthier level.


oops....it was the sister who sued the brother (my DH) over mother's estate


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @SomethingGoodCanWork



love this.....having the dogs in there was genius.....I wonder if the dogs really do live with her at the palace.  I guess I always pictured them living in the country.  maybe she brings them with her wherever she goes?


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Hmm MM used her heavy pregnancy to avoid admitting she was *not* invited to PP’s funeral and it appears to me that Harry used her heavy pregnancy to avoid admitting he was *not* invited to the queen’s birthday lunch and slithered home to MM.  How convenient for them.  Surprised we haven’t seen the heavily pregnant one out and about cradling the moon bump.


So useful being "heavily" pregnant for months. If their flight to financial independence founders, she might have to do it again to chalk up sympathy points.


----------



## bag-mania

As for a decline in Netflix stock, they are still the most popular streaming service. They have a lot more competition these days chipping away at their numbers. Viewers are trying out some of the newer services and those subscription fees really add up.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> love this.....having the dogs in there was genius.....I wonder if the dogs really do live with her at the palace.  I guess I always pictured them living in the country.  maybe she brings them with her wherever she goes?



I always assumed they go where she goes. I'd hate to think she ever has to be without them.


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @SomethingGoodCanWork



It was very cool and inspired the opening of Asian Games involving the Indonesian President.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 'She is wonderful and kind': Chrissy Teigen reveals Meghan Markle reached out to offer support when she learned model's son was stillborn following her own miscarriage
> 
> Of course she did.


I thought Chrissy got off social media....is this old news?
editing....I guess this was a TV appearance....I'm sorry for Chrissy's loss but I personally could not see any sense in exposing her private life to the extent she did.  and then she was upset when it backfired.  good that she got off social media.  she must be experiencing withdrawal


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 'She is wonderful and kind': Chrissy Teigen reveals Meghan Markle reached out to offer support when she learned model's son was stillborn following her own miscarriage
> 
> Of course she did.


LOL, I read that yesterday.  Fame whore to fame whore.  Suitcase girl to suitcase girl.  One with a real loss, and the other unleashing her groundswell of compassion on the other.  (Side note, I don't know what they were doling out on that show, but they seemed to marry well!  Leyla Milani was another one.)


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Hmm MM used her heavy pregnancy to avoid admitting she was *not* invited to PP’s funeral and it appears to me that Harry used her heavy pregnancy to avoid admitting he was *not* invited to the queen’s birthday lunch and slithered home to MM.  How convenient for them.  Surprised we haven’t seen the heavily pregnant one out and about cradling the moon bump.


Pregnancy excuses come in quite handy.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> For years, OW told us to eliminate the negative people in our lives. I think her line was, *“if someone doesn’t treat you how you want them to, eliminate them.”  * OW’s thinking was/is very popular with many people.
> View attachment 5061658


Maybe MM inspired her?


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> So useful being "heavily" pregnant for months. If their flight to financial independence founders, she might have to do it again to chalk up sympathy points.



The really phrase really irks me... I thought you can only be heavily pregnant in your 8th-9th month? I was pregnant twice and was a total whale in my 2nd pregnancy (people thought I had twins!) and that was when I really felt heavily pregnant but I bet MM is watching her diet and staying slim so that’s such a crap excuse. How many months is she anyway?





bag-mania said:


> He wasn't wanted, by anyone apparently. He would never see it but it illustrates how completely he has cut himself off, not just from family, but from friends as well. Had he kept in touch with some of his old friends maybe he could have met up again before returning home. He had nothing to keep him there.



It’s a good move to isolate Harry if that is her intent. He has no one else but her and the kids now, and I bet with all the emotional baggage he will not want a divorce.

Maybe it’s a way for her to retain the kids custody in the event of a divorce... I’ve read before that by British law the royal children belong to the Queen? Does anyone know what happens if the kids are no longer British and not in UK? Then the British law cannot apply right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> It’s a good move to isolate Harry if that is her intent. He has no one else but her and the kids now, and I bet with all the emotional baggage he will not want a divorce.
> 
> Maybe it’s a way for her to retain the kids custody in the event of a divorce... I’ve read before that by British law the royal children belong to the Queen? Does anyone know what happens if the kids are no longer British and not in UK? Then the British law cannot apply right?



It is an archaic law that nobody believes would be enforced these days. Harry and Meghan are perfectly free to raise their kids to be entitled little brats just like themselves. The BRF has no shortage of royal children. Archie and baby yet-to-be-named will not be claimed by anyone else.


----------



## justwatchin

carmen56 said:


> I bet Meghan was interrogating Harry as to who said what, when and where before he was through the front door!


I’ll bet she’s been doing that non stop since the day he left for the funeral.


----------



## catlover46

Rouge H said:


> That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.


I wouldn’t be surprised if she refused to see him or was told to leave her alone by Anne,Edward,and Sophie.


----------



## Aimee3

I read in one newspaper tabloid but forget which one, and it said MM was 7 months pregnant now so hardly “heavily” pregnant unless it’s twins. 
i do wonder that there are no pap staged photos of her.  Maybe Amazon’s heavily pregnant moon bump got lost in the mail.


----------



## ladyglen

Maybe it’s a way for her to retain the kids custody in the event of a divorce... *I’ve read before that by British law the royal children belong to the Queen? *Does anyone know what happens if the kids are no longer British and not in UK? Then the British law cannot apply right?
[/QUOTE]
like all the swans?
I have not heard that about the kids, but as my mother said when we moved to the US "the Queen never gives you up". I can still have a British passport and my US-born kids can too


----------



## Icyjade

ladyglen said:


> Maybe it’s a way for her to retain the kids custody in the event of a divorce... *I’ve read before that by British law the royal children belong to the Queen? *Does anyone know what happens if the kids are no longer British and not in UK? Then the British law cannot apply right?


like all the swans?
I have not heard that about the kids, but as my mother said when we moved to the US "the Queen never gives you up". I can still have a British passport and my US-born kids can too
[/QUOTE]

Found this:








						Why Kate and William Technically Don't Have Custody of Their Own Children
					

Technically, the Queen has custody.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## Rouge H

bag-mania said:


> He had to get back immediately to comfort the heavily pregnant one and spill everything that happened.



Exactly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comments on Insta under a short video from when they walked back to the castle.


----------



## ibefit5

Hi there! I just bought a Cartier Love Bracelet in white gold, and I want to wear it on my left wrist with my Apple Watch. Will the Apple Watch scratch the bracelet?  I see a lot of posts in regards to wearing them together, and some even mentioning the potential of the watch getting scratched (I don’t really care about that)....but will the constant contact with the watch scratch the bracelet?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the CT article:
> 
> 
> 
> Who exactly is everyone?
> 
> Also, Chrissy was a suitcase girl too?


Chrissy is famous for marrying a famous guy, dressing tacky and exposing every detail of their lives right?
Isn’t she just Megan’s double?


----------



## jelliedfeels

LittleStar88 said:


> That makes sense - they had a flood of subscribers over the pandemic so it makes sense that new subscribers would be slim at this point.
> 
> H&M's proposed material is not going to be a big exciting draw. New movies and series programs with big stars and/or enticing storylines will be.
> 
> For instance, when Stranger Things and Ozark come back I bet they will see a bit of an uptick. Once you have been to the end of Netflix and back, there's no need to keep the subscription until your favorite programs return.


Hope they can pull it back because they really are a great company for taking so many risks with unexpected shows.
Not exactly surprised H&M aren’t the draw they thought though. They’ve done the OW interview what else have they got to say? 
One charity documentary that sounds like the sort of thing you put on at weekday teatime? Groundbreaking.


----------



## marietouchet

Icyjade said:


> like all the swans?
> I have not heard that about the kids, but as my mother said when we moved to the US "the Queen never gives you up". I can still have a British passport and my US-born kids can too



Found this:








						Why Kate and William Technically Don't Have Custody of Their Own Children
					

Technically, the Queen has custody.




					www.marieclaire.com
				



[/QUOTE]
I think there is something to this story of the kids are the queen’s but I think we have all the details wrong , must find better source than Marie Claire for what I think is part of UK law


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> love this.....having the dogs in there was genius.....I wonder if the dogs really do live with her at the palace.  I guess I always pictured them living in the country.  maybe she brings them with her wherever she goes?



The new puppies are with her at Windsor, she was seen taking them out for walks (driving herself at age 94...that was a few days ago!).


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> Heavily pregnant is a pretty common term to me... it's a casual description for how someone looks/feels, not really a scientific term by any means.



I think it's about the context and the purpose for using the term.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I thought Chrissy got off social media....is this old news?
> editing....I guess this was a TV appearance....I'm sorry for Chrissy's loss but I personally could not see any sense in exposing her private life to the extent she did.  and then she was upset when it backfired.  good that she got off social media.  she must be experiencing withdrawal



I really felt for her and also thought the way she shared her experience was maybe helpful for the discussion and it didn't struck me as attention grabbing, but generally she is not my cup of tea. She overshares, often in a vulgar way, and she's not as funny as she thinks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is Ozark coming back?  Thought Nflix cancelled that show.



It is! Season 4 will be the last - 14 episodes being broken into two sets (7 aired first, then break, then air the last 7). Not sure of the start date.

Stranger Things likely won't come back until 2022


----------



## lalame

I like Chrissy but she really does overshare too much. But I guess it's worked for her because she was able to parlay her social media into a whole culinary business now with Target, a cookbook, and some collabs. Go figure but I can't really knock success. I don't think she's comparable to Meghan in any way except that they married famous dudes.


----------



## bag-mania

Rouge H said:


> That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.



Harry's presence wouldn't be a comfort to the Queen. He represents a source of stress and anxiety to the family. Who would want to be around someone during a time of grief who cannot be trusted?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> It’s a good move to isolate Harry if that is her intent. He has no one else but her and the kids now, and I bet with all the emotional baggage he will not want a divorce.



I'm still going back and forth on Harry. He's a POS, agreed, he has done unforgiveable things to his family, but if we're all watching a victim of psychological violence being abused in public (and there's video footage out there from their interactions that make my skin crawl), maybe people (friends, the BRF) SHOULD still engange and try to keep up *some* connection. Dunno.


----------



## marietouchet

There is something called the 1717 The Grand Opinion for the Prerogative Concerning the Royal Family, ok cannot find a super solid source on this , but this will have to do

the sovereign controls the education, marriage, raising of the kids and grandkids, which is different from saying QEII has custody of them

this does not apply to Archie now, as he is a great grand child of the monarch, but, theoretically when Charles becomes king, A is the grandchild of the sovereign and the Opinion applies. Of course then, A gets the perk of being a Prince so why should the monarch not have some say ?????

The Opinion does not seem to be an act of Parliament ie a law, so is more of a guideline, I guess, legal scholars please weigh in here

But, I guess MM does not like guidelines set by others, which is why she spirited A out of the UK ASAP









						Meghan Markle does not have legal custody of Anglo-American royal baby Archie
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry don’t have legal custody of their Anglo-American baby Archie. According to an expert, the Royal Family have an unusual agreement with the Queen which means she …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. But I also hope it is somehow relayed to Harry how low the whole world thought his behaviour towards his dying grandfather was. That's the one thing I really want him to know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I like Chrissy but she really does overshare too much. But I guess it's worked for her because she was able to parlay her social media into a whole culinary business now with Target, a cookbook, and some collabs. Go figure but I can't really knock success. I don't think she's comparable to Meghan in any way except that they married famous dudes.



For the longest time I really thought she actually wrote that cookbook (it's two, isn't it? I'm not sure) haha. Then I found out who did (renowned foodwriter Adeena Sussmann...her newest book under her own name on sparkly drinks from the Middle East will be out shortly, and her last one on Israeli food is in my personal Top 10). That said, she doesn't especially bother me, I simply don't find her entertaining and won't seek her out.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For the longest time I really thought she actually wrote that cookbook (it's two, isn't it? I'm not sure) haha. Then I found out who did (renowned foodwriter Adeena Sussmann...her newest book under her own name on sparkly drinks from the Middle East will be out shortly, and her last one on Israeli food is in my personal Top 10). That said, she doesn't especially bother me, I simply don't find her entertaining and won't seek her out.



They co-wrote it I think. Chrissy is always testing recipes on her social media and actually that's what I find most interesting about her insta... I don't really care for the beefs or other stuff she always makes headlines for.


----------



## csshopper

So she yanked the chain and his wife will double down on him going forward, "I am the only one who really loves you." I don't think Harry has any real comprehension of what being trapped is, and it was not his gilded lifestyle as a Royal, it's his subservient role as no more than a Chimpo to the Bimbo. The two children seal his fate. They will be trained to think of the "mean nasty spiteful people in England who hurt Daddy and Mommy."

Re: Charles trip to Wales. He makes an annual summer trip to his home there, one he found and restored after a 40 year search, using local materials and Welsh craftspeople to be a showcase of small businesses in the rural area. He writes eloquently and lovingly about it on a Wales website. It's obviously a refuge.

He is not my favorite Royal but I cut him a lot of slack for recognizing his need to regroup and to mend and to act on it, even knowing he will be criticized for it. I think it's a healthy sign and only undertaken because he knows the Queen is in good hands. Anne, Edward and Andrew are nearby, there is a rota of beloved family and staff (Ladies in Waiting, Angela Kelley) to spend time with her. He would be at her side quickly if necessary. 

Charles is 72, he's had Covid, we have no way of knowing, but it is possible he is still feeling some effects of it, but has been soldiering on. (Having two elderly  Covid "long haulers" in my family I know this is possible.) Particularly from the day he was summoned to the hospital by his father, going forward he has dealt with a tremendous level of anxiety and emotion. All of the normal in this situation, exacerbated by the unrelenting anguish caused by his whinging son and daughter-in-law. Tension over how Harry might behave once back in Britain and then what evidently was limited and not productive contact. Going forward he and William have to chart a course that will determine the future of the Monarchy, talk about having the weight of the world on your shoulders! Hopefully it is eased by the reports the Queen has made it clear she supports Charles and William going forward. 

I understand the viewpoint that he should have a stiff upper lip and stay in London. But I think his leaving actually shows some strength in sending a message to Harry that he will not waste time hanging around hoping for crumbs from his youngest son, when there is work to be done and he will pursue that work in an environment most beneficial to him right now, in Wales. I don't think his father would have begrudged him. When he retired from Royal life Prince Phillip retreated to Woods Farm for most of his remaining days until it was no longer workable. He did what was best for himself at the time and set a precedent I think.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still going back and forth on Harry. He's a POS, agreed, he has done unforgiveable things to his family, but if we're all watching a victim of psychological violence being abused in public (and there's video footage out there from their interactions that make my skin crawl), maybe people (friends, the BRF) SHOULD still engange and try to keep up *some* connection. Dunno.



Wait. Hold up, please. Harry is the “ victim of psychological violence “ ????  Do you have a link?

ETA: do you mean MM is/was abusing him psychologically?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. But I also hope it is somehow relayed to Harry how low the whole world thought his behaviour towards his dying grandfather was. That's the one thing I really want him to know.



I don't think H is happy in Montecito, and I'm starting to believe this is not going to end well. 

"_Regarding Kate's relationship with the Duke of Sussex, the commentator added: "She loved Harry.

"He said she is the sister that he never had.

"She has been heartbroken to see them fall out."_









						Kate Middleton 'heartbroken' by breakdown in relationship with Harry
					

KATE, the Duchess of Cambridge is "heartbroken" over the breakdown of her and Prince William's relationship with Prince Harry according to a royal commentator.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Allisonfaye

Sharont2305 said:


> William and Catherine got there first remember.
> Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana.



Then ONLY the first name Diana will top them.


----------



## lalame

Harry is no victim lol. He's a grown ass man! Neither of them are victims... they wanted to do XYZ, and they pretty much did XYZ! They're living fine in Montecito, with soon-to-be 2 children and a potentially lucrative business. The only people we should be feeling sorry for are the BRF. Don't let their appearance as victims get to you... it's well crafted by PR people, marketers, celebrity friends, and themselves at the end of the day.


----------



## Chanbal

The title of this article says everything! (MM PR effort   )












						Prince Harry and Prince William's bond to never be the 'same again'
					

PRINCE HARRY has been warned by a royal commentator that his relationship with Prince William and the rest of the Royal Family will never be the same again.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still going back and forth on Harry. He's a POS, agreed, he has done unforgiveable things to his family, but if we're all watching a victim of psychological violence being abused in public (and there's video footage out there from their interactions that make my skin crawl), maybe people (friends, the BRF) SHOULD still engange and try to keep up *some* connection. Dunno.



I am over feeling sorry for Harry. While Meghan may be calling the shots it is clear he has been a full and willing participant all along. Maybe he doesn't always like what they are doing, but he still does it anyway.

I don't believe it is up to others to "save" someone from their own bad decisions OR their mental illness. Harry has lived a life of luxury and privilege the rest of us cannot fathom. He is still living beyond what 99.9% of the population knows. He is mentally competent to understand what he's done and what he continues to do. Absolutely no pity for him here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## HiromiT

bag-mania said:


> He wasn't wanted, by anyone apparently. He would never see it but it illustrates how completely he has cut himself off, not just from family, but from friends as well. Had he kept in touch with some of his old friends maybe he could have met up again before returning home. He had nothing to keep him there.



I agree and think no one wanted to spend time with Harry after the funeral, so he had to slink back to Cali. I wouldn’t be surprised if Charles hightailed it to the Wales to avoid being confronted by Harry demanding for more $$$, security, and whatever else the odious pair think is their god-given right. Charles can easily return to Windsor to celebrate the Queen’s birthday.

I doubt Will and Kate would have invited Harry over for tea. They basically made small talk during their walk and it was mostly for the benefit of lip readers.

And as for Edward, Sophie, and Anne, well, you could see from the funeral that they weren’t going to poke him with a 10-foot pole.

Wouldn’t it be great if Meghan had hopes of demanding more stuff from Charles but only to have him refuse to see Harry who then was forced to return with his tail between his legs, mission unaccomplished? I can hear more china being smashed....


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> It sounds like the jealousy towards Kate started at the time of Kate's wedding. He shows some of MM's posts from that time and pictures from Kate's wedding reception and MM's wedding reception (Trevor E.) a few months later.
> View attachment 5060151



Wow! This was intense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M are not the victims. They are the bullies. No one wants to spend time with H because they know he will record everything and merch it.  Surely we all know an obnoxious someone who photographs and records family events, then posts the footage on their Facebook, yes?   It can be so annoying that no one wants that person in the room.  IMO it is completely understandable why no one wanted to ‘spend time’ with H.


----------



## LittleStar88

Final nail in the coffin for Harry with me: When he whined to Oprah about how daddy had cut him off financially and he had to rely on his own _millions and millions_ to _survive_. He was skating on thin ice for a while, but after that I just couldn't anymore with him.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> Harry is no victim lol. He's a grown ass man! Neither of them are victims... they wanted to do XYZ, and they pretty much did XYZ! They're living fine in Montecito, with soon-to-be 2 children and a potentially lucrative business. The only people we should be feeling sorry for are the BRF. Don't let their appearance as victims get to you... it's well crafted by PR people, marketers, celebrity friends, and themselves at the end of the day.


ITA
Their problem is that they never expected to have to pay their own bills. That's where all the self-pity and resentment is rooted. They keep thinking how much better life would be if only PC were still picking up the tab, if only the Queen had agreed to half-in, half-out, if only the palace had allowed them to do it their way, if only W&K had realized they were equal and maybe even superior, if only .... if only ...


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> yeah if you’re serious about it then write an op Ed or put out a statement where you can actually treat it like serious subject matter... don’t just drop it casually into a conversation and not allow any follow up FFS.How are you going to make a bombshell accusation in like 2 sentences and just leave it there?



It kind of makes you wonder if SOMEONE or some organization somewhere was advising her? WHAT did she gain by doing that?


----------



## scarlet555

I am not sure how sick Harry is, in terms of mental health, I tend to think we all have 'some' personality *trait* issues, not personality disorder, however, I thought he was off his meds when with the assist of his wife, which in those situations, there are some manipulations that can be easier done to those off meds than say you or me, who aren't on meds.  And I'm sure when you take classes to manipulate people, you have a better methodology...not to say he isn't at fault, but ...  he would be more vulnerable off his meds if he had severe mental issues.

edit-personality trait issues not personality disorder


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M are not the victims. They are the bullies. No one wants to spend time with H because they know he will record everything and merch it.  _*Surely we all know an obnoxious someone who photographs and records family events, then posts the footage on their Facebook, yes? *_  It can be so annoying that no one wants that person in the room.  IMO it is completely understandable why no one wanted to ‘spend time’ with H.


OMG you know my BIL!  
He once complained to me that my kids turned away or even left the room every time he started snapping photos or recording video. I told him that next time, I would join them and informed him that we could probably make a case against him based on the local privacy laws. He was dumbfounded (good look on him, the dumb a*s).


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Final nail in the coffin for Harry with me: When he whined to Oprah about how daddy had cut him off financially and he had to rely on his own _millions and millions_ to _survive_. He was skating on thin ice for a while, but after that I just couldn't anymore with him.



That was the moment he went from being merely a slow-witted simpleton to being a full blown douchebag.


----------



## Jayne1

Allisonfaye said:


> Then ONLY the first name Diana will top them.


I'm going with *not* Diana as a first name. It would take the attention away from Meg and everything is supposed to be about her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Bad optics. PP *never* would have dodged a confrontation with one of his _children._


Just saying, Philip never had to worry about his children or grandchildren trying to record or photograph their meetings, because they loved and respected him, except for H whose attitude changed after he married his now 'heavily pregnant' wife. And after Megxit, Philip's health started to deteriorate to the point, I'm sure, the family would have prevented H from visiting him.

ET correct error


----------



## csshopper

Apologies if this is repetitive, sometimes it's hard to keep up with all the great posts , but an "A" option for Sussex#2 could be "Alexandra" as it is the Queen's middle name (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary).

To be "woke" she could be "Alex" or "Lexie".
But, Archie and Alex sounds to me like a comedy team, so they might want to be careful. 

From a future CBS program listing:  8PM  "Archie and Alex" spoof the Royal Family.


----------



## Chanbal

_Complains to Ofcom over Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey have hit 6,200 since it aired last month.

Figures released by the broadcast regulator show that the interview, which aired on ITV on March 8, has now received a total of 6,203 complaints.

*According to the latest data released by Ofcom, it is the most complained about programme this month*, receiving 257 complaints since April 6. 

The shocking interview saw Meghan accuse an unnamed member of the Royal Family of racism, while also stating she was denied support after revealing she was struggling with suicidal thoughts._









						Complaints against Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview rise to 6,200
					

Thousands have complained since the interview with Harry and Meghan was aired on ITV at the start of last month. The interview saw Meghan accuse an unnamed Royal of racism.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC is now dragging Omid's plastic face bwahaha (around the 40 mins mark).



I've been watching parts of the recent Lady CC video and at the 18:05 mark she basically says that MM and Harry are actually seriously surprised by the backlash. MM expected worldwide admiration from her OW interview.  Maybe she convinced Harry that the royals would fall all over themselves with apologies and offers of being half-in/half-out of the family and they would have _all_ that they originally asked for and were denied.   

Subsequent to Lady CC's video, I read earlier today that the Queen and the Palace think in "100 year time frames".   For them, Harry and MM are a blip.  The Queen thinks the family will be in good hands with Charles, then Will, then George.  So, they carry on and issue statements that state "recollections may vary", which I believe is British for "they are lying liars who lie".


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _Complains to Ofcom over Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey have hit 6,200 since it aired last month.
> 
> Figures released by the broadcast regulator show that the interview, which aired on ITV on March 8, has now received a total of 6,203 complaints.
> 
> *According to the latest data released by Ofcom, it is the most complained about programme this month*, receiving 257 complaints since April 6.
> 
> The shocking interview saw Meghan accuse an unnamed member of the Royal Family of racism, while also stating she was denied support after revealing she was struggling with suicidal thoughts._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Complaints against Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview rise to 6,200
> 
> 
> Thousands have complained since the interview with Harry and Meghan was aired on ITV at the start of last month. The interview saw Meghan accuse an unnamed Royal of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Their wreath story did not help their ‘narrative’.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Today I'm going with: Deedee Oprah Philippine Mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I've been watching parts of the recent Lady CC video and at the 18:05 mark she basically says that *MM and Harry are actually seriously surprised by the backlash. *MM expected worldwide admiration from her OW interview.  Maybe she convinced Harry that the royals would fall all over themselves with apologies and offers of being half-in/half-out of the family and they would have _all_ that they originally asked for and were denied.
> 
> Subsequent to Lady CC's video, I read earlier today that the Queen and the Palace think in "100 year time frames".   For them, Harry and MM are a blip.  The Queen thinks the family will be in good hands with Charles, then Will, then George.  So, they carry on and issue statements that state "recollections may vary", which I believe is British for "they are lying liars who lie".



That's the narcissism at work. It is unimaginable to her that everyone doesn't see her exactly the way she wants them to and she's angry about it. Personally I'm shocked they didn't receive more backlash from that phony feel-sorry-for-us excuse for an interview. The US press dutifully repeated every one of their claims without question.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> I've been watching parts of the recent Lady CC video and at the 18:05 mark she basically says that MM and Harry are actually seriously surprised by the backlash. MM expected worldwide admiration from her OW interview.  Maybe she convinced Harry that the royals would fall all over themselves with apologies and offers of being half-in/half-out of the family and they would have _all_ that they originally asked for and were denied.
> 
> Subsequent to Lady CC's video, I read earlier today that the Queen and the Palace think in "100 year time frames".   For them, Harry and MM are a blip.  The Queen thinks the family will be in good hands with Charles, then Will, then George.  So, they carry on and issue statements that state "recollections may vary", which I believe is British for "they are lying liars who lie".


And hence MM's gracious offer to forgive them. She's probably wondering why they are so dense and not following her script. They were supposed to cower and give in before she ta-dah! shows her receipts!

 I'm going to have to borrow Her Majesty's wonderful turn of phrase the next time I meet with the divas of the office. Yes, the British definition of "recollections may vary" will come in very handy.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Apologies if this is repetitive, sometimes it's hard to keep up with all the great posts , but an "A" option for Sussex#2 could be "Alexandra" as it is the Queen's middle name (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary).
> 
> To be "woke" she could be "Alex" or "Lexie".
> But, Archie and Alex sounds to me like a comedy team, so they might want to be careful.
> 
> From a future CBS program listing:  8PM  "Archie and Alex" spoof the Royal Family.


Ugh... Lexie always reminds me of Lex Luthor


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Their wreath story did not help their ‘narrative’.



They got slated in the Australian press.

_Daniela Elser is a royal expert and a writer with more than 15 years' experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles_ 

*OPINION:*

There is one crucial way that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex – mother, activist, and former cable star – is united with her mother-in-law, Diana, Princess of Wales. Both women have a unique ability to loom over royal proceedings even from far, far away.

Overnight Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh was laid to rest, with his funeral service taking place at St George's Chapel at Windsor Castle.

While Prince Harry had returned to the UK for the sombre event, his first trip to the UK since the couple's dramatic exit from royal life last year, the Duchess was unable to join him. Due to give birth soon, reportedly in June, doctors had advised her against travelling.

Yet still, despite being more than 8500km away, Meghan managed to play a role in the historic funeral.

In a moving tribute to the 99-year-old Duke, a handwritten note penned by the Duchess, a former professional calligrapher, was attached to the wreath sent by the Sussexes, one of only nine family wreaths in the chapel.

The arrangement, we know, included Eryngium, or sea holly, to represent Philip's ties to the Royal Marines; Acanthus mollis, the national flower of Greece, in a nod to his heritage; Campanula, to represent "gratitude and everlasting love"; and roses to signify the royal consort's June birthday.

All incredibly touching and thoughtful.

And all information that somehow – miraculously – has found its way out there in the public domain.

According to The Telegraph, "a source close to the Sussexes confirmed that [their wreath] had been designed and handmade by Willow Crossley, a Cotswolds florist known for her natural, rustic arrangements".

*What is bewildering here is why and how - on a day which should have been resolutely, solely focused on celebrating the Duke - something Sussex-related has managed to end up in the headlines.*

These symbolic and meaningful blooms by Crossley – who was in charge of the flowers for the Sussexes' wedding reception and son Archie's 2019 christening – included deeply personal touches.

But why did anyone feel the need to share this information with the world?

While Buckingham Palace has released a cavalcade of specifics about yesterday's proceedings - everything from precise timings, to where exactly Philip's valets would be standing - no particulars about the other eight wreaths that were placed in the chapel have been released.

*The unavoidable conclusion here is that the details of the Crossley-created salute are known today, and making headlines, because someone wanted them out there. (It's not as if any eagle-eyed member of the press was ever going to cotton on to the fact that Eryngium or Acanthus mollis featured in the arrangement.)

And that is deeply problematic.

The appearance here is that even at this moment of mourning, someone Sussex-adjacent has seen the wreath and Meghan's note as an opportunity to drum up some good PR.*

Previously, the now California-based royal couple has chosen to publicise two meaningful royal family-related occasions which could have remained private.

In early September the Sussexes visited a local preschool to plant forget-me-nots in honour of the anniversary of Diana's passing, while in November, to mark Remembrance Day, the couple visited Commonwealth war graves in Los Angeles.

In both instances, a photographer was on hand and images of the couple were made public.

In recent months both Harry and Meghan's approval ratings in the UK have cratered to record lows, with both the Duke and Duchess hitting negative figures, according to a poll done in the wake of their explosive Oprah Winfrey TV interview last month.

Perhaps it was too much to expect that this weekend's proceedings could have gone off without something Harry and Meghan-related in the mix.

All of this comes as the Queen offered up what could be read as a jewel-encrusted olive branch to the self-exiled Sussexes. Her Majesty had been expected to wear a brooch to today's service that had some connection to her husband of more than 73 years, however instead she opted to don the Queen Mary pearl and diamond Richmond brooch.

The last time she wore this particular number was to the Sussexes' 2018 wedding, suggesting that this could represent something of a subtle peace offering.

In less than two months, brothers Harry and William will be reunited again in London for the unveiling of the statue they commissioned to honour their mother Diana on what would have been her 60th birthday.

Let's hope the city's photographers and florists are on standby – they just might be getting a call from California about then.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Ugh... Lexie always reminds me of Lex Luthor


Lexie reminds me of legs eleven in Bingo


----------



## poopsie

Soooooo................did I somehow miss M&H's birthday salute to TQ?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> The damage done by Oprah's interview continues...
> 
> "_The upset caused by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's bombshell Oprah interview could pose a threat to Prince Charles' long-awaited ascension, according to Anna Pasternak._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan may cause monarchy to topple, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, Anna Pasternak - the author of Princess in Love - said she is 'not 100 per cent sure' that the Prince of Wales, 72, will ever ascend to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She should be so proud of herself if she can bring down the British monarchy, something others have been trying to do for decades. The people don't understand the damage this is all causing...both to the RF and our country.


----------



## Aimee3

I doubt Harrywill go back for the Diana statue ceremony.  I think he’s too much of a coward and given the frosty reception he received at the funeral, plus not being invited back to the post funeral gathering etc he will look for an excuse why he can’t go back.  Now it’s being said the baby is due in June so there’s a ready excuse.  Since they aren’t very much into telling the truth, MM or surrogate will go into labor when Harrys due to leave (Even if the baby was born earlier than that date, or even if the baby isn’t really due then). By allegedly having a home birth, no one will know exactly when that birth occurs.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still going back and forth on Harry. He's a POS, agreed, he has done unforgiveable things to his family, but if we're all watching a victim of psychological violence being abused in public (and there's video footage out there from their interactions that make my skin crawl), maybe people (friends, the BRF) SHOULD still engange and try to keep up *some* connection. Dunno.


Interesting comment. I get something-is-off-vibes from her, absolutely. Maybe you are right about Harry being a victim here, men are often overlooked in this category. But he still just seems so belligerent and entitled and bratty? And would he have been let out on his own like this last weekend, to see his family, without Meghan's supervision if he was really under her control? I don't know either. It'll be interesting to see who will do what within the BRF going forward and if they will announce any changes publicly.


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel these people are giving a wannabe way too much credit. She won't destroy an institution that's existed for a millenium.



I wouldn't be so sure. The US is on the brink with this BS.


----------



## Allisonfaye

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Interesting comment. I get something-is-off-vibes from her, absolutely. Maybe you are right about Harry being a victim here, men are often overlooked in this category. But he still just seems so belligerent and entitled and bratty? And would he have been let out on his own like this last weekend, to see his family, without Meghan's supervision if he was really under her control? I don't know either. It'll be interesting to see who will do what within the BRF going forward and if they will announce any changes publicly.



It would be a good way to test her hold on him, no?


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Soooooo................did I somehow miss M&H's birthday salute to TQ?



They are probably still putting the finishing touches on the copy detailing the flower arrangement they sent and the significance of each bloom.


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> True!  Ha!
> 
> She'd last 5 minutes on the campaign trail in the U.S. (or in an actual interview with a respectable journalist).



Lucky for her there are very few respectable journalists left and they aren't even asking real questions these days.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> I don't think he's happy either, but then I don't know that he's ever been all that happy. If he thought he was trapped before, he's truly stuck now. He _might_ be able to free himself from her if he gave her all of his money, but he would lose the kids for sure. They would always be bargaining chips. And of course whatever shreds of reputation he has left would be lost because you know she would spin it that a break up was all his fault and too many people mindlessly believe everything she says.



Agree. He would look like a total heel if he left her with two little kids.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For the longest time I really thought she actually wrote that cookbook (it's two, isn't it? I'm not sure) haha. Then I found out who did (renowned foodwriter Adeena Sussmann...her newest book under her own name on sparkly drinks from the Middle East will be out shortly, and her last one on Israeli food is in my personal Top 10). That said, she doesn't especially bother me, I simply don't find her entertaining and won't seek her out.


I find Chrissy vulgar and her constant promotion of cancelling everyone who disagrees with her sometimes rabid opinions is something I think is very distasteful.  I felt badly for her loss, but I also didn't understand the series of pictures of her at the hospital while undergoing the loss.  I thought that was a bit much, TBH, and not really necessary to share with the general public.  It's almost like she took a photographer with her!  (Sounds like someone else we know!)


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Between the narcissism and the codependency, I think they'll stay together.



Definitely, SHE would be the one to have to leave him. If he is no longer useful, she will. As long as he is making her $$, she will stay.


----------



## Allisonfaye

eunaddict said:


> I don't think she likes any of them but at this point, one of the few tributes she can do to suck up to them again is naming her daughter after Diana and/or QE2 or squishing PP's name in there somehow.
> 
> It's not because she likes them, it's because she needs to reclaim SOME reputation to the public.



WOULD she have an interest in sucking up to them after she threw them under the bus? To what end? And I don't think naming the baby Diana in ANY form would endear her to QEII. It might make JCMH think more highly of her.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Definitely, SHE would be the one to have to leave him. If he is no longer useful, she will. As long as he is making her $$, she will stay.



And she won't leave until she is certain she can get something better. She is pure mercenary.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> And it was brilliant! She had a cheeky twinkle in her eye addressing Mr Bond. Whoever thought of that, I think it was Danny Boyle, and to actually pull it off was genius. The ultimate Bond girl.


Here's the kicker, apparently MM wanted to be a Bond girl in 2016, but obviously she wasn't a good enough. She should've taken lessons from the best, HMQEII and not just about acting, but about loyalty, courtesy, honour, respect, etc.. 

MM not a Bond Girl


----------



## TC1

Just saw a small news flash that read "Meghan Markle and Archie spoke with the Queen before PP's service" was nice of her to call that headline in


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I am over feeling sorry for Harry. While Meghan may be calling the shots it is clear he has been a full and willing participant all along. Maybe he doesn't always like what they are doing, but he still does it anyway.
> 
> I don't believe it is up to others to "save" someone from their own bad decisions OR their mental illness. Harry has lived a life of luxury and privilege the rest of us cannot fathom. He is still living beyond what 99.9% of the population knows. He is mentally competent to understand what he's done and what he continues to do. Absolutely no pity for him here.


ITA.  Mental illness is a serious thing, but I feel like more and more people use it as an excuse for their $hitty behavior.  My SIL is, to this day, using her "mental illness" as an excuse to suck her 83 and 93 year old parents dry.  I have to constantly hear how she's "had a hard life".  Her parents are still happily married, she went to private then boarding schools for her amazing education, was never physically or sexually abused, has worked maybe less than a year of her life in total since the age of 25, yet "has had a hard life".  She won't get help, and won't take her medication as prescribed, yet we are all to feel sorry for her dumb decisions.  She has a mental illness, yet has the mental capacity to manipulate her parents, especially her mother, who then tries to manipulate the rest of us into enabling her so that she's "taken care of" after MIL and FIL are gone.  There are people with serious mental illnesses, then there are others who like to jump on that band wagon for their own good, which is what I really believe MM did with her "suicidal ideations".


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> Just saw a small news flash that read "Meghan Markle and Archie spoke with the Queen before PP's service" was nice of her to call that headline in


Yep.  The incessant self promotion with People and Us continues.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Apologies if this is repetitive, sometimes it's hard to keep up with all the great posts , but an "A" option for Sussex#2 could be "Alexandra" as it is the Queen's middle name (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary).
> 
> To be "woke" she could be "Alex" or "Lexie".
> But, *Archie and Alex *sounds to me like a comedy team, so they might want to be careful.
> 
> From a future CBS program listing:  8PM  "Archie and Alex" spoof the Royal Family.


It also sounds like a low budget jewelry collection.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Rouge H said:


> That little sh*t couldn’t stay one more day to comfort/spend time with his grandmother on her birthday.


Well, can we really believe that HM would've wanted to spend time with a traitorous grandchild as oppose to spending quality time with loyal family members, especially on her birthday and while in mourning.


----------



## poopsie

Regarding the Diana statue event---- just think of the cosplay opportunity it affords


----------



## CarryOn2020

Full disclosure: I love Catherine Walker, her story, her clothes, all the CW’s Diana wore [I have the book]. That said, sometimes it’s too much. It takes skill to choose the proper CW creation. Duchess of Kent and Diana were  the quintessential customers IMO.

Fast forward to now, Kate is representing the brand very well.  Still, one can overdo it, dilute the effect.
Perhaps only 1 Royal lady should wear it, if [big if] William goes ahead with the unveiling. Fingers crossed, he cancels the public show.

Just pick your faves -


			Catherine Walker – now and since 1977


----------



## gelbergirl

bag-mania said:


> And she won't leave until she is certain she can get something better. She is pure mercenary.



who could top JCMH in terms of notoriety?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I don't think Harry has any real comprehension of what being trapped is, and it was not his gilded lifestyle as a Royal, it's his subservient role as no more than a Chimpo to the Bimbo.



Reading Bimbo makes me SO uncomfortable. I googled and learned it's derived from Italian and apparently means an unladylike woman? But in German, it's extremely racially loaded, right next to the n-word.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait. Hold up, please. Harry is the “ victim of psychological violence “ ????  Do you have a link?
> 
> ETA: do you mean MM is/was abusing him psychologically?



That's exactly what I mean. The narcissism alone is already a form of abuse, but she also seems to train him like a dog. And he apparently graduated from first and second grade because she doesn't even have to give verbal commands anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I don't think H is happy in Montecito, and I'm starting to believe this is not going to end well.
> 
> "_Regarding Kate's relationship with the Duke of Sussex, the commentator added: "She loved Harry.
> 
> "He said she is the sister that he never had.
> 
> "She has been heartbroken to see them fall out."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton 'heartbroken' by breakdown in relationship with Harry
> 
> 
> KATE, the Duchess of Cambridge is "heartbroken" over the breakdown of her and Prince William's relationship with Prince Harry according to a royal commentator.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I can believe it. Whenever they showed up somewhere together you could see they genuinely liked each other and had fun.


----------



## Lodpah

CHIMPO! I hope the company that hired him realize what a joke they will become.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Harry is no victim lol. He's a grown ass man!



So what. Tons of adults fall victims to narcissists, gaslighters, endure verbal and physical abuse from their spouses hands. And it happens to people far more stable than Harry, who one day wake up and are in a situation where they can't see the light at the end of the tunnel without even fully understanding how it got that bad.

I'm obviously Team Queen (doesn't it roll of the tongue better than Team BRF haha), I do think Harry is a spoilt brat with no manners and no conscience, but also I see the traits of an abuser in Meghan.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe it. Whenever they showed up somewhere together you could see they genuinely liked each other and had fun.



Everything was different BM
before Meghan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M are not the victims. They are the bullies. No one wants to spend time with H because they know he will record everything and merch it.  Surely we all know an obnoxious someone who photographs and records family events, then posts the footage on their Facebook, yes?   It can be so annoying that no one wants that person in the room.  IMO it is completely understandable why no one wanted to ‘spend time’ with H.



I understand it too and I don't blame any of the family for their, uh, measured reactions. In fact I think they showed a lot more goodwill than he deserved.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Everything was different BM
> before Meghan



*"BM" *


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe it. Whenever they showed up somewhere together you could see they genuinely liked each other and had fun.



Not a fan of MM at all. If I remember the OW interview correctly, when he introduced her to QE, he did not prepare her. H&M arrive at the palace, he says ‘ready to meet the Queen?’, she replied yes, then the issues about a curtsy came up.  called to Sarah to come out and show MM how to curtsy. He thought that funny. MM should have taken it as a red flag. She’s a barely millionaire American working woman, surrounded by the highest class of British aristocracy, and he doesn’t prep her??? Shame on him.

IMO it is the guy’s responsibility to introduce his lady successfully.  An immature guy will mess it up, make it an awkward competition.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Complains to Ofcom over Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey have hit 6,200 since it aired last month.
> 
> Figures released by the broadcast regulator show that the interview, which aired on ITV on March 8, has now received a total of 6,203 complaints.
> 
> *According to the latest data released by Ofcom, it is the most complained about programme this month*, receiving 257 complaints since April 6.
> 
> The shocking interview saw Meghan accuse an unnamed member of the Royal Family of racism, while also stating she was denied support after revealing she was struggling with suicidal thoughts._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Complaints against Meghan and Harry's Oprah interview rise to 6,200
> 
> 
> Thousands have complained since the interview with Harry and Meghan was aired on ITV at the start of last month. The interview saw Meghan accuse an unnamed Royal of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I actually support that a lot. Someone needs to hold the media accountable.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Randy Andy and JCMH have a lot in common... new brides   










						Intruder claiming to be Prince Andrew's fiancée allowed into Royal Lodge
					

Royal security is being reviewed after a "glamorous" intruder claiming to be "Irene Windsor" was waved into the Duke of York’s home and left to walk freely within the grounds. The smartly dressed woman was allowed through the security gates at Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park after telling...




					www.yahoo.com
				













						Woman claims Harry agreed to MARRY HER & goes to court to have him arrested
					

A FURIOUS woman from India wants Prince Harry ARRESTED – after a conman pretending to be the royal proposed to her. The woman, identified as Palwinder Kaur, claimed a relationship blossomed o…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> The Queen thinks the family will be in good hands with Charles, then Will, then George.  So, they carry on and issue statements that state "recollections may vary", which I believe is British for "they are lying liars who lie".



If someone makes a t-shirt with RECOLLECTIONS MAY VARY I'll buy it.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Agree. He would look like a total heel if he left her with two little kids.


two kids and multiple servants for a few days?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not a fan of MM at all. If I remember the OW interview correctly, when he introduced her to QE, he did not prepare her. H&M arrive at the palace, he says ‘ready to meet the Queen?’, she replied yes, then the issues about a curtsy came up.  called to Sarah to come out and show MM how to curtsy. He thought that funny. MM should have taken it as a red flag. She’s a barely millionaire American working woman, surrounded by the highest class of British aristocracy, and he doesn’t prep her??? Shame on him.
> 
> IMO it is the guy’s responsibility to introduce his lady successfully.  An immature guy will mess it up, make it an awkward competition.


I think this was an exaggerated story, she knew very well what to do. Oops, I forgot, she never googled Harry or the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> two kids and multiple servants for a few days?



in an exclusive enclave of Santa Barbara, in a mansion with a zillion bathrooms, her own mother readily available?
Life is so tough.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I think this was an exaggerated story, she knew very well what to do. Oops, I forgot, she never googled Harry or the BRF.



Very possibly it was a lie that made him look horrible, still she was out of her league with those ladies.

There is wealth, then there is Royal wealth.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm obviously Team Queen (doesn't it roll of the tongue better than Team BRF haha), I do think Harry is a spoilt brat with no manners and no conscience, but also I see the traits of an abuser in Meghan.



I sure hope Harry has a safe word


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe it. Whenever they showed up somewhere together you could see they genuinely liked each other and had fun.





poopsie said:


> Everything was different BM
> before Meghan


There is still hope AM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> Just saw a small news flash that read "Meghan Markle and Archie spoke with the Queen before PP's service" was nice of her to call that headline in



Yeah, I'm sure the Queen had time for that. Just like MM was walking around making playlists sending them to friends the morning of her wedding.


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I'm sure the Queen had time for that. Just like MM was walking around making playlists sending them to friends the morning of her wedding.


What, you don't like singing "Going to the Chapel" on the day of your televised wedding and then telling Oprah about it??


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not a fan of MM at all. If I remember the OW interview correctly, when he introduced her to QE, he did not prepare her. H&M arrive at the palace, he says ‘ready to meet the Queen?’, she replied yes, then the issues about a curtsy came up.  called to Sarah to come out and show MM how to curtsy. He thought that funny. MM should have taken it as a red flag. She’s a barely millionaire American working woman, surrounded by the highest class of British aristocracy, and he doesn’t prep her??? Shame on him.
> 
> IMO it is the guy’s responsibility to introduce his lady successfully.  An immature guy will mess it up, make it an awkward competition.



I don't believe it. Can you imagine Meghan wishing to be taught how to meet the Queen? Just one more of her fabricated stories in that travesty of an interview.


----------



## marietouchet

MM reminds me of a friend of mine who always has to have the last word ... 

Sad to say been wondering if this friend is a narcissist ....

What you learn from this thread LOL... must laugh ... planning to do an MD in psychology now that I am a flat-out expert ...


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


>



Reading  the Queen's message on her birthday again, how deeply she is feeling her loss really came through. There are no "Prince Phillip" "His Royal Highness" or "The Duke of Edinburgh" titles used. He is simply, as he was to her, "my husband" and "Phillip" even as she's talking about his world wide impact. My heart aches for her. I hope her remaining years are not distressed by Horrid Harry and his wife. (Credit to the person who pointed out this is probably one of the most offensive to Meghan ways of referring to her as it makes clear her place in life is only because of her husband not anything she has achieved.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> two kids and multiple servants for a few days?



I think she meant leaving as in divorce.


----------



## V0N1B2

Jayne1 said:


> I'm going with *not* Diana as a first name. It would take the attention away from Meg and everything is supposed to be about her.


I think just having the child born on July 1st will be enough of a link with Diana. Whatever name Harry’s wife chooses, I think we can be assured it’ll be something deep and meaningful. I’m sure there will be a press release detailing the symbolism of whatever gobbledygook name she picks. “The first letter of the name is for the official flower of South Africa with the second and third letters being associated with the Union Jack and the forth letter is the Greek letter for infinity, while the fifth letter signifies truth and rebirth in Sanskrit.... and on and on and on...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don't believe it. Can you imagine Meghan wishing to be taught how to meet the Queen? Just one more of her fabricated stories in that travesty of an interview.



I can believe he forgot to mention stuff that seemed self-explanatory to him, and yes, that was his oversight. BUT as usual, girlfriend is overacting. Fergie had to come out to teach her? Because there was no staff to be found in that huge palace to demonstrate if you really needed a hands-on lesson for that? (not that I ever bought that "I never googled" story, but I'll bet money control-freak Meghan would never have casually strolled in without preparing herself. Narcissists don't like to look like idiots)


----------



## marietouchet

V0N1B2 said:


> I think just having the child born on July 1st will be enough of a link with Diana. Whatever name Harry’s wife chooses, I think we can be assured it’ll be something deep and meaningful. I’m sure there will be a press release detailing the symbolism of whatever gobbledygook name she picks. “The first letter of the name is for the official flower of South Africa with the second and third letters being associated with the Union Jack and the forth letter is the Greek letter for infinity, while the fifth letter signifies truth and rebirth in Sanskrit.... and on and on and on...


Agree ...
I cant get over the silly press release about all the symbolism in her purple and pink wreath.

You would think she used a California florist since the wreath looked so out of place.

I begrudgingly give her credit,  purple is a color of mourning ... but PINK ???

We had to wear pink at Mother-in-Laws funeral because it was her favorite colors, I begrudgingly had on a tiny pink necklace with my grey while I fielded the questions about why the women in the family were in pink


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe he forgot to mention stuff that seemed self-explanatory to him, and yes, that was his oversight. BUT as usual, girlfriend is overacting. Fergie had to come out to teach her? Because there was no staff to be found in that huge palace to demonstrate if you really needed a hands-on lesson for that? (not that I ever bought that "I never googled" story, but I'll bet money control-freak Meghan would never have casually strolled in without preparing herself. Narcissists don't like to look like idiots)


The curtsy lesson supposedly took place at Fergie and Andrew's home not the palace, but still a curtsy is not hard, the key thing is to attempt a sign of respect not do a debutante-worthy genuflection that allows the forehead to touch the ground


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> The curtsy lesson supposedly took place at Fergie and Andrew's home not the palace, but still a curtsy is not hard, the key thing is to attempt a sign of respect not do a debutante-worthy genuflection that allows the forehead to touch the ground


But now that you mention it, I’m surprised Harry’s wife didn’t do the Texas debutante curtsy since she was making her debut to the RF!  Then she could continue to do so while 9 months pregnant as well  Now that I’d love to see.


----------



## bellecate

poopsie said:


> Soooooo................did I somehow miss M&H's birthday salute to TQ?



Her birthday gift to The Queen was ‘silence’. After all silence is golden.


----------



## rose60610

Knowing you were going to meet TQ one day, how could you not know you should curtsey as a sign of respect? Why the turbo lesson at the last second? That sounded so stupid. Was Meghan also surprised the BRF lived in large houses, and were somewhat kinda famous? You'd think someone who majored in International Relations at an expensive school might spend a couple of minutes learning about the foreign family of the chump she was stalking. For someone who was determined to claw her way into the BRF her tales of "I had no idea" are incredulous. She tries to make it sound as though met Harry at a coffee shop and just he was a cool guy to hang out with, THEN IT TURNED OUT HE WAS A PRINCE! OMG!!! Meghan drinks Stupid Juice for Liars by the 12 pack.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe he forgot to mention stuff that seemed self-explanatory to him, and yes, that was his oversight. BUT as usual, girlfriend is overacting. *Fergie had to come out to teach her? *Because there was no staff to be found in that huge palace to demonstrate if you really needed a hands-on lesson for that? (not that I ever bought that "I never googled" story, but I'll bet money control-freak Meghan would never have casually strolled in without preparing herself. Narcissists don't like to look like idiots)



I imagine Fergie sitting at home watching the interview and when it gets to that point she drops her popcorn and says out loud "What? I did not teach that ***** how to curtsy. I wasn't even there!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @SomethingGoodCanWork




Loved this!


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So what. Tons of adults fall victims to narcissists, gaslighters, endure verbal and physical abuse from their spouses hands. And it happens to people far more stable than Harry, who one day wake up and are in a situation where they can't see the light at the end of the tunnel without even fully understanding how it got that bad.
> 
> I'm obviously Team Queen (doesn't it roll of the tongue better than Team BRF haha), I do think Harry is a spoilt brat with no manners and no conscience, but also I see the traits of an abuser in Meghan.



It's true, lots of adults fall victims to narcissists and gaslighters but we have no indication Meghan is literally verbally abusing him. We're just assuming it MUST be the case if he's doing xyz stupid thing... when he could just be doing xyz stupid thing because he's, well, always been kind of a brat.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> For years, OW told us to eliminate the negative people in our lives. I think her line was, “if someone doesn’t treat you how you want them to, eliminate them.”   OW’s thinking was/is very popular with many people.
> View attachment 5061658




MM's version: Only surround yourself with people who can lift your bank account.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> It is an archaic law that nobody believes would be enforced these days. Harry and Meghan are perfectly free to raise their kids to be entitled little brats just like themselves. The BRF has no shortage of royal children. Archie and baby yet-to-be-named will not be claimed by anyone else.



Agree. Why on earth would the BRF want them?


----------



## csshopper

I was curious if there has been a link between Meghan and Chrissie so googled and found the following. Eye popping in content to me. Note the date of December 2019 from a publication in Australia, the blatant statements about what Meghan is doing instead of spending Christmas with the family, the timelines etc. Read through and there is a connection between Meghan and Chrissie via a jewelry designer. 
For some reason, user error I'm sure, I can't get the link to post so am having to send it all, but think it is worth the read.

*Meghan Markle is working on her brand during her holiday*
Kate Halfpenny Entertainment and Lifestyle Editor
10:11pm, Dec 11, 2019








Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at a One Young World event in London on October 26. _Photo: Instagram_
As Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoy their six-week sabbatical from royal duties, various reports have them celebrating Thanksgiving in California and sunning themselves in unnamed tropical locales.
But it turns out Meghan hasn’t been building sandcastles with son Archie, seven months, or re-reading her favourite holiday book (_The Dud Avocado_, by Elaine Dundy) according to multiple media reports.
Instead, she’s using her time away from the spotlight – which includes missing Christmas with the royal family – to plan the US launch of her Sussex Royal foundation.
“While Harry and Meghan are technically on rest, she is not the type of woman who likes doing nothing,” a source told _The Telegraph._
The former _Suits_ star has dipped back into her one-time world and called in her old Hollywood publicist Keleigh Thomas Morgan to help.
Meghan is said to be in “full work mode” before the launch of the Sussex Royal charity venture next year, and is building a strategy to make it one of the world’s biggest philanthropic outfits.
“Meghan may officially be on her royal break, but don’t believe she is taking her foot off the gas,” a source told _DailyMailTV_.
“The break and Thanksgiving of course have been a time to balance the needs of her family, but you cannot underestimate what an incredible force Meghan is.”


Meghan and Harry on November 10 in London just before their break. _Photo: Instagram_
Included in an 18-month plan is the goal of raising “tens of millions of dollars” for the foundation and “creating a legacy as a new royal” for Meghan.
Which is where Ms Thomas Morgan comes into the picture.
The PR adviser heads up Los Angeles power agency Sunshine Sachs, whose clients include Leonardo DiCaprio and Natalie Portman.
Meghan was a client before her engagement to Harry, and Ms Thomas Morgan is close enough to the ex-actress to have been a guest at the Sussexes’ wedding in May 2018.
The PR is helping with business relationships once Meghan has reached out to celebrity supporters and friends, including George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey and Serena Williams.
While the charity will be global, Meghan “sees Hollywood and American business circles as key to fundraising,” the source said.
“Meghan feels with the wealth in the US, focusing on fundraising stateside will bring in tens of millions of dollars quickly.”
But despite the publicist’s input, the duchess, 38, is very much “running things”, according to reports.


Meghan at the University of Johannesburg on October 1. _Photo: Instagram_
With Harry’s blessing, Meghan makes all the executive decisions and has complete creative control.
“This is a mission Meghan has been on for a long time. Even in her younger years in Hollywood, she wanted to work towards creating an international charity changing lives,” said the_ Telegraph _source.
“Now that she has the platform and profile of being a British royal, she can truly build this plan … and Harry is right behind her.”
Buckingham Palace has acknowledged Sunshine Sachs is working with the Sussexes on the fundraising initiative, which is being paid for “privately”.
Meanwhile, Meghan’s jewellery designer friend Jennifer Meyer has removed all mention of the duchess from her social media accounts, reportedly at the insistence of Buckingham Palace.
Meyer, who has images of Reese Witherspoon, Chrissy Teigen and Jennifer Aniston on her Insta account, had repeatedly used photos of Meghan to promote her business.
That allegedly breached a non-disclosure agreeement, said _The Sun_.
The duchess wore Meyer’s designs at her New York baby shower (a $1849 ‘mummy’ necklace), when Archie made his public debut and when the family met Archbishop Desmond Tutu in South Africa.
A section on Meyer’s website dedicated to Meghan has also been deleted.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jayne1 said:


> I'm going with *not* Diana as a first name. It would take the attention away from Meg and everything is supposed to be about her.



I tend to wonder how she will parent a girl anyway and if there will be a competition thing.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Allisonfaye said:


> Agree. Why on earth would the BRF want them?



I assume that any law regarding the BRF and offspring would date back to times when an heir was a major deal and many of them died along the way.  Say, had Henry the VIII had a son, I doubt that child would have been allowed out of his sight ever.


----------



## lalame

The culture of victimhood has gone too far... you're not a victim if you have a nasty spouse that other people don't like but who makes you happy. I've never seen a victim go on tv and say "I'm finally living the life I want to live... I was a victim before" which is basically what he said to Oprah. He has a history of telling the world he didn't like his lifestyle before and now he's telling everyone it's awesome. When he can say, "I was abused, that sucked" then I'll give him some sympathy but until then I'm not making him a victim if that's not how he sees himself.


----------



## V0N1B2

csshopper said:


> I was curious if there has been a link between Meghan and Chrissie so googled and found the following. Eye popping in content to me. Note the date of December 2019 from a publication in Australia, the blatant statements about what Meghan is doing instead of spending Christmas with the family, the timelines etc. Read through and there is a connection between Meghan and Chrissie via a jewelry designer.
> For some reason, user error I'm sure, I can't get the link to post so am having to send it all, but think it is worth the read.
> 
> *Meghan Markle is working on her brand during her holiday*
> Kate Halfpenny Entertainment and Lifestyle Editor
> 10:11pm, Dec 11, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at a One Young World event in London on October 26. _Photo: Instagram_
> As Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoy their six-week sabbatical from royal duties, various reports have them celebrating Thanksgiving in California and sunning themselves in unnamed tropical locales.
> But it turns out Meghan hasn’t been building sandcastles with son Archie, seven months, or re-reading her favourite holiday book (_The Dud Avocado_, by Elaine Dundy) according to multiple media reports.
> Instead, she’s using her time away from the spotlight – which includes missing Christmas with the royal family – to plan the US launch of her Sussex Royal foundation.
> “While Harry and Meghan are technically on rest, she is not the type of woman who likes doing nothing,” a source told _The Telegraph._
> The former _Suits_ star has dipped back into her one-time world and called in her old Hollywood publicist Keleigh Thomas Morgan to help.
> Meghan is said to be in “full work mode” before the launch of the Sussex Royal charity venture next year, and is building a strategy to make it one of the world’s biggest philanthropic outfits.
> “Meghan may officially be on her royal break, but don’t believe she is taking her foot off the gas,” a source told _DailyMailTV_.
> “The break and Thanksgiving of course have been a time to balance the needs of her family, but you cannot underestimate what an incredible force Meghan is.”
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry on November 10 in London just before their break. _Photo: Instagram_
> Included in an 18-month plan is the goal of raising “tens of millions of dollars” for the foundation and “creating a legacy as a new royal” for Meghan.
> Which is where Ms Thomas Morgan comes into the picture.
> The PR adviser heads up Los Angeles power agency Sunshine Sachs, whose clients include Leonardo DiCaprio and Natalie Portman.
> Meghan was a client before her engagement to Harry, and Ms Thomas Morgan is close enough to the ex-actress to have been a guest at the Sussexes’ wedding in May 2018.
> The PR is helping with business relationships once Meghan has reached out to celebrity supporters and friends, including George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey and Serena Williams.
> While the charity will be global, Meghan “sees Hollywood and American business circles as key to fundraising,” the source said.
> “Meghan feels with the wealth in the US, focusing on fundraising stateside will bring in tens of millions of dollars quickly.”
> But despite the publicist’s input, the duchess, 38, is very much “running things”, according to reports.
> 
> 
> Meghan at the University of Johannesburg on October 1. _Photo: Instagram_
> With Harry’s blessing, Meghan makes all the executive decisions and has complete creative control.
> “This is a mission Meghan has been on for a long time. Even in her younger years in Hollywood, she wanted to work towards creating an international charity changing lives,” said the_ Telegraph _source.
> “Now that she has the platform and profile of being a British royal, she can truly build this plan … and Harry is right behind her.”
> Buckingham Palace has acknowledged Sunshine Sachs is working with the Sussexes on the fundraising initiative, which is being paid for “privately”.
> Meanwhile, Meghan’s jewellery designer friend Jennifer Meyer has removed all mention of the duchess from her social media accounts, reportedly at the insistence of Buckingham Palace.
> Meyer, who has images of Reese Witherspoon, Chrissy Teigen and Jennifer Aniston on her Insta account, had repeatedly used photos of Meghan to promote her business.
> That allegedly breached a non-disclosure agreeement, said _The Sun_.
> The duchess wore Meyer’s designs at her New York baby shower (a $1849 ‘mummy’ necklace), when Archie made his public debut and when the family met Archbishop Desmond Tutu in South Africa.
> A section on Meyer’s website dedicated to Meghan has also been deleted.


It’s funny because I thought it later turned out that they were in fact not “in California for Thanksgiving”, nor were they “sunning themselves in unnamed tropical locales”. Wasn’t it later revealed that they left the UK and went directly to Vancouver Island? Where they managed to live for several weeks in complete anonymity?  It was only by the time everyone found out where they were that they had to seek refuge in California and were whisked in covert ops-like secrecy out of Sleepy Hollow, oops I mean North Saanich.
Sure, I’m not saying she wasn’t working on her brand, but she would have been (as we like to say out here) rusting on the beaches instead of sunning herself. 

Six week sabbatical, lol.  Let’s be honest, it evolved into an 18 month - and counting - leave of absence. I think the technical term is dereliction of duty.


----------



## csshopper

V0N1B2 said:


> It’s funny because I thought it later turned out that they were in fact not “in California for Thanksgiving”, nor were they “sunning themselves in unnamed tropical locales”. Wasn’t it later revealed that they left the UK and went directly to Vancouver Island? Where they managed to live for several weeks in complete anonymity?  It was only by the time everyone found out where they were that they had to seek refuge in California and were whisked in covert ops-like secrecy out of Sleepy Hollow, oops I mean North Saanich.
> Sure, I’m not saying she wasn’t working on her brand, but she would have been (as we like to say out here) rusting on the beaches instead of sunning herself.
> 
> Six week sabbatical, lol.  Let’s be honest, it evolved into an 18 month - and counting - leave of absence. I think the technical term is dereliction of duty.


It's a perfect example of all the gobbled gook baggage the Sussexes' haul around with them.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> “Meghan may officially be on her royal break,* but don’t believe she is taking her foot off the gas,*” a source told _DailyMailTV_.
> “The break and Thanksgiving of course have been a time to balance the needs of her family, but you cannot underestimate what an incredible force Meghan is.”



Just like we heard she was "going to hit the ground running" when she married Harry to start her new life in the UK and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in Vancouver and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in L.A.  I guess they've come up with a new phrase. 

Still, now it's time to actually work and we'll see if they do that.  They need to produce actual, watchable content for netflix and actual, listenable (is that a word lol) content for spotify. No more excuses.  Let's see what they can do.


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> Just like we heard she was "going to hit the ground running" when she married Harry to start her new life in the UK and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in Vancouver and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in L.A.  I guess they've come up with a new phrase.
> 
> Still, now it's time to actually work and we'll see if they do that.  *They need to produce actual, watchable content for netflix and actual, listenable (is that a word lol) content for spotify. No more excuses.*  Let's see what they can do.



I think the only way they come out with "watchable and listenable" is if they hire someone to do it for them. Or we're going to get "look how smart and perfect we are even though we're victims and anyone who doesn't like us is racist."


----------



## octopus17

MR CB has just said "how can she be a part of the Royal Family when she's not even part of her own family". Let's hope she feels differently about family now that she has Archie and expecting another...


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I think the only way they come out with "watchable and listenable" is if they hire someone to do it for them. Or we're going to get "look how smart and perfect we are even though we're victims and anyone who doesn't like us is racist."


their one and only podcast so far was a bunch of mini-interviews with socially concious celebs....I wonder what they think they can do.  If they want to do topical/political stuff, I doubt they can do it better (or as well) as PBS.  It's one thing for people to believe all the crap they spewed on Oprah but it's another thing for people to watch boring content.  I don't have netflix anyway but will see what they can do.


----------



## lalame

Cornflower Blue said:


> MR CB has just said "how can she be a part of the Royal Family when she's not even part of her own family". Let's hope she feels differently about family now that she has Archie and expecting another...



Well, you can't say she's treating her BRF family any worse than her real family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I think the only way they come out with "watchable and listenable" is if they hire someone to do it for them. Or we're going to get "look how smart and perfect we are even though we're victims and anyone who doesn't like us is racist."



They did hire someone to work on a show for them. Now whether they are smart enough to leave them alone and trust them to do their job is another matter.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> Just like we heard she was "going to hit the ground running" when she married Harry to start her new life in the UK and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in Vancouver and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in L.A.  I guess they've come up with a new phrase.
> 
> Still, now it's time to actually work and we'll see if they do that.  They need to produce actual, watchable content for netflix and actual, listenable (is that a word lol) content for spotify. No more excuses.  Let's see what they can do.


My sympathies are all with the ground. What did it ever do to her that she had to hit it worldwide?


----------



## roshe

Can we vote to have the title of this thread replaced to "Prince Harry and his wife thread"?


----------



## Mendocino

poopsie said:


> Can't get this song out of my head now............junior high music LOL
> 
> 
> [/QUOTE





Sharont2305 said:


> And it was brilliant! She had a cheeky twinkle in her eye addressing Mr Bond. Whoever thought of that, I think it was Danny Boyle, and to actually pull it off was genius. The ultimate Bond girl.


Yes! Yes! Yes! I loved the way she kept writing at her desk, after the footman announced James Bond, and him waiting patiently to be acknowledged!

To me she was never a Bond girl; rather, Bond was The Queen's man.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Mendocino said:


> Yes! Yes! Yes! I loved the way she kept writing at her desk, after the footman announced James Bond, and him waiting patiently to be acknowledged!
> 
> To me she was never a Bond girl; rather, Bond was The Queen's man.



Exactly! This “Bond girl” stuff is nonsense. Bond works “In her Majesty’s service” remember. He’s a Windsor Boy if anything!


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Her birthday gift to The Queen was ‘silence’. After all silence is golden.


She might be silent (or silenced), but her PR-team is working hard today as usual!


----------



## bag-mania

roshe said:


> Can we vote to have the title of this thread replaced to "Prince Harry and his wife thread"?



If we’re thinking of changing it I’d like to suggest ”Meghan Markle and her Meal Ticket.” For accuracy’s sake.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> She might be silent (or silenced), but her PR-team is working hard today as usual!
> View attachment 5062099
> 
> View attachment 5062095
> 
> View attachment 5062098



It's crazy how exaggerated some of those headlines are. Chrissy said Meghan reached out to her after her loss and she found her to be nice. It's hardly a "friendship" or "connection." That would've been months and months ago... Doesn't even sound like they've talked since.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I was curious if there has been a link between Meghan and Chrissie so googled and found the following. Eye popping in content to me. Note the date of December 2019 from a publication in Australia, the blatant statements about what Meghan is doing instead of spending Christmas with the family, the timelines etc. Read through and there is a connection between Meghan and Chrissie via a jewelry designer.
> For some reason, user error I'm sure, I can't get the link to post so am having to send it all, but think it is worth the read.
> 
> *Meghan Markle is working on her brand during her holiday*
> Kate Halfpenny Entertainment and Lifestyle Editor
> 10:11pm, Dec 11, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at a One Young World event in London on October 26. _Photo: Instagram_
> As Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoy their six-week sabbatical from royal duties, various reports have them celebrating Thanksgiving in California and sunning themselves in unnamed tropical locales.
> But it turns out Meghan hasn’t been building sandcastles with son Archie, seven months, or re-reading her favourite holiday book (_The Dud Avocado_, by Elaine Dundy) according to multiple media reports.
> Instead, she’s using her time away from the spotlight – which includes missing Christmas with the royal family – to plan the US launch of her Sussex Royal foundation.
> “While Harry and Meghan are technically on rest, she is not the type of woman who likes doing nothing,” a source told _The Telegraph._
> The former _Suits_ star has dipped back into her one-time world and called in her old Hollywood publicist Keleigh Thomas Morgan to help.
> Meghan is said to be in “full work mode” before the launch of the Sussex Royal charity venture next year, and is building a strategy to make it one of the world’s biggest philanthropic outfits.
> “Meghan may officially be on her royal break, but don’t believe she is taking her foot off the gas,” a source told _DailyMailTV_.
> “The break and Thanksgiving of course have been a time to balance the needs of her family, but you cannot underestimate what an incredible force Meghan is.”
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry on November 10 in London just before their break. _Photo: Instagram_
> Included in an 18-month plan is the goal of raising “tens of millions of dollars” for the foundation and “creating a legacy as a new royal” for Meghan.
> Which is where Ms Thomas Morgan comes into the picture.
> The PR adviser heads up Los Angeles power agency Sunshine Sachs, whose clients include Leonardo DiCaprio and Natalie Portman.
> Meghan was a client before her engagement to Harry, and Ms Thomas Morgan is close enough to the ex-actress to have been a guest at the Sussexes’ wedding in May 2018.
> The PR is helping with business relationships once Meghan has reached out to celebrity supporters and friends, including George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey and Serena Williams.
> While the charity will be global, Meghan “sees Hollywood and American business circles as key to fundraising,” the source said.
> “Meghan feels with the wealth in the US, focusing on fundraising stateside will bring in tens of millions of dollars quickly.”
> But despite the publicist’s input, the duchess, 38, is very much “running things”, according to reports.
> 
> 
> Meghan at the University of Johannesburg on October 1. _Photo: Instagram_
> *With Harry’s blessing, Meghan makes all the executive decisions and has complete creative control.
> “This is a mission Meghan has been on for a long time. Even in her younger years in Hollywood, she wanted to work towards creating an international charity changing lives,” said the Telegraph source.
> “Now that she has the platform and profile of being a British royal, she can truly build this plan … and Harry is right behind her.”
> Buckingham Palace has acknowledged Sunshine Sachs is working with the Sussexes on the fundraising initiative, which is being paid for “privately”.*
> Meanwhile, Meghan’s jewellery designer friend Jennifer Meyer has removed all mention of the duchess from her social media accounts, reportedly at the insistence of Buckingham Palace.
> Meyer, who has images of Reese Witherspoon, Chrissy Teigen and Jennifer Aniston on her Insta account, had repeatedly used photos of Meghan to promote her business.
> That allegedly breached a non-disclosure agreeement, said _The Sun_.
> The duchess wore Meyer’s designs at her New York baby shower (a $1849 ‘mummy’ necklace), when Archie made his public debut and when the family met Archbishop Desmond Tutu in South Africa.
> A section on Meyer’s website dedicated to Meghan has also been deleted.


Wow.
And the best she could do is this jewelry business and that latte stuff [being nice]??? Wow.
Proving once again, these nouveau entrepreneurs are in it for our $$$$$.  Not interested in putting in the hours, doing the research, finding real talent - all about the fast-money$$$$.


----------



## catlover46

Harry and Meghan go on Oprah and accuse the BRF of wanting to harm her and Archie by pulling their security but yet Harry doesn’t understand why his family gave him the cold shoulder of death at Phillip’s funeral? GMAB.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> It's crazy how exaggerated some of those headlines are. Chrissy said Meghan reached out to her after her loss and she found her to be nice. It's hardly a "friendship" or "connection." That would've been months and months ago... Doesn't even sound like they've talked since.



One more lil lie, they’ve known each other for years [suitcase dayz,], etc.  Such Hwood bs, all about $$$$


----------



## roshe

bag-mania said:


> If we’re thinking of changing it I’d like to suggest ”Meghan Markle and her Meal Ticket.” For accuracy’s sake.



If she really is a narcissist she would not like having her name not mentioned at all. That's why a lot of people now are referring to her as Harry's wife and not mentioning her name.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more lil lie, they’ve known each other for years [suitcase dayz,], etc.  Such Hwood bs, all about $$$$



Chrissie literally said she never met her on that show.


----------



## lalame

I'm not even a huge fan of Chrissie but I don't know why anyone has to be collateral damage just by distant association to M. The girl barely said M reached out to her and she was nice. Didn't even say they were friends or she had any sort of relationship with her. Doubt she would lie, or what does she get from lying about not knowing someone... have you SEEN the things she has revealed about herself. 

Edit: Never mind, I saw a longer clip of the interview with Andy and she talks more about talking to Meghan at least after the Oprah interview too. Maybe they are friends.


----------



## catlover46

I call TOTAL bs on the Queen talking to her and Archie the morning of PP’s funeral...nope nope nope.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Chrissie literally said she never met her on that show.



Full disclosure: I really don’t know who Chrissie is or what her claim to fame is. So, I am not aware of this who-knew-who-when drama. For my mental health, I will not google it either. I did find this:








						Chrissy Teigen Reminisced About Being on ‘Deal or No Deal’ With Meghan Markle
					

"I could be Princess Harry."




					www.glamour.com


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Full disclosure: I really don’t know who Chrissie is or what her claim to fame is. So, I am not aware of this who-knew-who-when drama. For my mental health, I will not google it either. I did find this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Reminisced About Being on ‘Deal or No Deal’ With Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> "I could be Princess Harry."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com



If you read the article, she doesn't even say she knew M. The headline is just misleading... but I remember her being hounded by this question all the time when the Deal or No Deal photo surfaced and she kept having to say she didn't know her at all. It's like me "reminiscing about being at a conference with Will Smith" (true story).. no I didn't speak a word with Will Smith lol but we were sure there at a conference at the same time.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Full disclosure: I really don’t know who Chrissie is or what her claim to fame is. So, I am not aware of this who-knew-who-when drama. For my mental health, I will not google it either. I did find this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Reminisced About Being on ‘Deal or No Deal’ With Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> "I could be Princess Harry."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com



I had never heard of Chrissy before last year when she had a miscarriage and shared (and overshared) the details of it with the press.


----------



## lalame

I think what this does show us though is M has started getting really cozy with random celebs who probably wouldn't have given her the time of day before... kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Do you want a private, normal life or do you want to have a celebrity lifestyle?

Funny thing is Chrissy is exactly the type of person that M probably looks down on, since she's in that Kardashian lane. Wonder how deep THAT friendship actually goes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> If you read the article, she doesn't even say she knew M. The headline is just misleading... but I remember her being hounded by this question all the time when the Deal or No Deal photo surfaced and she kept having to say she didn't know her at all. It's like me "reminiscing about being at a conference with Will Smith" (true story).. no I didn't speak a word with Will Smith lol but we were sure there at a conference at the same time.



Recollections may vary ???

ETA: The Queen rules


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> I think just having the child born on July 1st will be enough of a link with Diana. Whatever name Harry’s wife chooses, I think we can be assured it’ll be something deep and meaningful. I’m sure there will be a press release detailing the symbolism of whatever gobbledygook name she picks. “The first letter of the name is for the official flower of South Africa with the second and third letters being associated with the Union Jack and the forth letter is the Greek letter for infinity, while the fifth letter signifies truth and rebirth in Sanskrit.... and on and on and on...


It kind of reminds me when Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes named their daughter Suri and claimed it was a Hebrew word for princess or something or other and people came forth and said WTF are they talking about??


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> But now that you mention it, I’m surprised Harry’s wife didn’t do the Texas debutante curtsy since she was making her debut to the RF!  Then she could continue to do so while 9 months pregnant as well  Now that I’d love to see.


While wearing 6" stilettos surrounded by chickens


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Just like we heard she was "going to hit the ground running" when she married Harry to start her new life in the UK and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in Vancouver and then she was "going to hit the ground running" when they arrived in L.A.  I guess they've come up with a new phrase.
> 
> Still, now it's time to actually work and we'll see if they do that.  They need to produce actual, watchable content for netflix and actual, listenable (is that a word lol) content for spotify. No more excuses.  Let's see what they can do.


Maybe she "hit the ground running" face first


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she "hit the ground running" face first


Which accounts for the repeated nose upgrades...


----------



## xincinsin

Mendocino said:


> Yes! Yes! Yes! I loved the way she kept writing at her desk, after the footman announced James Bond, and him waiting patiently to be acknowledged!
> 
> To me she was never a Bond girl; rather, Bond was The Queen's man.





A1aGypsy said:


> Exactly! This “Bond girl” stuff is nonsense. Bond works “In her Majesty’s service” remember. He’s a Windsor Boy if anything!


Tough day. These made me grin


----------



## djfmn

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If someone makes a t-shirt with RECOLLECTIONS MAY VARY I'll buy it.



Just for you 





						This item is unavailable - Etsy
					

Find the perfect handmade gift, vintage & on-trend clothes, unique jewellery, and more… lots more.




					www.etsy.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Full disclosure: I really don’t know who Chrissie is or what her claim to fame is. So, I am not aware of this who-knew-who-when drama. For my mental health, I will not google it either. I did find this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Reminisced About Being on ‘Deal or No Deal’ With Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> "I could be Princess Harry."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com


Adding this to your findings.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> If you read the article, she doesn't even say she knew M. The headline is just misleading... but I remember her being hounded by this question all the time when the Deal or No Deal photo surfaced and she kept having to say she didn't know her at all. It's like me "reminiscing about being at a conference with Will Smith" (true story).. no I didn't speak a word with Will Smith lol but we were sure there at a conference at the same time.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Recollections may vary ???
> 
> ETA: The Queen rules


Would this help?


Spoiler: old acquaintance?


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I find Chrissy vulgar and her constant promotion of cancelling everyone who disagrees with her sometimes rabid opinions is something I think is very distasteful.  I felt badly for her loss, but I also didn't understand the series of pictures of her at the hospital while undergoing the loss.  I thought that was a bit much, TBH, and not really necessary to share with the general public.  It's almost like she took a photographer with her!  (Sounds like someone else we know!)


Saw her on some talk show and her face can't move, it's so swollen. I agree, she's vulgar, overshares and keeps returning to social media after she promises to leave.

I'm always a bit surprised that John finds that attractive.


----------



## Chanbal

This yacht girl twitter account has so much information on the duke's wife.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> CHIMPO! I hope the company that hired him realize what a joke they will become.


Agree. H added more bad light on himself (no surprise) by the way he acted at the funeral service. From Betterup website 'Prince Harry will expand on the work he's been doing for years, as he educates, inspires our community and champions the importance of focusing on preventative mental fitness and human potential worldwide.'  He's shown the world he is not a good champion/representative of Betterup. What client would want to follow his lead unless it's to just see a sideshow.


----------



## xincinsin

Is this for real? Quite the opposite of any desire for privacy. 








						The Baby Part 2: The Deal - BLIND GOSSIP
					

SOLVED! UPDATED! [Blind Gossip] You may recall that this celebrity couple signed a very lucrative deal to produce TV shows. So… where are the shows? Have you heard about any specific projects? Want to hear about their first one? Here you go! They have their first project and it is going to be...




					blindgossip.com
				




ETA Whew! April Fool's joke


----------



## elvisfan4life

Allisonfaye said:


> I assume that any law regarding the BRF and offspring would date back to times when an heir was a major deal and many of them died along the way.  Say, had Henry the VIII had a son, I doubt that child would have been allowed out of his sight ever.



You don’t know your history - Henry had several sons legitimate and illegitimate - most of the legitimate ones died at birth still born but his son by Jane Seymour was crowned Edward VI at the age of 9 until his death 6 years later when his half sister Mary became Queen


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Would this help?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: old acquaintance?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5062242



Yeeaaaah just like her close friendships with Idris, Amal, Oprah, Victoria B, and all those people at her wedding lol


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M are not the victims. They are the bullies. No one wants to spend time with H because they know he will record everything and merch it.  Surely we all know an obnoxious someone who photographs and records family events, then posts the footage on their Facebook, yes?   It can be so annoying that no one wants that person in the room.  IMO it is completely understandable why no one wanted to ‘spend time’ with H.


You mean Chrissy Teigan? 



Jayne1 said:


> Saw her on some talk show and her face can't move, it's so swollen. I agree, she's vulgar, overshares and keeps returning to social media after she promises to leave.
> 
> I'm always a bit surprised that John finds that attractive.


Honestly, I think she’s a beard. All this oversharing is very suspicious to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> It's true, lots of adults fall victims to narcissists and gaslighters but we have no indication Meghan is literally verbally abusing him. We're just assuming it MUST be the case if he's doing xyz stupid thing... when he could just be doing xyz stupid thing because he's, well, always been kind of a brat.



I did not say she verbally abuses him. But we have all seen the footage where she taps him to sit, stand, move, talk, shut up, plus the cute (not) extras where she ellbows him in the ribs to get ahead of him or sends him around like well-trained dog in public while making jokes on his expenses. That's not normal and not healthy.


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> Is this for real? Quite the opposite of any desire for privacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Baby Part 2: The Deal - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> SOLVED! UPDATED! [Blind Gossip] You may recall that this celebrity couple signed a very lucrative deal to produce TV shows. So… where are the shows? Have you heard about any specific projects? Want to hear about their first one? Here you go! They have their first project and it is going to be...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA Whew! April Fool's joke


Big pass from me, I was offered to have a mirror while I was giving birth to my first and refused, not interested on seeing my bits stretched and not interested on seeing other women’s unless I was the midwife!


----------



## eunaddict

Per her mouthpiece.





Interesting. I wonder what happened to not being able to use HRH after leaving the family business (William, Kate and H are still HRHs on the official site, MM is not).


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

It's funny how the algorithms of the internets work. This video came up in my YT feed the other day, as if by happenstance   But I wasn't posting this to lament our glorious new Big Brother society in the making.

I wanted to post this beautiful Canadian song for little Archie, whom I think we all wish the best for and who as so many other children, has to suffer the consequences of adults behaving badly. Warning though, this song is highly addictive, I've been singing the chorus out loud so much my kids are begging me for mercy 

Alvvays - Archie, Marry Me


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Full disclosure: I really don’t know who Chrissie is or what her claim to fame is. So, I am not aware of this who-knew-who-when drama. For my mental health, I will not google it either. I did find this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Reminisced About Being on ‘Deal or No Deal’ With Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> "I could be Princess Harry."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com


I don't know much about them either, but from the occasional pics I saw used to think her and her hubby were a handsome couple with cute kids. But then I saw some things she has said/tweeted and I now think of them both more as scum. I'm very much for free speech but kids are out of bounds for me, and she crossed that line in a big and ugly way.


----------



## bubablu

Chanbal said:


> Adding this to your findings.
> View attachment 5062235


This photo with the big open mouth scares me every time, lol.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bubablu said:


> This photo with the big open mouth scares me every time, lol.



Well H loves it lol


----------



## mdcx

Gosh Meghan really can't keep her mouth shut about Harrys trip to the UK can she? First it was that Meghan had a floral wreath delivered to the funeral, then all about Harry meeting up with his relatives while over there, then we get told about Meghan chatting with the Queen before the funeral...Then we just happen to get pics of him being driven home from the airport in the US...


----------



## creme fraiche

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't know much about them either, but from the occasional pics I saw used to think her and her hubby were a handsome couple with cute kids. But then I saw some things she has said/tweeted and I now think of them both more as scum. I'm very much for free speech but kids are out of bounds for me, and she crossed that line in a big and ugly way.



I don't know much about Chrissie, but I find her pretty innocuous compared to MM.  Sure, she is quite...active on social media, but somehow she does not make my hackles rise as much as the DoS.

I do have lots of respect for her husband , which probably colours my opinion of her.  He is not only an EGOT winner, but his backstory is amazing.  Home schooled, skipped 2 years of school when he did finally enter formal educations because he was that advanced,  graduated salutatorian of his class, accepted by a variety of schools including Harvard, went to Penn where he was in an honours society, worked for BCG....  Yes, he has earned his fame and fortune.


----------



## creme fraiche

This is John Legend in college where he was in an a cappella band. Did this as an extracurricular whilst also doing well enough to graduate magna cum laude AND play piano on a Lauren Hill album.  (can you tell that I really respect him?)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, I didn't know that about John. But I loved, loved, loved his recent his song wih Faouzia (didn't quite love Chrissy advertising it on Twitter saying "I'm not only saying this because I'm having sex with John!" when she could just have said "Because I'm married to John", but eh, that's me). 

I did not see her attacking kids though, that's a hard pass for me.


----------



## mdcx

Palace is 'calmer' without Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'kicking off
					

Speaking to The Mirror, a source claimed that one of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's main issues was their '[inability to understand how things worked.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How's it even possible that someone who grew up in said palace doesn't understand how things work?


----------



## Sharont2305

mdcx said:


> Palace is 'calmer' without Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'kicking off
> 
> 
> Speaking to The Mirror, a source claimed that one of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's main issues was their '[inability to understand how things worked.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The only issue I have with this, I've not read it properly though so I don't know in what context this article is about, but when people say things like "they didn't know how things work" etc is that it's half wrong. She didn't know how things work but he bloody does, he's lived it his whole life. It's not a new thing for him and part of his "job" was to teach his wife the rules and protocols expected of her in her new role. Yes, at the beginning she made mistakes but that was expected really so we thought okay, she'll learn. Her problem was that she will not be told. She could've had a fantastic life as a proper senior member of the RF, doing her duty to The Queen, then her father in law. But no, it's all about Meghan with capital ME.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How's it even possible that someone who grew up in said palace doesn't understand how things work?


You beat me to it whilst I was writing my spiel, lol


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> The only issue I have with this, I've not read it properly though so I don't know in what context this article is about, but when people say things like "they didn't know how things work" etc is that it's half wrong. She didn't know how things work but he bloody does, he's lived it his whole life. It's not a new thing for him and part of his "job" was to teach his wife the rules and protocols expected of her in her new role. Yes, at the beginning she made mistakes but that was expected really so we thought okay, she'll learn. Her problem was that she will not be told. She could've had a fantastic life as a proper senior member of the RF, doing her duty to The Queen, then her father in law. But no, it's all about Meghan with capital ME.


Typical narcissist. She can't be bothered to learn because she knows better.


----------



## Allisonfaye

lalame said:


> I think what this does show us though is M has started getting really cozy with random celebs who probably wouldn't have given her the time of day before... kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Do you want a private, normal life or do you want to have a celebrity lifestyle?
> 
> Funny thing is Chrissy is exactly the type of person that M probably looks down on, since she's in that Kardashian lane. Wonder how deep THAT friendship actually goes.



Chrissy is of the same woke crowd that MM wants so badly to be the queen of. I saw her and John L once while having breakfast at the Bel Air Hotel right after she had her second baby. It was literally a day or two after so I was surprised to see them out so soon.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know that about John. But I loved, loved, loved his recent his song wih Faouzia (didn't quite love Chrissy advertising it on Twitter saying "I'm not only saying this because I'm having sex with John!" when she could just have said "Because I'm married to John", but eh, that's me).
> 
> I did not see her attacking kids though, that's a hard pass for me.


I could be wrong so don't want to post any of the tweets, she might have just expressed herself clumsily. Search for Chrissy, tweets and toddlers tiaras. I remember Chrissy deleted thousands of tweets because of it so obviously something was not all right. This happened at the same time, I think, as some H-wood director and friend to the stars was discovered to have made pe*do jokes on Twitter about abusing young kids. 

Ricky Gervais' 2020 Golden Globes roasting of Hollywood was so epic. Not surprisingly he never was sued for any of it...


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> It kind of reminds me when Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes named their daughter Suri and claimed it was a Hebrew word for princess or something or other and people came forth and said WTF are they talking about??



It was probably some sort of Scientology thing. On a side note, did anyone happen to catch the Wikileaks drop of the Scientology Dictionary? Yikes. Just as whacked as you would have guessed.


----------



## Allisonfaye

elvisfan4life said:


> You don’t know your history - Henry had several sons legitimate and illegitimate - most of the legitimate ones died at birth still born but his son by Jane Seymour was crowned Edward VI at the age of 9 until his death 6 years later when his half sister Mary became Queen



I stand corrected.


----------



## Allisonfaye

creme fraiche said:


> This is John Legend in college where he was in an a cappella band. Did this as an extracurricular whilst also doing well enough to graduate magna cum laude AND play piano on a Lauren Hill album.  (can you tell that I really respect him?)




I saw him once as the opening act for Sade. I think he is really a good performer. I just don't share his woke politics.


----------



## papertiger

eunaddict said:


> View attachment 5062329
> 
> 
> Per her mouthpiece.
> 
> View attachment 5062330
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting. I wonder what happened to not being able to use HRH after leaving the family business (William, Kate and H are still HRHs on the official site, MM is not).



This was a very interesting topic for discussion because most mothers of Royal children had certs worded the other way. 

Using the verifiable particular name of the mother one could be sure of the actual birth mother (important for historical records) the 'approximation' of just using the title raises eyebrows and questions.


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How's it even possible that someone who grew up in said palace doesn't understand how things work?



William spent time with the Queen and PP every Sunday and I think that had a positive impact on him. Unfortunately JCMH didn’t.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> This was a very interesting topic for discussion because most mothers of Royal children had certs worded the other way.
> 
> Using the verifiable particular name of the mother one could be sure of the actual birth mother (important for historical records) the 'approximation' of just using the title raises eyebrows and questions.


As in surrogate?


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> As in surrogate?



 All shrouded in...mystery

I should think the birth (delivery) was unverifiable. 

Maybe that's why they moved to the US?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> All shrouded in...mystery
> 
> I should think the birth (delivery) was unverifiable.
> 
> Maybe that's why they moved to the US?


And perhaps why there’s been very little in the way of bump cradling pictures/vids?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> All shrouded in...mystery
> 
> I should think the birth (delivery) was unverifiable.
> 
> Maybe that's why they moved to the US?


Agree there has been mystery aplenty on the subject of bumps ... WHY? In this day and age who cares if you get some help with fertility ??? Honestly, own it !

The real issue is all the MYSTERY that was created eg with secrecy, B&W or fashionable-out-of-focus photos, refusal to answer questions, no adorable baby photos a la Eugenie, bump cradling was odd

I think about Katherine McPhee's pregnancy, she is a peer of MM career wise and also has a well-known husband - she has been discreet but not secretive , she managed


----------



## youngster

Do our British members know whether the next baby is legally eligible to be in the line of succession since she is very clearly going to be born in the U.S.?  

She'll automatically get U.S. citizenship of course since she'll be born on U.S. soil.  I think if I were British, it might bother me a bit to have someone in the top 10 of the line of succession who was not born in the U.K. or not in the Commonwealth at minimum and who had duel citizenship with another nation.  (I assume she will automatically get UK citizenship.)  Maybe they'll take a quick private jet trip to Vancouver for the birth lol.  But, maybe she's far enough down the succession that it doesn't matter.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> Do our British members know whether the next baby is legally eligible to be in the line of succession since she is very clearly going to be born in the U.S.?
> 
> She'll automatically get U.S. citizenship of course since she'll be born on U.S. soil.  I think if I were British, it might bother me a bit to have someone in the top 10 of the line of succession who was not born in the U.K. or not in the Commonwealth at minimum and who had duel citizenship with another nation.  (I assume she will automatically get UK citizenship.)  Maybe they'll take a quick private jet trip to Vancouver for the birth lol.  But, maybe she's far enough down the succession that it doesn't matter.


The baby will have dual nationality like Archie, and be in the line of succession as he is. But the child will be a long way off succeeding to the throne - mind you I did watch Kind Hearts & Coronets again recently......


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Do our British members know whether the next baby is legally eligible to be in the line of succession since she is very clearly going to be born in the U.S.?
> 
> She'll automatically get U.S. citizenship of course since she'll be born on U.S. soil.  I think if I were British, it might bother me a bit to have someone in the top 10 of the line of succession who was not born in the U.K. or not in the Commonwealth at minimum and who had duel citizenship with another nation.  (I assume she will automatically get UK citizenship.)  Maybe they'll take a quick private jet trip to Vancouver for the birth lol.  But, maybe she's far enough down the succession that it doesn't matter.



Yes, she'll be eligible. It's a question of breeding not territory.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Yeah, doesn't she seem like someone who would post a naked, pregnant photo with her hands strategically placed?


----------



## papertiger

^ I should also say, once one/more of any of W&K's children have children of their own, both H&M's children will be out of the running - and there're 3 of them.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> ^ I should also say, once one/more of any of W&K's children have children of their own, both H&M's children will be out of the running - and there're 3 of them.


Let’s hope they marry young


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> And perhaps why there’s been very little in the way of bump cradling pictures/vids?



I will bow to others' expert knowledge on the subject. 

Since I've never been pregnant and have little interest in 'young' mothers or babies in general (apart from a couple possibly trying to hoodwink an entire nation) I couldn't say.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Let’s hope they marry young



Charlotte wouldn't even need to


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Yeeaaaah just like her close friendships with Idris, Amal, Oprah, Victoria B, and all those people at her wedding lol


Looking at how Chrissy Teigen jumped to MM's defense, I would say she is a lot closer than Amal or Victoria B...


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> ^ I should also say, once one/more of any of W&K's children have children of their own, both H&M's children will be out of the running - and there're 3 of them.


Agree but they get (unfortunately) closer to the throne at the death of QEII ... I am sure the gray men are thinking ahead of how to cope with that conundrum when Charles will have "custody" of Archie LOL I doubt a 70 years wants a 1-2 year old running around his prize gardens


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Agree but they get (unfortunately) closer to the throne at the death of QEII ... I am sure the gray men are thinking ahead of how to cope with that conundrum when Charles will have "custody" of Archie LOL I doubt a 70 years wants a 1-2 year old running around his prize gardens



The probability of Archie, even Harry, ascending to the throne are virtually nil.

I think there may be a revolution before it even happened.

The way Charles is thinking it may be, as King he may ask Parliament to cut the succession after Prince Prince Louis and pull-up the drawbridge behind.


----------



## elvisfan4life

mdcx said:


> Gosh Meghan really can't keep her mouth shut about Harrys trip to the UK can she? First it was that Meghan had a floral wreath delivered to the funeral, then all about Harry meeting up with his relatives while over there, then we get told about Meghan chatting with the Queen before the funeral...Then we just happen to get pics of him being driven home from the airport in the US...



She has to exercise that big mouth for his arrival lol


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Doria Ragland (MMs mother) is a qualified mental health worker and had been working in the LA region for at least 3 years between 2015-2018. I'm sure she could have helped her daughter when she was going through her mental health issues. 

I really wish Oprah had questioned MM about why H or Doria (qualified mental health profession) did not help her in a professional capacity. Such a big hole in her story. Especially since suicide is no joke, and it is not a fleeting/temporary feeling.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Doria Ragland (MMs mother) is a qualified mental health worker and had been working in the LA region for at least 3 years between 2015-2018. I'm sure she could have helped her daughter when she was going through her mental health issues.
> 
> I really wish Oprah had questioned MM about why H or Doria (qualified mental health profession) did not help her in a professional capacity. Such a big hole in her story. Especially since suicide is no joke, and it is not a fleeting/temporary feeling.



Oprah read off cue cards as did M, i.e. there was no questioning.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Oprah - this says it all


----------



## sdkitty

roshe said:


> Can we vote to have the title of this thread replaced to "Prince Harry and his wife thread"?


as long as it's not prince harry and duchess Meghan


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow.
> And the best she could do is this jewelry business and that latte stuff [being nice]??? Wow.
> Proving once again, these nouveau entrepreneurs are in it for our $$$$$.  Not interested in putting in the hours, doing the research, finding real talent - all about the fast-money$$$$.


"Harry is right behind her" LOL
He still is....like the queen and her consort


----------



## sdkitty

roshe said:


> If she really is a narcissist she would not like having her name not mentioned at all. That's why a lot of people now are referring to her as Harry's wife and not mentioning her name.


I've noticed Harry is always talking about his Wife - as opposed to saying her name.  Reminds me of a boy who's so proud of his Wife, he has to keep talking about her and how he must protect her, etc.


----------



## queennadine

Good Lord, MM and JCMH must be paying Snapchat a ton for their constant “features.”


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Agree there has been mystery aplenty on the subject of bumps ... WHY? In this day and age who cares if you get some help with fertility ??? Honestly, own it !
> 
> The real issue is all the MYSTERY that was created eg with secrecy, B&W or fashionable-out-of-focus photos, refusal to answer questions, no adorable baby photos a la Eugenie, bump cradling was odd
> 
> I think about Katherine McPhee's pregnancy, she is a peer of MM career wise and also has a well-known husband - she has been discreet but not secretive , she managed


Thinking of parallels between the mystery of the birth and the famous commitment ceremony 3 days before wedding ... 

We know more about the ceremony because the Archbishop of Canterbury was forced to say the early ceremony was not legally binding, and he is bound by law not to lie about wedding certificates, I believe him

So, they had a commitment ceremony cool BUT MM said they got legally married at the early date. Pick your word for that - lie, misrepresentation etc. I see it as MM trying to control the narrative of the wedding after the fact (why ? who knows ? who cares?)

I think the mystery was created by NOT providing typical snaps, provide godparents, birth info etc. Another attempt to control the narrative. A HUGE omission that has backfired splendidly by giving rise to the surrogacy gossip. Archie does not deserve the gossip. 

So, the first attempt to control the narrative was soundly denounced by a credible Archbishop . And in  the second case, the narrative control has caused the discussion to spin out of control to the detriment of the child


----------



## Chanbal

I have to agree with this title... 










						Royals 'crazy' to talk to Meg & Harry as they're 'obsessed' with global coverage
					

THE Royal Family would be “crazy” to talk to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry – as “privacy is the last thing the Sussexes want”, an expert has claimed. Royal commentato…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

papertiger said:


> The probability of Archie, even Harry, ascending to the throne are virtually nil.


A plane crash is all it takes, actually. Happen all the time, e.g. John Kennedy Jr and wife, Kobe Bryant and daughter, etc. With extreme weather events, the likelihood is there. Those small planes/helicopters (for beach holiday,  some event, etc) are like bicycles in the sky.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> I was curious if there has been a link between Meghan and Chrissie so googled and found the following. Eye popping in content to me. Note the date of December 2019 from a publication in Australia, the blatant statements about what Meghan is doing instead of spending Christmas with the family, the timelines etc. Read through and there is a connection between Meghan and Chrissie via a jewelry designer.
> For some reason, user error I'm sure, I can't get the link to post so am having to send it all, but think it is worth the read.
> 
> *Meghan Markle is working on her brand during her holiday*
> Kate Halfpenny Entertainment and Lifestyle Editor
> 10:11pm, Dec 11, 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at a One Young World event in London on October 26. _Photo: Instagram_
> As Meghan Markle and Prince Harry enjoy their six-week sabbatical from royal duties, various reports have them celebrating Thanksgiving in California and sunning themselves in unnamed tropical locales.
> But it turns out Meghan hasn’t been building sandcastles with son Archie, seven months, or re-reading her favourite holiday book (_The Dud Avocado_, by Elaine Dundy) according to multiple media reports.
> Instead, she’s using her time away from the spotlight – which includes missing Christmas with the royal family – to plan the US launch of her Sussex Royal foundation.
> “While Harry and Meghan are technically on rest, she is not the type of woman who likes doing nothing,” a source told _The Telegraph._
> The former _Suits_ star has dipped back into her one-time world and called in her old Hollywood publicist Keleigh Thomas Morgan to help.
> Meghan is said to be in “full work mode” before the launch of the Sussex Royal charity venture next year, and is building a strategy to make it one of the world’s biggest philanthropic outfits.
> “Meghan may officially be on her royal break, but don’t believe she is taking her foot off the gas,” a source told _DailyMailTV_.
> “The break and Thanksgiving of course have been a time to balance the needs of her family, but you cannot underestimate what an incredible force Meghan is.”
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry on November 10 in London just before their break. _Photo: Instagram_
> Included in an 18-month plan is the goal of raising “tens of millions of dollars” for the foundation and “creating a legacy as a new royal” for Meghan.
> Which is where Ms Thomas Morgan comes into the picture.
> The PR adviser heads up Los Angeles power agency Sunshine Sachs, whose clients include Leonardo DiCaprio and Natalie Portman.
> Meghan was a client before her engagement to Harry, and Ms Thomas Morgan is close enough to the ex-actress to have been a guest at the Sussexes’ wedding in May 2018.
> The PR is helping with business relationships once Meghan has reached out to celebrity supporters and friends, including George and Amal Clooney, Oprah Winfrey and Serena Williams.
> While the charity will be global, Meghan “sees Hollywood and American business circles as key to fundraising,” the source said.
> “Meghan feels with the wealth in the US, focusing on fundraising stateside will bring in tens of millions of dollars quickly.”
> But despite the publicist’s input, the duchess, 38, is very much “running things”, according to reports.
> 
> 
> Meghan at the University of Johannesburg on October 1. _Photo: Instagram_
> With Harry’s blessing, Meghan makes all the executive decisions and has complete creative control.
> “This is a mission Meghan has been on for a long time. Even in her younger years in Hollywood, she wanted to work towards creating an international charity changing lives,” said the_ Telegraph _source.
> “Now that she has the platform and profile of being a British royal, she can truly build this plan … and Harry is right behind her.”
> Buckingham Palace has acknowledged Sunshine Sachs is working with the Sussexes on the fundraising initiative, which is being paid for “privately”.
> Meanwhile, Meghan’s jewellery designer friend Jennifer Meyer has removed all mention of the duchess from her social media accounts, reportedly at the insistence of Buckingham Palace.
> Meyer, who has images of Reese Witherspoon, Chrissy Teigen and Jennifer Aniston on her Insta account, had repeatedly used photos of Meghan to promote her business.
> That allegedly breached a non-disclosure agreeement, said _The Sun_.
> The duchess wore Meyer’s designs at her New York baby shower (a $1849 ‘mummy’ necklace), when Archie made his public debut and when the family met Archbishop Desmond Tutu in South Africa.
> A section on Meyer’s website dedicated to Meghan has also been deleted.


I had to hoot with laughter at the mention of MM planning for the Sussex Royal Foundation raising tens of millions of dollars. She probably thought that once she reached the upper echelons of society, all wallets would pop open and the cheques would just flow in so that she could have a cushy financially independent job making executive demands and screaming her creative control.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I did not say she verbally abuses him. But we have all seen the footage where she taps him to sit, stand, move, talk, shut up, plus the cute (not) extras where she ellbows him in the ribs to get ahead of him or sends him around like well-trained dog in public while making jokes on his expenses. That's not normal and not healthy.


The way she shoves him aside is really rude. You wouldn't do that to anyone else if you had any modicum of manners.



eunaddict said:


> View attachment 5062329
> 
> 
> Per her mouthpiece.
> 
> View attachment 5062330
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting. I wonder what happened to not being able to use HRH after leaving the family business (William, Kate and H are still HRHs on the official site, MM is not).


According to dear Wiki:
_Meghan became a princess of the United Kingdom upon her marriage to Prince Harry, entitled to the style of *Royal Highness*. After her marriage, she was styled "*Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex*". She also holds the titles of Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel. _
Looks like her name is not included in her title.



Allisonfaye said:


> Yeah, doesn't she seem like someone who would post a naked, pregnant photo with her hands strategically placed?


Copycat Demi Moore? Yes, I can see it - with an emerald tiara no doubt to hide the lack of intelligence.



papertiger said:


> Oprah read off cue cards as did M, i.e. there was no questioning.


The interview was like a comedy routine with OTT expressions from all three stooges.


----------



## Chanbal

Can't blame Charles!   










						Prince Charles 'relieved' at 'calmer' life without Meghan & Harry
					

PRINCE CHARLES is finding the Royal Family "a lot calmer" without Meghan Markle and Prince Harry "kicking off" when they did not get their own way, insiders have claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> A plane crash is all it takes, actually. Happen all the time, e.g. John Kennedy Jr and wife, Kobe Bryant and daughter, etc. With extreme weather events, the likelihood is there. Those small planes/helicopters (for beach holiday,  some event, etc) are like bicycles in the sky.


I think there is a rule that the family cannot all travel on the same plane.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I find Chrissy vulgar and her constant promotion of cancelling everyone who disagrees with her sometimes rabid opinions is something I think is very distasteful.  I felt badly for her loss, but I also didn't understand the series of pictures of her at the hospital while undergoing the loss.  I thought that was a bit much, TBH, and not really necessary to share with the general public.  It's almost like she took a photographer with her!  (Sounds like someone else we know!)



They really do have a lot in common.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Jktgal said:


> A plane crash is all it takes, actually. Happen all the time, e.g. John Kennedy Jr and wife, Kobe Bryant and daughter, etc. With extreme weather events, the likelihood is there. Those small planes/helicopters (for beach holiday,  some event, etc) are like bicycles in the sky.



For this very reason, I read they have a rule that the heir to the throne, and those in direct accession should not fly together.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How's it even possible that someone who grew up in said palace doesn't understand how things work?



You beat me to it.  I don’t understand this at all, Harry spent all his life as part of the royal machine and knows very well how things work.  I put this all down to M, who more than likely wanted things done, and done yesterday.  It was down to H to explain that the wheels of monarchy grind slowly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> A plane crash is all it takes, actually. Happen all the time, e.g. John Kennedy Jr and wife, Kobe Bryant and daughter, etc. With extreme weather events, the likelihood is there. Those small planes/helicopters (for beach holiday,  some event, etc) are like bicycles in the sky.



Heir and spare never take the same plane/train/car


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> The only issue I have with this, I've not read it properly though so I don't know in what context this article is about, but when people say things like "they didn't know how things work" etc is that it's half wrong. She didn't know how things work but he bloody does, he's lived it his whole life. It's not a new thing for him and part of his "job" was to teach his wife the rules and protocols expected of her in her new role. Yes, at the beginning she made mistakes but that was expected really so we thought okay, she'll learn. Her problem was that she will not be told. She could've had a fantastic life as a proper senior member of the RF, doing her duty to The Queen, then her father in law. But no, it's all about Meghan with capital ME.


We forgot the crucial part of Harry's cult conversion: What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Once that soaked into his noggin, everything else was forgotten.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I had to hoot with laughter at the mention of MM planning for the Sussex Royal Foundation raising tens of millions of dollars. She probably thought that once she reached the upper echelons of society, all wallets would pop open and the cheques would just flow in so that she could have a cushy financially independent job making executive demands and screaming her creative control.
> 
> 
> The way she shoves him aside is really rude. You wouldn't do that to anyone else if you had any modicum of manners.
> 
> 
> According to dear Wiki:
> _Meghan became a princess of the United Kingdom upon her marriage to Prince Harry, entitled to the style of *Royal Highness*. After her marriage, she was styled "*Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex*". She also holds the titles of Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel. _
> Looks like her name is not included in her title.
> 
> 
> Copycat Demi Moore? Yes, I can see it - with an emerald tiara no doubt to hide the lack of intelligence.
> 
> 
> The interview was like a comedy routine with OTT expressions from all three stooges.



There were 3 Stooges but 6 Marx Brothers. We only seem to remember 3. 

In 20 years no-one will remember the sparkle-Harkles. They're too exhausting and not at all amusing.


----------



## Allisonfaye

marietouchet said:


> Agree there has been mystery aplenty on the subject of bumps ... WHY? In this day and age who cares if you get some help with fertility ??? Honestly, own it !
> 
> The real issue is all the MYSTERY that was created eg with secrecy, B&W or fashionable-out-of-focus photos, refusal to answer questions, no adorable baby photos a la Eugenie, bump cradling was odd
> 
> I think about Katherine McPhee's pregnancy, she is a peer of MM career wise and also has a well-known husband - she has been discreet but not secretive , she managed



Unless the reasons are not related to lack of ability to carry the baby herself.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> I've noticed Harry is always talking about his Wife - as opposed to saying her name.  Reminds me of a boy who's so proud of his Wife, he has to keep talking about her and how he must protect her, etc.



My sister does this all the time. It is always 'my husband this, my husband that'. The more I know my sister, I think it's about narcissistic tendencies and ownership.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I've noticed Harry is always talking about his Wife - as opposed to saying her name.  Reminds me of a boy who's so proud of his Wife, he has to keep talking about her and how he must protect her, etc.



Lucky for her, he doesn't refer to her as 'me ol' lady', ''er indoors' or 'me be-er 'alf' as often wives are called in Britain.


----------



## Icyjade

carmen56 said:


> It was down to H to explain that the wheels of monarchy grind slowly.



What M wants, M gets and erm, lack of balls


----------



## Allisonfaye

Jktgal said:


> A plane crash is all it takes, actually. Happen all the time, e.g. John Kennedy Jr and wife, Kobe Bryant and daughter, etc. With extreme weather events, the likelihood is there. Those small planes/helicopters (for beach holiday,  some event, etc) are like bicycles in the sky.



I feel confident the BRF wouldn't have all the members of the line of succession in one plane. Although I have to admit, I have visions of MM trying to figure out a way....


----------



## papertiger

Allisonfaye said:


> Unless the reasons are not related to lack of ability to carry the baby herself.



If it's true, I think they just needed a certainty. 

It can take years to conceive naturally at any age and they needed a good-news story and cement their status as a Royal power couple - like now (or at least 9-months from now). 

Interesting that she never never had kids before (since she was married twice) yet in such a hurry to procreate. 

Yes, I'm a beeach  ,  but I must say their timing on the things they can control and need to get under their belts are just so convenient fortuitous.

I never even thought of it as a possibility until she made so much of carrying and obsessive about mentioning her role as Royal mother, now I'm not so sure.


----------



## Icyjade

Allisonfaye said:


> I feel confident the BRF wouldn't have all the members of the line of succession in one plane. Although I have to admit, I have visions of MM trying to figure out a way....



William, Kate and the kids used to fly together all the time, even on budget airlines...









						Kate Middleton, Prince William, and Kids Flew Commercial to Scotland
					

Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis looked adorably travel-ready.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				












						The One Travel Rule Prince William and Kate Middleton Constantly Break
					

This means Prince William technically should never be on board the same flight as either his father or his own children, for that matter.




					www.travelandleisure.com


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> If it's true, I think they just needed a certainty.
> 
> It can take years to conceive naturally at any age and they needed a good-news story and cement their status as a Royal power couple - like now (or at least 9-months from now).
> 
> Interesting that she never never had kids before (since she was married twice) yet in such a hurry to procreate.
> 
> Yes, I'm a beeach  ,  but I must say their timing on the things they can control and need to get under their belts are just so convenient fortuitous.
> 
> I never even thought of it as a possibility until she made so much of carrying and obsessive about mentioning her role as Royal mother, now I'm not so sure.


well she didn't have the opportunity to give birth to royalty before H


----------



## youngster

carmen56 said:


> You beat me to it.  I don’t understand this at all, Harry spent all his life as part of the royal machine and knows very well how things work.  I put this all down to M, who more than likely wanted things done, and done yesterday.  It was down to H to explain that the wheels of monarchy grind slowly.



I think she didn't want to understand how things worked and didn't want to fully embrace the new life and the role.  Remember, they were most likely planning to leave from the very beginning so they needed to come up with reasons to leave.  If I recall though, didn't the Queen send over one of her most trusted people to help MM with protocol and help her adapt? I think she stayed in the position several few months at least so I thought that was another half-truth/lie in her OW interview, that no one helped her adapt when there were newspaper articles on this woman joining their staff.

If that wasn't the case and they weren't planning to leave from day one, then Harry did a horrible job explaining how things worked to her clearly and in a way that she fully understood and fully accepted before they married. I could see him being that clueless too. Maybe you should explain to your future wife that she'll need to learn the words to the national anthem and how to curtsy properly and wear a hat when the Queen tells you to wear a hat, though I think she could have figured this out on her own if she was half the thorough hard worker we've been told she is.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ricky Gervais' 2020 Golden Globes roasting of Hollywood was so epic. Not surprisingly he never was sued for any of it...



It was a pleasure to watch Hollywood's elite celebs shifting uncomfortably in their seats. They know what's going on and who is doing it but when it is someone with power in the industry then they all become ostriches with their heads in the sand. They are the worst hypocrites.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> well she didn't have the opportunity to give birth to royalty before H


Before that, her career took precedence - that was given as the reason why she mailed her rings back to Trevor.
Now, she has to nail down titles, money, status and glory. She already made a big fuss over how she sacrificed her "Hollywood career" as a "sought-after actress"   Sunshine Sachs definitely thinks no one ever fact-checks anything or remembers anything.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> William, Kate and the kids used to fly together all the time, even on budget airlines...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, Prince William, and Kids Flew Commercial to Scotland
> 
> 
> Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis looked adorably travel-ready.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The One Travel Rule Prince William and Kate Middleton Constantly Break
> 
> 
> This means Prince William technically should never be on board the same flight as either his father or his own children, for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.travelandleisure.com



Charles is the heir


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Doria Ragland (MMs mother) is a qualified mental health worker and had been working in the LA region for at least 3 years between 2015-2018. I'm sure she could have helped her daughter when she was going through her mental health issues.
> 
> I really wish Oprah had questioned MM about why H or Doria (qualified mental health profession) did not help her in a professional capacity. Such a big hole in her story. Especially since suicide is no joke, and it is not a fleeting/temporary feeling.



Oprah was there to help Meghan and to get big ratings, not necessarily in that order. Oprah is a talk show host, she's not an investigative reporter. Trust me, when I was young Oprah was an anchor on our local noon news and she was not very good at it.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> as long as it's not prince harry and duchess Meghan


"Prince Harry and the heavily pregnant one he was duped into marrying"


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Oprah - this says it all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5062480



Almost everyone in Hollywood and show business kissed Harvey's ass for years. They all say they didn't like him now, but...


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Looking at how Chrissy Teigen jumped to MM's defense, I would say she is a lot closer than Amal or Victoria B...



I just doubt it. First people said Meghan had no real celeb friends, now suddenly she has all these close celeb friends


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I did not say she verbally abuses him. But we have all seen the footage where she taps him to sit, stand, move, talk, shut up, plus the cute (not) extras where she ellbows him in the ribs to get ahead of him or sends him around like well-trained dog in public while making jokes on his expenses. That's not normal and not healthy.



Eh not everyone who has a rude spouse is a victim... and not every rude spouse is an abuser. Those are big words and more than I’m willing to give Harry in particular - unless he says so himself. Nothing about this situation says to me this guy is powerless and being taken advantage of and needs help. Sure, feel sorry for him but victim???


----------



## xincinsin

I wonder if there will ever be Interview #2. After all the falsehoods that were uncovered, will there still be a market for a second round of wailing and gnashing of teeth? Or has Oprah moved on already? Despite all the "friendliness" and chickens, I think the two women were just making use of each other.


----------



## lalame

elvisfan4life said:


> Oprah - this says it all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5062480



I kind of give Oprah a pass on knowing him because so many people were in photos just like this, and they turned out to be victims and were traumatized by the pressure to put on a happy face. Like these were real victims of emotional and sometimes physical abuse (not saying Oprah was though). Idk what happened to he but I don’t think it’s fair people get flack just for being on the periphery when we don’t know if there was even a relationship there.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this true? It's amazing how much info one can find on this twitter account.


----------



## Icyjade

papertiger said:


> Charles is the heir



Senior members of the BRF, not just the heir and his son. You can imagine how catastrophic it will be if William’s entire family is in an accident.


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> I wonder if there will ever be Interview #2. After all the falsehoods that were uncovered, will there still be a market for a second round of wailing and gnashing of teeth? Or has Oprah moved on already? Despite all the "friendliness" and chickens, I think the two women were just making use of each other.



I still wonder what the purpose of interview #1 was lol.  All of their complaints, grievances, and petty problems could have been handled within the family, as any other mature couple would have done in their position. To me, they ended up looking petty, incredibly foolish, and mean spirited, especially given the age of the Queen and the state of Prince Philip's health at the time.  ETA:  And, since it was done a year after they left, they had plenty of time to think it through and consider the ramifications and how much hurt they would cause.  So, let's double down on "mean spirited".  

I guess interview #2 will be all about how no one in the family will sit down and talk to them about anything but the weather and how awful that is.  How they are being shut out. How they are excluded.   Oprah might offer to bring Prince Charles, William and Kate to the U.S. and include Dr. Phil in a televised therapy session so that they can all "heal together" and set the monarchy on the right path again lol.


----------



## Chanbal

I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Icyjade said:


> William, Kate and the kids used to fly together all the time, even on budget airlines...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, Prince William, and Kids Flew Commercial to Scotland
> 
> 
> Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis looked adorably travel-ready.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The One Travel Rule Prince William and Kate Middleton Constantly Break
> 
> 
> This means Prince William technically should never be on board the same flight as either his father or his own children, for that matter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.travelandleisure.com



Not with Charles though he is next in line


----------



## duna

Shopaholic2021 said:


> For this very reason, I read they have a rule that the heir to the throne, and those in direct accession should not fly together.



Yes, but Diana and Charles broke that rule when they flew to Australia with baby William, it was the first time it had happened. Since then this rule hasn't applied any longer.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Heir and spare never take the same plane/train/car


Charles, William and George are the heirs. Harry, Charlotte and Louis are the spares.


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> The probability of Archie, even Harry, ascending to the throne are virtually nil.
> 
> I think there may be a revolution before it even happened.
> 
> The way Charles is thinking it may be, as King he may ask Parliament to cut the succession after Prince Prince Louis and pull-up the drawbridge behind.



If Charles gets Parliament to do that, is there any way William could undo it when he gets his turn at bat?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.



If I remember this correctly they weren’t even supposed to be present for viewing the stuff on the table, and invited themselves to join in?  Pretty embarrassing how they were shooed about by the staff


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

Sharont2305 said:


> Charles, William and George are the heirs. Harry, Charlotte and Louis are the spares.



Harry now ranks behind Charlotte and Louis, thankfully.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Lucky for her, he doesn't refer to her as 'me ol' lady', ''er indoors' or 'me be-er 'alf' as often wives are called in Britain.



Please explain the indoors!


----------



## bag-mania

Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> I feel confident the BRF wouldn't have all the members of the line of succession in one plane. Although I have to admit, I have visions of MM trying to figure out a way....



I do too. Especially after M&H's wedding which they wanted to appear more grand than Will and Kate's. It was quite the splashy affair for a three time bride(zilla) who specializes in self absorption and pity. Meghan thought she could guilt her way to the throne


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> I still wonder *what the purpose of interview #1 was* lol.  All of their complaints, grievances, and petty problems could have been handled within the family, as any other mature couple would have done in their position. To me, they ended up looking petty, incredibly foolish, and mean spirited, especially given the age of the Queen and the state of Prince Philip's health at the time.  ETA:  And, since it was done a year after they left, they had plenty of time to think it through and consider the ramifications and how much hurt they would cause.  So, let's double down on "mean spirited".
> 
> I guess interview #2 will be all about how no one in the family will sit down and talk to them about anything but the weather and how awful that is.  How they are being shut out. How they are excluded.   Oprah might offer to bring Prince Charles, William and Kate to the U.S. and include Dr. Phil in a televised therapy session so that they can all "heal together" and set the monarchy on the right path again lol.


Possibly if we mapped the rise and fall of their media spotlight, at that point in time they needed something to propel them into the foreground. And there were articles about how Oprah has been trying to snare an interview with the BRF since forever and she needed a big splash to promote her comeback interview series. She couldn't get Diana in the past, but she got Fergie. The whiny Harkles must have been a godsend.


----------



## Sharont2305

Icyjade said:


> Harry now ranks behind Charlotte and Louis, thankfully.


Thankfully indeed. I just wrote it age wise rather than succession wise as in Harry was William's spare and C & L were George's. Again thankfully Harry is no longer a spare, even before he left he wasn't a spare, George put paid to that when he came along. Now, all we have to worry about is what happens if something happens to Charles and William before George reaches 18.Would Harry be considered Prince Regent now that he's left? As far as I'm aware, yes. Something needs to be put into place.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626



It's really interesting how the UK headlines I've seen have all painted this in a negative light, eg "nothing will ever be the same" but all the US ones have been like "Progress Being Made"... if that doesn't tell you you really can't believe everything you read, nothing does. We're living in 2 realities.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please explain the indoors!


It refers when women were tied to the kitchen. She was always indoors.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626


I must say she's trained him well, looking directly at the camera.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.




I'v seen the first part of the footage before (not the dramatic face later though), and I ask the same question I asked earlier today: how is it even possible Prince Harry, son of the next monarch, needs palace stuff to rush over to keep him from walking in front of all those people higher up in the pecking order than he is? Just...how.


----------



## Prettyinpnknwht

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's funny how the algorithms of the internets work. This video came up in my YT feed the other day, as if by happenstance   But I wasn't posting this to lament our glorious new Big Brother society in the making.
> 
> I wanted to post this beautiful Canadian song for little Archie, whom I think we all wish the best for and who as so many other children, has to suffer the consequences of adults behaving badly. Warning though, this song is highly addictive, I've been singing the chorus out loud so much my kids are begging me for mercy
> 
> Alvvays - Archie, Marry Me




I love this song!!  I first fell in love with it not long after it came out and rediscovered it over the past year.



Icyjade said:


> Senior members of the BRF, not just the heir and his son. You can imagine how catastrophic it will be if William’s entire family is in an accident.



For the love of Pete, after all Harry’s and the heavily pregnant one’s antics, I hope they stop letting William travel with his kids immediately.  I hate it for him and the kids, but there is no freaking way they need to be taking any kind of risk that would allow those two nincompoops anywhere near the throne unless the family has some sort of death wish for the institution they’ve devoted their lives to.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.




Wow. Just wow. They even tried to pass up TQ. WTH? Charles diplomatically tried to throw some shade and at that point I believe the assistants got wind of the M&H coup and headed them off before they could bolt. I would not have put past Meghan elbowing the Queen to get out of her way, let alone Kate or Camilla.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

youngster said:


> I still wonder what the purpose of interview #1 was lol. All of their complaints, grievances, and petty problems could have been handled within the family, as any other mature couple would have done in their position.



I was left feeling the same at the end of the interview too. I didn't understand what the purpose of the interview was. I think the beginning of the interview Oprah said 'this is Meghans truth', which implies it was not about facts and the absolute truth, but Meghan's feelings. But all that was discussed was really a family matter and I feel so bad for Charles, William and the Queen. I would not like it if my sibling started to blast personal issues on TV. 

I think the real purpose of the TV interview was to show their side of the story and address the reasons for leaving. Their image is pretty bad right now, and some of it was to control bad PR. And it worked in the US, people are on their side in the US. But I don't think the BRF care what Americans think (sorry), so it really didn't damage the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> It's really interesting how the UK headlines I've seen have all painted this in a negative light, eg "nothing will ever be the same" but all the US ones have been like "Progress Being Made"... if that doesn't tell you you really can't believe everything you read, nothing does. We're living in 2 realities.



We can laugh about all the discrepancies in viewpoints when it is about a shallow topic like these two. They aren't relevant to our lives other than as a source of amusement. What is really sad is it happens with all news stories, even the most important ones. It is impossible to completely trust anything you read or hear.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

xincinsin said:


> And there were articles about how Oprah has been trying to snare an interview with the BRF since forever and she needed a big splash to promote her comeback interview series. She couldn't get Diana in the past, but she got Fergie. The whiny Harkles must have been a godsend.



Oprah used them for sure, but I don't think it really helped promote her interview series. Like someone mentioned, she isn't really a investigative journalist, and in this day and age I really have no respect for people who do not use critical thinking skills. If they can do interviews like this, then there is no reason that she should be angry with her father for doing the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Is this for real? Quite the opposite of any desire for privacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Baby Part 2: The Deal - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> SOLVED! UPDATED! [Blind Gossip] You may recall that this celebrity couple signed a very lucrative deal to produce TV shows. So… where are the shows? Have you heard about any specific projects? Want to hear about their first one? Here you go! They have their first project and it is going to be...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA Whew! April Fool's joke


LOL!  At least it would shut up those of us who think she uses a surrogate!  Unless she's able to photoshop her bot face onto the surrogate's neck, trying to appear angelic and totally in love with the process.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please explain the indoors!


Men traditionally went out to work, their wives stayed home - unless he wasn't bringing home enough 'bacon' (money) , so 'her indoors' was a puffed-out chest boast to his mate as well asa  diminutive term to his wife.


----------



## purseinsanity

creme fraiche said:


> I don't know much about Chrissie, but I find her pretty innocuous compared to MM.  Sure, she is quite...active on social media, but somehow she does not make my hackles rise as much as the DoS.
> 
> I do have lots of respect for her husband , which probably colours my opinion of her.  He is not only an EGOT winner, but his backstory is amazing.  Home schooled, skipped 2 years of school when he did finally enter formal educations because he was that advanced,  graduated salutatorian of his class, accepted by a variety of schools including Harvard, went to Penn where he was in an honours society, worked for BCG....  Yes, he has earned his fame and fortune.


I love John Legend's music, but the fact that he's married to her lessens him in my mind, and shows me that even intelligent people do dumba$$ things.


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> You mean Chrissy Teigan?
> 
> 
> Honestly, *I think she’s a beard*. All this oversharing is very suspicious to me.



You could be on to something there


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I love John Legend's music, but the fact that he's married to her lessens him in my mind, and shows me that even intelligent people do dumba$$ things.



They're kind of the epitome of that quiet and brooding person + extroverted person combo.  I think John's amazing.... Chrissy is a lot. I don't really take things she says THAT seriously because she's so extra about everything. Definitely one who's comic relief and that's it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Thankfully indeed. I just wrote it age wise rather than succession wise as in Harry was William's spare and C & L were George's. Again thankfully Harry is no longer a spare, even before he left he wasn't a spare, George put paid to that when he came along. Now, all we have to worry about is what happens if something happens to Charles and William before George reaches 18.Would Harry be considered Prince Regent now that he's left? As far as I'm aware, yes. Something needs to be put into place.



If they learned anything from their petty opponents, they already put matters into motion but conveniently forgot to inform the Sussexes. They don't need to know anyway as luckily it's highly unlikely a regent for George will be ever needed.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!  At least it would shut up those of us who think she uses a surrogate!  Unless she's able to photoshop her bot face onto the surrogate's neck, trying to appear angelic and totally in love with the process.


I got halfway through and really believed it, because I thought she would be daft enough and desperate enough to do this to chalk up ratings. She would definitely sell a programme like this as feminine empowerment  And Harry, whether victim or not, is obviously enabling her and a willing accomplice to her schemes.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> I kind of give Oprah a pass on knowing him because so many people were in photos just like this, and they turned out to be victims and were traumatized by the pressure to put on a happy face. Like these were real victims of emotional and sometimes physical abuse (not saying Oprah was though). Idk what happened to he but I don’t think it’s fair people get flack just for being on the periphery when we don’t know if there was even a relationship there.


But not every woman draped and entwined their body around him, a challenge with his huge gut. I think this picture is ICKY! Wonder what year it was taken and where she was in her career trajectory when it was taken?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626


A better description would be "the princes tip toe towards healing." or even "slip and slide towards healing"


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's funny how the algorithms of the internets work. This video came up in my YT feed the other day, as if by happenstance   But I wasn't posting this to lament our glorious new Big Brother society in the making.
> 
> I wanted to post this beautiful Canadian song for little Archie, whom I think we all wish the best for and who as so many other children, has to suffer the consequences of adults behaving badly. Warning though, this song is highly addictive, I've been singing the chorus out loud so much *my kids are begging me for mercy*
> 
> Alvvays - Archie, Marry Me




Annnnnnnnndddd now I've got Duffy in my head


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It drives me mad when tabloids prefer to make up stuff instead of researching anything. My inner perfectionist cringes at the laziness.
> 
> I've been sitting on my fingers for days as one of my direct neighbours, who used to be a huge celebrity in their day, died unexpectedly, and since the news broke, German yellow press has been circulating they'd lived in a carehome with relatives visiting once in a while. Well, they lived with one of their siblings and the whole family went out of their way to take care of them. Such sh*tty reporting.



Ugh, it is horrible that they would besmirch the life of someone who just died but it happens all the time. The biggest deception that has been forced on us over the years is the belief that journalism is a proud institution based on integrity. Journalists have all the same neuroses, ego issues, biases, and character failings as in every other industry. The difference is journalists have the power to alter the thinking of the masses.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> You could be on to something there



Not to be stereotypical, but I don't think he dresses will enough  

Being a beard would be my dream job, please PM me if you know of a vacancy   .


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Shopaholic2021 said:


> For this very reason, I read they have a rule that the heir to the throne, and those in direct accession should not fly together.



This is no longer true. 









						The One Travel Rule Prince William and Kate Middleton Constantly Break
					

This means Prince William technically should never be on board the same flight as either his father or his own children, for that matter.




					www.travelandleisure.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626


This picture of William wasn’t taken at the funeral though, that’s a blue jacket


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Annnnnnnnndddd now I've got Duffy in my head



Thank goodness they didn't call him Alfie or we'd all have Cilla Black in our head


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Not to be stereotypical, but I don't think he dresses will enough
> 
> Being a beard would be my dream job, please PM me if you know of a vacancy   .



I meant 'well' (literally) 

A Freudian slip.

But whatever (works)


----------



## youngster

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Oprah used them for sure, but I don't think it really helped promote her interview series. Like someone mentioned, she isn't really a investigative journalist, and in this day and age I really have no respect for people who do not use critical thinking skills. If they can do interviews like this, then there is no reason that she should be angry with her father for doing the same.



I was left thinking if Oprah were an actual true friend, she would have pulled them aside and said, look, this is going to torch all your relationships with the royal family and the Queen.  Do you understand that?  Instead, consider focusing on the future, all your future plans, how happy you are now, plans for your charity, and leave the past in the past and work out your complaints and grievances in private like mature people are supposed to do.  It's what I imagine many of us have done in our own lives when confronted with someone who wants to take personal issues and grievances to social media. Counsel taking a step back, take a deep breath, think it through, make sure you aren't wrong yourself.

Of course, Oprah didn't do that because Oprah acted in her own self-interest. Ratings and attention.  She wouldn't have gotten a prime time slot but maybe only an afternoon slot for the broadcast if she didn't have something juicy.  This is a lesson Harry likely needed to learn. He's been protected his whole life from the consequences of his decisions and actions by his family and the Palace. Nobody was there to stop him this time and save him from himself.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I got halfway through and really believed it, because I thought she would be daft enough and desperate enough to do this to chalk up ratings. She would definitely sell a programme like this as feminine empowerment  And Harry, whether victim or not, is obviously enabling her and a willing accomplice to her schemes.



100% agree

If she is a narcissist, he is her enabler and a co-dependent. They're not good for each other's mental health, that's for sure.

Apologies for my typing my screen's broken and I can't read what I've written very well


----------



## purseinsanity

Jktgal said:


> A plane crash is all it takes, actually. Happen all the time, e.g. John Kennedy Jr and wife, Kobe Bryant and daughter, etc. With extreme weather events, the likelihood is there. Those small planes/helicopters (for beach holiday,  some event, etc) are like bicycles in the sky.


But I believe this type of reason is precisely why all the heirs never travel together?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

purseinsanity said:


> I love John Legend's music, but the fact that he's married to her lessens him in my mind, and shows me that even intelligent people do dumba$$ things.



There is a famous quote about people not thinking about their life partner enough. Something about how they spend more time choosing their horse, or something. I think it's and English saying. 

I have seen many instances of intelligent people making poor choices in a life partner, its like people's brains turn off when choosing a partner.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Allisonfaye said:


> I feel confident the BRF wouldn't have all the members of the line of succession in one plane. Although I have to admit, I have visions of MM trying to figure out a way....


When I see a pic of Harry's wife, I always wonder, "Hum, what's Lucrezia Borgia up to now?!"

ET remove  redundant verb


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626





csshopper said:


> A better description would be "the princes tip toe towards healing." or even "slip and slide towards healing"



Or maybe "The brothers are in the pitch black middle of the tunnel fighting over the torch because they can't see either the end of the tunnel or it's accompanying light".


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> I was left thinking if Oprah were an actual true friend, she would have pulled them aside and said, look, this is going to torch all your relationships with the royal family and the Queen.  Do you understand that?  Instead, consider focusing on the future, all your future plans, how happy you are now, plans for your charity, and leave the past in the past and work out your complaints and grievances in private like mature people are supposed to do.  It's what I imagine many of us have done in our own lives when confronted with someone who wants to take personal issues and grievances to social media. Counsel taking a step back, take a deep breath, think it through, make sure you aren't wrong yourself.
> 
> Of course, Oprah didn't do that because Oprah acted in her own self-interest. Ratings and attention.  She wouldn't have gotten a prime time slot but maybe only an afternoon slot for the broadcast if she didn't have something juicy.  This is a lesson Harry likely needed to learn. He's been protected his whole life from the consequences of his decisions and actions by his family and the Palace. Nobody was there to stop him this time and save him from himself.



And isn't it sad that this would need to be pointed out to people who are nearly 40 years old? And perhaps Oprah did just that, but as we all know, Meghan knows best. Can't you hear her say "Harry, we're so loved and revered by everyone that it won't matter if we throw your family under the bus. Just because they gave us untold millions and riches doesn't mean we owe them anything. Leave it to me. Everything will work in our favor".


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> But not every woman draped and entwined their body around him, a challenge with his huge gut. I think this picture is ICKY! Wonder what year it was taken and where she was in her career trajectory when it was taken?



I think Oprah is known to be very warm. I remember watching Graham Norton recently and the actor from Get Out was saying that when he met her, she gave him a big hug. So who really knows what her relationship is but I don't think a photo like this is any indication. Have you ever been to one of those parties where Guest of a Guest or Patrick McMillan is going around taking photos? People kinda cozy up for a nice warm photo.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'v seen the first part of the footage before (not the dramatic face later though), and I ask the same question I asked earlier today: how is it even possible Prince Harry, son of the next monarch, needs palace stuff to rush over to keep him from walking in front of all those people higher up in the pecking order than he is? Just...how.


He was just following her, I wonder if he was embarrassed. It seems that she didn't like to be stopped and was very upset on the last part of the footage.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Wow. Just wow. They even tried to pass up TQ. WTH? Charles diplomatically tried to throw some shade and at that point I believe the assistants got wind of the M&H coup and headed them off before they could bolt. I would not have put past Meghan elbowing the Queen to get out of her way, let alone Kate or Camilla.


That was the impression I got from the video. She was ready to go in front of QE.


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> And isn't it sad that this would need to be pointed out to people who are nearly 40 years old? And perhaps Oprah did just that, but as we all know, Meghan knows best. Can't you hear her say "Harry, we're so loved and revered by everyone that it won't matter if we throw your family under the bus. Just because they gave us untold millions and riches doesn't mean we owe them anything. Leave it to me. Everything will work in our favor".



I agree with you.  I believe Meghan would have pushed forward no matter what anyone said, even Oprah, and would have dragged Harry with her. She  is always right.  She sees herself as some kind of victim (which just boggles the mind) and wanted to lash out, have the last word, and hurt the Queen and the family, thinking everyone would sympathize with her.  Bizarre.  I've never been a huge fan of Lady CC but I think she has it right when she said the two of them don't have a firm grip on reality.  The family and the Palace could have helped them in so many ways too, even with them being in the U.S., and now they won't likely lift a finger.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.




This was so embarrassing! Yes, H&M together wanted to cut off W&K, so Camilla skillfully stays with them. Clearly, H&M don’t care about the display, just being equal to Charles. Notice how the staff/guard are so polite and respectful to them, but H continues to ‘debate’.

So glad they will be out of the news for the foreseeable future. Once Charles and W announce the new assignments, H&M will be even more irrelevant.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> When I see a pic of Harry's wife, I always wonder, "Hum, what's Lucrezia Borgia is up to now?!"



OMG she _wishes_!  

Lucrezia Borgia was noblewoman in her own right, a Governor (of Spoleto) and had a brain TDF.

I wouldn't drink anything M gave me, just in case though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

I just bought a book about the Borgias.  Must be this thread...


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> That was the impression I got from the video. She was ready to go in front of QE.



Harry had to make a grand gesture with his hand. That was totally for M's benefit. Like _he_ was 'letting them' (including QEII, Charles and Will) go first, he knew the order but let her save face.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Clearblueskies said:


> If I remember this correctly they weren’t even supposed to be present for viewing the stuff on the table, and invited themselves to join in?  Pretty embarrassing how they were shooed about by the staff


ITA. Just like party crashers, they interrupted the event because they are so important that it simply could not happen without them.


----------



## BagStag

come on, just let them be, we really don't know personally what is happening with the royal family. So let's not be so judgemental


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> That was the impression I got from the video. She was ready to go in front of QE.



The shocking thing to me was how both H&M were stealing the spotlight. He knew he was not supposed to walk in there at that time.
He knew better. She didn’t care. Total disrespect.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lalame said:


> It's really interesting how the UK headlines I've seen have all painted this in a negative light, eg "nothing will ever be the same" but all the US ones have been like "Progress Being Made"... if that doesn't tell you you really can't believe everything you read, nothing does. *We're living in 2 realities.*


No, just greedy companies willing to lie to collect their paycheck.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not trying to advertise for anyone, but I just found this book. Well written, insight into the RF, all good things books should be.
From The Guardian interview:
_Markle’s mistake, she says, was to not understand that all the royals, even the spares, work hard: “I think she thought she could drive around in a golden coach. But it’s actually quite boring. Princess Margaret did so much charity work, and without any photographers, unlike the Princess of Wales.” (Glenconner is a staunch royalist, but her sympathies are with the more traditional branches of the family; even Princes William and Harry, she says, “go on about their mother the whole time. I think it’s a bit much.”)








						'I’m no snowflake': Anne Glenconner on Margaret, marriage and Meghan Markle
					

The former lady-in-waiting’s memoir is a surprise bestseller. She discusses family tragedy and why Princess Margaret was more fun than people think




					www.theguardian.com
				



_
Looks like H&M need to _ _


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to advertise for anyone, but I just found this book. Well written, insight into the RF, all good things books should be.
> From The Guardian interview:
> _Markle’s mistake, she says, was to not understand that all the royals, even the spares, work hard: “I think she thought she could drive around in a golden coach. But it’s actually quite boring. Princess Margaret did so much charity work, and without any photographers, unlike the Princess of Wales.” (Glenconner is a staunch royalist, but her sympathies are with the more traditional branches of the family; even Princes William and Harry, she says, “go on about their mother the whole time. I think it’s a bit much.”)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I’m no snowflake': Anne Glenconner on Margaret, marriage and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The former lady-in-waiting’s memoir is a surprise bestseller. She discusses family tragedy and why Princess Margaret was more fun than people think
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Looks like H&M need to __


I read this book last year, I was expecting it to be really great but it wasn’t really up to the reviews IMO. Interesting on her relationships with Princess Margaret and her very eccentric husband.


----------



## lalame

Maggie Muggins said:


> No, just greedy companies willing to lie to collect their paycheck.



You know what's really sick if you think about it... a lot of these companies probably have the same owner so they're getting paid for all the stories across geographies. Again going back to that idea of volume = $, doesn't matter what the content is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> I read this book last year, I was expecting it to be really great but it wasn’t really up to the reviews IMO. Interesting on her relationships with Princess Margaret and her very eccentric husband.



FWIW I’m enjoying the book. The lady has had an interesting life. I only mentioned the book because of the interview with The Guardian. Her comment about MM seemed spot on.   Golden coach


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was so embarrassing! Yes, H&M together wanted to cut off W&K, so Camilla skillfully stays with them. Clearly, H&M don’t care about the display, just being equal to Charles. Notice how the staff/guard are so polite and respectful to them, but H continues to ‘debate’.



Watching it again...they didn't even fake interest and had a quick look at the insignia. Of course that would have required walking behind William and Kate, which we all know Meghan doesn't like too much. I still can't get over Harry, though. HE GREW UP WITH IT. It's like women from, say, Iran, who immigrated to a Western country and took off the scarf they always hated for good, but still said they felt exposed the first few weeks. It's ingrained in you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Harry had to make a grand gesture with his hand. That was totally for M's benefit. Like _he_ was 'letting them' (including QEII, Charles and Will) go first, he knew the order but let her save face.



I found that so odd, "allowing" CHARLES to go first. Yeah RIGHT.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to advertise for anyone, but I just found this book. Well written, insight into the RF, all good things books should be.
> From The Guardian interview:
> _Markle’s mistake, she says, was to not understand that all the royals, even the spares, work hard: “I think she thought she could drive around in a golden coach. But it’s actually quite boring. Princess Margaret did so much charity work, and without any photographers, unlike the Princess of Wales.” (Glenconner is a staunch royalist, but her sympathies are with the more traditional branches of the family; even Princes William and Harry, she says, “go on about their mother the whole time. I think it’s a bit much.”)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I’m no snowflake': Anne Glenconner on Margaret, marriage and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The former lady-in-waiting’s memoir is a surprise bestseller. She discusses family tragedy and why Princess Margaret was more fun than people think
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Looks like H&M need to __



That's on my wishlist, but I buy so many books my to-be-read pile is always a mile high. Right now I love science thrillers, because at the end of the 400 pages, the evil pandemic someone set free while robbing a grave or something is usually contained


----------



## Chanbal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I was left feeling the same at the end of the interview too. I didn't understand what the purpose of the interview was. I think the beginning of the interview Oprah said 'this is Meghans truth', which implies it was not about facts and the absolute truth, but Meghan's feelings. But all that was discussed was really a family matter and I feel so bad for Charles, William and the Queen. I would not like it if my sibling started to blast personal issues on TV.
> 
> I think the real purpose of the TV interview was to show their side of the story and address the reasons for leaving. Their image is pretty bad right now, and some of it was to control bad PR. And it worked in the US, people are on their side in the US. But I don't think the BRF care what Americans think (sorry), so it really didn't damage the BRF.


The main purposes of the interview were to help MM&H with their global brand and to 'pay back' Oprah for her help with MM&H's relocation to California. Oprah got her $9M and MM&H got their (bad) exposition all over the world.
We may like or not like Oprah, but we must recognize that she is a very smart lady. It's obvious that she knows that most of the answers she got could be categorized as falsehoods, 'Meghan's truth'.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's on my wishlist, but I buy so many books my to-be-read pile is always a mile high. Right now I love science thrillers, because at the end of the 400 pages, the evil pandemic someone set free while robbing a grave or something is usually contained


As a book rec I offer this one.  It gives the courtiers perspective, the abdication, and illustrates how very, very close Britain came to losing the war in the summer of 1940.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626


Could they not find a photo where he isn’t smirking? I remember he looked pretty upset when talking about being cut off financially, perhaps get a still from that?



papertiger said:


> Not to be stereotypical, but I don't think he dresses will enough
> 
> Being a beard would be my dream job, please PM me if you know of a vacancy   .


Well he’ll be trying not to give the game away and appeal to the socially-conservative male, I think. I do get gay vibes from him. Then again, the place where I grew up the men look like angry potatoes so maybe I am still mystified by metrosexuals. 

Alas I know of no current vacancies. Very out of the social loop  I was sort of one myself with a now-out friend of mine at one point.

I don’t want to be disrespectful of anyone’s relationship (well apart from being *****y about Chrissy obviously.) I just think if someone is constantly insisting on telling us about the sex with their spouse, (when that goes without saying you’d think) and their dream marriage in general, it usually means that it’s not true.

I suppose one good thing we can say about H&M is we’ve never been informed of their conjugal relations.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.




Oh, man. You KNOW she hated walking behind Kate.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> Thank goodness they didn't call him Alfie or we'd all have Cilla Black in our head


Now, I would go straight to Dionne Warwick
What's it all about.........ALFIE


----------



## CeeJay

Yet again .. late to the our favorite "party" (H&M thread) .. so I apologize if someone already posted this, but it makes TOTAL sense .. why should any of the BRF cater to these clowns????? 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...arkle-Prince-Harry-kicking-source-claims.html


----------



## Allisonfaye

Prettyinpnknwht said:


> I love this song!!  I first fell in love with it not long after it came out and rediscovered it over the past year.
> 
> 
> 
> For the love of Pete, after all Harry’s and the heavily pregnant one’s antics, I hope they stop letting William travel with his kids immediately.  I hate it for him and the kids, but there is no freaking way they need to be taking any kind of risk that would allow those two nincompoops anywhere near the throne unless the family has some sort of death wish for the institution they’ve devoted their lives to.



Biting tongue not to bring US politics into this one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> As a book rec I offer this one.  It gives the courtiers perspective, the abdication, and illustrates how very, very close Britain came to losing the war in the summer of 1940.
> View attachment 5062895



Thanks! I love non-fiction.


----------



## rhyvin

found a good use for the green dress!


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I meant 'well' (literally)
> 
> A Freudian slip.
> 
> But whatever (works)


Haha prefers Will without the clothes 


Allisonfaye said:


> Oh, man. You KNOW she hated walking behind Kate.


I’m surprised MM didn’t tell Oprah how evil Kate incited that whole slip-up and in fact invented making them walk in rank order out of spite and the Queen, in fact, wanted her and Harry to go first


----------



## justwatchin

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Doria Ragland (MMs mother) is a qualified mental health worker and had been working in the LA region for at least 3 years between 2015-2018. I'm sure she could have helped her daughter when she was going through her mental health issues.
> 
> I really wish Oprah had questioned MM about why H or Doria (qualified mental health profession) did not help her in a professional capacity. Such a big hole in her story. Especially since suicide is no joke, and it is not a fleeting/temporary feeling.


Did Oprah even ask her if she was getting help now?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> OMG she _wishes_!
> 
> Lucrezia Borgia was noblewoman in her own right, a Governor (of Spoleto) and had a brain TDF.
> 
> I wouldn't drink anything M gave me, just in case though


Yes, MM is just a mere replica of Lucrezia. She doesn't have her brain power   and yet she thinks herself so cunning. She so craves world adulation and recognition, like becoming a queen or president with lots of moolah, that she'll do anything to get it. Let's hope that in the end, she'll rise to the position of chicken farmer caring for saved chicken from killer chicken processing plants.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Yet again .. late to the our favorite "party" (H&M thread) .. so I apologize if someone already posted this, but it makes TOTAL sense .. why should any of the BRF cater to these clowns?????
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...arkle-Prince-Harry-kicking-source-claims.html



The relief when the toxic people depart is like a breath of fresh spring air. Once again, another reason to cancel the statue reveal.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Charles is the heir


Yes, but God forbid something happens to him and Will is flying around with all three kids and something happens to that plane, we will have Queen Meghan after all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Haha prefers Will without the clothes
> 
> I’m surprised MM didn’t tell Oprah how evil Kate incited that whole slip-up and in fact invented making them walk in rank order out of spite and the Queen, in fact, wanted her and Harry to go first



Love the way W&K give such a dismissive look [ ‘sneer‘ ] to the Hazbeens.  No question who will be a great leader.  I guess QE didn’t want a shouting match so she expertly ignored the kerfuffle.  Future organizations/companies should take note - H&M are not team players.


----------



## csshopper

BagStag said:


> come on, just let them be, we really don't know personally what is happening with the royal family. So let's not be so judgemental


Welcome BagStag!

The first post on this particular Celebrity Gossip Forum was posted in 2006, covering 15 years of history, obviously not all including Meghan.  It would be the equivalent of reading a history book at this point, LOL. To quote the Queen, "Recollections may vary" but overwhelmingly, imo, comments/opinions/ judgements are based on all that's been learned cumulatively through the years in various media and the tangential things we sometimes discuss can be fascinating and educational. With the relentless PR machine of Harry and his wife, there is always lots to talk about.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> If Charles gets Parliament to do that, is there any way William could undo it when he gets his turn at bat?


I can't imagine William wanting to reverse it and put Harry back in if Charles cut him out!  I'd trust Harry as much as Richard III with his two nephews "disappearing" in the Tower!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does this erase the huge footprint he made within the last 9 days?  Will he giving up his gas guzzler?









						Proud' Prince Harry honours 'conservation champion'
					

The Duke of Sussex recorded the voice-over for the African Parks charity he has been President of since 2017.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Prince Harry Narrated a Special Earth Day Video About Protected Areas in Africa
					

"I reflect on generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy," the duke said in a statement.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> If I remember this correctly they weren’t even supposed to be present for viewing the stuff on the table, and invited themselves to join in?  Pretty embarrassing how they were shooed about by the staff


They invited themselves for the viewing then didn't even view anything on the table?  
Their intentions are so grossly obvious, even to us peons!


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Oprah was there to help Meghan and to get big ratings, not necessarily in that order. Oprah is a talk show host, she's not an investigative reporter. Trust me, when I was young Oprah was an anchor on our local noon news and she was not very good at it.


Right.  Oprah got exactly what she wanted from that interview.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I can't imagine William wanting to reverse it and put Harry back in if Charles cut him out!  I'd trust Harry as much as Richard III with his two nephews "disappearing" in the Tower!



oooooooooh! I thought she was talking about putting an end to the monarchy all together. My mistake. Agreed, I wouldn't trust Harry to take care of a pet rock on his own, let alone anything else.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does this erase the huge footprint he made within the last 9 days?  Will he giving up his gas guzzler?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Proud' Prince Harry honours 'conservation champion'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex recorded the voice-over for the African Parks charity he has been President of since 2017.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh good!  Haz does voiceover work too!


----------



## rhyvin

Slightly wish fulfillment on my part, but I would love to see the Sussex titles revoked and replaced with Windsor titles..... therefore cementing the title with those who turn their back on the BRF.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I did not see her attacking kids though, that's a hard pass for me.


Not a huge CT fan, I think she's harmless and sometimes funny...I googled and could not find examples of her attacking kids 



bag-mania said:


> It is impossible to completely trust anything you read or hear.



That's why it's important to research and fact check everything these days. 



bag-mania said:


> The difference is journalists have the power to alter the thinking of the masses.



Only if we let them. 



BagStag said:


> come on, just let them be, we really don't know personally what is happening with the royal family. So let's not be so judgemental







Allisonfaye said:


> Biting tongue not to bring US politics into this one.



Why stop now?


----------



## Clearblueskies

purseinsanity said:


> They invited themselves for the viewing then didn't even view anything on the table?
> Their intentions are so grossly obvious, even to us peons!


I think it was a display intended for the Queen and the heirs only to be photographed looking at. Harry and Meg were supposed to go straight to wherever everyone else is.  That’s why the staff ushered them away, and it was all so awkward.


----------



## RAINDANCE

rhyvin said:


> Slightly wish fulfillment on my part, but I would love to see the Sussex titles revoked and replaced with Windsor titles..... therefore cementing the title with those who turn their back on the BRF.


 as in Duke and Duchess of Windsor ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the voiceover ?   Is he still patron of this organization? Is he now a ‘working’ Royal???

From the DM:

_Prince Harry today paid tribute to the Duke of Edinburgh's conservation work as he narrated a video for his wildlife charity to bang the drum for environmentalism.
To celebrate Earth Day, the Duke of Sussex recorded the voice-over for the African Parks NGO - which he has been President of since 2017._


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> as in Duke and Duchess of Windsor ?



Great idea


----------



## Lodpah

I, for one, don’t believe there’s massive interest in her or her son, no offense to the sweet baby. The only reason she’s out there cause she pays the PR for placements. There’s a neighbor of hers over on Quora and she’s constantly on walks with her son and mother. After that incident of Archie being photographed, albeit his dangly legs, no credible papers want to take that chance of being sued.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626


People just likes to kiss MM and Haz behinds, don't they?


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> It's really interesting how the UK headlines I've seen have all painted this in a negative light, eg "nothing will ever be the same" but all the US ones have been like "Progress Being Made"... if that doesn't tell you you really can't believe everything you read, nothing does. *We're living in 2 realities.*


More like one reality, and "Meghan's Reality".


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does this erase the huge footprint he made within the last 9 days?  Will he giving up his gas guzzler?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Proud' Prince Harry honours 'conservation champion'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex recorded the voice-over for the African Parks charity he has been President of since 2017.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Narrated a Special Earth Day Video About Protected Areas in Africa
> 
> 
> "I reflect on generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy," the duke said in a statement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Like Murky Meg's input on this!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the voiceover ?   Is he still patron of this organization? Is he now a ‘working’ Royal???
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> _Prince Harry today paid tribute to the Duke of Edinburgh's conservation work as he narrated a video for his wildlife charity to bang the drum for environmentalism.
> To celebrate Earth Day, the Duke of Sussex recorded the voice-over for the African Parks NGO - which he has been President of since 2017._


This isn't a Royal Patronage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> US People just likes to kiss MM and Haz behinds, don't they?



Eeeek, I goofed again.  Humble apologies, @purseinsanity


----------



## Shopaholic2021

justwatchin said:


> Did Oprah even ask her if she was getting help now?



No she didn't. MM did allude to the fact that it was due to being bullied by the media and silenced by the BRF that caused her to feel suicidal, which is extremely worrying. It takes more than just that to feel suicidal. I'm not saying she was lying about being suicidal, but that there must be more to it. Being bullied by the media and silenced by the BRF (as she claims) would cause depression and feeling down, but it requires a little more to feel truly suicidal (especially when you're pregnant). I'm also surprised H didn't show much emotion or feeling with this claim. I would be mortified and truly worried if my pregnant partner said that to me. 

I think it gave the wrong message to the world too. She claimed she has never felt this way before (suicidal) which again may be true, but she was perpetuating that suicide is caused by temporary circumstances, when this isn't always the case, and a change of circumstances doesn't magically make everything better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I, for one, don’t believe there’s massive interest in her or her son, no offense to the sweet baby. The only reason she’s out there cause she pays the PR for placements. There’s a neighbor of hers over on Quora and she’s constantly on walks with her son and mother. After that incident of Archie being photographed, albeit his dangly legs, no credible papers want to take that chance of being sued.



It is slightly sad, isn't it. You own property the size of a small village, choose to walk around the streets so paps can find you, yet they just don't want to.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> More like one reality, and "*Meghan's Reality*".


haha, "Meghan's Reality" may explain some of her claims!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it was a display intended for the Queen and the heirs only to be photographed looking at. Harry and Meg were supposed to go straight to wherever everyone else is.  That’s why the staff ushered them away, and it was all so awkward.


It looks like Charles is surprised to see them, presumably they were supposed to be seated already. I think this one is totally on Harry even though at this date Meghan had been in the family for 18 months since the engagement and knew the walking order. Having crashed the viewing, it looks as though they then tried to sneek ahead to get into the next room but weren't quick enough and were then likely to enter in front of the Queen. Bit like being late for a wedding and having to sprint up the aisle with the bride 2 paces behind and everyone thinking who the hell is that idiot as they turn to see the bride !
I noticed Meghan was seated next to Lindley, with Lady Sarah next to him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> This isn't a Royal Patronage.



Okay.
Seems to me a blurry line here. By invoking the name of Prince Philip, is he speaking for the BRF? I’m confused.
Looks like the plan may be to start this in the USA.  Hmmmm.

Does he really think he can come over here and set up the same stuff the UK has?  
No, not without a lot of pushback from some of us. 









						Our People
					






					www.africanparks.org


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, anyone remember how she talks to Serena William's mother, who looks the other way and completely ignores her? Halfway through Meghan gets it put still insists on blabbering on. And there's more videos like this.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okay.
> Seems to me a blurry line here. By invoking the name of Prince Philip, is he speaking for the BRF? I’m confused.
> Looks like the plan may be to start this in the USA.  Hmmmm.
> 
> Does he really think he can come over here and set up the same stuff the UK has?
> No, not without a lot of pushback from some of us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our People
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.africanparks.org


He probably used his grandfather's name as he took a great interest in wildlife too etc, and to remind us he's his grandson.  
Also, African Parks don't have a base in the UK


----------



## scarlet555

Shopaholic2021 said:


> *No she didn't*. MM did allude to the fact that it was due to being bullied by the media and silenced by the BRF that caused her to feel suicidal, which is extremely worrying. It takes more than just that to feel suicidal. I'm not saying she was lying about being suicidal, but that there must be more to it. Being bullied by the media and silenced by the BRF (as she claims) would cause depression and feeling down, but it requires a little more to feel truly suicidal (especially when you're pregnant). I'm also surprised H didn't show much emotion or feeling with this claim. I would be mortified and truly worried if my pregnant partner said that to me.
> 
> I think it gave the wrong message to the world too. She claimed she has never felt this way before (suicidal) which again may be true, but she was perpetuating that suicide is caused by temporary circumstances, when this isn't always the case, and a change of circumstances doesn't magically make everything better.



This is what I call irresponsible journalism-OR just plain old poor interviewing skills from the Great O... no significant follow up questions, just 'ahhh' and grand facial expressions of nothing -clown play... very sad for O.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'v seen the first part of the footage before (not the dramatic face later though), and I ask the same question I asked earlier today: how is it even possible Prince Harry, son of the next monarch, needs palace stuff to rush over to keep him from walking in front of all those people higher up in the pecking order than he is? Just...how.


I'm going to pretend Harry is like Dori, the fish from Finding Nemo with short term amnesia.


----------



## Genie27

RAINDANCE said:


> It looks like Charles is surprised to see them, presumably they were supposed to be seated already. I think this one is totally on Harry even though at this date Meghan had been in the family for 18 months since the engagement and knew the walking order. Having crashed the viewing, it looks as though they then tried to sneek ahead to get into the next room but weren't quick enough and were then likely to enter in front of the Queen. Bit like being late for a wedding and having to *sprint up the aisle with the bride 2 paces behind *and everyone thinking who the hell is that idiot as they turn to see the bride !
> I noticed Meghan was seated next to Lindley, with Lady Sarah next to him.


More like being one step behind the bridesmaids, pretending they were in the bridal party.
I think she tried *really hard* to nonchalantly enter after W & K, so that it would appear that they entered the church (?) as part of the group. Instead they had to wait, and then enter 'late' when they should have already been seated/standing with the rest of the people. 

That's why she looks mortified. They were made to wait. It presented as a shameful 'late arrival' after the most important people have arrived.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> He probably used his grandfather's name as he took a great interest in wildlife too etc, and to remind us he's his grandson.
> Also, African Parks don't have a base in the UK



They need to update their bio. Statements like this just _muddy the waters_ [intentional Earth Day reference ].








						The Duke of Sussex
					






					www.africanparks.org
				



_The Duke of Sussex, Prince Harry, is the younger son of The Prince of Wales and Diana, Princess of Wales. Prince Harry spent ten years working in the Armed Forces and now spends his working life supporting a number of charitable activities and projects, and *carrying out public duties in support of The Queen.*_


Interesting that the USA board has a Walton on it. Hmmm.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I agree with you.  I believe Meghan would have pushed forward no matter what anyone said, even Oprah, and would have dragged Harry with her. She  is always right. * She sees herself as some kind of victim (which just boggles the mind)* and wanted to lash out, have the last word, and hurt the Queen and the family, thinking everyone would sympathize with her.  Bizarre.  I've never been a huge fan of Lady CC but I think she has it right when she said the two of them don't have a firm grip on reality.  The family and the Palace could have helped them in so many ways too, even with them being in the U.S., and now they won't likely lift a finger.



What gets me is so many people believe her (even, or perhaps especially, Oprah). Meghan benefitted from many people wanting to believe that the BRF were behaving in a racist manner towards her and treating her badly. If you want to believe something is true you don't go looking for the facts that might prove it isn't.


----------



## rhyvin

RAINDANCE said:


> as in Duke and Duchess of Windsor ?


Yes Ma'am


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Can't blame Charles!
> View attachment 5062552
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles 'relieved' at 'calmer' life without Meghan & Harry
> 
> 
> PRINCE CHARLES is finding the Royal Family "a lot calmer" without Meghan Markle and Prince Harry "kicking off" when they did not get their own way, insiders have claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


yes, I'm sure Charles authorized "sources" to say this....don't think so


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is hard at work. They got the cover this week.
> 
> View attachment 5062626



Here is the UK response to the above article! 



*No “meaningful conversations” have taken place since the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral last week.*
_And sources say aides still harbour deep misgivings about any future clear-the-air discussions with Harry.

*They point to a flurry of articles in the US within hours of his return to California.*

And they have become increasingly alarmed at the speed at which details of private family exchanges have emerged..._








						Prince Harry talks with senior royals put on hold because of constant leaks ‘from the Sussex side’
					

CRUNCH talks between Prince Harry and senior royals have been put on hold because of constant leaks “from the Sussex side”, The Sun can reveal. No “meaningful conversations” have taken place since …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

lalame said:


> Chrissy is a lot. I don't really take things she says THAT seriously because she's so extra about everything. Definitely one who's comic relief and that's it.



I must respectfully disagree. There's nothing funny about her and her wokester  following. People like her can do a lot of damage.
There is a scene in Dr Zhivago where a character says that as the military struggle nears it's close the political one intensifies and in victory all will be JUDGED POLITICALLY regardless of their imilitary record.
That's what is going on now. Doesn't matter what you've accomolished you will be judged by your politics.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> My sister does this all the time. It is always 'my husband this, my husband that'. The more I know my sister, I think it's about narcissistic tendencies and ownership.


thats especially odd if she is talking to family members who obviously know her husband by his name


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Could they not find a photo where he isn’t smirking? I remember he looked pretty upset when talking about being cut off financially, perhaps get a still from that?
> 
> 
> Well he’ll be trying not to give the game away and appeal to the socially-conservative male, I think. I do get gay vibes from him. Then again, the place where I grew up the men look like angry potatoes so maybe I am still mystified by metrosexuals.
> 
> Alas I know of no current vacancies. Very out of the social loop  I was sort of one myself with a now-out friend of mine at one point.
> 
> I don’t want to be disrespectful of anyone’s relationship (well apart from being *****y about Chrissy obviously.) I just think if someone is constantly insisting on telling us about the sex with their spouse, (when that goes without saying you’d think) and their dream marriage in general, it usually means that it’s not true.
> *
> I suppose one good thing we can say about H&M is we’ve never been informed of their conjugal relations.*


It would probably go like this: and then the doctor took Harry's drippings from his porno viewing, and using a dropper, oh so gently placed some on my eggs in the petri dish.  Since my eggs are scrambled, we had another dish with the donor's eggs.  The drippings seemed to like the donor best.  Thank goodness she looks so much like me!


----------



## Sharont2305

Genie27 said:


> More like being one step behind the bridesmaids, pretending they were in the bridal party.
> I think she tried *really hard* to nonchalantly enter after W & K, so that it would appear that they entered the church (?) as part of the group. Instead they had to wait, and then enter 'late' when they should have already been seated/standing with the rest of the people.
> 
> That's why she looks mortified. They were made to wait. It presented as a shameful 'late arrival' after the most important people have arrived.


It was at Buckingham Palace.


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Senior members of the BRF, not just the heir and his son. You can imagine how catastrophic it will be if William’s entire family is in an accident.


Please say would be not will be


----------



## Chanbal

Nice!  










						Royal Family warned Prince Harry will not allow monarchy to 'use him'
					

THE Royal Family has been warned that Prince Harry will not allow the monarchy to "use him" to improve their PR according to an etiquette expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Nice!
> View attachment 5063009
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family warned Prince Harry will not allow monarchy to 'use him'
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been warned that Prince Harry will not allow the monarchy to "use him" to improve their PR according to an etiquette expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Oh honey. The not so firm grip on reality is really slipping, isn't it. I bet the BRF would like to pretend they don't know you or the heavily pregnant one.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Like Murky Meg's input on this!
> 
> View attachment 5062957



Maybe H&M could try to curb their methane output by complaining less. All that hot air. Sheesh!


----------



## rose60610

How could the monarchy possibly "use" Harry since he is use-LESS? Did he think they'd crumble without him and the Heavily Pregnant One? I don't see the monarchy begging Harry to come back....


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Nice!
> View attachment 5063009
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family warned Prince Harry will not allow monarchy to 'use him'
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been warned that Prince Harry will not allow the monarchy to "use him" to improve their PR according to an etiquette expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I've been giving the Express a pass on their previous inflammatory headlines but this one has to be made up. Even as much of a dunce as Harry is, he cannot possibly believe this.


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> I must respectfully disagree. There's nothing funny about her and her wokester  following. People like her can do a lot of damage.
> There is a scene in Dr Zhivago where a character says that as the military struggle nears it's close the political one intensifies and in victory all will be JUDGED POLITICALLY regardless of their imilitary record.
> That's what is going on now. Doesn't matter what you've accomolished you will be judged by your politics.



Not sure what you disagree with in my statement since it had nothing to do with what you just said... to be clear, I'm saying I don't take anything Chrissy says as fact because she exaggerates a lot. Her contribution to society is limited to comic relief.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh honey. The not so firm grip on reality is really slipping, isn't it. I bet the BRF would like to pretend they don't know you or the heavily pregnant one.


Completely delusional! Harry's "_eyes are wide open and he talks about the firm and the machine of it all and so forth. So I don't believe he would allow himself to be used in that manner_..."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I opened the article about the BRF not wanting to engage because of the leaks and nearly spit out my tea. Who hurt Omid? I'm emotionally jarred. Maybe even scarred.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

"I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time, we would still just be silent if there is an active role that the Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us," Meghan says — "the Firm" referring to the institution of the royal family. "And if that comes with risk of losing things, I mean I — there's a lot that's been lost already." 

This statement that MM made during the beginning of the interview, to me sounds like they're ok with cutting ties and that they're not really open to building bridges. Even if H is, MM isn't. MM is basically saying she doesn't care what the fall out or impact of the interview will be. 

I can understand that they feel that the media was harsh and that the BRF were not more active in protecting them from the media but what they did was not any better.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Nice!
> View attachment 5063009
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family warned Prince Harry will not allow monarchy to 'use him'
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family has been warned that Prince Harry will not allow the monarchy to "use him" to improve their PR according to an etiquette expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



He really needs to stop....


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Fixed it
> [imo both are loser rags]


I was referring to the People magazine cover on which they were pictured.  People has constant non news stories on them too.  I always think of Us as the Kardashians personal diaries, LOL.


----------



## Allisonfaye

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Why stop now?



That's funny. I thought I had been rather restrained.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I've been giving the Express a pass on their previous inflammatory headlines but this one has to be made up. Even as much of a dunce as Harry is, he cannot possibly believe this.


Keep in mind, they are professional victims!   I wouldn't be surprised if MM&H think that we (the general public) believe in all the falsehoods continuously released via their PR machine...


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I was referring to the People magazine cover on which they were pictured.  People has constant non news stories on them too.  I always think of Us as the Kardashians personal diaries, LOL.



Most humble Apologies, dear @purseinsanity. No excuses, my mistake. I will learn to read more carefully.


----------



## sdkitty

Since Harry has voluntarily stepped back from being a working royal, can't they remove him from the line of succession?
Never mind.....this has probably been covered here before but I had forgotten, apparently parliment would have to remove him, not the queen


----------



## youngster

Shopaholic2021 said:


> "I don't know how they could expect that after all of this time, we would still just be silent if there is an active role that the Firm is playing in perpetuating falsehoods about us," Meghan says — "the Firm" referring to the institution of the royal family. "And if that comes with risk of losing things, I mean I — there's a lot that's been lost already."
> 
> *This statement that MM made during the beginning of the interview, to me* *sounds like they're ok with cutting ties and that they're not really open to building bridges.* Even if H is, MM isn't. MM is basically saying she doesn't care what the fall out or impact of the interview will be.



I agree with you.  I think she was fine with cutting ties and markling the BRF about two months ago. But, maybe she didn't expect the backlash.  The timing of the interview was, once again, really poor with Prince Philip dying just a short time after and that they added to his pain and the Queen's pain is undeniable.  She didn't get a public apology and didn't get any concessions from the family.  So, all that's happened since then (the press releases that MM wanted to be at the funeral, that she was watching the funeral at home, that she called the Queen, that the wreath was chosen with so much heartfelt meaning, that she wrote a personal note, and on and on), that all gives me the impression that it's MM and Harry who are the ones eager to re-establish ties with the family and/or continue to be seen as being on the inside.  It's the family that is saying we're grieving for Prince Philip, go back to California, maybe we'll chat later. With witnesses.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I agree with you.  I think she was fine with cutting ties and markling the BRF about two months ago. But, maybe she didn't expect the backlash.  The timing of the interview was, once again, really poor with Prince Philip dying just a short time after and that they added to his pain and the Queen's pain is undeniable.  She didn't get a public apology and didn't get any concessions from the family.  So, all that's happened since then (the press releases that MM wanted to be at the funeral, that she was watching the funeral at home, that she called the Queen, that the wreath was chosen with so much heartfelt meaning, that she wrote a personal note, and on and on), that all gives me the impression that it's MM and Harry who are the ones eager to re-establish ties with the family and/or continue to be seen as being on the inside.  It's the family that is saying we're grieving for Prince Philip, go back to California, maybe we'll chat later. With witnesses.


but everyone in the US seemed to believe everything she said.....guess not in GB


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Since Harry has voluntarily stepped back from being a working royal, can't they remove him from the line of succession?



I bet they wish they could. They likely don't want to feed the beast as far as giving H&M ammunition for their nonstop pity party. You know the US press would make it out like Harry was being punished for falling in love with a woman of color. They would disregard everything else.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> but everyone in the US seemed to believe everything she said.....guess not in GB



I think it got about 17 million viewers in the U.S.?  I just looked it up and that's what I found. There are 325 million people in the U.S. so maybe 5% of the population saw it when it aired. A much larger number likely heard brief snippets of it on the news after of course or saw headlines.  Personally, other than the posters on this thread, I don't think I know anyone who watched it.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think it got about 17 million viewers in the U.S.?  I just looked it up and that's what I found. There are 325 million people in the U.S. so maybe 5% of the population saw it when it aired. A much larger number likely heard brief snippets of it on the news after of course or saw headlines.  Personally, other than the posters on this thread, I don't think I know anyone who watched it.


probably true that most americans don't care about these two one way or the other.  but everything I saw in US media (esp TV) basically reported all that they said as fact - and bashed people who weren't sympathetic to her (alleged) mental health crisis.


----------



## lalame

I don't know anyone else who watched it either. Most people just don't care. I do think the coverage was way more sympathetic in the US but I think a lot of public support has to do with ignorance about BRF norms and they're hearing just this side and not the other. I think if William or Charles were to do a sit down it could majorly change, but of course they won't.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't know anyone else who watched it either. Most people just don't care. I do think the coverage was way more sympathetic in the US but I think a lot of public support has to do with ignorance about BRF norms and they're hearing just this side and not the other. I think if William or Charles were to do a sit down it could majorly change, but of course they won't.


they won't and also she has played the race card to her advantage big time


----------



## Aimee3

Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????


interesting that they are keeping him under wraps....are they waiting for him to get cuter?  
I guess he's cute in a regular baby way but hasn't shown any of the adorableness of will & kates's kids yet


----------



## lalame

Cute baby!


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## RachelCohen808

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????


It does not make any sense If she could not fly because of the doctor's orders how can she carry a toddler on her baby bump? Doctors also warn against carrying your child and walking around when pregnant, only lift and hold on the hip for a short period of time. Seeing this makes me think that she actually never been pregnant as she does not have any idea how pregnant women behave. I would never carry my child around on my baby bump only on the hip even though I have been doing vinyasa yoga for years.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????



Notice the photos are by "Backgrid," a paparazzi company known for being hired for staged encounters. It must have been killing her to stay inside while Harry was away. She had to call in the big guns to produce some "candid" shots to make her feel better.

Wants her privacy indeed.


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> as in Duke and Duchess of Windsor ?



   It's late here, took me a moment too, I had to say it out loud and then I  .


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, anyone remember how she talks to Serena William's mother, who looks the other way and completely ignores her? Halfway through Meghan gets it put still insists on blabbering on. And there's more videos like this.



I actually feel sorry for her in that 'tableau', so totally embarrassing - and still wouldn't take the hint.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I opened the article about the BRF not wanting to engage because of the leaks and nearly spit out my tea. Who hurt Omid? I'm emotionally jarred. Maybe even scarred.
> 
> View attachment 5063021



I think he's just been at new eyebrow products again and overdone the first-impressions experiment


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Most humble Apologies, dear @purseinsanity. No excuses, my mistake. I will learn to read more carefully.


No apologies necessary, LOL!   With all the rubbish they run, there's really no difference!!


----------



## Lodpah

Oops spoke too soon. I guess it’s her paid photographer. That tummy does not make sense.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I don't know anyone else who watched it either. Most people just don't care. I do think the coverage was way more sympathetic in the US but I think a lot of public support has to do with ignorance about BRF norms and they're hearing just this side and not the other. I think if William or Charles were to do a sit down it could majorly change, but of course they won't.


LOL my parents are visiting and last night my poor father happened to ask what exactly is going on with Harry and his wife?  My response was I can't stand MM.  They made the mistake of asking me why and were treated to a hour long soliloquy on all of MM's horrible attributes.  They listened politely, but I could tell by their glazed eyes about 15 minutes in, they really didn't care about MM or H


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????



She probably would if she was desperate for someone to snap a picture. That said, I'm pleasantly surprised she apparently learned how to carry a child without it looking like she'll drop him within the next seconds.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????


Oh look!  Her bump is big enough for Archie to comfortably perch on!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> interesting that they are keeping him under wraps....are they waiting for him to get cuter?
> I guess he's cute in a regular baby way but hasn't shown any of the adorableness of will & kates's kids yet



I love the Cambridge kids (Louis will be 3 tomorrow!) but I also feel Archie's parents haven't exactly shown him in a favourable way so far. Maybe he'll sue them for presenting him to the world in nothing but full diapers once he's old enough.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????


It is a good question, the little boy is likely too heavy for a heavily pregnant woman. I wonder if they went stationery shopping. 

(Kate was recently spotted with her kids shopping for new stationery ...)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RachelCohen808 said:


> It does not make any sense If she could not fly because of the doctor's orders how can she carry a toddler on her baby bump? Doctors also warn against carrying your child and walking around when pregnant, only lift and hold on the hip for a short period of time. Seeing this makes me think that she actually never been pregnant as she does not have any idea how pregnant women behave. I would never carry my child around on my baby bump only on the hip even though I have been doing vinyasa yoga for years.



Really? (not being snarky, I don't have kids) That seems like impossible to follow for moms with several small kids and no help (the "Don't carry your kids" part).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Notice the photos are by "Backgrid," a paparazzi company known for being hired for staged encounters. It must have been killing her to stay inside while Harry was away. She had to call in the big guns to produce some "candid" shots to make her feel better.
> 
> Wants her privacy indeed.



Why would you use a pap company known for being a pap company you probably hired! (not questioning what you are saying, I was wondering the same thing when the Canada pap encounter happened too) It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, it's like admitting they are not interested enough to chase you.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love the Cambridge kids (Louis will be 3 tomorrow!) but I also feel Archie's parents haven't exactly shown him in a favourable way so far. Maybe he'll sue them for presenting him to the world in nothing but full diapers once he's old enough.


Don't like the parents, but the kid is cute!!!











						Pregnant Meghan Markle, Archie seen for first time since Harry’s US return
					

The Duchess of Sussex propped the 1-year-old up on her growing baby bump as she carried his space-themed lunch box.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Oh look!  Her bump is big enough for Archie to comfortably perch on!


Is she using her bump to carry Archie?


----------



## Aimee3

And what’s with the lunch box and back pack??? Is he in nursery school?  Where is she?  In her neck of the woods I didn’t think people walk unless they’re exercising. They live too far from anything not to have to take a car.  Why carry him at all?  He must be walking at 2 years old.  I’m confused by these pics.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> And what’s with the lunch box and back pack??? Is he in nursery school?  Where is she?  In her neck of the woods I didn’t think people walk unless they’re exercising. They live too far from anything not to have to take a car.  Why carry him at all?  He must be walking at 2 years old.  I’m confused by these pics.


This was likely just a brief walk for the photo-op. It's Louis's birthday!


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> If it's true, I think they just needed a certainty.
> 
> It can take years to conceive naturally at any age and they needed a good-news story and cement their status as a Royal power couple - like now (or at least 9-months from now).
> 
> Interesting that she never never had kids before (since she was married twice) yet in such a hurry to procreate.
> 
> Yes, I'm a beeach  ,  but I must say their timing on the things they can control and need to get under their belts are just so convenient fortuitous.
> 
> I never even thought of it as a possibility until she made so much of carrying and obsessive about mentioning her role as Royal mother, now I'm not so sure.



Call me a beeach too.   Told my DH before H&M got married, watch M she'll get pregnant with at least two as fast as possible. It's her mark into RF and history. Saw that coming. Just saying.


----------



## Genie27

Aimee3 said:


> And what’s with the lunch box and back pack??? Is he in nursery school?  Where is she?  In her neck of the woods I didn’t think people walk unless they’re exercising. They live too far from anything not to have to take a car.  Why carry him at all?  He must be walking at 2 years old.  I’m confused by these pics.


I’m confused too! I don’t have kids but I think carrying a kid with his huge backpack, while heavily pregnant would throw my centre of gravity way off. 

And is he off to daycare? How very plebeian.


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> Is she using her bump to carry Archie?
> 
> View attachment 5063114


 Maybe it’s a steel moon bump for carrying purposes!!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would you use a pap company known for being a pap company you probably hired! (not questioning what you are saying, I was wondering the same thing when the Canada pap encounter happened too) It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, it's like admitting they are not interested enough to chase you.



She is counting on most people not knowing they are staged. I have to admit I never knew about celebrities arranging staged candid photos until I started reading the celebrity threads here.


----------



## Chanbal

Enjoy!










						JAN MOIR: Why the hell SHOULD William forgive Harry?
					

JAN MOIR: Events following the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral suggest that Princes William and Harry will never be able to repair their broken fraternal bond. How can they?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She is counting on most people not knowing they are staged. I have to admit I never knew about celebrities arranging staged candid photos until I started reading the celebrity threads here.


Same here. This last year has been educational!


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I think it got about 17 million viewers in the U.S.?  I just looked it up and that's what I found. There are 325 million people in the U.S. so maybe 5% of the population saw it when it aired. A much larger number likely heard brief snippets of it on the news after of course or saw headlines.  Personally, other than the posters on this thread, I don't think I know anyone who watched it.



Completely agree. No one, absolutley no one, I know watched. Lots because of OW, some because of CBS/GK, most because they do not waste time on rich, entitled prima-dons/donnas. The media support has only come from ‘certain’ networks. Change the channel and next to nothing is said. 

RE: the lil guy.  Yes, all children are adorable, this one too.  No reason for the parents’ drama, tho. They really need to get over their huge egos. Their antics invite negative comments. I’m on the Kate team about photos of lil kids. They look better when engaged in a real world activity, not being carried. Old enough to carry a backpack [merch], old enough to walk. If she is trying to get sympathy b/c H is away, not there to carry the kid, icky icky ick.  Not gonna work.

please please cancel the statue show.


----------



## octopus17

rose60610 said:


> oooooooooh! I thought she was talking about putting an end to the monarchy all together. My mistake. Agreed, I wouldn't trust Harry to take care of a pet rock on his own, let alone anything else.


I actually had a pet rock in the Seventies (it was indeed a "thing") and I agree with you... lol!


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> They look better when engaged in a real world activity, not being carried.


But then it wouldn’t be about her, would it? That just won’t do. Kid is unfortunately an accessory, just as much as the lunchpack and teeny tiny gold jewelry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> I'm going with *not* Diana as a first name. It would take the attention away from Meg and everything is supposed to be about her.


Agreed.
Reading this again made me wonder how the name Archie has any connection to her, it's obvious what the Harrison stands for so the Archie must have a connection to MM.
Which made me remember her real first name is Rachel and I think that's how they came up with the name.
If you take the letters of Rachel and re-arrange them, it can make up most of Archie, just swap the 'L' for an 'I'.
Just like that, both of his names are a tribute to his parents  It might not be correct at all, but it is believable.






CAH said:


> Maybe he politely was told it wasn't necessary for him to stay!












Chanbal said:


> I watched this video before, but I don't recall to have seen it so clearly. It gives the impression that MM (and H?) tried to break protocol twice in a very short period of time.



Ugh. They were sooo rude and inappropriate at this event, it will never not be awkward to watch. Her face at the ending, she's seething 




TC1 said:


> Just saw a small news flash that read *"Meghan Markle and Archie spoke with the Queen before PP's service"* was nice of her to call that headline in











QueenofWrapDress said:


> I opened the article about the BRF not wanting to engage because of the leaks and nearly spit out my tea. Who hurt Omid? I'm emotionally jarred. Maybe even scarred.
> 
> View attachment 5063021


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Is she using her bump to carry Archie?
> 
> View attachment 5063114



Archie is very cute but that is the oddest looking pregnancy bump. I've had 2 children myself and that just looks strange. Seriously. The bump is very low and kind of sagging. It looks like she should be delivering any second when she's not due for a couple months.  She doesn't look like she's put on weight anywhere else either. She looks thinner than in the OW interview. I'm perplexed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Don't like the parents, but the kid is cute!!!



I'm not disagreeing (in fact, I think that dark red hair is gorgeous), I was saying in response to some feeling Archie has nothing on the Cambridge kids that he hasn't had the same chances that they've had to shine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This was likely just a brief walk for the photo-op. It's Louis's birthday!



Oh. Now that you say it!


----------



## mdcx

When I was that preg, my back was very delicate and would go out at any minute. No way could I lug 10-15kg of toddler on one hip, let alone resting them on my bump? Obviously a staged pap stroll pic and I am unconvinced about the authenticity of that bump.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. She learned *another *thing. Not staring into the camera and grinning like a lunatic very pleased with herself. Or is it a picture series and we only saw the demure one?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Don't like the parents, but the kid is cute!!!
> 
> View attachment 5063111
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan Markle, Archie seen for first time since Harry’s US return
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex propped the 1-year-old up on her growing baby bump as she carried his space-themed lunch box.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


The kid is adorable and all H.  I wonder if she contributed in any way.


----------



## scarlet555

Aimee3 said:


> And what’s with the lunch box and back pack??? Is he in nursery school?  Where is she?  In her neck of the woods I didn’t think people walk unless they’re exercising. They live too far from anything not to have to take a car.  Why carry him at all?  He must be walking at 2 years old.  *I’m confused by these pics*.



We all are!  Almost want to ask a* heavily pregnant* woman to carry her toddler like this picture to see if she would or can, for a nice walk.  She would probably look at me like I'm crazy and tell me about the invention of a 'stroller'.


----------



## mdcx

Chanbal said:


> Don't like the parents, but the kid is cute!!!
> 
> View attachment 5063111
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan Markle, Archie seen for first time since Harry’s US return
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex propped the 1-year-old up on her growing baby bump as she carried his space-themed lunch box.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Honestly these look like an attempt at seeming like a down to earth school mum dropping toddler off at kinder ala Kate Middleton. But the backpack and lunchbag look brand new and unused, and I highly doubt Archie is attending anywhere where members of the public can observe him and Meghan and potentially leak non Meghan PR approved stories or pics.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Cornflower Blue said:


> I actually had a pet rock in the Seventies (it was indeed a "thing") and I agree with you... lol!



Mood ring?


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> Archie is very cute but that is the oddest looking pregnancy bump. I've had 2 children myself and that just looks strange. Seriously. The bump is very low and kind of sagging. It looks like she should be delivering any second when she's not due for a couple months.  She doesn't look like she's put on weight anywhere else either. She looks thinner than in the OW interview. I'm perplexed.



Agree. The picture of her a few pages back with the black dress makes me think she was pregnant the first time because she looks heavier in that picture than I have ever seen her.


----------



## lalame

I'm confused that we can see Archie's face at all.... isn't it illegal to show minors' faces like that unless authorized? I normally see them censored in pap photos...


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> Archie is very cute but that is the oddest looking pregnancy bump. I've had 2 children myself and that just looks strange. Seriously. The bump is very low and kind of sagging. It looks like she should be delivering any second when she's not due for a couple months.  She doesn't look like she's put on weight anywhere else either. She looks thinner than in the OW interview. I'm perplexed.


You're right. She's using her bump to carry a child. How odd.


Allisonfaye said:


> Agree. The picture of her a few pages back with the black dress makes me think she was pregnant the first time because she looks heavier in that picture than I have ever seen her.


I was convinced she was really pregnant this time, but now... not so much.

ETA - I had a mood ring, now that I think about it.  lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Charles and Camilla visiting Berlin in 2019 (could as well be a century ago, hu?). He mentions Archie's birth and is just beaming. So sad when families break down.


----------



## Jayne1

Chloe302225 said:


>



Oh, no wonder we see Archie, it's Prince Louis' birthday!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Ok for those pregnant or have had multiple pregnancies your back tends to arch backwards and you waddle when you are that pregnant, not full on head forward. I could be wrong but dang that’s full sped forward.


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> You're right. She's using her bump to carry a child. How odd.
> 
> I was convinced she was really pregnant this time, but now... not so much.
> 
> ETA - I had a mood ring, now that I think about it.  lol


I am fairly sure that the BRFs opposition to advanced assisted fertility practices was one reason for Megxit. Gender selection, surrogacy etc.


----------



## octopus17

Hermes Zen said:


> Call me a beeach too.   Told my DH before H&M got married, watch M she'll get pregnant with at least two as fast as possible. It's her mark into RF and history. Saw that coming. Just saying.


Mr CB said that the first thing she'd do would be to get pregnant asap after the marriage


----------



## mdcx

Jayne1 said:


> Oh, no wonder we see Archie, it's Prince Louis' birthday!


Louis is the most darling, happy looking boy.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Oh, no wonder we see Archie, it's Prince Louis' birthday!


Precisely!  This is the first time in years that we have actually had a good look at Archie.  The only reason she is doing it is because of Louis.  She also must have received a memo from the magazines that she is not going to get the mega bucks that she thought she would for pictures of him.  

The DM has adorable pictures of Louis  on a bicycle and they are also throwing shade at Harry by showing one of him with William and his parents on bicycles as well.  

That is the oddest looking bump.  Either that baby has dropped  and she is going to deliver fairly soon or she is wearing a pillow.  I can't see holding a child the size of Archie with a bump like that.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I'm confused that we can see Archie's face at all.... isn't it illegal to show minors' faces like that unless authorized? I normally see them censored in pap photos...



There is a law in California restricting the rights of photographers to take pictures of celebrities children. There was a lot of lobbying done to get this done. It was meant to protect the children of the celebs (and rightly so, since the children did not choose this line of work). So I hope they sue the paper for this, and if they don't, that proves that she arranged this pap shot. 

You cannot see her smug/smiling face because of the mask, but you can see it in the eyes. You can tell when someone is smiling by looking at their eyes, and if it was a candid photo then why would she be smiling. The child on the hip is weird for someone that is heavily pregnant, I would think its not advised to light heavy objects at that stage of the pregnancy. I agree with other comments that she looks skinnier in those pictures than she did on the Oprah interview. She looked more bloated in the face in the interview, but that could've just been temporary and in her last pregnancy I think she wasn't really heavy anywhere else.


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> Archie is very cute but that is the oddest looking pregnancy bump. I've had 2 children myself and that just looks strange. Seriously. The bump is very low and kind of sagging. It looks like she should be delivering any second when she's not due for a couple months.  She doesn't look like she's put on weight anywhere else either. She looks thinner than in the OW interview. I'm perplexed.


Also looks like she dropped. No way she can walk like that. Your bladder alone would burst.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Oh, no wonder we see Archie, it's Prince Louis' birthday!



Butttttt, This is a full body photo. No one has seen that before. oooooooh, so cool, aren’t we lucky??? Here’s the surprise - we don’t care.  Sure, sure, if they had released regular photos for holidays, events, etc., we might care. But now, after being jerked around by them. A foot here, a hand there, a full diaper (!!!),  Nope, nothing to see here. [just notice once again mother and child are not interacting.]


----------



## bagshopr

Nope, not a pregnant abdomen


----------



## Aimee3

bagshopr said:


> Nope, not a pregnant abdomen


It looks like the bump is on her crotch (excuse the vulgarity)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, anyone remember how she talks to Serena William's mother, who looks the other way and completely ignores her? Halfway through Meghan gets it put still insists on blabbering on. And there's more videos like this.


I think the 'heavily pregnant' one doesn't think things through before acting. It's all optics for her. Even when being ignored, she carries on talking to Serena's mother maybe thinking that people aren't that astute or observant (unlike us on TPF) to notice that she is being ignored. IMO, being seen as interacting with VIPs is more important to her than actually having a conversation with them.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> There is a law in California restricting the rights of photographers to take pictures of celebrities children. There was a lot of lobbying done to get this done. It was meant to protect the children of the celebs (and rightly so, since the children did not choose this line of work). So I hope they sue the paper for this, and if they don't, that proves that she arranged this pap shot.
> 
> You cannot see her smug/smiling face because of the mask, but you can see it in the eyes. You can tell when someone is smiling by looking at their eyes, and if it was a candid photo then why would she be smiling. The child on the hip is weird for someone that is heavily pregnant, I would think its not advised to light heavy objects at that stage of the pregnancy. I agree with other comments that she looks skinnier in those pictures than she did on the Oprah interview. She looked more bloated in the face in the interview, but that could've just been temporary and in her last pregnancy I think she wasn't really heavy anywhere else.



Yeah the first thing I thought was if it's really a pap shot, they're bold since she is known to sue freely for this stuff. It would be interesting to see how this goes down since it's first lawsuit, from US, to US company right?

The smile didn't really throw me off... she seems like she could just be talking to him and having a happy moment. I mean I smile when out and about, especially if with friends and such. I wonder if she just hadn't had any botox done lately but loaded up for that OW interview.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> And what’s with the lunch box and back pack??? Is he in nursery school?  Where is she?  In her neck of the woods I didn’t think people walk unless they’re exercising. They live too far from anything not to have to take a car.  Why carry him at all?  He must be walking at 2 years old.  I’m confused by these pics.


And, she is carrying too much weight plus the child than is good for a "heavily pregnant" woman.  She has the backpack on Archie and she is carrying something else as well.  Why is he wearing the hat?  She doesn't want his hair to show?  Is that going to be the next big reveal?


----------



## youngster

Shopaholic2021 said:


> You cannot see her smug/smiling face because of the mask, but you can see it in the eyes. You can tell when someone is smiling by looking at their eyes, and if it was a candid photo then why would she be smiling. The child on the hip is weird for someone that is heavily pregnant, I would think its not advised to light heavy objects at that stage of the pregnancy. I agree with other comments that she looks skinnier in those pictures than she did on the Oprah interview. She looked more bloated in the face in the interview, but that could've just been temporary and in her last pregnancy I think she wasn't really heavy anywhere else.



I think she had fillers right before the interview. Made her face look puffy.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Is she using her bump to carry Archie?
> 
> View attachment 5063114


Her bump in these pics looks the same size as it was in those screenshots posted here in the chicken coop 'scene' from the OW sh*tshow of an iNtErViEw.  Weird. Surely there would be a difference in size by now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Aimee3 said:


> And what’s with the lunch box and back pack??? Is he in nursery school?  Where is she?  In her neck of the woods I didn’t think people walk unless they’re exercising. They live too far from anything not to have to take a car.  Why carry him at all?  He must be walking at 2 years old.  I’m confused by these pics.



Hard to say since it doesn't say where she actually is here... Montecito as a whole does have sidewalks so this could be post car ride walking somewhere.


----------



## gracekelly

Palace is 'calmer' without Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'kicking off
					

Speaking to The Mirror, a source claimed that one of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's main issues was their '[inability to understand how things worked.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




No kidding!  Harry understood perfectly how things worked, he just didn't like it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MM’s shoes look new, but I could be wrong.

Anyone know who this woman is?    never mind, I know.

_However, we’re told the Duke of Sussex wanted to return home to his heavily pregnant wife Meghan Markle — banned by doctors from joining him in the UK — and their son Archie. He flew back Tuesday on a commercial flight and headed back to his Montecito, Calif., home to be reunited with his family.

The royal family and the Annenberg family have a rich history together: Wallis’ father, Walter Annenberg, was the US ambassador to the UK under Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1974.

Wallis, 81, heads her family’s multibillion-dollar Annenberg Foundation. Her family’s namesake Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts is where Vanity Fair traditionally holds its glitzy Oscars party. She is also on the boards of USC, the LA County Museum of Art, and LA’s Museum of Contemporary Art._









						Prince Harry lunches with LA power player on Queen Elizabeth’s birthday
					

A source told us, “They sat outside, far from other people, and Harry came in wearing a mask.”




					pagesix.com
				




So, is this the mom walking the fussy kid while the dad is taking the power lunch?  She may be furious that he didn’t take the fussy kid out for a quick walk. Just a thought...


----------



## gracekelly

Kate Middleton borrowed the Queen's earrings for her birthday
					

The Duchess of Cambridge, 39, borrowed the silver jubilee diamond and pearl earrings from the monarch, 93, who first wore them to celebrate her silver jubilee in 1977.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Still pushing Kate and The Queen.  BP is on a full out offensive to squash anything coming from the Sussex.  Meghan can call the paps as much as she likes for pictures of her and Archie, as cute as they are, they won't mean a thing.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM’s shoes look new, but I could be wrong.
> 
> Anyone know who this woman is?    never mind, I know.
> 
> _However, we’re told the Duke of Sussex wanted to return home to his heavily pregnant wife Meghan Markle — banned by doctors from joining him in the UK — and their son Archie. He flew back Tuesday on a commercial flight and headed back to his Montecito, Calif., home to be reunited with his family.
> 
> The royal family and the Annenberg family have a rich history together: Wallis’ father, Walter Annenberg, was the US ambassador to the UK under Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1974.
> 
> Wallis, 81, heads her family’s multibillion-dollar Annenberg Foundation. Her family’s namesake Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts is where Vanity Fair traditionally holds its glitzy Oscars party. She is also on the boards of USC, the LA County Museum of Art, and LA’s Museum of Contemporary Art._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lunches with LA power player on Queen Elizabeth’s birthday
> 
> 
> A source told us, “They sat outside, far from other people, and Harry came in wearing a mask.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



That's interesting.... I didn't think the Annenbergs really cared about celebrities. They're definitely on another level of wealth and power.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM’s shoes look new, but I could be wrong.
> 
> Anyone know who this woman is?    never mind, I know.
> 
> _However, we’re told the Duke of Sussex wanted to return home to his heavily pregnant wife Meghan Markle — banned by doctors from joining him in the UK — and their son Archie. He flew back Tuesday on a commercial flight and headed back to his Montecito, Calif., home to be reunited with his family.
> 
> The royal family and the Annenberg family have a rich history together: Wallis’ father, Walter Annenberg, was the US ambassador to the UK under Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1974.
> 
> Wallis, 81, heads her family’s multibillion-dollar Annenberg Foundation. Her family’s namesake Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts is where Vanity Fair traditionally holds its glitzy Oscars party. She is also on the boards of USC, the LA County Museum of Art, and LA’s Museum of Contemporary Art._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lunches with LA power player on Queen Elizabeth’s birthday
> 
> 
> A source told us, “They sat outside, far from other people, and Harry came in wearing a mask.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Big money! It's good that she has 4 kids... 









						Wallis Annenberg - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Wallis, 81, heads her family’s multibillion-dollar Annenberg Foundation. Her family’s namesake Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts is where Vanity Fair traditionally holds its glitzy Oscars party. She is also on the boards of USC, the LA County Museum of Art, and LA’s Museum of Contemporary Art._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lunches with LA power player on Queen Elizabeth’s birthday
> 
> 
> A source told us, “They sat outside, far from other people, and Harry came in wearing a mask.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Maybe she's his new adoptive grandmother?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM’s shoes look new, but I could be wrong.
> 
> Anyone know who this woman is?    never mind, I know.
> 
> _However, we’re told the Duke of Sussex wanted to return home to his heavily pregnant wife Meghan Markle — banned by doctors from joining him in the UK — and their son Archie. He flew back Tuesday on a commercial flight and headed back to his Montecito, Calif., home to be reunited with his family.
> 
> The royal family and the Annenberg family have a rich history together: Wallis’ father, Walter Annenberg, was the US ambassador to the UK under Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1974.
> 
> Wallis, 81, heads her family’s multibillion-dollar Annenberg Foundation. Her family’s namesake Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts is where Vanity Fair traditionally holds its glitzy Oscars party. She is also on the boards of USC, the LA County Museum of Art, and LA’s Museum of Contemporary Art._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lunches with LA power player on Queen Elizabeth’s birthday
> 
> 
> A source told us, “They sat outside, far from other people, and Harry came in wearing a mask.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Wow!  Her face!  Meghan should take note of it!  This is what happens when you can't stop using the fillers.  Harry is obviously looking for money.  Haven't really heard about WA lately.  She is another generation. KWIM?


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> That's interesting.... I didn't think the Annenbergs really cared about celebrities. They're definitely on another level of wealth and power.


Back in the day this was the Ron and Nancy Reagan set.  I thought most of those people were dead.  They are wealthy people, but they have been eclipsed by the newer money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

People are getting creative with avoiding MM's name  



> Piper I am trying. I usually refer to her as MM but I am trying to get in the habit of using something that doesn't drive trend on SM. I will stop using H's full name too. I am sorta partial to *Spenderella* and her *Red Haired Fella*, myself!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe she's his new adoptive grandmother?


With the money and connections Annenberg has, the answer is likely yes. I wonder if he invited her to be a godmother (she is jewish though) of little DeeDee Oprah Philippine.


----------



## lalame

Wonder if this is why he skipped Granny's bday?


----------



## lalame

The more I think about him not making her birthday, though it was just 2 days away, the more I think he must be a d-bag. Your grandfather just passed away and you can't even stay for your grandmother's birthday TWO DAYS away? I hope this is not the case and I'm sorry if it offends anyone for me to say it... but it could be the last birthday he could spend with her. I mean what in the...


----------



## Chanbal

One more lesson from Lady C! I guess she didn't know about granny Annenberg...


----------



## EverSoElusive

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## octopus17

Allisonfaye said:


> Mood ring?


No, but I did have a work colleague in later years who had Mood earrings that were presents from her sons - it didn't surprise me tbh, she was very temperamental, and I'm being kind...


gracekelly said:


> Palace is 'calmer' without Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'kicking off
> 
> 
> Speaking to The Mirror, a source claimed that one of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's main issues was their '[inability to understand how things worked.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No kidding!  Harry understood perfectly how things worked, he just didn't like it.


I agree, and I think he gave minimal practical advice to Meghan tbh (which might be why she's left floundering and looking awkward in many situations). I don't think he had the wherewithal to integrate her into his family at all. That, plus any manipulation by her, has created a toxic situation.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> The more I think about him not making her birthday, though it was just 2 days away, the more I think he must be a d-bag. Your grandfather just passed away and you can't even stay for your grandmother's birthday TWO DAYS away? I hope this is not the case and I'm sorry if it offends anyone for me to say it... but it could be the last birthday he could spend with her. I mean what in the...


The more I think about his not hanging around for her birthday the more I think that he never intended to stay a minute longer than he did.  He managed to make it to a lunch with a woman he had never met before.  Things like this are set up well in advance.  He knew he had to get back to LA to see her.  I bet the only reason she agreed to it is because she had met TQ and PP somewhere along the line and she wished to convey her condolences to Harry.  Of course he wasn't interested in that.  He just wants to pick her pocket.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe QE arranged it for him??
This is Walter and Lenore, his second wife. Wallis is a daughter from his first marriage.
I need to read up on this family. I have forgotten most of whatever I knew.

WALTER ANNENBERG, with his wife and Queen Elisabeth II at the Royal Opera House in London for the premiere of "Sleeping Beauty", March 15, 1973. Courtesy: CSU Archives / Everett Collection


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe QE arranged it for him??
> Not certain if this is Wallis or someone else. I need to read up on this family. I have forgotten most of whatever I knew.
> 
> WALTER ANNENBERG, with his wife and Queen Elisabeth II at the Royal Opera House in London for the premiere of "Sleeping Beauty", March 15, 1973. Courtesy: CSU Archives / Everett Collection
> View attachment 5063219


All Harry's people  had to do is drop his name to WA for her to say yes.  The bigger question is will she ever agree to see him again lol!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I opened the article about the BRF not wanting to engage because of the leaks and nearly spit out my tea. Who hurt Omid? I'm emotionally jarred. Maybe even scarred.
> 
> View attachment 5063021


Looks like the eyebrows got pasted on a little off kilter this morning, left side higher.


----------



## Gourmetgal

If it is metal on metal then yes, they will both scratch and honestly, would not look good together.  But then I’m not a fan of the stacking trend.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

lalame said:


> The more I think about him not making her birthday, though it was just 2 days away, the more I think he must be a d-bag. Your grandfather just passed away and you can't even stay for your grandmother's birthday TWO DAYS away? I hope this is not the case and I'm sorry if it offends anyone for me to say it... but it could be the last birthday he could spend with her. I mean what in the...



I guess William and Charles are douchebags as well as they didn't hang around for her birthday either.


----------



## bag-mania

mdcx said:


> When I was that preg, my back was very delicate and would go out at any minute. No way could I lug 10-15kg of toddler on one hip, let alone resting them on my bump? Obviously a staged pap stroll pic and I am unconvinced about the authenticity of that bump.



Somewhere in Southern California there is a surrogate who sitting at home with her feet up, carrying baby Sussex.


----------



## csshopper

RachelCohen808 said:


> It does not make any sense If she could not fly because of the doctor's orders how can she carry a toddler on her baby bump? Doctors also warn against carrying your child and walking around when pregnant, only lift and hold on the hip for a short period of time. Seeing this makes me think that she actually never been pregnant as she does not have any idea how pregnant women behave. I would never carry my child around on my baby bump only on the hip even though I have been doing vinyasa yoga for years.


All you've said, plus it's just plain stupid and irresponsible. Boys Archie's age can be wiggle worms, look where his tennis shoed feet hang in relationship to her body. If she really is pregnant and there's a fetus in there, one accidental kick from a sturdy looking little boy could send pain through her that might cause her to lose her grip on him. Then the photographer would have an action shot of a falling, possibly screaming toddler, injured on the sidewalk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I guess William and Charles are douchebags as well as they didn't hang around for her birthday either.



IMO they all are.
It is only through zero effort of their own that they are where they are. The least they could do is be quiet, calm and live drama-free.

I do like royalty when it elevates us from everyday doldrums [not in a Disney way], such as PP’s funeral. I strongly dislike public displays of angst, from them or even celebs, especially during a pandemic.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

I see tin-foil hats are back in fashion.

Honestly....


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> All you've said, plus it's just plain stupid and irresponsible. Boys Archie's age can be wiggle worms, look where his tennis shoed feet hang in relationship to her body. If she really is pregnant and there's a fetus in there, one accidental kick from a sturdy looking little boy could send pain through her that might cause her to lose her grip on him. Then the photographer would have an action shot of a falling, possibly screaming toddler, injured on the sidewalk.



IMO this is the weirdly calmest 2 year old I’ve seen.  Almost creepy.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> If that wasn't the case and they weren't planning to leave from day one, then Harry did a horrible job explaining how things worked to her clearly and in a way that she fully understood and fully accepted before they married. I could see him being that clueless too. Maybe you should explain to your future wife that she'll need to learn the words to the national anthem and how to curtsy properly and wear a hat when the Queen tells you to wear a hat, though I think she could have figured this out on her own *if she was half the thorough hard worker we've been told she is.*


In my experience, people who have to tell others how hard they work generally have an inflated sense of their labour in life.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

xincinsin said:


> In my experience, people who have to tell others how hard they work generally have an inflated sense of their labour in life.


You mean how the entire Royal Family put out a list of their engagements over the year, or get PR for every event *they* attend? Like that?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Cornflower Blue said:


> Mr CB said that the first thing she'd do would be to get pregnant asap after the marriage



Sorry but who is CB?    Lot of us thought it. We saw through M!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM’s shoes look new, but I could be wrong.
> 
> Anyone know who this woman is?    never mind, I know.
> 
> _However, we’re told the Duke of Sussex wanted to return home to his heavily pregnant wife Meghan Markle — banned by doctors from joining him in the UK — and their son Archie. He flew back Tuesday on a commercial flight and headed back to his Montecito, Calif., home to be reunited with his family.
> 
> The royal family and the Annenberg family have a rich history together: Wallis’ father, Walter Annenberg, was the US ambassador to the UK under Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1974.
> 
> Wallis, 81, heads her family’s multibillion-dollar Annenberg Foundation. Her family’s namesake Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts is where Vanity Fair traditionally holds its glitzy Oscars party. She is also on the boards of USC, the LA County Museum of Art, and LA’s Museum of Contemporary Art._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lunches with LA power player on Queen Elizabeth’s birthday
> 
> 
> A source told us, “They sat outside, far from other people, and Harry came in wearing a mask.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, is this the mom walking the fussy kid while the dad is taking the power lunch?  She may be furious that he didn’t take the fussy kid out for a quick walk. Just a thought...



Wonder if Harry was schmoozing for a big donation to Archewell. This is what Harry has come to, trying to charm an old lady out of a few million.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The more I think about his not hanging around for her birthday the more I think that he never intended to stay a minute longer than he did.  He managed to make it to a lunch with a woman he had never met before.  Things like this are set up well in advance.  He knew he had to get back to LA to see her.  I bet the only reason she agreed to it is because she had met TQ and PP somewhere along the line and she wished to convey her condolences to Harry.  Of course he wasn't interested in that.  He just wants to pick her pocket.



She’s a smart and savvy lady. By her own admission, her greatest strength is her ability to read people.
Lots of luck, big H.


----------



## Annawakes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I opened the article about the BRF not wanting to engage because of the leaks and nearly spit out my tea. Who hurt Omid? I'm emotionally jarred. Maybe even scarred.
> 
> View attachment 5063021


Even his nostrils are lopsided.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

*Prince Harry says he’ll continue Philip’s ‘legacy’ in World Earth Day tribute*








Prince Harry has vowed to continue Prince Philip’s legacy in a tribute to his late grandfather on World Earth Day. 

The Duke of Sussex narrated a video about Africa named ‘Hope Starts Here’ for the annual environmental protection event on Thursday. He called the Duke of Edinburgh ‘a conservation champion’ in an accompanying statement that pledged his ‘dedication to our environment and collective well-being’. 

The royal, who is currently expecting his second child with wife Meghan Markle, said: ‘As we now begin to move towards an era of global recovery and regeneration, it’s critical that we continue to look at the strengthening and protecting of biodiversity, not just as a value we hold – but as a responsibility that is vital to our way of life.


‘On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy. ‘This year especially, I join the incredible African Parks team and communities around the world in shared dedication to our environment and collective well-being.’


He spent three months working on projects in Namibia, Tanzania, South Africa and Botswana after leaving the Army in 2015. 

The Duke camped out under the stars with the Duchess of Sussex on a safari trip in Botswana, weeks after meeting her in 2016.

Prince Philip was known for his support for wildlife conservation, serving as President of the World Wide Fund for Nature for 15 years. Harry’s tribute comes as he returns to LA following the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral on Saturday.














						Prince Harry says he'll continue Philip's 'legacy' in World Earth Day tribute
					

'On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy.'




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Aimee3

“The Duke camped out under the stars with the Duchess of Sussex on a safari trip in Botswana, weeks after meeting her in 2016.”
Is that where/when Harry’s wife-to-be peed in the woods???


----------



## CarryOn2020

FreeSpirit71 said:


> *Prince Harry says he’ll continue Philip’s ‘legacy’ in World Earth Day tribute*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has vowed to continue Prince Philip’s legacy in a tribute to his late grandfather on World Earth Day.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex narrated a video about Africa named ‘Hope Starts Here’ for the annual environmental protection event on Thursday. He called the Duke of Edinburgh ‘a conservation champion’ in an accompanying statement that pledged his ‘dedication to our environment and collective well-being’.
> 
> The royal, who is currently expecting his second child with wife Meghan Markle, said: ‘As we now begin to move towards an era of global recovery and regeneration, it’s critical that we continue to look at the strengthening and protecting of biodiversity, not just as a value we hold – but as a responsibility that is vital to our way of life.
> 
> 
> ‘On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy. ‘This year especially, I join the incredible African Parks team and communities around the world in shared dedication to our environment and collective well-being.’
> 
> 
> He spent three months working on projects in Namibia, Tanzania, South Africa and Botswana after leaving the Army in 2015.
> 
> The Duke camped out under the stars with the Duchess of Sussex on a safari trip in Botswana, weeks after meeting her in 2016.
> 
> Prince Philip was known for his support for wildlife conservation, serving as President of the World Wide Fund for Nature for 15 years. Harry’s tribute comes as he returns to LA following the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he'll continue Philip's 'legacy' in World Earth Day tribute
> 
> 
> 'On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk




Yes, this was posted several pages ago.  I know, it is difficult to keep up.  Fact is H is not a working Royal, so the ‘people‘ page is incorrect. Google will supply those wishing to donate with a thorough list of outstanding organizations. IMO if he is involved as president, it is very likely an ineffective group. A red flag on any organization is an outdated website.


----------



## xincinsin

FreeSpirit71 said:


> You mean how the entire Royal Family put out a list of their engagements over the year, or get PR for every event *they* attend? Like that?


Nope, that's part and parcel of life as a public figure. 

It's the people who talk about how hard they work with that undercurrent of "and so I deserve praise/sympathy/a raise/promotion/gratitude". The narc I worked with used to pause now and then when the office was too quiet for him, breathe a gusty tornado of pent up frustration and tell all of us about how hard his life was, so many projects, how he needs a break etc etc. It was an open office. We knew what each other was doing. He was just having a pity fest. Like MM, he kept wanting people to ask him how he was so that he could moan.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this is the weirdly calmest 2 year old I’ve seen.  Almost creepy.


Maybe she gave him a witch's brew before leaving made with herbs from
her garden.


----------



## Annawakes

I am 99.99% sure that pic of MM carrying Archie is staged, for two reasons:

1. It looks to me like Archie is sitting on her forearm, not her hip.  Her hips are lower than where he is sitting.  Normally when you carry a child on your hip, the top of their head or face is around “kissing level”, and his head is way higher than hers.  So it doesn’t seem to me he is on her hip, just sitting on her forearm.  Which, must be made of steel for a big boy of his size and weight.

2.  Is she right handed or left handed?  I’m right handed and I never, ever carried my child with my left arm.  Always on my right because it’s my stronger arm.  I cannot imagine trying to carry my child on my left arm, while also being “heavily pregnant”.  It’s completely not feasible.  That’s why I think she had this pic arranged and only briefly, very briefly, but for a few seconds, had him sitting precariously on her left, non-dominant forearm, assuming she is right-handed.  

(re-attaching the page six photo here for reference purposes)

I’m not sure I totally believe the moonbump theories.  She does look thinner here but I think her face was puffy for the interview because of Botox or fillers or whatever she’s doing.


----------



## Annawakes

Oh yeah, and she is definitely grinning from ear to ear under that mask.  You can see it around her eyes.


----------



## Annawakes

Oh, and as someone else said, there is zero, but zero, reason why she would even *have* to carry him.  He can walk!!! At that age!!!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s a smart and savvy lady. By her own admission, her greatest strength is her ability to read people.
> Lots of luck, big H.




I've been to the Annenberg Space for Photography a few times (before COVID), it's a great place. She is obviously a very smart woman, but the older we get, the more trusting we become (not always). So let's hope she will not fall for falsehoods...

Also, it's not very thoughtful to take an older lady for lunch immediately after an internationally trip. He should self-quarantine for a few days and then take a COVID test before engaging in this type of social events.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> “The Duke camped out under the stars with the Duchess of Sussex on a safari trip in Botswana, weeks after meeting her in 2016.”
> *Is that where/when Harry’s wife-to-be peed in the woods???*



Yes, that is where the magic happened.


----------



## bag-mania

Gag. More flowery PR being pumped out, we get to hear how supportive Meghan was while Harry was away. Translation: she called him several times every day. 

*How Meghan Markle Tried To Calm Prince Harry’s Worries About Her During His UK Trip*
*Amid a difficult time and trip, Harry “didn’t want to leave Meghan and Archie alone.”*

Prince Harry is back in Californianow; he returned Tuesday after spending a week in England for his grandfather Prince Philip’s funeral. His wife Meghan Markle was unable to travel with him, as her doctor did not clear her to flyso late into her pregnancy. This week, People got a little more detail about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s dynamic during the trip—and just how supportive Meghan was of Harry from afar.

“Meghan and Harry have been in touch every day,” a source said of Harry’s time away. “She knows the trip to England has been difficult for Harry. He didn’t want to leave Meghan and Archie alone. Meghan has insisted to him every day though that they are fine. She hasn’t wanted him to worry.”

Meghan and the couple’s nearly two-year-old son Archie were also in contact with the Queen, People’s source revealed: “Meghan spoke with Harry before his grandfather’s funeral. Meghan and Archie also spoke with the Queen earlier this week.”

Us Weekly had similar intel about Harry and Meghan’s correspondence while he was away. A source told the outlet on April 12, “He’s already really missing Meghan and Archie and has been FaceTiming them every day to check in. He actually speaks to Meghan a few times a day because he worries [about] leaving her when she’s so far along in her pregnancy.”

Harper’s Bazaar reported yesterday that British tabloid reports that Harry made great strides with his brother Prince William and father Prince Charles while in the UK weren’t accurate. Harry’s visit was the first time he had been back to the UK since his and Meghan’s bombshell-filled Oprah interview aired in March, where they addressed why the royal family’s treatment led them to ultimately step back from their senior royal family roles permanently.

A source close to Harry told Harper’s Bazaar that respecting Philip was the focus of the trip, not brokering peace. “This trip was to honor the life of his grandfather and support his grandmother and relatives,” the source said. “It was very much a family-focused period of time. Saturday broke the ice for future conversations but outstanding issues have not been addressed at any great length. The family simply put their issues to one side to focus on what mattered.”



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> I am 99.99% sure that pic of MM carrying Archie is staged, for two reasons:
> 
> 1. It looks to me like Archie is sitting on her forearm, not her hip.  Her hips are lower than where he is sitting.  Normally when you carry a child on your hip, the top of their head or face is around “kissing level”, and his head is way higher than hers.  So it doesn’t seem to me he is on her hip, just sitting on her forearm.  Which, must be made of steel for a big boy of his size and weight.
> 
> 2.  Is she right handed or left handed?  I’m right handed and I never, ever carried my child with my left arm.  Always on my right because it’s my stronger arm.  I cannot imagine trying to carry my child on my left arm, while also being “heavily pregnant”.  It’s completely not feasible.  That’s why I think she had this pic arranged and only briefly, very briefly, but for a few seconds, had him sitting precariously on her left, non-dominant forearm, assuming she is right-handed.
> 
> (re-attaching the page six photo here for reference purposes)
> 
> I’m not sure I totally believe the moonbump theories.  She does look thinner here but I think her face was puffy for the interview because of Botox or fillers or whatever she’s doing.


ITA the pic looks weird and makes me wonder if it was photoshopped. What if a pic was taken of someone else holding Archie in that position and then Archie was photoshopped on a pic of MM in the same position? Anything is possible with the heavily pregnant one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

I somehow don’t think this happened. If it was ‘private’ I’m sure the Queen didn’t tell them and the rest of the family would have had someone else in the room so that ‘recollections wouldn’t vary’.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> LOL my parents are visiting and last night my poor father happened to ask what exactly is going on with Harry and his wife?  My response was I can't stand MM.  They made the mistake of asking me why and were treated to a hour long soliloquy on all of MM's horrible attributes.  They listened politely, but I could tell by their glazed eyes about 15 minutes in, they really didn't care about MM or H


DS dismissed her in one line: Why are you reading about that drama queen? 
And DS is a pretty woke guy who lives online.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5063293
> 
> I somehow don’t think this happened. If it was ‘private’ I’m sure the Queen didn’t tell them and the rest of the family would have had someone else in the room so that ‘recollections wouldn’t vary’.


OT but I am currently disappointed in the Independent. An Indonesian submarine went missing on 21 April. The Independent ran the story with the date 12 April appearing in the headline & in the body text. Do they have no one to proofread now?








						Indonesia in frantic search for lost submarine with 53 people on board
					

Contact with the vessel was lost at 4:30 am on 12 April




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## mdcx

Regards Wallis Annenberg - theres a very long history of wealthy Americans exchanging cash for proximity to aristocratic titles. See all those Dollar Princesses of yesteryear. The ultimate status symbol is hobnobbing with royalty etc.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I guess William and Charles are douchebags as well as they didn't hang around for her birthday either.



I didn't know that... well, if it's not a big deal in their family then it is what it is.  Were they all on engagements elsewhere?


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is slightly sad, isn't it. You own property the size of a small village, choose to walk around the streets so paps can find you, yet they just don't want to.



not long before she runs into KK in some random parking lot


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## Chanbal

mdcx said:


> Regards Wallis Annenberg - theres a very long history of wealthy Americans exchanging cash for proximity to aristocratic titles. See all those Dollar Princesses of yesteryear. The ultimate status symbol is hobnobbing with royalty etc.



Then better stay on the side of the queen, she is the one that gives titles...   

I don't think Annenberg would care about titles. If she saw Oprah's interview and the photo-ops/news released by MM's PR machine, she shouldn't be impressed with the Harkles. She was likely bored and curious, and decided to accept H's invitation...  She should know that it's her money that got the invitation.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


>




This doesn't really speak to whether or not M staged them though. Celebrities tip off paps all the time for "candids" - they're not the ones paying for them. The publications buy them and release them whenever, but it's like a win-win-win situation for all involved. 

If she wasn't involved at all, we should all be seeing news of a lawsuit pretty soon.


----------



## Chanbal

This person makes a valid point about the shoes...


----------



## lalame

I don't get the fuss about the shoes... what's wrong with those shoes?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> This doesn't really speak to whether or not M staged them though. Celebrities tip off paps all the time for "candids" - they're not the ones paying for them. The publications buy them and release them whenever, but it's like a win-win-win situation for all involved.
> 
> If she wasn't involved at all, we should all be seeing news of a lawsuit pretty soon.



‘Right. Look how long we have gone with no pap photos, none. Then. On QE’s birthday, she shows up. Same day hubs is lunching with WA. Voila, pap photo taken. My oh my, the coinky-dinks are startling. Guese the universe and The harkies were in sync?


----------



## Lodpah

FreeSpirit71 said:


> *Prince Harry says he’ll continue Philip’s ‘legacy’ in World Earth Day tribute*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has vowed to continue Prince Philip’s legacy in a tribute to his late grandfather on World Earth Day.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex narrated a video about Africa named ‘Hope Starts Here’ for the annual environmental protection event on Thursday. He called the Duke of Edinburgh ‘a conservation champion’ in an accompanying statement that pledged his ‘dedication to our environment and collective well-being’.
> 
> 
> 
> nice
> 
> The royal, who is currently expecting his second child with wife Meghan Markle, said: ‘As we now begin to move towards an era of global recovery and regeneration, it’s critical that we continue to look at the strengthening and protecting of biodiversity, not just as a value we hold – but as a responsibility that is vital to our way of life.
> 
> 
> ‘On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy. ‘This year especially, I join the incredible African Parks team and communities around the world in shared dedication to our environment and collective well-being.’
> 
> 
> He spent three months working on projects in Namibia, Tanzania, South Africa and Botswana after leaving the Army in 2015.
> 
> The Duke camped out under the stars with the Duchess of Sussex on a safari trip in Botswana, weeks after meeting her in 2016.
> 
> Prince Philip was known for his support for wildlife conservation, serving as President of the World Wide Fund for Nature for 15 years. Harry’s tribute comes as he returns to LA following the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he'll continue Philip's 'legacy' in World Earth Day tribute
> 
> 
> 'On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> This doesn't really speak to whether or not M staged them though. Celebrities tip off paps all the time for "candids" - they're not the ones paying for them. The publications buy them and release them whenever, but it's like a win-win-win situation for all involved.
> 
> *If she wasn't involved at all, we should all be seeing news of a lawsuit pretty soon.*


If not involved, she will sue.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mdcx said:


> Regards Wallis Annenberg - theres a very long history of wealthy Americans exchanging cash for proximity to aristocratic titles. See all those Dollar Princesses of yesteryear. The ultimate status symbol is hobnobbing with royalty etc.



Just watch the interview. There is no indication WA cares one bit about titles or people who have them. She seems to care about what wealthy do with their money, how charitable are they. Charitable as in their money and time make a difference, not charitable in selling their names. Big difference.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yes!




According to the original article, the guy who leaked the photos may well get fired. He said it would be worth it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Yes, that is where the magic happened.


I think more than that happened. OKAY slap me!


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> I don't get the fuss about the shoes... what's wrong with those shoes?


Slides are tricky to walk in, even without carrying a ~30-40 pound toddler and being "heavily pregnant." She could slip easily in those shoes.


----------



## lalame

I feel like someone of WA's money and connections would be able to go straight to the source if they wanted a title. Harry is like new money celebrity level of access... what strings could he really pull for you with the BRF these days? He couldn't even get them to pay for his security.


----------



## lalame

redney said:


> Slides are tricky to walk in, even without carrying a ~30-40 pound toddler and being "heavily pregnant." She could slip easily in those shoes.



That's weird, I've seen mommy sites like What to Expect and the Bump recommend all sorts of shoes like that for moms. Sometimes the criticism of everything she does is so picky. I find 4" Louboutins extremely ill advised for women of any condition but don't feel the need to call them out on it. I guess that's why I'm not in the public eye... I would hate it and i'm sure I'd be criticised for every single thing.


----------



## Chanbal

How thoughtful of Ginger and wife!




_A source told US Weekly that the Duke of Sussex left a present on behalf of him and his wife.

They said: “Prince Harry got to say goodbye to the Queen before her birthday and he left her a gift and card from him and Meghan.”

The card reportedly had a message honouring Her Majesty’s legacy but the birthday gift is unknown._









						Prince Harry and Meghan left ‘gift and card’ for Queen's birthday
					

PRINCE HARRY left the Queen a gift and card for her birthday before he returned back to the US, according to a source.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> That's weird, I've seen mommy sites like What to Expect and the Bump recommend all sorts of shoes like that for moms. Sometimes the criticism of everything she does is so picky. I find 4" Louboutins extremely ill advised for women of any condition but don't feel the need to call them out on it. I guess that's why I'm not in the public eye... I would hate it and i'm sure I'd be criticised for every single thing.


When I was pregnant there's no way I'd opt for slippery slides even without a toddler in tow. You feel off balance at times anyway. That, plus smooth slippery soles and it's easy for feet to slip out of that style. YMMV


----------



## CarryOn2020

5 days? That’s all it takes to know someone?  His ‘mentors’, advisors, must really dislike him. No way I would advise my child to spend 5 days alone with a person, to get to know them.  Wrong on so many levels. 

_In an interview after their engagement, Harry said: "I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana.

“We camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for *five days *out there, which was absolutely fantastic.

"So then we were really by ourselves, which was crucial to me to make sure that *we had a chance to know each other."*_


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> One more lesson from Lady C! I guess she didn't know about granny Annenberg...



I appreciate watching through your links because there are no ads!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> 5 days? That’s all it takes to know someone?  His ‘mentors’, advisors, must really dislike him. No way I would advise my child to spend 5 days alone with a person, to get to know them.  Wrong on so many levels.
> 
> _In an interview after their engagement, Harry said: "I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana.
> 
> “We camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for *five days *out there, which was absolutely fantastic.
> 
> "So then we were really by ourselves, which was crucial to me to make sure that *we had a chance to know each other."*_


 Alone with your gf under the stars and your security detail paid for by your daddy.  I really don't want to know more.


----------



## tiktok

Annawakes said:


> I am 99.99% sure that pic of MM carrying Archie is staged, for two reasons:
> 
> 1. It looks to me like Archie is sitting on her forearm, not her hip.  Her hips are lower than where he is sitting.  Normally when you carry a child on your hip, the top of their head or face is around “kissing level”, and his head is way higher than hers.  So it doesn’t seem to me he is on her hip, just sitting on her forearm.  Which, must be made of steel for a big boy of his size and weight.
> 
> 2.  Is she right handed or left handed?  I’m right handed and I never, ever carried my child with my left arm.  Always on my right because it’s my stronger arm.  I cannot imagine trying to carry my child on my left arm, while also being “heavily pregnant”.  It’s completely not feasible.  That’s why I think she had this pic arranged and only briefly, very briefly, but for a few seconds, had him sitting precariously on her left, non-dominant forearm, assuming she is right-handed.
> 
> (re-attaching the page six photo here for reference purposes)
> 
> I’m not sure I totally believe the moonbump theories.  She does look thinner here but I think her face was puffy for the interview because of Botox or fillers or whatever she’s doing.



Re 2: That’s a very good observation. She’s right handed, just google “Meghan Markle signing” and you’ll see in photos. 
I always carry kids with my dominant arm as well, can’t imagine doing otherwise, it would feel very awkward. Does anyone do this differently?


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> I’m confused too! I don’t have kids but I think carrying a kid with his huge backpack, while heavily pregnant would throw my centre of gravity way off.
> 
> And is he off to daycare? How very plebeian.


It kind of reminds me of Angelina Jolie when her kids were younger.  I was always amazed she'd carry one child in each scrawny arm with all her veins popping, as if under strain.  They were quite big too!  I was always impressed, because every time my two year old would beg me to pick her up, I'd be absolutely winded.  And my daughter was a light weight!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Back in the day this was the Ron and Nancy Reagan set.  I thought most of those people were dead.  They are wealthy people, but they have been eclipsed by the newer money.


Yes, I believe Wallis' (LOL can't believe she's named that!) parents were good friends of the Reagans.  They have a huge estate in Rancho Mirage, CA, where presidents used to go and stay.  Her parents gave $125 million to USC and UPenn each, if I recall correctly.  Insanely wealthy.


----------



## purseinsanity

tiktok said:


> Re 2: That’s a very good observation. She’s right handed, just google “Meghan Markle signing” and you’ll see in photos.
> I always carry kids with my dominant arm as well, can’t imagine doing otherwise, it would feel very awkward. Does anyone do this differently?


I must admit I do.  I'm right handed, but I do quite a bit with my left.  For example, I can't carry a shoulder bag on my right shoulder for the life of me...it'll always slip off, whereas my left shoulder never has that problem.  Even my Birkins have to go on my left or I bang them on every wall with my right.  The only exception is I occasionally carry clutches with my right hand.  I also always carried my children with my left arm as well, whether they were babies tucked into my left arm, or toddlers on my left hip. 

Egads, am I actually defending Meg?  I need to go take some aspirin and go lie down.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this is the weirdly calmest 2 year old I’ve seen.  Almost creepy.


Maybe this is Archie's stunt double?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Genie27 said:


> But then it wouldn’t be about her, would it? That just won’t do. Kid is unfortunately an accessory, just as much as the lunchpack and teeny tiny gold jewelry.


Exactly, if Archie was walking beside her, the majority of the photo(s) would be of him and her legs. And that wouldn't do for our Meghan now would it?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> 5 days? That’s all it takes to know someone?  His ‘mentors’, advisors, must really dislike him. No way I would advise my child to spend 5 days alone with a person, to get to know them.  Wrong on so many levels.
> 
> _In an interview after their engagement, Harry said: "I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana.
> 
> “We camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for *five days *out there, which was absolutely fantastic.
> 
> "So then we were really by ourselves, which was crucial to me to make sure that *we had a chance to know each other."*_


I would take at least a fortnight.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I must admit I do.  I'm right handed, but I do quite a bit with my left.  For example, I can't carry a shoulder bag on my right shoulder for the life of me...it'll always slip off, whereas my left shoulder never has that problem.  Even my Birkins have to go on my left or I bang them on every wall with my right.  The only exception is I occasionally carry clutches with my right hand.  I also always carried my children with my left arm as well, whether they were babies tucked into my left arm, or toddlers on my left hip.
> 
> Egads, am I actually defending Meg?  I need to go take some aspirin and go lie down.



lol you're not defending Meghan. You're just sharing something about yourself. I hate when things suddenly fall out of favor just because Meghan happens to do it/wear it/say it. I swear we were ready to cancel the color green because M wore a dress that one time. I'm absolutely going to avoid this thread if I ever see M photographed wearing something I own.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, I believe Wallis' (LOL can't believe she's named that!) parents were good friends of the Reagans.  They have a huge estate in Rancho Mirage, CA, where presidents used to go and stay.  Her parents gave $125 million to USC and UPenn each, if I recall correctly.  Insanely wealthy.



That's an understatement! I remember when this happened... they gave $365m to a few schools, including $120m to USC, and that was in cash (not spread out over several years). In 1993 dollars.  They don't need anything from Harry they couldn't get themselves so I'm thinking it might be him making an ask.


----------



## zen1965

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, this was posted several pages ago.  I know, it is difficult to keep up.  Fact is H is not a working Royal, so the ‘people‘ page is incorrect. Google will supply those wishing to donate with a thorough list of outstanding organizations. IMO if he is involved as president, it is very likely an ineffective group. A red flag on any organization is an outdated website.


I live in a central African country with numerous national parks and I can assure you that Afrikan Parks is a highly  respected international NGO. JCMH most likely acts as a figurehead.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Annawakes said:


> Oh, and as someone else said, there is zero, but zero, reason why she would even *have* to carry him.  He can walk!!! At that age!!!


She’s carrying him so her face is in the frame.  Only reason.


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just watch the interview. There is no indication WA cares one bit about titles or people who have them. She seems to care about what wealthy do with their money, how charitable are they. Charitable as in their money and time make a difference, not charitable in selling their names. Big difference.


Interesting points, I can't really imagine any thinking person being drawn in by M&H's claims that they want to be charitable, there seems to be little evidence of them parting with actual cash but as another poster said perhaps she is just testing the waters, curious etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Sorry but who is CB?   Lot of us thought it. We saw through M!



You know the drill, I'm answering as I go along, so someone else might have said it. Mr. Cornflower Blue (OP's husband).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


> *Prince Harry says he’ll continue Philip’s ‘legacy’ in World Earth Day tribute*



Funny how he couldn't go see his dying grandfather, but has no problems claiming him when he thinks it furthers his career.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> The more I think about him not making her birthday, though it was just 2 days away, the more I think he must be a d-bag. Your grandfather just passed away and you can't even stay for your grandmother's birthday TWO DAYS away? I hope this is not the case and I'm sorry if it offends anyone for me to say it... but it could be the last birthday he could spend with her. I mean what in the...



I don't think it was his choice TBF, KWIM?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe QE arranged it for him??
> This is Walter and Lenore, his second wife. Wallis is a daughter from his first marriage.
> I need to read up on this family. I have forgotten most of whatever I knew.
> 
> WALTER ANNENBERG, with his wife and Queen Elisabeth II at the Royal Opera House in London for the premiere of "Sleeping Beauty", March 15, 1973. Courtesy: CSU Archives / Everett Collection
> View attachment 5063219



Well done for finding the pic

May explain why M was not present


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Somewhere in Southern California there is a surrogate who sitting at home with her feet up, carrying baby Sussex.



If there is, I hope she's getting well paid too.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Wonder if Harry was schmoozing for a big donation to Archewell. This is what Harry has come to, *trying to charm an old lady out of a few million.*



I thought that was one of the only things he was apparently ever good at (beyond playing dress-up)


----------



## papertiger

FreeSpirit71 said:


> *Prince Harry says he’ll continue Philip’s ‘legacy’ in World Earth Day tribute*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has vowed to continue Prince Philip’s legacy in a tribute to his late grandfather on World Earth Day.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex narrated a video about Africa named ‘Hope Starts Here’ for the annual environmental protection event on Thursday. He called the Duke of Edinburgh ‘a conservation champion’ in an accompanying statement that pledged his ‘dedication to our environment and collective well-being’.
> 
> The royal, who is currently expecting his second child with wife Meghan Markle, said: ‘As we now begin to move towards an era of global recovery and regeneration, it’s critical that we continue to look at the strengthening and protecting of biodiversity, not just as a value we hold – but as a responsibility that is vital to our way of life.
> 
> 
> ‘On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy. ‘This year especially, I join the incredible African Parks team and communities around the world in shared dedication to our environment and collective well-being.’
> 
> 
> He spent three months working on projects in Namibia, Tanzania, South Africa and Botswana after leaving the Army in 2015.
> 
> The Duke camped out under the stars with the Duchess of Sussex on a safari trip in Botswana, weeks after meeting her in 2016.
> 
> Prince Philip was known for his support for wildlife conservation, serving as President of the World Wide Fund for Nature for 15 years. Harry’s tribute comes as he returns to LA following the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he'll continue Philip's 'legacy' in World Earth Day tribute
> 
> 
> 'On this Earth Day, I reflect on the generations of conservation champions, including my late grandfather, and feel proud and energised to continue doing my part in this legacy.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk




At least I agree with the cause - if not H's toxic involvement.

That article is all about them_ again_, not at all about the flora and fauna of the Earth


----------



## JY89

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funny how he couldn't go see his dying grandfather, but has no problems claiming him when he thinks it furthers his career.



Yet another source of income for him and the disgusting m to milk from. Will not be surprise at all that anything related to this will appear on Netflix or one of his talk show eventually $$$$$$$$$$


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5063293
> 
> I somehow don’t think this happened. If it was ‘private’ I’m sure the Queen didn’t tell them and the rest of the family would have had someone else in the room so that ‘recollections wouldn’t vary’.



Shame on the Independent. Using that old photo is totally disrespectful. Suggesting QEII's currently wearing a bright colour and was all smiles right now with all that happened/going on and all is amicable between them. 

More like he hammered twice on the door of her aide. Just cover restrictions would have kept them apart. They must really think we're stupid. 

When exactly did she have time to see him in person twice while he was 'isolating' at Frogmore?

PR assault is obviously full-on.


----------



## JY89

Chanbal said:


> How thoughtful of Ginger and wife!
> 
> View attachment 5063381
> 
> 
> _A source told US Weekly that the Duke of Sussex left a present on behalf of him and his wife.
> 
> They said: “Prince Harry got to say goodbye to the Queen before her birthday and he left her a gift and card from him and Meghan.”
> 
> The card reportedly had a message honouring Her Majesty’s legacy but the birthday gift is unknown._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan left ‘gift and card’ for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY left the Queen a gift and card for her birthday before he returned back to the US, according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Haven’t they present the “best” gift to the queen on the tell all interview already? Just go away really. Shameless couple of the century


----------



## papertiger

mdcx said:


> Regards Wallis Annenberg - theres a very long history of wealthy Americans exchanging cash for proximity to aristocratic titles. See all those Dollar Princesses of yesteryear. The ultimate status symbol is hobnobbing with royalty etc.



He can't grant Royal anything though and Duchess has already been taken.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I don't get the fuss about the shoes... what's wrong with those shoes?



They're not her size for a start so they're falling off. 

I think it depends on the person's foot. I wouldn't risk carry my cat wearing flat mules because my instep pushes me out of them, my sister on the other hand could walk around all day. They'd have to fit her though.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> That's weird, I've seen mommy sites like What to Expect and the Bump recommend all sorts of shoes like that for moms. Sometimes the criticism of everything she does is so picky. I find 4" Louboutins extremely ill advised for women of any condition but don't feel the need to call them out on it. I guess that's why I'm not in the public eye... I would hate it and i'm sure I'd be criticised for every single thing.



...but it is curious

High heels when pregnant, car to party/meet&greet, making an effort and risking some discomfort to look glamorous is one thing.

Deciding to carry a heavy toddler whilst HEAVILY pregnant, wearing what look like new, ill-fitting slides is the kinda thing accidents are made of.

If we can criticise the choice of her third-time around full-on white wedding dress, I think it's fair to comment on M's choice of footwear as she's carrying "the seventh in-line" and potentially/possibly the eighth.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I appreciate watching through your links because there are no ads!



Don't say that too loudly  YT are probably working on how to legally make that work as we type.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> How thoughtful of Ginger and wife!
> 
> View attachment 5063381
> 
> 
> _A source told US Weekly that the Duke of Sussex left a present on behalf of him and his wife.
> 
> They said: “Prince Harry got to say goodbye to the Queen before her birthday and he left her a gift and card from him and Meghan.”
> 
> The card reportedly had a message honouring Her Majesty’s legacy but the birthday gift is unknown._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan left ‘gift and card’ for Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY left the Queen a gift and card for her birthday before he returned back to the US, according to a source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Can you believe they put this out????  

I'm guessing a book voucher. 

Perhaps she can buy a copy of _Finding Fantasy _from Amazon - she may have to chip-in from the Privy Purse since they probably went for the lowest denomination possible.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe this is Archie's stunt double?



Maybe it's a life-size doll?

Do they do _those_ now? Moondolls? Sundolls? 

If not, I can see a gap in the market.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, if Archie was walking beside her, the majority of the photo(s) would be of him and her legs. And that wouldn't do for our Meghan now would it?



You got it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So it's 11 a.m. on a Friday morning and I just turned in the last of my freelance assignments and could basically start the weekend early. Seeing I often work through the weekends I grab what I can haha. I wonder if I should do a H & M detox, too!


----------



## JY89

Prince Harry talks with royals stall due to 'endless leaks from the Sussex side'
					

Since Prince Harry returned to California a number of comments from his time there have emerged including private details suggesting issues between senior royals 'have not been addressed'




					www.dailystar.co.uk
				




Despicable Meghan and her despicable moves

Not even a moment of peace for the RF even after PP passing. Throughout the entire time, this despicable M just can’t stop getting herself into the spotlight. She just need that attention so badly doesn’t she? Yea we can all see that the struggle is real


----------



## JY89




----------



## xincinsin

tiktok said:


> Re 2: That’s a very good observation. She’s right handed, just google “Meghan Markle signing” and you’ll see in photos.
> I always carry kids with my dominant arm as well, can’t imagine doing otherwise, it would feel very awkward. Does anyone do this differently?


I'm right-handed. I carried with my left arm because I needed to use my right hand to open the door, turn the key, etc. But for a walk, I'd definitely have used a baby sling, especially if I had a backpack and lunchbag. In this case, I'd have let the kid walk. I was pregnant with #2 when #1 was about 1.5yo. No way I could have carried #1 during the 3rd trimester. I'm voting for staged photo.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> They're not her size for a start so they're falling off.
> 
> I think it depends on the person's foot. I wouldn't risk carry my cat wearing flat mules because my instep pushes me out of them, my sister on the other hand could walk around all day. They'd have to fit her though.


There were articles about her footwear early on. Said she always wears shoes that are too big. But the examples shown were heels. Maybe she thought the same applied to slip-ons.








						Why Meghan Markle Always Wears Shoes That Are Too Big for Her
					

The reason is so relatable.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> There were articles about her footwear early on. Said she always wears shoes that are too big. But the examples shown were heels. Maybe she thought the same applied to slip-ons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle Always Wears Shoes That Are Too Big for Her
> 
> 
> The reason is so relatable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



Even more curious as the slip-ons look too small.

All I can think, non-article included as often shoes that are too big also give you blisters from friction, is that her shoes are freebies


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Even more curious as the slip-ons look too small.
> 
> All I can think, non-article included as often shoes that are too big also give you blisters from friction, is that her shoes are freebies


Now that there are no palace aides looking at what gets delivered, she can have all the freebies she wants.


----------



## justwatchin

.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> It would probably go like this: and then the doctor took Harry's drippings from his porno viewing, and using a dropper, oh so gently placed some on my eggs in the petri dish.  Since my eggs are scrambled, we had another dish with the donor's eggs.  The drippings seemed to like the donor best.  Thank goodness she looks so much like me!


I thought this a Yorkshire recipe for scrambled eggs in dripping for a second. 

I mean isn’t it ironic there’s a load of taboo about fertility problems due to age and a lot of misogynistic ideas that infertile women, especially, are unnatural that H&M could be addressing but oddly enough they don’t want to touch an actual taboo with a ten foot pole? 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I opened the article about the BRF not wanting to engage because of the leaks and nearly spit out my tea. Who hurt Omid? I'm emotionally jarred. Maybe even scarred.
> 
> View attachment 5063021


He’s really going down that Michael Jackson path isn’t he?

perhaps someone pointed out what a hypocrite he is going along with this ‘someone said the baby is too dark’ lie when he clearly bleaches his own skin.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I thought this a Yorkshire recipe for scrambled eggs in dripping for a second.
> 
> I mean isn’t it ironic there’s a load of taboo about fertility problems due to age and a lot of misogynistic ideas that infertile women, especially, are unnatural that H&M could be addressing but oddly enough they don’t want to touch an actual taboo with a ten foot pole?
> 
> He’s really going down that Michael Jackson path isn’t he?
> 
> perhaps someone pointed out what a hypocrite he is going along with this ‘someone said the baby is too dark’ lie when he clearly bleaches his own skin.



H&M:
ITA on the taboo issue, but that may also provoke further investigation on the full total process/procedure they chose.

On OS:
It could be make-up or filter - let's give him the benefit of the doubt (although granted he _never_ has).

On my own phone one of the beauty filters would allow me to 'brighten' my face/skin (sad but true).


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I wore slides the last month of my second pregnancy because they were the only shoes that were comfortable at that point and as a bonus I didn’t have to bend down to put them on. 

I also have a photo of myself holding my toddler in pretty much that same unnatural and dangerous position, with his leg over my 7 months pregnant stomach, that I am happy to post if receipts are needed. 

I am thrilled and relieved that we somehow survived what I now understand are serious maternal transgressions.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> Even more curious as the slip-ons look too small.
> 
> All I can think, non-article included as often shoes that are too big also give you blisters from friction, is that her shoes are freebies



or perhaps her feet are swollen as often happens during pregnancy?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> Oh look!  Her bump is big enough for Archie to comfortably perch on!


 

Perch is an underrated word.


----------



## Roxanna

Possible.  However in that case it would be even more difficult to keep slides on the feets while walking.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Roxanna said:


> Possible.  However in that case it would be even more difficult to keep slides on the feets while walking.



After I posted I was thinking about that....all the things I thought I could or would NEVER do until I became the parent of two young children and voila...all of a sudden I am breaking all my rules and pushing past my shame or embarrassment to just get through the days! Obviously MM and most celebrities have staff and choices many of us don't at that stage of life but I think it did make me less judgmental and more open to grace and empathy. I guess some might even say "woke"


----------



## Shopaholic2021

CarryOn2020 said:


> 5 days? That’s all it takes to know someone?  His ‘mentors’, advisors, must really dislike him. No way I would advise my child to spend 5 days alone with a person, to get to know them.  Wrong on so many levels.
> 
> _In an interview after their engagement, Harry said: "I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana.
> 
> “We camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for *five days *out there, which was absolutely fantastic.
> 
> "So then we were really by ourselves, which was crucial to me to make sure that *we had a chance to know each other."*_



I think he did this to escape the paps. He couldn't really do this in any part of the world. Its weird that she went though, I would not feel safe going to some secluded place with someone I knew for a few weeks. But I guess he isn't just anyone. They really know how to rack up the CO2 levels. Stupid thing to say on World Earth Day, given we know how much destruction CO2 levels are doing to our planet. And his promise to conserve the earth is rather short sighted. I think he doesn't realize just how much him and his families contribution to the CO2 levels are. 

The wealthy spout all this nonsense about climate change and doing our bit to reduce destruction, yet they fail to see the hypocrisy in what they are preaching.


----------



## Icyjade

Anyone knows if this is true?





See Kate’s reaction vs the two. Omg they are even more awful than I thought


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Oh look!  Her bump is big enough for Archie to comfortably perch on!


There are several versions of the photos, at least one if not all appear to have a photoshopped bump , blacked out crudely


----------



## byzina

Icyjade said:


> Anyone knows if this is true?
> View attachment 5063632
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Kate’s reaction vs the two. Omg they are even more awful than I thought




I remember reading somewhere that this is not the moment when Lord Guthrie fell off the horse. It was before that. Kate just yawned and Meghan was talking to Harry.


----------



## 1LV

lalame said:


> The more I think about him not making her birthday, though it was just 2 days away, the more I think he must be a d-bag. Your grandfather just passed away and you can't even stay for your grandmother's birthday TWO DAYS away? I hope this is not the case and I'm sorry if it offends anyone for me to say it... but it could be the last birthday he could spend with her. I mean what in the...


I completely agree with you, but we’ve all assumed he had a choice.  I’m beginning to think the decision to see his grandmother maybe wasn’t his to make.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

mdcx said:


> Interesting points, I can't really imagine any thinking person being drawn in by M&H's claims that they want to be charitable, there seems to be little evidence of them parting with actual cash but as another poster said perhaps she is just testing the waters, curious etc.



I still don't understand why they have a 'foundation'. It sounds like something they created to generate income for themselves, by paying themselves from the donations as 'admin fees/admin work', and then donating the money given to the foundation to other organizations whilst lapping up the good PR. It is also a good tax reducing model, which will help when they are raking in the millions of dollars from the media deals. People this wealthy do as much as they can to reduce tax liability. They likely will pay less % tax than someone getting the national wage in CA.

H complains that he has been cut off financially and that is why they have these insanely high paying jobs in the pipeline, to pay for living and security. So how they are able to donate to other charities is beyond me, since he is acting like a charity case himself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

byzina said:


> I remember reading somewhere that this is not the moment when Lord Guthrie fell off the horse. It was before that. Kate just yawned and Meghan was talking to Harry.



IMO, they are all reacting to something unexpected and all at once. That's not a yawn, even H's face is going "ouch!" and M is def laughing and not saying to H. 

In addition, M looks at H even when she's not talking, she's clearly not addressing him her in this pic.


----------



## lazeny

Full disclosure. I don't like Meghan. I find her off putting and crass. That being said, I'd like to comment about her carrying a toddler and perching the kid on her belly. 

I was carrying my toddler up to the day I delivered, exactly the way she does. Except my go-to footwear are Birkenstocks. It's totally possible. And it was easy for me to carry my heavy kid with a heavily pregnant belly. Probably because I am always physically active and was doing weight training up to my labor. I've also carried my kid while heavily pregnant lugging a diaper bag and my Longchamp tote, and as a Mom, mom-bags are always full lol. 

Also toddlers just know, and Archie may have sensed that another is on the way and is starting to become clingy. My boy wanted to be carried and snuggled all the time. I indulged him because I knew I will be busy with a newborn for the next few months.

 I may not like how Meghan is seemingly an insecure manipulator and attention seeking, but that picture of her lugging the kid carrying bags is totally normal looking to me.


----------



## Allisonfaye

tiktok said:


> Re 2: That’s a very good observation. She’s right handed, just google “Meghan Markle signing” and you’ll see in photos.
> I always carry kids with my dominant arm as well, can’t imagine doing otherwise, it would feel very awkward. Does anyone do this differently?



I would often carry my kid on the left side using my right arm to guide. I probably switched back and forth because the pressure on one hip all the time was too much.

I will say that I was never supposed to pick up my daughter when I was pregnant with my other daughter because as a former C-section patient, you are always at risk to your vagina exploding, for lack of a better word. (My kids are talking a mile a minute and I can't think of a better word now).


----------



## papertiger

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I still don't understand why they have a 'foundation'. It sounds like something they created to generate income for themselves, by paying themselves from the donations as 'admin fees/admin work', and then donating the money given to the foundation to other organizations whilst lapping up the good PR. It is also a good tax reducing model, which will help when they are raking in the millions of dollars from the media deals. People this wealthy do as much as they can to reduce tax liability. They likely will pay less % tax than someone getting the national wage in CA.
> 
> H complains that he has been cut off financially and that is why they have these insanely high paying jobs in the pipeline, to pay for living and security. So how they are able to donate to other charities is beyond me, since he is acting like a charity case himself.



So, basically, you _do _understand why they have a 'foundation'


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Oh, and as someone else said, there is zero, but zero, reason why she would even *have* to carry him.  He can walk!!! At that age!!!



It’s so her fans can gush over what a wonderful mother she is, because if they didn’t see her holding him how would they know?


----------



## Aimee3

Harry needed to get back to his heavily pregnant wife because he didn’t want her to be alone?  As if she didn’t have a staff of people in the 16 bathroom house at her beck and call, her mother, and most likely 2 or 3 nannies...one of whom could’ve carried Archie to wherever they were allegedly going in the pap photos.


----------



## bag-mania

FreeSpirit71 said:


>




Of course the photos were bought and published the same day they were offered to them by the paps. Why would the buyer hold onto them and not put them out immediately? The real question is why were these photos staged at this particular time after Meghan has been cloistered away for months (Oprah notwithstanding).


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just watch the interview. There is no indication WA cares one bit about titles or people who have them. She seems to care about what wealthy do with their money, how charitable are they. Charitable as in their money and time make a difference, not charitable in selling their names. Big difference.



It would be interesting to know who approached who for this meeting. Did Harry approach her ostensibly to ask for advice on running a foundation? Did she approach him out of curiosity?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s heavily pregnant wife is pictured on page six of NYPost.  Article says Archie is one year old while we know he will be 2 next month.  Would a heavily pregnant woman carry an almost 2 year old on a real bump or just a moon bump????


His age is a weird thing to get wrong- just shows how sloppy they are. 
I guess she’s got a nanny conveniently out of frame to toss him to when the pap leaves - wouldn’t worry about her back


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> His age is a weird thing to get wrong- just shows how sloppy they are.
> I guess she’s got a nanny conveniently out of frame to toss him to when the pap leaves - wouldn’t worry about her back



Technically they are correct, he isn’t 2 yet. Only with babies do months matter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

M’s feet, ankles and hands do not appear to be swollen which is usually the case with heavily pregnant women, right?


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I didn't know that... well, if it's not a big deal in their family then it is what it is.  Were they all on engagements elsewhere?



Charles went immediately to Wales to his house there to grieve apparently. (He may still be there. Camilla stayed in London as she had commitments.) Will and Kate went back to their home but have been out subsequently for a couple of engagements.  No one really knows who actually was with the Queen on her birthday, besides her staff in her covid bubble, but reports are that the family has a rotating schedule with people going over to visit her on a regular basis.  I can imagine that a number of them were with her on her birthday, depending on covid restrictions and whether they met outside or inside.  Due to quarantine restrictions, I doubt Harry was able to see her unless it was outside.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> H complains that he has been cut off financially and that is why they have these insanely high paying jobs in the pipeline, to pay for living and security. So how they are able to donate to other charities is beyond me, since he is acting like a charity case himself.



The entitlement. They could just live modestly like normal people. Where does it come from that they insist they deserve the multi-million dollar lifestyle when they obviously can't fund it themselves? Should have thought about that before the both of you not bit, but mauled the hand that fed you.


----------



## Jktgal

purseinsanity said:


> For example, I can't carry a shoulder bag on my right shoulder for the life of me...it'll always slip off, whereas my left shoulder never has that problem.


@purseinsanity have you ever gone to a doctor of chiropractic to have your spine checked? Your alignment might be asymmetrical (could get worse if not treated - with some health impacts).


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

tiktok said:


> Re 2: That’s a very good observation. She’s right handed, just google “Meghan Markle signing” and you’ll see in photos.
> I always carry kids with my dominant arm as well, can’t imagine doing otherwise, it would feel very awkward. Does anyone do this differently?


Baby carrying confession: I'm right handed but preferred to carry my kids on my left hip. My guess is, because I was often doing other things with my right hand.

But I never perched (thank you, purseinsanity ) any of them on my bumps. It would have been impossible, so what The Heavily Pregnant One is doing in that pic is quite a feat. Only thing missing is an impromptu sidewalk squat. Maybe it's just the "improvised for photo op carrying my firstborn like a trophy technique" of a mother who doesn't really carry her own kid that often.

As so many of you already noted, I understand it's Will and Kate's youngest's birthday today? What an extraordinary coincidence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

FreeSpirit71 said:


> You mean how the entire Royal Family put out a list of their engagements over the year, or get PR for every event *they* attend? Like that?


Isn't this accountability because they are spending public $$?


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Technically they are correct, he isn’t 2 yet. Only with babies do months matter.


Up to the age of 2 I always went by months, ie 16 months, 20 months, 23 months. Once they hit 2 it was 2 and a bit, 2 and a half, he'll be 3 in 3 months etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Up to the age of 2 I always went by months, ie 16 months, 20 months, 23 months. Once they hit 2 it was 2 and a bit, 2 and a half, he'll be 3 in 3 months etc.



A vlogger I used to watch has two kids and is still noting on her profile "Kids: son x, 38 months; daughter x, 22 months". I really want to know if she's going to do this until he's 18


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A vlogger I used to watch has two kids and is still noting on her profile "Kids: son x, 38 months; daughter x, 22 months". I really want to know if she's going to do this until he's 18


Had to think then what 38 months was lol.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe Meghan is trying to get a fancy stroller comped.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Can you believe they put this out????
> 
> I'm guessing a book voucher.
> 
> Perhaps she can buy a copy of _*Finding Fantasy* _from Amazon - she may have to chip-in from the Privy Purse since they probably went for the lowest denomination possible.


Or they left Granny an autographed copy of Funding Freedom with a cute little handwritten blurb. 
"Dear Granny, 
We hope you will be surviving and thriving again soon. Send more cash if you want us to stop talking to the press about your family's cheep and racist attitude.
Cheerio!
Duke & Duchess of Sussex"


----------



## Shopaholic2021

FreeSpirit71 said:


> You mean how the entire Royal Family put out a list of their engagements over the year, or get PR for every event *they* attend? Like that?



In a monarchy, a king or queen is Head of State. The British Monarchy is known as a constitutional monarchy. This means that, while The Sovereign is Head of State, the ability to make and pass legislation resides with an elected Parliament.

Although The Sovereign no longer has a political or executive role, he or she continues to play an important part in the life of the nation.

As Head of State, The Monarch undertakes constitutional and representational duties which have developed over one thousand years of history. In addition to these State duties, The Monarch has a less formal role as 'Head of Nation'. The Sovereign acts as a focus for national identity, unity and pride; gives a sense of stability and continuity; officially recognises success and excellence; and supports the ideal of voluntary service.

In all these roles The Sovereign is supported by members of their immediate family.

*The entire Royal family put out a list of engagements and get PR at each event because they are representing the country and in turn the country compensated them (through the taxes we pay). *


----------



## sdkitty

mdcx said:


> Louis is the most darling, happy looking boy.


their kids are all so cute....that scene with George in his bathrobe meeting the president was unforgettable.  and Charlotte is just beyond adorable.


----------



## Annawakes

As others have said before, I think whether the Archie photo is staged or not, regardless of whether she’s actually carrying him or not, is determined by whether there will be a lawsuit over the photo.  If no lawsuit then we know for sure she wanted it taken.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> That's interesting.... I didn't think the Annenbergs really cared about celebrities. They're definitely on another level of wealth and power.


OT but that woman looks horrid.  I don't know how she would have looked w/o PS but all the cosmetic procedures, makeup, hair, eww....not a good look


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The more I think about his not hanging around for her birthday the more I think that he never intended to stay a minute longer than he did.  He managed to make it to a lunch with a woman he had never met before.  Things like this are set up well in advance.  He knew he had to get back to LA to see her.  I bet the only reason she agreed to it is because she had met TQ and PP somewhere along the line and she wished to convey her condolences to Harry.  Of course he wasn't interested in that.  He just wants to pick her pocket.


I wonder if this woman is going to help them and in what way


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Can you believe they put this out????
> 
> I'm guessing a book voucher.
> 
> Perhaps she can buy a copy of _Finding Fantasy _from Amazon - she may have to chip-in from the Privy Purse since they probably went for the lowest denomination possible.


It's possible that was a copy of 'Funding Freebies'. I bet they have plenty of extra copies for friends and family. They have also other products to merchandise...  A basket of instant oat milk lattes, hopping QE gives "the drink the thumbs up". A free subscription to N*flix or Sp*tify...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I've been to the Annenberg Space for Photography a few times (before COVID), it's a great place. She is obviously a very smart woman, but the older we get, the more trusting we become (not always). So let's hope she will not fall for falsehoods...
> 
> Also, it's not very thoughtful to take an older lady for lunch immediately after an internationally trip. He should self-quarantine for a few days and then take a COVID test before engaging in this type of social events.


I wonder if her foundation would contribue to Archewell.....doesn't seem right to me - Archewell should be giving money not getting it, right?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This person makes a valid point about the shoes...
> View attachment 5063376


and who tipped the media to what she wore...in the fashion subforum, everthing is listed including madewell jeans.....I don't see how anyone could ID those jeans just by looking at these pics


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just watch the interview. There is no indication WA cares one bit about titles or people who have them. She seems to care about what wealthy do with their money, how charitable are they. Charitable as in their money and time make a difference, not charitable in selling their names. Big difference.


she says her talent is reading people....wonder what she thinks of H


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> That's an understatement! I remember when this happened... they gave $365m to a few schools, including $120m to USC, and that was in cash (not spread out over several years). In 1993 dollars.  They don't need anything from Harry they couldn't get themselves so I'm thinking it might be him making an ask.


I'd bet money that it is him asking her for something


----------



## jelliedfeels

Allisonfaye said:


> Mood ring?


I’ve got a mood ring still from when I was a kid and I still bust it out from time to time when I’m wearing white metals


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I thought this a Yorkshire recipe for scrambled eggs in dripping for a second.
> 
> I mean isn’t it ironic there’s a load of taboo about fertility problems due to age and a lot of misogynistic ideas that infertile women, especially, are unnatural that H&M could be addressing but oddly enough they don’t want to touch an actual taboo with a ten foot pole?


I find it ironic that *IF* she did fertility treatments such as IVF, they won't discuss it (don't know royal related issues with that), but she'll go on and on about the alleged miscarriage she had.  One is taboo, the other is open for her verbal diarrhea, some of which is plagiarized.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It would be interesting to know who approached who for this meeting. Did Harry approach her ostensibly to ask for advice on running a foundation? Did she approach him out of curiosity?


I don't think Annenberg approached H, why would she? She is a huge donor, she (her money) gets invitations all the time...


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I wore slides the last month of my second pregnancy because they were the only shoes that were comfortable at that point and as a bonus I didn’t have to bend down to put them on.
> 
> I also have a photo of myself holding my toddler in pretty much that same unnatural and dangerous position, with his leg over my 7 months pregnant stomach, that I am happy to post if receipts are needed.
> 
> I am thrilled and relieved that we somehow survived what I now understand are serious maternal transgressions.


I don't really care how she carried her kid when pregnant.  I found pregnancy so uncomfortable, that whatever position I could carry my firstborn while pregnant with my second, I did.  I've seen women in Africa and India, HEAVILY pregnant, still working in the fields (I wonder if Meg asked them if they were ok?  ).  I also wore whatever shoes I could that were comfortable.  I personally couldn't wear slides because even when not pregnant, they sometimes fly off my feet.  It's the stupid smirk I can see in her eyes that irritates me.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The entitlement. They could just live modestly like normal people. Where does it come from that they insist they deserve the multi-million dollar lifestyle when they obviously can't fund it themselves? Should have thought about that before the both of you not bit, but mauled the hand that fed you.


With the several millions H has (or had), they wouldn't need to live modestly. However, they seem to want a billionaire lifestyle, and for that...










						Harry and Meghan must throw Cambridges’ ‘under woke bus’
					

THE DUKE and Duchess of Sussex have been advised they need to "throw the Cambridges under the woke bus" if they are to "truly establish themselves as celebrities in America".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> or perhaps her feet are swollen as often happens during pregnancy?


it does seem odd though that she would risk dropping archie or falling and injuring her unborn child by wearing these unsafe (and ugly IMO) shoes...surely she could have gotten one of the staff to get buy her a pair of 
slip- on athletic shoes.  I have some I keep by the door.  they do have backs but pretty easy to get in and out of.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know the drill, I'm answering as I go along, so someone else might have said it. Mr. Cornflower Blue (OP's husband).


Thank you QueenofWrapDress!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> So, basically, you _do _understand why they have a 'foundation'


they aren't rated on Charity Navigator
from their site:
*This organization cannot be evaluated by our Encompass Rating methodology because it files Form 990-EZ, as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than $200,000 annual revenue.*


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> M’s feet, ankles and hands do not appear to be swollen which is usually the case with heavily pregnant women, right?


Not all women have water retention problems. I had none.

I lived in sneakers during pregnancy. My work required me to walk a lot as well as climb stairs. Sneakers or athletic shoes were the most comfortable. I chose a model that was higher cut for stability.


----------



## jelliedfeels

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I guess William and Charles are douchebags as well as they didn't hang around for her birthday either.


It’s not impossible.....


bag-mania said:


> Wonder if Harry was schmoozing for a big donation to Archewell. This is what Harry has come to, trying to charm an old lady out of a few million.


I’m getting Zero Mostel in ‘the producers’ vibes.
Maybe they are trying the ‘springtime for h’ tactics  on Netflix.


----------



## lazeny

CarryOn2020 said:


> M’s feet, ankles and hands do not appear to be swollen which is usually the case with heavily pregnant women, right?


 
Every pregnancy is different. Not all heavily pregnant women get swollen hands and feet. I'm one of the lucky ones that didn't.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if her foundation would contribue to Archewell.....doesn't seem right to me - Archewell should be giving money not getting it, right?


Arch*well should be giving money and not collecting money, but Ginger and wife need money... I believe Annaberg has billions, so she is a very thoughtful target for big donations. What wasn't thoughtful was meeting with her immediately after an international trip in COVID time.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> . . . George in his bathrobe meeting the president was unforgettable. . .



Absolutely the cutest!








						Prince George, Like a Boss, Met the Obamas In His Bathrobe
					

Ultimate power move, George.




					www.gq.com
				



I loved GQ's take:
_Prince George—badass 2-year-old, knee sock enthusiast, and heir to the throne of England—pulled the ultimate power move today when meeting President ***** and First Lady Michelle. Instead of wearing one of his fetching little sweater vests, collared shirts, or knits, he decided to keep things casual. As in bathrobe casual._


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So it's 11 a.m. on a Friday morning and I just turned in the last of my freelance assignments and could basically start the weekend early. Seeing I often work through the weekends I grab what I can haha. I wonder if I should do a H & M detox, too!


11pm on a Friday night for me and I think I'll join you for the detox. I want to know if there can be a 48-hour period without their PR agency or one of their sock puppets releasing something to keep them in the public eye.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> lol you're not defending Meghan. You're just sharing something about yourself. I hate when things suddenly fall out of favor just because Meghan happens to do it/wear it/say it. I swear we were ready to cancel the color green because M wore a dress that one time. I'm absolutely going to avoid this thread if I ever see M photographed wearing something I own.


I’m not giving up on green for anyone!  
Also I’m sorry but if the colour green belongs to anyone it’s Elizabeth Taylor. Liz also gets pale yellow and violet. Life’s not fair but it is what it is.

MM can have sweat-stained and shiny brown forever


papertiger said:


> I thought that was one of the only things he was apparently ever good at (beyond playing dress-up)


Oh my g*d he IS Max Bialystock. Except at least Max managed to put out more than one terrible show and didn’t marry the eye candy.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Don't say that too loudly  YT are probably working on how to legally make that work as we type.


Oops - maybe someone can delete my post!  lol


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m not giving up on green for anyone!
> Also I’m sorry but if the colour green belongs to anyone it’s Elizabeth Taylor. Liz also gets pale yellow and violet. Life’s not fair but it is what it is.
> 
> MM can have sweat-stained and shiny brown forever
> 
> Oh my g*d he IS Max Bialystock. Except at least Max managed to put out more than one terrible show and didn’t marry the eye candy.



Not giving-up on green either - far too much invested in green H bags to opt-out now. 

Just really pleased M's greens of Emerald and Jade (that look good on her, but perhaps in smaller doses) are not _my_ greens


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Or they left Granny an autographed copy of Funding Freedom with a cute little handwritten blurb.
> "Dear Granny,
> We hope you will be surviving and thriving again soon. Send more cash if you want us to stop talking to the press about your family's cheep and racist attitude.
> Cheerio!
> Duke & Duchess of Sussex"


Being so “woke” maybe H packed one of his wife’s lemon olive oil cakes for his Granny. Of course it would have been wrapped and the pkg decorated with an olive sprig from the tree, along with a hand picked (not to be confused with one that fell on the ground) lemon to be used at tea time. All presented with a calligraphic note and, COVID compliant, left on the Windsor Castle stoop.

There would be a complete lack of comprehension that the best gift they could give her would be silence and good behavior.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if this woman is going to help them and in what way





sdkitty said:


> I wonder if her foundation would contribute to Archewell.....doesn't seem right to me - *Archewell should be giving money not getting it, right*?



Archwell is going to need to get money in order to give it. So, they are going to be massively fundraising for a time, perhaps for years and years.  There is no major business fortune that either of them have to donate to kick off this foundation like Bill Gates.  So, they have to build an endowment from scratch.  The biggest foundations have huge underlying endowments that are invested for the long term, of which a portion is spent annually on their charitable programs and to pay their operating expenses with an eye on continuing their operations for decades, if not a century.  Bill Gates' foundation is likely going to operate for centuries after his death as the underlying asset base is so huge.

But, Harry and MM are basically starting with zero, unless they've contributed a start up amount from their own personal funds.  So, I could see that meeting with Ms. Annenberg taking place for two purposes. First, he gets her take on the current state of philanthropy in the U.S. and gets to ask an expert a lot of questions.  Second, it's to lay the preliminary groundwork for a request for funding. Lots of big charitable entities fund other, smaller organizations.

It's going to be interesting to see how much money they can raise.  If I'm someone like Ms. Annenberg, I want to know why I should give money to a start up organization with zero track record when I can fund a hundred other charities that are well run, have been operating for years, and are working on identical issues.  So, Harry would have to impress the heck out of me with intelligence, focus, detailed plans and a unique approach or solution to specific problems they want Archwell to address.  I'd also have to be convinced of his level of commitment and I'd ask where his foundation falls on his daily To Do list when he is also supposed to be working for Netflix, Spotify, being Chief Impact Officer of Wherever, and promoting vegan lattes.  I'd also have a hundred other questions but you get the drift!  He's going to be held accountable by anyone who gives his foundation money along with both the IRS and the Cali Franchise Tax Board. Will be an interesting experience for him.


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> Oh look!  Her bump is big enough for Archie to comfortably perch on!



Yikes, that bump is just HUGE More like a twin bump.....I had 4 kids but was never that big, not even close!!!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Archwell is going to need to get money in order to give it. So, they are going to be massively fundraising for a time, perhaps for years and years.  There is no major business fortune that either of them have to donate to kick off this foundation like Bill Gates.  So, they have to build an endowment from scratch.  The biggest foundations have huge underlying endowments that are invested for the long term, of which a portion is spent annually on their charitable programs and to pay their operating expenses with an eye on continuing their operations for decades, if not a century.  Bill Gates' foundation is likely going to operate for centuries after his death as the underlying asset base is so huge.
> 
> But, Harry and MM are basically starting with zero, unless they've contributed a start up amount from their own personal funds.  So, I could see that meeting with Ms. Annenberg taking place for two purposes. First, he gets her take on the current state of philanthropy in the U.S. and gets to ask an expert a lot of questions.  Second, it's to lay the preliminary groundwork for a request for funding. Lots of big charitable entities fund other, smaller organizations.
> 
> It's going to be interesting to see how much money they can raise.  If I'm someone like Ms. Annenberg, I want to know why I should give money to a start up organization with zero track record when I can fund a hundred other charities that are well run, have been operating for years, and are working on identical issues.  So, Harry would have to impress the heck out of me with intelligence, focus, detailed plans and a unique approach or solution to specific problems they want Archwell to address.  I'd also have to be convinced of his level of commitment and I'd ask where his foundation falls on his daily To Do list when he is also supposed to be working for Netflix, Spotify, being Chief Impact Officer of Wherever, and promoting vegan lattes.  I'd also have a hundred other questions but you get the drift!  He's going to be held accountable by anyone who gives his foundation money along with both the IRS and the Cali Franchise Tax Board. Will be an interesting experience for him.


I think if he was trying to learn from her maybe he should have been accompanied by some staff person (CFO type) who would better understand these things.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Not all women have water retention problems. I had none.


It didn't look to me that Catherine did either with her three pregnancies. 
Meghan was facially puffy during and after having Archie.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m not giving up on green for anyone!
> Also I’m sorry but if the colour green belongs to anyone it’s Elizabeth Taylor. Liz also gets pale yellow and violet. Life’s not fair but it is what it is.
> 
> MM can have sweat-stained and shiny brown forever


And the Queen can have every colour, they all suit her.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she says her talent is reading people....wonder what she thinks of H



She's probably wondering why there are no words...


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Don't like the parents, but the kid is cute!!!
> 
> View attachment 5063111
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan Markle, Archie seen for first time since Harry’s US return
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex propped the 1-year-old up on her growing baby bump as she carried his space-themed lunch box.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



He is rather sweet.... poor child.....

Anyone think M's mask is the one H wore at the funeral?? Or was this pic taken when H was in the UK?? Sorry, I just can't keep up with this thread


----------



## Chanbal

Cringe's PR


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> He is rather sweet.... poor child.....
> 
> Anyone think M's mask is the one H wore at the funeral?? Or was this pic taken when H was in the UK?? Sorry, I just can't keep up with this thread


No, it was only The Queen and Prince Charles who wore white trimmed masks.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Something that people fail to realize is just how lucky and privileged someone has to be in order to run/ manage charities and live a charmed life, without actually doing any of the hard work. 

For example, doctors, nurses, lawyers, judges, social workers etc all work in the field and contribute massively to society, yet they are paid a meager wage and sometimes it takes them years to be financially comfortable (student loans et al). Managers and executives in these charities earn much higher wages, and they do not have the debt level or the stress level that comes with working in the field. To me, if you want to work in a charity, you should do it without compensation. A lot of these charities pay the executives huge salaries for minimal work.

Charities just seem like a new industry now, we still have systemic poverty and major issues, even though America has tons of $$$.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Is she using her bump to carry Archie?
> 
> View attachment 5063114


I'm ten pages behind and usually read to the end before posting but I couldn't resist.
You can tell she's grinning like a loon behind that face mask. People can roast me, IDGAF, but you can actually see the giddy grin on her face that she's being photographed. She's loving it. Absolutely loving it. Just like the pap photos when the Archie doll was slipping off her shoulders last year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> it does seem odd though that she would risk dropping archie or falling and injuring her unborn child by wearing these unsafe (and ugly IMO) shoes...surely she could have gotten one of the staff to get buy her a pair of
> slip- on athletic shoes.  I have some I keep by the door.  they do have backs but pretty easy to get in and out of.



Or just shop online. Athleisure footwear seems to be one of the favourite seasonal product pushes this time of the year if my YT ads are anything to go by. 

I forgot she doesn't do Google (other search engines may apply).


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Cringe's PR



This is so sickly


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> No, it was only The Queen and Prince Charles who wore white trimmed masks.



Ah, ok, I didn't notice.....


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Charles went immediately to Wales to his house there to grieve apparently. (He may still be there. Camilla stayed in London as she had commitments.) Will and Kate went back to their home but have been out subsequently for a couple of engagements.  No one really knows who actually was with the Queen on her birthday, besides her staff in her covid bubble, but reports are that the family has a rotating schedule with people going over to visit her on a regular basis.  I can imagine that a number of them were with her on her birthday, depending on covid restrictions and whether they met outside or inside.  Due to quarantine restrictions, I doubt Harry was able to see her unless it was outside.


We won't know because the BRF doesn't disclose every little thing they do.


----------



## lazeny

Sharont2305 said:


> It didn't look to me that Catherine did either with her three pregnancies.
> Meghan was facially puffy during and after having Archie.




Yes. Kate carries her pregnancy very well. Her clothes and coats are tailored to a tee even with a bump. She reminds me of Blake Lively when pregnant. Blooming and beautiful.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jktgal said:


> @purseinsanity have you ever gone to a doctor of chiropractic to have your spine checked? Your alignment might be asymmetrical (could get worse if not treated - with some health impacts).


 I have, thank you! Luckily, that's one thing I don't have to worry about (yet anyway)! My mother and sister are also right handed and carry things on their left. We surprisingly have a lot of left handed family members, so maybe I got only half the gene, LOL. Or maybe we are all just weird.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Baby carrying confession: I'm right handed but preferred to carry my kids on my left hip. My guess is, because I was often doing other things with my right hand.
> 
> But I never perched *(thank you, purseinsanity )* any of them on my bumps. It would have been impossible, so what The Heavily Pregnant One is doing in that pic is quite a feat. Only thing missing is an impromptu sidewalk squat. Maybe it's just the "improvised for photo op carrying my firstborn like a trophy technique" of a mother who doesn't really carry her own kid that often.
> 
> As so many of you already noted, I understand it's Will and Kate's youngest's birthday today? What an extraordinary coincidence.


Any time!


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> This is so sickly


Only in Meg's world is the fact that a parent chooses to raise their own child "their way", is it a headline.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A vlogger I used to watch has two kids and is still noting on her profile "Kids: son x, 38 months; daughter x, 22 months". I really want to know if she's going to do this until he's 18


Sad to say I'm over 485 months.


----------



## youngster

Also, if Harry can manage a contribution to Archwell from Ms. Annenberg then that could be taken as an initial stamp of approval that might lead to other major foundations following along.  They would trumpet that in press releases for ages, even if the contribution is a relatively paltry amount.  It'll be interesting to watch.  I think Ms. Annenberg is used to having people ask her for money so we'll see how well she reads Harry or whether this was a meeting she just took out of politeness.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Or they left Granny an autographed copy of Funding Freedom with a cute little handwritten blurb.
> "Dear Granny,
> We hope you will be surviving and thriving again soon. Send more cash if you want us to stop talking to the press about your family's cheep and racist attitude.
> Cheerio!
> Duke & Duchess of Sussex"


 Nothing says "We love you" like a thinly veiled threat


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> Cringe's PR




They gave up their position of privilege to become tabloid fodder? Really cannot understand the two awful ones.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe she's his new adoptive grandmother?


It all goes back to the grand plan first floated in 2019. "While the (Susssex) charity will be global, Meghan “sees Hollywood and American business circles as key to fundraising,” the source said.“Meghan feels with the wealth in the US, focusing on fundraising stateside will bring in tens of millions of dollars quickly.”

Meghan's wily enough to know that a Royal by blood, not title, is what is needed in the stratosphere where the Annenbergs dwell so Harry got dispatched carrying those family/ Vanity Fair/Netflix connections with him in hopes of opening the Annenberg Foundation checkbook . 

Maybe this should be a lesson to him, the meeting site is supposedly one of the most exclusively private places to meet and be sheltered from the media, yet in less than 24 hours this was on line. Privacy is only possible secluded in Montecito, if there are no drones in the air.


----------



## youngster

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Something that people fail to realize is just how lucky and privileged someone has to be in order to run/ manage charities and live a charmed life, without actually doing any of the hard work.
> 
> For example, doctors, nurses, lawyers, judges, social workers etc all work in the field and contribute massively to society, yet they are paid a meager wage and sometimes it takes them years to be financially comfortable (student loans et al). Managers and executives in these charities earn much higher wages, and they do not have the debt level or the stress level that comes with working in the field. To me, if you want to work in a charity, you should do it without compensation. A lot of these charities pay the executives huge salaries for minimal work.
> 
> *Charities just seem like a new industry now*, we still have systemic poverty and major issues, even though America has tons of $$$.



They are, it's a huge industry and a marvelous tax scheme for very wealthy families.  Instead of your family fortune being subject to estate taxation, you just donate the bulk of it to your family charitable foundation.  You then appoint yourself and your children to the Board.  You basically get to continue to control your fortune during your lifetime and do not have to hand it over to the government at your death. That's a cynical view of course, and I recognize that numerous foundations do amazing work and fill gaps that would otherwise not be addressed since governments can't do everything.  Many times these charities do a better job than any government program could too.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve got a mood ring still from when I was a kid and I still bust it out from time to time when I’m wearing white metals


I miss those days!  Totally showing my age, but I found mood rings, Chinese jump ropes and hop scotch so satisfying.  My kids find the fact that I'd entertain myself for hours with a Lemon Twist or Bucket Stilts "so stupid".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> We won't know because the BRF doesn't disclose every little thing they do.


And really, we don't even need to know.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Being so “woke” maybe H packed one of his wife’s lemon olive oil cakes for his Granny. Of course it would have been wrapped and the pkg decorated with an olive sprig from the tree, along with a hand picked (not to be confused with one that fell on the ground) lemon to be used at tea time. All presented with a calligraphic note and, COVID compliant, left on the Windsor Castle stoop.
> 
> There would be a complete lack of comprehension that the best gift they could give her would be silence and good behavior.


I hope the Queen still has tasters, in case the cake is poisoned.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Nope, that's part and parcel of life as a public figure.
> 
> It's the people who talk about how hard they work with that undercurrent of "and so I deserve praise/sympathy/a raise/promotion/gratitude". The narc I worked with used to pause now and then when the office was too quiet for him, breathe a gusty tornado of pent up frustration and tell all of us about how hard his life was, so many projects, how he needs a break etc etc. It was an open office. We knew what each other was doing. He was just having a pity fest. Like MM, he kept wanting people to ask him how he was so that he could moan.


The other major difference is the Royals listed in the Court Circular are working on behalf of the Queen in service to support others, unlike the Montecito branch of the family who prefer to work on behalf of themselves.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I miss those days!  Totally showing my age, but I found mood rings, Chinese jump ropes and hop scotch so satisfying.  My kids find the fact that I'd entertain myself for hours with a Lemon Twist or Bucket Stilts "so stupid".


The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go! 
I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic? 
Sorry for OT.


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


> Sad to say I'm over 485 months.


Quoting myself, because I just realized, even at this age, in Meg's world, I'm a "young mother"!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> H&M:
> ITA on the taboo issue, but that may also provoke further investigation on the full total process/procedure they chose.
> 
> On OS:
> It could be make-up or filter - let's give him the benefit of the doubt (although granted he _never_ has).
> 
> On my own phone one of the beauty filters would allow me to 'brighten' my face/skin (sad but true).


Full disclosure - if it is true they had to go for some kind of fertility procedure and the Royals really felt this was a problem because of some archaic prejudices about legitimacy then the royals are completely in the wrong on this. If the big revelation from the OW interview was that they covered up the surrogacy for the family but now they were being open about it - I would be completely on their side. I think it’s crazy in this day and age that it’s ok to blame someone, usually the woman, for infertility (because she is too old and selfish obv)

Maybe a bit controversial but if someone does bleach their skin I think it’s their body their choice  but it strikes me as pretty shame-faced to condemn people for allegedly just asking about skin tone when you are clearly ok with dramatically altering your own skin’s appearance on photos at least.


csshopper said:


> Being so “woke” maybe H packed one of his wife’s lemon olive oil cakes for his Granny. Of course it would have been wrapped and the pkg decorated with an olive sprig from the tree, along with a hand picked (not to be confused with one that fell on the ground) lemon to be used at tea time. All presented with a calligraphic note and, COVID compliant, left on the Windsor Castle stoop.
> 
> There would be a complete lack of comprehension that the best gift they could give her would be silence and good behavior.



they are extending the olive (oil) branch of mercy to the sinners eh?


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.


I did play it!  
I'm not British, but my daughter wishes I were, LOL.  She's obsessed with the accent and all things British.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Full disclosure - if it is true they had to go for some kind of fertility procedure and the Royals really felt this was a problem because of some archaic prejudices about legitimacy then the royals are completely in the wrong on this. If the big revelation from the OW interview was that they covered up the surrogacy for the family but now they were being open about it - I would be completely on their side. I think it’s crazy in this day and age that it’s ok to blame someone, usually the woman for infertility (because she is too old and selfish obv)
> 
> Maybe a bit controversial but if someone does bleach their skin I think it’s their body their choice  but it strikes me as pretty shame-faced to condemn people for allegedly just asking about skin tone when you are clearly ok with dramatically altering your own skin’s appearance on photos at least.
> 
> 
> they are extending the olive (oil) branch of mercy to the sinners eh?


I'm probably not following this thread closely enough but I thought it ?her puppet scobie who was believed to be bleaching his skin?  was it Meghan also?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

youngster said:


> That's a cynical view of course, and I recognize that numerous foundations do amazing work and fill gaps that would otherwise not be addressed since governments can't do everything. Many times these charities do a better job than any government program could too.



Although I agree with what you say here, something to remember is that the family essentially creates regular income for themselves and their descendants for many many decades after they have passed. This allows those descendants to live a privileged and luxurious life, without actually having to do much work. And this leads to greater income inequality.

So although the charities may be giving money away, they are not really doing the hard work you see doctors, nurses, lawyers etc do. Some of those people risk their health and even life for others. It would be better if the families actually paid their taxes like the rest of the country, and if they used the left over money for charity work, I would be impressed and call those people actual humanitarians.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.


I do!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> And the Queen can have every colour, they all suit her.


I tend to picture her in coral and dark pinks. I thought that neon green number from her train ride with MM was a bit the riddler to be brutally honest. 
I do love her devotion to hats though. I’d have a billion hats too if I had the storage for them.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Icyjade said:


> They gave up their position of privilege to become tabloid fodder? Really cannot understand the two awful ones.


My immediate reaction too   *so this is actually what she _WANTS_?*   Bl##dy H#ll


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> Also, if Harry can manage a contribution to Archwell from Ms. Annenberg then that could be taken as an initial stamp of approval that might lead to other major foundations following along.  They would trumpet that in press releases for ages, even if the contribution is a relatively paltry amount.  It'll be interesting to watch.  I think Ms. Annenberg is used to having people ask her for money so we'll see how well she reads Harry or whether this was a meeting she just took out of politeness.


I’m sure we will find out if they are successful.  
personally, I wouldn’t part with my hard-earned inheritance based on what we’ve seen of that minuscule portfolio


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> they aren't rated on Charity Navigator
> from their site:
> *This organization cannot be evaluated by our Encompass Rating methodology because it files Form 990-EZ, as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than $200,000 annual revenue.*


This explains their confusion when they left the Royal Family; H & M thought they could just fill out *Form 50/50-EZ *and file to be half in/ half out Royals


----------



## csshopper

FreeSpirit71 said:


> I guess William and Charles are douchebags as well as they didn't hang around for her birthday either.



NO! 
*Prince William and Kate Middleton back to work after getting special permission from Queen*
Prince William and Kate Middleton visited the RAF Air Cadets in East Ham, London, where a tribute was paid to Philip as the Queen's 95th birthday came four days after his funeral.

As the monarch faced a lonely 95th birthday, the Cambridges visited the RAF Air Cadets' 282 (East Ham) Squadron in east London on Wednesday to learn how it supports young people through the Duke of Edinburgh Awards.

The couple were given special permission by the Queen to attend the engagement during royal mourning to honour the Duke of Edinburgh’s links with the air cadets and the DoE awards.

On the command ‘three cheers for His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh’, the cadets gave a rousing ‘hip, hip hooray’.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Chanbal Thanks for this image.




H's heavily pregnant wife is a headlines grabbing famewhore and...


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> They are, it's a huge industry and a marvelous tax scheme for very wealthy families.  Instead of your family fortune being subject to estate taxation, you just donate the bulk of it to your family charitable foundation.  You then appoint yourself and your children to the Board.  You basically get to continue to control your fortune during your lifetime and do not have to hand it over to the government at your death. That's a cynical view of course, and I recognize that numerous foundations do amazing work and fill gaps that would otherwise not be addressed since governments can't do everything.  Many times these charities do a better job than any government program could too.



I think everything you say here is factually right though one nuance to it I think is.. for a super wealthy family, a foundation isn't really the most "profitable" way to shelter taxes. There are way more options available to them, like offshore banking. The main benefit of a foundation to the wealthy is being able to control where their tax money goes versus the government. And I do get that... if you're forking over millions a year, it'd be nice to know exactly where it's going and see a concrete output from that, whether it's # of scholarships or hospital wing or whatever it is.

And on the point a lot of these charities do a better job than a government program - yes, and the government knows it too! They fund a lot of charities through grants. There's no way a government can reach into every locality here and abroad, with all its different needs, in a cost-effective way. Of course the downside to that is... there are some truly useless charities that are probably wasting what would be tax revenue on niche programs that don't provide much benefit to society.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Chanbal Thanks for this image.
> 
> View attachment 5063892
> 
> 
> H's heavily pregnant wife is a headlines grabbing famewhore and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5063893


Always boggles my mind, even after all this time, the pronoun used is "*MY.*.."  not "*Our..*" Even if they used a surrogate,  Harry must have contributed something to this pregnancy.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.



I always played elastic at school! Actually even at home, by myself, I would put it round 2 chairs and I would play!


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I'm probably not following this thread closely enough but I thought it ?her puppet scobie who was believed to be bleaching his skin?  was it Meghan also?


No sorry I was referring to Omid only in the last post. I didn’t mean MM.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lazeny said:


> Yes. Kate carries her pregnancy very well. Her clothes and coats are tailored to a tee even with a bump. She reminds me of Blake Lively when pregnant. Blooming and beautiful.


She's so tall that pregnancy looks good on her. Me, however at 5ft 2in and normally weighing 100lbs, I started showing early. Even strangers came out of the word work to ask if I was pregnant. I felt like saying, "No I had a bowling ball implanted so I could try out all the marvelous maternity clothes."


----------



## TC1

LOL Harry gets to pick the name from a "short list"


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I think everything you say here is factually right though one nuance to it I think is.. for a super wealthy family, a foundation isn't really the most "profitable" way to shelter taxes. There are way more options available to them, like offshore banking. The main benefit of a foundation to the wealthy is being able to control where their tax money goes versus the government. And I do get that... if you're forking over millions a year, it'd be nice to know exactly where it's going and see a concrete output from that, whether it's # of scholarships or hospital wing or whatever it is.



Offshore accounts still must be disclosed to the IRS (there is an annual question on your 1040) and also must included on valuations of estates.  You can't escape taxation of assets, no matter where they are located.  Of course, if people want to lie and hide assets, that's different and, yes, you could escape taxation that way if you wanted to roll those particular dice.


----------



## csshopper

Clearblueskies said:


> I do!


What is "elastics"? Sounds snappy


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm ten pages behind and usually read to the end before posting but I couldn't resist.
> You can tell she's grinning like a loon behind that face mask. People can roast me, IDGAF, but you can actually see the giddy grin on her face that she's being photographed. She's loving it. Absolutely loving it. Just like the pap photos when the Archie doll was slipping off her shoulders last year.


  I'm sorry @V0N1B2, it was meant to be a silly joke when I posted the picture of a loon after your earlier comment and I actually liked your post. And I only roast rescue chickens


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> What is "elastics"? Sounds snappy


I didn't realise it comes under many other names, we just know it as elastics.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I have, thank you! Luckily, that's one thing I don't have to worry about (yet anyway)! My mother and sister are also right handed and carry things on their left. We surprisingly have a lot of left handed family members, so maybe I got only half the gene, LOL. Or maybe we are all just weird.


I don't know how old you are, but I remember in elementary school during the 50's, left-handed kids were forced to use their right hand to write. My mother told me it was the same when she went to school. I imagine the 'southpaw gene' would still be transferrable to their descendants, who then functioned normally after this practice was abolished.


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> What is "elastics"? Sounds snappy


You jump and make patterns with the elastic using your feet, it gets higher (and harder) with each turn! 



Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't realise it comes under many other names, we just know it as elastics.
> 
> View attachment 5063912


Do kids still play this or are they too busy with their phones?


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't realise it comes under many other names, we just know it as elastics.
> 
> View attachment 5063912


My 912 month old mind looked at this and thought, "Hmmm, better not try this now." Sigh, a missed opportunity, but was into hop scotch and jump rope (including Double Dutch which uses two ropes for those not familiar with it) and the old fashioned skates we attached to our shoes using a special key to tighten the clips that held them in place so we could skate on the sidewalks and paved driveways.

Back on topic: lots of Harry and his wife to talk about today.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> Offshore accounts still must be disclosed to the IRS (there is an annual question on your 1040) and also must included on valuations of estates.  You can't escape taxation of assets, no matter where they are located.  Of course, if people want to lie and hide assets, that's different and, yes, you could escape taxation that way if you wanted to roll those particular dice.



Not about hiding or escaping it, but tax schemes are different in different countries and may be more advantageous in certain scenarios. Eg family with business entities in multiple nations may push more transactions to certain country-registered ones at different times of the year or for certain types of transactions. My company does it all the time and it's perfectly legal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I can't imagine H is asking WA for money for Archewell, that would be so tacky... I wonder if he's fundraising for specific charities he supports like Afrikan Parks. For someone to ask for money from a family foundation... to another family foundation, what's the point? 2 middle-men?? The Gates Foundation and other reputable family foundations don't accept donations for this reason... they tell you to donate directly to their grantees.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Always boggles my mind, even after all this time, the pronoun used is "*MY.*.."  not "*Our..*" Even if they used a surrogate,  Harry must have contributed something to this pregnancy.


Very true, but I also find the saying, "We are pregnant" ridiculous.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> You jump and make patterns with the elastic using your feet, it gets higher (and harder) with each turn!
> 
> 
> Do kids still play this or are they too busy with their phones?


Too busy with their phones


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't know how old you are, but I remember in elementary school during the 50's, left-handed kids were forced to use their right hand to write. My mother told me it was the same when she went to school. I imagine the 'southpaw gene' would still be transferrable to their descendants, who then functioned normally after this practice was abolished.


I told you, I'm over 485 months old!  

My parents were odd balls.  They actually tried to make me left handed, and I'd keep switching my utensils and crayons to my right.  We have so many southpaws on both sides, they thought it was totally normal and "looked cool".  They didn't succeed with me, but 3/5 of their grandchildren are left handed.  The other two are ambidextrous.  My son is right handed but plays sports with his left, as does my niece.  Genes are weird but so fun (to a nerd like me anyway).


----------



## Allisonfaye

Allisonfaye said:


> I would often carry my kid on the left side using my right arm to guide. I probably switched back and forth because the pressure on one hip all the time was too much.
> 
> I will say that I was never supposed to pick up my daughter when I was pregnant with my other daughter because as a former C-section patient, you are always at risk to your vagina exploding, for lack of a better word. (My kids are talking a mile a minute and I can't think of a better word now).



And not vagina. Uterus.


----------



## csshopper

Taking a second look at the US cover it says Harry's wife has "12 weeks to go." Then pulled up the paparazzi shot and the bump Archie is perched on looks too big for a baby not due til near the end of June. 

Could there be twins on the way? It would just their style to do an "oops, surprise, forgot to mention." Also makes it possible for them to have 3 children (like Will and Kate), in spite of proclaiming they would only have two, to save the planet.


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> LOL Harry gets to pick the name from a "short list"



It's funny but you know it'll be true


----------



## Genie27

It seems they were only able to grab the 'S' section of the thesaurus when they first fled to Canadian shores - why else would they only ever plan Special Sweet Secret (Surrogate) Surprises? I always think it's her own hand-calligraphed press release when it includes any/all of those key terms.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Always boggles my mind, even after all this time, the pronoun used is "*MY.*.."  not "*Our..*" Even if they used a surrogate, Harry must have contributed something to this pregnancy.


The magazine cover shows '12 weeks to go', so the baby should be born towards the end of July. In February at the time of her photo-op announcing the pregnancy with a huge bump (and Oprah's interview taping), was she only 4 months pregnant??? What am I missing here?


----------



## CAH

Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't realise it comes under many other names, we just know it as elastics.
> 
> View attachment 5063912


We called it Chinese Jump Rope - I was a champion at that back in the day!


----------



## Allisonfaye

papertiger said:


> Not giving-up on green either - far too much invested in green H bags to opt-out now.
> 
> Just really pleased M's greens of Emerald and Jade (that look good on her, but perhaps in smaller doses) are not _my_ greens



I LOVE green but that dress was no bueno.


----------



## bubablu

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> As so many of you already noted, I understand it's Will and Kate's youngest's birthday today? What an extraordinary coincidence.


 And it's not just us: an italian tabloid joked about this as well, and pointed out also that the photo is so clear that she must have seen (read: called) the paparazzi. I mean, girl, you are so obvious.
*La coincidenza: il giorno del compleanno di Louis*
Dall’altra parte dell’oceano, però, la stampa inglese non ha potuto non notare la coincidenza incredibile. Dopo mesi di silenzio e di spostamenti in incognito, la prima volta che Archie viene fotografato bene per strada è il giorno del terzo compleanno di suo cugino, il *principe Louis*.

Le immagini sono nitide. Non rubate da lontano. Meghan ha visto perfettamente i paparazzi appostati che la fotografavano. E che, probabilmente, la aspettavano da tempo in strada. Con tutti i giorni possibili, è successo il 23 aprile. I casi della vita!


----------



## carmen56

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.



I’m a Brit and I used to love playing elastic!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The magazine cover shows '12 weeks to go', so the baby should be born towards the end of July. In February at the time of her photo-op announcing the pregnancy with a huge bump (and Oprah's interview taping), was she only 4 months pregnant??? What am I missing here?


Which also means she was maybe 27 weeks pregnant at the time of the funeral.  Heavily pregnant, my a$$.  Most doctors I know are okay with pregnant women travelling at that stage, as long as there aren't other complications.  If Meg is perching Archie on her belly, I'm guessing she doesn't have any of the usual complications that would prevent traveling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> With the several millions H has (or had), they wouldn't need to live modestly. However, they seem to want a billionaire lifestyle, and for that...



30 millions won't see you far if your wife spends 1 million in clothes per year, you insist on a house that could accomodate five families and you really don't work all that much.



> View attachment 5063747
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan must throw Cambridges’ ‘under woke bus’
> 
> 
> THE DUKE and Duchess of Sussex have been advised they need to "throw the Cambridges under the woke bus" if they are to "truly establish themselves as celebrities in America".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Harry's a low-life. We all know what I think about greedy, soulless Meghan, but it's his family that did everything for him he allows to be treated like this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

'People are bored!' Meghan & Harry warned people already tired of them
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry may be too overexposed in the public, according to a royal commentator, who admitted that he had been told online that people are "bored of hearing about" the couple.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Cringe's PR




The thing is, who thinks that makes her look good? So bratty, defiant and unnecessarily aggressive, it does not make her sound endearing.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Too busy with their phones



You mean like us


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> You mean like us


Ooops!!


----------



## octopus17

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't know how old you are, but I remember in elementary school during the 50's, left-handed kids were forced to use their right hand to write. My mother told me it was the same when she went to school. I imagine the 'southpaw gene' would still be transferrable to their descendants, who then functioned normally after this practice was abolished.


This happened to my mother (although strangely not her brothers). She was forced to change from left to right and as a result developed a terrible stutter which she then had treatment for - awful really...
I'm left-handed myself and the weird thing I recently noticed, is that she writes my name exactly the same as I write my name - she with her right hand and me with my left. The writing is identical. Freaked me out a bit!


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> *I can't imagine H is asking WA for money for Archewell, that would be so tacky... *I wonder if he's fundraising for specific charities he supports like Afrikan Parks. For someone to ask for money from a family foundation... to another family foundation, what's the point? 2 middle-men?? The Gates Foundation and other reputable family foundations don't accept donations for this reason... they tell you to donate directly to their grantees.



Don't underestimate his most abundant qualities


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Very true, but I also find the saying, "We are pregnant" ridiculous.



Especially, when the guy says it and the woman isn't even in the room!!!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if this woman is going to help them and in what way


She listened to him politely and for old time’s sake and then after he left, she told her assistant that if he called again, to say she was in a meeting and don’t give hime a dime.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Neither one is likeable, IMO.  Merchers and moochers make all of us uncomfortable.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, who thinks that makes her look good? So bratty, defiant and unnecessarily aggressive, it does not make her sound endearing.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Especially, when the guy says it and the woman isn't even in the room!!!


Next guy that says that can have the morning sickness and labor pains


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Very true, but I also find the saying, "We are pregnant" ridiculous.


Agree,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Very true, but I also find the saying, "We are pregnant" ridiculous.



Jup, only topped by "We gave birth". No, one of you most certainly wasn't / didn't. That said, "our child" would maybe be more considerate than "my child", unless you are a single mom with a deadbeat dad


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't know how old you are, but I remember in elementary school during the 50's, left-handed kids were forced to use their right hand to write. My mother told me it was the same when she went to school. I imagine the 'southpaw gene' would still be transferrable to their descendants, who then functioned normally after this practice was abolished.


My 4th grade teacher who was 65 if she was a day when she was my teacher, said the nuns at her grammar school tied her left hand behind her back to get her to write right handed.  She turned out to have beautiful penmanship. One of my nieces is a leftie  and we don’t know where that came from. Only one in generations.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> You mean like us


Excuse me, I'm on my computer.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> My 4th grade teacher who was 65 if she was a day when she was my teacher, said the nuns at her grammar school tied her left hand behind her back to get her to write right handed.  She turned out to have beautiful penmanship. One of my nieces is a leftie  and we don’t know where that came from. Only one in generations.



I had my left hand tied behind my back in the 1960s didn’t work I’m still left handed I did mirror writing when they put a pen in my right hand every time -I was 4


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Next guy that says that can have the morning sickness and labor pains


And the bloating, indigestion, constipation, frequent urination, body aching, waddling, and (my personal favorite) "mommy brain". 
(Can you tell my pregnancies were awful?)


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> I had my left hand tied behind my back in the 1960s didn’t work I’m still left handed I did mirror writing when they put a pen in my right hand every time -I was 4



To this day, there is still so much ignorance in the world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Next guy that says that can have the morning sickness and labor pains



Piers tried one of this machines that simulate labour. He was making benevolent fun of giving birth before, then screamed in pain when they put it to level 60 or something and demanded to take if off. One of the show's female producers came out and said "Well, I tried it, I got up to 65, I'd say that's about the level of pain before they even give you oxygen and gas." He was crushed.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I think everything you say here is factually right though one nuance to it I think is.. for a super wealthy family, a foundation isn't really the most "profitable" way to shelter taxes. There are way more options available to them, like offshore banking. The main benefit of a foundation to the wealthy is being able to control where their tax money goes versus the government. And I do get that... if you're forking over millions a year, it'd be nice to know exactly where it's going and see a concrete output from that, whether it's # of scholarships or hospital wing or whatever it is.
> 
> And on the point a lot of these charities do a better job than a government program - yes, and the government knows it too! They fund a lot of charities through grants. There's no way a government can reach into every locality here and abroad, with all its different needs, in a cost-effective way. Of course the downside to that is... there are some truly useless charities that are probably wasting what would be tax revenue on niche programs that don't provide much benefit to society.



I don't think its ok for the super wealthy to build the foundations so that they can control where there tax dollars go. That is a imbalance of power and not really fair. I don't see why someone who earns an average wage should have less of a choice/option in where there tax dollars go. Why should a doctor, nurse, lawyer, firefighter etc have less of a choice where there money is spent? 

The unpaid taxes of the super rich could solve a lot of problems such as healthcare, homelessness, public health etc. And you would be able to fund more charities which you say can be more effective than the government. 

I just don't see the virtue in creating a charity when there are so many already.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> I had my left hand tied behind my back in the 1960s didn’t work I’m still left handed I did mirror writing when they put a pen in my right hand every time -I was 4


You should have been around during the time you couldn't speak Welsh in school, in Wales


----------



## LittleStar88

.


csshopper said:


> Taking a second look at the US cover it says Harry's wife has "12 weeks to go." Then pulled up the paparazzi shot and the bump Archie is perched on looks too big for a baby not due til near the end of June.
> 
> Could there be twins on the way? It would just their style to do an "oops, surprise, forgot to mention." Also makes it possible for them to have 3 children (like Will and Kate), in spite of proclaiming they would only have two, to save the planet.



No way does she have 12 weeks to go!

She is going to pop that kid out as soon as possible and drag Diana, Jr and Archie to the Diana statue thingy in July. I am convinced she will be there just to be a spectacle and outshine the whole event and family.


----------



## zen1965

carmen56 said:


> I’m a Brit and I used to love playing elastic!


I am not a Brit but from across the channel and I used to love it, too!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I can't imagine H is asking WA for money for Archewell, that would be so tacky... I wonder if he's fundraising for specific charities he supports like Afrikan Parks. For someone to ask for money from a family foundation... to another family foundation, what's the point? 2 middle-men?? The Gates Foundation and other reputable family foundations don't accept donations for this reason... they tell you to donate directly to their grantees.



I agree, it would be tacky asking WA for money. He may be able to get some big money from her and then put a couple of dollars from Arch*well and advertise  a donation to, for example, AfriKan Parks as a joint venture between both foundations. Big publicity for Ginger and Cringe...   

Though, it was also tacky asking the Disney's CEO for a job for Cringe, and he did it anyway...


----------



## bubablu

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.


I played elastic too! A lot!


----------



## Jayne1

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I also have a photo of myself holding my toddler in pretty much that same unnatural and dangerous position, with his leg over my 7 months pregnant stomach, that I am happy to post if receipts are needed.


Posing for a still photo or going for a walk?


----------



## CarryOn2020

No surprise to most of us.
For the disastrous duo, it may be time to get on the right side of the pond.  While the US may have plenty of money [cough, cough], it won’t be going to an entitled prince. Celebs come and go, the Queen is forever.
 









						Queen is a bigger 'global brand' than Beyoncé, research claims
					

Research from Statista reveals that the Queen's personal brand is 16 times bigger than Beyoncé's brand, six times the size of Kim Kardashian and 23 times bigger than the Beckhams.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> Cringe's PR



I am posting as I read. May be really behind the discussion - but from this she has 12 weeks to go. 3 months, give or take. If she's so "heavily pregnant" at 6 months, she'll have a hot air balloon as a moon bump at 9 months!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 30 millions won't see you far if your wife spends 1 million in clothes per year, you insist on a house that could accomodate five families and you really don't work all that much.
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's a low-life. We all know what I think about greedy, soulless Meghan, but it's his family that did everything for him he allows to be treated like this.


Agree with you, but a budget of 30 million dollars (I believe >$40M according to lady C), allows for more than a modest lifestyle imo. 

If possible, the BRF should remove their titles and succession rights...


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> She listened to him politely and for old time’s sake and then after he left, she told her assistant that if he called again, to say she was in a meeting and don’t give hime a dime.


You got my vote!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

redney said:


> I am posting as I read. May be really behind the discussion - but from this she has 12 weeks to go. 3 months, give or take. If she's so "heavily pregnant" at 6 months, she'll have a hot air balloon as a moon bump at 9 months!


I think someone ordered the wrong size moon bumps from Amazon.  I think they sent her the moon bumps for “triplets”.
Edit for tyo


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> And the bloating, indigestion, constipation, frequent urination, body aching, waddling, and (my personal favorite) "mommy brain".
> (Can you tell my pregnancies were awful?)



I might be a freak but I loved being pregnant. I had some kind of hormone high from it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't think its ok for the super wealthy to build the foundations so that they can control where there tax dollars go. That is a imbalance of power and not really fair. I don't see why someone who earns an average wage should have less of a choice/option in where there tax dollars go. Why should a doctor, nurse, lawyer, firefighter etc have less of a choice where there money is spent?
> 
> The unpaid taxes of the super rich could solve a lot of problems such as healthcare, homelessness, public health etc. And you would be able to fund more charities which you say can be more effective than the government.
> 
> I just don't see the virtue in creating a charity when there are so many already.



I have mixed feeling about this. A legitimate charity, IMO, beats the government bloat and bureaucracy all day long. But since these wealthy people figured out how to game the system, it's all different.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't think its ok for the super wealthy to build the foundations so that they can control where there tax dollars go. That is a imbalance of power and not really fair. I don't see why someone who earns an average wage should have less of a choice/option in where there tax dollars go. Why should a doctor, nurse, lawyer, firefighter etc have less of a choice where there money is spent?
> 
> The unpaid taxes of the super rich could solve a lot of problems such as healthcare, homelessness, public health etc. And you would be able to fund more charities which you say can be more effective than the government.
> 
> I just don't see the virtue in creating a charity when there are so many already.



I wasn't saying that it's better for the rich to avoid taxes and donate it directly to charity instead. I just meant, assuming they are paying their fair share of taxes (however that is defined by the respective governments) then I totally get the desire to have charitable donations be channeled directly to their desired purposes. Normal people DO get to choose where their donations go - you can choose who you donate to. The issue of taxation is totally different, it's not a discretionary donation... it's basically a fee for upkeep of your community. Everyone should pay their fee first and foremost before discretionary spending. 

To me a charity is kind of like a business... why do we have so many businesses when there are so many already? There might be a lot of redundancy but it's one of those things... people want to create their own spin on whatever it is. A foundation, though technically registered as a charity, is totally different though and I think that's just functional. It's the same as creating a trust or bank account.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> I had my left hand tied behind my back in the 1960s didn’t work I’m still left handed I did mirror writing when they put a pen in my right hand every time -I was 4



This happed to me in the 1980s! Although a religious school, perhaps they were more 'traditional' (my mother took me away because she caught me outside after being asked to measure the playground - twice).

Pencil pulled out of my hand every time for writing with my left hand in English (my father was a leftie) the rule was "if you can't see clearly what you've written, don't write it that way". Wasn't the same with writing other languages or art, so I carried on using my left too. 

I'm ambidextrous now but write different styles left and right. Play guitar right handed (you need dexterity in both hands so actually it shouldn't be an issue either way) and tennis left. 

Since we type all the time now on devices all this fuss was just pointless and cruel.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Piers tried one of this machines that simulate labour. He was making benevolent fun of giving birth before, then screamed in pain when they put it to level 60 or something and demanded to take if off. One of the show's female producers came out and said "Well, I tried it, I got up to 65, I'd say that's about the level of pain before they even give you oxygen and gas." He was crushed.


Most of us get the chance to ease into labour though. Mine took 24 hours to get to the level of needing something.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> Maybe it's a life-size doll?
> 
> Do they do _those_ now? Moondolls? Sundolls?
> 
> If not, I can see a gap in the market.


Those life like dolls are creepy AF 
Maybe I've read too much Stephen King  but I could NEVER sleep with one of them in the house


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I think someone ordered the wrong size moon bumps from Amazon.  I think they sent her the moon bumps for “triplets”.
> Edit for tyo


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> This happed to me in the 1980s! Although a religious school, perhaps they were more 'traditional' (my mother took me away because she caught me outside after being asked to measure the playground - twice).
> 
> Pencil pulled out of my hand every time for writing with my left hand in English (my father was a leftie) the rule was "if you can't see clearly what you've written, don't write it that way". Wasn't the same with writing other languages or art, so I carried on using my left too.
> 
> I'm ambidextrous now but write different styles left and right. Play guitar right handed (you need dexterity in both hands so actually it shouldn't be an issue either way) and tennis left.
> 
> Since we type all the time now on devices all this fuss was just pointless and cruel.



Yeah, child of the 80s and they made me sit on my left hand, but I’m dyslexic so I couldn’t learn to write right handed so they just didn’t teach me and I had to teach myself... finally had a teacher in 4 th grade who let me write left handed and left me alone. Was behind in skills for years over it. ah the Backwards South... thank the gods for keyboards because my handwriting is unreadable.


----------



## papertiger

Sol Ryan said:


> Yeah, child of the 80s and they made me sit on my left hand, but I’m dyslexic so I couldn’t learn to write right handed so they just didn’t teach me and I had to teach myself... finally had a teacher in 4 th grade who let me write left handed and left me alone. Was behind in skills for years over it. ah the Backwards South... thank the gods for keyboards because my handwriting is unreadable.



Cruelty. So sorry this happed to you (and others on here that were affected).


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> LOL Harry gets to pick the name from a "short list"


It sounds like she’s going to mail it to him doesn’t it? Perhaps he’ll get a little shock in his collar when he suggests the wrong one.

Also, is everyone on this thread left handed?
Is being sinister-sided like the sunglasses in ‘they live’ but for the Harkles’ lies?

If so, bad news guys were always only a third or something. 

Edit - according to Wikipedia lefties are actually only 10% of the population.


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> Cruelty. So sorry this happed to you (and others on here that were affected).



Thanks. I’m just glad I was in public school and not taught by nuns like my dad. He had scars on his hands from where they got him with a ruler....


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Sad to say I'm over 485 months.


You’re still a youngster. I’m at 783 months. Yeesh that’s a lot.


----------



## redney

Leftie here! The only issue I had in school was there were never left-handed scissors in elementary school so I learned to use scissors with my right hand. Otherwise, no issues from family or teachers. I was in school during the 70s-80s.


----------



## Sol Ryan

redney said:


> Leftie here! The only issue I had in school was there were never left-handed scissors in elementary school so I learned to use scissors with my right hand. Otherwise, no issues from family or teachers. I was in school during the 70s-80s.



I love leftie scissors and notebooks... sadly though they were so hard to find I’m worse with the lefty scissors than I am with right handed ones


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I didn’t mind being pregnant. It was the “giving birth” part that I could’ve done without.  26 hours and 5 epidurals.  Nowadays you have an epidural drip which is so much better than having to tell my husband to run out and get me on the list for my next dose since there was only one doctor giving them and the floor was filled to capacity with laboring patients.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> I might be a freak but I loved being pregnant. I had some kind of hormone high from it.


That's awesome!  I was always envious of women who glowed and coasted through pregnancy saying "I love being pregnant".  Must be lovely.  I looked and felt like a troll the entire time.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> And not vagina. Uterus.


I was going to say..."exploding vagina" sounds absolutely horrendous.  (Not that an exploding uterus is any better, mind you...)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> I didn’t mind being pregnant. It was the “giving birth” part that I could’ve done without.  26 hours and 5 epidurals.  Nowadays you have an epidural drip which is so much better than having to tell my husband to run out and get me on the list for my next dose since there was only one doctor giving them and the floor was filled to capacity with laboring patients.



I'm so deadly afraid of epidurals. I was offered one when at the ICU with pancreatitis and they couldn't manage my pain at all even with morphines. I was basically crying when I breathed in too deeply by accident, couldn't find a position to lie comfortably in, was unable to sleep until I passed out from exhaustion but I refused because it sounded like my biggest nightmare. If I ever fall pregnant I better work on that for those 9 months haha.


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> It seems they were only able to grab the 'S' section of the thesaurus when they first fled to Canadian shores - why else would they only ever plan Special Sweet Secret (Surrogate) Surprises? I always think it's her own hand-calligraphed press release when it includes any/all of those key terms.


I think the baby (staying with the S theme) should go the route of Claire from Outlander and be called Sassenach.  How fitting, right?  She's an "English person" by birthright?


----------



## csshopper

Briefly OT, but relevant to the Lefties who post. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with this business.

DS is a leftie, the only one in a family of 4, back in 1978 on a vacation trip to San Francisco CA we discovered what was then a new store in the Pier 39 shopping area, "Lefty's, the Left Hand Store." He was a little boy and felt like we had discovered treasure. We loaded up with things to make his home and school life easier. The store closed for a period of years due to family illness, but the Pier 39 management continued to get so many requests for the store, they contacted the family, it reopened, a new larger facility, and are, I think are still in business, unless affected by Covid.  They have a website and on line shopping. 

Too exhaustive to list all their products but some he has found helpful as an adult, all scissors (kitchen, haircutting, medical, manicure, heavy duty and they have sewing scissors); box cutter and pocket knives, pruners for the garden and grass  trimmer, hand held can opener for camping trips. Everything needed for office supplies. Fun to browse.


----------



## rose60610

Is anyone safe from trying to be sucked off of by Meghan and Harry? Wallis Annenberg is 81 years old. M&H's PR team must have hired detectives to find filthy wealthy people agreeable to meeting this disgusting couple who would be NOTHING without the BRF they love to slander. One wonders how many other wealthy people were hit up but told M&H's handlers to F off. Surely Annenberg knew Harry's intent was to dial for dollars plus mine her for more referrals, nothing more. Notice how the heavily pregnant one did not attend, why risk her stupid mouth blurting out something idiotic and killing any potential deal? If Harry came home empty handed he'd get the Riot Act so he had to bring his A-game. Maybe he even showered and had his clothes pressed for the occasion. Those who know Annenberg will be screening their calls against Ginge/Cringe tentacles. M&H probably figured Wallis could be a good bridge to Gates, Spielberg, Bezos, some Silicon Valley tycoons and others and at age 81 might be dotty enough to drop a dime on them. Anytime M&H pretend to care about anyone, it's just a money grab. Philanthropists live with people hitting them up for money all the time, and the uber wealthy know they can call in a card when they contribute to each other. What do M&H have to offer? Connections to the BRF? Hah! That bond is incinerated. They have nothing but stories of self pity. Hardly marketable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Has this been posted? People are screaming for sueing Scobie and the Harkles for treason and setting some people up in the Tower while dropping the keys into the Thames    She also says Harry's welcome was, uh, unenthusiastic but said she'd only reveal in detail what she's been told if people expressively ask about is, so next video perhaps.


----------



## Genie27

purseinsanity said:


> I think the baby (staying with the S theme) should go the route of Claire from Outlander and be called Sassenach.  How fitting, right?  She's an "English person" by birthright?


Sussex Sassenach as promoted by Sunshine Sachs?


----------



## pukasonqo

Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't realise it comes under many other names, we just know it as elastics.
> 
> View attachment 5063912



We called it “liga” or “liguero”, my sister was awesome at it and obsessed to the point she would use chairs to stretch the elastic and entertain herself
My personal favourite was hopscotch which we called “rayuela” o “mundo” i think depending on how you drew the board


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Cringe's PR




12 WEEKS?!?!?
That bump she was sporting looked more like 12 days to go


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> I was going to say..."exploding vagina" sounds absolutely horrendous.  (Not that an exploding uterus is any better, mind you...)



I hadn't had any coffee yet and it was late arrival day...AGAIN.


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> Sussex Sassenach as promoted by Sunshine Sachs?


Two strippers!!


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> My 4th grade teacher who was 65 if she was a day when she was my teacher, said the nuns at her grammar school tied her left hand behind her back to get her to write right handed.  She turned out to have beautiful penmanship. One of my nieces is a leftie  and we don’t know where that came from. Only one in generations.



I had a teacher at uni who was originally from an African country and had beautiful handwriting 
He told the class he was originally a leftie but was educated at a catholic school were the priests would bind his left hand to his body to force him to use his right hand (he also mentioned physical punishment) and it broke my heart
My son is a southpaw, the only one in the family and he had difficulties in writing when he started learning (no spaces, starting to write from the right, etc) but had a wonderful teacher and as a result he has really clear writing ( apparently he was told by a classmate his handwriting was as neat as a girl’s..which wasn’t welcome)
Myself, I carried my kids on my left hip and it was my left leg my strong leg when doing ballet, coincidentally it was issues w my left leg that lead to my MS diagnosis


----------



## pukasonqo

csshopper said:


> Briefly OT, but relevant to the Lefties who post. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with this business.
> 
> DS is a leftie, the only one in a family of 4, back in 1978 on a vacation trip to San Francisco CA we discovered what was then a new store in the Pier 39 shopping area, "Lefty's, the Left Hand Store." He was a little boy and felt like we had discovered treasure. We loaded up with things to make his home and school life easier. The store closed for a period of years due to family illness, but the Pier 39 management continued to get so many requests for the store, they contacted the family, it reopened, a new larger facility, and are, I think are still in business, unless affected by Covid.  They have a website and on line shopping.
> 
> Too exhaustive to list all their products but some he has found helpful as an adult, all scissors (kitchen, haircutting, medical, manicure, heavy duty and they have sewing scissors); box cutter and pocket knives, pruners for the garden and grass  trimmer, hand held can opener for camping trips. Everything needed for office supplies. Fun to browse.











						Famous lefties
					

In honor of World Left-Handers Day, we highlight some of the most notable people to have ever embarked down the dexterous road less taken




					www.cbsnews.com
				




My personal favourites: Ned Flanders, Hellboy and *****


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
					

Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rhyvin

Aimee3 said:


> I think someone ordered the wrong size moon bumps from Amazon.  I think they sent her the moon bumps for “triplets”.
> Edit for tyo


I'm a triplet and my mom (who was very petite- 5'2) was on bed rest for the last two months because she was so large!


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Is anyone safe from trying to be sucked off of by Meghan and Harry? Wallis Annenberg is 81 years old. M&H's PR team must have hired detectives to find filthy wealthy people agreeable to meeting this disgusting couple who would be NOTHING without the BRF they love to slander. One wonders how many other wealthy people were hit up but told M&H's handlers to F off. Surely Annenberg knew Harry's intent was to dial for dollars plus mine her for more referrals, nothing more. Notice how the heavily pregnant one did not attend, why risk her stupid mouth blurting out something idiotic and killing any potential deal? If Harry came home empty handed he'd get the Riot Act so he had to bring his A-game. Maybe he even showered and had his clothes pressed for the occasion. Those who know Annenberg will be screening their calls against Ginge/Cringe tentacles. M&H probably figured Wallis could be a good bridge to Gates, Spielberg, Bezos, some Silicon Valley tycoons and others and at age 81 might be dotty enough to drop a dime on them. Anytime M&H pretend to care about anyone, it's just a money grab. Philanthropists live with people hitting them up for money all the time, and the uber wealthy know they can call in a card when they contribute to each other. What do M&H have to offer? Connections to the BRF? Hah! That bond is incinerated. They have nothing but stories of self pity. Hardly marketable.



Some facts may help with perspective:

- Walter Annenberg, Wallis’s father, was the USA’s Ambassador to the UK during Nixon‘s presidency. He earned several medals/awards.








						Walter Annenberg - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



- Lenore Annenberg, Wallis’s step-mom, was Chief of Protocol of the US during Reagan’s presidency
Take a moment to appreciate how well-connected Wallis’s parents were and, especially, what her formative years must have been like.
Since 2007, she has successfully led the Annenberg Foundation. She is well-educated, well-connected and very aware of current events.

Take a look at what they do - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annenberg_Foundation
_The Annenberg Foundation owns the not-for-profit website FactCheck.org which describes itself as a service to reduce confusion over U.S. politics.[3]
The Annenberg Foundation receives grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.[4]
The Annenberg Foundation continues its programming focus, but its efforts include environmental stewardship, social justice, and animal welfare. The foundation has roots as a traditional grantmaking institution and is also involved in the community. The Annenberg Foundation promotes charitable activities through which large-scale solutions to systemic problems are pursued._

True, the lady is of a certain age, but this idea that she is a helpless, preyed upon female is *totally false*. Watch the interview. She is strong, wise, and surrounded by loving family members. She has been handing out dollars successfully for decades, knows how to read people and gets what _she_ wants out of them. She is more informed, more aware than she is being given credit for. Please, she can handle her own.

My guess is she will refuse H’s calls in the future .. unless he brings Charles with him. Whatever she does with the BRF [not H&M] is for the greater good of the Annenberg Foundation. Only good will come from that.


----------



## Toby93

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.


Lol, yep


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so deadly afraid of epidurals. I was offered one when at the ICU with pancreatitis and they couldn't manage my pain at all even with morphines. I was basically crying when I breathed in too deeply by accident, couldn't find a position to lie comfortably in, was unable to sleep until I passed out from exhaustion but I refused because it sounded like my biggest nightmare. If I ever fall pregnant I better work on that for those 9 months haha.



I recently had an epic abdominal surgery and had the most lovely epidural... Felt zero pain. I'm so sorry it didn't work for you. Post-op pain was my biggest worry and I seemed to skate right through (thankfully).


csshopper said:


> Briefly OT, but relevant to the Lefties who post. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with this business.
> 
> DS is a leftie, the only one in a family of 4, back in 1978 on a vacation trip to San Francisco CA we discovered what was then a new store in the Pier 39 shopping area, "Lefty's, the Left Hand Store." He was a little boy and felt like we had discovered treasure. We loaded up with things to make his home and school life easier. The store closed for a period of years due to family illness, but the Pier 39 management continued to get so many requests for the store, they contacted the family, it reopened, a new larger facility, and are, I think are still in business, unless affected by Covid.  They have a website and on line shopping.
> 
> Too exhaustive to list all their products but some he has found helpful as an adult, all scissors (kitchen, haircutting, medical, manicure, heavy duty and they have sewing scissors); box cutter and pocket knives, pruners for the garden and grass  trimmer, hand held can opener for camping trips. Everything needed for office supplies. Fun to browse.



Both of my parents were lefties... They didn't receive any push to use their right hands. But I remember this store! I think there was another someplace in the bay area at one point. My mom always had the lefty scissors and they were impossible for me to use 



Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5064226
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
> 
> 
> Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



There's truth, and then there is the Sussex reality. I think they created their own reality and have decided to just live there, then regurgitate it as truths.


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Taking a second look at the US cover it says Harry's wife has "12 weeks to go." Then pulled up the paparazzi shot and the bump Archie is perched on looks too big for a baby not due til near the end of June.
> 
> Could there be twins on the way? It would just their style to do an "oops, surprise, forgot to mention." Also makes it possible for them to have 3 children (like Will and Kate), in spite of proclaiming they would only have two, to save the planet.


If she still has 12 weeks to go, then she could definitely been approved to fly!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
> 
> 
> Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is OW trying to reclaim the narrative, “her truth”.

RE: Wallis A. - H&M do not have an _A game_, so there is no way he brought his non-existent ‘A game’ — the best they offer is a Z-list game.


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> Famous lefties
> 
> 
> In honor of World Left-Handers Day, we highlight some of the most notable people to have ever embarked down the dexterous road less taken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My personal favourites: Ned Flanders, Hellboy and *****


I believe many presidents since WWII were also left handed!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if her foundation would contribue to Archewell.....doesn't seem right to me - Archewell should be giving money not getting it, right?



They want someone to give them the money that they are going to give away. You can’t expect them to give away their own money.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More on WA - notice how well H&M’s projects line up with hers.  What a coinky-dink.
Y’all, the world is bigger than H&M’s kid. 









						Wallis Annenberg - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




_Philanthropic projects include:_

_Wallis Annenberg PetSpace_
_Wallis Annenberg GenSpace_
_Wallis Annenberg Center for the Performing Arts_
_Annenberg Space for Photography_
_Annenberg Community Beach House_


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is OW trying to reclaim the narrative, “her truth”.
> 
> RE: Wallis A. - H&M do not have an _A game_, so there is no way he brought his non-existent ‘A game’ — the best they offer is a Z-list game.


If Oprah is still clinging to the interview as truths, then she has as many problems as Harry and his wife. Part of the "impact, which she chooses to ignore, although if she reads at all must be aware of it, is that many more people know Meghan is a narcissistic liar, out of touch with reality (secret wedding etc) and that she, Oprah, looked foolish for being unprepared with facts. And that H is a whiny man child shackled to a she wolf. Literally, a lot of chicken **** got spread.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is OW trying to reclaim the narrative, “her truth”.
> 
> RE: Wallis A. - H&M do not have a A game, the best they offer is a Z-list game.



Oprah, MM, H... are still not satisfied with the damage done to the BRF, it looks like they want more. Prince Philip's funeral was less than 1 week ago, and the lack of respect is 

She keeps bringing the conversations on Archie's skin color, which were contradicted by Harry during the interview, and doesn't address any of the several claims that were verified and confirmed false.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting video!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oprah, MM, H... are still not satisfied with the damage done to the BRF, it looks like they want more. Prince Philip's funeral was less than 1 week ago, and the lack of respect is
> 
> She keeps bringing the conversations on Archie's skin color, which were contradicted by Harry during the interview, and doesn't address any of the several claims that were verified and confirmed false.



How odd, it turns out she is the older woman people should worry was duped by H&M.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Chanbal Thanks for this image.
> 
> View attachment 5063892
> 
> 
> H's heavily pregnant wife is a headlines grabbing famewhore and...



I still have to catch up on several pages but has anybody addressed the text in that little magenta burst next to Meghan?

It says “World Exclusive 12 Weeks to Go.” Does that mean what I think it does? They promised to give US Weekly an exclusive on the birth of the new baby. 12 weeks from now is near the end of July. Not as heavily pregnant as she wanted us to believe apparently.

ETA: I see it has been addressed already. Well, I’m still appalled.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5064226
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
> 
> 
> Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Walking it back, is she?


----------



## octopus17

csshopper said:


> Briefly OT, but relevant to the Lefties who post. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with this business.
> 
> DS is a leftie, the only one in a family of 4, back in 1978 on a vacation trip to San Francisco CA we discovered what was then a new store in the Pier 39 shopping area, "Lefty's, the Left Hand Store." He was a little boy and felt like we had discovered treasure. We loaded up with things to make his home and school life easier. The store closed for a period of years due to family illness, but the Pier 39 management continued to get so many requests for the store, they contacted the family, it reopened, a new larger facility, and are, I think are still in business, unless affected by Covid.  They have a website and on line shopping.
> 
> Too exhaustive to list all their products but some he has found helpful as an adult, all scissors (kitchen, haircutting, medical, manicure, heavy duty and they have sewing scissors); box cutter and pocket knives, pruners for the garden and grass  trimmer, hand held can opener for camping trips. Everything needed for office supplies. Fun to browse.



The main things I find most awkward to use are a tin opener and a corkscrew - everything goes the wrong way . That shop sounds great!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> *Also, is everyone on this thread left handed?*
> Edit - according to Wikipedia lefties are actually only 10% of the population.


Just clarifying, I'm not a southpaw, but I asked questions when I realized there were many on TPF and I was hoping no one here went through what the kid behind me in grade four went through. His left hand writing was atrocious so you can imagine what his right hand writing was like. I think it's unconscionable how so many suffered at the hands of clueless instructors for so many years.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> How odd, it turns out she is the older woman people should worry was duped by H&M.


I don't think Oprah was duped, she is just continuing to help MM. She already profited several millions with her help, not bad!


----------



## xyzzy

bag-mania said:


> I still have to catch up on several pages but has anybody addressed the text in that little magenta burst next to Meghan?
> 
> It says “World Exclusive 12 Weeks to Go.” Does that mean what I think it does? They promised to give US Weekly an exclusive on the birth of the new baby. 12 weeks from now is near the end of July. Not as heavily pregnant as she wanted us to believe apparently.
> 
> ETA: I see it has been addressed already. Well, I’m still appalled.



Funny, I wouldn’t go around letting magazines have exclusive stories on the impending delivery of my moon bump if I _jUsT wANtED pRiVacY _ … do you think this will also be “her truth”?


----------



## csshopper

Cornflower Blue said:


> The main things I find most awkward to use are a tin opener and a corkscrew - everything goes the wrong way . That shop sounds great!




The pictures didn't copy, but this is currently on line:
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



Left Handed Can Openers, Peelers & Corkscrews


----------



## Chanbal

This is obvious! 


_Speaking to MailOnline a royal insider said the Queen was annoyed by the Ms Winfrey interview.
They said: “*The Queen has made it clear to senior advisers that she is united with Charles and William, and was disappointed with aspects of Harry and Meghan’s interview*._









						Queen ‘disappointed’ in Sussexes over Oprah interview
					

THE QUEEN was "disappointed" by the incendiary interview the Duke and Duchess of Sussex gave to Oprah Winfrey last month according to a royal insider.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Oprah was duped, she is just continuing to help MM. She already profited several millions with her help, not bad!



True she supposedly profited several million, look at what she has lost in terms of reputation, integrity, etc. The stuff that matters, IMO. H&M have lost so much more by doing the one interview.

Maybe someday OW will explain why she didn’t ask the obvious follow-ups and seemed so ill-prepared.

ETA: if we are now in an OW vs QE world, I’m with QE.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5064226
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
> 
> 
> Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So now, Oprah is trying to distance herself.  She was "surprised".  Not her idea, don't look at her.


----------



## Allisonfaye

My take on the Oprah thing is even she couldn't believe what dopes these people were throwing the BRF under the bus.


----------



## Aimee3

youngster said:


> So now, Oprah is trying to distance herself.  She was "surprised".  Not her idea, don't look at her.


But the interview was taped over several hours, wasn’t it?  Then edited?  Wouldn’t a real interviewer then say, hey we need to address these points you brought up etc.  Or, did that happen and then all the good stuff got edited out?  Who had final editing “rights”?
So many questions.


----------



## lalame

Aimee3 said:


> But the interview was taped over several hours, wasn’t it?  Then edited?  Wouldn’t a real interviewer then say, hey we need to address these points you brought up etc.  Or, did that happen and then all the good stuff got edited out?  Who had final editing “rights”?
> So many questions.



I think it probably did.... I imagine there had to be instances where they went somewhere they did not want to make public. I think that's kind of normal for an interview though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OW was duped.  H&M misled her such that she was shocked. 
My, my, she seems so desperate for the world to know, know, she is giving back. Y’all get that? She has been handing out $15K checks.  It would be more if the gov’t allowed it.  Everyone should understand she has been blessed and now is giving back. Ok? Okaaay?


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> If Oprah is still clinging to the interview as truths, then she has as many problems as Harry and his wife. Part of the "impact, which she chooses to ignore, although if she reads at all must be aware of it, is that many more people know Meghan is a narcissistic liar, out of touch with reality (secret wedding etc) and that she, Oprah, looked foolish for being unprepared with facts. And that H is a whiny man child shackled to a she wolf. Literally, a lot of chicken **** got spread.


In for a penny in for a pound


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think it probably did.... I imagine there had to be instances where they went somewhere they did not want to make public. I think that's kind of normal for an interview though.



The more skilled interviewers would have simply asked for evidence, not accusations, not gossip, not hearsay.
Evidence to support the claims. Without the facts, it belongs in a gossip thread, so here we are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW was duped.  H&M misled her such that she was shocked.
> My, my, she seems so desperate for the world to know, know, she is giving back. Y’all get that? She has been handing out $15K checks.  It would be more if the gov’t allowed it.  Everyone should understand she has been blessed and now is giving back. Ok? Okaaay?



Did she send a pandemic relief check to Ginger & Cringe?


----------



## AbbytheBT

Am lefty too! The lefty scissors in school box were dull and never worked!


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, OW admits she knew how hurtful the interview would be to the BRF and aired it anyway.
Wow.


Didn’t H&M claim they had no idea when the interview would air? 
Yeah.


----------



## lalame

poopsie said:


> In for a penny in for a pound



Bingo.... but frankly I can't hate on it. I make a fraction of a fraction what Oprah makes for evangelizing boring technology products.   You would think they cured male baldness, the way I market them as the best products ever. Oprah's become an influencer more than a journalist - she knows whatever she does sells.


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> Briefly OT, but relevant to the Lefties who post. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with this business.
> 
> DS is a leftie, the only one in a family of 4, back in 1978 on a vacation trip to San Francisco CA we discovered what was then a new store in the Pier 39 shopping area, "Lefty's, the Left Hand Store." He was a little boy and felt like we had discovered treasure. We loaded up with things to make his home and school life easier. The store closed for a period of years due to family illness, but the Pier 39 management continued to get so many requests for the store, they contacted the family, it reopened, a new larger facility, and are, I think are still in business, unless affected by Covid.  They have a website and on line shopping.
> 
> Too exhaustive to list all their products but some he has found helpful as an adult, all scissors (kitchen, haircutting, medical, manicure, heavy duty and they have sewing scissors); box cutter and pocket knives, pruners for the garden and grass  trimmer, hand held can opener for camping trips. Everything needed for office supplies. Fun to browse.


I remember that store. They also have a store in downtown Disney in FL. I was just browsing through the online store.  


			Lefty's the Left Hand Store | Everything for the Left-Hander


----------



## redney

Puhleaze. OW wasn't duped. She knew exactly what topics would be allowed to be discussed, edited, and broadcast in advance. It's common PR stuff. Interviewers are given exactly what the "talent" will and will not discuss. If a topic outside of the approved topics comes up, filming will be stopped or any related words edited out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today she says ‘surprised’.
Are you saying she is misleading [cough, lying, cough] us?
IMO, duped and now trying to walk it all back.  She wants her book to sell.


*Oprah admits she was 'surprised' that Meghan Markle 'went all the way there' with allegations of racism against the royal family during bombshell TV interview - and says the Sussexes' only goal was to 'tell their story truthfully'*

*The 67-year-old mogul opened up about her March 7 interview with the royal couple and its 'reverberating' impact*
*She said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible'*
*Oprah admitted she was especially 'surprised' when Meghan revealed there were concerns over 'how dark' Archie's skin might be  *
*'I'm like, "What? You're going there? You're going all the way there,"' Oprah said of her thought process at that time*
*While she gives herself credit for asking good questions, she said the interview was so powerful 'because they answered the way they did' and were 'open' *
*Still, she admitted she had 'no idea' the Q&A would have such an impact*
_Oprah said that she had only texted with Harry and Meghan before the actual interview, and her only understanding what they were focused on sharing the truth. 

'Whenever I'm doing interviews with anybody for anything that is significant, I have a conversation with them before,' she said. 

'I didn't see Harry and Meghan before but I did text them and say intention is very important to me, tell me what your intention is, so that we can be aligned in our goal. And our shared intention was the truth. They wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' _
She continued: 'The reason why it was such a powerful interview — first of all, I know how to ask questions, and you [Nancy] know how to ask questions, we all know how to do our jobs, but what makes it powerful is when you have someone else who is willing to be as open, as vulnerable, as truthful, as they were,' she continued. 

'_So, I don't give myself credit for that, I give myself credit for asking the questions, but the reason the interview was what it was, was because they answered the way they did.' 

Certainly, the fact that no one knew how much the couple would reveal before the interview actually aired also contributed to its bombshell-like impact.

'It was really important to me that what we put out there in the world was put out at the time everyone could see it and that things didn't leak, and things weren't misconstrued before the actual interview happened,' Oprah said.

'So I remember when we finished doing the interview and that interview was 3 hours and 20 minutes I think, and I stood up and said to the crew, we all know what was said here, and how important it is to have the trust of the people who just shared that, and so I'm hoping you all will not go out into the world and share what has happened here. And nobody did. 

'And so, as we were releasing clips to CBS, we were releasing them in such a way that whatever was being put out there could not be exploited. So a lot of time and effort and energy went into it on my part.' 

Of the bombshells dropped during the interview, Meghan and Harry's accusation that a member of his family expressed 'concern' over Archie's skin color was certainly the most shocking.

'At the time it was awkward. I was a bit shocked,' said Harry, who refused to share further details about the conversation or with whom he had it. 

The couple also spoke candidly about Meghan's struggles with depression, with the Duchess admitting there was a point where 'I just didn't want to be alive anymore' — but though she asked times for professional help, she was told she couldn't pursue it. 

'I said that, "I've never felt this way before, and I need to go somewhere." And I was told that I couldn't, that it wouldn't be good for the institution,' Meghan said. 

Other striking revelations included the Prince Harry's claim that his father had stopped taking his calls, while Meghan contradicted reports that she had made her sister-in-law Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, cry leading up to her wedding — saying it was actually Kate who had made her cry.

Tensions between the Sussexes and the rest of the royal family are understood to have been at an all-time high in recent weeks in the wake of the primetime sit-down - however the rift was said to have been set to one side when Harry traveled to the UK last week to attend the funeral of his grandfather, Prince Philip. 

It has since been reported that Harry met the Queen privately 'at least twice' during his trip to the UK, and that he spoke with his father and his brother after the funeral at Windsor Castle on Saturday. 

MailOnline's Dan Wootton first revealed earlier this week that Charles and William preferred to meet with the Duke of Sussex face-to-face together within the grounds of the castle after Prince Philip's funeral so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards.

That meeting came after the royal brothers had taken 'baby steps' towards healing their fraught relationship while walking back to the Queen's home from St George's Chapel after being pushed together by peacemaker Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge_.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5064226
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
> 
> 
> Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


 T_hey wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.'   _As truthful as possible?  As possible?  Does that mean only lie a little?  Only lie if necessary?


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> True she supposedly profited several million, look at what she has lost in terms of reputation, integrity, etc. The stuff that matters, IMO. H&M have lost so much more by doing the one interview.
> 
> Maybe someday OW will explain why she didn’t ask the obvious follow-ups and seemed so ill-prepared.
> 
> ETA: if we are now in an OW vs QE world, I’m with QE.



I think Oprah is sooo wealthy that she can afford not to care in the slightest. She lives and travels in very powerful circles. The interview doesn't affect her and what should have been follow ups don't register IMO. M&H are garbage people nearly 40 years old and totally responsible for their words, Oprah was simply there to offer them a global megaphone to VOICE their idiotic supposed views that they believe they can somehow leverage into $$$. Nothing is off limits to whatever those 3 can make a buck from, even slandering the BRF to the hilt. Didn't Oprah try to interview some royals in the past but was turned down? She probably relishes the dirt M&H dished out. Harry is dumb, Meghan is crafty and conniving, but not that smart. She is far too emotional to stick to a single strategy. They didn't have to toss the BRF into a dumpster. If they appease the Netflix gods with quality programs they have no worries. But what do we have now? "The BRF are racists and mean." Harry goes to funeral and mid-pregnancy M stays behind. M can't afford to be met with boo's. Harry meets with 81 year old billionaire Annenberg. Why? They must rely on padding their nest egg by whatever ends justify the means. Clearly M&H are hateful, and fearful of bad press that could impact the Netflix contract. The U.S. media continue to fawn over them until there aren't enough sugars to support the entertainment contracts. When baby #2 comes along, let's see what demands they make with the christening, etc. There's going to be another dumpster fire. Popcorn time!


----------



## CarryOn2020

OW has set herself up for a huge failure. She has admitted, and GK confirmed, that OW worked so hard on this interview. She has admitted she texted with them before the interview so that everyone was “aligned in our goal”.

Is it better for OW to say she was ‘surprised’ [duped] by the allegations OR that she knew before the interview exactly what was going to be said? She cannot have it both ways.

@rose60610  IMO people of her wealth want the invitations, want to be with the in-crowd. [Ralph Lauren said that in his interview with her.] They want invitations and they want the in-people to come to their parties.  The money is important, but not a driving factor. They’ve got their millions. It is the invitations that count. If she has found herself to be _unwelcome_ at some important parties, that hurts more than losing a few million. Remember, dears, OW is “blessed”.

ETA:  she sees her invite to the coronation slip-sliding away. Guessing we will have more ‘healing’ interviews.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today she says ‘surprised’.
> Are you saying she is misleading [cough, lying, cough] us?
> IMO, duped and now trying to walk it all back.  She wants her book to sell.
> 
> 
> *Oprah admits she was 'surprised' that Meghan Markle 'went all the way there' with allegations of racism against the royal family during bombshell TV interview - and says the Sussexes' only goal was to 'tell their story truthfully'*
> 
> *The 67-year-old mogul opened up about her March 7 interview with the royal couple and its 'reverberating' impact*
> *She said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible'*
> *Oprah admitted she was especially 'surprised' when Meghan revealed there were concerns over 'how dark' Archie's skin might be  *
> *'I'm like, "What? You're going there? You're going all the way there,"' Oprah said of her thought process at that time*
> *While she gives herself credit for asking good questions, she said the interview was so powerful 'because they answered the way they did' and were 'open' *
> *Still, she admitted she had 'no idea' the Q&A would have such an impact*
> _Oprah said that she had only texted with Harry and Meghan before the actual interview, and her only understanding what they were focused on sharing the truth.
> 
> 'Whenever I'm doing interviews with anybody for anything that is significant, I have a conversation with them before,' she said.
> 
> 'I didn't see Harry and Meghan before but I did text them and say intention is very important to me, tell me what your intention is, so that we can be aligned in our goal. And our shared intention was the truth. They wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' _
> She continued: 'The reason why it was such a powerful interview — first of all, I know how to ask questions, and you [Nancy] know how to ask questions, we all know how to do our jobs, but what makes it powerful is when you have someone else who is willing to be as open, as vulnerable, as truthful, as they were,' she continued.
> 
> '_So, I don't give myself credit for that, I give myself credit for asking the questions, but the reason the interview was what it was, was because they answered the way they did.'
> 
> Certainly, the fact that no one knew how much the couple would reveal before the interview actually aired also contributed to its bombshell-like impact.
> 
> 'It was really important to me that what we put out there in the world was put out at the time everyone could see it and that things didn't leak, and things weren't misconstrued before the actual interview happened,' Oprah said.
> 
> 'So I remember when we finished doing the interview and that interview was 3 hours and 20 minutes I think, and I stood up and said to the crew, we all know what was said here, and how important it is to have the trust of the people who just shared that, and so I'm hoping you all will not go out into the world and share what has happened here. And nobody did.
> 
> 'And so, as we were releasing clips to CBS, we were releasing them in such a way that whatever was being put out there could not be exploited. So a lot of time and effort and energy went into it on my part.'
> 
> Of the bombshells dropped during the interview, Meghan and Harry's accusation that a member of his family expressed 'concern' over Archie's skin color was certainly the most shocking.
> 
> 'At the time it was awkward. I was a bit shocked,' said Harry, who refused to share further details about the conversation or with whom he had it.
> 
> The couple also spoke candidly about Meghan's struggles with depression, with the Duchess admitting there was a point where 'I just didn't want to be alive anymore' — but though she asked times for professional help, she was told she couldn't pursue it.
> 
> 'I said that, "I've never felt this way before, and I need to go somewhere." And I was told that I couldn't, that it wouldn't be good for the institution,' Meghan said.
> 
> Other striking revelations included the Prince Harry's claim that his father had stopped taking his calls, while Meghan contradicted reports that she had made her sister-in-law Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge, cry leading up to her wedding — saying it was actually Kate who had made her cry.
> 
> Tensions between the Sussexes and the rest of the royal family are understood to have been at an all-time high in recent weeks in the wake of the primetime sit-down - however the rift was said to have been set to one side when Harry traveled to the UK last week to attend the funeral of his grandfather, Prince Philip.
> 
> It has since been reported that Harry met the Queen privately 'at least twice' during his trip to the UK, and that he spoke with his father and his brother after the funeral at Windsor Castle on Saturday.
> 
> MailOnline's Dan Wootton first revealed earlier this week that Charles and William preferred to meet with the Duke of Sussex face-to-face together within the grounds of the castle after Prince Philip's funeral so that nobody's words could be misconstrued afterwards.
> 
> That meeting came after the royal brothers had taken 'baby steps' towards healing their fraught relationship while walking back to the Queen's home from St George's Chapel after being pushed together by peacemaker Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge_.



Oh wait!  Oprah was SOOO SURPRISED      that she didn't bother with any follow up questions?  OW just went along with whatever crap they happened to be spewing. Do I hear spitting in disgust sounds, as in BACKLASH? Oprah is already wealthy enough to not have to care, M&H are scrambling to find all the dollars they can before they implode. Even Charles and William don't trust Harry. Meghan must be proud to have broken up another family. She's a pro!


----------



## Carmenbella

sdkitty said:


> voodoo?


Jamaica is a Protestant Island. Voodoo is found in places where Catholicism is the main religion, for example Haiti.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has the meaning of ‘silently’ changed?
Why is she telling us about her ‘silent’ efforts?  









						Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
					

Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_During her interview with Nancy, Oprah also revealed the way she has been *silently* helping people who have been struggling during the pandemic by  mailing out $15,000 checks to individuals.  

'I literally have been, *people don't know this*, going through the newspaper finding stories of people who weren't doing well in their life, sending them money, trying to help because I know I have been blessed,' she said._


----------



## Chanbal

The crown always finds the right head...   


Like many people, I used to love Prince Harry. He was the fun, quirky, spirited, more “normal” of the pair — a Nazi slip-up notwithstanding.

Goody two shoes William, with his tan chinos and sensible shoes, just seemed a bit, well, beige.

While the tide has been turning for some time, these past few days have shown just how public perception of the brothers has gone a full 180.

Within hours of Harry’s return to California, following the funeral of his beloved grandad, the Duke of Edinburgh, a flurry of positively spun articles appeared in his and wife Meghan’s favourite publication, People magazine.

Then their self-important pal, and co-author of sycophantic biography Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie, declared that Meghan had twice spoken to the Queen. Philip, surely, will be writhing in his grave.

This, of course, is from a couple who recently sued a Sunday newspaper over a supposed breach of privacy. And a couple who refuse to engage with the British tabloids.

No strangers to accusations of hypocrisy, the private jet-loving environ- mentalists have outdone themselves. *In Line Of Duty terms, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are “rats”: Grassing up their loved ones in return for better press.

The main difference being that instead of going into witness protection, they go on to Oprah (and employ a £3million-a-year private security team — previously paid for by Prince Charles)*.

Whether Harry deeply regrets the Oprah debacle — or never getting a chance to see his grandad to make good before he died — no one but Harry will ever know.

Yet his decision to flee back to his £11million Montecito mansion 24 hours before his grieving grandmother’s 95th birthday seems a strange one.

Yes, his pregnant wife is in her third trimester, but would another day really have made such a difference?

Much has already been said of the reinvented couple’s £100million-plus Netflix and Spotify deals.

*UNEXPECTEDLY ROGUE*

And with Harry keen to dismiss suggestions he is workshy, week after week he gets a new, highly lucrative job.

His latest sees him with the grand new title of Chief Impact Officer, or Chimpo to give it its full Silicon Valley acronym.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14747642/prince-william-born-leader-harry-play-dirty/#
Alas, it emerges, Chimpo means “penis” in Japan. Which is not the first time he’s been a right royal c***.

*In stark contrast, dad-of-three William ploughs on with dignity*.

*With ever-loyal Kate by his side — again, a woman we once shamefully considered dull compared to beautiful, glossy, Hollywood starlet Meghan — he has come into his own in recent days.*

Usually the quiet one, on Monday he went unexpectedly rogue, making a personal intervention to help sink dastardly European Super League plans.

A Villa fan, and President of the FA, Wills knows his football, and defied protocol to speak out on behalf of fans.

Perhaps a few days spent in never- knowingly-publicity-shy Harry’s company had rubbed off on him.

Whatever the reason, William broke free of his royal shackles and showed some chutzpah.

He and Kate haven’t been briefing the world’s press on their woes. And they’ve had an excellent pandemic.

*Not even a nasty bout of Covid-19 could stop the second-in-line to the throne from carrying out 14 zoom engagements in his month of illness.

With “service” and “duty” apparently the buzzwords post-H&M’s quitting of the Royal Family, no one exemplifies these better than William.*

Two years ago we probably all wished Harry was our first-born.

Now we’re thanking our lucky stars he’s not.









						Prince William proved he's a born leader... Harry, you still play dirty
					

PRIMOGENITURE isn’t really something I’ve ever given much thought to. But never has this old feudal custom — making the royal first-born heir to the throne — been more of a godsend.  Read our Megh…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, OW admits she knew how hurtful the interview would be to the BRF and aired it anyway.
> Wow.
> 
> 
> Didn’t H&M claim they had no idea when the interview would air?
> Yeah.
> 
> View attachment 5064352


She is planning for the future when when she wants to cover Charlotte's Sweet 16 party.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has the meaning of ‘silently’ changed?
> Why is she telling us about her ‘silent’ efforts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah praises Meghan and Harry for being  'vulnerable' and 'truthful'
> 
> 
> Oprah, 67, said Harry and Meghan 'wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible.' She admitted she had 'no idea' how impactful it would be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _During her interview with Nancy, Oprah also revealed the way she has been *silently* helping people who have been struggling during the pandemic by  mailing out $15,000 checks to individuals.
> 
> 'I literally have been, *people don't know this*, going through the newspaper finding stories of people who weren't doing well in their life, sending them money, trying to help because I know I have been blessed,' she said._


OW may be pissed at QE because QE is a bigger global brand than many other queens, including Oprah.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Have a listen to #8 - written by Ronald Binge to reflect the post-war optimism of a "new Elizabethan Age" that began with the accession of Queen Elizabeth II in February 1952.  Enjoy the ‘light music’   

Scroll down to #8 - enjoy:



Proving again H&M made a huge blunder!

More info: https://www.classicfm.com/composers/binge/music/elizabethan-serenade/
A light music classic, well-known to veteran radio listeners.

Ronald Binge was a British composer and arranger of light music. This is probably his best known composition.

When it was first played by the Mantovani orchestra in 1951, it was simply titled Andante cantabile, although the original orchestral manuscript parts in Binge's own hand show the title The Man In The Street.

The name was altered by the composer to reflect the optimism of the new Elizabethan age beginning with the Accession of Queen Elizabeth II in 1952.

It was used as the theme for the popular 1950s radio series Music Tapestry, and as the play-out for the British Forces Network radio station.

The piece won Binge an Ivor Novello award and it also had chart success in Germany and in South Africa.


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> The kids next door have chalked a hop scotch grid on their drive, I'm dying to have a go!
> I'm assuming, going by your posts, you're British? If so, do you remember playing elastic?
> Sorry for OT.


We played Elastic in 1976/1977 in Canada (Burnaby, BC)
The short kids never got past kneesies. Suckers


----------



## mdcx

CarryOn2020 said:


> 5 days? That’s all it takes to know someone?  His ‘mentors’, advisors, must really dislike him. No way I would advise my child to spend 5 days alone with a person, to get to know them.  Wrong on so many levels.
> 
> _In an interview after their engagement, Harry said: "I managed to persuade her to come and join me in Botswana.
> 
> “We camped out with each other under the stars. She came and joined me for *five days *out there, which was absolutely fantastic.
> 
> "So then we were really by ourselves, which was crucial to me to make sure that *we had a chance to know each other."*_


I believe this is where Meghan demonstrated her... hidden talents..for the first time.


----------



## mdcx

It is a good day when I come back to this thread and there are 20 pages of comments to read, thanks ladies (and gents!)


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m haunted by the nostrils and the eyebrows!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Oprah was duped, she is just continuing to help MM. She already profited several millions with her help, not bad!



I agree. They're watching all the press coverage and they see how the interview didn't really paint them in the best of light with the majority of people, like they were hoping. So Oprah is backpedaling. If they interview had been a hit, by which I mean people turning on the BRF and supporting H and M, then she would be celebrating the amazing interview she did. 

The interview backfired big time in the UK and in the US the majority of people don't care. She really is not well known as an actress, she has not won any awards or even been nominated for any awards. The show Suits was mediocre at best. She did not continue in her profession after getting married (and she claims to be a feminist and women's rights activist).


----------



## mdcx

Icyjade said:


> Anyone knows if this is true?
> View attachment 5063632
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Kate’s reaction vs the two. Omg they are even more awful than I thought



H is grimacing in worry, K is obviously shocked, M looks like she is giggling.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

MM was lying when she said she didn't follow the royal family or know anything about them. In 2014 entry of her blog The big, she wrote, “Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power. Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate.”

She's not very smart when it comes to lying. Why lie about something that is so early disproven.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree. They're watching all the press coverage and they see how the interview didn't really paint them in the best of light with the majority of people, like they were hoping. _*So Oprah is backpedaling*_. If they interview had been a hit, by which I mean people turning on the BRF and supporting H and M, then she would be celebrating the amazing interview she did.
> 
> The interview backfired big time in the UK and in the US the majority of people don't care. She really is not well known as an actress, she has not won any awards or even been nominated for any awards. The show Suits was mediocre at best. She did not continue in her profession after getting married (and she claims to be a feminist and women's rights activist).



It’s all deceit, half-truths, all designed to mislead hard-working people. OW has a book to sell.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM was lying when she said she didn't follow the royal family or know anything about them. In 2014 entry of her blog The big, she wrote, “Little girls dream of being princesses. I, for one, was all about She-Ra, Princess of Power. Grown women seem to retain this childhood fantasy. Just look at the pomp and circumstance surrounding the royal wedding and endless conversation about Princess Kate.”
> 
> She's not very smart when it comes to lying. Why lie about something that is so early disproven.



To get the $$$$$.



Dan wears it best.


----------



## mdcx

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Chanbal Thanks for this image.
> 
> View attachment 5063892
> 
> 
> H's heavily pregnant wife is a headlines grabbing famewhore and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5063893


I havent read to the end of the thread yet but my goodness - she posed for this pic and did an interview with Us Weekly? Or is this one of those cobbled together jobs? If she participated in this it seems the height of disrespect given recent events and just basically tasteless.


----------



## Icyjade

redney said:


> Puhleaze. OW wasn't duped. She knew exactly what topics would be allowed to be discussed, edited, and broadcast in advance. It's common PR stuff. Interviewers are given exactly what the "talent" will and will not discuss. If a topic outside of the approved topics comes up, filming will be stopped or any related words edited out.



Exactly, and she had plenty of time to check on the factual accuracy even after the interview was performed. Why Archie isn’t a prince is a simple example. OW hoped that the interview will be a hit and now that it backfired she’s back pedaling. I don’t buy her crap at all.


----------



## mdcx

rhyvin said:


> I'm a triplet and my mom (who was very petite- 5'2) was on bed rest for the last two months because she was so large!


How did your poor mother even stay upright? How incredible to carry three babes at once.


----------



## rhyvin

From the W&K page-



CarryOn2020 said:


> _As always with the occasional pictures we see of Kate and William's children it was fun and uplifting.
> 
> Kate has managed with ease to protect her children from the media spotlight, allowing them as much as possible a normal life, while at the same time honouring an unwritten contract with the public to offer us a welcome glimpse into their lives._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: What Meghan Markle could learn from Kate Middleton
> 
> 
> AMANDA PLATELL: A simple picture of a three-year-old boy with a grin balancing on his bike and heading for his first day at nursery school. A  photo taken by his mum, the Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



fantastic comment in response to the article: 

    We were introduced to the Cambridge children when they leave the hospital - that 3 min pause on the steps outside the hospital before they are put into a vehicle and driven away. While the press are there anxious for the photo, it is not that William and Catherine have been ask to stage a photo shoot. M said she didn't want to be on world display after the birth - yet that is what she staged when she ordered a press conference with her selected few- which was far more invasive than pausing outside a hospital for 3 min would have been. *She constantly makes herself the victim after she is the one dictating, and directing the narrative*.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, OW admits she knew how hurtful the interview would be to the BRF and aired it anyway.
> Wow.
> 
> 
> Didn’t H&M claim they had no idea when the interview would air?
> Yeah.
> 
> View attachment 5064352


I never get tired of seeing this man do that


----------



## purseinsanity

mdcx said:


> I believe this is where *Meghan demonstrated her... hidden talents..for the first time.*


You mean urinating in the woods?


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m haunted by the nostrils and the eyebrows!



Truffle hound?  More like $hit pig.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> I never get tired of seeing this man do that


Now I need to go watch some GoT on demand.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m haunted by the nostrils and the eyebrows!



Do we think him and his mistress both prefer to get their rhinoplasties done by blind cobblers on turbulent ferry crossings? Or is there one white thing they really love..... 


lalame said:


> Bingo.... but frankly I can't hate on it. I make a fraction of a fraction what Oprah makes for evangelizing boring technology products.   You would think they cured male baldness, the way I market them as the best products ever.


I find baldness quite attractive personally  certainly better than a ratted wig.


CarryOn2020 said:


> OW was duped.  H&M misled her such that she was shocked.
> My, my, she seems so desperate for the world to know, know, she is giving back. Y’all get that? She has been handing out $15K checks.  It would be more if the gov’t allowed it.  Everyone should understand she has been blessed and now is giving back. Ok? Okaaay?


 


redney said:


> Puhleaze. OW wasn't duped. She knew exactly what topics would be allowed to be discussed, edited, and broadcast in advance. It's common PR stuff. Interviewers are given exactly what the "talent" will and will not discuss. If a topic outside of the approved topics comes up, filming will be stopped or any related words edited out.


Looks like OW is taking a leaf from spinderella’s book:
1. Lie about your ignorance something that is a) easy to research and b) your job to know and hope that deceitful incompetence plays as cute ingenue.   
2. Silently tell the world about your silent, pitifully small donations.
3. Act like you didn’t realise the implications of calling people racist and had no say in airing those comments.
4. Plug your product selling other people’s pain.
5. Jump on a popular cause and make it all about you baby!


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Do we think him and his mistress both prefer to get their rhinoplasties done by blind cobblers on turbulent ferry crossings? Or is there one white thing they really love.....
> 
> I find baldness quite attractive personally  certainly better than a ratted wig.
> 
> 
> Looks like OW is taking a leaf from spinderella’s book:
> 1. Lie about your ignorance something that is a) easy to research and b) your job to know and hope that deceitful incompetence plays as cute ingenue.
> 2. Silently tell the world about your silent, pitifully small donations.
> 3. Act like you didn’t realise the implications of calling people racist and had no say in airing those comments.
> 4. Plug your product selling other people’s pain.
> 5. Jump on a popular cause and make it all about you baby!


Nailed it all, jelliedfeels! Rhinoplasty comment is hysterical, thanks for the great laughs.
edited to fix auto spell version of your name.


----------



## bellecate

Love the new photo of the queen.


	

		
			
		

		
	
And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.


Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.


----------



## Clearblueskies

zen1965 said:


> I am not a Brit but from across the channel and I used to love it, too!





bubablu said:


> I played elastic too! A lot!





V0N1B2 said:


> We played Elastic in 1976/1977 in Canada (Burnaby, BC)
> The short kids never got past kneesies. Suckers


Listen, if Breaking (really?) and Skateboarding () can become bona fide Olympic sports I think we should lobby for Elastics. Who knew it had such an international reach?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Love the new photo of the queen.
> View attachment 5064471
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.



This must have been when they were on a tour??? Or is it in Cali??? 
Getting more and more difficult giving these two any energy - they are simply ego - maniacs.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m haunted by the nostrils and the eyebrows!



His nose is collapsing.


----------



## bubablu

Jayne1 said:


> His nose is collapsing.


Like his credibility. (Errr, sorry, he has never had it)


----------



## Clearblueskies

Whatever happened to Marcus whateverhisnamewas who was such a big mate of Megs?  Where is he? He seems to have disappeared


----------



## mdcx

Clearblueskies said:


> Whatever happened to Marcus whateverhisnamewas who was such a big mate of Megs?  Where is he? He seems to have disappeared


His usefulness rapidly diminished once Meghan had secured the bag by marrying Harry.
Marcus finagled her intro to Harry at Soho House I believe, but the transactional friendship’s time came to an end.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I believe many presidents since WWII were also left handed!


Prince William is left handed


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Has this been posted? People are screaming for sueing Scobie and the Harkles for treason and setting some people up in the Tower while dropping the keys into the Thames    She also says Harry's welcome was, uh, unenthusiastic but said she'd only reveal in detail what she's been told if people expressively ask about is, so next video perhaps.




Slightly off at a tangent with this latest one Lady C but...

OMG  

I think if this thread is ever renamed it should be *H&M*:*Folie* *à deux *

Perfect


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> Love the new photo of the queen.
> View attachment 5064471
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.


They ain’t being g coy anymore. How much more disrespectful can they get?


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Love the new photo of the queen.
> View attachment 5064471
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.



So predictable 

and

Isn't it W&K's 10 wedding anniversary?

I'm not on any 'team', but boy oh boy, H&M are FIXATED, W&K are def the opposition for them, can't not get something out, all loved-up together on the Cambridge's big 'tin' day  .


----------



## zen1965

^^And such a natural photo. Visiting in the stables in heels .
She seems completely unhinged.


----------



## papertiger

She certainly seems to like a bit of shoe-controversy 

Horses are in focus though, so there's a plus - for us


----------



## gelbergirl

bellecate said:


> Love the new photo of the queen.
> View attachment 5064471
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.




Such a great photo of the Queen -  She looks terrific!


----------



## Lodpah

A smart Quoran zoomed in on Archie’s cheek. What is it?


----------



## duna

Maggie Muggins said:


> *I don't know how old you are, but I remember in elementary school during the 50's, left-handed kids were forced to use their right hand to write. My mother told me it was the same when she went to school*. I imagine the 'southpaw gene' would still be transferrable to their descendants, who then functioned normally after this practice was abolished.



This also happened to me in the 60's when I went to a French primary school: I'm left handed but I write mainly with my right hand as I was forced to. I can also write with my left hand but not so well.


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m haunted by the nostrils and the eyebrows!




This guy is SOOOO creepy


----------



## Clearblueskies

Lodpah said:


> A smart Quoran zoomed in on Archie’s cheek. What is it?
> View attachment 5064545


Poor kid’s probably too hot.  What’s the temp in LA?  But Meg’s earning money from that hat, and because she knows people are interested to see if Archie has his fathers hair she keeps it hidden, sad narc that she is 
So it was either the hat or a b&w snap, but b&w doesn’t look sufficiently “papped in the street” for a prearranged shot, so hat it is


----------



## Clearblueskies

duna said:


> This guy is SOOOO creepy


Ooh look they share an expression


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince William is left handed



As was his great-grandfather George VI (retrained as a 'rightie'). 

His 'retraining' perhaps this contributed to his shyness and stammer(?) 

It was thought to be a precursor symptom to possible 'feeble-mindedness' (mental-illness in 'old money').

The practice of retraining bias from left to right still goes on in many parts of the world so probably the stigma too .


----------



## Chagall

There were four kids in my family. The two boys were right handed and the girls lefties. My older sister had her hand tied so she would use the ‘correct’ hand. By the time I was in school this practice was no longer done. One teacher took the time to show me how to slant the paper in the correct direction for a left handed person, rather than have my arm circled around the top of the page. It took her a moment to show me and it made all the difference. I can’t fathom why all left handed children are not taught this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is from an article on William's and Kate's marriage (their 10th anniversary is coming up), but oh the glaring differences:



> 'Thank goodness Catherine at least was able to adapt to her new life without any fuss. *I can't recall her complaining about anything. No one at the Palace did any more for her than for Meghan. *
> 
> 'It's always been the same when someone new arrives in the family – you're here, you'll learn, now get on with it. She did. She gives William so much confidence.'





> It was a sign of things to come when William complained to the Queen that he and Kate knew virtually nobody on the guest list prepared by Palace officials.
> 
> Her response was to tell him to ignore it and to draw up his own. *The new list had a much more ********ic feel, with guests now including the landlord of Kate's favourite pub near her home village of Bucklebury, Berkshire, along with the Middletons' postman as well as the couple's St Andrews friends.*





> *So there were 'Mr and Mrs Cambridge', as they styled themselves*, stepping almost immediately into the private life they craved. They had barely unpacked at the farmhouse when William was among crew flying to the aid of a 70-year-old walker who had suffered a suspected heart attack in the Snowdonia mountains.





> In the kitchen Kate busied herself *making strawberry jam and baking cakes *which William would take in to the airbase to share with mess-room colleagues.



Yet no Insta post!



> David Buckland, who runs Funsport surf shop in Rhosneigr, recalls a young lady calling herself Mrs Cambridge trying on a wetsuit and saying she'd buy it – only to discover she'd forgotten her purse.
> 
> 'I'll come back tomorrow and pay,' she told him with a smile. In fact it was one of the police protection officers who called in to pay and collect the suit the following day. Only then did he realise who 'Mrs Cambridge' was.





> Charles found it hard at times to hide his discomfort at how the focus was all on his wife, and little on himself. William, on the other hand, was thrilled at the reception Kate received and the way people instantly took to her. One moment they were wearing ten gallon hats at the famous Calgary stampede, the next they were in the Northwest Territories furiously paddling canoes with local villagers.
> 
> Kate, ever a sporty girl, had forgotten those early nerves. She was loving it and they were loving her. The key? Onlookers were clear: *this girl was just being herself.*





> 'With everything that William has on his plate, that interview was the last thing he needed,' says one of William's friends. 'William was incredibly upset over what was said about the Royal Family and racism. And he was enraged that Meghan should drag up that cruel old chestnut *'Waity Katie'.*



I didn't watch the interview besides a few snippets. Can someone enlighten me in which context - besides being an a*shole - Meghan brought that up?



> How prophetic those remarks a wise Prince Philip made all those years ago after his grandson and his girlfriend briefly split up. Turning to the Queen he said, *'Thank goodness he didn't give her up.'*



While he strongly advised Harry not to marry Meghan. Go figure.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...mwork-William-Kates-triumphant-ten-years.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> She continued: 'The reason why it was such a powerful interview — first of all, I know how to ask questions, and you [Nancy] know how to ask questions, we all know how to do our jobs, but what makes it powerful is when you have someone else who is willing to be as open, as vulnerable, as truthful, as they were,' she continued.



Oh please, Oprah. A journalism intern could have done better than you in this particular interview. You didn't do any homework, and you certainly didn't let us see your special talent in asking questions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rhyvin said:


> From the W&K page-
> 
> 
> 
> fantastic comment in response to the article:
> 
> We were introduced to the Cambridge children when they leave the hospital - that 3 min pause on the steps outside the hospital before they are put into a vehicle and driven away. While the press are there anxious for the photo, it is not that William and Catherine have been ask to stage a photo shoot. M said she didn't want to be on world display after the birth - yet that is what she staged when she ordered a press conference with her selected few- which was far more invasive than pausing outside a hospital for 3 min would have been. *She constantly makes herself the victim after she is the one dictating, and directing the narrative*.



In the article is says Meghan has claimed she only didn't do the staged photo shoot Kate didn't have because she wasn't asked to do one. Poor victim, eternally left out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.



Are you sure that was put out just now? Because that was taken on the 2019 tour to Morocco.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Ooh look they share an expression



What expression?


----------



## needlv

Well - the timing of MM’s pap walk is suspect... I don’t have an issue of her merching  the clothes she was wearing (and makeup) on Meghans Mirror.

At least she isn’t airing more family secrets.

And I suspect they are running out of money.  Mortgage payments, staff costs, security and her wardrobe... They are going through H’s millions very fast.  

The real test is whether she sues over the photo of Archie.  By then She would have already got a cut from Meghans mirror...


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you sure that was put out just now? Because that was taken on the 2019 tour to Morocco.



_The Telegraph_ reposted the pic 5 days ago. That's the latest I could find but could be wrong. 

Sustainability is really big in the JCMH + family so perhaps they're recycling photos (if I ever see that Disney-esque photo of JCMH and Ariel in matching emerald outfits and sharing umbrella in the rain photo again I will throw-up)

However, my money's on something lovey-dovey-baby-driven 29 April.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In the article is says Meghan has claimed she only didn't do the staged photo shoot Kate didn't have because she wasn't asked to do one. Poor victim, eternally left out.


They keep trying to rewrite what they did.  There was a load of stuff released back then about how there was no way she was going to put herself and her child on display.  I can’t be bothered to look up the exact words they used but it was all about being *different*, and *modern* and all that nonsense.  Guess she’s regretting it.


----------



## creme fraiche

Re the staged papped photo of Meghan, couple things which I just don't understand:
- what is the temperature in LA/Santa Barbara?  Surely it is warm enough that a beanie hat is not necessary on a toddler and the multiple layering he is wearing is overdoing it?
- What kind of daycare would necessitate a child bringing his own lunch, snacks, and an additional backpack at the age of under 2?
- why would it be wise for an under 2 year old, therefore probably not potty trained, to wear skinny jeans?  Surely loose fitting trousers with poppers would be more practical?
- Why wear a hoodie which is fussy to put on a squirming toddler as opposed to a zippable outer layer?
- the shoes!  surely a toddler would be better off in a supportive pair of Geox shoes (other brands are available).  those just don't look practical or useful.

Perhaps I am just over thinking it, but I have mothered 2 active boys and practical to a fault and I just can't get my head around how that boy is dressed (not even with much style!).  Could not care anything else about that photo.  If all of that effort was to make a few quid (can't imagine that all of the possible merching she is trying to do would be very lucrative), seems to be rather more effort than reward.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Ooh look they share an expression



So much smugness.


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> What expression?


I think it's this expression.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> She certainly seems to like a bit of shoe-controversy
> 
> Horses are in focus though, so there's a plus - for us


If the picture was released now by MM, I would think that she is just hiding her bump size. So it's impossible to guess whether the photo was taken yesterday or 1 year ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The horses are not the focus... she is just hiding her bump size. So it's impossible to guess whether the photo was taken yesterday or 1 year ago.



isn’t it from the Morocco tour?








						Meghan Markle Wears Two Looks for Her Day in Morocco with Prince Harry!
					

See Duchess Meghan's two looks!




					www.justjared.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

jennlt said:


> I think it's this expression.
> View attachment 5064644
> 
> View attachment 5064645


That’s the one


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> isn’t it from the Morocco tour?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wears Two Looks for Her Day in Morocco with Prince Harry!
> 
> 
> See Duchess Meghan's two looks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justjared.com


It could very well be. I wonder why it is shown now. Is it to coincide with QE's new picture?


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> I think it's this expression.
> View attachment 5064644
> 
> View attachment 5064645



That's the: 
'I'm trying _really_ hard to not show I'm acting' against all the odds of how much botulism I've had pumped into my face expression 

Only silent movie stars could do better -     apologies Gloria


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> If the picture was released now by MM, I would think that she is just hiding her bump size. So it's impossible to guess whether the photo was taken yesterday or 1 year ago.



It's def a 2019 pic and the bump was Archie (allegedly)


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> His nose is collapsing.


It really is freaky, like some crazed plastic surgeon did 1/2 of his face at a time. Two different brows and two different nostrils.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> It really is freaky, like some crazed plastic surgeon did 1/2 of his face at a time. Two different brows and two different nostrils.


Ugh. Now you made me go back and look again   This is the trouble when people start fiddling with their faces too much.  The features look like they’ve been assembled from an assortment of different people, and the face looks unreal.
....or
...maybe he’s saving up his pocket money to get the other half done?


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting view on one of the last photos released by their PR...


----------



## carmen56

Is People and Us Weekly just two of those American tabloid mags that don’t exist?  (According to M, that is)


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh please, Oprah. A journalism intern could have done better than you in this particular interview. You didn't do any homework, and you certainly didn't let us see your special talent in asking questions.


He makes a very good point!


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Love the new photo of the queen.
> View attachment 5064471
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.


really? is this a new photo?  If they are trying to compete with the queen, it's ridiculous and very small of them


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> She certainly seems to like a bit of shoe-controversy
> 
> Horses are in focus though, so there's a plus - for us


and now we know that in addition to the 16 bathrooms, they have a stable of horses......poor Meghan


----------



## tiktok

Hidden message in royal birthday pic
					

There is one big problem with living in Kensington Palace. The palace might be a magnificent example of Georgian architecture boasting numerous grand state apartments and several twee cottages but the whole lovely lot is actually smack bang in a public park.




					www.news.com.au
				




“...Which is what makes today’s inclusion of it so eyebrow-raising. (The image was actually taken on Wednesday this week by Kate ahead of Louis’ first day at nursery school.)

For one thing, there are in fact a number of shots of Harry as a child riding a two-wheeler with his own dad Prince Charles and brother Prince William. Therefore, it could be argued that the duchess is highlighting that perhaps Harry has been indulging in a certain historical revisionism, something which the inhabitants of Kensington Palace did not miss.

The inclusion of the bike can also be read as a very clear rejoinder on William and Kate’s part that despite Harry’s characterisation of the climate in the UK as “toxic”, the Cambridge kids enjoy a life of relative normalcy.

In the scheme of things, Louis’ red bike is a powerful symbol of the comparatively sane, press intrusion-free childhoods that royal kids in Britain enjoy today...”

ETA: “ Even this week, Kate, George and Charlotte were reportedly seen shopping on the nearby Kings Road in Chelsea. Have any pictures emerged? Negativo.” —> but Meghan couldn’t leave the palace for months, she was jailed there.


----------



## Icyjade

Came across this and thought it was an interesting read:

“It's long been established that there are two types of narcissists: "vulnerable" ones, who have low self-esteem and crave affirmation, and "grandiose" ones, who have a genuinely overinflated sense of self.

A new study from New York University shows that grandiose narcissists might not be considered narcissists at all, because their behaviour could resemble psychopathy – a related condition in which people act with no empathy in self-serving ways. The research team suggests vulnerable types are the true narcissists, because they don't seek power or dominance, but rather affirmation and attention that elevate their status and image in the minds of others.”









						Why some narcissists actually hate themselves
					

People who chronically brag and boast are grating – and, at times, repellent. But a surprising truth about narcissists might help us feel unexpected compassion for them.




					www.bbc.com
				




Now I can’t help wondering which type she is.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and now we know that in addition to the 16 bathrooms, they have a stable of horses......poor Meghan



I think was in Morocco, but they could if they wanted.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I think was in Morocco, but they could if they wanted.


I "spoke" too soon


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He makes a very good point!




I really have no sympathy. This is a woman who made a fortune interviewing people, and she did a sh*tty job there. Had she done her homework on the BRF and maybe asked one or two follow-up questions she wouldn't look like an idiot right now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really have no sympathy. This is a woman who made a fortune interviewing people, and she did a sh*tty job there. Had she done her homework on the BRF and maybe asked one or two follow-up questions she wouldn't look like an idiot right now.


she is Meghan's "friend".  Period.  This was basically propaganda for H&M.  Telling their "truth"
It's all about a WOC being the victim of racism


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she is Meghan's "friend".  Period.  This was basically propaganda for H&M.  Telling their "truth"
> It's all about a WOC being the victim of racism



Sure. I was picking up on "poor Oprah was duped". She totally was not, she either like you said willingly let them spout their lies or she brought herself into a situation where she emerged less than stellar because of laziness and negligence.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand more tea on Harry's frosty reception, brought to you by the one and only Lady CC. Disclaimer, I haven't watched yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you sure that was put out just now? Because that was taken on the 2019 tour to Morocco.


I took it from Twitter where it was said it was just released. Took them at their word but personally don’t know for sure.


----------



## youngster

Clearblueskies said:


> Whatever happened to Marcus whateverhisnamewas who was such a big mate of Megs?  Where is he? He seems to have disappeared



Yes, along with all of Harry's old UK friends.  Notice how none of them, not a single one, of his lifelong friends has said a word in his defense.  Many of them are also friends with William. So, they've chosen their side.


----------



## Sharont2305

Yep, Morocco.
I don't think that picture of the Queen is new either, she looks younger and it hasn't been posted on any of the Royal Families official social media.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure. I was picking up on "poor Oprah was duped". She totally was not, she either like you said willingly let them spout their lies or she brought herself into a situation where she emerged less than stellar because of laziness and negligence.


sorry to say I think in the US the Oprah interview got positive coverage from the media....and as we've said here, the general public probably doesn't care
So if the public doesn't care, then how are they going to have their big media career?


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> sorry to say I think in the US the Oprah interview got positive coverage from the media....and as we've said here, the general public probably doesn't care
> So if the public doesn't are, then *how are they going to have their big media career*?



Good question. I don't know how you sustain a media career as professional compassionate do-gooders.  The public has a 5 minute attention span and we all don't watch or listen to the same 3 networks anymore in the U.S.  With so many options for news and entertainment and social media, after your 5 minutes, it's on to whatever is next.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Good question. I don't know how you sustain a media career as professional compassionate do-gooders.  The public has a 5 minute attention span and we all don't watch or listen to the same 3 networks anymore in the U.S.  With so many options for news and entertainment and social media, after your 5 minutes, it's on to whatever is next.


right.  maybe this is why they're keeping archie under wraps - so they can use him on camera when the time comes.  but how much mileage are you going to get out of a toddler?


----------



## Sharont2305

tiktok said:


> ETA: “ Even this week, Kate, George and Charlotte were reportedly seen shopping on the nearby Kings Road in Chelsea. Have any pictures emerged? Negativo.” —> but Meghan couldn’t leave the palace for months, she was jailed there.


Yep, future Consort, mum of 3rd in line, with said 3rd and 4th in tow. Perfectly normal. And free.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, future Consort, mum of 3rd in line, with said 3rd and 4th in tow. Perfectly normal. And free.



You guys just don't understand. The other one ist just more popular, so she can't mingle with the unwashed masses.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Shackleton on expedition would have received a warmer welcome from the penguins I imagine!"      (says the person writing in, not Lady CC)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"I don't understand how Harry could expect a warm welcome. Did he not realize the Oprah Show was shown over here?" 

He apparently doesn't have as much common sense as most people.


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, Morocco.
> I don't think that picture of the Queen is new either, she looks younger and it hasn't been posted on any of the Royal Families official social media.
> 
> View attachment 5064760


I got the photos from Twitter, should have done a little more back checking.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> I got the photos from Twitter, should have done a little more back checking.
> View attachment 5064772


It's not a new photo, it's a "previously unseen" photo released by the Royal Windsor Horse Show to wish her a happy birthday. 
And she was still in the official mourning.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chagall said:


> There were four kids in my family. The two boys were right handed and the girls lefties. My older sister had her hand tied so she would use the ‘correct’ hand. By the time I was in school this practice was no longer done. One teacher took the time to show me how to slant the paper in the correct direction for a left handed person, rather than have my arm circled around the top of the page. It took her a moment to show me and it made all the difference. I can’t fathom why all left handed children are not taught this.


Wait, what do you mean?
Have I been writing in a bad way for a southpaw all these years?


papertiger said:


> I think was in Morocco, but they could if they wanted.


If they are already haemorrhaging money just one of those loveable money pits would ruin them I suspect. No one send Archie a book about ponies. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> You guys just don't understand. The other one ist just more popular, so she can't mingle with the unwashed masses.


yes she’s  Schrodinger’s celeb in that she’s both so adored by the Brit public that she can’t stop grabbing the press’ attention and yet so hated by the racist British public that there is a press campaign to annihilate her and all while getting underwhelming ratings on her tv appearances.
weird.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charles found it hard at times to hide his discomfort at how the focus was all on his wife, and little on himself. William, on the other hand, was thrilled at the reception Kate received.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...mwork-William-Kates-triumphant-ten-years.html


The big difference was that Diana craved the attention, she knew Charles was jealous but she didn’t care and loved one upping him.

Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays a bit in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.

That’s why their marriage is working so successfully and one of the reasons Diana's did not.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> The big difference was that Diana craved the attention, she knew Charles was jealous but she didn’t care and loved one upping him.
> 
> Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.
> 
> That’s why their marriage is working so successfully and one of the reasons Diana's did not.


[/QUOTE]
and they have a genuine love marriage I think.  whereas charles basically married diana, who was really too young for him and whom he didn't love, to give him heirs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Yep, Morocco.
> I don't think that picture of the Queen is new either, she looks younger and it hasn't been posted on any of the Royal Families official social media.
> 
> View attachment 5064760


Why would a picture of Cringe & Ginger & horses appear at the same time of QE's picture with horses? I'm still confused.


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> The big difference was that Diana craved the attention, she knew Charles was jealous but she didn’t care and loved one upping him.
> 
> *Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays a bit in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.
> 
> That’s why their marriage is working so successfully and one of the reasons Diana's did not.*


Same can be said for Prince Philip actions and his and the Queen's lengthy and successful marriage.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> and they have a genuine love marriage I think.  whereas charles basically married diana, who was really too young for him and whom he didn't love, to give him heirs.


And he was basically told to marry her. She was an aristocratic virgin, which was ideal for the Heir at the time.


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> Why would a picture of Cringe & Ginger & horses appears at the same time of QE's picture with horses? I'm still confused.


Yet another example of Cringe's need to one-up everyone all the time.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays a bit in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.


But I bet its all equal at home, no hierarchy there.


----------



## catlover46

Does anybody else think that not only did she act like a diva when told no she couldn’t wear the Vladimir Tiara, that she also wanted a big London Westminster Abbey Royal Wedding and melted down when told no?


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> Same can be said for Prince Philip actions and his and the Queen's lengthy and successful marriage.


And he was the boss at home.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger and Cringe may not have a new podcast for Spotify, but they likely have headaches...


_Meghan Markle__, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, have been criticised for their new podcast series with Spotify. One musician, in particular, has spoken about how their deal is like a “kick in the teeth”. This comes after stars like Paul McCartney, Chris Martin and Kate Bush have come together recently to criticise the way music streaming works...

This comes after a series of musicians penned an open letter to Boris Johnson calling for changing how streaming works.

The letter signed by 156 artists calls on the Prime Minister to change the economic model of streaming._









						Meghan and Harry Spotify deal criticised amid calls for stream reform
					

MEGHAN MARKLE'S and Prince Harry's new deal with Spotify has been condemned by a musician amid calls for it to be reformed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Jayne1 said:


> The big difference was that Diana craved the attention, she knew Charles was jealous but she didn’t care and loved one upping him.
> 
> Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays a bit in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.
> 
> That’s why their marriage is working so successfully and one of the reasons Diana's did not.



With Charles and Diana, they were never in love, although I think Diana thought she was, and that he was too. She was only 19 when they married, so I can relate to her having this thinking. I was far too naive and short sighted at that age. When she realized that Charles didn't love her, and didn't give her the attention or love she craved (which is understandable), she turned to the media and other outlets to get that, which fueled her popularity. Charles and Diana never were a team either. People did not question is Diana was suitable or ready for such a high profile role because she was aristocracy, and this was a failure on Charles part.

Kate and William had dated for years, grew up together in a way, met each others families, went on holidays with the families too. William really made sure she was suitable and aware of what royal life will be like. She also came from a stable, close and loving family which most likely made things easier for them. And I think Kate does not really crave the limelight, she wants to raise her children and support her husband, and this is the type of person that William needed. Just like Prince Philip, all royal consorts need to really have this goal in life. 

MM wanted to make more of an impact and be a humanitarian (possibly like Diana), but that really doesn't work well when you're married to the younger brother. I don't think she could ever take on a role like Kate has because that is not what she wants, and that's ok if she wants to have more impact and be more political, she just shouldn't have done it as a working royal or even married a royal.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> With Charles and Diana, they were never in love, although I think Diana thought she was, and that he was too. She was only 19 when they married, so I can relate to her having this thinking. I was far too naive and short sighted at that age. When she realized that Charles didn't love her, and didn't give her the attention or love she craved (which is understandable), she turned to the media and other outlets to get that, which fueled her popularity. Charles and Diana never were a team either. People did not question is Diana was suitable or ready for such a high profile role because she was aristocracy, and this was a failure on Charles part.
> 
> Kate and William had dated for years, grew up together in a way, met each others families, went on holidays with the families too. William really made sure she was suitable and aware of what royal life will be like. She also came from a stable, close and loving family which most likely made things easier for them. And I think Kate does not really crave the limelight, she wants to raise her children and support her husband, and this is the type of person that William needed. Just like Prince Philip, all royal consorts need to really have this goal in life.
> 
> MM wanted to make more of an impact and be a humanitarian (possibly like Diana), but that really doesn't work well when you're married to the younger brother. I don't think she could ever take on a role like Kate has because that is not what she wants, and that's ok if she wants to have more impact and be more political, she just shouldn't have done it as a working royal or even married a royal.


I don’t know if it’s actually about the image or the politics with M to be honest. 
H, despite being a spare, has very much been given two charitable niches of his own to grow with invictus and sentebale and she could have worked on them for a couple of years building a rep. They also gave her several personal patronages and she got the chance to do speaking events about her interests. The whole branding of royalty nowadays is they are professional ‘do-Gooders’ and ‘advocates’ so she could have easily made herself into a new Diana. that’s the way they were all trying to sell her.

the real problem, as I see it, was she couldn’t get the cash in hand (aristocrats are notorious for having lots of assets and no ready money) and she wasn’t allowed make money and she wanted to run in the LA super-rich circles. 
Now she’s finding out it’s not that easy to make money even with an existing brand and Beyoncé, Amal and Serena are getting more and more distant.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and now we know that in addition to the 16 bathrooms, they have a stable of horses......poor Meghan



We will be hearing about Meghan sponsoring a rescue horse any day now.


----------



## Chanbal

Really??? Cringe played the race card, but didn't think it was powerful... She didn't follow the recent riots in the US. And the mental health card?


----------



## youngster

I think MM would love to engage in a transatlantic back-and-forth squabble with Kate publicly. Hence, the latest pap photo released on Prince Louis' birthday after discussing their ridiculous pre-wedding tiff and bringing up the old waity-Katie nickname in the OW interview.  She's gotten no response from Kate and no response from the Palace, except for their "recollections may vary" dismissal. There is no way MM would be able to keep quiet so she likely is stumped at what she has to do to provoke these people. There is power in silence, in absolutely refusing to engage with someone publicly, which must frustrate MM terribly.  

Though, if you read the article from that Australia royal reporter linked previously, Kate's photo of Prince Louis' on his little red bike at the park around Kensington Palace was a very deft jab at Harry who claimed in the OW interview that he could never do anything normal like a ride a bike as a child (when there are numerous pictures of him on a bike as a child and, oh look, there is little Prince Louis on his bike).


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Really??? Cringe played the race card, but didn't think it was powerful... She didn't follow the recent riots in the US. And the mental health card?
> 
> View attachment 5064814


No one in their right mind is going to believe that claim.


----------



## marietouchet

Itty bitty blurb in the latest Point de Vue, French language royalty magazine, wow how their coverage has shrunk... 
Anyway, the proposed Archewell Invictus documentary will follow athletes training for the 2022 games ie the show will not come out any time soon


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> And he was basically told to marry her. She was an aristocratic virgin, which was ideal for the Heir at the time.



He didn’t have to marry Diana in particular, but Charles lollygagged too long dating lots of women throughout the ‘70s and just wouldn’t pick one. Women aren’t going to stay virgins forever waiting for him to find someone who checked all his boxes!

For anyone who thinks if only there wasn’t a virgin rule he could have had Camilla, I say bullsh*t. Charles was not ready to settle down when he was dating Camilla. If they had married back then they would have inevitably cheated on each other the same way they cheated on their first spouses. Neither one was the monogamous type.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Really??? Cringe played the race card, but didn't think it was powerful... She didn't follow the recent riots in the US. And the mental health card?
> 
> View attachment 5064814


Imho, MM thought she could get the Palace to cave to her after her statements, because she knew the topic was hot
MM totally underestimated the tenacity of the opposition

I believe OW when she says she did not know H&M would go that far, I find it hard to believe she did not ask her market reasearch staff to evaluate the possible fallout once interview was in the can.

OW must have known she had controversial material, and her choice was to increase the length of the show, not shorten it (whack out the juicy bits)
why increase not shorten ? Dunno


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I think MM would love to engage in a transatlantic back-and-forth squabble with Kate publicly. Hence, the latest pap photo released on Prince Louis' birthday after discussing their ridiculous pre-wedding tiff and bringing up the old waity-Katie nickname in the OW interview.  She's gotten no response from Kate and no response from the Palace, except for their "recollections may vary" dismissal. There is no way MM would be able to keep quiet so she likely is stumped at what she has to do to provoke these people. There is power in silence, in absolutely refusing to engage with someone publicly, which must frustrate MM terribly.
> 
> Though, if you read the article from that Australia royal reporter linked previously, Kate's photo of Prince Louis' on his little red bike at the park around Kensington Palace was a very deft jab at Harry who claimed in the OW interview that he could never do anything normal like a ride a bike as a child (when there are numerous pictures of him on a bike as a child and, oh look, there is little Prince Louis on his bike).


Countdown now starting for a picture of Archie astride a tricycle.


----------



## catlover46

marietouchet said:


> Imho, MM thought she could get the Palace to cave to her after her statements, because she knew the topic was hot
> MM totally underestimated the tenacity of the opposition
> 
> I believe OW when she says she did not know H&M would go that far, I find it hard to believe she did not ask her market reasearch staff to evaluate the possible fallout once interview was in the can.
> 
> OW must have known she had controversial material, and her choice was to increase the length of the show, not shorten it (whack out the juicy bits)
> why increase not shorten ? Dunno


I think her and OW weren’t counting on Prince Phillip dying so quickly after the interview and weren’t expecting the amount of the sympathy the Queen got.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Imho, MM thought she could get the Palace to cave to her after her statements, because she knew the topic was hot
> MM totally underestimated the tenacity of the opposition
> 
> I believe OW when she says she did not know H&M would go that far, I find it hard to believe she did not ask her market reasearch staff to evaluate the possible fallout once interview was in the can.
> 
> OW must have known she had controversial material, and her choice was to increase the length of the show, not shorten it (whack out the juicy bits)
> why increase not shorten ? Dunno


more controversy equals more attention


----------



## Chloe302225

I think we should look for more attention grabbing behavior as William and Kate's 10 year anniversary approaches.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Really??? Cringe played the race card, but didn't think it was powerful... She didn't follow the recent riots in the US. And the mental health card?
> 
> View attachment 5064814


She doesn’t read the papers  


marietouchet said:


> Imho, MM thought she could get the Palace to cave to her after her statements, because she knew the topic was hot
> MM totally underestimated the tenacity of the opposition
> 
> I believe OW when she says she did not know H&M would go that far, I find it hard to believe she did not ask her market reasearch staff to evaluate the possible fallout once interview was in the can.
> 
> OW must have known she had controversial material, and her choice was to increase the length of the show, not shorten it (whack out the juicy bits)
> why increase not shorten ? Dunno


More show, more room for constipation tablet ads.

I think OW thought it wouldn’t come back at her whatever the reaction. No one said Martin Bashir was to blame for the fallout from MJ or Diana. Well until about a decade later and OW is gonna be on her private island by then. I’ve said before she thought this would be her swansong and she’d be praised for challenging an institution and tackling taboos. Basically, I think she wanted to sell the brand so much she didn’t really look at the products. Like an episode of the apprentice.

Add on - unfortunately for OW, it looks like H&M are nowhere near as beloved or tragic as MJ or Diana and it has not taken very long at all for the public to find their behaviour silly rather than shocking and turn on all 3 of them.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

youngster said:


> There is power in silence, in absolutely refusing to engage with someone publicly, which must frustrate MM terribly.



I live by this, even though I am not in the public eye. Choosing when to speak up and keeping quiet is powerful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe because CBS/Discovery/OW/GK/H&M needed the boost. Times are tough. 
These mansions and jets don’t take care of themselves.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Countdown now starting for a picture of Archie astride a tricycle.


I was thinking more skateboard than tricycle.
And we have Princess Charlotte's birthday on the 2nd of May too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OW/GK/H&M  are woefully behind the times. The pandemic changed everything.
Mansions, jets, gated communities, complaining, humble-bragging [“I am blessed”], talking about yourself = out.
 In = focusing on others, loyalty, trust, inter gritty, everything Prince Philip stood for. 

Here’s how 78 looks in 2021:


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Countdown now starting for a picture of Archie astride a tricycle.



He will be wearing a helmet... Archie's hair color is a private matter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> The big difference was that Diana craved the attention, she knew Charles was jealous but she didn’t care and loved one upping him.
> 
> Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays a bit in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.
> 
> That’s why their marriage is working so successfully and one of the reasons Diana's did not.



Yeah, my point was to compare the Duchess of Cambridge to Duchess Disney, not Kate and Diana. I believe I highlighted the part that said "the girl was being herself" as opposed to someone who's always, always acting.


----------



## Chanbal

For the bored ones due to limited activities in COVID time, here is another informative video!


----------



## bellecate

Was just at my favorite jewelry store and the manager was telling me about a new line they were bringing in from a designer from Toronto. Said it was gorgeous but said the only problem with it was "that Markle women or whatever her name is, was known for wearing it".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Diana was bound to get a lot of attention, it took forever for Charles to find SOMEBODY, and when his pretty aristocratic bride was 19 vs his 32, of course the cameras were on her. If Chuck was peeved at the attention Diana got, he didn't help his own case by continuing his relationship with Camilla. Perhaps Diana purposely attracted even more attention to get back at Charles. At the end of the day, Diana's purpose as far Charles was concerned was to be a broodmare and he treated her as such. Whatever her personal faults, Diana was popular and loved by the public, and seemed to have genuine affection for people. In contrast, everything Meghan did and does looks very calculating and contrived. Any well deserved criticism is met with knee jerk responses of "racism!" and/or "victim!"  Kate went  into her marriage to be supportive of the Crown. Meghan glommed onto Harry to become center of the universe, with expectations of the Crown owing HER. She still doesn't get it. She'll always be the self pitying sociopath with the idiot husband. 
Diana had William 11 months after the wedding, and had Harry 27 months after. Meghan had Archie 12 months after the wedding and Baby #2 will be about 38 months after but the supposed miscarriage would have had similar timing to Diana having Harry. Diana's purpose was to produce heirs, Meghan's purpose was to force more copycat moves of Diana. Granted, she's older and if kids were on her horizon she had to get busy, but it didn't dawn on her to have meal tickets kids until the third husband. And to boot, she got to call the BRF a bunch of racists and say they drove her to suicidal thoughts. I guess that's what the BRF gets when they don't make a sociopath center of the universe.


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> He will be wearing a helmet... Archie's hair color is a private matter



HE will be wearing a helmet—- it will be a 2 hour photo shoot , you know —- safety first!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I think Diana felt alone. She came from a broken home and she thought marrying the Prince would mean the same thing could not happen to her. Thats what I read, and at that age you can forgive a girl for thinking that. I don't think Diana really was into all the pomp and attention. It was not something she craved. It was only when her marriage went downhill and she felt alone, that's when she found solace. Because she was so young, naive and alone, I can look pass Dianas transgressions. 

I think if the same thing had happened to Kate for example, she could go to her parents and siblings because they are close and loving. I get the feeling Diana didn't have anyone to turn to and she was so young, with little real world experience. MM has had plenty of freedom and time to grow up, yet she claims to have been naive.


----------



## Aimee3

bellecate said:


> Was just at my favorite jewelry store and the manager was telling me about a new line they were bringing in from a designer from Toronto. Said it was gorgeous but said the only problem with it was "that Markle women or whatever her name is, was known for wearing it".


Reminds me of a time I was shopping with my daughter who put on an outfit and was debating if she wanted it.  The salesgirl poked her head in the dressing room and hoping to make a sale said “oh Miss Famous starlet” (who I won’t mention here, but the salesgirl did mention starlet by name) just bought that and was photographed wearing it.  My daughter quickly started to take off the outfit and replied “in that case, I no longer want it.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Diana was bound to get a lot of attention, it took forever for Charles to find SOMEBODY, and when his pretty aristocratic bride was 19 vs his 32, of course the cameras were on her. If Chuck was peeved at the attention Diana got, he didn't help his own case by continuing his relationship with Camilla. Perhaps Diana purposely attracted even more attention to get back at Charles. At the end of the day, Diana's purpose as far Charles was concerned was to be a broodmare and he treated her as such. Whatever her personal faults, Diana was popular and loved by the public, and seemed to have genuine affection for people. In contrast, everything Meghan did and does looks very calculating and contrived. Any well deserved criticism is met with knee jerk responses of "racism!" and/or "victim!"  Kate went  into her marriage to be supportive of the Crown. Meghan glommed onto Harry to become center of the universe, with expectations of the Crown owing HER. She still doesn't get it. She'll always be the self pitying sociopath with the idiot husband.
> Diana had William 11 months after the wedding, and had Harry 27 months after. Meghan had Archie 12 months after the wedding and Baby #2 will be about 38 months after but the supposed miscarriage would have had similar timing to Diana having Harry. Diana's purpose was to produce heirs, Meghan's purpose was to force more copycat moves of Diana. Granted, she's older and if kids were on her horizon she had to get busy, but it didn't dawn on her to have meal tickets kids until the third husband. And to boot, she got to call the BRF a bunch of racists and say they drove her to suicidal thoughts. I guess that's what the BRF gets when they don't make a sociopath center of the universe.



All true, here’s the thing: complaining, jealousy, spite - pre pandemic.

Now, as OW says, so many of us have suffered, except her b/c she is blessed. Could she/GK/H&M be more egotistical? 
Read the f-ing room.

Pre-pandemic, go ahead and selfishly drain the positive vibes out of the universe, now:




H&M lose again


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW/GK/H&M  are woefully behind the times. The pandemic changed everything.
> Mansions, jets, gated communities, complaining, humble-bragging [“I am blessed”], talking about yourself = out.
> In = focusing on others, loyalty, trust, inter gritty, everything Prince Philip stood for.
> 
> Here’s how 78 looks in 2021:
> 
> View attachment 5064888


I think more people are humble bragging than ever before. Example - I get to live in Malibu and go to the beach everyday, I live the simple life, I'm so blessed.

(McCartney sure has a thick hairline in that photo.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> And with William’s support, Kate set about learning from the best. Night after night she would sit mugging up on the protocol, talking to the Queen’s ladies-in-waiting and picking the brains of her diplomatic advisors.



While Meghan told Angela Kelly who emailed her to inform her she better wore a hat while out with the Queen that she'd prefer not to (and didn't).



> Diana’s son and his beautiful bride were the Royal Family’s new superstars and the world was agog. (In LA on that same trip, Nicole Kidman – yes, the Oscar-winning actress – was squealing with excitement at the prospect of meeting the royal couple. That’s the power of royalty.)
> 
> Given such levels of adulation, it may come as a surprise to know that behind the scenes, this was still a couple feeling their way. One senior official who was on the trip tells me, ‘I remember the duchess coming in on the second day and asking if she was “doing OK”.
> 
> *'We’d just seen scenes akin to Beatlemania, and she was asking if she was “doing OK”. I think that tells you quite a lot. There was a humility about her, coupled with a desire to get it right. That was the hallmark of those early years. And she didn’t put a foot wrong.*



Such. A. Stark. Contrast.

Am I doing ok? Even as the world went wild for her, behind the scenes Kate was desperate to get it right


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I think more people are humble bragging than ever before. Example - I get to live in Malibu and go to the beach everyday, I live the simple life, I'm so blessed.
> 
> (McCartney sure has a thick hairline in that photo.)



I know, I know, the hairline is noticeably thicker.   He should send Hazzie his tips   Just a few weeks ago, PM looked a bit [um] haggard?  Still, I like his attitude, his positivity, and his refreshed (?) look.

The humblebraggers are on the OUT list. Once again, the _*cool Brits *_(not these z-listers) are leading us to the post-pandemic world, just like they did in the 60s. All we are saying is give peace a chance. 



Spoiler: Peace



Ev'rybody's talking about
Bagism, Shagism, Dragism, Madism, Ragism, Tagism
This-ism, that-ism, is-m, is-m, is-m
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
C'mon
Ev'rybody's talking about Ministers
Sinisters, Banisters and canisters
Bishops and Fishops and Rabbis and Pop eyes
And bye bye, bye byes
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
Let me tell you now
Ev'rybody's talking about
Revolution, evolution, masturbation
Flagellation, regulation, integrations
Meditations, United Nations
Congratulations
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance



ETA: who is a *cool Brit*? 
My list, so far:  Prince Philip, QE, William, Kate, Paul McCartney, Ringo, Mick (start me up), Peter Philips, Mike & Zara,  ???


----------



## ladyglen

Princess Royal is a pretty cool Lady in my eyes


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW/GK/H&M  are woefully behind the times. The pandemic changed everything.
> Mansions, jets, gated communities, complaining, humble-bragging [“I am blessed”], talking about yourself = out.
> In = focusing on others, loyalty, trust, inter gritty, everything Prince Philip stood for.
> 
> Here’s how 78 looks in 2021:
> 
> View attachment 5064888



Oh man, Paul’s grandkids must have shown him the filters.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> They did hire someone to work on a show for them. Now whether they are smart enough to leave them alone and trust them to do their job is another matter.


.. *BUT *.. will said person *actually be able to* work on a show for them??? .. or (_more like it_) .. wouldn't they be just *doing what Meghan tells them to do*???? .. after all, that's pretty much what Omid Scoobie-do-be-Dummy did when he (_and the other woman_) SUPPOSEDLY wrote the 'infamous' book about the 2 of the grifters "finding freedom"?!?!?!?! I honestly can't see anyone who has had such the privilege () to work for them .. *EVER *being able to actually do their job!


----------



## pukasonqo

Aimee3 said:


> Reminds me of a time I was shopping with my daughter who put on an outfit and was debating if she wanted it.  The salesgirl poked her head in the dressing room and hoping to make a sale said “oh Miss Famous starlet” (who I won’t mention here, but the salesgirl did mention starlet by name) just bought that and was photographed wearing it.  My daughter quickly started to take off the outfit and replied “in that case, I no longer want it.”



Didn’t Tom Ford was apparently appalled that Victoria Beckham was buying Gucci    when he was creative director for the house?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Harry Markle blog on the uniform debacle. Well, doesn't she have a point! (I always say she, but do we even know who writes that blog?)



> While I believe it was the right decision in the end because people were losing track of the fact that The Queen had lost her husband, it did deprive her children of wearing a uniform out of respect for their Naval Officer father. *Put simply, if they had sent MM packing on her merry way back in 2016, banned her from coming near Harry, and blocked her number, then he would have carried on dating leggy blondes and would have worn his uniform at the funeral.*


----------



## papertiger

ladyglen said:


> Princess Royal is a pretty cool Lady in my eyes



I'm against her on GM crops (but agreeing with Charles who's also against) but otherwise   yes, mostly, because she doesn't mind hard work (unlike another couple of people I could mention - one who announces maternity leave from doing nothing)


----------



## Chanbal

The planning of Megxit (part-time of course). 




_A US media firm suggested the Duchess of Sussex front a show called Princesses And Puppies during a meeting at Kensington Palace – *almost a year before she and Prince Harry unveiled their Megxit plans*, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

*The couple met executives from streaming service Quibi on January 30, 2019.* *Yet during an interview with Oprah Winfrey earlier this year, Prince Harry said the couple ‘didn’t have a plan’ after they quit as working Royals in January 2020 and signed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify only after the family ‘cut me off financially’.*

According to a source, the couple had previously discussed various projects with executives at the now-defunct Quibi.

One idea suggested by the firm’s founder, Jeffrey Katzenberg, was for the Duchess to host an online show that combined Royalty and pets.

‘Meghan seemed to find that idea offensive and though she was gracious in the moment, people in the room were a bit appalled that this was the pitch to her,’ said the source.

‘*Jeffrey thought that puppies and princesses both sold well so if you put them together you’d have something incredibly commercial*.’ 

*Mr Katzenberg, 70, is one of the most powerful men in Hollywood, having headed Disney Studios and founded the DreamWorks studios with Steven Spielberg.* He launched Quibi – a streaming service to broadcast ‘short-bite’ shows on mobile phones – in August 2018 with £1.3 billion in funding. 

Joining Mr Katzenberg at the meeting at Kensington Palace were fellow Quibi executives Janice Min and Brian Tannenbaum. The source said: ‘I believe Quibi first approached Harry and Meghan, who invited executives to meet them in London.

*‘There was discussion about a sustainable travel programme and another show about Harry’s charity interests in Africa. There was talk about Meghan narrating a nature documentary. Quibi held several discussions with them.’*

The Duke reportedly had one further in-person meeting with Quibi executives in London in January 2020 – the month that the couple stepped back from Royal duties – but the talks petered out.

Harry and Meghan later relocated to California, where they now live in an £11 million mansion.

Quibi collapsed last December. Yesterday, Ms Min and Mr Tannenbaum both said they were unable to comment.

Mr Katzenberg did not reply to requests for comment. _









						Harry and Meghan met US streaming firm a YEAR before Megxit
					

The couple met executives from streaming service Quibi on January 30, 2019 at Kensington Palace, despite telling Oprah Winfrey earlier this year the coupled 'didn't have a plan'  after Megzit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## daisychainz

I bet the baby drops on July 1st, this woman is beyond calculating.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Love the new photo of the queen.
> View attachment 5064471
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, that nasty  wife of JCMH had to try and one up TQ. New picture has been put out.
> View attachment 5064472
> 
> Didn’t work, the Queen wins by a landslide.


Oh for the love of Pete.  This piece of poo can't even come up with her own animal??


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Countdown now starting for a picture of Archie astride a tricycle.


His will be a low carbon footprint bike revelaed in the word salad press release


----------



## Aimee3

daisychainz said:


> I bet the baby drops on July 1st, this woman is beyond calculating.


And if the baby comes early and it’s really a home birth then who is to know the REAL truth??


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Came across this and thought it was an interesting read:
> 
> “It's long been established that there are two types of narcissists: "vulnerable" ones, who have low self-esteem and crave affirmation, and "grandiose" ones, who have a genuinely overinflated sense of self.
> 
> A new study from New York University shows that grandiose narcissists might not be considered narcissists at all, because their behaviour could resemble psychopathy – a related condition in which people act with no empathy in self-serving ways. The research team suggests vulnerable types are the true narcissists, because they don't seek power or dominance, but rather affirmation and attention that elevate their status and image in the minds of others.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why some narcissists actually hate themselves
> 
> 
> People who chronically brag and boast are grating – and, at times, repellent. But a surprising truth about narcissists might help us feel unexpected compassion for them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I can’t help wondering which type she is.


My $0.05 "psychiatric" opinion is she's a class of her own:  "Vulnerose" narcissist.  She craves affirmation and has a genuinely overinflated sense of self.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Yes, along with all of Harry's old UK friends.  Notice how none of them, not a single one, of his lifelong friends has said a word in his defense.  Many of them are also friends with William. So, they've chosen their side.


I too would've chosen the future king with the nice wife who both seem more down to earth than the spare whose two bit "actress" wife is a certifiable nut case and cut you out of his life before you even blinked.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> The big difference was that Diana craved the attention, she knew Charles was jealous but she didn’t care and loved one upping him.
> *
> Kate, on the other hand, knows exactly what not to do. She stays a bit in the background, she doesn’t try to draw attention, she knows William would not like that and she knows not to be a media hog.*
> 
> That’s why their marriage is working so successfully and one of the reasons Diana's did not.


Absolutely!  She knows the only reason she's famous is because of her husband (as should her simpleton SIL, who thinks she's the grandest of them all).  Who cares if he gets the attention outside?  I'd rather be the boss at home.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Countdown now starting for a picture of Archie astride a tricycle.


I think they'll one up it even more by picturing Archie riding a carriage 
That way they can put down PP and Louise too.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I live by this, even though I am not in the public eye. Choosing when to speak up and keeping quiet is powerful.


My husband always says it takes two to argue.  If one party doesn't engage, there literally can't be an argument.


----------



## gelbergirl

Was no other woman interested in Harry?
Were they all taken?
Was he a known bad-catch?


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> And if the baby comes early and it’s really a home birth then who is to know the REAL truth??



Exactly. As long as they get the midwife to vouch for the date couldn’t they write in whatever they wanted?


----------



## catlover46

bag-mania said:


> Oh man, Paul’s grandkids must have shown him the filters.


Most likely his teenage daughter as well.


----------



## mdcx

gelbergirl said:


> Was no other woman interested in Harry?
> Were they all taken?
> Was he a known bad-catch?


He was known to be not-smart, cheap, and a party boy. His wife would have had a lot on her plate with all that, then add in all the protocol, duties, publicity and always being second to Kate. Several girlfriends said “no thanks” before Meghan said “OMG Yes!”


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> He will be wearing a helmet... Archie's hair color is a private matter





It looks like his hair is black or very dark in the video of them on the beach?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for the love of Pete.  *This piece of poo can't even come up with her own animal??*


Dear little people,
Hi, it's me and my husband H in one of our many bathrooms. I don't care all that much about animals, but appearing to really care for animals endears us to the plebes. With the horse pic,  I wanted to show up the Queen, after all, I'm as if not more important than than she is. So there!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5065080
> 
> It looks like his hair is black or very dark in the video of them on the beach?


possibly, but hard to tell on a B&W photo.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> possibly, but hard to tell on a B&W photo.


True, but any B&W pic I have from when my kids were small, they look bald as they were blond/strawberry blond.   His hair is definitely dark.


----------



## mdcx

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5065080
> 
> It looks like his hair is black or very dark in the video of them on the beach?


I would say his hair is dark red e. g.


----------



## csshopper

The picture on the  right is the unauthorized one taken at her friend's house dated in March. Same shaped hair cut as the beach picture, kind of odd, almost like something plopped on his head.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How do we know this is really Arxie?
Remember, she’s from Hwood, the land of fake.



gelbergirl said:


> Was no other woman interested in Harry?
> Were they all taken?
> Was he a known bad-catch?



Yes, yes, yes!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is the tide turning?
No idea who this is, but it looks like more people are aware of the shady stuff:


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I think Archie looks like MMs dad. They have a similar nose and features. Kinda like how George looks like Kates dad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ok, good, new chapters, can’t wait 








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s biography getting new chapters: report
					

The 2020 book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand will be re-issued on Aug. 5 and will reportedly include new chapters about the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Philip&#…




					pagesix.com


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, good, new chapters, can’t wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s biography getting new chapters: report
> 
> 
> The 2020 book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand will be re-issued on Aug. 5 and will reportedly include new chapters about the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Philip&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Àhhhh yes. The gift that keeps on giving


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, good, new chapters, can’t wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s biography getting new chapters: report
> 
> 
> The 2020 book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand will be re-issued on Aug. 5 and will reportedly include new chapters about the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Philip&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Are they going to cash in on Prince Philip?


----------



## Chanbal

This lady makes a good point!


----------



## csshopper

Please Charles strip the titles. They've squeezed Diana, so now it's on to Phillip. (can't find the words!) 

Next thing they'll be on QVC, hustling the latest products for a fast buck. 

There is NOTHING Royal about their behavior.


----------



## JY89

Harry 'spent Queen's birthday having lunch with LA billionaire at members' club'
					

Prince Harry reportedly had dinner with 81-year-old Wallis Annenberg, a philanthropist who has an interest in environmental stewardship, social justice and animal welfare, on the Queen's birthday




					www.dailystar.co.uk
				




From a Prince to a social climber just like maggot. We can see their constant efforts in trying to enter the upper circle to gain connections for more milking. Hustling hard on his grandmother’s birthday


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, good, new chapters, can’t wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s biography getting new chapters: report
> 
> 
> The 2020 book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand will be re-issued on Aug. 5 and will reportedly include new chapters about the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Philip&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



They were lucky enough to sell some of those lame books last year. How ridiculous of them to expect their fans are going to buy it again just to get an extra chapter about an interview they already saw.

At least there can be no more denial that Meghan actively collaborated in the writing of Finding Freedom.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5065080
> 
> It looks like his hair is black or very dark in the video of them on the beach?


That doesn't even look like him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Please Charles strip the titles. They've squeezed Diana, so now it's on to Phillip. (can't find the words!)
> 
> Next thing they'll be on QVC, hustling the latest products for a fast buck.
> 
> There is NOTHING Royal about their behavior.


Neither the Queen nor Charles can remove the Dukedom from the evil duo, but Parliament can.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of royal titles | Royal | News (Reports)*

Henry Smith, the Tory MP for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal titles. A constituent has written to the MP and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.
David Probett, a retired employee of Natwest Bank, has written to his MP concerning Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
The letter, which he shared on his Twitter account, reads: “Dear Mr Smith, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (aka Prince Harry And Megan Markle).
“Shortly before the marriage, Her Majesty the Queen granted the couple the couple the titles of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Polytic Mag


----------



## CarryOn2020

Alternatively, they could *renounce* the titles. 
It would save everyone the time, hassle and angst that this action will cause.  But wait, that would require integrity, honor, etc.
Qualities they have not shown to date.






Maggie Muggins said:


> Neither the Queen nor Charles can remove the Dukedom from the evil duo, but Parliament can.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of royal titles | Royal | News (Reports)*
> 
> Henry Smith, the Tory MP for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal titles. A constituent has written to the MP and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.
> David Probett, a retired employee of Natwest Bank, has written to his MP concerning Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> The letter, which he shared on his Twitter account, reads: “Dear Mr Smith, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (aka Prince Harry And Megan Markle).
> “Shortly before the marriage, Her Majesty the Queen granted the couple the couple the titles of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Polytic Mag


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternatively, they could *renounce* the titles.
> It would save everyone the time, hassle and angst that this action will cause.  But wait, that would require integrity, honor, etc.
> Qualities they have not shown to date.


The last thing they want is to renounce the titles, but they may do it if Parliament starts the process of removing them. 

Hope Henry Smith gets the needed support...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternatively, they could *renounce* the titles.
> It would save everyone the time, hassle and angst that this action will cause.  But wait, that would require integrity, honor, etc.
> Qualities they have not shown to date.


Agree, that is the honourable way to go, but their only goal is acquiring as much $$$ and fame as possible and be damned all principles.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> That doesn't even look like him.


Yes I saw on Twitter some random poster suggesting it was a CNN journalists son in the video footage.  It seemed too far fetched to believe.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> *Henry Smith, the Tory MP for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal titles.* A constituent has written to the MP and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.
> David Probett, a retired employee of Natwest Bank, has written to his MP concerning Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> The letter, which he shared on his Twitter account, reads: “Dear Mr Smith, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (aka Prince Harry And Megan Markle).
> “Shortly before the marriage, Her Majesty the Queen granted the couple the couple the titles of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Polytic Mag



It looks like this is from September 2020, did they stop the process?









						Meghan and Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of titles
					

A TORY MP has been urged to table a motion in the House of Commons to officially strip Meghan Markle and Prince Harry of their royal titles.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## catlover46

Chanbal said:


> This lady makes a good point!



Does Omid really think he and Meghan are going to bring down the BRF? He sounds like a real POS and needs to lay off the plastic surgery.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks this is from September 2020, did they stop the process?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of titles
> 
> 
> A TORY MP has been urged to table a motion in the House of Commons to officially strip Meghan Markle and Prince Harry of their royal titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




Okaaay, she is better than Jason’s chair!


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, good, new chapters, can’t wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s biography getting new chapters: report
> 
> 
> The 2020 book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand will be re-issued on Aug. 5 and will reportedly include new chapters about the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Philip&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Is it a new chapter or an Errata?

You read it here last, ladies and gentlemen. After updating us about the ‘bombshell’ interview, a secret surprise wreath and a not so secret meeting with a billionaire bigwig, Omid is going to scoop the non-news that Harry met with the queen to discuss his plans to modernize the American monarchy. And that he walked with Will in grandpa’s funeral cortège.

Edit to fix quote.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It looks like this is from September 2020, did they stop the process?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of titles
> 
> 
> A TORY MP has been urged to table a motion in the House of Commons to officially strip Meghan Markle and Prince Harry of their royal titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I found this little blurb dated April 21, 2021 which regurgitates the first paragraph of the previous article, but I can't find any other results. Maybe the British posters can find more. Please and thank you. 

www.politicmag.net › politics-news › meghan-markle
Apr 21, 2021 · Henry Smith, the Tory* MP* for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal* titles.* A constituent has written to the* MP* and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't see this posted here before. Whoever does this has a great humor.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Neither the Queen nor Charles can remove the Dukedom from the evil duo, but Parliament can.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of royal titles | Royal | News (Reports)*
> 
> Henry Smith, the Tory MP for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal titles. A constituent has written to the MP and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.
> David Probett, a retired employee of Natwest Bank, has written to his MP concerning Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> The letter, which he shared on his Twitter account, reads: “Dear Mr Smith, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (aka Prince Harry And Megan Markle).
> “Shortly before the marriage, Her Majesty the Queen granted the couple the couple the titles of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Polytic Mag


Maggie, you are absolutely right and thank you for making the correction. In my anger reading they will be  writing about Prince Phillip I didn't fully engage my brain prior to typing. With all the knowledge shared here in the thousands of posts I did know it took an act of Parliament and we need to keep the facts straight. If I lived in Sussex I would be mounting the campaign! Or in Dumbarton where he is the Earl, they are an embarrassment to his countrymen and women and she's a shameless carpetbagger.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I found this little blurb dated April 21, 2021 which regurgitates the first paragraph of the previous article, but I can't find any other results. Maybe the British posters can find more. Please and thank you.
> 
> www.politicmag.net › politics-news › meghan-markle
> Apr 21, 2021 · Henry Smith, the Tory* MP* for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal* titles.* A constituent has written to the* MP* and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.


I also looked for more details and came across the 2020 article. Let's hope the UK members have more info. It would make sense to have a motion to rescind their tiles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Currently, we have 59,472.

Let’s celebrate at 60K [probably in a few days  ].


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Maggie, you are absolutely right and thank you for making the correction. In my anger reading they will be  writing about Prince Phillip I didn't fully engage my brain prior to typing. With all the knowledge shared here in the thousands of posts I did know it took an act of Parliament and we need to keep the facts straight. If I lived in Sussex I would be mounting the campaign! Or in Dumbarton where he is the Earl, they are an embarrassment to his countrymen and women and she's a shameless carpetbagger.


Oh, I'm with you on this; I'd be sitting on the steps of Parliament (providing it's legal to do so) holding a huge placard denouncing them and demanding the removal of their titles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

Oh I'm not so sure I would want them stripped of the Duke/Duchess titles. He will always be Prince by birth, so if you remove Duke, the pair of them will gladly milk the Prince Harry/Princess Henry titles for $$$.
I suspect they are trying to achieve this by acting out as they are, with the narcissist's endgame being that she wants to be called by a title that is as similar to 'Princess Diana' as possible.


----------



## Icyjade

jblended said:


> Oh I'm not so sure I would want them stripped of the Duke/Duchess titles. He will always be Prince by birth, so if you remove Duke, the pair of them will gladly milk the Prince Harry/Princess Henry titles for $$$.
> I suspect they are trying to achieve this by acting out as they are, with the narcissist's endgame being that she wants to be called by a title that is as similar to 'Princess Diana' as possible.



Agree... and also it helps with the all Brits all racists narrative. The best is if everyone ignores them so that they can fade into obscurity.

Can they be banished from UK though? Just like the Duke of Windsor?


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Diana was bound to get a lot of attention, it took forever for Charles to find SOMEBODY, and when his pretty aristocratic bride was 19 vs his 32, of course the cameras were on her. If Chuck was peeved at the attention Diana got, he didn't help his own case by continuing his relationship with Camilla. Perhaps Diana purposely attracted even more attention to get back at Charles. At the end of the day, Diana's purpose as far Charles was concerned was to be a broodmare and he treated her as such. Whatever her personal faults, Diana was popular and loved by the public, and seemed to have genuine affection for people. In contrast, everything Meghan did and does looks very calculating and contrived. Any well deserved criticism is met with knee jerk responses of "racism!" and/or "victim!"  Kate went  into her marriage to be supportive of the Crown. Meghan glommed onto Harry to become center of the universe, with expectations of the Crown owing HER. She still doesn't get it. She'll always be the self pitying sociopath with the idiot husband.
> Diana had William 11 months after the wedding, and had Harry 27 months after. Meghan had Archie 12 months after the wedding and Baby #2 will be about 38 months after but the supposed miscarriage would have had similar timing to Diana having Harry. Diana's purpose was to produce heirs, Meghan's purpose was to force more copycat moves of Diana. Granted, she's older and if kids were on her horizon she had to get busy, but it didn't dawn on her to have meal tickets kids until the third husband. And to boot, she got to call the BRF a bunch of racists and say they drove her to suicidal thoughts. I guess that's what the BRF gets when they don't make a sociopath center of the universe.


Yes I think It’s easy to forget what enormous pressure must have been on Diana and Kate to quickly produce an heir to consolidate the line. (Of course in the old days it wasn’t good enough if you had a girl either.)

Also the age and, more importantly, experience gap between Diana and Charles was enormous when she became the royal consort. D had already lived through it all and died too young by the age M was when she hooked up with Haz. It’s really not comparable.



CarryOn2020 said:


> I know, I know, the hairline is noticeably thicker.   He should send Hazzie his tips   Just a few weeks ago, PM looked a bit [um] haggard?  Still, I like his attitude, his positivity, and his refreshed (?) look.
> 
> The humblebraggers are on the OUT list. Once again, the _*cool Brits *_(not these z-listers) are leading us to the post-pandemic world, just like they did in the 60s. All we are saying is give peace a chance.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Peace
> 
> 
> 
> Ev'rybody's talking about
> Bagism, Shagism, Dragism, Madism, Ragism, Tagism
> This-ism, that-ism, is-m, is-m, is-m
> All we are saying is give peace a chance
> All we are saying is give peace a chance
> C'mon
> Ev'rybody's talking about Ministers
> Sinisters, Banisters and canisters
> Bishops and Fishops and Rabbis and Pop eyes
> And bye bye, bye byes
> All we are saying is give peace a chance
> All we are saying is give peace a chance
> Let me tell you now
> Ev'rybody's talking about
> Revolution, evolution, masturbation
> Flagellation, regulation, integrations
> Meditations, United Nations
> Congratulations
> All we are saying is give peace a chance
> All we are saying is give peace a chance
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: who is a *cool Brit*?
> My list, so far:  Prince Philip, QE, William, Kate, Paul McCartney, Ringo, Mick (start me up), Peter Philips, Mike & Zara,  ???


As much as I like Sir Paul’s music I think he’s a bit too sanctimonious and sheltered from reality nowadays. 


pukasonqo said:


> Didn’t Tom Ford apparently appalled that Victoria Beckham was buying Gucci    when he was creative director for the house?


Possibly, and that was a big mistake, huge.


Chanbal said:


> The planning of Megxit (part-time of course).
> 
> View attachment 5065010
> 
> 
> _A US media firm suggested the Duchess of Sussex front a show called Princesses And Puppies during a meeting at Kensington Palace – *almost a year before she and Prince Harry unveiled their Megxit plans*, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> *The couple met executives from streaming service Quibi on January 30, 2019.* *Yet during an interview with Oprah Winfrey earlier this year, Prince Harry said the couple ‘didn’t have a plan’ after they quit as working Royals in January 2020 and signed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify only after the family ‘cut me off financially’.*
> 
> According to a source, the couple had previously discussed various projects with executives at the now-defunct Quibi.
> 
> One idea suggested by the firm’s founder, Jeffrey Katzenberg, was for the Duchess to host an online show that combined Royalty and pets.
> 
> ‘Meghan seemed to find that idea offensive and though she was gracious in the moment, people in the room were a bit appalled that this was the pitch to her,’ said the source.
> 
> ‘*Jeffrey thought that puppies and princesses both sold well so if you put them together you’d have something incredibly commercial*.’
> 
> *Mr Katzenberg, 70, is one of the most powerful men in Hollywood, having headed Disney Studios and founded the DreamWorks studios with Steven Spielberg.* He launched Quibi – a streaming service to broadcast ‘short-bite’ shows on mobile phones – in August 2018 with £1.3 billion in funding.
> 
> Joining Mr Katzenberg at the meeting at Kensington Palace were fellow Quibi executives Janice Min and Brian Tannenbaum. The source said: ‘I believe Quibi first approached Harry and Meghan, who invited executives to meet them in London.
> 
> *‘There was discussion about a sustainable travel programme and another show about Harry’s charity interests in Africa. There was talk about Meghan narrating a nature documentary. Quibi held several discussions with them.’*
> 
> The Duke reportedly had one further in-person meeting with Quibi executives in London in January 2020 – the month that the couple stepped back from Royal duties – but the talks petered out.
> 
> Harry and Meghan later relocated to California, where they now live in an £11 million mansion.
> 
> Quibi collapsed last December. Yesterday, Ms Min and Mr Tannenbaum both said they were unable to comment.
> 
> Mr Katzenberg did not reply to requests for comment. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met US streaming firm a YEAR before Megxit
> 
> 
> The couple met executives from streaming service Quibi on January 30, 2019 at Kensington Palace, despite telling Oprah Winfrey earlier this year the coupled 'didn't have a plan'  after Megzit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



with all that’s happened it’s so easy to forget about quibi but it really is hilarious when you look back at it. K spelling out what he learnt at Disney with ‘princesses and puppies’ cracks me up.

That mansion is still getting cheaper, it was £13mil last time  

poor old Harry his eyes look like they are about to disappear into his sunburn entirely in that still. Evidently he needs someone to remind him to put on sunscreen.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> My $0.05 "psychiatric" opinion is she's a class of her own:  "Vulnerose" narcissist.  She craves affirmation and has a genuinely overinflated sense of self.


Vulnerose.... put that on the namelist Harry!
Personally I think the vulnerability is a complete charade to win sympathy and to give her some sort of persona arc beyond ‘I’m a calculating wannabe who schemed my way into this malicious and neurotic royal’s life.’

edit - deleted superfluous apostrophe


----------



## jelliedfeels

gelbergirl said:


> Was no other woman interested in Harry?
> Were they all taken?
> Was he a known bad-catch?


I strongly suspect he was and it was much worse than him being seen as a stupid party boy as why else would a class-obsessed circle like the aristocrats avoid a chance to move up a notch and consolidate their position? 
(Some of them are so desperate to get money and prestige for their white elephant estates that they’ll go on reality tv and marry new money after all.  )

Many of the royals marry people who they know from school circles or the royal household (the yorks’ husbands, fergie, Diana)
He got several proposals turned down by more aristocratic women who he knew through these kind of connections. They clearly knew he was a stink you couldn’t shake.


----------



## creme fraiche

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW/GK/H&M  are woefully behind the times. The pandemic changed everything.
> Mansions, jets, gated communities, complaining, humble-bragging [“I am blessed”], talking about yourself = out.
> In = focusing on others, loyalty, trust, inter gritty, everything Prince Philip stood for.
> 
> Here’s how 78 looks in 2021:
> 
> View attachment 5064888


Woefullyoff topic, but WOW, Sir Paul looks great at 78. Looks his age but in a very good way.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is the tide turning?
> No idea who this is, but it looks like more people are aware of the shady stuff:


. 





csshopper said:


> Please Charles strip the titles. They've squeezed Diana, so now it's on to Phillip. (can't find the words!)
> 
> Next thing they'll be on QVC, hustling the latest products for a fast buck.
> 
> There is NOTHING Royal about their behavior.


I think the tides turning personally. I think a lot of people I knew in the moderate camp felt like they would give them the benefit of the doubt but they needed to come up with proof of their interview allegations and they’ve just buried it like it didn’t matter and moved on to the next story. That’s turned a lot of people off, even those who were inclined to believe the royals and the press had an agenda against H&M.

They don’t have the charisma to sell on QVC.  They’ve shown their conversational limits with that podcast.

I don’t think they’ll take anything off H&M till there’s a resolution to the Epstein trial and Andrew’s involvement because that would actually look terrible.


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> And if the baby comes early and it’s really a home birth then who is to know the REAL truth??


We would only know for sure if it's a hospital birth. Albeit even in that case, people do dubious things when paid tons of money.  I just don't believe that the Harkles have that amount right now to bribe a whole hospital to pretend.
OT: I just can't catch up with you (I guess) ladies. You write a lightyear a day.


----------



## DeMonica

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think Archie looks like MMs dad. They have a similar nose and features. Kinda like how George looks like Kates dad.


I think George's features are a bit of a mix of the two families, but Louis is definitely a mini-Michael Middleton. Quoting Jon Arryn GOT : The (Middleton) seed is strong .(and it might be a good thing)


----------



## papertiger

catlover46 said:


> Does Omid really think he and Meghan are going to bring down the BRF? He sounds like a real POS and needs to lay off the plastic surgery.



Don't be shy now, just say what you mean


----------



## duna

daisychainz said:


> I bet the baby drops on July 1st, this woman is beyond calculating.



I bet she has a cesarean already programmed for July 1st, but, of cours, it will be an emergency last minute decision, officially!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternatively, they could *renounce* the titles.
> It would save everyone the time, hassle and angst that this action will cause.  But wait, that would require integrity, honor, etc.
> Qualities they have not shown to date.





Chanbal said:


> The last thing they want is to renounce the titles, but they may do it if Parliament starts the process of removing them.
> Hope Henry Smith gets the needed support...


and @Maggie Muggins (can't multi-quote successfully today)

It's my understanding, the Queen can take back anything she bestowed (Duke/Duchess of Sussex, Count/Countess of Dumbarton and Baron/Baroness Kilkeel) but H would have to renounce his Prince title, his birthright (autocorrect tried to change to 'Price' LOL) and that would negate MM as Princess too.

You'd have to physically remove them _all_ with a crowbar and solvent IMO, those two are welded to those titles. They can't operate without them.

It could be, if they felt/knew they were going to be stripped they'd surely 'jump' before they were pushed to save face. Actually, that would be a good move, then they'd be known as 'the former Duke and Duchess of S' wherever and whenever.

Perhaps, the Palace is letting them tie themselves up in knots so badly, that if it ever came down to it and it went to Parliament, it would be a the type of treason scenario, that H&M are hurting the reputation of the UK so much it can no longer be tolerated by its people etc, in which case their claims of discrimination and victimisation are nothing to do with the RF but a political distancing (how's that for cancel culture? ).

Personally, I think, they've damaged their rep in the UK so much, they can never come back. Abroad, they're clowns, with relatively little capital in the circle they'd like to move in (therefore forever to be houseguests or not invited) and virtually no connections or power (who's fault's that?). The more they do interviews and 'stuff', the cheaper their price.

At the end of the day the products they've pushed are influencer level and they can't seen to be going into 'trade' too much (old term for going to work) Real charity work, not just using them as a front, is hard graft. Away from the shelter of the Palace, whatever they do now is going to be gone through with a fine-tooth comb and scrutinised. Which of course, puts them right back to where/why they left, not enough glamour/money and escaping from commitment and work


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m because someone posted the pic!


----------



## ladyglen

jelliedfeels said:


> I strongly suspect he was and it was much worse than him being seen as a stupid party boy as why else would a class-obsessed circle like the aristocrats avoid a chance to move up a notch and consolidate their position?
> (Some of them are so desperate to get money and prestige for their white elephant estates that they’ll go on reality tv and marry new money after all.  )
> 
> _Many of the royals marry people who they know from school circles or the royal household (the yorks’ husbands, fergie, Diana)
> He got several proposals turned down by more aristocratic women who he knew through these kind of connections. They clearly knew he was a stink you couldn’t shake.
> _




Good POint there, he is to me , as my spouse calls them "life's lost puppies" and was a sitting duck for Wallis Meaghan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Many of the royals marry people who they know from school circles or the royal household (the yorks’ husbands, fergie, Diana)
> He got several proposals turned down by more aristocratic women who he knew through these kind of connections. They clearly knew he was a stink you couldn’t shake.



Who were they? I only have Cressida and Chelsey on my radar.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

The Palace is “markeling” them right now.  No contact and ignoring them Because they keep leaking.  Seems to work.  Carry on HMTQ.  Just keep quoting the “recollections may vary” and ignore all contact for a while.

If H runs out of money will MM leave???  RF plays the long game,


----------



## ladyglen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who were they? I only have Cressida and Chelsey on my radar.


they were both interchangeable blondes with names beginning with C?  maybe Cinderella was the 3rd.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> and @Maggie Muggins (can't multi-quote successfully today)
> 
> It's my understanding, the Queen can take back anything she bestowed (Duke/Duchess of Sussex, Count/Countess of Dumbarton and Baron/Baroness Kilkeel) but H would have to renounce his Prince title, his birthright (autocorrect tried to change to 'Price' LOL) and that would negate MM as Princess too.
> 
> You'd have to physically remove them _all_ with a crowbar and solvent IMO, those two are welded to those titles. They can't operate without them.
> 
> It could be, if they felt/knew they were going to be stripped they'd surely 'jump' before they were pushed to save face. Actually, that would be a good move, then they'd be known as 'the former Duke and Duchess of S' wherever and whenever.
> 
> Perhaps, the Palace is letting them tie themselves up in knots so badly, that if it ever came down to it and it went to Parliament, it would be a the type of treason scenario, that H&M are hurting the reputation of the UK so much it can no longer be tolerated by its people etc, in which case their claims of discrimination and victimisation are nothing to do with the RF but a political distancing (how's that for cancel culture? ).
> 
> Personally, I think, they've damaged their rep in the UK so much, they can never come back. Abroad, they're clowns, with relatively little capital in the circle they'd like to move in (therefore forever to be houseguests or not invited) and virtually no connections or power (who's fault's that?). The more they do interviews and 'stuff', the cheaper their price.
> 
> At the end of the day the products they've pushed are influencer level and they can't seen to be going into 'trade' too much (old term for going to work) Real charity work, not just using them as a front, is hard graft. Away from the shelter of the Palace, whatever they do now is going to be gone through with a fine-tooth comb and scrutinised. Which of course, puts them right back to where/why they left, not enough glamour/money and escaping from commitment and work


I think they’re stuck.  They’ve ruined their reputation with the uk public and the Royals won’t trust them anymore.  It’s impossible to imagine them carrying out royal duties in the uk or abroad on behalf of the crown.  Invited to some events perhaps, for politeness sake, but that’s it. 
There are no acting parts for Meg, and she doesn’t seem to be fielding any offers.  Harry’s only getting offers to stick his name on things, (and only in the US) because he’s a Prince.  They’re so leaky, cheap and silly, the real A list in the US will be very wary too.  
In the end everyone will move on and they’ll be left behind.  They’ve blown it IMO.  I don’t think they had a proper strategy, and certainly no contingency plan for what to do if their half in half out demands weren’t met.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> The Palace is “markeling” them right now.  No contact and ignoring them Because they keep leaking.  Seems to work.  Carry on HMTQ.  Just keep quoting the “recollections may vary” and ignore all contact for a while.
> 
> If H runs out of money will MM leave???  RF plays the long game,



I've said it before. It's going to be very hard for H to get through all his money at once. It's in-trust and he gets a fraction per 'X'. They are created to keep money in the family, just so unscrupulous business partners, spouses, exes, etc can't freeload or swindle. There are conditions and stipulations at every turn, managers he has to get on his side before they sign, all off-shore I bet too.

RF do indeed play the long game. Right to the bitter end.


----------



## Clearblueskies

And someone needs to tell them (soon) that overexposure is a thing


----------



## ladyglen

Clearblueskies said:


> I think they’re stuck.  They’ve ruined their reputation with the uk public and the Royals won’t trust them anymore.  It’s impossible to imagine them carrying out royal duties in the uk or abroad on behalf of the crown.  Invited to some events perhaps, for politeness sake, but that’s it.
> There are no acting parts for Meg, and she doesn’t seem to be fielding any offers.  Harry’s only getting offers to stick his name on things, (and only in the US) because he’s a Prince.  They’re so leaky, cheap and silly, the real A list in the US will be very wary too.
> In the end everyone will move on and they’ll be left behind.  They’ve blown it IMO.  I don’t think they had a proper strategy, and certainly no contingency plan for what to do if their half in half out demands weren’t met.


perhaps they thought threats of leaving would be met with, please, please stay
Harry should read some history "Uncle David"


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> I've said it before. It's going to be very hard for H to get through all his money at once. It's in-trust and he gets a fraction per 'X'. They are created to keep money in the family, just so unscrupulous business partners, spouses, exes, etc can't freeload or swindle. There are conditions and stipulations at every turn, managers he has to get on his side before they sign, all off-shore I bet too.
> 
> RF do indeed play the long game. Right to the bitter end.



yes I do recall that Fergie got very little when she divorced.  I say “very little” in Comparison to the what most people would expect she would get as a former royal...


----------



## Clearblueskies

ladyglen said:


> perhaps they thought threats of leaving would be met with, please, please stay
> Harry should read some history "Uncle David"


Yes, I think they probably did.  They were riding a massive wave of popularity after the wedding and it must’ve seemed to them like they could do anything.  But they ruined it with petulance and foolishness.  A lot of high handed hot air and hypocrisy is all they’ve delivered in 3 years.  People expect more.


----------



## ladyglen

papertiger said:


> RF do indeed play the long game. Right to the bitter end.


think about how QM treated Wallis she never forgave her and that led to the Windsors being exiled from Britain. and she lived to 100


----------



## Shopaholic2021

needlv said:


> yes I do recall that Fergie got very little when she divorced. I say “very little” in Comparison to the what most people would expect she would get as a former royal...



I think this is how it should be if one divorces. I do not understand large settlements when the marriage was short, the other partner did not work (ever), and they get a large allowance for 'lifestyle' reasons. It is a really weird concept to me. I can understand if you made joint financial contributions or you have children and need an allowance for their education, clothing etc, but some people come away with millions for simply being a spouse.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5065080
> 
> It looks like his hair is black or very dark in the video of them on the beach?


who is the adult?  looks like a woman but doesn't have Meghan's skinny legs


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Neither the Queen nor Charles can remove the Dukedom from the evil duo, but Parliament can.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry row: Parliament urged to STRIP Sussexes of royal titles | Royal | News (Reports)*
> 
> Henry Smith, the Tory MP for Crawley in West Sussex, has been asked to establish whether other politicians would support a motion to rescind the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their royal titles. A constituent has written to the MP and accused the royal couple of “bringing the country and the monarchy into disrepute” and by abusing their royal links.
> David Probett, a retired employee of Natwest Bank, has written to his MP concerning Meghan Markle and Prince Harry.
> The letter, which he shared on his Twitter account, reads: “Dear Mr Smith, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (aka Prince Harry And Megan Markle).
> “Shortly before the marriage, Her Majesty the Queen granted the couple the couple the titles of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Polytic Mag


but then Parliment would be racists


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> yes I do recall that Fergie got very little when she divorced.  I say “very little” in Comparison to the what most people would expect she would get as a former royal...



Because of those embarrassing toe sucking pics right? In comparison Diana didn’t do too badly monetary wise.

Diana:
In addition to a spacious three-level apartment at Kensington Palace, she got access to the royal private jets for travel, was given a one-off payment of around £18 million, as well as a roughly £400,000 annual salary for her private office and staff.

Fergie:
According to the Daily Telegraph, Fergie got a mere £16,000 a year as a salary, as well as just under £500,000 to buy a house.

She also received about £1.4 million to start a trust fund for her daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

Finally, she was given a one-off cash payment of approximately £370,000.






						Sarah Ferguson news: Why Duchess of York received less money than Diana in divorce  | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
					

SARAH FERGUSON received a far less generous divorce settlement than her close friend Princess Diana, when she split from her husband Prince Andrew in 1996.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> who is the adult?  looks like a woman but doesn't have Meghan's skinny legs


I’m sure I read somewhere that theres a lookalike


----------



## sdkitty

gerryt said:


> I’m sure I read somewhere that theres a lookalike


well those healthy calves will never pass for Meghan


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> well those healthy calves will never pass for Meghan


Ive looked up the purported persons Facebook and lets just say not the only lookalike in the family!


----------



## Chanbal

no further comments, title says everything...










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle desperate to 'stay relevant'
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are desperate to "stay relevant" amid claims they are leaking stories to the press, royal expert Russell Myers has said.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## catlover46

jelliedfeels said:


> I strongly suspect he was and it was much worse than him being seen as a stupid party boy as why else would a class-obsessed circle like the aristocrats avoid a chance to move up a notch and consolidate their position?
> (Some of them are so desperate to get money and prestige for their white elephant estates that they’ll go on reality tv and marry new money after all.  )
> 
> Many of the royals marry people who they know from school circles or the royal household (the yorks’ husbands, fergie, Diana)
> He got several proposals turned down by more aristocratic women who he knew through these kind of connections. They clearly knew he was a stink you couldn’t shake.


I bet another reason is that he has his mother on a pedestal and they know they could never live up to his expectations.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> no further comments, title says everything...
> View attachment 5065529
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle desperate to 'stay relevant'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are desperate to "stay relevant" amid claims they are leaking stories to the press, royal expert Russell Myers has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I can't imagine what they are going to do to stay relevant....guess they should have thought of that before leaving the RF


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> but then Parliment would be racists


Any validity to this is obscured by nutty’s nutty behavior!!! How unfortunate!!


----------



## youngster

ladyglen said:


> they were both interchangeable blondes with names beginning with C?  maybe Cinderella was the 3rd.



I think that isn't completely fair to Chelsy Davy who I thought would have been a good match for Harry.  Chelsea was born in Zimbabwe and she has a law degree, though I think she gave up practicing law a few years ago.  She always seemed an intelligent, attractive girl who realized that she didn't want to be part of the royal family and didn't want her family put under the tabloid microscope, especially given that they own a huge amount of land in Zimbabwe.  Still, she was the real deal: born in Africa and an actual lawyer lol, but I think they met when they were both too young.


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine what they are going to do to stay relevant....guess they should have thought of that before leaving the RF


Wonder what crap they are going to pull when the Queen or god forbid his father dies.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine what they are going to do to stay relevant....guess they should have thought of that before leaving the RF


They were not planning on leaving the BRF, they only wanted to be part-time royals. Celebrities in the US and VIP royals in the UK.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> They were not planning on leaving the BRF, they only wanted to be part-time royals. Celebrities in the US and VIP royals in the UK.


yes, as previously said, they want to have their cake and eat it too


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> They were not planning on leaving the BRF, they only wanted to be part-time royals. Celebrities in the US and VIP royals in the UK.


That’s why I have always believed they were told to leave BRF and to save face allowed by BRF to say they voluntarily chose to step down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who were they? I only have Cressida and Chelsey on my radar.



From 2017 - the ones we know about 








						A Look Back At Prince Harry's Dating History
					

Before there was Meghan Markle, these ladies caught the prince's eye.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




From 2020:








						Where Are Prince Harry's Ex-Girlfriends Today? - The List
					

While the world knows how Prince Harry's own love story turned out, they may not be as familiar with the current lives of his ex-girlfriends. What are they up to today? Did Prince Harry's ex-girlfriends get their own happily ever afters? Here is where some of Prince Harry's former flames are now.




					www.thelist.com


----------



## csshopper

I took advantage of an opportunity to read the relevant articles in the latest People and US magazines, shared by a neighbor.

People's coverage is 7 pages of text and photos. Harry's wife is mentioned briefly in the context of the Interview and then as being denied travel, etc. She was not described as "heavily pregnant." No mention of the wreath or calls to the Queen. There are 35 pictures accompanying the text, some almost full page. One page features 3 columns, William, Prince Charles, Harry with lists of 6 pictures under their names, comparing similarities in their lives. These pictures are 1 1/2" squares. It's relevant because one of those little pictures is the ONLY picture of Harry's wife in all 7 pages and it's the gooey shot of them under the tree in the garden in Montecito when the pregnancy was announced. In this small dimension I had to squint to make sure. One line of this page of pictures compares the shared love of Polo between Charles and his sons and mentions William is a leftie and had to learn to play right handed, as lefties are banned from the sport.

The US cover leads one to believe the pregnant one is heavily (deliberately chose that adjective ) featured in the issue. Not! She gets the equivalent of 1 page, split over 2 because of side articles about others. The kind of crap article that can be ripped off in 10 minutes in time to make a deadline. The usual "insider" cited as source for information like M craves pasta does yoga, keeps art supplies and healthy snacks on hand,  "having independence" is the most important thing to her, they are so "blessed to be able to raise their daughter in the US and can live by their own rules..." Indicating this writer might not have gotten the Memo to stress the Dr. said "no" to travel, was this gem: "This pregnancy has been a little easier than the last for Meghan-especially in terms of less morning sickness", the source continues. "She's feeling much better this time around and is beyond excited." And a warning (my word) to the world: "After giving birth to Archie, Meghan laid low. But the source says that won't be the case this time around. "Meghan plans on being a lot more public following this pregnancy. She's excited to bring attention to organizations that breed change and provide help, but she's also looking forward to [simple things, like just] being able to go out to dinner with friends", shares the source. "Both she and Harry are eager to get back out into the world."

If Harry's wife was reading the magazine, especially as she was featured on the cover, she would have been dismayed to turn the page following the last mention of her to find the following 2 page spread of photos, as there is no mention of this spread on the cover:


----------



## daisychainz

Aimee3 said:


> And if the baby comes early and it’s really a home birth then who is to know the REAL truth??


Oh my gosh, you're 100% right! I completely forgot  We are dealing with someone who will hide any truth anyway; we'll never really know.


----------



## marietouchet

Icyjade said:


> Because of those embarrassing toe sucking pics right? In comparison Diana didn’t do too badly monetary wise.
> 
> Diana:
> In addition to a spacious three-level apartment at Kensington Palace, she got access to the royal private jets for travel, was given a one-off payment of around £18 million, as well as a roughly £400,000 annual salary for her private office and staff.
> 
> Fergie:
> According to the Daily Telegraph, Fergie got a mere £16,000 a year as a salary, as well as just under £500,000 to buy a house.
> 
> She also received about £1.4 million to start a trust fund for her daughters, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.
> 
> Finally, she was given a one-off cash payment of approximately £370,000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Ferguson news: Why Duchess of York received less money than Diana in divorce  | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
> 
> 
> SARAH FERGUSON received a far less generous divorce settlement than her close friend Princess Diana, when she split from her husband Prince Andrew in 1996.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Diana also signed that she would not write a book, Sarah did not and did write one


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, good, new chapters, can’t wait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s biography getting new chapters: report
> 
> 
> The 2020 book by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand will be re-issued on Aug. 5 and will reportedly include new chapters about the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, Prince Philip&#…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


But...but...I thought they *DIDN'T* collaborate with scummy Scobie??


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternatively, they could *renounce* the titles.
> It would save everyone the time, hassle and angst that this action will cause.  *But wait, that would require integrity, honor, etc.
> Qualities they have not shown to date.*



Yep!  These two???  They've never done a selfless thing in their lives!


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Agree... and also it helps with the all Brits all racists narrative. The best is if everyone ignores them so that they can fade into obscurity.
> 
> Can they be banished from UK though? Just like the Duke of Windsor?


They should strip them of the right to ever step on UK soil again!  And strip Haz and Archie of British citizenship.


----------



## purseinsanity

creme fraiche said:


> Woefullyoff topic, but WOW, Sir Paul looks great at 78. Looks his age but in a very good way.


Money can buy amazing plastic surgery.


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> I took advantage of an opportunity to read the relevant articles in the latest People and US magazines, shared by a neighbor.
> 
> People's coverage is 7 pages of text and photos. Harry's wife is mentioned briefly in the context of the Interview and then as being denied travel, etc. She was not described as "heavily pregnant." No mention of the wreath or calls to the Queen. There are 35 pictures accompanying the text, some almost full page. One page features 3 columns, William, Prince Charles, Harry with lists of 6 pictures under their names, comparing similarities in their lives. These pictures are 1 1/2" squares. It's relevant because one of those little pictures is the ONLY picture of Harry's wife in all 7 pages and it's the gooey shot of them under the tree in the garden in Montecito when the pregnancy was announced. In this small dimension I had to squint to make sure. One line of this page of pictures compares the shared love of Polo between Charles and his sons and mentions William is a leftie and had to learn to play right handed, as lefties are banned from the sport.
> 
> The US cover leads one to believe the pregnant one is heavily (deliberately chose that adjective ) featured in the issue. Not! She gets the equivalent of 1 page, split over 2 because of side articles about others. The kind of crap article that can be ripped off in 10 minutes in time to make a deadline. The usual "insider" cited as source for information like M craves pasta does yoga, keeps art supplies and healthy snacks on hand,  "having independence" is the most important thing to her, they are so "blessed to be able to raise their daughter in the US and can live by their own rules..." Indicating this writer might not have gotten the Memo to stress the Dr. said "no" to travel, was this gem: "This pregnancy has been a little easier than the last for Meghan-especially in terms of less morning sickness", the source continues. "She's feeling much better this time around and is beyond excited." And a warning (my word) to the world: "After giving birth to Archie, Meghan laid low. But the source says that won't be the case this time around. "Meghan plans on being a lot more public following this pregnancy. She's excited to bring attention to organizations that breed change and provide help, but she's also looking forward to [simple things, like just] being able to go out to dinner with friends", shares the source. "Both she and Harry are eager to get back out into the world."
> 
> If Harry's wife was reading the magazine, especially as she was featured on the cover, she would have been dismayed to turn the page following the last mention of her to find the following 2 page spread of photos, as there is no mention of this spread on the cover:
> 
> View attachment 5065659


Thanks for taking one for the team! LOL, is there any china left in Montecito to throw?


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> .
> I think the tides turning personally. I think a lot of people I knew in the moderate camp felt like they would give them the benefit of the doubt but they needed to come up with proof of their interview allegations and they’ve just buried it like it didn’t matter and moved on to the next story. That’s turned a lot of people off, even those who were inclined to believe the royals and the press had an agenda against H&M.
> *
> They don’t have the charisma to sell on QVC.  They’ve shown their conversational limits with that podcast.*
> 
> I don’t think they’ll take anything off H&M till there’s a resolution to the Epstein trial and Andrew’s involvement because that would actually look terrible.


I've said it before...I'm waiting for Harry to tout Depends (he couldn't hold his bladder with James Corden) and Meg to start doing ads for tampons (homage to Charles), then segue into menopausal products.  She's not going to be a "young mother" forever.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> They were not planning on leaving the BRF, they only wanted to be part-time royals. Celebrities in the US and VIP royals in the UK.



How come millions of us knew that wasn't possible and they didn't?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine what they are going to do to stay relevant....guess they should have thought of that before leaving the RF


Porn?


----------



## purseinsanity

Harry may pull out of Diana statue trip after icy Royal Family welcome left him 'shocked'
					

PRINCE HARRY was so taken aback by the "very, very cold reception" he received from the Royal Family that he may pull out of his upcoming trip to the UK in July.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Woohoo!!


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> How come millions of us knew that wasn't possible and they didn't?


Because they are special and different and suffer from terminal uniqueness ?


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> Because they are special and different and suffer from terminal uniqueness ?



In other words, they're generally delusional and more specifically, insufferable narcissists


----------



## catlover46

purseinsanity said:


> Harry may pull out of Diana statue trip after icy Royal Family welcome left him 'shocked'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY was so taken aback by the "very, very cold reception" he received from the Royal Family that he may pull out of his upcoming trip to the UK in July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woohoo!!


He was taken aback??? He trashed his family and expected to be lovingly welcomed back? What a dolt!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I think that isn't completely fair to Chelsy Davy who I thought would have been a good match for Harry.  Chelsea was born in Zimbabwe and she has a law degree, though I think she gave up practicing law a few years ago.  She always seemed an intelligent, attractive girl who realized that she didn't want to be part of the royal family and didn't want her family put under the tabloid microscope, especially given that they own a huge amount of land in Zimbabwe.  Still, she was the real deal: born in Africa and an actual lawyer lol, but I think they met when they were both too young.



I do think she was good for him, she just knew royal life wasn't for her, and I think you nailed it with them meeting when they were too young. Makes me think of someone on here saying "Charles and Camilla wouldn't have worked had they gotten married when they first met". I just find it tragic that apparently he had no intention of riding into the African sunset with Chelsey, but threw it all away for Duchess Disney.

But also, I don't think Cressida deserves snark, by all accounts she's a down-to-earth, intelligent woman as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Harry may pull out of Diana statue trip after icy Royal Family welcome left him 'shocked'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY was so taken aback by the "very, very cold reception" he received from the Royal Family that he may pull out of his upcoming trip to the UK in July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woohoo!!



To repeat what one of Lady CC's fans wrote to her: "Did he not realize the Oprah Show would be shown over here?" Did he really expect they'd be all warm and fuzzy and ask how MM was? 

But also, if he pulls out I wonder when he'll unveil his own statue on his Montecito estate.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine what they are going to do to stay relevant....guess they should have thought of that before leaving the RF



My guess, once the second baby is born, virtual daily press releases spotlighting some organization that they spend half a day at or send sandwiches to or zoom call.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> My guess, once the second baby is born, virtual daily press releases spotlighting some organization that they spend half a day at or send sandwiches to or zoom call.



Coz what we _really_ want to do, when we've finished a day of Zoom calls/meetings, is watching someone else's


----------



## Chagall

Well. I had never heard of Meghan Markle or given Harry a thought until their marriage. I wished them well and dismissed them from my thoughts. If it was attention they wanted, and I think we can all agree it was, then they nailed it with stepping down, back, away, across the pond, from Royal duties.  Now look at all the attention these idiots are getting. To a narcissist any attention is good, even negative attention. I just hope they don’t do too much more damage before they get their comeuppance, which if there is any justice in this world, they will. They will sadly be the parents of two small children.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> Thanks for taking one for the team! LOL, is there any china left in Montecito to throw?


She moved on to plastic  plates, but they did too much damage when thrown and eventually they cracked.  Then she moved on to Chinet paper plates, but that became too expensive.  They are now down to paper plates from The Dollar Store.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Harry may pull out of Diana statue trip after icy Royal Family welcome left him 'shocked'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY was so taken aback by the "very, very cold reception" he received from the Royal Family that he may pull out of his upcoming trip to the UK in July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woohoo!!


Maybe he needs to watch the first part of the OW interview and see what his heavily pregnant wife said. You know? Figure out what the hell is going on. He's kinda stupid and dim witted so he obviously can't understand the fall out.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Well. I had never heard of Meghan Markle or given Harry a thought until their marriage. I wished them well and dismissed them from my thoughts. If it was attention they wanted, and I think we can all agree it was, then they nailed it with stepping down, back, away, across the pond, from Royal duties.  Now look at all the attention these idiots are getting. To a narcissist any attention is good, even negative attention. I just hope they don’t do too much more damage before they get their comeuppance, which if there is any justice in this world, they will. They will sadly be the parents of two small children.


every dog has his day and these two may have had theirs


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To repeat what one of Lady CC's fans wrote to her: "Did he not realize the Oprah Show would be shown over here?" Did he really expect they'd be all warm and fuzzy and ask how MM was?
> 
> But also, if he pulls out I wonder when he'll unveil his own statue on his Montecito estate.


I am betting there will be a statue that looks like the Virgin Mary, but has Meghan's face and the baby she is holding will look like Archie. The statue for Harry will be St. Francis of Assisi, with his face of course, with his hand extended with a rescue chicken resting in it and copious bird droppings on his shoulder.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To repeat what one of Lady CC's fans wrote to her: "Did he not realize the Oprah Show would be shown over here?" Did he really expect they'd be all warm and fuzzy and ask how MM was?
> 
> But also, if he pulls out I wonder when he'll unveil his own statue on his Montecito estate.


You know, that might happen.


----------



## Chagall

sdkitty said:


> every dog has his day and these two may have had theirs


Agreed! Let’s hope their 15 minutes is over.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> I've said it before...I'm waiting for Harry to tout Depends (he couldn't hold his bladder with James Corden) and Meg to start doing ads for tampons (homage to Charles), then segue into menopausal products.  She's not going to be a "young mother" forever.


But she's a "young mother' and an ingenue.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> Agreed! Let’s hope their 15 minutes is over.


really....how much mileage can they get out of Harry's name?


----------



## rose60610

Few people are as capable as Meghan. She went from admired new royal to persona non grata, from copying Diana as much as possible to now Harry maybe "missing" his own mother's 60th birthday statue unveiling? Gotta say, they move fast! Soon they'll be sooo bored as they're running out of bridges to burn! All we need is for Netflix and Spotify to reneg on the deals and for the American media to wake TF up. By then maybe Depends won't even want her. Watch for M&H to push their kids to become child actors. Somebody has to bring in some income.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Few people are as capable as Meghan. She went from admired new royal to persona non grata, from copying Diana as much as possible to now Harry maybe "missing" his own mother's 60th birthday statue unveiling? Gotta say, they move fast! Soon they'll be sooo bored as they're running out of bridges to burn! All we need is for Netflix and Spotify to reneg on the deals and for the American media to wake TF up. By then maybe Depends won't even want her. Watch for M&H to push their kids to become child actors. Somebody has to bring in some income.


I'm sure if spotify or netflix tried to get out of their deal H&M would sue.  that's one of their favorite pastimes


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure if spotify or netflix tried to get out of their deal H&M would sue.  that's one of their favorite pastimes



You're right! But if there was a "morals clause" in the contract Netflix could exercise that. If Harry's own family doesn't want him back, how are M&H going to get more material for a doc on the royals? M&H had better "have receipts" of their accusations to defend themselves. And I believe Netflix has deeper pockets than M&H to fight.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> You're right! But if there was a "morals clause" in the contract Netflix could exercise that. If Harry's own family doesn't want him back, how are M&H going to get more material for a doc on the royals? M&H had better "have receipts" of their accusations to defend themselves. And I believe Netflix has deeper pockets than M&H to fight.


and if H&M don't come up with product then I don't think they would have a winning argument


----------



## xeyes

mdcx said:


> H is grimacing in worry, K is obviously shocked, M looks like she is giggling.



It’s a little hard to say without a high-def version of the photo, but I think her teeth (bared in a grin) are just visible through her fingers - for anybody who might say “Oh, she’s just gasping behind her hand”.



gracekelly said:


> I am betting there will be a statue that looks like the Virgin Mary, but has Meghan's face and the baby she is holding will look like Archie. The statue for Harry will be St. Francis of Assisi, with his face of course, with his hand extended with a rescue chicken resting in it and copious bird droppings on his shoulder.



if she’s wearing the dress from the Oprah interview for her statue, then the bird droppings on _her _shoulder would make the statue even more realistic!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Lodpah said:


> Maybe he needs to watch the first part of the OW interview and see what his heavily pregnant wife said. You know? Figure out what the hell is going on. He's kinda stupid and dim witted so he obviously can't understand the fall out.


I wonder if the panic has started to set in yet. 
Is reality sinking in, Haz?
You are thousands of miles from the world that coddled  and sheltered you. 
You have a growing family and a demanding impossible to please wife. 
Your choices,as I see them are : 
1) to grow up and take control of your life
2) to realize #1 is never going to happen forcing you to cling ever tighter to your wife------- as a drowning man clutches a life preserver 
3) you can admit defeat and crawl back home to the now frigid bosom of your family 
Whatever you choose you can be assured that you will most definitely find out what being trapped is REALLY like


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> I took advantage of an opportunity to read the relevant articles in the latest People and US magazines, shared by a neighbor.
> 
> People's coverage is 7 pages of text and photos. Harry's wife is mentioned briefly in the context of the Interview and then as being denied travel, etc. She was not described as "heavily pregnant." No mention of the wreath or calls to the Queen. There are 35 pictures accompanying the text, some almost full page. One page features 3 columns, William, Prince Charles, Harry with lists of 6 pictures under their names, comparing similarities in their lives. These pictures are 1 1/2" squares. It's relevant because one of those little pictures is the ONLY picture of Harry's wife in all 7 pages and it's the gooey shot of them under the tree in the garden in Montecito when the pregnancy was announced. In this small dimension I had to squint to make sure. One line of this page of pictures compares the shared love of Polo between Charles and his sons and mentions William is a leftie and had to learn to play right handed, as lefties are banned from the sport.
> 
> The US cover leads one to believe the pregnant one is heavily (deliberately chose that adjective ) featured in the issue. Not! She gets the equivalent of 1 page, split over 2 because of side articles about others. The kind of crap article that can be ripped off in 10 minutes in time to make a deadline. The usual "insider" cited as source for information like M craves pasta does yoga, keeps art supplies and healthy snacks on hand,  "having independence" is the most important thing to her, they are so "blessed to be able to raise their daughter in the US and can live by their own rules..." Indicating this writer might not have gotten the Memo to stress the Dr. said "no" to travel, was this gem: "This pregnancy has been a little easier than the last for Meghan-especially in terms of less morning sickness", the source continues. "She's feeling much better this time around and is beyond excited." And a warning (my word) to the world: "After giving birth to Archie, Meghan laid low. But the source says that won't be the case this time around. "Meghan plans on being a lot more public following this pregnancy. She's excited to bring attention to organizations that breed change and provide help, but she's also looking forward to [simple things, like just] being able to go out to dinner with friends", shares the source. "Both she and Harry are eager to get back out into the world."
> 
> If Harry's wife was reading the magazine, especially as she was featured on the cover, she would have been dismayed to turn the page following the last mention of her to find the following 2 page spread of photos, as there is no mention of this spread on the cover:
> 
> View attachment 5065659


I know we shouldn’t expect any better of people mag or the heavily pregnant one but given she’s announced she considered suicide during her last pregnancy I would have thought that pregnancy-related depression might be a more pressing issue for her and her representatives than morning sickness but then here I am again expecting the advocate for women and mental health to take these matters seriously. How ridiculous of me!

[


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who were they? I only have Cressida and Chelsey on my radar.


Sorry for not getting back to you. I see someone else posted the Harper’s article. I think lady C mentioned a couple of other match-ups with titled ladies in the H&M book but I don’t have it anymore.
I have heard Cressida and Florence were friends of his York cousins which fits this friends and family network. H clearly has a bit of a taste for the minor celeb though it seems.



Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think this is how it should be if one divorces. I do not understand large settlements when the marriage was short, the other partner did not work (ever), and they get a large allowance for 'lifestyle' reasons. It is a really weird concept to me. I can understand if you made joint financial contributions or you have children and need an allowance for their education, clothing etc, but some people come away with millions for simply being a spouse.


OT but I bet Robert de Niro wishes he met you...
 As does anyone forced to sit through one of the great actor’s car adverts.


----------



## Genie27

gracekelly said:


> She moved on to plastic  plates, but they did too much damage when thrown and eventually they cracked.  Then she moved on to Chinet paper plates, but that became too expensive.  They are now down to paper plates from The Dollar Store.


That’s _Royal_ Chinet to the rest of us, since they can’t use that term. 

“not allowed”


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think she was good for him, she just knew royal life wasn't for her, and I think you nailed it with them meeting when they were too young. Makes me think of someone on here saying "Charles and Camilla wouldn't have worked had they gotten married when they first met". I just find it tragic that apparently he had no intention of riding into the African sunset with Chelsey, but threw it all away for Duchess Disney.
> 
> But also, I don't think Cressida deserves snark, by all accounts she's a down-to-earth, intelligent woman as well.


Yeah, in a way, Chelsey is Harry’s biggest tell. When he was a prince, even before M, he loved to lecture us on how he hated his gilded cage & would be much happier doing development work in Africa away from the paparazzi and the pomp. Then he meets this woman who a) is Zimbabwean b) hates the press attention and c) is keen on building a sustainable business based in Africa. And he didn’t treat her very well it seems

They may have been a bit young at the outset but the reality is he just loves complaining like the dog in the manger he is.

I agree Cressida doesn’t deserve any snark. None of these poor girls do. He  clearly plays up the way he thinks his ‘divine right of spares’ allows him to. After all, everyone is supposed to be nice to  him just because he’s a prince.


----------



## Annawakes

Aimee3 said:


> And if the baby comes early and it’s really a home birth then who is to know the REAL truth??


Maybe when she presents a baby the size of a 3 month old as a newborn?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Both Chelsea and Cressida were invited to H&M's wedding. 

Chelsea broke up with him because she didn't want the royal lifestyle, like Will and Kate, with all the tours etc. She also struggled with the constant media attention. Thats why I thought MM would be good for him, since she is an actress, she would be able to handle all the media attention. And in truth, I think she was ok with the media attention and at times courted it, especially before marriage. It's Harry who couldn't handle it, as it has been something that has been with him since birth. Harry doesn't benefit from the media, by which I mean the attention he gets from the media does not translate to $$$. Whereas when you're an actor, you need the media attention to boost your profile and to advertise/promote your show and movies. So when there was the statement about the media profiting from them, I can understand why he was upset, but MM has used the media many times before to get exposure and thus more work. The complaining about the media only came after she started dating him, and most likely came from him. She has called the paps many times before to get exposure.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry and Meghan’s $25M Spotify deal a ‘kick in the teeth’ to musicians
					

Musicians across the pond are fuming over Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s $25 million deal to produce feel-good, woke podcasts for Spotify. Famed musicians including Paul McCartney, Chris Martin, …




					www.google.com


----------



## Chanbal

Intriguing piece of info here


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> I know we shouldn’t expect any better of people mag or the heavily pregnant one but given she’s announced she considered suicide during her last pregnancy I would have thought that pregnancy-related depression might be a more pressing issue for her and her representatives than morning sickness but then here I am again expecting the advocate for women and mental health to take these matters seriously. How ridiculous of me!
> 
> [


The whole US article was pablum, and I'm thinking Scoooobie with everything attributed to "a source".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Intriguing piece of info here




Mhhh. I saw her being all flirty, but that's how she generally acts with men around. Also, she had just given birth to someone else's baby, so I don't know, that would be a new low even for her. I also feel Serena is not the type of person to hold back, and she has really not said anything, just stopped speaking out in MM's favour. So I'm not convinced.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> Intriguing piece of info here




I think they are still friends. Serena posted support on IG for MM recently.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Meghan Markle 'prepared to heal rift' when Royal Family apologise

Always her impertinent self, but also...why would she even be interested in making up? Because she's seeing her hopes dashed maybe?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I really hope they officially lose one of the deals, Spotify or Netflix.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of the future ... can we expect anything soon from either Archewell or H&M ?
MM will soon go on maternity leave.  She said she was unwell (suicidal) during last pregnancy, so with two munchkins, and nannies to hire and fire, I would not expect much from her in 2021, not even podcasts ?? Maybe ghost write the new edition of FF for Omid ?
H will go off to a few ceremonial CHIMPO gigs and follow around some Invictus athletes for next year’s documentary, and figure out what to do with the Diana garden opening trip
and they don’t have an experienced staff to fall back on, eg St Laurent is gone 
what is it they are doing for Spotify and Netflix? Specifically tangible income producing accomplishments ... I don’t see much


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> Thinking of the future ... can we expect anything soon from either Archewell or H&M ?
> MM will soon go on maternity leave.  She said she was unwell (suicidal) during last pregnancy, so with two munchkins, and nannies to hire and fire, I would not expect much from her in 2021, not even podcasts ?? Maybe ghost write the new edition of FF for Omid ?
> H will go off to a few ceremonial CHIMPO gigs and follow around some Invictus athletes for next year’s documentary, and figure out what to do with the Diana garden opening trip
> and they don’t have an experienced staff to fall back on, eg St Laurent is gone
> what is it they are doing for Spotify and Netflix? Specifically tangible income producing accomplishments ... I don’t see much



* Invictus documentary.
* Merching photos of baby Diana2.0 
* zoom calls
* another update of Scobies book, with “her truth” again
* occasional sandwich giveaway for charity (staged photos)
* more pap photos of sponsors products - electric bike, cars, clothes, makeup

Not enough $$$ to cover her expected lifestyle...

So if they get desperate - reality TV...


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lanasyogamama said:


> I really hope they officially lose one of the deals, Spotify or Netflix.



I think it's incredibly insulting to those who work so hard, for so many years to get into the creative fields, when H&M get a deal like this with zero accomplishments. There are some seriously hardworking and talented people out there that will suffer as a result of these two getting the deals. 

And then there is the job as a chief impact officer, which was essentially just a way to get some PR for a mental health company (for profit company). The founder and CEO said as much in an interview. 

"I think the main thing is sure, we'll take the PR," Robichaux said. "That's not why we started working with Prince Harry," he added. 
Robichaux told CNN that BetterUp decided to hire Harry because of "who he is as a person." "I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world," he added.

I wonder Robichaux (the CEO) watched the Oprah interview where it was claimed his wife could not get help from suicidal thoughts, which in my mind would disqualify such as person for a job in the mental health field. He couldn't get his own wife mental health help but wants to help others?!


----------



## 1LV

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think it's incredibly insulting to those who work so hard, for so many years to get into the creative fields, when H&M get a deal like this with zero accomplishments. There are some seriously hardworking and talented people out there that will suffer as a result of these two getting the deals.
> 
> And then there is the job as a chief impact officer, which was essentially just a way to get some PR for a mental health company (for profit company). The founder and CEO said as much in an interview.
> 
> "I think the main thing is sure, we'll take the PR," Robichaux said. "That's not why we started working with Prince Harry," he added.
> Robichaux told CNN that BetterUp decided to hire Harry because of "who he is as a person." "I was so impressed with his genuine and sincere desire to be of service and to make a positive impact in the world," he added.
> 
> *I wonder Robichaux (the CEO) watched the Oprah interview where it was claimed his wife could not get help from suicidal thoughts, which in my mind would disqualify such as person for a job in the mental health field. He couldn't get his own wife mental health help but wants to help others?!*


Amen!


----------



## Aimee3

Annawakes said:


> Maybe when she presents a baby the size of a 3 month old as a newborn?


Since she’s barely shown any photos of Archie, I doubt they’ll show any of the second baby either.  A photo of a finger or a foot is not interesting and those body parts could be anyone’s baby.  Probably won’t see baby #2 for a long time unless of course they get paid.


----------



## Icyjade

Aimee3 said:


> Since she’s barely shown any photos of Archie, I doubt they’ll show any of the second baby either.  A photo of a finger or a foot is not interesting and those body parts could be anyone’s baby.  Probably won’t see baby #2 for a long time unless of course they get paid.



I’m guessing some deal and to make it palatable the money will go to Archwell

Other baby pic deals if anyone is interested. 








						17 Celebs Who Sold Their Baby Photos For Millions (And 3 Who Showed Them For Free)
					

Take Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s biological twins as an example, who broke the records when it came to most expensive baby photos ever.




					www.babygaga.com


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Since she’s barely shown any photos of Archie, I doubt they’ll show any of the second baby either.  A photo of a finger or a foot is not interesting and those body parts could be anyone’s baby.  Probably won’t see baby #2 for a long time unless of course they get paid.


They may get a deal of 2 for the price on 1.


----------



## 1LV

Aimee3 said:


> Since she’s barely shown any photos of Archie, I doubt they’ll show any of the second baby either.  A photo of a finger or a foot is not interesting and those body parts could be anyone’s baby.  Probably won’t see baby #2 for a long time unless of course they get paid.


I don’t even care anymore.  Kate and William are filling that niche.

edited to clarify- the sweet baby niche (Go, George!)


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan Markle 'prepared to heal rift' when Royal Family apologise
> 
> Always her impertinent self, but also...why would she even be interested in making up? Because she's seeing her hopes dashed maybe?



I think she thought she could force the royal family into a public statement and apology after the OW interview, which did not occur.  Perhaps she even thought they would make more concessions to them in the aftermath.  It didn't happen,  so now she's putting out statements to try and force an apology, though who is supposed to apologize, I wonder? Should the Queen apologize for everything and everyone? Would that be good enough for her? Or maybe she wants separate apologies from Charles and Will and Kate and other miscellaneous relatives for her entire 10 minutes in the royal family? 

I think she'll wait a long time. No one will apologize, especially since "recollections vary", and especially not after Prince Philip's death. They probably think Harry and MM owe them the apology and they'd be right.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Intriguing piece of info here



With "friends" like Meghan, who needs enemies!!??!!


----------



## Icyjade

This comes complete with pics and videos. The one of Serena’s mum completely ignoring Harry’s wife is so  









						Meghan Markle and Serena Williams: Fake Besties? Serena's Mom Ignores Meghan and Husband Drama! — EXPOSINGSMG
					

Did Meghan Markle hit on Serena Williams' husband and is that why Serena's mom was ignoring Meghan at her match?




					www.exposingsmg.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Icyjade said:


> This comes complete with pics and videos. The one of Serena’s mum completely ignoring Harry’s wife is so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Serena Williams: Fake Besties? Serena's Mom Ignores Meghan and Husband Drama! — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Did Meghan Markle hit on Serena Williams' husband and is that why Serena's mom was ignoring Meghan at her match?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com


I doubt it because surely even she realises it would backfire to flirt with your friend’s man in public with cameras on you? Also if you are attracted to Amazonian billionaire Serena....M is probably... not your type. Also can you imagine the hit he’d take if S divorced him? A married floozie is not worth that. 

I do believe probably S is cooling off on her dear friend but I think it’s because she’s realising that M has neither the connections nor the socio-political nouse she pretends to and she’s just the fake hanger-on who never buys the drinks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, Charles & William are working out the ‘new’ monarchy. Iirc it should be announced in a week or so. 
Should we expect a load ( ) of articles detailing all the do-good acts the DimDuo have done?
Or will it be more poor, pitiful me stuff?


----------



## Icyjade

This site is totally... even more gossipy than this forum haha. You have to read it... super scandalous stuff at the end of Part 1:









						The Scandalous Truth About Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — EXPOSINGSMG
					

Here is Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's full relationship timeline and how they've been shady from the start plus some crazy things exposed!




					www.exposingsmg.com
				












						The Truth About Meghan Markle's Past Relationships: Trevor Engelson, Cory Vitiello — EXPOSINGSMG
					

Before Prince Harry, Meghan Markle was married once before and in a serious relationship with another. So what happened with them? Well it's time we expose that along more on her and Prince Harry and her relationship with the queen




					www.exposingsmg.com
				












						The Truth About Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Feud With Prince William and Kate Middle Middleton — EXPOSINGSMG
					

In this post we expose Meghan's alleged feud with Kate and Prince William, how the Queen treated Meghan, the Sussexs scam of a charity, Hollywood dreams, and more.




					www.exposingsmg.com


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chagall said:


> Well. I had never heard of Meghan Markle or given Harry a thought until their marriage. I wished them well and dismissed them from my thoughts. If it was attention they wanted, and I think we can all agree it was, then they nailed it with stepping down, back, away, across the pond, from Royal duties.  Now look at all the attention these idiots are getting. To a narcissist any attention is good, even negative attention. I just hope they don’t do too much more damage before they get their comeuppance, which if there is any justice in this world, they will. They will sadly be the parents of two small children.



The best thing to do is step back and not give them any attention or oxygen they will soon disappear if people ignore them the press won’t bother them if there is no mirage on covering their news


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> How come millions of us knew that wasn't possible and they didn't?


Didn't they claim that there were other part-time royals and so it was unfair to deny them their half-in/half-out deal? One commentator described their proposal not as "part-time" royals but as "freelance" royals. Makes me wonder if their proposal was like for a Hollywood A-lister: payment per job, perks per trip, retainer for being on stand-by, first class tickets and hotel of choice, first right of refusal. Probably thought it was an offer that the BRF could not possibly refuse.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Great read.  Worth the time taken to go through the history.


Icyjade said:


> This site is totally... even more gossipy than this forum haha. You have to read it... super scandalous stuff at the end of Part 1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Scandalous Truth About Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Here is Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's full relationship timeline and how they've been shady from the start plus some crazy things exposed!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Truth About Meghan Markle's Past Relationships: Trevor Engelson, Cory Vitiello — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Before Prince Harry, Meghan Markle was married once before and in a serious relationship with another. So what happened with them? Well it's time we expose that along more on her and Prince Harry and her relationship with the queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Truth About Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Feud With Prince William and Kate Middle Middleton — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> In this post we expose Meghan's alleged feud with Kate and Prince William, how the Queen treated Meghan, the Sussexs scam of a charity, Hollywood dreams, and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> great read.  Took some time but I did enjoy the timeline.  Thanks for posting...


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Didn't they claim that there were other part-time royals and so it was unfair to deny them their half-in/half-out deal?


The only difference is that the other part time royals are not directly in line with the Monarch. The Queen's children are full time Royals. Okay, he's a grandson of the Monarch at the moment, but he's also a son of a future Monarch and a brother to another heir, that makes him different to any of the other grandchildren of the Queen particularly Beatrice and Eugenie ( I know Peter and Zara have never been classed as working Royals) To me, he qualifies as a full time Royal, especially when his father becomes King.
He could look at Anne as an example of being in a similar situation. When Anne was younger, her grandfather was King, her mother would be Queen and her brother will be King.


----------



## pukasonqo

The VF cover is a really nice photo of MM
Sadly they don’t seem to realise that is they who need the RF not the other way around


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> Great read.  Worth the time taken to go through the history.



So much good stuff in the archives!


			https://www.exposingsmg.com/search?q=meghan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow. I knew most of the accusations already from here and other places, but seeing then all neatly lined up again was really driving home the point what an ugly person she is. But the cheating rumours? That was a year ago and so far there's been no big exposure but a new baby.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Didn't they claim that there were other part-time royals and so it was unfair to deny them their half-in/half-out deal? One commentator described their proposal not as "part-time" royals but as "freelance" royals. Makes me wonder if their proposal was like for a Hollywood A-lister: payment per job, perks per trip, retainer for being on stand-by, first class tickets and hotel of choice, first right of refusal. Probably thought it was an offer that the BRF could not possibly refuse.



They were Senior Royals. It's a loose definition, but they are/were supposed to be all full-time apart from Prince Edward/Sophie that only sometimes step-in (Andy 'stepped-down' not that he ever did much in any case). 

H&M _wanted _to be Senior Royals. Big show of it _before_ they got married.

It's my understanding they thought it was like pick-&-mix at a sweet shop: take all the money, privileges and engagements/charities/patronages you want and leave the ones you don't quite fancy (presumably for others to deal with). 

That wasn't on, an unworkable model.  You certainly can't pop-over from your Cali faux-castle to open a garden fete or attend a premiere and fly off into the smog-filled sunset again hours later, whilst lecturing on climate change _and_ eat/have all the cake forever and ever   

 Name me one other job that works that way?


----------



## Chagall

I can’t find it now to quote but that footage of H/M trying to proceed the queen and Chuck is something else. She didn’t need to be briefed on proper protocol. I don’t care if you crawled out from under a rock or climbed down out of a tree anyone would know better than this. The video at the end does not show an embarrassed person, as she should have been, it shows a furious person who is totally PO’ed at being put in her place.


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> They were Senior Royals. It's a loose definition, but they are/were supposed to be all full-time apart from Prince Edward/Sophie that only sometimes step-in (Andy 'stepped-down' not that he ever did much in any case).
> 
> H&M _wanted _to be Senior Royals. Big show of it _before_ they got married.
> 
> It's my understanding they thought it was like pick-&-mix at a sweet shop: take all the money, privileges and engagements/charities/patronages you want *and leave the ones you don't quite fancy (presumably for others to deal with).*
> 
> That wasn't on, an unworkable model.  You certainly can't pop-over from your Cali faux-castle to open a garden fete or attend a premiere and fly off into the smog-filled sunset again hours later, whilst lecturing on climate change _and_ eat/have all the cake forever and ever
> 
> Name me one other job that works that way?



 Like this one below - where it actually looks like everyone is having great craic !









						Princess Anne tours a bin lorry depot in Cambridge
					

Princess Anne, 70, visited the home of the Greater Cambridge Shared Waste Service today - just hours after her daughter Zara Tindall announced the arrival of her baby boy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Princess Anne visited the home of the Greater Cambridge Shared Waste Service where she met the waste and recycling collection crews today - just hours after it was revealed her daughter Zara Tindall has given birth to a baby boy.

The Royal Family Twitter page shared three photographs of the royal, 70, during the working engagement, alongside a caption which read: 'This afternoon The Princess Royal visited the home of the Greater Cambridge Shared Waste Service where she met the waste and recycling collection crews.'

'Her Royal Highness thanked the refuse loaders and bin lorry drivers who have worked as frontline key workers throughout the pandemic, through times when households have generated more recycling and household waste than ever due to lockdown.


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> Like this one below - where it actually looks like everyone is having great craic !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Anne tours a bin lorry depot in Cambridge
> 
> 
> Princess Anne, 70, visited the home of the Greater Cambridge Shared Waste Service today - just hours after her daughter Zara Tindall announced the arrival of her baby boy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Anne visited the home of the Greater Cambridge Shared Waste Service where she met the waste and recycling collection crews today - just hours after it was revealed her daughter Zara Tindall has given birth to a baby boy.
> 
> The Royal Family Twitter page shared three photographs of the royal, 70, during the working engagement, alongside a caption which read: 'This afternoon The Princess Royal visited the home of the Greater Cambridge Shared Waste Service where she met the waste and recycling collection crews.'
> 
> 'Her Royal Highness thanked the refuse loaders and bin lorry drivers who have worked as frontline key workers throughout the pandemic, through times when households have generated more recycling and household waste than ever due to lockdown.


I think this kind of thing is so important- the bin men in my area haven’t missed a single collection since the start of the pandemic, not one, and I’m incredibly grateful.  Royal visits like this (and they do look like they’re having fun) show appreciation and thanks on behalf of all of us.


----------



## lallybelle

Yeah no fan, but I don't believe the Serena thing. She seems like the one who may actually be a friend and not just a "famous acquaintance". Besides Serena was just gushing over her when the interview came out. I doubt that would be the case if this had any truth to it. Mama Oracene seems to know what's up though...lol.


----------



## Allisonfaye

creme fraiche said:


> Re the staged papped photo of Meghan, couple things which I just don't understand:
> - what is the temperature in LA/Santa Barbara?  Surely it is warm enough that a beanie hat is not necessary on a toddler and the multiple layering he is wearing is overdoing it?
> - What kind of daycare would necessitate a child bringing his own lunch, snacks, and an additional backpack at the age of under 2?
> - why would it be wise for an under 2 year old, therefore probably not potty trained, to wear skinny jeans?  Surely loose fitting trousers with poppers would be more practical?
> - Why wear a hoodie which is fussy to put on a squirming toddler as opposed to a zippable outer layer?
> - the shoes!  surely a toddler would be better off in a supportive pair of Geox shoes (other brands are available).  those just don't look practical or useful.
> 
> Perhaps I am just over thinking it, but I have mothered 2 active boys and practical to a fault and I just can't get my head around how that boy is dressed (not even with much style!).  Could not care anything else about that photo.  If all of that effort was to make a few quid (can't imagine that all of the possible merching she is trying to do would be very lucrative), seems to be rather more effort than reward.



It can be chilly close to the beach in LA/Santa Barbara. You can go inland a bit and the temp can go up by a lot. If you go over the hill into the valley, the temp can increase by as much as 30 degrees sometimes.


----------



## marietouchet

My predictions for THE NAME ... I am doubling down on the idea of NO DIANA - too much competition for MM. 

Been thinking of Archie's name with the reference to his father in there (Archie Harrison) not to some family member eg Charles, Philip. Odd that dad should be highlighted.

I predict:

1. FIRST NAME will be offbeat like Archie is offbeat - no Diana. We cannot begin to imagine ... 

2. MIDDLE NAME - there will be no Diana. There will be NO reference to family members eg Elizabeth, Mary. No Doria.
The MIDDLE NAME - there shall be only ONE - could be a reference to Meghan just as Harrison referred to Harry. 

My money is down on my predictions LOL 

PS 30 sec after I typed this, it came to me ... what about Spencer??? This upsets my whole apple cart ... but must reflect for more than 10 sec on this wild and crazy idea, very much a long shot as MM does not know the Spencers


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> My predictions for THE NAME ... I am doubling down on the idea of NO DIANA - too much competition for MM.
> 
> Been thinking of Archie's name with the reference to his father in there (Archie Harrison) not to some family member eg Charles, Philip. Odd that dad should be highlighted.
> 
> I predict:
> 
> 1. FIRST NAME will be offbeat like Archie is offbeat - no Diana. We cannot begin to imagine ...
> 
> 2. MIDDLE NAME - there will be no Diana. There will be NO reference to family members eg Elizabeth, Mary. No Doria.
> The MIDDLE NAME - there shall be only ONE - could be a reference to Meghan just as Harrison referred to Harry.
> 
> My money is down on my predictions LOL
> 
> PS 30 sec after I typed this, it came to me ... what about Spencer??? This upsets my whole apple cart ... but must reflect for more than 10 sec on this wild and crazy idea, very much a long shot as MM does not know the Spencers


I don't think Archie is an off beat name tbh, not here in the UK anyway. 
Spencer is more of a male name, again, here in the UK but as they're not here it might sound OK over there. 
I'm going with Frances in there somewhere, Diana's middle name was Frances and her mother was Frances. 
There you go, Archie and Frankie Mountbatten - Windsor.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> My predictions for THE NAME ... I am doubling down on the idea of NO DIANA - too much competition for MM.
> 
> Been thinking of Archie's name with the reference to his father in there (Archie Harrison) not to some family member eg Charles, Philip. Odd that dad should be highlighted.
> 
> I predict:
> 
> 1. FIRST NAME will be offbeat like Archie is offbeat - no Diana. We cannot begin to imagine ...
> 
> 2. MIDDLE NAME - there will be no Diana. There will be NO reference to family members eg Elizabeth, Mary. No Doria.
> The MIDDLE NAME - there shall be only ONE - could be a reference to Meghan just as Harrison referred to Harry.
> 
> My money is down on my predictions LOL
> 
> PS 30 sec after I typed this, it came to me ... what about Spencer??? This upsets my whole apple cart ... but must reflect for more than 10 sec on this wild and crazy idea, very much a long shot as MM does not know the Spencers


Maybe she will use Rachel as the middle name, as a "subtle" reference to herself.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I agree the name won’t be Diana.  I could see them including Francis, her middle name or something like that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think Archie is an off beat name tbh, not here in the UK anyway.
> Spencer is more of a male name, again, here in the UK but as they're not here it might sound OK over there.
> I'm going with Frances in there somewhere, Diana's middle name was Frances and her mother was Frances.
> There you go, Archie and Frankie Mountbatten - Windsor.



*Frankie Goes To Hollywood*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was watching the short commercial the Queen did with Harry and the O's for the Invictus Games back in 2016. Comments are all goodnatured and humorous playing on UK and US being competirors, but I feel these two might apply to the current situation as well:



> What the queen said:"Oh really please.."
> 
> What the queen actually meant : *"foolish mortals i've watched civilizations rise and fall your'e no match for me"*





> Queen: "Oh really please.."
> 
> Translation: *"My victory is inevitable. A day, A year, A millennium it matters not. I hold the patience of stone and the will of stars. Your striving is insignificant. Let your defeat be the same." *



At this point, I'm really not too worried. H & M aren't that great playing chess.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> *Frankie Goes To Hollywood*


YESSSS!!


----------



## catlover46

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was watching the short commercial the Queen did with Harry and the O's for the Invictus Games back in 2016. Comments are all goodnatured and humorous playing on UK and US being competirors, but I feel these two might apply to the current situation as well:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this point, I'm really not too worried. H & M aren't that great playing chess.


But Meghan’s nest of vipers-Anna Pasternak, Omid,Oprah,and Gayle King are determined to get the Monarchy abolished aren’t they?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> But Meghan’s nest of vipers-Anna Pasternak, Omid,Oprah,and Gayle King are determined to get the Monarchy abolished aren’t they?



If Omid wants the monarchy abolished he'll need another job, claiming to be a royal correspondent and such.


----------



## youngster

catlover46 said:


> But Meghan’s nest of vipers-Anna Pasternak, Omid,Oprah,and Gayle King are determined to get the Monarchy abolished aren’t they?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> If Omid wants the monarchy abolished he'll need another job, claiming to be a royal correspondent and such.



The only people who get a say in whether the monarchy stays or goes are the British people.  Having foreign celebrities lecture a country on changing its entire system of government to suit them would be enough to push 90% of British citizens to the pro-monarchy side imho, if they aren't already there.  Also, since the UK is a constitutional monarchy, it would take years, maybe a decade or more, to actually achieve. Remove the royals from public life, change your money, change your passport, change your national anthem, change about a thousand things.   I can't imagine anyone in the UK would actually want to go through that, especially if your motivation is just to appease foreign entertainment reporters, an American drama duchess and a disgruntled princeling.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Sharont2305 said:


> The only difference is that the other part time royals are not directly in line with the Monarch. The Queen's children are full time Royals. Okay, he's a grandson of the Monarch at the moment, but he's also a son of a future Monarch and a brother to another heir, that makes him different to any of the other grandchildren of the Queen particularly Beatrice and Eugenie ( I know Peter and Zara have never been classed as working Royals) To me, he qualifies as a full time Royal, especially when his father becomes King.
> He could look at Anne as an example of being in a similar situation. When Anne was younger, her grandfather was King, her mother would be Queen and her brother will be King.



I think if Charles was king Harry would be more relevant/useful. Because all the Queens children still continue to represent the Queen on official duties, Harry has more freedom in that his wife didn't have to be a part of the working royals. It would have probably been better if she did continue to act and he was the only one doing official duties but I don't think she wanted to that.

I think the claim was the Eugenie and Beatrice, along with Zara are part time royals, which isn't really true, they do represent the queen or some charities very occasionally but they do not have official duties and they do not receive tax payer money either in terms of security or income. Andrew was really upset about this, he wanted both his girls to receive income and security but he was told flat out no. When Charles becomes king, Harry's children will be in the same position as Eugenie and Beatrice so the palace was justified in denying Hs children tax payer security (at least until 18 years old). For E and B the cost was £500K a year, and now it would probably be £1 million a year (accounting for inflation etc).


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she will use Rachel as the middle name, as a "subtle" reference to herself.


Hmmm  no I dont think she likes Rachel, a love or hate name, I think


----------



## Shopaholic2021

youngster said:


> The only people who get a say in whether the monarchy stays or goes are the British people. Having foreign celebrities lecture a country on changing its entire system of government to suit them would be enough to push 90% of British citizens to the pro-monarchy side imho, if they aren't already there.



This happened to me. I don't have very strong feelings about the monarchy but when people started to tweet, send messages on instagram, the TV and even the stupid American president felt the need to release a statement, that made me very pro-monarchy. I really do not appreciate foreign interference, especially when the foreigners are ignorant. I mean, how would Americans like it if the Brits started to interfere in elections and try to topple or bully the president? Celebrities are increasingly becoming sanctimonious and hypocritical. They really should just stick to their profession, and only talk on matters they have a deep knowledge of. Ricky Gervais roasted a whole load of celebs during the golden globes ceremony for this and it was insanely funny, the celebs looked uncomfortable because they knew it was true.


----------



## xincinsin

I get the feeling that part of MM's princess dream (before she transformed into a mermaid) was that first you marry the prince, then he becomes King and you become Queen. And her idea of princess/Queen was all glamour and being waited on hand and foot, definitely not service to the common folk. And if that's what being a fulltime working royal meant to her, it's no wonder that she got teary-eyed and depressed  

Her fight to be equal to W&K may have roots in this delusion. Perhaps in her non-British conniving mind, she thought that if she proved more popular than K, she could boost H's and her standing to the level that they would have a chance to snatch the throne. That's how it works in the movies, right? Favourite son/grandson becomes king, and the firstborn is cast aside.

Talking about movies, some MM fan described her as starring in movies. Did Duchess Disney ever have roles in movies?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I get the feeling that part of MM's princess dream (before she transformed into a mermaid) was that first you marry the prince, then he becomes King and you become Queen. And her idea of princess/Queen was all glamour and being waited on hand and foot, definitely not service to the common folk. Her fight to be equal to W&K may have roots in this delusion. Perhaps in her non-British conniving mind, she thought that if she proved more popular than K, she could boost H's and her standing to the level that they would have a chance to snatch the throne. That's how it works in the movies, right? Favourite son/grandson becomes king, and the firstborn is cast aside.
> 
> Talking about movies, some MM fan described her as starring in movies. Did Duchess Disney ever have roles in movies?


I don't know what she thought but Harry knew very well what the duties of a royal were.  did he not tell her?  or she just didn't want to hear it?
When she married him her fame went from zero household name almost instantly.  And her lifestyle, clothing, etc. did same.  but in the long run if they aren't successful with their "creative" endeavors, what will their lifestyle be?  can they continue to live in a mansion?  will the reality show cover the expenses?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what she thought but Harry knew very well what the duties of a royal were.  did he not tell her?  or she just didn't want to hear it?
> When she married him her fame went from zero household name almost instantly.  And her lifestyle, clothing, etc. did same.  but in the long run if they aren't successful with their "creative" endeavors, what will their lifestyle be?  can they continue to live in a mansion?  will the reality show cover the expenses?


In my few experiences with working with narcs, they have very selective hearing. And even when you impress upon them repeatedly certain unpleasant facts, they will just assume that it couldn't possibly apply to them because they are so special.


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what she thought but Harry knew very well what the duties of a royal were.  did he not tell her?  or she just didn't want to hear it?
> When she married him her fame went from zero household name almost instantly.  And her lifestyle, clothing, etc. did same.  but in the long run if they aren't successful with their "creative" endeavors, what will their lifestyle be?  can they continue to live in a mansion?  will the reality show cover the expenses?


To be fair to Harry, I don’t think anyone can tell Meghan anything.  She simply doesn’t listen to advice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Talking about movies, some MM fan described her as starring in movies. Did Duchess Disney ever have roles in movies?



Oh she did. Hallmark movies and I once saw 10 minutes of an awful Disney Channel movie where she was the obnoxious sexy friend of the main character. That's 10 minutes of my life I'll never get back. 

But if you ask if she was in any blockbusters or serious Hollywood productions, nope.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh she did. Hallmark movies and I once saw 10 minutes of an awful Disney Channel movie where she was the obnoxious sexy friend of the main character. That's 10 minutes of my life I'll never get back.
> 
> But if you ask if she was in any blockbusters or serious Hollywood productions, nope.


I think she is still playing the role of obnoxious sexy friend


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> I think she is still playing the role of obnoxious sexy friend


Badly


----------



## youngster

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This happened to me. I don't have very strong feelings about the monarchy but when people started to tweet, send messages on instagram, the TV and even the stupid American president felt the need to release a statement, that made me very pro-monarchy. I really do not appreciate foreign interference, especially when the foreigners are ignorant. I mean, how would Americans like it if the Brits started to interfere in elections and try to topple or bully the president? Celebrities are increasingly becoming sanctimonious and hypocritical. They really should just stick to their profession, and only talk on matters they have a deep knowledge of. Ricky Gervais roasted a whole load of celebs during the golden globes ceremony for this and it was insanely funny, the celebs looked uncomfortable because they knew it was true.


 
I totally understand and I would feel the same in your place.  The British are as patriotic as any and I doubt they are ready to change their system of government to please Harry.

Btw, did I miss something?  Have there been widespread pro-MM/Harry demonstrations in the UK?  Two or three million people who marched on Buckingham Palace perhaps, calling for the removal of the Queen? No?  There haven't been?  Well, until that happens, I think the monarchy is safe.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I think she is still playing the role of obnoxious sexy friend


well the obnoxious part wouldn't require any acting, the sexy part IDK.....she does seem to have put a spell on H


----------



## lanasyogamama

Does anyone remember the original Vanity Fair article? Looking back, I was trying so hard to give her the benefit of the doubt and understand why we were expected to think she was such a big deal. It was yet another life lesson to me that I need to believe my instincts when it comes to people.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Does anyone remember the original Vanity Fair article? Looking back, I was trying so hard to give her the benefit of the doubt and understand why we were expected to think she was such a big deal. It was yet another life lesson to me that I need to believe my instincts when it comes to people.


she was a big deal because she was a biracial, divorced american actress.....not because she was especially beautiful or talented


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> Badly


Her role has now evolved: obnoxious sexy fiend, because the letter R (for royalty) is a no-no.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If Omid wants the monarchy abolished he'll need another job, claiming to be a royal correspondent and such.



If the British monarchy _is_ abolished H&M will be plain Harry and Meghan M-W, no titles and no curtsies. 

This is why they're so dumb. No strategy, no end game, just knee-jerk actions fuelled by jealousy and greed


----------



## catlover46

youngster said:


> I totally understand and I would feel the same in your place.  The British are as patriotic as any and I doubt they are ready to change their system of government to please Harry.
> 
> Btw, did I miss something?  Have there been widespread pro-MM/Harry demonstrations in the UK?  Two or three million people who marched on Buckingham Palace perhaps, calling for the removal of the Queen? No?  There haven't been?  Well, until that happens, I think the monarchy is safe.


There were Sugars commenting on Celebitchy at the time of the interview that because of it, there wouldn’t be a lot of people showing up to view the Queen lying in state and lining the streets for her funeral procession. Actually I think PP dying and the interview have rallied people around her. I think turnout for her funeral procession/lying in state is going to be huge.


----------



## sdkitty

catlover46 said:


> There were Sugars commenting on Celebitchy at the time of the interview that because of it, there wouldn’t be a lot of people showing up to view the Queen lying in state and lining the streets for her funeral procession. Actually I think PP dying and the interview have rallied people around her. I think turnout for her funeral procession/lying in state is going to be huge.


and it could very well be a few years or several before that happens so speculating on that is tasteless IMO


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> This comes complete with pics and videos. The one of Serena’s mum completely ignoring Harry’s wife is so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Serena Williams: Fake Besties? Serena's Mom Ignores Meghan and Husband Drama! — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Did Meghan Markle hit on Serena Williams' husband and is that why Serena's mom was ignoring Meghan at her match?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com


Meg is shameless.


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> and it could very well be a few years or several before that happens so speculating on that is tasteless IMO


Those commentators are terrible.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I get the feeling that part of MM's princess dream (before she transformed into a mermaid) was that first you marry the prince, then he becomes King and you become Queen. And her idea of princess/Queen was all glamour and being waited on hand and foot, definitely not service to the common folk. And if that's what being a fulltime working royal meant to her, it's no wonder that she got teary-eyed and depressed
> 
> Her fight to be equal to W&K may have roots in this delusion. Perhaps in her non-British conniving mind, she thought that if she proved more popular than K, she could boost H's and her standing to the level that they would have a chance to snatch the throne. That's how it works in the movies, right? Favourite son/grandson becomes king, and the firstborn is cast aside.
> 
> Talking about movies, some MM fan described her as starring in movies. Did Duchess Disney ever have roles in movies?


She played a FedEx delivery person in a scene in one movie once.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> She played a FedEx delivery person in a scene in one movie once.


when you think about it, it's amazing that she landed a prince in the most famous RF in the world.  but then again, a true star would not want or need to marry H....they have their own money and fame.  I wonder if he has started to realize he should have found a nice British woman.


----------



## rose60610

Since it's Meghan vs. the Monarchy, I'd find it ironic if Baby#2's name had any reference to any royal. At first I thought "Diana", of course! but since her accusations of "racism" bla bla bla against the RF, I don't see any royal names. UNLESS, it'd be Meghan's way of saying "I forgive you  BRF for all the mean things you did to me. Now dole out millions of dollars to us you racist rotten BRF".  Meghan would find that logical. She's that effed up. Maybe she's trying to cut such deals now, and the BRF are telling her to go to hell. Well, she has only three months of being heavily pregnant to go....


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Since it's Meghan vs. the Monarchy, *I'd find it ironic if Baby#2's name had any reference to any royal.* At first I thought "Diana", of course! but since her accusations of "racism" bla bla bla against the RF, I don't see any royal names. UNLESS, it'd be Meghan's way of saying "I forgive you  BRF for all the mean things you did to me. Now dole out millions of dollars to us you racist rotten BRF".  Meghan would find that logical. She's that effed up. Maybe she's trying to cut such deals now, and the BRF are telling her to go to hell. Well, she has only three months of being heavily pregnant to go....


I could see it happening if it could be monetised. The name will likely be something snappy, posh and can be trademarked.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I could see it happening if it could be monetised. The name will likely be something snappy, posh and can be trademarked.


maybe but Archie is the furthest thing from posh IMO


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> To be fair to Harry, I don’t think anyone can tell Meghan anything.  *She simply doesn’t listen to advice.*



That arrogance will be her downfall. How she managed to screw up such a sweet deal in such a short time will be the subject of debate for years to come. She has squandered so much good will and popularity in only a few years. She lacks patience and moderation in her planning. Meghan MUST HAVE IT ALL, RIGHT NOW!

She freaks out whenever she doesn’t get her way immediately. That’s when the desperation kicks in and her really bad decisions happen.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Does anyone remember the original Vanity Fair article? Looking back, I was trying so hard to give her the benefit of the doubt and understand why we were expected to think she was such a big deal. It was yet another life lesson to me that I need to believe my instincts when it comes to people.



There were expectations for what she would represent that had nothing to do with Meghan as an individual. She was supposed to be a symbol of pride for many. She wasn’t up to those expectations, but don’t tell the fans because they are still clinging to the idea of what they want her to be instead of who she actually is.


----------



## sdkitty

I was listening to an interview the other day with courtney b. vance in relation to his role in the Aretha Genius show.  He and his wife, Angela Bassett, have a couple of daughters.  He was talking about how they raised them.  they didn't allow the girls on their sets, didn't ever take them to red carpet events or allow them to be in limos with them.  
I know I'm spending too much time on this thread but it made me wonder how much Meghan's time on the set of Married With Children impacted her.  Granted it wasn't the most glamourous show.  But still the cast were TV stars.  Maybe her dad did her no favors allowing that.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Had she ever been on the cover of magazines before the news of her dating Harry had broken? Her vanity fair cover was only because she was dating the Prince and people wanted some gossip, it was nothing to do with her work. 

And remember when Harry pimped out his royal status to get Meghan the Disney voice over job? That was cringe. You'd think that if she was good at her job, she would be able to market herself on her own accomplishments. In honesty I don't think she would have got any good gigs after suits if she carried on acting.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> maybe but Archie is the furthest thing from posh IMO


There's a story about his name which, if true, is quite sentimental.








						The Reason Prince Harry Named His Son Archie Will Melt Hearts
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle welcomed their royal baby, son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, into the world on May 6. The moniker is believed to be a nod to a military officer who saved the Duke of Sussex's military career.




					graziadaily.co.uk
				




However, I'm taking the choice of Archie as a childish attempt at thumbing their nose at royalty. "We are going to be different! Independent! Modern! Our son's name will have nothing to do with fuddy-duddy old-fashioned nomenclature!"

Archie also harmonized a little too well with Archewell - so I think Archewell was already in the works when they were working on Sussex Royal.

ETA: they need money now, which wasn't the case when Archie was born.


----------



## youngster

catlover46 said:


> There were Sugars commenting on Celebitchy at the time of the interview that because of it, there wouldn’t be a lot of people showing up to view the Queen lying in state and lining the streets for her funeral procession. Actually I think PP dying and the interview have rallied people around her. I think turnout for her funeral procession/lying in state is going to be huge.



The sugars should remember that today's news wraps tomorrow's fish.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OogleAtLuxury said:


> The American president did not release a statement on MM and Harry. The Press Secretary answered a question from a journalist, and all the Press Secretary said was that mental health is important. She did not make any claims about abolishing the monarchy or racism. In fact, she ended her answer by saying that the US/British relationship is strong, which is not something she would've said if the position of the administration was that the monarchs are racist.




The president praised them for shining light on their mental health issues, which shows he has a lack of critical thinking. They claim to have mental health issues but couldn't get help for those issues despite being linked to many mental health charities and trying to raise awareness of mental health. 

She also mentioned that they are private citizens for now, which kinda hints at something in the future (or maybe I am reading too much into that comment). She did say they would not comment further since they are private citizens sharing their own story which is what she should've lead with imo. I just don't think the president should be commenting on privileged aristocrats, especially when they're living on American soil. I mean America is the land of the free, there are no titles etc here, that's one of the reasons for the war and separation from the UK. I think it was a bad look, and it seemed to show support for H&Ms narrative.


----------



## bubablu

I went back to the engagement interview (very slow smartworking day today) and the new comments are gold! This one is so true.


----------



## Chanbal

No comments!


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The president praised them for shining light on their mental health issues, which shows he has a lack of critical thinking. They claim to have mental health issues but couldn't get help for those issues despite being linked to many mental health charities and trying to raise awareness of mental health.
> 
> She also mentioned that they are private citizens for now, which kinda hints at something in the future (or maybe I am reading too much into that comment). She did say they would not comment further since they are private citizens sharing their own story which is what she should've lead with imo. I just don't think the president should be commenting on privileged aristocrats, especially when they're living on American soil. I mean America is the land of the free, there are no titles etc here, that's one of the reasons for the war and separation from the UK. I think it was a bad look, and it seemed to show support for H&Ms narrative.


I'm not allowed to criticize politicians I don't like so please don't say negative things about our current President
thank you


----------



## CarryOn2020

Throwing in my 2 cents, 
- @sdkitty spot on with visiting the TV set daily. It gave a false sense of reality. Keep in mind, according to Trevor, she was fine until she went to Canada for Suits. Wonder what happened there to change her - Was it Markus Anderson?
- as an actress, her job was to show up for a short time, answer questions politely, then disappear until her next gig. It could be weeks before she would be seen again. The Hwood crowd has lots of downtime. As a Royal, the job is 24/7. Their business is everyone’s business. My guess is she was not prepared for the ‘always on’ part of the job.
- @Chanbal the way she holds the baby is all about merching. Wonder what her cut was?


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty the perfect green dress.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Throwing in my 2 cents,
> - @sdkitty spot on with visiting the TV set daily. It gave a false sense of reality. Keep in mind, according to Trevor, she was fine until she went to Canada for Suits. Wonder what happened there to change her - Was it Markus Anderson?
> - as an actress, her job was to show up for a short time, answer questions politely, then disappear until her next gig. It could be weeks before she would be seen again. The Hwood crowd has lots of downtime. As a Royal, the job is 24/7. Their business is everyone’s business. My guess is she was not prepared for the ‘always on’ part of the job.
> - @Chanbal the way she holds the baby is all about merching. Wonder what her cut was?


Yes, everything is merchandise...  
I've still zillions of posts to read later today, so I hope the info posted is not a duplicate here.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> In my few experiences with working with narcs, they have very selective hearing. And even when you impress upon them repeatedly certain unpleasant facts, they will just assume that it couldn't possibly apply to them because they are so special.


and I'm sure she was so excited about her new found fame and the fortune she was coming into that nothing could stop her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I was listening to an interview the other day with courtney b. vance in relation to his role in the Aretha Genius show.  He and his wife, Angela Bassett, have a couple of daughters.  He was talking about how they raised them.  they didn't allow the girls on their sets, didn't ever take them to red carpet events or allow them to be in limos with them.
> I know I'm spending too much time on this thread but *it made me wonder how much Meghan's time on the set of Married With Children impacted her.  *Granted it wasn't the most glamourous show.  But still the cast were TV stars.  Maybe her dad did her no favors allowing that.



You know my gut feeling is she didn't spend nearly as much time there as we were led to believe. Like everything else with Meghan it was probably an exaggeration. The set of a TV show is a professional place of business like any other and a lighting director is not going to be allowed to have his teenage daughter hanging around at work except for special occasions. The same with General Hospital. Her father working on that show got her a one-time, one-line bit part but otherwise she wasn't around there much.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

xincinsin said:


> Was it the previous American president that said something?



Michelle ***** (former First Lady) was asked about Meghan and Harry. Not the actual former President *****.



She was neutral on the issue: "The thing that I always keep in mind is that none of this is about us in public service. It's about the people that we serve. I always try to push the light back out and focus it on the folks that we're actually here to serve. Race isn't a new construct in this world for people of color. So, it wasn't a complete surprise to *hear her feelings* and have them articulated. The thing that I hope for and the thing I think about is that this first and foremost is a family, and I pray for forgiveness and healing for them so that they can use this as a teachable moment for us all." 

She never said the BRF is racist. All she said was that Meghan _felt_ discriminated against (not that she actually was) and that the family needs to heal. 

To be frank, American politicians have bigger fish to fry than silly spats in an antiquated figurehead family.


----------



## bag-mania

Yep, political figures always walk a tightrope whenever they speak. The "plight" of a millionaire celebrity like Meghan is not worth getting up on the soapbox.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Allisonfaye said:


> It can be chilly close to the beach in LA/Santa Barbara. You can go inland a bit and the temp can go up by a lot. If you go over the hill into the valley, the temp can increase by as much as 30 degrees sometimes.


If I may add, it look like there was a layer of marine fog in the photo and would add to the chill.


----------



## bag-mania




----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> If the British monarchy _is_ abolished H&M will be plain Harry and Meghan M-W, no titles and no curtsies.
> 
> This is why they're so dumb. No strategy, no end game, just knee-jerk actions fuelled by jealousy and greed



He could be the Douche Formerly Known as a Prince


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5066625



is it bad that I saw those for jibbitz on the back of Crocs? I giggled like a 12 year old....I’m so southern.....


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> I just doubt it. First people said Meghan had no real celeb friends, now suddenly she has all these close celeb friends
> Eh not everyone who has a rude spouse is a victim... and not every rude spouse is an abuser. Those are big words and more than I’m willing to give Harry in particular - unless he says so himself. Nothing about this situation says to me this guy is powerless and being taken advantage of and needs help. Sure, feel sorry for him but victim???


Her pushing and shoving and tapping and hand grabbing shows me that she was in control of him.  It's more than rudeness.  She directed, he obeyed.




CarryOn2020 said:


> This was so embarrassing! Yes, H&M together wanted to cut off W&K, so Camilla skillfully stays with them. Clearly, H&M don’t care about the display, just being equal to Charles. Notice how the staff/guard are so polite and respectful to them, but H continues to ‘debate’.
> So glad they will be out of the news for the foreseeable future. Once Charles and W announce the new assignments, H&M will be even more irrelevant.


H arguing the toss with the employees showed just how arrogant he was.  How dare mere servants tell him where he can and cannot go.  His furious demeanor in the second photo is further evidence.




lalame said:


> I don't get the fuss about the shoes... what's wrong with those shoes?


I had a pair of shoes like that.  They went into the bin the first day because they flew off my feet with every step.  Pregnant wearing them?  Never.




Clearblueskies said:


> She’s carrying him so her face is in the frame.  Only reason.


I have to say that I have seem many photos of celebrities in CA carrying their children, some of whom look 4 or 5.  It might just be the trend out there.


Finally, to add my guess to the baby's name:  Maya.  Has her first initial and is the name of a famous poet/author.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This happened to me. I don't have very strong feelings about the monarchy but when people started to tweet, send messages on instagram, the TV and even the stupid American president felt the need to release a statement, that made me very pro-monarchy. I really do not appreciate foreign interference, especially when the foreigners are ignorant. I mean, how would Americans like it if the Brits started to interfere in elections and try to topple or bully the president? Celebrities are increasingly becoming sanctimonious and hypocritical. They really should just stick to their profession, and only talk on matters they have a deep knowledge of. Ricky Gervais roasted a whole load of celebs during the golden globes ceremony for this and it was insanely funny, the celebs looked uncomfortable because they knew it was true.



I'm in the states.  I just watched the clip this morning. Ricky Gervais is so funny!


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> Was it the previous American president that said something?



I'm paraphrasing but the previous president said "Good luck to Harry. He's going to need it."


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> Her pushing and shoving and tapping and hand grabbing shows me that she was in control of him.  It's more than rudeness.  She directed, he obeyed.
> 
> 
> 
> H arguing the toss with the employees showed just how arrogant he was.  How dare mere servants tell him where he can and cannot go.  His furious demeanor in the second photo is further evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> I had a pair of shoes like that.  They went into the bin the first day because they flew off my feet with every step.  Pregnant wearing them?  Never.
> 
> 
> 
> I have to say that I have seem many photos of celebrities in CA carrying their children, some of whom look 4 or 5.  It might just be the trend out there.
> 
> 
> Finally, to add my guess to the baby's name:  Maya.  Has her first initial and is the name of a famous poet/author.


I like your name choice.  Could be.  According to a Google search :    *What does Maya mean*? Latin for "great" or "larger," Sanskrit for "illusion." In Roman mythology, Maia is a daughter of Atlas, whose *name* was given to the month of May. It's also a variation of the *English name* May.   

She might change the spelling slightly.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty the perfect green dress.




Is it just me or does that dress keep getting greener?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> maybe but Archie is the furthest thing from posh IMO


I read something on another site that struck a cord.  Harry is a nickname for his real name of Henry.  They certainly could have named him Archibald and then nicknamed him Archie.  He sounds like he is named for a pet or my personal favorite, a pub owner in East London.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Michelle ***** (former First Lady) was asked about Meghan and Harry. Not the actual former President *****.
> 
> 
> 
> She was neutral on the issue: "The thing that I always keep in mind is that none of this is about us in public service. It's about the people that we serve. I always try to push the light back out and focus it on the folks that we're actually here to serve. Race isn't a new construct in this world for people of color. So, it wasn't a complete surprise to *hear her feelings* and have them articulated. The thing that I hope for and the thing I think about is that this first and foremost is a family, and I pray for forgiveness and healing for them so that they can use this as a teachable moment for us all."
> 
> She never said the BRF is racist. All she said was that Meghan _felt_ discriminated against (not that she actually was) and that the family needs to heal.
> 
> To be frank, American politicians have bigger fish to fry than silly spats in an antiquated figurehead family.



While I’m not the strongest monarchist around, I think that’s quite a patronising way to talk about  royal family and the British system.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> He could be the Douche Formerly Known as a Prince


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I like your name choice.  Could be.  According to a Google search :    *What does Maya mean*? Latin for "great" or "larger," Sanskrit for "illusion." In Roman mythology, Maia is a daughter of Atlas, whose *name* was given to the month of May. It's also a variation of the *English name* May.
> 
> She might change the spelling slightly.



Maya in Russian means mine


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

jelliedfeels said:


> While I’m not the strongest monarchist around, I think that’s quite a patronising way to talk about  royal family and the British system.


 
I fully accept that the statement was patronizing, but it's my opinion. Doesn't reflect anything about my nation or my president, btw. 

Also, to flip that around, I have plenty of issues with the tone people in this thread have taken with POC/race issues, so I didn't really feel the need to try to be polite.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Many, many, many posts ago, when the question arose about Meghan's end game, I posted that she was looking to bring down the monarchy.  I still believe it.  Does she want it destroyed, I don't think so, she just wants to bring everyone down to her level.  For someone like her, having to defer to others is unthinkable.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I think Oprah is known to be very warm. I remember watching Graham Norton recently and the actor from Get Out was saying that when he met her, she gave him a big hug. So who really knows what her relationship is but I don't think a photo like this is any indication. Have you ever been to one of those parties where Guest of a Guest or Patrick McMillan is going around taking photos? People kinda cozy up for a nice warm photo.


Uhhhhhh .. Oprah warm?!?! .. not so fast!  Talk to some of her former employees, and they will tell you that she was pretty well known for being a pretty nasty person, especially if she perceived some slight from said employee.  Yes, on her shows .. it did appear that she was a warm & caring person, but .. as in the case with Martha Stewart, that is "for show"; there is a (_sadly_) a reason why these women get to the top .. they use, take your ideas, take credit for your ideas, abuse and then spit you out when they no longer have 'use' for you!  I know more than a few people who worked for Oprah and Martha Stewart and the comments are the same; worst job they ever had!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mhhh. I saw her being all flirty, but that's how she generally acts with men around. Also, she had just given birth to someone else's baby, so I don't know, that would be a new low even for her. I also feel Serena is not the type of person to hold back, and she has really not said anything, just stopped speaking out in MM's favour. So I'm not convinced.


Forgot to post this yesterday, it’s in the same People magazine as the article on the William/Harry/the funeral. If there is a shift in the friendship with Serena, this might be part of it. How dare she score what sounds like a lucrative deal with a rival of theirs, while the Markles are trolling for dollars.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OogleAtLuxury said:


> I fully accept that the statement was patronizing, but it's my opinion. Doesn't reflect anything about my nation or my president, btw.
> 
> Also, to flip that around, I have plenty of issues with the tone people in this thread have taken with POC/race issues, so I didn't really feel the need to try to be polite.


 Funny whenever you get challenged you say it’s fine because there’s all these questionable opinions on the thread but you never call any of them out all you do is claim other people are more objectionable than you so it’s ok for you to be rude.

Frankly the less American politics on this thread the better in general.


----------



## bag-mania

Cavalier Girl said:


> Many, many, many posts ago, when the question arose about Meghan's end game, I posted that she was looking to bring down the monarchy.  I still believe it.  Does she want it destroyed, I don't think so, she just wants to bring everyone down to her level.  For someone like her, having to defer to others is unthinkable.



I agree about bringing them down to her level but I believe she would like to see the monarchy destroyed because she wasn't allowed to use it for her personal benefit the way she wanted. Had the BRF and the British press compliantly given in to each of her whims she would probably still be there happily exploiting it. 

Since she was met with resistance, that changed everything. If Meghan can't have it then nobody should have it!


----------



## lalame

lulilu said:


> Her pushing and shoving and tapping and hand grabbing shows me that she was in control of him.  It's more than rudeness.  She directed, he obeyed.



Do you also call people with BDSM fetishes victims? The difference is if it's welcome and accepted by the person receiving it. There's no indication he's not happy with how he's treated by Meghan, no matter how much you or I wouldn't want to be in his place.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Also, to flip that around, I have plenty of issues with the tone people in this thread have taken with POC/race issues, so I didn't really feel the need to try to be polite.



What issues do you have with the tone taken with regard to POC and race issues? I am interested as I have not come across any posts that I felt had a racist or prejudicial tone.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I agree about bringing them down to her level but I believe she would like to see the monarchy destroyed because she wasn't allowed to use it for her personal benefit the way she wanted. Had the BRF and the British press compliantly given in to each of her whims she would probably still be there happily exploiting it.
> 
> Since she was met with resistance, that changed everything. If Meghan can't have it then nobody should have it!



and still she insists she's on the blower to Her Maj umpteen times a day, and Harry, gawd-luv-a-duck, pops-in whenever, unannounced for a quick cuppa, hobnob and a jabber with his gran.

These 2 don't know whether to destroy the Monarchy or prepare for cameos in _Eastenders_ (is that soap still going?)


----------



## csshopper

Cavalier Girl said:


> Many, many, many posts ago, when the question arose about Meghan's end game, I posted that she was looking to bring down the monarchy.  I still believe it.  Does she want it destroyed, I don't think so, she just wants to bring everyone down to her level.  For someone like her, having to defer to others is unthinkable.


CG, Probably not going to happen, but the picture I would like to live long enough to see is Meghan having to curtsy to Kate.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> *Do you also call people with BDSM fetishes victims? *The difference is if it's welcome and accepted by the person receiving it. There's no indication he's not happy with how he's treated by Meghan, no matter how much you or I wouldn't want to be in his place.



You may be on to something, perhaps H like to 'play'?  

Certainly explains the uniform fetish and tantrums lately


----------



## catlover46

Cavalier Girl said:


> Many, many, many posts ago, when the question arose about Meghan's end game, I posted that she was looking to bring down the monarchy.  I still believe it.  Does she want it destroyed, I don't think so, she just wants to bring everyone down to her level.  For someone like her, having to defer to others is unthinkable.


I’ve wondered if she and especially Harry are doing this because he wants payback for how they treated Diana.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> You may be on to something, perhaps H like to 'play'?
> 
> Certainly explains the uniform fetish and tantrums lately



Wouldn't even be surprised.... he seems like someone who needs - and likes - to be put in his place.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> You may be on to something, perhaps H like to 'play'?
> 
> Certainly explains the uniform fetish and tantrums lately


Somewhere, too many pages to backspace to find, someone printed a picture found on the net of Mistress Meghan in a dominatrix outfit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> CG, Probably not going to happen, but the picture I would like to live long enough to see is Meghan having to curtsy to Kate.



I'll eat my tiara if that ever happens


----------



## Cavalier Girl

catlover46 said:


> I’ve wondered if she and especially Harry are doing this because he wants payback for how they treated Diana.



I don't think it has much if anything to do with Diana.  It's about an unwillingness to assume their natural positions within the Royal Family.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Shopaholic2021 said:


> What issues do you have with the tone taken with regard to POC and race issues? I am interested as I have not come across any posts that I felt had a racist or prejudicial tone.



A couple examples:

(the comment this person is replying to)https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34392604






						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:




					forum.purseblog.com
				




(the comment this person is replying to) https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34396036

Islamophobia: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-33351258

Islamophobia: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34481967


----------



## Hermes Zen

lalame said:


> Wouldn't even be surprised.... he seems like someone who needs - and likes - to be put in his place.



Agree!  Didn't we see a photo of M in one of those outfits?!? Wish I could find it to repost. 

OOOPS sorry csshopper beat me to posting the same thought.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> I’ve wondered if she and especially Harry are doing this because he wants payback for how they treated Diana.



I feel that's giving her too much credit, she doesn't give a sh*t about Diana or Harry for the matter, she only drives her own agenda. That said, it's been said how Harry was resentful, but why lashing out at his brother then? William didn't cheat on Diana, he didn't take her style as a HRH away (in fact, he's been said to have told her not to worry, he'd reinstall it once he was king), and he had to walk behind that coffin with his heart shredded into pieces just like Harry did. If the destruction of the BRF is what he's after, he's destroying his brother's future more than anything.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Somewhere, too many pages to backspace to find, someone printed a picture found on the net of Mistress Meghan in a dominatrix outfit.





Hermes Zen said:


> Agree!  Didn't we see a photo of M in one of those outfits?!? Wish I could find it to repost.



Omg guys  not sure anyone needs to see that


----------



## Cavalier Girl

OogleAtLuxury said:


> To be frank, American politicians have bigger fish to fry than silly spats in an antiquated figurehead family.



Goodness knows, that's the truth!  And to add, more than once I've taken exception to the borderline overt racism in this thread.  It's disgraceful, and from now on, I intend to point it out when I see it.  Thank you for the reminder OAL.  That kind of post is relatively rare, but it does happen, and none of us should sit quietly by when it occurs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whatever H&M’s initial end game may have been, surely by now they realize their game is not working. They have woven a web of too many lies, too much complaining and too many promises. They have not delivered on those promises.  

Surely by now they realize a paltry millionaire-lifestyle is not going to cover their desired billionaire-lifestyle.  

Surely by now they understand very few people feel sorry for them - and that lack of sympathy has nothing to do with race.  Michelle is right - it really is about service which really is about serving other people, i.e., not focusing on themselves.

Complaining about the millionaire-lifestyle is a really tough sell in 2021.  At least for me, it is.

Yes, rumors are out there about H’s, uh, preferences  

Keep the politicians, Royal scandals are the best, IMO.

_Europe's monarchies: scandal-ridden but such good fun_
_In a continent full of grey politicians, royals may matter more than ever_
From 2010:





						Europe's monarchies: scandal-ridden but such good fun - Macleans.ca
					

In a continent full of grey politicians, royals may matter more than ever




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## Lodpah

Come on now being freaky is a personal thing. KWIM?


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Come on now being freaky is a personal thing. KWIM?




2 good 4 them


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> No comments!




To be fair.... not sure what this really means? Most brands take this opportunity when they see their stuff being worn by celebs. Sometimes the celeb IS set up for that and paid to do it but not always so I don't think this is conclusive that she was "merching."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Uhhhhhh .. Oprah warm?!?! .. not so fast!  Talk to some of her former employees, and they will tell you that she was pretty well known for being a pretty nasty person, especially if she perceived some slight from said employee.  Yes, on her shows .. it did appear that she was a warm & caring person, but .. as in the case with Martha Stewart, that is "for show";* there is a (sadly) a reason why these women get to the top .. they use, take your ideas, take credit for your ideas, abuse and then spit you out when they no longer have 'use' for you! * I know more than a few people who worked for Oprah and Martha Stewart and the comments are the same; worst job they ever had!


ITA, they have narcissistic personalities, so do many movie stars and high achievers. Harry's wife, who also uses people, than discards them. She 'worked' with OW, so I wonder which one will markle the other first. Can't wait to see the big fallout.


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Uhhhhhh .. Oprah warm?!?! .. not so fast!  Talk to some of her former employees, and they will tell you that she was pretty well known for being a pretty nasty person, especially if she perceived some slight from said employee.  Yes, on her shows .. it did appear that she was a warm & caring person, but .. as in the case with Martha Stewart, that is "for show"; there is a (_sadly_) a reason why these women get to the top .. they use, take your ideas, take credit for your ideas, abuse and then spit you out when they no longer have 'use' for you!  I know more than a few people who worked for Oprah and Martha Stewart and the comments are the same; worst job they ever had!



I should've clarified... warm to other famous people.


----------



## needlv

I think the baby’s #2 name is going to be Grace... Since rumour has it they have trademarked “Gracewell”

so they have Archwell and Gracewell....


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Somewhere, too many pages to backspace to find, someone printed a picture found on the net of Mistress Meghan in a dominatrix outfit.


Here you go, but I'm not sure if it's really her. It's called: Meghan Markle latex fake 02 v01 by ElisabetaM on DeviantArt


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

needlv said:


> I think the baby’s #2 name is going to be Grace... Since rumour has it they have trademarked “Gracewell”
> 
> so they have Archwell and Gracewell....


They're too late. Gracewell is already a network of 20+ luxury nursing homes across the UK. https://www.gracewell.co.uk/en#


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here you go, but I'm not sure if it's really her. It's called: Meghan Markle latex fake 02 v01 by ElisabetaM on DeviantArt
> View attachment 5066839


In the one posted earlier, if I remember correctly, she's wearing fewer clothes and looks younger.


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> In the one posted earlier, if I remember correctly, she's wearing fewer clothes and looks younger.


Agree.  It was a different photo. I still can't find it.  This one scares me more.


----------



## lalame

Ew, I think erotic fan art is so icky. I can't imagine what it must feel like to be famous and having people come up with erotic stories and images with your likeness... knowing strangers are imagining you in those situations.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> It's my understanding they thought it was like pick-&-mix at a sweet shop: take all the money, privileges and engagements/charities/patronages you want and leave the ones you don't quite fancy (presumably for others to deal with).
> 
> That wasn't on, an unworkable model.  You certainly can't pop-over from your Cali faux-castle to open a garden fete or attend a premiere and fly off into the smog-filled sunset again hours later, whilst lecturing on climate change _and_ eat/have all the cake forever and ever
> 
> Name me one other job that works that way?


Keep coming back to your description of the sweets shop pick-n-mix. It is so apt. Every narc I've worked with in the office really did show signs of this mentality. My first office narc was a middle-aged guy inherited from my predecessor. At every performance review, he would explain his "failure to thrive" in these words: I only do work which I like.


----------



## xincinsin

Cavalier Girl said:


> Many, many, many posts ago, when the question arose about Meghan's end game, I posted that she was looking to bring down the monarchy.  I still believe it.  Does she want it destroyed, I don't think so, she just wants to bring everyone down to her level.  For someone like her, having to defer to others is unthinkable.


I think more like bring them down and keep them down, juuust a tad lower than her. She needs to be top dog. Hence her expectations of an apology from the BRF.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here you go, but I'm not sure if it's really her. It's called: Meghan Markle latex fake 02 v01 by ElisabetaM on DeviantArt
> View attachment 5066839


Is this the "slutty airline attendant" Halloween costume?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Is this the *"slutty airline attendant"* Halloween costume?


Don't know, but when I googled "slutty airline attendant" OMG!  My poor virgin eyes!


----------



## Chanbal

It's about time! 








						Harry and Meghan could soon be fully ‘ditched’ from royal family
					

The cost-saving move might cut down “the Firm” to just Charles and his wife Camilla, Prince William and Kate and their children, George, Charlotte and Louis.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

haha, someone else is proposing Diana Doria


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> It's about time!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan could soon be fully ‘ditched’ from royal family
> 
> 
> The cost-saving move might cut down “the Firm” to just Charles and his wife Camilla, Prince William and Kate and their children, George, Charlotte and Louis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I thought they weren't getting any support from the BRF today... what costs do they save from removing their royal titles? Not that I don't think they should remove them anyway, of course. They don't need those.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> haha, someone else is proposing Diana Doria



That awful green getup refers to Harry's wife green monster dress in quoted post! Kitty Spencer looks so chic compared to the others. 
	

		
			
		

		
	




Edited to add: the green getup refers to Harry's wife green monster dress.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here you go, but I'm not sure if it's really her. It's called: Meghan Markle latex fake 02 v01 by ElisabetaM on DeviantArt
> View attachment 5066839
> 
> [/QUOTE





Chanbal said:


> haha, someone else is proposing Diana Doria



Maybe it's just me, but I am thinking that Scobie wore it best.


----------



## Jktgal

OogleAtLuxury said:


> The fact that you fail to mention the last comment about the "Nation of Islam" speaks for itself.  btw, I did report that comment to Tpf moderators but it wasn't take down.
> 
> And, I think if you read the context of those comments it is clear why I interpreted them as Islamophobic...


I read all posts you quoted, and I thought that to quote the quote you quoted, to you, is overkill. Is the comment you allude to here where poster mentioned the word of Nation of Islam is not gospel? This was what I mentioned regarding the status of NGO (which Nation of Islam is). Well, such discussion exists amongst the faithful and nonfaihful alike. Anyone or any NGO can publish a fatwa, religious opinion, etc, but not all who profess the faith will consider it "gospel". I don't understand why that would be Islamophobia. Just like discussion of whether to be baptised by a dunk in the water or not, for Christians. 

To not be so OOT. Regarding head cover in the mosque. Either you play, or you decline. I either wear a headcover correctly, or I don't bother at all (as a minority, I am exempt). Harry's wife is like, yes I'll play but then stands around texting. It could also be a fashion choice since her trademark style seems to be dishevelled, like me.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I thought they weren't getting any support from the BRF today... what costs do they save from removing their royal titles? Not that I don't think they should remove them anyway, of course. They don't need those.


I got the impression from Oprah's interview that they have been attempting to get more financial support (e.g. security) from the BRF. 

People in the UK want them to be stripped from the tiles, and it's the obligation of the monarchy to also listen to their people. They burned the bridges with the UK, and the royal titles don't make sense in the States imo. 









						'They are an insult to Sussex' Calls to strip Meghan and Harry of titles
					

Harry and Meghan will not return as working members of the Royal Family - and  hundreds of readers said they should now be stripped of their…




					www.theargus.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Maybe it's just me, but I am thinking that Scobie wore it best.
> 
> View attachment 5066925


My vote goes also for Scobie!


----------



## xincinsin

I'm very confused by this. 
MM talks about her basic right to privacy, and there are some things she says with which I actually agree, having been harassed by very nosey colleagues before who claim that if I don't tell them something, that means I must be hiding something unsavoury. 
But then she ends off by saying "They’ve created a false narrative. I mean, I’ve never talked about privacy." Is she doing her false equivalency argument again where she uses a word, in this case "privacy", in more than one definition?








						Meghan Markle Addresses Criticisms She Was Too Private as a Royal: ‘They’ve Created a False Narrative’
					

In an unaired clip from her Oprah interview, Meghan explained, "I think everyone has a basic right to privacy."




					www.elle.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I'm very confused by this.
> MM talks about her basic right to privacy, and there are some things she says with which I actually agree, having been harassed by very nosey colleagues before who claim that if I don't tell them something, that means I must be hiding something unsavoury.
> But then she ends off by saying "They’ve created a false narrative. I mean, I’ve never talked about privacy." Is she doing her false equivalency argument again where she uses a word, in this case "privacy", in more than one definition?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Addresses Criticisms She Was Too Private as a Royal: ‘They’ve Created a False Narrative’
> 
> 
> In an unaired clip from her Oprah interview, Meghan explained, "I think everyone has a basic right to privacy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



She’s a fantasist, living in a fantasy world. MM is spinning a false either/or option. Notice OW is uncomfortable with the topic, she and GK and plenty of others have snooped on people. Choosing to be in the public eye comes at a cost - they receive huge amounts of $$$$ and plenty of freebies for a photo. If the celeb doesn’t want to pay that cost, then step out of the limelight. Not half in/half out. All the way out or all the way in. OW has managed to find privacy. She is much more well known than H&M. Fwiw, there is no _right_ to privacy, but there are invasions of privacy. Many celebs and royals (W&K) have found the balance. Such are the problems of millionaires who want to be billionaires.  In the end, it is just a photo. Much ado about nothing. Yawn.

Notice how she did not answer the question about being unavailable as a royal. She did not like being ‘on’ 24/7.  It’s too much work for someone who is accustomed to taking weeks off.


----------



## Chanbal

Amaz*n sells paper plates in bulk 

_*"There have been doubters and naysayers, in the verdant hills of Montecito, California, with its 50 shades of green with envy.*

"This is a tale of two couples — *and for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the triumph of William and Kate is a bitter pill.*"









						Meghan and Harry have 'bitter pill' to swallow after 'insults' thrown at Kate and William
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been warned "petty insults" thrown at Prince William and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge will backfire.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I got the impression from Oprah's interview that they have been attempting to get more financial support (e.g. security) from the BRF.
> 
> People in the UK want them to be stripped from the tiles, and it's the obligation of the monarchy to also listen to their people. They burned the bridges with the UK, and the royal titles don't make sense in the States imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'They are an insult to Sussex' Calls to strip Meghan and Harry of titles
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will not return as working members of the Royal Family - and  hundreds of readers said they should now be stripped of their…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theargus.co.uk



I know the Duke and Duchess title is not too significant to some. The Queen, iirc, said the title doesn’t matter because they aren’t working royals, right?  Well, as we saw with Phillip’s funeral, it does indeed matter.  SurlyHarry was allowed to travel on a diplomatic passport, allowed vip-chauffeured access, and stayed behind palace walls [as far as we know] with a Palace staff bending to his will.  He is allowed to stay in the US with his special Visa and receives special courtesies due to his Royal status. [ Guessing he gets diplomatic immunity in the event of an accident? ]

Sure, by birthright, he will always be a prince and will always be in Charles’s will. Therein lies the problem.  With all of these exceptions made for him, he will never be seen as earning any money on his own merit. All of his money will come because of his Royal status.  He and all of them are playing both sides. Royal with most of the perks, little of the responsibility. IMO to be taken seriously, he needs to renounce all of it. Otherwise, it just millionaire-wannabe-billionaire problems. Yawn. Ymmv.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> I know the Duke and Duchess title is not too significant to some. The Queen, iirc, said the title doesn’t matter because they aren’t working royals, right?  Well, as we saw with Phillip’s funeral, it does indeed matter.  SurlyHarry was allowed to travel on a diplomatic passport, allowed vip-chauffeured access, and stayed behind palace walls [as far as we know] with a Palace staff bending to his will.  He is allowed to stay in the US with his special Visa and receives special courtesies due to his Royal status. [ Guessing he gets diplomatic immunity in the event of an accident? ]
> 
> Sure, by birthright, he will always be a prince and will always be in Charles’s will. Therein lies the problem.  With all of these exceptions made for him, he will never be seen as earning any money on his own merit. All of his money will come because of his Royal status.  He and all of them are playing both sides. Royal with most of the perks, little of the responsibility. IMO to be taken seriously, he needs to renounce all of it. Otherwise, it just millionaire-wannabe-billionaire problems. Yawn. Ymmv.



What? He’s here working with diplomatic status? I thought  he was on an O-1...


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I got the impression from Oprah's interview that they have been attempting to get more financial support (e.g. security) from the BRF.
> 
> People in the UK want them to be stripped from the tiles, and it's the obligation of the monarchy to also listen to their people. They burned the bridges with the UK, and the royal titles don't make sense in the States imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'They are an insult to Sussex' Calls to strip Meghan and Harry of titles
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will not return as working members of the Royal Family - and  hundreds of readers said they should now be stripped of their…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theargus.co.uk


I think TQ is between a rock and a hard place. My understanding is that she can’t take it and only Parliament can do that. Harry will fight tooth and nail to keep it. It is part of his image. He’s a Royal Duke who doesn’t appear to be a Royal in the  least.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apparently, there is still confusion on this issue.  It’s time for the BRF to provide the answers. 

From April, 2021:









						Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship
					

Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by sp




					www.natlawreview.com
				



_Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by speculation. This does not affect Meghan or Archie as they are U.S citizens. Also, Prince Harry is no longer a member of the British royal family. A new report to The Times noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told The Times that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”
*Potential Visa Option*
Among the many other ways in which Prince Harry can get a visa to live and work in the U.S., one lucrative option would be to have an O-1 visa. A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.
For Prince Harry to seek an O-1 visa, he must be sponsored by an organization that plans to work with him and identify the fields where he excels. Initially, an O-1 visa is approved for three years; thereafter it must be renewed every year. It will not be hard for Prince Harry to prove extraordinary ability given his philanthropic activities — the founding of the Invictus Games can certainly get him an O-1 visa.
*Prince Harry’s Immigration Status*
There is a lot of speculation surrounding Prince Harry’s current immigration status. He has stayed too long to be on a B-2 visitor’s visa or through the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), through which a traveler cannot stay in the U.S. for more than 90 days. Additionally, there was speculation that Prince Harry would be issued a diplomatic visa, Although, there are no confirmed sources on this speculation._
*U.S. Citizenship in Question*
_If Prince Harry decides to become a U.S. citizen, he will be forced to expressly renounce any title or order of nobility he holds before he acquires U.S. citizenship, according to the Immigration and Nationalization Act. But although the Queen has stripped Prince Harry and Meghan of many honorary military appointments and royal patronages, they remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, at the least. In addition, acquiring U.S. citizenship could potentially lead to Prince Harry having to pay worldwide taxes._


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Amaz*n sells paper plates in bulk
> 
> _*"There have been doubters and naysayers, in the verdant hills of Montecito, California, with its 50 shades of green with envy.*
> 
> "This is a tale of two couples — *and for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the triumph of William and Kate is a bitter pill.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have 'bitter pill' to swallow after 'insults' thrown at Kate and William
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been warned "petty insults" thrown at Prince William and Kate, Duchess of Cambridge will backfire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


One aspect I have never understood about the whole Harry & Meg debacle is the way they treat every.little.thing. as a competition.  From the get-go Meghan has been like this, whilst Harry used to seem happy to be a team player - but not since Meghan arrived on the scene.

You haven’t failed if someone else has succeeded. 
You can succeed without grinding everyone else into the dust.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> Wouldn't even be surprised.... he seems like someone who needs - and likes - to be put in his place.



Lol, who knows what they’re dynamic is... I just remembered they’re house has a stripper pole... party on...








						Inside Meghan & Harry's £11.1m new home - with stripper pole and princess castle
					

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry and Archie have moved into a stunning nine-bed, 16-bath home in Montecito, Santa Barbara - and photos from an old listing show what it looked like inside when the previous owners lived there




					www.mirror.co.uk
				





eta.... I don’t want to know what they’re dynamic is either.... I was just looking at stories and this nugget popped back up... lol thought it was appropriate lol


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> One aspect I have never understood about the whole Harry & Meg debacle is the way they treat every.little.thing. as a competition.  From the get-go Meghan has been like this, whilst Harry used to seem happy to be a team player - but not since Meghan arrived on the scene.
> 
> You haven’t failed if someone else has succeeded.
> You can succeed without grinding everyone else into the dust.


I can't believe I'm saying this, but from this point of view, I actually do feel some sympathy for Harry's wife. It looks like she wasn't a success most of her life, using people to climb higher but never making it to the top. Even being a humanitarian was a manufactured image. And then, on the verge of being a has-been actress, she manages to score big time by getting a prince to fall for her. She must be really desperate to stay on top of her little sandcastle.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> I can't believe I'm saying this, but from this point of view, I actually do feel some sympathy for Harry's wife. It looks like she wasn't a success most of her life, using people to climb higher but never making it to the top. Even being a humanitarian was a manufactured image. And then, on the verge of being a has-been actress, she manages to score big time by getting a prince to fall for her. She must be really desperate to stay on top of her little sandcastle.



With the opportunity she had in marrying into the RF, and being biracial - she could have used that for positive reasons... But she has made some spectacular errors, with the Oprah interview being the final nail in the coffin.  You could say she “markled  herself”

Seriously... so idiotic.  She let her jealousy, greed and need for attention ruin this opportunity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> One aspect I have never understood about the whole Harry & Meg debacle is the way they treat every.little.thing. as a competition.  From the get-go Meghan has been like this, whilst Harry used to seem happy to be a team player - but not since Meghan arrived on the scene.
> 
> You haven’t failed if someone else has succeeded.
> You can succeed without grinding everyone else into the dust.



There are plenty of articles that discuss H’s unhappiness for many years, even before leaving the military. It wasn’t just the press or his mother’s death. He never has accepted his lot in life.  Most likely, this is why those other relationships didn’t work out. Chronic complainers are difficult to be around.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s a fantasist, living in a fantasy world. MM is spinning a false either/or option. Notice OW is uncomfortable with the topic, she and GK and plenty of others have snooped on people. Choosing to be in the public eye comes at a cost - they receive huge amounts of $$$$ and plenty of freebies for a photo. If the celeb doesn’t want to pay that cost, then step out of the limelight. Not half in/half out. All the way out or all the way in. OW has managed to find privacy. She is much more well known than H&M. Fwiw, there is no _right_ to privacy, but there are invasions of privacy. Many celebs and royals (W&K) have found the balance. Such are the problems of millionaires who want to be billionaires.  In the end, it is just a photo. Much ado about nothing. Yawn.
> 
> Notice how she did not answer the question about being unavailable as a royal. She did not like being ‘on’ 24/7.  It’s too much work for someone who is accustomed to taking weeks off.



Right, I think famous people have a VERY basic right to privacy as in you can't take photos into their homes or whatnot but what they do out and about is fair game. If you weren't famous, why would anyone even care what you thought about ... anything you think about? She should know better, as someone who was I'm sure trying for years to be more famous in her career.


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> Maya in Russian means mine


That’s rather MOya(mine). In Russian speaking countries Maya is girls name mainly given to babies born in May or Spring.✌)

ETA: My bet on the name is Jermagesty or JoMagesty ‍♀️


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are plenty of articles that discuss H’s unhappiness for many years, even before leaving the military. It wasn’t just the press or his mother’s death. He never has accepted his lot in life.  Most likely, this is why those other relationships didn’t work out. Chronic complainers are difficult to be around.


But they love it when they find a willing listener. This is probably Harry's wife's strength in fostering the relationship. She listens, agrees and gives his ego a boost. So he goes along with whatever she says. Soulmates and what have you. That's why at the end of the long saga of escape from the manacles of royal life, she can so deftly flip the responsibility for everything onto him and give him full marks for rescuing all of them. If it goes wrong and they have to downgrade to 8 bathrooms, it will be Harry's fault for not having a plan.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are plenty of articles that discuss H’s unhappiness for many years, even before leaving the military. It wasn’t just the press or his mother’s death. He never has accepted his lot in life.  Most likely, this is why those other relationships didn’t work out. Chronic complainers are difficult to be around.


That’s an entirely different matter.  And I’m not sure I accept it as *fact*.  He may or may not have been serious about leaving - he certainly enjoyed the polo, the status and the perks of royal life.  He did not undermine his family however.


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> I'm very confused by this.
> MM talks about her basic right to privacy, and there are some things she says with which I actually agree, having been harassed by very nosey colleagues before who claim that if I don't tell them something, that means I must be hiding something unsavoury.
> But then she ends off by saying "They’ve created a false narrative. I mean, I’ve never talked about privacy." Is she doing her false equivalency argument again where she uses a word, in this case "privacy", in more than one definition?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Addresses Criticisms She Was Too Private as a Royal: ‘They’ve Created a False Narrative’
> 
> 
> In an unaired clip from her Oprah interview, Meghan explained, "I think everyone has a basic right to privacy."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


Why are we seeing unaired clips being released?  Didn’t they, after speaking their *truth* via Oprah, say they were done?  I suppose we all assumed they wouldn’t be, but it’s disappointing all the same to see them being so predictable.  Meghan’s got more “just one more thing’s” than Columbo


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> Why are we seeing unaired clips being released?  Didn’t they, after speaking their *truth* via Oprah, say they were done?  I suppose we all assumed they wouldn’t be, but it’s disappointing all the same to see them being so predictable.  Meghan’s got more “just one more thing’s” than Columbo


I'm sure money or page views or some other monetizing factor will result in many more clips being released.

And I love Columbo. He would have had a field day with Harry's wife. She ticks all the boxes for the self-confident villainess of the week in Columbo. MM missed her calling.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Meghan does a really good job of talking about unrelated things confidently in order to convince people she’s made a good point. The huge difference between me putting a picture on my desk and people in the public eye releasing pictures is that I do it to make me happy - they do it to get attention and publicity. So when you invite publicity by releasing Pictures and doing interviews with world famous personalities, peop,e want to know more - because you ASKED for the attention.
If we want to go back to her desk analogy, it would be more truthful to say she grabbed a coworker from the hall, pulled them into her office and said come on come on look at my pictures. That’s why they ask to see more - you demanded the attention.


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> I can't believe I'm saying this, but from this point of view, I actually do feel some sympathy for Harry's wife. It looks like she wasn't a success most of her life, using people to climb higher but never making it to the top. Even being a humanitarian was a manufactured image. And then, on the verge of being a has-been actress, she manages to score big time by getting a prince to fall for her. She must be really desperate to stay on top of her little sandcastle.


  Like a modern day Madame Bovary?


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> Like a modern day Madame Bovary?


I think she is more crafty than Emma.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> no further comments, title says everything...
> View attachment 5065529
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle desperate to 'stay relevant'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle are desperate to "stay relevant" amid claims they are leaking stories to the press, royal expert Russell Myers has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Does the British press support their side like they do in America?


----------



## Allisonfaye

daisychainz said:


> Oh my gosh, you're 100% right! I completely forgot  We are dealing with someone who will hide any truth anyway; we'll never really know.



I am sure it's way illegal to falsify a birth certificate. Someone will have to be paid a lot of money...


----------



## Allisonfaye

papertiger said:


> How come millions of us knew that wasn't possible and they didn't?



Because being famous for doing not much has worked for some others so they figured it would work for them.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> really....how much mileage can they get out of Harry's name?



And the fact is, they are trying to cash in the BRF...you know, the one they just threw under the bus? The irony is thick.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> Few people are as capable as Meghan. She went from admired new royal to persona non grata, from copying Diana as much as possible to now Harry maybe "missing" his own mother's 60th birthday statue unveiling? Gotta say, they move fast! Soon they'll be sooo bored as they're running out of bridges to burn! All we need is for Netflix and Spotify to reneg on the deals and for the American media to wake TF up. By then maybe Depends won't even want her. Watch for M&H to push their kids to become child actors. Somebody has to bring in some income.



I wouldn't bet on the American media to wake up anytime soon. The narrative is way bigger than H&M for them. H&M are the poster children for the American media.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> You may be on to something, perhaps H like to 'play'?
> 
> Certainly explains the uniform fetish and tantrums lately


my understanding is that the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were into some sort of S&M with her being the dominant one....maybe these two have more in common with them than we know


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here you go, but I'm not sure if it's really her. It's called: Meghan Markle latex fake 02 v01 by ElisabetaM on DeviantArt
> View attachment 5066839


her face on someone else's body?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> her face on someone else's body?



It's not her. DeviantArt is a site for people to post their artistic creations. Now the reasons why the artist was motivated to create this, um, interesting interpretation of Meghan is a question in itself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apparently, there is still confusion on this issue.  It’s time for the BRF to provide the answers.
> 
> From April, 2021:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by sp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.natlawreview.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by speculation. This does not affect Meghan or Archie as they are U.S citizens. Also, Prince Harry is no longer a member of the British royal family. A new report to The Times noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told The Times that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”
> *Potential Visa Option*
> Among the many other ways in which Prince Harry can get a visa to live and work in the U.S., one lucrative option would be to have an O-1 visa. A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.
> For Prince Harry to seek an O-1 visa, he must be sponsored by an organization that plans to work with him and identify the fields where he excels. Initially, an O-1 visa is approved for three years; thereafter it must be renewed every year. It will not be hard for Prince Harry to prove extraordinary ability given his philanthropic activities — the founding of the Invictus Games can certainly get him an O-1 visa.
> *Prince Harry’s Immigration Status*
> There is a lot of speculation surrounding Prince Harry’s current immigration status. He has stayed too long to be on a B-2 visitor’s visa or through the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), through which a traveler cannot stay in the U.S. for more than 90 days. Additionally, there was speculation that Prince Harry would be issued a diplomatic visa, Although, there are no confirmed sources on this speculation._
> *U.S. Citizenship in Question*
> _If Prince Harry decides to become a U.S. citizen, he will be forced to expressly renounce any title or order of nobility he holds before he acquires U.S. citizenship, according to the Immigration and Nationalization Act. But although the Queen has stripped Prince Harry and Meghan of many honorary military appointments and royal patronages, they remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, at the least. In addition, acquiring U.S. citizenship could potentially lead to Prince Harry having to pay worldwide taxes._


he is living in CA with a billionaire lifestyle.  he should pay taxes like an American
Really when you think about it - they are posing as people who care so much for the less fortunate and they aren't paying their fair share of taxes?


----------



## bag-mania

Harry and Meghan are everything their fans would likely say they despise about entitled rich people, yet they adore them. Go figure.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are everything their fans would likely say they despise about entitled rich people, yet they adore them. Go figure.


yeah go figure
there are a lot of wealthy people in Hollywood and elsewhere who don't mind paying their fair share.  these two want to pose as the most enlightened people but don't want to walk the walk?


----------



## marietouchet

What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
					

The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s an entirely different matter.  And I’m not sure I accept it as *fact*.  He may or may not have been serious about leaving - he certainly enjoyed the polo, the status and the perks of royal life.  *He did not undermine his family however.*


Yes he did, every time he pulled one of his 'not so funny' stunts as an adult: drunken binges and brawls, Nazi uniform, naked parties, using racist slurs. Did I miss anything?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


they have a new mission - vaccine equity
so very woke


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Think the chair will preside over the meetings and delegate work. Press releases will be in their name. They make a few speeches. Should be just their cup of tea.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes he did, every time he pulled one of his 'not so funny' stunts as an adult: drunken binges and brawls, Nazi uniform, naked parties, using racist slurs. Did I miss anything?


I thought it would be obvious I meant attacking the family as he is now.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Think the chair will preside over the meetings and delegate work. Press releases will be in their name. They make a few speeches. Should be just their cup of tea.


The Sussexes are expected to deliver a message during the event.
Dont know if that means on camera?  Cant wait


----------



## catlover46

Wonder what stunt they are going to pull on Thursday to steal the thunder from W&K’s 10th wedding anniversary?


----------



## xincinsin

Interestingly, the original Vax Live press release does not mention the twosome.





						Global Citizen Announces "VAX LIVE: The Concert To Reunite The World" Hosted By Selena Gomez
					

/PRNewswire/ -- International advocacy organization Global Citizen today announced VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World, a global broadcast and streaming...




					www.prnewswire.com
				



But Vanity Fair and Harpers are headlining them, so Sunshine Sachs must have sent out additional info to the media to highlight their clients' participation.

ETA: their names, just names, no details, are in another page giving times of telecast.








						Vax Live
					

VAX LIVE: A Concert to Reunite the World is a global broadcast special celebrating COVID-19 vaccines, and we are calling on world leaders to make vaccines accessible to everyone, everywhere.




					www.globalcitizen.org


----------



## Sharont2305

catlover46 said:


> Wonder what stunt they are going to pull on Thursday to steal the thunder from W&K’s 10th wedding anniversary?


Love is universal? You don't have to have a special day to prove that?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Interestingly, the original Vax Live press release does not mention the twosome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Global Citizen Announces "VAX LIVE: The Concert To Reunite The World" Hosted By Selena Gomez
> 
> 
> /PRNewswire/ -- International advocacy organization Global Citizen today announced VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World, a global broadcast and streaming...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.prnewswire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But Vanity Fair and Harpers are headlining them, so Sunshine Sachs must have sent out additional info to the media to highlight their clients' participation.
> 
> ETA: their names, just names, no details, are in another page giving times of telecast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vax Live
> 
> 
> VAX LIVE: A Concert to Reunite the World is a global broadcast special celebrating COVID-19 vaccines, and we are calling on world leaders to make vaccines accessible to everyone, everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalcitizen.org


Oh, the Duke & Duchess - why not Meghan and JCMH?
This must be like the beginning of her dream come true - mingling with the stars who had no idea who she was a couple of years ago


----------



## bag-mania

catlover46 said:


> Wonder what stunt they are going to pull on Thursday to steal the thunder from W&K’s 10th wedding anniversary?





Sharont2305 said:


> Love is universal? You don't have to have a special day to prove that?



My guess is there will be more black and white photos. Maybe showing them looking lovingly into each other's eyes while Harry lays his hand on Meghan's moonbump. How romantic! Why nobody has ever loved as completely and fiercely as they do!


----------



## csshopper

Once again the couple in Montecito are a little late to the party. 

I'm sure they will try to somehow take credit for this, but after having already read this headline in the New York Times, *"U.S. to Send 60 Million Vaccine Doses Abroad"* I came here to catch up and found the article about the event in early May where they are scheduled to preach to us that this should be done. Guess they will have to amend the script.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I like this chart!



Others:


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> I like this chart!
> View attachment 5067316
> 
> 
> Others:
> View attachment 5067318


good 
but hasn't happened yet in the US I don't think


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


so I guess the bell goes ding and dong.....apparently Gayle King is part of this show - does not seem like a fit for someone her age and profession - guess her "friends" got her in?


----------



## Icyjade

sdkitty said:


> good
> but hasn't happened yet in the US I don't think



Sooner or later it will... all the pretty packaging will unravel sooner or later. Once they are divorced and the kids are safe, she is doomed. Harry will be taken back since he’s family but I’m sure there is so much dirt on her that’s just being held back for now.

Edit: I think it must kill Harry’s wife that even after her attack on Kate, Kate is more popular than ever


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Sooner or later it will... all the pretty packaging will unravel sooner or later. Once they are divorced and the kids are safe, she is doomed. Harry will be taken back since he’s family but I’m sure there is so much dirt on her that’s just being held back for now.


we'll see
If Harry and his name doesn't bring in the money as expected she may divorce him


----------



## Icyjade

sdkitty said:


> we'll see
> If Harry and his name doesn't bring in the money as expected she may divorce him



She has a history of using and then ditching people... but probably a bit hard to hook up with the next sucker since she is pregnant and all. So a while longer but I strongly believe it will happen


----------



## Shopaholic2021

''For the position of campaign chair, it’s best to identify someone who is well known, respected and has deep ties to the community. While their tasks will vary based on your campaign and the capacity of each person, some typical campaign chair responsibilities are to identify endorsements and high-level fundraising targets and offer their general feedback on strategy and the campaign plan. Ideally, your campaign chairperson would be someone who has the means to give a maximum donation to your campaign and could call 10 or so people themselves who could also give your campaign a maximum donation.''

They are listed as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex still, and I thought they were going to stop using that title .


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Icyjade said:


> She has a history of using and then ditching people... but probably a bit hard to hook up with the next sucker since she is pregnant and all. So a while longer but I strongly believe it will happen



I don't think she would ever divorce him because she has a princess syndrome. She wants to be royalty and have all that entails with that, I mean all the good glamorous things. She said as much in her blog.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Don’t feel bad Meghan, you’re still above Andrew!


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't think she would ever divorce him because she has a princess syndrome. She wants to be royalty and have all that entails with that, I mean all the good glamorous things. She said as much in her blog.


I agree....I don't think she's gonna attract anyone else at his level.  what has she got?  Harry.  period.  and in the near future two kids.  she's pushing 40.  if she gives him up I don't think it will be for another man.


----------



## Annawakes

lanasyogamama said:


> Don’t feel bad Meghan, you’re still above Andrew!


For now....


----------



## carmen56

Allisonfaye said:


> Does the British press support their side like they do in America?



Not that I’ve noticed.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> good
> but hasn't happened yet in the US I don't think



What will get them here will be the indifference. They will never be as disliked as they are in the UK but people in the US won't care about them for much longer. Even now interest in them is waning. It makes sense since H&M don't actually DO anything except cause drama.

The new baby will get them lots of attention this summer but after that...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> What will get them here will be the indifference. They will never be as disliked as they are in the UK but people in the US won't care about them for much longer. Even now interest in them is waning. It makes sense since H&M don't actually DO anything except cause drama.
> 
> The new baby will get them lots of attention this summer but after that...


maybe the baby will get them some attention but I don't think a second baby is as exciting as a first....so unless they can get some adorable photos of the kids as Kate does, meh


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> good
> but hasn't happened yet in the US I don't think


I think there are, hopefully  a few chinks in the protective wall around them, but in the end, the UK perceptions are the ones that matter. If any further curtailment of them as Royals is going to happen, it will happen there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> so I guess the bell goes ding and dong.....apparently Gayle King is part of this show - does not seem like a fit for someone her age and profession - guess her "friends" got her in?


Gayle is like 20 years older than MM , JLO is 10 years older, and Selena is like 10 years younger - covers the spectrum of ages


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> Interestingly, the original Vax Live press release does not mention the twosome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Global Citizen Announces "VAX LIVE: The Concert To Reunite The World" Hosted By Selena Gomez
> 
> 
> /PRNewswire/ -- International advocacy organization Global Citizen today announced VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World, a global broadcast and streaming...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.prnewswire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But Vanity Fair and Harpers are headlining them, so Sunshine Sachs must have sent out additional info to the media to highlight their clients' participation.
> 
> ETA: their names, just names, no details, are in another page giving times of telecast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vax Live
> 
> 
> VAX LIVE: A Concert to Reunite the World is a global broadcast special celebrating COVID-19 vaccines, and we are calling on world leaders to make vaccines accessible to everyone, everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalcitizen.org


Thanks for sharing.  Interesting to see at least two of H&M's 'fan friends' also listed .. CT & GK. Bet they had something to do with getting H&M involved or H&M heard about this and went to them to get them involved.


----------



## Aimee3

Hermes Zen said:


> Thanks for sharing.  Interesting to see at least two of H&M's 'fan friends' also listed .. CT & GK. Bet they had something to do with getting H&M involved or H&M heard about this and went to them to get them involved.


Wait...wasn’t Harry’s wife supposed to be on maternity leave and not “working” (not that she’s done anything in the last year anyway?)


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Maybe it's just me, but I am thinking that Scobie wore it best.
> 
> View attachment 5066925


Not one real nose in the bunch. lol


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Wait...wasn’t Harry’s wife supposed to be on maternity leave and not “working” (not that she’s done anything in the last year anyway?)



They are "campaign chairs." How much time could that possibly entail, maybe a two minute taped Zoom call at most? Don't worry, we're not going to see any actual effort from them. Meghan is still heavily pregnant after all.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Aimee3 said:


> Wait...wasn’t Harry’s wife supposed to be on maternity leave and not “working” (not that she’s done anything in the last year anyway?)


Maybe she will have a brief cameo or photo appearance.  WAIT maybe it will also be a brief cameo or photo of H too!?!   Seriously, H probably be shown live.  May even show M live to show the world her ever growing bump.

Wonder if as chairs it will be under Archewell.  It didn't say in that posting but it is a way to kick start their foundation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't watched yet as I was out driving a tiny sparrow (as in, not even fully out of the eggshell!) to a rescue and it took the better part of the afternoon, but I wonder what news on the bump Lady CC could have.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I can't believe I'm saying this, but from this point of view, I actually do feel some sympathy for Harry's wife. It looks like she wasn't a success most of her life, using people to climb higher but never making it to the top. Even being a humanitarian was a manufactured image. And then, on the verge of being a has-been actress, she manages to score big time by getting a prince to fall for her. She must be really desperate to stay on top of her little sandcastle.


You're a bigger person than I am!   I can't sympathize for someone who uses others, discards them when they're done with them, and creates false narratives to put herself up and others down.  She was lucky she manipulated her way into being a prince's wife.  I don't feel sorry for her at all.  I find her disgraceful and almost every attribute I would never tell my daughter to emulate.  She's a user and abuser as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> they have a new mission - vaccine equity
> so very woke


Someone must think that these two have global appeal or they inserted themselves or their PR people inserted them. It is pretty obvious that by hiring a company like Sunshine Sachs, all these relationships are transactional and incestuous. It is all do for me and I will do for you and the chief orchestrator is the PR firm.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Icyjade said:


> Sooner or later it will... all the pretty packaging will unravel sooner or later. Once they are divorced and the kids are safe, she is doomed. Harry will be taken back since he’s family but I’m sure there is so much dirt on her that’s just being held back for now.
> 
> Edit: I think it must kill Harry’s wife that even after her attack on Kate, Kate is more popular than ever



I will love seeing her face the day Kate becomes Queen


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was out driving a tiny sparrow (as in, not even fully out of the eggshell!) to a rescue


 awwwwwwwwww ❤️


----------



## Chanbal

It's becoming very obvious that Cringe is after Will&Kate... Should we invite the Cambridges to join this thread? They will feel they are not alone.   



_
And now, royal expert Dan Wootton, who first broke the news of Megxit, has claimed, *"the level of bitterness and rancour between the Duke of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex has, if anything, been underplayed".*

Writing in the Mail Online, Mr Wootton said: *"Wills was angry about the behaviour of his sister-in-law for well over a year

"And that was before she sat down with Oprah Winfrey to attack his beloved wife and then accuse his flesh and blood of racism and uncaring behaviour towards someone with mental health issues."*

The royal commentator went onto cite a royal source, who claimed William was furious with Meghan after she tried to "disrespect" the Firm.

The royal insider told the Mail Online: "William soon began to wonder about some of Meghan's traits and motivations.

"*He was worried that at times she seemed to be more concerned about her personal progression or profile over the wider goals and aims of the Royal Family.*

"*But he largely kept any reservations to himself as he desperately wanted her to be happy and appreciated the huge adjustment of entering the Royal Family.*

"Following Megxit though, everything changed. He could no longer hide his true feelings because he felt like she had publicly attempted to disrespect his family and the Queen."

Mr Wootton then sensationally claimed Prince William's feelings of reservation for the American-born former actor were shared by the Queen's senior staff.

He said:* "I've learned senior staff working for the Queen had shared with William their reservations about some of Meghan's behaviour.*

"*William is believed to have backed a decision – approved by the Queen – to ban Meghan from borrowing items in the Royal Collection, including tiaras and jewellery once worn by his mother Princess Diana.*

"Kate is also thought to have shared with William details of an awkward encounter with Meghan, which I first revealed in December 2018, where she warned her sister-in-law not to talk rudely to staff at Kensington Palace..."_









						Prince William can 'no longer hide feelings' of fury at Meghan
					

PRINCE WILLIAM can "no longer hide feelings" of "bitterness" towards Meghan Markle after the Duchess of Sussex "attempted to disrespect his family and the Queen", it has been claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> I will love seeing her face the day Kate becomes Queen


For the clap back to that, she will probably post nude picture of herself from when she was young.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It's becoming very obvious that Cringe is after Will&Kate... Should we invite the Cambridges to join this thread? They will feel they are not alone.
> 
> View attachment 5067450
> 
> 
> _And now, royal expert Dan Wootton, who first broke the news of Megxit, has claimed, *"the level of bitterness and rancour between the Duke of Cambridge and Duchess of Sussex has, if anything, been underplayed".*
> 
> Writing in the Mail Online, Mr Wootton said: *"Wills was angry about the behaviour of his sister-in-law for well over a year
> 
> "And that was before she sat down with Oprah Winfrey to attack his beloved wife and then accuse his flesh and blood of racism and uncaring behaviour towards someone with mental health issues."*
> 
> The royal commentator went onto cite a royal source, who claimed William was furious with Meghan after she tried to "disrespect" the Firm.
> 
> The royal insider told the Mail Online: "William soon began to wonder about some of Meghan's traits and motivations.
> 
> "*He was worried that at times she seemed to be more concerned about her personal progression or profile over the wider goals and aims of the Royal Family.*
> 
> "*But he largely kept any reservations to himself as he desperately wanted her to be happy and appreciated the huge adjustment of entering the Royal Family.*
> 
> "Following Megxit though, everything changed. He could no longer hide his true feelings because he felt like she had publicly attempted to disrespect his family and the Queen."
> 
> Mr Wootton then sensationally claimed Prince William's feelings of reservation for the American-born former actor were shared by the Queen's senior staff.
> 
> He said:* "I've learned senior staff working for the Queen had shared with William their reservations about some of Meghan's behaviour.*
> 
> "*William is believed to have backed a decision – approved by the Queen – to ban Meghan from borrowing items in the Royal Collection, including tiaras and jewellery once worn by his mother Princess Diana.*
> 
> "Kate is also thought to have shared with William details of an awkward encounter with Meghan, which I first revealed in December 2018, where she warned her sister-in-law not to talk rudely to staff at Kensington Palace..."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William can 'no longer hide feelings' of fury at Meghan
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM can "no longer hide feelings" of "bitterness" towards Meghan Markle after the Duchess of Sussex "attempted to disrespect his family and the Queen", it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Prince William is expressing himself!


----------



## lanasyogamama

You can’t blame Will for his anger. You can see it on his face.

I respect what Lady C does, but man those videos are too long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## catlover46

I don’t know if anybody saw this but the Queen returned to work today.








						Queen Elizabeth Smiles During First Official Public Appearance Since Prince Philip’s Funeral
					

The monarch is already getting back to her royal duties, holding two virtual audiences on Tuesday.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> You can’t blame Will for his anger. You can see it on his face.
> 
> I respect what Lady C does, but man those videos are too long.


They are.  She puts on all that jewelry for each one and wants to make sure that we all see it!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> You can’t blame Will for his anger. You can see it on his face.
> 
> I respect what Lady C does, but man those videos are too long.



I'm sure he detests phony people like we do.


----------



## Chanbal

UK is off limits for Cringe.  Europe in general is likely off limits too ... Canada? US may not be able to export/share the work of Mother Teresa of Montecito. We will have to put up with all her fantastic work here!   










						Courtiers fear Meghan Markle 'could be booed' by public
					

COURTIERS fear Meghan Markle "could be booed" if she appears at an event in the UK attended by members of the public, it has sensationally been claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

catlover46 said:


> I don’t know if anybody saw this but the Queen returned to work today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth Smiles During First Official Public Appearance Since Prince Philip’s Funeral
> 
> 
> The monarch is already getting back to her royal duties, holding two virtual audiences on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



Doesn't surprise me at all. The Queen is all about duty and isn't going to hide away feeling sorry for herself (like someone else much younger we know). She's the definition of "Keep calm and carry on."


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They are.  She puts on all that jewelry for each one and wants to make sure that we all see it!


And we love that too.


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


 
Who are _they _to _demand_ anything? Unless they bypassed their shots in order to give them to someone less fortunate they need to stfu


----------



## Chanbal

I agree with her!


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> they have a new mission - vaccine equity
> so very woke


a touchy subject - Boris has no vaccine to give away, the EU also wants some of the (perceived) UK stockpile and Joe thinks he has enough to give away (hmmmm...)
Not clear how a gala benefit is going to help India get the vaccine


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Who are _they _to _demand_ anything? Unless they bypassed their shots in order to give them to someone less fortunate they need to stfu



If anything they used their celebrity to get their vaccines earlier than they should have and kept people who needed it more than they did from getting it. Not everyone has a mansion to lock themselves away in. Some people have actual jobs where they have to interact with others every day and they are at constant risk.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> You can’t blame Will for his anger. You can see it on his face.
> 
> I respect what Lady C does, but man those videos are too long.



I listen whist taking my makeup off, and then clean my teeth, and then clean my kitchen - and she's still going  Brave though, she puts it out there


----------



## Sophisticatted

Interesting how Charles seems to get bypassed in the decision making (according to that article).  It’s “the Queen and Will decided” to not let her have access to the jewels, etc.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I agree with her!




Sigh
They do NOT live in LA/Hollywood. Santa Barbara/Montecito is nothing like them.
If anything it would be the isolation that might 'get' to Harry. IMO he would fare better where there is more 'action'. Other than riding his electric bike and communing with the rescue hens there isn't much for him to do out in the sticks


----------



## Clearblueskies

marietouchet said:


> a touchy subject - Boris has no vaccine to give away, the EU also wants some of the (perceived) UK stockpile and Joe thinks he has enough to give away (hmmmm...)
> Not clear how a gala benefit is going to help India get the vaccine


But India is one of the worlds biggest vaccine producers, including for covid.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> UK is off limits for Cringe.  Europe in general is likely off limits too ... Canada? US may not be able to export/share the work of Mother Teresa of Montecito. We will have to put up with all her fantastic work here!
> View attachment 5067483
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Courtiers fear Meghan Markle 'could be booed' by public
> 
> 
> COURTIERS fear Meghan Markle "could be booed" if she appears at an event in the UK attended by members of the public, it has sensationally been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


M deserves the booing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> Interesting how Charles seems to get bypassed in the decision making (according to that article).  It’s “the Queen and Will decided” to not let her have access to the jewels, etc.



That article is probably blowing smoke. But let's be honest, Charles has _never_ given the impression of being a strong, confident man who takes charge. At the funeral he looked rather frail and lost. That is understandable under the circumstances but still his father Philip gave off a commanding presence right up until his last few months. Charles doesn't have it in him IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure he detests phony people like we do.


Probably more so.  I think it is one of the biggest occupational hazards of being in line for the throne.  All sorts of people are sucking up to you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Say what you will about Harry and his wife, they are providing entertainment for people in a way that you couldn't make it up! I mean, can you imagine if anybody had written a book of fiction and said "Minor actress, ensemble player, hustler by her own account, *completely remanufactured by plastic surgeons and other outside interventions* marries prince" [...]." 

Dying over here.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I doubt most of the viewers of this TV show will care about H&M


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Think the chair will preside over the meetings* and delegate work*. Press releases will be in their name. They make a few speeches. Should be just their cup of tea.


For these two, sounds about right!


----------



## bag-mania

Taking credit for the hard work of others? Yep, that job title has Harry and Meghan written all over it.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> What is a compaign chair ? JLO and Selena are the hosts
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle demand world leaders share vaccines to 'restore faith in humanity' | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's far more complicated than simply giving vaccines to other countries and "faith in humanity". Getting a country's population vaccinated is critical to getting that country's economy up and running. Once each country can accomplish that milestone, then they will have the bandwidth to assist other countries. 

This just shows that, as we all know, these two haven't a clue on how things work.

And I am sure these two elbowed their way in line to get their vaccine since it falls in line with their "do as we say, not as we do" way of living.


----------



## catlover46

papertiger said:


> I listen whist taking my makeup off, and then clean my teeth, and then clean my kitchen - and she's still going  Brave though, she puts it out there


I also notice every 2-3 minutes there’s an ad break lol.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Sigh
> They do NOT live in LA/Hollywood. Santa Barbara/Montecito is nothing like them.
> If anything it would be the isolation that might 'get' to Harry. IMO he would fare better where there is more 'action'. Other than riding his electric bike and communing with the rescue hens there isn't much for him to do out in the sticks


He must be terribly bored. Going from the vibrant London to the idyllic Montecito may not help with his mental health issues.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

LittleStar88 said:


> Getting a country's population vaccinated is critical to getting that country's economy up and running. Once each country can accomplish that milestone, then they will have the bandwidth to assist other countries.



Agree 100%. Even before countries had started to vaccinate, people were complaining about vaccine nationalism and rich countries not sharing vaccines. I mean come on, we need to get vaccinated to a certain level before we can help others. Its like with the oxygen mask, you put yours on first and then help others.


----------



## RAINDANCE

bag-mania said:


> That article is probably blowing smoke. But let's be honest, Charles has _never_ given the impression of being a strong, confident man who takes charge. At the funeral he looked rather frail and lost. That is understandable under the circumstances but still his father Philip gave off a commanding presence right up until his last few months. Charles doesn't have it in him IMO.


 I was thinking similar myself. Charles does not have the presence of either Prince Philip or the Queen. I wonder if temperamentally he is like his maternal grandfather ? I guess waiting 72 years to fufil your destiny would give anyone some existential angst every now and then.
 Some people have a natural charisma like Diana (and also former Us pres. Bill Clin ton according to friends of ours who met him years ago) but I do think William now has the maturity to become a presence. It's hard to define or explain  "presence" but whenever I see pictures or videos of CP Victoria of Sweden I see a Queen in waiting. Her whole demeanour is regal.


----------



## Chanbal

Clearblueskies said:


> But India is one of the worlds biggest vaccine producers, including for covid.


Yes, they are. Indeed, "_in March, fears of vaccine shortages led to the government temporarily halting exports of a version of the University of Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine known as Covishield, which is produced by the Serum Institute of India (SII), based in Pune." _









						India’s COVID-vaccine woes — by the numbers
					

How an explosion of coronavirus cases in India is putting global vaccine supplies at risk.




					www.nature.com


----------



## rose60610

Celebrity Chairs of major events often don't lift a finger. They just lend their name, maybe throw some $ at the cause and get others to do the same. Then they cough up when THEIR buddies are chairs of causes/events. Many of the heavy hitter foundations are affiliated with this cause, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates and Rockefeller foundations, etc. Is this simply a way for M&H to have an excuse to schmooze with la creme de la creme? Many in the Hollywood crowd are anti-vaccine, right, like not getting their  or other kids vaccinated against measles, etc? Examples include Jessica Biel, Jim Carrey, Kristin Cavallari, Letitia Wright, Robert DeNiro, others. So I'd imagine they're not crazy on Covid vaccines either. So we can expect Meghan to pro Covid vaccine today, but if it's WOKE to discourage other vaccines, she'll switch teams in five seconds.


----------



## jcnc

Chanbal said:


> Yes, they are. Indeed, "_in March, fears of vaccine shortages led to the government temporarily halting exports of a version of the University of Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine known as Covishield, which is produced by the Serum Institute of India (SII), based in Pune." _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> India’s COVID-vaccine woes — by the numbers
> 
> 
> How an explosion of coronavirus cases in India is putting global vaccine supplies at risk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nature.com


I know its OT but I cant help but comment. US banned the export of raw materials used to produce vaccines in countries like India. India is in such a dire state right now their crematoriums are melting from constant use.. 

Many countries including India requested the US govt to pause the patent for the vaccines so they could be produced globally and save more lives. So far US hasnt agreed. The way the global “leaders” have handled the covid situation is unethical at soo many levels, it boils my blood.

I despise celebrities who Re trying to get another click by providing lip service.. every day the situation on the other side of the globe is getting worse and the little help that the western countries are pledging is too little too late IMHO


----------



## zinacef

catlover46 said:


> Wonder what stunt they are going to pull on Thursday to steal the thunder from W&K’s 10th wedding anniversary?


a doctor’s visit for the heavily pregnant one?  A parking lot pap walk a la Kim K?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> Sigh
> They do NOT live in LA/Hollywood. Santa Barbara/Montecito is nothing like them.
> If anything it would be the isolation that might 'get' to Harry. IMO he would fare better where there is more 'action'. Other than riding his electric bike and communing with the rescue hens there isn't much for him to do out in the sticks



Right. At least "back home" if he was at Balmoral or somewhere he'd know he'd be returning to the hustle and bustle of London or planning a trip somewhere. And if he thinks about it, aren't those rescue hens literally TRAPPED in a coop and enclosure? What are he and Meghan going to do about Finding Freedom for their trapped chickens? Meghan has her chickens trapped in a coop and Harry trapped in the dog house. She "rescued" Harry from the BRF to trap him all over again. Pretty soon Harry may feel like the character in Stephen King's "Misery".


----------



## poopsie

b
[QUOTE="Chanbal said:


> He must be terribly bored. Going from the vibrant London to the idyllic Montecito may not help with his mental health issues.



Especially with the covid shut downs. Not that there is that much to do around there in the best of times, IMO. Once you get north of Ventura the activities/amenities get pretty limited, unless you want to hang with the college crowd in Goleta/Isla Vista or the tourists in Solvang. It is the gateway to that long and isolated stretch of coastal central California.


----------



## Hermes Zen

poopsie said:


> Especially with the covid shut downs. Not that there is that much to do around there in the best of times, IMO. Once you get north of Ventura the activities/amenities get pretty limited, unless you want to hang with the college crowd in Goleta/Isla Vista or the tourists in Solvang. It is the gateway to that long and isolated stretch of coastal central California.


Hmmm come to think of it, the college crowd in Goleta may be what H wants since he's such a partier before M.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jcnc said:


> I know its OT but I cant help but comment. US banned the export of raw materials used to produce vaccines in countries like India. India is in such a dire state right now their crematoriums are melting from constant use..
> 
> Many countries including India requested the US govt to pause the patent for the vaccines so they could be produced globally and save more lives. So far US hasnt agreed. The way the global “leaders” have handled the covid situation is unethical at soo many levels, it boils my blood.
> 
> I despise celebrities who Re trying to get another click by providing lip service.. every day the situation on the other side of the globe is getting worse and the little help that the western countries are pledging is too little too late IMHO



You beat me to it. This goes far beyond "We need to get vaccinated before we can help others". It's scandalous and gross and also very short-sighted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Pretty soon Harry may feel like the character in Stephen King's "Misery".



As you might have been able to tell from previous posts I don't share the opinion he's happy and loves his life with Meghan. I really think by now he must have doubts at least occasionally if he has two brain cells left, but chooses to see the situation through rose-tinted spectacles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I respect what Lady C does, but man those videos are too long.



OMG yes. I find her entertaining, but I usually watch her videos in 10 to 15 mins segments because apparently I have short attention span.


----------



## poopsie

Hermes Zen said:


> Hmmm come to think of it, the college crowd in Goleta may be what H wants since he's such a partier before M.



Well he's going to have to wait as I doubt that UCSB is having in person classes at this time.
Assuming he could evade his wife's clutches, of course


----------



## Lodpah

I will not be watching. I have a mind of my own, can research what’s best for me. I’m vaccinated already and don’t need a bunch of stupid and out of touch people to entertain me about vaccines.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> He must be terribly bored. Going from the vibrant London to the idyllic Montecito may not help with his mental health issues.


I’m sure his heavily pregnant wife is keeping him busy eating roast chicken.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As you might have been able to tell from previous posts I don't share the opinion he's happy and loves his life with Meghan. I really think by now he must have doubts at least occasionally if he has two brain cells left, but chooses to see the situation through rose-tinted spectacles.


I think sometimes the mask slips and it's apparent he is not happy, but to admit it would mean his family's doubts about his wife were accurate and he is not a man enough to admit this. One more reason he has trapped himself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Many lessons have been learned from the Live Aid scandals — see spoiler.  Call me a skeptic, much of this is just a ‘billionaire/millionaire do-good show’.  The people of India have been struggling for months. The world turned away...again. 

A consciousness-raiser????  I don’t need a lecture from entitled elites. Actions speak louder than words.
Hard pass. 









						‘Vax Live’ Stadium Show and TV Taping Adds David Letterman, Gayle King, Ben Affleck, Sean Penn and More
					

A full complement of actors and TV hosts has been added to the lineup for May 2’s “Vax Live” taping at So-Fi Stadium, for a Global Citizen special that will air on major networks …




					variety.com
				




_A full complement of actors and TV hosts has been added to the lineup for May 2’s “Vax Live” taping at So-Fi Stadium, for a Global Citizen special that will air on major networks and online platforms the following Saturday, May 8.

David Letterman, Gayle King, Ben Affleck, Chrissy Teigen, Jimmy Kimmel, Sean Penn, Nomzamo Mbatha and Olivia Munn are the non-musical additions expected to be appearing in person at the Inglewood stadium for the taping this Sunday.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have also just been announced as Vax Live’s campaign co-chairs and “will be delivering an important global message for vaccine equity during the event.”
*
Also newly added for the vaccination awareness special — appearing remotely with pre-recorded messages — are world leaders and cultural figures including President Joe ***** and First Lady Dr. Jill *****, Vice President *************, President Macron of France, Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada and Prime Minister Plenković of Croatia.

*Selena Gomez was previously revealed as the show’s host.* Also already announced were the show’s musical performers: fresh-off-the-Oscars H.E.R., Jennifer Lopez, J Balvin, Eddie Vedder and Foo Fighters.

The size of the audience for Sunday’s So-Fi Stadium show has not been announced, but Global Citizen has said it will consist of fully vaccinated frontline workers.

As is typical with Global Citizen’s events, *the show is not a telethon per se but designed more as a consciousness-raiser than a fundraiser as far as the viewing audience is concerned. *But also typically for Global Citizen, it is designed to raise money — primarily in advance of the actual airing — through reaching out to corporations to step up in the interest of philanthropy. In this case, the goal is to collect funds to distribute the COVID vaccine to healthcare workers and other frontline personnel who are in the most danger in countries around the world where the jabs now taken for granted in the U.S. are still a precious scarcity.

Global Citizen announced that, with five days still to go until the special is recorded, $11.5 million has already been raised to purchase roughly 2.3 million vaccine doses for health workers. Of that, Cisco donated $5 million, which was matched “by a Swiss Foundation who prefers to remain anonymous.” Additionally, the Analog Devices Foundation contributed $1 million, and the Coca-Cola Foundation has earmarked $500,000 to support the Gavi COVAX AMC.

That’s not nearly the sum of what Global Citizen is asking for. The org says it is asking governments to step up with $19 billion, which is what it says is needed to provide 1.8 billion vaccine doses and treatments to the poorest countries in the world by the end of this year.

“Vax Live” will air at 8 p.m ET May 8 on ABC, CBS, YouTube and iHeartMedia’s radio stations app, with a delayed airing that night on Fox outlets as well._






Spoiler: The Terrible Truth












						Live Aid: The Terrible Truth
					

One night at dinner in late 1985, a friend talked about Ethiopia being in a civil war. Neither I nor anyone else at the table had heard that. It hadn't




					www.spin.com
				



*Live Aid: The Terrible Truth*
*On the 30th anniversary of Live Aid, we're republishing SPIN's 1986 exposé on the so-called "global jukebox" *
Written By SPIN Staff July 13 2015, 2:57 PM ET

EMAIL
SHARE
TWEET
REDDIT
_*One night at dinner in late 1985, a friend talked about Ethiopia being in a civil war. *Neither I nor anyone else at the table had heard that. It hadn’t been covered in the American press. This was just six months after the Live Aid concerts in Philadelphia and London had directly and indirectly raised over $100 million dollars for famine relief in the African nation. The next day I asked my sister Nina, an assistant at _SPIN_ then, to research this, because if the country was at war, it would surely be difficult to move aid around and get it to people who needed it.
In those days we didn’t have the Internet, so research was done by going to the library and trawling through endless spools of microfiche — film of newspaper pages from around the world. That evening she came into my office ashen faced — she had discovered it was clear, and very well evidenced, that this famine, the awful depictions of which had pulled on the world’s heartstrings, was man made, by government planes deliberately napalming rebel farms. 
Every year Ethiopia experiences some degree of drought, the worst ones bringing famine. But the country historically dealt with this. Some years were worse than others. In 1984 the famine that inspired first Band Aid’s “Do They Know It’s Christmas?” and then Live Aid, was very bad and people were dying of starvation. But the cause was less nature than cynical genocide. A fact apparently so easy to discover that an editorial assistant barely out of college did so in a matter of hours at the library. 
I asked Bob Keating, a superb young investigative reporter who had just started working with us, to look into this for a story. The assignment was simple — all this money had been raised, where was it going, was it actually doing good?
He discovered it was not doing good, but, horrifically, unimaginably, the exact opposite. The Ethiopian dictator, Mengistu, until then deadlocked in the war, was using the money the west gave him to buy sophisticated weapons from the Russians, and was now able to efficiently and viciously crush the opposition. Ethiopia, then the third poorest country in the world, suddenly had the largest, best equipped army on the African continent.
By this time we had all seen the pictures and TV footage of Bob Geldof, the figurehead of Live Aid, bear hugging and playfully punching Mengistu in the arm as he literally handed over the funding for this slaughter. It was on TV now alright, but as an endless, relentless reel of heroic Bob Geldof highlights. He drenched himself in the adulation and no one begrudged him it, until our investigation exposed the holocaust that Live Aid’s collected donations had help perpetrate on the Eritrean independence fighters. 
Most damningly, Keating reported that Geldof was warned, repeatedly, from the outset by several relief agencies in the field about Mengistu, who was dismantling tribes, mercilessly conducting resettlement marches on which 100,000 people died, and butchering helpless people. According to Medicins Sans Frontiers, who begged Geldof to not release the money until there was a reliable infrastructure to get it to victims, he simply ignored them, instead famously saying: “I’ll shake hands with the Devil on my left and on my right to get to the people we are meant to help.”
In the course of preparing our story, we tried to interview Geldof, who in the beginning, perhaps expecting more of the same media worship, was apparently willing to talk, but as soon as he and Live Aid realized what we knew and were going to ask him about, he declined. For more than a month we kept calling and faxing requests for his comments. As we were nearing our deadline, we Fedex’ed him written questions and two cassettes, every day for two weeks. Two cassettes because I urged him to record his answers on two machines, send us one cassette and keep the other as a record, so there could be no dispute about quoting him out of context.
He never replied, and our report, in July 1986, shocked the world. That is not an overstatement. It comprehensively exposed the fraudulent use of the charitable money by unmistakably the world’s most brutal dictator, and the naive, hubris-drenched, unwitting complicity of Live Aid and Geldof. 
After the story broke, Geldof lied, claiming we published it to punish him because he wouldn’t grant us an interview. That sounded as ridiculous as it was, and, more crucially, was a pretty thin rebuttal for the serious issues revealed in the article. 
At first our story was met with a terrific backlash. We were vilified by a disbelieving media, who felt we sensationalized the situation in Ethiopia to sell magazines.  Our music industry advertisers pulled their ads. We went on the offensive and I personally did hundreds upon hundreds of interviews, with anyone who would talk to me. Every interview concluded with my saying, “You’re a news organization, look into it yourself!” Many did, and then more, and slowly the tide turned as they began to realize we were right. Live Aid had, through its missteps, exacerbated the already terrible humanitarian crisis.
Eventually, the Wall Street Journal ran an Op-Ed exonerating our reporting and commending us for being brave to uncover the real story, unpopular though it was.
This week, _SPIN_ is republishing the stories that we ran then over a several-month period, starting with the first article today, which is the 30th Anniversary of the concerts in 1985, and continuing with our follow-up investigation published in September ’86, and the publication in the August ’86 issue of a statement Geldof distributed to the media (but not to us), which we then rebuffed, point by point.
Once again, 29 years later from the original publication of these articles, we have asked Bob Geldof to respond.
— Bob Guccione Jr., founder of _SPIN_, July 13, 2015_


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> I listen whist taking my makeup off, and then clean my teeth, and then clean my kitchen - and she's still going  Brave though, she puts it out there


That’s kind of what I do. I do some housecleaning or I do some work on the computer, all the while listening to Lady C talk and talk. But I do like her!


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Wait...wasn’t Harry’s wife supposed to be on maternity leave and not “working” (not that she’s done anything in the last year anyway?)


And miss the chance to bump clutch & PDA on a nationwide (global?) platform? Very sure she will work in some self-reflective glory statement like how they foresaw this issue from the start and have been working on resolving it since forever because they want to Heal The World (copy from MJ but she figures no one will notice).


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I agree with her!



Oh, but H has MM to guide (shove) him and I'm sure he is "adjusting" better to LA than she did to the UK/BRF. 
If she is planning to conquer the Hollywood glitterati, where else could they go? Of course if she really dives into politics, they might have to buy a mansion with bigger bathrooms for the sobbing sessions.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> Interesting how Charles seems to get bypassed in the decision making (according to that article).  It’s “the Queen and Will decided” to not let her have access to the jewels, etc.


Her jewels, his mother. Divorced ex ranks lower in that decision.
So glad H's wife didn't get to pick-n-mix the royal jewelry. Just imagine how much more she would cosplay


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Good point!


----------



## CarryOn2020

No surprise to anyone with brains!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry and Meghan are the only royals who have not seen their ratings change much. Two fifths of Britons like Harry, while half (49%) dislike him, which is similar to in March (45% vs 48%).

Three in ten people (29%) like Meghan while three in five (61%) dislike her – also similar to her previous scores (31% vs 58%).


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> Good point!


OT, but I am so enamoured by your avatar!


----------



## Chanbal

jcnc said:


> I know its OT but I cant help but comment. US banned the export of raw materials used to produce vaccines in countries like India. India is in such a dire state right now their crematoriums are melting from constant use..
> 
> Many countries including India requested the US govt to pause the patent for the vaccines so they could be produced globally and save more lives. So far US hasnt agreed. The way the global “leaders” have handled the covid situation is unethical at soo many levels, it boils my blood.
> 
> I despise celebrities who Re trying to get another click by providing lip service.. every day the situation on the other side of the globe is getting worse and the little help that the western countries are pledging is too little too late IMHO


I have been following the situation in India and, I agree with you, it is shocking. I have no doubt the US will help the fight against COVID worldwide. Bill Gates through his foundation has already committed $1.75 billion dollars to it, this is serious money. The administration of Johnson & Johnson vaccine has been resumed in the US. This vaccine requires a single shot which makes it easier to use in overpopulated countries. So I believe the situation in India will significantly improve in the next few months.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I have been following the situation in India and, I agree with you, it is shocking. I have no doubt the US will help the fight against COVID worldwide. Bill Gates through his foundation has already committed $1.75 billion dollars to it, this is serious money. The administration of Johnson & Johnson vaccine has been resumed in the US. This vaccine requires a single shot which makes it easier to use in overpopulated countries. So I believe the situation in India will significantly improve in the next few months.


Now that H&M have inserted themselves as chairs (lol), India is very much on topic IMO. Clearly H wants his Live Aid moment, repeat Invictus moment. So obvious, so shameless, so immature.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Especially with the covid shut downs. Not that there is that much to do around there in the best of times, IMO. Once you get north of Ventura the activities/amenities get pretty limited, unless you want to hang with the college crowd in Goleta/Isla Vista or the tourists in Solvang. It is the gateway to that long and isolated stretch of coastal central California.


I don't see H interested in a college crowed. Solvang is fun, but after a few visits, there is not much to do there. San Francisco is a lot of fun, but it is still a relatively long drive from Montecito.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now that H&M have inserted themselves as chairs (lol), India is very much on topic IMO. Clearly H wants his Live Aid moment, repeat Invictus moment. So obvious, so shameless, so immature.


Ginger and Cringe provide no help, but collect credit... It's disgusting!


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many lessons have been learned from the Live Aid scandals — see spoiler.  Call me a skeptic, much of this is just a ‘billionaire/millionaire do-good show’.  The people of India have been struggling for months. The world turned away...again.
> 
> A consciousness-raiser????  I don’t need a lecture from entitled elites. Actions speak louder than words.
> Hard pass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Vax Live’ Stadium Show and TV Taping Adds David Letterman, Gayle King, Ben Affleck, Sean Penn and More
> 
> 
> A full complement of actors and TV hosts has been added to the lineup for May 2’s “Vax Live” taping at So-Fi Stadium, for a Global Citizen special that will air on major networks …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _A full complement of actors and TV hosts has been added to the lineup for May 2’s “Vax Live” taping at So-Fi Stadium, for a Global Citizen special that will air on major networks and online platforms the following Saturday, May 8.
> 
> David Letterman, Gayle King, Ben Affleck, Chrissy Teigen, Jimmy Kimmel, Sean Penn, Nomzamo Mbatha and Olivia Munn are the non-musical additions expected to be appearing in person at the Inglewood stadium for the taping this Sunday.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have also just been announced as Vax Live’s campaign co-chairs and “will be delivering an important global message for vaccine equity during the event.”*
> 
> Also newly added for the vaccination awareness special — appearing remotely with pre-recorded messages — are world leaders and cultural figures including President Joe ***** and First Lady Dr. Jill *****, Vice President *************, President Macron of France, Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada and Prime Minister Plenković of Croatia.
> 
> *Selena Gomez was previously revealed as the show’s host.* Also already announced were the show’s musical performers: fresh-off-the-Oscars H.E.R., Jennifer Lopez, J Balvin, Eddie Vedder and Foo Fighters.
> 
> The size of the audience for Sunday’s So-Fi Stadium show has not been announced, but Global Citizen has said it will consist of fully vaccinated frontline workers.
> 
> As is typical with Global Citizen’s events, *the show is not a telethon per se but designed more as a consciousness-raiser than a fundraiser as far as the viewing audience is concerned. *But also typically for Global Citizen, it is designed to raise money — primarily in advance of the actual airing — through reaching out to corporations to step up in the interest of philanthropy. In this case, the goal is to collect funds to distribute the COVID vaccine to healthcare workers and other frontline personnel who are in the most danger in countries around the world where the jabs now taken for granted in the U.S. are still a precious scarcity.
> 
> Global Citizen announced that, with five days still to go until the special is recorded, $11.5 million has already been raised to purchase roughly 2.3 million vaccine doses for health workers. Of that, Cisco donated $5 million, which was matched “by a Swiss Foundation who prefers to remain anonymous.” Additionally, the Analog Devices Foundation contributed $1 million, and the Coca-Cola Foundation has earmarked $500,000 to support the Gavi COVAX AMC.
> 
> That’s not nearly the sum of what Global Citizen is asking for. The org says it is asking governments to step up with $19 billion, which is what it says is needed to provide 1.8 billion vaccine doses and treatments to the poorest countries in the world by the end of this year.
> 
> “Vax Live” will air at 8 p.m ET May 8 on ABC, CBS, YouTube and iHeartMedia’s radio stations app, with a delayed airing that night on Fox outlets as well._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Terrible Truth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Live Aid: The Terrible Truth
> 
> 
> One night at dinner in late 1985, a friend talked about Ethiopia being in a civil war. Neither I nor anyone else at the table had heard that. It hadn't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spin.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Live Aid: The Terrible Truth*
> *On the 30th anniversary of Live Aid, we're republishing SPIN's 1986 exposé on the so-called "global jukebox" *
> Written By SPIN Staff July 13 2015, 2:57 PM ET
> 
> EMAIL
> SHARE
> TWEET
> REDDIT
> _*One night at dinner in late 1985, a friend talked about Ethiopia being in a civil war. *Neither I nor anyone else at the table had heard that. It hadn’t been covered in the American press. This was just six months after the Live Aid concerts in Philadelphia and London had directly and indirectly raised over $100 million dollars for famine relief in the African nation. The next day I asked my sister Nina, an assistant at _SPIN_ then, to research this, because if the country was at war, it would surely be difficult to move aid around and get it to people who needed it.
> In those days we didn’t have the Internet, so research was done by going to the library and trawling through endless spools of microfiche — film of newspaper pages from around the world. That evening she came into my office ashen faced — she had discovered it was clear, and very well evidenced, that this famine, the awful depictions of which had pulled on the world’s heartstrings, was man made, by government planes deliberately napalming rebel farms.
> Every year Ethiopia experiences some degree of drought, the worst ones bringing famine. But the country historically dealt with this. Some years were worse than others. In 1984 the famine that inspired first Band Aid’s “Do They Know It’s Christmas?” and then Live Aid, was very bad and people were dying of starvation. But the cause was less nature than cynical genocide. A fact apparently so easy to discover that an editorial assistant barely out of college did so in a matter of hours at the library.
> I asked Bob Keating, a superb young investigative reporter who had just started working with us, to look into this for a story. The assignment was simple — all this money had been raised, where was it going, was it actually doing good?
> He discovered it was not doing good, but, horrifically, unimaginably, the exact opposite. The Ethiopian dictator, Mengistu, until then deadlocked in the war, was using the money the west gave him to buy sophisticated weapons from the Russians, and was now able to efficiently and viciously crush the opposition. Ethiopia, then the third poorest country in the world, suddenly had the largest, best equipped army on the African continent.
> By this time we had all seen the pictures and TV footage of Bob Geldof, the figurehead of Live Aid, bear hugging and playfully punching Mengistu in the arm as he literally handed over the funding for this slaughter. It was on TV now alright, but as an endless, relentless reel of heroic Bob Geldof highlights. He drenched himself in the adulation and no one begrudged him it, until our investigation exposed the holocaust that Live Aid’s collected donations had help perpetrate on the Eritrean independence fighters.
> Most damningly, Keating reported that Geldof was warned, repeatedly, from the outset by several relief agencies in the field about Mengistu, who was dismantling tribes, mercilessly conducting resettlement marches on which 100,000 people died, and butchering helpless people. According to Medicins Sans Frontiers, who begged Geldof to not release the money until there was a reliable infrastructure to get it to victims, he simply ignored them, instead famously saying: “I’ll shake hands with the Devil on my left and on my right to get to the people we are meant to help.”
> In the course of preparing our story, we tried to interview Geldof, who in the beginning, perhaps expecting more of the same media worship, was apparently willing to talk, but as soon as he and Live Aid realized what we knew and were going to ask him about, he declined. For more than a month we kept calling and faxing requests for his comments. As we were nearing our deadline, we Fedex’ed him written questions and two cassettes, every day for two weeks. Two cassettes because I urged him to record his answers on two machines, send us one cassette and keep the other as a record, so there could be no dispute about quoting him out of context.
> He never replied, and our report, in July 1986, shocked the world. That is not an overstatement. It comprehensively exposed the fraudulent use of the charitable money by unmistakably the world’s most brutal dictator, and the naive, hubris-drenched, unwitting complicity of Live Aid and Geldof.
> After the story broke, Geldof lied, claiming we published it to punish him because he wouldn’t grant us an interview. That sounded as ridiculous as it was, and, more crucially, was a pretty thin rebuttal for the serious issues revealed in the article.
> At first our story was met with a terrific backlash. We were vilified by a disbelieving media, who felt we sensationalized the situation in Ethiopia to sell magazines.  Our music industry advertisers pulled their ads. We went on the offensive and I personally did hundreds upon hundreds of interviews, with anyone who would talk to me. Every interview concluded with my saying, “You’re a news organization, look into it yourself!” Many did, and then more, and slowly the tide turned as they began to realize we were right. Live Aid had, through its missteps, exacerbated the already terrible humanitarian crisis.
> Eventually, the Wall Street Journal ran an Op-Ed exonerating our reporting and commending us for being brave to uncover the real story, unpopular though it was.
> This week, _SPIN_ is republishing the stories that we ran then over a several-month period, starting with the first article today, which is the 30th Anniversary of the concerts in 1985, and continuing with our follow-up investigation published in September ’86, and the publication in the August ’86 issue of a statement Geldof distributed to the media (but not to us), which we then rebuffed, point by point.
> Once again, 29 years later from the original publication of these articles, we have asked Bob Geldof to respond.
> — Bob Guccione Jr., founder of _SPIN_, July 13, 2015_



I haven't had any use for Geldof after he adopted Michael Hutchence's daughter instead of letting the sister and the Hutchence family have Tiger


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I don't see H interested in a college crowed. Solvang is fun, but after a few visits, there is not much to do there. San Francisco is a lot of fun, but it is still a relatively long drive from Montecito.



I don't either, but that was the point.........there isn't a heckuva lot to do there so those were the only options I could come up with


----------



## Hermes Zen

poopsie said:


> Well he's going to have to wait as I doubt that UCSB is having in person classes at this time.
> Assuming he could evade his wife's clutches, of course



True.  Maybe on one of his biking adventures, he could sneak out. He does love to party. I can see him throwing back a shot or join in on a keg party.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I haven't had any use for Geldof after he adopted Michael Hutchence's daughter instead of letting the sister and the Hutchence family have Tiger



Exactly my point. All of these people have feet of clay. When they get on these shows, it tends to go to their heads and they become even more sanctimonious than ever.  At least this is not a fund-raiser, just a consciousness-raiser.  Lectures galore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> True.  Maybe on one of his biking adventures, he could sneak out. He does love to party. I can see him throwing back a shot or join in on a keg party.



Vegas isn’t that far  by jet.  About 1 hour, 10 mins.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Vegas isn’t that far  by jet.  About 1 hour, 10 mins.


Excellent point and we know how much he loved Vegas!!!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly my point. All of these people have feet of clay. When they get on these shows, it tends to go to their heads and they become even more sanctimonious than ever.  At least this is not a fund-raiser, just a consciousness-raiser.  Lectures galore.



All I can say is thank goodness we live in a time where there are hundreds of television choices available. We aren’t limited to watching those half dozen or so channels that signed up for this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Are Ginger and Cringe going to contribute with any funds? Are they going to help to produce more vaccines? Are they sponsoring the developments of better therapeutic approaches to treated Covid? Or is this just one more photo op for them? I wonder how much they pay to SS for these photo-ops...











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
					

The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> I have been following the situation in India and, I agree with you, it is shocking. I have no doubt the US will help the fight against COVID worldwide. Bill Gates through his foundation has already committed $1.75 billion dollars to it, this is serious money. The administration of Johnson & Johnson vaccine has been resumed in the US. This vaccine requires a single shot which makes it easier to use in overpopulated countries. So I believe the situation in India will significantly improve in the next few months.



The Bill gates foundation recommended that Oxford partner with AstraZeneca (ie sell them the rights to manufacture the vaccine) after Oxford had committed to making it open source (ie anyone can have access to the product in order to make it). Pharma companies have been lobbying to keep the patent in effect, because otherwise too many people will make the vaccine and this will cause confusion with all the variants (I don't understand this argument). ***** has refused to lift the patents, same with the UK and the EU. There is no reasoning given.

Given that the US government invested billions of dollars, as did the UK and EU, into vaccine development, I think they have a right to lift the patent for a short time. At the time when people were complaining about vaccine nationalism, the poorer countries had the lowest covid cases and deaths, if they didn't, then I can understand the complaining.

With regard to India specifically, they are not really a poor country, they have some of the worlds wealthiest people (Ambani et al). They had a failure in leadership, they opened up too early and they did so in massive crowds, with religious festivals and political rallies. And I'm pretty sure that the case numbers and deaths have been severely underreported before. The problem right now is not going to be fixed with sending vaccines. They need medical supplies, and for people to stay at home in order to reduce the transmission of the disease.

Right now the western countries (specifically US and UK) are hoarding vaccines unnecessarily. The majority of the population that wants to be vaccinated are near enough done. There is still major hesitancy towards the jab. I work in a medical clinic and only half of my office is vaccinated, and that is unlikely to change (they don't want it). So unless the government is going to force people to be vaccinated, I don't see why we need all those vaccines.

The Vax-live reminds me of Ricky Gervais roasting celebs for being ignorant and sanctimonious.


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Ginger! 










						Prince Harry 'wanted to marry almost every girl he fell in love with'
					

PRINCE HARRY was the ‘opposite' of his brother William in matters of love and romance, a royal biographer has said.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Are Ginger and Cringe going to contribute with any funds? Are they going to help to produce more vaccines? Are they sponsoring the developments of better therapeutic approaches to treated Covid? *Or is this just one more photo op for them?* I wonder how much they pay to SS for these photo-ops...
> 
> View attachment 5067804
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Rhetorical question?    The heavily pregnant one loves photo ops! Everyone wants to see everyone else vaccinated. I also think other countries should step up to the plate to help other countries, but as usual it's the "rotten racist USA" that is expected to donate billions and billions and wipe the snot off everyone else's nose.  One wonders....that with all the wealth in the Middle East, where Rolls Royces get abandoned because they run out of gas and ME royal families rent out the entire Plaza Hotel in NYC for visits, where the EFF is THEIR money to help out with disasters--earthquakes, pandemics, others-- around the world????


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Vegas isn’t that far  by jet.  About 1 hour, 10 mins.



Las Vegas isn’t that far driving either, around four hours or so.


----------



## TC1

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Bill gates foundation recommended that Oxford partner with AstraZeneca (ie sell them the rights to manufacture the vaccine) after Oxford had committed to making it open source (ie anyone can have access to the product in order to make it). Pharma companies have been lobbying to keep the patent in effect, because otherwise too many people will make the vaccine and this will cause confusion with all the variants (I don't understand this argument). ***** has refused to lift the patents, same with the UK and the EU. There is no reasoning given.
> 
> Given that the US government invested billions of dollars, as did the UK and EU, into vaccine development, I think they have a right to lift the patent for a short time. At the time when people were complaining about vaccine nationalism, the poorer countries had the lowest covid cases and deaths, if they didn't, then I can understand the complaining.
> 
> With regard to India specifically, they are not really a poor country, they have some of the worlds wealthiest people (Ambani et al). They had a failure in leadership, they opened up too early and they did so in massive crowds, with religious festivals and political rallies. And I'm pretty sure that the case numbers and deaths have been severely underreported before. The problem right now is not going to be fixed with sending vaccines. They need medical supplies, and for people to stay at home in order to reduce the transmission of the disease.
> 
> Right now the western countries (specifically US and UK) are hoarding vaccines unnecessarily. The majority of the population that wants to be vaccinated are near enough done. There is still major hesitancy towards the jab. I work in a medical clinic and only half of my office is vaccinated, and that is unlikely to change (they don't want it). So unless the government is going to force people to be vaccinated, I don't see why we need all those vaccines.
> 
> The Vax-live reminds me of Ricky Gervais roasting celebs for being ignorant and sanctimonious.



To add, The states didn't approve the AZ vaccine..ever. So sitting on millions of doses is ridiculous. Of course they can donate them. They don't need MM et al to help make that happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Rhetorical question?    The heavily pregnant one loves photo ops! Everyone wants to see everyone else vaccinated. I also think other countries should step up to the plate to help other countries, but as usual it's the "rotten racist USA" that is expected to donate billions and billions and wipe the snot off everyone else's nose.  One wonders....that with all the wealth in the Middle East, where Rolls Royces get abandoned because they run out of gas and ME royal families rent out the entire Plaza Hotel in NYC for visits, where the EFF is THEIR money to help out with disasters--earthquakes, pandemics, others-- around the world????



Here’s a thought that may shock a few -  if money is the issue, how about selling some of those never worn, never seen jewels in the vault? Maybe some of the cars?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Rhetorical question?    The heavily pregnant one loves photo ops! Everyone wants to see everyone else vaccinated. I also think other countries should step up to the plate to help other countries, but as usual it's the "rotten racist USA" that is expected to donate billions and billions and wipe the snot off everyone else's nose.  One wonders....that with all the wealth in the Middle East, where Rolls Royces get abandoned because they run out of gas and ME royal families rent out the entire Plaza Hotel in NYC for visits, where the EFF is THEIR money to help out with disasters--earthquakes, pandemics, others-- around the world????


We are not short of problems here, and I'm so tired of seeing the US criticized for almost everything. One of the reasons I come to this thread is to avoid getting more upset with some of the dirty COVID politics. We had the highest numbers of deaths, imported overpriced broken ventilators, our hospitals were not able to get masks from the usual suppliers...


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Rhetorical question?    The heavily pregnant one loves photo ops! Everyone wants to see everyone else vaccinated. I also think other countries should step up to the plate to help other countries, but as usual it's the "rotten racist USA" that is expected to donate billions and billions and wipe the snot off everyone else's nose.  One wonders....that with all the wealth in the Middle East, where Rolls Royces get abandoned because they run out of gas and ME royal families rent out the entire Plaza Hotel in NYC for visits, where the EFF is THEIR money to help out with disasters--earthquakes, pandemics, others-- around the world????


So agree!

FYI - B*den sent 1.5 million doses of AstraZeneca to us in Canada, because our government let us down in a big way.  So, much appreciated!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a thought that may shock a few -  if money is the issue, how about selling some of those never worn, never seen jewels in the vault? Maybe some of the cars?


Are you thinking about those $1M dollars earrings?


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> Are Ginger and Cringe going to contribute with any funds? Are they going to help to produce more vaccines? Are they sponsoring the developments of better therapeutic approaches to treated Covid? Or is this just one more photo op for them? I wonder how much they pay to SS for these photo-ops...
> 
> View attachment 5067804
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


WTF who are they to tell people to do that?  If you give 3 million $ towards vaccines to the WHO to distribute vaccines blablabla but WTF?  These two loosers telling people what to do when they complained about daddy cutting us off financially, does that even make any sense?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This World Recovery Plan has been in operation since Feb.  Notice whose names are missing.
  Anyone see a member of the BRF? Monaco?



			https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/info/2021/
		

_Who is supporting this campaign?
As of Feb. 23, 2021, the following have lent their support for the campaign:
Artists:
Billie Eilish, Coldplay, Femi Kuti, H.E.R., Hugh Jackman, Idris & Sabrina Elba, Jonas Brothers, Lang Lang, Lars Ulrich, Miley Cyrus, Priyanka Chopra Jonas, Rachel Brosnahan, SuperM, Usher and Yemi Alade. Global Citizen Ambassadors Jill and Olivia Vedder are also supporting.  
Global Leaders
With the support of Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, and World Leaders Emmanuel Macron, President of France; Cyril Ramaphosa, President of the Republic of South Africa; Carlos Alvarado Quesada, President of Costa Rica; Nayib Bukele, President of El Salvador; Ralph Gonsalves, Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Lee Hsien Loong, Prime Minister of Singapore; Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany; Mario Draghi, Prime Minister of Italy;  Frank Bainimarama, Prime Minister of Fiji; Erna Solberg, Prime Minister of Norway;  Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada; António Costa, Prime Minister of Portugal; Andrej Plenković, Prime Minister of Croatia; Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand; Pedro Sánchez, Prime Minister of Spain; Kyriakos Mitsotakis, Prime Minister of the Hellenic Republic; Robert Abela, Prime Minister of the Republic of Malta; Micheál Martin, Taoiseach of Ireland; Alexander De Croo, Prime Minister of Belgium; well as H.E. Amina J. Mohammed, Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations;  Pedro Brolo Vila, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Guatemala; Antony Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate; and the Government of Paraguay.
Campaign Partners
In partnership with Declan Kelly and Teneo, the global CEO advisory firm, a coalition of many of the world's leading companies, including: Citi, Cisco, The Coca-Cola Company, Delta Air Lines, Google, Live Nation, P&G and Verizon will work together to engage the private sector to help achieve the Recovery Plan for the World's policy priorities. Co-chairs Chuck Robbins, Chairman and CEO of Cisco; Hans Vestberg, CEO of Verizon; Ed Bastian, CEO of Delta Air Lines; James Quincey, Chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Company; Marc Pritchard, CBO of P&G; Michael Rapino, CEO of Live Nation; and Jane Fraser, incoming CEO of Citi will lead their respective sectors to step up in-kind and value chain support, and investment for the campaign. Lorraine Twohill, CMO of Google and Mindy Grossman, CEO of WW International will also be supporting leaders of this campaign._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rest easy, they have 2 more ‘opportunities’ to show us who they are:




			https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/info/2021/


----------



## Chanbal

I don't think Ginger's letter to daddy has been shared here.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones questioning Cringe's participation on the upcoming big event...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> For the ones questioning Cringe's participation on the upcoming big event...



Is that a recent photo? The nose looks very different.


----------



## Chanbal

On Page Six today! 

*The British royal family’s Megxit disaster is mostly Prince Harry’s fault for not properly preparing his wife, Meghan Markle, for life as part of the tradition-bound firm, a royal expert says.*

“It’s a combination of Harry and Meghan’s fault, mainly Harry for not explaining it to her properly,” Robert Jobson, author of “Prince Philip’s Century,” told Page Six.

“*He’s not the sharpest guy, but maybe he didn’t want to explain it. It’s hard work being a member of the royal family.* People think it’s not but it is. It’s not glamorous and maybe she didn’t fancy that after at all.”

Jobson didn’t completely absolve the Duchess of Sussex from blame for the couple’s failure to make it in the royal household, since she could have shown more curiosity about what she was getting into.

“*It’s up to you to do your own homework if you want to marry into a prestigious family,*” he said.

Jobson noted that *Markle had little excuse for not knowing how things worked, as the Palace assigned Samantha Cohen, a member of the Queen’s personal team, to help her learn the ins and outs of being a duchess.

Understanding their place in the pecking order, and coming to peace with that, would have prevented the Sussexes from striking out in hopes of finding fortune on their own in Hollywood, he said.*

“*When she saw that she had the little house and William and Kate were the number one couple she probably didn’t understand that and thought, ‘Well we can do better than this and start commercializing the royal family,’* well frankly that’s not acceptable,” he said.

The couple, who now live in Santa Barbara, Calif., have signed a $25 million Spotify deal to produce feel-good podcasts and inked a multiyear deal with Netflix, which will handsomely compensate them for producing documentaries, feature films and, scripted shows

“The British people fund the royal family, it’s our royal family, we expect them to show respect. without the British people, the royal family doesn’t exist.”

Jobson notes that the point of the royal family is centered on “service and helping others. It’s not to do with helping yourself. I’m afraid that’s what’s happened here. I blame Harry really because he knew the story but he wanted his cake and to eat it and you can’t do that.”

The couple announced in January 2020 that they had made the decision to “step back as “senior” members of the royal family, and intended to split their time between the UK and North America and become financially independent.

In February 2021 Buckingham Palace made the split permanent by confirming that the Duke and Duchess would relinquish their royal patronages and would not be returning as working members of the family.

Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, seemingly made the break acrimonious by sitting down for a tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in which the biracial Duchess claimed an unnamed royal had raised concerns over the darkness of their baby Archie’s skin.









						Harry should have better prepared Meghan for royal life, expert says
					

“He’s not the sharpest guy, but maybe he didn’t want to explain it.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Is that a recent photo? The nose looks very different.


Good point, I wonder if he became a client of his wife's plastic surgeon.


----------



## Chanbal

He is certainly not the sharpest guy...

_KATE Middleton worried that Prince Harry hadn't met Meghan Markle's father before the two were married, a royal biographer claims.
"She could not understand why Harry had never met his future father-in-law, nor why Meghan, who Harry assured was The One and 'ticked all his boxes', appeared embarrassed about her family and unwilling to speak about them apart from her mother," she said.









						Kate Middleton worried that Harry hadn't met Meghan's dad before wedding
					

KATE Middleton worried that Prince Harry hadn’t met Meghan Markle’s father before the two were married, a royal biographer claims. The Duchess of Cambridge – thought of as a siste…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_


----------



## jcnc

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The Bill gates foundation recommended that Oxford partner with AstraZeneca (ie sell them the rights to manufacture the vaccine) after Oxford had committed to making it open source (ie anyone can have access to the product in order to make it). Pharma companies have been lobbying to keep the patent in effect, because otherwise too many people will make the vaccine and this will cause confusion with all the variants (I don't understand this argument). ***** has refused to lift the patents, same with the UK and the EU. There is no reasoning given.
> 
> Given that the US government invested billions of dollars, as did the UK and EU, into vaccine development, I think they have a right to lift the patent for a short time. At the time when people were complaining about vaccine nationalism, the poorer countries had the lowest covid cases and deaths, if they didn't, then I can understand the complaining.
> 
> With regard to India specifically, they are not really a poor country, they have some of the worlds wealthiest people (Ambani et al). They had a failure in leadership, they opened up too early and they did so in massive crowds, with religious festivals and political rallies. And I'm pretty sure that the case numbers and deaths have been severely underreported before. The problem right now is not going to be fixed with sending vaccines. They need medical supplies, and for people to stay at home in order to reduce the transmission of the disease.
> 
> Right now the western countries (specifically US and UK) are hoarding vaccines unnecessarily. The majority of the population that wants to be vaccinated are near enough done. There is still major hesitancy towards the jab. I work in a medical clinic and only half of my office is vaccinated, and that is unlikely to change (they don't want it). So unless the government is going to force people to be vaccinated, I don't see why we need all those vaccines.
> 
> The Vax-live reminds me of Ricky Gervais roasting celebs for being ignorant and sanctimonious.




I agree with you that national governments of the countries have the ultimate response towards their people, not foreign powers. But my point remains that this was known (especially in the scientific community ) that the virus will spread like wildfire in most of the poor/ over populated countries. Yet, despite calls, the covid solutions have been very disproportionately nationalist in nature . 

Having some billionaires doesn’t make a country rich. Millions live below poverty live and their definition of poverty is less than $15 income per month. I do agree the Indian Government should have done more but i have seen firsthand the challenges of having longer and stricter lockdowns in a country where a vast majority are daily wagers. India doesn’t have programs like food supplies or unemployment insurance. How the first wave didn’t manage as much destruction amazed the scientists because there was no logical rational for that.. again, in short everyone knew it was about to happen. 

This pandemic is essentially a repeat of the smallpox one in the sense that the richer world got the solution while the poorer countries suffer for much much longer till they were ready to oblige the asian-African countries with the solution (vaccine). Had there been a more global approach, soo many lives could have been saved 

I hope things gets better every day all over the world. But I have serious doubts fluff things like vaxlive will do anything to alleviate the situation.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Her jewels, his mother. Divorced ex ranks lower in that decision.
> So glad H's wife didn't get to pick-n-mix the royal jewelry. Just imagine how much more she would cosplay



Shame most of Diana's actual clothes were sold (for charity - way back when) M could have literally played dress-up


----------



## papertiger

jcnc said:


> I agree with you that national governments of the countries have the ultimate response towards their people, not foreign powers. But my point remains that this was known (especially in the scientific community ) that the virus will spread like wildfire in most of the poor/ over populated countries. Yet, despite calls, the covid solutions have been very disproportionately nationalist in nature .
> 
> Having some billionaires doesn’t make a country rich. Millions live below poverty live and their definition of poverty is less than $15 income per month. I do agree the Indian Government should have done more but i have seen firsthand the challenges of having longer and stricter lockdowns in a country where a vast majority are daily wagers. India doesn’t have programs like food supplies or unemployment insurance. How the first wave didn’t manage as much destruction amazed the scientists because there was no logical rational for that.. again, in short everyone knew it was about to happen.
> 
> This pandemic is essentially a repeat of the smallpox one in the sense that the richer world got the solution while the poorer countries suffer for much much longer till they were ready to oblige the asian-African countries with the solution (vaccine). Had there been a more global approach, soo many lives could have been saved
> 
> I hope things gets better every day all over the world. But I have serious doubts fluff things like vaxlive will do anything to alleviate the situation.



I am for global assistance/cooperation to all nations that need it, this virus knows no borders. 

But, I would like to see some of the Indian/Pakistan multi-millionaires/billionaires, like tech/property developer Gulu Lalvani - (rumoured to date Diana back in the day although it was more cover for Hasnet Khan). Most speak perfect English, Hindi and/or Urdu and have the power and the platforms. The West has a saviour complex IMO, why aren't Indians leading the call? 

This PR stunt really feeds into H&M's delusion that they're   of the Globe (back to Disney) - reminds me of Michael Jackson.

Find an unpopular cause land stick your neck out as a person, like Diana with AIDS and landmines, she changed attitudes and drew attention to things no one else would pick-up.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Find an unpopular cause land stick your neck out as a person, like Diana with AIDS and landmines, she changed attitudes and drew attention to things no one else would pick-up.


But that would require actual work 
And Diana had real people power, unlike Miss Wannabe.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Shame most of Diana's actual clothes were sold (for charity - way back when) M could have literally played dress-up


Quite a nightmare vision: like Norman Bates in his mum's clothes


----------



## needlv

Well if you want to go back in time and have a read of some of Harry’s stunts ... here you go.  Harry was not a catch.  The other ladies I. Aristo circles knew this and steered clear...









						Diana, 'Uncle James' Hewitt and the emotional wounds that haunt Harry: Fascinating psychological insight into the forces that shaped the playboy Prince
					

Although Charles and Diana did their best to shield their sons from marital discord, say friends, Harry was highly sensitive to atmosphere, suffering long and exhausting screaming fits that could be calmed only by his brother, writes CHRIS HUTCHINS.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> I haven't had any use for Geldof after he adopted Michael Hutchence's daughter instead of letting the sister and the Hutchence family have Tiger



I might be lacking a big chunk of backstory because I always thought that was a nice thing to do. He had the financial means, he's the father to three siblings she got to grow up with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Poor Ginger!
> View attachment 5067807
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'wanted to marry almost every girl he fell in love with'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY was the ‘opposite' of his brother William in matters of love and romance, a royal biographer has said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



It does sound funny because it's so desperate, but isn't it sad because it's so desperate? That guy is really emotionally damaged, and I stand by my words that like a true predator Tyrannosaurus Megs could smell the open wound from miles away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> “*When she saw that she had the little house and William and Kate were the number one couple she probably didn’t understand that and thought, ‘Well we can do better than this and start commercializing the royal family,’* well frankly that’s not acceptable,” he said.



Just a little reminder: guess whose London base Nottingham Cottage was before they got the grand Kensington apartment? That's right, William's and Kate's. Recollections may vary, but I don't recall Kate complaining about the small house being beneath her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not the sharpest guy...
> 
> _KATE Middleton worried that Prince Harry hadn't met Meghan Markle's father before the two were married, a royal biographer claims.
> "She could not understand why Harry had never met his future father-in-law, nor why Meghan, who Harry assured was The One and 'ticked all his boxes', appeared embarrassed about her family and unwilling to speak about them apart from her mother," she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton worried that Harry hadn't met Meghan's dad before wedding
> 
> 
> KATE Middleton worried that Prince Harry hadn’t met Meghan Markle’s father before the two were married, a royal biographer claims. The Duchess of Cambridge – thought of as a siste…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



The red flags where there for everyone to see. I wonder how the family felt watching Harry rush to his doom, trying to tell themselves maybe it wouldn't be that bad and to give Duchess Disney a chance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Well if you want to go back in time and have a read of some of Harry’s stunts ... here you go.  Harry was not a catch.  The other ladies I. Aristo circles knew this and steered clear...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana, 'Uncle James' Hewitt and the emotional wounds that haunt Harry: Fascinating psychological insight into the forces that shaped the playboy Prince
> 
> 
> Although Charles and Diana did their best to shield their sons from marital discord, say friends, Harry was highly sensitive to atmosphere, suffering long and exhausting screaming fits that could be calmed only by his brother, writes CHRIS HUTCHINS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



IMO The more we learn about Diana, the less likable she is. Same for Harry. 
It sounds like William was the parent in that household. 

_Diana’s one-time lover James Hewitt — who was, as I will reveal next week, a profound early influence on Prince Harry — claims she once told him she would never be able to live with the thought of her sons being sent away to war.

‘She said it wouldn’t be fair to her as a mother,’ he records.

‘I pointed out that all soldiers had mothers. She was silent for a bit, and then said that her sons were special because they were the only men in her life.’_

On Harry:

_There was worse — far worse — to come. In 1998, Harry and his brother had helped arrange a Highgrove party ahead of their father’s 50th birthday.

Guests included the actors Rowan Atkinson, Stephen Fry and Emma Thompson. William and Harry had persuaded them to stage some comedy sketches poking fun at their father along the lines of Atkinson’s Blackadder.

It was not long into the night, however, before a drunken 14-year-old Harry stripped completely naked and ran around the surprised — to put it mildly — distinguished guests. 

‘Charles was visibly shocked,’ remembers a guest.

‘In fact he turned crimson, but he told a group of us later that it was just teenage high spirits and he himself had done much the same. It was the only time in my life that I didn’t believe him.’_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might be lacking a big chunk of backstory because I always thought that was a nice thing to do. He had the financial means, he's the father to three siblings she got to grow up with.


IMO he did it out of spite.
He had no biological right to her. The Hutchence family wanted her and fought to have her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _‘She said it wouldn’t be fair to her as a mother,’ he records._



That sounds like something my mother would say. Forget the actual people being in harm's way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On a lighter note, since we will be subjected to a :consciousness-raising: lecture soon, wonder if H&M will utilize the ‘word salad generators‘ that are readily available on google.

ETA:  removed link to a generator b/c it may be too controversial.  Here’s a sample:
_"Emotional intelligence influences visible timelessness" _
“Each "quote" is generated from a list of words that can be found in xxxx’s  Twitter stream randomly stuck together in a sentence.”   I can generate random ”truths” with a simple click.  So cool


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Quite a nightmare vision: like Norman Bates in his mum's clothes



    



All of you must go away now, I need to do some da*n work!!!!


----------



## ladyglen

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO The more we learn about Diana, the less likable she is


back in the day when Diana came on the scene, I couldn't get enough of her clothes, etc
but once you start reading about her,  it's a totally different picture,  
to be fair C and D were 2 people who should never have got together, but they did,  but her sanctification  at the denigration of PC bothers me, he was no angel either.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry must be so over articles about how dumb he is! Boo hoo!!


----------



## lulilu

lalame said:


> Do you also call people with BDSM fetishes victims? The difference is if it's welcome and accepted by the person receiving it. There's no indication he's not happy with how he's treated by Meghan, no matter how much you or I wouldn't want to be in his place.


Happy or just well trained?



bag-mania said:


> They are "campaign chairs." How much time could that possibly entail, maybe a two minute taped Zoom call at most? Don't worry, we're not going to see any actual effort from them. Meghan is still heavily pregnant after all.


I wonder what size moon bump she will wear?  Or maybe she will just video chat doing a head shot.




Lodpah said:


> I will not be watching. I have a mind of my own, can research what’s best for me. I’m vaccinated already and don’t need a bunch of stupid and out of touch people to entertain me about vaccines.


I don't think people actually watch these telethon shows, do they? 

Re Harry wanting to marry every girl, and why women like Cressida dumped him -- didn't I read that he flatly refused to pay airfare for them to come to England?  They had to pay their own way for the joy of seeing him.  Can you imagine?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I couldn’t even be bothered to watch the Oscars, there is no way I’m turning this thing on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I couldn’t even be bothered to watch the Oscars, there is no way I’m turning this thing on.



I completely missed they were even on, and have yet to look up the winners for best movie, best actor and best actress. Covid's killed my vibe.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I don't see H interested in a college crowed. Solvang is fun, but after a few visits, there is not much to do there. San Francisco is a lot of fun, but it is still a relatively long drive from Montecito.





Clearblueskies said:


> But India is one of the worlds biggest vaccine producers, including for covid.


Agree there is that ...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s an entirely different matter.  And I’m not sure I accept it as *fact*.  He may or may not have been serious about leaving - he certainly enjoyed the polo, the status and the perks of royal life.  *He did not undermine his family however.*





Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes he did, every time he pulled one of his 'not so funny' stunts as an adult: drunken binges and brawls, Nazi uniform, naked parties, using racist slurs. Did I miss anything?


I forgot quite a bit actually. Harry has been undermining his family from Megxit time, by supporting his wife through all her BS: her merchandising, the OW interview and her misinterpretation of service. If he maintains his present course, he will continue to undermine the RF until he renounces his style and his titles for himself and his descendants. Only then will he prove that he really loves and honours his family.

ET correct spelling


----------



## Clearblueskies

Maggie Muggins said:


> I forgot quite a bit actually. Harry has been undermining his family from Megxit time, by supporting his wife through all her BS: her merchandising, the OW interview and her misinterpretation of service. If he maintain his present course, he will continue to undermine the RF until he renounces his style and his titles for himself and his descendants. Only then will he prove that he really loves and honours his family.


You’re quoting me out of context.  My original point was that he started attacking them when Meghan arrived on the scene...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Clearblueskies said:


> You’re quoting me out of context.  My original point was that he started attacking them when Meghan arrived on the scene...


I'm sorry, I should have been more precise; I wasn't trying to contradict you, just adding more proof on how unworthy he has always been.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm sorry, I should have been more precise; I wasn't trying to contradict you, just adding more proof on how unworthy he has always been.



The DM article that @needlv posted confirms his behavior has been an issue since a very young age.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Jobson noted that *Markle had little excuse for not knowing how things worked, as the Palace assigned Samantha Cohen, a member of the Queen’s personal team, to help her learn the ins and outs of being a duchess.*



This!  This is what I was trying to recall.  I knew that I'd read  a year or two ago that the Queen had sent over one of her most trusted people to help MM adapt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ladyglen

CarryOn2020 said:


> The DM article that @needlv posted confirms his behavior has been an issue since a very young age.


ADD?  but doubtful he would be able to survive military with an ADD DX


----------



## marietouchet

You guys are great ... 
in last few posts, an issue of misquoting, it was handled gracefully, like gentlemen LOL 
That is why I like this thread , grace and dignity thank you


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Are Ginger and Cringe going to contribute with any funds? Are they going to help to produce more vaccines? Are they sponsoring the developments of better therapeutic approaches to treated Covid? Or is this just one more photo op for them? I wonder how much they pay to SS for these photo-ops...
> 
> View attachment 5067804
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be 'campaign chairs' at concert
> 
> 
> The event, hosted by star Selena Gomez , will be held virtually at the beginning of May and the Sussexes say will 'restore faith in humanity'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I was wondering about them contributing money too.  You'd think with their high profile, titles and Chair positions, they'd have to give something significant


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Ginger's letter to daddy has been shared here.



that's hilarious


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just a little reminder: guess whose London base Nottingham Cottage was before they got the grand Kensington apartment? That's right, William's and Kate's. Recollections may vary, but I don't recall Kate complaining about the small house being beneath her.


and I imagine that small house wasn't that small compared to how the rest of us live and compared to how Meghan grew up.....just small compared to Will & Kates?


----------



## Chanbal

Amaz*n has paper plates in bulk on sale... Cringe is now consulting an immigration lawyer...










						Prince Harry's diplomatic immunity in US, raised by royal expert
					

PRINCE HARRY's diplomatic immunity in the US could protect him if Meghan Markle ever begins divorce proceedings, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Just posting this DM title because it's hilarious!  Ginger didn't prepare his future wife better for royal life because he "_didn't want to put her off_"  After a visit to the vault?  He is certainly not the sharpest tool in the box!


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> This!  This is what I was trying to recall.  I knew that I'd read  a year or two ago that the Queen had sent over one of her most trusted people to help MM adapt.



Yet another bald faced lie Meghan told Oprah. It wasn't true that no one instructed Meghan on proper protocol, it's that Meghan didn't want to follow it. She had no respect for the institution she was marrying into or for their silly rules and she did what she wanted.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Yet another bald faced lie Meghan told Oprah. It wasn't true that no one instructed Meghan on proper protocol, it's that Meghan didn't want to follow it. She had no respect for the institution she was marrying into or for their silly rules and she did what she wanted.


In a nutshell, yes. She knew best and wasn't going to be told what she should be doing or how to behave.


----------



## Jktgal

Spoiler: Gobbledygook



"Meghan told Oprah: “They were saying they didn’t want him to be a prince or princess ‒ not knowing what the gender would be, which would be different from protocol ‒ and that he wasn’t going to receive security.”

She added: “How does that work? It’s like, ‘No, no, no. Look, because if he’s not going to be a prince, it’s like, OK, well, he needs to be safe, so we’re not saying don’t make him a prince or princess ‒ whatever it’s going to be…'

“But if you’re saying the title is what’s going to attend their protection, we haven’t created this monster machine around us in terms of clickbait and tabloid fodder, you’ve allowed that to happen, which means our son needs to be safe.”



I didn't watch the interview but is this, like, verbatim?? What a waste of education. Edit to add - I changed the quote to spoiler - don't read it if you don't want extra wrinkles on your forehead - thank me later. (Now must add extra serum to own poor forehead).


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> "Meghan told Oprah: “They were saying they didn’t want him to be a prince or princess ‒ not knowing what the gender would be, which would be different from protocol ‒ and that he wasn’t going to receive security.”
> 
> She added: “How does that work? It’s like, ‘No, no, no. Look, because if he’s not going to be a prince, it’s like, OK, well, he needs to be safe, so we’re not saying don’t make him a prince or princess ‒ whatever it’s going to be…'
> 
> “But if you’re saying the title is what’s going to attend their protection, we haven’t created this monster machine around us in terms of clickbait and tabloid fodder, you’ve allowed that to happen, which means our son needs to be safe.”
> 
> I didn't watch the interview but is this, like, verbatim?? What a waste of education.



She had lied her way into a corner and she had to talk gobbledygook to get out of it.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> She had lied her way into a corner and she had to talk gobbledygook to get out of it.


Duchess Gobbledygook...


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yet another bald faced lie Meghan told Oprah. It wasn't true that no one instructed Meghan on proper protocol, it's that Meghan didn't want to follow it. She had no respect for the institution she was marrying into or for their silly rules and she did what she wanted.


so now Oprah is going to interview Elliot Page (formerly ellen).  This is supposed to help trans people but the cynic in me thinks it's for ratings.  trouble is being trans isn't sensensational anymore so I'm not sure how wide an audience this will attract.  I have no problem with Elliot Page but I'm not really that curious about him either (and I don't have Apple TV anyway)


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I was wondering about them contributing money too.  You'd think with their high profile, titles and Chair positions, they'd have to give something significant


Their contribution is probably their faces, names and titles... Like many of us, I gave cash contributions for COVID last year. I plan to give them again this year,  but I do not sponsor photo-ops!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Their contribution is probably their faces, names and titles... Like many of us, I gave cash contributions for COVID last year. I plan to give them again this year,  but I do not sponsor photo-ops!


this show is basically about music as far as the entertainment goes....how many of the people watching (young?) care about H&M?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> and I imagine that small house wasn't that small compared to how the rest of us live and compared to how Meghan grew up.....just small compared to Will & Kates?



It is kind of modest, but also, it was never intented to be their family home (plus, the exile to ugly Frogmore Cottage IMO was a direct reaction to their diva behaviour...what with wanting either an apartment in Windsor Castle or Frogmore HOUSE?). It has 123 square metres or 1324 square feet, two bedrooms, two reception rooms, one bathroom and a small private garden (seeing Kensington's "garden" is a public park, that's kind of a bonus, isn't it ).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Amaz*n has paper plates in bulk on sale... Cringe is now consulting an immigration lawyer...
> View attachment 5068340
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's diplomatic immunity in US, raised by royal expert
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY's diplomatic immunity in the US could protect him if Meghan Markle ever begins divorce proceedings, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Mh. If true, I'm kind of gaining a lot of respect for the master minds back in the palace.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is kind of modest, but also, it was never intented to be their family home (plus, the exile to ugly Frogmore Cottage IMO was a direct reaction to their diva behaviour...what with wanting either an apartment in Windsor Castle or Frogmore HOUSE?). It has 123 square metres or 1324 square feet, two bedrooms, two reception rooms, one bathroom and a small private garden (seeing Kensington's "garden" is a public park, that's kind of a bonus, isn't it ).


one bathroom!   def not worthy of her magnificence


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Just posting this DM title because it's hilarious!  Ginger didn't prepare his future wife better for royal life because he "_didn't want to put her off_"  After a visit to the vault?  *He is certainly not the sharpest tool in the box!*
> 
> View attachment 5068342


HM had several sessions with both boys to prepare them for their future roles, but IMO William listened very carefully, but not so Harry.  If we look at the heirs (firstborn) around the world, Sweden's Princess Estelle, Denmark's Prince Christian and Monaco's Prince Jacques, they are poised and attentive from early on and their behaviour seems different from their siblings and cousins, which indicates that parents and courtiers prepare them from birth to fulfill their future roles. Harry was probably afforded the same training as a spare, but to no avail. I've always suspected that he just couldn't handle it. After reading articles about Harry or just seeing his picture, your quote or this one, "His porchlight is on, but he's not home" comes to mind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.

Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary

Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> ... After reading articles about Harry or just seeing his picture, your quote or this one, *"His porchlight is on, but he's not home" comes to mind.*



It's either stupidity or love, maybe both



*Your lights are on, but you're not home*
Your mind is not your own
Your heart sweats, your body shakes
Another kiss is what it takes
You can't sleep, you can't eat
There's no doubt, you're in deep
Your throat is tight, you can't breathe
Another kiss is all you need
Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough
You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love
*You see the signs, but you can't read*
You're running at a different speed
Your heart beats in double time
Another kiss and you'll be mine, a one track mind
*You can't be saved
Oblivion is all you crave*
If there's some left for you
You don't mind if you do
Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
It's…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> HM had several sessions with both boys to prepare them for their future roles, but IMO William listened very carefully, but not so Harry.  If we look at the heirs (firstborn) around the world, Sweden's Princess Estelle, Denmark's Prince Christian and Monaco's Prince Jacques, they are poised and attentive from early on and their behaviour seems different from their siblings and cousins, which indicates that parents and courtiers prepare them from birth to fulfill their future roles. Harry was probably afforded the same training as a spare, but to no avail. I've always suspected that he just couldn't handle it. After reading articles about Harry or just seeing his picture, your quote or this one, "His porchlight is on, but he's not home" comes to mind.



I'm slightly confused. Are you saying all the young heirs of Europes royal houses act differently from their siblings because they have been prepared from birth, but Harry - a sibling - probably got the same training as William? Isn't this contradictory?


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Shame most of Diana's actual clothes were sold (for charity - way back when) M could have literally played dress-up





xincinsin said:


> Quite a nightmare vision: like Norman Bates in his mum's clothes



*Who wants to chip-in for a ("I would if I could")  'push' present? *


Princess Diana Portrait Doll & Clothes Princess Grace Trunk photo credit we-r-toyz


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is kind of modest, but also, it was never intented to be their family home (plus, the exile to ugly Frogmore Cottage IMO was a direct reaction to their diva behaviour...what with wanting either an apartment in Windsor Castle or Frogmore HOUSE?). It has 123 square metres or 1324 square feet, two bedrooms, two reception rooms, one bathroom and a small private garden (seeing Kensington's "garden" is a public park, that's kind of a bonus, isn't it ).


It's sounds like a lovely cottage, and plenty of room for a couple. I think QE would have upgraded them to a bigger house after the birth of Archie if they had behaved better.


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is kind of modest, but also, it was never intented to be their family home (plus, the exile to ugly Frogmore Cottage IMO was a direct reaction to their diva behaviour...what with wanting either an apartment in Windsor Castle or Frogmore HOUSE?). It has 123 square metres or 1324 square feet, two bedrooms, two reception rooms, *one bathroom *and a small private garden (seeing Kensington's "garden" is a public park, that's kind of a bonus, isn't it ).


The inhumanity!!!

Actually I would not like sharing a bathroom with H either. Ewwwww


----------



## bag-mania

I expect their only part in Sunday's event will be a short pre-recorded message about getting vaccinated. Harry and Meghan don't do live work very often and I doubt that will change. I'll be surprised if they actually go to the concert themselves, although the stadium is only an hour and 40 minutes away so it is definitely doable. It probably depends on how heavily-pregnant she is this weekend. Maybe she can use the smaller Moonbump.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.
> 
> Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary
> 
> Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?


If Charles's has a long life, Kate may need to wait a couple of decades to become a queen. So she could get a princess title now... The paper plate industry will benefit with that.


----------



## poopsie

ladyglen said:


> ADD?  but doubtful he would be able to survive military with an ADD DX



I don't believe for one minute that he endured a 'normal' military experience


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I expect their only part in Sunday's event will be a short pre-recorded message about getting vaccinated. Harry and Meghan don't do live work very often and I doubt that will change. I'll be surprised if they actually go to the concert themselves, although the stadium is only an hour and 40 minutes away so it is definitely doable. It probably depends on how heavily-pregnant she is this weekend. Maybe she can use the smaller Moonbump.


They will want to be there imo. The size of the bump will be according to her choice of attire.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It's either stupidity or love, maybe both
> 
> 
> 
> *Your lights are on, but you're not home*
> Your mind is not your own
> Your heart sweats, your body shakes
> Another kiss is what it takes
> You can't sleep, you can't eat
> There's no doubt, you're in deep
> Your throat is tight, you can't breathe
> Another kiss is all you need
> Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
> It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough
> You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love
> *You see the signs, but you can't read*
> You're running at a different speed
> Your heart beats in double time
> Another kiss and you'll be mine, a one track mind
> *You can't be saved
> Oblivion is all you crave*
> If there's some left for you
> You don't mind if you do
> Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
> It's…



okayyyyy 
BUT IF YOU ARE A REAL FAN OF THE 1980S - you know Palmer stole his videos, suits, stage presence from Bryan Ferry - Palmer had a great voice, good writer but was highly derivative  hmmm anyone we know like that ...
Ferry's Slave to Love was one year before Addicted


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm slightly confused. Are you saying all the young heirs of Europes royal houses act differently from their siblings because they have been prepared from birth, but Harry - a sibling - probably got the same training as William? Isn't this contradictory?


I think the firstborn is treated with more deference from an early age as it is presumed they will ascend the throne someday. However, the spare must be trained to assume power if something happens to the heir, but they have to defer to the firstborn just the same.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They will want to be there imo. The size of the bump will be accordingly to her choice of attire.



Or according to the other pregnant women attending. She would need to have the biggest bump.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I expect their only part in Sunday's event will be a short pre-recorded message about getting vaccinated. Harry and Meghan don't do live work very often and I doubt that will change. I'll be surprised if they actually go to the concert themselves, although the stadium is only an hour and 40 minutes away so it is definitely doable. It probably depends on how heavily-pregnant she is this weekend. Maybe she can use the smaller Moonbump.


Smaller Moonbump makes it easier for her to cling to both it and her husband at the same time.


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> one bathroom!   def not worthy of her magnificence


While William and Kate lived in a small house in Wales when he was a helicopter pilot and had to pay rent but yet you didn’t them hear complain though.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm slightly confused. Are you saying all the young heirs of Europes royal houses act differently from their siblings because they have been prepared from birth, but Harry - a sibling - probably got the same training as William? Isn't this contradictory?


I've read in various sources, Harry was not included in Will's preparatory meetings with QE2, Charles, etc. One source of his resentment toward his brother and his place in the family.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or according to the other pregnant women attending. She would need to have the biggest bump.


Yes, she will be the heaviest pregnant woman in the event!


----------



## poopsie

I guess it will be nice for Stan to get some use out of his multibillion dollar white elephant
Personally, I wish it was still Hollywood Park


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Smaller Moonbump makes it easier for her to cling to both it and her husband at the same time.



Good thinking! The optics would be better if she could maintain constant contact with both Harry and Moonbump.

However, if she wore the bigger one Harry would have a convenient place to put down his beer. It's a dilemma.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> okayyyyy
> BUT IF YOU ARE A REAL FAN OF THE 1980S - you know Palmer stole his videos, suits, stage presence from Bryan Ferry - Palmer had a great voice, good writer but was highly derivative  hmmm anyone we know like that ...
> Ferry's Slave to Love was one year before Addicted



but didn't everyone (pop stars) wear a suit in the '80s (unless they were rock stars)?

This is even better fit, it should be called Harry and Meghan not Johnny and Mary (RP in a tie 6 years earlier in vid).




Lyrics
*Johnny's always runnin' around
Tryin' to find certainty
He needs all the world to confirm
That he ain't lonely
Mary counts the walls
Knows he tires easily
Johnny thinks the world would be right
If it could buy the truth from him*
Mary says, "He changes his mind more than a woman"
But she made her bed
Even when the chance was slim
*Johnny says, "He's willing to learn
When he decides, he's a fool"
Johnny says, "He'll live anywhere
When he earns time to"*
Mary combs her hair
Says, "She should be used to it"
*Mary always hedges her bets
She never knows what to think
She says that he still acts
Like he is bein' discovered
Scared that he'll be caught
Without a second thought
Runnin' around
Johnny feels he's wasting his breath
Tryin' to talk sense to her*
Mary says, "He's lackin' a real
Sense of proportion"
So she combs her hair
Knows he tires easily
Johnny's always runnin' around
Tryin' to find certainty
He needs all the world to confirm
That he ain't lonely
Mary counts the walls
Says, "She should be used to it"
Johnny' s always runnin' around
Runnin' around


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.
> 
> Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary
> 
> Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?



LOL like someone said, is there any China left to break... would love to be a fly on the wall for this one...even with just the news of the possibility, I'm sure Harry's wife is fuming...


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> LOL like someone said, is there any China left to break... would love to be a fly on the wall for this one...even with just the news of the possibility, I'm sure Harry's wife is fuming...


well if she did react that way it would be ridiculous IMO......she is the one who didn't want to do the duties while Kate has done what was required....but of course that's being logical
and I realize even if M had stayed she would not ever be queen.....


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> Once again the couple in Montecito are a little late to the party.
> 
> I'm sure they will try to somehow take credit for this, but after having already read this headline in the New York Times, *"U.S. to Send 60 Million Vaccine Doses Abroad"* I came here to catch up and found the article about the event in early May where they are scheduled to preach to us that this should be done. Guess they will have to amend the script.


Or worse cancel the event! Imagine the  cruelty of depriving those poor celebs of their hard-earned publicity!

maybe I’m being a little cynical



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't watched yet as I was out driving a tiny sparrow (as in, not even fully out of the eggshell!) to a rescue and it took the better part of the afternoon, but I wonder what news on the bump Lady CC could have.



Oh how sweet. I hope it all turns out well. I love watching the birds in the garden.


gracekelly said:


> They are.  She puts on all that jewelry for each one and wants to make sure that we all see it!


I’m surprised and slightly disappointed she doesn’t do a costume change.
She seems to reference Norma Desmond a lot and I can’t help thinking it’s with secret and due reverence to a leisurewear icon.


Chanbal said:


> I agree with her!



Good old caprice. Ladies of London was not as entertaining  without her mix of psychobabble and astute character assassinations. Sounds like she’s got ginge on first shot.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It's sounds like a lovely cottage, and plenty of room for a couple. I think QE would have upgraded them to a bigger house after the birth of Archie if they had behaved better.


When Archie was born they were already residing in Frogmore Cottage, which had just been freshly renovated with Charles shelling out for furniture and the Queen offering art from her personal collection.


----------



## catlover46

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.
> 
> Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary
> 
> Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?


The Sugars would absolutely melt down and I’m here for it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh how sweet. I hope it all turns out well. I love watching the birds in the garden.



The lady I left him with has literally an incubator for baby birds and even had one just a few days older (she also had several handicapped birds roaming free in her living room haha). If he can make it - the people I got him from found him on the street, so he had a hefty fall - she will give him the best start he could ask for in his dire circumstances. I've lost two newly hatched blackbirds and an adult sparrow to my parents' murderous cat already this month (was initially able to rescue them, but they all died overnight at the rescue for various reasons). See, not only the Sussexes rescue birds


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

really???


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Ginger will be lecturing the other participants of the vaccine event on COVID. He has one publication on the subject!  











						Prince Harry: COVID-19 is what we get for messing with 'Mother Nature'
					

"At the end of the day, nature is our life source," the red-headed royal rebel said in a recent interview for WaterBear, a streaming platform dedicated to environmental documentaries.




					nypost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I cannot access the article from the link either, but here's a trick that just worked for me: in the search results, see if you can find the cached version.

*Does Meghan Markle Tip Off The Paparazzi? Photographer Spills Insider Details On Interactions With The Duchess*

By:Aisling O'Connor 

Since Meghan Markle has married into the royal family, the question has been posed about whether or not she tips off the paparazzi for her own personal benefit. 

Photographer *Jesal Parshotam*, who has taken photos of the Duchess of Sussex, other members of the royal family and the likes of the Kardashians, opened up about his experiences with Meghan on the "Hollywood Raw Podcast."
"I'm going to have to say no comment," Parshotam said of whether Meghan tips off photographers. "You boys interpret that as you wish, but I can't say it's a categorical no and I can't say it's a categorical yes."  

The photographer took one of the first pictures of Meghan and Prince Harry when they began dating, which landed his shot on the front page of a national newspaper. "To break such a massive story for me was iconic," he said.
"I photographed Harry across the years, I photographed him with *Chelsy Davy*, three girlfriends ago," Parshotam recalled. "I got the first pictures of him and *Cressida Bonas* as well, the girlfriend before Meghan, but the first picture of Meghan and Harry for me was an iconic picture. I knew that was the woman he was going to marry."   

The early photo of Meghan and Harry is now framed in his living room window. "I have to remind myself that when I go to work in the morning, this is the kind of work I want to do," he said. 

Once Meghan and Harry were officially an item, Parshotam flew to Toronto. "The best set I took of Meghan was her going to a forest, and at the forest, she honestly facilitated, she posed up for us," he recalled. 
Parshotam continued, "She smiled at us, me and the other guys I was working with and we got such a beautiful set of pictures. She talked to us, and at one point, she was telling me, 'Oh where are you from?' I said London. She said you need to stop wearing that trench coat because we're in Toronto, you need to wear a puffer jacket.

"Honestly, it's surreal — it was very different than what I expected. I photographed her there and again, you need to be in these places for the chance to get the two shot. After doing all that work, I photographed Meghan in India, she went for some charity work. I flew [to] Mumbai, and I managed to get her literally arriving at the airport," he added.
Parshotam does not believe he has a relationship with Meghan and Harry, but said he has had positive experiences with them.

"When Meghan talked about the press and Harry talks about the press, in my personal experience, it wasn't like that. Every time I have photographed Meghan, she has laughed, she has said hello, she has smiled. That day in Toronto, she talked about me wearing a better jacket — is that someone who doesn't like the press? The funny thing about that is Meghan has also posed with paparazzi. I have seen images of her standing next to paparazzi," he explained. 

Before she was dating Harry, "Meghan also used to organize set-ups," according to Parshotam. "She would ask an agency, 'I am turning up to a restaurant, event, can you photograph me coming in?'" 
Meanwhile, during her sit-down chat with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan said that the negative press "just because I was breathing" was one of the reasons they stepped back from royal life.


No Link because as I said, I can't access it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> really???




I mean, none of us is surprised at the article's meager relevations (so the photographer basically confirms she does, but beats around he bush, uh oh), but to see it in the US press is kind of interesting.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> True.  Maybe on one of his biking adventures, he could sneak out. He does love to party. I can see him throwing back a shot or join in on a keg party.


This is becoming real life Andy Capp. Wife will probably let security wallop him with the rolling pin. She is heavily pregnant after all.

Poor git must be missing the pub.   


Chanbal said:


> For the ones questioning Cringe's participation on the upcoming big event...



That’s brilliant. Might have to steal that.
Seems there’s a fair few injectable enthusiasts on that guest list so it’s very versatile too.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When Archie was born they were already residing in Frogmore Cottage, which had just been freshly renovated with Charles shelling out for furniture and the Queen offering art from her personal collection.



I'm sure Frogmore Cottage has 4 beds, no?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I don't think Ginger's letter to daddy has been shared here.



It’s almost Molesworth like this. Very good. 


Chanbal said:


> On Page Six today!
> 
> *The British royal family’s Megxit disaster is mostly Prince Harry’s fault for not properly preparing his wife, Meghan Markle, for life as part of the tradition-bound firm, a royal expert says.*
> 
> “It’s a combination of Harry and Meghan’s fault, mainly Harry for not explaining it to her properly,” Robert Jobson, author of “Prince Philip’s Century,” told Page Six.
> 
> “*He’s not the sharpest guy, but maybe he didn’t want to explain it. It’s hard work being a member of the royal family.* People think it’s not but it is. It’s not glamorous and maybe she didn’t fancy that after at all.”
> 
> Jobson didn’t completely absolve the Duchess of Sussex from blame for the couple’s failure to make it in the royal household, since she could have shown more curiosity about what she was getting into.
> 
> “*It’s up to you to do your own homework if you want to marry into a prestigious family,*” he said.
> 
> Jobson noted that *Markle had little excuse for not knowing how things worked, as the Palace assigned Samantha Cohen, a member of the Queen’s personal team, to help her learn the ins and outs of being a duchess.
> 
> Understanding their place in the pecking order, and coming to peace with that, would have prevented the Sussexes from striking out in hopes of finding fortune on their own in Hollywood, he said.*
> 
> “*When she saw that she had the little house and William and Kate were the number one couple she probably didn’t understand that and thought, ‘Well we can do better than this and start commercializing the royal family,’* well frankly that’s not acceptable,” he said.
> 
> The couple, who now live in Santa Barbara, Calif., have signed a $25 million Spotify deal to produce feel-good podcasts and inked a multiyear deal with Netflix, which will handsomely compensate them for producing documentaries, feature films and, scripted shows
> 
> “The British people fund the royal family, it’s our royal family, we expect them to show respect. without the British people, the royal family doesn’t exist.”
> 
> Jobson notes that the point of the royal family is centered on “service and helping others. It’s not to do with helping yourself. I’m afraid that’s what’s happened here. I blame Harry really because he knew the story but he wanted his cake and to eat it and you can’t do that.”
> 
> The couple announced in January 2020 that they had made the decision to “step back as “senior” members of the royal family, and intended to split their time between the UK and North America and become financially independent.
> 
> In February 2021 Buckingham Palace made the split permanent by confirming that the Duke and Duchess would relinquish their royal patronages and would not be returning as working members of the family.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, seemingly made the break acrimonious by sitting down for a tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in which the biracial Duchess claimed an unnamed royal had raised concerns over the darkness of their baby Archie’s skin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry should have better prepared Meghan for royal life, expert says
> 
> 
> “He’s not the sharpest guy, but maybe he didn’t want to explain it.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I think this is way too lenient a view of both of them tbh. As if Harry has ever had to explain anything: there is an entire team of people who articulate and administer his whims into reality. He just gets the cue cards and the credit.

They were going to be carried and coaxed along into doing a perfectly fine performance by their crew they just decided they didn’t want to play their roles if they were only going to be supporting characters and they couldn’t do endorsements mid-play.


----------



## gerryt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is kind of modest, but also, it was never intented to be their family home (plus, the exile to ugly Frogmore Cottage IMO was a direct reaction to their diva behaviour...what with wanting either an apartment in Windsor Castle or Frogmore HOUSE?). It has 123 square metres or 1324 square feet, two bedrooms, two reception rooms, one bathroom and a small private garden (seeing Kensington's "garden" is a public park, that's kind of a bonus, isn't it ).


That’s Nottingham cottage, Harry’s home when he met his wife.  Frogmore cottage has 5 bedrooms, a large garden and had a £2million plus refit to H and Ms specifications, so I doubt it’s shabby!  And I’m sure I read that they were offered a 20 room plus apartment in Kensington similar to W and Ks, but they had to wait for the Gloucesters to move into their new house which was being renovated.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The red flags where there for everyone to see. I wonder how the family felt watching Harry rush to his doom, trying to tell themselves maybe it wouldn't be that bad and to give Duchess Disney a chance.


I think they were just desperate for him to marry. There is evidently a lot of pressure on these royals to settle down and have babies. I also believe they totally bought into the hype of the ‘modern royals’ publicity and were reassured she knew about ‘being in the public eye’. 


papertiger said:


> Shame most of Diana's actual clothes were sold (for charity - way back when) M could have literally played dress-up


M has update alerts for Gianni Versace on eBay and vestaire collective set up - after all they still have to be somewhere in the world.   


xincinsin said:


> Quite a nightmare vision: like Norman Bates in his mum's clothes


I don’t think she’ll ever get to that level of style. Certainly not as well-fitted or as good a wig ( though she’s clearly stolen Ma bates’ hairstyle )


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When Archie was born they were already residing in Frogmore Cottage, which had just been freshly renovated with Charles shelling out for furniture and the Queen offering art from her personal collection.


Can you imagine going from priceless fine art to West Elm bird's nest prints? 


(something tells me that the art at FC was bolted to the wall with presure sensitive security pads to prevent 'borrowing')


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When Archie was born they were already residing in Frogmore Cottage, which had just been freshly renovated with Charles shelling out for furniture and the Queen offering art from her personal collection.


They moved to Frogmore because they were too impatient to move out of their small London cottage. If they had waited, they would likely have gotten a bigger residence in London after Archie's birth. However, all this is irrelevant, because it's becoming obvious that MM wanted to move to California.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I'm sure Frogmore Cottage has 4 beds, no?


And how many toilets? That seems very important.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> so now Oprah is going to interview Elliot Page (formerly ellen).  This is supposed to help trans people but the cynic in me thinks it's for ratings.  trouble is being trans isn't sensensational anymore so I'm not sure how wide an audience this will attract.  I have no problem with Elliot Page but I'm not really that curious about him either (and I don't have Apple TV anyway)


For some reason I thought you meant Ellen de generes then and I had this image of the entire interview being a standoff of trying to force the other to admit to being fake nice (which I would certainly watch.)


bag-mania said:


> I expect their only part in Sunday's event will be a short pre-recorded message about getting vaccinated. Harry and Meghan don't do live work very often and I doubt that will change. I'll be surprised if they actually go to the concert themselves, although the stadium is only an hour and 40 minutes away so it is definitely doable. It probably depends on how heavily-pregnant she is this weekend. Maybe she can use the smaller Moonbump.


I personally want them to have some sort of mime or interpretive dance going on during their message to give us some entertainment. Perhaps a clown troop would be most appropriate.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> The lady I left him with has literally an incubator for baby birds and even had one just a few days older (she also had several handicapped birds roaming free in her living room haha). If he can make it - the people I got him from found him on the street, so he had a hefty fall - she will give him the best start he could ask for in his dire circumstances. I've lost two newly hatched blackbirds and an adult sparrow to my parents' murderous cat already this month (was initially able to rescue them, but they all died overnight at the rescue for various reasons). See, not only the Sussexes rescue birds


Fingers crossed. You haven’t publicised a terrible pun name for your rescue area so it doesn’t count, sorry.


----------



## gerryt

Chanbal said:


> They moved to Frogmore because they were too impatient to move out of their small London cottage. If they had waited, they would likely have gotten a bigger residence in London after Archie's birth. However, all this is irrelevant, because it's becoming obvious that MM wanted to move to California.


True!  and if you google interior of Frogmore cottage you can definitely see Meghans influence in the interior design.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

gerryt said:


> True!  and if you google interior of Frogmore cottage you can definitely see Meghans influence in the interior design.


There aren't any photos of the interior of Frogmore Cottage online.


----------



## gerryt

Sharont2305 said:


> There aren't any photos of the interior of Frogmore Cottage online.


Ive just been looking at them!  Admittedly some of the photos say Frogmore cottage are clearly of Frogmore House, they are very formal, but you can see the rustic ones which look more like a beach type cottage than one in the middle of Windsor.  Very nice actually.  I might have searched via Safari images rather than google if that makes a difference (not very technical)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gerryt said:


> That’s Nottingham cottage, Harry’s home when he met his wife.  Frogmore cottage has 5 bedrooms, a large garden and had a £2million plus refit to H and Ms specifications, so I doubt it’s shabby!  And I’m sure I read that they were offered a 20 room plus apartment in Kensington similar to W and Ks, but they had to wait for the Gloucesters to move into their new house which was being renovated.


Yes, I'm well aware. Someone said Nottingham Cottage was probably only small in comparison to Kate's and William's apartment, and that was my answer...that it's a modest home with only one bathroom but a private garden. The Frogmore bit was in there as extra opinion, because she didn't like that one also. Also, Frogmore is on the Windsor estate, not at Kensington Palace


----------



## gerryt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, I'm well aware. Someone said Nottingham Cottage was probably only small in comparison to Kate's and William's apartment, and that was my answer...that it's a modest home with only one bathroom but a private garden. The Frogmore bit was in there as extra opinion, because she didn't like that one also. Also, Frogmore is on the Windsor estate, not at Kensington Palace


Sorry, didn’t mean to question!  Just my four pennorth!  I’m sure I read that W and K lived at Nottingham with George before they moved into their apartment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'm sure Frogmore Cottage has 4 beds, no?


I don't know. I think the post I was replying to said something along the lines of the Queen would have given them a better home than Nottingham Cottage once they'd started a family, so I pointed out that when Archie was born they had already been upgraded - not to their liking, but upgraded. I didn't look up Frogmore specifics because that house really doesn't speak to me haha. Now, if someone gave it to me for free and said "Here's 3 millions to remodel and furnish" I'd be all over it, but it's definitely nothing I look at and swoon haha.


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I cannot access the article from the link either, but here's a trick that just worked for me: in the search results, see if you can find the cached version.
> 
> *Does Meghan Markle Tip Off The Paparazzi? Photographer Spills Insider Details On Interactions With The Duchess*
> 
> By:Aisling O'Connor
> 
> Since Meghan Markle has married into the royal family, the question has been posed about whether or not she tips off the paparazzi for her own personal benefit.
> 
> Photographer *Jesal Parshotam*, who has taken photos of the Duchess of Sussex, other members of the royal family and the likes of the Kardashians, opened up about his experiences with Meghan on the "Hollywood Raw Podcast."
> "I'm going to have to say no comment," Parshotam said of whether Meghan tips off photographers. "You boys interpret that as you wish, but I can't say it's a categorical no and I can't say it's a categorical yes."
> 
> The photographer took one of the first pictures of Meghan and Prince Harry when they began dating, which landed his shot on the front page of a national newspaper. "To break such a massive story for me was iconic," he said.
> "I photographed Harry across the years, I photographed him with *Chelsy Davy*, three girlfriends ago," Parshotam recalled. "I got the first pictures of him and *Cressida Bonas* as well, the girlfriend before Meghan, but the first picture of Meghan and Harry for me was an iconic picture. I knew that was the woman he was going to marry."
> 
> The early photo of Meghan and Harry is now framed in his living room window. "I have to remind myself that when I go to work in the morning, this is the kind of work I want to do," he said.
> 
> Once Meghan and Harry were officially an item, Parshotam flew to Toronto. "The best set I took of Meghan was her going to a forest, and at the forest, she honestly facilitated, she posed up for us," he recalled.
> Parshotam continued, "She smiled at us, me and the other guys I was working with and we got such a beautiful set of pictures. She talked to us, and at one point, she was telling me, 'Oh where are you from?' I said London. She said you need to stop wearing that trench coat because we're in Toronto, you need to wear a puffer jacket.
> 
> "Honestly, it's surreal — it was very different than what I expected. I photographed her there and again, you need to be in these places for the chance to get the two shot. After doing all that work, I photographed Meghan in India, she went for some charity work. I flew [to] Mumbai, and I managed to get her literally arriving at the airport," he added.
> Parshotam does not believe he has a relationship with Meghan and Harry, but said he has had positive experiences with them.
> 
> "When Meghan talked about the press and Harry talks about the press, in my personal experience, it wasn't like that. Every time I have photographed Meghan, she has laughed, she has said hello, she has smiled. That day in Toronto, she talked about me wearing a better jacket — is that someone who doesn't like the press? The funny thing about that is Meghan has also posed with paparazzi. I have seen images of her standing next to paparazzi," he explained.
> 
> Before she was dating Harry, "Meghan also used to organize set-ups," according to Parshotam. "She would ask an agency, 'I am turning up to a restaurant, event, can you photograph me coming in?'"
> Meanwhile, during her sit-down chat with Oprah Winfrey, Meghan said that the negative press "just because I was breathing" was one of the reasons they stepped back from royal life.
> 
> 
> No Link because as I said, I can't access it.


There's a forest in downtown Toronto?? well I'll be damned. Must be beside the Loblaw's that used to be Maple Leaf Gardens.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gerryt said:


> Sorry, didn’t mean to question!  Just my four pennorth!  I’m sure I read that W and K lived at Nottingham with George before they moved into their apartment.



No worries, I probably worded that weirdly!


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. I think the post I was replying to said something along the lines of the Queen would have given them a better home than Nottingham Cottage once they'd started a family, so I pointed out that when Archie was born they had already been upgraded - not to their liking, but upgraded. I didn't look up Frogmore specifics because that house really doesn't speak to me haha. Now, if someone gave it to me for free and said "Here's 3 millions to remodel and furnish" I'd be all over it, but it's definitely nothing I look at and swoon haha.


For me, the inside is more important than the outside but ONE bathroom???  That would be a deal breaker for me.  I need to go when I need to go!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is this thread wonky for anyone else or is it my irritable internet again? The formatting is all off and makes it hard to read, refreshing doesn't help.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, I'm well aware. Someone said Nottingham Cottage was probably only small in comparison to Kate's and William's apartment, and that was my answer...that it's a modest home with only one bathroom but a private garden. The Frogmore bit was in there as extra opinion, because she didn't like that one also. Also, Frogmore is on the Windsor estate, not at Kensington Palace



They wanted to live in the (Windsor) Castle. QEII said no, here's a nice house for you, H&M said no, we need 16 bathrooms.


----------



## Sharont2305

gerryt said:


> Ive just been looking at them!  Admittedly some of the photos say Frogmore cottage are clearly of Frogmore House, they are very formal, but you can see the rustic ones which look more like a beach type cottage than one in the middle of Windsor.  Very nice actually.  I might have searched via Safari images rather than google if that makes a difference (not very technical)


The rustic ones are of Soho Farmhouse. The designer of those helped with the design of Frogmore Cottage


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Ginger will be lecturing the other participants of the vaccine event on COVID. He has one publication on the subject!
> View attachment 5068514
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 is what we get for messing with 'Mother Nature'
> 
> 
> "At the end of the day, nature is our life source," the red-headed royal rebel said in a recent interview for WaterBear, a streaming platform dedicated to environmental documentaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



tPF word of the day = *Agnotology*











						Agnotology - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



Agnotology is the study of culturally induced ignorance or doubt, particularly the publication of inaccurate or misleading scientific data. It was coined in 1995 by Robert N. Proctor, a Stanford University professor, and linguist Iain Boal.









						The man who studies the spread of ignorance
					

How do people or companies with vested interests spread ignorance and obfuscate knowledge? Georgina Kenyon finds there is a term which defines this phenomenon.




					www.bbc.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> For me, the inside is more important than the outside but ONE bathroom???  That would be a deal breaker for me.  I need to go when I need to go!



I think Nott Cott (the 1 bath residence) is charming from the outside, but I really love brick and quarry stone houses.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> They wanted to live in the (Windsor) Castle. QEII said no, here's a nice house for you, H&M said no, we need 16 bathrooms.


I think the bit she didn't understand is that no one gets to live at Windsor Castle, only the Monarch and family if there's any young children
I hear more plates being thrown over the pond at this latest release


----------



## gerryt

Sharont2305 said:


> The rustic ones are of Soho Farmhouse. The designer of those helped with the design of Frogmore Cottage


Aw, I’m disappointed now!  I really liked those and they seemed similar to the sort of thing going on in the background of the H and M video in Montecito.  Unless that’s not their house either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

In response to royal expert Robert Jobson who "_insisted Harry should have better prepared Meghan for being a royal_", Ms Levin tweeted: "_Harry told me he went into great detail about the restrictions and obligations_." 

Easy to explain, the student aced the perks of being a royal class but spaced out during the restrictions and obligations class. 









						Meghan Markle warned about royal life by Prince Harry
					

MEGHAN Markle was warned by Prince Harry about royal life, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My take: she was well informed, she just saw the pot of gold dangling in front of her, and in her usual manner she thought she could charm or tantrum her way out of uncomfortable rules.


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> It's either stupidity or love, maybe both
> 
> 
> 
> *Your lights are on, but you're not home*
> Your mind is not your own
> Your heart sweats, your body shakes
> Another kiss is what it takes
> You can't sleep, you can't eat
> There's no doubt, you're in deep
> Your throat is tight, you can't breathe
> Another kiss is all you need
> Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
> It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough
> You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love
> *You see the signs, but you can't read*
> You're running at a different speed
> Your heart beats in double time
> Another kiss and you'll be mine, a one track mind
> *You can't be saved
> Oblivion is all you crave*
> If there's some left for you
> You don't mind if you do
> Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah
> It's…



LOVE this song and video!  Takes me BACK!  Cant' stop moving now. Thanks!!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the bit she didn't understand is that no one gets to live at Windsor Castle, only the Monarch and family if there's any young children
> *I hear more plates being thrown over the pond at this latest release*



No worries! @gracekelly informed us that they are now using paper plates.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> LOVE this song and video!  Takes me BACK!  Cant' stop moving now. Thanks!!



My WHOLE look for tomorrow! (models not RP)


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Ginger will be lecturing the other participants of the vaccine event on COVID. He has one publication on the subject!
> View attachment 5068514
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 is what we get for messing with 'Mother Nature'
> 
> 
> "At the end of the day, nature is our life source," the red-headed royal rebel said in a recent interview for WaterBear, a streaming platform dedicated to environmental documentaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I’m pacing back and forth to figure out what he’s saying. 

Oh Harry, whoever is giving words to say are making fun of you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also: negative articles about Harry are popping up here and there. Not too overwhelming yet, but...do we witness the start of a PR campaign against him, so she can discard of him easily later and put all the blame on him? I might be getting ahead of myself, but...dunno. Just a hunch.


----------



## gerryt

There’s something in the UK papers about the Queen possibly granting Kate the title of Princess in recognition of their tenth wedding anniversary tomorrow, because she made Philip a Prince on their tenth anniversary.  Not sure whether things happen quite that neatly, but if so would love to be a fly on the wall when Meghan hears!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> My WHOLE look for tomorrow! (models not RP)



Glad to know someone else loves this classic look! 








						Where Are They Now: "Addicted to Love" Robert Palmer Girls
					

Have you wondered what happened to the Robert Palmer girls from the Addicted to Love video? We take a look at what they have been doing these last 30 years.




					inthe1980s.com
				




ETA:  they are still friends  
_I still can’t watch it. But I’m proud of it now. I’m really proud that I did it.  I’m proud of all the other girls I did it with.  They are all fantastic girls.  I get on with them very well and we are still in contact.
JULIA BOLINO_


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Ginger will be lecturing the other participants of the vaccine event on COVID. He has one publication on the subject!
> View attachment 5068514
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 is what we get for messing with 'Mother Nature'
> 
> 
> "At the end of the day, nature is our life source," the red-headed royal rebel said in a recent interview for WaterBear, a streaming platform dedicated to environmental documentaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



“Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground,” he mused. “What if every single one of us was a raindrop, and if every single one of us cared?”

I can't even. Honestly, why does anyone want to hear what he says on such serious topics? It took Leonardo diCaprio a long time to even start being taken mildly serious for being an environmentalist and he actually put the $ and effort into it. These guys are just making a lot of press for saying whatever comes to mind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I’m pacing back and forth to figure out what he’s saying.
> 
> Oh Harry, whoever is giving words to say are making fun of you.



From the tweet world:

"The mind heals potential experiences"

"The ego is in the midst of infinite excellence"

"Everything is beyond subtle mortality"

"Each of us shapes formless genes"

LOL, earlier today I learned about these “tweet word salad generators”.   Using someone’s random tweets, the generator [a bot] uses the words randomly to form a new thought.  Hilarious.  Deep thoughts


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> *I’m pacing back and forth to figure out what he’s saying.*
> 
> Oh Harry, whoever is giving words to say are making fun of you.



Unless you were pacing with magic mushrooms... can't imagine you were successful.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also: negative articles about Harry are popping up here and there. Not too overwhelming yet, but...do we witness the start of a PR campaign against him, so she can discard of him easily later and put all the blame on him? I might be getting ahead of myself, but...dunno. Just a hunch.



That doesn't make sense though. What is Meghan without Harry? Nothing. She doesn't want to go back to being a nobody. I think she'll cling to him as long as she can. The only thing that would make her let go is if a more important/wealthy man wanted her and that's not likely to happen.


----------



## A1aGypsy

TC1 said:


> There's a forest in downtown Toronto?? well I'll be damned. Must be beside the Loblaw's that used to be Maple Leaf Gardens.



there are a couple!


----------



## zinacef

Uh oh.

Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary

Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?
[/QUOTE]

[/QUOTE]
uh oh,  some more chinet picnic plates be torn, or this calls for some voodoo consultations —— for real!  Or somebody’s gonna lose some hair plugs!  Let’s see what Omid comes up with or GK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> “Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground,” he mused. “What if every single one of us was a raindrop, and if every single one of us cared?”
> 
> I can't even. Honestly, why does anyone want to hear what he says on such serious topics? It took Leonardo diCaprio a long time to even start being taken mildly serious for being an environmentalist and he actually put the $ and effort into it. These guys are just making a lot of press for saying whatever comes to mind.


If I were a rain drop, I would  gather all my fellow rain drops and we would congregate in a bucket and then dump ourselves on  Harry’s head to shut him up.


----------



## gerryt

zinacef said:


> Uh oh.
> 
> Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary
> 
> Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?



[/QUOTE]
uh oh,  some more chinet picnic plates be torn, or this calls for some voodoo consultations —— for real!  Or somebody’s gonna lose some hair plugs!  Let’s see what Omid comes up with or GK.
[/QUOTE]

She hopefully won’t be Queen for a while yet though, so wouldn't it be great!  Maybe the Queen might see it as an opportunity to demonstrate her confidence in W and K.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> I personally want them to have some sort of mime or interpretive dance going on during their message to give us some entertainment. Perhaps a clown troop would be most appropriate.
> 
> jelliedfeels,
> I think a ventriloquist's act would be most suited to Harry and his wife. Even when his mouth moves, it's always her word salad spewing forth. And he sits there like a dummy.
> 
> (With apologies to Edgar Bergen and Charlie McCarthy, a US act from about the 50's to the 70's.)
> 
> edit for formatting


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the bit she didn't understand is that no one gets to live at Windsor Castle, only the Monarch and family if there's any young children
> I hear more plates being thrown over the pond at this latest release



I have a twelve piece place setting, plus platters and bowls set of Royal (making it very appropriate) Daulton china that no one in my family wishes to inherit. Perhaps I should send it south to Montecito and they can get rid of it for me? It should last for a headline or two, maybe less if outstanding pictures of the Cambridge family and their popularity are included.


----------



## youngster

I've been re-watching some of Will and Kate's wedding from 10 years ago.  It really struck me how young and happy Harry looked and with a full head of red hair lol!  He's lost half his hair in the past 10 years.  He looked so cheeky and fun and like he was having a good time too.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Unless you were pacing with magic mushrooms... can't imagine you were successful.


Lol I don’t even think magic mushrooms will help. Not even tripping the light fantastic and to think I read complicated papers all day long . . . it’s above my pay grade to figure this out.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.
> 
> Queen could give Kate a Princess title after anniversary
> 
> Now I don't think it will happen because ultimately she'll be queen anyway, but can you imagine the fury at the other side of the ocean if this ever came to be?


I'll get the popcorn ready. There will be a snowstorm of righteous indignation from H's wife's sock puppets who will claim that it proves racism, and she was not given the honour because she is biracial. 



Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Ginger will be lecturing the other participants of the vaccine event on COVID. He has one publication on the subject!
> View attachment 5068514
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 is what we get for messing with 'Mother Nature'
> 
> 
> "At the end of the day, nature is our life source," the red-headed royal rebel said in a recent interview for WaterBear, a streaming platform dedicated to environmental documentaries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Didn't Jane Goodall say it first? 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, none of us is surprised at the article's meager relevations (so the photographer basically confirms she does, but beats around he bush, uh oh), but to see it in the US press is kind of interesting.


If he doesn't say it outright, he won't get sued. 



jelliedfeels said:


> For some reason I thought you meant Ellen de generes then and I had this image of the entire interview being a standoff of trying to force the other to admit to being fake nice (which I would certainly watch.)


Ellen is amazingly fake. Both OW and EdG mug to the camera.


----------



## rose60610

M&H muscled (whined) their way into being part of this Covid event. My guess their PR team tipped them off, no celebrity contacted them or suggested to the committee to bring them in. The fame whores who demand privacy strong arm their way into publicity any way they can get. I'm waiting for some idiotic word salad utterances that they're going to try to walk back. Any bets on mentions of "raindrops", "Diana", "service is universal", "I know what it's like to suffer", "Archewell accepts donations", or "no one cares as much as we do"?


----------



## Annawakes

She must be really mad W&K released their anniversary photos a day early.  Now she can’t *try* to release a competing photo (it’s always no-competition, IMO!)


----------



## bisousx

Now here’s a tabloid cover I can believe


----------



## bag-mania

We are coming up on the 4,000th page of this thread. Congratulations everyone! We couldn’t have done it without each and every one of you. Yay us!!


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> We are coming up on the 4,000th page of this thread. Congratulations everyone! We couldn’t have done it without each and every one of you. Yay us!!


Also coming up on 60,000 posts!


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> Also coming up on 60,000 posts!



These two inspire strong feelings, I’ll give them that.


----------



## Chanbal

It's difficult not to feel sorry for Ginger after reading this. He has changed so much... 

_Prince Harry__ inherited his mother's £300,000 sapphire ring after her death, Paul Burrell, Princess Diana’s former butler, revealed.

But Prince Harry donated the ring to his brother, Prince William, before his engagement to Kate Middleton in 2010, in honour and memory of their late mother.

Mr Burrell said on the documentary: “Harry said to him: ‘Wouldn’t it be fitting if she had mummy’s ring?’.”

He added: “Then one day that ring will be sat on the throne of England.









						Prince Harry’s ‘selfless act’ for Kate Middleton inspired by Diana - 'One thing he kept'
					

PRINCE HARRY donated a very special gift to Prince William and Kate Middleton.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Icyjade

bisousx said:


> Now here’s a tabloid cover I can believe
> 
> View attachment 5068873



What’s inside? Anyone can share?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> It's difficult not to feel sorry for Ginger after reading this. He has changed so much...
> 
> _Prince Harry__ inherited his mother's £300,000 sapphire ring after her death, Paul Burrell, Princess Diana’s former butler, revealed.
> 
> But Prince Harry donated the ring to his brother, Prince William, before his engagement to Kate Middleton in 2010, in honour and memory of their late mother.
> 
> Mr Burrell said on the documentary: “Harry said to him: ‘Wouldn’t it be fitting if she had mummy’s ring?’.”
> 
> He added: “Then one day that ring will be sat on the throne of England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s ‘selfless act’ for Kate Middleton inspired by Diana - 'One thing he kept'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY donated a very special gift to Prince William and Kate Middleton.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



As much as H has given me/us grief, I am grateful he offered his mother's ring to W to give to K. His actions and what he said touched my heart.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Soon to be 4000 pages?!  Congratulations!! Most of you have been on this thread for years. Thank you to you all.  I've only been on for months and happy I joined this H&M thread.  It's kept me out of some h (the OTHER h) trouble.  hehehe


----------



## CarryOn2020

How perfect that we reach 4,000 pages on W&K’s 10 year anniversary


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> For me, the inside is more important than the outside but ONE bathroom???  That would be a deal breaker for me.  I need to go when I need to go!


Meg enjoys peeing in nature (is Harry implying if we all peed outside we may have prevented Covid?), so the number of bathrooms shouldn’t matter


----------



## Hermes Zen

YIPEEEEE !!  Page 4000!   CONGRATULATIONS!


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> YIPEEEEE !!  Page 4000!   CONGRATULATIONS!


Now I’m embarrassed that the post starting the 4000th page was about pee


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Now I’m embarrassed that the post starting the 4000th page was about pee


It's okay purseinsanity!  We are talking about M after all.    Thanks for being the first to post on 4000.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly not the sharpest guy...
> 
> _KATE Middleton worried that Prince Harry hadn't met Meghan Markle's father before the two were married, a royal biographer claims.
> "She could not understand why Harry had never met his future father-in-law, nor why Meghan, who Harry assured was The One and 'ticked all his boxes', appeared embarrassed about her family and unwilling to speak about them apart from her mother," she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton worried that Harry hadn't met Meghan's dad before wedding
> 
> 
> KATE Middleton worried that Prince Harry hadn’t met Meghan Markle’s father before the two were married, a royal biographer claims. The Duchess of Cambridge – thought of as a siste…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


With Kate’s family background, it was unbelievable to her that such a thing could happen. My problem with this was that The Queen didn’t insist upon it.


----------



## Icyjade

purseinsanity said:


> Meg enjoys peeing in nature (is Harry implying if we all peed outside we may have prevented Covid?), so the number of bathrooms shouldn’t matter






purseinsanity said:


> Now I’m embarrassed that the post starting the 4000th page was about pee



It’s quite appropriate imo  

4000!! Wow it’s quite an achievement. Congrats everyone!


----------



## lalame

Didn't they only date for a year too? Everything about it was pretty FAST. I mean it happens all the time for normal people but you would think Harry himself would've wanted to go through that kind of vetting. Even wealthy NORMAL people would want that.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> No worries! @gracekelly informed us that they are now using paper plates.


Phew, I was so worried, thank you for reminding me


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> We are coming up on the 4,000th page of this thread. Congratulations everyone! We couldn’t have done it without each and every one of you. Yay us!!


You mean, we couldn't have done it without Meghan, self serving as per usual


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> It's difficult not to feel sorry for Ginger after reading this. He has changed so much...
> 
> _Prince Harry__ inherited his mother's £300,000 sapphire ring after her death, Paul Burrell, Princess Diana’s former butler, revealed.
> 
> But Prince Harry donated the ring to his brother, Prince William, before his engagement to Kate Middleton in 2010, in honour and memory of their late mother.
> 
> Mr Burrell said on the documentary: “Harry said to him: ‘Wouldn’t it be fitting if she had mummy’s ring?’.”
> 
> He added: “Then one day that ring will be sat on the throne of England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s ‘selfless act’ for Kate Middleton inspired by Diana - 'One thing he kept'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY donated a very special gift to Prince William and Kate Middleton.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Bet he's regretting it now, or Meghan keeps reminding him to regret it. 
"it should have been mine, it should have been mine" 
Its in safe hands with Catherine.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Didn't they only date for a year too? Everything about it was pretty FAST. I mean it happens all the time for normal people but you would think Harry himself would've wanted to go through that kind of vetting. Even wealthy NORMAL people would want that.


You wouldn’t understand they were ‘In Looovvvveee.’
W suggesting H slow down was the start of their beef wasn’t it?



Chanbal said:


> Just posting this DM title because it's hilarious!  Ginger didn't prepare his future wife better for royal life because he "_didn't want to put her off_"  After a visit to the vault?  He is certainly not the sharpest tool in the box!
> 
> View attachment 5068342


Is being a royal even that hard a job? You’ve got to go to events and be nice to people and represent the ‘firm’ and do some charity work. It sounds a bit like being a headhunter or a sales manager without the quotas. Admittedly I’m sure it’s tiring and it’s  not for more introverted people but there are billions of people who do something similar but a royal doesn’t even have to do their own paperwork or meet a target.  Willy Loman would marry Haz in a second. 
I just roll my eyes when idiots like Welby and H act like being a royal is some sort of extreme torture when it’s the definition of a privileged life. 





bisousx said:


> Now here’s a tabloid cover I can believe
> 
> View attachment 5068873


Oh that must be from one of those US tabloids that don’t exist yes?


----------



## V0N1B2

TC1 said:


> There's a forest in downtown Toronto?? well I'll be damned. Must be beside the Loblaw's that used to be Maple Leaf Gardens.


Bridal Path, daahhling. 
I'm pretty sure her sugars will tell you she was moving in pretty high-falutin' circles when she was the star of the top-rated TV drama making a mil an episode. Pretty sure she bought a house with its _own forest_. (sarcasm, dolls)
The title of that article killed me. "Does MM tip off the paparazzi?"
Does a bear sh!t in the woods?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Lodpah said:


> I’m pacing back and forth to figure out what he’s saying.
> 
> Oh Harry, whoever is giving words to say are making fun of you.


Right? I mean he might as well just say 'my hovercraft is full of eels'. 
It would make about as much sense.


----------



## csshopper

I remember reading that Harry used a special diamond  for his wife's engagement ring and helped in the design of it so it was unique and meaningful. It seemed a romantic thing to have done. Within a year and a half she had it redesigned with a band of pave diamonds and then a year later a diamond eternity ring turned up on her left hand as well.

I bet at some point the story of Diana's sapphire ring became known and the enhanced redesign of Harry's wife's original engagement ring was the "price" her husband had to pay for having given what might have been "her ring" to Kate. Probably didn't help the jealousy she obviously has towards Kate either.

From an article online at the time:
"The original band was made of gold and the ring was created by Cleave and Company, Court Jewelers and Medalists to Her Majesty the Queen. The trilogy ring boasts a large central diamond flanked on either side by two smaller jewels. The stones were specially selected by the Prince; the central diamond is from Botswana, where the couple previously vacationed together, and the other two diamonds are from his late mother's personal collection."

"The ring is obviously yellow gold because that's [Meghan's] favourite and the main stone itself I sourced from Botswana and the little diamonds either side are from my mother's jewellery collection, to make sure that she's with us on this crazy journey together," Harry said during the couple's first sit-down interview with the BBC, hours after they announced their engagement. It is not known when the Duchess of Sussex made the change, but it is thought it happened during the time she was pictured without it - many fans had thought she was not wearing it because of swelling due to pregnancy.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Bet he's regretting it now, or Meghan keeps reminding him to regret it.
> "it should have been mine, it should have been mine"
> Its in safe hands with Catherine.


Maybe it is one of the conditions of their return.
#1: Apology from HMTQ
#2: Windsor Castle
.
.
#7: Return that ring! It should have been mine!


----------



## V0N1B2

bisousx said:


> Now here’s a tabloid cover I can believe
> 
> View attachment 5068873


I don't know what's more disturbing; Harry's toupee or that picture on the bottom right of Howdy Doody.
Dayum! They did Macaulay dirty with that.

What's this I hear about 4000 pages?
Let's par-tay ladies!


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> I remember reading that Harry used a special diamond  for his wife's engagement ring and helped in the design of it so it was unique and meaningful. It seemed a romantic thing to have done. Within a year and a half she had it redesigned with a band of pave diamonds and then a year later a diamond eternity ring turned up on her left hand as well.


It was actually 13 months after the wedding we saw the change. Archie was born in the May and a month later she was at Trooping the Colour with her newly redesigned engagement ring and new eternity ring. I'll give her a fair pass on the eternity ring though but I was shocked with the engagement ring. I thought you ungrateful cow. The ring was beautiful beforehand, one of my favourite royal engagement rings tbh, despite the wearer of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I remember reading that Harry used a special diamond  for his wife's engagement ring and helped in the design of it so it was unique and meaningful. It seemed a romantic thing to have done. Within a year and a half she had it redesigned with a band of pave diamonds and then a year later a diamond eternity ring turned up on her left hand as well.



As much as I dislike her, I can explain the eternity band: in the UK it's apparently customary that fathers give one to celebrate motherhood. Kate has one too, given to her when George was born. If you look closely at the anniversary pics you can see it in front of her engagement ring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought you ungrateful cow.



Jup. I understand Americans often upgrade or change the setting, but usually for a 10th anniversary or something, not a year after the wedding.



> The ring was beautiful beforehand, one of my favourite royal engagement rings tbh, despite the wearer of it.



I liked the style and I'm also fond of cushion cuts, but always thought it was unbalanced, as in the side stones are too big to be mere accents but too small to make a true three-stone ring.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As much as I dislike her, I can explain the eternity band: in the UK it's apparently customary that fathers give one to celebrate motherhood. Kate has one too, given to her when George was born. If you look closely at the anniversary pics you can see it in front of her engagement ring.


Wait what....I haven’t got one of those. I better get one this time.  I hope I can cite this thread as precedent.    
Mr jellied ‘do I get anything to celebrate fatherhood?’ 
me ‘obviously not. You already hit the jackpot marrying  me!’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Wait what....I haven’t got one of those. I better get one this time.  I hope I can cite this thread as precedent.
> Mr jellied ‘do I get anything to celebrate fatherhood?’
> me ‘obviously not. You already hit the jackpot marrying  me!’



I mean, fatherhood is a whole lot easier to achieve than motherhood if we're being honest. Bring on the gifts, dads.


----------



## RAINDANCE

jelliedfeels said:


> Wait what....I haven’t got one of those.* I better get one this time.* I hope I can cite this thread as precedent.
> Mr jellied ‘do I get anything to celebrate fatherhood?’
> me ‘obviously not. You already hit the jackpot marrying  me!’



Did I miss you/we have another baby arriving soon on this thread ? Congratulations - hope all is going well. 

You _definitely_ need a ring. I said to DH if he wants to do the labour bit, he can too have an expensive gift !


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> Did I miss you/we have another baby arriving soon on this thread ? Congratulations - hope all is going well.
> 
> You _definitely_ need a ring. I said to DH *if he wants to do the labour bit,* he can too have an expensive gift !



and the carrying around for 9 months 'bit'


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Wait what....I haven’t got one of those. I better get one this time.  I hope I can cite this thread as precedent.
> Mr jellied ‘do I get anything to celebrate fatherhood?’
> me ‘obviously not. *You already hit the jackpot marrying  me!’*


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As much as I dislike her, I can explain the eternity band: *in the UK it's apparently customary that fathers give one to celebrate motherhood. *Kate has one too, given to her when George was born. If you look closely at the anniversary pics you can see it in front of her engagement ring.



Correct


----------



## Icyjade

jelliedfeels said:


> Wait what....I haven’t got one of those. I better get one this time. I hope I can cite this thread as precedent.



It’s called “push present” and it’s a thing. I got something for both kids.

As @RAINDANCE said, if DH carries a baby around for 9 months, suffers all the terrible symptoms and then goes through labour, I’ll gladly buy him a present too.


----------



## lazeny

papertiger said:


> and the carrying around for 9 months 'bit'



Carrying the baby for 9 months, laboring & pushing the kid out only to find that the kids look like their Dad. I definitely want another ring for that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

RAINDANCE said:


> Did I miss you/we have another baby arriving soon on this thread ? Congratulations - hope all is going well.
> 
> You _definitely_ need a ring. I said to DH if he wants to do the labour bit, he can too have an expensive gift !


We are already parents but I am currently going to be ‘heavily 
pregnant’ until August all being well.
I do fancy a nice ring.


----------



## Aimee3

jelliedfeels said:


> We are already parents but I am currently going to be ‘heavily
> pregnant’ until August all being well.
> I do fancy a nice ring.


Hop on over to the jewelry forum if you need a bunch of ideas after you peruse all the jewelry websites.    We are full of ideas and suggestions here too since it’s not really OT since Harry’s wife has one!
And lots of healthy next few months to you!


----------



## Chanbal

I'm not excusing him at all, but he was just called at the end to confirm his wife's falsehoods. The way the interview was orchestrated could also be seen as a trap. I hope he has learned his lesson. 

_Prince Harry was 'hurt and angry' over how his wife was treated by the Royal Family and used their Oprah Winfrey interview to 'get it out' - but is now 'regretful and embarrassed', a royal expert has claimed.

Duncan Larcombe, author of Prince Harry: The Inside Story, got to know the Duke of Sussex, 36, during his decade-long stint as a royal editor and described him as 'hot-headed'.
_
'_*Harry was clearly hurt and angry about Meghan's experience with the royals - and used the interview to get it out,' Duncan said. 'But after returning home, I've no doubt he's been feeling embarrassed, regretful and awkward. He's now facing the consequences. I believe he'll regret that interview - and maybe his decision to leave the Royal Family.*_'









						Prince Harry feels 'regretful and embarrassed over Oprah interview'
					

Duncan Larcombe told Closer magazine that Prince Harry, 36, has a tendency to act on impulse and recalled a time when the prince 'flew off the handle' at him in 2008 over Peter Phillips' stag do.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Prince Harry was 'hurt and angry' over how his wife was treated by the Royal Family and used their Oprah Winfrey interview to 'get it out' - but is now 'regretful and embarrassed', a royal expert has claim_



The thing is, he was right there to witness they made a lot of concessions for her and that she was unwilling to fit in, attacked staff and wasted money on frivolities. I can't wrap my head around how he still thinks SHE was wronged.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'll get the popcorn ready. There will be a snowstorm of righteous indignation from H's wife's sock puppets who will claim that it proves racism, and she was not given the honour because she is biracial.
> 
> 
> Didn't Jane Goodall say it first?
> 
> 
> If he doesn't say it outright, he won't get sued.
> 
> 
> Ellen is amazingly fake. Both OW and EdG mug to the camera.


I had heard some time ago that Ellen wanted to give up her TV show.  It wasn't fun for her (in spite of all her dancing around).  But she's still on and also on another show?  guess there is never enough money for these people


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> With Kate’s family background, it was unbelievable to her that such a thing could happen. My problem with this was that The Queen didn’t insist upon it.


even for a "regular" person, I think someone having a huge wedding and not inviting Any family member except for her mother would have seemed odd to the groom's family....but I guess harry was all in so they just shut up and let him have his way


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, he was right there to witness they made a lot of concessions for her and that she was unwilling to fit in, attacked staff and wasted money on frivolities. I can't wrap my head around how he still thinks SHE was wronged.


he was infatuated with her?  under her spell (witchcraft)?  saw everything her way apparently


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I'm not excusing him at all, but he was just called at the end to confirm his wife's falsehoods. The way the interview was orchestrated could also be seen as a trap. I hope he has learned his lesson.
> 
> _Prince Harry was 'hurt and angry' over how his wife was treated by the Royal Family and used their Oprah Winfrey interview to 'get it out' - but is now 'regretful and embarrassed', a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> Duncan Larcombe, author of Prince Harry: The Inside Story, got to know the Duke of Sussex, 36, during his decade-long stint as a royal editor and described him as 'hot-headed'._
> 
> '_*Harry was clearly hurt and angry about Meghan's experience with the royals - and used the interview to get it out,' Duncan said. 'But after returning home, I've no doubt he's been feeling embarrassed, regretful and awkward. He's now facing the consequences. I believe he'll regret that interview - and maybe his decision to leave the Royal Family.*_'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry feels 'regretful and embarrassed over Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Duncan Larcombe told Closer magazine that Prince Harry, 36, has a tendency to act on impulse and recalled a time when the prince 'flew off the handle' at him in 2008 over Peter Phillips' stag do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


well, when he got into how his daddy didn't take his calls and didn't pay for his son's security, that went beyond just sitting there and backing her up


----------



## jelliedfeels

I do love talking about rings. Very happy for this to continue as it is kind of on topic.  So here’s the before and after shots for those who don’t remember the engagement ring:


and here it is with the matching eternity band he got her:


Personally I love the centre stone but I see what @queenofthewrapdress means about the accent stones being a bit small. I am not that into pave and I don’t think it adds anything the engagement ring but I guess it matches that narrow style eternity band which I find very MEH.

Here’s some of the other royal rings:








						25 Royal Engagement Rings We Love
					

From Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle, here is a complete list of our favorite royal engagement rings in recent history.




					www.brides.com
				





I like the queen’s e ring but mixed metals are such a no no for me 
Fergie’s and Zara’s are very *style of the time*
Diana’s is pretty famous now and I do like it.
The actual winner in my book is Camilla. Look at this extra large emerald cut baby- great compensation for marrying Charles


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder which behavior caused such reservations... 

_THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed._
_
*The monarch's staff are said to have told the Duke of Cambridge of their "reservations about some of Meghan's behaviour". *And William reportedly backed a decision, approved by the Queen, to ban the Duchess of Sussex from borrowing jewellery from the Royal Collection.

The Royal Collection includes items previously worn by William and Prince Harry's late mother Princess Diana._









						Royal LIVE: Queen and William teamed up to take on Meghan with ban
					

THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, when he got into how his daddy didn't take his calls and didn't pay for his son's security, that went beyond just sitting there and backing her up


Yes, that was his call. However, I believe he was surprised with the very damaging race and mental health cards. As I said, I'm not excusing him. Hopefully, he has learned his lesson.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, he was right there to witness they made a lot of concessions for her and that she was unwilling to fit in, attacked staff and wasted money on frivolities. I can't wrap my head around how he still thinks SHE was wronged.


Going by how, even during courtship, she was feeding him the tall tale of her being "virtually an orphan" and a pitiful media target, I would bet my last penny that his entire impression of her is composed of layer upon layer of déception and device. For him to reject any lie now would bring the whole house of cards down, and I don't think he has the courage to do that. She has already cut him off from family and friends.


----------



## Icyjade

He’s a grown man isn’t he? So no excuses for his behavior and bad judgement.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> We are coming up on the 4,000th page of this thread. Congratulations everyone! We couldn’t have done it without each and every one of you. Yay us!!



4,000 pages? If we've filled 4,000 pages, then printing Meghan's whining and self-pitying comments could fill the Library of Congress. We are simply observers.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wonder which behavior caused such reservations...
> 
> _THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed._
> _
> *The monarch's staff are said to have told the Duke of Cambridge of their "reservations about some of Meghan's behaviour". *And William reportedly backed a decision, approved by the Queen, to ban the Duchess of Sussex from borrowing jewellery from the Royal Collection.
> 
> The Royal Collection includes items previously worn by William and Prince Harry's late mother Princess Diana._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal LIVE: Queen and William teamed up to take on Meghan with ban
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


She salivated? Maybe immediately enquired as to how many loans she was entitled to and for how long, and were the vault staff really sure that the mighty duchess needed HM's approval?  You know, like when we mère mortals walk into a library


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> well, when he got into how his daddy didn't take his calls and didn't pay for his son's security, that went beyond just sitting there and backing her up



If someone sat next to me and gave their 'recollections' very different to my own (even though I was there) I'm not sure I could keep my mouth shut. I certainly wouldn't fan the fires of hell by bringing-up more ridiculous accusations that made me look completely complicit in my partner's regretful and embarrassing behaviour. 

Both  

No sympathy from me


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I wonder which behavior caused such reservations...
> 
> _THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed._
> 
> _*The monarch's staff are said to have told the Duke of Cambridge of their "reservations about some of Meghan's behaviour". *And William reportedly backed a decision, approved by the Queen, to ban the Duchess of Sussex from borrowing jewellery from the Royal Collection.
> 
> The Royal Collection includes items previously worn by William and Prince Harry's late mother Princess Diana._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal LIVE: Queen and William teamed up to take on Meghan with ban
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I’m surprised they didn’t just blame it on the postage rates to and from Cali because they clearly aren’t going to be seeing her any time soon   

 Its crazy anyone could  even think they could borrow some since they gave up the job after all. That’s like me busting into my old office to get free pens.

Still she’s got her ‘delicate’ gold vermeil from the insta brands to promote so it’s not all bad.


----------



## Sharont2305

Come on Meggy, where are you?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I do love talking about rings. [...]
> The actual winner in my book is Camilla. Look at this extra large emerald cut baby- great compensation for marrying Charles



I think the Queen's and Camilla's are my favourite, too. Seeing both are vintage rings they look remarkably sleek and modern, not aged like Fergie's (I was surprised to see Eugenie went with a very similar style). Alas I am super partial to yellow gold. I know many people dislike setting diamonds that are not fancy coloured in yellow gold, but I love the look. And even worse than mixing metals in wedding set: a yellow gold ring with white / platinum prongs for the stone like done with MM's ring. I'd take a completely white gold / platinum ring over that any day even though I only own yellow and rose gold pieces.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> 4,000 pages? If we've filled 4,000 pages, then printing Meghan's whining and self-pitying comments could fill the Library of Congress. We are simply observers.


Our books would have spicier memes and  pictures  though. Both would definitely be in the ‘obscure things most people have lost interest in’ section though.


sdkitty said:


> he was infatuated with her?  under her spell (witchcraft)?  saw everything her way apparently


Hey! as a proud member of the cackling crone coven I take exception to a tupenny gold-digger like her being compared to us noble witches!   


papertiger said:


> If someone sat next to me and gave their 'recollections' very different to my own (even though I was there) I'm not sure I could keep my mouth shut. I certainly wouldn't fan the fires of hell by bringing-up more ridiculous accusations that made me look completely complicit in my partner's regretful and embarrassing behaviour.
> 
> Both
> 
> No sympathy from me


You hit the nail on the head there!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m surprised they didn’t just blame it on the postage rates to and from Cali because they clearly aren’t going to be seeing her any time soon
> 
> Its crazy anyone could  even think they could borrow some since they gave up the job after all. That’s like me busting into my old office to get free pens.
> 
> Still she’s got her ‘delicate’ gold vermeil from the insta brands to promote so it’s not all bad.



I think that was very shortly after the wedding, so pre-Megxit, though.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. I understand Americans often upgrade or change the setting, but usually for a 10th anniversary or something, *not a year after the wedding.*
> 
> 
> 
> I liked the style and I'm also fond of cushion cuts, but always thought it was unbalanced, as in the side stones are too big to be mere accents but too small to make a true three-stone ring.



Exactly. It was more like a sign that nothing the BRF did could ever be good enough for Meghan. Was she furious that she couldn't pick out her own ring and had to lay down the law to Harry by changing it? I'm surprised she didn't reject the ring at the altar. Or was she just being nice that day?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, that was his call. However, I believe he was surprised with the very damaging race and mental health cards. As I said, I'm not excusing him. Hopefully, he has learned his lesson.


hard to believe he didn't know what she was going to say but I suppose it's possible.....the whole thing was disgusting IMO.  and everyone in the US media believed that these two adults (not young but at an age when they should be mature) weren't capable of getting medical help for her?  Really?  this thrice married 40 year old champion networker couldn't pick up the phone?  had to go to HR and plead for help?  ridiculous


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> I do love talking about rings. Very happy for this to continue as it is kind of on topic.  So here’s the before and after shots for those who don’t remember the engagement ring:
> View attachment 5069214
> 
> and here it is with the matching eternity band he got her:
> View attachment 5069215
> 
> Personally I love the centre stone but I see what @queenofthewrapdress means about the accent stones being a bit small. I am not that into pave and I don’t think it adds anything the engagement ring but I guess it matches that narrow style eternity band which I find very MEH.
> 
> Here’s some of the other royal rings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25 Royal Engagement Rings We Love
> 
> 
> From Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle, here is a complete list of our favorite royal engagement rings in recent history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brides.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5069239
> 
> I like the queen’s e ring but mixed metals are such a no no for me
> Fergie’s and Zara’s are very *style of the time*
> Diana’s is pretty famous now and I do like it.
> The actual winner in my book is Camilla. Look at this extra large emerald cut baby- great compensation for marrying Charles
> View attachment 5069245



Camilla's ring is amazing.  I also really like the Queen's ring.   MM's first ring was much more sturdy and would have stood up well over time.  Her revised ring with that very thin pave band is a pretty, delicate look but it likely won't stand up to years of wear, unless she literally does no work with her hands at all.  Which I could see being the case.    Somebody else is going to have to feed those chickens and clean that coop.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Exactly. It was more like a sign that nothing the BRF did could ever be good enough for Meghan. Was she furious that she couldn't pick out her own ring and had to lay down the law to Harry by changing it? I'm surprised she didn't reject the ring at the altar. Or was she just being nice that day?



I'm even a big supporter of having exactly the ring you want, because you go into it with the plan to wear it every day for the rest of your life. I just think if he really picked awfully (and I know I am so specific with my taste, e.g. I'll bookmark a bracelet I love but would never buy it because I hate the clasp ) say so before showing the ring around. Pulling a stunt like MM won't look good on anyone. But Harry's sensitive so I guess during the proposal she wouldn't have done anything to upset him. With a wedding ring and a new baby she knew he wasn't going anywhere. I'll bet money she claimed she pretended to ADORE that ring when he gave it to her.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> I do love talking about rings. Very happy for this to continue as it is kind of on topic.  So here’s the before and after shots for those who don’t remember the engagement ring:
> View attachment 5069214
> 
> and here it is with the matching eternity band he got her:
> View attachment 5069215
> 
> Personally I love the centre stone but I see what @queenofthewrapdress means about the accent stones being a bit small. I am not that into pave and I don’t think it adds anything the engagement ring but I guess it matches that narrow style eternity band which I find very MEH.
> 
> Here’s some of the other royal rings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25 Royal Engagement Rings We Love
> 
> 
> From Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle, here is a complete list of our favorite royal engagement rings in recent history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brides.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5069239
> 
> I like the queen’s e ring but mixed metals are such a no no for me
> Fergie’s and Zara’s are very *style of the time*
> Diana’s is pretty famous now and I do like it.
> The actual winner in my book is Camilla. Look at this extra large emerald cut baby- great compensation for marrying Charles
> View attachment 5069245


Diana and Kate wore/wear mixed metal too.
Camilla’s ring belonged to The Queen Mother.
Some members of the British Royal Family have used pure Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, since 1923. This tradition was founded by The Queen Mother, then Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, on her marriage to the Duke of York on 26th April, 1923.

Other members of the Royal Family that have had Welsh gold wedding rings include:

• 1923 The Queen Mother's marriage to King George VI
• 1947 Queen Elizabeth II marriage to Prince Phillip
• 1960 Princess Margaret’s marriage
• 1973 Princess Anne's marriage
• 1981 Prince Charles's marriage to Princess Diana
• 2005 Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
• 2011 Prince William's marriage to Catherine Middleton
• 2018 Prince Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's very own wedding ring, from her marriage to The Duke of Edinburgh on 20th November 1947, is crafted from a nugget of pure Welsh gold from the Clogau St. David's gold mine.

The tradition of the British Royal Family using Welsh gold wedding rings was carried into its 95th year during the most recent royal wedding of Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on 19th May, 2018.

Rare Welsh gold is contained within each piece of Clogau jewellery, making it some of the most exclusive jewellery in the world. The content of Welsh gold can be identified by the Welsh dragon stamp, and other unique marks that denote a genuine piece of Clogau.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *I wonder which behavior caused such reservations... *
> 
> _THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed._
> 
> _*The monarch's staff are said to have told the Duke of Cambridge of their "reservations about some of Meghan's behaviour". *And William reportedly backed a decision, approved by the Queen, to ban the Duchess of Sussex from borrowing jewellery from the Royal Collection.
> 
> The Royal Collection includes items previously worn by William and Prince Harry's late mother Princess Diana._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal LIVE: Queen and William teamed up to take on Meghan with ban
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN and Prince William were both so concerned with Meghan Markle during her early time with the Royal Family they teamed up to introduce a ban on her borrowing jewellery, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Maybe she came right in and did some quality checks to see which ones were the best.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think the Queen's and Camilla's are my favourite, too. Seeing both are vintage rings they look remarkably sleek and modern, not aged like Fergie's (I was surprised to see Eugenie went with a very similar style). Alas I am super partial to yellow gold. I know many people dislike setting diamonds that are not fancy coloured in yellow gold, but I love the look. And even worse than mixing metals in wedding set: a yellow gold ring with white / platinum prongs for the stone like done with MM's ring. I'd take a completely white gold / platinum ring over that any day even though I only own yellow and rose gold pieces.


Oh my gosh we have very similar tastes! I prefer Yellow and rose gold too. I don’t get this idea white diamonds always look better in white metal - it depends on the stone.  
I think my ideal royal ring would be Camilla’s but in YG. I do think the queen’s is in best in platinum though. I do think platinum is the best white metal colour but I don’t own any.

Oh no I hadn’t noticed the prongs. It’s not a deal breaker for me compared to 2 different coloured bands (which would drive me crazy)  but it would probably annoy me.

My own wedding set is yellow with sapphire and diamonds but it’s a lot smaller

Poor Eugenie, I don’t like hers at all! But then again I don’t really like pink stones as I think they are a bit little girl.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Or they noticed how she tried to overshadow Kate at any occasion. I can't see her fighting back so maybe they were looking out for her. Who knows, maybe Harry had already put in requests for certain famous pieces (reaching here, but seeing how he acted with Tiaragate everything's possible I guess).


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Diana and Kate wore/wear mixed metal too.
> Camilla’s ring belonged to The Queen Mother.
> Some members of the British Royal Family have used pure Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, since 1923. This tradition was founded by The Queen Mother, then Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, on her marriage to the Duke of York on 26th April, 1923.
> 
> Other members of the Royal Family that have had Welsh gold wedding rings include:
> 
> • 1923 The Queen Mother's marriage to King George VI
> • 1947 Queen Elizabeth II marriage to Prince Phillip
> • 1960 Princess Margaret’s marriage
> • 1973 Princess Anne's marriage
> • 1981 Prince Charles's marriage to Princess Diana
> • 2005 Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
> • 2011 Prince William's marriage to Catherine Middleton
> • 2018 Prince Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle
> Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's very own wedding ring, from her marriage to The Duke of Edinburgh on 20th November 1947, is crafted from a nugget of pure Welsh gold from the Clogau St. David's gold mine.
> 
> The tradition of the British Royal Family using Welsh gold wedding rings was carried into its 95th year during the most recent royal wedding of Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on 19th May, 2018.
> 
> Rare Welsh gold is contained within each piece of Clogau jewellery, making it some of the most exclusive jewellery in the world. The content of Welsh gold can be identified by the Welsh dragon stamp, and other unique marks that denote a genuine piece of Clogau.


Yeah I heard about Welsh clogau and it’s interesting but I personally just couldn’t stand it. I don’t know whether the goldsmiths would be against it but I’d want a white gold band if I had a platinum or WG e-ring.
Luckily the royals haven’t been battering my door down with proposals I abandon Mr Jellied and the little jellies to become a princess so I don’t think it’ll ever come up


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> Camilla's ring is amazing.  I also really like the Queen's ring.   MM's first ring was much more sturdy and would have stood up well over time.  Her revised ring with that very thin pave band is a pretty, delicate look but it likely won't stand up to years of wear, unless she literally does no work with her hands at all.  Which I could see being the case.    Somebody else is going to have to feed those chickens and clean that coop.


Haha yes while I agree that the little bitty pave bands don’t look built to last... I don’t think there’s much danger of her wearing her ring away with hard work. There’s a good chance it’ll last the marriage


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> I do love talking about rings. Very happy for this to continue as it is kind of on topic.  So here’s the before and after shots for those who don’t remember the engagement ring:
> View attachment 5069214
> 
> and here it is with the matching eternity band he got her:
> View attachment 5069215
> 
> Personally I love the centre stone but I see what @queenofthewrapdress means about the accent stones being a bit small. I am not that into pave and I don’t think it adds anything the engagement ring but I guess it matches that narrow style eternity band which I find very MEH.
> 
> Here’s some of the other royal rings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25 Royal Engagement Rings We Love
> 
> 
> From Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle, here is a complete list of our favorite royal engagement rings in recent history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brides.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5069239
> 
> I like the queen’s e ring but mixed metals are such a no no for me
> Fergie’s and Zara’s are very *style of the time*
> Diana’s is pretty famous now and I do like it.
> The actual winner in my book is Camilla. Look at this extra large emerald cut baby- great compensation for marrying Charles
> View attachment 5069245


My vote goes to QE. I love antique and vintage jewellery.  I agree that those two rings don't look particularly pretty together. I have all kinds of rings, but I normally don't mix rings of different gold tones  unless the ring is made out of several different tones.
IMO Meagain's eternity ring too thin to my liking. I like delicate things especially on delicate hands, but her hand and fingers are anything but delicate so a bigger bling would look better on her. Maybe JCMH couldn't afford a bigger one.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or they noticed how she tried to overshadow Kate at any occasion. I can't see her fighting back so maybe they were looking out for her. Who knows, maybe Harry had already put in requests for certain famous pieces (reaching here, but seeing how he acted with Tiaragate everything's possible I guess).



Harry would be totally oblivious to the jewelry unless she was pushing for it. She certainly wheedled him to get involved to try to get her the pieces she wanted. We know that is what happened with the tiara she decided she had to have.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm even a big supporter of having exactly the ring you want, because you go into it with the plan to wear it every day for the rest of your life. I just think if he really picked awfully (and I know I am so specific with my taste, e.g. I'll bookmark a bracelet I love but would never buy it because I hate the clasp ) say so before showing the ring around. Pulling a stunt like MM won't look good on anyone. But Harry's sensitive so I guess during the proposal she wouldn't have done anything to upset him. With a wedding ring and a new baby she knew he wasn't going anywhere. I'll bet money she claimed she pretended to ADORE that ring when he gave it to her.


I’m sure she would not be the first woman in the world to pretend she likes her engagement ring and then, in good time, either ‘lose’ it or suggest an upgrade. Discretion is the nobler part of valour. Not that any of that’s particularly relevant for M.
She would definitely not throw away months of pretending to be humble and down to earth by revealing she didn’t think the carat weight was big enough. Wait till he’s signed on the dotted line of course. 

I actually had no idea what I wanted when I met my OH and wasn’t much help hinting. My tastes have...developed since then. Thank you TPF and Liz Taylor


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How to write an account of miscarriage that doesn't irritate people.

The Flavors of my Grief

(also I have all of her books, but the grief-stricken one is somehow her best)


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Harry would be totally oblivious to the jewelry unless she was pushing for it. She certainly wheedled him to get involved to try to get her the pieces she wanted. We know that is what happened with the tiara she decided she had to have.



I'd like to know how she knew all the pieces (to ask for) or why/how the subject was raised? I've never asked to borrow my MIL's jewellery or family heirlooms. Never even thought about it. If I was offered - a different matter.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How to write an account of miscarriage that doesn't irritate people.
> 
> The Flavors of my Grief
> 
> (also I have all of her books, but the grief-stricken one is somehow her best)


Wow, that’s a sad but amazing essay.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I'd like to know how she knew all the pieces (to ask for) or why/how the subject was raised? I've never asked to borrow my MIL's jewellery or family heirlooms. Never even thought about it. If I was offered - a different matter.


Despite never googling the man she was intent on marrying, she was not averse to perusing the Tiarapedia (very entertaining reading I assure you).





						The Tiarapedia
					

The Vladimir Tiara, currently owned by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom (Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images) The Tiarapedia   Accept no substitutes -- the Tiarapedia, the original online encyclopedia of tiaras, is back!   Whether




					www.thecourtjeweller.com


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> hard to believe he didn't know what she was going to say but I suppose it's possible.....the whole thing was disgusting IMO.  and everyone in the US media believed that these two adults (not young but at an age when they should be mature) weren't capable of getting medical help for her?  Really?  this thrice married 40 year old champion networker couldn't pick up the phone?  had to go to HR and plead for help?  ridiculous


I agree, the all thing was ridiculous. Why would Oprah spend 2/3 of the interview alone with Harry's wife? Very weird. He may be regretful, but I don't think the BRF will be able to trust or forgive him in the near future. 

Harry's wife may also be regretful, but for different reasons. She will not be welcomed in many photo-Op opportunities, and she may have to pay more for the ones arranged by SS. She didn't anticipate the huge support the BRF received after her interview.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I agree, the all thing was ridiculous. Why would Oprah spend 2/3 of the interview alone with Harry's wife? Very weird. He may be regretful, but I don't think the BRF will be able to trust or forgive him in the near future.
> 
> Harry's wife may also be regretful, but for different reasons. She will not be welcomed in many photo-Op opportunities, and she may have to pay more for the ones arranged by SS. She didn't anticipate the huge support the BRF received after her interview.


are you in the US?  As far as I know, Meghan got nothing but sympathy from the US media....RF got very little


----------



## Chanbal

DeMonica said:


> My vote goes to QE. I love antique and vintage jewellery.  I agree that those two rings don't look particularly pretty together. I have all kinds of rings, but I normally don't mix rings of different gold tones  unless the ring is made out of several different tones.
> IMO Meagain's eternity ring too thin to my liking. I like delicate things especially on delicate hands, but her hand and fingers are anything but delicate so a bigger bling would look better on her. Maybe JCMH couldn't afford a bigger one.


I like the original version of Cringe's ring. Diana & Kate's ring is beautiful, but I was never a fan of it.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I agree, the all thing was ridiculous. Why would Oprah spend 2/3 of the interview alone with Harry's wife? Very weird. He may be regretful, but I don't think the BRF will be able to trust or forgive him in the near future.
> 
> Harry's wife may also be regretful, but for different reasons. She will not be welcomed in many photo-Op opportunities, and she may have to pay more for the ones arranged by SS. She didn't anticipate the huge support the BRF received after her interview.


Diana was a worldwide phenomenon. Apart from the US, is there anywhere else that would welcome Harry's wife and give her the adulation she craves? The countries she visited as a royal?


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> I do love talking about rings. Very happy for this to continue as it is kind of on topic.  So here’s the before and after shots for those who don’t remember the engagement ring:
> View attachment 5069214
> 
> and here it is with the matching eternity band he got her:
> View attachment 5069215
> 
> Personally I love the centre stone but I see what @queenofthewrapdress means about the accent stones being a bit small. I am not that into pave and I don’t think it adds anything the engagement ring but I guess it matches that narrow style eternity band which I find very MEH.
> 
> Here’s some of the other royal rings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 25 Royal Engagement Rings We Love
> 
> 
> From Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle, here is a complete list of our favorite royal engagement rings in recent history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brides.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5069239
> 
> I like the queen’s e ring but mixed metals are such a no no for me
> Fergie’s and Zara’s are very *style of the time*
> Diana’s is pretty famous now and I do like it.
> The actual winner in my book is Camilla. Look at this extra large emerald cut baby- great compensation for marrying Charles
> View attachment 5069245


Notice how the royal rings are less flashy and not as humongous as the Hollywood celeb _new money_ ideal.

So, not being into diamonds that much (other than my Peretti DBtY necklaces) can someone explain the reasoning for liking one Meg ring over the other?  Is the second diamond a new one and not the "special Botswana" diamond H picked out?


----------



## RAINDANCE

I recall a report that Meghan wanted to take a tiara on one of the tours they did but was told by Charles that it was not appropriate.

Found it - Fiji State Dinner in October 2018

_Several months later, People magazine, citing a Daily Mail report, described how Meghan had been especially eager to make a good impression at the state dinner in Fiji. She wanted to complete her look with a tiara but Prince Charles said no, explaining to her that wearing such a sparkling accessory would be viewed as too “extravagant” in some Commonwealth countries. Tiaras are usually reserved for royal weddings or state banquets with visiting dignitaries at Buckingham Palace, People explained.

“Meghan did not understand all of this because she was new to the role and so Prince Charles told her that it would not be appropriate,” the source told the Daily Mail at the time. Charles’s advice was “kindly” dispensed._

*Instead she wore the diamond earrings.*

_People magazine reported that the earrings were gifted on March 7, 2018, from the Saudi royal family, who is represented by bin Salman. The crown prince met with the queen at Buckingham palace during a three-day visit to launch a Saudi-U.K. economic and investment partnership. At the time, bin Salman was viewed by Western leaders and the media as a potential force for progressive change in the Middle East, but that view changed with the death of Khashoggi.

Neither Meghan or Harry was present when the earrings were received by Buckingham Palace, People said. *As is protocol, any wedding gift of this nature remains the property of The Crown, *People added. 

The Duchess of Sussex wore the earrings to a formal dinner in Fiji in Oct. 2018, just three weeks after journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. While the Duchess's lawyers maintain that she was unaware of the connection between the crown prince and Khashoggi murder, The Telegraph reports a much-different story. 

According to an unnamed royal source, the Duchess of Sussex wore the diamond earrings "against advice from palace aides" which paints another picture altogether. Choosing to wear them to the state dinner in Fiji, the media were simply told that the earrings were "borrowed," but the palace did not give further details on their provenance.

The Telegraph's royal source has dismissed the Sussexes' claim that Markle did not know about the connection between the earrings and the murder. In fact, they have made it clear to the newspaper that palace staff advised the Duchess not to wear the jewelry, and that "members of Royal Household staff sometimes advise people on their options, but what they choose to do with that advice is a very different matter."

As a source told The Times that the tour of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga was "a difficult one for staff," they also claimed that the Duchess insisted they tell the media the earrings were "borrowed from a jeweler." The Duchess's lawyers have denied the "jeweler" portion of the quote or that she misled anyone, but did admit that she may have stated they were borrowed.

Saudi Arabia admitted to Khasoggi's death on Oct. 20 just three days before the dinner, while the earrings had already been chosen as part of the Duchess's "tour wardrobe" (via The Telegraph). London aides were immediately "concerned" when they saw the Duchess's earrings in the media, alerting Kensington Palace, but did not say anything to the Susessexes "for fear for what their reaction would be."

*When Markle chose to wear the earrings again to the Prince of Wales' 70th birthday one month later, an aide confronted Prince Harry, who reportedly looked "shocked" when informed.*

Read More: https://www.thelist.com/347735/megh...r-these-earrings-heres-why/?utm_campaign=clip_


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> are you in the US?  As far as I know, Meghan got nothing but sympathy from the US media....RF got very little


Yes, she is still getting sympathy from the US media. From what I understand, she is paying a very costly PR-team to release positive news about her every week. However, I doubt that she will be invited to join selected crowds/events unless they are also arranged by SS or Oprah.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

New video (and nice jewelry)


----------



## Chagall

I’m going to be a voice in the wilderness here but I don’t think Harry should have given William Diana’s engagement ring. Diana was fully aware that William was going to be king and not Harry. If she had wanted it to be worn by the future queen, then she would have specifically left it to William. She left the ring to Harry and not William. This was her wish and she probably had a reason for doing it. Her wish should have been honoured.


----------



## poopsie

RAINDANCE said:


> _As a source told The Times that the tour of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga was "a difficult one for staff," they also claimed that the Duchess insisted they tell the media the earrings were "borrowed from a jeweler." *The Duchess's lawyers have denied the "jeweler" portion of the quote or that she misled anyone, but did admit that she may have stated they were borrowed.*
> 
> 
> Read More: https://www.thelist.com/347735/megh...r-these-earrings-heres-why/?utm_campaign=clip_



If her lawyers are going to comment on every varied recollection those billable hours must be astronomical


----------



## youngster

Speaking of jewelry, one of the things I did really like about MM's wedding day look was the Queen Mary diamond bandeau tiara she wore, even if it was the 2nd choice  tiara depending on which story to believe.

I wonder how deeply inside the vault that tiara will be buried?  I wonder if it will ever be seen again on any member of the family?  Maybe they'll try to erase MM's connection to it and loan it out freely to Bea or Eugenie or others perhaps.  I'm guessing that it won't be seen for a 100 years lol.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chagall said:


> I’m going to be a voice in the wilderness here but I don’t think Harry should have given William Diana’s engagement ring. Diana was fully aware that William was going to be king and not Harry. If she had wanted it to be worn by the future queen, then she would have specifically left it to William. She left the ring to Harry and not William. This was her wish and she probably had a reason for doing it. Her wish should have been honoured.


I thought the boys were told to pick a piece of jewellery each, William chose the Cartier watch and Harry the ring.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Diana and Kate wore/wear mixed metal too.
> Camilla’s ring belonged to The Queen Mother.
> Some members of the British Royal Family have used pure Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, since 1923. This tradition was founded by The Queen Mother, then Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, on her marriage to the Duke of York on 26th April, 1923.
> 
> Other members of the Royal Family that have had Welsh gold wedding rings include:
> 
> • 1923 The Queen Mother's marriage to King George VI
> • 1947 Queen Elizabeth II marriage to Prince Phillip
> • 1960 Princess Margaret’s marriage
> • 1973 Princess Anne's marriage
> • 1981 Prince Charles's marriage to Princess Diana
> • 2005 Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
> • 2011 Prince William's marriage to Catherine Middleton
> • 2018 Prince Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle
> Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's very own wedding ring, from her marriage to The Duke of Edinburgh on 20th November 1947, is crafted from a nugget of pure Welsh gold from the Clogau St. David's gold mine.
> 
> The tradition of the British Royal Family using Welsh gold wedding rings was carried into its 95th year during the most recent royal wedding of Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on 19th May, 2018.
> 
> Rare Welsh gold is contained within each piece of Clogau jewellery, making it some of the most exclusive jewellery in the world. The content of Welsh gold can be identified by the Welsh dragon stamp, and other unique marks that denote a genuine piece of Clogau.



My mom and I both have the clogau Queen Elizabeth the second anniversary ring


----------



## Chagall

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought the boys were told to pick a piece of jewellery each, William chose the Cartier watch and Harry the ring.


Maybe you are right. I remember her leaving it to Harry.


----------



## bisousx

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sure she would not be the first woman in the world to pretend she likes her engagement ring and then, in good time, either ‘lose’ it or suggest an upgrade. Discretion is the nobler part of valour. Not that any of that’s particularly relevant for M.
> She would definitely not throw away months of pretending to be humble and down to earth by revealing she didn’t think the carat weight was big enough. Wait till he’s signed on the dotted line of course.
> 
> I actually had no idea what I wanted when I met my OH and wasn’t much help hinting. My tastes have...developed since then. Thank you TPF and Liz Taylor



Okay, reading this reminds me of a close friend who was so reckless with her e-ring that I’m now suspicious she wanted it to be stolen. She openly hated her ring also, it was from Tiffany but not the ctw she wanted.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought the boys were told to pick a piece of jewellery each, William chose the Cartier watch and Harry the ring.


Same here, I thought the boys chose what they wanted to remember their mother by.


----------



## eunaddict

OogleAtLuxury said:


> To be frank, American politicians have bigger fish to fry than silly spats in an antiquated figurehead family.



To be fair, at this point in time...most politicians of most countries have bigger fish to fry - pandemic, economic crises and usual politicking. And yet, they must, to a certain extent, keep up with this family's spat because (as seen in the video) these questions can and do come up in interviews and they need to have some form of view on it; and the more knowledgeable about the situation, the easier it is to come up with that perfectly politically correct response +/- their own subtle takes on the issue.

This family is one of the longest reigning "powers" - QE2 has seen American presidents come and go, die and get assassinated and she's still here. This particular family's soft power is not to be under-estimated, judging by the public's interest in this couple AND this thread's longevity. To dismiss it as "antiquated figurehead family" is really under-cutting that soft power (and they ARE an economic powerhouse for the British economy on their own) they yield and have held on to for so long.

I mean generally speaking, around the world, whenever scions in powerhouse families misbehave, it makes news, it makes waves and sometimes those waves have political and economical impacts - South Korea, India etc.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> My mom and I both have the clogau Queen Elizabeth the second anniversary ring


If it's the one I remember wanting, it's beautiful


----------



## csshopper

Clearblueskies said:


> Same here, I thought the boys chose what they wanted to remember their mother by.


From Wikipedia:
After Diana's death, Princes William and Harry selected mementos from their mother's possessions. Harry chose the engagement ring, while William selected Diana's £19,000 yellow gold Cartier Tank Francaise watch. They eventually exchanged mementos.[47]When Prince William proposed to Catherine Middleton in the autumn of 2010 in Kenya, he gave her the ring.[48] William later said that giving the ring to his fiancée was a "way of making sure my mother didn't miss out on today and the excitement."[48] Middleton eventually had the ring resized because she had lost weight prior to the wedding. Her finger being an H, she requested Crown Jewellers G Collins and Sons to attach two platinum studs to it to make it a size I.[49]


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> I’m going to be a voice in the wilderness here but I don’t think Harry should have given William Diana’s engagement ring. Diana was fully aware that William was going to be king and not Harry. If she had wanted it to be worn by the future queen, then she would have specifically left it to William. She left the ring to Harry and not William. This was her wish and she probably had a reason for doing it. Her wish should have been honoured.


I have a very distinct memory of that part of the story and it isn’t that Harry was given the ring. That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy. The story has been repeated so much, that it has been taken as truth. My memory is William said very specifically at the time of her death that he wanted his mother’s ring.  It makes total sense to me. He saw her HRH removed after the divorce and promised her that he woukd reinstate it when he became King. The symbolism of his mother)s ring being worn by his future wife as Queen would not have been lost on him as something that belonged to Diana would be worn by a Queen, i.e. Diana never made it to being Queen, but her ring did.    Burrell tried to control the ownership of Diana’s possessions and kept many things that he was not supposed to have. I don’t believe a word he says. I could see Harry jumping onto this story as part of his victim narrative of always being treated as second best. He should have realized at a young age that he was second, not necessarily second best. There is a difference and he could have taken another road in life if he was smart enough as he was given every advantage. He was not smart enough and he has proven that many times.


ETA. Saw the wiki entry. I don’t believe everything I read there. I knew a man who sued them over misinformation in the bio of him and he prevailed again them.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Sigh
> They do NOT live in LA/Hollywood. Santa Barbara/Montecito is nothing like them.
> If anything it would be the isolation that might 'get' to Harry. IMO he would fare better where there is more 'action'. Other than riding his electric bike and communing with the rescue hens there isn't much for him to do out in the sticks


100% agree .. mind you, it's a beautiful part of CA, but it's not "bustling" per se!  I had had a job offer up there, and thought about it, but then thought .. my god, it would just be going to work, coming home from work, going to work .. and forget about truly being able to afford any housing there - HA!


----------



## sgj99

You have to wonder if Prince Charles regrets walking Megan part way down the aisle at the wedding since she’s done so much damage to the working Firm as well as the family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, she is still getting sympathy from the US media. From what I understand, she is paying a very costly PR-team to release positive news about her every week. However, I doubt that she will be invited to join selected crowds/events unless they are also arranged by SS or Oprah.


I hope you're right but they are the chairs of a big celeb thing in a couple of weeks


----------



## csshopper

sgj99 said:


> You have to wonder if Prince Charles regrets walking Megan part way down the aisle at the wedding since she’s done so much damage to the working Firm as well as the family.


If so, I hope he can take comfort in the fact he is not alone, but one of many whose kindness, consideration towards her has been abused.

In retrospect I think she would have preferred a solo journey down the aisle, it would have played to her narcissism in not having to share the limelight. I do remember a lip reader reporting that Harry said "Thank you Pa" to Charles at the altar. Unfortunately H seems to have conveniently forgotten experiences like this as he spewed his venom to Oprah.


----------



## bisousx

sgj99 said:


> You have to wonder if Prince Charles regrets walking Megan part way down the aisle at the wedding since she’s done so much damage to the working Firm as well as the family.



Hopefully not, one should never be regretful to be kind to someone (even if they don’t deserve this kindness).


----------



## catlover46

sgj99 said:


> You have to wonder if Prince Charles regrets walking Megan part way down the aisle at the wedding since she’s done so much damage to the working Firm as well as the family.


I also wonder if the reason Prince George and Princess Charlotte walked with their parents instead of the Bridal party when they left the chapel was because they were being picked on by the Mulroney kids. Aren’t there rumors about Jessica Mulroney and her daughter bullying Charlotte at a fitting?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I have a very distinct memory of that part of the story and it isn’t that Harry was given the ring. That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy. The story has been repeated so much, that it has been taken as truth. My memory is William said very specifically at the time of her death that he wanted his mother’s ring.  It makes total sense to me. He saw her HRH removed after the divorce and promised her that he woukd reinstate it when he became King. The symbolism of his mother)s ring being worn by his future wife as Queen would not have been lost on him as something that belonged to Diana would be worn by a Queen, i.e. Diana never made it to being Queen, but her ring did.    Burrell tried to control the ownership of Diana’s possessions and kept many things that he was not supposed to have. I don’t believe a word he says. I could see Harry jumping onto this story as part of his victim narrative of always being treated as second best. He should have realized at a young age that he was second, not necessarily second best. There is a difference and he could have taken another road in life if he was smart enough as he was given every advantage. He was not smart enough and he has proven that many times.
> 
> 
> ETA. Saw the wiki entry. I don’t believe everything I read there. I knew a man who sued them over misinformation in the bio of him and he prevailed again them.



Agreed. I wish people wouldn't give so much credibility to what the hangers-on and the tell-all authors have to say. Same thing with that smarmy James Hewitt, who seems to have spent the last 25 years riding the "fame" of having had an affair with Diana. The biographers goal is to sell a lot of books, the juicier the better. They are not too particular about fact checking. If someone says something salacious, it's going in. That's why dead people are the easiest to write about. The dead can't sue for slander or libel.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Notice how the royal rings are less flashy and not as humongous as the Hollywood celeb _new money_ ideal.



I do like the Kardashians, but their rings (thinking Kim and Khloe, even though the latter claims it's not an engagement ring) are obscene, and I wholeheartedly dislike the look.



> So, not being into diamonds that much (other than my Peretti DBtY necklaces) can someone explain the reasoning for liking one Meg ring over the other?  Is the second diamond a new one and not the "special Botswana" diamond H picked out?



She only changed up the band (from plain yellow gold to a super dainty diamond eternity).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I knew all of this already, and still she never ceases to amaze me, and not in a good way.



RAINDANCE said:


> _Several months later, People magazine, citing a Daily Mail report, described how Meghan had been especially eager to make a good impression at the state dinner in Fiji. She wanted to complete her look with a tiara but Prince Charles said no, explaining to her that wearing such a sparkling accessory would be viewed as too “extravagant” in some Commonwealth countries. Tiaras are usually reserved for royal weddings or state banquets with visiting dignitaries at Buckingham Palace, People explained. _



So yeah, she never cared for the bling, but wanted to take a tiara, she didn't want a title for her son but is so resentful two years later she has to bring it up to Oprah. LMAO she's so transparent.

_



			According to an unnamed royal source, the Duchess of Sussex wore the diamond earrings "against advice from palace aides" which paints another picture altogether. Choosing to wear them to the state dinner in Fiji, the media were simply told that the earrings were "borrowed," but the palace did not give further details on their provenance.

The Telegraph's royal source has dismissed the Sussexes' claim that Markle did not know about the connection between the earrings and the murder. In fact, they have made it clear to the newspaper that palace staff advised the Duchess not to wear the jewelry, and that "members of Royal Household staff sometimes advise people on their options, but what they choose to do with that advice is a very different matter."

As a source told The Times that the tour of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga was "a difficult one for staff," they also claimed that the Duchess insisted they tell the media the earrings were "borrowed from a jeweler." The Duchess's lawyers have denied the "jeweler" portion of the quote or that she misled anyone, but did admit that she may have stated they were borrowed.
		
Click to expand...

_
I still don't understand why there wasn't a huge scandal. Duchess Disney, the gooddoer who forgets all morals and values (using these terms loosely) when major bling is involved.

_*



			When Markle chose to wear the earrings again to the Prince of Wales' 70th birthday one month later, an aide confronted Prince Harry, who reportedly looked "shocked" when informed.
		
Click to expand...

*_
May I add he looked shocked because they had been found out, not because he thought it was a sh*tty move of his wife? As reported in several other magazines.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> I’m going to be a voice in the wilderness here but I don’t think Harry should have given William Diana’s engagement ring. Diana was fully aware that William was going to be king and not Harry. If she had wanted it to be worn by the future queen, then she would have specifically left it to William. She left the ring to Harry and not William. This was her wish and she probably had a reason for doing it. Her wish should have been honoured.



She did not. The boys were given a choice from her jewelry. William picked the Cartier watch Harry's wife now prances around in (not her own, I know she has one), Harry picked the ring, then offered it to William once he learned William wanted to propose. I can't see anything wrong with this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy.



A few of his interviews came up on my Youtube suggestions, and I thought "Gosh, this guy surely likes to talk a lot." I have no clue what he does for a living, but I'm pretty sure he's not a butler anymore because who would want one who can't keep their mouth shut, and not always in a cute way (like my new favourite, ex-royal chef Darren McGrady. He cooked for Diana, the boys, the Queen, Prince Philip, he does share stories with his recipes, but they are always respectful and completely innocent).


----------



## bellecate

*Will these two never stop!   * The title of the special is just another slap in the face to the Royal Family. My heart goes out to The Queen, Charles, William and Catherine. To have to put up with these idiotic two that seem hel- bent on hurting them both personally and reputation wise. 



*‘Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary’ Special Set at Discovery Plus U.K.*

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...line-to-leave-looms/ar-BB1gc9uJ?ocid=msedgdhp
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/f...and-flavored-cigars/ar-BB1gbEKa?ocid=msedgdhp







© CBS
Click here to read the full article.
Discovery U.K. is rehashing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s nuclear interview for a new special.
“Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary,” which will air on streamer Discovery Plus out of the U.K., will convene body language, linguistics and forensic psychology experts to dissect key moments from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.

As revealed by _Variety_, Discovery was in the final race to win rights to the interview in the U.K., ultimately losing out to ITV. Had they won, the event would have likely landed on fledgling streamer Discovery Plus, which the company is evidently trying to turn into a royal destination.

The Shearwater-produced special will examine the couple’s speech, tone of voice, movements and expressions frame by frame, discussing the allegations of racism against the royal family, Markle’s mental health struggles, and Harry’s fractured relationship with his family. The special will also look back on the pair’s 2017 engagement interview, the 2019 ITV special with Tom Bradby, and Prince William’s response to racism claims made in the recent CBS program.

Clare Laycock, senior VP of planning and head of content for lifestyle and entertainment, said: “In one of our most ambitious investigative specials to date, the royal interview that divided the world is going under the microscope. With Shearwater at the helm, ‘Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary’ promises to serve up some ground-breaking insights that may finally put to bed questions around the claims that made headlines.”

Shearwater executive producer Steve Anderson added: “This is a new and different way to dissect the interview of the year. What is revealed by facial expressions, physical gestures and patterns of speech? The answers are fascinating.”

Laycock ordered the show, while Charlotte Reid is the commissioner and Romy Page is the commissioning executive. Steve Anderson and Jeff Anderson are the executive producers for Shearwater Media.

“Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary” premieres on Friday.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Dunno...sounds like a dig towards the troublesome two to me? All body language specialist have said so far they're full of it and dissected why they thought they were lying, so...


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> *Will these two never stop!   * The title of the special is just another slap in the face to the Royal Family. My heart goes out to The Queen, Charles, William and Catherine. To have to put up with these idiotic two that seem hel- bent on hurting them both personally and reputation wise.
> 
> 
> 
> *‘Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary’ Special Set at Discovery Plus U.K.*
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...line-to-leave-looms/ar-BB1gc9uJ?ocid=msedgdhp
> https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/f...and-flavored-cigars/ar-BB1gbEKa?ocid=msedgdhp
> View attachment 5069468
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> © CBS
> Click here to read the full article.
> Discovery U.K. is rehashing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s nuclear interview for a new special.
> “Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary,” which will air on streamer Discovery Plus out of the U.K., *will convene body language, linguistics and forensic psychology experts to dissect key moments from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.*
> 
> As revealed by _Variety_, Discovery was in the final race to win rights to the interview in the U.K., ultimately losing out to ITV. Had they won, the event would have likely landed on fledgling streamer Discovery Plus, which the company is evidently trying to turn into a royal destination.
> 
> The Shearwater-produced special will examine the couple’s speech, tone of voice, movements and expressions frame by frame, discussing the allegations of racism against the royal family, Markle’s mental health struggles, and Harry’s fractured relationship with his family. The special will also look back on the pair’s 2017 engagement interview, the 2019 ITV special with Tom Bradby, and Prince William’s response to racism claims made in the recent CBS program.
> 
> Clare Laycock, senior VP of planning and head of content for lifestyle and entertainment, said: “In one of our most ambitious investigative specials to date, the royal interview that divided the world is going under the microscope. With Shearwater at the helm, ‘Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary’ promises to serve up some ground-breaking insights that may finally put to bed questions around the claims that made headlines.”
> 
> Shearwater executive producer Steve Anderson added: “This is a new and different way to dissect the interview of the year. What is revealed by facial expressions, physical gestures and patterns of speech? The answers are fascinating.”
> 
> Laycock ordered the show, while Charlotte Reid is the commissioner and Romy Page is the commissioning executive. Steve Anderson and Jeff Anderson are the executive producers for Shearwater Media.
> 
> “Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary” premieres on Friday.



I'd actually like to see this. It sounds like the Oprah interview will be put under scrutiny and analyzed by behavior experts. It's a shame it won't be shown in the US but I'd love to hear reviews from our UK members who watch it.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I hope you're right but they are the chairs of a big celeb thing in a couple of weeks


We may not like it, but Daniela Elser makes a very valid point. It is shocking how they pulled this off,  after that disgusting interview... Seeing this can make one lose faith in humanity.

_Meghan__ and Prince Harry's next chapter as breakaway members of the Royal Family still committed to a life of service could become a nightmare for the Firm, according to a royal commentator. In a warning to the Royal Family and courtiers, royal expert *Daniela Elser analysed how Meghan and Harry's upcoming participation in Vax Live could represent the real launch of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's life and work in the US and the beginning of their competition with the royal Firm.*

Ms Elser believes *Meghan and Harry sharing the stage with US President J** B*d*n and worldwide stars like Jennifer Lopez will help the couple "position them as leaders on the world stage.*"

As independent royals Meghan and Harry, she continued, will likely unveil a "competing view of what royalty can look like and achieve".

While on this side of the pond the Royal Family is set to remain respectful of protocols and traditions while carrying out charitable and military work, the Sussexes are likely to embody a more contemporary aspect of royal service._









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to unveil 'competing view' of royalty
					

QUEEN ELIZABETH II and the palace have been warned they "could see things get much worse" as Meghan Markle and Prince Harry prepare to rub shoulders with world leaders and celebrities.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _While on this side of the pond the Royal Family is set to remain respectful of protocols and traditions while carrying out charitable and military work, the Sussexes are likely to embody a more contemporary aspect of royal service._



Is is really royal service though if you're just a pair of wannabe ex-royals?


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is is really royal service though if you're just a pair of wannabe ex-royals?



Is it really Royal Service when your just out for personal fame?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My take: she was well informed, she just saw the pot of gold dangling in front of her, and in her usual manner she thought she could charm or tantrum her way out of uncomfortable rules.


*THIS, THIS and THIS .. 100%!!!!  *

After finding out various things about her (including her earlier years), it has ALWAYS been her ambition to be "the STAR" and that also meant LOTS and LOTS of $$$$$!!!!  Regardless of any "training" per se, I think she wanted to marry Harry because she viewed it as the almighty way to get that moo-lah ($$$) and she is going to use that every single day (unless she finds someone richer but let's face it, she's not exactly a youngster anymore)!!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is is really royal service though if you're just a pair of wannabe ex-royals?


Charles needs to move fast with his decision to slim down the monarchy. What this couple is doing is shocking to say the least. They are more relevant than the scientists behind the new vaccine technology, front line workers... Weird world that allows this!


----------



## Chanbal

They probably sent an email, I don't think Will or Kate want to talk to Harry's wife.


----------



## lalame

I like Meghan's engagement ring... it's fairly modest for royal jewels, I thought. Kate's ring isn't my style at all but it's really grown on me... I like that both are a little more traditional. I did think it was interesting Meghan added the pave band just after a year of marriage or so... you would think she'd have it done prior to engagement unless Harry truly surprised her with that design. That seems unlikely to me.

I agree with the poster who said the current trend of giant rocks is garish.... especially giant rock + like 4 rows of halos. Yikes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Notice how the royal rings are less flashy and not as humongous as the Hollywood celeb _new money_ ideal.
> 
> So, not being into diamonds that much (other than my Peretti DBtY necklaces) can someone explain the reasoning for liking one Meg ring over the other?  Is the second diamond a new one and not the "special Botswana" diamond H picked out?


Yes. I wonder if she fancies a giant rock like buddy Beyoncé’s? I can’t say I didn’t love Mariah’s though.

To be clear M has just had the band replaced with a pave I still the same three stones up top. She also has an eternity ring now. The Botswana diamond is quite a nice size I think. With the alterations she’s probably gained a carat weight of little stones. Diana’s sapphire is a whopper but I love coloured stones.




sgj99 said:


> You have to wonder if Prince Charles regrets walking Megan part way down the aisle at the wedding since she’s done so much damage to the working Firm as well as the family.


Do you think he wishes he’d had it fitted with a trapdoor? That’d be so scooby doo!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A few of his interviews came up on my Youtube suggestions, and I thought "Gosh, this guy surely likes to talk a lot." I have no clue what he does for a living, but I'm pretty sure he's not a butler anymore because who would want one who can't keep their mouth shut, and not always in a cute way (like my new favourite, ex-royal chef Darren McGrady. He cooked for Diana, the boys, the Queen, Prince Philip, he does share stories with his recipes, but they are always respectful and completely innocent).



gracekelly said:
*That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy.*

The ring story is *false*. This is why fake news/rumors are so dangerous. Look how many years the Burrell lie has lived!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is is really royal service though if you're just a pair of wannabe ex-royals?


They are definitely EX and trying for their own fame.  Good luck with that because there is nothing to back it up.



Sol Ryan said:


> Is it really Royal Service when your just out for personal fame?



They will never do anything in the way of Royal Service again.  They are just thirsty for fame.  That is all their exit has ever been about.  Fame. Money. Fame. Money.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> gracekelly said:
> *That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy.*
> 
> The ring story is *false*. This is why fake news/rumors are so dangerous. Look how many years the Burrell lie has lived!


We seem to be the only people old enough to remember lol!  At least I am.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They probably sent an email, I don't think Will or Kate want to talk to Harry's wife.



What a difference in postures.  Harry and Meghan look like they are at a business meeting and Will and Kate look like they love each other.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> We may not like it, but Daniela Elser makes a very valid point. It is shocking how they pulled this off,  after that disgusting interview... Seeing this can make one lose faith in humanity.
> 
> _Meghan__ and Prince Harry's next chapter as breakaway members of the Royal Family still committed to a life of service could become a nightmare for the Firm, according to a royal commentator. In a warning to the Royal Family and courtiers, royal expert *Daniela Elser analysed how Meghan and Harry's upcoming participation in Vax Live could represent the real launch of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's life and work in the US and the beginning of their competition with the royal Firm.*
> 
> Ms Elser believes *Meghan and Harry sharing the stage with US President J** B*d*n and worldwide stars like Jennifer Lopez will help the couple "position them as leaders on the world stage.*"
> 
> As independent royals Meghan and Harry, she continued, will likely unveil a "competing view of what royalty can look like and achieve".
> 
> While on this side of the pond the Royal Family is set to remain respectful of protocols and traditions while carrying out charitable and military work, the Sussexes are likely to embody a more contemporary aspect of royal service._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to unveil 'competing view' of royalty
> 
> 
> QUEEN ELIZABETH II and the palace have been warned they "could see things get much worse" as Meghan Markle and Prince Harry prepare to rub shoulders with world leaders and celebrities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I doubt the gruesome two will ‘share the stage’ with anyone. We social distance here. The danger will be that their nonsense misleads people. They are not scientists nor do they understand science.  Both have proven they are willing to lie and to repeat other people’s lies.  The best thing would be low ratings. Together we can make that happen


----------



## jelliedfeels

DeMonica said:


> My vote goes to QE. I love antique and vintage jewellery.  I agree that those two rings don't look particularly pretty together. I have all kinds of rings, but I normally don't mix rings of different gold tones  unless the ring is made out of several different tones.
> IMO Meagain's eternity ring too thin to my liking. I like delicate things especially on delicate hands, but her hand and fingers are anything but delicate so a bigger bling would look better on her. Maybe JCMH couldn't afford a bigger one.


The shade! I love it. ‘Us royals don’t carry cash (or settle our outstanding debts)’ indeed. 



Sharont2305 said:


> Diana and Kate wore/wear mixed metal too.
> Camilla’s ring belonged to The Queen Mother.
> Some members of the British Royal Family have used pure Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, since 1923. This tradition was founded by The Queen Mother, then Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, on her marriage to the Duke of York on 26th April, 1923.
> 
> Other members of the Royal Family that have had Welsh gold wedding rings include:
> 
> • 1923 The Queen Mother's marriage to King George VI
> • 1947 Queen Elizabeth II marriage to Prince Phillip
> • 1960 Princess Margaret’s marriage
> • 1973 Princess Anne's marriage
> • 1981 Prince Charles's marriage to Princess Diana
> • 2005 Prince Charles's marriage to Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
> • 2011 Prince William's marriage to Catherine Middleton
> • 2018 Prince Harry's marriage to Meghan Markle
> Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's very own wedding ring, from her marriage to The Duke of Edinburgh on 20th November 1947, is crafted from a nugget of pure Welsh gold from the Clogau St. David's gold mine.
> 
> The tradition of the British Royal Family using Welsh gold wedding rings was carried into its 95th year during the most recent royal wedding of Their Royal Highnesses, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex on 19th May, 2018.
> 
> Rare Welsh gold is contained within each piece of Clogau jewellery, making it some of the most exclusive jewellery in the world. The content of Welsh gold can be identified by the Welsh dragon stamp, and other unique marks that denote a genuine piece of Clogau.


Something I just realised is if Disney is the last one that means that B and E didn’t get clogaus and looking at the list) nor did any of the Phillips clan.
It seems funny they don’t as they aren’t that expensive and the tradition started with the queen mother who was meant to be married to the spare not the heir.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> We seem to be the only people old enough to remember lol!  At least I am.



I remember it all too well.  We are young at heart.






						Paul Burrell - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



From Wikipedia: 
_On 18 February 2008, The Sun newspaper reported that Burrell had admitted, on tape, that he had not told "the whole truth" during his appearance at the Diana inquest; he also said he had thrown in a "few red herrings". Some reports suggested that Burrell could be charged with perjury.[26] The Sun said it would hand the tape to the court on 19 February 2008.[27]

Burrell was criticised for copying Diana's letters and his integrity was called into question. The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, said: "*In the end, there is an important issue as to the credibility of the witness.*"[28]_


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I doubt the gruesome two will ‘share the stage’ with anyone. We social distance here. The danger will be that their nonsense misleads people. They are not scientists nor do they understand science.  Both have proven they are willing to lie and to repeat other people’s lies.  The best thing would be low ratings. Together we can make that happen


Eventually the elbow rubbing with a Royal, and by that I mean Harry and not her, will get old.  The curiosity factor will fade and they will be yesterday's news.  If all they can do is rehash old perceived insults, then people will tire of them even faster.  She was not there long enough to have anymore than she has already trotted out.  Thank goodness!

I am going to say this for the 89th time, if BP knew what she was like, how did they not put a stop to this?  Why did they give them the big wedding?  There was so many red flags right at the engagement and if the blind items have any ring of truth to them, she named a price to bought off.  She would have taken the money and he would have pouted until he found another girlfriend.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I remember it all too well.  We are young at heart.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Burrell - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From Wikipedia:
> _On 18 February 2008, The Sun newspaper reported that Burrell had admitted, on tape, that he had not told "the whole truth" during his appearance at the Diana inquest; he also said he had thrown in a "few red herrings". Some reports suggested that Burrell could be charged with perjury.[26] The Sun said it would hand the tape to the court on 19 February 2008.[27]
> 
> Burrell was criticised for copying Diana's letters and his integrity was called into question. The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, said: "*In the end, there is an important issue as to the credibility of the witness.*"[28]_


He is a slime ball.  I think I read someplace that he had a huge disagreement with one or both of Diana's sisters regarding her possessions.  He was savvy enough to realize that they would have value over time and he tried to get his hands on as much as he could.


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did not. The boys were given a choice from her jewelry. William picked the Cartier watch Harry's wife now prances around in (not her own, I know she has one), Harry picked the ring, then offered it to William once he learned William wanted to propose. I can't see anything wrong with this?


Well excuse me. That is what I read somewhere. As I said, I’m not a Royalist, so I am not quite as invested in this thread as some, and recollections may vary. I stand by my comment that if it was left to Harry he should have kept it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

This is all interesting to read about Paul Burrell... I had seen him here and there on chat shows but didn't realize he was so disreputable!


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> Speaking of jewelry, one of the things I did really like about MM's wedding day look was the Queen Mary diamond bandeau tiara she wore, even if it was the 2nd choice  tiara depending on which story to believe.
> 
> I wonder how deeply inside the vault that tiara will be buried?  I wonder if it will ever be seen again on any member of the family?  Maybe they'll try to erase MM's connection to it and loan it out freely to Bea or Eugenie or others perhaps.  I'm guessing that it won't be seen for a 100 years lol.


It has a detachable brooch- maybe that’ll get a spin 
If it is causing them too much pain I’m happy to take it off their hands.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I remember it all too well.  We are young at heart.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Burrell - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From Wikipedia:
> _On 18 February 2008, The Sun newspaper reported that Burrell had admitted, on tape, that he had not told "the whole truth" during his appearance at the Diana inquest; he also said he had thrown in a "few red herrings". Some reports suggested that Burrell could be charged with perjury.[26] The Sun said it would hand the tape to the court on 19 February 2008.[27]
> 
> Burrell was criticised for copying Diana's letters and his integrity was called into question. The coroner, Lord Justice Scott Baker, said: "*In the end, there is an important issue as to the credibility of the witness.*"[28]_


recollections may vary indeed!

One thing we can all hopefully agree on is that the ring in question would not have been massively improved by Lorraine Schwartz pave studding it like Liberace’s long johns.

It seems like, in this at least, serendipity prevailed.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *THIS, THIS and THIS .. 100%!!!!  *
> 
> After finding out various things about her (including her earlier years), it has ALWAYS been her ambition to be "the STAR" and that also meant LOTS and LOTS of $$$$$!!!!  Regardless of any "training" per se, I think she wanted to marry Harry because she viewed it as the almighty way to get that moo-lah ($$$) and she is going to use that every single day (unless she finds someone richer but let's face it, she's not exactly a youngster anymore)!!


$$$ and don't forget Fame


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Something I just realised is if Disney is the last one that means that B and E didn’t get clogaus and looking at the list) nor did any of the Phillips clan.
> It seems funny they don’t as they aren’t that expensive and the tradition started with the queen mother who was meant to be married to the spare not the heir.



The original nugget of Welsh gold was given to the BRF in 1920, Queen Mum's ring was the first to be made out of it. The nugget was replaced by another gift to the Queen in 1980, after Diana's wedding band was the last one made from the original lump of gold. Maybe it's slowly coming to an end again, and they're keeping the last bit for George's wife? They shouldn't have wasted it on MM, though.

P.S. The mine is closed now and thus Welsh gold is 5x as expensive as other gold.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Eventually the elbow rubbing with a Royal, and by that I mean Harry and not her, will get old.  The curiosity factor will fade and they will be yesterday's news.  If all they can do is rehash old perceived insults, then people will tire of them even faster.  She was not there long enough to have anymore than she has already trotted out.  Thank goodness!
> 
> I am going to say this for the 89th time, if BP knew what she was like, how did they not put a stop to this?  Why did they give them the big wedding?  There was so many red flags right at the engagement and if the blind items have any ring of truth to them, she named a price to bought off.  She would have taken the money and he would have pouted until he found another girlfriend.


don't forget in additon to rehasing old perceived insults, preaching to all of us on how to live, what to think, etc


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> Come on Meggy, where are you?



Music was a bit much, but they really seem like a lovely family


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> I remember reading that Harry used a special diamond  for his wife's engagement ring and helped in the design of it so it was unique and meaningful. It seemed a romantic thing to have done. Within a year and a half she had it redesigned with a band of pave diamonds and then a year later a diamond eternity ring turned up on her left hand as well.
> 
> I bet at some point the story of Diana's sapphire ring became known and the enhanced redesign of Harry's wife's original engagement ring was the "price" her husband had to pay for having given what might have been "her ring" to Kate. Probably didn't help the jealousy she obviously has towards Kate either.
> 
> From an article online at the time:
> "The original band was made of gold and the ring was created by Cleave and Company, Court Jewelers and Medalists to Her Majesty the Queen. The trilogy ring boasts a large central diamond flanked on either side by two smaller jewels. The stones were specially selected by the Prince; the central diamond is from Botswana, where the couple previously vacationed together, and the other two diamonds are from his late mother's personal collection."
> 
> "The ring is obviously yellow gold because that's [Meghan's] favourite and the main stone itself I sourced from Botswana and the little diamonds either side are from my mother's jewellery collection, to make sure that she's with us on this crazy journey together," Harry said during the couple's first sit-down interview with the BBC, hours after they announced their engagement. It is not known when the Duchess of Sussex made the change, but it is thought it happened during the time she was pictured without it - many fans had thought she was not wearing it because of swelling due to pregnancy.


I remember reading that!  To each her own, but if my husband gave me a stone on a string, I’d keep it is as is.  Maybe a new anniversary ring later, but I personally thought it incredibly rude of her to change it that quickly.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> We may not like it, but Daniela Elser makes a very valid point. It is shocking how they pulled this off,  after that disgusting interview... Seeing this can make one lose faith in humanity.
> 
> _Meghan__ and Prince Harry's next chapter as breakaway members of the Royal Family still committed to a life of service could become a nightmare for the Firm, according to a royal commentator. In a warning to the Royal Family and courtiers, royal expert *Daniela Elser analysed how Meghan and Harry's upcoming participation in Vax Live could represent the real launch of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's life and work in the US and the beginning of their competition with the royal Firm.*
> 
> Ms Elser believes *Meghan and Harry sharing the stage with US President J** B*d*n and worldwide stars like Jennifer Lopez will help the couple "position them as leaders on the world stage.*"
> 
> As independent royals Meghan and Harry, she continued, will likely unveil a "competing view of what royalty can look like and achieve".
> 
> While on this side of the pond the Royal Family is set to remain respectful of protocols and traditions while carrying out charitable and military work, the Sussexes are likely to embody a more contemporary aspect of royal service._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to unveil 'competing view' of royalty
> 
> 
> QUEEN ELIZABETH II and the palace have been warned they "could see things get much worse" as Meghan Markle and Prince Harry prepare to rub shoulders with world leaders and celebrities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


they can position themselves but how interesting are they really?  how can they maintain interest?  maybe I'm in denial but he used to be the cute young prince and now he's not.  she used to be the little-known cable TV actress and now she is the woke fake duchess....who cares?  we'll see but I don't plan to watch that Vax show


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> Maybe she came right in and did some quality checks to see which ones were the best.
> 
> View attachment 5069280


  

Glad to see you guys aren't slacking on the wit.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> don't forget in additon to rehasing old perceived insults, *preaching to all of us on how to live*, what to think, etc



Particularly when what they preach about has been discussed by more qualified, trustworthy people long before H&M jumped on the bandwagon of the moment. They want so badly to be influencers. And come Sunday night, are there really uninformed pathetic souls out there who are against getting Covid vaccines who will suddenly decide they want it because Harry and Meghan say they should? I suppose there might be _somebody_ and the more vaccinated people the better, but damn.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lalame said:


> I like Meghan's engagement ring... it's fairly modest for royal jewels, I thought. Kate's ring isn't my style at all but it's really grown on me... I like that both are a little more traditional. I did think it was interesting Meghan added the pave band just after a year of marriage or so... you would think she'd have it done prior to engagement unless Harry truly surprised her with that design. That seems unlikely to me.
> 
> I agree with the poster who said the current trend of giant rocks is garish.... especially giant rock + like 4 rows of halos. Yikes.


I'm so pleb, my wedding ring is "just" a band of gold. I'm very 'more is less' when it comes to jewellery. Maybe I'd feel differently if I had access to a royal jewellery vault


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Particularly when what they preach about has been discussed by more qualified, trustworthy people long before H&M jumped on the bandwagon of the moment. They want so badly to be influencers. And come Sunday night, are there really uninformed pathetic souls out there who are against getting Covid vaccines who will suddenly decide they want it because Harry and Meghan say they should? I suppose there might be _somebody_ and the more vaccinated people the better, but damn.


right.....the people I've talked to who don't want to get vaccinated are mostly pretty firmly entrenched


----------



## sdkitty

interesting  - People is calling her Meghan Markle
https://people.com/music/meghan-mar...en-vax-live-the-concert-to-reunite-the-world/


----------



## bag-mania

^Your link isn't working, probably because the president's name is in it.


----------



## Chagall

sgj99 said:


> You have to wonder if Prince Charles regrets walking Megan part way down the aisle at the wedding since she’s done so much damage to the working Firm as well as the family.


I bet he doesn’t regret walking her part way down the aisle. He is probably glad that he did go above and beyond what he had to do. He appeared to completely welcome Harry’s new bride. His conscience would at this point be clear. Their ensuing bad behaviour is all on H/M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> ^Your link isn't working, probably because the president's name is in it.


oh.....well anyway headline says Prince Harry and Meghan Markle....wonder if this is something new or an isolated case (of not using Duchess)


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Eventually the elbow rubbing with a Royal, and by that I mean Harry and not her, will get old.  The curiosity factor will fade and they will be yesterday's news.  If all they can do is rehash old perceived insults, then people will tire of them even faster.  She was not there long enough to have anymore than she has already trotted out.  Thank goodness!
> 
> I am going to say this for the 89th time, if BP knew what she was like, how did they not put a stop to this?  Why did they give them the big wedding?  There was so many red flags right at the engagement and if the blind items have any ring of truth to them, she named a price to bought off.  She would have taken the money and he would have pouted until he found another girlfriend.



Well said!
Same thing happened with Sarah. OW tried so hard to make Sarah happen in the US. Didn’t work then, won’t work now for the gruesome-two’s. At Prince Phillip’s funeral, the world saw H’s very cold reception due to his petulant behavior and lies. Waiting on Charles to make his official announcement. 

If only we had real journalists worthy of the job. They would ask those questions and more. IMO it was b/c Charles knew Harry would throw a fit if he didn’t get the big wedding to rival W&K’s. His deep-seated jealousy goes way back to childhood.  Since H’s  teachers saw his aggression early on, then surely Charles knew the kid had issues. Like most parents, he probably thought hoped H would grow out of it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> oh.....well anyway headline says Prince Harry and Meghan Markle....wonder if this is something new or an isolated case (of not using Duchess)



I'm going to guess these mags/sites use Meghan Markle in their headlines because that is the name people Google. They want to make sure they get as many searches as possible leading to their site.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has this been posted?   Maybe he will head back to the UK  









						Prince Harry feels 'regretful and embarrassed over Oprah interview'
					

Duncan Larcombe told Closer magazine that Prince Harry, 36, has a tendency to act on impulse and recalled a time when the prince 'flew off the handle' at him in 2008 over Peter Phillips' stag do.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> I’m going to be a voice in the wilderness here but I don’t think Harry should have given William Diana’s engagement ring. Diana was fully aware that William was going to be king and not Harry. If she had wanted it to be worn by the future queen, then she would have specifically left it to William. She left the ring to Harry and not William. This was her wish and she probably had a reason for doing it. Her wish should have been honoured.


I don’t think it was Diana’s choice.  I recall reading that each son was each given the chance to pick a piece of her jewelry.  William picked a watch and Harry picked the ring, then decided to give it to William.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?   Maybe he will head back to the UK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry feels 'regretful and embarrassed over Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Duncan Larcombe told Closer magazine that Prince Harry, 36, has a tendency to act on impulse and recalled a time when the prince 'flew off the handle' at him in 2008 over Peter Phillips' stag do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm not necessarily buying that he's regretful....unless it's because he's worried about the money being cut off


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I have a very distinct memory of that part of the story and it isn’t that Harry was given the ring. That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy. The story has been repeated so much, that it has been taken as truth. My memory is William said very specifically at the time of her death that he wanted his mother’s ring.  It makes total sense to me. He saw her HRH removed after the divorce and promised her that he woukd reinstate it when he became King. The symbolism of his mother)s ring being worn by his future wife as Queen would not have been lost on him as something that belonged to Diana would be worn by a Queen, i.e. Diana never made it to being Queen, but her ring did.    Burrell tried to control the ownership of Diana’s possessions and kept many things that he was not supposed to have. I don’t believe a word he says. I could see Harry jumping onto this story as part of his victim narrative of always being treated as second best. He should have realized at a young age that he was second, not necessarily second best. There is a difference and he could have taken another road in life if he was smart enough as he was given every advantage. He was not smart enough and he has proven that many times.
> 
> 
> ETA. Saw the wiki entry. I don’t believe everything I read there. I knew a man who sued them over misinformation in the bio of him and he prevailed again them.


Is this the guy who identified himself as Diana's rock?

I hate that someone came up with that because now everyone is using it, even for the Queen and I don't think it's always accurate, or the right word.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Music was a bit much, but they really seem like a lovely family


As much as I've grown to respect them as a team, I found Kate's constant smiling to be a bit forced. Like an ad campaign for a lifestyle brand of clothing.

Great family though!


----------



## Jayne1

catlover46 said:


> I also wonder if the reason Prince George and Princess Charlotte walked with their parents instead of the Bridal party when they left the chapel was because they were being picked on by the Mulroney kids. Aren’t there rumors about Jessica Mulroney and her daughter bullying Charlotte at a fitting?


Doubt it.  Those Mulroney kids are adorable and not the nasty type - their father is a sweetheart, totally unlike his own father, our ex-Prime Minister.

I think we'd hear something if the kids were out of control.

Also I think Jessica was too starstruck to act up in front of the royal family.  We are a constitutional monarchy here in Canada, after all.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said!
> Same thing happened with Sarah. OW tried so hard to make Sarah happen in the US. Didn’t work then, won’t work now for the gruesome-two’s. At Prince Phillip’s funeral, the world saw H’s very cold reception due to his petulant behavior and lies. Waiting on Charles to make his official announcement.
> 
> *If only we had real journalists worthy of the job.* They would ask those questions and more. IMO it was b/c Charles knew Harry would throw a fit if he didn’t get the big wedding to rival W&K’s. His deep-seated jealousy goes way back to childhood.  Since H’s  teachers saw his aggression early on, then surely Charles knew the kid had issues. Like most parents, he probably thought hoped H would grow out of it.



That is the problem.  These people are nothing more than celebrity reporters at this point.  There is not real reportage and journalism currently.    

Sarah F. reportedly was very concerned and present for The Queen.  I have always thought that she was a nice person, just a foolish one.  She is the perfect example of a person who understood the consequences of what she vis a vis PP and why he would have nothing to do with her.  She also understood that she would not be at the funeral and I wonder if she would have been invited even without  Covid.  She took all of this like an adult and didn't whine about it.  She also saw the big picture and how her daughters fit into it.  She is probably so grateful for what The Queen did for Bea's wedding  that she will do anything for her.  If someone sat down with Harry and tried to explain all of this to him, he would never understand or want to understand.  He is a spoiled child.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> As much as I've grown to respect them as a team, I found Kate's constant smiling to be a bit forced. Like an ad campaign for a lifestyle brand of clothing.
> 
> Great family though!


Some people are smilers.  I have a niece like that.  She has been that way since she was a baby.  It's not fake, it's just the way they are.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> interesting  - People is calling her Meghan Markle
> https://people.com/music/meghan-mar...en-vax-live-the-concert-to-reunite-the-world/


Her PR people must have put out the word.  So now she wants an identity separate from being the Duchess?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I don’t think it was Diana’s choice.  I recall reading that each son was each given the chance to pick a piece of her jewelry.  William picked a watch and Harry picked the ring, then decided to give it to William.



This is one of Burrell’s lies/half-truths.  Why would the palace divy up Diana’s jewelry?  It makes no sense.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Her PR people must have put out the word.  So now she wants an identity separate from being the Duchess?


but I saw another thing where it said she and H were co-chairing this event and called her Duchess.....guess we'll see what happens


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Some people are smilers.  I have a niece like that.  She has been that way since she was a baby.  It's not fake, it's just the way they are.


I had a friend like that - she, her sisters and their mother all smiled a lot


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?   Maybe he will head back to the UK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry feels 'regretful and embarrassed over Oprah interview'
> 
> 
> Duncan Larcombe told Closer magazine that Prince Harry, 36, has a tendency to act on impulse and recalled a time when the prince 'flew off the handle' at him in 2008 over Peter Phillips' stag do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Who's Duncan Larcombe? I totally believe this story though. Harry strikes me as a man-child who easily buys into whoever is talking to him last so long as the conversation made him feel good. I'm not even trying to be mean... a lot of people are like this! Though that also means after a few weeks at home, he'll be back to Oprah Harry soon enough.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bellecate said:


> *Will these two never stop!   * The title of the special is just another slap in the face to the Royal Family. My heart goes out to The Queen, Charles, William and Catherine. To have to put up with these idiotic two that seem hel- bent on hurting them both personally and reputation wise.
> 
> 
> 
> *‘Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary’ Special Set at Discovery Plus U.K.*
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...line-to-leave-looms/ar-BB1gc9uJ?ocid=msedgdhp
> https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/f...and-flavored-cigars/ar-BB1gbEKa?ocid=msedgdhp
> View attachment 5069468
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> © CBS
> Click here to read the full article.
> Discovery U.K. is rehashing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s nuclear interview for a new special.
> “Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary,” which will air on streamer Discovery Plus out of the U.K., will convene body language, linguistics and forensic psychology experts to dissect key moments from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> As revealed by _Variety_, Discovery was in the final race to win rights to the interview in the U.K., ultimately losing out to ITV. Had they won, the event would have likely landed on fledgling streamer Discovery Plus, which the company is evidently trying to turn into a royal destination.
> 
> The Shearwater-produced special will examine the couple’s speech, tone of voice, movements and expressions frame by frame, discussing the allegations of racism against the royal family, Markle’s mental health struggles, and Harry’s fractured relationship with his family. The special will also look back on the pair’s 2017 engagement interview, the 2019 ITV special with Tom Bradby, and Prince William’s response to racism claims made in the recent CBS program.
> 
> Clare Laycock, senior VP of planning and head of content for lifestyle and entertainment, said: “In one of our most ambitious investigative specials to date, the royal interview that divided the world is going under the microscope. With Shearwater at the helm, ‘Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary’ promises to serve up some ground-breaking insights that may finally put to bed questions around the claims that made headlines.”
> 
> Shearwater executive producer Steve Anderson added: “This is a new and different way to dissect the interview of the year. What is revealed by facial expressions, physical gestures and patterns of speech? The answers are fascinating.”
> 
> Laycock ordered the show, while Charlotte Reid is the commissioner and Romy Page is the commissioning executive. Steve Anderson and Jeff Anderson are the executive producers for Shearwater Media.
> 
> “Meghan and Harry: Recollections May Vary” premieres on Friday.



Apologies if this was already posted.  Here's about a 2 hr video of four of the world's top body language and behavior experts that analyze H&M Oprah Interview.  I watched this in segments since it's long but worth watching. Be interesting to compare the difference (if any) with these experts to the Discovery Plus U.K. program.  Enjoy.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Some people are smilers.  I have a niece like that.  She has been that way since she was a baby.  It's not fake, it's just the way they are.


Yep! EVH was a big smiler!


----------



## rose60610

So......what are the specs on the anniversary wreath that Meghan sent to William and Kate? Who made it and what is the symbolism of each flower? Doesn't their friendship go waaaaay back and have special meaning?  Oh wait! I have events mixed up! Did Kate find a dead rescue chicken on her doorstep?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> That is the problem.  These people are nothing more than celebrity reporters at this point.  There is not real reportage and journalism currently.
> 
> Sarah F. reportedly was very concerned and present for The Queen.  I have always thought that she was a nice person, just a foolish one.  She is the perfect example of a person who understood the consequences of what she vis a vis PP and why he would have nothing to do with her.  She also understood that she would not be at the funeral and I wonder if she would have been invited even without  Covid.  She took all of this like an adult and didn't whine about it.  She also saw the big picture and how her daughters fit into it.  She is probably so grateful for what The Queen did for Bea's wedding  that she will do anything for her.  If someone sat down with Harry and tried to explain all of this to him, he would never understand or want to understand.  He is a spoiled child.


there are certainly entertainment reporters but as far as real news, there isn't much to report right now.  the RF isn't saying anything ...everything is "sources"....and of course, H&M news is all propaganda being put out to keep them in the public realm


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Yep! EVH was a big smiler!


EVH?


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> This is all interesting to read about Paul Burrell... I had seen him here and there on chat shows but didn't realize he was so disreputable!


Didn't he try to crash a royal wedding? He and his boyfriend turned up and were turned away. IIRC he claimed Diana would have wanted him there


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Apologies if this was already posted.  Here's about a 2 hr video of four of the world's top body language and behavior experts that analyze H&M Oprah Interview.  I watched this in segments since it's long but worth watching. Be interesting to compare the difference (if any) with these experts to the Discovery Plus U.K. program.  Enjoy.




Thanks for posting. I started watching this last month but only saw half an hour of it. I need to finish because it was enlightening.


----------



## V0N1B2

rose60610 said:


> So......what are the specs on the anniversary wreath that Meghan sent to William and Kate? Who made it... Oh wait! I have events mixed up! Did Kate find a dead rescue chicken on her doorstep?


Boiling on the stove


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> oh.....well anyway headline says Prince Harry and Meghan Markle....wonder if this is something new or an isolated case (of not using Duchess)



MM cashed in as much as possible on the duchess title. However, she is now well-known and can afford to go by only MM. 

Also, they are unsure whether they would be able to keep the duchess/duke titles. So until the situation in the UK is more 'stable', they likely prefer to go by MM and prince...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said!
> Same thing happened with Sarah. OW tried so hard to make Sarah happen in the US. Didn’t work then, won’t work now for the gruesome-two’s. At Prince Phillip’s funeral, the world saw H’s very cold reception due to his petulant behavior and lies. Waiting on Charles to make his official announcement.
> 
> If only we had real journalists worthy of the job. They would ask those questions and more. IMO it was b/c Charles knew Harry would throw a fit if he didn’t get the big wedding to rival W&K’s. His deep-seated jealousy goes way back to childhood.  Since H’s  teachers saw his aggression early on, then surely Charles knew the kid had issues. Like most parents, he probably thought hoped H would grow out of it.


I hope you are right, but they are so different from Sarah. Sarah is not greedy.


----------



## xincinsin

This article claims William inherited the ring. Other articles said her personal jewellery was in a pool shared by the princes.
So we've seen Kate with the sapphire ring and sapphire earrings, and Harry's wife has the Cartier tennis bracelet and the Asprey aquamarine ring.








						What Princess Diana left in her will for when Prince Harry turned 30
					

It was a poignant request that was finally fulfilled in 2014




					www.bristolpost.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article by BA Laue
*The End Game*
_*The wedding was marvelous, the weather superb. Crowds ten deep along the mall to Windsor Castle. An American bride for the warrior-prince. The pubs rang out with cheers “To the Royal Couple”!*

A breath of fresh air; the Brits are always up for a breath of fresh air. They gave us the Rolling Stones, the Beatles, and the miniskirt, for heaven’s sake. And here she was, young, beautiful, American, an actress, Catholic, divorced, and biracial. Perfect. What could possibly go wrong? Meghan Markle was about to enter a life of luxury, glamour, and deference the likes of which few people can imagine, let alone aspire to, a life she craved but did not understand. The latest fashions, the finest entertainments, the love of a besotted young man who, with a little encouragement, might mimic the career of his kinsman, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. *All this, and at so little cost to the bride.

In exchange for all this, the British people expected her to try to stay awake while visiting the gluten-free gumball factory *as the plant manager explains how the little suckers are produced. At times a plaque must be unveiled on the side of a post office, hospital, college, railway station, or army barracks. Occasionally little school children need to be patted on the head, no problem; the Duchess likes children, or so she says. And then *there are the trips, lots and lots of trips; to Fiji, Lesotho, Tonga, Tuvalu, and many more places that Her Highness has never heard of, and there will be gifts and dinners and more gifts and more little heads to be patted.* And then there are men standing in straight lines all wearing the same funny suits, carrying rifles because they have sworn to defend you and your family with their lives, if need be. All you have to do is walk past them down the line and smile. When you have a child, people will cheer and artillery will sound and bells will ring and there will be happiness everywhere. That’s it, that’s all that’s expected.

And it was unsurvivable. Unsurvivable.

*There were some early clues*; t*he toothless smile at the Trooping of the Colour* (it was almost a smirk). T*he reticence in allowing photos of her newborn son Archie to be published*. The move to Canada—well, all right, grandmother’s profile is on every coin so we’re not really that far away. But then California, bumming off friends or business contacts. Then Megxit—an act so shocking that it was easily compared to the 1936 abdication crisis. *To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand*. It goes against their basic concepts of personal identity; it is akin to cowardice. Your duty is something you knew was expected of you when you were born to a specific role in society or took an oath to uphold certain principles or values. To dishonor them is to dishonor yourself. It is a way of thinking Meghan Markle cannot grasp.

And then the interview, complete with background music. Oprah, to her credit, said it was “your truth,” not “the truth.” Markle’s ridiculous contention that her son would not receive security protection or that he would not be provided a princely title is for an American audience not familiar with the workings of royal etiquette. *Harry could have bestowed his subsidiary title of Baron Dumbarton on his infant son immediately but refused in an act of petty narcissism rare in British society.* *His whining about money, as if fully expecting his countrymen to finance his lifestyle after he objected to carrying out his royal role.* And he spouted a lie that he thought the public might consider—that his father and brother were “trapped” in their roles, that their duty was thrust upon them as it was on him, that some devious entity had hijacked their true life paths. What garbage. It was a disingenuous ploy to escape the contempt merited by his failure of character.

*In its totality, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged in an act of pure selfishness that bespoke a lack of respect for their family, their country, and the service they had pledged to perform.*

One can envision the reaction of the millions of women living in tiny houses or “council housing” trying to lovingly make them into homes for their families, clipping the 99-cent coupon for the roast beast Sunday feast, their mouths agape at the sheer nerve. One can only imagine the murmured comments at the Cavalry and Guards Club or White’s or the Victory Service, as everyone stood around the television in the library sipping single malts; “Well, no more balcony time for them,” “I’ll be damned,” “I wouldn’t have believed it if you had told me.” The pubs must have been silent, pints quietly poured as the Duchess described her awful royal existence from the garden of a nameless estate in the warm sunshine of California as people in London, Cardiff, Aberdeen, and Belfast continue to die from a pandemic in the cold, damp air of a British spring.

Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, Duke of Sussex, seems consigned by his wife or by choice to a life of poolside parties, discussing the finer points of child rearing with his good friends Kanye and Wendy Williams, sipping pinot grigio while passing the appetizers to Fergie (the rapper, not his aunt), discussing the plight of the Ndebele with Lily Cole, and “making shapes” on the dance floor with the rest of the Beverly Hills bric-a-brac. *It makes the life of his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, and his wife from Baltimore look absolutely disciplined by comparison.*_



			https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I hope you are right, but they are so different from Sarah. Sarah is not greedy.



Sarah was in a difficult situation. It is doubtful anyone else would have handled it any better. Imagine being compared constantly to Diana, then imagine being married to a friend of Epstein. Then imagine OW calling with all kinds of inflated promises. IMO completely understandable why she had food and spending issues. By all accounts Bea and Eugenie are hard-working, kind ladies. That speaks well for the parents, IMO. Sarah smartened up, straightened out the messes and got on with it. She deserves credit for that. 

H&M’s situation is all of their own making. The important thing to remember is Sarah and Andrew married in their late 20s. H&M were late 30s, now pushing 40.  Still waiting for Charles to announce the way forward.


----------



## Chanbal

Nice article by Sarah Vine! 

_*What Harry and Meghan will make of it is anyone’s guess.* But from where I’m sitting, that freezing cold, windswept beach in Norfolk looks a darn sight sunnier than California._









						SARAH VINE: Eat your heart out Harry and Meghan
					

SARAH VINE: Marshmallows toasting on an open fire, rosy cheeks and cosy jumpers, squeals of laughter and loving glances and the Duchess of Cambridge looking smashing in a fedora.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article by BA Laue
> *The End Game*
> _*The wedding was marvelous, the weather superb. Crowds ten deep along the mall to Windsor Castle. An American bride for the warrior-prince. The pubs rang out with cheers “To the Royal Couple”!*
> 
> A breath of fresh air; the Brits are always up for a breath of fresh air. They gave us the Rolling Stones, the Beatles, and the miniskirt, for heaven’s sake. And here she was, young, beautiful, American, an actress, Catholic, divorced, and biracial. Perfect. What could possibly go wrong? Meghan Markle was about to enter a life of luxury, glamour, and deference the likes of which few people can imagine, let alone aspire to, a life she craved but did not understand. The latest fashions, the finest entertainments, the love of a besotted young man who, with a little encouragement, might mimic the career of his kinsman, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. *All this, and at so little cost to the bride.
> 
> In exchange for all this, the British people expected her to try to stay awake while visiting the gluten-free gumball factory *as the plant manager explains how the little suckers are produced. At times a plaque must be unveiled on the side of a post office, hospital, college, railway station, or army barracks. Occasionally little school children need to be patted on the head, no problem; the Duchess likes children, or so she says. And then *there are the trips, lots and lots of trips; to Fiji, Lesotho, Tonga, Tuvalu, and many more places that Her Highness has never heard of, and there will be gifts and dinners and more gifts and more little heads to be patted.* And then there are men standing in straight lines all wearing the same funny suits, carrying rifles because they have sworn to defend you and your family with their lives, if need be. All you have to do is walk past them down the line and smile. When you have a child, people will cheer and artillery will sound and bells will ring and there will be happiness everywhere. That’s it, that’s all that’s expected.
> 
> And it was unsurvivable. Unsurvivable.
> 
> *There were some early clues*; t*he toothless smile at the Trooping of the Colour* (it was almost a smirk). T*he reticence in allowing photos of her newborn son Archie to be published*. The move to Canada—well, all right, grandmother’s profile is on every coin so we’re not really that far away. But then California, bumming off friends or business contacts. Then Megxit—an act so shocking that it was easily compared to the 1936 abdication crisis. *To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand*. It goes against their basic concepts of personal identity; it is akin to cowardice. Your duty is something you knew was expected of you when you were born to a specific role in society or took an oath to uphold certain principles or values. To dishonor them is to dishonor yourself. It is a way of thinking Meghan Markle cannot grasp.
> 
> And then the interview, complete with background music. Oprah, to her credit, said it was “your truth,” not “the truth.” Markle’s ridiculous contention that her son would not receive security protection or that he would not be provided a princely title is for an American audience not familiar with the workings of royal etiquette. *Harry could have bestowed his subsidiary title of Baron Dumbarton on his infant son immediately but refused in an act of petty narcissism rare in British society.* *His whining about money, as if fully expecting his countrymen to finance his lifestyle after he objected to carrying out his royal role.* And he spouted a lie that he thought the public might consider—that his father and brother were “trapped” in their roles, that their duty was thrust upon them as it was on him, that some devious entity had hijacked their true life paths. What garbage. It was a disingenuous ploy to escape the contempt merited by his failure of character.
> 
> *In its totality, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged in an act of pure selfishness that bespoke a lack of respect for their family, their country, and the service they had pledged to perform.*
> 
> One can envision the reaction of the millions of women living in tiny houses or “council housing” trying to lovingly make them into homes for their families, clipping the 99-cent coupon for the roast beast Sunday feast, their mouths agape at the sheer nerve. One can only imagine the murmured comments at the Cavalry and Guards Club or White’s or the Victory Service, as everyone stood around the television in the library sipping single malts; “Well, no more balcony time for them,” “I’ll be damned,” “I wouldn’t have believed it if you had told me.” The pubs must have been silent, pints quietly poured as the Duchess described her awful royal existence from the garden of a nameless estate in the warm sunshine of California as people in London, Cardiff, Aberdeen, and Belfast continue to die from a pandemic in the cold, damp air of a British spring.
> 
> Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, Duke of Sussex, seems consigned by his wife or by choice to a life of poolside parties, discussing the finer points of child rearing with his good friends Kanye and Wendy Williams, sipping pinot grigio while passing the appetizers to Fergie (the rapper, not his aunt), discussing the plight of the Ndebele with Lily Cole, and “making shapes” on the dance floor with the rest of the Beverly Hills bric-a-brac. *It makes the life of his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, and his wife from Baltimore look absolutely disciplined by comparison.*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/



Thank you for this article, @Chanbal 
A well-written summary.  The bold captures it perfectly!

_the toothless smile
   _


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article by BA Laue
> *The End Game*
> _*The wedding was marvelous, the weather superb. Crowds ten deep along the mall to Windsor Castle. An American bride for the warrior-prince. The pubs rang out with cheers “To the Royal Couple”!*
> 
> A breath of fresh air; the Brits are always up for a breath of fresh air. They gave us the Rolling Stones, the Beatles, and the miniskirt, for heaven’s sake. And here she was, young, beautiful, American, an actress, Catholic, divorced, and biracial. Perfect. What could possibly go wrong? Meghan Markle was about to enter a life of luxury, glamour, and deference the likes of which few people can imagine, let alone aspire to, a life she craved but did not understand. The latest fashions, the finest entertainments, the love of a besotted young man who, with a little encouragement, might mimic the career of his kinsman, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. *All this, and at so little cost to the bride.
> 
> In exchange for all this, the British people expected her to try to stay awake while visiting the gluten-free gumball factory *as the plant manager explains how the little suckers are produced. At times a plaque must be unveiled on the side of a post office, hospital, college, railway station, or army barracks. Occasionally little school children need to be patted on the head, no problem; the Duchess likes children, or so she says. And then *there are the trips, lots and lots of trips; to Fiji, Lesotho, Tonga, Tuvalu, and many more places that Her Highness has never heard of, and there will be gifts and dinners and more gifts and more little heads to be patted.* And then there are men standing in straight lines all wearing the same funny suits, carrying rifles because they have sworn to defend you and your family with their lives, if need be. All you have to do is walk past them down the line and smile. When you have a child, people will cheer and artillery will sound and bells will ring and there will be happiness everywhere. That’s it, that’s all that’s expected.
> 
> And it was unsurvivable. Unsurvivable.
> 
> *There were some early clues*; t*he toothless smile at the Trooping of the Colour* (it was almost a smirk). T*he reticence in allowing photos of her newborn son Archie to be published*. The move to Canada—well, all right, grandmother’s profile is on every coin so we’re not really that far away. But then California, bumming off friends or business contacts. Then Megxit—an act so shocking that it was easily compared to the 1936 abdication crisis. *To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand*. It goes against their basic concepts of personal identity; it is akin to cowardice. Your duty is something you knew was expected of you when you were born to a specific role in society or took an oath to uphold certain principles or values. To dishonor them is to dishonor yourself. It is a way of thinking Meghan Markle cannot grasp.
> 
> And then the interview, complete with background music. Oprah, to her credit, said it was “your truth,” not “the truth.” Markle’s ridiculous contention that her son would not receive security protection or that he would not be provided a princely title is for an American audience not familiar with the workings of royal etiquette. *Harry could have bestowed his subsidiary title of Baron Dumbarton on his infant son immediately but refused in an act of petty narcissism rare in British society.* *His whining about money, as if fully expecting his countrymen to finance his lifestyle after he objected to carrying out his royal role.* And he spouted a lie that he thought the public might consider—that his father and brother were “trapped” in their roles, that their duty was thrust upon them as it was on him, that some devious entity had hijacked their true life paths. What garbage. It was a disingenuous ploy to escape the contempt merited by his failure of character.
> 
> *In its totality, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged in an act of pure selfishness that bespoke a lack of respect for their family, their country, and the service they had pledged to perform.*
> 
> One can envision the reaction of the millions of women living in tiny houses or “council housing” trying to lovingly make them into homes for their families, clipping the 99-cent coupon for the roast beast Sunday feast, their mouths agape at the sheer nerve. One can only imagine the murmured comments at the Cavalry and Guards Club or White’s or the Victory Service, as everyone stood around the television in the library sipping single malts; “Well, no more balcony time for them,” “I’ll be damned,” “I wouldn’t have believed it if you had told me.” The pubs must have been silent, pints quietly poured as the Duchess described her awful royal existence from the garden of a nameless estate in the warm sunshine of California as people in London, Cardiff, Aberdeen, and Belfast continue to die from a pandemic in the cold, damp air of a British spring.
> 
> Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, Duke of Sussex, seems consigned by his wife or by choice to a life of poolside parties, discussing the finer points of child rearing with his good friends Kanye and Wendy Williams, sipping pinot grigio while passing the appetizers to Fergie (the rapper, not his aunt), discussing the plight of the Ndebele with Lily Cole, and “making shapes” on the dance floor with the rest of the Beverly Hills bric-a-brac. *It makes the life of his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, and his wife from Baltimore look absolutely disciplined by comparison.*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/


Love the turn of phrase in this!
Did the American psyche ever subscribe to JFK's famous "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country"? Closest I can think of to the British concept of service.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sarah was in a difficult situation. It is doubtful anyone else would have handled it any better. Imagine being compared constantly to Diana, then imagine being married to a friend of Epstein. Then imagine OW calling with all kinds of inflated promises. IMO completely understandable why she had food and spending issues. By all accounts Bea and Eugenie are hard-working, kind ladies. That speaks well for the parents, IMO. Sarah smartened up, straightened out the messes and got on with it. She deserves credit for that.
> 
> H&M’s situation is all of their own making. The important thing to remember is Sarah and Andrew married in their late 20s. H&M were late 30s, now pushing 40.  Still waiting for Charles to announce the way forward.


Sarah is a decent person, but MM is one of the worse nightmare for the BRF. QE and Charles are likely regretting not to have met the bride's family prior to the weeding. I wonder if they insisted for H to know better his girlfriend and family before scheduling the wedding.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for this article, @Chanbal
> A well-written summary.  The bold captures it perfectly!
> 
> _the toothless smile
> _


The last thing one wants is to have a daughter in law with that _toothless smile... _


----------



## sdkitty

had the TV on and one of the entertainment shows - inside edition or ET - reported on Will & Kates anniversary.  then they said H&M congratulated them privately.  So if it was private, why report on it?  I guess entertainment news is slow and they are grasping at nothing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Smirk and the jerk














						See Meghan Markle's Two Trooping the Colour Appearances Side-by-Side a Year Later!
					

The new mom, who welcomed son Archie Harrison on May 6, made her first post-baby appearance at the annual celebration of the Queen's birthday




					people.com


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I did think it was interesting Meghan added the pave band just after a year of marriage or so... you would think she'd have it done prior to engagement unless Harry truly surprised her with that design. That seems unlikely to me.
> 
> I agree with the poster who said the current trend of giant rocks is garish.... especially giant rock + like 4 rows of halos. Yikes.


I wonder if H decided that since the engagement ring would get world-wide press, he couldn't and shouldn't make it too Hollywood, new money, too modern.  Something more in line with the rest of the BRF rings.

I see him saying she could do what she likes after the media attention on the ring cooled down.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> This article claims William inherited the ring. Other articles said her personal jewellery was in a pool shared by the princes.
> So we've seen Kate with the sapphire ring and sapphire earrings, and Harry's wife has the Cartier tennis bracelet and the Asprey aquamarine ring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Princess Diana left in her will for when Prince Harry turned 30
> 
> 
> It was a poignant request that was finally fulfilled in 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bristolpost.co.uk


Thanks for finding the article!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Thanks for finding the article!


Diana's will also seems to be available for perusal on the internet, but it's not very informative regarding individual items.





						Last Will and Testament of Princess Diana
					

Princess Diana's last will and testament has been probated. Read the full text of Princess Diana's last will and testament here.




					www.livingtrustnetwork.com


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Smirk and the jerk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle's Two Trooping the Colour Appearances Side-by-Side a Year Later!
> 
> 
> The new mom, who welcomed son Archie Harrison on May 6, made her first post-baby appearance at the annual celebration of the Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


He looks the same. She looks so matronly in the navy. Is it all due to the camera angle, change in hairstyle and make-up?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article by BA Laue
> *The End Game*
> _*The wedding was marvelous, the weather superb. Crowds ten deep along the mall to Windsor Castle. An American bride for the warrior-prince. The pubs rang out with cheers “To the Royal Couple”!*
> 
> A breath of fresh air; the Brits are always up for a breath of fresh air. They gave us the Rolling Stones, the Beatles, and the miniskirt, for heaven’s sake. And here she was, young, beautiful, American, an actress, Catholic, divorced, and biracial. Perfect. What could possibly go wrong? Meghan Markle was about to enter a life of luxury, glamour, and deference the likes of which few people can imagine, let alone aspire to, a life she craved but did not understand. The latest fashions, the finest entertainments, the love of a besotted young man who, with a little encouragement, might mimic the career of his kinsman, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. *All this, and at so little cost to the bride.
> 
> In exchange for all this, the British people expected her to try to stay awake while visiting the gluten-free gumball factory *as the plant manager explains how the little suckers are produced. At times a plaque must be unveiled on the side of a post office, hospital, college, railway station, or army barracks. Occasionally little school children need to be patted on the head, no problem; the Duchess likes children, or so she says. And then *there are the trips, lots and lots of trips; to Fiji, Lesotho, Tonga, Tuvalu, and many more places that Her Highness has never heard of, and there will be gifts and dinners and more gifts and more little heads to be patted.* And then there are men standing in straight lines all wearing the same funny suits, carrying rifles because they have sworn to defend you and your family with their lives, if need be. All you have to do is walk past them down the line and smile. When you have a child, people will cheer and artillery will sound and bells will ring and there will be happiness everywhere. That’s it, that’s all that’s expected.
> 
> And it was unsurvivable. Unsurvivable.
> 
> *There were some early clues*; t*he toothless smile at the Trooping of the Colour* (it was almost a smirk). T*he reticence in allowing photos of her newborn son Archie to be published*. The move to Canada—well, all right, grandmother’s profile is on every coin so we’re not really that far away. But then California, bumming off friends or business contacts. Then Megxit—an act so shocking that it was easily compared to the 1936 abdication crisis. *To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand*. It goes against their basic concepts of personal identity; it is akin to cowardice. Your duty is something you knew was expected of you when you were born to a specific role in society or took an oath to uphold certain principles or values. To dishonor them is to dishonor yourself. It is a way of thinking Meghan Markle cannot grasp.
> 
> And then the interview, complete with background music. Oprah, to her credit, said it was “your truth,” not “the truth.” Markle’s ridiculous contention that her son would not receive security protection or that he would not be provided a princely title is for an American audience not familiar with the workings of royal etiquette. *Harry could have bestowed his subsidiary title of Baron Dumbarton on his infant son immediately but refused in an act of petty narcissism rare in British society.* *His whining about money, as if fully expecting his countrymen to finance his lifestyle after he objected to carrying out his royal role.* And he spouted a lie that he thought the public might consider—that his father and brother were “trapped” in their roles, that their duty was thrust upon them as it was on him, that some devious entity had hijacked their true life paths. What garbage. It was a disingenuous ploy to escape the contempt merited by his failure of character.
> 
> *In its totality, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged in an act of pure selfishness that bespoke a lack of respect for their family, their country, and the service they had pledged to perform.*
> 
> One can envision the reaction of the millions of women living in tiny houses or “council housing” trying to lovingly make them into homes for their families, clipping the 99-cent coupon for the roast beast Sunday feast, their mouths agape at the sheer nerve. One can only imagine the murmured comments at the Cavalry and Guards Club or White’s or the Victory Service, as everyone stood around the television in the library sipping single malts; “Well, no more balcony time for them,” “I’ll be damned,” “I wouldn’t have believed it if you had told me.” The pubs must have been silent, pints quietly poured as the Duchess described her awful royal existence from the garden of a nameless estate in the warm sunshine of California as people in London, Cardiff, Aberdeen, and Belfast continue to die from a pandemic in the cold, damp air of a British spring.
> 
> Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, Duke of Sussex, seems consigned by his wife or by choice to a life of poolside parties, discussing the finer points of child rearing with his good friends Kanye and Wendy Williams, sipping pinot grigio while passing the appetizers to Fergie (the rapper, not his aunt), discussing the plight of the Ndebele with Lily Cole, and “making shapes” on the dance floor with the rest of the Beverly Hills bric-a-brac. *It makes the life of his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, and his wife from Baltimore look absolutely disciplined by comparison.*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/


It’s a nice story but it’s a bit far fetched. Alas the pubs were quiet because they were all shut at the time. Also the ratings suggest that not that many people cared.


----------



## Chanbal

The duke and duchess of Glum   










						DAN WOOTTON: Prince William and Kate Middleton have achieved happiness
					

After ten years of marriage, Prince William and Catherine clearly represent the Royal Family's best chance of survival, writes DAN WOOTTON.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Grandiose nonsense better be ignored   


_Ms Levin said: "Kate is a very positive person and she comes from a very stable and happy family and believes repairing the relationship is very important.

"But I don't think Harry and Meghan want to know, there has got to be some sort of compromise.

"*But they are standing very firmly that they are never to blame and they are always right and if the Royal Family apologise they might consider being friends again.*

"*It is all grandiose nonsense really*."

Mr Graham mocked the Duke for the leaking of how he was feeling regarding his visit to the UK for Prince Philip's funeral and the frosty reception he received.

Ms Levin insisted the Duke was rude to the Royal Family and should have expected an awkward reception.

She added: "If you want to overcome an argument it is very personal, it comes from very deep inside you.
"You have got to have the confidence it is between the two of you, you are building towards something positive.

"But if you don't bother to do that, or is it done in a deliberate way to hold a superior position?

"*I think there is a battle going on Prince Harry and Meghan, William and Kate although William and Kate aren't fighting*.









						Prince Harry is 'sulking' and Duke 'simply doesn't care' about Royal Family, warns expert
					

PRINCE HARRY'S desire to be superior to Prince William is preventing the brothers from repairing their relationship, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> They probably sent an email, I don't think Will or Kate want to talk to Harry's wife.



Catherine's parents, sister and brother probably congratulated them privately too, though we don't hear of that do we? And we don't need to, private means private to most people.


----------



## Sharont2305

lalame said:


> This is all interesting to read about Paul Burrell... I had seen him here and there on chat shows but didn't realize he was so disreputable!


He's awful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> The shade! I love it. ‘Us royals don’t carry cash (or settle our outstanding debts)’ indeed.
> 
> 
> Something I just realised is if Disney is the last one that means that B and E didn’t get clogaus and looking at the list) nor did any of the Phillips clan.
> It seems funny they don’t as they aren’t that expensive and the tradition started with the queen mother who was meant to be married to the spare not the heir.


There's not enough gold left apparently and they use it sparingly (the Royals have a nugget of it) so maybe it's only for senior Royals.
I've wondered why the Queen Mother chose to have it in her wedding ring too. I'd understand it if she had been marrying the Prince of Wales. Maybe she thought it would tie in with the fact she was Scottish, husband was English and she could include Wales too. 
I'm quite proud as a Welshie she did this. The mine is down the coast from me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm so pleb, my wedding ring is "just" a band of gold. I'm very 'more is less' when it comes to jewellery. Maybe I'd feel differently if I had access to a royal jewellery vault


I think that’s lovely.
My parents have never bought rings at all. I’m just on the more is more trend I guess  


gracekelly said:


> Some people are smilers.  I have a niece like that.  She has been that way since she was a baby.  It's not fake, it's just the way they are.


After all, she’s got a lot to be happy about despite living in a gilded cage of unimaginable horror that’s little better than solitary at strangeways. 

I sometimes think the popular  ‘I’m a serious statesman and I am thinking very hard’ frown looks even more ridiculous.



rose60610 said:


> So......what are the specs on the anniversary wreath that Meghan sent to William and Kate? Who made it and what is the symbolism of each flower? Doesn't their friendship go waaaaay back and have special meaning?  Oh wait! I have events mixed up! Did Kate find a dead rescue chicken on her doorstep?


Perhaps they woke up to the handlebars of their bikes in their bed.

Or maybe she sent the same apology bouquet K gave her several years later 


Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if H decided that since the engagement ring would get world-wide press, he couldn't and shouldn't make it too Hollywood, new money, too modern.  Something more in line with the rest of the BRF rings.
> 
> I see him saying she could do what she likes after the media attention on the ring cooled down.


I’m sure, like everything in his life, there was a patient team of advisors dedicated to combing through H’s moronic ideas till the got to something vaguely workable.

Realistically she was going to get some of Diana’s diamonds reworked into it for symbolism and the new materials would need to have ethical mining certifications so that would’ve brought the diamond weight down a bit I think.

edit- sorry accidental quote.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> There's not enough gold left apparently and they use it sparingly (the Royals have a nugget of it) so maybe it's only for senior Royals.


The shade that smirk and jerk got some   
I guess it just goes to show the royals were really drinking the kool aid at the time.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> He looks the same. She looks so matronly in the navy. Is it all due to the camera angle, change in hairstyle and make-up?


This is why I never wear navy. I don’t think it suits dark hair at all.

The thing that’s getting me is the fillers and her nose tilt, gosh has she had a lot of work done.
To be fair to her, I get the impression the nasal droop is like one of those coastal cliff-edge houses where it’s a constant battle against subsidence.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The original nugget of Welsh gold was given to the BRF in 1920, Queen Mum's ring was the first to be made out of it. The nugget was replaced by another gift to the Queen in 1980, after Diana's wedding band was the last one made from the original lump of gold. Maybe it's slowly coming to an end again, and they're keeping the last bit for George's wife? They shouldn't have wasted it on MM, though.
> 
> P.S. The mine is closed now and thus Welsh gold is 5x as expensive as other gold.


Sorry, didn't see this reply. 
Also to add, the rings are not 100% Welsh gold, just a sliver is put in, just enough to be able to put the hallmark on it.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Realistically she was going to get some of Diana’s diamonds reworked into it for symbolism and the new materials would need to have ethical mining certifications so that would’ve brought the diamond weight down a bit I think.


I'm thinking she probably expected something huge and more bragworthy if she was going by Hollywood standards. And since she couldn't toss out the meaningful sentimental Botswana/Diana diamonds, she went with replacing the band. Poor design move. The pave band makes it look "too much and yet not enough".


----------



## Sharont2305

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm so pleb, my wedding ring is "just" a band of gold. I'm very 'more is less' when it comes to jewellery. Maybe I'd feel differently if I had access to a royal jewellery vault


That's another thing Meghan couldn't handle, access to the Royal jewellery vault. You don't, you get offered pieces on loan. The wedding tiara will be known as her tiara when it isn't. If she'd have behaved herself she would probably have had a permanent loan of it to wear at state occasions had she been invited to them and it wouldn't be seen on anyone else. Much like the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara, it wasn't Diana's, it was on loan to her and now it's on loan to Catherine. Bet Meghan's fuming about that tiara too. Good job she has no right to wear the Spencer tiara.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is one of Burrell’s lies/half-truths.  Why would the palace divy up Diana’s jewelry?  It makes no sense.


The Palace wouldn't do that. It was Charles I'm sure, and they were her personal jewellery not Royal jewellery.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> The Palace wouldn't do that. It was Charles I'm sure, and they were her personal jewellery not Royal jewellery.


Her mother and sisters were the executors of her will. I doubt she would have asked Charles to do anything after he achieved his goal of transforming into a tampon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Her mother and sisters were the executors of her will. I doubt she would have asked Charles to do anything after he achieved his goal of transforming into a tampon.


That is absolutely hilarious! 

Now I’m picturing him running around in a tampax mascot costume.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> The Palace wouldn't do that. It was Charles I'm sure, and they were her personal jewellery not Royal jewellery.



Exactly, the palace would not want to get involved in Diana’s jewelry decisions. Those were best left to her sisters. I read somewhere that her godchildren did not receive as much as they thought they would. Also, in the will posted above, it is interesting to note that her sisters changed the age of inheritance from 25 to 30. Although none of this is the public’s business, it is eye-opening to realize these hidden agendas are in every family, rich or not.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sharont2305 said:


> That's another thing Meghan couldn't handle, access to the Royal jewellery vault. You don't, you get offered pieces on loan. The wedding tiara will be known as her tiara when it isn't. If she'd have behaved herself she would probably have had a permanent loan of it to wear at state occasions had she been invited to them and it wouldn't be seen on anyone else. Much like the Cambridge Lovers Knot Tiara, it wasn't Diana's, it was on loan to her and now it's on loan to Catherine. Bet Meghan's fuming about that tiara too. Good job she has no right to wear the Spencer tiara.



I wonder if the BRF though Meghan would settle down after the star-struckness had eased off a bit ? 
One of the reasons she was so well received by the British public initially was the thought that as an actress she would be able to handle not only the media interest but the intensity of personal appearances with crowds.  

I think we can assume The Earrings are in California though.
If a gift is taken into a member of the BRF's own possession - ie, does not remain the possession of The Crown - there is tax to pay on it so Harry owes BIK tax at his highest marginal rate to HMRC on the value of the gift. (45% on £500k = £225k ?)


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> This is why I never wear navy. I don’t think it suits dark hair at all.
> 
> The thing that’s getting me is the fillers and her nose tilt, gosh has she had a lot of work done.
> To be fair to her, I get the impression the nasal droop is like one of those coastal cliff-edge houses where it’s a constant battle against subsidence.



‘Maybe the round neck with the pulled-back hair didn’t help. Usually, she looked good in navy.
I don’t know, I  thought the full face was due to the pregnancy weight.  If not, then, yes, she had a lot of work done. Wow.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Maybe the round neck with the pulled-back hair didn’t help. Usually, she looked good in navy.
> I don’t know, I  thought the full face was due to the pregnancy weight.  If not, then, yes, she had a lot of work done. Wow.


You are a more generous spirit than I. Every pregnancy is different and I did get a lot of swelling myself but my instincts are telling me she was going for the ‘in’ Jennifer Lawrence face but it didn’t quite work. (Tbh I think J law’s gone too far as well.)

she’s definitely got a much fuller cheek now. Not to mention completely the slimmed, retrousse nose and cat-eye which I call the Voldemort package


----------



## RachelCohen808

I've read that the interview was recorded remotely using the the 'green screen' like the one done with BO earlier so Oprah was not even in the same place as them. It is also heavily edited so it is not possible to be sure what questions H or M are answering. They might have signed some sort of exclusive contract and did not have any creative input in to how the interview was montaged. So it is still possible that neither Harry nor Meghan did not hear each other's responses in the final version. Here is another interview which was done by Opah recently in a very similar setting to Sussex's one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

RachelCohen808 said:


> I've read that the interview was recorded using the newest technologies and the 'green screen' like the one done with BO earlier. It is also heavily edited so it is not possible to be sure what questions H or M are answering. They might have signed some sort of exclusive contract and did not have any creative input in to how the interview was montaged. So it is still possible that neither Harry nor Meghan did not hear each other's responses in the final version. Here is another interview which was done by Opah recently in a very similar setting to Sussex's one.
> 
> View attachment 5069984
> View attachment 5069985


Sure editing is very common and we know that this broadcast certainly tooled given that headline montage was clearly full of lies.

What I would say is that celebs tend to put out at least one public statement if they feel they have been wrongly represented and the dynamic duo haven’t said a word about what has been implied about the family. Instead they doubled down by clarifying it wasn’t QE or the late PP.

I don’t think any of these people are lying awake at night worrying that they have misled the public provided it keeps paying their way.

edit- missing a was. Is anyone else finding that the website keeps refreshing and deleting things?


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is one of Burrell’s lies/half-truths.  Why would the palace divy up Diana’s jewelry?  It makes no sense.


I can see leaving a very important piece to jewelry to a specific person rather than lumping it all in together. Despite all the marital problems Diana loved that ring.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This article claims William inherited the ring. Other articles said her personal jewellery was in a pool shared by the princes.
> So we've seen Kate with the sapphire ring and sapphire earrings, and Harry's wife has the Cartier tennis bracelet and the Asprey aquamarine ring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Princess Diana left in her will for when Prince Harry turned 30
> 
> 
> It was a poignant request that was finally fulfilled in 2014
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bristolpost.co.uk



Diana wore the Aqua more so it should be of more sentimental value IMO

It's also common for the oldest (girl, if there is a girl) child to inherit the E-ring in Britain (not sure east of the world)


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article by BA Laue
> *The End Game*
> _*The wedding was marvelous, the weather superb. Crowds ten deep along the mall to Windsor Castle. An American bride for the warrior-prince. The pubs rang out with cheers “To the Royal Couple”!*
> 
> A breath of fresh air; the Brits are always up for a breath of fresh air. They gave us the Rolling Stones, the Beatles, and the miniskirt, for heaven’s sake. And here she was, young, beautiful, American, an actress, Catholic, divorced, and biracial. Perfect. What could possibly go wrong? Meghan Markle was about to enter a life of luxury, glamour, and deference the likes of which few people can imagine, let alone aspire to, a life she craved but did not understand. The latest fashions, the finest entertainments, the love of a besotted young man who, with a little encouragement, might mimic the career of his kinsman, Lord Louis Mountbatten of Burma. *All this, and at so little cost to the bride.
> 
> In exchange for all this, the British people expected her to try to stay awake while visiting the gluten-free gumball factory *as the plant manager explains how the little suckers are produced. At times a plaque must be unveiled on the side of a post office, hospital, college, railway station, or army barracks. Occasionally little school children need to be patted on the head, no problem; the Duchess likes children, or so she says. And then *there are the trips, lots and lots of trips; to Fiji, Lesotho, Tonga, Tuvalu, and many more places that Her Highness has never heard of, and there will be gifts and dinners and more gifts and more little heads to be patted.* And then there are men standing in straight lines all wearing the same funny suits, carrying rifles because they have sworn to defend you and your family with their lives, if need be. All you have to do is walk past them down the line and smile. When you have a child, people will cheer and artillery will sound and bells will ring and there will be happiness everywhere. That’s it, that’s all that’s expected.
> 
> And it was unsurvivable. Unsurvivable.
> 
> *There were some early clues*; t*he toothless smile at the Trooping of the Colour* (it was almost a smirk). T*he reticence in allowing photos of her newborn son Archie to be published*. The move to Canada—well, all right, grandmother’s profile is on every coin so we’re not really that far away. But then California, bumming off friends or business contacts. Then Megxit—an act so shocking that it was easily compared to the 1936 abdication crisis. *To refuse to do your duty is a selfish impulse the British cannot understand*. It goes against their basic concepts of personal identity; it is akin to cowardice. Your duty is something you knew was expected of you when you were born to a specific role in society or took an oath to uphold certain principles or values. To dishonor them is to dishonor yourself. It is a way of thinking Meghan Markle cannot grasp.
> 
> And then the interview, complete with background music. Oprah, to her credit, said it was “your truth,” not “the truth.” Markle’s ridiculous contention that her son would not receive security protection or that he would not be provided a princely title is for an American audience not familiar with the workings of royal etiquette. *Harry could have bestowed his subsidiary title of Baron Dumbarton on his infant son immediately but refused in an act of petty narcissism rare in British society.* *His whining about money, as if fully expecting his countrymen to finance his lifestyle after he objected to carrying out his royal role.* And he spouted a lie that he thought the public might consider—that his father and brother were “trapped” in their roles, that their duty was thrust upon them as it was on him, that some devious entity had hijacked their true life paths. What garbage. It was a disingenuous ploy to escape the contempt merited by his failure of character.
> 
> *In its totality, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex engaged in an act of pure selfishness that bespoke a lack of respect for their family, their country, and the service they had pledged to perform.*
> 
> One can envision the reaction of the millions of women living in tiny houses or “council housing” trying to lovingly make them into homes for their families, clipping the 99-cent coupon for the roast beast Sunday feast, their mouths agape at the sheer nerve. One can only imagine the murmured comments at the Cavalry and Guards Club or White’s or the Victory Service, as everyone stood around the television in the library sipping single malts; “Well, no more balcony time for them,” “I’ll be damned,” “I wouldn’t have believed it if you had told me.” The pubs must have been silent, pints quietly poured as the Duchess described her awful royal existence from the garden of a nameless estate in the warm sunshine of California as people in London, Cardiff, Aberdeen, and Belfast continue to die from a pandemic in the cold, damp air of a British spring.
> 
> Prince Henry Mountbatten-Windsor, Duke of Sussex, seems consigned by his wife or by choice to a life of poolside parties, discussing the finer points of child rearing with his good friends Kanye and Wendy Williams, sipping pinot grigio while passing the appetizers to Fergie (the rapper, not his aunt), discussing the plight of the Ndebele with Lily Cole, and “making shapes” on the dance floor with the rest of the Beverly Hills bric-a-brac. *It makes the life of his great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, and his wife from Baltimore look absolutely disciplined by comparison.*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/



Sounds like someone's been visiting this thread


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> There's not enough gold left apparently and they use it sparingly (the Royals have a nugget of it) so maybe it's only for senior Royals.
> I've wondered why the Queen Mother chose to have it in her wedding ring too. I'd understand it if she had been marrying the Prince of Wales. Maybe she thought it would tie in with the fact she was Scottish, husband was English and she could include Wales too.
> I'm quite proud as a Welshie she did this. The mine is down the coast from me.



'We' have Scottish gold too, not enough to make it viable commercially. It's great they value _Welsh_ gold


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Diana wore the Aqua more so it should be of more sentimental value IMO
> 
> It's also common for the oldest (girl, if there is a girl) child to inherit the E-ring in Britain (not sure east of the world)


Yeah I think the aquamarine is a nicer ring than the sapphire personally. Maybe it would have made a nice engagement ring too but perhaps she could only keep a commissioned piece in the event of divorce 

I was just wondering about that. I reckon they’d get that gorgeous emerald-cut back off Camilla if she were to split with Charles as it was the queen mother’s but what about Diana’s stuff? Could Kate keep the ring if she were to divorce Will or is it still technically his?

I can see the logic of getting one made for the wedding then there’s no argument it’s yours.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I'm thinking she probably expected something huge and more bragworthy if she was going by Hollywood standards. And since she couldn't toss out the meaningful sentimental Botswana/Diana diamonds, she went with replacing the band. Poor design move. The pave band makes it look "too much and yet not enough".



I agree, the point of a solitaire, even if there is a halo/step surround/shoulders is to draw attention to the centre stone, not take it away. Fuelled with the taste for Disney-style merch


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> I have a very distinct memory of that part of the story and it isn’t that Harry was given the ring. That came from Paul Burrell Diana’s butler, who has proven himself to be grasping, deceitful and untrustworthy. The story has been repeated so much, that it has been taken as truth. My memory is William said very specifically at the time of her death that he wanted his mother’s ring.  It makes total sense to me. He saw her HRH removed after the divorce and promised her that he woukd reinstate it when he became King. The symbolism of his mother)s ring being worn by his future wife as Queen would not have been lost on him as something that belonged to Diana would be worn by a Queen, i.e. Diana never made it to being Queen, but her ring did.    Burrell tried to control the ownership of Diana’s possessions and kept many things that he was not supposed to have. I don’t believe a word he says. I could see Harry jumping onto this story as part of his victim narrative of always being treated as second best.* He should have realized at a young age that he was second, not necessarily second best. There is a difference and he could have taken another road in life if he was smart enough as he was given every advantage. He was not smart enough and he has proven that many times.*
> 
> 
> ETA. Saw the wiki entry. I don’t believe everything I read there. I knew a man who sued them over misinformation in the bio of him and he prevailed again them.


Exactly. He clearly doesn't have what it takes to the second best. Opportunities e.g. status, money, access to the best universities all around the world or a promising military career (with soft padding) others have to work hard for were offered to him on a silver plate. He was also extremely popular due to being Diana's son and his military achievements. Still, he was unable to use any of those to his advantage and carve a decent career out for himself. His faults were less obvious when he was influenced by his brother and the rest of the family, who had most probably intervened a number of times to cover up his blunders but when he's left to his own devices the unattractive, let's put it mildly, traits in his personality surfaced. Now he's under the orders of his new master who uses his instability and influenceable nature to use him as a puppet to her own advantage. The funeral trip might have been a little eye opener but I have doubts that he's braced for the moment when he would realize the measure of damage he did to himself, his family and country.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I think the aquamarine is a nicer ring than the sapphire personally. Maybe it would have made a nice engagement ring too but perhaps she could only keep a commissioned piece in the event of divorce
> 
> I was just wondering about that. I reckon they’d get that gorgeous emerald-cut back off Camilla if she were to split with Charles as it was the queen mother’s but what about Diana’s stuff? Could Kate keep the ring if she were to divorce Will or is it still technically his?
> 
> I can see the logic of getting one made for the wedding then there’s no argument it’s yours.



Even if (in the very highly unlikely event) Kate kept the ring, Charlotte would inherit it. 

A man should never expect the E-ring back after divorce. 

The e-ring is promise, a 'contract' he'll back to fulfil his promise of marriage. A man cannot take back his promise after if it's fulfilled. If the woman changes her mind or breaks the engagement in another way, then she is duty bound to return the ring since she broke the 'contract'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Sorry, didn't see this reply.
> Also to add, the rings are not 100% Welsh gold, just a sliver is put in, just enough to be able to put the hallmark on it.



The royal rings or the rings marketed as Clougau rings?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels said:


> I think that’s lovely.
> My parents have never bought rings at all. I’m just on the more is more trend I guess
> [...]


Thank you  I've always felt I'm married in my heart more than with my ring, if that explains it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I agree, the point of a solitaire, even if there is a halo/step surround/shoulders is to draw attention to the centre stone, not take it away. Fuelled with the taste for Disney-style merch


I agree though I find it’s not even so much these giant stones that irritate me so much as the weird, impractical shanks they have. I look at Beyonce’s split shank or that open one Scar Jo has and think - how is that meant to stay in place after constant wear? I suppose the reality is a lot of these rings are only worn on the red carpet and then go back in the safe.






papertiger said:


> Even if (in the very highly unlikely event) Kate kept the ring, Charlotte would inherit it.
> 
> A man should never expect the E-ring back after divorce.
> 
> The e-ring is promise, a 'contract' he'll back to fulfil his promise of marriage. A man cannot take back his promise after if it's fulfilled. If the woman changes her mind or breaks the engagement in another way, then she is duty bound to return the ring since she broke the 'contract'.


I agree with the divorce part- maybe I’d get a satisfaction out of giving it back if I really hated them. Mind you, was it zsa zsa who said ‘I’ve never hated a man enough to give his diamonds back’  

A friend broke off her engagement with an absolute pig and she gave him the ring back.
Personally. I felt there are cases when you should keep the ring even if you never got married because you already earned it. It’d also prevent him proposing to some other poor girl with it.

Add on - the ex-f actually inherited the ring now I think about it. 
If you suspect your relative is an idiot you should definitely think twice about leaving an engagement ring to them. 
Perhaps that’s why Will ended up with the sapphire after all


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The royal rings or the rings marketed as Clougau rings?


Without the CG bit for the Royals.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Fb


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Thank you  I've always felt I'm married in my heart more than with my ring, if that explains it.


That’s really sweet. 


Sharont2305 said:


> Without the CG bit for the Royals.


Sorry I’m a bit confused. I would imagine that the commercially available clogau is a mix of welsh gold and other origin gold e.g.








						Clogau 1854 18ct Gold 3mm Wedding Ring | Clogau
					

Item code 1854WED3. Since 1923, generations of the royal family have chosen rare Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, a tradition that Clogau shares.   For over 25 years we have been creating the most beautiful wedding jewellery containing rare Welsh gold – the Gold of Royalty.   Elegantly...




					www.clogau.co.uk
				



I read the queen’s ring was made from one Welsh nugget but does that mean other royal rings are a mix of Welsh gold and other golds or are they pure Welsh too but the important thing was QE’s was made from one piece? I dunno. 
I can’t see how they couldn’t have enough nuggets for about 20 pure welsh rings over about 100 years if they are still selling it commercially (though the blend is probably very blended I know) or maybe only the queen gets pure Welsh as a special honour. I don’t know.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Doubt it.  Those Mulroney kids are adorable and not the nasty type - their father is a sweetheart, totally unlike his own father, our ex-Prime Minister.
> 
> I think we'd hear something if the kids were out of control.
> 
> Also I think Jessica was too starstruck to act up in front of the royal family.  We are a constitutional monarchy here in Canada, after all.


There were rumblings that Jessica Mulroney, her daughter and Meghan were meangirling Charlotte when they were all trying on dresses before the wedding. Calling Charlotte chubby, that she was unkempt somehow (coming directly from playing at her school) and telling the Mulroney girl that she was the star of the flower girls. This came from others attending this occasion, I think the Cambridge's nanny Maria (?) was there.



Jayne1 said:


> As much as I've grown to respect them as a team, I found Kate's constant smiling to be a bit forced. Like an ad campaign for a lifestyle brand of clothing.
> 
> Great family though!


I agree, she was overdoing it with the laughing when they were at that golf outing and in the family film. I don't remember seeing her do this before. Maybe it's just media picking up on it for whatever reason they think they should. Or she's been told to by some BRF PR person who doesn't understand the concept of less is more, to do it. 

I feel for Kate, I think she's had to endure this far worse than she should have had to, especially as Meghan's wrath seems to have been very much aimed at her. Meghan was Harry's responsibility, not Kate's. And Kate's never been allowed to "speak her truth" publicly. The BRF should give her a well deserved break and I think Kate and Will only need to stay calm and carry on and deal firmly and solely on their own terms with the Montecito side of the family,  and things will work out well for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I think the aquamarine is a nicer ring than the sapphire personally. Maybe it would have made a nice engagement ring too but perhaps she could only keep a commissioned piece in the event of divorce
> 
> I was just wondering about that. I reckon they’d get that gorgeous emerald-cut back off Camilla if she were to split with Charles as it was the queen mother’s but what about Diana’s stuff? Could Kate keep the ring if she were to divorce Will or is it still technically his?
> 
> I can see the logic of getting one made for the wedding then there’s no argument it’s yours.



No clue about the UK, but in the US the ring is the wife's once the marriage goes through. If the engagement ends before a wedding the ring has to be returned.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> Fb
> 
> That’s really sweet.
> 
> Sorry I’m a bit confused. I would imagine that the commercially available clogau is a mix of welsh gold and other origin gold e.g.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clogau 1854 18ct Gold 3mm Wedding Ring | Clogau
> 
> 
> Item code 1854WED3. Since 1923, generations of the royal family have chosen rare Welsh gold to create their wedding rings, a tradition that Clogau shares.   For over 25 years we have been creating the most beautiful wedding jewellery containing rare Welsh gold – the Gold of Royalty.   Elegantly...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.clogau.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I read the queen’s ring was made from one Welsh nugget but does that mean other royal rings are a mix of Welsh gold and other golds or are they pure Welsh too but the important thing was QE’s was made from one piece? I dunno.
> I can’t see how they couldn’t have enough nuggets for about 20 pure welsh rings over about 100 years if they are still selling it commercially (though the blend is probably very blended I know) or maybe only the queen gets pure Welsh as a special honour. I don’t know.


The commercially available have a small amount of Welsh gold, I know that. Hadn't really thought if the Royals are pure Welsh gold, quite possibly they are. Like someone else said a nugget was given to The Queen Mother pre marriage and another was gifted pre Diana.
I know there is a shortage, the mine is closed. I remember seeing the owner on TV saying they do have enough to produce items for so many years, can't remember how long but this was a few years ago now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> Exactly. He clearly doesn't have what it takes to the second best. Opportunities e.g. status, money, access to the best universities all around the world or a promising military career (with soft padding) others have to work hard for were offered to him on a silver plate. He was also extremely popular due to being Diana's son and his military achievements. Still, he was unable to use any of those to his advantage and carve a decent career out for himself. *His faults were less obvious when he was influenced by his brother and the rest of the family, who had most probably intervened a number of times to cover up his blunders but when he's left to his own devices the unattractive, let's put it mildly, traits in his personality surfaced. Now he's under the orders of his new master who uses his instability and influenceable nature to use him as a puppet to her own advantage. The funeral trip might have been a little eye opener but I have doubts that he's braced for the moment when he would realize the measure of damage he did to himself, his family and country.*



I can't like this enough. Especially the fat parts.


----------



## Aimee3

jelliedfeels said:


> That is absolutely hilarious!
> 
> Now I’m picturing him running around in a tampax mascot costume.


Better than running around in a nazi costume!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Smirk and the jerk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle's Two Trooping the Colour Appearances Side-by-Side a Year Later!
> 
> 
> The new mom, who welcomed son Archie Harrison on May 6, made her first post-baby appearance at the annual celebration of the Queen's birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


she looks a lot like her mother in the pic on the right


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> she looks a lot like her mother in the pic on the right



She does! Her face was thinner and younger-looking before the baby and it seems she never got that old face back, either from weight to the face or fillers. She is looking more like her mom as she ages.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Sounds like someone's been visiting this thread


yes, maybe we're "royal experts" too


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> This is why I never wear navy. I don’t think it suits dark hair at all.
> 
> The thing that’s getting me is the fillers and her nose tilt, gosh has she had a lot of work done.
> To be fair to her, I get the impression the nasal droop is like one of those coastal cliff-edge houses where it’s a constant battle against subsidence.


excuse me because I know very little about PS but doesn't she have the opposite of nasal droop?  her nose slopes up like Harry's


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, maybe we're "royal experts" too



Better than some that get paid for the job - mentioning no names


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> There were rumblings that Jessica Mulroney, her daughter and Meghan were meangirling Charlotte when they were all trying on dresses before the wedding. Calling Charlotte chubby, that she was unkempt somehow (coming directly from playing at her school) and telling the Mulroney girl that she was the star of the flower girls. This came from others attending this occasion, I think the Cambridge's nanny Maria (?) was there.


But the daughter is only eight years old, so she would’ve been five at the time of the wedding. I can’t see a five-year-old mean girling anyone.

I can see Meg, an American, not having as much respect for the BRF as we Canadians do. We’re part of the monarchy. The queen is on our money. So, barging into the palace and being rude? Hard to believe.

I can see it for Meg though. lol


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Better than some that get paid for the job - mentioning no names
> 
> View attachment 5070132


I was going to say the same thing, lol


----------



## bag-mania

RachelCohen808 said:


> I've read that the interview was recorded remotely using the the 'green screen' like the one done with BO earlier so Oprah was not even in the same place as them. It is also heavily edited so it is not possible to be sure what questions H or M are answering. They might have signed some sort of exclusive contract and did not have any creative input in to how the interview was montaged. So it is still possible that neither Harry nor Meghan did not hear each other's responses in the final version. Here is another interview which was done by Opah recently in a very similar setting to Sussex's one.
> 
> View attachment 5069984
> View attachment 5069985



I'm afraid you are reaching there. The interview was recorded over the course of two days, with additional follow-up work shot later. The content was undoubtedly edited to show the most outrageous claims they made, but the fact remains they did make those claims. It is unclear whose property they were on for most of the interview. It was said to have been at the home of an unnamed friend of Oprah's (Hi Gayle!). However, if you wonder about the authenticity of it, you need only watch the "chicken coop" scenes again. There Oprah is seated between Meghan and Harry and she turns to gauge Harry's response to one of Meghan's more wild accusations. The moment Oprah turns to him, Harry ducks his head and stares intently at a chicken. He is visibly uncomfortable with what his wife just said and he doesn't want Oprah to ask him about it. 

Frankly, I would love to see some of the scenes that were not used. I bet there were more contradictions in their narrative that deserve scrutiny.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> But the daughter is only eight years old, so she would’ve been five at the time of the wedding. I can’t see a five-year-old mean girling anyone.
> 
> I can see Meg, an American, not having as much respect for the BRF as we Canadians do. We’re part of the monarchy. The queen is on our money. So, barging into the palace and being rude? Hard to believe.
> 
> I can see it for Meg though. lol


Didn't Jessica Mulroney get into trouble for bullying someone? If MM was dismissive of Charlotte, I can see Mulroney taking her side, and then the daughter would have copied whatever Mummy does.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Didn't Jessica Mulroney get into trouble for bullying someone? If MM was dismissive of Charlotte, I can see Mulroney taking her side, and then the daughter would have copied whatever Mummy does.


but someone said the girl was five - kinda young for bullying


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> but someone said the girl was five - kinda young for bullying


Not bullying on her own, but if Jessica says, "Ivy, you look lovely. Not like that dirty girl over there. Such a mess!", the mum's attitude would encourage her 5-year-old to be unfriendly towards the 3-year-old.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jenniferlr

I've seen a five year old girl bully in my son's Kindergarten class:  Girl #1 pleased as punch with her princess costume for Halloween.  Girl #2 with a mean look on her face tells her "you're too fat to be a princess".  They're all now in 4th grade and Girl #2 is still at it.  A few minutes with her mother and you realize where she learned to do it.


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I think the aquamarine is a nicer ring than the sapphire personally. Maybe it would have made a nice engagement ring too but perhaps she could only keep a commissioned piece in the event of divorce


I never liked that sapphire ring from the moment I saw it, when they posed in front of the cameras for the first time.

It looked blackish, not blue and anything other than a macro shot, looked cheap.

And then of course I thought of it as being a cursed ring, although it’s lovely to see that Kate has broken that curse.

I do love that aquamarine ring though!


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Didn't Jessica Mulroney get into trouble for bullying someone? If MM was dismissive of Charlotte, I can see Mulroney taking her side, and then the daughter would have copied whatever Mummy does.


Again, as Canadians, I find it hard to believe that someone would barge into the palace and bully the child of our future queen.

It’s been reported that Jessica was mean to a fellow relatively unknown influencer, but that’s a whole different thing.

A Canadian stylist, being allowed into the palace for the first time and feeling superior to our future queen and her daughter is just too hard to believe.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I never liked that sapphire ring from the moment I saw it, when they posed in front of the cameras for the first time.
> 
> It looked blackish, not blue and anything other than a macro shot, looked cheap.
> 
> And then of course I thought of it as being a cursed ring, although it’s lovely to see that Kate has broken that curse.
> 
> I do love that aquamarine ring though!


the aquamarine one is less valuable but beautiful
Fergie's ring looks like it's from a dept store to me


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I'm afraid you are reaching there. The interview was recorded over the course of two days, with additional follow-up work shot later. The content was undoubtedly edited to show the most outrageous claims they made, but the fact remains they did make those claims. It is unclear whose property they were on for most of the interview. It was said to have been at the home of an unnamed friend of Oprah's (Hi Gayle!). However, if you wonder about the authenticity of it, you need only watch the "chicken coop" scenes again. There Oprah is seated between Meghan and Harry and she turns to gauge Harry's response to one of Meghan's more wild accusations. The moment Oprah turns to him, Harry ducks his head and stares intently at a chicken. He is visibly uncomfortable with what his wife just said and he doesn't want Oprah to ask him about it.
> 
> Frankly, I would love to see some of the scenes that were not used. I bet there were more contradictions in their narrative that deserve scrutiny.


He gives new meaning to the term "henpecked".

Perhaps he doesn't fear his wife nor does she abuse him, but many spouses will not embarrass their other half in public or on camera. They would rather keep the peace by pretending not to see or hear whatever outrageous action happened.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Again, as Canadians, I find it hard to believe that someone would barge into the palace and bully the child of our future queen.
> 
> It’s been reported that Jessica was mean to a fellow relatively unknown influencer, but that’s a whole different thing.
> 
> A Canadian stylist, being allowed into the palace for the first time and feeling superior to our future queen and her daughter is just too hard to believe.


We will probably never know what really happened, although I'm sure MM will bring it up again and again.

If it's true that Kate wasn't around when it was happening and the nanny reported it to her, then it may be a strength in numbers situation, and Jessica only saw a vulnerable 3-year-old and forgot about the future queen. I re-read the articles about her threats to the influencer and she appears to have a really mean streak in her.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> We will probably never know what really happened, although I'm sure MM will bring it up again and again.
> 
> If it's true that Kate wasn't around when it was happening and the nanny reported it to her, then it may be a strength in numbers situation, and Jessica only saw a vulnerable 3-year-old and forgot about the future queen. I re-read the articles about her threats to the influencer and she appears to have a really mean streak in her.


the business about Meghan saying Kate made her cry was so galling....she's a real biatch - posing as a sweet little victim


----------



## rose60610

As for Meghan's face, there's so much filler it's like an over inflated balloon and squishes her eyes more shut. I imagine she had to redo her facial recognition  devices- iPhone, iPad, etc because she barely looks like the same person. There's an artful way of getting fillers, then there's Meghan's way. It matches her over-dramatic and over the top allegations Drama Queen persona.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I'm afraid you are reaching there. The interview was recorded over the course of two days, with additional follow-up work shot later. The content was undoubtedly edited to show the most outrageous claims they made, but the fact remains they did make those claims. It is unclear whose property they were on for most of the interview. It was said to have been at the home of an unnamed friend of Oprah's (Hi Gayle!). However, if you wonder about the authenticity of it, you need only watch the "chicken coop" scenes again. There Oprah is seated between Meghan and Harry and she turns to gauge Harry's response to one of Meghan's more wild accusations. The moment Oprah turns to him, Harry ducks his head and stares intently at a chicken. He is visibly uncomfortable with what his wife just said and he doesn't want Oprah to ask him about it.
> 
> Frankly, I would love to see some of the scenes that were not used. I bet there were more contradictions in their narrative that deserve scrutiny.


I'd heard there's 2 more hours of footage, god only knows what that's about?


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Again, as Canadians, I find it hard to believe that someone would barge into the palace and bully the child of our future queen.


Maybe it was a perfect storm .. per Lady Colin Campbell’s account ...
Charlotte was treated unkindly at dress fitting, when accompanied by her nanny not mum, and nanny would be circumspect at the time but reported to employers later
MM was being a diva , could not make up her mind
JM was MM’s stylist, so would have taken charge of all fittings and tried to be in charge
Ivy was there too, so, at least two if not more children were there
Dressmaking staff was there in addition to JM, MM and children

not justifying anyone or anything, but, it was crowded at the fitting, too many cooks in the kitchen, so, I can see where things got out of hand

a final thought on all these stories of tears ... perhaps the tears were after the fact ??? 

when first reported I PRESUMED that A upset B, and the B broke into tears at the time, IN FRONT of A...
but maybe tears came later ...

EX K was not a fitting, nanny was ... nanny tells K that things went badly and K breaks out in tears but not in front of JM or MM
OR .. dressmaking does not go smoothly, no tears at the time, but K feels badly, sends flowers to MM, MM does not feel this is enough of an APOLOGY for kerufffle at dressmaker’s, and bursets out in tears while pitching flowers into trash


----------



## lalame

RachelCohen808 said:


> I've read that the interview was recorded remotely using the the 'green screen' like the one done with BO earlier so Oprah was not even in the same place as them. It is also heavily edited so it is not possible to be sure what questions H or M are answering. They might have signed some sort of exclusive contract and did not have any creative input in to how the interview was montaged. So it is still possible that neither Harry nor Meghan did not hear each other's responses in the final version. Here is another interview which was done by Opah recently in a very similar setting to Sussex's one.
> 
> View attachment 5069984
> View attachment 5069985



I think if they were seriously misrepresented, we would've heard about it - from them or friends. But since then, their friends (thinking of Chrissy lately) have even come out and said things like "they said their truth" during the interview. So I don't think that happened in this particular case.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> but someone said the girl was five - kinda young for bullying


It could be possible I think, especially with Ivy being singled out in front of all the others as being " the favorite bridesmaid" and "extra special one". Children this age are impressionable and will mimic the adults. If the rumors are true and bridezilla acted as it was described in belittling Charlotte, Ivy mimicking her "Aunt Meghan" or whatever she was called, would not be surprising. Especially if Ivy was not reprimanded initially and it was allowed to continue.  Ivy has a mother who demonstrated her bullying tactics in trying to ruin a young black woman's career, which fortunately blew up in her face when the woman called Jessica out and made the bullying public. Probably not a "one off" (being Harry's wife's bestie at the time says a lot about her character) so not a good role model and who knows what Ivy might have already absorbed from her Mother about dealing with people.

It's interesting to revisit some of these reported incidents now that we have several years of data about Harry's wife and videos where we get glimpses of the nasty. Her sneer, for example, is shivering and she has a certain look that makes me want to run and find the amulet I brought home from the Bazaar in Istanbul that protects against the evil eye. There are not nice things going on inside her.

One who would know what really went on in the dressing rooms would be Maria, the Cambridge Nanny, who it was reported accompanied Charlotte to fittings. Maria could be threatened to internment in the Tower of London but would never ever say a syllable publicly about what transpired, a fact the Meanie would know and use to her advantage.

Found this on line, Ivy's "specialness" was highlighted in her role at the ceremony along with her brothers, who were responsible for the bridal veil:

From HELLO! magazine:

It is safe to say that the ten bridesmaids and page boys who played important roles at *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*'s royal wedding melted hearts as they walked down the aisle behind the bride on her big day. But on close inspection, one of the little bridesmaids wasn’t holding a bouquet of flowers like the rest – and there is a very simple reason why. Meghan's best friend Jessica Mulroney's four-year-old daughter Ivy had her hands free as she undertook her bridesmaid duties so that she could take Meghan's bouquet to hold during the ceremony.
Without a maid of honour, Meghan needed someone to hold her flowers for her, and would have wanted Ivy to feel like she had an extra-special role at her wedding, as her older twin brothers Brian and John, seven, were given the task of holding Meghan's veil.


----------



## LittleStar88

It's very clear that Kate lives rent-free in Meghan's head full-time. And Kate just continues on happily living her best life and not showing that it affects her in any way. Kate has much more important things to tend to, like selflessly supporting her patronages and being a loving mother and wife.

That must be so hard for Meghan to deal with on a daily basis.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> It could be possible I think, especially with Ivy being singled out in front of all the others as being " the favorite bridesmaid" and "extra special one". Children this age are impressionable and will mimic the adults. If the rumors are true and bridezilla acted as it was described in belittling Charlotte, Ivy mimicking her "Aunt Meghan" or whatever she was called, would not be surprising. Especially if Ivy was not reprimanded initially and it was allowed to continue.  Ivy has a mother who demonstrated her bullying tactics in trying to ruin a young black woman's career, which fortunately blew up in her face when the woman called Jessica out and made the bullying public. Probably not a "one off" (being Harry's wife's bestie at the time says a lot about her character) so not a good role model and who knows what Ivy might have already absorbed from her Mother about dealing with people.
> 
> It's interesting to revisit some of these reported incidents now that we have several years of data about Harry's wife and videos where we get glimpses of the nasty. Her sneer, for example, is shivering and she has a certain look that makes me want to run and find the amulet I brought home from the Bazaar in Istanbul that protects against the evil eye. There are not nice things going on inside her.
> 
> One who would know what really went on in the dressing rooms would be Maria, the Cambridge Nanny, who it was reported accompanied Charlotte to fittings. Maria could be threatened to internment in the Tower of London but would never ever say a syllable publicly about what transpired, a fact the Meanie would know and use to her advantage.
> 
> Found this on line, Ivy's "specialness" was highlighted in her role at the ceremony along with her brothers, who were responsible for the bridal veil:
> 
> From HELLO! magazine:
> 
> It is safe to say that the ten bridesmaids and page boys who played important roles at *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*'s royal wedding melted hearts as they walked down the aisle behind the bride on her big day. But on close inspection, one of the little bridesmaids wasn’t holding a bouquet of flowers like the rest – and there is a very simple reason why. Meghan's best friend Jessica Mulroney's four-year-old daughter Ivy had her hands free as she undertook her bridesmaid duties so that she could take Meghan's bouquet to hold during the ceremony.
> Without a maid of honour, Meghan needed someone to hold her flowers for her, and would have wanted Ivy to feel like she had an extra-special role at her wedding, as her older twin brothers Brian and John, seven, were given the task of holding Meghan's veil.


I hadn't recalled she had no maid of honor.  why? no friends? LOL
Let me guess - she didn't want anyone ugly as it would detract from her wedding party and someone too attractive might get too much attention.  wouldn't want another Pippa


----------



## TC1

rose60610 said:


> As for Meghan's face, there's so much filler it's like an over inflated balloon and squishes her eyes more shut. I imagine she had to redo her facial recognition  devices- iPhone, iPad, etc because she barely looks like the same person. There's an artful way of getting fillers, then there's Meghan's way. It matches her over-dramatic and over the top allegations Drama Queen persona.


The one pic in the Navy outfit was her first appearance after giving birth. So, she's puffy then..and in the OW interview. Clearly she's had work done, but perhaps some of the puffiness in pregnancy related? I guess we'll find out a few months after her "summertime" delivery.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I hadn't recalled she had no maid of honor.  why? no friends? LOL
> Let me guess - she didn't want anyone ugly as it would detract from her wedding party and someone too attractive might get too much attention.  wouldn't want another Pippa


LOL! One article I checked out claimed she had no maid of honor because she didn't want to have to pick between her friends. I thought "well, a coin toss could work if she could find two."

You've got her figured out and your reference to Pippa relates to something else. Supposedly Charlotte told Meanie she would become her Aunt, like her Aunt Pippa and Meanie got angry and told Charlotte she would be much better than her Aunt Pippa. One of those comments that at the time I thought was probably not true, but now years later, think, could be, wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## Chanbal

Wasn't Harry's wife going to be on maternity leave? 



_The Duchess of Sussex spoke with teenage girls as she encouraged the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation faced in order for their voices to be heard. Meghan hosted a virtual roundtable with a group of 13 to 18-year-olds - primarily girls of colour - who are part of the US non-profit organisation Girls Inc. The duchess, joined by the leaders of Girls Inc and The National Women's Law Centre, which advocates women's legal rights, spoke of "everyday struggles during Covid-19", including mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".









						Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has urged young girls to confront "everyday struggles" in a new heartfelt plea.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Wasn't Harry's wife going to be on maternity leave?
> View attachment 5070322
> 
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex spoke with teenage girls as she encouraged the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation faced in order for their voices to be heard. Meghan hosted a virtual roundtable with a group of 13 to 18-year-olds - primarily girls of colour - who are part of the US non-profit organisation Girls Inc. The duchess, joined by the leaders of Girls Inc and The National Women's Law Centre, which advocates women's legal rights, spoke of "everyday struggles during Covid-19", including mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has urged young girls to confront "everyday struggles" in a new heartfelt plea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _




_* "everyday struggles during Covid-19", including mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".*_

Not to diminish the everyday struggles of so many people during Covid, but I get the feeling that she is talking about herself.


----------



## gerryt

xincinsin said:


> We will probably never know what really happened, although I'm sure MM will bring it up again and again.
> 
> If it's true that Kate wasn't around when it was happening and the nanny reported it to her, then it may be a strength in numbers situation, and Jessica only saw a vulnerable 3-year-old and forgot about the future queen. I re-read the articles about her threats to the influencer and she appears to have a really mean streak in her.


Lady C has a video in this topic!


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Not to diminish the everyday struggles of so many people during Covid, but *I get the feeling that she is talking about herself.*



Well, it is her favorite subject.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> But the daughter is only eight years old, so she would’ve been five at the time of the wedding. I can’t see a five-year-old mean girling anyone.
> 
> I can see Meg, an American, not having as much respect for the BRF as we Canadians do. We’re part of the monarchy. The queen is on our money. So, barging into the palace and being rude? Hard to believe.
> 
> I can see it for Meg though. lol


Unfortunately, 5-year olds can and do bully and hurt other children, sanctioned by their parents or not.  

The information on this particular Meghan drama that came out was very specific in its details. Compared to the Heavily Pregnant One, whose stories and claims are always conveniently vague.


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> _* "everyday struggles during Covid-19", including mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".*_
> 
> Not to diminish the everyday struggles of so many people during Covid, but I get the feeling that she is talking about herself.


Very possible, I've no patience for professional victims with so many resources available to them.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xincinsin said:


> We will probably never know what really happened, although I'm sure MM will bring it up again and again.
> 
> If it's true that Kate wasn't around when it was happening and the nanny reported it to her, then it may be a strength in numbers situation, and Jessica only saw a vulnerable 3-year-old and forgot about the future queen. I re-read the articles about her threats to the influencer and she appears to have a really mean streak in her.


Yes. She and Meghan do seem to get on really well most of the time and it's probably no coincidence.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Again, as Canadians, I find it hard to believe that someone would barge into the palace and bully the child of our future queen.
> 
> It’s been reported that Jessica was mean to a fellow relatively unknown influencer, but that’s a whole different thing.
> 
> A Canadian stylist, being allowed into the palace for the first time and feeling superior to our future queen and her daughter is just too hard to believe.


Maybe Jessica took her cues on behaviour among the BRF, from Meghan?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> Wasn't Harry's wife going to be on maternity leave?
> View attachment 5070322
> 
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex spoke with teenage girls as she encouraged the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation faced in order for their voices to be heard. Meghan hosted a virtual roundtable with a group of 13 to 18-year-olds - primarily girls of colour - who are part of the US non-profit organisation Girls Inc. The duchess, joined by the leaders of Girls Inc and The National Women's Law Centre, which advocates women's legal rights, spoke of "everyday struggles during Covid-19", including mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has urged young girls to confront "everyday struggles" in a new heartfelt plea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Where's the "Like barf emoji"?!


----------



## marietouchet

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Maybe Jessica took her cues on behaviour among the BRF, from Meghan?


Well, it was a huge make or break moment for JM's stylist business, it was going to be televised to like a BAZILLION people and MM was being a diva 
Yes, MM & JM were friends before and JM dressed her, but arguably JM was more famous (FIL is past Canadian PM) - before the engagement
I can see how their relationship might have changed after engagement when MM became the super star, and could unleash her inner DIVA
Plus the stress of the mega wedding - BRIDEZILLA time


----------



## V0N1B2

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Yes. She and Meghan do seem to get on really well most of the time and it's probably no coincidence.


They get along well because Harry’s wife owes Jessica for making her who she is - or who she became in order to snag Harry. It was Jessica’s (and Ben’s) connections that M used to climb the Toronto social scene’s ladder. She would be nothing without her. I’m pretty sure it was Jessica who introduced M to Soho House, her celeb chef boyfriend Corey, and she probably even got her the gig with Reitmans. It was written in this thread just a few days ago about the paparazzi guy who said Harry’s wife would tip them off that she was going to be leaving a particular restaurant.
Jessica taught her all the ins and outs of self-promotion IMO. I mean, M was the member of an ensemble cast, on a cable tv series filmed in Toronto. She was an unknown. The only reason I had even heard of the show was because my then-boyfriend worked in the Bay-Adelaide Centre where some scenes were filmed.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

kipp said:


> _* "everyday struggles during Covid-19", including mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".*_
> 
> Not to diminish the everyday struggles of so many people during Covid, but I get the feeling that she is talking about herself.



I don't know any normal/average person who has to deal with 'identity loss' with or without covid19. Also the isolation is extreme for some people with and without covid19.

I work in the healthcare sector, and many of my patients (mainly elderly) suffer from loneliness, which actually can lead to death/illness. It breaks my heart that I cannot give them more of my time. Sometimes I am the only human contact they have for months on end.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Well, it is her favorite subject.



Seriously, that seems to be her only subject


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Where's the "Like barf emoji"?!



Take your pick, unfortualtly no shortcuts 

  

Keeps it 'lighter' and more positive on tPF if we don't have an H/M emoji too readily available


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

V0N1B2 said:


> They get along well because Harry’s wife owes Jessica for making her who she is - or who she became in order to snag Harry. It was Jessica’s (and Ben’s) connections that M used to climb the Toronto social scene’s ladder. She would be nothing without her. I’m pretty sure it was Jessica who introduced M to Soho House, her celeb chef boyfriend Corey, and she probably even got her the gig with Reitmans. It was written in this thread just a few days ago about the paparazzi guy who said Harry’s wife would tip them off that she was going to be leaving a particular restaurant.
> Jessica taught her all the ins and outs of self-promotion IMO. I mean, M was the member of an ensemble cast, on a cable tv series filmed in Toronto. She was an unknown. The only reason I had even heard of the show was because my then-boyfriend worked in the Bay-Adelaide Centre where some scenes were filmed.


Yes, Soho House! Something someone wrote a couple of pages ago made me think of it but I forgot, thank you for bringing it up. Meghan and her pals, including that Marcus guy and Jessica. They sure got around.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> Take your pick, unfortualtly no shortcuts
> 
> 
> 
> Keeps it 'lighter' and more positive on tPF if we don't have an H/M emoji too readily available


You are right, of course. They're a bit confusing as they are, even right now. I preferred the Like button as it was actually, but the Love one is nice too.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Yes, Soho House! Something someone wrote a couple of pages ago made me think of it but I forgot, thank you for bringing it up. Meghan and her pals, including that Marcus guy and Jessica. They sure got around.



I'd love to find out where Markus Anderson is today and whether he is still in touch with Meghan. He has fallen out of the gossip pages. My assumption is he has been Markled after serving his purpose helping Meghan attain her goal. Still would like to hear all the dirt he has on her. Her meeting Harry was orchestrated by someone, I always wondered if it was Markus.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> Again, as Canadians, I find it hard to believe that someone would barge into the palace and bully the child of our future queen.
> 
> It’s been reported that Jessica was mean to a fellow relatively unknown influencer, but that’s a whole different thing.
> 
> *A Canadian stylist, being allowed into the palace for the first time and feeling superior to our future queen and her daughter is just too hard to believe.*



I agree with you.  I would love to hear Kate's side of what actually happened but she will never respond and get into some sort of transatlantic squabble with MM over it, which is likely what MM hopes.  It could have been as simple as Kate telling MM that the little girls needed to wear tights and MM taking the opportunity to burst into tears at Kate telling her something she didn't want to hear.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I agree with you.  I would love to hear Kate's side of what actually happened but she will never respond and get into some sort of transatlantic squabble with MM over it, which is likely what MM hopes.  It could have been as simple as Kate telling MM that the little girls needed to wear tights and MM taking the opportunity to burst into tears at Kate telling her something she didn't want to hear.


you mean like a tantrum?


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I'd love to find out where Markus Anderson is today and whether he is still in touch with Meghan. He has fallen out of the gossip pages. My assumption is he has been Markled after serving his purpose helping Meghan attain her goal. Still would like to hear all the dirt he has on her. Her meeting Harry was orchestrated by someone, I always wondered if it was Markus.


I read over on Quora he lives with them two in Montecito.


----------



## csshopper

*Re: Bridezilla and Charlotte's dress fittings for the wedding.

This is from a Tumblr account "The Empress" and I think it was the original source of the information about bridezilla and Charlotte. It frequently startles me how much stays accessible on the Net.*

Anonymous asked:
Hi!
So I have a cousin who works as within Givenchy and one of her best friends from work was at the fittings for Meghan’s wedding dress and the flower girls. My cousin had just went on maternity leave but basically what Meghan is saying is nothing but lies and nonsense as she was a complete diva and treated the seamstresses & Givenchy staff horribly so and was nasty to Clare who was there most of the time alongside my cousin’s colleagues and best friend. 
Meghan made Catherine cry, knowing she was pregnant and this was because she was incredibly nasty to Charlotte. Meghan was adamant on not having Charlotte or George in the wedding party but Charles & the Queen made her do so as they are Harry’s niece & nephew, and basically they’re paying for all this so you will do this. 
Meghan didn’t pay for the dress either as Charles paid for it, and she was forever changing her mind on what style & design she wanted for the dress & veil - this is why it was such a badly fitted dress & veil because it was basically a last minute piece put together as she wouldn’t stop changing her mind. 
All the staff were at their wits end because of Meghan. She would have them working on strict rules and long hours but then would shout at them saying that their work was awful, that she didn’t want it like that and forcing them to start all over again. She slapped one of the staff who was trying to do the fitting for one of the first design ideas that Meghan wanted, when they did nothing wrong. All the staff have said that Meghan definitely seemed to enjoy treating them like servants and constantly belittling them whilst on their backs about it all. Most were nervous wrecks, and I’m glad my cousin was off away from it all. 
The Givenchy staff gave her nicknames such as were The Dictator Duchess-To-Be, Meddlesome Meghan and Ms. Snobby. My cousin’s colleagues say they’re certain that how Clare allowed Meghan to constantly treat them, the Givenchy staff but also the end result not reflecting the high standards of Givenchy either, is a major factor in why Clare was let go so suddenly. But Clare is apparently quite like Meghan in that they are arrogant & pushy. 
But concerning Charlotte. Meghan HATED having to include her as a bridesmaid and made it quite frighteningly clear & constantly mocked and made fun of her especially when she would arrive from home or school like any young child, a bit messy from having fun, called her chubby and mocked her voice. Charlotte said to Meghan about how she’d be her new Auntie like how she had her Auntie Pippa which Meghan went off about saying she was much better than Pippa Middleton, who it had been announced privately, was pregnant. 
Catherine found out from María who witnessed it, and both ladies including William were furious as Charlotte had been reduced to tears but Meghan would then mock her for crying. Ivy Mulroney isn’t a nice little girl whatsoever, and was constantly rude to the women working on her dress fittings when she arrived and Meghan definitely showed a lot of favouritism towards Ivy over Charlotte and pitted them against one another, saying that Ivy was going to be the best flower girl and that Charlotte should learn how a proper girl behaves, basically encouraged Ivy to bully Charlotte which she did. Charlotte ended up getting pulled out of the fittings due to how Meghan and also Jess & Ivy were mocking and bullying her which is the reason why Charlotte’s dress didn’t fit to her proper measurements as the seamstresses had to use Florence van Cutsem for the fitting of Charlotte’s dress. Meghan had been rude to Catherine, Charlotte and María for pretty much the whole thing, and a strong rumour is that is one of the reasons the FabFour summit was so tense. 
The shoes were a big issue for the British born flower girls and their parents as they were really uncomfortable for them but Meghan refused to let them wear tights or even socks, and said to the Givenchy and Aquazurra staff that this was what happens when you coddle children, they turn into horrible whiny brats that want everything when it is HER wedding. The flower crown head-wreaths were also last minute and literally had Charlotte told at before she got in the car that here was hers which is when it was quickly fitted best as possible. Ivy was singled out again by Meghan as the special one, and called the mini maid of honour which is why she didn’t have a flower crown head-wreath or her own bouquet as Meghan had made it clear to all the other girls even Remi and Rylan, children of her college friend that they weren’t as good as Ivy. 
The florist was so last minute getting chased up that it is a reason for why the flower colour scheme didn’t fit with the wedding & flower-girl dress colours. Clare tried to get Meghan to try a more muted white fitting for a divorcee and an understated veil but Meghan just screamed at her about unnecessary negative opinions and my cousin’s best friend that was there at the time. 





Hello, thanks for sharing this. I think this is the first time I have heard that the family made her include Princess Charlotte and Prince George. I actually can believe that she did not want them in her wedding party as she does not like sharing the limelight with anyone, yes not even little children.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> excuse me because I know very little about PS but doesn't she have the opposite of nasal droop?  her nose slopes up like Harry's


Well Googling it I think we are at cross purposes as it seems to be used to describe all kinds of nasal undesirables whereas I’m  referring to a specific side effect and how I see the surgery is interacting with it.
Nasal droop, as I mean it, is not just  the tip of the nose goes downwards - I’d say that’s just having an aquiline nose, What I mean by nasal droop is a bit hard to explain but it’s essentially when the whole nose loses structure and definition and begins to look like it’s falling in on itself, it can also mean your nostrils become different sizes to each other, bumps appear  and the nose skin starts to look a bit saggy due to cartilage loss. 
The most common reason this happens is from snorting certain things which damage the inside of the nose.
Now M has clearly had one nose job at least. Her bridge is far narrower and I think she did have  nose tip turned up in cosmetic surgery as the retrousse nose is considered pretty. But what I mean is when you look at the sides and the bridge it does look to me like she’s had some cartilage loss and her nostrils are becoming uneven. I also think his nose looks like it’s been taking a lot of punishment....
obviously I don’t have any proof of this and I am being a bit careful about what I say full stop but it just looks... off to me


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No clue about the UK, but in the US the ring is the wife's once the marriage goes through. If the engagement ends before a wedding the ring has to be returned.


I'm not aware of any hard and fast rules about it all over here (but I could well be wrong!). All I know if it were me and it all ended either before or after marriage, I couldn't have any wedding or engagement rings in my possession afterwards - that's because I wouldn't be able to cope with the emotional attachment tbh. I guess if it were expensive I'd return it but otherwise I guess I'd either give it away or sell it depending on my circumstances.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> *Re: Bridezilla and Charlotte's dress fittings for the wedding.
> 
> This is from a Tumblr account "The Empress" and I think it was the original source of the information about bridezilla and Charlotte. It frequently startles me how much stays accessible on the Net.*
> 
> Anonymous asked:
> Hi!
> So I have a cousin who works as within Givenchy and one of her best friends from work was at the fittings for Meghan’s wedding dress and the flower girls. My cousin had just went on maternity leave but basically what Meghan is saying is nothing but lies and nonsense as she was a complete diva and treated the seamstresses & Givenchy staff horribly so and was nasty to Clare who was there most of the time alongside my cousin’s colleagues and best friend.



I know you are just re-posting this but I have a hard time believing this happened this way.  Seems like someone took an initial report of tears and drama at the fitting and ran with it, straight into Cruella de Ville territory. Next installment would be MM's kicking Charlotte's puppy whilst she laughs her evil Disney witch laugh.  ETA:  I'm not a fan of MM's, that's for sure, but let's call her out on verifiable behavior.  For example, bringing up the bridal fitting kerfuffle in the OW interview was definite mean girl behavior since she knew Kate could not/would not respond.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> but someone said *the girl was five - kinda young for bullying*


Not really.  I've seen toddlers and pre-kindergartners be nasty!  My daughter was in preschool and my son was in kindergarten at the same school.  Their playgrounds were separated by a fence.  One morning, I took my son to drop off my daughter first, and my son glared at a 4 year old and made a motion of bringing his eyes to his face and then pointing them at the child, like a "I'm watching you".  I was shocked and scolded him.  He turns around and tells me, "You don't see what I see!  That mean boy pushes my sister off the swing every day and laughs when she cries!  I'm not going to take it any more!"  I've never taught my kids to be violent, but I must admit I was quite proud of my son.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> *He gives new meaning to the term "henpecked".*
> 
> Perhaps he doesn't fear his wife nor does she abuse him, but many spouses will not embarrass their other half in public or on camera. They would rather keep the peace by pretending not to see or hear whatever outrageous action happened.


The chicken coop conversation suddenly makes perfect sense!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I'd heard there's 2 more hours of footage, god only knows what that's about?


PC was so mean!
Camilla was so mean!
Anne was so mean!
Zara was so mean!
Beatrice was so mean!
Eugenie was so mean!
Andrew was so mean!
PP was so mean!
Sarah was so mean!
George was so mean!
Charlotte was so mean!
And my favorite:  Louis was so mean!


----------



## xincinsin

TC1 said:


> The one pic in the Navy outfit was her first appearance after giving birth. So, she's puffy then..and in the OW interview. Clearly she's had work done, but perhaps some of the puffiness in pregnancy related? I guess we'll find out a few months after her "summertime" delivery.


She didn't look so puffy when the two of them did the media fanfare to show off the mystery baby. Is there such a thing as post-pregnancy bloating?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I know you are just re-posting this but I have a hard time believing this happened this way.  Seems like someone took an initial report of tears and drama at the fitting and ran with it, straight into Cruella de Ville territory. Next installment would be MM's kicking Charlotte's puppy whilst she laughs her evil Disney witch laugh.  ETA:  I'm not a fan of MM's, that's for sure, but let's call her out on verifiable behavior.  For example, bringing up the bridal fitting kerfuffle in the OW interview was definite mean girl behavior since she knew Kate could not/would not respond.



I found it over the top when Lady CC read it out in one of her videos, but what stopped me right in my tracks is that this is the second time Duchess Disney has been quoted using the word "coddle" (the other time was when the bullying allegations came up, she apparently said it wasn't her job to coddle staff).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> I know you are just re-posting this but I have a hard time believing this happened this way.  Seems like someone took an initial report of tears and drama at the fitting and ran with it, straight into Cruella de Ville territory. Next installment would be MM's kicking Charlotte's puppy whilst she laughs her evil Disney witch laugh.  ETA:  I'm not a fan of MM's, that's for sure, but let's call her out on verifiable behavior.  For example, bringing up the bridal fitting kerfuffle in the OW interview was definite mean girl behavior since she knew Kate could not/would not respond.


I absolutely agree with you, it would be hard to verify much of it. Have no idea how this gained so much coverage.  Some detail has been factually included in articles related to the dress part. The designer, Clare Keller, was quoted in Bride's magazine about the process which took the equivalent of 162 days.  

"In an interview with _Paris Match_ last year Keller talked about *the process of designing the dress, which took 3,900 hours to create...After thousands of hours and eight (!!) dress fittings, they finally landed on the simple but elegant design Markle ultimately married Prince Harry in."*


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found it over the top when Lady CC read it out in one of her videos, but what stopped me right in my tracks is that this is the second time Duchess Disney has been quoted using the word "coddle" (the other time was when the bullying allegations came up, she apparently said it wasn't her job to coddle staff).


'Coddle' is a very old-fashioned word, well to me anyway. It's a very good, apt and descriptive word but it's usage seems to be nowadays limited I would guess? Maybe it's used more than I know!  I've always associated it with the the way Meghan has used it or with 'coddled eggs' which is where I want to be with it. Nyum..


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> I absolutely agree with you, it would be hard to verify much of it. Have no idea how this gained so much coverage.  Some detail has been factually included in articles related to the dress part. The designer, Clare Keller, was quoted in Bride's magazine about the process which took the equivalent of 162 days.
> 
> "In an interview with _Paris Match_ last year Keller talked about *the process of designing the dress, which took 3,900 hours to create...After thousands of hours and eight (!!) dress fittings, they finally landed on the simple but elegant design Markle ultimately married Prince Harry in."*



3,900 hours to create that dress? 8 fittings? No way lol!!  That dress was so underwhelming and so poorly fitted. No wonder CWK lost her job at Givenchy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found it over the top when Lady CC read it out in one of her videos, but what stopped me right in my tracks is that this is the second time Duchess Disney has been quoted using the word "coddle" (the other time was when the bullying allegations came up, she apparently said *it wasn't her job to coddle staff).*



And yet here she is today lecturing teens about ‘everyday struggles’.  I guess this is her answer to W&K’s glorious anniversary posts.  Isn’t it better to show us than tell us? Isn’t it better to phrase her thought positively rather than negatively?  No one is asking for coddling - how about nurturing? how about helping staff rather than demanding they help her?  Hmmmm.

I have pasted the pretentious junk below. Her English teachers must have laughed themselves silly at her writing.

See the post by @Chanbal 
_Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea

— _to encourage the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation are facing so that their voices are heard. 
— engaging with communities of girls and girl-serving organisations, [?????]
— taking an approach of listening to and learning directly from a new generation of leaders.
— convened conversations with women and girls,
— spoken with gender icons [who?] as well as new leaders, and
— partnered with key organisations advocating for a more equitable and just future."
— spoke of mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
— gave the young women a platform to "help define a path forward and continue making an impact".
— ambitions of medical professionals, US senators, and presidents
— making an impact around education, social justice, and health and wellness in their own schools and communities".
— girls who attended had strong and incisive perspectives on issues critical to girls today.
— Meghan has rarely been seen in public since her bombshell interview with Oprah was aired last month. [that is her best strategy].


----------



## queennadine

xincinsin said:


> She didn't look so puffy when the two of them did the media fanfare to show off the mystery baby. Is there such a thing as post-pregnancy bloating?



So I actually gained more weight post-partum with both of my kids than during the pregnancies. I had bad morning sickness with both, lost weight, and then wasn’t able to put much on until after when I was nursing and ravenous. So I’ll say it’s entirely possible this happened to her.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> And yet here she is today lecturing teens about ‘everyday struggles’.  I guess this is her answer to W&K’s glorious anniversary posts.  Isn’t it better to show us than tell us? Isn’t it better to phrase her thought positively rather than negatively?  No one is asking for coddling - how about nurturing? how about helping staff rather than demanding they help her?  Hmmmm.
> 
> I have pasted the pretentious junk below. Her English teachers must have laughed themselves silly at her writing.
> 
> See the post by @Chanbal
> _Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> — _to encourage the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation are facing so that their voices are heard.
> — engaging with communities of girls and girl-serving organisations, [?????]
> — taking an approach of listening to and learning directly from a new generation of leaders.
> — convened conversations with women and girls,
> — spoken with gender icons [who?] as well as new leaders, and
> — partnered with key organisations advocating for a more equitable and just future."
> — spoke of mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> — gave the young women a platform to "help define a path forward and continue making an impact".
> — ambitions of medical professionals, US senators, and presidents
> — making an impact around education, social justice, and health and wellness in their own schools and communities".
> — girls who attended had strong and incisive perspectives on issues critical to girls today.
> — Meghan has rarely been seen in public since her bombshell interview with Oprah was aired last month. [that is her best strategy].


Dude, that's lot of pressure, man.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> 3,900 hours to create that dress? 8 fittings? No way lol!!  That dress was so underwhelming and so poorly fitted. No wonder CWK lost her job at Givenchy.



Wow, no kidding! I don't believe it... must be a typo or just a flat out exaggeration. Out of curiosity, I looked up a celeb wedding dress I liked recently, Sophie Turner's, and this unique and detailed dress "only" took 350 hours! It fits her like a glove too. EDIT: Okay, I was wrong - it took 1,050 hours!

"For Turner’s dress, more than 10 embroiderers worked for 1,050 hours on the 14 meters of tulle, covered with a digitally designed pattern of more than 650,000 stitches. Each panel was embroidered with 50,400 crystal beads and 50,400 white beads."




Edit: I actually liked Meghan's wedding dress so not knocking the dress but there's no way it took that much work.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> 3,900 hours to create that dress? 8 fittings? No way lol!!  That dress was so underwhelming and so poorly fitted. No wonder CWK lost her job at Givenchy.


She knew what a train wreck that dress was so she puts out this fairy tale as damage control. It didn’t work, did it.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> And yet here she is today lecturing teens about ‘everyday struggles’.  I guess this is her answer to W&K’s glorious anniversary posts.  Isn’t it better to show us than tell us? Isn’t it better to phrase her thought positively rather than negatively?  No one is asking for coddling - how about nurturing? how about helping staff rather than demanding they help her?  Hmmmm.
> 
> I have pasted the pretentious junk below. Her English teachers must have laughed themselves silly at her writing.
> 
> See the post by @Chanbal
> _Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> — _to encourage the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation are facing so that their voices are heard.
> — engaging with communities of girls and girl-serving organisations, [?????]
> — taking an approach of listening to and learning directly from a new generation of leaders.
> — convened conversations with women and girls,
> — spoken with gender icons [who?] as well as new leaders, and
> — partnered with key organisations advocating for a more equitable and just future."
> — spoke of mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> — gave the young women a platform to "help define a path forward and continue making an impact".
> — ambitions of medical professionals, US senators, and presidents
> — making an impact around education, social justice, and health and wellness in their own schools and communities".
> — girls who attended had strong and incisive perspectives on issues critical to girls today.
> — Meghan has rarely been seen in public since her bombshell interview with Oprah was aired last month. [that is her best strategy].



Her daily posts that are meant to be inspiring are absolutely draining.  I’m starting to picture her wide eyed, arched eyebrows, robot head on Stuart Smalley’s body during an SNL “Daily Affirmations” skit every time one of her idiotic PR releases comes out :

“I’m good enough,
I’m smart enough,
And gosh darn it,
People like ME!!!!”


----------



## gerryt

csshopper said:


> *Re: Bridezilla and Charlotte's dress fittings for the wedding.
> 
> This is from a Tumblr account "The Empress" and I think it was the original source of the information about bridezilla and Charlotte. It frequently startles me how much stays accessible on the Net.*
> 
> Anonymous asked:
> Hi!
> So I have a cousin who works as within Givenchy and one of her best friends from work was at the fittings for Meghan’s wedding dress and the flower girls. My cousin had just went on maternity leave but basically what Meghan is saying is nothing but lies and nonsense as she was a complete diva and treated the seamstresses & Givenchy staff horribly so and was nasty to Clare who was there most of the time alongside my cousin’s colleagues and best friend.
> Meghan made Catherine cry, knowing she was pregnant and this was because she was incredibly nasty to Charlotte. Meghan was adamant on not having Charlotte or George in the wedding party but Charles & the Queen made her do so as they are Harry’s niece & nephew, and basically they’re paying for all this so you will do this.
> Meghan didn’t pay for the dress either as Charles paid for it, and she was forever changing her mind on what style & design she wanted for the dress & veil - this is why it was such a badly fitted dress & veil because it was basically a last minute piece put together as she wouldn’t stop changing her mind.
> All the staff were at their wits end because of Meghan. She would have them working on strict rules and long hours but then would shout at them saying that their work was awful, that she didn’t want it like that and forcing them to start all over again. She slapped one of the staff who was trying to do the fitting for one of the first design ideas that Meghan wanted, when they did nothing wrong. All the staff have said that Meghan definitely seemed to enjoy treating them like servants and constantly belittling them whilst on their backs about it all. Most were nervous wrecks, and I’m glad my cousin was off away from it all.
> The Givenchy staff gave her nicknames such as were The Dictator Duchess-To-Be, Meddlesome Meghan and Ms. Snobby. My cousin’s colleagues say they’re certain that how Clare allowed Meghan to constantly treat them, the Givenchy staff but also the end result not reflecting the high standards of Givenchy either, is a major factor in why Clare was let go so suddenly. But Clare is apparently quite like Meghan in that they are arrogant & pushy.
> But concerning Charlotte. Meghan HATED having to include her as a bridesmaid and made it quite frighteningly clear & constantly mocked and made fun of her especially when she would arrive from home or school like any young child, a bit messy from having fun, called her chubby and mocked her voice. Charlotte said to Meghan about how she’d be her new Auntie like how she had her Auntie Pippa which Meghan went off about saying she was much better than Pippa Middleton, who it had been announced privately, was pregnant.
> Catherine found out from María who witnessed it, and both ladies including William were furious as Charlotte had been reduced to tears but Meghan would then mock her for crying. Ivy Mulroney isn’t a nice little girl whatsoever, and was constantly rude to the women working on her dress fittings when she arrived and Meghan definitely showed a lot of favouritism towards Ivy over Charlotte and pitted them against one another, saying that Ivy was going to be the best flower girl and that Charlotte should learn how a proper girl behaves, basically encouraged Ivy to bully Charlotte which she did. Charlotte ended up getting pulled out of the fittings due to how Meghan and also Jess & Ivy were mocking and bullying her which is the reason why Charlotte’s dress didn’t fit to her proper measurements as the seamstresses had to use Florence van Cutsem for the fitting of Charlotte’s dress. Meghan had been rude to Catherine, Charlotte and María for pretty much the whole thing, and a strong rumour is that is one of the reasons the FabFour summit was so tense.
> The shoes were a big issue for the British born flower girls and their parents as they were really uncomfortable for them but Meghan refused to let them wear tights or even socks, and said to the Givenchy and Aquazurra staff that this was what happens when you coddle children, they turn into horrible whiny brats that want everything when it is HER wedding. The flower crown head-wreaths were also last minute and literally had Charlotte told at before she got in the car that here was hers which is when it was quickly fitted best as possible. Ivy was singled out again by Meghan as the special one, and called the mini maid of honour which is why she didn’t have a flower crown head-wreath or her own bouquet as Meghan had made it clear to all the other girls even Remi and Rylan, children of her college friend that they weren’t as good as Ivy.
> The florist was so last minute getting chased up that it is a reason for why the flower colour scheme didn’t fit with the wedding & flower-girl dress colours. Clare tried to get Meghan to try a more muted white fitting for a divorcee and an understated veil but Meghan just screamed at her about unnecessary negative opinions and my cousin’s best friend that was there at the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hello, thanks for sharing this. I think this is the first time I have heard that the family made her include Princess Charlotte and Prince George. I actually can believe that she did not want them in her wedding party as she does not like sharing the limelight with anyone, yes not even little children.


Also, re the shoes being uncomfortable, there are wedding pictures of Charlotte lifting her feet way off the ground, she looks uncomfortable to me and surely tights would have been a simple solution if the shoes were rubbing the children?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> And yet here she is today lecturing teens about ‘everyday struggles’.  I guess this is her answer to W&K’s glorious anniversary posts.  Isn’t it better to show us than tell us? Isn’t it better to phrase her thought positively rather than negatively?  No one is asking for coddling - how about nurturing? how about helping staff rather than demanding they help her?  Hmmmm.
> 
> I have pasted the pretentious junk below. Her English teachers must have laughed themselves silly at her writing.
> 
> See the post by @Chanbal
> _Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> — _to encourage the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation are facing so that their voices are heard.
> — engaging with communities of girls and girl-serving organisations, [?????]
> — taking an approach of listening to and learning directly from a new generation of leaders.
> — convened conversations with women and girls,
> — spoken with gender icons [who?] as well as new leaders, and
> — partnered with key organisations advocating for a more equitable and just future."
> — spoke of mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> — gave the young women a platform to "help define a path forward and continue making an impact".
> — ambitions of medical professionals, US senators, and presidents
> — making an impact around education, social justice, and health and wellness in their own schools and communities".
> — girls who attended had strong and incisive perspectives on issues critical to girls today.
> — Meghan has rarely been seen in public since her bombshell interview with Oprah was aired last month. [that is her best strategy].


I can’t help rolling my eyes at some of these ‘awareness’ charities full stop. 9 times out of 10 people are ‘aware’ of a problem, especially if they are suffering from it, there is just no easy or cheap solution. The job of charities in my book is to either to provide the solution or fund research into finding it. 
The last thing most causes need is some self-promoting spokesperson  siphoning off donations to create a nice little soapbox for themselves.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> I absolutely agree with you, it would be hard to verify much of it. Have no idea how this gained so much coverage.  Some detail has been factually included in articles related to the dress part. The designer, Clare Keller, was quoted in Bride's magazine about the process which took the equivalent of 162 days.
> 
> "In an interview with _Paris Match_ last year Keller talked about *the process of designing the dress, which took 3,900 hours to create...After thousands of hours and eight (!!) dress fittings, they finally landed on the simple but elegant design Markle ultimately married Prince Harry in."*



I get 'Empress' now, a la The Empress' New Clothes 

Nice dress, simple design, good colour on M, but did _not_ fit at all. 

Where _did_ those hours go?


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Wow, no kidding! I don't believe it... must be a typo or just a flat out exaggeration. Out of curiosity, I looked up a celeb wedding dress I liked recently, Sophie Turner's, and this unique and detailed dress "only" took 350 hours! It fits her like a glove too. EDIT: Okay, I was wrong - it took 1,050 hours!
> 
> "For Turner’s dress, more than 10 embroiderers worked for 1,050 hours on the 14 meters of tulle, covered with a digitally designed pattern of more than 650,000 stitches. Each panel was embroidered with 50,400 crystal beads and 50,400 white beads."
> 
> View attachment 5070868
> 
> 
> Edit: I actually liked Meghan's wedding dress so not knocking the dress but there's no way it took that much work.


 The numbers are those stated by the designer Clare Waight Keller, and given all that she had to do to achieve the final gown, it probably even seemed longer to her as she was going through it.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> And yet here she is today lecturing teens about ‘everyday struggles’.  I guess this is her answer to W&K’s glorious anniversary posts.  Isn’t it better to show us than tell us? Isn’t it better to phrase her thought positively rather than negatively?  No one is asking for coddling - how about nurturing? how about helping staff rather than demanding they help her?  Hmmmm.
> 
> I have pasted the pretentious junk below. Her English teachers must have laughed themselves silly at her writing.
> 
> See the post by @Chanbal
> _Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> — _to encourage the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation are facing so that their voices are heard.
> — engaging with communities of girls and girl-serving organisations, [?????]
> — taking an approach of listening to and learning directly from a new generation of leaders.
> — convened conversations with women and girls,
> — spoken with gender icons [who?] as well as new leaders, and
> — partnered with key organisations advocating for a more equitable and just future."
> — spoke of mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> — gave the young women a platform to "help define a path forward and continue making an impact".
> — ambitions of medical professionals, US senators, and presidents
> — making an impact around education, social justice, and health and wellness in their own schools and communities".
> — girls who attended had strong and incisive perspectives on issues critical to girls today.
> — Meghan has rarely been seen in public since her bombshell interview with Oprah was aired last month. [that is her best strategy].



What a lot of hot air


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> I get 'Empress' now, a la The Empress' New Clothes
> 
> Nice dress, simple design, good colour on M, but did _not_ fit at all.
> 
> Where _did_ those hours go?


Tantrums?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gerryt

youngster said:


> 3,900 hours to create that dress? 8 fittings? No way lol!!  That dress was so underwhelming and so poorly fitted. No wonder CWK lost her job at Givenchy.


Though to be fair if Harry’s wife was changing her mind constantly as to the design, up till the last minute, then its not very fair to sack the designer.  I think it’s more likely that the feedback from one of the Givenchy staff which we’ve all seen, which suggests she was let go because she didnt step up to the plate and manage the way the staff were being treated, is more likely to be the truth. Just my opinion.


----------



## Genie27

jelliedfeels said:


> Or maybe she sent the same apology bouquet K gave her several years later


we know she loves holding on to grievances till they turn to ash



CarryOn2020 said:


> And yet here she is today lecturing teens about ‘everyday struggles’.  I guess this is her answer to W&K’s glorious anniversary posts.  Isn’t it better to show us than tell us?
> 
> I have pasted the pretentious junk below. Her English teachers must have laughed themselves silly at her writing.
> 
> See the post by @Chanbal
> _Meghan Markle urges young girls to confront 'everyday struggles' in heartfelt plea
> 
> — _to encourage the "young activists" to share the challenges their generation are facing so that their voices are heard.
> — engaging with communities of girls and girl-serving organisations, [?????]
> — taking an approach of listening to and learning directly from a new generation of leaders.
> — convened conversations with women and girls,
> — spoken with gender icons [who?] as well as new leaders, and
> — partnered with key organisations advocating for a more equitable and just future."
> — spoke of mental health, racism and "identity loss and isolation".
> — gave the young women a platform to "help define a path forward and continue making an impact".
> — ambitions of medical professionals, US senators, and presidents
> — making an impact around education, social justice, and health and wellness in their own schools and communities".
> — girls who attended had strong and incisive perspectives on issues critical to girls today.
> — Meghan has rarely been seen in public since her bombshell interview with Oprah was aired last month. [that is her best strategy].


This reads like “key qualifications” action points on a resume. One that was auto generated by the aforementioned randomizer. Also one destined for the circular file by any reviewer because you know it’s all bull.


----------



## Icyjade

Backpedaling? Damage control? 









						Omid Scobie: Meghan 'was wrong to suggest Archie should be a Prince'
					

In her bombshell Oprah interview in March, Meghan, 39, said that her son was not made a Prince due to a change in protocol but 'may have been confused' her friend Omid Scobie says.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Icyjade said:


> Backpedaling? Damage control?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie: Meghan 'was wrong to suggest Archie should be a Prince'
> 
> 
> In her bombshell Oprah interview in March, Meghan, 39, said that her son was not made a Prince due to a change in protocol but 'may have been confused' her friend Omid Scobie says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



He claims that Meghan was wrong in saying that Archie should be given a title at birth and that there is more to the story, yet does not elaborate. This is just damage control now for good PR. I can't believe that they thought the public were that stupid that we wouldn't see through the holes in the story. We may not all have a private education, but we sure have basic critical thinking skills. These two both went to private schools (Harry went to the most prestigious school in the UK, were Prime Ministers and high ranking officials are made), yet they couldn't come up with a solid story.

She made claims that he would not get security or title and the reason for no security was because there is no title (what a dumb thing to claim when Princess B and E both have titles yet no security) and at the same time she says there are conversations of skin color of the child. H rebuked that claim when he said it was a member of the family that made that remark before marriage. So she was clearly misrepresenting the truth (which is just another word for lying). And if anyone has heard of the nursery story about the guy who cried wolf, then I feel this is where they are headed. I wouldn't believe anything they say anymore because of the extent of their dishonesty.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gerryt said:


> Though to be fair if Harry’s wife was changing her mind constantly as to the design, up till the last minute, then its not very fair to sack the designer.  I think it’s more likely that the feedback from one of the Givenchy staff which we’ve all seen, which suggests she was let go because she didnt step up to the plate and manage the way the staff were being treated, is more likely to be the truth. Just my opinion.



True, but Givenchy needs to be able to trust you do top notch work. I doubt they were too pleased to read all over the press and the internet how that haute couture dress didn't fit. It's the designer's job to at some point put their foot down with the client to protect the brand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Backpedaling? Damage control?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie: Meghan 'was wrong to suggest Archie should be a Prince'
> 
> 
> In her bombshell Oprah interview in March, Meghan, 39, said that her son was not made a Prince due to a change in protocol but 'may have been confused' her friend Omid Scobie says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Hu? Does Omid understand his future as a royal correspondent might not lie with the Sussexes? Or did he come off whatever he was smoking before.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> She made claims that he would not get security or title and the reason for no security was because there is no title (what a dumb thing to claim when Princess B and E both have titles yet no security)



Also, courtiers have strongly rejected this statement saying as long as they were in the UK, Harry's wife and any minor children would always have had protection. They couldn't really expect anyone, British citizens or Charles, expect to fund a horrendous security bill abroad, could they?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, courtiers have strongly rejected this statement saying as long as they were in the UK, Harry's wife and any minor children would always have had protection. They couldn't really expect anyone, British citizens or Charles, expect to fund a horrendous security bill abroad, could they?



In the United States I don't think they need security. She is not a well known actress and he is not famous there either. I don't see any serious security threats in the states. They only have normal treats that the rest of the population has to deal with (gun violence etc). The paps will be everywhere in LA, but they live in Santa Barbara and I don't think they would have commanded top dollar for their pictures if they didn't do the Oprah interview. 

When they were in Canada they had security until they 'stepped down', at which point the British taxpayer withdrew security money (well Charles ultimately made that decision). The Canadians said they would not fund their security so they moved to someones house in LA that had security. I wonder if the US government would like to fund their security since they were so sympathetic towards them? 

The security thing also doesn't make sense because they already had security and Archie would be with them at all times, so why would he need his own security?


----------



## lulilu

The designer's statement that the gown involved 3700 hours gives credence to the story read by Lady C.

It is likely because she made dozens of changes and demands.  They also can be counting the hours spent on embroidering the veil.

I always thought the flower girls looked silly and "unfinished" with their bare legs and feet.  They are little girls.  If not tights, why not short socks?  I never see little girls dressed like that with nothing on their legs/feet except in poor areas.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lulilu said:


> The designer's statement that the gown involved 3700 hours gives credence to the story read by Lady C.
> 
> It is likely because she made dozens of changes and demands.  They also can be counting the hours spent on embroidering the veil.
> 
> I always thought the flower girls looked silly and "unfinished" with their bare legs and feet.  They are little girls.  If not tights, why not short socks?  I never see little girls dressed like that with nothing on their legs/feet except in poor areas.


Was there ever a reason given for the little girls not wearing socks with their shoes? It's kind of a strange idea for marrying in a city and not on the beach in summer. Was Meghan reminiscing about her beach marriage to Trevor? Was it Meghan's adult manner of sticking it to the queen for demanding Meghan cover her legs with hosiery when on public duty? 

Everything seems to be a_ statement_ or sticking it to someone, for Meghan.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

To add to Luli's post, we're talking man hours, the hours each person involved in the making of the dress spent on it.  I can easily see the hours racking up when working with someone like Nutmeg.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> 3,900 hours to create that dress? 8 fittings? No way lol!!  That dress was so underwhelming and so poorly fitted. No wonder CWK lost her job at Givenchy.


I could see the veil taking many hours with all that embroidery but that gown was pretty simple.....however, they could have made it in more than one fabric...done someting and started over.  she is apparently pretty demanding


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Her daily posts that are meant to be inspiring are absolutely draining.  I’m starting to picture her wide eyed, arched eyebrows, robot head on Stuart Smalley’s body during an SNL “Daily Affirmations” skit every time one of her idiotic PR releases comes out :
> 
> “I’m good enough,
> I’m smart enough,
> And gosh darn it,
> People like ME!!!!”


that's hilarious


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Backpedaling? Damage control?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie: Meghan 'was wrong to suggest Archie should be a Prince'
> 
> 
> In her bombshell Oprah interview in March, Meghan, 39, said that her son was not made a Prince due to a change in protocol but 'may have been confused' her friend Omid Scobie says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


yawn


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I could see the veil taking many hours with all that embroidery but that gown was pretty simple.....however, they could have made it in more than one fabric...done someting and started over.  she is apparently pretty demanding



Were all of these hours spent on the 1 wedding dress?
She had 15+ dresses made by Givenchy. Knowing her time in the UK was short, maybe she was trying to get lots of work done.









						20 Times Meghan Markle Stunned in Givenchy
					

Meghan Markle clearly knows what she likes—and it's Givenchy.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Was there ever a reason given for the little girls not wearing socks with their shoes? It's kind of a strange idea for marrying in a city and not on the beach in summer. Was Meghan reminiscing about her beach marriage to Trevor? Was it Meghan's adult manner of sticking it to the queen for demanding Meghan cover her legs with hosiery when on public duty?
> 
> Everything seems to be a_ statement_ or sticking it to someone, for Meghan.




Rumours are while Kate tried to make it happen claiming tradition Duchess KnowItAll insisted it was too warm and formal. I bet the only reason was to go against Kate and to give the middle finger to tradition, not an actual reason that made sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I could see the veil taking many hours with all that embroidery but that gown was pretty simple.....however, they could have made it in more than one fabric...done someting and started over.  she is apparently pretty demanding



I think with haute couture dresses they make a mock-up out of cheap fabric (I want to say burlap, but obviously not. Does look a bit like rough linen, though), do fittings on that, then make up the real dress and do the final fitting so the expensive material is spared. That's with a normal client, of course.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Cavalier Girl said:


> To add to Luli's post, we're talking man hours, the hours each person involved in the making of the dress spent on it.  I can easily see the hours racking up when working with someone like Nutmeg.


I wonder how much of a financial loss was made by Givenchy on the dress - as in, was there an agreed budget, exceeded and the cost overrun part of the reason for Clare Keller's departure ?


----------



## papertiger

Shopaholic2021 said:


> In the United States I don't think they need security. She is not a well known actress and he is not famous there either. I don't see any serious security threats in the states. They only have normal treats that the rest of the population has to deal with (gun violence etc). The paps will be everywhere in LA, but they live in Santa Barbara and I don't think they would have commanded top dollar for their pictures if they didn't do the Oprah interview.
> 
> When they were in Canada they had security until they 'stepped down', at which point the British taxpayer withdrew security money (well Charles ultimately made that decision). The Canadians said they would not fund their security so they moved to someones house in LA that had security. I wonder if the US government would like to fund their security since they were so sympathetic towards them?
> 
> The security thing also doesn't make sense because they already had security and Archie would be with them at all times, so why would he need his own security?



They are his parents, their choice to take their son abroad, now they're responsible for his security, end of.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I could see the veil taking many hours with all that embroidery but that gown was pretty simple.....however, they could have made it in more than one fabric...done someting and started over.  she is apparently pretty demanding


Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.

*Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I wonder how much of a financial loss was made by Givenchy on the dress - as in, was there an agreed budget, exceeded and the cost overrun part of the reason for Clare Keller's departure ?



Certainly didn't generate the (financial) return for the House that Alexander McQueen's dress did when Kate wore hers a decade ago. If it had they would not have let CWK go. No-one seems to last long at Givenchy, but I would have thought that the wedding dress was a golden opportunity. It's a shame, I like a lot of her work (although I like the new Givenchy AW21 collection by Matthew Williams - quite 'hardcore' in comparison). For the UK, it's a loss because CWK was British and we pride ourselves on our designers' international reps.


----------



## plastic-fish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think with haute couture dresses they make a mock-up out of cheap fabric (I want to say burlap, but obviously not. Does look a bit like rough linen, though), do fittings on that, then make up the real dress and do the final fitting so the expensive material is spared. That's with a normal client, of course.


You might be thinking of muslin fabric, woven cotton, but MM wearing a prototype in cotton!? Good grief no! The tragedy


----------



## lalame

RAINDANCE said:


> I wonder how much of a financial loss was made by Givenchy on the dress - as in, was there an agreed budget, exceeded and the cost overrun part of the reason for Clare Keller's departure ?



Something tells me it was Charles who took any losses there


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages



Yeh, whatever marieclaire, recollections, reflections (and opinions) may differ. What I saw was a badly fitting dress, I don't care what the material was.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Certainly didn't generate the (financial) return for the House that Alexander McQueen's dress did when Kate wore hers a decade ago. If it had they would not have let CWK go. No-one seems to last long at Givenchy, but I would have thought that the wedding dress was a golden opportunity. It's a shame, I like a lot of her work (although I like the new Givenchy AW21 collection by Matthew Williams - quite 'hardcore' in comparison). For the UK, it's a loss because CWK was British and we pride ourselves on our designers' international reps.



I feel like Givenchy was so hot by that point already... M was kind of following the trend instead of other way around by wearing them. So I’m not that surprised it didn’t get MORE popular after her. I swear almost ever influencer and celeb was already carrying an Antigona.


----------



## Icyjade

She seems to wear ill fitting clothes often so no surprise her wedding dress was the same?


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rumours are while Kate tried to make it happen claiming tradition Duchess KnowItAll insisted it was too warm and formal. I bet the only reason was to go against Kate and to give the middle finger to tradition, not an actual reason that made sense.



In what world was that wedding not formal?  If she was wearing a never-ending veil, the children should have worn tights or socks.  She was simply being mean and antagonistic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages



Uhm, sorry. If everyone who looks at it feels it's ill-fitting, maybe think about your creative vision once more. If only someone with a degree in fashion engineering or a couture seamstress can see what you were going to achieve, something's off. How do they say, "If you can't explain it simply, you didn't understand it well enough".


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages



Interesting article. “Intentionally ill-fitting” is the epitome of spin lol so I take that with a grain of salt but I appreciate the detail into the fabric. I can imagine it was a really lovely fabric to feel and wear but probably a little too avant-garde for a wedding dress silhouette. That’s what made it I’ll fitting, it was not “intentional.” I’m sure “make it I’ll fitting” was not one of M’s requests to them.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> She seems to wear ill fitting clothes often so no surprise her wedding dress was the same?
> View attachment 5071180
> View attachment 5071181
> View attachment 5071182



Remind me not to choose a bandeau bra even for a boat/slash neck. Strapless bras don't have to look like that under a dress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

plastic-fish said:


> You might be thinking of muslin fabric, woven cotton, but MM wearing a prototype in cotton!? Good grief no! The tragedy



Yes, muslin, thank you! I couldn't for the life of me even think of the German word.


----------



## lulilu

Icyjade said:


> She seems to wear ill fitting clothes often so no surprise her wedding dress was the same?
> View attachment 5071180
> View attachment 5071181
> View attachment 5071182



Her penchant for ill-fitting strapless bras under thin knit materials shows her lack of style and taste.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> She seems to wear ill fitting clothes often so no surprise her wedding dress was the same?
> View attachment 5071180
> View attachment 5071181
> View attachment 5071182



Remember this ?











						Givenchy Bespoke Navy Pleated Skirt - Meghan's Mirror
					

An elegant pleated skirt, created for the Duchess by Clare Waight-Keller for Givenchy.




					www.meghansmirror.com


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I feel like Givenchy was so hot by that point already... M was kind of following the trend instead of other way around by wearing them. So I’m not that surprised it didn’t get MORE popular after her. I swear almost ever influencer and celeb was already carrying an Antigona.



Sometimes the accessories (including bags) and catwalk RTW reps are a bit different, just ask a Bal lover - but I do know what you mean.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Certainly didn't generate the (financial) return for the House that Alexander McQueen's dress did when Kate wore hers a decade ago. If it had they would not have let CWK go. No-one seems to last long at Givenchy, but I would have thought that the wedding dress was a golden opportunity. It's a shame, I like a lot of her work (although I like the new Givenchy AW21 collection by Matthew Williams - quite 'hardcore' in comparison). For the UK, it's a loss because CWK was British and we pride ourselves on our designers' international reps.



Kate's dress was one I would never pick for myself (I much preferred her second look), but it fit her impeccably, like painted on her body. Basically, like all of her formal clothes we have ever seen her in. I am not sure why apparently Duchess Disney was never let in on the secret that a good seamstress is everything.


----------



## lalame

Didn’t they have to do a last minute fitting on Kate’s dress too since she lost weight? Or maybe I’m thinking of her ring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Interesting article. “Intentionally ill-fitting” is the epitome of spin lol so I take that with a grain of salt but I appreciate the detail into the fabric. I can imagine it was a really lovely fabric to feel and wear but probably a little too avant-garde for a wedding dress silhouette. That’s what made it I’ll fitting, it was not “intentional.” I’m sure “make it I’ll fitting” was not one of M’s requests to them.



It also wrinkled badly, it was already not pristine anymore when they left the church.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I think she makes poor fashion choices. She isn't someone I would look to as a fashion icon. She seems to just follow trends even if they don't suit her, and I think she things the more expensive something is, the better it will look. I also wonder if she made a deal with companies behind the royal families back. Royals are not allowed to accept gifts or money to wear designers clothes or accessories, but I have a feeling she was paid secretly to wear Aquazurra shoes, she always seemed to wear them. Her shoes are the only thing that actually looked good on her. She does wear shoes that are a size bigger, and apparently that is so that they are more comfortable, but I've never heard of this. Maybe she just likes the baggy look. I like a more fitted, tailored and feminine style, so maybe I just have a different style to her.


----------



## gerryt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but Givenchy needs to be able to trust you do top notch work. I doubt they were too pleased to read all over the press and the internet how that haute couture dress didn't fit. It's the designer's job to at some point put their foot down with the client to protect the brand.


I do agree and I’m sure Givenchy were pretty pxxxxd off about the upshot, but to be honest M doesn’t strike me as someone who would react well to anyone putting their foot down about her choices, probably why the situation arose in the first place.  Maybe someone further up the chain should have taken up the matter with the RF given the threat to the company’s reputation - they must surely have known what was going on.  I just think that given everything we are hearing about Harry’s wife, leaving matters to the designer alone is unrealistic.  Doesn't excuse not backing the staff up though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember this ?
> 
> View attachment 5071185
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Givenchy Bespoke Navy Pleated Skirt - Meghan's Mirror
> 
> 
> An elegant pleated skirt, created for the Duchess by Clare Waight-Keller for Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansmirror.com



I do, I just wasn't aware it was completely see-through even when not against the light. How does this happen - designer, wearer, dresser, husband...none of them paused and thought "Maybe not a good idea"?


----------



## lulilu

csshopper said:


> Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages



If the material was too thick to allow her to move unless the dress was cut too big, perhaps it was the wrong material.  Or the wrong style.

To defend the dress against complaints it was too plain, the author points to the fact that it was not her first wedding.  One might wonder then, why the 10+ foot train and the 15+ foot veil?  The whole thing was a fail, no matter how one might defend it.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but Givenchy needs to be able to trust you do top notch work. I doubt they were too pleased to read all over the press and the internet how that haute couture dress didn't fit. It's the designer's job to at some point put their foot down with the client to protect the brand.




IKR
Don't _any _of these people watch Project Runway?
There was _always_ a client challenge


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Didn’t they have to do a last minute fitting on Kate’s dress too since she lost weight? Or maybe I’m thinking of her ring.



Too long ago. I remember I went to a street party with DH to celebrate dressed in Deco formal finery as Edward and Mrs. Simpson, carrying a cake decorated with white Malteasers (as pearls) and pretending we weren't welcome at the wedding so were gatecrashing the one we went to instead. The rest of the day and everything connected with the wedding is a blur  . I hear it went well


----------



## Shopaholic2021

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember this ?
> 
> View attachment 5071185
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Givenchy Bespoke Navy Pleated Skirt - Meghan's Mirror
> 
> 
> An elegant pleated skirt, created for the Duchess by Clare Waight-Keller for Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansmirror.com



WOW! I have not seen this before. That is completely see through, and given that dark color, it makes me think this was done on purpose. You can see her panties so clearly. The bra straps are very visible too, looks like the top is too thin. This leaves very little to the imagination.


----------



## papertiger

Shopaholic2021 said:


> WOW! I have not seen this before. That is completely see through, and given that dark color, it makes me think this was done on purpose. You can see her panties so clearly. The bra straps are very visible too, looks like the top is too thin. This leaves very little to the imagination.



and therefore totally against royal protocol. 

She obviously remembered Diana's see-though dress story and how pics went round the World reveal times over and forever, hoping to replicate the publicity. Not a good look (unless you have the body of a 1990s supermodel)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I actually liked the plainness of the dress, made a nice background for the tiara and over-the-top veil. I just didn't like the execution, or the sloppy hair, or the smug grin and face malfunctions of the bride during the ceremony.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, I used to find her so pretty, but now I can’t even see it. She just looks    sinister in every picture.


----------



## lalame

I like Meghan’s style but it leans very casual. She doesn’t seem at home in fitted, tailored, or feminine looks and she never has. Her best event looks before marriage were more along that casual, contemporary style. The feminine ones were just meh. I don’t know if this is her body type or eye but anything that leans too fitted never looks right on her and most feminine styles have that fitted look.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> and therefore totally against royal protocol.
> 
> She obviously remembered Diana's see-though dress story and how pics went round the World reveal times over and forever, hoping to replicate the publicity. Not a good look (unless you have the body of a 1990s supermodel)



Honestly, I don't even want to see Helena Christensen circa 1991 (infamous Wicked Games video  ) in a see-through dress at a formal occasion.


----------



## csshopper

If you think you are hearing an evil cackle as you are reading this post, it's me. I think it's the perfect put down for Harry's wife that her wedding gown, made to her exact demands, looks better on the dress dummy used to display it at Windsor Castle than it did on her! Much prefer the dummy's version with smoothed front. This bride is polished, unlike the MessyMeghan version of scrunched up midriff and ill fitting bra we see ad nauseam in so many of her outfits.

Windsor Castle:
The specific location of the exhibit is particularly fitting. The display is open for public viewing in the castle's Grand Reception Room, where the Queen hosted an afternoon reception for the 600 wedding guests following the St George's Chapel wedding ceremony on 19 May. This gives visitors a chance to view the bride and groom's outfits up close in the space where the event actually took place. The display also highlights the level of detail and craftsmanship that went into creating one of the most talked-about wedding dresses in recent history.






Curator Caroline de Guitaut makes final adjustments
ROYAL COLLECTION TRUST / HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II 2018


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here are 19 of the Givenchy outfits - dates & locations are given
Look #8 is the see-thru skirt.  Look #4 is the one referred to in the OW interview - the mental health struggle. 








						20 Times Meghan Markle Stunned in Givenchy
					

Meghan Markle clearly knows what she likes—and it's Givenchy.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, I don't even want to see Helena Christensen circa 1991 (infamous Wicked Games video  ) in a see-through dress at a formal occasion.



Cue music:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Windsor Castle:
> The specific location of the exhibit is particularly fitting. The display is open for public viewing in the castle's Grand Reception Room, where the Queen hosted an afternoon reception for the 600 wedding guests following the St George's Chapel wedding ceremony on 19 May. This gives visitors a chance to view the bride and groom's outfits up close in the space where the event actually took place. The display also highlights the level of detail and craftsmanship that went into creating *one of the most talked-about wedding dresses in recent history.*



Possibly for all the wrong reasons, though.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Curator Caroline de Guitaut makes final adjustments
> ROYAL COLLECTION TRUST / HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II 2018



So if it's the material, how come it fits the mannequin?


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages


Really?  
she wanted to dodge criticism on appropriateness so she, as an almost-40 divorcee, wore a long veil over her face?

*Also bearing in mind that the marriage was Meghan's second (she wed Trevor Engelson in 2011), maybe she purposefully avoided pomp as an attempt to dodge critiques of "inappropriateness" in the same way Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, did.*


----------



## purseinsanity

gerryt said:


> Though to be fair if Harry’s wife was changing her mind constantly as to the design, up till the last minute, then its not very fair to sack the designer.  I think it’s more likely that the feedback from one of the Givenchy staff which we’ve all seen, which suggests she was let go because she didnt step up to the plate and manage the way the staff were being treated, is more likely to be the truth. Just my opinion.


ITA.  But 3900 hours??  That's 162.5 DAYS!  Or in toddler ages, 5.4 months.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems Harry and his pages had a completely positive experience -








						Prince Harry's Royal Wedding Uniform Sleeves Took One Week to Make
					

Savile Row tailor Dege & Skinner let us in on what it takes to dress a prince for his big day.




					www.gq.com


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> If the material was too thick to allow her to move unless the dress was cut too big, perhaps it was the wrong material.  Or the wrong style.
> 
> To defend the dress against complaints it was too plain, the author points to the fact that it was not her first wedding.  One might wonder then, why the 10+ foot train and the 15+ foot veil?  The whole thing was a fail, no matter how one might defend it.


I wondered too why that fabric was used


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Does Omid understand his future as a royal correspondent might not lie with the Sussexes? Or did he come off whatever he was smoking before.


LOL I highly doubt he's a real "royal correspondent".  None of the other royals will ever give him the time of day.  If he's calling himself that because he regurgitates whatever BS MM feeds him, then I am also a "Royal Correspondent" because I have spent a helluva lot of hours on this thread talking about royals and royal was beens.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here are 19 of the Givenchy outfits - dates & locations are given
> Look #8 is the see-thru skirt.  Look #4 is the one referred to in the OW interview - the mental health struggle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 Times Meghan Markle Stunned in Givenchy
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle clearly knows what she likes—and it's Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Givenchy is clearly one of her favorite brands but their looks don’t really do her figure any favors. My favorite look from this page was the white Theia dress.. I actually wonder if that one was originally a wedding dress. I considered theia for my wedding dress too because they also do minimalist wedding dresses well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> *Also bearing in mind that the marriage was Meghan's second (she wed Trevor Engelson in 2011), maybe she purposefully avoided pomp as an attempt to dodge critiques of "inappropriateness" in the same way Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, did.*



If I remember correctly, Camilla wore a coat dress in a pastel colour and a hat. That is of course pretty similar to a bright white dress, a diamond tiara and an embroidered veil that was dragging several feet behind her.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  But 3900 hours??  That's 162.5 DAYS! * Or in toddler ages, 5.4 months.*



 !!!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm so pleb, my wedding ring is "just" a band of gold. I'm very 'more is less' when it comes to jewellery. Maybe I'd feel differently if I had access to a royal jewellery vault


I just realised I miss wrote "more is less" instead of "less is more"  Thank you everyone for playing along and being nice  I'm blaming the fact that I only stay logged in here for about 5-10 minutes at a time and reading and liking and then responding to 10-20 pages or more of posts in that time is quite a demanding process. A challenge I'm of course never hesitant to take on, with varying results


----------



## Hermes Zen

AND M couldn't get any help ... Premieres this month according to yesterdays article. I bet h used this as a convincing factor to get his job at ButterUp BetterUp.  



> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...3VQWXRaZ3JCbmtIdVQzaHlqOXcwWTN5ODh0YWp6Uk02Ug..
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Teaming Up With Oprah on a Documentary Series About Mental Health*
> *The project will launch on Apple TV+ in May.*
> By Caroline Hallemann
> Apr 30, 2021
> 
> Prince Harry and Oprah are teaming up once again for a television event. In 2019, Kensington Palace announced that Prince Harry was partnering with Oprah Winfrey on a documentary series about mental health on which they will both serve as co-creators and executive producers.





> According to a statement released by the Palace in April 2019, "The multi-part documentary series will focus on both mental illness and mental wellness, inspiring viewers to have an honest conversation about the challenges each of us faces, and how to equip ourselves with the tools to thrive, rather than to simply survive."





> The series is part of Prince Harry's larger focus on mental health, both in supporting programs that assist with mental health concerns and in helping to reducing the stigma surrounding the issue.





> “I truly believe that good mental health – mental fitness – is the key to powerful leadership, productive communities and a purpose-driven self. It is a huge responsibility to get this right as we bring you the facts, the science and the awareness of a subject that is so relevant during these times," Prince Harry said of launching this initiative.





> "Our hope is that this series will be positive, enlightening and inclusive – sharing global stories of unparalleled human spirit fighting back from the darkest places, and the opportunity for us to understand ourselves and those around us better. I am incredibly proud to be working alongside Oprah on this vital series which we have been developing together for several months."





> Here's what we know about the project.
> *It will premiere in May 2021.*


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> She seems to wear ill fitting clothes often so no surprise her wedding dress was the same?
> View attachment 5071180
> View attachment 5071181
> View attachment 5071182



I may be in the minority, but I don't find popping nipples (especially in nice dresses) attractive AT ALL.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Givenchy is clearly one of her favorite brands but their looks don’t really do her figure any favors. My favorite look from this page was the white Theia dress.. I actually wonder if that one was originally a wedding dress. I considered theia for my wedding dress too because they also do minimalist wedding dresses well.



You know, I always thought she looked like she played dress-up in her formal royal day looks complete with fascinators, it really didn't suit her. But some of her day looks on other occasions would have looked good HAD THEY FIT, e.g. the grey sheath dress from earlier or that green dress she wore to Ireland.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Here's a link to an article posted October 21, 2020 from MarieClaire magazine in which the fit is explained, it was intentional because of the fabric, as you speculated. The article also talks about veil, tiara etc.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Wasn't As "Ill-Fitting" As You ...*
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/meghan-markle-wedding-dress-fit - 168k - Cached - Similar pages


Haha, sure.  And my split pants when I gained too much weight and bent over too fast was intentional as well.


----------



## bag-mania

Hey UK members! Have any of you seen “Recollections May Vary?” It was supposed to premiere yesterday. We need impressions.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> WOW! I have not seen this before. That is completely see through, and given that dark color, it makes me think this was done on purpose. You can see her panties so clearly. The bra straps are very visible too, looks like the top is too thin. This leaves very little to the imagination.


I too believe it's intentional.  It's not like she'd never been photographed before.  I think she wants people "accidentally" seeing her body.  She probably thinks she can attract more people into liking her that way.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think with haute couture dresses they make a mock-up out of cheap fabric (I want to say burlap, but obviously not. Does look a bit like rough linen, though), do fittings on that, then make up the real dress and do the final fitting so the expensive material is spared. That's with a normal client, of course.



Maybe the material of that gown was stunning up close, but on TV it looked like CWK took a couple of my heavy damask table cloths and stitched them together.
ETA:  Other than the fit, I rather liked the lines of the dress and the color was quite flattering.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> If you think you are hearing an evil cackle as you are reading this post, it's me. I think it's the perfect put down for Harry's wife that her wedding gown, made to her exact demands, looks better on the dress dummy used to display it at Windsor Castle than it did on her! *Much prefer the dummy's version with smoothed front. This bride is polished, unlike the MessyMeghan version of scrunched up midriff and ill fitting bra we see ad nauseam in so many of her outfits.*



I much prefer the dummy's face too!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> Cue music:



Helena still looks fabulous. The 90's super models were some of the healthiest models to ever walk down catwalks. There was actually a hint of a very minimal mini muffin top on them at times


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Cue music:



Damn you all!  Constantly putting songs in my head.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If I remember correctly, Camilla wore a coat dress in a pastel colour and a hat. That is of course pretty similar to a bright white dress, a diamond tiara and an embroidered veil that was dragging several feet behind her.


and don't forget the veil over her face - so virginal


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> AND M couldn't get any help ... Premieres this month according to yesterdays article. I bet h used this as a convincing factor to get his job at ButterUp BetterUp.


so I guess you could say this is clever.....Harry was always compaining how he suffered mentally due to the loss of his mom.  now his wife has also suffered......so they call tell us all what to do


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

Camilla looked exquisite IMO


----------



## RAINDANCE

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  But 3900 hours??  That's 162.5 DAYS!  Or in toddler ages, 5.4 months.


 Ia that longer than the enagament. Probably longer than the amount of time they knew each other before the proposal !


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Were all of these hours spent on the 1 wedding dress?
> She had 15+ dresses made by Givenchy. Knowing her time in the UK was short, maybe she was trying to get lots of work done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 Times Meghan Markle Stunned in Givenchy
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle clearly knows what she likes—and it's Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Whoever purchased the Givenchy clutch for M got their money worth. M used it several times in these photos.  It is a lovely clutch.


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Helena still looks fabulous. The 90's super models were some of the healthiest models to ever walk down catwalks. There was actually a hint of a very minimal mini muffin top on them at times



I've just been studying Chanel shows 1990-2001. The early 1990s are so much fun (especially SS94). 

Most had 'proper' figures for sure, but even at the shows most of their clothes were altered to fit for the runway. The time is always very limited for fittings at shows, sometimes last minute, an outfit would be pulled (off the roster) if it didn't look the way it should, that's why the designer is backstage - not because he/she wants to be there. 

Can you imagine knowing that possibly the entire World would be watching you get married and you didn't check the mirror and/or ask the designer/atelier/head-vendeuse to be there before stepping out .


----------



## lalame

I think her most flattering feminine looks were...







Nothing tight all over, ideally A-line on the bottom with a nipped in waist. If no waist belt, it should be slightly loose in the body to skim over curves not cling. Come to think of it, the 2nd dress looks like a similarly rigid fabric and cut to the wedding dress but it seems to be much better fitted.


----------



## gerryt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, I always thought she looked like she played dress-up in her formal royal day looks complete with fascinators, it really didn't suit her. But some of her day looks on other occasions would have looked good HAD THEY FIT, e.g. the grey sheath dress from earlier or that green dress she wore to Ireland.


It’s strange how the poorly fitting areas are always the same - too long in the body or too tight across bustline/upper arms and hip area.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Damn you all!  Constantly putting songs in my head.



 The BBC is here to help! 
*Six of the best ways to cure an earworm - BBC Science Focus ...*
https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/six-of-the-best-ways-to-cure-an-earworm/ - 320k - Cached - Similar pages


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> I think her most flattering feminine looks were...
> 
> View attachment 5071222
> View attachment 5071226
> View attachment 5071233
> View attachment 5071240
> 
> 
> Nothing tight all over, ideally A-line on the bottom with a nipped in waist. If no waist belt, it should be slightly loose in the body to skim over curves not cling. Come to think of it, the 2nd dress looks like a similarly rigid fabric and cut to the wedding dress but it seems to be much better fitted.


She REALLY needs your help with wardrobe selection.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I think her most flattering feminine looks were...
> 
> View attachment 5071222
> View attachment 5071226
> View attachment 5071233
> View attachment 5071240
> 
> 
> Nothing tight all over, ideally A-line on the bottom with a nipped in waist. If no waist belt, it should be slightly loose in the body to skim over curves not cling. Come to think of it, the 2nd dress looks like a similarly rigid fabric and cut to the wedding dress but it seems to be much better fitted.



I loved that denim dress...until I learned it cost well over 2000 pounds. To be worn to a freaking polo tournament to smooch Harry in public, hasn't been seen since. She has no sense for appropriateness somehow.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> She REALLY needs your help with wardrobe selection.



I could use help myself.   If only you could see how ill-fitted MY wedding dress was, and actually I'm also a sucker for Ted Baker dresses that are made for the opposite of my body type. But Meghan has lots of help and can do better.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I loved that denim dress...until I learned it cost well over 2000 pounds. To be worn to a freaking polo tournament to smooch Harry in public, hasn'tbeen seen since. She has no sense for appropriateness somehow.


hence the long virginal veil over the face.....I mean really? to me a veil over the face is for a first time bride, not a 40 year old divorcee....and then add to it that it went to the floor?
She sure liked the pomp and circumstance when she didn't have to do anything to earn it


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I loved that denim dress...until I learned it cost well over 2000 pounds. To be worn to a freaking polo tournament to smooch Harry in public, hasn't been seen since. She has no sense for appropriateness somehow.



I noticed she tends to wear more lower end brands when traveling, like Staud, Banana Republic, Reformation, when you think she'd want to pull out the dressier looks... and higher end clothes on 2nd tier events in the UK.  Seems like an odd strategy.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan talking about "everyday struggles" is a like a billionaire griping that he has to pay people to dust his fleet of exotic cars.  She ditches the BRF, throws them under the bus, then complains that Charles doesn't pay for their security.  She is the architect of her own "struggles".


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate's dress was one I would never pick for myself (I much preferred her second look), but it fit her impeccably, like painted on her body. Basically, like all of her formal clothes we have ever seen her in. I am not sure why apparently Duchess Disney was never let in on the secret that a good seamstress is everything.


Is it possible the difference is due to fabric choice ? Kate seems to pick a lot of wool dress coats for walk arounds, while the photos of Meghan are in more clingy fabrics ?
also K has great detailing on her AMcQ pieces, contrast collars and buttons , patch pockets with flaps , all of that distracts from clingy fabrics
M eschews all the details which draws your eye to the tailoring instead 
K seems to wear the same pieces even after three children, fabulous that


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I've just been studying Chanel shows 1990-2001. The early 1990s are so much fun (especially SS94).
> 
> Most had 'proper' figures for sure, but even at the shows most of their clothes were altered to fit for the runway. The time is always very limited for fittings at shows, sometimes last minute, an outfit would be pulled (off the roster) if it didn't look the way it should, that's why the designer is backstage - not because he/she wants to be there.
> 
> Can you imagine knowing that possibly the entire World would be watching you get married and you didn't check the mirror and/or ask the designer/atelier/head-vendeuse to be there before stepping out .


Unimaginable


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I noticed she tends to wear more lower end brands when traveling, like Staud, Banana Republic, Reformation, when you think she'd want to pull out the dressier looks... and higher end clothes on 2nd tier events in the UK.  Seems like an odd strategy.


She is merching the clothing


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I noticed she tends to wear more lower end brands when traveling, like Staud, Banana Republic, Reformation, when you think she'd want to pull out the dressier looks... and higher end clothes on 2nd tier events in the UK.  Seems like an odd strategy.



wasn’t that when she went to SoAfrica? The other tours were high end, such as Givenchy.  iirc


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> hence the long virginal veil over the face.....I mean really? to me a veil over the face is for a first time bride, not a 40 year old divorcee....and then add to it that it went to the floor?
> She sure liked the pomp and circumstance when she didn't have to do anything to earn it



Didn‘t QE explain to her that very point?  Markie said she wouldn’t wear the veil, then showed up with it on. So, QE looks quite displeased in the photos.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

CarryOn2020 said:


> Didn‘t QE explain to her that very point?  Markie said she wouldn’t wear the veil, then showed up with it on. So, QE looks quite displeased in the photos.



There were reports that the Queen didn't understand why she needed to wear a veil as it was her second wedding. Its all hearsay so who knows what happened. I have a tendency to not listen to such tabloid gossip, but recently I found that a lot of it is actually true, so perhaps the Queen did say this.


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> Meghan talking about "everyday struggles" is a like a billionaire griping that he has to pay people to dust his fleet of exotic cars.  She ditches the BRF, throws them under the bus, then complains that Charles doesn't pay for their security.  *She is the architect of her own "struggles"*.



This. This exactly. I don't think anyone should underestimate her Disney princess mind-set.  She presents herself and Harry as some grand fairy tale.  She's even said it more than once, that their story is "better than any fairy tale you've ever read".  So, what does every fairy tale have?  An evil monarch and family in league against the heroine who struggles but eventually triumphs and weds the handsome prince and lives happily ever after.  (Apparently though, she's never sat through "Into The Woods".)   However, what if the "evil" monarch and family walked her down the aisle, paid for a lavish wedding, loaned her a fabulous tiara, paid for a lavish wardrobe and a huge house remodel and had her represent them on international trips?  Well, that sure doesn't fit her fairy tale lol.  So, better create those struggles and paint that family in the worst possible light in order to fit the narrative.  It worked with Harry; she convinced him she was all alone in the cruel world with no family to speak of after all.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> She is merching the clothing



I don't think she would've been allowed to do that, if you literally mean she was getting paid to wear them or was getting a percentage of sales. They wouldn't even let her get the clothes for free.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> wasn’t that when she went to SoAfrica? The other tours were high end, such as Givenchy.  iirc



I think also Australia.. That's where we saw this infamous dress.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I don't think she would've been allowed to do that, if you literally mean she was getting paid to wear them or was getting a percentage of sales. They wouldn't even let her get the clothes for free.



That true, the royal family are not allowed to take gifts. Kate was once given blazers from the Canadian company Smythe, but the palace said no, you can send some and if Kate likes them, she will purchase them full price. 

I do however think that Meghan still lived in the celeb mindset, and celebs get clothes for free (even paid to wear them). The companies may have bypassed the palace and just given them to her directly. 

And right now, I'm pretty sure she doesn't pay for her clothing. She gets them for free in exchange for 'publicity'.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That true, the royal family are not allowed to take gifts. Kate was once given blazers from the Canadian company Smythe, but the palace said no, you can send some and if Kate likes them, she will purchase them full price.
> 
> I do however think that Meghan still lived in the celeb mindset, and celebs get clothes for free (even paid to wear them). The companies may have bypassed the palace and just given them to her directly.
> 
> And right now, I'm pretty sure she doesn't pay for her clothing. She gets them for free in exchange for 'publicity'.



On one hand, I can't imagine companies giving her clothes for free during COVID era since she's so rarely seen. On the other hand, I REALLY can't imagine someone in their financial position paying retail for $5k+ dresses. Not sure what is going on there!

Is it really possible companies could bypass the palace to give her clothing? I would think they are very strict about that and everything is accounted for. Does anyone know if things like clothing budgets get tracked and publicized as if they were official expenditures? That would be quite interesting to see.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oh yes, vey similar. NOT! 
I thought Camilla looked beautiful in both outfits.
As a divorcee, both of them, quite rightly got married in the Registry Office in the middle of Windsor and the blessing in St George's Chapel. This is what H&M should've done.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> I've just been studying Chanel shows 1990-2001. The early 1990s are so much fun (especially SS94).
> 
> Most had 'proper' figures for sure, but even at the shows most of their clothes were altered to fit for the runway. The time is always very limited for fittings at shows, sometimes last minute, an outfit would be pulled (off the roster) if it didn't look the way it should, that's why the designer is backstage - not because he/she wants to be there.
> 
> Can you imagine knowing that possibly the entire World would be watching you get married and you didn't check the mirror and/or ask the designer/atelier/head-vendeuse to be there before stepping out .


It's strange, isn't it? 

Meghan as a royal was in dire need of a real stylist who understood royal protocol. Jessica did her no favours. I guess it's the way of someone who knows best, never listens and always gets what they want.



Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes, vey similar. NOT!
> I thought Camilla looked beautiful in both outfits.
> As a divorcee, both of them, quite rightly got married in the Registry Office in the middle of Windsor and the blessing in St George's Chapel. This is what H&M should've done.


Camilla looks lovely in both outfits. Perfect, I'd say.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok now that I looked up that denim dress I want this season's denim pencil skirt that is a whopping 1200 Euros. Ha.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes, vey similar. NOT!
> I thought Camilla looked beautiful in both outfits.
> As a divorcee, both of them, quite rightly got married in the Registry Office in the middle of Windsor and the blessing in St George's Chapel. This is what H&M should've done.



Why was MM and H allowed to get married in a church if Charles and Camilla couldn't? 

I'm sure MM would gasp at the idea that a divorce shouldn't be allowed to wear a veil. She would complain that's racist and not very feminist.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Why was MM and H allowed to get married in a church if Charles and Camilla couldn't?
> 
> I'm sure MM would gasp at the idea that a divorce shouldn't be allowed to wear a veil. She would complain that's racist and not very feminist.



Because religiously speaking, Duchess Disney was not a divorcee, as she wasn't Anglican before but converted. While both Camilla and Charles were.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Queen of Spain was married before as well, but it didn't count as she only had a civil ceremony with her first husband.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

A Civil Ceremony was chosen to avoid potential controversy caused by the future supreme governor of the Church of England marrying a divorcée in a religious ceremony. 
Likewise, the Queen did not attend the civil ceremony only the "blessing"


----------



## lalame

I thought maybe it was Harry who wanted a "normal" royal wedding since it would've been his first and possibly only wedding. But since then they said they weren't into all that anyway so...


----------



## daisychainz

Allisonfaye said:


> I am sure it's way illegal to falsify a birth certificate. Someone will have to be paid a lot of money...


Didn't they do something fake with their wedding date? She doesn't care about truth.


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> * maybe she purposefully avoided pomp as an attempt to dodge critiques of "inappropriateness" in the same way Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, did.*


I loved what Camilla was wearing on her wedding day. Even the headpiece - it suited her so nicely.

I thought everything was just so appropriate for a second marriage to a future king.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I don't think she would've been allowed to do that, if you literally mean she was getting paid to wear them or was getting a percentage of sales. They wouldn't even let her get the clothes for free.


Firstly, how would they know what she as doing?  That's all she did with everything and all she does now.  She never gets the money directly, it is all circumvented.   Why do you think that her clothes and jewelry appear on Meghan's Mirror 30 seconds after she is seen wearing them?  It happens far too quickly for there not to have been advance notice.


----------



## Chagall

csshopper said:


> *Re: Bridezilla and Charlotte's dress fittings for the wedding.
> 
> This is from a Tumblr account "The Empress" and I think it was the original source of the information about bridezilla and Charlotte. It frequently startles me how much stays accessible on the Net.*
> 
> Anonymous asked:
> Hi!
> So I have a cousin who works as within Givenchy and one of her best friends from work was at the fittings for Meghan’s wedding dress and the flower girls. My cousin had just went on maternity leave but basically what Meghan is saying is nothing but lies and nonsense as she was a complete diva and treated the seamstresses & Givenchy staff horribly so and was nasty to Clare who was there most of the time alongside my cousin’s colleagues and best friend.
> Meghan made Catherine cry, knowing she was pregnant and this was because she was incredibly nasty to Charlotte. Meghan was adamant on not having Charlotte or George in the wedding party but Charles & the Queen made her do so as they are Harry’s niece & nephew, and basically they’re paying for all this so you will do this.
> Meghan didn’t pay for the dress either as Charles paid for it, and she was forever changing her mind on what style & design she wanted for the dress & veil - this is why it was such a badly fitted dress & veil because it was basically a last minute piece put together as she wouldn’t stop changing her mind.
> All the staff were at their wits end because of Meghan. She would have them working on strict rules and long hours but then would shout at them saying that their work was awful, that she didn’t want it like that and forcing them to start all over again. She slapped one of the staff who was trying to do the fitting for one of the first design ideas that Meghan wanted, when they did nothing wrong. All the staff have said that Meghan definitely seemed to enjoy treating them like servants and constantly belittling them whilst on their backs about it all. Most were nervous wrecks, and I’m glad my cousin was off away from it all.
> The Givenchy staff gave her nicknames such as were The Dictator Duchess-To-Be, Meddlesome Meghan and Ms. Snobby. My cousin’s colleagues say they’re certain that how Clare allowed Meghan to constantly treat them, the Givenchy staff but also the end result not reflecting the high standards of Givenchy either, is a major factor in why Clare was let go so suddenly. But Clare is apparently quite like Meghan in that they are arrogant & pushy.
> But concerning Charlotte. Meghan HATED having to include her as a bridesmaid and made it quite frighteningly clear & constantly mocked and made fun of her especially when she would arrive from home or school like any young child, a bit messy from having fun, called her chubby and mocked her voice. Charlotte said to Meghan about how she’d be her new Auntie like how she had her Auntie Pippa which Meghan went off about saying she was much better than Pippa Middleton, who it had been announced privately, was pregnant.
> Catherine found out from María who witnessed it, and both ladies including William were furious as Charlotte had been reduced to tears but Meghan would then mock her for crying. Ivy Mulroney isn’t a nice little girl whatsoever, and was constantly rude to the women working on her dress fittings when she arrived and Meghan definitely showed a lot of favouritism towards Ivy over Charlotte and pitted them against one another, saying that Ivy was going to be the best flower girl and that Charlotte should learn how a proper girl behaves, basically encouraged Ivy to bully Charlotte which she did. Charlotte ended up getting pulled out of the fittings due to how Meghan and also Jess & Ivy were mocking and bullying her which is the reason why Charlotte’s dress didn’t fit to her proper measurements as the seamstresses had to use Florence van Cutsem for the fitting of Charlotte’s dress. Meghan had been rude to Catherine, Charlotte and María for pretty much the whole thing, and a strong rumour is that is one of the reasons the FabFour summit was so tense.
> The shoes were a big issue for the British born flower girls and their parents as they were really uncomfortable for them but Meghan refused to let them wear tights or even socks, and said to the Givenchy and Aquazurra staff that this was what happens when you coddle children, they turn into horrible whiny brats that want everything when it is HER wedding. The flower crown head-wreaths were also last minute and literally had Charlotte told at before she got in the car that here was hers which is when it was quickly fitted best as possible. Ivy was singled out again by Meghan as the special one, and called the mini maid of honour which is why she didn’t have a flower crown head-wreath or her own bouquet as Meghan had made it clear to all the other girls even Remi and Rylan, children of her college friend that they weren’t as good as Ivy.
> The florist was so last minute getting chased up that it is a reason for why the flower colour scheme didn’t fit with the wedding & flower-girl dress colours. Clare tried to get Meghan to try a more muted white fitting for a divorcee and an understated veil but Meghan just screamed at her about unnecessary negative opinions and my cousin’s best friend that was there at the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hello, thanks for sharing this. I think this is the first time I have heard that the family made her include Princess Charlotte and Prince George. I actually can believe that she did not want them in her wedding party as she does not like sharing the limelight with anyone, yes not even little children.


I am absolutely flabbergasted that she could get away with not wanting to include Harry’s niece and nephew in the wedding party. Their parents are the future king and queen, and her future brother and sister in law. I’ve never heard of such high handedness. Why was everyone pussyfooting around her. Something needed to be said to her by someone, especially if children are being mistreated. I don’t care if you are the bride. If this report is true, that is incredibly atrocious behaviour.


----------



## gracekelly

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Why was MM and H allowed to get married in a church if Charles and Camilla couldn't?
> 
> I'm sure MM would gasp at the idea that a divorce shouldn't be allowed to wear a veil. She would complain that's racist and not very feminist.


The problem for Charles, as heir to the throne, is that Camilla has a living ex-husband.  As future head of the Church of England, he is not supposed to have be married to woman with a living ex.  The rule only applies currently to heirs as I understand it. When Princess Anne remarried she did it in the Church of Scotland and her mother is not head of the Church of Scotland, so she managed to get married in a way that did not step on toes and The Queen was able to attend.  For Charles, this solution was out of the question.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I loved what Camilla was wearing on her wedding day. Even the headpiece - it suited her so nicely.
> 
> I thought everything was just so appropriate for a second marriage to a future king.


Yes!  She looked great that day.  From that day forward, I have been in love with all her hat choices.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> On one hand, I can't imagine companies giving her clothes for free during COVID era since she's so rarely seen. On the other hand, I REALLY can't imagine someone in their financial position paying retail for $5k+ dresses. Not sure what is going on there!
> 
> Is it really possible companies could bypass the palace to give her clothing? I would think they are very strict about that and everything is accounted for. Does anyone know if things like clothing budgets get tracked and publicized as if they were official expenditures? That would be quite interesting to see.


She can get whatever she wants for free now.  She is no longer a working member of the family and she doesn't represent them in a formal way.    As far as I can tell, she is no different from any Hollywood actress who gets sent boxes full of designer clothing for free.  If I am completely wrong about this, please correct me.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do, I just wasn't aware it was completely see-through even when not against the light. How does this happen - designer, wearer, dresser, husband...none of them paused and thought "Maybe not a good idea"?



Or perhaps intentional for attention.


----------



## gracekelly

Chagall said:


> I am absolutely flabbergasted that she could get away with not wanting to include Harry’s niece and nephew in the wedding party. Their parents are the future king and queen, and her future brother and sister in law. I’ve never heard of such high handedness. Why was everyone pussyfooting around her. Something needed to be said to her by someone, especially if children are being mistreated. I don’t care if you are the bride. If this report is true, that is incredibly atrocious behaviour.


They were in fear of the big *R* word.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> The problem for Charles, as heir to the throne, is that Camilla has a living ex-husband.  As future head of the Church of England, he is not supposed to have be married to woman with a living ex.  The rule only applies currently to heirs as I understand it. When Princess Anne remarried she did it in the Church of Scotland and her mother is not head of the Church of Scotland, so she managed to get married in a way that did not step on toes and The Queen was able to attend.  For Charles, this solution was out of the question.



Thanks grace kelley,  I didn't know about her marriage in the Church of Scotland. One of the reasons I love this forum is the fun things learned.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> hence the long virginal veil over the face.....I mean really? to me a veil over the face is for a first time bride, not a 40 year old divorcee....and then add to it that it went to the floor?
> She sure liked the pomp and circumstance when she didn't have to do anything to earn it


But we must remember it wasn't for her, they were married 3 days before. It was for all us peasants to fawn over her greatness  grossness.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> But we must remember it wasn't for her, they were married 3 days before. It was for all us peasants to fawn over her greatness  grossness.


right
like she didn't want the fairy princess wedding.....does anyone believe that crap?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I feel like their angle on mental health is more focused on the privileged elites, rather than ordinary people. Anyone can suffer from mental illness, regardless of income, class, education or job. The thing that strikes me is that the privileged have greater access to health care that deals with mental illness, and they have more unique issues such as the need to thrive, rather than just survive. I find it really patronizing that this is how they approach mental illness, as only the privileged really have the opportunity to thrive. There are still billions of people in the world (western world included) that cannot have their basic needs met.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I feel like their angle on mental health is more focused on the privileged elites, rather than ordinary people. Anyone can suffer from mental illness, regardless of income, class, education or job. The thing that strikes me is that the privileged have greater access to health care that deals with mental illness, and they have more unique issues such as the need to thrive, rather than just survive. I find it really patronizing that this is how they approach mental illness, as only the privileged really have the opportunity to thrive. There are still billions of people in the world (western world included) that cannot have their basic needs met.


I have heard that thrive not merely survive used pretty regularly lately....and not just for rich people.  of course the Truly poor would be relieved to just survive


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> right
> like she didn't want *the fairy princess wedding..*...does anyone believe that crap?



at nearly 40 yrs old


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> at nearly 40 yrs old


and the american public was thrilled to see a biracial american divorcee marrying the prince.....too bad she turned out to be so nasty


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> Firstly, how would they know what she as doing?  That's all she did with everything and all she does now.  She never gets the money directly, it is all circumvented.   Why do you think that her clothes and jewelry appear on Meghan's Mirror 30 seconds after she is seen wearing them?  It happens far too quickly for there not to have been advance notice.


Yes I think you are right.  After that pap walk photo carrying Archie, Meghans mirror had the outfit and the makeup!  How would Meghans Mirror know the makeup used unless MM tells them or authorises it.

  But when she was a working royal that is a big no-no...  I think she did it anyway.... via Jessica or Meghans Mirror...


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, I always thought she looked like she played dress-up in her formal royal day looks complete with fascinators, it really didn't suit her. But some of her day looks on other occasions would have looked good HAD THEY FIT, e.g. the grey sheath dress from earlier or that green dress she wore to Ireland.





gerryt said:


> It’s strange how the poorly fitting areas are always the same - too long in the body or too tight across bustline/upper arms and hip area.


I wonder if she imagines herself as a Audrey Hepburnesque body shape? Those dresses would look amazing on a gamine figure. Or a tall lithe one. Or an hourglass even. Or even on someone short with a little something extra. *As long as they were tailored to fit.* Tailoring can work magic. Unless it’s all merched and needs to be returned or resold.

That’s why I was disappointed when all her outfits looked like ****. She had access to couture seamstresses and fitters and still looked a hot mess.

If Jessica is an example of “stylists” at work I’d be wary of trusting them too, but I’ve seen the magic that a skilled seamstress can work on a garment.

And while I’m at it, can I complain about this “yoga practitioner” with awful posture? I think she just does the moves mechanically - half assed just like everything else. Most of the people I know who are serious about it are much more graceful in how they hold themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

Genie27 said:


> And while I’m at it, can I complain about this “yoga practitioner” with awful posture? I think she just does the moves mechanically - half assed just like everything else. *Most of the people I know who are serious about it are much more graceful in how they hold themselves.*



I think she may have natural flexibility, but that doesn't mean that she really does any of it properly or at all. So true about posture!   How about all those movement classes that actors are supposed to take as part of their training?  Oh right, she isn't a real actor.


----------



## Icyjade

I wonder if she ever felt “stumpy” next to Kate? Her body shape is sort of blocky, waist is thick etc hence why I think she had fit issues (apart from really poor taste). Kate on the other hand has a model figure even after 3 kids! Plus Kate chooses better materials imo. Not so clingy and better fitting underwear. Hasn’t the stumpy one heard of spanx?


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> She can get whatever she wants for free now.  She is no longer a working member of the family and she doesn't represent them in a formal way.    As far as I can tell, she is no different from any Hollywood actress who gets sent boxes full of designer clothing for free.  If I am completely wrong about this, please correct me.



She can get anything for free now, but the poster I was responding to was saying as a royal she was getting kick backs under the table and bypassing the palace. That part I was skeptical about since they are very protocol-driven. I don't think she could've kept that a secret from them while living there.


----------



## lalame

Icyjade said:


> I wonder if she ever felt “stumpy” next to Kate? Her body shape is sort of blocky, waist is thick etc hence why I think she had fit issues (apart from really poor taste). Kate on the other hand has a model figure even after 3 kids! Plus Kate chooses better materials imo. Not so clingy and better fitting underwear. Hasn’t the stumpy one heard of spanx?



Wow this is a bit cold. I mean most women would probably feel "stumpy" next to supermodel Kate. Who doesn't have some sort of "flaw" with their body?


----------



## Icyjade

lalame said:


> Wow this is a bit cold. I mean most women would probably feel "stumpy" next to supermodel Kate. Who doesn't have some sort of "flaw" with their body?



Well, she had a multi-million wardrobe budget hence I have higher expectations of her.


----------



## Genie27

lalame said:


> Wow this is a bit cold. I mean most women would probably feel "stumpy" next to supermodel Kate. Who doesn't have some sort of "flaw" with their body?


It’s not just about feeling stumpy though. She’s petite, within a normal range of sizes, and has access to a huge range of designers and clothing lines, which can then be tailored to fit. Torso, length, width, shoulder. And undergarmented by professionals. Time to get rid of the stretched out jockey bralettes.

I’m short and have a similar stockiness in my mid section so I was curious to see what she wore and how. Kate’s style/proportions and wardrobe don’t translate well to my shape, so while I admire her look, it’s not one I can emulate or glean from. I had hopes of  being inspired by the stumpy one (obviously forlorn)


----------



## lalame

We can all agree Meghan has a problem choosing well-fitting clothes. But it seemed like a general knock at anyone with a less-than-Kate body... that's most women. I would hate to know someone was thinking about me, standing next to a thin friend, "doesn't she feel stumpy? Blocky, thick waist, whereas the other one is a supermodel." I mean... yes, but ouch?


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> She can get anything for free now, but the poster I was responding to was saying as a royal she was getting kick backs under the table and bypassing the palace. That part I was skeptical about since they are very protocol-driven. I don't think she could've kept that a secret from them while living there.



Thanks for the clarification of your post.  She was merching then and the palace did find  out about it.  It was a major reason why she wanted to leave. They told her she needed to stop doing it. I am pretty sure that this played into her "they are being mean to me and won't let me do what I want" complaints about the palace suits.    Even in the half in/out, she believed that she could continue to merch because the palace would be far enough away and not looking over her shoulder.   There is a story floating around that the palace was already showing them the door before they came out with their manifesto.  The very fact that they caught on to her planned trip to the Oscars and then came up with the last minute trip to Morocco tells that she was being watched carefully.   In retrospect, I think she as just going to show up at the Oscars the same way she just showed up for Serena's tennis match and Skippy's wedding.  She is a creature of habit and her patterns don't vary, but her recollections sure do lol!


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> We can all agree Meghan has a problem choosing well-fitting clothes. But it seemed like a general knock at anyone with a less-than-Kate body... that's most women. I would hate to know someone was thinking about me, standing next to a thin friend, "doesn't she feel stumpy? Blocky, thick waist, whereas the other one is a supermodel." I mean... yes, but ouch?


So true.  Very few women are built like Kate especially after having three children.  All the more reason why MM needed to have professional assistance.  Jessica was a self proclaimed stylist.   That is about as good as my saying that I am a brain surgeon.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Thanks for the clarification of your post.  She was merching then and the palace did find  out about it.  It was a major reason why she wanted to leave. They told her she needed to stop doing it. I am pretty sure that this played into her "they are being mean to me and won't let me do what I want" complaints about the palace suits.    Even in the half in/out, she believed that she could continue to merch because the palace would be far enough away and not looking over her shoulder.   There is a story floating around that the palace was already showing them the door before they came out with their manifesto.  The very fact that they caught on to her planned trip to the Oscars and then came up with the last minute trip to Morocco tells that she was being watched carefully.   In retrospect, I think she as just going to show up at the Oscars the same way she just showed up for Serena's tennis match and Skippy's wedding.  She is a creature of habit and her patterns don't vary, but her recollections sure do lol!



Has there been proof that she was merching while a royal? Like you said, they watched her closely, so I just find it hard to believe she could've even attempted to do this while knowing it was against policy. And by merching, we mean literally she was being paid to promote certain brands yes? I haven't heard it come up except this thread so I'm not doubting you necessarily, I'm trying to figure out for myself how this would even work. While she was a royal, I would think her press office would reach out to brands or media letting them know she wore their items or was wearing XYZ - I think that's what most celebrities do and how you find out super fast what someone was wearing. But merching is like a whole other thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

lalame said:


> We can all agree Meghan has a problem choosing well-fitting clothes. *But it seemed like a general knock at anyone* with a less-than-Kate body... that's most women. *I would hate to know someone was thinking about me*, standing next to a thin friend, "doesn't she feel stumpy? Blocky, thick waist, whereas the other one is a supermodel." I mean... yes, but ouch?



It wasn’t a personal comment about you. So not sure why you are reacting like this. If it helps, I have a less than Kate body too.

I was commenting on someone who had the resources to look good and well put together. Can we stick to a discussion on her please.


----------



## catlover46

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes, vey similar. NOT!
> I thought Camilla looked beautiful in both outfits.
> As a divorcee, both of them, quite rightly got married in the Registry Office in the middle of Windsor and the blessing in St George's Chapel. This is what H&M should've done.


I loved both of Camilla’s dresses that day❤️


----------



## Icyjade

Genie27 said:


> It’s not just about feeling stumpy though. She’s petite, within a normal range of sizes, and has access to a huge range of designers and clothing lines, which can then be tailored to fit. Torso, length, width, shoulder. And undergarmented by professionals. Time to get rid of the stretched out jockey bralettes.
> 
> I’m short and have a similar stockiness in my mid section so I was curious to see what she wore and how. Kate’s style/proportions and wardrobe don’t translate well to my shape, so while I admire her look, it’s not one I can emulate or glean from. I had hopes of  being inspired by the stumpy one (obviously forlorn)



Yes exactly... it’s like, I’ve learnt to stay away from certain collars/cuts even if I like them as they make me look even fatter right? V necks are better than round collars for example. Clingy tops are out... etc etc. You don’t have to have a perfect body to be a style inspiration, just have to know how to make the best of things to look good and she had more than a good fighting chance considering her resources.




catlover46 said:


> I loved both of Camilla’s dresses that day❤



Me too! I thought she looked fabulous and her emerald cut diamond ring is so stunning. I mean Camilla isn’t someone with great figure right? But she does the best with what she has and that’s why she looked fabulous. Plus her beautiful smile of course.


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> right
> like she didn't want the fairy princess wedding.....does anyone believe that crap?


I also think she wanted the big London Westminster Abbey Royal Wedding and was told absolutely not.


----------



## poopsie

Icyjade said:


> I wonder if she ever felt “stumpy” next to Kate? Her body shape is sort of blocky, waist is thick etc hence why I think she had fit issues (apart from really poor taste). Kate on the other hand has a model figure even after 3 kids! Plus Kate chooses better materials imo. Not so clingy and better fitting underwear. Hasn’t the stumpy one heard of spanx?



OMG.........Red and Stumpy
bwahahhahaha


----------



## lalame

Icyjade said:


> It wasn’t a personal comment about you. So not sure why you are reacting like this. If it helps, I have a less than Kate body too.
> 
> I was commenting on someone who had the resources to look good and well put together. Can we stick to a discussion on her please.



This isn't even directed at you specifically because I get what you mean but I just feel like I see some criticism of M here from time to time for doing things so common that most people could be faulted for the same. I'm just waiting for brunettes to be insulted next just because M happens to have brown hair (obviously being hyperbolic here). It's like, I get it, the lady sucks, but it's kind of hard not to feel bad to see her being insulted for things that I might do or that are so common for women that it's odd to criticise it.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

MM mentioned that Kate didn't reach out to her, but also MM didn't reach out to her either. How would you go about this? I mean if you were MM and no one reached out to you, would you reach out to them? I know everyone is different, and personally if it was me I would expect people to reach out to me if I joined the family but I also realize that people are different and not everyone will do as you would do. I think Kate could possibly be reserved and not as open or chatty like MM. She seems very diplomatic and constrained, which I guess she has to be in her job. There were news articles saying that Kate didn't think have much in common. 

Something else I MM said was that the media were worse with her because of the racial undertones which Kate obviously didn't receive. Kate did initially receive a lot of press which labelled her as lazy (she left her first job after 6 months to work for her family business) and she was asked about this in the engagement interview which I thought was below the belt. MM has never been questioned like this by the press. Kates family were also labelled as social climbers and calculated people. Do you think the medias treatment of MM was worse because of the racial undertones? I find it interesting that they believe because of MMs race, the media were worse to her and therefore she deserves to be put on pedestal. Thats how it came across to me.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM mentioned that Kate didn't reach out to her, but also MM didn't reach out to her either. How would you go about this? I mean if you were MM and no one reached out to you, would you reach out to them? I know everyone is different, and personally if it was me I would expect people to reach out to me if I joined the family but I also realize that people are different and not everyone will do as you would do. I think Kate could possibly be reserved and not as open or chatty like MM. She seems very diplomatic and constrained, which I guess she has to be in her job. There were news articles saying that Kate didn't think have much in common.
> 
> Something else I MM said was that the media were worse with her because of the racial undertones which Kate obviously didn't receive. Kate did initially receive a lot of press which labelled her as lazy (she left her first job after 6 months to work for her family business) and she was asked about this in the engagement interview which I thought was below the belt. MM has never been questioned like this by the press. Kates family were also labelled as social climbers and calculated people. Do you think the medias treatment of MM was worse because of the racial undertones? I find it interesting that they believe because of MMs race, the media were worse to her and therefore she deserves to be put on pedestal. Thats how it came across to me.



Interesting questions! 

#1 - I don't blame Kate at all (if it was true of course). They're such a busy family and if anything I think it's Harry's responsibility to facilitate as much or as little family bonding as M needed in the "welcome to the family" stage. Kate has no responsibility here. And she probably _didn't_ have much in common, to go above and beyond!

#2 - I get Meghan's point that, while Kate was criticized, it wasn't for racist things. Some people do think about it this way, like a hierarchy of insulting things. I guess I just don't... racism is vile, but so is sexism, classism, and all of that stuff that Kate endured for years when she was an innocent young woman. I thought it was unfair for Meghan to brush it off unsympathetically like "she was criticized but not for this." So what? What prize do you win? It's still awful and Harry especially should have sympathy since he's made up his entire persona about being hurt by the media.


----------



## Aimee3

According to google Kate is 5’ 9” and Harry’s wife is 5’ 6”.  5’ 6” is tall to me as I admit to being 5’ 1 1/2”


----------



## Hermes Zen

I've read some postings about Meghan's Mirror. I've never heard of it. What immediately comes to mind every single time I read it here is the wicked witch in the magic mirror in Snow W.   I saw M in that mirror each time. Soooo, I had to google Meghan's Mirror.  WOW did not realize. It's filled with M photos and things.   I had to go further to find out who owned this website ...Effervescence Media Group. Searched some more.  Interesting stuff.  Found the below link.  Way to long to give you a summary but maybe you'd enjoy reading it if you haven't seen this already. They even got a beaten from M fans it sounds like. Although they say they don't know M personally or met her, I think as others pointed out that M makeup and clothing etc etc gets to the folks at M Mirror via ... my guess, M tells her press or a friend (JM or her staff maybe) they tell M Mirror. I wouldn't be surprised M gets some $$'s out of this and if JM is in on this her too or whomever.  

Oh forgot, Happy weekend all !   


*Do you know Meghan personally?*
No. We do not.

What we do know is that we have been fans of hers since 2011 (!) when we first saw her on Suits. Our Editor Amanda was a fan of the Tig from day one and fell in love with her casual style from social media. We have interacted with Meghan on social media years ago through one of our subsidiary accounts, but that’s as close as it gets. 

http://effervescencegroup.com/a-statement-about-meghans-mirror/


----------



## Hermes Zen

Aimee3 said:


> According to google Kate is 5’ 9” and Harry’s wife is 5’ 6”.  5’ 6” is tall to me as I admit to being 5’ 1 1/2”


Me too!


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM mentioned that Kate didn't reach out to her, but also MM didn't reach out to her either. How would you go about this? I mean if you were MM and no one reached out to you, would you reach out to them? I know everyone is different, and personally if it was me I would expect people to reach out to me if I joined the family but I also realize that people are different and not everyone will do as you would do. I think Kate could possibly be reserved and not as open or chatty like MM. She seems very diplomatic and constrained, which I guess she has to be in her job. There were news articles saying that Kate didn't think have much in common.
> 
> Something else I MM said was that the media were worse with her because of the racial undertones which Kate obviously didn't receive. Kate did initially receive a lot of press which labelled her as lazy (she left her first job after 6 months to work for her family business) and she was asked about this in the engagement interview which I thought was below the belt. MM has never been questioned like this by the press. Kates family were also labelled as social climbers and calculated people. Do you think the medias treatment of MM was worse because of the racial undertones? I find it interesting that they believe because of MMs race, the media were worse to her and therefore she deserves to be put on pedestal. Thats how it came across to me.



Your first point illustrates how completely self-absorbed Meghan was/is. Why in the world would a 35+year old woman need another woman to “reach out to her” or take her shopping? Meghan needs to stop expecting that everyone lives to make her life easy and take care of her own damn self.


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> Your first point illustrates how completely self-absorbed Meghan was/is. Why in the world would a 35+year old woman need another woman to “reach out to her” or take her shopping? Meghan needs to stop expecting that everyone lives to make her life easy and take care of her own damn self.



Anyone who is a mum will understand how difficult it is to find time... plus Meghan came in all high powered Hollywood and ready to overhaul the BRF so I won’t be surprised if Kate wasn’t sure what to do with this new sister in law. Plus all the fuss over the wedding right (and whoever cried). Self-centered indeed.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Has there been proof that she was merching while a royal? Like you said, they watched her closely, so I just find it hard to believe she could've even attempted to do this while knowing it was against policy. And by merching, we mean literally she was being paid to promote certain brands yes? I haven't heard it come up except this thread so I'm not doubting you necessarily, I'm trying to figure out for myself how this would even work. While she was a royal, I would think her press office would reach out to brands or media letting them know she wore their items or was wearing XYZ - I think that's what most celebrities do and how you find out super fast what someone was wearing. But merching is like a whole other thing.


From PageSix on line:
*Meghan Markle was livid after palace aides sent back designer freebies*
By Laura Italiano
Stacks of freebie designer clothes poured in when Meghan Markle started dating Prince Harry — and the future duchess had furious fights with palace aides who sent them all back, according to a new report.

Keeping the free designer fashions sent by major labels is fine for an actress — but it’s against royal protocol, sources told the Sun. 

Markle was livid when told she couldn’t keep the duds, which were sent to her at Kensington Palace after news broke that she was Prince Harry’s girlfriend, the Sun reported.

News of the high-fashion tantrum is just the latest accusation of bullying to flood the gossip pages in the days before her and Harry’s much-anticipated interview with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday.

“As an actress it was perfectly acceptable to take freebies sent by fashion chains and designer labels,” one source told the UK paper.

Markle is seen wearing a camel Smythe coat and a Marks & Spencer jumper Getty Images
“But Meghan had to be told it was not the done thing when you are a member of the royal family.”

Prince Charles eventually picked up the tab for Markle’s wardrobe expenses after she married Harry in May 2018.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> From PageSix on line:
> *Meghan Markle was livid after palace aides sent back designer freebies*
> By Laura Italiano
> Stacks of freebie designer clothes poured in when Meghan Markle started dating Prince Harry — and the future duchess had furious fights with palace aides who sent them all back, according to a new report.
> 
> Keeping the free designer fashions sent by major labels is fine for an actress — but it’s against royal protocol, sources told the Sun.
> 
> Markle was livid when told she couldn’t keep the duds, which were sent to her at Kensington Palace after news broke that she was Prince Harry’s girlfriend, the Sun reported.
> 
> News of the high-fashion tantrum is just the latest accusation of bullying to flood the gossip pages in the days before her and Harry’s much-anticipated interview with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday.
> 
> “As an actress it was perfectly acceptable to take freebies sent by fashion chains and designer labels,” one source told the UK paper.
> 
> Markle is seen wearing a camel Smythe coat and a Marks & Spencer jumper Getty Images
> “But Meghan had to be told it was not the done thing when you are a member of the royal family.”
> 
> Prince Charles eventually picked up the tab for Markle’s wardrobe expenses after she married Harry in May 2018.



I read this when it came out but is this what merching means? I thought merching = you get paid for advertising brand items, like $ per sale/click/whatever or flat fee just for doing an ad. I didn't think it meant just accepting and wearing free things.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

lalame said:


> I read this when it came out but is this what merching means? I thought merching = you get paid for advertising brand items, like $ per sale/click/whatever or flat fee just for doing an ad. I didn't think it meant just accepting and wearing free things.


But it can also be a more complex 3-card Monty kind of scheme. No money changes hands directly but (purely speculation): MM “purchases” dress (PC gets the bill), wear it to a public appearance, and 5 seconds later the Mirror site has every detail of the outfit as well as a large number of lower end dupes listed. The site makes a commission from any purchases through the affiliate links and perhaps M’s business receives a “commission” based on theirs. It’s all PR behind the scenes anyway. 

US bloggers have to reveal if a post is sponsored or gifted - FCC rules to promote transparency in advertising.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I read this when it came out but is this what merching means? I thought merching = you get paid for advertising brand items, like $ per sale/click/whatever or flat fee just for doing an ad. I didn't think it meant just accepting and wearing free things.



Curious to know what you call “accepting and wearing free things” for the purpose of getting paid?
What is it called when those worn-once  ‘free things’ are returned?


----------



## lalame

Genie27 said:


> But it can also be a more complex 3-card Monty kind of scheme. No money changes hands directly but (purely speculation): MM “purchases” dress (PC gets the bill), wear it to a public appearance, and 5 seconds later the Mirror site has every detail of the outfit as well as a large number of lower end dupes listed. The site makes a commission from any purchases through the affiliate links and perhaps M’s business receives a “commission” based on theirs. It’s all PR behind the scenes anyway.
> 
> US bloggers have to reveal if a post is sponsored or gifted - FCC rules to promote transparency in advertising.



That sounds like textbook merching to me... if M or her business was profiting from her wearing something in a commission scheme, there's nothing else to call it really but merching lol. But I guess my question is... why do people think she did this? Was there a story or something specifically about her (or her business) making money this way? Or is it just, she probably did it because she's a bad person who would do bad things.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Curious to know what you call “accepting and wearing free things”?
> What is it called when those worn-once  ‘free things’ are returned?



Accepting and wearing free things... freeloading... borrowing... same idea with positive, negative, or neutral connotation. But it's something else entirely if you are given free things and you are making money off sales of those things (obviously or secretly). That's what I thought merching was.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I read this when it came out but is this what merching means? I thought merching = you get paid for advertising brand items, like $ per sale/click/whatever or flat fee just for doing an ad. I didn't think it meant just accepting and wearing free things.


I'd be interested to know too.

But I also think the value a "star" gets or gives might not be in terms of money. The company where I work once had a sponsorship deal with a well known tech company. There was no money involved. The company didn't even need us to put their name on air. They said their products were distinctive enough on their own. What they wanted was brand association.

So H's wife might be getting non-monetary benefits like the brands she wears and publicises give her lots of free clothes/make-up/ baby stuff, and services like sponsorship of her personal needs: spa, botox, stylists to follow her to events. I don't believe she would be willing to pay for all that. Which is why they are so aghast at having to spend their own money for house and security. Part of Sunshine Sachs brief is probably to follow up with companies on getting FOC the stuff she wants.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Accepting and wearing free things... freeloading... borrowing... same idea with positive, negative, or neutral connotation. But it's something else entirely if you are given free things and you are making money off sales of those things (obviously or secretly). That's what I thought merching was.



This is why many say H&M are _transactional_ people. Everything is a quid-pro-quo. Kinda like D saying don’t give away the milk for free. Is this the best advice the 40 year olds have to give to the younger generation?  Never pay their way?  IMO it is disgusting on so many levels. Nothing they can say can be trusted when we know they are getting paid to say it. The more these people can be exposed for the charlatans [grifters] they are, the better.

ETA: in this world, the best advice older people can give younger people is to *protect their integrity*.  QE and Prince Phillip did it for over 70 years. Now it is up to the younger ones to do the same.


----------



## Genie27

She probably thought her huge Reitmans following ( ) will be super eager to know where to buy cheap dupes for her Dior and Givenchy.

After all, one of her/their big commercials was of some women falling over themselves to see the tag on her basic white shirt.


----------



## lalame

And just to be clear, I'm not defending merching or not lol. It's not like the word is in the dictionary so I'm literally asking if there is a different definition of it than I thought.

Here's what I THINK...

Celebs/influencers getting stuff for free and not getting paid to advertise it = not merching, but distasteful 
Celebs/influencers getting stuff for free and getting paid to advertise it = merching, and distasteful

Royals getting stuff for free and not getting paid to advertise it = not merching, against protocol, distasteful
Royals getting stuff for free and getting paid to advertise it = merching, extremely against protocol, extremely distasteful

Because it is so distasteful and against protocol for royals to do it, that's why I'm skeptical that they could either be in the dark about M doing it or let it happen to any degree.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> That sounds like textbook merching to me... if M or her business was profiting from her wearing something in a commission scheme, there's nothing else to call it really but merching lol. But I guess my question is... why do people think she did this? Was there a story or something specifically about her (or her business) making money this way? Or is it just, she probably did it because she's a bad person who would do bad things.


For me, part of the reason I am prone to believe she is merching is the lack of repeat wear for clothes. She has a never ending stream of new stuff, all of which can be purchased and isn't some vintage find (well, apart from the bras which many seem to think are old and worn). I don't see her out in the same outfit again after some time. I'm waiting to see if the backpack and lunchbag reappear. If Archie keeps having new backpacks and lunch bags, then I would firmly believe she is merching.


----------



## lalame

And btw, I totally believe M and H receive a ton of free stuff today. No doubts about that whatsoever. Again, is this considered merching??


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> For me, part of the reason I am prone to believe she is merching is the lack of repeat wear for clothes. She has a never ending stream of new stuff, all of which can be purchased and isn't some vintage find (well, apart from the bras which many seem to think are old and worn). I don't see her out in the same outfit again after some time. I'm waiting to see if the backpack and lunchbag reappear. If Archie keeps having new backpacks and lunch bags, then I would firmly believe she is merching.



I have no doubt whatsoever every children's company is trying to send them free stuff for Archie. Even D-list vloggers get sent free stuff from brands these days...


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m waiting for the blood diamond earrings to show up.

ETA: “Elegance is refusal“. Coco Chanel


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I have no doubt whatsoever every children's company is trying to send them free stuff for Archie.


True, but if she keeps switching to new ones for him, it undercuts her sustainability message.
Also, with my kids when they were pre-school age, even if they had 20 teeshirts and 4 backpacks, they had favourites to which they gravitated. Archie can't be a total blank slate. Or can he? Hmmm...


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> True, but if she keeps switching to new ones for him, it undercuts her sustainability message.
> Also, with my kids when they were pre-school age, even if they had 20 teeshirts and 4 backpacks, they had favourites to which they gravitated. Archie can't be a total blank slate. Or can he? Hmmm...



I just assume all celebrity children get used to and expect a revolving closet of clothing and toys (literally and figuratively).  They're probably so spoiled. Nothing about the whole influencer/freebie economy now is sustainable. I hope M does rewear more of her stuff... I was just wondering today what she'll do with all the red carpet looks and $$ outfits... I doubt we'll ever see them again. All wasted?


----------



## Genie27

lalame said:


> I was just wondering today what she'll do with all the red carpet looks and $$ outfits... I doubt we'll ever see them again. All wasted?


They’ve probably mostly ended up on TRR or Vestiaire. “New with tags”. “As seen on MM” Even the pit stain number.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## shpahlc

Long time viewer, first time posting. Thought I’d add a thought to the merching conversation. 

Let’s say an outfit is worn by Meghan. Said outfit gets posted to Meghan‘s Mirror. Meghan’s Mirror provides affiliate links to shop/purchase said item(s), and in turns makes a % from any purchase that was clicked through the site.

Example: the most recent pics with her and Archie include this Cuyana coat. If I click through to the coat from Meghan’s Mirror to Cuyana and buy it, I would assume Meghan’s Mirror would get a small cut from Cuyana. 

Assuming she has some involvement with Meghan‘s Mirror, direct or indirect, and the items were given to her, I’d say that is classic merching. 

All of this is of course speculation and just one person‘s opinion. I could absolutely be wrong here


----------



## lalame

shpahlc said:


> Long time viewer, first time posting. Thought I’d add a thought to the merching conversation.
> 
> Let’s say an outfit is worn by Meghan. Said outfit gets posted to Meghan‘s Mirror. Meghan’s Mirror provides affiliate links to shop/purchase said item(s), and in turns makes a % from any purchase that was clicked through the site.
> 
> Example: the most recent pics with her and Archie include this Cuyana coat. If I click through to the coat from Meghan’s Mirror to Cuyana and buy it, I would assume Meghan’s Mirror would get a small cut from Cuyana.
> 
> Assuming she has some involvement with Meghan‘s Mirror, direct or indirect, and the items were given to her, I’d say that is classic merching.
> 
> All of this is of course speculation and just one person‘s opinion. I could absolutely be wrong here



For sure sites like MM are getting paid for things like this. I guess I never really thought it meant the person themselves were merching if their fan sites do this (obviously unless they are getting a cut themselves)? I think dozens and dozens of sites, media outlets, etc get paid for doing the same thing - and this is also why we see so many damn articles about M out there.

Also fyi MM's owners also run a bunch of sites for royal merch lol. They even have one for Kate. Their whole business model is built on affiliate links based on what royals wear. I actually like their Kate instagram - they have a lot of photos/outfits I had never seen before.


----------



## lalame

One thing I'm conflicted about re: the merching... it was definitely not a good look that she wore such extravagant clothes as a royal. Then she says she doesn't want to be a royal and follow all the rules, ok, so now she is trying to do the normal celebrity freebie thing. I don't think that's tasteful exactly but I can't really place why, since she's not a royal anymore. Would it be more acceptable if they lost their royal titles and didn't still associate their identity with the BRF?


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I just assume all celebrity children get used to and expect a revolving closet of clothing and toys (literally and figuratively).  They're probably so spoiled. Nothing about the whole influencer/freebie economy now is sustainable. I hope M does rewear more of her stuff... I was just wondering today what she'll do with all the red carpet looks and $$ outfits... I doubt we'll ever see them again. All wasted?


The crux of the problem: she likely thought being a royal meant being a super celebrity, getting a better class of freebies and an upgraded revolving closet. I doubt it would occur to Harry to say: "By the way, if we get serious, you are going to have to start paying for your clothes." 

If she really wants to be Diana 2.0, she should donate some of those expensive gowns to charity. If they never appear again, then she left them behind when she "fled to freedom", stashed them in storage expecting a triumphant return to the UK, or they were discreetly returned or exchanged for benefits after PC was given the bill.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> One thing I'm conflicted about re: the merching... it was definitely not a good look that she wore such extravagant clothes as a royal. Then she says she doesn't want to be a royal and follow all the rules, ok, so now she is trying to do the normal celebrity freebie thing. I don't think that's tasteful exactly but I can't really place why, since she's not a royal anymore. Would it be more acceptable if they lost their royal titles and didn't still associate their identity with the BRF?


So long as she holds on to her titles, she will be seen as royalty. But would she get so many freebies if she becomes plain old Mrs Henry MW?


----------



## gracekelly

shpahlc said:


> Long time viewer, first time posting. Thought I’d add a thought to the merching conversation.
> 
> Let’s say an outfit is worn by Meghan. Said outfit gets posted to Meghan‘s Mirror. Meghan’s Mirror provides affiliate links to shop/purchase said item(s), and in turns makes a % from any purchase that was clicked through the site.
> 
> Example: the most recent pics with her and Archie include this Cuyana coat. If I click through to the coat from Meghan’s Mirror to Cuyana and buy it, I would assume Meghan’s Mirror would get a small cut from Cuyana.
> 
> Assuming she has some involvement with Meghan‘s Mirror, direct or indirect, and the items were given to her, I’d say that is classic merching.
> 
> All of this is of course speculation and just one person‘s opinion. I could absolutely be wrong here


It is a circuitous journey, but it still comes back to her and something ending up in her pocket.  She was doing this before she ever met Harry, and she never stopped until forced

I think one reason for the outrageous expenditures for clothing was that it was a clapback at the refusal to allow the freebies.  The thing I always had a problem with was the astronomical prices on some of these garments. Not only were quite a few unattractive, they didn’t flatter or fit her. I know that couture is expensive, but these didn’t appear to be couture and the designers should have fainted when they saw how bad she looked wearing them. In a nutshell, someone was taken to the proverbial cleaners because nothing looked worthy of the price tag attached.


----------



## Toulouse

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh yes, vey similar. NOT!
> I thought Camilla looked beautiful in both outfits.
> As a divorcee, both of them, quite rightly got married in the Registry Office in the middle of Windsor and the blessing in St George's Chapel. This is what H&M should've done.



But the situations were hardly synonymous. Charles and Camilla married in their mid/late 50s after carrying on a very public extramarital affair with one another. And, though this was almost 10 years after Diana’s death, Camilla was not exactly beloved by the British people at that time. I thought the way they handled things was tasteful, all things considered, but I don’t think there was anything wrong with Harry and Meghan marrying in the same chapel where Charles and Camilla had their blessing. It’s not like they chose St Paul’s or Westminster Abbey.


----------



## needlv

lalame said:


> One thing I'm conflicted about re: the merching... it was definitely not a good look that she wore such extravagant clothes as a royal. Then she says she doesn't want to be a royal and follow all the rules, ok, so now she is trying to do the normal celebrity freebie thing. I don't think that's tasteful exactly but I can't really place why, since she's not a royal anymore. Would it be more acceptable if they lost their royal titles and didn't still associate their identity with the BRF?



To be honest I don’t care if she merches this way now...  she has stepped back and is not a senior royal.  If she gets papped in clothes, gets a cut from Meghans Mirror then sells the original later on eBay - it’s distasteful and not royal - but no different from other celebs and influencers.  Her expenses must be exceeding their income.  And it’s better than another tell all book, interview or whine-fest  about how it’s really hard to be a duchess and live in palaces and stately homes.

and it just reinforces my opinion of her.  She may have a title, but her lack of class (via her actions.... not anything else...) means she is not in the same league as other royalty and nor will she ever be.  Her tell all with Oprah cemented her as “just another celebrity/ wannabe”.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Were all of these hours spent on the 1 wedding dress?
> She had 15+ dresses made by Givenchy. Knowing her time in the UK was short, maybe she was trying to get lots of work done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 Times Meghan Markle Stunned in Givenchy
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle clearly knows what she likes—and it's Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


That could well be true. But surely a lot of these things are altered RTW. Theres no way they have the detail to  be couture? (I don’t know givenchy that well though)

Just looking at these pieces I feel a bit sorry for poor CWK, little did she know that she was digging her own grave.  I wasn’t interested in M or the royals when this came out but I was branching into being somewhat interested in Givenchy.
I know I dislike MM and that might be a factor but all these pieces are just awfully cheap-looking and don’t show cwk’s strengths at all.

This dress looks like 2010 Karen Millen. A pencil cut shift in block colours with a skinny patent waist belt.
I remember having one just like it for going clubbing....trust me..... that’s not a good look at all.




Add on- come to think of it. I think I had a hardshell black satin box clutch with a clashing silver hardware ball closure & some black patent platform courts too. My gosh what were they thinking? Perhaps CKW did have it in for her all along
I don’t see how they didn’t realise that copying 2010s high street looks made givenchy look bad.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and the american public was thrilled to see a biracial american divorcee marrying the prince.....too bad she turned out to be so nasty



So was the UK! 

And ditto


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I read this when it came out but is this what merching means? I thought merching = you get paid for advertising brand items, like $ per sale/click/whatever or flat fee just for doing an ad. I didn't think it meant just accepting and wearing free things.



'Merching' is mutable. Accepting jewellery and other presents from foreign dignitaries/HoS as presents goes through the Crown. Commercial enterprises gifting - no. 

The difference between the upper-classes (RF at the top) and the upper-middle was land not trade. 

It also messes up the By Appointment system which is very strict and highly sought after. British luxury and the maintenance of standards in quality owes a lot to the different BAs. The background of the company is gone through in meticulous detail and is nearly always British, this in turn promotes British business abroad. 

Can't have any Tom & Co, Dick & Son or Heinrich Int. chucking stuff at them all the time. Royal endorsement is everything. The Royal Warrants are some the best 'influencer' currency any company can have.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Curious to know what you call “accepting and wearing free things” for the purpose of getting paid?
> What is it called when those worn-once  ‘free things’ are returned?



Borrowed 

Celebs used to borrow clothes until understood their power, then they demanded (through PR or stylists) to keep. 

Historically, they work without contracts and there have been some very heated misunderstandings (arguments) about handing back jewellery after events. I've been involved with a few myself (on the jewellers side). When going through PR or Stylists (that have vested interests in both the celeb and brands - and often get paid by both) sometimes the conditions of lending are not conveyed to their final borrower - and sometimes they don't want to know/pretend they don't.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> That could well be true. But surely a lot of these things are altered RTW. Theres no way they have the detail to  be couture? (I don’t know givenchy that well though)
> 
> Just looking at these pieces I feel a bit sorry for poor CWK, little did she know that she was digging her own grave.  I wasn’t interested in M or the royals when this came out but I was branching into being somewhat interested in Givenchy.
> I know I dislike MM and that might be a factor but all these pieces are just awfully cheap-looking and don’t show cwk’s strengths at all.
> 
> This dress looks like 2010 Karen Millen. A pencil cut shift in block colours with a skinny patent waist belt.
> I remember having one just like it for going clubbing....trust me..... that’s not a good look at all.
> 
> View attachment 5072077
> 
> 
> Add on- come to think of it. I think I had a hardshell black satin box clutch with a clashing silver hardware ball closure & some black patent platform courts too. My gosh what were they thinking? Perhaps CKW did have it in for her all along
> I don’t see how they didn’t realise that copying 2010s high street looks made givenchy look bad.



ITA. 

CWK created so many elegantly modern outfits. 

There's nothing wrong with M's figure. She's short-waisted and fine-boned (Kate is also fine-boned, long-waisted) and gamine, many of the outfits emphasise the horizontal all the way down rather the the vertical, and are simply too 'stuffy' for her petite bone structure. 

Someone should have told her, what suited Audrey Hepburn (also a gamine in facial features and fine boned but classic proportions and tall) and Angelina (long, large-boned and tall) does not suit everyone. 

I think M's 'stylist' wasn't good enough and came along for the ride/fun. How could she let her wear that underwear?


----------



## Hermes Zen

I'm just a regular client and had a group of jewelry sent to me over the years to decide which I wanted to keep/pay and shipped the rest back. My sa told me they had a celebrity in L.A. that didn't return anything one time and when the establishment asked for payment for all that jewelry, the celeb said they thought it was all comp'd to them. The store did eventually get the jewelry returned but it was a struggle.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Certainly didn't generate the (financial) return for the House that Alexander McQueen's dress did when Kate wore hers a decade ago. If it had they would not have let CWK go. No-one seems to last long at Givenchy, but I would have thought that the wedding dress was a golden opportunity. It's a shame, I like a lot of her work (although I like the new Givenchy AW21 collection by Matthew Williams - quite 'hardcore' in comparison). For the UK, it's a loss because CWK was British and we pride ourselves on our designers' international reps.


I do think Givenchy is one of the hardest brands to succeed with. It is not that well known as a name. It has no logos or trademark leather goods  in their tradition and no really blockbuster perfumes to make easy money. 


plastic-fish said:


> lalame said:
> 
> 
> 
> I feel like Givenchy was so hot by that point already... M was kind of following the trend instead of other way around by wearing them. So I’m not that surprised it didn’t get MORE popular after her. I swear almost ever influencer and celeb was already carrying an Antigona.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah givenchy was already really hot by that point. She was definitely clout-chasing the trend & of course it turned out to be the end of the line for CWK.
> 
> The McQueen dress was interesting because it was such a departure from brand expectations and did draw a clear line at the difference between original and new McQueen under Sarah Burton.
> 
> I liked CWK‘s work a lot too but she should’ve recognised that publicly parading sloppy RTW like that not to mention that hideous dress was going to kill her credibility no matter how great Rachel Weiss looked at the oscars.
> QUOTE="papertiger, post: 34507989, member: 222564"]
> Remind me not to choose a bandeau bra even for a boat/slash neck. Strapless bras don't have to look like that under a dress.
Click to expand...

I honestly would have thought she was bra-less if it wasn’t so visible. What is the point?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember this ?
> 
> View attachment 5071185
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Givenchy Bespoke Navy Pleated Skirt - Meghan's Mirror
> 
> 
> An elegant pleated skirt, created for the Duchess by Clare Waight-Keller for Givenchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansmirror.com





csshopper said:


> If you think you are hearing an evil cackle as you are reading this post, it's me. I think it's the perfect put down for Harry's wife that her wedding gown, made to her exact demands, looks better on the dress dummy used to display it at Windsor Castle than it did on her! Much prefer the dummy's version with smoothed front. This bride is polished, unlike the MessyMeghan version of scrunched up midriff and ill fitting bra we see ad nauseam in so many of her outfits.
> 
> Windsor Castle:
> The specific location of the exhibit is particularly fitting. The display is open for public viewing in the castle's Grand Reception Room, where the Queen hosted an afternoon reception for the 600 wedding guests following the St George's Chapel wedding ceremony on 19 May. This gives visitors a chance to view the bride and groom's outfits up close in the space where the event actually took place. The display also highlights the level of detail and craftsmanship that went into creating one of the most talked-about wedding dresses in recent history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curator Caroline de Guitaut makes final adjustments
> ROYAL COLLECTION TRUST / HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II 2018


Oh look, it actually looks plain and not completely tasteless  when the line isn’t obstructed by a tangled witch weave  
Im beginning to think I should sue her stylist for plagiarising my hideous 2010s style. I too wore the wrong thickness of hair extensions then.... I thought mismatching black suits separates were the height of Marlene Dietrich style.... pretty sure I had a knife pleat skirt which kept blowing up too. My defence is was I was dumb, young and broke - I think only one of them is true of M


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm just a regular client and had a group of jewelry sent to me over the years to decide which I wanted to keep/pay and shipped the rest back. My sa told me they had a celebrity in L.A. that didn't return anything one time and when the establishment asked for payment for all that jewelry, the celeb said they thought it was all comp'd to them. The store did eventually get the jewelry returned but it was a struggle.



 

It's a headache.  At one of the last big events I went to prior to C-19 (an award ceremony) staff were there at the end of the evening to take the jewellery from actresses/performers before they left the venue.


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> It's a headache.  At one of the last big events I went to prior to C-19 (an award ceremony) staff were there at the end of the evening to take the jewellery from actresses/performers before they left the venue.



I imagine it's tough and one needs to catch the celebs before they get to far. Otherwise they can say anything happened to it and the jewelry be gone forever.   It sounds like you have a fun job though. 

Oops I may be mistaken. Apologies, maybe you were a guest and observed this.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> I imagine it's tough and one needs to catch the celebs before they get to far. Otherwise they can say anything happened to it and the jewelry be gone forever.   It sounds like you have a fun job though.
> 
> Oops I may be mistaken. Apologies, maybe you were a guest and observed this.



I won't working at this particular event but I have worked at/for many, so you're doubly right  .


----------



## jelliedfeels

gerryt said:


> It’s strange how the poorly fitting areas are always the same - too long in the body or too tight across bustline/upper arms and hip area.



she clearly thinks she’s taller and thinner than she is and orders the wrong size.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I loved that denim dress...until I learned it cost well over 2000 pounds. To be worn to a freaking polo tournament to smooch Harry in public, hasn't been seen since. She has no sense for appropriateness somehow.


2k for a denim dress. They saw her coming. It looks like J crew 


lalame said:


> I noticed she tends to wear more lower end brands when traveling, like Staud, Banana Republic, Reformation, when you think she'd want to pull out the dressier looks... and higher end clothes on 2nd tier events in the UK.  Seems like an odd strategy.


Well it makes sense if you are an attention seeker: if I go to hang out with the plebs in Givenchy I’ll be the only one in designer clothes and it’s more newsworthy whereas if I’m hanging out with well-turned out professional women if I just wear cheap then it’s because I’m not making an effort to compete and I get attention from not following the dress code.


papertiger said:


> ITA.
> 
> CWK created so many elegantly modern outfits.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with M's figure. She's short-waisted and fine-boned (Kate is also fine-boned, long-waisted) and gamine, many of the outfits emphasise the horizontal all the way down rather the the vertical, and are simply too 'stuffy' for her petite bone structure.
> 
> Someone should have told her, what suited Audrey Hepburn (also a gamine in facial features and fine boned but classic proportions and tall) and Angelina (long, large-boned and tall) does not suit everyone.
> 
> I think M's 'stylist' wasn't good enough and came along for the ride/fun. How could she let her wear that underwear?


yeah she’s small and skinny and she shouldn’t have any problems body wise. Rachel Weisz is about the same height at only 5’6 and she looks like a goddess in CWK Givenchy.  MM is such a cheap-looking Insta thot type she ruins anything with an artistic and restrained aesthetic. At least the Kardashians have the good sense to stick to their strengths in Balmain!


----------



## xincinsin

Most of us here feel that H's wife was badly styled despite her stylist bestie. What are Mulroney's credentials? Is she famous for anything apart from being the bestie and married to a guy from a famous family? Did she style anyone noteworthy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Wow this is a bit cold. I mean most women would probably feel "stumpy" next to supermodel Kate. Who doesn't have some sort of "flaw" with their body?



I think OP has already answered, but: there's nothing wrong with her body. There's something wrong with her insistence to pick unflattering styles, clothes too small (e.g. that Lion King premiere dress. She had just given birth, only a jerk would pick on her weight gain, but someone who spent 1 million pounds on clothing in a mere 9 months was unable to freaking buy the next size and instead pranced around with backfat - not trying to be mean for once, just for lack of a better word - squished up over the rim of the corsage?), underwear that doesn't fit and her refusal to get a seamstress to fix the problem areas. Even "super model Kate" would not look half as good if she didn't make sure her clothes fit her the way they do. And it's such an easy fix if you have the money. 

Oh, and comb her hair for her televised wedding or visiting a mosque.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Something else I MM said was that the media were worse with her because of the racial undertones which Kate obviously didn't receive. Kate did initially receive a lot of press which labelled her as lazy (she left her first job after 6 months to work for her family business) and she was asked about this in the engagement interview which I thought was below the belt. MM has never been questioned like this by the press. Kates family were also labelled as social climbers and calculated people. Do you think the medias treatment of MM was worse because of the racial undertones? I find it interesting that they believe because of MMs race, the media were worse to her and therefore she deserves to be put on pedestal. Thats how it came across to me.



I personally think Kate (and even Camilla) had it way worse than MM. The way the paparazzi harrassed her - at her workplace, while leaving her apartment, while out with her sister - gave me anxiety just watching the footage. We are not talking taking her picture from the other side of the street, but a bunch of photographers literally shoving their cameras in her face at touching distance.

They belittled her upbringing, they insulted her mother, they painted her as lazy. It's just that at the current climate racism claims top everything, which I find ironic seeing the real issues with racism still aren't dealt with properly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> According to google Kate is 5’ 9” and Harry’s wife is 5’ 6”.  5’ 6” is tall to me as I admit to being 5’ 1 1/2”



Ha. That's an inch taller than I am, and I don't feel particularly short.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha. That's an inch taller than I am, and I don't feel particularly short.



We're the same height. 

I think M may actually be 5'6" in 120(mm) Louboutins


----------



## Chanbal

With so many people working hard to fight COVID around the world, what is JCMH and his wife doing here?  Of course this is the work of a PR team and/or cashing in on certain connections.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

There is an article on Express on how Cringe prepared for her first meeting with Will. She wanted to win him over and, apparently, she put a lot of work on it.  









						Meghan 'prepared for a grilling' at first meeting with William
					

MEGHAN MARKLE "prepared herself for a grilling" before her first meeting with Prince William, as she sought to make a good impression, a friend has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Watch at your own risk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> With so many people working hard to fight COVID around the world, what is JCMH and his wife doing here?  Of course this is the work of a PR team and/or cashing in on certain connections.
> View attachment 5072236



Because history tells us a concert is all we need “to reunite the world.”
Remind me again, when was the world united?  Once again, the titles are used. Snore yawn


----------



## Shopaholic2021

A tweet Selena Gomez sent to Prime minister Arden (NZ):

"Thank you! Your commitment will save lives around the world. @JacindaArdern can we count on your support too? You’ve helped New Zealand fight Covid-19 domestically. Now we need your help globally to ensure everyone can access the vaccine. #VaxLive."

A spokesperson for the Prime Minister commented on the pop star's tweet to 1 NEWS.
"New Zealand is committed to equitable access to safe and effective vaccines globally. New Zealand is a strong supporter of COVAX and has already contributed NZD17 million to COVAX to help fund free vaccines to 92 low income economies.
"Recently we announced that New Zealand will donate enough Covid-19 vaccines for more than 800,000 people to COVAX for distribution to developing countries with a focus on the Pacific.
"New Zealand has also purchased enough vaccines to ensure our Polynesian neighbours are able to vaccinate everyone who is eligible. We are also working with a number of other Pacific nations to support their vaccination campaigns."

I really think a lot of these celebs should do research before spouting crap, especially when they have large followings who see this. They are essentially spreading mis-information.

There are two goals to the concert. One is to encourage people to get vaccinated, and I can tell you that in the US there is still substantial resistance, as we now have more vaccines than people willing to get vaccinated. I also work in the medical office with less than 50% of people vaccinated. They won't listen to me when I tell them why they need to get vaccinated, so what makes these celebs think they will listen to someone with no science or medical training. The second aim of the concert is to encourage equitable distribution of the vaccines. I know that world leaders know that the virus has no borders and that they need to help each other, they don't need uneducated unelected officials (aka Harry et al) to tell them this. It is ironic that the Presidents will be present considering they have yet to donate any vaccinations and france even planned to block export of vaccines to the UK. Not exactly a show of unity. The US say they will donate vaccines once the FDA approves the Astra-Zeneca vaccine but then I read another article saying they have yet to commit to the donation, it is just something they will get around to once the states are all vaccinated.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha. That's an inch taller than I am, and I don't feel particularly short.


Lol I said I “admit” to being 5’ 1 1/2” but I have a feeling I’m not *that tall* anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Icyjade said:


> I wonder if she ever felt “stumpy” next to Kate? Her body shape is sort of blocky, waist is thick etc hence why I think she had fit issues (apart from really poor taste). Kate on the other hand has a model figure even after 3 kids! Plus Kate chooses better materials imo. Not so clingy and better fitting underwear. Hasn’t the stumpy one heard of spanx?



In the beginning, Meghan was very thin and I thought she looked great, figure-wise. During and after Archie her figure hasn't yet bounced back but maybe it's a case of it can't or maybe she's satisfied the way she is. Many of us strive to have a great figure for special occasions, in her case obviously the wedding was a big deal and she wanted to look the royal part. Now it seems she feels she can just slap on an expensive dress and think she looks great with terrible hair extensions and over filled face; or she loves the sloppy ripped jeans look as though to say "I love being back in L.A. so I can finally dress how I want without the racist and oppressive BRF guidelines. Besides, even if I look like a slob, I'm royal and better than everyone else." 
Kate bounced back great after three kids and it must take a lot of effort and maintenance. Kate and Queen Letizia of Spain look fantastic.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MM mentioned that Kate didn't reach out to her, but also MM didn't reach out to her either. How would you go about this? I mean if you were MM and no one reached out to you, would you reach out to them? I know everyone is different, and personally if it was me I would expect people to reach out to me if I joined the family but I also realize that people are different and not everyone will do as you would do. I think Kate could possibly be reserved and not as open or chatty like MM. She seems very diplomatic and constrained, which I guess she has to be in her job. There were news articles saying that Kate didn't think have much in common.
> 
> Something else I MM said was that the media were worse with her because of the racial undertones which Kate obviously didn't receive. Kate did initially receive a lot of press which labelled her as lazy (she left her first job after 6 months to work for her family business) and she was asked about this in the engagement interview which I thought was below the belt. MM has never been questioned like this by the press. Kates family were also labelled as social climbers and calculated people. Do you think the medias treatment of MM was worse because of the racial undertones? I find it interesting that they believe because of MMs race, the media were worse to her and therefore she deserves to be put on pedestal. Thats how it came across to me.


It's funny how she had no problem reaching out across the pond to Piers Morgan and various other British people she didn't know beforehand


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> This isn't even directed at you specifically because I get what you mean but I just feel like I see some criticism of M here from time to time for doing things so common that most people could be faulted for the same. I'm just waiting for brunettes to be insulted next just because M happens to have brown hair (obviously being hyperbolic here). It's like, I get it, the lady sucks, but it's kind of hard not to feel bad to see her being insulted for things that I might do or that are so common for women that it's odd to criticise it.


I think first of all it's backlash as she is so full of herself.  and secondly she has the resources to make herself look much closer to perfect.  not tall like a model but still, could do better


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> True, but if she keeps switching to new ones for him, it undercuts her sustainability message.
> Also, with my kids when they were pre-school age, even if they had 20 teeshirts and 4 backpacks, they had favourites to which they gravitated. Archie can't be a total blank slate. Or can he? Hmmm...



Message? Why that’s for people like you and I who are expected to make personal sacrifices for the greater good. Celebrity messengers are never expected to go without the very best. They deserve it more than we do because they are famous.  

We live in a messed up reality.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Your first point illustrates how completely self-absorbed Meghan was/is. Why in the world would a 35+year old woman need another woman to “reach out to her” or take her shopping? Meghan needs to stop expecting that everyone lives to make her life easy and take care of her own damn self.


Yes, Harry's wife expects everyone to coddle her while she in turn coddles no one (because that "isn't her job").


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I think M's 'stylist' wasn't good enough and came along for the ride/fun. How could she let her wear that underwear?



I don’t know how talented the stylist was but it doesn’t matter if she didn’t follow recommendations. Don’t stylists trust their clients to be competent enough to pick out their own underwear?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know how talented the stylist was but it doesn’t matter if she didn’t follow recommendations. Don’t stylists trust their clients to be competent enough to pick out their own underwear?


IDK....I don't have a stylist but if I were going to dress for the red carpet (or for photos) I could probably use some help with my underwear


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> IDK....I don't have a stylist but if I were going to dress for the red carpet (or for photos) I could probably use some help with my underwear



I bet you know the basics. Don’t wear anything that is going to stick out or show through the outfit comes to mind. 

Meghan was a TV actress, albeit a minor one. She had professionals doing her clothes/costuming for the show. She should have learned all about the mysteries of underwear at that time.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> Message? Why that’s for people like you and I who are expected to make personal sacrifices for the greater good. Celebrity messengers are never expected to go without the very best. They deserve it more than we do because they are famous.



That's how I feel when celebs try to lecture the general public on important issues. They expect us to make sacrifices for the greater good so that they can carry on living their lavish lifestyle. COVID has really amplified this divide more. Kim Kardashian for example boasting about taking her entire family to a private island for her birthday and getting them all tested and how she is so grateful that she can do this, while people are forced to shelter for months and months (sacrificing their mental health and financial positions).


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> I bet you know the basics. Don’t wear anything that is going to stick out or show through the outfit comes to mind.
> 
> *Meghan was a TV actress, albeit a minor one. She had professionals doing her clothes/costuming for the show. She should have learned all about the mysteries of underwear at that time.*


And should have learned to have others check her clothing out from all angles and lighting to catch anything see through, VPL, bunched seams, etc.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I bet you know the basics. Don’t wear anything that is going to stick out or show through the outfit comes to mind.
> 
> Meghan was a TV actress, albeit a minor one. She had professionals doing her clothes/costuming for the show. She should have learned all about the mysteries of underwear at that time.


I have not watched any episodes of Suits.
The only scenes I've seen were in a Youtube vid about MM, and the selected clips showed MM all hot and bothered, necking with a guy and ready to disrobe in the file room. Was she playing a slutty character (who didn't need underwear)?


----------



## V0N1B2

jelliedfeels said:


> That could well be true. But surely a lot of these things are altered RTW. Theres no way they have the detail to  be couture? (I don’t know givenchy that well though)
> 
> Just looking at these pieces I feel a bit sorry for poor CWK, little did she know that she was digging her own grave.  I wasn’t interested in M or the royals when this came out but I was branching into being somewhat interested in Givenchy.
> I know I dislike MM and that might be a factor but all these pieces are just awfully cheap-looking and don’t show cwk’s strengths at all.
> 
> This dress looks like 2010 Karen Millen. A pencil cut shift in block colours with a skinny patent waist belt.
> I remember having one just like it for going clubbing....trust me..... that’s not a good look at all.
> 
> View attachment 5072077
> 
> 
> Add on- come to think of it. I think I had a hardshell black satin box clutch with a clashing silver hardware ball closure & some black patent platform courts too. My gosh what were they thinking? Perhaps CKW did have it in for her all along
> I don’t see how they didn’t realise that copying 2010s high street looks made givenchy look bad.


I think it's interesting that in this family photo (the entire photo, not this snip) EVERYONE is wearing some shade of blue and/or cream.
Everyone except Harry's wife. Of course. She wears black (with cream)


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I bet you know the basics. Don’t wear anything that is going to stick out or show through the outfit comes to mind.
> 
> Meghan was a TV actress, albeit a minor one. She had professionals doing her clothes/costuming for the show. She should have learned all about the mysteries of underwear at that time.



Did she though... IDK what Jessica was actually doing but she clearly wasn't doing her any favors. Meghan didn't really have great red carpet looks even before Harry. I think the feminine, tailored, and fitted dresses are probably a new world for her (judging by how she used to dress) and she just never really got the hang of it or didn't take anyone's advice.

Case in point... I have a similar body to her and I would never wear a cropped top that short and skirt with that high of a waist. At your widest point? Disaster.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I have not watched any episodes of Suits.
> The only scenes I've seen were in a Youtube vid about MM, and the selected clips showed MM all hot and bothered, necking with a guy and ready to disrobe in the file room. Was she playing a slutty character (who didn't need underwear)?


I've never watched Suits and I'm not interested enough in her to go look at a youtube video


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> I have not watched any episodes of Suits.
> The only scenes I've seen were in a Youtube vid about MM, and the selected clips showed MM all hot and bothered, necking with a guy and ready to disrobe in the file room. Was she playing a slutty character (who didn't need underwear)?



Suits was a good show! A few of us here were fans actually.  Her character wasn't really slutty, especially compared to everyone else on that show... She had maybe 2 sex scenes and of course that's all that gets shown nowadays.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Did she though... IDK what Jessica was actually doing but she clearly wasn't doing her any favors. Meghan didn't really have great red carpet looks even before Harry. I think the feminine, tailored, and fitted dresses are probably a new world for her (judging by how she used to dress) and she just never really got the hang of it or didn't take anyone's advice.
> 
> Case in point... I have a similar body to her and I would never wear a cropped top that short and skirt with that high of a waist. At your widest point? Disaster.
> 
> View attachment 5072471


yes, not a good look but the skirt is pretty


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> yes, not a good look but the skirt is pretty



It's kind of painful because I think she does wear good things... it just doesn't look right because of fit or wrong combo or whatever. I loved the infamous green cape dress.


----------



## lalame

Here's another where I like the dress itself but it just doesn't seem fit for function. Looks too casual for a fashion show/party and isn't really the most flattering look for her.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> It's kind of painful because I think she does wear good things... it just doesn't look right because of fit or wrong combo or whatever. I loved the infamous green cape dress.


eww....hate that green outfit....so much green and a shade of green that I don't care for....and we have seen that photo So Many times


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Here's another where I like the dress itself but it just doesn't seem fit for function. Looks too casual for a fashion show/party and isn't really the most flattering look for her.
> 
> View attachment 5072477


I don't know when this photo was taken but she looks like a kid in that outfit to me


----------



## gracekelly

Shopaholic2021 said:


> A tweet Selena Gomez sent to Prime minister Arden (NZ):
> 
> "Thank you! Your commitment will save lives around the world. @JacindaArdern can we count on your support too? You’ve helped New Zealand fight Covid-19 domestically. Now we need your help globally to ensure everyone can access the vaccine. #VaxLive."
> 
> A spokesperson for the Prime Minister commented on the pop star's tweet to 1 NEWS.
> "New Zealand is committed to equitable access to safe and effective vaccines globally. New Zealand is a strong supporter of COVAX and has already contributed NZD17 million to COVAX to help fund free vaccines to 92 low income economies.
> "Recently we announced that New Zealand will donate enough Covid-19 vaccines for more than 800,000 people to COVAX for distribution to developing countries with a focus on the Pacific.
> "New Zealand has also purchased enough vaccines to ensure our Polynesian neighbours are able to vaccinate everyone who is eligible. We are also working with a number of other Pacific nations to support their vaccination campaigns."
> 
> I really think a lot of these celebs should do research before spouting crap, especially when they have large followings who see this. They are essentially spreading mis-information.
> 
> There are two goals to the concert. One is to encourage people to get vaccinated, and I can tell you that in the US there is still substantial resistance, as we now have more vaccines than people willing to get vaccinated. I also work in the medical office with less than 50% of people vaccinated. They won't listen to me when I tell them why they need to get vaccinated, so what makes these celebs think they will listen to someone with no science or medical training. The second aim of the concert is to encourage equitable distribution of the vaccines. I know that world leaders know that the virus has no borders and that they need to help each other, they don't need uneducated unelected officials (aka Harry et al) to tell them this. It is ironic that the Presidents will be present considering they have yet to donate any vaccinations and france even planned to block export of vaccines to the UK. Not exactly a show of unity. The US say they will donate vaccines once the FDA approves the Astra-Zeneca vaccine but then I read another article saying they have yet to commit to the donation, it is just something they will get around to once the states are all vaccinated.


Selena Gomez has a big mouth and is an idiot. She gave some mother and daughter with a frozen yogurt store in LA an online tongue lashing and they didn’t take it sitting down. I think SG is still on drugs based upon her behavior.


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> I think it's interesting that in this family photo (the entire photo, not this snip) EVERYONE is wearing some shade of blue and/or cream.
> Everyone except Harry's wife. Of course. She wears black (with cream)


She doesn’t follow the dress code so she will stand out in the picture. It’s totally deliberate.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know how talented the stylist was but it doesn’t matter if she didn’t follow recommendations.* Don’t stylists trust their clients to be competent enough to pick out their own underwear?*





Usually everything top to toe and every layer, and then check photogenic quality with a Polaroid and phone camera.


----------



## Chloe302225

gracekelly said:


> Selena Gomez has a big mouth and is an idiot. She gave some mother and daughter with a frozen yogurt store in LA an online tongue lashing and they didn’t take it sitting down. I think SG is still on drugs based upon her behavior.



That was Demi Lovato not Selena Gomez.


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> Don’t stylists trust their clients to be competent enough to pick out their own underwear?


They shouldn’t. I’d hope a good stylist not only selects fit- and occasion-appropriate outfits, but also adds the right underpinnings for the best results.

Like @papertiger said above


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


>


I think real professional stylists DO pick proper underwear for their clients.  I recall watching some reality shows of stylists and if the client didn’t come to them they’d bring huge amounts of clothing and some undergarments to their house to try on just in case.  Although I have to say I think a lot of actresses in Hollywood probably don’t need to wear a bra so the stylist isn’t toting around bras in 12 or more different sizes and styles each time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I have a long torso and a boxy waist as well, I’ve always thought it would be great to have a stylist to tell me how to best flatter my figure, but I’ve at least figured out during the years that I cannot wear things that are belted.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She doesn’t follow the dress code so she will stand out in the picture. It’s totally deliberate.


well, to be fair, to me she was wearing white with black trim.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm reading the article on MM preparing for meeting William, and this sentence stuck out to me:



> Aware that members of Harry's family could be suspicious of her motives, the Duchess of Sussex went to great lengths to ensure she said all the right things.



I think the writer is onto something, but not what he thought he was saying. 

Apparently Finding Freebies mentions how she meticulously prepared herself for that meeting. Oh I bet she did.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Usually everything top to toe and every layer, and then check photogenic quality with a Polaroid and phone camera.





Genie27 said:


> They shouldn’t. I’d hope a good stylist not only selects fit- and occasion-appropriate outfits, but also adds the right underpinnings for the best results.
> 
> Like @papertiger said above



Thanks. I’ve learned so much from this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Did she though... IDK what Jessica was actually doing but she clearly wasn't doing her any favors. Meghan didn't really have great red carpet looks even before Harry. I think the feminine, tailored, and fitted dresses are probably a new world for her (judging by how she used to dress) and she just never really got the hang of it or didn't take anyone's advice.
> 
> Case in point... I have a similar body to her and I would never wear a cropped top that short and skirt with that high of a waist. At your widest point? Disaster.
> 
> View attachment 5072471



She’s trying hard to dress young. The demographic of her fanbase is mainly what? Females in their teens to late 20s or so?


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


> That was Demi Lovato not Selena Gomez.


Thanks.  I have to admit, they are interchangeable for me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I finally got around to reading some of the articles I had open on my laptop, and one of them was the piece on Harry's ex-gfs. I had said a few pages earlier the only ones I remember are Chelsey and Cressida...seems that is because these two were the only actual relationships AND the only appropriate gfs he's ever had. The rest is rumoured or one night stands or short affairs with starlets. And then there's Duchess Disney.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well, to be fair, to me she was wearing white with black trim.....



IMO Camilla, the future Queen  the wife of the heir, should have been the only one in all white.  Sometimes it is better to blend in than stick out.

ETA: fixed the Queen reference.  Thank you, @papertiger


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Camilla, the future Queen, should have been the only one in all white.  Sometimes it is better to blend in than stick out.



Not sure she'll be the future Queen, even if Charles becomes King. Maybe, Princess Consort or something


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm reading the article on MM preparing for meeting William, and this sentence stuck out to me:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the writer is onto something, but not what he thought he was saying.
> 
> Apparently Finding Freebies mentions how she meticulously prepared herself for that meeting. Oh I bet she did.



But she couldn’t be bothered with doing any research about the BRF or what she might expect when marrying in... She surely had her priorities in line.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> That was Demi Lovato not Selena Gomez.



Looks like Selena’s tweet has created quite a mess.  Can we ever trust Hwood celebs?








						Selena Gomez annoys New Zealanders with COVID-19 tweet to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern
					

"Selena. Our PM has this covered."




					www.newshub.co.nz


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> I loved what Camilla was wearing on her wedding day. Even the headpiece - it suited her so nicely.
> 
> I thought everything was just so appropriate for a second marriage to a future king.


The coat over the dress was perfect, imo. Her hat sort of mimicked a crown/tiara too. It all worked very well.

I was no Camilla fan but she does know her "place" (and I hate saying that). Also, she has a kick-a** jewel collection!


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> But she couldn’t be bothered with doing any research about the BRF or what she might expect when marrying in... She surely had her priorities in line.



It’s like someone unqualified who answers all of the questions correctly in the interview to get hired for the job. She said/did whatever she had to to her foot in the door. By the time the truth was discovered it was too late.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We've had the body language analysts, now here's a video analyzing how she worded things. I have not watched the whole thing yet, but from the comments, the verdict seems once again to lean towards "full of it".


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Well Googling it I think we are at cross purposes as it seems to be used to describe all kinds of nasal undesirables whereas I’m  referring to a specific side effect and how I see the surgery is interacting with it.
> Nasal droop, as I mean it, is not just  the tip of the nose goes downwards - I’d say that’s just having an aquiline nose, What I mean by nasal droop is a bit hard to explain but it’s essentially when the whole nose loses structure and definition and begins to look like it’s falling in on itself, it can also mean your nostrils become different sizes to each other, bumps appear  and the nose skin starts to look a bit saggy due to cartilage loss.
> The most common reason this happens is from snorting certain things which damage the inside of the nose.
> Now M has clearly had one nose job at least. Her bridge is far narrower and I think she did have  nose tip turned up in cosmetic surgery as the retrousse nose is considered pretty. But what I mean is when you look at the sides and the bridge it does look to me like she’s had some cartilage loss and her nostrils are becoming uneven. I also think his nose looks like it’s been taking a lot of punishment....
> obviously I don’t have any proof of this and I am being a bit careful about what I say full stop but it just looks... off to me


interesting....as I said I know very little about PS.... retrousse  nose is new to me......I'd call what she and harry both have a ski slope nose and don't think it's that attractive.....not that her nose is terrible but I wouldn't go out of my way to have that type of nose
thanks for the insight


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We've had the body language analysts, now here's a video analyzing how she worded things. I have not watched the whole thing yet, but from the comments, the verdict seems once again to lean towards "full of it".




I have said it before, this analysis just adds further support. OW has been, is and will be highly involved in this marriage. The clues all point to an agenda at work here. I don’t know exactly _what_ the agenda is, but it exists.  Stay tuned, we are in for a bumpy ride.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We've had the body language analysts, now here's a video analyzing how she worded things. I have not watched the whole thing yet, but from the comments, the verdict seems once again to lean towards "full of it".



  Harry's wife is consistent no matter the type of analysis used to study her: oral language analysis, body language analysis, facial expression analysis in caught off guard moments, she is consistently narcissistic, lying, calculating, manipulative, corrosive. It is so completely her core, it oozes out in every way no matter how she tries to mask it.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Not sure she'll be the future Queen, even if Charles becomes King. Maybe, Princess Consort or something


Does she even want to be Queen.  It always appeared that wasn't so important to her.

She'll have all the perks of a Queen anyway.


----------



## Jayne1

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That's how I feel when celebs try to lecture the general public on important issues. They expect us to make sacrifices for the greater good so that they can carry on living their lavish lifestyle. COVID has really amplified this divide more. Kim Kardashian for example boasting about taking her entire family to a private island for her birthday and getting them all tested and how she is so grateful that she can do this, while people are forced to shelter for months and months (sacrificing their mental health and financial positions).


Jenifer Aniston was also quoted saying how the lockdowns had a silver lining and good things came of it... and I thought... to who?  Celebs getting time off to recuperate from plastic surgery?

Most people had a terrible time, lost wages, jobs, health, stress, loneliness, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I finally got around to reading some of the articles I had open on my laptop, and one of them was the piece on Harry's ex-gfs. I had said a few pages earlier the only ones I remember are Chelsey and Cressida...seems that is because these two were the only actual relationships AND the only appropriate gfs he's ever had. The rest is rumoured or one night stands or short affairs with starlets. And then there's Duchess Disney.


Harry took Bryan Ferry’s ex wife to a wedding the Caribbean, she is much younger than BF


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> She seems to wear ill fitting clothes often so no surprise her wedding dress was the same?
> View attachment 5071180
> View attachment 5071181
> View attachment 5071182


Yuck! If my clothes looked like hers, I'd never leave home: ill-fitting grey dress with poor undergarments and no slip; loose hair strand under wedding veil; wrinkled white dress and hair mop under little hat.


----------



## caramelize126

papertiger said:


> Usually everything top to toe and every layer, and then check photogenic quality with a Polaroid and phone camera.





Genie27 said:


> They shouldn’t. I’d hope a good stylist not only selects fit- and occasion-appropriate outfits, but also adds the right underpinnings for the best results.
> 
> Like @papertiger said above





Aimee3 said:


> I think real professional stylists DO pick proper underwear for their clients.  I recall watching some reality shows of stylists and if the client didn’t come to them they’d bring huge amounts of clothing and some undergarments to their house to try on just in case.  Although I have to say I think a lot of actresses in Hollywood probably don’t need to wear a bra so the stylist isn’t toting around bras in 12 or more different sizes and styles each time.




To be fair, a stylist can only do so much- especially difficult if the client isnt willing to meet ahead of time to try things on, take pictures, etc.

Based on meghans outfits on tour and at formal events ( which we saw were almost all wrinkled, ill-fitted, or didn't suit her body type), It looks like meghan just throws things on last minute and heads out the door lol. My guess is that she wanted her employees to do the work for her and couldnt be bothered with trying things on ahead of time.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lulilu said:


> In what world was that wedding not formal?  If she was wearing a never-ending veil, the children should have worn tights or socks.  She was simply being mean and antagonistic.


I think she was deliberately flaunting royal protocols, traditions, routines and practices with the intention of embarrassing the RF into welcoming her as the heroine, who would modernize this 'antiquated' family.


----------



## scarlet555

csshopper said:


> Harry's wife is consistent no matter the type of analysis used to study her: oral language analysis, body language analysis, facial expression analysis in caught off guard moments, she is consistently narcissistic, lying, calculating, manipulative, corrosive. It is so completely her core, it oozes out in every way no matter how she tries to mask it.


 As consistent as a lot of us here without that kind of formal education but just plain basics and common sense!! We didn’t even get our professional aura reader license online or the sorts...


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Not sure she'll be the future Queen, even if Charles becomes King. Maybe, Princess Consort or something


agree for two reasons 
1. shocked to see her abysmal low popularity, despite years of great work
2. I don’t think she has the personality to fight for a title, she is far more circumspect than that

remember how she was not at Eugenie’s wedding ... previous engagement ... hmmm ... she may have history with Andrew and Sarah and simply ceded the high ground, I think that is typical of Camilla


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> It's kind of painful because I think she does wear good things... it just doesn't look right because of fit or wrong combo or whatever. I loved the infamous green cape dress.


I hated it. I think it was a size or two too small for her. The seams were bulging and she looked strangled by the cape. A stan video dubbed it MM's revenge dress which I thought was incredibly stupid. Cosplay her MIL in green, yes. Any comparison to Diana's marital situation then or her revenge dress is just absurd. 



gracekelly said:


> She doesn’t follow the dress code so she will stand out in the picture. It’s totally deliberate.


ITA 
It has happened too many times for it not to be deliberate. 



papertiger said:


> Not sure she'll be the future Queen, even if Charles becomes King. Maybe, Princess Consort or something


Based on surveys, there is still a large number of British people who won't accept her as Queen. Their affair was sordid and will always affect people's impression of her. 



bag-mania said:


> It’s like someone unqualified who answers all of the questions correctly in the interview to get hired for the job. She said/did whatever she had to to her foot in the door. By the time the truth was discovered it was too late.


Happens to every boss. And they only show their true colours after they are confirmed in the job. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> We've had the body language analysts, now here's a video analyzing how she worded things. I have not watched the whole thing yet, but from the comments, the verdict seems once again to lean towards "full of it".



Must find time to view this, although it is quite depressing that so many of her fans still have her up in a pedestal.


----------



## Aimee3

Someone mentioned several pages back that Harry’s wife wears her shoes in a size bigger than she would normally wear.  I’ve read other people do this too.  What I really want to know is how the heck do they stay on your feet then?  Sometimes even wearing my normal size, pumps will fly off my feet when I walk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Someone mentioned several pages back that Harry’s wife wears her shoes in a size bigger than she would normally wear.  I’ve read other people do this too.  What I really want to know is how the heck do they stay on your feet then?  Sometimes even wearing my normal size, pumps will fly off my feet when I walk.



Years ago she had serious bunion surgery.  The photos are out there.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> *then I am also a "Royal Correspondent" because I have spent a helluva lot of hours on this thread talking about royals and royal was beens. *


Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut. 
Please forgive me if I missed anyone.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Maggie Muggins


----------



## CarryOn2020

The transformation is complete


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m so honored!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


Thank you Maggie Muggins!!  I'm honored to be on your list.  This is so COOOOL !


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Aimee3 said:


> Someone mentioned several pages back that Harry’s wife wears her shoes in a size bigger than she would normally wear.  I’ve read other people do this too.  What I really want to know is how the heck do they stay on your feet then?  Sometimes even wearing my normal size, pumps will fly off my feet when I walk.



Wearing a shoe sizer bigger would make my shoes fly off my feet too, so I thought this was a weird hack. I try to find shoes that have ankle straps.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


Let's have a party with champagne!


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> Jenifer Aniston was also quoted saying how the lockdowns had a silver lining and good things came of it... and I thought... to who?  Celebs getting time off to recuperate from plastic surgery?
> 
> Most people had a terrible time, lost wages, jobs, health, stress, loneliness, etc.


I guess it was different for everyone but I agree with Jennifer. I was fortunate enough to come out of the pandemic far better off than when I went in. Of course in my case the bar is set extremely low but I was able to actually save money for the first time. I also got a ton of stuff done around the house.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Didn‘t QE explain to her that very point?  Markie said she wouldn’t wear the veil, then showed up with it on. So, QE looks quite displeased in the photos.


Yes! I've read that she was told that as a divorcee, she couldn't wear a veil and wear only off-white colours. Brides must be escorted down the aisle. No bare shoulders are allowed in the church. But, she disregarded all the rules and when they realized that she was walking down the aisle by herself, Charles was asked to intervene.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We've had the body language analysts, now here's a video analyzing how she worded things. I have not watched the whole thing yet, but from the comments, the verdict seems once again to lean towards "full of it".



These are so interesting! Thanks for the link!  It's so confusing though - need a second listen.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


Wonderful!  I love this!


----------



## zinacef

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


I MADE IT!   Thank you! Finally official! I promise not to overdo Botox, fillers, what not like The official mouth piece — Omid—aaa


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937



Truth seekers all,


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh, someone heard us  








						Prince Harry gets standing ovation at Vax Live charity concert in LA
					

Prince Harry was among many high profile stars - including Jennifer Lopez and Selena Gomez - to take the stage at Sunday night's concert taping at the So-Fi Stadium in Inglewood.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have said it before, this analysis just adds further support. OW has been, is and will be highly involved in this marriage. The clues all point to an agenda at work here. I don’t know exactly _what_ the agenda is, but it exists.  Stay tuned, we are in for a bumpy ride.


I agree with this speculation.
Back In January 2020 in her Mail Column Jan Moir wrote that it was Oprah's network (OWN ?) that was the most vocal about the racist treatment of the couple in the British press. I will find the article later if I can. It struck me as odd then that OW would be so invested in the UK tabloids.

I believe that H&M may have some very agenda driven puppet masters in the shadows even if they are not aware of it. At the risk of sounding like I need to get my tin foil hat on for the day, I will add; at some point M is going to do, say or behave in a way that is unacceptable to her promoters. 

Lets face it by her actions and press releases she has said Go F**k You to the Queen on several occasions.

And it is this deeply insulting and disrespectful behavior that I find unacceptable in this couple. If they wanted to leave they could have done so in a polite and respectful manner. None of the victimhood, accusations and ingratitude were even slightly necessary.

How about " It's more difficult that we though; I was not prepared for the reality of royal service; please could we have a year off; I miss my family and would like to go back to the US for a while"

I have posted the below before and will do so again.

When Prince Friso (the Netherlands Spare) wanted to marry, his fiancée was deemed unsuitable because of past acquaintances and the Dutch government refused permission. They proceeded to marry and in order to do so he withdrew for the line of succession. I think it was a bit of a scandal at the time and Princess Mabel got a tough time in the tabloid press. Friso remained a prince and his wife a princess as a courtsey title. Princess Mabel is fierce. She is an incredibly smart woman and has worked at the highest level in the field of her expertise and philanthropy. Until his untimely death in 2013 following a skiing accident in 2012 Prince Friso held regular jobs as an investment banker and other finance roles. *My point - It is quite possible to leave a royal family and be independent financially and do humanitarian work without selling your royalty and without insulting your family, Monachy and countrymen.*

I wonder if OW's actual plan was to portray M was a "survivor". I don't doubt that anyone would find the press attention tough especially in the era of social media. I still think Sarah, Duchess of York had it worse. The Duchess of Pork headlines were well before she sought attention elsewhere and were just awful. IMO the Meghan's script was too close to Diana's experiences. I find it difficult to believe that the palace machine of the 1980's is anything like 2017.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Lets face it by her actions and press releases she has said Go F**k You to the Queen on several occasions.
> 
> And it is this deeply insulting and disrespectful behavior that I find unacceptable in this couple. If they wanted to leave they could have done so in a polite and respectful manner. None of the victimhood, accusations and ingratitude were even slightly necessary.
> 
> How about " It's more difficult that we though; I was not prepared for the reality of royal service; please could we have a year off; I miss my family and would like to go back to the US for a while"



This is exactly my problem with them, too. Besides her being really unlikeable, but eh, many celebrities are not my cup of tea.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I am honored to make The List   Thank you
I love the banter, intelligent conversation, "tough love" and all (totally relevant) off topic education on this thread from all contributors.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Again, I apologize for missing several names on The List. Before I get chastised by the Press Club, I'm posting a list of also very worthy Royal Correspondents. Congratulations to all!  



Thanks everyone for the great comments. I love the party suggestions. Please let me know if I missed anyone else. By the time, I finished the first list, I was totally cross-eyed.


----------



## Tootsie17

Although I don't comment often, I read this beloved thread daily.  Therefore, I shall give my best meghan impersonation.  What about me?  Am I not worthy? You all are racists and don't care about my feelings! No one asked me if I wanted to be on the list. No one asked if I'm OK! What about my feelings and my truth! I am so hurt that I must order another designer dress and merch it. LOL! That was fun. I'm being totally cheeky, of course. Love you all.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

In the interview Harry mentioned that he had discussions with his family about the relentless press intrusion and the horrible false lies that were spread about them via the press. Harry was told by the family that they all suffered in the same way, and he implied that the rest of the family made there peace with it and were trying to work with the press so that they would be less unfavorable and not hound them as much. And Harrys take on this (via Duchess Disney) was that this is unacceptable and not something that anyone should be putting up with. I think she thought it was some human rights abuse the way she talks about it. 

I don't think his family would be very sympathetic towards there struggles because they all had to go through the same (and in some cases much worse). So that's why I don't think they will really ever be on normal speaking terms.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Tootsie17
Sincere apologies.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


You made my day!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


I love this! Great work! Now to get our air be flights to balmoral booked


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like Selena’s tweet has created quite a mess.  Can we ever trust Hwood celebs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Selena Gomez annoys New Zealanders with COVID-19 tweet to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern
> 
> 
> "Selena. Our PM has this covered."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newshub.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5072667



Whatever would we do without well-meaning but clueless celebrities who expect to solve the world's problems by offering encouragement?


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Whatever would we do without well-meaning but clueless celebrities who expect to solve the world's problems by offering encouragement?


Jacinta Arden’s response to the pandemic was efficient and effective, I would be pissed if a celebrity (any) tries to give advice on how to run a country and deal with a unprecedented situation








						Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern fires back at Selena Gomez over COVID-19 tweet
					

Gomez was using her platform to urge world leaders to help other countries.




					www.newshub.co.nz
				



Plus NZ is already involved w COVAX


----------



## xincinsin

A lighthearted comparison between the BRF and the Addams:








						When a glamorous narcissist ruins your family: By Gomez and Fester Addams
					

Nothing breaks up a happy home like a sexy narcissist with a taste for the finer things in life, just ask Prince William... or Gomez Addams.




					www.sinisterisles.com


----------



## csshopper

Tootsie17 said:


> Although I don't comment often, I read this beloved thread daily.  Therefore, I shall give my best meghan impersonation.  What about me?  Am I not worthy? You all are racists and don't care about my feelings! No one asked me if I wanted to be on the list. No one asked if I'm OK! What about my feelings and my truth! I am so hurt that I must order another designer dress and merch it. LOL! That was fun. I'm being totally cheeky, of course. Love you all.


Great fun post, hope you do it more often.


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> Jacinta Arden’s response to the pandemic was efficient and effective, I would be pissed if a celebrity (any) tries to give advice on how to run a country and deal with a unprecedented situation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern fires back at Selena Gomez over COVID-19 tweet
> 
> 
> Gomez was using her platform to urge world leaders to help other countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newshub.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus NZ is already involved w COVAX


This was an epic fail. There was a Twitter response from a kiwialliance rep asking Selena Gomez to acknowledge what they were telling her. I wonder if she was gracious enough to do so (not on Twitter, so I did not follow the story).


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger is very popular! After his standing ovation for giving away half of his >40 million dollars to make the COVID vaccine available to all (oops it's not April 1st, sorry about that), he made Page Six again today: 

_The royal family is fed up with the “distraction” of dealing with the aftermath of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s bombshell TV tell-all — and will likely turn its back on the California-based couple, a royal expert has predicted.









						Fed-up royal family likely to shun Harry and Meghan as ‘distraction’: expert
					

An expert says The royal family is fed up with the “distraction” of dealing with the aftermath of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s TV tell-all.




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the vaccine event:


----------



## Chanbal

Fairy Godmother is back! After ending COVID, our hero will tackle mental health stigma. Another standing ovation, please! 

_Oprah's claim her show with Prince Harry will air this month came before Apple TV+ made any formal announcement on the series. 









						Oprah Winfrey says TV project with Prince Harry will be released this month
					

PRINCE HARRY's new series on mental health is set to be released this month, Oprah Winfrey has said.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

@Maggie Muggins now that I've made the list of royal commentators, I don't want to disappoint!

So, here is another puzzling article about our hero and his lovely wife!  



Speaking to Palace Confidential on MailPlus, Ms Griffiths said: "The reason their popularity has gone down is because they moved to America and did it such an incendiary way.

"I think the British public do not approve of disloyalty.

"On the face of it, *Harry has just been very disloyal to his family.*

"To think that even Andrew went up in the polls but *Meghan went down; she's not in good company."*

Mr Eden noted: "*Do we really think Harry and Meghan would care though? Their focus is so much on America now."

Ms Griffiths added: "They're all about service now but what the poll shows is we don't really want them to be doing all this service because they're not very popular.*

"Although they've dedicated their life to service, is there any appetite for them to do us all such a massive favour?"

The poll, which quizzed 1,730 UK adults from April 21-22, found 49 percent of Britons now regard Harry negatively, giving him a net score of -6.

This is a further drop from March 11-12, when attitudes towards the Duke turned negative for the first time.

Just 43 percent viewed Harry positively, down from 45 percent the previous month.

Meghan's scores have also plunged, with just 29 percent having a positive view of the Duchess.

A total of 61 percent view her negatively, up from 58 percent.









						'We don't want them!' Meghan Markle and Prince Harry mocked
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry mocked for commiting to a life of service as their popularity plummets to a new low.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, someone heard us
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry gets standing ovation at Vax Live charity concert in LA
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was among many high profile stars - including Jennifer Lopez and Selena Gomez - to take the stage at Sunday night's concert taping at the So-Fi Stadium in Inglewood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So, Harry got a standing ovation for just showing up.

Here's a new word for the day "claque", "a group hired to applaud at a performance." Claquers go back to the 16th century in France, the practice spread to other countries, and throughout history have been used either positively (cheers, standing ovations) or negatively (boos, fist shaking, throwing items at the stage). Tickets to the venues where employed were complementary. Put some well placed, scattered claquers in the audience, in camera range, and the stadium will erupt. I would put money on this "standing ovation" not being spontaneous. A few start and the mob mentality takes over and everyone jumps to their feet, or at least enough to make the sitters less obvious. Yes, I am a cynic.

He got his 5 minutes of fame, but his Spotify bosses might be less than thrilled as IHeartMedia, a major sponsor of this VAX event, is in ongoing competition with them. I don't routinely read the Business pages, but curiosity caused me to do a few quick clicks to see if there was any relationship and quickly found the information. It may not hurt Harry at all, on the other hand, it play to the Sussex's tendency to grab at the next available thing and not consider the big picture.

Edited to add: Didn't see Chanbal's repost (of Murky Meg's talking about the cousins being told to stand and cheer for Harry) while I was typing this and before I sent it. LOL! Clauqers are alive and active in LA. What a farce.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins now that I've made the list of royal commentators, I don't want to disappoint!
> 
> So, here is another puzzling article about our hero and his lovely wife!
> 
> View attachment 5073205
> 
> Speaking to Palace Confidential on MailPlus, Ms Griffiths said: "The reason their popularity has gone down is because they moved to America and did it such an incendiary way.
> 
> "I think the British public do not approve of disloyalty.
> 
> "On the face of it, *Harry has just been very disloyal to his family.*
> 
> "To think that even Andrew went up in the polls but *Meghan went down; she's not in good company."*
> 
> Mr Eden noted: "*Do we really think Harry and Meghan would care though? Their focus is so much on America now."
> 
> Ms Griffiths added: "They're all about service now but what the poll shows is we don't really want them to be doing all this service because they're not very popular.*
> 
> "Although they've dedicated their life to service, is there any appetite for them to do us all such a massive favour?"
> 
> The poll, which quizzed 1,730 UK adults from April 21-22, found 49 percent of Britons now regard Harry negatively, giving him a net score of -6.
> 
> This is a further drop from March 11-12, when attitudes towards the Duke turned negative for the first time.
> 
> Just 43 percent viewed Harry positively, down from 45 percent the previous month.
> 
> Meghan's scores have also plunged, with just 29 percent having a positive view of the Duchess.
> 
> A total of 61 percent view her negatively, up from 58 percent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'We don't want them!' Meghan Markle and Prince Harry mocked
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry mocked for commiting to a life of service as their popularity plummets to a new low.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I'll believe in their devotion to service if they actually do work that isn't glamourous or obvious brand promotion and revenue generating. And the sooner Harry's wife stops being a duchess, the better. Why she wants to be constantly reminded of her dark days, I have no idea (rhetorical  )


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins now that I've made the list of royal commentators, I don't want to disappoint!
> 
> So, here is another puzzling article about our hero and his lovely wife!
> 
> View attachment 5073205
> 
> 
> 
> Mr Eden noted: "*Do we really think Harry and Meghan would care though? Their focus is so much on America now."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'We don't want them!' Meghan Markle and Prince Harry mocked
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry mocked for commiting to a life of service as their popularity plummets to a new low.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Um... when weren’t they focused on America? Even Archie‘s announcement was timed to US news cycles....


----------



## TC1

This was an IN-PERSON event taping? urging people to vaccinate, during a pandemic?


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> This was an IN-PERSON event taping? urging people to vaccinate, during a pandemic?



I _think_ all of the people attending in the stadium were vaccinated front line workers. Hopefully everyone working on the show were vaccinated as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Yanca

I read that the audience was already standing in this event, so it's a little exageration to say that Hazza got a standing ovation from his preaching,  Sunshine Suck and their PR company are  all over the media again to put  his name out there, while this iniative is for a good cause, I don't get the push to the Goverment leaders ,  are they raising money or is this just a bunch of celebrities raising awareness again? Long before this, I read that   the more developed Nations are already pledging  and donating vaccines to the countries that are struggling. I really hope that communities will REALLY get the most  benefit from this event and  not just the celebrities to raise awareness and their profiles.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have said it before, this analysis just adds further support. OW has been, is and will be highly involved in this marriage. The clues all point to an agenda at work here. I don’t know exactly _what_ the agenda is, but it exists.  Stay tuned, we are in for a bumpy ride.


Harry in the future "there were three of us in this marriage"


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


Yay, I made it!


----------



## mellibelly

I’m late to the Markle merch talk but she was definitely paid to wear Jen Meyers jewelry when still a working royal. This was an old blind about the incident. Say what you will about Blind Gossip, but IMO they have been 100% accurate about Harry’s wife.








						Side Deal Silence - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] A private side deal recently led to a public embarrassment. This actress is looking for every opportunity possible to ingratiate herself with other prominent people… and to make money! One of those people who could help make that happen is this well-connected designer and business...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

TC1 said:


> This was an IN-PERSON event taping? urging people to vaccinate, during a pandemic?











						6 Ways 'VAX LIVE' Kept Attendees Safe at SoFi Stadium
					

Global Citizen took action to ensure the health and safety of everyone in attendance at 'VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World.'




					www.globalcitizen.org
				






Yanca said:


> I read that the audience was already standing in this event.  Sunshine Suck and their PR company is all over the media again to put  his name out there, while this iniative is for a good cause, I don't get the push, are they raising money or is this just a bunch of celebrities raising awareness again? Long before this, I think the more developed Nations are already pledging vaccines to the countries that are struggling? I really hope that communities wil benefit from this even, not just the celebrities to raise awareness and their profiile.












						'VAX LIVE' Surpasses Campaign Goal With More Than 10 Million COVID-19 Vaccine Doses Pledged
					

The actions of Global Citizens have rapidly mobilized over 10 million COVID-19 doses only a week out from the ‘VAX LIVE’ broadcast on May 8.




					www.globalcitizen.org


----------



## Annawakes

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


Thank you Maggie Muggins!  You made my day!


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> 6 Ways 'VAX LIVE' Kept Attendees Safe at SoFi Stadium
> 
> 
> Global Citizen took action to ensure the health and safety of everyone in attendance at 'VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalcitizen.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'VAX LIVE' Surpasses Campaign Goal With More Than 10 Million COVID-19 Vaccine Doses Pledged
> 
> 
> The actions of Global Citizens have rapidly mobilized over 10 million COVID-19 doses only a week out from the ‘VAX LIVE’ broadcast on May 8.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalcitizen.org


Yes. The irony of it. Crowding those people.


----------



## mellibelly

Imagine if this poor man’s Rachel Zoe was your stylist


----------



## lalame

Aimee3 said:


> Someone mentioned several pages back that Harry’s wife wears her shoes in a size bigger than she would normally wear.  I’ve read other people do this too.  What I really want to know is how the heck do they stay on your feet then?  Sometimes even wearing my normal size, pumps will fly off my feet when I walk.



I've noticed this too with many celebs and wondered the same! My theory.... comfort could be it but maybe they're borrowed items from a stylist/brand or they plan to sell/donate them after wear and want to limit the amount of damage to the shoes. When you wear shoes that are too big, they tend to crease less at the toe and have less wear to the back obviously.


----------



## lalame

mellibelly said:


> Imagine if this poor man’s Rachel Zoe was your stylist
> View attachment 5073328
> View attachment 5073329
> View attachment 5073330
> View attachment 5073331



I do NOT understand how Jessica is seen as a great stylist. Now, I do think many stylists dress down or sloppy in their own lives and don't necessarily judge them for that - like how some doctors are overweight or smoke - but Jessica actually does seem like she tries and it's part of her image.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> Yes. The irony of it. Crowding those people.



If you read the link you'll see they specifically stated they weren't crowded?


----------



## Tootsie17

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Tootsie17
> Sincere apologies.
> View attachment 5073100


I feel so loved! Thanks for adding me to the list. This thread saved me from depression during the worst of covid, and you all have a permanent reserved spot in my heart. The laughs I get from your comments are priceless! Maggie Muggins, you are the best.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yanca said:


> I read that the audience was already standing in this event, so it's a little exxageration to say that Hazza got a standing ovation from his preaching,  Sunshine Suck and their PR company are  all over the media again to put  his name out there, while this iniative is for a good cause, I don't get the push to the Goverment leaders ,  are they raising money or is this just a bunch of celebrities raising awareness again? Long before this, I read that   the more developed Nations are already pledging  and donating vaccines to the countries that are struggling. I really hope that communities will REALLY get the most  benefit from this event and  not just the celebrities to raise awareness and their profiles.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Icyjade said:


> Well, she had a multi-million wardrobe budget hence I have higher expectations of her.



I don't think they get 'multi million wardrobe budgets. That's almost nonsensical.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tootsie17 said:


> I feel so loved! Thanks for adding me to the list. This thread saved me from depression during the worst of covid and you all have a permanent reserved spot in my heart. The laughs I get from your comments are priceless!



Seriously, this thread has provided much comfort and entertainment during really stressful times, and at this point I consider us all a big happy group of online friends


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't think they get 'multi million wardrobe budgets. That's almost nonsensical.



She did spend 1 million pounds of Charles' money in 9 months, though. And that's only the pieces that were identified and added up. But yes, not your average royal's budget, hence the public outcry.


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> A lighthearted comparison between the BRF and the Addams:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When a glamorous narcissist ruins your family: By Gomez and Fester Addams
> 
> 
> Nothing breaks up a happy home like a sexy narcissist with a taste for the finer things in life, just ask Prince William... or Gomez Addams.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sinisterisles.com



I LOVED the old Addams Family TV show. Never saw the movies, though. The original cast was perfection personified IMO they could never top that.


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did spend 1 million pounds of Charles' money in 9 months, though. And that's only the pieces that were identified and added up. But yes, not your average royal's budget, hence the public outcry.



Wow, seriously? I would have to WORK to spend that much on clothes.


----------



## lalame

mellibelly said:


> I’m late to the Markle merch talk but she was definitely paid to wear Jen Meyers jewelry when still a working royal. This was an old blind about the incident. Say what you will about Blind Gossip, but IMO they have been 100% accurate about Harry’s wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Side Deal Silence - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] A private side deal recently led to a public embarrassment. This actress is looking for every opportunity possible to ingratiate herself with other prominent people… and to make money! One of those people who could help make that happen is this well-connected designer and business...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



Thanks for sharing this. This is exactly what I wanted to see.

One interesting comment from that page, that also relates to the big shoes topic! Now this makes sense! Too-big shoes could've been from her pre-royal days maybe.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I've noticed this too with many celebs and wondered the same! My theory.... comfort could be it but maybe they're borrowed items from a stylist/brand or they plan to sell/donate them after wear and want to limit the amount of damage to the shoes. When you wear shoes that are too big, they tend to crease less at the toe and have less wear to the back obviously.


That’s brilliant, it makes so much sense, when your shoes are too big you can clog it and they don’t crease as much. You do risk them scuffing if you trip but I guess they are used to it.



Allisonfaye said:


> I don't think they get 'multi million wardrobe budgets. That's almost nonsensical.


it’s an exaggeration but we’ve certainly seen her in plenty of expensive things like Maria Grazia’s old curtain kaftan and the notorious earrings. Also this couple save a lot of money between then as Harry apparently only has one suit and he’s cultivating hobbit feet to save on shoes.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Jayne1 said:


> Jenifer Aniston was also quoted saying how the lockdowns had a silver lining and good things came of it... and I thought... to who?  Celebs getting time off to recuperate from plastic surgery?
> 
> Most people had a terrible time, lost wages, jobs, health, stress, loneliness, etc.



People who got to keep their jobs and work from home for the first time ever. People who were able to spend more time with their children/families since they weren't at work all the time. People who were invested in the stock market and were able to benefit from its growth. Introverts (like me) who ultimately enjoy being home more than anything else. People who are prone to getting sick once a month during cold/flu season (like me) who were able to stay home basically 100% of the time and not experience that this year. I don't doubt that the pandemic has been hard on some people (maybe not most...who knows), but others have definitely benefitted.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Still on the vaccine event:




Like trained seals
Several years ago we went to one of the first tapings of X factor in the US. Audiences are always given the pump it up pep talk prior to taping. Along with a long list of bullsh!t instructions of do's and don'ts


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Jayne1 said:


> Jenifer Aniston was also quoted saying how the lockdowns had a silver lining and good things came of it... and I thought... to who?  Celebs getting time off to recuperate from plastic surgery?
> 
> Most people had a terrible time, lost wages, jobs, health, stress, loneliness, etc.







OogleAtLuxury said:


> People who got to keep their jobs and work from home for the first time ever. People who were able to spend more time with their children/families since they weren't at work all the time. People who were invested in the stock market and were able to benefit from its growth. Introverts (like me) who ultimately enjoy being home more than anything else. People who are prone to getting sick once a month during cold/flu season (like me) who were able to stay home basically 100% of the time and not experience that this year. I don't doubt that the pandemic has been hard on some people (maybe not most...who knows), but others have definitely benefitted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OogleAtLuxury said:


> People who got to keep their jobs and work from home for the first time ever. People who were able to spend more time with their children/families since they weren't at work all the time. People who were invested in the stock market and were able to benefit from its growth. Introverts (like me) who ultimately enjoy being home more than anything else. People who are prone to getting sick once a month during cold/flu season (like me) who were able to stay home basically 100% of the time and not experience that this year. I don't doubt that the pandemic has been hard on some people (maybe not most...who knows), but others have definitely benefitted.



Do you still enjoy it? I'm a huge introvert and for the first few months was all over it, but I'll admit at this point even I miss the occcasional meeting in office or meeting my favourite co-worker for lunch.


----------



## purseinsanity

Merching or not, gifting or not, I believe the IRS requires taxes on gifts over a certain value.  I wonder if Harry's wife and other celebrities actually declare the value of all of their "gifts"?


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> I've noticed this too with many celebs and wondered the same! My theory.... comfort could be it but maybe they're borrowed items from a stylist/brand or they plan to sell/donate them after wear and want to limit the amount of damage to the shoes. When you wear shoes that are too big, they tend to crease less at the toe and have less wear to the back obviously.



I’ve worn pumps a half size too large because I couldn’t get my normal size and it was a disaster. You have to walk funny to keep them from slipping off your feet and it caused me blisters galore. I can’t imagine shoes a full size or more larger! ITA it’s because they were gifted or loaned shoes.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> In the beginning, Meghan was very thin and I thought she looked great, figure-wise. During and after Archie her figure hasn't yet bounced back but maybe it's a case of it can't or maybe she's satisfied the way she is. Many of us strive to have a great figure for special occasions, in her case obviously the wedding was a big deal and she wanted to look the royal part. Now it seems she feels she can just slap on an expensive dress and think she looks great with terrible hair extensions and over filled face; or she loves the sloppy ripped jeans look as though to say "I love being back in L.A. so I can finally dress how I want without the racist and oppressive BRF guidelines. Besides, even if I look like a slob, I'm royal and better than everyone else."
> Kate bounced back great after three kids and it must take a lot of effort and maintenance. Kate and Queen Letizia of Spain look fantastic.


My youngest is 15 years old so I can't blame my "postpartum body" on her any more.     Compared to me, MM has a great figure even after her first, so I won't criticize her for that.  I'd take her body any day (especially her chicken legs, LOL!), but if I had the access to money to clothes and seamstresses, I'd look a helluva lot better!


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> I’ve worn pumps a half size too large because I couldn’t get my normal size and it was a disaster. You have to walk funny to keep them from slipping off your feet and it caused me blisters galore. I can’t imagine shoes a full size or more larger! ITA it’s because they were gifted or loaned shoes.



It could explain why she is desperately grasping at H.  If those shoes don’t fit, she knows she easily fall, especially on the stairs.


----------



## mellibelly

lalame said:


> I do NOT understand how Jessica is seen as a great stylist. Now, I do think many stylists dress down or sloppy in their own lives and don't necessarily judge them for that - like how some doctors are overweight or smoke - but Jessica actually does seem like she tries and it's part of her image.


Is she seen as a good stylist? Does she dress any known celebrities besides Nutmeg? The old adage money doesn’t buy taste definitely applies here. Bad extensions, spray tan and poorly done fillers too. With friends like these styling you, who needs enemies?


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Someone mentioned several pages back that Harry’s wife wears her shoes in a size bigger than she would normally wear.  I’ve read other people do this too.  What I really want to know is how the heck do they stay on your feet then?  Sometimes even wearing my normal size, pumps will fly off my feet when I walk.


I've made this mistake of buying my regular shoe size online only to find the shoes too big.  I could never walk in high heels in even a half size bigger without falling and breaking my neck!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


What a wonderful group to be a part of!


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I do NOT understand how Jessica is seen as a great stylist. Now, I do think many stylists dress down or sloppy in their own lives and don't necessarily judge them for that - like how some doctors are overweight or smoke - but Jessica actually does seem like she tries and it's part of her image.


I wish Jessica would stop with the plastic surgery, coloured contacts and over inflated boobs and lips.  I don’t even like her dressing style… but why she lost all her gigs and her brand destroyed is ridiculous.

The actual multi-day transcripts of the Jessica/Sasha emails have been posted in one of our national newspapers and Sasha's emails are really bizarre and scary to read. Both are privileged women, but Jessica is constantly making nice and apologizing for being herself and Sasha is being so forceful and unpleasant.

Sasha really benefited from this. Her IG numbers are now huge and she has lots of TV work too. She's a gorgeous woman, so that makes sense.

Anyway, cancel culture and mob-like behaviour can be terrifying. Especially when the media doesn’t even ask for specifics.  I wonder if it's too late for Jessica... the mob has long since spoken.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It could explain why she is desperately grasping at H.  If those shoes don’t fit, she knows she easily fall, especially on the stairs.



I've seen that argument brought up by the stans [ETA: not that she shoes were too big because gifted, but "She can't walk well in heels, so has to grab onto Harry"], but...how did she walk before meeting Harry then?

Plus, she walked perfectly fine _heavily _pregnant on solo engagements in 4" heels.


----------



## LittleStar88

Allisonfaye said:


> I don't think they get 'multi million wardrobe budgets. That's almost nonsensical.



She made spending look easy!









						40 of Meghan Markle's most expensive outfits so far
					

Much like Kate Middleton before her, Markle debuted quite a few extravagantly priced outfits as she built her royal wardrobe.




					www.insider.com
				




And then there was this hot mess dress...









						Meghan Markle Wore a Beautifully Sheer Dress to Her BFF's Wedding in Rome
					

Meghan Markle wore a sheer dress to Misha Nonoo's wedding in Rome with many other celebrities in attendance. See the photos.




					www.whowhatwear.com


----------



## catlover46

I’m honored to make the cut!


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> This was an IN-PERSON event taping? urging people to vaccinate, during a pandemic?


Oh, the irony!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> *I'll believe in their devotion to service if they actually do work that isn't glamourous or obvious brand promotion and revenue generating.* And the sooner Harry's wife stops being a duchess, the better. Why she wants to be constantly reminded of her dark days, I have no idea (rhetorical  )


There are some celebrities that do good without any fanfare, and it comes to light months or even years later, or maybe not at all.  Keanu Reeves and Jamie Fox come to mind.  Those celebrities I actually respect, because it's more genuine and from the heart than passing out a sandwich and having a headline, "SEE WHAT I DID?!!?  AREN'T I WONDERFUL?!!?"


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do you still enjoy it? I'm a huge introvert and for the first few months was all over it, but I'll admit at this point even I miss the occcasional meeting in office or meeting my favourite co-worker for lunch.



Yeah, I wouldn't necessarily say that the pandemic is strictly better for me. I do have bouts of missing my family (who live in a different state) but now that I'm vaccinated, I can go travel to them and kind of get the best of both worlds! Also, I'm married, so I don't have the issue of extreme loneliness that I know a lot of my introvert single friends have run into. I do miss gossiping with my coworkers, but I have arranged virtual hangouts with the ones I care about to eat lunch together.   I don't know. Ultimately, it's all just personal preference!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've seen that argument brought up by the stans [ETA: not that she shoes were too big because gifted, but "She can't walk well in heels, so has to grab onto Harry"], but...how did she walk before meeting Harry then?
> 
> Plus, she walked perfectly fine _heavily _pregnant on solo engagements in 4" heels.



I am definitely not one of _those_. Ewwww. Shudder.

On another note, I watched the video that analysed  the text of “the interview“ that @QueenofWrapDress posted.    Fascinating discussion.  In order to avoid distractions, used the text printed in the Sun rather than use clips from the interview.  Take a look at the text.  The printed words are so much more powerful.  Still puzzled why a billionaire wants to be involved with this nonsense.









						Read the full transcript of Harry and Meghan's bombshell interview with Oprah
					

THE DUKE and Duchess of Sussex’s sit-down with Oprah was one of the most sensational royal interviews of all time. Speaking to Oprah Winfrey in California, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle blas…




					www.the-sun.com
				






Spoiler: The text



Speaking to Oprah Winfrey in California, Harry and Meghan blasted “racist” Britain, the Royal Family and the Press, while highlighting Meghan’s mental health struggles. Here, we reveal the full astonishing transcript…
OPRAH: We can’t hug, everybody is double- masked and has face shields. You look lovely. Do you know if you’re having a boy or a girl?

Meghan: We do this time. I’ll wait for my husband to join us and we can share that with you.

Oprah: That would be really great. Before we get into to it, I just want to make clear to everybody that, even though we’re neighbours, I’m down the road, you’re up the road, we’re using a friend’s place. There has not been an agreement, you don’t know what I’m going to ask, there is no subject that’s off limits and you are not getting paid for this interview.

Meghan: All of that’s correct.
Oprah: I remember sitting in the chapel — thanks for inviting me, by the way. I so recall this sense of magic. I never experienced anything like it. When you came through that door, you seemed like you were floating down the aisle. Were you even inside your body at that time?
Meghan: I’ve thought about this a lot. It was like having an out-of- body experience I was very present for. The night before, I slept through the night entirely, which is a bit of a miracle, and then woke up and started listening to Going To The Chapel, to make it fun and light and remind ourselves this was our day. We were both aware in advance of that this wasn’t our day, this was the day planned for the world.
Oprah: Everybody who gets married knows you’re really marrying the family. But you weren’t just marrying a family, you were marrying a 1,200-year-old institution, you’re marrying the monarchy. What did you think it was going to be like?

Meghan: I would say I went into it naively because I didn’t grow up knowing much about the Royal Family. It wasn’t part of something that was part of conversation at home. It wasn’t something that we followed. My mum even said to me a couple of months ago, ‘Did Diana ever do an interview?’ Now I can say. ‘Yes, a very famous one’, but my mum doesn’t know that.
Oprah: But you were aware of the royals and, if you were going to marry into the royals, you’d do research about what that would mean?
Meghan: I didn’t do any research about what that would mean.
Oprah: You didn’t do any research?

Meghan: No. I didn’t feel any need to, because everything I needed to know he was sharing with me. Everything we thought I needed to know, he was telling me.
Oprah: So, you didn’t have a conversation with yourself, or talk to your friends about what it would be like to marry a prince, who is Harry, who you had fallen in love with . . .  you didn’t give it a lot of thought?
Meghan: No. We thought a lot about what we thought it might be. I didn’t fully understand what the job was: What does it mean to be a working royal? What do you do? What does that mean? He and I were very aligned on our cause- driven work, that was part of our initial connection. But there was no way to understand what the day-to- day was going to be like, and it’s so different because I didn’t romanticise any element of it. But I think, as Americans especially, what you do know about the royals is what you read in fairytales, and you think is what you know about the royals. It’s easy to have an image that is so far from reality, and that’s what was so tricky over those past few years, when the perception and the reality are two different things and you’re being judged on the perception but you’re living the reality of it. There’s a complete misalignment and there’s no way to explain that to people.
Oprah: With every family things get serious when you’re brought in to meet the grandmother or the mother. The grandmother is the matriarch and, in your situation it’s the Queen.
Meghan: She was one of the first people I met. The real Queen.

Oprah: What was that like? Were you worried about making the right impression?

Meghan: There wasn’t a huge formality the first time I met Her Majesty The Queen. We were going for lunch at Royal Lodge, which is where some other members of the family live, specifically Andrew and Fergie, and Eugenie and Beatrice would spend a lot of time there. Eugenie and I had known each other before I knew Harry, so that was comfortable and it turned out the Queen was finishing a church service in Windsor and so she was going to be at the house. Harry and I were in the car and he says, ‘OK, well my grandmother is there, you’re going to meet her’. (I said) ‘OK, great’. I loved my grandmother, I used to take care of my grandmother. (He said) ‘Do you know how to curtsey?’ ‘What?’ ‘Do you know how to curtsey?’ I thought genuinely that’s what happens outside, that was part of the fanfare. I didn’t think that’s what happens inside. I go, ‘But it’s your grandmother’. He goes, ‘It’s the Queen!’

Oprah: Wow!


Meghan: And that was really the first moment the penny dropped?

Oprah: Did you Google how to curtsey?

Meghan: No, we were in the car. Deeply, to show respect, I learned it very quickly right in front of the house. We practised and walked in.

Oprah: Harry practised?


Meghan: Yeah, and Fergie ran out and said, ‘Are you ready? Do you know how to curtsey? Oh, my goodness, you guys’. I practised very quickly and went in, and apparently I did a very deep curtsey, and we just sat there and we chatted and it was lovely and easy and I think, thank God, I hadn’t known a lot about the family. Thank God, I hadn’t researched. I would have been so in my head about all of it.

Oprah: (What) you’re sharing with us is that you were no more nervous as a regular person who goes to meet somebody’s grandmother.

Meghan: I had confused the idea. I grew up in LA, you see celebrities all the time. This is not the same but it’s very easy, especially as an American, to go, ‘These are famous people’. This is a completely different ball game.

_(Cut to them and Oprah at their house)_


Oprah: What are you feeling here (their home)? What’s the word?

Meghan: Peace.

Oprah: Peace?

Meghan: Yeah.


_(Oprah narrates) The day after our interview, I stopped over to Harry and Meghan’s new home._
Meghan: Hi, Guy (dog).

Oprah: Hi, Guy.

Meghan: Yeah, Guy’s been — Guy’s been through everything with me.


Oprah: Yeah, from the beginning, from the very first date, yeah?

Meghan: If Guy, I mean, I had him in Canada. I got him from a kill shelter in Kentucky.

Oprah: Yeah?

_(In Harry and Meghan’s hen coop)_


Meghan: Hi, girls!

_(Oprah narrates) We put on wellies to feed the hens Meghan and Harry recently rescued from a factory farm. ‘I love your little designer house here. Archie’s chick inn. Oh, how cute is that.’_

Harry: She’s always wanted chickens.

Meghan: Well, you know, I just love rescuing.


Oprah: So, this is a part of your new life? What are you most excited about?

Meghan: Whoop! You’re OK . . .

Oprah: What are you most excited about in the new life? What are you most excited about? Here, chick, chick, chick, chick.

Meghan: I think just being able to live authentically.


Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: Right? Like this kind of stuff. It’s so, it’s so basic, but it’s really fulfilling. Just getting back down to basics. I was thinking about it — even at our wedding, you know, three days before our wedding, we got married . . .

Oprah: Ah!

Meghan: No one knows that. But we called the Archbishop, and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us’. So, like, the vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury, and that was the piece that . . .


Harry: Just the three of us.

Oprah: Really?

Harry: Just the three of us.

Meghan: Just the three of us.


_(Back to Oprah)_

Oprah: You know, the wedding was the most perfect picture, you know, anybody’s ever seen. But through that picture that we were all seeing, behind the scenes, obviously, there was a lot of drama going on. And soon after your marriage, the tabloids started offering stories that painted a not-so-flattering picture of you in your new world. There were rumours about you being ‘Hurricane Meghan’.

Meghan: I hadn’t heard that.
Oprah: OK.


Oprah: So, there were rumours about you being Hurricane Meghan, for the departure of several high-profile palace staff members. And there was also a story — did you hear this one? — about you making Kate Middleton cry?

Meghan: This I heard about.

Oprah: You heard about that. OK.

Meghan: This was . . . that was . . . that was a turning point.


Oprah: That was a turning point?

Meghan: Yeah.
_(Oprah narrates) Six months after Harry and Meghan’s wedding, headlines began to swirl about a rift between Meghan and her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton. It was reported that Meghan had left Kate “in tears” over the bride-to-be’s “strict demands” over flower-girl dresses._

Meghan: The narrative with Kate — which didn’t happen — was really, really difficult and something that  . . . I think that’s when everything changed, really.


Oprah: You say the narrative with Kate, it didn’t happen. So, specifically, did you make Kate cry?

Meghan: No.

Oprah: So, where did that come from?

Meghan: (Sighs)


Oprah: Was there a situation where she might have cried? Or she could have cried?

Meghan: No, no. The reverse happened. And I don’t say that to be disparaging to anyone, because it was a really hard week of the wedding. And she was upset about something, but she owned it, and she apologised. And she brought me flowers and a note, apologising. And she did what I would do if I knew that I hurt someone, right, to just take accountability for it. What was shocking was . . . what was that, six, seven months after our wedding?

Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: That the reverse of that would be out in the world.


Oprah: The story came out six, seven months after it actually happened?

Meghan: Yeah.

Oprah: So, when you say . . .

Meghan: I would have never wanted that to come out about her ever, even though it had happened. I protected that from ever being out in the world.


Oprah: So, when you say the reverse happened, explain to us what you mean by that.

Meghan: A few days before the wedding, she was upset about something pertaining — yes, the issue was correct — about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings. And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn’t make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.

Oprah: This was a really big story at the time, that you made Kate cry. Now you’re saying you didn’t make Kate cry, Kate made you cry. So, we all want to know, what would make you cry? What . . . what were you going through? You were going through all of the anxiety that brides go through putting their wedding together and going through all of the issues with your father: Was he coming? Was he not coming?

Meghan: Mmm.


Oprah: And there was a confrontation over the . . . the dresses?

Meghan: It wasn’t a confrontation, and I actually don’t think it’s fair to her to get into the details of that, because she apologised.

Oprah: OK.

Meghan: And I’ve forgiven her.


Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: What was hard to get over was being blamed for something that not only I didn’t do but that happened to me. And the people who were part of our wedding going to our comms team and saying, ‘I know this didn’t happen.’ I don’t have to tell them what actually happened.

Oprah: OK.

Meghan: But I can at least go on the record and say she didn’t make her cry. And they were all told the same . . .


Oprah: So, all the time the stories were out that you had made Kate cry . . . you knew all along, and people around you knew that that wasn’t true?

Meghan: Everyone in the institution knew it wasn’t true.

Oprah: So, why didn’t somebody just say that?

Meghan: That’s a good question.


Oprah: Hmm.

Meghan: I’m not sharing that piece about Kate in any way to be disparaging to her. I think it’s really important for people to understand the truth.

Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: But also I think, a lot of it, that was fed into by the media. And I would hope that she would have wanted that corrected, and maybe in the same way that the Palace wouldn’t let anybody else.


Oprah: Yeah.

Meghan: Negate it, they wouldn’t let her, because she’s a good person. And I think so much of what I have seen play out is this idea of polarity, where if you love me, you don’t have to hate her. And if you love her, you don’t need to hate me.

Oprah: Mm-hmm. You know, there were several stories that compared headlines written about you to those written about Kate.
Meghan: Mmm.


Oprah: Since you don’t read things, let me tell you what was said.

Meghan: OK.

Oprah: There were stories where Kate was being praised for holding her baby bump.

Meghan: Oh, gosh, have I done it since we’ve been sitting down?


Oprah: Yes, you’ve been doing it the whole time.

Meghan: Probably. OK.

Oprah: Kate was praised for cradling her baby bump, and the headline about you doing the same thing said, ‘Meghan can’t keep hands off her baby bump for pride or vanity’.

Meghan: What does it have to do with pride or vanity?


Oprah: Well, I’m just — I’m just telling you about the stories, OK?

Meghan: OK, I hear you.

Oprah: Then there was a whole online piece about this: ‘Kate eating avocados to help with morning sickness’.

Meghan: (Laughs) I heard — OK, I heard about the avocado one.


Oprah: But you were eating avocados . . .

Meghan: And fuelling murder, apparently.

Oprah: Wolfing down a fruit linked to water shortages, illegal deforestation and environmental devastation. There was, seems . . . there seems to be . . . there was a . . .

Meghan: That’s a really loaded piece of toast. (Laughter) I mean . . . you have to laugh at a certain point, because it’s just ridiculous.


Oprah: That’s good: ‘That’s a loaded piece of toast.’ It’s about deforestation and . . .

Meghan: Oh, man!

Oprah: Oh, wow! So, do you think there was a standard for Kate in general and a separate one for you? And if so, why?

Meghan: I don’t know why. I can see now what layers were at play.
Oprah: Mm-hmm.


Meghan: And, again, they really seemed to want a narrative of a hero and a villain.

Oprah: Yeah. You came in as the first mixed-race person to marry into the family, and did that concern you in being able to fit in?

Meghan: Mmm.

Oprah: And did that concern you in being able to fit in? Did you think about that at all?


Meghan: I thought about it because they made me think about it.

Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: Right? But at the same time now, upon reflection, thank God all of those things were true. Thank God I had that life experience. Thank god I had known the value of working. My first job was when I was 13, at a frozen yoghurt shop called Humphrey Yogart.

Oprah: Mm-hmm.
Meghan: I’ve always worked. I’ve always valued independence. I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights. I mean, that’s the sad irony of the last four years . . . is I’ve advocated for so long for women to use their voice, and then I was silent.

Oprah: Were you silent? Or were you silenced?

Meghan: The latter.

Oprah: So, how does that work? Were you told by the comms people, or the, I don’t know, the institution? Were you told to keep silent? How were you told to handle tabloids or gossip? Were you . . . were you told to say nothing?


Meghan: Everyone from . . .  everyone in my world was given very clear directive, from the moment the world knew Harry and I were dating, to always say, ‘No comment’. That’s my friends, my mom and dad.

Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: And we did.

Oprah: Mm-hmm.


Meghan: I did anything they told me to do — of course I did, because it was also through the lens of, ‘And we’ll protect you’. So, even as things started to roll out in the media that I didn’t see — but my friends would call me and say, ‘Meg, this is really bad’ — because I didn’t see it, I’d go, ‘Don’t worry. I’m being protected’.

Oprah: Mmm.

Meghan: I believed that. And I think that was . . . that was really hard to reconcile because it was only . . . it was only once we were married and everything started to really worsen that I came to under-stand that not only was I not being protected, but they were willing to lie to protect other members of the family but they weren’t willing to tell the truth to protect me and my husband.

Oprah: So, are you saying you did not feel supported by the powers that be, be that The Firm, the monar-chy, all of them?


Meghan: It’s hard for people to distinguish the two because there’s . . . it’s a family business, right?

Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: So, there’s the family, and then there’s the people that are running the institution. Those are two separate things. And it’s important to be able to compartmentalise that, because the Queen, for example, has always been wonderful to me. I mean, we had one of our first joint engagements together. She asked me to join her, and I . . .

Oprah: Was this on the train?


Meghan: Yeah, on the train.

Oprah: Yeah.

Meghan: We had breakfast together that morning, and she’d given me a beautiful gift, and I just really loved being in her company. And I remember we were in the car . . .

Oprah: Can you share what the gift was? Or . . .


Meghan: Yes. She gave me beautiful pearl earrings and a matching necklace. And we were in the car going between engagements, and she has a blanket that sits across her knees for warmth. And it was chilly, and she was like, ‘Meghan, come on’ and put it over my knees as well.

Oprah: Oh, nice.

Meghan: Right. Just moments of . . .  and it made me think of my grand-mother, where she’s always been warm and inviting and . . . and really welcoming.

Oprah: So, OK, so she made you feel welcomed?


Meghan: Yes.

Oprah: Did you feel welcomed by everyone? It seemed like you and Kate . . . at the Wimbledon game where you were going to watch a friend play tennis . . .

Meghan: (Laughs)

Oprah: Was it what it looked like? You are two sisters-in-law out there in the world, getting to know each other. Was she helping you, embracing you into the family, helping you adjust?


Meghan: I think everyone welcomed me.

Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: And, yeah, when you say, ‘Was it what it looked like?’, my under-standing and my experience of the past four years is it’s nothing like what it looks like. It’s nothing like what it looks like. And I . . . and I remember so often people within The Firm would say, ‘Well, you can’t do this because it’ll look like that. You can’t’. So, even, ‘Can I go and have lunch with my friends?’ ‘No, no, no, you’re oversaturated, you’re every-where, it would be best for you to not go out to lunch with your friends’. I go, ‘Well, I haven’t . . . I haven’t left the house in months’.

I mean, there was a day that one of the members of the family, she came over, and she said, ‘Why don’t you just lay low for a little while, because you are everywhere right now’. And I said, ‘I’ve left the house twice in four months. I’m everywhere, but I am nowhere’. And from that standpoint, I continued to say to people, ‘I know there’s an obsession with how things look, but has anyone talked about how it feels? Because right now, I could not feel lonelier’.


Oprah: Hmm. You were feeling lonely, even though your prince . . .  you’re in love, you’re with him.

Meghan: I’m not lonely . . . I wasn’t lonely with him.

Oprah: Yeah.

Meghan: There were moments that he had to work or he had to go away, there’s moments in the middle of the night. And so, there was very little that I was allowed to do.


Oprah: Mm-hmm.

Meghan: And so, yeah, of course that breeds loneliness when you’ve come from such a full life or when you’ve come from freedom. I think the easiest way that now people can understand it is what we’ve all gone through in lockdown.

Oprah: Yeah, well, everybody can certainly relate now.

_(Cuts to footage of interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby in South Africa in October, 2019)_


Meghan:  . . . asked if I’m OK, but it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes.

Bradby: And the answer is, would it be fair to say, ‘Not really OK’, as in it’s really been a struggle?

Meghan: Yes.

_(Back to Oprah)_


Oprah: Well, I would have to say, in South Africa, when the reporter stopped and asked, ‘Are you OK . . ?’

Meghan: Mmm.

Oprah: And, whooo, we all felt that. Why did that question strike such a nerve? What was going on with you, internally at that time?

Meghan: That was the last day of the tour. You know, those tours are . . . I’m sure they have beautiful pictures and it looks vibrant, and all of that is true. It’s also really exhausting. So, I was fried, and I think it just hit me so hard because we were making it look like every-thing was fine. I can understand why people were really surprised to see that there was pain there.


----------



## Chanbal

It's fun to look at what other royal commentators have to say about our hero and his lovely wife.





Spoiler: his wife


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OogleAtLuxury said:


> People who got to keep their jobs and work from home for the first time ever. People who were able to spend more time with their children/families since they weren't at work all the time. People who were invested in the stock market and were able to benefit from its growth. Introverts (like me) who ultimately enjoy being home more than anything else. People who are prone to getting sick once a month during cold/flu season (like me) who were able to stay home basically 100% of the time and not experience that this year. I don't doubt that the pandemic has been hard on some people (maybe not most...who knows), but others have definitely benefitted.



The pandemic may have benefited you (and a small number of others), but I promise you more people have suffered than have benefited from the pandemic. The amount of deaths (not just from covid itself, but secondary effects such as delayed cancer treatments and diagnosis, suicides from isolation which is never counted in official figures) is horrendous. Over half a million people (and counting) in the US have died from COVID.

The work from home thing would have happened eventually without covid, which in effect would mean more time with family and introverts get comfort. The flu has severely declined this year due to mask wearing and social distancing, but it dwarfs the amount of deaths caused by COVID.

People have lost homes, can't feed themselves or their families, lost income from businesses, retail decline and closing of stores, and thus jobs. COVID may have benefited those who have the ability to work from home and are introverted, but there are BILLIONS of people on this earth and they are still suffering from this disease. There have been more cases and deaths around the world in the last two weeks than in the first 6 months of the pandemic.

What about students and children? They are missing out on education (a lot of people in rural areas do not have access to internet or fast enough internet, or even electronics which we take for granted). There is also the social development that they miss out on.

Basically if you are rich or well off and comfortable then you would have seen no change or even benefited from this pandemic. And talking about how COVID benefited you can come across as insensitive and shortsighted.


----------



## mellibelly

LittleStar88 said:


> And then there was this hot mess dress...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wore a Beautifully Sheer Dress to Her BFF's Wedding in Rome
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore a sheer dress to Misha Nonoo's wedding in Rome with many other celebrities in attendance. See the photos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.whowhatwear.com


$13,500 for that ugly frock?!


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The pandemic may have benefited you (and a small number of others), but I promise you more people have suffered than have benefited from the pandemic. The amount of deaths (not just from covid itself, but secondary effects such as delayed cancer treatments and diagnosis, suicides from isolation which is never counted in official figures) is horrendous. Over half a million people (and counting) in the US have died from COVID.
> 
> The work from home thing would have happened eventually without covid, which in effect would mean more time with family and introverts get comfort. The flu has severely declined this year due to mask wearing and social distancing, but it dwarfs the amount of deaths caused by COVID.
> 
> People have lost homes, can't feed themselves or their families, lost income from businesses, retail decline and closing of stores, and thus jobs. COVID may have benefited those who have the ability to work from home and are introverted, but there are BILLIONS of people on this earth and they are still suffering from this disease. There have been more cases and deaths around the world in the last two weeks than in the first 6 months of the pandemic.
> 
> What about students and children? They are missing out on education (a lot of people in rural areas do not have access to internet or fast enough internet, or even electronics which we take for granted). There is also the social development that they miss out on.
> 
> Basically if you are rich or well off and comfortable then you would have seen no change or even benefited from this pandemic. And talking about how COVID benefited you can come across as insensitive and shortsighted.



I'm sorry that I made you uncomfortable, but I was answering a post that literally said, " Jenifer Aniston was also quoted saying how the lockdowns had a silver lining and good things came of it... and I thought... to who?" 

I am who. That is all. I obviously was not arguing that we should have a COVID 2022 -_-


----------



## bisousx

mellibelly said:


> Imagine if this poor man’s Rachel Zoe was your stylist
> View attachment 5073328
> View attachment 5073329
> View attachment 5073330
> View attachment 5073331



I’m laughing at the comment cause I can be petty. I think she looks cute in these outfits tho


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I've made this mistake of buying my regular shoe size online only to find the shoes too big.  I could never walk in high heels in even a half size bigger without falling and breaking my neck!


I remember trying to wear my mum’s heels when I was a broke teen and she’s a size bigger than me. I’d stumble so much in them that one of my friends accused me of secretly pre-drinking to  
avoid sharing my precious booze.
 I finally realised that it was a pretty stupid scheme.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

Guys, do you think Cringe spends the entire Sussex grooming and clothing budget on herself? I still can’t believe Archie’s first birthday diaper video.  And Ginge, as one poster said, looks like he has bad hygiene and wears sad outfits.

Exhibit A:


He’s losing his hair, it happens. But why is the hair he still has so long? It makes the bald patch more prominent. And all the neck hair should be trimmed. It’s so unkept. I found his long hair/bald patch distracting during PP’s funeral. Wills has the right idea keeping his hair short.

Exhibit B:
	

		
			
		

		
	



Scruffy old brown shoes, BLACK socks, light gray wrinkled suit. Couldn’t mommy pick out a better outfit?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am definitely not one of _those_. Ewwww. Shudder.
> 
> On another note, I watched the video that analysed  the text of “the interview“ that @QueenofWrapDress posted.    Fascinating discussion.  In order to avoid distractions, used the text printed in the Sun rather than use clips from the interview.  Take a look at the text.  The printed words are so much more powerful.  Still puzzled why a billionaire wants to be involved with this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the full transcript of Harry and Meghan's bombshell interview with Oprah
> 
> 
> THE DUKE and Duchess of Sussex’s sit-down with Oprah was one of the most sensational royal interviews of all time. Speaking to Oprah Winfrey in California, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle blas…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The text
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking to Oprah Winfrey in California, Harry and Meghan blasted “racist” Britain, the Royal Family and the Press, while highlighting Meghan’s mental health struggles. Here, we reveal the full astonishing transcript…
> OPRAH: We can’t hug, everybody is double- masked and has face shields. You look lovely. Do you know if you’re having a boy or a girl?
> 
> Meghan: We do this time. I’ll wait for my husband to join us and we can share that with you.
> 
> Oprah: That would be really great. Before we get into to it, I just want to make clear to everybody that, even though we’re neighbours, I’m down the road, you’re up the road, we’re using a friend’s place. There has not been an agreement, you don’t know what I’m going to ask, there is no subject that’s off limits and you are not getting paid for this interview.
> 
> Meghan: All of that’s correct.
> Oprah: I remember sitting in the chapel — thanks for inviting me, by the way. I so recall this sense of magic. I never experienced anything like it. When you came through that door, you seemed like you were floating down the aisle. Were you even inside your body at that time?
> Meghan: I’ve thought about this a lot. It was like having an out-of- body experience I was very present for. The night before, I slept through the night entirely, which is a bit of a miracle, and then woke up and started listening to Going To The Chapel, to make it fun and light and remind ourselves this was our day. We were both aware in advance of that this wasn’t our day, this was the day planned for the world.
> Oprah: Everybody who gets married knows you’re really marrying the family. But you weren’t just marrying a family, you were marrying a 1,200-year-old institution, you’re marrying the monarchy. What did you think it was going to be like?
> 
> Meghan: I would say I went into it naively because I didn’t grow up knowing much about the Royal Family. It wasn’t part of something that was part of conversation at home. It wasn’t something that we followed. My mum even said to me a couple of months ago, ‘Did Diana ever do an interview?’ Now I can say. ‘Yes, a very famous one’, but my mum doesn’t know that.
> Oprah: But you were aware of the royals and, if you were going to marry into the royals, you’d do research about what that would mean?
> Meghan: I didn’t do any research about what that would mean.
> Oprah: You didn’t do any research?
> 
> Meghan: No. I didn’t feel any need to, because everything I needed to know he was sharing with me. Everything we thought I needed to know, he was telling me.
> Oprah: So, you didn’t have a conversation with yourself, or talk to your friends about what it would be like to marry a prince, who is Harry, who you had fallen in love with . . .  you didn’t give it a lot of thought?
> Meghan: No. We thought a lot about what we thought it might be. I didn’t fully understand what the job was: What does it mean to be a working royal? What do you do? What does that mean? He and I were very aligned on our cause- driven work, that was part of our initial connection. But there was no way to understand what the day-to- day was going to be like, and it’s so different because I didn’t romanticise any element of it. But I think, as Americans especially, what you do know about the royals is what you read in fairytales, and you think is what you know about the royals. It’s easy to have an image that is so far from reality, and that’s what was so tricky over those past few years, when the perception and the reality are two different things and you’re being judged on the perception but you’re living the reality of it. There’s a complete misalignment and there’s no way to explain that to people.
> Oprah: With every family things get serious when you’re brought in to meet the grandmother or the mother. The grandmother is the matriarch and, in your situation it’s the Queen.
> Meghan: She was one of the first people I met. The real Queen.
> 
> Oprah: What was that like? Were you worried about making the right impression?
> 
> Meghan: There wasn’t a huge formality the first time I met Her Majesty The Queen. We were going for lunch at Royal Lodge, which is where some other members of the family live, specifically Andrew and Fergie, and Eugenie and Beatrice would spend a lot of time there. Eugenie and I had known each other before I knew Harry, so that was comfortable and it turned out the Queen was finishing a church service in Windsor and so she was going to be at the house. Harry and I were in the car and he says, ‘OK, well my grandmother is there, you’re going to meet her’. (I said) ‘OK, great’. I loved my grandmother, I used to take care of my grandmother. (He said) ‘Do you know how to curtsey?’ ‘What?’ ‘Do you know how to curtsey?’ I thought genuinely that’s what happens outside, that was part of the fanfare. I didn’t think that’s what happens inside. I go, ‘But it’s your grandmother’. He goes, ‘It’s the Queen!’
> 
> Oprah: Wow!
> 
> 
> Meghan: And that was really the first moment the penny dropped?
> 
> Oprah: Did you Google how to curtsey?
> 
> Meghan: No, we were in the car. Deeply, to show respect, I learned it very quickly right in front of the house. We practised and walked in.
> 
> Oprah: Harry practised?
> 
> 
> Meghan: Yeah, and Fergie ran out and said, ‘Are you ready? Do you know how to curtsey? Oh, my goodness, you guys’. I practised very quickly and went in, and apparently I did a very deep curtsey, and we just sat there and we chatted and it was lovely and easy and I think, thank God, I hadn’t known a lot about the family. Thank God, I hadn’t researched. I would have been so in my head about all of it.
> 
> Oprah: (What) you’re sharing with us is that you were no more nervous as a regular person who goes to meet somebody’s grandmother.
> 
> Meghan: I had confused the idea. I grew up in LA, you see celebrities all the time. This is not the same but it’s very easy, especially as an American, to go, ‘These are famous people’. This is a completely different ball game.
> 
> _(Cut to them and Oprah at their house)_
> 
> 
> Oprah: What are you feeling here (their home)? What’s the word?
> 
> Meghan: Peace.
> 
> Oprah: Peace?
> 
> Meghan: Yeah.
> 
> 
> _(Oprah narrates) The day after our interview, I stopped over to Harry and Meghan’s new home._
> Meghan: Hi, Guy (dog).
> 
> Oprah: Hi, Guy.
> 
> Meghan: Yeah, Guy’s been — Guy’s been through everything with me.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Yeah, from the beginning, from the very first date, yeah?
> 
> Meghan: If Guy, I mean, I had him in Canada. I got him from a kill shelter in Kentucky.
> 
> Oprah: Yeah?
> 
> _(In Harry and Meghan’s hen coop)_
> 
> 
> Meghan: Hi, girls!
> 
> _(Oprah narrates) We put on wellies to feed the hens Meghan and Harry recently rescued from a factory farm. ‘I love your little designer house here. Archie’s chick inn. Oh, how cute is that.’_
> 
> Harry: She’s always wanted chickens.
> 
> Meghan: Well, you know, I just love rescuing.
> 
> 
> Oprah: So, this is a part of your new life? What are you most excited about?
> 
> Meghan: Whoop! You’re OK . . .
> 
> Oprah: What are you most excited about in the new life? What are you most excited about? Here, chick, chick, chick, chick.
> 
> Meghan: I think just being able to live authentically.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: Right? Like this kind of stuff. It’s so, it’s so basic, but it’s really fulfilling. Just getting back down to basics. I was thinking about it — even at our wedding, you know, three days before our wedding, we got married . . .
> 
> Oprah: Ah!
> 
> Meghan: No one knows that. But we called the Archbishop, and we just said, ‘Look, this thing, this spectacle is for the world, but we want our union between us’. So, like, the vows that we have framed in our room are just the two of us in our backyard with the Archbishop of Canterbury, and that was the piece that . . .
> 
> 
> Harry: Just the three of us.
> 
> Oprah: Really?
> 
> Harry: Just the three of us.
> 
> Meghan: Just the three of us.
> 
> 
> _(Back to Oprah)_
> 
> Oprah: You know, the wedding was the most perfect picture, you know, anybody’s ever seen. But through that picture that we were all seeing, behind the scenes, obviously, there was a lot of drama going on. And soon after your marriage, the tabloids started offering stories that painted a not-so-flattering picture of you in your new world. There were rumours about you being ‘Hurricane Meghan’.
> 
> Meghan: I hadn’t heard that.
> Oprah: OK.
> 
> 
> Oprah: So, there were rumours about you being Hurricane Meghan, for the departure of several high-profile palace staff members. And there was also a story — did you hear this one? — about you making Kate Middleton cry?
> 
> Meghan: This I heard about.
> 
> Oprah: You heard about that. OK.
> 
> Meghan: This was . . . that was . . . that was a turning point.
> 
> 
> Oprah: That was a turning point?
> 
> Meghan: Yeah.
> _(Oprah narrates) Six months after Harry and Meghan’s wedding, headlines began to swirl about a rift between Meghan and her sister-in-law, the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton. It was reported that Meghan had left Kate “in tears” over the bride-to-be’s “strict demands” over flower-girl dresses._
> 
> Meghan: The narrative with Kate — which didn’t happen — was really, really difficult and something that  . . . I think that’s when everything changed, really.
> 
> 
> Oprah: You say the narrative with Kate, it didn’t happen. So, specifically, did you make Kate cry?
> 
> Meghan: No.
> 
> Oprah: So, where did that come from?
> 
> Meghan: (Sighs)
> 
> 
> Oprah: Was there a situation where she might have cried? Or she could have cried?
> 
> Meghan: No, no. The reverse happened. And I don’t say that to be disparaging to anyone, because it was a really hard week of the wedding. And she was upset about something, but she owned it, and she apologised. And she brought me flowers and a note, apologising. And she did what I would do if I knew that I hurt someone, right, to just take accountability for it. What was shocking was . . . what was that, six, seven months after our wedding?
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: That the reverse of that would be out in the world.
> 
> 
> Oprah: The story came out six, seven months after it actually happened?
> 
> Meghan: Yeah.
> 
> Oprah: So, when you say . . .
> 
> Meghan: I would have never wanted that to come out about her ever, even though it had happened. I protected that from ever being out in the world.
> 
> 
> Oprah: So, when you say the reverse happened, explain to us what you mean by that.
> 
> Meghan: A few days before the wedding, she was upset about something pertaining — yes, the issue was correct — about flower-girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings. And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn’t make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.
> 
> Oprah: This was a really big story at the time, that you made Kate cry. Now you’re saying you didn’t make Kate cry, Kate made you cry. So, we all want to know, what would make you cry? What . . . what were you going through? You were going through all of the anxiety that brides go through putting their wedding together and going through all of the issues with your father: Was he coming? Was he not coming?
> 
> Meghan: Mmm.
> 
> 
> Oprah: And there was a confrontation over the . . . the dresses?
> 
> Meghan: It wasn’t a confrontation, and I actually don’t think it’s fair to her to get into the details of that, because she apologised.
> 
> Oprah: OK.
> 
> Meghan: And I’ve forgiven her.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: What was hard to get over was being blamed for something that not only I didn’t do but that happened to me. And the people who were part of our wedding going to our comms team and saying, ‘I know this didn’t happen.’ I don’t have to tell them what actually happened.
> 
> Oprah: OK.
> 
> Meghan: But I can at least go on the record and say she didn’t make her cry. And they were all told the same . . .
> 
> 
> Oprah: So, all the time the stories were out that you had made Kate cry . . . you knew all along, and people around you knew that that wasn’t true?
> 
> Meghan: Everyone in the institution knew it wasn’t true.
> 
> Oprah: So, why didn’t somebody just say that?
> 
> Meghan: That’s a good question.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Hmm.
> 
> Meghan: I’m not sharing that piece about Kate in any way to be disparaging to her. I think it’s really important for people to understand the truth.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: But also I think, a lot of it, that was fed into by the media. And I would hope that she would have wanted that corrected, and maybe in the same way that the Palace wouldn’t let anybody else.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Yeah.
> 
> Meghan: Negate it, they wouldn’t let her, because she’s a good person. And I think so much of what I have seen play out is this idea of polarity, where if you love me, you don’t have to hate her. And if you love her, you don’t need to hate me.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm. You know, there were several stories that compared headlines written about you to those written about Kate.
> Meghan: Mmm.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Since you don’t read things, let me tell you what was said.
> 
> Meghan: OK.
> 
> Oprah: There were stories where Kate was being praised for holding her baby bump.
> 
> Meghan: Oh, gosh, have I done it since we’ve been sitting down?
> 
> 
> Oprah: Yes, you’ve been doing it the whole time.
> 
> Meghan: Probably. OK.
> 
> Oprah: Kate was praised for cradling her baby bump, and the headline about you doing the same thing said, ‘Meghan can’t keep hands off her baby bump for pride or vanity’.
> 
> Meghan: What does it have to do with pride or vanity?
> 
> 
> Oprah: Well, I’m just — I’m just telling you about the stories, OK?
> 
> Meghan: OK, I hear you.
> 
> Oprah: Then there was a whole online piece about this: ‘Kate eating avocados to help with morning sickness’.
> 
> Meghan: (Laughs) I heard — OK, I heard about the avocado one.
> 
> 
> Oprah: But you were eating avocados . . .
> 
> Meghan: And fuelling murder, apparently.
> 
> Oprah: Wolfing down a fruit linked to water shortages, illegal deforestation and environmental devastation. There was, seems . . . there seems to be . . . there was a . . .
> 
> Meghan: That’s a really loaded piece of toast. (Laughter) I mean . . . you have to laugh at a certain point, because it’s just ridiculous.
> 
> 
> Oprah: That’s good: ‘That’s a loaded piece of toast.’ It’s about deforestation and . . .
> 
> Meghan: Oh, man!
> 
> Oprah: Oh, wow! So, do you think there was a standard for Kate in general and a separate one for you? And if so, why?
> 
> Meghan: I don’t know why. I can see now what layers were at play.
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> 
> Meghan: And, again, they really seemed to want a narrative of a hero and a villain.
> 
> Oprah: Yeah. You came in as the first mixed-race person to marry into the family, and did that concern you in being able to fit in?
> 
> Meghan: Mmm.
> 
> Oprah: And did that concern you in being able to fit in? Did you think about that at all?
> 
> 
> Meghan: I thought about it because they made me think about it.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: Right? But at the same time now, upon reflection, thank God all of those things were true. Thank God I had that life experience. Thank god I had known the value of working. My first job was when I was 13, at a frozen yoghurt shop called Humphrey Yogart.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> Meghan: I’ve always worked. I’ve always valued independence. I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights. I mean, that’s the sad irony of the last four years . . . is I’ve advocated for so long for women to use their voice, and then I was silent.
> 
> Oprah: Were you silent? Or were you silenced?
> 
> Meghan: The latter.
> 
> Oprah: So, how does that work? Were you told by the comms people, or the, I don’t know, the institution? Were you told to keep silent? How were you told to handle tabloids or gossip? Were you . . . were you told to say nothing?
> 
> 
> Meghan: Everyone from . . .  everyone in my world was given very clear directive, from the moment the world knew Harry and I were dating, to always say, ‘No comment’. That’s my friends, my mom and dad.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: And we did.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> 
> Meghan: I did anything they told me to do — of course I did, because it was also through the lens of, ‘And we’ll protect you’. So, even as things started to roll out in the media that I didn’t see — but my friends would call me and say, ‘Meg, this is really bad’ — because I didn’t see it, I’d go, ‘Don’t worry. I’m being protected’.
> 
> Oprah: Mmm.
> 
> Meghan: I believed that. And I think that was . . . that was really hard to reconcile because it was only . . . it was only once we were married and everything started to really worsen that I came to under-stand that not only was I not being protected, but they were willing to lie to protect other members of the family but they weren’t willing to tell the truth to protect me and my husband.
> 
> Oprah: So, are you saying you did not feel supported by the powers that be, be that The Firm, the monar-chy, all of them?
> 
> 
> Meghan: It’s hard for people to distinguish the two because there’s . . . it’s a family business, right?
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: So, there’s the family, and then there’s the people that are running the institution. Those are two separate things. And it’s important to be able to compartmentalise that, because the Queen, for example, has always been wonderful to me. I mean, we had one of our first joint engagements together. She asked me to join her, and I . . .
> 
> Oprah: Was this on the train?
> 
> 
> Meghan: Yeah, on the train.
> 
> Oprah: Yeah.
> 
> Meghan: We had breakfast together that morning, and she’d given me a beautiful gift, and I just really loved being in her company. And I remember we were in the car . . .
> 
> Oprah: Can you share what the gift was? Or . . .
> 
> 
> Meghan: Yes. She gave me beautiful pearl earrings and a matching necklace. And we were in the car going between engagements, and she has a blanket that sits across her knees for warmth. And it was chilly, and she was like, ‘Meghan, come on’ and put it over my knees as well.
> 
> Oprah: Oh, nice.
> 
> Meghan: Right. Just moments of . . .  and it made me think of my grand-mother, where she’s always been warm and inviting and . . . and really welcoming.
> 
> Oprah: So, OK, so she made you feel welcomed?
> 
> 
> Meghan: Yes.
> 
> Oprah: Did you feel welcomed by everyone? It seemed like you and Kate . . . at the Wimbledon game where you were going to watch a friend play tennis . . .
> 
> Meghan: (Laughs)
> 
> Oprah: Was it what it looked like? You are two sisters-in-law out there in the world, getting to know each other. Was she helping you, embracing you into the family, helping you adjust?
> 
> 
> Meghan: I think everyone welcomed me.
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: And, yeah, when you say, ‘Was it what it looked like?’, my under-standing and my experience of the past four years is it’s nothing like what it looks like. It’s nothing like what it looks like. And I . . . and I remember so often people within The Firm would say, ‘Well, you can’t do this because it’ll look like that. You can’t’. So, even, ‘Can I go and have lunch with my friends?’ ‘No, no, no, you’re oversaturated, you’re every-where, it would be best for you to not go out to lunch with your friends’. I go, ‘Well, I haven’t . . . I haven’t left the house in months’.
> 
> I mean, there was a day that one of the members of the family, she came over, and she said, ‘Why don’t you just lay low for a little while, because you are everywhere right now’. And I said, ‘I’ve left the house twice in four months. I’m everywhere, but I am nowhere’. And from that standpoint, I continued to say to people, ‘I know there’s an obsession with how things look, but has anyone talked about how it feels? Because right now, I could not feel lonelier’.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Hmm. You were feeling lonely, even though your prince . . .  you’re in love, you’re with him.
> 
> Meghan: I’m not lonely . . . I wasn’t lonely with him.
> 
> Oprah: Yeah.
> 
> Meghan: There were moments that he had to work or he had to go away, there’s moments in the middle of the night. And so, there was very little that I was allowed to do.
> 
> 
> Oprah: Mm-hmm.
> 
> Meghan: And so, yeah, of course that breeds loneliness when you’ve come from such a full life or when you’ve come from freedom. I think the easiest way that now people can understand it is what we’ve all gone through in lockdown.
> 
> Oprah: Yeah, well, everybody can certainly relate now.
> 
> _(Cuts to footage of interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby in South Africa in October, 2019)_
> 
> 
> Meghan:  . . . asked if I’m OK, but it’s a very real thing to be going through behind the scenes.
> 
> Bradby: And the answer is, would it be fair to say, ‘Not really OK’, as in it’s really been a struggle?
> 
> Meghan: Yes.
> 
> _(Back to Oprah)_
> 
> 
> Oprah: Well, I would have to say, in South Africa, when the reporter stopped and asked, ‘Are you OK . . ?’
> 
> Meghan: Mmm.
> 
> Oprah: And, whooo, we all felt that. Why did that question strike such a nerve? What was going on with you, internally at that time?
> 
> Meghan: That was the last day of the tour. You know, those tours are . . . I’m sure they have beautiful pictures and it looks vibrant, and all of that is true. It’s also really exhausting. So, I was fried, and I think it just hit me so hard because we were making it look like every-thing was fine. I can understand why people were really surprised to see that there was pain there.


Oprah is not an Interviewer, she is a Prompter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> $13,500 for that ugly frock?!



She seems to love these sheer dresses, $75,000.  








						Here's the stunning, $75,000 dress Meghan Markle wore in her official engagement photos
					

Meghan Markle wore a modern, couture dress from Ralph & Russo in her recent engagement photos with Prince Harry.




					www.insider.com


----------



## LittleStar88

mellibelly said:


> $13,500 for that ugly frock?!



I'm sure it looks ok on a size 00, but she doesn't have the right kind of figure to carry off that bouffant monstrosity.

The worst part if her wardrobe spending is that it seems she has not recycled ANY of these outfits... And she knew she would be bailing on the BRF... The intention was to build a foundational wardrobe for future use. She spent lavishly knowing that would never happen.


----------



## lalame

OogleAtLuxury said:


> People who got to keep their jobs and work from home for the first time ever. People who were able to spend more time with their children/families since they weren't at work all the time. People who were invested in the stock market and were able to benefit from its growth. Introverts (like me) who ultimately enjoy being home more than anything else. People who are prone to getting sick once a month during cold/flu season (like me) who were able to stay home basically 100% of the time and not experience that this year. I don't doubt that the pandemic has been hard on some people (maybe not most...who knows), but others have definitely benefitted.



I'm with you. I've really enjoyed the WFH aspect of the last year, with the exception of not traveling. That actually has impacted my mental health as I tend not to take time off from work if there's no destination that's "worth it" (yes I am American ). I'm sure you also feel bad about the people who aren't as lucky, as am I... there is definitely some guilt here from thriving during these times when so many are not.


----------



## bag-mania

Yeesh, Chrissy makes Selena Gomez sound like a Rhodes scholar when it comes to what she knows about Covid. Oh, and she wants to hang out with Meghan.

*Chrissy Teigen Reveals What She Most Wants to Do Now That She's Friends With Meghan Markle (Exclusive)*
Chrissy Teigen is ready to head to Montecito, California! The 35-year-old model and cookbook author spoke with ET's Keltie Knight at Sunday's VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World about her newfound friendship with Meghan Markle. 

Markle and her husband, Prince Harry, served as co-chairs for the event at which Teigen was a celebrity guest. Markle, who is currently pregnant with her and Harry's second child, did not make an in-person appearance at the event, though her husband gave an impassioned speech. On the red carpet, Teigen talked about getting in touch with her regal new pal.

"I feel like our world has just gotten so small, through this whole pandemic and everything," Teigen shared. "We have to go to Montecito and chill in the chicken house. Archie's Cluckin' Hut?"

In fact, the house, which was featured during Harry and Markle's tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March, is called "Archie's Chick Inn" and is named after their almost 2-year-old son, Archie.  

"They're so wonderful for co-chairing this," Teigen added of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. "This is obviously such an incredibly important event that I'm so happy to be a part of." 

Last month, Teigen revealed that she and Markle had connected over their experiences with pregnancy loss. Teigen lost her son, Jack, in September at 20 weeks pregnant, and Markle opened up about suffering a miscarriage last summer. 

"She's been so kind to me ever since we connected on-- she had written me about baby Jack and loss, but yeah," Teigen said on _Watch What Happens Live With Andy Cohen_ at the time. "She is really wonderful and so kind, and just as kind as everyone says she is."

As for the pandemic, Teigen told ET, "Let's get this s**t over with!" 

"We want to tell people to get vaccinated, plain and simply, this event is just something to celebrate not only these frontline workers that are able to come see and watch this event, but also be able to tell people to get this vaccine and that it's safe and it's something that is going to let us get back to our normal lives," the social media queen shared, adding, "And we can hug people again and kiss and cook food and have brunch and do the silly things we miss so much. It's a step toward that."

Teigen was joined by her husband, John Legend, and their 5-year-old daughter, Luna, who peeked out of her mom's orange dress train on the red carpet. 

"I think she might want to be a publicist," Teigen said of Luna. "She's like, 'Mom, you have to turn this way. Don't say that!' She really watches what I say too. She might be a good publicist." 

Global Citizen’s VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World will air Saturday, May 8 at 8 p.m. ET/PT on select channels and will stream at 8 p.m. ET on YouTube.








						Chrissy Teigen Reveals Funny Plans to Hang With New Pal Meghan Markle
					

The model opens up about connecting with the Duchess of Sussex.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> She seems to love these sheer dresses, $75,000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the stunning, $75,000 dress Meghan Markle wore in her official engagement photos
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore a modern, couture dress from Ralph & Russo in her recent engagement photos with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



I loved this dress, personally. But $75K, wow. It's interesting to see it on the runway... it looks so red carpet, a bit "much" for an engagement shoot but hey I guess she had the money.  

I REALLY hope she recycles this one, if it was not loaned (they can't even loan right?). That would be a huge waste if not.


----------



## papertiger

Tootsie17 said:


> Although I don't comment often, I read this beloved thread daily.  Therefore, I shall give my best meghan impersonation.  What about me?  Am I not worthy? You all are racists and don't care about my feelings! No one asked me if I wanted to be on the list. No one asked if I'm OK! What about my feelings and my truth! I am so hurt that I must order another designer dress and merch it. LOL! That was fun. I'm being totally cheeky, of course. Love you all.



Just give yourself a tile and sue


----------



## TC1

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, the irony!


Just a bit more of the "do as we say, not as we do" for the collection of preachy-bs


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Yeah, I wouldn't necessarily say that the pandemic is strictly better for me. I do have bouts of missing my family (who live in a different state) but now that I'm vaccinated, I can go travel to them and kind of get the best of both worlds! Also, I'm married, so I don't have the issue of extreme loneliness that I know a lot of my introvert single friends have run into. I do miss gossiping with my coworkers, but I have arranged virtual hangouts with the ones I care about to eat lunch together.   I don't know. Ultimately, it's all just personal preference!



Favourite co-worker and I made the video calls we had with our biggest client stop because we couldn't be bothered anymore haha (replaced them with phone conferences). But yeah, maybe we will do a virtual lunch, thanks for the idea!


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> She seems to love these sheer dresses, $75,000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the stunning, $75,000 dress Meghan Markle wore in her official engagement photos
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore a modern, couture dress from Ralph & Russo in her recent engagement photos with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



She had to open a lot of briefcases to save up for that dress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> People have lost homes, can't feed themselves or their families, lost income from businesses, retail decline and closing of stores, and thus jobs. COVID may have benefited those who have the ability to work from home and are introverted, but there are BILLIONS of people on this earth and they are still suffering from this disease. There have been more cases and deaths around the world in the last two weeks than in the first 6 months of the pandemic.



I'm not exactly struggling, but my main project ended in early spring (for reasons unrelated to Covid), and I must say freelancing during a pandemic is kind of a lot more exhausting than freelancing is during normal times. Nobody is starting exiting new things or looking to spend lots of money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I'm with you. I've really enjoyed the WFH aspect of the last year, with the exception of not traveling. That actually has impacted my mental health as I tend not to take time off from work if there's no destination that's "worth it" (yes I am American ). I'm sure you also feel bad about the people who aren't as lucky, as am I... there is definitely some guilt here from thriving during these times when so many are not.



Honestly, don't feel bad. This thing is beyond our control, and nothing is won when more people are struggling.


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> Guys, do you think Cringe spends the entire Sussex grooming and clothing budget on herself? I still can’t believe Archie’s first birthday diaper video.  And Ginge, as one poster said, looks like he has bad hygiene and wears sad outfits.
> 
> Exhibit A:
> View attachment 5073415
> 
> He’s losing his hair, it happens. But why is the hair he still has so long? It makes the bald patch more prominent. And all the neck hair should be trimmed. It’s so unkept. I found his long hair/bald patch distracting during PP’s funeral. Wills has the right idea keeping his hair short.
> 
> Exhibit B:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073419
> 
> Scruffy old brown shoes, BLACK socks, light gray wrinkled suit. Couldn’t mommy pick out a better outfit?


Exhibit A reminds me of when I had a go at cutting poor Mr Jellied’s hair with clippers and I somehow completely missed his neck hairs and shaved a big chunk out of his hairline instead  
 Luckily he thought it was very funny seeing my face in the mirror when I did it.  




csshopper said:


> Oprah is not an Interviewer, she is a Prompter.


Beautifully put.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The pandemic may have benefited you (and a small number of others), but I promise you more people have suffered than have benefited from the pandemic. The amount of deaths (not just from covid itself, but secondary effects such as delayed cancer treatments and diagnosis, suicides from isolation which is never counted in official figures) is horrendous. Over half a million people (and counting) in the US have died from COVID.
> 
> The work from home thing would have happened eventually without covid, which in effect would mean more time with family and introverts get comfort. The flu has severely declined this year due to mask wearing and social distancing, but it dwarfs the amount of deaths caused by COVID.
> 
> People have lost homes, can't feed themselves or their families, lost income from businesses, retail decline and closing of stores, and thus jobs. COVID may have benefited those who have the ability to work from home and are introverted, but there are BILLIONS of people on this earth and they are still suffering from this disease. There have been more cases and deaths around the world in the last two weeks than in the first 6 months of the pandemic.
> 
> What about students and children? They are missing out on education (a lot of people in rural areas do not have access to internet or fast enough internet, or even electronics which we take for granted). There is also the social development that they miss out on.
> 
> Basically if you are rich or well off and comfortable then you would have seen no change or even benefited from this pandemic. And talking about how COVID benefited you can come across as insensitive and shortsighted.


Really, really well said. I try and avoid this topic but I have to second you on this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I've made this mistake of buying my regular shoe size online only to find the shoes too big.  I could never walk in high heels in even a half size bigger without falling and breaking my neck!



Rule of thumb is most people go down 0.5 size in high heels. Something def odd going on when you pretend you chose to swim in 120s and it's a hack for comfort. No creases maybe, but could be superglue in the inners.


----------



## zinacef

bag-mania said:


> Whatever would we do without well-meaning but clueless celebrities who expect to solve the world's problems by offering encouragement?


selenaa, Selena —- Bless her heart y’all!


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> There are some celebrities that do good without any fanfare, and it comes to light months or even years later, or maybe not at all.  Keanu Reeves and Jamie Fox come to mind.  Those celebrities I actually respect, because it's more genuine and from the heart than passing out a sandwich and having a headline, "SEE WHAT I DID?!!?  AREN'T I WONDERFUL?!!?"



It's seriously easier to dress as a guy, casually and on the red carpet. 

I _love_ clothes but I acknowledge the pressure of appearances as a female public figure must be horrendous.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> She seems to love these sheer dresses, $75,000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the stunning, $75,000 dress Meghan Markle wore in her official engagement photos
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore a modern, couture dress from Ralph & Russo in her recent engagement photos with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com


You are right she does....Well I suppose this way she can claim there is always one transparent thing about her


----------



## bag-mania

Finally! Some Americans who only follow mainstream media are slowly catching on. The comments at the bottom of this _Washington Post_ article are leaning against Harry and Meghan, whereas even two months ago they would have been mostly positive. There are still a few fans fighting hard for their favorites but they are getting overwhelmed.

*Meghan and Harry are becoming your typical American mega-celebrities*
In Montecito, Calif., a 9.3-square-mile coastal enclave nestled between the Santa Ynez mountains and the Pacific, where gray whales swim by the shoreline, avocado and citrus trees bear fruit nearly year-round and there’s nary a sidewalk in sight, multi-acre properties near the beach routinely sell for upward of $20 million. You can surf in the mornings and hike scenic foothill trails on weekend afternoons and look out for celebrities who live nearby, like Ellen DeGeneres, Oprah Winfrey, Adam Levine and Katy Perry.

Yes, the town has ample attractions to lure Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, into buying a $14.7 million home after “stepping back” from the royal family last year. But there’s another reason the location makes sense: The couple is modeling their new life together on those of the Oprahs and Ellens around them. Through various business moves, two new jobs for Harry and a PR-savvy, revelation-packed interview with Oprah herself earlier this spring, they are reinventing themselves as multihyphenate American celebrities, the kind who dabble in content, philanthropy, technology and a tasteful dash of politics.

Essentially, they are becoming a brand — and their unique royal sparkle would make them especially well positioned to leverage that brand across many different areas. That wasn’t an option for Harry’s great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, when he abdicated his position as king back in 1936. But whether this new form of fame will give the Sussexes a happier and more sustainable life remains to be seen.

“Harry and Meghan will be sought after socially in America and paid generously (some might say exorbitantly) for their celebrity value,” said Kitty Kelley, a biographer who’s written books about the Kennedy family, Winfrey and the British royal family, in an email. “Not even the biggest U.S. movie star or sports giant can claim Harry and Meghan’s link to the British monarchy.”

Still, the former actress and semi-prince are restyling themselves in the image of such stars and giants who start out in one field and then end up in all of them — performers like Dwayne Johnson and Jennifer Lopez, athletes like LeBron James and Serena Williams, models like Tyra Banks, chefs like Bobby Flay and, of course, political families, the most famous recipients of the “American royalty” moniker. Jacqueline Kennedy was known to use her celebrity for charitable causes; now the *******s are creating novels, podcasts and docuseries. Barack and Michelle ***** launched podcasts on Spotify (“The Michelle ***** Podcast” for her; “Renegades” with Bruce Springsteen for him) and partnered with Netflix to produce a slate of socially conscious movies and shows, such as the documentaries “American Factory” and “Crip Camp” and the cooking series “Waffles + Mochi.”

So by the time the Sussexes made their royal exit in 2020, the blueprint for what to do next was already there. Archewell Audio, the podcast they host and produce in partnership with Spotify, launched in December with an episode featuring reflections on the elapsed year from stars like Elton John, James Corden and Stacey Abrams. On April 6, the couple’s Archewell Productions announced the first project to come out of their multiyear deal with Netflix: “Heart of Invictus,” a docuseries about the Invictus Games, the international competition for athletes with disabilities that Harry founded in 2014.

Archewell, which also includes a foundation, states on its website that all of its endeavors aim to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” It’s named for the Greek word meaning “source of action,” which reportedly influenced the name of their son, Archie. Last week, it announced the couple would be co-chairs of a charity concert in May to help bring coronavirus vaccines to the world’s poorest countries.

Kelley noted that there’s some precedent for royals (or ex-royals) crossing the pond to make money: Sarah, the Duchess of York, the ex-wife of Prince Andrew, partnered with the U.S.-based company then known as Weight Watchers as a spokesperson in 1997. The Sussexes, though, seem to be aiming to put a more glamorous and ambitious twist on the Fergie model.

After the arrival of their second child, a girl, later this year, Meghan will eventually resume some of her philanthropic work on behalf of women and girls. (A spokesperson for the couple declined to comment on the record for this article.) In March, Harry joined the nonprofit Aspen Institute’s Commission on Information Disorder, which will study misinformation and disinformation in the United States. He was also named chief impact officer at the San Francisco-based BetterUp, a tech start-up that partners with employers to offer coaching that promotes organizational harmony and growth. As soon as the latter announcement hit the Internet, the jokes about Harry’s new life as a tech bro began rolling in: “prince harry in a patagonia vest slamming drinks in the marina after his barry’s class WHEN,” asked one Twitter user. And certainly, “chief impact officer” is one of those titles that, true to Silicon Valley form, is just vague enough to suggest an amorphous-but-senior role and a hefty salary.

Divina Gamble, managing partner of the management-consulting firm Korn Ferry, noted that roles like these, often with “impact” in the title, have been growing in popularity in both the corporate and nonprofit worlds, and that they often have oversight of how the company promotes or maintains social responsibility.

For years, Silicon Valley companies have worked with celebrities in any form they can, often enjoying the free press it generates. Sometimes those partnerships consist of little more than the celebrity showing up, promoting the product and collecting a check: Justin Bieber, for example, “unveiled” a dancing robot called mRobo at the 2012 CES tech conference in Las Vegas.

Some celebrities, though, try to be more involved in the companies that pay them by accepting similarly amorphous-but-lofty titles like “creative director.” Everyone from Justin Timberlake (Bud Light Platinum) to Jay-Z (Puma Basketball) to Lady Gaga (Polaroid) has been a creative director.

While it’s common for companies to claim that their celebrity employees are doing real work and participating in developing the company’s strategy, it’s unclear how many are going into an office, looking at spreadsheets and chatting about their weekends in the kitchenette. BetterUp has stated that Harry will “expand on the work he’s been doing for years, as he educates and inspires our community and champions the importance of focusing on preventative mental fitness and human potential worldwide.” The company did not respond to a request for further specifics, and we may never know them. The Duke of Sussex does not appear likely to post his duties on LinkedIn — unlike other celebrities-as-brands, the Sussexes don’t have a social media presence, for now.

Still, Harry isn’t an entirely out-of-the-blue pick for the company. He’s been vocal about supporting mental health causes, one of the few remnants of his old life that has carried over into his new one. In 2016, alongside his brother, Prince William, and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, Harry led a U.K. campaign to end the stigma around mental health issues, called Heads Together; three years later, with Meghan on board, the same group promoted a mental health campaign called Every Mind Matters. Stateside, Harry is continuing work on a documentary series about mental health with Winfrey for Apple TV Plus. (First announced in 2019, the series was delayed by the couple’s move from the U.K. and then by covid-19.)

When the Duke of Windsor, former King Edward VIII, left the throne 85 years ago to marry Wallis Simpson, a divorcée and an American, their post-royal lifestyle was posh: The Duke wrote a memoir and served for five years as the governor of the Bahamas. “They lived luxuriously in the Bahamas and Paris, and always traveled as royal ‘guests,’ ” Kelley noted in an email. (That said, a 2018 biography of Simpson painted a picture of an unhappy union, and the Duke’s legacy has come under scrutiny for his apparent pro-Nazi sentiments.)

In their new life, Meghan and Harry may similarly enjoy some of the perks of still being blood relations of the royals. Unlike the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, who were known to host parties often, the Sussexes seem to crave a somewhat private home life.

Their chosen home of Montecito may be the perfect place to pursue it. In the quiet Santa Barbara-adjacent village, celebrities and moguls can count on being able to go about their business each day un-gawked-at and unapproached. “They’re left in peace, they raise their families … and just enjoy kind of an idyllic lifestyle” while sending their kids to “first-class, award-winning schools,” said Joy Bean, a Montecito-based real estate agent for Sotheby’s. “It’s far from the madding crowd, although we’re only 90 minutes from Los Angeles.”

Soon, the Sussexes may be just another hard-working, high-earning, southern California couple, trying to raise two little kids while balancing a tech job, a podcast, an assortment of philanthropic commitments and some projects with Netflix. You know — the American Dream.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, the irony!





TC1 said:


> Just a bit more of the "do as we say, not as we do" for the collection of preachy-bs



Not sure what you mean...everyone there was vaccinated and masked...what were they saying and not doing? 

I get that this is the anti H&M thread but does that mean trashing everything they are involved with no matter how noble the cause? Isn't that, dare I say, cancel culture?


----------



## Jayne1

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The pandemic may have benefited you (and a small number of others), but I promise you more people have suffered than have benefited from the pandemic. The amount of deaths (not just from covid itself, but secondary effects such as delayed cancer treatments and diagnosis, suicides from isolation which is never counted in official figures) is horrendous. Over half a million people (and counting) in the US have died from COVID.
> 
> The work from home thing would have happened eventually without covid, which in effect would mean more time with family and introverts get comfort. The flu has severely declined this year due to mask wearing and social distancing, but it dwarfs the amount of deaths caused by COVID.
> 
> People have lost homes, can't feed themselves or their families, lost income from businesses, retail decline and closing of stores, and thus jobs. COVID may have benefited those who have the ability to work from home and are introverted, but there are BILLIONS of people on this earth and they are still suffering from this disease. There have been more cases and deaths around the world in the last two weeks than in the first 6 months of the pandemic.
> 
> What about students and children? They are missing out on education (a lot of people in rural areas do not have access to internet or fast enough internet, or even electronics which we take for granted). There is also the social development that they miss out on.
> 
> Basically if you are rich or well off and comfortable then you would have seen no change or even benefited from this pandemic. And talking about how COVID benefited you can come across as insensitive and shortsighted.


This is so well written.

I know some have benefited, those with homes and those who can stay at home.  But as you said, delayed cancer treatments, delayed surgeries, small businesses going under, businesses that rely on tourism, hospitality and entertainment.  Is this the worst economic downturn since the Depression?

I just feel so bad for so many people.

On another note - Selena Gomez and Chrissy Teigen, both should shut up and go away for a very long while.


----------



## redney

"Typical American mega-celebrities" Ahh-hahahahahahahahhahahahahahaahhaahaa  In Sunshine Sachs' dreams


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> $13,500 for that ugly frock?!


Wasn't this wedding during the time when she claimed she was held prisoner by the BRF, taking away her keys and passport?


----------



## VickyB

LittleStar88 said:


> But she couldn’t be bothered with doing any research about the BRF or what she might expect when marrying in... She surely had her priorities in line.


I google a restaurant menu before I arrive.


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not sure what you mean...everyone there was vaccinated and masked...what were they saying and not doing?
> 
> I get that this is the anti H&M thread but does that mean trashing everything they are involved with no matter how noble the cause? Isn't that, dare I say, cancel culture?


Well, considering the CDC said "fully vaccinated" people may now walk OUTSIDE without masks, and the claim that vaccinated people can still transmit the virus to others, or still get the virus themselves, makes a bunch of "celebs" congregating to preach to idiots like me about the virus, a little ironic.

I have zero interest in cancel culture, but I also don't think MM or JCMH are any expert by any means to now teach the rest of us about the virus or getting vaccinated.  I find them, as usual, to be jumping on the bandwagon of the news du jour, and will likely forget all about COVID with their next endeavor.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Thanks for sharing this. This is exactly what I wanted to see.
> 
> One interesting comment from that page, that also relates to the big shoes topic! Now this makes sense! Too-big shoes could've been from her pre-royal days maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5073368


"_Harry's family must have hoped it was worth it to make him happy._"
The above sentence has crossed my mind a few times. I bet they have now many regrets.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> "Typical American mega-celebrities" Ahh-hahahahahahahahhahahahahahaahhaahaa  In Sunshine Sachs' dreams



Seriously, how many companies have extra millions to throw at these two?  I suppose we'll find out over the next few years.


----------



## A1aGypsy

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not sure what you mean...everyone there was vaccinated and masked...what were they saying and not doing?
> 
> I get that this is the anti H&M thread but does that mean trashing everything they are involved with no matter how noble the cause? Isn't that, dare I say, cancel culture?



only the audience had to be fully vaccinated. Media and production only had to show negative tests (which are unreliable). And talent weren’t masked.

I recognize that this is largely probably a regional view because the country I live in is far more conservative about COVID but to me, given that there are still concerns about transmission even after vaccination, it seems a bit reckless to throw a big in person event like that, in such circumstances, to convince people to be vaccinated.

It feels more like self promotion for a bunch of people who have been out of the limelight as opposed to actual charity.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Finally! Some Americans who only follow mainstream media are slowly catching on. The comments at the bottom of this _Washington Post_ article are leaning against Harry and Meghan, whereas even two months ago they would have been mostly positive. There are still a few fans fighting hard for their favorites but they are getting overwhelmed.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry are becoming your typical American mega-celebrities*
> In Montecito, Calif., a 9.3-square-mile coastal enclave nestled between the Santa Ynez mountains and the Pacific, where gray whales swim by the shoreline, avocado and citrus trees bear fruit nearly year-round and there’s nary a sidewalk in sight, multi-acre properties near the beach routinely sell for upward of $20 million. You can surf in the mornings and hike scenic foothill trails on weekend afternoons and look out for celebrities who live nearby, like Ellen DeGeneres, Oprah Winfrey, Adam Levine and Katy Perry.
> 
> Yes, the town has ample attractions to lure Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, into buying a $14.7 million home after “stepping back” from the royal family last year. But there’s another reason the location makes sense: The couple is modeling their new life together on those of the Oprahs and Ellens around them. Through various business moves, two new jobs for Harry and a PR-savvy, revelation-packed interview with Oprah herself earlier this spring, they are reinventing themselves as multihyphenate American celebrities, the kind who dabble in content, philanthropy, technology and a tasteful dash of politics.
> 
> Essentially, they are becoming a brand — and their unique royal sparkle would make them especially well positioned to leverage that brand across many different areas. That wasn’t an option for Harry’s great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, when he abdicated his position as king back in 1936. But whether this new form of fame will give the Sussexes a happier and more sustainable life remains to be seen.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan will be sought after socially in America and paid generously (some might say exorbitantly) for their celebrity value,” said Kitty Kelley, a biographer who’s written books about the Kennedy family, Winfrey and the British royal family, in an email. “Not even the biggest U.S. movie star or sports giant can claim Harry and Meghan’s link to the British monarchy.”
> 
> Still, the former actress and semi-prince are restyling themselves in the image of such stars and giants who start out in one field and then end up in all of them — performers like Dwayne Johnson and Jennifer Lopez, athletes like LeBron James and Serena Williams, models like Tyra Banks, chefs like Bobby Flay and, of course, political families, the most famous recipients of the “American royalty” moniker. Jacqueline Kennedy was known to use her celebrity for charitable causes; now the *******s are creating novels, podcasts and docuseries. Barack and Michelle ***** launched podcasts on Spotify (“The Michelle ***** Podcast” for her; “Renegades” with Bruce Springsteen for him) and partnered with Netflix to produce a slate of socially conscious movies and shows, such as the documentaries “American Factory” and “Crip Camp” and the cooking series “Waffles + Mochi.”
> 
> So by the time the Sussexes made their royal exit in 2020, the blueprint for what to do next was already there. Archewell Audio, the podcast they host and produce in partnership with Spotify, launched in December with an episode featuring reflections on the elapsed year from stars like Elton John, James Corden and Stacey Abrams. On April 6, the couple’s Archewell Productions announced the first project to come out of their multiyear deal with Netflix: “Heart of Invictus,” a docuseries about the Invictus Games, the international competition for athletes with disabilities that Harry founded in 2014.
> 
> Archewell, which also includes a foundation, states on its website that all of its endeavors aim to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” It’s named for the Greek word meaning “source of action,” which reportedly influenced the name of their son, Archie. Last week, it announced the couple would be co-chairs of a charity concert in May to help bring coronavirus vaccines to the world’s poorest countries.
> 
> Kelley noted that there’s some precedent for royals (or ex-royals) crossing the pond to make money: Sarah, the Duchess of York, the ex-wife of Prince Andrew, partnered with the U.S.-based company then known as Weight Watchers as a spokesperson in 1997. The Sussexes, though, seem to be aiming to put a more glamorous and ambitious twist on the Fergie model.
> 
> After the arrival of their second child, a girl, later this year, Meghan will eventually resume some of her philanthropic work on behalf of women and girls. (A spokesperson for the couple declined to comment on the record for this article.) In March, Harry joined the nonprofit Aspen Institute’s Commission on Information Disorder, which will study misinformation and disinformation in the United States. He was also named chief impact officer at the San Francisco-based BetterUp, a tech start-up that partners with employers to offer coaching that promotes organizational harmony and growth. As soon as the latter announcement hit the Internet, the jokes about Harry’s new life as a tech bro began rolling in: “prince harry in a patagonia vest slamming drinks in the marina after his barry’s class WHEN,” asked one Twitter user. And certainly, “chief impact officer” is one of those titles that, true to Silicon Valley form, is just vague enough to suggest an amorphous-but-senior role and a hefty salary.
> 
> Divina Gamble, managing partner of the management-consulting firm Korn Ferry, noted that roles like these, often with “impact” in the title, have been growing in popularity in both the corporate and nonprofit worlds, and that they often have oversight of how the company promotes or maintains social responsibility.
> 
> For years, Silicon Valley companies have worked with celebrities in any form they can, often enjoying the free press it generates. Sometimes those partnerships consist of little more than the celebrity showing up, promoting the product and collecting a check: Justin Bieber, for example, “unveiled” a dancing robot called mRobo at the 2012 CES tech conference in Las Vegas.
> 
> Some celebrities, though, try to be more involved in the companies that pay them by accepting similarly amorphous-but-lofty titles like “creative director.” Everyone from Justin Timberlake (Bud Light Platinum) to Jay-Z (Puma Basketball) to Lady Gaga (Polaroid) has been a creative director.
> 
> While it’s common for companies to claim that their celebrity employees are doing real work and participating in developing the company’s strategy, it’s unclear how many are going into an office, looking at spreadsheets and chatting about their weekends in the kitchenette. BetterUp has stated that Harry will “expand on the work he’s been doing for years, as he educates and inspires our community and champions the importance of focusing on preventative mental fitness and human potential worldwide.” The company did not respond to a request for further specifics, and we may never know them. The Duke of Sussex does not appear likely to post his duties on LinkedIn — unlike other celebrities-as-brands, the Sussexes don’t have a social media presence, for now.
> 
> Still, Harry isn’t an entirely out-of-the-blue pick for the company. He’s been vocal about supporting mental health causes, one of the few remnants of his old life that has carried over into his new one. In 2016, alongside his brother, Prince William, and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, Harry led a U.K. campaign to end the stigma around mental health issues, called Heads Together; three years later, with Meghan on board, the same group promoted a mental health campaign called Every Mind Matters. Stateside, Harry is continuing work on a documentary series about mental health with Winfrey for Apple TV Plus. (First announced in 2019, the series was delayed by the couple’s move from the U.K. and then by covid-19.)
> 
> When the Duke of Windsor, former King Edward VIII, left the throne 85 years ago to marry Wallis Simpson, a divorcée and an American, their post-royal lifestyle was posh: The Duke wrote a memoir and served for five years as the governor of the Bahamas. “They lived luxuriously in the Bahamas and Paris, and always traveled as royal ‘guests,’ ” Kelley noted in an email. (That said, a 2018 biography of Simpson painted a picture of an unhappy union, and the Duke’s legacy has come under scrutiny for his apparent pro-Nazi sentiments.)
> 
> In their new life, Meghan and Harry may similarly enjoy some of the perks of still being blood relations of the royals. Unlike the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, who were known to host parties often, the Sussexes seem to crave a somewhat private home life.
> 
> Their chosen home of Montecito may be the perfect place to pursue it. In the quiet Santa Barbara-adjacent village, celebrities and moguls can count on being able to go about their business each day un-gawked-at and unapproached. “They’re left in peace, they raise their families … and just enjoy kind of an idyllic lifestyle” while sending their kids to “first-class, award-winning schools,” said Joy Bean, a Montecito-based real estate agent for Sotheby’s. “It’s far from the madding crowd, although we’re only 90 minutes from Los Angeles.”
> 
> Soon, the Sussexes may be just another hard-working, high-earning, southern California couple, trying to raise two little kids while balancing a tech job, a podcast, an assortment of philanthropic commitments and some projects with Netflix. You know — the American Dream.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/


“Mega celebrities” are we sure this isn’t a feed from sunshine sack-me? 


OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not sure what you mean...everyone there was vaccinated and masked...what were they saying and not doing?
> 
> I get that this is the anti H&M thread but does that mean trashing everything they are involved with no matter how noble the cause? Isn't that, dare I say, cancel culture?


I don’t think so. Questioning the efficacy (and arguably in this current situation safety) of these ‘live-8’ style awareness concerts is perfectly legitimate question that in no way demeans the validity of the cause they support.

 There’s also nothing wrong with asking a charity where the money is going and what proportion of it goes to the cause versus the other expenses. The same could be said for publicity for the cause over publicity for the celeb supporter.
 I, for one, feel I am hearing an awful lot about these celebrities and very little about what the charity’s actual plan is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

purseinsanity said:


> Well, considering the CDC said "fully vaccinated" people may now walk OUTSIDE without masks, and the claim that vaccinated people can still transmit the virus to others, or still get the virus themselves, makes a bunch of "celebs" congregating to preach to idiots like me about the virus, a little ironic.
> 
> I have zero interest in cancel culture, but I also don't think MM or JCMH are any expert by any means to now teach the rest of us about the virus or getting vaccinated.  I find them, as usual, to be jumping on the bandwagon of the news du jour, and will likely forget all about COVID with their next endeavor.



The CDC literally said vaccinated people can congregate with masks on (see "full capacity worship service"): 



			https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/pdfs/choosingSaferActivities.pdf


----------



## purseinsanity

OogleAtLuxury said:


> The CDC literally said vaccinated people can congregate with masks on (see "full capacity worship service"):
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/pdfs/choosingSaferActivities.pdf


From the pictures I saw, it didn't look like everyone was wearing masks to me.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

purseinsanity said:


> From the pictures I saw, it didn't look like everyone was wearing masks to me.



Can you post the picture you saw?


----------



## purseinsanity

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Can you post the picture you saw?


Here's one.  You can google if you want more.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Just received the following awards from the Press Club honouring the
Royal Correspondents, who have been earlier missed. Apologies for the delay and congratulations!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> Well, considering the CDC said "fully vaccinated" people may now walk OUTSIDE without masks, and the claim that vaccinated people can still transmit the virus to others, or still get the virus themselves, makes a bunch of "celebs" congregating to preach to idiots like me about the virus, a little ironic.
> 
> I have zero interest in cancel culture, but I also don't think MM or JCMH are any expert by any means to now teach the rest of us about the virus or getting vaccinated.  I find them, as usual, to be jumping on the bandwagon of the news du jour, and will likely forget all about COVID with their next endeavor.





A1aGypsy said:


> only the audience had to be fully vaccinated. Media and production only had to show negative tests (which are unreliable). And talent weren’t masked.
> 
> I recognize that this is largely probably a regional view because the country I live in is far more conservative about COVID but to me, given that there are still concerns about transmission even after vaccination, it seems a bit reckless to throw a big in person event like that, in such circumstances, to convince people to be vaccinated.
> 
> It feels more like self promotion for a bunch of people who have been out of the limelight as opposed to actual charity.



They had a concert for frontline workers who certainly deserve to feel celebrated and special. And they are trying to raise awareness and funds for global vaccines.  

I've been vaccinated and still double mask pretty much everywhere I go but I'm not insulted if someone (even a celeb who I don't like) wants to remind everyone to stay safe and take precautions.

I guess I just don't take this stuff personally


----------



## VickyB

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just received the following awards from the Press Club honouring the
> Royal Correspondents, who have been earlier missed. Apologies for the delay and congratulations!
> 
> View attachment 5073465
> View attachment 5073460
> View attachment 5073461
> View attachment 5073462
> View attachment 5073463
> View attachment 5073469
> 
> View attachment 5073468
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073464
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073466


Thanks so very much!!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> If you read the link you'll see they specifically stated they weren't crowded?


What does this look like to you?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937





Maggie Muggins said:


> Just received the following awards from the Press Club honouring the
> Royal Correspondents, who have been earlier missed. Apologies for the delay and congratulations!
> 
> View attachment 5073465
> View attachment 5073460
> View attachment 5073461
> View attachment 5073462
> View attachment 5073463
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073464
> View attachment 5073466




*waves frantically*

I.....I...I'm not just a mod to you am I?  *sob


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> What does this look like to you?
> 
> View attachment 5073490



These photos stress me out LOL


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> Here's one.  You can google if you want more.



That's really a shame because attendees were told they had to wear masks. I guess that explains why it's so important for everyone...celebrities, politicians, all of us...to talk about the importance of keeping ourselves and others safe. 

Luckily it seems the other photos from the article show masked audience members so hoping that most everyone else followed the rules. 









						Prince Harry gets standing ovation at Vax Live charity concert in LA
					

Prince Harry was among many high profile stars - including Jennifer Lopez and Selena Gomez - to take the stage at Sunday night's concert taping at the So-Fi Stadium in Inglewood.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> These photos stress me out LOL


They are definitely not as separated as they should be vaccinated or not.

Two things.  The people were standing and not seated. The ovation, if that is what it should be called was from people who didn't have seats.  Los Angeles  audiences are also known for giving a standing ovation to the opening of a door.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> It feels more like self promotion for a bunch of people who have been out of the limelight as opposed to actual charity.


These celebrities need the attention like they need air to breathe.  So yeah, that's how I feel.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I loved this dress, personally. But $75K, wow. It's interesting to see it on the runway... it looks so red carpet, a bit "much" for an engagement shoot but hey I guess she had the money.
> 
> I REALLY hope she recycles this one, if it was not loaned (they can't even loan right?). That would be a huge waste if not.



I agree, I loved the dress but thought it was OTT for an engagement photo and too hollywood which is ironic since she never was 'hollywood'. She could wear it to a red carpet event when they start again but I doubt she as designers will give her clothes to promote their brand, as is usual for those type of events.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> What does this look like to you?
> 
> View attachment 5073490



Looks like really happy registered nurses to me. God bless them.   



LittleStar88 said:


> These photos stress me out LOL



Lol me too...I wouldn't have gone but I won't criticize any front line workers who did. I stayed home while they were heroes, not my place to criticize them now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> These celebrities need the attention like they need air to breathe.  So yeah, that's how I feel.


The celebs were let out of their Covid cage and couldn't wait to display themselves.  Frankly, what they usually have to say is not worth listening to.


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Looks like really happy registered nurses to me. God bless them.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol me too...I wouldn't have gone but I won't criticize any front line workers who did. I stayed home while they were heroes, not my place to criticize them now.


Yes they are happy and I am very glad of it, but they were standing too close together.


----------



## A1aGypsy

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They had a concert for frontline workers who certainly deserve to feel celebrated and special. And they are trying to raise awareness and funds for global vaccines.
> 
> I've been vaccinated and still double mask pretty much everywhere I go but I'm not insulted if someone (even a celeb who I don't like) wants to remind everyone to stay safe and take precautions.
> 
> I guess I just don't take this stuff personally



Oh come now. I’m fairly certain I didn’t say I was insulted. And this has nothing (for me) to do with MM’s involvement.

And maybe it is personal. I’m currently sitting in a lockdown with a stay at home order because of numbers. Everything but essentials is shuttered. COVID transmission impacts everyone and the more it spreads (via events such as this) the longer it will take to eradicate.

They (the organizers) can remind people to vaccinate til the cows come home, I think it is a great message. I just don’t think they should have done it live and put people at risk to spread the message (or, in my more cynical mind, so people like Jennifer Lopez can have a forum to perform).


----------



## LittleStar88

Awwww... I just realized that the whole Global Citizen Vax Live - crowd gave standing ovation to Harry...

He just wants to be loved and popular, guys! Like, not SIXTH IN LINE, not THIRD WHEEL, but NUMBER ONE!!!1111!! That's what's he's in it for


----------



## csshopper

A1aGypsy said:


> only the audience had to be fully vaccinated. Media and production only had to show negative tests (which are unreliable). And talent weren’t masked.
> 
> I recognize that this is largely probably a regional view because the country I live in is far more conservative about COVID but to me, given that there are still concerns about transmission even after vaccination, it seems a bit reckless to throw a big in person event like that, in such circumstances, to convince people to be vaccinated.
> 
> It feels more like self promotion for a bunch of people who have been out of the limelight as opposed to actual charity.


YES! You said it best: It feels more like self promotion for a bunch of people who have been out of the limelight as opposed to actual charity.

Varied celebrities with time on their hands and trying to jump start getting back on the concert circuit, making films, doing TV. For a segment of the population, they may have made an impact, if so, good. But with the Grifters as Headliners, it screams self-promotion and, even if his wife was a no show, Harry was in it for the Sussex brand. I believe they were the last named to the line up so it must have taken their PR team some time to get them included. I think originally it was billed with Serena and JLo.


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They had a concert for frontline workers who certainly deserve to feel celebrated and special. And they are trying to raise awareness and funds for global vaccines.
> 
> I've been vaccinated and still double mask pretty much everywhere I go but I'm not insulted if someone (even a celeb who I don't like) wants to remind everyone to stay safe and take precautions.
> 
> I guess I just don't take this stuff personally


I'm not taking it personally.  I am at the point that to each his or her own.  If one is scared of COVID and wants to be locked up forever, go right ahead.  If someone is comfortable masking and going out to eat, go right ahead.  However, I do find people who are not experts on a topic (really anything in the case of MM and JCMH, IMO) preaching about things that some of us are actually educated in, preposterous.  I am not telling anyone to hate MM or JCMH or to "cancel" them by any means, but I am also not going to promote their self righteous PR.


----------



## LittleStar88

A1aGypsy said:


> Oh come now. I’m fairly certain I didn’t say I was insulted. And this has nothing (for me) to do with MM’s involvement.
> 
> And maybe it is personal. I’m currently sitting in a lockdown with a stay at home order because of numbers. Everything but essentials is shuttered. COVID transmission impacts everyone and the more it spreads (via events such as this) the longer it will take to eradicate.
> 
> They (the organizers) can remind people to vaccinate til the cows come home, I think it is a great message. I just don’t think they should have done it live and put people at risk to spread the message (or, in my more cynical mind, so people like Jennifer Lopez can have a forum to perform).



Since it appeared that A LOT of the "talent" were over the age of 50, I am guessing they all got vaxxed already


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937



Clearly you did much more research than Meghan did before she married into the BRF. She couldn't be bothered since she had more important business such as clawing her way and manipulating everyone she could to nail Harry ASAP  but now I think she will be doing a heckuva lot of research on Bill Gates now that he's back on the market   . Luckily there are many royal watchers who can keep tabs.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> “Mega celebrities” are we sure this isn’t a feed from sunshine sack-me?



It was written by two entertainment writers, their ages fit right into the Meghan demographic. They may have once been stans. While they still like H&M in sounds like the bloom is off the rose. The people commenting are better. They are definitely over H&M.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> Yes they are happy and I am very glad of it, but they were standing too close together.



I'm guessing they had people who work together sitting together since they mentioned separate areas for groups but we can agree to disagree. These people are heroes and I just can't criticize them now.



A1aGypsy said:


> Oh come now. I’m fairly certain I didn’t say I was insulted. And this has nothing (for me) to do with MM’s involvement.
> 
> And maybe it is personal. I’m currently sitting in a lockdown with a stay at home order because of numbers. Everything but essentials is shuttered. COVID transmission impacts everyone and the more it spreads (via events such as this) the longer it will take to eradicate.
> 
> They (the organizers) can remind people to vaccinate til the cows come home, I think it is a great message. I just don’t think they should have done it live and put people at risk to spread the message (or, in my more cynical mind, so people like Jennifer Lopez can have a forum to perform).



I get it, and I'm really lucky that I live in an area where everyone is still super careful, when I see stories about anti maskers or anti vaxers it makes me crazy.  I'm really sorry


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937




I feel so honoured!


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> And maybe it is personal. I’m currently sitting in a lockdown with a stay at home order because of numbers. Everything but essentials is shuttered. COVID transmission impacts everyone and the more it spreads (via events such as this) the longer it will take to eradicate.


Are you in Toronto?  Or somewhere in Ontario?  Because I'm starting to feel sorry for myself with the rest of the world getting back to normal.  lol


----------



## A1aGypsy

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I get it, and I'm really lucky that I live in an area where everyone is still super careful, when I see stories about anti maskers or anti vaxers it makes me crazy.  I'm really sorry



Thank you. I hate it when I feel like I am not articulating myself well.




@jayne01 me too!


----------



## Chanbal

There is hope$$$$ for Harry's wife to become the next Mrs Gates! Sunshine S would likely be happy$$$$! As they say, there is always a silver lining in any gloomy situation!


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> Someone mentioned several pages back that Harry’s wife wears her shoes in a size bigger than she would normally wear.  I’ve read other people do this too.  What I really want to know is how the heck do they stay on your feet then?  Sometimes even wearing my normal size, pumps will fly off my feet when I walk.


There are orthotics, heel pads that fill in the gap, bunion pads etc 
They won’t fit with your regular size heels 
kind of the same issue with fluffy socks, you need a bigger shoe


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Clearly you did much more research than Meghan did before she married into the BRF. She couldn't be bothered since she had more important business such as clawing her way and manipulating everyone she could to nail Harry ASAP  but now I think she will be doing a heckuva lot of research on Bill Gates now that he's back on the market  . Luckily there are many royal watchers who can keep tabs.


Thank you very much. Hopefully Bill Gates isn't morally, emotionally, intellectually and factually deficient like Harry's wife.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> "_Harry's family must have hoped it was worth it to make him happy._"
> The above sentence has crossed my mind a few times. I bet they have now many regrets.



I don't think "regret" even begins to capture it.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> It could explain why she is desperately grasping at H.  If those shoes don’t fit, she knows she easily fall, especially on the stairs.


Found this on line,  have to say it sounds miserably uncomfortable to me, but I haven't worn heels in years.

"Celebrities often have to wear high heels for hours on end and there’s nothing glamorous about swollen, painful feet – hence wearing shoes that are at least one size too big for them.

Apparently, larger-sized heels won’t rub or pinch and the shoes are kept from slipping off the feet by stylists inserting silicone pads or double-sided tape inside the pumps."


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> She seems to love these sheer dresses, $75,000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the stunning, $75,000 dress Meghan Markle wore in her official engagement photos
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore a modern, couture dress from Ralph & Russo in her recent engagement photos with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



$75k dress? Geez. She has the nerve to talk about helping people who are less fortunate?


----------



## lalame

General question... do celebrities REALLY pay the retail price for designer outfits like that? I'm not talking about when it's comped, but when they actually have to buy it. Maybe it's just a different stratosphere of wealth that I can't fathom but how does anyone feel at ease paying even $7k for a one-time wear garment much less $75k?


----------



## xeyes

Chanbal said:


> There is hope$$$$ for Harry's wife to become the next Mrs Gates! Sunshine S would likely be happy$$$$! As they say, there is always a silver lining in any gloomy situation!
> View attachment 5073499



I’m not holding my breath for it to happen, and there would be a lot of damage done all around, but I gotta admit that it could be a fun trainwreck to watch if she tried.


----------



## Hermes Zen

OMGOSH, now M has a chance with billionaire B Gates!  Did you hear??  I'm sad !!  



> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/business/bill-melinda-gates-divorce.html
> 
> *Bill and Melinda Gates Are Divorcing After 27 Years of Marriage*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm guessing they had people who work together sitting together since they mentioned separate areas for groups but we can agree to disagree. These people are heroes and I just can't criticize them now.



I don't think anyone was criticizing the people who got invited, but the people who invited them and didn't make sure there was space between them. At least that was my take.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Are you in Toronto?  Or somewhere in Ontario?  Because I'm starting to feel sorry for myself with the rest of the world getting back to normal.  lol


 
You are not alone. Germany is still in semi-lockdown. I can't remember the last time I went anywhere but the supermarket. Oh wait, my elderly grandmother's birthday where we had to schedule 45 minute slots so everyone could congratulate her, with masks on obviously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> There is hope$$$$ for Harry's wife to become the next Mrs Gates! Sunshine S would likely be happy$$$$! As they say, there is always a silver lining in any gloomy situation!
> View attachment 5073499



I just read that, but I feel Duchess Disney might not be his type.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> General question... do celebrities REALLY pay the retail price for designer outfits like that? I'm not talking about when it's comped, but when they actually have to buy it. Maybe it's just a different stratosphere of wealth that I can't fathom but how does anyone feel at ease paying even $7k for a one-time wear garment much less $75k?



The only people that could justify such an expensive dress would be a billionaire. Millionaires would not spend that much on a dress (which is most celebs). They would either get them discounted or free (in return for publicity). After all there is a reason why these people are wealthy, they know how to make invest but also know how to spend. 

The royal family however will always pay full price for clothes, they don't accept discounts as well as gifts.


----------



## caramelize126

bag-mania said:


> Finally! Some Americans who only follow mainstream media are slowly catching on. The comments at the bottom of this _Washington Post_ article are leaning against Harry and Meghan, whereas even two months ago they would have been mostly positive. There are still a few fans fighting hard for their favorites but they are getting overwhelmed.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry are becoming your typical American mega-celebrities*
> In Montecito, Calif., a 9.3-square-mile coastal enclave nestled between the Santa Ynez mountains and the Pacific, where gray whales swim by the shoreline, avocado and citrus trees bear fruit nearly year-round and there’s nary a sidewalk in sight, multi-acre properties near the beach routinely sell for upward of $20 million. You can surf in the mornings and hike scenic foothill trails on weekend afternoons and look out for celebrities who live nearby, like Ellen DeGeneres, Oprah Winfrey, Adam Levine and Katy Perry.
> 
> Yes, the town has ample attractions to lure Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, into buying a $14.7 million home after “stepping back” from the royal family last year. But there’s another reason the location makes sense: The couple is modeling their new life together on those of the Oprahs and Ellens around them. Through various business moves, two new jobs for Harry and a PR-savvy, revelation-packed interview with Oprah herself earlier this spring, they are reinventing themselves as multihyphenate American celebrities, the kind who dabble in content, philanthropy, technology and a tasteful dash of politics.
> 
> Essentially, they are becoming a brand — and their unique royal sparkle would make them especially well positioned to leverage that brand across many different areas. That wasn’t an option for Harry’s great-great uncle, the Duke of Windsor, when he abdicated his position as king back in 1936. But whether this new form of fame will give the Sussexes a happier and more sustainable life remains to be seen.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan will be sought after socially in America and paid generously (some might say exorbitantly) for their celebrity value,” said Kitty Kelley, a biographer who’s written books about the Kennedy family, Winfrey and the British royal family, in an email. “Not even the biggest U.S. movie star or sports giant can claim Harry and Meghan’s link to the British monarchy.”
> 
> Still, the former actress and semi-prince are restyling themselves in the image of such stars and giants who start out in one field and then end up in all of them — performers like Dwayne Johnson and Jennifer Lopez, athletes like LeBron James and Serena Williams, models like Tyra Banks, chefs like Bobby Flay and, of course, political families, the most famous recipients of the “American royalty” moniker. Jacqueline Kennedy was known to use her celebrity for charitable causes; now the *******s are creating novels, podcasts and docuseries. Barack and Michelle ***** launched podcasts on Spotify (“The Michelle ***** Podcast” for her; “Renegades” with Bruce Springsteen for him) and partnered with Netflix to produce a slate of socially conscious movies and shows, such as the documentaries “American Factory” and “Crip Camp” and the cooking series “Waffles + Mochi.”
> 
> So by the time the Sussexes made their royal exit in 2020, the blueprint for what to do next was already there. Archewell Audio, the podcast they host and produce in partnership with Spotify, launched in December with an episode featuring reflections on the elapsed year from stars like Elton John, James Corden and Stacey Abrams. On April 6, the couple’s Archewell Productions announced the first project to come out of their multiyear deal with Netflix: “Heart of Invictus,” a docuseries about the Invictus Games, the international competition for athletes with disabilities that Harry founded in 2014.
> 
> Archewell, which also includes a foundation, states on its website that all of its endeavors aim to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” It’s named for the Greek word meaning “source of action,” which reportedly influenced the name of their son, Archie. Last week, it announced the couple would be co-chairs of a charity concert in May to help bring coronavirus vaccines to the world’s poorest countries.
> 
> Kelley noted that there’s some precedent for royals (or ex-royals) crossing the pond to make money: Sarah, the Duchess of York, the ex-wife of Prince Andrew, partnered with the U.S.-based company then known as Weight Watchers as a spokesperson in 1997. The Sussexes, though, seem to be aiming to put a more glamorous and ambitious twist on the Fergie model.
> 
> After the arrival of their second child, a girl, later this year, Meghan will eventually resume some of her philanthropic work on behalf of women and girls. (A spokesperson for the couple declined to comment on the record for this article.) In March, Harry joined the nonprofit Aspen Institute’s Commission on Information Disorder, which will study misinformation and disinformation in the United States. He was also named chief impact officer at the San Francisco-based BetterUp, a tech start-up that partners with employers to offer coaching that promotes organizational harmony and growth. As soon as the latter announcement hit the Internet, the jokes about Harry’s new life as a tech bro began rolling in: “prince harry in a patagonia vest slamming drinks in the marina after his barry’s class WHEN,” asked one Twitter user. And certainly, “chief impact officer” is one of those titles that, true to Silicon Valley form, is just vague enough to suggest an amorphous-but-senior role and a hefty salary.
> 
> Divina Gamble, managing partner of the management-consulting firm Korn Ferry, noted that roles like these, often with “impact” in the title, have been growing in popularity in both the corporate and nonprofit worlds, and that they often have oversight of how the company promotes or maintains social responsibility.
> 
> For years, Silicon Valley companies have worked with celebrities in any form they can, often enjoying the free press it generates. Sometimes those partnerships consist of little more than the celebrity showing up, promoting the product and collecting a check: Justin Bieber, for example, “unveiled” a dancing robot called mRobo at the 2012 CES tech conference in Las Vegas.
> 
> Some celebrities, though, try to be more involved in the companies that pay them by accepting similarly amorphous-but-lofty titles like “creative director.” Everyone from Justin Timberlake (Bud Light Platinum) to Jay-Z (Puma Basketball) to Lady Gaga (Polaroid) has been a creative director.
> 
> While it’s common for companies to claim that their celebrity employees are doing real work and participating in developing the company’s strategy, it’s unclear how many are going into an office, looking at spreadsheets and chatting about their weekends in the kitchenette. BetterUp has stated that Harry will “expand on the work he’s been doing for years, as he educates and inspires our community and champions the importance of focusing on preventative mental fitness and human potential worldwide.” The company did not respond to a request for further specifics, and we may never know them. The Duke of Sussex does not appear likely to post his duties on LinkedIn — unlike other celebrities-as-brands, the Sussexes don’t have a social media presence, for now.
> 
> Still, Harry isn’t an entirely out-of-the-blue pick for the company. He’s been vocal about supporting mental health causes, one of the few remnants of his old life that has carried over into his new one. In 2016, alongside his brother, Prince William, and Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, Harry led a U.K. campaign to end the stigma around mental health issues, called Heads Together; three years later, with Meghan on board, the same group promoted a mental health campaign called Every Mind Matters. Stateside, Harry is continuing work on a documentary series about mental health with Winfrey for Apple TV Plus. (First announced in 2019, the series was delayed by the couple’s move from the U.K. and then by covid-19.)
> 
> When the Duke of Windsor, former King Edward VIII, left the throne 85 years ago to marry Wallis Simpson, a divorcée and an American, their post-royal lifestyle was posh: The Duke wrote a memoir and served for five years as the governor of the Bahamas. “They lived luxuriously in the Bahamas and Paris, and always traveled as royal ‘guests,’ ” Kelley noted in an email. (That said, a 2018 biography of Simpson painted a picture of an unhappy union, and the Duke’s legacy has come under scrutiny for his apparent pro-Nazi sentiments.)
> 
> In their new life, Meghan and Harry may similarly enjoy some of the perks of still being blood relations of the royals. Unlike the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, who were known to host parties often, the Sussexes seem to crave a somewhat private home life.
> 
> Their chosen home of Montecito may be the perfect place to pursue it. In the quiet Santa Barbara-adjacent village, celebrities and moguls can count on being able to go about their business each day un-gawked-at and unapproached. “They’re left in peace, they raise their families … and just enjoy kind of an idyllic lifestyle” while sending their kids to “first-class, award-winning schools,” said Joy Bean, a Montecito-based real estate agent for Sotheby’s. “It’s far from the madding crowd, although we’re only 90 minutes from Los Angeles.”
> 
> Soon, the Sussexes may be just another hard-working, high-earning, southern California couple, trying to raise two little kids while balancing a tech job, a podcast, an assortment of philanthropic commitments and some projects with Netflix. You know — the American Dream.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/



Sunshine sachs is really hustling. I just checked and the comments now are overwhelmingly negative. I wonder if the positive comments are PR/paid?


----------



## Aimee3

I bought these clear silicone things that were similar to rubber bands but being clear really didn’t show that you slipped over your foot and under the pumps to keep the high heels on my feet for a formal event.  We were being photographed and luckily holding on to the person next to us, when photographer said “move a little bit to the left”. Well there was a defect in the flooring, my heel was stuck in this tiny hole, I was moving but the shoe was not.  The silicone bands were holding my foot in the unmoving shoe and I toppled.  I’m really lucky I didn’t break my foot since my foot went sideways and the shoe did not!


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not sure what you mean...everyone there was vaccinated and masked...what were they saying and not doing?
> 
> I get that this is the anti H&M thread but does that mean trashing everything they are involved with no matter how noble the cause? Isn't that, dare I say, cancel culture?



How noble is this cause?
My understanding, which could be wrong, is this was a *show* for healthcare workers. Who at this show would have the means to send vaccines to the countries that need it?  We lil people cannot mail vaccines, can we?  
Where o where are the billionaires, the powers-that be?  It is all smoke and mirrors designed to fool the masses. Is it really a standing ovation if people are told to stand up?  Really pretentious of Hazzie to use full title, no? 
So, again, please tell me how noble is this cause?


ETA: Bill and Melinda are divorcing ????


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CobaltBlu said:


> *waves frantically*
> 
> I.....I...I'm not just a mod to you am I?  *sob


Of course not. Hmm, the Press Club saved your award for last as in the best for last.  
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
  Congratulations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I've noticed this too with many celebs and wondered the same! My theory.... comfort could be it but maybe they're borrowed items from a stylist/brand or they plan to sell/donate them after wear and want to limit the amount of damage to the shoes. When you wear shoes that are too big, they tend to crease less at the toe and have less wear to the back obviously.


The MM shoe article claimed that it was a hack that she learnt from all those red carpet events she attended: by wearing a size or two larger, her feet may swell from standing a long time but she will still be comfortable. I too wondered how she managed to keep the shoes on her feet. Super glue?

Also, are all those favourite brand Aquazzura shoes a side deal too? Does she re-use them? They don't come cheap. Despite her claim to be a self-made millionaire before she met H, I can't see her shelling out for new shoes all the time.


----------



## octopus17

jelliedfeels said:


> I remember trying to wear my mum’s heels when I was a broke teen and she’s a size bigger than me. I’d stumble so much in them that one of my friends accused me of secretly pre-drinking to
> avoid sharing my precious booze.
> I finally realised that it was a pretty stupid scheme.


I have a hard time walking in any kind of heels even now and I'm in my late fifties. I look better in them than flats, but OMG, there's nothing on this this earth that would make me wear them for over a couple of hours max and there would have to be a darn good reason even then.... But holy mackerel, wearing a size bigger.... I'd be on my a**. If Meghan can actually do it, regardless of reason, I take my hat off to her tbh, but maybe she's a bit more driven than I ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Almost sold out!
Yes, yes, I know this is not the OdlR worn by MM and others.  It is a much cheaper option.  Oscar’s comes in several different styles, too.








						La Piazzetta Dress
					

Il Dolce Far Niente. Upon your return, they will surely ask you what you were doing in Italy.You will probably just shrug and say, “Niente.”Nothing.Sure, for nearly three months you roamed up and down the boot from Trentino-Alto Adige where the streets have German names to the piazzetta on Capri...




					jpeterman.com
				





Oscar’s




ETA:  LOL, side-by-side they look nothing alike, still lemons are lemons, right?


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost sold out!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> La Piazzetta Dress
> 
> 
> Il Dolce Far Niente. Upon your return, they will surely ask you what you were doing in Italy.You will probably just shrug and say, “Niente.”Nothing.Sure, for nearly three months you roamed up and down the boot from Trentino-Alto Adige where the streets have German names to the piazzetta on Capri...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jpeterman.com


Different dress. The lemon print dress Harry's wife (and the U.S. First Lady) wore was by Oscar de la Renta.

ETA just saw your edit with the OdlR dress.


----------



## Icyjade

Kate apparently wears non-slip tights - that’s a royal styling tip! 

Need to live up to my royal correspondent title... thanks @Maggie Muggins 









						Kate Middleton tights: brands of hosiery duchess Kate wears
					

Ever wondered about Kate Middleton's tights? What brand of hosiery does Duchess Kate wear? Find out in this blog post: we think we know her hose!




					katemiddletonstyle.org


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The only people that could justify such an expensive dress would be a billionaire. Millionaires would not spend that much on a dress (which is most celebs). They would either get them discounted or free (in return for publicity). After all there is a reason why these people are wealthy, they know how to make invest but also know how to spend.
> 
> The royal family however will always pay full price for clothes, they don't accept discounts as well as gifts.



Billionaires... or rappers.  I JUST watched a video where someone asks Drake how much his outfit cost and the entire look head to toe was $975K!  He can definitely afford it though.

In case anyone's curious about Drake's outfit:


----------



## rose60610

It's possible Meghan is studying up on Bill Gates   wondering how she can muscle into his orbit. Omid really isn't up to the task. My impression is that Gates doesn't suffer fools, and wouldn't take 15 seconds worth of Meghan's word salad.  Gates' security would have her hauled off as she screeches "Aren't you going to ask me if I'm OK?!"


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You are not alone. Germany is still in semi-lockdown. I can't remember the last time I went anywhere but the supermarket. Oh wait, my elderly grandmother's birthday where we had to schedule 45 minute slots so everyone could congratulate her, with masks on obviously.


We can’t even do that. Not even to attend a funeral. It’s been almost a full year although things loosened up a bit last summer.

Oh well, things will get better soon.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> How noble is this cause?
> My understanding, which could be wrong, is this was a *show* for healthcare workers. Who at this show would have the means to send vaccines to the countries that need it?  We lil people cannot mail vaccines, can we?
> Where o where are the billionaires, the powers-that be?  It is all smoke and mirrors designed to fool the masses. Is it really a standing ovation if people are told to stand up?  Really pretentious of Hazzie to use full title, no?
> So, again, please tell me how noble is this cause?
> 
> 
> ETA: Bill and Melinda are divorcing ????



As I posted earlier they have raised $53.8 million so far for 10 million vaccine doses and PPE.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost sold out!
> Yes, yes, I know this is not the OdlR worn by MM and others.  It is a much cheaper option.  Oscar’s comes in several different styles, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> La Piazzetta Dress
> 
> 
> Il Dolce Far Niente. Upon your return, they will surely ask you what you were doing in Italy.You will probably just shrug and say, “Niente.”Nothing.Sure, for nearly three months you roamed up and down the boot from Trentino-Alto Adige where the streets have German names to the piazzetta on Capri...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jpeterman.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oscar’s
> 
> View attachment 5073620
> 
> 
> ETA:  LOL, side-by-side they look nothing alike, still lemons are lemons, right?


I'll pass on the lemons!


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Here's one.  You can google if you want more.


WOW, that's a lot of people. Even if most were vaccinated, they all still need to be careful. We've all heard this. I want to share ... Just this past week I heard from two friends from two different parts on the east coast (USA).  Both had their covid shots beginning of the year. One passed away last week.  The other friend is still struggling to recover but hopefully will in a few months or will have issues for the rest of his life. Where I'm at we are rolling back a phase because of the spike in covid cases. Personally, take it or leave it, think this event should have been totally done virtually or at least without an audience.

I just got my second shot over the weekend and I won't be going out even after two week waiting period from now.  Call me a scaredy cat but this is serious s**t!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just received the following awards from the Press Club honouring the
> Royal Correspondents, who have been earlier missed. Apologies for the delay and congratulations!
> 
> View attachment 5073465
> View attachment 5073460
> View attachment 5073461
> View attachment 5073462
> View attachment 5073463
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073464
> View attachment 5073466


YOU ARE THE BEST Maggie Muggins!  Love yah!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> As I posted earlier they have raised $53.8 million so far for 10 million vaccine doses and PPE.



Sounds good. They still need a bit more.
If GloCitizen does indeed vaccinate the world by the end of the year, then it is a good cause. IMO all of these billionaires and foundations took their time to step up. Many deaths could have been avoided.  _Noble_ would have been to have it done by March of this year. _Really noble / hero status _would be to have contributed the money, set up the supply lines, etc., last year.
Just my opinion, ymmv.


ETA: GloCit’s numbers are pledges. Will be interesting if the pledged amounts actually are delivered.  Many times in these type of shows the money never shows up. Waiting to see receipts on H&M’s donations.









						'VAX LIVE' Surpasses Campaign Goal With More Than 10 Million COVID-19 Vaccine Doses Pledged
					

The actions of Global Citizens have rapidly mobilized over 10 million COVID-19 doses only a week out from the ‘VAX LIVE’ broadcast on May 8.




					www.globalcitizen.org
				



_COVAX aimse of  to deliver 2 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses by the end of 2021 to end the acute phase of the pandemic, and unless more than half of the world’s population is immunized, an end to the pandemic is nowhere in sight.

The commitments announced on Sunday include $39.5 million toward COVAX AMC. Gavi, as part of Gavi’s Matching Funds Mechanism, has agreed to financially match pledges to at least US $11.75 million, for a total contribution of $51.25 million.

The May 8 broadcast will feature commitments from a number of philanthropic and private sector partners including Mastercard, Cisco, Procter & Gamble, The Analog Devices Foundation, The Stadler Family Foundation, Stanley Black & Decker, Accenture, Terumo Corporation, Spotify and The Coca-Cola Foundation._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> WOW, that's a lot of people. Even if most were vaccinated, they all still need to be careful. We've all heard this. I want to share ... Just this past week I heard from two friends from two different parts on the east coast (USA).  Both had their covid shots beginning of the year. One passed away last week.  The other friend is still struggling to recover but hopefully will in a few months or will have issues for the rest of his life. Where I'm at we are rolling back a phase because of the spike in covid cases. Personally, take it or leave it, think this event should have been totally done virtually or at least without an audience.
> 
> I just got my second shot over the weekend and I won't be going out even after two week waiting period from now.  Call me a scaredy cat but this is serious s**t!



These are vaccinated healthcare workers. It would add more pain to catch it from a healthcare worker.
You are correct - it is serious s**t.  When the final chapter is written, my guess is the billionaires and foundations will be held to account. If ever there was a reason to spend that money, covid would be it.  Instead we have at least 1,500 pages on 2 millionaire brats complaining about not having enough, while they live in the 19 bathroom secluded mansion. Talk is cheap. Very cheap.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> These are vaccinated healthcare workers. It would add more pain to catch it from a healthcare worker.
> You are correct - it is serious s**t.  When the final chapter is written, my guess is the billionaires and foundations will be held to account. If ever there was a reason to spend that money, covid would be it.  Instead we have at least 1,500 pages on 2 millionaire brats complaining about not having enough, while they live in the 19 bathroom secluded mansion. Talk is cheap. Very cheap.


Yes, aware healthcare workers. Bless them for all they do and risking their lives and exhaustion for us. I have a family member who's in the field and proud of all they do. Agree it would be painful if someone to catch it from a healthcare worker but I know you'd agree with me, it would be painful for them to catch it from someone else too.

Agree, talk is cheap!  Let them put money where the mouth is M&H and the rest of them celebs!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Does anyone know why his lovely wife pulled out at last minute?


----------



## caramelize126

I am kinda hoping we'd see megs on video at the Live Vax event. Wonder if we'd have another moon bump sighting


----------



## lalame

Hermes Zen said:


> WOW, that's a lot of people. Even if most were vaccinated, they all still need to be careful. We've all heard this. I want to share ... Just this past week I heard from two friends from two different parts on the east coast (USA).  Both had their covid shots beginning of the year. One passed away last week.  The other friend is still struggling to recover but hopefully will in a few months or will have issues for the rest of his life. Where I'm at we are rolling back a phase because of the spike in covid cases. Personally, take it or leave it, think this event should have been totally done virtually or at least without an audience.
> 
> I just got my second shot over the weekend and I won't be going out even after two week waiting period from now.  Call me a scaredy cat but this is serious s**t!



I'm with you. Alber Elbaz dying from COVID despite being vaccinated put me on alert.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> These are vaccinated healthcare workers. It would add more pain to catch it from a healthcare worker.
> You are correct - it is serious s**t.  When the final chapter is written, my guess is the billionaires and foundations will be held to account. If ever there was a reason to spend that money, covid would be it.  Instead we have at least 1,500 pages on 2 millionaire brats complaining about not having enough, while they live in the 19 bathroom secluded mansion. Talk is cheap. Very cheap.



The problem for a philanthropist is... COVID isn't the only disaster where aid will be needed. Next year, there could be another COVID-level event. Just like with financial investments, you usually don't want to put all your eggs in 1 basket to get the best returns (of course returns in this case being needed support long-term).

Talk is cheap but what else does H have? Anything they could donate is a drop in the bucket compared to how much they could fundraise if they donate their time to pool efforts together, like this event. Now I think it's obnoxious Harry's contribution is a speech so I'm really just defending actual artists donating performances.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I'm with you. Alber Elbaz dying from COVID despite being vaccinated put me on alert.


Do you know when he got infected? Was it before or after being vaccinated?


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Do you know when he got infected? Was it before or after being vaccinated?



Don't quote me on it but I'm pretty sure it was after vaccination... he caught one of the newer strains from South Africa.


----------



## lalame

I don't get how the concert Harry was involved in raised money though... wasn't the concert free for everyone who attended (healthcare workers)? Or did it not directly contribute to the funds Global Youth raised overall?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Do you know when he got infected? Was it before or after being vaccinated?











						Had Alber Elbaz been vaccinated against Covid-19?
					

ISRAELI fashion designer Alber Elbaz has died from coronavirus at the age of 59. The France-based creative director, known mostly for his work at French fashion houses Lanvin And Yves Saint-Lauren,…




					www.the-sun.com
				



*Had Alber Elbaz been vaccinated against Covid-19? *
According to the Times of Israel, Elbaz was infected with the South African Covid variant despite being fully vaccinated.

Alber died aged 59 on Saturday, April 24, 2021, after a battle with Covid-19, the Richemont luxury group revealed.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Merching or not, gifting or not, I believe the IRS requires taxes on gifts over a certain value.  I wonder if Harry's wife and other celebrities actually declare the value of all of their "gifts"?


I had a CEO once who only declared the gifts he didn't like. Company policy was quite strict and his secretary (a bimbo) would openly tell us that anything crave-worthy (like the latest model cellphone) was a "personal gift" and so not subject to company policy. H's wife and other celebrities probably get a pass on tax or a lower tax rate by declaring the gifts as business-related.



Jayne1 said:


> The actual multi-day transcripts of the Jessica/Sasha emails have been posted in one of our national newspapers and Sasha's emails are really bizarre and scary to read. Both are privileged women, but Jessica is constantly making nice and apologizing for being herself and Sasha is being so forceful and unpleasant.


Do you have a link for that? Would love to read the transcripts.
It got weird when Jessica was apologizing publicly and threatening to sue privately.



mellibelly said:


> $13,500 for that ugly frock?!


It probably takes a lot of manhours and a heavy dose of twisted genius to make an ugly frock which a celeb wants to wear.



purseinsanity said:


> Wasn't this wedding during the time when she claimed she was held prisoner by the BRF, taking away her keys and passport?


Perhaps we should scrutinize the photos: the poor security personnel from the UK had to follow her there, right? Maybe H's wife will claim that she was "forced" to wear sheer dresses so that they could visually check her for contraband like her passport.



VickyB said:


> I google a restaurant menu before I arrive.


Before, she was a naive innocent girl who fell in love with a "nice guy". 
Once she became a royal, it was probably beneath her to google anything.



marietouchet said:


> There are orthotics, heel pads that fill in the gap, bunion pads etc
> They won’t fit with your regular size heels
> kind of the same issue with fluffy socks, you need a bigger shoe


I doubt that was the case with MM. There are a lot of close-ups of her feet in those big shoes and you could insert a finger or two into the back. I'm not surprised she got bunions wearing shoes that didn't fit.



xeyes said:


> I’m not holding my breath for it to happen, and there would be a lot of damage done all around, but I gotta admit that it could be a fun trainwreck to watch if she tried.


Another round of her flashing those starry-eyed looks again? <<shudder>> Let's see if she gets Sunshine to help her weasel her way into events that headline Bill Gates. He has the dough she loves, but considering that his foundation gives away that dough, she might become very depressed because they aren't giving it to her.


----------



## Chanbal

Shy man's wife will appear when #vaxlive is shown on TV!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I don't get how the concert Harry was involved in raised money though... wasn't the concert free for everyone who attended (healthcare workers)? Or did it not directly contribute to the funds Global Youth raised overall?



They raised _pledges, _not real money. We need to wait to see if the real money is actually delivered and where it goes. Before calling this concert a huge success, I want to know actual numbers, see the receipts, follow the money and the vaccines. Many people will get caught up in the moment, claim they will donate and then poof, nada. How much did H&M pledge or, even, actually donate? Again, talk is cheap. H&M can offer real $$$$$, not just talk.

Yes, there will be more Corona viruses in the future and other viruses, too. So, success in the future depends on getting this response right. The concern now is that the world is being sloppy and selfish about this one. People need to understand that applauding mediocrity gets us nowhere fast.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> YOU ARE THE BEST Maggie Muggins!  Love yah!!


Thank you. I love seeing and hearing happy people, especially people laughing during this epidemic. It helps heal the soul, the mind and the body.   Every time I see a laugh icon, I hear the laughter in my head and whenever someone post a funny item, I roar laughing. Hubby doesn't jump anymore, he knows I'm enjoying myself. I wish the same for everyone here.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> They raised _pledges, _not real money. We need to wait to see if the real money is actually delivered and where it goes. Before calling this concert a huge success, I want to know actual numbers, see the receipts, follow the money and the vaccines. Many people will get caught up in the moment, claim they will donate and then poof, nada. How much did H&M pledge or, even, actually donate? Again, talk is cheap. H&M can offer real $$$$$, not just talk.
> 
> Yes, there will be more Corona viruses in the future and other viruses, too. So, success in the future depends on getting this response right. The concern now is that the world is being sloppy and selfish about this one. People need to understand that applauding mediocrity gets us nowhere fast.



 Real $$$$$? You must mean $. People who can donate $$$$$ usually aren't on national TV whining about not having security paid for by their dads. Until they ACTUALLY get those Spotify and Netflix moneys, all they probably have to give are talk.


----------



## TC1

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not sure what you mean...everyone there was vaccinated and masked...what were they saying and not doing?
> 
> I get that this is the anti H&M thread but does that mean trashing everything they are involved with no matter how noble the cause? Isn't that, dare I say, cancel culture?


Ok, I'll bite. So..this is a fundraiser, for vaccines (how much did they donate from Archwell?) other than standing on a stage for attention, *ahem* what was donated? As for the preach-y bit. When you have all the access in the world to mental health, yet give the camera some doe eyes and say "no one has asked me if I'm ok" orrrr, if you have airtime to preach about the carbon footprint and fly private (continually) perhaps.. they deserve a little "trash talking" *shrug*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you. I love seeing and hearing happy people, especially people laughing during this epidemic. It helps heal the soul, the mind and the body. Every time I see a laugh icon, I hear the laughter in my head and whenever someone post a funny item, I roar laughing. Hubby doesn't jump anymore, he knows I'm enjoying myself. I wish the same for everyone here.



@Maggie Muggins  this is the sweetest thing I’ve read in a few days. 
Thank you so much for all your kindness, positivity and grace under pressure. You are the [emerald?] jewel in our H&M crown.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Do you have a link for that? Would love to read the transcripts.
> It got weird when Jessica was apologizing publicly and threatening to sue privately.


From the National Post, one of our Canadian newspapers.  After reading the texts, I actually wondered if she would/could/should sue for defamation of character.









						Barbara Kay: Text messages exonerate Jessica Mulroney after she was cancelled last summer
					

“Cancel culture” is pandemic today, but the virus was already in patchy play 30 years ago.




					nationalpost.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> Ok, I'll bite. So..this is a fundraiser, for vaccines (how much did they donate from Archwell?) other than standing on a stage for attention, *ahem* what was donated? As for the preach-y bit. When you have all the access in the world to mental health, yet give the camera some doe eyes and say "no one has asked me if I'm ok" orrrr, if you have airtime to preach about the carbon footprint and fly private (continually) perhaps.. they deserve a little "trash talking" *shrug*



IMO it is holding their feet to fire, as we say over here. They need to be held accountable, every single time they open their mouths.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I'm with you. Alber Elbaz dying from COVID despite being vaccinated put me on alert.



There are conflicting reports on whether he was fully vaccinated when he got COVID. Israeli media said he was fully vaccinated and he caught the SA variant and became ill. Other reports suggest he couldn't have been vaccinated fully as he was in France and only become eligible for vaccination 10 days before he died. I don't know how the Israeli media would have access to such information given that medical information like that is confidential. There was no official statement by the family.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> There are conflicting reports on whether he was fully vaccinated when he got COVID. Israeli media said he was fully vaccinated and he caught the SA variant and became ill. Other reports suggest he couldn't have been vaccinated fully as he was in France and only become eligible for vaccination 10 days before he died. I don't know how the Israeli media would have access to such information given that medical information like that is confidential. There was no official statement by the family.



I got curious and Googled it... maybe he was able to get vaccinated due to a health condition? Wouldn't be a shock since he was obese (his words).


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

TC1 said:


> Ok, I'll bite. So..this is a fundraiser, for vaccines (how much did they donate from Archwell?) other than standing on a stage for attention, *ahem* what was donated? As for the preach-y bit. When you have all the access in the world to mental health, yet give the camera some doe eyes and say "no one has asked me if I'm ok" orrrr, if you have airtime to preach about the carbon footprint and fly private (continually) perhaps.. they deserve a little "trash talking" *shrug*



As I explained earlier I am not defending H&M at all...all I am saying is I don't understand the need to trash an entire organization just because they have something to do with it. It's not about them. It seems to me (from my admittedly limited knowledge) that this could be a good cause and I think it's a shame to "cancel" it because they happen to be involved in some way. That's it.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> From the National Post, one of our Canadian newspapers.  After reading the texts, I actually wondered if she would/could/should sue for defamation of character.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barbara Kay: Text messages exonerate Jessica Mulroney after she was cancelled last summer
> 
> 
> “Cancel culture” is pandemic today, but the virus was already in patchy play 30 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalpost.com


Thank you. Puts quite a different spin on things if what JM provided is the whole story.
The danger with current culture is that the first person to publicise a story usually makes the strongest and most long-lasting impression. Corrections, addendums, admissions of errors, fact-checks don't pop up in the first few hits when you google. Years from now, people who search "Markle" + "wedding date" will probably end up believing that she was married in secret in her backyard.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

We may never know about Elbaz but it just seems to make sense to stay as safe as possible. Sadly mask wearing became a political issue which is just crazy to me but I will continue to wear mine even though I'm vaccinated.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins  this is the sweetest thing I’ve read in a few days.
> Thank you so much for all your kindness, positivity and grace under pressure. You are the [emerald?] jewel in our H&M crown.


Thank you.  I'm convinced that we are all contributing to each other's mental wellbeing as so many have already been quoted as saying some variation of "This thread has kept me sane through Covid19."


----------



## lalame

I don't really have negative feelings about celebrity-involved charity events, concerts, galas, whatever for fundraising but something about Harry and Meghan being so oversaturated in the news for that stuff these days annoys me. It seems like that is their "brand," and as far as I know it's kind of an undeserved brand compared to many people actually doing the work. I wouldn't even call the BRF philanthropists necessarily because that's their job, their duty, and part of the social pact for their upkeep. But Harry leaves it... and suddenly he's a philanthropist and authority figure on all these causes? Seems like Peter Philips selling you a milk for personal gain, only they're doing it for PR (which then feeds into their budding empire).


----------



## xincinsin

I feel very old. I miss the days when journalists were expected to check and verify sources and info. Consumers now expect instant info fed to them in easily digestible nuggets with quotable quotes.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

xincinsin said:


> I feel very old. I miss the days when journalists were expected to check and verify sources and info. Consumers now expect instant info fed to them in easily digestible nuggets with quotable quotes.



Unfortunately this is one of the negative traits of social media and the internet. Most people get the news online and anyone can publish anything online and there is no accountability hence the need for critical thinking in schools and education in general. With a decline in revenue from traditional media (newspapers) I feel like a lot of the media tries to sensationalize stories to get the views and hence revenue.


----------



## pukasonqo

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just received the following awards from the Press Club honouring the
> Royal Correspondents, who have been earlier missed. Apologies for the delay and congratulations!
> 
> View attachment 5073465
> View attachment 5073460
> View attachment 5073461
> View attachment 5073462
> View attachment 5073463
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073464
> View attachment 5073466


 Wooooohooooo!!!


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I don't really have negative feelings about celebrity-involved charity events, concerts, galas, whatever for fundraising but something about Harry and Meghan being so oversaturated in the news for that stuff these days annoys me. It seems like that is their "brand," and as far as I know it's kind of an undeserved brand compared to many people actually doing the work. I wouldn't even call the BRF philanthropists necessarily because that's their job, their duty, and part of the social pact for their upkeep. But Harry leaves it... and suddenly he's a philanthropist and authority figure on all these causes? Seems like Peter Philips selling you a milk for personal gain, only they're doing it for PR (which then feeds into their budding empire).


It's the whiff of ulterior motive that sours their ventures. 
I don't have a problem with their profit-oriented work in itself. That mansion and lifestyle must cost a pretty penny and it's not like they are going to rent out those bathrooms and start a Chick-Inn restaurant serving lemonade. It's their concept of financial independence which offends me: they are victims who have *no choice but to work* because PC refuses to slip them a few million quid every year for existing. They cloak profit and promotion in a thin veneer of philanthropism. I would stomach them better if they just gave up the royal connection and go all-out celebrity style merching.


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> It's the whiff of ulterior motive that sours their ventures.
> I don't have a problem with their profit-oriented work in itself. That mansion and lifestyle must cost a pretty penny and it's not like they are going to rent out those bathrooms and start a Chick-Inn restaurant serving lemonade. It's their concept of financial independence which offends me: they are victims who have *no choice but to work* because PC refuses to slip them a few million quid every year for existing. They cloak profit and promotion in a thin veneer of philanthropism. I would stomach them better if they just gave up the royal connection and go all-out celebrity style merching.



Yes, totally right. And I bet Peter Philips is more qualified to sell milk than Harry is to give speeches on the environment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> Yes, totally right. And I bet Peter Philips is more qualified to sell milk than Harry is to give speeches on the environment.


I'm still waiting for H to give an impassioned (hypocritical) speech voicing his concern about the "avalanche of misinformation" in the digital world. I'm impressed that Sunshine managed to get him onto an authentic platform like Aspen without a silly title like Chimpo. If H makes the most of this opportunity and does not just rely on star power, he might begin to gain credibility. He has to start somewhere, and he doesn't have the advantage of heavy eye make-up, cosplay or moonbumps.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Shy man's wife will appear when #vaxlive is shown on TV!



Harry's wife wasn't there because I'm not sure if y'all heard or not?  *She's HEAVILY PREGNANT*!


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> As I explained earlier I am not defending H&M at all...all I am saying is I don't understand the need to trash an entire organization just because they have something to do with it. It's not about them. It seems to me (from my admittedly limited knowledge) that this could be a good cause and I think it's a shame to "cancel" it because they happen to be involved in some way. That's it.


I totally understand your point.  I wasn't trying to trash the event, nor cancel it.  Hopefully, it did start from good intentions.  With the way things are nowadays though, I've become more suspicious of everything because I don't know what's true or not any more since "news" is no longer unbiased, actual factual news.  I'm not sure these celebrities truly care, or are trying to garner attention when times are tough even for them.  Celebrities bring attention to causes, which is lovely, but when they start acting like experts is when they just need to sit down.  Tweeting things to the NZ PM without actually researching the facts makes one look stupid.  MM and JCMH jumping into this with zero knowledge of anything is annoying to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry gets standing ovation at Vax Live charity concert in LA
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was among many high profile stars - including Jennifer Lopez and Selena Gomez - to take the stage at Sunday night's concert taping at the So-Fi Stadium in Inglewood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well there we have it folks!  For those of us wondering what MM and JCMH would be taking maternity and paternity leave from: hosting events!


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> I feel very old. I miss the days when journalists were expected to check and verify sources and info. Consumers now expect instant info fed to them in easily digestible nuggets with quotable quotes.


Wonder if anyone is streaming All the President's Men 
I have the dvd but I'm too lazy to hook up the player


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> Harry's wife wasn't there because I'm not sure if y'all heard or not?  *She's HEAVILY PREGNANT*!



She could not have gone in person.  Being pregnant, it’s highly unlikely she has taken the vaccine, and the bad press she would have gotten from attending in person, whilst pregnant would have been world wide news.

plus this way, she gets to pretape (rehearse) what she is going to say, alter lighting and filters to make herself look good and slap on a huge amount of makeup.  

i am sure that it kills her she couldn’t be there in person clutching her bump in yet another Oscar worthy gown though....


----------



## xincinsin

poopsie said:


> Wonder if anyone is streaming All the President's Men
> I have the dvd but I'm too lazy to hook up the player


It actually occurred to me to wonder if this was the divergent point. Bernstein and Woodward were relying on a single source Deep Throat, and NYT and WaPo were relying on their gut feel. It all worked out but it could have easily gone south if Deep Throat was a troll.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> General question... do celebrities REALLY pay the retail price for designer outfits like that? I'm not talking about when it's comped, but when they actually have to buy it. Maybe it's just a different stratosphere of wealth that I can't fathom but how does anyone feel at ease paying even $7k for a one-time wear garment much less $75k?


Many celebrity stylists hire clothes, especially couture, for client appearances. Good press for the brand and the star. 

However, it is my understanding that the royals are not allowed to accept promo hires or free products. They have the option to buy things, especially from British companies, with their clothing allowance.

I would assume she wanted to get the most expensive things to make a point that she’d made it after being a no name who had to go the premier in Armani jeans rather than prive her entire career.
Maybe she got the Ralph russo and the Givenchy at a discount. I think it’s kind of moot point really as the important part for her was the obedient press told everyone that her dress was worth that while insisting what a humble, revolutionary, compassionate woman she is 

Also rule number 1 of gold digging  is 750k sounds a lot less when itsomeone else’s money


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I feel very old. I miss the days when journalists were expected to check and verify sources and info. Consumers now expect instant info fed to them in easily digestible nuggets with quotable quotes.



In today’s instant info world, no checks and balances, no verification for sources and info &, most worrying to me, there is no context provided, no perspective.  So, someone in the BRF made a comment about skin color, but we aren‘t told who, the rest of the conversation, who heard the comment, etc. Without the context, credibility is lost.   B&W spent considerable amount of time  checking the facts, re-interviewing those involved. Why? They wanted to get the story right. They well understood recollections may vary. As you said, today instant info rules.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> How noble is this cause?
> My understanding, which could be wrong, is this was a *show* for healthcare workers. Who at this show would have the means to send vaccines to the countries that need it?  We lil people cannot mail vaccines, can we?
> Where o where are the billionaires, the powers-that be?  It is all smoke and mirrors designed to fool the masses. Is it really a standing ovation if people are told to stand up?  Really pretentious of Hazzie to use full title, no?
> So, again, please tell me how noble is this cause?
> 
> 
> ETA: Bill and Melinda are divorcing ????


To be fair to him, he didn’t add Duke Disney, Diana’s son or his CHIMPO title.
kind of restrained really  

I completely agree, it seems it be taken as a given that these glorified variety shows are an effective means of fundraising and we should be grateful or something when all the stats I’ve seen show they are acknowledged to be incredibly inefficient.


Cornflower Blue said:


> I have a hard time walking in any kind of heels even now and I'm in my late fifties. I look better in them than flats, but OMG, there's nothing on this this earth that would make me wear them for over a couple of hours max and there would have to be a darn good reason even then.... But holy mackerel, wearing a size bigger.... I'd be on my a**. If Meghan can actually do it, regardless of reason, I take my hat off to her tbh, but maybe she's a bit more driven than I ...


She got invaluable experience clomping around the yachts in Perspex pleasers JK


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> In today’s instant info world, no checks and balances, no verification for sources and info &, most worrying to me, there is no context provided, no perspective.  Yes, someone in the BRF made a comment about skin color, but we aren‘t told who, the rest of the conversation, who heard the comment, etc. Without the context, credibility is lost.   B&W spent considerable amount of time  checking the facts, re-interviewing those involved. Why? They wanted to get the story right. They well understood recollections may vary. As you said, today instant info rules.


Yep, if you read the book and not just watch the movie, you'll realize that there was a lot of soul-searching. The two reporters spent a lot of time trying to verify what Deep Throat said - doing research sideways as it were.

I'm of the opinion that there was no comment about Archie's skin colour but there may very well be pondering of culture clash at the courtship stage, which is taken askew by Harry as meaning MM is black and won't fit in with the royalty's way of life. Harry was so eager to play her knight in shining armour against the media. He would have been equally vociferous with his own family after she had primed him with her victimhood tales.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> The problem for a philanthropist is... COVID isn't the only disaster where aid will be needed. Next year, there could be another COVID-level event. Just like with financial investments, you usually don't want to put all your eggs in 1 basket to get the best returns (of course returns in this case being needed support long-term).
> 
> Talk is cheap but what else does H have? Anything they could donate is a drop in the bucket compared to how much they could fundraise if they donate their time to pool efforts together, like this event. Now I think it's obnoxious Harry's contribution is a speech so I'm really just defending actual artists donating performances.


I think the exact opposite is true. I think the amount these people get each from public donations is not a lot at all compared to what they could comfortably take from their own piggy banks.

But we all know what is really going on:  giving say 750k is one news story. 
WHEREAS giving a speech is one news story, then all the memes, then an article asking where your awful wife is, then an article about her pregnancy swelling/sickness etc, then a sponsored post about the clothes you wore, then an article about your body/hairline after Covid,  then finally a puff piece announcing your passionate speech  raised (and I’m being really generous here) a personal best of 300k donations...

Well doesn’t that 300k mean so much more than that 750k ever could?




lalame said:


> Billionaires... or rappers.  I JUST watched a video where someone asks Drake how much his outfit cost and the entire look head to toe was $975K!  He can definitely afford it though.
> 
> In case anyone's curious about Drake's outfit:



The vast majority of that is his Richard Mille watch and multiple carats of diamonds & you could argue they are investments/assets it’s not really the same as a single dress you wear once.

He thought his clothing, without shoes, was about 13k which is normal for high-end tailoring I’d have thought.
I’m sure Prince Charles’ saville row is about 10k a suit. Kate wears a mix of high end high street and designer.  Plus the women get to borrow major jewellery. It’s not like they were forcing her to wear primark- she just had to take the mick as per usual.

Add on- brother is a watch head and I just remembered that Mille watch Drake is wearing is apparently really famous among the watch community for being a complex design and therefore ludicrously expensive even for Mille.


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> She could not have gone in person.  Being pregnant, it’s highly unlikely she has taken the vaccine, and the bad press she would have gotten from attending in person, whilst pregnant would have been world wide news.
> 
> plus this way, she gets to pretape (rehearse) what she is going to say, alter lighting and filters to make herself look good and slap on a huge amount of makeup.
> 
> i am sure that it kills her she couldn’t be there in person clutching her bump in yet another Oscar worthy gown though....


I can’t help but wonder if she got cold feet at the thought a live audience packed with health workers might spot padding when they saw it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Does anyone know why his lovely wife pulled out at last minute?




I heard she was heavily pregnant.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

xincinsin said:


> It actually occurred to me to wonder if this was the divergent point. Bernstein and Woodward were relying on a single source Deep Throat, and NYT and WaPo were relying on their gut feel. It all worked out but it could have easily gone south if Deep Throat was a troll.



...although as you stated later they took great pains to confirm everything with other sources before publishing.

Which is what legitimate investigative journalists still do. But today we have opinion masquerading as news, without any checks and balances. Sort of like this thread  

I guess for me the difference is I don’t expect an entertainment personality, like Oprah, to function like Christiane Amanpour. 

What I find more troubling is the divisiveness...when we retreat to our “sides” and automatically dismiss whatever the “other” is saying simply because “they” are saying it.

I would hate to promote vaccine refusal because two would be celebrities are involved with an event...we literally have a “news” personality supporting anti vaxers because he doesn’t like the messenger ("Some creepy old guy telling your children, your little kids to take medicine whose effects we do not fully understand.") 

That worries me a lot more than anything a former actress and her ex pat husband do to extend their 15 minutes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> ...although as you stated later they took great pains to confirm everything with other sources before publishing.
> 
> Which is what legitimate investigative journalists still do. But today we have opinion masquerading as news, without any checks and balances. Sort of like this thread
> 
> I guess for me the difference is I don’t expect an entertainment personality, like Oprah, to function like Christiane Amanpour.
> 
> What I find more troubling is the divisiveness...when we retreat to our “sides” and automatically dismiss whatever the “other” is saying simply because “they” are saying it.
> 
> I would hate to promote vaccine refusal because two would be celebrities are involved with an event...we literally have a “news” personality supporting anti vaxers because he doesn’t like the messenger ("Some creepy old guy telling your children, your little kids to take medicine whose effects we do not fully understand.")
> 
> That worries me a lot more than anything a former actress and her ex pat husband do to extend their 15 minutes.


I called it a divergent point because I've seen instances over the years when wannabe journalists take a leap of faith and publish a rumour as fact, and even describe their source as their Deep Throat. B&W had to work extra hard to try to verify their story, whereas these wannabes are only harping on the exclusivity of their source. Their takeaway from the breaking of the Watergate story is that they must find some insider to spill the beans, never mind if the beans are truth or lie.

Agree on the divisiveness. There is too much "Are you for me or against me?" going on. Cannot understand why health matters have become so political. Have they not heard of Death the Leveller?


----------



## xincinsin

Dupe


----------



## xincinsin

Dupe again - sabo'd by system


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> There are some celebrities that do good without any fanfare, and it comes to light months or even years later, or maybe not at all.  Keanu Reeves and Jamie Fox come to mind.  Those celebrities I actually respect, because it's more genuine and from the heart than passing out a sandwich and having a headline, "SEE WHAT I DID?!!?  AREN'T I WONDERFUL?!!?"


Look at what we learnt about George Michael after he passed away. (I still can't get used to those words where he's concerned)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I made it through the Mulroney article, and I have to say: if that is indeed the gist of the conversation, Sasha Exeter - whose side I initially took - was way out of line. Being black isn't your wild card for being an a*shole.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you very much. Hopefully Bill Gates isn't morally, emotionally, intellectually and factually deficient like Harry's wife.



He's trying to dim the sun. Even the scientists are like, um, no.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGOSH, now M has a chance with billionaire B Gates!  Did you hear??  I'm sad !!



Can you imagine a conversation between those two? (Has anyone seen Inside Bill Gate's Brain?)


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Harry's wife wasn't there because I'm not sure if y'all heard or not?  *She's HEAVILY PREGNANT*!


Oh, wow! Thanks for clarifying, it explains the rumors about a potential bump malfunction on stage.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

purseinsanity said:


> Tweeting things to the NZ PM without actually researching the facts makes one look stupid. MM and JCMH jumping into this with zero knowledge of anything is annoying to me.



This is what is dangerous too. Selena Gomez has 65+million twitter followers who I assume look up to her and listen to her. She spread false information and some people from NZ corrected her, yet she did not feel the need to correct her tweet or apologize, which shows she doesn't care if she is right or wrong, she just wants the attention. 

Harry once defended his use of private planes while preaching about climate change and reducing emissions by saying his family needs the security of a private jet. So basically one rule for the rich and another for peasants.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  LOL, side-by-side they look nothing alike, still lemons are lemons, right?



Lemons are super trendy at the moment. I’m seeing them everywhere. So at least Meghan is on trend in her fashion, unlike her social activism which is always at least a year behind.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I guess for me the difference is I don’t expect an entertainment personality, like Oprah, to function like Christiane Amanpour.



Although Oprah is not an investigative journalist, she gave MM and H a platform to promote falsehoods, so this is more of ethical issue.
MM basically trashed the royal family when she knew they would never be able to defend themselves publicly.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> But today we have opinion masquerading as news, without any checks and balances. Sort of like this thread



This thread is far from news, just like any other sort of social media or forum which we are all well aware of. This is space for opinions and ideas, nothing we say here is taken as a fact or written in stone. No one quotes things from this thread as a 'fact'.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would hate to promote vaccine refusal because two would be celebrities are involved with an event.



Vaccine hesitancy has been around for a long time and has prevented the eradication of many diseases. I don't think that is a political divide as people have sighted religion and religious leaders advising them not to take certain vaccinations.

We are not promoting vaccine refusal at all, regardless of who is or isn't hosting/attending the event. I really doubt that people will listen to celebs with zero science or medical knowledge/skills when they don't even listen to doctors and nurses (people who dedicated their entire life to the service of others).


----------



## Aimee3

Harry’s wife is most likely vaccinated. Pregnant women were allowed to get the vaccine no matter their age.   just realized...maybe Harry’s wife isn’t pregnant and thus wasn’t eligible for the vaccine yet, only the surrogate was.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This thread is far from news, just like any other sort of social media or forum which we are all well aware of. This is space for opinions and ideas, nothing we say here is taken as a fact or written in stone. No one quotes things from this thread as a 'fact'.



The title of the thread includes the word “gossip”.  One definition according to Google:
_casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> She could not have gone in person.  Being pregnant, it’s highly unlikely she has taken the vaccine, and *the bad press she would have gotten from attending in person, whilst pregnant would have been world wide news.*
> 
> plus this way, she gets to pretape (rehearse) what she is going to say, alter lighting and filters to make herself look good and slap on a huge amount of makeup.
> 
> i am sure that it kills her she couldn’t be there in person clutching her bump in yet another Oscar worthy gown though....


That's why she didn't go.  Not going to PP's funeral because of her pregnancy, then going to host an event would have given bad press.  I imagine her sitting at home, gnashing her teeth at the fact she wasn't there.  Pregnant women are encouraged to get the vaccine, especially in the third trimester, which the heavily pregnant one must be in by now.  There's no way she didn't climb over people to be one of the first to get it.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> To be fair to him, he didn’t add Duke Disney, Diana’s son or his CHIMPO title.
> kind of restrained really


Did he just go as "Harry"?


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> ...although as you stated later they took great pains to confirm everything with other sources before publishing.
> 
> Which is what legitimate investigative journalists still do. But today we have opinion masquerading as news, without any checks and balances. Sort of like this thread
> 
> I guess for me the difference is I don’t expect an entertainment personality, like Oprah, to function like Christiane Amanpour.
> 
> What I find more troubling is the divisiveness...when we retreat to our “sides” and automatically dismiss whatever the “other” is saying simply because “they” are saying it.
> 
> I would hate to promote vaccine refusal because two would be celebrities are involved with an event...we literally have a “news” personality supporting anti vaxers because he doesn’t like the messenger ("Some creepy old guy telling your children, your little kids to take medicine whose effects we do not fully understand.")
> 
> That worries me a lot more than anything a former actress and her ex pat husband do to extend their 15 minutes.



I could not agree with you more!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s wife is most likely vaccinated. Pregnant women were allowed to get the vaccine no matter their age.   just realized...maybe Harry’s wife isn’t pregnant and thus wasn’t eligible for the vaccine yet, only the surrogate was.


Well she’s classed as vulnerable due to the incredible strain of being bullied by the evil press and she’s probably got PTSD from that one time that woman told her she is supposed to wear a hat to meet the queen and she still wakes up at night screaming ‘No! Not the fascinators!’

I also assume that for the right price you can class being ginger as a nervous system disorder.

Edit missing an is and a still


----------



## Sharont2305

Breaking news, she's publishing a book in June called "The Bench" about the relationship between a father and son. It's based on a poem she wrote for Harry's first Fathers day shortly after Archie was born. 
I think it's a children's book
*rolling my eyes very much here


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking news, she's publishing a book in June called "The Bench" about the relationship between a father and son. It's based on a poem she wrote for Harry's first Fathers day shortly after Archie was born.
> I think it's a children's book
> *rolling my eyes very much here


Oh dear.
Poor Thomas 
And pass the sick bag


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking news, she's publishing a book in June called "The Bench" about the relationship between a father and son. It's based on a poem she wrote for Harry's first Fathers day shortly after Archie was born.
> I think it's a children's book
> *rolling my eyes very much here


Is it named after where he will soon be standing to get visitation rights?

We shall see as they announce a lot of things but nothing turns up.


----------



## Sharont2305

"Once upon a time there was a Prince, he had a father, then along came a witch who took him away to a far off land from said father who was very wicked in not letting the witch have her own way."
The End. 

There, wrote it for you megs. 
Can I have my publishing contract now please?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I really doubt that people will listen to celebs with zero science or medical knowledge/skills when they don't even listen to doctors and nurses (people who dedicated their entire life to the service of others).



Lol you must not live in America, I have learned never to underestimate who and what people choose to believe despite all evidence to the contrary (google hydroxychloroquine...it’s mind blowing)!


----------



## Sharont2305

It's all word salad by the looks of it.


----------



## djuna1




----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> It's all word salad by the looks of it.


 Oh boy, suddenly Sarah Ferguson looks like a literary heavyweight


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> It's all word salad by the looks of it.
> 
> View attachment 5074084
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074085
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074086



She made sure "The Duchess of Sussex" was on the cover. She loves milking that title she was given from the family she likes to accuse of racism.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh boy, suddenly Sarah Ferguson looks like a literary heavyweight



That's what I thought. Didn't Fergie write some children's books about a little helicopter. It wasn't Thomas the Tank Engine or anything but I think she sold a few.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Budgie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> That's what I thought. Didn't Fergie write some children's books about a little helicopter. It wasn't Thomas the Tank Engine or anything but I think she sold a few.


Yes, it even got made into an animated series.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> That's what I thought. Didn't Fergie write some children's books about a little helicopter. It wasn't Thomas the Tank Engine or anything but I think she sold a few.





Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, it even got made into an animated series.


Yes, there were the budgie the helicopter ones and I think some more about a girl called Little Red.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

The irony in keeping the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex after relinquishing their duties. This is the definition of exploiting your title for $$$.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder if the Cambridges will get a personalised signed copy?


----------



## bag-mania

Oh my God, such horrible poetry. When I was a kid I entered a statewide poetry contest at age 11. I got third place. Even at that age all of the child competitors had much more depth to their work than this garbage. I feel sorry for any little kid whose Meghan-stan mother reads this insipid crap at bedtime. 

Looking out at My Love
And our beautiful boy.
And here in the window
I'll have tears of great joy...


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Does anyone know why his lovely wife pulled out at last minute?



Damage control?


----------



## CarryOn2020

My first thought about the children’s book was Fergie 2.0.
1. Leave the BRF, sorta
2. Do the OW interview, offend everyone
3. Publish children’s book - use OW’s publisher
Next another OW interview to announce her ‘finding herself’ tour - visiting ashrams in Arizona, etc.
Weight watchers, then, heal the family rifts.
More children‘s books, blah blah blah.


ETA: removed ‘self‘


----------



## xincinsin

djuna1 said:


>



Special bond again. This must be her recurring literary device, which future scholars will discern spanning her extensive oeuvre.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meet the Illustrator: Christian Robinson | Brightly
					

In today’s Meet the Illustrator feature we hear from Christian Robinson, illustrator of the New York Times bestseller Last Stop on Market Street.




					www.readbrightly.com
				










						Homepage - Random House Children's Books
					






					www.rhcbooks.com


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, it even got made into an animated series.


Doesn't she also have a program where she dresses up and reads the books? Or is it other story books? From time to time there has been a picture on line, but don't know if it's a regular thing.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meet the Illustrator: Christian Robinson | Brightly
> 
> 
> In today’s Meet the Illustrator feature we hear from Christian Robinson, illustrator of the New York Times bestseller Last Stop on Market Street.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.readbrightly.com



I love Last Stop On Market Street!









						Last Stop on Market Street by Matt de la Peña: 9780399257742 | PenguinRandomHouse.com: Books
					

#1 New York Times Bestseller  A USA Today Bestseller  Winner of the Newbery Medal  A Caldecott Honor Book   A Coretta Scott King Illustrator Honor Book     This award-winning modern classic—a...



					www.penguinrandomhouse.com


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> It's all word salad by the looks of it.
> 
> View attachment 5074084
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074085
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074086


Is she styling herself without her surname now?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Special bond again. This must be her recurring literary device, which future scholars will discern spanning her extensive oeuvre.



Layering, another device that she loves.
So, nothing on fathers and daughters? Hmmmmm. 

_








						Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, to release 1st children's book
					

Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, is releasing her first children's book next month




					www.ny1.com
				



“That poem became this story," Meghan said. "Christian layered in beautiful and ethereal watercolor illustrations that capture the warmth, joy and comfort of the relationship between fathers and sons from all walks of life; this representation was particularly important to me, and Christian and I worked closely to depict this special bond through an inclusive lens.”_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking news, she's publishing a book in June called "The Bench" about the relationship between a father and son. It's based on a poem she wrote for Harry's first Fathers day shortly after Archie was born.
> I think it's a children's book
> *rolling my eyes very much here



Can't make that sh*t up. 

Also, may I add I'm a published author of three bestselling cookbooks and have difficulties securing a 4th contract on a different subject because I don't have outrageous social media following in that area? Happy to see Duchess Disney gets sh*t handed to her completely undeserved LOL


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Is she styling herself without her surname now?



The *title*, gotta use the *title*. All about the *title*.  *Title = $$$$$*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

In sports, when you are “benched” you aren’t playing. It’s not a good thing. Then again there are the urban dictionary definitions.......


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> It's all word salad by the looks of it.
> 
> View attachment 5074084
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074085
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074086



Looking out at My Love, and our beautiful boy. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little, and I also am very disappointed in Penguin, which I thought to be a serious publisher.


----------



## Icyjade

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The irony in keeping the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex after relinquishing their duties. This is the definition of exploiting your title for $$$.



Personally I find it disgusting. If I am living in Sussex I think I will be even more revolted at the blatant exploitation of the “royal title”. Why can’t she just stick to MM since she is no longer a working royal.

She is really thick skinned isn’t she.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The *title*, gotta use the *title*. All about the *title*.  *Title = $$$$$*


Yes, Your Honour. I'm here to change my name. 
My first name will be Duchess. My family name will be Sussex. Those racists will never take my name from me!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Looking out at My Love, and our beautiful boy. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little, and I also am very disappointed in Penguin, which I thought to be a serious publisher.



OW gets what OW wants. I expect we will see more product promos, too. Fergie had to do it.

A look back for those too young to remember:








						Before the Meghan Markle Special, Watch Oprah’s 1996 Interview With Sarah Ferguson
					

“It’s not a fairy tale.”




					www.glamour.com
				





and









						Saving Sarah From Herself, Oprah Style (Published 2011)
					

The rehabilitation of Sarah Ferguson is playing out on Oprah Winfrey’s TV network.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## mellibelly

poopsie said:


> Wonder if anyone is streaming All the President's Men
> I have the dvd but I'm too lazy to hook up the player


HBO Max has it!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> In sports, when you are “benched” you aren’t playing. It’s not a good thing. Then again there are the urban dictionary definitions.......


I had to look it up ...  

I work in media. About 10 years ago, our corporate comms team designed the Christmas card to wish everyone lots of turkeys. Truly a face-palm moment.


----------



## Yanca

The hypocrisy is astounding. Thrashes the BRF with her pity interview with her "journalist" friend/enabler Oprah, and mouthpiece Royal Reporter Scooby- who thrashes the BRF too every chance he could get, So called  Royal Reporter but is so bias and pro Sussex.  Wants to be linked not rank, promotes compassion but  both estranged from their families and is  accused of bullying from her employees, looks like want to contribute for the demise of the Royal family, walked away from Royal duries but kept the title.  Why can't she just go by her own name? Do whatever you want to do, merching, rubbing elbows with Hollywood woke elites, making shows,  be a lifetsyle blogger, do that but leave the monarchy  alone, stop drip dropping PR when members of BRF has birthdays, events and announcements to make,   and drop the titles and go at it with your own name and credentials- the moment they do it the less they will see criticism against them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Benches are frequently used in poetry, especially the ‘empty bench’. 
Also, haven’t they been making the insta world with landscape designers?

My point — this topic is not an original idea.


----------



## madamelizaking

Can someone please explain to me WTF "activate compassion" means...
Also, feminists don't cling to titles only earned by marriage, and activists don't focus on self promotion.


----------



## bsprout

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, to Publish Debut Children's Book
					

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has written her first picture book, 'The Bench,' illustrated by Caldecott Honor artist Christian Robinson, to be published on June 8.




					www.publishersweekly.com


----------



## xincinsin

madamelizaking said:


> Can someone please explain to me WTF "activate compassion" means...
> Also, feminists don't cling to titles only earned by marriage, and activists don't focus on self promotion.



She has evolved! No more fake self-promotion as philanthropist or humanitarian.
Two dogs - what happened to the two dogs she left behind when she got married?


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Doesn't she also have a program where she dresses up and reads the books? Or is it other story books? From time to time there has been a picture on line, but don't know if it's a regular thing.


I think she's been doing that over lockdown on Instagram.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I made it through the Mulroney article, and I have to say: if that is indeed the gist of the conversation, Sasha Exeter - whose side I initially took - was way out of line. Being black isn't your wild card for being an a*shole.











						Barbara Kay: Text messages exonerate Jessica Mulroney after she was cancelled last summer
					

“Cancel culture” is pandemic today, but the virus was already in patchy play 30 years ago.




					nationalpost.com
				




I just read the whole thing too.  The transcripts of their DM and text message exchange is really troubling.  Sasha Exeter is the one that comes across as the bully and apparently the whole thing started when JM missed an initial video posted by SE who asked for anti-racism messages to be posted and SE thought JM had responded with a MLK quote that SE considered inadequate.  Turns out though that JM never saw the video and had posted the MLK quote independently.  The back and forth then started.  Makes for interesting reading and I actually feel for JM.


----------



## Annawakes

I can’t believe she put DoS on the cover of that book.  If that isn’t profiting off her royal connections, what is?  So so blatant.  She should have published under her regular name MM.  
I’m waiting for someone to find an almost identical book/“poem” that she was “heavily inspired” by.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Benches are frequently used in poetry, especially the ‘empty bench’.
> Also, haven’t they been making the insta world with landscape designers?
> 
> My point — this topic is not an original idea.


We would never accuse her of the sin of original thought! Plagiarism is the core and driving force behind her endeavours.


----------



## CarryOn2020

madamelizaking said:


> Can someone please explain to me WTF "activate compassion" means...
> Also, feminists don't cling to titles only earned by marriage, and activists don't focus on self promotion.




So, no specific mention of Hazzie.  Hmmm, a generic bio speaks volumes. She wants to be thought of as independent, yet she uses the title.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> I can’t believe she put DoS on the cover of that book.  If that isn’t profiting off her royal connections, what is?  So so blatant.  She should have published under her regular name MM.
> I’m waiting for someone to find an almost identical book/“poem” that she was “heavily inspired” by.



I’m looking.  Life, tho, is intervening and slowing me down. Almost have it.


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> Is she styling herself without her surname now?


Yes, like Cher, Madonna and Adele...and multi-talented according to the author bio, yeah?



CarryOn2020 said:


> So, nothing on fathers and daughters? Hmmmmm.


Wait for the new sprog - sometime this summer.

And her rhyming poetry -
boy, joy, toy
blue, you, too?


----------



## Lodpah

Like a general once said when asked why Golda Meir didn’t go to the athletes’ funeral, he said she was afraid to be booed. Maybe that’s why the heavily pregnant one didn’t go. Oh wait! Social pathetic narcissistic people don’t feel. So strike that. 

@maggiemuggins yay I made the list


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> OW gets what OW wants. I expect we will see more product promos, too. Fergie had to do it.
> 
> A look back for those too young to remember:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before the Meghan Markle Special, Watch Oprah’s 1996 Interview With Sarah Ferguson
> 
> 
> “It’s not a fairy tale.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.glamour.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saving Sarah From Herself, Oprah Style (Published 2011)
> 
> 
> The rehabilitation of Sarah Ferguson is playing out on Oprah Winfrey’s TV network.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Those two live in a disconnected world of their own.


----------



## gerryt

Genie27 said:


> Yes, like Cher, Madonna and Adele...and multi-talented according to the author bio, yeah?
> 
> 
> Wait for the new sprog - sometime this summer.
> 
> And her rhyming poetry -
> boy, joy, toy
> blue, you, too?


Maybe we’ve missed a trick and the names going to be Sparkle Markle!


----------



## Lodpah

madamelizaking said:


> Can someone please explain to me WTF "activate compassion" means...
> Also, feminists don't cling to titles only earned by marriage, and activists don't focus on self promotion.



I think it means you pick and choose what you want to have compassion on. Like throw away your family you deactivate compassion but total strangers you wouldn’t give a hoot about you throw out your word salad to come across as compassionate but in reality you fake it?


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if the Cambridges will get a personalised signed copy?


...with the inscription reading:

"I hope you're all okay".

Sincerely, Megypoo


----------



## RAINDANCE

Yanca said:


> The hypocrisy is astounding. Thrashes the BRF with her pity interview with her "journalist" friend/enabler Oprah, and mouthpiece Royal Reporter Scooby- who thrashes the BRF too every chance he could get, So called  Royal Reporter but is so bias and pro Sussex.  Wants to be linked not rank, promotes compassion but  both estranged from their families and is  accused of bullying from her employees, looks like want to contribute for the demise of the Royal family, walked away from Royal duries but kept the title.  Why can't she just go by her own name? Do whatever you want to do, merching, rubbing elbows with Hollywood woke elites, making shows,  be a lifetsyle blogger, do that but leave the monarchy  alone, stop drip dropping PR when members of BRF has birthdays, events and announcements to make,   and drop the titles and go at it with your own name and credentials- the moment they do it the less they will see criticism against them.


I wish I could like this 1,000 times.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, recurring devices:
special bond 
inclusive
resonate
activate compassion
Evolving 
expanding
inclusive

Looking out at My Love
And our beautiful boy.
And here in the window
I'll have tears of great joy...
_Because there is no hoi polloi 










						Meghan Markle writes children’s book ‘The Bench’ about dads and sons
					

Meghan Markle’s first children’s book hits stores on June 8. She will also narrate the audiobook.




					pagesix.com
				



_“’The Bench’ started as a poem I wrote for my husband on Father’s Day, the month after Archie was born,” Markle said in a statement, adding that the story is depicted through “an inclusive lens. “… My hope is that ‘The Bench’ resonates with every family, no matter the makeup, as much as it does with mine.”

“Inspired by her own husband and son, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut touchingly captures the evolving and expanding relationship between fathers and sons and reminds us of the many ways that love can take shape and be expressed in a modern family,” the publisher said.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can't make that sh*t up.
> 
> Also, may I add I'm a published author of three bestselling cookbooks and have difficulties securing a 4th contract on a different subject because I don't have outrageous social media following in that area? Happy to see Duchess Disney gets sh*t handed to her completely undeserved LOL


Just like she gets Spotify deals for really no talent at all.  Musicians gets screwed by the Douchess gets rewarded.


----------



## gracekelly

Activist...and what does that mean for her?  It is such an overused term and personally, I find it extremely annoying.  When I ran a food pantry several years ago, ran sales of donated clothing and helped to teach nutrition classes, did that make me a community activist?  I called my self a volunteer doing charity work.  None of the people I worked with made a big deal out of what we were doing, and we actually did things that helped people in lower income communities.    To date, this woman and her husband have made some videos and handed out some diapers.  I wouldn't call a single thing she did as the description of an activist.   A major problem is our times is that people are in the habit of attaching all sorts of labels to their name, whether warranted or not, and the public takes it as gospel that what people say about themselves is true.  Who is demanding proof?  I recently read about actors who, during the pandemic, gave substantial money and time to help essential care workers.  This information was not discussed at the time and you have to dig to find it. I don't see them standing up on a stage for a taped television production, with applause signs for the audience. telling the world how wonderful they are or spouting off and telling the world how things should be done.  

FYI, the vaccine is out there.  The real problem currently is getting people to agree to take it.  The experts are now stating that the US will never have herd immunity because there are not enough people willing to be vaccinated.  

Rant over.


----------



## purseinsanity

If that crap warrants a book publication, I deserve one too!  For those who don't know, I am also a poet.  For your reading pleasure:

Roses are red, 
Violets are blue,
Meghan doesn't have a single original thought in her head,
And Harry, neither do you!



(I'm clapping at my own brilliance, much like Harry's wife.  )


----------



## Allisonfaye

xincinsin said:


> It actually occurred to me to wonder if this was the divergent point. Bernstein and Woodward were relying on a single source Deep Throat, and NYT and WaPo were relying on their gut feel. It all worked out but it could have easily gone south if Deep Throat was a troll.



Minor in comparison to the corruption now, oddly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

@purseinsanity I think we all have some poetry in us.

Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
That chicken poop stinks,
and Meg's poetry does too.


----------



## DeMonica

mellibelly said:


> Guys, do you think Cringe spends the entire Sussex grooming and clothing budget on herself? I still can’t believe Archie’s first birthday diaper video.  And Ginge, as one poster said, looks like he has bad hygiene and wears sad outfits.
> 
> Exhibit A:
> View attachment 5073415
> 
> He’s losing his hair, it happens. But why is the hair he still has so long? It makes the bald patch more prominent. And all the neck hair should be trimmed. It’s so unkept. I found his long hair/bald patch distracting during PP’s funeral. Wills has the right idea keeping his hair short.
> 
> Exhibit B:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5073419
> 
> Scruffy old brown shoes, BLACK socks, light gray wrinkled suit. Couldn’t mommy pick out a better outfit?


Maybe he' growing his hair longer to be able to comb it over his bald patch.  Those shoes are Keanu level worn but Keanu is cool while Ging looks a sort of pathetic. 
Funny, that M's bump looks bigger there than two months later. Picking moon bumps or outfits for hubby is not her strongest point.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Oh my God, such horrible poetry. When I was a kid I entered a statewide poetry contest at age 11. I got third place. Even at that age all of the child competitors had much more depth to their work than this garbage. I feel sorry for any little kid whose Meghan-stan mother reads this insipid crap at bedtime.
> 
> Looking out at My Love
> And our beautiful boy.
> And here in the window
> I'll have tears of great joy...


We are a little family, perfect just at 3
Everybody else has been disowned by me, 
We will pose for pictures underneath our lemon tree,
Then I’ll hand you back to our latest nanny. 

I’m so grateful that rather than keeping this simple Father’s Day gift as a personal memento they are flogging it -seemingly without even a charitable donation included- that takes real class.


----------



## Allisonfaye

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> ...although as you stated later they took great pains to confirm everything with other sources before publishing.
> 
> Which is what legitimate investigative journalists still do. But today we have opinion masquerading as news, without any checks and balances. Sort of like this thread
> 
> I guess for me the difference is I don’t expect an entertainment personality, like Oprah, to function like Christiane Amanpour.
> 
> What I find more troubling is the divisiveness...when we retreat to our “sides” and automatically dismiss whatever the “other” is saying simply because “they” are saying it.
> 
> I would hate to promote vaccine refusal because two would be celebrities are involved with an event...we literally have a “news” personality supporting anti vaxers because he doesn’t like the messenger ("Some creepy old guy telling your children, your little kids to take medicine whose effects we do not fully understand.")
> 
> That worries me a lot more than anything a former actress and her ex pat husband do to extend their 15 minutes.



Funny that you use Amanpour as a beacon of truth. I am not going to post what she said on here as it would be viewed as too political. You can Google it. Hint: She isn't unbiased.


----------



## gracekelly

I am going to go into my garden and sit on my *bench,* yes I really have one, and await all the poems I know that this thread group will produce.  When we are finished, they should be put into a book, which I am certain will sell better than Meggie's mess.


----------



## Aimee3

Roses are red
Violets are blue
Harry’s wife’s book made me barf
How about you!


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> Maybe he' growing his hair longer to be able to comb it over his bald patch.  Those shoes are Keanu level worn but Keanu is cool while Ging looks a sort of pathetic.
> Funny, that M's bump looks bigger there than two months later. Picking moon bumps or outfits for hubby is not her strongest point.


Douchess always goes for the most expensive outfit there is, while her hubby always looks like he just shopped at a thrift shop.  What goes??


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> It actually occurred to me to wonder if this was the divergent point. Bernstein and Woodward were relying on a single source Deep Throat, and NYT and WaPo were relying on their gut feel. It all worked out but it could have easily gone south if Deep Throat was a troll.



Follow the money..............................


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I am going to go into my garden and sit on my *bench,* yes I really have one, and await all the poems I know that this thread group will produce.  When we are finished, they should be put into a book, which I am certain will sell better than Meggie's mess.


OMG YESSS!!!  

We can title it, "Finding Poems" by the Royal Correspondents of The Purse Forum.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> I am going to go into my garden and sit on my *bench,* yes I really have one, and await all the poems I know that this thread group will produce.  When we are finished, they should be put into a book, which I am certain will sell better than Meggie's mess.


Poor Grace Kelly is sat upon her bench,
Awaiting poetry lacking in meghan’s literary stench,
I hope she is somewhere temperate when pursuing this plan, 
She may be waiting for an ice age long span,


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking news, she's publishing a book in June called "The Bench" about the relationship between a father and son. It's based on a poem she wrote for Harry's first Fathers day shortly after Archie was born.
> I think it's a children's book
> *rolling my eyes very much here


I think she's creating herself a history as the Duchess of Sussex, so even if the title is eventually revoked, she would always be remembered as such. I thought the same when H&M changed their names and titles on Archie's birth certificate and when MM filed her lawsuits using the title. She is devious.


----------



## queennadine

“Sitting on this bench
And thinking with glee 
Who needs Charles
When you have Oprah Winfrey?

I call myself a feminist
An activist, what tales I’ve spun!
I’ll make Harry renounce his titles
So I’ll be the only Royal one 

Montecito has a real Royal now
Not Liz or that Kate
Or the other mean cow

I’m on top of the world
And feeling so free 
Oops, time to remind humanity 
How much it needs me”


----------



## CarryOn2020

There once was a man-child from Sussex
who lived in the tussocks
He made a deal with Better-Up
so he wouldn’t f%^k it up.




ETA: I went low


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> FYI, the vaccine is out there.  The real problem currently is getting people to agree to take it.  The experts are now stating that the US will never have herd immunity because there are not enough people willing to be vaccinated.


Send them to us in Canada.  We are still in lockdown because, even though people are lining up for hours around the block, there aren't enough. (Our government really let us down.)


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> Barbara Kay: Text messages exonerate Jessica Mulroney after she was cancelled last summer
> 
> 
> “Cancel culture” is pandemic today, but the virus was already in patchy play 30 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just read the whole thing too.  The transcripts of their DM and text message exchange is really troubling.  Sasha Exeter is the one that comes across as the bully and apparently the whole thing started when JM missed an initial video posted by SE who asked for anti-racism messages to be posted and SE thought JM had responded with a MLK quote that SE considered inadequate.  Turns out though that JM never saw the video and had posted the MLK quote independently.  The back and forth then started.  Makes for interesting reading and I actually feel for JM.



Me too. I feel a little embarrassed. I was making judgments about Jessica without knowing the whole story.

But, assuming Harry’s wife did know the full story, the fact she did not speak up on behalf of her supposedly BFF, Jessica, and instead quickly distanced herself from Jessica, is disgusting. All she needed to say is something like, "this needs another look, I feel like something must be missing", or "based on years of friendship this has not been my experience" etc.

Harry's wife, the "Douchess" (with credit to purseinsanity for the title) is a venomous snake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Send them to us in Canada.  We are still in lockdown because, even though people are lining up for hours around the block, there aren't enough. (Our government really let us down.)



That’s the hidden agenda, right? Which countries will receive all of these doses? Who will decide? Faux-politicians like H&M?


----------



## Lodpah

For all those talking about Lemons remember this? Maybe it’s MM sadistic side like her urban language to Harry?

When I was just a lad of ten, my father said to me
"Come here and take a lesson from the lovely lemon tree"
"Don't put your faith in love, my boy", my father said to me
"I fear you'll find that love is like the lovely lemon tree"
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat
One day, beneath the lemon tree, my love and I did lie
A girl so sweet that when she smiled the stars rose in the sky
We passed that summer lost in love beneath the lemon tree
The music of her laughter hid my father's words from me
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat
One day, she left without a word, she took away the sun
And in the dark, she left behind, I knew what she had done
She'd left me for another, it's a common tale but true
A sadder man but wiser now, I sing these words to you
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat
Lemon tree very pretty and the lemon flower is sweet
But the fruit of the poor lemon is impossible to eat
Lemon tree
Lemon tree
Lemon tree
Lemon tree


----------



## Allisonfaye

This comment may seem out of context now because I am way behind on the pages but I think that things would have been much different for MM if we didn't have the internet. The mainstream media would idolize her as they do and most people wouldn't have any sources to see the counter narrative. We wouldn't have access to the British sources so easily either. The internet is not her friend because we can find other sources to use to form our opinions of her.  If I had to depend on People magazine to know what I know about her, I would probably think she was a saint.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Poor Grace Kelly is sat upon her bench,
> Awaiting poetry lacking in meghan’s literary stench,
> I hope she is somewhere temperate when pursuing this plan,
> She may be waiting for an ice age long span,


Grace Kelly just fell off her bench
Whilst reading the poetry 
About that Montecito wench.

The wait may be long,
And futile at best, 
But we'll soldier through it
And beat those nitwits yet!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I made it through the Mulroney article, and I have to say: if that is indeed the gist of the conversation, Sasha Exeter - whose side I initially took - was way out of line. Being black isn't your wild card for being an a*shole.


Yeah I’m still wading through this now. If you ask me the worst thing she did was ever countenance this  attention-seeker insisting she needs to do what she’s told on Twitter in the first place. 
I’d probably say What’s the point in endorsing anything if you are being told to do it rather than it being your own choice?



Allisonfaye said:


> He's trying to dim the sun. Even the scientists are like, um, no.


I choose to interpret this as a high commitment Simpsons homage myself.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Send them to us in Canada.  We are still in lockdown because, even though people are lining up for hours around the block, there aren't enough. (Our government really let us down.)


I always knew that Canadians were more polite, and now it appears that they have more brains as well!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> This comment may seem out of context now because I am way behind on the pages but I think that things would have been much different for MM if we didn't have the internet. The mainstream media would idolize her as they do and most people wouldn't have any sources to see the counter narrative. We wouldn't have access to the British sources so easily either. The internet is not her friend because we can find other sources to use to form our opinions of her.  If I had to depend on People magazine to know what I know about her, I would probably think she was a saint.



Exactly why Diana was able to gain so much momentum. American mags printed only the glowing praises. 
Surely there was no agenda back then


----------



## purseinsanity

Cringe and Gringe, sitting in a tree,
Doing anything for P-U-B-L-I-C-I-T-Y,
First came a set up,
Then came pee,
Then came plenty o' moon bumps for thee!

(It seems I have a slow work day today, LOL!)


----------



## Laila619

The irony is rich.

She treats her own father/sister like absolute garbage and only uses her mother when it suits her, but writes a book about the “special relationship” between fathers and sons? Is she for real?! Truly gross and so tone deaf, coming from her.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Douchess always goes for the most expensive outfit there is, while her hubby always looks like he just shopped at a thrift shop.  What goes??



Gotta give them a pass on this
I always dressed like I was working on Mad Ave and the boy friends like they live in Ocean Beach
Of course I got the hang of pajama chic real quick during the last year. 
It was a struggle to find 'real clothes' when I went back to work


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Gotta give them a pass on this
> I always dressed like I was working on Mad Ave and the boy friends like they live in Ocean Beach
> Of course I got the hang of pajama chic real quick during the last year.
> It was a struggle to find 'real clothes' when I went back to work


Yea, but this is a guy that was born a Prince!  He dresses like he has one outfit.  The hobo on my neighborhood corner has more outfit options than Just Harry.


----------



## bisousx

youngster said:


> Barbara Kay: Text messages exonerate Jessica Mulroney after she was cancelled last summer
> 
> 
> “Cancel culture” is pandemic today, but the virus was already in patchy play 30 years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nationalpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just read the whole thing too.  The transcripts of their DM and text message exchange is really troubling.  Sasha Exeter is the one that comes across as the bully and apparently the whole thing started when JM missed an initial video posted by SE who asked for anti-racism messages to be posted and SE thought JM had responded with a MLK quote that SE considered inadequate.  Turns out though that JM never saw the video and had posted the MLK quote independently.  The back and forth then started.  Makes for interesting reading and I actually feel for JM.



The conversation between Jessica & Sasha, if it’s true, went exactly how I thought it went down.. Sasha bullied Jessica and was the instigator, taking advantage of a moment for her own gain. I had a sideye for Sasha crying about being targeted as a single mom when there was so much info omitted from the story.


----------



## youngster

bisousx said:


> The conversation between Jessica & Sasha, if it’s true, went exactly how I thought it went down.. Sasha bullied Jessica and was the instigator, taking advantage of a moment for her own gain. I had a sideye for Sasha crying about being targeted as a single mom when there was so much info omitted from the story.



Apparently, SE's parents live next door to her so they are available to help with her daughter so she's not exactly a struggling single mother.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> In sports, when you are “benched” you aren’t playing. It’s not a good thing. *Then again there are the urban dictionary definitions.......*



Yeah.....well......I'm not looking this time


----------



## gerryt

purseinsanity said:


> Yea, but this is a guy that was born a Prince!  He dresses like he has one outfit.  The hobo on my neighborhood corner has more outfit options than Just Harry.


Maybe she used up all their luggage options packing all her clothing funded by PC!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Yeah.....well......I'm not looking this time



Fortunately the definition there is what we know it to be. Nothing creepy or overtly sexual for a change. 

*benched*
Removed from a game or removed from play; can be applied to any situation where one is not permitted to participate in an activity.

Derived from the sporting world where players often sit on a bench when not playing. A player can be benched for many reasons including but not limited to: playing or performing poorly or sucking, disobeying the coach or leader, unsportsmanlike conduct, not following the game plan, showing up late, etc.
Coach says I'm benched because I can't catch today.

Man I thought I had a chance with that cute girl over there but she totally benched me.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> It's all word salad by the looks of it.
> 
> View attachment 5074084
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074085
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074086


She clings to that title as if her life depended on it. If they left the BRF, hence not really a royal anymore, why not Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor? Or if it's not "feminist" enough or too old fashioned, why not Meghan Markle?


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you. I love seeing and hearing happy people, especially people laughing during this epidemic. It helps heal the soul, the mind and the body.   Every time I see a laugh icon, I hear the laughter in my head and whenever someone post a funny item, I roar laughing. Hubby doesn't jump anymore, he knows I'm enjoying myself. I wish the same for everyone here.


Here’s to you Maggie Muggins:


aaargh. Don’t know why this got shaded in transmission


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Of course I got the hang of pajama chic real quick during the last year.
> It was a struggle to find 'real clothes' when I went back to work



I will have such difficulties getting dressed again. Good thing I like knit dresses, they at least feel like yoga pants.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> This comment may seem out of context now because I am way behind on the pages but I think that things would have been much different for MM if we didn't have the internet. The mainstream media would idolize her as they do and most people wouldn't have any sources to see the counter narrative. We wouldn't have access to the British sources so easily either. The internet is not her friend because we can find other sources to use to form our opinions of her.  If I had to depend on People magazine to know what I know about her, I would probably think she was a saint.



Absolutely. We wouldn't have tons of information from her shady past, either. And I'll say even the UK press would not have gone all out because printed pages are more expensive than online ones, so they wouldn't have given all that space to her.


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Aimee3 said:


> Harry’s wife is most likely vaccinated. Pregnant women were allowed to get the vaccine no matter their age.   just realized...maybe Harry’s wife isn’t pregnant and thus wasn’t eligible for the vaccine yet, only the surrogate was.



Regardless of whether she's pregnant (which, let's be real, the surrogacy conspiracy theory in this thread is just downright embarassing...) she's been eligible for the vaccine in the US since April 19.


----------



## scarlet555

OogleAtLuxury said:


> Regardless of whether she's pregnant (which, let's be real, the *surrogacy conspiracy* theory in this thread is just *downright embarassing*...) she's been eligible for the vaccine in the US since April 19.




Can you point to facts/as to why you don't believe they used a surrogate, people in this thread actually use pictures of her moonbump with different sizes inconsistent with her actual previous bumps, even in the same day.  they don't just randomly gossip without some pictures/ to back their ideas. though sometimes we do.  Of course you don't have to do anything, I am just curious as to why you think you know and what makes you say that.


----------



## Aimee3

Actually I know lots of pregnant women that got the vaccine well before April 19th. The date probably  depends on where in the USA you live.


----------



## lalame

I don't believe in the surrogacy rumors either. Or, better put, I don't feel like I know enough about what bumps should or shouldn't look like to draw a conclusion based on just photos. It's just so out of the pale to lie about a pregnancy, for someone in such a scrutinized position, it would take really clear evidence or admission for me to believe it. I think Beyonce lied about having a surrogate (right?) so I don't think it's implausible either... I just don't feel confident dying on either hill so I default to the standard face value belief.


----------



## scarlet555

What's going on with the nursery rhymes and poetry... these two  Douche and Douchess barely deserve punctuation and grammar from any of your brains my lovelies...


----------



## caramelize126

I posted that gif of her walking with her moon bump swinging side to side a few pages back so Im in the surrogate theory camp but if she is really pregnant- there are still doctors advising pregnant women to hold off on the vaccine. There is more data coming in that looks great but many are still being cautious. If she isnt going out much its probably not worth the potential risk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Bench


The comments are gold!



scarlet555 said:


> What's going on with the nursery rhymes and poetry... these two  Douche and Douchess barely deserve punctuation and grammar from any of your brains my lovelies...


----------



## caramelize126

lalame said:


> I don't believe in the surrogacy rumors either. Or, better put, I don't feel like I know enough about what bumps should or shouldn't look like to draw a conclusion based on just photos. It's just so out of the pale to lie about a pregnancy, for someone in such a scrutinized position, it would take really clear evidence or admission for me to believe it. I think Beyonce lied about having a surrogate (right?) so I don't think it's implausible either... I just don't feel confident dying on either hill so I default to the standard face value belief.



I posted this gif a few pages back. Do you think a pregnant belly moves like this? lol





Also, i personally dont know anyone that could squat like this while pregnant and wearing heels: 

Although to be fair- She was very puffy after archie was born. I dont think you can fake that. The whole thing is strange.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Here’s to you Maggie Muggins:
> View attachment 5074574
> 
> aaargh. Don’t know why this got shaded in transmission


*WOW!  * Just gaping at the screen and totally overwhelmed. Thank you so much for this great honour. I hope we will work together for the greater good of the association. 
You're definitely getting the Pulitzer Prize for this masterpiece.


----------



## scarlet555

lalame said:


> I don't believe in the surrogacy rumors either. Or, better put, I don't feel like I know enough about what bumps should or shouldn't look like to draw a conclusion based on just photos. It's just so out of the pale to lie about a pregnancy, for someone in such a scrutinized position, it would take really clear evidence or admission for me to believe it. I think Beyonce lied about having a surrogate (right?) so I don't think it's implausible either... I just don't feel confident dying on either hill so I default to the standard face value belief.


The way Beyonce was sitting with that moonbump for the interview... wow! and how she described giving birth-I can't even remember if someone wants to chime in...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

caramelize126 said:


> I posted this gif a few pages back. Do you think a pregnant belly moves like this? lol
> 
> 
> Although to be fair- She was very *puffy after archie was born*. I dont think you can fake that. The whole thing is strange.
> 
> View attachment 5074582



Easily, multiple buffet trips plus a couple gin and tonics and other spirits, and boom, some days I look like I just gave birth the night before or even look I am 4 months pregnant... no jokes.


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think she's creating herself a history as the Duchess of Sussex, so even if the title is eventually revoked, she would always be remembered as such. I thought the same when H&M changed their names and titles on Archie's birth certificate and when MM filed her lawsuits using the title. She is devious.


100%.  And thank you for your kind acknowledgment.  Gonna print and frame it!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't believe in the surrogacy rumors either. Or, better put, I don't feel like I know enough about what bumps should or shouldn't look like to draw a conclusion based on just photos. *It's just so out of the pale to lie about a pregnancy, for someone in such a scrutinized position*, it would take really clear evidence or admission for me to believe it. I think Beyonce lied about having a surrogate (right?) so I don't think it's implausible either... I just don't feel confident dying on either hill so I default to the standard face value belief.



People lying about reproductive issues is actually quite common. They want to keep the origin of their child private. It's not so much a lie as it is a nondisclosure. It's understandable that there could be a stigma, real or perceived, about needing help to procreate. Then again, look at Alec Baldwin's baby-producing machine of a wife. She outright lied and said all those babies came out of her body, right up until the last two kids when there was only a few months separating them and she couldn't get away with it.

ETA: Wearing a moonbump would be seen as a lie IMO because she is presenting herself as pregnant.


----------



## zinacef

Sharont2305 said:


> "Once upon a time there was a Prince, he had a father, then along came a witch who took him away to a far off land from said father who was very wicked in not letting the witch have her own way."
> The End.
> 
> There, wrote it for you megs.
> Can I have my publishing contract now please?


and he has to sit on a bench waiting for his money. there‘s The bench!


----------



## poopsie

The Group W bench?!?!


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I don't believe in the surrogacy rumors either. Or, better put, I don't feel like I know enough about what bumps should or shouldn't look like to draw a conclusion based on just photos. It's just so out of the pale to lie about a pregnancy, for someone in such a scrutinized position, it would take really clear evidence or admission for me to believe it. I think Beyonce lied about having a surrogate (right?) so I don't think it's implausible either... I just don't feel confident dying on either hill so I default to the standard face value belief.


Beyonce had a surrogate?!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> People lying about reproductive issues is actually quite common. They want to keep the origin of their child private. It's not so much a lie as it is a nondisclosure. It's understandable that there could be a stigma, real or perceived, about needing help to procreate. Then again, look at Alec Baldwin's baby-producing machine of a wife. She outright lied and said all those babies came out of her body, right up until the last two kids when there was only a few months separating them and she couldn't get away with it.
> 
> ETA: Wearing a moonbump would be seen as a lie IMO because she is presenting herself as pregnant.


OMG my mind is being blown.  So Hilarious also used surrogates for pregnancies other than the most recent?


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Megain Markle, douchess of Sussex
Wants to be an A-lister, but it's really X

Snags a dumb prince, for the tiara and sash
Thought she'd be swimming in boatload of cash

Work as a royal, maybe for a day or two
Give the family the finger, byebye toodaloo

Run off to Montecito to spew bs with Oprah
Realized not everyone is a big suckah

Liars liars, pants are on fire
Her majesty sits back, as support rises higher
Playing the long game, until they run out of clout
Then she swoops in and kicks their ass out

--

Now give me my own publication, Penguin!!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> OMG my mind is being blown.  So Hilarious also used surrogates for pregnancies other than the most recent?


She was always posting preggo photos.  I think the surrogate was just for the last one.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Personally, the answer to a lot of these ‘why discuss x about H&M’ questions is because it’s funny and I enjoy having these running in-jokes on the thread with people from all over the world.
 It’s really not that serious.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> OMG my mind is being blown.  So Hilarious also used surrogates for pregnancies other than the most recent?



We'll never know for sure. We know she isn't exactly a shining example of honestly and neither is he.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> She was always posting preggo photos.  I think the surrogate was just for the last one.


That's what I thought too, but I learn something new here every day, LOL!


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

caramelize126 said:


> I posted this gif a few pages back. Do you think a pregnant belly moves like this? lol
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074582
> 
> 
> Also, i personally dont know anyone that could squat like this while pregnant and wearing heels:
> 
> Although to be fair- She was very puffy after archie was born. I dont think you can fake that. The whole thing is strange.




What exactly do you think a pregnant person is like? A statue made of stone?  She's in heels, so the sheer impact of her foot hitting the ground is certainly more than enough to jiggle stuff on someone's body. Especially if she gained weight during pregnancy. When you jump, does your belly not jiggle...?


----------



## OogleAtLuxury

Aimee3 said:


> Actually I know lots of pregnant women that got the vaccine well before April 19th. The date probably  depends on where in the USA you live.



That was my point. Regardless of whether she was pregnant, she would've been eligible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Golly such good serendipitous Bench timing ... how did they get that right ? 
Kate’s book comes out in three days ...


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> Can you imagine a conversation between those two? (Has anyone seen Inside Bill Gate's Brain?)



MM: "You haven't asked me if I'm OK  "

BG: "My guess is you're OK compared to the truly destitute people around the world to whom I've donated tens of billions. How many billions are you hitting me up for?"

MM: "Prince Charles cut us off, wouldn't pay for our security, and my Netflix contract is about one day's interest to you. If you give me a lousy couple billion I can give Harry the heave-ho. I can't shove off Harry until it's in my account. A girl's gotta eat." 

BG: "And if I give you nothing?"

MM: "I'll tell Oprah a bunch of crap so at least I'll get paid something! Harry is desperate as I am so he won't care!"

BG: "Your rescue chickens have more brains than both of you put together."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I don't believe in the surrogacy rumors either. Or, better put, I don't feel like I know enough about what bumps should or shouldn't look like to draw a conclusion based on just photos. It's just so out of the pale to lie about a pregnancy, for someone in such a scrutinized position, it would take really clear evidence or admission for me to believe it. I think Beyonce lied about having a surrogate (right?) so I don't think it's implausible either... I just don't feel confident dying on either hill so I default to the standard face value belief.



I think Lady CC got it right: she is indeed pregnant, she was also pregnant with Archie, but her drama and secrecy (plus the padding she must use or otherwise some pictures and video footage are inexplainable) she deliberately used and uses to keep people talking backfired and caused the surrogacy rumours.

Re: Beyoncé, was that ever confirmed? I remember during her first pregnancy she had both a belly malfunction (it completely folded over on itself and collapsed when she sat down) and when some media person wanted to touch the belly (which I find super rude and intrusive) she grabbed the hand in a panic and placed it elsewhere on the bump which people interpreted as the original placing would have revealed it was fake.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> People lying about reproductive issues is actually quite common. They want to keep the origin of their child private. It's not so much a lie as it is a nondisclosure. It's understandable that there could be a stigma, real or perceived, about needing help to procreate. Then again, look at Alec Baldwin's baby-producing machine of a wife. She outright lied and said all those babies came out of her body, right up until the last two kids when there was only a few months separating them and she couldn't get away with it.
> 
> ETA: Wearing a moonbump would be seen as a lie IMO because she is presenting herself as pregnant.



Hu? So they used a surrogate for more than the youngest kid? 

I must admit I find it way weirder they couldn't space them out 10 months than going to a lab and order your custom baby (as in, they specifically wanted a girl). What was the hurry?


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> *WOW!  * Just gaping at the screen and totally overwhelmed. Thank you so much for this great honour. I hope we will work together for the greater good of the association.
> You're definitely getting the Pulitzer Prize for this masterpiece.


You are the amazing one. It took a lot of time to edit these pages to generate the list of all who post. It's a thoughtful gesture and resulted in a fun read for the rest of us to see the broad focus.

The numbers vary of course, as this rolls on at sometimes super speed it seems, but in one set of numbers you had made 538 posts which generated a whopping 4,786 likes. That struck me as a significant % of feedback for the number of posts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Kaka_bobo said:


> Megain Markle, douchess of Sussex
> Wants to be an A-lister, but it's really X
> 
> Snags a dumb prince, for the tiara and sash
> Thought she'd be swimming in boatload of cash
> 
> Work as a royal, maybe for a day or two
> Give the family the finger, byebye toodaloo
> 
> Run off to Montecito to spew bs with Oprah
> Realized not everyone is a big suckah
> 
> Liars liars, pants are on fire
> Her majesty sits back, as support rises higher
> Playing the long game, until they run out of clout
> Then she swoops in and kicks their ass out
> 
> --
> 
> Now give me my own publication, Penguin!!


This is very Lawrence Ferlinghetti with its rhythms
Im going for more a Mcgonagall’s ‘the Tay bridge disaster’ vibe myself.


bag-mania said:


> People lying about reproductive issues is actually quite common. They want to keep the origin of their child private. It's not so much a lie as it is a nondisclosure. It's understandable that there could be a stigma, real or perceived, about needing help to procreate. Then again, look at Alec Baldwin's baby-producing machine of a wife. She outright lied and said all those babies came out of her body, right up until the last two kids when there was only a few months separating them and she couldn't get away with it.
> 
> ETA: Wearing a moonbump would be seen as a lie IMO because she is presenting herself as pregnant.



I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again this whole thing is twisted because it feels like the implication so often is that surrogacy is picked due to vanity and laziness and that fertility issues are somehow weak. There is nothing weak or wrong about being unable to have children. 


Lying is weak. Lying to people who admire you is especially weak. Lying because you want to avoid a misogynistic label when you call yourself a feminist activist is pretty embarrassing too.

If you respect women’s bodies and their freedom of choice then it’s really not difficult to say something like:
“I am actually lucky enough to be pregnant but I don’t think there should be any stigma attached to surrogacy or other ways of becoming a parent and I would happily tell you if I was pursuing it.”


----------



## Genie27

June
(baby)moon
soon
- Wench on the Bench




Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937


Aww, thanks! I made the cut. Even though I don’t always feel up to chatting, I do read and laugh, and post the random comment or two when I can


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, has it been brought up that apparently Sunshine Sachs was one of the main organizers of that vaccination event? I haven't fact-checked, I just picked it up from Lady CC's newest video.


----------



## lalame

caramelize126 said:


> I posted this gif a few pages back. Do you think a pregnant belly moves like this? lol
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074582
> 
> 
> Also, i personally dont know anyone that could squat like this while pregnant and wearing heels:
> 
> Although to be fair- She was very puffy after archie was born. I dont think you can fake that. The whole thing is strange.




I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


----------



## gerryt

Off topic here, but I recently took early retirement.  (I know none of you actually know me but for some reason its important to me to emphasis the ‘early’ part!)
I was pretty worried about the changing structure of my day to day life, how I was going to spend my time etc.  Then I found this forum and the interesting and funny people on it!  Its the first thing I look at in the morning, the last thing at night!  I find Harry and his wife intensely irritating but I suppose I have to thank them for easing me into retirement!!
Particular thanks to Maggie Muggins for my new career as a royal correspondent!


----------



## caramelize126

jelliedfeels said:


> This is very Lawrence Ferlinghetti with its rhythms
> Im going for more a Mcgonagall’s ‘the Tay bridge disaster’ vibe myself.
> 
> 
> I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again this whole thing is twisted because it feels like the implication so often is that surrogacy is picked due to vanity and laziness and that fertility issues are somehow weak. There is nothing weak or wrong about being unable to have children.
> 
> 
> Lying is weak. Lying to people who admire you is especially weak. Lying because you want to avoid a misogynistic label when you call yourself a feminist activist is pretty embarrassing too.
> 
> If you respect women’s bodies and their freedom of choice then it’s really not difficult to say something like:
> “I am actually lucky enough to be pregnant but I don’t think there should be any stigma attached to surrogacy or other ways of becoming a parent and I would happily tell you if I was pursuing it.”



I don’t remember the details anymore but when the questions about surrogacy first came up, it was thought that they were secretive about it because if it came out that Archie was born from a surrogate, he could not be in the line of succession. Does anyone remember the details?


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> People lying about reproductive issues is actually quite common. They want to keep the origin of their child private. It's not so much a lie as it is a nondisclosure. It's understandable that there could be a stigma, real or perceived, about needing help to procreate. Then again, look at Alec Baldwin's baby-producing machine of a wife. She outright lied and said all those babies came out of her body, right up until the last two kids when there was only a few months separating them and she couldn't get away with it.
> 
> ETA: Wearing a moonbump would be seen as a lie IMO because she is presenting herself as pregnant.



Wow are you saying Alec Baldwin's wife lied about having a surrogate too? I actually don't know anything about her other than being surprised that she was popping out so many babies.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think Lady CC got it right: she is indeed pregnant, she was also pregnant with Archie, but her drama and secrecy (plus the padding she must use or otherwise some pictures and video footage are inexplainable) she deliberately used and uses to keep people talking backfired and caused the surrogacy rumours.
> 
> Re: Beyoncé, was that ever confirmed? I remember during her first pregnancy she had both a belly malfunction (it completely folded over on itself and collapsed when she sat down) and when some media person wanted to touch the belly (which I find super rude and intrusive) she grabbed the hand in a panic and placed it elsewhere on the bump which people interpreted as the original placing would have revealed it was fake.



I totally thought Beyonce's was confirmed but you guys are making me question it.   If it wasn't confirmed, I take it back!


----------



## Lounorada

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This happened to me. I don't have very strong feelings about the monarchy but when people started to tweet, send messages on instagram, the TV and even the stupid American president felt the need to release a statement, that made me very pro-monarchy. I really do not appreciate foreign interference, especially when the foreigners are ignorant. I mean, how would Americans like it if the Brits started to interfere in elections and try to topple or bully the president? Celebrities are increasingly becoming sanctimonious and hypocritical. They really should just stick to their profession, and only talk on matters they have a deep knowledge of. Ricky Gervais roasted a whole load of celebs during the golden globes ceremony for this and it was insanely funny, the celebs looked uncomfortable because they knew it was true.


Yes!  To all of this.






bag-mania said:


> We are coming up on the 4,000th page of this thread. Congratulations everyone! We couldn’t have done it without each and every one of you. Yay us!!









xincinsin said:


> Her mother and sisters were the executors of her will. *I doubt she would have asked Charles to do anything after he achieved his goal of transforming into a tampon.*









Maggie Muggins said:


> Congratulations! It seems we all made the cut.
> Please forgive me if I missed anyone.
> View attachment 5072937





Maggie Muggins said:


> Again, I apologize for missing several names on The List. Before I get chastised by the Press Club, I'm posting a list of also very worthy Royal Correspondents. Congratulations to all!
> 
> View attachment 5073081
> 
> Thanks everyone for the great comments. I love the party suggestions. Please let me know if I missed anyone else. By the time, I finished the first list, I was totally cross-eyed.


Girl, you had me disappointed for a second, but you came through with that follow-up list 






Chanbal said:


> Still on the vaccine event:



More like:










mellibelly said:


> Imagine if this poor man’s Rachel Zoe was your stylist
> View attachment 5073328
> View attachment 5073329
> View attachment 5073330
> View attachment 5073331











jelliedfeels said:


> it’s an exaggeration but we’ve certainly seen her in plenty of expensive things like Maria Grazia’s old curtain kaftan and the notorious earrings. Also this couple save a lot of money between then as Harry apparently only has one suit and he’s cultivating hobbit feet to save on shoes.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, has it been brought up that apparently Sunshine Sachs was one of the main organizers of that vaccination event? I haven't fact-checked, I just picked it up from Lady CC's newest video.



Does SS represent Selena Gomez and the others appearing? Suddenly everything is coming into focus.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

caramelize126 said:


> I don’t remember the details anymore but when the questions about surrogacy first came up, it was thought that they were secretive about it because if it came out that Archie was born from a surrogate, he could not be in the line of succession. Does anyone remember the details?


LOL. There will be people with sharper memory than I have at the moment, but I do remember some discussion when the changes to his birth certificate were revealed because it tied into a statement about the birth from the mother, and a surrogate would not fit the language, if that makes sense?


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.



Let us know how it goes!  I'm excited for you!  

I don't buy into the surrogate rumors either so much, but that video with the swinging baby bump is really odd to me.  I've had 2 children and I am similar in build and height to MM.  There is no way I had a swinging, swaying bump in either pregnancy.  Both babies were big but no way were they swinging side to side like in that video.  I could feel them move _a lot _but it was rare to see movement on the "outside" of my body if that makes sense. Everything was fairly firmly held in place by all the other organs and muscle surrounding the baby, that's the way I remember it. In fact, toward the end, it's very cramped in there and there isn't a lot of room for baby to move.  (I had to have a special procedure in fact to push one of them into the correct position since baby was kind of stuck and would have been a breech otherwise.) So, that video is just really weird and I can't explain it.


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> He's trying to dim the sun. Even the scientists are like, um, no.


The joys of being in a different time zone - I wake up to a plethora of poems and misread this as Bill Gates trying to make dim sum. I think I need more sleep. See you later


----------



## gracekelly

Gosh, I am heartbroken at the thought that she wrote a book about a father and son bond before the son was even born. Oh No!  What if it was a girl?  Silly me...they made sure it was a boy with the IVF.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


Great news!  Congrats!


----------



## lalame

I missed it entirely... what book?   Meghan wrote a book about father and son bonding before Archie was born?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Does SS represent Selena Gomez and the others appearing? Suddenly everything is coming into focus.


Of course.  It appears that all these events are created as a showcase for their clients.


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I missed it entirely... what book?   Meghan wrote a book about father and son bonding before Archie was born?


Look above at my post.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Look above at my post.



Your post is what made me ask but i saw some comments about it earlier too that I forgot to respond to. Is this new? First I've heard about it at least...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.



Congratulations


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I totally thought Beyonce's was confirmed but you guys are making me question it.   If it wasn't confirmed, I take it back!



I honestly don't know because I don't usually follow any celebrities but the troublesome two   So chances are I have just completely missed it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gerryt said:


> Off topic here, but I recently took early retirement.  (I know none of you actually know me but for some reason its important to me to emphasis the ‘early’ part!)
> I was pretty worried about the changing structure of my day to day life, how I was going to spend my time etc.  Then I found this forum and the interesting and funny people on it!  Its the first thing I look at in the morning, the last thing at night!  I find Harry and his wife intensely irritating but I suppose I have to thank them for easing me into retirement!!
> Particular thanks to Maggie Muggins for my new career as a royal correspondent!


Happy retirement and a hearty welcome aboard. Hope you enjoy your new career. 

Et correct spelling


----------



## DeMonica

OogleAtLuxury said:


> What exactly do you think a pregnant person is like? A statue made of stone?  She's in heels, so the sheer impact of her foot hitting the ground is certainly more than enough to jiggle stuff on someone's body. Especially if she gained weight during pregnancy. When you jump, does your belly not jiggle...?


Normally, you have to be extremely fat with very soft connective tissue and fat _above _your abdominal muscles to see this kind of jiggling...and you have to move like an elephant. Now, the pregnant belly is usually relatively firm, because it's not fat but a baby swimming in amniotic fluid in an amniotic sac filling all the available space underneath the abdominal muscles. The pregnant bump normally changes shape when the baby moves inside the sac.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


Congratulations!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


Congrats and best wishes!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Gosh, I am heartbroken at the thought that she wrote a book about a father and son bond before the son was even born. Oh No!  What if it was a girl?  Silly me...they made sure it was a boy with the IVF.



The Tweet is from September, Archie was born in May, and apparently that thing was a spin-off of a poem (!) she wrote for Harry's first father's day when Archie was four weeks old. So the timeline does make kind of sense.

In fact, while the poetry is awful I could have found it cute if they roll like this. The cuteness stops though when she takes that sappy thing and makes it into a book no publisher would have bought if it wasn't pinned by THE DUCHESS (I mean...look how long it took to get a contract) while probably thinking she's the next Toni Morrison.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Wow are you saying Alec Baldwin's wife lied about having a surrogate too? I actually don't know anything about her other than being surprised that she was popping out so many babies.



The last baby was from a surrogate for sure. I’d say at least one of the others was as well. She had two miscarriages in 2019 so I suspect the babies born after that were all from surrogates. I don’t trust any of her pregnancy photos given her history of fakery.


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if the Cambridges will get a personalised signed copy?



They'll get 1000 copies with an invoice and a "Payment Due By Date".  Meghan will do anything to squeeze a nickel out of the Crown.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> It's all word salad by the looks of it.
> 
> View attachment 5074084
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074085
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074086


Gosh, I came back to this thread to learn that Ginger's wife is cashing in on the title again. Is Ginger in a military uniform? Beautiful illustrations, but the text...   I wonder how many books omid purchased...


----------



## lalame

Ohh, now I'm caught up on the book.  "Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex"

Is she legally required to use that title or whyyy must it be used so obnoxiously? Seems like that person who signs ", Ph.D" or whatever everywhere their name appears.


----------



## Chanbal

madamelizaking said:


> *Also, feminists don't cling to titles only earned by marriage, and activists don't focus on self promotion.*


YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## xincinsin

Aimlessly surfing at breakfast. How odd that in Jan 2020, Sunshine said it was no longer representing H's wife. The article also describes her as a "huge superstar" with a "squeaky clean image" 









						Will Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Pursue Hollywood Deals After 'Step Back' From Royal Duties?
					

"They've probably been flooded with endorsement opportunities," one former endorsement agent tells TheWrap




					www.thewrap.com


----------



## lallybelle

I don't know, Selena wasn't giving out false Medical or Scientific facts or news. She just didn't know that Ms. Ardern, who is a badass by the way, was already involved. I mean, I'm glad the spokesperson corrected and brought up all she is doing/has done, but It's not like Selena was telling people to inject bleach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Trying to process all these details:
-They leave in *Jan. 2020.*
-South Africa tour is *Sept. 24th 2019*
-Dan Wootton’s article is posted in The Sun on *Sept. 6, 2019.*
— article confirms Palace knew she had written a book, had a contract with a publisher,  was planning on spending time in the US.
-*Aug. 2019* she was in contact with her US PR firm, Sunshine Sachs








						Meghan Markle hires crisis management firm that once represented Harvey Weinstein and Michael Jackson in bid to improve her damaged image
					

MEGHAN called on a Hollywood crisis management company to help improve her image after being caught up in a string of controversies. She has hired Sunshine Sachs — a firm whose clients included the…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



-*May 2019* Archie born

Was the book written during the summer of 2019?









						Meghan Markle upsets royals by keeping secret Hollywood agent to run her career
					

MEGHAN has sparked new concerns at Buckingham Palace — by using a Hollywood agent, lawyer and business manager. The secret US team is looking after her future career — and believed to be in negotia…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_
But a senior royal insider said the team’s “role in ongoing projects like her children’s book” is “concerning” the Palace.

Meghan, 38, believes the book — which she has already written — will be a sensation with the right launch.

But the source said: “As a full-time member of the Royal Family, it would be the expectation for that type of work to be exclusively handled by Palace staff who balance individual desire over what’s right for the wider institution.”

They went on: “It is clear she is wanting to keep surrounding herself with her Hollywood people. That wasn’t the expectation.”

She may spend part of the year in the US in future, it is believed._


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Bench
> 
> 
> The comments are gold!



Released in time for Archie's birthday and father's day. People were questioning about what she was going to do to outshine the Cambridges...  wow


----------



## CarryOn2020

lallybelle said:


> I don't know, Selena wasn't giving out false Medical or Scientific facts or news. She just didn't know that Ms. Ardern, who is a badass by the way, was already involved. I mean, I'm glad the spokesperson corrected and brought up all she is doing/has done, but It's not like Selena was telling people to inject bleach.



Does she or her ‘assistant’ know how to Google?  If not, why is she posting about stuff she doesn’t know? Why is she ‘leading‘ a vaccine concert?   We must stop these celebs dumbing down the USA. Just stop it.

ETA: no one said to “inject bleach”.  Google it.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Gosh, I came back to this thread to learn that Ginger's wife is cashing in on the title again. Is Ginger in a military uniform? Beautiful illustrations, but the text...   I wonder how many books omid purchased...



Who is the sock puppet accusing of whinging and throwing tantrums?


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


OMG congratulations!


----------



## lalame

Thanks ladies for the kind congrats.  This thread really gets the scoop... y'all found out even before my mother (a little toooo soon to share).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

caramelize126 said:


> I don’t remember the details anymore but when the questions about surrogacy first came up, it was thought that they were secretive about it because if it came out that Archie was born from a surrogate, he could not be in the line of succession. Does anyone remember the details?



yes.  There is a law in the UK that the child must be born “of the body”.  Ie. even if the egg and sperm were from M&H, if she used a gestational carrier, then the child is not born of the body of the biological mother, so no title.  This applies to all aristos - not just the royal family.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

needlv said:


> yes.  There is a law in the UK that the child must be born “of the body”.  Ie. even if the egg and sperm were from M&H, if she used a gestational carrier, then the child is not born of the body of the biological mother, so no title.  This applies to all aristos - not just the royal family.



I did not know of this law, and it would thus make sense that they wanted to keep it quiet (having a surrogate if they did). I don't have strong feelings as to whether she had a surrogate or not but if this is the law it would make sense that they wanted to keep it quiet. But would it not be easy for a leak to occur if she did have a surrogate? There was always someone leaking some information constantly. 

Its a silly rule and one that could've been overturned by the Queen (I think). I know they changed the laws so that the eldest child of the monarch (regardless of sex) would become the heir apparent, so basically re-writing the sexist inheritance/succession laws.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I did not know of this law, and it would thus make sense that they wanted to keep it quiet (having a surrogate if they did). I don't have strong feelings as to whether she had a surrogate or not but if this is the law it would make sense that they wanted to keep it quiet. *But would it not be easy for a leak to occur if she did have a surrogate? There was always someone leaking some information constantly.*
> 
> Its a silly rule and one that could've been overturned by the Queen (I think). I know they changed the laws so that the eldest child of the monarch (regardless of sex) would become the heir apparent, so basically re-writing the sexist inheritance/succession laws.



I looked up the surrogacy law in the UK earlier out of curiosity and saw this (below). This makes me doubt she'd take the risk of a surrogate then...

*Overview*
Surrogacy is legal in the UK, but if you make a surrogacy agreement it cannot be enforced by the law.
*The legal parents at birth*
If you use a surrogate, *they will be the child’s legal parent at birth.*
If the surrogate is married or in a civil partnership, their spouse or civil partner will be the child’s second parent at birth, unless they did not give their permission.
Legal parenthood can be transferred by parental order or adoption after the child is born.
If there is disagreement about who the child’s legal parents should be, the courts will make a decision based on the best interests of the child.
*Surrogacy agreements*
The intended parents and surrogate can record how they want the arrangement to work in a surrogacy agreement.
*Surrogacy agreements are not enforceable by UK law, even if you have a signed document with your surrogate and have paid their expenses.*


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Ohh, now I'm caught up on the book.  "Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex"
> 
> Is she legally required to use that title or whyyy must it be used so obnoxiously? Seems like that person who signs ", Ph.D" or whatever everywhere their name appears.


The use of the duchess title by Ginger's wife is beyond ridiculous. PhD, MD, MD/PhD, MBA, or Ed.D are merit earned titles, there is no comparison imo. In our society, women are often criticized by using their titles, it's usually Dr. Man and Mrs. Woman.


----------



## caramelize126

lalame said:


> I looked up the surrogacy law in the UK earlier out of curiosity and saw this (below). This makes me doubt she'd take the risk of a surrogate then...
> 
> *Overview*
> Surrogacy is legal in the UK, but if you make a surrogacy agreement it cannot be enforced by the law.
> *The legal parents at birth*
> If you use a surrogate, *they will be the child’s legal parent at birth.*
> If the surrogate is married or in a civil partnership, their spouse or civil partner will be the child’s second parent at birth, unless they did not give their permission.
> Legal parenthood can be transferred by parental order or adoption after the child is born.
> If there is disagreement about who the child’s legal parents should be, the courts will make a decision based on the best interests of the child.
> *Surrogacy agreements*
> The intended parents and surrogate can record how they want the arrangement to work in a surrogacy agreement.
> *Surrogacy agreements are not enforceable by UK law, even if you have a signed document with your surrogate and have paid their expenses.*



This is interesting. Would this still be the case if the surrogate was american/contract was signed in america? Or is it based on where the baby is born?


----------



## lalame

caramelize126 said:


> This is interesting. Would this still be the case if the surrogate was american/contract was signed in america? Or is it based on where the baby is born?



I would guess wherever legal jurisdiction holds - at that time she was living in the UK and any contract fulfilled (aka baby born) would've been in the UK.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> The use of the duchess title by Ginger's wife is beyond ridiculous. PhD, MD, MD/PhD, MBA, or Ed.D are merit earned titles, there is no comparison imo. In our society, women are often criticized by using their titles, it's usually Dr. Man and Mrs. Woman.



I have respect for those titles but all the same I find it so obnoxious and pretentious when anyone insists on listing them after their name when the credential isn't required.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Ohh, now I'm caught up on the book.  "Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex"
> 
> Is she legally required to use that title or whyyy must it be used so obnoxiously? Seems like that person who signs ", Ph.D" or whatever everywhere their name appears.



At least the PhD earned it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trying to process all these details:
> -They leave in *Jan. 2020.*
> -South Africa tour is *Sept. 24th 2019*
> -Dan Wootton’s article is posted in The Sun on *Sept. 6, 2019.*
> — article confirms Palace knew she had written a book, had a contract with a publisher,  was planning on spending time in the US.
> -*Aug. 2019* she was in contact with her US PR firm, Sunshine Sachs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires crisis management firm that once represented Harvey Weinstein and Michael Jackson in bid to improve her damaged image
> 
> 
> MEGHAN called on a Hollywood crisis management company to help improve her image after being caught up in a string of controversies. She has hired Sunshine Sachs — a firm whose clients included the…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -*May 2019* Archie born
> 
> Was the book written during the summer of 2019?



I mean, it doesn't seem like a whole lot of text.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


Congrats! We will follow your updates.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Me too. I feel a little embarrassed. I was making judgments about Jessica without knowing the whole story.
> 
> But, assuming Harry’s wife did know the full story, the fact she did not speak up on behalf of her supposedly BFF, Jessica, and instead quickly distanced herself from Jessica, is disgusting. All she needed to say is something like, "this needs another look, I feel like something must be missing", or "based on years of friendship this has not been my experience" etc.
> 
> Harry's wife, the "Douchess" (with credit to purseinsanity for the title) is a venomous snake.


After sleeping on it, I'm also wondering why this wasn't brought up earlier. It's very touching that the reporter is following up with the story a year later, but didn't Mulroney have any other friends besides H's wife? So many articles describe her and her husband as a power couple. Doesn't she have connections, familial or otherwise, who can advise her? No one spoke up on her behalf at all? Everyone ditched her? If she had this evidence, why didn't she seek legal counsel? Sorry for being cynical, but it's hard to believe that in the entire Canadian press corps, no one asked her for her side of the story. Maybe the truth is somewhere in-between.


----------



## Staci_W

poopsie said:


> Wonder if anyone is streaming All the President's Men
> I have the dvd but I'm too lazy to hook up the player


I'm really far behind, so I don't know if anyone has answered this. I just watched this movie on HBO Max last week.


----------



## Jayne1

scarlet555 said:


> The way Beyonce was sitting with that moonbump for the interview... wow! and how she described giving birth-I can't even remember if someone wants to chime in...





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Beyoncé, was that ever confirmed? I remember during her first pregnancy she had both a belly malfunction (it completely folded over on itself and collapsed when she sat down) and when some media person wanted to touch the belly (which I find super rude and intrusive) she grabbed the hand in a panic and placed it elsewhere on the bump which people interpreted as the original placing would have revealed it was fake.


I'm absolutely convinced Bey used a surrogate the first time. She was so secretive, she acted so odd and she didn't even look pregnant, other than a bump.

The second time, she was obviously pregnant and was so proud, she posted pictures of herself naked and was out there so much more, posing in front of the cameras.  Also, the second time she had that pregnant look and glow and her boobs got big, you know, the usual.

But that was only for the second pregnancy.

Strangely though, years later, she produced a historical documentary about herself and showed a neck-down big bare belly when she was supposedly pregnant with her first, and although we saw _no head attached to the belly,_ her fans all said, see she really was pregnant the first time. 

This all based on a quick shot of a torso, not even seeing a head attached to the belly - that's all Bey had to do to convince her fans.


----------



## bisousx

xincinsin said:


> After sleeping on it, I'm also wondering why this wasn't brought up earlier. It's very touching that the reporter is following up with the story a year later, but didn't Mulroney have any other friends besides H's wife? So many articles describe her and her husband as a power couple. Doesn't she have connections, familial or otherwise, who can advise her? No one spoke up on her behalf at all? Everyone ditched her? If she had this evidence, why didn't she seek legal counsel? Sorry for being cynical, but it's hard to believe that in the entire Canadian press corps, no one asked her for her side of the story. Maybe the truth is somewhere in-between.



This was a clear example of cancel culture - evidence or other sides of the story are no longer needed to judge. Nothing Jessica would’ve said publicly at the time would’ve been a good look for her. Everyone on IG was stomping their feet demanding influencers and companies to support BLM... or ELSE. I wonder how some of the influencers I follow feel now, having been pressured to donate thousands and post receipts, knowing it very well may have helped fund a couple mansions for one of the leaders.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> They'll get 1000 copies with an invoice and a "Payment Due By Date".  Meghan will do anything to squeeze a nickel out of the Crown.


Yes, but I imagine that Will & Kate don't have to accept the delivery and if I were them, I would have the package (books and invoice) forwarded COD to H & his wife.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bisousx said:


> This was a clear example of cancel culture - evidence or other sides of the story are no longer needed to judge. Nothing Jessica would’ve said publicly at the time would’ve been a good look for her. Everyone on IG was stomping their feet demanding influencers and companies to support BLM... or ELSE. I wonder how some of the influencers I follow feel now, having been pressured to donate thousands and post receipts, knowing it very well may have helped fund a couple mansions for one of the leaders.


Sad...


----------



## bellecate

Trying to keep up with this face paced forum today.
I'm Duchess Meghan,
So this is about me
I have a husband and son
That hide under the lemon tree.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is also confused! 










						PIERS MORGAN: How can Meghan preach about father-child relationships?
					

Meghan Markle has written a book called 'The Bench' about the very special bond between father and child - the very notion of her dishing out advice on this is ridiculous.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> After sleeping on it, I'm also wondering why this wasn't brought up earlier. It's very touching that the reporter is following up with the story a year later, but didn't Mulroney have any other friends besides H's wife? So many articles describe her and her husband as a power couple. Doesn't she have connections, familial or otherwise, who can advise her? No one spoke up on her behalf at all? Everyone ditched her? If she had this evidence, why didn't she seek legal counsel? Sorry for being cynical, but it's hard to believe that in the entire Canadian press corps, no one asked her for her side of the story. Maybe the truth is somewhere in-between.


Her personal friends didn't ditch her... she immediately lost all her gigs, her jobs, her promotions, everything. Cancel culture at its finest. The first hint of scandal and the big corporations go running.

The article mentioned some of her 'friends' who all work here in Toronto in television for CTV and CityLine and they scattered.

I was reminded of Jessica when Sharon Osbourne got cancelled too. People are afraid to stick around and lose their TV gigs.  But those are the people in the media. No one wants to speak up and everyone's afraid.


----------



## bisousx

xincinsin said:


> Sad...



Without knowing much about the Mulroneys, Jessica seems like someone who has a lot to lose and an easy target for cancel culture. Beautiful, white, wealthy, prominent (and happy) family and gorgeous children... I’m not surprised someone succeeded in taking her down. If it wasn’t Sasha, it could’ve been someone else.


----------



## xincinsin

This thread was moving at the speed of light last night (my night  )!

@lalame Congrats!  Appreciate your POVs and courteous discourse!

@Maggie Muggins All hail the bureau chief! 

And regarding the swaying bump: my mind tied itself into knots. I had two pregnancies and my bumps were tight and rounded - say Hi to my stretch marks  The only time they moved was when the baby stretched and then it looked like those scenes in alien movies. I wasn't a exercise nut but I had a fairly active job then. H's wife is supposed to be a yoga practitioner and very limber. I thought, maybe all that yoga made her so flexible that her bump slides around because there is nothing to hold it to her lithe body. Then I decided I was being silly and I'm off to get myself some caffeine....


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Piers is also confused!
> View attachment 5074807
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: How can Meghan preach about father-child relationships?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has written a book called 'The Bench' about the very special bond between father and child - the very notion of her dishing out advice on this is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I love that Piers puts in writing what we're thinking.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> This thread was moving at the speed of light last night (my night  )!
> 
> @lalame Congrats!  Appreciate your POVs and courteous discourse!
> 
> @Maggie Muggins All hail the bureau chief!
> 
> And regarding the swaying bump: my mind tied itself into knots. I had two pregnancies and my bumps were tight and rounded - say Hi to my stretch marks  The only time they moved was when the baby stretched and then it looked like those scenes in alien movies. I wasn't a exercise nut but I had a fairly active job then. H's wife is supposed to be a yoga practitioner and very limber. I thought, maybe all that yoga made her so flexible that her bump slides around because there is nothing to hold it to her lithe body. Then I decided I was being silly and I'm off to get myself some caffeine....


Could it also be an optical illusion because of the pattern of the dress?


----------



## caramelize126

needlv said:


> Could it also be an optical illusion because of the pattern of the dress?



Perhaps. But that doesnt explain how she was able to squat with heels on and a belly that big?


----------



## Hermes Zen

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


Congratulations!  What a blessing.


----------



## needlv

The RF can’t object to MM using her title as Duchess of York also used her title on her children’s books.  So RF can’t say anything.

so far their efforts in rising funds:

1.  Harry’s position as CHIMPO
2.  Harry turning up at a think tank (Aspen institute)
3.  Harry Netflix Invictus doco
4. Harry as exec producer of Oprah Winfrey interview 

5.  MM writing children’s book
6 . MM pap walk with Archie, merching.
7.  Oat lattes

Did I miss anything?  There isn’t anything too offensive in that list (other than the Oprah interview).  With the Netflix documentary -  I would hope invictus does get some $$ out of it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Piers is also confused!
> View attachment 5074807
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: How can Meghan preach about father-child relationships?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has written a book called 'The Bench' about the very special bond between father and child - the very notion of her dishing out advice on this is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Jayne1 said:


> I love that Piers puts in writing what we're thinking.


Yes, Piers laughs off M's book. LOL, according to him here's his shortlist of would-be comparable books.

1. D***** T****'s Guide to Diplomacy?
2. The Art of Protecting One's Privacy by the Kardashian Sisters?
3. Why Marriage is for Keeps by Bill and Melinda Gates?"


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> The RF can’t object to MM using her title as Duchess of York also used her title on her children’s books.  So RF can’t say anything.
> 
> so far their efforts in rising funds:
> 
> 1.  Harry’s position as CHIMPO
> 2.  Harry turning up at a think tank (Aspen institute)
> 3.  Harry Netflix Invictus doco
> 4. Harry as exec producer of Oprah Winfrey interview
> 
> 5.  MM writing children’s book
> 6 . MM pap walk with Archie, merching.
> 7.  Oat lattes
> 
> Did I miss anything?  There isn’t anything too offensive in that list (other than the Oprah interview).  With the Netflix documentary -  I would hope invictus does get some $$ out of it.



You left out the multimillion dollar contracts they signed with Spotify and Netflix last year, which may have involved large cash advances that neither company has seen a return on so far. (I know you mentioned the Invictus show but we all know that isn’t the kind of program Netflix wants out of them.)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> *The RF can’t object to MM using her title as Duchess of York also used her title on her children’s books.  So RF can’t say anything.*
> 
> so far their efforts in rising funds:
> 
> 1.  Harry’s position as CHIMPO
> 2.  Harry turning up at a think tank (Aspen institute)
> 3.  Harry Netflix Invictus doco
> 4. Harry as exec producer of Oprah Winfrey interview
> 
> 5.  MM writing children’s book
> 6 . MM pap walk with Archie, merching.
> 7.  Oat lattes
> 
> Did I miss anything?  There isn’t anything too offensive in that list (other than the Oprah interview).  With the Netflix documentary -  I would hope invictus does get some $$ out of it.



Big difference. Sarah may be silly or whatever you wish to call her, but she would never have deserted nor publicly dissed the RF. She always spoke highly of HMTQ and even stated on more than one occasion that HM is the most forgiving person she knew.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Could it also be an optical illusion because of the pattern of the dress?


I also considered that, as well as the possibility that the gif was manipulated. 
But in the larger scheme of things, I don't have time to watch videos of her to see if the same sway happens in non-patterned outfits like that purple tent which is oft quoted as visual proof of the bump sliding to her knees.

With her penchant for creating news of herself and that quote ascribed to her by Number One Fan of refusing to serve up her firstborn on a silver platter, I would not be surprised if she really was pregnant, but deliberately used bumps and other props (like those coats!)  to create "Is she/isn't she" mystery as well as misdirect people as to when the babe is/will be born. It's the perfect opportunity to milk attention for at least half a year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Betty-Lou

Good Day All,

Long time Lurker

First time posting

 There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...


----------



## Annawakes

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> 
> Long time Lurker
> 
> First time posting
> 
> There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...
> View attachment 5074878


Amazing!!!!  I knew the top sleuths in this thread would find it!  Hahahahah!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> The RF can’t object to MM using her title as Duchess of York also used her title on her children’s books.  So RF can’t say anything.
> 
> so far their efforts in rising funds:
> 
> 1.  Harry’s position as CHIMPO
> 2.  Harry turning up at a think tank (Aspen institute)
> 3.  Harry Netflix Invictus doco
> 4. Harry as exec producer of Oprah Winfrey interview
> 
> 5.  MM writing children’s book
> 6 . MM pap walk with Archie, merching.
> 7.  Oat lattes
> 
> Did I miss anything?  There isn’t anything too offensive in that list (other than the Oprah interview).  With the Netflix documentary -  I would hope invictus does get some $$ out of it.




IMO there is plenty _offensive _nonsense in the list. YMMV.
To be fully enlightened, we must  provide context:


1. Harry’s position as CHIMPO - using his title, he advertises himself to be knowledgeable of mental health issues and [the important part] able to judge someone’s professional skills to provide mental health assistance.   What are his credentials?


2. Harry turning up at a think tank (Aspen institute) - the stated goal is to study misinformation and disinformation. Again, what are his credentials? He himself has put out volumes of disinformation. 

3. Harry Netflix Invictus doco - is it available? This will help war wounded from the country he left as well as other countries. He no longer carries the military patronages, it’s fair to ask will he even attend? Do they want him?  He took the idea from the US‘s Warrior Games. Do they get credit?

4. Harry as exec producer of Oprah Winfrey interview - the show where he lies & his wife lies. Or, they both spread misinformation and disinformation.

5. MM writing children’s book - signed contract while an active royal, lied about releasing her American PR agency, published book with a company that publishes Dr. Seuss books who some call a racist. She’s ok with that? FYI for all who make the “_Sarah did it, so I can, too” _ argument - is Sarah the person one should be copying on life choices? Shouldn’t we strive to lead, not follow?

6 . MM pap walk with Archie, [shameless] merching - while Hazzie is meeting with one the wealthiest women on the west coast.

7. Oat lattes - from  those Chinese concentration camps. 

Others have mentioned:

8. Spotify - so far 1 show with minimal audience, 2 entitled royal preaching to the masses

9. Netflix - not sure what they’ve done. Invictus was discussed in item 3. Again, it seems they will send out more preachings. What are their credentials?

Okaaay, do they really need to pester Charles and William for money?  Do H&M really _need_ to use those titles?  Aren’t they capable of making it on their own?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> 
> Long time Lurker
> 
> First time posting
> 
> There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...
> View attachment 5074878


Hi and welcome aboard. 

Well, she is known, at least to us, to plagiarize other authors' works.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, it doesn't seem like a whole lot of text.



It‘s the dates that can be confusing - what happened & when did it happen. They reveal how long H&M were lying/misleading/disinforming. Also, the Palace knew long before the public did. That makes the SoAfrica interview all the more fake. IMO.

ETA:  she knew in her SA interview that she had a book deal in the US and that she was planning on leaving.  
Shameful to play the victim. IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> 
> Long time Lurker
> 
> First time posting
> 
> There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...
> View attachment 5074878



Welcome to The Society of Royal Commentators! We support education on how to detect hypocrisy, greed, and falsehoods through articles, pictures, educational videos, and links to other respected sources.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the last educational video from Lady Colin Campbell!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaay, do they really need to pester Charles and William for money?  Do H&M really _need_ to use those titles?  Aren’t they capable of making it on their own?


They will already ascend a notch in my opinion if they stop offering to forgive the BRF. I'm pretty sure that the olive branch is grafted to an ATM.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Harry's position as chief impact officer would typically require years of experience and also a master degree (preferably in business related subject as this is a for profit company). C-suite jobs are well paid (especially with bonuses) so it is sad to see that this company choose to hire him as a PR stunt as he certainly is not qualified. Using the excuse that need $$$ for security doesn't cut it when you're essentially depriving someone who is capable and hardworking of this opportunity. 

I guess it all comes down to life isn't fair, and it's about who you know, not what you know. It really sucks. Even Bill Gates got his company off the ground due to his mothers help- she had the business contacts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Harry's position as chief impact officer would typically require years of experience and also a master degree (preferably in business related subject as this is a for profit company). C-suite jobs are well paid (especially with bonuses) so it is sad to see that this company choose to hire him as a PR stunt as he certainly is not qualified. Using the excuse that need $$$ for security doesn't cut it when you're essentially depriving someone who is capable and hardworking of this opportunity.
> 
> I guess it all comes down to life isn't fair, and it's about who you know, not what you know. It really sucks. Even Bill Gates got his company off the ground due to his mothers help- she had the business contacts.



C-suite jobs - One more reason what they’ve done is offensive to many Americans. IMO one more reason why their failure will be epic.
While Bill’s mother may have provided the contacts, he had to work to keep the company not only solvent, but flourishing.
A Fortune 500 company is not nothing. Microsoft served a useful purpose to many of us. It is a solid product.

   H&M [with no product to sell but their titles] have certainly been using those titles and those connections to give themselves an advantage. We shall see if it works. Guessing it won’t because the more we learn about them, the less likeable they are.


----------



## Yanca

Chanbal said:


> Piers is also confused!
> View attachment 5074807
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: How can Meghan preach about father-child relationships?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has written a book called 'The Bench' about the very special bond between father and child - the very notion of her dishing out advice on this is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I like the fact that Piers Morgan tell it as it is. They can say what they want about him his arguments  about the duo have merits though. I get his frustration with  Meghan and Haz. Mainstream media  and suessex fans calls him obsessed with Meghan because he was ghosted by her before, but in my own humble opinion, he see right through her,  her schemes, her  version of her truths, her manipulations. The cancel culture is getting worse, and people are afraid to utter any word and just to even agree with you  if you tend to have other opinion not leaning towards the "woke"  (like what Sharon O did to Piers) for the fear of loosing your livelihood. Megain complained to ITV which was one of the reason why Piers was cancelled or fired because he refused to publicly apologize to her, true the issues she mention, mental health, depression , etc is hard to contest, and nobody knows the truth but her, but it does raise the questions if she really was denied help because of the optics that it would look bad in the press, with them having all these priveleges in their finger tips that we normal people can never ever imagine to experience or given.  Even Omid Scoobie gloating that the more people whine and complain her book sells even more,  from what I gather people are  aghast by her hypocrisy of using her title when she detest the Royal family, and if they say well,  Fergie did that and used her title, but Fergie has always been resperctful  of  the queen,  I watched one of her interviews before and she said that she spends Christmas day alone because her daughters spend ity with the Royal Family in Sandringham and that was her gift to the Queen, with Megain she seemed to  shunned almost all the traditions, turned down Summer in Balmoral, Christmas in Sandringham while wanting to keep all the perks of being a semi Royal. It is the  walking away from royal obligation but wanting to be called a Duchess that gets to me. go as Mr and Mrs Windsor. I  read on twitter she dropped this book probably because Kate Hold Still Photo book will be release in June 8.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yanca said:


> I like the fact that Piers Morgan tell it as it is. They can say what they want about him his arguments  about the duo have merits though. I get his frustration with  Meghan and Haz. Mainstream media  and suessex fans calls him obsessed with Meghan because he was ghosted by her before, but in my own humble opinion, he see right through her,  her schemes, her  version of her truths, her manipulations. The cancel culture is getting worse, and people are afraid to utter any word and just to even agree with you  if you tend to have other opinion not leaning towards the "woke"  (like what Sharon O did to Piers) for the fear of loosing your livelihood. Megain complained to ITV which was one of the reason why Piers was cancelled or fired because he refused to publicly apologize to her, true the issues she mention, mental health, depression , etc is hard to contest, and nobody knows the truth but her, but it does raise the questions if she really was denied help because of the optics that it would look bad in the press, with them having all these priveleges in their finger tips that we normal people can never ever imagine to experience or given.  Even Omid Scoobie gloating that the more people whine and complain her book sells even more,  from what I gather people are  aghast by her hypocrisy of using her title when she detest the Royal family, and if they say well,  Fergie did that and used her title, but Fergie has always been resperctful  of  the queen,  I watched one of her interviews before and she said that she spends Christmas day alone because her daughters spend ity with the Royal Family in Sandringham and that was her gift to the Queen, with Megain she seemed to  shunned almost all the traditions, turned down Summer in Balmoral, Christmas in Sandringham while wanting to keep all the perks of being a semi Royal. It is the  walking away from royal obligation but wanting to be called a Duchess that gets to me. go as Mr and Mrs Windsor. I  read on twitter she dropped this book probably because Kate Hold Still Photo book will be release in June 8.



100% agree.  
H&M loudly divorced the Royal family. Sarah divorced Andrew, not the family. 

This little boy does not look happy. Hidden message?


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, but I imagine that Will & Kate don't have to accept the delivery and if I were them, I would have the package (books and invoice) forwarded COD to H & his wife.


And the Cambridge children don’t need to read about a special father bond, they live it, experience it with an excellent role model, not a whiny pisser.


----------



## Mendocino

lalame said:


> Suits was a good show! A few of us here were fans actually.  Her character wasn't really slutty, especially compared to everyone else on that show... She had maybe 2 sex scenes and of course that's all that gets shown nowadays.


Yep. Yep. Yep. And yep!

I liked her character on Suits and thought she did a good job on the show.


----------



## gracekelly

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> 
> Long time Lurker
> 
> First time posting
> 
> There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...
> View attachment 5074878


Welcome!  It has been well established and discussed on this thread and on other sites, that Meghan Markle has neve been in possession of an original thought.  She copies everything.  This  has happened too many times to believe that they are co-incidences.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

jhodges@unitedagents.co.uk This is the book agent for Corrinne Averniss. Anyone think she would be interested in making a comparison between her client's book and Meghan's book?


----------



## scarlet555

Guys, I can’t keep up with you guys...I sleep and wake up and its like a never ending novel... now there is poetry... I keep losing my page holder...


----------



## xincinsin

scarlet555 said:


> Guys, I can’t keep up with you guys...I sleep and wake up and its like a never ending novel... now there is poetry... I keep losing my page holder...


The word we are looking for is "saga", but if she keeps venturing into new literary territory, perhaps "compendium" might be more appropriate.


----------



## mellibelly

I authentically submit my creative activation in consideration for Estranged: Our Community Poetry

There once was a Duke from Sussex
Who needed a kick to the buttocks 
His wife wrote The Bench
She’s a gold digging wench
Soon to leave him for Warren Buffet


----------



## lazeny

This sub is like lightning fast I couldn't keep up.

TL;DR. What is going on??


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I really don't know. Literally, I just don't know enough about bumps to judge if that is realistic or not. Maybe in about 5 months I'll know better.


Congratulations! That’s great news!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree.
> H&M loudly divorced the Royal family. Sarah divorced Andrew, not the family.
> 
> This little boy does not look happy. Hidden message?
> View attachment 5074912


Someone on another site asked why the father is black on some pages and white on others. He or she was told off by the stans for not understanding that the man in the pics was not Harry but some concept of fatherhood. 

Fellow correspondents, we are venturing into myth creation and universe building here. That child is not unhappy. He is a personification of the inarticulate desire in each of us to renew and maintain that special bond we have with the paternal figure in our lives. (I knew that degree in literature would come in handy one day  )


----------



## needlv

Where is that vomit emoji...?









						Prince Harry ‘is US sex symbol’ as fans gush over the Duke’s 'swag and glow up'
					

Prince Harry’s status as a sex symbol appears to have reached new heights as American fans of the Duke of Sussex took to Twitter to gush over their Prince, commenting on his "Californian glow up"




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> Where is that vomit emoji...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘is US sex symbol’ as fans gush over the Duke’s 'swag and glow up'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s status as a sex symbol appears to have reached new heights as American fans of the Duke of Sussex took to Twitter to gush over their Prince, commenting on his "Californian glow up"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



Watch out M !  H has groupies lurking!!


----------



## Handbag1234

I haven't looked deeply into the book as I can't stomach it quite frankly. But at first glance it appears very self indulgent, like a personal journal. I notice MM uses her title. 

Just looks like a PR exercise, but we are all expected to rush out and buy it.


----------



## DeMonica

caramelize126 said:


> This is interesting. Would this still be the case if the surrogate was american/contract was signed in america? Or is it based on where the baby is born?


It might be the later. I've read about parents using Ukrainian surrogates and not being able take the baby when the surrogate mother had second thoughts, because surrogacy agreements  are apparently not enforceable in Ukraine, either. I find this practice disgusting to milk desperate parents-to-be even further and shatter their dreams , unless the surrogate supplied the eggs because it's a different case then. 
I'm not entirely convinced that Ginge and Cringe used surrogates but I find that video very suspicious. IMO if they wanted they could do it secretly. I'm sure there are secrecy clauses in these kind of agreements. There are so many celebrities rumoured using surrogates, yet, I haven't seen those surrogates coming forward and selling their stories to the tabloids. It might be the amount of money or those gagging orders that keep them in the shadow. If Duchess Disney had used one for the first time, she had the whole BRF behind her in addition to a watertight agreement.
Regarding this funny little book of hers: I'm not a published author but I read articles and have a family member working as literary agent. What I read and hear is that the vast majority of books are refused by publishers even excellent ones. This highly mediocre effort of hers only got  publishing, having good illustrator attached to it and the "free" publicity because of "her title". I think using a well-known illustrator of hit book also helps with the sales because it creates a subconscious connection as if The Bench had anything to do with the other book. I wonder where it would land on the list if it was published under a pseudonym and illustrated by somebody unknown. My guess is the bargain section - if it would be published at all.


----------



## xincinsin

If she wasn't a duchess and clickbait material, only a vanity publisher would touch something so pretentious. I shall be most disappointed if my local library throws away cash buying this.


----------



## jelliedfeels

DeMonica said:


> It might be the later. I've read about parents using Ukrainian surrogates and not being able take the baby when the surrogate mother had second thoughts, because surrogacy agreements  are apparently not enforceable in Ukraine, either. I find this practice disgusting to milk desperate parents-to-be even further and shatter their dreams , unless the surrogate supplied the eggs because it's a different case then.
> I'm not entirely convinced that Ginge and Cringe used surrogates but I find that video very suspicious. IMO if they wanted they could do it secretly. I'm sure there are secrecy clauses in these kind of agreements. There are so many celebrities rumoured using surrogates, yet, I haven't seen those surrogates coming forward and selling their stories to the tabloids. It might be the amount of money or those gagging orders that keep them in the shadow. If Duchess Disney had used one for the first time, she had the whole BRF behind her in addition to a watertight agreement.
> Regarding this funny little book of hers: I'm not a published author but I read articles and have a family member working as literary agent. What I read and hear is that the vast majority of books are refused by publishers even excellent ones. This highly mediocre effort of hers only got  publishing, having good illustrator attached to it and the "free" publicity because of "her title". I think using a well-known illustrator of hit book also helps with the sales because it creates a subconscious connection as if The Bench had anything to do with the other book. I wonder where it would land on the list if it was published under a pseudonym and illustrated by somebody unknown. My guess is the bargain section - if it would be published at all.


So I’m not sure about the situation in the Ukraine but in the UK it is actually illegal to charge for a fee for going through a surrogacy. You can claim expenses for loss of earnings/travel/living expenses and from what I understand though they are vetted by family court they are lenient about itemisation. Apparently it’s estimated the compensation for a surrogate is between 15k-30k which honestly doesn’t seem like a lot to me.
There are also agencies charges a fee to match and liaise between parents and willing surrogate. To me this is the most clearly commercialised bit of the process but we don’t have a system where a surrogate can legally demand lump sums to have the baby or to hand it over which is, I believe, more common in other countries.

Egg donation also follows the expenses claim model to a maximum of 8k in UK law.

I think it’s a little harsh the surrogate always wants to retain the baby for monetary gain & is being cruel. I can understand that you could agree to surrogacy with the best of intentions but find you bond with the baby so much you don’t want to give up motherhood. It’s not an easy situation to say who gets custody in my opinion and it’s got to be case by case. Especially if the family wants you to give up contact or take it to another area/country as is often the case with fertility tourism.

In UK law it is said that the woman who births the baby is the legal mother regardless of whose egg it is. You can see how this would create a problem with legitimacy for H&M as to be a true heir of the crown you need to be the child of both the married parents and not adopted. I know that this is different in US and other places, so I have to assume that if they did pursue the surrogacy route it would be with an American surrogate or another nationality than British as they would be understood to be the legal parents. 

I totally agree that the law should be changed that disinherits adopted and children born from surrogacy. (This is also why Christopher Guest’s children can’t inherit the titles as they are adopted) I think if they discovered that infertility was an issue the BRF should’ve used it as an opportunity to update a backward inheritance law. (It’s weird as well as of course normally adopted children are classed as heirs even without a will.)

Though I suppose if your main argument for authority is your traceable bloodline then you would not be keen to draw attention to how ridiculous that is.


add on- does anyone remember that scandalous story where this Australian couple got a Thai surrogate to have twins for them and they only took the healthy twin and left her with the twin with Down’s syndrome? While the Thai mother said she was happy to raise her baby you can see that there are cases where it’s definitely a financial risk for the surrogate as well as the donors when it’s not properly regulate.


----------



## K.D.

If she has a book deal then surely there must be more than 1 children's book with a couple of lines? I can't imagine this making serious cash for a publisher.


----------



## periogirl28

Wanna just say, apparently for some people, *compassion* is not inborn but needs to be *activated*, like a switch. These people seem to switch it on for some, to achieve their own purposes, and then off for others, like their own Fathers and families. 

Self-proclaimed very occasional Royal Commentator.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I love Piers name for Harry’s wife...princess Pinocchio!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> With her penchant for creating news of herself and that quote ascribed to her by Number One Fan of refusing to serve up her firstborn on a silver platter, I would not be surprised if she really was pregnant, but deliberately used bumps and other props (like those coats!)  to create "Is she/isn't she" mystery as well as misdirect people as to when the babe is/will be born. It's the perfect opportunity to milk attention for at least half a year.




That's my take too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  she knew in her SA interview that she had a book deal in the US and that she was planning on leaving.
> Shameful to play the victim. IMO.



I doubt she had the book deal back in 2019. It doesn't take two years to produce a children's book that has about half a page of text. But obviously she did know that she wanted to sell it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> I wonder where it would land on the list if it was published under a pseudonym and illustrated by somebody unknown. My guess is the bargain section - if it would be published at all.



Nobody would have given such a bad writer a contract if not for the name.


----------



## xincinsin

lazeny said:


> This sub is like lightning fast I couldn't keep up.
> 
> TL;DR. What is going on??


She Who Shall Be Nameless has a children's book out that Omid is crowing will be a bestseller and one UK newspaper says will turn a generation off reading. Very coincidentally, it will be published same timing as Kate's book.

Harry appeared on Vax Live sans wife, audience instructed to scream and clap for him, and is now hailed as a sex symbol. Wife will appear in the TV telecast of the event.

Bump swaying and surrogacy discussed in depth.

Much poetry has been contributed overnight.


----------



## Annawakes

Is Kate’s book also a children’s book?


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> Is Kate’s book also a children’s book?


I believe it is a collection of photos, she sponsored a COVID-distracting photo competition during lockdown, but that is from memory and i do not know the name of the book
I googled for the notice but all i found was a bunch of gossip books about her


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> 
> Long time Lurker
> 
> First time posting
> 
> There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...
> View attachment 5074878


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Is Kate’s book also a children’s book?


It's a collection of photos from this exhibition.




__





						Hold Still - Hold Still
					





					www.npg.org.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> She Who Shall Be Nameless has a children's book out that Omid is crowing will be a bestseller and one UK newspaper says will turn a generation off reading. Very coincidentally, it will be published same timing as Kate's book.
> 
> Harry appeared on Vax Live sans wife, audience instructed to scream and clap for him, and is now hailed as a sex symbol. Wife will appear in the TV telecast of the event.
> 
> Bump swaying and surrogacy discussed in depth.
> 
> Much poetry has been contributed overnight.


And a plethora of Royal Correspondents was formed


----------



## Sophisticatted

I thought Sarah released Budgie while she was still married, but I could be wrong about that.  She was also accused of plagiarism because someone felt her character and story was too similar to someone else’s creation.  

The Marchioness of Bath used a surrogates for her second pregnancy and they specifically used a surrogate based in California because the laws are very clear there.

I could see the Royal family not wanting to touch the surrogacy issue because Archie is pretty far down on the list of succession (so not worth worrying about) and Meghan is so toxic that they would not want her involved in the Monarchy should the worst case scenario come to pass (the legality is their ace in the hole, should anything happen, and they can skip over Archie and Meghan to someone else who aligns better with “theFirm”).


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I did not know of this law, and it would thus make sense that they wanted to keep it quiet (having a surrogate if they did). I don't have strong feelings as to whether she had a surrogate or not but if this is the law it would make sense that they wanted to keep it quiet. But would it not be easy for a leak to occur if she did have a surrogate? There was always someone leaking some information constantly.
> 
> Its a silly rule and one that could've been overturned by the Queen (I think). I know they changed the laws so that the eldest child of the monarch (regardless of sex) would become the heir apparent, so basically re-writing the sexist inheritance/succession laws.


I didn't know of it either, but if their whole premise in the beginning was, "Oh we don't want a title for Archie", then WTH cares?!  They just contradict themselves.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I looked up the surrogacy law in the UK earlier out of curiosity and saw this (below). This makes me doubt she'd take the risk of a surrogate then...
> 
> *Overview*
> Surrogacy is legal in the UK, but if you make a surrogacy agreement it cannot be enforced by the law.
> *The legal parents at birth*
> If you use a surrogate, *they will be the child’s legal parent at birth.*
> If the surrogate is married or in a civil partnership, their spouse or civil partner will be the child’s second parent at birth, unless they did not give their permission.
> Legal parenthood can be transferred by parental order or adoption after the child is born.
> If there is disagreement about who the child’s legal parents should be, the courts will make a decision based on the best interests of the child.
> *Surrogacy agreements*
> The intended parents and surrogate can record how they want the arrangement to work in a surrogacy agreement.
> *Surrogacy agreements are not enforceable by UK law, even if you have a signed document with your surrogate and have paid their expenses.*


Wow.  I think these need to be updated!  There were so many issues with surrogacy in the US in the past.  It seems to be less now, so maybe laws here have changed?  I remember reading some of the surrogacy lawsuits years ago and thinking how awful it would be to have someone else carry your biological child with all costs (and fees) paid and legal agreements in place, only to then claim it as their own.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> I'm absolutely convinced Bey used a surrogate the first time. She was so secretive, she acted so odd and she didn't even look pregnant, other than a bump.
> 
> The second time, she was obviously pregnant and was so proud, she posted pictures of herself naked and was out there so much more, posing in front of the cameras.  Also, the second time she had that pregnant look and glow and her boobs got big, you know, the usual.
> 
> But that was only for the second pregnancy.
> 
> Strangely though, years later, she produced a historical documentary about herself and showed a neck-down big bare belly when she was supposedly pregnant with her first, and although we saw _no head attached to the belly,_ her fans all said, see she really was pregnant the first time.
> 
> This all based on a quick shot of a torso, not even seeing a head attached to the belly - that's all Bey had to do to convince her fans.


I am also surprised at the sheer quantity of celebrities who "happen to have" twins.  The percentage is ridiculous compared to the general public.  You know there's a lot of IVF going on.  Just like Geena Davis claiming she got pregnant at what?  Like 55?  That's a donor egg.  I understand their need for privacy and that it's really none of our business, but then they go around parading things like they're so much better than the rest of us.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Piers is also confused!
> View attachment 5074807
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: How can Meghan preach about father-child relationships?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has written a book called 'The Bench' about the very special bond between father and child - the very notion of her dishing out advice on this is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Good question Piers.  We here at tPF have also wondered this very thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Where is that vomit emoji...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘is US sex symbol’ as fans gush over the Duke’s 'swag and glow up'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s status as a sex symbol appears to have reached new heights as American fans of the Duke of Sussex took to Twitter to gush over their Prince, commenting on his "Californian glow up"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


Here you go and that goes for me also.  
	

		
			
		

		
	




As for Harry being a sex symbol, I'm ROTFL.  I must be getting really really old because I can't see his appeal now and never did. I find Yoda so much sexier than him. Here is sex appeal personified.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Where is that vomit emoji...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘is US sex symbol’ as fans gush over the Duke’s 'swag and glow up'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s status as a sex symbol appears to have reached new heights as American fans of the Duke of Sussex took to Twitter to gush over their Prince, commenting on his "Californian glow up"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


Sex symbol??  I like my man to actually have a pair.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Sex symbol??  I like my man to actually have a pair.



Some women like 'em submissive. What their fans really like is the whole fantasy story we were sold that Harry gave it all up for the love and protection of Meghan. (Cue the chick flick musical score!) There are too many grown women out there who still want to believe love is like a Hallmark movie or a paperback romance.


----------



## V0N1B2

xincinsin said:


> After sleeping on it, I'm also wondering why this wasn't brought up earlier. It's very touching that the reporter is following up with the story a year later, but didn't Mulroney have any other friends besides H's wife? So many articles describe her and her husband as a power couple. Doesn't she have connections, familial or otherwise, who can advise her? No one spoke up on her behalf at all? Everyone ditched her? If she had this evidence, why didn't she seek legal counsel? Sorry for being cynical, but it's hard to believe that in the entire Canadian press corps, no one asked her for her side of the story. Maybe the truth is somewhere in-between.


Much like Harry's wife's interview with Oprah, once the racism word is spoken or implied, its game over. You're untouchable and your claims will never be investigated. (I'm still trying to wrap my head around how Jussie Smollet got busted). No media outlet whether it's ABC, CNN, People, The NYT, Vogue, The Globe & Mail... none of them are going to question anything. Your friends and co-workers cannot come to your defence as they will then be publicly accused as being racist as well. Their careers will also be over - we've seen this happen to other people. People have become so afraid of saying the wrong thing that saying nothing is the only option for them. 


bisousx said:


> This was a clear example of cancel culture - evidence or other sides of the story are no longer needed to judge. Nothing Jessica would’ve said publicly at the time would’ve been a good look for her. Everyone on IG was stomping their feet demanding influencers and companies to support BLM... or ELSE. I wonder how some of the influencers I follow feel now, having been pressured to donate thousands and post receipts, knowing it very well may have helped fund a couple mansions for one of the leaders.


This, exactly.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle Wins Last Court Copyright Claim Over Letter to Her Father*

Meghan Markle’s case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) received a further boost on Wednesday with the latest ruling in her favor.

Markle had sued Associated Newspapers, publishers of The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, for publishing articles that in 2018 reproduced parts of a letter she had sent to her father Thomas Markle, on the grounds that they misused private information, infringed copyright and breached the Data Protection Act.

Lawyers for ANL had argued that the letter was co-authored by Jason Knauf, former communications secretary to the Sussexes, implying that its copyright belonged to the Crown.

However, on Wednesday, a U.K. High Court heard that Knauf “emphatically” denied being a co-author. In addition, lawyers representing the Queen informed Markle’s legal representation that they “did not consider the Crown to be the copyright owner.”

Knauf’s lawyers told the court: “Mr Knauf did not draft, and has never claimed to have drafted, any parts of the electronic draft or the letter and would never have asserted copyright over any of their content. In our client’s view, it was the duchess’s letter alone.”

Representing Markle, Ian Mill, QC, told the court: “This unequivocal statement of Mr Knauf’s position also gives the lie to the defendant’s inferential case, in its defence to both the privacy and copyright claims, that the claimant considered using the letter ‘as part of a media strategy.’”

Acting upon this, Lord Justice Warby granted summary judgement, meaning a final judgement in Markle’s favor that avoids a trial.

This is the latest in a series of court victories for Markle against ANL. In February, a U.K. High Court ruled in favor of her, saying that she had “reasonable expectation that the contents of the letter would remain private.”









						Meghan Markle Wins Last Court Copyright Claim Over Letter to Her Father
					

Meghan Markle’s case against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) received a further boost on Wednesday with the latest ruling in her favor. Markle had sued Associated Newspapers, publishers o…




					variety.com


----------



## Chanbal

periogirl28 said:


> Wanna just say, apparently for some people, *compassion* is not inborn but needs to be *activated*, like a switch. These people seem to switch it on for some, to achieve their own purposes, and then off for others, like their own Fathers and families.
> 
> Self-proclaimed very occasional Royal Commentator.



Yes!!! Ginger is extending his brilliant work in vaccines to the development of new drugs to target that particular switch and activate the genes of compassion. I would like to add that his lovely wife will be the first person to enroll in the clinical trial.   

We would like to encourage you to share you ideas more often.


----------



## Jktgal




----------



## gerryt

marietouchet said:


> I believe it is a collection of photos, she sponsored a CVOVID-distracting photo competition during lockdown, but that is from memory and i do not know the name of the book
> I googled for the notice but all i found was a bunch of gossip books about her


You can preorder Kate’s book on Amazon.  Ive just placed my order - so want her to outsell H’s wife.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> I love Piers name for Harry’s wife...princess Pinocchio!


It looks like a Cartoon Movement company (?) is selling this!


----------



## Chanbal

gerryt said:


> You can preorder Kate’s book on Amazon.  Ive just placed my order - so want her to outsell H’s wife.


Didn't find Kate's book, but found another interesting one. I wonder if Harry's wife would like a copy for Mother's Day!


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, yes... that military uniform 


_Phil Dampier, author of Royally Suited: Harry and Meghan In Their Own Words, told Fabulous that Meghan is using the book to highlight how sad Harry is to lose his military titles.

He explained: “The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.


“Mum is in tears as she looks through the window, and sees her husband returning from battle to pick up family life once more.

“It’s a scenario familiar to so many military couples separated by conflicts.

“But of course it wasn't a reality for Harry, who was in a different relationship when he served in Afghanistan.

“Rather Meghan is probably showing how much the Army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles. _









						Meghan 'using book to show Harry is upset at being stripped of military titles'
					

MEGHAN Markle is “using her new book to show how ‘upset’ Harry was to be stripped of his military titles, says a royal author.  It has been announced that the Duchess of Sussex, 39, has writte…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes... that military uniform
> View attachment 5075420
> 
> _Phil Dampier, author of Royally Suited: Harry and Meghan In Their Own Words, told Fabulous that Meghan is using the book to highlight how sad Harry is to lose his military titles.
> 
> He explained: “The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.
> 
> 
> “Mum is in tears as she looks through the window, and sees her husband returning from battle to pick up family life once more.
> 
> “It’s a scenario familiar to so many military couples separated by conflicts.
> 
> “But of course it wasn't a reality for Harry, who was in a different relationship when he served in Afghanistan.
> 
> “Rather Meghan is probably showing how much the Army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles. _
> L
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'using book to show Harry is upset at being stripped of military titles'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is “using her new book to show how ‘upset’ Harry was to be stripped of his military titles, says a royal author.  It has been announced that the Duchess of Sussex, 39, has writte…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



IMO since the book is designed for ages 3-7 (?), most young children won’t read _that_ much into the picture.  I do wonder if there is enough text for the 5-7 year olds. Don’t they need more substance? more story?


ETA:  What  a coincidence that the book launches one day after the concert that they pushed their way into!  Odd how that all works out, no?


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes... that military uniform
> View attachment 5075420
> 
> _Phil Dampier, author of Royally Suited: Harry and Meghan In Their Own Words, told Fabulous that Meghan is using the book to highlight how sad Harry is to lose his military titles.
> 
> He explained: “The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.
> 
> 
> “Mum is in tears as she looks through the window, and sees her husband returning from battle to pick up family life once more.
> 
> “It’s a scenario familiar to so many military couples separated by conflicts.
> 
> “But of course it wasn't a reality for Harry, who was in a different relationship when he served in Afghanistan.
> 
> “Rather Meghan is probably showing how much the Army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'using book to show Harry is upset at being stripped of military titles'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is “using her new book to show how ‘upset’ Harry was to be stripped of his military titles, says a royal author.  It has been announced that the Duchess of Sussex, 39, has writte…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



barf


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Didn't find Kate's book, but found another interesting one. I wonder if Harry's wife would like a copy for Mother's Day!
> View attachment 5075416


Here's the description of Kate's book being published. There really is no comparison possible between what this book represents in terms of service to her subjects from Kate vs the vanity volume of no consequence from that other woman.
*How Kate Middleton Helped Turn Her Pandemic Photo Project Into a Charitable Book*
By Morgan Halberg • 03/30/21 2:13pm





Kate Middleton is venturing in to the publishing realm with her photography project, _Hold Still_. Matt Porteous via Getty Images

Last year, Kate Middleton teamed up with the National Portrait Gallery to launch a special photography project, _Hold Still_. The Duchess of Cambridge, who is royal patron of the National Portrait Gallery, asked people from all around the U.K. to submit a photographic portrait depicting their lives amid the coronavirus pandemic; the goal was to capture the “portrait of the nation” during the COVID-19 crisis.

Duchess Kate and a panel of judges received over 31,000 submissions, and selected 100 images that were put on display for a digital exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery. Now, the project is being turned into a special coffee table book, titled _Hold Still: A Portrait of Our Nation in 2020_.


----------



## bag-mania

That children's book. It is 40 pages and Amazon is charging $18.99 for it ($11.99 for the Kindle version). 

Interestingly, Amazon has it listed under "Children's Black & African American Stories."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Prettyinpnknwht

Hermes Zen said:


> Watch out M !  H has groupies lurking!!



Barf.  Someone must need to tell Sunshine Sachs that April Fool's Day has already passed, because this ish is too over the top to seem even remotely unorchestrated.


----------



## jennlt

I'm several pages behind but here's my poetry contribution.

There was a young woman from California
Who wanted the Vladimir Tiara to adorn her
When she couldn't use Sussex Royal to merch
The Queen's good name she besmirched
And now she's painted herself in a corner


----------



## Chanbal

No  The videographer confused Harry's lovely wife with someone else. A D-list diva??? No way @CeeJay,  Z-list diva...


"*She was very high maintenance and rude.*

"She was difficult and demanding."

He explained how Meghan would bring a large entourage with her and laid down some strict rules, including not photographing her feet.

He told the MailOnline: "People told me, 'Get ready because she is a lot'.

"They used to call her 'the princess'.

*"When I saw her, right away from the moment she arrived, I didn't even know who she was and she was acting like a diva.*

"It was the attitude, how she talked to people, the rules.

"She came in wearing a (baseball) cap, hiding her face and she had her head down and just walked back towards the make-up room.

"It was like it was the big diva coming in, and she doesn't want people to see her, like you would do if you're walking in the street and you don't want the paparazzi to take your picture."

He went on to say how* he was not "impressed" by Meghan's attitude and how everyone thought she was no more than a "D-lister*".

He added: *"But it was kind of like a caricature of someone playing the superstar,* you know, because a real superstar, generally unless it's a super bad day, they will play it naturally and be generous with their presence."









						Photographer lifts lid on what Meghan is REALLY like when cameras off
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been branded "difficult" and "demanding" by a photographer who has made a series of claims on what the Duchess of Sussex is like when the cameras go off.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Clearblueskies

What next I wonder in the Meghan Markle literary oeuvre?? 
*Rabbit-Duck*
*Archies adventures in LaLa land*
*The Mansion at Pooh Corner*


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> That children's book. It is 40 pages and Amazon is charging $18.99 for it ($11.99 for the Kindle version).
> 
> Interestingly, Amazon has it listed under "Children's Black & African American Stories."
> 
> View attachment 5075433


Why does “The Duchess of Sussex’s first children’s book” sound like a threat?


----------



## TC1

I'm sure MM is thanking the media for coming up with the plot of the man being sad because of his military disconnect, 'cause we know she didn't


----------



## Lodpah

periogirl28 said:


> Wanna just say, apparently for some people, *compassion* is not inborn but needs to be *activated*, like a switch. These people seem to switch it on for some, to achieve their own purposes, and then off for others, like their own Fathers and families.
> 
> Self-proclaimed very occasional Royal Commentator.


Yep. You nailed it. It’s called being fake.


----------



## nyshopaholic

I am not surprised by this at all. MM does not have one original thought in her head.









						Meghan Markle accused of plagiarizing book, but defended by author
					

Online critics are accusing Meghan Markle of ripping-off of another author with her new children’s book. The author of the original work disagrees that Markle copied the story.




					pagesix.com
				




*Meghan Markle accused of plagiarizing book, but defended by author*

By Lee Brown

Meghan Markle’s new kids’ book is already getting panned before publication — with online critics accusing it of looking like a rip-off of another work already available in stores.

“Before you run out and waste money on the book by Harry’s wife, read ‘The Boy on the Bench’ by Corrinne Averiss and Gabriel Alborozo … The original,” one Twitter user wrote of the apparent likeness.

Dozens of others soon complained on Twitter that the Duchess of Sussex’s book, “The Bench,” didn’t only share a similar title to UK author Averiss’ 2018 book — but also similar artwork from Christian Robinson.

Many others insisted the storyline — which Markle said “started as a poem I wrote for my husband on Father’s Day, the month after Archie was born” — also sounded too similar to be true.

One online critic, Emma Kaye Wootton, even suggested that the book was “Blatantly plagiarized” and that Markle’s work should be “boycotted.”

However, the attacks were soon dismissed by the very author the duchess was accused of copying.

“Reading the description and published excerpt of the Duchess’s new book, this is not the same story or the same theme as ‘The Boy on the Bench.’ I don’t see any similarities,” Averiss insisted on Twitter.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO since the *book is designed for ages 3-7 *(?), most young children won’t read _that_ much into the picture.  I do wonder if there is enough text for the 5-7 year olds. Don’t they need more substance? more story?
> 
> 
> ETA:  What  a coincidence that the book launches one day after the concert that they pushed their way into!  Odd how that all works out, no?


Oh really, is the book that advanced? I thought it was for babies, but that explains why it's not a cloth & vinyl book. Pardon my ignorance!


----------



## 1LV

_Reading the description and published excerpt of the Duchess’s new book, this is not the same story or the same theme as ‘The Boy on the Bench.’ I don’t see any similarities,” __Averiss insisted on Twitter._

Would you want her “work“ compared to yours?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh really, is the book that advanced? I thought it was for babies, but that explains why it's not a cloth & vinyl book. Pardon my ignorance!



Difficult for me to call it ‘advanced’.  40 pages with, maybe, 4 lines of text per page. So, 80 lines maximum.
  My expectations for 7 yr olds are higher.


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> _Reading the description and published excerpt of the Duchess’s new book, this is not the same story or the same theme as ‘The Boy on the Bench.’ I don’t see any similarities,” __Averiss insisted on Twitter._
> 
> Would you want her “work“ compared to yours?


 
Only if it sold more of my books $$$$$


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Only if it sold more of my books $$$$$


I guess that could take some of the sting out.


----------



## bag-mania

I can believe it wasn't plagiarized. _The Boy on the Bench_ has an actual plot, a little boy who is sitting on a bench with his dad because he's afraid to go play with the other kids.

Meghan's book has no plot, it's just a bunch of bad, sugary rhymes that don't advance any discernible story. It's word salad for babies!

Here's another page from the Amazon listing:

_This is your bench
Where you’ll witness great joy.
From here you will rest
See the growth of our boy._


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I can believe it wasn't plagiarized. _The Boy on the Bench_ has an actual plot, a little boy who is sitting on a bench with his dad because he's afraid to go play with the other kids.
> 
> Meghan's book has no plot, it's just a bunch of bad, sugary rhymes that don't advance any discernible story. It's word salad for babies!
> 
> Here's another page from the Amazon listing:
> 
> _This is your bench
> Where you’ll witness great joy.
> From here you will rest
> See the growth of our boy._


40 pages, huh?

ETA Harry must be a blithering idiot.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gerryt said:


> You can preorder Kate’s book on Amazon.  Ive just placed my order - so want her to outsell H’s wife.



I'll admit I bought William's (I mean, he added just as much as Meghan added to "hers"...a foreword!) charity cookbook while refusing to get the other one...then it came in and pleasantly surprised me. Very well made, top notch photography, and very respected contributors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Didn't find Kate's book, but found another interesting one. I wonder if Harry's wife would like a copy for Mother's Day!
> View attachment 5075416



I'd consider chipping in so she can have one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He added: *"But it was kind of like a caricature of someone playing the superstar,* you know, because a real superstar, generally unless it's a super bad day, they will play it naturally and be generous with their presence."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photographer lifts lid on what Meghan is REALLY like when cameras off
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has been branded "difficult" and "demanding" by a photographer who has made a series of claims on what the Duchess of Sussex is like when the cameras go off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



That's an old story they must have brought to life again, because I remember reading it last year. BUT that caricature thing is kind of a red thread with her...in my opinion, she was never more than a caricature royal, with her patronizing behaviour towards the unwashed masses.

She gives a completely different meaning to fake it til you make it haha.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes... that military uniform
> View attachment 5075420
> 
> _Phil Dampier, author of Royally Suited: Harry and Meghan In Their Own Words, told Fabulous that Meghan is using the book to highlight how sad Harry is to lose his military titles.
> 
> He explained: “The illustration of a red-haired soldier (obviously you know who) hugging his little boy, looks as though he has come home from war after many years and pulls at the heart-strings.
> 
> 
> “Mum is in tears as she looks through the window, and sees her husband returning from battle to pick up family life once more.
> 
> “It’s a scenario familiar to so many military couples separated by conflicts.
> 
> “But of course it wasn't a reality for Harry, who was in a different relationship when he served in Afghanistan.
> 
> “Rather Meghan is probably showing how much the Army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'using book to show Harry is upset at being stripped of military titles'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle is “using her new book to show how ‘upset’ Harry was to be stripped of his military titles, says a royal author.  It has been announced that the Duchess of Sussex, 39, has writte…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


And the uniform, especially the hat, doesn't even look like a British Army one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> _This is your bench
> Where you’ll witness great joy.
> From here you will rest
> See the growth of our boy._



Oh god, this is so bad. Even though "Where you'll witness great joy" is slightly better than "I'll have tears of great joy".


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Here's the description of Kate's book being published. There really is no comparison possible between what this book represents in terms of service to her subjects from Kate vs the vanity volume of no consequence from that other woman.
> *How Kate Middleton Helped Turn Her Pandemic Photo Project Into a Charitable Book*
> By Morgan Halberg • 03/30/21 2:13pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton is venturing in to the publishing realm with her photography project, _Hold Still_. Matt Porteous via Getty Images
> 
> Last year, Kate Middleton teamed up with the National Portrait Gallery to launch a special photography project, _Hold Still_. The Duchess of Cambridge, who is royal patron of the National Portrait Gallery, asked people from all around the U.K. to submit a photographic portrait depicting their lives amid the coronavirus pandemic; the goal was to capture the “portrait of the nation” during the COVID-19 crisis.
> 
> Duchess Kate and a panel of judges received over 31,000 submissions, and selected 100 images that were put on display for a digital exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery. Now, the project is being turned into a special coffee table book, titled _Hold Still: A Portrait of Our Nation in 2020_.


As usual, Catherine is putting someone or something before herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And the uniform, especially the hat, doesn't even look like a British Army one.



He's American now!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Here's another page from the Amazon listing:
> 
> *This is your bench
> Where you’ll witness great joy.
> From here you will rest*
> _*See the growth of our boy.*_


Absolutely profound.  

That dad sounds lazy, if he's just going to sit on a bench and "witness".  
You know...sit back and let others do the work.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> That children's book. It is 40 pages and Amazon is charging $18.99 for it ($11.99 for the Kindle version).
> 
> Interestingly, Amazon has it listed under "Children's Black & African American Stories."
> 
> View attachment 5075433


Are they kidding? Forty pages with four stinking lines at $18.99. There are at least four lines, two signatures, 2 seals, a picture of Washington and the colour green on the front alone of a US dollar bill and it's only worth one dollar or 100 pennies.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's American now!


Ah yes, I forgot


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments on Piers' piece on Princess Pinocchio's book:



> Spot on Margo, and when Haz is a Hazbeen, there will be another book, all about what happened in the marriage and how badly he treated her. When anyone says, "but you looked so in love", she will say things aren't always as they appear. Except they are, we see through MM.



I'm afraid the commenter is right.

ETA: the "spot on Margo" refers to said Margo writing that she doesn't even love Harry but that marriage was a plot from the beginning.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I can believe it wasn't plagiarized. _The Boy on the Bench_ has an actual plot, a little boy who is sitting on a bench with his dad because he's afraid to go play with the other kids.
> 
> Meghan's book has no plot, it's just a bunch of bad, sugary rhymes that don't advance any discernible story. It's word salad for babies!
> 
> Here's another page from the Amazon listing:
> 
> _This is your bench
> Where you’ll witness great joy.
> From here you will rest
> See the growth of our boy._


Is every single rhyme in this book boy and joy? That’s extremely Mcgonagall  of her. https://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk/gems/the-famous-tay-whale

I don’t really want to give them the clicks but is there any charitable donation with this book? I personally find it amazing they’d be so blatant as to make a novelty item like a picture book and it not be at least an archewell fundraiser.

It makes sense they put it in a specialised category like black American interest as fewer entries=better chance of being no #1.  I notice they sometimes have several slightly differently worded but similar categories just so multiple things can claim to be #1.

Also it looks a bit like this illustrator is the author in the listing a bit and if the  illustrator is well known in the US it’ll list the book when people are looking for his other stuff.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> And the uniform, especially the hat, doesn't even look like a British Army one.


She’s enlisted him into the French foreign legion. 


Lounorada said:


> Yes!  To all of this.
> View attachment 5074632
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074650
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074652
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Girl, you had me disappointed for a second, but you came through with that follow-up list
> View attachment 5074655
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5074656


I am very honoured one of my jokes got a reacting gif. You have great taste in gifs. Thank you!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh god, this is so bad. Even though "Where you'll witness great joy" is slightly better than "I'll have tears of great joy".



What is hilarious, yet horrifying, is those two verses are being used to sell the book. We can assume they are the best lines in the whole damn thing.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Is every single rhyme in this book boy and joy? That’s extremely Mcgonagall  of her. https://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk/gems/the-famous-tay-whale
> 
> I don’t really want to give them the clicks but is there any charitable donation with this book? I personally find it amazing they’d be so blatant as to make a novelty item like a picture book and it not be at least an archewell fundraiser.
> 
> It makes sense they put it in a specialised category like black American interest as fewer entries=better chance of being no #1.  I notice they sometimes have several slightly differently worded but similar categories just so multiple things can claim to be #1.
> 
> Also it looks a bit like this illustrator is the author in the listing a bit and if the  illustrator is well known in the US it’ll list the book when people are looking for his other stuff.



No mention of money going to charity on these. The profit will likely go right to Meghan since she's going to need new designer clothes and jewelry since Charles cut off the supply line.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Difficult for me to call it ‘advanced’.  40 pages with, maybe, 4 lines of text per page. So, 80 lines maximum.
> My expectations for 7 yr olds are higher.


Well 40 pages of pure wisdom... some of it perhaps acquired on the bench??? 



Spoiler: The bench!


----------



## bag-mania

Who is the target audience for _The Bench_?

1) The stans who buy anything connected to Meghan because she is their QUEEN!! YAAAAAAS!
2) Young incredibly hormonal mothers who burst into tears over sad commercials, sad songs, sad TV shows. Only in that specifically overemotional state could any woman enjoy reading horrible verse about dads and kids.

Who is not going to enjoy reading it?

1) Children
2) Fathers whose turn it is to read a bedtime story.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Is every single rhyme in this book boy and joy?



Good thing their firstborn wasn't a girl, hu?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Well 40 pages of pure wisdom... some of it perhaps acquired on the bench???
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The bench!




Not even her freaking bikini bottoms fit.

P.S. It is kind of weird to me that someone as ligitatious as Princess Pinocchio (thank you Piers, I LOVE it haha) never goes after these rumours, because they would p*ss me off way more than "I made Kate cry".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also...I don't think you can rent the Kardashians, and have you seen their Instas? I like them (minus doormat Khloe with her ill-mannered little brat) but those pictures often look like advertisements for adult entertainment these days.

ETA: never mind, I missed the did it say Z list. I guess at the K's salary class nobody would read it as an offer haha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I rarely ever watch any MM videos besides Lady CC's, but Youtube picked up on it haha.


----------



## gerryt

Chanbal said:


> Didn't find Kate's book, but found another interesting one. I wonder if Harry's wife would like a copy for Mother's Day!
> View attachment 5075416


I got it from Amazon uk, maybe it’s not out yet on com!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good thing their firstborn wasn't a girl, hu?



Hold your horses now. That will be the sequel, due next year.  

It will be bad poetry about mothers and daughters and about how weepy Meghan gets looking at baby Diana every night when the nanny brings her in for her bedtime kiss.

That kind of extreme emotion writes itself:

_Oh how I love my little girl
On her head grows an auburn swirl
She is worth any price
I'll take a roll of the dice
With my settlement from her father, I can afford any pearl!_


----------



## Hermes Zen

Must have been a friend or her press who said that   

“Meghan loves writing and she’s very good at it,” said a source close to the Duchess. “She wanted to have a go at writing a children’s book first and depending on the success of this, there will be more. She is also keen to write books for adults too.”


https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/05/meghan-markle-childrens-book


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I am also surprised at the sheer quantity of celebrities who "happen to have" twins.  The percentage is ridiculous compared to the general public.  You know there's a lot of IVF going on.  Just like Geena Davis claiming she got pregnant at what?  Like 55?  That's a donor egg.  I understand their need for privacy and that it's really none of our business, but then they go around parading things like they're so much better than the rest of us.


That’s true, so many celebrities having twins, but I think most of them were actually carrying the babies.

Some of them got so huge. I remember seeing Angelina Jolie and thinking she looked stunning with the pregnancy glow and added weight.


----------



## Jayne1

bisousx said:


> ...pressured to donate thousands and post receipts, knowing it very well may have helped fund a couple mansions for one of the leaders.


That BLM woman you were referring to has acquired quite the real estate portfolio.

But isn’t that how it always is with these charities and foundations and the Markles nonprofit? You have to wonder where the money goes.


----------



## csshopper

My "read" on the book.

Harry's wife is biracial, but made choices to (1) live with her white father when he had money that gave her a private school education, and a lifestyle and industry connections she aspired to, (2) to only date and marry white men (this may not be 100% accurate but an internet search did not get me to any pictures that support diversity, I will happily stand corrected if needed) and especially to aggressively pursue a husband who is the ultimate representation of white privilege, a pale faced ginger, a Prince of the Realm. Except for what appear to be strategically staged appearances with her mother, a WOC, Harry's wife does not celebrate, let alone acknowledge, her black family. The latter is really difficult to understand since the few articles that were published about them around the time of the wedding were very positive and the family members quoted were amazingly gracious in reference to her, in spite of her dismissiveness. No one has dared challenge her publicly on this, so we have no idea "why" they were Markled.

Her "lens" (one of her oft quoted words: "Christian and I worked closely to depict this special bond through an inclusive lens,” the duchess says.) of seeing herself as a racism victim is well documented. I believe she uses being a WOC for attention when convenient. But this does not necessarily translate into $$$$, which she craves along with the attention.

Which brings us to the present time: The PR team she employs has been working overtime. Harry's wife wrote some maudlin pap, but they employed Christian Robinson so her poetry is illustrated by a multiple award winning, delightful, successful young black man, who by association with the project gives the writing more gravitas than it merits. And in their final coup movement, product placement is in the "Children's Black and African American Stories" section of Books. "Ka-Ching"

Be prepared for a carefully staged photo shoot on a bench of the adoring mother, strategically placed for emphasis, father in less focus, and Archie with book cover prominently displayed supposedly enjoying the story. Of course, since The Bench features the boy in the family, there is sure to be a sequel in a few years, maybe with a swing, for the girl in the family. The sequel could be a challenge, what rhymes with "girl"?


----------



## rose60610

If Harry is a "sex symbol", then so is Woody Allen. And Quentin Tarantino. Ugh.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Who is the target audience for _The Bench_?
> 
> 1) The stans who buy anything connected to Meghan because she is their QUEEN!! YAAAAAAS!
> 2) Young incredibly hormonal mothers who burst into tears over sad commercials, sad songs, sad TV shows. Only in that specifically overemotional state could any woman enjoy reading horrible verse about dads and kids.
> 
> Who is not going to enjoy reading it?
> 
> 1) Children
> 2) Fathers whose turn it is to read a bedtime story.


In Meg's world, I am a "young mother" , and although I am an utter sap and cry even at Kleenex commercials, I still would NOT enjoy this crap.  I'll stick to Love You Forever by Robert Munsch, thank you very much!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Hold your horses now. That will be the sequel, due next year.
> 
> It will be bad poetry about mothers and daughters and about how weepy Meghan gets looking at baby Diana every night when the nanny brings her in for her bedtime kiss.
> 
> That kind of extreme emotion writes itself:
> 
> _Oh how I love my little girl
> On her head grows an auburn swirl
> She is worth any price
> I'll take a roll of the dice
> With my settlement from her father, I can afford any pearl!_



What will she call her next masterpiece?  The Grass?  (As in the cool, crisp spring grass where Harry showed us his "sexy" feet  when they announced the second coming?)

The Giving Tree?  (Oh, has that been taken?  Hasn't prevented Meg from stealing before!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Harry's wife is biracial, but made choices to (1) live with her white father when he had money that gave her a private school education, and a lifestyle and industry connections she aspired to, (2) to only date and marry white men (this may not be 100% accurate but an internet search did not get me to any pictures that support diversity, I will happily stand corrected if needed)



I give her a pass for #1. Any parent would want their child to go to as good of a school as possible. My children won't be making any other choices in this regard. 

#2 - she had some boyfriends in high school who were POC. I've seen 2 pop up in the media. IDK if there were any others after this though... it's not like there was wide, or any, interest in her personal life before she Harry so we may never know.


----------



## rose60610

I married a Prince 
and make the world wince
When I say "Do you know who I am?"
I stormed the castle and created a hassle
Now people say "STFU your life is a scam!"


----------



## Lodpah

jelliedfeels said:


> She’s enlisted him into the French foreign legion.
> 
> I am very honoured one of my jokes got a reacting gif. You have great taste in gifs. Thank you!


Haha Harry is so emasculated he won’t last a minute in the FFL. Those are real men. Harry is not a man. He’s in a man’s body but his brain is still developing.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> I give her a pass for #1. Any parent would want their child to go to as good of a school as possible. My children won't be making any other choices in this regard.
> 
> #2 - she had some boyfriends in high school who were POC. I've seen 2 pop up in the media. IDK if there were any others after this though... it's not like there was wide, or any, interest in her personal life before she Harry so we may never know.


Thanks for the correction, I couldn't find anything from high school days.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> That’s true, so many celebrities having twins, but* I think most of them were actually carrying the babies.*
> 
> Some of them got so huge. I remember seeing Angelina Jolie and thinking she looked stunning with the pregnancy glow and added weight.


I do too, but I really believe many of them had IVF.  Twins are not that common in real life as they are in Hollywood and the entertainment industry.  I'm sure a few are natural, but others who are honest about their surrogacy, like Kristen Wiig, have my respect.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> My "read" on the book.
> 
> Harry's wife is biracial, but made choices to (1) live with her white father when he had money that gave her a private school education, and a lifestyle and industry connections she aspired to, (2) to only date and marry white men (this may not be 100% accurate but an internet search did not get me to any pictures that support diversity, I will happily stand corrected if needed) and especially to aggressively pursue a husband who is the ultimate representation of white privilege, a pale faced ginger, a Prince of the Realm. Except for what appear to be strategically staged appearances with her mother, a WOC, Harry's wife does not celebrate, let alone acknowledge, her black family. The latter is really difficult to understand since the few articles that were published about them around the time of the wedding were very positive and the family members quoted were amazingly gracious in reference to her, in spite of her dismissiveness. No one has dared challenge her publicly on this, so we have no idea "why" they were Markled.
> 
> Her "lens" (one of her oft quoted words: "Christian and I worked closely to depict this special bond through an inclusive lens,” the duchess says.) of seeing herself as a racism victim is well documented. I believe she uses being a WOC for attention when convenient. But this does not necessarily translate into $$$$, which she craves along with the attention.
> 
> Which brings us to the present time: The PR team she employs has been working overtime. Harry's wife wrote some maudlin pap, but they employed Christian Robinson so her poetry is illustrated by a multiple award winning, delightful, successful young black man, who by association with the project gives the writing more gravitas than it merits. And in their final coup movement, product placement is in the "Children's Black and African American Stories" section of Books. "Ka-Ching"
> 
> Be prepared for a carefully staged photo shoot on a bench of the adoring mother, strategically placed for emphasis, father in less focus, and Archie with book cover prominently displayed supposedly enjoying the story. Of course, since The Bench features the boy in the family, there is sure to be a sequel in a few years, maybe with a swing, for the girl in the family. The sequel could be a challenge, what rhymes with "girl"?


Why is a story about the love between a man, his son and a bench, an "African American Story"?  Isn't this (without the bench) a universal theme?  Why is it suddenly associated with a race?
*
Isn't love, like service, universal? *


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> If Harry is a "sex symbol", then so is Woody Allen. And Quentin Tarantino. Ugh.


If Harry is a "sex symbol", I am a "yacht girl".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> In Meg's world, I am a "young mother" , and although I am an utter sap and cry even at Kleenex commercials, I still would NOT enjoy this crap.  I'll stick to Love You Forever by Robert Munsch, thank you very much!


OMG, I still have that book. I teared up every time I read it to my 2 boys and the oldest would get this long sad face.  I'll never ever regret those precious times when they learned that parents are there forever and no matter what. I'm so glad it wasn't Princess Pinocchio's book.


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> My "read" on the book.
> 
> Harry's wife is biracial, but made choices to (1) live with her white father when he had money that gave her a private school education, and a lifestyle and industry connections she aspired to, (2) to only date and marry white men (this may not be 100% accurate but an internet search did not get me to any pictures that support diversity, I will happily stand corrected if needed) and especially to aggressively pursue a husband who is the ultimate representation of white privilege, a pale faced ginger, a Prince of the Realm. Except for what appear to be strategically staged appearances with her mother, a WOC, Harry's wife does not celebrate, let alone acknowledge, her black family. The latter is really difficult to understand since the few articles that were published about them around the time of the wedding were very positive and the family members quoted were amazingly gracious in reference to her, in spite of her dismissiveness. No one has dared challenge her publicly on this, so we have no idea "why" they were Markled.
> 
> Her "lens" (one of her oft quoted words: "Christian and I worked closely to depict this special bond through an inclusive lens,” the duchess says.) of seeing herself as a racism victim is well documented. I believe she uses being a WOC for attention when convenient. But this does not necessarily translate into $$$$, which she craves along with the attention.
> 
> Which brings us to the present time: The PR team she employs has been working overtime. Harry's wife wrote some maudlin pap, but they employed Christian Robinson so her poetry is illustrated by a multiple award winning, delightful, successful young black man, who by association with the project gives the writing more gravitas than it merits. And in their final coup movement, product placement is in the "Children's Black and African American Stories" section of Books. "Ka-Ching"
> 
> Be prepared for a carefully staged photo shoot on a bench of the adoring mother, strategically placed for emphasis, father in less focus, and Archie with book cover prominently displayed supposedly enjoying the story. Of course, since The Bench features the boy in the family, there is sure to be a sequel in a few years, maybe with a swing, for the girl in the family. The sequel could be a challenge, what rhymes with "girl"?



OMGosh you are SPOT ON csshopper!!  Wish the world could read this.   

I'm certain your thought of a carefully staged photo shoot on a bench will be coming out soon.  Was there a bench in the baby girl announcement by the tree??  There could be now!  



> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...ce-harry-archie-baby-girl-announcement-photo/
> 
> *See Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, and Archie in a New Family Portrait*


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> Of course, since The Bench features the boy in the family, there is sure to be a sequel in a few years, maybe with a swing, for the girl in the family. The sequel could be a challenge, *what rhymes with "girl"*?



The word that immediately comes to mind is _hurl_.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> OMG, I still have that book. I teared up every time I read it to my 2 boys and the oldest would get this long sad face.  I'll never ever regret those precious times when they learned that parents are there forever and no matter what. I'm so glad it wasn't Princess Pinocchio's book.


The first time I heard about this book was a Mother's Day luncheon at my then 2 year old's preschool.  They read it aloud and there was not a dry eye in the house.  I loved it so much that I bought a copy for myself and have given it as a present to every new mom I know!


----------



## Genie27

Sharont2305 said:


> And the uniform, especially the hat, doesn't even look like a British Army one.


Global soldier, global clown


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> If Harry is a "sex symbol", then so is Woody Allen. And Quentin Tarantino. Ugh.


I remember there was a time when cosmo was trying to convince us that James corden was a sex symbol, I assume the same press team is hard at work.
i have a lot of respect for Quentin but I’ve heard he likes feet 



Lodpah said:


> Haha Harry is so emasculated he won’t last a minute in the FFL. Those are real men. Harry is not a man. He’s in a man’s body but his brain is still developing.


I think that would be her plan. 
You know survival of the fittest and all that...


purseinsanity said:


> Why is a story about the love between a man, his son and a bench, an "African American Story"?  Isn't this (without the bench) a universal theme?  Why is it suddenly associated with a race?


I just cracked up at the image of the love between a man and a bench. Do you think the bench grows jealous of the son and starts growling at him and they have to train it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> What will she call her next masterpiece?  The Grass?  (As in the cool, crisp spring grass where Harry showed us his "sexy" feet  when they announced the second coming?)
> 
> The Giving Tree?  (Oh, has that been taken?  Hasn't prevented Meg from stealing before!)



The Coop


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> Haha Harry is so emasculated he won’t last a minute in the FFL.



100%. Plus, he expects his daddy to provide an allowance and security for him and his  shrew of a sue-happy wife. He's a p****whipped wimp.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> The first time I heard about this book was a Mother's Day luncheon at my then 2 year old's preschool.  They read it aloud and there was not a dry eye in the house.  I loved it so much that I bought a copy for myself and have given it as a present to every new mom I know!



Maybe this book was after my kids time. 
I’ve never heard of this book before. I’ll need to read it now.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Maybe this book was after my kids time.
> I’ve never heard of this book before. I’ll need to read it now.


OMG I highly recommend it!  (I wish I got commission off it, LOL!  I literally give it to everyone with kids.)


----------



## Handbag1234

bag-mania said:


> I can believe it wasn't plagiarized. _The Boy on the Bench_ has an actual plot, a little boy who is sitting on a bench with his dad because he's afraid to go play with the other kids.
> 
> Meghan's book has no plot, it's just a bunch of bad, sugary rhymes that don't advance any discernible story. It's word salad for babies!
> 
> Here's another page from the Amazon listing:
> 
> _This is your bench
> Where you’ll witness great joy.
> From here you will rest
> See the growth of our boy._



sounds like the type of thing I came up with in junior school, when we ‘did poems’ in class. Hardly Keats is it? Maybe she had created a new thing, Woke poetry. Is there another poem that includes ‘service is universal’ ?


----------



## bag-mania

While looking at Amazon this page came up. I have to laugh that there are people making money off of Meghan by selling unflattering, downright ugly t-shirts with this image.










						Amazon.com: Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt : Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry
					

Buy Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt: Shop top fashion brands T-Shirts at Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY and Returns possible on eligible purchases



					www.amazon.com


----------



## bag-mania

Handbag1234 said:


> sounds like the type of thing I came up with in junior school, when we ‘did poems’ in class. Hardly Keats is it? Maybe she had created a new thing, Woke poetry. Is there another poem that includes ‘service is universal’ ?



Like everything else Meghan writes, it is a whole lot of nothing dressed up like it is something.


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGosh you are SPOT ON csshopper!!  Wish the world could read this.
> 
> I'm certain your thought of a carefully staged photo shoot on a bench will be coming out soon.  Was there a bench in the baby girl announcement by the tree??  There could be now!


Hermes Zen
Thank you for your comment. 

LOL. looking at the pictures you reposted I noticed something and laughed out loud, we get bombarded with examples of her hypocrisy on all levels. Earlier I had read an article from a photographer about her diva attitude and one of the first demands is "no pictures" of her feet. Yet in these photos, or at least one clearly, she is barefoot. How "woke" ! A tiny thing, but so typical.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> OMG I highly recommend it!  (I wish I got commission off it, LOL!  I literally give it to everyone with kids.)











						Love You Forever - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



From the Wikipedia article - spoiler alert, there is a summary
_The book is prominently featured in the Friends episode "The One with the Cake". In the episode, Joey performs a dramatic reading of the book at Emma's first birthday, moving everyone to tears. Inspired by this, Joey later decides to recite the book as a dramatic monologue at an audition._


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> While looking at Amazon this page came up. I have to laugh that there are people making money off of Meghan by selling unflattering, downright ugly t-shirts with this image.
> 
> View attachment 5075655
> View attachment 5075656
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt : Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry
> 
> 
> Buy Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt: Shop top fashion brands T-Shirts at Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY and Returns possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


HAVE 7 HOURS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO UNSEE THIS OR I AM GOING TO HAVE NIGHTMARES. EEEEEEEKKKKKK


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Haha Harry is so emasculated he won’t last a minute in the FFL. Those are real men. Harry is not a man. He’s in a man’s body *but his brain is still developing*.


I think what little brain he possessed vacated the premises when his oversized ego moved in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is why warnings and spoilers were invented. Seriously, frightening stuff ! 
   



bag-mania said:


> While looking at Amazon this page came up. I have to laugh that there are people making money off of Meghan by selling unflattering, downright ugly t-shirts with this image.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt : Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry
> 
> 
> Buy Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt: Shop top fashion brands T-Shirts at Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY and Returns possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I do too, but I really believe many of them had IVF.  Twins are not that common in real life as they are in Hollywood and the entertainment industry.  I'm sure a few are natural, but others who are honest about their surrogacy, like Kristen Wiig, have my respect.


Oh, I agree. All those sets of twins, but why do so many actresses need IVF?


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> HAVE 7 HOURS TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO UNSEE THIS OR I AM GOING TO HAVE NIGHTMARES. EEEEEEEKKKKKK



Be careful, those eyes could devour your soul in your sleep.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> While looking at Amazon this page came up. I have to laugh that there are people making money off of Meghan by selling unflattering, downright ugly t-shirts with this image.
> 
> View attachment 5075655
> View attachment 5075656
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt : Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry
> 
> 
> Buy Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt: Shop top fashion brands T-Shirts at Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY and Returns possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


Serves her right.  I wonder if she'll sue for using her likeness or claim it looks nothing like her LOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love You Forever - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the Wikipedia article - spoiler alert, there is a summary
> _The book is prominently featured in the Friends episode "The One with the Cake". In the episode, Joey performs a dramatic reading of the book at Emma's first birthday, moving everyone to tears. Inspired by this, Joey later decides to recite the book as a dramatic monologue at an audition._


I thought I'd seen every episode of Friends!  I missed this one!


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> Breaking news, she's publishing a book in June called "The Bench" about the relationship between a father and son. It's based on a poem she wrote for Harry's first Fathers day shortly after Archie was born.
> I think it's a children's book
> *rolling my eyes very much here









Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> 
> Long time Lurker
> 
> First time posting
> 
> There is an almost identical book out there called The Boy on the Bench by Corrinne Averiss. Check it out, I just looked it up and even the colors of the book are the same. So did she base her book on this book, very similar...
> View attachment 5074878









needlv said:


> Where is that vomit emoji...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘is US sex symbol’ as fans gush over the Duke’s 'swag and glow up'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s status as a sex symbol appears to have reached new heights as American fans of the Duke of Sussex took to Twitter to gush over their Prince, commenting on his "Californian glow up"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk












Hermes Zen said:


> Must have been a friend or her press who said that
> 
> “*Meghan loves writing and she’s very good at it*,” said a source close to the Duchess. “She wanted to have a go at writing a children’s book first and depending on the success of this, there will be more. She is also keen to write books for adults too.”
> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/05/meghan-markle-childrens-book








jelliedfeels said:


> I am very honoured one of my jokes got a reacting gif. You have great taste in gifs. Thank you!


Thank you @jelliedfeels


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

And MM thinks Kate is mean? Lol

A born queen! After she became the empress, she severely punished the ***** to establish authority


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Oh, I agree. All those sets of twins, but why do so many actresses need IVF?



Two reasons come to my mind...first, some are having kids really late, like in their mid to late 40s, and conceiving naturally at that age is a gamble. And then a lab baby takes out a lot of risks and uncertainty because they select the healthy embryos. I follow this derm from NYC and she shared she had in-vitro after one or two miscarriages and learned that out of ten embryos only three were fine while the others had massive genetic defects. So had she gotten pregnant naturally there would have been a lot more miscarriages for her.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Two reasons come to my mind...first, some are having kids really late, like in their mid to late 40s, and conceiving naturally at that age is a gamble. And then a lab baby takes out a lot of risks and uncertainty because they select the healthy embryos. I follow this derm from NYC and she shared she had in-vitro after one or two miscarriages and learned that out of ten embryos only three were fine while the others had massive genetic defects. So had she gotten pregnant naturally there would have been a lot more miscarriages for her.


I had a colleague with 3 kids who told me that in between each pregnancy, she would have one or two miscarriages. And those are only the ones she was sure were miscarriages. Sometimes she would miss a period, but then have a very heavy period a few weeks later off-cycle. She suspected that they were also embryos that were not viable.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also...I don't think you can rent the Kardashians, and have you seen their Instas? I like them (minus doormat Khloe with her ill-mannered little brat) but those pictures often look like *advertisements for adult entertainment *these days.
> 
> ETA: never mind, I missed the did it say Z list. I guess at the K's salary class nobody would read it as an offer haha.


 When I read that H's wife wanted to write books for adults, my first thought was sleaze.


----------



## Lodpah

MM be like to Harry:
(Since you all write poetry so good imma copy this but credit it to singer)

More More More (Andrea True Connection)

Ooh, how do you like your love?
Ooh, how do you like your love?
But if you want to know
How I really feel
Get the cameras rolling
Get the action going
Baby you know my love for you is real
Take me where you want to
Me and my heart you steal
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
Ooh, how do you like your love?
Ooh, how do you like your love?
But if you want to know
How I really feel
Just get the cameras rolling
Get the action going
Baby you know my love for you is real
So take me where you want to
Me and my heart you steal
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like your love?
But if you want to know
How I really feel
Get the cameras rolling
Get the action going
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?
More, more, more


----------



## Chanbal

_The monarch, 95, was urged to instruct her lawyers to contact the publishers of Meghan's 40-page children's storybook to have the title of the former working royal blotted out. Meghan, 39, this week announced she had written a book to mark Archie's second birthday on Thursday. On the front cover the author's name is listed as "Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex" - something which sent some royal fans into a frenzy given that *she is no longer a working member of the Royal Family*._









						Queen told 'contact publishers now' to remove Meghan's title from book
					

QUEEN Elizabeth II has been told to "get firm" on her approach to Meghan Markle and immediately strip her of the Duchess of Sussex title which is printed on her new book.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5075889
> 
> _The monarch, 95, was urged to instruct her lawyers to contact the publishers of Meghan's 40-page children's storybook to have the title of the former working royal blotted out. Meghan, 39, this week announced she had written a book to mark Archie's second birthday on Thursday. On the front cover the author's name is listed as "Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex" - something which sent some royal fans into a frenzy given that *she is no longer a working member of the Royal Family*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen told 'contact publishers now' to remove Meghan's title from book
> 
> 
> QUEEN Elizabeth II has been told to "get firm" on her approach to Meghan Markle and immediately strip her of the Duchess of Sussex title which is printed on her new book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



This better be true... more China breaks somewhere... Douchess forcing Douche to threaten his family with some dirty laundry she is going to make up...


----------



## Laila619

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5075889
> 
> _The monarch, 95, was urged to instruct her lawyers to contact the publishers of Meghan's 40-page children's storybook to have the title of the former working royal blotted out. Meghan, 39, this week announced she had written a book to mark Archie's second birthday on Thursday. On the front cover the author's name is listed as "Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex" - something which sent some royal fans into a frenzy given that *she is no longer a working member of the Royal Family*._



Oh, I REALLY wish the Queen would do this. The cover should say Meghan Markle, not DoS. She has NO right to use that anymore, the nerve!


----------



## bag-mania

There are still too many stans who write for the web. Check out what came up tonight. I won’t post the text but you can get the gist from the headlines.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5075889
> 
> _The monarch, 95, was urged to instruct her lawyers to contact the publishers of Meghan's 40-page children's storybook to have the title of the former working royal blotted out. Meghan, 39, this week announced she had written a book to mark Archie's second birthday on Thursday. On the front cover the author's name is listed as "Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex" - something which sent some royal fans into a frenzy given that *she is no longer a working member of the Royal Family*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen told 'contact publishers now' to remove Meghan's title from book
> 
> 
> QUEEN Elizabeth II has been told to "get firm" on her approach to Meghan Markle and immediately strip her of the Duchess of Sussex title which is printed on her new book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Would love to see the change, but Sarah did it, with the HRH!  This is while she was married to Andrew.  Her first book, below, published in 1995. Divorce in 1996.











						Meghan the author...but which other royals have written children's books?
					

Sarah Ferguson and Prince Charles have both written children's books.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sarah, last year, still using title [no HRH], but in smaller font:










						Sarah Ferguson Duchess of York in 'mega bucks' children's books publishing deal
					

Ex-wife of the disgraced Prince Andrew, Sarah 'Fergie' Ferguson - the Duchess of York and mother of Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie - has penned seven children's books for Australian publisher Serenity Press




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

One of her stans defended the book and said MM was already a published author. And I searched and I searched. Finally, further down the comments trail, another stan said MM wrote a blog = published author. 
Thought they were claiming the cookbook as her own work.

I wouldn't mind so much if the poetry was better and not some half-a*sed haiku mutant. Yoda could write better poetry.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Your first point illustrates how completely self-absorbed Meghan *was/is*. Why in the world would a 35+year old woman need another woman to “reach out to her” or take her shopping? Meghan needs to stop expecting that everyone lives to make her life easy and take care of her own damn self.



First, fixed this for you!  
Secondly, as a meghan-alo-maniac narcissist, of course she is going to expect that all the low-life minions "bow" to her and her demands!  
Unfortunately, her behavior (_to some degree_) is part-&-parcel of how spoiled she was from a fairly early age!  Everything was given to her on a silver platter, that's why it just irks me that she tries to play the poor/disadvantaged card because she was anything but.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*A Poem by Anon*
Whose bench is that? I think I know.
Its owner is quite happy though.
Full of joy like a vivid rainbow,
I watch him laugh. I cry hello.

He gives his bench a shake,
And laughs until her belly aches.
The only other sound's the break,
Of distant waves and birds awake.

The bench is love, boy and deep,
But he has promises to keep,
After cake and lots of sleep.
Sweet dreams come to him cheap.

He rises from his gentle bed,
With thoughts of kittens in his head,
He eats his jam with lots of bread.
Ready for the day ahead.

_With thanks to the poet, Robert Frost, for the underlying structure._
Please note: This poem was created with our quick poem generator, so results are fairly basic.






						Poem Not Available | Poem Generator
					

This is a great automatic poem generator but the poem you want ain't here.



					www.poem-generator.org.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

A haiku for you — note the auto-praise [Enid seems out of sorts tho]:

*Bench - A Haiku*

*by Anonymous*
Pleasant summertime
An optical, clear bench squeaks
after the children

*Auto Praise for Bench - A Haiku*
"The juxtaposition of bench and children is truly inspired."
- The Daily Tale
"I don't like short poems. So why am I reviewing a haiku, you may wonder? Well, I liked the title - 'Bench'. It went down hill from there."
- Enid Kibbler
"Amazing how so few words can set a scene so perfectly. I close my eyes and all I can see is the pleasant summertime."
- Hit the Spoof
"I felt that I _was_ a bench. It was spooky. I hope to read more by Anonymous. Perhaps next time, something longer."
- Zob Gloop
"I've always wanted to write a haiku about a bench. I can't belive Anonymous has beaten me to it."
- Betty Borison
"_Pleasant summertime_ is a popular first line for a haiku. It's incredible how much diversity can be achieved with those final lines."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> If Harry is a "sex symbol", I am a "yacht girl".


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> There are still too many stans who write for the web. Check out what came up tonight. I won’t post the text but you can get the gist from the headlines.
> View attachment 5075907
> 
> 
> View attachment 5075908


I wonder when Harry's wife will sue Piers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Need more popcorn - H&M, Gates, Prince Phillip - it’s all too much


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Need more popcorn - H&M, Gates, Prince Phillip - it’s all too much


----------



## Sharont2305

I think she got her own name wrong on the cover. It should read Me****, Duchess of Sussex and not The Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## Sharont2305

Happy 2nd Birthday to Archie. 
I see the official Royal Family instagram team have got this out pretty early, its 7:40am here UK. Probably so no one can say its an afterthought if they posted later in the day. I'm assuming H&M are just going to bed so they might have seen this.


----------



## xincinsin

If that is the only photo they have to use for his 2nd birthday, it's sad. That was when he was "mystery" days old.

Glad that it is a very public birthday wish, and not some weird "we are announcing that we have privately given wishes" proclamation.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Sharont2305

Father's and sons eh?


----------



## Lodpah

Happy Birthday sweet Archie baby!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would love to see the change, but Sarah did it, with the HRH!  This is while she was married to Andrew.  Her first book, below, published in 1995. Divorce in 1996.
> 
> View attachment 5075906
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan the author...but which other royals have written children's books?
> 
> 
> Sarah Ferguson and Prince Charles have both written children's books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com



The problem is not a children's book, however poorly written. The problem is one author being an a*shole.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Happy 2nd Birthday to Archie.
> I see the official Royal Family instagram team have got this out pretty early, its 7:40am here UK. Probably so no one can say its an afterthought if they posted later in the day. I'm assuming H&M are just going to bed so they might have seen this.




I just read under Angela Levin's tweet covering the birthday wishes that the Royal Family account usually does not acknowledge birthdays of the non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren. If true - I honestly don't know because I only check over there sporadically - why on earth are they appeasing the terrorists like this? It won't ever be enough for the troublesome two but makes the palace look kind of weak.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read under Angela Levin's tweet covering the birthday wishes that the Royal Family account usually does not acknowledge birthdays of the non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren. If true - I honestly don't know because I only check over there sporadically - why on earth are they appeasing the terrorists like this? It won't ever be enough for the troublesome two but makes the palace look kind of weak.


That's a very interesting point. 
I get why Clarence House has done it as Charles is his grandfather and The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have done it as he's William's nephew. 
Hmmm, interesting.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


>



Who is the woman in the back in the beige Dick  Tracey outfit? I kind of love it  
Better times eh?



bag-mania said:


> While looking at Amazon this page came up. I have to laugh that there are people making money off of Meghan by selling unflattering, downright ugly t-shirts with this image.
> 
> View attachment 5075655
> View attachment 5075656
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt : Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry
> 
> 
> Buy Funny Megxit Gifts for Team Meghan Fans Markle Lover Brits T-Shirt: Shop top fashion brands T-Shirts at Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY and Returns possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com



Personally, I like the style as it reminds me of king of the hill.
The only thing it’s missing is her very own  delusionalcuckold Dale Gribble beside her.
Add on - actually it’s quite a resemblance. Pasty, grumpy, paranoid, self-righteous but utterly unaware, always wears the same tatty clothes.






CarryOn2020 said:


> Would love to see the change, but Sarah did it, with the HRH!  This is while she was married to Andrew.  Her first book, below, published in 1995. Divorce in 1996.
> 
> View attachment 5075906
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan the author...but which other royals have written children's books?
> 
> 
> Sarah Ferguson and Prince Charles have both written children's books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com


That freaky helicopter thing will give me nightmares though. Yikes. It looks like goofy became an eldritch abomination and he’s already creepy at the best of times.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Who is the woman in the back in the beige Dick  Tracey outfit? I kind of love it
> Better times eh?



One of Diana's sisters (but I can't tell them apart).

ETA: Lady Jane Fellowes and to her right is Lady Sarah McCorquodale.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> I am also surprised at the sheer quantity of celebrities who "happen to have" twins.  The percentage is ridiculous compared to the general public.  You know there's a lot of IVF going on.  Just like Geena Davis claiming she got pregnant at what?  Like 55?  That's a donor egg.  I understand their need for privacy and that it's really none of our business, but then they go around parading things like they're so much better than the rest of us.


It's actually quite common for women to have twins in their late 30's and 40's. Somebody here might know more about this than I do because I don't remember the exact percentage right now. But yes, IVF is probably more common in H-wood. Freezing eggs for having kids at a more convenient time seems like something a lot of rich and famous people do. And then they fight about who owns said sperms and eggs. Didn't some guy try to hijack Sofia Vergara's eggs?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## Sharont2305

Lady Jane Spencer married Robert Fellowes in 1978. In 1977 Fellowes was recruited to join the Royal Household as Assistant Private Secretary to the Queen. He spent the next 20 years in the Private Secretary's Office, becoming Deputy in 1986, and Private Secretary in 1990.
On retirement in 1999, he was created a life peer on 12 July 1999 taking the title Baron Fellowes, of Shotesham in the County of Norfolk in the Queen's Birthday Honours List. He sits as a crossbench peer.
He is also a first cousin to Major Ron Ferguson, Sarah's father.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One of Diana's sisters (but I can't tell them apart).
> 
> ETA: Lady Jane Fellowes and to her right is Lady Sarah McCorquodale.


Thank you very much. That’s interesting. I couldn’t think who they might be. I thought it was Camilla for a second and then saw she was sitting down.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read under Angela Levin's tweet covering the birthday wishes that the Royal Family account usually does not acknowledge birthdays of the non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren. If true - I honestly don't know because I only check over there sporadically - why on earth are they appeasing the terrorists like this? It won't ever be enough for the troublesome two but makes the palace look kind of weak.


I know I take a dimmer view of the royals than others on this thread but I think they are just addicted to good press at this point and the baby love tweet is an easy win.


----------



## Aimee3

Just curious...why were Diana’s sisters in the photo as great-aunts but PC’s siblings were not?  Were the great-aunts the god parents?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Diana’s sisters were there in order to have Diana represented.  

Regarding Fergie using the title, IMO it is all about agreements.  The Sussexes agreed to NOT use the titles.  They should honor their agreement.  

Birthday wishes for Archie, maybe in case his mother tries to say he was never wanted there is proof in the universe that they did acknowledge him and did care.  Also as proof in case of a custody battle in the future?


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> MM: "You haven't asked me if I'm OK  "
> 
> BG: "My guess is you're OK compared to the truly destitute people around the world to whom I've donated tens of billions. How many billions are you hitting me up for?"
> 
> MM: "Prince Charles cut us off, wouldn't pay for our security, and my Netflix contract is about one day's interest to you. If you give me a lousy couple billion I can give Harry the heave-ho. I can't shove off Harry until it's in my account. A girl's gotta eat."
> 
> BG: "And if I give you nothing?"
> 
> MM: *"I'll tell Oprah that you are a racist."*
> 
> BG: *"Here's a check."*



Here, I fixed it for you.


----------



## TimeToShop

I’m late to the party, my try:

There once was a ’young mother’ named Markle
Who tried to convince us her s**t did sparkle
She penned what she thought was a ballad
But really was just a word salad


----------



## TimeToShop

Also, 40 pages? That’s too long for a 3 y/o. The reading level will be too low for a 7 y/o.

What a waste of resources that could have gone to a deserving author.

And the army outfit? She may think it’s an fu to the queen but comes across as whiny and petulant. No one forced him out, ok maybe Megs did, but he chose to turn his back on his duties. Boo hoo


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It's actually quite common for women to have twins in their late 30's and 40's. Somebody here might know more about this than I do because I don't remember the exact percentage right now. But yes, IVF is probably more common in H-wood. Freezing eggs for having kids at a more convenient time seems like something a lot of rich and famous people do. And then they fight about who owns said sperms and eggs. Didn't some guy try to hijack Sofia Vergara's eggs?


Just to add some probable science to my post above:








						Older Women More Likely to Have Twins
					

Hormonal changes that come with age are one reason older women are more likely to have twins, a new study states.




					www.webmd.com
				












						Older women more likely to conceive twins due to evolution
					

Women are more likely to conceive fraternal twins once they reach their 30s as a result of an evolutionary response to combat declining embryo viability, according to a new international collaboration involving researchers at The University of Western Australia.




					phys.org
				




_"Women are more likely to conceive fraternal twins once they reach their 30s as a result of an evolutionary response to combat declining embryo viability, according to a new international collaboration involving researchers at The University of Western Australia.

While it is already well known that women are more likely to conceive twins during the middle of their reproductive life, the research findings, published today in Nature Ecology and Evolution, explain the evolutionary history behind this phenomenon.

Associate Professor Joseph Tomkins from UWA's School of Biological Sciences said the frequency of double ovulation, which is the release of two eggs during the same month of a menstrual cycle, had evolved to maintain female fertility."_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The full article is behind a paywall, but oh the shade


----------



## xincinsin

I'm foreseeing another video of her reading to Archie (on a bench). Her stans will gasp in delight and bulkbuy more copies. There will be no sign of Harry until the end, when he will re-enact a touching scene from one of the illustrations as she thrilllingly intones the corresponding "poem".


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I'm foreseeing another video of her reading to Archie (on a bench). Her stans will gasp in delight and bulkbuy more copies. There will be no sign of Harry until the end, when he will re-enact a touching scene from one of the illustrations as she thrilllingly intones the corresponding "poem".


And H (in the book) gets to wear the military uniform that was refused to him in London

I find the camouflage outfit in the book to be awkward given recent events , not wrong, awkward, try explaining that to a little one


----------



## xincinsin

There is going to be an audiobook narrated by her, and one of the sites calls her "Meghan, the actor formerly known as Meghan Markle"  So she is indeed going for no-surname branding. Convenient if they strip her title or she strips H of his $$$$.








						The Bench: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, to release first children’s book-Art-and-culture News , Firstpost
					

The book is one of several projects that Meghan and Harry have announced since stepping away from royal duties in early 2020.




					www.firstpost.com


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read under Angela Levin's tweet covering the birthday wishes that the Royal Family account usually does not acknowledge birthdays of the non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren. If true - I honestly don't know because I only check over there sporadically - why on earth are they appeasing the terrorists like this? It won't ever be enough for the troublesome two but makes the palace look kind of weak.


It's possible that non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren receive their birthday wishes privately. However, in this case, the last thing the BRF may want is to exchange private messages with Harry and his wife. Private exchanges with those two can be conveyed to the public after a certain translation...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> It's possible that non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren receive their birthday wishes privately. However, in this case, the last thing the BRF may want is to exchange private messages with Harry and his wife. Private exchanges with those two can be conveyed to the public after a certain translation...



I think at the end of the day Harry is the son and brother of the future Kings and so they will continue to include him in family events and celebrations. I just think they will be more business like, rather than the normal informal family way. The BRF have a reputation to protect too. I think the BRF will always be there for them should they ever need anything. 

Even though Charles stopped taking Harrys calls after he left his duties and country he is still his father and most likely cares for him a lot. I know my father would've done the same thing if I did what Harry  did (probably even worse).


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read under Angela Levin's tweet covering the birthday wishes that the Royal Family account usually does not acknowledge birthdays of the non-HRH grandchildren and great-grandchildren. If true - I honestly don't know because I only check over there sporadically - *why on earth are they appeasing the terrorists like this? It won't ever be enough for the troublesome two but makes the palace look kind of weak.*



I think they did it for PR purposes. H&M have forced the Royal Family to play the game. The press is watching like hawks for any little nugget about H&M they can report. Publicly showing that the BRF doesn't bear any ill will towards a 2-year-old because of his parents' bad behavior is a no-brainer.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The full article is behind a paywall, but oh the shade
> 
> View attachment 5076268



"MM's fun-free children's book may put an entire generation off reading" 

  _my_ generation


----------



## Chanbal

$5 is probably what Harry and wife donate to charities... 













						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle urge supporters vaccine drive Archie
					

The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, shared a lengthy post on their Archewell Foundation site calling for royal fans to support the vaccine equity drive.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Please correct me if I'm wrong! MM's claims that the BRF didn't protect her are false, and she had to be reminded about making a reference to her father's health in her letter to him after his surgery... 

*"The Duchess of Sussex's former communications secretary 'led extensive efforts' to defend her reputation, his lawyers have said - despite Meghan Markle's previous claims that she felt 'unprotected' by the Royal Family. *
_
Jason Knauf 'repeatedly' spoke to Meghan's estranged father Thomas Markle and directly contacted media organisations to 'object to intrusions into Mr Markle's privacy' from 2016, his lawyers said in a letter last month.

*Mr Knauf also advised that 'a reference to Mr Markle's ill-health be included' *in a letter sent by the Duchess to her father in August 2018, which his solicitors described as 'only a very minor suggestion'...

Mr Knauf and his colleagues made significant efforts over many months to protect Mr Markle and to object to intrusions into his privacy, in addition to the steps that were regularly taken to object to coverage of the duchess herself, where this was perceived to be unfair or untrue,' it continued."_









						Meghan Markle's palace PR chief 'led extensive efforts' to defend her
					

The Duchess of Sussex's former communications secretary Jason Knauf 'repeatedly' spoke to Meghan's estranged father Thomas Markle, his lawyers said in a letter.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

PAUL THOMAS on... Meghan Markle's book
					

PAUL THOMAS on... Meghan Markle's book




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

He makes a good point!


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe I'm overthinking a dumb children's book, but using the image of a military father to represent Harry seems particularly offensive. Meghan didn't know Harry when he was in the military. Harry has never been away from Archie for more than a few days (and that was only recently). To me it makes a mockery of the actual separation of kids from their deployed fathers, which could last months.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> Maybe I'm overthinking a dumb children's book, but using the image of a military father to represent Harry seems particularly offensive. Meghan didn't know Harry when he was in the military. Harry has never been away from Archie for more than a few days (and that was only recently). To me it makes a mockery of the actual separation of kids from their deployed fathers, which could last months.



I agree. Harry left the military years before meeting Markle and they have both spent a lot of time with him since his birth (due to covid and the fact that they take him when traveling). I think it could be offensive to actual military heroes who spend months (and even years) fighting for their country and thus sacrificing watching their children grow up.


----------



## Sharont2305

If we do get a picture of Archie today I can almost guarantee that it'll be an artistic shot of the back or side of his head resting on the moon bump. Yes, it has to be about her too, just to remind us all of her heavily pregnant state.


----------



## CeeJay

RAINDANCE said:


> I agree with this speculation.
> Back In January 2020 in her Mail Column Jan Moir wrote that it was Oprah's network (OWN ?) that was the most vocal about the racist treatment of the couple in the British press. I will find the article later if I can. It struck me as odd then that OW would be so invested in the UK tabloids.


Oh brother OW .. playing that card again? .. puhleeze 

OW made a huge scene and played that card a while back, remember the Hermes incident where she accused them of being racist because she and Gail were not let into the boutique???  Well .. lies, lies, lies .. the reason why they weren't let into the said boutique was because they had a special event that was invite-only and neither OW or Gail had said "invite" .. but you know OW, she felt that her 'celebrity' would provide her with the means to be able to "_jump the queue_" per se and when Hermes said "*NOPE*", well then .. she had to make the news and say that they were racist.  Well, how interesting that Hermes slapped back and the '*real*' story came out and did OW respond back?? .. nope.  In some respects OW and MM are the same; they both "look" like they are these wonderful, thoughtful, "_always there to help YOU_" people when in fact, they are *ONLY* thinking about THEMSELVES 24/7.  *Hypocrites* ..


----------



## gracekelly

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think at the end of the day Harry is the son and brother of the future Kings and so they will continue to include him in family events and celebrations. I just think they will be more business like, rather than the normal informal family way. The BRF have a reputation to protect too. I think the BRF will always be there for them should they ever need anything.
> 
> Even though Charles stopped taking Harrys calls after he left his duties and country he is still his father and most likely cares for him a lot. I know my father would've done the same thing if I did what Harry  did (probably even worse).


Charles and William are tweaking The Godfather.  _We are strictly business and we will not be personal at all._


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> If we do get a picture of Archie today I can almost guarantee that it'll be an artistic shot of the back or side of his head resting on the moon bump. Yes, it has to be about her too, just to remind us all of her heavily pregnant state.


I'm still waiting.  I love the speculation about a video call.  I want proof.  This is all made up for clicks.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> $5 is probably what Harry and wife donate to charities...
> 
> View attachment 5076328
> 
> View attachment 5076325
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle urge supporters vaccine drive Archie
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, shared a lengthy post on their Archewell Foundation site calling for royal fans to support the vaccine equity drive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The gall those two have!  Ridiculous, definitely  deserving of their title of Douche and Douchess of the world!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The full article is behind a paywall, but oh the shade
> 
> View attachment 5076268


Isn't this major shade since the source is the Telegraph, instead of the DM, Express, Sun, or Mirror?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> There is going to be an audiobook narrated by her, and one of the sites calls her "Meghan, the actor formerly known as Meghan Markle"  *So she is indeed going for no-surname branding*. Convenient if they strip her title or she strips H of his $$$$.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bench: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, to release first children’s book-Art-and-culture News , Firstpost
> 
> 
> The book is one of several projects that Meghan and Harry have announced since stepping away from royal duties in early 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.firstpost.com


She thinks she's the second coming of Cher and Madonna.  

Maybe it should be, Meghan, the wife formerly known as a Z list "actress".


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think she wrote the book so that she can be introduced as an author and poet.


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Charles ‘May Never Forgive’ Prince Harry for Bombshell Interview
					

Prince Charles is being more stubborn than Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II when it comes to Harry, a source tells Us — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com
				




A family feud for the ages. *Prince Charles* is having a harder time moving on from *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*’s tell-all interview than *Prince William *and *Queen Elizabeth II,* a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly._

*Queen Elizabeth II's Royal Family Tree*
“With the way things are going, Charles may never forgive Harry, which hasn’t gone down well with Elizabeth,” the insider tells _Us_. “She feels that he’s putting his pride before the best interest of the monarchy. She has enough on her plate dealing with the loss of her husband. It’s drama she can do without.”

The source adds that Charles, 72, is “more stubborn” than son William, 38, who was spotted chatting with Harry, 36, last month after Prince Philip’s funeral service in the U.K.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Families React to Bombshell Interview*
“They’re definitely not at the point where they speak on a regular basis, but William wants to be the bigger person and set a precedent. He believes that in order to repair damage and destruction from Harry’s interview, the best approach is to keep things civil with his brother rather than fanning the flames and fighting back with a tit-for-tat attitude,” the source says. “Elizabeth is proud of William for taking the dignified approach, unlike Charles, who still hasn’t forgiven Harry for dragging his name through the mud.”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made headlines in March after they opened up about their decision to stop working for the 95-year-old monarch, citing concerns about racism in the U.K. and within the family. During the tell-all, Harry revealed that Charles stopped taking his calls after the couple relocated to California in March 2020.

“Because I took matters … into my own hands. It was like, I needed to do this for my family,” Harry, who shares 2-year-old Archie with Meghan, said at the time. “This is not a surprise to anybody. It’s really sad that it’s got to this point. I will always love him, but there’s a lot of hurt that’s happened. And I will continue to make it one of my priorities to try and heal that relationship.”

*The Royal Family's Sweetest Quotes About Prince Philip*
Another source previously told _Us_ that Charles didn’t have any meaningful conversations with Harry during his first trip back to London in April.

“Unfortunately, Harry and Charles didn’t resolve their differences when Harry returned to the U.K. They barely communicated,” the source said last month. “There definitely continues to be a huge wedge between the two.”


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Charles Is ‘Still Fuming’ Over Prince Harry, ‘Freezing’ Him Out
					

Prince Charles and Prince Harry did not repair their relationship amid Prince Philip’s funeral in the U.K. — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## gracekelly

Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.









						Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
					

Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.




					archewell.com


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Charles Is ‘Still Fuming’ Over Prince Harry, ‘Freezing’ Him Out
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Prince Harry did not repair their relationship amid Prince Philip’s funeral in the U.K. — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


I think that Harry expected Charles to apologize to HIM!  That was not going to happen.  If the reports about Charles are true, he takes any slight very personally and this was a big one.  Of course he has William giving him the emotional support to maintain this posture.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
> 
> 
> Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


Is that Archie?  Or is that from that preschool event where they (without parents' permission) planted flowers with preschoolers?


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Charles ‘May Never Forgive’ Prince Harry for Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Charles is being more stubborn than Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II when it comes to Harry, a source tells Us — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A family feud for the ages. *Prince Charles* is having a harder time moving on from *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*’s tell-all interview than *Prince William *and *Queen Elizabeth II,* a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly._
> 
> *Queen Elizabeth II's Royal Family Tree*
> “With the way things are going, Charles may never forgive Harry, which hasn’t gone down well with Elizabeth,” the insider tells _Us_. “She feels that he’s putting his pride before the best interest of the monarchy. She has enough on her plate dealing with the loss of her husband. It’s drama she can do without.”
> 
> The source adds that Charles, 72, is “more stubborn” than son William, 38, who was spotted chatting with Harry, 36, last month after Prince Philip’s funeral service in the U.K.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Families React to Bombshell Interview*
> “They’re definitely not at the point where they speak on a regular basis, but William wants to be the bigger person and set a precedent. He believes that in order to repair damage and destruction from Harry’s interview, the best approach is to keep things civil with his brother rather than fanning the flames and fighting back with a tit-for-tat attitude,” the source says. “Elizabeth is proud of William for taking the dignified approach, unlike Charles, who still hasn’t forgiven Harry for dragging his name through the mud.”
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made headlines in March after they opened up about their decision to stop working for the 95-year-old monarch, citing concerns about racism in the U.K. and within the family. During the tell-all, Harry revealed that Charles stopped taking his calls after the couple relocated to California in March 2020.
> 
> “Because I took matters … into my own hands. It was like, I needed to do this for my family,” Harry, who shares 2-year-old Archie with Meghan, said at the time. “This is not a surprise to anybody. It’s really sad that it’s got to this point. I will always love him, but there’s a lot of hurt that’s happened. And I will continue to make it one of my priorities to try and heal that relationship.”
> 
> *The Royal Family's Sweetest Quotes About Prince Philip*
> Another source previously told _Us_ that Charles didn’t have any meaningful conversations with Harry during his first trip back to London in April.
> 
> “Unfortunately, Harry and Charles didn’t resolve their differences when Harry returned to the U.K. They barely communicated,” the source said last month. “There definitely continues to be a huge wedge between the two.”


 
Harry doesn't deserve ANYONE'S forgiveness.  Can only blame nutty Douchess for so long.  But Harry-please get back on your medications and go home...  Secret service will pick up the kids later.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Sharont2305 said:


> If we do get a picture of Archie today I can almost guarantee that it'll be an artistic shot of the back or side of his head resting on the moon bump. Yes, it has to be about her too, just to remind us all of her heavily pregnant state.



There is a picture of the back of archie holding balloons and it looks like it in their back yard on the archwell website.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Maybe I'm overthinking a dumb children's book, but using the image of a military father to represent Harry seems particularly offensive. Meghan didn't know Harry when he was in the military. Harry has never been away from Archie for more than a few days (and that was only recently). To me it makes a mockery of the actual separation of kids from their deployed fathers, which could last months.



I agree with you. I thought this too but was holding out for her to make it clear this is a purely fictional story.

It just seems like another example of how they view themselves as major victims. Comparing their situation to a deployed military family is over the top. Please make it clear this is a fictional story inspired by the military families you respect or something like that - NOT your own situation.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
> 
> 
> Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com



If it's the photo at the top I don't see how that could be Archie. That child looks more to be 4 or 5. I had 3 extremely tall boys and that kids not 2.
Quoted at the bottom of the ranked "Duchess of Sussex" page is this. They sure don't come anymore un-self-aware than Harry's wife. Yeesh. 





*"We are linked not ranked’ is the shortest way I’ve ever found to say what our goal is."*
*Gloria Steinem*
NEW YORK, NEW YORK


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I agree with you. I thought this too but was holding out for her to make it clear this is a purely fictional story.



She undoubtedly gave the artist instructions to make the military father returning home illustration resemble her little family. It's likely the other illustrations will all be of different characters/families. 

There's a reason why that particular image was chosen to represent the book to the press and it sure wasn't because of the catchy wordplay of the author.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

gracekelly said:


> Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
> 
> 
> Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


Is she pregnant- and if so how pregnant- in that pic? Because her pregnancy knees together squatting game is still really strong, in that case.


----------



## rose60610

Instead of requesting that everyone ELSE donate to a cause "in honor of Archie's birthday", why don't H&M make a huge donation to something in honor of Archie's birthday? Issuing a "Join us" insinuates guilting everyone to cough up a few bucks for the kid whose privacy is supposedly SOOOOOOOO important.  These two shameless Fame Whores don't miss a beat, do they? I wonder what cause we'll be guilted into donating in "honor of Dead Diana" on July 1st. And next year on the anniversary of Philip's death. We'll be reminded that it killed the Heavily Pregnant One not be able to attend the funeral. When is Andrew's birthday? Will they request donations for human trafficking then? How about Charles' birthday--donate some tampons to a cause that is near and dear to Camilla? Nothing can be put past our two favorite Fame Whores. September 15 is Harry's birthday, I'd like to send him a pair of pears with a Sharpie inscribed message: "Grow a pair/pear" and see if he gets it.


----------



## bag-mania

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Is she pregnant- and if so how pregnant- in that pic? Because her pregnancy knees together squatting game is still really strong, in that case.



Hmm, do we have any way of knowing when that photo was taken? It's Southern California so they could be pretending to plant flowers for the photographer at any time of the year.

Archie's looks change every time we see him. I suppose that makes sense when it is so long between his appearances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I think that Harry expected Charles to apologize to HIM!  That was not going to happen.  If the reports about Charles are true, he takes any slight very personally and this was a big one.  Of course he has William giving him the emotional support to maintain this posture.


Of course, some magazines put out this blather citing unnamed 'sources' that often don't exist for the simple reason that they would be divulging HM's private thoughts and feelings without her consent. Most of the time, I   and imagine that they're saying, "I  don't know what the hell I'm talking about, but boy oh boy, the clicks will fetch $$$."


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.
> View attachment 5076434
> View attachment 5076434


Someone needs to send them a memo that is sh*t is old and stop it!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Is that Archie?  Or is that from that preschool event where they (without parents' permission) planted flowers with preschoolers?


Wow!  You read my mind!  That was my first impression of the photo from last year.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Is she pregnant- and if so how pregnant- in that pic? Because her pregnancy knees together squatting game is still really strong, in that case.


She used the small pillow on picture taking day.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Instead of requesting that everyone ELSE donate to a cause "in honor of Archie's birthday", why don't H&M make a huge donation to something in honor of Archie's birthday? Issuing a "Join us" insinuates guilting everyone to cough up a few bucks for the kid whose privacy is supposedly SOOOOOOOO important.  These two shameless Fame Whores don't miss a beat, do they? I wonder what cause we'll be guilted into donating in "honor of Dead Diana" on July 1st. And next year on the anniversary of Philip's death. We'll be reminded that it killed the Heavily Pregnant One not be able to attend the funeral. When is Andrew's birthday? Will they request donations for human trafficking then? How about Charles' birthday--donate some tampons to a cause that is near and dear to Camilla? Nothing can be put past our two favorite Fame Whores. September 15 is Harry's birthday, I'd like to send him a pair of pears with a Sharpie inscribed message: "Grow a pair/pear" and see if he gets it.


They remind me of my SIL.  She is good at spending other people's money.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  You read my mind!  That was my first impression of the photo from last year.


Great minds!


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Of course, some magazines put out this blather citing unnamed 'sources' that often don't exist for the simple reason that they would be divulging HM's private thoughts and feelings without her consent. Most of the time, I   and imagine that they're saying, "I  don't know what the hell I'm talking about, but boy oh boy, the clicks will fetch $$$."


I do think that all the journos are staying awake at night to come up with click bait.  The funeral gave them a lot to work with, and they also have the upcoming Diana statue unveiling.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> They remind me of my SIL.  She is good at spending other people's money.


Oh yikes, same here!


----------



## Hermes Zen

M's standing ovation comment backfired on her.  

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ve-standing-ovation-un-women-royal-family-spt


----------



## V0N1B2

Hermes Zen said:


> M's standing ovation comment backfired on her.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ve-standing-ovation-un-women-royal-family-spt


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
> 
> 
> Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


That picture comes from their little jaunt to plant flowers in Diana's memory in Sept 2020. Disgusting duo!

Article and Pic


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> *Instead of requesting that everyone ELSE donate to a cause "in honor of Archie's birthday", why don't H&M make a huge donation to something in honor of Archie's birthday? *


Yeah right!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I think they did it for PR purposes. H&M have forced the Royal Family to play the game. The press is watching like hawks for any little nugget about H&M they can report. Publicly showing that the BRF doesn't bear any ill will towards a 2-year-old because of his parents' bad behavior is a no-brainer.



I personally just don't think it's a genius PR move, quite the opposite.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> $5 is probably what Harry and wife donate to charities...
> 
> View attachment 5076328
> 
> View attachment 5076325
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle urge supporters vaccine drive Archie
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 39, shared a lengthy post on their Archewell Foundation site calling for royal fans to support the vaccine equity drive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I must have missed the Cambridges asking for birthday presents for their kids. WTF.

(I realize it's a donation, I just think it's rich to assume strangers would want to mark Archie's birthday)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Is that Archie?  Or is that from that preschool event where they (without parents' permission) planted flowers with preschoolers?





gracekelly said:


> Wow!  You read my mind!  That was my first impression of the photo from last year.





Maggie Muggins said:


> That picture comes from their little jaunt to plant flowers in Diana's memory in Sept 2020. Disgusting duo!
> 
> Article and Pic



Oh thank goodness! I thought Archie had turned into a different kid when it WAS in fact a different kid. 

This is the event that took place merely two or three weeks after her supposed traumatic miscarriage. How brave of her to soldier on through her pain and pose for publicity stills having fun with a bunch of schoolchildren she's never seen before or since.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Charles ‘May Never Forgive’ Prince Harry for Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Charles is being more stubborn than Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II when it comes to Harry, a source tells Us — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A family feud for the ages. *Prince Charles* is having a harder time moving on from *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*’s tell-all interview than *Prince William *and *Queen Elizabeth II,* a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly._



I don't know. I feel Charles has indulged the both of them a great deal, and if I was forced to bet money it would be  on William being unforgiving. Charles seems to have mellowed out with age.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally just don't think it's a genius PR move, quite the opposite.



I don't believe it is a genius PR move. It's more a proactive way to reduce the chances of being accused of slighting Archie by the Meghan-obsessed press. Kind of like turning the other cheek.


----------



## CarryOn2020

There’s forgiving and moving on = W&K
Then, there is forgiving and kissing up, hoping the manipulative ones will love you more = Charles
For a zillion reasons, Charles seems to be the easily manipulated one.  The thing is once someone has shown you who they are, don’t expect better from them.  It is a tough and sad lesson to learn.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.
> View attachment 5076434
> View attachment 5076434



Are they for real. That filter is hurting my eyes (quite literally, no dig).


----------



## marietouchet

Yes the camouflage outfit in the book is awkward and whiny at this point









						Meghan Markle using book to show how much army meant to Harry
					

Meghan Markle is using her new book The Bench to show 'how much the army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles,' royal author Philip Dampier claimed, speaking to The Sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> M's standing ovation comment backfired on her.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ve-standing-ovation-un-women-royal-family-spt



The press should ask us, I think we debunked that one a year ago. I just will never understand how she lies, lies, lies when she opens her mouth and never seems embarrassed when people prove she's full of it.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> There’s forgiving and moving on = W&K
> Then, there is forgiving and kissing up, hoping the manipulative ones will love you more = Charles
> For a zillion reasons, Charles seems to be the easily manipulated one.  The thing is once someone has shown you who they are, don’t expect better from them.  It is a tough and sad lesson to learn.



I've always thought we rarely see Charles as he actually is in his personal dealings. That man has more layers than he shows publicly.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The press should ask us, I think we debunked that one a year ago. I just will never understand how she lies, lies, lies when she opens her mouth and never seems embarrassed when people prove she's full of it.


I totally agree with you. I don't get it either BUT it's because we are no where like her!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they for real. That filter is hurting my eyes (quite literally, no dig).



Aren‘t balloons dangerous to planes and birds? Thought this was an environmental no-no. 
‘Another example of ‘do-as-I-say”?


----------



## gracekelly

@purseinsanity I think we were right in what we were thinking.  They took a picture from the daycare visit and tweaked it.  They are liars.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don't believe it is a genius PR move. It's more a proactive way to reduce the chances of being accused of slighting Archie by the Meghan-obsessed press. Kind of like turning the other cheek.



I understand what you are saying, but it rubs me entirely the wrong way that once again it's to the disadvantage of others (in this case, the children who don't get acknowledged in public).


----------



## queennadine

bag-mania said:


> Maybe I'm overthinking a dumb children's book, but using the image of a military father to represent Harry seems particularly offensive. Meghan didn't know Harry when he was in the military. Harry has never been away from Archie for more than a few days (and that was only recently). To me it makes a mockery of the actual separation of kids from their deployed fathers, which could last months.





Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree. Harry left the military years before meeting Markle and they have both spent a lot of time with him since his birth (due to covid and the fact that they take him when traveling). I think it could be offensive to actual military heroes who spend months (and even years) fighting for their country and thus sacrificing watching their children grow up.


100% agree with both posts. My DH wasn’t at our son’s birth because he was deployed. He’s home now, safe and sound by the grace of God, and literally does come home each day in a similar uniform. This has throttled my disgusto-meter even higher for them. They have no idea what true family and military sacrifice is.


gracekelly said:


> Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
> 
> 
> Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That can’t be Archie, right? That looks like a 4 year old.





lanasyogamama said:


> That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.
> View attachment 5076434
> View attachment 5076434


Is that the real filter? I thought maybe my phone wasn’t done loading the pics!


gracekelly said:


> They remind me of my SIL.  She is good at spending other people's money.





purseinsanity said:


> Oh yikes, same here!


Ha! I have one of those too!


----------



## gracekelly

How far are they willing to deceive?  I think they went too far this time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I totally agree with you. I don't get it either BUT it's because we are no where like her!



She made up this whole elaborate story how Ban Ki-moon started the standing ovations that never existed to begin with. Just...how?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Good for W !  W&K knows M&H well and their intentions.  Hah take that M !!  I just hope BG knows not to meet with M&H also. 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...gates-divorce-kate-middleton-royal-family-spt


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Yes the camouflage outfit in the book is awkward and whiny at this point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle using book to show how much army meant to Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is using her new book The Bench to show 'how much the army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles,' royal author Philip Dampier claimed, speaking to The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's so she can weasel her way out of any criticism. Should anyone ask "is that supposed to be you, Harry, and Archie?" She can claim from the uniform that it is clearly supposed to be an American enlisted man and any similarity is purely coincidental. As always she thinks she's being so clever.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5076352
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PAUL THOMAS on... Meghan Markle's book
> 
> 
> PAUL THOMAS on... Meghan Markle's book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Daddy home from the war or wha?

JCMH as hardly been away from Archie and not in any danger. I'm disgusted. 

Outrageous!


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I've always thought we rarely see Charles as he actually is in his personal dealings. That man has more layers than he shows publicly.


LAYERS! OMG! That’s my favorite word salad word.





Signed, duchess Meghan of Sussex, linked (not ranked) by my husband’s white privileged family, poet, author, philanthropist and mother of the 7th in line (aka: ranked) for the British throne.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Good for W !  W&K knows M&H well and their intentions.  Hah take that M !!  I just hope BG knows not to meet with M&H also.
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...gates-divorce-kate-middleton-royal-family-spt



Nooooo, this is bad. BG was also had a friendship with JeffE. BG’s kids are angry with him.   William needs to stay away from this mess.


----------



## TC1

I love the fact that the posts all say Happy Birthday Archie. And NOT Archie Montbatten Windsor, son of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Just plain old Archie


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must have missed the Cambridges asking for birthday presents for their kids. WTF.
> 
> (I realize it's a donation, I just think it's rich to assume strangers would want to mark Archie's birthday)



Never mind the global pandemic, Brixit and the dire prospects for the global economy, let's all think about their toddler and chip in to make _them_ look good.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

TC1 said:


> I love the fact that the posts all say Happy Birthday Archie. And NOT Archie Montbatten Windsor, son of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Just plain old Archie



I think MM will turn around and say 'why are you not using Archie's full title, he is not a mere peasant, he is the son of a PRINCE and DUKE, how dare they, they are racist I tell you'


----------



## TC1

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think MM will turn around and say 'why are you not using Archie's full title, he is not a mere peasant, he is the son of a PRINCE and DUKE, how dare they, they are racist I tell you'


Yeah, but the MAIN reason she was so pissed in the O interview was because he has NO title!   that's why she throws hers in at every opportunity


----------



## CarryOn2020

Was this every _really_ a concern?  _really_?
So sweet of her, a woman who married royalty, to claim women who lunch don’t work.  Oh, the hypocrisy!  Oh, the arrogance!
She, Steinem, Hillary, OW, GK can take that horses$it and spread it in their coops.  
ETA: it is ok for her to use stereotypes, but not anyone else.  Pi$$ off.

From the Express article: 
“I never wanted to be a lady who lunches; I’ve always wanted to be a woman who works.”


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> LAYERS! OMG! That’s my favorite word salad word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Signed, duchess Meghan of Sussex, linked (not ranked) by my husband’s white privileged family, poet, author, philanthropist and mother of the 7th in line (aka: ranked) for the British throne.


That gif EPITOMIZES her phoniness.  Her acting abilities are sub par at best.  My 3 year old niece is better.  She makes a variety of faces and can cry on cue.


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> I love the fact that the posts all say Happy Birthday Archie. And NOT Archie Montbatten Windsor, son of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Just plain old Archie


They're still his family, whether Meg likes it or not, so I think it'd be odd to state the last name.  My brother used to always sign his entire name (including last) on cards as a kid.  I kept telling him I know what your last name is, dummy!


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.
> View attachment 5076434
> View attachment 5076434


Aww that’s sweet 
Archie’s first escape attempt captured for posterity!


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> Never mind the global pandemic, Brixit and the dire prospects for the global economy, let's all think about their toddler and chip in to make _them_ look good.



On top of that, this children's book of MM's is apparently a pure commercial, for profit venture. Proceeds are not going to charity.  So, buy the book and help pay the mortgage on the 16 bathroom Santa Barbara mansion.


----------



## gelbergirl

marietouchet said:


> Yes the camouflage outfit in the book is awkward and whiny at this point
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle using book to show how much army meant to Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is using her new book The Bench to show 'how much the army meant to Harry and how upset he is to lose his military titles,' royal author Philip Dampier claimed, speaking to The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's nutty. She needs professional help.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

lanasyogamama said:


> That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.
> View attachment 5076434
> View attachment 5076434



Why??! is she washing out a photo with balloons


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, well - 









						Meghan's mother Doria texted Thomas Markle after Archie’s birth
					

DORIA RAGLAND texted Thomas Markle after Meghan Markle gave birth to her son Archie, but the Duchess "didn't want to know" if her father replied to the message, according to a biography.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

They deserve each other! 


*Prince Harry knew he’d toss a grenade into the royal family with the interview he and wife Meghan Markle gave to Oprah Winfrey, a royal expert claims.*
_
“He knew what he was doing,” royal scribe Ingrid Seward told Page Six.

“*I can swear to you that, and he wanted to rock that boat. Quite why, I don’t understand, but he did want to. And then he did, and I don’t think he’s surprised by the repercussions or that he regrets it for a moment.”*

But what Seward, whose latest book is “Prince Philip Revealed,” doesn’t understand is why Harry, 36, and Meghan, 39, decided to unburden themselves to Winfrey — or Markle’s claim that her request for mental health help was rebuffed by Buckingham Palace.
_
*“I find that so difficult to understand … what she was trying to tell us there,” Seward says. “You don’t go to the HR department in the UK. You go and see a doctor, or you say to your husband, ‘Darling, I feel dreadful, I need you to find someone.’ Harry was in therapy himself, so he must have known people.”*









						Prince Harry knew the Oprah interview would ‘rock the boat’
					

“He wanted to rock that boat. And then he did, and I don’t think he’s surprised by the repercussions or that he regrets it for a moment.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

She makes a few good points!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, well -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's mother Doria texted Thomas Markle after Archie’s birth
> 
> 
> DORIA RAGLAND texted Thomas Markle after Meghan Markle gave birth to her son Archie, but the Duchess "didn't want to know" if her father replied to the message, according to a biography.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



This was in the book 'Finding Freedom'. The problem with her father is that he wanted to make up but his conditions were to have a photo op showing them making up. I think the media really messed up the relationship she had with him, and I sympathize with her on this. I don't think her father is toxic, he has just been brainwashed and manipulated by the press. He said he will continue to do interviews until MM reaches out and allows him back into her life. But again, if I was MM I wouldn't trust him, he is really in the medias pocket and this is really sad. Her father really needed protection from the media before the wedding.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was this every _really_ a concern?  _really_?
> So sweet of her, a woman who married royalty, to claim women who lunch don’t work.  Oh, the hypocrisy!  Oh, the arrogance!
> She, Steinem, Hillary, OW, GK can take that horses$it and spread it in their coops.
> ETA: it is ok for her to use stereotypes, but not anyone else.  Pi$$ off.
> 
> From the Express article:
> “I never wanted to be a lady who lunches; I’ve always wanted to be a woman who works.”


Oh honey, you marry rich enough to be a lady who lunches, you work for every last penny. 
Isn't that the real reason she couldn’t hack it in (royal) public service and left after 18 months? 
*which really when you consider her mat leave and the time-out in Canada after the Africa tour, it’s really more like 12-13 month of “work” she did while holding her royal title? Why do I get the feeling her idea of ‘work’ is just a liiiitle bit different than mine?
This pretty much sums up duchess did-very-little.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, well -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's mother Doria texted Thomas Markle after Archie’s birth
> 
> 
> DORIA RAGLAND texted Thomas Markle after Meghan Markle gave birth to her son Archie, but the Duchess "didn't want to know" if her father replied to the message, according to a biography.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



F!cking hypocrite, preaching peace and wellness and justice to the world, try to fix your family first!  Want to be a hypocrite fine, but don't make it so obvious, you don't have carte blanche, just the race card psycho!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Was this already posted? Australian man-giggle-take on the crowning of Meghan's literary ambitions 
"And it's also going to be an audio book as well, I believe?"
"Can you imagine anything better? Pop it on in the car. Pop it on at home while cooking dinner. Meghan's dulcet tones, just reading poetry."


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> LAYERS! OMG! That’s my favorite word salad word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Signed, duchess Meghan of Sussex, linked (not ranked) by my husband’s white privileged family, poet, author, philanthropist and mother of the 7th in line (aka: ranked) for the British throne.



Here's a big 'ol fresh serving of word salad for you.  From today's demand for donations:

*"We cannot think of a more resonant way to honor our son's birthday. If we all show up, with compassion for those we both know and don't know, we can have a profound impact. Even a small contribution can have a ripple effect. Together, we can uplift, protect, and care for one another."*


----------



## TimeToShop

Nothing says you’re an environmentalist like a bunch of helium filled mylar balloons! Bet they released them so Archie could watch them go to Granny Diana.

No bench in the photo? She missed that opportunity.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Here's a big 'ol fresh serving of word salad for you.  From today's demand for donations:
> 
> *"We cannot think of a more resonant way to honor our son's birthday. If we all show up, with compassion for those we both know and don't know, we can have a profound impact. Even a small contribution can have a ripple effect. Together, we can uplift, protect, and care for one another."*


Hey Meg, why don't you show a little compassion for your old dad on your beloved son's birthday.  A simple text may ripple to his heart to uplift him and show him you actually care!

Just a thought.


----------



## bag-mania

TimeToShop said:


> Nothing says you’re an environmentalist like a bunch of helium filled mylar balloons! Bet they released them so Archie could watch them go to Granny Diana.
> 
> *No bench in the photo? She missed that opportunity.*



She's saving that one for Father's Day next month. Maybe there will be a bench in the background of a sepia toned photo of Harry and Archie playing ball.


----------



## TimeToShop

bag-mania said:


> She's saving that one for Father's Day next month. Maybe there will be a bench in the background of a sepia toned photo of Harry and Archie playing ball.



Or maybe they’ll act it out. We know how much Harry likes to wear military clothing. They already have that much photographed bench.


----------



## Hermes Zen

V0N1B2 said:


> LAYERS! OMG! That’s my favorite word salad word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Signed, duchess Meghan of Sussex, linked (not ranked) by my husband’s white privileged family, poet, author, philanthropist and mother of the 7th in line (aka: ranked) for the British throne.



I keep scrolling the thread and every time I get to this clip I want to


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> Nothing says you’re an environmentalist like a bunch of helium filled mylar balloons!



Or freaking fireworks at your wedding when it's so bad for the environment and kills birds and other wildlife because the noise and lights make them panic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Hey Meg, why don't you show a little compassion for your old dad on your beloved son's birthday.  A simple text may ripple to his heart to uplift him and show him you actually care!
> 
> Just a thought.



It's not her job to coddle people!


----------



## Aimee3

I'm beginning to think there is something terribly wrong with their child's face.  Why else not show it for 2 entire years?  If the Cambridge children's faces can be seen, why can't Harry's kid's face?  Ridiculous and pretentious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> I'm beginning to think there is something terribly wrong with their child's face.  Why else not show it for 2 entire years?  If the Cambridge children's faces can be seen, why can't Harry's kid's face?  Ridiculous and pretentious.



The thing is, if they really just wanted to keep him out of the limelight I'd respect them. But the way the have gone about it from day 1 makes it so clear this is just another marketing strategy mixed with their usual pettiness.


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> Here is your birthday photo and not too far off from what @Sharont2305 was thinking.  He is wearing a mask.  Not much to see. I am unable to copy the picture itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Supporting Champions of Systemic Change | Archewell
> 
> 
> Through support, Archewell Foundation is underscoring its purpose of driving systemic cultural change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com



I went to their website and walked away for several minutes before checking it out and I had this message (below) at the bottom of my screen when I returned. I've never seen this type of message before on other sites.  Curious. The font was slightly larger "We love ..." and italicized. Maybe they thought I was lurking and was unwanted  OR  They want more clicks!  That's it!!  LOL 

_We love having you here... _ But we're mindful of screen time. Why not take a break? We'll be here.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, if they really just wanted to keep him out of the limelight I'd respect them. But the way the have gone about it from day 1 makes it so clear this is just another marketing strategy mixed with their usual pettiness.



Wasn't his face THE focus of a social media Christmas "card" in the past? People can change their minds but.... it's hard to follow.


----------



## csshopper

They really ought to commission Kate to take some snapshots for them, their family album would definitely benefit from her exceptional skills.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This was in the book 'Finding Freedom'. The problem with her father is that he wanted to make up but his conditions were to have a photo op showing them making up.* I think the media really messed up the relationship she had with him,* and I sympathize with her on this. I don't think her father is toxic, he has just been brainwashed and manipulated by the press. He said he will continue to do interviews until MM reaches out and allows him back into her life. But again, if I was MM I wouldn't trust him, he is really in the medias pocket and this is really sad. Her father really needed protection from the media before the wedding.


I think H&M accomplished that all by themselves. They had ample time before the wedding to visit TM to introduce Harry to him. Since both are feminist, they probably shrugged at the idea of Harry asking TM for his daughter's hand in marriage otherwise we'd heard about it umpteen times by now. And then there was that awful texting aimed at scaring TM into keeping quiet. They all need to swallow their pride and apologize, but I don't see this happening anytime soon.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I'm beginning to think there is something terribly wrong with their child's face.  Why else not show it for 2 entire years?  If the Cambridge children's faces can be seen, why can't Harry's kid's face?  Ridiculous and pretentious.



I wouldn't care if they didn't mention him in _every_ other word-salad sentence,_ every_ PR slobber-stunt they put out _5 times _a week.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TM dropped the note at OW’s. Now that I know DR texted him about baby’s birth, guaranteed he has visited Arch. Of course he has.
This charade needs to end and end quickly.


----------



## Lodpah

Oh M. Having spent close 14 years in the Army, your husband is the type of officer we would listen to cause you know? We respect the rank, not the man if he’s a dimwit and as soon as he walked away, I would tell the troops ok we do it this away. Then all the NCOs would get together and and say what an “ate the FCUK up officer.” Your husband’s uniform does not make a good officer. 

I believe lots of Harry types got fragged during combat cause they’re the type who get men killed. I’m not saying it’s right but if your one testicle hubby is that type then he’s an idiot.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I'm slightly involved with fashion and receive articles and newsletters.  Just got this.  $700k !?!?!    

*Was Meghan Markle paid $700k for her kid’s book?*
Meghan Markle: actress, duchess, and…children’s book author? If rumors are to be believed, Markle has reportedly received a $700,000 advance for her first kid’s picture book, “The Bench,” according to Page Six.  Though the sum is unconfirmed, Markle’s sure to receive a large payday for the title when it comes out in June—after all, the book is already a top-ranking pre-order in Amazon’s “Children’s Books” section.


> https://fashionweekdaily.com/daily-...st-drop-meghan-markles-book-advance-and-more/
> 
> *Daily News: Super Stylists Rob & Mariel’s New Collab, Tommy’s Latest Drop, Meghan Markle’s $$$ Book Advance, And More!*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Here's a big 'ol fresh serving of word salad for you.  From today's demand for donations:
> 
> *"We cannot think of a more resonant way to honor our son's birthday. If we all show up, with compassion for those we both know and don't know, we can have a profound impact. Even a small contribution can have a ripple effect. Together, we can** uplift,** protect, and care for one another."*


But only while wearing your custom-made Wonder Bra.


----------



## Lodpah

Lol from her word salad.

Definition of resonant
1 : continuing to sound : ECHOING
2a : capable of inducing resonance
b : relating to or exhibiting resonance
3a : intensified and enriched by or as if by resonance
a resonant voice
b : marked by grandiloquence


----------



## 1LV

Clearblueskies said:


> Aww that’s sweet
> Archie’s first escape attempt captured for posterity!


Hilarious!


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm slightly involved with fashion and receive articles and newsletters.  Just got this.  $700k !?!?!
> 
> *Was Meghan Markle paid $700k for her kid’s book?*
> Meghan Markle: actress, duchess, and…children’s book author? If rumors are to be believed, Markle has reportedly received a $700,000 advance for her first kid’s picture book, “The Bench,” according to Page Six.  Though the sum is unconfirmed, Markle’s sure to receive a large payday for the title when it comes out in June—after all, the book is already a top-ranking pre-order in Amazon’s “Children’s Books” section.



What's that in kaftans and R&R nude dresses? 

Her wedding dress(es) cost a quarter of $1M alone - and she didn't pay for that either. 

I mean come on guys, bathrobes for each of 16 bathrooms are gonna eat away at the book deal alone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Lol from her word salad.
> 
> Definition of resonant
> 1 : continuing to sound : ECHOING
> 2a : capable of inducing resonance
> b : relating to or exhibiting resonance
> 3a : intensified and enriched by or as if by resonance
> a resonant voice
> b : marked by grandiloquence



I hear AI writes poetry now too, sounds scarily similar. Maybe MM is/was a prototype?

I worry for art, I worry for language, I worry for the sanity of the world


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm slightly involved with fashion and receive articles and newsletters.  Just got this.  $700k !?!?!
> 
> *Was Meghan Markle paid $700k for her kid’s book?*
> Meghan Markle: actress, duchess, and…children’s book author? If rumors are to be believed, Markle has reportedly received a $700,000 advance for her first kid’s picture book, “The Bench,” according to Page Six.  Though the sum is unconfirmed, Markle’s sure to receive a large payday for the title when it comes out in June—after all, the book is already a top-ranking pre-order in Amazon’s “Children’s Books” section.


Amazon has already dropped the price, maybe the publisher got worried about the backlash and not making the profit they projected so hope the decrease will spur sales. The TV presenter who burst out laughing while on the air, plus Piers who still has a huge following got a lot of coverage of their negative reactions. Haven’t checked on Lady C yet.


----------



## sdkitty

I was listening to a podcast recently (probably Fresh Air).  They were interviewing a woman who was biracial and she said she had gone through a lot - people being very ugly towards her black, professional father, microaggressions against her,  not including her in a gifted program that she was more than qualified to be in until her white mother went to see the principal, etc.
Now Meghan has never spoken about any challenges she had with racism except from the British tabloids and the RF, right?
Maybe she has been the victim of this type of racism but interesting she hasn't complained about it.
From what @CeeJay has told us her friends who knew Meghan didn't even know she was biracial - thought she was white?
Just interesting that she, who likes to portray herself as a victim, hasn't complained of any other racism.
Or maybe she knows if she did there would be classmates and other who knew her when who would respond?


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I keep scrolling the thread and every time I get to this clip I want to


It makes me want to gouge my eyes out, except my brain still remembers it and is pi$$es me off!  Can't turn my brain off.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@sdkitty 
ITA, little by little, people are catching on and reporting on her outright lies and half truths and phony charities. Can't wait for the truth (not *her* truth) to come out and wipe that smirk off her face.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm slightly involved with fashion and receive articles and newsletters.  Just got this.  $700k !?!?!
> 
> *Was Meghan Markle paid $700k for her kid’s book?*
> Meghan Markle: actress, duchess, and…children’s book author? If rumors are to be believed, Markle has reportedly received a $700,000 advance for her first kid’s picture book, “The Bench,” according to Page Six.  Though the sum is unconfirmed, Markle’s sure to receive a large payday for the title when it comes out in June—after all, the book is already a top-ranking pre-order in Amazon’s “Children’s Books” section.


_*$700K?!!?*_
Who at that publishing house is on crack!??!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> _*$700K?!!?*_
> Who at that publishing house is on crack!??!



_*reportedly* received a $700,000 advance_
Doubtful she got anywhere close to that amount — SS working overtime.
IMO they will do and say anything, any thang, to get press.


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> It makes me want to gouge my eyes out, except my brain still remembers it and is pi$$es me off!  Can't turn my brain off.


It makes me dizzy (seeing her move like that), weak and


----------



## Shopaholic2021

It makes me sad to think she gets paid that much for something that would have only take a few days to write. Its not deep or thought provoking, but then again it is a children's book. I think it will sell really well. Her cookbook she helped with in the UK sold well, but a portion of that went to charities. I think she will probably put the money from the book advance into Archewell (so this doesn't get taxed since archwell is a non profit. And then they will use the money from Archwell to pay for security by claiming it as a business expense hence they evade tax. I gotta get make myself a non profit.


----------



## needlv

Note that all the RF social media tweets are reusing official Archie pics but really old ones?  Is this telling the world that they don’t have any recent photos either?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I actually think she looks kind of fun and charming in that gif. The only facial expression we’ve seen in a few years is sulking or a really fake zoom smile.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

needlv said:


> Note that all the RF social media tweets are reusing official Archie pics but really old ones?  Is this telling the world that they don’t have any recent photos either?



Archie hasn't seen anyone (in person) from the Royal family since October 2019 which was when they left for Canada as a extended vacation, before they declared they were leaving. There have only been video calls (as per MM and H) so they wouldn't be able to post newer pics even if they wanted to. 

One of the things that H said in the interview was that it was the royal family (William in particular) that had not been very welcoming or wanting to form bonds. I think they just have a very strained relationship. I don't blame William for keeping his distance, because I am in a similar position to him, and I choose to keep my distance from my SIL to be. I love my brother so I haven't told him that she is manipulative (she told me to tell him that I love her when they were fighting to try and get him to like her) and she is possible gold digger (he pays for everything even though she works and they specifically moved states for her career). So I see why William would want some distance, it doesn't mean that he doesn't love his brother, he just doesn't want to get involved in drama.


----------



## marietouchet

on topic of A’s birthday photo , again out of focus, black and white, weird - no shadows from balloons - heavily photoshopped , not facing camera ... 
Compare Charlotte’s ”normal” birthday photo ...

the dam has broken and I have to say ...

the subterfuge and secrecy about A ... enough is enough ... lots of celebs don’t provide photos , I am good with that ... 
What are they hiding with this photographic artistic garbage ?

Returning to my corner now ...


----------



## Shopaholic2021

marietouchet said:


> on topic of A’s birthday photo , again out of focus, black and white, weird - no shadows from balloons - heavily photoshopped , not facing camera ...
> Compare Charlotte’s ”normal” birthday photo ...
> 
> the dam has broken and I have to say ...
> 
> the subterfuge and secrecy about A ... enough is enough ... lots of celebs don’t provide photos , I am good with that ...
> What are they hiding with this photographic artistic garbage ?
> 
> Returning to my corner now ...



I think they do this because they are afraid that there will be backlash and possibly bullying and making fun of Archie due to the unpopularity of the parents. But given this, I would've thought it better to just not publish a photo of him if they are concerned for him in this way. I think they want to protect him but they also want attention which is a oxymoron really.


----------



## needlv

Oooh  - questions being asked about monetising that title.  Does anyone know if Sarah F’s books were also for her own commercial gain?









						Meghan Markle defies Queen as she is caught usin
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has penned her first children's book under the name of Duchess of Sussex despite the Queen warning about the usage of titles for "commercial gain."




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

Their ****ty website doesn’t even load properly on my phone. So I can’t even see any of the photos y’all are discussing other than the boy-from-up escaping with balloons sepia tint, that someone posted here.


----------



## V0N1B2

I can’t believe you don’t like my overly exaggerated affectations you guys! I’m sad. 
signed, The Meghan


----------



## V0N1B2

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Archie hasn't seen anyone (in person) from the Royal family since October 2019 which was when they left for Canada as a extended vacation, before they declared they were leaving. There have only been video calls (as per MM and H) so they wouldn't be able to post newer pics even if they wanted to.
> 
> One of the things that H said in the interview was that it was the royal family (William in particular) that had not been very welcoming or wanting to form bonds. I think they just have a very strained relationship. I don't blame William for keeping his distance, because I am in a similar position to him, and I choose to keep my distance from my SIL to be. I love my brother so I haven't told him that she is manipulative (she told me to tell him that I love her when they were fighting to try and get him to like her) and she is possible gold digger (he pays for everything even though she works and they specifically moved states for her career). So I see why William would want some distance, it doesn't mean that he doesn't love his brother, he just doesn't want to get involved in drama.


But like, how involved in Archie’s life were they expecting his aunt & uncle to be? The kid was six months old when they fled the UK under the cover of night with just the shirts on their backs. William has three kids of his own and has like, a job. He has charities and patron things and old folks homes to visit... did they expect him to come over every weekend to bond with his nephew while worrying if his SIL was secretly recording their interactions? I don’t even know what kind of mother his wife is - was she the type to keep her infant away from people and GERMS! Eek! until her son was a few months older? I know we caught a glimpse of him when she surprised Harry at that polo match she was reportedly escorted away from...
It’s just so selfish of Harry to even think that William showed little interest in his kid. I’m beginning to think he’s just as big of a narc as his wife.


----------



## V0N1B2

lanasyogamama said:


> I actually think she looks kind of fun and charming in that gif. The only facial expression we’ve seen in a few years is sulking or a really fake zoom smile.


I thought we were friends. 




*crosses lanasyogamama off Christmas card list.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> But like, how involved in Archie’s life were they expecting his aunt & uncle to be? The kid was six months old when they fled the UK under the cover of night with just the shirts on their backs. William has three kids of his own and has like, a job. He has charities and patron things and old folks homes to visit... did they expect him to come over every weekend to bond with his nephew while worrying if his SIL was secretly recording their interactions? I don’t even know what kind of mother his wife is - was she the type to keep her infant away from people and GERMS! Eek! until her son was a few months older? I know we caught a glimpse of him when she surprised Harry at that polo match she was reportedly escorted away from...
> It’s just so selfish of Harry to even think that William showed little interest in his kid. I’m beginning to think he’s just as big of a narc as his wife.



Omg, if only W&K knew their place. They were supposed to take this kid, baby$it him, rai$e him, so we the dynamic in-demand duo can traver$e the world in the private jet$ and share our wi$dom while we learn and li$ten. Does that re$onate with you?  $$$$$$.


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> on topic of A’s birthday photo , again out of focus, black and white, weird - no shadows from balloons - heavily photoshopped , not facing camera ...
> Compare Charlotte’s ”normal” birthday photo ...
> 
> the dam has broken and I have to say ...
> 
> the subterfuge and secrecy about A ... enough is enough ... lots of celebs don’t provide photos , I am good with that ...
> What are they hiding with this photographic artistic garbage ?
> 
> Returning to my corner now ...



I think they do all this ridiculousness around Archie and his pictures to have people talk about. I believe for her any publicity helps fulfill her need to be in the spotlight.


----------



## catlover46

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Charles ‘May Never Forgive’ Prince Harry for Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Charles is being more stubborn than Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II when it comes to Harry, a source tells Us — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A family feud for the ages. *Prince Charles* is having a harder time moving on from *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*’s tell-all interview than *Prince William *and *Queen Elizabeth II,* a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly._
> 
> *Queen Elizabeth II's Royal Family Tree*
> “With the way things are going, Charles may never forgive Harry, which hasn’t gone down well with Elizabeth,” the insider tells _Us_. “She feels that he’s putting his pride before the best interest of the monarchy. She has enough on her plate dealing with the loss of her husband. It’s drama she can do without.”
> 
> The source adds that Charles, 72, is “more stubborn” than son William, 38, who was spotted chatting with Harry, 36, last month after Prince Philip’s funeral service in the U.K.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Families React to Bombshell Interview*
> “They’re definitely not at the point where they speak on a regular basis, but William wants to be the bigger person and set a precedent. He believes that in order to repair damage and destruction from Harry’s interview, the best approach is to keep things civil with his brother rather than fanning the flames and fighting back with a tit-for-tat attitude,” the source says. “Elizabeth is proud of William for taking the dignified approach, unlike Charles, who still hasn’t forgiven Harry for dragging his name through the mud.”
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made headlines in March after they opened up about their decision to stop working for the 95-year-old monarch, citing concerns about racism in the U.K. and within the family. During the tell-all, Harry revealed that Charles stopped taking his calls after the couple relocated to California in March 2020.
> 
> “Because I took matters … into my own hands. It was like, I needed to do this for my family,” Harry, who shares 2-year-old Archie with Meghan, said at the time. “This is not a surprise to anybody. It’s really sad that it’s got to this point. I will always love him, but there’s a lot of hurt that’s happened. And I will continue to make it one of my priorities to try and heal that relationship.”
> 
> *The Royal Family's Sweetest Quotes About Prince Philip*
> Another source previously told _Us_ that Charles didn’t have any meaningful conversations with Harry during his first trip back to London in April.
> 
> “Unfortunately, Harry and Charles didn’t resolve their differences when Harry returned to the U.K. They barely communicated,” the source said last month. “There definitely continues to be a huge wedge between the two.”


Due to Harry’s falling out with Charles and William, do you think someone from the family called or texted Harry that his grandfather had died or god forbid he found out by watching the news?


----------



## lanasyogamama

V0N1B2 said:


> I thought we were friends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *crosses lanasyogamama off Christmas card list.


I’m going to make it up to you, I promise!


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think they do this because they are afraid that there will be backlash and possibly bullying and making fun of Archie due to the unpopularity of the parents. But given this, I would've thought it better to just not publish a photo of him if they are concerned for him in this way. I think they want to protect him but they also want attention which is a oxymoron really.



I have a feeling she would monetize photos of Archie if she could find someone who would pay enough.

That may be the one thing Harry might actually man-up and put his foot down about. His reason for leaving England was supposedly to protect his family from the press. Releasing a bunch of Archie photos when he sued paps for taking shots of him on their property last year doesn’t look good.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe you don’t like my overly exaggerated affectations you guys! I’m sad.
> signed, The Meghan



What the hell is she doing? It looks like she is digging her fingers into his hand while elbowing him in the nuts.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> I have a feeling she would monetize photos of Archie if she could find someone who would pay enough.
> 
> That may be the one thing Harry might actually man-up and put his foot down about. His reason for leaving England was supposedly to protect his family from the press. Releasing a bunch of Archie photos when he sued paps for taking shots of him on their property last year doesn’t look good.


I understand so they should just not post any photos of Archie instead of these ridiculous photos of just the back of the kid.  Makes it look like there’s something wrong.


----------



## rose60610

Are we even sure the kid is Archie? And the book illustration of Harry in a uniform is pretty bad especially after the faux compassion photo op in the cemetery with JCMH in full dress uniform with medals. 

I'm having difficulty with ranking in order their levels of: tone deafness, desperation, greed, stupidity, narcissism, and self pitying.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I think at some point M is working on a multi-million dollar spread of Archie with a magazine(s). If there's no clear face photos so far, M can get big $$$$$'s for those photos.


----------



## zinacef

Archie’s photos with privacy screen AKA filters/art And that will be $5 please—- oh it’s for the COVID vaccine. nobody will ever see the money these fundraisers have done. Where’s that money they raised for PPE for frontline workers, never heard of it again after they had those zoom concerts, etc.. with Lady Gaga on it. Local charity or companies were even better.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> LAYERS! OMG! That’s my favorite word salad word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Signed, duchess Meghan of Sussex, linked (not ranked) by my husband’s white privileged family, poet, author, philanthropist and mother of the 7th in line (aka: ranked) for the British throne.


She is just trying to be cute again. What is this obsession of hers with being cute - wiggling and tongue-twitching?



CarryOn2020 said:


> Was this every _really_ a concern?  _really_?
> So sweet of her, a woman who married royalty, to claim women who lunch don’t work.  Oh, the hypocrisy!  Oh, the arrogance!
> She, Steinem, Hillary, OW, GK can take that horses$it and spread it in their coops.
> ETA: it is ok for her to use stereotypes, but not anyone else.  Pi$$ off.
> 
> From the Express article:
> “I never wanted to be a lady who lunches; I’ve always wanted to be a woman who works.”


It's not easy working those marionette strings as she sends the hubby out to do network lunching.



Shopaholic2021 said:


> This was in the book 'Finding Freedom'. The problem with her father is that he wanted to make up but his conditions were to have a photo op showing them making up. I think the media really messed up the relationship she had with him, and I sympathize with her on this. I don't think her father is toxic, he has just been brainwashed and manipulated by the press. He said he will continue to do interviews until MM reaches out and allows him back into her life. But again, if I was MM I wouldn't trust him, he is really in the medias pocket and this is really sad. Her father really needed protection from the media before the wedding.


The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. D&D claim they want to make up with H's family but they are leaking info like a sinking boat. Maybe like her father, she will "continue to do interviews until (the BRF) reaches out and allows (them) back into (the cushy) life."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I understand so they should just not post any photos of Archie instead of these ridiculous photos of just the back of the kid.  Makes it look like there’s something wrong.



They could settle for showing Archie in situations where it would make sense, like his birthday, and leaving him out of their self-promoting extravaganza the rest of the time. On his birthday last year they made that video where she was reading him a storybook and we saw his face then.

We also saw that Meghan had a difficult time holding Archie’s attention at age 1. It is probably harder for her now so I don’t think we’ll see any new videos as he enters the terrible twos.


----------



## Chanbal

They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806


They are gunning to be the leaders of global indignation. High profile and easy to promote.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806


WTF these two ... I’d be so pissed if I was CEO of those companies,


----------



## Clearblueskies

1LV said:


> Hilarious!


It’s like when teenagers discover there are *big* words and use them thinking it looks _really _clever  


Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806


I mean honestly, this just takes the biscuit - because what the world needs in a desperate crisis is another pointless stunt from these shameless self promotors.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> on topic of A’s birthday photo , again out of focus, black and white, weird - no shadows from balloons - heavily photoshopped , not facing camera ...
> Compare Charlotte’s ”normal” birthday photo ...
> 
> the dam has broken and I have to say ...
> 
> the subterfuge and secrecy about A ... enough is enough ... lots of celebs don’t provide photos , I am good with that ...
> What are they hiding with this photographic artistic garbage ?
> 
> Returning to my corner now ...


Charlotte's photo, as with a lot of the ones Catherine has taken looks like she's been playing and her mum has just told her to stand there, I'll take a picture. Totally natural and not a modelling session.


----------



## xincinsin

I can see it now...

ARCHIE'S WORLD
His first 5 years in pictures
Foreword by Oprah Winfrey
Poems by Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I was listening to a podcast recently (probably Fresh Air).  They were interviewing a woman who was biracial and she said she had gone through a lot - people being very ugly towards her black, professional father, microaggressions against her,  not including her in a gifted program that she was more than qualified to be in until her white mother went to see the principal, etc.
> Now Meghan has never spoken about any challenges she had with racism except from the British tabloids and the RF, right?
> Maybe she has been the victim of this type of racism but interesting she hasn't complained about it.
> From what @CeeJay has told us her friends who knew Meghan didn't even know she was biracial - thought she was white?
> Just interesting that she, who likes to portray herself as a victim, hasn't complained of any other racism.
> Or maybe she knows if she did there would be classmates and other who knew her when who would respond?



She did address her experiences being biracial. This article lists some examples: https://www.etonline.com/everything...acial-and-the-fight-for-racial-justice-149362

But also, in general, not everyone who has been a victim of racism complains about it casually and especially if it was traumatic.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sound like the Queen had nice birthday zoom with Archie for his birthday.   

Sharing a portion of the article ...

*How Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, And The Queen Celebrated Archie's 2nd Birthday*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are celebrating Archie's second birthday today at their Montecito, CA, home. But Us Weekly got intel about how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are making the day special for Archie, with some help from his great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth IIfrom England.
“While Harry and Meghan are raising Archie to be grounded, they go the extra mile on his birthday,” a source told Us. “They made [his] card themselves and wrote a sweet poem inside, splashed out on gifts—including outdoor toys—and have bought him the cutest birthday outfit!”

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...-harry-the-queen-archie-2nd-birthday-details/


----------



## Clearblueskies

Hermes Zen said:


> Sound like the Queen had nice birthday zoom with Archie for his birthday.
> 
> Sharing a portion of the article ...
> 
> *How Meghan Markle, Prince Harry, And The Queen Celebrated Archie's 2nd Birthday*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are celebrating Archie's second birthday today at their Montecito, CA, home. But Us Weekly got intel about how the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are making the day special for Archie, with some help from his great-grandmother Queen Elizabeth IIfrom England.
> “While Harry and Meghan are raising Archie to be grounded, they go the extra mile on his birthday,” a source told Us. “They made [his] card themselves and wrote a sweet poem inside, splashed out on gifts—including outdoor toys—and have bought him the cutest birthday outfit!”
> 
> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...-harry-the-queen-archie-2nd-birthday-details/


Hmm more spin methinks - it says QE2 “planning to” but who cares really?  Grandparent calls kid on birthday - shock!  This is aimed at the audience of stans to whom she’s selling the fantasy fairytale as hard and as often as she can.  Unless little Archie is reading calligraphy at the age of 2 that is


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Note that all the RF social media tweets are reusing official Archie pics but really old ones?  Is this telling the world that they don’t have any recent photos either?


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was this every _really_ a concern?  _really_?
> So sweet of her, a woman who married royalty, to claim women who lunch don’t work.  Oh, the hypocrisy!  Oh, the arrogance!
> She, Steinem, Hillary, OW, GK can take that horses$it and spread it in their coops.
> ETA: it is ok for her to use stereotypes, but not anyone else.  Pi$$ off.
> 
> From the Express article:
> “I never wanted to be a lady who lunches; I’ve always wanted to be a woman who works.”


Just as service, work is universal. Running a family and/or being a useful member of the society takes hard work, as all of us living in somewhat functioning families can attest to. So as doing an excellent work between the sheets requires dedication, too, but only a few women own it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

No mention of Doria (love how autocorrect turns that into Doris) zooming young Archie or spoiling him with prezzies  
Why is only the Queen getting tagged?  Could it be that Meggie is a snob?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I can see it now...
> 
> ARCHIE'S WORLD
> His first 5 years in pictures
> Foreword by Oprah Winfrey
> Poems by Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex



I can see the title order will be different 

ARCHIE'S WORLD
His first 5 years in pictures
Poems by author/poet/humanitarian/philanthropist/human rights speaker, Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex
Foreword by Oprah Winfrey


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> No mention of Doria (love how autocorrect turns that into Doris) zooming young Archie or spoiling him with prezzies
> Why is only the Queen getting tagged?  Could it be that Meggie is a snob?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> No mention of Doria (love how autocorrect turns that into Doris) zooming young Archie or spoiling him with prezzies
> Why is only the Queen getting tagged?  Could it be that Meggie is a snob?


Or his grandfather Charles.


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Here's a big 'ol fresh serving of word salad for you.  From today's demand for donations:
> 
> *"We cannot think of a more resonant way to honor our son's birthday. If we all show up, with compassion for those we both know and don't know, we can have a profound impact. Even a small contribution can have a ripple effect. Together, we can uplift, protect, and care for one another."*


Compassion for what exactly? For people who lost a loved one during the pandemic,  for ones who lost their jobs or for the elderly being lonely and isolated, for people who has been working on the frontline for very little money for more than a year now or for an entitled, whiny couple who has too many toilets to buy toilet rolls for?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe you don’t like my overly exaggerated affectations you guys! I’m sad.
> signed, The Meghan



I still wonder what she was trying to do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> I know we caught a glimpse of him when she surprised Harry at that polo match she was reportedly escorted away from...



I think the polo match were she was escorted away from was before the wedding? Where she rummaged through the trunk of Harry's car?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806



Awww cute. Just for some background information: the Pfizer - you know, developed in Germany and funded heavily by our government - is barely available in Germany because they can't produce as much as there's demand (and they don't vaccinate people under 60 with Astra Zeneca anymore). Also, it is pretty idiotic to expect a handful of countries to produce enough to feed the world so to speak...the licenses need to be made so that e.g. India can produce their own stock.


----------



## RAINDANCE

"We cannot think of a more resonant (?) way to make our son's birthday all about us.... "

_F_rom Merriam Webster
Definition of _resonant _
: marked by grandiloquence

Definition of _grandiloquence_
: a lofty, extravagantly colorful, pompous, or bombastic style, manner, or quality especially in language


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I can see the title order will be different
> 
> ARCHIE'S WORLD
> His first 5 years in pictures
> Poems by author/poet/humanitarian/philanthropist/human rights speaker, Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex
> Foreword by Oprah Winfrey


Maybe in 3 years' time, we can look foward to seeing

Meghan, formerly known as THE Duchess of Sussex


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> I can see the title order will be different
> 
> ARCHIE'S WORLD
> His first 5 years in pictures
> Poems by author/poet/humanitarian/philanthropist/human rights speaker, Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex
> Foreword by Oprah Winfrey


And with them all being black and white photos she could call it *Archie - 59 Shades of Grey* and pick up another originality award at the same time


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806


I'm sure the global pharmaceutical companies are very concerned about their letter. I'm sure they get tones of letters like that daily from self-appointed influencers, like Duchess Disney and her puppet.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806



So these Pharma companies aren't already in distribution mode? The world's leaders, the UN (worthless but still), the WHO, other international organizations have been working around the clock for world distribution. But leave it to Meghan and Harry to pretend to be some kind of important global entity. Anyone who signs onto their "open letter" ought to have their head examined. If M&H reeeeally wanted to "be a voice" they'd have been more impactful by not dumping the BRF. They are NOTHING without the family they torched and burned. I'm thinking of writing my own "open letter" that people can co-sign, addressed to M&H, telling them to quit pretending they're important and accept the fact they're just a couple of fame whores who'll do anything for a nickel. The only difference between Meghan and Harry and porn stars is that at least porn stars are honest about what they do for money.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe you don’t like my overly exaggerated affectations you guys! I’m sad.
> signed, The Meghan





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still wonder what she was trying to do.


She moves in quickly to castrate H with her elbow and in a defensive move H crosses his legs to protect what's left of his manhood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.

But also: in the comments there's someone mentioning a rumour that MM had a teenage pregnancy and after an incident that child was removed from her. Someone else added they had seen pictures of a pregnant looking teen MM. Now l'll say that I find it highly unlikely someone as controlling and type A wouldn't just, uh, take care of the problem, but has anyone ever heard of this?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5077145
> 
> 
> Well.
> 
> But also: in the comments there's someone mentioning a rumour that MM had a teenage pregnancy and after an incident that child was removed from her. Someone else added they had seen pictures of a pregnant looking teen MM. Now l'll say that I find it highly unlikely someone as controlling and type A wouldn't just, uh, take care of the problem, but has anyone ever heard of this?


I've read about that rumour, but the version I saw was debunked because there was photo evidence that she was non-bumpy during that period of her life.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> She moves in quickly to castrate H with her elbow and in a defensive move H crosses his legs to protect what's left of his manhood.


I find it so typical of her. She is shoving herself in front of Harry.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5077145
> 
> 
> Well.
> 
> But also: in the comments there's someone mentioning a rumour that MM had a teenage pregnancy and after an incident that child was removed from her. Someone else added they had seen pictures of a pregnant looking teen MM. Now l'll say that I find it highly unlikely someone as controlling and type A wouldn't just, uh, take care of the problem, but has anyone ever heard of this?





xincinsin said:


> I've read about that rumour, but the version I saw was debunked because there was photo evidence that she was non-bumpy during that period of her life.



Maybe she was practicing her moon bump already for a worthwhile millionaire heir already at that age and since he didn’t fall for it, she removed the moon bump...
Maybe she had a baby and  s/he is being kept for their own protection... by their adopted parents...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also: in the comments there's someone mentioning a rumour that MM had a teenage pregnancy and after an incident that child was removed from her. Someone else added they had seen pictures of a pregnant looking teen MM. *Now l'll say that I find it highly unlikely someone as controlling and type A wouldn't just, uh, take care of the problem,* but has anyone ever heard of this?





scarlet555 said:


> Maybe she had a baby and  s/he is being kept for their own protection... by their adopted parents...



Since we are speculating, let me throw this down the hypothetical rabbit hole. If she had an abortion as a teen there is a small chance it could affect her fertility later in life. In rare cases it happens, hence the need for IVF or a surrogate.


----------



## youngster

RAINDANCE said:


> "We cannot think of a more resonant (?) way to make our son's birthday all about us.... "
> 
> _F_rom Merriam Webster
> Definition of _resonant _
> : marked by grandiloquence
> 
> Definition of _grandiloquence_
> : a lofty, extravagantly colorful, pompous, or bombastic style, manner, or quality especially in language



I read the ". . . _more resonant way_ . . . " part of their statement and just .  She is a terrible writer, pompous at every opportunity and about _everything_, even a 2 year old's birthday lol.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I read the ". . . _more resonant way_ . . . " part of their statement and just . She is a terrible writer, pompous at every opportunity and about _everything_, even a 2 year old's birthday lol.



She uses words she thinks will inspire strong emotions rather than trying to string together a coherent sentence.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aren‘t balloons dangerous to planes and birds? Thought this was an environmental no-no.
> ‘Another example of ‘do-as-I-say”?



Exactly what I was thinking: surely they're not good for the environment......


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> She uses words she thinks will inspire strong emotions rather than trying to string together a coherent sentence.



I think she knows deep down that she did not earn a book contract, a Spotify deal, or a Netflix producing deal through her own talent and hard work but through marriage and Harry's fame as a prince and Diana's son.  She overcompensates as a result.  That's my armchair analysis of her writing and speaking style, someone who is trying desperately to show how thoughtful and important she is.


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> I think she knows deep down that she did not earn a book contract, a Spotify deal, or a Netflix producing deal through her own talent and hard work but through marriage and Harry's fame as a prince and Diana's son.  She overcompensates as a result.  That's my armchair analysis of her writing and speaking style, someone who is trying desperately to show how thoughtful and important she is.


Spot on


----------



## CarryOn2020

The DM going the extra mile to throw shade - the battle of the books will continue ad infinitum.  






*Sarah Ferguson makes foray into adult fiction with Mills & Boon novel*
SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE: Step forward the Duchess of York, 61, the leading writer of children's fiction in royal circles, who made her name with her Budgie The Little Helicopter series.



www.dailymail.co.uk

_The Duchess of Sussex may have announced this week she has written her first children's book called The Bench, but there is, of course, another Duchess who beat her to it.

Step forward the Duchess of York, 61, the leading writer of children's fiction in royal circles, who made her name with her Budgie The Little Helicopter series.

And Sarah is clearly determined that Meghan doesn't steal her publishing limelight, as this August she makes her first foray into adult fiction, with a historical romance called Her Heart For A Compass, co-written with Marguerite Kaye, for Mills & Boon, no less._


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I think she knows deep down that she did not earn a book contract, a Spotify deal, or a Netflix producing deal through her own talent and hard work but through marriage and Harry's fame as a prince and Diana's son.  She overcompensates as a result.  That's my armchair analysis of her writing and speaking style, someone who is trying desperately to show how thoughtful and important she is.



You know I really wish she had that kind of self-reflection in her but I don't believe she sees herself that way. What I've observed over the past 2–3 years points to a sense of entitlement. She feels she deserves everything she has and more. She desperately wants to be loved by everyone. The key to achieving that goal was to model herself as Diana 2.0 and follow the proven template of creating a charitable foundation to constantly drive home the message that _Meghan is making a difference. _Harry was necessary for all of it to happen and she knows it. She isn't letting him go any time soon.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

xincinsin said:


> D&D claim they want to make up with H's family but they are leaking info like a sinking boat. Maybe like her father, she will "continue to do interviews until (the BRF) reaches out and allows (them) back into (the cushy) life."



Yeah I find it ironic that H and MM want to make up and repair the relationships with William and Charles yet they keeping leaking stories. I really think H has a lot of unresolved mental health issues and also he has a very poor understanding of the monarchy. He really isn't the brightest (he got poor grades despite going to the best school in England). However I realize people can be smart even with poor grades at school. He screwed up with his lecturing on climate change but then traveling on a private jet, for which his royal advisor had told him not to do, he didn't listen, then he made up some dumb excuse that his family have to use a private jet for security reasons. So he isn't really smart in the real world either.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> You know I really wish she had that kind of self-reflection in her but I don't believe she sees herself that way. What I've observed over the past 2–3 years points to a sense of entitlement. She feels she deserves everything she has and more. She desperately wants to be loved by everyone. The key to achieving that goal was to model herself as Diana 2.0 and follow the proven template of creating a charitable foundation to constantly drive home the message that _Meghan is making a difference. _Harry was necessary for all of it to happen and she knows it. She isn't letting him go any time soon.



I was actually just reflecting on what I previously posted and thought, well, my theory only works if she has some degree of self awareness and humility which she does not seem to have lol.   Still, I think she writes how she _thinks_ a thoughtful, important person would write in order to be taken very seriously, not realizing that her writing style verges on parody.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M shamelessly copy what others are doing which sets up comparisons that show H&M’s version is below standard. All of this is because they really do lack talent and pizazz. Charles’s Prince’s Trusts concerts would have flopped without Diana’s glow. No one can copy someone’s glow. It’s what smart people have always known.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I was actually just reflecting on what I previously posted and thought, well, my theory only works if she has some degree of self awareness and humility which she does not seem to have lol.   Still, I think she writes how she _thinks_ a thoughtful, important person would write in order to be taken very seriously, not realizing that her writing style verges on parody.



I agree. She functions as a chameleon, presenting herself in whatever way she thinks will get her what she wants, ATTENTION! It is so obvious when you see how her interest and support hops from one social cause to the next, whatever is currently in fashion. She abandons those causes which are no longer front page news without a second thought.


----------



## Chanbal

Alan Jones!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Charlotte's photo, as with a lot of the ones Catherine has taken looks like she's been playing and her mum has just told her to stand there, I'll take a picture. Totally natural and not a modelling session.


Kate takes great pics.  Meghan doesn't need to have that talent; she can hire someone to take great pics of Archie.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5077145
> 
> 
> Well.
> 
> But also: in the comments there's someone mentioning a rumour that MM had a teenage pregnancy and after an incident that child was removed from her. Someone else added they had seen pictures of a pregnant looking teen MM. Now l'll say that I find it highly unlikely someone as controlling and type A wouldn't just, uh, take care of the problem, but has anyone ever heard of this?


speaking of commoditizing, Diana is on the cover of the new VF......poor woman was used to produce heirs, now is being used by H&M for sympathy and she's still selling magazines......seems she's a bottomless pit


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

catlover46 said:


> Due to Harry’s falling out with Charles and William, do you think someone from the family called or texted Harry that his grandfather had died or god forbid he found out by watching the news?


I have no idea, but I can't imagine they're heartless.  I would assume someone would still call Harry personally, even though Harry didn't seem to do anything to publicly show he actually gave a damn.


----------



## Chanbal

How nice 1% of the net proceeds go to charity! It will buy a couple more sandwiches...


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> It makes me sad to think she gets paid that much for something that would have only take a few days to write. Its not deep or thought provoking, but then again it is a children's book. I think it will sell really well. Her cookbook she helped with in the UK sold well, but a portion of that went to charities. I think she will probably put the money from the book advance into Archewell (so this doesn't get taxed since archwell is a non profit. And then they will use the money from Archwell to pay for security by claiming it as a business expense hence they evade tax. I gotta get make myself a non profit.


What's also sad is there are actual writers with much more creativity than Douchess who can't get published.  Although I hate cancel culture, I'd love to cancel the part where celebrities and their children get fast passed to the front of the line to "accomplish" things.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> It makes me sad to think she gets paid that much for something that would have only take a few days to write. Its not deep or thought provoking, but then again it is a children's book. I think it will sell really well. Her cookbook she helped with in the UK sold well, but a portion of that went to charities. I think she will probably put the money from the book advance into Archewell (so this doesn't get taxed since archwell is a non profit. And then they will use the money from Archwell to pay for security by claiming it as a business expense hence they evade tax. I gotta get make myself a non profit.



That's the world we live in, unfortunately. Forget this stupid book, some people make a million+ just for sharing an instagram pic.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I went to their website and walked away for several minutes before checking it out and I had this message (below) at the bottom of my screen when I returned. I've never seen this type of message before on other sites.  Curious. The font was slightly larger "We love ..." and italicized. Maybe they thought I was lurking and was unwanted  OR  They want more clicks!  That's it!!  LOL
> 
> _We love having you here... _ But we're mindful of screen time. Why not take a break? *We'll be here.*


Of course they will be.  What else do they have going on?


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> Note that all the RF social media tweets are reusing official Archie pics but really old ones?  Is this telling the world that they don’t have any recent photos either?


I think it's a way for the Royals to make a statement beyond "Happy Birthday". Depending on how it's interpreted, even a little snarky. to which I say, well deserved!

Royal Family -1 Douch and Douchesss -0 Christening Group Photo posted by Kensington Royal Account
Making the statement, which he will see in archives as he ages, that he was once part of a large family before his parents dumped them and fled to America. He had no vote. (Mama, who are these people who are all dressed up?)

Prince Charles- 1 Douch and Douchess- 0 Fathers and Sons Photo posted by Clarence House Account
Best yet is the picture of Charles, Harry, and Archie which illustrates what The Bench is supposedly celebrating, the bonds between fathers and sons. It was written _for other people_ by his Mother, who is incapable of understanding of the subject  of familial love. (Daddy, if he's my grandfather will he buy me a bicycle?)


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> How nice 1% of the net proceeds go to charity! It will buy a couple more sandwiches...
> 
> View attachment 5077328



Is that 1% offer something the book set or something the retailer set? It looks kind of like the latter, eg Amazon is the one choosing books and the amount and the charity.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Oh M. Having spent close 14 years in the Army, your husband is the type of officer we would listen to cause you know? We respect the rank, not the man if he’s a dimwit and as soon as he walked away, I would tell the troops ok we do it this away. Then all the NCOs would get together and and say what an “ate the FCUK up officer.” Your husband’s uniform does not make a good officer.
> 
> I believe lots of Harry types got fragged during combat cause they’re the type who get men killed. I’m not saying it’s right but if your *one testicle hubby* is that type then he’s an idiot.


Wow you're generous.  I'm assuming he has zero.


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> She moves in quickly to castrate H with her elbow and in a defensive move H crosses his legs to protect what's left of his manhood.



oops! Too late!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Since we are speculating, let me throw this down the hypothetical rabbit hole. If she had an abortion as a teen there is a small chance it could affect her fertility later in life. In rare cases it happens, hence the need for IVF or a surrogate.


if she had an abortion I would imagine it would be very early in the pregnancy and no one would have seen her looking pregnant.....she's not a total idiot (I don't think)


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> I can’t believe you don’t like my overly exaggerated affectations you guys! I’m sad.
> signed, The Meghan


The other gif that makes me want a lobotomy!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I have a feeling she would monetize photos of Archie if she could find someone who would pay enough.
> *
> That may be the one thing Harry might actually man-up and put his foot down about. His reason for leaving England was supposedly to protect his family from the press.* Releasing a bunch of Archie photos when he sued paps for taking shots of him on their property last year doesn’t look good.


Yeah, no, I don't see Harry manning up for anything.  He will do exactly what his mistress tells him to, or will gladly be whipped.


----------



## V0N1B2

lalame said:


> Is that 1% offer something the book set or something the retailer set? It looks kind of like the latter, eg Amazon is the one choosing books and the amount and the charity.


Yeah, that particular tweet may have been from someone in Canada. Indigo/Chapters is a Canadian retailer and their program is below. Too lazy to explain, took screen caps instead 
It is for EVERY children's book sold, not just The Giving Bench or whatever it's called.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Is that 1% offer something the book set or something the retailer set? It looks kind of like the latter, eg Amazon is the one choosing books and the amount and the charity.


I don't know, but I would think an author has the right to allocate part of his/her profit to charity.


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C on the book, letter...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I can see it now...
> 
> ARCHIE'S WORLD
> His first 5 years in pictures
> Foreword by Oprah Winfrey
> Poems by Meghan, THE Duchess of Sussex


OMG I read that first as "His first 5 words in pictures".  My brain automatically zoomed to "WTF?  They'll illustrate his first 5 words?  Like crocodile and waffle and basically it'll be an urban dictionary photo book??"


----------



## csshopper

Meghan's day is in tatters. Sniff Sniff.
If there is a shift in one of the tectonic plates in California today, I will suspect the epicenter of the Quake is to the South of me in Montecito.

*Kate's Hold Still photography book is ALREADY a bestseller - as she launches treasure hunt by leaving copies hidden around the UK with a letter tucked inside*

*Kate Middleton, 39, looked elegant in a vibrant red coat from Eponine as she visited National Portrait Gallery *
*The Duchess of Cambridge paired the coat with brown accessories, including a new £295 DeMellier handbag*
*Mother-of-three went on to visit Royal London Hospital where she spoke to staff about working in pandemic*
* Visit comes as her Hold Still photobook topped bestseller lists after it was released this morning *
*Proceeds from sales of the book will be split equally between Mind charity and National Portrait Gallery*
*Earlier today the mother-of-three launched a nation-wide treasure hunt for her photography book*
*Judges and participants of the contest have been given copies to hide in their communities*
*The mother-of-three started the project in 2020 to document the Covid-19 pandemic in the UK *
*Success of Kate's book comes days after Meghan Markle, 39, announced plans to release a children's book *


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I don't know, but I would think an author has the right to allocate part of his/her profit to charity.



Yes but I mean that particular offer may be the retailer's, not the author's. She may have her own thing going on, like 0-100% of HER proceeds go to charity, but it's not listed there. Might be listed in the book or called out when it's released.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> Since we are speculating, let me throw this down the hypothetical rabbit hole. If she had an abortion as a teen there is a small chance it could affect her fertility later in life. In rare cases it happens, hence the need for IVF or a surrogate.



Having an abortion should have no effect on your fertility. However STIs that are left untreated can affect fertility. Fertility is poorly understood scientifically, by which I mean there are 20 year olds that fail to get pregnant after many years and need multiple IVF treatments before conceiving. Then there are 'older' mothers in their 30s that get pregnant within a few months. Also its supposed to be easier to have a second child after the first one is conceived. People always assume older woman = must have been IVF but this isn't always true. 

One of my cousins wife has had multiple terminations as she doesn't want more children (she has two which she can just about deal with). So abortion shouldn't affect your fertility.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Having an abortion should have no effect on your fertility. However STIs that are left untreated can affect fertility. Fertility is poorly understood scientifically, by which I mean there are 20 year olds that fail to get pregnant after many years and need multiple IVF treatments before conceiving. Then there are 'older' mothers in their 30s that get pregnant within a few months. Also its supposed to be easier to have a second child after the first one is conceived. People always assume older woman = must have been IVF but this isn't always true.
> 
> One of my cousins wife has had multiple terminations as she doesn't want more children (she has two which she can just about deal with). So abortion shouldn't affect your fertility.


Abortions, especially repetitive, can definitely affect fertility.  They can cause Asherman's Syndrome, which causes adhesions inside the uterus, making it difficult for a pregnancy to implant.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Abortions, especially repetitive, can definitely affect fertility.  They can cause Asherman's Syndrome, which causes adhesions inside the uterus, making it difficult for a pregnancy to implant.



It's fascinating how much stuff I learn I would never have heard of if it wasn't for this misunderstood little thread


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Awww cute. Just for some background information: the Pfizer - you know, developed in Germany and* funded heavily by our government* - is barely available in Germany because they can't produce as much as there's demand (and they don't vaccinate people under 60 with Astra Zeneca anymore). Also, it is pretty idiotic to expect a handful of countries to produce enough to feed the world so to speak...the licenses need to be made so that e.g. India can produce their own stock.


Actually EU provided funds for the development as well, but it's not the point, though. It hasn't managed to deliver the quantities ordered by EU so far, so it's very unlikely that they have extra stocks to share. In fact, AstraZeneca, Jansen or Sputnik V is better choice for the developing countries due to the storage temperature requirements. While some countries halted and some other countries restricted the used of Astra in the EU, whatever extra quantities are available there are countries which happily take it. I know that Astra is in talks with several countries in Asia to produce vaccines there, so is Russia.
Just because of their letter, no manufacturer will be able to produce surplus amounts to provide enough vaccines to the rest of the world. I don't think that even QE would be able to make a difference in this matter, but they are definitely too insignificant to matter to any major decision maker in this issue. It's a hollow PR stunt as usual.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Having an abortion should have no effect on your fertility. However STIs that are left untreated can affect fertility. Fertility is poorly understood scientifically, by which I mean there are 20 year olds that fail to get pregnant after many years and need multiple IVF treatments before conceiving. Then there are 'older' mothers in their 30s that get pregnant within a few months. Also its supposed to be easier to have a second child after the first one is conceived. People always assume older woman = must have been IVF but this isn't always true.
> 
> One of my cousins wife has had multiple terminations as she doesn't want more children (she has two which she can just about deal with). So abortion shouldn't affect your fertility.


too bad the cousin doesn't know about birth control....I'm an advcate of choice but hate to see women use abortion as birth control.....and a grown woman who has a couple kids should def know better


----------



## mellibelly

marietouchet said:


> on topic of A’s birthday photo , again out of focus, black and white, weird - no shadows from balloons - heavily photoshopped , not facing camera ...
> Compare Charlotte’s ”normal” birthday photo ...
> What are they hiding with this *photographic artistic garbage *?


I love this description. Photographic artistic garbage = visual word salad. She thinks it’s an artsy pic of A when it really looks like a picture frame stock image from a Home Goods clearance section.


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah, that particular tweet may have been from someone in Canada. Indigo/Chapters is a Canadian retailer and their program is below. Too lazy to explain, took screen caps instead
> It is for EVERY children's book sold, not just The Giving Bench or whatever it's called.
> View attachment 5077338
> View attachment 5077339


Heather Reisman, owner of Indigo and much else, who has more than a billion dollars to her name...  

Normally I wouldn't think twice, and this woman personally gives back in a _hug_e way, but putting one percent on the cover just looks bad.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they for real. That filter is hurting my eyes (quite literally, no dig).


What’s the name of this filter?
Drained dry?
Seems appropriate.


----------



## Jayne1

Clearblueskies said:


> No mention of Doria (love how autocorrect turns that into Doris) zooming young Archie or spoiling him with prezzies
> Why is only the Queen getting tagged?  Could it be that Meggie is a snob?


Doria is the nanny. Doubt she'd live there if she didn't serve a purpose.


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> They contribute nothing and take credit for everything! Disgusting!
> View attachment 5076806





xincinsin said:


> They are gunning to be the leaders of global indignation. High profile and easy to promote.





scarlet555 said:


> WTF these two ... I’d be so pissed if I was CEO of those companies,


Right, now that they have called on the vaccine manufacturers, NOW they will decide to provide more vaccines.  Why didn't they think of that before???  




purseinsanity said:


> Yeah, no, I don't see Harry manning up for anything.  He will do exactly what his mistress tells him to, or will gladly be whipped.


I think H is just as all-in on the nonsense they spew, the lies, the bull, as M is.  He is no "innocent" puppet.  He is mad at this family and wants to hurt them.  Spoiled, petulant azz.


----------



## Clearblueskies

purseinsanity said:


> OMG I read that first as "His first 5 words in pictures".  My brain automatically zoomed to "WTF?  They'll illustrate his first 5 words?  Like crocodile and waffle and basically it'll be an urban dictionary photo book??"


That’s a much better idea than the bench thing


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> What’s the name of this filter?
> Drained dry?
> Seems appropriate.



It looks like a 20% screen of the image. Something you would do when you intend to run text over it and the photo was meant to be a background for the web page. Either they had nothing to say or else Meghan thought it looked artsy that way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Yeah I find it ironic that H and MM want to make up and repair the relationships with William and Charles yet they keeping leaking stories. I really think H has a lot of unresolved mental health issues and also he has a very poor understanding of the monarchy. He really isn't the brightest (he got poor grades despite going to the best school in England). However I realize people can be smart even with poor grades at school. He screwed up with his lecturing on climate change but then traveling on a private jet, for which his royal advisor had told him not to do, he didn't listen, then he made up some dumb excuse that his family have to use a private jet for security reasons. So he isn't really smart in the real world either.


I think he has a very poor understanding in general. Having poor grades seems to be a family trait - Diana didn't excel at school at all and received very basic education, Charles was mediocre as I've heard. Still, many people who are not too strong academically do well in life through creativity, resourcefulness and/or hard work, or just simply grow up to the task, but he's not even street smart. He might have taken his military role seriously, although: he was probably protected more than the fellow soldiers, but  I don't think he had a strong drive to prove himself. There were no high stakes anyway: he never had to work for his living or fulfill serious obligations. IMO his possible mental issues and his upbringing make him incapable to realize how everyday people's lives are different than his and how things work in real life. See how visibly upset he was in the OW interview when he talked about that he had been cut off financially and had to buy his mansion from the money he had inherited from Diana. I think a Westworld kind of awakening is still to come.



Shopaholic2021 said:


> Having an abortion should have no effect on your fertility. However STIs that are left untreated can affect fertility. Fertility is poorly understood scientifically, by which I mean there are 20 year olds that fail to get pregnant after many years and need multiple IVF treatments before conceiving. Then there are 'older' mothers in their 30s that get pregnant within a few months. Also its supposed to be easier to have a second child after the first one is conceived. People always assume older woman = must have been IVF but this isn't always true.
> 
> One of my cousins wife has had multiple terminations as she doesn't want more children (she has two which she can just about deal with). So abortion shouldn't affect your fertility.


Actually it can affect your fertility. Your cousin's wife is rather an exception. Using termination as a birth control is not a wise choice at all, albeit if she doesn't want more children, her fertility is not an issue to consider. Nowadays, it might be less risky than 70 years ago, but every surgical procedure has a risk, more you have them, the more risk you take. In case of younger patients or the ones who haven't got children yet, they try to be extra careful because an injury can lead to future pregnancy losses or even infertility. Eg. an injured cervix won't be able to hold the growing fetus in and it leads to miscarriage or premature birth, but this just one potential complication of the many.
Unfortunately, age is also an issue. Of course older women can get pregnant naturally and have healthy pregnancies, but statistically speaking fertility starting to decline from your early 30s with accelerated speed and takes a dive after 42. That's the sad truth and I can attest to it.


----------



## mellibelly

swaneer, come sit with us!


----------



## csshopper

The Bench may turn out to have weak slats and be plagued by splinters   
I did read her stans had put out the directive to buy multi copies (I envision boxes of unread books moldering in a storage unit somewhere) so the numbers will make her look good.

*Meghan Markle's new book is 'dull' and not suited to children because 'they want elephants and scary tigers not a lecture about their relationship with their father', royal expert claims*

*The Duchess of Sussex, 39, revealed this week she is publishing her first book*
*The Bench is inspired by a poem she wrote for Harry after Archie was born*
*Angela Levin says its subject matter is better suited to adults than children and branded its cover 'very dull' on this week's edition of The Royal Beat *


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> The Bench may turn out to have weak slats and be plagued by splinters
> I* did read her stans had put out the directive to buy multi copies *(I envision boxes of unread books moldering in a storage unit somewhere) so the numbers will make her look good.



Unbelievable. What do her stans get out of it? Do they think that by buying her poorly written children's book it will make Meghan more popular, more respected? 

A fool and her money are soon parted.


----------



## Aimee3

csshopper said:


> The Bench may turn out to have weak slats and be plagued by splinters
> I did read her stans had put out the directive to buy multi copies (I envision boxes of unread books moldering in a storage unit somewhere) so the numbers will make her look good.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's new book is 'dull' and not suited to children because 'they want elephants and scary tigers not a lecture about their relationship with their father', royal expert claims*
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex, 39, revealed this week she is publishing her first book*
> *The Bench is inspired by a poem she wrote for Harry after Archie was born*
> *Angela Levin says its subject matter is better suited to adults than children and branded its cover 'very dull' on this week's edition of The Royal Beat *


Now that they mention it that’s so true.  Kids want action in their stories, something the little ones can see.  Feelings are a harder concept for little ones to understand.  I really don’t care for the artwork either.  
Bland!


----------



## Chanbal

Really??? 










						Meghan and Harry making 'interesting' use of royal titles to secure US
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have sparked discussion among royal commentators due to their continued use of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles now they no longer work for the Royal Family.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> Right, now that they have called on the vaccine manufacturers, NOW they will decide to provide more vaccines.  Why didn't they think of that before???
> 
> 
> 
> I think H is just as all-in on the nonsense they spew, the lies, the bull, as M is.  He is no "innocent" puppet.  He is mad at this family and wants to hurt them.  Spoiled, petulant azz.


Can you imagine appealing to Prince Harry your liege lord for a vaccine injection?  Sounds like a nightmare. 

 I take his feelings towards his family to be a form of mental illness.  He festers with all of the imagined wrongdoings.  I have known several people in my greater family who are like this and the irony to me was that they were the ones who were always catered to and received the most attention and money.  Wait a second!!!  It sounds like I am a member of the Royal Family! Who knew?


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Unbelievable. What do her stans get out of it? Do they think that by buying her poorly written children's book it will make Meghan more popular, more respected?
> 
> A fool and her money are soon parted.


I don’t understand stans, they get so emotionally invested w someone who, let’s be honest, is very likely not to piss on them even if they were on fire
Wonder what is the motivation behind being a stan, it really feels like it needs to enter the category of mental illness...


----------



## bag-mania

pukasonqo said:


> I don’t understand stans, they get so emotionally invested w someone who, let’s be honest, is very likely not to piss on them even if they were on fire
> Wonder what is the motivation behind being a stan, it really feels like it needs to enter the category of mental illness...



I can't explain it. I compare it to the obsessive devotion some sports fans have. They will support their team no matter how bad they suck.


----------



## V0N1B2

If she’s so focused on getting the vaccines to the less fortunate, why aren’t her and Harry flying to Mumbai or Delhi and setting up some mobile vaccination clinics?  Think of the photo ops!  Not to mention the publicity she’d garner by doing a few well-meaning interviews.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Since we are speculating, let me throw this down the hypothetical rabbit hole. If she had an abortion as a teen there is a small chance it could affect her fertility later in life. In rare cases it happens, hence the need for IVF or a surrogate.



Sorry bag-mania for tagging on to your comment. I'm just catching up and wanted to jump in. 

I agree with you.  Hmmm Didn't M have a marriage annulled when she was young?  I thought I read something about it.  Does anyone else remember?  Hmmm maybe she ended two things.  Sad to think it but maybe.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Copied from article:

The couple did not list the book under the charitable branch of their new vehicle, Archewell Foundation, suggesting they may not be giving the proceeds to charity either.

This contrasts with the other most recent royal book, ‘Hold Still’, by Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, which explains that the proceeds will be shared between the mental health charity Mind and the National Portrait Gallery.

Meghan’s book is also a much more personal affair, which will lift the lid on their family life.

According to royal commentator Camilla Tominey, Meghan received an advance “of between £250,000 and £500,000” for her book.
@UKRoyalTea continued: “I don’t think everything they do needs to be about a cause, but I’m curious to see how she will promote something purely commercial.



> *Meghan 'received advance of £250,000 to £500,000' for The Bench*
> *MEGHAN MARKLE's new book called ‘The Bench' will soon be available on the market - and royal fans have spotted that it will be the Sussexes' first "purely commercial" venture, especially as she reportedly received a hefty advance for her literary debut.*
> By Kate Nicholson
> PUBLISHED: 09:57, Fri, May 7, 2021 | UPDATED: 09:57, Fri, May 7, 2021





> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ble-angle-archewell-foundation-commercial-spt


----------



## gelbergirl

csshopper said:


> The Bench may turn out to have weak slats and be plagued by splinters
> I did read her stans had put out the directive to buy multi copies (I envision boxes of unread books moldering in a storage unit somewhere) so the numbers will make her look good.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's new book is 'dull' and not suited to children because 'they want elephants and scary tigers not a lecture about their relationship with their father', royal expert claims*
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex, 39, revealed this week she is publishing her first book*
> *The Bench is inspired by a poem she wrote for Harry after Archie was born*
> *Angela Levin says its subject matter is better suited to adults than children and branded its cover 'very dull' on this week's edition of The Royal Beat *



When I see The Bench in the bookstore’s discount bin I’ll be sure to snap a photo and post it here !


----------



## Lounorada

TimeToShop said:


> I’m late to the party, my try:
> 
> There once was a ’young mother’ named Markle
> Who tried to convince us her s**t did sparkle
> She penned what she thought was a ballad
> But really was just a word salad











lanasyogamama said:


> That photo is so washed out and overly filtered it’s ridiculous.
> View attachment 5076434





Ahhh! Why is the picture so bright?! That filter hurt my eyes  
It took my eyes a few seconds to re-focus, so I scrolled on by and didn't even notice that Archie was in the picture.




bag-mania said:


> Here's a big 'ol fresh serving of word salad for you.  From today's demand for donations:
> *"We cannot think of a more resonant way to honor our son's birthday. If we all show up, with compassion for those we both know and don't know, we can have a profound impact. Even a small contribution can have a ripple effect. Together, we can uplift, protect, and care for one another."*


It's a big no thanks from me


And they sure do love to use the word 'compassion' a lot, considering they don't seem to have a clue what it's meaning is or how to practice compassion in real life. They use that word like they get paid every time they mention it.




Hermes Zen said:


> I went to their website and walked away for several minutes before checking it out and I had this message (below) at the bottom of my screen when I returned. I've never seen this type of message before on other sites.  Curious. The font was slightly larger "We love ..." and italicized. Maybe they thought I was lurking and was unwanted  OR  They want more clicks!  That's it!!  LOL
> _*We love having you here... *_* But we're mindful of screen time. Why not take a break? We'll be here.*





That sounds so creepy 





Chanbal said:


> How nice 1% of the net proceeds go to charity! It will buy a couple more sandwiches...
> 
> View attachment 5077328





Only 1% of net proceeds will be donated to charity!? 
There was me thinking that the sole-pupose of this book was it being made for charity and that ALL net proceeds made from the sale of the book would be donated to a charity/charities. 
That's what a good philanthropist and *compassionate* person would do with a platform like this.







Chanbal said:


> Really???
> View attachment 5077521
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry making 'interesting' use of royal titles to secure US
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have sparked discussion among royal commentators due to their continued use of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles now they no longer work for the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I would love to see JCMH reaction if called Mr. Markle to his face


----------



## Kevinaxx

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Charles ‘May Never Forgive’ Prince Harry for Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> Prince Charles is being more stubborn than Prince William and Queen Elizabeth II when it comes to Harry, a source tells Us — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A family feud for the ages. *Prince Charles* is having a harder time moving on from *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*’s tell-all interview than *Prince William *and *Queen Elizabeth II,* a source exclusively reveals in the new issue of _Us Weekly._
> 
> *Queen Elizabeth II's Royal Family Tree*
> “With the way things are going, Charles may never forgive Harry, which hasn’t gone down well with Elizabeth,” the insider tells _Us_. “She feels that he’s putting his pride before the best interest of the monarchy. She has enough on her plate dealing with the loss of her husband. It’s drama she can do without.”
> 
> The source adds that Charles, 72, is “more stubborn” than son William, 38, who was spotted chatting with Harry, 36, last month after Prince Philip’s funeral service in the U.K.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Families React to Bombshell Interview*
> “They’re definitely not at the point where they speak on a regular basis, but William wants to be the bigger person and set a precedent. He believes that in order to repair damage and destruction from Harry’s interview, the best approach is to keep things civil with his brother rather than fanning the flames and fighting back with a tit-for-tat attitude,” the source says. “Elizabeth is proud of William for taking the dignified approach, unlike Charles, who still hasn’t forgiven Harry for dragging his name through the mud.”
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made headlines in March after they opened up about their decision to stop working for the 95-year-old monarch, citing concerns about racism in the U.K. and within the family. During the tell-all, Harry revealed that Charles stopped taking his calls after the couple relocated to California in March 2020.
> 
> “Because I took matters … into my own hands. It was like, I needed to do this for my family,” Harry, who shares 2-year-old Archie with Meghan, said at the time. “This is not a surprise to anybody. It’s really sad that it’s got to this point. I will always love him, but there’s a lot of hurt that’s happened. And I will continue to make it one of my priorities to try and heal that relationship.”
> 
> *The Royal Family's Sweetest Quotes About Prince Philip*
> Another source previously told _Us_ that Charles didn’t have any meaningful conversations with Harry during his first trip back to London in April.
> 
> “Unfortunately, Harry and Charles didn’t resolve their differences when Harry returned to the U.K. They barely communicated,” the source said last month. “There definitely continues to be a huge wedge between the two.”


If I picked up $2mm plus (just one example of what’s been done for the ingrates) for someone I _barely_ know that just _happens_ to be marrying my child and they* both* decide to go on a tell all about how _horrible_ they’ve been treated I’d hold a grudge too.

particularly at the child, that kinda cuts deep.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> If she’s so focused on getting the vaccines to the less fortunate, why aren’t her and Harry flying to Mumbai or Delhi and setting up some mobile vaccination clinics?  Think of the photo ops!  Not to mention the publicity she’d garner by doing a few well-meaning interviews.


----------



## Chanbal

Don't miss this article!   













						Ready for your Meg-time story? JAN MOIR pens her affectionate parody
					

JAN MOIR: In a munificent invasion of her own privacy, the Duchess of Sussex revealed that she gifted her husband with a poem on the first Father's Day following the birth of their son, Archie.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal,    You and I posted almost simultaneously. Jan Moir nails it!!!! This is hilarious, so much better than the palaver it parodies. The stans will be frothing at the mouth.

*Ready for your Meg-time story? JAN MOIR pens her own affectionate parody*
With pen in hand and heart on sleeve, the Duchess of Sussex has sallied forth and committed herself to the beautiful world of poetry and literature.

In a munificent invasion of her own privacy, the Duchess revealed that she gifted her husband with a poem on the first Father’s Day following the birth of their son, Archie.

O hail the imp of inspiration/the imaginative elf/for she went and wrote it/all by herself.

This poem became the basis of her children’s book The Bench, which focuses on the deep bond shared by father and son, often prodigious.

Perhaps soon she will write a companion book called Approach The Bench, focusing on the deep bond shared by father and daughter, often litigious.

In the spirit of fun, and to celebrate Meghan’s achievement, we have summoned up the mothers of invention and pulped the creative juices from the sermon lemons to reimagine her poem and affectionately parody her book — through a compassionate and inclusive lens, of course.





This image released by Random House Children's Books shows The Bench, a children's book by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, and with pictures by Christian Robinson

*To my love, upon the occasion of becoming a father*
Come my love and tarry forth,
Upon this bench we’ll perch.
I’d never heard of you before we met,
Despite my hundredth Google search.
A Prince you say?
A Duke to boot,
well that’s just
fine and dandy.
I’m against unearned white privilege,
unless it comes in handy.
Let’s talk of the family we’ll raise,
Our babe, our kith, our kin.
Let’s speak of finding freedom,
and play our victim violin.
For this great symphony we have started,
over nations it will cross
And my love while you’re a father now,
Don’t forget who’s boss




This is your bench/ All polished and fine/ We’ll pad it with the finest silk/ Now we’re on Disney’s dime





My Love is home from the old country/ In a uniform that’s become a life lesson/ His granny won’t let him wear it no more/ I call that a micro-aggression





Daddy has a daddy too,/ We thought we’d love him in perpetuity./ But then he failed the mommy test/ By refusing to pay for our security





It’s Baby’s first Oprah,/ A TV appearance so bold./ I know I promised you privacy, child/ But just hush and do what you’re told





My love and my son play/ Down in the henhouse,/ Counting our eggy inlay./ But why is it still that so few people/ Have asked if I am OK?





Son, play billiards sans culottes/ Run wild and look super cute./ But even in a moment of fun/ Please don’t give a Nazi salute





Here comes My Love, in his gas-guzzling Jeep./ Those promises to be good and green?/ So very hard to keep





The bond of father and son/ Forms the heart of the family altar./ A shame I can’t say the same/ About a father and a daughter





Yes, we loathe the Royal Family/ And a way of life that stifles/ But please, O Lord, and all above,/ Let us hang on to our titles


----------



## Shopaholic2021

It's odd that they got married so fast, or that they were allowed to do. H would have to had got permission from the Queen, as is required and she agreed. I'm surprised Charles didn't tell him to wait a year or longer. Getting married after on a year of dating, and especially in the position he is in, is a high risk. Charles should've known since he didn't date Diana for long before proposing, so you'd think he would counsel his son better. 

H seems to have a low level of emotional intelligence as well, because his reaction to his brother telling him that he should spend more time getting to know MM was taken as a slight, rather than a caring and responsible thing to do. Marriage isn't about feelings, feelings come and go, its so much deeper and complex. I highly doubt these two are as compatible as they make out, it feels like they change to please the other, specifically H changing his way of life because he wanted a wife. I honestly think he just wanted to get married, he had for many years, and he wasn't that fussy.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Sorry bag-mania for tagging on to your comment. I'm just catching up and wanted to jump in.
> 
> I agree with you.  Hmmm Didn't M have a marriage annulled when she was young?  I thought I read something about it.  Does anyone else remember?  Hmmm maybe she ended two things.  Sad to think it but maybe.



Who knows? If she was married before Trevor she has succeeded in eliminating any trace of it. Nothing would surprise me at this point.


----------



## plastic-fish

@csshopper Meghan's day is in tatters. Sniff Sniff.
If there is a shift in one of the tectonic plates in California today, I will suspect the epicenter of the Quake is to the South of me in Montecito.

Poor Meghan, suffering from terrible timing. After all, the publication of Meghan’s book was close to Kate’s purely by accident, wasn’t it? Haha, I’m being sarcastic...of course... I’m sure Meghan was scrambling to write _something_ so it could be published to upstage Hold Still...


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Chanbal,    You and I posted almost simultaneously. Jan Moir nails it!!!! This is hilarious, so much better than the palaver it parodies. The stans will be frothing at the mouth.
> 
> *Ready for your Meg-time story? JAN MOIR pens her own affectionate parody*
> With pen in hand and heart on sleeve, the Duchess of Sussex has sallied forth and committed herself to the beautiful world of poetry and literature.
> 
> In a munificent invasion of her own privacy, the Duchess revealed that she gifted her husband with a poem on the first Father’s Day following the birth of their son, Archie.
> 
> O hail the imp of inspiration/the imaginative elf/for she went and wrote it/all by herself.
> 
> This poem became the basis of her children’s book The Bench, which focuses on the deep bond shared by father and son, often prodigious.
> 
> Perhaps soon she will write a companion book called Approach The Bench, focusing on the deep bond shared by father and daughter, often litigious.
> 
> In the spirit of fun, and to celebrate Meghan’s achievement, we have summoned up the mothers of invention and pulped the creative juices from the sermon lemons to reimagine her poem and affectionately parody her book — through a compassionate and inclusive lens, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This image released by Random House Children's Books shows The Bench, a children's book by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, and with pictures by Christian Robinson
> 
> *To my love, upon the occasion of becoming a father*
> Come my love and tarry forth,
> Upon this bench we’ll perch.
> I’d never heard of you before we met,
> Despite my hundredth Google search.
> A Prince you say?
> A Duke to boot,
> well that’s just
> fine and dandy.
> I’m against unearned white privilege,
> unless it comes in handy.
> Let’s talk of the family we’ll raise,
> Our babe, our kith, our kin.
> Let’s speak of finding freedom,
> and play our victim violin.
> For this great symphony we have started,
> over nations it will cross
> And my love while you’re a father now,
> Don’t forget who’s boss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is your bench/ All polished and fine/ We’ll pad it with the finest silk/ Now we’re on Disney’s dime
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My Love is home from the old country/ In a uniform that’s become a life lesson/ His granny won’t let him wear it no more/ I call that a micro-aggression
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daddy has a daddy too,/ We thought we’d love him in perpetuity./ But then he failed the mommy test/ By refusing to pay for our security
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s Baby’s first Oprah,/ A TV appearance so bold./ I know I promised you privacy, child/ But just hush and do what you’re told
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My love and my son play/ Down in the henhouse,/ Counting our eggy inlay./ But why is it still that so few people/ Have asked if I am OK?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Son, play billiards sans culottes/ Run wild and look super cute./ But even in a moment of fun/ Please don’t give a Nazi salute
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here comes My Love, in his gas-guzzling Jeep./ Those promises to be good and green?/ So very hard to keep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The bond of father and son/ Forms the heart of the family altar./ A shame I can’t say the same/ About a father and a daughter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we loathe the Royal Family/ And a way of life that stifles/ But please, O Lord, and all above,/ Let us hang on to our titles


*THIS book I will pay for!  *

Actually no I won't LOL.  I just got it for free!


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> What's also sad is there are actual writers with much more creativity than Douchess who can't get published.  Although I hate cancel culture, I'd love to cancel the part where celebrities and their children get fast passed to the front of the line to "accomplish" things.



I also hate cancel culture, ESPECIALLY the outlets that cancel out any negative news on Meghan and Harry. This in turn keeps the sugars loyal to a greedy, self-pitying, pathetic and idiotic couple who operate on dollar signs and sell their souls and lie about anything, anybody and anytime they want to, to make a buck.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In this case, knowing someone longer than a few months did *not* guarantee a long marriage.  
She and Trev knew each other about 7 yrs prior to marriage. Look what happened!

_They reportedly started dating back in 2004, and after seven years together, Markle and Engelson tied the knot in a casual ceremony on September 10, 2011 at the Jamaica Inn in Ocho Rios. However, just two years after getting married, Markle and Engelson quietly separated in August of 2013._








						Meghan Markle's Ex-Husband Trevor Engelson Reportedly Got Married Over the Weekend
					

Markle and Engelson separated back in 2013.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> In this case, knowing someone longer than a few months did *not* guarantee a long marriage.
> She and Trev knew each other about 7 yrs prior to marriage. Look what happened!
> 
> _They reportedly started dating back in 2004, and after seven years together, Markle and Engelson tied the knot in a casual ceremony on September 10, 2011 at the Jamaica Inn in Ocho Rios. However, just two years after getting married, Markle and Engelson quietly separated in August of 2013._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Ex-Husband Trevor Engelson Reportedly Got Married Over the Weekend
> 
> 
> Markle and Engelson separated back in 2013.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I'm out of my depth here. A casual ceremony? Didn't the festivities carry on for 4 days?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I'm out of my depth here. A casual ceremony? Didn't the festivities carry on for 4 days?



I don’t know, wasn’t the ceremony held on the beach, barefoot-style?  Maybe that is why it’s called ‘casual’.  The ‘quietly separated’ caught my eye.  With Hazzie, has anything been quiet?


----------



## Chanbal

I'm impressed with the talent out there.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

Her nose can’t get any longer. 









						We made huge efforts to protect Meghan Markle’s privacy, says former royal aide
					

The Duchess of Sussex's former press secretary has insisted he led "extensive efforts" to protect her privacy and reputation during her time as a working member of the Royal Family. Jason Knauf appeared to question Meghan's claim that she was "unprotected" by Kensington Palace staff, stating...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5077875


Like @gracekelly said, a fool and his or her money are soon parted!  I hope the #DoucheyDirtbags are following their supreme leader and donating $5 more to line their pockets!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Don't miss this article!
> 
> View attachment 5077735
> 
> View attachment 5077738
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ready for your Meg-time story? JAN MOIR pens her affectionate parody
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: In a munificent invasion of her own privacy, the Duchess of Sussex revealed that she gifted her husband with a poem on the first Father's Day following the birth of their son, Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She mistyped My Love, though 

Really, if serious journalists can't resist the tempration to mock her mercilessly, you know it's bad.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Like @gracekelly said, a fool and his or her money are soon parted!  I hope the #DoucheyDirtbags are following their supreme leader and donating $5 more to line their pockets!



Unfortunately for H&M, their stans occupy the cheapest seats


----------



## papertiger

First in the Times, this was later picked-up yahoo (that has no pay wall) https://uk.news.yahoo.com/art-lecturer-suspended-accusations-racism-meghan-163546287.html

I've tried to take out the clickbait and I've removed the pics (just random previously published pics of M)



*Art lecturer suspended over accusations of racism after 'colourful' Meghan comment*

Rebecca Taylor
·Royal Correspondent
Fri, 7 May 2021, 5:35 pm·4-min read


Dr Anne Anderson was speaking after the interview between Meghan and Oprah Winfrey aired. Meghan here in February 2019. (Hannah Mckay - Pool/Getty Images)
An art historian has been suspended as a speaker from the Arts Society after an off-the-cuff comment she made about Meghan Markle before giving a lecture.
Dr Anne Anderson, who has been lecturing for 28 years, was speaking to members of the Truro Arts Society before she gave a talk on Ikea and Scandinavian Design on 12 March, a few days after Meghan and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey had aired.
Dr Anderson, 65, remarked to one of those who had joined the Zoom call: "You couldn’t turn the television on without some person of a colourful disposition having a moan about something."
She told _Yahoo UK_ that two days later, she received an email saying she had been suspended from the Society's list of speakers because of a complaint over racist language.
She said: "With the new Zoom world that we live in, you forget you have got 30 or 40 people in your living room. Normally I would be in a village hall with 120 people and before the lecture I would be talking to a few friends - I would be able to correct anything I said.
"But you don't even see half the audience that is with you."
Dr Anderson has explained to _The Times_ that she was referring to the language when she said "colourful disposition" and should have said "florid language".
She told _Yahoo UK_: "I got an email saying I had been suspended from the society, and I faced being de-accredited because I had made non-inclusive or racist remarks. I did not get the vibe that what I had said was any more contentious than anyone else who had been involved in the conversation - we were just chatting about Meghan Markle.
"I offered to apologise - I do not go out of my way to offend anyone."
But Dr Anderson says the offer to apologise was not passed onto the Truro branch, where she had been speaking, which she claims is against the usual procedure of The Arts Society.
Instead she went straight to a panel which included the two complainants, to explain her actions.
She said: "It could have been dealt with within the society. I have a good relationship with most Art Societies, I have been working for them since 1994.
"What I'm really worried about is abuse of power.
"They have this caveat of 'bringing the society into disrepute'. The only person who decides that is the CEO.
"He was deciding my fate and I think it went too far. I don't think my crime fitted my punishment."
Dr Anderson voiced concerns that younger lecturers might not have been able to deal with the same situation.
She has now written letters of apology and agreed to go on a diversity training course, though commitments mean she has not yet been able to do this.
She also has to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her "inappropriate behaviour" - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic.
Dr Anderson said: "I will definitely be doing [the course] in the next week, I don't have any problem with it, and I know in the current climate it's a good thing to do."
She said she was still suspended from the speakers' list, despite the letters and the agreement to the follow-up course.
"I'm 65 and coming to the end of my career, but if this happened to a younger lecturer, to go through this, if you are starting out and your reputation and your livelihood is threatened...
"The avenues by which people in education make money are dwindling," she added.
Florian Schweizer, chief executive, The Arts Society said: "The Arts Society followed its complaints procedure after a complaint had been made against Dr Anne Anderson.
"The matter was resolved by following this procedure. We have no further comments on this matter."


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5077875



Just the name "Sussex Squad" sounds violent and threatening.....


----------



## Clearblueskies

duna said:


> Just the name "Sussex Squad" sounds violent and threatening.....


Intended to be intimidating IMO 



papertiger said:


> First in the Times, this was later picked-up yahoo (that has no pay wall) https://uk.news.yahoo.com/art-lecturer-suspended-accusations-racism-meghan-163546287.html
> 
> I've tried to take out the clickbait and I've removed the pics (just random previously published pics of M)
> 
> 
> 
> *Art lecturer suspended over accusations of racism after 'colourful' Meghan comment*
> 
> Rebecca Taylor
> ·Royal Correspondent
> Fri, 7 May 2021, 5:35 pm·4-min read
> 
> 
> Dr Anne Anderson was speaking after the interview between Meghan and Oprah Winfrey aired. Meghan here in February 2019. (Hannah Mckay - Pool/Getty Images)
> An art historian has been suspended as a speaker from the Arts Society after an off-the-cuff comment she made about Meghan Markle before giving a lecture.
> Dr Anne Anderson, who has been lecturing for 28 years, was speaking to members of the Truro Arts Society before she gave a talk on Ikea and Scandinavian Design on 12 March, a few days after Meghan and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey had aired.
> Dr Anderson, 65, remarked to one of those who had joined the Zoom call: "You couldn’t turn the television on without some person of a colourful disposition having a moan about something."
> She told _Yahoo UK_ that two days later, she received an email saying she had been suspended from the Society's list of speakers because of a complaint over racist language.
> She said: "With the new Zoom world that we live in, you forget you have got 30 or 40 people in your living room. Normally I would be in a village hall with 120 people and before the lecture I would be talking to a few friends - I would be able to correct anything I said.
> "But you don't even see half the audience that is with you."
> Dr Anderson has explained to _The Times_ that she was referring to the language when she said "colourful disposition" and should have said "florid language".
> She told _Yahoo UK_: "I got an email saying I had been suspended from the society, and I faced being de-accredited because I had made non-inclusive or racist remarks. I did not get the vibe that what I had said was any more contentious than anyone else who had been involved in the conversation - we were just chatting about Meghan Markle.
> "I offered to apologise - I do not go out of my way to offend anyone."
> But Dr Anderson says the offer to apologise was not passed onto the Truro branch, where she had been speaking, which she claims is against the usual procedure of The Arts Society.
> Instead she went straight to a panel which included the two complainants, to explain her actions.
> She said: "It could have been dealt with within the society. I have a good relationship with most Art Societies, I have been working for them since 1994.
> "What I'm really worried about is abuse of power.
> "They have this caveat of 'bringing the society into disrepute'. The only person who decides that is the CEO.
> "He was deciding my fate and I think it went too far. I don't think my crime fitted my punishment."
> Dr Anderson voiced concerns that younger lecturers might not have been able to deal with the same situation.
> She has now written letters of apology and agreed to go on a diversity training course, though commitments mean she has not yet been able to do this.
> She also has to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her "inappropriate behaviour" - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic.
> Dr Anderson said: "I will definitely be doing [the course] in the next week, I don't have any problem with it, and I know in the current climate it's a good thing to do."
> She said she was still suspended from the speakers' list, despite the letters and the agreement to the follow-up course.
> "I'm 65 and coming to the end of my career, but if this happened to a younger lecturer, to go through this, if you are starting out and your reputation and your livelihood is threatened...
> "The avenues by which people in education make money are dwindling," she added.
> Florian Schweizer, chief executive, The Arts Society said: "The Arts Society followed its complaints procedure after a complaint had been made against Dr Anne Anderson.
> "The matter was resolved by following this procedure. We have no further comments on this matter."


I find that shocking.  It doesn’t sound like a proper disciplinary process.  Kangaroo court more like 
Life is getting more Kafka-like with every passing day.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Intended to be intimidating IMO
> 
> 
> I find that shocking.  It doesn’t sound like a proper disciplinary process.  Kangaroo court more like
> Life is getting more Kafka-like with every passing day.



Basically any mention of M is forbidden. Even though Anderson wasn't found to be violating any written codes or bringing the Society into disrepute she still has "to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her 'inappropriate behaviour' - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic."


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Basically any mention of M is forbidden. Even though Anderson wasn't found to be violating any written codes or bringing the Society into disrepute she still has "to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her 'inappropriate behaviour' - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic."


Awful.  I hope this sort of stuff gets tested in court one day soon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> *Art lecturer suspended over accusations of racism after 'colourful' Meghan comment*



This is f*cking getting out of hand. At this point I want to know who is the powerful figure hiding in the shadow, because it sure as hell is not an ageing Z-list actress with an oversized ego.


----------



## Chanbal

Let's see if I understood this article well. Harry and wife blamed staff when things didn't go their way, and Harry's wife had an impressive interest in British military history, but was clueless about the BRF. 

_*MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry "blamed staff when they didn't get their way", a palace insider has claimed.*

The couple's relationship with Harry's father Prince Charles soured after they left the Royal Family and moved to North America.

An insider said Harry, 36, was frustrated and felt let down as he tried to speak to Charles, 72, and the Queen face-to-face about his decision to leave, only to be stopped by Royal aides.

*The source told the Telegraph that Harry and Meghan, 39, often "blamed the staff" when things didn't go their way.*

The source also said: *"[Charles] ploughed money into the wedding and into Frogmore [the couple’s Windsor home] and did his utmost to make them feel financially supported* but then when they said they were upping sticks, he had less and less inclination to take calls."

*Charles took an immediate shine to Meghan when they first met.*_

_*They both shared a passion for holistic medicine, and Charles was reportedly impressed with Meghan's interest in British military history.*

Charles even walked Meghan down the aisle at her wedding after her dad Thomas was unable to attend.

However in an explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, Harry claimed that Charles stopped taking his calls when he moved to North America.

*FAMILY REUNION*
Harry and Charles had an awkward reunion during Prince Philip's funeral last month.

Harry had claimed his father and brother Prince William were "trapped" in the Royal Family during his interview with Oprah.

He also claimed Charles had used palace staff to carry out his parental responsibilities and that he had been cut off financially.

Charles was said to be "devastated", "despairing" and "deeply saddened" by Harry's comments in the interview._


> _[Charles] ploughed money into the wedding and into Frogmore... but then when they said they were upping sticks, he had less and less inclination to take calls
> A Royal Source_


_Things got worse when Gayle King, the host of CBS's This Morning TV show and a friend of the Sussexes, revealed on air that calls between Harry and Charles had been "unproductive".

The relationship between father and son had previously been extremely close, with Harry telling the BBC on the 20th anniversary of his mother Diana's death: "He was there for us; he was the one out of two left and he tried to do his best and to make sure we were protected and looked after."

Meghan reportedly encouraged Harry to pay tribute to Charles, saying he needed to be as close as he could to "the one parent you have left".

Meghan's once-tight relationship with her own father Thomas became strained after he co-operated in a paparazzi photoshoot before her wedding and then pulled out of attending the ceremony at the last moment because of poor health.

Both Harry and Meghan were said to be in tears as a result, and the the bride was left with no one to walk her down the aisle._









						Meghan and Harry 'blamed staff when they didn't get their way', insider claims
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry “blamed staff when they didn’t get their way”, a palace insider has claimed. The couple’s relationship with Harry’s father Prince Charle…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Let's see if I understood this article well. Harry and wife blamed staff when things didn't go their way, and Harry's wife had an impressive interest in British military history, but was clueless about the BRF.
> 
> _*MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry "blamed staff when they didn't get their way", a palace insider has claimed.*
> 
> The couple's relationship with Harry's father Prince Charles soured after they left the Royal Family and moved to North America.
> 
> An insider said Harry, 36, was frustrated and felt let down as he tried to speak to Charles, 72, and the Queen face-to-face about his decision to leave, only to be stopped by Royal aides.
> 
> *The source told the Telegraph that Harry and Meghan, 39, often "blamed the staff" when things didn't go their way.*
> 
> The source also said: *"[Charles] ploughed money into the wedding and into Frogmore [the couple’s Windsor home] and did his utmost to make them feel financially supported* but then when they said they were upping sticks, he had less and less inclination to take calls."
> 
> *Charles took an immediate shine to Meghan when they first met.
> 
> They both shared a passion for holistic medicine, and Charles was reportedly impressed with Meghan's interest in British military history.*
> 
> Charles even walked Meghan down the aisle at her wedding after her dad Thomas was unable to attend.
> 
> However in an explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, Harry claimed that Charles stopped taking his calls when he moved to North America.
> 
> *FAMILY REUNION*
> Harry and Charles had an awkward reunion during Prince Philip's funeral last month.
> 
> Harry had claimed his father and brother Prince William were "trapped" in the Royal Family during his interview with Oprah.
> 
> He also claimed Charles had used palace staff to carry out his parental responsibilities and that he had been cut off financially.
> 
> Charles was said to be "devastated", "despairing" and "deeply saddened" by Harry's comments in the interview.
> 
> Things got worse when Gayle King, the host of CBS's This Morning TV show and a friend of the Sussexes, revealed on air that calls between Harry and Charles had been "unproductive".
> 
> The relationship between father and son had previously been extremely close, with Harry telling the BBC on the 20th anniversary of his mother Diana's death: "He was there for us; he was the one out of two left and he tried to do his best and to make sure we were protected and looked after."
> 
> Meghan reportedly encouraged Harry to pay tribute to Charles, saying he needed to be as close as he could to "the one parent you have left".
> 
> Meghan's once-tight relationship with her own father Thomas became strained after he co-operated in a paparazzi photoshoot before her wedding and then pulled out of attending the ceremony at the last moment because of poor health.
> 
> Both Harry and Meghan were said to be in tears as a result, and the the bride was left with no one to walk her down the aisle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'blamed staff when they didn't get their way', insider claims
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry “blamed staff when they didn’t get their way”, a palace insider has claimed. The couple’s relationship with Harry’s father Prince Charle…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



I don't know why we are surprised when nothing these 2 says makes any sense. They are both fantasists. 

It's not actually advisable to join them in their shared madness,_ a la folie a deux_, but meanwhile people can lose their jobs/get cancelled for calling them out on verifiable lies.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> First in the Times, this was later picked-up yahoo (that has no pay wall) https://uk.news.yahoo.com/art-lecturer-suspended-accusations-racism-meghan-163546287.html
> 
> I've tried to take out the clickbait and I've removed the pics (just random previously published pics of M)
> 
> 
> 
> *Art lecturer suspended over accusations of racism after 'colourful' Meghan comment*
> 
> Rebecca Taylor
> ·Royal Correspondent
> Fri, 7 May 2021, 5:35 pm·4-min read
> 
> 
> Dr Anne Anderson was speaking after the interview between Meghan and Oprah Winfrey aired. Meghan here in February 2019. (Hannah Mckay - Pool/Getty Images)
> An art historian has been suspended as a speaker from the Arts Society after an off-the-cuff comment she made about Meghan Markle before giving a lecture.
> Dr Anne Anderson, who has been lecturing for 28 years, was speaking to members of the Truro Arts Society before she gave a talk on Ikea and Scandinavian Design on 12 March, a few days after Meghan and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey had aired.
> Dr Anderson, 65, remarked to one of those who had joined the Zoom call: "You couldn’t turn the television on without some person of a colourful disposition having a moan about something."
> She told _Yahoo UK_ that two days later, she received an email saying she had been suspended from the Society's list of speakers because of a complaint over racist language.
> She said: "With the new Zoom world that we live in, you forget you have got 30 or 40 people in your living room. Normally I would be in a village hall with 120 people and before the lecture I would be talking to a few friends - I would be able to correct anything I said.
> "But you don't even see half the audience that is with you."
> Dr Anderson has explained to _The Times_ that she was referring to the language when she said "colourful disposition" and should have said "florid language".
> She told _Yahoo UK_: "I got an email saying I had been suspended from the society, and I faced being de-accredited because I had made non-inclusive or racist remarks. I did not get the vibe that what I had said was any more contentious than anyone else who had been involved in the conversation - we were just chatting about Meghan Markle.
> "I offered to apologise - I do not go out of my way to offend anyone."
> But Dr Anderson says the offer to apologise was not passed onto the Truro branch, where she had been speaking, which she claims is against the usual procedure of The Arts Society.
> Instead she went straight to a panel which included the two complainants, to explain her actions.
> She said: "It could have been dealt with within the society. I have a good relationship with most Art Societies, I have been working for them since 1994.
> "What I'm really worried about is abuse of power.
> "They have this caveat of 'bringing the society into disrepute'. The only person who decides that is the CEO.
> "He was deciding my fate and I think it went too far. I don't think my crime fitted my punishment."
> Dr Anderson voiced concerns that younger lecturers might not have been able to deal with the same situation.
> She has now written letters of apology and agreed to go on a diversity training course, though commitments mean she has not yet been able to do this.
> She also has to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her "inappropriate behaviour" - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic.
> Dr Anderson said: "I will definitely be doing [the course] in the next week, I don't have any problem with it, and I know in the current climate it's a good thing to do."
> She said she was still suspended from the speakers' list, despite the letters and the agreement to the follow-up course.
> "I'm 65 and coming to the end of my career, but if this happened to a younger lecturer, to go through this, if you are starting out and your reputation and your livelihood is threatened...
> "The avenues by which people in education make money are dwindling," she added.
> Florian Schweizer, chief executive, The Arts Society said: "The Arts Society followed its complaints procedure after a complaint had been made against Dr Anne Anderson.
> "The matter was resolved by following this procedure. We have no further comments on this matter."


This is disturbing to say the least.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Both Harry and Meghan were said to be in tears as a result, and the the bride was left with no one to walk her down the aisle.



Really??? Both in tears??? Him, too??? He had never met TM, so why the tears?  Worried he’s about to be embarrassed in front of the whole world??? Victims, victims. :shaking my head:


----------



## sdkitty

Sarah Ferguson Speaks Out About Meghan Markle (yahoo.com) 
Fergie (friend of Oprah) speaks out in support of Meghan and promotes her own books at the same time


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I don't know why we are surprised when nothing these 2 says makes any sense. They are both fantasists.
> 
> It's not actually advisable to join them in their shared madness,_ a la folie a deux_, but meanwhile people can lose their jobs/get cancelled for calling them out on verifiable lies.


They sound like very dangerous fantasists. From one of Lady C's last videos, there is a possible _quid pro quo_ related to Harry's participation on the vax event.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really??? Both in tears??? Him, too??? He had never met TM, so why the tears?  Worried he’s about to be embarrassed in front of the whole world??? Victims, victims. :shaking my head:


Tears of joy?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They sound like very dangerous fantasists. From one of Lady C's last videos, there is a possible *quid pro quo r*elated to Harry's participation on the vax event.



Never doubted it.
He isn’t leaving the 19 bathrooms & the coop for nothing.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Basically any mention of M is forbidden. Even though Anderson wasn't found to be violating any written codes or bringing the Society into disrepute she still has "to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her 'inappropriate behaviour' - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic."


She really is turning into Voldemort.  She who must not be named.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I don't know why we are surprised when nothing these 2 says makes any sense. They are both fantasists.
> 
> It's not actually advisable to join them in their shared madness,_ a la folie a deux_, but meanwhile people can lose their jobs/get cancelled for calling them out on verifiable lies.


they are the equivalent of an executive who is characterized as an "empty suit".....the best thing that can happen is for everyone to just get bored with them and stop paying attention to their stupid antics


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hey Harry's wife,
Here is a picture of a lovely child, whose first birthday is on Monday May 10th. Guess what? Prince Charles is second in the Luxembourg succession and the parents post new pics of the child without asking for $$$. He is also pictured at a tree-planting ceremony (see link below) for his 1st birthday.




Tree-Planting Ceremony


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'll translate for all of us!



Chanbal said:


> _*They both shared a passion for holistic medicine, and Charles was reportedly impressed with Meghan's interest in British military history. *_




Read: _Meghan's interest in appearing interested in British military history. _[how freaking random and very specific, hu? Also, maybe she researched that in order to charm Philip, only that man had extremly good knowledge of human nature. But instead of binning her newfound knowledge, she recycled it for Charles]

_



			Meghan reportedly encouraged Harry to pay tribute to Charles, saying he needed to be as close as he could to "the one parent you have left".
		
Click to expand...

_
Read: _Meghan reportedly encouraged Harry to keep the open purse as close to them as he could. 




			Meghan's once-tight relationship with her own father Thomas became strained after he co-operated in a paparazzi photoshoot before her wedding and then pulled out of attending the ceremony at the last moment because of poor health.
		
Click to expand...

_
Read: _Meghan's once tight relationship with her own father became strained after she decided he wasn't posh enough and she had apparently found a gullible replacement, royal and rich. _[only that at some point she wasn't able anymore to squeeze Charles dry because he slowly woke up to her ways]

_



			Both Harry and Meghan were said to be in tears as a result, and the the bride was left with no one to walk her down the aisle.
		
Click to expand...

_
No translation, but boy does that grown man cry a lot over the silliest things.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hey Harry's wife,
> Here is a picture of a lovely child, whose first birthday is on Monday May 10th. Guess what? Prince Charles is second in the Luxembourg succession and the parents post new pics of the child without asking for $$$. He is also pictured at a tree-planting ceremony (see link below) for his 1st birthday.
> 
> View attachment 5078156
> 
> 
> Tree-Planting Ceremony



I just love seeing photos of this cutie and his parents. The look (of love) on the faces of his parents in the previous photos taken with him is priceless.
(Quite coincidentally I spent today looking at hotels in Luxembourg as were hoping for a holiday in July to the Benelux countries !)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They sound like very dangerous fantasists. From one of Lady C's last videos, there is a possible _quid pro quo_ related to Harry's participation on the vax event.



Oh, can you elaborate? I have a few saved but they are so long, I haven't watched the last two or three.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hey Harry's wife,
> Here is a picture of a lovely child, whose first birthday is on Monday May 10th. Guess what? Prince Charles is second in the Luxembourg succession and the parents post new pics of the child without asking for $$$. He is also pictured at a tree-planting ceremony (see link below) for his 1st birthday.
> 
> View attachment 5078156
> 
> 
> Tree-Planting Ceremony



Oooooh, that last photo is beyond adorable.  Looks like George, Charlotte and Louis have some competition.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I just love seeing photos of this cutie and his parents. The look (of love) on the faces of his parents in the photos taken with him is priceless.
> (Quite coincidentally I spent today looking at hotels in Luxembourg as were hoping for a holiday in July to the Benelux countries !)



I don't even love travelling all that much, but I can't wait for my first trip once things slowly normalize. Just found out I'll get my first shot (with the good stuff, Biontec) next week. My dad, a retired doctor, swears they opened up the tiers to my specific pre-existing condition, I'm not convinved it isn't solely a case of knowing the right people (because last time I looked, it wasn't covered), but at this point, I'll take it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Sarah Ferguson Speaks Out About Meghan Markle (yahoo.com)
> Fergie (friend of Oprah) speaks out in support of Meghan and promotes her own books at the same time



Grrrr, as you know I speak out against media manipulation at every opportunity and this is why. That sorry excuse for an article was written by an editor for the PureWow website, a full-on Meghan fangirl place. In the original Daily Mail article it was about Fergie's new book but of course DM had to insert a question about Meghan and make half of the story about that. Below is the article that PureWow used as its source. As you can see it started about Fergie and then skews towards Meghan. PureWow dropped almost all of the Fergie info and make it _all about fangirling for Meghan_. Then Yahoo! presents it as if it was a legitimate story instead of an opinion. 

It should infuriate everyone that this is the way the media operates today. All of our news is being filtered and edited through the biases and preferences of those presenting it. Okay, time for me to get off of my soapbox for a bit.

Here is the original DM story PureWow cherrypicked their info from. I feel sorry for Fergie. She was doing promotion for her own book. She doesn't want or need the distraction of Meghan.









						Sarah Ferguson makes foray into adult fiction with Mills & Boon novel
					

SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE: Step forward the Duchess of York, 61, the leading writer of children's fiction in royal circles, who made her name with her Budgie The Little Helicopter series.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> they are the equivalent of an executive who is characterized as an "empty suit".....the best thing that can happen is for everyone to just get bored with them and stop paying attention to their stupid antics



Less fun for us though


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Grrrr, as you know I speak out against media manipulation at every opportunity and this is why. That sorry excuse for an article was written by an editor for the PureWow website, a full-on Meghan fangirl place. In the original Daily Mail article it was about Fergie's new book but of course DM had to insert a question about Meghan and make half of the story about that. Here is the article that PureWow used as its source. As you can see it started about Fergie and then then skews towards Meghan. PureWow dropped almost all of the Fergie info and make it _all about fangirling for Meghan_. Then Yahoo! presents it as if it was a legitimate story instead of an opinion.
> 
> It should infuriate everyone that this is the way the media operates today. All of our news is being filtered and edited through the biases and preferences of those presenting it. Okay, time for me to get off of my soapbox for a bit.
> 
> Here is the original DM story PureWow cherrypicked their info from. I feel sorry for Fergie. She was doing promotion for her own book. She doesn't want or need the distraction of Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Ferguson makes foray into adult fiction with Mills & Boon novel
> 
> 
> SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE: Step forward the Duchess of York, 61, the leading writer of children's fiction in royal circles, who made her name with her Budgie The Little Helicopter series.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


yes but the good news is this stuff is pretty trivial and easy to see through.
there are legit news sources; not every surce of news is biased....we musn't buy into the idea that all the press is bad or dishonest


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> maybe she researched that in order to charm Philip, only that man had extremly good knowledge of human nature. But instead of binning her newfound knowledge, she recycled it for Charles]



Nice to know she managed to recycle _something_


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes but the good news is this stuff is pretty trivial and easy to see through.
> there are legit news sources; not every surce of news is biased....we musn't buy into the idea that all the press is bad or dishonest



I don't think all of the press is bad. I do believe all of the press has biases and they present their news stories accordingly.

I always say whenever someone believes their news channel/newspaper is unbiased, it is because that particular outlet's biases align with their own.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't think all of the press is bad. I do believe all of the press has biases and they present their news stories accordingly.
> 
> I always say whenever someone believes their news channel/newspaper is unbiased, it is because that particular outlet's biases align with their own.


well, I'm gonna have to say I think that is cynical but you're entitled to your opinion


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, I'm gonna have to say I think that is cynical but you're entitled to your opinion



I definitely agree that I am very cynical. It comes from a lifetime of observing human nature.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even love travelling all that much, but I can't wait for my first trip once things slowly normalize. Just found out I'll get my first shot (with the good stuff, Biontec) next week. My dad, a retired doctor, swears they opened up the tiers to my specific pre-existing condition, I'm not convinved it isn't solely a case of knowing the right people (because last time I looked, it wasn't covered), but at this point, I'll take it.



We have been very lucky, I feel, in the UK to have ordered vaccines early and had a very competently organised vaccination programme, certainly in my area. I had 2nd dose of Pfizer last week as medication for rheumatoid arthritis put me in a high risk category and I just got a call to say my teenager can now book as a household member to a clinically vulnerable adult (me!)
Conversely the roll out in Ireland where we have family has been very, very different - over 60's just got called compared with over 40's in the UK now being done - Not only were vaccines in short supply there but the organisation of the adminstration of jabs has not been as efficient as here.

Even vaccinated we are not optimistic at getting to Ireland this summer (hence exploring the possibility of a road trip to Benelux - we will take the overnight boat from Hull) DD has not seen her now 87 year old grandmother since Christmas 2019. We are, of course, nothing special and different in this regard but naturally missing family.

Back to topic, I can't get wound up with H&M encouraging people to get vaccinated and even appear at an awareness raising event. (BTW is that on tonight ?) If even one person gets a jab who would not have done otherwise, that's good. It's the common welfare of us all which benefits. I do however have a huge issue with the open letter; that, to me, is venturing into political territory. Harry would know for certain that would not be OK if he were in the UK. Some may say, he's independent of the BRF now but I would consider this as not in the spirit of the agreement with his grandmother.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan was supposedly very interested in British military history yet was unaware of The Commonwealth? Despite a degree in International Relations and flowers representing all Commonwealth countries embroidered into her wedding veil? And now somebody got  fired for saying "You couldn’t turn the television on without some person of a colourful disposition having a moan about something." when relating to Meghan?  Welcome to Wokeness!  Where only certain stupid lying bishes can get away with anything and everything because Woke World has people walking on eggshells. Some people routinely get criticized, drawn and quartered--anything goes--and the critics get applauded! But if one criticizes, or even makes an observation, of certain others--BAM!  
Sooner or later a critical mass bigger than the Woke Critical Mass will develop when enough people realize that being force-fed woke poop isn't very appetizing.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Intended to be intimidating IMO
> 
> 
> I find that shocking.  It doesn’t sound like a proper disciplinary process.  Kangaroo court more like
> Life is getting more Kafka-like with every passing day.


Kafka like is a good description and you can throw in the Thought Police for good measure.  I told the DH the other day that it was getting to the point where airing ANY opinion about ANYTHING was going to be detrimental to one's health.  If the mob doesn't like what you think, then batten down the hatches.  Make sure you made a trip to Costco for supplies because you will be sequestered for a long time.  Welcome to WOKE WORLD.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I definitely agree that I am very cynical. It comes from a lifetime of observing human nature.


Sad to say I am a member of your club.


----------



## csshopper

The longer the Birthday Boy's washed out photo is posted, the more absurd it looks compared to other photos on line.

The real issue to me, and I wish someone would call his unrelentingly hypocritical environmentalist parents out on this, is entrusting a 2 year year old with a bunch of at least 10-12 helium inflated Mylar balloons. Enough to make him look like he's in danger of taking flight. But the real danger is if he loses his grip and the balloons take flight into space. Mylar balloons are a threat to be taken seriously.

*Balloon Alert: from Save the Whales*


> “Balloons are perceived as a celebration of life: The birth of a child, grand openings, fairs, birthdays, get well wishes, and anniversaries, among others. But for marine animals, balloons may mean death, as do other forms of plastic. Balloons are ingested by whales, dolphins, turtles, seals, fish and water-fowl, who innocently believe they are food such as jellyfish or squid. ONCE YOU KNOW BALLOONS BRING DEATH, YOU CAN ACT.”  Save the Whales



*From their favorite network, CBS, where Oprah and Gayle hang out, October 2, 2020 headline:
Nearly 4,000 households lost power in Southern California this week. The culprit? A shiny balloon, utility officials say.*
"We have thousands of these outages every year — it's a big problem," a spokesperson for Southern California Edison (SCE) told CBS MoneyWatch. Beyond disrupting electric service, mylar balloons that bump into power lines can pose a public safety risk and cause enormous damage from fires and downed lines. Helium-filled balloons also can stay aloft for as long as two weeks and float for miles.

Mylar, or foil, balloons crossing paths with power lines caused 376 outages in Pacific Gas and Electric Company's service area last year, cutting power to more than 179,000 homes and businesses, according to PG&E. The San Francisco-based company provides energy to almost 16 million people in northern and central California.

In 2015, a mylar balloon struck a power line and sparked a blaze that burned 75 acres in California's Butte County. Two years earlier, a bouquet of metallic balloons drifted into transmission power lines in Tehama County, starting the Deer Fire, which burned more than 11,000 acres over several days."

I hope someone enlightens them or they take the time to study the kinds of Fire Prevention materials all agencies in the state are cranking out in anticipation of a record year of fire losses.The potential situation in CA is far more dire in 2021 than it was 6 years ago. They reside in the midst of acres of potential fuel, surrounded by a state almost entirely in severe draught conditions.


----------



## Hermes Zen

What a wonderful thing to do.  I wish I was in London to go hunt for one of these treasures.  This is something that M could learn from but know that's not likely to happen.

*See the Secret Note Kate Middleton Left in Books Hidden Around London*
Typed on Kensington Palace stationary, the letter is addressed to "Finder"
https://people.com/royals/kate-midd...ld-still-books-hidden-around-london/?amp=true


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> The longer the Birthday Boy's washed out photo is posted, the more absurd it looks compared to other photos on line.
> 
> The real issue to me, and I wish someone would call his unrelentingly hypocritical environmentalist parents out on this, is entrusting a 2 year year old with a bunch of at least 10-12 helium inflated Mylar balloons. Enough to make him look like he's in danger of taking flight. But the real danger is if he loses his grip and the balloons take flight into space. Mylar balloons are a threat to be taken seriously.
> 
> *Balloon Alert: from Save the Whales
> 
> 
> From their favorite network, CBS, where Oprah and Gayle hang out, October 2, 2020 headline:
> Nearly 4,000 households lost power in Southern California this week. The culprit? A shiny balloon, utility officials say.*
> "We have thousands of these outages every year — it's a big problem," a spokesperson for Southern California Edison (SCE) told CBS MoneyWatch. Beyond disrupting electric service, mylar balloons that bump into power lines can pose a public safety risk and cause enormous damage from fires and downed lines. Helium-filled balloons also can stay aloft for as long as two weeks and float for miles.
> 
> Mylar, or foil, balloons crossing paths with power lines caused 376 outages in Pacific Gas and Electric Company's service area last year, cutting power to more than 179,000 homes and businesses, according to PG&E. The San Francisco-based company provides energy to almost 16 million people in northern and central California.
> 
> In 2015, a mylar balloon struck a power line and sparked a blaze that burned 75 acres in California's Butte County. Two years earlier, a bouquet of metallic balloons drifted into transmission power lines in Tehama County, starting the Deer Fire, which burned more than 11,000 acres over several days."
> 
> I hope someone enlightens them or they take the time to study the kinds of Fire Prevention materials all agencies in the state are cranking out in anticipation of a record year of fire losses.The potential situation in CA is far more dire in 2021 than it was 6 years ago. They reside in the midst of acres of potential fuel, surrounded by a state almost entirely in severe draught conditions.


My other California disaster favorite was the gender reveal party with the fireworks that started one of the worst fires ever.  At least we were spared the reveal party by the Harkles.  However, a baby shower could bring new threats.  I hope they don't do anything stupid with flames where they live because that is definitely dangerous fire territory.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, can you elaborate? I have a few saved but they are so long, I haven't watched the last two or three.


I got the impression from the video that the vax chairmanship was arranged by SS, and that some 'compensation' for their participation could potentially be arranged later. As far as I recall she used the term 'quid pro quo', but didn't want to elaborate more because of legal reasons.


----------



## LittleStar88

Just pondering here about photos of Archie and why the only ones we see don’t really show his image very well.

I‘m not a parent, but every parent I know will jump at the chance to show anyone and everyone a picture of their kid. If they could plaster their kid’s photo on every billboard and sign, they likely would do that, too. I’ve never met a parent who wasn’t extremely eager to show off their kiddos.

Wondering if there’s some physical/developmental complication that they don’t want seen? Or would we have heard this by now?

Not trying to be mean to Archie, just seems so odd.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> Just pondering here about photos of Archie and why the only ones we see don’t really show his image very well.
> 
> I‘m not a parent, but every parent I know will jump at the chance to show anyone and everyone a picture of their kid. If they could plaster their kid’s photo on every billboard and sign, they likely would do that, too. I’ve never met a parent who wasn’t extremely eager to show off their kiddos.
> 
> Wondering if there’s some physical/developmental complication that they don’t want seen? Or would we have heard this by now?
> 
> Not trying to be mean to Archie, just seems so odd.


I think the only complication or problem is in H's wife's head and it's called avarice and she'll monetize her son to achieve her goal. In her mind, Archie's pictures will be worth a fortune if she waits long enough to sell them.
Dictionary definition - Avarice is extreme greed for wealth and material gain as in "She wants to be rich beyond the dreams of avarice."


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think the only complication or problem is in H's wife's head and it's called avarice and she'll monetize her son to achieve her goal. In her mind, Archie's pictures will be worth a fortune if she waits long enough to sell them.
> Dictionary definition - Avarice is extreme greed for wealth and material gain as in "She wants to be rich beyond the dreams of avarice."



If they were going to fetch top dollar I feel we would have seen them by now. Truth is likely there’s not as much intere$t as she thinks, so she waits.

Archie will age out of having value soon enough. They’ll have baby Princess Diana Doria to pimp out for a while.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don't think all of the press is bad. I do believe all of the press has biases and they present their news stories accordingly.
> 
> I always say whenever someone believes their news channel/newspaper is unbiased, it is because that particular outlet's biases align with their own.



You have a point there.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> If they were going to fetch top dollar I feel we would have seen them by now. Truth is likely there’s not as much intere$t as she thinks, so she waits.
> 
> Archie will age out of having value soon enough. They’ll have baby Princess Diana Doria to pimp out for a while.


Perhaps, but if she assembles a photo diary of let's say, "Archie at age 1 to 5" to sell to the highest bidder, she might fetch a decent price for each never-before seen photo of Archie. At least, I think she's waiting to commercialize him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Even vaccinated we are not optimistic at getting to Ireland this summer (hence exploring the possibility of a road trip to Benelux - we will take the overnight boat from Hull) DD has not seen her now 87 year old grandmother since Christmas 2019. We are, of course, nothing special and different in this regard but naturally missing family.



I feel so lucky my own grandmother lives two houses away, so even when we were being super strict with isolating her we could stop by and wave through the window or she'd be in the garden (on her bench  ) and we'd have a quick talk over the fence. I can only imagine how hard it is to be completely cut off.

I am way beyond my teenage years and I cried when our family Christmas (with grandmother, aunts, uncles, cousins and the occasional friend) was cancelled last year and then on top of that my youngest brother couldn't make it home from university due to travel restrictions. 

So I hope you can at least take the trip!



> Harry would know for certain that would not be OK if he were in the UK. Some may say, he's independent of the BRF now but I would consider this as not in the spirit of the agreement with his grandmother.



My sister - who had been indifferent on them and even scolded me for being way harsh on Meghan when I first started to find her ricidulous - asked me today how on earth it was ok for her to put that Duchess title on her book when she spouts at every occasion how awful the BRF is.

I truly think they know they are full of it but trust the BRF won't speak out publicly and won't sue either. They already took away funding and privileges, so I guess they just don't care.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> The longer the Birthday Boy's washed out photo is posted, the more absurd it looks compared to other photos on line.
> 
> The real issue to me, and I wish someone would call his unrelentingly hypocritical environmentalist parents out on this, is entrusting a 2 year year old with a bunch of at least 10-12 helium inflated Mylar balloons. Enough to make him look like he's in danger of taking flight. But the real danger is if he loses his grip and the balloons take flight into space. Mylar balloons are a threat to be taken seriously.
> 
> *Balloon Alert: from Save the Whales
> 
> 
> From their favorite network, CBS, where Oprah and Gayle hang out, October 2, 2020 headline:
> Nearly 4,000 households lost power in Southern California this week. The culprit? A shiny balloon, utility officials say.*
> "We have thousands of these outages every year — it's a big problem," a spokesperson for Southern California Edison (SCE) told CBS MoneyWatch. Beyond disrupting electric service, mylar balloons that bump into power lines can pose a public safety risk and cause enormous damage from fires and downed lines. Helium-filled balloons also can stay aloft for as long as two weeks and float for miles.
> 
> Mylar, or foil, balloons crossing paths with power lines caused 376 outages in Pacific Gas and Electric Company's service area last year, cutting power to more than 179,000 homes and businesses, according to PG&E. The San Francisco-based company provides energy to almost 16 million people in northern and central California.
> 
> In 2015, a mylar balloon struck a power line and sparked a blaze that burned 75 acres in California's Butte County. Two years earlier, a bouquet of metallic balloons drifted into transmission power lines in Tehama County, starting the Deer Fire, which burned more than 11,000 acres over several days."
> 
> I hope someone enlightens them or they take the time to study the kinds of Fire Prevention materials all agencies in the state are cranking out in anticipation of a record year of fire losses.The potential situation in CA is far more dire in 2021 than it was 6 years ago. They reside in the midst of acres of potential fuel, surrounded by a state almost entirely in severe draught conditions.



Excellent post, @csshopper. 
 I’m surprised more people are unaware of the dangers of balloons. Always good to get the word out.
Again, one more example of hypocrisy from this obnoxious couple.


----------



## Chanbal

Came across several tweets praising the couple and asking for money via Arch$w$ll. There is this other tweet that uses chocolate bars to explain how celeb charity appeals work, but it seems to be ignored.


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> Just pondering here about photos of Archie and why the only ones we see don’t really show his image very well.
> 
> I‘m not a parent, but every parent I know will jump at the chance to show anyone and everyone a picture of their kid. If they could plaster their kid’s photo on every billboard and sign, they likely would do that, too. I’ve never met a parent who wasn’t extremely eager to show off their kiddos.
> 
> Wondering if there’s some physical/developmental complication that they don’t want seen? Or would we have heard this by now?
> 
> Not trying to be mean to Archie, just seems so odd.


Probably money related. Whoever offers the most money.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Came across several tweets praising the couple and asking for money via Arch$w$ll. There is this other tweet that uses chocolate bars to explain how celeb charity appeals work, but it seems to be ignored.
> 
> View attachment 5078399



Oooooh Myra, you are so right!  They did think of us


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> General question... do celebrities REALLY pay the retail price for designer outfits like that? I'm not talking about when it's comped, but when they actually have to buy it. Maybe it's just a different stratosphere of wealth that I can't fathom but how does anyone feel at ease paying even $7k for a one-time wear garment much less $75k?


NO they don't, which really *PISSES* me off (_well - wait a minute, Hermes DOES NOT allow anyone to pay less than retail other than there high-revenue sales folks_).  Oftentimes, the celebrities get the item at wholesale (_typically 50% less than retail), but they are also known to go directly to the designer and have them make something .. and then it gets "gifted" to them in order to get the designer and said item "in the news"_).  It's all a game, and frankly, when I heard this (_thanks to a Hollywood BIZ Agent who I sat next to on a flight from Boston --> LA_), I was disgusted to think that I would have to sell my Jewelry (_high-karat gold with all Diamonds_) to folks at wholesale!!!!  Artists/Designers, etc. - need to at least make some $$$ in order to LIVE!  We have to have a roof over our heads, be able to buy food, etc. -- and especially when these celebrities (_most of which are major-league a$$holes_) pay very little for the goods that they get .. *MAKES ME SICK*!


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Let's see if I understood this article well. Harry and wife blamed staff when things didn't go their way, and Harry's wife had an impressive interest in British military history, but was clueless about the BRF.
> 
> _*MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry "blamed staff when they didn't get their way", a palace insider has claimed.*
> 
> The couple's relationship with Harry's father Prince Charles soured after they left the Royal Family and moved to North America.
> 
> An insider said Harry, 36, was frustrated and felt let down as he tried to speak to Charles, 72, and the Queen face-to-face about his decision to leave, only to be stopped by Royal aides.
> 
> *The source told the Telegraph that Harry and Meghan, 39, often "blamed the staff" when things didn't go their way.*
> 
> The source also said: *"[Charles] ploughed money into the wedding and into Frogmore [the couple’s Windsor home] and did his utmost to make them feel financially supported* but then when they said they were upping sticks, he had less and less inclination to take calls."
> 
> *Charles took an immediate shine to Meghan when they first met.*_
> 
> _*They both shared a passion for holistic medicine, and Charles was reportedly impressed with Meghan's interest in British military history.*
> 
> Charles even walked Meghan down the aisle at her wedding after her dad Thomas was unable to attend.
> 
> However in an explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey, Harry claimed that Charles stopped taking his calls when he moved to North America.
> 
> *FAMILY REUNION*
> Harry and Charles had an awkward reunion during Prince Philip's funeral last month.
> 
> Harry had claimed his father and brother Prince William were "trapped" in the Royal Family during his interview with Oprah.
> 
> He also claimed Charles had used palace staff to carry out his parental responsibilities and that he had been cut off financially.
> 
> Charles was said to be "devastated", "despairing" and "deeply saddened" by Harry's comments in the interview._
> 
> _Things got worse when Gayle King, the host of CBS's This Morning TV show and a friend of the Sussexes, revealed on air that calls between Harry and Charles had been "unproductive".
> 
> The relationship between father and son had previously been extremely close, with Harry telling the BBC on the 20th anniversary of his mother Diana's death: "He was there for us; he was the one out of two left and he tried to do his best and to make sure we were protected and looked after."
> 
> Meghan reportedly encouraged Harry to pay tribute to Charles, saying he needed to be as close as he could to "the one parent you have left".
> 
> Meghan's once-tight relationship with her own father Thomas became strained after he co-operated in a paparazzi photoshoot before her wedding and then pulled out of attending the ceremony at the last moment because of poor health.
> 
> Both Harry and Meghan were said to be in tears as a result, and the the bride was left with no one to walk her down the aisle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'blamed staff when they didn't get their way', insider claims
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry “blamed staff when they didn’t get their way”, a palace insider has claimed. The couple’s relationship with Harry’s father Prince Charle…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I bet she does not even know which beach the Brits landed on during the Normandy invasion.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry and wife are becoming mega-celebrities... 





			https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/
		


Help yourself:


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Harry and wife are becoming mega-celebrities...
> View attachment 5078438
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/
> 
> 
> 
> Help yourself:


This is what you call the Paris Hilton effect. You hire PR people, push your narrative and be in the papers or tv or internet and eventually people know your brand to become famous. They’re not in major fashion magazines cause they know she won’t sell.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent post, @csshopper.
> I’m surprised more people are unaware of the dangers of balloons. Always good to get the word out.
> Again, one more example of hypocrisy from this obnoxious couple.


Thanks, CarryOn2020,

We are living in such fragile times. I am hypersensitive. Last September, we were part of a mandatory evacuation order issued at 11:55 PM. In the midst of Covid sheltering, DD and I spent 5 nights in a motel room we were lucky enough to score, because the shelters were full, waiting to find out if we would have homes waiting for us at the end of it. We were blessed by the firefighters being able to subdue the flames 25' feet away. Right now I am about 18 hours into a Red Flag Alert that is projected to be in force through Monday morning. This is months before the formerly "usual" fire season calls for one of these. Every little preventable action is essential. 

Harry, in particular, would probably not recognize their immediate environment being as precarious as it is. She should know having grown up in LA, but probably thinks they are exempt from any potential disaster since they are so very special. The harsh reality is bailing water from every single toilet would not make a difference.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Harry and wife are becoming mega-celebrities...
> View attachment 5078438
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/
> 
> 
> 
> Help yourself:


Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. He needs to hawk her book.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> Sad to say I am a member of your club.


Yes, I'm also a member of that club.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Thanks, CarryOn2020,
> 
> We are living in such fragile times. I am hypersensitive. Last September, we were part of a mandatory evacuation order issued at 11:55 PM. In the midst of Covid sheltering, DD and I spent 5 nights in a motel room we were lucky enough to score, because the shelters were full, waiting to find out if we would have homes waiting for us at the end of it. We were blessed by the firefighters being able to subdue the flames 25' feet away. Right now I am about 18 hours into a Red Flag Alert that is projected to be in force through Monday morning. This is months before the formerly "usual" fire season calls for one of these. Every little preventable action is essential.
> 
> Harry, in particular, would probably not recognize their immediate environment being as precarious as it is. She should know having grown up in LA, but probably thinks they are exempt from any potential disaster since they are so very special. The harsh reality is bailing water from every single toilet would not make a difference.



Thank you, again, for mentioning it. The photos of the damaged birds got to me years ago. The fires are another layer of horror to these outdoor balloon events. When the birthday photo was first posted here, I commented on the hypocritical use of balloons. Maybe my comment didn’t resonate with our audience, I thought the photo was a slap in the face to all of us truly concerned about the environment.  The press did not fuss much about it either.  The hypocrisy needs to be noted, screamed about, protested, photo removed and apologies made.  Enough.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

LittleStar88 said:


> Just pondering here about photos of Archie and why the only ones we see don’t really show his image very well.
> 
> I‘m not a parent, but every parent I know will jump at the chance to show anyone and everyone a picture of their kid. If they could plaster their kid’s photo on every billboard and sign, they likely would do that, too. I’ve never met a parent who wasn’t extremely eager to show off their kiddos.
> 
> Wondering if there’s some physical/developmental complication that they don’t want seen? Or would we have heard this by now?
> 
> Not trying to be mean to Archie, just seems so odd.


I would never post pics of my kids on social media. I send pics to relatives and friends a couple of times a year. The reason being I generally think it's wrong as kids aren't old enough to consent to such a public decision. I cringe when I see parents trying to make their tiny tots "happen" on the internet. Or worse, post humiliating things that will haunt the poor kid forever. Or bring their kids in on political commentary and satire. Stop it!

On the other hand, the internets would be a lot less fun if parents didn't post pics ending up in YT clips like "I left my husband alone with the kids for five minutes... Mayhem!" (Zoom in on dad sleeping like a baby, half fallen off the sofa, or snoring in a baby pool, while toddlers and dogs roam free in the kitchen or garden adorned with whatever contents were in the fridge or flower bed).

But I agree about the Heavily Pregnant Ones, they soak up attention at whatever cost so it is strange. Unless they are hoping for a big well paid magazine spread. I hope little Archie is alright.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Harry and wife are becoming mega-celebrities...
> View attachment 5078438
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/
> 
> 
> 
> Help yourself:


Ya, I need all of them    and a few more for that nonsense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post. He needs to hawk her book.



Plus, Amazon is probably sitting on a warehouse full of Harry and Meghan crap they want to unload on the sugars. Meghan Christmas ornaments anyone? Nothing says "I have a great brand" like needing to tell people you even have a brand    .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Harry and wife are becoming mega-celebrities...
> View attachment 5078438
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/05/03/meghan-harry-betterup-archewell-podcast-netflix/
> 
> 
> 
> Help yourself:



That a reputable magazin like WP doesn't see the irony - and contradiction - in "American royalty".


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, again, for mentioning it. The photos of the damaged birds got to me years ago. The fires are another layer of horror to these outdoor balloon events. When the birthday photo was first posted here, I commented on the hypocritical use of balloons. Maybe my comment didn’t resonate with our audience, I thought the photo was a slap in the face to all of us truly concerned about the environment.  The press did not fuss much about it either.  The hypocrisy needs to be noted, screamed about, protested, photo removed and apologies made.  Enough.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Plus, Amazon is probably sitting on a warehouse full of Harry and Meghan crap they want to unload on the sugars. Meghan Christmas ornaments anyone? Nothing says "I have a great brand" like needing to tell people you even have a brand    .



LOL. You too can have a replica of Harry's wife's wedding ring, version 2 of course,  available on Amazon. And best of all, check out the manufacturing statement highlighted below.

*Yellow-Gold-Plated Sterling Silver Cushion Cut Celebrity "Meghan" Ring set with Swarovski Zirconia*
4.3 out of 5 stars    57 ratings

Price:$29.60 - $29.99  & Free Returns on some sizes and colors
Free 7-day try-on available for some sizes and colors.
Free shipping & returns. Learn more 

Royalty inspired engagement ring fit for a Princess!

Dazzling elongated center with two brilliant round on either side for a new take on the 3-stone ring.
*This jewelry design was manufactured with the highest quality standards. All efforts are being made to use sustainable resources and socially responsible providers.*

Once your finger is paying homage to Meghan, Amazon also gives you the opportunity to highlight stan status with a replica of her wedding crown. I bet the Queen never ever gives her access to the Royal vault again.
*Meghan Markle Wedding Tiaras and Crowns for Women Crystal Prom Quinceanera Party Pageant Hair Jewelry*


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, again, for mentioning it. The photos of the damaged birds got to me years ago. The fires are another layer of horror to these outdoor balloon events. When the birthday photo was first posted here, I commented on the hypocritical use of balloons. Maybe my comment didn’t resonate with our audience, I thought the photo was a slap in the face to all of us truly concerned about the environment.  The press did not fuss much about it either.  The hypocrisy needs to be noted, screamed about, protested, photo removed and apologies made.  Enough.



Why aren't  these things banned?  They cause damage to people and property.  Not to mention that they litter up the landscape.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> LOL. You too can have a replica of Harry's wife's wedding ring, version 2 of course,  available on Amazon. And best of all, check out the manufacturing statement highlighted below.
> 
> *Yellow-Gold-Plated Sterling Silver Cushion Cut Celebrity "Meghan" Ring set with Swarovski Zirconia*
> 4.3 out of 5 stars    57 ratings
> 
> Price:$29.60 - $29.99  & Free Returns on some sizes and colors
> Free 7-day try-on available for some sizes and colors.
> Free shipping & returns. Learn more
> 
> Royalty inspired engagement ring fit for a Princess!
> 
> Dazzling elongated center with two brilliant round on either side for a new take on the 3-stone ring.
> *This jewelry design was manufactured with the highest quality standards. All efforts are being made to use sustainable resources and socially responsible providers.*
> 
> Once your finger is paying homage to Meghan, Amazon also gives you the opportunity to highlight stan status with a replica of her wedding crown. I bet the Queen never ever gives her access to the Royal vault again.
> *Meghan Markle Wedding Tiaras and Crowns for Women Crystal Prom Quinceanera Party Pageant Hair Jewelry*


They wanted to donate it for people to pick up for free, but it turns out that nobody wants any of it.  Perhaps there is a way to recycle it all into fuel so we pay less on energy bills.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Ya, I need all of them    and a few more for that nonsense.


They want to be a brand, but they take it too seriously.  I recall years ago Cindy Crawford was talking about herself as a brand.  She made it clear that CC the brand, was a marketed business entity and that CC the person was separate and apart and she wanted to keep it that way.  That is the problem with the Harkles, they will never be able to make that separation and that is why that is particularly mentally unhealthy for both of them.

Cindy also said that when she was invited to KP by Diana to meet the young Prince William, she made sure to be on her best behavior and not do anything stupid because she wanted to be invited back again.   A certain grade Z actress did not get that memo and we know the result.


----------



## pixiejenna

I’m watching allvax a benefit concert on TV and to my surprise Prince Harry came on to talk. I‘m surprised Megan let him out, probably only so she could tag along and hobnob with the other real celebrities lol.


----------



## Allisonfaye

pixiejenna said:


> I’m watching allvax a benefit concert on TV and to my surprise Prince Harry came on to talk. I‘m surprised Megan let him out, probably only so she could tag along and hobnob with the other real celebrities lol.



Yep. He's at it again. Not even that great at reading off a teleprompter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Why aren't  these things banned?  They cause damage to people and property.  Not to mention that they litter up the landscape.



The Balloon Council!!! Would love to serve on their council   



			https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2020-02-28/balloon-bans-take-flight-across-the-country
		

Even The Balloon Council, a trade group that represents balloon retailers, distributors and manufacturers, last year adopted a stance against balloon releases.
"In the past TBC didn't advocate for or against balloon releases, we advised people on the best practices to minimize environmental impact such as only using latex and not adding strings," council Chairman Dan Flynn said in a statement. "Over the years, as the social and political climates have changed, our position has also evolved. This change in stance fully recognizes the need for everyone to be as 'green' as we possibly can be to protect our planet."



			CVW Balloon release legislation
		

*Legislation regulating the release of balloons *

Mass release of balloons is illegal in several states and cities, including Virginia. Jurisdictions that have laws in effect dealing with balloon releases include:



> Connecticut, Florida, Tennessee, New York, Texas, California and Virginia.
> Cities of Ocean City, Maryland; Louisville; Huntsville, Ala.; San Francisco; and Baltimore.
> Legislation is pending in other states including Massachusetts, Maryland, and New York.


----------



## pixiejenna

Allisonfaye said:


> Yep. He's at it again. Not even that great at reading off a teleprompter.



He was never good at it, it;s just more glaringly notable against actual performers and you know people who work for a living.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That a reputable magazin like WP doesn't see the irony - and contradiction - in "American royalty".


NM


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Why aren't  these things banned?  They cause damage to people and property.  Not to mention that they litter up the landscape.


Ok, it has taken me years to learn ...
I can do more for climate change by not buying the crappy plastic stuff that I don’t really need (than by not eating beef, or by recycling, or driving an EV, all of which I strive to do but ... )
no plastic
i even make my own play doh for GD from flour not plastic slime


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be Balloon Smart Pledge – Meet Faraday
					






					balloonsliftup.com


----------



## gelbergirl

csshopper said:


> LOL. You too can have a replica of Harry's wife's wedding ring, version 2 of course,  available on Amazon. And best of all, check out the manufacturing statement highlighted below.
> 
> *Yellow-Gold-Plated Sterling Silver Cushion Cut Celebrity "Meghan" Ring set with Swarovski Zirconia*
> 4.3 out of 5 stars    57 ratings
> 
> Price:$29.60 - $29.99  & Free Returns on some sizes and colors
> Free 7-day try-on available for some sizes and colors.
> Free shipping & returns. Learn more
> 
> Royalty inspired engagement ring fit for a Princess!
> 
> Dazzling elongated center with two brilliant round on either side for a new take on the 3-stone ring.
> *This jewelry design was manufactured with the highest quality standards. All efforts are being made to use sustainable resources and socially responsible providers.*
> 
> Once your finger is paying homage to Meghan, Amazon also gives you the opportunity to highlight stan status with a replica of her wedding crown. I bet the Queen never ever gives her access to the Royal vault again.
> *Meghan Markle Wedding Tiaras and Crowns for Women Crystal Prom Quinceanera Party Pageant Hair Jewelry*



I am aghast, stunned and disgusted as to what she is doing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> I am aghast, stunned and disgusted as to what she is doing.



So am I, but I'm pretty sure if there's one thing MM is not to blame for it is cheap copies of her jewelry on amazon.


----------



## pixiejenna

Ugh now Megan was on I forgot she was pregnant she did a filmed bit so shockingly she’s not there. She did a better job at reading her script and announced that she’s having a girl. I don’t know if it’s been said before since I’m not following them closely but it seems right up her ally to find a way to make it about her lol.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> This is what you call the Paris Hilton effect. You hire PR people, push your narrative and be in the papers or tv or internet and eventually people know your brand to become famous. They’re not in major fashion magazines cause they know she won’t sell.


Once she pops the sprog, she will probably get SS to negotiate for magazine covers. I remembers in the run-up to the wedding, one of the falsehoods being pushed alongside "highly sought-after actress" was "super model".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Once she pops the sprog, she will probably get SS to negotiate for magazine covers. I remembers in the run-up to the wedding, one of the falsehoods being pushed alongside "highly sought-after actress" was "super model".



Isn't she like 4" too short for that.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> If they were going to fetch top dollar I feel we would have seen them by now. Truth is likely there’s not as much intere$t as she thinks, so she waits.
> 
> Archie will age out of having value soon enough. They’ll have baby Princess Diana Doria to pimp out for a while.


The peak of his photo value was at his birth, and she missed out on cashing in then because she was still with the BRF.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't she like 4" too short for that.


  Maybe she will wear higher heels.


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> He was never good at it, it;s just more glaringly notable against actual performers and you know people who work for a living.


this is what galls me about the two of them....I know a lot of you here find celebs like Leo Dicaprio who are environmental activists, or whatever, annoying.  But at least they got their fame and money from work and talent.  Harry got his from birth and his Wife got hers by nailing him.  Neither of them have any significant accomplishments or talent.  Unless you count networking.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> LOL. You too can have a replica of Harry's wife's wedding ring, version 2 of course,  available on Amazon. And best of all, check out the manufacturing statement highlighted below.
> 
> *Yellow-Gold-Plated Sterling Silver Cushion Cut Celebrity "Meghan" Ring set with Swarovski Zirconia*
> 4.3 out of 5 stars    57 ratings
> 
> Price:$29.60 - $29.99  & Free Returns on some sizes and colors
> Free 7-day try-on available for some sizes and colors.
> Free shipping & returns. Learn more
> 
> Royalty inspired engagement ring fit for a Princess!
> 
> Dazzling elongated center with two brilliant round on either side for a new take on the 3-stone ring.
> *This jewelry design was manufactured with the highest quality standards. All efforts are being made to use sustainable resources and socially responsible providers.*
> 
> Once your finger is paying homage to Meghan, Amazon also gives you the opportunity to highlight stan status with a replica of her wedding crown. I bet the Queen never ever gives her access to the Royal vault again.
> *Meghan Markle Wedding Tiaras and Crowns for Women Crystal Prom Quinceanera Party Pageant Hair Jewelry*


I just clicked on the ratings, and people are comparing the ring to a Nordstrom's version.  I wonder if Amaz*n is donating part of the profit to Arch$w$ll.


----------



## pixiejenna

sdkitty said:


> this is what galls me about the two of them....I know a lot of you here find celebs like Leo Dicaprio who are environmental activists, or whatever, annoying.  But at least they got their fame and money from work and talent.  Harry got his from birth and his Wife got hers by nailing him.  Neither of them have any significant accomplishments or talent.  Unless you count networking.



They aren’t even good at networking either, begging for jobs at promotions in front of the paparazzi lol.


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> They aren’t even good at networking either, begging for jobs at promotions in front of the paparazzi lol.


well, I'll have to say she must have been very good at networking.  she went looking for an English guy and landed a prince.


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> this is what galls me about the two of them....I know a lot of you here find celebs like Leo Dicaprio who are environmental activists, or whatever, annoying.  But at least they got their fame and money from work and talent.  Harry got his from birth and his Wife got hers by nailing him.  Neither of them have any significant accomplishments or talent.  Unless you count networking.



I am so disgusted by these two, famous for whining and leaving his actual birth ‘role’ fake job whatever behind and telling people what to do with their money and time and prayers and wishes... I mean
wtf !!!! Preaching about unity when they both deserted their family publicly, true whiny douche and douchess of nothing, I mean nothing.  On the news talking about hope and books about family- hey family are the people you cut off losers!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Heavily pregnant??? Um, I’m so going with the surrogate. This is not the same pregnancy face we saw with Archie.











						Prince Harry makes call for COVID vaccine to be equitably distributed
					

The VaxLive concert aired on US television on Saturday night, with Prince Harry taking to the stage to call for distribution of the vaccine across the globe.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




He sounds so ignorant of the issues. His simplistic view doesn’t influence anyone with intelligence.


----------



## needlv

Does anyone remember the story about MM rummaging around in a car boot (trunk)?  There is video evidence... she scurried away looking guilty.  watch the first thirty seconds of this....


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heavily pregnant??? Um, I’m so going with the surrogate. This is not the same pregnancy face we saw with Archie.
> 
> View attachment 5078716
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes call for COVID vaccine to be equitably distributed
> 
> 
> The VaxLive concert aired on US television on Saturday night, with Prince Harry taking to the stage to call for distribution of the vaccine across the globe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He sounds so ignorant of the issues. His simplistic view doesn’t influence anyone with intelligence.



seriously she wears too much eyeliner...  it’s making her eyes look smaller.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heavily pregnant??? Um, I’m so going with the surrogate. This is not the same pregnancy face we saw with Archie.
> 
> View attachment 5078716
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes call for COVID vaccine to be equitably distributed
> 
> 
> The VaxLive concert aired on US television on Saturday night, with Prince Harry taking to the stage to call for distribution of the vaccine across the globe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He sounds so ignorant of the issues. His simplistic view doesn’t influence anyone with intelligence.


There’s that world famous bench.


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> Does anyone remember the story about MM rummaging around in a car boot (trunk)?  There is video evidence... she scurried away looking guilty.  watch the first thirty seconds of this....



This may be the only time she's been seen running from a camera.   Hmmmmm


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now that they have decided to join the spotlight, they will find the glare much harsher than ever before.  The entitled elites lecturing the poor masses, it’s a tough sell.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now that they have decided to join the spotlight, they will find the glare much harsher than ever before.  The entitled elites lecturing the poor masses, it’s a tough sell.




Shut up, stop saying the sun is hot, the rain is water, snow melts, what dumb remarks, ‘the only way to heal and recover is to do that together.’  Why don’t you try that with your families?   Stop talking and do something, action speaks louder than words and these two douches, lets just call H douche 1 and M douche 2, calling the weather as it happens, no one wants to hear this pathetic duo anymore.... OMFG what crap comes out of their mouthes...


----------



## scarlet555

needlv said:


> Does anyone remember the story about MM rummaging around in a car boot (trunk)?  There is video evidence... she scurried away looking guilty.  watch the first thirty seconds of this....




I think there is another video circulating... where she is caught more than once going back and forth-true footage lol, none of the ‘I carry my toddler on top of my moonbump’ photo Op. If someone finds it, that’s the one footage I’d like to see, the new stuff is pretty repetitive, ‘yeah, justice for all’, ‘vaccines for all’, ‘hope for all’, ’benches for all’, ‘jewelry for all’... my goodness...


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> First in the Times, this was later picked-up yahoo (that has no pay wall) https://uk.news.yahoo.com/art-lecturer-suspended-accusations-racism-meghan-163546287.html
> 
> I've tried to take out the clickbait and I've removed the pics (just random previously published pics of M)
> 
> 
> 
> *Art lecturer suspended over accusations of racism after 'colourful' Meghan comment*
> 
> Rebecca Taylor
> ·Royal Correspondent
> Fri, 7 May 2021, 5:35 pm·4-min read
> 
> 
> Dr Anne Anderson was speaking after the interview between Meghan and Oprah Winfrey aired. Meghan here in February 2019. (Hannah Mckay - Pool/Getty Images)
> An art historian has been suspended as a speaker from the Arts Society after an off-the-cuff comment she made about Meghan Markle before giving a lecture.
> Dr Anne Anderson, who has been lecturing for 28 years, was speaking to members of the Truro Arts Society before she gave a talk on Ikea and Scandinavian Design on 12 March, a few days after Meghan and Prince Harry's interview with Oprah Winfrey had aired.
> Dr Anderson, 65, remarked to one of those who had joined the Zoom call: "You couldn’t turn the television on without some person of a colourful disposition having a moan about something."
> She told _Yahoo UK_ that two days later, she received an email saying she had been suspended from the Society's list of speakers because of a complaint over racist language.
> She said: "With the new Zoom world that we live in, you forget you have got 30 or 40 people in your living room. Normally I would be in a village hall with 120 people and before the lecture I would be talking to a few friends - I would be able to correct anything I said.
> "But you don't even see half the audience that is with you."
> Dr Anderson has explained to _The Times_ that she was referring to the language when she said "colourful disposition" and should have said "florid language".
> She told _Yahoo UK_: "I got an email saying I had been suspended from the society, and I faced being de-accredited because I had made non-inclusive or racist remarks. I did not get the vibe that what I had said was any more contentious than anyone else who had been involved in the conversation - we were just chatting about Meghan Markle.
> "I offered to apologise - I do not go out of my way to offend anyone."
> But Dr Anderson says the offer to apologise was not passed onto the Truro branch, where she had been speaking, which she claims is against the usual procedure of The Arts Society.
> Instead she went straight to a panel which included the two complainants, to explain her actions.
> She said: "It could have been dealt with within the society. I have a good relationship with most Art Societies, I have been working for them since 1994.
> "What I'm really worried about is abuse of power.
> "They have this caveat of 'bringing the society into disrepute'. The only person who decides that is the CEO.
> "He was deciding my fate and I think it went too far. I don't think my crime fitted my punishment."
> Dr Anderson voiced concerns that younger lecturers might not have been able to deal with the same situation.
> She has now written letters of apology and agreed to go on a diversity training course, though commitments mean she has not yet been able to do this.
> She also has to meet with a retired lecturer to discuss her "inappropriate behaviour" - which she says is even talking about Meghan at all, claiming the duchess is now a banned topic.
> Dr Anderson said: "I will definitely be doing [the course] in the next week, I don't have any problem with it, and I know in the current climate it's a good thing to do."
> She said she was still suspended from the speakers' list, despite the letters and the agreement to the follow-up course.
> "I'm 65 and coming to the end of my career, but if this happened to a younger lecturer, to go through this, if you are starting out and your reputation and your livelihood is threatened...
> "The avenues by which people in education make money are dwindling," she added.
> Florian Schweizer, chief executive, The Arts Society said: "The Arts Society followed its complaints procedure after a complaint had been made against Dr Anne Anderson.
> "The matter was resolved by following this procedure. We have no further comments on this matter."


Is it my imagination or is Meg winning at everything.  Everyone gets fired for even the most innocuous comment. That, and she wins her lawsuits.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> this is what galls me about the two of them....I know a lot of you here find celebs like Leo Dicaprio who are environmental activists, or whatever, annoying.  But at least they got their fame and money from work and talent.  Harry got his from birth and his Wife got hers by nailing him.  Neither of them have any significant accomplishments or talent.  Unless you count networking.


Dicaprio is annoying because he's a huge hypocrite, just like the Markles.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


>



Maybe it’s because I’m on my iPad and it sometimes reads color a little differently, but her hair extensions look more glossy brown, mimicking Kate, than the witchy cheap looking black from prior appearances,


----------



## Straight-Laced

Jayne1 said:


> Is it my imagination or is Meg winning at everything.  Everyone gets fired for even the most innocuous comment. That, and she wins her lawsuits.


Will it always be this way or is there an end point I wonder?


----------



## xincinsin

Very sad - ever since she wrote that "book", tpf keeps giving me garden furniture advertising 

Did anyone identify yet how much $$$$$ the flowered red top/dress costs?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Very sad - ever since she wrote that "book", tpf keeps giving me garden furniture advertising
> 
> Did anyone identify yet how much $$$$$ the flowered red top/dress costs?



Carolina Herrera $1690





__





						Carolina Herrera Floral Belted Midi Silk Dress - Bergdorf Goodman
					

Get free shipping on Carolina Herrera Floral Belted Midi Silk Dress at Bergdorf Goodman. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.



					www.bergdorfgoodman.com
				







the necklace - https://aweinspired.com/


----------



## CarryOn2020

I know many will disagree, I think she has already had the kid.  Her face looks thinner, jewelry all seem to fit, and this bump is smaller than before. If she is going for a Kate look, she failed. Kate has lightened up on the eyeliner, never really did the glossy lips or glossy cheeks.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Following on from news of the suspended art historian this great piece written by Brendan O'Neill of Spiked (UK) regarding the OW nonsense and exit of Piers Morgan is entirely relevant. Some plain speaking from Brendan O'N as always  


*Thou shalt not criticise St Meghan*
*As Piers Morgan has discovered, if you diss the patron saint of wokeness you’re in trouble.*
_Brendan O’Neill Spiked Online 7 March 2021_

Hold on. In Britain in 2021 you can lose your job for criticising a member of the royal family? That appears to be the lesson of Piers Morgan’s parting of the ways with ITV. Morgan, morning TV’s biggest name, is out after 41,000 people complained to Ofcom about his recent comments on Meghan Markle. It’s official: diss this duchess and you will suffer.

What _century_ is this? I thought we had moved beyond all that medieval nonsense about treason and hounding people out of polite society if they blaspheme against royalty? Seems not. Morgan is famous for not being a fan of Ms Markle. But this week he apparently went ‘too far’ – who are these mysterious people who get to decide what is ‘too far’? – when he said he didn’t ‘believe a word’ of what Markle said to Oprah.

On his show _Good Morning Britain_ they aired a clip of Meghan saying she was depressed and even suicidal when cooped up in Kensington Palace. In response Morgan said: ‘I’m sorry, I don’t believe a word she says. I wouldn’t believe her if she read me a weather report.’ Cue meltdown among the Twitterati, the scalp-hungry cancel-culture mob and mental-health charities, all of whom wailed about Morgan disrespecting a suffering woman’s ‘truth’ as if he had just punched a statue of the Virgin Mary in 1930s Ireland.

Thousands of people grassed on Morgan to Ofcom. He then had an on-air falling-out with his black co-presenter, Alex Beresford, who accused Morgan of ‘trashing’ Markle. Which, as we now know, is sacrilege. Morgan flounced off set. And now ITV has said that, ‘following discussions’ – never a good sign – Morgan has decided to leave _GMB_. People suspect he was at least partly pushed out. It seems that way. Time will tell.

​
But what is indisputable is that a weird, unsettling and censorious atmosphere of religiosity now surrounds the Duchess of Sussex. The cultural elites have beatified her. They’ve made her the patron saint of critical race theory, the goddess of wokeness. To venture a criticism of this high priestess of correct thought is to risk cancellation. Questioning her ‘truth’ is to 2021 what questioning the truth of the Bible was to 1521. Okay, you won’t lose your head, but you might lose your job.

The speed with which Meghan has been venerated by the new elites is terrifying. From the supposedly radical left (their claims to radicalism are becoming more hilarious by the day) to the broadsheet press and the liberal elites, Meghan has been elevated into the chief awareness-raiser of contemporary Britain. Institutions are falling over themselves to heed her sermon about the need to cleanse the nation of racism and ‘build compassion’. It’s creepy.

And now it is becoming menacing. The atmosphere in the wake of that Oprah interview is taking a dark turn. It’s like the hysteria that followed the death of Princess Diana mashed together with the weird BLM events in the summer of last year. ‘Yes, Britain IS a racist country’, the Meghan cult dutifully intones. ‘Yes, the royals are racist. Yes, the media are racist. Yes, white people are racist.’ Meghan’s confessional has further empowered the self-hatreds and censorious vengeance of the woke elites, who will now see racism in more and more areas of life, even where it doesn’t exist, and cancel anyone who dares to say: ‘Isn’t it possible Meghan is talking ****?’

​
It took a very long time for Brits to win the right to criticise royalty. To blaspheme against gods, to speak freely. Yet now a woke form of treason is being rehabilitated on the back of the veneration of Holy Meghan, with the threat of cancellation hanging over anyone who doesn’t think Britain is racist, doesn’t think taking the mick out of Meghan for eating avocados is racist, and doesn’t think we all need to supplicate ourselves before St Meghan and the cleansing rituals of critical race theory.

Blasphemers, step forward. This nonsense cannot be allowed to take hold.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I know many will disagree, I think she has already had the kid.  Her face looks thinner, jewelry all seem to fit, and this bump is smaller than before. If she is going for a Kate look, she failed. Kate has lightened up on the eyeliner, never really did the glossy lips or glossy cheeks.


I would believe you. The belly in that black white artsy photo announcement was too large for a summer birth.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.

Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle. 

*Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
By Jessica Bennett

May 8, 2021 | 11:52am

https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> By Jessica Bennett
> 
> May 8, 2021 | 11:52am
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/


I can't believe this...


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> I can't believe this...


She wasn’t in the original photo though...? so are they suggesting PC should only have posted the christening day one?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> She wasn’t in the original photo though...? so are they suggesting PC should only have posted the christening day one?


The way they are keeping him under wraps, the BRF will be using these same photos for the next few birthdays. 

Maybe that's the idea: the kid will grow up totally dependent on only the Spiteful and the Spineless.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, again, for mentioning it. The photos of the damaged birds got to me years ago. The fires are another layer of horror to these outdoor balloon events. When the birthday photo was first posted here, I commented on the hypocritical use of balloons. Maybe my comment didn’t resonate with our audience, I thought the photo was a slap in the face to all of us truly concerned about the environment.  The press did not fuss much about it either.  The hypocrisy needs to be noted, screamed about, protested, photo removed and apologies made.  Enough.



No, I got it. Thanks to @csshopper and others too. 

I couldn't believe my eyes seeing that hideous, dangerous trash in the sky for the sake of a photo op. Never mind how hypocritical. 

I can't believe they haven't been called out by the mainstream press, this 'royal family' of the US


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she will wear higher heels.



You mean stilts?


----------



## papertiger

@xincinsin "Once she pops the sprog, she will probably get SS to negotiate for magazine covers. I remembers in the run-up to the wedding, one of the falsehoods being pushed alongside "highly sought-after actress" was "super model"."



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't she like 4" too short for that.



We _are_ all perfect (I do believe that) but in commercial terms, just put her photo up against Naomi, Yasmin or Linda's - she's everything short for that


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Very sad - ever since she wrote that "book", tpf keeps giving me garden furniture advertising
> 
> Did anyone identify yet how much $$$$$ the flowered red top/dress costs?



I hate it. 

I'm really pleased I hate it, she ruined a Gucci coat for me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> We _are_ all perfect (I do believe that) but in commercial terms, just put her photo up against Naomi, Yasmin or Linda's - she's everything short for that



Ha. I'll say though they don't make them like in the 90s anymore. That era is gone.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> The way they are keeping him under wraps, the BRF will be using these same photos for the next few birthdays.
> 
> Maybe that's the idea: the kid will grow up totally dependent on only the *Spiteful and the Spineless*.



Bullseye!  Talk about in a nutshell!


----------



## gelbergirl

Hermes Zen said:


> Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> By Jessica Bennett
> 
> May 8, 2021 | 11:52am
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/



I'd really like for Charles to somehow mend this relationship with his son.
Not MM, just his son.
I'd rather see the Monarch with both his sons on coronation day  you know?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> I'd really like for Charles to somehow mend this relationship with his son.
> Not MM, just his son.
> I'd rather see the Monarch with both his sons on coronation day  you know?



I always think it's sad when families break apart, but what can he do? The whole family has bent over backwards to please these two entitled brats, yet it's never enough. And at this point Harry becomes kind of a security risk with his tendency to leak like a faulty faucet.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Carolina Herrera $1690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera Floral Belted Midi Silk Dress - Bergdorf Goodman
> 
> 
> Get free shipping on Carolina Herrera Floral Belted Midi Silk Dress at Bergdorf Goodman. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bergdorfgoodman.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5078839
> 
> 
> the necklace - https://aweinspired.com/


Just clicked the link for the necklace. The word salad intro to the site is so her. Intersectional feminism - huh?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Dicaprio is annoying because he's a huge hypocrite, just like the Markles.


well at least he does something else......the only thing I see them doing is preaching to all of us


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Just clicked the link for the necklace. The word salad intro to the site is so her. Intersectional feminism - huh?



I tried posting the actual link to the necklace. It would not post correctly because it has the name of our VP in it.
So, on the site try searching for a KH necklace.

All the info:








						Meghan's meaningful jewelry collection including Diana's watch
					

Meghan Markle, 39, wore a stack of jewels worth thousands as she appeared from her $14 million Californian mansion yesterday for the VaxLive concert.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heavily pregnant??? Um, I’m so going with the surrogate. This is not the same pregnancy face we saw with Archie.
> 
> View attachment 5078716
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes call for COVID vaccine to be equitably distributed
> 
> 
> The VaxLive concert aired on US television on Saturday night, with Prince Harry taking to the stage to call for distribution of the vaccine across the globe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He sounds so ignorant of the issues. His simplistic view doesn’t influence anyone with intelligence.


I don't want to watch this but looking at the still pic, her face looks full to me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> By Jessica Bennett
> 
> May 8, 2021 | 11:52am
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/


I'd cut her out too if I were him


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


>



Looks like she's wearing her jammies. Wonder what that outfit cost.
ETA: never mind, I just saw the $$ total of the outfit. Still looks like jammies to me. And also it appears that she upgraded the extensions.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I definitely agree that I am very cynical. It comes from a lifetime of observing human nature.


Haha me too!  

In my freshman college psychology class, our professor went across the front row of students in the auditorium, asking them their major.  95% said "PreMed".  After the 9th or 10th person who answered that, the professor asked WTH are you Premed?  The student's answer was that he wanted to help people.  The professor said, really, well I'll guarantee 99% of those same patients won't help you!  I remember thinking the professor was bitter and crotchety.  Well, I now look back and realize he was just being honest.  Sad, but true!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I tried posting the actual link to the necklace. It would not post correctly because it has the name of our VP in it.
> So, on the site try searching for a KH necklace.
> 
> All the info:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's meaningful jewelry collection including Diana's watch
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, wore a stack of jewels worth thousands as she appeared from her $14 million Californian mansion yesterday for the VaxLive concert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I swear, if she farts, her stan publications will label it "meaningful".  She's wearing a watch.  Why is it pointed out every.single.time that it was Diana's?  Does every photo of Kate Middleton proclaim she's wearing Diana's engagement ring?  Jeesh.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Yep. He's at it again. Not even that great at reading off a teleprompter.


Because you have to be literate to do that!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Because you have to be literate to do that!


I saw about 30 seconds of him on that vax concert show....enough for me.....I doubt the target audience for that show cared much about him


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the vax show is exactly that - a show. As someone on another site pointed out, almost every country with extra doses *long ago *committed to sending those extras to countries with less.  It is simply common sense. So, why all the pledging now?  $$$$$, perhaps? After dismal Oscar audiences, Hwood needs a ‘feel-good’ moment to reassure itself?  Yes, I’m skeptical with a dash of cynical.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Is it my imagination or is Meg winning at everything.  Everyone gets fired for even the most innocuous comment. That, and she wins her lawsuits.



People have gotten fired for saying the most innocuous things, not just about Meghan. But she's one of the protected Woke Cows, that's for sure. She's crafty and clever, but only because she can (and does) whip out and play the "race" card when it "suits" her.  The media are also too scared and gutless to call her on anything, since they aid and abet the use of race to spin everything in general. As crafty as she is, she's only crafty and sneaky, not crafty and masterminded. There's a difference. Apparently she has enough sugars at this point to land sappy interviews, but where are all the A-Listers defending her stupid comments?  My guess, a few A-Lister attorneys counseled their clients not to get into the M&H fray. 
The few people in my circle who even remember Meghan roll their eyes and see her as a gold-digging spoiled bish who landed a famous guy who turned out to be a p*ssy whipped idiot. She's a conniving retread bride trying to pass herself off as an innocent "Who, ME?" and failing miserably. Let her win a few dopey lawsuits here and there. Her long game is going to end in flames, and all the wokers and media in the world won't be enough to cover up her stupidity and selfishness. She's a self-important celebrity, not a leader of some third world nation in a strategical geographic location that receives billions of dollars in aid annually just to line their own personal pockets. Though Meghan acts as though she is deserving of receiving billions   and we're supposed to feel sorry for her that she doesn't.


----------



## Chagall

What has this world come to when a child treats their parent like Harry treated Charles, and Charles is not to react in any way. What a crazy planet, and it seems to have become a lot crazier since the onset of the pandemic.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> What has this world come to when a child treats their parent like Harry treated Charles, and Charles is not to react in any way. What a crazy planet, and it seems to have become a lot crazier since the onset of the pandemic.


IMO Meghan hit the jackpot being a WOC at this time in history.  She never really represented herself that way before but now it's a huge benefit, affording her super protections.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chagall said:


> What has this world come to when a child treats their parent like Harry treated Charles, and Charles is not to react in any way. What a crazy planet, and it seems to have become a lot crazier since the onset of the pandemic.


I think the pandemic has unfortunately created a lot of lazy, entitled people.  At least in the US, there are so many people not wanting to work because they make more sitting at home collecting unemployment.  It's quite shocking.  The world we live in now is one where the whiners and hypocrites are rewarded.  Meg and Haz are the King and Queen of lazy and entitled, hence they're "celebrated".


----------



## TC1

Did Harry double down on his comment of "Covid is mother natures way of punishing us" when the cameras were rolling? Asshat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The 2021 hits just keep on coming - the KY Derby winner has tested positive for …. drugs.
Not disqualified yet,  awaiting results of second drug test.  Oooooo my. 


ETA:  Is Hazzie involved in this, too?


----------



## Sol Ryan

TC1 said:


> Did Harry double down on his comment of "Covid is mother natures way of punishing us" when the cameras were rolling? Asshat.



Did he really say that? And no one has called him out on it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don’t know about last night, he said this is Dec., 2020:
_Prince Harry has suggested the coronavirus pandemic could be a rebuke from nature for mistreating the environment.

He said: "Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic, it's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour, to really take a moment and think about what we've done._









						Prince Harry: COVID-19 pandemic almost like 'Mother Nature sent us to our rooms'
					

The royal has appeared for the first time since his wife, Meghan, revealed she had suffered a miscarriage this year.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> Did Harry double down on his comment of "Covid is mother natures way of punishing us" when the cameras were rolling? Asshat.





From: The Hill https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...iticized-for-appearing-to-link-mother-natures

“Someone said to me right at the beginning of the pandemic, it’s almost as though Mother Nature sends us to our rooms for bad behavior, to really take a moment and think about what we’ve done,” he said in a video interview with the new streaming service WaterBear Network, which is focused on climate and conservation documentaries."

"It certainly reminded me, as it's probably has reminded all of us, how interconnected we all are, not just as people but through nature," continued the prince, who is known for his environmental activism. "We take so much from her, but we rarely give anything back."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heavily pregnant??? Um, I’m so going with the surrogate. This is not the same pregnancy face we saw with Archie.
> 
> View attachment 5078716
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes call for COVID vaccine to be equitably distributed
> 
> 
> The VaxLive concert aired on US television on Saturday night, with Prince Harry taking to the stage to call for distribution of the vaccine across the globe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He sounds so ignorant of the issues. His simplistic view doesn’t influence anyone with intelligence.


Am I the only one, who doesn't like her hair? It looks too strait and tight around her face and then that ugly horse's tail hanging down her left side.


----------



## lalame

Hermes Zen said:


> Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> By Jessica Bennett
> 
> May 8, 2021 | 11:52am
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/



I saw a similar article to this this morning too... people are so ridiculous. They expected W+K to post candid family photos of Archie.... when H+M have specifically said they don't want people sharing photos of him unless they are the ones releasing them? What candid family photos, anyway? That christening was probably the last time they saw him in person!









						Prince William and Kate Middleton's Birthday Post for Nephew Archie Called out by Fans
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton joined the British royal family on Thursday in wishing young [...]




					popculture.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, if she farts, her stan publications will label it "meaningful".  She's wearing a watch.  Why is it pointed out every.single.time that it was Diana's?  Does every photo of Kate Middleton proclaim she's wearing Diana's engagement ring?  Jeesh.



But that is because Kate Middleton is a nobody. Just the boring future queen of the UK, not an internationally adored woke influenster duchess.


----------



## Genie27

That dress is so frumpy. Reminds me of the blue and white bedspread outfit. 

Her hair does look more brown than the usual flat black. And yes, how best to merch the new chestnut mane than to have it cascading down one shoulder?


----------



## DeMonica

Hermes Zen said:


> Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> By Jessica Bennett
> 
> May 8, 2021 | 11:52am
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/


Stans must be really delusional. What did they expect after she had stirred the pot on international level and called him many things in that awful interview? Giving her a diamond necklace?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> Bet M was fuming when she saw that post.
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> By Jessica Bennett
> 
> May 8, 2021 | 11:52am
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2021/05/08/prin...-meghan-markle-with-archie-birthday-post/amp/


H's wife doesn't belong in a three-generation photo (2 dads and 2 sons).

ET change 3 dads to 2 dads (I guess I forgot how to add. )


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Am I the only one, who doesn't like her hair? It looks too strait and tight around her face and then that ugly horse's tail hanging down her left side.


You are not alone!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> From: The Hill https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...iticized-for-appearing-to-link-mother-natures
> 
> “Someone said to me right at the beginning of the pandemic, it’s almost as though Mother Nature sends us to our rooms for bad behavior, to really take a moment and think about what we’ve done,” he said in a video interview with the new streaming service WaterBear Network, which is focused on climate and conservation documentaries."
> 
> "It certainly reminded me, as it's probably has reminded all of us, how interconnected we all are, not just as people but through nature," continued the prince, who is known for his environmental activism. "We take so much from her, but we rarely give anything back."


STRAIGHT FROM THE MOUTH OF ONE OF THE WORLD'S MOST HYPOCRITICAL, DIMWITTED ABUSERS: "We take so much from her, but we rarely give anything back."

Harry, here's looking at YOU and THE WIFE.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t know about last night, he said this is Dec., 2020:
> _Prince Harry has suggested the coronavirus pandemic could be a rebuke from nature for mistreating the environment.
> 
> He said: "Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic, it's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour, to really take a moment and think about what we've done._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 pandemic almost like 'Mother Nature sent us to our rooms'
> 
> 
> The royal has appeared for the first time since his wife, Meghan, revealed she had suffered a miscarriage this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com


That "somebody" is very likely Jane Goodall. A lot of what Hazzie is saying sounds like it was regurgitated from her.








						Why Jane Goodall says human disregard for nature led to the coronavirus pandemic
					

“We are all interconnected,” the famed primatologist, and a leading voice in conservation efforts, told the PBS NewsHour. “And if we don’t get that lesson from this pandemic, then maybe we never will.”




					www.pbs.org


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha. I'll say though they don't make them like in the 90s anymore. That era is gone.


Unfortunately. Sometimes I even wonder if those models are female in editorials and web shops. Don't take me wrong: they don't have to look like glamour models or plus size, but a little femininity would be helpful to be able to imagine those clothes on me.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> The 2021 hits just keep on coming - the KY Derby winner has tested positive for …. drugs.
> Not disqualified yet,  awaiting results of second drug test.  Oooooo my.
> 
> 
> ETA:  Is Hazzie involved in this, too?


Who tested positive for drugs?  The horse or the jockey?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t know about last night, he said this is Dec., 2020:
> _Prince Harry has suggested the coronavirus pandemic could be a rebuke from nature for mistreating the environment.
> 
> He said: "Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic, it's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour, to really take a moment and think about what we've done._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 pandemic almost like 'Mother Nature sent us to our rooms'
> 
> 
> The royal has appeared for the first time since his wife, Meghan, revealed she had suffered a miscarriage this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com


I wish someone would send him to his room


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t know about last night, he said this is Dec., 2020:
> _Prince Harry has suggested the coronavirus pandemic could be a rebuke from nature for mistreating the environment.
> 
> He said: "Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic, it's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour, to really take a moment and think about what we've done._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 pandemic almost like 'Mother Nature sent us to our rooms'
> 
> 
> The royal has appeared for the first time since his wife, Meghan, revealed she had suffered a miscarriage this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com


IMO there's some truth in it. Unfortunately, the ones who mostly pay the price are not the ones mistreated or benefited from the mistreatment of the environment. Those can still buy first class health care and hide in luxury mansions.


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> That "somebody" is very likely Jane Goodall. A lot of what Hazzie is saying sounds like it was regurgitated from her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Jane Goodall says human disregard for nature led to the coronavirus pandemic
> 
> 
> “We are all interconnected,” the famed primatologist, and a leading voice in conservation efforts, told the PBS NewsHour. “And if we don’t get that lesson from this pandemic, then maybe we never will.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pbs.org



She's not exactly wrong. COVID is one of many diseases brought about from handling or eating wild animals in unsanitary conditions. Most or all contagious diseases originate from "mother nature" in one way or another. I truly hope we've (human race) learned something new from this experience that allows us to avoid making the same mistake in the future.

That's just me casually pontificating though. I don't know why Harry gets a standing ovation for casually pontificating on stage but it is what it is!

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending what Harry said. It's actually comical how he might have taken a coherent thought and articulated it himself in the most childish, naive way possible. Maybe he thinks everyone has to understand complex thoughts through analogies about their mother as he does? Who knows.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Wishing all mothers a Happy Mother's Day and to all our mothers who are no longer with us, this wish is for you too.


----------



## gracekelly

Genie27 said:


> That dress is so frumpy. Reminds me of the blue and white bedspread outfit.
> 
> Her hair does look more brown than the usual flat black. And yes, how best to merch the new chestnut mane than to have it cascading down one shoulder?


Perhaps she is trying to match up to the auburn hues in Archie's hair or the hair she is expecting on the baby.  I agree, it looks like she is wearing a bedspread, curtains or a tablecloth for a picnic table.  I would never suggest wearing a spaced out print for an image that is going to be presented on a large screen TV.  It looks ridiculous.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t know about last night, he said this is Dec., 2020:
> _Prince Harry has suggested the coronavirus pandemic could be a rebuke from nature for mistreating the environment.
> 
> He said: "Somebody said to me at the beginning of the pandemic, it's almost as though Mother Nature has sent us to our rooms for bad behaviour, to really take a moment and think about what we've done._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry: COVID-19 pandemic almost like 'Mother Nature sent us to our rooms'
> 
> 
> The royal has appeared for the first time since his wife, Meghan, revealed she had suffered a miscarriage this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com


I understand the point being made, but somehow it smacks of some medieval person preaching to  a crowd that the plague was sent because man is inherently evil.  What is Harry going to postulate if we have an earthquake?


----------



## gracekelly

Allisonfaye said:


> Yep. He's at it again. Not even that great at reading off a teleprompter.


I saw that.  Very choppy.  Maybe he needs glasses?  Or the language was too complicated.  Not enough 3 letter words.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The 2021 hits just keep on coming - the KY Derby winner has tested positive for …. drugs.
> Not disqualified yet,  awaiting results of second drug test.  Oooooo my.
> 
> 
> ETA:  Is Hazzie involved in this, too?


Seriously?  That was the first Derby I've ever actually watched!  I was visiting MIL and FIL and who knew (not even DH) that they were that into it.  That's disappointing.  Well, Haz has a new cause:  drugs.  Meg can now plagiarize Nancy Reagan and tell children everywhere, "Just say no!"


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> STRAIGHT FROM THE MOUTH OF ONE OF THE WORLD'S MOST HYPOCRITICAL, DIMWITTED ABUSERS: "We take so much from her, but we rarely give anything back."
> 
> Harry, here's looking at YOU and THE WIFE.


He says that about Mother Nature?  Hey Hazzy boy, you can say that about Father Charles as well:  We take so much from him, but we rarely give anything back.  Actually, we give nothing back!!


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps she is trying to match up to the auburn hues in Archie's hair or the hair she is expecting on the baby.  I agree, it looks like she is wearing a bedspread, curtains or a tablecloth for a picnic table.  I would never suggest wearing a spaced out print for an image that is going to be presented on a large screen TV.  It looks ridiculous.


She wanted show that she's "blooming". Symbolism and messages.... I don't hate it but I've seen a better outfit, still better than a dressing gown. 
I'm sure her hairdresser had a tough day: those extensions and taming the rest....It's unusually smooth and thick - screams fake. I like the colour, though.


----------



## queennadine

The more these hypocrites “call for” everyone getting “the jab” the more I’m digging my heels. No thanks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DeMonica said:


> She wanted show that she's "blooming". Symbolism and messages.... I don't hate it but I've seen a better outfit, still better than a dressing gown.
> I'm sure her hairdresser had a tough day: those extensions and taming the rest....It's unusually smooth and thick - screams fake. I like the colour, though.



Here’s the message — Cali’s state flower is a poppy.  Remember, when she wore the lemon dress, she made that lemon cake from her lemon tree. Well, guess what she’ll make now!


----------



## Allisonfaye

Maggie Muggins said:


> Big difference. Sarah may be silly or whatever you wish to call her, but she would never have deserted nor publicly dissed the RF. She always spoke highly of HMTQ and even stated on more than one occasion that HM is the most forgiving person she knew.



Some people know not to bite the hand that feeds them. MM, not so much.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hi and welcome aboard.
> 
> Well, she is known, at least to us, to plagiarize other authors' works.



Plagiarism is accepted now. Didn't you know?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the message — Cali’s state flower is a poppy.  Remember, when she wore the lemon dress, she made that lemon cake from her lemon tree. Well, guess what she’ll make now!



Opium?


----------



## rose60610

TC1 said:


> Did Harry double down on his comment of "Covid is mother natures way of punishing us" when the cameras were rolling? Asshat.



What? So is cancer "mother nature's way of punishing us" too? And all the other diseases? How about hurricanes, floods, and other disasters? Are they "to punish us"?  No wonder Harry married Meghan. You can't fit that amount of stupid into just one person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> What? So is cancer "mother nature's way of punishing us" too? And all the other diseases? How about hurricanes, floods, and other disasters? Are they "to punish us"?  No wonder Harry married Meghan. You can't fit that amount of stupid into just one person.



Exactly, and this is a person lecturing us about science and politics. Did he ever take a world history class?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Opium?



I have no idea about opium but won’t be surprised if they turn out to be growers of Cali poppies.  The drought-resistance flower grows easily in Cali, so maybe she will make bagels topped with poppyseeds?


----------



## Chanbal

DM provides the price tags. Please multiply by 1.4 if in the US or 1.15 if in other European countries. 










						Meghan Markle wore $1,690 Carolina Herrera dress for Vaxlive
					

Meghan Markle, 39, wore a stack of jewels worth thousands as she appeared from her $14 million Californian mansion yesterday for the VaxLive concert.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> What? So is cancer "mother nature's way of punishing us" too? And all the other diseases? How about hurricanes, floods, and other disasters? Are they "to punish us"?  No wonder Harry married Meghan. You can't fit that amount of stupid into just one person.


Scary about 2 children who will have them as role models.


----------



## csshopper

Allisonfaye said:


> Plagiarism is accepted now. Didn't you know?


A new synonym for plagiarism is "Meghan's Truths."


----------



## carmen56

Perhaps I’m in a minority of one, but I actually like the poppy dress.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Mother's Day to all! 
The lovely couple is also celebrating this day by getting Procter & Gamble to donate their products ... And of course, they made sure to have a Press release to advertise their (middle man?) donation  

_Journalist Omid Scobie also wrote on Twitter: "Archewell Foundation and @ProcterGamble have teamed up for #MothersDayUS to donate diapers, cleaning supplies and other essentials to support the moms and babies at @HarvestHomeLA —a residential program transforming the lives of pregnant homeless women and their children."_









						Pregnant Meghan Markle celebrates Mother’s Day with donation
					

MEGHAN Markle has celebrated Mother's Day with a donation to a homeless women's group.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

don't know if this has been posted....isn't she just wonderful?








						Meghan Markle Celebrates Mother's Day With Letter, Donation To Homeless Moms
					

A Los Angeles organization announced that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex donated essential supplies for homeless mothers in honor of Mother's Day.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Am I the only one, who doesn't like her hair? It looks too strait and tight around her face and then that ugly horse's tail hanging down her left side.


you mean her extensions?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Happy Mother's Day to all!
> The lovely couple is also celebrating this day by getting Procter & Gamble to donate their products ... And of course, they made sure to have a Press release to advertise their (middle man?) donation
> 
> _Journalist Omid Scobie also wrote on Twitter: "Archewell Foundation and @ProcterGamble have teamed up for #MothersDayUS to donate diapers, cleaning supplies and other essentials to support the moms and babies at @HarvestHomeLA —a residential program transforming the lives of pregnant homeless women and their children."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan Markle celebrates Mother’s Day with donation
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has celebrated Mother's Day with a donation to a homeless women's group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



What about the place in Dallas, the one that needed roof repairs? 
‘Oh wait, with this disaster-loving couple it is always the “one & done”.


----------



## rose60610

I don't mind the poppy dress either, but many times a pattern is hard to pull off when you're on screen. Huge flowy dresses are OK on some other people, they overwhelm me. On expectant mothers, I get it.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Happy Mother's Day to all!
> The lovely couple is also celebrating this day by getting Procter & Gamble to donate their products ... And of course, they made sure to have a Press release to advertise their (middle man?) donation
> 
> _Journalist Omid Scobie also wrote on Twitter: "Archewell Foundation and @ProcterGamble have teamed up for #MothersDayUS to donate diapers, cleaning supplies and other essentials to support the moms and babies at @HarvestHomeLA —a residential program transforming the lives of pregnant homeless women and their children."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan Markle celebrates Mother’s Day with donation
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has celebrated Mother's Day with a donation to a homeless women's group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


such a great couple of do-gooders.....this seems to be what they do - constant self-promotion


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Perhaps I’m in a minority of one, but I actually like the poppy dress.



That's fine, I won't fight you (or M) for it


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Happy Mother's Day to all!
> The lovely couple is also celebrating this day by getting Procter & Gamble to donate their products ... And of course, they made sure to have a Press release to advertise their (middle man?) donation
> 
> _Journalist Omid Scobie also wrote on Twitter: "Archewell Foundation and @ProcterGamble have teamed up for #MothersDayUS to donate diapers, cleaning supplies and other essentials to support the moms and babies at @HarvestHomeLA —a residential program transforming the lives of pregnant homeless women and their children."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnant Meghan Markle celebrates Mother’s Day with donation
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has celebrated Mother's Day with a donation to a homeless women's group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Sooo in other words, it would have NEVER occurred to Procter & Gamble to donate anything to any shelter of any sort without input from Meghan?  I'm not buying it. If Meghan were so "omg! powerful!" then why isn't she getting every company to do something for somebody? Companies do this all the freakin' time!!!! Without any input from The Heavily Pregnant One. Stay tuned for every time any company donates to any cause, Meghan will be front and center taking credit for it. Some celebrities and professional athletes raise millions for a cause. Meghan demands credit for making one damn phone call (if she ever did) or donating ten pairs of mittens and making it sound like she's single handedly saving the world. Yet she's out to destroy everyone's family ties, why, happy mother's day!!  Why can't she just shut up?


----------



## bag-mania

This is why the Queen was wise in posting her Archie birthday message. Charles also posted one but it didn’t meet with the stans approval and now he is getting slammed for it. We live in such an effed up world. There’s nothing out there as important as Meghan to these people.

*Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle. 

“Happy birthday to Archie, who turns two today,” he captioned a photo of himself with son Harry and grandson Archie. Followers immediately made note of Markle’s absence, as she was included in other dedications to the toddler posted by other family members.

“Sad! Very sad state of affairs when the supposed future king cuts the mother of his grandchild out of the photo with which he chooses to share,” wrote one critic. “Yes, they haven’t seen Archie for over 12mnths, but to not include Meghan… it’ll only add fuel to the fire of the tabloids. #Archie.”


“Lovely picture, but where is Meghan on the picture?” another added.

“Why would you not call him your grandson and why cut his mother off?” wrote yet another disappointed Tweeter. “You have made a lot of mistakes yourself or have you forgotten that. This is not helping at all.”


Other royals were sure to include pictures of Archie with his mother within their birthday wishes, including Prince William and the Queen herself.

“Wishing Archie Mountbatten-Windsor a very happy 2nd birthday today,” said a message posted on Queen Elizabeth II’s official “Royal Family” Twitter account, along with an emoji of a red balloon.

Prince Charles — who’s only seen grandson Archie twice since his birth — is reportedly “still fuming” over Meghan and Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, with a source telling Us Weekly, “Charles is still fuming about Harry throwing shade at him and the royal family in the big interview and won’t let it drop.”









						Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post
					

Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Mark…




					www.google.com


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Sooo in other words, it would have NEVER occurred to Procter & Gamble to donate anything to any shelter of any sort without input from Meghan?  I'm not buying it. If Meghan were so "omg! powerful!" then why isn't she getting every company to do something for somebody? Companies do this all the freakin' time!!!! Without any input from The Heavily Pregnant One. Stay tuned for every time any company donates to any cause, Meghan will be front and center taking credit for it. Some celebrities and professional athletes raise millions for a cause. Meghan demands credit for making one damn phone call (if she ever did) or donating ten pairs of mittens and making it sound like she's single handedly saving the world. Yet she's out to destroy everyone's family ties, why, happy mother's day!!  Why can't she just shut up?


can you imagine being them? sitting around scheming about what next to do to get some attention from the media?  I'm beginning to think she may have been better off as a working actress, even if Z-list.  and of course, Harry IMO would be better off as a royal in England than to be aimlessly living in CA, being led around by his Wife.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> you mean her extensions?


Yes. To me it looks like a horse tail that has been caught in the barn door too many times.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What about the place in Dallas, the one that needed roof repairs?
> ‘Oh wait, with this disaster-loving couple it is always the “one & done”.


they contributed to help repair the roof, right?  not to pay for the whole thing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine being them? sitting around scheming about what next to do to get some attention from the media?  I'm beginning to think she may have been better off as a working actress, even if Z-list.  and of course, Harry IMO would be better off as a royal in England than to be aimlessly living in CA, being led around by his Wife.



No. With all due respect, no, I can't imagine what it must be like being them. Now, I'll admit, I've never gotten a call from NASA to head the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION or contacted to take over the neurosurgery unit of a famous hospital, but NO, I can't imagine what it must be like to be so stupid as Meghan and Harry. Granted, Meghan had a few million from her Z-List days, but every pence and pound Harry has ever had came from his family who he and Meghan can't trash enough. And Meghan slobbered and glommed onto his supposed "racist" family just long enough to crank out a meal ticket and give them the heave-ho to move to "racist" America. She demands the world break down sobbing in pity for all her self-inflicted suffering. They wouldn't be living in a 19 bathroom mansion without the BRF's money. If I came into that kind of wealth I wouldn't be: 1. trashing the family whose wealth it is, or 2. pi$$ing it away then whining to Oprah about Charles cutting off the allowance to people who are damn near 40 years old who begged for independence and supposedly have $$ coming from Netflix, and whining how awful royal life was that I wanted to kill myself and an unborn child (but la-la-la-la so la-la-la-la happy now!), or 3. lecturing the world about the environment as I jet around on private planes and wear a million dollar wardrobe then lecture to young girls about how I can identify with their suffering, or 4. suing for privacy then popping up like a cockroach for every self-promo opportunity, including pimping dead soldiers for a cemetery photo op, or 5. knowing full well I can get away with crap because all I have to do is whip out the race card and media kiss my a$$.  

So, no, I can't imagine being them. But you're 100% right they must sit around and scheme about how to get attention from the media. "Aimless" is a great word for Harry. He threw his own family under the bus for an insecure, self-absorbed shameless pity monger. They're both deranged.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> No. With all due respect, no, I can't imagine what it must be like being them. Now, I'll admit, I've never gotten a call from NASA to head the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION or contacted to take over the neurosurgery unit of a famous hospital, but NO, I can't imagine what it must be like to be so stupid as Meghan and Harry. Granted, Meghan had a few million from her Z-List days, but every pence and pound Harry has ever had came from his family who he and Meghan can't trash enough. And Meghan slobbered and glommed onto his supposed "racist" family just long enough to crank out a meal ticket and give them the heave-ho to move to "racist" America. She demands the world break down sobbing in pity for all her self-inflicted suffering. They wouldn't be living in a 19 bathroom mansion without the BRF's money. If I came into that kind of wealth I wouldn't be: 1. trashing the family whose wealth it is, or 2. pi$$ing it away then whining to Oprah about Charles cutting off the allowance to people who are damn near 40 years old who begged for independence and supposedly have $$ coming from Netflix, and whining how awful royal life was that I wanted to kill myself and an unborn child (but la-la-la-la so la-la-la-la happy now!), or 3. lecturing the world about the environment as I jet around on private planes and wear a million dollar wardrobe then lecture to young girls about how I can identify with their suffering, or 4. suing for privacy then popping up like a cockroach for every self-promo opportunity, including pimping dead soldiers for a cemetery photo op, or 5. knowing full well I can get away with crap because all I have to do is whip out the race card and media kiss my a$$.
> 
> So, no, I can't imagine being them. But you're 100% right they must sit around and scheme about how to get attention from the media. "Aimless" is a great word for Harry. He threw his own family under the bus for an insecure, self-absorbed shameless pity monger. They're both deranged.


double-like for this post
esp the part about popping up like a cockroach....LOL


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the message — Cali’s state flower is a poppy.  Remember, when she wore the lemon dress, she made that lemon cake from her lemon tree. Well, guess what she’ll make now!


Isn't the poppy the source of opium and morphine?  Maybe she thinks it'll drug us all into submission?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> No. With all due respect, no, I can't imagine what it must be like being them. Now, I'll admit, I've never gotten a call from NASA to head the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION or contacted to take over the neurosurgery unit of a famous hospital, but NO, I can't imagine what it must be like to be so stupid as Meghan and Harry. Granted, Meghan had a few million from her Z-List days, but every pence and pound Harry has ever had came from his family who he and Meghan can't trash enough. And Meghan slobbered and glommed onto his supposed "racist" family just long enough to crank out a meal ticket and give them the heave-ho to move to "racist" America. She demands the world break down sobbing in pity for all her self-inflicted suffering. They wouldn't be living in a 19 bathroom mansion without the BRF's money. If I came into that kind of wealth I wouldn't be: 1. trashing the family whose wealth it is, or 2. pi$$ing it away then whining to Oprah about Charles cutting off the allowance to people who are damn near 40 years old who begged for independence and supposedly have $$ coming from Netflix, and whining how awful royal life was that I wanted to kill myself and an unborn child (but la-la-la-la so la-la-la-la happy now!), or 3. lecturing the world about the environment as I jet around on private planes and wear a million dollar wardrobe then lecture to young girls about how I can identify with their suffering, or 4. suing for privacy then popping up like a cockroach for every self-promo opportunity, including pimping dead soldiers for a cemetery photo op, or 5. knowing full well I can get away with crap because all I have to do is whip out the race card and media kiss my a$$.
> 
> So, no, I can't imagine being them. But you're 100% right they must sit around and scheme about how to get attention from the media. "Aimless" is a great word for Harry. He threw his own family under the bus for an insecure, self-absorbed shameless pity monger. They're both deranged.


Now that I'm thinking about it, I think what they want is to be American royals or royals in America.  But we fought a revolution to be free from all that.  we don't need them to worship.  and she esp has no business using that title IMO.  they wanted to be free, so be free - you have done nothing to earn the title and now you are actively doing things to damage the people who bestowed it on you.  Shame.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Chanbal said:


> Journalist Omid Scobie also wrote on Twitter: "Archewell Foundation and @ProcterGamble have teamed up for #MothersDayUS to donate diapers, cleaning supplies and other essentials to support the moms and babies at @HarvestHomeLA —a residential program transforming the lives of pregnant homeless women and their children."



So does this mean MM asked Procter and Gamble to donate some of their products to this small charity on Mothers day to help boost the company's profile, rather than the foundation paid for the products as a donation to the charity.

I think if the donation was made from the foundation using their money then that is wonderful, especially since it is a small local charity. If she just got the company to donate in exchange for PR, well that's kinda sad.


----------



## sdkitty

IDK but I doubt they bought stuff from P&G and then donated it.  If that was the case they probably wouldn't have even given any credit to P&G.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Isn't the poppy the source of opium and morphine?  Maybe she thinks it'll drug us all into submission?



There are different varieties  of the poppy plant. The Cali version is not used for opium.  


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschscholzia_californica#Uses


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> they contributed to help repair the roof, right?  not to pay for the whole thing?



IMO the sincere philanthropists choose fewer organizations to give their full support to. The consistent, steady donations make the difference in the long run.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine being them? sitting around scheming about what next to do to get some attention from the media?  I'm beginning to think she may have been better off as a working actress, even if Z-list.  and of course, Harry IMO would be better off as a royal in England than to be aimlessly living in CA, being led around by his Wife.


No, I see her sitting around scheming with her Hollywood advisers and Sunshine, and H mindlessly nodding his head at everything. Pretty sure they have the next two years planned out to maximize every PR and photo op, efficiently use her sock puppets and mobilize her stans.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Now that I'm thinking about it, I think what they want is to be American royals or royals in America.  But we fought a revolution to be free from all that.  we don't need them to worship.  and she esp has no business using that title IMO.  they wanted to be free, so be free - you have done nothing to earn the title and now you are actively doing things to damage the people who bestowed it on you.  Shame.


It was obvious from the way he came out on the stage that he really loves the attention and adulation.  The fact is that he has done nothing to warrant either.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> No, I see her sitting around scheming with her Hollywood advisers and Sunshine, and H mindlessly nodding his head at everything. Pretty sure they have the next two years planned out to maximize every PR and photo op, efficiently use her sock puppets and mobilize her stans.


I think this is true and the PR people are happy to do it as long as the checks clear the bank.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It was obvious from the way he came out on the stage that he really loves the attention and adulation.  The fact is that he has done nothing to warrant either.


I couldn't watch.  I saw him twice, each time for 30 seconds or less.  he's pretty much respulsive to me now


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> No, I see her sitting around scheming with her Hollywood advisers and Sunshine, and H mindlessly nodding his head at everything. Pretty sure they have the next two years planned out to maximize every PR and photo op, efficiently use her sock puppets and mobilize her stans.


mobilize the stans LOL....that's pathetic when you think about it.  makes me wonder what these sunshine people actually think of H&M


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> mobilize the stans LOL....that's pathetic when you think about it.  *makes me wonder what these sunshine people actually think of H&M*


Just a job to them. They won't be shelling out five bucks for Archie's birthday.
If you look at it from a purely theoretical POV, they might even see it as a very satisfying challenge: selling a couple of grifters with no credibility and building up the promo till they are seen as pseudo-experts and pseudo-leaders in any ongoing hot topic. To keep the momentum going and stay in the public eye, the Harkles will have to latch on to whatever is the next crusade. Hence the scattershot approach of their charitable activities.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But that is because Kate Middleton is a nobody. Just the boring future queen of the UK, not an internationally adored woke influenster duchess.



More like America adored woke influence duchess. None outside of the US gives a **** what she says. Especially not on the eastern side of the world.

Over the past few years, Hollywood has become lesser and lesser of importance. They all live inside their big hypocritical vacuum bubble and think the world still looks to them and wants to hear what they say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Kaka_bobo said:


> More like America adored woke influence duchess. None outside of the US gives a **** what she says. Especially not on the eastern side of the world.
> 
> Over the past few years, Hollywood has become lesser and lesser of importance. They all live inside their big hypocritical vacuum bubble and think the world still looks to them and wants to hear what they say.


I wouldn't even include them with Hollywood celebs...they are in a class by themselves....and its not high class IMO


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> such a great couple of do-gooders.....this seems to be what they do - constant self-promotion



They created a new way to make donations, it's call 'team up donations.' Others give the money or goods, Harry and lovely wife do the press releases and collect the credit via Arch$w$ll. All this without the need of spending a cent, and probably with tax benefits...


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Sooo in other words, it would have NEVER occurred to Procter & Gamble to donate anything to any shelter of any sort without input from Meghan?  I'm not buying it. If Meghan were so "omg! powerful!" then why isn't she getting every company to do something for somebody? Companies do this all the freakin' time!!!! Without any input from The Heavily Pregnant One. Stay tuned for every time any company donates to any cause, Meghan will be front and center taking credit for it. Some celebrities and professional athletes raise millions for a cause. Meghan demands credit for making one damn phone call (if she ever did) or donating ten pairs of mittens and making it sound like she's single handedly saving the world. Yet she's out to destroy everyone's family ties, why, happy mother's day!!  Why can't she just shut up?


Procter & Gamble has been donating to several organizations. H and his wife are just taking credit...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> This is why the Queen was wise in posting her Archie birthday message. Charles also posted one but it didn’t meet with the stans approval and now he is getting slammed for it. We live in such an effed up world. There’s nothing out there as important as Meghan to these people.
> 
> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> “Happy birthday to Archie, who turns two today,” he captioned a photo of himself with son Harry and grandson Archie. Followers immediately made note of Markle’s absence, as she was included in other dedications to the toddler posted by other family members.
> 
> “Sad! Very sad state of affairs when the supposed future king cuts the mother of his grandchild out of the photo with which he chooses to share,” wrote one critic. “Yes, they haven’t seen Archie for over 12mnths, but to not include Meghan… it’ll only add fuel to the fire of the tabloids. #Archie.”
> 
> 
> “Lovely picture, but where is Meghan on the picture?” another added.
> 
> “Why would you not call him your grandson and why cut his mother off?” wrote yet another disappointed Tweeter. “You have made a lot of mistakes yourself or have you forgotten that. This is not helping at all.”
> 
> 
> Other royals were sure to include pictures of Archie with his mother within their birthday wishes, including Prince William and the Queen herself.
> 
> “Wishing Archie Mountbatten-Windsor a very happy 2nd birthday today,” said a message posted on Queen Elizabeth II’s official “Royal Family” Twitter account, along with an emoji of a red balloon.
> 
> Prince Charles — who’s only seen grandson Archie twice since his birth — is reportedly “still fuming” over Meghan and Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, with a source telling Us Weekly, “Charles is still fuming about Harry throwing shade at him and the royal family in the big interview and won’t let it drop.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post
> 
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Mark…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


They also criticized Will and Kate's picture. QE was the only one that was spared. They want us to believe they have strong ties to QE. I'm stating to believe that their stans get instructions on what to criticize from their queen...


----------



## Chanbal

Shopaholic2021 said:


> So does this mean MM asked Procter and Gamble to donate some of their products to this small charity on Mothers day to help boost the company's profile, rather than the foundation paid for the products as a donation to the charity.
> 
> I think if the donation was made from the foundation using their money then that is wonderful, especially since it is a small local charity. If she just got the company to donate in exchange for PR, well that's kinda sad.


Procter & Gamble is well established and donates to several organizations. Arch$w$ll is just taking credit imo.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> They also criticized Will and Kate's picture. QE was the only one that was spared. They want us to believe they have strong ties *BONDS* to QE. I'm stating to believe that their stans get instructions on what to criticize from their queen...


It's always super glue with those two.

I think they have a few chief stans who set the ball in motion for them.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> They also criticized Will and Kate's picture. QE was the only one that was spared. They want us to believe they have strong ties to QE. I'm stating to believe that their stans get instructions on what to criticize from their queen...



I think they’re doing it without Meghan’s direction. The top stans want to do whatever they can think of to help her. If they can make her successful then it justifies to themselves their obsessive devotion IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

He asks an excellent question! Why?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> It's always super glue with those two.
> 
> I think they have a few chief stans who set the ball in motion for them.



In this day and age, it is entirely possible someone is running a _bot farm _for them. They have done it before.
From 2019








						Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
					

A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## rose60610

Are M&H's "stans" actually hired bots to make them look good to somebody (like maybe Netflix?)?  I'll concede they do have a few legit stans, the kind of people who are bleeding hearts, believe anybody's crap about anything and think Santa Claus could be real. Also the narrative pushing rags that make a buck only if they promote division and chaos.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Are M&H's "stans" actually hired bots to make them look good to somebody (like maybe Netflix?)?  I'll concede they do have a few legit stans, the kind of people who are bleeding hearts, believe anybody's crap about anything and think Santa Claus could be real. Also the narrative pushing rags that make a buck only if they promote division and chaos.


Maybe that's why the stan's crowdfunding for their mortgage failed. Bots don't have money to donate.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Maybe that's why the stan's crowdfunding for their mortgage failed. Bots don't have money to donate.



Interesting comment. I wonder if Netflix and Spotify are thinking the same thing??


----------



## CarryOn2020

Never underestimate their power to deceive us, especially after the disastrous OW interview.
With them, we must verify every.single.thing.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Maybe that's why the stan's crowdfunding for their mortgage failed. Bots don't have money to donate.



These stans likely model themselves after Meghan’s example. They aren’t going to donate their own money. They’ll just make a lot of noise and hype to try to make others give away their money.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

carmen56 said:


> Perhaps I’m in a minority of one, but I actually like the poppy dress.



Somehow now when I see her photos I wonder how many doses of vaccines each designer dress can pay for. It’s like a subconscious thing.

Also, the hair even with extensions can’t compare to Kate’s beautiful tresses. If she wants to be a WOC rep, she should let her naturally kinky hair shine. Stop straightening!


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> In this day and age, it is entirely possible someone is running a _bot farm _for them. They have done it before.
> From 2019
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca


Fascinating.

So is this part of Sunshine Sachs' workload or is it something Meg would do on her own. I'm thinking this is something SS does.


----------



## csshopper

Kaka_bobo said:


> More like America adored woke influence duchess. None outside of the US gives a **** what she says. Especially not on the eastern side of the world.
> 
> Over the past few years, Hollywood has become lesser and lesser of importance. They all live inside their big hypocritical vacuum bubble and think the world still looks to them and wants to hear what they say.


I am happy and relieved common sense and ethics exist somewhere. 
This is a genuine statement, not sarcasm or snark.


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> DM provides the price tags. Please multiply by 1.4 if in the US or 1.15 if in other European countries.
> View attachment 5079234
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore $1,690 Carolina Herrera dress for Vaxlive
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, 39, wore a stack of jewels worth thousands as she appeared from her $14 million Californian mansion yesterday for the VaxLive concert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


new Extensions —— $4750.62 —- priceless!


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> From: The Hill https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...iticized-for-appearing-to-link-mother-natures
> 
> “Someone said to me right at the beginning of the pandemic, it’s almost as though Mother Nature sends us to our rooms for bad behavior, to really take a moment and think about what we’ve done,” he said in a video interview with the new streaming service WaterBear Network, which is focused on climate and conservation documentaries."
> 
> "It certainly reminded me, as it's probably has reminded all of us, how interconnected we all are, not just as people but through nature," continued the prince, who is known for his environmental activism. "We take so much from her,* but we rarely give anything back."*



"....You do actually, plastic balloons"


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> Are M&H's "stans" actually hired bots to make them look good to somebody (like maybe Netflix?)?  I'll concede they do have a few legit stans, the kind of people who are bleeding hearts, believe anybody's crap about anything and think Santa Claus could be real. Also the narrative pushing rags that make a buck only if they promote division and chaos.



I wonder if she had these stans when she was just a Z list actress, before she met H??


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Fascinating.
> 
> So is this part of Sunshine Sachs' workload or is it something Meg would do on her own. I'm thinking this is something SS does.


Should be SS service. They were found previously to be cleaning up their clients' profiles in Wikipedia, out with the Yucks!, in with the Ooh!

I read that that during her time with the BRF, H's wife was still using her Hollywood advisers, including her agent, lawyer and SS. Meaning the advisers she had before she became linked to H. Apart from the fact that she was never a Hollywood star, it must be costly to keep people like SS on a retainer when she was a minor celebrity. Gives credence to @QueenofWrapDress's speculation about a "powerful figure hiding in the shadow_"._


----------



## DeMonica

Allisonfaye said:


> Some people know not to bite the hand that feeds them. MM, not so much.


I think Fergie has learnt her lesson after all. I doubt that HMTQ would let her live on the grounds of Windsor Castle if she acted like MM. BTW is SF still together with Randy Andy?


----------



## carmen56

DeMonica said:


> I think Fergie has learnt her lesson after all. I doubt that HMTQ would let her live on the grounds of Windsor Castle if she acted like MM. BTW is SF still together with Randy Andy?



They are still living together in Royal Lodge at Windsor.  They might as well remarry now that Prince Philip is gone.


----------



## DeMonica

rose60610 said:


> What? So is cancer "mother nature's way of punishing us" too? And all the other diseases? How about hurricanes, floods, and other disasters? Are they "to punish us"?  No wonder Harry married Meghan. You can't fit that amount of stupid into just one person.


While some diseases are eradicated by modern medicines, some diseases are definitely environment related. My late father who was an ob/gyn, he had more breast cancer patients from a small town of 15 000 with a chemical plant, than in the whole area of 600 000 altogether.
Deforestation which is done by humans is just one of the many things we do to change the environment. That activity alone can cause climate change, desertification, landslides or flooding. Of course, there are many other human activities, too, which can be directly linked to natural disasters.
I don't want to turn into Greta Thunberg or crawl back into a cave and become a hunter/gatherer, because I still hope to be able to travel by planes time to time, but we definitely have to change how we treat the environment because we bring upon ourselves even bigger problems we ever thought.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> Procter & Gamble has been donating to several organizations. H and his wife are just taking credit...
> 
> View attachment 5079379



All companies do this stuff. My husband works for a major corporation and they do this stuff all the time. Maybe next time they make a $1m donation, I will try to take credit for it.


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> All companies do this stuff. My husband works for a major corporation and they do this stuff all the time. Maybe next time they make a $1m donation, I will try to take credit for it.


Do it quick, before the Harkles try to move in on it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> All companies do this stuff. My husband works for a major corporation and they do this stuff all the time. Maybe next time they make a $1m donation, I will try to take credit for it.



Now let's not be unfair. She wrote a letter. I wonder if she put in the faux calligraphy or if it was typed.


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I wonder if she had these stans when she was just a Z list actress, before she met H??


The paid ones? I think she had a few. She couldn't afford more at that time.


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> All companies do this stuff. My husband works for a major corporation and they do this stuff all the time. Maybe next time they make a $1m donation, I will try to take credit for it.


It is the Angelina Jolie effect ... She was a bad girl in the day until she adopted her first then changed her tune and started good things,  donating and doing charitable works eg for UN 
It worked amazingly  ... she became St Angelina and was even recognized by QEII
After that, charitable works were added to all Hollywood celebrity playbooks and also to major corp. mission statements
Nowadays every company/celebrity overtly backs some charity, that is a new thing in the last 15-20 years 
It is not that is was NEVER done before ... companies did contribute (mine gave to United Way eons ago...) but it was quiet, employees were encouraged to donate too ... but there was never a BIG SPLASH in the press (there was no social media)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> I wonder if she had these stans when she was just a Z list actress, before she met H??



She probably had a few regular fans who watched Suits and liked her, but stans are a different breed. I bet virtually all of her vocal, support-her-no-matter-what fans discovered Meghan when she got engaged to Harry.


----------



## Chanbal

Racially abused in the comfort of their Montecito 16 (or 19) bathroom-mansion... Really? Are they asking QE and Charles for more money after calling them racists without providing any evidence?  This is sad!


----------



## Chanbal

The title says everything... 


_Phil Dampier, author of Royally Suited: Harry and Meghan In Their Own Words, said they often leaked news to the media via their spokesperson rather than announcing it themselves. He claimed they did this to paint a flattering picture of themselves on social media but it instead looked “manipulated and contrived”.









						Meghan Markle and Harry accused of relentless ‘PR stunts’ to look ‘good on social media’
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry turn every opportunity into a publicity stunt so they "look good on social media," a royal expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## rose60610

DeMonica said:


> While some diseases are eradicated by modern medicines, some diseases are definitely environment related. My late father who was an ob/gyn, he had more breast cancer patients from a small town of 15 000 with a chemical plant, than in the whole area of 600 000 altogether.
> Deforestation which is done by humans is just one of the many things we do to change the environment. That activity alone can cause climate change, desertification, landslides or flooding. Of course, there are many other human activities, too, which can be directly linked to natural disasters.
> I don't want to turn into Greta Thunberg or crawl back into a cave and become a hunter/gatherer, because I still hope to be able to travel by planes time to time, but we definitely have to change how we treat the environment because we bring upon ourselves even bigger problems we ever thought.



I totally agree with your statements. Harry said in so many words that Covid is Mother Nature getting back at us. Covid is a disease that could have been contained but wasn't and I'm in no mood to explain or go on for 800 pages about that. The good news is that the U.S. Army is working on a vaccine to cover not only Covid but its variants as well. I hope they succeed, of course. Bottom line: Harry is in no position to make any sweeping statements about anything. He has become a joke. And his wife is a self-pitying grifter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Racially abused in the comfort of their Montecito 16 (or 19) bathroom-mansion... Really? Are they asking QE and Charles for more money after calling them racists without providing any evidence?  This is sad!




Besides the ridiculousness: your selling point is not really strong if I'd have to actually click the link to find out what exactly we're petitioning for. Amateurs.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think Sharon is quite liberal herself, right? Maher makes sense since he's the king of saying outrageous things (sort of like Piers) and not believing in cancel culture so it should be a sympathetic crowd.


I watched the Bill Mahr interview last night.  How refreshing to see an American TV personality say what he said.  Basically he said -- so if you don't agree with Meghan Markle you're a racist?  And his (liberal I assume) audience seemed really welcoming to Sharon.  Wish more people had the guts to challenge H&M.  Sharon also said Harry is the extreme version of white privilege living in his mansion.  Good interview.  I think she was smart to do this.  Interesting, I didn't see ET or any of the other shows reporting on the interview.

edit - didn't see any TV show covering this but did find this story on the Entertainment website








						Sharon Osbourne to Bill Maher on 'The Talk' exit: 'Disagreeing with someone does not make you racist'
					

Sharon Osbourne is speaking out about her exit from 'The Talk' after an on-air dust-up over Piers Morgan's remarks about Meghan Markle.




					ew.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Luxembourg Palace has released more pictures and a video of Prince Charles celebrating his first birthday today. Prince Charles 
I think he's just adorable.


----------



## Chanbal

Honesty has a 'new meaning' in our 'new normal... 



_According to a statement, *Harry and Oprah will 'guide honest discussions about mental health* and emotional well-being' while opening up about 'their own mental health journeys and struggles' throughout the series._









						Harry warns majority of people 'carry some form of unresolved trauma'
					

The Duke of Sussex , 36, is the co-creator and executive producer on The Me You Can't See, a new programme with the US chat show queen which will start on the streaming service on May 21.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> Racially abused in the comfort of their Montecito 16 (or 19) bathroom-mansion... Really? Are they asking QE and Charles for more money after calling them racists without providing any evidence?  This is sad!



Geezus! This is just incredible! Ludicrous and pathetic. Utterly tone deaf. I can't even....


----------



## Betty-Lou

Allisonfaye said:


> All companies do this stuff. My husband works for a major corporation and they do this stuff all the time. Maybe next time they make a $1m donation, I will try to take credit for it.



It's nice to see -Amazon- has grown another arm, in order to pat themselves on the back. One of the worst offenders in the growing chorus of self-congratulatory ads on TV, and what is the point?

They tell you nothing about their business, other than why the should get a Nobel prize for Self-Promotion.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The title says everything...
> View attachment 5079572
> 
> _Phil Dampier, author of Royally Suited: Harry and Meghan In Their Own Words, said they often leaked news to the media via their spokesperson rather than announcing it themselves. He claimed they did this to paint a flattering picture of themselves on social media but it instead looked “manipulated and contrived”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry accused of relentless ‘PR stunts’ to look ‘good on social media’
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry turn every opportunity into a publicity stunt so they "look good on social media," a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


well, the royal correspondents here on the PF could have told everyone that - right @Maggie Muggins ?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the ridiculousness: your selling point is not really strong if I'd have to actually click the link to find out what exactly we're petitioning for. Amateurs.


Some other duchess posted this. I would like to read about the miracle pill, but I don't have access to this tabloid.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Honesty has a 'new meaning' in our 'new normal...
> 
> View attachment 5079594
> 
> _According to a statement, *Harry and Oprah will 'guide honest discussions about mental health* and emotional well-being' while opening up about 'their own mental health journeys and struggles' throughout the series._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry warns majority of people 'carry some form of unresolved trauma'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex , 36, is the co-creator and executive producer on The Me You Can't See, a new programme with the US chat show queen which will start on the streaming service on May 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Funny how instead of having actual medical/psychiatric professionals to have a serious, informative discussion of mental health issues, Oprah went the "celebrities are f*cked up too" route to get the word out. I realize there are some people who won't watch anything unless it is hidden under the guise of entertainment, but I doubt this show's message will reach them anyway.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Funny how instead of having actual medical/psychiatric professionals to have a serious, informative discussion of mental health issues, Oprah went the "celebrities are f*cked up too" route to get the word out. I realize there are some people who won't watch anything unless it is hidden under the guise of entertainment, but I doubt would show will reach them anyway.
> [/QUOTE
> how many people watch Apple TV anyway?  this is one of my big frustrations - entertainment is broken up into so many outlets you can't get everything unless you pay for several things - HBO, HBO Max, Netflix, Amazon, Hulu.  I guess some people do this but we pay a lot for cable TV and we're not gonna pay for all of these things on top of it.
> So, again, how many people are going to watch this?  And if I understand it correctly, O is supposed to talk about her mental health struggles?  up to now as far as I know, she has talked about being molested and getting pregnant as a young girl.  I guess that could make for mental health problems.  Don't know of anything else but maybe she's going to reveal that she has suffered from depression.  doesn't seem the type but what do I know?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Some other duchess posted this. I would like to read about the miracle pill, but I don't have access to this tabloid.




I mean...every narcissist needs an enabler.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Funny how instead of having actual medical/psychiatric professionals to have a serious, informative discussion of mental health issues, Oprah went the "celebrities are f*cked up too" route to get the word out. I realize there are some people who won't watch anything unless it is hidden under the guise of entertainment, but I doubt would show will reach them anyway.


Ignorance is bliss! I was happier when I was an idealist and didn't know about the levels of hypocrisy and greed of these people.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Honesty has a 'new meaning' in our 'new normal...
> 
> View attachment 5079594
> 
> _According to a statement, *Harry and Oprah will 'guide honest discussions about mental health* and emotional well-being' while opening up about 'their own mental health journeys and struggles' throughout the series._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry warns majority of people 'carry some form of unresolved trauma'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex , 36, is the co-creator and executive producer on The Me You Can't See, a new programme with the US chat show queen which will start on the streaming service on May 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> how many people watch Apple TV anyway? this is one of my big frustrations - entertainment is broken up into so many outlets you can't get everything unless you pay for several things - HBO, HBO Max, Netflix, Amazon, Hulu. I guess some people do this but we pay a lot for cable TV and we're not gonna pay for all of these things on top of it.
> So, again, how many people are going to watch this? And if I understand it correctly, O is supposed to talk about her mental health struggles? up to now as far as I know, she has talked about being molested and getting pregnant as a young girl. I guess that could make for mental health problems. Don't know of anything else but maybe she's going to reveal that she has suffered from depression. doesn't seem the type but what do I know?



I'll be surprised if Oprah goes into her past. The show will address mental health issues in that celebrity way, where each celeb gets to talk about how he/she was troubled once but _everything is all better now_. It will be all about encouragement and reducing stigma but don't expect any one of them to be brave enough to admit they still have mental problems to this day.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...every narcissist needs an enabler.


and will throw everyone under the bus until she/he gets her/his billions...


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> too bad the cousin doesn't know about birth control....I'm an advcate of choice but hate to see women use abortion as birth control.....and a grown woman who has a couple kids should def know better



I agree with you, I hate that a grown ass woman AND man can't use birth control. They're both to blame and it infuriates me that they both think abortion = birth control method. They live in the US and have easy access to birth control, and he could just get a vasectomy. She actually laughs about the fact that she has had so many abortions, make me sick and sad.

I also believe in choice and that abortions should be legal but abortions shouldn't be a method of birth control, as my cousins think they are.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree with you, I hate that a grown ass woman AND man can't use birth control. They're both to blame and it infuriates me that they both think abortion = birth control method. They live in the US and have easy access to birth control, and he could just get a vasectomy. She actually laughs about the fact that she has had so many abortions, make me sick and sad.
> 
> I also believe in choice and that abortions should be legal but abortions shouldn't be a method of birth control, as my cousins think they are.


that's disgusting.....and not good for her health either.  They must be very ignorant to go around laughing about this.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> that's disgusting.....and not good for her health either.  They must be very ignorant to go around laughing about this.



No, she's just not a responsible adult. She is educated and is well aware of birth control options yet chooses to take her chances all the time. I feel sorry for her children, they really have poor role models.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> No, she's just not a responsible adult. She is educated and is well aware of birth control options yet chooses to take her chances all the time. I feel sorry for her children, they really have poor role models.


yes, I've seen this behavior with teens but for a mother of a couple of kids to do this and actually talk about it socially.....just wrong.....freedom of choice is good but using abortion as birth controls is wrong....you and I agree on that


----------



## papertiger

DeMonica said:


> While some diseases are eradicated by modern medicines, some diseases are definitely environment related. My late father who was an ob/gyn, he had more breast cancer patients from a small town of 15 000 with a chemical plant, than in the whole area of 600 000 altogether.
> Deforestation which is done by humans is just one of the many things we do to change the environment. That activity alone can cause climate change, desertification, landslides or flooding. Of course, there are many other human activities, too, which can be directly linked to natural disasters.
> I don't want to turn into Greta Thunberg or crawl back into a cave and become a hunter/gatherer, because I still hope to be able to travel by planes time to time, but we definitely have to change how we treat the environment because we bring upon ourselves even bigger problems we ever thought.



It's one thing for Greta or Jane to talk about the environment IMO, a whole different continent for JCMH who hasn't a clue what he's talking about.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> It's one thing for Greta or Jane to talk about the environment IMO, a whole different continent for JCMH who hasn't a clue what he's talking about.


I think Greta is awesome....so passionate and really works for what she believes in


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'll be surprised if Oprah goes into her past. The show will address mental health issues in that celebrity way, where each celeb gets to talk about how he/she was troubled once but _everything is all better now_. It will be all about encouragement and reducing stigma but don't expect any one of them to be brave enough to admit they still have mental problems to this day.


IDK and I won't be watching but I think it could be possible for someone like Lady Gaga to tell the truth, whatever that is
I've been somewhat a fan of O and thought her speech at the Oscars a few years ago was very inspiring but this alliance of hers and Gayle's with Meghan is turning me off


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Who is the target audience for _The Bench_?
> 
> 1) The stans who buy anything connected to Meghan because she is their QUEEN!! YAAAAAAS!
> 2) Young incredibly hormonal mothers who burst into tears over sad commercials, sad songs, sad TV shows. Only in that specifically overemotional state could any woman enjoy reading horrible verse about dads and kids.
> 
> Who is not going to enjoy reading it?
> 
> 1) Children
> 2) Fathers whose turn it is to read a bedtime story.



It's not about an audience or even sales. It's about including 'author' on her resume.


----------



## Chanbal

Still on Mother's Day Celebration. No idea who Artemiss is, but the drawings are amazing. I wish I could draw like this...


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Luxembourg Palace has released more pictures and a video of Prince Charles celebrating his first birthday today. Prince Charles
> I think he's just adorable.
> 
> View attachment 5079586



Delightful photo! You mean it's possible to share a photo of a one year old that likely didn't take hours of prepping and posing or numerous filters to produce artsy sepia images? And this little guy is wearing real clothes, not underwear! And his cake probably isn't organic vegan eggless soy oat latte either!  Bbbbbbuuuut, something's missing...hmmm...OH! Who made all the clothes everyone is wearing? Who's the baker who made the cake? What is the symbolism behind the blue and white striped candle? What fruit purveyor supplied the raspberries? What brand knife was used to cut the cake? And most importantly--WHERE CAN I BUY ALL THIS??    What a happy non-contrived family photo! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> it must be costly to keep people like SS on a retainer when she was a minor celebrity. Gives credence to @QueenofWrapDress's speculation about a "powerful figure hiding in the shadow_"._


Who are we thinking it is?


Chanbal said:


> Honesty has a 'new meaning' in our 'new normal...
> 
> View attachment 5079594
> 
> _According to a statement, *Harry and Oprah will 'guide honest discussions about mental health* and emotional well-being' while opening up about 'their own mental health journeys and struggles' throughout the series._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry warns majority of people 'carry some form of unresolved trauma'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex , 36, is the co-creator and executive producer on The Me You Can't See, a new programme with the US chat show queen which will start on the streaming service on May 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What a dope.  Couldn't even think to get help for his worldly-wise, suicidal wife.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Who are we thinking it is?



I personally have no clue and I'm not usually into conspiracy theories, but I just can't wrap my mind around a virtual nobody showing up, snagging Harry and suddenly ruling the world. I mean, even as Harry's wife, she isn't all that (because he is not all that...#6 who is not on speaking terms with the family that makes him interesting to begin with), she isn't that rich, she doesn't hold any real power. So seeing people and organisations react to her the way they do...I just don't know. 

I think what tipped me over the edge was the fired professor. That woman ain't no Piers and she didn't even say anything hostile, yet was told to never mention Duchess Disney, ever.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally have no clue and I'm not usually into conspiracy theories, but I just can't wrap my mind around a virtual nobody showing up, snagging Harry and suddenly ruling the world. I mean, even as Harry's wife, she isn't all that (because he is not all that...#6 who is not on speaking terms with the family that makes him interesting to begin with), she isn't that rich, she doesn't hold any real power. So seeing people and organisations react to her the way they do...I just don't know.
> 
> I think what tipped me over the edge was the fired professor. That woman ain't no Piers and she didn't even say anything hostile, yet was told to never mention Duchess Disney, ever.


I think she just came along at the right moment in time for a WOC and she's taking full advantage of it


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I think she just came along at the right moment in time for a WOC and she's taking full advantage of it



‘With the help of their powerful friends


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think what tipped me over the edge was the fired professor. That woman ain't no Piers and she didn't even say anything hostile, yet was told to never mention Duchess Disney, ever.



There is no place more intolerant of other viewpoints than a university campus. If you are not in lockstep agreement with the prevailing opinions then you’d better fake it or you will be shut down. They don’t want to hear anything that opposes their view, that goes for students and professors.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘With the help of their powerful friends


sadly this whole thing is making me look at Oprah and Gayle a bit differently.  the other night I was watching the HBO documentary about Tina Turner.  at the end, a now elderly Tina was making an appearance at the opening of the Broadway show about her life.  Oprah was hanging onto her arm.  Now I think it's quite possible that she and O are good friends but after what's gone on lately I found mysefel feeling like Oprah was maybe taking advantage of that moment.  And a smiling Gayle was shown posing on the red carpet and sitting in the audience.  where O goes, Gayle goes.
For many years, Gayle was mainly known as O's BFF.  Now she has a legit career of her own and I think this whole H&M thing is tainting her credibility.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> sadly this whole thing is making me look at Oprah and Gayle a bit differently.  the other night I was watching the HBO documentary about Tina Turner.  at the end, a now elderly Tina was making an appearance at the opening of the Broadway show about her life.  Oprah was hanging onto her arm.  Now I think it's quite possible that she and O are good friends but after what's gone on lately I found mysefel feeling like Oprah was maybe taking advantage of that moment.  And a smiling Gayle was shown posing on the red carpet and sitting in the audience.  where O goes, Gayle goes.
> For many years, Gayle was mainly known as O's BFF.  Now she has a legit career of her own and I think this whole H&M thing is tainting her credibility.



I too see Oprah differently now. She appears to be a predator, and it was surprising to find out that she had actually been trying to get Meghan to do an interview just before the wedding. She must have known that it is not possible or linked that someone entering the royal family would be allowed to a candid interview. She had tried to get an interview with Diana before but was told to go away. I have a feeling Oprah may have used the WOC angle to bond with her. She definitely took advantage of her Meghans mom by befriending her when she was dating the prince. There is no other reason for her to bond with a random woman that moves in different circles. Oprah was using her mom as a way to get it, and she got it in the end.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Honesty has a 'new meaning' in our 'new normal...
> 
> View attachment 5079594
> 
> _According to a statement, *Harry and Oprah will 'guide honest discussions about mental health* and emotional well-being' while opening up about 'their own mental health journeys and struggles' throughout the series._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry warns majority of people 'carry some form of unresolved trauma'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex , 36, is the co-creator and executive producer on The Me You Can't See, a new programme with the US chat show queen which will start on the streaming service on May 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I can’t say strongly enough how much I despise Harry and Oprah with their false portrayal of someone competent to give advice on these subjects.   JCMH is swiftly rising to the same level of garbage as his wife.
ETA - read this to my DH and he said I must have some ‘unresolved trauma issues’.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I too see Oprah differently now. She appears to be a predator, and it was surprising to find out that she had actually been trying to get Meghan to do an interview just before the wedding. She must have known that it is not possible or linked that someone entering the royal family would be allowed to a candid interview. She had tried to get an interview with Diana before but was told to go away. I have a feeling Oprah may have used the WOC angle to bond with her. She definitely took advantage of her Meghans mom by befriending her when she was dating the prince. There is no other reason for her to bond with a random woman that moves in different circles. Oprah was using her mom as a way to get it, and she got it in the end.


you're saying O befriended Doria before she met Meghan?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> sadly this whole thing is making me look at Oprah and Gayle a bit differently.  the other night I was watching the HBO documentary about Tina Turner.  at the end, a now elderly Tina was making an appearance at the opening of the Broadway show about her life.  Oprah was hanging onto her arm.  Now I think it's quite possible that she and O are good friends but after what's gone on lately I found mysefel feeling like Oprah was maybe taking advantage of that moment.  And a smiling Gayle was shown posing on the red carpet and sitting in the audience.  where O goes, Gayle goes.
> For many years, Gayle was mainly known as O's BFF.  Now she has a legit career of her own and I think this whole H&M thing is tainting her credibility.



Tina is a goddess!  She seemed very nervous about going onstage, probably due to her stroke. Walking seemed difficult, especially with the flashbulbs popping everywhere. To me, it looked like the photographers were only interested in Tina and sorta pushed OW away. Seeing the two women together, the differences were noticeable. Tina, the seasoned professional, versus OW, the clumsy wannabe.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> you're saying O befriended Doria before she met Meghan?



Oprah took advantage of Doria when Meghan was still dating Harry. Doria would get followed by the press and she was facing unwanted intrusion into her life. Oprah befriended her and per 'Finding freedom', Oprah was keeping her safe and giving her advice. A bit random, given Oprah had never crossed paths with or had any connection to Doria or Meghan.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> There is no place more intolerant of other viewpoints than a university campus. If you are not in lockstep agreement with the prevailing opinions then you’d better fake it or you will be shut down. They don’t want to hear anything that opposes their view, that goes for students and professors.


The beauty of academia used to be the freedom of exchanging and pursuing new ideas in a tolerant and respectful environment. Unfortunately, this has changed and professors need to be very careful with what they say these days. The years of provocative statements and open minded discussions are virtually gone.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I can’t say strongly enough how much I despise Harry and Oprah with their false portrayal of someone competent to give advice on these subjects.   JCMH is swiftly rising to the same level of garbage as his wife.
> ETA - read this to my DH and he said I must have some ‘unresolved trauma issues’.


right....Harry can give advice to tv viewers but he couldn't get a shrink for his suicidal wife?  and anyone who doesn't buy that line is a racist


----------



## mellibelly

The Oprah and Harry story on Huffington Post is full of upvoted negative comments. There’s a stan or two with only downvotes. Seems the general public is sick of their sh!t already.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally have no clue and I'm not usually into conspiracy theories, but I just can't wrap my mind around a virtual nobody showing up, snagging Harry and suddenly ruling the world. I mean, even as Harry's wife, she isn't all that (because he is not all that...#6 who is not on speaking terms with the family that makes him interesting to begin with), she isn't that rich, she doesn't hold any real power. So seeing people and organisations react to her the way they do...I just don't know.
> 
> I think what tipped me over the edge was the fired professor. That woman ain't no Piers and she didn't even say anything hostile, yet was told to never mention Duchess Disney, ever.



Whoever Harry married was going to get some major press for awhile, couple that with an American WOC Z-Lister actress who can't shut up and a media that loves to blow everything up by injecting race into everything, you end up with our perfect little storm of sugars who fawn over Ms. "No one's asked me if I'm OK".  Meghan claims to want privacy yet hasn't turned down a microphone or photo op. Our media is lazy, emotionally charged, protects sacred cows and can always depend on Meghan to blurt emotionally charged  accusations with zero proof. Meghan doesn't need proof, all she has to do is be married to JCMH and b*tch that Charles is basically racist, cut off "their " money and then get pity that Chuck's Mother's Day wishes weren't good enough. All the media needs is a manufactured sob story from somebody with woke name recognition and bam!--a journalist gets paid and a few more rags sell. You think the sugars would come out in defense of, ummmm...Candace Owens? Hell no! Woke Hypocrisy is where it's at!


----------



## marietouchet

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Oprah took advantage of Doria when Meghan was still dating Harry. Doria would get followed by the press and she was facing unwanted intrusion into her life. Oprah befriended her and per 'Finding freedom', Oprah was keeping her safe and giving her advice. A bit random, given Oprah had never crossed paths with or had any connection to Doria or Meghan.


There is also the story that O barely knew MM prior to wedding (so how much help did D get ???) 
But if O had significantly helped D, then that is a reason to invite O to wedding 
O & MM - this is like the saga of the flower girl dresses ... we have heard so many different versions ....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I don't really see Oprah differently because of the interview, but that's because I think she's always done softball interviews. She's not a hard-hitting journalist. And for people like her, they DO have to network and hunt down people to interview - and yes, of course, those people are probably strangers to her. Her role is partly to sell her show to the interviewee, the network, and the audience. It's just business. She doesn't have that much a vested interest in each individual person beyond finding them interesting enough to interview.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't really see Oprah differently because of the interview, but that's because I think she's always done softball interviews. She's not a hard-hitting journalist. And for people like her, they DO have to network and hunt down people to interview - and yes, of course, those people are probably strangers to her. Her role is partly to sell her show to the interviewee, the network, and the audience. It's just business. She doesn't have that much a vested interest in each individual person beyond finding them interesting eI nough to interview.


true but I feel in this case, she is somehow promoting Meghan and helping her to present "her truth" as fact when IMO it is not truth....seems she may have some vested interest in this particular couple


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> true but I feel in this case, she is somehow promoting Meghan and helping her to present "her truth" as fact when IMO it is not truth....seems she may have some vested interest in this particular couple



Doubt it... she's already onto her next news-making hit... It seems like Gayle has developed a friendship with H/M and I'm sure Oprah is friendLY but Oprah has met heads of states and hob knobs with some truly powerful people. M/H are probably nothing to her. Oprah's promoting Oprah.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Doubt it... she's already onto her next news-making hit... It seems like Gayle has developed a friendship with H/M and I'm sure Oprah is friendLY but Oprah has met heads of states and hob knobs with some truly powerful people. M/H are probably nothing to her. Oprah's promoting Oprah.


Oh I forgot per Elaine Welteroth of The Talk anyone who says hurtful things against Meghan, hurts her and all black women too.  So, there we have it.  I'm sure there are some WOC who see Meghan for who she is, but there seems to have been a decision among most WOC in the American media that she is a victim and no one should question her credibility.
Oprah is one of her champions.


----------



## bag-mania

All those million dollar contracts and H&M are back to donating baby hats to the needy just like last year.

Because there is nothing a baby who is at risk in a horrible domestic violence situation needs more than an adorable little beanie. Cute hats stop abuse y'all! It would be funny if it wasn't so damned tone deaf.

*Archie's Birthday Gift Revealed! Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Donate 200 Beanies to Kids in Need*

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's birthday donation will benefit mothers and children escaping domestic violence*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are celebrating Archie's birthday with families in need on the other side of the world.

The New Zealand-based social enterprise Make Give Live revealed on social media on Sunday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex donated 200 beanies to the I Got Your Back Pack (IGYBP) initiative as a birthday gift in honor of their son, who turned 2 earlier this week.
In a video entitled, "Archie's Birthday gift to kids in NZ," Make Give Live founder Claire Conza explained how the beanies would become a part of an IGYBP backpack, which provides a range of essential items to mothers and children escaping from domestic violence.
"Thank you Harry & Meghan, Duke & Duchess of Sussex, and of course, Archie for the generous donation of these 200 beanies to your friends on the other side of the world in NZ," Make Give Live posted alongside the footage.

"@igotyourbackpacknz was very grateful for them and they will be sent in care packs to refuges around NZ to warm heads and hearts ❤," they added.

"It also meant a lot for our maker community to have something special to bring them together to enjoy connection and creativity whilst making them, and didn't they do an incredible job!?"

The social enterprise then signed off with a birthday greeting to Meghan and Harry's son, saying simply, "Happy Birthday Archie"

This isn't the first time that Meghan and Harry have donated to Make Give Live. The Duke and Duchess ordered 100 beanies from the social enterprise in December 2020, which doubled to 200 cozy hats through the organization's "buy one, give one" model.

"They said that they wanted to help our members continue to enjoy making, connecting and supporting each other which has never been as important as now," Make Give Live wrote on Instagram shortly afterward.
In January 2020, the royals also shared a super-snuggly photo of Archie wearing one of the organization's warming pom-pom knit-caps, while Meghan was given an item of their headwear during the couple's visit to New Zealand in October 2018.

Fittingly, Make Give Live revealed the news of Meghan and Harry's donation on Mother's Day, which is also celebrated in New Zealand on May 9.

The day was extra special for Meghan this year as the Duke and Duchess are expecting a baby girl this summer who will be a younger sister to Archie.

On Sunday, Meghan also celebrated the occasion nearer to home by honoring the work of a local charity in her home state of California.

"In honor of Mother's Day, Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, are recognizing the work of Harvest Home, a Los Angeles–based organization that uplifts expectant mothers who are experiencing homelessness," read a statement on their Archewell Foundation website Sunday.

"Through Archewell Foundation, The Duke and Duchess' mission is to demonstrate compassion in action, spark supportive and connected communities, and build a more equitable and just future. Their aim is to ensure that parents, of every makeup and all walks of life, have the support they need to raise families that thrive," the statement continued.

"With this mission in mind, Archewell Foundation, along with Procter & Gamble are fulfilling Harvest Home's online wish list for the women they serve, including diapers for a year and cleaning supplies to stock the shelves at Harvest Home's first facility as well as their new home in progress. From all of us at Team Archewell, Happy Mother's Day. May we all recognize and support the expectant mothers, as well as all mothers, in our lives and communities every day in the year ahead."









						Archie's Birthday Gift Revealed! Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Donate 200 Beanies to Kids in Need
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's birthday donation will benefit mothers and children escaping domestic violence




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Harry and Meghan accused of ‘trolling the world’ with hidden images of Archie



> Writer of royal biography Finding Freedom, Omid Scobie, claims the decision for a blurry and out-of-focus photo for Archie's 2nd birthday is entirely deliberate. The royal author said: "This was, as I think we've come to experience from the Sussexes, a photo of Archie but not too clear.  *"I think this is their way of trolling the world." *



Well, I wouldn't say "accused" when it's clear lapdog Omid admires the move. How childish are these people. They apparently never graduated kindergarten, the three of them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *Archie's Birthday Gift Revealed! Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Donate 200 Beanies to Kids in Need*



OMG how did THAT happen? They really need to identify the person who leaks private matters like birthday gifts to the press.


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally have no clue and I'm not usually into conspiracy theories, but I just can't wrap my mind around a virtual nobody showing up, snagging Harry and suddenly ruling the world. I mean, even as Harry's wife, she isn't all that (because he is not all that...#6 who is not on speaking terms with the family that makes him interesting to begin with), she isn't that rich, she doesn't hold any real power. So seeing people and organisations react to her the way they do...I just don't know.
> 
> I think what tipped me over the edge was the fired professor. That woman ain't no Piers and she didn't even say anything hostile, yet was told to never mention Duchess Disney, ever.


I think Meghan has a far better than average radar to spot people to advance her "career" and get the maximum mileage out of them to help her to realize her ambitions. Her previous millionaire husband is a proof to that. IMO she had seen the opportunity and started to make plans early in the relationship with H. Famous friends grew out of the ground immediately like mushrooms after rain. She must have been in some kind of connection with Oprah well before the wedding. I can't exclude that O had been helping her to develop her strategy - as it has been unearthed that Cringe and Ginge started talking to companies while they were still working royals. I don't think that alone, without high profile supporters Duchess Pinocchio would have been given such media attention, even with her race card that she uses like weapon against any criticism.
IMO the aftermath of this interview points beyond Megxit, it became a manifestation of the cancel culture and impaired freedom of speech which, if it goes on like this, foreshadows a very bleak and dystopic future for us.


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> All those million dollar contracts and H&M are back to donating baby hats to the needy just like last year.
> 
> Because there is nothing a baby who is at risk in a horrible domestic violence situation needs more than an adorable little beanie. Cute hats stop abuse y'all! It would be funny if it wasn't so damned tone deaf.
> 
> *Archie's Birthday Gift Revealed! Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Donate 200 Beanies to Kids in Need*
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's birthday donation will benefit mothers and children escaping domestic violence*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are celebrating Archie's birthday with families in need on the other side of the world.
> 
> The New Zealand-based social enterprise Make Give Live revealed on social media on Sunday that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex donated 200 beanies to the I Got Your Back Pack (IGYBP) initiative as a birthday gift in honor of their son, who turned 2 earlier this week.
> In a video entitled, "Archie's Birthday gift to kids in NZ," Make Give Live founder Claire Conza explained how the beanies would become a part of an IGYBP backpack, which provides a range of essential items to mothers and children escaping from domestic violence.
> "Thank you Harry & Meghan, Duke & Duchess of Sussex, and of course, Archie for the generous donation of these 200 beanies to your friends on the other side of the world in NZ," Make Give Live posted alongside the footage.
> 
> "@igotyourbackpacknz was very grateful for them and they will be sent in care packs to refuges around NZ to warm heads and hearts ❤," they added.
> 
> "It also meant a lot for our maker community to have something special to bring them together to enjoy connection and creativity whilst making them, and didn't they do an incredible job!?"
> 
> The social enterprise then signed off with a birthday greeting to Meghan and Harry's son, saying simply, "Happy Birthday Archie"
> 
> This isn't the first time that Meghan and Harry have donated to Make Give Live. The Duke and Duchess ordered 100 beanies from the social enterprise in December 2020, which doubled to 200 cozy hats through the organization's "buy one, give one" model.
> 
> "They said that they wanted to help our members continue to enjoy making, connecting and supporting each other which has never been as important as now," Make Give Live wrote on Instagram shortly afterward.
> In January 2020, the royals also shared a super-snuggly photo of Archie wearing one of the organization's warming pom-pom knit-caps, while Meghan was given an item of their headwear during the couple's visit to New Zealand in October 2018.
> 
> Fittingly, Make Give Live revealed the news of Meghan and Harry's donation on Mother's Day, which is also celebrated in New Zealand on May 9.
> 
> The day was extra special for Meghan this year as the Duke and Duchess are expecting a baby girl this summer who will be a younger sister to Archie.
> 
> On Sunday, Meghan also celebrated the occasion nearer to home by honoring the work of a local charity in her home state of California.
> 
> "In honor of Mother's Day, Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, are recognizing the work of Harvest Home, a Los Angeles–based organization that uplifts expectant mothers who are experiencing homelessness," read a statement on their Archewell Foundation website Sunday.
> 
> "Through Archewell Foundation, The Duke and Duchess' mission is to demonstrate compassion in action, spark supportive and connected communities, and build a more equitable and just future. Their aim is to ensure that parents, of every makeup and all walks of life, have the support they need to raise families that thrive," the statement continued.
> 
> "With this mission in mind, Archewell Foundation, along with Procter & Gamble are fulfilling Harvest Home's online wish list for the women they serve, including diapers for a year and cleaning supplies to stock the shelves at Harvest Home's first facility as well as their new home in progress. From all of us at Team Archewell, Happy Mother's Day. May we all recognize and support the expectant mothers, as well as all mothers, in our lives and communities every day in the year ahead."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archie's Birthday Gift Revealed! Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Donate 200 Beanies to Kids in Need
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's birthday donation will benefit mothers and children escaping domestic violence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


However will they top that next year? 300 beanies?


----------



## DeMonica

mellibelly said:


> The Oprah and Harry story on Huffington Post is full of upvoted negative comments. There’s a stan or two with only downvotes. Seems the general public is sick of their sh!t already.


I do hope you are right.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I think she just came along at the right moment in time for a WOC and she's taking full advantage of it



_Whatever_ came along, she'd take full advantage of it


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I'll be surprised if Oprah goes into her past. The show will address mental health issues in that celebrity way, where each celeb gets to talk about how he/she was troubled once but _everything is all better now_. It will be all about encouragement and reducing stigma but don't expect any one of them to be brave enough to admit they still have mental problems to this day.


This was posted on line April 29, and oh, by the way, she talks about this in a new book of hers, "What Happened to You?"  Merching book and Mental Health series with Harry, yada yada yada.  
*Oprah Winfrey touches on childhood abuse struggle*







Oprah Winfrey touches on childhood abuse struggles
Oprah Winfrey recently sat down for a chat and got candid about her childhood struggles with abuse in Mississippi.
The TV show host discussed her traumatic past in her new book titled _What Happened to You?_


----------



## TC1

200 beanies?? why not 200 vaccines?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> This was posted on line April 29, and oh, by the way, she talks about this in a new book of hers, "What Happened to You?"  Merching book and Mental Health series with Harry, yada yada yada.
> *Oprah Winfrey touches on childhood abuse struggle*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey touches on childhood abuse struggles
> Oprah Winfrey recently sat down for a chat and got candid about her childhood struggles with abuse in Mississippi.
> The TV show host discussed her traumatic past in her new book titled _What Happened to You?_



IMO She revealed this entire story on her show way back when. Sadly, some [maybe all] of the woke generation won‘t know anything about “her truth” because they are too young. So, she needed to update them by replaying this stuff.  See, they need to know that *she* has been through abuse, racism, weight-ism, etc. She was woke long before woke was cool. Please understand this billionaire had a miserable, horrible painful childhood and was able to turn it all around [with the help of some powerful connections].

Seriously, I believed her struggle was real, liked her show, bought her messages, enjoyed the guests she chose, etc. Back then, we did not have the internet fact checkers.  We did not know how fake Hwood was.  I am wiser now, I think.  I do wish she had not become involved with H&M saga. Her Sarah shows were enough. She may not be known as a ‘hard-hitting’ interviewer, but she looked woefully unprepared and somewhat dim.  Seems that many of these women of a certain age do not know when to exit. Staying too long makes them look greedy and selfish. IMO


----------



## DeMonica

TC1 said:


> 200 beanies?? why not 200 vaccines?


They could get a dose of AstraZeneca vaccine for $5. I'm sure that an army of stans answered their calling and  enthusiastically donated to Archewell - the foundation serving Archie's financial well-being.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I think people are just expecting a little too much from Oprah. She didn't make an empire from doing interviews - she made an empire from getting interviews that people wanted to watch. She's interviewed Lindsay Lohan during the depths of her breakdown, Michael Jackson during "Leaving Neverland," she just interviewed Elliott Page during a highly visible moment in his life, and I see she has Priyanka Chopra coming up. Did she really press into Lindsay Lohan about why she's such a train wreck, ask MJ about specifics of his allegations, challenge Elliott Page on any of his experiences, or do you think she'll ask Priyanka about how she was a well-known mistress for many years to a famous Indian actor? Heck no. That's not her brand. Her brand is to give them the spotlight, ask questions to learn a little more, and treat it as "their truth." She also knows that a positive light helps her get more exclusive interviews, which gets her more money. 

It's a cycle that's worked for her. And look, even months later, we're still talking about her interview with M and media outlets are still making money from all the clicks. Oprah knows what she's doing and she doesn't really care that she's not Baba Wawa - she's going for the $$$ not the Pulitzer.


----------



## LittleStar88

lalame said:


> I think people are just expecting a little too much from Oprah. She didn't make an empire from doing interviews - she made an empire from getting interviews that people wanted to watch. She's interviewed Lindsay Lohan during the depths of her breakdown, Michael Jackson during "Leaving Neverland," she just interviewed Elliott Page during a highly visible moment in his life, and I see she has Priyanka Chopra coming up. Did she really press into Lindsay Lohan about why she's such a train wreck, ask MJ about specifics of his allegations, challenge Elliott Page on any of his experiences, or do you think she'll ask Priyanka about how she was a well-known mistress for many years to a famous Indian actor? Heck no. That's not her brand. Her brand is to give them the spotlight, ask questions to learn a little more, and treat it as "their truth." She also knows that a positive light helps her get more exclusive interviews, which gets her more money.
> 
> It's a cycle that's worked for her. And look, even months later, we're still talking about her interview with M and media outlets are still making money from all the clicks. Oprah knows what she's doing and she doesn't really care that she's not Baba Wawa - she's going for the $$$ not the Pulitzer.



Perfectly said!

And waiting for the "Who is Baba Wawa?" questions


----------



## CarryOn2020

OW as daytime tv was fine.  Primetime is a different game, different audience. Mega bucks are at stake. Only reason we are discussing it now is because she let so many loose ends fly by. All the cynics, myself included, will say it’s because she wants more money. This is what she does on her own network. It’s a shameful cash grab that most see through.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I think people are just expecting a little too much from Oprah. She didn't make an empire from doing interviews - she made an empire from getting interviews that people wanted to watch. She's interviewed Lindsay Lohan during the depths of her breakdown, Michael Jackson during "Leaving Neverland," she just interviewed Elliott Page during a highly visible moment in his life, and I see she has Priyanka Chopra coming up. Did she really press into Lindsay Lohan about why she's such a train wreck, ask MJ about specifics of his allegations, challenge Elliott Page on any of his experiences, or do you think she'll ask Priyanka about how she was a well-known mistress for many years to a famous Indian actor? Heck no. That's not her brand. Her brand is to give them the spotlight, ask questions to learn a little more, and treat it as "their truth." She also knows that a positive light helps her get more exclusive interviews, which gets her more money.
> 
> It's a cycle that's worked for her. And look, even months later, we're still talking about her interview with M and media outlets are still making money from all the clicks. Oprah knows what she's doing and she doesn't really care that she's not Baba Wawa - she's going for the $$$ not the Pulitzer.



I get what you are saying, but...are were her other guest out to destroy a family just out of spite? I feel that's where the whole thing becomes morally rotten. I do think you need to have basic decency even as an entertainer.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I'll be surprised if Oprah goes into her past. The show will address mental health issues in that celebrity way, where each celeb gets to talk about how he/she was troubled once but _everything is all better now_. It will be all about encouragement and reducing stigma but don't expect any one of them to be brave enough to admit they still have mental problems to this day.


I won't be surprised if, as usual, Oprah makes her show all about herself.  She's found a kindred spirit in Meg.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I get what you are saying, but...are were her other guest out to destroy a family just out of spite? I feel that's where the whole thing becomes morally rotten. I do think you need to have basic decency even as an entertainer.



I do think Oprah underestimated how damaging the interview would be, and I believe her when she said she really didn't think they'd get SO personal. But at the same time, yeah Oprah has interviewed some real jerks. So has Gayle... I think it's a totally valid point that it's immoral to give nasty people a platform but I don't think M+H are that consequential to the American public that Oprah would consider them in the same league as R.Kelly, MJ, etc. I don't think they are myself.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> *Oprah Winfrey touches on childhood abuse struggle*


Another picture of her looking constipated, all the while spouting oral diarrhea.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I do think Oprah underestimated how damaging the interview would be, and I believe her when she said she really didn't think they'd get SO personal.



It was not a live show, they had plenty of time to edit so even if she didn't know that they would get SO personal, she could have edited sections out. She had control of the interview and what would be aired.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> It was not a live show, they had plenty of time to edit so even if she didn't know that they would get SO personal, she could have edited sections out. She had control of the interview and what would be aired.



It's true but as an interviewer, if you are surprised by getting even juicier info than you expected.... why wouldn't you use it? That's your money shot. And it worked. I went into it thinking it was going to be a nothingburger of an interview and... well, I ended up watching it, reading way too many articles on it, watching a mess of coverage on it, and still chatting about it today so it fulfilled Oprah's goal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> It's true but as an interviewer, if you are surprised by getting even juicier info than you expected.... why wouldn't you use it? That's your money shot. And it worked. I went into it thinking it was going to be a nothingburger of an interview and... well, I ended up watching it, reading way too many articles on it, watching a mess of coverage on it, and still chatting about it today so it fulfilled Oprah's goal.



IMO she should not use it because she is already a billionaire. She sacrificed integrity and respect for a few bucks. Greedy, no?
Remember Prince Phillip was in a hospital fighting for his life.


----------



## wisconsin

Mistake


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO she should not use it because she is already a billionaire. She sacrificed integrity and respect for a few bucks. Greedy, no?
> Remember Prince Phillip was in a hospital fighting for his life.



"I don't need more money, I'm already a billionaire" said no real billionaire lol. They become billionaires by not stopping at millions, hundreds of millions, one billion, etc. Greediness is absolutely the defining feature of a person that rich. I agree with you it was not in good taste especially because of Prince Philip but I think Oprah just wasn't very sensitive to that because, like most Americans, she's probably not that tuned into the respect and admiration Brits may have for the royal family. I think that's why H/M chose her though.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> It's true but as an interviewer, if you are surprised by getting even juicier info than you expected.... why wouldn't you use it? That's your money shot. And it worked. I went into it thinking it was going to be a nothingburger of an interview and... well, I ended up watching it, reading way too many articles on it, watching a mess of coverage on it, and still chatting about it today so it fulfilled Oprah's goal.



I think most of the coverage of the interview was negative (especially in the UK) for both H&M and Oprah. This is why Oprah had to backtrack by saying she was so surprised that the couple 'went there'. I'm not really sure how the interview was perceived in the US, but imo it was split between political lines. Even though it may not have been investigative journalism, people took what they said as fact when it wasn't, and given that they complain about misinformation it was so ironic. H&M also had to backtrack on claims she made that they were married 3 days before the wedding. 

The boy who cried wolf is an English fable, and one which Meghan should probably read because it will explain why people will most likely not believe anything they say (even if it is true).


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think most of the coverage of the interview was negative (especially in the UK) for both H&M and Oprah. This is why Oprah had to backtrack by saying she was so surprised that the couple 'went there'. I'm not really sure how the interview was perceived in the US, but imo it was split between political lines. Even though it may not have been investigative journalism, people took what they said as fact when it wasn't, and given that they complain about misinformation it was so ironic. H&M also had to backtrack on claims she made that they were married 3 days before the wedding.
> 
> The boy who cried wolf is an English fable, and one which Meghan should probably read because it will explain why people will most likely not believe anything they say (even if it is true).



In my opinion, I think this is the benefit to this kind of interview... that you let the person's claims hang them. Oprah's been criticized for these softball interviews for a longggg time so maybe it's just with that context that I didn't really seek "the truth" in it. You should've seen me watching in disbelief as she enabled Tom Cruise during that infamous, bizarre interview. This man had just said he believed psychology/psychiatry was a danger to the human race.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> "I don't need more money, I'm already a billionaire" said no real billionaire lol. They become billionaires by not stopping at millions, hundreds of millions, one billion, etc. Greediness is absolutely the defining feature of a person that rich. I agree with you it was not in good taste especially because of Prince Philip but I think Oprah just wasn't very sensitive to that because, like most Americans, she's probably not that tuned into the respect and admiration Brits may have for the royal family. I think that's why H/M chose her though.



You are right about billionaires, people always want more than what they have even if what they have is more than enough. Rich people never really stop hustling, and they probably have to because of the huge costs to maintain the lifestyle. Some people are more greedier than others. 

I think there was an article that H&M would not delay the showing just because of Prince Phillips poor health as they didn't think it was justified and that they had waited a long time already. I get that they wanted to dispel things that were false and not true but they actually made things worse by lying and making false statements themselves. They would have probably faired better if they made a public statement to correct rumors or false stories. They need to also realize that there will be false stories, gossip and crap printed about them (just like every other public figure) and they should pick their battles, rather than continuously fighting with the media.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> This man had just said he believed psychology/psychiatry was a danger to the human race.




And now the same Oprah is making a documentary about mental health with Harry. Maybe she should bring on Cruise as a special guest


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> "I don't need more money, I'm already a billionaire" said no real billionaire lol. They become billionaires by not stopping at millions, hundreds of millions, one billion, etc. Greediness is absolutely the defining feature of a person that rich. I agree with you it was not in good taste especially because of Prince Philip but I think Oprah just wasn't very sensitive to that because, like most Americans, she's probably not that tuned into the respect and admiration Brits may have for the royal family. I think that's why H/M chose her though.



Okaaay, then maybe she should tone down the holier-than-thou preaching she does. She does not know all. She is not the judge of all, neither is GK. Both have supported some real losers. She desperately hounded Diana for an interview, even after Diana said no. Almost like she has a fixation. One ‘no’ should be enough. She relentlessly pursued Diana. When Sarah didn’t deliver enough dirt, she continued to dig for more dirt on the BRF with H&M. Shameless.


----------



## lalame

I don't think Oprah actually agrees with most guests she puts on, but she does excel in making it seem like she's a supportive person there "just to chat." That's kind of what she's known for, and probably why she still gets sought out interviews. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when she's REALLY saying what she thinks.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> And now the same Oprah is making a documentary about mental health with Harry. Maybe she should bring on Cruise as a special guest



Xenu won't let him.


----------



## redney

lalame said:


> I don't think Oprah actually agrees with most guests she puts on, but she does excel in making it seem like she's a supportive person there "just to chat." That's kind of what she's known for, and probably why she still gets sought out interviews. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when she's REALLY saying what she thinks.


Exactly, she positions herself as non-judgmental and lets the celebs speak. Celebs' PR teams like that. That's why she gets the interviews over other interviewers who may be considered tougher and look to ask the tougher questions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She leads the guests in the direction she wants to go. She knows what to ask to get viewers. All about the greed.
Were you silent or were you silenced?  Such awkward phrasing, a rehearsed question if ever there was one.
IMO


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> She leads the guests in the direction she wants to go. She knows what to ask to get viewers. All about the greed.
> Were you silent or were you silenced?  Such awkward phrasing, a rehearsed question if ever there is one.
> IMO


Agree. None of these interviews are filmed in one take, without stopping. They can stop, reword questions, answers. During editing there is a lot of manipulation to get the conversation just the way both parties want it.


----------



## marietouchet

putting a few pieces together ... been perusing murky meg’s Twitter feed where I noted 
1. In interview, H said BRF DID NOT KNOW of MM’s suicidal thoughts, he never told them because it is a talk one does not have (or words to that effect)
2, She goes to HR to get help, not to (BR) Family 
I conclude they both deliberately avoided telling his family, deliberately ...
interesting candid and ineffective approach to seeking help ...given the new H and O program on mental health


----------



## wkim

lalame said:


> I think people are just expecting a little too much from Oprah. She didn't make an empire from doing interviews - she made an empire from getting interviews that people wanted to watch. She's interviewed Lindsay Lohan during the depths of her breakdown, Michael Jackson during "Leaving Neverland," she just interviewed Elliott Page during a highly visible moment in his life, and I see she has Priyanka Chopra coming up. Did she really press into Lindsay Lohan about why she's such a train wreck, ask MJ about specifics of his allegations, challenge Elliott Page on any of his experiences, or do you think she'll ask Priyanka about how she was a well-known mistress for many years to a famous Indian actor? Heck no. That's not her brand. Her brand is to give them the spotlight, ask questions to learn a little more, and treat it as "their truth." She also knows that a positive light helps her get more exclusive interviews, which gets her more money.
> 
> It's a cycle that's worked for her. And look, even months later, we're still talking about her interview with M and media outlets are still making money from all the clicks. Oprah knows what she's doing and she doesn't really care that she's not Baba Wawa - she's going for the $$$ not the Pulitzer.



Lindsay Lohan had a show on OWN about returning back to Hollywood, overcoming addiction and all that. And apparently it didn't go well: https://www.nydailynews.com/enterta...fumes-working-lindsay-lohan-article-1.1571267


----------



## lalame

Oprah is to journalism what Keeping Up with the Kardashians is to documentaries. It's all entertainment, along with the choice editing and scripting that maximizes clips.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> And now the same Oprah is making a documentary about mental health with Harry. Maybe she should bring on Cruise as a special guest


Scientology doesn't believe in psychiatry and psych meds, right?  Wasn't Nicole Kidman's father a psychologist or psychiatrist and that was an issue too?  Cruise won't give any sympathy to Meg and her "mental health struggles".


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> putting a few pieces together ... been perusing murky meg’s Twitter feed where I noted
> 1. In interview, H said BRF DID NOT KNOW of MM’s suicidal thoughts, he never told them because it is a talk one does not have (or words to that effect)
> 2, She goes to HR to get help, not to (BR) Family
> I conclude they both deliberately avoided telling his family, deliberately ...
> interesting candid and ineffective approach to seeking help ...given the new H and O program on mental health



Even if they didn't tell the BRF, they are both adults and should've known how to google a psychiatrist.  My 5 year old nephew can google anything.  Maybe he can give these schmucks some coaching about the obvious?


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> What a dope.  Couldn't even think to get help for his worldly-wise, suicidal wife.


I think he realized that he couldn't trot out Dead Mom for the rest of his life, so he needed a new angle with no expiry date and picked mental health. It's a serious issue that is being cheapened by H and his wife. I'm firmly in Piers Morgan's camp when it comes to the OW interview: I think nothing that MM said can be believed, especially not her "I can't be left alone". She is using "suicidal thoughts" as a vehicle for victimhood, knowing that it would be taboo for people to doubt her. My own mother used suicide threats as a tool to manipulate us, so I find it disgusting for MM to trumpet her dark days living in luxury and for H to preach to the world about mental health when he claims to be ashamed of his wife's suicidal thoughts - if she ever had any. 
"Oh Hazzie, I'm going to die if those paps don't leave me alone when I'm shopping!"
"Cheer up, girl! Let's go watch Cirque du Soleil."


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> Scientology doesn't believe in psychiatry and psych meds, right?  Wasn't Nicole Kidman's father a psychologist or psychiatrist and that was an issue too?  Cruise won't give any sympathy to Meg and her "mental health struggles".



Come to think of it, H/M might be perfect successors to Tom Cruise in scientology.   They're almost there...

Isolate yourself from friends and family who don't believe in your truth
Get treated like royalty by hordes of minions manipulated to think you're infallible
Be seen as paragon of charity while still benefiting from multi-million dollar day job
Decry religious/social persecution while launching vicious attacks on others


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now let's not be unfair. She wrote a letter. I wonder if she put in the faux calligraphy or if it was typed.



You're right. My handwriting is terrible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Maybe MM doesn’t have as many Twitter stans as it seems?  Use of bot farms to attack royal reporters who say negative things about her...









						Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
					

A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## Chanbal

This tweet suggests that some of Diana's jewelry pieces circulating around these days are copies...


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

OT
I've been watching an anime and one of the characters is so like MM that I'd believe it was based on her except it predates her.

_"Lila is proud and loves attention, which she is willing to obtain by lying. ... She gets jealous if someone gets more attention or love than her and doesn't like it when someone reveals that her lies aren't true, showing no remorse for lying in the first place. If anyone attempts to expose her, she won't hesitate to try to make them miserable or break them down just to get them out of her way. ...  Lila is a very crafty and sneaky liar. She is able to use her lies to manipulate people into doing what she wants. When this doesn't work, she tries to make others feel pity for her and manipulate them emotionally."  _









						Lila Rossi
					

Click here to see quotes from Lila Rossi. Lila Rossi is an Italian student in Miss Bustier's class at Collège Françoise Dupont and the tertiary antagonist of Miraculous: Tales of Ladybug & Cat Noir. She is the love rival of Marinette Dupain-Cheng and Ladybug, competing their rivalry for Adrien...




					miraculousladybug.fandom.com


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> This tweet suggests that some of Diana's jewelry pieces circulating around these days are copies...




wait...so where is Diana’s jewellery then?  Does the RF or spencer  family still have it?  I was shocked by that aquamarine ring was a copy!!!


----------



## Icyjade

Hmm...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Icyjade said:


> Hmm...



Goodness, that does look odd


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Hmm...



18 Dec 2018. She described herself as "very pregnant".


----------



## lanasyogamama

She seems to go strait from conception to very / heavily pregnant


----------



## Clearblueskies

I suspect she doesn’t have a big bump until close to the end, (and that because she wants to draw attention to her pregnant state) she augments it.
That dress though.  Has to be one of the most unflattering things she’s ever worn


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This tweet suggests that some of Diana's jewelry pieces circulating around these days are copies...




Not convinced. First, the palace can't deny Harry to give away stuff he inherited to whomever. Second, the earrings are shot at a different angle and the Di pic is blurry. Third, the Skippy person lost me when they claimed her engagement ring came from CVS.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> That dress though.  Has to be one of the most unflattering things she’s ever worn



Yeah, because it was  three sizes to small. I wonder how it even zipped.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She wears a lot of things that may look better standing up but are not flattering when seated. Esp when you’re heavily heavily pregnant


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, because it was  three sizes to small. I wonder how it even zipped.


Competing with Marilyn Monroe? That lady wore 2 sizes too small and Candle in the Wind was originally about her. Maybe H's wife hopes that Elton will adapt a song for her too, to strengthen her special bond with Diana. The B*tch is Back?


----------



## lanasyogamama

This was probably posted, although I don’t remember seeing it. How is she able to get CNN to take articles down!?









						DAN WOOTTON: Has Meghan got to CNN?
					

CNN's coverage of Prince Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey was taken from its usual woke playbook. But there was one honourable exception, writes DAN WOOTTON.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I never thought one way or another about Harry’s wife using a non royal Gyno/obgyn but now that I’m thinking about it, if she did use a surrogate she couldn’t possibly use a royal dr.  Wouldn’t a royal Gyno/obgyn have a duty to the royal family first and thus reveal the real goings on?  I’m also wondering if they used a donor egg which would also increase the need for secrecy.  Many have said that Harry’s wife doesn’t act maternal nor at ease with Archie.  Could it be because Archie doesn’t have her DNA?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry and Meghan accused of ‘trolling the world’ with hidden images of Archie
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I wouldn't say "accused" when it's clear lapdog Omid admires the move. How childish are these people. They apparently never graduated kindergarten, the three of them.


isn't trolling a negative thing?  so their friend is calling them trolls?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought that was odd wording as well


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> I thought that was odd wording as well


me too


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Another picture of her looking constipated, all the while spouting oral diarrhea.


reiminds me of Maya Angelou here


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I think he realized that he couldn't trot out Dead Mom for the rest of his life, so he needed a new angle with no expiry date and picked mental health. It's a serious issue that is being cheapened by H and his wife. I'm firmly in Piers Morgan's camp when it comes to the OW interview: I think nothing that MM said can be believed, especially not her "I can't be left alone". She is using "suicidal thoughts" as a vehicle for victimhood, knowing that it would be taboo for people to doubt her. My own mother used suicide threats as a tool to manipulate us, so I find it disgusting for MM to trumpet her dark days living in luxury and for H to preach to the world about mental health when he claims to be ashamed of his wife's suicidal thoughts - if she ever had any.
> "Oh Hazzie, I'm going to die if those paps don't leave me alone when I'm shopping!"
> "Cheer up, girl! Let's go watch Cirque du Soleil."


Oh but Harry will always bring up his mom when talking about his mental health struggles


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> This was probably posted, although I don’t remember seeing it. How is she able to get CNN to take articles down!?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Has Meghan got to CNN?
> 
> 
> CNN's coverage of Prince Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey was taken from its usual woke playbook. But there was one honourable exception, writes DAN WOOTTON.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



As near as I can tell CNN has always been completely supportive of Meghan. If there was this one semi-critical piece it was probably taken down by those within the organization. CNN doesn't want to be called the R-word! Meghan didn't need to do a thing.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Competing with Marilyn Monroe? That lady wore 2 sizes too small and Candle in the Wind was originally about her. Maybe H's wife hopes that Elton will adapt a song for her too, to strengthen her special bond with Diana. The B*tch is Back?



I wonder what Elton is thinking these days. He couldn't wait to lend them a jet and give them a place to stay early on. I imagine he isn't quite as happy with them now.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> I never thought one way or another about Harry’s wife using a non royal Gyno/obgyn but now that I’m thinking about it, if she did use a surrogate she couldn’t possibly use a royal dr.  Wouldn’t a royal Gyno/obgyn have a duty to the royal family first and thus reveal the real goings on?  I’m also wondering if they used a donor egg which would also increase the need for secrecy.  Many have said that Harry’s wife doesn’t act maternal nor at ease with Archie.  Could it be because Archie doesn’t have her DNA?


One presumes anyone officially associated with the BRF (in a medical capacity) has signed a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA).  That is possibly redundant since doctors (midwives ?? nurses too???) are bound by patient confidentiality in the UK. I know that for a FACT - just watched a 2002 BBC mystery where that came up.  Legal scholars please weigh in.

Archie has MM DNA - he has her eyes in the XMAS card when he was like 8 months old or the 1rst birthday video (with the famous droopy drawers..) Those are almost the only photos of him from the front.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> wait...so where is Diana’s jewellery then?  Does the RF or spencer  family still have it?  I was shocked by that aquamarine ring was a copy!!!



If the RF still has Diana's jewelry, they deserve more credit than what we have been giving them. 
This also helps explaining Cringe's anger towards the in-laws...


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> She seems to go strait from conception to very / heavily pregnant


That explains it!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not convinced. First, the palace can't deny Harry to give away stuff he inherited to whomever. Second, the earrings are shot at a different angle and the Di pic is blurry. Third, the Skippy person lost me when they claimed her engagement ring came from CVS.


I agree with you, but it would have been interesting if the info posted was correct. I read somewhere that they had to limit her access to the vault when she was in the UK. I wonder why... 

Someone posted that the watch she purchased was like Diana's, is that right? Cartier has zillions of models... That would be creepy...


----------



## Sharont2305

Aimee3 said:


> I never thought one way or another about Harry’s wife using a non royal Gyno/obgyn but now that I’m thinking about it, if she did use a surrogate she couldn’t possibly use a royal dr.  Wouldn’t a royal Gyno/obgyn have a duty to the royal family first and thus reveal the real goings on?  I’m also wondering if they used a donor egg which would also increase the need for secrecy.  Many have said that Harry’s wife doesn’t act maternal nor at ease with Archie.  Could it be because Archie doesn’t have her DNA?


Or Archie is most definitely her son, has the same dna and just doesn't care for one of his parents. Just like mum.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but it would have been interesting if the info posted was correct. I read somewhere that they had to limit her access to the vault when she was in the UK. I wonder why...
> 
> Someone posted that the watch she purchased was like Diana's, is that right? Cartier has zillions of models... That would be creepy...
> View attachment 5080606


She wouldn't have access to the vault, the vault would've been brought to her so to speak, and the Queen would've been in charge.


----------



## Chanbal

This is sick... 

_Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._









						Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
					

Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I browsed Twitter and info on Inskip and others is resurfacing. Yacht girl (https://twitter.com/yachtgirlmm?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author) posted pictures & videos of H's wife and let's say they are not very royal! Obviously the pictures/videos are real, but if the info is true... 



Spoiler: Inskip


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


They’re really going for it, huh?!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



oh, the ignorance and irony 

*Sir Timothy John Berners-Lee* OM KBE FRS FREng FRSA FBCS (born 8 June 1955),[1] also known as *TimBL*, is an *English* computer scientist best known as the inventor of the World Wide Web.


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


Hahahahahahahahaa, that is hilarious! Asking Twitter to block an entire country from the service?  

These nutters are delusional.


----------



## queennadine

Chanbal said:


> If the RF still has Diana's jewelry, they deserve more credit than what we have been giving them.
> This also helps explaining Cringe's anger towards the in-laws...



IF this is true, I believe William had something to do with it. 
I obviously don’t think the engagement ring is from QVC, but the aquamarine ring worn the night of the wedding certainly doesn’t look like Diana’s. Unless Diana had more than one, which is entirely possible.


----------



## Chanbal

queennadine said:


> IF this is true, I believe William had something to do with it.
> I obviously don’t think the engagement ring is from QVC, but the aquamarine ring worn the night of the wedding certainly doesn’t look like Diana’s. Unless Diana had more than one, which is entirely possible.


I also believe the wedding ring is (very) real. I don't know about the aquamarine ring, not familiar with it.   

I understand that H's wife purchased her own Cartier watch years ago, which is perfectly normal. However, I was under the impression from one of the Tweets that the purchased watch is like the one from Diana, is that right?


----------



## Aimee3

To me it always looked like he has Harry’s shaped eyes and is possibly cross eyed like Harry’s baby photos.    If they used a donor egg, then they probably picked a donor that looked like Harry’s wife, preferably without her personality.


----------



## redney

I don't think it matters if Archie is biologically Harry's wife's son or not. A narcissistic parent puts themselves first regardless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Keeping with today‘s Unreal theme:


----------



## TC1

queennadine said:


> IF this is true, I believe William had something to do with it.
> I obviously don’t think the engagement ring is from QVC, but the aquamarine ring worn the night of the wedding certainly doesn’t look like Diana’s. Unless Diana had more than one, which is entirely possible.


Perhaps MM had the aquamarine re-set? we know she likes to do that.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ... the Skippy person lost me when they claimed her engagement ring came from CVS.


As if. Can't see Meg wearing anything cheap, even if a copy. Her copy will be an extremely expensive copy.


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan court case 'not over yet' as ‘very complicated' process begins
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has "still got to argue" with the Mail on Sunday over the remaining issues in her lawsuit against them despite victory in her claims, royal commentators have warned.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Yanca

I read VAx live rating was not that high, people are really getting tired of these celebrities preaching us mere mortals on what we should do. As usual the PR machines of the hazzard duo  were in full blast, the diapers and cleaning  wipes donation via Proctor and Gamble last mother day, etc, why among the other philanthropist their donations and every move are announced and documented? must not be all them and maybe the charities are willing to be used for Publicity too to attract more donors. They are getting too much with their antics, of course sharing for the less fortunate should always be encouraged, it's just galling that they probably donate a few boxes and they are hailed left and right , their foundation always act as a middle man, why was it not specified  what came from them and from proctor and gamble? the money they spent on PR and Publicity could have been donated and they could have given more.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy to know that JCMH found his Shangri-la! Where was this good friend when poor H's wife was having her mental health issues?  












						Prince Harry 'spiritually at home' in California, Bryony Gordon says
					

Bryony Gordon, 40, wrote in The Telegraph Prince Harry, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California, has found a 'sense of purpose' since stepping back.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Keeping with today‘s Unreal theme:



That’s pathetic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> IF this is true, I believe William had something to do with it.
> I obviously don’t think the engagement ring is from QVC, but the aquamarine ring worn the night of the wedding certainly doesn’t look like Diana’s. Unless Diana had more than one, which is entirely possible.



Maybe Meghan had the setting changed. Like she did with her engagement ring.


----------



## redney

Yanca said:


> I read VAx live rating was not that high, people are really getting tired of these celebrities preaching us mere mortals on what we should do. As usual the PR machines of the hazzard duo  were in full blast, the diapers and cleaning  wipes donation via Proctor and Gamble last mother day, etc, why among the other philanthropist their donations and every move are announced and documented? must not be all them and maybe the charities are willing to be used for Publicity too to attract more donors. They are getting too much with their antics, of course sharing for the less fortunate should always be encouraged, it's just galling that they probably donate a few boxes and they are hailed left and right , their foundation always act as a middle man, why was it not specified  what came from them and from proctor and gamble? the money they spent on PR and Publicity could have been donated and they could have given more.


Television ratings have been low for many events this year. So many people I know, myself included, have "cut the cord" with broadcast TV/cable and instead use streaming services. Can't tell you when I last watched something on the US media channels ABC, CBS, NBC.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> isn't trolling a negative thing?  so their friend is calling them trolls?



Yes, but he obviously doesn't use it in the negative way it's normally used. You can tell he thinks they are letting the world have it, rightfully so.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Happy to know that JCMH found his Shangri-la! Where was this good friend when poor H's wife was having her mental health issues?
> View attachment 5080713
> 
> View attachment 5080714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'spiritually at home' in California, Bryony Gordon says
> 
> 
> Bryony Gordon, 40, wrote in The Telegraph Prince Harry, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California, has found a 'sense of purpose' since stepping back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Sounds like he'd be spiritually at home anywhere his family isn't.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but it would have been interesting if the info posted was correct. I read somewhere that they had to limit her access to the vault when she was in the UK. I wonder why...



Yes, but that was the Queen's jewelry including the items she lent to Diana, not Diana's personal collection which the boys inherited. Who knows...it was reported it was due to Her Majesty's displeasure with Duchess Disney's behaviour, but at this point, I wouldn't think it completely impossible if Harry asked for something outrageously stupid like letting MM wear the Lover's Knot which has been on loan to Kate for years. Ya know, just to make her feel welcome and like she wasn't below Kate in rank. 

Now that I think of it a bit more, the Queen doesn't strike me as a petty person who'd pull out some random, unrelated punishment just because, so I really wonder if it was something similar to what I described.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but it would have been interesting if the info posted was correct. I read somewhere that they had to limit her access to the vault when she was in the UK. I wonder why...
> 
> Someone posted that the watch she purchased was like Diana's, is that right? Cartier has zillions of models... That would be creepy...
> View attachment 5080606



They were both Tank Francaises but Meghan's was two tone and Diana's was full gold it looks like. That's not really that creepy... the Tank Francais is extremely popular.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



Honestly, if I was Duchess Disney I'd think hard if I wanted to be associated with people that far off the deep end.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One thing that always struck me as odd: this is a woman who sues when a magazine reports she bought a copper bathtub. Yet she seems completely unfazed by all the people claiming she used to prostitute herself? I'm really starting to wonder why. Yes, it's not on the front of the DM, but you can - and people do - go after random internet posters.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> wait...so where is Diana’s jewellery then?  Does the RF or spencer  family still have it?  I was shocked by that aquamarine ring was a copy!!!


Yeah, where is all of Diana's jewelry then?  I'm confused.  I'm not sure I believe this one.  My mother recently gifted me with her gorgeous aquamarine and diamond ring, which I adore.  DH and DD's reactions?  It's pretty, but that color looks fake!


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One thing that always struck me as odd: this is a woman who sues when a magazine reports she bought a copper bathtub. Yet she seems completely unfazed by all the people claiming she used to prostitute herself? I'm really starting to wonder why. Yes, it's not on the front of the DM, but you can - and people do - go after random internet posters.



Have there been magazine/news reports saying she was a prostitute? I thought that was just an internet rumor but no outlets have actually tried to make that claim. Celebrities usually don't bother suing individual people... not much to gain there, financially or otherwise. You just look like you're punching down versus taking on a corporation.


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Hmm...



The folds under her stomach?  Are they talking about the dress?


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> I suspect she doesn’t have a big bump until close to the end, (and that because she wants to draw attention to her pregnant state) she augments it.
> *That dress though.  Has to be one of the most unflattering things she’s ever worn*


That's saying a lot.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> The folds under her stomach?  Are they talking about the dress?



It looks like her dress just hiked up a bit.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



Cancel Culture is going for whole countries now?    How ambitious of them.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, but it would have been interesting if the info posted was correct. I read somewhere that they had to limit her access to the vault when she was in the UK. I wonder why...
> 
> Someone posted that the watch she purchased was like Diana's, is that right? Cartier has zillions of models... That would be creepy...
> View attachment 5080606


I could've sworn we discussed her Cartier watch before being inscribed as "To MM from MM"?  She could be wearing her own watch and calling it Diana's every time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> It looks like her dress just hiked up a bit.


Yes.  I am no fan of MM (shocking to you all, I know), but some of these things are ridiculous.  I don't see her belly in folds, just looks like the dress to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

redney said:


> I don't think it matters if Archie is biologically Harry's wife's son or not. A narcissistic parent puts themselves first regardless.


As far as the BRF is concerned, I think it's more important if Archie is biologically Harry's than Meg's.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> That’s pathetic.


And unoriginal, just like every.other.thing.they.do.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> They’re really going for it, huh?!


Hmmmm. Maybe other intelligent, informed, sensible, ethical, analytical, insightful, people around the world, like those who post on this Forum, are starting to make an impact and the only alternative to the stans is to cancel.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Hmmmm. Maybe other intelligent, informed, sensible, ethical, analytical, insightful, people around the world, like those who post on this Forum, are starting to make an impact and the only alternative to the stans is to cancel.


Maybe they'll aim to cancel this thread next.  Then we've really hit the big leagues.


----------



## Hermes Zen

lalame said:


> They were both Tank Francaises but Meghan's was two tone and Diana's was full gold it looks like. That's not really that creepy... the Tank Francais is extremely popular.


Agree with you lalame that M's was two-tone.  In case others have interest and missed it, here's an article that was posted several pages back.



> https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/2493844/meghan-markle-cartier-watch-baby-girl-heirloom/
> 
> *Meghan Markle has a £4,800 Cartier watch she plans to give to her baby girl*


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> They were both Tank Francaises but Meghan's was two tone and Diana's was full gold it looks like. That's not really that creepy... the Tank Francais is extremely popular.


Cartier watches come in several models/versions (I've a few ), it would have been rather creepy to have chosen the exact same one imo. It looks like it's a different watch, a much less expensive version of Diana's Tank Française. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I could've sworn we discussed her Cartier watch *before being inscribed as "To MM from MM"*?  She could be wearing her own watch and calling it Diana's every time.



How appropriate. From the person she loves the most, to the person she loves the most.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Cartier watches come in several models/versions (I've a few ), it would have been rather creepy to have chosen the exact same one imo. It looks like it's a different watch, a much less expensive version of Diana's Tank Française. Thanks for clarifying.



What do you mean? It's a two tone Tank Francaise... funny enough I only really started getting interested in Meghan because I was researching a TF myself and came across all those articles about her and her watch. Ended up getting a Datejust instead.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, if I was Duchess Disney I'd think hard if I wanted to be associated with people that far off the deep end.


She needs all her stans at the present time. She might become more selective after making her billions...


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> What do you mean? It's a two tone Tank Francaise... funny enough I only really started getting interested in Meghan because I was researching a TF myself and came across all those articles about her and her watch. Ended up getting a Datejust instead.


As you have said, one is solid gold and the other one is steel/gold... That is already a major difference!


----------



## queennadine

TC1 said:


> Perhaps MM had the aquamarine re-set? we know she likes to do that.





bag-mania said:


> Maybe Meghan had the setting changed. Like she did with her engagement ring.



The pics looked like Diana’s was longer and more rectangular and MM’s was very square. Maybe my eyes deceived me, lol.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heavily pregnant??? Um, I’m so going with the surrogate. This is not the same pregnancy face we saw with Archie.
> 
> View attachment 5078716
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes call for COVID vaccine to be equitably distributed
> 
> 
> The VaxLive concert aired on US television on Saturday night, with Prince Harry taking to the stage to call for distribution of the vaccine across the globe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He sounds so ignorant of the issues. His simplistic view doesn’t influence anyone with intelligence.


HA .. so I'm not the only one who thought exactly the same!!!  Her face does not look puffy at all, and it sure did when she was "carrying" Archie!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> The folds under her stomach?  Are they talking about the dress?



December, 2018 - 4 months pregnant????










						Meghan Markle Just Wore Florals for Winter—Here's Why It's Groundbreaking
					

She's wearing the brand editors love.




					uk.style.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

She does have a gift for getting big companies to fork over money to her. Sunshine Sachs is working over time singing her praises. Is anyone stupid enough to believe all of the "Meghan changes the world" sh*t?

*Meghan Markle Comes Full Circle with the Feminist Campaign She Launched When She Was Just 11!*

When she was 11 years old, Meghan spoke out after seeing an advertisement for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared, "Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans."

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry just announced a new partnership with a brand that has a special connection to the Duchess of Sussex.

The couple's Archewell Foundation announced a multi-year global partnership with Procter & Gamble on Tuesday.

"Based on shared values, the partnership will focus on gender equality, more inclusive online spaces, and resilience and impact through sport," according to the announcement. "It will build on joint aspirations, most recently demonstrated by our work together in support of Global Citizen's_ VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World_, an event that inspired vaccine confidence worldwide and mobilized more than $300 million in the push for greater global access to COVID-19 vaccines."

When she was 11 years old, Meghan wrote to Procter & Gamble after seeing an advertisement for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared, "Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans."

"At age 11, I had seen a commercial at the time that I thought to be very sexist," Meghan said during a 2019 panel discussion for International Women's Day. "Truth be told, at 11 I don't think I even knew what sexism meant. I just knew that something struck me internally that was telling me it was wrong, and I knew that it was wrong. And using that as my moral compass and moving through from the age of 11, at that age I was able to change this commercial."

She added, "It really set up the trajectory for me to say, if there was a wrong, if there is a lack of justice, and there is an inequality, then someone needs to do something. And why not me?"

Meghan's tactic was effective: The company ended up changing their slogan from "women all over America" to "people all over America."

Fittingly, gender equality is a key focus of the partnership.

"Through Archewell Foundation, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on a mission to build a more equitable and just future for women and girls," they said. "In this partnership, Archewell Foundation and P&G will put a priority focus on gender equity."

Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, are welcoming a daughter this summer.
In a virtual speech for the Global Citizen's _VAX Live: The Concert to Reunite the World_ over the weekend, Meghan talked about how expecting a baby girl has opened their eyes even further to the plight of young girls around the world.









						Meghan Markle Comes Full Circle with the Feminist Campaign She Launched When She Was Just 11!
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Archewell Foundation is partnering with Procter & Gamble, which has a longtime connection to Meghan




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> She does have a gift for getting big companies to fork over money to her. Sunshine Sachs is working over time singing her praises. Is anyone stupid enough to believe all of the "Meghan changes the world" sh*t?
> 
> *Meghan Markle Comes Full Circle with the Feminist Campaign She Launched When She Was Just 11!*
> 
> When she was 11 years old, Meghan spoke out after seeing an advertisement for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared, "Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans."
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry just announced a new partnership with a brand that has a special connection to the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> The couple's Archewell Foundation announced a multi-year global partnership with Procter & Gamble on Tuesday.
> 
> "Based on shared values, the partnership will focus on gender equality, more inclusive online spaces, and resilience and impact through sport," according to the announcement. "It will build on joint aspirations, most recently demonstrated by our work together in support of Global Citizen's_ VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World_, an event that inspired vaccine confidence worldwide and mobilized more than $300 million in the push for greater global access to COVID-19 vaccines."
> 
> When she was 11 years old, Meghan wrote to Procter & Gamble after seeing an advertisement for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared, "Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans."
> 
> "At age 11, I had seen a commercial at the time that I thought to be very sexist," Meghan said during a 2019 panel discussion for International Women's Day. "Truth be told, at 11 I don't think I even knew what sexism meant. I just knew that something struck me internally that was telling me it was wrong, and I knew that it was wrong. And using that as my moral compass and moving through from the age of 11, at that age I was able to change this commercial."
> 
> She added, "It really set up the trajectory for me to say, if there was a wrong, if there is a lack of justice, and there is an inequality, then someone needs to do something. And why not me?"
> 
> Meghan's tactic was effective: The company ended up changing their slogan from "women all over America" to "people all over America."
> 
> Fittingly, gender equality is a key focus of the partnership.
> 
> "Through Archewell Foundation, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on a mission to build a more equitable and just future for women and girls," they said. "In this partnership, Archewell Foundation and P&G will put a priority focus on gender equity."
> 
> Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, are welcoming a daughter this summer.
> In a virtual speech for the Global Citizen's _VAX Live: The Concert to Reunite the World_ over the weekend, Meghan talked about how expecting a baby girl has opened their eyes even further to the plight of young girls around the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Comes Full Circle with the Feminist Campaign She Launched When She Was Just 11!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Archewell Foundation is partnering with Procter & Gamble, which has a longtime connection to Meghan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Article says 0 about what this "partnership" is about.  Is P&G giving them money? Or giving who money?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> IMO Meghan hit the jackpot being a WOC at this time in history.  She never really represented herself that way before but now it's a huge benefit, affording her super protections.


But yet .. does she "truly" embrace her WOC attributes? .. to me, that hair of hers is NOT what she originally had and if she truly wants to represent Women of Color, let that hair be natural!!!


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> She does have a gift for getting big companies to fork over money to her. Sunshine Sachs is working over time singing her praises. Is anyone stupid enough to believe all of the "Meghan changes the world" sh*t?
> 
> *Meghan Markle Comes Full Circle with the Feminist Campaign She Launched When She Was Just 11!*
> 
> When she was 11 years old, Meghan spoke out after seeing an advertisement for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared, "Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans."
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry just announced a new partnership with a brand that has a special connection to the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> The couple's Archewell Foundation announced a multi-year global partnership with Procter & Gamble on Tuesday.
> 
> "Based on shared values, the partnership will focus on gender equality, more inclusive online spaces, and resilience and impact through sport," according to the announcement. "It will build on joint aspirations, most recently demonstrated by our work together in support of Global Citizen's_ VAX LIVE: The Concert to Reunite the World_, an event that inspired vaccine confidence worldwide and mobilized more than $300 million in the push for greater global access to COVID-19 vaccines."
> 
> When she was 11 years old, Meghan wrote to Procter & Gamble after seeing an advertisement for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared, "Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans."
> 
> "At age 11, I had seen a commercial at the time that I thought to be very sexist," Meghan said during a 2019 panel discussion for International Women's Day. "Truth be told, at 11 I don't think I even knew what sexism meant. I just knew that something struck me internally that was telling me it was wrong, and I knew that it was wrong. And using that as my moral compass and moving through from the age of 11, at that age I was able to change this commercial."
> 
> She added, "It really set up the trajectory for me to say, if there was a wrong, if there is a lack of justice, and there is an inequality, then someone needs to do something. And why not me?"
> 
> Meghan's tactic was effective: The company ended up changing their slogan from "women all over America" to "people all over America."
> 
> Fittingly, gender equality is a key focus of the partnership.
> 
> "Through Archewell Foundation, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on a mission to build a more equitable and just future for women and girls," they said. "In this partnership, Archewell Foundation and P&G will put a priority focus on gender equity."
> 
> Meghan, 39, and Prince Harry, 36, are welcoming a daughter this summer.
> In a virtual speech for the Global Citizen's _VAX Live: The Concert to Reunite the World_ over the weekend, Meghan talked about how expecting a baby girl has opened their eyes even further to the plight of young girls around the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Comes Full Circle with the Feminist Campaign She Launched When She Was Just 11!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Archewell Foundation is partnering with Procter & Gamble, which has a longtime connection to Meghan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I read an article not long ago that they decided to change the commercial just before receiving M's letter. I haven't found that article yet but maybe someone else recall reading that? Maybe that article wasn't true or could it be?


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> December, 2018 - 4 months pregnant????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Just Wore Florals for Winter—Here's Why It's Groundbreaking
> 
> 
> She's wearing the brand editors love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.style.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5080941


Her belly looks completely different than when she was sitting. This dress is weird choice. She looks like an overstuffed sausage.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> But yet .. does she "truly" embrace her WOC attributes? .. to me, that hair of hers is NOT what she originally had and if she truly wants to represent Women of Color, let that hair be natural!!!


I understand what you're saying, but hair to me doesn't mean much.  I have my hair straightened with Japanese straightening religiously, because I always wanted my college roommate's beautiful slick straight Asian hair.  She got perms because she wanted curls!  I feel like a lot of women want what they don't have when it comes to hair.  I straighten mine because my curls are so uncontrollable it drives me bat $hit crazy, not because I want to be white.

(Someone slap me, I'm defending Meg again.  )


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Article says 0 about what this "partnership" is about.  Is P&G giving them money? Or giving who money?



That is the magic of their PR machine. They make H&M sound like they are the most influential people on the planet and companies cannot wait to throw millions at them.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I understand what you're saying, but hair to me doesn't mean much.  I have my hair straightened with Japanese straightening religiously, because I always wanted my college roommate's beautiful slick straight Asian hair.  She got perms because she wanted curls!  I feel like a lot of women want what they don't have when it comes to hair.  I straighten mine because my curls are so uncontrollable it drives me bat $hit crazy, not because I want to be white.
> 
> (Someone slap me, I'm defending Meg again.  )



I like the truth more than I dislike (or like) any one person. Sounds like you too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DeMonica said:


> Her belly looks completely different than when she was sitting. This dress is weird choice. She looks like an overstuffed sausage.



Remember, before leaving her cottage, she looked in the mirror and thought, “Damn, I look good.”
Kinda says it all.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> December, 2018 - 4 months pregnant????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Just Wore Florals for Winter—Here's Why It's Groundbreaking
> 
> 
> She's wearing the brand editors love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.style.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5080941


Crap, my belly looks bigger than hers and I'm -189 months pregnant!


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> Her belly looks completely different than when she was sitting. This dress is weird choice. She looks like an overstuffed sausage.



I'm pained looking at that dress... it is SO tight and the material looks like it's giving way. I'd look like a stuffed sausage in it, pregnant or not!


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> December, 2018 - 4 months pregnant????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Just Wore Florals for Winter—Here's Why It's Groundbreaking
> 
> 
> She's wearing the brand editors love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.style.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5080941



Are you thinking her bump looks too big or too small for 4 months?


----------



## bisousx

purseinsanity said:


> I understand what you're saying, but hair to me doesn't mean much.  I have my hair straightened with Japanese straightening religiously, because I always wanted my college roommate's beautiful slick straight Asian hair.  She got perms because she wanted curls!  I feel like a lot of women want what they don't have when it comes to hair.  I straighten mine because my curls are so uncontrollable it drives me bat $hit crazy, not because I want to be white.
> 
> (Someone slap me, I'm defending Meg again.  )



This ^. We need to stop telling WOC what they should do with their hair. I find it offensive to tell or be told how to look if I want to represent my peeps.


----------



## Aimee3

In the standing up photo, it looks like the bump shifted to her backside because her tush is much bigger than her stomach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Are you thinking her bump looks too big or too small for 4 months?



Neither.  I’m thinking her butt looks huge, maybe it’s just the angle. Her arms, face and legs are thin thin thin. The photo was in December, they announced in September. Some thought she was 3 months along then, maybe 2. So in December she would have been 6 months, right?  Baby was born in May, they say.  Exactly how far along was she in Sept?  Her pregnancy would be 9 months, right? Maybe 10?  Ugh,  Nothing with them feels right or normal, ever.  Or in this case, _looks_ right.

ETA:  they are always screwing with our minds,


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Neither.  I’m thinking her butt looks huge, maybe it’s just the angle. Her arms, face and legs are thin thin thin. The photo was in December, they announced in September. Some thought she was 3 months along then, maybe 2. So in December she would have been 6 months, right?  Baby was born in May, they say.  Exactly how far along was she in Sept?  Her pregnancy would be 9 months, right? Maybe 10?  Ugh,  Nothing with them feels right or normal, ever.



If Archie was born in May, then I think December would be about 5 months. I've noticed lots of thin women maintain thin arms, face, and legs in pregnancy if they were thin beforehand. It just comes down to your body I think. She doesn't look like she ever gains an ounce to those places, except maybe her face (or fillers).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> But yet .. does she "truly" embrace her WOC attributes? .. to me, that hair of hers is NOT what she originally had and if she truly wants to represent Women of Color, let that hair be natural!!!


Yes.  Let us see that big hair like her childhood pics


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> If Archie was born in May, then I think December would be about 5 months. I've noticed lots of thin women maintain thin arms, face, and legs in pregnancy if they were thin beforehand. It just comes down to your body I think. She doesn't look like she ever gains an ounce to those places, except maybe her face (or fillers).


Yes, it’s all down to her body. Plus, they do try to keep the public confused. It keeps them in the news. More click$$.









						These Details in Meghan Markle’s Baby Photos Reveal the Totally Normal Effects of Giving Birth
					

And she still managed to look flawless!




					www.prevention.com


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, it’s all down to her body. Plus, they do try to keep the public confused. It keeps them in the news. More click$$.
> 
> View attachment 5080997
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These Details in Meghan Markle’s Baby Photos Reveal the Totally Normal Effects of Giving Birth
> 
> 
> And she still managed to look flawless!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.prevention.com



But where is the confusion lol. Seems to come down to different bodies.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree with you lalame that M's was two-tone.  In case others have interest and missed it, here's an article that was posted several pages back.


I’ve gone on record before about how much mixing metals stresses me out.
So of course I feel completely validated hearing that captain calamity herself went for Two tone   


Chanbal said:


> Honesty has a 'new meaning' in our 'new normal...
> 
> View attachment 5079594
> 
> _According to a statement, *Harry and Oprah will 'guide honest discussions about mental health* and emotional well-being' while opening up about 'their own mental health journeys and struggles' throughout the series._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry warns majority of people 'carry some form of unresolved trauma'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex , 36, is the co-creator and executive producer on The Me You Can't See, a new programme with the US chat show queen which will start on the streaming service on May 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Hate to be cynical but I am really sick of this self-promotion getting rebranded as ‘raising awareness’. At least most celebs in the old days would admit they were just trying to flog their book or whatever. 

I don’t think we need more awareness of these problems. I think it’s quite well recognised at this point. Also, If you live an isolated life of fame and luxury there is little relevance in your story for the vast majority of people and you aren’t really telling them anything useful. 


purseinsanity said:


> Scientology doesn't believe in psychiatry and psych meds, right?  Wasn't Nicole Kidman's father a psychologist or psychiatrist and that was an issue too?  Cruise won't give any sympathy to Meg and her "mental health struggles".


Imagine if cruise came on for an intervention Jerry Springer style. Imagine if TC called you ‘delusional’ 
I think would melt with sheer embarrassment. 


lalame said:


> Come to think of it, H/M might be perfect successors to Tom Cruise in scientology.   They're almost there...
> 
> Isolate yourself from friends and family who don't believe in your truth
> Get treated like royalty by hordes of minions manipulated to think you're infallible
> Be seen as paragon of charity while still benefiting from multi-million dollar day job
> Decry religious/social persecution while launching vicious attacks on others


A cult is a cult is a cult I guess. 





bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Elton is thinking these days. He couldn't wait to lend them a jet and give them a place to stay early on. I imagine he isn't quite as happy with them now.


Elton knows which side his bread is buttered and which is soaked in old lemon juice.


Chanbal said:


> Happy to know that JCMH found his Shangri-la! Where was this good friend when poor H's wife was having her mental health issues?
> View attachment 5080713
> 
> View attachment 5080714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'spiritually at home' in California, Bryony Gordon says
> 
> 
> Bryony Gordon, 40, wrote in The Telegraph Prince Harry, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California, has found a 'sense of purpose' since stepping back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I don’t want to offend any of the California girls present but the idea that anyone could find British society too judgemental and pressurised and then conclude the logical thing to do is to try and make it in showbiz in the Golden state.....well.... it doesn’t really make a lot of sense.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> This ^. We need to stop telling WOC what they should do with their hair. I find it offensive to tell or be told how to look if I want to represent my peeps.



Agree. Makes no sense. Imagine telling any woman, of any race, they must not be proud of or represent their race because of the way they wear their hair.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> But where is the confusion lol. Seems to come down to different bodies.



How old is Archie? Where was he born? Blah blah blah.
Now that we fully understand how these two operate, we know they will knowingly deceive us, that they are in it for themselves, etc., none of that really matters.  See, we know so much more about them now, the less interesting they are and the less likable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Agree. Makes no sense. Imagine telling any woman, of any race, they must not be proud of or represent their race because of the way they wear their hair.



True for any woman IMO.  Silver hair is quite ok.
ETA: mother’s ought to teach their daughters that any man who chooses based on hair color, hair style, any superficial stuff - give that one a pass. Plenty of men who will love their daughters for who they are.

ETA2: The people who told MM to change her hair were who?  Hwood people? Magazines she read?  I doubt any of those messages came from her family.  This is why mothers need to keep the daughters away from the Disney messages. Moms, it is up to you.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> True for any woman IMO.  Silver hair is quite ok.
> ETA: mother’s ought to teach their daughters that any man who chooses based on hair color, hair style, any superficial stuff - give that one a pass. Plenty of men who will love their daughters for who they are.
> 
> ETA2: The people who told MM to change her hair were who?  Hwood people? Magazines she read?  I doubt any of those messages came from her family.  This is why mothers need to keep the daughters away from the Disney messages. Moms, it is up to you.



I think the message is a little off here. Mothers should teach their daughters to wear whatever the hell they want to, including their hair, whether that's the hair they were born with or not. Your preferences for hair style or color doesn't make you any more or less what you are, whether that be a woman or a woman of color.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think the message is a little off here. Mothers should teach their daughters to wear whatever the hell they want to, including their hair, whether that's the hair they were born with or not. Your preferences for hair style or color doesn't make you any more or less what you are, whether that be a woman or a woman of color.



We all get to have our own opinions. 
Moms and dads are the key to their child’s success. Kids require love, guidance and nurturing, especially when peer pressure and Hwood pressure are involved.  Even today impressionable girls are getting flawed messages.  IMO, ymmv.

The thing that has damaged  H&M most is their sweeping, high-minded platitudes. They don‘t live up to their own messages. When a celeb, royal, whoever chooses to lecture us, they need to walk their talk. H&M missed that message. H, probably because Diana was inconsistent and unsteady. M, probably because she was immersed in Hwood & Disney culture.  Eventually, they will figure it out. Whether or not they own their mistakes is an altogether different level of thinking.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I understand what you're saying, but hair to me doesn't mean much.  I have my hair straightened with Japanese straightening religiously, because I always wanted my college roommate's beautiful slick straight Asian hair.  She got perms because she wanted curls!  I feel like a lot of women want what they don't have when it comes to hair.  I straighten mine because my curls are so uncontrollable it drives me bat $hit crazy, not because I want to be white.
> 
> (Someone slap me, I'm defending Meg again.  )


I've similar recollections... straight to curls and vice versa. It may take some time (or serious damage) until one's accepts her own hair.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> We all get to have our own opinions.
> Moms and dads are the key to their child’s success. Kids require love, guidance and nurturing, especially when peer pressure and Hwood pressure are involved.  Even today impressionable girls are getting flawed messages.  IMO, ymmv.



What is this false dichotomy between telling a child they must wear their natural hair or they must change their natural hair? Nurture and love your child by telling them to do whatever makes them happy. It could be their natural hair one day, a different hairstyle another day, and back and forth forever. There is nothing loving or nurturing about the message that a woman has to look ANY certain way.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Oops
If P&G was looking for publicity, they may have done a bad deal...


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> What is this false dichotomy between telling a child they must wear their natural hair or they must change their natural hair? Nurture and love your child by telling them to do whatever makes them happy. It could be their natural hair one day, a different hairstyle another day, and back and forth forever. There is nothing loving or nurturing about the message that a woman has to look ANY certain way.



Hold up.
Perhaps I’m misreading your posts. MM’s hair, straight or curly, has always looked good. She has a perfect face that can handle any hairstyle.  Again, ymmv.

From 2019:
https://www.allure.com/gallery/meghan-markle-hair-evolution


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up.
> Perhaps I’m misreading your posts. MM’s hair, straight or curly, has always looked good. She has an almost perfect face that can handle any hairstyle.  Again, ymmv.
> 
> From 2019:
> https://www.allure.com/gallery/meghan-markle-hair-evolution



I think we're talking 2 different things, my friend. I was just making the point that hairstyle is no reflection on how black, white, asian, indian, anything, someone is. There was a comment made about that. Not yours. 

FWIW, I think Meghan looked much better with straight hair. She chose the best style for her face. But hard to say since she hasn't worn the curls in a long time and might carry them totally differently as an adult.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Actually, I take that back. I think her best hair style is wavy, which complements her heart shaped face. Stick straight is a bit too severe on her.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

MMs new BFF is being accused of being a bully. Wonder if she will try to distance herself from her now.









						Chrissy Teigen Is Being Accused Of Bullying A 16-Year-Old Courtney Stodden And Telling Them To Commit Suicide
					

"[Chrissy] wouldn’t just publicly tweet about wanting me to take 'a dirt nap' but would privately DM me and tell me to kill myself."




					www.buzzfeed.com


----------



## Lodpah

Seems every one associated with MM eventually gets marked or some drama happens.


----------



## Aimee3

Speaking of hair (I know OT but I’m curious what you all think) I read a young woman in India cut her very long hair into a bob, and they cut off 7 Feet of hair and it weighed 9 pounds!!!  How is that possible?  Wouldn’t her head be jerked backwards from all that weight pulling on her head?  Supposedly she’s going to be in the Guinness book of records and the hair is going to some museum.


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Speaking of hair (I know OT but I’m curious what you all think) I read a young woman in India cut her very long hair into a bob, and they cut off 7 Feet of hair and it weighed 9 pounds!!!  How is that possible?  Wouldn’t her head be jerked backwards from all that weight pulling on her head?  Supposedly she’s going to be in the Guinness book of records and the hair is going to some museum.


Exaggeration? My hair is down to my thighs now, and I've had it past my knees before, and I never felt the weight. Let me ask my Indian buddies. They have lovely thick glossy hair (can you hear my envy?  ). I think as the hair grows, you just get accustomed to the weight.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Aimee3 said:


> Speaking of hair (I know OT but I’m curious what you all think) I read a young woman in India cut her very long hair into a bob, and they cut off 7 Feet of hair and it weighed 9 pounds!!!  How is that possible?  Wouldn’t her head be jerked backwards from all that weight pulling on her head?  Supposedly she’s going to be in the Guinness book of records and the hair is going to some museum.



Some Indians have really thick hair. Growing up I had super thick hair, like 5-6 shoots of hair growing in one single follicle. My hair was so thick that it was really hard to see my scalp. My hair also grows super fast so I guess 7 feet of hair and 9lbs sounds reasonable.

I have super straight and silky hair, and it really doesn't curl so I get super envious of girls with loose curls. I think wanting what we can't have runs true with hair. We used to talk about this at secondary school.


----------



## Jktgal

@Aimee3, interesting. I googled. 
I know people with this thick hair. You can floss with their hair.   

"Although a single strand of hair looks very thin and fragile, it can carry a weight of up to 100 grams. This is because of the three-layered structure of the hair shaft and also the strong keratin fibers that make up the middle layer, or the cortex, of the hair strand."








						Test the Strength of Hair
					

A hairy science project from Science Buddies




					www.scientificamerican.com


----------



## lalame

God bless this thread.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MMs new BFF is being accused of being a bully. Wonder if she will try to distance herself from her now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Is Being Accused Of Bullying A 16-Year-Old Courtney Stodden And Telling Them To Commit Suicide
> 
> 
> "[Chrissy] wouldn’t just publicly tweet about wanting me to take 'a dirt nap' but would privately DM me and tell me to kill myself."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeed.com


Chrissy Teigan is, to me, a hypocritical, two bit, vulgar low life "model", whose jokes and bullying I absolutely abhor.  She seems to think that because she is married to a famous singer, she is somehow more important and thus entitled to open her inflated bulbous lips and scream the loudest, and we'll all sit up and listen to her BS.  This know it all is telling a 16 year old that she wishes she were dead?  WTF is wrong with this woman?  She herself was 20 when she met John.  Not much older.  I found the whole Stodden/Doug Hutchinson thing completely disturbing more because of HIM.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Speaking of hair (I know OT but I’m curious what you all think) I read a young woman in India cut her very long hair into a bob, and they cut off 7 Feet of hair and it weighed 9 pounds!!!  How is that possible?  Wouldn’t her head be jerked backwards from all that weight pulling on her head?  Supposedly she’s going to be in the Guinness book of records and the hair is going to some museum.


I don't know, but my hair is pretty thick and HEAVY.  I've cut off 12" before and ran home to see how much weight I lost (don't ask )  I can't imagine dealing with 7 feet of it.   That lady must have some strong neck muscles that strengthened the more it grew!


----------



## Aimee3

Jktgal said:


> @Aimee3, interesting. I googled.
> I know people with this thick hair. You can floss with their hair.
> 
> "Although a single strand of hair looks very thin and fragile, it can carry a weight of up to 100 grams. This is because of the three-layered structure of the hair shaft and also the strong keratin fibers that make up the middle layer, or the cortex, of the hair strand."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Test the Strength of Hair
> 
> 
> A hairy science project from Science Buddies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scientificamerican.com


I knew I’d get answers and feedback from this very diverse group!  Thank you to all who answered.  I thought I had thick and heavy hair but mine is nothing like what some have described.  Going to see if I can weigh it!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m jealous of all this thick hair!!


----------



## Aimee3

well maybe not very scientifically done but I think my hair weighs 1.5 pounds on the kitchen scale!  Who knew?!?


----------



## queennadine

Omg if I see the words “equality” and “equity” and “inclusion” and “internal” thrown out in meaningless jibber jabber one more time...


----------



## bisousx

Aimee3 said:


> Speaking of hair (I know OT but I’m curious what you all think) I read a young woman in India cut her very long hair into a bob, and they cut off 7 Feet of hair and it weighed 9 pounds!!!  How is that possible?  Wouldn’t her head be jerked backwards from all that weight pulling on her head?  Supposedly she’s going to be in the Guinness book of records and the hair is going to some museum.



This must be the reason I hate what I see on the scale. It’s the weight of all this hair


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Little more info on the subject.  Also per article ... No additional details on the partnership were provided, but according to a statement shared online by P&G, more details will be announced "in the weeks and months ahead as P&G and Archewell Foundation work to do more for our communities." Can't wait to see what more M&H will announce. 

Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, have set the goal of "building a better online environment that unlocks positive, compassionate, and creative spaces" with P&G.




> https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/meghan-markle-prince-harry-partner-procter-gamble
> 
> *Meghan Markle, Prince Harry partner with Procter & Gamble years after she asked company to change ‘sexist’ ad*
> *The Sussexes are launching a 'multi-year global partnership' with the company*
> Nate DayPublished 54 mins ago


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Little more info on the subject.  Also per article ... No additional details on the partnership were provided, but according to a statement shared online by P&G, more details will be announced "in the weeks and months ahead as P&G and Archewell Foundation work to do more for our communities." Can't wait to see what more M&H will announce.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, have set the goal of "building a better online environment that unlocks positive, compassionate, and creative spaces" with P&G.


So much verbal fluff. And it runs counter to all those measurable goals that I have to set for myself in my staff performance review. There is no gauge to measure if they have unlocked or activated anything. In the "weeks and months" ahead, we'll still have MM sniffling about negativity and the lack of compassion for herself.


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Little more info on the subject.  Also per article ... No additional details on the partnership were provided, but according to a statement shared online by P&G, more details will be announced "in the weeks and months ahead as P&G and Archewell Foundation work to do more for our communities." Can't wait to see what more M&H will announce.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, have set the goal of "building a better online environment that unlocks positive, compassionate, and creative spaces" with P&G.


Multi-year global partnership lololol!  Just more overblown verbosity.  P&G send to many charities and these two will attempt to make it sound like it is an exclusive.


----------



## Chanbal

A tortured soul! 

*Stop torturing yourself, Harry*

_Prince Harry is absolutely correct when he says that most people ‘carry some form of unresolved trauma, loss or grief’.

But not everyone chooses to resolve that trauma in public, which is what he has been doing — consciously or unconsciously — since he entered a commercial partnership with Oprah Winfrey.

Can’t he see that by airing his grievances like this he is simply perpetuating the cycle?

I’ve always felt for Harry, and for his brother, William, who both suffered a very great tragedy when they lost their mother at such a tender age.

They could not help but be shaped by it.

*With Kate, William was lucky enough to marry a woman who has been able, somehow, to help heal that wound.

Meghan, by contrast, seems to have had the opposite effect on Harry.*

That may not be her fault: but there is no doubt that Harry is — or at least appears to be — a much more tortured soul than he was before he turned his back on his home and surrendered to the siren call of Hollywood._









						SARAH VINE: Take it from me, having a difficult dad can be a gift
					

SARAH VINE: Adele's estranged father, Mark Evans, has died at the age of 57 from bowel cancer. A one-time alcoholic, he spent the last few years of his life living modestly in Bridgend, Wales.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Little more info on the subject.  Also per article ... No additional details on the partnership were provided, but according to a statement shared online by P&G, more details will be announced "in the weeks and months ahead as P&G and Archewell Foundation work to do more for our communities." Can't wait to see what more M&H will announce.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, have set *the goal of "building a better online environment that unlocks positive, compassionate, and creative spaces" with P&G.*



To achieve that goal, maybe they should set up an online chat forum. They could make people pay to post, probably would generate lots of revenue. They could make it as ‘creative’ as they wish


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> To achieve that goal, maybe they should set up an online chat forum. They could make people pay to post, probably would generate lots of revenue. They could make it as ‘creative’ as they wish


They could creatively make it a subscription service; only members can post. Then the revenue is guaranteed even if people don't post much. They could bill it as a "safe place" where people won't get cyberbullied and can share uplifting tales of compassion. Then mine it for material for their podcasts and productions.


----------



## Icyjade

Clearblueskies said:


> I suspect she doesn’t have a big bump until close to the end, (and that because she wants to draw attention to her pregnant state) she augments it.
> That dress though.  Has to be one of the most unflattering things she’s ever worn



I think so too. If you have strong abs, you actually may not show much until the last trimester. That was the case with my sister and some other women I know especially for the first child. Like no bump for months and suddenly the bump is there in the last trimester. My sis was hardly showing in her second trimester.




purseinsanity said:


> The folds under her stomach?  Are they talking about the dress?



It’s the way the dress folds under the tummy that looks completely unnatural




xincinsin said:


> I think as the hair grows, you just get accustomed to the weight.



Agree! I cut my waist length hair to ‘boy cut’ length once and my goodness my head felt light for the rest of the day. Like I could literally feel the weight go off.

Also when my hair was a certain length I do like to tie up my hair and rest them on my shoulders in a particular way as it felt lighter.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> To achieve that goal, maybe they should set up an online chat forum. They could make people pay to post, probably would generate lots of revenue. They could make it as ‘creative’ as they wish


Hell if they are paying decently I’ll post about how much I love Harry’s red hair and how I empathise with the struggle of rhyming words until the cows come home.

It’s always good to be able to find the positives in people.

If she starts carrying decent bags again we can all be rich! Rich! Rich!
Get the lady Dior out the vault stat!


----------



## CarryOn2020

They can get Serena’s husband to set it up.  Perfect business plan, could be a global game-changer


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve gone on record before about how much mixing metals stresses me out.
> So of course I feel completely validated hearing that captain calamity herself went for Two tone
> 
> 
> Hate to be cynical but I am really sick of this self-promotion getting rebranded as ‘raising awareness’. At least most celebs in the old days would admit they were just trying to flog their book or whatever.
> 
> I don’t think we need more awareness of these problems. I think it’s quite well recognised at this point. Also, If you live an isolated life of fame and luxury there is little relevance in your story for the vast majority of people and you aren’t really telling them anything useful.
> 
> Imagine if cruise came on for an intervention Jerry Springer style. Imagine if TC called you ‘delusional’
> I think would melt with sheer embarrassment.
> 
> A cult is a cult is a cult I guess.
> Elton knows which side his bread is buttered and which is soaked in old lemon juice.
> 
> I don’t want to offend any of the California girls present but the idea that anyone could find British society too judgemental and pressurised and then conclude the logical thing to do is to try and make it in showbiz in the Golden state.....well.... it doesn’t really make a lot of sense.


I am not the least bit offended by your statement.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> God bless this thread.


Amen!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> December, 2018 - 4 months pregnant????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Just Wore Florals for Winter—Here's Why It's Groundbreaking
> 
> 
> She's wearing the brand editors love.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.style.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5080941


That dress is such a nightmare. You can tell fashion editors are getting paid if they are claiming this is a hot design from a cool brand. this and the terrible photography are why I am so sick of Vogue et al.

It looks like when there was that trend for poly-satin mock Chinese meets western dresses for little girls and teens in the late 90s from the likes of Tammy girl and new look.
Also looks like she just picked it up, worn and crumpled, from the teen’s bedroom floor.


Shopaholic2021 said:


> Some Indians have really thick hair. Growing up I had super thick hair, like 5-6 shoots of hair growing in one single follicle. My hair was so thick that it was really hard to see my scalp. My hair also grows super fast so I guess 7 feet of hair and 9lbs sounds reasonable.
> 
> I have super straight and silky hair, and it really doesn't curl so I get super envious of girls with loose curls. I think wanting what we can't have runs true with hair. We used to talk about this at secondary school.


I agree I used to want a curl or a wave but it won’t take it at all.

Oh gosh, when I went through the terrible wrong thickness of extensions phase. I had some gorgeous thick hair (which I think was Indian) that wouldn’t blend with my fine texture at all. Tiered hair horror. I don’t know what my excuse is as I had internet then. 

I mean to be fair to me MM often seems to wear the wrong thickness and she’s had even longer to figure it out.

OT but speaking of fashion, I’m thinking of getting my colour palette done but I’m kind of afraid that I’ll get a crazy stylist like MM and they’ll tell me to wear fuschia and Navy .

Has anyone had their colours done?


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> That dress is such a nightmare. You can tell fashion editors are getting paid if they are claiming this is a hot design from a cool brand. this and the terrible photography are why I am so sick of Vogue et al.
> 
> It looks like when there was that trend for poly-satin mock Chinese meets western dresses for little girls and teens in the late 90s from the likes of Tammy girl and new look.
> Also looks like she just picked it up, worn and crumpled, from the teen’s bedroom floor.
> 
> I agree I used to want a curl or a wave but it won’t take it at all.
> 
> Oh gosh, when I went through the terrible wrong thickness of extensions phase. I had some gorgeous thick hair (which I think was Indian) that wouldn’t blend with my fine texture at all. Tiered hair horror. I don’t know what my excuse is as I had internet then.
> 
> I mean to be fair to me MM often seems to wear the wrong thickness and she’s had even longer to figure it out.
> 
> OT but speaking of fashion, I’m thinking of getting my colour palette done but I’m kind of afraid that I’ll get a crazy stylist like MM and they’ll tell me to wear fuschia and Navy .
> 
> Has anyone had their colours done?


I knew someone who had their colours done, she wouldn’t wear anything but sludgy browns and yellows for years.  Didn’t suit her at all, and put me off the idea completely


----------



## gerryt

Clearblueskies said:


> I knew someone who had their colours done, she wouldn’t wear anything but sludgy browns and yellows for years.  Didn’t suit her at all, and put me off the idea completely


I had mine done years and years ago - ‘diagnosed’ a Winter which did reflect the colours I felt best in.  Didnt stop me buying clothes I loved which weren’t in that palette though!  Am now in my 60s, hair colour has changed, skin tone too, to a lesser degree.  Do you think it’s possible to change from the original diagnosis or do you ultimately stay in the same colours group for life?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> I knew someone who had their colours done, she wouldn’t wear anything but sludgy browns and yellows for years.  Didn’t suit her at all, and put me off the idea completely


I strongly suspect she got told she’s an autumn and I will be too as I’ve got yellow tones in my skin and dark hair. I actually like yellow  though.


gerryt said:


> I had mine done years and years ago - ‘diagnosed’ a Winter which did reflect the colours I felt best in.  Didnt stop me buying clothes I loved which weren’t in that palette though!  Am now in my 60s, hair colour has changed, skin tone too, to a lesser degree.  Do you think it’s possible to change from the original diagnosis or do you ultimately stay in the same colours group for life?


That said I might be a winter or I think I am sometimes as I have high contrast.
I think your season has got to change a bit as people’s skin tone can change dramatically with age and if you go grey/dye your hair that’s a whole different colour element. I guess sometimes it shows if a hair colour is wrong for you if it doesnt tie in with your complexion. 

there’s a nearby beauticians where they are trying to sell this custom eyebrow package where they dye your brow to the ideal colour. I kid you not the lady who was trying to sell this to me had platinum blonde hair and ginger brown eyebrows.
I politely declined.
it does make me worry about some of these colour gurus though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I read an article not long ago that they decided to change the commercial just before receiving M's letter. I haven't found that article yet but maybe someone else recall reading that? Maybe that article wasn't true or could it be?



I don't have it at hand but I remember that one too, because I came here b*tching about it haha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> MMs new BFF is being accused of being a bully. Wonder if she will try to distance herself from her now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chrissy Teigen Is Being Accused Of Bullying A 16-Year-Old Courtney Stodden And Telling Them To Commit Suicide
> 
> 
> "[Chrissy] wouldn’t just publicly tweet about wanting me to take 'a dirt nap' but would privately DM me and tell me to kill myself."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeed.com



I read that in passing but apparently missed the PM part the first time around. If Courtney tells the truth, WTF is wrong with Chrissy. That girl had it bad enough as is, with her parents allowing her to marry a freaking predator at age 16 who shamelessly exploited her. I was so happy the day she announced she was leaving his sorry a*s and trying to grow up.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> I strongly suspect she got told she’s an autumn and I will be too as I’ve got yellow tones in my skin and dark hair. I actually like yellow  though.
> 
> That said I might be a winter or I think I am sometimes as I have high contrast.
> I think your season has got to change a bit as people’s skin tone can change dramatically with age and if you go grey/dye your hair that’s a whole different colour element. I guess sometimes it shows if a hair colour is wrong for you if it doesnt tie in with your complexion.
> 
> there’s a nearby beauticians where they are trying to sell this custom eyebrow package where they dye your brow to the ideal colour. I kid you not the lady who was trying to sell this to me had platinum blonde hair and ginger brown eyebrows.
> I politely declined.
> it does make me worry about some of these colour gurus though


I think these days some women get eyebrow blind to how odd they look.  Same could be said of our dear friend Omid


----------



## lanasyogamama

History will not look back kindly on what some women have done to their eyebrows.

Did I miss something? Is navy bad?


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> History will not look back kindly on what some women have done to their eyebrows.
> 
> Did I miss something? Is navy bad?


No it really suits a lot of people and blue is really popular. I’m just one of the minority of people who doesn’t really suit or like most blues. I only like powder blue, cornflower and periwinkle,


----------



## rose60610

I've never understood these "color/palette rules", much less feeling one must adhere to what somebody else recommends YOU wear. Some colors look better than others on everybody and I'm not convinced that if "you're a winter you must wear ABC colors" etc.  Sometimes regardless the color there are some wacky patterns that'd look weird on anybody. Meghan has worn some colors that look striking on her, and some that wash her out or look terrible.


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Little more info on the subject.  Also per article ... No additional details on the partnership were provided, but according to a statement shared online by P&G, more details will be announced "in the weeks and months ahead as P&G and Archewell Foundation work to do more for our communities." Can't wait to see what more M&H will announce.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, have set the goal of "building a better online environment that unlocks positive, compassionate, and creative spaces" with P&G.


BFD


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t want to offend any of the California girls present but the idea that anyone could find British society too judgemental and pressurised and then conclude the logical thing to do is to try and make it in showbiz in the Golden state.....well.... it doesn’t really make a lot of sense.



Harry traded in the grey suits of the palace for the equivalent in Hollywood. He just hasn't figured that out yet.  He may think he's calling the shots, but he answers to the people who hired him to produce content or make appearances or whatever, and the second his projects are judged of poor quality or they are badly received or receive poor ratings or people who work with him decide he really is not all that smart, they will toss him aside without a look back.  At least the grey suits of the palace were working with his and his family's long term best interests in mind.


----------



## Aimee3

As far as having your color palette done, I guess it depends on how talented the person doing it is.  There used to be a company “color me beautiful” and they were so wrong in my case.  I think I just don’t fit into cool or warm, I am more neutral in my skin tone so i can get away with both cool and warm tones but only if I stay away from extremes.  I used to own a medium deep peach silk blouse, which according to color me beautiful was supposed to be A great color for me.  However I can tell you that any time I wore that blouse to work, at least 3 people would come up to me and ask if I were feeling ok because I looked like I might be coming down with something!  So that color me beautiful thing do not work for me in either color choices for clothes nor makeup.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read that in passing but apparently missed the PM part the first time around. If Courtney tells the truth, *WTF is wrong with Chrissy.* That girl had it bad enough as is, with her parents allowing her to marry a freaking predator at age 16 who shamelessly exploited her. I was so happy the day she announced she was leaving his sorry a*s and trying to grow up.



I read the article posted too and they have copies of tweets that Chrissy Teigen subsequently deleted where it's clear she did say exactly that to Courtney. Courtney Stodden is now also saying that she sent her DM's as well. WTF is wrong with Chrissy is the right question to be asking.  She needs serious mental help herself.  I used to think she was kind of cute and goofy but no longer.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> there’s a nearby beauticians where they are trying to sell this custom eyebrow package where they dye your brow to the ideal colour. I kid you not the lady who was trying to sell this to me had platinum blonde hair and ginger brown eyebrows.
> I politely declined.
> it does make me worry about some of these colour gurus though


OMG, I had a new hairdresser do my Japanese straightening last summer.  He tells me my eyebrows looked "too harsh" (they're basically black) and convinced me to lighten them just a shade.  What a mistake that was!  I looked like I had no eyebrows all summer and I won't even begin to describe the cackling DH, DS, and DD put me through.  Never doing that again!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> OMG, I had a new hairdresser do my Japanese straightening last summer.  He tells me my eyebrows looked "too harsh" (they're basically black) and convinced me to lighten them just a shade.  What a mistake that was!  I looked like I had no eyebrows all summer and I won't even begin to describe the cackling DH, DS, and DD put me through.  Never doing that again!


could have maybe been worse....I thought you were gonna say they came out red


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I had heard some time ago that Ellen wanted to give up her TV show.  It wasn't fun for her (in spite of all her dancing around).  But she's still on and also on another show?  guess there is never enough money for these people


Ellen DeGeneres Show to End with Upcoming Season 19 | PEOPLE.com 

apparently ellen is now really ending her show?  If People can be believed?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> December, 2018 - 4 months pregnant????
> View attachment 5080941


It's all in the posture and the pronounced lumbar curvature. Sly Harry's wife is pushing her butt backwards and belly forward to accentuate the bump.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> I read the article posted too and they have copies of tweets that Chrissy Teigen subsequently deleted where it's clear she did say exactly that to Courtney. Courtney Stodden is now also saying that she sent her DM's as well. WTF is wrong with Chrissy is the right question to be asking.  She needs serious mental help herself.  I used to think she was kind of cute and goofy but no longer.


Chrissy as in Harry's wife's new BFF???? What's that old cliche, "Birds of a feather flock together." The Douche Duchess is just more subtle in her destruction of people, she's been doing it longer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Icyjade said:


> Somehow now when I see her photos I wonder how many doses of vaccines each designer dress can pay for. It’s like a subconscious thing.
> 
> Also, the hair even with extensions can’t compare to Kate’s beautiful tresses. If she wants to be a WOC rep, she should let her naturally kinky hair shine. Stop straightening!


She will never let her hair go back to its natural state, imo. She's always hidden what she is, both race and personality. She's only trotted out the POC label recently because it "sells".

And yes Kate has the most gorgeous hair--shampoo commercial hair. Sigh ...


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I had heard some time ago that Ellen wanted to give up her TV show.  It wasn't fun for her (in spite of all her dancing around).  But she's still on and also on another show?  guess there is never enough money for these people



I think they work so hard to build up what they have that once they get it, it's really hard to let it go... plus it gets easier and easier to make $$$$$$$ the longer you do it. I'm not cut out for that life... I would've retired after the first $50M and pulled an Ashton Kutcher by investing. Passive income, baby.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think they work so hard to build up what they have that once they get it, it's really hard to let it go... plus it gets easier and easier to make $$$$$$$ the longer you do it. I'm not cut out for that life... I would've retired after the first $50M and pulled an Ashton Kutcher by investing. Passive income, baby.


apparently now  - according to People - she is leaving after this season


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> She will never let her hair go back to its natural state, imo. She's always hidden what she is, both race and personality. She's only trotted out the POC label recently because it "sells".
> 
> And yes Kate has the most gorgeous hair--shampoo commercial hair. Sigh ...


right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"

sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This headline is too good to not share


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I same the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really know for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?


Nicole Kidman had stunning curls. I remember her before she came really well known in Bangkok Hilton and Vietnam. Stunning. BTW, those two series are well worth a watch, if you can find them.


----------



## csshopper

An interesting update: When _The Bench _was first announced it was touted as a coming best seller because of the woke author, and was ranked #16 of Amazon's top 100 Books.

Today, the book, due to be released June 8, has now had it's second price reduction: $18.99 to $15.99 to currently $12.91 and is ranked #525 in all books.

In the subsection, "Chidren's Black and African American Story Books" it has gone from #1 to #4.

Relative to conversations here, the #3 book in that subsection is _Hair Love, _priced at $6_._90 

From Amazon: (The sample pages are delightful)
*It's up to Daddy to give his daughter an extra-special hair style in this ode to self-confidence and the love between fathers and daughters, from Academy-Award winning director and former NFL wide receiver Matthew A. Cherry and New York Times bestselling illustrator Vashti Harrison.*
_Zuri's hair has a mind of its own. It kinks, coils, and curls every which way. Zuri knows it's beautiful. When Daddy steps in to style it for an extra special occasion, he has a lot to learn. But he LOVES his Zuri, and he'll do anything to make her -- and her hair -- happy.

Tender and empowering, Hair Love is an ode to loving your natural hair -- and a celebration of daddies and daughters everywhere. A perfect gift for special occasions including Father’s Day, birthdays, baby showers, and more!_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I read the article posted too and they have copies of tweets that Chrissy Teigen subsequently deleted where it's clear she did say exactly that to Courtney. Courtney Stodden is now also saying that she sent her DM's as well. WTF is wrong with Chrissy is the right question to be asking.  She needs serious mental help herself.  I used to think she was kind of cute and goofy but no longer.



I am honestly appalled. I knew she had been after Courtney which I thought was low for a grown woman but I had no idea to which extend. WTFFF.


----------



## youngster

*Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.*
— ABRAHAM LINCOLN (also attributed to Mark Twain and others; there is a Biblical proverb with similar meaning as well)

So, in the spirit of Lincoln or Twain and adapted for modern social media. . . celebrities, entertainers, politicians and cast-off royals take note:
*Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to tweet and remove all doubt.*


----------



## 1LV

Who thinks CT would have apologized if CS had not made the tweets public?  I certainly don’t.  She (CT) left Twitter briefly because her feelings were being hurt.  Hmmm.  Hunting is no fun when the rabbit has the gun.


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> Who thinks CT would have apologized if CS had not made the tweets public?  I certainly don’t.  She (CT) left Twitter briefly because her feelings were being hurt.  Hmmm.  Hunting is no fun when the rabbit has the gun.


No way.  It's the typical celebrity apology where they apologize because they were caught.  If she truly felt badly, she's had 10 years to make a private apology to the girl she wished death upon!


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?



I’ve never seen anyone refer to Debra Messing’s or Nicole Kidman’s natural curls in reference to their whiteness or how they ought to go natural to highlight the strength of their white features, etc. 

Your commenting on a WOC’s physical representation of their race and how they ought to look in order to please your opinions hit on a different level which is inappropriate, not anyone’s place to say so as a non-WOC and dare I say this: a little racist?


----------



## lalame

1LV said:


> Who thinks CT would have apologized if CS had not made the tweets public?  I certainly don’t.  She (CT) left Twitter briefly because her feelings were being hurt.  Hmmm.  Hunting is no fun when the rabbit has the gun.





purseinsanity said:


> No way.  It's the typical celebrity apology where they apologize because they were caught.  If she truly felt badly, she's had 10 years to make a private apology to the girl she wished death upon!



There's a lively convo about this going on in the John and Chrissy thread. Bring all your ideas there so we don't miss out.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?



This is 2 different things. You might ask Debra or Nicole why they don't wear their curly hair anymore, since you liked it, and it would be fine. You would NOT tell Debra or Nicole they aren't being real white gals if they aren't wearing their natural hair. They represent white women just fine no matter what their hair style. And any WOC represents her race just fine no matter what their hair style. 

I highly doubt you look at a black woman on the street and think "she's got straight hair, she must not be that black." It sounds like the exact same thing that's being said about Meghan.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

youngster said:


> I read the article posted too and they have copies of tweets that Chrissy Teigen subsequently deleted where it's clear she did say exactly that to Courtney. Courtney Stodden is now also saying that she sent her DM's as well. WTF is wrong with Chrissy is the right question to be asking.  She needs serious mental help herself.  I used to think she was kind of cute and goofy but no longer.



And this has not been investigated or looked into by the media. If it was someone else who had done this then there would be major headlines. It is ironic that Teigen decided to leave Twitter due to people apparently bullying her, and now it turns out she was the bully along. She went back to twitter after 3 weeks, citing that she was not going to give in to the bullies.

There are reports that she bullied other teenagers too. She called a 9 year old girl 'cocky'. A weird comment to make about a 9 year old who is still growing and learning. Im sure she would not appreciate people calling her children cocky. 

Even if Courtney doesn't release the DMs, the public tweets were terrible and enough to warrant an investigation or censorship. There really isn't any excuse to tell someone to kill themselves, especially someone who is clearly in a abusive relationship.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> This is 2 different things. You might ask Debra or Nicole why they don't wear their curly hair anymore, since you liked it, and it would be fine. You would NOT tell Debra or Nicole they aren't being real white gals if they aren't wearing their natural hair. They represent white women just fine no matter what their hair style. And any WOC represents her race just fine no matter what their hair style.
> 
> I highly doubt you look at a black woman on the street and think "she's got straight hair, she must not be that black." It sounds like the exact same thing that's being said about Meghan.


OK, point taken
Is is all right to say that when I see a WOC with beautiful natural hair, I like it and often compliment her?


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> OK, point taken
> Is is all right to say that when I see a WOC with beautiful natural hair, I like it and often compliment her?



It would to this WOC!  In fact I need the validation... my hair is always a mess no matter the style these days.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> And this has not been investigated or looked into by the media. If it was someone else who had done this then there would be major headlines. It is ironic that Teigen decided to leave Twitter due to people apparently bullying her, and now it turns out she was the bully along. She went back to twitter after 3 weeks, citing that she was not going to give in to the bullies.
> 
> There are reports that she bullied other teenagers too. She called a 9 year old girl 'cocky'. A weird comment to make about a 9 year old who is still growing and learning. Im sure she would not appreciate people calling her children cocky.
> 
> Even if Courtney doesn't release the DMs, the public tweets were terrible and enough to warrant an investigation or censorship. There really isn't any excuse to tell someone to kill themselves, especially someone who is clearly in a abusive relationship.


Twitter has been known to ban people for less than death threats.  Let's see what happens to Chrissy.  My guess?  Absolutely nothing.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I never thought one way or another about Harry’s wife using a non royal Gyno/obgyn but now that I’m thinking about it, if she did use a surrogate she couldn’t possibly use a royal dr.  Wouldn’t a royal Gyno/obgyn have a duty to the royal family first and thus reveal the real goings on?  I’m also wondering if they used a donor egg which would also increase the need for secrecy.  Many have said that Harry’s wife doesn’t act maternal nor at ease with Archie.  Could it be because Archie doesn’t have her DNA?



My partner and I act devotedly and parentally towards our cats and (as far I know) we share no DNA.

However, we don't have a nanny and look after them ourselves. 

Practice makes perfect not inherited genes.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



Takes Brexit > Megxit to a whole new level LOL 

Not that I care, I don't do Twitter and I live on an island.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Takes Brexit > Megxit to a whole new level LOL
> 
> Not that I care, I don't do Twitter and I live on an island.


Haha, I care! I don't have a Twitter account, but have fun with some tweets from the UK.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I care, too. This idea of banning anything we dislike puts us smack in the Middle Ages and contributes more to the dumbing down of the US. If the disastrous duo is so interested in creating a positive social environment, start a damn forum. Have rigid terms of service.  Make it a pay-to-post forum.  Everything heavily filtered and regulated. Then , watch what happens.


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> Little more info on the subject.  Also per article ... No additional details on the partnership were provided, but according to a statement shared online by P&G, more details will be announced "in the weeks and months ahead as P&G and Archewell Foundation work to do more for our communities." Can't wait to see what more M&H will announce.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle, 39, have set the goal of "building a better online environment that unlocks positive, compassionate, and creative spaces" with P&G.


In other words we will censor people. The internet is not a thing that you mold or change. Stupid is as stupid does.


----------



## Icyjade

lalame said:


> I highly doubt you look at a black woman on the street and think "she's got straight hair, she must not be that black." It sounds like the exact same thing that's being said about Meghan.



I don’t because I don’t think they represent themselves like that. I do for JCMH’s wife as she puts herself out there as a WOC rep so I have higher standards/expectations for her.


----------



## lalame

Icyjade said:


> I don’t because I don’t think they represent themselves like that. I do for JCMH’s wife as she puts herself out there as a WOC rep so I have higher standards/expectations for her.



You have higher standards of her to "look" black because she's a WOC who talks about being a WOC? I don't know how she is putting herself out there as a WOC rep but this isn't a fair standard for anyone.

I don't get it. Gal Gadot speaks out about being Israeli, does anyone call her out for not looking Israeli because she straightens her hair too? It's a weird standard for anyone.


----------



## Icyjade

lalame said:


> You have higher standards of her to "look" black because she's a WOC who talks about being a WOC? I don't know how she is putting herself out there as a WOC rep but this isn't a fair standard for anyone.
> 
> I don't get it. Gal Gadot speaks out about being Israeli, does anyone call her out for not looking Israeli because she straightens her hair too? It's a weird standard for anyone.



We can agree to disagree. I was just explaining my perspective, not expecting/requiring you to agree.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Oh dear, Jason Knauf is leaving - how sad. 



			https://www.laineygossip.com/longtime-aide-to-prince-william-and-kate-jason-knauf-announces-resignation-raising-a-lot-of-eyebrows/68616
		



They always tell on themselves in the end.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Nicole Kidman had stunning curls. I remember her before she came really well known in Bangkok Hilton and Vietnam. Stunning. BTW, those two series are well worth a watch, if you can find them.


Bangkok Hilton terrified me when I first saw it. Agree about her natural hair.


lalame said:


> I don't get it. Gal Gadot speaks out about being Israeli, does anyone call her out for not looking Israeli because she straightens her hair too? It's a weird standard for anyone.


Most Israelis have straight hair so Gadot might not be the best example. Her hair is straight naturally. She had the ugliest perm at one time, but her hair is naturally shiny and straight.

Speaking of perms, Meg Ryan, Goldie Hawn and Julia Roberts had some great perms back in the day. I wonder if that style will ever return.

Back on topic in a way -  I read that Diana had a perm. I always thought her hairdresser, who blew out her hair twice a day, was responsible for that big hair.  lol


----------



## DrDior

sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?



The texture of one’s hair changes over time, both from environment & aging. I used to have cute curls & now most days I look like Albert Einstein.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO What did H&M _think_ would happen?  Hazzie knew all about the prejudices of British tabloids and the public, so what did he expect to happen? The Palace, like Haz himself,  can tell the press to stop, but what if they don’t?  They have little to no authority to tell a private business to stop, do they? H&M did not have to do those tours, they did not have to have a huge expensive wedding. He is not the heir.  He knew he would not stay on as a working royal. So what did he think would happen?  Knowing what we now know, seems to me he wanted the drama. Sadly MM gets caught in the middle. All my opinion, ymmv.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?



Wait...you know it’s offensive to WOC yet you persist in posting? Sorry I guess I’m one of those deplorable “woke“ people because I cannot understand that at all.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga




----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oh dear, Jason Knauf is leaving - how sad.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.laineygossip.com/longtime-aide-to-prince-william-and-kate-jason-knauf-announces-resignation-raising-a-lot-of-eyebrows/68616
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They always tell on themselves in the end.




Buried in Laney's post is this pretty understandable reason for leaving a job: "So there’s the gossip, but there are also practical angles to this too. Like the fact that Jason’s partner has a job overseas and he’s relocating."

I think that man is probably over all the drama anyway. He seems like a normal guy doing his job, then gets dragged into a lawsuit  (letter copyright) and then gets his name splashed all over the news because of the private bullying complaint. I don't know if he leaked it but one would think he would've kept his own name out of the papers if he did. I'm sure he got inundated with hate messages after that.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Are there any volunteers to throw a baby shower for H's wife?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> 
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


 
Silly devotees! She is a global disaster. If UK is blocked from Twitter, I'd start an account just to hoot at her. I'll admit that I'm petty. MM made a big fuss over how she wanted the Commonwealth with her on what we now know she considers her "faux" wedding, resulting in that very expensive embroidered train which was probably just a prestige point for her (my train is longer than yours!). This member of the Commonwealth is going to be with the false harpy forever.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> This headline is too good to not share
> 
> View attachment 5081732


 
My first thought was Deal or No Deal.



csshopper said:


> An interesting update: When _The Bench _was first announced it was touted as a coming best seller because of the woke author, and was ranked #16 of Amazon's top 100 Books.
> 
> Today, the book, due to be released June 8, has now had it's second price reduction: $18.99 to $15.99 to currently $12.91 and is ranked #525 in all books.
> 
> In the subsection, "Chidren's Black and African American Story Books" it has gone from #1 to #4.
> 
> Relative to conversations here, the #3 book in that subsection is _Hair Love, _priced at $6_._90
> 
> From Amazon: (The sample pages are delightful)
> *It's up to Daddy to give his daughter an extra-special hair style in this ode to self-confidence and the love between fathers and daughters, from Academy-Award winning director and former NFL wide receiver Matthew A. Cherry and New York Times bestselling illustrator Vashti Harrison.*
> _Zuri's hair has a mind of its own. It kinks, coils, and curls every which way. Zuri knows it's beautiful. When Daddy steps in to style it for an extra special occasion, he has a lot to learn. But he LOVES his Zuri, and he'll do anything to make her -- and her hair -- happy.
> 
> Tender and empowering, Hair Love is an ode to loving your natural hair -- and a celebration of daddies and daughters everywhere. A perfect gift for special occasions including Father’s Day, birthdays, baby showers, and more!_


 



sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?





bisousx said:


> I’ve never seen anyone refer to Debra Messing’s or Nicole Kidman’s natural curls in reference to their whiteness or how they ought to go natural to highlight the strength of their white features, etc.
> 
> Your commenting on a WOC’s physical representation of their race and how they ought to look in order to please your opinions hit on a different level which is inappropriate, not anyone’s place to say so as a non-WOC and dare I say this: a little racist?





lalame said:


> This is 2 different things. You might ask Debra or Nicole why they don't wear their curly hair anymore, since you liked it, and it would be fine. You would NOT tell Debra or Nicole they aren't being real white gals if they aren't wearing their natural hair. They represent white women just fine no matter what their hair style. And any WOC represents her race just fine no matter what their hair style.
> 
> I highly doubt you look at a black woman on the street and think "she's got straight hair, she must not be that black." It sounds like the exact same thing that's being said about Meghan.


We are looking at stereotypes, which the transmutable MM is fond of implying. She is biracial but playing the WOC card now. I'm not white or black, but the black stereotype I always had in my mind included large families filled with love and support. MM is only representative of greed and narcissism in my eyes.


----------



## Chanbal

H and wife need a lot of cash, PR seems costly!


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Bangkok Hilton terrified me when I first saw it. Agree about her natural hair.
> 
> Most Israelis have straight hair so Gadot might not be the best example. Her hair is straight naturally. She had the ugliest perm at one time, but her hair is naturally shiny and straight.
> 
> Speaking of perms, Meg Ryan, Goldie Hawn and Julia Roberts had some great perms back in the day. I wonder if that style will ever return.
> 
> Back on topic in a way -  I read that Diana had a perm. I always thought her hairdresser, who blew out her hair twice a day, was responsible for that big hair.  lol



Most 'Israelis' don't have any kind of hair unless you can offer us evidence in a verifiable national survey.

As you may know, during times of slavery in the US, Free Black Americans would often straighten their hair to denote the status as free men and women.  Something slaves were not allowed to do. Conversely, in the wake of the Civil Rights movement letting one's hair be natural was a sign of Black pride. Tulloch C. (2004) _Black Style_ London: V&A Pub ISBN:9781851774241.

Hair is part of fashion as well as identity. Can we just let people have whatever type/style hair they pleasy now? Otherwise you are going to make me start feeling sorry for M -


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chanbal said:


> H and wife need a lot of cash, PR seems costly!




 Sooooo....let me get this straight.  They wanted out, so people wanted them off the payroll - fair enough.  So they were taken off - done.  Then people wanted them to payback what was owed for Frogmore Cottage and pay for their own security - done and done.

They were told to earn their own money. Done.  Obviously this means people don't want them to earn _too _much, don't be _too_ successful. I mean, it's truly laughable.

Keep moving those goalposts.


----------



## Clearblueskies

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Sooooo....let me get this straight.  They wanted out, so people wanted them off the payroll - fair enough.  So they were taken off - done.  Then people wanted them to payback what was owed for Frogmore Cottage and pay for their own security - done and done.
> 
> They were told to earn their own money. Done.  Obviously this means people don't want them to earn _too _much, don't be _too_ successful. I mean, it's truly laughable.
> 
> Keep moving those goalposts.


People wanted them to stop the ceaseless PR and exploiting of their titles and Royal Family connection - not done


----------



## CarryOn2020

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Sooooo....let me get this straight.  They wanted out, so people wanted them off the payroll - fair enough.  So they were taken off - done.  Then people wanted them to payback what was owed for Frogmore Cottage and pay for their own security - done and done.
> 
> *They were told to earn their own money. *Done.  Obviously this means people don't want them to earn _too _much, don't be _too_ successful. I mean, it's truly laughable.
> 
> Keep moving those goalposts.



Since they grift off the titles and his place in line, it isn’t earning their own money.
ETA:  They should pay back the expensive wardrobe, too.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Bangkok Hilton terrified me when I first saw it. Agree about her natural hair.


LOL, me too. It put me off going to Thailand for good, which is wrong as its a beautiful country. My cousin got married there and another cousin lived there on and off for about five years.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Are there any volunteers to throw a baby shower for H's wife?



Side bar, This is such a strange photo of her. Is it photoshopped?It kind of makes her look more like Teri Hatcher than herself 


youngster said:


> Harry traded in the grey suits of the palace for the equivalent in Hollywood. He just hasn't figured that out yet.  He may think he's calling the shots, but he answers to the people who hired him to produce content or make appearances or whatever, and the second his projects are judged of poor quality or they are badly received or receive poor ratings or people who work with him decide he really is not all that smart, they will toss him aside without a look back.  At least the grey suits of the palace were working with his and his family's long term best interests in mind.


I think you are right on the money there. There’s always a quid pro quo. 


purseinsanity said:


> OMG, I had a new hairdresser do my Japanese straightening last summer.  He tells me my eyebrows looked "too harsh" (they're basically black) and convinced me to lighten them just a shade.  What a mistake that was!  I looked like I had no eyebrows all summer and I won't even begin to describe the cackling DH, DS, and DD put me through.  Never doing that again!


Oh gosh yes. I have black eyebrows too and I feel like these beauticians just tell you to do the opposite of what you have. A lot of blondes seem to get black eyebrows then if you’ve got dark hair they try and persuade you to go light brown?
 I get drawing or tattooing them in if you don’t have a lot naturally and I even mine out as one is thicker but changing the colour completely? I don’t get it. 


lalame said:


> Buried in Laney's post is this pretty understandable reason for leaving a job: "So there’s the gossip, but there are also practical angles to this too. Like the fact that Jason’s partner has a job overseas and he’s relocating."
> 
> I think that man is probably over all the drama anyway. He seems like a normal guy doing his job, then gets dragged into a lawsuit  (letter copyright) and then gets his name splashed all over the news because of the private bullying complaint. I don't know if he leaked it but one would think he would've kept his own name out of the papers if he did. I'm sure he got inundated with hate messages after that.


Yes I mean they can always drag him back in for yet another court case regardless of where he goes. However, I do feel like maybe they had an idea he wanted to move so they asked him to wash the dirty laundry for them and he probably got a golden handshake on the way out.


----------



## gerryt

On the colours/skintones/eyebrows front, I‘m Welsh and my natural hair colouring is so dark brown as to be almost black.  My hair started going grey in my twenties so have until recently coloured it back to my natural shade, however my eyebrows have always remained black.  I had a discussion with my hairdresser when we were finally allowed to book appointments, about whether now was the time to go a lighter shade, given how huge my roots were! He suggested blonde as being flattering for older skintones - my concern was that blond hair and black eyebrows would gave made me look like Myra Hindley!  ( I am sure its a good look on some though!).  So I went with a slightly lighter brown with light brown/blonde streaks.  Pleased with it, but am now questioning the colours in my wardrobe!  Getting older is expensive in so many ways!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Are there any volunteers to throw a baby shower for H's wife?




You know, she really has a talent for making something that's actually a good thing that should not invite criticism into a WTF moment. Let's ignore for a moment why this is once again subject for a press release because who cares, but "I feel there's better ways to spend our time"? So full of herself. As if she works 24/7 and doesn't have tons of downtime she spends as she sees fit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Most Israelis have straight hair so Gadot might not be the best example.



They do? Israel is a multi-ethnic state so I honestly doubt that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Hair is part of fashion as well as identity. Can we just let people have whatever type/style hair they pleasy now? Otherwise you are going to make me start feeling sorry for M -



Yeah. She is the poster child of an opportunist, but she'd not be more likeable with her natural hair.

ETA: I perm my lashes because they point downwards due to my ancestors, but until now I didn't see it as a political statement.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. She is the poster child of an opportunist, but *she'd not be more likeable with her natural hair.*
> 
> ETA: I perm my lashes because they point downwards due to my ancestors, but until now I didn't see it as a political statement.


----------



## sdkitty

according to this from People, Anne is firmy Team Sussex 
Princess Anne Thinks Harry And Meghan’s Royal Exit Was 'The Right Thing to Do' (yahoo.com)


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> according to this from People, Anne is firmy Team Sussex
> *Princess Anne Thinks Harry And Meghan’s Royal Exit Was 'The Right Thing to Do' (yahoo.com)*




....so she could be rid of them!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry is going on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry is going on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast.


ha....what is he the expert on?  how to insult and embarass your family?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> according to this from People, Anne is firmy Team Sussex
> Princess Anne Thinks Harry And Meghan’s Royal Exit Was 'The Right Thing to Do' (yahoo.com)



She's a practical woman. Can you imagine the tension had they stayed?


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry is going on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast.



An expert at sitting in an armchair?


----------



## queennadine

I feel like Harry would like to lock everyone he doesn’t like in the Tower.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. She is the poster child of an opportunist, but she'd not be more likeable with her natural hair.
> 
> ETA: I perm my lashes because they point downwards due to my ancestors, but until now I didn't see it as a political statement.


Everything is a political statement now. Put down the perm, woman, and submit to your natural straight lashes


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. She is the poster child of an opportunist, but she'd not be more likeable with her natural hair.
> 
> ETA: I perm my lashes because they point downwards due to my ancestors, but until now I didn't see it as a political statement.


Totally OT: the guy who did my wedding make-up was horrified that I did not own an eyelash curler - supposedly a girl's best friend  
My Indian BFF for the last 30 years was dourly hilarious when I gushed over his baby son's thick curling eyelashes: "Collects dust".


----------



## CarryOn2020

Will the pity party ever end?

*'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*

*Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
*Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
*Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
*Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
*Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
*When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
*Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
*Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
*








						Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
					

The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
> *Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
> *Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
> *When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
> *Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
> *Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Oh, so he had therapy on Meghan's advice but she couldn't get therapy for herself w/o HR setting it up?
And people will buy this crap


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
> *Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
> *Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
> *When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
> *Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
> *Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Sniggering. So she can psychoanalyse him and advise him that he is angry, after which he gets therapy. But when she is supposedly suicidal, they both don't know what to do and she goes to HR for help?
ETA: the last time I asked my HR for help (last month), the HR lady was so "helpful" that I wanted to ram my head against the wall. Does this mean I was suicidal too?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know, she really has a talent for making something that's actually a good thing that should not invite criticism into a WTF moment. Let's ignore for a moment why this is once again subject for a press release because who cares, but "I feel there's better ways to spend our time"? So full of herself. As if she works 24/7 and doesn't have tons of downtime she spends as she sees fit.


Let me see if I understood, you are not offering to throw a baby shower for H's wife.


----------



## lalame

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry is going on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast.



Wow gotta say I am proud of Dax for getting him. I’ve seen Dax’s podcast really blossom over the years in terms of the quality of guests he is able to get. I’ll definitely give this ep a listen. Dax is also a softball like Oprah but he will actually dive deep into the convo because he’s a curious person so should be interesting.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> according to this from People, Anne is firmy Team Sussex
> Princess Anne Thinks Harry And Meghan’s Royal Exit Was 'The Right Thing to Do' (yahoo.com)


Oh yeah! The very right thing, and the sooner the merrier!


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Sniggering. So she can psychoanalyse him and advise him that he is angry, after which he gets therapy. But when she is supposedly suicidal, they both don't know what to do and she goes to HR for help?
> ETA: the last time I asked my HR for help (last month), the HR lady was so "helpful" that I wanted to ram my head against the wall. Does this mean I was suicidal too?


right....anyone with any sense would know the RF is more powerful than HR


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, he criticized the way Charles was raised. 
Does the jerk know he is criticizing QE and Prince Phillip?  No way out of it now. Seems the right thing to do is to renounce his line in the succession, no?


----------



## Chanbal

People on Twitter are talking about H's wife friend.  Are these tweets real? 


One more from the same source:


----------



## queennadine

^ my understanding is it that those tweets of CT’s are very real.


----------



## Jktgal

sdkitty said:


> right - but if now her ticket to being basically teflon is that she is a WOC, then why not accentuate that aspect?  As you say, now it "sells"
> 
> sorry - I know some WOC here will be offended at this conversation but if it matters at all, I say the same thing about white women like Debra Messing and Nicole Kidman - what was wrong with your curly hair? why do we never see it anymore?  do you (esp debra who was really known for that beautiful hair) now think it's messy or somehow not worthy?



Also Harry and his wife are always about 'the authentic self' - when she doctors hair/face/toes, etc. I think the word they want is 'synthetic'.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
> *Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
> *Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
> *When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
> *Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
> *Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


WOW


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are talking about H's wife friend.  Are these tweets real?
> 
> 
> One more from the same source:
> View attachment 5082592



Disgusting. She sounds like a pedophile in the making and yes, women can also be pedophiles.


----------



## duna

I've just Googled this Chrissy Teigen woman as I've never heard of her.....I'm still not sure what she does, but she sure looks like the type of friend Duchess Pinocchio would have!


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> I've just Googled this Chrissy Teigen woman as I've never heard of her.....I'm still not sure what she does, but she sure looks like the type of friend Duchess Pinocchio would have!


Also sounds like the kind of friend that Douchess will Markle if she becomes controversial. I wonder if they have set up the playdate in the chicken coop yet...


----------



## Yanca

Hazza and Megadrama PR team all over twitter today. Hazza was a guest on a  podcast, whining about his family again. Saying growing up in the BRF is a mix of a Zoo and truman show. They are so exhausting and their PR team are working nonstop to put their names out there. I don't get the constant complaining about his family and yet wanting to keep the titles and feeling hurt that his kids wont get any titles. Just be up front and be Hollywood celebrities like their  woke friends, but his constant attack against his royal  family, and the BRF and in a way the UK and its people is too much. They  walked a way buyt  they seemed to be really intent on destroying the institution.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Renounce Renounce Renounce. *
Do it and the entire issue goes away.


----------



## lalame

So I'm going to go out on a limb and say those articles about Harry "regretting" the Oprah interview were... not accurate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
> *Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
> *Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
> *When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
> *Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
> *Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I’m still amazed that anyone finds these two relevant. So the Missus gave him advice about having therapy yet she says she was suicidal and couldn’t get help? Lastly, please tell H it’s time to find a new topic and stop whining.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
> *Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
> *Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
> *When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
> *Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
> *Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


His life now is more like the Truman show than it ever was in the UK, where he was left alone unless on duty for the RF.  He sounds desperately unhappy and totally screwed up.


----------



## Sol Ryan

xincinsin said:


> Sniggering. So she can psychoanalyse him and advise him that he is angry, after which he gets therapy. But when she is supposedly suicidal, they both don't know what to do and she goes to HR for help?
> ETA: the last time I asked my HR for help (last month), the HR lady was so "helpful" that I wanted to ram my head against the wall. Does this mean I was suicidal too?



I mean I don’t want to call him a liar but... he’s been in therapy since before he met MM.....









						Prince Harry says he's been in therapy for seven years
					

Harry and Meghan spoke at their first event since stepping down as Royals.




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				












						Prince Harry Was 'Close to a Complete Breakdown' in Years Following Princess Diana's Death
					

The royal said he sought counseling.




					www.wmagazine.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Better yet, tell the jerk to renounce his place in line and hand the titles back to the Queen, the one who messed up his dad.
Renounce and be done with this $hit$show.


----------



## bag-mania

So the man who has never experienced a day of hardship in his life, who has never had to do without anything, who has always been put on a pedestal for no reason other than the chance of his birth, wants us common folk to feel sorry for him.

What. A. Douchebag.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

For eff sakes....can the dimwit please just STFU and live his "private life" with his annoying wife.

NOONE CARES....BOOHOOO


----------



## Yanca

CarryOn2020 said:


> Better yet, tell the jerk to renounce his place in line and hand the titles back to the Queen, the one who messed up his dad.
> Renounce and be done with this $hit$show.






CarryOn2020 said:


> *Renounce Renounce Renounce. *
> Do it and the entire issue goes away.



Its another day another tantrum by Just call me Hazza.  Hates the Royal family and don't want to renounced his titles and place of sucession, its embarassing for the UK to have this so called UK Prince but really just want to be a American Celebrity. His familly are starting to do Royal duties in person again and he and his fake wife are busy lining their pockets, wanting to be globally adored while thrashing his family everyday. Unreal. You could tell they want to hang on to their titles, their mouthpiece Scoobie Doo always start his twitter post with " Duchess" Megadrama


----------



## CarryOn2020

For W&K’s sake, I hope they cancel the Diana reveal. Doesn’t Hazzie realize that blaming his ‘mum’ weakens her legacy?  Making a show out of her statue seems very silly. She was no victim and neither is he. Renounce and be gone, Hazzie. Your free ride has ended.


----------



## xincinsin

Sol Ryan said:


> I mean I don’t want to call him a liar but... he’s been in therapy since before he met MM.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he's been in therapy for seven years
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan spoke at their first event since stepping down as Royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Was 'Close to a Complete Breakdown' in Years Following Princess Diana's Death
> 
> 
> The royal said he sought counseling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wmagazine.com


Oh, let's just get over it and call him a liar. The way he is editing his own life, it won't be long before No. 1 Fan can start.publicizing _Finding Freedom the re-revised edition (with more truth than before)_.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Phoney pontificators. 

_However, some did mention in passing Harry’s appearance, but again he was talking politics, or rather he attempted to because he clearly didn’t have a clue what he was actually saying, but at least his flailing arms amused us as the masses mocked him again for uttering nonsense. It would have been much better for him if he merely smiled for photos, and left it at that, but *without his title there would be even less interest in him.*_








						The Sussexes ~ Phoney Pontificators?
					

The world deserves a break, no rather we need a break from the duo who claim to want a life of privacy, but instead they bombard the media platforms (or anyone who will listen to their drivel) with…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are talking about H's wife friend.  Are these tweets real?
> 
> 
> One more from the same source:
> View attachment 5082592



Future guest on the Oprah-Harry show about Mental Health? OMG, this woman is S-I-C-K.


----------



## Clearblueskies

He’s just returned from the UK where by all accounts he was totally shocked by the anger and disappointment he received.  This is his reaction.  He feels rejected (all his life he’s been fun, uber-popular Harry) and so now he’s rejecting.  
I’m not a psychologist, although I studied psychology as part of my bachelor's degree - this is just my opinion.  I think he’s in a very bad place and anyone with his best interests at heart should try to make him stop these exploitative appearances and get him some real help. 
Yes he’s immature and entitled and rather stupid, all of that, but he’s being screwed with by a narcissist and narcissists do tremendous harm.


----------



## sdkitty

they're talking about us mean girls again on the why is celeb forum so cruel thread
I don't feel like responding


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> they're talking about us mean girls again on the why is celeb forum so cruel thread
> I don't feel like responding


Then why post it here?  B*tching about other members posts is against tpf rules - if you think someone‘s doing that (and I don’t know the thread you’re referencing) just report it and let the mods deal with it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We aren’t the ones being cruel. 
We aren’t the ones monetizing the Royal family.
We aren’t the ones exploiting his royal connections. 
We aren’t the ones pressing him to reveal salacious details about his family, especially his ‘mum’ and his dad, the future King.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

sdkitty said:


> they're talking about us mean girls again on the why is celeb forum so cruel thread
> I don't feel like responding


Wait is that a real thread?


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> Wait is that a real thread?


yes in the OG Hangout subforum


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *



Yeah, right. It's really time to lay off the drugs, Harry. Not cute anymore.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, right. It's really time to lay off the drugs, Harry. Not cute anymore.


there isn't much cute about him anymore.....for awhile he was cuter than Will but now with the hair loss and all whining and temper tantrums he's lost his charm for me


----------



## queennadine

sdkitty said:


> yes in the OG Hangout subforum


*scurries off*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Disgusting. She sounds like a pedophile in the making and yes, women can also be pedophiles.



There have been rumours. I shrugged it off as haters. Now I think she at least brought it on herself. ETA: I don't think she's an actual pedophile, but after what I've learned about the bullying and the CS incident and now these gross tweets about children she's definitely not right in the head and I wonder what hyperintelligent John sees in her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genetic...pain. Is that guy for real? Is he talking about transgenerational trauma (that does indeed change the genetic make-up of the sufferer)? Is he seriously comparing his hyperprivileged upbringing to, say, a holocaust survivor's trauma or that of a survivor of the ISIS human trafficking of Yezidi women? Shame on you, you spoiled brat.

Honestly, at this point the Windsors have two choices. Abduct him and keep him locked up until they have him deprogrammed, or pretend he died and simply not react to anything he's saying or doing (and with react I mean, don't even acknowledge he exists).

WTFFF.


----------



## Betty-Lou

CarryOn2020 said:


> Phoney pontificators.
> 
> _However, some did mention in passing Harry’s appearance, but again he was talking politics, or rather he attempted to because he clearly didn’t have a clue what he was actually saying, but at least his flailing arms amused us as the masses mocked him again for uttering nonsense. It would have been much better for him if he merely smiled for photos, and left it at that, but *without his title there would be even less interest in him.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes ~ Phoney Pontificators?
> 
> 
> The world deserves a break, no rather we need a break from the duo who claim to want a life of privacy, but instead they bombard the media platforms (or anyone who will listen to their drivel) with…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com



All mainstream media in the United States will say and write anything to get a response and will always interject race into a story for no other reason than to stir the pot. They are not to be trusted.

 I myself live and read this blog from the comfort of my home in the Midwest USA, I never discus the subject with others. 

"I'm sure they don't care"


----------



## TC1

When all else fails, bring up Diana for the sympathy points. He's so unoriginal


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> I mean I don’t want to call him a liar but... he’s been in therapy since before he met MM.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he's been in therapy for seven years
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan spoke at their first event since stepping down as Royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Was 'Close to a Complete Breakdown' in Years Following Princess Diana's Death
> 
> 
> The royal said he sought counseling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wmagazine.com


Yeah on one level I can appreciate that he suffered a great loss young and he was born into a job and a lifestyle he’s not cut out for.
but on the other hand, he has had plenty of chances to retreat quietly and that’s essentially the fate of most of his cousins.
I don’t think he has any right to make these kinds of pronouncements about the mental health and lives of his family and I definitely question how fair it is to blame your family for you and your wife’s mental health struggles - that sounds like manipulative behaviour to me. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Genetic...pain. Is that guy for real? Is he talking about transgenerational trauma (that does indeed change the genetic make-up of the sufferer)? Is he seriously comparing his hyperprivileged upbringing to, say, a holocaust survivor's trauma or that of a survivor of the ISIS human trafficking of Yezidi women? Shame on you, you spoiled brat.
> 
> Honestly, at this point the Windsors have two choices. Abduct him and keep him locked up until they have him deprogrammed, or pretend he died and simply not react to anything he's saying or doing (and with react I mean, don't even acknowledge he exists).
> 
> WTFFF.


I mean royals by their very nature are told they are prominent due to their bloodline so I suppose it’s not surprising that some of them seem obsessed with their lineage.
I think they should cut their losses all round but it’s second nature to keep it in the family as it were


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they're talking about us mean girls again on the why is celeb forum so cruel thread
> I don't feel like responding



Seriously? I'll admit we can really get going on the topic, but we're nowhere close to being as outrageous as the people we are discussing.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They do? Israel is a multi-ethnic state so I honestly doubt that.


I was thinking of the majority that are from Europe, so straight, spirals and waves are more common than springy ringlets or Afro-textured as we were initially discussing.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*


*"Because of 'what it did to mum."* How bad does he think his family treated Diana?  She lived in the palace, was treated like royalty, got do do whatever she wanted, whenever she wanted...

 The divorce changed things, but not that much, other than here losing her HRH and wanting to give up her security.  What is he moaning about?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They do? Israel is a multi-ethnic state so I honestly doubt that.


I used to think all Asians had super straight hair but having worked with Thais I learned that some have curly or wavy hair


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he criticized the way Charles was raised.
> Does the jerk know he is criticizing QE and Prince Phillip?  No way out of it now. Seems the right thing to do is to renounce his line in the succession, no?


well, according to People, the break is permanant....now I'd like to see him removed from the line of succession


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> When all else fails, bring up Diana for the sympathy points. He's so unoriginal


really starting to wonder if she would like being used this way....grow up Harry.  It was very tragic when they lost their mom but others have lost theirs.  not in such a public way but then again those other people didn't have all the wealth and opportunity H had.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> really starting to wonder if she would like being used this way....grow up Harry.  It was very tragic when they lost their mom but others have lost theirs.  not in such a public way but then again those other people didn't have all the wealth and opportunity H had.



Plus, some would say Harry is not the only son of Diana. For some reason, William turned out alright, does his job (and does it well), found himself a great wife who is good for him and is generally able to function.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Plus, some would say Harry is not the only son of Diana. For some reason, William turned out alright, does his job (and does it well), found himself a great wife who is good for him and is generally able to function.


the three year age difference could play a part...but even if Harry took it harder, he doesn't have to spend his whole life moaning about it....you have your freedom, your beautiful WIFE and kids....move on


----------



## TC1

I'm going to need them to trot out a pic of them hanging out in the frozen food section for me to believe they would meet for dates in the supermarket. He has access to everything and anything to keep his privacy, but they would meet at the market?? LOL ok buddy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> the three year age difference could play a part...but even if Harry took it harder, he doesn't have to spend his whole life moaning about it....you have your freedom, your beautiful WIFE and kids....move on



Maybe he should read Philip's upcoming biography (or one of the older ones)...that man lost his father to his mistresses and his mother to madness at an even younger age, but for some reason, I can't recall having ever heard him whine. Instead he made himself into the best version of himself he could. Harry needs to lay off the self-pity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I'm going to need them to trot out a pic of them hanging out in the frozen food section for me to believe they would meet for dates in the supermarket. He has access to everything and anything to keep his privacy, but they would meet at the market?? LOL ok buddy.



Right? It doesn't get more ridiculous.


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right? It doesn't get more ridiculous.



I think he think’s he’s Jasmine from Aladdin. The James Corden interview really has me thinking it...she wants to be the little Mermaid apparently?


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> the three year age difference could play a part...but even if Harry took it harder, he doesn't have to spend his whole life moaning about it....you have your freedom, your beautiful WIFE and kids....move on


My brother and I lost our mother young, I was 16, he was 12.  My dad had a breakdown shortly afterwards and we tried to keep it to ourselves because we were frightened we would be taken away from each other.  My brother struggled a bit more than I did in the early years and was, like Harry, a bit wild in his youth, but by his mid twenties was settled and we have both been lucky to have led pretty good lives.  I am always torn, when listening to Harry, between fully understanding a lot of what he went through as a youngster and wanting to tell him to grow up and count his many blessings. He seems to constantly point outwards wanting to lay blame and doesn’t seem to truly see the need to recognise that ultimately only he himself can solve this.  How will he ever cope when the next major event comes, such as life threatening illness.  But the saddest part of this, to me, is that there are blessings in every situation, in this case the extremely close relationship I have with my brother which has been so all of our lives and was, I feel, our mother’s last gift to us.  Harry too had this in his relationship with William and it astounds me - makes me cry - that he seems to have willingly thrown this away.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Wants to be likable 

The founder of the London Speech Workshop told FEMAIL: 'It's not so much that he's developed an American accent but more that he is adapting his. For example, dropping his Ts… and use of Americanisms.'
She added: 'This softening of his own accent is really his psychology at play... He has a strong desire to be liked and to connect. 
'When we adjust our accents to make people feel comfortable, it's a way of reaching out and saying "I'm like you." It's about being accessible.'


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...cent-sound-American-claims-speech-expert.html
> 
> *Prince Harry is 'adapting his accent' to sound more American and 'be liked', claims speech expert*


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I'm so sorry you went through that @gerryt and so glad you and your brother have each other


----------



## gerryt

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm so sorry you went through that @gerryt and so glad you and your brother have each other


Thank You xx


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> So the man who has never experienced a day of hardship in his life, who has never had to do without anything, who has always been put on a pedestal for no reason other than the chance of his birth, wants us common folk to feel sorry for him.
> 
> *What. A. Douchebag.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

@gerryt, good on you and your brother   

IMO people who are pushing Harry to do these very public shows are using him in the most horrible way.  Yep, I’m looking at OW, GK & the wife.  Seems like they won’t be happy until he breaks down on stage.  Horrible people to surround himself with. Anyone encouraging this path is equally as revolting. Yep, I’m looking at these ‘stans’ and corporations now.  It needs to stop.


----------



## lalame

I don't blame the interviewer... I'm sure if Harry wanted to come on and talk about literally anything other than his dead mother, they would still be happy to have him on. He's the one setting the agenda.


----------



## Chanbal

duchess will do...


----------



## lalame

I think it says a lot that they "left" a year ago and are still talking non-stop about what happened. If they really wanted privacy, less prying eyes, they should stop pouring their hearts (more like baggage) out to every outlet that will listen. Harry's actually doing a roadshow at this point to market the most tragic moments of his life. Why? I get if you want to share about your experience to help other people in the same situation.... but there isn't exactly a huge contingent of "imprisoned" royals desperate to leave and just can't find their voice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't blame the interviewer... I'm sure if Harry wanted to come on and talk about literally anything other than his dead mother, they would still be happy to have him on. He's the one setting the agenda.


yes, I think H&M set the agenda for the Oprah interview.  O obviously thought it would get ratings so she was happy to oblige


----------



## pukasonqo

He was born into a life of privileges and opportunities, yes, he experienced trauma as a child but had access to excellent mental health care and family support 
Currently anywhere we look at in the world there are children and young people literally being torn to pieces, forced to beg, sell themselves or are doing anything to survive another day with no access to aid or education 
As we speak young people are risking their lives crossing oceans and deserts for what they hope is a better life
Maybe Harry should volunteer with Medecins sans Frontiers or the UN refugee program, it might give him some insight into hardship and maybe a cause he can put  his energy into and actually doing something positive and not preaching from his millionaire quarters


----------



## gerryt

CarryOn2020 said:


> @gerryt, good on you and your brother
> 
> IMO people who are pushing Harry to do these very public shows are using him in the most horrible way.  Yep, I’m looking at OW, GK & the wife.  Seems like they won’t be happy until he breaks down on stage.  Horrible people to surround himself with. Anyone encouraging this path is equally as revolting. Yep, I’m looking at these ‘stans’ and corporations now.  It needs to stop.


I totally totally agree. Its all so cruel.  I wish too that Harry could recognise that all he is doing is perpetuating a thought process/situation that will never go away whilst he is feeding the tiger, or allowing others to feed it for him.  For many years the thought that kept me going in adversity was to remind myself that nothing would ever be worse than when our mother died, so anything else that came along I would cope with.  As it turns out that’s not strictly true, life threatening illness for my brother, and once he was well, for me too, came very close to that loss, but fortunately we both survived.  So for many years, acknowledging the magnitude of losing a parent early offered a kind of comfort when worrying about lesser situations, and even when our illnesses exposed that thought as being wrong, at least by then we were mature enough to know that we would ultimately grieve again, but we would get through that too when it came.  Love to all who are ‘up against it’ at this time xxx


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Genetic...pain*. Is that guy for real? Is he talking about transgenerational trauma (that does indeed change the genetic make-up of the sufferer)? Is he seriously comparing his hyperprivileged upbringing to, say, a holocaust survivor's trauma or that of a survivor of the ISIS human trafficking of Yezidi women? Shame on you, you spoiled brat.
> 
> Honestly, at this point the Windsors have two choices. Abduct him and keep him locked up until they have him deprogrammed, or pretend he died and simply not react to anything he's saying or doing (and with react I mean, don't even acknowledge he exists).
> 
> WTFFF.


Genetic pain? It sounds more like a delusional disorder. Levin makes a good point!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> duchess will do...




I don't even understand his quote. Meghan told _Harry_ "you don't need to be a princess..."? Surely she meant 'Prince'?


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> He was born into a life of privileges and opportunities, yes, he experienced trauma as a child but had access to excellent mental health care and family support
> Currently anywhere we look at in the world there are children and young people literally being torn to pieces, forced to beg, sell themselves or are doing anything to survive another day with no access to aid or education
> As we speak young people are risking their lives crossing oceans and deserts for what they hope is a better life
> Maybe Harry should volunteer with Medecins sans Frontiers or the UN refugee program, it might give him some insight into hardship and maybe a cause he can put  his energy into and actually doing something positive and not preaching from his millionaire quarters


exactly
there are many people facing much worse hardship than what he experienced
He needs to take a step back and realize how privileged he has been and continues to be


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> I don't even understand his quote. Meghan told _Harry_ "you don't need to be a princess..."? Surely she meant 'Prince'?


I think MM was referring to herself not needing a title to create her own life, narrative, etc


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> I think MM was referring to herself not needing a title to create her own life, narrative, etc



Why didn't she then?

Instead of her taking his name, he could of taken hers. Equal ops and all that


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I don't even understand his quote. Meghan told _Harry_ "you don't need to be a princess..."? Surely she meant 'Prince'?


I believe H was quoting the wife, Me, Me, Me... It's what counts!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I believe H was quoting the wife, Me, Me, Me...



and there I was, delusional that she was offering advice to her husband, thinking about how to set him free of is hideously entombed life as a rich, powerful playboy Prince, who did exactly what he liked for over 30 years and got rewarded for it over and over. 

But  M was thinking/talking about princess mermaid herself again, quelle surprise. I need to stop giving ether one of these grifters credit.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I don't even understand his quote. Meghan told _Harry_ "you don't need to be a princess..."? Surely she meant 'Prince'?


A "Freudian slip" (an unintentional error regarded as revealing subconscious feelings) since she's figuratively emasculated him. And I don't see any hope, especially following this latest interview, he'll ever retrieve what he's lost and "man up". Too busy playing the poor lost little boy victim role enabled by his wife. It's getting attention, even some $, just what the Grifters crave.

Edit: oops, just read what was posted as I was typing. Guess I interpreted the quote incorrectly if it was Harry speaking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He doesn’t know how to tell a simple story, probably because the wife (TW) has made him rehearse it countless times. When the cameras roll, this is what comes out - you don’t need to be a princess.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> exactly
> there are many people facing much worse hardship than what he experienced
> He needs to take a step back and realize how privileged he has been and continues to be


I’m sure I read that in discussions about their future the Queen offered H&M the opportunity to live in Lesotho and focus on Sentebale. I couldnt understand why they didn’t leap at that at the time, things are so much clearer now!  Perhaps that’s where he should be heading next, should he ever escape her clutches.


----------



## gerryt

gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948


My favourite dessert too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

During an appearance on Dax Shepard‘s “Armchair Expert” podcast on Thursday, May 13 Prince Harry opened up about royal life.

Harry said that being a member of the royal family was similar to being in a cage.

He Knew He Didn't Want to Be a Royal

He was asked if he felt like he was in a "cage" while in his royal duties, having to make his way around the Commonwealth comforting others with a smile on his face, while he himself was also going through a rough time.

"It's the job right? Grin and bear it. Get on with it. I was in my early twenties and I was thinking I don't want this job, I don't want to be here," Prince Harry said. "I don't want to be doing this.'

The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining" and seek help for his mental health.

He talked about how wife Meghan Markle helped him realize he needed therapy.

“It was a conversation that I had with my now-wife. And she saw it. She saw it straightaway. She could tell that I was hurting and that some of the stuff that was out of my control was making me really angry. It would make my blood boil.”

He noted he felt frustrated not being able to change things 

"How are you going to make your mom proud? How are you going to use this platform to really affect change and be able to give people that confidence to be able to change their own lives?'," he said.









						Prince Harry says growing up royal was mix of 'Truman Show' and 'being in a zoo'
					

"The biggest issue for me was that being born into it you inherit the risk."




					www.today.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

_The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining" and seek help for his mental health._
?????

So exactly when did he seek help?

From Jan., 2021:








						All The Royal Family Members Who Opened Up About Going to Therapy
					

'The Crown' season 4 depicts Princess Margaret and others seeking mental health support.




					www.elle.com
				



_Prince Harry has long been open about attending therapy to cope with the loss of his mother Diana at age 12. "I have probably been very close to a complete breakdown on numerous occasions when all sorts of grief and all sorts of lies and misconceptions and everything are coming to you from every angle," he revealed in 2017 on Telegraph reporter Bryony Gordon's podcast Mad World. Harry went on to say that the death of his mother caused "shutting down all of my emotions for the last 20 years." He added, "My way of dealing with it was sticking my head in the sand, refusing to ever think about my mum because why would that help?" *But at age 28, with the help of his brother William, Harry says he saw a therapist "more than a couple of times."* He continued, "The experience I have had is that once you start talking about it, you realize that actually, you're part of quite a big club. I can't encourage people enough to just have that conversation because you will be surprised firstly, how much support you get and secondly, how many people literally are longing for you to come out."_


----------



## lalame

LittleStar88 said:


> He was asked if he felt like he was in a "cage" while in his royal duties, having to make his way around the Commonwealth comforting others with a smile on his face, while he himself was also going through a rough time.
> 
> "It's the job right? Grin and bear it. Get on with it. I was in my early twenties and I was thinking I don't want this job, I don't want to be here," Prince Harry said. "I don't want to be doing this.'



He does realize that is just the nature of a job, right? I had to go back to work 2 weeks after my father died suddenly (and I was lucky to take 2 weeks off). I have sympathy for anyone dealing with depression but this is a very normal experience for those of us who have responsibilities. Calling it a cage is really dramatic.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining"* and seek help for his mental health._



 Um excuse me...what???? That's exactly what he's BEEN DOING all this time after she showed up.....COMPLAIN COMPLAIN COMPLAIN.... LOL thanks for the good laugh Prince Dimwit


----------



## gerryt

Sorry for your loss Lalame.  As you say, we all have responsibilities.  Many people spend a lifetime in a job they hate for the sake of their loved ones.


----------



## csshopper

Now that he has subverted his Grandmother, the Queen, it doesn't seem there is much lower he can go, but given he's under the spell of his Wife, who knows. He's become so loathsome it may be only a matter of time until he takes his shots at his dead Grandfather. 

Oprah will find a way with help from the Douchess. Maybe a new segment of the Oprah-Harry series so he will have time to really really unload, after all it should take at least an hour to continue unpacking the baggage from his horror of a life. 

Odds on his showing up for the unveiling of Diana's statue?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Genetic pain? It sounds more like a delusional disorder. Levin makes a good point!




Isn't it interesting that usually measured people have reached the point of no patience with him anymore.


----------



## lalame

gerryt said:


> Sorry for your loss Lalame.  As you say, we all have responsibilities.  Many people spend a lifetime in a job they hate for the sake of their loved ones.



The more he paints his picture of victimhood, the less sympathetic I feel as it turns out he's struggling with normal life issues... only most don't have a fraction of the privileges. You know what he DIDN'T have to do in his cage? Study hard to get a well-paying job, work hard so he doesn't get evicted, deal with an 8-10 hour work day and then have to go buy groceries, cook, take your car into the shop, etc... all while waking up bright eyed the next morning so the boss doesn't fire him. This guy is literally saying his struggle is to work while depressed? Smh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I don't even understand his quote. Meghan told _Harry_ "you don't need to be a princess..."? Surely she meant 'Prince'?



Do you even go here. As usually, she was talking about herself. (Joking aside, I had to read that three times to somewhat understand the gibberish)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948



You're all kindly invited to hop over to the Philip thread. We've unearthed a former royal chef who cooked for the Queen, Philip and many years for Diana and the boys, and he shared his recipe just a few days ago.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining" and seek help for his mental health._
> ?????



Did he. When is he going to start to stop complaining, though?


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> The more he paints his picture of victimhood, the less sympathetic I feel as it turns out he's struggling with normal life issues... only most don't have a fraction of the privileges. You know what he DIDN'T have to do in his cage? Study hard to get a well-paying job, work hard so he doesn't get evicted, deal with an 8-10 hour work day and then have to go buy groceries, cook, take your car into the shop, etc... all while waking up bright eyed the next morning so the boss doesn't fire him. This guy is literally saying his struggle is to work while depressed? Smh.


I think she brainwashed him and he is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he. When is he going to start to stop complaining, though?


He has such a large chip on his shoulder that the answer is NEVER.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> The more he paints his picture of victimhood, the less sympathetic I feel as it turns out he's struggling with normal life issues... only most don't have a fraction of the privileges. You know what he DIDN'T have to do in his cage? Study hard to get a well-paying job, work hard so he doesn't get evicted, deal with an 8-10 hour work day and then have to go buy groceries, cook, take your car into the shop, etc... all while waking up bright eyed the next morning so the boss doesn't fire him. This guy is literally saying his struggle is to work while depressed? Smh.



‘Yeah, most of us have to pick up after ourselves, do our own grocery shopping, wash our own clothes, even dress ourselves. Sheesh, it is exhausting.      He, the great prince, has ‘people’.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @gerryt, good on you and your brother
> 
> IMO people who are pushing Harry to do these very public shows are using him in the most horrible way.  Yep, I’m looking at OW, GK & the wife.  Seems like they won’t be happy until he breaks down on stage.  Horrible people to surround himself with. Anyone encouraging this path is equally as revolting. Yep, I’m looking at these ‘stans’ and corporations now.  It needs to stop.


It's about cash for all involved parties, I mean interviewers and interviewees. I stopped feeling sorry for H, he is old enough to understand that he doesn't deserve the perks he gets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

papertiger said:


> I don't even understand his quote. Meghan told _Harry_ "you don't need to be a princess..."? Surely she meant 'Prince'?



I think that Meghan was telling Harry that SHE doesn't need the title of princess in order to have a princess lifestyle, she can make it happen without. This further shows Meghan doesn't understand what they BRF stand for and the function of the BRF. She is so far removed from reality.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948



I've eaten it, and I've even made it


----------



## lalame

I was just watching an interview with Chris Rock and he was talking about the troubled Chris Farley. He said he blamed all the entertainment folks, interviewers, etc for enabling him because they only cared about getting him sober just long enough for them to get what they needed and then they dropped him. And the kindest thing you can do for any drug-addicted person is fire them from the job, take away their path to abuse (money in that case). I thought it was interesting, similar to what some are saying here.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Study hard to get a well-paying job











						£45,000 damages for Prince Harry teacher
					

· Eton agrees compensation for former art teacher  · College decides 'to bring matter to a close'




					www.theguardian.com
				




Harry got 'help' to pass his exams in order to join the military.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> During an appearance on Dax Shepard‘s “Armchair Expert” podcast on Thursday, May 13 Prince Harry opened up about royal life.
> 
> Harry said that being a member of the royal family was similar to being in a cage.
> 
> He Knew He Didn't Want to Be a Royal
> 
> He was asked if he felt like he was in a "cage" while in his royal duties, having to make his way around the Commonwealth comforting others with a smile on his face, while he himself was also going through a rough time.
> 
> "It's the job right? Grin and bear it. Get on with it. I was in my early twenties and I was thinking I don't want this job, I don't want to be here," Prince Harry said. "I don't want to be doing this.'
> 
> The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining" and seek help for his mental health.
> 
> He talked about how wife Meghan Markle helped him realize he needed therapy.
> 
> “It was a conversation that I had with my now-wife. And she saw it. She saw it straightaway. She could tell that I was hurting and that some of the stuff that was out of my control was making me really angry. It would make my blood boil.”
> 
> He noted he felt frustrated not being able to change things
> 
> "How are you going to make your mom proud? How are you going to use this platform to really affect change and be able to give people that confidence to be able to change their own lives?'," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says growing up royal was mix of 'Truman Show' and 'being in a zoo'
> 
> 
> "The biggest issue for me was that being born into it you inherit the risk."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com



They both need _intensive_ therapy


----------



## lalame

Do you think Harry realizes Princess Diana didn't die because of the BRF - she died because of the intense gossip and headlines she was constantly a part of? Yet here they are, left the BRF but purposely stoking tons of family gossip, doing as much as possible to get on as many headlines as possible. He gave up the best parts of that situation and perpetuated the worst. Make it make sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> £45,000 damages for Prince Harry teacher
> 
> 
> · Eton agrees compensation for former art teacher  · College decides 'to bring matter to a close'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry got 'help' to pass his exams in order to join the military.



Hold up.
A teacher‘s life is ruined because of this entitled jerk???!!!! 
:shaking my head: 

_Yesterday, Ms Forsyth's lawyer, Anthony Sakrouge of Russell-Cooke, said his client was "content that the settlement that has been agreed reflects the fact that she was unfairly treated"._

””””””””
This is what he said at the time:
_””””””””_
*In his 21st birthday message to the country in September, Harry commented on the accusations: "Maybe it's just part of who I am. I have to deal with it. There's lots of things people get accused of. Unfortunately mine are made public."*

 what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry appears to criticise way he was raised by his father
					

Duke of Sussex also speaks of ‘genetic pain and suffering’ in royal family in new interview in US




					www.theguardian.com
				




_As the podcast was released, it emerged that Madame Tussauds had moved waxwork models of Harry and Meghan away from other members of the House of Windsor and placed them in the attraction’s Hollywood zone with waxworks of other celebrities._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up.
> A teacher‘s life is ruined because of this entitled jerk???!!!!
> :shaking my head:



If I understood the article correctly, she was discriminated against and unfairly dismissed, and the part of her writing Harry's assignments came up at part of the lawsuit but is not directly related.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Prince Harry, a weak student who was helped to cheat in exam, says ex-teacher*

This article is more than 16 years old from May, 2005

Former teachers of Prince Harry at Eton College helped him cheat in his A-level art course because he was such a weak student, a tribunal was told yesterday.

Former teachers of Prince Harry at Eton College helped him cheat in his A-level art course because he was such a weak student, a tribunal was told yesterday.

One teacher allegedly prepared explanatory text to go with images produced by Harry while a second helped the prince insert the lines into a project.

The head of art at Eton also allegedly completed work for Harry which was later published in newspapers around the world.

As the prince began army officer training at Sandhurst yesterday, one of his former teachers, Sarah Forsyth, was claiming that his art exam result, which helped him get into the elite college, was flawed.

Ms Forsyth told an employment tribunal, where she is claiming unfair dismissal, that the evening before a moderator was due at the school to look at the students' AS-level work - which counts towards their A-level grade - she was asked by the head of art, Ian Burke, to prepare text to go with some of Harry's work for his Expressive Project, in which a pupil is required to explain some of his work and relate it to that of great artists.

Ms Forsyth said she was "profoundly shocked", adding: "I was concerned that this was unethical and probably constituted cheating."
She told the tribunal at Reading, Berkshire: "I assumed I had been asked to do this because Prince Harry was a weak student."

Ms Forsyth, 30, said Harry's failings as a student were well known at Eton and she had been told that a teacher who marked Harry's entrance exam had been "desperate" to find points for which he could award marks.

She claims she was too frightened to disobey Mr Burke and did what was asked of her. Later she allegedly saw the prince sitting beside Mr Burke apparently deciding which of her lines should go where. Ms Forsyth claims the prince thanked her for her help.

The former teacher claimed Mr Burke would occasionally help boys complete work while they chatted to him about football and betting, his "pet subjects".

In a witness statement put before the tribunal, Ms Forsyth claimed Mr Burke finished off work for Harry which "featured in the newspapers".

She did not specify in the statement which pictures she was referring to, but in June 2003 a photograph of Harry with two of his screen prints inspired by Aboriginal designs and colours was released to the media.

Eton told the Guardian that this was part of his A-level work, but the college said it did not know if these were the images Ms Forsyth referred to in her statement.

Ms Forsyth had arrived at Eton in September 2000 with an excellent academic record but no formal teaching qualifications. She claims her job went well until Mr Burke's arrival at Eton. She alleges he bullied her.

*Under cross-examination she claimed she was dismissed partly because Mr Burke wanted to give his girlfriend her £28,000 job and partly because of the "Harry mess". The school insists she was sacked because her teaching was not up to scratch.*

Ms Forsyth also claimed she secretly taped a conversation in which the prince confirmed he had written "about a sentence" of the disputed text.

Prince Harry and Eton strongly deny he was guilty of cheating. Mr Burke denies finishing pupils' work.

The hearing continues.









						Prince Harry was helped to cheat in exam, says ex-teacher
					

Former teachers of Prince Harry at Eton College helped him cheat in his A-level art course because he was such a weak student, a tribunal was told yesterday.




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Icyjade

lalame said:


> I don't get it. Gal Gadot speaks out about being Israeli, does anyone call her out for not looking Israeli because she straightens her hair too? It's a weird standard for anyone.



Btw her kid photos. Was curious about her natural hair and found these.


----------



## lalame

Icyjade said:


> Btw her kid photos. Was curious about her natural hair and found these.
> View attachment 5083018
> View attachment 5083019



Yes, another poster pointed this out. You know what I meant. Pick any number of other examples... Nicole Kidman, Selena Gomez, Gemma Chan, J.Lo. Many women, famous and not, dye, curl, or straighten their hair for any number of reasons.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up.
> A teacher‘s life is ruined because of this entitled jerk???!!!!
> :shaking my head:
> 
> _Yesterday, Ms Forsyth's lawyer, Anthony Sakrouge of Russell-Cooke, said his client was "content that the settlement that has been agreed reflects the fact that she was unfairly treated"._
> 
> ””””””””
> This is what he said at the time:
> _””””””””_
> *In his 21st birthday message to the country in September, Harry commented on the accusations: "Maybe it's just part of who I am. I have to deal with it. There's lots of things people get accused of. Unfortunately mine are made public."*
> 
> what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive.


----------



## Chanbal

A must read! 












						SARAH VINE: Now even the Queen can't escape Prince Harry's self pity
					

Not content with embellishing the facts to suit his agenda in the Oprah Winfrey interview Harry - has launched another searing attack on the folks back home, writes SARAH VINE.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

lalame said:


> Do you think Harry realizes Princess Diana didn't die because of the BRF - she died because of the intense gossip and headlines she was constantly a part of? Yet here they are, left the BRF but purposely stoking tons of family gossip, doing as much as possible to get on as many headlines as possible. He gave up the best parts of that situation and perpetuated the worst. Make it make sense.


They switch back and forth about whether BRF or the tabloids were ruining their lives.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> They switch back and forth about whether BRF or the tabloids were ruining their lives.


The only consistent direction they take is that nothing, absolutely nothing, was their fault.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> They switch back and forth about whether BRF or the tabloids were ruining their lives.


Is this Harry? Poor guy... Disorientation and confusion are not good.


----------



## Coconuts40

Leaving his family is one thing.  Throwing them under the bus is another.
I don't think this is a smart move on Harry's end, all these recent interviews about how miserable he was in the Royal Family.  It's not just the Royal Family, it's his Family and this is just not right.  I don't think this will bode well for him in the long run.  These interviews are so cringeworthy.


----------



## Chanbal

The photo taken on prince Louis's birthday, according to Ginger, was Archie on his first day of school, really???  In-person classes in April? I don't think there is a school very close to their 16-restroom mansion. Did they make the pregnant woman walk all the way to school?  









						Prince Harry Reveals Paparazzi Photographed Archie on First Day of School
					

In the family's first major attack on a U.S. outlet, Prince Harry said the 'New York Post' published photos of Archie getting picked up by Meghan Markle.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> The photo taken on prince Louis's birthday, according to Ginger, was Archie on his first day of school, really???  In-person classes in April? I don't think there is a school very close to their 16-restroom mansion. Did they make the pregnant woman walk all the way to school?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reveals Paparazzi Photographed Archie on First Day of School
> 
> 
> In the family's first major attack on a U.S. outlet, Prince Harry said the 'New York Post' published photos of Archie getting picked up by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5083145


I thought we didn’t have the evil press in the US? I thought that’s why they had to come here from the U.K.?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry appears to criticise way he was raised by his father
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex also speaks of ‘genetic pain and suffering’ in royal family in new interview in US
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _As the podcast was released, it emerged that Madame Tussauds had moved waxwork models of Harry and Meghan away from other members of the House of Windsor and placed them in the attraction’s Hollywood zone with waxworks of other celebrities._



They finally made it in Wax Hollywood!  



*A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. *









						Harry and Meghan's waxworks moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds
					

A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. Waxworks of Harry and wife Meghan have been moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds in London. They now stand among …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I thought we didn’t have the evil press in the US? I thought that’s why they had to come here from the U.K.?


Well, one can hire his/her own personal paparazzi almost everywhere in the world.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think she brainwashed him and he is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.



Maybe she did, but that only proves what a weak-minded creature he was to begin with that she could manipulate him so easily.


----------



## DrDior

I wish someone would screw up my life the way Harry’s life has been screwed up! 

Dear BRF, I beg of you, please give me some of your genetic pain!!


----------



## lalame

Sol Ryan said:


> I thought we didn’t have the evil press in the US? I thought that’s why they had to come here from the U.K.?



During the podcast, he mentioned he doesn't really get the 1st amendment and thinks it's a bonkers idea. I don't think he understood for one minute what he was getting into.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> They finally made it in Wax Hollywood!
> 
> View attachment 5083187
> 
> *A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's waxworks moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. Waxworks of Harry and wife Meghan have been moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds in London. They now stand among …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Yikes the MM wax copy has freaky eyes... they should have moved them to the horror section!


----------



## periogirl28

Am glad I did not run into people loitering about, looking down and muttering to themselves about parchment paper (was this for roast chicken I wonder) while I shopped at my local Whole Foods @ Kensington High Street. Would have totally freaked me out.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The photo taken on prince Louis's birthday, according to Ginger, was Archie on his first day of school, really???  In-person classes in April? I don't think there is a school very close to their 16-restroom mansion. Did they make the pregnant woman walk all the way to school?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reveals Paparazzi Photographed Archie on First Day of School
> 
> 
> In the family's first major attack on a U.S. outlet, Prince Harry said the 'New York Post' published photos of Archie getting picked up by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5083145


Sigh! "*First*" major attack. At some point, they will graduate to the category of litigious people whom judges consider frivolous.
"If it [Paparazzi attention] becomes any worse then what you're basically accepting is ... let's punish *people who have got a talent and have literally worked their asses off *to get to a point where, yes, they're making money and, yes, their fans are contributing to that but they're bringing entertainment and value to society."
And he thinks "certain people" should not be weaponizing mental illness. Like who? Himself and Herself?


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> The photo taken on prince Louis's birthday, according to Ginger, was Archie on his first day of school, really???  In-person classes in April? I don't think there is a school very close to their 16-restroom mansion. Did they make the pregnant woman walk all the way to school?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reveals Paparazzi Photographed Archie on First Day of School
> 
> 
> In the family's first major attack on a U.S. outlet, Prince Harry said the 'New York Post' published photos of Archie getting picked up by Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5083145



As a practical matter, I imagine she drove to the school, parked, and walked him in.


----------



## xincinsin

periogirl28 said:


> Am glad I did not run into people loitering about, looking down and muttering to themselves about parchment paper (was this for roast chicken I wonder) while I shopped at my local Whole Foods @ Kensington High Street. Would have totally freaked me out.


If they were talking about anger issues in the supermarket canned food section, that aisle would have cleared out super fast.
In any case, the paps would have caught on if they really were meeting furtively in a supermarket. Maybe they did it all of once.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Harry has managed to go from being one of the most loved royals to being one of the most disliked in a remarkably short time. He’s never going to be any more popular here in the US than he is at the moment and he’s NOT all that popular now. Meghan is even less so.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> If they were talking about anger issues in the supermarket canned food section, that aisle would have cleared out super fast.
> *In any case, the paps would have caught on if they really were meeting furtively in a supermarket. Maybe they did it all of once.*



Just one more of their cutesy little lies to excite their fans.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> During the podcast, he mentioned he doesn't really get the 1st amendment and thinks it's a bonkers idea. I don't think he understood for one minute what he was getting into.


That makes two of them since she didn't know what she signed up for when she married him.


----------



## periogirl28

xincinsin said:


> If they were talking about anger issues in the supermarket canned food section, that aisle would have cleared out super fast.
> In any case, the paps would have caught on if they really were meeting furtively in a supermarket. Maybe they did it all of once.


Glad the closest our paths ever crossed was when his car drove past me on his way back from Invictus Games via Heathrow. Only knew this because it was reported as news then.
As mentioned, the chewing gum on floor might not be Whole Foods either.
But recollections may vary.


----------



## gerryt

lalame said:


> During the podcast, he mentioned he doesn't really get the 1st amendment and thinks it's a bonkers idea. I don't think he understood for one minute what he was getting into.


There’s an excellent article in the March 2018 edition of Prospect magazine that compares the US first amendment with the position within UK law that I just found on google - perhaps he should just do the same search!  Or one of his minions...


----------



## lalame

gerryt said:


> There’s an excellent article in the March 2018 edition of Prospect magazine that compares the US first amendment with the position within UK law that I just found on google - perhaps he should just do the same search!  Or one of his minions...



Honestly I didn't really understand his confusion (as I don't understand the UK law!). Can you or someone knowledgeable break down what the main differences are? ARE there significant differences?


----------



## gerryt

lalame said:


> Honestly I didn't really understand his confusion (as I don't understand the UK law!). Can you or someone knowledgeable break down what the main differences are? ARE there significant differences?


Ooh, not a lawyer or even something similar so would be hesitant to put my spin on it!  Am I allowed to copy excepts from the article here, as the writer explains it pretty well??


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> "If it [Paparazzi attention] becomes any worse then what you're basically accepting is ... let's punish *people who have got a talent and have literally worked their asses off *to get to a point where, yes, they're making money and, yes, their fans are contributing to that but they're bringing entertainment and value to society."


He really did say this??? Pray tell, what talent does he have and what exactly did he work his ass off doing? The only skill I see between the Douche and Douchess of Sucks is her calligraphy. She's qualified to address wedding invitations.

Chrissy Tiegan will soon be Markled. There's a new post on Blind Gossip about her, what a psychopath! I'd post it here, but this isn't her thread.


----------



## gerryt

gerryt said:


> Ooh, not a lawyer or even something similar so would be hesitant to put my spin on it!  Am I allowed to copy excepts from the article here, as the writer explains it pretty well??


If you google Hugh Tomlinson + prospect magazine the article comes up.  It’s an interesting read!


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> They finally made it in Wax Hollywood!
> 
> View attachment 5083187
> 
> *A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's waxworks moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. Waxworks of Harry and wife Meghan have been moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds in London. They now stand among …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



His waxwork is better dressed and groomed. Probably smarter too


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> They finally made it in Wax Hollywood!
> 
> View attachment 5083187
> 
> *A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's waxworks moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. Waxworks of Harry and wife Meghan have been moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds in London. They now stand among …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


And true to life, her dress is a wrinkled mess.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lalame said:


> During the podcast, he mentioned he doesn't really get the 1st amendment and thinks it's a bonkers idea. I don't think he understood for one minute what he was getting into.



Wait.... what the flying f***? Like nah...I really do need to refer him to a Disney+ subscription don’t I?


----------



## Sharont2305

gerryt said:


> My favourite dessert too!


Mine too.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Harry has managed to go from being one of the most loved royals to being one of the most disliked in a remarkably short time. He’s never going to be any more popular here in the US than he is at the moment and he’s NOT all that popular now. Meghan is even less so.



I totally think his popularity is peaking/peaked over here. Even the really left-leaning, young forums I catch have been trending more and more unsympathetic to them. Here's one, if anyone is curious about the comments: https://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/120736731.html?view=comments#comments

Right now they are only interesting because of the whole Megxit thing but you can only trade on that story for so long before it gets tired.


----------



## csshopper

gerryt said:


> There’s an excellent article in the March 2018 edition of Prospect magazine that compares the US first amendment with the position within UK law that I just found on google - perhaps he should just do the same search!  Or one of his minions...


He'll need to hire someone to read and explain it to him. It's sure to contain multi syllable words that will challenge his comprehension.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948


Reminds me of my fave dessert Pavlova. Does it taste like a Pavlova?


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> He'll need to hire someone to read and explain it to him. It's sure to contain multi syllable words that will challenge his comprehension.


Surely his highly-educated beloved amphibian can do that?


----------



## gerryt

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of my fave dessert Pavlova. Does it taste like a Pavlova?


To all intents and purposes, but made with pouring cream.  Actually even nicer if you use Creme fraiche!


----------



## jelliedfeels

ff


TC1 said:


> I'm going to need them to trot out a pic of them hanging out in the frozen food section for me to believe they would meet for dates in the supermarket. He has access to everything and anything to keep his privacy, but they would meet at the market?? LOL ok buddy.


I’m not a spy or anything (or am I?) but it’s driving me crazy because The last place I’d think a celebrity could seek privacy was in a public area with a high footfall 
Has he never heard of private function rooms at bars and clubs? I would’ve thought they could’ve gone to soho farmhouse lol but perhaps Marcus was touching them for a tip & Harry doesn’t carry cash 

add on-  this is a massive throwback but do you remember when there was that drama in Canada where this restaurant said they wouldn’t close for just Harry and Meghan? Weird they thought of private dining in an isolated enclave of Canada (where apparently everyone is super rich anyway) but didn’t think it was an option in a little place called London.

add on add on- the more I think about it, the more I think this is just wish fulfilment for the drooling fan girls-
“Maybe I too will meet a prince in whole foods!”


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of my fave dessert Pavlova. Does it taste like a Pavlova?


Yes, it’s just broken meringue mixed up with cream and strawberries.  Car crash pavlova!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will the pity party ever end?
> 
> *'He’s treated me the way he was treated': Harry claims he moved family to LA to 'break cycle' of 'genetic pain and suffering' passed on from Charles, the Queen and Philip - and 'wanted to quit as royal in early 20s' because of 'what it did to mum'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepherd's podcast before to promote Oprah Apple show and Spotify deals*
> *Compared his royal life to 'the Truman Show' or being an animal being watched in a zoo before he quit*
> *Describing LA life he said: 'I can actually lift my head, you can walk around feeling a little bit more free'*
> *Duke revealed he and Meghan Markle, 39, met secretly in supermarket when she first visited him in London *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and having therapy after advice from Meghan who saw he was 'angry' *
> *When asked if he was 'in a cage' as a royal he said: 'It's the job right? You grin and bear it. You get on with it'*
> *Duke told 'Armchair Expert' show that in his 20s that he 'didn't want the job' of being a full time royal *
> *Describes the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to Harry *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his life is 'like Truman Show' in podcast interview
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' show that they tried to stay 'incognito' during his wife's first trip to stay with him in London in 2016, where he lived at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Only when Diana stops selling. So....never. 


gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948


My mum used to say Eton mess is what you call it when you drop the meringues  delicious!


pukasonqo said:


> He was born into a life of privileges and opportunities, yes, he experienced trauma as a child but had access to excellent mental health care and family support
> Currently anywhere we look at in the world there are children and young people literally being torn to pieces, forced to beg, sell themselves or are doing anything to survive another day with no access to aid or education
> As we speak young people are risking their lives crossing oceans and deserts for what they hope is a better life
> Maybe Harry should volunteer with Medecins sans Frontiers or the UN refugee program, it might give him some insight into hardship and maybe a cause he can put  his energy into and actually doing something positive and not preaching from his millionaire quarters


He’s done about a decade of visiting the terminally ill, meeting victims of war and abuse and helped run a charity for orphans from AIDS and it has not instilled the tiniest drop of compassion in him for anyone else. See also his money laundering ‘foundation.’ 



LittleStar88 said:


> During an appearance on Dax Shepard‘s “Armchair Expert” podcast on Thursday, May 13 Prince Harry opened up about royal life.
> 
> Harry said that being a member of the royal family was similar to being in a cage.
> 
> He Knew He Didn't Want to Be a Royal
> 
> He was asked if he felt like he was in a "cage" while in his royal duties, having to make his way around the Commonwealth comforting others with a smile on his face, while he himself was also going through a rough time.
> 
> "It's the job right? Grin and bear it. Get on with it. I was in my early twenties and I was thinking I don't want this job, I don't want to be here," Prince Harry said. "I don't want to be doing this.'
> 
> The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining" and seek help for his mental health.
> 
> He talked about how wife Meghan Markle helped him realize he needed therapy.
> 
> “It was a conversation that I had with my now-wife. And she saw it. She saw it straightaway. She could tell that I was hurting and that some of the stuff that was out of my control was making me really angry. It would make my blood boil.”
> 
> He noted he felt frustrated not being able to change things
> 
> "How are you going to make your mom proud? How are you going to use this platform to really affect change and be able to give people that confidence to be able to change their own lives?'," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says growing up royal was mix of 'Truman Show' and 'being in a zoo'
> 
> 
> "The biggest issue for me was that being born into it you inherit the risk."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


This says it all doesn’t it? As I was visiting the orphans I couldn’t help thinking ‘why am I expected to do this given MY pain. It’s just a job- I don’t actually care about any of the people who waited to meet me or feel sorry for them that they are suffering.’ 


gerryt said:


> I’m sure I read that in discussions about their future the Queen offered H&M the opportunity to live in Lesotho and focus on Sentebale. I couldnt understand why they didn’t leap at that at the time, things are so much clearer now!  Perhaps that’s where he should be heading next, should he ever escape her clutches.


You don’t get to interview with Oprah and flog yourself to Silicon Valley living in Lesotho. Just have to do boring charity work for people who don’t appreciate how much you are suffering. Him and MM sound like peas in a pod.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gerryt said:


> My brother and I lost our mother young, I was 16, he was 12.  My dad had a breakdown shortly afterwards and we tried to keep it to ourselves because we were frightened we would be taken away from each other.  My brother struggled a bit more than I did in the early years and was, like Harry, a bit wild in his youth, but by his mid twenties was settled and we have both been lucky to have led pretty good lives.  I am always torn, when listening to Harry, between fully understanding a lot of what he went through as a youngster and wanting to tell him to grow up and count his many blessings. He seems to constantly point outwards wanting to lay blame and doesn’t seem to truly see the need to recognise that ultimately only he himself can solve this.  How will he ever cope when the next major event comes, such as life threatening illness.  But the saddest part of this, to me, is that there are blessings in every situation, in this case the extremely close relationship I have with my brother which has been so all of our lives and was, I feel, our mother’s last gift to us.  Harry too had this in his relationship with William and it astounds me - makes me cry - that he seems to have willingly thrown this away.


I’m so sorry this happened but I am so glad you have such a beautiful relationship with your brother. Siblings really can be the most amazing thing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> You don’t get to interview with Oprah and flog yourself to Silicon Valley living in Lesotho. Just have to do boring charity work for people who don’t appreciate how much you are suffering. Him and MM sound like peas in a pod.


This.  Harry could’ve done whatever he wanted with his life.  He didn’t have the same expectations imposed on him as his brother - because he was never going to be king.  As soon as William had kids he no longer had the constraints of being the spare.  At that point he was free, free to be whatever, go wherever, do whatever he wanted.  He had the kind of opportunities and resources the rest of us can only dream about. He could’ve lived a private life anywhere in the world.
In marrying Harry, Meghan had the same astonishing opportunities open to her.

They’re in LA providing fodder for paps and exploitative journos.  Marching their kids clothes.  Their choice.  It’s unbelievable when you stop to think about it


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> This.  Harry could’ve done whatever he wanted with his life.  He didn’t have the same expectations imposed on him as his brother - because he was never going to be king.  As soon as William had kids he no longer had the constraints of being the spare.  At that point he was free, free to be whatever, go wherever, do whatever he wanted.  He had the kind of opportunities and resources the rest of us can only dream about. He could’ve lived a private life anywhere in the world.
> In marrying Harry, Meghan had the same astonishing opportunities open to her.
> 
> They’re in LA providing fodder for paps and exploitative journos.  Marching their kids clothes.  Their choice.  It’s unbelievable when you stop to think about it


They have the "glass-half-empty" mentality, never acknowledging that not only is their glass brimful, but the glass is also Baccarat.


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> They have the "glass-half-empty" mentality, never acknowledging that not only is their glass brimful, but the glass is also Baccarat.


Absolutely!  Pearls before swine....(literally in this case)


----------



## gerryt

This latest press release has really got under my skin.  I feel as though I want to go through what he has said and compare to the reality of the situation, adding to the original tally of lies told to Oprah. How can he possibly compare the regime in Gordonstoun to that at Eton.  If he was so miserable helping the orphans in Lesovo why did he look so happy - he’s not that good an actor, he looks permanently miserable now!  The ‘first’ attack from the US press when Archie was photographed, yet the Oprah introduction was proved to contain quotes and altered headlines from the UK, US and Australian press.  I could go on.  I am genuinely thinking he has lost it.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> His waxwork is better dressed and groomed. Probably smarter too



Yes, because it keeps its mouth shut


----------



## Clearblueskies

In the news today - Mary Beard (historian) is giving 2 Cambridge scholarships to disadvantaged students to mark her retirement.  Because she wants people from more diverse backgrounds to be able to study Classics.  What a positive thing to do!  Thats what being an activist is in my opinion - seeing something you want changing and actually doing something about it


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> They finally made it in Wax Hollywood!
> 
> View attachment 5083187
> 
> *A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's waxworks moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. Waxworks of Harry and wife Meghan have been moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds in London. They now stand among …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Ok but that is clearly a Jennifer Connelly dummy- It doesn’t look a bit like MM! I know she changes her face every week but they could’ve at least got the wig right.

Madame Tussaud’s got a much better likeness. I assume they’ve melted them down or they could’ve got them secondhand


----------



## gelbergirl

Sneaking around the supermarket??


I am rolling my eyes all over the place this morning....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

gerryt said:


> If he was so miserable helping the orphans in Lesovo why did he look so happy -


Because he didn’t know he was oppressed, miserable and royally shackled until the Instacart girl (now-wife) _told_ him he was.


----------



## Coconuts40

These interviews are setting him up for future isolation and failure. How does he feel this is a good idea?  These interviewers are all 'yes' people that are allowing Harry to air his dirty laundry at his expense.  I will never know what it was like to live in this Royal bubble.  However, what does this say to all the patronages that Harry has supported all these years - sorry everyone I was miserable and really didn't want to be there.  The smile on my face - fake.  The connection you believe you felt with me - well, that was fake too.   But now, I am really going to help people by being a world ambassador.  And in a few years we are going to hear how miserable he was in L.A. and how he wants to repair his relationship with his family.


----------



## Genie27

Genie27 said:


> Because he didn’t know he was oppressed, miserable and royally shackled until the Instacart girl (now-wife) _told_ him he was.


Too bad the Costco sample lady didn’t tell him she was seeing (cue dramatic music) *his future*


----------



## Coconuts40

Ben Shephard criticises Prince Harry over Charles comments: 'He's been a parent for five minutes'
					

The presenter pointed out that Harry's comments came very soon after the death of Charles' father.




					ca.yahoo.com
				




I agree with this

It just dawned on me.  I wouldn't be surprised if Harry started talking again because of the way he was snubbed at Prince Phillips funeral.  After all, wasn't there supposed to be a truce to try to resolve the differences privately.


----------



## queennadine

If Harry truly said that about the 1st Amendment, I don’t even know where to begin. The GALL of a Royal to come over to America and criticize our Constitution...  

You can’t make this up.

I’m thinking maybe Harry should GFO of the U.S.


----------



## octopus17

gerryt said:


> To all intents and purposes, but made with pouring cream.  Actually even nicer if you use Creme fraiche!


It's very quick and easy to do and (whispers) I've sometimes made it with ice cream, probably turning it into a completely different pudding right there . Gluten free and can be dairy free too using df cream/ice cream ...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Coconuts40 said:


> Ben Shephard criticises Prince Harry over Charles comments: 'He's been a parent for five minutes'
> 
> 
> The presenter pointed out that Harry's comments came very soon after the death of Charles' father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with this
> 
> It just dawned on me.  I wouldn't be surprised if Harry started talking again because of the way he was snubbed at Prince Phillips funeral.  After all, wasn't there supposed to be a truce to try to resolve the differences privately.


Yeah until Gayle King started commenting on those private conversations the minute he landed back in LA.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> In the news today - Mary Beard (historian) is giving 2 Cambridge scholarships to disadvantaged students to mark her retirement.  Because she wants people from more diverse backgrounds to be able to study Classics.  What a positive thing to do!  Thats what being an activist is in my opinion - seeing something you want changing and actually doing something about it



I just read that on Twitter and loved the backstory (her supervisor paying for her thesis being typed and telling her to pay it forward instead of paying him back). So many people just do it better than the Montecito drama queens.


----------



## gerryt

Clearblueskies said:


> This.  Harry could’ve done whatever he wanted with his life.  He didn’t have the same expectations imposed on him as his brother - because he was never going to be king.  As soon as William had kids he no longer had the constraints of being the spare.  At that point he was free, free to be whatever, go wherever, do whatever he wanted.  He had the kind of opportunities and resources the rest of us can only dream about. He could’ve lived a private life anywhere in the world.
> In marrying Harry, Meghan had the same astonishing opportunities open to her.
> 
> They’re in LA providing fodder for paps and exploitative journos.  Marching their kids clothes.  Their choice.  It’s unbelievable when you stop to think about it


He has six first cousins, two of which are still not fully grown.  The other four have successfully combined working for a living, raising families (well, three of them so far) and supporting the Queen whenever asked, whilst not taking Civil List money or official security details (except when at royal events), though they may pay for their own.  The lifestyle he says he wanted but couldn’t have.  Of course he could have.  
I believe that far from treating him badly, Prince Charles bent over backwards to keep him happy, being very conscious of the impact the loss of Diana had had on him, which is possibly where he went wrong.  Diana was reportedly very keen to ensure that Harry was treated as equal to William wherever possible and I wonder now if in that she did him a disservice.  He isn’t Williams equal in status and I think that he resents that.  His aunt spent many years as second in line but didn’t seem to struggle with this fact or indeed with coping with having to take a further step backwards each time a new younger brother came along.  (Its great that Charlotte won’t have to experience that).  Same family, so dont point at the Queen and PPs parenting style here, Harry.  Another fact he just doesn’t take on board is that whilst the paparazzi played a significant part in Diana’s death, four people got into that car and only one put on a seatbelt.  The one who survived.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also the paparazzi didn't force alcohol down the driver's throat.


----------



## marietouchet

The Dax S podcast ... oh dear ...   The rant about Charles, Philip and QEII ...   6 (as Murky Meg has dubbed him, love that) has NOT MOVED ON years after his childhood trauma 
Kubler Ross chronology of grief - Depression, Anger, Bargaining, Denial , Acceptance. 6 is somewhere between Anger & Bargaining - 6 is stuck
Evidently, 6 felt a need to blame dad, QEII (???!!!)  & Philip (!!!!!!!). Relations with dad were bad - we know that from O interview - Dad cut me off. Why bring it up again? 6 seems to want to have the last word, a bad habit

The complaints about the BRF will never stop... Not today, not in 5 or 10 years ...


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> I think she brainwashed him and he is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.



I used to think this too. Another take: after they met they sensed they were both as screwed up as each other, fed off each other, manipulated each another and ultimately one may throw the other under the bus just as each has already done with other family members and friends. If Meghan gets sufficient attention and coverage ($$$) out of child #2, will she go for child #3? Or is the plan to ditch Harry if Mr. Unsuspecting Billionaire can be snagged? I mean, Mr. Ecclestone's wife had a baby last year just two weeks before his 90th birthday. Stay tuned for a mega dollar payout photo of Archie holding baby sister.


----------



## xincinsin

The hypocrisy is killing me.








						Prince Harry slams Joe Rogan over vaccination remarks
					

Don’t seat Prince Harry next to Joe Rogan at the next Spotify company picnic.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Aimee3

jelliedfeels said:


> ff
> add on add on- the more I think about it, the more I think this is just wish fulfilment for the drooling fan girls-
> “Maybe I too will meet a prince in whole foods!”


I hope Harry’s wife didn’t pee in the salad greens mistaking them for the woods!


----------



## drifter

oh he's such a fool!  Most people will have days when they hate living/their jobs/their lives but they grin and bear it anyway!  But I guess who would want to grin and shake hands with commoners when you can complain about everything and everyone under the sun while getting paid?  Maybe he's not such a fool after all???!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Yanca

The thing that bothered me was when he said that he realized in his twenties that he did not want to do this job, so does it mean when he was volunterring in Africa, the Commonwealth Nations, his tours, his invictus and sentabale charities, mingling with the people he was not happy and was just faking it? I know we are  accused of being cruel because of this thread, but I am just honestly confused and it was a nice place to discuss their shenanigans looking from a point of view of those that are not bias. I used to like H he seemed to be a sincere nice guy when he was doing all those work, I watched his interviews before where he talks about the Queen and her impact to  the world and how he now knows the magnitude of what she represents, when they had the interview during their engagement he said there's a lot of work to be done, and of course things changed- his bride is not British, does not seemed to have the appreciation and respect of the traditions and want it to be bend for her. They have walked away and now are doing things that they want ,  earning money and notoriety but why continue to fire shots on his family, it is not just Hazza talking about his mental struggles, it seemed that he really want to bring the Monarchy down, I dont get it,  normal regular  employee when you leave or resign, you give the proper two weeks notice, and would not continue to bash your old employers because it would reflectb adly of you too. Hopefully He and Megnain are truly happy, I just wish they stop being hypocrites, and hopefully all the charity endeavors they want to do are really sincere and not contrived and all for public image.


----------



## Aimee3

How do we know he’s not faking again?  We already decided he’s not an actor, so when he seemed happy doing all the above, he was able to act?  I’m confused!
I’d really love if Cressida and Chelsey would be interviewed and give us what H was really like in those days.  I suspect that not only they’ve moved on from this H train wreck but are likely too classy to tell all.


----------



## bag-mania

Coconuts40 said:


> Ben Shephard criticises Prince Harry over Charles comments: 'He's been a parent for five minutes'
> 
> 
> The presenter pointed out that Harry's comments came very soon after the death of Charles' father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with this
> 
> It just dawned on me.  I wouldn't be surprised if Harry started talking again because of the way he was snubbed at Prince Phillips funeral.  After all, wasn't there supposed to be a truce to try to resolve the differences privately.



That article makes a valid point. Harry is like those brand new parents who believe they know it all and just know they will do a much better job raising their own kids than their parents did with them. We'll see...


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> How do we know he’s not faking again?  We already decided he’s not an actor, so when he seemed happy doing all the above, he was able to act?  I’m confused!
> I’d really love if Cressida and Chelsey would be interviewed and give us what H was really like in those days.  I suspect that not only they’ve moved on from this H train wreck but are likely too classy to tell all.



He's faking it and he knows it IMO 

I don't want to hear from his old GFs. Who cares?


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> The Dax S podcast ... oh dear ...   The rant about Charles, Philip and QEII ...   6 (as Murky Meg has dubbed him, love that) has NOT MOVED ON years after his childhood trauma
> Kubler Ross chronology of grief - Depression, Anger, Bargaining, Denial , Acceptance. 6 is somewhere between Anger & Bargaining - 6 is stuck
> Evidently, 6 felt a need to blame dad, QEII (???!!!)  & Philip (!!!!!!!). Relations with dad were bad - we know that from O interview - Dad cut me off. Why bring it up again? 6 seems to want to have the last word, a bad habit
> 
> The complaints about the BRF will never stop... Not today, not in 5 or 10 years ...



PS I might be wrong maybe he had made progress before the alliterative one and she caused him to backpedal to where he is now - between Anger and Bargaining 
Maybe he has not been stuck for two decades ..


----------



## jennlt

Poetry interlude:
 A dimwit duke doesn't understand the first amendment
Freedom of the press won't add to his contentment
They'll expose all his lies 
and his Chicken Little skies
and leave him stewing in the soup of his resentment


----------



## csshopper

The BetterUp Chief Impact Officer is unraveling in the public domain.  Going to be a hard sell to merch him as someone capable of helping others. Years of therapy and he’s an oozing mess, is not a good advert.

Another fall out might be Invictus Games since saying he’s been so miserable in doing his work undermines what is supposed to have been his major accomplishment. All the support for wounded warriors seemed sincere at the time.  Wonder how they feel about him now?


----------



## xincinsin

Coconuts40 said:


> Ben Shephard criticises Prince Harry over Charles comments: 'He's been a parent for five minutes'
> 
> 
> The presenter pointed out that Harry's comments came very soon after the death of Charles' father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with this
> 
> It just dawned on me.  I wouldn't be surprised if Harry started talking again because of the way he was snubbed at Prince Phillips funeral.  After all, wasn't there supposed to be a truce to try to resolve the differences privately.


I find it hard to believe that he could be so dense as to think he'd be greeted with open arms after his global whine fest. OTOH, I've seen the same lack of self-awareness in the narcs I've had the misfortune of knowing.



queennadine said:


> If Harry truly said that about the 1st Amendment, I don’t even know where to begin. The GALL of a Royal to come over to America and criticize our Constitution...
> 
> You can’t make this up.
> 
> I’m thinking maybe Harry should GFO of the U.S.


Is there an island in the Atlantic somewhere in between? You know, a very private island without paps? Somewhere "authentic" where we can deposit them? Because the British will say, "The GALL of that American hussy, coming over to criticize our Queen."



marietouchet said:


> The complaints about the BRF will never stop... Not today, not in 5 or 10 years ...


As their star wanes in Hollywood, they will crank up the blame game. They have very little else to spin.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Another fall out might be Invictus Games since saying he’s been so miserable in doing his work undermines what is supposed to have been his major accomplishment. All the support for wounded warriors seemed sincere at the time.  Wonder how they feel about him now?



Oh, he'll soon scramble to release a statement claiming that Invictus means the world to him. Remember, he has that Netflix show about it coming out soon. It is in his personal and financial best interests to still support it.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Is there an island in the Atlantic somewhere in between? You know, a very private island without paps? Somewhere "authentic" where we can deposit them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bermuda? The triangle preferably.
Click to expand...


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok but that is clearly a Jennifer Connelly dummy- It doesn’t look a bit like MM! I know she changes her face every week but they could’ve at least got the wig right.
> 
> Madame Tussaud’s got a much better likeness. I assume they’ve melted them down or they could’ve got them secondhand



The wax museum was very generous imo, MM finally made the Hollywood A-list as a dummy, but nevertheless the A-list.


----------



## duna

gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948



I think most British people know what Eton Mess is: absolutely delicious by the way!


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> I think most British people know what Eton Mess is: absolutely delicious by the way!


Absolutely. Its my favourite too.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> During an appearance on Dax Shepard‘s “Armchair Expert” podcast on Thursday, May 13 Prince Harry opened up about royal life.
> 
> Harry said that being a member of the royal family was similar to being in a cage.
> 
> He Knew He Didn't Want to Be a Royal
> 
> He was asked if he felt like he was in a "cage" while in his royal duties, having to make his way around the Commonwealth comforting others with a smile on his face, while he himself was also going through a rough time.
> 
> "It's the job right? Grin and bear it. Get on with it. I was in my early twenties and I was thinking I don't want this job, I don't want to be here," Prince Harry said. "I don't want to be doing this.'
> 
> The Duke of Sussex revealed that after meeting Meghan he decided to "stop complaining" and seek help for his mental health.
> 
> He talked about how wife Meghan Markle helped him realize he needed therapy.
> 
> “It was a conversation that I had with my now-wife. And she saw it. She saw it straightaway. She could tell that I was hurting and that some of the stuff that was out of my control was making me really angry. It would make my blood boil.”
> 
> He noted he felt frustrated not being able to change things
> 
> "How are you going to make your mom proud? How are you going to use this platform to really affect change and be able to give people that confidence to be able to change their own lives?'," he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says growing up royal was mix of 'Truman Show' and 'being in a zoo'
> 
> 
> "The biggest issue for me was that being born into it you inherit the risk."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


OK, fine.  so now you're free. stop whining and asking for money from the RF


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Do you think Harry realizes Princess Diana didn't die because of the BRF - she died because of the intense gossip and headlines she was constantly a part of? Yet here they are, left the BRF but purposely stoking tons of family gossip, doing as much as possible to get on as many headlines as possible. He gave up the best parts of that situation and perpetuated the worst. Make it make sense.


she died because she was being driven by a drunk driver and not wearing a seatbelt.  yes, she was being chased by paps but she wouldn't have died due to that if she'd been driven safely


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Words of wisdom!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> OK, fine.  so now you're free. stop whining and asking for money from the RG



That's what is so ingenuous about H&M. They have been bitterly complaining ever since their Megxit over a year ago. So get on with it! Quit wallowing in self-pity and try to make something of yourselves besides being a source of internet drama.


----------



## gracekelly

duna said:


> I think most British people know what Eton Mess is: absolutely delicious by the way!


My comment was directed at US posters.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That's what is so ingenuous about H&M. They have been bitterly complaining ever since their Megxit over a year ago. So get on with it! Quit wallowing in self-pity and try to make something of yourselves besides being a source of internet drama.


they don't want to live in a fishbowl or do all the royal duties but they want the money and the perks - and the fame - and the titles.  and we're the bad ones for pointing this out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5083548




Are they for real.


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> The hypocrisy is killing me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry slams Joe Rogan over vaccination remarks
> 
> 
> Don’t seat Prince Harry next to Joe Rogan at the next Spotify company picnic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Dimwit prince who cheat to get  through Eton vs the former host of Fear Factor


----------



## gracekelly

Can Harry be so unaware as to not see the confusion here?   He was colossally p*ssed off to have his patronages removed and his HRH put into cold storage. These were part of his being trapped in The Truman Show, as he describes his life prior to his “escape,”  but he would take them back in a flash if offered.  He would have been just fine with the toxic environment that he is now complaining about if he had been allowed to do the half in/out with generous allowance from Charles,   The more he whines about his prior life, the more he sounds like a child who didn’t get what he wanted.   If he believes that this will give him the celebrity status he craves, he doesn’t understand the process, especially in the US. Reinventing yourself is usually coupled with talent and hard work. Zoom calls, standing on a stage for applause and mouthing off on various subjects about which, you know very little if anything, doesn’t cut it.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Can Harry be so unaware as to not see the confusion here?   He was colossally p*ssed off to have his patronages removed and his HRH put into cold storage. These were part of his being trapped in The Truman Show, as he describes his life prior to his “escape,”  but he would take them back in a flash if offered.  He would have been just fine with the toxic environment that he is now complaining about if he had been allowed to do the half in/out with generous allowance from Charles,   The more he whines about his prior life, the more he sounds like a child who didn’t get what he wanted.   If he believes that this will give him the celebrity status he craves, he doesn’t understand the process, especially in the US. Reinventing yourself is usually coupled with talent and hard work. Zoom calls, standing on a stage for applause and mouthing off on various subjects about which, you know very little if anything, doesn’t cut it.


hope you're right about the US.  So far, they are getting lots of opportunities.  but how long before the public gets bored with them?  I mean really, they are preaching and occasionally getting on a zoom call with some charitable organization, not sharing pics of the kid....what is interesting?
Oh, she's probably waiting with baited breath for a red carpet opportunity.  and she will probably get it.  but then what?  will she be the most beautiful or best dressed?  doubt it


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5083548




I mean if COVID restrictions have eased at that time nothing restricts them from getting plane tickets and standing with the crowds...

sad thing is the BRF would probably let them come... smh


----------



## xincinsin

When he complained to OW that they had no plan for the future and they were forced to dip into his mum's money, he obviously meant they never thought anyone would turn down their generous offer to be celebrity jetsetting royals. I think the two of them enhance each other's mean-mindedness in a stunning demo of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they don't want to live in a fishbowl or do all the royal duties but they want the money and the perks - and the fame - and the titles.  and we're the bad ones for pointing this out



And apparently we're mean for pointing out the obvious, that these two hypocritical elitists who want to get a lifelong free ride of fame are NOT GOOD, NICE PEOPLE because they throw a tiny bone at a charity every once in awhile.


----------



## V0N1B2

marietouchet said:


> The Dax S podcast ... oh dear ...   The rant about Charles, Philip and QEII ...   6 (as Murky Meg has dubbed him, love that) has NOT MOVED ON years after his childhood trauma
> Kubler Ross chronology of grief - Depression, Anger, Bargaining, Denial , Acceptance. 6 is somewhere between Anger & Bargaining - 6 is stuck
> Evidently, 6 felt a need to blame dad, QEII (???!!!)  & Philip (!!!!!!!). Relations with dad were bad - we know that from O interview - Dad cut me off. Why bring it up again? 6 seems to want to have the last word, a bad habit
> 
> The complaints about the BRF will never stop... Not today, not in 5 or 10 years ...


So did Dax "dive deep" as some said he would, or was it a softball interview like Oprah's?
Any gotcha moments catching Harry in a lie? Asking to explain himself?


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> The Dax S podcast ... oh dear ...   The rant about Charles, Philip and QEII ...   6 (as Murky Meg has dubbed him, love that) has NOT MOVED ON years after his childhood trauma
> Kubler Ross chronology of grief - Depression, Anger, Bargaining, Denial , Acceptance. 6 is somewhere between Anger & Bargaining - 6 is stuck
> Evidently, 6 felt a need to blame dad, QEII (???!!!)  & Philip (!!!!!!!). Relations with dad were bad - we know that from O interview - Dad cut me off. Why bring it up again? 6 seems to want to have the last word, a bad habit
> 
> The complaints about the BRF will never stop... Not today, not in 5 or 10 years ...



I think Kubler Ross missed a step between Denial and Acceptance - "Make Money." That's where Harry's at now!


----------



## LittleStar88

mellibelly said:


> Dimwit prince who cheat to get  through Eton vs the former host of Fear Factor



That's a tough one, but in a battle of brains I put my money on Joe Rogan, even with his dumb vaccine comment. Joe still outsmarts Harry by a mile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

V0N1B2 said:


> So did Dax "dive deep" as some said he would, or was it a softball interview like Oprah's?
> Any gotcha moments catching Harry in a lie? Asking to explain himself?



I feel the Dax interview was a positive lovefest. Dax got a bit of a boner over Harry's time in the RAF.

I 100% believe that MM & JCMH only do interviews where they will be loved and everything is supportive and positive towards them. They don't have the balls to do anything that might cause them to explain themselves or the questionable things they have done/said.


----------



## lalame

V0N1B2 said:


> So did Dax "dive deep" as some said he would, or was it a softball interview like Oprah's?
> Any gotcha moments catching Harry in a lie? Asking to explain himself?



I think Dax's more casual vibe did get Harry to talk at greater length than in the OW interview (IMO this is why I like Dax's interview style). It was like a conversation. Did he challenge him? Not really... sometimes he came kind of close, like Dax said afterwards he refused to call him Duke of Sussex which I enjoyed hearing. One part that I found appalling on Harry's part is Dax always tries to relate to the guest and at one point he started talking about how childhood trauma can lead to acting out... and Harry was actually going along with the comparison between his sheltered life and Dax's seriously F'ed up experience. Dax grew up with a poor single mom, sexually molested as a child, had severe drug and alcohol abuse, etc. I couldn't believe Harry wouldn't just graciously say "No, my problems were nothing like yours - let's not compare them, because I grew up in a lot of privilege at the end of the day."


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> They finally made it in Wax Hollywood!
> 
> View attachment 5083187
> 
> *A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's waxworks moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> A PAIR of Royal dummies have found a new home among Hollywood A-listers. Waxworks of Harry and wife Meghan have been moved away from other royals at Madame Tussauds in London. They now stand among …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


"A pair of Royal dummies" *snicker*


----------



## bag-mania

How long can Harry milk the "hardship" of being born into the lap of luxury that is royalty? How much longer can Meghan get away with whining about how difficult it was for her to spend a whole 18 months being part of it?

And perhaps most importantly, how long will the press continue to feed their enormously pampered egos by giving them a free rein to say whatever they want without fact checking any of their ridiculous claims?


----------



## queennadine

xincinsin said:


> I find it hard to believe that he could be so dense as to think he'd be greeted with open arms after his global whine fest. OTOH, I've seen the same lack of self-awareness in the narcs I've had the misfortune of knowing.
> 
> As their star wanes in Hollywood, they will crank up the blame game. They have very little else to spin.



YES! I completely agree with you. It’s galling and appalling to me that she went to another country and criticized their royal family.


----------



## CeeJay

lalame said:


> I think Dax's more casual vibe did get Harry to talk at greater length than in the OW interview (IMO this is why I like Dax's interview style). It was like a conversation. Did he challenge him? Not really... sometimes he came kind of close, like Dax said afterwards he refused to call him Duke of Sussex which I enjoyed hearing. One part that I found appalling on Harry's part is Dax always tries to relate to the guest and at one point he started talking about how childhood trauma can lead to acting out... and Harry was actually going along with the comparison between his sheltered life and Dax's seriously F'ed up experience. Dax grew up with a poor single mom, sexually molested as a child, had severe drug and alcohol abuse, etc. I couldn't believe Harry wouldn't just graciously say "No, my problems were nothing like yours - let's not compare them, *because I grew up in a lot of privilege at the end of the day*."


Yes, Harry did say that .. but I truly believe that even though HE KNOWS he grew up with privilege, he still thinks that everyone should still feel soooooooooooooo sorry for him given what occurred with Princess Diana.  Yes, it's sad, but .. c'mon dude, you know how many folks have been in much worse situations .. for instance, I know an actor friend who lost his mother (his father had left the premises when he was about 1 or 2) .. also at a young age and so then, it was just him and his brothers (who were older).  They all got parceled out to various places (he grew up in the UK), but .. he resolved to make something of himself and not wallow in self-pity .. and today, he is a very successful actor, director, producer & writer .. so there you go!!!  

While I did not lose my mother at a young age, my mother spent most of my youth in Mental Institutions .. so, she wasn't around for me.  While my sisters did the best that they could (my Dad wasn't around for much of my childhood), thank god for my Italian Grandmother.  She was the one who told me "YOU CAN DO IT" .. and I always pushed forward.  That type of stuff can either break you or make you stronger; I chose to the BE STRONGER version!


----------



## lalame

CeeJay said:


> Yes, Harry did say that .. but I truly believe that even though HE KNOWS he grew up with privilege, he still thinks that everyone should still feel soooooooooooooo sorry for him given what occurred with Princess Diana.  Yes, it's sad, but .. c'mon dude, you know how many folks have been in much worse situations .. for instance, I know an actor friend who lost his mother (his father had left the premises when he was about 1 or 2) .. also at a young age and so then, it was just him and his brothers (who were older).  They all got parceled out to various places (he grew up in the UK), but .. he resolved to make something of himself and not wallow in self-pity .. and today, he is a very successful actor, director, producer & writer .. so there you go!!!
> 
> While I did not lose my mother at a young age, my mother spent most of my youth in Mental Institutions .. so, she wasn't around for me.  While my sisters did the best that they could (my Dad wasn't around for much of my childhood), thank god for my Italian Grandmother.  She was the one who told me "YOU CAN DO IT" .. and I always pushed forward.  That type of stuff can either break you or make you stronger; I chose to the BE STRONGER version!



He does say at some points "I grew up in privilege" but it's like he doesn't understand why that should make someone a little more sensitive to comparisons with more unfortunate people. It's like a throwaway line he was coached to say to appear self-aware.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yanca said:


> The thing that bothered me was when he said that he realized in his twenties that he did not want to do this job, so does it mean when he was volunterring in Africa, the Commonwealth Nations, his tours, his invictus and sentabale charities, mingling with the people he was not happy and was just faking it? I know we are  accused of being cruel because of this thread, but I am just honestly confused and it was a nice place to discuss their shenanigans looking from a point of view of those that are not bias. I used to like H he seemed to be a sincere nice guy when he was doing all those work, I watched his interviews before where he talks about the Queen and her impact to  the world and how he now knows the magnitude of what she represents, when they had the interview during their engagement he said there's a lot of work to be done, and of course things changed- his bride is not British, does not seemed to have the appreciation and respect of the traditions and want it to be bend for her. They have walked away and now are doing things that they want ,  earning money and notoriety but why continue to fire shots on his family, it is not just Hazza talking about his mental struggles, it seemed that he really want to bring the Monarchy down, I dont get it,  normal regular  employee when you leave or resign, you give the proper two weeks notice, and would not continue to bash your old employers because it would reflectb adly of you too. Hopefully He and Megnain are truly happy, I just wish they stop being hypocrites, and hopefully all the charity endeavors they want to do are really sincere and not contrived and all for public image.


Yeah I think he enjoyed the attention & the great PR but he has never had an ounce of empathy. It’s really easy to be charitable with other people’s money especially when your only job is a nice meet&greet with people who admire you. Now it’s his shady charity paying out its 20 sandwiches and 50 hats a year - max. 


sdkitty said:


> hope you're right about the US.  So far, they are getting lots of opportunities.  but how long before the public gets bored with them?  I mean really, they are preaching and occasionally getting on a zoom call with some charitable organization, not sharing pics of the kid....what is interesting?
> Oh, she's probably waiting with baited breath for a red carpet opportunity.  and she will probably get it.  but then what?  will she be the most beautiful or best dressed?  doubt it


Well fingers crossed the big wigs are seeing they aren’t quite the production powerhouse they made out at an impressive one podcast in nearly six months and maybe a documentary that sounds like something you’d show at a business conference. 
also she’d only be best dressed if....no not going to happen. 


xincinsin said:


> When he complained to OW that they had no plan for the future and they were forced to dip into his mum's money, he obviously meant they never thought anyone would turn down their generous offer to be celebrity jetsetting royals. I think the two of them enhance each other's mean-mindedness in a stunning demo of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.


I think so too. I have no sympathy for     Harry he’s found his Partner in crime.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I think Dax's more casual vibe did get Harry to talk at greater length than in the OW interview (IMO this is why I like Dax's interview style). It was like a conversation. Did he challenge him? Not really... sometimes he came kind of close, like Dax said afterwards he refused to call him Duke of Sussex which I enjoyed hearing. One part that I found appalling on Harry's part is Dax always tries to relate to the guest and at one point he started talking about how childhood trauma can lead to acting out... and Harry was actually going along with the comparison between his sheltered life and Dax's seriously F'ed up experience. Dax grew up with a poor single mom, sexually molested as a child, had severe drug and alcohol abuse, etc. I couldn't believe Harry wouldn't just graciously say "No, my problems were nothing like yours - let's not compare them, because I grew up in a lot of privilege at the end of the day."


I didn't hear the podcast.  so did Dax talk about the childhood trauma?  if so, then definitely Harry should have acknowledged that it was much worse than what he experienced.  but if he didn't have his boss there to tell him what to say, I don't know how smart he is to come up with something on his own.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I think he enjoyed the attention & the great PR but he has never had an ounce of empathy. It’s really easy to be charitable with other people’s money especially when your only job is a nice meet&greet with people who admire you. Now it’s his shady charity paying out its 20 sandwiches and 50 hats a year - max.
> 
> Well fingers crossed the big wigs are seeing they aren’t quite the production powerhouse they made out at an impressive one podcast in nearly six months and maybe a documentary that sounds like something you’d show at a business conference.
> also she’d only be best dressed if....no not going to happen.
> 
> I think so too. I have no sympathy for     Harry he’s found his Partner in crime.


I listened to their podcast.  My phone actually prompted to me to do it but anyway.  I wasn't that impressed at all.  they had lots of people talking but instead of hearing an indepth interview with someone as terry gross does so masterfully, it was a bunch of short blurbs of people talking about covid, etc., etc.
people who could have been interesting but not that interesting in this format IMO


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I didn't hear the podcast.  so did Dax talk about the childhood trauma?  if so, then definitely Harry should have acknowledged that it was much worse than what he experienced.  but if he didn't have his boss there to tell him what to say, I don't know how smart he is to come up with something on his own.



Yup, he mentioned belong molested as a child and how it affected his later addiction to crack cocaine and alcohol and not being able to control it... It came up because Dax asked Harry whether his trauma led to him acting out and doing things like stripping in Vegas. I don't think Dax brought his own story up on purpose to draw a contrast but the difference was jarring to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Charles just doesn’t get it … yet:

_Prince Harry's brutal attack on his dad's parenting ability in a US podcast this week has many royal watchers speculating that relations between Prince Charles and the Sussexes have hit rock bottom.

But the heir to the throne remains determined to find a way back into the royal fold for his wayward son and wife Meghan Markle – even if it takes years to broker a rapprochement.

Allies of the Prince of Wales concede the father/son relationship is currently 'strained to say the least', but they insist Charles is focussed on finding a long-term solution, not Harry's regular verbal missiles._








						WOOTTON: Charles hoped William's aide quitting would get Harry back
					

DAN WOOTTON: Prince Harry's attack on his dad's parenting ability has royal watchers speculating that relations between Charles and the Sussexes have hit rock bottom.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Charles just doesn’t get it … yet:
> 
> _Prince Harry's brutal attack on his dad's parenting ability in a US podcast this week has many royal watchers speculating that relations between Prince Charles and the Sussexes have hit rock bottom.
> 
> But the heir to the throne remains determined to find a way back into the royal fold for his wayward son and wife Meghan Markle – even if it takes years to broker a rapprochement.
> 
> Allies of the Prince of Wales concede the father/son relationship is currently 'strained to say the least', but they insist Charles is focussed on finding a long-term solution, not Harry's regular verbal missiles._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOOTTON: Charles hoped William's aide quitting would get Harry back
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Prince Harry's attack on his dad's parenting ability has royal watchers speculating that relations between Charles and the Sussexes have hit rock bottom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


We can see where H got his smarts.


----------



## jennlt

Are we still working on our poetry book?

*An Ode to Ribbon Cutting Ceremonies*

There was a ginger prince across the pond
whose wife thought she'd married into beau monde
but cutting a ribbon
wasn't how she was living
So they ran away to LA to form a $pecial bond


----------



## lalame

Oh, and should anyone wonder why Harry would go on the podcast.... it's pretty clear when, during the interview, Dax says "you should check out Harry and Oprah's upcoming series 'The Me You Can't See' on Apple TV starting May 21" - it was a part of the promo tour for this new project.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Orlando who???









						How Prince Harry became BFFs with actor Orlando
					

Prince Harry and Orlando Bloom's close proximity isn't the only parallel between the duo, who are both friends with Misha Nonoo, have connections with Ellie Goulding and an interest in spirituality.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Oh, and should anyone wonder why Harry would go on the podcast.... it's pretty clear when, during the interview, Dax says "you should check out Harry and Oprah's upcoming series 'The Me You Can't See' on Apple TV starting May 21" - *it was a part of the promo tour for this new project.*



This is the daily grind he'll be on for the rest of his time in Hollywood.  Wonder if he's figured that out yet?  He won't be working on charitable endeavors in the UK but instead will be flogging his latest production or podcast wherever his agent has booked him in the U.S.  Bizarre that he would think the latter is superior to the former.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Orlando who???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Harry became BFFs with actor Orlando
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Orlando Bloom's close proximity isn't the only parallel between the duo, who are both friends with Misha Nonoo, have connections with Ellie Goulding and an interest in spirituality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Nooooooo! Not Orlando! He’s the only guy that made me question myself!

That may have been an over share...


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> This is the daily grind he'll be on for the rest of his time in Hollywood.  Wonder if he's figured that out yet?  He won't be working on charitable endeavors in the UK but instead will be flogging his latest production or podcast wherever his agent has booked him in the U.S.  Bizarre that he would think the latter is superior to the former.


Yep!  Harry will be on the dog and pony show tour.  Will we be treated to him on Bill Maher?  Bill would have to soft pedal so slowly that he might have a stroke. I would like to see him on Jimmy Fallon who will do something really anti-monarchy.


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> This is the daily grind he'll be on for the rest of his time in Hollywood.  Wonder if he's figured that out yet?  He won't be working on charitable endeavors in the UK but instead will be flogging his latest production or podcast wherever his agent has booked him in the U.S.  Bizarre that he would think the latter is superior to the former.



Superior? No. $$$uperior? Yah.


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> Dax grew up with a poor single mom, sexually molested as a child, had severe drug and alcohol abuse, etc. I couldn't believe Harry wouldn't just graciously say "No, my problems were nothing like yours - let's not compare them, because I grew up in a lot of privilege at the end of the day."


Oh my goodness - Dax (didn't know anything about him) should have said, listen man, you think you had trauma, you don't know what trauma is!  And give him a lesson on what people can go through and manage to deal with without moaning for the rest of their lives...


----------



## queennadine

lalame said:


> He does say at some points "I grew up in privilege" but it's like he doesn't understand why that should make someone a little more sensitive to comparisons with more unfortunate people. It's like a throwaway line he was coached to say to appear self-aware.


I think in his eyes, acknowledging his privilege makes him even more of a martyr and victim. “See how wonderful and great I am, to give all of this up...”


----------



## V0N1B2

Jayne1 said:


> Oh my goodness - Dax (didn't know anything about him) should have said, listen man, you think you had trauma, you don't know what trauma is!  And give him a lesson on what people can go through and manage to deal with without moaning for the rest of their lives...


Is it really much different though than Harry’s wife standing there in South Africa complaining that “not many people have asked me if I’m okay”?
Y’all, she was still breastfeeding and expected to soldier on and put on a brave face. You know, like women in refugee camps and stuff.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> Oh my goodness - Dax (didn't know anything about him) should have said, listen man, you think you had trauma, you don't know what trauma is!  And give him a lesson on what people can go through and manage to deal with without moaning for the rest of their lives...



I think eventually this will happen, some host or interviewer is going to be bored hearing Harry say the same thing and will ask him some uncomfortable, unplanned questions and enjoy the resulting publicity.   It's really only a matter of time.  He's a celebrity in the U.S. but not untouchable. He's not a citizen or even a green card holder.  Nobody likes someone moving to their country and then telling them that they're doing it wrong and that would go double for the U.S.  Continuing to whine about his upbringing isn't going to win him many friends here.  He's a SNL parody waiting to happen and some interviewer is going to leap on the opportunity.

ETA:  Also, if he and his wife do intend to speak out about political issues then the gloves will come off earlier.  He'll alienate 40 - 60% of the country depending on what position he takes right off the bat.  It would be to his long term benefit to keep his political opinions to himself, but I don't know if he has the self control or the smarts to realize that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> This is the daily grind he'll be on for the rest of his time in Hollywood.  Wonder if he's figured that out yet?  He won't be working on charitable endeavors in the UK but instead will be flogging his latest production or podcast wherever his agent has booked him in the U.S.  Bizarre that he would think the latter is superior to the former.



He will be paying OW for the rest of his life. Guess that’s how she got her revenge on the BRF.  So sad.




Sol Ryan said:


> Nooooooo! Not Orlando! He’s the only guy that made me question myself!
> 
> That may have been an over share...



Loved him until he left Miranda. They were so cute together [or so I thought]. Now, I’m wiser.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Orlando who???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Harry became BFFs with actor Orlando
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Orlando Bloom's close proximity isn't the only parallel between the duo, who are both friends with Misha Nonoo, have connections with Ellie Goulding and an interest in spirituality.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Geez I wouldn’t like to be on their pub quiz team. Orlando’s looks permanently befuddled. I feel like he’s still trying to figure out a joke Sean bean told him on the first day of LOTR.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Is there an island in the Atlantic somewhere in between? You know, a very private island without paps? *Somewhere "authentic" where we can deposit them?* Because the British will say, "The GALL of that American hussy, coming over to criticize our Queen."


I'll say a little prayer for you. "Oh Great Cosmos, I beg you, let their be an island or planet named Chunga-Changa to where we can deport H and his wife. So be it."


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think eventually this will happen, some host or interviewer is going to be bored hearing Harry say the same thing and will ask him some uncomfortable, unplanned questions and enjoy the resulting publicity.   It's really only a matter of time.  He's a celebrity in the U.S. but not untouchable. He's not a citizen or even a green card holder.  Nobody likes someone moving to their country and then telling them that they're doing it wrong and that would go double for the U.S.  Continuing to whine about his upbringing isn't going to win him many friends here.  He's a SNL parody waiting to happen and some interviewer is going to leap on the opportunity.
> 
> ETA:  Also, if he and his wife do intend to speak out about political issues then the gloves will come off earlier.  He'll alienate 40 - 60% of the country depending on what position he takes right off the bat.  It would be to his long term benefit to keep his political opinions to himself, but I don't know if he has the self control or the smarts to realize that.


I'd like to him or his Wife go on Bill Maher


----------



## marietouchet

Ohhhh dearrrrr
6 evidently told Dax that the First Amendment is completely ”bonkers”
ok, he has a right to his opinion. ... gritting teeth while writing this ...
BUTTTTTTTTTT
doesnt he realize that the 1rst Amendment is what gives him the right to express his opinion ? 
Talk about biting the hand that feeds you ...  wait no, he has already trashed his father, grandmother and late grandfather ...


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Ohhhh dearrrrr
> 6 evidently told Dax that the First Amendment is completely ”bonkers”
> ok, he has a right to his opinion. ... gritting teeth while writing this ...
> BUTTTTTTTTTT
> doesnt he realize that the 1rst Amendment is what gives him the right to express his opinion ?
> Talk about biting the hand that feeds you ...  wait no, he has already trashed his father, grandmother and late grandfather ...



Ah, well he appreciates that he has the right to say whatever he pleases. He just doesn’t quite grasp that everyone else should have the same right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they for real.


The Golden Girls? They are great, I believe only one is still alive. 
The comment that _Harry_ wants to attend QE's Jubilee because he_ "wants to be there for the Queen_", after his interview on parenting, is hilarious...


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The Golden Girls? They are great, I believe only one is still alive.
> The comment that _Harry_ wants to attend QE's Jubilee because he_ "wants to be there for the Queen_", after his interview on parenting, is hilarious...


We had a saying in our family someone needs to put  on a cue card for clueless Hazard: 

"Engage brain, before proceeding to operate mouth."  

Yes, I know this would challenge his abilities and would be made inoperable when he's serving as his wife's ventriloquist dummy, but it's worth a try.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Ah, well he appreciates that he has the right to say whatever he pleases. He just doesn’t quite grasp that everyone else should have the same right.



He comes from a land that doesn’t allow press [people] to speak against him.  This is what creates that sense of entitlement, that he is better than the rest of us.  Of course, celebs dislike being papped. They want us to believe their lie and get upset/angry/mad when they are exposed. As many have said over and over, that is why they get paid the big bucks, so get over the pity party.  This guy is nothing but a complainer.  Save his lectures for people who care.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> How long can Harry milk the "hardship" of being born into the lap of luxury that is royalty? How much longer can Meghan get away with whining about how difficult it was for her to spend a whole 18 months being part of it?
> 
> And perhaps most importantly, how long will the press continue to feed their enormously pampered egos by giving them a free rein to say whatever they want without fact checking any of their ridiculous claims?


While they pay SS's fees, the press will continue feeding their pampered egos... I read somewhere that they want to become OW, and they seem to be moving in the right direction.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Golden Girls? They are great, I believe only one is still alive.
> The comment that _Harry_ wants to attend QE's Jubilee because *he "wants to be there for the Queen", after his interview on parenting*, is hilarious...



Hold up




Be there for the Queen????  H&M [and OW/GK] want the media attention.  That’s all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> While they pay SS's fees, the press will continue feeding their pampered egos... I read somewhere that they want to become OW, and they seem to be moving in the right direction.



Yes, I see them as the next Jerry Springer show.  Ellen’s slot is open.  Would that work for them?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Ohhhh dearrrrr
> 6 evidently told Dax that the First Amendment is completely ”bonkers”
> ok, he has a right to his opinion. ... gritting teeth while writing this ...
> BUTTTTTTTTTT
> doesnt he realize that the 1rst Amendment is what gives him the right to express his opinion ?
> Talk about biting the hand that feeds you ...  wait no, he has already trashed his father, grandmother and late grandfather ...


H isn't very sharp and probably knows very little about the real world and how countries have different governments, laws and customs. He wouldn't understand that British and USA constitutions are very different. Hell, he probably doesn't even know what a constitution is. Geography probably isn't his strong suit either. I bet when he looks at a world map, he thinks the equator is a bridge around the world where we all stand together holding hands and sing, "We are the World."


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> *Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post*
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Markle.
> 
> “Happy birthday to Archie, who turns two today,” he captioned a photo of himself with son Harry and grandson Archie. Followers immediately made note of Markle’s absence, as she was included in other dedications to the toddler posted by other family members.
> 
> “Sad! Very sad state of affairs when the supposed future king cuts the mother of his grandchild out of the photo with which he chooses to share,” wrote one critic. “Yes, they haven’t seen Archie for over 12mnths, but to not include Meghan… it’ll only add fuel to the fire of the tabloids. #Archie.”
> 
> 
> “Lovely picture, but where is Meghan on the picture?” another added.
> 
> “Why would you not call him your grandson and why cut his mother off?” wrote yet another disappointed Tweeter. “You have made a lot of mistakes yourself or have you forgotten that. This is not helping at all.”
> 
> 
> Other royals were sure to include pictures of Archie with his mother within their birthday wishes, including Prince William and the Queen herself.
> 
> “Wishing Archie Mountbatten-Windsor a very happy 2nd birthday today,” said a message posted on Queen Elizabeth II’s official “Royal Family” Twitter account, along with an emoji of a red balloon.
> 
> Prince Charles — who’s only seen grandson Archie twice since his birth — is reportedly “still fuming” over Meghan and Harry’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, with a source telling Us Weekly, “Charles is still fuming about Harry throwing shade at him and the royal family in the big interview and won’t let it drop.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles accused of snubbing Meghan Markle with Archie birthday post
> 
> 
> Followers of the royal family couldn’t help but notice Prince Charles’ recent social media post wishing grandson Archie a happy birthday didn’t include a photo of mom, Meghan Mark…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com





HowTF is that a 'snub'? Her stans are are as delusional as their idol. Charles is the grandfather of Archie and a picture was shared of PC and his 2 blood relatives, a son & grandson wishing said grandson a happy birthday. WhyTF would MM need to be in the picture? It wasn't her birthday 




rose60610 said:


> No. With all due respect, no, I can't imagine what it must be like being them. Now, I'll admit, I've never gotten a call from NASA to head the INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION or contacted to take over the neurosurgery unit of a famous hospital, but NO, I can't imagine what it must be like to be so stupid as Meghan and Harry. Granted, Meghan had a few million from her Z-List days, but every pence and pound Harry has ever had came from his family who he and Meghan can't trash enough. And Meghan slobbered and glommed onto his supposed "racist" family just long enough to crank out a meal ticket and give them the heave-ho to move to "racist" America. She demands the world break down sobbing in pity for all her self-inflicted suffering. They wouldn't be living in a 19 bathroom mansion without the BRF's money. If I came into that kind of wealth I wouldn't be: 1. trashing the family whose wealth it is, or 2. pi$$ing it away then whining to Oprah about Charles cutting off the allowance to people who are damn near 40 years old who begged for independence and supposedly have $$ coming from Netflix, and whining how awful royal life was that I wanted to kill myself and an unborn child (but la-la-la-la so la-la-la-la happy now!), or 3. lecturing the world about the environment as I jet around on private planes and wear a million dollar wardrobe then lecture to young girls about how I can identify with their suffering, or 4. suing for privacy then popping up like a cockroach for every self-promo opportunity, including pimping dead soldiers for a cemetery photo op, or 5. knowing full well I can get away with crap because all I have to do is whip out the race card and media kiss my a$$.
> 
> So, no, I can't imagine being them. But you're 100% right they must sit around and scheme about how to get attention from the media. "Aimless" is a great word for Harry. He threw his own family under the bus for an insecure, self-absorbed shameless pity monger. They're both deranged.












Chanbal said:


> This is sick...
> _Devoted fans of the Duchess of Sussex have called for the UK to be "blocked" on Twitter so the rest of the world can “enjoy” Meghan Markle._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fans hit back and call for UK to be 'blocked from the internet'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's fans have hit back at online trolls targeting the Duchess for her Vax Live speech, with some calling for the entire UK to be banned from "all social media"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk









Chanbal said:


> Happy to know that JCMH found his Shangri-la! Where was this good friend when poor H's wife was having her mental health issues?
> View attachment 5080713
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'spiritually at home' in California, Bryony Gordon says
> 
> 
> Bryony Gordon, 40, wrote in The Telegraph Prince Harry, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California, has found a 'sense of purpose' since stepping back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





He moved thousands of miles away to celebrity HQ to live a celebrity lifestyle and he now feels he 'doesn't have to live in the expectations of others'? 
The poor delusional idiot.




lalame said:


> Do you think Harry realizes Princess Diana didn't die because of the BRF - she died because of the intense gossip and headlines she was constantly a part of? Yet here they are, left the BRF but purposely stoking tons of family gossip, doing as much as possible to get on as many headlines as possible. He gave up the best parts of that situation and perpetuated the worst. Make it make sense.


Exactly, it makes _no _sense





Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5083548


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Charles just doesn’t get it … yet:
> 
> _Prince Harry's brutal attack on his dad's parenting ability in a US podcast this week has many royal watchers speculating that relations between Prince Charles and the Sussexes have hit rock bottom.
> 
> *But the heir to the throne remains determined to find a way back into the royal fold for his wayward son and wife Meghan Markle – even if it takes years to broker a rapprochement.*
> 
> Allies of the Prince of Wales concede the father/son relationship is currently 'strained to say the least', but they insist Charles is focussed on finding a long-term solution, not Harry's regular verbal missiles._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOOTTON: Charles hoped William's aide quitting would get Harry back
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Prince Harry's attack on his dad's parenting ability has royal watchers speculating that relations between Charles and the Sussexes have hit rock bottom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm feeling optimistic today, so I will give Charles the benefit of the doubt. 
If Charles doesn't give them more money, slims down the monarchy... He is giving H and wife enough rope to...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I'm feeling optimistic today, so I will give Charles the benefit of the doubt.
> If Charles doesn't give them more money, slims down the monarchy... He is giving H and wife enough rope to...



Agree.  On some level, I feel like MM and OW are putting H out there in order to show the world how dim he really is.  He, being the dim one and now without his royal minders, does not realize they are laughing at him.  IMO he continues to expose his massive ignorance.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I see them as the next Jerry Springer show.  Ellen’s slot is open.  Would that work for them?


----------



## Chanbal

Finally someone explains what is genetic pain!


----------



## Aimee3

The more H opens his mouth, I just can’t believe how dumb he is.  Other than discussing the person du jour who has insulted them, what does the dumb one and his wife talk about?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Dax would never have been hard on H, they’re both Spotify. Even tho H and M seem to be struggling with what to do for episode two.


----------



## csshopper

Aimee3 said:


> The more H opens his mouth, I just can’t believe how dumb he is.  Other than discussing the person du jour who has insulted them, what does the dumb one and his wife talk about?



Who's turn it is to muck around in the chicken ****?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Betty-Lou

Good Day All,
Airing on TV right now is a Gayle King special on Queen Elizabeth II.

I bet Gayle will bring Prince Harry & Meghan into the story.

Gayle King is Trouble with a capital T.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chanbal said:


> Finally someone explains what is genetic pain!




Is what Harry said really any different to what Charles said in the Jonathan Dimbleby interview and biography or in the Charles-sanctioned piece in Vanity Fair in 2017? https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2017/4/the-lonely-heir.

"When Prince Charles hit bottom after his separation from Diana, in 1992, he unburdened himself about the miseries of his youth to Jonathan Dimbleby, who was writing an authorized biography. Dimbleby noted that, as a little boy, Charles was “easily cowed by the forceful personality of his father,” whose rebukes for “a deficiency in behaviour or attitude... easily drew tears.” While brusque, Philip was “well-meaning but unimaginative.” Friends who spoke with Charles’s permission described the duke’s “belittling” and even “bullying” his son. Charles was less harsh about his mother, but his opinion had a bitter edge. She was “not indifferent so much as detached.”

I'm wondering if anyone has actually listened to the entire Armchair Expert podcast because it's actually quite good.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry a mental health activist? Omid


----------



## CarryOn2020

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Is what Harry said really any different to what Charles said in the Jonathan Dimbleby interview and biography or in the Charles-sanctioned piece in Vanity Fair in 2017? https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2017/4/the-lonely-heir.
> 
> "When Prince Charles hit bottom after his separation from Diana, in 1992, he unburdened himself about the miseries of his youth to Jonathan Dimbleby, who was writing an authorized biography. Dimbleby noted that, as a little boy, Charles was “easily cowed by the forceful personality of his father,” whose rebukes for “a deficiency in behaviour or attitude... easily drew tears.” While brusque, Philip was “well-meaning but unimaginative.” Friends who spoke with Charles’s permission described the duke’s “belittling” and even “bullying” his son. Charles was less harsh about his mother, but his opinion had a bitter edge. She was “not indifferent so much as detached.”
> 
> I'm wondering if anyone has actually listened to the entire Armchair Expert podcast because it's actually quite good.



No, I have not and will not listen to ear poison which is all Hazzie offers. ymmv

Yes, this is completely different from Charles’s interviews. How?  Charles is the future king, again he will be KING.  His words matter.  He never cut off his family. He never gave up his responsibility. He was not looking to fleece his family for more money, but making observations about his life. Charles was not being vindictive, as childish, entitled brats tend to be. He was simply offering explanations on his upbringing. Back then, people wanted to know what kind of parents the Queen and Prince were.  They did reconcile to such an extent that Charles has shown nothing but respect for his father, especially lately.

Hazzie is 6th. His words are simply complaining, bad noise. He wants more money.  This looks like some sort of shake-down, IMO.


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Is what Harry said really any different to what Charles said in the Jonathan Dimbleby interview and biography or in the Charles-sanctioned piece in Vanity Fair in 2017? https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2017/4/the-lonely-heir.
> 
> "When Prince Charles hit bottom after his separation from Diana, in 1992, he unburdened himself about the miseries of his youth to Jonathan Dimbleby, who was writing an authorized biography. Dimbleby noted that, as a little boy, Charles was “easily cowed by the forceful personality of his father,” whose rebukes for “a deficiency in behaviour or attitude... easily drew tears.” While brusque, Philip was “well-meaning but unimaginative.” Friends who spoke with Charles’s permission described the duke’s “belittling” and even “bullying” his son. Charles was less harsh about his mother, but his opinion had a bitter edge. She was “not indifferent so much as detached.”
> 
> I'm wondering if anyone has actually listened to the entire Armchair Expert podcast because it's actually quite good.



I listened to it. I mean it was certainly entertaining and I liked the vibe a lot more than the Oprah interview, but I always enjoy Dax's podcasts. I found Harry a coherent speaker and can see how he might be likeable given he had a sense of humor, etc. but he rubbed me the wrong way with much of what he said. I also just find it distasteful to use his family drama as the hook for marketing his next series. I don't think that works out too well for most celebrities, much less people who seem to demand as much privacy as they do. His brand has become trashing his family and an institution he left a year ago now. He needs to move on.

And btw I do find it a little different to have a biographer characterize Charles's life in that way, in a way that might be unflattering to his family, compared to having Charles give a tell-all type of interview where he himself hurls those insults. This is why people found Diana's interview distasteful as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie craves the spotlight. He will say anything to get it.  Trash-talking one’s parents has a statue of limitations.  He is way past that point. None of us needs a reminder of why he is mad, stomps his feet, fussy because someone took his picture and didn’t pay for it.


----------



## lalame

I just don't see what Harry has to offer aside from his royal drama. Once people tire of that story, I really don't understand what will keep him in the public interest. He has no earned expertise to be speaking on the environment, public health, mental health, etc. Yes, he has some personal, individual experience but so do many people... why does he get the eyeballs? I just don't get it. When he had the royal platform, ok, I don't really look up to any of the royals myself but ok I get it, but he left that job.

And I feel that way about the both of them. There are so many actually accomplished actors who champion causes for decades and people barely listen to what they say. The only reason Harry and Meghan are getting the attention now is because of the very public, ugly royal drama that just happened. And they probably know this, and that's probably why they keep doing these sensational tell alls to keep it in the public conversation.


----------



## needlv

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Is what Harry said really any different to what Charles said in the Jonathan Dimbleby interview and biography or in the Charles-sanctioned piece in Vanity Fair in 2017? https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2017/4/the-lonely-heir.
> 
> "When Prince Charles hit bottom after his separation from Diana, in 1992, he unburdened himself about the miseries of his youth to Jonathan Dimbleby, who was writing an authorized biography. Dimbleby noted that, as a little boy, Charles was “easily cowed by the forceful personality of his father,” whose rebukes for “a deficiency in behaviour or attitude... easily drew tears.” While brusque, Philip was “well-meaning but unimaginative.” Friends who spoke with Charles’s permission described the duke’s “belittling” and even “bullying” his son. Charles was less harsh about his mother, but his opinion had a bitter edge. She was “not indifferent so much as detached.”
> 
> I'm wondering if anyone has actually listened to the entire Armchair Expert podcast because it's actually quite good.



i see your point.  Charles did point out how harsh PP was as a father.  I just wish H wasn’t doing this to make money...


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Harry a mental health activist? Omid
> 
> View attachment 5083978



Piers Morgan reply was pretty good...


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Do you mean the guy constantly trashing his family in interviews, without a care for THEIR mental health? <a href="https://t.co/unBYUUr0yP">https://t.co/unBYUUr0yP</a></p>&mdash; Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) <a href="">May 14, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## Jktgal




----------



## rose60610

Why would a "mental health activist" whine about his horrid suffering and victim victim victim stories being a member of the BRF with all the perks and privilege of being a world famous prince--while also supposedly thinking highly of participants in the Invictus Games? Invictus Games participants got there through ACTUAL suffering. And my guess is that their suffering wasn't in the form of royal living. How can Harry show his face to those people as he b*tches like a piss ant about royal life? Daddy Chuck was hard on him? Poor baby! If Harry's upbringing and life were so terrible, why did it take a self pitying gold digger to get him to leave his oh-so-horrible family that gave him the 50 million dollar wedding etc etc etc? These two have gone from annoying to whoring a$$holes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Charles was in the midst of a nasty, bitter divorce from a vindictive woman. It is understandable he would reflect on his own upbringing. Charles and Harry are not in the same situation, are they?  The ‘genetic pain’ nonsense sounds like so much of MM’s word salads and OW’s armchair psychobabble.  I got enough of that junk in the 80s and 90s.  Not listening to the poison now.

_Prince Charles allowed broadcaster and journalist Jonathan Dimbleby unprecedented access into his private life when he wrote a biography on the heir to the throne in *1994*. In a series of interviews with the author, the Prince of Wales painted a grim picture of his childhood - in a brutal swipe at the Queen and Prince Philip.

Royal biographer Gyles Brandreth highlighted Prince Charles' obvious contempt for his childhood in his new book on Prince Philip.

He wrote: “Once upon a time Prince Charles was in the habit of complaining about his childhood – plaintively and to almost anyone who would listen.

"In the early 1990s, when he cooperated with the broadcaster Jonathan Dimbleby to produce a documentary and a book about his life, the Prince of Wales made it clear to all the world that, as a boy, he had felt neglected at home and abandoned at school.

"His parents did not cherish him, or understand him, in the way that his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, did."

Later in the book, he added: "Today it is evident that Prince Charles has mixed feelings about his upbringing.

"Overall his memories of his childhood are not happy ones and they go back a long way.

"He told his biographer, Anthony Holden, that he could still recall his first pram, ‘lying in its vastness, overshadowed by its high sides’.

"Charles believes he was neglected by his parents when he was small."

*Mr Brandreth pointed out that this negative portrayal was not shared by his sister Princess Anne, who is just two years younger than Charles.*

The biographer also pointed out his parents did not agree with this depiction.

He wrote: "His parents, understandably, saw it differently.

"When I raised it with him, Prince Philip shrugged and pointed out that, at the time, he was serving in the Royal Navy and that servicemen and their families are often apart."

He added: "And, as his father reminded me, Charles was far from being either neglected or unloved: when he was not with his parents, he was with doting nurses and grandparents who adored him."

*But, Mr Brandreth pointed out Charles's view of his childhood changed as the year went on.

He noted that in 2012, for the Jubilee broadcast, the Prince of Wales "spoke of both his parents with unfeigned affection".*

The biographer told Express.co.uk his change of heart had little to do with his relationship with his parents, but due to how Charles was feeling in the early 1990s.

He said: "Prince Charles was I think in the 1990s in what we would now call a dark place.

"And the dark thoughts that were in his head, and we know this because he gave interviews himself, he talked about feelings of elements of neglect and abandonment when he was a child.

"Not being loved. Those were the feelings that he had."_

*Mr Brandreth explained that his resentment at the time lay largely because he was grappling with his failed marriage - having separated from Princess Diana two years before.

But Prince Charles' harsh portrayal of his parents was completely inaccurate, according to the biographer, who said the comments were just "a reflection of where Charles was at that time".*

_








						Prince Charles’s brutal description of Queen and Prince Philip’s parenting laid bare
					

PRINCE CHARLES hit out at the Queen and Prince Philip's parenting, where the royal felt he had been "neglected and abandoned" as a child.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Why are Harry's PoV and his ability to care about the participants of the Invictus Games even being linked? That's a bit of a stretch. He's well able to be working through his own issues and care about those of others, just like any other human being.

People of wealth and yes, privilege are as able as the rest of us to have highly dysfunctional families and mental health issues.  Harry is just being upfront about his past issues.

Many of Harry's military friends and Invictus Games participants have come to his defense and even supported his stepping down.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

In the Dax Shepard podcast Harry said in his 20s he realized he didn't want to be involved in the royal life.


FreeSpirit71 said:


> I'm wondering if anyone has actually listened to the entire Armchair Expert podcast because it's actually quite good.



He literally lied again when he claimed it was his wife who got him to see a therapist which led to his self proclaimed self actualization, when in reality his brother who told him to seek professional help when he could see he was struggling. And if Meghan had told him to seek help, which according to him he did, why could that person not have helped her when she need it? 

"It’s the job right? Grin and bear it. Get on with it. I was in my early twenties and I was thinking I don’t want this job, I don’t want to be here. I don’t want to be doing this. Look what it did to my mum. How am I ever going to settle down and have a wife and family when I know it’s going to happen again?" - Well then why did he have a public wedding? Why didn't they have a private wedding and live a private life? They easily could have lived a quiet life, like Eugiene, Beatrice, Zara, Peter etc. (all his cousins). It was not required for him to represent the royal family since William will be king, and then George, and William has children who would become 'spares'. The reality is he doesn't have any qualifications or skill sets that would allow him to have a life-style he is accustomed to. And I really don't think he could do a 'normal' job either. Why did he specifically ask to carry out royal duties when Meghan was given the option to carry on working?

He also got very salty about the paps profiting off celeb photos, and not giving them good press even though the paps benefit with the $$$. He has mentioned this in the letter when they split from the BRF.



lalame said:


> I just don't see what Harry has to offer aside from his royal drama. Once people tire of that story, I really don't understand what will keep him in the public interest.



I was thinking the exact thing after listening to the podcast. It seems like he will forever trash the royal family at every angle to get attention and $$$ but there will come a point when people will really not care and it will get old. In 10-20 years time people will not care. What will they talk about then? He did not get an education despite having the best resources in the world available to him. He is not street smart. She has a degree but she seems dim considering her degree was in international relations, yet doesn't understand how the BRF works, or how the British political system works. Her show was mediocre at best, and she wasn't exactly a star. The only reason either of them got any of the media deals was because of the association with the BRF (and the titles). 

I think ultimately they will get political, and in the next decade she will run for office. I think that is one of her big plans. 

They have a $100 million netflix deal apparently so that will keep them sweet for at least 10-15 years. I think the BRF will still be there for him, they are his blood and I don't think Charles or William would turn him away if he went to them and said he was struggling. Charles was cross at him and so stopped taking his calls, and like I said before, I would do the same think if my grown up son was acting like a child.

Something to remember - we are always only hearing one side.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One day he hates being a royal, the smiling, the shaking hands. Next day he loves it?  This is crazy-making behavior.  No, he cannot have it both ways. He is unstable, even now.  The camera clicks frighten him. He wants privacy but not really. Utter Nonsense.  That sort of person is not the best choice to help someone who is struggling. Mentally unhealthy people are lifted up by being surrounded with mentally healthy people.

All of those tweets/instas shown above are from Jan, 2020. The photos are much older. This was when people thought kind words could stop his exit.  Now that he has trashed-talked his family, skipped important events, bragged about his latrine-heavy house and his mega-million dollar deals, he is most unlikeable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> All of those tweets/instas shown above are from Jan, 2020. The photos are much older. This was when people thought kind words could stop his exit.  Now that he has trashed-talked his family, skipped important events, bragged about his latrine-heavy house and his mega-million dollar deals, he is most unlikeable.



All true. I wish someone would find those guys and ask them what they think of Harry today. Feelings about him may have changed quite a lot.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Disgusting. She sounds like a pedophile in the making and yes, *women can also be pedophiles*.


Look at all the teachers getting arrested for having sex with teenage boys!  I can't wrap my mind around it.  My son is now 19.  Even at a legal age, NEVER do I look at one of his friends and think, oooh yea.    Gross!


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> He comes from a land that doesn’t allow press [people] to speak against him.  This is what creates that sense of entitlement, that he is better than the rest of us.  Of course, celebs dislike being papped. They want us to believe their lie and get upset/angry/mad when they are exposed. As many have said over and over, that is why they get paid the big bucks, so get over the pity party.  This guy is nothing but a complainer.  Save his lectures for people who care.


No that’s not at all correct, the British press has not held back in its criticism of Harry, he’s not protected from that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Harry a mental health activist? Omid
> 
> View attachment 5083978



Lol. I think we live in a world where many once taboo health conditions are destigmatised that doesn’t mean you can’t call out people who are faking it for attention. If anything it’s all the more reason that you should.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> No that’s not at all correct, the British press has not held back in its criticism of Harry, he’s not protected from that.



Thank you. Glad to be wrong.  He needs to be held accountable. Says he doesn’t want to do what they did. Yet,
he does these interviews just like them, complains vociferously about the royal life and lack of privacy, lectures with the do as I say, not as I do attitude, blah blah blah.  Now he wants to go to the coronation. Hope Charles says no. Hope the Diana statue show is cancelled.


From the transcript:








						Harry moved to US to 'break cycle' after Charles 'pain and suffering'
					

PRINCE Harry admitted he moved to the US with his wife Meghan Markle and son Archie was partly to "break the cycle" of the Royal Family's parenting style, as the Duke of Sussex claimed he had "experienced pain and suffering" in the same way his father Prince Charles did.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_He added that his frame of mind was: 'I've seen behind the curtain, I've seen the business model and seen how this whole thing works and I don't want to be part of this', before revealing he had therapy after meeting Meghan, which 'burst' a bubble and he decided to 'stop complaining'. 
_
Ummm...they're quite literally known for their need to complain loudly and publicly to absolutely anyone who will listen. Maybe Harry needs a dictionary and a definition of "complaining" because they certainly haven't stopped.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Couple of opinion pieces from major UK newspapers :

*Prince Harry’s difficult past is no excuse for kicking the Queen*
_Penny Junor The Times 15 May_

Having once been a huge fan of Prince Harry, my admiration is wearing perilously thin. And where once I felt great sympathy for him, struggling to find his way after the traumas in his early life, my sympathy is on the wane too.

Two months ago he and Meghan shocked the world in their lengthy and, in my view, self-serving interview with Oprah Winfrey. Among all the accusations they lobbed at the royal family, backed up with nothing but the vaguest evidence, that of racism by some unnamed member was little short of wicked.

Harry, I thought, might have felt some remorse after that interview. I can understand Meghan having no qualms — she has only been part of the family for three years and is now safely home in California — but I did think that when he saw the fallout Harry might have had the odd sleepless night.

I was clearly wrong, because here he is taking another wrecking ball to his family, blaming his woes — the “pain and suffering” — on generations of bad parenting. This time it is not just his father who comes in for a kicking, it is the Queen too; Prince Charles was a bad parent because he himself had been badly parented. This is the sort of exploration usually reserved for the therapist’s couch, not for public consumption. Or self-promotion.

Harry did have a difficult childhood but so did a great many other people and hundreds of thousands had parents in rotten marriages that ended in divorce. He was not the only child who was left with nannies or childminders or packed off to boarding school because their parents were busy working, or who had to endure being in the public eye because of who his parents were.

Harsh as it might sound, Harry was not the only child to have lost a mother. There can be few more terrible things to bear in life but there are two choices: to let the experiences of childhood cripple you for ever or attempt to move on and use those experiences to make you stronger.

So, although it was not the happiest of childhoods, Harry was never abused; he always had a roof over his head, clothes to keep him warm; he never had to wonder where the next meal would come from; and he had the best education money could buy. He had luxurious holidays and beautiful horses to ride. And most important of all, Harry was loved. He was loved by his mother, his father, his brother, his aunts and uncles, and his grandparents. He also had stable and loving nannies. He was surrounded by love. And love is infinitely more valuable than money, privilege or fame.

What Harry will discover as his children grow up is that we parents all muddle along with our children, learning as we go and doing the best we can, as I have no doubt Prince Charles did. Sometimes we make mistakes and I am sure Harry will make the odd mistake with Archie. Very few of us get it absolutely right, but it’s the children who never felt loved or wanted that deserve our sympathy.

He is now 36 years old. It is time he stopped blaming others for his situation and started taking responsibility.


----------



## jelliedfeels

queennadine said:


> I think in his eyes, acknowledging his privilege makes him even more of a martyr and victim. “See how wonderful and great I am, to give all of this up...”


I think so too. Not only does he know that it’s the ‘correct’ thing to say but it shows a how humble he must be that he doesn’t care for all that status and money (apart from when he does) and if anything how much worse his suffering is than the average peasant’s that he can’t get over the trauma despite the life of luxury. 


V0N1B2 said:


> Is it really much different though than Harry’s wife standing there in South Africa complaining that “not many people have asked me if I’m okay”?
> Y’all, she was still breastfeeding and expected to soldier on and put on a brave face. You know, like women in refugee camps and stuff.


Birds of a feather.... 


FreeSpirit71 said:


> Why are Harry's PoV and his ability to care about the participants of the Invictus Games even being linked? That's a bit of a stretch. He's well able to be working through his own issues and care about those of others, just like any other human being.
> 
> People of wealth and yes, privilege are as able as the rest of us to have highly dysfunctional families and mental health issues.  Harry is just being upfront about his past issues.
> 
> Many of Harry's military friends and Invictus Games participants have come to his defense and even supported his stepping down.



I think it all comes down to interpretation. You might see his work for invictus as earnest and these tweets are a touching acknowledgment of that. I personally think that he’s a grifter who will pretend to care to look good and do the bare minimum. When I see those tweets I think a confidence trickster needs at least some people to be confident in him.

As to Prince Charles, I don’t have a high opinion of him either. I find him petulant. Personally, I don’t like most of the BRF but I respect that other people like them and of course some people like H&M it’s all opinion. 

To me, you can criticise Harry’s actions as a public figure independent of how you feel about his relatives’ actions. I don’t understand how one would discount the other.


----------



## Straight-Laced

*Prince Harry's 'genetic pain' is an insult to his grandmother*
_*The Duke's preoccupations with mental health and his parents reveal him to be as self-obsessed as any privileged millennial*_
Joanna Williams The Telegraph 14 May

Mental health awareness week brings another excuse for the Duke of Sussex to divulge his emotional struggles to a global audience. Indeed, Prince Harry ‘opens up’ so frequently, and is now so well-versed in ‘therapy speak’, he seems to have lost all ability to distinguish a public platform from the therapist’s couch.

When the people you hold responsible for your trauma happen to be the next-in-line to the throne and, by implication, the Queen and her recently deceased husband, then having some sense of discretion might be wise. But no. Harry goes there. Over the course of a 90 minute podcast interview, the Duke repeatedly identifies Prince Charles as the cause of his mental turmoil.

We shouldn’t be surprised. After all, blaming your parents for every painful feeling endured, every set back experienced, every facet of your being you wish were different, is wildly popular. Back in 1971, Larkin’s declaration that, ‘They **** you up, your mum and dad’ was subversive for more than just the expletive. It broke bonds of privacy, loyalty and respect. Today it just makes us yawn.

Harry revealed daddy issues when he complained to Oprah about having been ‘literally cut off financially’ at the tender age of 36. Perhaps it’s now time for the Prince to grow up. The search for parental scapegoats may be fashionable but it is also debilitating. It prevents people from fully maturing and assuming responsibility for their own lives and the world they live in. The older you get, the more neurotically resentful it seems. And when your upbringing was one of unrivalled luxury, blaming daddy just appears petty.

To be fair to Harry, all that expensive therapy has taught him forgiveness. Charles may have given his son a complex - but it wasn’t his fault! ‘Suddenly I started to piece it all together and go OK so this is where he went to school, this is what happened, I know this bit about his life, I also know that’s connected to his parents,’ Harry tells us, ‘So that means he’s treating me the way he was treated which means how can I change that for my own kids.’

It might console Charles to know that his son doesn’t consider him to have been deliberately vindictive. But I doubt it. For a child to examine the biography of their parent, only to discover and expose suffering, is monumentally patronising.

This line of reasoning deflects blame down the generations; bizarrely Harry even seems convinced it is genetic. Ultimately, he lays fault at the door of his grandparents: if only the Queen had been a better mother, then Charles would have been a better father, and he would not be suffering today. This is not just patronising, it is insulting.

Harry’s goal, he reveals, is to ‘break the cycle’ of ‘genetic pain’ for his own children and to ensure his own childhood experiences are not replicated. Well, good for him. But rather than rushing to condemn his father and grandparents (Diana gets a free pass, of course), Harry might want to consider that ‘parenting’ was just not something people did in the past. Adults married, had children, and got on with it. Good parents made sure their children were fed and clothed: the rich outsourced such mundane tasks. The idea that you had actually to practice parenting as a specific skill was unthinkable.

Harry and Meghan have money and a lifestyle most of us can barely imagine. Yet their preoccupations with mental health and parenting reveal them to be as self-obsessed as any privileged millennial. When Harry’s interview was released yesterday, Prince Charles was visiting the Breast Cancer Now research centre in London. I’m no royalist but I’ll take a commitment to public duty over emotional incontinence any day.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. Glad to be wrong.  He needs to be held accountable. Says he doesn’t want to do what they did. Yet,
> he does these interviews just like them, complains vociferously about the royal life and lack of privacy, lectures with the do as I say, not as I do attitude, blah blah blah.  Now he wants to go to the coronation. Hope Charles says no. Hope the Diana statue show is cancelled.
> 
> 
> From the transcript:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry moved to US to 'break cycle' after Charles 'pain and suffering'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry admitted he moved to the US with his wife Meghan Markle and son Archie was partly to "break the cycle" of the Royal Family's parenting style, as the Duke of Sussex claimed he had "experienced pain and suffering" in the same way his father Prince Charles did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _He added that his frame of mind was: 'I've seen behind the curtain, I've seen the business model and seen how this whole thing works and I don't want to be part of this', before revealing he had therapy after meeting Meghan, which 'burst' a bubble and he decided to 'stop complaining'. _
> 
> Ummm...they're quite literally known for their need to complain loudly and publicly to absolutely anyone who will listen. Maybe Harry needs a dictionary and a definition of "complaining" because they certainly haven't stopped.



seriously.... when are they gonna stop complainin? Legit... like I’m just waiting till he learns the word “affluenza”...


----------



## Hermes Zen

How I worry for Archie and his soon to be little sister. How sad to have parents like H&M. It should be interesting to see Archie's and sister's personalities as they form. I truly hope they turn out better than their parents.  Sad.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> _He added that his frame of mind was: 'I've seen behind the curtain, I've seen the business model and seen how this whole thing works and I don't want to be part of this', before revealing he had therapy after meeting Meghan, which 'burst' a bubble and he decided to '*stop* *complaining*'. _


----------



## jelliedfeels

Straight-Laced said:


> *Prince Harry's 'genetic pain' is an insult to his grandmother*
> _*The Duke's preoccupations with mental health and his parents reveal him to be as self-obsessed as any privileged millennial*_
> Joanna Williams The Telegraph 14 May
> 
> Mental health awareness week brings another excuse for the Duke of Sussex to divulge his emotional struggles to a global audience. Indeed, Prince Harry ‘opens up’ so frequently, and is now so well-versed in ‘therapy speak’, he seems to have lost all ability to distinguish a public platform from the therapist’s couch.
> 
> When the people you hold responsible for your trauma happen to be the next-in-line to the throne and, by implication, the Queen and her recently deceased husband, then having some sense of discretion might be wise. But no. Harry goes there. Over the course of a 90 minute podcast interview, the Duke repeatedly identifies Prince Charles as the cause of his mental turmoil.
> 
> We shouldn’t be surprised. After all, blaming your parents for every painful feeling endured, every set back experienced, every facet of your being you wish were different, is wildly popular. Back in 1971, Larkin’s declaration that, ‘They **** you up, your mum and dad’ was subversive for more than just the expletive. It broke bonds of privacy, loyalty and respect. Today it just makes us yawn.
> 
> Harry revealed daddy issues when he complained to Oprah about having been ‘literally cut off financially’ at the tender age of 36. Perhaps it’s now time for the Prince to grow up. The search for parental scapegoats may be fashionable but it is also debilitating. It prevents people from fully maturing and assuming responsibility for their own lives and the world they live in. The older you get, the more neurotically resentful it seems. And when your upbringing was one of unrivalled luxury, blaming daddy just appears petty.
> 
> To be fair to Harry, all that expensive therapy has taught him forgiveness. Charles may have given his son a complex - but it wasn’t his fault! ‘Suddenly I started to piece it all together and go OK so this is where he went to school, this is what happened, I know this bit about his life, I also know that’s connected to his parents,’ Harry tells us, ‘So that means he’s treating me the way he was treated which means how can I change that for my own kids.’
> 
> It might console Charles to know that his son doesn’t consider him to have been deliberately vindictive. But I doubt it. For a child to examine the biography of their parent, only to discover and expose suffering, is monumentally patronising.
> 
> This line of reasoning deflects blame down the generations; bizarrely Harry even seems convinced it is genetic. Ultimately, he lays fault at the door of his grandparents: if only the Queen had been a better mother, then Charles would have been a better father, and he would not be suffering today. This is not just patronising, it is insulting.
> 
> Harry’s goal, he reveals, is to ‘break the cycle’ of ‘genetic pain’ for his own children and to ensure his own childhood experiences are not replicated. Well, good for him. But rather than rushing to condemn his father and grandparents (Diana gets a free pass, of course), Harry might want to consider that ‘parenting’ was just not something people did in the past. Adults married, had children, and got on with it. Good parents made sure their children were fed and clothed: the rich outsourced such mundane tasks. The idea that you had actually to practice parenting as a specific skill was unthinkable.
> 
> Harry and Meghan have money and a lifestyle most of us can barely imagine. Yet their preoccupations with mental health and parenting reveal them to be as self-obsessed as any privileged millennial. When Harry’s interview was released yesterday, Prince Charles was visiting the Breast Cancer Now research centre in London. I’m no royalist but I’ll take a commitment to public duty over emotional incontinence any day.


 I know this is a pretentious thing to say (pretentious moi?) but my eyes are rolling so hard at that sophomoric interpretation of Larkin’s ‘this be the verse’ that I can’t finish the article.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> H isn't very sharp and probably knows very little about the real world and how countries have different governments, laws and customs. He wouldn't understand that British and USA constitutions are very different. Hell, he probably doesn't even know what a constitution is. Geography probably isn't his strong suit either. I bet when he looks at a world map, he thinks the equator is a bridge around the world where we all stand together holding hands and sing, "We are the World."



Why doesn't H get the constitution. He doesn't get constitutions. He sees us _all_ as ants. Why would anyone give ants the right of free speech. 

The British do NOT have a constitution as such (or in other words it's unwritten) we have a monarchy. 
We have constitutional _conventions_; EU law/Int. treaties; the Royal Prerogative (Royal privilege); Laws of Parliament (that must be double-checked by Lords before being passed); and works of authoritative writers. 
We (UK) have only had the right of Freedom of Expression (whatever that means  ) since 1998, and had the Freedom of Speech as part of EU law on Human Rights (but we are no longer held by most EU laws). We even have to apply for public information through a Freedom of Information (FOI) as public authorities keep 'what's good for us' to themselves - and that goes with detailed arrangements on Royal (financial) support, their tax liability (or the lack of) which offshore accounts the RF keep their millions etc.  

The US constitution is prob based on the things that US citizens were not allowed when the monarchy reigned over it as a colony. 

This is why I do not understand why you allow a Prince, a rep of your former colonial masters, lord it over you and use his title in your land.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I know this is a pretentious thing to say (pretentious moi?) but my eyes are rolling so hard at that sophomoric interpretation of Larkin’s ‘this be the verse’ that I can’t finish the article.



'H's genetic pain' is the height and extent of his suffering (I wonder who taught him the term  ). H knows he can't really complain about anything else in his life apart from losing his mother at a fairly young age.

Larkin mentions Charles' upbringing, but the Queen was around more than Diana's mother for her. Interesting because of Saint Diana's status/rep. H can't attribute any genetic pain to her (a "free pass"). Diana's abandonment/upbringing was by all accounts much lonelier and motherless - did she not suffer from this 'genetic pain'?

Basically, it's the Queen's fault for having a full-time job.

Let's face it, with H, we're back to:

1. Only men should be kings, hold public office or go out to work.
2. Men are not capable of bringing up kids (Phillip could have been a S@HD)
3. All women should be mothers.
4. All mothers should stay at home.
5. All mothers should never die.


----------



## gelbergirl

I remember Diana, after the divorce saying Charles was an excellent father.
She made a point of this.
How was Charles not a good parent?  Or is this more MM influence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> 'H's genetic pain' is the height and extent of his suffering (I wonder who taught him the term  ). H knows he can't really complain about anything else in his life apart from losing his mother at a fairly young age.
> 
> Larkin mentions Charles' upbringing, but the Queen was around more than Diana's mother for her. Interesting because of Saint Diana's status/rep. H can't attribute any genetic pain to her (a "free pass"). Diana's abandonment/upbringing was by all accounts much lonelier and motherless - did she not suffer from this 'genetic pain'?
> 
> Basically, it's the Queen's fault for having a full-time job.
> 
> Let's face it, with H, we're back to:
> 
> 1. Only men should be kings, hold public office or go out to work.
> 2. Men are not capable of bringing up kids (Phillip could have been a S@HD)
> 3. All women should be mothers.
> 4. All mothers should stay at home.
> 5. All mothers should never die.


No “genetic pain” arising from the fraught relationships within the Markle family then?  Funny that.


----------



## RAINDANCE

*William and Harry: two dukes – two very different approaches to happiness*
The princes shared the same turbulent upbringing, but then took very different paths to break their ‘cycle of suffering’

ByAngela Levin14 May 2021 • 6:59pm  Daily Telegraph

The brothers have gone their separate ways, both literally and figuratively

Prince Harry, who has long craved privacy, made headlines yet again this week. During an interview with American actor Dax Shepard, for his _Armchair Expert_ podcast, the Duke of Sussex compared his life to being in _The Truman Show_.
He spoke of wanting to “break the cycle” of “genetic pain” passed from parent to child and how, as a result, he had no choice but to escape to America with his wife and child. Interestingly, he added that he owes his decision to have therapy to a conversation with Meghan, which helped “burst the bubble”.
*This struck me as odd, as I interviewed Harry at length shortly before he got engaged to Meghan in 2017, for the biography I was writing. Our conversation turned to his depression and panic attacks, and I asked if Meghan had encouraged him to get help.
“Absolutely not,” he replied. “She had nothing to do with it.” It was, he said, his brother Prince William who had convinced him his mental health needed attention. *“At first I didn’t listen,” he added. “The time wasn’t right and like many others, I don’t like to do what my older brother says.” In the end, though, he took his advice and added how grateful he was for the help.

William, of course, was brought up by the same parents, with the same worries that Harry mentions to Shepard – one of which was that he wouldn’t be able to trust a woman enough to have a successful marriage.
It is on this issue that the lives of the two brothers have so obviously diverged. While Harry lashes out from his home in California, making woke podcasts and giving interviews to Oprah with his wife by his side, William has always been able to see the bigger picture – and set about a very practical pursuit of happiness from a young age. And despite the line Harry now seems desperate to draw between their choices, both brothers have sought to avoid repeating the destructive pattern they saw so clearly in their own parents.

It’s not surprising. Neither Diana nor Charles were given enough love and stability in their formative years. Diana was badly affected by her parents’ acrimonious divorce. Charles had deep scars of his own, partly from his rather cold upbringing. When they split in 1992, 10-year-old William became the man of the house. Diana described him as her “closest confidant and soulmate” – a terrible burden to place on a child.
Harry, who wears his heart on his sleeve, is a different character. He adored his mother because she could be great fun and gave him lots of hugs.
Nonetheless, their dysfunctional background meant that neither prince had much of a clue what a normal, happy family life looked like.  
That may be why William rejected many of the options placed before him as a young man, determined to explore life’s other possibilities. With willpower and courage, the rather shy heir chose to study at the University of St Andrews, partly because it was far away from his family. He insisted on staying in student accommodation – rather than the smart flat with staff that his aides suggested – where he met Kate Middleton. Together they did simple things like grocery shopping, having a drink in the pub and eating fish and chips while sitting on the pavement. An ordinary person would find it difficult to understand how important this was for William and how it helped him feel liberated.  
William desperately wanted to avoid the sort of painful divorce his parents went through and it took him seven years of battling between emotion and stiff upper lip to trust Kate enough to ask her to marry him. It was obvious how important his choice had been when, during their engagement interview, he said he had waited so long to give her time “to back out if she needed to before it all got too much”, adding significantly: “I have wanted to try to learn from lessons in the past.” He felt that Kate might in the end still have turned him down.
During that long period of courtship, William allowed himself to become close to the Middletons. They took him back to basics and provided a model he could work towards – learning how a settled and caring household works. William found he loved being part of a warm family unit and it was a healing experience for him to see how well Kate’s parents got on. He enjoyed going on holiday with them, watching television with supper on his lap and it’s even been claimed that he called Michael Middleton ‘Dad.’ Harry, of course, got on with Kate too and said she was the older sister he had always wanted.  
Many men marry someone who reminds them of their mother, but William wasn’t tempted to find someone who was as magnetic as Diana, preferring straightforward Kate. No one should underestimate the soul-seeking he went through to prove that, by making thoughtful choices, one can stop history from repeating itself.
William and Kate’s marriage, in April 2011, drew a firm line under everything that his parents’ union had represented without rejecting either of them. Instead, he draws his mother’s influence into his life in a positive way through his obvious joy in having children and his deep involvement in George, Charlotte and Louis’s lives.  

George was born in July 2013 and on the steps of the Lindo Wing, Kate revealed that William had already changed his first nappy. It is inconceivable that any previous heir to the throne would even have contemplated such a thing and it was William’s first step to being a hands-on father. He takes his turn to do the school run, spends weekends in Norfolk and obviously loves the rough and tumble with his children, who you can see adore him. It is beyond doubt that as his genetic destiny looms larger, his little family will remain top priority.  

*Harry has a different personality, more Spencer than Windsor, and has responded to his upbringing in a different way – not least because he is the ‘spare’. Diana encouraged him to be naughty and not get caught. He started drinking in 1997, aged 12, when he, William and their mother were holidaying on a boat owned by Mohamed Al Fayed – Harry going ashore whenever he could and returning drunk on the local tipple. It became a way for him to escape. He also told me he’d chosen to join the “bad boys” at Eton and added smoking and drugs to his intake.*
Most teenagers start seeing their parents as imperfect, but Harry lost his mother before that could happen. Now in his thirties, and in therapy speak, he blames Prince Charles for the “genetic pain” he feels. Many think it is about time he stops playing the victim card.
Of course, like all those who have had turbulent upbringings, there is nothing wrong with trying to “break the cycle of pain and suffering” – and, as William has demonstrated, there are many non self-destructive ways to do this, including just getting on with parenting your own children. Instead, Harry seems to hang on tightly to his family’s mistakes.  

I hope he can find a way to let two-year-old Archie and his soon-to-be-born daughter meet the Royal family. Children can build wonderful bonds with relatives of different generations – as Harry himself, once close to the late Duke of Edinburgh, knows.
Indeed, there is always the chance that when Archie grows up he might rail against the decisions of his own father – about missed opportunities and how his name has been used to promote commercial goods and charities for his parents’ financial gain.  
In Shepard’s podcast, Harry accepts that he had a privileged childhood but points out that people can “start in one place and change over time.”  
In his California mansion, with its 16 bathrooms, a swimming pool and acres of land, he remains privileged. But have the other changes he has tried so hard to make – distancing himself from his family, adopting therapy speak, becoming a spokesperson rather than a working Royal – really made him happier than the cautious brother he has left behind? It may be that only the next spin of their genetic cycle will tell.


----------



## RAINDANCE

*PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Why does Prince Harry always make Charles the villain - and never Diana?*
By AMANDA PLATELL FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:24, 14 May 2021 | UPDATED: 07:34, 15 May 2021


How devastating for Prince Charles to learn, from a podcast beamed to the world, that Harry left the UK to break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering' bequeathed to him by his supposedly dysfunctional father and grandparents.
Harry suggests he suffered so much at the hands of his family that he does not want to inflict similar anguish upon his own children.
The only way to do this has been to escape the torture of royal life, rush off to LA to make multi-million deals and denounce his father from afar.

What Harry seems to ignore, though, is that back in boring Blighty Charles loves his son dearly and always has. 
He did everything he could to care for Harry after Diana's death; he helped fund Harry's extravagant lifestyle; he walked Meghan Markle down the aisle for their wedding in her father's absence. And was always trying to be the dad Harry needed.

Prince Harry with Diana, Princess Of Wales, Prince Charles And Prince William at the V-Day 50th anniversary parade
With his podcast, Harry has trashed all that paternal love in the most public and humiliating way. Yet what cuts most is that he criticises his father while exonerating his mother.
I am an unashamed fan of Diana, and was furious on her behalf when Charles betrayed her with Camilla. But even I accept Diana was no saint. 
We lost count of the number of her lovers, many of them married — James Hewitt, James Gilbert, Oliver Hoare and Will Carling to name but a few.

*And while she was pursued by the paparazzi so loathed by Harry, she also relentlessly and calculatingly courted the media. We were all informed — certainly I was as a newspaper editor — as to when and where she would be so we could take a snap portraying 'poor abandoned Diana'.*
And since Harry is criticising his royal grandparents, let's not forget that Diana Spencer was born into the most broken of aristocratic families. 

Her mother Frances was dubbed 'the bolter', after she scandalously left Earl Spencer for the wallpaper heir, Peter Shand Kydd. Custody of the children was granted to their father. Nine-year-old Diana and her older brother Charles were shuffled between her parents and she later recalled the effect on her was 'devastating'. 

School holidays were grim, she remembered: 'Two weeks Mummy and two weeks Daddy . . . and the trauma of going from one house to another, and each parent trying to make it up with material things rather than the tactile stuff we craved, but never got.'
Which is why I can't understand why Harry so cruelly has his father and his family in his sights, but not his equally flawed mother and hers.
The fact is Harry had two unfaithful parents who sadly did not love each other. He is determined not to repeat mistakes and be the perfect dad.
But life is so much more complicated than he seems to think — and the tragedy is that, by rejecting his past, he is making his future so much more difficult. Of course, we're bound to hear lots more about it on Netflix.


----------



## RAINDANCE

There was a really nice article about Sentabale in the papers last week which has been completely buried under the latest stuff. It's so sad because that charity really has made a difference in peoples lives  and Harry always seemed to be so engaged with it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

“How sharper than a serpents tooth it is, to have a thankless child!”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> *William and Harry: two dukes – two very different approaches to happiness*



Wanna bet money whose kids will turn out well adjusted and successful? I think I've made up my mind.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

FreeSpirit71 said:


> He's well able to be working through his own issues and care about those of others, just like any other human being.
> 
> People of wealth and yes, privilege are as able as the rest of us to have highly dysfunctional families and mental health issues. Harry is just being upfront about his past issues.
> 
> Many of Harry's military friends and Invictus Games participants have come to his defense and even supported his stepping down.



His involvement in the Invictus games does seem to be in earnest and it was something that he seemed to be passionate about.

His claim of being in a dysfunctional family which contributed to his mental health struggles is one-sided. He talks about his fathers dysfunctional family, when in fact his mothers seemed much worse, and was one of the reasons she wanted to marry Charles - to escape the same fate as her parents. Since Harry is soo keen to read anything written about his family, even if his mother didn't tell him about her family or he did not spend much time with them, he would have known with the countless documentaries and books written about her.

I also want to point out that although privileged and wealthy individuals can suffer from abuse, neglect and mental health issues, the very fact that they are wealthy allows them to break free, seek help and get out. One of the most common reasons people can't leave partners or abusive relationships is due to finance. It is so sad to see this abuse and mental pain is as a result of money. 

Harrys military friends supported his decision to step down, they didn't say it was ok to publicly air family grievances or to profit off them. Something to remember - just because his military friends have a good opinion of him, doesn't mean he is a good person or hardworking. We are mad of many layers and we show certain parts of ourselves to different people in our lives.

I wish the media would just stop reporting on them, then maybe no one would want them since the would no longer be relevant.

He really has no right to complain about paps when his own wife has been using them to boost her profile and career. The only reason she doesn't like them now is because everyone know who she is (through association) and so doesn't need the paps anymore. Paps help make people relevant and boost peoples career, but once they are 'big enough' those same celebs start complaining. The celebs are just as bad at using people, it is not just the paps at fault here.


----------



## jennlt

Clearblueskies said:


> No “genetic pain” arising from the fraught relationships within the Markle family then?  Funny that.


Harry and his wife live by the adage "follow the money"


----------



## marietouchet

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> Airing on TV right now is a Gayle King special on Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> I bet Gayle will bring Prince Harry & Meghan into the story.
> 
> Gayle King is Trouble with a capital T.


Hmmm
thinking of 6’s comments on the First Amendment ... he needs to take some civics lessons ... as a Brit, he lacks the background on the US topic
And this goes both ways ...
Gayle, the American, has demonstrated a lack of understanding of the UK system that has a place for the BRF - a system which is antithetical to US values where there are no titles or monarchy ... etc
i just wish people who have forums would help educate people in other cultures rather than start by trashing them
I think that thought goes to the compassion that 6 is always promoting


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## drifter

LOL I thought, what does "genetic pain" even mean??  Subsequent googling suggests that Harry might have used the term wrongly/ignorantly/in a futile attempt to make himself look intelligent.  .  Seems like genetic pain refers to actual genes and pain sensitivity.  huffpost article and sciencedirect article for reference.


----------



## rose60610

I'm thinking "genetic pain" is a term to be pulled out and played like the race card. When Harry does something stupid and gets called on it, all he has to do is blame it on "genetic pain"!  

And those who state in so many words that the First Amendment and Free Speech should be "limited" for "some people" NEVER intend for it to be limiting for THEM, because that WOULD BE *BAD.* Free speech for the Woke among us means it's acceptable to pick and choose WHO is entitled to blather anything with no repercussions vs those who must be cancelled.


----------



## Clearblueskies

drifter said:


> LOL I thought, what does "genetic pain" even mean??  Subsequent googling suggests that Harry might have used the term wrongly/ignorantly/in a futile attempt to make himself look intelligent.  . Seems like genetic pain refers to actual genes and pain sensitivity. huffpost article and sciencedirect article for reference.


More meaningless Meghanisms.  I think the woman has a random word generator for a brain.


----------



## jennlt

drifter said:


> LOL I thought, what does "genetic pain" even mean??  Subsequent googling suggests that Harry might have used the term wrongly/ignorantly/in a futile attempt to make himself look intelligent.  .  Seems like genetic pain refers to actual genes and pain sensitivity.  huffpost article and sciencedirect article for reference.


I would never presume to know how his brain works but is it possible he was referring to "generational trauma"?


----------



## Clearblueskies

jennlt said:


> I would never presume to know how his brain works but is it possible he was referring to "generational trauma"?


I think you have a point


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

According to Dax and his office, they were asked not to release the podcast immediately but to wait to give the British press less time to evaluate the truthfulness of H's statements.  I have no reason not to believe Dax, and this is just another example of HM and their publicists' efforts to influence public opinion in their favor, and to avoid being called out for their lies.


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> There was a really nice article about Sentabale in the papers last week which has been completely buried under the latest stuff. It's so sad because that charity really has made a difference in peoples lives  and Harry always seemed to be so engaged with it.


I believe he is going to scramble for damage control because his brain omitted the big picture when his mouth yapped about how miserable he was during all those years of service with the BRF. After that Invictus docu, he is likely to focus his next production on HIV, Sentabale and drag out Dead Mom's efforts for HIV. He doesn't have that much in his life he can use as material (cultural analysis of partygoing habits of the young, rich and famous?).

Archewell is already mining its supporters for material. Its website invites people to share their stories.
*How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
_We want to hear from you. Share your story for a chance to be featured. Tell us: What does compassion mean to you? How have you, or someone you know, acted with compassion this year? Or describe a time where you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance?_

If you read the t&c, anything you share becomes theirs in perpetuity and they can edit it as they wish: "_Archewell has the right to edit, revise, abridge, crop, combine, condense, quote selected portion of the Submission as it deems appropriate or necessary._" Which I take to mean that even if they change your story, you have no legal recourse. They own your name, your likeness and biographical material, and in the event they make a fortune from using your story, they are not obliged to pay you a cent.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wanna bet money whose kids will turn out well adjusted and successful? I think I've made up my mind.


I've seen successful and responsible adults who grew up in dysfunctional families. Let's hope Archie and Doria Diana will be OK.


----------



## sdkitty

Betty-Lou said:


> Good Day All,
> Airing on TV right now is a Gayle King special on Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> I bet Gayle will bring Prince Harry & Meghan into the story.
> 
> Gayle King is Trouble with a capital T.


I saw part of that.....she was pretty positive from what I recall (I think I fell asleep).  Seems to me having Meghan's fan girl do this was an odd choice.  I guess she's still the crown jewel at CBS


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


>


----------



## Chanbal

This unfortunately may explain the genetic pain, racism, mental health...










						In California, It’s Good Business: Why Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Won’t Stop Talking About Themselves
					

Prince Harry went on air with Dax Shepherd. He slung some of his customary barbs across the pond at his family. But the math of being an American celebrity is different from that of being a British royal.  Here's the takeaway on how Harry's fitting in out in California.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## lalame

FreeSpirit71 said:


> People of wealth and yes, privilege are as able as the rest of us to have highly dysfunctional families and mental health issues. Harry is just being upfront about his past issues.



This is completely true and I don’t want anyone to think I’m saying privileged people can’t have problems. I had no issues when Harry and William did their mental health roadshow thing to destigmatize mental health and discussed their challenges with the world. I forgot the name of their program but it was quite popular. I didn’t even mind Meghan’s “no one asked if I’m okay” thing and had sympathy for her just at the basic level of a human being unhappy in their new job/home/country/etc. I liked all of them just fine during that.

What bothers me about the current situation is they aren’t just spontaneously sharing.... they are giving sensational tell all’s as part of a marketing plan for their private ventures. they are profiting off their pain while creating more pain for their family. This podcast came out literally one week, almost to the day, before his Apple TV project airs. It’s not a coincidence. They’re using their suffering to get rich... how is that any different than the Kardashians or reality tv stars stoking drama and gossip for the cameras? Or what her sister and father were doing by giving interviews about her? It’s tasteless.

And btw it’s tasteless when even normal privileged people have no awareness of their privilege and complain widely about their normal problems. Tell all to your close friends, sure... don’t shy away from it when asked, sure... but make a big fanfare such that it’s part of your brand? There’s a difference.


----------



## Chanbal

Didn't click on the article, but I wonder what she means and what her intentions are...


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> This is completely true and I don’t want anyone to think I’m saying privileged people can’t have problems. I had no issues when Harry and William did their mental health roadshow thing to destigmatize mental health and discussed their challenges with the world. I forgot the name of their program but it was quite popular. I didn’t even mind Meghan’s “no one asked if I’m okay” thing and had sympathy for her just at the basic level of a human being unhappy in their new job/home/country/etc. I liked all of them just fine during that.
> 
> What bothers me about the current situation is they aren’t just spontaneously sharing.... they are giving sensational tell all’s as part of a marketing plan for their private ventures. they are profiting off their pain while creating more pain for their family. This podcast came out literally one week, almost to the day, before his Apple TV project airs. It’s not a coincidence. They’re using their suffering to get rich... how is that any different than the Kardashians or reality tv stars stoking drama and gossip for the cameras? Or what her sister and father were doing by giving interviews about her? It’s tasteless.
> 
> And btw it’s tasteless when even normal privileged people have no awareness of their privilege and complain widely about their normal problems. Tell all to your close friends, sure... don’t shy away from it when asked, sure... but make a big fanfare such that it’s part of your brand? There’s a difference.



You make an excellent point. They really are following the reality star template. While they are trying to be seen as more hoity toity and intellectual than others the objective is the same, get as many people talking about them as possible and sell, sell, sell.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Didn't click on the article, but I wonder what she means and what her intentions are...
> View attachment 5084403



The questions she wished she never asked.  Oh please.

More like she didn't ask the hard questions, didn't follow up and didn't challenge those two. Oprah, it's time to step back from being an interviewer.


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t get Harry’s complaints at all. While Charles and Diana may have despised each other, they both loved their children. They didn’t bad mouth each other to the kids. Divorce is never easy on children but many, many kids with divorced parents grow up to be normal and well-adjusted.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

gracekelly said:


> Will we be treated to him on Bill Maher?



We can only hope.  I have a feeling Bill would rip him a new one.  Never going to happen, though.  Harry lost his balls a long time ago, if indeed they ever dropped.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> According to Dax and his office, they were asked not to release the podcast immediately but to wait to give the British press less time to evaluate the truthfulness of H's statements.  I have no reason not to believe Dax, and this is just another example of HM and their publicists' efforts to influence public opinion in their favor, and to avoid being called out for their lies.



So he knows he is lying. What exactly is wrong with him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. Why did Dax reveal that information though? Was he asked or did it just casually come up?


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> The questions she wished she never asked.  Oh please.
> 
> More like she didn't ask the hard questions, didn't follow up and didn't challenge those two. Oprah, it's time to step back from being an interviewer.


I was reading some old reviews of the OW interview and they claimed Winfrey did an excellent job, circling back time and again to relentlessly probe and follow up. My recollections are varying. I thought she mainly said What?! and did quotable quotes like "silent or silenced".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. Why did Dax reveal that information though? Was he asked or did it just casually come up?



Dax has talked about his personal issues frequently on his podcast and he’s been in the news recently for relapsing so I think he just treats it as casually sharing. I think he was trying to relate to Harry with the whole traumatic childhood leading to bad behaviors thing. Interestingly he called out the stripping but not the nazi costume


----------



## Coconuts40

bag-mania said:


> I don’t get Harry’s complaints at all. While Charles and Diana may have despised each other, they both loved their children. They didn’t bad mouth each other to the kids. Divorce is never easy on children but many, many kids with divorced parents grow up to be normal and well-adjusted.



I agree, they both loved their children.  I do wonder however how Diana's constant confiding in her children about her struggles may have impacted their perception of their father.

I must say, I really feel bad for Prince Charles right now. He is being thrown under the bus by his own son, just shy of burying his own father.  No one is perfect but airing family struggles in public can never go well, whether you are a Royal Family member or just an average person.


----------



## gracekelly

Coconuts40 said:


> I agree, they both loved their children.  I do wonder however how Diana's constant confiding in her children about her struggles may have impacted their perception of their father.
> 
> I must say, I really feel bad for Prince Charles right now. He is being thrown under the bus by his own son, just shy of burying his own father.  No one is perfect but airing family struggles in public can never go well, whether you are a Royal Family member or just an average person.


Agree, it is really mean.  Is this cluelessness at best?  Or is it a deep resentment that has been there a while?  A combination of both probably and helped along by a little bird whispering in his ear.  He could spend years on an analyst's couch going through all of this.  Maybe he should spend on the therapy instead of the PR.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Dax has talked about his personal issues frequently on his podcast and he’s been in the news recently for relapsing so I think he just treats it as casually sharing. I think he was trying to relate to Harry with the whole traumatic childhood leading to bad behaviors thing. Interestingly he called out the stripping but not the nazi costume



I meant being asked by Team Sussex to delay the publishing of the podcast so the British press wouldn't have time to fact check. Which IMO proves they know they are full of it, because why worry otherwise?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> While Charles and Diana may have despised each other, they both loved their children. They didn’t bad mouth each other to the kids.


Oh yes she did, big time. She constantly complained about Charles, even to her kids, and they had to comfort her as was reported.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t get Harry’s complaints at all. While Charles and Diana may have despised each other, they both loved their children. They didn’t bad mouth each other to the kids. Divorce is never easy on children but many, many kids with divorced parents grow up to be normal and well-adjusted.





gracekelly said:


> Agree, it is really mean.  Is this cluelessness at best?  Or is it a deep resentment that has been there a while?  A combination of both probably and helped along by a little bird whispering in his ear.  He could spend years on an analyst's couch going through all of this.  Maybe he should spend on the therapy instead of the PR.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I meant being asked by Team Sussex to delay the publishing of the podcast so the British press wouldn't have time to fact check. Which IMO proves they know they are full of it, because why worry otherwise?


Harry's complains, resentment, and publishing delay are all explained by the Forbes article, it's good business for them.


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> Didn't click on the article, but I wonder what she means and what her intentions are...
> View attachment 5084403



I didn't click it either, but I read somewhere the question she regrets is asking Sally Field if Burt Reynolds slept with his toupee on. But her producers assured her it's "what everyone wants to know"


----------



## gracekelly

They held back the Spotify so they could release it when the Cambriges were doing their mental health thing.  Typical.


----------



## Chanbal

An article about a big supporter of Harry's wife! 



Spoiler: Disturbing 












						Candace Owens calls Chrissy Teigen a 'predator' protected by Hollywood
					

Candace Owens labels Chrissy Teigen a Hollywood 'predator' similar to Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein who has publicly victimized women for years in new tweets.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Harry's complains, resentment, and publishing delay are all explained by the Forbes article, it's good business for them.



Yeah, but I wanted to know why Dax chose to share that bit of information


----------



## marietouchet

Making a living off of telling about one’s pain ...
I guess that means you are out of a job if you ever transcend the pain and get over it


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Oh yes she did, big time. She constantly complained about Charles, even to her kids, and they had to comfort her as was reported.



Says who, some biographer? What makes you think you can believe what they say? They are out to make money by selling as many books as possible. The truth is often boring and nobody wants to read that. Those tell-alls are deliberately as inflammatory as they can get away with. The worst I’ve ever heard was that William once pushed tissues under the door when he knew his mother was crying. So what? Women in horrible marriages sometimes do cry. It’s not a crime or bad parenting. It just happens. I never heard anything about Diana trash talking about Charles to the boys.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I think eventually this will happen, some host or interviewer is going to be bored hearing Harry say the same thing and will ask him some uncomfortable, unplanned questions and enjoy the resulting publicity.   It's really only a matter of time.  He's a celebrity in the U.S. but not untouchable. He's not a citizen or even a green card holder.  *Nobody likes someone moving to their country and then telling them that they're doing it wrong and that would go double for the U.S. * Continuing to whine about his upbringing isn't going to win him many friends here.  He's a SNL parody waiting to happen and some interviewer is going to leap on the opportunity.


*THIS, THIS and THIS* .. sooooooo true and living/working in Boston where there are a LOT of expats from the Great Britain (_Brits, Scots, Irish, etc._) .. they especially need to be careful on their comments (_especially on the 4th of July when many of them told me that they just hide in their houses_!).  I had a British Boss (_I actually had my own business at this time, so I didn't really 100% care what she thought of me personally_) .. who I liked, but every once in a while .. she would start on her schtick about the superiority of the British ways and many times felt that she DESERVED to be treated better (_like going right up to the front of the queue_)!  Uh, no .. you don't get away with that sh!te in London (_where she was from_), so why did she think that was "okay" in the US?  I finally had it with her one day and just told her "_you know what, when you behave in this manner it reconfirms to us Americans that we did the right thing in kicking your a$$es out over 200 years ago!!!  If you don't like it here, PUHLEEZE do us all a favor and go back, but .. you know darn well that you were just another mid-to-lower level citizen (NOT A TOFF by any means), so I know that you would NEVER do that - right_???"  Well that shut her up but good because she knew that I was 100% right!  

I really wish someone would call Harry (_and Meghan_) out on the carpet and ask the *TOUGH* questions but knowing those two, they would likely get up (_Meghan crying_) and say "_you are being mean .._" because it's tough to win with those 2 *CLASS-Z-VICTIMS*!


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> *THIS, THIS and THIS* .. sooooooo true and living/working in Boston where there are a LOT of expats from the Great Britain (_Brits, Scots, Irish, etc._) .. they especially need to be careful on their comments (_especially on the 4th of July when many of them told me that they just hide in their houses_!).  I had a British Boss (_I actually had my own business at this time, so I didn't really 100% care what she thought of me personally_) .. who I liked, but every once in a while .. she would start on her schtick about the superiority of the British ways and many times felt that she DESERVED to be treated better (_like going right up to the front of the queue_)!  Uh, no .. you don't get away with that sh!te in London (_where she was from_), so why did she think that was "okay" in the US?  I finally had it with her one day and just told her "_you know what, when you behave in this manner it reconfirms to us Americans that we did the right thing in kicking your a$$es out over 200 years ago!!!  If you don't like it here, PUHLEEZE do us all a favor and go back, but .. you know darn well that you were just another mid-to-lower level citizen (NOT A TOFF by any means), so I know that you would NEVER do that - right_???"  Well that shut her up but good because she knew that I was 100% right!
> 
> I really wish someone would call Harry (_and Meghan_) out on the carpet and ask the *TOUGH* questions but knowing those two, they would likely get up (_Meghan crying_) and say "_you are being mean .._" because it's tough to win with those 2 *CLASS-Z-VICTIMS*!


Really?  I worked with a horrible American guy.  His name was Ivan.  He was truly weird but I didn‘t take him as representative of the whole American nation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh, how many stereotypes are there of the obnoxious American tourist?   Yes, we are somewhat ‘less ancestral’ which must be extremely irritating to a British royal.

_‘There’s a European snobbery towards Americans in terms of culture and creation. I thought the innovation in New York was great, but weirdly enough the results – especially in fashion – were not. But there’s more freedom in America, which is linked to it being less ancestral, and that gave me the liberty to propose whatever I wanted. I had a deeply personal approach and a completely different vision.’








						‘There’s a European snobbery towards Americans in terms of culture and creation’
					

Alexandre de Betak rewrote the fashion-show playbook. Now he wants to apply his rebellious approach to other fields.




					frameweb.com
				





ETA:  _wonder when Hazzie plans to give up his diplomatic passport?  See, he will never renounce his place in succession or any title because he craves that passport!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> _We want to hear from you. Share your story for a chance to be featured. Tell us: What does compassion mean to you? How have you, or someone you know, acted with compassion this year? Or describe a time where you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance?_



This is an assignment for a 6th grade catechism class. Pretty sure I saw something like this come home from my kid's Catholic grade school at the time lol.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I believe he is going to scramble for damage control because his brain omitted the big picture when his mouth yapped about how miserable he was during all those years of service with the BRF. After that Invictus docu, he is likely to focus his next production on HIV, Sentabale and drag out Dead Mom's efforts for HIV. He doesn't have that much in his life he can use as material (cultural analysis of partygoing habits of the young, rich and famous?).
> 
> Archewell is already mining its supporters for material. Its website invites people to share their stories.
> *How Do You Activate Compassion in the World?*
> _We want to hear from you. Share your story for a chance to be featured. Tell us: What does compassion mean to you? How have you, or someone you know, acted with compassion this year? Or describe a time where you felt connected with your friends, family, or community, despite the distance?_
> 
> If you read the t&c, anything you share becomes theirs in perpetuity and they can edit it as they wish: "_Archewell has the right to edit, revise, abridge, crop, combine, condense, quote selected portion of the Submission as it deems appropriate or necessary._" Which I take to mean that even if they change your story, you have no legal recourse. They own your name, your likeness and biographical material, and in the event they make a fortune from using your story, they are not obliged to pay you a cent.


one example I can think of would be to be kind and forgiving to your parents


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> *THIS, THIS and THIS* .. sooooooo true and living/working in Boston where there are a LOT of expats from the Great Britain (_Brits, Scots, Irish, etc._)


Scots and Northern Irish _are _Brits. 

*runs off in fear


----------



## gerryt

bag-mania said:


> Says who, some biographer? What makes you think you can believe what they say? They are out to make money by selling as many books as possible. The truth is often boring and nobody wants to read that. Those tell-alls are deliberately as inflammatory as they can get away with. The worst I’ve ever heard was that William once pushed tissues under the door when he knew his mother was crying. So what? Women in horrible marriages sometimes do cry. It’s not a crime or bad parenting. It just happens. I never heard anything about Diana trash talking about Charles to the boys.


I dont think anyone of us could prove this either way.  I do find it hard personally to think that she was never negative about Charles in the children’s hearing though - she herself described William as her greatest confidante at a time when she was completely opposed to Charles becoming the next King, and William was allowed to see the Bashir interview, which reportedly greatly upset him.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Scots and Northern Irish _are _Brits.
> 
> *runs off in fear


Don't feel bad.  People tend to make generalizations all the time in the US about areas in the US.  Everyone in NYC is unfriendly and rude.  Everyone in California is a dopehead or a wannabe actor. lol!


----------



## lalame

I have to think if Diana went on national TV to trash talk Charles, she probably couldn't help doing it in private to anyone who would listen too. Didn't Chrissy pretty much say the same about Meghan... that she told her all her grievances too and it matched up pretty much exactly to what she told Oprah? I don't think there's anything wrong with venting in private anyhow, that gets into "not my business" territory.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I have to think if Diana went on national TV to trash talk Charles, she probably couldn't help doing it in private to anyone who would listen too. Didn't Chrissy pretty much say the same about Meghan... that she told her all her grievances too and it matched up pretty much exactly to what she told Oprah? I don't think there's anything wrong with venting in private anyhow, that gets into "not my business" territory.


venting to friends is fine but venting to children and potentially turning them against the other parent, not so good.  hopefully diana didn't do that


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> venting to friends is fine but venting to children and potentially turning them against the other parent, not so good.  hopefully diana didn't do that



I don't think so either but she had a lot of flaws when it came to managing her emotions. I'd bet she did that. All the same to me I think that's a very normal level of flawed... going on national TV to blast your own family is next level drama. In her defense, I think she insisted that she really respected the queen and stuff right?


----------



## gerryt

lalame said:


> I don't think so either but she had a lot of flaws when it came to managing her emotions. I'd bet she did that. All the same to me I think that's a very normal level of flawed... going on national TV to blast your own family is next level drama. In her defense, I think she insisted that she really respected the queen and stuff right?


I too think she may have done that in private, which doesn’t make it ok but then she was human.  I’m sure that reading this some will be able to say that in similar circumstances they resisted saying anything negative in front of the children and others will not, it all comes down to the level of emotional heat at the time.  In fact, in many cases where one of the royals behaviour is scrutinised I feel that we hold them to a higher standard than we may be able to claim for ourselves.  Others will argue that’s what they are paid to be.  Harry has stepped way beyond all such boundaries though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I've seen successful and responsible adults who grew up in dysfunctional families. Let's hope Archie and Doria Diana will be OK.


Yes. I think we should definitely give credit to all the resilience there is out there. It’s incredible how many people do grow up and thrive despite traumatic circumstances. Often it’s not even known about among friends given a lot of people don’t discuss their pasts. 


lalame said:


> Dax has talked about his personal issues frequently on his podcast and he’s been in the news recently for relapsing so I think he just treats it as casually sharing. I think he was trying to relate to Harry with the whole traumatic childhood leading to bad behaviors thing. Interestingly he called out the stripping but not the nazi costume


Well it sounds like Dax is trying to be very generous (let’s say) with him so best to leave the accountability at the door  
I didn’t know who Dax is (I’m not that into interview shows) I do find the idea of the interviewer sharing details of their trauma a bit...confusing I guess? What do I know. 



TC1 said:


> I didn't click it either, but I read somewhere the question she regrets is asking Sally Field if Burt Reynolds slept with his toupee on. But her producers assured her it's "what everyone wants to know"


I’ve never heard that. That is hilarious. I’d want to know if he slept with the cigar 
How did Sally reply? 
It sounds to me like production were setting OW up for ... ‘well, Oprah, do you sleep with your wig on?’


----------



## melissatrv

If Oprah really wanted to ask a tough question, she should have asked why Meghan could not get access to mental health counseling when she and her husband are advocates for  mental health and Harry got counseling before he even met her, so why couldn't she?  Meghan opened the can of worms, and Oprah missed her opportunity to delve into that statement.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sharont2305 said:


> Scots and Northern Irish _are _Brits.
> 
> *runs off in fear


Quoting and correcting myself, Northern Irish are not Brits.


----------



## redney

melissatrv said:


> If Oprah really wanted to ask a tough question, she should have asked why Meghan could not get access to mental health counseling when she and her husband are advocates for  mental health and Harry got counseling before he even met her, so why couldn't she?  Meghan opened the can of worms, and Oprah missed her opportunity to delve into that statement.


She could have been told not to ask more about it. Or maybe there was conversation about it that ended up on the cutting room floor. Don't forget, their PR flaks were certainly involved.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Well it sounds like Dax is trying to be very generous (let’s say) with him so best to leave the accountability at the door
> I didn’t know who Dax is (I’m not that into interview shows) I do find the idea of the interviewer sharing details of their trauma a bit...confusing I guess? What do I know.



Dax is like... a D-level celebrity haha so most don't know of him. That's why I was kind of proud of him for snagging such a high profile interview. He's married to Kristen Bell and is an actor and director in his own right but IMO he's now most well known for his podcast. What you pointed out is exactly why some people like him (and some dislike him)... his interview format is more like a conversation than a traditional interview. Some people think he makes the interview all about him... I don't think so, though. I think it just sounds like a natural conversation... it usually makes the interviewee feel comfortable enough to share more interesting info than the usual canned lines.


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> If Oprah really wanted to ask a tough question, she should have asked why Meghan could not get access to mental health counseling when she and her husband are advocates for  mental health and Harry got counseling before he even met her, so why couldn't she?  Meghan opened the can of worms, and Oprah missed her opportunity to delve into that statement.


right
I think the Oprah interview was very much a "friend" thing....made to allow them to tell "their truth" with no challenges


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Dax is like... a D-level celebrity haha so most don't know of him. That's why I was kind of proud of him for snagging such a high profile interview. He's married to Kristen Bell and is an actor and director in his own right but IMO he's now most well known for his podcast. What you pointed out is exactly why some people like him (and some dislike him)... his interview format is more like a conversation than a traditional interview. Some people think he makes the interview all about him... I don't think so, though. I think it just sounds like a natural conversation... it usually makes the interviewee feel comfortable enough to share more interesting info than the usual canned lines.


Dax isn't a big star but he was on the excellent TV series Parenthood.
I think he and Kristen are a cute couple.  Hope they are for real and will stay together.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> That's why I was kind of proud of him for snagging such a high profile interview.



His podcast over lockdown has been doing really well, and that is probably why he is moving to spotify with the exclusive deal. This is why Harry was probably on the show- to boost each others profile which means more $$$ for spotify. I think this interview was set up by spotify to benefit themselves as both shows will be on their platforms.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> Dax is like... a D-level celebrity haha so most don't know of him. That's why I was kind of proud of him for snagging such a high profile interview.



I'm not trying to throw shade, but...the Sussexes have the Netflix deal and Dax will move his podcast to Netflix soon. I don't think Harry being there was his own idea or because he thinks Dax is awsome.

ETA: Shopaholic beat me to it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Dax is like... a D-level celebrity haha so most don't know of him. That's why I was kind of proud of him for snagging such a high profile interview. He's married to Kristen Bell and is an actor and director in his own right but IMO he's now most well known for his podcast. What you pointed out is exactly why some people like him (and some dislike him)... his interview format is more like a conversation than a traditional interview. Some people think he makes the interview all about him... I don't think so, though. I think it just sounds like a natural conversation... it usually makes the interviewee feel comfortable enough to share more interesting info than the usual canned lines.


Ah, if he’s a d list celeb then it makes sense that H would feel at home opening up- I wonder if they did the interview in a supermarket aisle  
I’m sure Dax is a nice guy and what do I know about setting up an interview series? (Perhaps H could have got some tips while he’s there too as he’s still 1 for 1.)


----------



## bag-mania

gerryt said:


> I dont think anyone of us could prove this either way.  I do find it hard personally to think that she was never negative about Charles in the children’s hearing though - she herself described William as her greatest confidante at a time when she was completely opposed to Charles becoming the next King, and William was allowed to see the Bashir interview, which reportedly greatly upset him.



I am skeptical about tell all books about dead people that come out years later with reportedly never before heard information. The only person who could dispute what was said is long gone. I remember what was going on at that time in the 80s and 90s. When I hear something totally different 20 to 25 years later I’m going to give it the side eye.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Quoting and correcting myself, Northern Irish are not Brits.


I thought the NI are British citizens by the terms of good Friday agreement  and are also culturally Irish.  Obviously ROI aren’t Brits.
This is probably getting dangerously close to politics 

It does make you appreciate how confusing it is for the rest of the world and perhaps we take a bit of egocentric view about it. I mean the average Brit probably doesn’t know what the difference between the Flemish and the Walloons is.


----------



## lalame

gracekelly said:


> Harry doesn't understand the difference between genetic and generational.  He was sleeping that day at Eton.  He is an Eton mess. @papertiger you may be the only person here who knows what this is. lol!
> 
> View attachment 5082948



You put something out into the universe for me! I've always wanted to try one of these and never seen it IRL until today, one of my favorite bakeries that I only visit once or twice a year because it's so far, had some on offer! Delicious. I'm more into cake/shortbread than meringue but I definitely see what all the fuss is about.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I don't think so either but she had a lot of flaws when it came to managing her emotions. I'd bet she did that. All the same to me I think that's a very normal level of flawed... going on national TV to blast your own family is next level drama. In her defense, I think she insisted that she really respected the queen and stuff right?



Bashir told a lot of lies to get that interview, very unethical. 









						Martin Bashir quits BBC before release of Diana interview inquiry’s report
					

Journalist steps down as religion editor on health grounds before publication of investigation




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Quoting and correcting myself, Northern Irish are not Brits.



But they are part of the UK


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Bashir told a lot of lies to get that interview, very unethical.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Martin Bashir quits BBC before release of Diana interview inquiry’s report
> 
> 
> Journalist steps down as religion editor on health grounds before publication of investigation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



I've heard about this but never really looked deeply into it. I don't doubt it, but I suppose I still put the full accountability on her for still doing it and saying what she said. It was one of several times she went public with her dirty laundry.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Ah, if he’s a d list celeb then it makes sense that H would feel at home opening up- I wonder if they did the interview in a supermarket aisle
> I’m sure Dax is a nice guy and what do I know about setting up an interview series? (Perhaps H could have got some tips while he’s there too as he’s still 1 for 1.)



or since doing an interview in the supermarket isle. even 2 for 1


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I've heard about this but never really looked deeply into it. I don't doubt it, but I suppose I still put the full accountability on her for still doing it and saying what she said. It was one of several times she went public with her dirty laundry.



She fired people on the strength of his information, including the boys' nanny, and perhaps even refused protection because she was convinced (by Bashir) they were/would be informers. He falsified docs and got her brother to 'reason' with her on Bashir's 'evidence'. Once she did the interview, I think there was no turning back. Part of of her ridiculous mutterings about Charles should never be King were also swayed by his stirring-up her paranoia.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> She fired people on the strength of his information, including the boys' nanny, and perhaps even refused protection because she was convinced (by Bashir) they were/would be informers. He falsified docs and got her brother to 'reason' with her on Bashir's 'evidence'. Once she did the interview, I think there was no turning back. Part of of her ridiculous mutterings about Charles should never be King were also swayed by his stirring-up her paranoia.



He sounds awful... but what stopped her from being more discrete once she sat down? I don't think this is a situation where one person was right just because the other person was wrong. They both did things they shouldn't have, though driven by different motivations. I don't think she was a bad person but I do think she handled this in a very flawed way for someone who desperately wanted the media/public out of her private life.

Sounds familiar.


----------



## gerryt

bag-mania said:


> I am skeptical about tell all books about dead people that come out years later with reportedly never before heard information. The only person who could dispute what was said is long gone. I remember what was going on at that time in the 80s and 90s. When I hear something totally different 20 to 25 years later I’m going to give it the side eye.


Much of the time this may be so, but in this case I’m not sure I agree.  After all, Prince William is still here.  Before Diana’s death it was reported by her close friend that William objected to Diana’s relationship with Bashir, saying that he thought Bashir was not a good person.  So obviously he was familiar with the interview at a young age.  This is borne out, later on, by Williams unusual public support of the BBC investigation into how the interview was brought about.   And of course sometimes information is purposely withheld, deemed too sensitive or some such, but in time is released, whether it’s because official retention dates have expired (cant remember the correct term!) or indeed because societal attitudes have changed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

melissatrv said:


> If Oprah really wanted to ask a tough question, she should have asked why Meghan could not get access to mental health counseling when she and her husband are advocates for  mental health and Harry got counseling before he even met her, so why couldn't she?  Meghan opened the can of worms, and Oprah missed her opportunity to delve into that statement.



It will be in part 2. 
Remember, she edited this interview.

RE: blaming the producers.  Cheap tactic, IMO. OW should take responsibility rather than shove it off on unnamed ‘producers’. 
Time to hold these billionaires accountable for their nonsense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

NM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hear, hear!









						Royal aides want Harry and Meghan to give up their titles
					

Palace aides have called on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to give up their titles following Prince Harry's latest 'disgraceful' assault on the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





and










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle facing storm over a deal with US firm
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are facing questions over their partnership with the US multi-national Procter & Gamble (P&G).




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Bam! Maybe they’ll leave the USA?

_They say the products fuel a 'toxic belief' that 'a person's worth is measured by the colour of their skin' and that light skin is better than dark.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has found that Olay – a major P&G skincare brand – sells White Radiance moisturiser in India, Malaysia and Singapore.

In India, the product is said to lighten skin tone and deliver 'radiant and brighter skin'. 

In the Philippines, P&G sells Olay White Radiance Light Perfecting Essence, which 'inhibits melanin formation in the deepest layer of skin'. In Lagos, Nigeria, an MoS reporter last week bought Olay Natural White cream, which promises 'pinkish fairness'.

Alex Malouf, a former P&G executive, said Meghan and Harry will come under pressure to say whether they support the sale of such products._


----------



## chicinthecity777

Google P&G you will see this company has a lot of very questionable practices!


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> Google P&G you will see this company has a lot of very questionable practices!



So, why didn’t they check it out? The dumb/dim excuse just doesn’t explain this. We are left with *greed.*
Very ugly couple.

ETA:  is this how they shine their light?


----------



## Lounorada

marietouchet said:


> Ohhhh dearrrrr
> 6 evidently told Dax that the First Amendment is completely ”bonkers”
> ok, he has a right to his opinion. ... gritting teeth while writing this ...
> BUTTTTTTTTTT
> doesnt he realize that the 1rst Amendment is what gives him the right to express his opinion ?
> Talk about biting the hand that feeds you ...  wait no, he has already trashed his father, grandmother and late grandfather ...


The problem with JCMH & his wife is that they seem to believe _they _are entitled to their freedom of speech but everyone else (especially the media) shouldn't be granted the same freedom, unless what they are saying is something H&M agree with/is in their favour.






jelliedfeels said:


> I think so too. Not only does he know that it’s the ‘correct’ thing to say but it shows a how humble he must be that he doesn’t care for all that status and money (apart from when he does) and if anything how much worse his suffering is than the average peasant’s that he can’t get over the trauma despite the life of luxury.
> 
> I think it all comes down to interpretation. You might see his work for invictus as earnest and these tweets are a touching acknowledgment of that. I personally think that he’s a grifter who will pretend to care to look good and do the bare minimum. When I see those tweets I think a confidence trickster needs at least some people to be confident in him.
> 
> As to Prince Charles, I don’t have a high opinion of him either. I find him petulant. Personally, I don’t like most of the BRF but I respect that other people like them and of course some people like H&M it’s all opinion.
> 
> To me, you can criticise Harry’s actions as a public figure independent of how you feel about his relatives’ actions. I don’t understand how one would discount the other.


Agree with you on all points






RAINDANCE said:


> *William and Harry: two dukes – two very different approaches to happiness*
> The princes shared the same turbulent upbringing, but then took very different paths to break their ‘cycle of suffering’
> 
> ByAngela Levin14 May 2021 • 6:59pm  Daily Telegraph
> 
> The brothers have gone their separate ways, both literally and figuratively
> 
> Prince Harry, who has long craved privacy, made headlines yet again this week. During an interview with American actor Dax Shepard, for his _Armchair Expert_ podcast, the Duke of Sussex compared his life to being in _The Truman Show_.
> He spoke of wanting to “break the cycle” of “genetic pain” passed from parent to child and how, as a result, he had no choice but to escape to America with his wife and child. Interestingly, he added that he owes his decision to have therapy to a conversation with Meghan, which helped “burst the bubble”.
> *This struck me as odd, as I interviewed Harry at length shortly before he got engaged to Meghan in 2017, for the biography I was writing. Our conversation turned to his depression and panic attacks, and I asked if Meghan had encouraged him to get help.
> “Absolutely not,” he replied. “She had nothing to do with it.” It was, he said, his brother Prince William who had convinced him his mental health needed attention. *“At first I didn’t listen,” he added. “The time wasn’t right and like many others, I don’t like to do what my older brother says.” In the end, though, he took his advice and added how grateful he was for the help.
> 
> William, of course, was brought up by the same parents, with the same worries that Harry mentions to Shepard – one of which was that he wouldn’t be able to trust a woman enough to have a successful marriage.
> It is on this issue that the lives of the two brothers have so obviously diverged. While Harry lashes out from his home in California, making woke podcasts and giving interviews to Oprah with his wife by his side, William has always been able to see the bigger picture – and set about a very practical pursuit of happiness from a young age. And despite the line Harry now seems desperate to draw between their choices, both brothers have sought to avoid repeating the destructive pattern they saw so clearly in their own parents.
> 
> It’s not surprising. Neither Diana nor Charles were given enough love and stability in their formative years. Diana was badly affected by her parents’ acrimonious divorce. Charles had deep scars of his own, partly from his rather cold upbringing. When they split in 1992, 10-year-old William became the man of the house. Diana described him as her “closest confidant and soulmate” – a terrible burden to place on a child.
> Harry, who wears his heart on his sleeve, is a different character. He adored his mother because she could be great fun and gave him lots of hugs.
> Nonetheless, their dysfunctional background meant that neither prince had much of a clue what a normal, happy family life looked like.
> That may be why William rejected many of the options placed before him as a young man, determined to explore life’s other possibilities. With willpower and courage, the rather shy heir chose to study at the University of St Andrews, partly because it was far away from his family. He insisted on staying in student accommodation – rather than the smart flat with staff that his aides suggested – where he met Kate Middleton. Together they did simple things like grocery shopping, having a drink in the pub and eating fish and chips while sitting on the pavement. An ordinary person would find it difficult to understand how important this was for William and how it helped him feel liberated.
> William desperately wanted to avoid the sort of painful divorce his parents went through and it took him seven years of battling between emotion and stiff upper lip to trust Kate enough to ask her to marry him. It was obvious how important his choice had been when, during their engagement interview, he said he had waited so long to give her time “to back out if she needed to before it all got too much”, adding significantly: “I have wanted to try to learn from lessons in the past.” He felt that Kate might in the end still have turned him down.
> During that long period of courtship, William allowed himself to become close to the Middletons. They took him back to basics and provided a model he could work towards – learning how a settled and caring household works. William found he loved being part of a warm family unit and it was a healing experience for him to see how well Kate’s parents got on. He enjoyed going on holiday with them, watching television with supper on his lap and it’s even been claimed that he called Michael Middleton ‘Dad.’ Harry, of course, got on with Kate too and said she was the older sister he had always wanted.
> Many men marry someone who reminds them of their mother, but William wasn’t tempted to find someone who was as magnetic as Diana, preferring straightforward Kate. No one should underestimate the soul-seeking he went through to prove that, by making thoughtful choices, one can stop history from repeating itself.
> William and Kate’s marriage, in April 2011, drew a firm line under everything that his parents’ union had represented without rejecting either of them. Instead, he draws his mother’s influence into his life in a positive way through his obvious joy in having children and his deep involvement in George, Charlotte and Louis’s lives.
> 
> George was born in July 2013 and on the steps of the Lindo Wing, Kate revealed that William had already changed his first nappy. It is inconceivable that any previous heir to the throne would even have contemplated such a thing and it was William’s first step to being a hands-on father. He takes his turn to do the school run, spends weekends in Norfolk and obviously loves the rough and tumble with his children, who you can see adore him. It is beyond doubt that as his genetic destiny looms larger, his little family will remain top priority.
> 
> *Harry has a different personality, more Spencer than Windsor, and has responded to his upbringing in a different way – not least because he is the ‘spare’. Diana encouraged him to be naughty and not get caught. He started drinking in 1997, aged 12, when he, William and their mother were holidaying on a boat owned by Mohamed Al Fayed – Harry going ashore whenever he could and returning drunk on the local tipple. It became a way for him to escape. He also told me he’d chosen to join the “bad boys” at Eton and added smoking and drugs to his intake.*
> Most teenagers start seeing their parents as imperfect, but Harry lost his mother before that could happen. Now in his thirties, and in therapy speak, he blames Prince Charles for the “genetic pain” he feels. Many think it is about time he stops playing the victim card.
> Of course, like all those who have had turbulent upbringings, there is nothing wrong with trying to “break the cycle of pain and suffering” – and, as William has demonstrated, there are many non self-destructive ways to do this, including just getting on with parenting your own children. Instead, Harry seems to hang on tightly to his family’s mistakes.
> 
> I hope he can find a way to let two-year-old Archie and his soon-to-be-born daughter meet the Royal family. Children can build wonderful bonds with relatives of different generations – as Harry himself, once close to the late Duke of Edinburgh, knows.
> Indeed, there is always the chance that when Archie grows up he might rail against the decisions of his own father – about missed opportunities and how his name has been used to promote commercial goods and charities for his parents’ financial gain.
> In Shepard’s podcast, Harry accepts that he had a privileged childhood but points out that people can “start in one place and change over time.”
> In his California mansion, with its 16 bathrooms, a swimming pool and acres of land, he remains privileged. But have the other changes he has tried so hard to make – distancing himself from his family, adopting therapy speak, becoming a spokesperson rather than a working Royal – really made him happier than the cautious brother he has left behind? It may be that only the next spin of their genetic cycle will tell.





RAINDANCE said:


> *PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Why does Prince Harry always make Charles the villain - and never Diana?*
> By AMANDA PLATELL FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> 
> PUBLISHED: 22:24, 14 May 2021 | UPDATED: 07:34, 15 May 2021
> 
> 
> How devastating for Prince Charles to learn, from a podcast beamed to the world, that Harry left the UK to break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering' bequeathed to him by his supposedly dysfunctional father and grandparents.
> Harry suggests he suffered so much at the hands of his family that he does not want to inflict similar anguish upon his own children.
> The only way to do this has been to escape the torture of royal life, rush off to LA to make multi-million deals and denounce his father from afar.
> 
> What Harry seems to ignore, though, is that back in boring Blighty Charles loves his son dearly and always has.
> He did everything he could to care for Harry after Diana's death; he helped fund Harry's extravagant lifestyle; he walked Meghan Markle down the aisle for their wedding in her father's absence. And was always trying to be the dad Harry needed.
> 
> Prince Harry with Diana, Princess Of Wales, Prince Charles And Prince William at the V-Day 50th anniversary parade
> With his podcast, Harry has trashed all that paternal love in the most public and humiliating way. Yet what cuts most is that he criticises his father while exonerating his mother.
> I am an unashamed fan of Diana, and was furious on her behalf when Charles betrayed her with Camilla. But even I accept Diana was no saint.
> We lost count of the number of her lovers, many of them married — James Hewitt, James Gilbert, Oliver Hoare and Will Carling to name but a few.
> 
> *And while she was pursued by the paparazzi so loathed by Harry, she also relentlessly and calculatingly courted the media. We were all informed — certainly I was as a newspaper editor — as to when and where she would be so we could take a snap portraying 'poor abandoned Diana'.*
> And since Harry is criticising his royal grandparents, let's not forget that Diana Spencer was born into the most broken of aristocratic families.
> 
> Her mother Frances was dubbed 'the bolter', after she scandalously left Earl Spencer for the wallpaper heir, Peter Shand Kydd. Custody of the children was granted to their father. Nine-year-old Diana and her older brother Charles were shuffled between her parents and she later recalled the effect on her was 'devastating'.
> 
> School holidays were grim, she remembered: 'Two weeks Mummy and two weeks Daddy . . . and the trauma of going from one house to another, and each parent trying to make it up with material things rather than the tactile stuff we craved, but never got.'
> Which is why I can't understand why Harry so cruelly has his father and his family in his sights, but not his equally flawed mother and hers.
> The fact is Harry had two unfaithful parents who sadly did not love each other. He is determined not to repeat mistakes and be the perfect dad.
> But life is so much more complicated than he seems to think — and the tragedy is that, by rejecting his past, he is making his future so much more difficult. Of course, we're bound to hear lots more about it on Netflix.


Thanks for sharing @RAINDANCE - both interesting articles.
First one is very telling of JCMH. He started drinking at the age of 12? Lawd  Makes me think even more that he has issues with substance abuse.
Second article makes such an obvious point- that Charles is the one always vilified by JCMH, never Diana even though they both had issues and she wasn't as innocent in everything that happened pre & post divorce as she was made out to be.
He has extreme tunnel vision and the more he spills his guts in interviews/podcasts to anyone who will listen and broadcast it, the more unhinged he makes himself look. I struggle to believe he is getting any kind of therapy to work through his issues because i'm pretty sure any therapist/mental health professional would advise against discussing and bashing your family on a worldwide stage, burning every bridge that exists. That will do everything but help the situation and moving forward in a positive and healthy way.




lulilu said:


> According to Dax and his office, they were asked not to release the podcast immediately but to wait to give the British press less time to evaluate the truthfulness of H's statements.  I have no reason not to believe Dax, and this is just another example of HM and their publicists' efforts to influence public opinion in their favor, and to avoid being called out for their lies.


Did Dax actually come out and say that?! If so, kudos to him for saying that publicly! Not surprised at Pinky & The Brain trying to control the narrative.






bag-mania said:


> I don’t get Harry’s complaints at all. While Charles and Diana may have despised each other, they both loved their children. They didn’t bad mouth each other to the kids. Divorce is never easy on children but many, *many kids with divorced parents grow up to be normal and well-adjusted.*


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> right
> I think the Oprah interview was very much a "friend" thing....made to allow them to tell "their truth" with no challenges


In a Covid world with restrictions on how they can market themselves in person and drum up oodles of cash, it may have been less "a friend thing" and more likely produced to generate a big publicity splash event with follow up ripples that ultimately lead to the H and OW mental health production. 

It positions H and his wife as mental trauma victims who, due to their extensive victimhood, have the chops to advise others on their improved buzzword life: inclusivity, compassion, racism, heroism and Disney role-models. If they don't keep themselves in the limelight, they will become the Haz-beens that no one sees.

Putting H out there is a calculated move by SS, I believe. Not because the heavily pregnant mermaid doesn't prefer to be the bigger star, but because damage control is easier for H. No matter how many times he puts his foot in his mouth, the BRF is not going to come out to refute him big-time. His poor little rich boy image stays intact. And it enhances that caveman persona casting him as the man providing for his family. With the mermaid, there is no lack of people from her past who are willing to speak to the press.


----------



## lalame

I didn't hear Dax say that M/H asked them to hold the timing so the British press couldn't fact check but they did say at the end of the podcast that their press people (M/H) told them to wait a few hours/days so the American and British press would have equal time to react to the interview. I didn't really understand what that meant tbh but you can hear it for yourself if you want. It's at about -7:30 in the podcast (sorry, Apple podcast shows time this way for me). I don't know if this is different than what @lulilu is referring to tho.

And yes, I had to rewind it to that part again so I could double check.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hear, hear!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal aides want Harry and Meghan to give up their titles
> 
> 
> Palace aides have called on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to give up their titles following Prince Harry's latest 'disgraceful' assault on the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



When articles like this start appearing, that's when you know something is likely in the works to do just this down the road.


----------



## xincinsin

gerryt said:


> Much of the time this may be so, but in this case I’m not sure I agree.  After all, Prince William is still here.  Before Diana’s death it was reported by her close friend that William objected to Diana’s relationship with Bashir, saying that he thought Bashir was not a good person.  So obviously he was familiar with the interview at a young age.  This is borne out, later on, by Williams unusual public support of the BBC investigation into how the interview was brought about.   And of course sometimes information is purposely withheld, deemed too sensitive or some such, but in time is released, whether it’s because official retention dates have expired (cant remember the correct term!) or indeed because societal attitudes have changed.


It's called an "embargo" but in the Diana/Bashir case, more likely that some of what she told him might have created backlash and firestorm, so he held it back.


----------



## octopus17

Sharont2305 said:


> Quoting and correcting myself, Northern Irish are not Brits.


I am - it depends who you ask...


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle facing storm over a deal with US firm
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are facing questions over their partnership with the US multi-national Procter & Gamble (P&G).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bam! Maybe they’ll leave the USA?
> 
> _They say the products fuel a 'toxic belief' that 'a person's worth is measured by the colour of their skin' and that light skin is better than dark.
> 
> An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has found that Olay – a major P&G skincare brand – sells White Radiance moisturiser in India, Malaysia and Singapore.
> 
> In India, the product is said to lighten skin tone and deliver 'radiant and brighter skin'.
> 
> In the Philippines, P&G sells Olay White Radiance Light Perfecting Essence, which 'inhibits melanin formation in the deepest layer of skin'. In Lagos, Nigeria, an MoS reporter last week bought Olay Natural White cream, which promises 'pinkish fairness'.
> 
> Alex Malouf, a former P&G executive, said Meghan and Harry will come under pressure to say whether they support the sale of such products._


That may actually be unfair to P&G. I'm in Singapore and many skincare brands sold here promise brighter fairer skin. Even supposedly traditional herbal face packs promise fairer skin.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lalame said:


> I didn't hear Dax say that M/H asked them to hold the timing so the British press couldn't fact check but they did say at the end of the podcast that their press people (M/H) told them to wait a few hours/days so the American and British press would have equal time to react to the interview. I didn't really understand what that meant tbh but you can hear it for yourself if you want. It's at about -7:30 in the podcast (sorry, Apple podcast shows time this way for me). I don't know if this is different than what @lulilu is referring to tho.
> 
> And yes, I had to rewind it to that part again so I could double check.



I'm not sure I understand...even if they did ask them to hold the release how would that give any press less time to fact check?


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> That may actually be unfair to P&G. I'm in Singapore and many skincare brands sold here promise brighter fairer skin. Even supposedly traditional herbal face packs promise fairer skin.



Agree, so many skincare products all over Asia are marketed as brightening and "whitening" skin.


----------



## lalame

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm not sure I understand...even if they did ask them to hold the release how would that give any press less time to fact check?



I didn't hear fact check so I don't know where that came from. I don't even understand what they DID say.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I didn't hear Dax say that M/H asked them to hold the timing so the British press couldn't fact check but they did say at the end of the podcast that their press people (M/H) told them to wait a few hours/days so the American and British press would have equal time to react to the interview.



They live in the US and the accused the British media of racism and misrepresenting the truth so why would they even what the British media to respond to report on the podcast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> They live in the US and the accused the British media of racism and misrepresenting the truth so why would they even what the British media to respond to report on the podcast.



I don't know... It sounds like Dax and Monica (his sidekick) didn't really get it either but they obliged.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

xincinsin said:


> That may actually be unfair to P&G. I'm in Singapore and many skincare brands sold here promise brighter fairer skin. Even supposedly traditional herbal face packs promise fairer skin.



South east asia is partially bad when it comes to complexion. In India your beauty and worth is dictated by your skin shade. I have a cousin who would try and lighten her skin, and she thought she would never get married because she was darker. 

These skin care products are harmful and should be banned. They are sold but they're just not FDA approved.


----------



## xincinsin

Historically, even white people wanted to be "whiter". Personally, I think it's a class and culture thing. In the past, wealthy women could stay indoors and remain pale, while poorer women worked in the sun and became tanned.



			https://www.thecut.com/2013/12/most-dangerous-beauty-through-the-ages.html


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Alot of skincare in Asia has Whitening/brightening on it not really to "bleach" our skin white, but to even out our skin tones and to get rid of darkspots.

The majority of us don't really like to be in the sun or tan because it really ages the skin.

That article sounds like the usual shoving western cultural standards on us.


----------



## Icyjade

Kaka_bobo said:


> Alot of skincare in Asia has Whitening/brightening on it not really to "bleach" our skin white, but to even out our skin tones and to get rid of darkspots.
> 
> The majority of us don't really like to be in the sun or tan because it really ages the skin.
> 
> That article sounds like the usual shoving western cultural standards on us.



Agree! I even carry an umbrella when it’s sunny so that I can avoid a bit more sun... i wince whenever I think of how much sun damage I got when I was a kid.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The P&G partnership is a big change from the organic mushroom tea gig.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> The P&G partnership is a big change from the organic mushroom tea gig.


Wondering what P&G gets out of this. Did someone in the marketing team make a presentation on how consumers will be moved to buy more product by an association/alliance with the D&D? Not like the Heavily Pregnant one will flog their products for them unless they pay her a hefty Face of X Product fee. Would be totally ironic if she becomes the Face of Olay.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Kaka_bobo said:


> Alot of skincare in Asia has Whitening/brightening on it not really to "bleach" our skin white, but to even out our skin tones and to get rid of darkspots.
> 
> The majority of us don't really like to be in the sun or tan because it really ages the skin.
> 
> That article sounds like the usual shoving western cultural standards on us.



Although the products don't seem to bleaching skin products, they are marketed as such. The creams are marketed to conform to the idea that having fairer, lighter skin is more desirable and attractive. The products are actually called 'natural white' and 'white radiance' which plays to the colorist culture that exists in those markets. A lot of other brands have removed that type of wording from their products, like L'oreal and Johnson and Johnson. Colorism is really harmful in some cultures, just like sexism. 

Meghan got the partnership with Procter&Gamble because she saw a sexist ad and she wrote to the company. Now the company is showing it supports colorism.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Although the products don't seem to bleaching skin products, they are marketed as such. The creams are marketed to conform to the idea that having fairer, lighter skin is more desirable and attractive. The products are actually called 'natural white' and 'white radiance' which plays to the colorist culture that exists in those markets. A lot of other brands have removed that type of wording from their products, like L'oreal and Johnson and Johnson. Colorism is really harmful in some cultures, just like sexism.
> 
> Meghan got the partnership with Procter&Gamble because she saw a sexist ad and she wrote to the company. Now the company is showing it supports colorism.



Colorism is definitely a thing in nearly every culture around the globe and I do think it's harmful so I don't mean to say that doesn't exist, because it does. But these products aren't really about "white" skin... it's more like not discolored, and these products usually just do the same thing that common ingredients in the US like retinol, licorice, etc do. They lighten sunspots, hyperpigmentation, acne scars, etc. It's about evenness and luminosity. The marketing does not translate at all.


----------



## xincinsin

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Meghan got the partnership with Procter&Gamble because she saw a sexist ad and she wrote to the company. Now the company is showing it supports colorism.


Has anyone seen any fact-check of this incident? 
So far, I've read 3 versions of it.
MM saw the ad as part of a school project and decided to write to P&G.
MM saw the ad, was unhappy and asked her dad what she could do. He encouraged her to write to P&G.
P&G were in process of changing the ad due to other input, and MM's letter reached them when the change was already underway. She took credit for it.


----------



## rose60610

melissatrv said:


> If Oprah really wanted to ask a tough question, she should have asked why Meghan could not get access to mental health counseling when she and her husband are advocates for  mental health and Harry got counseling before he even met her, so why couldn't she?  Meghan opened the can of worms, and *Oprah missed her opportunity to delve into that statement.*



Agreed. But did Oprah "miss her opportunity" or did she just not dare put the screws to Meghan and Harry? She allowed them to trash the BRF six ways to Sunday and did not once ask for any proof or somebody who could corroborate the accusations. Oprah has had DECADES of interviewing experience. She promoted, aided and abetted the accusations of "racism" against the BRF. Oprah did her best to help fan the flames. She's too experienced to "play dumb" or "have regrets" over her embarrassing interview full of softball questions with zero follow up after wild accusations.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Colorism is definitely a thing in nearly every culture around the globe and I do think it's harmful so I don't mean to say that doesn't exist, because it does. But these products aren't really about "white" skin... it's more like not discolored, and these products usually just do the same thing that common ingredients in the US like retinol, licorice, etc do. They lighten sunspots, hyperpigmentation, acne scars, etc. It's about evenness and luminosity. The marketing does not translate at all.



The products are literally marketed as a product that will make your skin lighter, which is basically just conforming to racism and the idea that lighter skin is better, more desirable and the standard beauty. 

The fact that the products are not bleaching the skin doesn't matter. The products are not marketed to show improvement in hyperpigmentation, sun damage or as protection against the sun (which causes aging and tanning). If the products were market as such, then people in those markets would not buy them. They want products that will literally make them fairer and as close to white as possible. The people buying this believe that is what they do. If you see some of the marketing that is done in those countries you will know why I find them despicable. They help perpetuate that fairer skin is better (regardless of what the product actually does).


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The products are literally marketed as a product that will make your skin lighter, which is basically just conforming to racism and the idea that lighter skin is better, more desirable and the standard beauty.
> 
> The fact that the products are not bleaching the skin doesn't matter. The products are not marketed to show improvement in hyperpigmentation, sun damage or as protection against the sun (which causes aging and tanning). If the products were market as such, then people in those markets would not buy them. They want products that will literally make them fairer and as close to white as possible. The people buying this believe that is what they do. If you see some of the marketing that is done in those countries you will know why I find them despicable. They help perpetuate that fairer skin is better (regardless of what the product actually does).



I've lived in 3 Asian countries. I hear what you're saying, but I don't think the majority of people process it in that way... and I'd put it at colorism but racism is not really right. In each of those countries, having unmarked, pearly skin was desirable long before they came across another race of people. Before these products came along, people would wash their face with milk, rice water, crushed pearls, etc.

But look, I get it. I got flamed for saying I thought what Wills and Kate's photos being feted as rulers in the Solomon Islands was NAGL. It may be perfectly fine there, but it was NAGL for me as someone from another culture that has been colonized.


----------



## xincinsin

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The products are literally marketed as a product that will make your skin lighter, which is basically just conforming to racism and the idea that lighter skin is better, more desirable and the standard beauty.
> 
> The fact that the products are not bleaching the skin doesn't matter. The products are not marketed to show improvement in hyperpigmentation, sun damage or as protection against the sun (which causes aging and tanning). If the products were market as such, then people in those markets would not buy them. They want products that will literally make them fairer and as close to white as possible. The people buying this believe that is what they do. If you see some of the marketing that is done in those countries you will know why I find them despicable. They help perpetuate that fairer skin is better (regardless of what the product actually does).


I wonder if the degree to which they sell the "fairer skin is better" message would differ from country to country, especially for the same product. I'd imagine that in places where advertising standards are not enforced, there would be plenty of false promises, especially now when there are so many small-time online sellers. 

Recently, there was a case locally of an online seller who imported and sold a slimming product that contained harmful ingredients. She wasn't happy to be held responsible. 

But this is getting OT, so I'll stop here.


----------



## scarlet555

xincinsin said:


> Has anyone seen any fact-check of this incident?
> So far, I've read 3 versions of it.
> MM saw the ad as part of a school project and decided to write to P&G.
> MM saw the ad, was unhappy and asked her dad what she could do. He encouraged her to write to P&G.
> P&G were in process of changing the ad due to other input, and MM's letter reached them when the change was already underway. She *took credit* for it.



THAT wouldn’t be new at all, she is well known here for plagiarism and not ‘citing’, acting like it’s her own words.  Hopefully the world will catch on... maybe it has, that‘s why her PR is always trying to wind back the clock and act like she is God’s gift to mankind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

lalame said:


> I've lived in 3 Asian countries. I hear what you're saying, but I don't think the majority of people process it in that way... and I'd put it at colorism but racism is not really right. In each of those countries, having unmarked, pearly skin was desirable long before they came across another race of people. Before these products came along, people would wash their face with milk, rice water, crushed pearls, etc.
> 
> But look, I get it. I got flamed for saying I thought what Wills and Kate's photos being feted as rulers in the Solomon Islands was NAGL. It may be perfectly fine there, but it was NAGL for me as someone from another culture that has been colonized.



Exactly... not sure if the westerners writing all those articles have seen the Chinese stars from China? Some are so fair that they seem to glow... so no I don’t think it’s some colonial hangover. Some races have always preferred fairer skin. It’s more a cultural thing than a racism thing. P&G is just catering to market demand imo. Not everything is about the western world...


----------



## Chanbal

Harry, we are seeing who you are! 










						SARAH VINE: It's not all Meghan's fault - we're seeing the real Harry
					

SARAH VINE: Far from being brainwashed by Meghan, I think Harry's just starting to be himself. It now transpires that for a long time he has hated being a Royal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Icyjade said:


> Exactly... not sure if the westerners writing all those articles have seen the Chinese stars from China? Some are so fair that they seem to glow... so no I don’t it’s some colonial hangover. Some races have always preferred fairer skin. It’s more a cultural thing than a racism thing. P&G is just catering to market demand imo. Not everything is about the western world...



That is true for far east asian countries like China and Japan, they have always favored fairer, white and unblemished skin. That has not been the case with India until colorization occurred. Ancient Hindu scriptures referenced darker skinned individuals as being more respected. So for at least India and Indians colonization lead to colorism.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That is true for far east asian countries like China and Japan, they have always favored fairer, white and unblemished skin. That has not been the case with India until colorization occurred. Ancient Hindu scriptures referenced darker skinned individuals as being more respected. So for at least India and Indians colonization lead to colorism.



You bring up a good point. It makes total sense that any phenomenon would have different context and impacts in different cultures. Sort of like the US and UK to Megxit!!


----------



## pukasonqo

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The products are literally marketed as a product that will make your skin lighter, which is basically just conforming to racism and the idea that lighter skin is better, more desirable and the standard beauty.
> 
> The fact that the products are not bleaching the skin doesn't matter. The products are not marketed to show improvement in hyperpigmentation, sun damage or as protection against the sun (which causes aging and tanning). If the products were market as such, then people in those markets would not buy them. They want products that will literally make them fairer and as close to white as possible. The people buying this believe that is what they do. If you see some of the marketing that is done in those countries you will know why I find them despicable. They help perpetuate that fairer skin is better (regardless of what the product actually does).


I agree
In my country of origin the lighter skinned you are the higher up in the pecking order you also are
Indigenous or African features are seen as indications of being low class, uneducated and somehow lacking intelligence but being cunning and not trustworthy 
If you have the inclination google “La Paisana Jacinta”, is a “character” played by a male comedian and basically making fun and denigrating peruvian indigenous people, somehow it was hugely popular 
You can also read Toni Morrison’s “The Bluest Eyes” which deals with a young African American girl, Pecola and her desire for the bluest eyes (a signal of whiteness) which reminds me of the obsession with coloured contact lenses


----------



## Icyjade

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That is true for far east asian countries like China and Japan, they have always favored fairer, white and unblemished skin. That has not been the case with India until colorization occurred. Ancient Hindu scriptures referenced darker skinned individuals as being more respected. So for at least India and Indians colonization lead to colorism.



Ah, didn’t know about the India context and Hindu scriptures. I thought for India it's due to the historical Aryan invasion that’s why there is a cultural preference for fairer skin.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. But did Oprah "miss her opportunity" or did she just not dare put the screws to Meghan and Harry? She allowed them to trash the BRF six ways to Sunday and did not once ask for any proof or somebody who could corroborate the accusations. Oprah has had DECADES of interviewing experience. She promoted, aided and abetted the accusations of "racism" against the BRF. Oprah did her best to help fan the flames. She's too experienced to "play dumb" or "have regrets" over her embarrassing interview full of softball questions with zero follow up after wild accusations.



Or will this be covered in OW’s collaboration with Hazzie on mental health?
Or will this be covered in part 2 of the interview?
It is such an obvious follow-up question that I now doubt OW left it out.  The interview and the Dax show, all scream set-up. Is it possible that Hazzie is on the phone with Charles saying “disregard this interview, that interview - it is all part of my plan.  I will say disparaging things about the family, get shamed for it, then let OW heal me, people will love me, and I will get paid millions to discuss the healing, ad infinitum.“  Would they do that?  They’ll do anything for a few bucks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Harry, we are seeing who you are!
> View attachment 5084763
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: It's not all Meghan's fault - we're seeing the real Harry
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Far from being brainwashed by Meghan, I think Harry's just starting to be himself. It now transpires that for a long time he has hated being a Royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Finally, the world is catching up to where we were months ago!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hear, hear!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal aides want Harry and Meghan to give up their titles
> 
> 
> Palace aides have called on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to give up their titles following Prince Harry's latest 'disgraceful' assault on the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle facing storm over a deal with US firm
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are facing questions over their partnership with the US multi-national Procter & Gamble (P&G).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bam! Maybe they’ll leave the USA?
> 
> _They say the products fuel a 'toxic belief' that 'a person's worth is measured by the colour of their skin' and that light skin is better than dark.
> 
> An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has found that Olay – a major P&G skincare brand – sells White Radiance moisturiser in India, Malaysia and Singapore.
> 
> In India, the product is said to lighten skin tone and deliver 'radiant and brighter skin'.
> 
> In the Philippines, P&G sells Olay White Radiance Light Perfecting Essence, which 'inhibits melanin formation in the deepest layer of skin'. In Lagos, Nigeria, an MoS reporter last week bought Olay Natural White cream, which promises 'pinkish fairness'.
> 
> Alex Malouf, a former P&G executive, said Meghan and Harry will come under pressure to say whether they support the sale of such products._


Hypocrisy, jealousy, greed, cruelty... you name it! 

_But a close friend of Charles last night said: *'If you follow Harry's logic and treat the Royals just as ordinary people, then the Prince is a single parent who's been doing his best for years. 

Can you imagine how it feels to have that effort judged so harshly, so publicly?

'Harry talks about compassion.* But where is the compassion for his father? Where is your compassion for your own family who have just buried a much-loved member?

And where is your compassion for your grandmother who has just lost the man she's loved all her life?'_


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Agree, it is really mean.  Is this cluelessness at best?  Or is it a deep resentment that has been there a while?  A combination of both probably and helped along by a little bird whispering in his ear.  He could spend years on an analyst's couch going through all of this.  Maybe he should spend on the therapy instead of the PR.


I don't know what Harry thinks to accomplish by airing his dirty laundry in public.  It's just going to lead to hurt feelings and broken relationships.  I don't have much respect for him as it is, but for him to keep blithering on is his equivalent of Meg claiming no one asked if she's okay.  Two entitled, privileged has beens going on and on about how they've been wronged.  STFU.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Good article in The Sunday Times UK today. 
I agree with the writer - unless there's been a history of actual abuse in the family, relationships shouldn't be trashed in order to 'grow' and be free.  There's something wrong with that model.   


*Parents are always to blame Prince Harry. Your children will discover that too*
_The royal believes counselling is healing him, but sometimes therapy can do more harm than good_

MATTHEW SYED May 16 2021, 12.01am BST, The Sunday Times

Not long ago a researcher from Germany hunted down all the explanations that had been given for the fall of Rome. He found more than 200, from inflation to cooking with lead pots (one historian thought elites had poisoned themselves). The point was not to show that history is bunk but to show that it is interpretative. You can, with a bit of imagination, conjure up almost any narrative you like.

When it comes to our own personal histories, the narratives we piece together as explanations for our own lives, I wonder if the tendency for selective interpretation is even stronger. At an unconscious level I guess most of us edit out our failures and amplify our triumphs. We want to be the stars of our own shows, the heroes of our own autobiographies and, to an extent, this is probably healthy. As with nation states, a little mythology goes a long way.

But a dogma has come to infect the way that millions construct their life histories that is both fascinating and dangerous. I have noticed it more and more as I have grown older and, interestingly, the more time I have spent among the upper middle classes. The narrative is easy to summarise: anything that has gone wrong in your life, anything that causes you angst, blame the parents.

As with any interpretive history, this one is easy to corroborate. After all, even those with the most brilliant parents can find instances when they have behaved cruelly, irresponsibly or both. The time they favoured your brother, or sister, or dog; the time they had a blazing row, leaving you in tears; the time they left you in the supermarket. Yep: those happened to me, too.

And it is not difficult to see how this interpretation has become so prevalent — the rise of commercial counselling, a multibillion-dollar industry with particular prominence on the American West Coast. For this methodology has long zeroed in on parent-blaming as a route to personal nirvana, not least because it is so lucrative. After all, what better way to encourage clients to keep coming back for consultations than to collude in the pretence that their problems have nothing to do with them but are down to Mum and Dad?

As Professor Nassir Ghaemi of Tufts University put it: “The majority of psychotherapists follow a line of investigation rooted in a century of Freudian influence. What was your childhood like? What was your relationship with your parents? The parents will be found to be absent, or overinvolved; cold, or smothering; too permissive, or helicopter pilots . . . They’re easy targets.”

This is the context in which we should view the appearance by Prince Harry on the podcast _Armchair Expert_. Harry started having counselling on the advice of Meghan, who could apparently see his pain. “She could tell that I was hurting,” he said. Over the course of 60 minutes, Harry reinterpreted his “journey”, implicating his parents for his suffering and much else besides. He talked of “genetic pain”, of “cycles of suffering”, of “unresolved anger” and said: “Once I started doing therapy it was like the bubble was burst.”

Now, I would normally feel uneasy writing about someone’s private life, but in this case I feel little compunction. This is partly because Harry has forged a career from monetising the intimate details of his life, but even more so because his interview sits at the nub of a wider story. For Harry’s sentiments have become commonplace among those who can afford counselling: patients taught to reinterpret their childhoods and finding new strands of parent-induced trauma. For some this is doubtless helpful and, in a certain sense, accurate. But for those brought up by parents doing their best in difficult circumstances (in other words, most of us) it is, I think, pernicious.

One study of 30,000 participants from 72 countries found that criticising parents, far from helping people to deal with their problems, tended to make them significantly worse. As two researchers from Sussex University put it: “Blaming parents can be more dangerous for mental health than the past experiences themselves.”

And it is not difficult to see why. When we are encouraged to displace all our problems on to loved ones, it undermines any capacity for self-awareness. Just listen to Harry’s interview, in which he talks — apparently without irony — of not wishing to “blame” his parents while impugning them; of the trauma of being on public view while promoting his television series; of the awfulness of royal life while exploiting that connection. Only someone in West Coast therapy could display this level of narcissism.

*But the more urgent danger is that this kind of counselling risks fracturing the family itself, loved ones becoming collateral damage in the quest for utopia. In what other context could someone claim to have been healed when surrounded by the wreckage of so many vital relationships? Harry isn’t talking to his father, has fallen out with his brother and has publicly criticised his 95-year-old grandmother, still grieving for her husband. This isn’t enlightenment; it’s madness.*

Another revealing part of the podcast was when Harry talked of how he and Meghan are going to break the cycle with their own children. This is another classic aspect of modern counselling: “enlightened” mums and dads convinced that their own kids are going to grow up “whole” and eternally grateful. The tragedy, of course, is that Harry and Meghan will probably find themselves on the receiving end of the same payback, their kids blaming them in turn — for isn’t this the more conspicuous “cycle” in western culture?

I do not wish to tarnish all counselling, for there are many evidence-based treatments and practitioners. But the overall influence has been hugely damaging. Any treatment worthy of the name should be about building empathy between family members, not undermining it; helping people to see problems as part of the human condition rather than attributable to those who love them.

Harry may have inadvertently performed a public service in exposing the risks of commercialised treatment. For the narratives that expensive practitioners tell patients to help them feel good about themselves are often the most divorced from reality. This, at least, might offer a crumb of comfort to Prince Charles and the Queen, reportedly smarting from the latest assault by someone they will never stop loving.


----------



## Chanbal

This is so unfair... Whoever agreed to publish this book should feel embarrassed.  


The value of the book without the illustrations!


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That is true for far east asian countries like China and Japan, they have always favored fairer, white and unblemished skin. That has not been the case with India until colorization occurred. Ancient Hindu scriptures referenced darker skinned individuals as being more respected. So for at least India and Indians colonization lead to colorism.


I didn't realize that.  When did colorization occur in India?  British colonialism?  Ancient scriptures are thought to be, what?  10,000 years old?  I remember visiting India and seeing ads for all sorts of things (soaps, moisturizers, etc.) to help "lighten" your skin.  I also remember reading the back of a friend's parents' "India Abroad" as a child and seeing matrimonial ads in the back where people were "innocently divorced" and "fair skinned".  I had no idea WTH they were talking about as an 8 year old!


----------



## Straight-Laced

And this piece is trending at the Spectator UK.
Surely someone at this point is going to take the 6th-in-line celebrity resident of the USA aside and explain why there are some things _he_ in particular really shouldn't talk about ???  

*Prince Harry: America’s free speech protection is ‘bonkers’*
The Spectator 15 May 2021



Much has been written here in the UK about Prince Harry's Thursday appearance on Hollywood actor Dax Shepard's 'Armchair Expert' podcast. The Duke of Sussex's comments about the 'genetic pain and suffering' of growing up as a royal made the front page of Friday's tabloids with the _Daily Mail_asking 'Just how low can Harry go?' after he appeared to criticise the parenting of his own father Prince Charles.


Less attention though was paid to other comments made by the exiled royal in his interview. In March Harry was given a roleat international nonprofit the Aspen Institute, where he serves on the Orwell-esque 'Commission on Information Disorder' working on a six-month study on how inaccurate information spreads across the country. And it was that subject of misinformation the prince chose to turn his guns on in the interview, criticising the free speech provisions in the Bill of Rights, telling Shephard:

_“ I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers. I don’t want to start going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short time. But, you can find a loophole in anything. You can capitalise or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said_.

​
As an exercise in winning 'hearts and minds' this criticism of America's treasured civil liberties has not gone down well stateside. Comments underneath articles reporting the Duke's views include 'Hey, go home! We fought a war to get rid of Royals on our soil. No need to understand anything we do. Bye!!' and 'You can always leave if you don’t like our constitution and please find a country where you don’t have to deal with those bonker rights.' Even one congressman has weighed in, with Texas ********** Dan Crenshaw claiming Harry has 'just doubled the size of my Independence Day party.'

Given that America fought a small war in 1776 to, err, rid themselves of the current Queen's third great grandfather George III, Steerpike wonders whether Harry mag be given some history lessons in exchange for all the sermons on ethics.

​*WRITTEN BY*

_Steerpike_


----------



## zen1965

If „cultural preference“ of lighter skin goes hand in hand with judging darker skinned people as „uneducated peasants“, dirty, cunning etc., that is racism in my book. 
Anyway, back to D&D.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Oh boyohboyohboy!  Can’t wait for Archie’s Mommie Dearest book when he gets older!

_My mother never allowed me to have a childhood. My days were filled with tutors and therapists from morning til night. She tried to turn me into being a super genius kid. The reality was that I was just your average everyday kid and she couldn’t accept that.  Wait until you read my sister’s book. She has even worse things to say!_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Straight-Laced said:


> As two researchers from Sussex University put it: “Blaming parents can be more dangerous for mental health than the past experiences themselves.”



Wonder if OW is aware of this?  We know H&M are not.  Surely, something will done to stop this nonsense.


----------



## needlv

Great opinion piece about the problems of MM asking for donations whilst wearing expensive jewellery and clothing.  It comes across like 
 Marie Antoinette....










						Meghan’s secret money problem
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I didn't realize that.  When did colorization occur in India?  British colonialism?  Ancient scriptures are thought to be, what?  10,000 years old?  I remember visiting India and seeing ads for all sorts of things (soaps, moisturizers, etc.) to help "lighten" your skin.  I also remember reading the back of a friend's parents' "India Abroad" as a child and seeing matrimonial ads in the back where people were "innocently divorced" and "fair skinned".  I had no idea WTH they were talking about as an 8 year old!


What does "innocently divorced" mean? Marriage was not consummated?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hear, hear!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal aides want Harry and Meghan to give up their titles
> 
> 
> Palace aides have called on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to give up their titles following Prince Harry's latest 'disgraceful' assault on the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle facing storm over a deal with US firm
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are facing questions over their partnership with the US multi-national Procter & Gamble (P&G).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bam! Maybe they’ll leave the USA?
> 
> _They say the products fuel a 'toxic belief' that 'a person's worth is measured by the colour of their skin' and that light skin is better than dark.
> 
> An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has found that Olay – a major P&G skincare brand – sells White Radiance moisturiser in India, Malaysia and Singapore.
> 
> In India, the product is said to lighten skin tone and deliver 'radiant and brighter skin'.
> 
> In the Philippines, P&G sells Olay White Radiance Light Perfecting Essence, which 'inhibits melanin formation in the deepest layer of skin'. In Lagos, Nigeria, an MoS reporter last week bought Olay Natural White cream, which promises 'pinkish fairness'.
> 
> Alex Malouf, a former P&G executive, said Meghan and Harry will come under pressure to say whether they support the sale of such products._



and if the Palace allows Royal aides to vent their feelings, you can be sure this is an official warning for the out of control couple.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Don't feel bad.  People tend to make generalizations all the time in the US about areas in the US.  Everyone in NYC is unfriendly and rude.  Everyone in California is a dopehead or a wannabe actor. lol!


LOL, I'm just a sensitive old soul when it comes down to things like that


----------



## papertiger

Cornflower Blue said:


> I am - it depends who you ask...



I think @Sharont2305 meant geographically not in terms of identity. The difference being the British Isles and the United Kingdom. 

Of course when you use the terms British and not Britain then it's more a case of identity in NI. 

Even though I have a UK passport, I still feel European. I live in Scotland but am British not Scottish.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> But they are part of the UK


Yes, they are. The United Kingdom of Great Britain AND Northern Ireland. The Great Britain bit is Wales, Scotland and England. Brits.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Wondering what P&G gets out of this. Did someone in the marketing team make a presentation on how consumers will be moved to buy more product by an association/alliance with the D&D? Not like the Heavily Pregnant one will flog their products for them unless they pay her a hefty Face of X Product fee. Would be totally ironic if she becomes the Face of Olay.


It’d have to be changed to the faces of Olay  


zen1965 said:


> If „cultural preference“ of lighter skin goes hand in hand with judging darker skinned people as „uneducated peasants“, dirty, cunning etc., that is racism in my book.
> Anyway, back to D&D.


My understanding is that colourism is what you call it when the aggressor and the victim are the same race though of course even that’s very thorny.




purseinsanity said:


> I didn't realize that.  When did colorization occur in India?  British colonialism?  Ancient scriptures are thought to be, what?  10,000 years old?  I remember visiting India and seeing ads for all sorts of things (soaps, moisturizers, etc.) to help "lighten" your skin.  I also remember reading the back of a friend's parents' "India Abroad" as a child and seeing matrimonial ads in the back where people were "innocently divorced" and "fair skinned".  I had no idea WTH they were talking about as an 8 year old!


Well short layman answer. No. India has been colonised multiple times times before the British empire. Modern day India is a conglomerate of city states and empires which have at various times been separate governments and under both home and colonial rule. Darius the great annexed areas of the Indus Valley up to the modern day Punjab. Alexander the Great again invaded India and established a short-lived satrapy in the Punjab.  Areas of India were later concurrently under the control of the Mughal and Portuguese empires through the late medieval to late 18th century (neither of whom are indigenous). There’s many more examples than these are some I know of the top of my head. 
It should also be pointed out that areas of what were then part of Indian states are now understood to be different countries such as Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh. There’s also the fact I’m currently going just on nationality-based colonialism but that religious hegemony has been a huge issue in India. 

Ultimately I think this idea that pale=pretty comes from the colonisation of the west and the imposition of the idea of white supremacy during the scramble for empires period is largely historically inaccurate. There have been many damaging repercussions of this colonial period but I think what we might call colourist preferences predates it. The reality is that ancient peoples would have been aware of ethnic variance thousands of years ago through both trade and the ancient empires we tend to forget about. There are many ancient sources where one of the first desirable traits in the beautiful woman is her paleness. 
 There are also many cases of indigenous peoples who do not resemble the stereotype or majority. For example, we tend to think of a Chinese person as to an extent resembling the Han majority however there are ethnic minorities of China like the Miao who can have blonde or red hair, blue eyes and pale white skin. There’s actually a bit in Herodotus (I think) where he talks about stories of meeting blue-eyed  Chinese people.

To jump around the globe a bit more, there’s also the idea that in some cultures skin colour preference might have been split by sex. If we look at ancient Egyptian wall paintings we can see a trend of women being painted as a much lighter skintone than men, maybe from this we can assume it was seen as desirable for women to be pale but not men? I think that women’s appearance being more policed than men’s is a general trend in history.

I do think that using US history as a template can give us a highly misleading view of how race and skin colour have been understood in history because it’s actually pretty extreme.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> Agree, so many skincare products all over Asia are marketed as brightening and "whitening" skin.



It's not just a question of language though. 

Products marked 'fair' brightening' or 'whitening' can mean ingredients that bleach/lighten skin to make make it comply with colourist beauty standards, cultural bias, 'passing' or even religious practices. It's a HUGE market but supposedly what H&M are against.

Brightening, even whitening can mean clarifying or minimising age-related dark-spots. You could say that it's no less 'ist' than the type to address the above, 'just' ageist. These are on sale round the world, including my high street, and is also a HUGE market and no one bats an eye. 

I just love (not) that the 'beauty community' (Insta, YT, FB etc) thinks it addresses diversity, inclusivity and prejudice whilst continuing to push product that promises perfection and eternal youth. 

Anyway, I am also a hypocrite, I enjoy makeup and skin care


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Historically, even white people wanted to be "whiter". Personally, I think it's a class and culture thing. In the past, wealthy women could stay indoors and remain pale, while poorer women worked in the sun and became tanned.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thecut.com/2013/12/most-dangerous-beauty-through-the-ages.html



This is true British Georgian nobility risked lead poisoning painting their faces whiter with derived pigment, this was in spite of knowing and being warned against the consequences


----------



## Stansy

CeeJay said:


> Yes, Harry did say that .. but I truly believe that even though HE KNOWS he grew up with privilege, he still thinks that everyone should still feel soooooooooooooo sorry for him given what occurred with Princess Diana.  Yes, it's sad, but .. c'mon dude, you know how many folks have been in much worse situations .. for instance, I know an actor friend who lost his mother (his father had left the premises when he was about 1 or 2) .. also at a young age and so then, it was just him and his brothers (who were older).  They all got parceled out to various places (he grew up in the UK), but .. he resolved to make something of himself and not wallow in self-pity .. and today, he is a very successful actor, director, producer & writer .. so there you go!!!
> 
> While I did not lose my mother at a young age, my mother spent most of my youth in Mental Institutions .. so, she wasn't around for me.  While my sisters did the best that they could (my Dad wasn't around for much of my childhood), thank god for my Italian Grandmother.  She was the one who told me "YOU CAN DO IT" .. and I always pushed forward.  That type of stuff can either break you or make you stronger; I chose to the BE STRONGER version!


„Hard times make people bitter or better“ - my dad has a picture of this saying in his study.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I think @Sharont2305 meant geographically not in terms of identity. The difference being the British Isles and the United Kingdom.
> 
> Of course when you use the terms British and not Britain then it's more a case of identity in NI.
> 
> Even though I have a UK passport, I still feel European. I live in Scotland but am British not Scottish.





Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, they are. The United Kingdom of Great Britain AND Northern Ireland. The Great Britain bit is Wales, Scotland and England. Brits.
> l


This seems a bit of a misleading way of describing it to me. What do you call the nationality of people from the U.K. and it’s territories? British. It’s just a name. 
It doesn’t matter that the name comes from the name of the island being Britain (which comes from what the Romans called the island after one of the peoples). Lots of countries are named after one part of the whole. Belgium, for example, is named after an ancient tribe the Belgae but they aren’t the only Belgian tribe and lots of ancient Belgae territories is actually modern France.

The northern Irish are defined as British citizens regardless of the fact that the territory is on the island of Ireland. People from the Cayman Islands and Bermuda also have British nationality and they are nowhere near us. 

how you personally culturally identify is your business but I think we’re unnecessarily muddying the waters of what our nationality is for the international readers (so to speak.)No wonder other countries find it so confusing!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Stansy said:


> „Hard times make people bitter or better“ - my dad has a picture of this saying in his study.


Where does this come from?  I haven’t heard it before. It’s true!


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's not just a question of language though.
> 
> Products marked 'fair' brightening' or 'whitening' can mean ingredients that bleach/lighten skin to make make it comply with colourist beauty standards, cultural bias, 'passing' or even religious practices. It's a HUGE market but supposedly what H&M are against.
> 
> Brightening, even whitening can mean clarifying or minimising age-related dark-spots. You could say that it's no less 'ist' than the type to address the above, 'just' ageist. These are on sale round the world, including my high street, and is also a HUGE market and no one bats an eye.
> 
> I just love (not) that the 'beauty community' (Insta, YT, FB etc) thinks it addresses diversity, inclusivity and prejudice whilst continuing to push product that promises perfection and eternal youth.
> 
> Anyway, I am also a hypocrite, I enjoy makeup and skin care


This is a really interesting point about anti-ageing products. I do wonder whether they can ever actually fully divorce themselves from the idea that older = uglier. I remember in the 90s they used to use 20year olds to advertise anti-ageing then after the backlash they started to use mature models talking about ‘ageing joyfully’ & all that jazz. To me, realistically, the message is still the same that we need to fight ageing because wrinkles are ugly. 

I have this conflict in myself that I don’t like my hyperpigmentation but a big part of me thinks these ‘brightening’ products don’t work and am I setting a bad example to the kids by having unrealistic expectations?


Ultimately , I think the beauty industry is based at its core on selling us impossible perfection and we’d probably all be better of just ignoring it but no man is an island and I do love a good moisturiser.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> This is a really interesting point about anti-ageing products. I do wonder whether they can ever actually fully divorce themselves from the idea that older = uglier. I remember in the 90s they used to use 20year olds to advertise anti-ageing then after the backlash they started to use mature models talking about ‘ageing joyfully’ & all that jazz. To me, realistically, the message is still the same that we need to fight ageing because wrinkles are ugly.
> 
> I have this conflict in myself that I don’t like my hyperpigmentation but a big part of me thinks these ‘brightening’ products don’t work and am I setting a bad example to the kids by having unrealistic expectations?
> 
> 
> Ultimately , I think the beauty industry is based at its core on selling us impossible perfection and we’d probably all be better of just ignoring it but no man is an island and I do love a good moisturiser.



What's scary to me is the amount of influencers that worry they are exhibiting signs of ageing whilst in their 20s. They have serious following. 

With the amount of work done to M's face I guess she has no qualms about setting a 'bad' example to other women including younger. As you say none of us is an island and I am very grateful to Cica (Centella asiatica)


----------



## papertiger

When a read about Procter and Gamble, I am just as shocked by the untold deforestation (palm oil and toilet paper) than the whitening creams.

No amount of money could make me work for/alongside this company.

It's (should be) impossible to align H&M's perceived, apparent values and P&G. Shame on them  .

It reminds me why Gucci recreated/reformulated/rebranded their entire makeup line a few years ago. They knew they couldn't square their ESG and Kering's sustainability policy (Roadmap 2017-2025) I don't blame them.


----------



## Stansy

Clearblueskies said:


> Where does this come from?  I haven’t heard it before. It’s true!


Unfortunately I don‘t know! I almost don‘t dare to say that it is in caligraphy  but I like it a lot as it is true!


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> When a read about Procter and Gamble, I am just as shocked by the untold deforestation (palm oil and toilet paper) than the whitening creams.
> 
> No amount of money could make me work for/alongside this company.
> 
> It's (should be) impossible to align H&M's perceived, apparent values and P&G. Shame on them  .
> 
> It reminds me why Gucci recreated/reformulated/rebranded their entire makeup line a few years ago. They knew they couldn't square their ESG and Kering's sustainability policy (Roadmap 2017-2025) I don't blame them.


well you see it’s do as we say not as we do. Thinking about the environment is clearly the peasants’ job. They can partner with dubious companies and fly on private jets because they are serious business people.... or something.

I do try and avoid Nestle and P&G but my gosh they don’t make it easy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> Did Dax actually come out and say that?! If so, kudos to him for saying that publicly! Not surprised at Pinky & The Brain trying to control the narrative.



Pinky & The Brain  You kill me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Has anyone seen any fact-check of this incident?
> So far, I've read 3 versions of it.
> MM saw the ad as part of a school project and decided to write to P&G.
> MM saw the ad, was unhappy and asked her dad what she could do. He encouraged her to write to P&G.
> P&G were in process of changing the ad due to other input, and MM's letter reached them when the change was already underway. She took credit for it.



From what I've gathered, it was a school project, her dad helped her, but by the time she sent the letter the change was already underway. She still took credit


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> When articles like this start appearing, that's when you know something is likely in the works to do just this down the road.


I can hear the screams.  they won't want to give up those beautiful titles.  but if they protest, that could make them look bad.  they wanted their "freedom"
On the other hand, if the titles were taken away they could say it was due to racism, of course


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From what I've gathered, it was a school project, her dad helped her, but by the time she sent the letter the change was already underway. She still took credit


her dad who is now dead to her?
I really don't understand this.  so maybe he did some things she didn't like.  but he raised her, gave her everything.  now he's getting old and in failing health.  she can't just be civil to him?  I'm not even saying they have to have him move in or anything like that.  but talk to him? acknowledge that he's alive?

I'm taking a leap her but I assume if she had shown any signs of forgiveness, we'd know about it.


----------



## marietouchet

How things have changed in a month.... 

OK, the story was they had to tell their truth to Oprah, OK ... they did.. they explicitly  trashed Charles for withholding money ... Oprah, after the fact clarified that QEII & Philip did not make the comment about skin color, AS IF it was important a month ago, to ensure no vitriol was leveled at H's grandparents ... 

That was THEN ... With Dax, H explicitly goes after C, QEII & P as if the flood gates had been opened.. It seems to me that the change in tune must be PAYBACK for H's chilly reception at the funeral

It is one thing to try to make money (maybe tacky but not a crime) or to try to appear nice on camera (too much emphasis on hair, makeup and procedures may be a bad role mode ???) ...  But trashing the family for things that happened so long ago ... what shall I say ??? 

"Toto, we are no longer in Kansas anymore "


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> How things have changed in a month....
> 
> OK, the story was they had to tell their truth to Oprah, OK ... they did.. they explicitly  trashed Charles for withholding money ... Oprah, after the fact clarified that QEII & Philip did not make the comment about skin color, AS IF it was important a month ago, to ensure no vitriol was leveled at H's grandparents ...
> 
> That was THEN ... With Dax, H explicitly goes after C, QEII & P as if the flood gates had been opened.. It seems to me that the change in tune must be PAYBACK for H's chilly reception at the funeral
> 
> It is one thing to try to make money (maybe tacky but not a crime) or to try to appear nice on camera (too much emphasis on hair, makeup and procedures may be a bad role mode ???) ...  But trashing the family for things that happened so long ago ... what shall I say ???
> 
> "Toto, we are no longer in Kansas anymore "


and speaking of makeup on camera, would it have been a good idea for her to take a page from Michelle's book and wear something from  J. Crew (or some "regular" retailer).....since she's so woke?


----------



## Aimee3

With Harry and his wife, it’s always someone else’s fault, never theirs.  I’m sick of listening to them bash someone else.
As for H’s wife’s letter to P &G when she was 11 years old, I thought someone had posted many pages ago that her letter was only one among the many her class had collectively sent to P&G.  As a class project, she didn’t come up with the idea all by herself although that’s how she’s touting it now.


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> I think @Sharont2305 meant geographically not in terms of identity. The difference being the British Isles and the United Kingdom.
> 
> Of course when you use the terms British and not Britain then it's more a case of identity in NI.
> 
> Even though I have a UK passport, I still feel European. I live in Scotland but am British not Scottish.



I live in England, and I always state that I’m English, not British, and definitely not European!


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> How things have changed in a month....
> 
> OK, the story was they had to tell their truth to Oprah, OK ... they did.. they explicitly  trashed Charles for withholding money ... Oprah, after the fact clarified that QEII & Philip did not make the comment about skin color, AS IF it was important a month ago, to ensure no vitriol was leveled at H's grandparents ...
> 
> That was THEN ... With Dax, H explicitly goes after C, QEII & P as if the flood gates had been opened.. It seems to me that the change in tune must be PAYBACK for H's chilly reception at the funeral
> 
> It is one thing to try to make money (maybe tacky but not a crime) or to try to appear nice on camera (too much emphasis on hair, makeup and procedures may be a bad role mode ???) ...  But trashing the family for things that happened so long ago ... what shall I say ???
> 
> "Toto, we are no longer in Kansas anymore "


Finally, it dawned on me ...  It is one thing to say blah blah happened to me personally ...

MAYBE (???? I dunno) Charles was mistreated by his parents but he has never gone public about that and his opinion of his life is HIS TRUTH, not H's, surely Charles talked to H PRIVATELY about his upbringing ..

IMHO it is really BAD FORM to whine about someone's else's (alleged) mistreatment, it is for Charles to share, not H, as lawyers would say, H's account of his father's childhood is HEARSAY

The alliterative one made the same mistake in the O interview - she was not present at the (alleged) discussion of the child's skin color - that anecdote was for H to tell, not her


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Finally, it dawned on me ...  It is one thing to say blah blah happened to me personally ...
> 
> MAYBE (???? I dunno) Charles was mistreated by his parents but he has never gone public about that and his opinion of his life is HIS TRUTH, not H's, surely Charles talked to H PRIVATELY about his upbringing ..
> 
> IIMHO it is really BAD FORM to whine about someone's else's (alleged) mistreatment, it is for Charles to share, not H, as lawyers would say, H's account of his father's childhood is HEARSAY
> 
> The alliterative one made the same mistake in the O interview - she was not present at the (alleged) discussion of the child's skin color - that anecdote was for H to tell, not her


and while Charles may not have gotten all the warm hugs he needed as a child, he still had it as good or better than most kids so he doesn't complain.  called being a rational adult, being grateful for what he had


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> I can hear the screams.  they won't want to give up those beautiful titles.  but if they protest, that could make them look bad.  they wanted their "freedom"
> On the other hand, if the titles were taken away they could say it was due to racism, of course


I really object to them using their titles but did read somewhere that as the dukedom was within the Quuens gift she can remove it but the title of Prince is his birthright as is his place in the hereditary line and would require an Act of Parliament to remove. I would worry that if they didn’t go the whole hog M would just style herself Princess - she’s so conniving maybe that is her aim in all of this.  I dont think Diana was officially a princess but the public just started calling her that and the Palace acquiesced.  I really hope I’m wrong about all of that!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> her dad who is now dead to her?
> I really don't understand this.  so maybe he did some things she didn't like.  but he raised her, gave her everything.  now he's getting old and in failing health.  she can't just be civil to him?  I'm not even saying they have to have him move in or anything like that.  but talk to him? acknowledge that he's alive?
> 
> I'm taking a leap her but I assume if she had shown any signs of forgiveness, we'd know about it.


The narrative they are now pushing is that for their own mental health, they need to cut ties with their toxic families. And yes, ITA that if she wanted to forgive anyone, we'd know all about it because her "sources" would make sure of it.

What they are doing reminds me of that Zen tale of a monk who carried a lady across a puddle. His fellow monk was aghast and, after stewing on it for some time, blurted out his disapproval that he had touched a woman. The first monk pointed out that he had put down the lady several hours ago, but the second monk was still carrying her in his mind.

So long as the D&D want to stew on the supposed injustice they suffered and how they deserve freedom with someone else funding that freedom, they are still that second monk. The problem is that they *think* and expect us to believe that they are the first monk. Fettered Freedom.


----------



## LittleStar88

it’s entirely possible for one to have civil relationships with family members whom one perceives did them wrong. It’s called adulting.

You work through the trauma and issues privately, accept who they are, and move on. At least this is what grown adults do. Especially grown adults who have had therapy to work through issues and traumas. And if the relationship can’t be rehabilitated, you STFU and move on with your life (not blabber about it non-stop in the most public way possible). Sometimes things don’t work out with people (family or otherwise) so cut your losses and move on.

These two think that everyone needs to change for them, make a big stink over them, etc. They need to let it go and move on with their lives. The more they spin their wheels about allllllll of the family members who have wronged them in all the various ways, the more it starts to look like A) They are immature and B) The problem is actually them and not the family members.


----------



## xincinsin

gerryt said:


> I really object to them using their titles but did read somewhere that as the dukedom was within the Quuens gift she can remove it but the title of Prince is his birthright as is his place in the hereditary line and would require an Act of Parliament to remove. I would worry that if they didn’t go the whole hog M would just style herself Princess - she’s so conniving maybe that is her aim in all of this.  I dont think Diana was officially a princess but the public just started calling her that and the Palace acquiesced.  I really hope I’m wrong about all of that!


I would absolutely loathe to have her styled "Princess". She is as racist in her own way as Princess Michael of Kent. I use that term with a very specific meaning: MM thinks she is better than everyone else and she is not above fomenting racial disharmony, distrust and disgruntlement to make a quick buck.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> it’s entirely possible for one to have civil relationships with family members whom one perceives did them wrong. It’s called adulting.
> 
> You work through the trauma and issues privately, accept who they are, and move on. At least this is what grown adults do. Especially grown adults who have had therapy to work through issues and traumas. And if the relationship can’t be rehabilitated, you STFU and move on with your life (not blabber about it non-stop in the most public way possible). Sometimes things don’t work out with people (family or otherwise) so cut your losses and move on.
> 
> These two think that everyone needs to change for them, make a big stink over them, etc. They need to let it go and move on with their lives. The more they spin their wheels about allllllll of the family members who have wronged them in all the various ways, the more it starts to look like A) They are immature and B) The problem is actually them and not the family members.


right
first it was her family....no one except her mom is OK....now it's his family.....seems there's a pattern


----------



## Shopaholic2021

marietouchet said:


> The alliterative one made the same mistake in the O interview - she was not present at the (alleged) discussion of the child's skin color - that anecdote was for H to tell, not her



She was upset by this comment and thought it was racist. I feel the same way about the products that are marketed in India and that are named in such ways to discriminate against people with darker skin. She willingly struct up a deal with a company that perpetuates the idea that fairer and whiter skin is superior to darker skin. And I see this as no different (and actually worse) than the comment made by someone is Harrys family about the color of their potential child.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Icyjade said:


> Ah, didn’t know about the India context and Hindu scriptures. I thought for India it's due to the historical Aryan invasion that’s why there is a cultural preference for fairer skin.



The invasion of Aryans did not lead to colorism or discrimination based on race. There was fighting over land and wealth, but never race. The invasion of the British is what cemented colorism. 

One of the major gods, Krishna who is an avatar of Lord Vishnu is depicted as black. The word Krishna means black in Sanskrit. Unfortunately a lot of the images and TV shows/ movies have casted Krishna as fair and lighter skinned.


----------



## Sharont2305

carmen56 said:


> I live in England, and I always state that I’m English, not British, and definitely not European!


I'm Welsh, then British and like you definitely not European


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> right
> first it was her family....no one except her mom is OK....now it's his family.....seems there's a pattern



I would love to sit up on my high horse and, for every person who doesn’t bow down to everything about me or give me everything I want/demand/ask for, cry that it’s because of racism, or they’re mean, or they are the problem.

it takes maturity to realize sometimes the problem is my expectation is not correct, and then adjust myself to the situation and reality.

Expectations lead to disappointments, especially when the expectations are lofty, unreasonable, or simply narcissistic.

Her mom probably realizes this about MM so easier to maintain the relationship and keep quiet than to say a single word to anyone. I feel like she and her dad are very much alike but she is better at finessing the message than he is.


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> What's scary to me is the amount of influencers that worry they are exhibiting signs of ageing whilst in their 20s. They have serious following.
> 
> With the amount of work done to M's face I guess she has no qualms about setting a 'bad' example to other women including younger. As you say none of us is an island and I am very grateful to Cica (Centella asiatica)



My cousin, in her 20s, has been getting Botox for years.  She and her friends all do it... says it's normal in LA. Welcome to the Kardashian Age?


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> She was upset by this comment and thought it was racist. I feel the same way about the products that are marketed in India and that are named in such ways to discriminate against people with darker skin. She willingly struct up a deal with a company that perpetuates the idea that fairer and whiter skin is superior to darker skin. And I see this as no different (and actually worse) than the comment made by someone is Harrys family about the color of their potential child.
> I





lalame said:


> My cousin, in her 20s, has been getting Botox for years.  She and her friends all do it... says it's normal in LA. Welcome to the Kardashian Age?


really
I was talking to a woman in her 30's.....she's been botoxing her face and hands for years.....also has had two boob jobs and now wants a lift to make them look more fake....wonder what she will look like at 50


----------



## Allisonfaye

jelliedfeels said:


> This is a really interesting point about anti-ageing products. I do wonder whether they can ever actually fully divorce themselves from the idea that older = uglier. I remember in the 90s they used to use 20year olds to advertise anti-ageing then after the backlash they started to use mature models talking about ‘ageing joyfully’ & all that jazz. To me, realistically, the message is still the same that we need to fight ageing because wrinkles are ugly.
> 
> I have this conflict in myself that I don’t like my hyperpigmentation but a big part of me thinks these ‘brightening’ products don’t work and am I setting a bad example to the kids by having unrealistic expectations?
> 
> 
> Ultimately , I think the beauty industry is based at its core on selling us impossible perfection and we’d probably all be better of just ignoring it but no man is an island and I do love a good moisturiser.



Get a photo facial. They zap your dark spots with a laser and then they turn black and fall off. I don't know why people spend all that money on products to lighten dark spots. It's not all that expensive. I had one about 8 years ago and I am having another one this week.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> My cousin, in her 20s, has been getting Botox for years.  She and her friends all do it... says it's normal in LA. Welcome to the Kardashian Age?



I mean, prevention is better than trying to cure already manifested wrinkles. (I've yet to have Botox though at not quite 20 anymore, so not speaking from experience)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> Get a photo facial. They zap your dark spots with a laser and then they turn black and fall off. I don't know why people spend all that money on products to lighten dark spots. It's not all that expensive. I had one about 8 years ago and I am having another one this week.



Not all dark spots are created equal, though. There's freckles and melasma and age spots.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, prevention is better than trying to cure already manifested wrinkles. (I've yet to have Botox though at not quite 20 anymore, so not speaking from experience)



Thats why using serums, UV protection and cleaning and toning the face is good from a young age. But botox (actual toxin) for cosmetic reasons on your 20s is just weird. I can't imaging getting botox at the age. Unless she has some extreme wrinkling from sun damage. 

A lot of the cosmetic procedures that young people do actually makes them look older. Kylie is the youngest but could easily pass as one of the older sisters.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Thats why using serums, UV protection and cleaning and toning the face is good from a young age. But botox (actual toxin) for cosmetic reasons on your 20s is just weird. I can't imaging getting botox at the age. Unless she has some extreme wrinkling from sun damage.
> 
> A lot of the cosmetic procedures that young people do actually makes them look older. Kylie is the youngest but could easily pass as one of the older sisters.


I guess Kylie and other celebs like her have made looking fake a positive thing to some people


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I've read that using Botox at a younger age helps prevent some wrinkles from forming for a while. I think of it as scaffolding for the face to defy gravity. The younger one is the greater the peer pressure also. Chain reaction among friends.


----------



## queennadine

I got Botox for the first time at 31. At this point, I’ve been pregnant and/or nursing for almost 3 years and am desperate to get more


----------



## lalame

That's why I'm not phased by seeing Meghan using fillers. It's funny, some people are so insulted or in disbelief when you say Meghan might have had fillers. It's so normalized in LA that it wouldn't be controversial or surprising.


----------



## queennadine

^ Yeah, I don’t begrudge her, or anyone, getting Botox/fillers/whatever. Those things are common where I grew up and am moving back to.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> That's why I'm not phased by seeing Meghan using fillers. It's funny, some people are so insulted or in disbelief when you say Meghan might have had fillers. It's so normalized in LA that it wouldn't be controversial or surprising.


Might?  

I know it’s weird how in some circles it’s the norm and in general it’s not a big deal but then every now and then you find there’s a sacred cow who you are apparently affronting by stating the obvious.

I would class a 40 year old love interest actress and model in the public eye and trying to move in elite LA circles as an absolute certainty.




papertiger said:


> What's scary to me is the amount of influencers that worry they are exhibiting signs of ageing whilst in their 20s. They have serious following.
> 
> With the amount of work done to M's face I guess she has no qualms about setting a 'bad' example to other women including younger. As you say none of us is an island and I am very grateful to Cica (Centella asiatica)


I must check out cica too. I guess selling this preventative idea gets them hooked and paying for longer. Aside from whether it’s a good idea for your face, I think the fact you apparently  should do it every six months is a big financial commitment for early in your career even if it’s only a couple of hundred each time. People don’t think about the upkeep costs with implants either in my experience.


queennadine said:


> I got Botox for the first time at 31. At this point, I’ve been pregnant and/or nursing for almost 3 years and am desperate to get more


I’m sort of intrigued by it but Im hoping to nurse after this pregnancy so it’ll be a couple years yet. Maybe Ill try really committing to a retinol routine first.

Edit- it cut off my sentence for some reason


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> A lot of the cosmetic procedures that young people do actually makes them look older. Kylie is the youngest but could easily pass as one of the older sisters.



Oh, I'm the sunscreen troll. People have been laughing at me for years, but we're slowly getting to where the difference shows  

That said, barefaced Kylie does indeed look like a kid. She recently did post one of these pics and looked so young.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> That's why I'm not phased by seeing Meghan using fillers. It's funny, some people are so insulted or in disbelief when you say Meghan might have had fillers. It's so normalized in LA that it wouldn't be controversial or surprising.



Honestly, as long as it looks good I'm not against it. When you can't recognize the face anymore or the hips are weirder proportioned than Barbie that's when I think people need to lay off that sh*t.


----------



## gerryt

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm Welsh, then British and like you definitely not European


Welsh first, then British - me too!  I think sometimes the lack of standardisation on official forms contributes to this problem as you can only tick the most pertinent box.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, as long as it looks good I'm not against it. When you can't recognize the face anymore or the hips *are weirder proportioned than Barbie that's when I think people need to lay off* that sh*t.



 
   I saw a familiar face at a party yesterday and she could be said to be a Barbie wannabe. She had so much facial/lip filler that she distorted her face IMO. But I'm sure she loved it. And yes, upkeep is expensive. I don't have a lot of room to talk because I use filler/Botox too, but more subtle. Maybe some would disagree  .


----------



## bellecate

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Thats why using serums, UV protection and cleaning and toning the face is good from a young age. But botox (actual toxin) for cosmetic reasons on your 20s is just weird. I can't imaging getting botox at the age. Unless she has some extreme wrinkling from sun damage.
> 
> A lot of the cosmetic procedures that young people do actually makes them look older. Kylie is the youngest but could easily pass as one of the older sisters.


It saddens me that we don’t allow women to age and see the beauty in it. At 65 I have some wrinkles and age spots. I’ve also lived a lot of my life in the outdoors. I look in the mirror and see my life reflected back in my face. The way Harry’s wife has been playing with her face so much now leads me to think, along with a lot else in her life she’ll never be happy with her face.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> It saddens me that we don’t allow women to age and see the beauty in it. At 65 I have some wrinkles and age spots. I’ve also lived a lot of my life in the outdoors. I look in the mirror and see my life reflected back in my face. The way Harry’s wife has been playing with her face so much now leads me to think, along with a lot else in her life she’ll never be happy with her face.


yes, I think some of the criticism of M's alleged PS isn't that she's a bad person for doing it but that it's not helping her......I'm like you, aging naturally.  I'm kind of afraid of PS.  I think it's understandable for women in the public eye at a certain age to do some tweaking.  but too much can be very very bad.  I always remember the tragedy that was Kim Novak at the Oscars several years ago.

I think if you can see what's been done, it hasn't been done well or is too much


----------



## rose60610

bellecate said:


> It saddens me that we don’t allow women to age and see the beauty in it. At 65 I have some wrinkles and age spots. I’ve also lived a lot of my life in the outdoors. I look in the mirror and see my life reflected back in my face. The way Harry’s wife has been playing with her face so much now leads me to think, along with a lot else in her life she’ll never be happy with her face.



100%.  
My sister is 62 and looks fantastic, she doesn't even color her hair, she's content with the grays and face lines. She's exercised religiously for decades, lots of long distance running, marathons, weights, many exercise classes, rides horses, skis, loves the outdoors.  I think she looks better than many younger women who've undergone a lot of procedures. 
Before Meghan ditched the BRF I thought she was drop dead gorgeous. Now? L.A. hasn't been kind in the filler dept for her. I agree, she'll never be happy despite what she must spend on her appearance.


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> 100%.
> My sister is 62 and looks fantastic, she doesn't even color her hair, she's content with the grays and face lines. She's exercised religiously for decades, lots of long distance running, marathons, weights, many exercise classes, rides horses, skis, loves the outdoors.  I think she looks better than many younger women who've undergone a lot of procedures.
> Before Meghan ditched the BRF I thought she was drop dead gorgeous. Now? L.A. hasn't been kind in the filler dept for her. I agree, she'll never be happy despite what she must spend on her appearance.


Meghan looks very different now and it’s only 3 years since the wedding.  I think people never know when to stop with plastic surgery.  They tweak and tweak trying for perfection and then find themselves chasing what they used to look like.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> It saddens me that we don’t allow women to age and see the beauty in it. At 65 I have some wrinkles and age spots. I’ve also lived a lot of my life in the outdoors. *I look in the mirror and see my life reflected back in my face.* The way Harry’s wife has been playing with her face so much now leads me to think, along with a lot else in her life she’ll never be happy with her face.


Yes!  When I look in the mirror, I make a face, then I laugh because I know that I've earned every wrinkle and every grey hair and, better yet, I've learned so much in the process.


----------



## marietouchet

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan looks very different now and it’s only 3 years since the wedding.  I think people never know when to stop with plastic surgery.  They tweak and tweak trying for perfection and then find themselves chasing what they used to look like.


I always wonder ... rhetorical question, no answer required, just thinking .... does one divulge all the procedures done prior to meeting ? I mean in the sense of  our kids are going to need to do a lot of stuff to look like me ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> Really?  I worked with a horrible American guy.  His name was Ivan.  He was truly weird but I didn‘t take him as representative of the whole American nation.


In general, I love my colleagues from all parts of the world .. but of course, you always get the good & the bad!  To be honest, the absolute WORST PITA I ever worked with was also an American male and I don't often say that I hate someone, but I HATE this man given what he did to so many people!


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> Scots and Northern Irish _are _Brits.
> 
> *runs off in fear


HA HA HA .. you are too funny @Sharont2305 because I know you are going to correct me~!  The reason why I wrote it the way that I did, was because when I was living/working in Scotland .. and if I ever said that they were Brits, they would have had my head!  You likely know ..

the Scots hate the "Mc's" - Irish
the Irish hate the "Mac's" - the Scottish 
BUT - they both hate the British
that's what I was told by all 3 sides!


----------



## octopus17

gerryt said:


> Welsh first, then British - me too!  I think sometimes the lack of standardisation on official forms contributes to this problem as you can only tick the most pertinent box.


I know, so I was pleasantly surprised that the most recent census form here offered the full monty of choices and you could pick as many as you wanted. It was interesting to us as a family as we all ticked something different - I was the only one that ticked Northern Irish, British and Irish .


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bellecate said:


> It saddens me that we don’t allow women to age and see the beauty in it. At 65 I have some wrinkles and age spots. I’ve also lived a lot of my life in the outdoors. I look in the mirror and see my life reflected back in my face. The way Harry’s wife has been playing with her face so much now leads me to think, along with a lot else in her life she’ll never be happy with her face.



I think a lot of it has to do with LA and hollywood culture which is not nice to older and less toned women. Women in those industries have a lot of pressure to look good no matter your biological age. They don't seem to help each other either. It would be nice to see these women support each other more when it comes to aging and body issues. 

I think marketing and cosmetic businesses spend a lot in perpetuating what women should look like. If we were all happy and content aging gracefully then those companies wouldn't be making money, so I think a huge part of this is businesses driving this insecurity into women.


----------



## Chanbal

JCMH is showing his true colors...


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the genetic pain... Ungrateful nincompoop!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> JCMH is showing his true colors...



Harry, I think you're rude and ignorant in telling another nation how to behave and what to believe and I'm not even American. I say shut up and Mister Rogers has a couple of messages for you.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I also think MM looked way better before the wedding. Whatever she’s doing isn’t attractive to me at all.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I always wonder ... rhetorical question, no answer required, just thinking .... does one divulge all the procedures done prior to meeting ? I mean in the sense of  our kids are going to need to do a lot of stuff to look like me ...


There was a fictionalized account in a women's magazine a few years ago about how a woman with extensive work done snagged a rich guy, and was suspected of infidelity when she gave birth to a child who looked like neither of them. Not sure if the magazine meant it to be a cautionary tale.


----------



## gerryt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Harry, I think you're rude and ignorant in telling another nation how to behave and what to believe and I'm not even American. I say shut up and Mister Rogers has a couple of messages for you.
> View attachment 5085462


I totally agree, what bad manners.   I’m also finding it annoying when (on other sites!) people from outside of the UK tell us to get rid of the Royal Family.  Thats for us to decide!


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I also think MM looked way better before the wedding. Whatever she’s doing isn’t attractive to me at all.


I think she already had work done before the wedding, if all those Youtube videos comparing her teen face to her 30s face can be believed. She does look less attractive to me too. Someone here mentioned that MM had a heart-shaped face. It looks more oval after childbirth. She can cry victim and claim that she sacrificed her looks and figure to motherhood if ever H shows any signs of straying.


----------



## rhyvin

I wonder when the mermaid divorces him, she'll explain it by saying he lied to her about who he was (ex. YoU nEvEr ToLd Me YoUr NaMe WaS HeNrY?!?!?) *cue fake emotional distress*


----------



## xincinsin

rhyvin said:


> I wonder when the mermaid divorces him, she'll explain it by saying he lied to her about who he was (ex. YoU nEvEr ToLd Me YoUr NaMe WaS HeNrY?!?!?) *cue fake emotional distress*


See, that's why she could never find him when she googled - he was using an alias (for privacy of course)! She had to take someone else's word for it that he was "nice". And then he hoodwinked her with furtive liaisons in supermarkets - so exciting after her dull dreary life as a sought-after actress and top model. She started suspecting something was amiss only after he proposed with a ring that only had 3 measly diamonds. (What do you mean your money is tied up in trust funds and your cash comes from Daddy?!!!)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rhyvin said:


> I wonder when the mermaid divorces him, she'll explain it by saying he lied to her about who he was (ex. YoU nEvEr ToLd Me YoUr NaMe WaS HeNrY?!?!?) *cue fake emotional distress*


Too funny, but Henry's name would have been on the marriage license and marriage certificate. Plus, at the altar, the Archbishop of Canterbury said, "We have come together to witness the marriage of *Henry *Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan..." so she has no excuse unless she wasn't paying attention.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Too funny, but Henry's name would have been on the marriage license and marriage certificate. Plus, at the altar, the Archbishop of Canterbury said, "We have come together to witness the marriage of *Henry *Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan..." so she has no excuse unless she wasn't paying attention.



And wouldn't "Henry" also be on his trust which must have been updated to appoint Rachel Meghan as successor trustee? Think she'd reject THAT?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, looks change as we age. Just look at Hazzie on page 1 of this thread.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> What does "innocently divorced" mean? Marriage was not consummated?


I have no idea.  It confused me at 8 and still confuses me now years later!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I have no idea.  It confused me at 8 and still confuses me now years later!



If only billionaire couples could be ‘innocently divorced’.  Oh the drama. Oh the times.


----------



## creme fraiche

sdkitty said:


> and speaking of makeup on camera, would it have been a good idea for her to take a page from Michelle's book and wear something from  J. Crew (or some "regular" retailer).....since she's so woke?



Never - wearing high street labels for public face is something associated with the hated Catherine, and we all know that the Duchess of Susses always outDuchesses Kate.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> and speaking of makeup on camera, would it have been a good idea for her to take a page from Michelle's book and wear something from  J. Crew (or some "regular" retailer).....since she's so woke?





creme fraiche said:


> Never - wearing high street labels for public face is something associated with the hated Catherine, and we all know that the Duchess of Susses always outDuchesses Kate.



She actually did wear Banana Republic, Club Monaco, Reformation, H&M and J Crew a few times.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> There was a fictionalized account in a women's magazine a few years ago about how a woman with extensive work done snagged a rich guy, and was suspected of infidelity when she gave birth to a child who looked like neither of them. Not sure if the magazine meant it to be a cautionary tale.


I love that. I can imagine it’s a big problem with these Insta thot/trophy types as they are all so cookie cutter.
 Imagine lying on your lounger 6months pregs and suddenly seeing the pool boy has your natural nose 



xincinsin said:


> I think she already had work done before the wedding, if all those Youtube videos comparing her teen face to her 30s face can be believed. She does look less attractive to me too. Someone here mentioned that MM had a heart-shaped face. It looks more oval after childbirth. She can cry victim and claim that she sacrificed her looks and figure to motherhood if ever H shows any signs of straying.


Well, she was forced to go cheap on her PS to keep the boys in beanie hats  
 grifting doesn’t pay the way it used to. Haz has had to give up shoes after all.

She absolutely had a nose job after her teen years.  It looks a completely different shape by suits. These last few years have been especially Heavily diminishing returns for her nose.

On a completely unrelated note, it’s weird that this podcaster Dax talked so much about substance abuse and drugs. How could H&M possibly relate to that?



xincinsin said:


> See, that's why she could never find him when she googled - he was using an alias (for privacy of course)! She had to take someone else's word for it that he was "nice". And then he hoodwinked her with furtive liaisons in supermarkets - so exciting after her dull dreary life as a sought-after actress and top model. She started suspecting something was amiss only after he proposed with a ring that only had 3 measly diamonds. (What do you mean your money is tied up in trust funds and your cash comes from Daddy?!!!)


Sought after? even in M’s fantasy world that sounds unlikely 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, looks change as we age. Just look at Hazzie on page 1 of this thread.


Beauty fades...dumb is forever  

Weird he’s looking much more fraught now he’s living his best life & all that


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> Too funny, but Henry's name would have been on the marriage license and marriage certificate. Plus, at the altar, the Archbishop of Canterbury said, "We have come together to witness the marriage of *Henry *Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan..." so she has no excuse unless she wasn't paying attention.


She was too busy thinking get that ring on my finger and let's get that certificate signed!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The fall out from Dax’s show continues:








						Prince Harry calls the First Amendment 'bonkers'
					

Prince Harry on Thursday told Dax Shepard that he thought the First Amendment was 'bonkers', adding that he knew he had a lot to learn. Harry's comments raised eyebrows in the U.S.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Iirc many celebs dislike that the press are allowed to take photos of their kids and not blur the faces. There are simpler solutions than trashing our 1st amendment freedoms.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> The fall out from Dax’s show continues:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry calls the First Amendment 'bonkers'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Thursday told Dax Shepard that he thought the First Amendment was 'bonkers', adding that he knew he had a lot to learn. Harry's comments raised eyebrows in the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iirc many celebs dislike that the press are allowed to take photos of their kids and not blur the faces. There are simpler solutions than trashing our 1st amendment freedoms.



As a so-called woke lib, I really don’t like the fact I’m agreeing with a lot of the people in that article, but the First Amendment is one of the Cornerstones of our society. Although, I don’t like how they said it, the First Amendment is sacred and must be protected. Harry’s still a stuck up Jerk who thinks he’s better than us though.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Maggie Muggins said:


> Harry, I think you're rude and ignorant in telling another nation how to behave and what to believe and I'm not even American. I say shut up and Mister Rogers has a couple of messages for you.
> View attachment 5085462


It’s just basic good manners.  “When in Rome” and all that.  
You’re new, its not your culture or your country, just stfu and take the time to understand and learn the history and the nuance of where you are.
I just can’t get over how foolish Harry and Meghan are to be leaving all this cr*p on record.  Pretty soon the good citizens of Chunga Chunga are going to be their last hope.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rhyvin said:


> I wonder when the mermaid divorces him, she'll explain it by saying he lied to her about who he was (ex. YoU nEvEr ToLd Me YoUr NaMe WaS HeNrY?!?!?) *cue fake emotional distress*



But...but...she didn't have to google because everything she needed to know, he was telling her. She said so on Oprah!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> What does "innocently divorced" mean? Marriage was not consummated?



It means the party did nothing wrong. Even in some US states who's at fault can have financial consequences.


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s just basic good manners.  “When in Rome” and all that.
> You’re new, its not your culture or your country, just stfu and take the time to understand and learn the history and the nuance of where you are



Ditto for when that wife of his was here in the UK.


----------



## duna

bellecate said:


> It saddens me that we don’t allow women to age and see the beauty in it. At 65 I have some wrinkles and age spots. I’ve also lived a lot of my life in the outdoors. I look in the mirror and see my life reflected back in my face. The way Harry’s wife has been playing with her face so much now leads me to think, along with a lot else in her life she’ll never be happy with her face.



I totally agree with you. I'm almost your age and I've never done anything to my skin , except sun screen and moisturizers. This "always young" culture is so wrong on so many levels. Every age has it's beauty and people should embrace it! Especially since I have yet to see someone who has had good results with fillers/Botox and other such procedures. JMHO


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. you are too funny @Sharont2305 because I know you are going to correct me~!  The reason why I wrote it the way that I did, was because when I was living/working in Scotland .. and if I ever said that they were Brits, they would have had my head!  You likely know ..
> 
> the Scots hate the "Mc's" - Irish
> the Irish hate the "Mac's" - the Scottish
> BUT - they both hate the British
> that's what I was told by all 3 sides!


And I knew you wouldn't let me down with your reply


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> JCMH is showing his true colors...



Wow ... this story is getting traction ...

Fox News is running the same bonkers story at the top of its website

Fox is very hard core news, not gossip, albeit swings right rather than left


----------



## rose60610

Does Harry realize the First Amendment is what gives Americans the right to say such things as "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK", "The Royal Family is racist", "I didn't know about the British Commonwealth", and "My privacy is important to me"? It also gives other Americans the right to question one's statements even when the gutless media refuses to.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> I saw a familiar face at a party yesterday and she could be said to be a Barbie wannabe. She had so much facial/lip filler that she distorted her face IMO. But I'm sure she loved it. And yes, upkeep is expensive. I don't have a lot of room to talk because I use filler/Botox too, but more subtle. Maybe some would disagree  .



I am not opposed to a little bit of fillers/botox. It's when your face is frozen and distorted that it's an issue. I have botox about every 3 years in my forehead.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> Wow ... this story is getting traction ...
> 
> Fox News is running the same bonkers story at the top of its website
> 
> Fox is very hard core news, not gossip, albeit swings right rather than left



And my favorite responses to that story: 

"Sunday Riddle: How many more Hollywood-style interviews will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle give before they finally achieve the privacy they claim to be so desperate for?" replied Candace Owens.

"I wonder if he also thinks the Fourth Amendment is ‘bollocks’ and the 14th Amendment is ‘pish-posh,’" added author, filmmaker, and podcast host, Dinesh D'Souza.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What really confuses me: is he trying to imply UK citizens do not have the rights the First Amendment grants US citizens (particularly freedom of speech and press freedom)? I'm no pro for UK law, but that, uh, doesn't ring true.


----------



## csshopper

Sunshine Sachs has their work cut out for them, trying to neutralize what amounts to the latest spewing of verbal diarrhea by the idiot Prince.


----------



## xincinsin

Maybe Harry's faux pas was not a faux pas after all. Perhaps it was a deliberate publicity ploy. Nothing like insulting the Constitution to get nationwide, even global, attention. Then, when the frenzy is at its peak, the weeping mermaid makes an appearance to blame it all on the BRF. She will claim that those racist cads have silenced Harry all his life, till he cannot understand the importance of the first amendment. Then she calls on her fellow Americans to save her husband. They must aid her in deprogramming Harry, reverse his brainwashing, etc etc. One of the qualities I admire most in Americans is their willingness to help the unfortunate. She will tap right into that part of the national psyche and there will be a tsunami of sympathy.

What do you think?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What really confuses me: is he trying to imply UK citizens do not have the rights the First Amendment grants US citizens (particularly freedom of speech and press freedom)? I'm no pro for UK law, but that, uh, doesn't ring true.



I tried to outline them before but here they are better mapped-out:









						Hate speech vs. free speech: the UK laws | The Week UK
					

Swiss voters outlaw sexual-orientation discrimination



					www.theweek.co.uk
				




What you can say usually depends on who you are. We have anti-hate speech laws but 'clever' people know how to codify their hate.

We actually have a bill going through that is supposed to promote free speech at universities that have frequently shut down debates on topics one party refuses to acknowledge are debatable (and we're not talking historical/facts): https://www.theguardian.com/educati...ree-speech-law-england-likely-opposite-effect


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Maybe Harry's faux pas was not a faux pas after all. Perhaps it was a deliberate publicity ploy. Nothing like insulting the Constitution to get nationwide, even global, attention. Then, when the frenzy is at its peak, the weeping mermaid makes an appearance to blame it all on the BRF. She will claim that those racist cads have silenced Harry all his life, till he cannot understand the importance of the first amendment. Then she calls on her fellow Americans to save her husband. They must aid her in deprogramming Harry, reverse his brainwashing, etc etc. One of the qualities I admire most in Americans is their willingness to help the unfortunate. She will tap right into that part of the national psyche and there will be a tsunami of sympathy.
> 
> What do you think?




I think you're giving him too much credit, he's just what he said he is, i.e. dumb.

His Madame Tussaud's dummy is looking cleverer by the day. The intellectual antithesis to Dorian Gray's picture in the attic.

He's not fit to parade and/or talk. Hasn't he got a bathroom (or two) he can stay snd keep quiet in?


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Does Harry realize the First Amendment is what gives Americans the right to say such things as "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK", "The Royal Family is racist", "I didn't know about the British Commonwealth", and "My privacy is important to me"? It also gives other Americans the right to question one's statements even when the gutless media refuses to.





papertiger said:


> I tried to outline them before but here they are better mapped-out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hate speech vs. free speech: the UK laws | The Week UK
> 
> 
> Swiss voters outlaw sexual-orientation discrimination
> 
> 
> 
> www.theweek.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you can say usually depends on who you are. We have anti-hate speech laws but 'clever' people know how to codify their hate.
> 
> We actually have a bill going through atm https://www.theguardian.com/educati...ree-speech-law-england-likely-opposite-effect


Thank you for the UK side of this, I knew the law was different and was hoping someone would provide a link for my education 

If H was to say things in the UK it was not so much due to law as to custom for the BRF ie the BRF does not intrude on government, laws etc

OK,  so, the BRF is kinda, sorta supposed to be silent/silenced. Is that AWFUL ?  Not really, it is commonplace, everyone is supposed to hold his tongue at times, at work, in social situations - limiting one's speech is a UNIVERSAL issue in life, as is handling the collateral damage when you say the wrong thing

So to me, the BRF is not more or less silenced than mere mortals, I dont talk about politics in public either, and TPFers must not do so either here


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I tried to outline them before but here they are better mapped-out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hate speech vs. free speech: the UK laws | The Week UK
> 
> 
> Swiss voters outlaw sexual-orientation discrimination
> 
> 
> 
> www.theweek.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What you can say usually depends on who you are. We have anti-hate speech laws but 'clever' people know how to codify their hate.
> 
> We actually have a bill going through that is supposed to promote free speech at universities that have frequently shut down debates on topics one party refuses to acknowledge are debatable (and we're not talking historical/facts): https://www.theguardian.com/educati...ree-speech-law-england-likely-opposite-effect



That sounds pretty much like the German system. In fact, the part "depends on who you are" can probably be applied universally.


----------



## Chanbal

JCMH can learn a thing or two from Piers!


*'If the freedom of speech is taken away,' said America's first president George Washington, 'then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.'*

His view was shared by Thomas Jefferson, a fellow Founding Father and America's third president, who declared: 'Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.'

These two men helped create the initial United States Constitution and subsequent Bill of Rights that included the First Amendment which was specifically designed to protect the very freedoms they were referring to.

*That Amendment states: 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'*

They are arguably the most important words in the entire Constitution and have afforded Americans, and American journalists, the most powerful protection for their rights to freedom of speech and expression of any country in the world.

*The First Amendment is one of the things I most admire about the United States*, especially coming from a country like Britain where free speech for journalists like me is now heavily regulated.

But not everyone shares my admiration.

*In fact, Prince Harry has just declared the First Amendment to be 'bonkers.'*

His extraordinary outburst came during an interview he conducted with actor Dax Shephard for the 'Armchair Expert' podcast, during which he also launched a shameful new attack on his family.

'I've got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it,' he said, 'but it is bonkers. I don't want to start going down the First Amendment route because that's a huge subject and one which I don't understand because I've only been here a short time, but you can find a loophole in anything. You can capitalize or exploit what's not said rather than uphold what is said.'

*Like so much of the absurd Meghan-inspired psychobabble that spews out of his mouth, none of this makes any sense, and he clearly doesn't understand what he's saying either.*

Though we can safely assume that he just hates anything which affords any protection to journalists to say things he doesn't like, because that has been a familiar theme from the indignant media-loathing Prince for the last few years.

It's the same mindset that makes Meghan think she can complain to the bosses of TV networks when presenters like me refuse to believe her lies - and have them removed from their jobs if we don't apologise for our impertinence.

*But all that Americans will take away from Harry's outburst about the First Amendment is a posh, privileged British royal slamming their Constitution and their unalienable rights to freedom of speech and expression.

It takes an extraordinary amount of entitled arrogance to mock the most revered building block of your adopted country's history.*

And lest we forget, things didn't end well for the last British royal who tried to tell Americans how to lead their lives, George III.

Bashing the US Constitution is very dangerous territory for any British royal to meddle in, but Harry seems beyond caring about the impact of his ignorant and deluded words, and oblivious to his rank hypocrisy.

He professes to care about free speech, but like with so many of his statements, his actions suggest the complete opposite.

*Harry was the kind of person that Sir Winston Churchill was talking about when he said: 'Everyone is in favor of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people's idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.'

It's the same double standard that we see behind Harry's claim to be a man of compassion.*

The word screams off the front page of Archewell, the foundation he and Meghan set up in their son Archie's name.

*'Compassion in action,' the title headline boasts. 'Through our non-profit work, as well as creative activations, we drive systemic cultural change across all communities, one act of compassion at a time.'*

How touching.

*And barely a day goes by without the pair of these selfless charitable souls telling us how deeply compassionate they are.

But they're not, are they?

In fact, it's hard to imagine a less compassionate pair of ruthless, heartless, selfish, shameless little grifters than the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.*

Meghan's disowned almost her entire family, including her father, Thomas.

Just as she has tossed away anyone in her life, from her ex-husband to friends and work colleagues who've ceased to be of use to her on her frenzied scramble up the global celebrity ladder.

And Harry's spent the past few weeks publicly trashing his family on any media outlet that will have him.

I didn't think the world's most spoiled brats could plunge any lower than their two-hour Oprah whine-athon in which they branded the royals a bunch of horrible uncaring racists without producing a shred of evidence to support their claims, and bitterly attacked the institution of the Monarchy whilst continuing to trade off their royal titles to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

But Harry's new orgy of unsavoury self-indulgent podcast tripe on was even worse.

*The Prince of Compassion used his latest interview (he gives a lot of interviews for a guy who quit Britain to safeguard his privacy, *doesn't he?) to launch an astonishing rant about the terrible 'genetic pain' he claims to have suffered at the hands of his awful father, and then said that Prince Charles has only been such a bad parent because he himself had been treated just as badly by HIS parents, the Queen and Prince Philip.

'I don't think we should be pointing the finger or blaming anybody,' Harry began, before immediately pointing the finger and blaming people, 'but certainly when it comes to parenting, if I've experienced some form of pain or suffering because of the pain or suffering that perhaps my father or my parents had suffered, I'm going to make sure I break that cycle so that I don't pass it on, basically. It's a lot of genetic pain and suffering that gets passed on. I started to piece it together and go 'okay, so this is where he went to school, this is what happened, I know this about his life, I also know that is connected to his parents so that means he's treated me the way he was treated, so how can I change that for my own kids?'

It's shameful enough that Harry is once again publicly hammering his father in public like this, just as he did to Oprah when he sounded like a petulant teenager as he berated Charles for cutting him off financially and not taking his calls.

But for him to implicitly criticise the Queen and Prince Philip for the 'genetic pain and suffering' they supposedly inflicted on Charles which then got inflicted on him is beneath contempt.

*Does it get any less compassionate, or more disgusting than condemning your grandparents just weeks after one of them died? Or, any more reprehensible than to compound the mourning Queen's misery by making her feel even worse?*

How terribly hurt she must have felt when she heard what her grandson had said about her.

*It takes a rare degree of self-obsessed uncaring narcissism to do that to a grieving woman of 95, yet the most shocking about Harry's outburst is that it wasn't really shocking at all.*

The guy's hit the self-destruct button and is now unravelling before our eyes.

The only remaining question, as the front page of the Daily Mail asked last week is '*HOW LOW WILL HARRY GO?'*

I fear the answer is a lot lower.

After all, the only currency and relevance he has left is exploiting his royal status, and he has to give his lucrative new paymasters at Spotify and Netflix their money's worth.

The British public has grown increasingly angry at Harry's behavior, as can be seen in recent polls showing support for him and his grasping wife plummeting to record negative depths.

And now the American public is turning on him too, incensed that he is belittling their right to free speech whilst reserving the right to spew off about anything he likes.

But I doubt he either comprehends the damage he is doing, or cares.

*Like his equally shameless and hypocritical wife, all Harry seems to worry about is promoting himself and making as much money as he can from the royal status that he pretends to hate but loves to commercialize.*

The double standard of this position is so staggering, it's little wonder that furious Palace officials are now clamouring for the Sussexes to voluntarily stop using their royal titles.

But they won't, obviously, because without them they become just another celebrity couple on the make in California, only without any discernible talent.

As I wrote when they announced in January 2020 that they were quitting Britain and royal duty, Queen should have stripped them of the titles then and there.

She didn't because Harry's her beloved grandson and she doesn't want to be seen to mistreat him.

Today, the case for cutting him off from his royal status is even stronger, yet I suspect the Queen is still resisting all calls to do so, because she is an inherently decent woman and has a far greater loyalty to her family than Harry is showing.

*However, we've surely reached the point where she has to put the future of Monarchy before a couple of renegades way down the succession food-chain who are intent on wrecking it?

On the Archewell website, the Sussexes claim they are 'serving the Monarchy*, honouring the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II', insist they 'deeply believe in the role of The Monarchy and their commitment to Her Majesty..' and vow 'their roles will continue to reflect their sense of duty and allegiance to the Monarch.'

Sadly, as we can all see, this is complete bullsh*t.

With every word that now comes from his increasingly cruel mouth, Harry does more damage to the reputation of not just the Royal Family but the institution they serve.

The Queen is the head of that institution and its greatest protector.

*Her grandson's gone rogue and seems intent on destroying everything she's worked so hard to preserve.

It's time she showed him that the Monarchy is bigger than his pathetically bruised, fragile and victimhood-dominated ego and rendered him and Meghan plain title-less civilians.*

As for Harry, if I were Prince Charles, then I'd be tempted to borrow the words of Rocky Balboa when his son began behaving like this.

'Let me tell you something you already know,' Rocky said. 'The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard ya hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done! Now if you know what you're worth then go out and get what you're worth. But ya gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of him, or her, or anybody! Cowards do that.'

Exactly.
Harry's gone from being a courageous war hero to a spineless whiny cry baby who blames his family for all his supposed woes and who like his wife, shamelessly and cynically weaponises issues like mental health and racism to silence critics.
Neither he nor Meghan shows an ounce of the compassion they love to preach about to those closest to them.
Nor do they seem to appreciate just how chronically unself-aware they sound constantly bleating about their poor oppressed lives from the comfort of their $11 million Californian mansion, while much of the world reels from a deadly pandemic.
*Harry has lost his country, his dignity and now seems to be losing his mind too as he condemns everything from his grieving grandmother to free speech.
It's time His Royal Hypocrite stopped abusing his family, stopped moaning about everything all the bloody time, stopped exploiting his royal titles for huge financial gain, stopped trashing America's constitution - and grew a pair.*









						PIERS MORGAN: Harry's attack on free speech makes HIM look bonkers
					

Prince Harry has just declared the First Amendment to be 'bonkers.' His extraordinary outburst came during an interview  with actor Dax Shephard.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I think you're giving him too much credit, he's just what he said he is, i.e. dumb.
> 
> His Madame Tussaud's dummy is looking cleverer by the day. The intellectual equivalent to Dorian Gray's picture in the attic.
> 
> He's not fit to parade and/or talk. Hasn't he got a bathroom (or two) he can stay snd keep quiet in?
> 
> View attachment 5085747


Oh, I agree he is dumb. This would be sanctioned by SS. I'm thinking publicity ploy because there is no damage control yet. They are letting the story blow up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, I had heard before but Lady CC mentioned it during her last video in passing: these are the people who tried to lay down the law while living at Frogmore - the whole two minutes - to their neighbours. They were NOT to talk to them, their dog (!) or even look at them unless one of them initiated contact.

Like...what. I'm a shy introvert and I swear to the universe I'd have chatted them up whenever I saw them just to spite them (I'm the person who'll sometimes hide in a supermarket aisle so I don't have to greet a neighbour). WTF do they think they are? BUT so it doesn't surprise me that apparently they think everyone but them should be censored.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Thank you for the UK side of this, I knew the law was different and was hoping someone would provide a link for my education
> 
> If H was to say things in the UK it was not so much due to law as to custom for the BRF ie the BRF does not intrude on government, laws etc
> 
> OK,  so, the BRF is kinda, sorta supposed to be silent/silenced. Is that AWFUL ?  Not really, it is commonplace, everyone is supposed to hold his tongue at times, at work, in social situations - limiting one's speech is a UNIVERSAL issue in life, as is handling the collateral damage when you say the wrong thing
> 
> So to me, the BRF is not more or less silenced than mere mortals, I dont talk about politics in public either, and TPFers must not do so either here



The BRF is silent because it above commenting on laws. This is because whichever party put up a bill or passed the act, the monarch is supposed to be impartial (at least in public)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

xincinsin said:


> There was a fictionalized account in a women's magazine a few years ago about how a woman with extensive work done snagged a rich guy, and was suspected of infidelity when she gave birth to a child who looked like neither of them. Not sure if the magazine meant it to be a cautionary tale.


I think that really happened in China(?).  I remember reading about it.


----------



## purseinsanity

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s just basic good manners.  “When in Rome” and all that.
> You’re new, its not your culture or your country, just stfu and take the time to understand and learn the history and the nuance of where you are.
> I just can’t get over how foolish Harry and Meghan are to be leaving all this cr*p on record.  Pretty soon the good citizens of Chunga Chunga are going to be their last hope.


Plus, does the idiot not realize that the Constitution was created as a result of breaking free from the rule of his ancestors?  We don't care about your opinion Harry!  To very loosely paraphrase Coco Chanel, we don't care what you think about our Constitution, we don't care about you at all!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> I think that really happened in China(?).  I remember reading about it.



Yeah...didn't the husband seek divorce because the kid turned out "ugly" and he felt betrayed? (not in the sense of "You cheated" but "You never told me this was not your original face")


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Does Harry realize the First Amendment is what gives Americans the right to say such things as "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK", "The Royal Family is racist", "I didn't know about the British Commonwealth", and "My privacy is important to me"? It also gives other Americans the right to question one's statements even when the gutless media refuses to.


I think that part went over his head.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Oh, I agree he is dumb. This would be sanctioned by SS. I'm thinking publicity ploy because there is no damage control yet. They are letting the story blow up.



Well, it's pretty hard to defend. 

SS are probably in the kitchen cooking with MM on a feel-good diversion. They prob. just can't agree or find a positive/benign that will diffuse such an own goal.

Honestly, you couldn't make it up. Next H&M podcast: How to throw everything away in only 18 months: Part1. Tips and Tricks  .


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> And my favorite responses to that story:
> 
> "Sunday Riddle: How many more Hollywood-style interviews will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle give before they finally achieve the privacy they claim to be so desperate for?" replied Candace Owens.
> 
> "I wonder if he also thinks the Fourth Amendment is ‘bollocks’ and the 14th Amendment is ‘pish-posh,’" added author, filmmaker, and podcast host, Dinesh D'Souza.


lol as if he knows any of the others


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> I think that really happened in China(?).  I remember reading about it.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah...didn't the husband seek divorce because the kid turned out "ugly" and he felt betrayed? (not in the sense of "You cheated" but "You never told me this was not your original face")


Possibly. I read in English and Chinese, and often don't recall where I read what. I thought it might have been South Korea because cosmetic surgery is so common there that parents give new noses as graduation gifts.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I think that part went over his head.


Or, “In one ear and out the other since there’s nothing in the middle to stop it.”


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The fall out from Dax’s show continues:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry calls the First Amendment 'bonkers'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Thursday told Dax Shepard that he thought the First Amendment was 'bonkers', adding that he knew he had a lot to learn. Harry's comments raised eyebrows in the U.S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iirc many celebs dislike that the press are allowed to take photos of their kids and not blur the faces. There are simpler solutions than trashing our 1st amendment freedoms.


I'd have to agree with Meghan McCain on this one


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> I am not opposed to a little bit of fillers/botox. It's when your face is frozen and distorted that it's an issue. I have botox about every 3 years in my forehead.


respectfully, because I don't do this and maybe I'm wrong.  but if you only do it every three years isn't it wearing off way sooner than that?  do you really need it?


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Oh, I agree he is dumb. This would be sanctioned by SS. I'm thinking publicity ploy because there is no damage control yet. They are letting the story blow up.



Is it blowing up? It might be for those of us who see through their phoniness. For most Americans though, Meghan and Harry simply are not important or interesting enough to follow. The Oprah interview got tons of press attention. Philip's funeral got less. Everything since then about them has been relegated to the gossip pages.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Is it blowing up? It might be for those of us who see through their phoniness. For most Americans though, Meghan and Harry simply are not important or interesting enough to follow. The Oprah interview got tons of press attention. Philip's funeral got less. Everything since then about them has been relegated to the gossip pages.


we'll see
Last I heard Meghan McCain was defending them - she (or one of them on the view) said the RF kicked them out.  Now she's calling Harry on this dumb remarks.  (she is a conservative though)


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> we'll see
> Last I heard Meghan McCain was defending them - she (or one of them on the view) said the RF kicked them out.  Now she's calling Harry on this dumb remarks.  (she is a conservative though)



I don’t think in America the right to free speech is supported based on political affiliation. Even “woke liberals” like me believe it is foundational, so not the best issue to attack if you want to ingratiate yourself to Americans.


----------



## scarlet555

I'm starting to see why Douchess is not allowing Douche to speak in public without her hand squeeze directions and back pat directions.  Though she doesn't do much better, except from borrowed plagiarized speech/talk.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> I don’t think in America the right to free speech is supported based on political affiliation. Even “woke liberals” like me believe it is foundational, so not the best issue to attack if you want to ingratiate yourself to Americans.


definitely I agree but will "liberals" or POC turn on them? or even criticize them?  hasn't happened so far (unless I've missed something since Harry's stupid remarks)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Maybe Harry's faux pas was not a faux pas after all. Perhaps it was a deliberate publicity ploy. Nothing like insulting the Constitution to get nationwide, even global, attention. Then, when the frenzy is at its peak, the weeping mermaid makes an appearance to blame it all on the BRF. She will claim that those racist cads have silenced Harry all his life, till he cannot understand the importance of the first amendment. Then she calls on her fellow Americans to save her husband. They must aid her in deprogramming Harry, reverse his brainwashing, etc etc. One of the qualities I admire most in Americans is their willingness to help the unfortunate. She will tap right into that part of the national psyche and there will be a tsunami of sympathy.
> 
> What do you think?


Please, pretty please, don't give the witch of Montecito any ideas. Some of us believe they have spies on this blog. We know she will try anything to stay relevant.


----------



## lalame

To be fair to Harry, he said pretty clearly in the podcast that he didn't understand the First Amendment yet so he shouldn't really talk about it. He said it sounds bonkers to him but he doesn't know enough about it. He got a little TOO comfortable. Dax did correct him on some of his assumptions though.


----------



## marietouchet

interestingly whitewashed version of Dax interview from the Times, no mention of grandmother and late grandfather, H almost comes out well therein 
and of course the bonkers discussion is omitted


I wanted out in my twenties, says Harry 






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> definitely I agree but will "liberals" or POC turn on them? or even criticize them?  hasn't happened so far (unless I've missed something since Harry's stupid remarks)



I don’t think the liberal media, especially the liberal gossip media, represents all liberal opinions (from what I gather there are quite a few liberals on this thread who are not big fans of H&M). As in all issues, the media too often represents extremes on both sides, or whoever it pays to represent. I also don’t think most liberals care one way or the other about H&M. Can’t speak for POC since I’m not one but I doubt it’s any different.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Oh, I agree he is dumb. This would be sanctioned by SS. I'm thinking publicity ploy because there is no damage control yet. They are letting the story blow up.



Exactly.  He wants to change the law so kids’ faces are blurred out, just like in the UK.  Iirc he and Orlando and Dax and other celebs have signed a petition to make these changes.  There may be other laws he wants changed, too.  Undoubtedly, this is his next podcast talk. If/when the changes are made, he will claim credit for ‘fixing’ America.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Some Stan account used this series of pics from the Jamaica wedding (you know, where Harry is really drunk and his current wife is really p*ssed) to illustrate how they were meant to be. I hadn't seen this particular gem before:


----------



## CarryOn2020

We need to line up and kiss his feet. He is spreading his enlightenment all over ignorant America. 
Seriously, all of this egotistical bs brought to you by OW.









						Harry includes footage of himself at Diana's funeral in Apple TV show
					

The Apple TV show 'The Me You Can't See' set for broadcast on Friday, features tearful interviews with Lady Gaga, Glenn Close and Ms Winfrey herself as well a Syrian refugee named Fawzi.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m so confused, why would a Stan account use that picture!? She looks unhinged!


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly.  He wants to change the law so kids’ faces are blurred out, just like in the UK.  Iirc he and Orlando and Dax and other celebs have signed a petition to make these changes.  There may be other laws he wants changed, too.  Undoubtedly, this is his next podcast talk. If/when the changes are made, he will claim credit for ‘fixing’ America.



It is against the law in some states but I can't understand why sometimes I see them blurred and sometimes I don't.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m so confused, why would a Stan account use that picture!? She looks unhinged!



I don't know! They wrote up a whole story how them being there was a signal to the world how serious they were etc. I was like "Geez, couldn't you find some flattering pics and an occasion where it's not rumoured one party invited themselves after being dumped???"


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Maybe Harry's faux pas was not a faux pas after all. Perhaps it was a deliberate publicity ploy. Nothing like insulting the Constitution to get nationwide, even global, attention. Then, when the frenzy is at its peak, the weeping mermaid makes an appearance to blame it all on the BRF. She will claim that those racist cads have silenced Harry all his life, till he cannot understand the importance of the first amendment. Then she calls on her fellow Americans to save her husband. They must aid her in deprogramming Harry, reverse his brainwashing, etc etc. One of the qualities I admire most in Americans is their willingness to help the unfortunate. She will tap right into that part of the national psyche and there will be a tsunami of sympathy.
> 
> What do you think?


Possibly, especially given MM stating she read IR but didn’t know anything about the BRF.
Ignorance is cute and quirky remember!
They are just a pair of darling 40-year old ingenues!


marietouchet said:


> Thank you for the UK side of this, I knew the law was different and was hoping someone would provide a link for my education
> 
> If H was to say things in the UK it was not so much due to law as to custom for the BRF ie the BRF does not intrude on government, laws etc
> 
> OK,  so, the BRF is kinda, sorta supposed to be silent/silenced. Is that AWFUL ?  Not really, it is commonplace, everyone is supposed to hold his tongue at times, at work, in social situations - limiting one's speech is a UNIVERSAL issue in life, as is handling the collateral damage when you say the wrong thing
> 
> So to me, the BRF is not more or less silenced than mere mortals, I dont talk about politics in public either, and TPFers must not do so either here


Yeah exactly. He’s just completely disconnected from reality.
When you hear what he has to say, the policy of silence makes a lot of sense. You see it all the time, celebs cultivate an air of mysterious silence and then often when they do open their mouths they are not as edified and eloquent as their presentation would have you believe.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, I had heard before but Lady CC mentioned it during her last video in passing: these are the people who tried to lay down the law while living at Frogmore - the whole two minutes - to their neighbours. They were NOT to talk to them, their dog (!) or even look at them unless one of them initiated contact.
> 
> Like...what. I'm a shy introvert and I swear to the universe I'd have chatted them up whenever I saw them just to spite them (I'm the person who'll sometimes hide in a supermarket aisle so I don't have to greet a neighbour). WTF do they think they are? BUT so it doesn't surprise me that apparently they think everyone but them should be censored.


I agree. I think I’d be a little adversarial if someone announced I’m not allowed to look at them. Perhaps I’d have a coat printed with a picture of Harry in a nazi costume on it and wear it for my little outings.


lalame said:


> To be fair to Harry, he said pretty clearly in the podcast that he didn't understand the First Amendment yet so he shouldn't really talk about it. He said it sounds bonkers to him but he doesn't know enough about it. He got a little TOO comfortable. Dax did correct him on some of his assumptions though.


What we have here is apophasis and litotes:
“I really shouldn’t say anything negative about XY and Z....oh I really shouldn’t mention how wrong XY and Z are.....”

You are obviously still talking about it and are in fact drawing attention to your statement but you still have a degree of deniability.

Harry is clearly not an intellectual but he’s had a lot of rhetoric and speech tutoring so it’s not unreasonable to assume he’s picked up the odd thing.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> To be fair to Harry, he said pretty clearly in the podcast that he didn't understand the First Amendment yet so he shouldn't really talk about it. He said it sounds bonkers to him but he doesn't know enough about it. He got a little TOO comfortable. Dax did correct him on some of his assumptions though.



I agree, he did say he didn't understand it well. And since he doesn't understand the history behind it or what it truly means, he shouldn't really have an opinion on it. Having an opinion on something you are not fully aware of is biased and ignorant. 

I don't really see how the first amendment is bonkers. I'm just like Harry, a brit born and bread that moved to the states, and I would never insult my adopted countries laws or way of life unless I was fully informed and thought it was harmful.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Or, “In one ear and out the other since there’s nothing in the middle to stop it.”


In other words, H's noggin is a perfect echo chamber.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> To be fair to Harry, he said pretty clearly in the podcast that he didn't understand the First Amendment yet so he shouldn't really talk about it. He said it sounds bonkers to him but he doesn't know enough about it. He got a little TOO comfortable. Dax did correct him on some of his assumptions though.


But, it further exposes him as someone who admits he says things whether he knows the subject or not, in this case the First Amendment. This quote, unfortunately for him, clearly demonstrates his mindset: "but you can find a loophole in anything and you can capitalise or exploit what's not said, rather than uphold what is said."  

I read the transcript posted along with the article about it. Some of it did not make sense, and  some of it is so hypocritical it's ludicrous, from his discussion of hate in social media:

   "Why the hell would I share something that I hate with somebody else? I'm gonna share the good stuff. And then collectively, we can flip the whole thing and then suddenly, compassion, love and empathy becomes the driving force rather than - Sorry, got a little bit a little bit a little bit deep there". And then of course, he proceeds to do exactly that, spew his hate. 

 He is not an extemporaneous thinker, not being snarky, just factual.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Possibly, especially given MM stating she read IR but didn’t know anything about the BRF.
> Ignorance is cute and quirky remember!
> They are just a pair of darling 40-year old ingenues!
> 
> Yeah exactly. He’s just completely disconnected from reality.
> When you hear what he has to say, the policy of silence makes a lot of sense. You see it all the time, celebs cultivate an air of mysterious silence and then often when they do open their mouths they are not as edified and eloquent as their presentation would have you believe.
> 
> I agree. I think I’d be a little adversarial if someone announced I’m not allowed to look at them. Perhaps I’d have a coat printed with a picture of Harry in a nazi costume on it and wear it for my little outings.
> 
> What we have here is litotes:
> “I really shouldn’t say anything negative about XY and Z....oh I really shouldn’t mention how wrong XY and Z are.....”
> 
> You are obviously still talking about it and are in fact drawing attention to your statement but you still have a degree of deniability.
> 
> Harry is clearly not an intellectual but he’s had a lot of rhetoric and speech tutoring so it’s not unreasonable to assume he’s picked up the odd thing.





Shopaholic2021 said:


> I agree, he did say he didn't understand it well. And since he doesn't understand the history behind it or what it truly means, he shouldn't really have an opinion on it. Having an opinion on something you are not fully aware of is biased and ignorant.
> 
> I don't really see how the first amendment is bonkers. I'm just like Harry, a brit born and bread that moved to the states, and I would never insult my adopted countries laws or way of life unless I was fully informed and thought it was harmful.



Yeah I'm not saying it's right but I felt like the context was a little misleading in the media. I do think there's a difference between "This law is nuts" vs "This law sounds nuts to me but I know I just don't fully understand it yet" and some outlets are making it seem like he was stating a strong opinion. We all sometimes DO have opinions about things we aren't experts on but say "but i'm not there so I'm not sure. Someone correct me if I'm wrong."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Possibly, especially given MM stating she read IR but didn’t know anything about the BRF.
> Ignorance is cute and quirky remember!
> They are just a pair of darling 40-year old ingenues!
> 
> Yeah exactly. He’s just completely disconnected from reality.
> When you hear what he has to say, the policy of silence makes a lot of sense. You see it all the time, celebs cultivate an air of mysterious silence and then often when they do open their mouths they are not as edified and eloquent as their presentation would have you believe.
> 
> I agree. I think I’d be a little adversarial if someone announced I’m not allowed to look at them. Perhaps I’d have a coat printed with a picture of Harry in a nazi costume on it and wear it for my little outings.
> 
> What we have here is litotes:
> “I really shouldn’t say anything negative about XY and Z....oh I really shouldn’t mention how wrong XY and Z are.....”
> 
> You are obviously still talking about it and are in fact drawing attention to your statement but you still have a degree of deniability.
> 
> Harry is clearly not an intellectual but he’s had a lot of rhetoric and speech tutoring so it’s not unreasonable to assume he’s picked up the odd thing.



Or is it apophasis, the old technique that Cicero used most effectively against Catilin?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophasis 
*Apophasis *is a rhetorical device wherein the speaker or writer brings up a subject by either denying it, or denying that it should be brought up. Accordingly, it can be seen as a rhetorical relative of ironic .


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> But, it further exposes him as someone who admits he says things whether he knows the subject or not, in this case the First Amendment. This quote, unfortunately for him, clearly demonstrates his mindset: "but you can find a loophole in anything and you can capitalise or exploit what's not said, rather than uphold what is said."
> 
> I read the transcript posted along with the article about it. Some of it did not make sense, and  some of it is so hypocritical it's ludicrous, from his discussion of hate in social media:
> 
> "Why the hell would I share something that I hate with somebody else? I'm gonna share the good stuff. And then collectively, we can flip the whole thing and then suddenly, compassion, love and empathy becomes the driving force rather than - Sorry, got a little bit a little bit a little bit deep there". And then of course, he proceeds to do exactly that, spew his hate.
> 
> He is not an extemporaneous thinker, not being snarky, just factual.



Oh can you share the transcript? I listened to the podcast but definitely zoned out in a few areas... it would probably be helpful to others too who don't want to listen to it anyway.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or is it apophasis, the old technique that Cicero used most effectively against Catilin?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophasis
> *Apophasis *is a rhetorical device wherein the speaker or writer brings up a subject by either denying it, or denying that it should be brought up. Accordingly, it can be seen as a rhetorical relative of ironic .


Even better. Ultimately, professing ignorance of something and then making a declarative statement on it is at least one form of irony. 

I mean if we take the wider context that he so hated being negged by the evil British press that he decided to move to the country of the first amendment it’s even funnier.


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> "Why the hell would I share something that I hate with somebody else? I'm gonna share the good stuff. And then collectively, we can flip the whole thing and then suddenly, compassion, love and empathy becomes the driving force rather than - Sorry, got a little bit a little bit a little bit deep there". And then of course, he proceeds to do exactly that, spew his hate.



You are so right with this. I missed him saying that but yikes, self-awareness much? The good stuff he's shared - dissatisfaction with media, dissatisfaction with family, dissatisfaction with how he was parented, dissatisfaction with UK, dissatisfaction with Joe Rogan, dissatisfaction with people who XYZ, dissatisfaction with First Amendment.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> To be fair to Harry, he said pretty clearly in the podcast that he didn't understand the First Amendment yet so he shouldn't really talk about it. He said it sounds bonkers to him but he doesn't know enough about it. He got a little TOO comfortable. Dax did correct him on some of his assumptions though.


well, he knew this was a podcast, not a personal conversation so saying that makes him look like a dummy IMO.....don't you think before you open your mouth in this situation?


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> You are so right with this. I missed him saying that but yikes, self-awareness much? The good stuff he's shared - dissatisfaction with media, dissatisfaction with family, dissatisfaction with how he was parented, dissatisfaction with UK, dissatisfaction with Joe Rogan, dissatisfaction with people who XYZ, dissatisfaction with First Amendment.


Sorry, I can't seem to capture the url, but this is the headline, from the Daily Mail. The transcript is waay down at the end, just keep scrolling. It was kind of a slog as a read and I ended up skipping to his parts of the conversation. Then had to deal with his tedious use of "like" as an introduction to much of what he was saying.

*'Soon he will not be wanted on either side of the pond': Prince Harry sparks furious backlash in the US after calling the First Amendment 'bonkers' despite admitting he doesn't 'understand it'*


----------



## jennlt

rose60610 said:


> And my favorite responses to that story:
> 
> "Sunday Riddle: How many more Hollywood-style interviews will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle give before they finally achieve the privacy they claim to be so desperate for?" replied Candace Owens.
> 
> *"I wonder if he also thinks the Fourth Amendment is ‘bollocks’ and the 14th Amendment is ‘pish-posh,’" added author, filmmaker, and podcast host, Dinesh D'Souza.*



I doubt he's made it past the first amendment.


----------



## jelliedfeels

NM


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some Stan account used this series of pics from the Jamaica wedding (you know, where Harry is really drunk and his current wife is really p*ssed) to illustrate how they were meant to be. I hadn't seen this particular gem before:
> 
> View attachment 5085815


These pictures make me laugh, but I never put much stock into stills that capture a second in time.  I'm telling you, if someone did this to me, I'd look irate, delusional, happy, confused, etc.  I'd rather see a video for more proof!


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Sorry, I can't seem to capture the url, but this is the headline, from the Daily Mail. The transcript is waay down at the end, just keep scrolling. It was kind of a slog as a read and I ended up skipping to his parts of the conversation. Then had to deal with his tedious use of "like" as an introduction to much of what he was saying.
> 
> *'Soon he will not be wanted on either side of the pond': Prince Harry sparks furious backlash in the US after calling the First Amendment 'bonkers' despite admitting he doesn't 'understand it'*



Unfortunately, Harry isn't really getting backlash here in the US. The mainstream media is still protecting him and instead are using this story as a way to bash conservatives. Apparently only conservatives are upset about his insult to free speech. From _Newsweek_:

*Prince Harry Calls First Amendment 'Bonkers,' Sparks Conservative Backlash*
Prince Harry faced a backlash over comments denouncing the First Amendment as "bonkers"—which led right-wing commentators to invoke Independence Day.

The Duke of Sussex said the constitutional right to free speech was "a huge subject and one which I don't understand" but also indicated he had a lot he wanted to say about it.

Harry and Meghan Markle have sparked debates about freedom of expression in Britain through lawsuits and complaints about privacy.

However, he did not outline why exactly the First Amendment had provoked his reaction.

"I don't want to start going down the First Amendment route because that's a huge subject and one which I don't understand because I've only been here a short time, but you can find a loophole in anything.

"You can capitalize or exploit what's not said rather than uphold what is said."

The comments were seized on over the weekend by various Conservative commentators, such as Fox News host Laura Ingraham saying: "Don't let the door knob hit you, Windsor."

Meghan McCain, co-host of _The View_, tweeted: "We fought a war in 1776 so we don't have to care what you say or think.

"That being said, you have chosen to seek refuge from your homeland here and thrive because all of what our country has to offer and one of the biggest things is the 1st amendment—show some utter respect."

Former Fox News and NBC host Megyn Kelly wrote: "'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.' (Lincoln or Twain or someone smarter than Prince Harry.)"

********** Senator Ted Cruz posted: "Nice that he can say that." And Texas GOP Congressman Dan Crenshaw tweeted: "Well I just doubled the size of my Independence Day party."

While it is not clear exactly what Harry meant, the duke and duchess have used the law in disputes with the media on multiple occasions in the U.K. but would likely face a more difficult terrain bringing similar cases to U.S. courts.

In the U.K., freedom of expression is balanced against other competing aspects of law, such as the right to privacy under the Human Rights Act.

Britain's libel laws are also considered tougher on publishers than in America where there is protection for claims made about public figures.

Between them, Harry and Meghan brought six lawsuits in around a year, predominantly through the U.K. courts.

Their action against paparazzi agency Splash News at the High Court in London forced the company to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy even though the shots of Meghan and her son Archie had been taken in a public park.

The U.K. arm of Splash has already settled the case and gone into administration, while the U.S. branch has applied for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

In contrast, when U.S. paparazzi agency X17 used a drone to photograph baby Archie playing in the private grounds of Tyler Perry's Los Angeles mansion, the consequences of the couple's U.S. lawsuit appeared less severe. The company was forced into an apology and to pay a portion of the family's costs but continued trading.

Meghan and Archie were photographed again recently by agency Backgrid as the pregnant duchess picked up her son from school.

The images were published on Page Six potentially creating a new legal headache for the couple who face trying to find a way to sue under U.S. law if they are to maintain the line in the sand they drew with the British media over privacy.









						Prince Harry Calls First Amendment 'Bonkers,' Sparks Conservative Backlash
					

Prince Harry said the First Amendment was 'bonkers' and hinted he had a lot more he would like to add—leading Conservative commentators in the U.S. to reference Independence Day.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## queennadine

jennlt said:


> I doubt he's made it past the first amendment.


Episode 2 of Dax’s Podcast: Harry Discovers the Declaration of Independence


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> But, it further exposes him as someone who admits he says things whether he knows the subject or not, in this case the First Amendment. This quote, unfortunately for him, clearly demonstrates his mindset: "but you can find a loophole in anything and you can capitalise or exploit what's not said, rather than uphold what is said."
> 
> I read the transcript posted along with the article about it. Some of it did not make sense, and  some of it is so hypocritical it's ludicrous, from his discussion of hate in social media:
> 
> "Why the hell would I share something that I hate with somebody else? I'm gonna share the good stuff. And then collectively, we can flip the whole thing and then suddenly, compassion, love and empathy becomes the driving force rather than - Sorry, got a little bit a little bit a little bit deep there". And then of course, he proceeds to do exactly that, spew his hate.
> 
> He is not an extemporaneous thinker, not being snarky, just factual.



True hypocrite

but also, which bit was "deep"?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> well, he knew this was a podcast, not a personal conversation so saying that makes him look like a dummy IMO.....don't you think before you open your mouth in this situation?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Unfortunately, Harry isn't really getting backlash here in the US. The mainstream media is still protecting him and instead are using this story as a way to bash conservatives. Apparently only conservatives are upset about his insult to free speech. From _Newsweek_:
> 
> *Prince Harry Calls First Amendment 'Bonkers,' Sparks Conservative Backlash*
> Prince Harry faced a backlash over comments denouncing the First Amendment as "bonkers"—which led right-wing commentators to invoke Independence Day.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said the constitutional right to free speech was "a huge subject and one which I don't understand" but also indicated he had a lot he wanted to say about it.
> 
> Harry and Meghan Markle have sparked debates about freedom of expression in Britain through lawsuits and complaints about privacy.
> 
> However, he did not outline why exactly the First Amendment had provoked his reaction.
> 
> "I don't want to start going down the First Amendment route because that's a huge subject and one which I don't understand because I've only been here a short time, but you can find a loophole in anything.
> 
> "You can capitalize or exploit what's not said rather than uphold what is said."
> 
> The comments were seized on over the weekend by various Conservative commentators, such as Fox News host Laura Ingraham saying: "Don't let the door knob hit you, Windsor."
> 
> Meghan McCain, co-host of _The View_, tweeted: "We fought a war in 1776 so we don't have to care what you say or think.
> 
> "That being said, you have chosen to seek refuge from your homeland here and thrive because all of what our country has to offer and one of the biggest things is the 1st amendment—show some utter respect."
> 
> Former Fox News and NBC host Megyn Kelly wrote: "'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.' (Lincoln or Twain or someone smarter than Prince Harry.)"
> 
> ********** Senator Ted Cruz posted: "Nice that he can say that." And Texas GOP Congressman Dan Crenshaw tweeted: "Well I just doubled the size of my Independence Day party."
> 
> While it is not clear exactly what Harry meant, the duke and duchess have used the law in disputes with the media on multiple occasions in the U.K. but would likely face a more difficult terrain bringing similar cases to U.S. courts.
> 
> In the U.K., freedom of expression is balanced against other competing aspects of law, such as the right to privacy under the Human Rights Act.
> 
> Britain's libel laws are also considered tougher on publishers than in America where there is protection for claims made about public figures.
> 
> Between them, Harry and Meghan brought six lawsuits in around a year, predominantly through the U.K. courts.
> 
> Their action against paparazzi agency Splash News at the High Court in London forced the company to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy even though the shots of Meghan and her son Archie had been taken in a public park.
> 
> The U.K. arm of Splash has already settled the case and gone into administration, while the U.S. branch has applied for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
> 
> In contrast, when U.S. paparazzi agency X17 used a drone to photograph baby Archie playing in the private grounds of Tyler Perry's Los Angeles mansion, the consequences of the couple's U.S. lawsuit appeared less severe. The company was forced into an apology and to pay a portion of the family's costs but continued trading.
> 
> Meghan and Archie were photographed again recently by agency Backgrid as the pregnant duchess picked up her son from school.
> 
> The images were published on Page Six potentially creating a new legal headache for the couple who face trying to find a way to sue under U.S. law if they are to maintain the line in the sand they drew with the British media over privacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Calls First Amendment 'Bonkers,' Sparks Conservative Backlash
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said the First Amendment was 'bonkers' and hinted he had a lot more he would like to add—leading Conservative commentators in the U.S. to reference Independence Day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Let’s see what happens. The NYTimes included a mention that the podcast was a promo for the OW show. Yawn. The incessant OW connection is tiresome. All of 3 of them seem very thirsty.  Their heads may still be “in the sand”.

_After Meghan encouraged him to go to therapy, he said, “the bubble burst” and he “plucked his head out of the sand.”_








						Prince Harry Shares ‘Pain and Suffering’ of Growing Up in Royal Family (Published 2021)
					

In a wide-ranging interview for a podcast, Harry said his existence in the British monarchy had been “a mix between ‘The Truman Show’ and being in a zoo.”




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## papertiger

*"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle appear in trailer for Duke’s mental health documentary series The Me You Can’t See*

Lizzie Edmonds
5 hours ago







The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
(Apple TV)
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle appear in the trailer for the Duke of Sussex’s star-studded mental health documentary series The Me You Can’t See, which he created with Oprah Winfrey.
The trailer for the series - which sees a number of names including Harry and Winfrey open up about their mental health struggles - dropped on Monday ahead of its premiere this Friday, May 21, on AppleTV+.
Harry and Oprah are producers of the series - which was shot by four-time BAFTA Award-winning director Asif Kapadia who was behind Amy, the film about singer Amy Winehouse.
Meghan, 39, makes two short appearances in the trailer. In one, she stands behind her husband wearing a statement T-shirt reading “raising the future.” The other is previously seen footage of Meghan, who is pregnant with her second child - a girl, with the couple’s son Archie, two.




Meghan with her and Harry’s son ArchieApple TV
The docuseries also features singer, songwriter, and actress Lady Gaga, actress Glenn Close, Syrian refugee Fawzi, DeMar DeRozan of the NBA’s San Antonio Spurs, author and counselor Ambar, and many others.
Some 14 medical experts are also interviewed throughout the series to share their insights about mental health and treatment.
Lady Gaga said she wanted to share her mental health story as: “I have been through it and people need help.”
In the trailer, Harry says: “To make that decision to receive help is not a sign of weakness, In today’s world, more than ever, it is a sign of strength.”
Archive footage of a young Harry, now 36, at the funeral of his mother, Princess Diana, is also in the trailer.
It comes days after Harry, who is celebrating his three-year wedding anniversary with Meghan this week, said his life was “a mixture between The Truman Show and being in a zoo”.
...

Speaking on the podcast Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard, Harry said: “There is no blame.
“I don’t think we should be pointing the finger or blaming anybody, but certainly when it comes to parenting, if I’ve experienced some form of pain or suffering because of the pain or suffering that perhaps my father or my parents had suffered, I’m going to make sure I break that cycle so that I don’t pass it on, basically.
“It’s a lot of genetic pain and suffering that gets passed on anyway so we as parents should be doing the most we can to try and say ‘you know what, that happened to me, I’m going to make sure that doesn’t happen to you’.”
Harry also revealed as a young man he did not want to be a working royal: “I was in my early 20s and it was a case of, ‘I don’t want this job. I don’t want to be here. I don’t want to be doing this.’”
The Prince of Wales ignored questions about the Duke of Sussex who has suggested Charles’ parenting left him with “genetic pain and suffering”.
Charles ignored questions and carried on walking when asked about his son’s comments by a BBC reporter as he arrived for a visit to a family business in Cardiff hours after the podcast was broadcast."

*Raising the future: I think she's gone down a Moonbump or two *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> These pictures make me laugh, but I never put much stock into stills that capture a second in time.  I'm telling you, if someone did this to me, I'd look irate, delusional, happy, confused, etc.  I'd rather see a video for more proof!


Just for fun, here's a vid called Tarot by Andie where she sees Harry's situation much the same as most of us see it. Enjoy the revelations.


----------



## Clearblueskies

It’s all getting a bit boring isn’t it?  Just how many times do people want to listen to them moaning about their miseries with Oprah?  Surely the novelty’s wearing off?  And what’s the point of the therapy if it doesn’t make things better?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


>



I hate to say it, he looks intoxicated in a LOT of his pictures.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> Plus, does the idiot not realize that the Constitution was created as a result of breaking free from the rule of his ancestors?  We don't care about your opinion Harry!  To very loosely paraphrase Coco Chanel, we don't care what you think about our Constitution, we don't care about you at all!


Exactly! What about our _genetic pain_ that his ancestors inflicted upon our ancestors in the US?!


----------



## TC1

Whaaa, us rich folks have needed help with our mental health 
I've mentioned before, there was over a year waitlist to get my teenager into a therapy appt (at over $100/hr) I don't have sympathy for people who have the connections and cash to find immediate help..and still whine at every opportunity.
ETA of course no one has asked if MM is "ok" most of us could give a sh*t


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> *"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle appear in trailer for Duke’s mental health documentary series The Me You Can’t See*
> 
> Lizzie Edmonds
> 5 hours ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
> *Raising the future: I think she's gone down a Moonbump or two *



I don't see any bump at all????  Especially bending over like that?  WTF?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I am going through my saved for later videos and someone brought up an interesting point. They say when Harry put out that dramatic "Leave my girlfriend alone" message (which I think we've discussed and found a bit over the top) it was not that Duchess Disney was actually harassed by the press (in fact, I've always thought she probably had the time of her life, finally getting the attention she craved). They believe she put that into his ear to play on his Diana-related fears. And you know what? Knowing what we know now it makes an awful lot of sense, and it's also pretty horrible. She's been accused of similar stunts before (playing with his fear she could die etc.).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for fun, here's a vid called Tarot by Andie where she sees Harry's situation much the same as most of us see it. Enjoy the revelations.



I watched part of it and what can I say, I have no clue how good she is reading cards, but it makes a LOT of sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I don't see any bump at all????  Especially bending over like that?  WTF?



I just assumed it was old footage. Wasn't that mental health thing planned well before the interview?


----------



## gerryt

purseinsanity said:


> I don't see any bump at all????  Especially bending over like that?  WTF?


Ive just been looking at this too.  I probably have the chronological sequence wrong, because I dont think she’s pregnant in this video - I thought this mental health series came about after the ‘big one’??  Either that or she’s had her!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just assumed it was old footage. Wasn't that mental health thing planned well before the interview?


Oh, maybe?  I don't know.  I only keep up with these two here or wherever they're shoved in my face.


----------



## gerryt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I watched part of it and what can I say, I have no clue how good she is reading cards, but it makes a LOT of sense.


The Tarot by Andie series is a bit addictive - all the things you wish would happen!


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I don't see any bump at all????  Especially bending over like that?  WTF?



I think it must be old footage... they had a few old ones in that video. She looks really good here IMO! Minimal makeup and I can't see any obvious fillers.


----------



## gerryt

gerryt said:


> The Tarot by Andie series is a bit addictive - all the things you wish would happen!


There’s one up today that says their ‘removal from office’ or even abdication will happen in the next couple of days!  Keep your fingers crossed everyone!  Funnily enough, there was someone based in the UK saying so last night too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gerryt said:


> There’s one up today that says their ‘removal from office’ or even abdication will happen in the next couple of days!  Keep your fingers crossed everyone!  Funnily enough, there was someone based in the UK saying so last night too.



Honestly, that's not even giving me satisfaction. They no doubt deserve it, I just find it so sad for this family that is has to come to this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gerryt

Have W and K been looking at the best sellers chart today??


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> These pictures make me laugh, but I never put much stock into stills that capture a second in time.  I'm telling you, if someone did this to me, I'd look irate, delusional, happy, confused, etc.  I'd rather see a video for more proof!


agree...one's face caught for a moment can give a false impression I think


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> These pictures make me laugh, but I never put much stock into stills that capture a second in time.  I'm telling you, if someone did this to me, I'd look irate, delusional, happy, confused, etc.  I'd rather see a video for more proof!





sdkitty said:


> agree...one's face caught for a moment can give a false impression I think



I am honestly the WORST at this. If you could see how I come across in some candids you would laugh. I went to a Junior League event once that got captured by one of those party photography sites and my expression was so horrendous in one of them they posted it and had the Junior League request to remove the next day. LOL. It was mortifying. I looked like I was snubbing the entire event when really I was just telling a story. I have resting B face, resting clown face, resting sleep face, the whole spectrum.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I am honestly the WORST at this. If you could see how I come across in some candids you would laugh. I went to a Junior League event once that got captured by one of those party photography sites and my expression was so horrendous in one of them they posted it and had the Junior League request to remove the next day. LOL. It was mortifying. I looked like I was snubbing the entire event when really I was just telling a story. I have resting B face, resting clown face, resting sleep face, the whole spectrum.


I don't like having my picture taken esp in these days when people might put it on FB....I'm never happy with pics of myself.  and my DH is worse than me about it


----------



## purseinsanity

gerryt said:


> Have W and K been looking at the best sellers chart today??
> 
> View attachment 5086092


New idea for Meg.  Her next book can be "The King and His Bench"


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> I don't like having my picture taken esp in these days when people might put it on FB....I'm never happy with pics of myself.  and my DH is worse than me about it
> [/QUOTE


I can tell you a funny true story about pictures posted on Facebook. A few years back I had breast cancer - mastectomy and reconstruction.  I was part of a breast cancer closed support group on Facebook which helped hugely and I stayed on it for quite a while to support others.  A lady came on, saying she was dreading her up and coming reconstruction, didn’t know what it would look like and could she be cheeky and ask if anyone was pleased with theirs and willing to post a photo.  Well, mine was great (better than the real one!) so I duly posted a photo, minus my head, though of course my name was at the top of the post.  A few mins later my best mate rang.  “Err, did you mean to post that photo?”.   Technophobe that I am, I had posted it on my main page!  Frantic shrieking for help to my brother who was visiting, it was taken down a few mins later, though quite funny watching him try to do this without actually looking at a photo of his sisters boobs.   My friend said, don’t worry, no one will have been looking at it in the middle of the day and it was only up a few minutes, have a look at who’s gone on your page just so you know.  So I did and there were two people who had viewed it.  One was my friend.  The other was the vicar.  Never posted a photo since.


----------



## bisousx

gerryt said:


> I can tell you a funny true story about pictures posted on Facebook. A few years back I had breast cancer - mastectomy and reconstruction.  I was part of a breast cancer closed support group on Facebook which helped hugely and I stayed on it for quite a while to support others.  A lady came on, saying she was dreading her up and coming reconstruction, didn’t know what it would look like and could she be cheeky and ask if anyone was pleased with theirs and willing to post a photo.  Well, mine was great (better than the real one!) so I duly posted a photo, minus my head, though of course my name was at the top of the post.  A few mins later my best mate rang.  “Err, did you mean to post that photo?”.   Technophobe that I am, I had posted it on my main page!  Frantic shrieking for help to my brother who was visiting, it was taken down a few mins later, though quite funny watching him try to do this without actually looking at a photo of his sisters boobs.   My friend said, don’t worry, no one will have been looking at it in the middle of the day and it was only up a few minutes, have a look at who’s gone on your page just so you know.  So I did and there were two people who had viewed it.  One was my friend.  The other was the vicar.  Never posted a photo since.



Whoa! Thank goodness for true friends. And I am glad all seems to be well with you now


----------



## gerryt

bisousx said:


> Whoa! Thank goodness for true friends. And I am glad all seems to be well with you now


Yes, fine now thanks x


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh hi Vanessa. This. Is. Creepy. (also, whom's she smiling and batting eyelashes at? Harry's on her other side)


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh hi Vanessa. This. Is. Creepy. (also, whom's she smiling and batting eyelashes at? Harry's on her other side)


Prince William?


----------



## Chanbal

*Princess Diana's 60th Birthday Tribute*
“_Harry is demanding the Meghan be part of the official ceremony. She will not be able to attend in person because of the couple's second child, but *Harry is pushing to have comments prepared by Meghan included in the event or a video message featuring his wife released to the media the same day the brothers unveil the statue*,” sources tell Radar_."









						Prince Harry Demands Meghan Markle Be Officially Part Of His Mother Princess Diana's 60th Birthday Tribute Or He Won't Show
					

The late Diana would have turned 60 on June 1.




					radaronline.com


----------



## gerryt

purseinsanity said:


> Prince William?


My thought too!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So this was posted _a year ago _on the Exposing SMG blog. Guess Miss Vanessa confirmed it while going on Oprah. So bitter.



> There was also the subject of *royal titles for their children that were involved*. My source tells me that *Meghan hates the fact that Archie wasn’t given the title His Royal Highness Prince Archie Mountbatten Windsor, but yet* *Kate and William’s three children all have royal titles. *I mean this makes sense considering that William will be the next King and his children will be the IMMEDIATE royal family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Princess Diana's 60th Birthday Tribute*
> “_Harry is demanding the Meghan be part of the official ceremony. She will not be able to attend in person because of the couple's second child, but *Harry is pushing to have comments prepared by Meghan included in the event or a video message featuring his wife released to the media the same day the brothers unveil the statue*,” sources tell Radar_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Demands Meghan Markle Be Officially Part Of His Mother Princess Diana's 60th Birthday Tribute Or He Won't Show
> 
> 
> The late Diana would have turned 60 on June 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com




He can't be that insane, can he.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He can't be that insane, can he.



She is not going to miss an opportunity for her name to be near Diana...  She wants to suck up all that PR So it’s focussed on her not the Diana statue.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He can't be that insane, can he.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Princess Diana's 60th Birthday Tribute*
> “_Harry is demanding the Meghan be part of the official ceremony. She will not be able to attend in person because of the couple's second child, but *Harry is pushing to have comments prepared by Meghan included in the event or a video message featuring his wife released to the media the same day the brothers unveil the statue*,” sources tell Radar_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Demands Meghan Markle Be Officially Part Of His Mother Princess Diana's 60th Birthday Tribute Or He Won't Show
> 
> 
> The late Diana would have turned 60 on June 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com



I hope he carries out on his promise that he won't show


----------



## CarryOn2020

I find it intriguing that he would compare his life to The Truman Show [the true-man].  That movie came out in 1998, did he rent it?  Did he watch it multiple times? Does he _really_ understand it? Really?  Because his mega-million dollar wedding that could not have been more superficial and meaningless suggests otherwise.  Same for his insistence on those world tours, the wardrobe demands, the tiara, all of it says he is liar. Now, he insists on attending this statue show?????   Cancel it.  He is a media-w$ore. Deprive him of that global attention and, maybe, he will stop. 

A review: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...nniversary-jim-carrey-peter-weir-laura-linney





						The Truman Show - Movie Quotes - Rotten Tomatoes
					






					www.rottentomatoes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you missed this, another lie exposed:







A 2014 photograph of Meghan Markle posing with a magazine which has Kate Middelton on the cover has resurfaced online for the first time since The Duchess of Sussex quit the royal family 


It was also five years before Meghan would go-on to be the first guest-editor of the September issue of Vogue.









						Meghan Markle posed with a Kate Middleton magazine cover in 2014
					

An unearthed photograph has been revealed of Meghan Markle posing with a magazine that bore Kate Middleton on the cover - two years before the now-Duchess of Sussex met Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh hi Vanessa. This. Is. Creepy. (also, whom's she smiling and batting eyelashes at? Harry's on her other side)



She was flirting with her favorite lover, the camera.


----------



## gelbergirl

Can anyone explain to me why JCMH is talking about mental health on a Dax Shepard podcast.  Dax is a comedian/actor, why’s he talking about a serious topic


----------



## bisousx

gelbergirl said:


> Can anyone explain to me why JCMH is talking about mental health on a Dax Shepard podcast.  Dax is a comedian/actor, why’s he talking about a serious topic



There’s been a huge push from the psychology industry lately. Everytime I turn on the tv or a music app, there’s a celebrity is endorsing their mental health app, a drug or promoting therapy. While I get the positive side of destigmatizing mental health care, this wave of mental health advertising has gone too far and too creepy for my taste. Most people who didn’t have all the resources would have no choice but to deal with problems head on, self reflect and make corrections that they could look back on and feel proud of themselves. It can be a beautiful thing. Now it seems like the average person believes they *need* to be medicated and monitored.


----------



## Betty-Lou

I don't think the US liberal mainstream media will say or print anything negative about Prince Harry & Meghan Markle. They prefer to shove fake news and lies to the American people.

Nothing from the US media on the Procter & Gamble debacle. I wonder how much money Procter & Gamble spends on advertisements via ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, BBC, the whole lot.

Nothing from the US media on his podcast with Dax Shepard where he trashed his grandparents and his father.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Prince William?


Marcus Anderson?


----------



## lalame

gelbergirl said:


> Can anyone explain to me why JCMH is talking about mental health on a Dax Shepard podcast.  Dax is a comedian/actor, why’s he talking about a serious topic



Sounds like 2 different questions...

Why a serious topic on Dax's podcast: He often does have serious people on to talk about serious topics. It varies from celebs to regular people.

Why Harry is talking about mental health: Guess this is his new "thing." It's the brand he's trying to create for himself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> There’s been a huge push from the psychology industry lately. Everytime I turn on the tv or a music app, there’s a celebrity is endorsing their mental health app, a drug or promoting therapy. While I get the positive side of destigmatizing mental health care, this wave of mental health advertising has gone too far and too creepy for my taste. Most people who didn’t have all the resources would have no choice but to deal with problems head on, self reflect and make corrections that they could look back on and feel proud of themselves. It can be a beautiful thing. Now it seems like the average person believes they *need* to be medicated and monitored.



IMO it is because of the increase in suicides, especially among the teens. Most are due to covid restrictions which have brought up underlying mental health issues.  His complaining about an entitled life does no good. Zero.



lalame said:


> Sounds like 2 different questions...
> 
> Why a serious topic on Dax's podcast: He often does have serious people on to talk about serious topics. It varies from celebs to regular people.
> 
> Why Harry is talking about mental health: Guess this is his new "thing." It's the brand he's trying to create for himself.



Remember,  W&K and Hazzie started the heads together program, so he probably feels that gave him license to talk. Also, he sees himself as the god of Invictus [a program he copied from the USA]. How much time did he actually spend listening and helping people?  Not playing games, not at the bar, but doing the hard work that social workers do daily. Oh and don’t forget, Doria is an expert, too. 

As always, seek sound advice from mentally healthy people.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO it is because of the increase in suicides, especially among the teens. Most are due to covid restrictions which have brought up underlying mental health issues.  His complaining about an entitled life does no good. Zero.



It’s been a thing before covid blew up. The thing is, these therapy apps are not affordable to the average person at all. I view this influx of advertising similar to the cut throat beauty industry where they make $$ from tearing down women and banking on their insecurities. Instead of shaming you for wrinkles, they’re telling you that you need mental help, yet the average person can’t afford $80/hr cash/cc-only sessions multiple times per week. If these businesses truly stemmed from wanting to help others, why not price it affordably?


----------



## lalame

I think mental health is just a really accessible, easy topic for a celebrity to spearhead. You don't really have to do a lot of technical research or have deep expertise to talk about it - it can be all about your individual experience. He also dabbles with the environment but that's a limiting subject for him because at some point you DO have to draw on some expertise to have a real dialogue. With mental health, no one's going to challenge your experience with something so personal.


----------



## lalame

bisousx said:


> It’s been a thing before covid blew up. The thing is, these therapy apps are not affordable to the average person at all. I view this influx of advertising similar to the cut throat beauty industry where they make $$ from tearing down women and banking on their insecurities. Instead of shaming you for wrinkles, they’re telling you that you need mental help, yet the average person can’t afford $80/hr cash/cc-only sessions multiple times per week. If these businesses truly stemmed from wanting to help others, why not price it affordably?



I think Harry doesn't really promote therapy so much as general "be vulnerable, ask for help if you need it" - could be from friends, family, whatever. This is what I mean when I say it's an easy and accessible topic for him to be the face of... there's not much you can say to "if you need help, talk to a friend"


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think mental health is just a really accessible, easy topic for a celebrity to spearhead. You don't really have to do a lot of technical research or have deep expertise to talk about it - it can be all about your individual experience. He also dabbles with the environment but that's a limiting subject for him because at some point you DO have to draw on some expertise to have a real dialogue. With mental health, no one's going to challenge your experience with something so personal.



IMO mental health is too fragile to trust to an app or a distant website. The work needs to be face-to-face. An uneducated person can do lots of damage.  Protect your mind, look what happened Truman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

lalame said:


> I think Harry doesn't really promote therapy so much as general "be vulnerable, ask for help if you need it" - could be from friends, family, whatever. This is what I mean when I say it's an easy and accessible topic for him to be the face of... there's not much you can say to "if you need help, talk to a friend"



Oh, I wasn’t judging Harry for taking his position on mental health, since he has some experience on the matter (no sarcasm). IMO, mental health is being treated as the trend du jour such like acai berries and poke joints... all sorts of people/companies are capitalizing on it. This is why I think so many people are giving Harry platforms to discuss it, create shows about it... even though it’s kind of an otherwise boring and private topic.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO mental health is too fragile to trust to an app or a distant website. The work needs to be face-to-face. An uneducated person can do lots of damage.  Protect your mind, look what happened Truman.



If you're talking about BetterUp, I've never used it but it seems to simply be a program that connects you to face-to-face, human coaches. Similar to how you might find a professional/career coach on any platform. This is just their specialty. 

I've used similar companies like Lyra, which is focused on mental health providers. It's not much different than any other aggregator where you'd find and book a service like Airbnb, Yelp, Zocdoc, etc.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *IMO mental health is too fragile to trust to an app or a distant website.* The work needs to be face-to-face. An uneducated person can do lots of damage.  Protect your mind, look what happened Truman.


Yes! Mental health care should be administered by qualified medical professionals and not by these two-bit, sanctimonious and self-proclaimed experts.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Is it blowing up? It might be for those of us who see through their phoniness. *For most Americans though, Meghan and Harry simply are not important or interesting enough to follow. *The Oprah interview got tons of press attention. Philip's funeral got less. Everything since then about them has been relegated to the gossip pages.


I want this to be true. OTOH, it probably is, hence the non-stop drive to promote themselves.


----------



## LittleStar88

Oprah and a mental health book is the missing link in the Harry - Dax connection






						Oprah Winfrey and Bruce Perry, M.D., Ph.D with Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard for WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU? | Loyalty Bookstores
					






					www.loyaltybookstores.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

And, Dax and Kristin were anti-paps long ago, too.  IMO, the consumers are not the problem. The problem is the celeb who feeds this stuff. The more clicks they get, the bigger their checks.  It’s on them.

from 2014:








						Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard's scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi
					

Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard's scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi




					www.latimes.com
				



*Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard’s scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi*


Spoiler: Paps



By Susan Rohwer, guest blogger 
March 5, 2014 12 AM PT 
Consuming celebrity news, you might think that nothing is off-limits to the prying eyes of the paparazzi. In late January, actors Dax Shepard and his wife Kristen Bell launched a campaign on Twitter to end harassment they face from the paparazzi for pictures of their baby. Using the hashtags #pedorazzi and #NoKidsPolicy, Shepard and Bell called on the celebrity gossip media industry to stop using these images and for fans to stop buying them. 

Some media outlets took the tweeting seriously. Recently ET, People magazineand celebrity gossip blog Just Jared pledged to stop publishing unauthorized photos of celebrities’ kids. And on Wednesday, Perez Hilton posted his commitment to the cause.

These are notable first steps in limiting the kinds of unchecked access the public thinks it’s entitled to have into the lives of celebrities. But while we can congratulate these companies for this rare display of restraint within the celebrity media industry, we should recognize that there’s plenty of blame to go around.

Too many consumers display a twisted sense of entitlement when it comes to gawking at celebrities’ lives. From celebrity breakups to makeups, manicures to miscarriages, we demand unfettered access to the private lives of our celebrities. The paparazzi are the embodiment of that public demand.

While the paps certainly have the 1st Amendment on their side, it’s problematic when these photogs harass celebrities, and especially their children. Last August, during a hearing in support of a bill aimed at protecting the children of celebrities from paparazzi, actresses Jennifer Garner and Halle Berry described some of the harassment their families experience from photographers.

Nearly crying, Garner described how paparazzi aggressively follow her and her children. “I don’t want a gang of shouting, arguing, law-breaking photographers who camp out everywhere we are, all day, every day, to continue to traumatize my kids,” she said. Berry said that the constant presence of photographers yelling and taking pictures has made her young daughter afraid to go to school.

Senate Bill 606, which was signed into law in September, changes the definition of harassment to include photographing a child without a guardian’s permission. This is good, presumably, for protecting celebrities’ kids in California. Still, Shepard and Bell felt the need to launch their campaign _after_the law took effect Jan. 1. And it’s also worth highlighting a point The Times’ editorial board made last year: Law enforcement doesn’t do enough to enforce laws aimed at abusive paparazzi.

Explaining his concern, Shepard recently wrote in a blogpost:

“I personally believe, and I understand a lot of people differ on this point, that protecting her includes keeping her life private until the moment she decides otherwise. I think she is entitled to that. I think every minor is entitled to that. My wife and I, ever the approval-junkies, made a decision to get into show business and become public figures, but she has not. She hasn’t even decided if she prefers pureed carrots to peanut butter.”

*Shepard has said that he believes it’s up to the public to stop the out-of-control pursuit of celebrity gossip: “The consumer is the only one that can put an end to this. They are the only ones with real power.”*

But is that true?

While we should all reject these kinds of images, is that really enough? After all, we’re not the ones profiting from them, and throughout the chain of supply and demand, there’s much blame to share. It’s too easy to blame this solely on the paparazzi because they’re just doing their (distasteful) job. They wouldn’t be popping out of bushes at playgrounds frequented by celebs’ children if they didn’t get paid well for it.

Celebrity gossip is big business, and media companies have a financial interest in getting page views or selling magazines, regardless of how unsavory their practices. Our obsession with celebrity gossip has made companies such as Gawker and TMZ very rich.

Is this a sign of things to come for celebrity media? Maybe. But perhaps it’s also a shrewd business decision.

Celeb-focused media outlets need to be a little friendly with celebs if they want to continue to have “authorized” content to publish. Kristen Bell threatened to stop going to celebrity gossip magazines with authorized content if they continued running unauthorized photos of her baby. It’s possible that other celebrities would follow suit if none of the outlets made a move.

Putting a stop to publishing unauthorized photos of celebrities’ kids gives the parents and their child the space to make the choice to be in the public eye or not. While this isn’t a problem that many parents can relate to, we can relate to wanting to protect our kids from situations that could frighten or harm them, including protecting them from the harassment of paparazzi.






LittleStar88 said:


> Oprah and a mental health book is the missing link in the Harry - Dax connection
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey and Bruce Perry, M.D., Ph.D with Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard for WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU? | Loyalty Bookstores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.loyaltybookstores.com


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I hope he carries out on his promise that he won't show


Me too. It's going to be the PP funeral all over again with non-stop Me-again. I'd give a list of all the possible shenanigans the alliterative one might come up with, but I'll refrain in case @Maggie Muggins' spy alert is true.



csshopper said:


> I read the transcript posted along with the article about it. Some of it did not make sense, and  some of it is so hypocritical it's ludicrous, from his discussion of hate in social media:
> 
> "Why the hell would I share something that I hate with somebody else? I'm gonna share the good stuff. And then collectively, we can flip the whole thing and then suddenly, compassion, love and empathy becomes the driving force rather than - *Sorry, got a little bit a little bit a little bit deep there"*. And then of course, he proceeds to do exactly that, spew his hate.


This is hilarious  He wouldn't know "deep" if someone tossed him in the far end of the pool.



bag-mania said:


> She was flirting with her favorite lover, the camera.


ITA 
Checking that all the attention was on her.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> *"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle appear in trailer for Duke’s mental health documentary series The Me You Can’t See*
> 
> Lizzie Edmonds
> 5 hours ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex
> (Apple TV)



The typo on the shirt has been corrected, but the mystery of the bump continues unsolved!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you for the best laugh of the day, @Chanbal     Those comments are gold!
Agree with SeanG — they do have the same nose. Plus Hazzie’s teeth look chipped.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I find it intriguing that he would compare his life to The Truman Show [the true-man].  That movie came out in 1998, did he rent it?  Did he watch it multiple times? Does he _really_ understand it? Really?  Because his mega-million dollar wedding that could not have been more superficial and meaningless suggests otherwise.  Same for his insistence on those world tours, the wardrobe demands, the tiara, all of it says he is liar. Now, he insists on attending this statue show?????   Cancel it.  He is a media-w$ore. Deprive him of that global attention and, maybe, he will stop.
> 
> A review: https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywoo...nniversary-jim-carrey-peter-weir-laura-linney
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Truman Show - Movie Quotes - Rotten Tomatoes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rottentomatoes.com


On the Truman show...


----------



## Hermes Zen

I've enjoyed and learned from everyones discussion on fillers. Here's a vision I came across ... I'm at grandparent age and had to slowly scroll down to peak at the photos.    When I look in the mirror my mind plays tricks because I see me as a 30 year old still. Which I'm definitely NOT.   



> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/galleri...han-Harry-Kate-William-look-grandparents.html
> 
> *Gray heirs! Hilarious pictures show how Meghan, Harry, Kate and William might look as grandparents*


----------



## CarryOn2020

May is mental awareness month. That explains the uptick in ads, chats, etc.






						May is Mental Health Awareness Month | AHA
					

Quick answers on when is Mental Health Awareness Month in May. Hospitals and health systems play an important role in providing behavioral health care and helping patients find resources available in their community for those living with mental or behavioral health issues and to reduce stigma.




					www.aha.org


----------



## rose60610

When celebrities try to pass themselves off as experts or knowledgeable guides about mental health despite knowing nothing, they can do more harm than good. Mental health isn't some fluff issue. Those in need of help are not well served by princes or duchesses who alienate whole families and wallow in self pity as a result. M&H leveraged the mental health issue into a very lucrative paying gig, so it was in their financial interest to flame the BRF as a bunch of racists and trapped sods. And to dredge up Dead Diana 24/7. And claim PTSD at flashbulbs. Oh! So we're supposed to look up to them as being super strong heroic mortals who miraculously escaped the horrors of The Crown? But wait, rotten Charles isn't paying for their security--haul out the violins!  Taking advantage of the mental health issue under the pretense of caring just to pad your bank account is despicably low. Sadly, it's what we've come to expect out of these grifters.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry the 'dear' and 'darling boy'... How can one change so much?

*Prince Harry lavished praise on Prince Charles' parenting just three years ago, a resurfaced interview reveals.*
_
It comes after the Duke of Sussex criticised his father last week, saying Charles "suffered" during his childhood, and “treated me the way he was treated”.

Speaking about his upbringing as a royal, Harry told Dax Shepard his father passed on "genetic pain" and talked about how he wants to "break that cycle".

It is a far cry from the relationship the dad and son appeared to have when they chatted on BBC Radio 4's Today show back in 2017.

*During that broadcast, Harry enthused: "We could talk about this for hours and hours, which we always do, but not with a microphone in front of us.*

"I totally see it and I totally understand it because of all these years and conversations we've been having.

"I do end up picking your brains more now than I ever have done."
_
*The Prince of Wales referred to his son as "dear boy", adding: "Well darling boy it makes me very proud to think you understand."*









						Harry praises Prince Charles' parenting in clip three years before rift
					

The Duke of Sussex claimed he was suffering "genetic pain" and said he wanted to "break the cycle" last week in an apparent swipe at his dad, but back in 2017 he described how the pair would "talk for hours"




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> May is mental awareness month. That explains the uptick in ads, chats, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May is Mental Health Awareness Month | AHA
> 
> 
> Quick answers on when is Mental Health Awareness Month in May. Hospitals and health systems play an important role in providing behavioral health care and helping patients find resources available in their community for those living with mental or behavioral health issues and to reduce stigma.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aha.org



Something is very wrong with Harry's mental heath. It looks like he has replaced his previous memories with falsehoods.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> Harry the 'dear' and 'darling boy'... How can one change so much?
> 
> *Prince Harry lavished praise on Prince Charles' parenting just three years ago, a resurfaced interview reveals.*
> 
> _It comes after the Duke of Sussex criticised his father last week, saying Charles "suffered" during his childhood, and “treated me the way he was treated”.
> 
> Speaking about his upbringing as a royal, Harry told Dax Shepard his father passed on "genetic pain" and talked about how he wants to "break that cycle".
> 
> It is a far cry from the relationship the dad and son appeared to have when they chatted on BBC Radio 4's Today show back in 2017.
> 
> *During that broadcast, Harry enthused: "We could talk about this for hours and hours, which we always do, but not with a microphone in front of us.*
> 
> "I totally see it and I totally understand it because of all these years and conversations we've been having.
> 
> "I do end up picking your brains more now than I ever have done."_
> 
> *The Prince of Wales referred to his son as "dear boy", adding: "Well darling boy it makes me very proud to think you understand."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry praises Prince Charles' parenting in clip three years before rift
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex claimed he was suffering "genetic pain" and said he wanted to "break the cycle" last week in an apparent swipe at his dad, but back in 2017 he described how the pair would "talk for hours"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Dang, this just makes me so sad. Charles was clearly a flawed person in many ways but he tried his best... he tried to spare his kids from some of his worst experiences that WERE handed down, like Gordonstoun. He didn't abuse them, deprive them, or leave them to the wolves... he didn't deserve to be treated this way. For some reason Harry glorifies Diana but blames Charles. SMH.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gerryt said:


> I can tell you a funny true story about pictures posted on Facebook. A few years back I had breast cancer - mastectomy and reconstruction.  I was part of a breast cancer closed support group on Facebook which helped hugely and I stayed on it for quite a while to support others.  A lady came on, saying she was dreading her up and coming reconstruction, didn’t know what it would look like and could she be cheeky and ask if anyone was pleased with theirs and willing to post a photo.  Well, mine was great (better than the real one!) so I duly posted a photo, minus my head, though of course my name was at the top of the post.  A few mins later my best mate rang.  “Err, did you mean to post that photo?”.   Technophobe that I am, I had posted it on my main page!  Frantic shrieking for help to my brother who was visiting, it was taken down a few mins later, though quite funny watching him try to do this without actually looking at a photo of his sisters boobs.   My friend said, don’t worry, no one will have been looking at it in the middle of the day and it was only up a few minutes, have a look at who’s gone on your page just so you know.  So I did and there were two people who had viewed it.  One was my friend.  The other was the vicar.  Never posted a photo since.


That’s a very funny story. Oh well nothing wrong with being proud of your boobs they have been through a lot! 


bisousx said:


> There’s been a huge push from the psychology industry lately. Everytime I turn on the tv or a music app, there’s a celebrity is endorsing their mental health app, a drug or promoting therapy. While I get the positive side of destigmatizing mental health care, this wave of mental health advertising has gone too far and too creepy for my taste. Most people who didn’t have all the resources would have no choice but to deal with problems head on, self reflect and make corrections that they could look back on and feel proud of themselves. It can be a beautiful thing. Now it seems like the average person believes they *need* to be medicated and monitored.


I do worry about this. There’s a lot of quacks out there and hypochondriacs. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO mental health is too fragile to trust to an app or a distant website. The work needs to be face-to-face. An uneducated person can do lots of damage.  Protect your mind, look what happened Truman.





bisousx said:


> Oh, I wasn’t judging Harry for taking his position on mental health, since he has some experience on the matter (no sarcasm). IMO, mental health is being treated as the trend du jour such like acai berries and poke joints... all sorts of people/companies are capitalizing on it. This is why I think so many people are giving Harry platforms to discuss it, create shows about it... even though it’s kind of an otherwise boring and private topic.


 


rose60610 said:


> When celebrities try to pass themselves off as experts or knowledgeable guides about mental health despite knowing nothing, they can do more harm than good. Mental health isn't some fluff issue. Those in need of help are not well served by princes or duchesses who alienate whole families and wallow in self pity as a result. M&H leveraged the mental health issue into a very lucrative paying gig, so it was in their financial interest to flame the BRF as a bunch of racists and trapped sods. And to dredge up Dead Diana 24/7. And claim PTSD at flashbulbs. Oh! So we're supposed to look up to them as being super strong heroic mortals who miraculously escaped the horrors of The Crown? But wait, rotten Charles isn't paying for their security--haul out the violins!  Taking advantage of the mental health issue under the pretense of caring just to pad your bank account is despicably low. Sadly, it's what we've come to expect out of these grifters.





Chanbal said:


>



Yeah if you ask me unsolicited, unprofessional advice on mental health is actually dangerous because 1. the health services get swamped with hypochondriacs who want to have a trendy problem. 
2. people lose all scale of what serious mental health disorders are
3. A lot of grifters get jobs giving bad advice
4. That bad advice can lead to actually disturbed people harming themselves.
I am absolutely disgusted no women’s charity has had the balls to call out how p***poor a representation of post-natal depression MM has been giving. She went from saying she was fantasying about killing herself and her unborn baby to living her best life in LA. Sorry sweetie, you are clearly lying about one of those extremes because it doesn’t work like that. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> And, Dax and Kristin were anti-paps long ago, too.  IMO, the consumers are not the problem. The problem is the celeb who feeds this stuff. The more clicks they get, the bigger their checks.  It’s on them.
> 
> from 2014:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard's scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi
> 
> 
> Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard's scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard’s scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Paps
> 
> 
> 
> By Susan Rohwer, guest blogger
> March 5, 2014 12 AM PT
> Consuming celebrity news, you might think that nothing is off-limits to the prying eyes of the paparazzi. In late January, actors Dax Shepard and his wife Kristen Bell launched a campaign on Twitter to end harassment they face from the paparazzi for pictures of their baby. Using the hashtags #pedorazzi and #NoKidsPolicy, Shepard and Bell called on the celebrity gossip media industry to stop using these images and for fans to stop buying them.
> 
> Some media outlets took the tweeting seriously. Recently ET, People magazineand celebrity gossip blog Just Jared pledged to stop publishing unauthorized photos of celebrities’ kids. And on Wednesday, Perez Hilton posted his commitment to the cause.
> 
> These are notable first steps in limiting the kinds of unchecked access the public thinks it’s entitled to have into the lives of celebrities. But while we can congratulate these companies for this rare display of restraint within the celebrity media industry, we should recognize that there’s plenty of blame to go around.
> 
> Too many consumers display a twisted sense of entitlement when it comes to gawking at celebrities’ lives. From celebrity breakups to makeups, manicures to miscarriages, we demand unfettered access to the private lives of our celebrities. The paparazzi are the embodiment of that public demand.
> 
> While the paps certainly have the 1st Amendment on their side, it’s problematic when these photogs harass celebrities, and especially their children. Last August, during a hearing in support of a bill aimed at protecting the children of celebrities from paparazzi, actresses Jennifer Garner and Halle Berry described some of the harassment their families experience from photographers.
> 
> Nearly crying, Garner described how paparazzi aggressively follow her and her children. “I don’t want a gang of shouting, arguing, law-breaking photographers who camp out everywhere we are, all day, every day, to continue to traumatize my kids,” she said. Berry said that the constant presence of photographers yelling and taking pictures has made her young daughter afraid to go to school.
> 
> Senate Bill 606, which was signed into law in September, changes the definition of harassment to include photographing a child without a guardian’s permission. This is good, presumably, for protecting celebrities’ kids in California. Still, Shepard and Bell felt the need to launch their campaign _after_the law took effect Jan. 1. And it’s also worth highlighting a point The Times’ editorial board made last year: Law enforcement doesn’t do enough to enforce laws aimed at abusive paparazzi.
> 
> Explaining his concern, Shepard recently wrote in a blogpost:
> 
> “I personally believe, and I understand a lot of people differ on this point, that protecting her includes keeping her life private until the moment she decides otherwise. I think she is entitled to that. I think every minor is entitled to that. My wife and I, ever the approval-junkies, made a decision to get into show business and become public figures, but she has not. She hasn’t even decided if she prefers pureed carrots to peanut butter.”
> 
> *Shepard has said that he believes it’s up to the public to stop the out-of-control pursuit of celebrity gossip: “The consumer is the only one that can put an end to this. They are the only ones with real power.”*
> 
> But is that true?
> 
> While we should all reject these kinds of images, is that really enough? After all, we’re not the ones profiting from them, and throughout the chain of supply and demand, there’s much blame to share. It’s too easy to blame this solely on the paparazzi because they’re just doing their (distasteful) job. They wouldn’t be popping out of bushes at playgrounds frequented by celebs’ children if they didn’t get paid well for it.
> 
> Celebrity gossip is big business, and media companies have a financial interest in getting page views or selling magazines, regardless of how unsavory their practices. Our obsession with celebrity gossip has made companies such as Gawker and TMZ very rich.
> 
> Is this a sign of things to come for celebrity media? Maybe. But perhaps it’s also a shrewd business decision.
> 
> Celeb-focused media outlets need to be a little friendly with celebs if they want to continue to have “authorized” content to publish. Kristen Bell threatened to stop going to celebrity gossip magazines with authorized content if they continued running unauthorized photos of her baby. It’s possible that other celebrities would follow suit if none of the outlets made a move.
> 
> Putting a stop to publishing unauthorized photos of celebrities’ kids gives the parents and their child the space to make the choice to be in the public eye or not. While this isn’t a problem that many parents can relate to, we can relate to wanting to protect our kids from situations that could frighten or harm them, including protecting them from the harassment of paparazzi.


The more I hear about this Dax guy the more I think he sounds like an entitled man child who thinks he’s much smarter than he is. No wonder H loves The d list. 



Chanbal said:


> Harry the 'dear' and 'darling boy'... How can one change so much?
> 
> *Prince Harry lavished praise on Prince Charles' parenting just three years ago, a resurfaced interview reveals.*
> 
> _It comes after the Duke of Sussex criticised his father last week, saying Charles "suffered" during his childhood, and “treated me the way he was treated”.
> 
> Speaking about his upbringing as a royal, Harry told Dax Shepard his father passed on "genetic pain" and talked about how he wants to "break that cycle".
> 
> It is a far cry from the relationship the dad and son appeared to have when they chatted on BBC Radio 4's Today show back in 2017.
> 
> *During that broadcast, Harry enthused: "We could talk about this for hours and hours, which we always do, but not with a microphone in front of us.*
> 
> "I totally see it and I totally understand it because of all these years and conversations we've been having.
> 
> "I do end up picking your brains more now than I ever have done."_
> 
> *The Prince of Wales referred to his son as "dear boy", adding: "Well darling boy it makes me very proud to think you understand."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry praises Prince Charles' parenting in clip three years before rift
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex claimed he was suffering "genetic pain" and said he wanted to "break the cycle" last week in an apparent swipe at his dad, but back in 2017 he described how the pair would "talk for hours"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Well we’ve always known he was a lying hypocrite. This is just another slide for the PowerPoint.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Dang, this just makes me so sad. Charles was clearly a flawed person in many ways but he tried his best... he tried to spare his kids from some of his worst experiences that WERE handed down, like Gordonstoun. He didn't abuse them, deprive them, or leave them to the wolves... he didn't deserve to be treated this way. For some reason Harry glorifies Diana but blames Charles. SMH.


Father and son are both entitled whiners in my opinion. Lots of kids would give their right hand to go to Gordonstoun and have a tenth of the opportunities C and H have got. Yet C makes it sound like he was held by boko haram 

If we want to talk about stoical reserve I think the real MVPs are these peoples former teachers for not calling them out on all these insults. of course Charles probs waited till most of his old masters weredead.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> And, Dax and Kristin were anti-paps long ago, too.  IMO, the consumers are not the problem. The problem is the celeb who feeds this stuff. The more clicks they get, the bigger their checks.  It’s on them.
> 
> from 2014:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard's scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi
> 
> 
> Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard's scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Kristen Bell and Dax Shepard’s scheme to sideline aggressive paparazzi*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Paps
> 
> 
> 
> By Susan Rohwer, guest blogger
> March 5, 2014 12 AM PT
> Consuming celebrity news, you might think that nothing is off-limits to the prying eyes of the paparazzi. In late January, actors Dax Shepard and his wife Kristen Bell launched a campaign on Twitter to end harassment they face from the paparazzi for pictures of their baby. Using the hashtags #pedorazzi and #NoKidsPolicy, Shepard and Bell called on the celebrity gossip media industry to stop using these images and for fans to stop buying them.
> 
> Some media outlets took the tweeting seriously. Recently ET, People magazineand celebrity gossip blog Just Jared pledged to stop publishing unauthorized photos of celebrities’ kids. And on Wednesday, Perez Hilton posted his commitment to the cause.
> 
> These are notable first steps in limiting the kinds of unchecked access the public thinks it’s entitled to have into the lives of celebrities. But while we can congratulate these companies for this rare display of restraint within the celebrity media industry, we should recognize that there’s plenty of blame to go around.
> 
> Too many consumers display a twisted sense of entitlement when it comes to gawking at celebrities’ lives. From celebrity breakups to makeups, manicures to miscarriages, we demand unfettered access to the private lives of our celebrities. The paparazzi are the embodiment of that public demand.
> 
> While the paps certainly have the 1st Amendment on their side, it’s problematic when these photogs harass celebrities, and especially their children. Last August, during a hearing in support of a bill aimed at protecting the children of celebrities from paparazzi, actresses Jennifer Garner and Halle Berry described some of the harassment their families experience from photographers.
> 
> Nearly crying, Garner described how paparazzi aggressively follow her and her children. “I don’t want a gang of shouting, arguing, law-breaking photographers who camp out everywhere we are, all day, every day, to continue to traumatize my kids,” she said. Berry said that the constant presence of photographers yelling and taking pictures has made her young daughter afraid to go to school.
> 
> Senate Bill 606, which was signed into law in September, changes the definition of harassment to include photographing a child without a guardian’s permission. This is good, presumably, for protecting celebrities’ kids in California. Still, Shepard and Bell felt the need to launch their campaign _after_the law took effect Jan. 1. And it’s also worth highlighting a point The Times’ editorial board made last year: Law enforcement doesn’t do enough to enforce laws aimed at abusive paparazzi.
> 
> Explaining his concern, Shepard recently wrote in a blogpost:
> 
> “I personally believe, and I understand a lot of people differ on this point, that protecting her includes keeping her life private until the moment she decides otherwise. I think she is entitled to that. I think every minor is entitled to that. My wife and I, ever the approval-junkies, made a decision to get into show business and become public figures, but she has not. She hasn’t even decided if she prefers pureed carrots to peanut butter.”
> 
> *Shepard has said that he believes it’s up to the public to stop the out-of-control pursuit of celebrity gossip: “The consumer is the only one that can put an end to this. They are the only ones with real power.”*
> 
> But is that true?
> 
> While we should all reject these kinds of images, is that really enough? After all, we’re not the ones profiting from them, and throughout the chain of supply and demand, there’s much blame to share. It’s too easy to blame this solely on the paparazzi because they’re just doing their (distasteful) job. They wouldn’t be popping out of bushes at playgrounds frequented by celebs’ children if they didn’t get paid well for it.
> 
> Celebrity gossip is big business, and media companies have a financial interest in getting page views or selling magazines, regardless of how unsavory their practices. Our obsession with celebrity gossip has made companies such as Gawker and TMZ very rich.
> 
> Is this a sign of things to come for celebrity media? Maybe. But perhaps it’s also a shrewd business decision.
> 
> Celeb-focused media outlets need to be a little friendly with celebs if they want to continue to have “authorized” content to publish. Kristen Bell threatened to stop going to celebrity gossip magazines with authorized content if they continued running unauthorized photos of her baby. It’s possible that other celebrities would follow suit if none of the outlets made a move.
> 
> Putting a stop to publishing unauthorized photos of celebrities’ kids gives the parents and their child the space to make the choice to be in the public eye or not. While this isn’t a problem that many parents can relate to, we can relate to wanting to protect our kids from situations that could frighten or harm them, including protecting them from the harassment of paparazzi.



I don't see anything wrong with what he's saying. Minors should not be exploited by paps, and this was signed into law in CA. This doesn't just protect famous kids, it protects all kids from being harassed and having their photos taken and shared for profit without the parents' consent. It's already a law in the UK.

About consumers boycotting it.. meh, don't see how it's any different than some people here not buying products so the company doesn't profit. He's not saying the consumer is the problem per se, he's saying the consumer has economic power in this situation.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Dang, this just makes me so sad. Charles was clearly a flawed person in many ways but he tried his best... he tried to spare his kids from some of his worst experiences that WERE handed down, like Gordonstoun. He didn't abuse them, deprive them, or leave them to the wolves... he didn't deserve to be treated this way. For some reason Harry glorifies Diana but blames Charles. SMH.


Charles tried to be a good father, and he didn't deserve this. I'm starting to think that he glorifies Diana because it serves his purpose.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Father and son are both entitled whiners in my opinion. Lots of kids would give their right hand to go to Gordonstoun and have a tenth of the opportunities C and H have got. Yet C makes it sound like he was held by boko haram
> 
> If we want to talk about stoical reserve I think the real MVPs are these peoples former teachers for not calling them out on all these insults. of course Charles probs waited till most of his old masters weredead.



I don't blame Charles for not enjoying his experience. Not every privileged experience is good for every person, no matter how great it is to someone else. It's a fit issue. I would lose my $hit if forced to go to a school like that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I don't see anything wrong with what he's saying. Minors should not be exploited by paps, and this was signed into law in CA. This doesn't just protect famous kids, it protects all kids from being harassed and having their photos taken and shared for profit without the parents' consent. It's already a law in the UK.
> 
> About consumers boycotting it.. meh, don't see how it's any different than some people here not buying products so the company doesn't profit. He's not saying the consumer is the problem per se, he's saying the consumer has economic power in this situation.


Well I agree with the law of Child anonymity. But I mean look at what he’s actually saying.  If you are making a point about it by calling people just doing their job paedophiles and trying to trend that while the reality massively benefitting from the paparazzi and your family ties in your career then you, probably, are the ***


----------



## Straight-Laced

Humour alert !!!  









						Musket-Wielding Americans Chase Prince Harry Out Of The Country
					

LOS ANGELES, CA—After Prince Harry called the First Amendment "bonkers," Americans did what Americans do best, and chased the royal Englishman out of the country while wielding muskets.




					babylonbee.com
				



*Musket-Wielding Americans Chase Prince Harry Out Of The Country*




LOS ANGELES, CA—After Prince Harry called the First Amendment "bonkers," Americans did what Americans do best, and chased the royal Englishman out of the country while wielding muskets.

"Back to your side of the pond, British scum!" cried a mob of angry Americans as they loaded their muskets. "We won a war so we wouldn't have to care about your opinions on our freedoms! Now, you best start swimmin' back across the Atlantic if you don't want to catch a lead ball in yer trousers, ya hear?"

"If you don't like the First Amendement, you'll _hate _the Second Amendment!" The simple farmers with pitchforks and muskets banged on Harry's windows and shouted "USA! USA!" along with "No taxation without representation!"

Prince Harry frantically ran to his limousine, where his driver was waiting, but the Americans gave pursuit on horseback, chasing the English prince across the country until he finally escaped in his speed yacht.

Their anger unappeased, the crazed mob left to run other British people out of the country.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> Humour alert !!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Musket-Wielding Americans Chase Prince Harry Out Of The Country
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES, CA—After Prince Harry called the First Amendment "bonkers," Americans did what Americans do best, and chased the royal Englishman out of the country while wielding muskets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> babylonbee.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Musket-Wielding Americans Chase Prince Harry Out Of The Country*
> 
> View attachment 5086419
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES, CA—After Prince Harry called the First Amendment "bonkers," Americans did what Americans do best, and chased the royal Englishman out of the country while wielding muskets.
> 
> "Back to your side of the pond, British scum!" cried a mob of angry Americans as they loaded their muskets. "We won a war so we wouldn't have to care about your opinions on our freedoms! Now, you best start swimmin' back across the Atlantic if you don't want to catch a lead ball in yer trousers, ya hear?"
> 
> "If you don't like the First Amendement, you'll _hate _the Second Amendment!" The simple farmers with pitchforks and muskets banged on Harry's windows and shouted "USA! USA!" along with "No taxation without representation!"
> 
> Prince Harry frantically ran to his limousine, where his driver was waiting, but the Americans gave pursuit on horseback, chasing the English prince across the country until he finally escaped in his speed yacht.
> 
> Their anger unappeased, the crazed mob left to run other British people out of the country.


Yeah, but you’ll still want our TV, right?


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I don't blame Charles for not enjoying his experience. Not every privileged experience is good for every person, no matter how great it is to someone else. It's a fit issue. I would lose my $hit if forced to go to a school like that.


Yeah but the whole point is he doesn’t have to whine about itespecially given my family’s taxes paid for him to sulk in a kilt. 

Most kids don’t get to pick what school they go to anyway. They just make the best of what’s in the area, or not.

For all we know Anne hated wherever she got sent. However, she realised that life is not a pity party.

He’s cut from the same cloth as Harry in my opinion. If QE had any sense she’d get them both back into the classroom for stoicism 101.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Straight-Laced said:


> Humour alert !!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Musket-Wielding Americans Chase Prince Harry Out Of The Country
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES, CA—After Prince Harry called the First Amendment "bonkers," Americans did what Americans do best, and chased the royal Englishman out of the country while wielding muskets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> babylonbee.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Musket-Wielding Americans Chase Prince Harry Out Of The Country*
> 
> View attachment 5086419
> 
> 
> LOS ANGELES, CA—After Prince Harry called the First Amendment "bonkers," Americans did what Americans do best, and chased the royal Englishman out of the country while wielding muskets.
> 
> "Back to your side of the pond, British scum!" cried a mob of angry Americans as they loaded their muskets. "We won a war so we wouldn't have to care about your opinions on our freedoms! Now, you best start swimmin' back across the Atlantic if you don't want to catch a lead ball in yer trousers, ya hear?"
> 
> "If you don't like the First Amendement, you'll _hate _the Second Amendment!" The simple farmers with pitchforks and muskets banged on Harry's windows and shouted "USA! USA!" along with "No taxation without representation!"
> 
> Prince Harry frantically ran to his limousine, where his driver was waiting, but the Americans gave pursuit on horseback, chasing the English prince across the country until he finally escaped in his speed yacht.
> 
> Their anger unappeased, the crazed mob left to run other British people out of the country.


To be honest, where is the tea party when you need them? Why isn’t Harry being thrown into the sea as we speak? XX


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah but the whole point is he doesn’t have to whine about itespecially given my family’s taxes paid for him to sulk in a kilt.
> 
> Most kids don’t get to pick what school they go to anyway. They just make the best of what’s in the area, or not.
> 
> For all we know Anne hated wherever she got sent. However, she realised that life is not a pity party.
> 
> He’s cut from the same cloth as Harry in my opinion. If QE had any sense she’d get them both back into the classroom for stoicism 101.



I think there’s a huge difference between those 2. It seems like someone asked Charles about his experiences and he said he didn’t like it, Colditz in kilts, etc but didn’t really go out of his way to complain about it after. Harry’s waging a whole media campaign about his unhappy experience at this point.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Clearblueskies said:


> Yeah, but you’ll still want our TV, right?





jelliedfeels said:


> To be honest, where is the tea party when you need them? Why isn’t Harry being thrown into the sea as we speak? XX



I have no dog in this fight!! Just an Australian observer


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I think there’s a huge difference between those 2. It seems like someone asked Charles about his experiences and he said he didn’t like it, Colditz in kilts, etc but didn’t really go out of his way to complain about it after. Harry’s waging a whole media campaign about his unhappy experience at this point.


It’s just my opinion. All I’m saying is that you can tell what Harry inherited if not Charles’ looks. I don’t personally think there’s a huge difference between them. I think Charles has just got a better place in the firm and better handlers tbh.

This Stoicism thing is really for their own good, they need to be cautious about revealing how smart their bloodline really is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Straight-Laced said:


> I have no dog in this fight!! Just an Australian observer


     
I was joking. I do get some dark joy in picturing some men in historical dress and hats hurling H off a jetty. Perhaps the curb your enthusiasm theme plays as he resurfaces covered in seaweed.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s just my opinion. All I’m saying is that you can tell what Harry inherited if not Charles’ looks. I don’t personally think there’s a huge difference between them. I think Charles has just got a better place in the firm and better handlers tbh.
> 
> This Stoicism thing is really for their own good, they need to be cautious about revealing how smart their bloodline really is.



I don’t know how different they are REALLY in their hearts but it says something that one is listening to his handlers and the other is literally going out there giving interviews and speeches about how sucky his life is. Talk about stoicism... Buddha himself couldn’t convince me to keep my mouth shut like Charles has if my child were bad mouthing me on a monthly basis to the global press.


----------



## Straight-Laced

jelliedfeels said:


> I was joking. I do get some dark joy in picturing some men in historical dress and hats hurling H off a jetty. Perhaps the curb your enthusiasm theme plays as he resurfaces covered in seaweed.


I know you were joking.  As am I, it's all so ridiculous. But because the issue has such momentous, historical significance when a British prince blunders in everyone gets to revisit some history and make a bit of fun (of him)


----------



## lalame

Normally I want the royals to stay on script but God I really need one of them to speak up before this fool comes out swinging again. Don’t let one side control the narrative!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I don’t know how different they are REALLY in their hearts but it says something that one is listening to his handlers and the other is literally going out there giving interviews and speeches about how sucky his life is. Talk about stoicism... Buddha himself couldn’t convince me to keep my mouth shut like Charles has if my child were bad mouthing me on a monthly basis to the global press.


I mean, one will be king in the future so he definitely has a good motivation to behave himself. The other gets paid to whine. It’s different motivations. 

I’m sure there’s a dedicated team of people who listen to Charles’ feelings about Harry’s actions - it’s not like he’ll have to be ‘silent or silenced’ he just has to not say anything to a reporter. Even a moron could manage that. So Andrew utterly failed at that naturally


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I think there’s a huge difference between those 2. It seems like someone asked Charles about his experiences and he said he didn’t like it, Colditz in kilts, etc but didn’t really go out of his way to complain about it after. Harry’s waging a whole media campaign about his unhappy experience at this point.



It’s one thing to complain about an institution  and another to complain about a parent and grandparents.  Let us remember the parent is 70 and his mother is 94 (?) & recently lost her husband.  Now, let’s talk mental health and compassion.  Hazzie has shown himself to be a spoiled brat of the worst kind.


----------



## RAINDANCE

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah but the whole point is he doesn’t have to whine about itespecially given my family’s taxes paid for him to sulk in a kilt.
> 
> Most kids don’t get to pick what school they go to anyway. They just make the best of what’s in the area, or not.
> 
> *For all we know Anne hated wherever she got sent. However, she realised that life is not a pity party.*
> 
> He’s cut from the same cloth as Harry in my opinion. If QE had any sense she’d get them both back into the classroom for stoicism 101.



Anne went to Gordonstoun as did Andrew and Edward and both of Anne's children, Peter and Zara.

It seems to me that Prince Philip had a great time there and in some ways it "saved" him for being lost in his youth when he was homeless and parentless. Why, then, if he had such a great time there, would he not send his children to the same school ? It's what we do - human nuture is to try to give our children the same or better than we had.

Ironically Gordonstoun with its ethos of outdoors and sports would probably have suited Harry better than Eton ! I always got the impression that academic prowess was not as important at Gordonstoun. Eton being a breeding ground for future politicians and other high fliers.

I used to be slightly bemused by people who sent their kids to different schools (largely because I know I would have found it easier and more practical if all siblings to go to the same school) but now appreciate that some schools just don't suit different children. A very dear older (and very posh !) friend of mine sent her 3 girls to different boarding schools all over the country !

Earlier this year Facebook was sending me lots of adverts for boarding schools for some reason. DD is in her last year of school so was not relevant to us but I did follow through to have a look at Gordonstoun and it looked gorgeous, environment and buildings. I was expecting brutal grey granite buildings, an ignorance coloured by my only trip to that part of Scotland to do an audit in Frazerborough in the middle of a very wet and cold winter.


----------



## jelliedfeels

RAINDANCE said:


> Anne went to Gordonstoun as did Andrew and Edward and both of Anne's children, Peter and Zara.
> 
> It seems to me that Prince Philip had a great time there and in some ways it "saved" him for being lost in his youth when he was homeless and parentless. Why, then, if he had such a great time there, would he not send his children to the same school ? It's what we do - human nuture is to try to give our children the same or better than we had.
> 
> Ironically Gordonstoun with its ethos of outdoors and sports would probably have suited Harry better than Eton ! I always got the impression that academic prowess was not as important at Gordonstoun. Eton being a breeding ground for future politicians and other high fliers.
> 
> I used to be slightly bemused by people who sent their kids to different schools (largely because I know I would have found it easier and more practical if all siblings to go to the same school) but now appreciate that some schools just don't suit different children. A very dear older (and very posh !) friend of mine sent her 3 girls to different boarding schools all over the country !
> 
> Earlier this year Facebook was sending me lots of adverts for boarding schools for some reason. DD is in her last year of school so was not relevant to us but I did follow through to have a look at Gordonstoun and it looked gorgeous, environment and buildings. I was expecting brutal grey granite buildings, an ignorance coloured by my only trip to that part of Scotland to do an audit in Frazerborough in the middle of a very wet and cold winter.


I think there’s nothing wrong with knowing your child and playing to their strengths. I get the impression they mainly liked Eton because it was close to the family and not too far from London. Whereas G is pretty isolated. G will undoubtedly be gorgeous though I’ve never seen it. All these public schools have amazing set-ups & buckets of resources. All the more reason to appreciate you were lucky enough to go to any of them in my opinion. 

I wouldn’t say Eton is _that_ academic,
from what I’ve seen of people who went there and what their ethos is. I don’t think there’s much odds between it and G. I mean of course intelligent children thrive but many thrive in a bad school. 

The real academic hot houses are places like Winchester, Westminster & St. Paul’s school. 

The thing with Eton is its the old chicken and egg issue i think....
Did the prestigious Eton coax the man in the skills to achieve high position or did the fact he has the prestige to go to Eton guarantee the man a high position?


----------



## RAINDANCE

jelliedfeels said:


> I think there’s nothing wrong with knowing your child and playing to their strengths.* I get the impression they mainly liked Eton because it was close to the family and not too far from London.* Whereas G is pretty isolated. G will undoubtedly be gorgeous though I’ve never seen it. All these public schools have amazing set-ups & buckets of resources. All the more reason to appreciate you were lucky enough to go to any of them in my opinion.
> 
> I wouldn’t say Eton is _that_ academic,
> from what I’ve seen of people who went there and what their ethos is. I don’t think there’s much odds between it and G. I mean of course intelligent children thrive but many thrive in a bad school.
> 
> The real academic hot houses are places like Winchester, Westminster & St. Paul’s school.
> 
> The thing with Eton is its the old chicken and egg issue i think....
> Did the prestigious Eton coax the man in the skills to achieve high position or did the fact he has the prestige to go to Eton guarantee the man a high position?



The Spencer men went to Eton, both Diana's father and brother.

Will be interesting to see what W&K choose re. schooling for their kids.

Will be even more interesting to see what H&M choose re. schooling for their kids.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

lalame said:


> I don't blame Charles for not enjoying his experience. Not every privileged experience is good for every person, no matter how great it is to someone else. It's a fit issue. I would lose my $hit if forced to go to a school like that.


I will never understand the British- and others- sending off their very young kids to boarding school. As a child living abroad we saw this all the time, kids as young as 5-6 coming to stay just for holidays and then going back to school not seeing their parents for months.

There are some very good documentaries about what happened to children, now adults, that were sent off to boarding school in the UK. Grown men breaking down crying for what they suffered. Parents devoid of any feeling when asked why they'd send away a 5-year old that was clearly going through terror having to be sent away from their family. I would hope that the abuse, physical, mental and sexual, is not going on anymore but it wasn't long ago that it did.

I know many have thrived at these schools but for many kids it is torture.


----------



## Clearblueskies

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I will never understand the British- and others- sending off their very young kids to boarding school. As a child living abroad we saw this all the time, kids as young as 5-6 coming to stay just for holidays and then going back to school not seeing their parents for months.
> 
> There are some very good documentaries about what happened to children, now adults, that were sent off to boarding school in the UK. Grown men breaking down crying for what they suffered. Parents devoid of any feeling when asked why they'd send away a 5-year old that was clearly going through terror having to be sent away from their family. I would hope that the abuse, physical, mental and sexual, is not going on anymore but it wasn't long ago that it did.
> 
> I know many have thrived at these schools but for many kids it is torture.


That’s quite some generalisation


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> The Spencer men went to Eton, both Diana's father and brother.
> 
> Will be interesting to see what W&K choose re. schooling for their kids.
> 
> Will be even more interesting to see what H&M choose re. schooling for their kids.


I bet Archie gets homeschooled, poor little mite doesn’t seem to get out much.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s quite some generalisation


How so?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> I bet Archie gets homeschooled, poor little mite doesn’t seem to get out much.


Probably by an ever-changing rota of tutors on zoom so he never gets the chance to get too close to anyone.
Archie will be one posh boy who is not allowed to love nanny more than mother dearest.


RAINDANCE said:


> The Spencer men went to Eton, both Diana's father and brother.
> 
> Will be interesting to see what W&K choose re. schooling for their kids.
> 
> Will be even more interesting to see what H&M choose re. schooling for their kids.


Oh well that’s interesting too. I think it was a good choice for them really. I mean they even let Haz cheat on his A levels (allegedly)  
Imagine what a drama there would’ve been if the school had put their foot down!


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I will never understand the British- and others- sending off their very young kids to boarding school. As a child living abroad we saw this all the time, kids as young as 5-6 coming to stay just for holidays and then going back to school not seeing their parents for months.
> 
> There are some very good documentaries about what happened to children, now adults, that were sent off to boarding school in the UK. Grown men breaking down crying for what they suffered. Parents devoid of any feeling when asked why they'd send away a 5-year old that was clearly going through terror having to be sent away from their family. I would hope that the abuse, physical, mental and sexual, is not going on anymore but it wasn't long ago that it did.
> 
> I know many have thrived at these schools but for many kids it is torture.


Lots of people enjoy it. It’s not for everyone.

Of course, the way these schools make their money now is Asian parents sending their kids to a different continent for school. So even among boarding kids another part of the U.K. isn’t even a big deal.

The other thing is not all public schools (boarding or day) are made equal. Whenever there’s a big scandal one of these big institutions (I’m sure some of us might be able to think of a recent example) they tend to plead it’s not a school problem just a wider problem. Who is paying thousands a term to have to put up with the same problems as everyone else? Surely your reputation relies on you being better than average? Don’t you have the money and resources to have decent pastoral care?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Clearblueskies said:


> I bet Archie gets homeschooled, poor little mite doesn’t seem to get out much.



In the Dax podcast Harry said the pap photos taken by page six was of Meghan collecting Archie from school. I didn't know that children under 2 years (he was not even 2 at the time) have school. I thought the youngest age was 3. I assume they put him in school to develop his social skills and to be around children his age.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

lalame said:


> *I don't see anything wrong with what he's saying. Minors should not be exploited by paps*, and this was signed into law in CA. *This doesn't just protect famous kids, it protects all kids from being harassed and having their photos taken and shared for profit *without the parents' consent. It's already a law in the UK.
> 
> About consumers boycotting it.. meh, don't see how it's any different than some people here not buying products so the company doesn't profit. He's not saying the consumer is the problem per se, he's saying the consumer has economic power in this situation.


I see something wrong with what he's saying  








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
					

Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> In the Dax podcast Harry said the pap photos taken by page six was of Meghan collecting Archie from school. I didn't know that children under 2 years (he was not even 2 at the time) have school. I thought the youngest age was 3. I assume they put him in school to develop his social skills and to be around children his age.


I assume theatre school. It’s going to take a lot of work to beat those genetics.


----------



## jelliedfeels

jennlt said:


> I see something wrong with what he's saying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle surprise children to replant garden
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 35, and Meghan Markle, 39, surprised at-risk children to replant a garden at a preschool in Los Angeles on anniversary of Princess Diana's death yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That is just delicious irony. Thank you I’d forgotten about that.

Now I think about it they never seem that concerned about the privacy of the African orphans they like to get photos with. I suppose if it’s for Charriiiiddddeeee or awareness 

It’s only a problem if the kid is meant to be a Disney channel exclusive maybe.

For the record I think kids shouldn’t be in the limelight but it gets on my nerves that these celebs clearly have a symbiotic relationship with the paps and are on some level offering their kids in the package yet they still act like they are the victims.


----------



## queennadine

Shopaholic2021 said:


> In the Dax podcast Harry said the pap photos taken by page six was of Meghan collecting Archie from school. I didn't know that children under 2 years (he was not even 2 at the time) have school. I thought the youngest age was 3. I assume they put him in school to develop his social skills and to be around children his age.


Preschool starts as young as 2 here. Anything before that is daycare. But most preschools for 2 year olds have an age cut-off so the child has to be 2 by a certain date in August or September, and they must be potty trained. Archie could very well be potty trained but we know (well…do we?! Lol) that he didn’t turn 2 until May. So IMO she was taking him to some type of a class or program or daycare, not ‘school.’


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Harry the 'dear' and 'darling boy'... How can one change so much?
> 
> *Prince Harry lavished praise on Prince Charles' parenting just three years ago, a resurfaced interview reveals.*
> 
> _It comes after the Duke of Sussex criticised his father last week, saying Charles "suffered" during his childhood, and “treated me the way he was treated”.
> 
> Speaking about his upbringing as a royal, Harry told Dax Shepard his father passed on "genetic pain" and talked about how he wants to "break that cycle".
> 
> It is a far cry from the relationship the dad and son appeared to have when they chatted on BBC Radio 4's Today show back in 2017.
> 
> *During that broadcast, Harry enthused: "We could talk about this for hours and hours, which we always do, but not with a microphone in front of us.*
> 
> "I totally see it and I totally understand it because of all these years and conversations we've been having.
> 
> "I do end up picking your brains more now than I ever have done."_
> 
> *The Prince of Wales referred to his son as "dear boy", adding: "Well darling boy it makes me very proud to think you understand."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry praises Prince Charles' parenting in clip three years before rift
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex claimed he was suffering "genetic pain" and said he wanted to "break the cycle" last week in an apparent swipe at his dad, but back in 2017 he described how the pair would "talk for hours"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



And, then along came “the fox in the henhouse,” the family exterminator, the major isolationist, the supreme narcissistic manipulator, Harry’s wife, and history was rewritten. Or, in her wokeness, seen through a new lens.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the best laugh of the day, @Chanbal     Those comments are gold!
> Agree with SeanG — they do have the same nose. Plus Hazzie’s teeth look chipped.


I always notice they both have the ski slope noses.....and I also noticed the other day while she has hollywood teeth, H looks like his could have used some help.  guess teeth aren't a big priority with the royals


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Charles tried to be a good father, and he didn't deserve this. I'm starting to think that he glorifies Diana because it serves his purpose.


yes, Diana was popular while she was alive and became an icon when she died young.....I'm sure H loved his mom but I think he's also wanting to be part of that legend - latch on to her fame and adulation....and it's working with some people


----------



## marietouchet

Shopaholic2021 said:


> In the Dax podcast Harry said the pap photos taken by page six was of Meghan collecting Archie from school. I didn't know that children under 2 years (he was not even 2 at the time) have school. I thought the youngest age was 3. I assume they put him in school to develop his social skills and to be around children his age.


Speaking only to upper class childcare solutions since H&M are upper class... 

In the US, you can choose to put your child in a PAID day care AKA school (euphemism) almost from age 2 months in lieu of a nanny or au pair. 
An upper class UK solution tends to be a nanny - stay at home care for early years.  I think Prince Louis - age 3 - just started some sort of outside the home schooling. George (8?) has not gone away to school, yet, but there has been COVID

Things get reversed as the upper class child gets older - boarding school is a upper class solution in the UK from a tender age (10 or so, if memory serves). Boarding (away) school is rare in the US. One lives in a neighborhood which has good local schools. Some locales are known for their public schools (Beverly, Hills Bel Air) but private local school is typical too - mum or dad or the nanny drive the child to the private school.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> I've enjoyed and learned from everyones discussion on fillers. Here's a vision I came across ... I'm at grandparent age and had to slowly scroll down to peak at the photos.   When I look in the mirror my mind plays tricks because I see me as a 30 year old still. Which I'm definitely NOT.



Ha! Those photos make it look like Kate has never heard of sunscreen or moisturizer. And they aren't taking into account that Meghan knows about Botox and fillers.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Ha! Those photos make it look like Kate has never heard of sunscreen or moisturizer. And they aren't taking into account that Meghan knows about Botox and fillers.


The funniest thing about it is how William basically looks the same like Frau farbissina in Austin powers.  

Yeah I see MM ending up with more of a Mickey Rourke look myself. She’s clearly got a taste for the needle.


----------



## carmen56

jelliedfeels said:


> The funniest thing about it is how William basically looks the same like Frau farbissina in Austin powers.
> 
> Yeah I see MM ending up with more of a Mickey Rourke look myself. She’s clearly got a taste for the needle.



Or that Wildenstein woman.  Mickey Rourke was rather good looking back in the day, why did he start messing with his face?


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> Or that Wildenstein woman.  Mickey Rourke was rather good looking back in the day, why did he start messing with his face?


I know....I guess with some people they start and can't stop.  but you'd think if you were a Hollywood celeb you'd have the best surgeon and they wouldn't botch your face


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I see MM ending up with more of a Mickey Rourke look myself. She’s clearly got a taste for the needle.



I imagine centuries from now a group of archaeologists will be digging through the remnants of a Hollywood cemetery and be shocked by the amazing discovery of skeletons with incredibly well-preserved faces, breasts, and butts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Speaking only to upper class childcare solutions since H&M are upper class...
> 
> In the US, you can choose to put your child in a PAID day care AKA school (euphemism) almost from age 2 months in lieu of a nanny or au pair.
> An upper class UK solution tends to be a nanny - stay at home care for early years.  I think Prince Louis - age 3 - just started some sort of outside the home schooling. George (8?) has not gone away to school, yet, but there has been COVID
> 
> Things get reversed as the upper class child gets older - boarding school is a upper class solution in the UK from a tender age (10 or so, if memory serves). Boarding (away) school is rare in the US. One lives in a neighborhood which has good local schools. Some locales are known for their public schools (Beverly, Hills Bel Air) but private local school is typical too - mum or dad or the nanny drive the child to the private school.


Not to elect myself as the good schools guide but the set up is usually:
As you say nanny at home. Then they go to prep school (4-12/13) which can be boarding or day.  I think W and H boarded at prep school. W’s kids go to day school. Nanny still tends to be employed during this period for school holidays and stuff.

add on- a lot of the posh people I know really love their nanny and she’s a member of the family type vibes. Some people keep their nannies on till the kid is going to uni. 

age 12/13 they have to sit some entrance exams or whatever else it takes to get into one of the public schools. These are often boarding.
These are places like Eton, Harrow, Stowe etc.

Some of these Boarding schools aren’t actually super academically prestigious. They are basically about hunting, shooting and land management

Among the middle and working classes there are plenty of private nurseries (daycare) you can send your kid to from birth essentially. There’s also a lot of childminders - I dunno if that’s a thing in the US. This would be similar in a lot of Europe.

I would bet my big toes that the gruesome twosome have a carousel of nannies they cycle through to look after the kid and take him to and from daycare when theres no paparazzi conveniently around. I would also imagine they fire them at pretty regular intervals so they don’t get too close to the kid.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I imagine centuries from now a group of archaeologists will be digging through the remnants of a Hollywood cemetery and be shocked by the amazing discovery of skeletons with incredibly well-preserved faces, breasts, and butts.


I thought about this too.  There’ll be plastic and silicone, and all those Hollywood smiles.  I wonder what they’ll make of it?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gerryt

Shopaholic2021 said:


> In the Dax podcast Harry said the pap photos taken by page six was of Meghan collecting Archie from school. I didn't know that children under 2 years (he was not even 2 at the time) have school. I thought the youngest age was 3. I assume they put him in school to develop his social skills and to be around children his age.


But is it true that his clothing was merched straight away?  In which case clearly someone was in cahoots with the paparazzi, so its a bit rich to say they are in agreement with blanking out childrens faces (which I absolutely agree with) when they are picking and choosing when they want that to happen.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Among the middle and working classes there are plenty of private nurseries (daycare) you can send your kid to from birth essentially. There’s also a lot of childminders - I dunno if that’s a thing in the US. This would be similar in a lot of Europe.



Middle and working classes? Even the privileged gripe about not being able to afford such things here.  Case in point... me in the Parenting forum! Childcare is super expensive in the US.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> I don't see any bump at all????  Especially bending over like that?  WTF?



OMG! I totally missed this. Is this really supposed to be now?


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> To be honest, where is the tea party when you need them? Why isn’t Harry being thrown into the sea as we speak? XX



In another online group that I belong to, when I checked in this morning, people were discussing Harry's foolish 1st amendment comment.  They were really outraged. The topic of the British royals has never come up before in this group, not even the OW interview, but this really struck a nerve.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle shut down UK-based Sussex Royal firm they renamed MWX last year... in fresh sign couple are severing ties with Britain*

*Duke and Duchess of Sussex appoint voluntary liquidator to wind up charity*
*Company name MWX could refer to Markle Windsor or Mountbatten Windsor*









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle shut down UK-based Sussex Royal firm
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have appointed a voluntary liquidator to wind up the London-based charity, which they renamed MWX Trading in August last year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I imagine centuries from now a group of archaeologists will be digging through the remnants of a Hollywood cemetery and be shocked by the amazing discovery of skeletons with incredibly well-preserved faces, breasts, and butts.


I am watching a French TV series RIVIERES POURPRES - BBC AMAZON. Policemen that deal with gruesome crimes - satanism, eugenics, cults etc
The episode that I am currently on has exactly this theme - old ladies dying but their bodies look decades younger at the autopsy

No idea how the show comes out, but in this show, it will be gruesome


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> I am watching a French TV series RIVIERES POURPRES - BBC AMAZON. Policemen that deal with gruesome crimes - satanism, eugenics, cults etc
> The episode that I am currently on has exactly this theme - old ladies dying but their bodies look decades younger at the autopsy
> 
> No idea how the show comes out, but in this show, it will be gruesome


sounds fascinating


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Middle and working classes? Even the privileged gripe about not being able to afford such things here.  Case in point... me in the Parenting forum! Childcare is super expensive in the US.


It’s probably cheaper in the U.K. what is it per hour would you say? I’d say  it’s about £7-15 an hour on average here. Childminders are similar rates. 

It is also subsidised for lower income households from 2 and everyone is meant to get a bit from 3. But of course there’s more expensive options out there. It’s when it comes to sending your kid to school that the costs really start adding up. You either need to be able to afford to live in a nice area with good schools or pay to send them out to a good school that charges.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought about this too.  There’ll be plastic and silicone, and all those Hollywood smiles.  I wonder what they’ll make of it?!



There's no telling what humans will be doing to themselves in the name of cosmetic beauty by then. They might be appalled or they might think "look at how far we've come."


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> In another online group that I belong to, when I checked in this morning, people were discussing Harry's foolish 1st amendment comment.  They were really outraged. The topic of the British royals has never come up before in this group, not even the OW interview, but this really struck a nerve.


I don’t blame them. I’d be insulted too


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Not to elect myself as the good schools guide but the set up is usually:
> As you say nanny at home. Then they go to prep school (4-12/13) which can be boarding or day.  I think W and H boarded at prep school. W’s kids go to day school. Nanny still tends to be employed during this period for school holidays and stuff.
> 
> add on- a lot of the posh people I know really love their nanny and she’s a member of the family type vibes. Some people keep their nannies on till the kid is going to uni.
> 
> age 12/13 they have to sit some entrance exams or whatever else it takes to get into one of the public schools. These are often boarding.
> These are places like Eton, Harrow, Stowe etc.
> 
> Some of these Boarding schools aren’t actually super academically prestigious. They are basically about hunting, shooting and land management
> 
> Among the middle and working classes there are plenty of private nurseries (daycare) you can send your kid to from birth essentially. There’s also a lot of childminders - I dunno if that’s a thing in the US. This would be similar in a lot of Europe.
> 
> I would bet my big toes that the gruesome twosome have a carousel of nannies they cycle through to look after the kid and take him to and from daycare when theres no paparazzi conveniently around. I would also imagine they fire them at pretty regular intervals so they don’t get too close to the kid.


Wow! I never would have guessed Eton is public!  Do those schools let any kids in that aren’t from wealthy families?


----------



## xincinsin

gerryt said:


> But is it true that his clothing was merched straight away?  In which case clearly someone was in cahoots with the paparazzi, so its a bit rich to say they are in agreement with blanking out childrens faces (which I absolutely agree with) when they are picking and choosing when they want that to happen.


Her clothing and his lunchbox/backpack were identified on Meghan's Mirror. Someone is definitely providing the info because she was wearing jeans under a long coat and the site could give a shopping link for the jeans. I do not think they were identifiable from the pap photos.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, maybe?  I don't know.  I only keep up with these two here or *wherever they're shoved in my face*.



So pretty much all the time?


----------



## queennadine

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow! I never would have guessed Eton is public!  Do those schools let any kids in that aren’t from wealthy families?


I think public schools in England are essentially like private schools here, right? 

I currently pay my part-time babysitter $15 an hour to be with my two little ones in our home. 

DD will most likely start a part-time preschool in the fall, and she’s a couple of weeks older than Archie.


----------



## bag-mania

This NBC story is supposedly about criticism of Harry's 1st amendment comment but it ends up being more of a plug for the mental health show.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle face new criticism as they talk about their struggles
					

“The Me You Can’t See,” a new documentary series from Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey premiering this week, focuses on an issue important to both Harry and Meghan Markle: mental health. NBC News Now anchor Joe Fryer reports for TODAY.




					www.today.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow! I never would have guessed Eton is public!  Do those schools let any kids in that aren’t from wealthy families?


Public means private in the UK - as not state funded.  Most public schools offer some scholarships to kids from less affluent families, particularly if they’re gifted academically or in sport/athletics.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I've enjoyed and learned from everyones discussion on fillers. Here's a vision I came across ... I'm at grandparent age and had to slowly scroll down to peak at the photos.    When I look in the mirror my mind plays tricks because I see me as a 30 year old still. Which I'm definitely NOT.


LOL that's like that face app that aged your face.  My son did mine and my friends said I looked like a Sicilian grandmother!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> This NBC story is supposedly about criticism of Harry's 1st amendment comment but it ends up being more of a plug for the mental health show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle face new criticism as they talk about their struggles
> 
> 
> “The Me You Can’t See,” a new documentary series from Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey premiering this week, focuses on an issue important to both Harry and Meghan Markle: mental health. NBC News Now anchor Joe Fryer reports for TODAY.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


meh
boring to me but he's still getting attention


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> meh
> boring to me but he's still getting attention



I thought this was going to be a two-hour special about mental health. I didn't realize it was a multi-episode series. 

Who is going to want to watch an entire series about such a bleak topic? People watch television to be entertained, not to endure pretentious celebrity nonsense. The show's ratings are going to be horrible but Oprah and the Sussex twosome get to congratulate themselves on educating the masses.


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> The Spencer men went to Eton, both Diana's father and brother.
> 
> Will be interesting to see what W&K choose re. schooling for their kids.
> *
> Will be even more interesting to see what H&M choose re. schooling for their kids.*


Archie and Diana will be home schooled with practically burkas on so even their tutors will not be able to sneak a peek.  Meg and Haz will be fundamental in their groundswell of education to help turn around the vicious cycle of genetic pain poor Harry experienced.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I will never understand the British- and others- sending off their very young kids to boarding school. As a child living abroad we saw this all the time, kids as young as 5-6 coming to stay just for holidays and then going back to school not seeing their parents for months.
> 
> There are some very good documentaries about what happened to children, now adults, that were sent off to boarding school in the UK. Grown men breaking down crying for what they suffered. Parents devoid of any feeling when asked why they'd send away a 5-year old that was clearly going through terror having to be sent away from their family. I would hope that the abuse, physical, mental and sexual, is not going on anymore but it wasn't long ago that it did.
> 
> I know many have thrived at these schools but for many kids it is torture.


To each their own, but I personally couldn't do it.  My husband, his siblings and parents all went to boarding schools, but the thought alone was enough to make me tear up.  I bawled like a baby when my firstborn started college and left home!  My BIL and SIL on the other hand, sent all of their children to Deerfield.  When I sent my son to summer camp (because he insisted) my SIL commented how "I would never do that, I like my children at home in the summer".  WTF.    I told her I like my children at home all year long, but 5 weeks in the summer doing something they requested was okay with me.  (Can you tell I can't stand hypocrites!?)


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I imagine centuries from now a group of archaeologists will be digging through the remnants of a Hollywood cemetery and be shocked by the amazing discovery of skeletons with incredibly well-preserved faces, breasts, and butts.


Don't forget the skulls with perfect implants and caps still stuck in.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I thought this was going to be a two-hour special about mental health. *I didn't realize it was a multi-episode series*.


It's like herpes.  You can't get rid of it.


----------



## bisousx

omg


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I thought this was going to be a two-hour special about mental health. I didn't realize it was a multi-episode series.
> 
> Who is going to want to watch an entire series about such a bleak topic? People watch television to be entertained, not to endure pretentious celebrity nonsense. The show's ratings are going to be horrible but Oprah and the Sussex twosome get to congratulate themselves on educating the masses.



Not to worry. OW & Hazzie have this covered. Everything will be soft music, hushed tones, neutrals, concerned looks, and soft focus cameras. In other words, the perfect snoozer.


----------



## Jayne1

queennadine said:


> Preschool starts as young as 2 here. Anything before that is daycare. But most preschools for 2 year olds have an age cut-off so the child has to be 2 by a certain date in August or September, and they must be potty trained. Archie could very well be potty trained but we know (well…do we?! Lol) that he didn’t turn 2 until May. So IMO she was taking him to some type of a class or program or daycare, not ‘school.’


A 2 year old who is potty trained, enough to start school?  Times have changed since mine were that age.  lol


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to worry. OW & Hazzie have this covered. Everything will be soft music, hushed tones, neutrals, concerned looks, and soft focus cameras. In other words, the perfect snoozer.



Not to mention it is airing on Apple TV+. They are so hard up for viewers they give away subscriptions for free and they still don't have many people watching.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I thought this was going to be a two-hour special about mental health. I didn't realize it was a multi-episode series.
> 
> Who is going to want to watch an entire series about such a bleak topic? People watch television to be entertained, not to endure pretentious celebrity nonsense. The show's ratings are going to be horrible but Oprah and the Sussex twosome get to congratulate themselves on educating the masses.


So hard to keep up with this thread now (who would have thought, right???). 

I have ZERO desire to watch ANY of this .. "poor Harry" BS!! .. and don't get me started on Oprah who will likely sit there and be her usual simpering self.  Heck, in my opinion, Oprah has gone through some serious sh1t earlier in her life, so I would totally understand her issues with mental health!  Here's the thing, I get it .. 100%+ .. having gone through this early in my life with my mother being institutionalized multiple times, attempting suicide in front of me multiple times, and many other situations.  Yes, get counseling and maybe join groups with other folks who have experienced similar situations .. it's good to talk through things .. but MY GOD, at some point you have to grow up and take responsibility for keeping your life on track.  As I've said before, I've seen situations where mental health issues have broken some and (in my case).. made people stronger!!  I honestly have a pretty hard time feeling "sorry" for Harry; yes he lost his mother at an early age but .. there are MANY others who have gone through similar situations who did not have a LOT of what Harry had!!!


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s probably cheaper in the U.K. what is it per hour would you say? I’d say  it’s about £7-15 an hour on average here. Childminders are similar rates.
> 
> It is also subsidised for lower income households from 2 and everyone is meant to get a bit from 3. But of course there’s more expensive options out there. It’s when it comes to sending your kid to school that the costs really start adding up. You either need to be able to afford to live in a nice area with good schools or pay to send them out to a good school that charges.



I don't know about per hour but day care in my area is based on a monthly tuition system. It averages about $2-3k/month for 4-5 days a week. It can cost more the younger your child is, with some daycares accepting kids as young as 4 months. Nanny is much more expensive (big shortage here).


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I thought this was going to be a two-hour special about mental health. I didn't realize it was a multi-episode series.
> 
> Who is going to want to watch an entire series about such a bleak topic? People watch television to be entertained, not to endure pretentious celebrity nonsense. The show's ratings are going to be horrible but Oprah and the Sussex twosome get to congratulate themselves on educating the masses.



Did you watch the commercial? It does seem quite depressing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I don't see any bump at all????  Especially bending over like that?  WTF?





Allisonfaye said:


> OMG! I totally missed this. Is this really supposed to be now?



I think it's old footage. They used other old footage in the commercial too (like Meghan reading that children's book). Not sure if they shot segments for the show back then or if those were for other projects.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> So hard to keep up with this thread now (who would have thought, right???).
> 
> I have ZERO desire to watch ANY of this .. "poor Harry" BS!! .. and don't get me started on Oprah who will likely sit there and be her usual simpering self.  Heck, in my opinion, Oprah has gone through some serious sh1t earlier in her life, so I would totally understand her issues with mental health!  Here's the thing, I get it .. 100%+ .. having gone through this early in my life with my mother being institutionalized multiple times, attempting suicide in front of me multiple times, and many other situations.  Yes, get counseling and maybe join groups with other folks who have experienced similar situations .. it's good to talk through things .. but MY GOD, at some point you have to grow up and take responsibility for keeping your life on track.  As I've said before, I've seen situations where mental health issues have broken some and (in my case).. made people stronger!!  I honestly have a pretty hard time feeling "sorry" for Harry; yes he lost his mother at an early age but .. there are MANY others who have gone through similar situations who did not have a LOT of what Harry had!!!



They intersperse the stories of "ordinary people" who you know will have much more inspirational stories of overcoming hardships than the celebrities they have rounded up to regale us with their tales of woe. The unfortunate truth is most people don't want to spend their free time watching something like this even when there is a happy ending (for the regular folks, I don't care about the celebs).


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Not to mention it is airing on Apple TV+. They are so hard up for viewers they give away subscriptions for free and they still don't have many people watching.


They keep offering me a year free and I never accept. lol


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Did you watch the commercial? It does seem quite depressing.



I think they will end each story with something uplifting, but who wants to slog through the sadness to get to it?


----------



## gerryt

xincinsin said:


> Her clothing and his lunchbox/backpack were identified on Meghan's Mirror. Someone is definitely providing the info because she was wearing jeans under a long coat and the site could give a shopping link for the jeans. I do not think they were identifiable from the pap photos.


Just unbelievable!


----------



## queennadine

Jayne1 said:


> A 2 year old who is potty trained, enough to start school?  Times have changed since mine were that age.  lol


I’m just saying it’s possible  Not likely though…


----------



## gerryt

CeeJay said:


> So hard to keep up with this thread now (who would have thought, right???).
> 
> I have ZERO desire to watch ANY of this .. "poor Harry" BS!! .. and don't get me started on Oprah who will likely sit there and be her usual simpering self.  Heck, in my opinion, Oprah has gone through some serious sh1t earlier in her life, so I would totally understand her issues with mental health!  Here's the thing, I get it .. 100%+ .. having gone through this early in my life with my mother being institutionalized multiple times, attempting suicide in front of me multiple times, and many other situations.  Yes, get counseling and maybe join groups with other folks who have experienced similar situations .. it's good to talk through things .. but MY GOD, at some point you have to grow up and take responsibility for keeping your life on track.  As I've said before, I've seen situations where mental health issues have broken some and (in my case).. made people stronger!!  I honestly have a pretty hard time feeling "sorry" for Harry; yes he lost his mother at an early age but .. there are MANY others who have gone through similar situations who did not have a LOT of what Harry had!!!


Im totally with you on this, so sorry you went through such terrible times but very glad that you made it through.  Lady CC has a video up today andher take on years of therapy is very thought provoking.  Ive only had therapy once and it was useful but have found that talking things through with friends really helps, in particular because it gives you perspective and draws you closer to people who can support you all your life.


----------



## Genie27

Mental health - brought to you by apple, Oprah and harry

episode one: How I coped (and you can too) - my dad literally cut me off without a penny. Luckily I had a few million from my mum and Uncle Elton sent his private plane so we could flee with whatever couture and jewelry we could grab from our cottage.

Episode two: A throne of lies - somebody said something - but I’ll never tell. But no, no, no, it wasn’t gangan or gramps.

Episode Three: anguish in LA - the paparazzi won’t leave my now-wife alone. These colonial peasants shouldn’t be able to do this. See how it upsets me.

WWHL: Henry discusses his genetic pain, while Andy brings on a panel of people from former British colonies to discuss their generational trauma. (Only kidding - that never happened)

Grand finale - show stopping entrance of the Instacart girl wearing a bumpit, a moon bump and a velvet bedspread by Dior.

Thanks for listening. Don’t forget to hit ‘subscribe’ for our next episode...

PS. please leave the therapy to real professionals.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Jayne1 said:


> They keep offering me a year free and I never accept. lol



They got me with Ted Lasso... that show is the Sh!t.... i literally can’t find anything else to watch on it though. I may cancel it between seasons once I have to start paying for it.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> So hard to keep up with this thread now (who would have thought, right???).
> 
> I have ZERO desire to watch ANY of this .. "poor Harry" BS!! .. and don't get me started on Oprah who will likely sit there and be her usual simpering self.  Heck, in my opinion, Oprah has gone through some serious sh1t earlier in her life, so I would totally understand her issues with mental health!  Here's the thing, I get it .. 100%+ .. having gone through this early in my life with my mother being institutionalized multiple times, attempting suicide in front of me multiple times, and many other situations.  Yes, get counseling and maybe join groups with other folks who have experienced similar situations .. it's good to talk through things .. but MY GOD, at some point you have to grow up and take responsibility for keeping your life on track.  As I've said before, I've seen situations where mental health issues have broken some and (in my case).. made people stronger!!  I honestly have a pretty hard time feeling "sorry" for Harry; yes he lost his mother at an early age but .. there are MANY others who have gone through similar situations who did not have a LOT of what Harry had!!!


good for you for coming through all that stronger...some people do and some aren't as strong.  did you have someone like a grandparent to help compensate for all the horror with your mother?
as far as Harry, I agree, yes, he lost his mother and that was horrible.  and even his privileged childhood wasn't perfect.  I'm sure being in the spotlight all the time can by trying.  but there are obviously people much worse off.  he seems to be making a career out of whining about his mental struggles due to loss of his mother.  not a positive way to make a living IMO.  as we've said here before, I wonder what Diana would have to say about all of this.  seems likely she would be proud of William.  as for H - I'm sure she would love him but maybe not be so proud of him these days.  we'll never know.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Reminds me of Angelina Jolie’s movies, always SO depressing.  I believe one of them was called “First they killed my father”. I’m sure the topic was important, but man, what a downer.


----------



## Allisonfaye

gerryt said:


> I can tell you a funny true story about pictures posted on Facebook. A few years back I had breast cancer - mastectomy and reconstruction.  I was part of a breast cancer closed support group on Facebook which helped hugely and I stayed on it for quite a while to support others.  A lady came on, saying she was dreading her up and coming reconstruction, didn’t know what it would look like and could she be cheeky and ask if anyone was pleased with theirs and willing to post a photo.  Well, mine was great (better than the real one!) so I duly posted a photo, minus my head, though of course my name was at the top of the post.  A few mins later my best mate rang.  “Err, did you mean to post that photo?”.   Technophobe that I am, I had posted it on my main page!  Frantic shrieking for help to my brother who was visiting, it was taken down a few mins later, though quite funny watching him try to do this without actually looking at a photo of his sisters boobs.   My friend said, don’t worry, no one will have been looking at it in the middle of the day and it was only up a few minutes, have a look at who’s gone on your page just so you know.  So I did and there were two people who had viewed it.  One was my friend.  The other was the vicar.  Never posted a photo since.



OMG!!! Thank goodness it was only two people. I also had all that same surgery you had. I have the surgery done in another state so you have to take pictures of yourself and send them so they can plan ahead what to do. I try to delete all the photos off my phone after each time (I have been there 3 x) but one day, I had a lady helping me organize my photos. Thank God I opened up the computer before she came over because those pictures popped up.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sol Ryan said:


> G
> 
> 
> They got me with Ted Lasso... that show is the Sh!t.... i literally can’t find anything else to watch on it though. I may cancel it between seasons once I have to start paying for it.


I heard they purposely gave free subscriptions that will expire before Ted Lasso season 2 starts.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lanasyogamama said:


> I heard they purposely gave free subscriptions that will expire before Ted Lasso season 2 starts.


Monsters... cruel cruel monters!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I heard they purposely gave free subscriptions that will expire before Ted Lasso season 2 starts.


is that show with Jen Aniston still on?  that was a big deal when it started (at least as far as promos)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> is that show with Jen Aniston still on?  that was a big deal when it started (at least as far as promos)



waiting on season 2
It received lots of positive press, I thought it was slow and tedious.  I’m noticing these streaming services are dragging out their series’ shows. What could be a 2 episode series turns into a 6 or 8.  The latter shows are snoozers.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> as we've said here before, I wonder what Diana would have to say about all of this.  seems likely she would be proud of William.  as for H - I'm sure she would love him but maybe not be so proud of him these days.  we'll never know.



Had Diana lived Harry might well be bashing her the same way he is the rest of his family. At least he would be if he had hooked up with Meghan. The duchess narc would have still found a way to isolate him and turn him against everyone he loved except her. As a ghost Diana is useful as a means of influencing Harry. As a flesh-and-blood woman and mother, Diana would have been in Meghan’s way.


----------



## queennadine

bag-mania said:


> Had Diana lived Harry might well be bashing her the same way he is the rest of his family. At least he would be if he had hooked up with Meghan. The duchess narc would have still found a way to isolate him and turn him against everyone he loved except her. As a ghost Diana is useful as a means of influencing Harry. As a flesh-and-blood woman and mother, Diana would have been in Meghan’s way.


I agree. I think he has somehow idealized his ‘Mummy’ and made her into a larger-than-life heroine. Diana knew the importance of family and tradition and roles; I doubt she would have approved of him treating his grandparents, father, and brother like this.
I also think MM absolutely would have seen Diana as competition for Harry’s time, attention, and affection.


----------



## CeeJay

gerryt said:


> Im totally with you on this, so sorry you went through such terrible times but very glad that you made it through.  Lady CC has a video up today andher take on years of therapy is very thought provoking.  Ive only had therapy once and it was useful but have found that talking things through with friends really helps, in particular because it gives you perspective and draws you closer to people who can support you all your life.


100% agree .. honestly, the sessions that we had with my mother's Psychologist were some of the worst things I ever had to go through as a kid, in essence .. being told that your mother's illness is because of you?!?!?!  For some odd reason, people who have gone through similar situations .. well, let's just say that somehow .. you find each other and they are somewhat relieved to realize "heck - I'm not the only one that went through this"!


----------



## Jayne1

Genie27 said:


> Mental health - brought to you by apple, Oprah and harry
> 
> episode one: How I coped (and you can too) - my dad literally cut me off without a penny. Luckily I had a few million from my mum and Uncle Elton sent his private plane so we could flee with whatever couture and jewelry we could grab from our cottage.
> 
> Episode two: A throne of lies - somebody said something - but I’ll never tell. But no, no, no, it wasn’t gangan or gramps.
> 
> Episode Three: anguish in LA - the paparazzi won’t leave my now-wife alone. These colonial peasants shouldn’t be able to do this. See how it upsets me.
> 
> WWHL: Henry discusses his genetic pain, while Andy brings on a panel of people from former British colonies to discuss their generational trauma. (Only kidding - that never happened)
> 
> Grand finale - show stopping entrance of the Instacart girl wearing a bumpit, a moon bump and a velvet bedspread by Dior.
> 
> Thanks for listening. Don’t forget to hit ‘subscribe’ for our next episode...
> 
> PS. please leave the therapy to real professionals.


The _Me Me Me Me _You Can't See.

I'm not sure who would keep my interest constantly talking about themselves.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

I'm sorry UK members, but I have to join this journalist on 'take Prince Harry back'. Do it fast, please!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> I'm sorry UK members, but I have to join this journalist on 'take Prince Harry back'. Do it fast, please!



Let me think about that for a moment... Er, yeah, no thanks..   he’s all yours


----------



## purseinsanity

queennadine said:


> I agree. I think he has somehow idealized his ‘Mummy’ and made her into a larger-than-life heroine. Diana knew the importance of family and tradition and roles; I doubt she would have approved of him treating his grandparents, father, and brother like this.
> I also think MM absolutely would have seen Diana as competition for Harry’s time, attention, and affection.


Meg may never have been in the picture if Diana was around.  Maybe she would've picked up on her true character and not be easily swayed by the Bambi eyes and batting eyelashes.  We can only dream!


----------



## gerryt

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree .. honestly, the sessions that we had with my mother's Psychologist were some of the worst things I ever had to go through as a kid, in essence .. being told that your mother's illness is because of you?!?!?!  For some odd reason, people who have gone through similar situations .. well, let's just say that somehow .. you find each other and they are somewhat relieved to realize "heck - I'm not the only one that went through this"!


what kind of monster would do that to a child!  Try if you can to watch Lady CCs video - she touches on that very subject, where one of her therapists was manipulating her to her own end.  She says that it’s a profession that draws the wrong people to it. (not all, obviously, but that does sort of make sense).  I do agree that you seem to be led to certain people in life or others may be led to you and at some point you find yourselves looking at each other saying we were meant to meet, weren’t we!  I find that very comforting, like there is a plan.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I'm sorry UK members, but I have to join this journalist on 'take Prince Harry back'. Do it fast, please!



He's yours now, enjoy!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow! I never would have guessed Eton is public!  Do those schools let any kids in that aren’t from wealthy families?


Sorry it means something different to the American public school. 
essentially it’s a weird britishism that means a private independently run fee paying school. Their business model relies on predominantly fee-paying pupils. 
Theoretically  you could be poor and get a place at Eton by getting a scholarship but you would be very much in the minority.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> Let me think about that for a moment... Er, yeah, no thanks..   he’s all yours



Nope, he’s here on diplomat passport, right?  He is yours, luv.

"_Let me just start by saying the UK is one of the top ten exporters to the US, as an American and in the words of former President Donald ***** 'you all are not sending your best'", Amber told Susanna Reid and Adil Ray.








						US journalists begs UK 'take Harry back' after 'throwing grenade' at Royals
					

A US journalist has today begged the UK to “take Prince Harry back” on Good Morning Britain – claiming the duke “threw a grenade” at the Royal Family. Amber Athey, who…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




ETA: luv_


----------



## creme fraiche

Having been through this twice in the UK but being American, I can clarify posh education in England.

Nursery starts after age 2 and the children need to be potty trained to start.  Highly sought nurseries are booked at birth or soon after.  Nannies are from birth and continue until senior school age for many (age 11)

Pre-prep from 4-7, with schools like Wetherby booked at birth, but schools like Thomas’ (where George and Charlotte are) admitted based on interview and short tasks the year prior to entry.

Prep school for boys are from 8-13 with the most academic (junior schools attached to the big name schools like Westminster and St Paul’s) by serious competitive academic exam and interview in the year prior to entry.  Boys go onto senior schools at either 11 (co-Ed schools and increasingly many more schools) based On headmaster report, exam, and interview the year before.  If the boys are going onto boarding school or one of the big name public schools, there is a pre-entrance exam, iq test, and interview at 11 with conditional offers given with offers firmed based on passing the Common Entrance exam at the age of 13.

The term public school refers to a particular kind of private school - definitely on of the original schools investigated by the Clarendon Commision, Charterhouse, Eton College, Winchester College, Harrow, Rugby, Shrewsbury, and Westminster. They called themselved public school in the sense that the boys were being educated in a group, as opposed to privately by tutors at hone. Nowadays, public school just refers to a big, old posh private school.

Girls transfer to senior school at 11 (why the difference, who knows), and 11 is the age senior school starts at coed schools and state schools.  Private girls schools are also competitive entry with Iqtests pre-tests at the most selective, then exams and interviews.

11+ season is very stressful because children will be sitting separate exams or pre-tests for each school except for some of the girls schools which are in a consortium.  People start tutoring several years prior to pass the exams.

Eton today is not the same as when Diana’s brother and father went there and is a very difficult school to get into.  It most definitely is an academic high flyer and Harry would definitely have stuck out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Had Diana lived Harry might well be bashing her the same way he is the rest of his family. At least he would be if he had hooked up with Meghan. The duchess narc would have still found a way to isolate him and turn him against everyone he loved except her. As a ghost Diana is useful as a means of influencing Harry. As a flesh-and-blood woman and mother, Diana would have been in Meghan’s way.



I still think had she lived he'd probably not have fallen victim as easily to Duchess Disney. Then again, who knows...the boys were at boarding school while Diana travelled the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree .. honestly, the sessions that we had with my mother's Psychologist were some of the worst things I ever had to go through as a kid, in essence .. being told that your mother's illness is because of you?!?!?!  For some odd reason, people who have gone through similar situations .. well, let's just say that somehow .. you find each other and they are somewhat relieved to realize "heck - I'm not the only one that went through this"!



Ok...did that person win their degree during a raffle or why were they so sh*tty at their job? I'm appalled and so sorry you had to go through this.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> A 2 year old who is potty trained, enough to start school?  Times have changed since mine were that age.  lol


These nannies are very efficient you know. Failure will not be tolerated. Also you can always just get the maid to clear it up the accidents   
Mine definitely not by 2 either but I do know two mums who got their kids   on the potty before 2. It varies a lot.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nope, he’s here on diplomat passport, right?  He is yours, luv.
> 
> "_Let me just start by saying the UK is one of the top ten exporters to the US, as an American and in the words of former President Donald ***** 'you all are not sending your best'", Amber told Susanna Reid and Adil Ray.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US journalists begs UK 'take Harry back' after 'throwing grenade' at Royals
> 
> 
> A US journalist has today begged the UK to “take Prince Harry back” on Good Morning Britain – claiming the duke “threw a grenade” at the Royal Family. Amber Athey, who…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: luv_


I haven't seen his passport, but you guys are giving him standing ovations and he’s loving the attention he’s getting - so I don’t think he’s on his way back here anytime soon


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I don't know about per hour but day care in my area is based on a monthly tuition system. It averages about $2-3k/month for 4-5 days a week. It can cost more the younger your child is, with some daycares accepting kids as young as 4 months. Nanny is much more expensive (big shortage here).


So it’s about $25 an hour or £17.50 ish so it’s pricier and it sounds like they don’t have as much flexibility on times. It sounds like childminding should definitely become a thing in the US.


gerryt said:


> Im totally with you on this, so sorry you went through such terrible times but very glad that you made it through.  Lady CC has a video up today andher take on years of therapy is very thought provoking.  Ive only had therapy once and it was useful but have found that talking things through with friends really helps, in particular because it gives you perspective and draws you closer to people who can support you all your life.


Yes I really enjoyed that lady c video. I find she goes on a bit but I thought she was very clear on the issues. The stuff about 12 steppers not being experts I really agree with.


lanasyogamama said:


> Reminds me of Angelina Jolie’s movies, always SO depressing.  I believe one of them was called “First they killed my father”. I’m sure the topic was important, but man, what a downer.


At least those people have actual problems.

H and M’s equivalent is ‘first my father killed my airtime’


Jayne1 said:


> The _Me Me Me Me _You Can't See.
> 
> I'm not sure who would keep my interest constantly talking about themselves.


Joni Mitchell is the only person I can think of who can make their personal experience endlessly fascinating but then she’s a hardcore legend & should’ve been the first songwriter to get the Nobel prize for literature.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this, another lie exposed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A 2014 photograph of Meghan Markle posing with a magazine which has Kate Middelton on the cover has resurfaced online for the first time since The Duchess of Sussex quit the royal family
> 
> 
> It was also five years before Meghan would go-on to be the first guest-editor of the September issue of Vogue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle posed with a Kate Middleton magazine cover in 2014
> 
> 
> An unearthed photograph has been revealed of Meghan Markle posing with a magazine that bore Kate Middleton on the cover - two years before the now-Duchess of Sussex met Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ugh. 

"'And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn't make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.''

Just sounds like such gobboldy gook. In other words "everyone else was buying my victim of my dad status and walking on eggshells trying not to upset Bridezilla except Kate'.


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> LOL that's like that face app that aged your face.  My son did mine and my friends said I looked like a Sicilian grandmother!



I saw that app and I stayed clear away from it.  Kiddos to you for trying it!!  I'm not brave enough!  Too afraid to see myself!  LOL


----------



## Chanbal

Clearblueskies said:


> Let me think about that for a moment... Er, yeah, no thanks..   he’s all yours


haha


----------



## jelliedfeels

queennadine said:


> I agree. I think he has somehow idealized his ‘Mummy’ and made her into a larger-than-life heroine. Diana knew the importance of family and tradition and roles; I doubt she would have approved of him treating his grandparents, father, and brother like this.
> I also think MM absolutely would have seen Diana as competition for Harry’s time, attention, and affection.


I agree with this. While he’s clearly idealised her now plenty of people do that with their living parents too.

Had she lived I think Harry would be a mummy’s boy & I think Diana would be vetting his gals and she’d have said MM was a common golddigger and she’d have got the boot double time.

I don’t think he’d ever dump his mum for MM. Obviously dropping his family came easy to him as he didn’t like them that much any ways especially Will and Dad.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Allisonfaye said:


> Ugh.
> 
> "'And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn't make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.''
> 
> Just sounds like such gobboldy gook. In other words "everyone else was buying my victim of my dad status and walking on eggshells trying not to upset Bridezilla except Kate'.


I had to read that sentence 3 times


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> He's yours now, enjoy!


Can you take the wife?


----------



## Genie27

Clearblueskies said:


> I had to read that sentence 3 times


Now can you explain it to me please? I have no idea what it means.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I saw that app and I stayed clear away from it.  Kiddos to you for trying it!!  I'm not brave enough!  Too afraid to see myself!  LOL


Thanks, but I had no choice in the matter.  My son took his favorite picture of me and made me old.  He did that to everyone in the family.  Thank God for iPhones.  Not!  LOL.
He also used my wedding picture and it looked like two geriatric patients had found each other late in life.


----------



## gerryt

purseinsanity said:


> Meg may never have been in the picture if Diana was around.  Maybe she would've picked up on her true character and not be easily swayed by the Bambi eyes and batting eyelashes.  We can only dream!


I agree - Harry was always very attached to Diana (remember the video of him kicking his brother when Diana hugged William first).  Maybe had he spent time with her as an adult he would hopefully have developed a more balanced view of her character whilst still valuing her advice etc.  I think there is a part of Harry’s mind that stopped growing when he lost Diana.  Something similar happened to my father.  Think it’s called arrested development??   I just don’t believe that PC deserves the rap he is taking from Harry.  He clearly loves his boys hugely, and if there were negatives in his own upbringing I don’t believe he would have repeated them.  My feeling is that if anything, this is all because Harry has been very spoilt and is just used to getting his own way in everything.  Couple that with an immature mind and this behaviour is what you get.  It used to be said that the only person Harry would listen to was Tiggy - maybe that’s where Charles should be heading.


----------



## Genie27

Allisonfaye said:


> Just sounds like such gobboldy gook. In other words "everyone else was buying my victim of my dad status and walking on eggshells trying not to upset Bridezilla except Kate'.


Oh thanks! This run-on-sentence-rambling-stream-of-consciousness-word-salad was driving me nuts


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Oh thanks! This run-on-sentence-rambling-stream-of-consciousness-word-salad was driving me nuts


Harry and Meg, single-handedly modernising the english language one podcast at a time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still think had she lived he'd probably not have fallen victim as easily to Duchess Disney. Then again, who knows...the boys were at boarding school while Diana travelled the world.





jelliedfeels said:


> I agree with this. While he’s clearly idealised her now plenty of people do that with their living parents too.
> 
> Had she lived I think Harry would be a mummy’s boy & I think Diana would be vetting his gals and she’d have said MM was a common golddigger and she’d have got the boot double time.
> 
> I don’t think he’d ever dump his mum for MM. Obviously dropping his family came easy to him as he didn’t like them that much any ways especially Will and Dad.



Possibly, but I'm not convinced. By the time Harry would have introduced Diana to Meghan, I suspect he would already have been in her thrall. Never underestimate Meghan! Harry would have blown off Diana's advice in the same way he blew off Will's. In fact we might have been treated to a big helping of whatever Diana told him (plus the exaggerations and lies) during the Oprah interview.

Keep in mind that if she had lived Diana would almost certainly have remarried, probably not to Dodi, but to someone. That would have changed things in Harry's mind. He would have had to share his mum. I don't believe her death when he was young is completely to blame for the way he turned out. I think his core personality traits were already pretty much developed by age 12.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Keep in mind that if she had lived Diana would almost certainly have remarried, probably not to Dodi, but to someone. That would have changed things in Harry's mind. He would have had to share his mum. I don't believe her death when he was young is completely to blame for the way he turned out. I think his core personality traits were already pretty much developed by age 12.


Agree -- and also, I remember how she was becoming more disliked with all that forging ahead, doing what she liked, with what she thought was important in defiance of the royal family.

She died before any major screw ups and people forgot the bad stuff, like when Philip died, they forgot the homophobic and racist remarks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry’s passport - if it is a diplomatic one, he has enormous immunity for all kinds things.  The Palace has been silent on this topic. Interesting.









						Prince Harry's passport status sparks 'interesting' debate: 'I wonder if Meghan knew this'
					






					honey.nine.com.au
				




It remains unclear over how Prince Harry has stayed in the US without citizenship, however it is likely to be because of his royal status.

The duke may even have an A1 visa which is reserved for "diplomats and government officials", reports The Express.

Prince Harry and Meghan moved to California in early 2020 from Canada, just before the coronavirus pandemic closed the borders.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> Harry the 'dear' and 'darling boy'... How can one change so much?
> 
> *Prince Harry lavished praise on Prince Charles' parenting just three years ago, a resurfaced interview reveals.*
> 
> _It comes after the Duke of Sussex criticised his father last week, saying Charles "suffered" during his childhood, and “treated me the way he was treated”.
> 
> Speaking about his upbringing as a royal, Harry told Dax Shepard his father passed on "genetic pain" and talked about how he wants to "break that cycle".
> 
> It is a far cry from the relationship the dad and son appeared to have when they chatted on BBC Radio 4's Today show back in 2017.
> 
> *During that broadcast, Harry enthused: "We could talk about this for hours and hours, which we always do, but not with a microphone in front of us.*
> 
> "I totally see it and I totally understand it because of all these years and conversations we've been having.
> 
> "I do end up picking your brains more now than I ever have done."_
> 
> *The Prince of Wales referred to his son as "dear boy", adding: "Well darling boy it makes me very proud to think you understand."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry praises Prince Charles' parenting in clip three years before rift
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex claimed he was suffering "genetic pain" and said he wanted to "break the cycle" last week in an apparent swipe at his dad, but back in 2017 he described how the pair would "talk for hours"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



As is usually the case, he needed Meghan to point out how bad of a parent Charles was.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Agree -- and also, I remember how she was becoming more disliked with all that forging ahead, doing what she liked, with what she thought was important in defiance of the royal family.
> 
> She died before any major screw ups and people forgot the bad stuff, like when Philip died, they forgot the homophobic and racist remarks.



She was his mother. Most teens discover their parents are not perfect people as they become adults.

Harry has certainly changed his tune about Charles now that the cash flow has been cut off. As Chanbal pointed out, up until becoming intertwined with Meghan Harry had had a close relationship with his father and brother. I suspect he would have continued to have a close relationship with Diana but I'm not convinced it would have survived Megxit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He said he knew at 20 yrs old he did not want the royal job.  
Maybe someone could ask him the obvious question - why didn’t he leave then? 
He must think we are as dim as he is. If Charles wants his great reset to work, he needs to deal with his jerky son. Now that Hazzie has shouted his thoughts on our 1st amendment to all of us, the reset will be a tougher reset.  Charles et al. misjudged the American people. IMO 









						HRH the Prince of Wales and other leaders on the Forum's Great Reset
					

The Great Reset - the theme of Davos 2021 - is a commitment to jointly and urgently build the foundations of our economic and social system for a more fair, sustainable and resilient post-COVID future.




					www.weforum.org


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> Ugh.
> 
> "'And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn't make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.''
> 
> Just sounds like such gobboldy gook. In other words "everyone else was buying my victim of my dad status and walking on eggshells trying not to upset Bridezilla except Kate'.



Poor Megs. I read the first clouds in paradise arrived when she invited Kate to a pre-bridal luncheon with her new A-list friends like Amal Clooney, Misha Noonoo (is that how you write her name?) and Jessica Mulroney and the at the time heavily  pregnant Kate declined because she had another obligation that day and Duchess Disney failed to understand you don't just spontaneously invite senior royals but have to check their schedule first. So from that moment on she decided Kate was the enemy. 

Oh, and BTW, Megs: you are not entitled to silken gloves only because you can't keep a good relationship with any family member but your very detached mother, HTH.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Possibly, but I'm not convinced. By the time Harry would have introduced Diana to Meghan, I suspect he would already have been in her thrall. Never underestimate Meghan! Harry would have blown off Diana's advice in the same way he blew off Will's. In fact we might have been treated to a big helping of whatever Diana told him (plus the exaggerations and lies) during the Oprah interview.



I'm not saying he'd have dumped her following Di's advice. My theory is more along the lines of had she lived he wouldn't have been quite so messed up and vulnerable, so maybe he'd have been more resistant to her toxic charm. Plus, with Diana alive Duchess Disney would have lacked a huge arsenal of manipulation and cos-playing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> She died before any major screw ups and people forgot the bad stuff, like when Philip died, they forgot the homophobic and racist remarks.



Can you elaborate on the homophobic remarks? Because when the first member of the distant royal family married his boyfriend he was quoted saying "People need to do what makes them happy."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> He said he knew at 20 yrs old he did not want the royal job.
> Maybe someone could ask him the obvious question - why didn’t he leave then?
> He must think we are as dim as he is. If Charles wants his great reset to work, he needs to deal with his jerky son. Now that Hazzie has shouted his thoughts on our 1st amendment to all of us, the reset will be a tougher reset.  Charles et al. misjudged the American people. IMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HRH the Prince of Wales and other leaders on the Forum's Great Reset
> 
> 
> The Great Reset - the theme of Davos 2021 - is a commitment to jointly and urgently build the foundations of our economic and social system for a more fair, sustainable and resilient post-COVID future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.weforum.org



I think he's full of it. He basically sacrificed Chelsey - which for all we know would have been the much better choice - who could not deal with the restrictions and attention because he didn't want to leave. Hello, that girl was born and raised in Zimbabwe, which I hear her father owns to a big percentage. He could have lived his days watching lions and elephants had he chosen so.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not saying he'd have dumped her following Di's advice. My theory is more along the lines of had she lived he wouldn't have been quite so messed up and vulnerable, so maybe he'd have been more resistant to her toxic charm. Plus, with Diana alive Duchess Disney would have lacked a huge arsenal of manipulation and cos-playing.



What would Diana have thought about this cosplay that both Kate and MM do? Flattered? Irritated? Amused? Wear another LBD?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not saying he'd have dumped her following Di's advice. My theory is more along the lines of had she lived he wouldn't have been quite so messed up and vulnerable, so maybe he'd have been more resistant to her toxic charm. Plus, with Diana alive Duchess Disney would have lacked a huge arsenal of manipulation and cos-playing.



True enough. We'll never know how it would have played out. He seems to have been indulged by his father and grandmother in an attempt to compensate for the loss of his mother. It fanned the flames of an entitlement streak in him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, the Procter & Gamble deal has reached German media, and they are not impressed. Words like "hypocrisy" and "Funny, after the racism claims" might have been used by reputable magazines.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> What would Diana have thought about this cosplay that both Kate and MM do? Flattered? Irritated? Amused? Wear another LBD?



I honestly do not think it's William's kink.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly do not think it's William's kink.



Agree.  I think because of ‘the ring’ Kate gets dragged for wearing anything similar to Diana.  The problem is Diana wore so many perfect outfits that it is difficult to come up with something totally different. But the real problem is the press - any time someone wears polka dots, bam, she’s copying Diana. Easy to forget that even she got it wrong sometimes. Happily (?),  the DM reminds us. 











						Princess Diana's biggest sartorial mishaps
					

Diana, who made the transition from demure dresser to sartorial style queen, often plumped for garish gowns and unflattering frocks.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> I always notice they both have the ski slope noses.....and I also noticed the other day while she has hollywood teeth, H looks like his could have used some help.  guess teeth aren't a big priority with the royals



Um, have you ever been to the UK? It's a thing.


----------



## CeeJay

creme fraiche said:


> Having been through this twice in the UK but being American, I can clarify posh education in England.
> 
> Nursery starts after age 2 and the children need to be potty trained to start.  Highly sought nurseries are booked at birth or soon after.  Nannies are from birth and continue until senior school age for many (age 11)
> 
> Pre-prep from 4-7, with schools like Wetherby booked at birth, but schools like Thomas’ (where George and Charlotte are) admitted based on interview and short tasks the year prior to entry.
> 
> Prep school for boys are from 8-13 with the most academic (junior schools attached to the big name schools like Westminster and St Paul’s) by serious competitive academic exam and interview in the year prior to entry.  Boys go onto senior schools at either 11 (co-Ed schools and increasingly many more schools) based On headmaster report, exam, and interview the year before.  If the boys are going onto boarding school or one of the big name public schools, there is a pre-entrance exam, iq test, and interview at 11 with conditional offers given with offers firmed based on passing the Common Entrance exam at the age of 13.
> 
> The term public school refers to a particular kind of private school - definitely on of the original schools investigated by the Clarendon Commision, Charterhouse, Eton College, Winchester College, Harrow, Rugby, Shrewsbury, and Westminster. They called themselved public school in the sense that the boys were being educated in a group, as opposed to privately by tutors at hone. Nowadays, public school just refers to a big, old posh private school.
> 
> Girls transfer to senior school at 11 (why the difference, who knows), and 11 is the age senior school starts at coed schools and state schools.  Private girls schools are also competitive entry with Iqtests pre-tests at the most selective, then exams and interviews.
> 
> 11+ season is very stressful because children will be sitting separate exams or pre-tests for each school except for some of the girls schools which are in a consortium.  People start tutoring several years prior to pass the exams.
> 
> Eton today is not the same as when Diana’s brother and father went there and is a very difficult school to get into.  It most definitely is an academic high flyer and Harry would definitely have stuck out.


Sheesh!!! .. thanks for all this but, gosh .. that's a fair amount of pressure on kids at a relatively young age!  I can tell you that in the US, the "Prep" schools also look at Grades, an Interview is a must, sometimes they even require you to write an essay (of sorts) .. but a HUGE thing is also "how you are 'connected'" - vis-a-vis, your FAMILY!  Similar (sadly) to how the Ivy-league Universities work here in the US, if you have a former alumnus in your family, or you have a "name" .. (and especially if your family can pay the tuition!) .. there's a better chance that you will get in.  There was a private school directly across the street from where I grew up in Connecticut.  My grades were very high, I interviewed well, they liked my essay .. but a neighbor (who was a bone-head, seriously .. NOT BRIGHT at all) got her notice of acceptance before I did!  That pissed off my parents so much that they said "forget it", even though I did get accepted!  I ended up having to schlep to another private school in the next town, but after 1 year said "feh" (I didn't think their program was as good as they thought it was).  

So, if Eton is so hard to get into (academically), then I think we can all say that Hap-Hazza got in based on "connections" as opposed to his intellect (if there is even such a thing with him)!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I discovered my old riding intructor's Youtube channel and have gotten a  kick out of watching all his sales horse videos because that man is a born storyteller and the gaited horse community is still small enough that the stories are super cool, e.g. like when all the horses of one specific team fell sick during a World Championship and all the local riders shuffled to bring in their spare horses so the team suddenly left without rides had something to compete on.

While I still have my now retired horse I bought from him what feels like a lifetime ago, I'm kind of surprised how I started to miss riding regularly. I can only wonder: doesn't Harry miss his horses he left behind? He was a far more serious sportsman than I ever was (I think I competed exactly once because nerves and instead enjoyed my competition level horse to cruise around the forest in style) and a horse is not just a breathing bicycle. He's been on horseback since he was a toddler. He for sure had horses he had trained and built up for years. I just can't imagine. 

What say you...shall I be daring and book a lesson just to see for the first time in years? I kind of want to, but I'm scared haha.


----------



## Lodpah

Wow so much to read through. Just got back from vacation and it was nice to see in the wild no one gives a rip about these two. They’re wasting so much money on PR trying to make them relevant lol. 

Anyway read somewhere that for every 5 dollars donated to their foundation only .25 cents go to charity so they they are living large.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> While I still have my now retired horse I bought from him what feels like a lifetime ago, I'm kind of surprised how I started to miss riding regularly. I can only wonder:* doesn't Harry miss his horses he left behind? *He was a far more serious sportsman than I ever was (I think I competed exactly once because nerves and instead enjoyed my competition level horse to cruise around the forest in style) and a horse is not just a breathing bicycle. He's been on horseback since he was a toddler. He for sure had horses he had trained and built up for years. I just can't imagine.
> 
> What say you...shall I be daring and book a lesson just to see for the first time in years? I kind of want to, but I'm scared haha.



I don't know if Harry bonded with his mounts the way his grandparents did. It is clear the Queen loves her horses and so did Philip.

As for Harry, playing polo requires having a string of horses to ride during games. Who knows if any of them were around long enough to become special to him? Hopefully he had horses he liked to ride for pleasure, but I don't think he cares that much about them. Otherwise there would be a stable on the million dollar estate.

Meghan probably doesn't think horses are important so Harry doesn't either!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Anyway read somewhere that for every 5 dollars donated to their foundation only .25 cents go to charity so they they are living large.



Just...wow.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don't know if Harry bonded with his mounts the way his grandparents did. It is clear the Queen loves her horses and so did Philip.
> 
> As for Harry, playing polo requires having a string of horses to ride during games. Who knows if any of them were around long enough to become special to him? Hopefully he had horses he liked to ride for pleasure, but I don't think he cares that much about them. Otherwise there would be a stable on the million dollar estate.
> 
> Meghan probably doesn't think horses are important so Harry doesn't either!



It's just hard for me to imagine to be completely indifferent to a living being. Ugh.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I don't know if Harry bonded with his mounts the way his grandparents did. It is clear the Queen loves her horses and so did Philip.
> 
> As for Harry, playing polo requires having a string of horses to ride during games. Who knows if any of them were around long enough to become special to him? Hopefully he had horses he liked to ride for pleasure, but I don't think he cares that much about them. Otherwise there would be a stable on the million dollar estate.
> 
> Meghan probably doesn't think horses are important so Harry doesn't either!


Horses require about 2 acres per horse to feed off the land, so, their 8 acres won’t support a string of polo ponies ... you can keep your horses at stables, and maybe share ownership to help defray costs 
but horses are expensive, time consuming ( vet, exercise, heat, trailering, trucking worries ) and really tie you down to a location 
my guess, H has neither the time nor the funds for a string of ponies
i don’t doubt that he might asked do a charity match using a friend’s ponies , a horsy friend with deep pockets


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting how each country reports the same story differently 
as you recall, the British non-tabloid press Times soft pedaled the Dax interview, see one of my recent posts for link 
yet the French press , Point de Vue covers royals, has the cover title - the truce is over, H attacks his father and grandmother


----------



## queennadine

I agree with everyone that thinks he didn’t get what he wanted when he flew home
for PP’s funeral. So now he’s throwing a tantrum and “letting them have it.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did this ever get resolved?  It looks awful.
Happened in 2010.  While the article says the horse was fine, idk.  Comments seem to disagree.


Spoiler: Disturbing image














						Prince Harry faces animal cruelty claim over polo pony's stab wound from his spur
					

The Prince was accused yesterday after his horse suffered a bloody injury during a polo match. He was photographed riding the animal despite it appearing to have been stabbed by one of his spurs.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Horses require about 2 acres per horse to feed off the land, so, their 8 acres won’t support a string of polo ponies ... you can keep your horses at stables, and maybe share ownership to help defray costs
> but horses are expensive, time consuming ( vet, exercise, heat, trailering, trucking worries ) and really tie you down to a location
> my guess, H has neither the time nor the funds for a string of ponies
> i don’t doubt that he might asked do a charity match using a friend’s ponies , a horsy friend with deep pockets



For all we know playing polo was just one more of those tiresome chores his family expected of him. Thank goodness he has found freedom from all that hardship.


----------



## Hermes Zen

What caught my attention is 'drive H & M apart' wouldn't that be lovely.  But don't know how legit this is.  Interesting thoughts though. 

*Princess Diana’s former butler warns new documentary could ‘drive Harry and Meghan apart’ with ‘scandalous’ revelations*
By Caitlin Elliott

First Published 1 day ago

https://www.womanandhome.com/amp/li...and-meghan-apart-with-scandalous-revelations/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did this ever get resolved?  It looks awful.
> Happened in 2010.  While the article says the horse was fine, idk.  Comments seem to disagree.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Disturbing image
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5086937
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry faces animal cruelty claim over polo pony's stab wound from his spur
> 
> 
> The Prince was accused yesterday after his horse suffered a bloody injury during a polo match. He was photographed riding the animal despite it appearing to have been stabbed by one of his spurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I don't understand why spurs are even allowed in polo or jumping (IMO their purpose is to give even finer signals during dressage, which would obviously never cause injury because you don't jam them into the horse's side). Not my kind of horsemanship at all. But I don't think that was a life-threatening injury or even permanent damage.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> What caught my attention is 'drive H & M apart' wouldn't that be lovely.  But don't know how legit this is.  Interesting thoughts though.
> 
> *Princess Diana’s former butler warns new documentary could ‘drive Harry and Meghan apart’ with ‘scandalous’ revelations*
> By Caitlin Elliott
> 
> First Published 1 day ago
> 
> https://www.womanandhome.com/amp/li...and-meghan-apart-with-scandalous-revelations/



I mean, bring it on, but also, that guy talks too much, isn't as close to the sources as he likes to think and has been caught lying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand why spurs are even allowed in polo or jumping (IMO their purpose is to give even finer signals during dressage, which would obviously never cause injury because you don't jam them into the horse's side). Not my kind of horsemanship at all. But I don't think that was a life-threatening injury or even permanent damage.



He likes his dogs so I’d hope he has had horses in his past he cared about. Maybe not his polo horses but I bet he had a horse or two in his youth he loved.

An experience like this would be traumatic. I would be horrified. From the polo article: Prince Harry was said to be ‘very upset’ in May when another of his polo ponies, a ten-year-old mare called Drizzle, collapsed and died from a heart attack at a polo match. The prince had been riding the horse shortly before it died.


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I will never understand the British- and others- sending off their very young kids to boarding school. As a child living abroad we saw this all the time, kids as young as 5-6 coming to stay just for holidays and then going back to school not seeing their parents for months.
> 
> There are some very good documentaries about what happened to children, now adults, that were sent off to boarding school in the UK. Grown men breaking down crying for what they suffered. Parents devoid of any feeling when asked why they'd send away a 5-year old that was clearly going through terror having to be sent away from their family. I would hope that the abuse, physical, mental and sexual, is not going on anymore but it wasn't long ago that it did.
> 
> I know many have thrived at these schools but for many kids it is torture.



I would have_ loved_ it.

I went to a boarding school in West Sussex in my school Summer holidays for a few years (and my school had a long day - sometimes till 6pm). I would have loved to have gone there all year long.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Archie and Diana will be home schooled with practically burkas on so even their tutors will not be able to sneak a peek.  Meg and Haz will be fundamental in their groundswell of education to help turn around the vicious cycle of genetic pain poor Harry experienced.


I doubt Her Royal Aquatic Highness would ever dare talk about her own "genetic pain" since that would implicate her mum who is still alive and who was absent from her life for several years when she was young. He can do it because his mum is dead, and he is being saved by MM his pseudo-mum. Oedipal complex triggered by her use of Diana's perfume?

I wouldn't be surprised if H starts re-inventing Diana's life and talking about events which will get both Charles and William going "Whaaaaat?!!!" Hmmm, actually, that has already started with the disappearance of the family bike rides.

_ETA: changed complex_


----------



## ap.

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I will never understand the British- and others- sending off their very young kids to boarding school. As a child living abroad we saw this all the time, *kids as young as 5-6 coming to stay just for holidays and then going back to school not seeing their parents for months*.
> 
> 
> There are some very good documentaries about what happened to children, now adults, that were sent off to boarding school in the UK. Grown men breaking down crying for what they suffered. Parents devoid of any feeling when asked why they'd send away a 5-year old that was clearly going through terror having to be sent away from their family. I would hope that the abuse, physical, mental and sexual, is not going on anymore but it wasn't long ago that it did.
> 
> I know many have thrived at these schools but for many kids it is torture.



5 is incredibly young for boarding school. My family waited until we were 12/13 to send us away


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> To each their own, but I personally couldn't do it.  My husband, his siblings and parents all went to boarding schools, but the thought alone was enough to make me tear up.  I bawled like a baby when my firstborn started college and left home!  My BIL and SIL on the other hand, sent all of their children to Deerfield.  When I sent my son to summer camp (because he insisted) my SIL commented how "I would never do that, I like my children at home in the summer".  WTF.    I told her I like my children at home all year long, but 5 weeks in the summer doing something they requested was okay with me.  (Can you tell I can't stand hypocrites!?)


Some people are wired differently. I had a subordinate once who insisted on taking her annual leave during that week between Christmas and the New Year. It's a very popular time for going on vacation. I needed to maintain a skeleton crew, so months beforehand, those who wanted to take their leave then had already expressed their intention. She did not and insisted on taking time off at the last minute. When I turned her down, she said it was the only week in the year when she could be a good mother. It was hard not to roll my eyes. I'm sure what she said was not what she meant, but it literally meant she was a bad mother the other 51 weeks.


----------



## purseinsanity

queennadine said:


> I agree with everyone that thinks he didn’t get what he wanted when he flew home
> for PP’s funeral. So now he’s throwing a tantrum and “letting them have it.”


He didn't get all the photo ops Megs demanded!


----------



## Chanbal

TPF detectives, we have another mystery. How old is MM? Why did JS jump to MM's defense? 

*Joshua Silverstein met Meghan Markle at summer camp when they were 13*
*The pair had a summer romance.*
*He jumped to MM's defense and claimed the Royal Family has been 'racist for centuries.' *
*Joshua Silverstein was born in 1977- he is 44 years old*
*

*









						Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
					

Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle




					biographydaily.com
				











						Meghan Markle's childhood sweetheart praises 'courageous' Duchess
					

Joshua Silverstein, a Los Angeles-based actor, who was Markle's first kiss, aged 13, appeared on Lorraine today and praised the royal for handling criticism 'well.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not saying he'd have dumped her following Di's advice. My theory is more along the lines of had she lived he wouldn't have been quite so messed up and vulnerable, so maybe he'd have been more resistant to her toxic charm. Plus, with Diana alive Duchess Disney would have lacked a huge arsenal of manipulation and cos-playing.


Yep.  Harry would have had a mother and not tried to find a replacement mommy for himself.


----------



## floatinglili

lanasyogamama said:


> Reminds me of Angelina Jolie’s movies, always SO depressing.  I believe one of them was called “First they killed my father”. I’m sure the topic was important, but man, what a downer.


I really loved that film haha 
It was the first Angelina Jolie film I had seen and I was gobsmacked. 
Yeah - the topic was heavy.


----------



## xincinsin

queennadine said:


> I agree with everyone that thinks he didn’t get what he wanted when he flew home
> for PP’s funeral. So now he’s throwing a tantrum and “letting them have it.”


I'm inclined to think that his conversations would have bordered on ransom demands: If you want us back/if you want to see Meghan and Archie again/if you expect us to forgive you, you'll have to give us XXX, YYY, $$$.  At the thought of having the mermaid swanning around again and demanding an apparel allowance and jewels from the vault, it is no wonder that Charles fled. Private conversations with TQ - never happened. "Unproductive" convos with his brother - oh yes.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> TPF detectives, we have another mystery. How old is MM? Why did JS jump to MM's defense?
> 
> *Joshua Silverstein met Meghan Markle at summer camp when they were 13*
> *The pair had a summer romance.*
> *He jumped to MM's defense and claimed the Royal Family has been 'racist for centuries.' *
> *Joshua Silverstein was born in 1977- he is 44 years old*
> *
> View attachment 5087001
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> biographydaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's childhood sweetheart praises 'courageous' Duchess
> 
> 
> Joshua Silverstein, a Los Angeles-based actor, who was Markle's first kiss, aged 13, appeared on Lorraine today and praised the royal for handling criticism 'well.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




My guess, Meghan was 13 and Joshua was 17/18.

ETA: He is into self-promoting. Wonder how Meghan feels to be on the receiving end of someone using a flimsy connection with her to get himself in the news.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> My guess, Meghan was 13 and Joshua was 17/18.
> 
> ETA: He is into self-promoting. Wonder how Meghan feels to be on the receiving end of someone using a flimsy connection with her to get himself in the news.


But but... they had a special lip-lock bond!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> TPF detectives, we have another mystery. How old is MM? Why did JS jump to MM's defense?
> 
> *Joshua Silverstein met Meghan Markle at summer camp when they were 13*
> *The pair had a summer romance.*
> *He jumped to MM's defense and claimed the Royal Family has been 'racist for centuries.' *
> *Joshua Silverstein was born in 1977- he is 44 years old*
> *
> View attachment 5087001
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> biographydaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's childhood sweetheart praises 'courageous' Duchess
> 
> 
> Joshua Silverstein, a Los Angeles-based actor, who was Markle's first kiss, aged 13, appeared on Lorraine today and praised the royal for handling criticism 'well.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




She’s older??? She looks so young     Is she still heavily pregnant, too?


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> But but... they had a special lip-lock bond!



Far be it from me to question the veracity of a lifelong soul bond formed between two teens at summer camp.


----------



## periogirl28

creme fraiche said:


> Having been through this twice in the UK but being American, I can clarify posh education in England.
> 
> Nursery starts after age 2 and the children need to be potty trained to start.  Highly sought nurseries are booked at birth or soon after.  Nannies are from birth and continue until senior school age for many (age 11)
> 
> Pre-prep from 4-7, with schools like Wetherby booked at birth, but schools like Thomas’ (where George and Charlotte are) admitted based on interview and short tasks the year prior to entry.
> 
> Prep school for boys are from 8-13 with the most academic (junior schools attached to the big name schools like Westminster and St Paul’s) by serious competitive academic exam and interview in the year prior to entry.  Boys go onto senior schools at either 11 (co-Ed schools and increasingly many more schools) based On headmaster report, exam, and interview the year before.  If the boys are going onto boarding school or one of the big name public schools, there is a pre-entrance exam, iq test, and interview at 11 with conditional offers given with offers firmed based on passing the Common Entrance exam at the age of 13.
> 
> The term public school refers to a particular kind of private school - definitely on of the original schools investigated by the Clarendon Commision, Charterhouse, Eton College, Winchester College, Harrow, Rugby, Shrewsbury, and Westminster. They called themselved public school in the sense that the boys were being educated in a group, as opposed to privately by tutors at hone. Nowadays, public school just refers to a big, old posh private school.
> 
> Girls transfer to senior school at 11 (why the difference, who knows), and 11 is the age senior school starts at coed schools and state schools.  Private girls schools are also competitive entry with Iqtests pre-tests at the most selective, then exams and interviews.
> 
> 11+ season is very stressful because children will be sitting separate exams or pre-tests for each school except for some of the girls schools which are in a consortium.  People start tutoring several years prior to pass the exams.
> 
> Eton today is not the same as when Diana’s brother and father went there and is a very difficult school to get into.  It most definitely is an academic high flyer and Harry would definitely have stuck out.


Just wanna say thank you for this super clear summary, you said it much better than I ever could.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Far be it from me to question the veracity of a lifelong soul bond formed between two teens at summer camp.


I'm betting that MM will figure out some way of bonding with Diana too. You know, after she has planted forget-me-nots everywhere in D's honour, she probably senses some mystical union that transcends death.  _(excuse me while I go barf...)_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s older??? She looks so young     Is she still heavily pregnant, too?


I'm thinking vampiric lore. If Joshua Silverstein has personal knowledge of the BRF being "racist for centuries", maybe he is a lot more than 44 yo. MM is certainly bent on sucking the BRF dry. Drusilla Diana Doria MW.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nope, he’s here on diplomat passport, right?  He is yours, luv.
> 
> "_Let me just start by saying the UK is one of the top ten exporters to the US, as an American and in the words of former President Donald ***** 'you all are not sending your best'", Amber told Susanna Reid and Adil Ray.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US journalists begs UK 'take Harry back' after 'throwing grenade' at Royals
> 
> 
> A US journalist has today begged the UK to “take Prince Harry back” on Good Morning Britain – claiming the duke “threw a grenade” at the Royal Family. Amber Athey, who…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: luv_


Another lie linked to Hazz. He is definitely not a Diplomat.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I'm betting that MM will figure out some way of bonding with Diana too. You know, after she has planted forget-me-nots everywhere in D's honour, she probably senses some mystical union that transcends death.  _(excuse me while I go barf...)_



If Harry doesn’t return for the statue unveiling (and I’m positive he won’t), you can bet Harry and Meghan will have their own super-special tribute to Diana that will be so much more MEANINGFUL and COMPASSIONATE than some silly statue.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> TPF detectives, we have another mystery. How old is MM? Why did JS jump to MM's defense?
> 
> *Joshua Silverstein met Meghan Markle at summer camp when they were 13*
> *The pair had a summer romance.*
> *He jumped to MM's defense and claimed the Royal Family has been 'racist for centuries.' *
> *Joshua Silverstein was born in 1977- he is 44 years old*
> *
> View attachment 5087001
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> biographydaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's childhood sweetheart praises 'courageous' Duchess
> 
> 
> Joshua Silverstein, a Los Angeles-based actor, who was Markle's first kiss, aged 13, appeared on Lorraine today and praised the royal for handling criticism 'well.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




They met at Camp Agape, right?



			Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
		

_The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._









						Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?
					

AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.

Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”

She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.

Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.

ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> If Harry doesn’t return for the statue unveiling (and I’m positive he won’t), you can bet Harry and Meghan will have their own super-special tribute to Diana that will be so much more MEANINGFUL and COMPASSIONATE than some silly statue.


They will adopt a bench.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ve said it many times. This show needs to be cancelled. It is in poor taste.  
They can have a private unveiling, post the photos, move on.
We do not need a big reveal. Cancel it.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> They met at Camp Agape, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
> 
> 
> _The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?
> 
> 
> AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.
> 
> Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”
> 
> She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.
> 
> Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.
> 
> ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.


She might not want to emphasize this part of her life as it will mean bringing up Doria's incarceration.
If she was 13 in 1993, she will be 41 this year.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> My guess, Meghan was 13 and Joshua was 17/18.
> 
> ETA: He is into self-promoting. Wonder how Meghan feels to be on the receiving end of someone using a flimsy connection with her to get himself in the news.


Unless he was a counselor, 13 yo don't usually mix with 17/18 yo kids in summer camps. This sounds more like a make up story imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> She might not want to emphasize this part of her life as it will mean bringing up Doria's incarceration.
> If she was 13 in 1993, she will be 41 this year.



So, did Hazzie know all of this before the wedding?  If he did, then he has a bit more character than I thought.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle shut down UK-based Sussex Royal firm they renamed MWX last year... in fresh sign couple are severing ties with Britain*
> 
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex appoint voluntary liquidator to wind up charity*
> *Company name MWX could refer to Markle Windsor or Mountbatten Windsor*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle shut down UK-based Sussex Royal firm
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have appointed a voluntary liquidator to wind up the London-based charity, which they renamed MWX Trading in August last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Who is going to monitor where any money that remains is deposited? Wherever, it will benefit the Grifters.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They met at Camp Agape, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
> 
> 
> _The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?
> 
> 
> AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.
> 
> Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”
> 
> She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.
> 
> Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.
> 
> ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.



Oops! After reading your post, it's possible they mix kids of different ages at this Agape camp. The output of falsehoods from JCMH & wife is huge and it is difficult to believe in what they say.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> She might not want to emphasize this part of her life as it will mean bringing up Doria's incarceration.
> If she was 13 in 1993, she will be 41 this year.


I recall reading that she mentioned in an interview that she was born in the Year of the Goat, i.e., 1979. Which did not match up with the age she was claiming then. Hence all these rumours that she is older. If the Goat story is true, she would be 14 in 1993 and 42 this year. Aren't there any confirmed dates for her birth?


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how much money will be used to buy vaccines...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much money will be used to buy vaccines...
> View attachment 5087128



Real dollars or pledges?

Ya kno, if only they had been honest from day 1, they could have done this so much better.  Tell her history and her age, do a private wedding like Bea and Edo, then leave. All would be well. Graciously refuse the titles, don’t buy an expensive wardrobe, be happy. It appears that for some unknown reason, they wanted to spend big, put on a show, and go on multiple tours. Doing it this way [where we have to research for the truth] invites ridicule, anger, irritation and plenty of unkind comments. All they needed to do was be honest and walk away, heads held high.  Surely someone at the palace advised the honest approach?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Can you take the wife?



Nooooooooooo!


----------



## Straight-Laced

Prepare yourselves - May 19 is H & M's 3rd wedding anniversary !! 

It's been three years since the Queen conferred their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles. I saw these letters published in the UK Telegraph this week and I thought there were some good points made, very clearly.

The Sussexes should renounce their royal titles

SIR – _The Queen wears two hats, she is both head of state and the senior member of the Royal family. When Prince Harry joined the Army he took an oath to serve not his grandmother, but the head of state. When he married Meghan, the Queen gave them the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex so they could carry out official duties.

Harry has failed to grasp that while his family problems are private, his official duties are open to public scrutiny. As he has made it clear that he does not want to serve the Queen as head of state, it is inappropriate for the couple to keep their titles_.


SIR – _The Duke and Duchess’s website claims that they are “serving the Monarchy, honouring the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II” and that they “deeply believe in the role of The Monarchy and their commitment to Her Majesty … Their roles will continue to reflect their sense of duty and allegiance to the Monarch.”* How so?*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> Ugh.
> 
> "'And I thought, in the context of everything else that was going on in those days leading to the wedding, that it didn't make sense to not be just doing whatever everyone else was doing, which was trying to be supportive, knowing what was going on with my dad and whatnot.''
> 
> Just sounds like such gobboldy gook. In other words "everyone else was buying my victim of my dad status and walking on eggshells trying not to upset Bridezilla except Kate'.



I had to read that sentence 3 times 
[/QUOTE]

Using our language detective skills, she hides the meaning. Still, we can get some truth here. 
1 - everyone else was supportive - powerful admission!!!
2 - Everyone, including this person, knew _what was going on with her dad. _So, she knew a few weeks ahead of the date that he might not attend? I’ve suspected all along that the BRF really wanted Charles to walk her down the aisle. TM didn’t stand a chance.   Hmm.
3 - The really curious part of her statement is the* “and whatnot”*.   _Whatnot_ can include many, many things.  Hmmm.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Straight-Laced said:


> Prepare yourselves - May 19 is H & M's 3rd wedding anniversary !!
> 
> It's been three years since the Queen conferred their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles. I saw these letters published in the UK Telegraph this week and I thought there were some good points made, very clearly.
> 
> The Sussexes should renounce their royal titles
> 
> SIR – _The Queen wears two hats, she is both head of state and the senior member of the Royal family. When Prince Harry joined the Army he took an oath to serve not his grandmother, but the head of state. When he married Meghan, the Queen gave them the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex so they could carry out official duties.
> 
> Harry has failed to grasp that while his family problems are private, his official duties are open to public scrutiny. As he has made it clear that he does not want to serve the Queen as head of state, it is inappropriate for the couple to keep their titles_.
> 
> 
> SIR – _The Duke and Duchess’s website claims that they are “serving the Monarchy, honouring the reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II” and that they “deeply believe in the role of The Monarchy and their commitment to Her Majesty … Their roles will continue to reflect their sense of duty and allegiance to the Monarch.”* How so?*_




As @Sharont2305  said,   Nooooooooooo! 
[time to crawl under the covers]

ETA: He needs the titles to maintain his diplomat status and immunity, right?  If those get removed/renounced, then he needs to become a US citizen which means the IRS will come calling. The BRF does not want that at all. The titles will stay.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> As @Sharont2305  said,   Nooooooooooo!
> [time to crawl under the covers]
> 
> ETA: He needs the titles to maintain his diplomat status and immunity, right?  If those get removed/renounced, then he needs to become a US citizen which means the IRS will come calling. The BRF does not want that at all. The titles will stay.



They shouldnt take everything as MM becomes princess Henry which she would love. HMTQ should just take the Duke and Duchess titles.  Leave them with Earl and Countess Dumbarton...(the Scottish titles).  Harder to merch DUMBarton (apologies to the lovely people of Scotland)...


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> As @Sharont2305  said,   Nooooooooooo!
> [time to crawl under the covers]
> 
> ETA: He needs the titles to maintain his diplomat status and immunity, right?  If those get removed/renounced, then he needs to become a US citizen which means the IRS will come calling. The BRF does not want that at all. The titles will stay.


Wouldn't that boat have already sailed once he married a US citizen? The way they carry on with their expensive lifestyle, the IRS will come calling anyway.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Wouldn't that boat have already sailed once he married a US citizen? The way they carry on with their expensive lifestyle, the IRS will come calling anyway.



I could be wrong - My understanding is his BRF status makes his money untouchable. Her money probably is taxable, but I really don’t know. She can always say it’s his money.


----------



## Straight-Laced

As for boarding school  
I went to boarding school from age 11, which was my last year of primary school. I was boarding with girls as young as six and we were all miserable but it was horrible to see the very little girls shut down with grief and loneliness. Older girls tried to help them but they just wanted home and their pets and their parents. Shudder. We were allowed to bring our horses with us which was comforting, but no one I know from my generation remembers boarding school with affection. We definitely had some wild, fun times and I got into a bit of trouble here and there but in the late 1970's and 80's boarding schools for girls were AWFUL. I know things improved later because my nieces and nephews told me so and I know children now who love weekly boarding, but don't underestimate how tough boarding school was in the time before mobile/cell phones and kinder, gentler parenting and more caring schools.  

I had nannies too from infancy until I was about 9 years old. They were much nicer than my parents! True


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> They met at Camp Agape, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
> 
> 
> _The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?
> 
> 
> AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.
> 
> Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”
> 
> She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.
> 
> Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.
> 
> ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.


Does this add weight to the rumor Doria spent time in prison?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> An experience like this would be traumatic. I would be horrified. From the polo article: Prince Harry was said to be ‘very upset’ in May when another of his polo ponies, a ten-year-old mare called Drizzle, collapsed and died from a heart attack at a polo match. The prince had been riding the horse shortly before it died.



Yeah. It was probably an aortic avulsion, not a heart attack. It happened to a German dressage rider recently, and the comments were brutal saying she rode her horse - 17 years old and in her care for years, so had she not treated it well it would never have been fit to compete at that age - to death. But thing is, it can happen at any time, even when a horse is at the pasture grazing. It has nothing to do with the exercise at that very moment, and the horse will be dead within minutes from bleeding out internally. (in case of the German rider, it happened during the award ceremony, so possibly hours after they performed)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TPF detectives, we have another mystery. How old is MM? Why did JS jump to MM's defense?
> 
> *Joshua Silverstein met Meghan Markle at summer camp when they were 13*
> *The pair had a summer romance.*
> *He jumped to MM's defense and claimed the Royal Family has been 'racist for centuries.' *
> *Joshua Silverstein was born in 1977- he is 44 years old*
> *
> View attachment 5087001
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> biographydaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's childhood sweetheart praises 'courageous' Duchess
> 
> 
> Joshua Silverstein, a Los Angeles-based actor, who was Markle's first kiss, aged 13, appeared on Lorraine today and praised the royal for handling criticism 'well.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




He's 43 as his birthday is in late fall, but still...just 13 and turning 17 sounds like an unhealthy age gap.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> They met at Camp Agape, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
> 
> 
> _The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._





Does that mean the Doria rumours might have same truth to it? I mean, Samantha implied she was dealing (not that I have an opinion one way or another).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If she was 13 in 1993, she will be 41 this year.



Well. But didn't we have her yearbook / graduation date?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, did Hazzie know all of this before the wedding?  If he did, then he has a bit more character than I thought.



He did know what she wanted him to know. It doesn't sound too flattering even to cement her victimhood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Real dollars or pledges?



Probably real money, just not their own


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Sheesh!!! .. thanks for all this but, gosh .. that's a fair amount of pressure on kids at a relatively young age!  I can tell you that in the US, the "Prep" schools also look at Grades, an Interview is a must, sometimes they even require you to write an essay (of sorts) .. but a HUGE thing is also "how you are 'connected'" - vis-a-vis, your FAMILY!  Similar (sadly) to how the Ivy-league Universities work here in the US, if you have a former alumnus in your family, or you have a "name" .. (and especially if your family can pay the tuition!) .. there's a better chance that you will get in.  There was a private school directly across the street from where I grew up in Connecticut.  My grades were very high, I interviewed well, they liked my essay .. but a neighbor (who was a bone-head, seriously .. NOT BRIGHT at all) got her notice of acceptance before I did!  That pissed off my parents so much that they said "forget it", even though I did get accepted!  I ended up having to schlep to another private school in the next town, but after 1 year said "feh" (I didn't think their program was as good as they thought it was).
> 
> So, if Eton is so hard to get into (academically), then I think we can all say that Hap-Hazza got in based on "connections" as opposed to his intellect (if there is even such a thing with him)!



Whoever said most public schools (not exactly just private schools but set-up for the elite to be prepared for leadership). 'Public' means as opposed to be tutored at home (as the Queen was). The point of them is to create rounded, robust personalities who don't flinch under pressure (stiff upper lip) and create lifelong networks for favour-ship. 

Public school is also about legacy (brother(s) father, grandfather etc go to the same school). It's also about the military, as they often feed the same regiments. 

For Eton, since the 1980s, you'd pretty much have to put the child's name down before it's born. The waitlists are enormous and they are not only dependant on academic prowess - far from it. If you're a British Prince, you're waved through whatever. Harry could have gone to any school they'd wanted him to.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I discovered my old riding intructor's Youtube channel and have gotten a  kick out of watching all his sales horse videos because that man is a born storyteller and the gaited horse community is still small enough that the stories are super cool, e.g. like when all the horses of one specific team fell sick during a World Championship and all the local riders shuffled to bring in their spare horses so the team suddenly left without rides had something to compete on.
> 
> While I still have my now retired horse I bought from him what feels like a lifetime ago, I'm kind of surprised how I started to miss riding regularly. I can only wonder: doesn't Harry miss his horses he left behind? He was a far more serious sportsman than I ever was (I think I competed exactly once because nerves and instead enjoyed my competition level horse to cruise around the forest in style) and a horse is not just a breathing bicycle. He's been on horseback since he was a toddler. He for sure had horses he had trained and built up for years. I just can't imagine.
> 
> What say you...shall I be daring and book a lesson just to see for the first time in years? I kind of want to, but I'm scared haha.



Go riding!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did this ever get resolved?  It looks awful.
> Happened in 2010.  While the article says the horse was fine, idk.  Comments seem to disagree.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Disturbing image
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5086937
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry faces animal cruelty claim over polo pony's stab wound from his spur
> 
> 
> The Prince was accused yesterday after his horse suffered a bloody injury during a polo match. He was photographed riding the animal despite it appearing to have been stabbed by one of his spurs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Terrible. I was talk you tickle with spurs if ever worn (which I never have). Same with a dressage whip, it's merely an aid (threat not promise)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong - My understanding is his BRF status makes his money untouchable. Her money probably is taxable, but I really don’t know. She can always say it’s his money.



Money in trust already won't be taxable - that's the point of sending it off-shore.

His money made in the US will surely come under scrutiny. I doubt he'll get away with squirrelling it offshore. 

She won't say it's his money in any official doc(s), she's always thinking of the future and if there was acrimony ahead, _that_ would _not_ work in her favour.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> They met at Camp Agape, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
> 
> 
> _The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?
> 
> 
> AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.
> 
> Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”
> 
> She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.
> 
> Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.
> 
> ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.



I don’t think it was that Camp Agape...

“In 2005, Camp Agape began as a free kid’s camp exclusively for the children of incarcerated parents on the Island of Oahu.”



			About Camp Agape California
		


It’s more likely they attended a summer program through this Agape...









						Agape Live
					

AgapeLive




					agapelive.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Terrible. I was talk you tickle with spurs if ever worn (which I never have). Same with a dressage whip, it's merely an aid (threat not promise)



Yeah not once have I seen my instructor hit a horse (or even raise his voice at one). He uses the whip to tickle to bring the hindlegs forward etc. In fact re-watching these old videos made me realize what a great teacher he is. He's always going on about "Don't be frustrated if the horse doesn't want to do x, just go back to y that worked well and try again in 5 mins" or "Alright, that wasn't planned (re: wrong gait...can happen if you have so many of them haha), but take it, take it when it's on offer!" I don't understand the people who try to force everything at all or use sheer violence. I personally am not looking for a slave who is afraid of me, but for a partner who enjoys our time together.


----------



## 1LV

Just read that a puppy given to The Queen after Phillip passed away has died, and she is heartbroken.  This would be a good time for Harry and MM to get in another sucker punch.


----------



## Aimee3

Apparently Princess Beatrice is pregnant and has announced it on same date as Harry and wife’s 3 rd anniversary. People are saying it was announced this day on purpose, karma for H’s wife announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah not once have I seen my instructor hit a horse (or even raise his voice at one). He uses the whip to tickle to bring the hindlegs forward etc. In fact re-watching these old videos made me realize what a great teacher he is. He's always going on about "Don't be frustrated if the horse doesn't want to do x, just go back to y that worked well and try again in 5 mins" or "Alright, that wasn't planned (re: wrong gait...can happen if you have so many of them haha), but take it, take it when it's on offer!" I don't understand the people who try to force everything at all or use sheer violence. I personally am not looking for a slave who is afraid of me, but for a partner who enjoys our time together.


I agree, I’m a dog person rather than a horse one, but when I did dog training we were taught to train with praise and games.  And food lol!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently Princess Beatrice is pregnant and has announced it on same date as Harry and wife’s 3 rd anniversary. People are saying it was announced this day on purpose, karma for H’s wife announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding.


Hehehe


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don’t think it was that Camp Agape...
> 
> “In 2005, Camp Agape began as a free kid’s camp exclusively for the children of incarcerated parents on the Island of Oahu.”
> 
> 
> 
> About Camp Agape California
> 
> 
> 
> It’s more likely they attended a summer program through this Agape...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agape Live
> 
> 
> AgapeLive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> agapelive.com



I think you’re right, lots of articles mentioning the Agape Spiritual Center in LA. Apparently this is how Doria knows Oprah.


----------



## Icyjade

This article made me laugh!









						Fox News host labels Harry the Prince of Woke Social Justice
					

Fox News host Sean Hannity labeled Prince Harry as the Prince of Woke Social Justice after the royal called the first amendment 'bonkers.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Hannity added that it is 'sad' to watch Prince Harry's 'decline' and his 'decaying relationship' with his family.


'*And what's with the constant sense of entitlement, victimhood? Enjoy your multi-million dollar mansion in the enclave of Montecito, Santa Barbara, one of the most exclusive neighborhoods in America,' Hannity said.*

'Fine, I'm happy for you. I'm sincere. I wish you nothing but the best. Maybe over time you'll understand our amazing constitution, our great republic where apparently you're going to make a lot of money.'

During the segment, The Hill columnist Joe Concha - a Fox News contributor - slammed Prince Harry for not being dominant in his relationship with Meghan Markle.

*'I don't even know if Prince Harry is an alpha male, I don't think he's a beta male, he's more like a lambda male, an omega mu male,' Concha said.

'He's some sort of male, but he's definitely not the alpha in that relationship. He seems to now be pushing, as you said, the woke justice sort of message that Meghan Markle does.'*


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much money will be used to buy vaccines...
> View attachment 5087128


My maths isn't the greatest, but I can't make the figures match. The Archewell site is claiming it raised $3mil. Then it explains much further down, buried in the verbiage, that for every $5 raised, other entities are matching with $15. So that means they raised one quarter of $3mil or $750k.


----------



## creme fraiche

papertiger said:


> Whoever said most public schools (not exactly just private schools but set-up for the elite to be prepared for leadership). 'Public' means as opposed to be tutored at home (as the Queen was). The point of them is to create rounded, robust personalities who don't flinch under pressure (stiff upper lip) and create lifelong networks for favour-ship.
> 
> Public school is also about legacy (brother(s) father, grandfather etc go to the same school). It's also about the military, as they often feed the same regiments.
> 
> For Eton, since the 1980s, you'd pretty much have to put the child's name down before it's born. The waitlists are enormous and they are not only dependant on academic prowess - far from it. If you're a British Prince, you're waved through whatever. Harry could have gone to any school they'd wanted him to.



Not in many years.  You no longer need to put one's son down for Eton at birth -  the focus is very much on a well rounded student with academics being the principal factor.  I know many people whose sons are at Eton who did not register for the school until September of the year their sons turned 11.  Please read below:




			https://www.etoncollege.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Admissions-Booklet.pdf


----------



## creme fraiche

My sons and husband are into rowing and so I know this boy for whom Eton has been fantastic for:









						Rower who missed out on state school lands Eton College scholarship
					

Schuyler Audley-Williams, now 14, from White City in Hammersmith, secured a spot at one of Britain's most elite public schools by smashing two British records in less than a year of taking to the water.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




My sons don't go to Eton, but I think that they get a really bad rap about inherited privilege, and they really are making true strides to increase their outreach programmed to be much more than a good PR story with a goal of 25% on bursary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

creme fraiche said:


> Not in many years.  You no longer need to put one's son down for Eton at birth -  the focus is very much on a well rounded student with academics being the principal factor.  I know many people whose sons are at Eton who did not register for the school until September of the year their sons turned 11.  Please read below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.etoncollege.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Admissions-Booklet.pdf



That's good to know. I used to babysit for a very nice young 'man' who went to Eaton (both his parents from India) but he certainly had inherited privilege - and still does.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I discovered my old riding intructor's Youtube channel and have gotten a  kick out of watching all his sales horse videos because that man is a born storyteller and the gaited horse community is still small enough that the stories are super cool, e.g. like when all the horses of one specific team fell sick during a World Championship and all the local riders shuffled to bring in their spare horses so the team suddenly left without rides had something to compete on.
> 
> While I still have my now retired horse I bought from him what feels like a lifetime ago, I'm kind of surprised how I started to miss riding regularly. I can only wonder: doesn't Harry miss his horses he left behind? He was a far more serious sportsman than I ever was (I think I competed exactly once because nerves and instead enjoyed my competition level horse to cruise around the forest in style) and a horse is not just a breathing bicycle. He's been on horseback since he was a toddler. He for sure had horses he had trained and built up for years. I just can't imagine.
> 
> What say you...shall I be daring and book a lesson just to see for the first time in years? I kind of want to, but I'm scared haha.


You definitely should. Connect with someone you haven’t seen in years and also spend time with doing something fun? It’ll be great.
I think hanging with horses are great stress relief too- they are such kindcalm animals. Only downside is their upkeep! 


Lodpah said:


> Wow so much to read through. Just got back from vacation and it was nice to see in the wild no one gives a rip about these two. They’re wasting so much money on PR trying to make them relevant lol.
> 
> Anyway read somewhere that for every 5 dollars donated to their foundation only .25 cents go to charity so they they are living large.


That’s appalling but it doesn’t surprise me at all. Add to that a lot of their ‘charity’ work is donating the odd bundle of low cost items or talking to the odd kid on zoom and I think we know where the money is going. 


xincinsin said:


> Some people are wired differently. I had a subordinate once who insisted on taking her annual leave during that week between Christmas and the New Year. It's a very popular time for going on vacation. I needed to maintain a skeleton crew, so months beforehand, those who wanted to take their leave then had already expressed their intention. She did not and insisted on taking time off at the last minute. When I turned her down, she said it was the only week in the year when she could be a good mother. It was hard not to roll my eyes. I'm sure what she said was not what she meant, but it literally meant she was a bad mother the other 51 weeks.


It sounds to me like she and her family were really into the 12 days of Christmas tradition. My in-laws are too. They basically only visit relatives and have dinner parties for that fortnight.  I don’t think it’s that uncommon but I know it must be a scheduling nightmare  




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand why spurs are even allowed in polo or jumping (IMO their purpose is to give even finer signals during dressage, which would obviously never cause injury because you don't jam them into the horse's side). Not my kind of horsemanship at all. But I don't think that was a life-threatening injury or even permanent damage.


Cynical me is going to guess there’s a very small market of people who can afford to play polo and an even smaller number of them will be highly skilled riders because they either don’t have talent or don’t put the work in. The Spurs make things easier for them and the horses gotta put up with it.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> It sounds to me like she and her family were really into the 12 days of Christmas tradition. My in-laws are too. They basically only visit relatives and have dinner parties for that fortnight.  I don’t think it’s that uncommon but I know it must be a scheduling nightmare


Unfortunately, nope! We had a multiracial, multi-religious team, so we were always considerate. Apart from race-related festivities like the Lunar New Year, Christians were given priority for vacation leave near Christmas, Muslims for Hari Raya Puasa (their fasting month), Buddhists for Vesak, Hindus for Diwali. She was an Indian Muslim who tried to take vacation leave for every festival whether she celebrated it or not, and so I gave her priority for none.
ETA: she had 28 days of vacation leave, which was equivalent to almost 6 weeks leave, so she tried to muscle in on everyone's peak vacation period.


----------



## marietouchet

About sending money offshore to avoid taxes ... I arbitrarily looked up the Cayman Islands ...

Brits do not pay taxes (to the Brit Govt) on income generated in the Caymans
US citizens pay US Income Taxes on income generated in the Caymans, ditto Green Card holders
IF H has money there AND wishes to avoid paying US Income Tax on it , he cannot get a Green Card or become a US citizen.
Without citizenship or Green Card, he must be relying on his famous diplomatic passport to stay in the US

Of course, the diplomatic passport is only a rumor, and could evaporate quietly due to his unpopularity in the UK. I bet Boris could make that go away in a heartbeat...

Removing his title is a VERY PUBLIC kind of punishment while loss of the SECRET passport would be more of a PRIVATE rebuke, more in the BRF quiet style of handling things




This business will pay zero tax in Cayman. If you’re not from the United States, this probably means you won’t pay tax to any country.

If you’re a US citizen, your situation is more complex. Uncle Sam wants his cut no matter where you live. The US is one of the very few countries that taxes non-resident citizens and green card holders on their worldwide income.

https://www.escapeartist.com/blog/move-business-cayman-pay-no-tax/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently Princess Beatrice is pregnant and has announced it on same date as Harry and wife’s 3 rd anniversary. People are saying it was announced this day on purpose, karma for H’s wife announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding.



I just posted that in Philip's thread...I feel it's not so much snark as more a sign of "You just don't matter to us [as in BRF] anymore."

But also, how come it's their anniversary and we haven't seen a big circus yet? Like, an reenactment maybe.


----------



## creme fraiche

papertiger said:


> That's good to know. I used to babysit for a very nice young 'man' who went to Eaton (both his parents from India) but he certainly had inherited privilege - and still does.



I hear you.  These boys may be bright, but many/most definitely have inherited privilege in addition to their brains.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just posted that in Philip's thread...I feel it's not so much snark as more a sign of "You just don't matter to us [as in BRF] anymore."
> 
> But also, how come it's their anniversary and we haven't seen a big circus yet? Like, an reenactment maybe.


Its only early in California, there's a whole day ahead there.
A bump photo, just to remind everyone that she is heavily pregnant, unlike the real Princess who is probably not even barely showing *rolls eyes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don’t think it was that Camp Agape...
> 
> “In 2005, Camp Agape began as a free kid’s camp exclusively for the children of incarcerated parents on the Island of Oahu.”
> 
> 
> 
> About Camp Agape California
> 
> 
> 
> It’s more likely they attended a summer program through this Agape...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agape Live
> 
> 
> AgapeLive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> agapelive.com



Although I pulled the link from The Sun’s article, it is certainly possible they got it wrong.
Now I understand why there was such a fuss.  Here again, H&M could have easily stopped the narrative by being honest from the beginning. They wanted the controversy, wanted to provoke reactions rather than create a loving, kind story.  They seem to court the drama. Wonder if they regret it.

RE: Bea and Edo. Kudos to them!  

RE: Kate looks gorgeous today. She has found the fountain of youth.


----------



## Chanbal

The damage greedy Harry is doing on his family...   











						Prince Harry accused of 'invading Royal Family's privacy'
					

PRINCE HARRY has been accused of "invading the family's privacy" with his recent remarks, a source has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Who is paying for this? Big business for them...











						Harry and Meghan plan to build a community relief centre in India
					

The building in Mumbai, will be based on the blueprint of one the couple's Archewell foundation has built on the Caribbean island of Dominica.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

1LV said:


> Just read that a puppy given to The Queen after Phillip passed away has died, and she is heartbroken.  This would be a good time for Harry and MM to get in another sucker punch.


I think a washed out sepia photo of a corgi puppy is on the horizon myself. 

Wonder what the Queen’s puppy died of?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

jelliedfeels said:


> I think a washed out sepia photo of a corgi puppy is on the horizon myself.
> 
> Wonder what the Queen’s puppy died of?


No idea.  The blows seem to keep coming though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Probably real money, just not their own


They seem to be doing Proctor and Gamble’s laundry for them. You’d think the expertise would be on the other side. 


bisousx said:


> I think you’re right, lots of articles mentioning the Agape Spiritual Center in LA. Apparently this is how Doria knows Oprah.


Looking at the website I’m not sure if it’s a church or some sort of charity.

I guess Agape is a common Christian word.
It’s funny the words come back as I was joking H&M should name their daughter Agape as it means ‘selfless love’ and  we all know that’s a big theme for them 


xincinsin said:


> My maths isn't the greatest, but I can't make the figures match. The Archewell site is claiming it raised $3mil. Then it explains much further down, buried in the verbiage, that for every $5 raised, other entities are matching with $15. So that means they raised one quarter of $3mil or $750k.


We are watching and are not impressed with Archewell’s tomfoolery 


xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately, nope! We had a multiracial, multi-religious team, so we were always considerate. Apart from race-related festivities like the Lunar New Year, Christians were given priority for vacation leave near Christmas, Muslims for Hari Raya Puasa (their fasting month), Buddhists for Vesak, Hindus for Diwali. She was an Indian Muslim who tried to take vacation leave for every festival whether she celebrated it or not, and so I gave her priority for none.
> ETA: she had 28 days of vacation leave, which was equivalent to almost 6 weeks leave, so she tried to muscle in on everyone's peak vacation period.


Oh that is annoying. She just loved festivals I guess. Living that Blue Peter life!


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> About sending money offshore to avoid taxes ... I arbitrarily looked up the Cayman Islands ...
> 
> Brits do not pay taxes (to the Brit Govt) on income generated in the Caymans
> US citizens pay US Income Taxes on income generated n the Caymans, ditto Green Card holders
> IF H has money there AND wishes to avoid paying US Income Tax on it , he cannot get a Green Card or become a US citizen.
> Without citizenship or Green Card, he must be relying on his famous diplomatic passport to stay in the US
> 
> Of course, the diplomatic passport is only a rumor, and could evaporate quietly due to his unpopularity in the UK. I bet Boris could make that go away in a heartbeat...
> 
> Removing his title is a VERY PUBLIC kind of punishment while loss of the SECRET passport would be more of a PRIVATE rebuke, more in the BRF quiet style of handling things
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This business will pay zero tax in Cayman. If you’re not from the United States, this probably means you won’t pay tax to any country.
> 
> If you’re a US citizen, your situation is more complex. Uncle Sam wants his cut no matter where you live. The US is one of the very few countries that taxes non-resident citizens and green card holders on their worldwide income.
> 
> https://www.escapeartist.com/blog/move-business-cayman-pay-no-tax/


You have intrigued me with this. It’d be really really very interesting to know what’s going on with his taxes. Charitable foundations are a great way to launder your money....or so I’ve heard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

Icyjade said:


> This article made me laugh!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fox News host labels Harry the Prince of Woke Social Justice
> 
> 
> Fox News host Sean Hannity labeled Prince Harry as the Prince of Woke Social Justice after the royal called the first amendment 'bonkers.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .'
> 
> During the segment, The Hill columnist Joe Concha - a Fox News contributor - slammed Prince Harry for not being dominant in his relationship with Meghan Markle.
> 
> *'I don't even know if Prince Harry is an alpha male, I don't think he's a beta male, he's more like a lambda male, an omega mu male,' Concha said.
> 
> 'He's some sort of male, but he's definitely not the alpha in that relationship. He seems to now be pushing, as you said, the woke justice sort of message that Meghan Markle does.'*



Ugh... dang it... I don’t want to defend MM and JCMH but that’s gross... why does he need to be an alpha male? Why can’t people be Partners in a relationship? Or Harry be a sub? Every relationship has a dynamic.

There’s nothing saying Harry isn’t driving these attacks on his family.  He’s been acting out for years in smaller ways, he’s just got the opportunity now to go all in. I just think people are seeing the real Harry and he’s as awful as we thought he was.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Who is paying for this? Big business for them...
> 
> View attachment 5087417
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan plan to build a community relief centre in India
> 
> 
> The building in Mumbai, will be based on the blueprint of one the couple's Archewell foundation has built on the Caribbean island of Dominica.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The timescale for this doesn’t seem to tie in with the crisis going on.  India doesn’t have enough vaccine and is failing to meet its contracts with other countries.  And who will staff it?  Can’t imagine clinical staff are sitting around twiddling their thumbs in Mumbai at the mo.  Smacks of showbizzy grandstanding.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> You have intrigued me with this. It’d be really really very interesting to know what’s going on with his taxes. Charitable foundations are a great way to launder your money....or so I’ve heard.



It can be but just like with any fraud, you also can land in big trouble. Charitable foundations have to be audited by an accountancy firm each year just like public companies.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just posted that in Philip's thread...I feel it's not so much snark as more a sign of "You just don't matter to us [as in BRF] anymore."
> 
> _But also, how come it's their anniversary and we haven't seen a big circus yet? Like, an reenactment maybe._


Because it happened "3 days ago"


----------



## Shopaholic2021

gerryt said:


> I just don’t believe that PC deserves the rap he is taking from Harry. He clearly loves his boys hugely, and if there were negatives in his own upbringing I don’t believe he would have repeated them. My feeling is that if anything, this is all because Harry has been very spoilt and is just used to getting his own way in everything. Couple that with an immature mind and this behaviour is what you get. It used to be said that the only person Harry would listen to was Tiggy - maybe that’s where Charles should be heading.



I think Charles made sure his children had a better upbringing than he did, in terms of being present and also supporting them. Kate would holiday with them often and stay with the family for many years before even being engaged. That isn't something that I think Charles would have been allowed to do. 

Charles even walked Meghan down the aisle as well as footing the bill for the wedding. When Kate was married, her parents contributed to the cost of the wedding whereas Meghan did not contribute at all (as far as I am aware). Meghan and Harry said the wedding the held generated £1billion to the UK economy in terms of tourism so it was justified that they spent the UK tax payers money on the wedding. This is what celebrities do, sell their photos for $£$£, and this is how they are justifying the cost.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

jelliedfeels said:


> You have intrigued me with this. It’d be really really very interesting to know what’s going on with his taxes. Charitable foundations are a great way to launder your money....or so I’ve heard.



And will their children get American citizenship. I know they qualify and have a right to American citizenship but Harry has said he will not become an American citizen so I assume he is going to get a green card because I cannot see how else he can live in America long term.


----------



## lalame

ITA, Charles was not perfect by any means but you can tell this man tried. He did not deserve to be scorched in the public by his own son.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> And will their children get American citizenship. I know they qualify and have a right to American citizenship but Harry has said he will not become an American citizen so I assume he is going to get a green card because I cannot see how else he can live in America long term.



I believe the kids become automatic American citizens at birth, no matter what Harry chooses to do. He probably has some special visa that normal people can't get.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> I believe the kids become automatic American citizens at birth, no matter what Harry chooses to do. He probably has some special visa that normal people can't get.



I think it is despicable if he is here on a 'special visa' when there are thousands of refugees in need of shelter and escaping horrific conditions not being allowed into the country or having to jump through multiple hoops to get safe haven. And these refugees and migrants are most likely to be the ones that will do the jobs that we wouldn't want to do (low paid manual jobs). They fill a void in the labour force, whereas Harry is just sucking millions of dollars from the US market.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think it is despicable if he is here on a 'special visa' when there are thousands of refugees in need of shelter and escaping horrific conditions not being allowed into the country or having to jump through multiple hoops to get safe haven. And these refugees and migrants are most likely to be the ones that will do the jobs that we wouldn't want to do (low paid manual jobs). They fill a void in the labour force, whereas Harry is just sucking millions of dollars from the US market.



To be fair, we have many visa programs for work or family-related reasons so I really don't know which he would've gotten. Those are totally fair if he qualifies. I don't really care as long as he pays his taxes like anyone else. I would just be curious if he had a diplomatic type of visa.


----------



## LittleStar88

Clearblueskies said:


> The timescale for this doesn’t seem to tie in with the crisis going on.  India doesn’t have enough vaccine and is failing to meet its contracts with other countries.  And who will staff it?  Can’t imagine clinical staff are sitting around twiddling their thumbs in Mumbai at the mo.  Smacks of showbizzy grandstanding.



There’s a huge shortage of medical staff in India right now. I’m sure construction is also a challenge given their infection numbers.

By the time they complete this project it will be many, many months from now and India will have everything under control.

As usual with these two, too little too late.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> There’s a huge shortage of medical staff in India right now. I’m sure construction is also a challenge given their infection numbers.
> 
> By the time they complete this project it will be many, many months from now and India will have everything under control.
> 
> As usual with these two, too little too late.


Yep. It’s all talk per usual. I’m sure their government is as slow as ours was at the height of the pandemic when offices were shut down and people told to stay home. Honestly this woukd be a tiny drop in a bucket even if it opened tomorrow


----------



## xincinsin

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh... dang it... I don’t want to defend MM and JCMH but that’s gross... why does he need to be an alpha male? Why can’t people be Partners in a relationship? Or Harry be a sub? Every relationship has a dynamic.
> 
> There’s nothing saying Harry isn’t driving these attacks on his family.  He’s been acting out for years in smaller ways, he’s just got the opportunity now to go all in. I just think people are seeing the real Harry and he’s as awful as we thought he was.


It's the company he is keeping now. Previously, he acted out but he had family and friends who could tame his excesses. Now, the wifey is probably egging him on, or at least giving him free rein to behave like a spoilt kid. Before long, he'll start sending calligraphic letters to HM.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Who is paying for this? Big business for them...
> 
> View attachment 5087417
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan plan to build a community relief centre in India
> 
> 
> The building in Mumbai, will be based on the blueprint of one the couple's Archewell foundation has built on the Caribbean island of Dominica.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Confusing. Is the relief centre in Dominica functioning yet? This Bloomberg article from December says it will be ready early 2021 but the Archewell site is still describing the project in future tense.


			Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
		


And are they claiming undue credit again? It sounds like World Central Kitchen is spearheading the relief centres and Archewell is providing financial support, not doing the actual construction or daily operations. Most of their projects are these lowhanging fruit type of fanfare where they make a PR splash but don't put in much effort.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> She might not want to emphasize this part of her life as it will mean bringing up Doria's incarceration.
> If she was 13 in 1993, she will be 41 this year.


WHAT? .. SHOCKING!!! .. yet another lie??? .. her AGE?  Count me *SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO* surprised on that front!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

World Central Kitchen  | India Update: Serving 20,000 meals per day, Community Relief Center announced with Archewell
					

This week, India’s total Covid infection count surpassed 25 million, with more than 4,000 people killed in just 24 hours. In response, from Varanasi in northern India to Chicalim on the country’s western coast, WCK partner chef teams at 8 hotels are cooking nutritious meals for 27 different...




					wck.org
				



World Central Kitchen is already hard at work in India. Archewell is just hitching a ride on their train.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> World Central Kitchen  | India Update: Serving 20,000 meals per day, Community Relief Center announced with Archewell
> 
> 
> This week, India’s total Covid infection count surpassed 25 million, with more than 4,000 people killed in just 24 hours. In response, from Varanasi in northern India to Chicalim on the country’s western coast, WCK partner chef teams at 8 hotels are cooking nutritious meals for 27 different...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wck.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen is already hard at work in India. Archewell is just hitching a ride on their train.



Yep, typical H&M PR move. Piggyback on the good deeds of others and claim them as their own. Time will move on and everyone will forget to follow up and see if Harry and Meghan actually did anything they promised.


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> World Central Kitchen  | India Update: Serving 20,000 meals per day, Community Relief Center announced with Archewell
> 
> 
> This week, India’s total Covid infection count surpassed 25 million, with more than 4,000 people killed in just 24 hours. In response, from Varanasi in northern India to Chicalim on the country’s western coast, WCK partner chef teams at 8 hotels are cooking nutritious meals for 27 different...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wck.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> World Central Kitchen is already hard at work in India. Archewell is just hitching a ride on their train.





bag-mania said:


> Yep, typical H&M PR move. Piggyback on the good deeds of others and claim them as their own. Time will move on and everyone will forget to follow up and see if Harry and Meghan actually did anything they promised.


Ugh, this is so cynical it makes me cross


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh... dang it... I don’t want to defend MM and JCMH but that’s gross... why does he need to be an alpha male? Why can’t people be Partners in a relationship? Or Harry be a sub? Every relationship has a dynamic.
> 
> There’s nothing saying Harry isn’t driving these attacks on his family.  He’s been acting out for years in smaller ways, he’s just got the opportunity now to go all in. I just think people are seeing the real Harry and he’s as awful as we thought he was.


He was an Army officer and graduated from Sandhurst so he was *supposed* to be an alpha male.   Notice I used the word _supposed_.


----------



## DeMonica

xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately, nope! We had a multiracial, multi-religious team, so we were always considerate. Apart from race-related festivities like the Lunar New Year, Christians were given priority for vacation leave near Christmas, Muslims for Hari Raya Puasa (their fasting month), Buddhists for Vesak, Hindus for Diwali. She was an Indian Muslim who tried to take vacation leave for every festival whether she celebrated it or not, and so I gave her priority for none.
> ETA: she had 28 days of vacation leave, which was equivalent to almost 6 weeks leave, so she tried to muscle in on everyone's peak vacation period.


I had a very similar experience with a Hindu girl. She had requested and got day-offs for Diwali and other holidays she had claimed to be important for her, then she tried to have a vacation at Christmas and Easter (the only time in a year when girl who was Jehova witnesses follower requested a leave) because "she deserved them like anyone else". She wasn't too popular.


----------



## Sol Ryan

gracekelly said:


> He was an Army officer and graduated from Sandhurst so he was *supposed* to be an alpha male.   Notice I used the word _supposed_.



No he’s not. He’s supposed to be a Leader when he’s in the Army and in his professional life. His relationship dynamic between him and his wife should not be the Army’s business unless theres a legal issue (abuse, ethics, etc). There have been many military wives that ruled the roost at home, as they should when their husbands are away So long on deployments.

Im not saying MM is a military wife, but to say that Army men should be alphas that dominate their wives like the commentator in the article... no. Marriage is a partnership. If it’s not, whats the point? I worked in a Military Hospital for years and had to see so many battered military wives in the ER and their husbands being committed to the mental health ward after coming back from deployment and beat his wife. Screw alpha males.

You can be a mentally healthy male and not be an alpha male.

Edited.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> I had a very similar experience with a Hindu girl. She had requested and got day-offs for Diwali and other holidays she had claimed to be important for her, then she tried to have a vacation at Christmas and Easter (the only time in a year when girl who was Jehova witnesses follower requested a leave) because "she deserved them like anyone else". She wasn't too popular.



I mean, there's always that annoying person that either wants all the holidays off or all the bridging days so their vacation days go twice as far.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> I worked in a Military Hospital for years and had to see so many battered military wives in the ER and their husbands being committed to the mental health ward for “adjustment nos”... that’s code in the military medical for back from deployment and beat his wife. Screw alpha males.



Not sure if that is being alpha or having PTSD or something, though.



> You can be a mentally healthy male and not be an alpha male.



Yeah, sadly H is neither. 

You're of course right when you say every couple has their dynamics, the thing is, if the roles where reversed I bet money more people would be alarmed and consider their specific relationship abusive. But as he's the twice as big former military guy people ignore the red flags she who shall not be named raises. (no, I don't think she beats him up. I do think she manipulates and gaslights him and lets him have her narcisstic rages)


----------



## Lodpah

I’m saddened by this article. I mean how much more do they want to ruin his family? I don’t think the public needs to know so much. If they want to help they need to stop making it about them. MM and Harry truly go in for  the kill, as in revenge for whatever they perceive as them being slighted. Like the old saying be nice to people on your way up as you will meet them in your way down. They are the most despicable people alive as they do it sitting behind a glass house throwing stones. 









						Prince Harry to drop more ‘truth bombs’ in new AppleTV+ series with Oprah
					

Harry’s brother William “is dreadfully hurt,” by Harry’s continued revelations. “He’s an elegant man who lives for his job, his country and his family.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I’m saddened by this article. I mean how much more do they want to ruin his family? I don’t think the public needs to know so much. If they want to help they need to stop making it about them. MM and Harry truly go in for  the kill, as in revenge for whatever they perceive as them being slighted. Like the old saying be nice to people on your way up as you will meet them in your way down. They are the most despicable people alive as they do it sitting behind a glass house throwing stones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to drop more ‘truth bombs’ in new AppleTV+ series with Oprah
> 
> 
> Harry’s brother William “is dreadfully hurt,” by Harry’s continued revelations. “He’s an elegant man who lives for his job, his country and his family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



The thing is, I have serious doubts he is sharing actual incidents. He seems to make up sh*t as he goes along, one harmless example being "I could never ride bikes as a kid" when there are ample pics of both Charles or Diana having him on their bike or him riding a bike himself.

Give him a bit more time and he'll claim he was raised in the Tower whom he could never leave and Charles tried to sacrifice him to the devil so he could drink his blood and live forever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

On Chris Ship's tweet about Bea's pregnancy. Aw, those Stans never disappoint. 

Honest question: is it even a thing to publicly acknowledge anniversaries? In Germany it's certainly not unless it's a milestone one.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> On Chris Ship's tweet about Bea's pregnancy. Aw, those Stans never disappoint.
> 
> Honest question: is it even a thing to publicly acknowledge anniversaries? In Germany it's certainly not unless it's a milestone one.
> 
> View attachment 5087672



It seems to be a thing for royals but I don't really see anyone else doing it - or maybe they do and I haven't noticed. I hardly even pay attention to anniversaries of people I know so I don't get it at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> It seems to be a thing for royals but I don't really see anyone else doing it - or maybe they do and I haven't noticed. I hardly even pay attention to anniversaries of people I know so I don't get it at all.



Yeah I don't even congratulate my parents, and not out of spite, just because it's such a non-event around here.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh... dang it... I don’t want to defend MM and JCMH but that’s gross... why does he need to be an alpha male? Why can’t people be Partners in a relationship? Or Harry be a sub? Every relationship has a dynamic.
> 
> There’s nothing saying Harry isn’t driving these attacks on his family.  He’s been acting out for years in smaller ways, he’s just got the opportunity now to go all in. I just think people are seeing the real Harry and he’s as awful as we thought he was.


I agree, people are attracted to different things in a relationship. Who cares if it’s what they want?
I also don’t think there’s anything wrong with not wanting to be dominant in any circle of life.  



Clearblueskies said:


> The timescale for this doesn’t seem to tie in with the crisis going on.  India doesn’t have enough vaccine and is failing to meet its contracts with other countries.  And who will staff it?  Can’t imagine clinical staff are sitting around twiddling their thumbs in Mumbai at the mo.  Smacks of showbizzy grandstanding.





LittleStar88 said:


> There’s a huge shortage of medical staff in India right now. I’m sure construction is also a challenge given their infection numbers.
> 
> By the time they complete this project it will be many, many months from now and India will have everything under control.
> 
> As usual with these two, too little too late.


It did occur to me that most vaccination drives tend use either existing buildings or tents, seen as time is of the essence. Even if they wanted a more lasting structure you can just get a load of prefab portakabins and a transporter and you could put up multiple semi permanent medical locations in India for the price of one designed structure and with a much smaller time frame. Construction companies put up plumbed and wired portakabins all the time. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were only paying for one of the site’s chemical toilets 

maybe it’s hard to acquire vaccines as unqualified individuals but why don’t they just give 3 million to an organisation that can like I don’t know, say the Red Cross, MSF or even, say, Global citizen.

mind you can’t have a plaque on the side of some boxes or a portakabin


xincinsin said:


> Confusing. Is the relief centre in Dominica functioning yet? This Bloomberg article from December says it will be ready early 2021 but the Archewell site is still describing the project in future tense.
> 
> 
> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
> 
> 
> 
> And are they claiming undue credit again? It sounds like World Central Kitchen is spearheading the relief centres and Archewell is providing financial support, not doing the actual construction or daily operations. Most of their projects are these lowhanging fruit type of fanfare where they make a PR splash but don't put in much effort.


xincinsin, I have to commend you on your excellent and speedy sleuthing! 
You are finding all their dirty little secrets.
I’m sure AW hq would be sweating buckets if you turned up at their door.


----------



## bag-mania

They must pay a bundle to whoever does their web site but damn. Their background illustrations are half-@ssed, not quite childlike but not professional either. Not sure what the symbolic message of winding fingers in a vine is supposed to be but I'm sure it is full of compassion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I don't even congratulate my parents, and not out of spite, just because it's such a non-event around here.


I barely remember my own...


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, I have serious doubts he is sharing actual incidents. He seems to make up sh*t as he goes along, one harmless example being "I could never ride bikes as a kid" when there are ample pics of both Charles or Diana having him on their bike or him riding a bike himself.
> 
> G*ive him a bit more time and he'll claim he was raised in the Tower whom he could never leave and Charles tried to sacrifice him to the devil so he could drink his blood and live forever.*


At this point, that probably sounds like a missed opportunity to Charles


----------



## Sol Ryan

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure if that is being alpha or having PTSD or something, though.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, sadly H is neither.
> 
> You're of course right when you say every couple has their dynamics, the thing is, if the roles where reversed I bet money more people would be alarmed and consider their specific relationship abusive. But as he's the twice as big former military guy people ignore the red flags she who shall not be named raises. (no, I don't think she beats him up. I do think she manipulates and gaslights him and lets him have her narcisstic rages)



Agreed, but the idea that an army man has to be an alpha is unhealthy. It’s a standard that most men can’t keep and shouldn’t. It breeds more problems. Most of my early career was working with the military and my friends are military. The best leaders I’ve seen aren’t alphas. They make you want to work with them.

I don’t know. I think they’re both awful. They’re professional victims. I couldn’t imagine having to live with his snobby a$$. He’s probably getting everything he wanted and if it’s true that his money is protected, what’s he got to lose? He has no reputation. I mean who goes  I have 32 mil to live my entire life on, raise my family and security with... let’s buy a 16 mil dollar mansion and whine about how poor we are?

Maybe I just don’t explain myself well, but I just hate the term alpha male. Like I said, you can be a strong, mentally healthy male without being an alpha and that’s what I take issue with. Harry just isn’t a good example, but I know lots of good examples in my real life.

And now I’ve lost my train of thought....  ah well.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> They must pay a bundle to whoever does their web site but damn. Their background illustrations are half-@ssed, not quite childlike but not professional either. Not sure what the symbolic message of winding fingers in a vine is supposed to be but I'm sure it is full of compassion.
> 
> View attachment 5087682
> View attachment 5087683


I don’t think so. I think they cheap out on the website and a series of interns and occasional fiverrr hires do it. That’d explain why it keeps clogging up - web design is no joke


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Yep, typical H&M PR move. Piggyback on the good deeds of others and claim them as their own. Time will move on and everyone will forget to follow up and see if Harry and Meghan actually did anything they promised.



They failed to modernize the monarchy by being half-in, half-out royals so they've redoubled their efforts and will now modernize charity by doing none of the work but taking all the credit


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently Princess Beatrice is pregnant and has announced it on same date as Harry and wife’s 3 rd anniversary. *People are saying it was announced this day on purpose, karma for H’s wife announcing her pregnancy at Eugenie’s wedding.*


That was my first thought, and I must admit, I also thought GOOD FOR THEM!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> Agreed, but the idea that an army man has to be an alpha is unhealthy. It’s a standard that most men can’t keep and shouldn’t. It breeds more problems. Most of my early career was working with the military and my friends are military. The best leaders I’ve seen aren’t alphas. They make you want to work with them.



I think I might not fully understand what an alpha is. I'm talking way too much about horses lately, but my old horse was the alpha of the herd for the 20+ years I've had him (got him while in my early teens). This guy has not once randomly bit or kicked the other horses, he'd just show up with his larger than life personality and horses twice his size backed off. Our other one, though? He is comfortably in the middle of the pecking order, but he's a complete a*shole who'll relentlessly bully those below him to the point they are in full panic mode when he approaches. So for me, an alpha may be dominant, but above all has leadership qualities. I don't use it as synonym for toxic masculinity. If that's your definition of alpha, I completely agree with you that it's extremely unhealthy, unfair to the men who don't want to live up to that expectation and can venture into dangerous quickly.



> I don’t know. I think they’re both awful. They’re professional victims. I couldn’t imagine having to live with his snobby a$$. He’s probably getting everything he wanted and if it’s true that his money is protected, what’s he got to lose? He has no reputation. I mean who goes  I have 32 mil to live my entire life on, raise my family and security with... let’s buy a 16 mil dollar mansion and whine about how poor we are?



Jup. I'm not especially liking the new Harry, or shall I say, Harry revealed. I guess his minders deserve more credit than they were given.



> Maybe I just don’t explain myself well, but I just hate the term alpha male. Like I said, you can be a strong, mentally healthy male without being an alpha and that’s what I take issue with. Harry just isn’t a good example, but I know lots of good examples in my real life.
> 
> And now I’ve lost my train of thought....  ah well.



I think I understand where you're coming from, and as I said, I agree.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> They must pay a bundle to whoever does their web site but damn. Their background illustrations are half-@ssed, not quite childlike but not professional either. Not sure what the symbolic message of winding fingers in a vine is supposed to be but I'm sure it is full of compassion.
> 
> View attachment 5087682
> View attachment 5087683



I see impactful storytelling that resonates with everyone globally.
I see compassion in action.
Puff puff, don’t you?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just posted that in Philip's thread...I feel it's not so much snark as more a sign of "You just don't matter to us [as in BRF] anymore."
> *
> But also, how come it's their anniversary and we haven't seen a big circus yet? Like, an reenactment maybe.*


Shhhhhh!!!!  Don't put that out into the universe!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Obviously I'm giving that way too much thought, but...I wonder if Harry is indeed the lying liar that lies like she who shall not be named, or if we're witnessing the first stages of some serious mental health problem but not realizing it and then everyone will be shocked if he has to be whisked away to some expensive private clinic.

I mean...it is certainly not normal to rewrite your whole past like he's doing right now. Dunno.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> ITA, Charles was not perfect by any means but you can tell this man tried. He did not deserve to be scorched in the public by his own son.


Even men who are serial killers sometimes have children who still them in prison!  Harry is scum.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> There’s a huge shortage of medical staff in India right now. I’m sure construction is also a challenge given their infection numbers.
> *
> By the time they complete this project it will be many, many months from now and India will have everything under control.*
> 
> As usual with these two, too little too late.


I just read over 240 doctors have died treating COVID there.  Whenever India gets it under control, Meg and Haz will claim credit.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> That was my first thought, and I must admit, I also thought GOOD FOR THEM!


I'm SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO loving this; seriously, their stans are just nut-jobs!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Yep. It’s all talk per usual. I’m sure their government is as slow as ours was at the height of the pandemic when offices were shut down and people told to stay home. Honestly this would be a tiny drop in a bucket even if it opened tomorrow


People who test positive that are healthy enough to be quarantined at home, literally have "Danger" signs posted on their house doors and police are stationed nearby to make sure they don't leave their homes!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> He was an Army officer and graduated from Sandhurst so he was *supposed* to be an alpha male.   Notice I used the word _supposed_.


At this point, I'm assuming he has no gender.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Lodpah said:


> I’m saddened by this article. I mean how much more do they want to ruin his family? I don’t think the public needs to know so much. If they want to help they need to stop making it about them. MM and Harry truly go in for  the kill, as in revenge for whatever they perceive as them being slighted. Like the old saying be nice to people on your way up as you will meet them in your way down. They are the most despicable people alive as they do it sitting behind a glass house throwing stones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to drop more ‘truth bombs’ in new AppleTV+ series with Oprah
> 
> 
> Harry’s brother William “is dreadfully hurt,” by Harry’s continued revelations. “He’s an elegant man who lives for his job, his country and his family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com






Like, one side of their mouth they talk about being kind to people, considerate of others' mental health, etc. And on the other side they do this nonsense?

Absolutely nothing will be gained by continuing to publicly trash family. Are they really this bitter and jaded? At some point very soon they will no longer garner sympathy, and are already looking like spoiled complainers. Keep digging that hole, though!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously I'm giving that way too much thought, but...I wonder if Harry is indeed the lying liar that lies like she who shall not be named,* or if we're witnessing the first stages of some serious mental health problem but not realizing it and then everyone will be shocked if he has to be whisked away to some expensive private clinic.*
> 
> I mean...it is certainly not normal to rewrite your whole past like he's doing right now. Dunno.



Don't know. Don't care. Personally I believe he's a lying liar like his wife.

He's about to launch a TV series about mental illness and he has been surrounding himself with supposed experts on the topic. He's been going on about HIS issues for the past couple of years. He has been living for the subject of mental illness. If he had a massive breakdown and didn't see it coming you'd have to wonder if he was competent enough to put on his pants in the morning.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> No he’s not. He’s supposed to be a Leader when he’s in the Army and in his professional life. His relationship dynamic between him and his wife should not be the Army’s business unless theres a legal issue (abuse, ethics, etc). There have been many military wives that ruled the roost at home, as they should when their husbands are away So long on deployments.
> 
> Im not saying MM is a military wife, but to say that Army men should be alphas that dominate their wives like the commentator in the article... no. Marriage is a partnership. If it’s not, whats the point? I worked in a Military Hospital for years and had to see so many battered military wives in the ER and their husbands being committed to the mental health ward after coming back from deployment and beat his wife. Screw alpha males.
> *
> You can be a mentally healthy male and not be an alpha male.*
> 
> Edited.


Very true.  I didn't see the point of the whole alpha/beta thing.  He's henpecked, pure and simple, which makes it seem that he is spineless.  Maybe he's an amoeba male


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> It seems to be a thing for royals but I don't really see anyone else doing it - or maybe they do and I haven't noticed. I hardly even pay attention to anniversaries of people I know so I don't get it at all.


My parents just celebrated their 49th.  We sent cards and called, but that was about it.  Next year hopefully we can go all out, but that'll be for their 50th.  Not 45 months of toddler years.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I see impactful storytelling that resonates with everyone globally.
> I see compassion in action.
> Puff puff, don’t you?


I do too!  A groundswell of it all!


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously I'm giving that way too much thought, but...I wonder if Harry is indeed the lying liar that lies like she who shall not be named, or if we're witnessing the first stages of some serious mental health problem but not realizing it and then everyone will be shocked if he has to be whisked away to some expensive private clinic.
> 
> I mean...it is certainly not normal to rewrite your whole past like he's doing right now. Dunno.



He will probably expect the family to pay for his rehab, too! And then go on and on about it when they don't. And it's totally not normal to rewrite your past but impossible to do when his past is published all over the internet. The more he spins the more he looks like he is needing some help (recollections may vary hehe).

*Seasons Malibu* is probably where he will end up. Posh!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does that mean the Doria rumours might have same truth to it? I mean, Samantha implied she was dealing (not that I have an opinion one way or another).


Even I (who dislikes Meghan) think this sounds racist....unless someone comes up with actual evidence


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh... dang it... I don’t want to defend MM and JCMH but that’s gross... why does he need to be an alpha male? Why can’t people be Partners in a relationship? Or Harry be a sub? Every relationship has a dynamic.
> 
> There’s nothing saying Harry isn’t driving these attacks on his family.  He’s been acting out for years in smaller ways, he’s just got the opportunity now to go all in. I just think people are seeing the real Harry and he’s as awful as we thought he was.











						There Are 4 Types of Alpha Personalities - Understand Them & You Can build a Wolf Pack.
					

All alpha males are aggressive, competitive, and driven to achieve. They think big, aim high, and attack their goals with courage, confidence, and tenacity.




					www.linkedin.com
				



Perhaps the Hannity’s guest was thinking along these lines:
4 types of alphas:
For example, here's how the four types might look at a particular task:

Commander: This job needs someone to take charge and lead the way.
Visionary: I see a great possibility waiting to be unveiled and seized.
Strategist: The potential opportunities and risks need to be analyzed and solved.
Executor: Getting this done requires structure and control.
Hazzie doesn’t qualify for any of these types. He has been led his entire life. He left his job and family with *no* plan. Clearly he did not analyze risks. He seems to drift from one activity to another.

Many have said that Hazzie seems to have handed over control to MM, Doria or OW. Personally, I don’t believe they are controlling him, but OW is taking advantage of him. I think he is suffering from not knowing how to manage his life. He is accustomed to someone else making the decisions. Even on the Corden show, he seemed to shrink from stepping out. He interrupts himself, over explains and looks unkempt.  Once separated from his leaders/minders, he is falling apart. It often happens with 18 years olds going off to college or people in the military — when they are separated from their parents or leaders. They haven’t learned how to be an adult. It’s called *failure to launch*. Just my 2 cents.



ETA:  Apparently, some find the phrase ‘failure to launch’ offensive which is not my intent.   How about ‘emerging adulthood’.








						Emerging Adulthood is a Safer Approach
					

It is often taken for granted that the phenomenon known as “failure to launch” is pathological and merits extensive clinical and educational intervention. I have even heard this described as an “epidemic.” However, this stance ignores much of human history, development and culture.



					www.allkindsoftherapy.com


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> Even I (who dislikes Meghan) think this sounds racist....unless someone comes up with actual evidence



How is it racist? I'm confused.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Even I (who dislikes Meghan) think this sounds racist....unless someone comes up with actual evidence



Her teenage bf said they met at that camp for children with parents in prison. The Sun article linked to it. I posted the article last night.  Was he lying? Was the Sun lying?  Were they at the camp as volunteers? The point is she _seems_ to have overcome the odds and succeeded. If only they told the truth, their story would be truly inspirational.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He was an Army officer and graduated from Sandhurst so he was *supposed* to be an alpha male.   Notice I used the word _supposed_.


some men really like to have their wives take charge...my husbands brother is like that. His wife plans their vacations in detail pretty much minute by minute.  and I'm sure she's in charge of a lot of other aspects of their life.  he had a very nice wife before but she was kinda flaky and irresponsible.  he's happy with the boss


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It often happens with 18 years olds going off to college or people in the military — when they are separated from their parents or leaders. They haven’t learned how to be an adult. It’s called *failure to launch*. Just my 2 cents.



I mean, I have every sympathy for a kid who's moving out and having to learn to adult within minutes. But Harry's freaking 36 and a father himself. Time to grow up.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Just catching up on today's postings when I saw posting of Queen's corgi puppy passing.  So very sad. In case this hasn't already been posted, I found this article that says puppy was ill in February. Hadn't heard that before now. 

The Queen was reportedly left “devastated” after one of her two new Dorgi puppies died over the weekend after falling ill in February. 



> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/queen-dorgi-puppy-death-philip-b1849860.html


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> How is it racist? I'm confused.


well - and again I'm not a fan - she is a black woman.  that narrative seems kinda similar to saying Meghan was straight outta compton to me
If it's true, then OK.


----------



## lalame

I’ve said it before... I think Harry is a petulant man child. I’m kind of happy he’s showing us his real colors. Of course, I feel bad for his family though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I’m surprised Meghan’s dad or Samantha haven’t come out and said the obvious... “so WHY did you vilify us again when we were speaking our truth just like you are now?”


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> At this point, I'm assuming he has no gender.


well Demi Lovato just announced she is a they so....


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her teenage bf said they met at that camp for children with parents in prison. The Sun article linked to it. I posted the article last night.  Was he lying? Was the Sun lying?  Were they at the camp as volunteers? The point is she _seems_ to have overcome the odds and succeeded. If only they told the truth, their story would be truly inspirational.



Wait.. what? I haven’t seen this. Can you find the interview again?


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> You have intrigued me with this. It’d be really really very interesting to know what’s going on with his taxes. Charitable foundations are a great way to launder your money....or so I’ve heard.


Yes agree there is the wrinkle of the charitable foundation which complicates things 

Lets say HE does not personally have any business income from Netflix, Spotify etc   - it all goes to the charity, which pays his expenses (leaving little for accomplishing charitable works ??) including office space in the McMansion, and private jets all over the world, that is the upside of having a charity. The downside of the foundation construct is that one must employ a village full of expensive legal and financial help that ensure the charity is run per government guidelines 

But, of course, any income from the money left by Diana is in his name, possibly in the Caymans, and it is potentially taxable depending on citizenship. 

An anecdote ... president 45 - who supposedly DID not pay any income taxes once showed a stack of paper that represented his tax return for one year, cannot remember if the stack was one foot high or ten feet high, no matter... the point IS imagine all the work that went into preparing all that paperwork - IT AINT CHEAP to do the paperwork that says you owe $0 to the Fed


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> There Are 4 Types of Alpha Personalities - Understand Them & You Can build a Wolf Pack.
> 
> 
> All alpha males are aggressive, competitive, and driven to achieve. They think big, aim high, and attack their goals with courage, confidence, and tenacity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.linkedin.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps the Hannity’s guest was thinking along these lines:
> 4 types of alphas:
> For example, here's how the four types might look at a particular task:
> 
> Commander: This job needs someone to take charge and lead the way.
> Visionary: I see a great possibility waiting to be unveiled and seized.
> Strategist: The potential opportunities and risks need to be analyzed and solved.
> Executor: Getting this done requires structure and control.
> Hazzie doesn’t qualify for any of these types. He has been led his entire life. He left his job and family with no plan. Clearly he did not analyze risks. He seems to drift from one activity to another.
> 
> Many have said that Hazzie seems to have handed over control to MM, Doria or OW. Personally, I don’t believe they are controlling him, but OW is taking advantage of him. I think he is suffering from not knowing how to manage his life. He is accustomed to someone else making the decisions. Even on the Corden show, he seemed to shrink from stepping out. He interrupts himself, over explains and looks unkempt.  Once separated from his leaders/minders, he is falling apart. It often happens with 18 years olds going off to college or people in the military. They haven’t learned how to be an adult. It’s called *failure to launch*. Just my 2 cents.
> 
> View attachment 5087771



I don’t think it’s bad that he isn’t a leader. It’s bad he’s a jerk and an awful person, but like I once told one of my guys who was trying to force a kid to be a leader and the kid just wasn’t (it was almost well-intentioned bullying)... someone has to peel potatoes or no one gets fed. You just want to make sure he’s the best d**n potato peeler he can be and you get him what he needs to be an excellent potato peeler. ( I was really young and not great as a mentor... but the point was that not everyone can drive the car...you need people to do the work too and that’s not bad ). Harry should not be used as an example of Military people.

Its the same idea where I work now, they almost look down on people who don’t want to be management. Some people want to learn a skill and be good at it, there’s nothing wrong with that. You can develop without going into management. It’s a crazy idea...

I mean depending on how you judge it, has following MM and OW done him wrong so far? He’s got his mansion, contracts,  fake day job and no one really gets to question it without the crowd coming after them. Until it comes crashing down, he’s doing pretty well and when/if it crashes down, he can just run home to daddy And spin another sob story.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> well - and again I'm not a fan - she is a black woman.  that narrative seems kinda similar to saying Meghan was straight outta compton to me
> If it's true, then OK.



I've read tax evasion as the other possible reason for jail. So is it just a racist thing when accused of drugs? Or any jail time is racist? What if she were any other race - including white - and accused of jail for drugs? Or tax evasion? Is tax evasion different in this racism scenario?

Anyone of any race is capable of doing something illegal and getting busted for it. Anyone of any race can be accused of braking the law. It's not racist, just an accusation.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I've read tax evasion as the other possible reason for jail. So is it just a racist thing when accused of drugs? Or any jail time is racist? What if she were any other race - including white - and accused of jail for drugs? Or tax evasion? Is tax evasion different in this racism scenario?
> 
> Anyone of any race is capable of doing something illegal and getting busted for it. Anyone of any race can be accused of braking the law. It's not racist, just an accusation.


I understand but if this is not true and just made up, is it likely that a white woman in her position would have this story spread about her?


----------



## lalame

marietouchet said:


> Yes agree there is the wrinkle of the charitable foundation which complicates things
> 
> Lets say HE does not personally have any business income from Netflix, Spotify etc   - it all goes to the charity, which pays his expenses (leaving little for accomplishing charitable works ??) including office space in the McMansion, and private jets all over the world, that is the upside of having a charity. The downside of the foundation construct is that one must employ a village full of expensive legal and financial help that ensure the charity is run per government guidelines
> 
> But, of course, any income from the money left by Diana is in his name, possibly in the Caymans, and it is potentially taxable depending on citizenship.
> 
> An anecdote ... president 45 - who supposedly DID not pay any income taxes once showed a stack of paper that represented his tax return for one year, cannot remember if the stack was one foot high or ten feet high, no matter... the point IS imagine all the work that went into preparing all that paperwork - IT AINT CHEAP to do the paperwork that says you owe $0 to the Fed



I think that’s really unlikely this Netflix to charity to Harry’s living expenses would work out. For one, Netflix knows it would cost them much more than the cost of paying Harry to deal with the legal and PR ramifications of that. But more importantly an auditor and legal team would never support this... they would be doing something illegal themselves. There are guidelines about how much foundations must spend on charitable activities versus operating/admin expenses.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her teenage bf said they met at that camp for children with parents in prison. The Sun article linked to it. I posted the article last night.  Was he lying? Was the Sun lying?  Were they at the camp as volunteers? The point is she _seems_ to have overcome the odds and succeeded. If only they told the truth, their story would be truly inspirational.


oh, I missed that source....I wonder if she will come out (or her "friends" or "sources" will) and say it isn't true (even if it is true)
It does seem farfetched to me though.  even if her mom was in prison, she had her dad.  and she went to expensive schools.  I don't think she would have wanted to associate with kids of prisoners.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@lalame & @sdkitty 
page 4178, post 62,660.

from The Sun article:
_She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993._



Spoiler: The post



They met at Camp Agape, right?


Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
_The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._

*Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?*
AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…
_The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.

Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”

She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.

Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.

ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> @lalame & @sdkitty
> page 4178, post 62,660.
> 
> from The Sun article:
> _She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993._
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The post
> 
> 
> 
> They met at Camp Agape, right?
> 
> 
> Camp Agape California | A Summer Camp for Kids
> _The Purpose of Camp Agape California is to help children, who have one or both parents incarcerated, to learn how to build healthy relationships, create positive life-changing memories and experiences. Our desire is to allow our kids to be kids through fun activities and to facilitate healing and restoration by teaching and equipping them through the sharing of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through love, trust, forgiveness, hope and prayer._
> 
> *Who is Meghan Markle's first kiss Joshua Silverstein?*
> AS she gets ready to marry into royalty Meghan Markle has revealed who her first kiss was with. As the 36-year-old is getting ready to walk down the aisle to marry Prince Harry, a previous intervie…
> _The bride-to-be revealed to chat show host Larry King she first kissed a boy aged 13, when she was attending summer camp.
> 
> Meghan told the host: “Joshua Silverstein. I was 13, it was a summer camp and I kissed him!”
> 
> She shared her first kiss with a boy named Joshua Silverstein, when they were both at their Agape Spiritual Church summer camp, in Santa Monica in 1993.
> 
> Meghan Markle went to the camp while she was a pupil at Immaculate Heart Girls' School in Los Feliz, with Joshua living just five miles down the road – and he’s still there today.
> 
> ETA:_ If all of the above is true, she ought to emphasize this part of her story. She’s done well against many odds. Good on her.



That camp (for children of incarcerated parents) says it was created in 2005. From their website:

_In 2005, Camp Agape began as a free kid’s camp exclusively for the children of incarcerated parents on the Island of Oahu.

...

Camp Agape California Directors Jon and Liz have a strong passion for our at-risk children. Their vision is to bring the Camp Agape model from Hawaii to California and make a positive difference in as many children and families as they can in California._

The church camp is a totally different company with a website that doesn't say anything about incarcerated parents.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her teenage bf said they met at that camp for children with parents in prison. The Sun article linked to it. I posted the article last night.  Was he lying? Was the Sun lying?  Were they at the camp as volunteers? The point is she _seems_ to have overcome the odds and succeeded. If only they told the truth, their story would be truly inspirational.



No he didn't. He said they met at Agape Spiritual Camp. Someone confused that with Camp Agape. Two different programs entirely.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> That camp says it was created in 2005. From their website:
> 
> _In 2005, Camp Agape began as a free kid’s camp exclusively for the children of incarcerated parents on the Island of Oahu.
> 
> ...
> 
> Camp Agape California Directors Jon and Liz have a strong passion for our at-risk children. Their vision is to bring the Camp Agape model from Hawaii to California and make a positive difference in as many children and families as they can in California._



So, the boyfriend is lying ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> No he didn't. He said they met at Agape Spiritual Camp. Someone confused that with Camp Agate. Two different programs entirely.



So, The Sun messed up???

More info:

_When did Meghan Markle and Joshua Silverstein date and how did they meet? Joshua and Meghan met at a *theatre summer camp* when they were 13 years old but broke up before starting high school. _
Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2021/05/18/who-...-and-when-did-they-date-14604837/?ito=cbshare


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I understand but if this is not true and just made up, is it likely that a white woman in her position would have this story spread about her?



Yes. I do believe that. Anyone of any race or gender in the public eye is subject to all sorts of accusations. 

Don't get me wrong - I like Doria. I respect that she has been stoically quiet and seems like a class act... I like the work she does.

If she did time, I would guess it was jail and not prison (big difference) if it even got that far (arrested, court date, not made to serve time). And for something small that could be removed from the record (many states will purge small offenses so that the person can obtain gainful employment and have a productive life without the burden of a mark on their record).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

LittleStar88 said:


> I've read tax evasion as the other possible reason for jail. So is it just a racist thing when accused of drugs? Or any jail time is racist? What if she were any other race - including white - and accused of jail for drugs? Or tax evasion? Is tax evasion different in this racism scenario?
> 
> Anyone of any race is capable of doing something illegal and getting busted for it. Anyone of any race can be accused of braking the law. It's not racist, just an accusation.



There’s no evidence to justify accusing Doria of any crime, arrest or incarceration. I’ve done searches on it, zip zero evidence shows up.

It seems easy and casual for people to throw it out there and try to smear a celeb’s mother’s reputation... why? because Doria is black? That’s what’s racist about it.

Even Samantha has not come out and said anything about jail. If there was any truth, Sam would have spilled it long ago.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, the boyfriend is lying ?



No, there's 2 different camps with a similar name... 

Camp Agape for children of incarcerated parents (not sure who assumed this was the one?)
Agape International Spiritual Center, which runs a summer camp


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes. I do believe that. Anyone in the public eye is subject to all sorts of accusations.
> 
> Don't get me wrong - I like Doria. I respect that she has been stoically quiet and seems like a class act... I like the work she does.
> 
> If she did time, I would guess it was jail and not prison (big difference) if it even got that far (arrested, court date, not made to serve time). And for something small that could be removed from the record (many states will purge small offenses so that the person can obtain gainful employment and have a productive life without the burden of a mark on their record).


I neither like nor dislike doria.  she seems to know to keep her mouth shut when it comes to her daughter


----------



## lalame

I don't even know where the idea Doria went to jail or prison came from...


----------



## Chanbal

Clearblueskies said:


> The timescale for this doesn’t seem to tie in with the crisis going on.  India doesn’t have enough vaccine and is failing to meet its contracts with other countries.  And who will staff it?  Can’t imagine clinical staff are sitting around twiddling their thumbs in Mumbai at the mo.  Smacks of showbizzy grandstanding.


Would they use some of the raised funds for the vaccine to build (and staff) the community center?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I’m surprised Meghan’s dad or Samantha haven’t come out and said the obvious... “so WHY did you vilify us again when we were speaking our truth just like you are now?”



They have been surprisingly quiet. Paid off or threatened with another lawsuit?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> I don't even know where the idea Doria went to jail or prison came from...



Probably from that Sun article?


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Yes agree there is the wrinkle of the charitable foundation which complicates things
> 
> Lets say HE does not personally have any business income from Netflix, Spotify etc   - it all goes to the charity, which pays his expenses (leaving little for accomplishing charitable works ??) including office space in the McMansion, and private jets all over the world, that is the upside of having a charity. The downside of the foundation construct is that one must employ a village full of expensive legal and financial help that ensure the charity is run per government guidelines
> 
> But, of course, any income from the money left by Diana is in his name, possibly in the Caymans, and it is potentially taxable depending on citizenship.
> 
> An anecdote ... president 45 - who supposedly DID not pay any income taxes once showed a stack of paper that represented his tax return for one year, cannot remember if the stack was one foot high or ten feet high, no matter... the point IS imagine all the work that went into preparing all that paperwork - IT AINT CHEAP to do the paperwork that says you owe $0 to the Fed


Well now we know PG are giving them the donations let’s see if the charity commission (or whatever it’s called in US) starts saying they have to file a report now the are earning more than 20k. 
I mean it’s always seemed extremely bizarre to me that they claimed their organisation was getting such a small amount of money given they were already putting themselves out there so much.

then there was the whole business of them having some mysterious mx charity in the U.K. wonder what that was for.

we have our fair share of celebs who pay no tax through Cayman Islands and other work around too. There is periodical scandal about it but little happens as it’s technically not illegal. Just unscrupulous. 

while it is undoubtedly expensive to find a sneaky lawyer and a sneaky accountant it’s clearly they are clearly not that rare. People like DJ khaled have finessed for a small fortune by naming his kid as a producer and stuff like that and I doubt he’s in the 1st row at the insider parties.


----------



## bag-mania

What is being reported may not necessarily be accurate or true. Don't make me go on one of my media rants, i know they get old! 

Here is an article that offers a third option. It claims Meghan and Joshua met at a theatre camp when they were 13. That makes the most sense for two kids who would both become actors.

*Who is Meghan Markle’s ex Joshua Silverstein and when did they date?*

Meghan Markle’s childhood sweetheart made a reappearance on Lorraine this week and everyone wants to know more about Joshua Silverstein.  Joshua, who dated Meghan when they were children, spoke to Lorraine Kelly via Zoom about his friendship with the Duchess from many years ago.  However, as the interview had to take place via Zoom due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, it ended up being plagued with technical issues. The pair’s conversation was hindered by connection problems interrupting Joshua’s stories about the young Meghan, who is now married to Prince Harry.

This in turn meant fans of the Royals were keen to find out more about Joshua and how he and Meghan got to know each other in their youth. 

Joshua Silverstein is an actor from Los Angeles who is best known for appearances on Drop The Mic and The Late Late Show with James Corden.

*When did Meghan Markle and Joshua Silverstein date and how did they meet? *
Joshua and Meghan met at a theatre summer camp when they were 13 years old but broke up before starting high school. 

The pair remained friends throughout high school after their split, with Joshua seeing Meghan at church and staying in contact with her mother, Doria Ragland.

*Who is Joshua Silverstein dating now? *
Joshua is now married and he and his wife Cynthia share two children. 

*Did Meghan Markle ask out Joshua Silverstein? *
Yes, Meghan is the one who made the first move with Joshua, as he told Lorraine: ‘I think as she told it, she approached me, so I think that in itself was very attractive that a young person would have the confidence and walk up to me and tell me that she thought that I was attractive or anything like that.  ‘At that time we was together it’s what kids did. She told her friends she liked me, I told my friends I liked her. Our friends met and they kind of arranged it and then we became girlfriend and boyfriend.’









						Who is Meghan Markle's ex Joshua Silverstein and when did they date?
					

The pair dated as children.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, The Sun messed up???
> 
> More info:
> 
> _When did Meghan Markle and Joshua Silverstein date and how did they meet? Joshua and Meghan met at a *theatre summer camp* when they were 13 years old but broke up before starting high school. _
> Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2021/05/18/who-...-and-when-did-they-date-14604837/?ito=cbshare



Media outlets mess up all the time. I enjoy watching Project Veritas win retractions from outlets weekly




lalame said:


> I don't even know where the idea Doria went to jail or prison came from...



It’s a rumor from Quora


----------



## lalame

Good reminder to all to scrutinize what you read. Mix ups may happen.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lalame said:


> I don't even know where the idea Doria went to jail or prison came from...



It's been speculated quite frequently on this thread. Despite all evidence to the contrary.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> Good reminder to all to scrutinize what you read. Mix ups may happen.



Not a mix up, just crappy journalism. It's everywhere.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> There’s no evidence to justify accusing Doria of any crime, arrest or incarceration. I’ve done searches on it, zip zero evidence shows up.
> 
> It seems easy and casual for people to throw it out there and try to smear a celeb’s mother’s reputation... why? because Doria is black? That’s what’s racist about it.
> 
> Even Samantha has not come out and said anything about jail. If there was any truth, Sam would have spilled it long ago.



From what I have read today, the rumor stems from The Sun’s article. Misleading info is everywhere.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Not a mix up, just crappy journalism. It's everywhere.



You're right. I was being charitable. And frankly it's really sad if this WAS truly the root of such a terrible rumor to follow someone for years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gerryt

sdkitty said:


> oh, I missed that source....I wonder if she will come out (or her "friends" or "sources" will) and say it isn't true (even if it is true)
> It does seem farfetched to me though.  even if her mom was in prison, she had her dad.  and she went to expensive schools.  I don't think she would have wanted to associate with kids of prisoners.


I know it’s been said before, but the more that is coming out, the more I am struck by what a force for good she could have been.  Imagine she had been truthful in those early interviews -‘well, I’m 44, havent had the best of childhoods, separated from my mother when I needed her around but hey my dad was so great!  I love Harry, we would love our own children but I’m older, so we may explore other ways to get our family.  We also want to focus our time and energies on aspects of modern life that everyones aware need attention, such as mental health.  Harry’s experiences there with the loss of Diana attracts us to do what we can to help‘ etc etc. They could have touched even more hearts than they did in the beginning, before the vanity and lies began to surface and I do believe the RF would have supported them in all of that because they are well aware of the need to modernise.  The country would have been behind them all the way.  What a waste.


----------



## bag-mania

It's common for actresses to lie about their ages. In the ranking of Meghan's lies, knocking four years off of her age wouldn't even be in the Top 20 of her biggest fibs.


----------



## LittleStar88

bisousx said:


> There’s no evidence to justify accusing Doria of any crime, arrest or incarceration. I’ve done searches on it, zip zero evidence shows up.
> 
> It seems easy and casual for people to throw it out there and try to smear a celeb’s mother’s reputation... why? because Doria is black? That’s what’s racist about it.
> 
> Even Samantha has not come out and said anything about jail. If there was any truth, Sam would have spilled it long ago.



I don't think of these accusations as being racist. People of all races and all walks of life can find themselves in legal trouble. Whether or not she was busted for anything is anyone's guess. But I can't poo-poo a claim simply because of someone's race. 

I don't think Samantha's ax to grind is with Doria so makes sense that she wouldn't bring it up. Also, records can be exponged and infractions then become unsearchable. If it happened long before the internet it is easy to hide it.


----------



## gracekelly

When you have to pull up a boyfriend from when  you were 13, things are sad.  The only reason I can think of is that is one guy she didn't sleep with.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> From what I have read today, the rumor stems from The Sun’s article. Misleading info is everywhere.



It's what you read and spread and insisted was true despite that fact that 8 pages ago I explained, with a link, the camp didn't start until 2005 so it could not be the same program.

And now most on this thread believe Doria went to prison. Because of a mistake in a tabloid. 

And I would argue some racism thrown in as everyone seems all too eager to believe something that otherwise makes no sense at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gerryt said:


> I know it’s been said before, but the more that is coming out, the more I am struck by what a force for good she could have been.  Imagine she had been truthful in those early interviews -‘well, I’m 44, havent had the best of childhoods, separated from my mother when I needed her around but hey my dad was so great!  I love Harry, we would love our own children but I’m older, so we may explore other ways to get our family.  We also want to focus our time and energies on aspects of modern life that everyones aware need attention, such as mental health.  Harry’s experiences there with the loss of Diana attracts us to do what we can to help‘ etc etc. They could have touched even more hearts than they did in the beginning, before the vanity and lies began to surface and I do believe the RF would have supported them in all of that because they are well aware of the need to modernise.  The country would have been behind them all the way.  What a waste.



So true.  They could have easily stopped this storm of falsehoods.  Sometimes it seems they wanted the negative press. They gave cryptic answers in their engagement interview.  They played with fire by misleading the press, so it’s no surprise the press attacked them. And now here we are - our _first amendment is bonkers_.  Has there ever been a more un likeable couple?  Off to Google it…


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Would they use some of the raised funds for the vaccine to build (and staff) the community center?


I think it’s unrealistic to think that throwing money at it is the magic solution to what’s happening in India right now.  Where are those trained staff to come from?


----------



## bisousx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's what you read and spread and insisted was true despite that fact that 8 pages ago I explained, with a link, the camp didn't start until 2005 so it could not be the same program.
> 
> And now most on this thread believe Doria went to prison. Because of a mistake in a tabloid.
> 
> And I would argue some racism thrown in as everyone seems all too eager to believe something that otherwise makes no sense at all.



I’m still trying to figure out what “mistake” the tabloid made or how it contributed to the jail rumors 

The Sun article I read says it was the Agape Spiritual Center. There’s no confusion on my part when I read it.

There’s numerous articles about Doria being a part of this “church” for years, and how the ex bf keeps in touch with Doria via the church. Doria met Oprah through the Agape Spiritual Center and became friends. There’s even articles that suggest a Doria and Thomas married in a hippie spiritual center, which explains her interest in alternative religions.

The Sun article was written very recently. The Quora rumors about Doria have been around since Feb 2020 and before. It’s really weird to blame these rumors on supposed misinformation.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> I would have_ loved_ it.
> 
> I went to a boarding school in West Sussex in my school Summer holidays for a few years (and my school had a long day - sometimes till 6pm). I would have loved to have gone there all year long.


I'm glad for everyone who enjoyed boarding school safe and sound but not everyone did. Why isn't this spoken of more? Because mainly men are the victims? Just grin and bear it?

This is an ITV documentary by a man who himself was a victim of boarding school sexual abuse. In it there's a chilling interview with a boarding school teacher and sex offender who has no regrets what so ever for what he's done. "Tradition"... I think it's a good thing to hear how these individuals think because most of us couldn't fathom the insanity. But abusers like him were allowed to operate unhindered at these famous schools. This docu is just one of far too many.

What is additionally heartbreaking is one of the YT comments by someone who was abused at home and for whom boarding school was their only relief.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

On a lighter note.

The Behaviour Panel: Scott Rouse, Mark Bowden, Chase Hughes, and Greg Hartley do a professional, educational,and at the same time entertaining body language dissection of the Oprah interview with the Heavily Pregnant Ones. 

Scott Rouse, Mark Bowden, Chase Hughes, and Greg Hartley are all experts in human behaviour and at interviewing and interrogating with very impressive backgrounds in law enforcement, government agencies, military, corporate America and Wall Street.

Discussion includes why Harry is wearing what he did, Meghan's dress, the invoking of the divine Diana, and Wallis, who's controlling the conversation, lots of modified fig leafing and- validating my narcdar, classic narcissism spotted by pros. Well worth the two hours, and watching some of their other videos.


----------



## lalame

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.



I wondered that myself. But I'm guessing it's because Thomas's career is pretty well documented while Doria's background is a little more mysterious to people... seems like she went to school for a time, was a social worker for a time, was a yoga teacher for a time, etc. Either way I have to raise an eyebrow when I hear anything about Meghan these days that was not plastered all over the media over and over... I think any big secrets would've been well unearthed by now.


----------



## Clearblueskies

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's what you read and spread and insisted was true despite that fact that 8 pages ago I explained, with a link, the camp didn't start until 2005 so it could not be the same program.
> 
> And now most on this thread believe Doria went to prison. Because of a mistake in a tabloid.
> 
> And I would argue some racism thrown in as everyone seems all too eager to believe something that otherwise makes no sense at all.


Thanks a lot.  I don’t believe all the gossip I read on this thread or every newspaper headline, and I don’t assume everyone else does.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.



I can only speak for myself, but: because it was Doria who went MIA for years with no clues about her whereabouts while Thomas a) worked on that long-time project and b) raised the kid.


----------



## bag-mania

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.



I think it was because there was a span of years where Meghan lived with her father after the divorce. Of course there could be other reasons why she lived with her father instead of her mother, none of which involve prison.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gerryt

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it’s unrealistic to think that throwing money at it is the magic solution to what’s happening in India right now.  Where are those trained staff to come from?


I gather it’s not certain that the current vaccines are as effective against the Indian strain.  Local resource is already failing and can’t just be conjured up from within.  I think any additional resource to help them fight this would have to come from outside nations, maybe something along the lines of the flying eye hospitals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's what you read and spread and insisted was true despite that fact that 8 pages ago I explained, with a link, the camp didn't start until 2005 so it could not be the same program.
> 
> And now most on this thread believe Doria went to prison. Because of a mistake in a tabloid.
> 
> And I would argue some racism thrown in as everyone seems all too eager to believe something that otherwise makes no sense at all.



Just to be clear, I insisted that I was *not* the one saying it was a fact. I insisted I was quoting that Sun article, not giving my ‘more likely’ opinion. Rather than follow the Sun’s link which took me to another article,  I googled Joshua Silverstein and Agape Summer Camp. There are several Agape summer camps in Cali. How much easier it would have been if MM herself had stated the name of the camp - give them a shout-out.  No chance of a rumor then. Proving again she likes this drama.  Ironically, not much Agape found either.  Yes, this is exactly how false info spreads, here and everywhere else.

ETA: And this shows up — believe it at your own risk:








						Meet the latest actors who will play Harry and Meghan for Lifetime
					

Prince Harry, 36, will be played by New York-based Broadway actor and composer Jordan Dean, while actress and blogger Sydney Morton will portray Meghan, 39.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lalame

To be fair to Meghan, I don't think there's enough hours in the day for her to personally address and clarify every detail that someone else mentions about her. There's a lot. And imagine if every time someone on the periphery of her life mentions her, Meghan puts out a statement "we ate at XYZ restaurant on ABC date." It would look ridiculous.


----------



## lalame

But back to things that actually DID happen...

I didn't think the India thing was that big of a deal. Sounds like Central World Kitchen has been working at it for awhile in India and Archewell kicked in some money to build a new site for them to give food and vaccinations. It'll probably take some time to get built. I don't know about logistics but I learned a few weeks ago that my company was offering our Indian employees a benefit where they can have an ICU set up in their own homes if they get sick, so they don't have to go to the hospital. I've never heard of that before... so maybe the capacity is there to treat people but not enough infrastructure (hence the new building)? Just a thought.


----------



## Chanbal

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it’s unrealistic to think that throwing money at it is the magic solution to what’s happening in India right now.  Where are those trained staff to come from?


It sounds grand to announce building a community center to celebrate a wedding anniversary ...
My problem has to do with the source of the money for such celebration. They have donated a cake, sandwiches and hats, but I didn't see any sound donation coming directly from them so far.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> But back to things that actually DID happen...
> 
> I didn't think the India thing was that big of a deal. Sounds like Central World Kitchen has been working at it for awhile in India and Archewell kicked in some money to build a new site for them to give food and vaccinations. It'll probably take some time to get built. I don't know about logistics but I learned a few weeks ago that my company was offering our Indian employees a benefit where they can have an ICU set up in their own homes if they get sick, so they don't have to go to the hospital. I've never heard of that before... so maybe the capacity is there to treat people but not enough infrastructure (hence the new building)? Just a thought.


Capacity to treat means the same as infrastructure surely?  
There’s an acute oxygen shortage, and few high dependency beds.  Only a tiny % of the popn has been vaccinated and vaccine resistance is high.  There have been a number of religious events at which thousands gathered which have spread the virus.  Governments have been flying in oxygen generators etc.  It’s a big deal.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> To be fair to Meghan, I don't think there's enough hours in the day for her to personally address and clarify every detail that someone else mentions about her. There's a lot. And imagine if every time someone on the periphery of her life mentions her, Meghan puts out a statement "we ate at XYZ restaurant on ABC date." It would look ridiculous.



If, at the beginning of her introduction to the world of royalty and service, she had given complete background information, she would not need to address rumors that flare up because she only gives part of the story. Most PR professionals tell their clients to *stay ahead* of the story. I am guessing the BRF knows that, too. IMO


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh!



If true, one more reason to dislike this unlikeable couple. 
imo.


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.


I really thought the Doria rumors were put to rest a very long time ago. She did not go to jail/prison.   My understanding from at least 2 years ago, was that the summer camp had a religious affiliation.  Either these tabloids are deliberately misleading or they don't do the research because they are lazy.  Shame on them.


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> Capacity to treat means the same as infrastructure surely?
> There’s an acute oxygen shortage, and few high dependency beds.  Only a tiny % of the popn has been vaccinated and vaccine resistance is high.  There have been a number of religious events at which thousands gathered which have spread the virus.  Governments have been flying in oxygen generators etc.  It’s a big deal.



I'm not saying the situation in India is not a big deal. I'm saying I didn't find the Archewell announcement a controversial one. They are just adding support and capacity to an organization already doing this work on the ground, and helping them erect a building it looks like. One of the problems is few hospital beds - so I don't see the problem with adding more, and other support like food for those in difficult situations. Governments are sending vaccines to India so I would imagine having more facilities to vaccinate is a good thing.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> If, at the beginning of her introduction to the world of royalty and service, she had given complete background information, she would not need to address rumors that flare up because she only gives part of the story. Most PR professionals tell their clients to *stay ahead* of the story. I am guessing the BRF knows that, too. IMO



Down to a summer camp back in high school?? Haha I think that's a pretty tall order that few celebrities would meet unless their entire lives had already been well documented like the royal family.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> If true, one more reason to dislike this unlikeable couple.
> imo.


So what?  Oprah would give a good present lololol!  People are asked to be godparents for all sorts of reasons.  My DH told me that he was asked to be a godparent for a child when he was about 13-14. The parents sounded like they had run out of victims as this was their 7 or 8th child.   He didn't know the parents and never saw the child again ever after the baptism.  I kidded him that we might get a knock on the door one day from a grown person claiming to be this person.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> So what?  Oprah would give a good present lololol!  People are asked to be godparents for all sorts of reasons.  My DH told me that he was asked to be a godparent for a child when he was about 13-14. The parents sounded like they had run out of victims as this was their 7 or 8th child.   He didn't know the parents and never saw the child again ever after the baptism.  I kidded him that we might get a knock on the door one day from a grown person claiming to be this person.



Because it's strategic and not personal

I also thought godparents should be CofE


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Down to a summer camp back in high school?? Haha I think that's a pretty tall order that few celebrities would meet unless their entire lives had already been well documented like the royal family.



Haha She herself named her boyfriend on Larry King’s(?) show, iirc, told only part of the story. 
IMO she should have named the camp, avoid confusion. Ymmv.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Because it's strategic and not personal
> 
> I also thought godparents should be CofE


It is expected that everything they do has an ulterior motive.  Granted, if that is the rule, then was Oprah really allowed to do it?  Perhaps it is more likely that she is an "honorary" godparent.  Don't forget, this is the couple who stated that they got married 3 days prior to the big church wedding.  I will pass out large grains of salt to whomever wants one for any of their utterances.


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously I'm giving that way too much thought, but...I wonder if Harry is indeed the lying liar that lies like she who shall not be named, or if we're witnessing the first stages of some serious mental health problem but not realizing it and then everyone will be shocked if he has to be whisked away to some expensive private clinic.
> 
> *I mean...it is certainly not normal to rewrite your whole past like he's doing right now. Dunno.*


Unfortunately, it's more common than most people would think. I can name two family members who successfully rewrote their past in my close family and blaming family members for their invented misery.
It's fashionable to be a victim and even celebrated. I'm sure he'd gone through traumatic things from the start and due to his probably inborn sensitivity or/and instability he needed qualified help, but most of us mortals have to go through a some - hopefully minor not major - mistreatments, difficulties and all kind of obstacles in our families, school or workplace and learn to suck it up as much as we can.  He had seemed to be coping with his past relatively well, too, until Princess Pinocchio entered the picture. I'm certain that his blaming game and constant crying in the last two years would hardly help his mental state, and while he tries to paint himself as the hero of conquering his mental help problems, his efforts are easily contradicted by his deteriorating relationships with his family. Sad, that it's his  meal ticket at the moment besides milking those half-assed charity attempts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> *It is expected that everything they do has an ulterior motive.  *



This.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> I understand but if this is not true and just made up, is it likely that a white woman in her position would have this story spread about her?


If that white woman had a family like Meghan's has I wouldn't rule it out. Thomas Jr?


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.


I think that assumption was because there's a chunk of MM's life that Doria isn't accounted for, whereas Thomas is.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> They must pay a bundle to whoever does their web site but damn. Their background illustrations are half-@ssed, not quite childlike but not professional either. Not sure what the symbolic message of winding fingers in a vine is supposed to be but I'm sure it is full of compassion.
> 
> View attachment 5087682
> View attachment 5087683



Were you on their website long enough to have gotten this message, like I did ?!?  

_We love having you here... _But we're mindful of screen time. Why not take a break? We'll be here.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Oh!



What does a godparent do exactly?  Are they a proxy for the parents?  Because although O is exceptionally wealthy, I'm not sure she has parenting skills, especially at her age.

Or do H&M just want trust funds for the children...


----------



## CarryOn2020

FWIW:








						The Cold War Has Begun - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] The family war has begun, and the first shots have already been fired! Up until now, the family did not respond to the attacks and rude behavior of this couple. When The Couple engaged in petty stunts to steal the spotlight from other family members, The Family was privately...




					blindgossip.com
				



[Blind Gossip] The family war has begun, and the first shots have already been fired!

Up until now, the family did not respond to the attacks and rude behavior of this couple.

When The Couple engaged in petty stunts to steal the spotlight from other family members, The Family was privately annoyed… but did not react in public.

When The Couple lobbed insults and accusations, The Family was privately shocked… but did not react in public.



> Some members of his family, notably [redacted], wanted to counter the charges being leveled point by point. The decision was made that to do so would be seen as reactive and would only prolong and exacerbate the discussion. They continued to include the antagonists in social media posts and maintained a dignified silence about the insults and attacks in the hope that they would would stop.


Unfortunately, they did not stop. The attacks continued.

Now, The Family has decided that enough is enough.



> They have had quite enough of his nonsense. After the latest round of attacks, the family came up with a unified strategy by which everyone in the family could abide.


We told you before that the family would not attack directly. Sure enough, we were right!



> The strategy is subtle and dignified.
> No consideration will be made nor recognition given to [the couple’s] activities or schedule. Those quiet acts of omission will make it clear that they (and especially she) are now “personae non gratae.” It will also deprive them of publicity, the oxygen that fuels their unseemly behavior.
> The family will simply carry on with their own lives and activities. The omission of [the couple] from their communications will be quite subtle, yet, each time it happens, it will be noticed because it will demonstrate a distinct break from past traditions.


Basically, The Family is not going to attack The Couple. They are going to freeze out The Couple.

It’s a Cold War.

When will this war end? As we told you before, the only way back is without her.



> While they were once hopeful he would come around, the family has now come to the unfortunate realization that there will be no reconciliation as long as he is married to her. As a couple, they are manipulative, vindictive and completely untrustworthy.



ETA: Looks like Prince Charles is on board:








						Prince Charles gives video message.. with NO picture of Prince Harry
					

The Prince of Wales has been seen throughout the pandemic on video calls from his offices at Highgrove or Birkhall with an array of family photos behind him, including of Harry, Meghan and Archie.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> What does a godparent do exactly?  Are they a proxy for the parents?  Because although O is exceptionally wealthy, I'm not sure she has parenting skills, especially at her age.
> 
> Or do H&M just want trust funds for the children...


Theoretically a godparent will protect and assure the education of the child if needed. Oprah by being Archie's (and possibly Doria Diana's) godparent became almost a family member of the Harkles.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> FWIW:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Cold War Has Begun - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] The family war has begun, and the first shots have already been fired! Up until now, the family did not respond to the attacks and rude behavior of this couple. When The Couple engaged in petty stunts to steal the spotlight from other family members, The Family was privately...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] The family war has begun, and the first shots have already been fired!
> 
> Up until now, the family did not respond to the attacks and rude behavior of this couple.
> 
> When The Couple engaged in petty stunts to steal the spotlight from other family members, The Family was privately annoyed… but did not react in public.
> 
> When The Couple lobbed insults and accusations, The Family was privately shocked… but did not react in public.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, they did not stop. The attacks continued.
> 
> Now, The Family has decided that enough is enough.
> 
> 
> We told you before that the family would not attack directly. Sure enough, we were right!
> 
> 
> Basically, The Family is not going to attack The Couple. They are going to freeze out The Couple.
> 
> It’s a Cold War.
> 
> When will this war end? As we told you before, the only way back is without her.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Looks like Prince Charles is on board:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles gives video message.. with NO picture of Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales has been seen throughout the pandemic on video calls from his offices at Highgrove or Birkhall with an array of family photos behind him, including of Harry, Meghan and Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Hmm. I don't like it. I wish they'd address it. I think ignoring them is just going to empower H+M to speak out more and then they might have an additional complaint, being ghosted by their own family. It'll come to a head when the 2nd baby is born, if the BRF really does continue to freeze them out.


----------



## Chanbal

A $500,000 baby shower, common??? I wonder from which planet Omid comes from! 


_Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, which airs tonight, Omid Scobie claimed: 'I remember speaking to a palace aide at the time who rolled their eyes, they were horrified that something so common was happening within the House of Windsor.'_









						Palace aide 'rolled their eyes' when Meghan Markle had  baby shower
					

Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, Omid Scobie claimed aides were 'horrified' that Meghan's 'common' New York baby shower was happening.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Betty-Lou

Anybody know what type of Foundation Archwell is?


----------



## lalame

Betty-Lou said:


> Anybody know what type of Foundation Archwell is?



I think it's a private family foundation. It doesn't seem to accept donations directly from the public (no way to donate directly to them) and only makes grants, doesn't operate programs themselves. That might be their future ambition though.


----------



## Chanbal

Betty-Lou said:


> Anybody know what type of Foundation Archwell is?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Hmm. I don't like it. I wish they'd address it. I think ignoring them is just going to empower H+M to speak out more and then they might have an additional complaint, being ghosted by their own family. It'll come to a head when the 2nd baby is born, if the BRF really does continue to freeze them out.



H&M know what they are doing. They know that the BRF cannot speak out and address things directly so they are using that to their advantage. Harry already complained that his father didn't return his phone calls and Oprah made out that it was a massive shock/horror as though Charles is such a bad parent for ignoring him temporarily. It could have been that Charles was not mentally ready to talk to Harry and Charles is in a difficult position - he will be King and he needs to manage the publics money properly. Charles also does not have a massive amount of freedom (which Harry is aware of too). 

My father has ignored me for a few days (and my brother too) when we made choices he was not supportive of, or did not agree with. But then he was fine, and it seems like Charles was too. But with Harrys continued bashing of his father in a very public way, it may make it hard to repair or overlook.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Betty-Lou said:


> Anybody know what type of Foundation Archwell is?



They are a 501c3 non-profit.  I've been watching to see when they post their 2020 990 public info.


Mission:
Not Available

URL not available |  9665 WILSHIRE BLVD FIFTH FLOOR Beverly Hills CA 90212-2340
IS THIS YOUR NONPROFIT?
Request an Impact & Results score
Archewell Inc. is headquartered in Beverly Hills, CA, and is a 501(c)(3) organization. EIN: 85-2213963.  Donations are tax-deductible. The IRS NTEE classification code is T30,  Public Foundations within the Philanthropy, Voluntarism and Grantmaking Foundations category. The IRS ruling year for tax exemption was 2020.
(Source: IRS Business Master File and Form 990)


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> What does a godparent do exactly?  Are they a proxy for the parents?  Because although O is exceptionally wealthy, I'm not sure she has parenting skills, especially at her age.
> 
> Or do H&M just want trust funds for the children...


In the Anglican faith , god-parents are supposed to ensure the Christian upbringing of the child, mine mostly gave me gifts on big occasions, they never were actually involved in taking me to church or Sunday school
being Anglican is not a requirement for a god parent , my sister had a Methodist god mother , also Protestant but not the same thing


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> They must pay a bundle to whoever does their web site but damn. Their background illustrations are half-@ssed, not quite childlike but not professional either. Not sure what the symbolic message of winding fingers in a vine is supposed to be but I'm sure it is full of compassion.
> 
> View attachment 5087682
> View attachment 5087683


That vine: a metaphoric leash? Maybe we'll find out who the "artist" is when M publishes her next book - written by M, illustrated by M, audio book by M.

If we are going to inspect H for any signs of alpha maledom, I think his best moment was the "What M wants, M gets" incident. Maybe he *thinks* he is an alpha male - all those standing ovations must be making his head swell. Although any sign of alpha, beta or omega vanished when he whined like a baby about rescuing and providing for his family (with his mummy's money).


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Were you on their website long enough to have gotten this message, like I did ?!?
> 
> _We love having you here... _But we're mindful of screen time. Why not take a break? We'll be here.



No! That’s so chintzy. How many minutes was too long and they tried to kick you off? Way to make their web visitors feel welcome.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> No! That’s so chintzy. How many minutes was too long and they tried to kick you off? Way to make their web visitors feel welcome.



Agree!  I felt like they targeted me.   I don't recall how many minutes I was away from my pc.  I'm guessing 15 mins?  I was totally surprised. They don't like people appearing to be lurking on their website it seems!


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> That vine: a metaphoric leash? Maybe we'll find out who the "artist" is when M publishes her next book - written by M, illustrated by M, audio book by M.



The vine is to remind us that they are still environmentally conscious, even though they found that cause to not be lucrative enough to pursue.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree!  I felt like they targeted me.   I don't recall how many minutes I was away from my pc.  I'm guessing 15 mins?  I was totally surprised. They don't like people appearing to be lurking on their website it seems!


Adding to this for I forgot to mention ... I had taken a screen shot of that message from a few days ago when it happened and went to look for it before replying to you ...  WELL, guess what?!?  I couldn't find it in my photos!!  WTF!?!  I hope I just missed it 3 times going through it but it's making me   n e r v o u s!


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree!  I felt like they targeted me.   I don't recall how many minutes I was away from my pc.  I'm guessing 15 mins?  I was totally surprised. They don't like people appearing to be lurking on their website it seems!



Maybe it’s reverse psychology. They want visitors to think their website is so popular they have to be worried about their bandwidth. Don’t want all those millions of eager donors to accidentally overwhelm their site and bring it down!


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Adding to this for I forgot to mention ... I had taken a screen shot of that message from a few days ago when it happened and went to look for it before replying to you ...  WELL, guess what?!?  I couldn't find it in my photos!!  WTF!?!  I hope I just missed it 3 times going through it but it's making me   n e r v o u s!



Uh oh. Now you’ve done it. You’ve come to the wrong peoples’ attention.

If you are anything like me maybe you deleted the image and then forgot about it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Uh oh. Now you’ve done it. You’ve come to the wrong peoples’ attention.
> 
> If you are anything like me maybe you deleted the image and then forgot about it.


HAHAHA paranoia setting in.  I did check my delete folder.  Nope wasn't in there.   Maybe I forgot I deleted from the delete folder.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> HAHAHA paranoia setting in.  I did check my delete folder.  Nope wasn't in there.   Maybe I forgot I deleted from the delete folder.



Right now there is a very disappointed hacker out there. How do you say “what’s this crap?” in Russian?


----------



## bag-mania

DP


----------



## Kevinaxx

Hermes Zen said:


> They are a 501c3 non-profit.  I've been watching to see when they post their 2020 990 public info.
> 
> 
> Mission:
> Not Available
> 
> URL not available |  9665 WILSHIRE BLVD FIFTH FLOOR Beverly Hills CA 90212-2340
> IS THIS YOUR NONPROFIT?
> Request an Impact & Results score
> Archewell Inc. is headquartered in Beverly Hills, CA, and is a 501(c)(3) organization. EIN: 85-2213963.  Donations are tax-deductible. The IRS NTEE classification code is T30,  Public Foundations within the Philanthropy, Voluntarism and Grantmaking Foundations category. The IRS ruling year for tax exemption was 2020.
> (Source: IRS Business Master File and Form 990)


It’s interesting because even if you’re a non-profit, with the 501c3 you should be a corporation… and so Archewell is… but I cannot find out anything from state of California. I suppose they could have registered in Delaware (it’s either that or Nevada generally for any corporations thinking they’ll hit big or are big so they’d want to minimize the tax implications but…) they are headquartered in CA so if they have a physical presence shouldn’t they register as a foreign entity with state of CA?



Edit nvm it also includes unincorporated association (but if they write archewell inc that’s incorporated.)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Right now there is a very disappointed hacker out there. How do you say “what’s this crap?” in Russian?


Let Google Translate be your friend:  Что это за хрень?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Finally caught up on 20+ pages. Since we're both retired, Hubby and I have decided to downsize and move to a warmer climate and so we've been busy sorting and giving stuff and things away. It's a long and tiring process, but we're nearing the end. Just a few more weeks to go, so I may not be here as much for the next little while.
Meanwhile, for a little bit of humour, here's a pic of Eugenie and Edo and I'm wondering if Edo is in the early stage of Couvade Syndrome or pregnant dad syndrome. Who do you think has the biggest bump?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Finally caught up on 20+ pages. Since we're both retired, Hubby and I have decided to downsize and move to a warmer climate and so we've been busy sorting and giving stuff and things away. It's a long and tiring process, but we're nearing the end. Just a few more weeks to go, so I may not be here as much for the next little while.
> Meanwhile, for a little bit of humour, here's a pic of Eugenie and Edo and I'm wondering if Edo is in the early stage of Couvade Syndrome or pregnant dad syndrome. Who do you think has the biggest bump?
> View attachment 5088063


Congratulations on your retirements and move!


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> I don't even know where the idea Doria went to jail or prison came from...


I think there was a period in Doria's life where she dropped out of sight. The speculations run from she went back to school, to she was working, to she was a flight attendant, to she served time for tax evasion. I would have thought that if she went back to school, that would have been easily verified.



lalame said:


> I think it's a private family foundation. It doesn't seem to accept donations directly from the public (no way to donate directly to them) and only makes grants, doesn't operate programs themselves. That might be their future ambition though.


If it doesn't accept donations, how do they know how much money was donated on Archie's behalf? How did they get a $3mil figure? Were people supposed to send in $5 to Global Citizen and indicate that Archie was the donor? Then Archewell's dollar-matching partners would contribute the $15? All fuzzy-wuzzy.


----------



## bag-mania

Kevinaxx said:


> It’s interesting because even if you’re a non-profit, with the 501c3 you should be a corporation… and so Archewell is… but I cannot find out anything from state of California. I suppose they could have registered in Delaware (it’s either that or Nevada generally for any corporations thinking they’ll hit big or are big so they’d want to minimize the tax implications but…) they are headquartered in CA so if they have a physical presence shouldn’t they register as a foreign entity with state of CA?
> 
> View attachment 5088044
> 
> Edit nvm it also includes unincorporated association (but if they write archewell inc that’s incorporated.)



I think they did file something in Delaware. But for some reason I think that was for a business Doria was starting. Maybe someone else will remember.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Kevinaxx said:


> It’s interesting because even if you’re a non-profit, with the 501c3 you should be a corporation… and so Archewell is… but I cannot find out anything from state of California. I suppose they could have registered in Delaware (it’s either that or Nevada generally for any corporations thinking they’ll hit big or are big so they’d want to minimize the tax implications but…) they are headquartered in CA so if they have a physical presence shouldn’t they register as a foreign entity with state of CA?
> 
> View attachment 5088044
> 
> Edit nvm it also includes unincorporated association (but if they write archewell inc that’s incorporated.)



There was a doc approved as 501c3. Sent to R. Genow M's Hollywood agent/lawyer to the address that was posted at https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34543309.

Searched Genow and found this from 2020 that mentioned Delaware. My sleuthing ends here.  
https://images.app.goo.gl/yxQMZjfuzUJMzxAEA


----------



## Kevinaxx

Hermes Zen said:


> There was a doc approved as 501c3. Sent to R. Genow M's Hollywood agent/lawyer to the address that was posted at https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-34543309.
> 
> Searched Genow and found this from 2020 that mentioned Delaware. My sleuthing ends here.
> https://images.app.goo.gl/yxQMZjfuzUJMzxAEA


Yeah, I saw them at Delaware (the screenshot) but it still is weird to me that they say it’s headquartered in CA but they don’t register with the state as a foreign entity as they should…


----------



## Hermes Zen

Kevinaxx said:


> Yeah, I saw them at Delaware (the screenshot) but it still is weird to me that they say it’s headquartered in CA but they don’t register with the state as a foreign entity as they should…



Sounds like you know more about this stuff than I do. I'm familiar with usa non-profits but not as a foreign entity. The 501c3 was for federal exemption. I haven't seen anything about CA. Interesting question. Hmmm we should search a little more.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Finally caught up on 20+ pages. Since we're both retired, Hubby and I have decided to downsize and move to a warmer climate and so we've been busy sorting and giving stuff and things away. It's a long and tiring process, but we're nearing the end. Just a few more weeks to go, so I may not be here as much for the next little while.
> Meanwhile, for a little bit of humour, here's a pic of Eugenie and Edo and I'm wondering if Edo is in the early stage of Couvade Syndrome or pregnant dad syndrome. Who do you think has the biggest bump?
> View attachment 5088063


Congratulations on your retirement. Moving to a new home and city is exciting. It's also a great opportunity to get rid of stuff you don't need, I can barely get inside of my garage these days.


----------



## Kevinaxx

Hermes Zen said:


> Sounds like you know more about this stuff than I do. I'm familiar with usa non-profits but not as a foreign entity. The 501c3 was for federal exemption. I haven't seen anything about CA. Interesting question. Hmmm we should search a little more.


I used to work with a start up (we incorporate in Nevada for taxes but had to register in ca because we had physical presence there aka founder lives in CA and works out of her place).

and I also used to work as a business banker so I’ve helped numerous businesses open accounts/verify.  To my knowledge you cannot operate in CA without paying CA their dues. The LLC annual is $800.

I couldn’t find their docs on state of California. Usually it’s because of dba (aka they’re known as archewell in public but the actual business is abc llc so you’d have to know what county they’re in to look at the dba database to piece the two together) or, because it’s a LP and LPs while they have to register with state of ca (as any business) their paperwork is not entered in state of ca for search.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Hermes Zen 
@Chanbal 

Thanks for the good wishes and we'll sip one  or maybe two to your health under the sun!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Kevinaxx said:


> I used to work with a start up (we incorporate in Nevada for taxes but had to register in ca because we had physical presence there aka founder lives in CA and works out of her place).
> 
> and I also used to work as a business banker so I’ve helped numerous businesses open accounts/verify.  To my knowledge you cannot operate in CA without paying CA their dues. The LLC annual is $800.
> 
> I couldn’t find their docs on state of California. Usually it’s because of dba (aka they’re known as archewell in public but the actual business is abc llc so you’d have to know what county they’re in to look at the dba database to piece the two together) or, because it’s a LP and LPs while they have to register with state of ca (as any business) their paperwork is not entered in state of ca for search.


Hmmm I recall another name for Delaware (?) Honeycomb comes to mind. Have you seen this name?  Believe it was a LLC. I could be remembering incorrectly. I'd have to go back to research it. Maybe you know?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Hermes Zen
> @Chanbal
> 
> Thanks for the good wishes and we'll sip one  or maybe two to your health under the sun!


  Let's triple that. One for yourself, one for Chanbal and one for me.  This is so exciting! A new chapter in your life. Again, congratulations !!


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## Kevinaxx

Hermes Zen said:


> Hmmm I recall another name for Delaware (?) Honeycomb comes to mind. Have you seen this name?  Believe it was a LLC. I could be remembering incorrectly. I'd have to go back to research it. Maybe you know?


No, I only searched archewell which came up with the foundation and llc, unfortunately Delaware does not allow the forms online (but you can see it if you search for companies like poshmark for example:


	

		
			
		

		
	
)


and that’s what I mean by needing to register in CA.

I’m sure someone will get them on it eventually esp if archewell is new.

Florida has the business’s ein on the page as well.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Hermes Zen
> @Chanbal
> 
> Thanks for the good wishes and we'll sip one  or maybe two to your health under the sun!





Hermes Zen said:


> Let's triple that. One for yourself, one for Chanbal and one for me.  This is so exciting! A new chapter in your life. Again, congratulations !!



I'm also ready to downsize and move...


----------



## Chanbal

_A couple of years ago all I knew about Prince Henry of Wales is that he was a privileged ponce who liked a pint; now I know everything. And that’s entirely his doing, not the evil media’s. He won’t leave us alone. He accuses us of barging into his life by continuing to buy tabloids that publish pics of him and his wife, but it’s him who’s barging into our lives. You can’t switch on the TV or open a newspaper without seeing Harry wanging on about his feelings. I half expect to see him on a street corner soon, megaphone in hand, yelling at passers-by: ‘WILLIAM WON’T TAKE MY CALLS.’ Get a therapist, mate.









						The tragedy of Prince Harry
					

He will come to regret his conversion to wokeness.




					www.spiked-online.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> I'm also ready to downsize and move...



I NEED to downsize BUT don't want to move!


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> I NEED to downsize BUT don't want to move!


I should have nomad blood, I'm always ready to move.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A new journey really begins a new year!
Now, that is something to sparkle about


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> I should have nomad blood, I'm always ready to move.


I love to travel but don't want to move again.  Done that too many times.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Finally caught up on 20+ pages. Since we're both retired, Hubby and I have decided to downsize and move to a warmer climate and so we've been busy sorting and giving stuff and things away. It's a long and tiring process, but we're nearing the end. Just a few more weeks to go, so I may not be here as much for the next little while.
> Meanwhile, for a little bit of humour, here's a pic of Eugenie and Edo and I'm wondering if Edo is in the early stage of Couvade Syndrome or pregnant dad syndrome. Who do you think has the biggest bump?
> View attachment 5088063



Hilarious 
He is definitely putting a smile on her face. This is what love & happiness looks like.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I'm also ready to downsize and move...



Grand, the more the merrier. Enjoy life to the fullest in the sun and sand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Isner video  - Willow Bay’s reaction is gold, so are Beyoncé’s and JayZ.  

Another way to say ‘No’ to the string-pullers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, yep, yep


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Isner video  - Willow Bay’s reaction is gold, so are Beyoncé’s and JayZ.
> 
> Another way to say ‘No’ to the string-pullers.



According to reports, he typed his own letters!


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> I think there was a period in Doria's life where she dropped out of sight. The speculations run from she went back to school, to she was working, to she was a flight attendant, to she served time for tax evasion. I would have thought that if she went back to school, that would have been easily verified.
> 
> 
> If it doesn't accept donations, how do they know how much money was donated on Archie's behalf? How did they get a $3mil figure? Were people supposed to send in $5 to Global Citizen and indicate that Archie was the donor? Then Archewell's dollar-matching partners would contribute the $15? All fuzzy-wuzzy.



The $3m is the amount from their campaign to donate directly to a VAX Live charity. You can see the donation page here: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/connect/duke-duchess-sussex-covax-donation/ It doesn't go directly to them. They know the amount because they set up this campaign on Global Citizen.... it's like when you fundraise for a marathon, your friends and family donate through your specific campaign so you can see how much you raised but the money goes directly to the charity.


----------



## lalame

Kevinaxx said:


> Yeah, I saw them at Delaware (the screenshot) but it still is weird to me that they say it’s headquartered in CA but they don’t register with the state as a foreign entity as they should…



Foundations have more options. It could be set up as a donor advised fund through another charity. This is really common actually. For example at the top of my head, Jennifer Lawrence's foundation is actually a fund set up at the Louisville Community Foundation. It says so on the foundation website, but you don't have to disclose this if you're not asking for donations from the public.




The reason it wouldn't be registered as its own entity in CA is because, if this were the case, it's not really a legal entity. The legal entity is the parent charity.

And btw I don't know for certain if this is how their foundation is set up, but it's one of the reasons why it might not be registered in CA. I can't tell by the info I see on their site.


----------



## Kevinaxx

lalame said:


> Foundations have more options. It could be set up as a donor advised fund through another charity. This is really common actually. For example at the top of my head, Jennifer Lawrence's foundation is actually a fund set up at the Louisville Community Foundation. It says so on the foundation website, but you don't have to disclose this if you're not asking for donations from the public.
> 
> View attachment 5088196
> 
> 
> The reason it wouldn't be registered as its own entity in CA is because, if this were the case, it's not really a legal entity. The legal entity is the parent charity.
> 
> And btw I don't know for certain if this is how their foundation is set up, but it's one of the reasons why it might not be registered in CA. I can't tell by the info I see on their site.


Thanks for chiming in. I’m familiar with DAFs however if it’s a corporation like (with a ) 501c3 (status), it will not be a daf truly. DAFs can be named like a foundation but ultimately it’s not one nor is it a corporation.

there can be a non-profit that is set up as a business entity, which is what I suspect archewell foundation is given the inc behind what hermes zen found and also what I found at Delaware.

I’ve worked with folks with DAFs, super common, as well as folks who have foundations as business entities and therefore needs to file with the state it’s doing business in, along with the 501c3 status.

eta, that’s not to say it can’t be an unincorporated association (usually those are more like girl scout clubs or social clubs like a group of men getting together to pool money to invest but small enough amounts to skate by) but the key is they’re saying archewell itself is incorporated… and it’s very unusual for a non profit to get a 501c3 without setting up a corporation. I’ve seen this for even one (a non profit whom incorporated with 501c3) where their entire $$ is less than $100k on average per year.


----------



## lalame

Kevinaxx said:


> Thanks for chiming in. I’m familiar with DAFs however if it’s a corporation like (with a ) 501c3 (status), it will not be a daf truly. DAFs can be named like a foundation but ultimately it’s not one nor is it a corporation.
> 
> there can be a non-profit that is set up as a business entity, which is what I suspect archewell foundation is given the inc behind what hermes zen found and also what I found at Delaware.
> 
> I’ve worked with folks with DAFs, super common, as well as folks who have foundations as business entities and therefore needs to file with the state it’s doing business in, along with the 501c3 status.
> 
> eta, that’s not to say it can’t be an unincorporated association (usually those are more like girl scout clubs or social clubs like a group of men getting together to pool money to invest but small enough amounts to skate by) but the key is they’re saying archewell itself is incorporated… and it’s very unusual for a non profit to get a 501c3 without setting up a corporation. I’ve seen this for even one where their entire $$ is less than $100k on average per year.



Where do you see that they say they're based in CA? I kind of suspect the foundation is really a DAF for the moment but they're starting to set up the 501c3 themselves and haven't yet made it through filing in every state they need to. I used to advise donors on whether to set up a DAF or foundation and it was pretty common too for some to set up a DAF as a 1-2 year transition situation before they get fully set up in the way they need to.

ETA: Never mind, I just got caught up on what you and Hermes Zen were talking about (confirming it's a 501c3 entity itself). Hmm, not really sure why they may not be registered the way you're expecting in CA.


----------



## Kevinaxx

lalame said:


> Where do you see that they say they're based in CA? I kind of suspect the foundation is really a DAF for the moment but they're starting to set up the 501c3 themselves and haven't yet made it through filing in every state they need to. I used to advise donors on whether to set up a DAF or foundation and it was pretty common too for some to set up a DAF as a 1-2 year transition situation before they get fully set up in the way they need to.





Hermes Zen said:


> They are a 501c3 non-profit.  I've been watching to see when they post their 2020 990 public info.
> 
> 
> Mission:
> Not Available
> 
> URL not available |  9665 WILSHIRE BLVD FIFTH FLOOR Beverly Hills CA 90212-2340
> IS THIS YOUR NONPROFIT?
> Request an Impact & Results score
> Archewell Inc. is headquartered in Beverly Hills, CA, and is a 501(c)(3) organization. EIN: 85-2213963.  Donations are tax-deductible. The IRS NTEE classification code is T30,  Public Foundations within the Philanthropy, Voluntarism and Grantmaking Foundations category. The IRS ruling year for tax exemption was 2020.
> (Source: IRS Business Master File and Form 990)




that’s where.

and a daf once set up, anything going in is irrevocable gift so they can only transfer to another daf (like if they’re moving from one firm to another that offers dafs) or the funds will be disbursed to a charity.

it is not a daf because of what’s written.

as I wrote this I guess the loophole would be to use your daf to donate to your own charity.


----------



## lalame

Kevinaxx said:


> that’s where.
> 
> and a daf once set up, anything going in is irrevocable gift so they can only transfer to another daf (like if they’re moving from one firm to another that offers dafs) or the funds will be disbursed to a charity.
> 
> it is not a daf because of what’s written.
> 
> as I wrote this I guess the loophole would be to use your daf to donate to your own charity.



Yes that’s how we would handle if a donor started with a DAF and then switched to creating their own 501c3. I don’t know if that’s what’s happening here... I would hand it off to the lawyers to set that entity up once they went that route so I’m not familiar with the filing requirements of a corporation. I just suspected it was a DAF because of how new it is, 1 staff, few details like board, etc but you guys already confirmed it was a 501c3.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kevinaxx

lalame said:


> Yes that’s how we would handle if a donor started with a DAF and then switched to creating their own 501c3. I don’t know if that’s what’s happening here... I would hand it off to the lawyers to set that entity up once they went that route so I’m not familiar with the filing requirements of a corporation. I just suspected it was a DAF because of how new it is, 1 staff, few details like board, etc but you guys already confirmed it was a 501c3.


It’s funny because I guess I always err to the side of caution but it’s a smart way of getting (rid of) appreciated assets and the slight tax break (at a time of your choosing vs waiting for paperwork to be set up first esp when it comes to the timing of the assets and what the value was @ when sold) but something just for me, I guess that’s the difference between ones ethics and what is legal and allowed. (Also there’s more wiggle room with an actual business account that’s a non profit vs a daf meant for donating to charities).

in any case, it’ll be interesting to see if or when the foundation registers in CA.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hi Kevinaxx & lalame. I was heading to bed and thought I'd checkin before I did. 

I got the information that was referenced above from guidestar but also had searched for charity organizations/tax exempt organizations. Not a whole lot info out there IMO. Here's link to it:

IF this is not appropriate to post, Mods please delete. I'm not familiar to all the rules.  Thank you.  This is all public info for non-profits.


> https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/detailsPage?ein=852213963&name=Archewell Inc.&city=Beverly Hills&state=CA&countryAbbr=US&dba=&type=CHARITIES, DETERMINATIONLETTERS&orgTags=CHARITIES&orgTags=DETERMINATIONLETTERS



Another info filled website is the Archewell wikipedia. Appears someone, maybe staff, have been keeping it up to date:



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archewell


----------



## Kevinaxx

It’s funny I think I’m just a bit nosy by nature.  I’ve learned in the last few years that it’s often people who make a lot of noise like H&M for example, that may not have as much or it’s more smoke and mirror.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Kevinaxx said:


> ...I’ve learned in the last few years that it’s often people who make a lot of noise like H&M for example, that may not have as much or it’s more smoke and mirror.


I think that pretty much sums up this whole thread


----------



## lalame

Kevinaxx said:


> It’s funny I think I’m just a bit nosy by nature.



This one too if we’re being honest @Clearblueskies !


----------



## Hermes Zen

lalame said:


> This one too if we’re being honest @Clearblueskies !



Me also!!


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Grand, the more the merrier. Enjoy life to the fullest in the sun and sand.
> 
> View attachment 5088153



Already living by the beach, I can totally recommend it 

lots of  and luck for the move


----------



## papertiger

I was out and about 1 day (working/shopping) 2 days ago. I've _just_ caught-up - 

Thanks for all the info on charity status in the US, _very_ interesting. 

I'd like to know what the secret is of JCMH's status in the US and _why_ it's a secret (he's told us everything else). 

Why is he in the US on a diplomatic passport since he no longer represents GB? Why is it presumed he can be?

In fact, he undermines the UK's stability and reputation with every event/word. I think British citizens have the right to know. I certainly think US citizens do since he's also been 'diplomatically' trashing their constitution.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> The $3m is the amount from their campaign to donate directly to a VAX Live charity. You can see the donation page here: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/connect/duke-duchess-sussex-covax-donation/ It doesn't go directly to them. They know the amount because they set up this campaign on Global Citizen.... it's like when you fundraise for a marathon, your friends and family donate through your specific campaign so you can see how much you raised but the money goes directly to the charity.


Thanks for the link


----------



## papertiger

^ just to add I think I know he's been allowed to use it (GB end)

If M ever tries to divorce him in Cali, she can't. She will only be able to divorce him in the UK. Wonder if she knows?   This is when Archies' birthplace and status will make it hard for her to argue he should live with her away from his heritage and birthright. Makes me think he has had some separate legal guidance or she knows she will never be able to divorce.

Plus if he's still 'working' for us he doesn't have to pay US taxes so why would he apply for a Green card/apply for duel citizenship?

So is he paying UK tax? Doubt it. Or is he squirrelling away funds offshore?

He'd also have to renounce all titles before being allowed to have US citizenship (Immigration and Nationalisation Act). He's stupid, but not that stupid.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> This one too if we’re being honest @Clearblueskies !


You don’t need to be nosy to know everything about these two!  They absolutely _insist _we know.  

Pretty soon Megs is going to be posting pictures of her breakfast and her latest yoga wotsits on Tig-Royal or Tig-Duchy or some such *ahem* “construct” - you just know she’s dyyying to do it


----------



## jelliedfeels

gerryt said:


> I gather it’s not certain that the current vaccines are as effective against the Indian strain.  Local resource is already failing and can’t just be conjured up from within.  I think any additional resource to help them fight this would have to come from outside nations, maybe something along the lines of the flying eye hospitals.


I try and avoid this Covid issue but everything I’ve heard is that the vaccines is effective against the Indian strain. 

The reason India is struggling, as is my understanding, is the health care system is woefully underdeveloped and underfunded in all aspects for the size and wealth of the country. They have a space programme after all.

But as I said before, if you want to add emergency medical buildings buy pre-fab portakabins that can be put up and plugged in a week and last 10 years. These specially designed community centres are just another vanity project you can put a plaque on.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maybe I’m just in a harsh mood today, but on the Doria thing...
I don’t care about the prison rumours. (They come, my understanding, from how some people have read Sam Markle’s book. Lady Colin talks about it.)

add on- I also don’t think a prison sentence should necessarily define someone. And I don’t believe it, I think she had some sort of life crisis and ran off to a yoga retreat like clearblueskies said 

I, personally, feel we know all we need to know about her character from how she and M have treated the Markle family who brought M up while Doria was AWOL.  Now she can live the highlife and canoodle with celebs she’s mother of the year.

as to the accusations being racially coded. I think the whole family has had rumours spread about them.
The one about her white dad is he sexually abused her. So, if anything, Doria’s come out the better as I’d much rather be falsely called a dealer than an incestuous paedophile.

edit- for some reason a paragraph repeated.


----------



## gerryt

jelliedfeels said:


> I try and avoid this Covid issue but everything I’ve heard is that the vaccines is effective against the Indian strain.
> 
> The reason India is struggling, as is my understanding, is the health care system is woefully underdeveloped and underfunded in all aspects for the size and wealth of the country. They have a space programme after all.
> 
> But as I said before, if you want to add emergency medical buildings buy pre-fab portakabins that can be put up and plugged in a week and last 10 years. These specially designed community centres are just another vanity project you can put a plaque on.


I agree that some publications support your view, but others cast doubt.  I’m not convinced the position is clear yet. I also agree that the dynamic duo would want to support in a way where they can clearly label their input, such as the provision of buildings. 
I have a background in the NHS so have been involved in various aspects of healthcare in the past.  The most significant component in the delivery of healthcare is well trained resource, from consultants/experts all the way through to the people who maintain the cleanliness vital to managing the transmission of disease.  Looking at the UKs experience of Covid in the last year, in my view the message that came to the fore most from our government was the need to protect the NHS, and by that they meant the people within the NHS, who were plainly exhausted.  The UK had the resource to build extra emergency medical buildings and did so, but as I understand it these went largely unused, because the resource to staff them and the hospitals just wasn’t there.  That’s why I feel that international resource would be a better provision than prefab buildings (always assuming that the resource is available).  I don’t have a problem with H&M seeking donations etc to help but I would hope that the Indian government would have the final say as to how that resource is deployed.  Can’t see H&M wanting their ‘badge‘ being put on temporary crematoriums for instance.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Samantha definitely has no love for her stepmother...but she never claimed she was in jail. Which seems like something she would have eagerly shared.

I must admit I really only get any news about this couple on this thread so I’ve never head that rumor about her father. 

While the Doria in prison accusation has been repeated here fairly frequently.

I just find it interesting that this father and daughter who courted the tabloids are believed at all costs and given a pass for any transgressions we actually know about while the mother, a social worker and yoga teacher who has stayed as private and away from the press as possible, is so easily vilified.  



jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe I’m just in a harsh mood today, but on the Doria thing...
> I don’t care about the prison rumours. (They come, my understanding, from how some people have read Sam Markle’s book. Lady Colin talks about it.)
> 
> I, personally, feel we know all we need to know about her character from how she and M have treated the Markle family who brought M up while Doria was AWOL.  Now she can live the highlife and canoodle with celebs she’s mother of the year.
> 
> as to the accusations being racially coded. I think the whole family has had rumours spread about them.
> The one about her white dad is he sexually abused her. So, if anything, Doria’s come out the better as I’d much rather be falsely called a dealer than an incestuous paedophile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe I’m just in a harsh mood today, but on the Doria thing...
> I don’t care about the prison rumours. (They come, my understanding, from how some people have read Sam Markle’s book. Lady Colin talks about it.)
> 
> add on- I also don’t think a prison sentence should necessarily define someone.
> 
> I, personally, feel we know all we need to know about her character from how she and M have treated the Markle family who brought M up while Doria was AWOL.  Now she can live the highlife and canoodle with celebs she’s mother of the year.
> I, personally, feel we know all we need to know about her character from how she and M have treated the Markle family who brought M up while Doria was AWOL.  Now she can live the highlife and canoodle with celebs she’s mother of the year.
> 
> as to the accusations being racially coded. I think the whole family has had rumours spread about them.
> The one about her white dad is he sexually abused her. So, if anything, Doria’s come out the better as I’d much rather be falsely called a dealer than an incestuous paedophile.


Not harsh.  I agree with you.  Where there are gaps, people speculate, and this is a gossip thread after all.  People speculate in way they wouldn’t if Doria wasn’t being portrayed as a saint and Thomas a demon.  I happen not to believe that story (anymore than I believe the one about this all being part of a big plan Charles is orchestrating to take back the USA, which has come up here several times  ).  I think Doria was probably living in an ashram or in a relationship she and Meghan prefer not to make public.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I


gerryt said:


> I agree that some publications support your view, but others cast doubt.  I’m not convinced the position is clear yet. I also agree that the dynamic duo would want to support in a way where they can clearly label their input, such as the provision of buildings.
> I have a background in the NHS so have been involved in various aspects of healthcare in the past.  The most significant component in the delivery of healthcare is well trained resource, from consultants/experts all the way through to the people who maintain the cleanliness vital to managing the transmission of disease.  Looking at the UKs experience of Covid in the last year, in my view the message that came to the fore most from our government was the need to protect the NHS, and by that they meant the people within the NHS, who were plainly exhausted.  The UK had the resource to build extra emergency medical buildings and did so, but as I understand it these went largely unused, because the resource to staff them and the hospitals just wasn’t there.  That’s why I feel that international resource would be a better provision than prefab buildings (always assuming that the resource is available).  I don’t have a problem with H&M seeking donations etc to help but I would hope that the Indian government would have the final say as to how that resource is deployed.  Can’t see H&M wanting their ‘badge‘ being put on temporary crematoriums for instance.


Well part of my point is that the comparison of the U.K. NHS to the India healthcare system is flawed because they are extremely different and they are dealing with two massively different population demographics with different needs.

My point is really just that if time is of the essence, traditional construction is not really a helpful route because of the timescale. I don’t know how much governments get to consult on international aid projects but I would be surprised if they had the power to completely reroute funds from the initial idea. 

I agree that H&M name shouldn’t be put on crematoriums though, don’t want to make the poor bereaved even more upset.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let Google Translate be your friend:  Что это за хрень?


ok, I lack a Cyrillic keyboard but Spasiba


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Samantha definitely has no love for her stepmother...but she never claimed she was in jail. Which seems like something she would have eagerly shared.
> 
> I must admit I really only get any news about this couple on this thread so I’ve never head that rumor about her father.
> 
> While the Doria in prison accusation has been repeated here fairly frequently.
> 
> I just find it interesting that this father and daughter who courted the tabloids are believed at all costs and given a pass for any transgressions we actually know about while the mother, a social worker and yoga teacher who has stayed as private and away from the press as possible, is so easily vilified.


So if you read what I actually said, I said that my understanding was that the Doria rumour came from how people, including lady Colin herself, had interpreted Sam Markle’s

 The abuse rumour has been talked about on the thread before and it’s also discussed in LCC’s book.

My sense of the situation is just my instinct but so is yours. I’m going to assume neither of us are flies on their walls.
 I just feel wouldn’t be as complacent about my child disowning their family when the only reasons we’ve been given are extremely petty ones. Of course, there may be stuff going on behind the scenes but I just get the impression it’s the classic example of a divorced parent who likes the kid to be on their side only. I’m never going to like that person, no matter how well they can salute the sun. 

Ultimately, I think that things are just  factional at this point whereas I think the most reasonable view is that these are all flawed people who hurt each other.  I don’t like that the Markles have aired the dirty laundry but I also think you can’t really vilify them for talking to the press about their story given that selling the family secrets is how H&M make their own living.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

jelliedfeels said:


> So if you read what I actually said, I said that my understanding was that the Doria rumour came from how people, including lady Colin herself, had interpreted Sam Markle’s
> 
> The abuse rumour has been talked about on the thread before and it’s also discussed in LCC’s book.
> 
> My sense of the situation is just my instinct but so is yours. I’m going to assume neither of us are flies on their walls.
> I just feel wouldn’t be as complacent about my child disowning their family when the only reasons we’ve been given are extremely petty ones. Of course, there may be stuff going on behind the scenes but I just get the impression it’s the classic example of a divorced parent who likes the kid to be on their side only. I’m never going to like that person, no matter how well they can salute the sun.
> 
> Ultimately, I think that things are just  factional at this point whereas I think the most reasonable view is that these are all flawed people who hurt each other.  I don’t like that the Markles have aired the dirty laundry but I also think you can’t really vilify them for talking to the press about their story given that selling the family secrets is how H&M make their own living.



Just to clarify...I'm not on any side, I don't intensely like or dislike any of these people, I don't know enough about them (or honestly care enough about them) to feel passionately one way or another...but I'm pretty devoted to truth and facts. And while I love a good gossip session (I'm on this forum after all) I believe we are in dangerous territory when completely unfounded rumors are repeated and shared as facts. It may seem silly since this is just relatively meaningless celebrity fodder but in my country it's become a more serious issue so I take it more seriously.


----------



## gerryt

jelliedfeels said:


> I
> 
> Well part of my point is that the comparison of the U.K. NHS to the India healthcare system is flawed because they are extremely different and they are dealing with two massively different population demographics with different needs.
> 
> My point is really just that if time is of the essence, traditional construction is not really a helpful route because of the timescale. I don’t know how much governments get to consult on international aid projects but I would be surprised if they had the power to completely reroute funds from the initial idea.
> 
> I agree that H&M name shouldn’t be put on crematoriums though, don’t want to make the poor bereaved even more upset.


The NHS is indeed very different to the Indian healthcare system.  Of course it is.  But provision of healthcare in any country is made up of components, which is what I was trying to get to.  Even though demographics play a part, Covid is no respecter of these and once the appropriate ways of managing the illness are understood then that information, once shared, can surely be useful in the ongoing management of the illness in any demography/country.  So I will stick with my viewpoint that human resource is key, until persuaded otherwise, as no doubt will you with yours!  It’s good to debate!


----------



## byzina

Chanbal said:


> _Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, which airs tonight, Omid Scobie claimed: 'I remember speaking to a palace aide at the time who rolled their eyes, they were horrified that something so common was happening within the House of Windsor.'_



They rolled their eyes not because it was common, but because it was so nouveau riche. Meghan should have married a Russian oligarch. They like showing off money like this.


----------



## queennadine

I can’t fault her for the baby shower. Maybe for not having the whole thing be done more privately, but as an American woman about to have her first child…it would have been odd NOT to have a baby shower thrown for you!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> ok, I lack a Cyrillic keyboard but Spasiba



I do

On behalf of @marietouchet to @Maggie Muggins, Спасибо


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

queennadine said:


> I can’t fault her for the baby shower. Maybe for not having the whole thing be done more privately, but as an American woman about to have her first child…it would have been odd NOT to have a baby shower thrown for you!



Yeah, but most people don't waste half a freaking million on one. That's where it leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth, even if she didn't pay for it.


----------



## papertiger

gerryt said:


> The NHS is indeed very different to the Indian healthcare system.  Of course it is.  But provision of healthcare in any country is made up of components, which is what I was trying to get to.  Even though demographics play a part, Covid is no respecter of these and once the appropriate ways of managing the illness are understood then that information, once shared, can surely be useful in the ongoing management of the illness in any demography/country.  So I will stick with my viewpoint that human resource is key, until persuaded otherwise, as no doubt will you with yours!  It’s good to debate!



It's my understanding that the Indian people and their Government was lulled into a false sense of security and there were many huge meets allowed which spread the outbreak. According to my aunt, teachers were also threatened with dismissal if they didn't continue going in to teach.


----------



## papertiger

queennadine said:


> I can’t fault her for the baby shower. Maybe for not having the whole thing be done more privately, but as an American woman about to have her first child…it would have been odd NOT to have a baby shower thrown for you!



Wasn't this around the time H&M were publicly actively telling other people off for wasting earthly resources and emissions?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Williams arm looks so good in his vax pic, I can’t help but wonder if Harry will try to show his arm somehow.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Wasn't this around the time H&M were publicly actively telling other people off for wasting earthly resources and emissions?


What’s your point?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Wasn't this around the time H&M were publicly actively telling other people off for wasting earthly resources and emissions?



Naw, they would never, that's so hypocritical. Oh wait.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> What’s your point?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw, they would never, that's so hypocritical. Oh wait.



You're right, I'm forgetting who we're talking about. Forget I said anything!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Were you on their website long enough to have gotten this message, like I did ?!?
> 
> _We love having you here... _But we're mindful of screen time. Why not take a break? We'll be here.


It’s so patronising!
Um sweetie, I’m on my computer all day for work. 15 mins isn’t going to make a difference.
I think you’ve got a point that they don’t want anyone looking too closely at anything 
All I hope is that purse forum never brings in that feature. It’d be harrowing.


Chanbal said:


> A $500,000 baby shower, common??? I wonder from which planet Omid comes from!
> View attachment 5087981
> 
> _Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, which airs tonight, Omid Scobie claimed: 'I remember speaking to a palace aide at the time who rolled their eyes, they were horrified that something so common was happening within the House of Windsor.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace aide 'rolled their eyes' when Meghan Markle had  baby shower
> 
> 
> Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, Omid Scobie claimed aides were 'horrified' that Meghan's 'common' New York baby shower was happening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Let’s not forget this is coming from private honesty himself (who gets his orders from captain honesty and corporal honesty themselves). He really makes Paul Burrell look like the oracle of Delphi. 


byzina said:


> They rolled their eyes not because it was common, but because it was so nouveau riche. Meghan should have married a Russian oligarch. They like showing off money like this.





queennadine said:


> I can’t fault her for the baby shower. Maybe for not having the whole thing be done more privately, but as an American woman about to have her first child…it would have been odd NOT to have a baby shower thrown for you!





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but most people don't waste half a freaking million on one. That's where it leaves an extremely bad taste in my mouth, even if she didn't pay for it.


Yeah it’s having to fork out for an eco lecturing individual to spend an obscene amount of money flying to the US to hobnob with celebs. If she’d had tea at the ritz and opened a couple of parcels with her mates no one would object. 

I don’t want to get between an American and their baby shower normally 

We seem to take on American customs at intervals and the one I keep wishing we’d adopt is the hayride. It looks really fun.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> ok, I lack a Cyrillic keyboard but Spasiba


Пожалуйста (You're most welcome)


----------



## Aimee3

lanasyogamama said:


> Williams arm looks so good in his vax pic, I can’t help but wonder if Harry will try to show his arm somehow.


To “up” William, Harry will show BOTH arms, although I’m sure H and his wife got vaccinated a while ago.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Спасибо


Вы так внимательно интерпретируете. Спасибо


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty Where is the hat?   Escaping the Palace with titles, jewelry, videos...
*Surprise! Lifetime marked the Sussexes' third wedding anniversary by releasing the first image of the actors playing the couple in Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*










						Meet the latest actors who will play Harry and Meghan for Lifetime
					

Prince Harry, 36, will be played by New York-based Broadway actor and composer Jordan Dean, while actress and blogger Sydney Morton will portray Meghan, 39.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty Where is the hat?
> *Surprise! Lifetime marked the Sussexes' third wedding anniversary by releasing the first image of the actors playing the couple in Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> View attachment 5088371
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the latest actors who will play Harry and Meghan for Lifetime
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, will be played by New York-based Broadway actor and composer Jordan Dean, while actress and blogger Sydney Morton will portray Meghan, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


ha...that green outfit won't go away


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the anniversary celebrations, I wonder if they are already dressed up to preside their new community center aimed at releasing compassion...


----------



## Chanbal

Their compassion is on sale!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Still on the anniversary celebrations, I wonder if they are already dressed up to preside their new community center aimed releasing compassion...
> View attachment 5088375


so this thing with the red outfits was done by someone who likes them?


----------



## Chanbal

byzina said:


> They rolled their eyes not because it was common, but because it was so nouveau riche. Meghan should have married a Russian oligarch. They like showing off money like this.


If they rolled their eyes, a big if here as Omid is not a credible source. If they indeed rolled their, it was probably because they were shocked by the many demands and exorbitant amounts of money spent...


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> No he didn't. He said they met at Agape Spiritual Camp. Someone confused that with Camp Agape. Two different programs entirely.


that Agape center sounds like something Doria would like


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> No, there's 2 different camps with a similar name...
> 
> Camp Agape for children of incarcerated parents (not sure who assumed this was the one?)
> Agape International Spiritual Center, which runs a summer camp


should we invite the people from the "why is the celeb subforum so mean" thread to come see some of us defending Doria?


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just curious...when people read about the (incorrect) camp why did everyone assume it was Doria who had been incarcerated? The camp did not specify mothers. Of both parents I would actually have thought her father to be more disreputable given his antics. But no one even brought up that possibility. Something to think about.


other than talking to tabloids, what did the father do to that was disreputable?  I agree this was racist but no need to taint the dad while defending the mom


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It sounds grand to announce building a community center to celebrate a wedding anniversary ...
> My problem has to do with the source of the money for such celebration. They have donated a cake, sandwiches and hats, but I didn't see any sound donation coming directly from them so far.


my first reaction was that this is (or would appear to be) their first big philanthropic act....and it's in a foreign country.  nothing wrong with helping people in other countries but what have they done here?  brought food to people's door one time?  sent lunch to the staff of an organization?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> A $500,000 baby shower, common??? I wonder from which planet Omid comes from!
> View attachment 5087981
> 
> _Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, which airs tonight, Omid Scobie claimed: 'I remember speaking to a palace aide at the time who rolled their eyes, they were horrified that something so common was happening within the House of Windsor.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace aide 'rolled their eyes' when Meghan Markle had  baby shower
> 
> 
> Speaking in the Channel 4 documentary A Very Royal Baby: From Cradle to Crown, Omid Scobie claimed aides were 'horrified' that Meghan's 'common' New York baby shower was happening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The reviews slammed the programme, but some of the write-ups are hilarious in and of themselves.
_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are having another baby soon, and that was the *ankle* that this show hung on._
This was most probably a typo, but the image it brings to mind  H's ankles so fetchingly shown off in the grass?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> If true, one more reason to dislike this unlikeable couple.
> imo.


and (if true) goes to show how many friends she has.  I mean Oprah would be a very wealthy godmother capable of providing a lot of benefit to her godchild.  but doesn't she have any older, closer friends?  guess not.  they've all been Markled.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so this thing with the red outfits was done by someone who likes them?


That is my understanding, their stans are designing some outfits for them ... I wonder when they will be put up for sale as printable dress-up paper dolls...


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I'm also ready to downsize and move...



I posted this on a different forum and it never gets old, LOL!  Sorry to be off topic, but it's George Carlin's bit on "Stuff".


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> In the Anglican faith , god-parents are supposed to ensure the Christian upbringing of the child, mine mostly gave me gifts on big occasions, they never were actually involved in taking me to church or Sunday school
> being Anglican is not a requirement for a god parent , my sister had a Methodist god mother , also Protestant but not the same thing


pretty much the same with Catholics
Also in my family there seemed to be a belief that if both parents died the godparents would be responsible for raising the child


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> That is my understanding, their stans are designing some outfits for them ... I wonder when they will be put up for sale as printable dress-up paper dolls...



that's ridiculous....and not flattering.....how old are these people?  we had one here who I believe was a grown woman but who seemed to have a teenage "crush" on Meghan


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> *I just find it interesting that this father and daughter who courted the tabloids are believed at all costs and given a pass for any transgressions we actually know about* while the mother, a social worker and yoga teacher who has stayed as private and away from the press as possible, is so easily vilified.


I think that most of this thread, at least the past several months, is more about NOT believing ANYTHING the daughter says or does.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty Where is the hat?   Escaping the Palace with titles, jewelry, videos...
> *Surprise! Lifetime marked the Sussexes' third wedding anniversary by releasing the first image of the actors playing the couple in Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> View attachment 5088371
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the latest actors who will play Harry and Meghan for Lifetime
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, will be played by New York-based Broadway actor and composer Jordan Dean, while actress and blogger Sydney Morton will portray Meghan, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


And they picked our favorite dress!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> my first reaction was that this is (or would appear to be) their first big philanthropic act....and it's in a foreign country.  nothing wrong with helping people in other countries but what have they done here?  brought food to people's door one time?  sent lunch to the staff of an organization?


Aren't the vax funds channeled to India? According to DM, the community relief centre in India could be used as a vaccination hub... putting two and two together???


----------



## Chanbal

Piers on the First Amendment!


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Harry's wife will come to her defense... I guess I'll need a lot of for this one!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty Where is the hat?   Escaping the Palace with titles, jewelry, videos...
> *Surprise! Lifetime marked the Sussexes' third wedding anniversary by releasing the first image of the actors playing the couple in Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> View attachment 5088371
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the latest actors who will play Harry and Meghan for Lifetime
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, will be played by New York-based Broadway actor and composer Jordan Dean, while actress and blogger Sydney Morton will portray Meghan, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



it’s not right... it looks like the dress fits...

I shouldn’t say that.... but I can’t resist...


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> it’s not right... it looks like the dress fits...
> 
> I shouldn’t say that.... but I can’t resist...


that's funny....they copied her coutoure outfit and did a better job of it?


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> other than talking to tabloids, what did the father do to that was disreputable?  I agree this was racist but no need to taint the dad while defending the mom



I think the point was just that neither of them did anything disreputable but most people assumed it was Doria anyway.


----------



## lalame

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just to clarify...I'm not on any side, I don't intensely like or dislike any of these people, I don't know enough about them (or honestly care enough about them) to feel passionately one way or another...but I'm pretty devoted to truth and facts. And while I love a good gossip session (I'm on this forum after all) I believe we are in dangerous territory when completely unfounded rumors are repeated and shared as facts. It may seem silly since this is just relatively meaningless celebrity fodder but in my country it's become a more serious issue so I take it more seriously.





sdkitty said:


> should we invite the people from the "why is the celeb subforum so mean" thread to come see some of us defending Doria?



ITA with @OriginalBalenciaga. I don't think I defend anyone. I just prefer talking about things that either did happen or likely happened instead of things that are possible. it usually makes for more interesting discussion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Honestly, when Harry and Megan were hopping from house to house, one of the things I wondered about was “where is their stuff?”


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> I can’t fault her for the baby shower. Maybe for not having the whole thing be done more privately, but as an American woman about to have her first child…it would have been odd NOT to have a baby shower thrown for you!


well there are baby showers and there are baby showers....how many have a baby shower with celebs travelling from far and wide to attend?


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> _A couple of years ago all I knew about Prince Henry of Wales is that he was a privileged ponce who liked a pint; now I know everything. And that’s entirely his doing, not the evil media’s. He won’t leave us alone. He accuses us of barging into his life by continuing to buy tabloids that publish pics of him and his wife, but it’s him who’s barging into our lives. You can’t switch on the TV or open a newspaper without seeing Harry wanging on about his feelings. I half expect to see him on a street corner soon, megaphone in hand, yelling at passers-by: ‘WILLIAM WON’T TAKE MY CALLS.’ Get a therapist, mate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tragedy of Prince Harry
> 
> 
> He will come to regret his conversion to wokeness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



This was a very well done opinion piece, thanks @Chanbal!  Another excerpt:

_But is his new life really the great stab for liberty he and others claim it is? It seems to me that he is locked into a pretty destructive relationship with the global media, where he must continually offer up more glimpses into his life for the approval and analysis of the self-styled awareness-raisers of the woke set. To stay on side with the new elites he has joined, he must keep giving himself away, presumably until there is nothing left to give. Is that freedom, or the subordination of the self to the voracious cult of self-revelation?

This is the tragedy of Prince Harry. He left the royal family in the name of privacy, but he has far less privacy now than he did when he was a working royal. He struck out for freedom, but performative pain for the gawping woke media is a very phoney form of freedom. He said he wanted to be independent, yet, thanks to the therapeutic worldview, he lives in the shadow of his father and his allegedly corrosive influence more now than when he was in Clarence House. There’s a lesson here. Rejecting the ideals of duty, loyalty and family commitment doesn’t translate into instant liberty. Harry thinks he broke free from an individuality-crushing cult that punishes honesty and openness and that he is now getting in touch with his true self – I think the precise opposite has happened._


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Вы так внимательно интерпретируете. Спасибо



LOL


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty Where is the hat?   Escaping the Palace with titles, jewelry, videos...
> *Surprise! Lifetime marked the Sussexes' third wedding anniversary by releasing the first image of the actors playing the couple in Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> View attachment 5088371
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the latest actors who will play Harry and Meghan for Lifetime
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, will be played by New York-based Broadway actor and composer Jordan Dean, while actress and blogger Sydney Morton will portray Meghan, 39.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Harry certainly got buffer in adaption   
 Megs looks very young and pretty to but the fact they used that green dress is killing me!


----------



## Clearblueskies

lalame said:


> I think the point was just that neither of them did anything disreputable but most people assumed it was Doria anyway.


What, was there a poll??  Some people have discussed the topic, certainly not everyone, or even most people posting here.  Perhaps fewer generalisations would be a good thing, and more direct responses to posts.  There’s something ironic about criticising inappropriate judgement, whilst doing exactly that?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> That is my understanding, their stans are designing some outfits for them ... I wonder when they will be put up for sale as printable dress-up paper dolls...




What, no $6,000 kaftan?

How remiss


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Finally caught up on 20+ pages. Since we're both retired, Hubby and I have decided to downsize and move to a warmer climate and so we've been busy sorting and giving stuff and things away. It's a long and tiring process, but we're nearing the end. Just a few more weeks to go, so I may not be here as much for the next little while.
> Meanwhile, for a little bit of humour, here's a pic of Eugenie and Edo and I'm wondering if Edo is in the early stage of Couvade Syndrome or pregnant dad syndrome. Who do you think has the biggest bump?
> View attachment 5088063


Congratulations. Enjoy your new home! I'm sure it will be a nice place.
I hope to move in less than a year, so I also have to get rid off tons of my things. I know how hard it is.


----------



## lalame

Clearblueskies said:


> What, was there a poll??  Some people have discussed the topic, certainly not everyone, or even most people posting here.  Perhaps fewer generalisations would be a good thing, and more direct responses to posts.  There’s something ironic about criticising inappropriate judgement, whilst doing exactly that?



I was referring to people generally since this has been a rumor out in the ether, not people in this thread. I wasn't even criticizing it.  It was an observation.

ETA: I agree with your point though. There is a wide range of opinions in this thread and I think that gets overlooked.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> that's funny....they copied her coutoure outfit and did a better job of it?


Maybe MM had problems deciding which frock to wear, so she always vacillated till there was never time to get the right size or make any alterations. Some people I know are terminally indecisive because they always think there may be something better on the horizon if they just wait a while longer.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DeMonica said:


> Congratulations. Enjoy your new home! I'm sure it will be a nice place.
> I hope to move in less than a year, so I also have to get rid off tons of my things. I know how hard it is.


Thank you. Hopefully, we'll still be here to offer you moral support when the big day comes. Resting often and drinking plenty of fluids (preferably the bubbly kind) will make the task so much easier.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Congratulations. Enjoy your new home! I'm sure it will be a nice place.
> I hope to move in less than a year, so I also have to get rid off tons of my things. I know how hard it is.


tell me about it....we moved three years ago and have been thinking about possibly selling and moving again.  aside from moving all our stuff, we have  two very skittish cats.  I can hardly imagine trying to move with them.  GL with your cleaning out.  I don't really have that much trouble letting go of stuff.  my problem is when I think it's worth selling rather than donating - deciding how to sell, how to price, etc.


----------



## queennadine

I literally have movers in my home packing things up as I type right now. Can’t WAIT to move in less than 2 weeks!

Keeping things on topic: no one has asked me if I’m ok yet today


----------



## queennadine

sdkitty said:


> tell me about it....we moved three years ago and have been thinking about possibly selling and moving again.  aside from moving all our stuff, we have  two very skittish cats.  I can hardly imagine trying to move with them.  GL with your cleaning out.  I don't really have that much trouble letting go of stuff.  my problem is when I think it's worth selling rather than donating - deciding how to sell, how to price, etc.


We have 2 kitties as well! DH is going to drive with them while I fly with the kiddos. And yeah, we’re practically giving stuff away at this point.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> tell me about it....we moved three years ago and have been thinking about possibly selling and moving again.  aside from moving all our stuff, we have  two very skittish cats.  I can hardly imagine trying to move with them.  GL with your cleaning out.  I don't really have that much trouble letting go of stuff.  my problem is when I think it's worth selling rather than donating - deciding how to sell, how to price, etc.





queennadine said:


> We have 2 kitties as well! DH is going to drive with them while I fly with the kiddos. And yeah, we’re practically giving stuff away at this point.



Oh man I have so many comical moments myself with moving and cats. We did the cross country drive once from NY to CA with one cat. That was... interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Oh man I have so many comical moments myself with moving and cats. We did the cross country drive once from NY to CA with one cat. That was... interesting.


lots of vocalizing?  or quiet?
we had friends who moved their cats about 6-7 hrs away.  the wife was driving some vehicle with no A/C in summer.  she thought the cat might die.  they made it though


----------



## xincinsin

Vanity Fair's definition of "low key" is very different from that in the dictionary.








						The Low-Key—and Charitable—Way Meghan and Harry Celebrated Their Third Wedding Anniversary
					

On Wednesday, the couple announced an expansion to their partnership with World Central Kitchen to assist with COVID relief efforts in India.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> pretty much the same with Catholics
> Also in my family there seemed to be a belief that if both parents died the godparents would be responsible for raising the child



Jup. Which is why all my godparents (I have three, not the customary two...apparently a whole bunch of them is for royalty only) are actual family members. I do think had we been orphaned my grandparents would have taken us in, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I think that most of this thread, at least the past several months, is more about NOT believing ANYTHING the daughter says or does.



I think she was talking about Samantha.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. Which is why all my godparents (I have three, not the customary two...apparently a whole bunch of them is for royalty only) are actual family members. I do think had we been orphaned my grandparents would have taken us in, though.


LOL....my cousin who was maybe 12 when I was born was my godfather....don't think he would have taken me.  but his mother probably would have.  I think she was my godmother but there was no special attention given to it.  she was my aunt, just as my father's sister was my aunt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Harry's wife will come to her defense... I guess I'll need a lot of for this one!
> View attachment 5088446



Good thing her husband is rich.

Honestly, when she was pregnant with her last baby she used to post pictures on Instagram holding meetings for some business endeavor with staff present - she was on bedrest, but she chose to be lying ON her bed (instead of IN her bed covered with blankets) topless in panties because she was "uncomfortable". I thought it was wildly inappropriate, but I am really reconsidering if I add the really pervy tweets she wrote (not the Courtney ones, but the ones sexualizing children).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I think the point was just that neither of them did anything disreputable but most people assumed it was Doria anyway.



Yeah, but not because she's a) black b) female but because she has the gap in her CV and Thomas doesn't. I have no beef with Doria even though I've come to think differently of her during the past months (started out really liking her demeanor, at this point I can't put my finger on it but think something is subtly off...and no, it's not that I think she's a criminal).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> ITA with @OriginalBalenciaga. I don't think I defend anyone. I just prefer talking about things that either did happen or likely happened instead of things that are possible. it usually makes for more interesting discussion.



I think you do a pretty good job reining us in when we're running with it haha. I'm not even being ironic.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think she was talking about Samantha.


Oh, ok.  I don't think anyone believed Samantha initially either.  I personally thought she was a jealous quack!  Now, fast forward 3-4 years later, she seems to have been telling the truth based on Meg's actions.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> pretty much the same with Catholics
> Also in my family there seemed to be a belief that if both parents died the godparents would be responsible for raising the child


Not just in your family.  I was always told that a godparents are supposed to raise the child if the parents passed away. I don't know if it's a Roman Catholic idea because my family is very mixed - Roman and Greek Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinist - name it, we have it.


----------



## queennadine

lalame said:


> Oh man I have so many comical moments myself with moving and cats. We did the cross country drive once from NY to CA with one cat. That was... interesting.


So get that. The last time we moved, our oldest was a baby and she and one of the cats decided to cry in tandem the last 2 hours of the road trip.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Vanity Fair's definition of "low key" is very different from that in the dictionary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Low-Key—and Charitable—Way Meghan and Harry Celebrated Their Third Wedding Anniversary
> 
> 
> On Wednesday, the couple announced an expansion to their partnership with World Central Kitchen to assist with COVID relief efforts in India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


LOL my idea of a low year anniversary celebration would be to order in a pizza and chug a bottle of champagne watching TV!


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> Not just in your family.  I was always told that a godparents are supposed to raise the child if the parents passed away. I don't know if it's a Roman Catholic idea because my family is very mixed - Roman and Greek Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinist - name it, we have it.


We were always under that impression as well.  My sister even told me that she was flattered, but she doesn't have much money and she was stressing on how she'd put my kids through college.  I said it's called life insurance.


----------



## youngster

I wish some enterprising reporter or podcast host would pin Harry down and ask him when he got his own Covid vaccine or when his wife did? 

I just became eligible a few weeks ago (and just had my 2nd dose a week ago) and Harry is many, many years younger than I am so I wonder if he jumped the line to get the vaccine earlier?  If he had gotten it as soon as it was available to his age group in California, he might be reasonably 2 weeks ahead of me since I got my first dose within a couple of days of my eligibility. 

I just wondered since I saw that Will got his first dose today as he is now eligible in the UK, being under 40.  Just wondering if Harry went to the VaxLive event or did all these interviews unvaccinated or partially vaccinated or if he jumped the line back in January or February or March and has been fully vaccinated for awhile?   If they are going to poke their noses into the vaccine distribution conversation, then they need to be prepared for the questions that naturally arise.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, ok.  I don't think anyone believed Samantha initially either.  I personally thought she was a jealous quack!  Now, fast forward 3-4 years later, she seems to have been telling the truth based on Meg's actions.


This!  The problem was in the way she presented herself.  Showing up at the palace gates did nothing for her credibility.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I wish some enterprising reporter or podcast host would pin Harry down and ask him when he got his own Covid vaccine or when his wife did?
> 
> I just became eligible a few weeks ago (and just had my 2nd dose a week ago) and Harry is many, many years younger than I am so I wonder if he jumped the line to get the vaccine earlier?  If he had gotten it as soon as it was available to his age group in California, he might be reasonably 2 weeks ahead of me since I got my first dose within a couple of days of my eligibility.
> 
> I just wondered since I saw that Will got his first dose today as he is now eligible in the UK, being under 40.  Just wondering if Harry went to the VaxLive event or did all these interviews unvaccinated or partially vaccinated or if he jumped the line back in January or February or March and has been fully vaccinated for awhile?   If they are going to poke their noses into the vaccine distribution conversation, then they need to be prepared for the questions that naturally arise.


Harrreee, you got some 'splaining to dooooo


----------



## lalame

youngster said:


> I wish some enterprising reporter or podcast host would pin Harry down and ask him when he got his own Covid vaccine or when his wife did?
> 
> I just became eligible a few weeks ago (and just had my 2nd dose a week ago) and Harry is many, many years younger than I am so I wonder if he jumped the line to get the vaccine earlier?  If he had gotten it as soon as it was available to his age group in California, he might be reasonably 2 weeks ahead of me since I got my first dose within a couple of days of my eligibility.
> 
> I just wondered since I saw that Will got his first dose today as he is now eligible in the UK, being under 40.  Just wondering if Harry went to the VaxLive event or did all these interviews unvaccinated or partially vaccinated or if he jumped the line back in January or February or March and has been fully vaccinated for awhile?   If they are going to poke their noses into the vaccine distribution conversation, then they need to be prepared for the questions that naturally arise.



I would HOPE he was vaccinated already before doing all those appearances. I think people with 24/7 PA's like celebrities (and presumably H/M) probably had a good chance of finding flash opportunities to get vaxxed ahead of schedule... I've seen a few opportunities like that, like excess vaccines that would spoil, etc.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> it’s not right... it looks like the dress fits...
> 
> I shouldn’t say that.... but I can’t resist...


Oh my gosh I didn’t realise it was a lifetime movie! Oh my gosh yeeeesssss bring on psycho Kate Middleton and the poisoned tea!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you. Hopefully, we'll still be here to offer you moral support when the big day comes. Resting often and drinking plenty of fluids (preferably the bubbly kind) will make the task so much easier.





queennadine said:


> I literally have movers in my home packing things up as I type right now. Can’t WAIT to move in less than 2 weeks!
> 
> Keeping things on topic: no one has asked me if I’m ok yet today


A belated congratulations to you both on your moves! Really exciting    

I am horror stricken I have not asked if you are both ok. I can only assume my genetic pain at being British has hampered me.


----------



## Chanbal

This is getting ugly!   

_Did the BBC kill Princess Diana? Not directly, no.

But if you are Prince William or Prince Harry today reading Lord Dyson's devastating report into how Martin Bashir used deceit and lies to procure his famous interview with their late mother, you would be forgiven for asking that question.

Bashir's bombshell sit-down with the Princess of Wales - fraudulently obtained - led to the Queen demanding Prince Charles divorce his outspoken and then estranged wife._









						DAN WOOTTON: Does the BBC have their mother's blood on its hands?
					

DAN WOOTTON: Did the BBC kill Princess Diana? Not directly, no. But if you are Prince William or Harry reading Lord Dyson's report into Martin Bashir, you would be forgiven for asking that question.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> This!  The problem was in the way she presented herself.  Showing up at the palace gates did nothing for her credibility.



That whole family is so dramatic. It's just that they come across a bit redneck-y and obvious and she who shall not be named is subtly vulgar (as in, British upperclass, people of old money or people like us looking at her with a magnifying glass will see the tell-tale signs, but the general public won't).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is getting ugly!
> 
> _Did the BBC kill Princess Diana? Not directly, no.
> 
> But if you are Prince William or Prince Harry today reading Lord Dyson's devastating report into how Martin Bashir used deceit and lies to procure his famous interview with their late mother, you would be forgiven for asking that question.
> 
> Bashir's bombshell sit-down with the Princess of Wales - fraudulently obtained - led to the Queen demanding Prince Charles divorce his outspoken and then estranged wife._



Dear Mr. Wootton, not sure how you missed this, but it wasn't the BRF stripping Di of her security but her refusing to have them around after the divorce. Just sayin'. Plus...you know, the drunk driver and the seatbelt. 

I have not read up on the new findings yet, but the burning question I have is: what about Charles Spencer's involvement? Just...how and why.


----------



## queennadine

jelliedfeels said:


> A belated congratulations to you both on your moves! Really exciting
> 
> I am horror stricken I have not asked if you are both ok. I can only assume my genetic pain at being British has hampered me.


I’ll forgive you just this once in the name of equity, inclusion, compassion, gentleness, awareness, kindness, creativity, impact, and altruism.


----------



## Chanbal

Sign the Petition
					

Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance




					www.change.org


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry IN BIG TROUBLE/PALACE desire to strip royal status/PETITION 4 him to de-royalise   *


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

As you well know, I would _never_ stray off topic   but this does pertain to the discussion you guys had about aging, some posts ago. This, my dears, is how you stay young and age gracefully at the same time. Yes!

This awesome lady hula hooping her way through Shanghai is a Chinese version of my own grandmother who never missed an opportunity to shake it out to the beat when a good song came on the radio. Also I just want to post this Texas band Khruangbin everywhere because of how amazing they are  Ladies and gents, find your third room and...  Yes!


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> As you well know, I would _never_ stray off topic   but this does pertain to the discussion you guys had about aging, some posts ago. This, my dears, is how you stay young and age gracefully at the same time. Yes!
> 
> This awesome lady hula hooping her way through Shanghai is a Chinese version of my own grandmother who never missed an opportunity to shake it out to the beat when a good song came on the radio. Also I just want to post this Texas band Khruangbin everywhere because of how amazing they are  Ladies and gents, find your third room and...  Yes!



How cute is she?!  My MIL is the same.  Always dancing like no one is watching, even at 83!  I wish I had half her energy now at almost half her age!


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> This is getting ugly!
> 
> _Did the BBC kill Princess Diana? Not directly, no.
> 
> But if you are Prince William or Prince Harry today reading Lord Dyson's devastating report into how Martin Bashir used deceit and lies to procure his famous interview with their late mother, you would be forgiven for asking that question.
> 
> Bashir's bombshell sit-down with the Princess of Wales - fraudulently obtained - led to the Queen demanding Prince Charles divorce his outspoken and then estranged wife._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Does the BBC have their mother's blood on its hands?
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Did the BBC kill Princess Diana? Not directly, no. But if you are Prince William or Harry reading Lord Dyson's report into Martin Bashir, you would be forgiven for asking that question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I wasn't aware of all this when it happened so I admit I may be missing a whole lot of context here. That being said, I think W/H are being a little dramatic.... I totally get their anger over their mother being deceived, and it was horrible what Bashir did, but was it really this interview that indirectly led to her DEATH? What stoked the intense public interest was the very real drama happening, and that she fed the fire. She was deceived to do the interview, but she had control over how many lurid details to share.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> How cute is she?!  My MIL is the same.  Always dancing like no one is watching, even at 83!  I wish I had half her energy now at almost half her age!


I know! Just look at Toni Basil (Hey Mickey!). She's been a top performer and choreographer since the 1960's, danced in Elvis movies. This is her at over 70 years old, in 2017. She says exercise is the fountain of youth. Looking at her, she's not lying!


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dear Mr. Wootton, not sure how you missed this, but it wasn't the BRF stripping Di of her security but her refusing to have them around after the divorce. Just sayin'. Plus...you know, the drunk driver and the seatbelt.
> 
> I have not read up on the new findings yet, but the burning question I have is: what about Charles Spencer's involvement? Just...how and why.



Charles Spencer was shown the fake documents so Martin could gain his trust. Charles then introduced Martin to Diana.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

So......anyway.......    

I think we have this all wrong. 
I have caught up on the thread, finally, (thank you!!!  I am hiding out from noisy construction and this is a welcome diversion!!)
But I digress. Because we have missed what is right under our noses!!!

All of this is KATE'S FAULT.  She was too intimidated by Meghan's CV and can-do spirit to bridge the gap and thus, Megxit and the possible fall of the whole monarchy.  

KATE caused all of this with her insecurity. HOW OBVIOUS!!!  OF COURSE!!  *smacks head.

I have NO IDEA why none of you smart brilliant dolls (and myself included) did not put 2 and 2 together and realize this o-so-obvious cause of this whole debacle.  

But have no fear, this intrepid journalist spells it all out for us.  Darn you Kate! 
_
The combination of Kate plus Meghan would have been so much greater than the sum of them as individuals. It would have been a heady, heady time for the house of Windsor.
Instead, today, the words ‘royal family’ have become synonymous with rancour and discord.
I’ve said it before and chances are, I’ll say it again: If only. If only so many, many things had happened differently. If only Kate had put her alleged insecurity aside. If only there had never been a squabble over tights._









						Real reason Kate and Meghan aren’t friends
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au
				





You're welcome.


----------



## Lodpah

Not to go off topic one year we had to drive cross country from MN to LA. My baby girl was six months. Well we could only stay in motels that you had to put a quarter in that rocked the bed. Wondered what the next door people thought. That was the only way she could sleep!


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> Not to go off topic one year we had to drive cross country from MN to LA. My baby girl was six months. Well we could only stay in motels that you had to put a quarter in that rocked the bed. Wondered what the next door people thought. That was the only way she could sleep!



Wait... what??? That's a thing?


----------



## Chloe302225

lalame said:


> I wasn't aware of all this when it happened so I admit I may be missing a whole lot of context here. That being said, I think W/H are being a little dramatic.... I totally get their anger over their mother being deceived, and it was horrible what Bashir did, but was it really this interview that indirectly led to her DEATH? What stoked the intense public interest was the very real drama happening, and that she fed the fire. She was deceived to do the interview, but she had control over how many lurid details to share.



All true but these fake documents and interview subsequently increased Diana's paranoia, which led to her choosing private security instead of Royal protection officers. She thought she was being spied on so chose private  security but Harry and William could easily make the leap rightly or wrongly that their mother wouldn't of been driven by a drunk driver that was being chased by paparazzi if the driver was a royal protection officer.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> tell me about it....we moved three years ago and have been thinking about possibly selling and moving again.  aside from moving all our stuff, we have  two very skittish cats.  I can hardly imagine trying to move with them.  GL with your cleaning out.  I don't really have that much trouble letting go of stuff.  my problem is when I think it's worth selling rather than donating - deciding how to sell, how to price, etc.


Moving with cats can be tricky. They are very attached to place, if I'm not mistaken. Good luck with your move, too!
I'm planning to have pets after the move and finally having a normal garden. I'm a well-practised nomad. My parents had moved around a lot, then I went on doing it, just 11 times in the last 20 years. Hopefully, my next home will be for long term, if not forever. I've learnt how to reduce my stuff to move, but this time it involves my mother's household, too, and that's the tricky part of my move. I think I'll drink a bottle or two of a nice bubbly while I figure it out how I'm going to do that. Also, when I moved last time I donated tons but this time there are a few pieces I don't want to take to the new place, but I'd rather sell than donate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Not to go off topic one year we had to drive cross country from MN to LA. My baby girl was six months. Well we could only stay in motels that you had to put a quarter in that rocked the bed. Wondered what the next door people thought. That was the only way she could sleep!



Since the BRF is using the ignore button on H&M, why is anything here considered off topic? 
  It is our way of ignoring the gruesome twosome and the mother, all who do not wish to be discussed.  Discussing other things is, in fact, discussing _those who we are supposed to ignore_. See, we have officially entered the bizarro world - up is down, etc. 
Our 1st amendment is bonkers!

RE: MartinB.  Why is this happening 20+ years later?  The damage is done. Diana willingly participated.  The fact that she was duped is not shocking. Many of us for many years have known that the press lies/twists/manipulates people and info to get the ratings.  I thought the palace & BRF knew that, too.  Is this to lay the groundwork for H&M claiming OW lied/misrepresented her real motives? 

RE: titles.  Said it before, will continue to say it.  The titles stay so he can avoid the IRS.  Also, should he get into a dust-up with the locals, he can easily be pulled back to his homeland. Happens frequently with diplomats’ kids.

All my opinion, ymmv.


----------



## lalame

Chloe302225 said:


> All true but these fake documents and interview subsequently increased Diana's paranoia, which led to her choosing private security instead of Royal protection officers. She thought she was being spied on so chose private  security but Harry and William could easily make the leap rightly or wrongly that their mother wouldn't of been driven by a drunk driver that was being chased by paparazzi if the driver was a royal protection officer.



I thought several years went by between the interview and her death, where her life may have calmed down a bit after the divorce. No? Would she have gotten Royal Protection Officers that long even after the divorce? I thought she would've lost all that. Again forgive my ignorance of this time period... I didn't follow her at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> _The combination of Kate plus Meghan would have been so much greater than the sum of them as individuals. It would have been a heady, heady time for the house of Windsor.
> Instead, today, the words ‘royal family’ have become synonymous with rancour and discord.
> I’ve said it before and chances are, I’ll say it again: If only. If only so many, many things had happened differently. If only Kate had put her alleged insecurity aside. If only there had never been a squabble over tights._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Real reason Kate and Meghan aren’t friends
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



In which world owes someone their SIL anything? Especially in such a ranked environment as the BRF? Plus, yeah, I can totally see the future queen of the UK being completely intimidated by a wannabe. Oh well.


----------



## Chloe302225

lalame said:


> I thought several years went by between the interview and her death, where her life may have calmed down a bit after the divorce. No? Would she have gotten Royal Protection Officers that long even after the divorce? I thought she would've lost all that. Again forgive my ignorance of this time period... I didn't follow her at all.



Diana would of most likely been entitled to security until she remarried although it could of been stipulated differently in her divorce agreement. Her life never calmed down between this interview and her death. One could say that this interview put everything in her life into overdrive which led to a lot bad decision making. This interview was the foundation for a lot bad decisions all around.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Sources said William believes yesterday's report is 'just the beginning of the process of establishing the truth'._

IMO this could be the beginning of the grand reset for the BRF. 
Yes, we are all for the establishment of the truth. The BRF has lots of explaining to do about several of its members.

_Charles has studiously kept at arms’ length from the investigation, conscious that it is for Diana’s sons to take the lead in anything around her memory and legacy.

But the fact that his elder son has made a point of acknowledging what a damaging effect the interview also had on his relationship with his estranged wife is likely to help soothe troubled waters._

Really, Charles? Wow.









						Harry lashes out over 'unethical' BBC interview with Diana
					

In a statement tonight, Prince William told of his 'indescribable sadness' that the controversial Panorama interview increased his mother's 'fear, paranoia and isolation' in her final years.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Barbie10

I am so done with Prince Harry! I used to think he was absolutely precious, but now I think he is just another California tree hugger! Nothing wrong with tree huggers, but he was never like that before he met Megan. He used to actually hunt game with his grandmother and many more things that Megan doesn't stand for. I don't know if I can say this on here but I feel like he has no balls! He needs to grow a pair and do the things that he has done in the past that has made him happy. No need to conform to your spouse, you can still be your own person and respect each other. She put the kibosh on hunting when they first started dating. He fell for the wrong person. She has literally turned his life upside down and excommunicated him from his family. Blood is thicker than anything! Your family will be with you when everyone else leaves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> Diana would of most likely been entitled to security until she remarried although it could of been stipulated differently in her divorce agreement. Her life never calmed down between this interview and her death. One could say that this interview put everything in her life into overdrive which led to a lot bad decision making. This interview was the foundation for a lot bad decisions all around.



IMO her life was constant chaos. Remember her book was published in 1992. She & her ‘friends’ were sneaking people in her car’s trunk so that her book could be written. Hiding and sneaking around the palace was the drama of her life. Sad that William thinks her paranoia came from this one interview.  Sad that Charles thinks this will improve his relationship with his sons.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the Earl himself is feeling some guilt.

Who _are_ these people? Prince Phillip seems to be the only one with any sense.  And *they* think Meghan’s family is _trashy_?
Shaking my head.











						The false claims in Earl Spencer's scribbled notes from Bashir meeting
					

Earl Spencer kept meticulous notes of a meeting held on September 19, 1995, when he introduced the BBC man to his sister at her Knightsbridge flat.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				














						Charles Spencer, 9th Earl Spencer - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_On 31 August 1997, his elder sister Diana died after a car crash in Paris and Spencer delivered the eulogy at her funeral service held at Westminster Abbey six days later. In his eulogy he rebuked both Britain's royal family and the press for their treatment of his sister.[6] Spencer ruled out conspiracy theories concerning his sister's death, and called the alleged letter she wrote 10 months before her death in which she discussed *her fears of a planned accident "just a bizarre coincidence rather than tied in with reality."*[7] Spencer received an apology from Tim Davie, the BBC's director general, in late 2020 for the unethical practices used by BBC staff to gain his sister's consent to be interviewed in November 1995 for the corporation's Panorama television programme.[8] The Earl said a full inquiry should be conducted which Davie has said will happen.[9]

The Earl was a Member of the House of Lords from 29 March 1992 (the day his father died and he inherited the peerage) until the House of Lords Act 1999 excluded most hereditary peers on 11 November 1999.[10]

It was reported by The Daily Telegraph in 2003 that *Spencer had refused to allow his sister Diana to live in a cottage on the Althorp estate, despite her request at the height of her emotional difficulties*. It was also reported that *Spencer had accused Diana of displaying "deceitful" and "manipulative" behaviour which were characteristics of the mental illness associated with bulimia nervosa which Diana herself had admitted she suffered.*[11][12] Diana was eventually buried on Spencer's ancestral estate, Althorp, where he built a garden temple memorial and a museum to her memory, displaying her wedding dress and other personal effects. The museum was opened to the public in 1998 with all profits going to Diana's Memorial Fund, also set up by Spencer. At this stage, Spencer began writing a series of books dealing with the estate itself and with his family history, beginning with an account of his ancestral home, Althorp: the Story of an English House published in 1998._


----------



## Tootsie17

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you. Hopefully, we'll still be here to offer you moral support when the big day comes. Resting often and drinking plenty of fluids (preferably the bubbly kind) will make the task so much easier.


I'm late to give my two cents, but congratulations on your retirement and moving. What a grand adventure!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the Earl himself is feeling some guilt.
> 
> Who _are_ these people? Prince Phillip seems to be the only one with any sense.  And *they* think Meghan’s family is _trashy_?
> Shaking my head.
> 
> View attachment 5088782
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The false claims in Earl Spencer's scribbled notes from Bashir meeting
> 
> 
> Earl Spencer kept meticulous notes of a meeting held on September 19, 1995, when he introduced the BBC man to his sister at her Knightsbridge flat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles Spencer, 9th Earl Spencer - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _On 31 August 1997, his elder sister Diana died after a car crash in Paris and Spencer delivered the eulogy at her funeral service held at Westminster Abbey six days later. In his eulogy he rebuked both Britain's royal family and the press for their treatment of his sister.[6] Spencer ruled out conspiracy theories concerning his sister's death, and called the alleged letter she wrote 10 months before her death in which she discussed *her fears of a planned accident "just a bizarre coincidence rather than tied in with reality."*[7] Spencer received an apology from Tim Davie, the BBC's director general, in late 2020 for the unethical practices used by BBC staff to gain his sister's consent to be interviewed in November 1995 for the corporation's Panorama television programme.[8] The Earl said a full inquiry should be conducted which Davie has said will happen.[9]
> 
> The Earl was a Member of the House of Lords from 29 March 1992 (the day his father died and he inherited the peerage) until the House of Lords Act 1999 excluded most hereditary peers on 11 November 1999.[10]
> 
> It was reported by The Daily Telegraph in 2003 that *Spencer had refused to allow his sister Diana to live in a cottage on the Althorp estate, despite her request at the height of her emotional difficulties*. It was also reported that *Spencer had accused Diana of displaying "deceitful" and "manipulative" behaviour which were characteristics of the mental illness associated with bulimia nervosa which Diana herself had admitted she suffered.*[11][12] Diana was eventually buried on Spencer's ancestral estate, Althorp, where he built a garden temple memorial and a museum to her memory, displaying her wedding dress and other personal effects. The museum was opened to the public in 1998 with all profits going to Diana's Memorial Fund, also set up by Spencer. At this stage, Spencer began writing a series of books dealing with the estate itself and with his family history, beginning with an account of his ancestral home, Althorp: the Story of an English House published in 1998._


Agree, he is feeling some guilt, he was the one who linked up Bashir with his sister


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since the BRF is using the ignore button on H&M, why is anything here considered off topic?
> It is our way of ignoring the gruesome twosome and the mother, all who do not wish to be discussed.  Discussing other things is, in fact, discussing _those who we are supposed to ignore_. See, we have officially entered the bizarro world - up is down, etc.
> Our 1st amendment is bonkers!
> 
> RE: MartinB.  Why is this happening 20+ years later?  The damage is done. *Diana willingly participated. * The fact that she was duped is not shocking. Many of us for many years have known that the press lies/twists/manipulates people and info to get the ratings.  I thought the palace & BRF knew that, too.  Is this to lay the groundwork for H&M claiming OW lied/misrepresented her real motives?
> 
> RE: titles.  Said it before, will continue to say it.  The titles stay so he can avoid the IRS.  Also, should he get into a dust-up with the locals, he can easily be pulled back to his homeland. Happens frequently with diplomats’ kids.
> 
> All my opinion, ymmv.


As she participated in the writing of that Andrew Norton book. She might have agreed to that interview because of those fake bank statements but it was up to her to decide how much dirty laundry she would air during the Bashir interview. On the other hand the disappointment and anger she might have felt reading those false statements could easily push her to run amok and let her guard down.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


> Charles Spencer was shown the fake documents so Martin could gain his trust. Charles then introduced Martin to Diana.


What exactly were these fake documents?  I'm so confused.  I've been too lazy to go down that rabbit hole, LOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Sources said William believes yesterday's report is 'just the beginning of the process of establishing the truth'._
> 
> IMO this could be the beginning of the grand reset for the BRF.
> Yes, we are all for the establishment of the truth. The BRF has lots of explaining to do about several of its members.
> 
> _Charles has studiously kept at arms’ length from the investigation, conscious that it is for Diana’s sons to take the lead in anything around her memory and legacy.
> 
> But the fact that his elder son has made a point of acknowledging what a damaging effect the interview also had on his relationship with his estranged wife is likely to help soothe troubled waters._
> 
> Really, Charles? Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry lashes out over 'unethical' BBC interview with Diana
> 
> 
> In a statement tonight, Prince William told of his 'indescribable sadness' that the controversial Panorama interview increased his mother's 'fear, paranoia and isolation' in her final years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm starting to understand a bit.  I was a huge Princess Di stan as a kid (well, however much of a stan you can be when internet doesn't exist!) and have come to see her faults the more I learn about her.  While all this may be true, how did the interview influence her not to wear a seat belt?  I've read several times that if she had worn one, she may be alive today.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the Earl himself is feeling some guilt.
> 
> Who _are_ these people? Prince Phillip seems to be the only one with any sense.  And *they* think Meghan’s family is _trashy_?
> Shaking my head.
> 
> View attachment 5088782
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The false claims in Earl Spencer's scribbled notes from Bashir meeting
> 
> 
> Earl Spencer kept meticulous notes of a meeting held on September 19, 1995, when he introduced the BBC man to his sister at her Knightsbridge flat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles Spencer, 9th Earl Spencer - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _On 31 August 1997, his elder sister Diana died after a car crash in Paris and Spencer delivered the eulogy at her funeral service held at Westminster Abbey six days later. In his eulogy he rebuked both Britain's royal family and the press for their treatment of his sister.[6] Spencer ruled out conspiracy theories concerning his sister's death, and called the alleged letter she wrote 10 months before her death in which she discussed *her fears of a planned accident "just a bizarre coincidence rather than tied in with reality."*[7] Spencer received an apology from Tim Davie, the BBC's director general, in late 2020 for the unethical practices used by BBC staff to gain his sister's consent to be interviewed in November 1995 for the corporation's Panorama television programme.[8] The Earl said a full inquiry should be conducted which Davie has said will happen.[9]
> 
> The Earl was a Member of the House of Lords from 29 March 1992 (the day his father died and he inherited the peerage) until the House of Lords Act 1999 excluded most hereditary peers on 11 November 1999.[10]
> 
> It was reported by The Daily Telegraph in 2003 that *Spencer had refused to allow his sister Diana to live in a cottage on the Althorp estate, despite her request at the height of her emotional difficulties*. It was also reported that *Spencer had accused Diana of displaying "deceitful" and "manipulative" behaviour which were characteristics of the mental illness associated with bulimia nervosa which Diana herself had admitted she suffered.*[11][12] Diana was eventually buried on Spencer's ancestral estate, Althorp, where he built a garden temple memorial and a museum to her memory, displaying her wedding dress and other personal effects. The museum was opened to the public in 1998 with all profits going to Diana's Memorial Fund, also set up by Spencer. At this stage, Spencer began writing a series of books dealing with the estate itself and with his family history, beginning with an account of his ancestral home, Althorp: the Story of an English House published in 1998._


Her brother doesn't sound like an angel.  If you're scribbling down false claims, WTF are you even introducing the man to your sister in the first place??


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Her brother doesn't sound like an angel.  If you're scribbling down false claims, WTF are you even introducing the man to your sister in the first place??



IMO He had his own struggles. Due to his numerous divorces, several have been written about. I used to be a Diana stan, but as I watched those documentaries, learned more about her, she had issues, many issues. Some stem from her own childhood and family, some from the marriage, some from her enormous media coverage. 
Bottom line - she had free will, she could have said _no_ many times and, perhaps, the ending would be different. Remember she had her own security guard with her. Should he be blamed?  Interesting that her sisters have not commented.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Early in the new year of 1996 there was an unexpected visitor to Princess Diana’s apartment at Kensington Palace. He had arrived unseen, emerging from the boot of the Princess’s butler’s car.









						RICHARD KAY: Why Diana called Martin Bashir 'The Poison Dwarf'
					

RICHARD KAY: Many of the Princess's circle believed Martin Bashir had duped or tricked her into giving her interview in the first place, while questions were being asked in the BBC about his ethics.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Hermes Zen

This out 6 hrs ago from Vanity Fair. I didn't recall hearing if PC actually took that walk with H after the funeral but this article said they did along with W.  Article covers more. I thought it was interesting ... sharing.



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...py-can-this-father-son-relationship-ever-heal
> 
> *“All Charles Has Wanted Is for Harry to Be Happy”: Can This Father-Son Relationship Ever Heal?*
> *With Harry poised to speak openly about his grief following his mother’s death in a new documentary airing Friday, Prince Charles’s hopes for a reconciliation may once again be put to the test.*
> By Katie Nicholl
> May 20, 2021


----------



## Straight-Laced

smh... wondering if recollections vary ? 









						Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series
					

Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				



*Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*
*Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview*

The Duke of Sussex has accused the Royal family of "total neglect" and of "bullying him into silence" as he said the Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too.

Prince Harry, 36, underwent a highly personal therapy session on camera for his new Apple TV documentary series, discussing traumatic memories from his childhood.

He spoke extensively about his struggles with mental health and his disconnect with his family’s attitudes to the subject.

The Duke said that he and the Duchess of Sussex were subjected to such a level of harassment on social media that he felt “completely helpless” and assumed that his family would help.

“Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect,” he said.

“We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”

The Duke described over the first three episodes of the series, The Me You Can’t See, released on Friday, how he had come to realise that he needed to address the trauma he experienced following the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.

He told co-presenter Oprah Winfrey that his family had not spoken about her death and just expected him to deal with the paparazzi and press intrusion.

“My father used to say to me when I was younger, he used to say to both William and I, ‘Well it was like that for me so it’s going to be like that for you,’” he said.

“That doesn’t make sense. Just because you suffered doesn’t mean that your kids have to suffer, in fact quite the opposite - if you suffered, do everything you can to make sure that whatever negative experiences you had, that you can make it right for your kids.”

The Duke revealed that he was told to “play the game” and his life would be easier.

But he added: “I‘ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”

He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.

He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.

“That was one of the biggest reasons to leave, feeling trapped and feeling controlled through fear, both by the media and by the system itself which never encouraged the talking about this kind of trauma,” he said.

“Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”


----------



## V0N1B2

What a f**king wanker


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Straight-Laced said:


> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.



I don't want to doubt that Meghan was suicidal because that is serious and a very deep issue. If anyone told me they were suicidal I would take that seriously. However suicidal thoughts don't go away because you're thinking of someone else, feeling suicidal doesn't make you 'selfish'. That is what they are implying, if they say she didn't go through with it because she was thinking of Harry (which also doesn't make sense since she was pregnant- why would she not be thinking about her child as well in that case). People commit suicide have mental health issues, they don't do it because they are temporarily depressed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince Harry Says One of Son Archie's First Words Was 'Grandma': 'My Mom Would Be Incredibly Proud of Me'
					

Prince Harry reveals that a picture of Princess Diana is hanging in son Archie's nursery and that one of the child's first words was 'grandma'




					people.com
				




Archie's first words were very sentimental for Prince Harry.
In his new AppleTV+ docuseries _The Me You Can't See_, which he co-created with Oprah Winfrey, the Duke of Sussex, 36, revealed that one of his 2-year-old son's first words was "grandma" as a sweet nod to Princess Diana.
According to Harry, a photo of his late mother, who tragically died at age 36 following a car crash in Paris in 1997, is currently hanging in Archie's nursery at the home he shares with wife Meghan Markle.
"I got a photo of her in his nursery, and it was one of the first words that he said — apart from 'mama,' 'papa,' it was then 'grandma'. Grandma Diana," he shared. "It's the sweetest thing, but at the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here."

RELATED: Prince Harry on Panic Attacks, Therapy and His Mom's Death: I Needed to 'Heal Myself from the Past'
As for Archie's very first word, Harry previously revealed that it was "crocodile."
"He's got the most amazing personality. He's already putting three or four words together, he's already singing songs," he told James Corden during an appearance on _The Late Late Show _earlier this year.
"Three syllables," the proud dad remarked of Archie's first word at the time.
On the fifth episode of _The Me You Can't See_, which featured never-before-seen footage of Archie swinging on a hanging bench alongside his father, Harry also reflected on the loss of Diana.

"I wish she could've met Meghan," he said. "I wish she was around for Archie."

Still, the father of one — who is expecting a baby girl with Markle, 39, later this summer — believes his mother would have been proud of the man he is today and the life that he's created for his family.
"Yeah, I have no doubt that my mom would be incredibly proud of me. I'm living the life that she wanted to live for herself, living the life that she wanted us to be able to live," he said.
"So not only do I know that she's incredibly proud of me, but that she's helped me get here. And I've never felt her presence more as I have done over the last year."

*
NOW the first word was grandma?  Wasn't it "waffle maker" or "crocodile" just a couple months ago?  Do these people have short term memory loss?  Their stories change daily!*


----------



## purseinsanity

Straight-Laced said:


> smh... wondering if recollections vary ?
> *He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.*
> 
> He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.
> 
> *“Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”*



That's such BS.  I agree, "suicidal" thoughts are not something that can be switched off easily, or not done because it's "unfair".  If people actually thought like that, there would be very little suicide.  It's been said that it's a very selfish act, mostly I think because you're not thinking of how your loved ones will be after one does that.  Meghan was so suicidal, but so selfless as to think of Harry first.  What a load of $hit.

And Harry, we know you won't be silent.  You haven't shut up for a single day.

AND if they're nothing but bullies and neglectful, STOP USING YOUR TITLE and forfeit your place in line a$$hole.


----------



## V0N1B2

Why won’t he stop lying? I don’t understand. It’s like he doesn’t know that his statements have been recorded. Like he’d say Archie’s first word was gangan and he’d be corrected by a reporter and they’d show him the footage of him saying it was crocodile, then Harry will say it’s William or Charles’ fault. They planted the fake tape to make me look bad. 
I feel like I’ve seen this movie before...


----------



## Straight-Laced

More from the show, more evidence if anyone needed it that Harry should never be a spokesperson for good mental health and the benefits of 'moving on'!!  _I'm so free and happy now because every few days I get to dump on my birth family and violate their privacy for big bucks  _









						Parental problems, trauma triggers and a suicidal wife: Prince Harry’s long list for the therapist
					

The Duke of Sussex opens up about the mental health struggles he has faced since the death of his mother, during his new Apple TV series




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

purseinsanity said:


> And Harry, we know you won't be silent.  You haven't shut up for a single day.


Right?





Harry, dude... you’re in Cali now, man. Go find a safe space on your compound near some flowers or something, roll it tight and right and let the calm zen feelings wash over you.


----------



## xincinsin

Straight-Laced said:


> smh... wondering if recollections vary ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*
> *Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has accused the Royal family of "total neglect" and of "bullying him into silence" as he said the Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too.
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, underwent a highly personal therapy session on camera for his new Apple TV documentary series, discussing traumatic memories from his childhood.
> 
> He spoke extensively about his struggles with mental health and his disconnect with his family’s attitudes to the subject.
> 
> The Duke said that he and the Duchess of Sussex were subjected to such a level of harassment on social media that he felt “completely helpless” and assumed that his family would help.
> 
> “Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect,” he said.
> 
> “We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”
> 
> The Duke described over the first three episodes of the series, The Me You Can’t See, released on Friday, how he had come to realise that he needed to address the trauma he experienced following the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> He told co-presenter Oprah Winfrey that his family had not spoken about her death and just expected him to deal with the paparazzi and press intrusion.
> 
> “My father used to say to me when I was younger, he used to say to both William and I, ‘Well it was like that for me so it’s going to be like that for you,’” he said.
> 
> “That doesn’t make sense. Just because you suffered doesn’t mean that your kids have to suffer, in fact quite the opposite - if you suffered, do everything you can to make sure that whatever negative experiences you had, that you can make it right for your kids.”
> 
> The Duke revealed that he was told to “play the game” and his life would be easier.
> 
> But he added: “I‘ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”
> 
> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.
> 
> He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.
> 
> “That was one of the biggest reasons to leave, feeling trapped and feeling controlled through fear, both by the media and by the system itself which never encouraged the talking about this kind of trauma,” he said.
> 
> “Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”


He is really re-writing his whole life. 
_“We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”_
How did he get 4 years? I thought his wife threw in the towel less than 2 years after they got hitched?
If it was that bad, why were they proposing half-in/half-out? They wanted to be half-happy? Such a crock of sh*t that he keeps spewing nowadays.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Anyone else feel like the timing of the new show was planned to coincide with this report?  
Rating$$$$


----------



## lazeny

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I don't want to doubt that Meghan was suicidal because that is serious and a very deep issue. If anyone told me they were suicidal I would take that seriously. However suicidal thoughts don't go away because you're thinking of someone else, feeling suicidal doesn't make you 'selfish'. That is what they are implying, if they say she didn't go through with it because she was thinking of Harry (which also doesn't make sense since she was pregnant- why would she not be thinking about her child as well in that case). People commit suicide have mental health issues, they don't do it because they are temporarily depressed.



Just my 2 cents. 

I had been suicidal for years. What kept me from doing that final step are my dogs. Then my children when they came along. Therapy helps me manage it. The thoughts & planning never went away. It comes in waves, on toughest days.

These things are different for every body. I have no doubt that Meghan suffered from PPD and was suicidal. I also have no doubt that people can be suicidal but are also afraid of going through with it for varying reasons. Like leaving behind family. It's a bad place to be, the push and pull of wanting death and living for loved ones.

Sorry for becoming too personal. No matter how much I find Meghan in such a negative light, I do not doubt this part.

I do find the couple's penchant for courting drama unhelpful when both of them are so obviously mentally struggling. But many people with mental issues do crave drama and lash out publicly.


----------



## Sol Ryan

xincinsin said:


> He is really re-writing his whole life.
> _“We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”_
> How did he get 4 years? I thought his wife threw in the towel less than 2 years after they got hitched?
> If it was that bad, why were they proposing half-in/half-out? They wanted to be half-happy? Such a crock of sh*t that he keeps spewing nowadays.



He is so full of sh!t... what about his dad sending him to rehab? His brother and Kate trying to get him help? F- him and his revisionist history. He made his decisions, he’s an adult, it’s time for him to take some responsibility in his life. Ffs. I can’t stand him.


----------



## Chanbal

The way he is using his mother's memory is tasteless to say the least.  

"_History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn't white and now look what's happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself? They're not gonna stop until she dies. It's incredibly triggering to potentially lose another woman in my life._"









						Prince Harry on Dodi Al Fayed and Princess Diana's relationship
					

Prince Harry made a rare comment about his mother Princess Diana's relationship with Dodi Al Fayed in the mental health series, The Me You Can't See.




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but not because she's a) black b) female but because she has the gap in her CV and Thomas doesn't. I have no beef with Doria even though I've come to think differently of her during the past months (started out really liking her demeanor, at this point I can't put my finger on it but think something is subtly off...and no, it's not that I think she's a criminal).


I'm wondering if her "dignified silence" is her way of staying out of firing range. The way her daughter and son-in-law attack or ghost everyone in the family on either side, I wouldn't blame her for lying low. There were rumours that they bought her silence by paying for her business ventures, but I think they are too aggressive to bribe, more likely that they would pay so that she "owes" them.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> That whole family is so dramatic. It's just that they come across a bit redneck-y and obvious and she who shall not be named is subtly vulgar (as in, British upperclass, people of old money or people like us looking at her with a magnifying glass will see the tell-tale signs, but the general public won't).


All that making love to the camera and acting like an overaged 18-year-old... If there's anything I'd call improvement at the moment, it would be that she has stopped sticking her tongue out at people to look cute.



queennadine said:


> I’ll forgive you just this once in the name of equity, inclusion, compassion, gentleness, awareness, kindness, creativity, impact, and altruism.


I shall have to work this into my conversation the next time I interact with the unself-aware


----------



## Chanbal

_It's been revealed that Prince Harry will make an appearance on American TV on Friday morning, ahead of his Apple TV series launching the same day_.









						Prince Harry to appear on Good Morning America after ‘truth bombs’ in Oprah chat
					

Prince Harry is set to discuss his interview with Oprah Winfrey for Apple TV series The Me You Can't See, on Good Morning American on Friday




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lazeny said:


> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> I had been suicidal for years. What kept me from doing that final step are my dogs. Then my children when they came along. Therapy helps me manage it. The thoughts & planning never went away. It comes in waves, on toughest days.
> 
> These things are different for every body. I have no doubt that Meghan suffered from PPD and was suicidal. I also have no doubt that people can be suicidal but are also afraid of going through with it for varying reasons. Like leaving behind family. It's a bad place to be, the push and pull of wanting death and living for loved ones.
> 
> Sorry for becoming too personal. No matter how much I find Meghan in such a negative light, I do not doubt this part.
> 
> I do find the couple's penchant for courting drama unhelpful when both of them are so obviously mentally struggling. But many people with mental issues do crave drama and lash out publicly.



I’m so sorry you were in such pain, I’m very glad you are here and doing okay now.


----------



## needlv

So many stories today... Archies multiple different “first words” and H alleging they did everything to make it work... huh...

oh and Charles thrown under the bus again.  I guess H is still pissed off the bank of Dad closed...

well, the best response to these new allegations is...

”Recollections may vary”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure exactly what is going on in the 19 bathroom house, but I’m certain it isn’t happiness. 
Bonkers isn’t strong enough to describe how _off_ that household is.  Apparently, time spent with OW and his therapists has not helped him at all.


----------



## xincinsin

lazeny said:


> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> I had been suicidal for years. What kept me from doing that final step are my dogs. Then my children when they came along. Therapy helps me manage it. The thoughts & planning never went away. It comes in waves, on toughest days.
> 
> These things are different for every body. I have no doubt that Meghan suffered from PPD and was suicidal. I also have no doubt that people can be suicidal but are also afraid of going through with it for varying reasons. Like leaving behind family. It's a bad place to be, the push and pull of wanting death and living for loved ones.
> 
> Sorry for becoming too personal. No matter how much I find Meghan in such a negative light, I do not doubt this part.
> 
> I do find the couple's penchant for courting drama unhelpful when both of them are so obviously mentally struggling. But many people with mental issues do crave drama and lash out publicly.


I hope you are doing better now.

I do doubt M's claims of feeling suicidal because it is only one of a whole host of dubious claims she made in the OW interview. I think she may have felt down because she was not adjusting well to life as a royal and not really trying to adjust, but feeling down isn't eye-catching on TV, so she has inflated many of her claims to extract maximum audience sympathy.


----------



## Laila619

He is way, way more damaged than probably anyone knows.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I hope you are doing better now.
> 
> I do doubt M's claims of feeling suicidal because it is only one of a whole host of dubious claims she made in the OW interview. I think she may have felt down because she was not adjusting well to life as a royal and not really trying to adjust, but feeling down isn't eye-catching on TV, so she has inflated many of her claims to extract maximum audience sympathy.



Agree, they may be misusing the word ‘suicide’.


----------



## purseinsanity

lazeny said:


> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> I had been suicidal for years. What kept me from doing that final step are my dogs. Then my children when they came along. Therapy helps me manage it. The thoughts & planning never went away. It comes in waves, on toughest days.
> 
> These things are different for every body. I have no doubt that Meghan suffered from PPD and was suicidal. I also have no doubt that people can be suicidal but are also afraid of going through with it for varying reasons. Like leaving behind family. It's a bad place to be, the push and pull of wanting death and living for loved ones.
> 
> Sorry for becoming too personal. No matter how much I find Meghan in such a negative light, I do not doubt this part.
> 
> I do find the couple's penchant for courting drama unhelpful when both of them are so obviously mentally struggling. But many people with mental issues do crave drama and lash out publicly.


I'm so sorry to hear you were in that much pain.  I hope you are in a better place now!  
You are absolutely right, it's not the same for everyone.  Those of us who've never had such thoughts couldn't possibly know what it is like to have them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The way he is using his mother's memory is tasteless to say the least.
> 
> "_History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn't white and now look what's happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself? They're not gonna stop until she dies. It's incredibly triggering to potentially lose another woman in my life._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Dodi Al Fayed and Princess Diana's relationship
> 
> 
> Prince Harry made a rare comment about his mother Princess Diana's relationship with Dodi Al Fayed in the mental health series, The Me You Can't See.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Oh for Pete's sake.  He's now claiming she was hounded and chased because she was dating an Egyptian?  God Harry, STFU.  Not everything is about race.  Not everything is about you.


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for Pete's sake.  He's now claiming she was hounded and chased because she was dating an Egyptian?  God Harry, STFU.  Not everything is about race.  Not everything is about you.



H must be learning word salad techniques from MM


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Wait... what??? That's a thing?


Lol yes. I’m showing my age. It’s those motels along the roads. Cheap and very        Not nice. You put a quarter in and it rocks for 20 minutes. It mimicked the car ride. Doubt they have those beds anymore lol.


----------



## Jayne1

Straight-Laced said:


> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.


She's so manipulative, isn't she.


----------



## Chanbal

He accuses the media for everything, why doesn't he stop giving interviews and paying for PR? Why doesn't he live a private life?  This is sick! 

_*PRINCE Harry accuses his family of showing "total neglect" for his mental health woes and claims dad Charles made him "suffer" in a bombshell documentary set to leave the Palace reeling.

Prince Harry speaks about:*_

_*How he's convinced the media 'will not stop' until wife Meghan Markle 'dies'*_
*How Meghan resisted suicidal thoughts because she knew it would be 'unfair' for Harry to lose another woman in his life *









						Harry says Royals showed 'total neglect' & Charles made him 'suffer' in doc
					

PRINCE Harry accuses his family of showing “total neglect” for his mental health woes and claims dad Charles made him “suffer” in a bombshell documentary set to leave the Pa…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Lol yes. I’m showing my age. It’s those motels along the roads. Cheap and very        Not nice. You put a quarter in and it rocks for 20 minutes. It mimicked the car ride. Doubt they have those beds anymore lol.


I'm reading this and wishing I could put a quarter in my bed. It must be great for insomnia.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for Pete's sake.  He's now claiming she was hounded and chased because she was dating an Egyptian?  God Harry, STFU.  Not everything is about race.  Not everything is about you.





needlv said:


> H must be learning word salad techniques from MM


The hypocrisy of these people knows no bounds.


_Royal biographer Hugo Vickers branded Harry’s decision to give the interview to the network “embarrassing”. 

He told the Daily Mail: “It is quite embarrassing for Prince Harry. 

“*How could he possibly co-operate with an organisation which some years ago was the only outlet to publish a deeply distressing photo of his mother’s dying moment?*_









						Harry's Oprah branded 'hypocritical' after CBS published Diana crash picture
					

PRINCE Harry’s decision to give his bombshell interview to CBS has been branded “hypocritical” after the network published distressing pictures of Princess Diana moments after her 1997 car crash. T…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I'm reading this and wishing I could put a quarter in my bed. It must be great for insomnia.


If you have insomnia have you tried Magnesium Glycinate? It really helps if I take Magnesium Citrate I get wild dreams. Last night Paul McCartney was in my dreams lol and I don’t ever think of him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The show has dropped. Taking one for the team and watching it now.

ETA: episode 1  - OW, Lady Gaga and the others told their stories [painful to hear],  spoke openly about their abuse and how they want to help others.  H spoke about his trauma [his mother’s death], same stuff he has been talking about for the last year or so. He said when she was “driving the boys to and from school, she was always crying because she did not have security and paps swarmed her car.“ ??? No security?  At that time she was a royal wife. Odd. Idk, IMO he seems like he is repeating quotes from a self-help book. Claimed he has been in ‘therapy‘ has been the last 4 years. Hmm.

Once his part was over, *this reminded me of why the OW show was so good to watch*. She gives lots of insight into the healing process and lots of helpful advice on the how’s of healing.  So far, she is the reason to watch, not him.  I give it a solid A.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> If you have insomnia have you tried Magnesium Glycinate? It really helps if I take Magnesium Citrate I get wild dreams. Last night Paul McCartney was in my dreams lol and I don’t ever think of him.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The show has dropped. Taking one for the team and watching it now.



Waiting for your report!


----------



## madamelizaking

Chanbal said:


> The way he is using his mother's memory is tasteless to say the least.
> 
> "_History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn't white and now look what's happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself? They're not gonna stop until she dies. It's incredibly triggering to potentially lose another woman in my life._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry on Dodi Al Fayed and Princess Diana's relationship
> 
> 
> Prince Harry made a rare comment about his mother Princess Diana's relationship with Dodi Al Fayed in the mental health series, The Me You Can't See.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Paranoia is evident in Harry. Meghan really did a manipulative number on him.


----------



## Straight-Laced

This is all getting way too crazy now, feels like it’s spiralling out of control. 

Harry needs to stop what he’s doing and take a long break from the spotlight but instead he’s being encouraged.


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for Pete's sake.  He's now claiming she was hounded and chased because she was dating an Egyptian?  God Harry, STFU.  Not everything is about race.  Not everything is about you.



I have never heard this take either.  Was this actually something people discussed when it happened? What did his race have to do with anything??? She would've been hounded and chased no matter who she dated. Wow. I've never in my life used the term "the race card" but he's really pulling the race card out of his a$$ at this point.

ETA: This actually really rubs me the wrong way as a POC. It feels like he's appropriating real racial issues for personal sympathy and financial gain.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> Lol yes. I’m showing my age. It’s those motels along the roads. Cheap and very        Not nice. You put a quarter in and it rocks for 20 minutes. It mimicked the car ride. Doubt they have those beds anymore lol.



I remember those Magic Fingers beds and the motel at our airport had them for years. Not sure if they still do.  BUT you can get it for your home. 

The company is still around, at least in name - perhaps they are another *zombie brand*?  There's precious little information at their website, only the offer of the *home game* version of Magic Fingers.  In a way, it seems like Magic Fingers would work better at home anyway - you could have longer and more regular massage sessions to work away stress and help you to get to sleep.  Just keep a tin cup near the bed so you can drop in a quarter and hear the "clink" that let's you know the fun is about to start.

*Magic Fingers official website *(you've just GOTTA tell us if you buy one, or put one on your wedding registry...)


Edited: Typo Major Fingers to Magic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> I have never heard this take either.  Was this actually something people discussed when it happened? What did his race have to do with anything??? She would've been hounded and chased no matter who she dated. Wow. I've never in my life used the term "the race card" but he's really pulling the race card out of his a$$ at this point.


People used to see Dodi as a rich playboy. It had nothing to do with race, Diana would have been chased with any date. They were a good looking couple.


----------



## V0N1B2

Laila619 said:


> He is way, way more damaged deranged than probably anyone knows.


Fixed it for you


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Waiting for your report!



ETA: episode 1 - OW, Lady Gaga and the others told their stories [painful to hear], spoke openly about their abuse and how they want to help others. H spoke about his trauma [his mother’s death], same stuff he has been talking about for the last year or so. He said when she was “driving the boys to and from school, she was always crying because she did not have security and paps swarmed her car.“ ??? No security? At that time she was a royal wife. Odd. Idk, IMO he seems like he is repeating quotes from a self-help book. Claimed he has been in ‘therapy‘ has been the last 4 years. Hmm.

Once his part was over, this reminded me of why the OW show was so good to watch. She gives lots of insight into the healing process and lots of helpful advice on the how’s of healing. So far, she is the reason to watch, not him. I give it a solid A.

Full disclosure: when Lady Gaga cried, I teared up.  She was speaking from her heart.  It’s so sad.

OW wears this sweater with a white shirt and, of course, looks beautiful:





						Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim
					

Get free shipping on Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.



					www.neimanmarcus.com
				




In episode 2, she interviews Robin Williams’s son 
Hazzie continues his story about meeting MM, they got in a fight which triggered his 12 year old self. Same old story. Same story when they went to Royal Albert Hall, on and on. He definitley needs to deal with his stuff. He just is not interesting to watch. Lots of hand-gesturing, chopping the air, etc.

ETA2:  He is listed as one of executive producers -  
Executive Producer
Prince Harry 
Duke of Sussex


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: episode 1 - OW, Lady Gaga and the others told their stories [painful to hear], spoke openly about their abuse and how they want to help others. H spoke about his trauma [his mother’s death], same stuff he has been talking about for the last year or so. He said when she was “driving the boys to and from school, she was always crying because she did not have security and paps swarmed her car.“ ??? No security? At that time she was a royal wife. Odd. Idk, IMO he seems like he is repeating quotes from a self-help book. Claimed he has been in ‘therapy‘ has been the last 4 years. Hmm.
> 
> Once his part was over, this reminded me of why the OW show was so good to watch. She gives lots of insight into the healing process and lots of helpful advice on the how’s of healing. So far, she is the reason to watch, not him. I give it a solid A.
> 
> Full disclosure: when Lady Gaga cried, I teared up.  She was speaking from her heart.  It’s so sad.
> 
> OW wears this sweater with a white shirt and, of course, looks beautiful:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim
> 
> 
> Get free shipping on Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.neimanmarcus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In episode 2, she interviews Robin Williams’s son



Was it more uplifting or depressing?


----------



## Yanca

Wow It seemed that Harry is unraveling. They should really work on  getting the  mental help that they need, he seemed to be on a warpath and all the inconsitencies on their statements. They are in their late 30s but seemed to be expectant of the BRF to help them , they  did not need the BRF help when they opened a foundation, planned their exit, hire all the PR people, publicist and etc, hire the US base lawyers and etc  under the cloak of secrecy,  it just does not seem possible to me that they do not have any access to doctors, where they had access to anything else that they want to be kept secret from the BRF and the public. He seemed angrier and less happier right now than  he was the past few years ( from an outsider perspective at least) he may just be really good at hiding it, Hopefully all his and his wifes plan and projects panned out for their sake and for the sake of their families that they can't seemed to tire of attacking .


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since the BRF is using the ignore button on H&M, why is anything here considered off topic?
> It is our way of ignoring the gruesome twosome and the mother, all who do not wish to be discussed.  Discussing other things is, in fact, discussing _those who we are supposed to ignore_. See, we have officially entered the bizarro world - up is down, etc.
> Our 1st amendment is bonkers!
> 
> RE: MartinB.  Why is this happening 20+ years later?  The damage is done. Diana willingly participated.  The fact that she was duped is not shocking. Many of us for many years have known that the press lies/twists/manipulates people and info to get the ratings.  I thought the palace & BRF knew that, too.  Is this to lay the groundwork for H&M claiming OW lied/misrepresented her real motives?
> 
> RE: titles.  Said it before, will continue to say it.  The titles stay so he can avoid the IRS.  Also, should he get into a dust-up with the locals, he can easily be pulled back to his homeland. Happens frequently with diplomats’ kids.
> 
> All my opinion, ymmv.


I think you are right on the money. He’s undoubtedly allergic to paying tax. Hopefully Uncle Sam will find out for us  




Straight-Laced said:


> smh... wondering if recollections vary ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*
> *Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has accused the Royal family of "total neglect" and of "bullying him into silence" as he said the Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too.
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, underwent a highly personal therapy session on camera for his new Apple TV documentary series, discussing traumatic memories from his childhood.
> 
> He spoke extensively about his struggles with mental health and his disconnect with his family’s attitudes to the subject.
> 
> The Duke said that he and the Duchess of Sussex were subjected to such a level of harassment on social media that he felt “completely helpless” and assumed that his family would help.
> 
> “Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect,” he said.
> 
> “We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”
> 
> The Duke described over the first three episodes of the series, The Me You Can’t See, released on Friday, how he had come to realise that he needed to address the trauma he experienced following the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> He told co-presenter Oprah Winfrey that his family had not spoken about her death and just expected him to deal with the paparazzi and press intrusion.
> 
> “My father used to say to me when I was younger, he used to say to both William and I, ‘Well it was like that for me so it’s going to be like that for you,’” he said.
> 
> “That doesn’t make sense. Just because you suffered doesn’t mean that your kids have to suffer, in fact quite the opposite - if you suffered, do everything you can to make sure that whatever negative experiences you had, that you can make it right for your kids.”
> 
> The Duke revealed that he was told to “play the game” and his life would be easier.
> 
> But he added: “I‘ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”
> 
> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.
> 
> He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.
> 
> “That was one of the biggest reasons to leave, feeling trapped and feeling controlled through fear, both by the media and by the system itself which never encouraged the talking about this kind of trauma,” he said.
> 
> “Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”


There seems to be a giant transatlantic pity party going on if you ask me. 
I’m rolling my eyes at this Diana inquest. They love to keep her on team Windsor as much as possible as we all know she sells like hot cakes. She’s an easy way for the royals to gain sympathy that some outsider (who doesn’t really have much of a career anymore anyways) was the e force driving a wedge between husband, wife and sons. Ergo Charles is great, Diana is great, Will is great, Harry is.....Harry.

On the other side we have little mr spoilt changing his tune and the family he’s always claimed to love and respect are now emotionally distant sadists.

Also agree they might be thinking down the line Oprah can be the new bashir punching bag. Hopefully she will liquidise them when that happens 
It’s just partisanship  again at the end of the day & I think it’s beneath their dignity and our intellligence tbh.

Couple this with the shady Spencers and it’s almost like the idea of the innate superiority of the aristocracy is a bit of a myth or something


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: episode 1 - OW, Lady Gaga and the others told their stories [painful to hear], spoke openly about their abuse and how they want to help others. H spoke about his trauma [his mother’s death], same stuff he has been talking about for the last year or so. He said when she was “driving the boys to and from school, she was always crying because she did not have security and paps swarmed her car.“ ??? No security? At that time she was a royal wife. Odd. Idk, IMO he seems like he is repeating quotes from a self-help book. Claimed he has been in ‘therapy‘ has been the last 4 years. Hmm.
> 
> Once his part was over, this reminded me of why the OW show was so good to watch. She gives lots of insight into the healing process and lots of helpful advice on the how’s of healing. So far, she is the reason to watch, not him. I give it a solid A.
> 
> Full disclosure: when Lady Gaga cried, I teared up.  She was speaking from her heart.  It’s so sad.
> 
> OW wears this sweater with a white shirt and, of course, looks beautiful:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim
> 
> 
> Get free shipping on Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.neimanmarcus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In episode 2, she interviews Robin Williams’s son
> Hazzie continues his story about meeting MM, they got in a fight which triggered his 12 year old self. Same old story. Same story when they went to Royal Albert Hall, on and on. He definitley needs to deal with his stuff. He just is not interesting to watch. Lots of hand-gesturing, chopping the air, etc.


It's headlined by H & OW, right? But if he has already used up his pity-me quota on Ep 1, does he still appear in Ep2? 
Victim in Part 1 and Guru in Part 2?


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> There seems to be a giant transatlantic pity party going on if you ask me.
> I’m rolling my eyes at this Diana inquest. They love to keep her on team Windsor as much as possible as we all know she sells like hot cakes. She’s an easy way for the royals to gain sympathy that some outsider (who doesn’t really have much of a career anymore anyways) was the e force driving a wedge between husband, wife and sons. Ergo Charles is great, Diana is great, Will is great, Harry is.....Harry.
> 
> On the other side we have little mr spoilt changing his tune and the family he’s always claimed to love and respect are now emotionally distant sadists.
> 
> Also agree they might be thinking down the line Oprah can be the new bashir punching bag. Hopefully she will liquidise them when that happens
> It’s just partisanship  again at the end of the day & I think it’s beneath their dignity and our intellligence tbh.
> 
> Couple this with the shady Spencers and it’s almost like the idea of the innate superiority of the aristocracy is a bit of a myth or something


That's .... a bit, a bit, a bit deep ...


----------



## lalame

I’m also annoyed about Harry saying his dad told him “I went through it, so you have to too.” A reasonable person can understand what Charles meant... you were born into fame, the whole family is basically guaranteed unearned privilege, money, respect, etc for a lifetime at the expense of privacy, I went through it and it’s tough but you’ll probably go through it too because it affects the entire family. Wonder at what point Harry said, “Fine, I’ll give up the money, forgo the privileges, and try to have a normal job to be a normal person... please take away my exorbitant allowance. I don’t want to do royal duties so take away the rewards.” I’m guessing never.


----------



## papertiger

Laila619 said:


> He is way, way more damaged than probably anyone knows.



But he has been allowed to become fixated on it. Healing doesn't begin wildly gesticulating and screaming blame at everyone and everything else around you. In the end, one has to admit one's broken, that the past can't be changed, and to start mending oneself regardless of events. Life is not perfect, bad things happen, we can only protect ourselves by self-governance and creating tools for resilience.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Bashir behaved like a sh*t but Diana wanted that interview.  They used each other IMO.  If it hadn’t been him it would’ve been some other reporter.  Diana was a lot more savvy than Harry is.

Harry sounds delusional quite frankly.  I’m not sure how this will end for him and I don’t want to watch.  We’re seeing someone of limited self awareness and intelligence being dreadfully manipulated by guileful people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> Was it more uplifting or depressing?



It’s both. OW has always been a good about mixing the sad with happy.  When the non-famous people speak about they have mostly overcome their illness, you just want to cheer for them and for their accomplishments. Hazzie has not said anything yet about overcoming his difficulties.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I see Meghan is embellishing her time with the RF (4 tough years  ) the same way she exaggerated her 6 weeks internship with the Argentine embassy Always keeping an eye on her next move, Meg.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> It's headlined by H & OW, right? But if he has already used up his pity-me quota on Ep 1, does he still appear in Ep2?
> Victim in Part 1 and Guru in Part 2?


Force ghost in episode three

Or maybe unexpected death fake out leading to triumphal return at final battle in episode 6.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> It's headlined by H & OW, right? But if he has already used up his pity-me quota on Ep 1, does he still appear in Ep2?
> Victim in Part 1 and Guru in Part 2?



He’s guru in both episodes, so far.  It’s ‘poor me me me’, then ‘this is what you’ve got to do‘ in his lecture mode.  Maybe it’s cultural, maybe it’s his inability to be open, maybe because he has been singing the same song for the last year that to me it sounds tired and worn out.  Idk when did a parent’s death become a mental health issue like ocd? Zach Williams spoke openly about his alcoholism, bipolar, etc. Harry not at all, at least not yet.   All my opinion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> But he has been allowed to become fixated on it. Healing doesn't begin wildly gesticulating and screaming blame at everyone and everything else around you. In the end, one has to admit one's broken, that the past can't be changed, and to start mending oneself regardless of events. Life is not perfect, bad things happen, we can only protect ourselves by self-governance and creating tools for resilience.


These people are exploiting him.  I don’t think he’s got anyone around him with his best interests at heart.  In fact he’s been persuaded to alienate and attack those that might.  It’s very sad.


----------



## papertiger

It's interesting to me that the Diana/Bashir interview blows-up now to. Yes, for publicity for H's new show, but also for me, the parallels are really there. 

1. H blames the media for Diana's death and all possible/predicted future deaths, so he copies her MO and does a tell-all disguised as a 'in the interest of the public' broadcast.
2. More longterm, Diana used the media for her own ends almost daily and wrote a tell-all book, H is doing the same. It never stops.
3. Diana was paranoid (something that contributed to her death). H is also showing severe signs of paranoia, even creating/going along with fictional memories (evidence has shown otherwise such as going for bike rides when he was little etc).
4. Like Diana, he'd rather believe what supports his psychosis than have good judgement. There is no forward thinking just blind panic. 
5. Like Diana, he is upset by past/present drama, but deals with it by creating melodrama.
6. Like Diana, he is burning bridges, sometimes even before he gets to them as an escape route. He has about as much good judgement as someone who gets into a car with an intoxicated driver and doesn't wear a seatbelt. 
7. Like Diana, who reportedly saw al sorts of councillors, life-coaches and astrologers, Harry seeks help through people that are obviously not helping only enflaming bad choices. 
8. Like Diana, Harry is creating trauma that will be inherited by his children and thus continuing the cycle. With M as, by her own admission, suicidal mother and H as a manically, mentally-ill father I am worried for the welfare of their children. 
9. Like Diana, H will not shut-up/calm down for 5 sec to catch his breath.  
10. This Apple series seems every bit as self-obsessed and damaging to all concerned than the Diana interview that H now knows to have been built around a pack of lies. That was the interview that broke the camels back. That interview was the point of no return. He is a fool to think he can ever come back.


----------



## lalame

All I gotta say is I hope someone exploits me real quick if I can make $$$$$ by just talking about my own life over and over.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> If you have insomnia have you tried Magnesium Glycinate? It really helps if I take Magnesium Citrate I get wild dreams. Last night Paul McCartney was in my dreams lol and I don’t ever think of him.



I was going to recommend a couple of drops of lavender essential oil under the pillow, but your way sounds far more interesting


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> It's interesting to me that the Diana/Bashir interview blows-up now to. Yes, for publicity for H's new show, but also for me, the parallels are really there.
> 
> 1. H blames the media for Diana's death and all possible/predicted future deaths, so he copies her MO and does a tell-all disguised as a 'in the interest of the public' broadcast.
> 2. More longterm, Diana used the media for her own ends almost daily and wrote a tell-all book, H is doing the same. It never stops.
> 3. Diana was paranoid (something that contributed to her death). H is also showing severe signs of paranoia, even creating/going along with fictional memories (evidence has shown otherwise such as going for bike rides when he was little etc).
> 4. Like Diana, he'd rather believe what supports his psychosis than have good judgement. There is no forward thinking just blind panic.
> 5. Like Diana, he is upset by past/present drama, but deals with it by creating melodrama.
> 6. Like Diana, he is burning bridges, sometimes even before he gets to them as an escape route. He has about as much good judgement as someone who gets into a car with an intoxicated driver and doesn't wear a seatbelt.
> 7. Like Diana, who reportedly saw al sorts of councillors, life-coaches and astrologers, Harry seeks help through people that are obviously not helping only enflaming bad choices.
> 8. Like Diana, Harry is creating trauma that will be inherited by his children and thus continuing the cycle. With M as, by her own admission, suicidal mother and H as a manically, mentally-ill father I am worried for the welfare of their children.
> 9. Like Diana, H will not shut-up/calm down for 5 sec to catch his breath.
> 10. This Apple series seems every bit as self-obsessed and damaging to all concerned than the Diana interview that H now knows to have been built around a pack of lies. That was the interview that broke the camels back. That interview was the point of no return. He is a fool to think he can ever come back.



Well said, @papertiger
Thank you.

When OW is telling her story, she genuinely tears up — she has experienced really sad stuff.  Camera cuts to H. He stiffly nods and with a blank face says ‘uh huh‘.  More than once, I‘ve wondered is he high?  Wonder how many takes they had to do, how many cameras they had on him.

Knowing all the resources he has had at his disposal, it is nearly impossible for me to feel much sympathy for him.  The other people, so far, have experienced much more than death of a parent. Off to epi 3


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> I was going to recommend a couple of drops of lavender essential oil under the pillow, but your way sounds far more interesting


Oh I love Magnesium Glycinate. It's so good for you overall. But Magnesium Citrate is a whole other story . . . prepare for the wildest dreams of your life. Vivid, interesting and actually quite lovely lol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> *Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*



OMG, someone call CPS! A middle aged couple was neglected by the BRF!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.



Just you wait and the idiots will tell on themselves. If I needed any proof that indeed Princess Pinocchio was not suicidal but playing one of her usual games, there it is.

The one thing I have not decided yet is if not so bright Harry was once again duped or if he's in on the game because he thinks it will gather a lot of sympathies.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> I see Meghan is embellishing her time with the RF (4 tough years  ) the same way she exaggerated her 6 weeks internship with the Argentine embassy Always keeping an eye on her next move, Meg.


All while mysteriously getting about four years younger than she would have been at summer camp, say what you like,  she has excellent time management  



Lodpah said:


> Lol yes. I’m showing my age. It’s those motels along the roads. Cheap and very        Not nice. You put a quarter in and it rocks for 20 minutes. It mimicked the car ride. Doubt they have those beds anymore lol.


I knew about these from the Simpsons! I was kind of disappointed when I first stayed in the US and the hotels didn’t have them


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for Pete's sake.  He's now claiming she was hounded and chased because she was dating an Egyptian?  God Harry, STFU.  Not everything is about race.  Not everything is about you.


Yeah I find it distasteful for him to speculate on that.

the whole ‘they want to get rid of her because of her colour’ thing doesn’t match what happened historically and doesn’t make sense.
there have been plenty of cases globally where a family have found out their child is dating someone whose race, religion or gender is distasteful to their prejudiced minds. They tend to try and force a split or disown the child or there are even evil crimes like honour killings.

What the don’t _tend_ to do is throw an enormous televised public wedding and kit the new in-law out in a designer gown and fine jewellery before sending them out on missions as a representative of the family name. 



Chanbal said:


> He accuses the media for everything, why doesn't he stop giving interviews and paying for PR? Why doesn't he live a private life?  This is sick!
> 
> _PRINCE Harry accuses his family of showing "total neglect" for his mental health woes and claims dad Charles made him "suffer" in a bombshell documentary set to leave the Palace reeling.
> 
> Prince Harry speaks about:_
> 
> _How he's convinced the media 'will not stop' until wife Meghan Markle 'dies'_
> _How Meghan resisted suicidal thoughts because she knew it would be 'unfair' for Harry to lose another woman in his life _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry says Royals showed 'total neglect' & Charles made him 'suffer' in doc
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry accuses his family of showing “total neglect” for his mental health woes and claims dad Charles made him “suffer” in a bombshell documentary set to leave the Pa…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


I don’t know about you but I’m so glad that sensitive, vulnerable woman is now safely leading a private life free from press intrusion 

On a darker note, I believe the old ‘you need to do x and stop y or I’ll kill myself’ is page of ‘how to manipulate your way to the top in relationships’.

I had a friend who got back with her ex five times after he told her he’d hang himself if she left. Needless to say he’s alive and well and he left her for another woman.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> "I got a photo of her in his nursery, and it was one of the first words that he said — apart from 'mama,' 'papa,' it was then 'grandma'. Grandma Diana," he shared. "It's the sweetest thing, but at the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here."



Hu? Where's crocodile?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The way he is using his mother's memory is tasteless to say the least.
> 
> "_History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn't white and now look what's happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself? They're not gonna stop until she dies. It's incredibly triggering to potentially lose another woman in my life._"



This isn't even entertaining anymore. 

Also, if he really thinks that, why doesn't he get a divorce and leaves her be. We all know he loves to sacrifice himself for her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Where's crocodile?


Crocodile must be his name for his grandad 
 How could  an infant comprehend the existence of a long deceased person? Surely the grandma is obviously Doria? 
kind of insulting to Doria actually.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry sounds delusional quite frankly.  I’m not sure how this will end for him and I don’t want to watch.  We’re seeing someone of limited self awareness and intelligence being dreadfully manipulated by guileful people.



I agree.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> These people are exploiting him.  I don’t think he’s got anyone around him with his best interests at heart.  In fact he’s been persuaded to alienate and attack those that might.  It’s very sad.



This!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> the whole ‘they want to get rid of her because of her colour’ thing doesn’t match what happened historically and doesn’t make sense.
> there have been plenty of cases globally where a family have found out their child is dating someone whose race, religion or gender is distasteful to their prejudiced minds. They tend to try and force a split or disown the child or there are even evil crimes like honour killings.
> 
> What the don’t _tend_ to do is throw an enormous televised public wedding and kit the new in-law out in a designer gown and fine jewellery before sending them out on missions as a representative of the family name.



Stop making so much sense!


----------



## Sharont2305

A tale of two statements 
William - personal, confident, statesman like. 
Harry - Word salad, written by M.


----------



## justwatchin

Straight-Laced said:


> smh... wondering if recollections vary ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*
> *Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has accused the Royal family of "total neglect" and of "bullying him into silence" as he said the Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too.
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, underwent a highly personal therapy session on camera for his new Apple TV documentary series, discussing traumatic memories from his childhood.
> 
> He spoke extensively about his struggles with mental health and his disconnect with his family’s attitudes to the subject.
> 
> The Duke said that he and the Duchess of Sussex were subjected to such a level of harassment on social media that he felt “completely helpless” and assumed that his family would help.
> 
> “Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect,” he said.
> 
> “We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”
> 
> The Duke described over the first three episodes of the series, The Me You Can’t See, released on Friday, how he had come to realise that he needed to address the trauma he experienced following the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> He told co-presenter Oprah Winfrey that his family had not spoken about her death and just expected him to deal with the paparazzi and press intrusion.
> 
> “My father used to say to me when I was younger, he used to say to both William and I, ‘Well it was like that for me so it’s going to be like that for you,’” he said.
> 
> “That doesn’t make sense. Just because you suffered doesn’t mean that your kids have to suffer, in fact quite the opposite - if you suffered, do everything you can to make sure that whatever negative experiences you had, that you can make it right for your kids.”
> 
> The Duke revealed that he was told to “play the game” and his life would be easier.
> 
> But he added: “I‘ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”
> 
> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.
> 
> He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.
> 
> “That was one of the biggest reasons to leave, feeling trapped and feeling controlled through fear, both by the media and by the system itself which never encouraged the talking about this kind of trauma,” he said.
> 
> “Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”


So the prime time Oprah interview was just the beginning of more of this? At this point, he appears to be enjoying the attention and spotlight on himself. This is more gossip than trying to pitch it as being related to mental health. And he couldn’t stand his role in his family but it’s the only reason Oprah is interviewing him!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> A tale of two statements
> William - personal, confident, statesman like.
> Harry - Word salad, written by M.


William must feel like he’s lost his brother to a cult


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO Episode 3 is the best so far.  H doesn’t say much in this episode, other than the stuff about Charles saying he suffered, so they must. The big one is when he says the media won‘t be happy until “she is dead” - he is referring to MM and that is his version of history repeating itself.  We do see him go through an EMDR session - eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing.

Hussain Manawer is outstanding, inspirational and so authentic.  If you don‘t know his work, have a look:
https://www.campaignlive.com/article/me-hussain-manawer-poetry-mental-health-using-voices/1694506

The Syrian migrant children in Greece - heartbreaking yet hopeful
The parents who have lost children - heartbreaking yet hopeful
All of the stories are worth seeing. OW and her team have put together an excellent show that, I’m guessing, will help some people talk about their issues. Too bad they have advertised this as a Harry-tell-all because he is just a minor part.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lalame said:


> I have never heard this take either.  Was this actually something people discussed when it happened? What did his race have to do with anything??? She would've been hounded and chased no matter who she dated. Wow. I've never in my life used the term "the race card" but he's really pulling the race card out of his a$$ at this point.
> 
> ETA: This actually really rubs me the wrong way as a POC. It feels like he's appropriating real racial issues for personal sympathy and financial gain.



Mohamed Al Fayed believed there was a conspiracy against the couple because his son was Muslim but I don’t think he had many supporters 






						BBC NEWS | UK | Fayed conspiracy claim collapses
					






					news.bbc.co.uk


----------



## DeMonica

Straight-Laced said:


> smh... wondering if recollections vary ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*
> *Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has accused the Royal family of "total neglect" and of "bullying him into silence" as he said the Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too.
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, underwent a highly personal therapy session on camera for his new Apple TV documentary series, discussing traumatic memories from his childhood.
> 
> He spoke extensively about his struggles with mental health and his disconnect with his family’s attitudes to the subject.
> 
> The Duke said that he and the Duchess of Sussex were subjected to such a level of harassment on social media that he felt “completely helpless” and assumed that his family would help.
> 
> “Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect,” he said.
> 
> “*We spent four years trying to make it work.* We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”
> 
> The Duke described over the first three episodes of the series, The Me You Can’t See, released on Friday, how he had come to realise that he needed to address the trauma he experienced following the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> He told co-presenter Oprah Winfrey that his family had not spoken about her death and just expected him to deal with the paparazzi and press intrusion.
> 
> “My father used to say to me when I was younger, he used to say to both William and I, *‘Well it was like that for me so it’s going to be like that for you,’” he said.*
> 
> “That doesn’t make sense. Just because you suffered doesn’t mean that your kids have to suffer, in fact quite the opposite - if you suffered, do everything you can to make sure that whatever negative experiences you had, that you can make it right for your kids.”
> 
> The Duke revealed that he was told to “play the game” and his life would be easier.
> 
> *But he added: “I‘ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”*
> 
> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.
> 
> He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.
> 
> “That was one of the biggest reasons to leave, feeling trapped and feeling controlled through fear, both by the media and by the system itself which never encouraged the talking about this kind of trauma,” he said.
> 
> “Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”


1. It doesn't add up somehow. They had met in July 2016, then they were already in talks with companies about their private ventures before the left for Canada in October 2019. Maybe my math is wrong but from the time they allegedly got serious (two months after the first date) to leaving is just 3 years.
2. It'a a fact that even the rich and wealthy have to go through human dramas and inevitable suffering (See Steve Jobs' passing from cancer or Bill Gates' divorce) which plays out in front of the watchful eye of the unsympathetic, sometimes even cruel media. I think their family tried to provide them with a relatively normal childhood, apart form the unavoidable and surely very unpleasant divorce, and Diana's death. They were not shipped off to Gordonstoun, but kept close to home, there are pictures to prove that they spent a lot of time with Charles who together with the BRF made a pact with the media to respect the privacy of the children. Even according to Charles Spencer, Charles was a good father. Of course, as a child of someone, I feel, too, that my parents could have done more to help me growing up happy, but as a grown up I can see that most things they did and I have problem with now, were not done to intentionally hurt me, but that was the best they could have come up with then. It's possibly true in about Prince Charles, too. I think, though, that objective reflection on the past events is beyond him.
3. It's certainly true that she has a lot of Diana in him but it's not necessarily the good part of her in him. He's inconsiderate and hot headed like her, but he's unable to capture the heart of people as his mother could. In just two short years he managed to evaporate the significant public support he had had despite of his antics. How much HE will be sorry for his tirades which already damaged - IMO irreparably - his relationship to ones he used to be the closest to him in the first 30+ years in his life, only the future can tell, but I think it will be a rude awakening.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Episode 3 is the best so far.  H doesn’t say much in this episode, other than the stuff about Charles saying he suffered, so they must. The big one is when he says the media won‘t be happy until “she is dead” - he is referring to MM and that is his version of history repeating itself.  We do see him go through an EMDR session - eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing.
> 
> Hussain Manawer is outstanding, inspirational and so authentic.  If you don‘t know his work, have a look:
> https://www.campaignlive.com/article/me-hussain-manawer-poetry-mental-health-using-voices/1694506
> 
> The Syrian migrant children in Greece - heartbreaking yet hopeful
> The parents who have lost children - heartbreaking yet hopeful
> All of the stories are worth seeing. OW and her team have put together an excellent show that, I’m guessing, will help some people talk about their issues. Too bad they have advertised this as a Harry-tell-all because he is just a minor part.


Does the juxtaposition with people who genuinely suffered make him look whiney or he can still get away with the Self Portrait of a Victim?


----------



## Clearblueskies

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Mohamed Al Fayed believed there was a conspiracy against the couple because his son was Muslim but I don’t think he had many supporters
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC NEWS | UK | Fayed conspiracy claim collapses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.bbc.co.uk


Or evidence.  He never got over the death of his son, poor man.  And Diana was using Dodi to make Hasnat Khan jealous.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Mohamed Al Fayed believed there was a conspiracy against the couple because his son was Muslim but I don’t think he had many supporters
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC NEWS | UK | Fayed conspiracy claim collapses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.bbc.co.uk



Al Fayed was PO because the 'we' wouldn't give him British citizenship and he got a little confused between the BRF (who thought they could influence) and British UK Visas and Immigration (or whatever it was called then). He blamed the BRF for arranging their deaths - as a direct hit. 

Diana went out with quietly with posh British, Pakistani and Indian men before Dodi. There was never a word, who cares?. All her boyfriends were rich and well-connected. I don't remember her with a Black British plumber or waiter though  

Harry's 'they won't be happy till she (M) is dead' is _really_ worrying. This is a kind of 'cult think' and deeply embedded paranoia. Not only does he think it, he doesn't seem to worry if his thoughts appear way-out, but says it openly assuming we'll agree. 

It wasn't true of Diana and it's not true of M. No one wants anyone dead. In fact I wish they'd go away and be wonderfully healthy and happy. Presumably, H thinks his mother was murdered by his family(?) as Al Fayed did, perhaps he thinks they're plotting an accident for M? I seriously think this guy has GONE


----------



## DeMonica

needlv said:


> So many stories today... Archies multiple different “first words” and H alleging they did everything to make it work... huh...
> 
> oh and Charles thrown under the bus again.  I guess H is still pissed off the bank of Dad closed...
> 
> well, the best response to these new allegations is...
> 
> ”Recollections may vary”


Recollections may vary is the nicest way to put IMO. Kudos to the BRF that they can still keep their calm when these allegations thrown at them on daily basis.
On Archie's first words: My mother was born during WWII when he's father was away fighting. She met her father when she was almost two. In his absence, when they got a postcard from my grandpa, my grandma showed it to my baby mother and told that it was from daddy. My mother had thought that daddy meant a post card until she met her father but even then she had a problem to make a connection between the real man and the postcard. I don't think that Archie can really feel anything towards the pretty picture or can make a real mental connection. It's just to gain sympathy again.


----------



## mia55

It seems like M is planning a very public mental breakdown for Harry so either she controls all the assets deeming H unfit or force the family to take them back. Whichever road is taken, it’s dark for Harry.


----------



## xincinsin

DeMonica said:


> Recollections may vary is the nicest way to put IMO. Kudos to the BRF that they can still keep their calm when these allegations thrown at them on daily basis.
> On Archie's first words: My mother was born during WWII when he's father was away fighting. She met her father when she was almost two. In his absence, when they got a postcard from my grandpa, my grandma showed it to my baby mother and told that it was from daddy. My mother had thought that daddy meant a post card until she met her father but even then she had a problem to make a connection between the real man and the postcard. I don't think that Archie can really feel anything towards the pretty picture or can make a real mental connection. It's just to gain sympathy again.


I'm amusing myself with the thought of Archie's first drawing: Diana drawn as a crocodile (sitting on a bench with a waffle).


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> ETA: This actually really rubs me the wrong way as a POC. It feels like he's appropriating real racial issues for personal sympathy and financial gain.



I feel Meghan did the same thing. Although she may be bi-racial and when she was younger I could see her being picked on or being racially targeted but as a an adult and in the royal family she did not complain or show any signs of this happening. I think with children they are easier to target because they won't necessarily see or know how to react to racist (especially microagressions).


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


>



Combine it with vitamin B6 - even better. It helps with muscle cramps, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Just when you think it couldn't get any more sordid, it does. I'm secondhand nauseous for Harry. I think we all passed secondhand embarrassment many pages ago.

If Harry is doing this willingly and knowingly, the BRF needs to let the hounds of MI5 loose on H&M, via "other" sources. I don't believe for a minute that they haven't got the goods on her. But as always the BRF are showing restraint. Maybe H&M have got some goods on the BRF, but I think the BRF is probably dumbfounded and humiliated that one of their own could be so treacherous and not close ranks. Which is why it's so hard for them to discard Harry in the same way he's sacrificing them. It's just not done.

If Harry is, as many are suggesting, not of sound mind, and being manipulated while in this condition, he needs to be committed. This is going to end very badly for him, and the Heavily Pregnant One will just scrape him off of her over sized stilettos, and walk off in to the H-wood sunset, with everything, including kids when that happens. Does anyone believe she hasn't already made up her grand exit stories, covering every possible outcome?

As to Oprah, I have nothing good to say. She sold her soul a long time ago. She's not doing this series out of the goodness of her heart. She must be sharp enough to notice that something is off with Harry (and Meghan) but she still uses them for her own purposes to increase interest for a project that'd be fringe interesting at best if not for incorporating all of this salacious Royal dysfunction.

Others have said it before, and I agree, unless Harry has been the victim of serious abuse, i e physical violence, sexual abuse, psychological abuse like being locked up in the Tower and similar- just shut up and p***s o***f. There are real abuses and world problems going on out there.


----------



## gerryt

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Mohamed Al Fayed believed there was a conspiracy against the couple because his son was Muslim but I don’t think he had many supporters
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC NEWS | UK | Fayed conspiracy claim collapses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.bbc.co.uk


Years later, I remember watching W snd Ks wedding coverage and seeing a smiling Mr Al Fayed being escorted to a seat in the Abbey.  Its good to know that he came through that dreadful period and clearly no longer held the RF responsible.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Typical BBC, following a short reports of its own wrong doings and cover-ups with Harry's "documentary" criticising BRF for 3 times of the airtime in today's lunch time news. Distracting from the real issue of their despicable practices!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Harry's 'they won't be happy till she (M) is dead' is _really_ worrying. This is a kind of 'cult think' and deeply embedded paranoia. Not only does he think it, he doesn't seem to worry if his thoughts appear way-out, but says it openly assuming we'll agree.



So this guy has extensive therapy. None of his therapists have maybe tried to mention he is completely delusional? I have never had therapy, so maybe they don't do that, but I'd think part of their job would be to, uh, anchor their client a bit more in reality.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Even though I would like to see the Lady Gaga part, I refuse to give them one more view. I am thankful I can get the majority of the content from this thread.

He really disgusts me at this point. The British stiff upper lip is gone for sure. 

Also, four years my a$$


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If Harry is, as many are suggesting, not of sound mind, and being manipulated while in this condition, he needs to be committed. This is going to end very badly for him, and the Heavily Pregnant One will just scrape him off of her over sized stilettos, and walk off in to the H-wood sunset, with everything, including kids when that happens. Does anyone believe she hasn't already made up her grand exit stories, covering every possible outcome?



I honestly think you're 100 % spot on.

This woman not only does not love him like she claims, she doesn't even care for him on a basic level any decent person would care for another human being, or else he would not be out there falling into pieces like this.


----------



## gerryt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly think you're 100 % spot on.
> 
> This woman not only does not love him like she claims, she doesn't even care for him on a basic level any decent person would care for another human being, or else he would not be out there falling into pieces like this.


More and more I think he‘s heading for a breakdown.  If she loved him she’d have him wrapped up safe at home, putting everything into helping him get past this, not hawking him out for the world to see.


----------



## lazeny

I was too young during Diana's heyday post-divorce. But it seems there are similarities between Harry and Diana? The way they're so public with airing grievances with the BRF, the conflicting relationship with the press, the drama and self-importance. Except Diana is actually charming and charismatic while Harry is meh.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Harry said, in referring to MM, "they are not going to stop until she's dead". This is just disgusting lie! MM was never even close to as popular as Diana. Before Megxit, many people didn't care enough at all about the pair! He really is mentally unstable and needs some serious therapy! 

Publicity shy privacy seeking ex-royal now Netflix/Spotify/Apple employee launch tell-all documentary show on his life that the public haven't seen! You really couldn't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


----------



## Aimee3

Did Harry say he’s been in therapy these *past* 4 years?  If so, why couldn’t the therapists he was allegedly seeing give him a referral to a therapist for his wife when they claim no one would help her? 
I don’t think therapy has helped him much if we look at him now.  He has so much hate and is lashing out at the BRF.  At some point someone needs to ask him is this the way you want to live the rest of your life blaming them or do you want to get on with your life and move on.  You can’t change the past.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I would HOPE he was vaccinated already before doing all those appearances. I think people with 24/7 PA's like celebrities (and presumably H/M) probably had a good chance of finding flash opportunities to get vaxxed ahead of schedule... I've seen a few opportunities like that, like excess vaccines that would spoil, etc.
> ...
> let's face it; wealthy people have access to most things that they want.  I've seen stories of people getting leftover vaccines at the end of the day but I doubt Harry stood in line and waited


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Harry said, in referring to MM, "they are not going to stop until she's dead". This is just disgusting lie! MM was never even close to as popular as Diana. Before Megxit, many people didn't care enough at all about the pair! He really is mentally unstable and needs some serious therapy!
> 
> Publicity shy privacy seeking ex-royal now Netflix/Spotify/Apple employee launch tell-all documentary show on his life that the public haven't seen! You really couldn't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


Meghan wasn't stalked by the paps, was she?  I think her problem was racist remarks.  not sure how that equals her dying as Diana did. The only way I could see this if if you believe the racist remarks by the tabloids stirred up hatred and some crazy racist killed Meghan but I think that's a stretch.
 Ever since the marriage H reminds me of a teenage boy with a WIFE.  Has to protect his family.  shouting it from the rooftops.  I just don't see that M was in danger.  but obviously I see it differently than H.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I have zero doubt that she fed him the “they won’t stop until I’m dead” idea.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Moving with cats can be tricky. They are very attached to place, if I'm not mistaken. Good luck with your move, too!
> I'm planning to have pets after the move and finally having a normal garden. I'm a well-practised nomad. My parents had moved around a lot, then I went on doing it, just 11 times in the last 20 years. Hopefully, my next home will be for long term, if not forever. I've learnt how to reduce my stuff to move, but this time it involves my mother's household, too, and that's the tricky part of my move. I think I'll drink a bottle or two of a nice bubbly while I figure it out how I'm going to do that. Also, when I moved lasGt time I donated tons but this time there are a few pieces I don't want to take to the new place, but I'd rather sell than donate.


yes, cats like to stay home, not go everywhere with their people like dogs.  when we first got them they needed to go to the vet to get booster vaccinations.  getting them into the carrier was like a rodeo.  we actually had to go buy bigger top loading carriers because the ones we had used for all our other cats (front loading) didn't work for them.
GL with your move.  I did sell several larger furniture items on Offerup.  We still have lots of small items - antique/collectible we need to sell or donate.  our realtor friend has a friend who sells this type of stuff and could just take the whole lot and sell for us.  not sure what percentage we'd get out of it.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Prince Harry Says One of Son Archie's First Words Was 'Grandma': 'My Mom Would Be Incredibly Proud of Me'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry reveals that a picture of Princess Diana is hanging in son Archie's nursery and that one of the child's first words was 'grandma'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archie's first words were very sentimental for Prince Harry.
> In his new AppleTV+ docuseries _The Me You Can't See_, which he co-created with Oprah Winfrey, the Duke of Sussex, 36, revealed that one of his 2-year-old son's first words was "grandma" as a sweet nod to Princess Diana.
> According to Harry, a photo of his late mother, who tragically died at age 36 following a car crash in Paris in 1997, is currently hanging in Archie's nursery at the home he shares with wife Meghan Markle.
> "I got a photo of her in his nursery, and it was one of the first words that he said — apart from 'mama,' 'papa,' it was then 'grandma'. Grandma Diana," he shared. "It's the sweetest thing, but at the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here."
> 
> RELATED: Prince Harry on Panic Attacks, Therapy and His Mom's Death: I Needed to 'Heal Myself from the Past'
> As for Archie's very first word, Harry previously revealed that it was "crocodile."
> "He's got the most amazing personality. He's already putting three or four words together, he's already singing songs," he told James Corden during an appearance on _The Late Late Show _earlier this year.
> "Three syllables," the proud dad remarked of Archie's first word at the time.
> On the fifth episode of _The Me You Can't See_, which featured never-before-seen footage of Archie swinging on a hanging bench alongside his father, Harry also reflected on the loss of Diana.
> 
> "I wish she could've met Meghan," he said. "I wish she was around for Archie."
> 
> Still, the father of one — who is expecting a baby girl with Markle, 39, later this summer — believes his mother would have been proud of the man he is today and the life that he's created for his family.
> "Yeah, I have no doubt that my mom would be incredibly proud of me. I'm living the life that she wanted to live for herself, living the life that she wanted us to be able to live," he said.
> "So not only do I know that she's incredibly proud of me, but that she's helped me get here. And I've never felt her presence more as I have done over the last year."
> 
> 
> *NOW the first word was grandma?  Wasn't it "waffle maker" or "crocodile" just a couple months ago?  Do these people have short term memory loss?  Their stories change daily!*


oh gawd...the ego....she would be "incredibly" proud...I think she would be incredibly proud of William but we'll never know.
I saw a promo yesterday on ABC.  Harry and Oprah appearing on Good Morning America today - guess they're promoting their show.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> *Meghan wasn't stalked by the paps, was she?*  I think her problem was racist remarks.  not sure how that equals her dying as Diana did. The only way I could see this if if you believe the racist remarks by the tabloids stirred up hatred and some crazy racist killed Meghan but I think that's a stretch.
> Ever since the marriage H reminds me of a teenage boy with a WIFE.  Has to protect his family.  shouting it from the rooftops.  I just don't see that M was in danger.  but obviously I see it differently than H.


Not that I recall but to be honest, I didn't pay any attention back then. I think there were tabloids articles about them/her but nothing like how Diana was hounded by the paps.


----------



## Missydora

I think they should really ask themselves if the therapy they are having is working.  Because they seem awfully bitter and resentful . And there seems to be some need for revenge for them to feel better.  It don't seem to me like they are better,  positive people.  But more making themselves vindictive.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> If you have insomnia have you tried Magnesium Glycinate? It really helps if I take Magnesium Citrate I get wild dreams. Last night Paul McCartney was in my dreams lol and I don’t ever think of him.


I sometimes take over the counter sleeping pills when travelling.  Last time I had wild dreams - in color.


----------



## xincinsin

chicinthecity777 said:


> Harry said, in referring to MM, "they are not going to stop until she's dead". This is just disgusting lie! MM was never even close to as popular as Diana. Before Megxit, many people didn't care enough at all about the pair! He really is mentally unstable and needs some serious therapy!
> 
> Publicity shy privacy seeking ex-royal now Netflix/Spotify/Apple employee launch tell-all documentary show on his life that the public haven't seen! You really couldn't make this sh1t up even if you tried!


I find the choice of words interesting. "until *she's* dead" So the threat isn't to him or to his family. If it was based on racism, the threat would include Archie. If it was because of his choice of a non-white wife, the threat would include himself. So whom do we know who has been brainwashing him with the siren song of victimhood from the start? Who has been cosplaying Diana till he thinks the two women are interchangeable?

Someone ought to ask him WHY these mysterious "they" want her dead, and then watch him launch into conspiracy-speak. If anyone wants to push him over the edge, just hire some grey-clad actors to hang around Montecito and the heavily pregnant one will start blubbering about how she was followed home by the men in grey.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: episode 1 - OW, Lady Gaga and the others told their stories [painful to hear], spoke openly about their abuse and how they want to help others. H spoke about his trauma [his mother’s death], same stuff he has been talking about for the last year or so. He said when she was “driving the boys to and from school, she was always crying because she did not have security and paps swarmed her car.“ ??? No security? At that time she was a royal wife. Odd. Idk, IMO he seems like he is repeating quotes from a self-help book. Claimed he has been in ‘therapy‘ has been the last 4 years. Hmm.
> 
> Once his part was over, this reminded me of why the OW show was so good to watch. She gives lots of insight into the healing process and lots of helpful advice on the how’s of healing. So far, she is the reason to watch, not him. I give it a solid A.
> 
> Full disclosure: when Lady Gaga cried, I teared up.  She was speaking from her heart.  It’s so sad.
> 
> OW wears this sweater with a white shirt and, of course, looks beautiful:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim
> 
> 
> Get free shipping on Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.neimanmarcus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In episode 2, she interviews Robin Williams’s son
> Hazzie continues his story about meeting MM, they got in a fight which triggered his 12 year old self. Same old story. Same story when they went to Royal Albert Hall, on and on. He definitley needs to deal with his stuff. He just is not interesting to watch. Lots of hand-gesturing, chopping the air, etc.
> 
> ETA2:  He is listed as one of executive producers -
> Executive Producer
> Prince Harry
> Duke of Sussex


thanks for the report....I didn't see this show but agree, he's not interesting to watch - to listen to.  Arrogant and pouty.  Been there, done that.  don't need to see it again.


----------



## chicinthecity777

xincinsin said:


> I find the choice of words interesting. "until *she's* dead" So the threat isn't to him or to his family. If it was based on racism, the threat would include Archie. If it was because of his choice of a non-white wife, the threat would include himself. So whom do we know who has been brainwashing him with the siren song of victimhood from the start? Who has been cosplaying Diana till he thinks the two women are interchangeable?
> 
> Someone ought to ask him WHY these mysterious "they" want her dead, and then watch him launch into conspiracy-speak. If anyone wants to push him over the edge, just hire some grey-clad actors to hang around Montecito and the heavily pregnant one will start blubbering about how she was followed home by the men in grey.


Yep, all their accusations were directed at "they, them". Everything has been kept deliberately vague so nobody can come out and say "no i didn't say/do that". It's typical deceptive tactics!


----------



## csshopper

Archie will be in therapy knowing his mother considered suicide while pregnant with him. 

Shared by his father with an international audience.

At a loss for words.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> He accuses the media for everything, why doesn't he stop giving interviews and paying for PR? Why doesn't he live a private life?  This is sick!
> 
> _*PRINCE Harry accuses his family of showing "total neglect" for his mental health woes and claims dad Charles made him "suffer" in a bombshell documentary set to leave the Palace reeling.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry says Royals showed 'total neglect' & Charles made him 'suffer' in doc
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry accuses his family of showing “total neglect” for his mental health woes and claims dad Charles made him “suffer” in a bombshell documentary set to leave the Pa…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



I think Harry has jumped the shark.  
Every statement from him is more and more extreme and less and less believable.  He needs serious mental help.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG, someone call CPS! A middle aged couple was neglected by the BRF!


and HR wouldn't help her!


----------



## gerryt

youngster said:


> I think Harry has jumped the shark.
> Every statement from him is more and more extreme and less and less believable.  He needs serious mental help.


Depnding who he was speaking to and when, he seems to have already been in therapy for at least six  years. I dont know that much about poor mental health - whats the next step if therapy isn't working?  (Which it clearly isn’t).  Left to his own devices hes just going downhill...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: episode 1 - OW, Lady Gaga and the others told their stories [painful to hear], spoke openly about their abuse and how they want to help others. H spoke about his trauma [his mother’s death], same stuff he has been talking about for the last year or so. He said when she was “driving the boys to and from school, she was always crying because she did not have security and paps swarmed her car.“ ??? No security? At that time she was a royal wife. Odd. Idk, IMO he seems like he is repeating quotes from a self-help book. Claimed he has been in ‘therapy‘ has been the last 4 years. Hmm.
> 
> Once his part was over, this reminded me of why the OW show was so good to watch. She gives lots of insight into the healing process and lots of helpful advice on the how’s of healing. So far, she is the reason to watch, not him. I give it a solid A.
> 
> Full disclosure: when Lady Gaga cried, I teared up.  She was speaking from her heart.  It’s so sad.
> 
> OW wears this sweater with a white shirt and, of course, looks beautiful:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim
> 
> 
> Get free shipping on Brunello Cucinelli V-Neck Long-Sleeve Rib Cotton Top w/ Monili Trim at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.neimanmarcus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In episode 2, she interviews Robin Williams’s son
> Hazzie continues his story about meeting MM, they got in a fight which triggered his 12 year old self. Same old story. Same story when they went to Royal Albert Hall, on and on. He definitley needs to deal with his stuff. He just is not interesting to watch. Lots of hand-gesturing, chopping the air, etc.
> 
> ETA2:  He is listed as one of executive producers -
> Executive Producer
> Prince Harry
> Duke of Sussex


Thanks for the report. Rob Williams was a wonderful person and I can see the interview with his son a very emotional one. I'm not familiar with Lady Gaga's problems, but I feel sorry for all of them including H. However, it looks like H is using all the possible excuses (and potential falsehoods) to get paid security and other perks from the BRF. Why doesn't he give up his titles from an institution he seems to despise so much and live a private life?


----------



## marietouchet

May have already been noted ... difference between W & H responses to the outcome of the BBC enquiry

W was shattered and said the interview contributed to parents divorce - AGREE WHOLLY
H said (something along the lines of) the dastardly nasty press of the world contributed to death of mother - his truth, but a stretch ??

It should be noted that the BBC is the government sponsored channel - it would be diff if the guilty party were ITV


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking how M has hidden her bump this time , she has a right to do so and it does eliminate the comments about her habit of cradling the bump, so, probably a good thing


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> A tale of two statements
> William - personal, confident, statesman like.
> Harry - Word salad, written by M.


Will was described by a journalist here in the US as 'an elegant man', a perfect description for him. I wish him strength to deal with this mess.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Thinking how M has hidden her bump this time , she has a right to do so and it does eliminate the comments about her habit of cradling the bump, so, probably a good thing


And spared us all that irritating coat-flicking - I have never seen any other mum-to-be behave like that. OTOH for most mums, the baby is a natural development in the creation of life. Few others would have been revelling in the imminent arrival of a cash cow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

I don't know about others but I find exposing to the constant negativity very bad on my own mental health. I can't have those toxic people in my real life unless I have no choice. I have cut out people who were like that. Harry only ever talks to blame others. What has he done? He's been in therapy for years, why doesn't he talk about how it helped him? Leaving your family and trash them on a global scale only come across bitter and vindictive! TBH, I think people like him will never be happy and who would want to hear someone like him for more than 5 mins?


----------



## gerryt

marietouchet said:


> May have already been noted ... difference between W & h response to the outcome of the BBC enquiry
> 
> W was shattered and said the interview contributed to parents divorce - AGREE WHOLLY
> H said (something along) the dastardly nasty press of the world contributed to death of mother - his truth, but a stretch ??
> 
> It should be noted that the BBC is the government sponsored channel - it would be diff if the guilty party were ITV


I think the findings of the investigation into D’s death did implicate (in part) the paparazzi who were chasing her, the other aspect being the drunk driver.  But it has to be borne in mind that paparazzi intrusion was on a much greater scale then and even though H‘s wife got some bad press she wasnt hounded to anything like the same degree.   I do recall after my mothers death the fear that we lived with into adulthood was that other people we loved would also be snatched from us. But with maturity usually comes recognition that the past wont necessarily repeat itself.   Harry doesnt seem to have matured to this point though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I have zero doubt that she fed him the “they won’t stop until I’m dead” idea.


Bit dark but I picture her recording  a playlist of her saying that intercut with Elton John and playing it to him while he’s asleep. She’s got to use that home recording set-up for something and it ain’t the podcast 



gerryt said:


> Depnding who he was speaking to and when, he seems to have already been in therapy for at least six  years. I dont know that much about poor mental health - whats the next step if therapy isn't working?  (Which it clearly isn’t).  Left to his own devices hes just going downhill...


Honestly, get another therapist. Different personalities click and some are much more skilled than others.

It’s a very general term too.... I strongly suspect he’s got some yoga quack with the classic Phoenix online university macrobiotic and mental health degree. When he really needs a fully-trained psychiatrist. Perhaps someone with 20 years experience and a specialty in narcissistic behaviours.



marietouchet said:


> Thinking how M has hidden her bump this time , she has a right to do so and it does eliminate the comments about her habit of cradling the bump, so, probably a good thing


Perhaps I’m being mean-spirited but she doesn’t have anywhere to go this time round.  
I feel like if she could be at a ‘women who matter’ awards  or Beyoncé’s pool party she’d be front and centre doing lunges in louboutins with the bump bouncing around like a bean bag.


----------



## carmen56

gerryt said:


> Depnding who he was speaking to and when, he seems to have already been in therapy for at least six  years. I dont know that much about poor mental health - whats the next step if therapy isn't working?  (Which it clearly isn’t).  Left to his own devices hes just going downhill...



H should ask for his money back, the therapy clearly hasn’t worked!


----------



## gerryt

Perhaps I’m being mean-spirited but she doesn’t have anywhere to go this time round.  
I feel like if she could be at a ‘women who matter’ awards  or Beyoncé’s pool party she’d be front and centre doing lunges in louboutins with the bump bouncing around like a bean bag.
[/QUOTE]
and with one of those twin pregnancy support belts on top of her top - you know, just to tease us even further!!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> If you have insomnia have you tried Magnesium Glycinate? It really helps if I take Magnesium Citrate I get wild dreams. *Last night Paul McCartney was in my dreams lol and I don’t ever think of him.*



Hey, whatever your subconscious does with Paul is between it and him.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Why won’t he stop lying? I don’t understand. It’s like he doesn’t know that his statements have been recorded. Like he’d say Archie’s first word was gangan and he’d be corrected by a reporter and they’d show him the footage of him saying it was crocodile, then Harry will say it’s William or Charles’ fault. They planted the fake tape to make me look bad.
> I feel like I’ve seen this movie before...


----------



## justwatchin

Aimee3 said:


> Did Harry say he’s been in therapy these *past* 4 years?  If so, why couldn’t the therapists he was allegedly seeing give him a referral to a therapist for his wife when they claim no one would help her?
> I don’t think therapy has helped him much if we look at him now.  He has so much hate and is lashing out at the BRF.  At some point someone needs to ask him is this the way you want to live the rest of your life blaming them or do you want to get on with your life and move on.  You can’t change the past.


And again if M was suicidal why wouldn’t he have just had her quietly admitted for treatment? Did he just tell her it would pass, suck it up, or complain about himself? You love your wife then move heaven and earth to get her help.


----------



## V0N1B2

jelliedfeels said:


> Crocodile must be his name for his grandad
> How could  an infant comprehend the existence of a long deceased person? Surely the grandma is obviously Doria?
> kind of insulting to Doria actually.


Very insulting. It was also my assumption grandma = Doria
Is that what one would call a micro-aggression? Assuming your child is calling out for a dead white woman he's never met, instead of the Black woman who he most likely sees on a regular basis?
Hmpf.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Very insulting. It was also my assumption grandma = Doria
> Is that what one would call a micro-aggression? Assuming your child is calling out for a dead white woman he's never met, instead of the Black woman who he most likely sees on a regular basis?
> Hmpf.



I read it and didn't see the show so maybe I missed the nuance, but I thought he meant both. The first "grandma" was for Doria and "grandma Diana" was because he showed Archie a photo of Diana. Of course it is all is made up bullsh*t for the interview so it comes down to his lies being poorly told. He's not a professional actor.

“I’ve got a photo up in his nursery, and one of the first words that he said apart from ‘Mama’ [and] ‘Papa’ was then ‘Grandma. Grandma Diana.’ It’s the sweetest thing. At the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Will was described by a journalist here in the US as 'an elegant man', a perfect description for him. I wish him strength to deal with this mess.



He absolutely is an _elegant man_. IMO the BRF has the correct plan. Just ignore the Cali guy, eventually he will stop. He has 1 pity-song that has become dull. Diana, once we learned that she was no longer into the service aspect, looked like every other over-pampered, self-indulgent rich woman living off her hubs. The Queen is correct about service being the purpose of the monarchy.

@chicinthecity777  what makes this show inspiring is *not* Hazzie’s annoying analysis and complaining, it’s the *stories of the other people*. They focus on how they are overcoming their struggle. Sure, it is a daily struggle but they focus on the positives. Hazz gets a few minutes at the beginning and a few at the end. OW must have realized his 1 pity-song is worn out, even she looks tired of his complaining. It wears on the audience.

IMO Now more than ever, the statue show needs to be cancelled. Let it be for her family. The world doesn’t need to wallow in more self-pity or hear a lecture on the evils of photographers. We’ve lived it, we’ve heard it, we get it.  Time to move on.


----------



## V0N1B2

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> As to Oprah, I have nothing good to say. She sold her soul a long time ago. She's not doing this series out of the goodness of her heart. She must be sharp enough to notice that something is off with Harry (and Meghan) but she still uses them for her own purposes to increase interest for a project that'd be fringe interesting at best if not for incorporating all of this salacious Royal dysfunction.



Co-sign. I thought this right from their (Gail's) garden sit-down. Oprah isn't stupid - she has to know both of them were full of sh!t. I just don't believe that her spidey senses didn't pick up on how 'off' their stories, recollections, mannerisms were. She's interviewed and met enough people in her lifetime to pick up on a phoney when she sees one - save for that James Frey guy.  But she needs them to make a buck so here we are.


----------



## V0N1B2

lanasyogamama said:


> I have zero doubt that she fed him the “they won’t stop until I’m dead” idea.


Yeah, before they were even married. Wasn't that the reason for his manifesto telling the press to leave his girlfriend alone?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I read it and didn't see the show so maybe I missed the nuance, but I thought he meant both. The first "grandma" was for Doria and "grandma Diana" was because he showed Archie a photo of Diana or something. Of course it is all is made up bullsh*t for the interview so it comes down to his lies being poorly told. He's not a professional actor.
> 
> “I’ve got a photo up in his nursery, and one of the first words that he said apart from ‘Mama’ [and] ‘Papa’ was then ‘Grandma. Grandma Diana.’ It’s the sweetest thing. At the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here.”



He does not know how to tell an interesting story. His brain is spinning with all the little touches that he wants to include.



V0N1B2 said:


> Co-sign. I thought this right from their (Gail's) garden sit-down. Oprah isn't stupid - she has to know both of them were full of sh!t. I just don't believe that her spidey senses didn't pick up on how 'off' their stories, recollections, mannerisms were. She's interviewed and met enough people in her lifetime to pick up on a phoney when she sees one - save for that James Frey guy.  But she needs them to make a buck so here we are.



She knows he is a complainer, a dullard. She looks bored with it.  This show really wasn’t about him. I’d be interested to know how many minutes he actually appears — maybe 15 minutes?


----------



## V0N1B2

xincinsin said:


> And spared us all that irritating coat-flicking - I have never seen any other mum-to-be behave like that. OTOH for most mums, the baby is a natural development in the creation of life. Few others would have been revelling in the imminent arrival of a cash cow.


I guess covid has been good for something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

What did he say about drinking and drug use? I saw a headline somewhere.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> @chicinthecity777  what makes this show inspiring is *not* Hazzie’s annoying analysis and complaining, it’s the *stories of the other people*. They focus on how they are overcoming their struggle. Sure, it is a daily struggle but they focus on the positives. Hazz gets a few minutes at the beginning and a few at the end. OW must have realized his 1 pity-song is worn out, even she looks tired of his complaining. It wears on the audience.


So basically Harry does the whinging and others thriving and recovering. SMH!

If they do still go ahead with Diana's statue revealing, there is no way Harry would be back here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Does the juxtaposition with people who genuinely suffered make him look whiney or he can still get away with the Self Portrait of a Victim?



Whiney. 
He is clearly suffering from something, but he is clearly entitled and living a good life. Most of the others do not appear to have his kind of wealth. Lady Gaga who must be wealthier than he is - she is only telling her story to help others. She pours her heart out and it is raw.

Not to be mean, he sours the show. One more reason why royals should not speak about themselves  — we lil people do not have a fleet of rolls royces at our disposal. The self-pity is strong in him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> What did he say about drinking and drug use? I saw a headline somewhere.



I’ve only watched episodes 1-3. He has said he turned to drugs and drink because he thought that is what all 20 yr olds do. He did not know at the time that it was because he was dulling the pain from his mother’s death and the lack of family support. He has learned the reason for his wild behavior  through therapy. See, none of this is his fault or his responsibility - it’s all on the evil paps and his dad.

@papertiger  yes, the way he says that statement is kinda creepy.  There is definitely something off with him.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whiney.
> He is clearly suffering from something, but he is clearly entitled and living a good life. Most of the others do not appear to have his kind of wealth. Lady Gaga who must be wealthier than he is - she is only telling her story to help others. She pours her heart out and it is raw.
> 
> Not to be mean, he sours the show. One more reason why royals should not speak about themselves  — we lil people do not have a fleet of rolls royces at our disposal. The self-pity is strong in him.



He is probably incapable of sounding genuine because he cannot relate. He is faking it to fit in. All of the other people in the show were self-made. They didn't start out with all of the advantages Harry had from birth.

Everyone experiences challenges in life, it would be a hollow existence without them. It is how we handle those challenges and grow from them that shows who we are.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I think Harry has jumped the shark.
> Every statement from him is more and more extreme and less and less believable.  He needs serious mental help.


If he is having mental health issues, OW and MM should be more responsible dealing with him since they are not mental health therapists.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> oh gawd...the ego....she would be "incredibly" proud...I think she would be incredibly proud of William but we'll never know.
> I saw a promo yesterday on ABC.  Harry and Oprah appearing on Good Morning America today - guess they're promoting their show.


I'm sure she would "incredibly" proud to see how one son of hers is trying to traduce the other just because he's jealous of the other's first born status and popularity. It must be a dream come true for any mother to see her children fighting and tearing the family apart. Maybe Diana would be "incredibly" happy to see her weak son ending up with a shameless narcissist who get as much mileage out of him as she could. Right?
Opposite to the popular opinion, I have a feeling that Diana wouldn't have loved Meagain that much. I've read that Princess Margaret had seen that Diana would be a potential problem early on, before anybody else realized that. Being a difficult person herself, she probably knew better than anyone else to recognize one when she met one. IMO Diana would have seen through Meagain better than anyone.


----------



## youngster

Will Harry still be going on and on about his awful father and terrible life months from now? A year from now? 5 years from now?  Does he _never_ plan to get on the train leaving Pitysville or is he buying a waterfront estate there too?  

I'm amazed at his lack of self-awareness and his constant complaining about his hard lot in life. So many people in the world are born into horrific situations and have no chance at a decent life at all. Harry always had access to the best of everything, the best schools, the best medical care, the best therapists, he could carve out a life or career doing almost anything he wished, he had good, lifelong friends, he had a brother and a father and uncles and aunts and cousins and grandparents that loved him.  He also never, ever had to worry about a roof over his head or food on the table or showing up for work on time the next day. Not for a minute. So, Charles was not a perfect parent.  The Queen was not a perfect grandparent. They both do have rather demanding day jobs, you know, Harry. News flash too, Harry, there is no such thing as perfection in anything, let alone parenting, which is something you'll find out yourself in a few years.


----------



## Sol Ryan

youngster said:


> Will Harry still be going on and on about his awful father and terrible life months from now? A year from now? 5 years from now?



Short answer: yes. It’s making him tons of cash. As long as he’s making money and no one is stopping him, he’s gonna keep doing it.


----------



## Allisonfaye

I am at least a week behind on this thread. Has the BBC scandal been talked about yet?


----------



## V0N1B2

Good thing Harry never saw combat in Afghanistan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> If he is having mental health issues, OW and MM should be more responsible dealing with him since they are not mental health therapists.



Agree.
My personal experience, not saying this has anything to do with Hazz.
Years ago I knew someone who was in the midst of a manic episode, later diagnosed with bipolar.  He blamed everyone and anyone for his situation, especially his mother.  The family was worried he wouldn’t get better. The doctor explained it this way - think of mental health as a spiral. The top is a completely healthy, balanced person. The bottom is a psychotic break from reality. When a person is constantly blaming others, they are clearly spiraling down, but not at rock bottom.  Timing is important in helping the person recover. The doctors can stop the downward spiral but the person needs to get the proper help.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> Will Harry still be going on and on about his awful father and terrible life months from now? A year from now? 5 years from now?  Does he _never_ plan to get on the train leaving Pitysville or is he buying a waterfront estate there too?
> 
> I'm amazed at his lack of self-awareness and his constant complaining about his hard lot in life. So many people in the world are born into horrific situations and have no chance at a decent life at all. Harry always had access to the best of everything, the best schools, the best medical care, the best therapists, he could carve out a life or career doing almost anything he wished, he had good, lifelong friends, he had a brother and a father and uncles and aunts and cousins and grandparents that loved him.  He also never, ever had to worry about a roof over his head or food on the table or showing up for work on time the next day. Not for a minute. So, Charles was not a perfect parent.  The Queen was not a perfect grandparent. They both do have rather demanding day jobs, you know, Harry. News flash too, Harry, there is no such thing as perfection in anything, let alone parenting, which is something you'll find out yourself in a few years.


While I support Mental Health Services *100%+++* (_having gone through a lot in my youth with my mother_), there comes a point when .. *MY GOD .. get your freakin' life together*???  Okay, you've yapped and yapped and even earned $$$ over your mother's death (_which I think is horribly disgusting_) .. but now with the pissing on about Charles, constant negativity, Meghan's (_supposed_) mental health issues, I mean .. seriously??????  I used to blame Meghan more than him, but now .. I think he's shown his "*truth*" and it's a *MASSIVE TRAIN WRECK*!!!


----------



## DeMonica

It's interesting to see her standing in the flowery dress. Now the bump is clearly visible, yet it disappeared when she sat down. How unique!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The DM summarizes the show much better than I did.
They include clips which shows he handles himself. 
It will be awhile before I take the time to watch the rest of the episodes.  While inspiring, etc., it is also draining. Best in small doses.









						Prince William emerges from aftermath of Harry's 'truth bomb'
					

The Duke of Sussex used his new Apple TV+ series to accuse them of 'total silence' and 'neglect' when Meghan was suicidal, claiming his father Prince Charles made him 'suffer' as a child.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

All this focusing on mental health is just another money grab. Maybe they should try to understand why so many people are having mental health issues in the first place. Lockdowns, lack of employment, computers/devices all day every day in schools. I could go on an on.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> While I support Mental Health Services *100%+++* (_having gone through a lot in my youth with my mother_), there comes a point when .. *MY GOD .. get your freakin' life together*???  Okay, you've yapped and yapped and even earned $$$ over your mother's death (_which I think is horribly disgusting_) .. but now with the pissing on about Charles, constant negativity, Meghan's (_supposed_) mental health issues, I mean .. seriously??????  I used to blame Meghan more than him, but now .. I think he's shown his "*truth*" and it's a *MASSIVE TRAIN WRECK*!!!



Harry and Meghan feed each other's neuroses. They pass their victimhood football back and forth between them and work themselves into a frenzy of self-righteousness. They rationalize their lies because they feel they are at war with anyone who doesn't support them 100%. Rather than being at all sympathetic, H&M are a cautionary example of how damaging neurotic people can be to those around them.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan feed each other's neuroses. They pass their victimhood football back and forth between them and work themselves into a frenzy of self-righteousness. They rationalize their lies because they feel they are at war with anyone who doesn't support them 100%. Rather than being at all sympathetic, H&M are a cautionary example of how damaging neurotic people can be to those around them.


EXACTLY!!! .. and again, while I 100% support people getting therapy, etc. -- to have this fester on you day-after-day, is NOT good for your mental health!  They BOTH need to focus on the so many positive things they have in their life, but it seems that these 2 just can't be happy!  I read one of the DM articles where a body-reader watched and said "Harry is a VERY ANGRY person", the mental health person helping him? .. well, I don't see it YET!


----------



## youngster

So, this is Harry's quote:
_'I thought my family would help, but every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, just got met with total silence, total neglect. We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job. But Meghan was struggling.' _

Maybe, Harry, your family and your staff thought that you and Meghan are adults and they would not dream of inserting themselves into your personal lives to that extent. Had you and your wife not yelled at staff over small things like tiara fittings and that the color of blankets ordered was the incorrect shade of red?   Evidence to the contrary, you are not a child, you are approaching 40.  If you need help, call your doctor or therapist and take responsibility instead of shoving it off on your family and staff.  I guarantee that every doctor and therapist in the UK would dash out of an examining room to take a call from Prince Harry.

ETA:  Btw, where does he come up with 4 years?  They just had their 3rd anniversary and they bugged out of the UK about 18 months ago and were hardly working at all for months before that.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan feed each other's neuroses. They pass their victimhood football back and forth between them and work themselves into a frenzy of self-righteousness. They rationalize their lies because they feel they are at war with anyone who doesn't support them 100%. Rather than being at all sympathetic, H&M are a cautionary example of how damaging neurotic people can be to those around them.


My question for the day is are the children safe with them? They’ve got little Archie locked away in the tower never seeing daylight. How can that be mentally good for his development?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> Opposite to the popular opinion, I have a feeling that Diana wouldn't have loved Meagain that much. I've read that Princess Margaret had seen that Diana would be a potential problem early on, before anybody else realized that. Being a difficult person herself, she probably knew better than anyone else to recognize one when she met one. IMO Diana would have seen through Meagain better than anyone.



I share this opinion.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> Very insulting. It was also my assumption grandma = Doria
> Is that what one would call a micro-aggression? Assuming your child is calling out for a dead white woman he's never met, instead of the Black woman who he most likely sees on a regular basis?
> Hmpf.


Yeah I think you could say that.
Hopefully Doria understands it’s nothing personal, just business   


bag-mania said:


> I read it and didn't see the show so maybe I missed the nuance, but I thought he meant both. The first "grandma" was for Doria and "grandma Diana" was because he showed Archie a photo of Diana. Of course it is all is made up bullsh*t for the interview so it comes down to his lies being poorly told. He's not a professional actor.
> 
> “I’ve got a photo up in his nursery, and one of the first words that he said apart from ‘Mama’ [and] ‘Papa’ was then ‘Grandma. Grandma Diana.’ It’s the sweetest thing. At the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here.”


You are fighting the good fight. I can’t keep up with these endless varying iterations of  events- it’s like Groundhog Day with these two. 

I still don’t believe a toddler can recognise a person they’ve never met from a photo and understand the relationship. Even if you drill them on saying it. It makes the crocodile story sound feasible. 


DeMonica said:


> It's interesting to see her standing in the flowery dress. Now the bump is clearly visible, yet it disappeared when she sat down. How unique!


I love when my baby scrunches up like some sort of cushion  pad would so I can sit more comfortably. 


V0N1B2 said:


> I guess covid has been good for something.


That’s a hilarious gif
I keep thinking she’s going to reveal a load of fake watches hanging on the inside like a cartoon crook.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> _'I thought my family would help, but every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, just got met with total silence, total neglect. We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job. But Meghan was struggling.' _




What kind of asks and requests is he talking about, though? What Meghan wants, Meghan gets? We want to live in Windsor Castle? Can we have Frogmore HOUSE because we'll need the space once you sign off on us establishing our own court? We don't want to do the work, but please keep paying us 95 % of our allowance?


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I have never heard this take either.  Was this actually something people discussed when it happened? What did his race have to do with anything??? She would've been hounded and chased no matter who she dated. Wow. I've never in my life used the term "the race card" but he's really pulling the race card out of his a$$ at this point.
> 
> ETA: This actually really rubs me the wrong way as a POC. It feels like he's appropriating real racial issues for personal sympathy and financial gain.


Diana was dating that Pakistani heart surgeon (who she was really crazy about) and I don’t think anyone pulled the race card. Except maybe his parents who knew that the affair could not lead to anything.

Dodi raised some eyebrows because he was well known and had a reputation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> My question for the day is are the children safe with them? They’ve got little Archie locked away in the tower never seeing daylight. How can that be mentally good for his development?



I sincerely hope he spends most of his days with the nanny, who's probably his most sane caregiver.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I love when my baby scrunches up like some sort of cushion  pad would so I can sit more comfortably.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. The belly baring / coat flicking gif wouldn't load for me until jellied quoted it. I honestly didn't know it was a continuous habit, when I was complaining about it it was ONE clip of her exiting a car I was referencing because it's so grossly attention hogging (add that to the collage, it's not in there).


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> It's headlined by H & OW, right? But if he has already used up his pity-me quota on Ep 1, does he still appear in Ep2?
> Victim in Part 1 and Guru in Part 2?


Exactly. After the episode one pity party, then what, repeat the same thing over and over?


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Diana was dating that Pakistani heart surgeon (who she was really crazy about) and I don’t think anyone pulled the race card. Except maybe his parents who knew that the affair could not lead to anything.
> 
> Dodi raised some eyebrows because he was well known and had a reputation.


Heart surgeon was 1995-1997, right after divorce, and a terribly clandestine relationship, at the time
Dodi was different, Diana was photographed in a swimsuit on his yacht


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What kind of asks and requests is he talking about, though? What Meghan wants, Meghan gets? We want to live in Windsor Castle? Can we have Frogmore HOUSE because we'll need the space once you sign off on us establishing our own court? We don't want to do the work, but please keep paying us 95 % of our allowance?



I was just thinking about this yesterday.... everyone thinks Meghan was saying the palace wouldn't get her access to therapy but I think it's clear therapy isn't what they meant by "get help." They wanted the BRF to fix all the problems they thought they were having, including probably some gripes they had fundamentally about life as a royal. When the BRF told them they wouldn't change protocol, they took it as a personal affront. Harry's been catered to his entire life so he probably doesn't understand that the world won't move for you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What kind of asks and requests is he talking about, though? What Meghan wants, Meghan gets? We want to live in Windsor Castle? Can we have Frogmore HOUSE because we'll need the space once you sign off on us establishing our own court? We don't want to do the work, but please keep paying us 95 % of our allowance?



He seems to be talking about his requests for mental help since he couldn't apparently pick up a phone himself and call his own doctor who would likely have seen them both immediately, put together a treatment plan, put him in touch with an excellent therapist and/or checked Meghan into a psychiatric hospital if she were indeed suicidal.

So, nobody "helped" when they were struggling. That's his complaint. They didn't beat him, berate him, lock him in the Tower, deprive him of food, put him to work in the coal mines.  Maybe his "asks and requests" were met with silence since anyone with any common sense would never want to get involved with their mental health issues so as to be a scapegoat if something went wrong. That's not part of their Palace job description.  Maybe Charles thought, well, that's just Harry whining to get his way about living in Windsor Castle or their next overseas trip or Meghan's wardrobe expenses or wanting to go to the Oscars.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I was just thinking about this yesterday.... everyone thinks Meghan was saying the palace wouldn't get her access to therapy *but I think it's clear therapy isn't what they meant by "get help."* They wanted the BRF to fix all the problems they thought they were having, including probably some gripes they had fundamentally about life as a royal. When the BRF told them they wouldn't change protocol, they took it as a personal affront. Harry's been catered to his entire life so he probably doesn't understand that the world won't move for you.



Yes, exactly, this could encompass all their requests from where they wanted to live to wanting to pick and choose what events they attended.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> So basically Harry does the whinging and others thriving and recovering. SMH!
> 
> If they do still go ahead with Diana's statue revealing, there is no way Harry would be back here!



Have you not heard? 

*London is a trigger! *


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Heart surgeon was 1995-1997, right after divorce, and a terribly clandestine relationship, at the time
> Dodi was different, Diana was photographed in a swimsuit on his yacht



I think Dodi was a decoy - along with Gulu Lalvani and others. Anything to keep the press off the scent of Hasnat Khan and/or perhaps another. HK and Di had split-up (his doing) and she was still reeling from the fallout. Dodi had been a film producer but hadn't done anything for a while. Knowing the guys she really liked I can't believe she was serious about Dodi.  I was young then and didn't take much notice but I'm a grown woman now, and can totally believe she was just having a nice time with Dodi (nothing wrong with that for. single woman). The ones she was really serious about were kept quiet about.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Interesting thread to read!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think Dodi was a decoy - along with Gulu Lalvani and others. Anything to keep the press off the scent of Hasnat Khan and/or perhaps another. HK and Di had split-up (his doing) and she was still reeling from the fallout. Dodi had been a film producer but hadn't done anything for a while. Knowing the guys she really liked I can't believe she was serious about Dodi.  I was young then and didn't take much notice but I'm a grown woman now, and can totally believe she was just having a nice time with Dodi (nothing wrong with that for. single woman). The ones she was really serious about were kept quiet about.


And she was more public about relationships as W & H got older, by the time they were off to Eton, there wasn't too much threat (from Charles) of taking them away, they were not home during school year, holidays were with gran anyway 

Someone - dont remember where - suggested that C was a bad father in the last half year of her life, because he saw the boys only 26 or 29 days in those 6 months, well they were away at Eton ...


----------



## papertiger

*Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed’s relationship and how their experience of racism compares to Harry and Meghan*

Chelsea Ritschel
Fri, 21 May 2021, 5:24 pm







(AFP via Getty Images)
Prince Harry has opened up about his fear of history repeating itself after comparing his mother being “chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn’t white”, to his relationship with Meghan Markle.
The Duke of Sussex spoke candidly of the paparazzi harassment that led up to the tragic accident that took the lives of both his mother, Princess Diana, and her boyfriend at the time, Dodi Al Fayed, while speaking with Oprah Winfrey for a new Apple TV+ docu-series _The Me You Can’t See_.
Speaking of the couple’s own experience being targeted by the media, Harry told Winfrey: “Within the first eight days of our relationship being made public was when they said: ‘Harry’s girl almost straight outta Compton.’ And that her exotic DNA will be thickening the royal blood. We would get followed, photographed, chased, harassed.”
The 36-year-old then compared the couple’s experience with racism to his mother’s, continuing: “History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn’t white. And now look what’s happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself, they’re not gonna stop until she dies.”

This is everything to know about Princess Diana and Al Fayed’s relationship and the racism that the couple allegedly encountered before their deaths on 31 August 1997.
Who was Al Fayed and how did he and Diana meet?
Diana, who divorced Prince Harry and Prince William’s father Prince Charles in 1996 after years of separation, first began dating Al Fayed, an Egyptian filmmaker, in July 1997.
Al Fayed, who was born in Alexandria, Egypt, was the son of billionaire Mohamed Al-Fayed, who owned the Ritz hotel in Paris and the London department store Harrods.
Growing up, Al Fayed, who was raised Muslim, lived a life of luxury and split his time between France and Egypt.
He went to school at Le Rosay school in Switzerland before attending the British military academy Sandhurst. From there, Al Fayed received a commission in the United Arab Emirates air force, which saw him stationed as a junior officer in London.
However, Al Fayed eventually moved into filmmaking, with reports noting that he dated numerous celebrities, including Brooke Shields, Cathy Lee Crosby and Joanne Whalley, developing a reputation as a playboy.
Al Fayed reportedly first met Princess Diana in 1986 during a polo match against Prince Charles at Windsor, but it wasn’t until 11 years later that the pair became close - when Al Fayed’s father invited the Princess of Wales and her children to be his guests in St Tropez.




AFP via Getty Images
Diana, who was 36 at the time, began spending more time with Al Fayed, with photos of the pair kissing making headlines around the world on 10 August 1997, after the pictures were reportedly sold for more than £1m.
In late August, the public couple, who were dating casually at this point, despite Al Fayed frequently purchasing the Princess of Wales lavish gifts, went on another vacation, travelling from the South of France to Sardinia on his father’s yacht.
On 30 August, Al Fayed and Diana stopped for a night in Paris, where they stayed at the Ritz, before they were pursued by paparazzi as they attempted to flee the photographers as passengers in their driver’s car, a chase that eventually ended in their deaths.
Did the couple experience racism because of their relationship?
During their brief relationship, the couple’s every move was documented by the media, with paparazzi chasing them nearly everywhere they went.
For the most part, the focus was on Diana - however, some headlines were critical of the wealthy bachelor, with one _People_ magazine cover from August 1997 questioning whether Al Fayed was a “dreamboat or a deadbeat?”
However, according to Al Fayed’s father, Mohammed, their deaths were not an accident, but rather racially motivated “murder”.
After their deaths, Mohammed claimed that the crash was orchestrated by the British Secret Service to keep Princess Diana from “marrying a Muslim,” according to a 2001 _ABC News_ report.
At the time, the outlet noted that Mohammed had “filed lawsuits to force a number of US agencies to release files he believes would prove this conspiracy”.
“I seek the support of the American people to bring pressure through the members of Congress to release the documents that will reveal the truth about the tragedy. I am in no doubt that the death was the result of a murder with racism at the core,” the billionaire owner of Harrods had said.




Getty Images
In the years following the death of his son and Princess Diana, Mohammed continued to claim that the crash was orchestrated, with the Egyptian businessman alleging during a 2008 inquest into the deaths that the royal family wanted to “get rid” of Diana and accusing the late Prince Philip of being a “racist”.
In his written statement, Mohammed also expressed his belief that the Queen’s husband would not accept the idea of the mother of a future British king marrying “somebody who is naturally tanned, with curly hair,” according to _The New York Times._
While Mohammed’s claims were unfounded, former Prime Minister Tony Blair revealed in his 2010 memoir that he had warned Princess Diana against her relationship with Al Fayed because he felt it was a “problem”.
However, according to the former prime minister, his concern did not stem from “the obvious reasons” of Al Fayed’s “nationality, religion or background”.
“This was not for the obvious reasons, which would have made some frown on him; his nationality, religion or background don’t matter a hoot to me. I had never met him ... so if you ask me, well, spit it out, what was wrong, I couldn’t frankly say, but I felt uneasy,” he wrote, according to _The Guardian_.
Reflecting on the media’s often racially charged treatment of Meghan during their time in the UK, and the impact it had on her mental health, Prince Harry has claimed that their experience at the centre of the intense scrutiny was not unlike his mother’s.
He also noted that his biggest regret was “not making more of a stance earlier on in my relationship with my wife and calling out the racism when I did”.

*Interesting the way Harry hated the press hounding his mother before she died and then now drags her from her grave into every story so all the old stuff that he hated so much is dug-up again. Shame on him. 

Paranoia seems the constant decades on. I guess it makes for the most sensationalist headlines  *


----------



## Hermes Zen

It's going to take me awhile to catch up today. Have to share that my DH has endured a lot this morning from my fuming over the H stories on this thread and the news. My husband likes this daily news show and records it so he can watch it with me after breakfast. We get to the H story and I'm loudly spewing comments so he stops the recording so I can vent. After I'm done he says softly with concern, should we schedule time for you with a therapist?    I said maybe we should. At least he asked me how I'm doing. LOL So then he said he's going downstairs to finish watching his show. I said, don't you want to be with me to watch together?? He said, he doesn't want to derail the M&H path I'm on.  BUT, if he comes up with any revolutionary ideas of M&H he'd come up to tell me.  That's my sweetie!!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Sorry for going on about it but mental health stuck a cord with me. Harry is displaying classic symptoms of rumination. I have suffered from it myself. It's very unhealthy and any qualified mental health practitioner would guide a patient like this to break off the bad cycle. I don't who is looking out for him but rumination could persist depression and lead to paranoia, OCD and other mental health issues. Whatever therapy he had or didn't have, it's clearly not working!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> I was just thinking about this yesterday.... everyone thinks Meghan was saying the palace wouldn't get her access to therapy but I think it's clear therapy isn't what they meant by "get help." They wanted the BRF to fix all the problems they thought they were having, including probably some gripes they had fundamentally about life as a royal. When the BRF told them they wouldn't change protocol, they took it as a personal affront. Harry's been catered to his entire life so he probably doesn't understand that the world won't move for you.


Yeah, ironically, if ever there was a person that had heaven and earth moved for him it was H.

1. I think we can safely say he got into Eton for his name not his brains
2. His tutors allegedly helped him cheat on his a levels so he wouldn’t fail.
3. Got busted up the ranks in the army double time 
4. Never placed in any danger in army 
5. Offered all the sweet jobs like helicopter training
6. Enormous budget for partying etc
7. Widely reported as ‘most eligible bachelor’ in his prime 
8. Treated like, well, royalty wherever he goes.
9. Always got the same as his brother even though his brother outranks him.

I also feel like M is pretty darn spoiled too in more the LA basic manner


----------



## V0N1B2

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting thread to read!



Well obvs MurkyMeg wasn’t following along when they were hiding out in secret in Canada. I mean look at Harry. Poor thing, he look absolutely aghast at the intrusion and flashbulbs.


----------



## chicinthecity777

V0N1B2 said:


> Well obvs MurkyMeg wasn’t following along when they were hiding out in secret in Canada. I mean look at Harry. Poor thing, he look absolutely aghast at the intrusion and flashbulbs.
> View attachment 5089403
> View attachment 5089404
> View attachment 5089406
> View attachment 5089407
> View attachment 5089408


Thank you thank you thank you! So I was right about MM not being chased by paps here, or anywhere...


----------



## kipp

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah, ironically, if ever there was a person that had heaven and earth moved for him it was H.
> 1. I think we can safely say he got into Eton for his name not his brains
> 2. His tutoExrs allegedly helped him cheat on his a levels so he wouldn’t fail.
> 3. Got busted up the ranks in the army double time
> 4. Never placed in any danger in army
> 5. Offered all the sweet jobs like helicopter training
> 6. Enormous budget for partying etc
> 7. Widely reported as ‘most eligible bachelor’ in his prime
> 8. Treated like, well, royalty wherever he goes.
> 9. Always got the same as his brother even though his brother outranks him.
> 
> I also feel like M is pretty darn spoiled too in more the LA basic manner



EXACTLY.  
I haven't seen the Apple series with Oprah but after reading all this from those who have, and of course, over the last few years watching the train wreck of these two and the continuous whining, mostly in the service of monetizing, my recommendation for both of them is to start doing some GRATITUDE meditations regularly.  It might just change their lives for the better (and ours, too!).


----------



## csshopper

If the Suck-esses hoped proceeds from sales of Harry's wife's book, _The Bench,_ could help fund their much needed mental health therapy, it's not going to happen.

The book releases in about 2 1/2 weeks and continues to tank on the Amazon lists, dropping this week from #2,350 to #3909. It's had a slight price boost back up to $15.49, maybe in hopes of at least covering the advance I'm sure she got from the publisher?

Maybe she can write a sequel: The Dictionary of Archie's First Words
                                             Preparing Your Children for Therapy
                                             Strategies for Blaming Others for Your Problems
                                             How to Manipulate the Media for Maximum Effect (A History of Grandma Diana and Mum and Dad)
                                             When the Bench Splinters Get Out the Super Glue
                                             An Ode to Auntie Oprah and Uncle Doobie
                                             A Parent's Guide to Isolating Children from Pesky Family

Re: The Bench: from the Amazon website:

Best Sellers Rank: #3,909 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#20 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#118 in Children's Emotions Books
#286 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> So, this is Harry's quote:
> _'I thought my family would help, but every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, just got met with total silence, total neglect. We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job. But Meghan was struggling.' _
> 
> Maybe, Harry, your family and your staff thought that you and Meghan are adults and they would not dream of inserting themselves into your personal lives to that extent. Had you and your wife not yelled at staff over small things like tiara fittings and that the color of blankets ordered was the incorrect shade of red?   Evidence to the contrary, you are not a child, you are approaching 40.  If you need help, call your doctor or therapist and take responsibility instead of shoving it off on your family and staff.  I guarantee that every doctor and therapist in the UK would dash out of an examining room to take a call from Prince Harry.
> 
> ETA:  Btw, where does he come up with 4 years?  They just had their 3rd anniversary and they bugged out of the UK about 18 months ago and were hardly working at all for months before that.


He’s so used to having his every need anticipated and managed he has no idea how absurd this statement sounds to all the rest of us who fend for ourselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> *Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed’s relationship and how their experience of racism compares to Harry and Meghan*
> 
> Chelsea Ritschel
> Fri, 21 May 2021, 5:24 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (AFP via Getty Images)
> Prince Harry has opened up about his fear of history repeating itself after comparing his mother being “chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn’t white”, to his relationship with Meghan Markle.
> The Duke of Sussex spoke candidly of the paparazzi harassment that led up to the tragic accident that took the lives of both his mother, Princess Diana, and her boyfriend at the time, Dodi Al Fayed, while speaking with Oprah Winfrey for a new Apple TV+ docu-series _The Me You Can’t See_.
> Speaking of the couple’s own experience being targeted by the media, Harry told Winfrey: “Within the first eight days of our relationship being made public was when they said: ‘Harry’s girl almost straight outta Compton.’ And that her exotic DNA will be thickening the royal blood. We would get followed, photographed, chased, harassed.”
> The 36-year-old then compared the couple’s experience with racism to his mother’s, continuing: “History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn’t white. And now look what’s happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself, they’re not gonna stop until she dies.”
> 
> This is everything to know about Princess Diana and Al Fayed’s relationship and the racism that the couple allegedly encountered before their deaths on 31 August 1997.
> Who was Al Fayed and how did he and Diana meet?
> Diana, who divorced Prince Harry and Prince William’s father Prince Charles in 1996 after years of separation, first began dating Al Fayed, an Egyptian filmmaker, in July 1997.
> Al Fayed, who was born in Alexandria, Egypt, was the son of billionaire Mohamed Al-Fayed, who owned the Ritz hotel in Paris and the London department store Harrods.
> Growing up, Al Fayed, who was raised Muslim, lived a life of luxury and split his time between France and Egypt.
> He went to school at Le Rosay school in Switzerland before attending the British military academy Sandhurst. From there, Al Fayed received a commission in the United Arab Emirates air force, which saw him stationed as a junior officer in London.
> However, Al Fayed eventually moved into filmmaking, with reports noting that he dated numerous celebrities, including Brooke Shields, Cathy Lee Crosby and Joanne Whalley, developing a reputation as a playboy.
> Al Fayed reportedly first met Princess Diana in 1986 during a polo match against Prince Charles at Windsor, but it wasn’t until 11 years later that the pair became close - when Al Fayed’s father invited the Princess of Wales and her children to be his guests in St Tropez.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AFP via Getty Images
> Diana, who was 36 at the time, began spending more time with Al Fayed, with photos of the pair kissing making headlines around the world on 10 August 1997, after the pictures were reportedly sold for more than £1m.
> In late August, the public couple, who were dating casually at this point, despite Al Fayed frequently purchasing the Princess of Wales lavish gifts, went on another vacation, travelling from the South of France to Sardinia on his father’s yacht.
> On 30 August, Al Fayed and Diana stopped for a night in Paris, where they stayed at the Ritz, before they were pursued by paparazzi as they attempted to flee the photographers as passengers in their driver’s car, a chase that eventually ended in their deaths.
> Did the couple experience racism because of their relationship?
> During their brief relationship, the couple’s every move was documented by the media, with paparazzi chasing them nearly everywhere they went.
> For the most part, the focus was on Diana - however, some headlines were critical of the wealthy bachelor, with one _People_ magazine cover from August 1997 questioning whether Al Fayed was a “dreamboat or a deadbeat?”
> However, according to Al Fayed’s father, Mohammed, their deaths were not an accident, but rather racially motivated “murder”.
> After their deaths, Mohammed claimed that the crash was orchestrated by the British Secret Service to keep Princess Diana from “marrying a Muslim,” according to a 2001 _ABC News_ report.
> At the time, the outlet noted that Mohammed had “filed lawsuits to force a number of US agencies to release files he believes would prove this conspiracy”.
> “I seek the support of the American people to bring pressure through the members of Congress to release the documents that will reveal the truth about the tragedy. I am in no doubt that the death was the result of a murder with racism at the core,” the billionaire owner of Harrods had said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> In the years following the death of his son and Princess Diana, Mohammed continued to claim that the crash was orchestrated, with the Egyptian businessman alleging during a 2008 inquest into the deaths that the royal family wanted to “get rid” of Diana and accusing the late Prince Philip of being a “racist”.
> In his written statement, Mohammed also expressed his belief that the Queen’s husband would not accept the idea of the mother of a future British king marrying “somebody who is naturally tanned, with curly hair,” according to _The New York Times._
> While Mohammed’s claims were unfounded, former Prime Minister Tony Blair revealed in his 2010 memoir that he had warned Princess Diana against her relationship with Al Fayed because he felt it was a “problem”.
> However, according to the former prime minister, his concern did not stem from “the obvious reasons” of Al Fayed’s “nationality, religion or background”.
> “This was not for the obvious reasons, which would have made some frown on him; his nationality, religion or background don’t matter a hoot to me. I had never met him ... so if you ask me, well, spit it out, what was wrong, I couldn’t frankly say, but I felt uneasy,” he wrote, according to _The Guardian_.
> Reflecting on the media’s often racially charged treatment of Meghan during their time in the UK, and the impact it had on her mental health, Prince Harry has claimed that their experience at the centre of the intense scrutiny was not unlike his mother’s.
> He also noted that his biggest regret was “not making more of a stance earlier on in my relationship with my wife and calling out the racism when I did”.
> 
> *Interesting the way Harry hated the press hounding his mother before she died and then now drags her from her grave into every story so all the old stuff that he hated so much is dug-up again. Shame on him.
> 
> Paranoia seems the constant decades on. I guess it makes for the most sensationalist headlines *


Dodi was known to have a significant cocaine habit. It was also rumored that he liked  a dangerous lifestyle. His title of movie producer was a smokescreen for partying.  I think this is what made Bair uneasy. He is being polite by not stating it and not wishing to speak ill of the dead.  Considering the elevated circles that Dodi travelled in starting with his tenure at  ultra exclusive Le Rosey,  I doubt that he ever experienced really overt racism. His father was trying to deflect from the fact that his son was a drug using sleaze ball. Another person elevated to sainthood after death.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> My question for the day is are the children safe with them? They’ve got little Archie locked away in the tower never seeing daylight. How can that be mentally good for his development?



Thank goodness most children are adaptable and resilient. I'm hoping they figure out their own way but with only those two as examples who knows?


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> *Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed’s relationship and how their experience of racism compares to Harry and Meghan*
> 
> Chelsea Ritschel
> Fri, 21 May 2021, 5:24 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (AFP via Getty Images)
> Prince Harry has opened up about his fear of history repeating itself after comparing his mother being “chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn’t white”, to his relationship with Meghan Markle.
> The Duke of Sussex spoke candidly of the paparazzi harassment that led up to the tragic accident that took the lives of both his mother, Princess Diana, and her boyfriend at the time, Dodi Al Fayed, while speaking with Oprah Winfrey for a new Apple TV+ docu-series _The Me You Can’t See_.
> Speaking of the couple’s own experience being targeted by the media, Harry told Winfrey: “Within the first eight days of our relationship being made public was when they said: ‘Harry’s girl almost straight outta Compton.’ And that her exotic DNA will be thickening the royal blood. We would get followed, photographed, chased, harassed.”
> The 36-year-old then compared the couple’s experience with racism to his mother’s, continuing: “History was repeating itself. My mother was chased to her death while she was in a relationship with someone that wasn’t white. And now look what’s happened. You wanna talk about history repeating itself, they’re not gonna stop until she dies.”
> 
> This is everything to know about Princess Diana and Al Fayed’s relationship and the racism that the couple allegedly encountered before their deaths on 31 August 1997.
> Who was Al Fayed and how did he and Diana meet?
> Diana, who divorced Prince Harry and Prince William’s father Prince Charles in 1996 after years of separation, first began dating Al Fayed, an Egyptian filmmaker, in July 1997.
> Al Fayed, who was born in Alexandria, Egypt, was the son of billionaire Mohamed Al-Fayed, who owned the Ritz hotel in Paris and the London department store Harrods.
> Growing up, Al Fayed, who was raised Muslim, lived a life of luxury and split his time between France and Egypt.
> He went to school at Le Rosay school in Switzerland before attending the British military academy Sandhurst. From there, Al Fayed received a commission in the United Arab Emirates air force, which saw him stationed as a junior officer in London.
> However, Al Fayed eventually moved into filmmaking, with reports noting that he dated numerous celebrities, including Brooke Shields, Cathy Lee Crosby and Joanne Whalley, developing a reputation as a playboy.
> Al Fayed reportedly first met Princess Diana in 1986 during a polo match against Prince Charles at Windsor, but it wasn’t until 11 years later that the pair became close - when Al Fayed’s father invited the Princess of Wales and her children to be his guests in St Tropez.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AFP via Getty Images
> Diana, who was 36 at the time, began spending more time with Al Fayed, with photos of the pair kissing making headlines around the world on 10 August 1997, after the pictures were reportedly sold for more than £1m.
> In late August, the public couple, who were dating casually at this point, despite Al Fayed frequently purchasing the Princess of Wales lavish gifts, went on another vacation, travelling from the South of France to Sardinia on his father’s yacht.
> On 30 August, Al Fayed and Diana stopped for a night in Paris, where they stayed at the Ritz, before they were pursued by paparazzi as they attempted to flee the photographers as passengers in their driver’s car, a chase that eventually ended in their deaths.
> Did the couple experience racism because of their relationship?
> During their brief relationship, the couple’s every move was documented by the media, with paparazzi chasing them nearly everywhere they went.
> For the most part, the focus was on Diana - however, some headlines were critical of the wealthy bachelor, with one _People_ magazine cover from August 1997 questioning whether Al Fayed was a “dreamboat or a deadbeat?”
> However, according to Al Fayed’s father, Mohammed, their deaths were not an accident, but rather racially motivated “murder”.
> After their deaths, Mohammed claimed that the crash was orchestrated by the British Secret Service to keep Princess Diana from “marrying a Muslim,” according to a 2001 _ABC News_ report.
> At the time, the outlet noted that Mohammed had “filed lawsuits to force a number of US agencies to release files he believes would prove this conspiracy”.
> “I seek the support of the American people to bring pressure through the members of Congress to release the documents that will reveal the truth about the tragedy. I am in no doubt that the death was the result of a murder with racism at the core,” the billionaire owner of Harrods had said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> In the years following the death of his son and Princess Diana, Mohammed continued to claim that the crash was orchestrated, with the Egyptian businessman alleging during a 2008 inquest into the deaths that the royal family wanted to “get rid” of Diana and accusing the late Prince Philip of being a “racist”.
> In his written statement, Mohammed also expressed his belief that the Queen’s husband would not accept the idea of the mother of a future British king marrying “somebody who is naturally tanned, with curly hair,” according to _The New York Times._
> While Mohammed’s claims were unfounded, former Prime Minister Tony Blair revealed in his 2010 memoir that he had warned Princess Diana against her relationship with Al Fayed because he felt it was a “problem”.
> However, according to the former prime minister, his concern did not stem from “the obvious reasons” of Al Fayed’s “nationality, religion or background”.
> “This was not for the obvious reasons, which would have made some frown on him; his nationality, religion or background don’t matter a hoot to me. I had never met him ... so if you ask me, well, spit it out, what was wrong, I couldn’t frankly say, but I felt uneasy,” he wrote, according to _The Guardian_.
> Reflecting on the media’s often racially charged treatment of Meghan during their time in the UK, and the impact it had on her mental health, Prince Harry has claimed that their experience at the centre of the intense scrutiny was not unlike his mother’s.
> He also noted that his biggest regret was “not making more of a stance earlier on in my relationship with my wife and calling out the racism when I did”.
> 
> *Interesting the way Harry hated the press hounding his mother before she died and then now drags her from her grave into every story so all the old stuff that he hated so much is dug-up again. Shame on him.
> 
> Paranoia seems the constant decades on. I guess it makes for the most sensationalist headlines *


It’s interesting the one media source they quote about Dodi is from the tame US-based magazine people - fancy that!
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if Meghan was racially harassed by the U.K. media they should have sued them for discrimination especially given they are suing the press fairly regularly anyway. 

I also find it interesting that the national enquirer and all those none existent American tabloids regularly put out similar ‘Meghan is a psycho. Harry is a traitor’ type content to the the U.K. headlines  but H&M weirdly don’t see anything racially coded in their depiction stateside. Funny that.


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> Dodi was known to have a significant cocaine habit. It was also rumored that he liked  a dangerous lifestyle. His title of movie producer was a smokescreen for partying.  I think this is what made Bair uneasy. He is being polite by not stating it and not wishing to speak ill of the dead.  Considering the elevated circles that Dodi travelled in starting with his tenure at  ultra exclusive Le Rosey,  I doubt that he ever experienced really overt racism. His father was trying to deflect from the fact that his son was a drug using sleaze ball. Another person elevated to sainthood after death.



Agree. I don't think the couple was planning to marry. They had only dated a very short time.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

V0N1B2 said:


> Well obvs MurkyMeg wasn’t following along when they were hiding out in secret in Canada. I mean look at Harry. Poor thing, he look absolutely aghast at the intrusion and flashbulbs.
> View attachment 5089403
> View attachment 5089404
> View attachment 5089406
> View attachment 5089407
> View attachment 5089408


Now that's the face of a camera and attention shy woman


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Dodi was known to have a significant cocaine habit. It was also rumored that he liked  a dangerous lifestyle. His title of movie producer was a smokescreen for partying.  I think this is what made Bair uneasy. He is being polite by not stating it and not wishing to speak ill of the dead.  Considering the elevated circles that Dodi travelled in starting with his tenure at  ultra exclusive Le Rosey,  I doubt that he ever experienced really overt racism. His father was trying to deflect from the fact that his son was a drug using sleaze ball. Another person elevated to sainthood after death.


I mean, I don’t think we should be unfair to Mohamed al Fayed. He suffered losing his child which must be absolutely heartbreaking and it was also a bizarre set of circumstances. 
Diana’s death is to this day talked about and very well known and controversial. We all know it was absolute uproar when she died. People still get emotional about it. It still sells papers. Diana is a cult icon.... 
 but his son also died that day too. It must have felt like he was getting sidelined in his own tragedy. Like his son was a Minor player even in death.
Coupled with it being such a sudden, messy circumstance I can understand why he was furious as well as bereaved.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Agree. I don't think the couple was planning to marry. They had only dated a very short time.



This. I don't think they had been together for more than a month. She barely knew him.

IMO Diana was enjoying dating. She was experiencing what she had missed out on as a teen/20 something. I don't know why it should be assumed she was on the hunt for a new husband. Why on earth would she be in a hurry to get married again after that disaster of a marriage?

I can certainly believe Diana wanted to find love again and would have married eventually, but she wasn't looking for a commitment when she died.


----------



## youngster

Those bullying allegations and the aftermath are still being investigated by the Palace. That report will come out at some point, likely in less than a year.  It's going to be meticulously documented and the two of them need to have some kind of response which, just a guess, is going to be that they were both in a horrible mental place as everyone so clearly now knows.

So, maybe these never-ending attacks by Harry is meant to build a case for their awful treatment of their own staff while they were in the UK.  They were under such enormous pressure, you know, struggling terribly, so of course they were not at their best when dealing with their staff and they are so _terribly_ sorry they let their personal pain impact a handful of interactions with their staff.  I figure that's the line they will take once the report comes out.


----------



## TC1

Still waiting for the publication of all the pap chasing them for photos in the UK..at the secret grocery store meetings  
and not a single eff was given when they were in Canada.


----------



## Aimee3

TC1 said:


> Still waiting for the publication of all the pap chasing them for photos in the UK..at the secret grocery store meetings
> and not a single eff was given when they were in Canada.


More likely the paps didn’t chase them, but they chased after the paps!


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, I don’t think we should be unfair to Mohamed al Fayed. He suffered losing his child which must be absolutely heartbreaking and it was also a bizarre set of circumstances.
> Diana’s death is to this day talked about and very well known and controversial. We all know it was absolute uproar when she died. People still get emotional about it. It still sells papers. Diana is a cult icon....
> but his son also died that day too. It must have felt like he was getting sidelined in his own tragedy. Like his son was a Minor player even in death.
> Coupled with it being such a sudden, messy circumstance I can understand why he was furious as well as bereaved.


Not to mention that he enabled it with money.  He is feeling massively guilty.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Those bullying allegations and the aftermath are still being investigated by the Palace. That report will come out at some point, likely in less than a year.  It's going to be meticulously documented and the two of them need to have some kind of response which, just a guess, is going to be that they were both in a horrible mental place as everyone so clearly now knows.
> 
> So, maybe these never-ending attacks by Harry is meant to build a case for their awful treatment of their own staff while they were in the UK.  They were under such enormous pressure, you know, struggling terribly, so of course they were not at their best when dealing with their staff and they are so _terribly_ sorry they let their personal pain impact a handful of interactions with their staff.  I figure that's the line they will take once the report comes out.


Exactly.  Just like when people defend their sh*tty behavior by saying that they were not feeling well.  The dog died and I forgot my homework.  About the only thing that I believe they were struggling with was how to obtain the most they could get from Charles and the family by doing the least.  When they saw that wasn't going to happen, they left and starting dumping on them.  I have the feeling that Archie is more mature than his parents.


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> Still waiting for the publication of all the pap chasing them for photos in the UK..at the secret grocery store meetings
> and not a single eff was given when they were in Canada.


Yet they cleared out a restaurant.  The only importance that these two have is the importance that they give to themselves.  Far more famous people manage to walk on city streets.  I love the Alexander Skarsgard thread here and the pictures that are posted of him walking on a NYC street completely unmolested.  If ever a hunky guy was going to be mobbed and jumped, he is it!  He is also extremely approachable to fans.  That is something that the Sussex would never do.  If you saw either of them at Whole Foods and asked if they had tried the peaches, they would be screaming for a security man.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> I was just thinking about this yesterday.... everyone thinks Meghan was saying the palace wouldn't get her access to therapy but I think it's clear therapy isn't what they meant by "get help." They wanted the BRF to fix all the problems they thought they were having, including probably some gripes they had fundamentally about life as a royal. When the BRF told them they wouldn't change protocol, they took it as a personal affront. Harry's been catered to his entire life so he probably doesn't understand that the world won't move for you.



That actually makes a lot of sense. I'm not sure where those two completely lost their grip on reality (both with the rewriting of history and "You didn't really think that would work, did you?").


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry for going on about it but mental health stuck a cord with me. Harry is displaying classic symptoms of rumination. I have suffered from it myself. It's very unhealthy and any qualified mental health practitioner would guide a patient like this to break off the bad cycle. I don't who is looking out for him but rumination could persist depression and lead to paranoia, OCD and other mental health issues. Whatever therapy he had or didn't have, it's clearly not working!



You know, I feel that a bunch of random strangers who actually dislike his antics might be more worried about him than those closest to him, e.g. his wife and new fairy godmother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Heart surgeon was 1995-1997, right after divorce, and a terribly clandestine relationship, at the time
> Dodi was different, Diana was photographed in a swimsuit on his yacht


yes, as I understand the surgeon was a private person who wanted to do his work.....not seeking attention at all


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Dodi was known to have a significant cocaine habit. It was also rumored that he liked  a dangerous lifestyle. His title of movie producer was a smokescreen for partying.  I think this is what made Bair uneasy. He is being polite by not stating it and not wishing to speak ill of the dead.  Considering the elevated circles that Dodi travelled in starting with his tenure at  ultra exclusive Le Rosey,  I doubt that he ever experienced really overt racism. His father was trying to deflect from the fact that his son was a drug using sleaze ball. Another person elevated to sainthood after death.



Whatever his habits, probably no more so than a lot of people Diana hung out with. He'd been a film/series producer which from the outside seems quite glamorous, and _Chariots of fire_ and _Breaking Glass_ were quite successful fit in the UK, and had a very popular soundtracks. He was much better looking than a lot of other guys she fell for too, I can see the attraction. But marriage material, I don't think so.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This has always bothered me about Dodi. 






*Dodi Fayed - Wikipedia*






 en.wikipedia.org
_In July 1997, Fayed became romantically involved with Diana, Princess of Wales. Earlier that summer, Fayed had become engaged to an American model, Kelly Fisher, and had bought a house in Malibu, California, for himself and Fisher with money from his father.[8][9] Fisher subsequently claimed Fayed had jilted her for Diana and announced that she was filing a breach of contract suit against him, claiming that he had "led her emotionally all the way up to the altar and abandoned her when they were almost there. He threw her love away in a callous way with no regard for her whatsoever".[10] She dropped the lawsuit shortly after Fayed's death.






*Dodi Fayed's fiance says 'he dumped her' two days before wedding*
WHEN the story broke that Diana was dating Dodi Fayed, nobody was more shocked than the woman who had thought she was marrying the billionaire’s son in just two days’ time. American model Kelly Fi…



www.thesun.co.uk_


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, I don’t think we should be unfair to Mohamed al Fayed. He suffered losing his child which must be absolutely heartbreaking and it was also a bizarre set of circumstances.
> Diana’s death is to this day talked about and very well known and controversial. We all know it was absolute uproar when she died. People still get emotional about it. It still sells papers. Diana is a cult icon....
> but his son also died that day too. It must have felt like he was getting sidelined in his own tragedy. Like his son was a Minor player even in death.
> Coupled with it being such a sudden, messy circumstance I can understand why he was furious as well as bereaved.


but he supposedly wanted the US congress to look into their death?  what? neither were American and the accident happened in France


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Whatever his habits, probably no more so than a lot of people Diana hung out with. He'd been a film/series producer which from the outside seems quite glamorous, and _Chariots of fire_ and _Breaking Glass_ were quite successful fit in the UK, and had a very popular soundtracks. He was much better looking than a lot of other guys she fell for too, I can see the attraction. But marriage material, I don't think so.


rumour was she was using him to make the doctor jealous


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree.
> My personal experience, not saying this has anything to do with Hazz.
> Years ago I knew someone who was in the midst of a manic episode, later diagnosed with bipolar.  He blamed everyone and anyone for his situation, especially his mother.  The family was worried he wouldn’t get better. The doctor explained it this way - think of mental health as a spiral. The top is a completely healthy, balanced person. The bottom is a psychotic break from reality. When a person is constantly blaming others, they are clearly spiraling down, but not at rock bottom.  Timing is important in helping the person recover. The doctors can stop the downward spiral but the person needs to get the proper help.


Absolutely, he needs professional treatment asap. One could think that his image is being overused by greedy/envious people to make money and destroy the BRF. He may regret this clown phase later.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Absolutely, he needs professional treatment asap. One could think that his image is being overused by greedy/envious people to make money and destroy the BRF. He may regret this clown phase later.


IF he's smart enough


----------



## lalame

Unfortunately I think Harry himself IS one of the greedy/envious people out to make money and destroy the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Unfortunately I think Harry himself IS one of the greedy/envious people out to make money and destroy the BRF.


I don't know how much of it is due to my participation in this thread, but I've come to really dislike him.


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how much of it is due to my participation in this thread, but I've come to really dislike him.



I've always thought he was an entitled punk, especially with all those partying stories, but he seemed to have matured a lot over the last few years. My opinion turned around a bit when he started doing those press tours with Wills and Kate for their mental health charity. He was quite likeable and I had no problems with all the vulnerability stuff. These days.... he seems back to being an entitled, angry, person who shows no regard for others. But worse, it's now for money.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I've always thought he was an entitled punk, especially with all those partying stories, but he seemed to have matured a lot over the last few years. My opinion turned around a bit when he started doing those press tours with Wills and Kate for their mental health charity. He was quite likeable and I had no problems with all the vulnerability stuff. These days.... he seems back to being an entitled, angry, person who shows no regard for others. But worse, it's now for money.


I know.  Angry is not attractive.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This has always bothered me about Dodi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Dodi Fayed - Wikipedia*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> _In July 1997, Fayed became romantically involved with Diana, Princess of Wales. Earlier that summer, Fayed had become engaged to an American model, Kelly Fisher, and had bought a house in Malibu, California, for himself and Fisher with money from his father.[8][9] Fisher subsequently claimed Fayed had jilted her for Diana and announced that she was filing a breach of contract suit against him, claiming that he had "led her emotionally all the way up to the altar and abandoned her when they were almost there. He threw her love away in a callous way with no regard for her whatsoever".[10] She dropped the lawsuit shortly after Fayed's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Dodi Fayed's fiance says 'he dumped her' two days before wedding*
> WHEN the story broke that Diana was dating Dodi Fayed, nobody was more shocked than the woman who had thought she was marrying the billionaire’s son in just two days’ time. American model Kelly Fi…
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk_



Daddy must have paid her off. Anyone hear of her again?  Nope, she vanished.  

 If people ever stick around long enough to read film credits, you see see a gazillion production companies and executive producers listed.  These are not the people who did the actual work.  They are giving their name and/or money.  Dodi was lucky to be associated with some hits, but I really doubt he had anything to do with  the movie being a success. I laugh when I see this on TV shows as well.  After one season, the stars are always listed as executive producers.  It is all to feed the ego.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how much of it is due to my participation in this thread, but I've come to really dislike him.



The more I have learned about these royals [and others to some extent, think Monaco], the more I realize they really are like celebs.
They worry so much about their image, then, boom,  someone catches them in a lie.  If only they told the truth from the beginning, the ‘gotcha’ game would end.  None of us are perfect, so why hide who they really are?  H&M admittedly sneaking around the WF, hiding from the photographers, laughing themselves silly over how they escaped the press - come on, they are just asking  to be followed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Daddy must have paid her off. Anyone hear of her again?  Nope, she vanished.
> 
> If people ever stick around long enough to read film credits, you see see a gazillion production companies and executive producers listed.  These are not the people who did the actual work.  They are giving their name and/or money.  Dodi was lucky to be associated with some hits, but I really doubt he had anything to do with  the movie being a success. I laugh when I see this on TV shows as well.  After one season, the stars are always listed as executive producers.  It is all to feed the ego.



Gloria Allred was her attorney.  












						Kelly Fisher Her Lawyer Editorial Stock Photo - Stock Image | Shutterstock
					

Find the editorial stock photo of Kelly Fisher Her Lawyer, and more photos in the Shutterstock collection of editorial photography. 1000s of new photos added daily.




					www.shutterstock.com
				




_
The ex-model said: “You go in the course of three weeks from being engaged to Dodi to being left for the most famous, gorgeous woman in the world, to them all dying.

“In three weeks. That was just terrible. I was pretty young. It was pretty bad.”

She says the pain was made worse by Dodi’s father Mohamed denying his son had ever been engaged to her, and accusing her of being a “gold-digger”.


Kelly, who now lives in Aiken, South Carolina, and works as a property developer, said: “He was talking about the lawsuit. But I had stopped working – I put my life on hold.”








						Dodi Fayed's fiance says 'he dumped her' two days before wedding
					

WHEN the story broke that Diana was dating Dodi Fayed, nobody was more shocked than the woman who had thought she was marrying the billionaire’s son in just two days’ time. American model Kelly Fi…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how much of it is due to my participation in this thread, but I've come to really dislike him.


I also grew to dislike him. Unless he has a mental disorder that impairs his judgment, he seems to be a very envious and greedy man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I don't know about mental disorder, but some sort of emotional and maturity disorder for sure!


----------



## CarryOn2020

As we relive this stuff today, we can see there was much sordid behavior on all sides.
Did William and H know all of this stuff? Do they want to know it?
These are extremely entitled people of privilege who swan around the globe while the rest of us toil away. I can’t feel much sympathy for the idle rich, Diana included. She could have spent the night at the Paris Ritz, ffs. She was safe there.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I also grew to dislike him. Unless he has a mental disorder that impairs his judgment, he seems to be a very envious and greedy man.



Is being a back-stabbing, spoiled brat considered a mental disorder these days? Because that is all he is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

more from the Sun article - this woman has my sympathy, kinda
It feels like we are in some sleazy tv show.


_She had featured on the front covers of Elle and W before meeting Dodi in Paris in July 1996. She says he convinced her to give up her lucrative work and gave her a £2,000-a-day allowance.

He also bought her a £5million home in Malibu where she thought they would live together, and gave her a £180,000 engagement ring in February 1997.

After learning of Dodi’s romance with Diana, Kelly phoned her ex to vent her fury. A 20-minute recording of the call was played in London in 2007 during the inquest into Diana’s death. It captures Kelly fuming: “You even flew me down to St Tropez to sit on a boat while you seduced Diana all day and f***ed me all night.”_


----------



## Chanbal

Sign the Petition
					

Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance




					www.change.org


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I also grew to dislike him. Unless he has a mental disorder that impairs his judgment, he seems to be a very envious and greedy man.


I used to like him but no more


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Is being a back-stabbing, spoiled brat considered a mental disorder these days? Because that is all he is.


Yes, a back-stabbing and spoiled brat is what he looks like. MM and OW are possibly the right friends for him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.change.org




Hilarious!

more from the Sun —

_In the call Dodi insists they had already split, while Kelly rages that they had still been talking about their wedding.
She is also heard to say: “You told me you didn’t even like her. Why do you suddenly like her?”
Dodi calls her “crazy” and “hysterical”.

These days, Kelly says the only pain she feels is on behalf of William and Harry. She said: “I have a daughter now and cannot imagine what would have happened if I was suddenly gone. I can’t imagine what those boys must have felt.”
But she also revealed she has kept one memento of that time two decades ago.
She admitted: “Of course I have the engagement ring.”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really missing Dominick Dunne now

_On the night she died, Diana was traveling from a Fayed hotel to a Fayed apartment in a Fayed car with a Fayed driver, sitting next to Fayed’s son and behind a Fayed bodyguard._—Martyn Gregory, in his book _Diana: The Last Days.

The day that Mohamed Al Fayed, 75, took the stand at the inquest into the deaths of the Princess of Wales and his son, Dodi Al Fayed, was certainly the high point of the proceedings at the Royal Courts of Justice, in London. It pains me that I had to return to New York and missed what the Daily Mailstated was “one of the most extraordinary performances ever seen in a British courtroom.” Al Fayed is a mesmerizing figure, very much aware that he is the big name in the proceedings, as his accusations of conspiracy at a very high level have been the center of this $20 million inquest. British law requires that the government investigate any unnatural and indeterminate death of a British citizen abroad, but it was Al Fayed who fought for the inquest to be held before a jury, and it was Al Fayed who first circulated the notion that the royal family had orchestrated Diana and Dodi’s fatal crash. In the five months that the inquest has gone on, Al Fayed has acquired the imperious attitude of an international celebrity. In terms of character, not financial acumen, he is a modern version of one of literature’s greatest characters, Augustus Melmotte, the foreign financial tycoon who crashed London society in the 1870s in Anthony Trollope’s novel The Way We Live Now._






						Two Ladies, Two Yachts, and a Billionaire
					

The Diana inquest continued with a high-drama cast: the avenging father, Mohamed Al Fayed; the California model, Kelly Fisher, whose story rips a hole in Al Fayed's romantic myth; and the multi-millionaire butler, Paul Burrell, who may find himself up for perjury.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lalame

He seems like someone easily swayed by those around him. He's lucky he didn't fall into worse crowds, and looks like that's one thing the BRF did right at the least. 

Has anyone made comparisons between him and Andrew? I can't help but think... both spares, with a reputation for being fun and cheeky, having celebrity friends, and known to be relatively un-academic or duty-bound. That's the impression I got from the Crown at least.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>




Oh man, I hate that "little rising inflection." There are so many young women where every sentence they say sounds like a question.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hilarious!
> 
> more from the Sun —
> 
> _In the call Dodi insists they had already split, while Kelly rages that they had still been talking about their wedding.
> She is also heard to say: “You told me you didn’t even like her. Why do you suddenly like her?”
> Dodi calls her “crazy” and “hysterical”.
> 
> These days, Kelly says the only pain she feels is on behalf of William and Harry. She said: “I
> have a daughter now and cannot imagine what would have happened if I was suddenly gone. I can’t imagine what those boys must have felt.”
> But she also revealed she has kept one memento of that time two decades ago.
> She admitted: “Of course I have the engagement ring.”_


So she kept the engagement ring, good for her.


----------



## Lounorada

Lodpah said:


> *Anyway read somewhere that for every 5 dollars donated to their foundation only .25 cents go to charity so they they are living large.*









Hermes Zen said:


> What caught my attention is 'drive H & M apart' wouldn't that be lovely.  But don't know how legit this is.  Interesting thoughts though.
> *Princess Diana’s former butler warns new documentary could ‘drive Harry and Meghan apart’ with ‘scandalous’ revelations*
> By Caitlin Elliott
> First Published 1 day ago
> https://www.womanandhome.com/amp/li...and-meghan-apart-with-scandalous-revelations/









Chanbal said:


> The damage greedy Harry is doing on his family...
> View attachment 5087397
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of 'invading Royal Family's privacy'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has been accused of "invading the family's privacy" with his recent remarks, a source has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





This x1000000
The fact that he's going around shouting for and demanding pRiVaCy for himself, his wife and child, yet all he has done in the last year (especially this year) is repeatedly invade his families privacy to gain sympathy and attention for themselves, yet no one has called them out for this, to their faces. H&M are beyond hypocritical at this point.




bag-mania said:


> They must pay a bundle to whoever does their web site but damn. Their background illustrations are half-@ssed, not quite childlike but not professional either. *Not sure what the symbolic message of winding fingers in a vine is supposed to be but I'm sure it is full of compassion*.
> 
> View attachment 5087682
> View attachment 5087683


Tangled up in their own lies





lanasyogamama said:


> Williams arm looks so good in his vax pic, *I can’t help but wonder if Harry will try to show his arm somehow*.


He's probably practising his flexing in the mirror since Williams vaccine picture was released






youngster said:


> This was a very well done opinion piece, thanks @Chanbal!  Another excerpt:
> _This is the tragedy of Prince Harry. _*He left the royal family in the name of privacy, but he has far less privacy now than he did when he was a working royal. He struck out for freedom, but performative pain for the gawping woke media is a very phoney form of freedom. He said he wanted to be independent, yet, thanks to the therapeutic worldview, he lives in the shadow of his father and his allegedly corrosive influence more now than when he was in Clarence House. There’s a lesson here. Rejecting the ideals of duty, loyalty and family commitment doesn’t translate into instant liberty. Harry thinks he broke free from an individuality-crushing cult that punishes honesty and openness and that he is now getting in touch with his true self – I think the precise opposite has *_*happened.*_









purseinsanity said:


> Archie's first words were very sentimental for Prince Harry.
> In his new AppleTV+ docuseries _The Me You Can't See_, which he co-created with Oprah Winfrey, the Duke of Sussex, 36, *revealed that one of his 2-year-old son's first words was "grandma"* as a sweet nod to Princess Diana.
> According to Harry, a photo of his late mother, who tragically died at age 36 following a car crash in Paris in 1997, is currently hanging in Archie's nursery at the home he shares with wife Meghan Markle.
> "I got a photo of her in his nursery, and it was one of the first words that he said — apart from 'mama,' 'papa,' *it was then 'grandma'. Grandma Diana,"* he shared. "It's the sweetest thing, but at the same time, it makes me really sad because she should be here."









They think we're stupid enough to believe that was one of his first words?


----------



## chicinthecity777

One more post for today.
Now he said to OW that he never had therapy before he met MM.

Link to another article: https://journalistsresource.org/media/prince-harry-afghanistan-miguel-head-media-blackout/



Source: Twitter


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

JCMH and wife are not very popular on twitter.


----------



## lalame

Lodpah said:


> Wow so much to read through. Just got back from vacation and it was nice to see in the wild no one gives a rip about these two. They’re wasting so much money on PR trying to make them relevant lol.
> 
> Anyway read somewhere that for every 5 dollars donated to their foundation only .25 cents go to charity so they they are living large.



Where did you read that? I don't think their charity, Archewell, takes direct donations.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> One more post for today.
> Now he said to OW that he never had therapy before he met MM.
> 
> Link to full article: https://journalistsresource.org/media/prince-harry-afghanistan-miguel-head-media-blackout/
> 
> View attachment 5089602
> 
> Source: Twitter



I am hoping can we all agree at this point that Harry is a lying sack of sh*t unworthy of sympathy. Does anyone believe what he says?

It's interesting that H&M have made a concerted effort to put Harry in the forefront lately instead of Meghan. I'm not sure whether that is due to the pregnancy (keeps her out of sight so that the surrogate cover won't be blown) or if they have figured out none of the companies that are paying them want her to represent them.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gloria Allred was her attorney.
> 
> View attachment 5089557
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kelly Fisher Her Lawyer Editorial Stock Photo - Stock Image | Shutterstock
> 
> 
> Find the editorial stock photo of Kelly Fisher Her Lawyer, and more photos in the Shutterstock collection of editorial photography. 1000s of new photos added daily.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.shutterstock.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The ex-model said: “You go in the course of three weeks from being engaged to Dodi to being left for the most famous, gorgeous woman in the world, to them all dying.
> 
> “In three weeks. That was just terrible. I was pretty young. It was pretty bad.”
> 
> She says the pain was made worse by Dodi’s father Mohamed denying his son had ever been engaged to her, and accusing her of being a “gold-digger”.
> 
> 
> Kelly, who now lives in Aiken, South Carolina, and works as a property developer, said: “He was talking about the lawsuit. But I had stopped working – I put my life on hold.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dodi Fayed's fiance says 'he dumped her' two days before wedding
> 
> 
> WHEN the story broke that Diana was dating Dodi Fayed, nobody was more shocked than the woman who had thought she was marrying the billionaire’s son in just two days’ time. American model Kelly Fi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If GA was her attorney, she walked away with a tidy sum.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He did reveal the night before their interview was played, she woke him with her crying. 
She knew what would happen.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> He did reveal the night before their interview was played, she woke him with her crying.
> She knew what would happen.


I thought she prided herself on her ability to cry on demand.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> One more post for today.
> Now he said to OW that he never had therapy before he met MM.
> 
> Link to full article: https://journalistsresource.org/media/prince-harry-afghanistan-miguel-head-media-blackout/
> 
> View attachment 5089602
> 
> Source: Twitter


Either he suffers form Alzheimer's or he is talking about a different type of therapy. 



Spoiler: hmm :thinking:


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The hypocrisy of these people knows no bounds.
> View attachment 5088971
> 
> _Royal biographer Hugo Vickers branded Harry’s decision to give the interview to the network “embarrassing”.
> 
> He told the Daily Mail: “It is quite embarrassing for Prince Harry.
> 
> “*How could he possibly co-operate with an organisation which some years ago was the only outlet to publish a deeply distressing photo of his mother’s dying moment?*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's Oprah branded 'hypocritical' after CBS published Diana crash picture
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry’s decision to give his bombshell interview to CBS has been branded “hypocritical” after the network published distressing pictures of Princess Diana moments after her 1997 car crash. T…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Harry probably forgot that part.  He could be thinking it was BBC or ABC or NBC or CNN.  Letters can be confusing when you are illiterate.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> If GA was her attorney, she walked away with a tidy sum.



I doubt she did. Dodi died before the lawsuit could get rolling. 

Imagine how tied up the court system would be if everyone who was ever jilted by a romantic partner filed a lawsuit.


----------



## purseinsanity

lalame said:


> I have never heard this take either.  Was this actually something people discussed when it happened? What did his race have to do with anything??? She would've been hounded and chased no matter who she dated. Wow. I've never in my life used the term "the race card" but he's really pulling the race card out of his a$$ at this point.
> *
> ETA: This actually really rubs me the wrong way as a POC. It feels like he's appropriating real racial issues for personal sympathy and financial gain.*


Me too!

I remember Dodi's father claiming the BRF had them killed because he was a Muslim.  Maybe Harry is now extrapolating on that.  Whatever the case may be, Diana could've been dating a llama and she would've been hounded.  If she was so paranoid she could've buckled up or realized her driver was intoxicated.  Not everything is someone else's fault.  Sometimes one's own stupid decisions can cause their own harm.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I doubt she did. Dodi died before the lawsuit could get rolling.
> 
> Imagine how tied up the court system would be if everyone who was ever jilted by a romantic partner filed a lawsuit.


GA negotiated with daddy for her walk away money.  She had plenty of dirt to spill and daddy didn't want it to happen.   The lawsuit threat was just to get his attention and it did.


----------



## Chanbal

And she still uses the duchess title given to her by such terrible people ... 



_ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.
“That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
“She cried and she cried and she cried.”_









						Prince Harry claims Royals tried to ‘smear’ Meghan ahead of Oprah chat
					

PRINCE HARRY has made another bombshell claim - suggesting the Royal family tried to "smear" Meghan Markle ahead of the Sussex royals interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> And she still uses the duchess title given to her by such terrible people ...
> 
> View attachment 5089615
> 
> _ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.
> “That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
> “She cried and she cried and she cried.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry claims Royals tried to ‘smear’ Meghan ahead of Oprah chat
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has made another bombshell claim - suggesting the Royal family tried to "smear" Meghan Markle ahead of the Sussex royals interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I don't believe that woman has cried about anything in her entire life.  What she calls crying is nothing, but acting.  That may be the only believable acting that she can do.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> GA negotiated with daddy for her walk away money.  She had plenty of dirt to spill and daddy didn't want it to happen.   The lawsuit threat was just to get his attention and it did.



I remember his father being really messed up emotionally and mentally after the accident. He was certain it was a conspiracy.


----------



## Hermes Zen

TC1 said:


> Still waiting for the publication of all the pap chasing them for photos in the UK..at the secret grocery store meetings
> and not a single eff was given when they were in Canada.



Yes and not one photo of M covering her face because she didn't want to be photographed. With that smile she sure seem to be enjoying herself.  Why not?  She didn't get that much attention when she was an actress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that woman has cried about anything in her entire life.  What she calls crying is nothing, but acting.  That may be the only believable acting that she can do.


Yeah! Though angry crying might be a possibility.


----------



## Icyjade

chicinthecity777 said:


> One more post for today.
> Now he said to OW that he never had therapy before he met MM.
> 
> Link to another article: https://journalistsresource.org/media/prince-harry-afghanistan-miguel-head-media-blackout/
> 
> View attachment 5089602
> 
> Source: Twitter



That’s where the recollections may vary part applies I guess


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> He did reveal the night before their interview was played, she woke him with her crying.
> She knew what would happen.



Yeah read about that and thought “manipulative lying bi-a-tch”. This ensures no cold feet for the interview and a raging protective instinct. Win win for her.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

This is not going to end well. A lot the of things they talk about are simply family matters and family dynamics. I don't see why the fact that there is some dysfunction in the family makes them any different to other families. The only difference is that they will never have to think about money. The failure to acknowledge his mothers dysfunctional family shows he is not very bright or a deep thinker. 

There are many many families that do not address mental health issues. It is only over the last decade or so that mental health and its importance has been bought into the spotlight. 

I mean his own mother in law is a therapist, why could she not help her own daughter who is supposedly suffering so much. I would think she would be the most trusted and ideal person for the job. Or maybe she is their therapist and they just don't want to make that public.


----------



## purseinsanity

mia55 said:


> It seems like M is planning a very public mental breakdown for Harry so either she controls all the assets deeming H unfit or force the family to take them back. Whichever road is taken, it’s dark for Harry.


It sometimes does seem like that, but then I think what sort of human being has the foresight and evilness to not just plan all these things, but to actually make them happen?!  I mean this is like Mission Impossible type of stuff.  I think the real answer is Meg is vindictive enough to recognize what an injured bird Harry is, and to push every button.  He's like play dough in her hands because he already has severe mental illness to be that easily manipulated.  Many men can be "whipped", but to this extent?  I'm feeling sorry for him in the sense I think he has severe underlying issues that he actually needs to address, maybe even with in patient psychiatric treatment, not by being a chief whatever officer of Buttercup of whatever it's called.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So this guy has extensive therapy. None of his therapists have maybe tried to mention he is completely delusional? I have never had therapy, so maybe they don't do that, but I'd think part of their job would be to, uh, anchor their client a bit more in reality.


You'd think he could've contacted one of his therapists to help deal with his "suicidal" wife, since the BRF did "Nothing".


----------



## Chanbal

A must read!   
*JAN MOIR: Prince Harry's hurt is awful to behold - like an itch he can't stop scratching*
By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 17:00 EDT, 21 May 2021 | UPDATED: 17:24 EDT, 21 May 2021










						JAN MOIR: Prince Harry's hurt is awful to behold
					

JAN MOIR: A tiny, uncharitable voice deep inside my own wounded psyche wonders why, if the therapy celebrities ceaselessly advocate is so wonderful, are they still crying?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Good thing Harry never saw combat in Afghanistan.


I wish he had.  My DH used to go on and on about how his sister "had had a hard life".  That statement drove me nuts because she has parents who are still alive and happily married, had an amazing education and a rather privileged life compared to 90% of the world.  She was never sexually, physically or mentally abused (although she claims their mother is to blame for it all).  She F'ed it up herself by being an entitled, lazy as sin bee-yotch.  DH was sent to Iraq with the Marines in 2003 and saw first hand how people lived.  I have never heard him make that statement about her again. I'd love to dump Harry off with my relatives in a third world country, where he can walk miles for clean water, and not know for sure if he'll have supper.  He's nothing but a spoiled brat throwing temper tantrum after temper tantrum.  It's time to do what parents do to stop the tantrums:  IGNORE.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Archie will be in therapy knowing his mother considered suicide while pregnant with him.
> 
> Shared by his father with an international audience.
> 
> At a loss for words.


Hé and his baby sis are going to be messed up if MM is going to be playing suicidal victim and H is always verging on hysteria over her victim hood. 



jelliedfeels said:


> Perhaps I’m being mean-spirited but she doesn’t have anywhere to go this time round.
> I feel like if she could be at a ‘women who matter’ awards  or Beyoncé’s pool party she’d be front and centre doing *lunges in louboutins* with the *bump bouncing around like a bean bag*.


Love the alliteration 



lalame said:


> Where did you read that? I don't think their charity, Archewell, takes direct donations.


Not familiar with how American foundations are run. How does Archewell get the funds to support/partner/back other organizations if they don't take donations? 



Chanbal said:


> And she still uses the duchess title given to her by such terrible people ...
> 
> View attachment 5089615
> 
> _ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.
> “That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
> “She cried and she cried and she cried.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry claims Royals tried to ‘smear’ Meghan ahead of Oprah chat
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has made another bombshell claim - suggesting the Royal family tried to "smear" Meghan Markle ahead of the Sussex royals interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I'd reckon this was when she really pushed the "they won't stop till I'm dead" agenda.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I wish he had.  My DH used to go on and on about how his sister "had had a hard life".  That statement drove me nuts because she has parents who are still alive and happily married, had an amazing education and a rather privileged life compared to 90% of the world.  She was never sexually, physically or mentally abused (although she claims their mother is to blame for it all).  She F'ed it up herself by being an entitled, lazy as sin bee-yotch.  DH was sent to Iraq with the Marines in 2003 and saw first hand how people lived.  I have never heard him make that statement about her again. I'd love to dump Harry off with my relatives in a third world country, where he can walk miles for clean water, and not know for sure if he'll have supper.  He's nothing but a spoiled brat throwing temper tantrum after temper tantrum.  It's time to do what parents do to stop the tantrums:  IGNORE.



Harry doesn't need to be dumped off in a third world country, a short trip to LA with his eyes wide open will do. There are homeless encampments everywhere. The Venice boardwalk is now a huge homeless encampment with fights, fires and shootings. Grow up Harry, the world doesn't revolve around you!

QE is already on IGNORE. "_THE QUEEN has been seen smiling bravely in her first meeting since her grandson Prince Harry's bombshell interview."_








						Royal Family LIVE: Queen smiles bravely in first meeting since Harry's bombshell interview
					

THE QUEEN has been seen smiling bravely in her first meeting since her grandson Prince Harry's bombshell interview.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lalame

xincinsin said:


> Not familiar with how American foundations are run. How does Archewell get the funds to support/partner/back other organizations if they don't take donations?



There's different types of foundations. Some seek donations from the public but some are funded by a family or single donor alone. They might invite some friends or family to donate too but not choose to solicit widely for a few reasons, like ease of administration, want to keep it focused on the family's priorities, or just don't think it's right to ask less fortunate people to donate (because it's not a good look obviously). AKA Archewell's funds probably come from H/M themselves or whatever companies or friends they invite but I don't see a way for the public to donate.


----------



## csshopper

I ache for people who struggle with mental health issues, having experienced it in my family. I am not discounting the insidious effects of it on the person and those who love and support them. But, as for Harry's wife, nope, nada, she's acting out a script in a drama she devised about the time he did his equivalent-of-a-twelve-year-old's disintegration and she saw how to exploit his vulnerabilities and make him hers. 

When things were not going their way, she threatened suicide, mistakenly believing it would give them a bargaining chip with the RF to get what they wanted, figuring the RF would do anything to prevent such a thing being made public. She didn't realize too many people were figuring her out, or on having a husband, who although easily manipulated by her, could not get her all she wanted. What kind of a woman, a proclaimed feminist, stays with a man who admits repeatedly to millions of people that he was too embarrassed to ask for help for her? Meghan's kind.

She brings a whole new set of toxic genes into the baby making process and Archie and his sister are doomed to an existence his parents will never be able to manage if they are still perpetrating their victimhood throughout their lives. Dad's too dense and Mom too narcissistic to see what could be ahead for them. 

One interesting thing they may never have considered, if Archie and his sister are continuously kept so isolated, the # of people to blame when they start self destructing will be a very small pool: Mum, Dad and Grandma Doria.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> If GA was her attorney, she walked away with a tidy sum.


GA always seemed like a fame whore to me too.  She was always in every case on TV.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> And she still uses the duchess title given to her by such terrible people ...
> _ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her *[Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.*
> “That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
> “She cried and she cried and she cried.”_


So thoughtful of Meghan again.  Crying into her pillow so as not to awaken his highness.  Not committing suicide because he's suffered so.
I'm glad a good cuddle fixed all that anguish.


----------



## AbbytheBT

chicinthecity777 said:


> Sorry for going on about it but mental health stuck a cord with me. Harry is displaying classic symptoms of rumination. I have suffered from it myself. It's very unhealthy and any qualified mental health practitioner would guide a patient like this to break off the bad cycle. I don't who is looking out for him but rumination could persist depression and lead to paranoia, OCD and other mental health issues. Whatever therapy he had or didn't have, it's clearly not working!


 
Yes!! Exactly - I think for anyone who has experienced professional mental health care (myself included) it seems he has NOT received proper and adequate care. 
I have a sibling, (think “off the grid” type), who has resisted any mental health care in the past 30 years - despite numerous attempts by family members - and I have watched and listened to him create a strange, emotional cave full of perceived slights, discordant memories of our childhood and paranoid musings.  I would give anything to take the mental pain away from his life. But from his view, he is a victim. A gentle kind person, but full of damaging (and untrue) thoughts that have crippled his adult life.

Now I see the same rumination/ paranoia pattern with Harry - and truly think it is shocking how his mental frailty has been paraded for gain.  He very clearly needs much, much more professional mental health to get to an adult level of insight for himself - let alone be of help to anyone else. And all this talk about escaping this “horrific“ family and work experience seems to suck the air/energy away from focusing on learning “how to deal” which is the real purpose of good mental health care. 

OMG - I could definitely go on - lol - sorry for the rant, but appreciate the chance to vent


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

AbbytheBT said:


> Yes!! Exactly - I think for anyone who has experienced professional mental health care (myself included) it seems he has NOT received proper and adequate care.
> I have a sibling, (think “off the grid” type), who has resisted any mental health care in the past 30 years - despite numerous attempts by family members - and I have watched and listened to him create a strange, emotional cave full of perceived slights, discordant memories of our childhood and paranoid musings.  I would give anything to take the mental pain away from his life. But from his view, he is a victim. A gentle kind person, but full of damaging (and untrue) thoughts that have crippled his adult life.
> 
> Now I see the same rumination/ paranoia pattern with Harry - and truly think it is shocking how his mental frailty has been paraded for gain.  He very clearly needs much, much more professional mental health to get to an adult level of insight for himself - let alone be of help to anyone else. And all this talk about escaping this “horrific“ family and work experience seems to suck the air/energy away from focusing on learning “how to deal” which is the real purpose of good mental health care.
> 
> OMG - I could definitely go on - lol - sorry for the rant, but appreciate the chance to vent



I'm sorry to hear about your brother. That's got to be extremely difficult to see your loved one this way.  Thank you for sharing your story.


----------



## lalame

I saw a brilliant comment on another site about how mental health is the new "Get out and vote" cause among celebrities. It's a trendy topic, inscrutable, and an easy cause to take up for people who don't have any expertise elsewhere.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I wish he had.  My DH used to go on and on about how his sister "had had a hard life".  That statement drove me nuts because she has parents who are still alive and happily married, had an amazing education and a rather privileged life compared to 90% of the world.  She was never sexually, physically or mentally abused (although she claims their mother is to blame for it all).  She F'ed it up herself by being an entitled, lazy as sin bee-yotch.  DH was sent to Iraq with the Marines in 2003 and saw first hand how people lived.  I have never heard him make that statement about her again. I'd love to dump Harry off with my relatives in a third world country, where he can walk miles for clean water, and not know for sure if he'll have supper.  He's nothing but a spoiled brat throwing temper tantrum after temper tantrum.  It's time to do what parents do to stop the tantrums:  IGNORE.


He saw how people live in poor circumstances on his trips to Africa.  He has a short term memory.  Nothing penetrates.


----------



## lalame

God help me, I'm actually watching this show. I love how he says "I've always wanted to be normal. Not Prince Harry... just Harry." Umm, you're a grown ass adult who lives in a country where Princes are not recognized so why are you going out of your way to still be "Prince Harry" if you just want to be normal? I really don't get his doublespeak. 

And yes he actually says he only started going to therapy 4 years ago, that he always thought he didn't need it before. What happened with Heads Together???


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> God help me, I'm actually watching this show. I love how he says "I've always wanted to be normal. Not Prince Harry... just Harry." Umm, you're a grown ass adult who lives in a country where Princes are not recognized so why are you going out of your way to still be "Prince Harry" if you just want to be normal? I really don't get his doublespeak.
> 
> And yes he actually says he only started going to therapy 4 years ago, that he always thought he didn't need it before. What happened with Heads Together???


Someone should have sat down and made a timeline for him because he is getting everything twisted.  If you can't keep your lies straight, you have a big problem.


----------



## lalame

I have to give it to Oprah. Lady deserves a Golden Globe for listening to this dodo as if she actually respects his expertise or something. Oprah... at least Dr Oz and Dr Phil were doctors.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I remember how Oprah has been involved in politics before...and we’ve heard weird rumors about The unnamed one’s political ambitions...could Oprah be trying to be a political puppet master here?


----------



## Chanbal

I can't imagine what they could have said if they weren't the most compassionate couple.   
Harry's comments about Oprah's interview:
_‘*I like to think we were able to speak truth in the most compassionate way possible, therefore leaving an opening for reconciliation and healing,’ *he says. ‘The interview was about being real, being authentic and hopefully about sharing an experience that we know is incredibly relatable to a lot of people around the world despite our unique, privileged position.’_









						Prince Harry's relationship with royals is 'hanging by a thread'
					

As part of a series on mental health for Apple TV+ with his friend Oprah Winfrey, Prince Harry made a series of allegations which are said to have left the royal family 'at the end of their tether'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> but he supposedly wanted the US congress to look into their death?  what? neither were American and the accident happened in France


Yes it was dramatic but it was a pretty chaotic situation around the inquest. I dunno, also I get why he felt like he would feel he was one man (A very powerful man but not royal levels) against the system and why he was so angry. I think he’s changed his mind now. The entire situation really was like a grand, epic drama with all these complex players- nothing 6& wife can put out will ever compete in terms of interest.


Chanbal said:


>





lalame said:


> He seems like someone easily swayed by those around him. He's lucky he didn't fall into worse crowds, and looks like that's one thing the BRF did right at the least.
> 
> Has anyone made comparisons between him and Andrew? I can't help but think... both spares, with a reputation for being fun and cheeky, having celebrity friends, and known to be relatively un-academic or duty-bound. That's the impression I got from the Crown at least.


I think all the royal public personas definitely have some shorthands/positive stereotypes in them - in a way the positions have job descriptions and they need to fit. In a way, the spare need to be the party animals so the  eldest can seem more sensible and statesmanlike by comparison while the tabloids still get their fluffy light scandal stories. I think this was also the Queen/Margaret public dynamic. 


Chanbal said:


> JCMH and wife are not very popular on twitter.



Haha I bet he was, rotten tomatoes all round! Either that or worried they’d start deprogramming him while the dear leader was away. 


bag-mania said:


> I doubt she did. Dodi died before the lawsuit could get rolling.
> 
> Imagine how tied up the court system would be if everyone who was ever jilted by a romantic partner filed a lawsuit.


I think it’s one of those things where you have to have money to get money but just look at some of the spurious things the gruesome twosome have sued for & won. 





purseinsanity said:


> Me too!
> 
> I remember Dodi's father claiming the BRF had them killed because he was a Muslim.  Maybe Harry is now extrapolating on that.  Whatever the case may be, Diana could've been dating a llama and she would've been hounded.  If she was so paranoid she could've buckled up or realized her driver was intoxicated.  Not everything is someone else's fault.  Sometimes one's own stupid decisions can cause their own harm.


If she had dated a llama, she could have safely rode away from the press. Sorry I just quite liked the image of escape by llama.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I can't imagine what they could have said if they weren't the most compassionate couple.
> Harry's comments about Oprah's interview:
> _‘*I like to think we were able to speak truth in the most compassionate way possible, therefore leaving an opening for reconciliation and healing,’ *he says. ‘The interview was about being real, being authentic and hopefully about sharing an experience that we know is incredibly relatable to a lot of people around the world despite our unique, privileged position.’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's relationship with royals is 'hanging by a thread'
> 
> 
> As part of a series on mental health for Apple TV+ with his friend Oprah Winfrey, Prince Harry made a series of allegations which are said to have left the royal family 'at the end of their tether'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



"I like to think"
Just imagine how much worse it could have been if he didn't like to think 
They sure have a weird way of showing compassion, and* I think* their avenue for healing and reconciliation requires capitulation from the other party.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> A must read!
> *JAN MOIR: Prince Harry's hurt is awful to behold - like an itch he can't stop scratching*
> By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> 
> PUBLISHED: 17:00 EDT, 21 May 2021 | UPDATED: 17:24 EDT, 21 May 2021
> View attachment 5089646
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Prince Harry's hurt is awful to behold
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: A tiny, uncharitable voice deep inside my own wounded psyche wonders why, if the therapy celebrities ceaselessly advocate is so wonderful, are they still crying?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What... the...
Is this a real photo? From the tv show? I'm seeing a pattern here.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> What... the...
> Is this a real photo? From the tv show? I'm seeing a pattern here.
> View attachment 5089857
> View attachment 5089858


The thing it immediately made me think of was that meme of Maradona absolutely blazed at the World Cup.


----------



## Lodpah

She’s trotting him out like a show pony so she can say later he’s crazy. Don’t underestimate MM. She’s so wily a coyote couldn’t outshine her.


----------



## Lodpah

V0N1B2 said:


> What... the...
> Is this a real photo? From the tv show? I'm seeing a pattern here.
> View attachment 5089857
> View attachment 5089858


Mmmmmmmmm . . . center myself is what’s he’s saying or MM send me your thoughts. How quaint and stupid.


----------



## Lodpah

lalame said:


> Where did you read that? I don't think their charity, Archewell, takes direct donations.


Over on Quora they go deeply into the shenanigans of these two. Something about the difference between a foundation and charity. Let’s hope that investigation about their transferring from one foundation to another gets exposed. My opinion is that they closed their foundation in GB due to the investigation. It ain’t going to be good.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> What... the...
> Is this a real photo? From the tv show? I'm seeing a pattern here.
> View attachment 5089857
> View attachment 5089858



This is his EDMR therapy.









						EMDR: what is the trauma therapy used by Prince Harry?
					

Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing aims to reduce distress that some memories bring on




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## eunaddict

^ The Butterfly Hug! Also featured quite heavily in Netflix's K-drama "_It's Okay to Not Be Okay_". It's self-directed EMDR, supposedly it helps ground and calm people during panic attacks, severe mood swings etc.

AFAIK, EMDR is usually used for managing PTSD...but it's still a relatively new approach and being trotted out like that as a "cure-all" for everything psych is a bit...off.


----------



## jelliedfeels

eunaddict said:


> ^ The Butterfly Hug! Also featured quite heavily in Netflix's K-drama "_It's Okay to Not Be Okay_". It's self-directed EMDR, supposedly it helps ground and calm people during panic attacks, severe mood swings etc.
> 
> AFAIK, EMDR is usually used for managing PTSD...but it's still a relatively new approach and being trotted out like that as a "cure-all" for everything psych is a bit...off.


I’m not going to watch it, but is the implication that he has PTSD Flashbacks?
Like he’s currently blocking out the horror of only getting tiny little frogcott.

Add on -also doesn’t surprise me it’s from a popular tv show. He’d probably start doing the Macarena if it became a meme that it was something anxious, vulnerable people did.


----------



## Clearblueskies

eunaddict said:


> ^ The Butterfly Hug! Also featured quite heavily in Netflix's K-drama "_It's Okay to Not Be Okay_". It's self-directed EMDR, supposedly it helps ground and calm people during panic attacks, severe mood swings etc.
> 
> AFAIK, EMDR is usually used for managing PTSD...but it's still a relatively new approach and being trotted out like that as a "cure-all" for everything psych is a bit...off.


I wonder what his old army and polo mates think of all this?


----------



## Lodpah

Clearblueskies said:


> I wonder what his old army and polo mates think of all this?


Probably that he needs to come clean and put on a dress and heels and be truthful to himself. Don't know what lipstick he would look good in. He just needs to come clean and get it over with and have some dignity.


----------



## eunaddict

jelliedfeels said:


> Add on -also doesn’t surprise me it’s from a popular tv show. He’d probably start doing the Macarena if it became a meme that it was something anxious, vulnerable people did.



I mean, it is supposedly an actual aspect of bilateral stimulation developed by a psychologist - where you stimulate both left and right brain, and is one of the many techniques involved in EMDR. It was just popularized in media recently.

Also, EMDR is a relatively new inclusion into psychotherapy so a lot more needs to be known. Again, AFAIK...the mechanism for how EMDR works is still unknown and in general, there are plenty of skeptics including some pretty famous neurologists. But it is being implemented in many locations (chiefly) as a PTSD treatment and it IS more effective than no therapy.


----------



## jelliedfeels

eunaddict said:


> I mean, it is supposedly an actual aspect of bilateral stimulation developed by a psychologist - where you stimulate both left and right brain, and is one of the many techniques involved in EMDR. It was just popularized in media recently.
> 
> Also, EMDR is a relatively new inclusion into psychotherapy so a lot more needs to be known. Again, AFAIK...the mechanism for how EMDR works is still unknown and in general, there are plenty of skeptics including some pretty famous neurologists. But it is being implemented in many locations (chiefly) as a PTSD treatment and it IS more effective than no therapy.


To be clear my implication was more that of course he’s doing something because it’s being talked about, not that it is medically dubious in of itself. E.g.  If this was the early 00s he’d be claiming to be anorexic as that was in the media a lot then. 

As with all treatments helpful for PTSD sufferers but I don’t think it’s for people who *probably* don’t have it


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Yeah! Though angry crying might be a possibility.


Definitely, because those old meanies in the Firm repeatedly told her “no” even after Harry screamed at them that what she wanted she should get. Only problem being #6 and a spoiled brat does not carry the clout he thinks it does. So add tears of frustrated anger and, oh my, it made her downright suicidal.  But she  cured herself by moving to Montecito to rescue chickens. And she let #6 come along because his title is useful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> If GA was her attorney, she walked away with a tidy sum.



And why not. Way too many women are played by a*shole men and don't even get anything out of it, so if she could make money, good for her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> He did reveal the night before their interview was played, she woke him with her crying.
> She knew what would happen.



Yeah, sure. Poor Megs. I'm not doubting she woke him up, but I'm 100 % sure that were not real tears but just to make sure Harry was still in her corner.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I doubt she did. Dodi died before the lawsuit could get rolling.
> 
> Imagine how tied up the court system would be if everyone who was ever jilted by a romantic partner filed a lawsuit.



Until like 25 years ago in Germany women could sue for a broken engagement as well. So I don't find it that unbelievable. Up until today, the ring legally has to be returned if the engagement is broken off before the wedding because the contract isn't fulfilled then (that's for the US, Germany doesn't generally do big diamond honkers).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.
> “That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
> “She cried and she cried and she cried.”_



God, what a manipulative POS she is. Also, I'm all too familiar with that shtick to give her the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> I am hoping can we all agree at this point that Harry is a lying sack of sh*t unworthy of sympathy. Does anyone believe what he says?
> 
> It's interesting that H&M have made a concerted effort to put Harry in the forefront lately instead of Meghan. I'm not sure whether that is due to the pregnancy (keeps her out of sight so that the surrogate cover won't be blown) or if they have figured out none of the companies that are paying them want her to represent them.


Agree because he is the bigger draw because of his title. I’ve not watched her series (and I have AppleTV+) but it appears this is more about “celebrities” than mental health.


----------



## floatinglili

I am well and truly over these grifters.
I’ll be giving my viewing eyeballs and more importantly my charity $$ to a genuinely worthy cause - Orangutan Jungle School! The ‘school’ is rescues orphaned orangutans and trains them to live wild before releasing them to hopefully breed. 

These dear cousins of ours have watched their population plummet 80 percent in three generations. 
Whereas celebrities crying publicly about the pressures of fame seem to have really proliferated in recent years.

My sympathy is with the real endangered species.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

eunaddict said:


> I mean, it is supposedly an actual aspect of bilateral stimulation developed by a psychologist - where you stimulate both left and right brain, and is one of the many techniques involved in EMDR. It was just popularized in media recently.
> 
> Also, EMDR is a relatively new inclusion into psychotherapy so a lot more needs to be known. Again, AFAIK...the mechanism for how EMDR works is still unknown and in general, there are plenty of skeptics including some pretty famous neurologists. But it is being implemented in many locations (chiefly) as a PTSD treatment and it IS more effective than no therapy.


I don't have the details on this, but I recently read or saw a film about why it's so important for not just physical health but mental as well, that humans go walking. Because while we walk, apparently our eyes are scanning the environment from side to side continuously. This has a positive and necessary effect on the brain that's critical to our well-being. You can actually benefit from this even just by sitting still on a chair and moving your eyes from side to side like you would when walking outside. Maybe someone knows more specifics on this. 

Also, according to human behaviour experts, when you look down to your right, you access bad memories and start to feel negative emotions. Not because you necessarily want to, it just happens because of how this movement effects the brain. Very interesting stuff.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Betty-Lou

Prince Harry appears to have more hair on his head this week. "I'm just saying"

_I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much._

Really carrying too much. What a load of crap!
LOL


----------



## Genie27

I kinda hate watching this train wreck, formerly known as Prince. It’s obvious he has a lot of trauma, and needs to do a lot of difficult and personal work to get better. But the people around him are not looking out for his interests. And I doubt he’s done any of the work.

It also strikes me that for all his complaining about being trapped in his twenties, he didn’t explore any career options available to him? He may not have been academically gifted, but there are other career/life paths available after he hit the glass ceiling in the army, especially when money is no object. Professional polo player? High stakes strip poker? Most ordinary mortals pick a profession or interest to pursue. Some unfortunate sods have no choice in the matter at all other than to meet the most basic needs. Some lucky ones can choose not to do a 9-5 but explore whatever takes their fancy

Every time he opens his mouth these days, it underlines how tone deaf and entitled he is. Whining and whingeing about how *very hard* his life is, to an audience that is either staring at him gobsmacked, or are fans who are in awe of his munificence in sharing his canned half digested therapy-speak. Like so deep. Whoa!

And don’t forget, we need to feel sorry (er compassion) for how much of the world he is carrying, unlike the rest of us who don’t get cut off by our dads and have to use mommy’s millions.


----------



## Genie27

I do have some compassion for Harry having to get 8 or 9 ‘jobs’ to maintain their lifestyle - that must be hard. It’s gig-economy at the highest level, so Harry is just like any uber-driver and task rabbit. /s

Welcome to your California Dream, Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Betty-Lou said:


> _I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much._
> 
> Really carrying too much. What a load of crap!
> LOL



And all that after she only didn't kill herself because that would have been so unfair to this poor veteran of harsh life circumstances. That woman is a saint. Not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> And don’t forget, we need to feel sorry (er compassion) for how much of the world he is carrying, unlike the rest of us who don’t get cut off by our dads and have to use mommy’s millions.



Jup. Poor thing.

Also, the Trainwreck formerly known as Prince is genius


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I can't imagine what they could have said if they weren't the most compassionate couple.
> Harry's comments about Oprah's interview:
> _‘*I like to think we were able to speak truth in the most compassionate way possible, therefore leaving an opening for reconciliation and healing,’ *he says. ‘The interview was about being real, being authentic and hopefully about sharing an experience that we know is incredibly relatable to a lot of people around the world despite our unique, privileged position.’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's relationship with royals is 'hanging by a thread'
> 
> 
> As part of a series on mental health for Apple TV+ with his friend Oprah Winfrey, Prince Harry made a series of allegations which are said to have left the royal family 'at the end of their tether'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



thank you for the quote , I was going to reiterate it, most important truth bomb of all


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. Poor thing.
> 
> Also, the Trainwreck formerly known as Prince is genius


Quick copyright that


----------



## marietouchet

Front page story for the Times

regarding click bait title ... remember he has said that neither he nor M told the family that she was suicidal , the BRF did NOT know 

My pain over Diana






						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

yesterday afternoon I heard an interview of Oprah & Harry on NPR.  If I understood correctly, Harry was saying he's over his mental health problems - now he wants to help others.


----------



## sdkitty

Oprah defending Harry....she probably really believes what she's spouting
Oprah defends Prince Harry: 'Privacy doesn't mean silence' (yahoo.com)


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> yesterday afternoon I heard an interview of Oprah & Harry on NPR.  If I understood correctly, Harry was saying he's over his mental health problems - now he wants to help others.


Going out on a limb here and saying one of you are wrong.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> Oprah defending Harry....she probably really believes what she's spouting
> Oprah defends Prince Harry: 'Privacy doesn't mean silence' (yahoo.com)


Here ya go, Oprah


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> God, what a manipulative POS she is. Also, I'm all too familiar with that shtick to give her the benefit of the doubt.


Somebody wrote in the comments to an article about H&M, that all this current attention on Harry is to counter all the negative reporting on Meghan. I have no problem believing she is not beneath sacrificing Harry pushing to try and reposition herself in the public eye as the better of the two.

Of course, the one thing that contradicts the above is that Harry is just as petty and vindictive as Meghan is. But of the two of them, she is definitely the instigator and he the very willing but still useful idiot. Nothing like this seemed to have ever happened with his other girlfriends, I believe.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Somebody wrote in the comments to an article about H&M, that all this current attention on Harry is to counter all the negative reporting on Meghan. I have no problem believing she is not beneath sacrificing Harry pushing to try and reposition herself in the public eye as the better of the two.
> 
> Of course, the one thing that contradicts the above is that Harry is just as petty and vindictive as Meghan is. But of the two of them, she is definitely the instigator and he the very willing but still useful idiot. Nothing like this seemed to have ever happened with his other girlfriends, I believe.


what if he gets so full of himself - with all the attention on the Oprah show, etc - that he starts to want to think for himself?  Apparently it took starting a relationship with Meghan for him to realize he had problems.  But now he is healthy and strong.  Could she lose control over him?  probably not


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Front page story for the Times
> 
> regarding click bait title ... remember he has said that neither he nor M told the family that she was suicidal , the BRF did NOT know
> 
> My pain over Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


He is still sore that the BRF didn't ask her if she was okay. If only they had, she would have broken down in front of them in an obvious sign of requiring help. They should not have expected the troubled twosome to actually request help. They weren't compassionate enough! 《 face palm 》


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Someone should have sat down and made a timeline for him because he is getting everything twisted.  If you can't keep your lies straight, you have a big problem.


To be a good liar, one has to have a phenomenal memory!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> "I like to think"
> Just imagine how much worse it could have been if he didn't like to think
> They sure have a weird way of showing compassion, and* I think* their avenue for healing and reconciliation requires capitulation from the other party.


I'm glad he likes to think.  Can you imagine how he'd act if he didn't?


----------



## floatinglili

It is interesting she has faded from view. No doubt in the much-planned timeline this was meant to be key time of media whirlwind and money making, leading up to a million Disney firework$$$ upon the new Princess Birth, yet MM has become so unpopular that she needs to hide seeking a reset? 
Ergh I meant to be done with this couple.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Oprah defending Harry....she probably really believes what she's spouting
> Oprah defends Prince Harry: 'Privacy doesn't mean silence' (yahoo.com)


Oprah to Harry:  Were you private?  Or were you PRIVATED?


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> I doubt she did. Dodi died before the lawsuit could get rolling.
> 
> Imagine how tied up the court system would be if everyone who was ever jilted by a romantic partner filed a lawsuit.



It only happens when the jilter has deep pockets and significant dirt on them.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> I remember his father being really messed up emotionally and mentally after the accident. He was certain it was a conspiracy.



Well, in all fairness, after hearing the revelation that the BBC told Diana that she was being spied on by the BRF, you can kind of understand her paranoia.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is his EDMR therapy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EMDR: what is the trauma therapy used by Prince Harry?
> 
> 
> Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing aims to reduce distress that some memories bring on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


The EDMR therapy doesn't seem to be working for Harry. He needs to find a reputable psychiatrist asap.


----------



## gracekelly

So this morning Harpers Bazaar has the story that Harry can’t stand the thought of  losing amother. woman. He better sit down because there is the distinct possibility that MM won’t hang around after her title is removed


----------



## sdkitty

heres a transcript of the NPR interview if anyone is interested


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


>



Didn't have to delve to deep on this, a mere surface scratch will tell you it was a lie.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


>



makes no sense
didn't he promote mental health treatment before he met her? or am I getting confused?


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> My question for the day is are the children safe with them? They’ve got little Archie locked away in the tower never seeing daylight. How can that be mentally good for his development?


THIS is something that concerns greatly, as I have seen this FIRST HAND with my brother-in-law's children!  Their mother was a total nut-job who (because SHE felt that HER mother didn't pay enough attention to her), absolutely SMOTHERED her children to the point that when they were over my in-laws, she would come in the door and .. poof, off to the basement or upstairs to "be with my children".  Even their father, for cripes sake .. couldn't get a word in edgewise, and heaven forbid any of us "interacted" with them especially when playing a game .. she would say "they can NEVER lose" .. huh? .. what?? .. children have got to learn that they are not ALWAYS going to win.  

Needless to say, the eldest has major social issues, but the younger one .. my god!  Poor kid ended up in the Psych Ward on multiple occasions, tried to commit suicide on multiple occasions, etc. -- thank god for my brother-in-law who finally put his foot down (they ultimately divorced) .. and got her the treatment she really needed (it helped that he is a high-ranking Harvard/Boston physician himself).  She missed many years of school, had to go to a "special" (Outbound-type) of school, but finally turned the corner and attended University (she now works with Horses and is very happy).  At her eldest sister's wedding (which shocked my husband and I that the eldest even found someone to 'bond' with) .. the frostiness between the two girls and their mother was EPIC!  By smothering them, she had .. in essence, turned them so much AWAY from her .. she will likely lead a very lonely 'senior' life .. so sad!


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Until like 25 years ago in Germany women could sue for a broken engagement as well. So I don't find it that unbelievable. Up until today, the ring legally has to be returned if the engagement is broken off before the wedding because the contract isn't fulfilled then (that's for the US, Germany doesn't generally do big diamond honkers).



  OHH NOOOO, I'm NOT giving up a diamond honker! 

Happy Saturday everyone!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> I doubt she did. Dodi died before the lawsuit could get rolling.
> 
> Imagine how tied up the court system would be if everyone who was ever jilted by a romantic partner filed a lawsuit.



That does happen (to rich people, but that's suits in general)... you're suing the estate of the person. People were suing Michael Jackson for years after he died. You can also sue on behalf of a dead person, which I have personally done. The dead deserve justice too!


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


>




Privileged person not recognizing their privilege?


----------



## Chanbal

Wow!


----------



## bellecate

floatinglili said:


> It is interesting she has faded from view. No doubt in the much-planned timeline this was meant to be key time of media whirlwind and money making, leading up to a million Disney firework$$$ upon the new Princess Birth, yet MM has become so unpopular that she needs to hide seeking a reset?
> Ergh I meant to be done with this couple.


In the back of my brain I keep wondering if this is her step one in eventually divorcing him when she feels she is either high profile enough on her own or has the next unsuspecting stepping stone in her sights. Lets him loose on his own and he doesn't come across as too stable. She already has it out there that H has anger issues, had problems with drugs, alcohol. All she'd need to do is say he yells, violent?? and the kids, (money) go with her. Manipulation is her game.


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Privileged person not recognizing their privilege?
> 
> View attachment 5090182


No parent is perfect and I don't want to criticize Charles, his youngest son is excelling in doing that.
However, I wonder if he told JCMH how privileged he is and how thankful he should be for that. How lucky he is by not been born in a country where people are starving or in a family that couldn't pay for his basic needs or education... I wonder if he reminded JCMH that he is no better than the ones that don't have access to all the privilege he has. In Charles's favor, Will seems to be aware of that.


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


> No parent is perfect and I don't want to criticize Charles, his youngest son is excelling in doing that.
> However, I wonder if he told JCMH how privileged he is and how thankful he should be for that. How lucky he is by not been born in a country where people are starving or in a family that couldn't pay for his basic needs or education... I wonder if he reminded JCMH that he is no better than the ones that don't have access to all the privilege he has. In Charles's favor, Will seems to be aware of that.



Harry himself even said part of his job was going around visiting people much less fortunate. I think he recognizes his privilege in those specific areas where he was confronted directly with it but he has a blind spot where someone wasn't holding his hand and showing him the way. If it were me, I'd think... I'm literal royalty, rich, white Anglo male in UK, everything about my experience is probably privileged. But I've met, for example, male POC who think racism is real but not sexism.  Blind spots.


----------



## marietouchet

Drawing parallels between the collateral damage from the Diana Panorama interview and the H-O interviews

D did not speak to the press repeatedly so that she could be found to be contradicting herself as is H. There were two instances where D "spoke" freely to the press - Morton tapes and Bashir interview. The Morton tapes came out too late for there to be interest in comparing the two D accounts. But, we have video tapes of H, and lots of them. 

D admitted to close friends that she regretted the candor of her interview, but she died only two years later and has been placed on her pedestal, untouchable. I will get back to all of you in 5 years to see how H feels about his interviews

The D interview did lead to the divorce and put Charles and Camilla in the doghouse, I am not sure they ever managed to work their way out of that mess, despite YEARS of good work on both their parts. I think the O interviews will also cause a further decline in the popularity of Charles - mostly for stuff that is about 25 years old ... (water under the bridge, except with H ???)


Not sure there is anything that can or should be done to stop the flow of drivel ???  Title removal ? No ... Removal of rumored diplomatic passport? Should be done by Boris (does he care?)  There seems to be no more money flowing from C to H - a non issue now ? Does Charles need to call MM and make nice ? 

What do you think could be done ? Should something be done ? Does Charles need to publicly defend himself ??


----------



## bellecate

bellecate said:


> In the back of my brain I keep wondering if this is her step one in eventually divorcing him when she feels she is either high profile enough on her own or has the next unsuspecting stepping stone in her sights. Lets him loose on his own and he doesn't come across as too stable. She already has it out there that H has anger issues, had problems with drugs, alcohol. All she'd need to do is say he yells, violent?? and the kids, (money) go with her. Manipulation is her game.


Quoting myself to say I just read what I wrote to my DH and his response was "Or maybe she got tired of  wearing her baby bump and trying to remember which one to put on and that's why we don't see her".


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Quoting myself to say I just read what I wrote to my DH and his response was "Or maybe she got tired of  wearing her baby bump and trying to remember which one to put on and that's why we don't see her".


Ha....I think maybe your DH has been listening to you too much


----------



## gelbergirl

marietouchet said:


> Drawing parallels between the collateral damage from the Diana Panorama interview and the H-O interviews
> 
> D did not speak to the press repeatedly so that she could be found to be contradicting herself as is H. There were two instances where D "spoke" freely to the press - Morton tapes and Bashir interview. The Morton tapes came out too late for there to be interest in comparing the two D accounts. But, we have video tapes of H, and lots of them.
> 
> D admitted to close friends that she regretted the candor of her interview, but she died only two years later and has been placed on her pedestal, untouchable. I will get back to all of you in 5 years to see how H feels about his interviews
> 
> The D interview did lead to the divorce and put Charles and Camilla in the doghouse, I am not sure they ever managed to work their way out of that mess, despite YEARS of good work on both their parts. I think the O interviews will also cause a further decline in the popularity of Charles - mostly for stuff that is about 25 years old ... (water under the bridge, except with H ???)
> 
> 
> Not sure there is anything that can or should be done to stop the flow of drivel ???  Title removal ? No ... Removal of rumored diplomatic passport? Should be done by Boris (does he care?)  There seems to be no more money flowing from C to H - a non issue now ? Does Charles need to call MM and make nice ?
> 
> What do you think could be done ? Should something be done ? Does Charles need to publicly defend himself ??



I forgot about Morton.
wondering if she did that for the same reason as the Bashir interview


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Somebody wrote in the comments to an article about H&M, that all this current attention on Harry is to counter all the negative reporting on Meghan. I have no problem believing she is not beneath sacrificing Harry pushing to try and reposition herself in the public eye as the better of the two.
> 
> Of course, the one thing that contradicts the above is that Harry is just as petty and vindictive as Meghan is. But of the two of them, she is definitely the instigator and he the very willing but still useful idiot. Nothing like this seemed to have ever happened with his other girlfriends, I believe.


IDK ....would she be able to recognize/acknowledge negative reporting on herself?  would anyone working for her dare tell her?
She is apparently in her opinion and many others right up there with Michelle O


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> And she still uses the duchess title given to her by such terrible people ...
> 
> View attachment 5089615
> 
> _ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.
> “That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
> “She cried and she cried and she cried.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry claims Royals tried to ‘smear’ Meghan ahead of Oprah chat
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has made another bombshell claim - suggesting the Royal family tried to "smear" Meghan Markle ahead of the Sussex royals interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


.. wait, what?!?! .. so, we have *two Z-LIST actors* now (_Hap-Hazza and Meg-han-o-lo-maniac_)????  *WHAT UTTER BS! *


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. wait, what?!?! .. so, we have *two Z-LIST actors* now (_Hap-Hazza and Meg-han-o-lo-maniac_)????  *WHAT UTTER BS! *


sometimes I try (not very hard) to look at them through the lens of someone who likes them....it doesn't work.....they just aren't credible to me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> What do you think could be done ? Should something be done ? Does Charles need to publicly defend himself ??



I have no real solution, but Charles absolutely should not indulge them by saying anything. The BRF needs to adopt the firm policy of not negotiating with terrorists.


----------



## marietouchet

gelbergirl said:


> I forgot about Morton.
> wondering if she did that for the same reason as the Bashir interview


If I remember the chronology ... at the time of the book, she was rumored to have collaborated, but Morton denied it so the book was only PARTLY responsible for the separation , the tapes only came out 2-3 years ago when Morton reprinted the book

the Bashir interview, some 3 years after the separation, was the straw that broke the camel’s back, the Queen called for the divorce

we DO KNOW something BIG happened each time

Why did she help Morton ? Presumably to tell her truth so that the world knew of Camilla ?

we do know the WHY for the Bashir interview, forged docs, but that still does not explain her admitting her own affairs , all she had to do was complain of Camilla, since Charles had admitted his own infidelity in his interview


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no real solution, but Charles absolutely should not indulge them by saying anything. The BRF needs to adopt the firm policy of not negotiating with terrorists.


I am sort of thinking Boris needs to do something , I don’t know what  ... or at least work behind the scenes , as Tony Blair did after the death of D


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no real solution, but Charles absolutely should not indulge them by saying anything. The BRF needs to adopt the firm policy of not negotiating with terrorists.


yes, when they go low the royals go high


----------



## queennadine

I’m honestly not sure what they’re hoping to gain by trashing the BRF day in and day out. Although woke victimhood is trendy right now, people have a short attention span. I don’t think they can milk the “mental health issues because mum died and papa was mean” line much longer. Americans eventually get fed up with constant whining. We like winners and people who pick themselves up and move forward. IMO these two are already boring and predictable.


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> makes no sense
> didn't he promote mental health treatment before he met her? or am I getting confused?


Nope. You’re remembering correctly. It’s ‘just Harry’ whose recollections may vary.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

floatinglili said:


> It is interesting she has faded from view. No doubt in the much-planned timeline this was meant to be key time of media whirlwind and money making, leading up to a million Disney firework$$$ upon the new Princess Birth, yet MM has become so unpopular that she needs to hide seeking a reset?
> *Ergh I meant to be done with this couple.*


I share this feeling, I'm sick of their selfish antics. But I sure enjoy coming here for the great comments 


To answer marietouchet 's question what the BRF/Charles should do:
Renounce and be done with them, Charles and William, I beg of you


----------



## gerryt

V0N1B2 said:


> Nope. You’re remembering correctly. It’s ‘just Harry’ whose recollections may vary.
> View attachment 5090306
> View attachment 5090307


My view :  Having seen a lot of press coverage of H and the other royals over the years, I am, with I believe the majority of British people, of the opinion that whilst he will have had good and bad days, in general until he met M, (and with the obvious exception of the period around his mother’s death), H led a relatively happy life.

The more that I read on this, the more I think that H’s mental health problems developed early (maybe even prior to D’s death), that it was recognised by the RF and support, first within the family and then professionally, was put in place.  They kept him on a relatively even keel until M came along and whisked him away for her own ends.  Once beyond their support H has started spiralling downwards.  

Despite his illness he is very believable.  I think this is because he is also suggestible, genuinely believes the last thing he’s been told and therefore he creates this constantly changing narrative within the details.  We in the UK have been told that he’s been in therapy for a number of years, contrary to this latest statement that therapy started after Ms arrival.  Suggestibility being the case in point - that’s the last thing he’s been told and the damage-control message she currently wants out there.  I agree with those who have said that this is the part of her campaign where she absolves herself of any guilt and supports her position with regard to finance, custody etc moving forward.

Surely O with her own childhood experiences recognises his illness and vulnerability.  She is supposedly a great friend of theirs, yet instead of trying to help him towards healing, she seems to be colluding with M in exploiting him by playing this out on a worldwide stage.   She is only focusing on her own drivers, much as Bashir did to his mother.


----------



## sdkitty

gerryt said:


> My view :  Having seen a lot of press coverage of H and the other royals over the years, I am, with I believe the majority of British people, of the opinion that whilst he will have had good and bad days, in general until he met M, (and with the obvious exception of the period around his mother’s death), H led a relatively happy life.
> 
> The more that I read on this, the more I think that H’s mental health problems developed early (maybe even prior to D’s death), that it was recognised by the RF and support, first within the family and then professionally, was put in place.  They kept him on a relatively even keel until M came along and whisked him away for her own ends.  Once beyond their support H has started spiralling downwards.
> 
> Despite his illness he is very believable.  I think this is because he is also suggestible, genuinely believes the last thing he’s been told and therefore he creates this constantly changing narrative within the details.  We in the UK have been told that he’s been in therapy for a number of years, contrary to this latest statement that therapy started after Ms arrival.  Suggestibility being the case in point - that’s the last thing he’s been told and the damage-control message she currently wants out there.  I agree with those who have said that this is the part of her campaign where she absolves herself of any guilt and supports her position with regard to finance, custody etc moving forward.
> 
> Surely O with her own childhood experiences recognises his illness and vulnerability.  She is supposedly a great friend of theirs, yet instead of trying to help him towards healing, she seems to be colluding with M in exploiting him by playing this out on a worldwide stage.   She is only focusing on her own drivers, much as Bashir did to his mother.


IMO Oprah is a great sales person.  remember Oprah's favorite things?  she really made you believe those were her Personal favorites.  Now when her O employee (adam glassman) appears on TV hawking her favorite things, it's not the same.  just seems like stuff that was chosen by a committee at O magazine.
So she has decided that she is gonna sell H&M.  Sell them as victims of racism, victims of the RF.  A lot of people will buy it.
But she doesn't have her daily TV show anymore so she may not be as influential.  We'll see.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no real solution, but Charles absolutely should not indulge them by saying anything. The BRF needs to adopt the firm policy of not negotiating with terrorists.



Put them on ignore, don’t engage with them at all.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bellecate said:


> In the back of my brain I keep wondering if this is her step one in eventually divorcing him when she feels she is either high profile enough on her own or has the next unsuspecting stepping stone in her sights. Lets him loose on his own and he doesn't come across as too stable. She already has it out there that H has anger issues, had problems with drugs, alcohol. All she'd need to do is say he yells, violent?? and the kids, (money) go with her. Manipulation is her game.



The Montecito Palace is hers since she has to raise the kids, monthly $$$$$ for Archie and baby sister, alimony since H has all those high paying jobs and she gets to keep that engagement ring and any jewels she's stashed away.    H maybe out of the picture but not his $$$$$'s.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF, including Charles & William, have been dealing with Hazzie’s issues from day 1.
Plenty of others on both sides of the family [Spencer & Wales] had mental issues. They plan to _ignore _H’s nonsense. He is their family member, after 35+ years, they ought to know what works. Ignore. 

After watching his EMDR session, it is clear he, a troubled person, is being exploited. Also, whatever therapy he is doing, it has not worked, so maybe it is time for the OW therapist to send him on his way. The therapy must yield positive results. That is not happening here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> The Montecito Palace is hers since she has to raise the kids, monthly $$$$$ for Archie and baby sister, alimony since H has all those high paying jobs and she gets to keep that engagement ring and any jewels she's stashed away.    H maybe out of the picture but not his $$$$$'s.



She will get more $$$$$ if she keeps him.  Also, with 2 young kids, royal paps and a royal ex, she is becoming less and less attractive to the billionaire boys. IMO


----------



## chicinthecity777

Interesting tweet! Raising a lot of questions! Was he really using drugs which was covered up for years (perhaps with the help of RF, so much so for no special treatment in the army) or was it yet another lie?


----------



## Clearblueskies

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting tweet! Raising a lot of questions! Was he really using drugs which was covered up for years (perhaps with the help of RF, so much so for no special treatment in the army) or was it yet another lie?



I think he’s just told so many stories he’s lost track   he’s sounding a bit hysterical to me now


----------



## kipp

Just saw this on twitter and it felt appropriate for here as well:


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> IDK ....would she be able to recognize/acknowledge negative reporting on herself?  would anyone working for her dare tell her?
> 
> She is apparently in her opinion and many others right up there with Michelle O


I'm no fan of Mrs. Oba***ma but even I can't disagree with your comparison 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			






I'm convinced Meghan reads _everything_ written and posted she can find about herself, and then dutifully/manipulatively reports it all back to Harry, which is in part probably one of the reasons these two are in the mental state they are. I think this is basic celebrity for dummies: "Do not read what others write about you on the internet if you want to stay sane".

Think of all the people out there who, according to Meghan, are _WRONG!_ about her and that all need to recognise _HER!_ truth. I think this is one of the things that really keeps her going.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Chanbal said:


> QE is already on IGNORE. "_THE QUEEN has been seen smiling bravely in her first meeting since her grandson Prince Harry's bombshell interview."_


I imagine QE2 observed real hardships during WW2. She's probably embarrassed to have such a wuss of a grandson.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting tweet! Raising a lot of questions! Was he really using drugs which was covered up for years (perhaps with the help of RF, so much so for no special treatment in the army) or was it yet another lie?




Did he mean drugs as in what you buy on the streets or drugs as in prescribed by his psychiatrist? I didn't even catch that, but OMG.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Honestly, I don't enjoy watching someone melt down like this at all. That Meghan lets him (yes, he's an adult, but she doesn't even let him walk or sit or talk like he wants...in fact, I just watched a video from when she was pregnant and they were entering some event together. Apparently he wanted to let go of her hand and she not only did not allow him to do so, she YANKED his hand like you'd do with a tantruming child or a misbehaving dog, all while showing her fake megawatt smile for the press) tells us everything we need to now IMO.


----------



## redney

bellecate said:


> Quoting myself to say I just read what I wrote to my DH and his response was "Or maybe she got tired of  wearing her baby bump and trying to remember which one to put on and that's why we don't see her".


I'm with your DH. First thing that came to my mind.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

What was the name of that lord that minded Harry some years ago? Does anyone know more about him, and what his role was in looking after Harry?

It's a bit of a red flag when an adult of supposedly sound mind and body, in this case Harry, needs a caretaker, visibly even in public. I haven't followed Harry before his marriage so maybe I've misunderstood the role of this lord but I do remember a photo of him sitting right behind and talking in to the ear of a clearly sulking Harry.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, I don't enjoy watching someone melt down like this at all. That Meghan lets him (yes, he's an adult, but she doesn't even let him walk or sit or talk like he wants...in fact, I just watched a video from when she was pregnant and they were entering some event together. Apparently he wanted to let go of her hand and she not only did not allow him to do so, she YANKED his hand like you'd do with a tantruming child or a misbehaving dog, all while showing her fake megawatt smile for the press) tells us everything we need to now IMO.



THAT B$t*h!!!  DH swung by to check on me just now. He said are you getting into another froth dear? K will come back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This sums up my position ———   today
- Enough with the “trauma porn”
- Enough with the “secondhand trauma” through the therapy sessions, ‘truth-bombs’, etc.
- Enough with the complaining and ungrateful attitude. They have money, a huge network of connections that we lil people [the ones who worked for everything we have] do not have. Their options always _seemed _much better than ours, but now I am not so sure. So, yeah, the Montecito nuts need to stop. Be aware, H&M, that *now* nobody, but nobody, wants to follow you. E.v.e.r.
- Enough with trying to turn deranged Diana into some sort of Saint, she who had a long list of mental health problems - bulimia, depression, cutting, paranoia, etc. needs to rest in peace. 

Time for those beautiful summer days


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Not sure there is anything that can or should be done to stop the flow of drivel ??? Title removal ? No ... Removal of rumored diplomatic passport? Should be done by Boris (does he care?) There seems to be no more money flowing from C to H - a non issue now ? Does Charles need to call MM and make nice ?
> 
> *What do you think could be done ? Should something be done ? Does Charles need to publicly defend himself ??*



I don't think Charles needs to do anything. Dignified silence at this point is the best way forward for Charles, the Queen, Will and the rest of the family.  Get on with the day job and keep doing it well.  

Everything Harry is venting about basically involves private family dynamics. The more Harry rants, the more sympathy I have for Charles and, believe me, I was firmly Team Diana for many years, not so much recently as I've read about her affairs, her flaws, and her own manipulation of the press.  

I can understand how Charles though would very much wish to give his own interview in which he answers each claim one by one but I think getting into a transatlantic back and forth with Harry over his parenting style and skills, or what role the Palace staff should play in the private medical and psychiatric care of a family member, would be ridiculous. Eventually, Harry will have to stop because it will damage his own image, if it hasn't already. He looks self-absorbed and rather unhinged and over what?  That some family member or staff member didn't step in to call a psychiatrist for his wife?  Something he could have done himself?  The staff didn't leap high enough for him when he said _jump? _Would he really would want a full accounting of all of the "neglect" when it likely shows he and his wife were catered to and pampered and handled with tremendous care? Does he really want all of his actions and demands to be inventoried and made public?


----------



## Jktgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _After learning of Dodi’s romance with Diana, Kelly phoned her ex to vent her fury. A 20-minute recording of the call was played in London in 2007 during the inquest into Diana’s death. It captures Kelly fuming: “You even flew me down to St Tropez to sit on a boat while you seduced Diana all day and f***ed me all night.”_



Is it wrong to prefer to be the Kelly in this situation? [dreaming of snorkeling and swimming off a boat....]


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jktgal said:


> Is it wrong to prefer to be the Kelly in this situation? [dreaming of snorkeling and swimming off a boat....]



Noooo, not wrong at all.
She showed up to her interview with an awesome St. Tropez tan, the kind ya only get sunning on yachts, her mom (!), awesome haircut, and a *her* honker-ring.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooo, not wrong at all.
> She showed up to her interview with an awesome St. Tropez tan, the kind ya only get sunning on yachts, her mom (!), awesome haircut, and a *her* honker-ring.



I don't know about anyone else here but her engagement ring to me is to similar to Diana's. I know the style became very popular after Diana's. I have rings in that style back from the 80's too.  Just seems strange to me though. Maybe it's just me.


----------



## Jktgal

Given her moaning about the whole Camilla-Charles thing, pretty hypocritical of Diana to be putting herself in that situation.

Edit, just watched the video. She's very beautiful, looks a bit like Charlene the swimmer


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> This sums up my position ———   today
> - *Enough with the “trauma porn”*



I've wondered about this. Does emotional pain porn really do anybody any good?  Does it just make people feel better to know that the rich and famous can be unhappy too?

Jan Moir said in her piece in the DM linked above:
_*. . . what on earth was the point of it all, except to burnish the victim credentials of all who took part?*_

. . . *And where does it leave the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have told their story, and now they can only tell it again. And again.*
_*
This time around, the impact of Harry’s past suffering was already diluted, the revelations blunted by repetition.

Prince Harry has walked onto the stage of American life and given it all he has got – a tragic backstory. He means well, of course he does, but without his royal role he has no clarity of function, only a vague, inchoate, hippy-dippy wish to be some sort of public healer.*
_


----------



## VickyB

Enjoying everybody’s posts!
I used to think H sounds like a dumbass.  Now I think H is a dumbass.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> GA always seemed like a fame whore to me too.  She was always in every case on TV.



I understand why it may seem that way, but, in truth, not always. 

Will not go into detail to protect privacy of those involved, but a family member was part of a group of 10 women who sued their employer for sexual harassment and Gloria was their attorney. It was localized, not a case that garnered national attention, took several weeks to litigate. The women ranged from executive level to entry level clerks, the jerk did not discriminate in his sexual harassment. Gloria treated the case and the women at the same level she would treat celebrity clients with multimillions at stake. She went out of her way to low key it and appeared on TV only once and it was a brief clip. In the course of it she helped some of the women re establish their self esteem, commending them both in writing and verbally for their record keeping that resulted in compelling testimony and for their demeanor and presentations in court. It helped. They won, it was a slam dunk, did not result in millions per plaintiff, but everyone did get some monetary damages. She had a male associate, an older gentleman, who worked with her and he was equally superb.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooo, not wrong at all.
> She showed up to her interview with an awesome St. Tropez tan, the kind ya only get sunning on yachts, her mom (!), awesome haircut, and a *her* honker-ring.



That was raw! Poor girl, she was really hurt. It's true women- and men- get jilted all the time, so why is Kelly special? I don't really know what to think except I'd want revenge too.

She really seemed to be in shock, so I believe what she says happened, is what happened. It's one of those things that changes your perception of someone, in this case Diana who must have known about Kelly? It's like how I felt sorry for Aniston because of Pitt, until she and Justin dumped and paid off his long-term girlfriend...


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> And she still uses the duchess title given to her by such terrible people ...
> 
> View attachment 5089615
> 
> _ “Before the Oprah interview had aired, because of their headlines and that combined effort of The Firm and the media to smear her, I was woken up in the middle of the night to her [Meghan] crying in her pillow - because she doesn’t want to wake me up because I’m already carrying too much.
> “That’s heartbreaking. I held her. We talked.
> “She cried and she cried and she cried.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry claims Royals tried to ‘smear’ Meghan ahead of Oprah chat
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has made another bombshell claim - suggesting the Royal family tried to "smear" Meghan Markle ahead of the Sussex royals interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Yep. A girl who's so proud to be a modern American girl is sooooooo attached to that medieval title.

I'd also like to be enlightened about what kind of weights Hazzie carries. Does he have to carry sacks of coal to pay for rent? Maybe wood logs from shed to fill the fireplace - God knows how many they have in that mansion? Or do those bags of goods from Rodeo Drive weight that much? Or did she mean mental or emotional burden? Like having to take care of elderly relatives around the clock? Having to take three jobs to feed his family?
I know that he has been through a lot but he never had financial problems, a particularly demanding job (smiling and shaking a few hands doesn't seem to be too demanding to me), he was lucky (or unlucky) to find the girl of his dreams (?) and even had a child. If time didn't heal his wounds, he had access to the best possible care. He had a better than average chance to have a happy life. So why is this constant display his tremendous pain, yet complete disregard or compassion to others'? He would need an ice cold shower and year spent living the life of average mortals with limited budget.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for those beautiful summer days



It's nearly June and it's been raining, raining, raining.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well, that 180000 bucks engagement ring is ugly (it's even worse than Diana's / Kate's IMO), but the heart ring she wears on her other hand is cute.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, that 180000 bucks engagement ring is ugly (it's even worse than Diana's / Kate's IMO), but the heart ring she wears on her other hand is cute.



It was an ‘investment‘ piece.  Beauty is not the issue. All about the resale. 
Girlfriend knew her billionaire boy could drift, so she secured her future with significant jewels, house in Malibu, and cash. If someone wants to play in the high-stakes world, she needs to be prepared for the end.

Rainy in my town, too.  I am certain the sun will shine and the trauma-drama will end.


----------



## needlv

Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?









						She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## redney

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


WOW!  Sure seems to fit to a T.


----------



## csshopper

Not blind. More like eyes wide open, the more he talks, the more he incriminates himself, tragic if the cover ups are true, I hate to see the Queen smeared.

My question is what is Oprah, the instigator/enabler's connection to the Velociraptor? Are they co-conspirators?

An observation: she will not leave until she has the next victim in her sights. She needs an audience for her drama. No fun in it for her unless there's someone dancing to her tune in front of her.

ETA: And in the meantime she will dangle the threat of suicide and drench more pillows in tears to keep him under control.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


It fits like a glove!


----------



## Lounorada

Straight-Laced said:


> Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry accuses Royal family of 'total neglect' and 'bullying' in Apple TV series*
> *Duke of Sussex says Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too in explosive interview*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has accused the Royal family of "total neglect" and of "bullying him into silence" as he said the Prince of Wales had told him that as he had suffered, his sons would suffer too.
> 
> He spoke extensively about his struggles with mental health and his disconnect with his family’s attitudes to the subject.
> 
> “Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect,” he said.
> 
> “We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job.”
> 
> “That doesn’t make sense. Just because you suffered doesn’t mean that your kids have to suffer, in fact quite the opposite - if you suffered, do everything you can to make sure that whatever negative experiences you had, that you can make it right for your kids.”
> 
> But he added: “I‘ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”
> 
> He also revealed that when the Duchess, 39, felt suicidal, she had not gone through with it because it would have been “unfair” on him, having already lost his mother.
> 
> He said he was ashamed it had got “that bad” but that he was also too ashamed to go to his family, because he knew they could not give him what he needed.
> 
> “That was one of the biggest reasons to leave, feeling trapped and feeling controlled through fear, both by the media and by the system itself which never encouraged the talking about this kind of trauma,” he said.
> 
> “Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”





Wow. He is insufferable beyond belief. I can't roll my eyes enough at the sh*t he says.
_'We spent four years trying to make it work.'_ Uhmm, no. You just had your 3rd wedding anniversary and you ran away from your duties over a year ago. Math might not be your strong suit, but this is like basic, entry level math that young children would master, you're pushing 40 yo. 
_“Certainly now I will never be bullied into silence.”_ Okay. So you won't be bullied into silence, but it is perfectly fine for you to _bully your own family_ with the way you're behaving recently by accusing them of all sorts of terrible things knowing they will show restraint, remain silent and not respond because they don't play that way by having slanging matches in public, airing their private business and dancing to the tune of an attention seeking fool.



lanasyogamama said:


> I have zero doubt that she fed him the “they won’t stop until I’m dead” idea.


*Agreed*









V0N1B2 said:


> I guess covid has been good for something.











jelliedfeels said:


> That’s a hilarious gif
> *I keep thinking she’s going to reveal a load of fake watches hanging on the inside like a cartoon crook.*







Like Del Boy in Only Fools and Horses  These two are more like 'Only Fools and Whingers' or 'Only Fools and Hypocrites'.




V0N1B2 said:


> What... the...
> View attachment 5089857
> View attachment 5089858


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


You are not alone!


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he mean drugs as in what you buy on the streets or drugs as in prescribed by his psychiatrist? I didn't even catch that, but OMG.


There are stories he was wild at Eton, which would be after his mother died, and yes public school boys are known for drink and unprescribed drugs


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I find it really odd for a self proclaimed independent modern career woman chose to marry Harry, let alone date him. I think she really thought this would be a disney movie. I would have thought someone more educated, articulate and self made is someone her style, but I guess she really wanted the titles and privileges. 

It was rumored that Kate thought it was odd that Harry had not met Meghans family or her father before the wedding, and I have to agree. Harry really really wanted to get married, and I honestly don't think he is too picky. I have a theory that his need to get married stems from him needing a maternal figure in his life, rather than for the right reasons.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> I understand why it may seem that way, but, in truth, not always.
> 
> Will not go into detail to protect privacy of those involved, but a family member was part of a group of 10 women who sued their employer for sexual harassment and Gloria was their attorney. It was localized, not a case that garnered national attention, took several weeks to litigate. The women ranged from executive level to entry level clerks, the jerk did not discriminate in his sexual harassment. Gloria treated the case and the women at the same level she would treat celebrity clients with multimillions at stake. She went out of her way to low key it and appeared on TV only once and it was a brief clip. In the course of it she helped some of the women re establish their self esteem, commending them both in writing and verbally for their record keeping that resulted in compelling testimony and for their demeanor and presentations in court. It helped. They won, it was a slam dunk, did not result in millions per plaintiff, but everyone did get some monetary damages. She had a male associate, an older gentleman, who worked with her and he was equally superb.


That's wonderful to hear.  It's nice to get a different perspective of her.  Shows that what we see on TV is not always as it seems.


----------



## redney

Shopaholic2021 said:


> *I find it really odd for a self proclaimed independent modern career woman chose to marry Harry, let alone date him. I think she really thought this would be a disney movie*. I would have thought someone more educated, articulate and self made is someone her style, but I guess she really wanted the titles and privileges.


If that Blind Gossip item @needlv posted above is true, she saw him as her victim to exploit to gain worldwide fame and fortune!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> *I'm convinced Meghan reads everything written and posted she can find about herself*, and then dutifully/manipulatively reports it all back to Harry, which is in part probably one of the reasons these two are in the mental state they are. I think this is basic celebrity for dummies: "Do not read what others write about you on the internet if you want to stay sane".


Me too.  And I'm sure she's visited this forum a number of times and wonders why we are *so mean* and don't ever wonder if *she's ok*?!!?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he mean drugs as in what you buy on the streets or drugs as in prescribed by his psychiatrist? I didn't even catch that, but OMG.


I think he said to "numb the pain", which leads me to believe it's more drugs of the illegal sort.


----------



## Chanbal

QE looks great in red. 


_One source said: ‘*Harry’s grandmother has taken this very personally and is deeply upset by what Harry has said,* in particular his comments about Charles’s parenting and suggesting his father knows no better because of how he was brought up. It has been a very upsetting time.’

The friend added: ‘*Charles is such a gentle man and a dedicated father first and foremost. *He’ll be feeling wretched. He wants to seek a reconciliation. He is not vindictive at all.’ 

One aide said last week: ‘*They should put the titles into abeyance,* so they still exist but are not used, like they agreed to do with their HRHs. They should just become Harry and Meghan.’ _









						The Queen is 'deeply upset' at Harry's 'very personal' attacks
					

Royal sources say the Monarch has been shaken by Harry's repeated comments since the devastating interview that he and wife Meghan gave to US chat show star Oprah Winfrey in March.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				














						Sign the Petition
					

Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance




					www.change.org


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This sums up my position ———   today
> - Enough with the “trauma porn”
> - Enough with the “secondhand trauma” through the therapy sessions, ‘truth-bombs’, etc.
> - Enough with the complaining and ungrateful attitude. They have money, a huge network of connections that we lil people [the ones who worked for everything we have] do not have. Their options always _seemed _much better than ours, but now I am not so sure. So, yeah, the Montecito nuts need to stop. Be aware, H&M, that *now* nobody, but nobody, wants to follow you. E.v.e.r.
> - Enough with trying to turn deranged Diana into some sort of Saint, she who had a long list of mental health problems - bulimia, depression, cutting, paranoia, etc. needs to rest in peace.
> 
> Time for those beautiful summer days


You forgot all of their generational trauma, genetic trauma, and mommy trauma.


----------



## purseinsanity

VickyB said:


> Enjoying everybody’s posts!
> I used to think H sounds like a dumbass.  Now I think H is a dumbass.


Now I *KNOW* H is a dumbass!


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> That was raw! Poor girl, she was really hurt. It's true women- and men- get jilted all the time, so why is Kelly special? I don't really know what to think except I'd want revenge too.
> 
> She really seemed to be in shock, so I believe what she says happened, is what happened. It's one of those things that changes your perception of someone, in this case Diana who must have known about Kelly? It's like how I felt sorry for Aniston because of Pitt, until she and Justin dumped and paid off his long-term girlfriend...


I remember Laura Dern finding out her fiancé (Billy Bob) had left her for Angelina in a paper!


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


Ooooh, yes.  Meg is looking more and more like a future Black Widow!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm convinced Meghan reads _everything_ written and posted she can find about herself, and then dutifully/manipulatively reports it all back to Harry, which is in part probably one of the reasons these two are in the mental state they are. I think this is basic celebrity for dummies: "Do not read what others write about you on the internet if you want to stay sane".



Harry had a dummy instagram account and he used it when he was dating Meghan. He definitely reads things about himself in the media. He has said as much, and even said he has watched some of the crown. The producers did make it clear that the show was more fictional but I am sure if he gets a chance he will complain about it.


----------



## TimeToShop

Is it possible we’re selling her short? That she’s much more evil than we’ve given her credit for being? In a relatively short span she has isolated H from his family, convinced him to make a fool of himself on the world stage, got him to admit he drank and took drugs, and has anger issues.

Obviously she wants money and is no doubt trying to set up her big payday. Do you think she’s enjoying watching him spiral? Just a cruel person who is getting her jollies by being a puppet master? If it benefits her she’ll swoop in and help him but if not, oh well pay me or I’ll spill the family secrets?

You know the RF has the goods on her. Too bad they didn’t spill them before they married.


----------



## VickyB

purseinsanity said:


> I remember Laura Dern finding out her fiancé (Billy Bob) had left her for Angelina in a paper!


M will just change the locks and H will think there is something wrong with his key.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Does anyone think that H deliberately delayed his “ mental health “ tutorial and the venom included until after Prince Philip’s demise?  It has been years in the making and none of the individuals involved spoke of recent traumas and struggles. Why a release delay?  He has no empathy or compassion regarding his grandmother’s pain. Was he in any way intimidated by his grandfather?
Just  a thought


----------



## redney

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Does anyone think that H deliberately delayed his “ mental health “ tutorial and the venom included until after Prince Philip’s demise?  It has been years in the making and none of the individuals involved spoke of recent traumas and struggles. Why a release delay?  He has no empathy or compassion regarding his grandmother’s pain. Was he in any way intimidated by his grandfather?
> Just  a thought


The timing of all of this seems to align more with the OW interview and show and resulting PR trajectory they're on now.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Shopaholic2021 said:


> *I don't want to doubt that Meghan was suicidal because that is serious and a very deep issue. If anyone told me they were suicidal I would take that seriously. *However suicidal thoughts don't go away because you're thinking of someone else, feeling suicidal doesn't make you 'selfish'. That is what they are implying, if they say she didn't go through with it because she was thinking of Harry (which also doesn't make sense since she was pregnant- why would she not be thinking about her child as well in that case). People commit suicide have mental health issues, they don't do it because they are temporarily depressed.


Yet, we know that she would have no qualms in claiming it even if it weren't true just to destroy the family that didn't immediately elevate her to queen of the UK and wouldn't give her son the royal title he so rightly deserved.

ETA I'm being facetious in case you're wondering.


----------



## octopus17

DH has said that eventually no-one will be calling him and that it will just fizzle out - I really don't know. One can but hope...


----------



## Betty-Lou

TimeToShop said:


> Is it possible we’re selling her short? That she’s much more evil than we’ve given her credit for being? In a relatively short span she has isolated H from his family, convinced him to make a fool of himself on the world stage, got him to admit he drank and took drugs, and has anger issues.
> 
> Obviously she wants money and is no doubt trying to set up her big payday. Do you think she’s enjoying watching him spiral? Just a cruel person who is getting her jollies by being a puppet master? If it benefits her she’ll swoop in and help him but if not, oh well pay me or I’ll spill the family secrets?
> 
> You know the RF has the goods on her. Too bad they didn’t spill them before they married.



It almost like she is trying to put suicidal thoughts in his head.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



That fits her to a T. The only thing is the BRF isn’t without resources. They can make things disappear but they can also make things appear and her past is  not without blemish. I wonder at which point they start playing really dirty.


----------



## TimeToShop

Betty-Lou said:


> It almost like she is trying to put suicidal thoughts in his head.



Yes. I know she’s all about her and only her. Use and toss people aside. What if her endgame is to be his widow? She’ll always be part of the RF, presumably get a huge payday (depending on the will, etc), the sympathy that she’ll play into. What if she’s laying low and fueling his meltdown? Knowing full well she could stop it and help him - but not doing anything because she wants it all and he’s in the way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: @TimeToShop  IMO  be sure to factor in OW and Doria. They’ve been with the trauma-duo from the beginning. MM has made sure that we know they are all together. 

When was this OW s$it S$how filmed?  It was clear that editing had been done. I would still like to know the details - when each episode was filmed, who did the editing, how many cameras were used to film each episode, etc. Was this planned prior to their exit? One of his therapists sounded British, but I could be wrong.  How are all the participants doing today? That may be covered in the final episode, but I stopped with #3. 


Seems like we’ve heard about it since 2018? Pre covid?

=====
ok, looked it up — full article in spoiler








						Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey Apple + TV show 'delayed until later in 2021'
					

The Prince and the talkshow queen were due to release a series about mental health in 2020 – but filming is yet to begin and an air date is still to be confirmed




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_The series was first revealed in April 2019, with Prince Harry due to: “serve as co-creator and executive producer for the series.”_



Spoiler: Delays?



*The Prince and the talkshow queen were due to release a series about mental health in 2020 – but filming is yet to begin and an air date is still to be confirmed*
Seamus Duff
A TV project involving Prince Harry and talkshow queen Oprah Winfrey on the subject of mental health has been delayed – according to reports.

The 36-year-old Prince and the 66-year-old American chatshow legend had been planning to release a series together via Apple +.

The show was originally supposed to stream on Apple in Autumn 2020, but now the series allegedly isn’t expected to begin filming until later this year.
‘





Prince Harry's Apple + TV show has been delayed (Image: AFP/Getty Images)
According to The Sun: “No firm release date has yet been announced”.

While the report goes on to suggest the coronavirus pandemic, Prince Harry ’s decision to quit Royal life and move to the USA have “slowed down” plans.

A show insider has claimed that updates about the series have been kept under wraps because: “delays never look good.”





The Prince is making a series about mental health alongside Oprah Winfrey (Image: Getty Images for Global Citizen)

The Sun’s report also gave the vague timing of “Spring” for when filming might get underway.

Mirror Online have contacted representatives of Prince Harry and Ms Winfrey for comment.

The series was first revealed in April 2019, with Prince Harry due to: “serve as co-creator and executive producer for the series.”





Harry and his wife Meghan Markle have been keeping busy making video and audio content(Image: Teenager Therapy/Twitter)
A Sussex Royal Instagram post said at the time: “We are excited to announce The Duke of Sussex and Oprah Winfrey are partners, co-creators and executive producers on their forthcoming mental health series launching on Apple in 2020.”

Since then, Prince Harry and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, have signed multi million pound deals to make content for streaming service Netflix and music and podcast service Spotify.

The first podcast created by the royal couple was released last week and saw the duo interview Sir Elton John and James Corden as part of the show.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Me too.  And I'm sure she's visited this forum a number of times and wonders why we are *so mean* and don't ever wonder if *she's ok*?!!?


We always wonder if she is okay. Not our fault that we find so many signs that she is far from okay and even more signs that she reaches out to ensure anyone who goes close to her will be guaranteed to not be okay.



TimeToShop said:


> Is it possible we’re selling her short? That she’s much more evil than we’ve given her credit for being? In a relatively short span she has isolated H from his family, convinced him to make a fool of himself on the world stage, got him to admit he drank and took drugs, and has anger issues.
> 
> Obviously she wants money and is no doubt trying to set up her big payday. Do you think she’s enjoying watching him spiral? Just a cruel person who is getting her jollies by being a puppet master? If it benefits her she’ll swoop in and help him but if not, oh well pay me or I’ll spill the family secrets?
> 
> You know the RF has the goods on her. Too bad they didn’t spill them before they married.


I see her as a vicious opportunist with a heaping dose of self-pity. If you read about her pre-H life, there are quotes about her complaining about many things, including that as a biracial actress, she wasn't white enough or black enough for racial-specific roles. So the race card she is deftly wielding now was an inconvenience in the past.

She has convinced herself that the world owes her for not giving her more from the start. Everyone to her is viewed transactionally as to whether they can benefit her. So much of her life is fuzzy. Some of her stories - I wonder if they are true or false, or heavily embellished. Like the meet-cute story: who was the accursed person who arranged her blind date with H and did she really naively ask "Is he nice?" I highly doubt it.


----------



## Betty-Lou

She could play the villainess in her own soap opera story. "All My Woke Family & Friends"

Staring M, written, directed and produced by M. at Archwell production company & studios.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> You forgot all of their generational trauma, genetic trauma, and mommy trauma.



I firstly read 'money' trauma rather than "mommy". I guess both are appropriate, it must be hell having all your needs. wants and whims catered for.


----------



## queennadine

I just asked DH if he wanted to watch that new show and he said “you’re sh***ing me, right?”


----------



## csshopper

Betty-Lou said:


> She could play the villainess in her own soap opera story. "All My Woke Family & Friends"
> 
> Staring M, written, directed and produced by M. at Archwell production company & studios.


But it would be a very small cast with so many potential participants having been “Markled” through the years.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m torn. As much as I love the idea of comparing her to a velociraptor, Meghan is too impatient to play the long game. She could be feeding him some of the lines he’s saying, but there is the real possibility he is doing it to himself. The ability to randomly blurt out inappropriate, ill-conceived comments is 100% Harry IMO. It may ultimately play into her hands if things between them go south but I believe he really is stupid enough to say those things he did on his own.


----------



## needlv

I wonder if this is true...


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I find it really odd for a self proclaimed independent modern career woman chose to marry Harry, let alone date him. I think she really thought this would be a disney movie. I would have thought someone more educated, articulate and self made is someone her style, but I guess she really wanted the titles and privileges.
> 
> It was rumored that Kate thought it was odd that Harry had not met Meghans family or her father before the wedding, and I have to agree. Harry really really wanted to get married, and I honestly don't think he is too picky. I have a theory that his need to get married stems from him needing a maternal figure in his life, rather than for the right reasons.



I agree, and add to that a very pretty modern career woman who actually did get a great education and had many long-term SOs before. She wasn't a naive young gal jumping into first love. I really think most of the draw must have had something to do with his family and the perceived "job" she could get after being in the BRF. I do think she genuinely wanted to be a princess and do the philanthropy stuff they do. And you know what, that's fine, lots of attractive men and women do that these days and I can't deny she really maximized the opportunity for fame and fortune. But wow. She is actually lucky she married a dunce because I don't think a well-adjusted, mature SO would go along to this extent.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I’m torn. As much as I love the idea of comparing her to a velociraptor, Meghan is too impatient to play the long game. She could be feeding him some of the lines he’s saying, but there is the real possibility he is doing it to himself. The ability to randomly blurt out inappropriate, ill-conceived comments is 100% Harry IMO. It may ultimately play into her hands if things between them go south but I believe he really is stupid enough to say those things he did on his own.


I think he is just smart enough to dash down the highway to h*ll if she points him in the right direction, and says the right trigger words or performs the right trigger actions to set aflame his need to protect his woman. And he is just dumb enough not to realize that he has been manipulated. If anyone is the naive virgin in this marriage, it would be H because he has been protected from shrews and vipers for most of his life. That Givenchy gown was made in his size.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Do you believe him?  



> https://nypost.com/2021/05/22/martin-bashir-apologizes-to-william-and-harry-over-diana-interview/
> 
> *Martin Bashir apologizes to Princes William and Harry, saying he ‘loved’ Diana*
> By
> Martin Bashir has issued an apology to Princes William and Harry but said he “loved” their mother and insisted that his notorious TV interview with her was not damaging.
> Bashir’s comments, made to the Sunday Times, came after William and Harry slammed him and the BBC after a report about the infamous 1995 sit-down came out last week, the Sun reported Saturday.
> “I never wanted to harm Diana in any way and I don’t believe we did,” Bashir told the Times.
> “Everything we did in terms of the interview was as she wanted, from when she wanted to alert the palace, to when it was broadcast, to its contents … My family and I loved her.”
> Bashir denied, however, that he tricked Diana into doing the interview by misleading her.
> “Even in the early 1990s, there were stories and secretly recorded phone calls. I wasn’t the source of any of that,” he said.
> Martin Bashir said he and his family loved Princess Diana.Eduardo Di Baia, File/AP
> An official report by Lord Dyson released Thursday lambasted Bashir, whom Dyson said duped Diana into giving the interview by using fake documents, including mocked-up bank statements that purported to show palace staff being paid for stories about her.
> The report also decried BBC bosses, including former BBC chief Lord Hall, for attempting to cover it up.
> The princes said last week that the Bashir interview fueled her “fear, paranoia and isolation,” and led to her death.
> William insisted the “Panorama” special should never be aired again, adding: “The interview was a major contribution to making my parents’ relationship worse and has since hurt countless others.”
> Harry added: “Our mother was an incredible woman who dedicated her life to service. She was resilient, brave, and unquestionably honest. The ripple effect of a culture of exploitation and unethical practices ultimately took her life.”
> Bashir said that he should not be blamed for Diana’s death, hitting back directly at her brother, Earl Spencer. who accused him of that.
> “I don’t feel I can be held responsible for many of the other things that were going on in her life, and the complex issues surrounding those decisions,” Bashir said.
> Princes William and Harry have criticized the 1995 interview. Victoria Jones/Pool via AP
> “I can understand the motivation [of Earl Spencer’s comments] but to channel the tragedy, the difficult relationship between the royal family and the media purely on to my shoulders feels a little unreasonable … The suggestion I am singularly responsible I think is unreasonable and unfair.”


----------



## K.D.

needlv said:


> I wonder if this is true...



Interesting story, so is everything we've seen is fake/reproduced? In the comments on Twitter they call her Narckle hahaha


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


Wow!  I’ve been wondering where MM is hiding, she’s in the undergrowth to the left.


Hermes Zen said:


> Do you believe him?


No.  He is a worm. He’s been telling the world he’s still sick from Covid, but been photographed out shopping.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It was an ‘investment‘ piece.  Beauty is not the issue. All about the resale.
> Girlfriend knew her billionaire boy could drift, so she secured her future with significant jewels, house in Malibu, and cash. If someone wants to play in the high-stakes world, she needs to be prepared for the end.



I'm sure you can get rings that are expensive AND beautiful


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Does anyone think this blind is about MM?   Can you see her end game?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She Is A Velociraptor - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress is a Velociraptor. Her famous husband doesn’t even realize it. If you have seen the movie Jurassic Park, you may recall the species of dinosaur called Velociraptor. The park’s game warden, Robert Muldoon, knows how dangerous Raptors are. In the opening scene of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



Without having clicked the link velociraptor sounds appropriate.


----------



## lalame

Hermes Zen said:


> Do you believe him?



I don't see how anything he's saying addresses the horrible means he took to get to those ends. "She wanted to do the interview" doesn't really hold up if you have to create fake BANK statements to convince her to do it. He's just trying to get sympathy... whether he loves her or not or her life was complicated in other ways has nothing to do with what he did to her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Like the meet-cute story: who was the accursed person who arranged her blind date with H and did she really naively ask "Is he nice?" I highly doubt it.



The word she used as per I think the engagement interview was "kind". It was the first pointer she's full of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I wonder if this is true...




Sounds plausible. Royal jewelry is not the same as her personal jewelry (the Cartier, the aquamarine ring and argueably even her engagement ring). In fact, the choice of words - how she was allowed to keep the royal jewelry for her lifetime - makes me think it was a) gifts given in an official capacity and b) loans (e.g. the Lover's Knot tiara that is now on loan to Kate).

ETA: remember, Raptor was banned from using family jewels not too long after the wedding. I think I brought up several pages ago that maybe the Queen acted because the troublesome two were trying to get their hands on jewelry meant to be worn by Kate because she doesn't strike me as a petty person who'd put that rule into place just because.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Do you believe him?



No.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comments section of the article on the Queen being deeply upset.



> Harry is probably on drugs they regulate him on to make him more controlable.  Easy way to off him too....overdose.... New drama queen of widowhood coming..... So bloody obvious!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The word she used as per I think the engagement interview was "kind". It was the first pointer she's full of it.


Thank you!


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The word she used as per I think the engagement interview was "kind". It was the first pointer she's full of it.


Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Do you believe him?



Would you ever?


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.




H "She's capable of anything" 
M "Thank you" 

Me


----------



## chicinthecity777

Clearblueskies said:


> I think he’s just told so many stories lies he’s lost track   he’s sounding a bit hysterical to me now


There, fixed it for you.


----------



## DeMonica

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I find it really odd for a self proclaimed independent modern career woman chose to marry Harry, let alone date him. I think she really thought this would be a disney movie. I would have thought someone more educated, articulate and self made is someone her style, but I guess she really wanted the titles and privileges.
> 
> It was rumored that Kate thought it was odd that Harry had not met Meghans family or her father before the wedding, and I have to agree. Harry really really wanted to get married, and I honestly don't think he is too picky. I have a theory that his need to get married stems from him needing a maternal figure in his life, rather than for the right reasons.


I've mentioned before: it's very weird that Thomas never met at least Hazzie. In every somewhat decent family the in-laws meet at least before the wedding, but more likely even before the engagement. I don't understand how H&M could not fork out an economy class ticket to London and an acceptable room for a couple of nights in the period between 2016 and 2018. Their relationship with TM went sour directly before the wedding if I'm not mistaken. When she wrote that essay for Elle (published in December, 2016)  she had nothing against his Emmy winning dad who gave her a head start in her chosen profession. 
I wonder how much a modern, educated, independent career woman she is below the surface. Albeit, bagging Hazzie is good career move: seeing her in a Hallmark movie I think she reached her zenith with Suits talent-wise. Not that it's a bad thing. I think any actor made it who can make a living out of acting, considering that New York is full of waiters who are talented enough to be cast in a tentpole movie but there chance never came.
I remember that her degree had been discussed here, but I can't recall the outcome. Did she really graduated from Northwestern or just attended?


----------



## Clearblueskies

DeMonica said:


> I've mentioned before: it's very weird that Thomas never met at least Hazzie. In every somewhat decent family the in-laws meet at least before the wedding, but more likely even before the engagement. I don't understand how H&M could not fork out an economy class ticket to London and an acceptable room for a couple of nights in the period between 2016 and 2018. Their relationship with TM went sour directly before the wedding if I'm not mistaken. When she wrote that essay for Elle (published in December, 2016)  she had nothing against his Emmy winning dad who gave her a head start in her chosen profession.
> I wonder how much a modern, educated, independent career woman she is below the surface. Albeit, bagging Hazzie is good career move: seeing her in a Hallmark movie I think she reached her zenith with Suits talent-wise. Not that it's a bad thing. I think any actor made it who can make a living out of acting, considering that New York is full of waiters who are talented enough to be cast in a tentpole movie but there chance never came.
> I remember that her degree had been discussed here, but I can't recall the outcome. Did she really graduated from Northwestern or just attended?


It’s very odd Harry never met met Thomas and I doubt it was because Harry couldn’t be bothered to travel. I think Meghan had already cast her father as part of her *old* life a long time before the pre-wedding ruckus.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Article in The Irish Sun yesterday

*Americans are finally seeing what self-promoters Meghan & Prince Harry are really about – the fairytale is wearing thin*

COMMENT

Lee Cohen

22 May 2021, 10:17
*A FORMER adviser to senior US politicians on British relations tells The Sun that his fellow Americans will soon turn on Prince Harry and his wife Meghan.

Lee Cohen was an expert on Anglo-American matters for the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee.
He is now a senior fellow at the UK think tank the Bow Group and the Danube Institute, and writes:*

LAST year I met a New York-based British journalist who was aghast to learn that I - an American - harboured extreme doubts about our American-born Duchess, Meghan Markle.
I shocked him when I said that I could not immediately embrace someone like her — not because of background or ethnicity — but because she gave no hint of interest in the public role upon which she was embarking, or the great heritage into which she was marrying. 

Time has not removed my reservations.

It's now not so much Markle's disinterest and incomprehension of royal service that damns her in my mind, but her wholly ego-centric stance which has brought her to deliver assault-after-cringing-assault, culminating in March's Oprah interview in which she and her husband besmirched a Family, a great heritage, and a nation that welcomed them with hope and enthusiasm.


> Certainly many of my countrymen, like Harry and Meghan themselves, remain convinced that the withdrawal of the Sussexes from royal life was caused by (take your pick): a bigoted system, poor parenting, unresponsiveness to mental illness - you name it.


In short, the blame must lie anywhere but with them and their inability or lack of will to rise to their roles. With recent events, though, even on this side of the Atlantic, more critical, assessments are starting to be voiced. 

Immediately after the Oprah interview, the couple's popularity plummeted in Britain, while US polling showed the reverse.

Americans' support of Meghan surged from 45 per cent to 67 per cent, while Harry's shot up from 46 per cent to 69 per cent, post-interview. This reflects the different stages of press commentary. In the UK, press and public had already, long since, had enough.
In the US, their novelty had them still in a honeymoon period.

On both sides of the Atlantic, everyone loves the Cinderella story. But as they have gotten to know Meghan, the Brits saw what she really was - an ambitious self-promoter with a social justice agenda.

Now Americans are getting a chance to see what the couple are really about and the fairytale, replete with evil in-laws and half-siblings, is wearing thin.


> Over the past few days, US headlines have been crying fury, and this can be expected to feed through to general opinion.


To many Americans, on substance, the latest episode in the Sussex circus is revealing - and quite serious.

Speaking on the Armchair Expert podcast with Dax Shepard, the Duke claimed in consecutive sentences that he both knew and didn't know what he was talking about on the subject, but even so the First Amendment was "bonkers".

At the very least, this proclaims a deep lack of common sense - and lack of self-preservation instinct: the First Amendment is part of the bedrock of America's core beliefs, protecting freedoms of speech, religion, the press, right to assemble, and the right to petition the government - rights, by the way, inspired directly by English traditions of personal liberty and Common Law.
One wonders how often previously Harry has been saved from putting his foot in his mouth by adherence to the Royal Family's convention of avoiding controversy. With his departure from royal service and British shores, the protection in that restraint has fallen away.

It doesn't seem yet to have dawned on Harry that whether or not he's representing his birth country, criticising his host country is unlikely to bring him many admirers there.

US commentators did not hold back across social media.
Former NBC personality Megyn Kelly: “'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.' (Lincoln or Twain or someone smarter than Prince Harry.)"  
Texas Congressman Dan Crenshaw: "Well I just doubled the size of my Independence Day party."
TV personality Meghan McCain: "We fought a war in 1776 so we don't have to care what you say or think...That being said, you have chosen to seek refuge from your homeland here and thrive because all of what our country has to offer and one of the biggest things is the 1st amendment - show some utter respect."

There will always be elements - the same ones which seek to punish American institutions and historical figures for perceived social justice conflicts - that will passionately defend the fallen royal couple no matter their behaviour.

But with each new muddled Sussex observation, unsubstantiated claim and  disloyal act, ever more Americans will come to realise that the couple's failures rest on their own shoulders rather than on the British nation or the institution of monarchy.
In reality, this tawdry pair are now just another celebrity couple - let them be Hollywood royalty for as long as that lasts, but should they continue to enjoy the highest of honours from a country they've abandoned?
While it would be as wrong for an American to insert himself in the affairs of a sovereign nation as it was for Harry to criticize his host country’s law, nevertheless, I can only admire the growing chorus of Britons demanding the removal of the special status the Sussexes still are accorded from Harry’s birth into royalty.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> I don't know about anyone else here but her engagement ring to me is to similar to Diana's. I know the style became very popular after Diana's. I have rings in that style back from the 80's too.  Just seems strange to me though. Maybe it's just me.


and the short hair like Diana


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Yep. A girl who's so proud to be a modern American girl is sooooooo attached to that medieval title.
> 
> I'd also like to be enlightened about what kind of weights Hazzie carries. Does he have to carry sacks of coal to pay for rent? Maybe wood logs from shed to fill the fireplace - God knows how many they have in that mansion? Or do those bags of goods from Rodeo Drive weight that much? Or did she mean mental or emotional burden? Like having to take care of elderly relatives around the clock? Having to take three jobs to feed his family?
> I know that he has been through a lot but he never had financial problems, a particularly demanding job (smiling and shaking a few hands doesn't seem to be too demanding to me), he was lucky (or unlucky) to find the girl of his dreams (?) and even had a child. If time didn't heal his wounds, he had access to the best possible care. He had a better than average chance to have a happy life. So why is this constant display his tremendous pain, yet complete disregard or compassion to
> others'? He would need an ice cold shower and year spent living the life of average mortals with limited budget.


I wonder how hard his "job" is today compared to his role in the RF.  Now he has to go on TV and other media and try to act intelligent.  Clearly he has made at least one huge gaffe with the "bonkers" first amendment thing.  Is that stressful?   Don't get me wrong - I totally agree with you that he has never had to do an honest day's work in his life.  As a person who has worked for what she has, I find him and his Wife despicable.
But I am curious as to whether he is enjoying this whole media thing....feeling like a star.  Or is it too much work?  I mean if his mental health is not strong is all this too stressful for him?  When he was part of the RF he didn't really have to say that much and he had professional help with all his duties I imagine.  Now he has Oprah but she wasn't there for the Dax interview


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jktgal said:


> Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.




Ok, I had to go there and look it up. What she said was 



> "I didn't know much about him _besides the basics like his dead mother's favourite perfume_ - I just asked, *'Is he nice?' *Because *if he wasn't kind* I didn't really see there was any point _apart from a lot of money, luxuries, a massive raise in status and a royal title_"



The kind stuck with me because it's so over the top. I can see casually wondering if someone is a nice guy (as in, polite and charming), but wondering about someone's "kindness" (as in, the woman who raises orphaned baby cats and cooks for her elderly neighbour) before having met is...word salad and inappropriately intimate.

Edits in Italics by me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> H "She's capable of anything"



Oh how right he was. Just not in the way he thought.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> I've mentioned before: it's very weird that Thomas never met at least Hazzie. In every somewhat decent family the in-laws meet at least before the wedding, but more likely even before the engagement. I don't understand how H&M could not fork out an economy class ticket to London and an acceptable room for a couple of nights in the period between 2016 and 2018. Their relationship with TM went sour directly before the wedding if I'm not mistaken.



Now that you bring it up...didn't Harry rent a house in LA to host Thomas and Doria for Thanksgiving in 2016? So what happened there, why did the dinner never take place?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s very odd Harry never met met Thomas and I doubt it was because Harry couldn’t be bothered to travel. I think Meghan had already cast her father as part of her *old* life a long time before the pre-wedding ruckus.



I have no doubt about this. It wasn't Harry who didn't want to meet, it was Raptor who had things to hide.


----------



## Chanbal

*“Thank God William was born first”   *
_
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been “cashing in” on Princess Diana’s name in a classless attempt to launch their US career, according to political commentator Calvin Robinson. *His remarks come as the BBC has comes under fire after it was revealed Martin Bashir allegedly forged documents to coerce Princess Diana into an interview. 

Mr Robinson said there was a stark contrast between the way Prince Harry and wife Meghan handled themselves and the way in which future king, Prince William, does. *“Prince Harry moved to America for privacy to get away from all the press all the media in the UK, and what have they done since they’ve arrived in America, they’ve courted the media to no end,”* he said. 

Mr Robinson said *the runaway royals were “cashing in on poor Prince Harry’s late mother” while Prince William delivered a “really classy statement” to the media on the Diana scandal.* “What’s even worse than that is Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are trying to use this as a parallel for their own life,” Mr Robinson. *“They’re saying Meghan is the new Princess Diana. They’re trying to cash in on Diana’s name in order to up their fame. “That’s what all this is about, it’s all about upping the fame of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as they launch their US career. *

“There’s no class there when we look at the statements released by Meghan and Harry, really crass cashing in on the late Princess Diana. When we look at his big brother Prince William – really future king statements.” *Sky News host Rita Panahi said “thank God William was born first”*._









						‘Thank God Prince Harry wasn’t born first’: Rita Panahi
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been “cashing in” on Princess Diana’s name in a classless attempt to launch their US career, according to political commentator Calvin Robinson.  His remarks come as the BBC has comes under fire after it was revealed Martin Bashir allegedly forged documents to...




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> LAST year I met a New York-based British journalist who was aghast to learn that I - an American - harboured extreme doubts about our American-born Duchess, Meghan Markle.
> I shocked him when I said that I could not immediately embrace someone like her — not because of background or ethnicity — but because she gave no hint of interest in the public role upon which she was embarking, or the great heritage into which she was marrying.



Now lets not be unfair here, Lee. She is extremely interested in British military history, and she sure liked her clothes budget and wearing a tiara as well as blood diamonds.


----------



## DeMonica

Hermes Zen said:


> Do you believe him?


 He's sorry, yet, he refuses to take any responsibility for the aftermath. There's no reason to believe him.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I’m torn. As much as I love the idea of comparing her to a velociraptor, Meghan is too impatient to play the long game. She could be feeding him some of the lines he’s saying, but there is the real possibility he is doing it to himself. The ability to randomly blurt out inappropriate, ill-conceived comments is 100% Harry IMO. It may ultimately play into her hands if things between them go south but I believe he really is stupid enough to say those things he did on his own.


agree...I don't think she would have allowed him to say the first amendment is bonkers.....she wants to present at this very smart liberal person - having an idiot for a husband doesn't really fit that narrative


----------



## marietouchet

Just thinking about chronology ..

2016 ca H meets M, tells him to get therapy
2016 - 2018 ca H starts therapy 
2018 ca M is suicidal, goes to HR for help, H does NOT tell family, too embarrassed

Did he ask his therapist to help her?


----------



## DeMonica

Jktgal said:


> Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.



"She's capable of anything." - I have to give it you, Hazzie, you are absolutely right!


----------



## sdkitty

Jktgal said:


> Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.



LOL
almost spit out my coffee


----------



## Chanbal

It sounds unscrupulous and manipulative...


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh how right he was. Just not in the way he thought.


almost makes me wonder if the friend who set this up will regret it.....I'm sure as of now the "friend" is totally supportive of them leaving the evil RF but eventually when M's long game becomes apparent if it does turn out she has ruined H, will the "friend" be proud of what she did?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

even though the Today Show is reporting on this first amendment bonkers thing, all the criticism they quote is from the right.  when I see someone on the other side of the spectrum calling them out, I'll be interested.  








						Prince Harry draws criticism for calling First Amendment ‘bonkers’
					

Harry's comments about First Amendment protections while discussing the paparazzi on a podcast struck a nerve with conservative politicians and commentators.




					www.today.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> almost makes me wonder if the friend who set this up will regret it.....I'm sure as of now the "friend" is totally supportive of them leaving the evil RF but eventually when M's long game becomes apparent if it does turn out she has ruined H, will the "friend" be proud of what she did?



Malicious gossip had it that the friend doesn't exist. Rumour is they met in the wake of some Invictus Games (Turkey, maybe? My brain's a sieve) where Raptor's soulmate Markus Anderson managed to make it to Harry's suite with her in tow. She is crafty with making something out of nothing, I'll give her that.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Malicious gossip had it that the friend doesn't exist. Rumour is they met in the wake of some Invictus Games (Turkey, maybe? My brain's a sieve) where Raptor's soulmate Markus Anderson managed to make it to Harry's suite with her in tow. She is crafty with making something out of nothing, I'll give her that.


well then the friend would be Markus, right?  Yes she sure is crafty


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> well then the friend would be Markus, right?  Yes she sure is crafty



Yeah, but didn't they put out a childhood friend of Harry's introduced them in London, and then some source spilled it but didn't spill to the press and it supposedly was this German noblewoman? Something like this? Because "Markus Anderson brought her up to his hotel room" wasn't quite as posh of a story.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

To be honest, at this point I need a whiteboard to keep up with the plot.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but didn't they put out a childhood friend of Harry's introduced them in London, and then some source spilled it but didn't spill to the press and it supposedly was this German noblewoman? Something like this? Because "Markus Anderson brought her up to his hotel room" wasn't quite as posh of a story.


yes the way you describe it she sounds almost like a call girl


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are we certain OW was not part of the initial introductions?
It would be kinda interesting to review the year prior to their meeting. She was with the chef, right?  What was he doing, other than Invictus?


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest, at this point I need a whiteboard to keep up with the plot.


Pretty sure there is some hitherto unemployed scriptwriter/showrunner locked in a bed room in Monticito with copies of the Dimbelby book (Charles) the Morton book (Diana) plus copies of Charles, Diana and Sarah Fergusson' interviews, frantically writing the plot for our heroine.....


----------



## CarryOn2020

This OW series was first mentioned publicly in April, 2019.
They were still active BRF members. QE, Charles , etc. would have known about this film for a long time.
My point - there has been quite a bit of behind-the-scenes maneuvering for a long time [years] - on all sides.


----------



## Lenna.V

DeMonica said:


> I've mentioned before: it's very weird that Thomas never met at least Hazzie. In every somewhat decent family the in-laws meet at least before the wedding, but more likely even before the engagement. I don't understand how H&M could not fork out an economy class ticket to London and an acceptable room for a couple of nights in the period between 2016 and 2018. Their relationship with TM went sour directly before the wedding if I'm not mistaken. When she wrote that essay for Elle (published in December, 2016)  she had nothing against his Emmy winning dad who gave her a head start in her chosen profession.
> I wonder how much a modern, educated, independent career woman she is below the surface. Albeit, bagging Hazzie is good career move: seeing her in a Hallmark movie I think she reached her zenith with Suits talent-wise. Not that it's a bad thing. I think any actor made it who can make a living out of acting, considering that New York is full of waiters who are talented enough to be cast in a tentpole movie but there chance never came.
> I remember that her degree had been discussed here, but I can't recall the outcome. Did she really graduated from Northwestern or just attended?



I'm not defending Meghan. But from personal experience, I never met my husband's family. He was a difficult child and wasn't appreciate enough by his family. So we never talk about them. I am still curious about his family. But if he wasn't ready for me to meet them. I do not care. He has good relationship with my family so I'm cool. I don't feel like I missed something out.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Just thinking about chronology ..
> 
> 2016 ca H meets M, tells him to get therapy
> 2016 - 2018 ca H starts therapy
> 2018 ca M is suicidal, goes to HR for help, H does NOT tell family, too embarrassed
> 
> Did he ask his therapist to help her?


yes, it's ridiculous, isn't it?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Shopaholic2021 said:


> This is not going to end well. A lot the of things they talk about are simply family matters and family dynamics. I don't see why the fact that there is some dysfunction in the family makes them any different to other families. The only difference is that they will never have to think about money. The failure to acknowledge his mothers dysfunctional family shows he is not very bright or a deep thinker.
> 
> There are many many families that do not address mental health issues. It is only over the last decade or so that mental health and its importance has been bought into the spotlight.
> 
> I mean his own mother in law is a therapist, why could she not help her own daughter who is supposedly suffering so much. *I would think she would be the most trusted and ideal person for the job. *Or maybe she is their therapist and they just don't want to make that public.


Yes, the most trusted person to coach H how to behave as a victim of family abuse especially when big bucks are involved. Her motto is after all, "Don't give the milk away for free."


----------



## floatinglili

Lenna.V said:


> I'm not defending Meghan. But from personal experience, I never met my husband's family. He was a difficult child and wasn't appreciate enough by his family. So we never talk about them. I am still curious about his family. But if he wasn't ready for me to meet them. I do not care. He has good relationship with my family so I'm cool. I don't feel like I missed something out.


Wow that is really interesting (not meeting family before marriage). I dont think I’ve ever come across it in my personal life. I guess I can understand that in some circumstances it could happen but it seems very unusual to me. 
In a hardcore traditional, aristocratic - scratch that ROYAL - family wedding situation? The idea of not meeting immediate family to vet them thoroughly very early in a serious courtship seems absolutely crazy. Megain managed to hold  them off until the wedding was imminent, and then scratched Dad! She must have a megaton of insistent charisma.


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> Wow that is really interesting (not meeting family before marriage). I dont think I’ve ever come across it in my personal life. I guess I can understand that in some circumstances it could happen but it seems very unusual to me.
> In a hardcore traditional, aristocratic - scratch that ROYAL - family wedding situation? The idea of not meeting immediate family to vet them thoroughly very early in a serious courtship seems absolutely crazy. Megain managed to hold  them off until the wedding was imminent, and then scratched Dad! She must have a megaton of insistent charisma.


the RF did seem to like her but I think it was mostly H she had under her spell.   His mind was made up and they weren't gonna fight him.  so they did everything to support the couple right down to Charles walking her down the aisle.  and now they are being repaid by accusations of racism, heartlessness, poor parenting....disgusting


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sounds plausible. Royal jewelry is not the same as her personal jewelry (the Cartier, the aquamarine ring and argueably even her engagement ring). In fact, the choice of words - how she was allowed to keep the royal jewelry for her lifetime - makes me think it was a) gifts given in an official capacity and b) loans (e.g. the Lover's Knot tiara that is now on loan to Kate).
> 
> ETA: remember, Raptor was banned from using family jewels not too long after the wedding. I think I brought up several pages ago that maybe the Queen acted because the troublesome two were trying to get their hands on jewelry meant to be worn by Kate because she doesn't strike me as a petty person who'd put that rule into place just because.


‘Raptor’


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this OW show the one the BRF knew she was filming? 
Are we going to find out the whole thing has been a scam? Eeeek.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Lenna.V said:


> I'm not defending Meghan. But from personal experience, I never met my husband's family. He was a difficult child and wasn't appreciate enough by his family. So we never talk about them. I am still curious about his family. But if he wasn't ready for me to meet them. I do not care. He has good relationship with my family so I'm cool. I don't feel like I missed something out.



If my boyfriend did not want me to meet his family due to emotional abuse, abandonment etc I have no problem with that and I understand. However Meghans father provided her with a solid private education which led to her being accepted into one of the top colleges in the US and then her fathers brother (her uncle) secured a position for her in Argentina working in the US consulate. She studied international relations and theatre studies so this was related to her degree and gave her a head start. Getting those types of positions are not easy. 

She has always talked about how supportive her father was too, consoling her with race and identity when she was younger. She has never really talked much about her mother in her upbringing. She actually paid for her mother to get an education and become a social worker. She worked for a while as a mental health worker and with the elderly. 

I also think it is important to know a persons formative years, not to judge, but so you can understand that person better. A lot of people go through things or have been in a different position in the past to the present and you would not know unless you knew the person as a child.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this OW show the one the BRF knew she was filming?
> Are we going to find out the whole thing has been a scam? Eeeek.



The apple mental health series with Oprah and Harry was known to the BRF when they were still carrying out royal duties. It was supposed to be about promoting mental health.

The interview with H&M with Oprah was made to correct the world about why they left the BRF and to address tabloid gossip (that was the aim I think).


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> I would have_ loved_ it.
> 
> *I went to a boarding school in West Sussex* in my school Summer holidays for a few years (and my school had a long day - sometimes till 6pm). I would have loved to have gone there all year long.



Really? Can I ask you where you went, my grandparents lived in WS and I was there a lot.


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> the RF did seem to like her but I think it was mostly H she had under her spell.   His mind was made up and they weren't gonna fight him.  so they did everything to support the couple right down to Charles walking her down the aisle.  and now they are being repaid by accusations of racism, heartlessness, poor parenting....disgusting


My theory has always been that due to genetic imperatives, international travel increases ones ‘appeal’ stratospherically the moment you step off the plane. Kind of the flip side of ‘familiarity breeding contempt’.

Can. You. Imagine. A British actress of similar family / class background, mediocre career and romantic entanglements getting so far up in the royal family? Surely wouldn’t have got through the front door? 

A sexy foreign accent can really take you far lol, unencumbered as you are with the ‘tells’ of the local culture that can give your position away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> The apple mental health series with Oprah and Harry was known to the BRF when they were still carrying out royal duties. It was supposed to be about promoting mental health.
> 
> The interview with H&M with Oprah was made to correct the world about why they left the BRF and to address tabloid gossip (that was the aim I think).



There isn’t much in the OW series that we did not already know, except watching Hazzie (and the others) go through a therapy session.
To me, that was too far, too disturbing for viewers [like me].




floatinglili said:


> My theory has always been that due to genetic imperatives, international travel increases ones ‘appeal’ stratospherically the moment you step off the plane. Kind of the flip side of ‘familiarity breeding contempt’.
> 
> Can. You. Imagine. A British actress of similar family / class background, mediocre career and romantic entanglements getting so far up in the royal family? Surely wouldn’t have got through the front door?
> 
> A sexy foreign accent can really take you far lol, unencumbered as you are with the ‘tells’ of the local culture that can give your position away.



IMO I doubt the BRF cared that much who he chose, they just wanted him settled. He had become an uncomfortable third wheel.  After dealing with Princess Margaret, QE knew how awkward things could become. Charles had to deal with his siblings. Since H _says_ he did not enjoy putting on the ‘show’, he should have exited the stage much sooner.


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO I doubt the BRF cared that much who he chose, they just wanted him settled. He had become an uncomfortable third wheel.  After dealing with Princess Margaret, QE knew how awkward things could become. Charles had to deal with his siblings. *Since H says he did not enjoy putting on the ‘show’, he should have exited the stage much sooner.*



his problem was he had no plausible way to make $$$ to maintain his lifestyle without carrying out duties. I don’t think he even could’ve right after getting married... Megxit gave them a whole new level of fame to springboard off. That’s why he still relies on those themes to make money.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

CarryOn2020 said:


> To me, that was too far, too disturbing for viewers [like me].



I could not watch something like that because it would be triggering. The interview they did was a little triggering too, and I was surprised that there was no mentioned of a trigger warning or a message for people at the end of the interview with advice on where to go if they have been affected by the issues mentioned. This is always something that the BBC shows say when there are sensitive topics on the show. Everyone keeps talking about the importance of mental health but I see very little work being done to combat the lack of mental health professions and the issues that lead to lack of access. There is no point in having therapists and psychiatrist if people have to pay $200 a hour to see them. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO I doubt the BRF cared that much who he chose, they just wanted him settled. He had become an uncomfortable third wheel. After dealing with Princess Margaret, QE knew how awkward things could become. Charles had to deal with his siblings. Since H _says_ he did not enjoy putting on the ‘show’, he should have exited the stage much sooner.



Princess Anne and Prince Edward have never really had any major issues or ego problems. Andrew wanted his girls to have all the royal privileges, titles, money etc. The big wedding that Eugiene had was not picked up for live broadcast by any other English networks and that rubbed Andrew up the wrong way. Even before Epstein he had caused a lot of controversy with his shoddy business deals.


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> Really? Can I ask you where you went, my grandparents lived in WS and I was there a lot.



Sent you a DM


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I could not watch something like that because it would be triggering. The interview they did was a little triggering too, and I was surprised that there was no mentioned of a trigger warning or a message for people at the end of the interview with advice on where to go if they have been affected by the issues mentioned. This is always something that the BBC shows say when there are sensitive topics on the show. Everyone keeps talking about the importance of mental health but I see very little work being done to combat the lack of mental health professions and the issues that lead to lack of access. There is no point in having therapists and psychiatrist if people have to pay $200 a hour to see them.
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Anne and Prince Edward have never really had any major issues or ego problems. Andrew wanted his girls to have all the royal privileges, titles, money etc. The big wedding that Eugiene had was not picked up for live broadcast by any other English networks and that rubbed Andrew up the wrong way. Even before Epstein he had caused a lot of controversy with his shoddy business deals.



There _was_ a warning with numbers to call at the beginning and the ending of each episode. I wasn’t triggered by the session, it felt like exploitation. Sure, sure, they say he was ok with it, but we know how the tv folks manipulate people into doing stuff for ratings. Regrets come later [obvs].

Andrew had his share of controversy with his choice of women, too. Margaret, with the men. Other Royal families have similar issues and scandals, so we shouldn’t be surprised.


----------



## Chanbal

The out-of-control greed of the parties involved is becoming more and more obvious. All of them have a lot of money, but it's never enough. Are we observing a condition like the Great Gatsby Syndrome or Wealth Accumulation Disorder? Those conditions need treatment. Has the Mental Health Act (1983) been amended? They could risk getting their much wished (police) security on their next trip to the UK and perhaps a free stay at a 5 star lunatic asylum.  




OW et al. be thankful for whatever you have achieved and please do something good with your time and money. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people suffering in this world that are in real need of help.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think there was hope that, eventually, Harry would be more like a Princess Anne than Andy.  Be supportive, do the work.  Different temperament and personality, though.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Also, I thought the original partnership with Oprah was supposed to be a Heads Together thing.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> I wonder how hard his "job" is today compared to his role in the RF.  Now he has to go on TV and other media and try to act intelligent.  Clearly he has made at least one huge gaffe with the "bonkers" first amendment thing.  Is that stressful?   Don't get me wrong - I totally agree with you that he has never had to do an honest day's work in his life.  As a person who has worked for what she has, I find him and his Wife despicable.
> But I am curious as to whether he is enjoying this whole media thing....feeling like a star.  Or is it too much work?  I mean if his mental health is not strong is all this too stressful for him?  When he was part of the RF he didn't really have to say that much and he had professional help with all his duties I imagine.  Now he has Oprah but she wasn't there for the Dax interview


I think he's a victim of his own stupidity. I don't know how much they got from OW - they said that they were not paid but they are not whom I call trustworthy - or was this awful interview the first step of the campaign to sell them as mental health champions by OW. My bet is the later and if it was the later, he probably wouldn't have a chance to call it off, even if the wanted to. Smearing the family for a few bucks would cause some emotional turmoil and insomnia.  I don't think that the life they are living at the moment is the life they wanted to live by their own admission. Maybe Megs is counting the days to re-emerge bump-free and to enjoy the media attention, but it's true that at the moment Ginge has to pull the heavier weight. He might have dreamt to take Will's place but he doesn't have what it takes to be a smart public speaker, and failure  can be very stressful. He may not be aware, though, how much of a fool he makes of himself e.g., First Amendment. Maybe he enjoys to be in the public eye this time around because they can choose the shows and can be as outspoken (or silly) as he wants to be, while at home he had to behave. Yet, he might have realized that he's gone too far and there's no chance to turn back now. IMO sooner or later he'll find himself alone with his crumbling mental health.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, it seems this Apple show is, in fact, the video the BRF feared the gruesome-twosome were making.  Okaaay, then, we can breathe now. This should be the last of the ‘truth-bombs’ which appears to be nothing more than a parent-child issue.



DeMonica said:


> I think he's a victim of his own stupidity. I don't know how much they got from OW - they said that they were not paid but they are not whom I call trustworthy - or *was this awful interview the first step of the campaign to sell them as mental health champions by OW.* My bet is the later and if it was the later, he probably wouldn't have a chance to call it off, even if the wanted to. Smearing the family for a few bucks would cause some emotional turmoil and insomnia.  I don't think that the life they are living at the moment is the life they wanted to live by their own admission. Maybe Megs is counting the days to re-emerge bump-free and to enjoy the media attention, but it's true that at the moment Ginge has to pull the heavier weight. He might have dreamt to take Will's place but he doesn't have what it takes to be a smart public speaker, and failure  can be very stressful. He may not be aware, though, how much of a fool he makes of himself e.g., First Amendment. Maybe he enjoys to be in the public eye this time around because they can choose the shows and can be as outspoken (or silly) as he wants to be, while at home he had to behave. Yet, he might have realized that he's gone too far and there's no chance to turn back now. IMO sooner or later he'll find himself alone with his crumbling mental health.



Nooooo, no, no, no more. Unless  it’s her family - and they all speak.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> Is it possible we’re selling her short? That she’s much more evil than we’ve given her credit for being? *In a relatively short span she has isolated H from his family,* convinced him to make a fool of himself on the world stage, got him to admit he drank and took drugs, and has anger issues.
> 
> Obviously she wants money and is no doubt trying to set up her big payday. Do you think she’s enjoying watching him spiral? Just a cruel person who is getting her jollies by being a puppet master? If it benefits her she’ll swoop in and help him but if not, oh well pay me or I’ll spill the family secrets?
> 
> You know the RF has the goods on her. Too bad they didn’t spill them before they married.


She sounds like a classic abuser to me!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Sophisticatted said:


> Also, I thought the original partnership with Oprah was supposed to be a Heads Together thing.



That's what I think it was supposed to be too. Bring awareness to mental health issues and shining a light on people that work in the field and the ways in which people can access help. I think they changed the format and the content due to recent events (ie falling out with the BRF). 

Harry said in December 2017 that the BRF where the family that Meghan never had. That implies that her family neglected her or at the very least she is estranged from them. And now they are suddenly evil and the cause of his and her mental health issues.


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> Yes. I know she’s all about her and only her. Use and toss people aside. What if her endgame is to be his widow? She’ll always be part of the RF, presumably get a huge payday (depending on the will, etc), the sympathy that she’ll play into. What if she’s laying low and fueling his meltdown? Knowing full well she could stop it and help him - but not doing anything because she wants it all and he’s in the way.


Wouldn't it be great if people referred to her as the "Z list actress, formerly known as the Duchess of Sussex"?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> We always wonder if she is okay. Not our fault that we find so many signs that she is far from okay and even more signs that she reaches out to ensure anyone who goes close to her will be guaranteed to not be okay.
> 
> 
> I see her as a vicious opportunist with a heaping dose of self-pity. If you read about her pre-H life, there are quotes about her complaining about many things, including that as a biracial actress, she wasn't white enough or black enough for racial-specific roles. So the race card she is deftly wielding now was an inconvenience in the past.
> 
> She has convinced herself that the world owes her for not giving her more from the start. Everyone to her is viewed transactionally as to whether they can benefit her. So much of her life is fuzzy. Some of her stories - I wonder if they are true or false, or heavily embellished. Like the meet-cute story: who was the accursed person who arranged her blind date with H and did she really naively ask "Is he nice?" I highly doubt it.


I never understand people who think the world "owes them" simply for existing, especially once they're adults.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> There isn’t much in the OW series that we did not already know, except watching Hazzie (and the others) go through a therapy session.
> To me, that was too far, too disturbing for viewers [like me].


I always find televised therapy sessions so uncomfortable to watch (like in Real Housewives, don't judge, LOL!).  Therapy should be a personal thing, and televised ones always seem to be for some sort of financial benefit, whether it's the patient's or the therapist's.


----------



## purseinsanity

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I could not watch something like that because it would be triggering. The interview they did was a little triggering too, and I was surprised that there was no mentioned of a trigger warning or a message for people at the end of the interview with advice on where to go if they have been affected by the issues mentioned. This is always something that the BBC shows say when there are sensitive topics on the show. Everyone keeps talking about the importance of mental health but I see very little work being done to combat the lack of mental health professions and the issues that lead to lack of access. There is no point in having therapists and psychiatrist if people have to pay $200 a hour to see them.



That's a good point.  I can't stomach them at all so I didn't watch the OW interview.  Since she brought up suicide, did they ever show the suicide hotline number, or make a statement about who to turn to?  That would've been a good thing to do, especially considering the whole point was "we had no one to turn to for help".


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> Would you ever?



Nope. Not me.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Harry had a dummy instagram account and he used it when he was dating Meghan. He definitely reads things about himself in the media. He has said as much, and even said he has watched some of the crown. The producers did make it clear that the show was more fictional but I am sure if he gets a chance he will complain about it.


I don't doubt that you are right. But of the two, I think Meghan is the driving force keeping up to date with public and random internet poster opinions.


Harry did want to leave it all and move to Africa, not that long ago. I wish he had, for his sake. It's sad he didn't find someone to share that dream with him. Btw, I'm sure Meghan convinced him that living in Africa was her dream too (between wooing him by pe*eing in the Botswana bush).

Harry wasn't exactly an overly driven person before meeting her as far as I know. But one has to give it to Meghan, that she does have exceptional drive, having climbed over such an impressive number of people to come all this way.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Harry doesn't need to be dumped off in a third world country, a short trip to LA with his eyes wide open will do. There are homeless encampments everywhere. The Venice boardwalk is now a huge homeless encampment with fights, fires and shootings. Grow up Harry, the world doesn't revolve around you!
> 
> QE is already on IGNORE. "_THE QUEEN has been seen smiling bravely in her first meeting since her grandson Prince Harry's bombshell interview."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family LIVE: Queen smiles bravely in first meeting since Harry's bombshell interview
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN has been seen smiling bravely in her first meeting since her grandson Prince Harry's bombshell interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


*EXACTLY .. 100%* .. but, you see .. the two of them are ensconced in one of the most "*pristine*" areas of California, where .. even if they did see homeless people, I betcha they are NOTHING like the ones you would see downtown (those are the ones who have moved to Venice Beach) or here in the Valley.  There is not a single day that I don't see homeless people not that far from our houses and, as a matter of fact, we had a package stolen yesterday thanks to them.  My HB is pretty fed up out here and wants to go back to Boston, but I have to remind him that each place has its pro's & con's.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> We always wonder if she is okay. Not our fault that we find so many signs that she is far from okay and even more signs that she reaches out to ensure anyone who goes close to her will be guaranteed to not be okay.
> 
> 
> I see her as a vicious opportunist with a heaping dose of self-pity. If you read about her pre-H life, there are quotes about her complaining about many things, including that as a biracial actress, she wasn't white enough or black enough for racial-specific roles. So the race card she is deftly wielding now was an inconvenience in the past.
> 
> She has convinced herself that the world owes her for not giving her more from the start. Everyone to her is viewed transactionally as to whether they can benefit her. So much of her life is fuzzy. Some of her stories - I wonder if they are true or false, or heavily embellished. Like the meet-cute story: who was the accursed person who arranged her blind date with H and did she really naively ask "Is he nice?" I highly doubt it.


Dont forget too bad at acting for the blind casting roles  


chicinthecity777 said:


> Interesting tweet! Raising a lot of questions! Was he really using drugs which was covered up for years (perhaps with the help of RF, so much so for no special treatment in the army) or was it yet another lie?



I suspect it was like a more successful version of withnail and I where the testers gave him ‘discretion’ when he did it and looked the other way when he gave in another person’s ‘sample’. Just another example of how he wasn’t given any special treatment 

There’s a very laissez faire Attitude to celebrities doing drugs in general, especially coke.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s very odd Harry never met met Thomas and I doubt it was because Harry couldn’t be bothered to travel. I think Meghan had already cast her father as part of her *old* life a long time before the pre-wedding ruckus.


She also lucked out that he was a very easy guy to persuade that fathers are more trouble than they are worth   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, I had to go there and look it up. What she said was
> 
> 
> 
> The kind stuck with me because it's so over the top. I can see casually wondering if someone is a nice guy (as in, polite and charming), but wondering about someone's "kindness" (as in, the woman who raises orphaned baby cats and cooks for her elderly neighbour) before having met is...word salad and inappropriately intimate.
> 
> Edits in Italics by me.


Apparently a lot of older men on Grindr get messages asking if they are ‘generous’ which is code for ‘are you rich and looking for a sugar baby?’ 
I assume kind has a similar implication here.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> However Meghans father provided her with a solid private education which led to her being accepted into one of the top colleges in the US and then her fathers brother (her uncle) secured a position for her in Argentina working in the US consulate. She studied international relations and theatre studies so this was related to her degree and gave her a head start. Getting those types of positions are not easy.



Jup. I've one of these aunts myself who used to work for a huge political figure back in the day (he'd held a very high government position). She arranged the best internships and student jobs for me (I had to do months and months of internships during my master's, so I did arrange a few myself just to dilute the impression I'm one of these useless spoiled kids haha). I still talk to her.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Shopaholic2021 said:


> She has never really talked much about her mother in her upbringing. She actually paid for her mother to get an education and become a social worker. She worked for a while as a mental health worker and with the elderly.



I know that's the narrative on this thread but she has talked about her mother. This tig entry for example. Can you share where you learned MM paid for Doria's MSW? It seems she graduated in 2011 which I believe was the first year MM was on suits. I am wondering how MM would have had the disposable income at that time to cover tuition for grad school?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *EXACTLY .. 100%* .. but, you see .. the two of them are ensconced in one of the most "*pristine*" areas of California, where .. even if they did see homeless people, I betcha they are NOTHING like the ones you would see downtown (those are the ones who have moved to Venice Beach) or here in the Valley.  There is not a single day that I don't see homeless people not that far from our houses and, as a matter of fact, we had a package stolen yesterday thanks to them.  My HB is pretty fed up out here and wants to go back to Boston, but I have to remind him that each place has its pro's & con's.


I hadn't heard that about Venice....sad.
I'm sure Boston has homeless people too but the So Cal weather is better for someone w/o a roof over their head


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Can you share where you learned MM paid for Doria's MSW? It seems she graduated in 2011 which I believe was the first year MM was on suits. I am wondering how MM would have had the disposable income at that time to cover tuition for grad school?



It's on Doria's Wiki iirc. Now of course everyone can edit that info, but so far nobody from Team Sussex has removed it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That's what I think it was supposed to be too. Bring awareness to mental health issues and shining a light on people that work in the field and the ways in which people can access help. I think they changed the format and the content due to recent events (ie falling out with the BRF).
> 
> Harry said in December 2017 that the BRF where the family that Meghan never had. That implies that her family neglected her or at the very least she is estranged from them. And now they are suddenly evil and the cause of his and her mental health issues.



Please don't try and make sense of anything past/present/future where these two are concerned -


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> What was the name of that lord that minded Harry some years ago? Does anyone know more about him, and what his role was in looking after Harry?
> 
> It's a bit of a red flag when an adult of supposedly sound mind and body, in this case Harry, needs a caretaker, visibly even in public. I haven't followed Harry before his marriage so maybe I've misunderstood the role of this lord but I do remember a photo of him sitting right behind and talking in to the ear of a clearly sulking Harry.



Lord Mountbatten took care of Charles, after many years of mentoring Charle's father, Prince Philip. 

Not sure who may have done the same for H.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Shopaholic2021 said:


> That's what I think it was supposed to be too. Bring awareness to mental health issues and shining a light on people that work in the field and the ways in which people can access help. I think they changed the format and the content due to recent events (ie falling out with the BRF).
> 
> *Harry said in December 2017 that the BRF where the family that Meghan never had. That implies that her family neglected her or at the very least she is estranged from them. And now they are suddenly evil and the cause of his and her mental health issues.*


This is a great point! Harry's family went from the family Meghan never had, to another family she didn't want kind of quickly.


----------



## V0N1B2

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Btw, I'm sure Meghan convinced him that living in Africa was her dream too (between wooing him by pe*eing in the Botswana bush).


Of course she did. Didn't they have their first real date in Botswana? He took her away for the weekend or something, didn't he?
I thought the UN do-gooder act was really just a set up to get introduced to someone very high profile. 
Personally, I think she knew exactly who she had her sights on and how to get him.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> *EXACTLY .. 100%* .. but, you see .. the two of them are ensconced in one of the most "*pristine*" areas of California, where .. even if they did see homeless people, I betcha they are NOTHING like the ones you would see downtown (those are the ones who have moved to Venice Beach) or here in the Valley.  There is not a single day that I don't see homeless people not that far from our houses and, as a matter of fact, we had a package stolen yesterday thanks to them.  My HB is pretty fed up out here and wants to go back to Boston, but I have to remind him that each place has its pro's & con's.


Have you been to Brentwood lately? It used to be a pristine area. This is a serious problem, but perhaps not flashy enough to grab the attention of people like OW.


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Harry wasn't exactly an overly driven person before meeting her as far as I know. But one has to give it to Meghan, that she does have exceptional *drive*, having climbed over such an impressive number of people to come all this way.



Drive yes, but where's she driving them to except over a cliff-edge? 

I admire 'drive', to me this is obsession fuelled by self-delusion


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I know that's the narrative on this thread but she has talked about her mother. This tig entry for example. Can you share where you learned MM paid for Doria's MSW? It seems she graduated in 2011 which I believe was the first year MM was on suits. I am wondering how MM would have had the disposable income at that time to cover tuition for grad school?


well I believe she threw that Sayonara Zara party when she got the Suits job so I guess the supporting role on the basic cable channel paid pretty well


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> She also lucked out that he was a very easy guy to persuade that fathers are more trouble than they are worth
> Apparently a lot of older men on Grindr get messages asking if they are ‘generous’ which is code for ‘are you rich and looking for a sugar baby?’
> I assume kind has a similar implication here.



Do you mean Tinder? (Grindr tends to be a gay 'chat' site)

On Grindr, from what I've heard, you'd have to do some pretty kinky stuff to expect payment.

There are many special sites for sugar-babies

I can't believe I know all this stuff


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> *“Thank God William was born first”  *
> 
> _*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been “cashing in” on Princess Diana’s name in a classless attempt to launch their US career, according to political commentator Calvin Robinson. *His remarks come as the BBC has comes under fire after it was revealed Martin Bashir allegedly forged documents to coerce Princess Diana into an interview.
> 
> Mr Robinson said there was a stark contrast between the way Prince Harry and wife Meghan handled themselves and the way in which future king, Prince William, does. *“Prince Harry moved to America for privacy to get away from all the press all the media in the UK, and what have they done since they’ve arrived in America, they’ve courted the media to no end,”* he said.
> 
> Mr Robinson said *the runaway royals were “cashing in on poor Prince Harry’s late mother” while Prince William delivered a “really classy statement” to the media on the Diana scandal.* “What’s even worse than that is Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are trying to use this as a parallel for their own life,” Mr Robinson. *“They’re saying Meghan is the new Princess Diana. They’re trying to cash in on Diana’s name in order to up their fame. “That’s what all this is about, it’s all about upping the fame of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle as they launch their US career. *
> 
> “There’s no class there when we look at the statements released by Meghan and Harry, really crass cashing in on the late Princess Diana. When we look at his big brother Prince William – really future king statements.” *Sky News host Rita Panahi said “thank God William was born first”*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Thank God Prince Harry wasn’t born first’: Rita Panahi
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been “cashing in” on Princess Diana’s name in a classless attempt to launch their US career, according to political commentator Calvin Robinson.  His remarks come as the BBC has comes under fire after it was revealed Martin Bashir allegedly forged documents to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au




Thank you for the great article!  I'm wondering if H and staff is making sure M doesn't read all the bad press. I know there's some good press on them BUT here's LOTs of bad press too. I feel more than when M was pregnant with Archie. Since M says she was suicidal, what would this bad press do to her now?  This can't be good for her and the baby girl and for H worrying about them.  I know, they did it to themselves. I believe in that as you know I'm not a fan of M&H.  I was at the beginning like many people with high hopes they would do lot of good as royals.  Jut thinking about this is stressing me. I couldn't be a mother so maybe that's where my concern comes from.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> Drive yes, but where's she driving them to except over a cliff-edge?
> 
> I admire 'drive', to me this is obsession fuelled by self-delusion


I'm trying to show a bit of restraint  but you are right. This is not good.










						Meghan 'got everything' while Harry's 'anger' at losing 'everything'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE "got everything she wanted" while Prince Harry has made sacrifices according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk
				




*Meghan 'got everything' as Prince Harry's 'anger' at 'giving up everything' spilling out*
_MEGHAN MARKLE "got everything she wanted" while Prince Harry has made sacrifices according to a royal expert._
_Duncan Larcombe claimed Meghan Markle has way more than she could have dreamed of while Prince Harry has given everything up. The royal commentator also told talkRADIO the Duke of Sussex's anger is flowing out every single day as he continues to fire shots at the Royal Family._


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Charles promises to cut son Harry off if he attacks the Queen
					

PRINCE CHARLES would put his son Prince Harry "out in the cold" if he attacks the Queen one more time, a royal insider has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				





*Prince Harry on final warning: Charles promises to cut son off if he attacks the Queen*
*PRINCE CHARLES would put his son Prince Harry "out in the cold" if he attacks the Queen one more time, a royal insider has claimed.*

It has been reported that the Queen is "deeply upset" by the Duke of Sussex's "very personal" attacks on the Royal Family. Prince Harry's comments about his father Prince Charles's parenting and "suggestion his father knows no better because of how he was raised", have troubled the Monarch. Speaking to the Daily Mail a Royal source said: "Prince Harry’s grandmother has taken this very personally and is deeply upset by what Harry has said."


The source added: "Charles will want to engage, but it’s fair to say what Harry has said in both interviews with Oprah has been seen as very callous within the family. "If Harry was to attack the Queen in a more personal way, Charles would close ranks with the Queen without a doubt and Harry would be out in the cold." Prince Harry's latest comments about his family in the new documentary series The Me You Can't See has caused more concern.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Hermes Zen said:


> Thank you for the great article!  I'm wondering if H and staff is making sure M doesn't read all the bad press. I know there's some good press on them BUT here's LOTs of bad press too. I feel more than when M was pregnant with Archie. Since M says she was suicidal, what would this bad press do to her now?  This can't be good for her and the baby girl and for H worrying about them.  I know, they did it to themselves. I believe in that as you know I'm not a fan of M&H.  I was at the beginning like many people with high hopes they would do lot of good as royals.  Jut thinking about this is stressing me. _I couldn't be a mother so maybe that's where my concern comes from._


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

papertiger said:


> Lord Mountbatten took care of Charles, after many years of mentoring Charle's father, Prince Philip.
> 
> Not sure who may have done the same for H.


There was someone, I may not remember correctly, can't even find it on google. I'm sure I've seen pics of them together and that someone commented on this lord (?) even here.

Btw, I just googled this again and I mysteriously found Harry's Las Vegas commando pics on a blog!   

Anyone wants a link?


----------



## RAINDANCE

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> There was someone, I may not remember correctly, can't even find it on google. I'm sure I've seen pics of them together and that someone commented on this lord (?) even here.
> 
> Btw, I just googled this again and I mysteriously found Harry's Las Vegas commando pics on a blog!
> 
> Anyone wants a link?


Do you mean Mark Dyer ?








						Prince Harry's second father Mark Dyergiven  pride of place at concert
					

Mark Dyer, 50, has been a key figure in Prince Harry's life since childhood and his position alongside Harry at last night's concert in aid of  Sentebale showed just how deep their bond is.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> well I believe she threw that Sayonara Zara party when she got the Suits job so I guess the supporting role on the basic cable channel paid pretty well



Right...but it seems the timeline doesn’t make sense...Doria was graduating when the Suits job began...tuition would have been due during the years before the show?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Lenna.V said:


> I'm not defending Meghan. But from personal experience, I never met my husband's family. He was a difficult child and wasn't appreciate enough by his family. So we never talk about them. I am still curious about his family. But if he wasn't ready for me to meet them. I do not care. He has good relationship with my family so I'm cool. I don't feel like I missed something out.


Originally, Thomas Markle was to walk her down the aisle until the paparazzi photos, and she was very appreciated by her father, so I'm afraid it's a very different scenario. Plus, none of her family made the cut, not even relatives on her mother's side, except her mother.



sdkitty said:


> yes the way you describe it she sounds almost like a call girl


The same thing came to my mind when I read it. Probably that's why the changed the story for the public.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Originally, Thomas Markle was to walk her down the aisle until the paparazzi photos, and she was very appreciated by her father, so I'm afraid it's a very different scenario. Plus, none of her family made the cut, not even relatives on her mother's side, except her mother.
> 
> 
> The same thing came to my mind when I read it. Probably that's why the changed the story for the public.


wonder what happened that first night


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> _One aide said last week: ‘*They should put the titles into abeyance**,* so they still exist but are not used, like they agreed to do with their HRHs. They should just become Harry and Meghan.’ _


*YES, YES and YES* .. I soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hope that they do this!!!!!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I know that's the narrative on this thread but she has talked about her mother. This tig entry for example. Can you share where you learned MM paid for Doria's MSW? It seems she graduated in 2011 which I believe was the first year MM was on suits. I am wondering how MM would have had the disposable income at that time to cover tuition for grad school?











						The Profound Presence of Doria Ragland
					

In front of billions, Meghan Markle entered one of the oldest halls of whiteness, with the flowers of former colonies sewn on to  her veil, and blended in. Her mother stood out.




					www.newyorker.com
				




I don't think she has ever been a struggling artist before suits. She was given a very completive internship via family connections and she had odd acting jobs which although not millions of dollars, would have been substantial and much more than a normal office job.

Also Doria could have taken out a loan and Meghan paid it off.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

RAINDANCE said:


> Do you mean Mark Dyer ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's second father Mark Dyergiven  pride of place at concert
> 
> 
> Mark Dyer, 50, has been a key figure in Prince Harry's life since childhood and his position alongside Harry at last night's concert in aid of  Sentebale showed just how deep their bond is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thank you for the link, but no, that's not the man I remember from the pics I'm thinking of. Does anyone else remember that pic with a man sitting behind Harry at some sports event, talking to him while Harry is sulking? I'm sure it was a lord or similar.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> *YES, YES and YES* .. I soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hope that they do this!!!!!


Do not forget to sign the petition, it might help.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> his problem was he had no plausible way to make $$$ to maintain his lifestyle without carrying out duties. I don’t think he even could’ve right after getting married... Megxit gave them a whole new level of fame to springboard off. That’s why he still relies on those themes to make money.


He could have adjust his lifestyle to his means. He wasn't penniless, he had his inheritance and I'm sure he could have squeezed more out of Charles without this grand exit. Or he could just marry someone who had less demands but more money.


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> *He could have adjust his lifestyle to his means.* He wasn't penniless, he had his inheritance and I'm sure he could have squeezed more out of Charles without this grand exit. Or he could just marry someone who had less demands but more money.



He could have.... but he was never going to do that. In fairness to him, the only lifestyle he knew was a certain level of privilege and a $30m inheritance wasn't going to cut it. He probably felt stuck until he saw Megxit could give him a career.


----------



## Hermes Zen

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I know that's the narrative on this thread but she has talked about her mother. This tig entry for example. Can you share where you learned MM paid for Doria's MSW? It seems she graduated in 2011 which I believe was the first year MM was on suits. I am wondering how MM would have had the disposable income at that time to cover tuition for grad school?


From being a 'yacht girl'?


----------



## Chanbal

For the love of God will someone please shut Harry up! PAUL BALDWIN
					

RIGHT from the start, and without any apparent sense of irony, a full screen warning in sober black and white sternly advises us "viewer discretion advised".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> He could have.... but he was never going to do that. In fairness to him, the only lifestyle he knew was a certain level of privilege and a $30m inheritance wasn't going to cut it. He probably felt stuck until he saw Megxit could give him a career.



Charles was funding him to 95 %, the other 5 % came from the Sovereign Grant, so "official" money. I feel had he not went about things like he did - impertinent, entitled, rude and very, very public -  Charles would have probably quietly continued to do so, the public wouldn't have cried that Duchy of Cornwall money was flowing, etc.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charles was funding him to 95 %, the other 5 % came from the Sovereign Grant, so "official" money. I feel had he not went about things like he did - impertinent, entitled, rude and very, very public -  Charles would have probably quietly continued to do so, the public wouldn't have cried that Duchy of Cornwall money was flowing, etc.



But then what would he have done... just sit home for the rest of his life and live off Dad's money without working? I don't think that would be a tenable situation for him. He probably wanted to work and have purpose but didn't know how to be successful on his own.


----------



## Chanbal

This is serious!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Do not forget to sign the petition, it might help.



I think you have to be in the UK for it to count


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

Chanbal said:


>




Umm he more than ALLOWED it to happen. He clearly planned for it to... I don't get why people are still talking about Harry as if he is a hapless victim of something. He's doing this to make money and vent his anger. This is his new career. Just because other people don't like it doesn't mean it's somehow an accident or a manipulation. He knows what he's doing.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Just thinking about chronology ..
> 
> 2016 ca H meets M, tells him to get therapy
> 2016 - 2018 ca H starts therapy
> 2018 ca M is suicidal, goes to HR for help, H does NOT tell family, too embarrassed
> 
> Did he ask his therapist to help her?


And we learned all this in an Oprah interview and yet it didn’t even occur to her to ask about that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lalame said:


> But then what would he have done... just sit home for the rest of his life and live off Dad's money without working? I don't think that would be a tenable situation for him. He probably wanted to work and have purpose but didn't know how to be successful on his own.



True, I was looking solely at the financial aspect. That said, while you know my soft spot for mentally fragile Harry (I try to do better haha), my sympathy for a member of the most privileged family of the world not knowing what to do with his life is kind of low. He could have gotten into any school (we know that's not where his talent lies, but still), he could have gone about his army career a bit more earnest like Philip, he could have done philantrophy or environmental activism on a serious level because his family money would have afforded him that. Had he not treated his brother and SIL like sh*t, I'm sure he could have been the main guy at their environment award they launched which is already very reputable while William would have prepared for his monarch role. Heck, I'm sure Charles would have bought him a farm to breed polo ponies had he asked nicely. To me, all of these causes sound more valueable and more fulfilling then being Hollywood's latest trainwreck, but what do I know.

I did take my riding lesson today I was pondering about, best money I've spent on myself in ages...last time I went at least a decade ago they were already famous (probably even more so as my instructor who owns the thing was actively competing and held world champion titles in several categories, while he's since somewhat retired) and doing very well for themselves, but today? I was SHOCKED, that thing has grown to massive sizes, they have more tracks for both dressage and gaiting, a new arena, a trail area, several miles of especially prepared riding paths (apparently just using whatever natural path there is is for peasants haha), a café, an equipment shop, their own saddle line, several books and instructional videos, tons and tons of horses and tons and tons of boarders. I am sure they are multimillionaires of their own making by now, so the polo pony idea is not even that idiotic. Of course, these people put in the work.


----------



## DeMonica

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I don't doubt that you are right. But of the two, I think Meghan is the driving force keeping up to date with public and random internet poster opinions.
> 
> 
> Harry did want to leave it all and move to Africa, not that long ago. I wish he had, for his sake. It's sad he didn't find someone to share that dream with him. Btw, I'm sure Meghan convinced him that living in Africa was her dream too (between wooing him by pe*eing in the Botswana bush).
> 
> Harry wasn't exactly an overly driven person before meeting her as far as I know. But one has to give it to Meghan, that she does have exceptional drive, having climbed over such an impressive number of people to come all this way.


Wasn't he offered some kind of position in South Africa? I've read it somewhere think they refused it. My guess is SA wasn't close enough to Hollywood.


----------



## lalame

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, I was looking solely at the financial aspect. That said, while you know my soft spot for mentally fragile Harry (I try to do better haha), my sympathy for a member of the most privileged family of the world not knowing what to do with his life is kind of low. He could have gotten into any school (we know that's not where his talent lies, but still), he could have gone about his army career a bit more earnest like Philip, he could have done philantrophy or environmental activism on a serious level because his family money would have afforded him that. Had he not treated his brother and SIL like sh*t, I'm sure he could have been the main guy at their environment award they launched which is already very reputable while William would have prepared for his monarch role. Heck, I'm sure Charles would have bought him a farm to breed polo ponies had he asked nicely. To me, all of these causes sound more valueable and more fulfilling then being Hollywood's latest trainwreck, but what do I know.
> 
> I did take my riding lesson today I was pondering about, best money I've spent on myself in ages...last time I went at least a decade ago they were already famous (probably even more so as my instructor who owns the thing was actively competing and held world champion titles in several categories, while he's since somewhat retired) and doing very well for themselves, but today? I was SHOCKED, that thing has grown to massive sizes, they have more tracks for both dressage and gaiting, a new arena, a trail area, several miles of especially prepared riding paths (apparently just using whatever natural path there is is for peasants haha), a café, an equipment shop, their own saddle line, several books and instructional videos, tons and tons of horses and tons and tons of boarders. I am sure they are multimillionaires of their own making by now, so the polo pony idea is not even that idiotic. Of course, these people put in the work.



I totally agree, he SHOULD have been able to be successful on his own but... he wasn't that smart. The other royal kids who didn't want to do royal duties found other ways to succeed but Harry just never got it together. I don't have sympathy for him but I can see how he felt stuck given what he wanted but wasn't able to achieve. Marrying Meghan was probably the best thing that happened to him because it gave him a purpose that was easy to monetize. I mean for God's sake he's making money now from just talking. about. his. life. That's the easiest possible thing a person can do.


----------



## Lodpah

The plot of the two daggers these two perpetuate is just so extra. (Stealing from Caligula’s sisters’ and BIL history).


----------



## csshopper

I am guessing mental health _professionals_ world wide are cringing at the participation of a "colleague" Sanja Oakley, in televising what one might expect to be a very private and confidential mental health counseling session.

Doing so might be explained by Ms Oakley's background.

"A registered psychotherapist, Oakley has worked with patients in the U.S., the U.K. and Europe over the last two decades.
*According to her website, before becoming a psychotherapist and coach, she enjoyed a "successful and rewarding" career in sales and marketing across different industries, including publishing, media and consumer software.*

There is no mention of any medical or scientific training, nor of any accreditation.

From the Web: "It (EMDR)  claims to provide faster healing time than with more traditional forms of psychotherapy, for issues such as poor self-esteem, feeling powerless and other problems that cause people to seek help.

And therapist Sanja Oakley appears to have been working on similar issues with Prince Harry.

In the documentary, Prince Harry said: "Having now done therapy for four-and-a-bit years, five years now, for me it's all about prevention."

I'm confused by the claim EMDR can "provide faster healing" yet Harry has "now done therapy for four-and-a-bit years, five years," which from my perspective is not "faster healing," and, in fact, based on observation his "healing" is questionable. Then to say "now it's all about prevention." What prevention?

I am not trying to belittle a therapy, (EMDR) that may be helpful to people suffering from mental health issues, and if this helps them, then it was worth the investment of their time and money. But this segment with Harry comes across as hucksterism, an extension of Oakley's "sales and marketing".


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> wonder what happened that first night


Maybe they got serious very fast.

ETA: would any of you ask  whether the guy you are going to meet is kind or nice if a friend set up the date? I wouldn't because I assume that the friend keeps my best interest in mind and my date would be nice and kind. Who would set up a friend with a raging madman?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I am guessing mental health _professionals_ world wide are cringing at the participation of a "colleague" Sanja Oakley, in televising what one might expect to be a very private and confidential mental health counseling session.
> 
> Doing so might be explained by Ms Oakley's background.
> 
> "A registered psychotherapist, Oakley has worked with patients in the U.S., the U.K. and Europe over the last two decades.
> *According to her website, before becoming a psychotherapist and coach, she enjoyed a "successful and rewarding" career in sales and marketing across different industries, including publishing, media and consumer software.*
> 
> There is no mention of any medical or scientific training, nor of any accreditation.
> 
> From the Web: "It (EMDR)  claims to provide faster healing time than with more traditional forms of psychotherapy, for issues such as poor self-esteem, feeling powerless and other problems that cause people to seek help.
> 
> And therapist Sanja Oakley appears to have been working on similar issues with Prince Harry.
> 
> In the documentary, Prince Harry said: "Having now done therapy for four-and-a-bit years, five years now, for me it's all about prevention."
> 
> I'm confused by the claim EMDR can "provide faster healing" yet Harry has "now done therapy for four-and-a-bit years, five years," which from my perspective is not "faster healing," and, in fact, based on observation his "healing" is questionable. Then to say "now it's all about prevention." What prevention?
> 
> I am not trying to belittle a therapy, (EMDR) that may be helpful to people suffering from mental health issues, and if this helps them, then it was worth the investment of their time and money. But this segment with Harry comes across as hucksterism, an extension of Oakley's "sales and marketing".



*T.H.I.S.     *

I just said the same thing to my husband. Trained, respected therapists all over must be disgusted with the monetizing of their therapy. Surgeons dislike the youtube approach to medicine, too.


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> But then what would he have done... just sit home for the rest of his life and live off Dad's money without working? I don't think that would be a tenable situation for him. He probably wanted to work and have purpose but didn't know how to be successful on his own.


That's what he did before Megs and seemed to be content to do so. Although, he was involved in Invictus and other charities helping the wounded, injured servicemen or woman, e.g., Walking With The Wounded, and in my opinion he could have carved a nice a career out of it for himself if he wanted to. He was very popular with the soldiers and it's a very noble cause, too. Actually the military was the only thing he had any aptitude for. Now he can add slander and chicken farmer to his resume.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hilarious!  They are all in on the joke. 

_Speaking on rumours Prince Harry and Meghan had filmed their chat with Oprah in his abode, Rob shared: “It’s so funny.
“Everybody thinks the interview is shot at my house and then my friend Ted Sarandos who runs Netflix, everybody thought they shot it at his house,” Rob explained.  “Here’s my thing and I have no idea. I think they just plain old shot it at Oprah’s.
Speaking on rumours Prince Harry and Meghan had filmed their chat with Oprah in his abode, Rob shared: “It’s so funny."
“I swear to you, and they just said it was a mystery location.”_









						Rob Lowe says Montecito hasn't been 'the same’ since royals moved in
					

ROB LOWE has said his royal neighbours Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have "brought a lot of attention" to his "sleepy little town" of Montecito, Los Angeles after rumours spread he lent them his house for their interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

DeMonica said:


> Maybe they got serious very fast.
> 
> ETA: would any of you ask  whether the guy you are going to meet is kind or nice if a friend set up the date? I wouldn't because I assume that the friend keeps my best interest in mind and my date would be nice and kind. Who would set up a friend with a raging madman?


I guess I’m shallow. I ask if they are cute or good looking lol?


----------



## gelbergirl

Can someone provide link for the best place to read about EMDR.
I’m not too familiar.

I started the Oprah mental health show today


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gelbergirl said:


> Can someone provide link for the best place to read about EMDR.
> I’m not too familiar.
> 
> I started the Oprah mental health show today











						What is EMDR? - EMDR Institute - EYE MOVEMENT DESENSITIZATION AND REPROCESSING THERAPY
					

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a psychotherapy treatment that was originally designed to alleviate the distress associated with



					www.emdr.com
				












						Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy
					

Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a structured therapy that encourages the patient to briefly focus on the trauma memory and simultaneously experience bilateral stimulation (usually eye movements).




					www.apa.org
				




Full disclosure...I'm a huge fan (of EMDR that is)!


----------



## DeMonica

Lodpah said:


> I guess I’m shallow. I ask if they are cute or good looking lol?


It's more likely that you end up with a nice date than a good looking date, so IMO that's a valid question.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> What is EMDR? - EMDR Institute - EYE MOVEMENT DESENSITIZATION AND REPROCESSING THERAPY
> 
> 
> Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a psychotherapy treatment that was originally designed to alleviate the distress associated with
> 
> 
> 
> www.emdr.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) Therapy
> 
> 
> Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) is a structured therapy that encourages the patient to briefly focus on the trauma memory and simultaneously experience bilateral stimulation (usually eye movements).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.apa.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Full disclosure...I'm a huge fan (of EMDR that is)!


TY!
so then he did this during the discussion with Oprah because EDMR was part of his treatment to process and move forward?


----------



## xincinsin

floatinglili said:


> Wow that is really interesting (not meeting family before marriage). I dont think I’ve ever come across it in my personal life. I guess I can understand that in some circumstances it could happen but it seems very unusual to me.
> In a hardcore traditional, aristocratic - scratch that ROYAL - family wedding situation? The idea of not meeting immediate family to vet them thoroughly very early in a serious courtship seems absolutely crazy. Megain managed to hold  them off until the wedding was imminent, and then scratched Dad! She must have a megaton of insistent charisma.


All part of the "What Meghan wants" attitude. She probably had H throwing tantrums on her behalf after she fed him the tale of her horrible family. She really knows which buttons to press to get him fuming: family, death, neglect, abandonment, cruel media...



csshopper said:


> In the documentary, Prince Harry said: "Having now done therapy for four-and-a-bit years, five years now, for me it's all about prevention."
> 
> I'm confused by the claim EMDR can "provide faster healing" yet Harry has "now done therapy for four-and-a-bit years, five years," which from my perspective is not "faster healing," and, in fact, based on observation his "healing" is questionable. Then to say "now it's all about prevention." What prevention?


ITA
It's certainly not preventing him from going off his rails. Is this a quack doctor recommended by OW and MM?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gelbergirl said:


> TY!
> so then he did this during the discussion with Oprah because EDMR was part of his treatment to process and move forward?



I'm sorry I didn't watch it...I only know about EMDR!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> TY!
> so then he did this during the discussion with Oprah because EDMR was part of his treatment to process and move forward?



It’s in episode 3. I stopped watching at episode 3. 
To me, the therapist sounded British, so maybe he was doing it while in the UK.

ETA:  The more he talks, the more unhinged he sounds. Maybe he should try silence.


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> I think you have to be in the UK for it to count


Canadians can also sign. I have.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I think you have to be in the UK for it to count


You might be right, but I'm afraid several Americans are eager to join the party!


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> "A registered psychotherapist, Oakley has worked with patients in the U.S., the U.K. and Europe over the last two decades.
> *According to her website, before becoming a psychotherapist and coach, she enjoyed a "successful and rewarding" career in sales and marketing across different industries, including publishing, media and consumer software.*
> 
> There is no mention of any medical or scientific training, nor of any accreditation.


Boy-oh-boy-oh-boy .. would that be an *ENORMOUS RED FLAG* for me and this woman will likely *KA-CHING-A-DING-A-DING* [$$$$$$$] with this "sales pitch"!


----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Umm he more than ALLOWED it to happen. He clearly planned for it to... I don't get why people are still talking about Harry as if he is a hapless victim of something. He's doing this to make money and vent his anger. This is his new career. Just because other people don't like it doesn't mean it's somehow an accident or a manipulation. He knows what he's doing.


Angela Levin is not talking about Harry as if he is a hapless victim (or at the least not anymore). She is being sarcastic about him having public therapy sessions while complaining about invasion of privacy.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

One more person that stopped defending Harry...


_Speaking on Prince Harry’s reaction to the report, Lady Colin Campbell said: *“He wants to be free to say what he wants, but anybody who says what he doesn’t want to hear, should be silenced. *
“I think the whole thing is very regrettable."_









						Prince Harry ‘completely lacks dignity’ in his reaction to BBC report
					

PRINCE HARRY has completely "lacked dignity" in his response to the BBC report that found Martin Bashir to have used deception to secure an interview with his mother Princess Diana, said Lady Colin Campbell.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Kaka_bobo

bellecate said:


> Canadians can also sign. I have.



I've also just signed it. I suppose anyone part of the Commonwealth should be able to sign it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ICYMI [yes, it is a spoof]









						Spoof website jokes Harry 'running for vice presidency' with Meghan
					

A SPOOF website promoting Prince Harry for vice president has been set up – with the Duke’s campaign credits including ‘saying things’ and ‘listening to Meghan’.…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I mean for God's sake he's making money now from just talking. about. his. life. That's the easiest possible thing a person can do.



It isn’t a sustainable source of income. How long can he believe the public will want to hear it? Will he invent new grievances against his family every 2 or 3 months for the rest of his life? Will he be able to fulfill the contracts? I’m sure Netflix loves that they signed them for millions and the first show H&M does was for CBS and the second show was for Apple+. What is left for Netflix? Oh that’s right, they get a show about the Invictus Games.


----------



## queennadine




----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t a sustainable source of income. How long can he believe the public will want to hear it? *Will he invent new grievances against his family every 2 or 3 months for the rest of his life? *Will he be able to fulfill the contracts? I’m sure Netflix loves that they signed them for millions and the first show H&M does was for CBS and the second show was for Apple+. What is left for Netflix? Oh that’s right, they get a show about the Invictus Games.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Each new appearance makes it continuously obvious “6” is dumb, dense, delusional and deeply disconnected from seeing the reality of his negative impact.

How ironic he has railed in the past against the “grey suits” in the Palace. The loss of that kind of guidance and tethering of him has allowed people like his wife, OW, Gayle, Sunshine Sachs to use and abuse him for their own agenda $$$ and he allows himself to be complicit.

I think compared to some of the other stories he comes across as a self absorbed petulant man child and it’s alienating more people as they come to recognize this.


----------



## Genie27

queennadine said:


> View attachment 5091379


It’s bonkers!


----------



## Icyjade

I actually feel rather sad for the BRF, or anyone who loves him - family and/or friends. It must be very difficult and heart breaking to see someone that they love go off the rails and being manipulated to do stupid things.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember the fly?   

_The blink-and-you’d-miss-it moment happened when Bishop Michael Curry was giving a rousing sermon.

Fans watching the ceremony from home couldn’t believe their eyes when the giant blue bottle suddenly hit Megan.

She barely moved a muscle despite having the insect interrupting the most important moment of her life.

Viewers praised her reaction, with one writing: “Where did that silly fly come from? Meghan still maintained her composure. Love her!”_








						Meghan Markle gets smacked in the face by a huge fly during the Royal Wedding ceremony as viewers praise her for 'barely flinching'
					

WHILE we mere mortals would have screamed in shock, Meghan Markle barely flinched when an enormous fly hit her in the face during her wedding ceremony today. The Suits actress, who married Prince H…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Do you mean Tinder? (Grindr tends to be a gay 'chat' site)
> 
> On Grindr, from what I've heard, you'd have to do some pretty kinky stuff to expect payment.
> 
> There are many special sites for sugar-babies
> 
> I can't believe I know all this stuff


I’m sure it’s true on tinder as well, i was just going on something a friend was complaining about on Grindr and then apparently he found an article on it. I don’t know personally.

there’s definitely sugarbaby sites- though thinking about it I think Meghan might be a bit old for a sugar baby


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember the fly?
> 
> _The blink-and-you’d-miss-it moment happened when Bishop Michael Curry was giving a rousing sermon.
> 
> Fans watching the ceremony from home couldn’t believe their eyes when the giant blue bottle suddenly hit Megan.
> 
> She barely moved a muscle despite having the insect interrupting the most important moment of her life.
> 
> Viewers praised her reaction, with one writing: “Where did that silly fly come from? Meghan still maintained her composure. Love her!”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gets smacked in the face by a huge fly during the Royal Wedding ceremony as viewers praise her for 'barely flinching'
> 
> 
> WHILE we mere mortals would have screamed in shock, Meghan Markle barely flinched when an enormous fly hit her in the face during her wedding ceremony today. The Suits actress, who married Prince H…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


The fly knew something that everyone didn't. Maybe it was skulking in her room as she laid out her plans to OW and her Canadian BFF what's-her-name.



jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sure it’s true on tinder as well, i was just going on something a friend was complaining about on Grindr and then apparently he found an article on it. I don’t know personally.
> 
> there’s definitely sugarbaby sites- though thinking about it I think Meghan might be a bit old for a sugar baby


Once she gets her hands on the goodies and has H committed to longterm care, she'll swan around with a boy toy as she gets a dip in the plastic fountain of youth while looking for the next likely victim/husband.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t a sustainable source of income. How long can he believe the public will want to hear it? Will he invent new grievances against his family every 2 or 3 months for the rest of his life? Will he be able to fulfill the contracts? I’m sure Netflix loves that they signed them for millions and the first show H&M does was for CBS and the second show was for Apple+. What is left for Netflix? Oh that’s right, they get a show about the Invictus Games.


I'd like to see what contribution he can make to the Commission on Information Disorder. It's a 6-month study announced in March, so the results of the study should be out by next year. Harry's chief qualification for being appointed to the commission appears to be  "victim". He can now add "Disseminator of Misinformation" to his resume.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember the fly?
> 
> _The blink-and-you’d-miss-it moment happened when Bishop Michael Curry was giving a rousing sermon.
> 
> Fans watching the ceremony from home couldn’t believe their eyes when the giant blue bottle suddenly hit Megan.
> 
> She barely moved a muscle despite having the insect interrupting the most important moment of her life.
> 
> Viewers praised her reaction, with one writing: “Where did that silly fly come from? Meghan still maintained her composure. Love her!”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gets smacked in the face by a huge fly during the Royal Wedding ceremony as viewers praise her for 'barely flinching'
> 
> 
> WHILE we mere mortals would have screamed in shock, Meghan Markle barely flinched when an enormous fly hit her in the face during her wedding ceremony today. The Suits actress, who married Prince H…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Well she is a replicant...


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Well she is a replicant...


Blade Runner, Splash, what's next? Kill Bill?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> You might be right, but I'm afraid several Americans are eager to join the party!



Diplomatic passport? 

I was misinformed, this is going to Harry - U*K, US, all Commonwealth, all World citizens  WELCOME sign sign sign * 

Almost 19, 000 now  

Petition to ask H to park his titles


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> Diplomatic passport?
> 
> I was misinformed, this is going to Harry - U*K, US, all Commonwealth, all World citizens  WELCOME sign sign sign *
> 
> Almost 19, 000 now
> 
> Petition to ask H to park his titles



Done 

_The purpose is to invite Prince Harry to voluntarily ask The Queen to put his royal style, titles and rank into abeyance, thereby freeing him from the diplomatic, political and constitutional constraints that are an inevitable part of royal rank, and further freeing him from the constitutional conflicts which his beliefs are creating, with all their  implications at home and abroad, in particular in the United Kingdom and the United States of America, where his articulated beliefs are in open conflict with the accepted tenets of  both the United Kingdom and American Constitutions.  As a purely private citizen, with no royal rank, style or title, he will be able to indulge his personal beliefs, as is the right of all private citizens, without the consequential possibility of damaging the institution of the Monarchy or  relations between Friendly Powers, and will be free to articulate beliefs, no matter how objectionable, without the fallout  that is otherwise inevitable as long as he possesses royal status.  His invitation to The Sovereign, being of his own accord,  will resolve conflicts that would otherwise be inevitable, and will permit him to enjoy the credit of having put both national and international interests above his own, personal ones, in the process gaining him respect that he otherwise will not enjoy.  _


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Diplomatic passport?
> 
> I was misinformed, this is going to Harry - U*K, US, all Commonwealth, all World citizens  WELCOME sign sign sign *
> 
> Almost 19, 000 now
> 
> Petition to ask H to park his titles


Signed! They are a disgrace to the titles.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I guess I’m shallow. I ask if they are cute or good looking lol?



I guess I'm demanding, I'd give them my Wishlist 

Actually. I wouldn't trust someone else's opinion on things that can only be subjective.

Incidentally, how 'blind date' can a date be when there are a million pics of H all over the Net, and same with her? Oh, that's right, I forgot, she doesn't use a 'search'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not that it's news for us, just leaving this here for reference.



(the Cinderella tweet links to an Australian piece on Harry rewriting history)


----------



## papertiger

gelbergirl said:


> TY!
> so then he did this during the discussion with Oprah because EDMR was part of his treatment to process and move forward?



The treatment doesn't seem to be working


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I guess I'm demanding, I'd give them my Wishlist
> 
> Actually. I'm the opposite, I wouldn't trust someone else's opinion on things that can only be subjective.
> 
> I mean how 'blind date' can a date be when there are a million pics of H all over the Net, and same with her. Oh, that's right, I forgot, she doesn't use a 'search'


I think that was one of the first hooks she used to reel him in. You can just imagine his thought processes as she lures him into her web:
She uses Mummy's perfume! 
Finally, a girl who has no idea who I am, who likes me as Just Harry! Just like Mummy! 
How dare her family treat her abominably! If only I could protect her forever! Won't let her end up like Mummy. 
She deserves to have everything! She has been deprived of so much in her life. I'll give her everything I wanted to give Mummy. 
How dare the press harass her... Just like they harassed Mummy!


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Blade Runner, Splash, what's next? Kill Bill?


I don’t see her getting that fired up about her husband’s demise though not to mention risking her own precious ass


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These are a few snaps from another one of Angela's tweets (the one where she says Raptor promotes seeing things through a difference lense but Harry's lense is nothing but dark). 



> After a spoiled childhood and a traumatic adolescence H is a mentally fragile and distorted man. His family helped him as good as they could but his wife exploits and retraumatizes him for the sake of wealth and celebrity instead of creating a more secure and intimate setting.





> H is psychologically/emotionally stunted at age 12 (even body language experts have commented on this) & recreating his childhood trauma in the present day. H seems beyond therapy at this point & M will inflame his mental illness. He's in a dangerous state.





> Gaslighting ready for million dollar divorce.





> Without a doubt, I think it’s completely on the brink, wife has been unusually quiet and out of sight, (don’t believe that’s down to the pregnancy) I think she’s wound him up abs now quietly watching him wait to implode so she can’t be blamed, Oprah is doing her work.





> I found it distressing to see. I only watched a small part of the show. He is a shell and so unhappy. I almost cried.



And this one really hit me, so true:



> Yes, indeed and I suspect that it is Megham and mother Doria who is pushing him to expose himself in this way. *He is Diana 2nd. Not that dangerous narcissist his wife. *The Queen must be so worried about him now. There is so little they than can do.


----------



## Lodpah

I was perusing Netflix to binge on something and even though I don’t care for Piers Morgan that much before I see now where his radar went up on MM. He did a series of women killers and interviewed them and they all claimed innocence despite the overwhelming evidence so there. He’s not an idiot he does have journalistic experience to ascertains ai the tough questions. MM underestimated Piers Morgan and his ability to see right through a person.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember the fly?
> 
> _The blink-and-you’d-miss-it moment happened when Bishop Michael Curry was giving a rousing sermon.
> 
> Fans watching the ceremony from home couldn’t believe their eyes when the giant blue bottle suddenly hit Megan.
> 
> She barely moved a muscle despite having the insect interrupting the most important moment of her life.
> 
> Viewers praised her reaction, with one writing: “Where did that silly fly come from? Meghan still maintained her composure. Love her!”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gets smacked in the face by a huge fly during the Royal Wedding ceremony as viewers praise her for 'barely flinching'
> 
> 
> WHILE we mere mortals would have screamed in shock, Meghan Markle barely flinched when an enormous fly hit her in the face during her wedding ceremony today. The Suits actress, who married Prince H…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Lord of the Flies making its presence known to his Queen. That’s all it is.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I think that was one of the first hooks she used to reel him in. You can just imagine his thought processes as she lures him into her web:
> She uses Mummy's perfume!
> Finally, a girl who has no idea who I am, who likes me as Just Harry! Just like Mummy!
> How dare her family treat her abominably! If only I could protect her forever! Won't let her end up like Mummy.
> She deserves to have everything! She has been deprived of so much in her life. I'll give her everything I wanted to give Mummy.
> How dare the press harass her... Just like they harassed Mummy!



Calculated grooming, and gaslighting for future use. This is someone who takes their cues from soap opera scenarios - and it worked. 

He is remedial (and when I think about it, was not safe to serve in the British army let alone lead troops). 

I don't mind that they are together. She obviously is a chameleon who can pose as someone's dream (or delivering their dream) and he's an idiot. I don't see why we have to buy into their cheap fantasy scenarios and delusions. It would be laughable if it weren't so dangerous.


----------



## xincinsin

H is an idiot but I do feel sorry for him. There is a rather sexist Chinese saying: "A woman fears marrying the wrong man; a man fears going into the wrong career." I think H has both picked the wrong spouse and ended up in the wrong career (if you could call his self-abasement on the altar of celebrity and $$$ a career). I do not foresee him ever acknowledging that she is using him, and even if this marriage ends up on the rocks, he will find some external factor to blame (most likely the media because history must repeat itself).

As for the mermaid, she will probably claim that her current disappearance from public view is because she was getting depressed by negative public sentiment and so she has gone into seclusion to protect herself and her children. H is probably all chuffed at bringing home the bacon. (The "suicidal" feelings may reappear if she really wants to milk this.)


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> I totally agree, he SHOULD have been able to be successful on his own but...* he wasn't that smart. The other royal kids who didn't want to do royal duties found other ways to succeed but Harry just never got it together.* I don't have sympathy for him but I can see how he felt stuck given what he wanted but wasn't able to achieve. Marrying Meghan was probably the best thing that happened to him because it gave him a purpose that was easy to monetize. I mean for God's sake he's making money now from just talking. about. his. life. That's the easiest possible thing a person can do.


I have to disagree on this. Not being smart wouldn't have been a hindrance, only being completely stupid would. As with mental health, he could get all the possible help to figure it out what he could do with his life, that would support him to be financially independent and have purpose at the same time. I'm sure he could have got a dozen of excellent advisors on call if he had decided to ask for help or he had just let himself be helped.
It seemed that he was doing ok and starting to find his own thing when he met Princess Pinocchio anyway. It's ok not getting it together early on, after all his father's passion for organic farming or holistic healing started in his thirties. I think Charles did well with Duchy and has holiday homes all around Europe, as well. I'm sure he could have found something really close to his heart and profitable, if not alone, with the help of specialized counsellors.
Yes, he's making money now but the way he makes it is despicable. I haven't got much respect for people who constantly blame others for their misery, yet, the thought that they could have done more things or done them differently never occurs to them. I'm afraid I'm not a victim worshipper. He's like the man driving on the highway against traffic believing that all the others driving in the wrong direction. Besides, I think him as a mental health hero  completely lacks credibility. It's pretty clear that he hasn't gained control over his life, and he's still struggling with whatever caused his troubles in the past....and might be even losing the battle.


----------



## EverSoElusive

It's been awhile since I last posted here so hope everyone's doing well 

Not sure if William actually said this but either way, this is some sound advice for the likes of Toddler Harry and Maleficent of Montecito.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I think that was one of the first hooks she used to reel him in. You can just imagine his thought processes as she lures him into her web:
> She uses Mummy's perfume!
> Finally, a girl who has no idea who I am, who likes me as Just Harry! Just like Mummy!
> How dare her family treat her abominably! If only I could protect her forever! Won't let her end up like Mummy.
> She deserves to have everything! She has been deprived of so much in her life. I'll give her everything I wanted to give Mummy.
> How dare the press harass her... Just like they harassed Mummy!



So what was Diana's fave scent?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



This was my point exactly!  I don't understand these televised "therapy" sessions.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> So what was Diana's fave scent?


I think it was Diorissimo at one point.  I remember because I used to wear it.


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> Maybe they got serious very fast.
> 
> ETA: would any of you ask  whether the guy you are going to meet is kind or nice if a friend set up the date? I wouldn't because I assume that the friend keeps my best interest in mind and my date would be nice and kind. Who would set up a friend with a raging madman?


Maybe I'm overly cautious or just plain paranoid, but if you are wondering if someone you're set up on a "blind" date is "nice", would you then go to Africa by yourself with him within a couple weeks or months?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

RAINDANCE said:


> Do you mean Mark Dyer ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's second father Mark Dyergiven  pride of place at concert
> 
> 
> Mark Dyer, 50, has been a key figure in Prince Harry's life since childhood and his position alongside Harry at last night's concert in aid of  Sentebale showed just how deep their bond is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think you are right, RAINDANCE, it must be this guy Mark Dyer I'm thinking of. There really isn't anybody else. It's interesting he was a mentor to William as well, until William married. And that Dyer is Archie's godfather.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm overly cautious or just plain paranoid, but if you are wondering if someone you're set up on a "blind" date is "nice", would you then go to Africa by yourself with him within a couple weeks or months?


I've heard some women do, without even googling the guy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm overly cautious or just plain paranoid, but if you are wondering if someone you're set up on a "blind" date is "nice", would you then go to Africa by yourself with him within a couple weeks or months?


Only after I’d googled him.


----------



## Genie27

Hahaha I posted just as @SomethingGoodCanWork did


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> So what was Diana's fave scent?



Was it Quelque Fleurs by Houbigant?  I believe she wore it on her wedding day.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm overly cautious or just plain paranoid, but if you are wondering if someone you're set up on a "blind" date is "nice", would you then go to Africa by yourself with him within a couple weeks or months?



Even her most devoted stans must know the blind date meeting story was a load of crap. 

This was Meghan on that first "blind" date.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Was it Quelque Fleurs by Houbigant?  I believe she wore it on her wedding day.



Thank you


----------



## carmen56

Harry has always said how much he loves Africa, so why on Earth, if he hated royal life so much and wanted out, did he not go to PC and TQ early on and say he would like to go Africa, make his life there doing charity and/or conservation work? I’m sure TQ would have been sympathetic.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> I think it was Diorissimo at one point.  I remember because I used to wear it.



Maybe she layered them to good effect


----------



## carmen56

carmen56 said:


> Was it Quelque Fleurs by Houbigant?  I believe she wore it on her wedding day.



Just looked it up - according to Paul Burrell, Diana’s fave perfume was 24 Faubourg by Hermes.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> Umm he more than ALLOWED it to happen. He clearly planned for it to... *I don't get why people are still talking about Harry as if he is a hapless victim of something. He's doing this to make money and vent his anger. This is his new career.* Just because other people don't like it doesn't mean it's somehow an accident or a manipulation. He knows what he's doing.



I also think Harry doesn't have any other place to vent his anger but at the royal family.  They are an easy target for all of his pain and rage and immaturity.  They aren't going to respond so he is safe in attacking them.  He certainly can't blame his wife (at this point) since he willingly went along with Megexit and to do so would end the marriage and be utterly humiliating.  But, the loss of his old life must pain him to some extent so he vents at his family.  He really wanted that half-in/half-out life on his terms and is shocked they didn't give it to him, probably because they've always given him everything he ever wanted before.

I also think that he goes along with his own exploitation because his wife and Oprah and others have convinced him that by being "his authentic self", he will "help other people". You know, the little people who wouldn't even think of seeking mental help if it were not for Prince Harry filming a therapy session.    He is really that foolish.


----------



## justwatchin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not that it's news for us, just leaving this here for reference.
> 
> 
> 
> (the Cinderella tweet links to an Australian piece on Harry rewriting history)



So either he’s getting caught up in the lies or another case of “recollections may vary”


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> Harry has always said how much he loves Africa, so why on Earth, if he hated royal life so much and wanted out, did he not go to PC and TQ early on and say he would like to go Africa, make his life there doing charity and/or conservation work? I’m sure TQ would have been sympathetic.



I have been tossing around the idea lately that Harry will say whatever he thinks will sound good, not what he actually means. In that way he and his wife are in perfect harmony. Harry might very well love Africa. He loves it as a place to visit and experience, just like any tourist.

Harry doesn't have any intention of working hard or sacrificing even an iota of his luxury and wealth for charity. Neither does Meghan. They are all talk and there is nothing actually happening behind the curtain.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> *T.H.I.S.    *
> 
> I just said the same thing to my husband. Trained, respected therapists all over must be disgusted with the monetizing of their therapy. Surgeons dislike the youtube approach to medicine, too.


so now he's saying he's been in therapy for the past four or five years?  wouldn't that include the period where she was allegedly seeking help for her suicidal thoughts/depression?


----------



## Genie27

sdkitty said:


> so now he's saying he's been in therapy for the past four or five years?  wouldn't that include the period where she was allegedly seeking help for her suicidal thoughts/depression?


Yep, so he either neglected to mention to his therapist that he was dealing with a heavily depressed and suicidal wife or the therapist did nothing about it? Or did she keep it from him as he was already “carrying so much” and instead decided HR was the best resource? 

I still wanna know how she came out of it. (Well, technically I don’t, but if they do want to lay themselves bare authentically, why isn’t she gushing about what it took to get over that episode? Because “I went to a luxury spa for a 3-day stay and felt better” doesn’t have much gravitas?)


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> So what was Diana's fave scent?


There are several articles claiming that she used a Jo Malone bluebell cologne which is similar to a Penhaligon bluebell scent that Diana used.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so now he's saying he's been in therapy for the past four or five years?  wouldn't that include the period where she was allegedly seeking help for her suicidal thoughts/depression?



Now don't go expecting them to keep track of how their lies might contradict the other stories they've told. 

Each lie must be allowed to stand alone as an independent episode. That's the only way this works! It's like watching a cartoon. We see a whole lot of surreal zaniness but by next time everything that happened before is erased and forgotten.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Genie27 said:


> Yep, so he either neglected to mention to his therapist that he was dealing with a heavily depressed and suicidal wife or the therapist did nothing about it? Or did she keep it from him as he was already “carrying so much” and instead decided HR was the best resource?
> 
> I still wanna know how she came out of it. (Well, technically I don’t, but if they do want to lay themselves bare authentically, why isn’t she gushing about what it took to get over that episode? Because “I went to a luxury spa for a 3-day stay and felt better” doesn’t have much gravitas?)


Didn't the luxury spa fall through because the palace aides discovered that the Douchess was being paid to go to that spa?  

At the rate that Harry is rewriting his life further and further back, we will soon be told that he met Me-again when they were children and his mummy introduced them. You know, when MM was hanging around outside Buckingham Palace. He was 10 and she was 15 (or whatever age she decided to be), and their eyes just met!!! Red thread of Fate and all that...


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Now don't go expecting them to keep track of how their lies might contradict the other stories they've told.
> 
> Each lie must be allowed to stand alone as an independent episode. That's the only way this works! It's like watching a cartoon. We see a whole lot of surreal zaniness but by next time everything that happened before is erased and forgotten.


Which one of them is Wile E Coyote and which is the Roadrunner?


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Which one of them is Wile E Coyote and which is the Roadrunner?



Oh, Harry is going to fill the coyote's role. It is his destiny.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Which one of them is Wile E Coyote and which is the Roadrunner?



Although Meghan has her Wile E. moments too. I see her more this way.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Although Meghan has her Wile E. moments too. I see her more this way.
> 
> View attachment 5091625


My favourite cartoon 
Meg’ll be beep beeping herself out of all this at some point


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Now don't go expecting them to keep track of how their lies might contradict the other stories they've told.
> 
> Each lie must be allowed to stand alone as an independent episode. That's the only way this works! It's like watching a cartoon. We see a whole lot of surreal zaniness but by next time everything that happened before is erased and forgotten.


you would think Oprah - being a smart person - would be concerned that she is promoting these people and they keep changing their stories.  but I guess Oprah's audience isn't interested in the actual truth - just "their truth"


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh, Harry is going to fill the coyote's role. It is his destiny.
> 
> View attachment 5091624


yes I think we know who the wily one is


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> you would think Oprah - being a smart person - would be concerned that she is promoting these people and they keep changing their stories.  but I guess Oprah's audience isn't interested in the actual truth - just "their truth"



That is the way with media these days. They tell us what they decide is the truth. Our job is to sit back and believe it without question.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> you would think Oprah - being a smart person - would be concerned that she is promoting these people and they keep changing their stories.  but I guess Oprah's audience isn't interested in the actual truth - just "their truth"


Oprah is only concerned about raking in the cash before the crash.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is the way with media these days. They tell us what they decide is the truth. Our job is to just sit back and believe it without question.


well, Oprah is really entertainment media, right?  I continue to believe there are reputable news sources out there.  However I'm sad to say I haven't seen much in the way of unbiased reporting on these two.  CNN did do an exchange with a British reporter who said some things that weren't positive about them - basically that their statements will backfire.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember the fly?
> 
> _The blink-and-you’d-miss-it moment happened when Bishop Michael Curry was giving a rousing sermon.
> 
> Fans watching the ceremony from home couldn’t believe their eyes when the giant blue bottle suddenly hit Megan.
> 
> She barely moved a muscle despite having the insect interrupting the most important moment of her life.
> 
> Viewers praised her reaction, with one writing: “Where did that silly fly come from? Meghan still maintained her composure. Love her!”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gets smacked in the face by a huge fly during the Royal Wedding ceremony as viewers praise her for 'barely flinching'
> 
> 
> WHILE we mere mortals would have screamed in shock, Meghan Markle barely flinched when an enormous fly hit her in the face during her wedding ceremony today. The Suits actress, who married Prince H…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Hmmmmm .. *KARMA *perhaps???


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, Oprah is really entertainment media, right?  I continue to believe there are reputable news sources out there.  However I'm sad to say I haven't seen much in the way of unbiased reporting on these two.  CNN did do an exchange with a British reporter who said some things that weren't positive about them - basically that their statements will backfire.



Oh, Oprah is entertainment all the way. However she is highly respected in the industry. Her work is not questioned and rarely criticized. She has a unique credibility and trust from the public that other talk show hosts do not have.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> Diplomatic passport?
> 
> I was misinformed, this is going to Harry - U*K, US, all Commonwealth, all World citizens  WELCOME sign sign sign *
> 
> Almost 19, 000 now
> 
> Petition to ask H to park his titles


SIGNED!!!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> well, Oprah is really entertainment media, right?  I continue to believe there are reputable news sources out there.  However I'm sad to say I haven't seen much in the way of unbiased reporting on these two.  CNN did do an exchange with a British reporter who said some things that weren't positive about them - basically that their statements will backfire.


There was a minor kerfuffle over that: someone noticed that CNN removed that report which poked holes in the infamous interview. 

I'm thinking that the OW interview will be used in media classes in future as an example of what not to do: unconvincing noddies, lack of research, poor establishment of interviewee credibility, tone-deafness, lack of relevance to the average viewer in Covid circumstances.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> There was a minor kerfuffle over that: someone noticed that CNN removed that report which poked holes in the infamous interview.
> 
> I'm thinking that the OW interview will be used in media classes in future as an example of what not to do: unconvincing noddies, lack of research, poor establishment of interviewee credibility, tone-deafness, lack of relevance to the average viewer in Covid circumstances.


we can hope


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

carmen56 said:


> Just looked it up - according to Paul Burrell, Diana’s fave perfume was 24 Faubourg by Hermes.


HA - no kidding; my FAVORITE perfume as well!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Diplomatic passport?
> 
> I was misinformed, this is going to Harry - U*K, US, all Commonwealth, all World citizens  WELCOME sign sign sign *
> 
> Almost 19, 000 now
> 
> Petition to ask H to park his titles


Perfect, and for the ones that may have missed it... Over 19,000 now and aiming at 25,000 











						Sign the Petition
					

Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance




					www.change.org


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Oh, Oprah is entertainment all the way. However she is highly respected in the industry. Her work is not questioned and rarely criticized. She has a unique credibility and trust from the public that other talk show hosts do not have.


That used to be .. I'm not so sure that she's going to get the backing that she got before; she's gotten herself into a mell-of-a-hess with these two and at some point (perhaps MM's nemesis Piers Morgan) will start asking the hard questions of Oprah!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oh, Oprah is entertainment all the way. However she is highly respected in the industry. Her work is not questioned and rarely criticized. She has a unique credibility and trust from the public that other talk show hosts do not have.


she did have a couple of problems with book club selections and she did own up to those I think


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> That used to be .. I'm not so sure that she's going to get the backing that she got before; she's gotten herself into a mell-of-a-hess with these two and at some point (perhaps MM's nemesis Piers Morgan) will start asking the hard questions of Oprah!


we can hope
so far, most of the US media seems to still be taking their word for everything they say


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> HA - no kidding; my FAVORITE perfume as well!


Wow I’m wearing that now.


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> I have to disagree on this. Not being smart wouldn't have been a hindrance, only being completely stupid would. As with mental health, he could get all the possible help to figure it out what he could do with his life, that would support him to be financially independent and have purpose at the same time. I'm sure he could have got a dozen of excellent advisors on call if he had decided to ask for help or he had just let himself be helped.
> It seemed that he was doing ok and starting to find his own thing when he met Princess Pinocchio anyway. It's ok not getting it together early on, after all his father's passion for organic farming or holistic healing started in his thirties. I think Charles did well with Duchy and has holiday homes all around Europe, as well. I'm sure he could have found something really close to his heart and profitable, if not alone, with the help of specialized counsellors.



Yah but... you're talking about what he could've, should've, would've... I'm talking about what he did. He didn't really excel at anything that would get him the success he wanted independent of BRF duties. Whether it's not being smart or being completely stupid, who knows - I don't know the guy other than his abysmal academic record and lack of personal career. And it's ok not to be successful, I don't even make a judgment on that, but ultimately it did leave him stuck with how to maintain his lifestyle independently until Megxit came along.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> That used to be .. I'm not so sure that she's going to get the backing that she got before; she's gotten herself into a mell-of-a-hess with these two and at some point (perhaps MM's nemesis Piers Morgan) will start asking the hard questions of Oprah!



How many are paying attention though? We are, but most people only pick up bits and pieces about them and that is still supportive.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Diplomatic passport?
> 
> I was misinformed, this is going to Harry - U*K, US, all Commonwealth, all World citizens  WELCOME sign sign sign *
> 
> Almost 19, 000 now
> 
> Petition to ask H to park his titles


Lady CC is asking for his " royal rank, style or title "to be put into abeyance

She does not mention the passport - does anyone have firm knowledge on the passport topic? Does he really have a diplomatic passport ??

Has anyone seen him in the queue at Heathrow ?? Come on now, we needs snaps of the passport in his hand ...


----------



## Jktgal

DeMonica said:


> ETA: would any of you ask  whether the guy you are going to meet is kind or nice if a friend set up the date? I wouldn't because I assume that the friend keeps my best interest in mind and my date would be nice and kind. Who would set up a friend with a raging madman?



Not if her request to friends was to find her someone rich but dumb.


----------



## gerryt

xincinsin said:


> There are several articles claiming that she used a Jo Malone bluebell cologne which is similar to a Penhaligon bluebell scent that Diana used.


Sounds as though D had several favourites.  I am if the understanding that perfumes smell different on different people, how annoying that it smelt ‘right’ on M!!


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> Maybe they got serious very fast.
> 
> ETA: would any of you ask  whether the guy you are going to meet is kind or nice if a friend set up the date? I wouldn't because I assume that the friend keeps my best interest in mind and my date would be nice and kind. Who would set up a friend with a raging madman?



I don't think it's that unusual... I mean the choices aren't only nice or raging madman haha. Some people's foremost quality is kindness and some aren't. My husband's 1st quality is not kindness, that's for sure, but he's no raging madman. He's aggressive, assertive, and ambitious and a touchy feely person would not do well with him. Sounds to me like she was looking for someone whose foremost quality was being nice. That wouldn't really be my 1st priority.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Lady CC is asking for his " royal rank, style or title "to be put into abeyance
> 
> She does not mention the passport - does anyone have firm knowledge on the passport topic? Does he really have a diplomatic passport ??
> 
> Has anyone seen him in the queue at Heathrow ?? Come on now, we needs snaps of the passport in his hand ...



This has been my question throughout their so-called exit.  Seems like no one, but no one, will ask about it. The assumption is he still uses his diplomatic passport. Royals get many privileges, unrestricted travel is part of the package.


----------



## jelliedfeels

[/QUOTE]


papertiger said:


> So what was Diana's fave scent?


Yes as Gerryt and others have concluded there’s been several different answers to this - as you’d expect from someone who loved to switch up her style. I’m a perfume fanatic so I’ve checked up on this before more than anything else to do with Diana to be honest.   

I hadn’t heard of diorissimo but I would guess she wore that pre-wedding.
Then quelque  fleurs 1912 would be a great bridal scent as it’s so white floral.
During her marriage I heard it was suggested she ‘buy British’ as the royals tend to, so she wore penhalgions bluebell 1978 (which I can imagine was agony for a perfume head like her as it’s awful.)
Once she was free again she would probably go for something NEW , actually nice smelling, incredibly high end and FRENCH so 24 faubourg, released in 1995. 

I would imagine the scent H would associate with D would be the bluebell as she was wearing it during the marriage. And looky look here, apparently M also wears jo malone bluebell 








						The Royal Guide to Wearing Perfume Like Kate and Meghan
					

What you wear as a royal isn't as important as how (and when) you wear it.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




I’m surprised she can bring herself to do so given the evil KM likes Jo too. Personally I think Jo malone is horrendously overrated body spray but that’s just me


----------



## CarryOn2020

Petitions R Harry!  They have so many  
Lady Colin Campbell’s is the one I signed. 







						Search · Change.org
					






					www.change.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

I read somewhere once Diana's favorite perfume was from Creed - that seemed believable to me as it's so $$$ but interesting to hear her other favorites. I love Bluebell - both the Jo Malone and Penhaligon's version.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I don't think it's that unusual... I mean the choices aren't only nice or raging madman haha. Some people's foremost quality is kindness and some aren't. My husband's 1st quality is not kindness, that's for sure, but he's no raging madman. He's aggressive, assertive, and ambitious and a touchy feely person would not do well with him. Sounds to me like she was looking for someone whose foremost quality was being nice. That wouldn't really be my 1st priority.


well, maybe it sounds like she wanted someone nice but I think probably her first priority was someone wealthy


----------



## lalame

sdkitty said:


> well, maybe it sounds like she wanted someone nice but I think probably her first priority was someone wealthy



I'm guessing among that set of people (if it was Misha or Markus who introduced them - can't keep up) it's a given everyone's wealthy.    I'd be surprised if Harry even had a single friend who wasn't wealthy.


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> So what was Diana's fave scent?



Apologies if someone already posted this. I had read awhile back that her favorite perfume was Hermes 24 Faubourg but she wore other fragrances. Here's part of the article from Readers Digest from March 19, 2020 with link to it at the bottom.


Princess Diana was known for a lot of things: Her charity work and compassion, her shy nature, and, of course, her permanent status as a fashion icon. But what fragrance would you smell if you were lucky to be in her royal presence? According to sources close to her, a mix of orange blossom, gardenia, peaches, and amber.

And apparently, she never left home without it. Check out these stunning, rarely seen photos of Princess Diana.

“She always, always, always wore fragrance,” her former makeup artist Mary Greenwell told ABC News. “It’s kind of the final touch of beauty, walking out smelling divine and chic and individual.”

The perfume in question is Hermès 24 Faubourg ($140, Nordstrom), which, according to Hermès’s in-house perfumer Jean-Claude Ellena is “perfume in the absolute. An explosion of white flowers, enveloping warmth, captivating sensuality.” These are secrets about Princess Diana no one knew about until after her death.

It wasn’t the only scent Princess Di wore. On her wedding day, the bride-to-be walked down the aisle of St. Paul’s Cathedral wearing Quelques Fleurs($140, Nordstrom), a floral scent featuring a mix of tuberose, rose, and jasmine.


















						The Perfume Princess Diana Never Left Home Without
					

Princess Diana's favorite perfume is totally still available—and completely affordable. Read on to discover what fragrance the people's princess wore.




					www.rd.com


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Now don't go expecting them to keep track of how their lies might contradict the other stories they've told.
> 
> Each lie must be allowed to stand alone as an independent episode. That's the only way this works! It's like watching a cartoon. We see a whole lot of surreal zaniness but by next time everything that happened before is erased and forgotten.


It's like a bad soap opera. They are contradicting each other more and more, not mentioning how they mess up their supposed timeline. They should hire someone soon to take care of the continuity  or delegate the task to someone in the retinue. They should rehearse their parts a little more. too. The first tell tale sign was when they couldn't agree how many times and when the baby's colour had been brought up by the BRF. If it was such a crucial point that warrants for labelling the whole BRF racist, the minimum would be to recall the exact details. Probably the stans don't care that much, though, and drink up their words as the elixir of wellbeing, no matter how many times they contradict themselves.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> you would think Oprah - being a smart person - would be concerned that she is promoting these people and they keep changing their stories.  but I guess Oprah's audience isn't interested in the actual truth - just "their truth"


This may sound off the wall, but: I think it's a very deliberate move on Oprah's part to let them blather and lie and ultimately be made fools by their own behaviors as she rakes in the bucks, because she felt denied by Diana and this, in a sense is her payback. It's the bashing and the lashing of the Royals that is selling, if this program had been a laudatory tribute to "6's" family and their welcome to his Wife and attempts to help make her successful, the show would be a "yawn", but the bile spewing $ell$. Oprah profits and feels righteous and important.

There are multiple published sources of this information, this article was posted on the website of the GB Edition of "womanandhome.com"

*Oprah Winfrey failed to secure an interview with the late Princess Diana, despite her efforts. *

Oprah had reportedly desperately tried to secure an interview with Princess Diana in the mid-1990s.
The legendary chat show host even proposed ideas to Princess Diana over lunch at Kensington Palace.
Oprah Winfrey may be the queen of chat shows, but that still doesn’t grant her guaranteed royal access.

The TV veteran, who successfully scored a tell-all interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle following their controversial royal departure last week, hasn’t always had such luck with members of the British monarchy. In the mid-90s, Oprah had desperately tried to secure an interview with the late Princess Diana, only to lose out on the opportunity to UK broadcaster, Martin Bashir.

The media maven reportedly had gone to great measures to convince the royal icon to appear on her highly-rated TV program, The Oprah Winfrey Show, which had already hosted a litany of A-list guests since its commencement in 1986.

Oprah even personally met with Princess Diana at Kensington Palace, where she attempted to persuade her to accept an interview proposal over lunch. According to Diana’s former chef, Darren McGrady, the two chatted amicably over his specially-prepared tomato mousses but said goodbye without any agreement to an interview.

The rejection proved to be a major blow for Oprah, who had reportedly mentioned that interviewing Diana would be the 'highlight of her career’.

According to media consultant Jonathon Gabay, landing an exclusive with Meghan and Harry has given Oprah a second chance to pull off a bombshell royal interview.

“Oprah missed an opportunity with Di that she clearly wants to get right with Meghan and Harry,” he said.


----------



## marietouchet

Hermes Zen said:


> Apologies if someone already posted this. I had read awhile back that her favorite perfume was Hermes 24 Faubourg but she wore other fragrances. Here's part of the article from Readers Digest from March 19, 2020 with link to it at the bottom.
> 
> 
> Princess Diana was known for a lot of things: Her charity work and compassion, her shy nature, and, of course, her permanent status as a fashion icon. But what fragrance would you smell if you were lucky to be in her royal presence? According to sources close to her, a mix of orange blossom, gardenia, peaches, and amber.
> 
> And apparently, she never left home without it. Check out these stunning, rarely seen photos of Princess Diana.
> 
> “She always, always, always wore fragrance,” her former makeup artist Mary Greenwell told ABC News. “It’s kind of the final touch of beauty, walking out smelling divine and chic and individual.”
> 
> The perfume in question is Hermès 24 Faubourg ($140, Nordstrom), which, according to Hermès’s in-house perfumer Jean-Claude Ellena is “perfume in the absolute. An explosion of white flowers, enveloping warmth, captivating sensuality.” These are secrets about Princess Diana no one knew about until after her death.
> 
> It wasn’t the only scent Princess Di wore. On her wedding day, the bride-to-be walked down the aisle of St. Paul’s Cathedral wearing Quelques Fleurs($140, Nordstrom), a floral scent featuring a mix of tuberose, rose, and jasmine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Perfume Princess Diana Never Left Home Without
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's favorite perfume is totally still available—and completely affordable. Read on to discover what fragrance the people's princess wore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rd.com


Talk about knowing useless trivia ...
24 FBG scent was released in 2006 in concert with the scarf of the same name, 2006SS collection 
it could not have been her favorite for more than a year and a half


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> This may sound off the wall, but: I think it's a very deliberate move on Oprah's part to let them blather and lie and ultimately be made fools by their own behaviors as she rakes in the bucks, because she felt denied by Diana and this, in a sense is her payback. It's the bashing and the lashing of the Royals that is selling, if this program had been a laudatory tribute to "6's" family and their welcome to his Wife and attempts to help make her successful, the show would be a "yawn", but the bile spewing $ell$. Oprah profits and feels righteous and important.
> 
> There are multiple published sources of this information, this article was posted on the website of the GB Edition of "womanandhome.com"
> 
> *Oprah Winfrey failed to secure an interview with the late Princess Diana, despite her efforts. *
> 
> Oprah had reportedly desperately tried to secure an interview with Princess Diana in the mid-1990s.
> The legendary chat show host even proposed ideas to Princess Diana over lunch at Kensington Palace.
> Oprah Winfrey may be the queen of chat shows, but that still doesn’t grant her guaranteed royal access.
> 
> The TV veteran, who successfully scored a tell-all interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle following their controversial royal departure last week, hasn’t always had such luck with members of the British monarchy. In the mid-90s, Oprah had desperately tried to secure an interview with the late Princess Diana, only to lose out on the opportunity to UK broadcaster, Martin Bashir.
> 
> The media maven reportedly had gone to great measures to convince the royal icon to appear on her highly-rated TV program, The Oprah Winfrey Show, which had already hosted a litany of A-list guests since its commencement in 1986.
> 
> Oprah even personally met with Princess Diana at Kensington Palace, where she attempted to persuade her to accept an interview proposal over lunch. According to Diana’s former chef, Darren McGrady, the two chatted amicably over his specially-prepared tomato mousses but said goodbye without any agreement to an interview.
> 
> The rejection proved to be a major blow for Oprah, who had reportedly mentioned that interviewing Diana would be the 'highlight of her career’.
> 
> According to media consultant Jonathon Gabay, landing an exclusive with Meghan and Harry has given Oprah a second chance to pull off a bombshell royal interview.
> 
> “Oprah missed an opportunity with Di that she clearly wants to get right with Meghan and Harry,” he said.


wouldn't that be a stretch to say that because she was disappointed (or mad) that Diana wouldn't give her an interview, she is now punishing the son and his WOC wife?


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> Yah but... you're talking about *what he could've, should've, would've..*. I'm talking about what he did. He didn't really excel at anything that would get him *the success he wanted independent of BRF duties*. Whether it's not being smart or being completely stupid, who knows - I don't know the guy other than his abysmal academic record and lack of personal career. And it's ok not to be successful, I don't even make a judgment on that, but ultimately it did leave him stuck with how to maintain his lifestyle independently until Megxit came along.


Invictus was hardly a could've... and he was marching to that direction. None of us know how unhappy he was, if he was at all, with his role in the BRF in the bottom of his heart, but he certainly hadn't done much to change it. He seemed to be perfectly content spending daddy's money, partying with assorted blondes on his arm and doing a little work here and there representing the BRF. There's simply no proof that he was craving success independently. That, as I see, it just underlines that all these speeches about wanting to leave and being financial independent are BS, most likely M's later inventions. He was obviously not happy about being watched by the media, but frankly he had things to hide. I'm sure that those blunders of his which were covered by the media probably the just the tip of the iceberg.


----------



## lalame

DeMonica said:


> Invictus was hardly a could've... and he was marching to that direction. None of us know how unhappy he was, if he was at all, with his role in the BRF in the bottom of his heart, but he certainly hadn't done much to change it. He seemed to be perfectly content spending daddy's money, partying with assorted blondes on his arm and doing a little work here and there representing the BRF. There's simply no proof that he was craving success independently. That, as I see, it just underlines that all these speeches about wanting to leave and being financial independent are BS, most likely M's later inventions. He was obviously not happy about being watched by the media, but frankly he had things to hide. I'm sure that those blunders of his which were covered by the media probably the just the tip of the iceberg.



All I can rely on is the dude himself saying he was unhappy - and he did look quite unhappy several times and in several interviews back then. I'm sure it wasn't all bad, like Invictus as you said, but it clearly didn't make him happy enough to stay. If he wasn't happy, as he's to be believed, but he still stayed instead of doing something else... I can only conclude it was because he didn't find a legitimate way to "do something else" and maintain his lifestyle independently. And now that he has, he left. Seems pretty straight-forward to me.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Genie27 said:


> Yep, so he either neglected to mention to his therapist that he was dealing with a heavily depressed and suicidal wife or the therapist did nothing about it? Or did she keep it from him as he was already “carrying so much” and instead decided HR was the best resource?
> 
> I still wanna know how she came out of it. (Well, technically I don’t, but if they do want to lay themselves bare authentically, why isn’t she gushing about what it took to get over that episode? Because “I went to a luxury spa for a 3-day stay and felt better” doesn’t have much gravitas?)



I read articles that he claimed she didn't go through with taking her own life because she didn't want him to loose another woman in his life, since he has already lost his mother. The claim is that she knew it has been so hard on him to loose his mother, and loosing a wife would just add a lot. I don't know if this is plausible, I would think you need more than just that to not go through with it, something deeper.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Yah but... you're talking about what he could've, should've, would've... I'm talking about what he did. He didn't really excel at anything that would get him the success he wanted independent of BRF duties. Whether it's not being smart or being completely stupid, who knows - I don't know the guy other than his abysmal academic record and lack of personal career. And it's ok not to be successful, I don't even make a judgment on that, but ultimately it did leave him stuck with how to maintain his lifestyle independently until Megxit came along.



He is also using his mother as a way to get attention. He is claiming that his issues stem from her death and the paps that chased her. He has never mentioned this before Meghan. Its not just Megxit that is allowing him to earn $$, its him using his mother. He wrote an article about how he is his mothers son, and he has been bashing his father ever since he left England. That might be why he doesn't talk about his mothers dysfunctional family, because she did come from a toxic home. She specifically married Charles because she thought she could escape it that way, and she said she didn't want to ever get divorced like her parents and thought that would never happen with Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lalame said:


> All I can rely on is the dude himself saying he was unhappy - and he did look quite unhappy several times and in several interviews back then. I'm sure it wasn't all bad, like Invictus as you said, but it clearly didn't make him happy enough to stay. If he wasn't happy, as he's to be believed, but he still stayed instead of doing something else... I can only conclude it was because he didn't find a legitimate way to "do something else" and maintain his lifestyle independently. And now that he has, he left. Seems pretty straight-forward to me.



Ah, but has he really left?  As we know with all of his complaining, the BRF is very much in his head.  He still does Invictus, right? Still has the passport. Still uses his title. Still comparing his life here to there — it’s bonkers!  No, even now, he has not left.  IMO


----------



## lalame

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ah, but has he really left?  As we know with all of his complaining, the BRF is very much in his head.  He still does Invictus, right? Still has the passport. Still uses his title. Still comparing his life here to there — it’s bonkers!  No, even now, he has not left.  IMO



I think he's "left" in the sense of the responsibilities. He's certainly no longer a working royal but still holding firmly onto all the perks.


----------



## lalame

Shopaholic2021 said:


> He is also using his mother as a way to get attention. He is claiming that his issues stem from her death and the paps that chased her. He has never mentioned this before Meghan. Its not just Megxit that is allowing him to earn $$, its him using his mother. He wrote an article about how he is his mothers son, and he has been bashing his father ever since he left England. That might be why he doesn't talk about his mothers dysfunctional family, because she did come from a toxic home. She specifically married Charles because she thought she could escape it that way, and she said she didn't want to ever get divorced like her parents and thought that would never happen with Charles.



Yes, he's using his mother AND the BRF actually. But I call out Megxit because that event gave him the springboard to become his own celebrity and a platform for him to start using all these other levers. I really don't think he would be going down this route if not for Megxit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

marietouchet said:


> Talk about knowing useless trivia ...
> 24 FBG scent was released in 2006 in concert with the scarf of the same name, 2006SS collection
> it could not have been her favorite for more than a year and a half



You are right, useless trivia.  We may never really know or which perfume M decided to use unless she actually says.   

Adding ...

*24 Faubourg* was created by Maurice Roucel and launched in 1995.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't that be a stretch to say that because she was disappointed (or mad) that Diana wouldn't give her an interview, she is now punishing the son and his WOC wife?




IMO no, it is not a stretch. Remember Diana chose Bashir over OW and look how that turned out.  We know OW does not like to be dismissed [think Hermes], so, in the chat show world, missing out to the then unknown Bashir must have been troubling. Her role in the H&M saga has not been fully explained and may never be. Common sense says nothing happened the way they say.  Reviews for the mental health show are not stellar, reviews for the March interview were awful, so we shall see what’s next. 









						Harry and Oprah’s mental health documentary is moving but limited
					

Harry and Oprah’s purpose of destigmatising mental health conditions is admirable, but this series often fails to see a bigger picture




					www.standard.co.uk
				



_But while so many of the talking heads featured in The Me You Can’t See espouse the importance of therapy, almost all of them fail to allude to the structures and systems that ensure this kind of treatment remains out of reach for so many people who are struggling. It’s left to Lady Gaga to gesture towards this inequality in a to-camera interview, when she acknowledges her “privilege… money... power”. Cutting between a royal and a refugee camp feels like a strange decision, too. It’s oversights and choices like these that ultimately limit the series’ exploration of mental health: what could have been a powerful call-to-arms ends up mired in a well-meaning limbo._

If we can believe Burrell:
_








						Paul Burrell calls Oprah 'very clever business woman'
					

Appearing on Lorraine today, Paul recalled Oprah, 67, approaching Diana ahead of her Panorama interview in 1995, but the late Princess believed it would be too hard to 'control'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Going back to Oct., 2019 — sound familiar?










						Prince Harry says his mother's death is ‘a wound that festers’
					

The royal got candid about his grief and the reminders that take him “straight back” to the loss of Princess Diana.




					www.today.com
				



*Prince Harry says Princess Diana's death is ‘a wound that festers’*
Oct. 18, 2019, 8:15 AM CDT
Prince Harry was just 12 years old when his mother died, but the years have done little to ease the pain for the now 35-year-old royal.

In a new documentary filmed for Britain’s ITV News, Princess Diana’s youngest son opens up about his grief and about the grim reminders of her death that he encounters all too often.

“Harry & Meghan: An African Journey,” focuses on the recent tour in which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex visited the continent where Diana made such an impact with her own charitable work.

It was an important trip for Harry, one that would allow him to retrace his mother’s steps and continue her work — and, perhaps, even bring him some sense of peace. Because, as he said in an interview for the documentary, nothing has really done that for him so far.

Instead, he explained that her 1997 death, in a car crash that occurred while her driver attempted to flee from paparazzi, is still “a wound that festers” for him.






The Prince of Wales with Prince William and Prince Harry outside Westminster Abbey at the funeral of Diana, The Princess of Wales, on September 6, 1997.Getty Images
“I think being part of this family, in this role, in this job, every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back,” he said. “So, in that respect, it’s the worst reminder of her life, as opposed to the best.”

While in Angola, Harry found himself in the spotlight as he followed his late mother’s footsteps through a minefield in Huambo for the charity HALO Trust, an organization Princess Diana brought international attention to just months before her death.





Prince Harry retraces Princess Diana's footsteps in Angola minefieldDominic Lipinski/AP, Tim Graham/Getty Images
“Being here now, 22 years later, trying to finish what she started will be incredibly emotional, but everything I do reminds me of her,” he said just before embarking on that walk. “But as I said, with the role, with the job and the pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff, unfortunately.”

And “the bad stuff” isn’t just in the past for the prince. He fears that a similar fate could befall another woman he loves in the future.

We apologize, this video has expired.



Earlier this month, Harry made a rare and candid statement about the way the tabloid press has focused on his wife, the former Meghan Markle, since their marriage last year.

"I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person,” he wrote the same day a press release revealed that his wife would be suing one publication. “I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Apologies if someone already posted this. I had read awhile back that her favorite perfume was Hermes 24 Faubourg but she wore other fragrances. Here's part of the article from Readers Digest from March 19, 2020 with link to it at the bottom.
> 
> 
> Princess Diana was known for a lot of things: Her charity work and compassion, her shy nature, and, of course, her permanent status as a fashion icon. But what fragrance would you smell if you were lucky to be in her royal presence? According to sources close to her, a mix of orange blossom, gardenia, peaches, and amber.
> 
> And apparently, she never left home without it. Check out these stunning, rarely seen photos of Princess Diana.
> 
> “She always, always, always wore fragrance,” her former makeup artist Mary Greenwell told ABC News. “It’s kind of the final touch of beauty, walking out smelling divine and chic and individual.”
> 
> The perfume in question is Hermès 24 Faubourg ($140, Nordstrom), which, according to Hermès’s in-house perfumer Jean-Claude Ellena is “perfume in the absolute. An explosion of white flowers, enveloping warmth, captivating sensuality.” These are secrets about Princess Diana no one knew about until after her death.
> 
> It wasn’t the only scent Princess Di wore. On her wedding day, the bride-to-be walked down the aisle of St. Paul’s Cathedral wearing Quelques Fleurs($140, Nordstrom), a floral scent featuring a mix of tuberose, rose, and jasmine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Perfume Princess Diana Never Left Home Without
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's favorite perfume is totally still available—and completely affordable. Read on to discover what fragrance the people's princess wore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rd.com



Ah, beware! It is a clickbait ad masquerading as an article. The links to the Nordstrom sales page is the giveaway. They know people will click on a Diana article even all these years later. I hate that respectable publications resort to this kind of advertising.


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> I wonder if this is true...





Interesting! Also, it makes complete sense.




Jktgal said:


> Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.





That interview will always be one of the most cringeworthy things i've ever listened to. That patronising tone in MM's voice is painful to listen to. Even more so after everything they've done since that interview, up until now. She is so false.
And the way she jumps in to say about the imaginary 'fRiEnD' who didn't 'sEt ThEm Up', _"We should protect her privacy- a little too much of that!"_ You could almost hear the panic in her voice thinking JCMH was going to say too much or the wrong thing that didn't line up with her bulls*hit story. So controlling.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Malicious gossip had it that the friend doesn't exist. Rumour is they met in the wake of some Invictus Games (Turkey, maybe? My brain's a sieve) where *Raptor*'s soulmate Markus Anderson managed to make it to Harry's suite with her in tow. She is crafty with making something out of nothing, I'll give her that.


*'Raptor' *






bag-mania said:


> Even her most devoted stans must know the blind date meeting story was a load of crap.
> *This was Meghan on that first "blind" date.*
> View attachment 5091579


With a bit of this:



and A LOT of this:



Although, it's pretty obvious all red flags were completely ignored on both sides.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we can believe Burrell:
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Burrell calls Oprah 'very clever business woman'
> 
> 
> Appearing on Lorraine today, Paul recalled Oprah, 67, approaching Diana ahead of her Panorama interview in 1995, but the late Princess believed it would be too hard to 'control'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Too hard to control?

Little did she know there would be no hard questions, no challenging and no follow up questions...


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2017, some snippets from the article - sound familiar? 
 Hazz has been dining out on this same story for years, y e a r s.
………..
_For the young princes—William, then age 15, and Harry, then age 12—their last interaction with their mother came in the form of a phone conversation—something that had become a nightly occurrence after Diana's split with Prince Charles. 

“I can’t really, necessarily, remember what I said," Harry said in Diana, Our Mother. "But all I do remember is probably, you know, regretting for the rest of my life how short the phone call was. And if I’d known that was the last time I was going to speak to my mother—the things I would have said to her.”
……..
In an interview with Newsweek, Harry explained how difficult it was for him to handle the news of his mother's death. "My mother had just died, and I had to walk a long way behind her coffin, surrounded by thousands of people watching me while millions more did on television," said Harry, now 32. "I don’t think any child should be asked to do that, under any circumstances. I don’t think it would happen today."
………..
“It was very, very strange after her death, you know, the sort of outpouring of love and emotion from so many people that had never even met her," Harry said in Diana, Our Mother. "... And I was thinking to myself, how is it that so many people that never even met this woman, my mother, can be crying and showing more emotion than I actually am feeling?” 

Diana was buried on a small island in the middle of the Oval Lake at the Althorp Estate, her family home. “The first time I cried was at the funeral on the island…and only since then, maybe once," Harry said in the documentary. "So, you know, there’s a lot of grief that still needs to be let out.”
…………..
"She would just engulf you and squeeze you as tight as possible,” Harry recalls in the documentary. “Even talking about it now, I can feel the hugs that she used to give us and, you know, I miss that. I miss that feeling. I miss that part of a family. I miss having that mother ... to be able to give you those hugs and give you that compassion that I think everybody needs.”
….………..
Over the years, the loss of their mother has taken an immense toll on William and Harry. “I can safely say that losing my mum at the age of twelve, and therefore shutting down all of my emotions for the last twenty years, had had a quite serious effect not only on my personal life, but also my work as well,” Harry said in an interview with Bryony Gordon in The Telegraph. 

“I have probably been very close to a complete breakdown on numerous occasions, when all sorts of grief and sort of lies and misconceptions and everything are coming at you from every angle.”

Such a close, personal relationship with the issue of mental health inspired Prince Harry, Prince William, and Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge, to form their own joint charity called Heads Together. The charity focuses on raising awareness of mental health issues and seeking treatment for the homeless, military veterans, and young people. The creation of this organization is a charitable step forward for both princes in demonstrating the empathy they inherited from their mother.









						How Prince William and Prince Harry Reacted to Their Mother's Death
					

The royals only recently opened up publicly about the tragedy.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




_


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Going back to Oct., 2019 — sound familiar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his mother's death is ‘a wound that festers’
> 
> 
> The royal got candid about his grief and the reminders that take him “straight back” to the loss of Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry says Princess Diana's death is ‘a wound that festers’*
> Oct. 18, 2019, 8:15 AM CDT
> Prince Harry was just 12 years old when his mother died, but the years have done little to ease the pain for the now 35-year-old royal.
> 
> In a new documentary filmed for Britain’s ITV News, Princess Diana’s youngest son opens up about his grief and about the grim reminders of her death that he encounters all too often.
> 
> “Harry & Meghan: An African Journey,” focuses on the recent tour in which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex visited the continent where Diana made such an impact with her own charitable work.
> 
> It was an important trip for Harry, one that would allow him to retrace his mother’s steps and continue her work — and, perhaps, even bring him some sense of peace. Because, as he said in an interview for the documentary, nothing has really done that for him so far.
> 
> Instead, he explained that her 1997 death, in a car crash that occurred while her driver attempted to flee from paparazzi, is still “a wound that festers” for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales with Prince William and Prince Harry outside Westminster Abbey at the funeral of Diana, The Princess of Wales, on September 6, 1997.Getty Images
> “I think being part of this family, in this role, in this job, every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back,” he said. “So, in that respect, it’s the worst reminder of her life, as opposed to the best.”
> 
> While in Angola, Harry found himself in the spotlight as he followed his late mother’s footsteps through a minefield in Huambo for the charity HALO Trust, an organization Princess Diana brought international attention to just months before her death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry retraces Princess Diana's footsteps in Angola minefieldDominic Lipinski/AP, Tim Graham/Getty Images
> “Being here now, 22 years later, trying to finish what she started will be incredibly emotional, but everything I do reminds me of her,” he said just before embarking on that walk. “But as I said, with the role, with the job and the pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff, unfortunately.”
> 
> And “the bad stuff” isn’t just in the past for the prince. He fears that a similar fate could befall another woman he loves in the future.
> 
> We apologize, this video has expired.
> 
> 
> 
> Will he ever stop whining over the loss of his mother?  As he likes to remind everyone, he is a married man with a family now.  Not saying men can't express their feelings but how many times do we need to hear this?  Has the wound stopped festering yet?  He's had years of therapy.
> Earlier this month, Harry made a rare and candid statement about the way the tabloid press has focused on his wife, the former Meghan Markle, since their marriage last year.
> 
> "I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person,” he wrote the same day a press release revealed that his wife would be suing one publication. “I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Talk about knowing useless trivia ...
> 24 FBG scent was released in 2006 in concert with the scarf of the same name, 2006SS collection
> it could not have been her favorite for more than a year and a half


So the alleged perfume that was her favorite was released years after her death??


----------



## DeMonica

lalame said:


> All I can rely on is the dude himself saying he was unhappy - and he did look quite unhappy several times and in several interviews back then. I'm sure it wasn't all bad, like Invictus as you said, but it clearly didn't make him happy enough to stay. If he wasn't happy, as he's to be believed, but he still stayed instead of doing something else... I can only conclude it was because he didn't find a legitimate way to "do something else" and maintain his lifestyle independently. And now that he has, he left. Seems pretty straight-forward to me.


At other times he looked happy. He didn't find the way. What he had found was a work shy and devious woman, who's most likely a sex goddess, who realized the opportunity in his status, family and history and came up with the an excellent plan how to milk those to the maximum. I don't think he could find his shoe laces on his own.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> At other times he looked happy. He didn't find the way. What he had found was a work shy and devious woman, who most likely a sex goddess, who realized the opportunity in his status, family and history and came up with the an excellent plan how to milk those to the maximum. I don't think he could find his shoe laces on his own.


he's saying he did all the partying in his youth to numb the pain.  that is probably true but only on hindsight.  I'll bet at the time he was doing it for fun, as young people will do.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't that be a stretch to say that because she was disappointed (or mad) that Diana wouldn't give her an interview, she is now punishing the son and his WOC wife?





sdkitty said:


> wouldn't that be a stretch to say that because she was disappointed (or mad) that Diana wouldn't give her an interview, she is now punishing the son and his WOC wife?


Yes, I agree, you are right it would be a stretch and I didn't mean to imply "punishment"  so much as Oprah scoring this Interview made the point she ultimately gets what she wants. In this case, a Royal in the line of succession and his Wife. And she made the most of it, wanting, I think, to show she was in control,  not by helping their images, but by letting them lie and exaggerate about things easily disproved by photos and written material on the Net. The program could have been edited, what we viewed did not have to be the final "word". They were used, their fault, but, IMO, she sure abetted it.


----------



## Lodpah

I like this comment from a Quoran. Especially the last part. Harry should not be preaching or have anything to do with mental health as he’s shown it’s a total failure as far as his treatment.

Question about Harry. 

Virtually zero and still heading south. Hapless is as thick as ****e with the brain capacity of an amoeba.

Who else would come out with something as stupid as “…..I sort of get it. It’s bonkers” about the First Amendment. I very much doubt he’s ever read it or any other parts of the U. S. Constitution, let alone understands the checks and balances built into the system.

Who else would make a complete fool of himself in front of a global audience of tens of millions by claiming he never went cycling with his father - only to be confronted with pictures of him doing exactly that the next day all over the media.

He’s completely oblivious to any emotions other than his own, apparently totally happy to continue wallowing in self-pity and blaming everyone else for whatever has happened to him. He’s even dragging the army into it by claiming he was off his head half the time on drink and drugs when he was supposed to be a serving officer.

Egged on by the toxic tart, he’ll continue to spout lies and rubbish. He should be removed from the line of succession and have the Sussex title stripped; then he can truly be ordinary as he claims he wants to be.

If he has had therapy - as he claims - he’s a walking embodiment to its failure.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> he's saying he did all the partying in his youth to numb the pain.  that is probably true but only on hindsight.  I'll bet at the time he was doing it for fun, as young people will do.


I don't think that young people need any past emotional trauma to hit the bottle or do drugs. I don't doubt that his mother's death was traumatic, but probably he would have done it anyway.


----------



## 1LV

DeMonica said:


> At other times he looked happy. He didn't find the way. What he had found was a work shy and devious woman, who's most likely a sex goddess, who realized the opportunity in his status, family and history and came up with the an excellent plan how to milk those to the maximum. *I don't think he could find his shoe laces on his own.*


And if he could find them he would need help tying them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Didn't see this precious NYP article by Maureen Callahan here.


_Just call him Dotty Harry. 

*Clearly not content with his first strike two months ago — he and saucer-eyed, self-pitying wife Meghan whining to Oprah in a prime-time special — Harry is back again to blame his father, brother, and grandmother, the newly widowed Queen, for all that ails him, this 36-year-old globally famous multimillionaire.*

It’s Harry’s complaint, and we’re never going to hear the end of it. 

In his new Apple TV+ special “The Me You Can’t See” — really, Harry, haven’t we seen it all? — the beleaguered prince sits opposite his new BFF Oprah, lecturing us on mental health. 

Really, he’s been through it. Consider this: “Every time I put a suit and tie on,” Harry tells us, “I was in a fight-or-flight mode.” 

I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: *This is a supremely bad look for the COVID era. Who is advising these people? *

“Making this move was really scary,” Harry goes on. “Like every possible opportunity the forces that were working against us, trying to make it impossible.” 

It was only, like, a year and a half ago that Harry and Meghan flounced out of Buckingham Palace, huffing their grievances all the way to a $14 million Montecito mansion despite the royal family’s blessing. We do recall. 

Yet in this Apple TV+ series, Harry claims that his critics — by which he means the tabloid press who he believes exploited and killed his mother — must be psychotically damaged to find fault with him. 

*Who’s commodifying Diana now? 

But by all means, Harry, please keep talking — out of both sides of your mouth, as is your wont, begging for privacy from the media while becoming an active player in the media. 

Harkles, thy name is hypocrisy. *

So Harry’s back to share more details of how terrible a father Prince Charles was, bequeathing him “genetic pain,” and how his entire family cared nothing for his unhappiness, let alone his future wife’s — despite fast-tracking Meghan into the fold and throwing a $45 million wedding. 

Most shockingly, Harry offers more details about Meghan’s suicidal ideations while pregnant with Archie — with no thought to how this will surely affect his son. 

Yet Harry tells us that four years of counseling has made him all better! Harry is therapized, Americanized and ready to go, becoming one of our specialties — a self-help guru who’s really only in it to sate his narcissism. 

*America, strap yourselves into this feedback loop. We’re in it for now, even though Harry hasn’t realized that self-pity really isn’t in the American DNA*. *Unlike a little thing called the First Amendment, one of our most valued protections — which Harry last week called “bonkers” and something “I don’t understand.” *

It’s the very same thing that allows him to, you know, smack talk the Queen and two future kings of England on camera with Oprah like two gals gossiping over cocktails. 

Anyway, “the only way to break out and to free yourself,” Harry says, “is to tell the truth.” 

*Psychobabble, word salad, gobbledygook and Greek to me: It’s all on display, with Harry blissfully unaware that each public overshare diminishes his value on the open market. 

We are watching an overgrown child throw an epic tantrum, and the point is unclear. Does Harry want to bring down the royal family?* *Prove he has something worth contributing? Does he even know what he wants? *

One thing is clear: He’s profoundly tone deaf, and a course correction seems unlikely. Even Harry would have to admit the royals did one thing well: Their carefully crafted image of Harry — military man, good with kids, the lighthearted prince with a charitable soul — was far superior to this one._









						Prince Harry’s proclamations on mental health only expose his hypocrisy
					

Harry is back again to blame his father, brother, and grandmother, the newly widowed Queen, for all that ails him, this 36-year-old globally famous multimillionaire.




					nypost.com


----------



## Lodpah

I really wish he would shut up and go play house with his wife. Someone remove Archie from these two. They are not fit to care for him. They’re both mentally unstable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The forces working against us my ass. He really needs to lay off the paranoia. You're not that interesting, not even to your family seeing you haven't been the spare for a while and don't possess any special talent. (I do believe they were reluctant to let him go because they predicted pretty accurately how he'd completely unravel soon enough)


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I really wish he would shut up and go play house with his wife. Someone remove Archie from these two. They are not fit to care for him. They’re both mentally unstable.



Archie and baby yet-to-be-named may turn out to be just like their parents. Another generation of overprivileged crybabies.


----------



## Chanbal

Have Fun!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Didn't see this precious NYP article by Maureen Callahan here.
> View attachment 5091956
> 
> _Just call him Dotty Harry.
> 
> *Clearly not content with his first strike two months ago — he and saucer-eyed, self-pitying wife Meghan whining to Oprah in a prime-time special — Harry is back again to blame his father, brother, and grandmother, the newly widowed Queen, for all that ails him, this 36-year-old globally famous multimillionaire.*
> 
> It’s Harry’s complaint, and we’re never going to hear the end of it.
> 
> In his new Apple TV+ special “The Me You Can’t See” — really, Harry, haven’t we seen it all? — the beleaguered prince sits opposite his new BFF Oprah, lecturing us on mental health.
> 
> Really, he’s been through it. Consider this: “Every time I put a suit and tie on,” Harry tells us, “I was in a fight-or-flight mode.”
> 
> I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: *This is a supremely bad look for the COVID era. Who is advising these people? *
> 
> “Making this move was really scary,” Harry goes on. “Like every possible opportunity the forces that were working against us, trying to make it impossible.”
> 
> It was only, like, a year and a half ago that Harry and Meghan flounced out of Buckingham Palace, huffing their grievances all the way to a $14 million Montecito mansion despite the royal family’s blessing. We do recall.
> 
> Yet in this Apple TV+ series, Harry claims that his critics — by which he means the tabloid press who he believes exploited and killed his mother — must be psychotically damaged to find fault with him.
> 
> *Who’s commodifying Diana now?
> 
> But by all means, Harry, please keep talking — out of both sides of your mouth, as is your wont, begging for privacy from the media while becoming an active player in the media.
> 
> Harkles, thy name is hypocrisy. *
> 
> So Harry’s back to share more details of how terrible a father Prince Charles was, bequeathing him “genetic pain,” and how his entire family cared nothing for his unhappiness, let alone his future wife’s — despite fast-tracking Meghan into the fold and throwing a $45 million wedding.
> 
> Most shockingly, Harry offers more details about Meghan’s suicidal ideations while pregnant with Archie — with no thought to how this will surely affect his son.
> 
> Yet Harry tells us that four years of counseling has made him all better! Harry is therapized, Americanized and ready to go, becoming one of our specialties — a self-help guru who’s really only in it to sate his narcissism.
> 
> *America, strap yourselves into this feedback loop. We’re in it for now, even though Harry hasn’t realized that self-pity really isn’t in the American DNA*. *Unlike a little thing called the First Amendment, one of our most valued protections — which Harry last week called “bonkers” and something “I don’t understand.” *
> 
> It’s the very same thing that allows him to, you know, smack talk the Queen and two future kings of England on camera with Oprah like two gals gossiping over cocktails.
> 
> Anyway, “the only way to break out and to free yourself,” Harry says, “is to tell the truth.”
> 
> *Psychobabble, word salad, gobbledygook and Greek to me: It’s all on display, with Harry blissfully unaware that each public overshare diminishes his value on the open market.
> 
> We are watching an overgrown child throw an epic tantrum, and the point is unclear. Does Harry want to bring down the royal family?* *Prove he has something worth contributing? Does he even know what he wants? *
> 
> One thing is clear: He’s profoundly tone deaf, and a course correction seems unlikely. Even Harry would have to admit the royals did one thing well: Their carefully crafted image of Harry — military man, good with kids, the lighthearted prince with a charitable soul — was far superior to this one._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s proclamations on mental health only expose his hypocrisy
> 
> 
> Harry is back again to blame his father, brother, and grandmother, the newly widowed Queen, for all that ails him, this 36-year-old globally famous multimillionaire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



I wish I could “like” this article 10 times.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember the fly?
> 
> _The blink-and-you’d-miss-it moment happened when Bishop Michael Curry was giving a rousing sermon.
> 
> Fans watching the ceremony from home couldn’t believe their eyes when the giant blue bottle suddenly hit Megan.
> 
> She barely moved a muscle despite having the insect interrupting the most important moment of her life.
> 
> Viewers praised her reaction, with one writing: “Where did that silly fly come from? Meghan still maintained her composure. Love her!”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gets smacked in the face by a huge fly during the Royal Wedding ceremony as viewers praise her for 'barely flinching'
> 
> 
> WHILE we mere mortals would have screamed in shock, Meghan Markle barely flinched when an enormous fly hit her in the face during her wedding ceremony today. The Suits actress, who married Prince H…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


The Wedding Fly by a talented Tweeter!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wish I could “like” this article 10 times.


So do I. One of our very few journalists with courage to write about the hypocrisy of these two. She needs our support!


----------



## xincinsin

DeMonica said:


> At other times he looked happy. He didn't find the way. What he had found was a work shy and devious woman, who's most likely a sex goddess, who realized the opportunity in his status, family and history and came up with the an excellent plan how to milk those to the maximum. I don't think he could find his shoe laces on his own.





1LV said:


> And if he could find them he would need help tying them.


Maybe his wife has introduced him to velcro, the last resort of all mums whose kids tie themselves into knots


----------



## csshopper

Maybe it's time for shock therapy: "6" should be locked in the Tower where he is required to watch on an endless loop all of the times he was interviewed, photographed, taped talking about/ experiencing  the great relationship with his Dad, William, Katherine, "the sister he always wanted", his Gran, his Grandfather. Subjected to enough reality therapy maybe a chink might open and there would be hope for him. 

But, then again, maybe not. It may be too late.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He has said all this stuff before.  The new thing is now he is being paid for it and showing us his therapy sessions. 
Was this the plan all along? If so, guessing this is why QE and Charles say to ignore it. They have lived with it and heard it before, too.
The real shame is on the OW crowd for monetizing it.  *$$$$$*

Perhaps if Oprah discussed these mentally-healthy lessons that QE uses, the show would actually help people:

From December, 2020: _At 94, the Queen is the longest-reigning living monarch(!). Even now, Her Majesty continues her duties, seems to be in great health, and remains a cultural icon — and *as always, there's so much we can learn from her*. A new book, Long Live the Queen, released this week, has British culturalist Bryan Kozlowski exploring how the Queen eats, stays on top of work, spends leisure time, and navigates both familial and professional relationships, managing to do it all while aging gracefully. Kozlowski didn't directly interview the Queen for this guide, but it was curated from extensive research into public records and coverage of her entire life so far (there's even a bibliography which mega fans can turn to!) and his deep knowledge of British culture, which he cultivated in another fun guide to Jane Austen._

*Don’t let life’s drama get you down:*
_The Queen has endured a number of royal scandals over the years. But, she conveys a reliable, unflappable persona, outwardly at least. Some see Elizabeth as showing too little emotion, but her level of composure is a learned trait, needed to weather the challenges and responsibilities of a life in the public eye.

Learning ways to cope with stress and the drama that life sometimes brings reduces anxiety and can keep you from getting overwhelmed. “[The Queen] embodies resilience,” Medina-Walpole says. “Resilience is where you can manage and adapt to sources of stress, adversity, and you recover from that.” Optimism, social skills, self-advocacy, self-esteem and motivation could make you more resilient, she explains._








						12 Life Lessons Queen Elizabeth Follows for Good Health
					

Her Majesty knows how to have a good time.




					www.goodhousekeeping.com
				




*Mental health*

_Known for her stiff upper lip, the queen is on the opposite side of the spectrum from her granddaughter-in-law Meghan Markle, whom some see as embracing victimhood. 

“[Elizabeth] comes from a *dignity culture*, where everyone was very responsible for their own emotions,” said Kozlowski. He believes the queen’s glass-half-full attitude gives her mental strength. “She practices what psychologists call ‘*benefit-finding.*'”

He even predicts that Elizabeth will live longer than her mother, who died at the age of 101 in 2002. “She has this willingness to adapt, which banishes the insidious stress you get from resisting change,” he said. “That contributes to longevity and a fulfilling existence for sure.”_








						The secrets behind 94-year-old Queen Elizabeth’s longevity
					

A new book explores the secrets to 94-year-old Queen Elizabeth II’s enduring longevity, including her workout regimen, diet and beauty routine.




					nypost.com


----------



## Aimee3

“Toxic tart”. Love this!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imagine having access to the Queen’s wisdom!  









						Queen Elizabeth turns 95: Her brand is ‘three times’ bigger than Oprah’s
					

Her majesty also outranks Kim Kardashian, Beyoncé, Bill Gates, the Obamas — and even Coca-Cola.




					nypost.com


----------



## xincinsin

DeMonica said:


> Maybe they got serious very fast.
> 
> ETA: would any of you ask  whether the guy you are going to meet is kind or nice if a friend set up the date? I wouldn't because I assume that the friend keeps my best interest in mind and my date would be nice and kind. Who would set up a friend with a raging madman?


Someone set him up with a raging madwoman.



bag-mania said:


> Oh, Oprah is entertainment all the way. However she is highly respected in the industry. Her work is not questioned and rarely criticized. She has a unique credibility and trust from the public that other talk show hosts do not have.


I am fighting the urge to watch video of OW in her heyday. I cannot believe that someone who did that lousy H&M interview has credibility, except as a softball interviewer. She has to have been better in the past when she was actively earning her first million and not just resting on laurels and greedy for more money. Was it a case of Oprah telling her audience that she was good, and saying it so many times that people started believing it? The first time you hear it, you doubt it. The second time you hear it, you doubt yourself. The third time you hear it, fiction becomes fact.



lalame said:


> I don't think it's that unusual... I mean the choices aren't only nice or raging madman haha. Some people's foremost quality is kindness and some aren't. My husband's 1st quality is not kindness, that's for sure, but he's no raging madman. He's aggressive, assertive, and ambitious and a touchy feely person would not do well with him. Sounds to me like she was looking for someone whose foremost quality was being nice. That wouldn't really be my 1st priority.


Too bad H didn't ask "Is she nice/kind?" before the blind date.



lalame said:


> I think he's "left" in the sense of the responsibilities. He's certainly no longer a working royal but still holding firmly onto all the perks.


His main grievance is that he wasn't given even more perks.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Going back to Oct., 2019 — sound familiar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says his mother's death is ‘a wound that festers’
> 
> 
> The royal got candid about his grief and the reminders that take him “straight back” to the loss of Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry says Princess Diana's death is ‘a wound that festers’*
> Oct. 18, 2019, 8:15 AM CDT
> Prince Harry was just 12 years old when his mother died, but the years have done little to ease the pain for the now 35-year-old royal.
> 
> In a new documentary filmed for Britain’s ITV News, Princess Diana’s youngest son opens up about his grief and about the grim reminders of her death that he encounters all too often.
> 
> “Harry & Meghan: An African Journey,” focuses on the recent tour in which the Duke and Duchess of Sussex visited the continent where Diana made such an impact with her own charitable work.
> 
> It was an important trip for Harry, one that would allow him to retrace his mother’s steps and continue her work — and, perhaps, even bring him some sense of peace. Because, as he said in an interview for the documentary, nothing has really done that for him so far.
> 
> Instead, he explained that her 1997 death, in a car crash that occurred while her driver attempted to flee from paparazzi, is still “a wound that festers” for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales with Prince William and Prince Harry outside Westminster Abbey at the funeral of Diana, The Princess of Wales, on September 6, 1997.Getty Images
> “I think being part of this family, in this role, in this job, every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash, it takes me straight back,” he said. “So, in that respect, it’s the worst reminder of her life, as opposed to the best.”
> 
> While in Angola, Harry found himself in the spotlight as he followed his late mother’s footsteps through a minefield in Huambo for the charity HALO Trust, an organization Princess Diana brought international attention to just months before her death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry retraces Princess Diana's footsteps in Angola minefieldDominic Lipinski/AP, Tim Graham/Getty Images
> “Being here now, 22 years later, trying to finish what she started will be incredibly emotional, but everything I do reminds me of her,” he said just before embarking on that walk. “But as I said, with the role, with the job and the pressures that come with that, I get reminded of the bad stuff, unfortunately.”
> 
> And “the bad stuff” isn’t just in the past for the prince. He fears that a similar fate could befall another woman he loves in the future.
> 
> We apologize, this video has expired.
> 
> 
> 
> Earlier this month, Harry made a rare and candid statement about the way the tabloid press has focused on his wife, the former Meghan Markle, since their marriage last year.
> 
> "I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person,” he wrote the same day a press release revealed that his wife would be suing one publication. “I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces."


And he doesn't see himself as commoditizing his mum, that blithering idiot!
#6's wife will never go the route of Princess Di. She is too conniving and now she has the deep pockets to sue the media.



Jayne1 said:


> Too hard to control?
> 
> Little did she know there would be no hard questions, no challenging and no follow up questions...



Just a very persistent invitation to join the Church of Oprah.



csshopper said:


> Yes, I agree, you are right it would be a stretch and I didn't mean to imply "punishment"  so much as Oprah scoring this Interview made the point she ultimately gets what she wants. In this case, a Royal in the line of succession and his Wife. And she made the most of it, wanting, I think, to show she was in control,  not by helping their images, but by letting them lie and exaggerate about things easily disproved by photos and written material on the Net. The program could have been edited, what we viewed did not have to be the final "word". They were used, their fault, but, IMO, she sure abetted it.


OW uses them as a cash cow. MM uses H and Archie as her cash cows. It's a business version of genetic pain!!!


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I am fighting the urge to watch video of OW in her heyday. I cannot believe that someone who did that lousy H&M interview has credibility, except as a softball interviewer. She has to have been better in the past when she was actively earning her first million and not just resting on laurels and greedy for more money. Was it a case of Oprah telling her audience that she was good, and saying it so many times that people started believing it? The first time you hear it, you doubt it. The second time you hear it, you doubt yourself. The third time you hear it, fiction becomes fact.



Her interviews were never deep. Something about her connected with the daytime audience, soap operas and game shows were her competition. And she has always worked very hard at promoting herself. If you are interested this article does a good job of explaining Oprah’s early years in the business and her climb to the top.









						The Seven Secrets Of Oprah Winfrey’s Success
					

Almost no one has mastered the art of self-marketing as brilliantly as Oprah Winfrey. Read this article to find out the most important secrets of her success and how she became such a powerful brand.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

It really can be this simple:


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Her interviews were never deep. Something about her connected with the daytime audience, soap operas and game shows were her competition. And she has always worked very hard at promoting herself. If you are interested this article does a good job of explaining Oprah’s early years in the business and her climb to the top.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Seven Secrets Of Oprah Winfrey’s Success
> 
> 
> Almost no one has mastered the art of self-marketing as brilliantly as Oprah Winfrey. Read this article to find out the most important secrets of her success and how she became such a powerful brand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


Thank you. That was interesting, especially how she controlled her image by making everyone who knew her sign NDAs. Didn't anyone refuse to be  "silenced"? Makes her "silent or silenced" query sound hypocritical. Also makes me wonder about Trevor Engelson. There were reports that MM silenced him.

I'd dispute the writer's assertion that Oprah became "the richest and most famous woman in the world." She was a non-entity in my part of the world, so maybe she was famous only in the Western world? Or only in the USA? I got turned off the daytime TV talkshow format after watching one episode of Ellen dG - the bouncing on sofa and mugging hard at the camera routine was so fake that I never watched a second ep. 

Is Oprah's Book Club still in existence? And did The Bench get recommended by it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Thank you. That was interesting, especially how she controlled her image by making everyone who knew her sign NDAs. Didn't anyone refuse to be  "silenced"? Makes her "silent or silenced" query sound hypocritical. Also makes me wonder about Trevor Engelson. There were reports that MM silenced him.



Yeah, that confuses me. If one of my friends, family members or acquaintances dangled an NDA in front of me I'd refuse to sign it not because I wanted to spill tea to the press but because I'd think they were full of themselves and paranoid and I have no desire to be tangled up in more legal stuff than I have to.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, that confuses me. If one of my friends, family members or acquaintances dangled an NDA in front of me I'd refuse to sign it not because I wanted to spill tea to the press but because I'd think they were full of themselves and paranoid and I have no desire to be tangled up in more legal stuff than I have to.


Especially since this is the US we are talking about. If she managed to silence so many people, it makes me wonder what she used to threaten them and why people had so much dirt on her that wide-scale NDAs was the only solution. If they were employees, an NDA would be a requirement of employment, but the article says quite matter-of-factly that she made almost everyone in her life sign an NDA. Do I even detect a note of approval from the way the article is written?

So if you are rich, famous and powerful, fascist behaviour camouflaged by fake virtuousness is accepted. And if this ultra-controlling woman is mentoring H&M on their journey to trashtalk stardom, I'm not surprised that #6 *Mr Markle*'s wife is upset that the media isn't falling in line to obey her.

ETA: for standardisation


----------



## Clearblueskies

Harry is only #6 for the moment.  If Will and Kate have another sprog he’ll be #7, or if QE2 shuffles off the mortal whatever (later rather than sooner hopefully) he’ll be #5.  I realise it’s a numbering convention familiar to most on here because of its use for US presidents, but it’s not the same for the British RF and is never used in the UK.  
I’m especially dismayed to see its use if (as we’re led to believe) Meghan came up with it  Perhaps *H* was too much of a mouthful for her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry is only #6 for the moment.  If Will and Kate have another sprog he’ll be #7, or if QE2 shuffles off the mortal whatever (later rather than sooner hopefully) he’ll be #5.  I realise it’s a numbering convention familiar to most on here because of its use for US presidents, but it’s not the same for the British RF and is never used in the UK.
> I’m especially dismayed to see its use if (as we’re led to believe) Meghan came up with it  Perhaps *H* was too much of a mouthful for her



I mean, there would have to be a whole lot of bad luck for him to even come close to the throne. But also...must this not be his worst nightmare? Not because that means his grandmother, father, brother and three children would have died, but because poor traumatized Harry being sent back to the gulag? If I was him I'd give up my place in the succession oh so quick just to spare myself, but what do I know.


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry is only #6 for the moment.  If Will and Kate have another sprog he’ll be #7, or if QE2 shuffles off the mortal whatever (later rather than sooner hopefully) he’ll be #5.  I realise it’s a numbering convention familiar to most on here because of its use for US presidents, but it’s not the same for the British RF and is never used in the UK.
> I’m especially dismayed to see its use if (as we’re led to believe) Meghan came up with it  Perhaps *H* was too much of a mouthful for her


I shall standardize to calling him Mr Markle  (and hope he gets dropped from the line of succession so that he can break away from his past - much faster than rewriting history a year at a time).


----------



## needlv

MM has been suspiciously quiet.  No statement about supporting H’s right to speak his truth - or statement about how they are looking forward to baby no.2...


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> MM has been suspiciously quiet.  No statement about supporting H’s right to speak his truth - or statement about how they are looking forward to baby no.2...


It also seems like he’s the one picking up all the new gigs, the Oprah series, the chief crying officer or whatever that thing is, it’s surprising to me that she doesn’t want her face out there, but she thinks we’re probably all waiting with bated breath to see her again.


----------



## jennlt

needlv said:


> MM has been suspiciously quiet.  No statement about supporting H’s right to speak his truth - or statement about how they are looking forward to baby no.2...



Or a statement about her buying a single shingle for the roof of a women's shelter but taking credit for the entire roof


----------



## Aimee3

H’s wife has been suspiciously too quiet for at least a month.  What is she up to?  Or Did the moon bumps shrink in the wash and Amazon has them on back order?
Edited for typo


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> Or a statement about her buying a single shingle for the roof of a women's shelter but taking credit for the entire roof


She'll take credit for the entire shelter 
I've checked some of the charities or organisations which she supposedly supported for "years" and a lot of the time, she visited them once, wrote about them once, and then.... maybe she sent them a cake but the PR team hasn't gotten round to publicising it yet? 

Can anyone explain this donation to me? I'm very confused. Mermaid is credited with donating £10,000 to a Nottingham charity. The money was donated by the Royal Foundation but she alone takes the credit for it. Her PR team emailed and rang the charity repeatedly to emphasize that the donation was from her. Also, the article says the money came from sales of the Grenfell cookbook which was published to raise money for the Grenfell kitchen, and then lauds her for donating the money elsewhere. I'm not getting it.









						Meghan Markle donates £10,000 to Nottingham charity after cookbook success
					

The Duchess of Sussex chose to support a kitchen which brings together the Jewish and Muslim communities in Nottingham.




					sg.news.yahoo.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> MM has been suspiciously quiet.  No statement about supporting H’s right to speak his truth - or statement about how they are looking forward to baby no.2...



It makes me slightly uneasy. She's plotting something.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> She'll take credit for the entire shelter
> I've checked some of the charities or organisations which she supposedly supported for "years" and a lot of the time, she visited them once, wrote about them once, and then.... maybe she sent them a cake but the PR team hasn't gotten round to publicising it yet?
> 
> Can anyone explain this donation to me? I'm very confused. Mermaid is credited with donating £10,000 to a Nottingham charity. The money was donated by the Royal Foundation but she alone takes the credit for it. Her PR team emailed and rang the charity repeatedly to emphasize that the donation was from her. Also, the article says the money came from sales of the Grenfell cookbook which was published to raise money for the Grenfell kitchen, and then lauds her for donating the money elsewhere. I'm not getting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle donates £10,000 to Nottingham charity after cookbook success
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chose to support a kitchen which brings together the Jewish and Muslim communities in Nottingham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sg.news.yahoo.com


The article is dated 21 Mar 2021, two months ago. But it fails to state the date of the donation. It could have been a few years earlier around the time when the cookbook was sold 

The first sentence or so says "MM made a donation" of 10k pounds,  a later one says 'the money given to us by her foundation ". So, the donor appears to be a foundation not herself.

It is not clear WHICH foundation did the donation, Archewell ? or the older Sussex Royal foundation - that would have been the one ca the cookbook release. 

My guess, the article refers to an older donation made two years ago by Sussex Royal 

The article is clear as mud


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like a good point: Cash Compassion in Action!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

A nice article that may lead to broken dishes in Montecito. 








						Kate Middleton is stepping into Prince Philip's role as the 'glue'
					

Speaking to 60 Minutes Australia Vanity Fair royal editor Katie Nichol said the Duchess of Cambridge, 39, has become the royal family's 'greatest asset'  as 'the perfect vehicle for good PR'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> A nice article that may lead to broken dishes in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton is stepping into Prince Philip's role as the 'glue'
> 
> 
> Speaking to 60 Minutes Australia Vanity Fair royal editor Katie Nichol said the Duchess of Cambridge, 39, has become the royal family's 'greatest asset'  as 'the perfect vehicle for good PR'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can you imagine what Harry could have achieved, both in his healing journey and professionally, had he married someone just a little bit more like Kate? Quiet, stable, unpretentious, from a happy family background, willing to put in the work?


----------



## duna

Aimee3 said:


> H’s wife has been suspiciously too quiet for at least a month.  What is she up to?  Or Did the moon bumps shrink in the wash and Amazon has them on back order?
> Edited for typo



Maybe baby #2 has arrived and we'll find out in a month or two, or when it's most convenient for them??


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> The article is dated 21 Mar 2021, two months ago. But it fails to state the date of the donation. It could have been a few years earlier around the time when the cookbook was sold
> 
> The first sentence or so says "MM made a donation" of 10k pounds,  a later one says 'the money given to us by her foundation ". So, the donor appears to be a foundation not herself.
> 
> It is not clear WHICH foundation did the donation, Archewell ? or the older Sussex Royal foundation - that would have been the one ca the cookbook release.
> 
> My guess, the article refers to an older donation made two years ago by Sussex Royal
> 
> The article is clear as mud


I put on my waders and went trawling through the mud.
The cookbook was Mermaid's idea but the backing was from the Royal Foundation, not Sussex Royal. Proceeds were to fund the Grenfell kitchen. So why was it that she had control over the funds and could use them to make donations in her own name?








						Meghan launches Grenfell recipe book in first project as Duchess of Sussex
					

Meghan Markle proposed the charity cookbook during visit to communal kitchen after fire




					www.theguardian.com
				



An American publication also wrote about the cookbook and billed Mermaid as the author (she wrote the foreword!), but it is the rest of the article which really brings out the could-have-beens. The New Yorker was so optimistic that Mermaid would be an agent for positive change. What a pity that the mermaid was already cooking up her exit along with the chapatis.








						Meghan Markle’s Ever-So-Slightly Radical Cookbook
					

The Duchess of Sussex’s collection of recipes gathered by women whose families lived in Grenfell Tower suggests a mature, considered consciousness of the potential power she holds.




					www.newyorker.com


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can you imagine what Harry could have achieved, both in his healing journey and professionally, had he married someone just a little bit more like Kate? Quiet, stable, unpretentious, from a happy family background, willing to put in the work?



He isn't attracted to stable and sensible. Meghan isn't the first actress he dated and there were some models he was with too. Harry is drawn to drama and boy did he get it!


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I put on my waders and went trawling through the mud.
> The cookbook was Mermaid's idea but the backing was from the Royal Foundation, not Sussex Royal. Proceeds were to fund the Grenfell kitchen. So why was it that she had control over the funds and could use them to make donations in her own name?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan launches Grenfell recipe book in first project as Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle proposed the charity cookbook during visit to communal kitchen after fire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An American publication also wrote about the cookbook and billed Mermaid as the author (she wrote the foreword!), but it is the rest of the article which really brings out the could-have-beens. The New Yorker was so optimistic that Mermaid would be an agent for positive change. What a pity that the mermaid was already cooking up her exit along with the chapatis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Ever-So-Slightly Radical Cookbook
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex’s collection of recipes gathered by women whose families lived in Grenfell Tower suggests a mature, considered consciousness of the potential power she holds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newyorker.com


excellent work ! go team !

I had heard that MM did not write the book, as some claimed, she might have done a foreward and added the famous banana bread recipe but she routinely gets 100% credit for the book

I think the article on Yahoo is a great example of how a story can become gibberish these days as reported by internet journalism


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, there would have to be a whole lot of bad luck for him to even come close to the throne. But also...*must this not be his worst nightmare? Not because that means his grandmother, father, brother and three children would have died*, but because poor traumatized Harry being sent back to the gulag? If I was him I'd give up my place in the succession oh so quick just to spare myself, but what do I know.


I'm starting to think, no, that might actually be his dream come true, given how they've all done nothing but wronged him!  Even George, Charlotte, and Louis, how dare they were born and bumped him down??!!


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> MM has been suspiciously quiet.  No statement about supporting H’s right to speak his truth - or statement about how they are looking forward to baby no.2...


She's probably at the hospital with the surrogate as she gives birth.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It looks like a good point: Cash Compassion in Action!



A "mini boom"?  Isn't that an oxymoron?


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Thank you. That was interesting, especially how she controlled her image by making everyone who knew her sign NDAs. Didn't anyone refuse to be  "silenced"? Makes her "silent or silenced" query sound hypocritical. Also makes me wonder about Trevor Engelson. There were reports that MM silenced him.
> 
> I'd dispute the writer's assertion that Oprah became "the richest and most famous woman in the world." She was a non-entity in my part of the world, so maybe she was famous only in the Western world? Or only in the USA? I got turned off the daytime TV talkshow format after watching one episode of Ellen dG - the bouncing on sofa and mugging hard at the camera routine was so fake that I never watched a second ep.
> 
> Is Oprah's Book Club still in existence? And did The Bench get recommended by it?


Yeah as another non American I would say Oprah is really not that well-known and in lots of societies talk show hosts don’t really have the gravitas  they do in the US. I mean no one is saying Graham Norton or Richard and Judy are the new messiahs over here 

I have to agree a relative asking me to sign an NDA would hurt my feelings not to mention make me very suspicious that something bad was about to happen. 
Edit I meant gravitas not kudos 


xincinsin said:


> She'll take credit for the entire shelter
> I've checked some of the charities or organisations which she supposedly supported for "years" and a lot of the time, she visited them once, wrote about them once, and then.... maybe she sent them a cake but the PR team hasn't gotten round to publicising it yet?
> 
> Can anyone explain this donation to me? I'm very confused. Mermaid is credited with donating £10,000 to a Nottingham charity. The money was donated by the Royal Foundation but she alone takes the credit for it. Her PR team emailed and rang the charity repeatedly to emphasize that the donation was from her. Also, the article says the money came from sales of the Grenfell cookbook which was published to raise money for the Grenfell kitchen, and then lauds her for donating the money elsewhere. I'm not getting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle donates £10,000 to Nottingham charity after cookbook success
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chose to support a kitchen which brings together the Jewish and Muslim communities in Nottingham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sg.news.yahoo.com


Very well sleuthed. I don’t blame them for fudging two donations together- clearly these poor people can’t afford to make even a single 10k donation without access to someone else’s fund


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can you imagine what Harry could have achieved, both in his healing journey and professionally, had he married someone just a little bit more like Kate? Quiet, stable, unpretentious, from a happy family background, willing to put in the work?


That poor woman would have her work cut out for her though..,
I think the family tried to set him up with friends  but clearly Harry likes bad girls


----------



## Miss Liz

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It makes me slightly uneasy. She's plotting something.


Working feverishly behind the scenes to create a bidding war for the release of a photo of the newborn with Archie?


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> What a pity that the mermaid was already cooking up her exit along with the chapatis.


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> She'll take credit for the entire shelter
> I've checked some of the charities or organisations which she supposedly supported for "years" and a lot of the time, she visited them once, wrote about them once, and then.... maybe she sent them a cake but the PR team hasn't gotten round to publicising it yet?
> 
> Can anyone explain this donation to me? I'm very confused. Mermaid is credited with donating £10,000 to a Nottingham charity. The money was donated by the Royal Foundation but she alone takes the credit for it. Her PR team emailed and rang the charity repeatedly to emphasize that the donation was from her. Also, the article says the money came from sales of the Grenfell cookbook which was published to raise money for the Grenfell kitchen, and then lauds her for donating the money elsewhere. I'm not getting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle donates £10,000 to Nottingham charity after cookbook success
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chose to support a kitchen which brings together the Jewish and Muslim communities in Nottingham.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sg.news.yahoo.com


Quoting from the article:

*The donation was made last summer but has been made public by the charity this week.*

Is that because  *They kept emailing me and ringing me about the donation saying it was from the Duchess of Sussex and I just couldn't believe it*


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> She's probably at the hospital with the surrogate as she gives birth.


I wonder if it's a good idea to be at the hospital with the surrogate.  Too much of a chance of being seen.

I can see the surrogate giving birth and arriving at the mansion's door with a newborn though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if it's a good idea to be at the hospital with the surrogate.  Too much of a chance of being seen.
> 
> I can see the surrogate giving birth and arriving at the mansion's door with a newborn though.


I was being sarcastic.  No way would she degrade herself by actually supporting another human being, even if that being is giving birth to her child!
As I kid, I would torment my little sister saying she was left on our door step by gypsies and she's not really our blood family


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> H’s wife has been suspiciously too quiet for at least a month.  What is she up to?  Or Did the moon bumps shrink in the wash and Amazon has them on back order?
> Edited for typo



The last time she was out of the spotlight this long we got the Oprah interview. She's working on some big project (besides the baby). It's hard to predict what it could be. My wild guess is maybe she'll get her own talk show with Oprah's help.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> Her interviews were never deep. Something about her connected with the daytime audience, soap operas and game shows were her competition. And she has always worked very hard at promoting herself. If you are interested this article does a good job of explaining Oprah’s early years in the business and her climb to the top.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Seven Secrets Of Oprah Winfrey’s Success
> 
> 
> Almost no one has mastered the art of self-marketing as brilliantly as Oprah Winfrey. Read this article to find out the most important secrets of her success and how she became such a powerful brand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



And here I was, thinking she was an early trendsetter and model for all the youtubers who host giveaways as often as possible to boost their profile and follower count. 

(Also, as a non-American, this is the only thing about Oprah I know :x)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> That poor woman would have her work cut out for her though..,
> I think the family tried to set him up with friends  but clearly Harry likes bad girls



That said, he spent years with Chelsey (who didn't want such a public role, but wasn't crazy, vulgar or a golddigger from what I gather). Not sure where he took the completely wrong turn.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Miss Liz said:


> Working feverishly behind the scenes to create a bidding war for the release of a photo of the newborn with Archie?



That would actually be one of the more harmless endeavors.


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> And here I was, thinking she was an early trendsetter and model for all the youtubers who host giveaways as often as possible to boost their profile and follower count.
> 
> (Also, as a non-American, this is the only thing about Oprah I know :x)
> 
> View attachment 5092581



That car giveaway gave Oprah a ton of positive attention and press. Oprah was given the credit for the generous gesture but in reality Pontiac donated all of the new cars (nearly 300 of them). At first there were only going to be 25 cars given away but Oprah and her people kept pushing Pontiac for more. Look at where they stand today, Pontiac is out of business and Oprah is a billionaire. It was a bad promotion for Pontiac and GM.


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah as another non American I would say Oprah is really not that well-known and in lots of societies talk show hosts don’t really have the gravitas they do in the US. I mean no one is saying Graham Norton or Richard and Judy are the new messiahs over here



Lol I don't think anyone thinks Oprah is the new messiah here. If Graham Norton got a tell-all with Prince William, that would be a more likely comparison. It would be all over the news because it came at the right time. I think people are reading too much into Oprah and building her up more than needed to knock her down more than needed too. She's one of many US talk show personalities, albeit one of the more financially successful ones like Letterman or DeGeneres, except she happened to get some juicy interviews recently... no more no less.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think a lot of women in their 40s have a soft spot for Oprah because she was on tv when we came home from school as kids.


----------



## eunaddict

lalame said:


> Lol I don't think anyone thinks Oprah is the new messiah here. If Graham Norton got a tell-all with Prince William, that would be a more likely comparison. It would be all over the news because it came at the right time. I think people are reading too much into Oprah and building her up more than needed to knock her down more than needed too. She's one of many US talk show personalities, albeit one of the more financially successful ones like Letterman or DeGeneres, except she happened to get some juicy interviews recently... no more no less.



I *LOVE* Graham Norton (Not a Brit but he's the only talkshow host I watch with any amount of regularity). I mean even celebs love his interview style (it's so casual and conversational and he spends time with everyone) and so many of them keep coming back on the show saying that they've never enjoyed being interviewed by a talkshow as much ever.


----------



## Annawakes

Pretty sure the next time mermaid resurfaces she will have a brand new face.


----------



## TC1

Just saw a headline that said MM may go into early labour due to her "condition" mmmm, I didn't know narcissism was a health concern?


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> That car giveaway gave Oprah a ton of positive attention and press. Oprah was given the credit for the generous gesture but in reality Pontiac donated all of the new cars (nearly 300 of them). At first there were only going to be 25 cars given away but Oprah and her people kept pushing Pontiac for more. Look at where they stand today, Pontiac is out of business and Oprah is a billionaire. It was a bad promotion for Pontiac and GM.


And didn't everyone have to pay the taxes on the vehicles?, not to mention registration et al. I wonder how many people actually took them.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Harry is only #6 for the moment.  If Will and Kate have another sprog he’ll be #7, or if QE2 shuffles off the mortal whatever (later rather than sooner hopefully) he’ll be #5.  I realise it’s a numbering convention familiar to most on here because of its use for US presidents, but it’s not the same for the British RF and is never used in the UK.
> I’m especially dismayed to see its use if (as we’re led to believe) Meghan came up with it  Perhaps *H* was too much of a mouthful for her


maybe Will & Kate should consider having a couple more kids


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> maybe Will & Kate should consider having a couple more kids


Yes  Twins!


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> And didn't everyone have to pay the taxes on the vehicles?, not to mention registration et al. I wonder how many people actually took them.



General Motors paid the sales taxes and licensing fees, but audience members were responsible for federal and state income tax on the value of the cars. The government wants their cut of anything you get, the same as if you won the lottery. Some audience members complained that they had a hard time covering it. They were left with three options, pay the tax money, sell the car and they keep the cash after taxes, or refuse the prize. It is hard to feel too sorry for someone who was getting a brand new car and they only had to pay a small percentage of it's value when they could always opt out.

It was a lesson for anyone who enters contests. Winning a big prize doesn't mean you are exempt from taxes. Every year HGTV gives away a Dream Home and I think few if any winners have been able to afford keep them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> General Motors paid the sales taxes and licensing fees, but audience members were responsible for federal and state income tax on the value of the cars. The government wants their cut of anything you get, the same as if you won the lottery. Some audience members complained that they had a hard time covering it. They were left with three options, pay the tax money, sell the car and they keep the cash after taxes, or refuse the prize. It is hard to feel too sorry for someone who was getting a brand new car and they only had to pay a small percentage of it's value when they could always opt out.
> 
> It was a lesson for anyone who enters contests. Winning a big prize doesn't mean you are exempt from taxes. Every year HGTV gives away a Dream Home and I think few if any winners have been able to afford keep them.


Ahh, okay..thanks. We don't have that in Canada. We don't have to pay tax on anything considered a "windfall" but we're taxed up the wazoo for everything else.


----------



## lulilu

Does anyone know why they left Tyler Perry's house?  I read somewhere that they upset him by putting up that fugly privacy screen, but also that they mistreated (as per their typical behavior) his employees who worked at the property.  And he told them to leave.  I wish I could remember where I saw it.


----------



## bisousx

TC1 said:


> And didn't everyone have to pay the taxes on the vehicles?, not to mention registration et al. I wonder how many people actually took them.






bag-mania said:


> General Motors paid the sales taxes and licensing fees, but audience members were responsible for federal and state income tax on the value of the cars. The government wants their cut of anything you get, the same as if you won the lottery. Some audience members complained that they had a hard time covering it. They were left with three options, pay the tax money, sell the car and they keep the cash after taxes, or refuse the prize. It is hard to feel too sorry for someone who was getting a brand new car and they only had to pay a small percentage of it's value when they could always opt out.
> 
> It was a lesson for anyone who enters contests. Winning a big prize doesn't mean you are exempt from taxes. Every year HGTV gives away a Dream Home and I think few if any winners have been able to afford keep them.



IIRC, it was a mini scandal when Oprah’s audience was slapped with taxes on their gifted cars.

Totally agree with you @bag-mania that I don’t feel sorry for them... but then again we live in a society where people lack so much common sense.

We literally have to spell out everything so people can function. 

People can’t seem to use their brains and decipher when IG influencers are being paid to shill products, or whether the Kardashians are telling the truth about QuikTrim’s wizard-like weight loss powers. I can hardly believe the lack of personal responsibility these days

ETA: Imagine me having to explain to my husband why the Tide Pods were locked up behind a glass cabinet at our grocery store


----------



## lalame

eunaddict said:


> I *LOVE* Graham Norton (Not a Brit but he's the only talkshow host I watch with any amount of regularity). I mean even celebs love his interview style (it's so casual and conversational and he spends time with everyone) and so many of them keep coming back on the show saying that they've never enjoyed being interviewed by a talkshow as much ever.



Me too!!  I totally binge watch his clips on youtube, as a loser without BBC access.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, he spent years with Chelsey (who didn't want such a public role, but wasn't crazy, vulgar or a golddigger from what I gather). Not sure where he took the completely wrong turn.


The day M voodood him.


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> IIRC, it was a mini scandal when Oprah’s audience was slapped with taxes on their gifted cars.
> 
> Totally agree with you @bag-mania that I don’t feel sorry for them... but then again we live in a society where people lack so much common sense.
> 
> We literally have to spell out everything so people can function.
> 
> People can’t seem to use their brains and decipher when IG influencers are being paid to shill products, or whether the Kardashians are telling the truth about QuikTrim’s wizard-like weight loss powers. I can hardly believe the lack of personal responsibility these days
> 
> ETA: Imagine me having to explain to my husband why the Tide Pods were locked up behind a glass cabinet at our grocery store



Yeah, the complainers in the Oprah audience didn't see the big picture. Rather than being grateful that they received a much needed car (because that audience had been pre-screened to have only people who had either old cars or no cars), they were upset because they had to pay anything at all. Oprah wanted to have a promo where she would make a big difference in those people's lives and she got a bit burned by it.

I can speak from experience on this subject. Several years ago I won a car in a contest. I didn't have to pay taxes on it until April 15th of the following year. So it's not like the Oprah complainers needed to immediately come up with a few thousand dollars. They had months to plan and put away money for it. They just didn't want to have to pay anything.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> That car giveaway gave Oprah a ton of positive attention and press. Oprah was given the credit for the generous gesture but in reality Pontiac donated all of the new cars (nearly 300 of them). At first there were only going to be 25 cars given away but Oprah and her people kept pushing Pontiac for more. Look at where they stand today, Pontiac is out of business and Oprah is a billionaire. It was a bad promotion for Pontiac and GM.



Whereas Elvis gave away hundreds of cars to everyone out of his own money after he had given half of every penny he earned to his manager and paid more than he ever needed to to Uncle Sam as his manager never wanted to attract IRS attention lest he be thrown out of the country given he was a murdering illegal immigrant from Holland!!


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, the complainers in the Oprah audience didn't see the big picture. Rather than being grateful that they received a much needed car (because that audience had been pre-screened to have only people who had either old cars or no cars), they were upset because they had to pay anything at all. Oprah wanted to have a promo where she would make a big difference in those people's lives and she got a bit burned by it.
> 
> I can speak from experience on this subject. Several years ago I won a car in a contest. I didn't have to pay taxes on it until April 15th of the following year. So it's not like the Oprah complainers needed to immediately come up with a few thousand dollars. They had months to plan and put away money for it. They just didn't want to have to pay anything.



I can see it if they were in really dire financial straits... most Americans apparently wouldn't be able to cover a $1,000 emergency expense.   Source: https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/average-savings-by-age/


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Whereas Elvis gave away hundreds of cars to everyone out of his own money after he had given half of every penny he earned to his manager and paid more than he ever needed to to Uncle Sam as his manager never wanted to attract IRS attention lest he be thrown out of the country given he was a murdering illegal immigrant from Holland!!



Oh, don't get me started on the Colonel. The way he took advantage of Elvis' trust and loyalty was criminal. If Tom Parker was alive in today's social media environment I bet he could give Harry and Meghan lessons on grifting beyond anything they could imagine.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> That car giveaway gave Oprah a ton of positive attention and press. Oprah was given the credit for the generous gesture but in reality Pontiac donated all of the new cars (nearly 300 of them). At first there were only going to be 25 cars given away but Oprah and her people kept pushing Pontiac for more. Look at where they stand today, Pontiac is out of business and Oprah is a billionaire. It was a bad promotion for Pontiac and GM.


That's what I was going to say - also her favourite things were just promotions donated by different companies.

Some big stars gave big bucks to her Angel charity and O got the credit when she did something with it.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I can see it if they were in really dire financial straits... most Americans apparently wouldn't be able to cover a $1,000 emergency expense.  Source: https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/average-savings-by-age/



For the ones who were in bad financial shape they could have gone with the option of selling the car, keeping the cash after taxes, and maybe putting it towards buying a cheaper used car. They were still coming out way ahead of when they walked into Oprah's studio.

Americans have become irresponsible about the concept of saving.


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> Does anyone know why they left Tyler Perry's house?  I read somewhere that they upset him by putting up that fugly privacy screen, but also that they mistreated (as per their typical behavior) his employees who worked at the property.  And he told them to leave.  I wish I could remember where I saw it.


Did they move from the TP house to Montecito ? Bought their own ?


----------



## bisousx

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, the complainers in the Oprah audience didn't see the big picture. Rather than being grateful that they received a much needed car (because that audience had been pre-screened to have only people who had either old cars or no cars), they were upset because they had to pay anything at all. Oprah wanted to have a promo where she would make a big difference in those people's lives and she got a bit burned by it.
> 
> I can speak from experience on this subject. Several years ago I won a car in a contest. I didn't have to pay taxes on it until April 15th of the following year. So it's not like the Oprah complainers needed to immediately come up with a few thousand dollars. They had months to plan and put away money for it. They just didn't want to have to pay anything.




And the ole saying is proven true again. No good deed goes unpunished.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> For the ones who were in bad financial shape they could have gone with the option of selling the car, keeping the cash after taxes, and maybe putting it towards buying a cheaper used car. They were still coming out way ahead of when they walked into Oprah's studio.
> 
> Americans have become irresponsible about the concept of saving.



I'm going to guess people in that bad of financial shape probably aren't thinking that far ahead.  Or can't for whatever reason.


----------



## csshopper

In the DM. 
Laughed out loud at the baby picture of M used to highlight the comparison, since her supposedly evil step sister Samantha is the one holding her!

*Fans brand Archie 'mini Meghan' in newly resurfaced pictures*
Royal fans have noticed a striking resemblance between a resurfaced photo of Meghan Markle as a baby and new images of her son Archie.

A snap of Meghan at six-months-old and on the lap of her half-sister Samantha Markle was shared to Twitter by royal watcher Julieth next to a still of Archie on a swing which appeared in Prince Harry's new AppleTV+ documentary, The Me You Can't See.   

In the picture, Archie, two, looks delighted as he goes back and forth in the garden of the family's $14million Montecito home.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

To be fair to Oprah though, she organized it for that audience. Pontiac gave the cars and they deserve that credit (unless Oprah's company bought them) but it takes effort to organize that kind of thing so the people getting gifts owe her a thanks too. Otherwise they wouldn't have gotten them in the first place.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> The last time she was out of the spotlight this long we got the Oprah interview. She's working on some big project (besides the baby). It's hard to predict what it could be. My wild guess is maybe she'll get her own talk show with Oprah's help.


OMG can you imagine the word salad?  She'd have to find more and more individuals whose work to rip off!  She'd be like Oprah though, constantly talking about herself.


----------



## csshopper

This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.

*EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*

*Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
*Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
*A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
*Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
* 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
*They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:


Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#161 in Children's Emotions Books
#420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## V0N1B2

Is this a form of Reiki too? And all her other "tapping" Harry to let him know when's to speak etc?


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> Just saw a headline that said MM may go into early labour due to her "condition" mmmm, I didn't know narcissism was a health concern?


Mmmmhmmm, and what "condition" might that be?  Being heavily pregnant?  She's been heavily pregnant for so long, at this point, she's just due.  They'll probably pretend Diana's birthday was her actual due date, but she had to have her early.  And how exactly are they predicting she may go into early labor?  Is she being induced?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> maybe Will & Kate should consider having a couple more kids


Here's to hoping!!


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *


I don’t know whether to laugh at this or feel sad.  Poor Archie


----------



## TC1

purseinsanity said:


> Mmmmhmmm, and what "condition" might that be?  Being heavily pregnant?  She's been heavily pregnant for so long, at this point, she's just due.  They'll probably pretend Diana's birthday was her actual due date, but she had to have her early.  And how exactly are they predicting she may go into early labor?  Is she being induced?


I'm honestly not sure, I didn't click the link..it was an article on Google News though..


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> OMG can you imagine the word salad?  She'd have to find more and more individuals whose work to rip off!  She'd be like Oprah though, constantly talking about herself.



I'm already imagining the SNL skit! It would be hilarious.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
> Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #161 in Children's Emotions Books
> #420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


Ancestral healing?!!?  Wow, according to stories I've heard, a lot of my poor ancestors could certainly benefit from this to ease all the pain and suffering they went through!


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> I'm honestly not sure, I didn't click the link..it was an article on Google News though..


I think her condition is having fecal impaction (ie full of $hit) and having to say something, anything, to make sure she doesn't feel left out.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> For the ones who were in bad financial shape they could have gone with the option of selling the car, keeping the cash after taxes, and maybe putting it towards buying a cheaper used car. They were still coming out way ahead of when they walked into Oprah's studio.
> 
> Americans have become irresponsible about the concept of saving.


I read an IG meme today which says this perfectly:

"If you live* fake rich now*, you'll retire *real broke later*."


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I read an IG meme today which says this perfectly:
> 
> "If you live* fake rich now*, you'll retire *real broke later*."



The experts say everyone should be putting 20% of their gross income into savings each month. Now I expect most people cannot afford to do that much, but they should be putting some money into savings every paycheck. There are many people who make good salaries but they end up living beyond their means and spending it all as soon as they make it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know basically nothing about Reiki, but a friend at work became certified, and it was a very long process that took a lot of work on her part. It’s annoying that MM is acting like she knows the practice.


----------



## lulu212121

csshopper said:


> In the DM.
> Laughed out loud at the baby picture of M used to highlight the comparison, since her supposedly evil step sister Samantha is the one holding her!
> 
> *Fans brand Archie 'mini Meghan' in newly resurfaced pictures*
> Royal fans have noticed a striking resemblance between a resurfaced photo of Meghan Markle as a baby and new images of her son Archie.
> 
> A snap of Meghan at six-months-old and on the lap of her half-sister Samantha Markle was shared to Twitter by royal watcher Julieth next to a still of Archie on a swing which appeared in Prince Harry's new AppleTV+ documentary, The Me You Can't See.
> 
> In the picture, Archie, two, looks delighted as he goes back and forth in the garden of the family's $14million Montecito home.


Who ever is taking pictures of Archie does a horrible job. They are never clear, always grainy, blurred, out of focus. I took better pictures with a 35mm back in the day. No reason for the crappy photography with all the digital enhancements that can be done. Kate does a way better job, should've at least befriended her to learn her tricks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> In the DM.
> Laughed out loud at the baby picture of M used to highlight the comparison, since her supposedly evil step sister Samantha is the one holding her!
> 
> *Fans brand Archie 'mini Meghan' in newly resurfaced pictures*
> Royal fans have noticed a striking resemblance between a resurfaced photo of Meghan Markle as a baby and new images of her son Archie.
> 
> A snap of Meghan at six-months-old and on the lap of her half-sister Samantha Markle was shared to Twitter by royal watcher Julieth next to a still of Archie on a swing which appeared in Prince Harry's new AppleTV+ documentary, The Me You Can't See.
> 
> In the picture, Archie, two, looks delighted as he goes back and forth in the garden of the family's $14million Montecito home.



Ha! Look at how happy Samantha was holding baby Meghan. Little did she know!


----------



## lalame

purseinsanity said:


> I read an IG meme today which says this perfectly:
> 
> "If you live* fake rich now*, you'll retire *real broke later*."



TPF has never seen this meme


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulu212121 said:


> Who ever is taking pictures of Archie does a horrible job. They are never clear, always grainy, blurred, out of focus. I took better pictures with a 35mm back in the day. No reason for the crappy photography with all the digital enhancements that can be done. Kate does a way better job, should've at least befriended her to learn her tricks.



Kinda like the UFO photos. _They_ continue to show us the same blurry photo year after year. Just use an iPhone!




purseinsanity said:


> I think her condition is having fecal impaction (ie full of $hit) and having to say something, anything, to make sure she doesn't feel left out.



Her condition is that Hazz is getting all of the attention. She cannot handle being ignored. Ever.


----------



## needlv

lalame said:


> TPF has never seen this meme


Lol - it belongs in the Hermes forum!!


----------



## csshopper

lulu212121 said:


> Who ever is taking pictures of Archie does a horrible job. They are never clear, always grainy, blurred, out of focus. I took better pictures with a 35mm back in the day. No reason for the crappy photography with all the digital enhancements that can be done. Kate does a way better job, should've at least befriended her to learn her tricks.


Agree with you 100% and wonder if it is intentional on their part?


----------



## jelliedfeels

lalame said:


> Lol I don't think anyone thinks Oprah is the new messiah here. If Graham Norton got a tell-all with Prince William, that would be a more likely comparison. It would be all over the news because it came at the right time. I think people are reading too much into Oprah and building her up more than needed to knock her down more than needed too. She's one of many US talk show personalities, albeit one of the more financially successful ones like Letterman or DeGeneres, except she happened to get some juicy interviews recently... no more no less.


I don’t know. I think she’s got a bit more influence than others with her network and her magazine and all those assorted endeavours. 
I was just commenting that I think she’s very much a star for the American market and the article was making it sound like she has a big global following (which I’ve never experienced- I only know of her from Americans) and I do think the superstar chat host is quite a US specific thing. 

 I also wouldn’t say going on the Graham Norton show has quite the prestige that Oprah and Ellen has.



marietouchet said:


> Did they move from the TP house to Montecito ? Bought their own ?


I’m sorry to Tyler Perry but I just always read TP as toilet paper.
I was picturing them in some little Wendy house made out of loo rolls.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I can see it if they were in really dire financial straits... most Americans apparently wouldn't be able to cover a $1,000 emergency expense.   Source: https://www.sofi.com/learn/content/average-savings-by-age/


I think they were teachers.  so should be able to come up with money for registration.  I did hear a heartwarming story about a community of people who chipped in to buy the local pizza delivery driver his own car.  and they did pay for registration and insurance.  that was very thoughtful.  but I think his income would have been a lot lower than a teacher's.  and I think the car was a nice used one - not new.


----------



## lulilu

lulu212121 said:


> Who ever is taking pictures of Archie does a horrible job. They are never clear, always grainy, blurred, out of focus. I took better pictures with a 35mm back in the day. No reason for the crappy photography with all the digital enhancements that can be done. Kate does a way better job, should've at least befriended her to learn her tricks.


It has to be intentional, so no one gets a good look at him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> Agree with you 100% and wonder if it is intentional on their part?





lulilu said:


> It has to be intentional, so no one gets a good look at him.


It’s called not giving away the milk for free


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t know. I think she’s got a bit more influence than others with her network and her magazine and all those assorted endeavours.
> I was just commenting that I think she’s very much a star for the American market and the article was making it sound like she has a big global following (which I’ve never experienced- I only know of her from Americans) and I do think the superstar chat host is quite a US specific thing.
> 
> I also wouldn’t say going on the Graham Norton show has quite the prestige that Oprah and Ellen has.
> 
> 
> I’m sorry to Tyler Perry but I just always read TP as toilet paper.
> I was picturing them in some little Wendy house made out of loo rolls.



Oprah definitely has fans - she wouldn't be successful if she didn't - but I wouldn't say she's a huge cultural force that captures everyone's attention here. Neither is Ellen. I don't know how to compare her with Graham because I'm not there but my point was people aren't talking about Oprah a ton now because she's this major stop-what-you're-doing-and-listen attraction... it's just because she got a coveted interview with H+M. If it was Graham, we'd all be talking about him now too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Absolutely intentional


----------



## needlv

Oopsies - Did MM tell another lie?   Click on the attachment to see MM’s name...


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> Oopsies - Did MM tell another lie?   Click on the attachment to see MM’s name...



Well that explains the dodgy acting   But seriously, who lies about stuff like this??


----------



## lalame

needlv said:


> Oopsies - Did MM tell another lie?   Click on the attachment to see MM’s name...




This might not really mean anything... majors may fall under different colleges. In this case, this is just the School of Communications. A B.A in International Studies would probably be in a different college at Northwestern and be listed separately in that section or document. A quick look tells me an International Studies degree would be from the Weinberg College of Arts & Sciences. I don't know if she lied or not (and I'd think a degree in Theater would be a BFA anyway, not a BS) but I don't think this is conclusive either way.


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> Oprah definitely has fans - she wouldn't be successful if she didn't - but I wouldn't say she's a huge cultural force that captures everyone's attention here. Neither is Ellen. I don't know how to compare her with Graham because I'm not there but my point was people aren't talking about Oprah a ton now because she's this major stop-what-you're-doing-and-listen attraction... it's just because she got a coveted interview with H+M. If it was Graham, we'd all be talking about him now too.


Plus, her SOUL show is on the Discovery + streaming channel and the program with "6" is on Apple TV, both of which have a monthly subscription cost, unlike CBS, the free channel that aired "the" Interview . The subscriptions are a modest cost, but people have to make an effort to join them, unlike picking up the remote to the TV and clicking on CBS. She may have fewer viewers as a result?

Harry's a side show at this point, but as long as she tethers herself to him/them, she'll be in a media spotlight. I read she accompanied him to his therapy session, which seemed creepy to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

csshopper said:


> Plus, her SOUL show is on the Discovery + streaming channel and the program with "6" is on Apple TV, both of which have a monthly subscription cost, unlike CBS, the free channel that aired "the" Interview . The subscriptions are a modest cost, but people have to make an effort to join them, unlike picking up the remote to the TV and clicking on CBS. She may have fewer viewers as a result?
> 
> Harry's a side show at this point, but as long as she tethers herself to him/them, she'll be in a media spotlight. I read she accompanied him to his therapy session, which seemed creepy to me.



I was actually wondering why she's trying to do a career revival... she's all over the place these days. No one seems that interested here, but she was also in the news cycle recently for her Elliott Page interview, which was also very provocative obviously. I didn't watch it though. Maybe got bored in retirement?


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> I read she accompanied him to his therapy session, which seemed creepy to me.


Sounds controlling to me, very creepy


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> I thought they moved from the TP house to Montecito ? Bought their own ?


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
> Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #161 in Children's Emotions Books
> #420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


Funny how people are different ...
I hate being messed with, this would stress me out
Maintenance - hair, nails, etc - is not being pampered to me
a lot of my reaction is that I am allergic to all the products , oils, chemicals etc, used with wild abandon without asking ...
when will they realize that ALLERGIC PEOPLE MATTER ? LOL , this is a joke ...


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Clearblueskies said:


> Well that explains the dodgy acting   But seriously, who lies about stuff like this??



The same type of person who claims they got married 3 days earlier with just the Archbishop, in their back yard, exchanging vows. And then claiming the actual wedding was just a 'show' for us mortals.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Sounds controlling to me, very creepy



She’s probably terrified that if Harry spent an hour alone with a real psychologist he might actually make some progress. I wonder if Harry was allowed to talk or if it was all Meghan telling the therapist what was wrong with him.

(I’m not convinced there was any therapy.)


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She’s probably terrified that if Harry spent an hour alone with a real psychologist he might actually make some progress. I wonder if Harry was allowed to talk or if it was all Meghan telling the therapist what was wrong with him.
> 
> (I’m not convinced there was any therapy.)


Oprah went to the EMDR therapy session with him. Maybe his "heavily pregnant" wife was not available so his other "Keeper" went along.

“EMDR is always something that I wanted to try and that was one of the varieties of different forms of healing or curing that I was willing to experiment with, and I never would have been open to that had I not put in the work and the therapy that I’ve done over the years,” he told Oprah Winfrey, who accompanied him for his session with EMDR therapist Sanja Oakley in the third episode


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Oprah went to the EMDR therapy session with him. Maybe his "heavily pregnant" wife was not available so his other "Keeper" went along.
> 
> “EMDR is always something that I wanted to try and that was one of the varieties of different forms of healing or curing that I was willing to experiment with, and I never would have been open to that had I not put in the work and the therapy that I’ve done over the years,” he told Oprah Winfrey, who accompanied him for his session with EMDR therapist Sanja Oakley in the third episode



Oh, Harry is apparently so prone to messing up Oprah had to be there to guide him through it.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Undergraduate Programs: School of Communication - Northwestern University
					






					communication.northwestern.edu
				









						School of Communication < Northwestern University
					






					catalogs.northwestern.edu
				




The School of Communication grants the degree of bachelor of science in communication upon:

the satisfactory completion of 42 course units;
the fulfillment of the distribution requirement of the student’s major department; and
the completion of an approved major in communication suited to the student’s special interests and needs.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

A creative mind!


----------



## Chanbal

Not very responsible with donation funds! 

*MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have been criticised for spending £300,000 to start their Sussex Royal foundation only to quit 12 months later.*
_
The organisation spent half the money on legal and admin fees setting it up and closing it down._









						Meg & Harry slammed for starting £300k foundation then quitting 12 months later
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have been criticised for spending £300,000 to start their Sussex Royal foundation only to quit 12 months later. The organisation spent half the money on legal and adm…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who will win this battle??? 






Characters: Kim Kardashian's smartphone game which features a prince and a princess that want to escape an 'unwelcoming' royal family *has reportedly been accused of cashing in on Megxit*









						Kim Kardashian removes new level of app with prince and princess
					

The reality star, 40, launched her Hollywood app in June 2014 and has added a Royal Runaways level to the game which appears to depict Meghan and Harry. On Tuesday it was removed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I was actually wondering why she's trying to do a career revival... she's all over the place these days. No one seems that interested here, but she was also in the news cycle recently for her Elliott Page interview, which was also very provocative obviously. I didn't watch it though. Maybe got bored in retirement?


She misses the attention... and the adoration.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5093107



Harry can experience the literary quality of American tabloid coverage for a change since he thinks the British ones are too mean.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

lalame said:


> I was actually wondering why she's trying to do a career revival... she's all over the place these days. No one seems that interested here, but she was also in the news cycle recently for her Elliott Page interview, which was also very provocative obviously. I didn't watch it though. Maybe got bored in retirement?





CarryOn2020 said:


> Who will win this battle???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Characters: Kim Kardashian's smartphone game which features a prince and a princess that want to escape an 'unwelcoming' royal family *has reportedly been accused of cashing in on Megxit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kim Kardashian removes new level of app with prince and princess
> 
> 
> The reality star, 40, launched her Hollywood app in June 2014 and has added a Royal Runaways level to the game which appears to depict Meghan and Harry. On Tuesday it was removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Freedom is a smartphone game. WOW


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who will win this battle???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Characters: Kim Kardashian's smartphone game which features a prince and a princess that want to escape an 'unwelcoming' royal family *has reportedly been accused of cashing in on Megxit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kim Kardashian removes new level of app with prince and princess
> 
> 
> The reality star, 40, launched her Hollywood app in June 2014 and has added a Royal Runaways level to the game which appears to depict Meghan and Harry. On Tuesday it was removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


LOLOL!  Leave it to the Kardashians to turn the table on Meg!  Go Kim!  (Did I just say that?!  )


----------



## queennadine

On the topic of Oprah: IMO, she became famous because housewives watched her show in the 90’s. She inserted herself into practically everything, slathered herself onto every cover of her magazine, and promoted herself front and center.  I think her brand has been diminished. Her connection with Weinstein hasn’t helped.  No one my age (mid 30’s) cares too much about her, and I don’t see younger folks being interested in her either.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Harry can experience the literary quality of American tabloid coverage for a change since he thinks the British ones are too mean.


His actions lead to this type of headlines. Hope Palace Aids got a copy of the in Touch magazine, it may help to build a case to remove their titles.


----------



## Chanbal

According to Page Six, "_Prince Harry has some explaining to do._"  









						Photos of Prince Harry on a bike resurface after claim he ‘never’ rode
					

The Duke of Sussex claimed he “was never able” to ride a bike with his dad, Prince Charles, but old photos show him doing just that many years ago.




					pagesix.com


----------



## jehaga

“Evil” step-sister (@csshopper) is more natural holding someone else’s baby than the “actual” mother is holding her “own” baby.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jehaga said:


> View attachment 5093219
> 
> “Evil” step-sister (@csshopper) is more natural holding someone else’s baby than the “actual” mother is holding her “own” baby.



So, the Reiki for the 2 year old is to relieve stress, correct? 
Have the terrible twos arrived?  Or is it this generational stress that both parents suffer from?

ETA: I admit I did not read the article. It’s just too tiring and dull to keep up with their onslaught of nonsense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Oopsies - Did MM tell another lie?   Click on the attachment to see MM’s name...




I mean, at least that would explain why she hadn't heard about the Commonwealth.


----------



## jelliedfeels

A





marietouchet said:


> Funny how people are different ...
> I hate being messed with, this would stress me out
> Maintenance - hair, nails, etc - is not being pampered to me
> a lot of my reaction is that I am allergic to all the products , oils, chemicals etc, used with wild abandon without asking ...
> when will they realize that ALLERGIC PEOPLE MATTER ? LOL , this is a joke ...


I don’t like too much physical contact either. 
But what we’ve got to remember is that M’s ‘beauty’ is very much a daily team effort like so many Insta girls.

I don’t know all this new age stuff is giving me cult vibes. 


bag-mania said:


> Oh, Harry is apparently so prone to messing up Oprah had to be there to guide him through it.


He needs performance coaching - can’t hang your latest show and it’s pr rollout on what _might_ look like bratty, unconvincing whining. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Who will win this battle???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Characters: Kim Kardashian's smartphone game which features a prince and a princess that want to escape an 'unwelcoming' royal family *has reportedly been accused of cashing in on Megxit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kim Kardashian removes new level of app with prince and princess
> 
> 
> The reality star, 40, launched her Hollywood app in June 2014 and has added a Royal Runaways level to the game which appears to depict Meghan and Harry. On Tuesday it was removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It makes sense as the Ks love to sell fantasies  
I will play it when they set up a kanye’s Wyoming ranch and super church building level lol.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Oprah went to the EMDR therapy session with him. Maybe his "heavily pregnant" wife was not available so his other "Keeper" went along.
> 
> “EMDR is always something that I wanted to try and that was one of the varieties of different forms of healing or curing that I was willing to experiment with, and I never would have been open to that had I not put in the work and the therapy that I’ve done over the years,” he told Oprah Winfrey, who accompanied him for his session with EMDR therapist Sanja Oakley in the third episode


My Finance writes like that: meandering run-on sentences filling a few screens. And then they wonder why no one understands their announcements. 



Chanbal said:


> Not very responsible with donation funds!
> 
> *MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have been criticised for spending £300,000 to start their Sussex Royal foundation only to quit 12 months later.*
> 
> _The organisation spent half the money on legal and admin fees setting it up and closing it down._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg & Harry slammed for starting £300k foundation then quitting 12 months later
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have been criticised for spending £300,000 to start their Sussex Royal foundation only to quit 12 months later. The organisation spent half the money on legal and adm…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


There was another news article where the Harkles disclaimed all responsibility for financial errors and said the board of trustees runs the former Sussex Royal. Sheer waste of money, but I think their plans were thwarted in this instance. If HMTQ had not stopped them from monetizing Royal, we'd be awash now in aprons and T-shirts bearing fuzzy images of Archie hugging the bump.


----------



## RAINDANCE

jehaga said:


> View attachment 5093219
> 
> “Evil” step-sister (@csshopper) is more natural holding someone else’s baby than the “actual” mother is holding her “own” baby.



Is it very unkind of me to notice that sister Samantha looks to have not only a a Lady Di haircut but a good passing resemblance ( before I put my glasses on)


----------



## gelbergirl

xincinsin said:


> I shall standardize to calling him* Mr Markle*  (and hope he gets dropped from the line of succession so that he can break away from his past - much faster than rewriting history a year at a time).



... I wonder what last name they are using?  when they signed their mortgage and all that, legally


----------



## Clearblueskies

gelbergirl said:


> ... I wonder what last name they are using?  when they signed their mortgage and all that, legally


I’d love to know


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, at least that would explain why she hadn't heard about the Commonwealth.


She lost interest when she found out "Commonwealth" wasn't a dating site of exploitable husband material. 



gelbergirl said:


> ... I wonder what last name they are using?  when they signed their mortgage and all that, legally


I'm wondering what they will fill in on the birth certificate for their occupation. Is that field required in the US?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

gelbergirl said:


> ... I wonder what last name they are using?  when they signed their mortgage and all that, legally



They used the name and occupation of Prince and Princess of the UK on Archies birth certificate but in the US they do not recognize titles and I am pretty sure they require a last name. They most likely used the same last name as they gave Archie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Of course that’s what they used as an occupation. Rolling my eyes at JCMH.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
> Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #161 in Children's Emotions Books
> #420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
> Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #161 in Children's Emotions Books
> #420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


All those good memories of her grandma's cooking are now relegated to trauma and pain? And if Mermaid claims to be weighed under by a long lineage of pain and suffering, wouldn't that include Doria? She gonna claim it skipped a generation or nothing came through the matrilineal side?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jehaga said:


> View attachment 5093219
> 
> “Evil” step-sister (@csshopper) is more natural holding someone else’s baby than the “actual” mother is holding her “own” baby.


I thought of that too when I saw the pic of Samantha and Meghan. That meeting in Africa with Tutu, made me apprehensive for Archie's safety to be honest because of how awkward Meghan looked holding Archie. She seemed almost irritated with the little guy at times.You can't ask babies to fake attachment, I guess.

(Before I became a godmother to one of my friend's children, and had my own babies, I felt really awkward holding other people's babies but at least I held them in a kind of holy grail reverence, I didn't look like I was trying to claw at them.)


----------



## Chanbal

RAINDANCE said:


> Is it very unkind of me to notice that sister Samantha looks to have not only a a Lady Di haircut but a good passing resemblance ( before I put my glasses on)


She surely had a happy face holding a sister who is an only child.


----------



## Chanbal

It's all about cash???? I didn't contribute to the 25% rise...

_*Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey will reunite again this Friday to revisit their Apple TV+ documentary about mental health with a virtual follow-up discussion one week later.*

The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the five-part programme including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward'.

It comes after Apple said the series, which began streaming last Friday, had brought a 25 per cent rise in new viewers to the platform and a more than 40 per cent increase in average weekend viewership in the UK last week.









						Harry and Oprah will host ANOTHER Apple TV+ show this FRIDAY
					

The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the series including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward' this Friday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> It's all about cash???? I didn't contribute to the 25% rise...
> 
> _*Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey will reunite again this Friday to revisit their Apple TV+ documentary about mental health with a virtual follow-up discussion one week later.*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the five-part programme including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward'.
> 
> It comes after Apple said the series, which began streaming last Friday, had brought a 25 per cent rise in new viewers to the platform and a more than 40 per cent increase in average weekend viewership in the UK last week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah will host ANOTHER Apple TV+ show this FRIDAY
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the series including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward' this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Voyeurs not viewers


----------



## Lenna.V

floatinglili said:


> Wow that is really interesting (not meeting family before marriage). I dont think I’ve ever come across it in my personal life. I guess I can understand that in some circumstances it could happen but it seems very unusual to me.
> In a hardcore traditional, aristocratic - scratch that ROYAL - family wedding situation? The idea of not meeting immediate family to vet them thoroughly very early in a serious courtship seems absolutely crazy. Megain managed to hold  them off until the wedding was imminent, and then scratched Dad! She must have a megaton of insistent charisma.



Yes it was very unusual for me at first too. Not going to lie, once I thought he wasn't serious about me that's why he didn't let me know his family. Although they still have some kind of relationship I can see that his family wasn't a happy place for him. So that's that. I would never want to see him unhappy. And he is now became almost like my mom other son, so it's a win win for me because I have witnessed too many messy in-laws relationship in my life do not wish to have one myself hahaha

As for H even for me is hard to understand, as I gather from everything we know about her she have fairly good relationship with her dad. I really really curious how Meghan managed to do that.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I find the 25% increase very hard to believe.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It's all about cash???? I didn't contribute to the 25% rise...
> 
> _*Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey will reunite again this Friday to revisit their Apple TV+ documentary about mental health with a virtual follow-up discussion one week later.*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the five-part programme including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward'.
> 
> It comes after Apple said the series, which began streaming last Friday, had brought a 25 per cent rise in new viewers to the platform and a more than 40 per cent increase in average weekend viewership in the UK last week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah will host ANOTHER Apple TV+ show this FRIDAY
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the series including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward' this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Maybe they started off with a really low base figure. I did a module on "Discerning Fact from Fiction in Statistics" and one marketing ploy mentioned was to use percentages when the actual number isn't that impressive. If they only had 4 subscribers, just one new subscriber would be a 25% rise.


----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> I was actually wondering why she's trying to do a career revival... she's all over the place these days. No one seems that interested here, but she was also in the news cycle recently for her Elliott Page interview, which was also very provocative obviously. I didn't watch it though. Maybe got bored in retirement?


seems she wants to stay relevant.....she isn't on TV every day anymore so doesn't have that platform.  The magazine isn't that sucessful (I don't think).  She came up the hard way and became a huge star and isn't ready to let that go yet I guess.  To me she was a unique combo of entertainment and social consciousness.  What she seems to be doing lately is not as entertaining.  And not reaching as many screens.  Regardless she has enough money to last her a lifetime so all of this is just gravy.  I don't dislike her but I do kinda hope the hookup with H&M comes back to bite her and her BFF Gayle.


----------



## Chanbal

Clearblueskies said:


> Voyeurs not viewers


Yep. Knowing that DM will keep us informed on their falsehoods, no need to give these people more clicks...


----------



## Chanbal

Z-list according to @CeeJay


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who will win this battle???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Characters: Kim Kardashian's smartphone game which features a prince and a princess that want to escape an 'unwelcoming' royal family *has reportedly been accused of cashing in on Megxit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kim Kardashian removes new level of app with prince and princess
> 
> 
> The reality star, 40, launched her Hollywood app in June 2014 and has added a Royal Runaways level to the game which appears to depict Meghan and Harry. On Tuesday it was removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Aw, when I clicked on the link they have updated the article to say that the Bianca & Prince Aston level has been removed.

Kim is claiming she was unaware this level had been added the game. I actually believe that could be true. In the vast Kardashian merch empire, a little phone game isn't going to get much attention from the family. And game designers and programmers love to have fun with their creations.

A source close to Kim told DailyMail.com that the reality star was not aware of the storyline of the Royal Runaways game until Tuesday - and 'immediately took steps to ensure it was taken down.'

'She is disappointed that this happened and has requested an internal investigation to ensure that this misstep doesn’t happen again,' the source told us.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> _It comes after Apple said the series, which began streaming last Friday, had brought a 25 per cent rise in new viewers to the platform and a *more than 40 per cent increase in average weekend viewership in the UK last week*._


If anybody would believe that, then I have a bridge to sell to you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## caramelize126

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, he spent years with Chelsey (who didn't want such a public role, but wasn't crazy, vulgar or a golddigger from what I gather). Not sure where he took the completely wrong turn.



Chelsy was very private and grew up in a very wealthy but tight knit family. She was just as crazy as Harry when they were younger but the difference is that she grew out of it. That phase in your teens/early 20s. I guess Harry never did, went to a bad place, and thats when MM showed up?

Does anyone remember when chelsy and harry broke up? Did his heavy alcohol/drug use begin after the breakup?


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> *I was actually wondering why she's trying to do a career revival...* she's all over the place these days. No one seems that interested here, but she was also in the news cycle recently for her Elliott Page interview, which was also very provocative obviously. I didn't watch it though. Maybe got bored in retirement?



My guess: EGO

She was at the top of her game for many years. She couldn't have been more successful. Now all that is being forgotten as younger generations are coming up. She wants to get back to that position of power and influence. In her mind she must have something left to prove.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lenna.V said:


> Yes it was very unusual for me at first too. Not going to lie, once I thought he wasn't serious about me that's why he didn't let me know his family. Although they still have some kind of relationship I can see that his family wasn't a happy place for him. So that's that. I would never want to see him unhappy. And he is now became almost like my mom other son, so it's a win win for me because I have witnessed too many messy in-laws relationship in my life do not wish to have one myself hahaha
> 
> As for H even for me is hard to understand, as *I gather from everything we know about her she have fairly good relationship with her dad. I really really curious how Meghan managed to do that.*


I think she has a good relationship with anyone she feels can further her and benefit her.  I feel like you can easily see a child's future personality as an adult, because although they may change, it's often expressed early on.  My daughter had an acquaintance in first grade who was the most manipulative girl I've ever met.  I was actually shocked to see her in action.  She would sweet talk other girls into giving her things, and then once she got them, she would move on to her next "friend" ie victim.  I was appalled and kind of fascinated to see that in someone so young.  Nine years later, she's even worse!  I imagine Meg being the same.  Probably batted her eyelashes and told Daddy how much she loved him.  She's since literally milked him for all he had, and he served no further purpose.


----------



## bag-mania

caramelize126 said:


> Does anyone remember when chelsy and harry broke up? Did his heavy alcohol/drug use begin after the breakup?



They had ended it by the beginning of 2009. All the speculated reasons aside, I think they were in their 20s and Harry wasn't ready to settle down and take it to the next level. I saw in some article that Chelsy was called "_the right person at the wrong time_" for Harry. In that sense Harry was much like his father. Charles and Camilla met when he was in his early 20s.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> They had ended it by the beginning of 2009. All the speculated reasons aside, I think they were in their 20s and Harry wasn't ready to settle down and take it to the next level. I saw in some article that Chelsy was called "_the right person at the wrong time_" for Harry. In that sense Harry was much like his father. Charles and Camilla met when he was in his early 20s.


It was Chelsy who did the dumping not Harry


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> It was Chelsy who did the dumping not Harry



I know. I think she got sick of waiting for him to grow up. He wasn't making the effort for her that he would later fall all over himself to make for Meghan.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> I know. I think she got sick of waiting for him to grow up. He wasn't making the effort for her that he would later fall all over himself to make for Meghan.


She didn’t want the attention associated with the RF.  It was said she saw what happened to Kate and had no appetite for it.


----------



## jehaga

gelbergirl said:


> ... I wonder what last name they are using?  when they signed their mortgage and all that, legally


And what photo ID was used to verify identity to the notary public?
Also wonder what names are on their passports?


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> She didn’t want the attention associated with the RF.  It was said she saw what happened to Kate and had no appetite for it.



That too, that was the reason she gave publicly when they briefly tried it again in 2015. In the earlier years of their relationship they just were not that solid a couple. The tabloids were always reporting whenever Harry was seen at a party with other women. Those girls might not have meant anything to Harry but it couldn't help but be a source of consternation for Chelsy. The broke up for a little while in 2007 and I think that was due to gossip about him with another girl.


----------



## youngster

lalame said:


> I was actually wondering why she's trying to do a career revival... she's all over the place these days. No one seems that interested here, but she was also in the news cycle recently for her Elliott Page interview, which was also very provocative obviously. I didn't watch it though. Maybe got bored in retirement?



She may be bored but I also think when a person has been famous, even briefly, it's like a drug and she was on top for a really long time. So, it must be hard to let it go and feel your fame fading away.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Maybe they started off with a really low base figure. I did a module on "Discerning Fact from Fiction in Statistics" and one marketing ploy mentioned was to use percentages when the actual number isn't that impressive. If they only had 4 subscribers, just one new subscriber would be a 25% rise.


Oh that's interesting.  So to truly get an idea of the increase, the actual baseline number should be included?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

caramelize126 said:


> Chelsy was very private and grew up in a very wealthy but tight knit family. She was just as crazy as Harry when they were younger but the difference is that she grew out of it. That phase in your teens/early 20s. I guess Harry never did, went to a bad place, and thats when MM showed up?
> 
> Does anyone remember when chelsy and harry broke up? Did his heavy alcohol/drug use begin after the breakup?



Define crazy, though. I was more thinking along the lines of Duchess Disney crazy, not partying too much while in your 20s.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I think she has a good relationship with anyone she feels can further her and benefit her.  I feel like you can easily see a child's future personality as an adult, because although they may change, it's often expressed early on.  My daughter had an acquaintance in first grade who was the most manipulative girl I've ever met.  I was actually shocked to see her in action.  She would sweet talk other girls into giving her things, and then once she got them, she would move on to her next "friend" ie victim.  I was appalled and kind of fascinated to see that in someone so young.  Nine years later, she's even worse!  I imagine Meg being the same.  Probably batted her eyelashes and told Daddy how much she loved him.  She's since literally milked him for all he had, and he served no further purpose.



Oh yeah.

I have mentioned it before, anyone remember that Iranian-American reality TV guy who went to her sister highschool or whatever it's called (as hers was girls only)? He shared a tidbit about 16yo Raptor walking up to him, sitting down on his lap, bringing her face within half an inch of his and whispering "You're so beautiful" in Farsi (which she didn't speak, so made the effort). Then got up and walked away.

I feel this tiny incident tells A LOT about her character and her calculating and manipulative ways from a very young age.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh yeah.
> 
> I have mentioned it before, anyone remember that Iranian-American reality TV guy who went to her sister highschool or whatever it's called (as hers was girls only)? He shared a tidbit about 16yo Raptor walking up to him, sitting down on his lap, bringing her face within half an inch of his and whispering "You're so beautiful" in Farsi (which she didn't speak, so made the effort). Then got up and walked away.
> 
> I feel this tiny incident tells A LOT about her character and her calculating and manipulative ways from a very young age.


Oh yes...from Shahs of Sunset, right?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> My guess: EGO
> 
> She was at the top of her game for many years. She couldn't have been more successful. Now all that is being forgotten as younger generations are coming up. She wants to get back to that position of power and influence. In her mind she must have something left to prove.


If you've seen Oprah's background story, you can see how very ambitious she was.  She started out on local news and wanted to be a big star.  She wasn't very attractive back then - looks better now IMO.  But she just had Big Ambition and big dreams and she made it happen.  So that is her core.  She is now really a huge star and a household name but at her core, she still wants to be relevant and important.  Basically I'm agreeing with you.  I don't know if she will every go back to trying to entertain but I'm not really a huge fan of what she's doing now.
And I say this as a person who mostly likes her.  I was very impressed with that speech she gave at the Oscars a few years back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> If anybody would believe that, then I have a bridge to sell to you!



I'll pass on the bridge, but let me know when you'll have Nott Cott for sale.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If you've seen Oprah's background story, you can see how very ambitious she was.  She started out on local news and wanted to be a big star.  She wasn't very attractive back then - looks better now IMO.  But she just had Big Ambition and big dreams and she made it happen.  So that is her core.  She is now really a huge star and a household name but at her core, she still wants to be relevant and important.  Basically I'm agreeing with you.  I don't know if she will every go back to trying to entertain but I'm not really a huge fan of what she's doing now.
> And I say this as a person who mostly likes her.  I was very impressed with that speech she gave at the Oscars a few years back.



I was a kid when she was on the local noon news in Baltimore and she was awful. I remember my mother getting frustrated watching Oprah try to read news stories because she would make so many mistakes. 

The talk show format really is where she's at her best. Lucky for her she didn't keep trying to make it as a news anchor.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Aw, when I clicked on the link they have updated the article to say that the Bianca & Prince Aston level has been removed.
> 
> Kim is claiming she was unaware this level had been added the game. I actually believe that could be true. In the vast Kardashian merch empire, a little phone game isn't going to get much attention from the family. And game designers and programmers love to have fun with their creations.
> 
> A source close to Kim told DailyMail.com that the reality star was not aware of the storyline of the Royal Runaways game until Tuesday - and 'immediately took steps to ensure it was taken down.'
> 
> 'She is disappointed that this happened and has requested an internal investigation to ensure that this misstep doesn’t happen again,' the source told us.


I’m disappointed they closed it down before I could buy the moon bump booster pack but I had to keep saving for fillers and corn plasters  

Yeah goodness knows how much any K pays attention to any of their products. At least Oprah would wear her favourite thing  


Jayne1 said:


> Oh that's interesting.  So to truly get an idea of the increase, the actual baseline number should be included?



no way is Apple TV releasing those numbers - we all know it’s been a total embarrassment for them


----------



## lalame

Yeah I like Oprah as a person but I was never really a fan of her talk show. Too fluffy. But that's also why I'm not that surprised or really see it negatively what she did with H/M... that's always been her lane. You wouldn't watch her for hard hitting journalism.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> According to Page Six, "_Prince Harry has some explaining to do._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photos of Prince Harry on a bike resurface after claim he ‘never’ rode
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex claimed he “was never able” to ride a bike with his dad, Prince Charles, but old photos show him doing just that many years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



It took them almost three months to find out the truth. They should consult us - it took us only three days.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Oh, don't get me started on the Colonel. The way he took advantage of Elvis' trust and loyalty was criminal. If Tom Parker was alive in today's social media environment I bet he could give Harry and Meghan lessons on grifting beyond anything they could imagine.



He truly was a piece of you know what a vile man - he racked up millions of gambling debts and blackmailed Elvis into paying them off - he didn’t give a damn about Elvis the man as evidenced when he got the call to say Elvis had died - he set about copyrighting everything so he could make as much money as possible in the days after the death as he was heard to have said Elvis didn’t die the body died ... he was still fleecing him even then


----------



## Hermes Zen

This The Sun article came out last week.  I live in So Cal part-time but haven't been back for 1 1/2 yrs. I am very aware of the annual fire threats. I was once years ago to close to one fire. Thankfully the wind changed direction. Anyway, H&M will need to be aware and prepared if need be.




> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14994114/prince-harry-meghan-markle-montecito-home-threat-wildfires/


ROYAL DANGER *Prince Harry and Meghan’s $14.7m Montecito home under threat of ‘severe wildfires’ with neighbors ‘worried sick’*


Katy Forrester
Karleigh Smith

15:48, 18 May 2021
Updated: 16:13, 18 May 2021
PRINCE Harry and Meghan's $14.7million home is at risk of "severe wildfires" with neighbors "worried sick" after one of the one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade, The Sun can exclusively reveal.
The royal couple, who relocated from Britain to sunny California last year, bought a stunning home in a celebrity enclave in Montecito, where they live with their two-year-old son, Archie.



8
Meghan and Harry relocated to the US after stepping down as senior royalsCredit: Getty



8
The pair now live in a luxury mansion in Montecito with celebrity neighborsCredit: Google Earth
But despite their 18,000-square-foot modern property being set in lush green surroundings away from the hustle and bustle of the city, it's not the ideal location when it comes to safety. 
With Meghan heavily pregnant, they may end up evacuating with their newborn daughter, their toddler son and beloved pets, after officials delivered a stark warning this month.
Christina Favuzzi, Montecito Fire Public Information Officer, exclusively told The Sun homeowners such as Meghan and Harry should prepare for the worst.
She said: "We are facing concerning conditions in terms of record-low fuel moistures and predicted weather patterns. Those factors could lead to a severe fire season. 

"On [Meghan and Harry's road] and in all areas of the Montecito Fire Protection District, we have been conducting extensive wildfire prevention work in order to educate, prepare and protect our community.

"By this time last year, Montecito had received more than 17 inches of rain, according to the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, marking an average rainfall year.
"So far in 2021, our community has received about 10 inches of rain, making this one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade."
A number of major celebrities also live close to The Sussexes, including Oprah and newly-married Ariana Grande and her husband Dalton Gomez. 

The Montecito Fire Department declared May 3 the start of high fire season - two weeks early.
Santa Barbara County Fire also revealed the 2020/21 season yielded just 47 per cent of the normal rainfall.
Captain Daniel Bertucelli from the department told The Sun: "We have been in drought-like conditions for quite some time, nobody has a crystal ball as to how it's going to play out. 
"I heard Prince Harry and Meghan moved up here, the fire department doesn't give any preferential treatment to celebrities, every single person in our community is 100 per cent equal. 




8
The couple have been advised to educate themselves on the ready, set, go programCredit: AFP
"And from what I've read, that's exactly why they moved here, to be treated just like normal people, they can follow all the same advice we have been giving others ahead of this season."
He explained the pair will have to educate themselves on the 'Ready, Set, Go' program, which is state-wide and helps homeowners living in high fire hazard areas to prepare for disaster. 
"They need to provide 100 feet of defensible space around their house, and harden their home in case of a wind-driven fire where there are embers flying through the air," he said. 
"Most homes don't burn down from the fire front itself, they burn down from the embers that are flying through the air upwards of one mile in front of the fire. 




8
A source told The Sun neighbors are worried sick after the region only had 47 per cent of normal rain fallCredit: AFP or licensors



8
Shocking photographs from previous fires show Ventura County burning in a large infernoCredit: Ventura County Fire Department
"They should have their stuff set to go and have a plan in place, a meeting point if everyone is not home at the time. They should pack stuff that's irreplaceable. 
"Then if they are told to go, go without hesitation. More important than that, if they feel uncomfortable and want to go, but the authorities haven't said to yet, just go anyway. Do not wait."
A local source, who lives close to Harry and Meghan, told The Sun they are extremely worried and described the whole region as a "tinder box". 
"The Sussexes' place is right in the firing line, unfortunately," they said. 




8
Harry and Meghan live in Montecito with their son Archie and are expecting a baby girlCredit: Getty
"They live in the foothills of Montecito where there are hundreds of stands of eucalyptus that tend to explode because they’re full of oil, rather than merely burn. 
"A lot of people in our neighborhood are on edge, worried sick about how bad this fire season will be. 
"People who’ve just moved to the area won’t realize how bad it’s looking, but it’s about as bad as it can be. 
"It's just so dry, aside from all the rich people's lush lawns, of course. 

"At this time of year the hills should be a beautiful green, but they're still just brown. It's a truly scary sight if you've lived around here long enough.



8
Fire departments are warning local residents to be prepared for evacuation this summerCredit: EPA
“You only have to mention the Thomas Fire and the Santa Barbara landslides from a few years ago and locals' eyes are filled with fear. 
"There's still a lot of trauma and a lot of people still aren't back in their homes after having them destroyed.
“Meghan was in the UK for a lot of the most recent fires in Southern California, but hopefully she hasn’t forgotten what kids here learn from a young age about being ready to evacuate in the event of a fire or an earthquake. "

It is not known if Meghan and Harry would hire their own private firefighters, although many celebrities have done so in the past, including The Kardashians. 
Kim and her estranged husband Kanye West reportedly hired their own team to save their $60million mansion in Hidden Hills as fires ravaged the area back in 2018. 

The source added that Southern California might be beautiful, but thanks to the fires, earthquakes and mudslides, it's "not for the uninitiated or unprepared."
"Prince Harry, growing up in the flat, green pastures of Windsor and lush parks of Kensington, will likely never have felt the fear of seeing a roaring inferno racing toward your home," they said. 

"Let's hope that, unlike most of his neighbors around here, he never does."


----------



## V0N1B2

Rich people problems


----------



## lalame

I feel really bad for Ventura County residents (most of whom are not rich actually)... if it's not fire, it's earthquake or flooding it seems like.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Voyeurs not viewers



 Literally car-crash TV rubberneckers


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> This The Sun article came out last week.  I live in So Cal part-time but haven't been back for 1 1/2 yrs. I am very aware of the annual fire threats. I was once years ago to close to one fire. Thankfully the wind changed direction. Anyway, H&M will need to be aware and prepared if need be.
> 
> 
> 
> ROYAL DANGER *Prince Harry and Meghan’s $14.7m Montecito home under threat of ‘severe wildfires’ with neighbors ‘worried sick’*
> 
> 
> Katy Forrester
> Karleigh Smith
> 15:48, 18 May 2021
> Updated: 16:13, 18 May 2021
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan's $14.7million home is at risk of "severe wildfires" with neighbors "worried sick" after one of the one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade, The Sun can exclusively reveal.
> The royal couple, who relocated from Britain to sunny California last year, bought a stunning home in a celebrity enclave in Montecito, where they live with their two-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Meghan and Harry relocated to the US after stepping down as senior royalsCredit: Getty
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> The pair now live in a luxury mansion in Montecito with celebrity neighborsCredit: Google Earth
> But despite their 18,000-square-foot modern property being set in lush green surroundings away from the hustle and bustle of the city, it's not the ideal location when it comes to safety.
> With Meghan heavily pregnant, they may end up evacuating with their newborn daughter, their toddler son and beloved pets, after officials delivered a stark warning this month.
> Christina Favuzzi, Montecito Fire Public Information Officer, exclusively told The Sun homeowners such as Meghan and Harry should prepare for the worst.
> She said: "We are facing concerning conditions in terms of record-low fuel moistures and predicted weather patterns. Those factors could lead to a severe fire season.
> 
> "On [Meghan and Harry's road] and in all areas of the Montecito Fire Protection District, we have been conducting extensive wildfire prevention work in order to educate, prepare and protect our community.
> 
> "By this time last year, Montecito had received more than 17 inches of rain, according to the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, marking an average rainfall year.
> "So far in 2021, our community has received about 10 inches of rain, making this one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade."
> A number of major celebrities also live close to The Sussexes, including Oprah and newly-married Ariana Grande and her husband Dalton Gomez.
> 
> The Montecito Fire Department declared May 3 the start of high fire season - two weeks early.
> Santa Barbara County Fire also revealed the 2020/21 season yielded just 47 per cent of the normal rainfall.
> Captain Daniel Bertucelli from the department told The Sun: "We have been in drought-like conditions for quite some time, nobody has a crystal ball as to how it's going to play out.
> "I heard Prince Harry and Meghan moved up here, the fire department doesn't give any preferential treatment to celebrities, every single person in our community is 100 per cent equal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> The couple have been advised to educate themselves on the ready, set, go programCredit: AFP
> "And from what I've read, that's exactly why they moved here, to be treated just like normal people, they can follow all the same advice we have been giving others ahead of this season."
> He explained the pair will have to educate themselves on the 'Ready, Set, Go' program, which is state-wide and helps homeowners living in high fire hazard areas to prepare for disaster.
> "They need to provide 100 feet of defensible space around their house, and harden their home in case of a wind-driven fire where there are embers flying through the air," he said.
> "Most homes don't burn down from the fire front itself, they burn down from the embers that are flying through the air upwards of one mile in front of the fire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> A source told The Sun neighbors are worried sick after the region only had 47 per cent of normal rain fallCredit: AFP or licensors
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Shocking photographs from previous fires show Ventura County burning in a large infernoCredit: Ventura County Fire Department
> "They should have their stuff set to go and have a plan in place, a meeting point if everyone is not home at the time. They should pack stuff that's irreplaceable.
> "Then if they are told to go, go without hesitation. More important than that, if they feel uncomfortable and want to go, but the authorities haven't said to yet, just go anyway. Do not wait."
> A local source, who lives close to Harry and Meghan, told The Sun they are extremely worried and described the whole region as a "tinder box".
> "The Sussexes' place is right in the firing line, unfortunately," they said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Harry and Meghan live in Montecito with their son Archie and are expecting a baby girlCredit: Getty
> "They live in the foothills of Montecito where there are hundreds of stands of eucalyptus that tend to explode because they’re full of oil, rather than merely burn.
> "A lot of people in our neighborhood are on edge, worried sick about how bad this fire season will be.
> "People who’ve just moved to the area won’t realize how bad it’s looking, but it’s about as bad as it can be.
> "It's just so dry, aside from all the rich people's lush lawns, of course.
> 
> "At this time of year the hills should be a beautiful green, but they're still just brown. It's a truly scary sight if you've lived around here long enough.
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Fire departments are warning local residents to be prepared for evacuation this summerCredit: EPA
> “You only have to mention the Thomas Fire and the Santa Barbara landslides from a few years ago and locals' eyes are filled with fear.
> "There's still a lot of trauma and a lot of people still aren't back in their homes after having them destroyed.
> “Meghan was in the UK for a lot of the most recent fires in Southern California, but hopefully she hasn’t forgotten what kids here learn from a young age about being ready to evacuate in the event of a fire or an earthquake. "
> 
> It is not known if Meghan and Harry would hire their own private firefighters, although many celebrities have done so in the past, including The Kardashians.
> Kim and her estranged husband Kanye West reportedly hired their own team to save their $60million mansion in Hidden Hills as fires ravaged the area back in 2018.
> 
> The source added that Southern California might be beautiful, but thanks to the fires, earthquakes and mudslides, it's "not for the uninitiated or unprepared."
> "Prince Harry, growing up in the flat, green pastures of Windsor and lush parks of Kensington, will likely never have felt the fear of seeing a roaring inferno racing toward your home," they said.
> 
> "Let's hope that, unlike most of his neighbors around here, he never does."


They need to spend some dollars to make their 16 (or 19) toilet mansion more resistant to wildfires. While I'm very concerned with the fires in California, I'm not particularly worried with Ginger or Cringe; they can evacuate to one of the several Oprah's luxurious mansions.


----------



## queennadine

Sorry because I know this was discussed previously: when did that last b&w pic get released? She’s easily 7-8 months pregnant there, so I’m wondering if she’s had the baby.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Literally car-crash TV rubberneckers


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> If you've seen Oprah's background story, you can see how very ambitious she was.  She started out on local news and wanted to be a big star.  She wasn't very attractive back then - looks better now IMO.  *But she just had Big Ambition and big dreams and she made it happen.  So that is her core.  She is now really a huge star and a household name but at her core, she still wants to be relevant and important. * Basically I'm agreeing with you.  I don't know if she will every go back to trying to entertain but I'm not really a huge fan of what she's doing now.
> And I say this as a person who mostly likes her.  I was very impressed with that speech she gave at the Oscars a few years back.


With the exception of the huge star part, you could be describing MM.  Oprah and MM took different paths to achieve what they wanted.  MM used the scorched earth approach to make it happen for her.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> It's all about cash???? I didn't contribute to the 25% rise...
> 
> _*Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey will reunite again this Friday to revisit their Apple TV+ documentary about mental health with a virtual follow-up discussion one week later.*
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the five-part programme including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward'.
> 
> It comes after Apple said the series, which began streaming last Friday, had brought a 25 per cent rise in new viewers to the platform and a more than 40 per cent increase in average weekend viewership in the UK last week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah will host ANOTHER Apple TV+ show this FRIDAY
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will speak to Oprah and other celebrities involved in the series including actress Glenn Close as they reveal more about their stories in 'The Me You Can't See: A Path Forward' this Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


The viewers flock there to see the train wreck.  After the flood of lies and accusations they hope to hear something even more shocking, but I think M really has to let her fantasy fly to come up with something more damaging than what they had already told.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> With the exception of the huge star part, you could be describing MM.  Oprah and MM took different paths to achieve what they wanted.  MM used the scorched earth approach to make it happen for her.


maybe in some ways but Oprah worked hard....Meghan networked hard


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> maybe in some ways but Oprah worked hard....Meghan networked hard


I agree 100%.


----------



## csshopper

V0N1B2 said:


> Rich people problems





No, in California drought and fire danger is universal here, the rich and the homeless under the same threat. I am not rich, am in that very dark area (worst level). Official fire season was declared last week, months earlier than normal. Already on water reduction and per directions from city, county, and local fire district have what are referred to Go Bags ready just in case. Legal documents, medications, water, food, chargers for electronics etc. Lists made. Did it last year (which was bad, but nothing like this . We are 20” below our normal rainfall) and know how critical it is to be prepared when the alarm notice bleats on the phone. Last year the order came @ 11:30 PM. Spent 5 nights sweating it out. Was lucky, for fire came within 25’. As we are frequently reminded, it can burn again in the same area. Drought, record setting heat, and high winds are a potentially devastating trio.

Back on topic, the Markles are in the Severe Drought range. Not good,  but, waaay better than most of the rest of us.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wow, seeing the picture of that McMansion again, it really is quite obscene. Maybe they bought it because it's bigger than Anmer Hall.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> I agree 100%.


and also Oprah grew up poor and abused while M grew up pretty privileged.....more so than the average young woman


----------



## bag-mania

queennadine said:


> Sorry because I know this was discussed previously: when did that last b&w pic get released? She’s easily 7-8 months pregnant there, so I’m wondering if she’s had the baby.



The one with the floral dress? It was published the first week of March, around the time the Oprah interview aired. We can safely say it's a moon bump or other padding, not a baby.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> and also Oprah grew up poor and abused while M grew up pretty privileged.....more so than the average young woman


You’re right.   I think they want(ed) the same thing, just went about getting it in a different way.  Like you said, Oprah worked and MM networked. Once MM was where she wanted to be the gloves came off. Lots of collateral damage, including Archie.  I can’t imagine how it would feel to learn my mother contemplated suicide while carrying me.  I’ve yet to read where she said what stopped her was her love and concern for her baby.  Maybe I missed that part.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> You’re right.   I think they want(ed) the same thing, just went about getting it in a different way.  Like you said, Oprah worked and MM networked. Once MM was where she wanted to be the gloves came off. Lots of collateral damage, including Archie.  I can’t imagine how it would feel to learn my mother contemplated suicide while carrying me.  I’ve yet to read where she said what stopped her was her love and concern for her baby.  Maybe I missed that part.


don't worry.  Archie will be told and will believe that his mom was the victim.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Literally car-crash TV rubberneckers


This sudden influx of mental health interview reality shows reminds me of the ‘supersize vs super skinny’ and obesity reality shows of the 00s which had a gloss of a little science to them and were all about ‘raising awareness’

I do wonder if a few years down the line doctors will take the same dim view of these mental health shows they now do of the latter.

Add on- for what it’s worth I actually think it sounds like the obesity shows were better at providing solid advice for losing weight than the ‘rich people suffer too’ line is for dealing with mental health problems.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> don't worry.  Archie will be told and will believe that his mom was the victim.


Another Harry in the making?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> This sudden influx of mental health interview reality shows reminds me of the ‘supersize vs super skinny’ and obesity reality shows of the 00s which had a gloss of a little science to them and were all about ‘raising awareness’
> 
> I do wonder if a few years down the line doctors will take the same dim view of these mental health shows they now do of the latter.



Apparently, he asked the Queen years ago if he could do a programme on mental health, she agreed, as she thought he was going to narrate something to help war veterans. I'm sure this was far from anything she ever envisioned.


----------



## Sol Ryan

1LV said:


> You’re right.   I think they want(ed) the same thing, just went about getting it in a different way.  Like you said, Oprah worked and MM networked. Once MM was where she wanted to be the gloves came off. Lots of collateral damage, including Archie.  I can’t imagine how it would feel to learn my mother contemplated suicide while carrying me.  I’ve yet to read where she said what stopped her was her love and concern for her baby.  Maybe I missed that part.



I wonder if he’s going to be home schooled because you know no matter what school he goes to (public or private) the kids will tear him apart for that... “Your mom wanted to kill you...” that’s Kanye level....

I can’t imagine saying that in public, let alone in international television.... he’s going to see that. You tell your therapist stuff like that... not the public.  Poor Archie...

This is why people shouldn’t air their dirty laundry everywhere. The internet is forever...


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Apparently, he asked the Queen years ago if he could do a programme on mental health, she agreed, as she thought he was going to narrate something to help war veterans. I'm sure this was far from anything she ever envisioned.


I can only imagine.  she was probably picturing something like that Covid documentary they did. 
She must have known there’d be a flavour of selfish posture coming up after the Africa doc and given he takes after Charles who’s been known to whine too 

Actually I wouldn’t be surprised if what she agreed to was the groundwork for that invictus games documentary and they repivoted and repackaged it after the long goodbye.


----------



## DeMonica

Hermes Zen said:


> This The Sun article came out last week.  I live in So Cal part-time but haven't been back for 1 1/2 yrs. I am very aware of the annual fire threats. I was once years ago to close to one fire. Thankfully the wind changed direction. Anyway, H&M will need to be aware and prepared if need be.
> 
> 
> 
> ROYAL DANGER *Prince Harry and Meghan’s $14.7m Montecito home under threat of ‘severe wildfires’ with neighbors ‘worried sick’*
> 
> 
> Katy Forrester
> Karleigh Smith
> 15:48, 18 May 2021
> Updated: 16:13, 18 May 2021
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan's $14.7million home is at risk of "severe wildfires" with neighbors "worried sick" after one of the one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade, The Sun can exclusively reveal.
> The royal couple, who relocated from Britain to sunny California last year, bought a stunning home in a celebrity enclave in Montecito, where they live with their two-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Meghan and Harry relocated to the US after stepping down as senior royalsCredit: Getty
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> The pair now live in a luxury mansion in Montecito with celebrity neighborsCredit: Google Earth
> But despite their 18,000-square-foot modern property being set in lush green surroundings away from the hustle and bustle of the city, it's not the ideal location when it comes to safety.
> With Meghan heavily pregnant, they may end up evacuating with their newborn daughter, their toddler son and beloved pets, after officials delivered a stark warning this month.
> Christina Favuzzi, Montecito Fire Public Information Officer, exclusively told The Sun homeowners such as Meghan and Harry should prepare for the worst.
> She said: "We are facing concerning conditions in terms of record-low fuel moistures and predicted weather patterns. Those factors could lead to a severe fire season.
> 
> "On [Meghan and Harry's road] and in all areas of the Montecito Fire Protection District, we have been conducting extensive wildfire prevention work in order to educate, prepare and protect our community.
> 
> "By this time last year, Montecito had received more than 17 inches of rain, according to the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, marking an average rainfall year.
> "So far in 2021, our community has received about 10 inches of rain, making this one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade."
> A number of major celebrities also live close to The Sussexes, including Oprah and newly-married Ariana Grande and her husband Dalton Gomez.
> 
> The Montecito Fire Department declared May 3 the start of high fire season - two weeks early.
> Santa Barbara County Fire also revealed the 2020/21 season yielded just 47 per cent of the normal rainfall.
> Captain Daniel Bertucelli from the department told The Sun: "We have been in drought-like conditions for quite some time, nobody has a crystal ball as to how it's going to play out.
> "I heard Prince Harry and Meghan moved up here, the fire department doesn't give any preferential treatment to celebrities, every single person in our community is 100 per cent equal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> The couple have been advised to educate themselves on the ready, set, go programCredit: AFP
> "And from what I've read, that's exactly why they moved here, to be treated just like normal people, they can follow all the same advice we have been giving others ahead of this season."
> He explained the pair will have to educate themselves on the 'Ready, Set, Go' program, which is state-wide and helps homeowners living in high fire hazard areas to prepare for disaster.
> "They need to provide 100 feet of defensible space around their house, and harden their home in case of a wind-driven fire where there are embers flying through the air," he said.
> "Most homes don't burn down from the fire front itself, they burn down from the embers that are flying through the air upwards of one mile in front of the fire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> A source told The Sun neighbors are worried sick after the region only had 47 per cent of normal rain fallCredit: AFP or licensors
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Shocking photographs from previous fires show Ventura County burning in a large infernoCredit: Ventura County Fire Department
> "They should have their stuff set to go and have a plan in place, a meeting point if everyone is not home at the time. They should pack stuff that's irreplaceable.
> "Then if they are told to go, go without hesitation. More important than that, if they feel uncomfortable and want to go, but the authorities haven't said to yet, just go anyway. Do not wait."
> A local source, who lives close to Harry and Meghan, told The Sun they are extremely worried and described the whole region as a "tinder box".
> "The Sussexes' place is right in the firing line, unfortunately," they said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Harry and Meghan live in Montecito with their son Archie and are expecting a baby girlCredit: Getty
> "They live in the foothills of Montecito where there are hundreds of stands of eucalyptus that tend to explode because they’re full of oil, rather than merely burn.
> "A lot of people in our neighborhood are on edge, worried sick about how bad this fire season will be.
> "People who’ve just moved to the area won’t realize how bad it’s looking, but it’s about as bad as it can be.
> "It's just so dry, aside from all the rich people's lush lawns, of course.
> 
> "At this time of year the hills should be a beautiful green, but they're still just brown. It's a truly scary sight if you've lived around here long enough.
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Fire departments are warning local residents to be prepared for evacuation this summerCredit: EPA
> “You only have to mention the Thomas Fire and the Santa Barbara landslides from a few years ago and locals' eyes are filled with fear.
> "There's still a lot of trauma and a lot of people still aren't back in their homes after having them destroyed.
> “Meghan was in the UK for a lot of the most recent fires in Southern California, but hopefully she hasn’t forgotten what kids here learn from a young age about being ready to evacuate in the event of a fire or an earthquake. "
> 
> It is not known if Meghan and Harry would hire their own private firefighters, although many celebrities have done so in the past, including The Kardashians.
> Kim and her estranged husband Kanye West reportedly hired their own team to save their $60million mansion in Hidden Hills as fires ravaged the area back in 2018.
> 
> The source added that Southern California might be beautiful, but thanks to the fires, earthquakes and mudslides, it's "not for the uninitiated or unprepared."
> "Prince Harry, growing up in the flat, green pastures of Windsor and lush parks of Kensington, will likely never have felt the fear of seeing a roaring inferno racing toward your home," they said.
> 
> "Let's hope that, unlike most of his neighbors around here, he never does."


The fire in Windsor in 1992 was pretty bad, too. So Haz probably saw what fires can do but it wouldn't deter the Disney Duo from relocating to the most fire hazardous area if they can rub shoulders with A-listers and have the puppet master within arm's reach.


----------



## Nat334

papertiger said:


> Apparently, he asked the Queen years ago if he could do a programme on mental health, she agreed, as she thought he was going to narrate something to help war veterans. I'm sure this was far from anything she ever envisioned.



Ironically, an adult being required to ask his grandmother's permission to do something professionally, is a perfect recipe for poor mental health.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
> Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #161 in Children's Emotions Books
> #420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


HA HA HA HA HA .. what the hell??? .. I was left *HOWLING *at this nonsense, seriously????  I know that Doria is very friendly with Marianne Williamson (_you know - the "spiritual" healer_), but this sounds more like Doria on weed!  

I just spoke to my friend whose family were very good friends with Meghan and Thomas (_back in the days_), and when I told her about this one she said "_WHAT THE F? .. oh is Meghan referring to the very few times that Thomas might have said 'NO' to her in regards to her saying that they come from a long lineage of pain & suffering_"????


----------



## papertiger

Nat334 said:


> Ironically, an adult being required to ask his grandmother's permission to do something professionally, is a perfect recipe for poor mental health.



She wasn't just his grandmother, she was his boss. It's the family firm. I always check with my boss if I have a new initiative, most people would.


----------



## Nat334

papertiger said:


> She wasn't just his grandmother, she was his boss. It's the family firm. I always check with my boss if I have a new initiative, most people would.



I guess so, but the suppressed resentment appears to be manifesting nowadays.


----------



## DeMonica

1LV said:


> Another Harry in the making?


Hopefully not. Diana threw herself down the stairs while pregnant with William. He seems to be very stable despite of that accident and his childhood which was far from ideal.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> I wonder if he’s going to be home schooled because you know no matter what school he goes to (public or private) the kids will tear him apart for that... “Your mom wanted to kill you...” that’s Kanye level....
> 
> I can’t imagine saying that in public, let alone in international television.... he’s going to see that. You tell your therapist stuff like that... not the public.  Poor Archie...
> 
> This is why people shouldn’t air their dirty laundry everywhere. The internet is forever...


It’s worse than Joan ‘maybe I adopted you for a little publicity!’
Crawford level.

The fact she could casually speak about  that to her partner even speaks volumes about her manipulative nature.
 You’d think anyone with even an iota of awareness would realise that thinking about your partner and child nearly dying would be extremely upsetting- especially if that person is also apparently mentally ill himself & even more so given he seems to have some sort of hang-up that his wife is also doomed to a premature end.

Never mind the fact her child will one day hear it.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

1LV said:


> Another Harry in the making?


Poor little guy. I hope at least Harry comes back to whatever senses he had.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Nat334 said:


> Ironically, an adult being required to ask his grandmother's permission to do something professionally, is a perfect recipe for poor mental health.


I really disagree. There’s no one relationship dynamic that guarantees mental illness. After all we are often being told someone can have everything and still be mentally ill.

I also don’t think it’s a weird paradigm to ask to use a relative’s assets which is essentially what he’d be doing. 
On a much smaller scale, I’d ask before borrowing my grandma’s car even if I was driving it to work.


----------



## DeMonica

Nat334 said:


> I guess so, but the suppressed resentment appears to be manifesting nowadays.


He's resentful about great many things, one more or one less doesn't make much difference. Haz is an angry man.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> Hopefully not. Diana threw herself down the stairs while pregnant with William. He seems to be very stable despite of that accident and his childhood which was far from ideal.



Meghan told Oprah she thought about suicide. Given her history of lying who knows if that really happened. There's the truth and then there's Meghan's truth.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Meghan told Oprah she thought about suicide. Given her history of lying who knows if that really happened. There's the truth and then there's Meghan's truth.


Talking about suicide in the narrative she did is awful. Oprah helped her with the "did you consider suicide?" questioning for drama. It's not a subject to be handled the way these fools did...pretending NO ONE would help them is a slap in the face to anyone who is really struggling (IMO)


----------



## Nat334

jelliedfeels said:


> I really disagree. There’s no one relationship dynamic that guarantees mental illness. After all we are often being told someone can have everything and still be mentally ill.
> 
> I also don’t think it’s a weird paradigm to ask to use a relative’s assets which is essentially what he’d be doing.
> On a much smaller scale, I’d ask before borrowing my grandma’s car even if I was driving it to work.



While I do agree in principle, Harry's situation is a bit different in that (until they made the break to Canada) he never had a choice in the matter: it seems that any professional move had to be approved by the Queen, whether he liked it or not.

In any regular 'family business' dynamic, the subordinate family member usually has the freedom to strike out on their own if they don't like the lack of independence.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Talking about suicide in the narrative she did is awful. Oprah helped her with the "did you consider suicide?" questioning for drama. It's not a subject to be handled the way these fools did...pretending NO ONE would help them is a slap in the face to anyone who is really struggling (IMO)



Do you think maybe they worked out that story together to make it a more compelling interview?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Nat334 said:


> While I do agree in principle, Harry's situation is a bit different in that (until they made the break to Canada) he never had a choice in the matter: it seems that any professional move had to be approved by the Queen, whether he liked it or not.
> 
> In any regular 'family business' dynamic, the subordinate family member usually has the freedom to strike out on their own if they don't like the lack of independence.


His cousins have jobs outside of the British royal firm. He’s not the heir so he could have chosen to work for someone else. Evidentially he could chose to leave the royal family at any time given he has done so now.
If anything they encouraged him to have his own projects, like invictus, with unlimited money to back him up. Most family businesses I’ve seen are a lot more limited in scope than that.

He wanted to have it both ways in my opinion. Just look at how he reacted to the suggestion Meghan could continue acting- when you’d think that’d be a chance for her to have independence. 
He wanted to complain about the onerous duties stripping him of his freedoms but he didn’t want the risks of the working world.


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> View attachment 5093736
> 
> No, in California drought and fire danger is universal here, the rich and the homeless under the same threat. I am not rich, am in that very dark area (worst level). Official fire season was declared last week, months earlier than normal. Already on water reduction and per directions from city, county, and local fire district have what are referred to Go Bags ready just in case. Legal documents, medications, water, food, chargers for electronics etc. Lists made. Did it last year (which was bad, but nothing like this . We are 20” below our normal rainfall) and know how critical it is to be prepared when the alarm notice bleats on the phone. Last year the order came @ 11:30 PM. Spent 5 nights sweating it out. Was lucky, for fire came within 25’. As we are frequently reminded, it can burn again in the same area. Drought, record setting heat, and high winds are a potentially devastating trio.
> 
> Back on topic, the Markles are in the Severe Drought range. Not good,  but, waaay better than most of the rest of us.



This year is going to be bad. Fire threat is more of a problem for non-wealthy.

H&M will benefit from likely better fire protection and response (wealthy folk area), and they have the money to afford fire insurance at the higher premiums, and the coverage/finances to rebuild and replace.

Most in high-risk fire areas have insurance non-renewed or offered little coverage at premiums they can't afford. When there is a fire... What would be a big inconvenience for H&M can be impossible to recover from for most.

Not to mention when the state does burn, the toxic smoke makes it impossible to go outside for weeks at a time. Even if you are hundreds of miles from a fire. It's awful. That's probably the biggest problem H&M will have to deal with this summer.

They can always move back to the UK if they don't like it


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> This The Sun article came out last week.  I live in So Cal part-time but haven't been back for 1 1/2 yrs. I am very aware of the annual fire threats. I was once years ago to close to one fire. Thankfully the wind changed direction. Anyway, H&M will need to be aware and prepared if need be.
> 
> 
> 
> ROYAL DANGER *Prince Harry and Meghan’s $14.7m Montecito home under threat of ‘severe wildfires’ with neighbors ‘worried sick’*
> 
> 
> Katy Forrester
> Karleigh Smith
> 15:48, 18 May 2021
> Updated: 16:13, 18 May 2021
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan's $14.7million home is at risk of "severe wildfires" with neighbors "worried sick" after one of the one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade, The Sun can exclusively reveal.
> The royal couple, who relocated from Britain to sunny California last year, bought a stunning home in a celebrity enclave in Montecito, where they live with their two-year-old son, Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> Meghan and Harry relocated to the US after stepping down as senior royalsCredit: Getty
> 
> 
> 
> 8
> The pair now live in a luxury mansion in Montecito with celebrity neighborsCredit: Google Earth
> But despite their 18,000-square-foot modern property being set in lush green surroundings away from the hustle and bustle of the city, it's not the ideal location when it comes to safety.
> With Meghan heavily pregnant, they may end up evacuating with their newborn daughter, their toddler son and beloved pets, after officials delivered a stark warning this month.
> Christina Favuzzi, Montecito Fire Public Information Officer, exclusively told The Sun homeowners such as Meghan and Harry should prepare for the worst.
> She said: "We are facing concerning conditions in terms of record-low fuel moistures and predicted weather patterns. Those factors could lead to a severe fire season.
> 
> "On [Meghan and Harry's road] and in all areas of the Montecito Fire Protection District, we have been conducting extensive wildfire prevention work in order to educate, prepare and protect our community.
> 
> "By this time last year, Montecito had received more than 17 inches of rain, according to the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, marking an average rainfall year.
> "So far in 2021, our community has received about 10 inches of rain, making this one of the driest rainfall years in the last decade."
> A number of major celebrities also live close to The Sussexes, including Oprah and newly-married Ariana Grande and her husband Dalton Gomez.
> 
> The Montecito Fire Department declared May 3 the start of high fire season - two weeks early.
> Santa Barbara County Fire also revealed the 2020/21 season yielded just 47 per cent of the normal rainfall.
> Captain Daniel Bertucelli from the department told The Sun: "We have been in drought-like conditions for quite some time, nobody has a crystal ball as to how it's going to play out.
> "I heard Prince Harry and Meghan moved up here, the fire department doesn't give any preferential treatment to celebrities, every single person in our community is 100 per cent equal.
> 
> 
> The couple have been advised to educate themselves on the ready, set, go programCredit: AFP
> "And from what I've read, that's exactly why they moved here, to be treated just like normal people, they can follow all the same advice we have been giving others ahead of this season."
> He explained the pair will have to educate themselves on the 'Ready, Set, Go' program, which is state-wide and helps homeowners living in high fire hazard areas to prepare for disaster.
> "They need to provide 100 feet of defensible space around their house, and harden their home in case of a wind-driven fire where there are embers flying through the air," he said.
> "Most homes don't burn down from the fire front itself, they burn down from the embers that are flying through the air upwards of one mile in front of the fire.
> 
> 
> A source told The Sun neighbors are worried sick after the region only had 47 per cent of normal rain fallCredit: AFP or licensors
> 
> Shocking photographs from previous fires show Ventura County burning in a large infernoCredit: Ventura County Fire Department
> "They should have their stuff set to go and have a plan in place, a meeting point if everyone is not home at the time. They should pack stuff that's irreplaceable.
> "Then if they are told to go, go without hesitation. More important than that, if they feel uncomfortable and want to go, but the authorities haven't said to yet, just go anyway. Do not wait."
> A local source, who lives close to Harry and Meghan, told The Sun they are extremely worried and described the whole region as a "tinder box".
> "The Sussexes' place is right in the firing line, unfortunately," they said.
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan live in Montecito with their son Archie and are expecting a baby girlCredit: Getty
> "They live in the foothills of Montecito where there are hundreds of stands of eucalyptus that tend to explode because they’re full of oil, rather than merely burn.
> "A lot of people in our neighborhood are on edge, worried sick about how bad this fire season will be.
> "People who’ve just moved to the area won’t realize how bad it’s looking, but it’s about as bad as it can be.
> "It's just so dry, aside from all the rich people's lush lawns, of course.
> 
> "At this time of year the hills should be a beautiful green, but they're still just brown. It's a truly scary sight if you've lived around here long enough.
> 
> Fire departments are warning local residents to be prepared for evacuation this summerCredit: EPA
> “You only have to mention the Thomas Fire and the Santa Barbara landslides from a few years ago and locals' eyes are filled with fear.
> "There's still a lot of trauma and a lot of people still aren't back in their homes after having them destroyed.
> “Meghan was in the UK for a lot of the most recent fires in Southern California, but hopefully she hasn’t forgotten what kids here learn from a young age about being ready to evacuate in the event of a fire or an earthquake. "
> 
> It is not known if Meghan and Harry would hire their own private firefighters, although many celebrities have done so in the past, including The Kardashians.
> Kim and her estranged husband Kanye West reportedly hired their own team to save their $60million mansion in Hidden Hills as fires ravaged the area back in 2018.
> 
> The source added that Southern California might be beautiful, but thanks to the fires, earthquakes and mudslides, it's "not for the uninitiated or unprepared."
> "Prince Harry, growing up in the flat, green pastures of Windsor and lush parks of Kensington, will likely never have felt the fear of seeing a roaring inferno racing toward your home," they said.
> 
> "Let's hope that, unlike most of his neighbors around here, he never does."


It's always tragic for anyone to lose their home, but I somehow will save my sympathies for my former colleagues and the likes who lost their homes in the Napa and other fires, and others like them that don't have multi million dollar inheritances to fall back upon, or their "mean" families to lift them back up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> Talking about suicide in the narrative she did is awful. Oprah helped her with the "did you consider suicide?" questioning for drama. It's not a subject to be handled the way these fools did...pretending NO ONE would help them is a slap in the face to anyone who is really struggling (IMO)


Did she really actually ask that? 
Isn’t that suggesting something to a mentally unstable person? Doesn’t that trivialise suicide actuation? 
Jeez these mental health docs need to be dragged to filth.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



I see that picture, and automatically picture him making little circles with his fingers to signify he himself is CRAZY!


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I see that picture, and automatically picture him making little circles with his fingers to signify he himself is CRAZY!


Whoever is picking his publicity stills of late is not his friend!

but... they might be quite chummy with raptor.


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> I see that picture, and automatically picture him making little circles with his fingers to signify he himself is CRAZY!


Omg.  Now I do!


----------



## csshopper

1LV said:


> Another Harry in the making?


Hypocritical in all they do/say, the "6" and his wife will pass on "generational trauma" to their son, and probably their daughter. Since misery and victimhood is their only "schtick" it will be around for a long time and the children will have volumes of crap to read about when their time comes to share "their truths."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Driving Prince Phillip’s car = sweet  
Go ahead, Hazz, keep complaining. We‘ll be fine


----------



## hedur

I admit I'm not on here that much anymore... probably because i moved to Ireland from the states and had to leave all my leather bags at home ... anyway... I seem to remember this whole thing about Meghan saying her dream was always to do humanitarian work. That acting was never the end game and she always wanted to serve others with her life. It just seems odd that whenever I see her talking in the media now, it's all about her. What she's going through, how hard it's been, etc. And when I see Kate, it's never about her but actually all about others. Almost as if staying a working royal was a very good way, a fast track really, to actually live the life of service Meghan claimed she always wanted. I mean, that *is* what she always wanted, right? Just a thought.


----------



## Jktgal

Jayne1 said:


> Oh that's interesting.  So to truly get an idea of the increase, the actual baseline number should be included?


Ideally, and if not, I would think someone has something to hide, or an agenda. Statements like "will double your risks of cancer" - when risk is 1 out of 10,000, doubling of that risk(2/10,000) isn't much, in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Hermes Zen

hedur said:


> I admit I'm not on here that much anymore... probably because i moved to Ireland from the states and had to leave all my leather bags at home ... anyway... I seem to remember this whole thing about Meghan saying her dream was always to do humanitarian work. That acting was never the end game and she always wanted to serve others with her life. It just seems odd that whenever I see her talking in the media now, it's all about her. What she's going through, how hard it's been, etc. And when I see Kate, it's never about her but actually all about others. Almost as if staying a working royal was a very good way, a fast track really, to actually live the life of service Meghan claimed she always wanted. I mean, that *is* what she always wanted, right? Just a thought.


Welcome back!  Ireland is beautiful. Haven't been but seen pictures. 

I'm with you wondering about M and all that talk about being a humanitarian. I think it was all a front to look great and to eventually use it to catch a better man. I hate fakes!  

Hope to see you more on here!


----------



## V0N1B2

csshopper said:


> View attachment 5093736
> 
> No, in California drought and fire danger is universal here, the rich and the homeless under the same threat. I am not rich, am in that very dark area (worst level). Official fire season was declared last week, months earlier than normal. Already on water reduction and per directions from city, county, and local fire district have what are referred to Go Bags ready just in case. Legal documents, medications, water, food, chargers for electronics etc. Lists made. Did it last year (which was bad, but nothing like this . We are 20” below our normal rainfall) and know how critical it is to be prepared when the alarm notice bleats on the phone. Last year the order came @ 11:30 PM. Spent 5 nights sweating it out. Was lucky, for fire came within 25’. As we are frequently reminded, it can burn again in the same area. Drought, record setting heat, and high winds are a potentially devastating trio.
> 
> Back on topic, the Markles are in the Severe Drought range. Not good,  but, waaay better than most of the rest of us.


Sure. But this is Harry and Meghan’s thread. The article posted was pertaining to Harry and Meghan and their choice to live in Montecito. You wanna live in Montecito, then you deal with having to consider paying a private fire department to hose down your roof. Or pay extra for your home insurance to cover losses on your $16M property. I don’t feel bad for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I see that picture, and automatically picture him making little circles with his fingers to signify he himself is CRAZY!



IIRC that is exactly what he did.  When I saw the fingers near the ears, I thought ‘no, no way OW lets this get published.’  Yep, he did and she did.  

 Another lie:
QE thought they were making a video about veterans’ mental health. *Unreal*.









						News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
					

All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Nat334 said:


> Ironically, an adult being required to ask his grandmother's permission to do something professionally, is a perfect recipe for poor mental health.


If he was going to headline it with HRH Prince Harry presents, he would have needed to clear it with her as it could be seen as royal endorsement for whatever the programme was about.

I doubt that Prince Edward cleared every script with HM when he was running his own production house.


----------



## Chanbal

hedur said:


> I admit I'm not on here that much anymore... probably because i moved to Ireland from the states and had to leave all my leather bags at home ... anyway... I seem to remember this whole thing about Meghan saying her dream was always to do humanitarian work. That acting was never the end game and she always wanted to serve others with her life. It just seems odd that whenever I see her talking in the media now, it's all about her. What she's going through, how hard it's been, etc. And when I see Kate, it's never about her but actually all about others. Almost as if staying a working royal was a very good way, a fast track really, to actually live the life of service Meghan claimed she always wanted. I mean, that *is* what she always wanted, right? Just a thought.


How are you enjoying Ireland? I miss Europe so much. I'm just waiting for covid to be better controlled...

Will and Kate have a pleasant smile and a gracious approach to whatever they do. Cringe & Ginger, when they smile, it looks fake. Their victim and entitled presence makes them heavy and unpleasant imo.


----------



## caramelize126

jelliedfeels said:


> His cousins have jobs outside of the British royal firm. He’s not the heir so he could have chosen to work for someone else. Evidentially he could chose to leave the royal family at any time given he has done so now.
> If anything they encouraged him to have his own projects, like invictus, with unlimited money to back him up. Most family businesses I’ve seen are a lot more limited in scope than that.
> 
> He wanted to have it both ways in my opinion. Just look at how he reacted to the suggestion Meghan could continue acting- when you’d think that’d be a chance for her to have independence.
> He wanted to complain about the onerous duties stripping him of his freedoms but he didn’t want the risks of the working world.



Agree with all of this. It seems like he wanted it both ways...
From the family's POV- it may have been clear to senior members of the family that Harry would not be able to make out in the world by himself. He has lived an extremely sheltered existence, was not the brightest,  overall is naive to how the world works and IMO is extremely vulnerable. Maybe thats why they encouraged him to have his own projects instead of outright leaving royal duties?

As much we like to blame MM for everything here, I'm starting to think harry might be just as guilty. He may not realize the extent to which hes being manipulated but I dont think he is completely innocent. If he had been thinking about leaving the firm for years, Meghan and her unhappiness became a very convenient excuse. As far as i can tell, Meghan has taken most of the blame and obviously the family will take him back when this all falls apart. Besides his dignity, what else does Harry really have to lose?


----------



## caramelize126

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Define crazy, though. I was more thinking along the lines of Duchess Disney crazy, not partying too much while in your 20s.



Oh no not duchess disney crazy! Partying crazy- there was alot of talk of drug use at the time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe now it is sinking in that he really does not have camera presence. In the OW show, when he speaks, he randomly waves his hands all over the place. It is distracting and looks odd.  As with most things in life, there are positives and negatives to speaking with hand gestures.
_In adults, however, a discrepancy between speech and body language usually comes with a different result: People are less likely to trust adults whose motions and words don’t seem to match, Kinsey Goman suggests._








						The Fascinating Science Behind 'Talking' With Your Hands
					

We all do it. Here's what it means.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Chanbal

Harry is just an envious little man... 



_In a column for Australian News.com.au, Ms Elser wrote: “Prince William’s speech to the Church of Scotland over the weekend is particularly eyebrow raising.”

She described how William gave a “touching speech” when he talked about his happiest and saddest memories of Scotland.

Ms Elser added: “*However where things got particularly knotty was his decision to paint a tender and charming vision of childhood, a vision that just happened to contradict part of his brother Prince Harry’s latest attack on the palace.*”

During his speech in Scotland, William said: “As I grew up I saw how my grandmother relishes every minute she spends here and my father is never happier than in walking among the hills._









						Prince William’s speech was ‘eyebrow raising’ amid Harry’s ‘attack'
					

PRINCE WILLIAM's speech to the Church of Scotland was "particularly eyebrow raising" amid Prince Harry's recent "attacks" on the Royal Family, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

W&K are showing Cruella at the drive-in in Scotland. On their Instagram page, they show the crowd of cars while playing _Call Me Cruella. _ Somehow the lyrics fit here oh-so-well. How clever 

_Call me crazy, call me insane
But you're stuck in the past
And I'm ahead of the game

[Verse 3]
A life lived in penance, it just seems a waste
And the devil has much better taste
And I tried to be sweet, I tried to be kind
But I feel much better now that I'm out of my mind

[Verse 4]
Now there's always a line at the gates of Hell
But I go right to the front 'cause I dress this well
Rip it up, leave it all in tatters
Beauty is the only thing that matters
The fabric of your little world is torn
Embrace the darkness and be reborn








						Florence + The Machine – Call Me Cruella
					

“Call Me Cruella” is a song created for the 2021 Disney movie Cruella. The track seems to pick up where the original film’s title song, Cruella De Vil, left off, with the intro




					genius.com
				



_


----------



## Lodpah

They're literally becoming a joke. I wonder what their peers are saying behind closed doors. I imagine they would get invites for entertainment purposes and a source of carnival gazing. Like, seriously, who will take them seriously now?

Well they deserve it. 

Dedicated to Harry while he's making circles. 

Send in the Clowns (Barbara Streisand)

Isn't it rich?
Are we a pair?
Me here at last on the ground,
You in mid-air,
Where are the clowns?
Isn't it bliss?
Don't you approve?
One who keeps tearing around,
One who can't move,
Where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns?
Just when I'd stopped opening doors,
Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours
Making my entrance again with my usual flair
Sure of my lines
No one is there
Don't you love farce?
My fault, I fear
I thought that you'd want what I want
Sorry, my dear!
But where are the clowns
Send in the clowns
Don't bother, they're here
Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer?
Losing my timing this late in my career
But where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns
Well, maybe next year


----------



## xincinsin

caramelize126 said:


> Agree with all of this. It seems like he wanted it both ways...
> From the family's POV- it may have been clear to senior members of the family that Harry would not be able to make out in the world by himself. He has lived an extremely sheltered existence, was not the brightest,  overall is naive to how the world works and IMO is extremely vulnerable. Maybe thats why they encouraged him to have his own projects instead of outright leaving royal duties?
> 
> As much we like to blame MM for everything here, I'm starting to think harry might be just as guilty. He may not realize the extent to which hes being manipulated but I dont think he is completely innocent. If he had been thinking about leaving the firm for years, Meghan and her unhappiness became a very convenient excuse. As far as i can tell, Meghan has taken most of the blame and obviously the family will take him back when this all falls apart. Besides his dignity, what else does Harry really have to lose?


He was dry tinder, she was the fuse. The resulting conflagration, both are as guilty of feeding fuel to the flames (this is a good metaphor considering the fire zone they are in  )

Much as he was complaining, you didn't see him actually getting off his a*s and finding a job or vocation. He wanted for nothing. I believe Mermaid saw how easily influenced he was (he swallowed her tales hook, line & sinker pre-marriage) and made it her goal to catch him for the ultimate social climb. And H wanted to be wanted. After that, it was easy for her to cultivate the poor little princess act, and he would have been all too willing to believe it was his mother's story all over again. 

I think she is lying low now with her Reiki and whatnot, and letting him make a fool of himself for future leverage. As many have pointed out, she had the choice to continue with her acting. But she declined, and in the OW interview, she comes up with some BS: _"I wrote letters to his family when I got there, saying, ‘I am dedicated to this. I’m here for you. Use me as you’d like’." _Like who says things like that? It sounds positively sordid to ask people to "use" you.  

And the timeline fudging, it started during that interview too.
_Meghan: We were saying . . . gosh, it must have been *years ago* we were sitting in Nottingham (Nottingham Cottage, where Harry lived as a bachelor and when first married) . . . I was sitting in Nottingham Cottage and The Little Mermaid came on.  _
It makes it sound like they have been married for decades. 

_Meghan: And I grieve a lot. I mean, I’ve lost my father. I lost a baby. *I nearly lost my name.* I mean, there’s the loss of identity.  _
Really? Is she compensating now by making sure they are constantly in the gossip pages?


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> He was dry tinder, she was the fuse. The resulting conflagration, both are as guilty of feeding fuel to the flames (this is a good metaphor considering the fire zone they are in  )
> 
> Much as he was complaining, you didn't see him actually getting off his a*s and finding a job or vocation. He wanted for nothing. I believe Mermaid saw how easily influenced he was (he swallowed her tales hook, line & sinker pre-marriage) and made it her goal to catch him for the ultimate social climb. And H wanted to be wanted. After that, it was easy for her to cultivate the poor little princess act, and he would have been all too willing to believe it was his mother's story all over again.
> 
> I think she is lying low now with her Reiki and whatnot, and letting him make a fool of himself for future leverage. As many have pointed out, she had the choice to continue with her acting. But she declined, and in the OW interview, she comes up with some BS: _"I wrote letters to his family when I got there, saying, ‘I am dedicated to this. I’m here for you. Use me as you’d like’." _Like who says things like that? It sounds positively sordid to ask people to "use" you.
> 
> And the timeline fudging, it started during that interview too.
> _Meghan: We were saying . . . gosh, it must have been *years ago* we were sitting in Nottingham (Nottingham Cottage, where Harry lived as a bachelor and when first married) . . . I was sitting in Nottingham Cottage and The Little Mermaid came on.  _
> It makes it sound like they have been married for decades.
> 
> _Meghan: And I grieve a lot. I mean, I’ve lost my father. I lost a baby. *I nearly lost my name.* I mean, there’s the loss of identity.  _
> Really? Is she compensating now by making sure they are constantly in the gossip pages?


She lost her father by choice by kicking him to the curb and over the trash bins. She can pick up the phone and say "Daddy, we can work this out and thank you for always being there for me. We all make mistakes but I wouldn't trade the black and white dolls you got me, the time and expense you put in to make sure my school plays had awesome lighting, the times you took me to the studio to be with you and spend time with you, the education you provided for me at the expense of spending all your money. You may not be perfect daddy and no one is but you were always there. We can move past this and since I'm into compassion, I start by being compassionate to you daddy. I know all this is like a circus and you got taken advantage of but I'm sorry and since I'm so kind and compassionate, I forgive you and will you forgive me?"


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Use me as you’d like’."


That sounds a bit.... has anyone seen the Favourite? 
perhaps she was hoping to upgrade a brother  

it’s funny she’d also be concerned about losing her name given she’s always trying to go by 6’s title. 
I also think the writer is trying to shade her as in the rule of 3 don’t you put the biggest  thing last? That’d mean she cares more about her name than her miscarriage?


Lodpah said:


> She lost her father by choice by kicking him to the curb and over the trash bins. She can pick up the phone and say "Daddy, we can work this out and thank you for always being there for me. We all make mistakes but I wouldn't trade the black and white dolls you got me, the time and expense you put in to make sure my school plays had awesome lighting, the times you took me to the studio to be with you and spend time with you, the education you provided for me at the expense of spending all your money. You may not be perfect daddy and no one is but you were always there. We can move past this and since I'm into compassion, I start by being compassionate to you daddy. I know all this is like a circus and you got taken advantage of but I'm sorry and since I'm so kind and compassionate, I forgive you and will you forgive me?"


Imagine if, for even a minute, one of them realised the irony of them condemning the markles for going public when it seems their aim in life is to finally milk dry Diana’s media appeal & also slag off the rest of the family in the process.


----------



## xincinsin

I'm not saying Mermaid is evil personified. I think she does have some good in her. When she helped out at Hubb kitchen at the start, that was low-key and her behaviour then was vouched for by the people there. Maybe she was giving "service" a genuine attempt. But I think Mermaid and hard work were not a match made in heaven. It's a lot easier for her to go the celebrity route. And it may be easier for her to perform true charitable acts when she isn't thinking about the benefit she can derive from it. The Grenfell fire was a true tragedy which may have moved her, whereas a guided tour in Africa was still a step removed from reality, so she was only thinking about herself and why no one asked her if she was okay.

The press did seem to compare her unfavourably to the Duchess of Cambridge. Despite her showbiz background, or maybe because of it, Mermaid may have courted controversy with her coat-flicking, bump-cradling and penchant to seize the limelight vulgarly. Should we blame her upbringing for her lack of good manners? Or does she just innately lack refinement in the sow's ear/silk purse manner?


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> it’s funny she’d also be concerned about losing her name given she’s always trying to go by 6’s title.
> I also think the writer is trying to shade her as in the rule of 3 don’t you put the biggest  thing last? That’d mean she cares more about her name than her miscarriage?


No writer. Those were words from her own mouth. I copied it from the interview transcript.
And I totally didn't understand that part about losing her own name, especially after I read some early articles about her which were PR stuff and they used the term "DOS, formerly known as Meghan Markle" and I thought: she is still Meghan Markle!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nat334 said:


> Ironically, an adult being required to ask his grandmother's permission to do something professionally, is a perfect recipe for poor mental health.



Replace grandmother with boss and suddenly it all makes a whole lot of sense


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> No writer. Those were words from her own mouth. I copied it from the interview transcript.
> And I totally didn't understand that part about losing her own name, especially after I read some early articles about her which were PR stuff and they used the term "DOS, formerly known as Meghan Markle" and I thought: she is still Meghan Markle!


Yeah at this point she’s got so many names she needs a hype man.

I can just imagine someone from the WWE shouting out,
‘From Hollywood, California give it up for Meghan Markle aka the duchess of Disney aka princess Henry aka Megain aka the raptor aka the green hornet aka Migraine aka princess pushy aka the family killleeeeerrrrr’

while she parades around the ring to frenzied booing like a classic wrestling villain.


Perhaps a new look is needed for the adoring couple?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Do you think maybe they worked out that story together to make it a more compelling interview?


 
I don't. I'm completely positive she came up with it to control and manipulate Harry even further. Like the family she never had and like the crying, crying, crying at night just loud enough to wake him up even though she really didn't want to because he's already carrying too much. This woman is a monster.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> As many have pointed out, she had the choice to continue with her acting. But she declined, and in the OW interview, she comes up with some BS: _"I wrote letters to his family when I got there, saying, ‘I am dedicated to this. I’m here for you. Use me as you’d like’." _Like who says things like that? It sounds positively sordid to ask people to "use" you.



Nobody but Duchess Disney.

Also, what with all the letter writing?


----------



## Sharont2305

Hope this link works. From 2016. I remember watching this. The presenters Ant and Dec followed Prince Charles for a year.


----------



## Lenna.V

purseinsanity said:


> I think she has a good relationship with anyone she feels can further her and benefit her.  I feel like you can easily see a child's future personality as an adult, because although they may change, it's often expressed early on.  My daughter had an acquaintance in first grade who was the most manipulative girl I've ever met.  I was actually shocked to see her in action.  She would sweet talk other girls into giving her things, and then once she got them, she would move on to her next "friend" ie victim.  I was appalled and kind of fascinated to see that in someone so young.  Nine years later, she's even worse!  I imagine Meg being the same.  Probably batted her eyelashes and told Daddy how much she loved him.  She's since literally milked him for all he had, and he served no further purpose.



That is interesting put. Before I don't really pay much attention to her. I was quite happy for Harry to have a beautiful and seem nice wife and was on her side with all the circus that her father and sister brought up. But now, Alas! What a joke they are!

I mean, I get it. They need to have these talk shows for the money to support their life style and freedom. But is there nothing else interesting in their life to talk about beside **** on the RF? And they all keep digging about Diana. For good god, let her rest in peace stop digging her up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

QUOTE="QueenofWrapDress, post: 34556146, member: 689574"]
Nobody but Duchess Disney.

Also, what with all the letter writing?
[/QUOTE]
Calligraphy practice?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Nobody but Duchess Disney.
> 
> Also, what with all the letter writing?


I'd love to see that letter. Not for the calligraphy, but how she drama mama'd the prose (if this letter exists). And was it one letter to the BRF or one to each member of the senior royalty? I'm adding lusty sound effects when I imagine Prince Charles reading *Take me! USE ME!* in heavily illuminated calligraphy from his future daughter-in-law. Then I imagine Philip and Andrew reading it. Whoops! Could do a modernized British version of Streetcar Named Desire.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> They're literally becoming a joke. I wonder what their peers are saying behind closed doors. I imagine they would get invites for entertainment purposes and a source of carnival gazing. Like, seriously, who will take them seriously now?
> 
> Well they deserve it.
> 
> Dedicated to Harry while he's making circles.
> 
> Send in the Clowns (Barbara Streisand)
> 
> Isn't it rich?
> Are we a pair?
> Me here at last on the ground,
> You in mid-air,
> Where are the clowns?
> Isn't it bliss?
> Don't you approve?
> One who keeps tearing around,
> One who can't move,
> Where are the clowns?
> There ought to be clowns?
> Just when I'd stopped opening doors,
> Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours
> Making my entrance again with my usual flair
> Sure of my lines
> No one is there
> Don't you love farce?
> My fault, I fear
> I thought that you'd want what I want
> Sorry, my dear!
> But where are the clowns
> Send in the clowns
> Don't bother, they're here
> Isn't it rich?
> Isn't it queer?
> Losing my timing this late in my career
> But where are the clowns?
> There ought to be clowns
> Well, maybe next year



My parents loved this song and I had forgotten all about it!  (And it's now stuck in my head! )


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> This is how she is spending part of her time. Tapping her life away and digging into "ancestral healing" and note it is linked with Doria, who conveniently told her about "generational trauma". Obviously neither considers how their current actions are playing it forward.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Good vibrations? Meghan is doing Reiki touching therapy on Archie - and HERSELF - to feel 'balanced and relaxed,' friends reveal, and taught Harry about 'ancestral healing' that he claims will break the cycle of 'genetic pain and suffering'*
> 
> *Harry, 36, appeared on Dax Shepard's podcast and described the 'genetic pain' of being a royal, saying Charles had 'suffered' and he had done the same to him *
> *Harry spoke about mental health and seeking therapy after advice from Meghan Markle who saw he was 'angry' *
> *A source with close ties to Meghan tells DailyMail.com that she introduced Harry to the term 'ancestral healing' *
> *Meghan learned about generational trauma from her mom Doria Ragland, according to the source*
> * 'Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it's now up to them to break the cycle once and for all,' they added*
> *They went on to say that Meghan is a big advocate of tapping therapy and does Reiki on herself, Archie and her dogs *
> Edited to add: she may need more tapping to get "balanced and relaxed." The Bench continues to splinter:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #5,795 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #44 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #161 in Children's Emotions Books
> #420 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)
> 
> Yes, this has Doria written all over it....remember she was linked with marianne williamson....she is apparently into the new-agey stuff


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting how the alliterative one has not been seen since the big O interview, my ideas, pick one 

1. She is on maternity leave
2. She has taken a lot of heat as being a bad influence so is lying low to let it die down 
3. She is so unpopular and "jobs" are asking to minimize her participation 

It is interesting how H is on his own for the first time in 3 years, whereas she was glued to him and/or the microphone previously


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Interesting how the alliterative one has not been seen since the big O interview, my ideas, pick one
> 
> 1. She is on maternity leave
> 2. She has taken a lot of heat as being a bad influence so is lying low to let it die down
> 3. She is so unpopular and "jobs" are asking to minimize her participation
> 
> It is interesting how H is on his own for the first time in 3 years, whereas she was glued to him and/or the microphone previously



I think they and SS have finally realized they are over-exposed and should lie low for now, especially after the backlash from Harry's latest comments about Charles and that the 1st amendment is "bonkers".  Also, doesn't MM's children's book come out sometime in June?  I'm guessing that'll be the next PR push.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I think they and SS have finally realized they are over-exposed and should lie low for now, especially after the backlash from Harry's latest comments about Charles and that the 1st amendment is "bonkers".  Also, doesn't MM's children's book come out sometime in June?  I'm guessing that'll be the next PR push.


Funny how H is now the over exposed one rather than MM, cant wait for tomorrow's truth bombs


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I think they and SS have finally realized they are over-exposed and should lie low for now, especially after the backlash from Harry's latest comments about Charles and that the 1st amendment is "bonkers".  Also, *doesn't MM's children's book come out sometime in June? * I'm guessing that'll be the next PR push.



It comes out June 8th, right around the corner. Amazon appears to have learned from previous Meghan-centric books to turn the review function off before the release to avoid fake reviews.

I wonder if any professional book reviewers will take a crack at _The Bench_ or if it will get an automatic pass because it is a kids' book.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> I think they and SS have finally realized they are over-exposed and should lie low for now, especially after the backlash from Harry's latest comments about Charles and that the 1st amendment is "bonkers".  Also, doesn't MM's children's book come out sometime in June?  I'm guessing that'll be the next PR push.


And after that, lots of opportunity for her to weep over the MIL whom she never knew but with whom she had a special bond  
1 July: Diana's birthday (baby birth announcement?)
31 Aug: D's death anniversary (pronouncement that baby is the reincarnation of Diana?)
6 Sep: D's burial date (quickie photo op at random cemetery or in garden where she will plant forget me nots again?)


----------



## xincinsin

TC1 said:


> Just saw a headline that said MM may go into early labour due to her "condition" mmmm, I didn't know narcissism was a health concern?


Is there anyone else in the BRF who is about to give birth/get married/other significant event from whom she absolutely must steal the limelight? Hmmm, isn't Trooping the Colour coming soon?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ignore the annoying quote...I know some of us don't think pics say a lot, but I couldn't help but notice: he's focussed on her. She's focussed on the camera. She really is a one trick pony.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Is there anyone else in the BRF who is about to give birth/get married/other significant event from whom she absolutely must steal the limelight? Hmmm, isn't Trooping the Colour coming soon?



Isn't TTC cancelled due to Covid?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Interesting how the alliterative one has not been seen since the big O interview, my ideas, pick one
> 
> 1. She is on maternity leave
> 2. She has taken a lot of heat as being a bad influence so is lying low to let it die down
> 3. She is so unpopular and "jobs" are asking to minimize her participation
> 
> It is interesting how H is on his own for the first time in 3 years, whereas she was glued to him and/or the microphone previously


I think maybe maternity leave.  Or the team has decided Harry is the bigger draw.  but I don't really see her accepting that idea


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ignore the annoying quote...I know some of us don't think pics say a lot, but I couldn't help but notice: he's focussed on her. She's focussed on the camera. She really is a one trick pony.



Yeah, in every picture it’s obvious she’s thinking about how the shot looks 
There’s rarely a candid picture of Meghan she’s so laser focussed on the camera.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> *I'd dispute the writer's assertion that Oprah became "the richest and most famous woman in the world." She was a non-entity in my part of the world, so maybe she was famous only in the Western world? Or only in the USA? I got turned off the daytime TV talkshow format after watching one episode of Ellen dG - the bouncing on sofa and mugging hard at the camera routine was so fake that I never watched a second ep.*
> 
> Is Oprah's Book Club still in existence? And did The Bench get recommended by it?


ITA. It seems to be the norm for famous USA personalities to assume they are the most famous person in the world. Hollywood, USA regularly asserts their domination every time they release new movies. For the record, I ditched OW after a few episodes, because I found her too controlling and I couldn't stand the self-proclaimed experts, who seemed to have little experience in whatever subject they were discussing. I also didn't need anyone to tell me what books to read.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ignore the annoying quote...I know some of us don't think pics say a lot, but I couldn't help but notice: he's focussed on her. She's focussed on the camera. She really is a one trick pony.



"I've learnt more about myself in the last 4 years than I have in the 32 years before that"
Mermaid has taught him that he is angry, that he is trapped, that half-in/half-out is the perfect solution, that it's ok to treat your family like an ATM, that all his unhappiness is because his family NEVER cared about him and it is wonderful and compassionate to inclusively slag them on TV. Charming creature she is.
Isn't it poetic balance that she attributes their botched escape from slavery to him, and he credits her with his idiotic behaviour since then?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ignore the annoying quote...I know some of us don't think pics say a lot, but I couldn't help but notice: he's focussed on her. She's focussed on the camera. She really is a one trick pony.




How can Harry not notice how she is always mugging for the camera? Maybe he thinks it is cute.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I was being sarcastic.  No way would she degrade herself by actually supporting another human being, even if that being is giving birth to her child!
> *As I kid, I would torment my little sister saying she was left on our door step by gypsies and she's not really our blood family*


We could be related because my parents used to tell us the same when we misbehaved.


----------



## Annawakes

Did she really write that letter to the RF telling them to “use me”?  She really must have thought the royals would all step aside for her greatness, her wokeness, her word salads.  She thought she would be the star of the RF, overshadowing W&K, C&C, possibly even TQ.  I am continually astounded at how highly she thinks of herself.  No wonder she was furious when they basically told her to keep to her place, even walking behind K.  Just unbelievable.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Did she really write that letter to the RF telling them to “use me”?  She really must have thought the royals would all step aside for her greatness, her wokeness, her word salads.  She thought she would be the star of the RF, overshadowing W&K, C&C, possibly even TQ.  I am continually astounded at how highly she thinks of herself.  No wonder she was furious when they basically told her to keep to her place, even walking behind K.  Just unbelievable.


The existence of the letter(s) is unverifiable, but she brought it up in the OW interview. And yes, ITA that she thought she was going to be the star of the BRF and TQ's favourite. Although I suspect that what she was really after would be the imagined perks attendant to that status: her own castle, her own court, her side deals for merch and money, and free access to the jewel vault.


----------



## lazeny

Annawakes said:


> Did she really write that letter to the RF telling them to “use me”?  She really must have thought the royals would all step aside for her greatness, her wokeness, her word salads.  She thought she would be the star of the RF, overshadowing W&K, C&C, possibly even TQ.  I am continually astounded at how highly she thinks of herself.  No wonder she was furious when they basically told her to keep to her place, even walking behind K.  Just unbelievable.



If she think she's that great she should have been more successful as an actress. She's barely a star in Hollywood. She has  delusions of grandeur if she thinks she'll be a star in BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

lazeny said:


> If she think she's that great she should have been more successful as an actress. *She's barely a star in Hollywood. *She has  delusions of grandeur if she thinks she'll be a star in BRF.



That's the problem. Meghan was never good enough to become a star in Hollywood. She was unknown to everyone except for the viewers of _Suits_. That's why she had to take her show on the road. Apparently the bar is set much lower when it comes to acting ability to become a prince's wife.


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> Oopsies - Did MM tell another lie?   Click on the attachment to see MM’s name...



Well, well, well .. another lie and a big-time STUPID one at that!!!  Duh Meghan-a-lo-maniac, do you think that people can't look up this stuff?!?!?!


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Nobody but Duchess Disney.
> 
> Also, what with all the letter writing?



In her mind royals do that (write letters) and she wants to make an impression she would  *not * be a good addition to the royal family. M wants to leave her mark in the world. Just maybe that letter (& all the others like to her father) at least in her mind would be saved in the history vaults (who knows may show up in a museum at some point in to the future) and not thrown away. She's probably seen movies and read royal romance novels that princesses did that.  

Okay, I'll stop now ...


----------



## bag-mania

Has it ever been conclusively proven who were the two senior royals who helped her write her letter to Thomas? I bet whoever it was regrets it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Has it ever been conclusively proven who were the two senior royals who helped her write her letter to Thomas? I bet whoever it was regrets it.


Careful! She’ll sue you too! 

I can’t honestly tell you either way I lost the drift of what that letter lawsuit was about a long time ago. It reminds me of a Rumpole story I read once


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jehaga said:


> View attachment 5093219
> 
> “Evil” step-sister (@csshopper) is more natural holding someone else’s baby than the “actual” mother is holding her “own” baby.


WOW! The only similarities I can see here are two (different) women holding (different) babies. Nothing else matches.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5093107


WHOA, WHAT??? .. that is quite an accusation!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> In her mind royals do that (write letters) and she wants to make an impression she would  *not * be a good addition to the royal family. M wants to leave her mark in the world. Just maybe that letter (& all the others like to her father) at least in her mind would be saved in the history vaults (who knows may show up in a museum at some point in to the future) and not thrown away. She's probably seen movies and read royal romance novels that princesses did that.
> 
> Okay, I'll stop now ...



Absolutely, she wrote for the purposes of posterity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Let's wait and see if Nicholl is right.  


_But royal expert Katie Nicholl told the documentary that the couple's latest project will "not end well for them" if they continue to "trash the establishment".

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have faced criticism in recent months for their comments on other royal members.

Ms Nicholl said: *"I think it's safe to say that if they are seen to be cashing in on royal connections, continue to trash the establishment, it's not going to end very well for them*."

Ms Saayeng added: "It seems like neither Harry or Meghan will be retreating from the spotlight any time soon."_









						Prince Harry 'spoiling for a fight' as Duke's comments 'unnecessary'
					

PRINCE HARRY "spoiling for a fight" with the press as the royal has always shown "mistrust for the media", a royal expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Nat334 said:


> Ironically, an adult being required to ask his grandmother's permission to do something professionally, is a perfect recipe for poor mental health.


In reality, he would ask the palace advisers as to the appropriateness of such a programme, which would then be sanctioned as authorized by HMTQ. And if H wants to make his own decisions without the palace's input, he can renounce his titles and privileges and still remain the Queen's grandson, just like HM's other grandchildren, who have their own private businesses.


----------



## Chanbal

Cringe must be delighted to hear this:

_Prince Philip gave parting gifts to three close staffers by leaving them money in his will — and his grandchildren, including Prince Harry, could all receive an inheritance, according to a report Thursday.

*The Duke of Edinburgh left behind an estimated $42 million (£30 million) when he died last month at the age of 99, the Sun reported.*_

While the Queen is expected to be the main beneficiary, he also made sure to take care of some of his aides — which is unconventional, a royal source has claimed.
_
“Unlike some other royals, Prince Philip will be generous to the three men who looked after him,” the insider told the outlet.

“These include his private secretary Brigadier Archie Miller Bakewell, his page William Henderson and valet Stephen Niedojadlo.”

*The insider said that his grandchildren may also receive a windfall from the will — and that Prince Harry would be no exception, despite his public criticism of the royal family since stepping down from his official duties.*_









						Prince Philip reportedly left around $42 million in will — including to his staff
					

The late prince, who passed away last month at the age of 99, made sure all members of his family received an inheritance.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> seems she wants to stay relevant.....she isn't on TV every day anymore so doesn't have that platform.  The magazine isn't that sucessful (I don't think).  She came up the hard way and became a huge star and isn't ready to let that go yet I guess.  To me she was a unique combo of entertainment and social consciousness.  What she seems to be doing lately is not as entertaining.  And not reaching as many screens.  Regardless she has enough money to last her a lifetime so all of this is just gravy.  I don't dislike her but I do kinda hope the hookup with H&M comes back to bite her and her BFF Gayle.


I liked Oprah many years ago, but then when I met various people who had worked with and for her, wow .. it sounded very familiar to those who had worked (and gotten screwed over) by Martha Stewart.  Very similar .. you have a new & unique "idea", well .. expect that it will be taken and that you will get ZERO credit (and you better not even say a word about that)!!!  Look, sadly .. many of these folks are "users" who really don't give a hoot if they hurt, step, walk-on you or your feelings .. it's ALL ABOUT THEM (hmmmmm - sound familiar to anyone with the initials 'MM')???  The piece-de-resistance to me though was the Hermes incident, where Oprah 'attempted' to use the race card because she was pissed off that the boutique would not let her in as they were having a special occasion and it was by invitation card ONLY!  

I think I said this before, but at that time, I was working on a project in Paris and one of my colleagues' sister WORKED at that boutique.  As such, we all heard the real TRUTH and sure enough, word did get out that Oprah was incorrect .. did she ever come back and apologize for her behavior??? .. NOPE.  

I think she's as FAKE as heck and there was NO WAY that I was going to watch that drivel with Hap-Hazza and Meghan-o-la-maniac as I would never get that time back in my life!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Cringe must be delighted to hear this:
> 
> _Prince Philip gave parting gifts to three close staffers by leaving them money in his will — and his grandchildren, including Prince Harry, could all receive an inheritance, according to a report Thursday.
> 
> *The Duke of Edinburgh left behind an estimated $42 million (£30 million) when he died last month at the age of 99, the Sun reported.*_
> 
> While the Queen is expected to be the main beneficiary, he also made sure to take care of some of his aides — which is unconventional, a royal source has claimed.
> 
> _“Unlike some other royals, Prince Philip will be generous to the three men who looked after him,” the insider told the outlet.
> 
> “These include his private secretary Brigadier Archie Miller Bakewell, his page William Henderson and valet Stephen Niedojadlo.”
> 
> *The insider said that his grandchildren may also receive a windfall from the will — and that Prince Harry would be no exception, despite his public criticism of the royal family since stepping down from his official duties.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip reportedly left around $42 million in will — including to his staff
> 
> 
> The late prince, who passed away last month at the age of 99, made sure all members of his family received an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com




Even if Harry gets a share, it won't be much. He's too far down the ladder of inheritance and he'll have to share with the other 7 grandchildren.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Even if Harry gets a share, it won't be much. He's too far down the ladder of inheritance and he'll have to share with the other 7 grandchildren.


I'd be impressed if it's true he left something to staff. as far as family, I kinda doubt it.  they don't need it and I think the money will go to his wife.  she can leave what she wants to her family when she goes.

edit to say something like tens of thousands would mean a lot to a staff member but Nothing to H&M


----------



## youngster

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. It seems to be the norm for famous USA personalities to assume they are the most famous person in the world. Hollywood, USA regularly asserts their domination every time they release new movies. For the record, I ditched OW after a few episodes, because I found her too controlling and I couldn't stand the self-proclaimed experts, who seemed to have little experience in whatever subject they were discussing. I also didn't need anyone to tell me what books to read.



I have never watched an entire episode of Oprah, not even in her prime when she was on 5 days per week.  At that time, I was either working full time or part-time with children and balancing their schedules and activities.  Who had time to sit down in the middle of the day and watch her or any other mid-afternoon TV?  DH always used to ask that lol. I was never home then. I guess some working people recorded her show and watched it when they had time back in the day and she had a lot of retired people or stay-at-home mom's as her primary audience. I have, of course, seen segments of a few shows.  I remember the Tom Cruise jumping on the couch episode since it was played over and over on the news lol.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




I have to admit I fell asleep in the middle of this one, but I am glad she got the facts out at the beginning.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Cringe must be delighted to hear this:
> 
> _Prince Philip gave parting gifts to three close staffers by leaving them money in his will — and his grandchildren, including Prince Harry, could all receive an inheritance, according to a report Thursday.
> 
> *The Duke of Edinburgh left behind an estimated $42 million (£30 million) when he died last month at the age of 99, the Sun reported.*_
> 
> While the Queen is expected to be the main beneficiary, he also made sure to take care of some of his aides — which is unconventional, a royal source has claimed.
> 
> _“Unlike some other royals, Prince Philip will be generous to the three men who looked after him,” the insider told the outlet.
> 
> “These include his private secretary Brigadier Archie Miller Bakewell, his page William Henderson and valet Stephen Niedojadlo.”
> 
> *The insider said that his grandchildren may also receive a windfall from the will — and that Prince Harry would be no exception, despite his public criticism of the royal family since stepping down from his official duties.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip reportedly left around $42 million in will — including to his staff
> 
> 
> The late prince, who passed away last month at the age of 99, made sure all members of his family received an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I was expecting this. A reason why H had to go to the funeral to show like he's supporting his family while his heavily pregnant wife stayed at home. Gosh I feel like I'm in a bad mood today.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Even if Harry gets a share, it won't be much. He's too far down the ladder of inheritance and he'll have to share with the other 7 grandchildren.


Cringe will be disappointed if she reads your post. She shared a special bond with PP, she even sent a handwritten note... All that press release for nothing!?


----------



## TC1

CeeJay said:


> I liked Oprah many years ago, but then when I met various people who had worked with and for her, wow .. it sounded very familiar to those who had worked (and gotten screwed over) by Martha Stewart.  Very similar .. you have a new & unique "idea", well .. expect that it will be taken and that you will get ZERO credit (and you better not even say a word about that)!!!  Look, sadly .. many of these folks are "users" who really don't give a hoot if they hurt, step, walk-on you or your feelings .. it's ALL ABOUT THEM (hmmmmm - sound familiar to anyone with the initials 'MM')???  The piece-de-resistance to me though was the Hermes incident, where Oprah 'attempted' to use the race card because she was pissed off that the boutique would not let her in as they were having a special occasion and it was by invitation card ONLY!
> 
> I think I said this before, but at that time, I was working on a project in Paris and one of my colleagues' sister WORKED at that boutique.  As such, we all heard the real TRUTH and sure enough, word did get out that Oprah was incorrect .. did she ever come back and apologize for her behavior??? .. NOPE.
> 
> I think she's as FAKE as heck and there was NO WAY that I was going to watch that drivel with Hap-Hazza and Meghan-o-la-maniac as I would never get that time back in my life!


Right, but didn't Hermes let her return to a closed boutique to shop afterwards? I'm not an Oprah fan..when things don't go her way..she loves to place blame on those around her. *tsk tsk*


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO
RE: Prince Phillip’s money will stay with his beloved family members which does not include Hazz. This explains some of Charles’s tears afather leaving the hospital. If [ big if] Hazz was supposed to receive any, it will be held in a trust for 50 years. The BRF doesn’t play around with this stuff. It is why Hazz showed out at the funeral and glared at Anne.

RE: OW  After working all day, the last thing I wanted to see was someone lecturing me on how to live. Sure, she tried to be ‘nice’ about it, but it was still a lecture. Now, she seems more full of herself than ever and is still dining out on her abuse story. Maybe her therapy is not working either or financially she is having difficulty.   
 ETA — not making light of abuse, we must  move onward and not let it control us. Difficult to do, but necessary to living well. 

RE: _Ms Saayeng added: "It seems like neither Harry or Meghan will be retreating from the spotlight any time soon." _
Such a sad thought! Surely, they will take that _ultra-long maternity leave_, no? Hoping the Diana statue reveal is cancelled.


----------



## bag-mania

This is an interesting _Washington Post_ article comparing Harry to Princess Margaret. This is mainstream media, not the gossip page. What annoys me no end is the positive, supportive comments at the end from many readers. If someone posts a negative H&M comment they are quickly bombarded by Meghan fans defending everything she does. 

*Prince Harry wasn’t the first royal to struggle with drinking, drugs and depression. Princess Margaret did, too.*



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/05/26/princess-margaret-prince-harry-drinking-drugs/


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> It comes out June 8th, right around the corner. Amazon appears to have learned from previous Meghan-centric books to turn the review function off before the release to avoid fake reviews.
> 
> I wonder if any professional book reviewers will take a crack at _The Bench_ or if it will get an automatic pass because it is a kids' book.


The current ranking today on the Amazon website does not bode well for sales on June 8th: 

Best Sellers Rank: #6,429 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#48 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#183 in Children's Emotions Books
#462 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> The current ranking today on the Amazon website does not bode well for sales on June 8th:
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #6,429 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #48 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #183 in Children's Emotions Books
> #462 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)



Their fans support them wholeheartedly, right up until they have to open their wallets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I have to admit I fell asleep in the middle of this one, but I am glad she got the facts out at the beginning.



I'm right in the middle right now I think...she elaborates on people being concerned for Harry like two years ago, thinking he'd possibly kill himself if she ever disposed of him. She just said something along the lines what I've said before, when she's done with him he'll be a shell.

ETA: not sure I understood that correctly as it was said in passing, but apparently she had a bit more details on what Raptor told him when she was being "suicidal". She does not give details but apparently it was shocking.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Cringe will be disappointed if she reads your post. She shared a special bond with PP, she even sent a handwritten note... All that press release for nothing!?



But she sent a wreath, y’all. A WREATH!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Cringe must be delighted to hear this:
> 
> _Prince Philip gave parting gifts to three close staffers by leaving them money in his will — and his grandchildren, including Prince Harry, could all receive an inheritance, according to a report Thursday.
> 
> *The Duke of Edinburgh left behind an estimated $42 million (£30 million) when he died last month at the age of 99, the Sun reported.*_
> 
> While the Queen is expected to be the main beneficiary, he also made sure to take care of some of his aides — which is unconventional, a royal source has claimed.
> 
> _“Unlike some other royals, Prince Philip will be generous to the three men who looked after him,” the insider told the outlet.
> 
> “These include his private secretary Brigadier Archie Miller Bakewell, his page William Henderson and valet Stephen Niedojadlo.”
> 
> *The insider said that his grandchildren may also receive a windfall from the will — and that Prince Harry would be no exception, despite his public criticism of the royal family since stepping down from his official duties.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip reportedly left around $42 million in will — including to his staff
> 
> 
> The late prince, who passed away last month at the age of 99, made sure all members of his family received an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



There will be substantial death duties 
And I doubt that he had a lot of liquid assets since he was born an impoverished prince, rather the estate is likely composed of possessions, unlikely to go to market eg cars, horses, family mementoes 
he was never the recipient of a large chunk of cash like H received from Diana
so, H might get to select a memento if he goes to England to get it, but cash, IMHO no, not likely


----------



## Genie27

V0N1B2 said:


> But she sent a wreath, y’all. A WREATH!


And not just any common wreath, but an artisan-gathered, globally-sourced, organically-arranged wreath full of secret nods to the special sweet bond between the deceased and his most special, most favouritest of grand-daughters-in-law.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Secret nods indeed 
Mine, all mine


----------



## Jktgal

Genie27 said:


> And not just any common wreath, but an artisan-gathered, globally-sourced, organically-arranged wreath full of secret nods to the special sweet bond between the deceased and his most special, most favouritest of grand-daughters-in-law.


.... organically-arranged by _virgins_ dressed in _organic_ silk spun from silkworms fed on _authentic_ mulberry leaves....


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Princess Pinocchio, 
Don't hold your breath thinking that one day you will wear this tiara, but I'm  positive that your cherished SIL Kate will wear it brilliantly during her husband's reign. However, who am I to stop you from holding your breath and hoping. ER


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Secret nods indeed
> Mine, all mine
> 
> View attachment 5094745
> 
> 
> View attachment 5094744


Nah, Mermaid is after them green stones that wuz denied her on her big day.



Maggie Muggins said:


> Princess Pinocchio,
> Don't hold your breath thinking that one day you will wear this tiara, but I'm  positive that your cherished SIL Kate will wear it brilliantly during her husband's reign. However, who am I to stop you from holding your breath and hoping. ER
> 
> View attachment 5094754


Correcto, Bureau Chief!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO
> RE: Prince Phillip’s money will stay with his beloved family members which does not include Hazz. This explains some of Charles’s tears afather leaving the hospital. If [ big if] Hazz was supposed to receive any, it will be held in a trust for 50 years. The BRF doesn’t play around with this stuff. It is why Hazz showed out at the funeral and glared at Anne.
> 
> RE: OW  After working all day, the last thing I wanted to see was someone lecturing me on how to live. Sure, she tried to be ‘nice’ about it, but it was still a lecture. Now, she seems more full of herself than ever and is still dining out on her abuse story. Maybe her therapy is not working either or financially she is having difficulty.
> ETA — not making light of abuse, we must  move onward and not let it control us. Difficult to do, but necessary to living well.
> 
> RE: _Ms Saayeng added: "It seems like neither Harry or Meghan will be retreating from the spotlight any time soon." _
> Such a sad thought! Surely, they will take that _ultra-long maternity leave_, no? Hoping the Diana statue reveal is cancelled.


42M is still a respectable amount. Yep, money held in an irrevocable trust for 50 years and to be disbursed in 5% installments per year after that.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I appreciate you posting these... I can watch straight through and I do so while working on the computer. I don't mind the slow talking because I'm doing some visual work and I find it relaxing!

She's incredibly intelligent, isn't she.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> ... he was never the recipient of a large chunk of cash like H received from Diana
> so, H might get to select a memento if he goes to England to get it, but cash, IMHO no, not likely


H may have received money from Diana, but wasn't it the money from her divorce from Charles, who originally got it from the Queen?


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Jayne1 said:


> H may have received money from Diana, but wasn't it the money from her divorce from Charles, who originally got it from the Queen?



Correct, it was. His mother was also given residence in Kensington Palace so she would never have had to work or earn a living. Her family's estate seems to be very much on wilting away as her brother did get into quite a bit of financial trouble. 

$42 million seems like a lot of money for a penniless prince to have accumulated. I wonder where the money came from. Harry will definitely receive some money from his grandfather in his will. I think the same can be said for the Queen and Prince Charles. They will leave their children and grandchildren a few million each at the very least.


----------



## Hermes Zen

According to this April article:  Prince Philip was paid a large yearly salary from the Sovereign Grant, per _Express_. He and Queen Elizabeth also reportedly invested money in stocks



> https://www.thelist.com/382576/heres-where-prince-philips-multi-million-dollar-estate-will-go/
> 
> 
> 
> *Here's Where Prince Philip's Multi-Million Dollar Estate Will Go*
> Amanda Lynne
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anwar Hussein/Getty Images
> Prince Philip passed away at the age of 99 on April 9, following a brief hospital stay. The Duke of Edinburgh was the longest-living consort in British history, per CNN. Philip's wife of over 70 years, Queen Elizabeth II, announced his death with an official statement to the public. "It is with deep sorrow that Her Majesty The Queen announces the death of her beloved husband, His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. His Royal Highness passed away peacefully this morning at Windsor Castle. Further announcements will be made in due course. The Royal Family join with people around the world in mourning his loss," the statement read.
> In the weeks before his death, the duke had spent a month in two London hospitals while being treated for an infection. He also underwent a procedure on his heart for a pre-existing condition. Philip's funeral has been set for April 17. The service will take place at St. George's Chapel at Windsor Castle.
> With Philip's passing comes many questions about the future of the royal family, such as who will inherit his estate. _Celebrity Net Worth_ reports that Philip was worth about $30 million at the time of his death, but he may have opted not to share his wealth with certain family members for a very important reason.
> *Queen Elizabeth may inherit it all*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Max Mumby/indigo/Getty Images
> Prince Philip was paid a large yearly salary from the Sovereign Grant, per _Express_. He and Queen Elizabeth also reportedly invested money in stocks, as well as their considerable art collection, and Elizabeth is expected to keep the assets due to their shared nature. The outlet also reports that Philip's four children, Prince Charles, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew, and Prince Edward, may inherit shares of his assets.
> However, the queen may stand to inherit all of Philip's estate if the duke opted to hand down the entirety of his wealth to his wife. By doing so, Philip's estate would utilize a legal clause that allows inheritance to transfer from sovereign to sovereign without additional fees and taxes (via _inews_). This same clause would eventually allow the Queen to pass down her assets to her eldest son, Charles, at the time of her death. Although, if Philip did leave any of his assets to anyone other than his wife, the royal family could be left paying millions in inheritance tax.
> "What's interesting is who he'll give it to," royal author David McClure said. "The most efficient way is to pass it spouse to spouse. If he left his entire estate to the Queen there'd be no tax to pay on it. The Royal Family keeps it in the family when it comes to inheritance. Traditionally, they pass it on to the next in line," McClure added.
Click to expand...


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> According to this April article:  Prince Philip was paid a large yearly salary from the Sovereign Grant, per _Express_. He and Queen Elizabeth also reportedly invested money in stocks



In Montecito...


----------



## Chanbal

Another use for the bump after Diana Doria...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, it is _our_ fault?  Okaaay, we are really done with you. Go away now,  just go away.

_Speaking candidly about his father's death, Zak explained that he felt a disconnect between his private emotions and the collective public mourning that occurred. 

'From my end I didn't get a chance to focus on the private grieving process until a year and a half after my dad passed away,' he stated. 

*Harry concurred, saying: 'We have a lot of shared experience when you see so many people around the world grieving for someone they feel they knew better than you did because you're unable to grieve yourself.' *








						Prince Harry speaks about how he dealt with Meghan feeling suicidal
					

Harry and Oprah reunited for a bonus town hall episode following the conclusion of their Apple+ TV series, The Me You Can't See.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, it is _our_ fault?  Okaaay, we are really done with you. Go away now,  just go away.
> 
> _Speaking candidly about his father's death, Zak explained that he felt a disconnect between his private emotions and the collective public mourning that occurred.
> 
> 'From my end I didn't get a chance to focus on the private grieving process until a year and a half after my dad passed away,' he stated.
> 
> *Harry concurred, saying: 'We have a lot of shared experience when you see so many people around the world grieving for someone they feel they knew better than you did because you're unable to grieve yourself.' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry speaks about how he dealt with Meghan feeling suicidal
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah reunited for a bonus town hall episode following the conclusion of their Apple+ TV series, The Me You Can't See.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


This is not right. Mental health is a very serious matter, and what OW, H, MM... are doing can have very serious consequences.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Harry, you're talking incoherently. Your mother would be so sad, ashamed and humiliated that you placed yourself under the control of people, who seek their self-aggrandizement through your family and possibly your own ruin.  You need mental health care by competent medical professionals, not from the buffoons, that are pulling your strings. Smarten up and get the help you need and deserve.


----------



## needlv

Well I always find this thread enlightening.  I did not know of the other story about Oprah and Hermes...so thanks for sharing. 

and Blaming the public now for not processing his grief over the death of his mother?? Seriously?  

MM has been too quiet.  Has she had the baby and is waiting for the right time to announce?

  Or is she just watching H embarrass himself and trying to distance herself So her own “brand” doesn’t suffer too much?

 Later in a divorce her lawyer is going to love all this discussion about H’s substance abuse when the fight for custody begins.  i bet she is already collecting “receipts”.


----------



## Chanbal

This is the compassion Harry and wife preach to the world... 

_*Prince Charles is said to be "hurt" and "disappointed" by the attacks from his younger son and wishes he would stop*.

A source told US Weekly that he is "boiling with anger" and is finding it hard to "hold back".

"*He feels tortured by Harry with his constant digs*," the insider explained.

"The general consensus within the royal family is to ignore Harry’s behaviour, to avoid fanning the flames, but Charles is finding it hard to hold back.

"He really wants to defend himself.”_









						'Hurt' Charles is 'boiling with anger' over Prince Harry's 'constan...
					

PRINCE Charles is "boiling with anger" and feels "tortured" by Prince Harry's constant criticisms of him as a parent, according to a royal source.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This is the compassion Harry and wife preach to the world...
> 
> _*Prince Charles is said to be "hurt" and "disappointed" by the attacks from his younger son and wishes he would stop*.
> 
> A source told US Weekly that he is "boiling with anger" and is finding it hard to "hold back".
> 
> "*He feels tortured by Harry with his constant digs*," the insider explained.
> 
> "The general consensus within the royal family is to ignore Harry’s behaviour, to avoid fanning the flames, but Charles is finding it hard to hold back.
> 
> "He really wants to defend himself.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Hurt' Charles is 'boiling with anger' over Prince Harry's 'constan...
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles is "boiling with anger" and feels "tortured" by Prince Harry's constant criticisms of him as a parent, according to a royal source.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Now I’m sure he understands how MM father feels.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Correct, it was. His mother was also given residence in Kensington Palace so she would never have had to work or earn a living. Her family's estate seems to be very much on wilting away as her brother did get into quite a bit of financial trouble.
> 
> $42 million seems like a lot of money for a penniless prince to have accumulated. I wonder where the money came from. Harry will definitely receive some money from his grandfather in his will. I think the same can be said for the Queen and Prince Charles. They will leave their children and grandchildren a few million each at the very least.


Well Phil’s probably inherited something since then as he was from a big family and I believe he outlived everyone. 

In general, though, rich people penniless doesn’t really mean they might be out on the streets - it just means they have to have second rate polo horses.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Well Phil’s probably inherited something since then as he was from a big family and I believe he outlived everyone.
> 
> In general, though, rich people penniless doesn’t really mean they might be out on the streets - it just means they have to have second rate polo horses.


True. My MIL was from a wealthy family. Her idea of poverty was to have only two servants. In her heyday, she had a house with only 5 bathrooms (  ), a housekeeper, 2 maids, a cook, a gardener and a night watchman.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> There will be substantial death duties
> And I doubt that he had a lot of liquid assets since he was born an impoverished prince, rather the estate is likely composed of possessions, unlikely to go to market eg cars, horses, family mementoes
> he was never the recipient of a large chunk of cash like H received from Diana
> so, H might get to select a memento if he goes to England to get it, but cash, IMHO no, not likely



Kate Middleton has a networth of millions by now, and that's 10 years into the marriage and not 70+. Besides his work for the family, he also authored dozens of books. Not sure where that idea stems from you can't make a fortune during a long life. Most of us die richer than we started out.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> There will be substantial death duties
> And I doubt that he had a lot of liquid assets since he was born an impoverished prince, rather the estate is likely composed of possessions, unlikely to go to market eg cars, horses, family mementoes
> he was never the recipient of a large chunk of cash like H received from Diana
> so, H might get to select a memento if he goes to England to get it, but cash, IMHO no, not likely



and I very much doubt any sum will be allowed to leave these shores, it's not uncommon for cash legacies to have stipulations and restrictions, he could have also amended H's legacy in a codicil.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> and I very much doubt any sum will be allowed to leave these shores, it's not uncommon for cash legacies to have stipulations and restrictions, he could have also amended H's legacy in a codicil.


I hope so.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, it is _our_ fault?  Okaaay, we are really done with you. Go away now,  just go away.
> 
> _Speaking candidly about his father's death, Zak explained that he felt a disconnect between his private emotions and the collective public mourning that occurred.
> 
> 'From my end I didn't get a chance to focus on the private grieving process until a year and a half after my dad passed away,' he stated.
> 
> *Harry concurred, saying: 'We have a lot of shared experience when you see so many people around the world grieving for someone they feel they knew better than you did because you're unable to grieve yourself.' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry speaks about how he dealt with Meghan feeling suicidal
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah reunited for a bonus town hall episode following the conclusion of their Apple+ TV series, The Me You Can't See.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



This was discussed in Lady CC's latest too. People are incensed.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Well I always find this thread enlightening.  I did not know of the other story about Oprah and Hermes...so thanks for sharing.
> 
> and Blaming the public now for not processing his grief over the death of his mother?? Seriously?
> 
> MM has been too quiet.  Has she had the baby and is waiting for the right time to announce?
> 
> Or is she just watching H embarrass himself and trying to distance herself So her own “brand” doesn’t suffer too much?
> 
> Later in a divorce her lawyer is going to love all this discussion about H’s substance abuse when the fight for custody begins.  i bet she is already collecting “receipts”.



If he's using his Diplomatic passport, the 'battle' will be in the UK and it very likely won't come-up at all.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm right in the middle right now I think...she elaborates on people being concerned for Harry like two years ago, thinking he'd possibly kill himself if she ever disposed of him. She just said something along the lines what I've said before, when she's done with him he'll be a shell.
> 
> ETA: not sure I understood that correctly as it was said in passing, but apparently she had a bit more details on what Raptor told him when she was being "suicidal". She does not give details but apparently it was shocking.


This is sounding more and more like my friend and her ex. He is incredibly manipulative and completely emotionally blackmailed her in their relationship and subsequently. She was absolutely convinced he was going to do it and it was her fault if he did. It’s so sick.



Chanbal said:


> Cringe must be delighted to hear this:
> 
> _Prince Philip gave parting gifts to three close staffers by leaving them money in his will — and his grandchildren, including Prince Harry, could all receive an inheritance, according to a report Thursday.
> 
> *The Duke of Edinburgh left behind an estimated $42 million (£30 million) when he died last month at the age of 99, the Sun reported.*_
> 
> While the Queen is expected to be the main beneficiary, he also made sure to take care of some of his aides — which is unconventional, a royal source has claimed.
> 
> _“Unlike some other royals, Prince Philip will be generous to the three men who looked after him,” the insider told the outlet.
> 
> “These include his private secretary Brigadier Archie Miller Bakewell, his page William Henderson and valet Stephen Niedojadlo.”
> 
> *The insider said that his grandchildren may also receive a windfall from the will — and that Prince Harry would be no exception, despite his public criticism of the royal family since stepping down from his official duties.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip reportedly left around $42 million in will — including to his staff
> 
> 
> The late prince, who passed away last month at the age of 99, made sure all members of his family received an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com






xincinsin said:


> True. My MIL was from a wealthy family. Her idea of poverty was to have only two servants. In her heyday, she had a house with only 5 bathrooms (  ), a housekeeper, 2 maids, a cook, a gardener and a night watchman.


My gosh 5 bathrooms, she’s lucky MM didn’t live near her or she’d probably start turn up with the paps and a care package of mouldy cake as a gesture of solidarity for an impoverished woman  
Some people have an a very weird sense of wealth. A relative of mine, who was originally a poor migrant herself, became friends with a quite well-known RSC stage actress and she was absolutely convinced her friend was secretly poor as she had wood floors 
She was always like ‘poor x can’t even afford a carpet!’

Oh  just to clarify the actress lived in a millionquid townhouse in London and was always working of course. It made no sense but she was convinced the wood floors couldn’t possibly be a choice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Finally, the icing on this cake. Maybe now people will see these grifters for who they really are.









						Harry started work on Apple series with Oprah BEFORE quitting royals
					

Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey started collaborating on their mental health docu series for Apple TV+ before the British royal and his wife, Meghan Markle, quit Buckingham Palace.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels said:


> This is sounding more and more like my friend and her ex. He is incredibly manipulative and completely emotionally blackmailed her in their relationship and subsequently. She was absolutely convinced he was going to do it and it was her fault if he did. It’s so sick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My gosh 5 bathrooms, she’s lucky MM didn’t live near her or she’d probably start turn up with the paps and a care package of mouldy cake as a gesture of solidarity for an impoverished woman
> Some people have an a very weird sense of wealth. A relative of mine, who was originally a poor migrant herself, became friends with a quite well-known RSC stage actress and she was absolutely convinced her friend was secretly poor as she had wood floors
> She was always like ‘poor x can’t even afford a carpet!’
> 
> Oh  just to clarify the actress lived in a millionquid townhouse in London and was always working of course. It made no sense but she was convinced the wood floors couldn’t possibly be a choice.


Old houses and apartments with wood floors is my idea of interior design bliss


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Finally, the icing on this cake. Maybe now people will see these grifters for who they really are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry started work on Apple series with Oprah BEFORE quitting royals
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey started collaborating on their mental health docu series for Apple TV+ before the British royal and his wife, Meghan Markle, quit Buckingham Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yes, this was the one QEII signed-off on, thinking it would be about war veterans (wonder where she could have possibly got that idea from?  )


----------



## papertiger

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Old houses and apartments with wood floors is my idea of interior design bliss



Unless you live underneath the apartment of course  .

One of my houses (Edwardian) has wooden floors too. It's so much happier without edge to edge carpets, old houses need to be able to breath.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Yes, this was the one QEII signed-off on, thinking it would be about war veterans (wonder where she could have possibly got that idea from?  )



Playing devil's advocat here, maybe that's how it started out and the current form, uh, evolved over time. Because can you imagine the level of deceitfulness if he really planned that sh*tshow while still a working royal. Then again...yeah.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> This is sounding more and more like my friend and her ex. He is incredibly manipulative and completely emotionally blackmailed her in their relationship and subsequently. She was absolutely convinced he was going to do it and it was her fault if he did. It’s so sick.


Happened to a former work colleague of mine.  It was hell at work for a while (worse for her obvs) and he dumped her the minute he met someone else, leaving her with mahoosive debts


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Cringe must be delighted to hear this:
> 
> _Prince Philip gave parting gifts to three close staffers by leaving them money in his will — and his grandchildren, including Prince Harry, could all receive an inheritance, according to a report Thursday.
> 
> *The Duke of Edinburgh left behind an estimated $42 million (£30 million) when he died last month at the age of 99, the Sun reported.*_
> 
> While the Queen is expected to be the main beneficiary, he also made sure to take care of some of his aides — which is unconventional, a royal source has claimed.
> 
> _“Unlike some other royals, Prince Philip will be generous to the three men who looked after him,” the insider told the outlet.
> 
> “These include his private secretary Brigadier Archie Miller Bakewell, his page William Henderson and valet Stephen Niedojadlo.”
> 
> *The insider said that his grandchildren may also receive a windfall from the will — and that Prince Harry would be no exception, despite his public criticism of the royal family since stepping down from his official duties.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip reportedly left around $42 million in will — including to his staff
> 
> 
> The late prince, who passed away last month at the age of 99, made sure all members of his family received an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Sorry Chanbal, I didn’t reply to you before. I was just going to say isn’t the reported wealth of the grifters 30mill?
Isnt it interesting that one of them is regarded as the poor relative in a way and the others are empowered go-getters ?

Weird coincidence.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> My gosh 5 bathrooms, she’s lucky MM didn’t live near her or she’d probably start turn up with the paps and a care package of mouldy cake as a gesture of solidarity for an impoverished woman


We had the media on our doorstep once because of something an associate had done. MIL was horrified and sent me out to shoo them away. She has dementia now, and at one stage kept accusing us of kidnapping her and holding her prisoner, because this couldn't be her house. Her house, she declared, was bigger (we don't have 5 bathrooms and a huge garden with a pond).

I don't know what her stans see in MM. She is so fake that anyone with 2 brain cells could see through her.


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> The Duke of Sussex has today announced a partnership with Oprah Winfrey, as co-creators and executive producers of a forthcoming mental health documentary series for Apple. The multi-part documentary series will focus on both mental illness and mental wellness.
> Harry on partnership with Oprah "Our hope is that this series will be positive, enlightening and inclusive – sharing global stories of unparalleled human spirit fighting back from the darkest places, and the opportunity for us to understand ourselves and those around us better."


Note date of post is April 10, 2019
The press release doesn't seem to mention anything about Harry and his EMDR/Reiki/Televised Therapy Sessions


----------



## lanasyogamama

Prince Harry Slept Through Phone Calls Alerting Prince Philip's Death
					

Prince Harry slept through a bunch of phone calls the morning of Prince Philip's death.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Getty
EXCLUSIVE
*PRINCE HARRYCOPS URGENTLY TRIED TO WAKE HARRY... With News Of Prince Philip's Death*

Share on Facebook
 
Share on Twitter
 
Share with Email
*5/28/2021 1:00 AM PT*
Prince Harry got a phone call recently with some tragic news, but he never answered the phone and cops ended up at his door.
Law enforcement sources tell TMZ ... back on April 9, someone from the U.S. Embassy began calling Harry just before 3 AM to inform him his grandfather, Prince Philip, had died.




Getty
It's unclear if Harry's ringer was turned off or whether he and Meghan were just sound sleepers, but no one answered. After repeated attempts, the Embassy rep called the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Dept. and asked if an officer could go to Harry's Montecito estate to inform him the Embassy was urgently trying to reach him.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry I’m bad at pulling in articles


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A mundane question: do we know where the Cartier diamond bracelet and matching earrings she wore for the wedding (bracelet for ceremony, earrings for evening reception) came from? Was it Harry's wedding gift or from Charles?


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> Getty
> EXCLUSIVE
> *PRINCE HARRYCOPS URGENTLY TRIED TO WAKE HARRY... With News Of Prince Philip's Death*
> 
> Share on Facebook
> 
> 
> Share on Twitter
> 
> 
> Share with Email
> *5/28/2021 1:00 AM PT*
> Prince Harry got a phone call recently with some tragic news, but he never answered the phone and cops ended up at his door.
> Law enforcement sources tell TMZ ... back on April 9, someone from the U.S. Embassy began calling Harry just before 3 AM to inform him his grandfather, Prince Philip, had died.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty
> It's unclear if Harry's ringer was turned off or whether he and Meghan were just sound sleepers, but no one answered. After repeated attempts, the Embassy rep called the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Dept. and asked if an officer could go to Harry's Montecito estate to inform him the Embassy was urgently trying to reach him.


This really odd isn’t it?  So he can be woken instantly by Meghan’s little snuffles, but it takes the cops hammering at the door to wake him up for an emergency?  Was he pi**ed?  Are all those security people they’re employing asleep on the job?


----------



## csshopper

Where was his wife while the phone was repeatedly ringing in the middle of the night?


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Getty
> EXCLUSIVE
> *PRINCE HARRYCOPS URGENTLY TRIED TO WAKE HARRY... With News Of Prince Philip's Death*
> 
> Share on Facebook
> 
> Share on Twitter
> 
> Share with Email
> *5/28/2021 1:00 AM PT*
> Prince Harry got a phone call recently with some tragic news, but he never answered the phone and cops ended up at his door.
> Law enforcement sources tell TMZ ... back on April 9, someone from the U.S. Embassy began calling Harry just before 3 AM to inform him his grandfather, Prince Philip, had died.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty
> It's unclear if Harry's ringer was turned off or whether he and Meghan were just sound sleepers, but no one answered. After repeated attempts, the Embassy rep called the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Dept. and asked if an officer could go to Harry's Montecito estate to inform him the Embassy was urgently trying to reach him.


Strange how he was informed only an hour before the rest of the world.
3am his time was 11am here in the UK. Prince Philip's death was announced at midday, 4am for Harry. 
But then again, it depends how long people were trying to phone him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Clearblueskies said:


> This really odd isn’t it?  So he can be woken instantly by *Meghan’s little snuffles, *but it takes the cops hammering at the door to wake him up for an emergency?  Was he pi**ed?  Are all those security people they’re employing asleep on the job?


----------



## lanasyogamama

TBH it is odd for the parents of a young child.  I slept so lightly when my daughter was young.


----------



## marietouchet

Hermes Zen said:


> According to this April article:  Prince Philip was paid a large yearly salary from the Sovereign Grant, per _Express_. He and Queen Elizabeth also reportedly invested money in stocks


Yes some money from Sovereign Grant but he had an expensive life style - horses, staff, travel etc A sum of say half a million pounds per year sounds like a lot to most of us, but does not feed many horses, it is all relative, he still had carriage horses at his death

i am sure that he and HM have a few stocks, but, again, his estate will be hit by death duties, and the liquid assets - stocks - will cover that, rather than the sale of mementoes
there was a huge sale of mementoes at the death of Margaret since her estate went to her children not the Queen
I don’t remember such a sale when the Queen Mum died and the estate went to QEII, I do remember hearing that the Queen Mum was in debt and QEII paid the debts out of pocket

PS as I understand it, only when the monarch dies and stuff passes to the next monarch , not the case in the death of PP, does the estate escape death duties


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Where was his wife while the phone was repeatedly ringing in the middle of the night?



Makes you hope they have staff at all times around in case there's an emergency with the kids.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also...the embassy called? None of the family thought to inform him personally? Or did they only go this route after he wouldn't pick up the phone on any of them (article doesn't mention them calling). Seems odd for people who have been nothing but indulgent with him.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Makes you hope they have staff at all times around in case there's an emergency with the kids.


Archie’s probably in another wing with the Nanny(s)


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> This really odd isn’t it?  So he can be woken instantly by Meghan’s little snuffles, but it takes the cops hammering at the door to wake him up for an emergency?  Was he pi**ed?  Are all those security people they’re employing asleep on the job?


Do you think the sniffles might be accompanied with knees to the groin or was he on a big bender the night before? (which we should obviously feel really sorry for him about by the way)

yeah it’s all cooked up to try and convince us they don’t have a team of staff. Maybe there was a slight delay as they were drawing lots to see who was going to get tea poured over them that morning.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also...the embassy called? None of the family thought to inform him personally? Or did *they only go this route after he wouldn't pick up the phone on any of them *(article doesn't mention them calling). Seems odd for people who have been nothing but indulgent with him.



My guess is the petulant prince wouldn't answer a call from the palace.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Do you want you think the sniffles might be accompanied with knees to the groin or was he on a big bender the night before? (which we should obviously feel really sorry for him about by the way)
> 
> yeah it’s all cooked up to try and convince us they don’t have a team of staff. Maybe there was a slight delay as they were drawing lots to see who was going to get tea poured over them that morning.


I was thinking along those lines   
As in - Harry thinks he woke up to Meghan’s stifled tears, but in reality she was shaking him by the shoulders and bashing him with her pillow!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> My guess is the petulant prince wouldn't answer a call from the palace.



I just came up with a third possibility, he was acting out so much leading up to Philip's death they really didn't feel like talking to him. Which brings me back to "Those people have been nothing but indulgent, if they are fed up, it's bad".


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just came up with a third possibility, he was acting out so much leading up to Philip's death they really didn't feel like talking to him. Which brings me back to "Those people have been nothing but indulgent, if they are fed up, it's bad".


Nah he sets DO NOT DISTURB at night and does not have BP in his emergency contacts ...
Sending the cops was totally over the top though ... it sorta says to me he retains some sort of diplomatic dignitary status


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also...the embassy called? None of the family thought to inform him personally? Or did they only go this route after he wouldn't pick up the phone on any of them (article doesn't mention them calling). Seems odd for people who have been nothing but indulgent with him.


The Palace probably tried to call him and, after a few unsuccessful attempts, passed the baton to the Embassy. 

PP was very sick, and it's weird that they didn't account for a phone call in the middle of the night. It's like they didn't care...


----------



## CarryOn2020

The embassy staff???!!!  Nothing quite says privilege like having the embassy staff summoned. 
Sheeesh. 


_But sources told MailOnline today that neither the US Embassy in London - nor the UK Embassy in Washington DC - would have made such a request to the police.

If the report from TMZ is true, it raises questions about how closely in touch Harry is with other senior members of the Royal Family following Megxit. But there has been no official statement on the claims from either embassy or Buckingham Palace.

The Duke of Edinburgh's death was announced by Buckingham Palace in a statement at 12pm UK time, which is eight hours ahead of California where it was 4am._








						Police 'were forced visit Harry's home to alert him of Philip's death'
					

Embassy officials allegedly asked the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office in California to send an officer to Prince Harry's £11million home after they failed to wake him by phone at 3am on April 9.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Nah he sets DO NOT DISTURB at night and does not have BP in his emergency contacts ...
> Sending the cops was totally over the top though ... it sorta says to me he retains some sort of diplomatic dignitary status


Whoever was in charge of contacting him from Embassy was likely trying to avoid a potential diplomatic incident. 

Since he didn't account for a phone call about PP in the middle of the night, I would have let him learn through the newspapers like everybody else.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Whoever was in charge of contacting him from Embassy was likely trying to avoid a potential diplomatic incident.
> 
> Since he didn't account for a phone call about PP in the middle of the night, *I would have let him learn through the newspapers like everybody else.*



Heaven forbid. We would have been treated to years of his whining about how he heard about his beloved grandfather's passing from the press.


----------



## sdkitty

Harry is getting a lot of mileage out of the Oprah show
From Huffpost








						Prince Harry And Robin Williams’ Son Open Up About Shared Experience Of Public Grief
					

“It’s like… how are you grieving more for someone who was my parent and I’m unable to grieve myself?”




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Chanbal

Jan Moir and her thoughtful words:   

_How I winced for the Cambridges during their trip to St Andrews, the university town where they met 20 years ago. The Scottish weather closed in to give them a traditional welcome; an onslaught of cold rain sweeping in from the North Sea, a grey embrace that soaked into every moment.

Yet Kate looked utterly delighted to be there. She always does, wherever she happens to be. 

On the cold streets of the old Scottish burgh, she played another strong coat game in sharply tailored tartan, later floating through it all in an elegant camel button-through: composed and queenly, always.

And I thought: *if the pair of them can shine on in these circumstances; if they can survive the dreich of a day like this, in the middle of a terrible week, in the aftermath of Bashir, Oprah and following the death and funeral of Prince Philip, then they can survive anything.

Over the past year, the pressures on Prince William have increased exponentially.* Prince *Harry’s royal criticisms are heartfelt, but he never stops to think how his words might affect his older brother, swelling his burden of duty.* But in public at least, William just quietly accepts it, and soldiers on.

In the past it has seemed wrong to egregiously compare the two couples, to sound the trumpet for the great Cambridge v Sussex universal challenge. This is your starter for ten. Who has behaved worst over the past 12 months?

Each couple has their strengths and weaknesses, their folly and forethought. Yet now the comparisons are inevitable, because their fates and how they are perceived around the world are irrevocably intertwined.

*This is all down to the Sussexes, who have turned the fortunes of the Royal Family into a terrible game of thrones: a battle of insult and endurance in which one couple can survive only if they annihilate the other.

It is a duel, metaphorically speaking. And I know which Duke and Duchess my money is on.*

For there are only so many confessional, hear-my-pain television specials that the Sussexes can inflict upon the world before the world tires of them and their self-absorption.

*If I hear another word about Harry’s inner struggle, I may well have a psychotic break of my own.* What about Prince William’s mental health? They never seem to consider that, or perhaps he is just collateral damage.

In contrast, the dogged, quiet, rainy-day good works of the Cambridges seem destined to cement a mutually appreciative relationship with the public.

*William has behaved impeccably under duress, no doubt appreciative of his weatherproof wife’s steadfast support.*

I used to think Kate and William were a bit boring. Now I am grateful for their unfailing sense of duty and acceptance of the arduous destiny that awaits them.

*The future king and queen are coming into their own.*_









						JAN MOIR: Even amid the storms Kate and Wills have wind in their sails
					

JAN MOIR: After one of the most turbulent periods of their lives, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge went to Scotland for a week-long official visit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Secret nods indeed
> Mine, all mine
> 
> View attachment 5094745
> 
> 
> View attachment 5094744


so all the jewels and crowns will pass to the heir to the throne, right?  to Charles and then to William.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Whoever was in charge of contacting him from Embassy was likely trying to avoid a potential diplomatic incident.
> 
> Since he didn't account for a phone call about PP in the middle of the night, I would have let him learn through the newspapers like everybody else.


Just imagine the fuss he’d’ve made if that happened!


Chanbal said:


>



In other words you think life’s great till *someone* persuades you otherwise.....and life gets very dark....


----------



## Chanbal

Archie's first words called into question by US royal expert
					

ARCHIE Harrison's first words have been called into question as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle continue to reveal private details about their family life.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> Harry is getting a lot of mileage out of the Oprah show
> From Huffpost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Robin Williams’ Son Open Up About Shared Experience Of Public Grief
> 
> 
> “It’s like… how are you grieving more for someone who was my parent and I’m unable to grieve myself?”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


If he were truly purposely driven he would be doing this as a "Working Royal" under the banner of the various mental health groups already established in the UK, some of which he helped to set up. His Wife entered the Firm with a background that could have been supportive and beneficial except for her major character flaws of greed, avarice, cunning, and spite. Bottom line, she wasn't getting the starring role, pouting wasn't enough so threatened suicide, and then they cut and ran to the US. 

Instead, it feels like he's participating in a trivialization of the issues. His only purpose being $$$ He accepts no responsibility, and facilitated by major marketer Oprah Winfrey, is selling the Markle/Ragland snake oil of "genetic pain" and "ancestral healing." Maybe next up is a line of nutritional supplements taken twice a day after you've slice and diced all your family and attacked the feeling world audience who had the audacity to mourn Diana. They've already hawked oatmeal drinks.

I agree "Harry is getting a lot of mileage out of the Oprah show" but I hope a lot of that "vehicle" has tread worn tires and will flatten in the end. He's set himself up for the negative tone and the scathing visuals in the world wide jibes being published.

Good that he is #6 and prayerfully never rises further because there is not a throne in the United Kingdom big enough to accommodate  his inflated ego.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> TBH it is odd for the parents of a young child.  I slept so lightly when my daughter was young.



This, this, this.  New parents are conditioned to sleep lightly since the baby wakes up frequently and at all hours.  I think my sleep patterns have permanently changed as a result. I still sleep very lightly even decades later.  But, I guess they have a night nanny or nurse who does the real heavy lifting when it comes to childcare.


----------



## youngster

In an opinion piece entitled, ‘Who destroyed Prince Harry?’ journalist Ed West looked at the phenomenon of so-called “toxic validation”, when an audience cheers on the more people make the wrong mistakes.

Referring to Harry’s recent criticism of Charles’ parenting — and those who have supported his endeavour — Mr West asked: “Is Harry benefitting from the validation he gets here?”
He continued: *“*_*The wisest advice anyone could give him would be to avoid the media as much as possible, never say anything about his relationship with his family, not mention political subjects and instead concentrate on uncontroversial good causes.

“Every time he does any of these things, he gets validation and becomes slightly worse off; more unpopular, more divisive, less likely to rebuild happy relationships, more likely to feel guilt and self-disgust later in life.”*_

Harry's popularity in the UK has indeed plummeted to its lowest ever level, according to YouGov polls after his Oprah interview back in March.

Mr West also suggested in his piece for UnHerd that Harry is still “cheered on by an audience that dislikes the Royal Family”, whom he claims will sometimes be “swayed by fashion and sometimes they are just bored and want drama”.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Heaven forbid. We would have been treated to years of his whining about how he heard about his beloved grandfather's passing from the press.


Now we'll get years of him whining that his father didn't even bother to tell him, it was someone else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Whoever was in charge of contacting him from Embassy was likely trying to avoid a potential diplomatic incident.
> 
> Since he didn't account for a phone call about PP in the middle of the night, I would have let him learn through the newspapers like everybody else.



Hazz would have used that against the BRF. “See how awful they are? They couldn’t even call meeeee.” 
Victimology 101.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Mr West also suggested in his piece for UnHerd that Harry is still “*cheered on by an audience that dislikes the Royal Family*”, whom he claims will sometimes be “swayed by fashion and sometimes they are just bored and want drama”.



Perhaps cheered on by loyal royalists who want to see him banished?  He is terrible for the brand.


----------



## sdkitty

from In Style magazine.....not what I'd call a positive story on Harry
Queen Elizabeth Is Reportedly "Deeply Upset" with Harry's Latest Comments About the Royal Family | InStyle


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> so all the jewels and crowns will pass to the heir to the throne, right?  to Charles and then to William.


Crowns ie the bling stored in the Tower of London may be technically state property ??? But, yeah Charles will get to wear them and they dont live at Buckingham Palace ...

The historical tiaras, necklaces, brooches etc are all in vaults at BP, and will pass to Charles then William, who will get to wear them too ... LOL These may have a different legal status than the Tower bling, but, it is not as if the monarch will sell any of it

MY GUESS - the tiaras & brooches are part of a GRAND deal. No death duties are paid if they pass to the next monarch, but Charles will not be able to sell them.  In recent years, none of this BP bling is gifted outright to anyone, but some of the Queen Mum's tiaras are on "permanent" loan eg to Camilla, but she will have to give them back.

Camilla and Kate do own personal jewels. Example: Camilla has a snake necklace (Bulgari?) not a historical piece, a gift from Charles prior to marriage. That will pass to Camilla's children , who will have to pay death duties on it.


----------



## Chagall

Genie27 said:


> I kinda hate watching this train wreck, formerly known as Prince. It’s obvious he has a lot of trauma, and needs to do a lot of difficult and personal work to get better. But the people around him are not looking out for his interests. And I doubt he’s done any of the work.
> 
> It also strikes me that for all his complaining about being trapped in his twenties, he didn’t explore any career options available to him? He may not have been academically gifted, but there are other career/life paths available after he hit the glass ceiling in the army, especially when money is no object. Professional polo player? High stakes strip poker? Most ordinary mortals pick a profession or interest to pursue. Some unfortunate sods have no choice in the matter at all other than to meet the most basic needs. Some lucky ones can choose not to do a 9-5 but explore whatever takes their fancy
> 
> Every time he opens his mouth these days, it underlines how tone deaf and entitled he is. Whining and whingeing about how *very hard* his life is, to an audience that is either staring at him gobsmacked, or are fans who are in awe of his munificence in sharing his canned half digested therapy-speak. Like so deep. Whoa!
> 
> And don’t forget, we need to feel sorry (er compassion) for how much of the world he is carrying, unlike the rest of us who don’t get cut off by our dads and have to use mommy’s millions.


Harry really went through trauma loosing his mother at a young age, I don’t debate that. However, I actually know several people who lost a parent young and managed to grow up to be normal successful adults. They also didn’t have all the support and wealth Harry did. He had a father, grandparents, loads of relatives to turn to and servants to care for him. There was no going out to work at a young age to support a struggling family financially because of the deceased parents lost income etc. I call BS on all these ‘flavour of the month’ mental health issues.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Crowns ie the bling stored in the Tower of London may be technically state property ??? But, yeah Charles will get to wear them and they dont live at Buckingham Palace ...
> 
> The historical tiaras, necklaces, brooches etc are all in vaults at BP, and will pass to Charles then William, who will get to wear them too ... LOL These may have a different legal status than the Tower bling, but, it is not as if the monarch will sell any of it
> 
> MY GUESS - the tiaras & brooches are part of a GRAND deal. No death duties are paid if they pass to the next monarch, but Charles will not be able to sell them.  In recent years, none of this BP bling is gifted outright to anyone, but some of the Queen Mum's tiaras are on "permanent" loan eg to Camilla, but she will have to give them back.
> 
> Camilla and Kate do own personal jewels. Example: Camilla has a snake necklace (Bulgari?) not a historical piece, a gift from Charles prior to marriage. That will pass to Camilla's children , who will have to pay death duties on it.



I'm sure the Queen owns a few personal pieces but the rest is all the Crowns and that stays the property of the Crown and not to one monarch.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Crowns ie the bling stored in the Tower of London may be technically state property ??? But, yeah Charles will get to wear them and they dont live at Buckingham Palace ...
> 
> The historical tiaras, necklaces, brooches etc are all in vaults at BP, and will pass to Charles then William, who will get to wear them too ... LOL These may have a different legal status than the Tower bling, but, it is not as if the monarch will sell any of it
> 
> MY GUESS - the tiaras & brooches are part of a GRAND deal. No death duties are paid if they pass to the next monarch, but Charles will not be able to sell them.  In recent years, none of this BP bling is gifted outright to anyone, but some of the Queen Mum's tiaras are on "permanent" loan eg to Camilla, but she will have to give them back.
> 
> Camilla and Kate do own personal jewels. Example: Camilla has a snake necklace (Bulgari?) not a historical piece, a gift from Charles prior to marriage. That will pass to Camilla's children , who will have to pay death duties on it.


Kate will look beautiful in those crowns and jewels


----------



## Aimee3

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Old houses and apartments with wood floors is my idea of interior design bliss


This reminds me of a movie I saw (forgot the name of it) where these 2 poor-ish boys go to a very rich friend’s house for the first time.  It’s a big mansion estate type house with a butler etc.  There are priceless rugs in the wooden floors and one boy says to the other, I’m paraphrasing here) “what?  They can’t afford wall to wall carpet?  Even my parents have wall to wall”


----------



## jelliedfeels

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Old houses and apartments with wood floors is my idea of interior design bliss





papertiger said:


> Unless you live underneath the apartment of course  .
> 
> One of my houses (Edwardian) has wooden floors too. It's so much happier without edge to edge carpets, old houses need to be able to breath.


I agree, old houses aren’t built for fitted carpets - a couple of beautiful antique rugs on the other hand and lots of space to let the floorboards creak.


xincinsin said:


> We had the media on our doorstep once because of something an associate had done. MIL was horrified and sent me out to shoo them away. She has dementia now, and at one stage kept accusing us of kidnapping her and holding her prisoner, because this couldn't be her house. Her house, she declared, was bigger (we don't have 5 bathrooms and a huge garden with a pond).
> 
> I don't know what her stans see in MM. She is so fake that anyone with 2 brain cells could see through her.


Aw that is sad & good for you for all your support as it’s a difficult condition to cohabit with but it’s good she’s keeping her priorities on the bathrooms straight.
I honestly think it’s just factions pick a side and ignore whatever doesn’t fit the narrative.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> A mundane question: do we know where the Cartier diamond bracelet and matching earrings she wore for the wedding (bracelet for ceremony, earrings for evening reception) came from? Was it Harry's wedding gift or from Charles?


I do remember reading somewhere they were a personal gift from Charles. You know, as he was such a disdainful villain to her.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also...the embassy called? None of the family thought to inform him personally? Or did they only go this route after he wouldn't pick up the phone on any of them (article doesn't mention them calling). Seems odd for people who have been nothing but indulgent with him.


It does doesn’t it? Almost untrue


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure which royal family has the most stunning tiaras, the BRF is definitely in the top 3 or 4.
Since H&M made such a fuss over a tiara at their over-the-top wedding, I am hoping we get a tiara event soon. Love seeing QE, Camilla, Kate, Sophie, etc. in those beauties.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I don't know what her stans see in MM. She is so fake that anyone with 2 brain cells could see through her.


Thinking about it, I think some people actually like nasty behaviour for the ‘drama’ too. I mean I can’t understand how anyone couldn’t see that Jeffrey star is a piece of work but people would just be on his side because he’s ‘real’ or a ‘b*tch’ or something. They like the nastiness. 


papertiger said:


> I'm sure the Queen owns a few personal pieces but the rest is all the Crowns and that stays the property of the Crown and not to one monarch.


She definitely has the kind of collection which would cause a international meltdown on the jewellery box thread.   Even her personal brooches alone....


----------



## V0N1B2

csshopper said:


> If he were truly purposely driven he would be doing this as a "Working Royal" under the banner of the various mental health groups already established in the UK, some of which he helped to set up. His Wife entered the Firm with a background that could have been supportive and beneficial except for her major character flaws of greed, avarice, cunning, and spite. Bottom line, she wasn't getting the starring role, pouting wasn't enough so threatened suicide, and then they cut and ran to the US.
> 
> Instead, it feels like he's participating in a trivialization of the issues. His only purpose being $$$ He accepts no responsibility, and facilitated by major marketer Oprah Winfrey, is selling the Markle/Ragland snake oil of "genetic pain" and "ancestral healing." Maybe next up is a line of nutritional supplements taken twice a day after you've slice and diced all your family and attacked the feeling world audience who had the audacity to mourn Diana. They've already hawked oatmeal drinks.
> 
> I agree "Harry is getting a lot of mileage out of the Oprah show" but I hope a lot of that "vehicle" has tread worn tires and will flatten in the end. He's set himself up for the negative tone and the scathing visuals in the world wide jibes being published.
> 
> Good that he is #6 and prayerfully never rises further because there is not a throne in the United Kingdom big enough to accommodate  his inflated ego.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure which royal family has the most stunning tiaras, the BRF is definitely in the top 3 or 4.
> Since H&M made such a fuss over a tiara at their over-the-top wedding, I am hoping we get a tiara event soon. Love seeing QE, Camilla, Kate, Sophie, etc. in those beauties.
> 
> View attachment 5095495


 The Russian Fringe Tiara


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The Palace probably tried to call him and, after a few unsuccessful attempts, passed the baton to the Embassy.
> 
> PP was very sick, and it's weird that they didn't account for a phone call in the middle of the night. It's like they didn't care...


That phone call in the middle of the night is what I dread.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> Harry's popularity in the UK has indeed plummeted to its lowest ever level, according to YouGov polls after his Oprah interview back in March.


Well, as Lady CC mentioned, he's not playing to the UK market. His only interest lies with the American one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> That phone call in the middle of the night is what I dread.


Sleeping through it is even worse. 

Having TMZ tell the world you slept through it is worse again!!!


----------



## Hermes Zen

marietouchet said:


> Yes some money from Sovereign Grant but he had an expensive life style - horses, staff, travel etc A sum of say half a million pounds per year sounds like a lot to most of us, but does not feed many horses, it is all relative, he still had carriage horses at his death
> 
> i am sure that he and HM have a few stocks, but, again, his estate will be hit by death duties, and the liquid assets - stocks - will cover that, rather than the sale of mementoes
> there was a huge sale of mementoes at the death of Margaret since her estate went to her children not the Queen
> I don’t remember such a sale when the Queen Mum died and the estate went to QEII, I do remember hearing that the Queen Mum was in debt and QEII paid the debts out of pocket
> 
> PS as I understand it, only when the monarch dies and stuff passes to the next monarch , not the case in the death of PP, does the estate escape death duties



This all so interesting to me. I also read this re: Passing on stuff to the next monarch ...

The Queen could avoid paying inheritance tax on the Duke of Edinburgh’s private wealth if he has handed all of his multi-million pound estate to the monarch. 
Married couples are allowed to pass their estate to their spouse tax-free when they die – avoiding a 40 percent tax above a £325,000 threshold. 
An obscure legal clause also allows inheritance to pass from “sovereign to sovereign” or the consort of a sovereign to a reigning monarch, meaning that the Queen could pass it on to Prince Charles when she dies without also paying tax. 



> https://inews.co.uk/news/prince-phi...-estate-inheritance-tax-prince-charles-952004
> 
> *Prince Philip’s £10m estate could be passed to Queen without tax under married couples’ exemption*


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure which royal family has the most stunning tiaras, the BRF is definitely in the top 3 or 4.
> Since H&M made such a fuss over a tiara at their over-the-top wedding, I am hoping we get a tiara event soon. Love seeing QE, Camilla, Kate, Sophie, etc. in those beauties.
> 
> View attachment 5095495


Is this an unpopular opinion... the sparkle of that tiara focuses all my attention on it and not on the Queen in her prime.

It's almost like there's such a thing as too much sparkle... and I love sparkle, just not so much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Yeah, only the people who also need someone in their life to tell them where and when to stand, walk, sit, talk.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Jayne1 said:


> Is this an unpopular opinion... the sparkle of that tiara focuses all my attention on it and not on the Queen in her prime.
> 
> It's almost like there's such a thing as too much sparkle... and I love sparkle, just not so much.


It could be the lighting at the event which makes it super sparkly? 
Princess Beatrice was loaned the Queen Mary fringe tiara for her wedding which is slightly less bling but much les sparkly in the daytime, if that makes sense ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

Jayne1 said:


> That phone call in the middle of the night is what I dread.


It is a very difficult time of life, when we are expecting a middle of the night call. 
I recall I had a go-bag packed ready and phone always charged, especially overnight, for almost whole year when my mother was ill. We drove almost one side of the Uk to the other in about 2 hours in the very early morning one winter, a 3+ hour trip usually.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm sure the Queen owns a few personal pieces but the rest is all the Crowns and that stays the property of the Crown and not to one monarch.


Yes , her engagement ring came from diamonds of Philip’s mother, so, it is personal property
but honestly, not MAJOR bling lol


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> It could be the lighting at the event which makes it super sparkly?
> Princess Beatrice was loaned the Queen Mary fringe tiara for her wedding which is slightly less bling but much les sparkly in the daytime, if that makes sense ?


That tiara is solid diamonds , from ear to ear , not like the scroll work tiaras which have a lot of gaps in them
and that tiara does not waste any time on sapphires, pearls , rubies or emeralds
also the tiaras are rarely seen in daylight except at weddings , so, yes Beatrice sparkled and the sequined dress was a TDF match in the sparkle category
Hmmmmmm ... MM did not sparkle much in her diamond tiara ... no clue why ... Dress was too white ??? ... discuss


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> It is a very difficult time of life, when we are expecting a middle of the night call.
> I recall I had a go-bag packed ready and phone always charged, especially overnight, for almost whole year when my mother was ill. We drove almost one side of the Uk to the other in about 2 hours in the very early morning one winter, a 3+ hour trip usually.


I think H was dreading the call for more than one reason .... and forgot to keep phone charged


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> This year is going to be bad. Fire threat is more of a problem for non-wealthy.
> 
> H&M will benefit from likely better fire protection and response (wealthy folk area), and they have the money to afford fire insurance at the higher premiums, and the coverage/finances to rebuild and replace.
> 
> Most in high-risk fire areas have insurance non-renewed or offered little coverage at premiums they can't afford. When there is a fire... What would be a big inconvenience for H&M can be impossible to recover from for most.
> 
> Not to mention when the state does burn, the toxic smoke makes it impossible to go outside for weeks at a time. Even if you are hundreds of miles from a fire. It's awful. That's probably the biggest problem H&M will have to deal with this summer.


*100% SPOT-ON!!!* .. now, those of us who live in the San Fernando Valley (_often referred to as just "The Valley"_), it is a WHOLE DIFFERENT story!  Heck, we barely get protection from the LAPD; the LAFD is a little better .. but you better believe that they will go to a wealthier spot of the Valley (_like Clark Gable Estates_) before coming to where I am (_I'm not complaining about where I live, it's a small village filled with real-deal Mid-Century Modern homes_).  A few years back the fires were horrendous around us; we literally had one on every side of our house.  Of course, the Santa Ana winds were howling, the air was THICK with smoke such that you had to wear a mask, the inside of our house smelled smokey (_which freaked out our kitties_) and the LA County officials told everyone to limit their amount of time outdoors due to the "*toxic*" smoke!  

Unfortunately, with the super-dry climate, all the underbrush that is not dealt with .. and then, the *STUPID *people (_and not just the homeless - we have some pretty DUMB-a$$ neighbors_) who then let off fireworks .. and it only takes *1 SPARK* to set a fire and it takes less than a minute for that to turn into a fierce fire.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Prince Harry Slept Through Phone Calls Alerting Prince Philip's Death
> 
> 
> Prince Harry slept through a bunch of phone calls the morning of Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I saw that.  I wonder if that was included in the "nine times police were called to the property".  Them not picking up the phone does not equal intruder alert and needing more security.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



This from a man who grew up with the Queen's English?  WTF?  
English isn't my mother tongue and I write it better than this foolish English prince!


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> This, this, this.  New parents are conditioned to sleep lightly since the baby wakes up frequently and at all hours.  I think my sleep patterns have permanently changed as a result. *I still sleep very lightly even decades later. * But, I guess they have a night nanny or nurse who does the real heavy lifting when it comes to childcare.


Heck, my first born is now 19 and I STILL don't sleep well!  I remember when I was pregnant with him, a librarian once told me to sleep as much as I could, "because once you have a child, you will NEVER sleep well again!"  Now I know what she meant!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yes , her engagement ring came from diamonds of Philip’s mother, so, it is personal property
> but honestly, not MAJOR bling lol



She has a ton of major bling that is her personal property...gifts from her parents (e.g. they gave her Kate's wedding tiara for her 18th birthday), gifts from her grandmother (two items I can recall from the top of my head: the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland tiara plus a pretty substantial diamond rivière necklace), pieces she inherited from her mother and grandmother (e.g. the Queen Mother inherited a huge collection from her friend Mrs. Greville, which was then inherited by the Queen and has massive pieces like the Greville tiara or the Greville necklace; the Queen's wedding tiara which was originally a gift from Queen Mary to the Queen Mother), pieces her MIL gave her (not only did the diamonds for her engagement ring and wedding bracelet come from a dismantled tiara, Alice also gave her another tiara as a wedding gift), pieces Philip gave her over the years, pieces she herself commissioned including several tiaras.

Just in case this comes up next after "Philip is poor" and "The Queen has no jewelry": the Queen also owns castles and country houses in her own right, not as the reigning monarch


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> (_I'm not complaining about where I live, it's a small village filled with real-deal Mid-Century Modern homes_).



I LOVE Mid-Century Modern.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Yes , her engagement ring came from diamonds of Philip’s mother, so, it is personal property
> but honestly, not MAJOR bling lol



But when you consider who his mother was (and related to) I'm sure amazing history and sentimental value.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> That tiara is solid diamonds , from ear to ear , not like the scroll work tiaras which have a lot of gaps in them
> and that tiara does not waste any time on sapphires, pearls , rubies or emeralds
> also the tiaras are rarely seen in daylight except at weddings , so, yes Beatrice sparkled and the sequined dress was a TDF match in the sparkle category
> Hmmmmmm ... MM did not sparkle much in her diamond tiara ... no clue why ... Dress was too white ??? ... discuss


It’s a knockout but I’m going to have to disagree on coloured gemstones being time wasters  

I think the dress was trying to look like minimalist and sculptural givenchy so they tried to give her one of the more minimalist tiaras to match the vibe. The bandeau is comparatively understated jewel wise and all about the smooth shapes and flower detail.

I think the emerald she wanted or the fringe would not have worked - she’d have looked like the Statue of Liberty. (Not that I thought it was the most successful look on the day but I think they helped her out!)


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> That tiara is solid diamonds , from ear to ear , not like the scroll work tiaras which have a lot of gaps in them
> and that tiara does not waste any time on sapphires, pearls , rubies or emeralds
> also the tiaras are rarely seen in daylight except at weddings , so, yes Beatrice sparkled and the sequined dress was a TDF match in the sparkle category
> Hmmmmmm ... MM did not sparkle much in her diamond tiara ... no clue why ... Dress was too white ??? ... discuss



I _love_ QEII's tiara there. Stunning!


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> This from a man who grew up with the Queen's English?  WTF?
> English isn't my mother tongue and I write it better than this foolish English prince!



When people write/talk gibberish (word salad) it's usually because they didn't/don't really understand the concepts and issues behind keywords, but they use those keywords and on-trend pseudo-speak so it kinda sounds like you _should_ know what they're talking about.  

I professionally dissect language every day, I know a bunch of crap when I see/hear it. We are not wrong on this thread, both H&M only speak BS. 

Too bad, because mental health issues are very important (what they're actually talking about is mental-illness, but somewhere, someone thought it was too confusing with mentally handicapped which is/can be different). Mental _health_ is what we all aim to have.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> It could be the lighting at the event which makes it super sparkly?
> Princess Beatrice was loaned the Queen Mary fringe tiara for her wedding which is slightly less bling but much les sparkly in the daytime, if that makes sense ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5095600


Not sure how popular this opinion is, but I think Anne’s is the best royal wedding ensemble we’ve seen full stop.
It’s so Kate Bush to wear a Tudor gown and I love how the lines of the dress match the tiara and minimal veil.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Not sure how popular this opinion is, but I think Anne’s is the best royal wedding ensemble we’ve seen full stop.
> It’s so Kate Bush to wear a Tudor gown and I love how the lines of the dress match the tiara and minimal veil.


I agree, it’s a fabulous dress


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, it’s a fabulous dress


I feel a bit of a wedding philistine at times because I think I just don’t like a lot of the dress styles or details typical to wedding dresses. So I tend to prefer alternative designs.

I also think white is a really difficult colour as texture doesn’t stand out.
I feel like even the raptor’s dress would look much better in another colour where you could actually see the weave and sheen of the silk.
Add on - She should’ve gone for Ivory at the very least for the sake of the dress and after all we all know it wasn’t her first time at the rodeo.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> I feel a bit of a wedding philistine at times because I think I just don’t like a lot of the dress styles or details typical to wedding dresses. So I tend to prefer alternative designs.
> 
> I also think white is a really difficult colour as texture doesn’t stand out.
> I feel like even the raptor’s dress would look much better in another colour where you could actually see the weave and sheen of the silk.
> Add on - She should’ve gone for Ivory at the very least for the sake of the dress and after all we all know it wasn’t her first time at the rodeo.


Megs dress would’ve looked nice if it fitted her and if she’d chosen a better fabric.  I dislike those strapless wedding dresses everyone’s wearing lately.  I don’t think they’re flattering at all


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5095600


I love these pics with a great tiara, that doesn't outshine the happiness on the brides' faces.


----------



## sdkitty

more plates smashing in CA over this one?


Kate Middleton, Prince William See Drive-In Movie in Prince Philip's Car | PEOPLE.com


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *100% SPOT-ON!!!* .. now, those of us who live in the San Fernando Valley (_often referred to as just "The Valley"_), it is a WHOLE DIFFERENT story!  Heck, we barely get protection from the LAPD; the LAFD is a little better .. but you better believe that they will go to a wealthier spot of the Valley (_like Clark Gable Estates_) before coming to where I am (_I'm not complaining about where I live, it's a small village filled with real-deal Mid-Century Modern homes_).  A few years back the fires were horrendous around us; we literally had one on every side of our house.  Of course, the Santa Ana winds were howling, the air was THICK with smoke such that you had to wear a mask, the inside of our house smelled smokey (_which freaked out our kitties_) and the LA County officials told everyone to limit their amount of time outdoors due to the "*toxic*" smoke!
> 
> Unfortunately, with the super-dry climate, all the underbrush that is not dealt with .. and then, the *STUPID *people (_and not just the homeless - we have some pretty DUMB-a$$ neighbors_) who then let off fireworks .. and it only takes *1 SPARK* to set a fire and it takes less than a minute for that to turn into a fierce fire.


yes, we live in a fire area too.....DH is urging me to get our boy cat used to being picked up (which he doesn't like) in case we ever need to get him out in a fire


----------



## Chloe302225

marietouchet said:


> Yes , her engagement ring came from diamonds of Philip’s mother, so, it is personal property
> but honestly, not MAJOR bling lol



She actually owns a lot of major bling personally. For starters the entire Greville bequest is personal jewellery and it contains some of the Queen's most beautiful pieces with multiple tiaras like the emerald one Eugenie wore on her wedding day. The Queen's personal jewellery vault is almost as big the one left to the monarch and we are not counting in her brooches as yet.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> more plates smashing in CA over this one?
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, Prince William See Drive-In Movie in Prince Philip's Car | PEOPLE.com


Like this?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Plates are fine, Hazzie prefers balls.
From 2010,





						Prince Harry throws out first pitch at New York Mets game after cementing special relationship between US and British forces
					

Harry walked to the mound when the Mets ran onto the field before the first inning Saturday and received polite applause from the Citi Field crowd.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







Such a cool guy - not!


----------



## gracekelly

How an uneducated man with no common sense is giving advice to vulnerable people is beyond me.  Oprah is just as at fault. Anything for ratings must be her motto. I just hope that lasting damage isn’t done to a person at risk.  Will some professional speak up about this?


----------



## caramelize126

Sharont2305 said:


> Hope this link works. From 2016. I remember watching this. The presenters Ant and Dec followed Prince Charles for a year.




This was so nice, thanks for sharing.

No surprises that Harry "jokes" about offloading work to his father


----------



## bag-mania

They keep playing the victim card. Here’s an article in People where he not only stabs his family in the back, he twists the knife a couple of times.



			Redirect Notice


----------



## Hermes Zen

CeeJay said:


> *100% SPOT-ON!!!* .. now, those of us who live in the San Fernando Valley (_often referred to as just "The Valley"_), it is a WHOLE DIFFERENT story!  Heck, we barely get protection from the LAPD; the LAFD is a little better .. but you better believe that they will go to a wealthier spot of the Valley (_like Clark Gable Estates_) before coming to where I am (_I'm not complaining about where I live, it's a small village filled with real-deal Mid-Century Modern homes_).  A few years back the fires were horrendous around us; we literally had one on every side of our house.  Of course, the Santa Ana winds were howling, the air was THICK with smoke such that you had to wear a mask, the inside of our house smelled smokey (_which freaked out our kitties_) and the LA County officials told everyone to limit their amount of time outdoors due to the "*toxic*" smoke!
> 
> Unfortunately, with the super-dry climate, all the underbrush that is not dealt with .. and then, the *STUPID *people (_and not just the homeless - we have some pretty DUMB-a$$ neighbors_) who then let off fireworks .. and it only takes *1 SPARK* to set a fire and it takes less than a minute for that to turn into a fierce fire.



I know exactly what you are talking about CeeJay!  We lived in a L.A. neighborhood that every 4th of July it felt like we were in a war zone. Thick smoke and major rockets and fireworks popping off.  We would have to hose everything down before and be home just in case there was a spark!    We have since moved out of So Cal. We also LOVE mid-century homes !!!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plates are fine, Hazzie prefers balls.
> From 2010,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry throws out first pitch at New York Mets game after cementing special relationship between US and British forces
> 
> 
> Harry walked to the mound when the Mets ran onto the field before the first inning Saturday and received polite applause from the Citi Field crowd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5095689
> 
> 
> Such a cool guy - not!
> 
> View attachment 5095690



I’m glad that didn’t happen recently. If I was at a game where Harry threw out the first pitch you’d be able to hear my boos from outside the park.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has a ton of major bling that is her personal property...gifts from her parents (e.g. they gave her Kate's wedding tiara for her 18th birthday), gifts from her grandmother (two items I can recall from the top of my head: the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland tiara plus a pretty substantial diamond rivière necklace), pieces she inherited from her mother and grandmother (e.g. the Queen Mother inherited a huge collection from her friend Mrs. Greville, which was then inherited by the Queen and has massive pieces like the Greville tiara or the Greville necklace; the Queen's wedding tiara which was originally a gift from Queen Mary to the Queen Mother), pieces her MIL gave her (not only did the diamonds for her engagement ring and wedding bracelet come from a dismantled tiara, Alice also gave her another tiara as a wedding gift), pieces Philip gave her over the years, pieces she herself commissioned including several tiaras.
> 
> Just in case this comes up next after "Philip is poor" and "The Queen has no jewelry": the Queen also owns castles and country houses in her own right, not as the reigning monarch



I'm SITTING HERE DROOLING reading about all the jewelry!! STOP IT stop IT PLEASE !


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Hope this link works. From 2016. I remember watching this. The presenters Ant and Dec followed Prince Charles for a year.




Lots of insight in this video, especially in view of Hazzie’s comments now!  Same ill-fitting clothes, same distracting hand gestures, but the glowing praise of Charles is [almost] shocking.
Thank you for this video


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Hope this link works. From 2016. I remember watching this. The presenters Ant and Dec followed Prince Charles for a year.




It’s like Harry doesn’t realize how unhappy he is. If only there was someone who could come along and tell him how everything he has ever known is evil and wrong.

Seriously, what the hell happened?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lots of insight in this video, especially in view of Hazzie’s comments now!  Same ill-fitting clothes, same distracting hand gestures, but the glowing praise of Charles is [almost] shocking.
> Thank you for this video


I didn't follow the younger royals for some time except to look at pics in magazines and H was never my favourite. I thought he was a jokester playing for the cameras and trying to make W look as foolish as himself. My opinion hasn't changed in spite of that video. I think he blamed his family (TRF) for Diana's death and that with every stunt he pulled, he was getting even with them. Now, he and Princess Pinocchio are making a mockery of the RF and monarchy to earn millions of $$$ that the RF wouldn't freely give them.


----------



## Chanbal

Cringe will be upset if he says yes.   

_Piers Morgan__ has claimed ITV want him to return to Good Morning Britain after his bombshell exit from the show back in March.

The presenter, 56, quit the breakfast show following his comments about Meghan Markle and subsequent onscreen clash with co-star Alex Beresford.  

He said bosses have 'reached out' about a possible return and that he believes he could 'take the ratings back to where I left them' after a slump in viewing figures.









						Piers Morgan claims ITV bosses want him BACK
					

The presenter, 56, famously quit the breakfast show following his controversial comments about Meghan Markle and subsequent onscreen clash with co-star Alex Beresford.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Sophisticatted

Harry’s undies are sticking out in that pitch picture.


----------



## Chanbal

Jan Moir and Piers Morgan...   


_We meet for breakfast in a West London cafe. I get there early, but my frenemy Piers Morgan is even earlier.

‘I’m not having you saying I kept you waiting,’ he says, already halfway through his first powerful coffee in his power booth on what is probably a pretty standard Monday morning power trip.

Oh my god, I think. Here we go. Piers is just so combative and competitive, it is exhausting. On screen and off he is the arch controversialist, a Mr Marmite who revels in his reputation as someone who is either loved or hated, adored or abhorred.
...
*Before we met, I thought it might be hard getting Piers to talk about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but au contraire, try getting him to stop. *I feel like an ant trying to halt a thundering Meg-meteorite, a paper boat going over the Meg-rapids without a paddle. Piers still has so much to say and he is going to get his oar in, no matter what. He has strong views about Oprah’s interviews with the couple.

*‘It is very exploitative,’ he claims. ‘Surely Oprah can see that Prince Harry is unravelling?

‘But she is allowing him to vent and bare his soul, possibly creating an irreparable rift with his family in the process. It makes me feel very uncomfortable.*’ This from the man who regularly makes his celebrity guests cry on his Life Stories (ITV) show. 

During the upcoming interview with Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader breaks down multiple times, and not just about the recent election results.

‘I never set out to make people cry. And it’s not about making people cry, it is about showing their human side.

‘The Keir Starmer show is very powerful television.’

Very powerful. Just like Meghan.

*‘Yes. What we are dealing with is a very manipulative actress who knows exactly the hot button issues to press to create, in her eyes, a protective shield around anything she says.’

Yet he doesn’t mind if she perhaps feels a personal triumph at his inglorious GMB exit.*

..._








						Meghan Markle is in for a big shock, says PIERS MORGAN
					

JAN MOIR: Oh my god, I think. Here we go. Piers Morgan is just so combative and competitive, it is exhausting.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> Harry’s undies are sticking out in that pitch picture.



He comes to a foreign country, is invited to throw the opening pitch at a MLB game, and shows up dressed like that??? 
The disrespect, the rudeness, the lack of manners and decorum.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> He comes to a foreign country, is invited to throw the opening pitch at a MLB game, and shows up dressed like that???
> *The disrespect, the rudeness, the lack of manners and decorum.*


Harry's usual and despicable behaviour and the reasons why he isn't and will never be my favourite royal person.


----------



## Chanbal

Charles is worried, but he can't do much while H is surrounded by OW and MM... This is not good!


----------



## missfiggy

I've LOVED lurking on this thread.  As an Aussie, I find it fascinating to read the opinions of real Americans (and others, but mainly Americans). It's so 100% different from what is fed to us down here in the pathetic, lame stream media.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> He comes to a foreign country, is invited to throw the opening pitch at a MLB game, and shows up dressed like that???
> The disrespect, the rudeness, the lack of manners and decorum.


Nothing’s changed except his age.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> It’s like Harry doesn’t realize how unhappy he is. If only there was someone who could come along and tell him how everything he has ever known is evil and wrong.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I feel a bit of a wedding philistine at times because I think I just don’t like a lot of the dress styles or details typical to wedding dresses. So I tend to prefer alternative designs.
> 
> I also think white is a really difficult colour as texture doesn’t stand out.
> I feel like even the raptor’s dress would look much better in another colour where you could actually see the weave and sheen of the silk.
> Add on - She should’ve gone for Ivory at the very least for the sake of the dress and after all we all know it wasn’t her first time at the rodeo.


Could it be that it was "whitewash"? If I wear white like a virgin bride, simper like a teenager and stick my tongue out like a sweet young thing, naive people will believe I'm a 19 yo blushing bride (like Diana).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm SITTING HERE DROOLING reading about all the jewelry!! STOP IT stop IT PLEASE !


Here are some pictures...








						The Greville Bequest, Part 2
					

In 1942, the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville left her jewelry collection to Queen Elizabeth (later The Queen Mother), "with my loving thoughts." P...




					queensjewelvault.blogspot.com
				











						The Greville Bequest, Part 2
					

In 1942, the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville left her jewelry collection to Queen Elizabeth (later The Queen Mother), "with my loving thoughts." P...




					queensjewelvault.blogspot.com
				





CarryOn2020 said:


> Plates are fine, Hazzie prefers balls.
> From 2010,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry throws out first pitch at New York Mets game after cementing special relationship between US and British forces
> 
> 
> Harry walked to the mound when the Mets ran onto the field before the first inning Saturday and received polite applause from the Citi Field crowd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5095689
> 
> 
> Such a cool guy - not!
> 
> View attachment 5095690


The most hilarious thing is they reported the ‘polite applause’
*Curb your enthusiasm theme plays*


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Could it be that it was "whitewash"? If I wear white like a virgin bride, simper like a teenager and stick my tongue out like a sweet young thing, naive people will believe I'm a 19 yo blushing bride (like Diana).


Oh yes the wedding was very much her ‘like a virgin’ era. Complete with pretending to be a down-to-Earth hard working philanthropists


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Here are some pictures...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Greville Bequest, Part 2
> 
> 
> In 1942, the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville left her jewelry collection to Queen Elizabeth (later The Queen Mother), "with my loving thoughts." P...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> queensjewelvault.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Greville Bequest, Part 2
> 
> 
> In 1942, the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville left her jewelry collection to Queen Elizabeth (later The Queen Mother), "with my loving thoughts." P...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> queensjewelvault.blogspot.com


Wow


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Cringe will be upset if he says yes.
> 
> _Piers Morgan__ has claimed ITV want him to return to Good Morning Britain after his bombshell exit from the show back in March.
> 
> The presenter, 56, quit the breakfast show following his comments about Meghan Markle and subsequent onscreen clash with co-star Alex Beresford.
> 
> He said bosses have 'reached out' about a possible return and that he believes he could 'take the ratings back to where I left them' after a slump in viewing figures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan claims ITV bosses want him BACK
> 
> 
> The presenter, 56, famously quit the breakfast show following his controversial comments about Meghan Markle and subsequent onscreen clash with co-star Alex Beresford.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I think he’s just trolling him most likely? I can’t see them doing the volte face as he’s already a smug person and that would make him Teflon.
They just need to pull the trigger on a new anchor to start a new era. Tbh Beresford and Reid are personality vacuums so they should just get rid of the lot and start again I think.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> more plates smashing in CA over this one?
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, Prince William See Drive-In Movie in Prince Philip's Car | PEOPLE.com


Smashing plates? Shouldn't she be at the smashing toilet stage by now?


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Here are some pictures...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Greville Bequest, Part 2
> 
> 
> In 1942, the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville left her jewelry collection to Queen Elizabeth (later The Queen Mother), "with my loving thoughts." P...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> queensjewelvault.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Greville Bequest, Part 2
> 
> 
> In 1942, the Hon. Mrs. Ronald Greville left her jewelry collection to Queen Elizabeth (later The Queen Mother), "with my loving thoughts." P...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> queensjewelvault.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The most hilarious thing is they reported the ‘polite applause’
> *Curb your enthusiasm theme plays*




STOP IT I cannot take any more of this!  ...  NOOOOOOO DON'T STOP!!!

I LOVE this sapphire necklace and bracelet!!    Not sure this was shown already. Too BAD M is missing out on wearing all this glorious jewelry! BUT not Kate! 








*Kate Middleton Borrowed the Queen's Dazzling Sapphires for the First Time for Drive-In Movie Night*
The Queen is said to have "exclaimed in amazement" when she saw the sapphire set for the first time in 1979



> https://people.com/royals/kate-midd...rings-drive-in-movie-night-scotland/?amp=true


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plates are fine, Hazzie prefers balls.
> From 2010,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry throws out first pitch at New York Mets game after cementing special relationship between US and British forces
> 
> 
> Harry walked to the mound when the Mets ran onto the field before the first inning Saturday and received polite applause from the Citi Field crowd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5095689
> 
> 
> Such a cool guy - not!
> 
> View attachment 5095690


Looks like he's chucking a cricket ball.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> It’s like Harry doesn’t realize how unhappy he is. If only there was someone who could come along and tell him how everything he has ever known is evil and wrong.
> 
> Seriously, what the hell happened?


Exactly, and this was only 2016!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Speaking of therapy and curb, this is what I imagine Harry’s therapist is like:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes, we live in a fire area too.....DH is urging me to get our boy cat used to being picked up (which he doesn't like) in case we ever need to get him out in a fire



Just in case you can't make him used to it (we inherited a former stray who is NOT a fan), I watched a ton of Youtube videos when he had to go to the vet, throw a towel over him and stuff him into the carrier like this or if you can't take a carrier, stuff the whole cat into a pillow case (that was actually escalating the towel situation for fighters to get them into  the carrier, but eh, better to be carried around like this than die or get lost).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm SITTING HERE DROOLING reading about all the jewelry!! STOP IT stop IT PLEASE !



Check out the Insta account "britishroyaljewels"! They cover both the Queen's and family members' jewels and the postings are usually well researched (I know there are blogs out there, but I have short attention span  ).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5095825



I am really not a fan or Piers as a person, but I am routing for him because he seems to be the only public figure standing up to Raptor and her ridiculous demands, even if it does clearly not benefit him. Kudos.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Check out the Insta account "britishroyaljewels"! They cover both the Queen's and family members' jewels and the postings are usually well researched (I know there are blogs out there, but I have short attention span  ).



Thanks QueenofWrapDress!  Will check it out.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I enjoy watching these four body language guys. Like my prior posting of their M&H OW Interview, I watch in segments because they are 1 1/2 hrs long but definitely worth viewing. I'm connected with them on LinkedIn and they have so many other people that they analyze. But here's the one on H and OW Me You Can't See.  It starts by talking about why H doesn't button his color and the closed eyes conversation and much more.  Interesting stuff.  Enjoy!



> *Prince Harry Oprah Interview: The Me You Can't See EMDR Body Language Revealed (2021)*


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> I enjoy watching these four body language guys. Like my prior posting of their M&H OW Interview, I watch in segments because they are 1 1/2 hrs long but definitely worth viewing. I'm connected with them on LinkedIn and they have so many other people that they analyze. But here's the one on H and OW Me You Can't See.  It starts by talking about why H doesn't button his color and the closed eyes conversation and much more.  Interesting stuff.  Enjoy!



the closed eye talking made me laugh because I have seen that body language in others before!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Hermes Zen said:


> I enjoy watching these four body language guys. Like my prior posting of their M&H OW Interview, I watch in segments because they are 1 1/2 hrs long but definitely worth viewing. I'm connected with them on LinkedIn and they have so many other people that they analyze. But here's the one on H and OW Me You Can't See.  It starts by talking about why H doesn't button his color and the closed eyes conversation and much more.  Interesting stuff.  Enjoy!


“...he looks like he needs to be wormed..”   I’m not sure that’s the look he was going for!


----------



## Clearblueskies

^ I couldn’t stick with the whole video because it’s so long and I find Harry too annoying.  But the closed eye thing is very interesting - I assumed it was some kind of embarrassment or self conscious thing he was trying to hide.  Then I remembered someone I used to work with who did it a lot - and they definitely considered themselves a superior being. So he’s talking down to us - the twerp


----------



## Sharont2305

More plates being thrown I wonder?


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> More plates being thrown I wonder?



I am really curious if Mr Markle has been vaxxed.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I am really curious if Mr Markle has been vaxxed.


Please ... I don’t want to know if he is an anti vaxxer, if he so chooses so then OK, but for someone promoting the vaccine in India ... I choose not to know


----------



## elvisfan4life

xincinsin said:


> I am really curious if Mr Markle has been vaxxed.


 I misread that as hexed


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> more plates smashing in CA over this one?
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, Prince William See Drive-In Movie in Prince Philip's Car | PEOPLE.com


Fellow bloggers, do you think "Plate Smashing" will eventually become an Olympic Sport for which Princess Disney will take credit although it has been "invented" by our bloggers?


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Please ... I don’t want to know if he is an anti vaxxer, if he so chooses so then OK, but for someone promoting the vaccine in India ... I choose not to know



I want to know if he jumped the line and got his vaccine months ago.  He would have been eligible in California back in early April.  I figure MM didn't get it due to pregnancy and that's another reason she's rarely seen.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I am really curious if Mr Markle has been vaxxed.





youngster said:


> I want to know if he jumped the line and got his vaccine months ago.  He would have been eligible in California back in early April.  I figure MM didn't get it due to pregnancy and that's another reason she's rarely seen.



While I have no proof, I think Harry and Meghan were vaccinated by late February. That is when the Oprah show was recorded and she has the clout to get things done. Oprah took Covid seriously to the point where she made Stedman stay in a guest house last year for two weeks when he came back from a trip.

The chairs were set six feet apart for most of the interview, but then we had the chicken coop and walking scenes where they were right next to each other unmasked. They were vaccinated.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It’s like Harry doesn’t realize how unhappy he is. If only there was someone who could come along and tell him how everything he has ever known is evil and wrong.
> *
> Seriously, what the hell happened?*


A groundswelling of something called Meghan Markle.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Smashing plates? Shouldn't she be at the smashing toilet stage by now?


Better to leave all 16 toilets in tact so they can bail the water in case of fire.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just in case you can't make him used to it (we inherited a former stray who is NOT a fan), I watched a ton of Youtube videos when he had to go to the vet, throw a towel over him and stuff him into the carrier like this or if you can't take a carrier, stuff the whole cat into a pillow case (that was actually escalating the towel situation for fighters to get them into  the carrier, but eh, better to be carried around like this than die or get lost).


Throw a towel over them?  Okay, I'll try it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Throw a towel over them?  Okay, I'll try it!



PMed you a link!


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Throw a towel over them?  Okay, I'll try it!



I can vouch for the wrapping them in a towel method. It makes them feel more secure and it’s safer for you. My husband and I call this method the “kitty burrito” because that’s what they look like all wrapped up with just their little faces showing.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just in case you can't make him used to it (we inherited a former stray who is NOT a fan), I watched a ton of Youtube videos when he had to go to the vet, throw a towel over him and stuff him into the carrier like this or if you can't take a carrier, stuff the whole cat into a pillow case (that was actually escalating the towel situation for fighters to get them into  the carrier, but eh, better to be carried around like this than die or get lost).


but getting him into a pillow case would be worse than getting him into the carrier I think
when we first got the two cats we needed to take them to the vet for booster vaccinations.  It was impossible to get them into the old front loading carriers.  we bought two large top loading ones and that worked.  the girl is smaller and less skittish.  but he is bigger now and I think it would be a real challenge to get him in there.  unless you grabbed him very quickly before he was on to you.
I'll keep the towel idea in mind
thanks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I can vouch for the wrapping them in a towel method. It makes them feel more secure and it’s safer for you. My husband and I call this method the “kitty burrito” because that’s what they look like all wrapped up with just their little faces showing.


we adopted our cats from the shelter and don't know what they went through before we got them but he - while being a very fun kitty - is very skittish.  just now I went to the front door to see if there was a package here.  He went slinking down the hall - worried that an intruder was coming


----------



## eunaddict

lanasyogamama said:


> Prince Harry Slept Through Phone Calls Alerting Prince Philip's Death
> 
> 
> Prince Harry slept through a bunch of phone calls the morning of Prince Philip's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



Unforgivable.


If there were ever a moment to be hypervigilant, it's when you're expecting a beloved family member's death.

---
That being said, it's pretty telling that it wasn't a personal notification from family but through official embassy channels.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope this isn’t true, but I wouldn’t be surprised.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> While I have no proof, I think Harry and Meghan were vaccinated by late February. That is when the Oprah show was recorded and she has the clout to get things done. Oprah took Covid seriously to the point where she made Stedman stay in a guest house last year for two weeks when he came back from a trip.
> 
> The chairs were set six feet apart for most of the interview, but then we had the chicken coop and walking scenes where they were right next to each other unmasked. They were vaccinated.



At the start of the show when Meghan enters, they both hug so the two may have been vaccinated. I don't remember Oprah hugging Harry when he came on. I might be wrong.


----------



## queennadine

If either of them was an anti-vaxxer, we’d know about it. They seem to think we need their perspective on everything else.


----------



## sdkitty

queennadine said:


> If either of them was an anti-vaxxer, we’d know about it. They seem to think we need their perspective on everything else.


well the chaired the vaccine "show" so I guess they are pro-vaxx


----------



## maxter

this thread is fire


----------



## Icyjade

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope this isn’t true, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5096610



You know, if 6 dies, it might be the best outcome for MM. I don’t want that for 6 but can’t shake off the awful thought that as the widow, she keeps her “royal” ties forever, not to mention the kids and money. If so... pushing 6 towards mental instability is a good long term plan. Cos OD happens right? Velociraptor style planning?


----------



## csshopper

The drug could explain sleeping through the middle of the night phone call, still wonder where his wife was bunking.


----------



## redney

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope this isn’t true, but I wouldn’t be surprised.


Interesting. "Impair memory, judgment" 

*Temazepam*
Brand name: Restoril

*Description*
Sedative
It can treat insomnia.

*Controlled substance*
Can cause paranoid or suicidal ideation and impair memory, judgment, and coordination. Combining with other substances, particularly alcohol, can slow breathing and possibly lead to death.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> At the start of the show when Meghan enters, they both hug so the two may have been vaccinated. *I don't remember Oprah hugging Harry when he came on. *I might be wrong.



I don’t recall either. Could’ve been left on the cutting room floor along with 90% of Harry’s other scenes. That really was Meghan’s show.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> You know, if 6 dies, it might be the best outcome for MM. I don’t want that for 6 but can’t shake off the awful thought that as the widow, she keeps her “royal” ties forever, not to mention the kids and money. If so... pushing 6 towards mental instability is a good long term plan. Cos OD happens right? Velociraptor style planning?



IMO. Nah, her best cards are keeping him alive. The RF always has the upper hand, so his demise will bring her nothing but difficulty. Should she threaten them with going public - yawn - go ahead, tell the world and we will, too    Threaten them with never seeing the kids - yawn, the family has not seen them in years so there is no real connection.

The diabolical ones have made a critical error in handling Hazz [MM is not alone in this show].  We all have seen how ill he really is. We have heard him tell us when his downward spiral started. That is on her and her ‘others’.   Good luck getting anything.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> You know, if 6 dies, it might be the best outcome for MM. I don’t want that for 6 but can’t shake off the awful thought that as the widow, she keeps her “royal” ties forever, not to mention the kids and money. If so... pushing 6 towards mental instability is a good long term plan. Cos OD happens right? Velociraptor style planning?



I hate to think about that even hypothetically because it’s the kind of thing that really could happen. If there was an accidental death or even a suicide, that’s the end of Meghan’s popularity party. She’s not coming out of that clean. And if there was the slightest whiff of suspicion about the death, the media would turn on her like a pack of starving hyenas.


----------



## Chanbal

A well written letter...  


In the circumstances, it is entirely appropriate, with the utmost respect to you, that your attention is not only once again drawn to the unwelcome recent sequence of events largely precipitated by you and your wife, but also to the ensuing fallout that this has caused. Both you and your wife have opted to very publicly level wholly unsubstantiated accusations of racism, indifference and emotional trauma at thus far unnamed members of the Royal Family, your family, Sir.

Why you both feel the need to engage the media that you profess to loathe in this vendetta I cannot understand, nor can many millions of our fellow countrymen.

The British public at large were absolutely thrilled that you had found someone with whom you clearly share such a unique bond. Your future wife was welcomed with open arms, and on the day of your wedding you had people thronged together lining the streets of Windsor to show their joy at your happiness on your special day.

The weather was similarly glorious to add to the genuine mood of celebration for you and your wife.

In the ensuing years since that wonderful day at St Georges Chapel your popularity in this country has plummeted with the onset of widespread anger and disgust, increasing in intensity each time you decide to air your dirty laundry in public.

This is sadly an inescapable fact and one in which I personally take absolutely no pleasure in pointing out, along with many millions of people in both this country and the United States.

You were born into a unique and enigmatic family, who have provided a haven and rallying point for the people of this country for centuries.

Your family is an incredibly significant ingredient in the glue that binds us all together, and for you to unilaterally attack and defame their integrity is quite frankly despicable.

Many millions of people have suffered emotional trauma in some or other way throughout the world, so this is not unique to you. This does not of course make the loss of your mother in any way insignificant or indeed less tragic. The pain and sense of loss that both you and your brother, the Duke of Cambridge, have endured remains raw, and was also deeply felt by millions of others the length and breadth of this country. This was proven beyond any doubt with only a glance at the crowds in London on that day of the memorial for your mother at the Abbey.

In your statement preceding your departure from frontline Royal duties you solemnly pledged to always uphold the values of the monarchy. Well, Sir, you have a mighty strange way of showing it!

How does your professed loyalty to the Crown square with your present outbursts of spite and anger?

Does your Grandmother deserve any of this? Does the memory of your late Grandfather warrant being dragged through the mud simply as a selfish act of misguided catharsis on your part?

I certainly do not believe so, and many millions of people agree with me.

You oftentimes make no secret of your disdain and loathing of the press, who you accuse of a constant imposition into your “private” life.

Yes, the press is a part of the everyday existence of public figures, and you are certainly no exception to this, but it goes with the turf.

The added dimension in your case, however, is that the only acceptable press coverage when it comes to you and your wife is only that which fits the narrative put out by your spin doctors in LaLa land.

The sad truth of the matter is that you are enraged you couldn’t have it both ways.

You couldn’t enjoy the kudos that you seem to believe is your right along with cashing in on your status as both you and your wife would have wished.

As I am sure your Grandmother, your Father and your Brother made clear to you at what has been dubbed the “Sandringham Summit” you cannot have your cake and eat it.

You are either in or you are out, the best of both worlds is just not an option.

Both you and your wife have the unfortunate habit of trying to portray yourselves as victims, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Your public outbursts seeking sympathy on the back of launching entirely misguided attacks on your family looks very much like a cynical publicity stunt based it seems on a litany of inaccuracies.

Your flirtation with wokery is likewise an entirely self-serving exercise in the promotion of “Brand Sussex”, loaded with gross hypocrisy in preaching to the world at large.

Your PR team and other strategic media embedded mouthpieces display breath-taking ignorance of our heritage and culture, a fact that you ought to know full well.

You have regrettably allowed yourself to blur the lines between celebrity and royalty, for which there is no excuse for you or even your wife for that matter.

You have given up everything you have known up to this point in seeking a new life in the United States, although you were very definitely badly advised in making recent comments about the US Constitution first amendment, about which you clearly know nothing, and which was in fact an insult to your hosts.

You’re a guest in that country and you have no right to make remarks like that especially in view of your family background which maintains a totally apolitical viewpoint.

I could elaborate further on the grossly ill-advised course you have opted to pursue, but until such time as a good hard dose of reality sets in then there seems little point.

As disgusted as I am that I witness a Prince of the Realm from my country disparaging his family in such a disgraceful way, I nonetheless hope and pray that you find genuine peace and happiness one day.

I sincerely hope that you can overcome the demons of your emotional trauma and anger in finding a comfortable balance in your life.

Perhaps you should open your eyes wider, open your mind too and look a little deeper. You might be surprised at what you discover. But just stop with the nonsense of attacking your family.

One last point you might be well advised to take on board, Sir. You and your wife would be nothing and nobody were it not for the fact that you are the grandson of the Queen of England, the son, brother and uncle of future Kings of England.

Self-destruction doesn’t become you, so drop the hard done by rubbish and get a grip. You might just find it eventually pays off in positive ways that you least expected.









						'What you have done sir is quite frankly despicable': Letter to Harry
					

Sir, I am an ordinary citizen of the United Kingdom, a loyal and patriotic subject of Her Majesty the Queen of England.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## needlv

^^ wow.  100% with this opinion.

what a lifetime opportunity that H and M threw away.  MM having been very quiet lately means she either has had the baby or the realisation that they majorly misstepped must be hitting hard - so more plotting must be going on.

she miscalculated the effect of the O interview - expecting it would catapult her and H into major fame, $$$ and a new “royalty” for the USA to embrace.  Instead they got such backlash that even O was backpedaling from the interview.

I am waiting for the next move.  What is left?  Living a billionaire lifestyle when they are only millionaires leaves them desperate for the next $ opportunity.  The only thing left is reality TV.  They can’t go back to the RF.

that or  a separation/ divorce.  Think Amber herd and Johnny D style.  MM “has receipts!” 

But M miscalculated H’s worth... with many $$$ being held in family trusts.

the divorce is going to be epic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Prince Harry suffers huge US backlash - 'If you don't like it here, head back to Britain!'


"Americans do not take kindly to interlopers who turn up in their country and criticise it." 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...e-Sussex-Royal-Family-Meghan-Markle-latest-vn


----------



## duna

needlv said:


> ^^ wow.  100% with this opinion.
> 
> what a lifetime opportunity that H and M threw away.  MM having been very quiet lately means she either has had the baby or the realisation that they majorly misstepped must be hitting hard - so more plotting must be going on.
> 
> she miscalculated the effect of the O interview - expecting it would catapult her and H into major fame, $$$ and a new “royalty” for the USA to embrace.  Instead they got such backlash that even O was backpedaling from the interview.
> 
> I am waiting for the next move.  What is left?  Living a billionaire lifestyle when they are only millionaires leaves them desperate for the next $ opportunity.  The only thing left is reality TV.  They can’t go back to the RF.
> 
> that or  a separation/ divorce.  Think Amber herd and Johnny D style.  MM “has receipts!”
> 
> But M miscalculated H’s worth... with many $$$ being held in family trusts.
> 
> the divorce is going to be epic.



THIS, 1000%!!!!!


----------



## Lodpah

Enjoy! From Quora:
In my opinion, underneath all the pomp and circumstance Harry has always been this guy-






Panama Harry in Las Vegas! Sorry Harry the saying goes what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, except for you…

He may have worked to rehabilitate his image with Invictus Games but underneath he was still Panama Harry.

Then Panama Harry meets SoHo Karen









The Girl of his dreams is perfect for Panama Harry.

Unfortunately for him she is a


Urban Dictionary: harpy
A word to describe a women who draws a man into her grasp by pleasing the victims biggest desire only to destroy all that makes him what he is.





						Urban Dictionary: harpy
					

A word to describe a women who draws a man into her grasp by pleasing the victims biggest desire only to destroy all that makes him what he is.




					www.urbandictionary.com
				





I am not so sure she ruined Harry just ruined the fake persona he was trying to build, Panama Harry was there all along…


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> Prince Harry suffers huge US backlash - 'If you don't like it here, head back to Britain!'
> 
> 
> "Americans do not take kindly to interlopers who turn up in their country and criticise it."
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...e-Sussex-Royal-Family-Meghan-Markle-latest-vn


Quite right, and switch the word Americans to the British and the same goes for his wife.


----------



## gelbergirl

Lodpah said:


> Enjoy! From Quora:
> In my opinion, underneath all the pomp and circumstance Harry has always been this guy-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Panama Harry in Las Vegas! Sorry Harry the saying goes what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, except for you…
> 
> He may have worked to rehabilitate his image with Invictus Games but underneath he was still Panama Harry.
> 
> Then Panama Harry meets SoHo Karen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Girl of his dreams is perfect for Panama Harry.
> 
> Unfortunately for him she is a
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: harpy
> A word to describe a women who draws a man into her grasp by pleasing the victims biggest desire only to destroy all that makes him what he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: harpy
> 
> 
> A word to describe a women who draws a man into her grasp by pleasing the victims biggest desire only to destroy all that makes him what he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.urbandictionary.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not so sure she ruined Harry just ruined the fake persona he was trying to build, Panama Harry was there all along…



That Panama hat! (on both of them)!


----------



## Clearblueskies

gelbergirl said:


> That Panama hat! (on both of them)!


I know!   Meghan adores that hat, she seems to think she looks so cool in it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope this isn’t true, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5096610



So she made him go off his meds and do yoga instead to gain control, and now she put him back on to gain, uh, more control?

I know it's just a blind item, but I've also said at least a dozen times on here that he looked high or drunk in his recent pictures.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> You know, if 6 dies, it might be the best outcome for MM. I don’t want that for 6 but can’t shake off the awful thought that as the widow, she keeps her “royal” ties forever, not to mention the kids and money. If so... pushing 6 towards mental instability is a good long term plan. Cos OD happens right? Velociraptor style planning?



I saw a similar train of thought on Twitter under one of Angela Levin's tweets only a few days ago, as well as mentioned in DM comments. It really is not the stupid cow who needs to fear for her life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I hate to think about that even hypothetically because it’s the kind of thing that really could happen. If there was an accidental death or even a suicide, that’s the end of Meghan’s popularity party. *She’s not coming out of that clean.* And if there was the slightest whiff of suspicion about the death, the media would turn on her like a pack of starving hyenas.



I would hope so, but her Stans and the US media might make her happen nevertheless. I'd hope that would be the signal for the BRF to destroy her, though.


----------



## csshopper

Wonder if his employment at ButterUp or Netflix or Spotify includes medical benefits that cover mental health?

Who writes the Restoril prescriptions?  In the US it’s a Schedule IV controlled substance and illegal to possess without a prescription. 

ButterUp is not a typo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bringing some levity to the thread. 
Paris Hilton and Would You Rather ….  Would Paris Hilton rather party with Meghan Markle or Miley Cyrus? 
Answer around the 1:58 mark:


----------



## caramelize126

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bringing some levity to the thread.
> Paris Hilton and Would You Rather ….  Would Paris Hilton rather party with Meghan Markle or Miley Cyrus?
> Answer around the 1:58 mark:




You know its a problem when even paris doesnt want to hang out with you. She lives for the attention. But i doubt anyone in that hollywood crowd is going to hang out with M & H unless they want their business splashed in the tabloids the next day.

To people like Paris, MM is a grouper. bottom feeding fish.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Quite right, and switch the word Americans to the British and the same goes for his wife.


You can put the Commonwealth in for her too.


----------



## jennlt

csshopper said:


> Wonder if his employment at ButterUp or Netflix or Spotify includes medical benefits that cover mental health?
> 
> Who writes the Restoril prescriptions?  In the US it’s a Schedule IV controlled substance and illegal to possess without a prescription.
> 
> *ButterUp is not a typo*.



Haha and I think of it as ButterCup because H is such a fragile flower


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> You can put the Commonwealth in for her too.


True


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> You know, if 6 dies, it might be the best outcome for MM. I don’t want that for 6 but can’t shake off the awful thought that as the widow, she keeps her “royal” ties forever, not to mention the kids and money. If so... pushing 6 towards mental instability is a good long term plan. Cos OD happens right? Velociraptor style planning?


well, to be fair, a blind item can say anything....they can't sue on that one


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> You know, if 6 dies, it might be the best outcome for MM. I don’t want that for 6 but can’t shake off the awful thought that as the widow, she keeps her “royal” ties forever, not to mention the kids and money. If so... pushing 6 towards mental instability is a good long term plan. Cos OD happens right? Velociraptor style planning?



Lady C covered this. 

Terrible thought, but agreed.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> ^^ wow.  100% with this opinion.
> 
> what a lifetime opportunity that H and M threw away.  MM having been very quiet lately means she either has had the baby or the realisation that they majorly misstepped must be hitting hard - so more plotting must be going on.
> 
> she miscalculated the effect of the O interview - expecting it would catapult her and H into major fame, $$$ and a new “royalty” for the USA to embrace.  Instead they got such backlash that even O was backpedaling from the interview.
> 
> I am waiting for the next move.  What is left?  Living a billionaire lifestyle when they are only millionaires leaves them desperate for the next $ opportunity.  The only thing left is reality TV.  They can’t go back to the RF.



I think the next move is a Netflix series featuring themselves. The reason we haven’t heard from Meghan lately is she is working on something (and it’s not a baby). She doesn’t have the capacity for self-reflection to believe she went too far with the Oprah interview. If anything she has probably come up with other things she wishes she had said during the show.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Lady C covered this.
> 
> Terrible thought, but agreed.


much as I dislike her, I prefer not to think she wants to kill him


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> A well written letter...
> View attachment 5096827
> 
> In the circumstances, it is entirely appropriate, with the utmost respect to you, that your attention is not only once again drawn to the unwelcome recent sequence of events largely precipitated by you and your wife, but also to the ensuing fallout that this has caused. Both you and your wife have opted to very publicly level wholly unsubstantiated accusations of racism, indifference and emotional trauma at thus far unnamed members of the Royal Family, your family, Sir.
> 
> Why you both feel the need to engage the media that you profess to loathe in this vendetta I cannot understand, nor can many millions of our fellow countrymen.
> 
> The British public at large were absolutely thrilled that you had found someone with whom you clearly share such a unique bond. Your future wife was welcomed with open arms, and on the day of your wedding you had people thronged together lining the streets of Windsor to show their joy at your happiness on your special day.
> 
> The weather was similarly glorious to add to the genuine mood of celebration for you and your wife.
> 
> In the ensuing years since that wonderful day at St Georges Chapel your popularity in this country has plummeted with the onset of widespread anger and disgust, increasing in intensity each time you decide to air your dirty laundry in public.
> 
> This is sadly an inescapable fact and one in which I personally take absolutely no pleasure in pointing out, along with many millions of people in both this country and the United States.
> 
> You were born into a unique and enigmatic family, who have provided a haven and rallying point for the people of this country for centuries.
> 
> Your family is an incredibly significant ingredient in the glue that binds us all together, and for you to unilaterally attack and defame their integrity is quite frankly despicable.
> 
> Many millions of people have suffered emotional trauma in some or other way throughout the world, so this is not unique to you. This does not of course make the loss of your mother in any way insignificant or indeed less tragic. The pain and sense of loss that both you and your brother, the Duke of Cambridge, have endured remains raw, and was also deeply felt by millions of others the length and breadth of this country. This was proven beyond any doubt with only a glance at the crowds in London on that day of the memorial for your mother at the Abbey.
> 
> In your statement preceding your departure from frontline Royal duties you solemnly pledged to always uphold the values of the monarchy. Well, Sir, you have a mighty strange way of showing it!
> 
> How does your professed loyalty to the Crown square with your present outbursts of spite and anger?
> 
> Does your Grandmother deserve any of this? Does the memory of your late Grandfather warrant being dragged through the mud simply as a selfish act of misguided catharsis on your part?
> 
> I certainly do not believe so, and many millions of people agree with me.
> 
> You oftentimes make no secret of your disdain and loathing of the press, who you accuse of a constant imposition into your “private” life.
> 
> Yes, the press is a part of the everyday existence of public figures, and you are certainly no exception to this, but it goes with the turf.
> 
> The added dimension in your case, however, is that the only acceptable press coverage when it comes to you and your wife is only that which fits the narrative put out by your spin doctors in LaLa land.
> 
> The sad truth of the matter is that you are enraged you couldn’t have it both ways.
> 
> You couldn’t enjoy the kudos that you seem to believe is your right along with cashing in on your status as both you and your wife would have wished.
> 
> As I am sure your Grandmother, your Father and your Brother made clear to you at what has been dubbed the “Sandringham Summit” you cannot have your cake and eat it.
> 
> You are either in or you are out, the best of both worlds is just not an option.
> 
> Both you and your wife have the unfortunate habit of trying to portray yourselves as victims, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> Your public outbursts seeking sympathy on the back of launching entirely misguided attacks on your family looks very much like a cynical publicity stunt based it seems on a litany of inaccuracies.
> 
> Your flirtation with wokery is likewise an entirely self-serving exercise in the promotion of “Brand Sussex”, loaded with gross hypocrisy in preaching to the world at large.
> 
> Your PR team and other strategic media embedded mouthpieces display breath-taking ignorance of our heritage and culture, a fact that you ought to know full well.
> 
> You have regrettably allowed yourself to blur the lines between celebrity and royalty, for which there is no excuse for you or even your wife for that matter.
> 
> You have given up everything you have known up to this point in seeking a new life in the United States, although you were very definitely badly advised in making recent comments about the US Constitution first amendment, about which you clearly know nothing, and which was in fact an insult to your hosts.
> 
> You’re a guest in that country and you have no right to make remarks like that especially in view of your family background which maintains a totally apolitical viewpoint.
> 
> I could elaborate further on the grossly ill-advised course you have opted to pursue, but until such time as a good hard dose of reality sets in then there seems little point.
> 
> As disgusted as I am that I witness a Prince of the Realm from my country disparaging his family in such a disgraceful way, I nonetheless hope and pray that you find genuine peace and happiness one day.
> 
> I sincerely hope that you can overcome the demons of your emotional trauma and anger in finding a comfortable balance in your life.
> 
> Perhaps you should open your eyes wider, open your mind too and look a little deeper. You might be surprised at what you discover. But just stop with the nonsense of attacking your family.
> 
> One last point you might be well advised to take on board, Sir. You and your wife would be nothing and nobody were it not for the fact that you are the grandson of the Queen of England, the son, brother and uncle of future Kings of England.
> 
> Self-destruction doesn’t become you, so drop the hard done by rubbish and get a grip. You might just find it eventually pays off in positive ways that you least expected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'What you have done sir is quite frankly despicable': Letter to Harry
> 
> 
> Sir, I am an ordinary citizen of the United Kingdom, a loyal and patriotic subject of Her Majesty the Queen of England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Add to this the untold damage of Harry exclaiming our capital "London is trigger". 

This, from a Prince that lived in the finest buildings and apartments within our historic city and had every amenity. 

London was his F**king playground! 

He doesn't want it, great. I don't ever want to see him in London again. One of the finest cities I know, and feel so lucky to have grown-up in it. East End, West End, North and South, everywhere so full of character and very fine people. 

And that he said he had no choice to leave. He could have left at_ any_ time, gone _any_where. How dare he actually use his wife (culpable as she is) and his child. Please stay away. We certainly wouldn't want to be a 'trigger'. 

BTW, I like LA too, always had lots of fun there, and the people were soooo nice, SF and San Diego too, I could sing "I wish they could all be Californian" but LA certainly has less of a pull for me since H&M took root there. I find this couple with their Folie à deux very...triggering  .


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, I prefer not to think she wants to kill him



but the point was raised, she'll push him to kill _himself_. 

Wasn't me who suggested it m'lord, it was someone writing to Lady C


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> but the point was raised, she'll push him to kill _himself_.
> 
> Wasn't me who suggested it m'lord, it was someone writing to Lady C



Honestly whoever said it I don't think that's something that should be repeated, even in jest.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Honestly whoever said it I don't think that's something that should be repeated, even in jest.


I already said that it was a terrible thought.

Harry is already stating the media/family won't be happy until his wife is dead. That's also a disgusting thing to think let alone say in public.

Why should the British public be careful with words when the couple don't mind who they accuse of hidious, dubious insults and crines.

H&M never exactly took the moral high ground unless they were pontificating and dispensing sanctimonious clap trap from the top of a mountain.


----------



## csshopper

From the Comments section of an article on the DM, a name for Harry's Wife I hadn't seen before:" Methane"

"Yes Methane! She and Hazard are the toxic twosome!"

Brief and to the point!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> but the point was raised, she'll push him to kill _himself_.
> 
> Wasn't me who suggested it m'lord, it was someone writing to Lady C


I understand
You didn't raise this....but anyway if she pushed him to kill himself, then she would essentially be responsible for his death (even if not legally).  As I said, I don't like her but I'm not ready to call her evil to that extent.


----------



## jennlt

csshopper said:


> From the Comments section of an article on the DM, a name for Harry's Wife I hadn't seen before:" Methane"
> 
> "Yes Methane! She and Hazard are the toxic twosome!"
> 
> Brief and to the point!


Isn't Methane what cows pass when they have gas?


----------



## bag-mania

Why is information about his prescriptions being leaked? Everyone knows there are more than a few sketchy celebrity doctors in the LA area who will prescribe whatever a celeb asks for. They usually keep it very quiet though. They don’t want to lose their licenses. If the blind item is true, who is talking?


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> Isn't Methane what cows emit when they have flatulence?



Why yes, yes it is.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Why is information about his prescriptions being leaked? Everyone knows there are more than a few sketchy celebrity doctors in the LA area who will prescribe whatever a celeb asks for. They usually keep it very quiet though. They don’t want to lose their licenses. If the blind item is true, who is talking?


but it's a blind item.....so could be just fabricated, right?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but it's a blind item.....so could be just fabricated, right?



I don’t follow blind items as a rule, only when they appear about celebrities in our threads. Do they have a reputation of not being accurate?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t follow blind items as a rule, only when they appear about celebrities in our threads. Do they have a reputation of not being accurate?


IDK but if they are blind, they can say anything, I would think
Someone correct me if I'm wrong


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I understand
> You didn't raise this....but anyway if she pushed him to kill himself, then she would essentially be responsible for his death (even if not legally).  As I said, I don't like her but I'm not ready to call her evil to that extent.



nor am I 

I agreed with the quote quoted @Icyjade - about the repercussions. Not that she would/should do it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bringing some levity to the thread.
> Paris Hilton and Would You Rather ….  Would Paris Hilton rather party with Meghan Markle or Miley Cyrus?
> Answer around the 1:58 mark:





caramelize126 said:


> You know its a problem when even paris doesnt want to hang out with you. She lives for the attention. But i doubt anyone in that hollywood crowd is going to hang out with M & H unless they want their business splashed in the tabloids the next day.
> 
> To people like Paris, MM is a grouper. bottom feeding fish.


I’ve always thought Paris H has far more sense than she makes out. 


papertiger said:


> Add to this the untold damage of Harry exclaiming our capital "London is trigger".
> 
> This, from a Prince that lived in the finest buildings and apartments within our historic city and had every amenity.
> 
> London was his F**king playground!
> 
> He doesn't want it, great. I don't ever want to see him in London again. One of the finest cities I know, and feel so lucky to have grown-up in it. East End, West End, North and South, everywhere so full of character and very fine people.
> 
> And that he said he had no choice to leave. He could have left at_ any_ time, gone _any_where. How dare he actually use his wife (culpable as she is) and his child. Please stay away. We certainly wouldn't want to be a 'trigger'.
> 
> BTW, I like LA too, always had lots of fun there, and the people were soooo nice, SF and San Diego too, I could sing "I wish they could all be Californian" but LA certainly has less of a pull for me since H&M took root there. I find this couple with their Folie à deux very...triggering  .


Yeah, I don’t get it either, his mother very sadly died in PARIS, France and he spent most of his time growing up in schools in the Home Counties, he went to the army for years  & then he lived all over the shop.  Why is London a problem all of a sudden? If anything London was where he was was allowed to run around in a Nazi costume being an idiot- I dare not imagine he’s finally got the self-awareness to find that embarrassing.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Charles is worried, but he can't do much while H is surrounded by OW and MM... This is not good!
> View attachment 5095870
> View attachment 5095871


Military horrors??? .. I don't think so, at least .. HE didn't see the blood & guts, etc.  From what I understand (from a UK colleague who served with Hazza), he was "very protected" .. and yeah, he saw a lot of what the others DID NOT see .. in other words, privilege!  It seems that Hap-Hazza and Meghan-a-lo-maniac are actually very well suited .. in that they LIE like crazy and then believe their own lies.  I truly wish they would honor their "original" comments - as in "privacy"; STFU and stay OUT of the news!


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve always thought Paris H has far more sense than she makes out.
> 
> Yeah, I don’t get it either, his mother very sadly died in PARIS, France and he spent most of his time growing up in schools in the Home Counties, he went to the army for years  & then he lived all over the shop.  Why is London a problem all of a sudden? If anything London was where he was was allowed to run around in a Nazi costume being an idiot



Almost nothing with them makes much sense.



twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1397216444644003843?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I already said that it was a terrible thought.
> 
> Harry is already stating the media/family won't be happy until his wife is dead. That's also a disgusting thing to think let alone say in public.
> 
> Why should the British public be careful with words when the couple don't mind who they accuse of hidious, dubious insults and crines.
> 
> H&M never exactly took the moral high ground unless they were pontificating and dispensing sanctimonious clap trap from the top of a mountain.


Yeah, I have to back you up on this, maybe I’m just a sardonic goth but  personally I’m not clutching my pearls at the old black widow rumour in a blind- doesn’t everyone say that when there’s an obvious gold digger in town?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> I already said that it was a terrible thought.
> 
> Harry is already stating the media/family won't be happy until his wife is dead. That's also a disgusting thing to think let alone say in public.
> 
> Why should the British public be careful with words when the couple don't mind who they accuse of hidious, dubious insults and crines.
> 
> H&M never exactly took the moral high ground unless they were pontificating and dispensing sanctimonious clap trap from the top of a mountain.



Got it no worries sorry if I struck a nerve. 

I was just surprised at the cavalier mention of suicide/murder. 

But clearly I'm in the minority on this thread so please carry on.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am really not a fan or Piers as a person, but I am routing for him because he seems to be the only public figure standing up to Raptor and her ridiculous demands, even if it does clearly not benefit him. Kudos.


Same here .. I have a love/hate relationship with Piers (_his comments about US politics/politicians?!?! .. uggh_).  But, in regards to MM and Hazza .. well, I just *LOVE* his comments on these two!  I also 100% agree on his reasons for leaving the show; any journalist (_or anyone for that matter_) has a *RIGHT* to his/her opinion .. and to have to walk away from something simply because he has not spouted glowing reviews?!!? .. NOPE, no bueno!


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost nothing with them makes much sense.
> View attachment 5097173
> 
> 
> twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1397216444644003843?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


And there was an extended period of mat leave before November 
4 years my a*se - she’s a fraudster and he’s a fool


----------



## Annawakes

I also think Paris Hilton is much smarter than she lets on.  Nicky Hilton seems smart too, she just doesn’t put on an act like Paris does.  Anyway, back to topic!  It would’ve been funny if Paris had said, Meghan who??


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost nothing with them makes much sense.
> View attachment 5097173
> 
> 
> twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1397216444644003843?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet



4 years.  were they secretly dating for an amount of time that I do not know about??


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I can vouch for the wrapping them in a towel method. It makes them feel more secure and it’s safer for you. My husband and I call this method the *“kitty burrito”* because that’s what they look like all wrapped up with just their little faces showing.



*“kitty burrito”  *

Reminds me of the t-shirt I saw:  TACO CAT spelled backwards is still TACO CAT


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost nothing with them makes much sense.
> View attachment 5097173
> 
> 
> twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1397216444644003843?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Even from the engagement its only two years.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan claims the BRF is racist. Oh. Didn't she and Harry date for TWO YEARS and live together a while before the wedding? She was getting tons of media attention, 99.99999999% favorable. She absolutely LOVED all the cameras, appearances, flowers from children, etc. She got the historic wedding, titles, house, servants, wardrobe bla bla bla. When she realized Kate wasn't going anywhere, was THAT when she thought she could pull off the race card? Were William and Kate supposed to say: "You and Hazza should automatically takeover our roles, we'll step aside" and when they didn't the BRF became "racist"? Was that when Meghan supposedly became suicidal? And became a mental health guru with Harry? If true, when did Harry's manhood go missing that he couldn't dial a REAL mental health expert at the time? If they could jet to France, Africa, the U.S. for a baby shower, etc, how could they not slip away to see a professional or bring one in? It's not like Meghan was talking about having a nervous tic or a fear of spiders.
Whenever you put their claims and accusations on a timeline, nothing pans out.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Meghan claims the BRF is racist. Oh. Didn't she and Harry date for TWO YEARS and live together a while before the wedding? She was getting tons of media attention, 99.99999999% favorable. She absolutely LOVED all the cameras, appearances, flowers from children, etc. She got the historic wedding, titles, house, servants, wardrobe bla bla bla. When she realized Kate wasn't going anywhere, was THAT when she thought she could pull off the race card? Were William and Kate supposed to say: "You and Hazza should automatically takeover our roles, we'll step aside" and when they didn't the BRF became "racist"? Was that when Meghan supposedly became suicidal? And became a mental health guru with Harry? If true, when did Harry's manhood go missing that he couldn't dial a REAL mental health expert at the time? If they could jet to France, Africa, the U.S. for a baby shower, etc, how could they not slip away to see a professional or bring one in? It's not like Meghan was talking about having a nervous tic or a fear of spiders.
> Whenever you put their claims and accusations on a timeline, nothing pans out.


I don't know......someone on the view expressed that H&M were the most exciting of the royals and they were kicked out (not true obviously).  my guess is she thought she was going to be the star and when she found out that extra attention wasn't gonnna last forever and she had to go to boring ribbon cutting ceremonies, follow rules for dress and decorum, etc., she said not what I want.  and what Meghan wants Meghan gets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Hermes Zen said:


> I enjoy watching these four body language guys. Like my prior posting of their M&H OW Interview, I watch in segments because they are 1 1/2 hrs long but definitely worth viewing. I'm connected with them on LinkedIn and they have so many other people that they analyze. But here's the one on H and OW Me You Can't See.  It starts by talking about why H doesn't button his color and the closed eyes conversation and much more.  Interesting stuff.  Enjoy!


I really like these as well, watch from start to finish, and appreciate you posting the links... but the fact that they analyze his b*tching and moaning as being sincere isn't quite worth their time. 

Now, analyzing more of manipulative Meg -- that's what I'd love to see!


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> I don't know......someone on the view expressed that H&M were the most exciting of the royals and they were kicked out (not true obviously).  my guess is she thought she was going to be the star and when she found out that extra attention wasn't gonnna last forever and she had to go to boring ribbon cutting ceremonies, follow rules for dress and decorum, etc., she said not what I want.  and what Meghan wants Meghan gets.



True but H is just as culpable.  He was always a mess - which is why the aristo ladies steered clear.  MM thought this was going to be a huge payday for her.  H thought MM was both his ticket to be “better, more popular than his brother”, and then later, an excuse to leave.  They both deserve each other.  The grifter and the self-entitled, moaning prince.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Jayne1 said:


> I really like these as well, watch from start to finish, and appreciate you posting the links... but the fact that they analyze his b*tching and moaning as being sincere isn't quite worth their time.
> 
> Now, analyzing more of manipulative Meg -- that's what I'd love to see!


I too would love to see more body language analysis on MM from these guys. I'm thinking you've seen their analysis of the M&H OW interview. That's all I've seen so far from these four but I'm certain when M does more interviews, we will see their analysis!  Can't wait.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I really like these as well, watch from start to finish, and appreciate you posting the links... but the fact that they analyze his b*tching and moaning as being sincere isn't quite worth their time.
> 
> Now, analyzing more of manipulative Meg -- that's what I'd love to see!



Perhaps this is why we don’t see her, especially after the OW show. She knows the smarter set will point out her flaws. 
====
Early on, people expected a divorce. Now, after these OW shows, people have shifted to murder or suicide or accidental overdose. 
Even Hazz himself put out the _murder by paps _scenario. Kinda feels like an Agatha Christie mystery.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Don't recall seeing this body language video posted here.  I'm not familiar with Believing Bruce and how expert he is but it's very interesting points he's making. Now if I see M swoop her hair back, I will know what that means.   It's from Oct 1, 2020 and like 14mins long. Not to bad.  Enjoy.

*Meghan Markle Interview EXPOSED! Body Language -

*


----------



## Lodpah

What we should do (well at least for me) is now look at them and their antics as drama, a reality show, a circus and only for entertainment purposes as what is the next episode going to be about). They are a freak show now after airing their contrived grievances after all. They brought themselves down low and they only have themselves to blame.

No one will bring them down. They will do it themselves. They will eat each other alive. That’s guaranteed. When that happens? We just have to keep watching.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of Diana and the story of trying to fall down stairs while pregnant with William ...I was aghast at that suicide revelation in Morton’s book , another form of self harming added onto to the bulimia ... 
the bulimia was generally reported at the time, she got sooooo thin, but the suicide incident had not been told til the book , and I always wondered how the story might impact William ... she had a right to reveal the self harming but ... 
And MM did the exact same reveal about suicide during pregnancy, although, to be fair, the theme of self harming seems to not be there with MM .. or am I wrong ?


----------



## Jayne1

Hermes Zen said:


> Don't recall seeing this body language video posted here.  I'm not familiar with Believing Bruce and how expert he is but it's very interesting points he's making. Now if I see M swoop her hair back, I will know what that means.   It's from Oct 1, 2020 and like 14mins long. Not to bad.  Enjoy.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Interview EXPOSED! Body Language -
> 
> *



I like these very much, but I want every Body Language expert to analyze her wanting to commit suicide comments, her saying she didn't know who H was, how they met, not having any knowledge how to contact a therapist, what giving birth was like (not that's she's ever talked about that) -- you know - the good stuff!

Watched the whole think though - I like this guy.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Thinking of Diana and the story of trying to fall down stairs while pregnant with William ...I was aghast at that suicide revelation in Morton’s book , another form of self harming added onto to the bulimia ...
> the bulimia was generally reported at the time, she got sooooo thin, but the suicide incident had not been told til the book , and I always wondered how the story might impact William ... she had a right to reveal the self harming but ...
> And MM did the exact same reveal about suicide during pregnancy, although, to be fair, the theme of self harming seems to not be there with MM .. or am I wrong ?


Apparently that throwing herself down the stairs bit was hogwash.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently that throwing herself down the stairs bit was hogwash.



The only issue confirmed by Diana et al. was the bulimia, correct?


----------



## Jktgal

sdkitty said:


> but it's a blind item.....so could be just fabricated, right?


Why would they fabricate, there is enough gossip in the world and they're free.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> From the Comments section of an article on the DM, a name for Harry's Wife I hadn't seen before:" Methane"
> 
> "Yes Methane! She and Hazard are the toxic twosome!"
> 
> Brief and to the point!


Oh, this is gold!



sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, I prefer not to think she wants to kill him





sdkitty said:


> I understand
> You didn't raise this....but anyway if she pushed him to kill himself, then she would essentially be responsible for his death (even if not legally).  As I said, I don't like her but I'm not ready to call her evil to that extent.





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Got it no worries sorry if I struck a nerve.
> 
> I was just surprised at the cavalier mention of suicide/murder.
> 
> But clearly I'm in the minority on this thread so please carry on.


I don't think she is evil personified. I don't think she will push him to kill himself. However, with her record of use and discard, and how she is basically enabling Mr Markle to melt down in public view, I think she is laying the groundwork to get rid of him at some future date. It will be easy for her to claim that he is so unstable that he poses a danger to her and the children (and her ill-gotten gains). Don't forget that she has shady lawyers, sly agents, unscrupulous Sunshine Sachs and mentor OW giving her strategic advice. They are in her team, not her husband's. What Mr Markle does after she turns on him will be none of her affair.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost nothing with them makes much sense.
> View attachment 5097173
> 
> 
> twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1397216444644003843?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Can't get over how he can calculate 4 years, but didn't he say he had therapy for "four _and a bit_ years, five years now", so his skill at rounding up is obviously amazing. 

We know he was an academic flop. But 1.5 years of royal life plus IIRC a really rushed dating period = 4 years? I'm wondering if her education was up to par. Maybe she can't count either if there are no dollar signs in front of the numbers.


----------



## xincinsin

Is Methane Markle (love her new name) still hoping for a political future? If so, I'd think her next victim might not be a billionaire or someone in royalty or an A-lister or the upperclass social hierarchy. She might angle for somebody with the political clout to boost her up, trading future favours for once she is in office.

Maybe that's why she is lying low now to "remake her image". Distancing herself from H's confessions, doing Reiki to show she is performing positive affirmative action to counter her "stressful" life, implying responsible motherhood. Didn't one of her ex-BFFs call her a "chameleon"?


----------



## csshopper

G


CarryOn2020 said:


> The only issue confirmed by Diana et al. was the bulimia, correct?


Morton recorded her telling the story of her plunge on the stairs for attention:. She said she was crying her eyes out and Charles was ignoring her, so she tumbled down the stairs. She said the Queen came out and saw what she had done, had some bruising around her stomach but no other injury.


----------



## Chanbal

Is he jumping on one more bandwagon? 








						Harry and Oprah back alternative to police for mental health response
					

Prince Harry pushed an alternative to policing in his new Apple TV show as he praised a tax-payer funded Oregon group that responds to mental health call-outs with 'care' rather than armed cops.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Is he jumping on one more bandwagon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah back alternative to police for mental health response
> 
> 
> Prince Harry pushed an alternative to policing in his new Apple TV show as he praised a tax-payer funded Oregon group that responds to mental health call-outs with 'care' rather than armed cops.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5097448


Snickering. The comments are not very kind.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> ^^ wow.  100% with this opinion.
> 
> *what a lifetime opportunity that H and M threw away.*  MM having been very quiet lately means she either has had the baby or the realisation that they majorly misstepped must be hitting hard - so more plotting must be going on.
> 
> she miscalculated the effect of the O interview - expecting it would catapult her and H into major fame, $$$ and a new “royalty” for the USA to embrace.  Instead they got such backlash that even O was backpedaling from the interview.
> 
> I am waiting for the next move.  What is left?  Living a billionaire lifestyle when they are only millionaires leaves them desperate for the next $ opportunity.  The only thing left is reality TV.  They can’t go back to the RF.
> 
> that or  a separation/ divorce.  Think Amber herd and Johnny D style.  MM “has receipts!”
> 
> But M miscalculated H’s worth... with many $$$ being held in family trusts.
> 
> the divorce is going to be epic.


Yep, they threw away a wonderful opportunity to have a great life. However, I would have respected them if they had come to the US and live a more private life. MM may have miscalculated H's worth, but he is still the one bringing the cash. I don't see a divorce on the horizon soon.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Snickering. The comments are not very kind.


How could they be kind? It's so much hypocrisy coming from the one that wants several millions of dollars for private security.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remind me again, please - what are they doing to help LA’s homeless?  Are they handing out a lunch? Providing shelter for anyone? Sending in counselors?  Anything? 










						Can L.A. really clear homeless people from skid row by October? Here's what we know
					

Clear homeless people from skid row by October? This is a judge's bold order for L.A.




					www.latimes.com
				





Santa Monica - are they involved there?





						Addressing Homelessness — We Are Santa Monica
					






					www.weare.santamonica.gov


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remind me again, please - what are they doing to help LA’s homeless?  Are they handing out a lunch? Providing shelter for anyone? Sending in counselors?  Anything?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can L.A. really clear homeless people from skid row by October? Here's what we know
> 
> 
> Clear homeless people from skid row by October? This is a judge's bold order for L.A.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Santa Monica - are they involved there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Addressing Homelessness — We Are Santa Monica
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.weare.santamonica.gov


Maybe they are following in OW's footsteps. She piously claimed to have sent out cheques to those in need, because she is "so blessed". Someone analysed her criteria for who received those cheques and concluded that she sent them to her friends - who are probably under an NDA and cannot trumpet her holiness. Methane, being less flush, probably sent cake to her neighbours.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is he jumping on one more bandwagon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah back alternative to police for mental health response
> 
> 
> Prince Harry pushed an alternative to policing in his new Apple TV show as he praised a tax-payer funded Oregon group that responds to mental health call-outs with 'care' rather than armed cops.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5097448



Lots of people are calling him out on his hypocrisy (crying his family need state funded, round-the-clock security - and having called out the police 13 times since he arrived) and untold arrogance (telling Americans what they need).


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> What we should do (well at least for me) is now look at them and their antics as drama, a reality show, a circus and only for entertainment purposes as what is the next episode going to be about). They are a freak show now after airing their contrived grievances after all. They brought themselves down low and they only have themselves to blame.
> 
> No one will bring them down. They will do it themselves. They will eat each other alive. That’s guaranteed. When that happens? We just have to keep watching.



I agree with you, they really are a freak show! The one thing that bothers me, actually that makes me downright angry is that, in their freak show,  they deliberately harm other people, i.e. the Royal Family, with their lies. Nobody can accuse anyone of anything without proof and so far they have produced none!

As for them, I'm absolutely sure they will keep on bringing themselves down, more and more, until they touch the bottom!


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> Snickering. The comments are not very kind.


I’m laughing at the nicknames in the comments. Hazbeen, Methane, Orca


----------



## queennadine

Of course he would in favor of less funding for police departments. Maybe their security detail could be composed of social workers, then. (Not bashing social workers  at all, but they’re not law enforcement.)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I wish Hazbeen would GTFO of the US and take whats-her-face with him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yes god forbid the police should be called for non-violent, possibly mental illness or addiction related incidents like, I don’t know, people trespassing private grounds, privacy intrusions by stan or people being so drunk or high they don’t answer an urgent phone call. That would be really wasting police time 

Of course, it’s different if you are in a wealthy neighbourhood and you don’t want you and your security getting sued for assault.

I’m all for social services and mental illness organisations being involved in deescalating mental health crises but I think it’s always important to know what level of training these responders have and what authority they can claim in a situation and help they can administer.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Article/ op-Ed about Hazzie in my paper yesterday 









						No, Prince Harry, the First Amendment isn’t bonkers - The Boston Globe
					

It helps explain America’s astounding history of achievement.




					www.bostonglobe.com
				





*No, Prince Harry, the First Amendment isn’t bonkers*
*It helps explain America’s astounding history of achievement.*
By Jeff Jacoby Globe Columnist,Updated May 29, 2021, 3:00 a.m.






Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, speaks at "Vax Live: The Concert to Reunite the World" on May 2 in Inglewood, Calif.Jordan Strauss/Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP
Actually, anti-royalism is a fundamental element of the American way of life you are adapting to. Our Constitution expressly forbids both federal and state governments to grant titles of nobility. Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 84, extolled that ban as the “cornerstone” of America’s ********** system. Perhaps the one thing we Americans never argue about — and as you know, we are regularly at daggers drawn over just about everything — is whether we’d be better off with a monarch. When we turned our backs on royalty in 1776, it was for good.

Get Today in Opinion in your inboxGlobe Opinion's must-reads, delivered to you every Sunday-Friday. 
You know what else is a cornerstone — indeed, a bearing wall — of America’s ********ic republic? The First Amendment, about which you were rather disparaging in a recent interview.

Earlier this month, on the “Armchair Expert” podcast, you were bewailing the intrusiveness of the paparazzi and the brazenness with which they stalk celebrities. The interviewer noted that while the relentless photographers may be obnoxious, what they do is legal under the First Amendment, which protects the right of the press to gather and publish information.

“I don’t want to start sort of going down the First Amendment route, because that’s a huge subject and one which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here for a short period of time,” you replied. “But you can find a loophole in anything.” You complained that even though “laws were created to protect people,” the media are allowed to disregard people’s privacy so that “they can make more money and they can capitalize on our pain, grief, and this general self-destructive mode.”

Then you added: “I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment, as I still don’t understand it. But it’s bonkers.”

No, Harry, the First Amendment isn’t bonkers. It is indispensable to America’s astounding history of achievement and to the way of life that has made this country an unprecedented haven for men and women who yearn to speak — or write, or learn, or teach, or report — with a freedom unknown in their native lands.

There is no First Amendment in Britain, where people can get arrested for “online crimes of speech” if their social media posts are too offensive. In the United States, by contrast, the government is commanded by the First Amendment to let people have their say, no matter how reprehensible. To be sure, there have always been efforts to get around that command, from the Alien and Sedition Acts in America’s early years to the atrocious speech codes on many modern college campuses. Freedom of speech and of the press always require vigilant defense. Fortunately, those who defend them have the First Amendment on their side.

There is no question that unbridled speech and irresponsible journalism can have terrible downsides. I can’t fault you for detesting the paparazzi who have no respect for the feelings of the celebrities they pursue. You were just a young boy when your mother lost her life in a car wreck while being chased through Paris by paparazzi. It’s understandable that you might think it bonkers for the First Amendment to enshrine a right to ferret out and publish information about people against their wishes.

It’s true: Freedom of speech and of the press have often led to embarrassment, annoyance, and unfair publicity. But far more often, they have been the spotlight that exposes truth, illuminates corruption, reveals misjudgment, publicizes problems, and uncovers remedies. What society gains from the First Amendment vastly outweighs the price it pays.

In 1786, Thomas Jefferson complained bitterly about the way the “public papers” were “afflicting” John Jay, among the greatest statesmen of that generation. It was outrageous, he wrote, that a devoted public servant like Jay should “have his peace of mind so much disturbed by any individual who shall think proper to arraign him in a newspaper.” Nevertheless, Jefferson avowed, to stifle the press would be much worse: “Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost. To the sacrifice of time, labor, fortune, a public servant must count upon adding that of peace of mind and even reputation.”

You told your podcast interviewer that “laws were created to protect people,” but the First Amendment was created to protect a certain kind of culture: one in which liberty is valued as both a means and an end. In which even powerful officials, famous celebrities, and wealthy titans can be questioned, rebutted, or denounced. In which sacred cows can be slaughtered and prevailing dogmas mocked.

In recent months, you have had plenty to say on topics ranging from your mental health to race and the royal family to your father’s shortcomings as a parent. Your views have provoked sympathy and admiration in some quarters, fury and contempt in others. Thanks to the First Amendment, your freedom to express those views is unassailable. So is everyone else’s freedom to say what they think about you. It isn’t a perfect system, but it is the best one ever devised for holding the mighty accountable and unshackling human minds. That isn’t bonkers — it’s a blessing. And as an American resident, you share in it too.

_Jeff Jacoby can be reached at __jeff.jacoby@globe.com__. Follow him on Twitter __@jeff_jacoby__. To subscribe to Arguable, his weekly newsletter, visit __bitly.com/Arguable__._


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Lots of people are calling him out on his hypocrisy (crying his family need state funded, round-the-clock security - and having called out the police 13 times since he arrived) and untold arrogance (telling Americans what they need).


Arrogance on his part is high, and the people giving him a platform to cash in on so much hypocrisy are not better imo.


----------



## sdkitty

this is just ridiculous.....who do they think they are kidding?
I know this has been discussed here before but not sure the People version was posted
Prince Harry Shares New Photos of Archie and Reveals His First Words (yahoo.com)


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Is he jumping on one more bandwagon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah back alternative to police for mental health response
> 
> 
> Prince Harry pushed an alternative to policing in his new Apple TV show as he praised a tax-payer funded Oregon group that responds to mental health call-outs with 'care' rather than armed cops.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5097448


just doing as he's told probably


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The only issue confirmed by Diana et al. was the bulimia, correct?


Morton, in the intro to his second edition, did discuss the stairwell episode, the tapes  said the first to find D was QEII, D read the manuscript and asked that it be changed to the Queen Mum, so, the episode was definitely a real thing for Morton - he remembers writing and editing the star story. But, of course, he never talked to D personally 

IMHO, the episode happened in some way shape or fashion, but who knows the specifics - did D aggrandize the event? Maybe she stumbled and then thought "what if I had died?" ... who knows ... but something ahppe3ned on the stairs 

D dictated the tapes some 8 years after fact by which time the marriage had badly soured ie after Camilla came back to Charles 

I believe the correct chronology is C & C broke it off for the first few years of the marriage to D ie the time of the stairwell incident. Camilla did not disappear, she was around always, and D was suspicious of this woman who her husband better than herself. But C & C did not then misbehave, that came alter 

The Morton book was dictated after C & C got back together, after the birth of H, by which time D had just cause about C & C


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

The South China Morning Post has published an opinion piece by Andre Neveling who writes mainly lightweight entertainment stuff and has several articles which are pro-MM.


			Pardon Our Interruption
		

He thinks Methane deserves some love because during her time as a royal, there was "no drama from her at all". 
I echo OW: *Whaaat?*
He calls her a "fragile girl with mental health struggles" and says we should be cheering her on for being opportunistic.
The best part: "It’s not exactly like she’s running around town badmouthing the royals, showing off her child to the paparazzi, or posting controversial tweets – she’s remained pretty dignified throughout it all, and could do _a lot_ more damage if she wanted to."
Most of all, he thinks she is heavily pregnant and therefore deserves a break.
Andre Neveling lives under a very huge rock.


			https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3135357/8-reasons-why-meghan-markle-deserves-break-bullying


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Lots of people are calling him out on his hypocrisy (crying his family need state funded, round-the-clock security - and having called out the police 13 times since he arrived) and untold arrogance (telling Americans what they need).


Maybe a tax-payer approach would be good ... love to see the results of this approach before being asked to fund it

Call police or XYZ??? Have recently had issue with STUBBORN neighbor (physical and mental health issues ... )  who is estranged from children (why ???) Emergency vehicles  are there about every 2 weeks ... Social workers, neighbors, visiting nurses, paramedics, police and sometimes children
There is a whole posse of people to help her ... If the children and police cannot convince her to do ABC ...
WHY would YET ANOTHER group of strangers do a better job of helping her ????

FYI in the US you cannot FORCE a person to do something AGAINST their will (without a power of attorney) or have access to their medical records, not even adult children have automatic access !!!  You cannot make them  go to a nursing home for ex, remove alcohol from house etc. The options are
1. Cajole patient into signing a Power of Attorney giving estranged children, for ex, say in parent care , well, that is not likely
2. Social workers and emergency personnel can deem the situation so grave that they ask for a court to intervene - well, that is rare
3. Children or other goes to court ($$$$$$$$$) to become guardian of ill person.
4. Hope for the best


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Maybe a tax-payer approach would be good ... love to see the results of this approach before being asked to fund it
> 
> Call police or XYZ??? Have recently had issue with STUBBORN neighbor (physical and mental health issues ... )  who is estranged from children (why ???) Emergency vehicles  are there about every 2 weeks ... Social workers, neighbors, visiting nurses, paramedics, police ... once in a while I see a child come by ... There is a whole posse of people to help her ... If the children and police cannot convince her to do ABC ...
> 
> She already has access to non police help - friends, visiting nurses and social worker professionals ...
> 
> WHY would YET ANOTHER group of strangers do a better job of helping her ????


this is a complicated issue....I'm sure Harry knows very little about it.....He's just saying what he's told to say.....really kinda insulting having him come to our country and spout "his" opinions


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> Is he jumping on one more bandwagon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Oprah back alternative to police for mental health response
> 
> 
> Prince Harry pushed an alternative to policing in his new Apple TV show as he praised a tax-payer funded Oregon group that responds to mental health call-outs with 'care' rather than armed cops.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5097448


Does he even go here? Can you imagine how outraged he will be when he actually has to pay taxes for the first time?


Sanctimonious twerp. It’s obvious they are preaching one set of rules for the little people and a whole set of privileges for their lot.


----------



## Aimee3

Yes, it’s sad that grandmaDiana isn’t alive for Archie BUT that can’t be changed.  However, H and the toxic tart are cutting their kid off from both still alive grandfathers.  Makes zero sense to me.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Yes, it’s sad that grandmaDiana isn’t alive for Archie BUT that can’t be changed.  However, H and the toxic tart are cutting their kid off from both still alive grandfathers.  Makes zero sense to me.


can you just picture these two sitting around creating things to say?  Oh, let's say Archie said Grandma Diana.  What are they trying to make us believe?  they showed him a picture and he fell in love?  
Apparently there is no end to their using his dead mother.  Is he going to be talking about her death when he's in his 50's, 60's, 70's?

Really Diana wasn't a perfect person but she did try to do some good.  H could have done similar work as part of the RF.  I don't see why Diana would be proud of him.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The South China Morning Post has published an opinion piece by Andre Neveling who writes mainly lightweight entertainment stuff and has several articles which are pro-MM.
> 
> 
> Pardon Our Interruption
> 
> 
> He thinks Methane deserves some love because during her time as a royal, there was "no drama from her at all".
> I echo OW: *Whaaat?*
> He calls her a "fragile girl with mental health struggles" and says we should be cheering her on for being opportunistic.
> The best part: "It’s not exactly like she’s running around town badmouthing the royals, showing off her child to the paparazzi, or posting controversial tweets – she’s remained pretty dignified throughout it all, and could do _a lot_ more damage if she wanted to."
> Most of all, he thinks she is heavily pregnant and therefore deserves a break.
> Andre Neveling lives under a very huge rock.
> 
> 
> https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3135357/8-reasons-why-meghan-markle-deserves-break-bullying



He must get paid by the number of comments his articles generate. There could be no other explanation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On another site, someone characterized Diana as a person who jet-skied with playboys while trying to be a global do-gooder & Hazz as a drunken party boy while trying to be a global do-gooder.  IMO the gloss is off of these two. No wonder they didn’t want the media to follow them. They knew their hypocrisy would be exposed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> The South China Morning Post has published an opinion piece by Andre Neveling who writes mainly lightweight entertainment stuff and has several articles which are pro-MM.
> 
> 
> Pardon Our Interruption
> 
> 
> He thinks Methane deserves some love because during her time as a royal, there was "no drama from her at all".
> I echo OW: *Whaaat?*
> He calls her a "fragile girl with mental health struggles" and says we should be cheering her on for being opportunistic.
> The best part: "It’s not exactly like she’s running around town badmouthing the royals, showing off her child to the paparazzi, or posting controversial tweets – she’s remained pretty dignified throughout it all, and could do _a lot_ more damage if she wanted to."
> Most of all, he thinks she is heavily pregnant and therefore deserves a break.
> Andre Neveling lives under a very huge rock.
> 
> 
> https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3135357/8-reasons-why-meghan-markle-deserves-break-bullying



I'll have what he's smoking, I really would love to go through life with his level of oblivious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> On another site, someone characterized Diana as a person who jet-skied with playboys while trying to be a global do-gooder & Hazz as a drunken party boy while trying to be a global do-gooder.  IMO the gloss is off of these two. No wonder they didn’t want the media to follow them. They knew their hypocrisy would be exposed.



I am far from a Diana Stan, but I feel that's a bit unfair. Harry is completely useless, while Diana actually achieved something for the causes she supported. Why would she be expected to live like a nun in her private time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Disclaimer: I did not watch it, it came up in my recommendations. The title is pretty much how I feel about her right now.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am far from a Diana Stan, but I feel that's a bit unfair. Harry is completely useless, while Diana actually achieved something for the causes she supported. Why would she be expected to live like a nun in her private time.


H's stupid crusade is dragging her down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am far from a Diana Stan, but I feel that's a bit unfair. Harry is completely useless, while Diana actually achieved something for the causes she supported. Why would she be expected to live like a nun in her private time.



IMO big difference between ‘living like a nun’ vs. swanning around the south of France on a billionaire boyfriend‘s yacht. There are plenty of options in between those two extremes. Maybe the characterization is a bit harsh, but maybe in view of the H&M criticism, it will help keep the proper perspective and balance. Have the same questions been asked of her that are now being asked of H&M?  Do we know how much she donated to charities? Sure, she raised lots of money - did it all go to the charity? 

Seems to me Diana is getting a pass while H&M are heavily criticized. To glorify one while shaming the other does not seem right. IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO big difference between ‘living like a nun’ vs. swanning around the south of France on a billionaire boyfriend‘s yacht. There are plenty of options in between those two extremes. Maybe the characterization is a bit harsh, but maybe in view of the H&M criticism, it will help keep the proper perspective and balance. Have the same questions been asked of her that are now being asked of H&M?  Do we know how much she donated to charities? Sure, she raised lots of money - did it all go to the charity?
> 
> Seems to me Diana is getting a pass while H&M are heavily criticized. To glorify one while shaming the other does not seem right. IMO



She died when I was a teenager so I'm no pro on Diana, but I really feel comparing Diana and the troublesome two is like comparing apples and pears. I'm also not sure what her playboy boyfriend has to do with anything. It's not like he was standing on the balcony with her waving to the unwashed masses, and after all her ex-husband married his mistress (don't get me wrong, I do like Camilla and think her behaviour has been flawless ever since she entered the BRF).

Did she have her own foundation? I thought she supported causes already set up by others, so why would she even have access to the money raised? You are the first person I've ever heard bring that up, was there ever raised eyebrows where money went?

I am really confused, how does Diana "get a pass" for all the sh*t H & M do she never did? (but as I said, I might just have missed that)


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> The South China Morning Post has published an opinion piece by Andre Neveling who writes mainly lightweight entertainment stuff and has several articles which are pro-MM.
> 
> 
> Pardon Our Interruption
> 
> 
> He thinks Methane deserves some love because during her time as a royal, there was "no drama from her at all".
> I echo OW: *Whaaat?*
> He calls her a "fragile girl with mental health struggles" and says we should be cheering her on for being opportunistic.
> The best part: "It’s not exactly like she’s running around town badmouthing the royals, showing off her child to the paparazzi, or posting controversial tweets – she’s remained pretty dignified throughout it all, and could do _a lot_ more damage if she wanted to."
> Most of all, he thinks she is heavily pregnant and therefore deserves a break.
> Andre Neveling lives under a very huge rock.
> 
> 
> https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3135357/8-reasons-why-meghan-markle-deserves-break-bullying


How much did they pay him off to write this?  No seriously sane person could write this. That rock he is living under is also sequestered in a cave with the outlet blocked off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She died when I was a teenager so I'm no pro on Diana, but I really feel comparing Diana and the troublesome two is like comparing apples and pears. I'm also not sure what her playboy boyfriend has to do with anything. It's not like he was standing on the balcony with her waving to the unwashed masses, and after all her ex-husband married his mistress (don't get me wrong, I do like Camilla and think her behaviour has been flawless ever since she entered the BRF).
> 
> Did she have her own foundation? I thought she supported causes already set up by others, so why would she even have access to the money raised? You are the first person I've ever heard bring that up, was there ever raised eyebrows where money went?
> 
> I am really confused, how does Diana "get a pass" for all the sh*t H & M do she never did? (but as I said, I might just have missed that)


No Diana didn’t raise money and she didn’t have a foundation.  She let her hair down once she was single and no longer HRH, so what?  She was only with Dodi for the last few weeks of her life, hardly defining IMO?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Snickering. The comments are not very kind.


Yes, from the quotes: To Hazmat...Methane and Orca 
Such venerable nicknames for such venerable people.
Hazmat = H
Methane = Harry's wife
Orca = OW  Mind you OW can be deadlier than an Orca. 

@mellibelly 
Sorry, I responded before reading to the end of the thread and didn't see your post.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

queennadine said:


> Of course he would in favor of less funding for police departments. Maybe their security detail could be composed of social workers, then. (Not bashing social workers  at all, but they’re not law enforcement.)
> 
> *I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I wish Hazbeen would GTFO of the US and take whats-her-face with him.*


I sympathize with you, but no other country really wants them either. We'll probably have to wait until someone discovers planet Chunga-Changa or maybe Elon Musk will be kind to Earth and send them off on his next Mars-bound spaceship.


----------



## Genie27

Unlike the devious duo, I don't think I heard Diana preaching to the unwashed masses about how we should be living our sad sorry lives, while she was cavorting on those yachts though. 

Diana was married at 19(!) (that's practically a child), and had two kids while very young, and didn't get the support or love that she needed in her 20s. After the divorce, why not have some fun that she missed out on in her 20s. 

Her social and charity work was important back then - she brought attention to several causes. I'm sure as she left the control of the palace, she may have become prey to unscrupulous people - it seems to be the way these two are going.


----------



## rose60610

Diana lived in a time before social media, she was and is elevated to sainthood status. The major difference between Diana and Meghan is glaring and irreparable for Meghan. Regardless whether one is a fan of Diana, Diana actually had (at least in public) a charming magnetic personality and radiated warmth and kindness. Publicly she fulfilled her royal duties. I'm not aware of any reports of her berating servants or elbowing Charles in the gut to be first to greet somebody. She did embarrass Charles when she danced on stage once but the public ate it up. Charles was annoyed that the public LOVED Diana so much and the cameras glommed onto HER instead of him in many cases. While Diana said a few things in interviews, she wasn't constantly publicly in "pity-poor-me" victim mode.

I'm sure there are many Meghan stans who buy Meghan's claims of BRF racism etc as a "I won't suck it up and take it" when it comes to filling royal expectations, and as such say she is a strong and brave person. Because that's what they want to see and conveniently discard her own actions/statements that refute her own claims. Meghan's stans eat up her BS. They can't afford not to. She will be protected by the Oprah's of the world and media no matter how refutable her claims are. To question Meghan is to question themselves. 

Even after Diana and Charles' divorce the public still loved Diana. What confuses Meghan is that the public still loved Diana after the divorce (essentially the divorce of the BRF) and Meghan wonders why ME GAIN shrines aren't being built in her honor all over the globe. The public saw Charles as an awkward, cold, not very personable guy and could understand why the relationship between him and the personable and warm Diana broke apart.

On the other hand, Harry and Meghan are two peas in a pod and Harry said "whatever M wants M gets", a 180 degree difference from Charles' relationship with Diana. To this day Harry seems ga-ga over Meghan. Much of the public can't understand why Meghan loved every minute (and the zillions of perks) of being part of the BRF during the two years they dated and then after wedding, her every whim catered to, adored by her husband etc--THEN splitting off from the BRF--coupled with the EXPECTATION of the BRF financially supporting them even after the split. If any of Meghan's claims are true, wouldn't it have been a thousand times easier for age mid 30's Harry to find a pair of balls and lay down the law with the BRF's supposed "abuse" of Meghan rather than split off? NO! After the idiotic things Meghan said, like "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK" or "I'm only existing, not living", how did she expect the public and British media to react???  Since she was such great actress (cough cough) was she just acting how she loved everything?? It would have helped her case to show she wasn't in love with being the center of attention all the time. 

How can you go from adoring and CHASING the spotlight to crying about the lack of privacy? And then STILL chasing the spotlight from your 19 bathroom mansion? Her biggest supporter is a 67 year old ex talk show host. Where are all of her popular A-lister friends to support her? She lives among them. Meghan is slowly imploding. And like a true sociopath, she'll still be whining and demanding pity when she falls into the persona non grata gutter. And KATE will be Queen (consort), not Ms-Poor-Me, though she gave it one helluva try.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Unlike the devious duo, I don't think I heard Diana preaching to the unwashed masses about how we should be living our sad sorry lives, while she was cavorting on those yachts though.
> 
> Diana was married at 19(!) (that's practically a child), and had two kids while very young, and didn't get the support or love that she needed in her 20s. After the divorce, why not have some fun that she missed out on in her 20s.
> 
> Her social and charity work was important back then - she brought attention to several causes. I'm sure as she left the control of the palace, she may have become prey to unscrupulous people - it seems to be the way these two are going.


She did the opposite of Meg and Harry, far from jumping on the bandwagon du jour she highlighted causes no one else wanted to touch - like Aids, the impact of land mines, homelessness and so on.
Eta - I’m no Di fan, I think she was often selfish and self absorbed, but she was a far better humanitarian than her son and his horrid wife and she didn’t do it for money or fame.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> She did the opposite of Meg and Harry, far from jumping on the bandwagon du jour she highlighted causes no one else wanted to touch - like Aids, the impact of land mines, homelessness and so on.
> Eta - I’m no Di fan, I think she was often selfish and self absorbed, but she was a far better humanitarian than her son and his horrid wife and she didn’t do it for money or fame.


I don’t really have that much of an interest in Diana but I do think this is an big contrast between H&M and other philanthropic celebs in general.

When when people like angelina or Beyoncé are getting great publicity for their charitable endeavours they still write a big fat cheque at the end of the day.

The most the gruesome twosome has been linked to about maybe 10k in roof repairs? Usually it’s more like a couple of 1ks or less which is probably what any common or garden middle class person gives away over a year without demanding to be seen as a hero. 

I don’t know the numbers of what Diana gave away on average but I would hope it was more than the cost of 25 packed lunches


----------



## Lounorada

maxter said:


> this thread is fire








Chanbal said:


> A well written letter...
> View attachment 5096827
> 
> In the circumstances, it is entirely appropriate, with the utmost respect to you, that your attention is not only once again drawn to the unwelcome recent sequence of events largely precipitated by you and your wife, but also to the ensuing fallout that this has caused. Both you and your wife have opted to very publicly level wholly unsubstantiated accusations of racism, indifference and emotional trauma at thus far unnamed members of the Royal Family, your family, Sir.
> 
> Why you both feel the need to engage the media that you profess to loathe in this vendetta I cannot understand, nor can many millions of our fellow countrymen.
> 
> The British public at large were absolutely thrilled that you had found someone with whom you clearly share such a unique bond. Your future wife was welcomed with open arms, and on the day of your wedding you had people thronged together lining the streets of Windsor to show their joy at your happiness on your special day.
> 
> The weather was similarly glorious to add to the genuine mood of celebration for you and your wife.
> 
> In the ensuing years since that wonderful day at St Georges Chapel your popularity in this country has plummeted with the onset of widespread anger and disgust, increasing in intensity each time you decide to air your dirty laundry in public.
> 
> This is sadly an inescapable fact and one in which I personally take absolutely no pleasure in pointing out, along with many millions of people in both this country and the United States.
> 
> You were born into a unique and enigmatic family, who have provided a haven and rallying point for the people of this country for centuries.
> 
> Your family is an incredibly significant ingredient in the glue that binds us all together, and for you to unilaterally attack and defame their integrity is quite frankly despicable.
> 
> Many millions of people have suffered emotional trauma in some or other way throughout the world, so this is not unique to you. This does not of course make the loss of your mother in any way insignificant or indeed less tragic. The pain and sense of loss that both you and your brother, the Duke of Cambridge, have endured remains raw, and was also deeply felt by millions of others the length and breadth of this country. This was proven beyond any doubt with only a glance at the crowds in London on that day of the memorial for your mother at the Abbey.
> 
> In your statement preceding your departure from frontline Royal duties you solemnly pledged to always uphold the values of the monarchy. Well, Sir, you have a mighty strange way of showing it!
> 
> How does your professed loyalty to the Crown square with your present outbursts of spite and anger?
> 
> Does your Grandmother deserve any of this? Does the memory of your late Grandfather warrant being dragged through the mud simply as a selfish act of misguided catharsis on your part?
> 
> I certainly do not believe so, and many millions of people agree with me.
> 
> You oftentimes make no secret of your disdain and loathing of the press, who you accuse of a constant imposition into your “private” life.
> 
> Yes, the press is a part of the everyday existence of public figures, and you are certainly no exception to this, but it goes with the turf.
> 
> The added dimension in your case, however, is that the only acceptable press coverage when it comes to you and your wife is only that which fits the narrative put out by your spin doctors in LaLa land.
> 
> The sad truth of the matter is that you are enraged you couldn’t have it both ways.
> 
> You couldn’t enjoy the kudos that you seem to believe is your right along with cashing in on your status as both you and your wife would have wished.
> 
> As I am sure your Grandmother, your Father and your Brother made clear to you at what has been dubbed the “Sandringham Summit” you cannot have your cake and eat it.
> 
> You are either in or you are out, the best of both worlds is just not an option.
> 
> Both you and your wife have the unfortunate habit of trying to portray yourselves as victims, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
> 
> Your public outbursts seeking sympathy on the back of launching entirely misguided attacks on your family looks very much like a cynical publicity stunt based it seems on a litany of inaccuracies.
> 
> Your flirtation with wokery is likewise an entirely self-serving exercise in the promotion of “Brand Sussex”, loaded with gross hypocrisy in preaching to the world at large.
> 
> Your PR team and other strategic media embedded mouthpieces display breath-taking ignorance of our heritage and culture, a fact that you ought to know full well.
> 
> You have regrettably allowed yourself to blur the lines between celebrity and royalty, for which there is no excuse for you or even your wife for that matter.
> 
> You have given up everything you have known up to this point in seeking a new life in the United States, although you were very definitely badly advised in making recent comments about the US Constitution first amendment, about which you clearly know nothing, and which was in fact an insult to your hosts.
> 
> You’re a guest in that country and you have no right to make remarks like that especially in view of your family background which maintains a totally apolitical viewpoint.
> 
> I could elaborate further on the grossly ill-advised course you have opted to pursue, but until such time as a good hard dose of reality sets in then there seems little point.
> 
> As disgusted as I am that I witness a Prince of the Realm from my country disparaging his family in such a disgraceful way, I nonetheless hope and pray that you find genuine peace and happiness one day.
> 
> I sincerely hope that you can overcome the demons of your emotional trauma and anger in finding a comfortable balance in your life.
> 
> Perhaps you should open your eyes wider, open your mind too and look a little deeper. You might be surprised at what you discover. But just stop with the nonsense of attacking your family.
> 
> One last point you might be well advised to take on board, Sir. You and your wife would be nothing and nobody were it not for the fact that you are the grandson of the Queen of England, the son, brother and uncle of future Kings of England.
> 
> Self-destruction doesn’t become you, so drop the hard done by rubbish and get a grip. You might just find it eventually pays off in positive ways that you least expected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'What you have done sir is quite frankly despicable': Letter to Harry
> 
> 
> Sir, I am an ordinary citizen of the United Kingdom, a loyal and patriotic subject of Her Majesty the Queen of England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk








Well said!
Now, can someone please print this off and post it to JCMH, maybe throw in an audio version of the letter too, that plays on loop upon opening. Just so he gets the message because this is a message that he needs to hear loud and clear.


----------



## Lounorada

I had loads of posts from the past several days saved in multi-quote waiting for a quiet moment where I could sit down and reply, but they were all gone, except for the 2 posts above  I don't know where the posts disappeared to but damn I hate when technology fails me!


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do we know how much she donated to charities? Sure, she raised lots of money - did it all go to the charity?


Not a cent.  And Harry must be happy about that because he's living off what she never donated, since half of it went to him.


Clearblueskies said:


> No Diana didn’t raise money and she didn’t have a foundation.  She let her hair down once she was single and no longer HRH, so what?  She was only with Dodi for the last few weeks of her life, hardly defining IMO?


Diana had tons of fun while married - on the sly and not so on the sly. The Dodi thing just happened to be at the end of her life, so we remember it so well.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Morton recorded her telling the story of her plunge on the stairs for attention:. She said she was crying her eyes out and Charles was ignoring her, so she tumbled down the stairs. She said the Queen came out and saw what she had done, had some bruising around her stomach but no other injury.


She did tell Morton (through her tapes) that she threw herself down the stairs, but he later said that she was so miserable and prone to exaggeration that he wasn't sure she really did.  

He thought she might have slipped and overstated for effect.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope this isn’t true, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5096610


WHOA .. that's a benzo!  I have sleep issues, but my PCP will not (and never has) given me a medication that is a benzo because, frankly, it's too dangerous!  Yes, indeed .. he better not be drinking any of his beloved beer or have a glass of Meghan's favorite wine!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Have we heard of this? I found it in the comments section while watching footage of William and Charles playing polo around William's 21st birthday...Harry was there too, so naturally people were commenting how horrible his life looked (not):

"If anything it was Harry who was emotionally detached. The interview they did with Ant and Dec for the Prince's Trust, when Charles recounted the polo story of how he fell off his horse, got knocked out and ended up in hospital...Harry's reaction to his father lying on the ground was "Papa's having a snore"...like seriously? Your elderly father just fell from a horse and is unconscious...I would be terrified because my father is only a few years younger than Charles and rides."

Like...ok, people do have different senses of humour, but that is a weird reaction to your father getting seriously hurt.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have we heard of this? I found it in the comments section while watching footage of William and Charles playing polo around William's 21st birthday...Harry was there too, so naturally people were commenting how horrible his life looked (not):
> 
> "If anything it was Harry who was emotionally detached. The interview they did with Ant and Dec for the Prince's Trust, when Charles recounted the polo story of how he fell off his horse, got knocked out and ended up in hospital...Harry's reaction to his father lying on the ground was "Papa's having a snore"...like seriously? Your elderly father just fell from a horse and is unconscious...I would be terrified because my father is only a few years younger than Charles and rides."
> 
> Like...ok, people do have different senses of humour, but that is a weird reaction to your father getting seriously hurt.


I think that’s just a him brushing it off with a bit of dark  humour and also not showing too much shock or emotion which is exactly how I’d expect one of them to react. It is this new ‘letters to dead people and crying in public’ stance the royals are taking that I don’t recognise. Shrugging off your parent’s near demise with a joke seems much more their brand. 
I’d also say at that point the handlers must have had some handle on what was being said by of about Harry to Ant & Dec too.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO big difference between ‘living like a nun’ vs. swanning around the south of France on a billionaire boyfriend‘s yacht. There are plenty of options in between those two extremes. Maybe the characterization is a bit harsh, but maybe in view of the H&M criticism, it will help keep the proper perspective and balance. Have the same questions been asked of her that are now being asked of H&M?  Do we know how much she donated to charities? Sure, she raised lots of money - did it all go to the charity?
> 
> Seems to me Diana is getting a pass while H&M are heavily criticized. To glorify one while shaming the other does not seem right. IMO



If you were in your mid-30s and had been married to Charles for fifteen years, you'd probably go wild and find a fun lover too. Hell, we all would!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

H and M are having the worlds longest tantrum.

The Queen said no to the “half in/half out” plan whilst continuing to fund their extravagant lifestyle and security - whilst not in the UK or a Commonwealth country.

so every interview, promotion etc with them from now on, no matter the cause, is going to have some slight directed at the RF.  How else can they get headlines?

This from the couple whose non-profit (money laundering / tax avoidance) Archewell says it stands for “compassion”.

Actions speak louder than words.  So far they are all talk with minimal action (Sandwiches, sent a cake etc).

I am waiting for the next stunt.  10 June was Prince Philips birthday and 21 June is Will’s birthday - so expect something to drop on those dates so they take all the publicity.  

And don’t forget the Diana statue unveiling (1-July?) will probably be them upstaging it by showcasing their new baby (Online as neither M or H would return to the UK for fear of massive booing from the public).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Not a cent.  And Harry must be happy about that because he's living off what she never donated, since half of it went to him.
> 
> Diana had tons of fun while married - on the sly and not so on the sly. The Dodi thing just happened to be at the end of her life, so we remember it so well.



This. 
IMO
Plenty of other points to make about why Diana was no saint, just Google it. Beautifully photogenic, absolutely. Saint, nah.
Imo the important points are - She _chose_ to marry the future king. She _chose_ to hang out with the billionaires in her ‘free’ time. She _chose _Bashir and Morton to tell her story. She _chose _to drop most of her charities after her separation, then divorce. As we approach this statue reveal show, I expect we will see more Diana-glorification stories. Sad because the younger people who did not follow her will be duped by the Diana myth. So it goes.

We all know why Hazz is no saint which makes his global do-gooder stance all the more inconsistent with reality.
When reality collides with the myth, disappointment always follows. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the media presented a balanced view.  IMO, ymmv.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This.
> IMO
> Plenty of other points to make about why Diana was no saint, just Google it. Beautifully photogenic, absolutely. Saint, nah.
> Imo the important points are - She _chose_ to marry the future king. She _chose_ to hang out with the billionaires in her ‘free’ time. She _chose _Bashir and Morton to tell her story. She _chose _to drop most of her charities after her separation, then divorce. As we approach this statue reveal show, I expect we will see more Diana-glorification stories. Sad because the younger people who did not follow her will be duped by the Diana myth. So it goes.
> 
> We all know why Hazz is no saint which makes his global do-gooder stance all the more inconsistent with reality.
> When reality collides with the myth, disappointment always follows. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the media presented a balanced view.  IMO, ymmv.


I don't think anyone is saying Diana is a saint.  but she did a lot of good things with AIDS patients, etc.  The people loved her.  she became iconic with her early death.  
So she had some fun after her divorce.....I don't have a problem with that.  I don't think she would have married Dodi.


----------



## bag-mania

When well-liked, famous people die young and tragically they become icons. Whether it’s Diana, JFK, Marilyn Monroe, or James Dean, none of them were saints but they all became beloved because of their horrible deaths.

It’s not a club Diana or any of the others wished to join. They  all would have preferred to NOT be glorified if it meant they could have lived full lives. I think it’s important to keep it in perspective. The famous deceased people did not put themselves on pedestals. That is something the public chose to do. For whatever reason, the public needs it.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Not a good look for Piers Morgan, this has nothing to do with M&H and he's getting ratioed for his comments about Osaka, deservedly so...


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> When well-liked, famous people die young and tragically they become icons. Whether it’s Diana, JFK, Marilyn Monroe, or James Dean, none of them were saints but they all became beloved because of their horrible deaths.
> 
> It’s not a club Diana or any of the others wished to join. They  all would have preferred to NOT be glorified if it meant they could have lived full lives. I think it’s important to keep it in perspective. The famous deceased people did not put themselves on pedestals. That is something the public chose to do. For whatever reason, the public needs it.



Plenty of books that debate all of this.




OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not a good look for Piers Morgan, this has nothing to do with M&H and he's getting ratioed for his comments about Osaka, deservedly so...




Lots more to this story than we know.  She _chose_ to turn pro, so she needs to follow their rules, their expectations. With her insta posts, she turned this into a major drama. Not fair of her to distract from the game and the other players.




Spoiler: Players comment:



_'Why should she be treated any differently to the other players?' Mats Wilander, the former world No 1, told Eurosport. 'She definitely has to do press. We are all struggling with mental issues these days during the pandemic, but Naomi, I think you need to reconsider or, I would say, don't play in the tournament until you are ready to face the job.'

The top-ranked woman player, Ash Barty, suggested Osaka take herself a tad less seriously: 'Press is part of the job. We know what we sign up for as professional tennis players. At times, press conferences are hard, of course, but it's also not something that bothers me. ... For me, personally, it doesn't keep me up at night what I say and hear or what you guys ask me. So, I try and make it a little bit lighter and have a bit of fun with you guys.'

Daniil Medvedev, the No. 2-ranked man in tennis, even said that press scrutiny can help his mental health – finding it cathartic after a loss.

'I try always to come to a press conference,' he said, 'bad mood or good mood. And I feel like, even sometimes in the bad mood, I can be in a better mood after talking to you guys.'

This Osaka nonsense sadly epitomises the state of the woke-ravaged world today.

We're seeing mental health being used more and more as an excuse for deplorable behaviour._


It is ok that she withdraws, no?   Very important to pay attention to what the other players are saying:

From your article:
_Commendably, and ironically, *many* other top tennis stars have criticized her stance.

'Without the press,' said Rafael Nadal, 'without the people who normally travel, who are writing the news and achievements that we are having around the world, probably we will not be the athletes that we are today. We (aren't) going to have the recognition that we have around the world, and we will not be that popular, no?'

He was backed by Billie-Jean King who said: 'I have always believed that as professional athletes we have a responsibility to make ourselves available to the media. In our day, without the press, nobody would have known who we are or what we thought. They helped build and grow our sport into what it is today.'

Exactly.


_


----------



## Sol Ryan

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not a good look for Piers Morgan, this has nothing to do with M&H and he's getting ratioed for his comments about Osaka, deservedly so...




I feel for her, but I have to admit, as soon as I saw her announcement I knew I wasn’t going to go down well. Did she speak with anyone at the tournament before she posted it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I feel for her, but I have to admit, as soon as I saw her announcement I knew I wasn’t going to go down well. Did she speak with anyone at the tournament before she posted it?



Since it was so poorly handled, I’m guessing she did not. She admits that she did not want to cause this much drama.

ETA: Piers makes a good point about clay not being her service, so she was unlikely to win and likely would have been asked about why she is not a better player on clay.  The big question is why did she even enter RG?? And will Serena win???

ETA2:  this has been going on for awhile:

_Naomi revealed in an "appreciation post" for Cordae that he is as supportive as a partner should be. According to Naomi, while quarantining during the US Open last year, she FaceTimed Cordae and told him she was feeling "sad and lonely" _








						Naomi Osaka's Boyfriend, Cordae, Tells Her There's "No Need to Apologize" For Withdrawing from the French Open
					

He's been extremely supportive of her throughout the situation.




					www.seventeen.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lots more to this story than we know.  She _chose_ to turn pro, so she needs to follow their rules, their expectations. With her insta posts, she turned this into a major drama. Not fair of her to distract from the game and the other players.



Right, the irony is Piers behaved the same way when he walked off his set. Can’t stand the heat I guess...

Either way it has nothing to do with MM, other than the fact that they are both women of color. He would have been better off staying out of it or not mentioning H&M at all. It makes him seem obsessed and fuels critics who believe he is racist and misogynist.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Even after Diana and Charles' divorce the public still loved Diana. What confuses Meghan is that the public still loved Diana after the divorce (essentially the divorce of the BRF) and *Meghan wonders why ME GAIN shrines aren't being built in her honor all over the globe*. The public saw Charles as an awkward, cold, not very personable guy and could understand why the relationship between him and the personable and warm Diana broke apart.
> 
> On the other hand, Harry and Meghan are two peas in a pod and Harry said "whatever M wants M gets", a 180 degree difference from Charles' relationship with Diana. To this day Harry seems ga-ga over Meghan. Much of the public can't understand why Meghan loved every minute (and the zillions of perks) of being part of the BRF during the two years they dated and then after wedding, her every whim catered to, adored by her husband etc--*THEN splitting off from the BRF--coupled with the EXPECTATION of the BRF financially supporting them even after the split*.


ITA
Methane doesn't see anything wrong with what she is doing. Maybe in her heart of hearts of hearts (the really miniscule cell left), she may wonder why she is not getting more support from the world, but she would probably conclude it's because the world lacks COMPASSION! Perhaps she also sees continued financial support from the BRF as her due, as alimony and as ransom money. 

BTW, Mr Markle made this claim during the OW interview. Is there any truth to it?
_Harry: And I guess one of the most telling parts — and the saddest parts, I guess — was over 70 Members of Parliament, female Members of Parliament, both Conservative and Labour — came out and called out the . . . the colonial undertones of articles and headlines written about Meghan._


----------



## lallybelle

Osaka w/d because she didn't want it to become an on going controversy throughout the tournament. Both are right, as the  tournament is allowed to issue the fine, since it's the rules, and Naomi was absolutely right to do what she  felt she needed to do for her mental health. Sorry Piers, this is not the same as M & H.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This.
> IMO
> Plenty of other points to make about why Diana was no saint, just Google it. Beautifully photogenic, absolutely. Saint, nah.
> Imo the important points are - She _chose_ to marry the future king. She _chose_ to hang out with the billionaires in her ‘free’ time. She _chose _Bashir and Morton to tell her story. She _chose _to drop most of her charities after her separation, then divorce. As we approach this statue reveal show, I expect we will see more Diana-glorification stories. Sad because the younger people who did not follow her will be duped by the Diana myth. So it goes.
> 
> We all know why Hazz is no saint which makes his global do-gooder stance all the more inconsistent with reality.
> When reality collides with the myth, disappointment always follows. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the media presented a balanced view.  IMO, ymmv.


As far as I know, Diana came from a rather unstable family and married Charles at a very young age. The marriage was disappointing, which didn't help to give her the emotional security she needed. I believe she was still discovering herself at the time of her death. To my knowledge, she was not a greedy person, had empathy for other people, and loved her kids. I never heard of her preaching to others or showing signs of hypocrisy. She was a decent human being in my book, nobody is perfect! 

I wonder who had the idea of the statue, it doesn't make much sense imo. What H is doing to his mother's memory doesn't seem right, she should be let to rest in peace.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plenty of books that debate all of this.



Which part? Celebrity books are not written by archivists and scholars dedicated to preserving an accurate history for posterity. There’s plenty of leeway for authors to insert creative embellishment into those celeb bios. It’s what helps boost sales.

_Finding Freedom_ is a celebrity biography. I hate to think that that book will ever be quoted as being fact, but I suppose it’s inevitable that it will be.


----------



## Kevinaxx

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not a good look for Piers Morgan, this has nothing to do with M&H and he's getting ratioed for his comments about Osaka, deservedly so...



Honestly I’ve read another online poster (Reddit) say she should just pull a Marshall lynch and I agree.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kevinaxx said:


> Honestly I’ve read another online poster (Reddit) say she should just pull a Marshall lynch and I agree.



Yeah.
 The Beast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not a good look for Piers Morgan, this has nothing to do with M&H and he's getting ratioed for his comments about Osaka, deservedly so...




I don't see any similarity between Naomi and M/H so it's weird of Piers to say that. Naomi doesn't WANT press, she's 23 and clearly out of her element in those situations, especially as a shy girl.

I have sympathy for her but I don't think what she did was right. She says it herself, she's struggling to meet some of these expectations of her role. She's hardly the first to hate those press interviews during tournaments but others usually chalk it up to an annoying part of the job and get on. She's so young, I understand her struggling in these daunting situations. Hopefully she learns how to cope and finds a better way to deal with it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Staying on topic here:

Seems like H&M are following Diana’s playbook:
[Full article in spoiler]








						The truth about Princess Diana and the myth she created
					

The 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death is more than a month out, yet the summer of 2017 seems all Di, all the time. Three primetime network specials have already aired in May. US Weekly pub…




					nypost.com
				






Spoiler: Carefully crafted



*The truth about Princess Diana and the myth she created*
By Maureen Callahan
The 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death is more than a month out, yet the summer of 2017 seems all Di, all the time.

Three primetime network specials have already aired in May. US Weekly published a special bookazine that same month; People plans one for July 21, to tie in with a two-night ABC special in early August. A repackaged edition of Andrew Morton’s 1992 blockbuster expose “Diana: Her True Story” hits shelves on Tuesday; National Geographic publishes “Remembering Diana: A Life In Photographs” Aug. 1. HBO has announced its own Princess Diana documentary, and the Weinstein Company, working with AMI Media, has their own August project for TLC.

Enlarge ImagePrince Charles and Princess Diana in 1981 following the announcement of their engagement.AP
As The Post reported Wednesday, a Princess Diana musical is likely coming to Broadway. The second season of Ryan Murphy’s anthology “Feud” will retell Diana’s acrimonious 1996 divorce from Prince Charles, heir to the British throne.

“It’s about that pain, of the dissolving of a fairy tale, particularly for Diana,” Murphy said in April. “It starts with the filing of divorce papers and takes you up to her death.”

Though there’s nothing revelatory here — no new information, no counter-narrative — the collective hunger for all things Diana remains. Hers clearly is a story we like to be told over and over again, a post-modern parable about the vicissitudes of wealth, fame, beauty and idolatry — everything that goes to the true power of myth.

Yet amid all these retellings, one inexorable truth will be ignored: Diana actively created her own mythology.

Not since Jackie Kennedy’s masterful post-assassination theater — from deplaning in her blood-spattered pink Chanel to staging her husband’s funeral to demanding that her “Camelot” anecdote, which was a total lie, end the interview she granted to Life magazine days later — had a post-modern public figure so assiduously crafted her own narrative.

Like Jackie, Diana claimed to hate the press while expertly manipulating it to her own ends. Both became global celebrities through their first marriages, and when those marriages ended, each used the mass media not just to maintain their status but enlarge it, crying victim all the way.

“My life is just torture,” Diana said in 1992, a complaint that made tabloid headlines in the UK. Her marriage was unraveling, and she was plotting her life after Charles. “Bloody hell, after all I’ve done for this f – – king family . . . I’ll go out and conquer the world . . . do my bit in the way I know how and leave him behind.”

Enlarge Image Princess Diana sits in front of the Taj Mahal on Feb. 11, 1992.AP
Diana often lamented her lack of intellect, but she was an intuitive genius, a savant at branding and marketing. Here she was, the latest member of an institution whose leaders had, among other things, beheaded wives, imprisoned relatives, executed staffers, and abdicated the throne while sympathizing with Hitler, yet she somehow transformed her husband’s pedestrian infidelity into the biggest scandal facing the monarchy ever.

Her famous pose outside the Taj Mahal in February 1992, a forlorn and lonely princess at the world’s largest monument to love, laid the groundwork for her story arc — no matter that Charles was actually on the trip.



> *Princess Diana was the first ‘Real Housewife,’ and as all the best housewives do, she understood that survival depends on scripting and selling your narrative.*


“Diana, driven to five suicide bids by ‘uncaring’ Charles,” read the headline of the UK’s Sunday Times on July 7, 1992. “Marriage collapse led to illness; Princess says she will not be Queen.”

Given how stringent libel laws are in the UK, and the institutional power that the monarchy exerts over the British press, these headlines were bombshells in one sense only: They had to be coming from inside the house. For the first time since the invention of the printing press, a top-level member of the royal family was committing a form of treason.

*Diana had, in fact, spent most of 1991 secretly working with British reporter and admirer Andrew Morton on a book, one that would ostensibly reveal all. Here too, her particular genius is on display: Diana presaged confessional culture by years.

She understood that by stripping away the royal artifice and revealing her dirty little secrets — bulimia and self-harm, suicide attempts and a sexless marriage — the public would love her more, not less. Princess Diana was the first “Real Housewife,” and as all the best housewives do, she understood that survival depends on scripting and selling your narrative.*

On July 16, 1992, “Diana: Her True Story” was published. *Shrewdly, Diana had never met with Morton face to face, which gave her plausible deniability — yet as even Morton acknowledges in a new foreword, Diana easily defaulted to her fawn-in-the-woods act.*

“It was a part she played with aplomb,” Morton writes. “The author and TV star Clive James fondly recalled asking her over lunch whether she was behind the book. He wrote, ‘At least once, however, she lied to me outright. “I really had nothing to do with that Andrew Morton book,” she said. “But after my friends talked to him I had to stand by them.” She looked me straight in the eye when she said this, so I could see how plausible she could be when she was telling a whopper.’”

Whopper indeed: In his new foreword, Morton reproduces Diana’s own handwritten line-edits.

Enlarge ImageReuters
Just as she depicted herself as a lamb to the slaughter on her wedding day, a 19-year-old virgin victimized by a bloodless cabal of royals, Diana knew well before her wedding that her fiancé was in love with Camilla Parker-Bowles. An aristocrat herself, she knew that royals, especially monarchs and monarchs-in-waiting, had affairs more often than not, and she went ahead with it.

*She was insider cast as outsider, a role the media was complicit in propagating. Diana branded herself the only member of the royal family who cared about the little people — no matter that her mother-in-law, Queen Elizabeth, had braved the Blitz — and she could be clueless and *****y while doing so.*

Enlarge ImagePrince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles at Windsor Castle on their wedding day on April 9, 2005.Getty Images
She wrote to Morton of her vision for the royal family, her dream of hosting garden parties at Buckingham Palace for “all the handicapped and wheelchairs — which we did just before we got married — people who’ve never seen Buckingham Palace let alone been on the grass. But they are not allowed too many wheelchairs because it ruins the grass.”

*She told friends she considered “POW” short not for Princess of Wales but Prisoner of War — not a good look for a burgeoning humanitarian.*

Diana also refused to take any blame in the collapse of her marriage, to acknowledge that her increasing hysteria — her constant self-harm, suicide attempts and rage-filled tantrums — were enough to push anyone away. Instead, she told Morton of her shrink’s succinct diagnosis upon first meeting. “He said: ‘There’s nothing wrong with you; it’s your husband.’”

More crucially, Diana hid key information from Morton: She herself had cheated on Charles, with more than one man, early and often.

There was her bodyguard, 37-year-old Barry Mannakee, in 1986; car salesman James Gilbey, circa 1989, followed by Oliver Hoare, a married art dealer who broke it off, only to have Diana stalk him, calling his home up to 300 times. Then came rugby player Will Carling and, most famously, James Hewitt, who publicly claimed he was involved with Diana from 1986 through 1991.

Yet as this information slowly dripped out, public opinion remained heavily pro-Diana.

An aging palace couldn’t grasp how to dismantle her swift-moving character arc. Post-separation, Diana was photographed in workout gear, driving to and from her London gym, picking her children up from school, taking them to Disney for vacation — just another modern single mom on the go, albeit one making sure her boys wouldn’t be contaminated by the crown.

Enlarge ImagePrincess Diana in “The Revenge Dress”Getty Images
It took Prince Charles two years to give his version, sitting for a primetime interview with star journalist Jonathan Dimbleby.

This was an unprecedented move for a future king of England, and Charles, looking and sounding uncomfortable, admitted to cheating on Diana only after the marriage had “irretrievably broken down, us both having tried.” But Charles couldn’t win. The British public felt no sympathy; instead, they felt he’d debased himself and the monarchy.

The same night Charles’ interview aired, Diana scored another coup with what came to be called “The Revenge Dress”: For a party at the Serpentine Gallery, she wore a tight black strapless cocktail dress, cut well above the knee, neckline plunging.

Enlarge ImageDiana reinvented herself again, this time as a globetrotting humanitarian.Getty Images
“She wanted to look a million dollars,” said Anna Harvey, Diana’s stylist. “And she did.”

Diana made Charles’ admission look feeble and weak, and, more importantly, knocked him off the front page. Her message: You may prefer the older, haggard Camilla, but to look at me, the rest of the world will never understand why.

Diana did it again in 1995, granting a wide-ranging interview to Martin Bashir. Dressed in a smart black suit, eyes rimmed with kohl, Diana sought to blunt her own infidelity by volleying right back at Charles and Camilla.

“There were three of us in this marriage,” she said, damp eyes looking up from a bowed head. “So it was a bit crowded.”

More than 25 million people watched the interview, which was announced on Charles’ 47th birthday and aired on Queen Elizabeth’s 48th wedding anniversary — another piece of nonverbal jujitsu.

In it, Diana also claimed to be a victim of palace backstabbing, of orchestrated attempts to depict her as mentally ill, and as a target of sinister plots to get her to “go quietly.” The knife twist: Diana claimed her husband wasn’t fit for the British throne, his sole purpose in a life otherwise spent in purgatory.

*As for herself, Diana said she had no more humble aspiration than to be “a queen of people’s hearts.”*

After the couple divorced at the Queen’s insistence in 1996, Diana reinvented herself again, this time as a globetrotting humanitarian. Now her focus was on sick kids and landmines and meeting with Mother Teresa rather than movie stars — but still, she fought hard to retain her title.

Enlarge ImagePrincess Diana with Dodi al-Fayed in Paris on Aug. 31, 1997.Splash News
In the summer of 1997, Diana allowed paparazzi to catch her on vacation with Egyptian playboy Dodi al-Fayed, though she was fresh off a secret, two-year relationship with Hasnat Khan, a Pakistani heart surgeon she called “the love of her life.” *She’d even visited Khan’s extended family in Pakistan in May 1996, proof that she could live a private life when she chose.*

In the weeks and months after Diana’s death, chased through a Paris tunnel by paparazzi, there was much recrimination of the media.

*Even today — even as those who knew Diana admit she used the press to cover her romance with al-Fayed, hoping to make Khan jealous — the prevailing narrative paints Diana as pure victim, hounded by a soulless media, consumed by our own prurient interest. Why couldn’t we all just leave her alone?

That, truly, is the biggest fairy tale of all, and one much more interesting to hear.*


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Why should she be treated any differently to the other players?' Mats Wilander, the former world No 1, told Eurosport. 'She definitely has to do press. We are all struggling with mental issues these days during the pandemic, but Naomi, I think you need to reconsider or, I would say, don't play in the tournament until you are ready to face the job.'
> 
> The top-ranked woman player, Ash Barty, suggested Osaka take herself a tad less seriously: 'Press is part of the job. We know what we sign up for as professional tennis players. At times, press conferences are hard, of course, but it's also not something that bothers me. ... For me, personally, it doesn't keep me up at night what I say and hear or what you guys ask me. So, I try and make it a little bit lighter and have a bit of fun with you guys.'
> 
> Daniil Medvedev, the No. 2-ranked man in tennis, even said that press scrutiny can help his mental health – finding it cathartic after a loss.
> 
> 'I try always to come to a press conference,' he said, 'bad mood or good mood. And I feel like, even sometimes in the bad mood, I can be in a better mood after talking to you guys.'
> 
> This Osaka nonsense sadly epitomises the state of the woke-ravaged world today.
> 
> We're seeing mental health being used more and more as an excuse for deplorable behaviour._ It is ok that she withdraws, no? Very important to pay attention to what the other players are saying:
> 
> From your article:
> _Commendably, and ironically, *many* other top tennis stars have criticized her stance.
> 
> 'Without the press,' said Rafael Nadal, 'without the people who normally travel, who are writing the news and achievements that we are having around the world, probably we will not be the athletes that we are today. We (aren't) going to have the recognition that we have around the world, and we will not be that popular, no?'
> 
> He was backed by Billie-Jean King who said: 'I have always believed that as professional athletes we have a responsibility to make ourselves available to the media. In our day, without the press, nobody would have known who we are or what we thought. They helped build and grow our sport into what it is today.'
> 
> Exactly._


I'll defend anybody's right to reject media interviews, it shows that the person of interest wants to either illustrate how the media are opportunistic vulture whores or that the person of interest is too ashamed/arrogant/humiliated/disgusted/bothered to face the press. 

John McEnroe was a real jerk of a gifted tennis player. His tantrums were historic. He was fined and/or penalized from tournaments as a result yet he continued to have tantrums. Anybody can do as they wish. McEnroe paid dearly for his horrific behavior. Good!

Apparently Osaka decided not to face the media. So what. Maybe she has so much money she feels liberated from having to face the media for whatever reason. Maybe she feels that the media are a bunch of jerks. She wouldn't be alone.  She must also realize that her sponsors have the same decision making abilities to nullify their contracts based on her actions in general. The wealthiest athletes make most of their money from sponsor deals. 

Morgan can also do whatever he wants. So he criticizes Osaka. Who cares? Has he ever criticized Serena Williams or Venus Williams or Tiger Woods or any football/baseball/basketball players, jockeys, or other athletes of color? I've no idea. If he hasn't, how can one say he's racist for calling out Osaka? Has he ever criticized any Caucasian athletes? I've no idea either. 

Some people look/lust/pray for ANYTHING to make anybody's comments to be based on racism. 

And this is what prevents progress against racism. 

Based on what I've seen/heard/read--IMHO there is more to be gained ($$$$$$$$ and PPPOOOWWEEERRR) for race baiters by claiming there is racism where none exists than there is for REAL TRUE PROGRESS against racism. 

And there's a lot of racism out there. But calling somebody a racist based on no proof hurts GENUINE efforts against racism. But that doesn't matter if the end goal is $$ and power. 

Does anyone think that Meghan Markle really gives a damn about racism? Who said "IT'S ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS, BABY!!"? I think that applies to Meghan even though she isn't the one who said it. She never gave the time of day to the cause of racism until it became fashionable to do so. She erred by claiming one of the world's most famous families with a thousand year pedigree was racist and threw them under bus in the hopes of cashing in. womp womp womp. Where's the hundreds of millions, Meghan??? I guess that didn't work!!  

To compensate, Meghan and Harry gotta do something MAJOR. What'll it be? Another interview with a 67 year old ex talk show host?? Where are all the A Lister celebrities lining up to defend her claims of suicidal suffering she endured while living in palaces and Frogmore? Surely they love nothing better than to line up for fashionable causes. So where ARE they???

We can count on some things. Osaka will continue to be a great tennis player. Morgan will continue to open his big mouth. And Meghan and Harry will continue to beg for pity and sob about how horrible their lives have been in their 19 bathroom mansion even though Daddy-Aisle-Walkin'-Chuck isn't footing their security .


----------



## Kevinaxx

I just find it very hypocritical for H&M to speak out against the press yet they’re consistently fishing for the spotlight.

Their lack of class speaks volumes but they’ll (esp H being of royal bloodline, and such) probably deny they lack class simply because they come from $$$$$.


----------



## Kevinaxx

rose60610 said:


> To compensate, Meghan and Harry gotta do something MAJOR.


You know M is brewing for something big… that’s why she’s been so quiet lately.


----------



## Chanbal

A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.

On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!  

_A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.

*WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?*
According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...

L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."

"Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"_









						Meghan Markle Plans To Give Birth The 'Scientology' Way: Silent Birth Explained
					

A close source revealed that the couple were considering silent birth for the arrival of their baby girl.




					www.enstarz.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lots of things being said today.
Yes, I do indeed believe MM ‘gives a damn’ about racism.
Yes, I do indeed believe *H*&M are interested in $$$$. *Both* of them are. They have 2 small children.
Yes, I do indeed believe Diana was as manipulative and competitive as both H&M are.

No, it was not Diana’s youth, naivete, that caused her issues. Back in that day, women did marry ‘young’.  That is ok, it was _her_ choice. Diana was an aristocrat who knew the Royal life quite well. Before the wedding, she knew Charles was an ‘iffy’ choice, but she went through with the wedding anyway. She was raised on a constant diet of reading and believing romance novels and never received a proper education. She had a fantasy view of the world. Hazz has that same view and behaves accordingly.
=======

So, they are Scientologists now?
Okaaaay.



Chanbal said:


> A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.
> 
> On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!
> 
> _A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.
> 
> *WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?*
> According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...
> 
> L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."
> 
> "Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Plans To Give Birth The 'Scientology' Way: Silent Birth Explained
> 
> 
> A close source revealed that the couple were considering silent birth for the arrival of their baby girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.enstarz.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kevinaxx said:


> You know M is brewing for something big… that’s why she’s been so quiet lately.



After the mess they’ve caused, _quiet_ is exactly what we need from them. Hoping they are getting all the help and support they need. Same for Naomi and all of us.


----------



## Kevinaxx

CarryOn2020 said:


> After the mess they’ve caused, _quiet_ is exactly what we need from them. Hoping they are getting all the help and support they need. Same for Naomi and all of us.


I would really hope she’s doing so because she’s reflecting but based on what I’ve read and seen from her thus far, I doubt it. She’s 39 but she acts like (crossing out: shes 9) the victim.


----------



## bag-mania

lalame said:


> I don't see any similarity between Naomi and M/H so it's weird of Piers to say that. Naomi doesn't WANT press, she's 23 and clearly out of her element in those situations, especially as a shy girl.
> 
> I have sympathy for her but I don't think what she did was right. She says it herself, she's struggling to meet some of these expectations of her role. She's hardly the first to hate those press interviews during tournaments but others usually chalk it up to an annoying part of the job and get on. She's so young, I understand her struggling in these daunting situations. Hopefully she learns how to cope and finds a better way to deal with it.



This is the first I’ve heard of her. I don’t follow tennis.

When an athlete is asked to do a press conference, it is to represent their sport and their organization to the public. In this case it was to promote tennis to the world by featuring a popular young star. When an athlete is making all that money from a sport it is part of giving back to help promote it.

From what I read I can see it from both sides. I’m sympathetic to her for what she’s been going through but she could have handled it better. I think they got pissed at her because from their point of view she essentially blew off what was considered to be one of her responsibilities and then when they tried to contact her she didn’t make herself available. If she had discussed her problem with them beforehand maybe accommodations could have been made. My understanding was she never explained to anyone why she didn’t want to do it. Is that correct or am I missing an important part of the story?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lots of things being said today.
> Yes, I do indeed believe MM ‘gives a damn’ about racism.
> Yes, I do indeed believe *H*&M are interested in $$$$. *Both* of them are. They have 2 small children.
> Yes, I do indeed believe Diana was as manipulative and competitive as both H&M are.
> 
> No, it was not Diana’s youth, naivete, that caused her issues. Back in that day, women did marry ‘young’.  That is ok, it was _her_ choice. Diana was an aristocrat who knew the Royal life quite well. Before the wedding, she knew Charles was an ‘iffy’ choice, but she went through with the wedding anyway. She was raised on a constant diet of reading and believing romance novels and never received a proper education. She had a fantasy view of the world. Hazz has that same view and behaves accordingly.
> =======
> 
> So, they are Scientologists now?
> Okaaaay.


My friend @CarryOn2020, you sound particularly upset today. I agree with you that money (not racism or any other noble cause) is what MM&H care about. Having 2 kids doesn't justify their irresponsible greed. Though, I've a soft spot for Diana, because I think she was genuine. Her manipulations were rather childish, and not machiavelique... Sorry if I'm not making much sense, I blame it on a terrible headache today.


----------



## lalame

bag-mania said:


> This is the first I’ve heard of her. I don’t follow tennis.
> 
> When an athlete is asked to do a press conference, it is to represent their sport and their organization to the public. In this case it was to promote tennis to the world by featuring a popular young star. When an athlete is making all that money from a sport it is part of giving back to help promote it.
> 
> From what I read I can see it from both sides. I’m sympathetic to her for what she’s been going through but she could have handled it better. I think they got pissed at her because from their point of view she essentially blew off what was considered to be one of her responsibilities and then when they tried to contact her she didn’t make herself available. If she had discussed her problem with them beforehand maybe accommodations could have been made. My understanding was she never explained to anyone why she didn’t want to do it. Is that correct or am I missing an important part of the story?



I think you got it right. She posted her POV recently, and says herself she could've handled it better. I think being in the public eye must be hard for someone young and shy to suddenly handle, on top of very adult responsibilities like multi million dollar contracts. Hopefully she'll learn from the experience and either doesn't over-commit for her comfort level in the future or comes to terms with those responsibilities. I do think many of the top celebrity athletes also struggle with these press commitments, but they learn to handle it.

But to bring it back to topic... again, I don't really see any similarities between Naomi and H/M. Do I believe a 23 year old girl who suddenly finds herself with enormous responsibility and being in the public eye would struggle with it? Um, yes, I manage 23 year olds struggling just to handle NORMAL responsibilities lol. It's flawed, but forgivable. H/M are grown ass adults.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.
> 
> On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!
> 
> _A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated._



New Idea is the trashiest tabloid I can buy here... I wouldn’t put any value on it being true.  I can’t count the number of times they said “Jennifer Anniston is pregnant!”   Best to ignore.  Maybe it was quietly put out by the church PR as an implied invitation...?


----------



## Chanbal

I'm always amazed by people's creativity...


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> New Idea is the trashiest tabloid I can buy here... I wouldn’t put any value on it being true.  I can’t count the number of times they said “Jennifer Anniston is pregnant!”   Best to ignore.  Maybe it was quietly put out by the church PR as an implied invitation...?


Thanks! I saw the article on twitter, not familiar with the tabloid. I didn't take it seriously, but I would welcome their silence for a few months.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal 
Thank you for the kind message and concern.  I am fine, really I am. No, I am not an H&M sympathizer. Not at all. Nor am I a Diana sympathizer. Still, *there needs to be balance - here and everywhere. *Some things they get right, some, not so much. 

Sure sure, her sudden death caught the world off guard. Her glorification also caught the world off guard. Eventually, there _seemed _to be an agreement that, in the C&D marriage, there was plenty of fault on both sides and more people bought into the happy Charles and Camilla narrative. Probably because Hazz has been emphasizing her death at every opportunity, more people appear to buy his ‘the paps killed her’ nonsense than ever before. Now it seems Diana is being heralded as not just the wronged wife but as all that was/is wrong with royalty. “How dare they treat Diana the Saint so poorly”. Blah blah. IMO she was none of that. None of us know if she would be proud of Hazz. I think she would not be. Simply because he is shirking his responsibilities to the BRF. She cared greatly about doing her duty to an institution she was happy to join - as her ancestors had been royalists, she was too. Of course, she would be proud of Hazz’s wife and his kids - as any mother would. Just as she regretted her trashing of the BRF, she would not be proud of his doing the same thing.

She wanted to be the global do-gooder. Still IMO, her continual frolicking in the billionaire playgrounds is at odds with the do-gooder. She knew those ‘frolicking’ photos were bad for her image as do-gooder.   Same for Hazz. He knows any drunken photos will tank his do-gooder image, so he gritches about the paps. The world saw his behavior at Phillip’s funeral - appalling that he could not walk where they told him to. That, to me, reflects who he is. His hypocrisy continues to astound, even after 4000 pages. 

My post this morning is below. I still stand by it.
All my opinion, ymmv, recollections may vary. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> On another site, someone characterized Diana as a person who jet-skied with playboys while trying to be a global do-gooder & Hazz as a drunken party boy while trying to be a global do-gooder.  IMO the gloss is off of these two. No wonder they didn’t want the media to follow them. They knew their hypocrisy would be exposed.


----------



## Clearblueskies

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Not a good look for Piers Morgan, this has nothing to do with M&H and he's getting ratioed for his comments about Osaka, deservedly so...





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Right, the irony is Piers behaved the same way when he walked off his set. Can’t stand the heat I guess...
> 
> Either way it has nothing to do with MM, other than the fact that they are both women of color. He would have been better off staying out of it or not mentioning H&M at all. It makes him seem obsessed and fuels critics who believe he is racist and misogynist.


If it’s off topic as you say in each post, then why post it here?  As another attempt to derail *that* thread, I suppose


----------



## jelliedfeels

Not a critique of Osaka herself alone but I do think it is a dangerous trend that celebrities and media people can vilify the press as mental health bullies for asking the same questions which is essentially doing their jobs. Haz is much more guilty of this and we’ve called him out on it before.

Asking questions is the central point of journalism and a media that can only parrot the approved statements of the influential is doomed and dangerous.

while this might seem a bit dramatic for sports and celebs it is the popular coverage which supports a lot of the reporting of our investigative presses.

Ultimately, the press are people too and most of the time they are doing their job in the boundaries of a reciprocal system with the celebrity. I think we should be wary of the implications of blanket branding them as ghouls, liars and manipulators. 

this is a struggling industry and the sussexes suddenly deciding they didn’t want to allow photos from one particular paparazzi agency forced a lot of people out of work during Covid (though notably they do photos for others.)
Ultimately it’s no real skin off the nose of the French open, Piers, Osaka, the royals or H&M but it is no paycheck for the reporters who get paid by the story or the picture as is growing standard in the industry and I think this class dynamic isn’t really discussed at all.
 I can definitely see the analogy between Osaka’s refusal to do press for an institution she’s taking part in (the French open) and MM’s ( the BRF) but I think it is a bit harsh on Osaka as I get she is young and under a lot of pressure at a highly competitive level whereas MM is a well-aged bird who apparently found smiling and going on holiday too challenging


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> New Idea is the trashiest tabloid I can buy here... I wouldn’t put any value on it being true.  I can’t count the number of times they said “Jennifer Anniston is pregnant!”   Best to ignore.  Maybe it was quietly put out by the church PR as an implied invitation...?


If they opted for a "quiet" birth, they would find some way to leak it anyway. Isn't there an off-beat psychiatric intervention technique that calls for unruly children to experience "rebirth" to recover their mental health?


----------



## Jktgal

Lol this is so strange, not wanting to be asked something multiple times. If everyone takes the same attitude, there will be no teachers ("ask x from class of 1942"), no online forums ("read post #5), no dating, and no tennis (paying to watch the same exact repeated movements). Pretty idiotic thing to say, imo.


----------



## Jktgal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Right, the irony is Piers behaved the same way when he walked off his set. Can’t stand the heat I guess...


What happened to Piers Morgan would be equivalent if Naomi's coach questioned her on time spent with boyfriend instead of practicing, on live tv. Or if Zara asked Harry's wife's if she missed the memo on BRF titles while she's been jetsetting around on baby showers, on live tv. Now that would be reason for raising mental health concerns. Strangers asking the same questions over and over? People who can not handle this should not be in a public facing job.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> Lol this is so strange, not wanting to be asked something multiple times. If everyone takes the same attitude, there will be no teachers ("ask x from class of 1942"), no online forums ("read post #5), no dating, and no tennis (paying to watch the same exact repeated movements). Pretty idiotic thing to say, imo.


You do raise an interesting analogy with these other jobs/hobbies. 
Truly the authenticators are the noblest amongst us all


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Not a critique of Osaka herself alone but I do think it is a dangerous trend that celebrities and media people can vilify the press as mental health bullies for asking the same questions which is essentially doing their jobs. Haz is much more guilty of this and we’ve called him out on it before.
> 
> Asking questions is the central point of journalism and a media that can only parrot the approved statements of the influential is doomed and dangerous.
> 
> while this might seem a bit dramatic for sports and celebs it is the popular coverage which supports a lot of the reporting of our investigative presses.
> 
> Ultimately, the press are people too and most of the time they are doing their job in the boundaries of a reciprocal system with the celebrity. I think we should be wary of the implications of blanket branding them as ghouls, liars and manipulators.
> 
> this is a struggling industry and the sussexes suddenly deciding they didn’t want to allow photos from one particular paparazzi agency forced a lot of people out of work during Covid (though notably they do photos for others.)
> Ultimately it’s no real skin off the nose of the French open, Piers, Osaka, the royals or H&M but it is no paycheck for the reporters who get paid by the story or the picture as is growing standard in the industry and I think this class dynamic isn’t really discussed at all.
> I can definitely see the analogy betweenv Osaka’s refusal to do press for an institution she’s taking part in (the French open) and MM’s ( the BRF) but I think it is a bit harsh on Osaka as I get she is young and under a lot of pressure at a highly competitive level whereas MM is a well-aged bird who apparently found smiling and going on holiday too challenging


Harry probably thinks a free press is just as bonkers as that other thing he was talking about the other day


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> Diana lived in a time before social media, she was and is elevated to sainthood status. The major difference between Diana and Meghan is glaring and irreparable for Meghan. Regardless whether one is a fan of Diana, Diana actually had (at least in public) a charming magnetic personality and radiated warmth and kindness. Publicly she fulfilled her royal duties. I'm not aware of any reports of her berating servants or elbowing Charles in the gut to be first to greet somebody. She did embarrass Charles when she danced on stage once but the public ate it up. Charles was annoyed that the public LOVED Diana so much and the cameras glommed onto HER instead of him in many cases. While Diana said a few things in interviews, she wasn't constantly publicly in "pity-poor-me" victim mode.
> 
> I'm sure there are many Meghan stans who buy Meghan's claims of BRF racism etc as a "I won't suck it up and take it" when it comes to filling royal expectations, and as such say she is a strong and brave person. Because that's what they want to see and conveniently discard her own actions/statements that refute her own claims. Meghan's stans eat up her BS. They can't afford not to. She will be protected by the Oprah's of the world and media no matter how refutable her claims are. To question Meghan is to question themselves.
> 
> Even after Diana and Charles' divorce the public still loved Diana. What confuses Meghan is that the public still loved Diana after the divorce (essentially the divorce of the BRF) and Meghan wonders why ME GAIN shrines aren't being built in her honor all over the globe. The public saw Charles as an awkward, cold, not very personable guy and could understand why the relationship between him and the personable and warm Diana broke apart.
> 
> On the other hand, Harry and Meghan are two peas in a pod and Harry said "whatever M wants M gets", a 180 degree difference from Charles' relationship with Diana. To this day Harry seems ga-ga over Meghan. Much of the public can't understand why Meghan loved every minute (and the zillions of perks) of being part of the BRF during the two years they dated and then after wedding, her every whim catered to, adored by her husband etc--THEN splitting off from the BRF--coupled with the EXPECTATION of the BRF financially supporting them even after the split. If any of Meghan's claims are true, wouldn't it have been a thousand times easier for age mid 30's Harry to find a pair of balls and lay down the law with the BRF's supposed "abuse" of Meghan rather than split off? NO! After the idiotic things Meghan said, like "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK" or "I'm only existing, not living", how did she expect the public and British media to react???  Since she was such great actress (cough cough) was she just acting how she loved everything?? It would have helped her case to show she wasn't in love with being the center of attention all the time.
> 
> How can you go from adoring and CHASING the spotlight to crying about the lack of privacy? And then STILL chasing the spotlight from your 19 bathroom mansion? Her biggest supporter is a 67 year old ex talk show host. Where are all of her popular A-lister friends to support her? She lives among them. Meghan is slowly imploding. And like a true sociopath, she'll still be whining and demanding pity when she falls into the persona non grata gutter. And KATE will be Queen (consort), not Ms-Poor-Me, though she gave it one helluva try.



THIS!!

Although Diana had her flaws there is absolutely NO comparison with MM!


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> THIS!!
> 
> Although Diana had her flaws there is absolutely NO comparison with MM!



Other than both were wives of a Royal and used their husbands’ wealth/connections to move up. While Diana was an aristocrat, she did not have a world stage until she  married Charles.  While MM was an actress, she needed Hazz to elevate her to the world stage.   Diana and Hazz seem very similar in personality and behavior IMO.


----------



## Helventara

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Right, the irony is Piers behaved the same way when he walked off his set. Can’t stand the heat I guess...
> 
> Either way it has nothing to do with MM, other than the fact that they are both women of color. He would have been better off staying out of it or not mentioning H&M at all. It makes him seem obsessed and fuels critics who believe he is racist and misogynist.



 I think it’s not about women of colour that Piers is protesting. It’s about evading responsibility but wanting the reward and that’s right up H & M alley.

 I think next I will tell my boss that for the sake of my mental health,  I will not deliver my report on time as deadline is just making me depressed and sad. And the review meetings!  My god!  Such hostile questions!  I will skip them too!

PS. No disrespect to people with real mental illness and I reserve my sympathy for them. But I just feel mental illness has become an easy get out of jail card to evade responsibility. Just like the race card. And am speaking as a WOC.


----------



## needlv

Is someone a little worried they will be asked not to use their duke and duchess titles?  They will still have Earl and Countess of Dumbarton!









						Meghan Markle 'fearful of losing Duchess title' after Harry's 'truth bombs'
					

After stepping down as a senior member of the Royal Family, Meghan Markle has continued to style herself as the Duchess of Sussex on all platforms, including her recent children's book




					www.irishmirror.ie


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Clearblueskies said:


> If it’s off topic as you say in each post, then why post it here?  As another attempt to derail *that* thread, I suppose



Sorry not sure what you mean...I’m not trying to derail any thread. I thought it was appropriate to post here since he mentioned H&M. And I agree with his critics on Twitter that they are different situations. I think both can be true.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Is someone a little worried they will be asked not to use their duke and duchess titles?  They will still have Earl and Countess of Dumbarton!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'fearful of losing Duchess title' after Harry's 'truth bombs'
> 
> 
> After stepping down as a senior member of the Royal Family, Meghan Markle has continued to style herself as the Duchess of Sussex on all platforms, including her recent children's book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishmirror.ie


The same article also says Methane is "inundated with offers" because she is a duchess. 
 I'm adding that to my collection of MM fake descriptors: philanthropist, sought-after actress, top model, inundated with offers.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> The same article also says Methane is "inundated with offers" because she is a duchess.
> I'm adding that to my collection of MM fake descriptors: philanthropist, sought-after actress, top model, inundated with offers.


Also note that she did not express concern over H’s mental health... just over losing the titles!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry not sure what you mean...I’m not trying to derail any thread. I thought it was appropriate to post here since he mentioned H&M. And I agree with his critics on Twitter that they are different situations. I think both can be true.


“This has nothing to do with M&H”  “nothing to do with MM” - your words.


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> Also note that she did not express concern over H’s mental health... just over losing the titles!!!!


It’s ironic, but she’d have looked much more like the strong, independent woman she claims to be if she hadn’t used the titles in the US.  If they do get taken away she’ll look foolish.


----------



## needlv

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s ironic, but she’d have looked much more like the strong, independent woman she claims to be if she hadn’t used the titles in the US.  If they do get taken away she’ll look foolish.



exactly.  If she didn’t  want to be associated with the RF because they were “racist”, cold, uncaring for her mental health etc - why take the titles???  Oh that’s right...thats all she has to merch!!!! $$$$$


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Clearblueskies said:


> “This has nothing to do with M&H”  “nothing to do with MM” - your words.



I meant the Osaka comparison. Piers mentioned H&M in his tweet which is why I posted here. But now I am derailing the thread so I’ll agree to disagree.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.
> 
> On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!
> 
> _A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.
> 
> *WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?*
> According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...
> 
> L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."
> 
> "Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Plans To Give Birth The 'Scientology' Way: Silent Birth Explained
> 
> 
> A close source revealed that the couple were considering silent birth for the arrival of their baby girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.enstarz.com




Actually I had a silent birth w both my kids but just because I actually didn’t make much noise but it wasn’t by choice it just happened 
After I give birth to my DD my x heard a midwife telling another one she couldn’t work out how advanced the labour was as I was not making any noises
I think it might be a reaction to pain as it was the same when i burnt my arm and broke my leg
I personally think that there should be no pressure, you do what your body tells you to do: scream, sing, whimper...
And MM must remember that natural births cannot be closely planified and the focus should be on a healthy, safe mum and healthy, safely delivered baby
Are they know going to jump onto the scientology bandwagon? Then Hazza is removing himself further from the sucession


----------



## bag-mania

BVBookshop said:


> I think it’s not about women of colour that Piers is protesting. It’s about evading responsibility but wanting the reward and that’s right up H & M alley.
> 
> I think next I will tell my boss that for the sake of my mental health,  I will not deliver my report on time as deadline is just making me depressed and sad. And the review meetings!  My god!  Such hostile questions!  I will skip them too!
> 
> PS. No disrespect to people with real mental illness and I reserve my sympathy for them. But I *just feel mental illness has become an easy get out of jail card to evade responsibility. *Just like the race card. And am speaking as a WOC.



Exactly, it is a horrible precedent to set if everyone who claims depression or mental illness can use it as an unchallenged excuse to get out of doing something they don’t want to do.

Again I know nothing about this tennis player. But if she’s on the court at that level then she has performed for years in front of thousands of people without a problem. I wouldn’t call that crippling shyness. Speaking to the press may be well out of her comfort zone but that shouldn’t give her an automatic pass on doing what everyone else at that level has to do.


----------



## Jktgal

jelliedfeels said:


> You do raise an interesting analogy with these other jobs/hobbies.
> Truly the authenticators are the noblest amongst us all


They are! 10 years later and it's still the same questions lol.


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> Actually I had a silent birth w both my kids but just because I actually didn’t make much noise but it wasn’t by choice it just happened
> After I give birth to my DD my x heard a midwife telling another one she couldn’t work out how advanced the labour was as I was not making any noises
> I think it might be a reaction to pain as it was the same when i burnt my arm and broke my leg
> I personally think that there should be no pressure, you do what your body tells you to do: scream, sing, whimper...
> And MM must remember that natural births cannot be closely planified and the focus should be on a healthy, safe mum and healthy, safely delivered baby
> Are they know going to jump onto the scientology bandwagon? Then Hazza is removing himself further from the sucession


My DM said my birth was relatively quiet too. Back in those days, the Labour ward was just beds divided by curtains into cubicles. On her left, the woman in labour was screaming the house down. On her right, the woman was yelling for her mother and cursing her husband. My mum was so embarrassed that she merely whimpered.


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s ironic, but she’d have looked much more like the strong, independent woman she claims to be if she hadn’t used the titles in the US.  If they do get taken away she’ll look foolish.


I can't imagine how she is going to convince people she is strong and independent when she has made sure everyone knows she cannot take pressure, jumps ship when the going gets tough, and cries in bed.

Will they have to reprint the book cover if she loses the title?


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I can't imagine how she is going to convince people she is strong and independent when she has made sure everyone knows she cannot take pressure, jumps ship when the going gets tough, and cries in bed.
> 
> Will they have to reprint the book cover if she loses the title?



She wants to have it both ways so she can use whichever suits her needs at the moment. I think she would legally change her name to "Duchess" before that comes off of her book.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I can't imagine how she is going to convince people she is strong and independent when she has made sure everyone knows she cannot take pressure, jumps ship when the going gets tough, and cries in bed.
> 
> Will they have to reprint the book cover if she loses the title?



Spot on. And she has political ambitions?  Has anyone told her that politics requires a thick skin? She can't boo-hoo her opponent away.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Spot on. And she has political ambitions?  Has anyone told her that politics requires a thick skin? She can't boo-hoo her opponent away.



The first question she would get while campaigning: Your husband thinks the First Amendment is "bonkers," how do _you_ feel about it?

She would have to defend the US Constitution while not making her husband sound ignorant or arrogant. That would not be an easy task.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> *This is the first I’ve heard of her. I don’t follow tennis.*
> 
> When an athlete is asked to do a press conference, it is to represent their sport and their organization to the public. In this case it was to promote tennis to the world by featuring a popular young star. When an athlete is making all that money from a sport it is part of giving back to help promote it.
> 
> From what I read I can see it from both sides. I’m sympathetic to her for what she’s been going through but she could have handled it better. I think they got pissed at her because from their point of view she essentially blew off what was considered to be one of her responsibilities and then when they tried to contact her she didn’t make herself available. If she had discussed her problem with them beforehand maybe accommodations could have been made. My understanding was she never explained to anyone why she didn’t want to do it. Is that correct or am I missing an important part of the story?



I only watch Wimbledon and Roland Garros but I've never heard of her!


----------



## lallybelle

Naomi announced her intension and her reasons before the tournament even started. She was not only making a point about how she felt about how it affected her own mental health, but how having to do these after match press conferences win or lose, are just added pressure and anxiety for the players. She knew she would be fined and was willing to accept that. It did not need to turn into this big mess. Just fine her if it's in the rules and let it go, the whole threating she may be removed, etc. over it was ridiculous. I am glad Nike is standing by her decision, they have more sense than the tournament officials.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I feel for her, but I have to admit, as soon as I saw her announcement I knew I wasn’t going to go down well. Did she speak with anyone at the tournament before she posted it?


I don't like seeing her compared to the viper
Love the pink robin


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> The first question she would get while campaigning: Your husband thinks the First Amendment is "bonkers," how do _you_ feel about it?
> 
> She would have to defend the US Constitution while not making her husband sound ignorant or arrogant. That would not be an easy task.


Oh, she would go on the attack and deflect by accusing the person asking the question of some defect: sexist or racist or speciesist. They would have to find a WOC equivalent to her in power and personal history to interview her (the her that she is selling to the world as her "truth") - Sunshine Sachs will probably give OW exclusive rights, and OW would achieve her aim to be puppet master.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Oh, she would go on the attack and deflect by accusing the person asking the question of some defect: sexist or racist or speciesist. They would have to find a WOC equivalent to her in power and personal history to interview her (the her that she is selling to the world as her "truth") - Sunshine Sachs will probably give OW exclusive rights, and OW would achieve her aim to be puppet master.


Such devious behavior is hardly needed, I dont remember the last time I heard a politician actually answer a question, spouting any kind of drivel works great ...


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Such devious behavior is hardly needed, I dont remember the last time I heard a politician actually answer a question, spouting any kind of drivel works great ...



And she is the word salad queen. She might do quite well in politics, she is already on record as having made promises she didn't keep.


----------



## Aimee3

Can she run for a US poli**cal position while retaining the duchess title of a foreign country?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bringing some levity to the thread.
> Paris Hilton and Would You Rather ….  Would Paris Hilton rather party with Meghan Markle or Miley Cyrus?
> Answer around the 1:58 mark:



Maybe Paris is smarter than I gave her credit for!


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> From the Comments section of an article on the DM, a name for Harry's Wife I hadn't seen before:" Methane"
> 
> "Yes *Methane*! She and Hazard are the toxic twosome!"
> 
> Brief and to the point!


LOL back to Meghan and farts.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Almost nothing with them makes much sense.
> View attachment 5097173
> 
> 
> twitter.com/angelalevin1/status/1397216444644003843?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Math probably wasn't his strong suit.  I'm sure Meghan is good at counting...money that is.


----------



## carmen56

needlv said:


> Is someone a little worried they will be asked not to use their duke and duchess titles?  They will still have Earl and Countess of Dumbarton!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'fearful of losing Duchess title' after Harry's 'truth bombs'
> 
> 
> After stepping down as a senior member of the Royal Family, Meghan Markle has continued to style herself as the Duchess of Sussex on all platforms, including her recent children's book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishmirror.ie



Should have kept their gobs shut then!


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> Actually I had a silent birth w both my kids but just because I actually didn’t make much noise but it wasn’t by choice it just happened
> After I give birth to my DD my x heard a midwife telling another one she couldn’t work out how advanced the labour was as I was not making any noises
> I think it might be a reaction to pain as it was the same when i burnt my arm and broke my leg
> I personally think that there should be no pressure, you do what your body tells you to do: scream, sing, whimper...
> And MM must remember that natural births cannot be closely planified and the focus should be on a healthy, safe mum and healthy, safely delivered baby
> Are they know going to jump onto the scientology bandwagon? Then Hazza is removing himself further from the sucession


Gosh well done you. I don’t really remember what happened during my last labour. 

while the Scientology thing sounds a bit unlikely it might make sense for their showbiz longevity as the church certainly look after their own regardless of talent


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> Add to this the untold damage of Harry exclaiming our capital "London is trigger".
> 
> This, from a Prince that lived in the finest buildings and apartments within our historic city and had every amenity.
> 
> London was his F**king playground!
> 
> He doesn't want it, great. I don't ever want to see him in London again. One of the finest cities I know, and feel so lucky to have grown-up in it. East End, West End, North and South, everywhere so full of character and very fine people.
> 
> And that he said he had no choice to leave. He could have left at_ any_ time, gone _any_where. How dare he actually use his wife (culpable as she is) and his child. Please stay away. We certainly wouldn't want to be a 'trigger'.
> 
> BTW, I like LA too, always had lots of fun there, and the people were soooo nice, SF and San Diego too, I could sing "I wish they could all be Californian" but LA certainly has less of a pull for me since H&M took root there. I find this couple with their Folie à deux very...triggering  .


Personally, I prefer London to LA .. after living here for about 8 years.  Yes, people appear to be a lot more "friendly" out here, but what really irks me is the "entitle-itis" which is EPIC out here.  Here I am, constantly saying "excuse me", "please", etc. - and I NEVER hear that from anyone out here (unless - strangely enough, they are originally from back East - hmmmm).  The weather, for sure, can't be beat, but I'm really so tired of people trying to treat you like you are the stepping stone .. uh, NOPE .. and when I do call them out on it, WOW .. they are shocked that I would have the audacity to say something (remember my Kyle Richard's story at the Grocery Store?).  Honestly, the HB and I are pretty much done here .. and have been looking to leave ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Personally, I prefer London to LA .. after living here for about 8 years.  Yes, people appear to be a lot more "friendly" out here, but what really irks me is the "entitle-itis" which is EPIC out here.  Here I am, constantly saying "excuse me", "please", etc. - and I NEVER hear that from anyone out here (unless - strangely enough, they are originally from back East - hmmmm).  The weather, for sure, can't be beat, but I'm really so tired of people trying to treat you like you are the stepping stone .. uh, NOPE .. and when I do call them out on it, WOW .. they are shocked that I would have the audacity to say something (remember my Kyle Richard's story at the Grocery Store?).  Honestly, the HB and I are pretty much done here .. and have been looking to leave ..


Ha
my favorite is the mom with the stroller who lets you hold the door for her and then doesn't say thank you .....I have been known to say loudly "you're welcome" when this happens


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> Should have kept their gobs shut then!


she's no duchess to me


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!
> 
> _A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated._



I say have your baby any safe way that you want.  The baby will absolutely not remember if she was born in complete silence in a Montecito mansion or in a helicopter.
Still, I. Can't. Hardly. Wait. Until Archie and baby sister are tweens and then teenagers and then adults. 
We'll see if they give their parents an A+++ in parenting through the years.


----------



## lalame

The only other similarity I see between H/M and Naomi is Naomi gets an incredible amount of vitriol on social media, but the similarity ends there. A lot of the hate she gets is for her appearance, not her actual actions. It starts with her first claim to fame, when she beat Serena Williams in a tournament - Serena had lost her temper with a referee on the court and got penalized for it and Naomi ended up winning. Serena's actions weren't her fault at all but she was booed across the stadium after her win and she was crying on the court. Serena even hugged her and tried to console her. For a 23 year old, it's absolutely understandable to have mental health issues from that type of hate. Of course, it's your job and you deal with it and move on but we're watching the ugly learning experience.


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> I say have your baby any safe way that you want.  The baby will absolutely not remember if she was born in complete silence in a Montecito mansion or in a helicopter.
> Still, I. Can't. Hardly. Wait. Until Archie and baby sister are tweens and then teenagers and then adults.
> We'll see if they give their parents an A+++ in parenting through the years.


Parenting tweens and teens is not for the faint of heart!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Ha
> my favorite is the mom with the stroller who lets you hold the door for her and then doesn't say thank .....I have been know to say loudly "you're welcome" when this happens


*BINGO* .. and funny that you should mention this because it happened yesterday!  

Now, here I am .. literally hanging onto the Grocery Cart with my *Cane* clearly on top, hobbling around (_and yes - it was my choice to go into the store since I have not been in it since Nov-2020 due to my horrendous surgery_) .. and yet, she expects *ME* to open the door for her!  She did not even ask, she merely gave me the "*hairy eyeballs*" (_as in 'OPEN THE DAMN DOOR FOR ME YOU FLOORMAT_'), to which I the following happened: 


*ME*:    "_is there something wrong?_" 
*HER*:  "_well - I thought *YOU* could open the door for me, you see I have my child in his pram_"
*ME*:    "_oh - well, so sorry .. but the *MRO* (mind reading option) was turned of_f" 
*ME:*    "_You can clearly see that I have mobility issues, with a big Cane on top of my cart_" 
*ME:*    "_You could have asked nicely instead of giving me the hairy eyeballs_" 
*ME: *   "_but since you chose to give the hairy eyeballs, eff off and do it *YOURSELF*_"
.. and just like the other times when I give it back, I get the "*SHOCK*" of "_*well - how dare she speak to me like that and not PERFORM what she was TOLD*_"!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She wants to have it both ways so she can use whichever suits her needs at the moment. I think she would legally change her name to "Duchess" before that comes off of her book.


This is why I have suggested that they name Doria Diana as Princess Doria Diana...  No need of any title from the 'terrible' BRF (only the $$$$).


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *The first question she would get while campaigning: Your husband thinks the First Amendment is "bonkers," how do you feel about it?*
> 
> She would have to defend the US Constitution while not making her husband sound ignorant or arrogant. That would not be an easy task.


 This is why I'm currently filling for divorce.


----------



## Sol Ryan

pukasonqo said:


> Actually I had a silent birth w both my kids but just because I actually didn’t make much noise but it wasn’t by choice it just happened
> After I give birth to my DD my x heard a midwife telling another one she couldn’t work out how advanced the labour was as I was not making any noises
> I think it might be a reaction to pain as it was the same when i burnt my arm and broke my leg
> I personally think that there should be no pressure, you do what your body tells you to do: scream, sing, whimper...
> And MM must remember that natural births cannot be closely planified and the focus should be on a healthy, safe mum and healthy, safely delivered baby
> Are they know going to jump onto the scientology bandwagon? Then Hazza is removing himself further from the sucession



Can you be on the Scientology bandwagon and advocating for therapy? I thought those two didn’t go together.. I think this rumor is wrong.


----------



## Chanbal

_Royal expert Rupert Bell argued that there came a point where Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle realised that she and Prince Harry would not be in the limelight. While speaking on Talkradio, Mr Bell insisted before the wedding he predicted this the pair would come to this realisation. He said, once both Meghan and Harry realised they would not be important royals they opted to leave the Royal Family._









						Meghan Markle's desire to be 'in the spotlight' sped up Megxit
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been attacked for her misunderstanding of what life as a royal would be like and opting out with husband Prince Harry, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO...


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *BINGO* .. and funny that you should mention this because it happened yesterday!
> 
> Now, here I am .. literally hanging onto the Grocery Cart with my *Cane* clearly on top, hobbling around (_and yes - it was my choice to go into the store since I have not been in it since Nov-2020 due to my horrendous surgery_) .. and yet, she expects *ME* to open the door for her!  She did not even ask, she merely gave me the "*hairy eyeballs*" (_as in 'OPEN THE DAMN DOOR FOR ME YOU FLOORMAT_'), to which I the following happened:
> 
> 
> *ME*:    "_is there something wrong?_"
> *HER*:  "_well - I thought *YOU* could open the door for me, you see I have my child in his pram_"
> *ME*:    "_oh - well, so sorry .. but the *MRO* (mind reading option) was turned of_f"
> *ME:*    "_You can clearly see that I have mobility issues, with a big Cane on top of my cart_"
> *ME:*    "_You could have asked nicely instead of giving me the hairy eyeballs_"
> *ME: *   "_but since you chose to give the hairy eyeballs, eff off and do it *YOURSELF*_"
> .. and just like the other times when I give it back, I get the "*SHOCK*" of "_*well - how dare she speak to me like that and not PERFORM what she was TOLD*_"!


wow, she was so disrespectful....the entitlement!
good for you for responding approptiately to the biatch
I'm sure it's a challenge with the stroller but no excuse for rudeness


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.
> 
> On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!
> 
> _A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.
> 
> *WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?*
> According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...
> 
> L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."
> 
> "Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Plans To Give Birth The 'Scientology' Way: Silent Birth Explained
> 
> 
> A close source revealed that the couple were considering silent birth for the arrival of their baby girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.enstarz.com



Meghan wants a silent birth?  Can she please do us all a favor and actually live a silent life?!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO...



She is nothing but uncouth.  (Love that word, LOL!)


----------



## purseinsanity

BVBookshop said:


> I think it’s not about women of colour that Piers is protesting. It’s about evading responsibility but wanting the reward and that’s right up H & M alley.
> 
> I think next I will tell my boss that for the sake of my mental health,  I will not deliver my report on time as deadline is just making me depressed and sad. And the review meetings!  My god!  Such hostile questions!  I will skip them too!
> *
> PS. No disrespect to people with real mental illness and I reserve my sympathy for them. But I just feel mental illness has become an easy get out of jail card to evade responsibility. Just like the race card. And am speaking as a WOC.*


One million % yes!!!  ITA.  There are many people with serious mental health issues that need help, then there are those jumping on the band wagon and using it an excuse that others would be jerks to even question.
In my profession, my mental health is tested every.single.day.  The stress and responsibility is off the charts.  If I didn't show up because I'm "not mentally up to it today", I would be utterly vilified and fired on the spot for putting others at risk.  I am very fortunate to not have depression or any serious psychiatric condition, but stress and anxiety can be mentally detrimental too, but I can't use that as an excuse.  How many people don't have stress in their lives?  It's called life.  I wish every day was a stress free vacation in Shangi-La


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> A bit lost on Osaka's drama, so I can't comment on it.
> 
> On our topic, some of us will learn about Silent Birth!
> 
> _A source recently told New Idea that the couple is planning to have their child through silent birth, "Meghan and Harry feel they've been through enough in their own lives and are anxious to start over with their baby girl, and that means giving her the most peaceful entrance possible into the world," the source stated.
> 
> *WHAT IS SILENT BIRTH?*
> According to The Church of Scientology, reported by The Bump, the words that a newly-birth child hears during its labor may have an impact throughout its life that's why they want to eliminate any noises...
> 
> L Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, explains the importance of silence during birth. Giving birth without any noise can avoid "engrams" which is "the impressions formed in the brain because of "physical pain or painful" experiences."
> 
> "Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save both the sanity of the mother and the child. And the maintaining of silence does not mean a volley of sh*ts", Hubbard wrote in his book "Dianetics"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Plans To Give Birth The 'Scientology' Way: Silent Birth Explained
> 
> 
> A close source revealed that the couple were considering silent birth for the arrival of their baby girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.enstarz.com



Well you ‘learn’ something new every day haha.
I guess I must insane as though it’s all a bit hazy I’m pretty sure I wasn’t peaceful throughout my last childbirth 


lalame said:


> The only other similarity I see between H/M and Naomi is Naomi gets an incredible amount of vitriol on social media, but the similarity ends there. A lot of the hate she gets is for her appearance, not her actual actions. It starts with her first claim to fame, when she beat Serena Williams in a tournament - Serena had lost her temper with a referee on the court and got penalized for it and Naomi ended up winning. Serena's actions weren't her fault at all but she was booed across the stadium after her win and she was crying on the court. Serena even hugged her and tried to console her. For a 23 year old, it's absolutely understandable to have mental health issues from that type of hate. Of course, it's your job and you deal with it and move on but we're watching the ugly learning experience.


I can see why it’s upsetting to get heckled but it doesn’t necessarily follow that would lead to mental health issues, it doesn’t necessarily follow that any kind of negative experience will result in depression as is my understanding, it depends on the person and their ‘wiring. Not that I’m saying she can’t be depressed but that it’s not cause and effect.


To me, this incident is part of a wider problem that reporters just get stereotyped as the villains for doing their jobs.
if they were calling her ugly or useless or chasing her in the streets  that’d be one thing but asking repetitive questions about her technique and history playing on clay at a Tournament press conference seems perfectly reasonable to me and to claim they ‘doubt’ you and therefore you don’t want to interact with them is a little unreasonable on that basis considering this is the journalists’ livelihoods.


T





CeeJay said:


> *BINGO* .. and funny that you should mention this because it happened yesterday!
> 
> Now, here I am .. literally hanging onto the Grocery Cart with my *Cane* clearly on top, hobbling around (_and yes - it was my choice to go into the store since I have not been in it since Nov-2020 due to my horrendous surgery_) .. and yet, she expects *ME* to open the door for her!  She did not even ask, she merely gave me the "*hairy eyeballs*" (_as in 'OPEN THE DAMN DOOR FOR ME YOU FLOORMAT_'), to which I the following happened:
> 
> 
> *ME*:    "_is there something wrong?_"
> *HER*:  "_well - I thought *YOU* could open the door for me, you see I have my child in his pram_"
> *ME*:    "_oh - well, so sorry .. but the *MRO* (mind reading option) was turned of_f"
> *ME:*    "_You can clearly see that I have mobility issues, with a big Cane on top of my cart_"
> *ME:*    "_You could have asked nicely instead of giving me the hairy eyeballs_"
> *ME: *   "_but since you chose to give the hairy eyeballs, eff off and do it *YOURSELF*_"
> .. and just like the other times when I give it back, I get the "*SHOCK*" of "_*well - how dare she speak to me like that and not PERFORM what she was TOLD*_"!


I have never heard this hairy eyeballs expression before! We learn so much on this thread. 


Sol Ryan said:


> Can you be on the Scientology bandwagon and advocating for therapy? I thought those two didn’t go together.. I think this rumor is wrong.


well they love their contradictions as we know. Perhaps they’ll pitch a Scientology themed mental health podcast


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Staying on topic here:
> 
> Seems like H&M are following Diana’s playbook:
> [Full article in spoiler]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The truth about Princess Diana and the myth she created
> 
> 
> The 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death is more than a month out, yet the summer of 2017 seems all Di, all the time. Three primetime network specials have already aired in May. US Weekly pub…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Carefully crafted
> 
> 
> 
> *The truth about Princess Diana and the myth she created*
> By Maureen Callahan
> The 20th anniversary of Princess Diana’s death is more than a month out, yet the summer of 2017 seems all Di, all the time.
> 
> Three primetime network specials have already aired in May. US Weekly published a special bookazine that same month; People plans one for July 21, to tie in with a two-night ABC special in early August. A repackaged edition of Andrew Morton’s 1992 blockbuster expose “Diana: Her True Story” hits shelves on Tuesday; National Geographic publishes “Remembering Diana: A Life In Photographs” Aug. 1. HBO has announced its own Princess Diana documentary, and the Weinstein Company, working with AMI Media, has their own August project for TLC.
> 
> Enlarge ImagePrince Charles and Princess Diana in 1981 following the announcement of their engagement.AP
> As The Post reported Wednesday, a Princess Diana musical is likely coming to Broadway. The second season of Ryan Murphy’s anthology “Feud” will retell Diana’s acrimonious 1996 divorce from Prince Charles, heir to the British throne.
> 
> “It’s about that pain, of the dissolving of a fairy tale, particularly for Diana,” Murphy said in April. “It starts with the filing of divorce papers and takes you up to her death.”
> 
> Though there’s nothing revelatory here — no new information, no counter-narrative — the collective hunger for all things Diana remains. Hers clearly is a story we like to be told over and over again, a post-modern parable about the vicissitudes of wealth, fame, beauty and idolatry — everything that goes to the true power of myth.
> 
> Yet amid all these retellings, one inexorable truth will be ignored: Diana actively created her own mythology.
> 
> Not since Jackie Kennedy’s masterful post-assassination theater — from deplaning in her blood-spattered pink Chanel to staging her husband’s funeral to demanding that her “Camelot” anecdote, which was a total lie, end the interview she granted to Life magazine days later — had a post-modern public figure so assiduously crafted her own narrative.
> 
> Like Jackie, Diana claimed to hate the press while expertly manipulating it to her own ends. Both became global celebrities through their first marriages, and when those marriages ended, each used the mass media not just to maintain their status but enlarge it, crying victim all the way.
> 
> “My life is just torture,” Diana said in 1992, a complaint that made tabloid headlines in the UK. Her marriage was unraveling, and she was plotting her life after Charles. “Bloody hell, after all I’ve done for this f – – king family . . . I’ll go out and conquer the world . . . do my bit in the way I know how and leave him behind.”
> 
> Enlarge Image Princess Diana sits in front of the Taj Mahal on Feb. 11, 1992.AP
> Diana often lamented her lack of intellect, but she was an intuitive genius, a savant at branding and marketing. Here she was, the latest member of an institution whose leaders had, among other things, beheaded wives, imprisoned relatives, executed staffers, and abdicated the throne while sympathizing with Hitler, yet she somehow transformed her husband’s pedestrian infidelity into the biggest scandal facing the monarchy ever.
> 
> Her famous pose outside the Taj Mahal in February 1992, a forlorn and lonely princess at the world’s largest monument to love, laid the groundwork for her story arc — no matter that Charles was actually on the trip.
> 
> 
> “Diana, driven to five suicide bids by ‘uncaring’ Charles,” read the headline of the UK’s Sunday Times on July 7, 1992. “Marriage collapse led to illness; Princess says she will not be Queen.”
> 
> Given how stringent libel laws are in the UK, and the institutional power that the monarchy exerts over the British press, these headlines were bombshells in one sense only: They had to be coming from inside the house. For the first time since the invention of the printing press, a top-level member of the royal family was committing a form of treason.
> 
> *Diana had, in fact, spent most of 1991 secretly working with British reporter and admirer Andrew Morton on a book, one that would ostensibly reveal all. Here too, her particular genius is on display: Diana presaged confessional culture by years.
> 
> She understood that by stripping away the royal artifice and revealing her dirty little secrets — bulimia and self-harm, suicide attempts and a sexless marriage — the public would love her more, not less. Princess Diana was the first “Real Housewife,” and as all the best housewives do, she understood that survival depends on scripting and selling your narrative.*
> 
> On July 16, 1992, “Diana: Her True Story” was published. *Shrewdly, Diana had never met with Morton face to face, which gave her plausible deniability — yet as even Morton acknowledges in a new foreword, Diana easily defaulted to her fawn-in-the-woods act.*
> 
> “It was a part she played with aplomb,” Morton writes. “The author and TV star Clive James fondly recalled asking her over lunch whether she was behind the book. He wrote, ‘At least once, however, she lied to me outright. “I really had nothing to do with that Andrew Morton book,” she said. “But after my friends talked to him I had to stand by them.” She looked me straight in the eye when she said this, so I could see how plausible she could be when she was telling a whopper.’”
> 
> Whopper indeed: In his new foreword, Morton reproduces Diana’s own handwritten line-edits.
> 
> Enlarge ImageReuters
> Just as she depicted herself as a lamb to the slaughter on her wedding day, a 19-year-old virgin victimized by a bloodless cabal of royals, Diana knew well before her wedding that her fiancé was in love with Camilla Parker-Bowles. An aristocrat herself, she knew that royals, especially monarchs and monarchs-in-waiting, had affairs more often than not, and she went ahead with it.
> 
> *She was insider cast as outsider, a role the media was complicit in propagating. Diana branded herself the only member of the royal family who cared about the little people — no matter that her mother-in-law, Queen Elizabeth, had braved the Blitz — and she could be clueless and *****y while doing so.*
> 
> Enlarge ImagePrince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles at Windsor Castle on their wedding day on April 9, 2005.Getty Images
> She wrote to Morton of her vision for the royal family, her dream of hosting garden parties at Buckingham Palace for “all the handicapped and wheelchairs — which we did just before we got married — people who’ve never seen Buckingham Palace let alone been on the grass. But they are not allowed too many wheelchairs because it ruins the grass.”
> 
> *She told friends she considered “POW” short not for Princess of Wales but Prisoner of War — not a good look for a burgeoning humanitarian.*
> 
> Diana also refused to take any blame in the collapse of her marriage, to acknowledge that her increasing hysteria — her constant self-harm, suicide attempts and rage-filled tantrums — were enough to push anyone away. Instead, she told Morton of her shrink’s succinct diagnosis upon first meeting. “He said: ‘There’s nothing wrong with you; it’s your husband.’”
> 
> More crucially, Diana hid key information from Morton: She herself had cheated on Charles, with more than one man, early and often.
> 
> There was her bodyguard, 37-year-old Barry Mannakee, in 1986; car salesman James Gilbey, circa 1989, followed by Oliver Hoare, a married art dealer who broke it off, only to have Diana stalk him, calling his home up to 300 times. Then came rugby player Will Carling and, most famously, James Hewitt, who publicly claimed he was involved with Diana from 1986 through 1991.
> 
> Yet as this information slowly dripped out, public opinion remained heavily pro-Diana.
> 
> An aging palace couldn’t grasp how to dismantle her swift-moving character arc. Post-separation, Diana was photographed in workout gear, driving to and from her London gym, picking her children up from school, taking them to Disney for vacation — just another modern single mom on the go, albeit one making sure her boys wouldn’t be contaminated by the crown.
> 
> Enlarge ImagePrincess Diana in “The Revenge Dress”Getty Images
> It took Prince Charles two years to give his version, sitting for a primetime interview with star journalist Jonathan Dimbleby.
> 
> This was an unprecedented move for a future king of England, and Charles, looking and sounding uncomfortable, admitted to cheating on Diana only after the marriage had “irretrievably broken down, us both having tried.” But Charles couldn’t win. The British public felt no sympathy; instead, they felt he’d debased himself and the monarchy.
> 
> The same night Charles’ interview aired, Diana scored another coup with what came to be called “The Revenge Dress”: For a party at the Serpentine Gallery, she wore a tight black strapless cocktail dress, cut well above the knee, neckline plunging.
> 
> Enlarge ImageDiana reinvented herself again, this time as a globetrotting humanitarian.Getty Images
> “She wanted to look a million dollars,” said Anna Harvey, Diana’s stylist. “And she did.”
> 
> Diana made Charles’ admission look feeble and weak, and, more importantly, knocked him off the front page. Her message: You may prefer the older, haggard Camilla, but to look at me, the rest of the world will never understand why.
> 
> Diana did it again in 1995, granting a wide-ranging interview to Martin Bashir. Dressed in a smart black suit, eyes rimmed with kohl, Diana sought to blunt her own infidelity by volleying right back at Charles and Camilla.
> 
> “There were three of us in this marriage,” she said, damp eyes looking up from a bowed head. “So it was a bit crowded.”
> 
> More than 25 million people watched the interview, which was announced on Charles’ 47th birthday and aired on Queen Elizabeth’s 48th wedding anniversary — another piece of nonverbal jujitsu.
> 
> In it, Diana also claimed to be a victim of palace backstabbing, of orchestrated attempts to depict her as mentally ill, and as a target of sinister plots to get her to “go quietly.” The knife twist: Diana claimed her husband wasn’t fit for the British throne, his sole purpose in a life otherwise spent in purgatory.
> 
> *As for herself, Diana said she had no more humble aspiration than to be “a queen of people’s hearts.”*
> 
> After the couple divorced at the Queen’s insistence in 1996, Diana reinvented herself again, this time as a globetrotting humanitarian. Now her focus was on sick kids and landmines and meeting with Mother Teresa rather than movie stars — but still, she fought hard to retain her title.
> 
> Enlarge ImagePrincess Diana with Dodi al-Fayed in Paris on Aug. 31, 1997.Splash News
> In the summer of 1997, Diana allowed paparazzi to catch her on vacation with Egyptian playboy Dodi al-Fayed, though she was fresh off a secret, two-year relationship with Hasnat Khan, a Pakistani heart surgeon she called “the love of her life.” *She’d even visited Khan’s extended family in Pakistan in May 1996, proof that she could live a private life when she chose.*
> 
> In the weeks and months after Diana’s death, chased through a Paris tunnel by paparazzi, there was much recrimination of the media.
> 
> *Even today — even as those who knew Diana admit she used the press to cover her romance with al-Fayed, hoping to make Khan jealous — the prevailing narrative paints Diana as pure victim, hounded by a soulless media, consumed by our own prurient interest. Why couldn’t we all just leave her alone?
> 
> That, truly, is the biggest fairy tale of all, and one much more interesting to hear.*


Brilliant.  It takes a few decades but people finally start to come around.



sdkitty said:


> Ha
> my favorite is the mom with the stroller who lets you hold the door for her and then doesn't say thank you .....I have been known to say loudly "you're welcome" when this happens


So funny. Me too!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps NO needs her own thread?
> Guaranteed to be more drama and more opinions
> 
> Just made one for her. Enjoy.


Sorry I’ve already posted my extra long, slightly gloomy reply on the subject. 

now I want to get back to making jokes about stale cakes and moon bumps


----------



## lalame

jelliedfeels said:


> It is really over-simplistic to say because some young women have committed suicide in the past over cyber-bullying it follows that someone else will react in that way. In fact a beef I have with Oprah interview is the way she led from MM’s depression to asking about suicide as though that were a natural progression when that’s not how all depression sufferers feel and Oprah is normalising a dangerous extreme of behaviour as part of the standard manifestation of the condition.



I'll just address this here because it does touch on M/H. I wasn't saying because SOME women have committed suicide from cyber-bullying that ALL women will react this way... my point was because some women do get depressed by it, then it's a plausible reason for anyone to get depressed. Plausible as in not necessary but possible. I certainly don't get depressed by things some other women do and I'm sure I get depressed by things others don't. That's obvious.

I think Oprah was definitely ham-handed to ask someone who appeared depressed, "Did you want to commit suicide?" as if it was the logical conclusion but that is not where I was going with that.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO...




Whoa! What a steam roller. I'm sure Harry was read the Riot Act later for not introducing her first thing. She feels she must nail everyone with word salad at every opportunity. Without Harry she is a total NOTHING. I can better see now how she must be insanely jealous of Kate. She must have thought of every possible way to force her and William to step aside so SHE could be Queen. Of course that wasn't possible so obviously the BRF is racist. Who's going to ask her if she's OK when she behaves like that? What a biaytch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@jelliedfeels 
Yeah, this thread has that _outlaw _feel.
We’ve got the perfect bag, too


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/naomi-osaka.1043048/page-2


----------



## lallybelle

OMG guys...it's happening!

*Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself*
An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.

Posted on June 1, 2021, at 6:51 p.m. ET






Apple TV


In a series of interviews this year, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has made explosive claims against the royal family — the people and the institution — going into detail about the damaging toll his upbringing has had on his mental health.
Yet during some of these conversations, Harry takes on the role of revisionist historian, contradicting past statements he’s made about his mental health issues and the support — or lack thereof — he received from the royal family. The picture he paints is that of an uncaring institution ignoring his cries for help, of a man suffering in silence until Meghan Markle came into his life. But his past statements and what he’s saying now don’t always line up.

FULL ARTICLE BElOW








						Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself
					

An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'm going to put one more here since it is about the comparison with H&M. As I find out more about Naomi I think I now know what Piers Morgan was talking about. Let me play devil's advocate and see if it changes anyone's feelings at all.
> 
> In the last year alone Naomi made (depending on where you read it) somewhere between $35 to $55 million. She made about $5 million of that from winning tennis tournaments. The rest came from lucrative endorsement deals with big companies, among them Nike, Beats by Dre, Mastercard, Louis Vuitton, and Tag Heuer. She makes so much money she overtook Serena Williams and Naomi is now the world's highest paid female athlete.
> 
> Whether she likes it or not, Naomi the celebrity athlete is a brand (in a way Harry and Meghan could only dream). As such she has a team of publicity agents, sports agents, lawyers, and others, all working in tandem to ensure her financial success. She does commercials and print ads for her companies which requires her to perform in the presence of many people.
> 
> She also has an agreement with Athlete Speakers (https://www.athletespeakers.com/speaker/naomi-osaka) where for a fee of $100,000 and up, you can hire Naomi to be your keynote speaker, make a corporate guest appearance, or get her to come for an exclusive meet-and-greet. Is that something a person who suffers from incredible "shyness" does?
> 
> Here's where the comparison to Harry and Meghan comes in. Naomi seems to be perfectly fine with public speaking and answering questions if it is for something fun or lucrative, like a paid appearance. Is it possible she just doesn't like talking to the press because she's not getting anything out of it? Isn't that similar to Harry and Meghan not wanting to do their boring royal assignments and instead starting to market the hell out of themselves? Is that what Piers meant?


Actors go through the same ridiculous media circuit when promoting a film and they answer the same dumb question over and over... but that's part of their contract.

I do like the comparison you made with Harry and Meg. It's more fun to be paid.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO...



I cannot believe how ill-mannered she is! (I'd use another word, but then I'd have to use lots of *** to make it tpf-acceptable)
At least this time she only shoved herself in front of him. No use of those pointy elbows. 
And she has shoved herself in front of HMTQ too, so this was small potatoes to her.
(I knew an office narc like her in this respect. It was quite comedic if you weren't the one being pushed out of the way.)



bisousx said:


> I feel for Naomi. She is just a baby to me at 23 and I understand how she feels being frozen by depression and not wanting to play along with public interviews. She was willing to pay the fines, face the consequences of breaking her contract... I don’t think it’s a good look for Piers and the likes to be writing harsh things about this young girl. Good thing Naomi has enough money to do whatever she pleases. Wish her well.


OT but I'll put in my 2 cents. Naomi may need better minders and lawyers. Once you reach the top of your field, there are certain concessions you can squeeze out of event organizers. The French Open rules likely contractually require winners/losers to attend media conferences but, if she had a good lawyer, she can negotiate to minimize the number of conferences or the duration. The penalty clauses are a deterrent, but not supposed to be a way out. Otherwise, every tournament winner could just say, "Oh, it's only $X. I'll just pay it. No big deal." Being willing to pay the fine doesn't mean you should be actively breaking a contract that was supposedly signed in good faith. If Naomi did this whenever she felt down, her sponsors might not say anything in public, but they would take the attitude into consideration for contract offers and renewals. Her sponsorship contracts would have the same type of penalty clauses for no-show or inability to meet requirements.



bag-mania said:


> Okay, I'm going to put one more here since it is about the comparison with H&M. As I find out more about Naomi I think I now know what Piers Morgan was talking about. Let me play devil's advocate and see if it changes anyone's feelings at all.
> 
> In the last year alone Naomi made (depending on where you read it) somewhere between $35 to $55 million. She made about $5 million of that from winning tennis tournaments. The rest came from lucrative endorsement deals with big companies, among them Nike, Beats by Dre, Mastercard, Louis Vuitton, and Tag Heuer. She makes so much money she overtook Serena Williams and Naomi is now the world's highest paid female athlete.
> 
> Whether she likes it or not, Naomi the celebrity athlete is a brand (in a way Harry and Meghan could only dream). As such she has a team of publicity agents, sports agents, lawyers, and others, all working in tandem to ensure her financial success. She does commercials and print ads for her companies which requires her to perform in the presence of many people.
> 
> She also has an agreement with Athlete Speakers (https://www.athletespeakers.com/speaker/naomi-osaka) where for a fee of $100,000 and up, you can hire Naomi to be your keynote speaker, make a corporate guest appearance, or get her to come for an exclusive meet-and-greet. Is that something a person who suffers from incredible "shyness" does?
> 
> Here's where the comparison to Harry and Meghan comes in. Naomi seems to be perfectly fine with public speaking and answering questions if it is for something fun or lucrative, like a paid appearance. Is it possible she just doesn't like talking to the press because she's not getting anything out of it? Isn't that similar to Harry and Meghan not wanting to do their boring royal assignments and instead starting to market the hell out of themselves? Is that what Piers meant?


That is a very good point, although I would hope that she isn't like them. Just two of them is more than enough for the world.



CarryOn2020 said:


> @jelliedfeels
> Yeah, this thread has that _outlaw _feel.
> We’ve got the perfect bag, too
> 
> View attachment 5098681



And thanks for starting the NO thread.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO...



Honest. I had to watch it twice, jaw dropping and he looks thoroughly emasculated, I'd normally say "Unbelievable" but then remember this IS Methane we are watching!


----------



## Chanbal

Yep, something is very wrong.


----------



## xincinsin

lallybelle said:


> OMG guys...it's happening!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself*
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> Posted on June 1, 2021, at 6:51 p.m. ET
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple TV
> 
> 
> In a series of interviews this year, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has made explosive claims against the royal family — the people and the institution — going into detail about the damaging toll his upbringing has had on his mental health.
> Yet during some of these conversations, Harry takes on the role of revisionist historian, contradicting past statements he’s made about his mental health issues and the support — or lack thereof — he received from the royal family. The picture he paints is that of an uncaring institution ignoring his cries for help, of a man suffering in silence until Meghan Markle came into his life. But his past statements and what he’s saying now don’t always line up.
> 
> FULL ARTICLE BElOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself
> 
> 
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


The Sussex spokesperson they keep quoting is masterful at spinning. We could do an Excel file on Harry's contradicting and misleading comments over the years, but what it boils down to is, his (or his spokesperson's) spin is that no matter what anyone in the past did for him, what therapy he had or what he himself thought, it doesn't count. His reprieve/salvation/rebirth happened only when the omnipotent Methane took charge of his life, found him a good therapist and told him what to think.  Blithering idiot! If she could find you a good therapist, why couldn't she find one for herself?


----------



## Hermes Zen

lallybelle said:


> OMG guys...it's happening!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself*
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> Posted on June 1, 2021, at 6:51 p.m. ET
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple TV
> 
> 
> In a series of interviews this year, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has made explosive claims against the royal family — the people and the institution — going into detail about the damaging toll his upbringing has had on his mental health.
> Yet during some of these conversations, Harry takes on the role of revisionist historian, contradicting past statements he’s made about his mental health issues and the support — or lack thereof — he received from the royal family. The picture he paints is that of an uncaring institution ignoring his cries for help, of a man suffering in silence until Meghan Markle came into his life. But his past statements and what he’s saying now don’t always line up.
> 
> FULL ARTICLE BElOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself
> 
> 
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


I hate fakes and liars!!!   WHEN WILL H WTFU?!?!?! He better hurry for I'm hurting myself with the slap to my head!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lalame said:


> Naomi literally hides under towels while sobbing after matches. She wants to disappear, not be on every streaming show.



I have sympathy for Naomis mental health struggles, especially as she is so young. However, as she makes a fortune out of her media gig (ie commercials and endorsements), the fact that she said no to talking to the media was not cool. She is clearly happy to do the endorsements and commercials which is what is making her rich, yet she doesn't want to talk to the media in case they might criticize her or ask her difficult questions. She is just everyone else- wanting the $$$ with the least amount of physical and emotional/mental work. 

Tennis but her on the map, it is the reason she has all those endorsements and advertising money. Her mental health is important so she should have withdrawn rather than say she doesn't want to do media interviews. Its a part of the job. Imagine going to the doctors office and being told the doctor is going through some mental health issues so he/she will not be able to answer your questions, she will just fix you like a robot. Or the CEO of your company or manager saying they cannot respond to a presentation or changed they've made because of mental health issues. Surely those people would step down and let someone else take over while they get the help they need.

I would have thought she has a team of people and they would have advertised her that it is against the rules to not talk to the media. 

If you watch how she reacted to the crowds booing when she lost to Serena, you can see she is very fragile emotionally. She didn't understand that the booing was not to her, it was to the fact that Serena had lost, and Serena has a strong fan base due to her longer career.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Centuries old Native American human remains are found buried on estate just yards from Meghan and Harry's $14.7million mansion in Montecito*

*Bones were unearthed on May 24 on a street neighboring the royal couple's luxury complex, the Santa Barbara Sheriff's office confirmed*
*They were found during a landscaping construction project, authorities said *
*Officials have recruited the help of a forensic anthropologist to investigate*
*A sheriff's spokeswoman said they appeared to be 'very old,' and early reports indicate they could be the remains of a member of the Chumash people *









						Human remains found yards away from Meghan and Harry's mansion
					

Human remains have been found just yards away from Meghan and Harry's California mansion. Local authorities say the bones appear to be 'very old' and could be Chumash in origin.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Centuries old Native American human remains are found buried on estate just yards from Meghan and Harry's $14.7million mansion in Montecito*
> 
> *Bones were unearthed on May 24 on a street neighboring the royal couple's luxury complex, the Santa Barbara Sheriff's office confirmed*
> *They were found during a landscaping construction project, authorities said *
> *Officials have recruited the help of a forensic anthropologist to investigate*
> *A sheriff's spokeswoman said they appeared to be 'very old,' and early reports indicate they could be the remains of a member of the Chumash people *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Human remains found yards away from Meghan and Harry's mansion
> 
> 
> Human remains have been found just yards away from Meghan and Harry's California mansion. Local authorities say the bones appear to be 'very old' and could be Chumash in origin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


All that ancestral pain and suffering called out to the bones - if we want to put a Stephen King supernatural spin to it.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> All that ancestral pain and suffering called out to the bones - if we want to put a Stephen King supernatural spin to it.



How many ghost stories and hauntings begin with disturbing a burial ground? It’s a paranormal cliché! 

I hope the owners of the property have the bones put back, buried deeper and forget about them. It doesn’t seem right that a centuries old grave is uprooted because someone is putting in new landscaping.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They bought a haunted house!   They could use this to explain their cray-cray behavior.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> They bought a haunted house!   They could use this to explain their cray-cray behavior.



I guess they could claim to be possessed by morons. There must have been ancient bones under Frogmore cottage as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kevinaxx

lallybelle said:


> OMG guys...it's happening!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself*
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> Posted on June 1, 2021, at 6:51 p.m. ET
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple TV
> 
> 
> In a series of interviews this year, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has made explosive claims against the royal family — the people and the institution — going into detail about the damaging toll his upbringing has had on his mental health.
> Yet during some of these conversations, Harry takes on the role of revisionist historian, contradicting past statements he’s made about his mental health issues and the support — or lack thereof — he received from the royal family. The picture he paints is that of an uncaring institution ignoring his cries for help, of a man suffering in silence until Meghan Markle came into his life. But his past statements and what he’s saying now don’t always line up.
> 
> FULL ARTICLE BElOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself
> 
> 
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


I think when someone is going through something mental they’re not in a place to really speak of that subject as if they’re a third party expert if that makes sense.. and I feel like that’s a role he wants to switch in between playing victim.


----------



## needlv

Another New Idea source...(so perhaps truth is close to zero) but since this is a gossip thread I am posting anyway.

there may be trouble in paradise for M and H.









						Shock claim: Meghan and Harry’s explosive fight
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle took the ultimate gamble by stepping back from royal life and moving abroad.  But an insider revealed to New Idea the Sussexes’ move to LA has completely backfired, and as a result, the pair are struggling to get along behind closed doors.




					www.newidea.com.au


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> Another New Idea source...(so perhaps truth is close to zero) but since this is a gossip thread I am posting anyway.
> 
> there may be trouble in paradise for M and H.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shock claim: Meghan and Harry’s explosive fight
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle took the ultimate gamble by stepping back from royal life and moving abroad.  But an insider revealed to New Idea the Sussexes’ move to LA has completely backfired, and as a result, the pair are struggling to get along behind closed doors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


What’s that thing called when you’re really mad at your spouse but you project it on others? Seems like what Harry is doing.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> What’s that thing called when you’re really mad at your spouse but you project it on others? Seems like what Harry is doing.


Transference?








						Transference: What It Means and How It May Be Used in Therapy
					

Transference occurs when an individual has emotions about one person that are actually related to their feeling for another. It's common in relationships between a therapist and client and may even be used to help the client. Therapists are trained to be aware of transference and how to manage it.




					www.healthline.com


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I guess they could claim to be possessed by morons. There must have been ancient bones under Frogmore cottage as well.


She’s the Queen of Bones.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> She’s the Queen of Bones.


Is that a character in City of Bones? The author is a well-known plagiarist with stans who defend her to the death... Reminds me of MM.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> The Sussex spokesperson they keep quoting is masterful at spinning. We could do an Excel file on Harry's contradicting and misleading comments over the years, but what it boils down to is, his (or his spokesperson's) spin is that no matter what anyone in the past did for him, what therapy he had or what he himself thought, it doesn't count. His reprieve/salvation/rebirth happened only when the omnipotent Methane took charge of his life, found him a good therapist and told him what to think.  Blithering idiot! If she could find you a good therapist, why couldn't she find one for herself?


Well she’s so selfless, you see, she was so busy doing.......erm.......umm.............anyway she didn’t have time to organise for herself lol. Another classic out of the manipulator’s handbook  


CarryOn2020 said:


> *Centuries old Native American human remains are found buried on estate just yards from Meghan and Harry's $14.7million mansion in Montecito*
> 
> *Bones were unearthed on May 24 on a street neighboring the royal couple's luxury complex, the Santa Barbara Sheriff's office confirmed*
> *They were found during a landscaping construction project, authorities said *
> *Officials have recruited the help of a forensic anthropologist to investigate*
> *A sheriff's spokeswoman said they appeared to be 'very old,' and early reports indicate they could be the remains of a member of the Chumash people *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Human remains found yards away from Meghan and Harry's mansion
> 
> 
> Human remains have been found just yards away from Meghan and Harry's California mansion. Local authorities say the bones appear to be 'very old' and could be Chumash in origin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This is actually interesting. I wonder if academics will be able to set up an archaeological dig to discover elements of an ancient culture or whether that’ll mean too many peasants on the grounds for the pair’s tastes 
You’d hope they’d let it happen for the opportunities to milk a connection with a marginalised people on Instagram. 


xincinsin said:


> All that ancestral pain and suffering called out to the bones - if we want to put a Stephen King supernatural spin to it.


Oh my gosh it is very Stephen king isn’t it? Hopefully the undead bogie and the other missing dog won’t dig themselves up and make a bid for revenge 


Lodpah said:


> She’s the Queen of Bones.


The only human being to be comprised almost entirely of elbows. A true medical miracle.


bag-mania said:


> I guess they could claim to be possessed by morons. There must have been ancient bones under Frogmore cottage as well.


Now I’m imagining that LA seances are now going to be filled with historical morons denying responsibility for H&M’s actions. 
“Oh king John is here, he wants to say he may have been a fratricidal idiot who lost his fortune but he’s nowhere near as bad as Harry......Wallis Simpson says she wants the Meghan comparisons to stop as she may have been a fascist sympathiser but at least she had good dress sense....Nero, Tiberius & Caligula want to point out their daddy issues are nothing to do with Harry being a brat. Tamburlaine wants people to know he’s not Meghan-crazy-crazy even given his history of disembowelings..... etc etc.”


----------



## Lodpah

Oh I forgot you guys. Was scrolling through YouTube yesterday and remember the clapback that Fredo and Mego made about how service was “universal”? Welllllll . . . she might have plagiarized that from a little known Budweiser commercial. She just changed “for everybody” to Universal but we all know the subtle word variation or rather twist.

Correction: I'll own my mistake. It's service never stops.


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Is that a character in City of Bones? The author is a well-known plagiarist with stans who defend her to the death... Reminds me of MM.


Not sure.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry needs a "Come to Jesus Moment" to help him so Megido, if you are reading our threads, please send this along to your husband (plus he loves Africa so much).


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh my gosh, speaking of hauntings I just read that Dumbarton has a creepy bridge that dogs keep leaping off  








						Overtoun Bridge
					

This Scottish bridge seems to compel dogs to leap to their death.




					www.atlasobscura.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Well she’s so selfless, you see, she was so busy doing.......erm.......umm.............anyway she didn’t have time to organise for herself lol. Another classic out of the manipulator’s handbook
> 
> This is actually interesting. I wonder if academics will be able to set up an archaeological dig to discover elements of an ancient culture or whether that’ll mean too many peasants on the grounds for the pair’s tastes
> You’d hope they’d let it happen for the opportunities to milk a connection with a marginalised people on Instagram.
> 
> Oh my gosh it is very Stephen king isn’t it? Hopefully the undead bogie and the other missing dog won’t dig themselves up and make a bid for revenge
> 
> The only human being to be comprised almost entirely of elbows. A true medical miracle.
> 
> Now I’m imagining that LA seances are now going to be filled with historical morons denying responsibility for H&M’s actions.
> “Oh king John is here, he wants to say he may have been a fratricidal idiot who lost his fortune but he’s nowhere near as bad as Harry......Wallis Simpson says she wants the Meghan comparisons to stop as she may have been a fascist sympathiser but at least she had good dress sense....Nero, Tiberius & Caligula want to point out their daddy issues are nothing to do with Harry being a brat. Tamburlaine wants people to know he’s not Meghan-crazy-crazy even given his history of disembowelings..... etc etc.”


”......composed entirely of elbows”  comment of the week!
The first time I saw that clip shocked me to the core, and now, even though I’ve seen it several times I still find it unbelievably rude.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> ”......composed entirely of elbows”  comment of the week!
> The first time I saw that clip shocked me to the core, and now, even though I’ve seen it several times I still find it unbelievably rude.


Thank you, yes it’s pretty outrageous really, in a way it’s good that someone that ghastly and crass isn’t representing my country at diplomatic events anymore just because she got her claws into the idiot son 



CarryOn2020 said:


> @jelliedfeels
> Yeah, this thread has that _outlaw _feel.
> We’ve got the perfect bag, too
> 
> View attachment 5098681


That’s a beauty. I’m actually waiting on the delivery of a saddle bag with studded strap. Hopefully that’ll have a similar bandit feel


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Desire to be in the spotlight??? NO...




She did it in front of the Kind of Morocco, pushing Harry out of the way to greet him first. There's footage of a female journalist looking on and saying "She's despicable" with this disbelief in her voice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry, the word was repugnant (also the footage is super blurry, I can't seem to find the clearer one):


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh, speaking of hauntings I just read that Dumbarton has a creepy bridge that dogs keep leaping off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overtoun Bridge
> 
> 
> This Scottish bridge seems to compel dogs to leap to their death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.atlasobscura.com


I love browsing through atlas obscura.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh, speaking of hauntings I just read that Dumbarton has a creepy bridge that dogs keep leaping off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overtoun Bridge
> 
> 
> This Scottish bridge seems to compel dogs to leap to their death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.atlasobscura.com


If Methane suggests a visit, her husband should be suspicious. The theory of a mink marking the spot, and thus luring the dog over the edge, is too much like Methane marking in nature with her pee.  And we know how turned on Hazzard got from that. Death by pheromone would be diabolical.


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> They bought a haunted house!   They could use this to explain their cray-cray behavior.


Or this could be their next lawsuit(unbeknownst to them they bought a house near the burial ground), or a new show for Netflix (The Haunted Royals), or another episode with O to discuss how this is affecting his mental health…the monetary possibilities are endless


----------



## xincinsin

I was reading some old Blind Gossip items and there is one about MM from March 2020. A comment on it set me giggling. The nickname given to the gruesome twosome is Cash and Carry 








						A Shocking Accident - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] This actress is pretending to be all concerned about the health of her husband’s family members. What a crock. She mentioned this movie, [redacted], where the entire family was wiped out in a freak accident. The freak accident was certainly shocking, and it allowed someone...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> If Methane suggests a visit, her husband should be suspicious. The theory of a mink marking the spot, and thus luring the dog over the edge, is too much like Methane marking in nature with her pee.  And we know how turned on Hazzard got from that. Death by pheromone would be diabolical.


Its like an Agatha Christie isn’t it? Luckily for Harry I don’t think he has any intention of visiting the great unwashed of his constituencies any time soon.
I can definitely see a dog being driven so wild by a wonder smell they lose their senses.... like the smell of bluebells for example.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry, the word was repugnant (also the footage is super blurry, I can't seem to find the clearer one):



It's my first time seeing the videos and I'm honestly shocked.
I would not interrupt my partner while he's speaking to a group in my exceedingly dull ordinary life! How dare she push in front of him (him being royalty!!!!), and in front of other dignitaries- no less, as though she is somehow superior?
My mind is blown.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> It's my first time seeing the videos and I'm honestly shocked.
> I would not interrupt my partner while he's speaking to a group in my exceedingly dull ordinary life! How dare she push in front of him (him being royalty!!!!), and in front of other dignitaries- no less, as though she is somehow superior?
> My mind is blown.



I am a bit short on time, but will go looking for it later (I did post it before, but no clue where it is). Day 3 of marriage, Charles' garden party, they are leaving the building to make their entrance.

Harry as per his rank goes first. She walks up behind him, touches his back to make him stop, step back and let her go first. I wish I was joking.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry as per his rank goes first. She walks up behind him, touches his back to make him stop, step back and let her go first. I wish I was joking.


That's unbelievable! It's just such bad manners. I'll run a search and see if I can find it. Thanks for mentioning it. 
I try very hard to avoid all things related to them as it's tedious to listen to their entitled whinging, but every now and again I get a little caught up. I must say, I'm always left with my jaw on the floor as they seem to sink lower and lower in their behaviour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She has also ellbowed him in the guts to go first and ellbowed random strangers out of the way. You'd think she was raised by wolves.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They also invited themselves to an occasion where only the Queen, the Cornwalls and the Cambridges were supposed to be, then tried to cut in front of the Queen to get to the chapel (which courtiers didn't let happen). Can't make that sh*t up.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has also ellbowed him in the guts to go first and ellbowed random strangers out of the way. You'd think she was raised by wolves.


She acts like she’s waiting for the doors to open on the first day of Harrods sale.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They also invited themselves to an occasion where only the Queen, the Cornwalls and the Cambridges were supposed to be, then tried to cut in front of the Queen to get to the chapel (which courtiers didn't let happen). Can't make that sh*t up.



She also turned her back in the Queen...

does anyone remember this?  Watch the video.  i think the Queen does a bit of “side eye” at MM.









						The moment Meghan Markle breaks royal protocol right in front of the Queen
					

In the video you can see Prince Harry following it down to a tee.




					au.sports.yahoo.com


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> She also turned her back in the Queen...
> 
> does anyone remember this?  Watch the video.  i think the Queen does a bit of “side eye” at MM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The moment Meghan Markle breaks royal protocol right in front of the Queen
> 
> 
> In the video you can see Prince Harry following it down to a tee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> au.sports.yahoo.com


You wouldn’t break off conversation and turn your back on the host in normal life either.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has also ellbowed him in the guts to go first and ellbowed random strangers out of the way. You'd think she was raised by wolves.


She was! don’t you remember the poor girl had to struggle to survive in her leafy LA suburb and her private schools given she was raised by the vicious, insidious and decidedly lupine Markles?
without even a mother around to...I mean wait no her mother the feminist, empowered queen was always there besides ....no wait... they were the three cherubs but even doria couldn’t triumph over the evils of the teenaged Samantha markle who lied and cheated....no wait.... doria went away to study yoga or whatever but she was still the exemplary parent when compared to the evil Thomas who wouldn’t even make time for her....no wait.....he was doing the lighting for her show but then he wouldn’t walk out on the show when.... no wait.....

Listen she never had a family apart from her mother who is a strong woman but who wasn’t there but who was there so she looked for the family she never had in the windsors who apparently immediately turned on her and wanted her to kill herself.
I mean, what’s hard to understand about that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I cannot believe how ill-mannered she is! (I'd use another word, but then I'd have to use lots of *** to make it tpf-acceptable)
> At least this time she only shoved herself in front of him. No use of those pointy elbows.
> And she has shoved herself in front of HMTQ too, so this was small potatoes to her.
> (I knew an office narc like her in this respect. It was quite comedic if you weren't the one being pushed out of the way.)
> 
> 
> OT but I'll put in my 2 cents. Naomi may need better minders and lawyers. Once you reach the top of your field, there are certain concessions you can squeeze out of event organizers. The French Open rules likely contractually require winners/losers to attend media conferences but, if she had a good lawyer, she can negotiate to minimize the number of conferences or the duration. The penalty clauses are a deterrent, but not supposed to be a way out. Otherwise, every tournament winner could just say, "Oh, it's only $X. I'll just pay it. No big deal." Being willing to pay the fine doesn't mean you should be actively breaking a contract that was supposedly signed in good faith. If Naomi did this whenever she felt down, her sponsors might not say anything in public, but they would take the attitude into consideration for contract offers and renewals. Her sponsorship contracts would have the same type of penalty clauses for no-show or inability to meet requirements.
> 
> 
> That is a very good point, although I would hope that she isn't like them. Just two of them is more than enough for the world.
> 
> 
> 
> And thanks for starting the NO thread.


Tennis is a bit like the ladies ice skating at the Olympics - a HUGE glamour event, the outfit matters, and it is just you out there
Lots of ice skaters performance fell apart due to nerves through the years, so yeah STRESSFUL even without the press

I do remember the story about Naomi's first big win against Serena, S was heavily favored but argued with the umpires, lost to N, but Naomi was booed after the win


----------



## Chanbal

An open-minded future king!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has also ellbowed him in the guts to go first and ellbowed random strangers out of the way. You'd think she was raised by wolves.


Wolves have better manners and a stronger pack bond. 
Hyena? I see similarity in the skinny legs.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’ve got to be joking.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Wolves have better manners and a stronger pack bond.
> Hyena? I see similarity in the skinny legs.



Hyenas have a strong pack bond too. Although their pack is matriarchal and run by the most dominant female so…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> They’ve got to be joking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5099076



I'm no professional, but I have the strong feeling that therapist is either not worth their salt or the patient is beyond rescueing.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Honest. I had to watch it twice, jaw dropping and he looks thoroughly emasculated, I'd normally say "Unbelievable" but then remember this IS Methane we are watching!


It brought to my mind the image of a snake flicking its tongue before approaching a prey.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

lanasyogamama said:


> They’ve got to be joking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5099076



So why did he not say this to beginning with? Alternative truths to make his wife look good? or to slander the royal family who according to them did not care for the mental health of family members.

This also makes it very hard to believe the royal family did not help when Meghan was struggling or feeling suicidal. I mean, why would she ask the family when Harry claims she was the one who helped her get a therapist, surely she could have found one for herself if she was struggling.


----------



## bag-mania

Translation: They found a therapist who would happily agree with them that everything that ever went wrong in Harry's life was his family's fault and he has no personal responsibility for it.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5099118
> 
> 
> Translation: They found a therapist who would happily agree with them that everything that ever went wrong in Harry's life was his family's fault and he has no personal responsibility for it.


OMG you absolutely nailed it!


----------



## lanasyogamama

A Sussex spokesperson.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5099118
> 
> 
> Translation: They found a therapist who would happily agree with them that everything that ever went wrong in Harry's life was his family's fault and he has no personal responsibility for it.


One should be very careful when choosing a mental health therapist... 


Spoiler: brainwashing therapy












						'My Therapist Brainwashed Me Into Blaming My Parents For Everything Wrong In Life': Therapy Can Play Havoc Too
					

Therapy is surely a great way to deal with your issues in a more organized and supervised manner, but there are also ways that therapy can turn out to be a nightmare. One could say that finding the right therapist is like finding that perfect pair of jeans.




					edtimes.in


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Brilliant.  It takes a few decades but people finally start to come around.
> 
> 
> So funny. Me too!


honestly, most of these women seem to be privileged young white women whose husbands are paying the bills while they go shopping with their kids.... One particular incident stands out in my mind for some reason.  I was entering Nordstrom and held the door for this woman with the stolller.  Her mother (grandma of baby) thanked me (maybe after I did my "you're welcome").  The baby mama didn't say anything.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Whoa! What a steam roller. I'm sure Harry was read the Riot Act later for not introducing her first thing. She feels she must nail everyone with word salad at every opportunity. Without Harry she is a total NOTHING. I can better see now how she must be insanely jealous of Kate. She must have thought of every possible way to force her and William to step aside so SHE could be Queen. Of course that wasn't possible so obviously the BRF is racist. Who's going to ask her if she's OK when she behaves like that? What a biaytch.


well, I think even she would have to understand she could not actually be queen.....but maybe she thought she could be queen of hearts like Diana - the star of the family.  must have been a bitter pill to swallow when she figured out Kate was always gonna be above her in the heirarchy....and is also beautiful......If Kate had looked more like Anne, would she have felt any differently?  Hmm...dunno


----------



## 1LV

Clearblueskies said:


> You wouldn’t break off conversation and turn your back on the host in normal life either.


What’s the saying?  You can‘t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.  Right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> She also turned her back in the Queen...
> 
> does anyone remember this?  Watch the video.  i think the Queen does a bit of “side eye” at MM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The moment Meghan Markle breaks royal protocol right in front of the Queen
> 
> 
> In the video you can see Prince Harry following it down to a tee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> au.sports.yahoo.com


this just reinforces the idea that William was right and Harry should not have rushed into this marriage....aside from being egotistical, she didn't really understand her role and how to behave.  I don't forgive her for things like pushing herself in front of harry, tugging on him to prevent him from talking to people, etc.  But this turning her back on the queen - while a major breach - could have been accidental.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> well, I think even she would have to understand she could not actually be queen.....but maybe she thought she could be queen of hearts like Diana - the star of the family.  must have been a bitter pill to swallow when she figured out Kate was always gonna be above her in the heirarchy....and is also beautiful......If Kate had looked more like Anne, would she have felt any differently?  Hmm...dunno


I don’t think so, I think raptor would be doubly furious if Will’s wife looked like a mountain goat in LK Bennett and he still didn’t dump wifey and make M and her flutter lashes Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> this just reinforces the idea that William was right and Harry should not have rushed into this marriage....aside from being egotistical, she didn't really understand her role and how to behave.  I don't forgive her for things like pushing herself in front of harry, tugging on him to prevent him from talking to people, etc.  But this turning her back on the queen - while a major breach - could have been accidental.



Or - knowing her plan was to leave and make docudramas about the royals, maybe she needed to create some drama?  Turning her back on the Queen certainly gets tongues wagging. Surely by now we realize how almost everything they do is calculated. It may take some more time, eventually we will get a frame-by-frame analysis of every event from them.  Diana did it, they will too.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> She also turned her back in the Queen...
> 
> does anyone remember this?  Watch the video.  i think the Queen does a bit of “side eye” at MM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The moment Meghan Markle breaks royal protocol right in front of the Queen
> 
> 
> In the video you can see Prince Harry following it down to a tee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> au.sports.yahoo.com



Why do I get the feeling that if Meghan were introduced to Bill Gates she'd probably not cut him off and turn her back on him? hmmm..


----------



## rose60610

Don't you think that in explaining Queen Etiquette 101, Rules 1,2,3,4 & 5 are "Whatever you do, do not turn your back on the Queen"? Like Meghan said she had no idea that one curtseys before the Queen. My 6 year old niece from Iowa knows that. 

Question. Still no word on Baby#2.  How long has Meghan been "heavily pregnant"?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Question. Still no word on Baby#2.  How long has Meghan been "heavily pregnant"?



Baby is supposed to be born in the summer, thinking any time after mid-June we will hear about it. 

Meghan has been MIA for several weeks. Either she really is heavily pregnant and doesn't like how she looks. Or she cannot be bothered to try to keep the various sizes of her moonbumps straight until the surrogate delivers.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Don't you think that in explaining Queen Etiquette 101, Rules 1,2,3,4 & 5 are "Whatever you do, do not turn your back on the Queen"? Like Meghan said she had no idea that one curtseys before the Queen. My 6 year old niece from Iowa knows that.
> 
> Question. Still no word on Baby#2.  How long has Meghan been "heavily pregnant"?


What she did was simply rude, it showed her lack of education. She can spend $1M in clothes or borrow QE's tiaras, but she can't be an elegant woman.


----------



## DeMonica

jblended said:


> It's my first time seeing the videos and I'm honestly shocked.
> I would not interrupt my partner while he's speaking to a group in my exceedingly dull ordinary life! How dare she push in front of him (him being royalty!!!!), and in front of other dignitaries- no less, as though she is somehow superior?
> My mind is blown.


You can't teach protocol to people who refuse to learn it. She's obviously too self-absorbed to listen to anybody and blind to everything beyond her ambition, even to common sense. I wonder if those dignitaries were laughing behind her back or speechless from the shock.

My dear fellow royal experts you wrote such a volume in my absence that I can't even attempt to read all and catch up.

While I was doing other important things like trying work a little or getting from A to B with my swollen dislocated knee, a thought occurred to me: how come that Diana-Doria-Philippa-Charity hasn't been born yet? They made the announcement on Valentine's Day which was close to four months ago and she looked like she would be ready to pop soon.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or - knowing her plan was to leave and make docudramas about the royals, maybe she needed to create some drama?  Turning her back on the Queen certainly gets tongues wagging. Surely by now we realize how almost everything they do is calculated. It may take some more time, eventually we will get a frame-by-frame analysis of every event from them.  Diana did it, they will too.


They wouldn't survive without the support of Oprah and the services provided by SS.


----------



## DeMonica

Clearblueskies said:


> She acts like she’s waiting for the doors to open on the first day of Harrods sale.


Harrods? Rather Kmart or Target.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> While I was doing other important things like trying work a little or getting from A to B with my swollen dislocated knee, a thought occurred to me: how come that Diana-Doria-Philippa-Charity hasn't been born yet? They made the announcement on Valentine's Day which was close to four months ago and she looked like she would be ready to pop soon.



Not that we'll ever know exact timing on any of this, but _in theory_ she became pregnant in the fall so she's "due" in the summer. Never trust the photos!


----------



## Hermes Zen

This out today from Newsweek -



> https://www.newsweek.com/queen-eliz...meghan-markle-oprah-winfrey-interview-1596822
> 
> *Queen Elizabeth II Hit by New Palace Racism Scandal 3 Months After Meghan Markle Interview*
> By
> Queen Elizabeth II faces new allegations of historic racism at the palace just months after Meghan Markle's bombshell allegations in connection with her baby's skin color.
> Documents unearthed by _The Guardian_ appear to suggest Buckingham Palace had a policy of not employing "coloured immigrants or foreigners" to clerical roles in the royal household until at least the late 1960s.
> Buckingham Palace appeared to have a different policy for servants as the document notes the existence of "ordinary domestic posts for which coloured applicants were freely considered." The documents also show that the Queen and her household have benefitted from exemptions from sex and race discrimination laws.
> The incendiary claims were recorded by a civil servant in 1968 following a meeting with Elizabeth's chief financial manager, the keeper of the privy purse.
> And they follow allegations by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in March that an unnamed royal expressed concern their unborn baby's skin might be too dark.
> The family member was never named but the couple apparently told Oprah Winfrey off camera it was neither the queen nor Prince Philip.
> _The Guardian_ unearthed declassified government documents held at Britain's National Archives, at Kew, in West London, which show how the palace came to be made exempt from legislation securing equal rights in the workplace.
> Home Office civil servant, TG Weiler, wrote a memo in February 1968 summarizing a meeting he had with Lord Tryon, the keeper of the privy purse.
> Quoted in _The Guardian_, he described how Tryon had identified three categories of jobs at the palace.
> Weiler said these included: "(a) Senior posts, which were not filled by advertising or by any overt system of appointment and which would presumably be accepted as outside the scope of the bill; (b) clerical and other office posts, to which it was not, in fact, the practice to appoint coloured immigrants or foreigners; and (c) ordinary domestic posts for which coloured applicants were freely considered, but which would in any event be covered by the proposed general exemption for domestic employment."
> He added: "They were particularly concerned that if the proposed legislation applied to the Queen's household it would for the first time make it legally possible to criticise the household.
> "Many people do so already, but this has to be accepted and is on a different footing from a statutory provision."
> The race relations bill was brought in by then Labour Home Secretary and future Prime Minister James Callaghan.
> _The Guardian_ has suggested the negotiations to make the palace exempt were linked to the need under British law to seek "Queen's consent" for new legislation.
> The arcane provision is supposed to be a procedural formality but a _Guardian_ investigation has, over the past months, attempted to demonstrate it provides the royals an opportunity to lobby government before legislation has been publicly announced.
> The newspaper quoted a civil servant who, after the palace's exemption had been worked into the draft legislation, wrote that royal staff "agreed that the way was now open for the secretary of state to seek the Queen's consent to place her interest at the disposal of parliament for the purpose of the bill."
> The exemption ensured that formal complaints about racism against palace employees would go to the home secretary rather than the courts, potentially keeping them out of the public domain, _The Guardian_ reported.
> The exemption applied to the 1976 Race Relations Act, the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act and the 1970 Equal Pay Act and survives to this day as these were replaced by the Equality Act of 2010, according to the newspaper.
> From a Buckingham Palace spokesperson told _Newsweek _via email: "Claims based on a second hand account of conversations from over 50 years ago should not be used to draw or infer conclusions about modern day events or operations.
> "The principles of Crown Application and Crown Consent are long established and widely known.
> "The Royal Household and the Sovereign comply with the provisions of the Equality Act, in principle and in practise.
> "This is reflected in the diversity, inclusion and dignity at work policies, procedures and practices within the Royal Household.
> "Any complaints that might be raised under the Act follow a formal process that provides a means of hearing and remedying any complaint."
> Meghan had told Oprah in March: "In those months when I was pregnant, all around this same time, we have in tandem, the conversation of 'He won't be given security, he's not going to be given a title,' and also concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he's born."
> The queen is head of state not only in Britain but in 16 countries around the world, including 12 in the Caribbean and Indian Ocean.
> _Update 6/02/21, 11:30 a.m. ET: The article has been updated with comments from Buckingham Palace. _


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Baby is supposed to be born in the summer, thinking any time after mid-June we will hear about it.
> 
> Meghan has been MIA for several weeks. Either she really is heavily pregnant and doesn't like how she looks. Or she cannot be bothered to try to keep the various sizes of her moonbumps straight until the surrogate delivers.


Someone posted this other possibility on twitter.


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> She was! don’t you remember the poor girl had to struggle to survive in her leafy LA suburb and her private schools given she was raised by the vicious, insidious and decidedly lupine Markles?
> without even a mother around to...I mean wait no her mother the feminist, empowered queen was always there besides ....no wait... they were the three cherubs but even doria couldn’t triumph over the evils of the teenaged Samantha markle who lied and cheated....no wait.... doria went away to study yoga or whatever but she was still the exemplary parent when compared to the evil Thomas who wouldn’t even make time for her....no wait.....he was doing the lighting for her show but then he wouldn’t walk out on the show when.... no wait.....
> 
> Listen she never had a family apart from her mother who is a strong woman but who wasn’t there but who was there so she looked for the family she never had in the windsors who apparently immediately turned on her and wanted her to kill herself.
> I mean, what’s hard to understand about that?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> This out today from Newsweek -


This is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, isn’t it?

America, (the wonderful anti-racist paradise where H&M fled the evil British) had the full-on segregation of black Americans until the late 60s never mind ‘foreigners’ not being allowed to hold royal clerical positions.
It is almost like there’s been some changes over the last 60 years or something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Someone posted this other possibility on twitter.



That peanut cartoon is making me feel exhausted


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> This is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, isn’t it?
> 
> America, (the wonderful anti-racist paradise where H&M fled the evil British) had the full-on segregation of black Americans until the late 60s never mind ‘foreigners’ not being allowed to hold royal clerical positions.
> *It is almost like there’s been some changes over the last 60 years or something.*



Don't you love when young web writers get all judgy because (surprise!) at other times in history people didn't conduct themselves by today's standards. Did they learn anything in school?


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> This out today from Newsweek -


This is sad, but it was the reality of some decades ago. If you buy a house in certain neighborhoods here in the US, you can still find old documents (not in effect) with discriminatory rules. It's shocking, but we can't erase the past. We need to acknowledge it, and make sure we don't repeat the same mistakes in the present or future. 

I wonder if MM's PR is behind this article. Some people with their falsehoods seem to be interested in perpetuating a divisive environment.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *I wonder if MM's PR is behind this article. Some people with their falsehoods seem to be interested in perpetuating a divisive environment.*



I hate to think Newsweek sells to PR companies. More likely the writer is anti-monarchy and found something ugly from the past that would offend everyone like it just happened.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> This is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, isn’t it?
> 
> America, (the wonderful anti-racist paradise where H&M fled the evil British) had the full-on segregation of black Americans until the late 60s never mind ‘foreigners’ not being allowed to hold royal clerical positions.
> It is almost like there’s been some changes over the last 60 years or something.


I agree jelliedfeels. I think the media has less and less things to pick at, at least until M has her baby or H makes another blundering idiot of himself.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> This out today from Newsweek -


In fact looking again at what it actually says it’s ‘coloured immigrants and foreigners’ now this might be just reading too much into it, but the article later mentions ‘coloured people’ as a group as well.... so does that mean that this ban from clerical positions only applies to first generation migrants and foreign nationals but that it might not apply to ‘coloured’ Brits? It is unclear
If the ban only applies to foreign nationals I can see some rationale behind it because of the sensitive position of the royal family,  just like how you can’t usually go join the secret service of another country  because you might have a conflict of interest.
Also let’s remember this is a memo of a conversation it’s not meant to be an unambiguous legal document.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> This is sad, but it was the reality of some decades ago. If you buy a house in certain neighborhoods here in the US, you can still find old documents (not in effect) with discriminatory rules. It's shocking, but we can't erase the past. We need to acknowledge it, and make sure we don't repeat the same mistakes in the present or future.
> 
> I wonder if MM's PR is behind this article. Some people with their falsehoods seem to be interested in perpetuating a divisive environment.



Beautifully said Chanbal. Thank you.  As I had shared several pages ago, my mother and I during my youth, was discriminated. So to not repeat the same mistakes in the present or future is dear to my heart across ALL races. I am proud being half asian AND YES being half caucasian.  Why shouldn't I be proud of my multi-racial family.  I embrace all cultures. period


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Not that we'll ever know exact timing on any of this, but _in theory_ she became pregnant in the fall so she's "due" in the summer. Never trust the photos!


What can we trust if comes to Megs? I wonder when she'll "deliver" the baby. While she "couldn't" get a shrink in the UK, I'm sure that she was able to consult an ob/gyn in California. She had a miscarriage in July if we can trust her article . Ob/gyns generally recommend you to wait three months before trying to get pregnant again and, according to my personal experience, you might have to wait a few weeks more to get your hormones back in order and start to ovulate again. So in theory she should have waited until some time in October then the baby would arrive in July.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> What can we trust if comes to Megs? I wonder when she'll "deliver" the baby. While she "couldn't" get a shrink in the UK, I'm sure that she was able to consult an ob/gyn in California. She had a miscarriage in July if we can trust her article . Ob/gyns generally recommend you to wait three months before trying to get pregnant again and, according to my personal experience, you might have to wait a few weeks more to get your hormones back in order and start to ovulate again. So in theory she should have waited until some time in October then the baby would arrive in July.



In early December there were those incognito shots of her entering a building that TMZ said had a medical spa and other offices. It could have been a followup visit to an IVF clinic to make sure the procedure took.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe she is busy ‘advising’ on this show:









						Lifetime movie stars recreate Meghan and Prince Harry's home video
					

Sydney Morton, who is portraying Meghan Markle, 39, in the upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, was pictured with a fake baby bump while on-set in Vancouver on Tuesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*PIC EXCLUSIVE: A family affair! Actress playing Meghan in Lifetime's Megxit movie cradles her baby bump while filming on the beach with Prince Harry and Archie actors - as stars recreate candid home video from Sussexes' bombshell Oprah interview*

*Sydney Morton, who is portraying Meghan Markle, 39, in the upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, was pictured with a fake baby bump while on-set in Vancouver on Tuesday *
*The actress was joined on the beach by Jordan Dean, who is playing Prince Harry, and the little boy who stars as Archie, as well as Melanie Nicholls-King, who is taking on the role of Meghan's mother Doria Ragland *
*Morton and Dean were pictured on-set for the first time last week, when they were caught on camera filming several different scenes, including a few that appear to be set during Harry and Meghan's 2019 Africa tour *
*These latest on-set snaps were taken on the beach and appear to show Dean and Morton recreating footage from a home video that Harry and Meghan shared during their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March *
*The clip shared by the Sussexes is thought to have been taken by Harry, 36, and shows Meghan and Archie on a beach in California with one of their two dogs*
*Dean and Morton were seen playing with the same blue Chuckit! dog toy that Meghan and Archie held *


----------



## SpicyTuna13

[QUOTE="DeMonica, post: 34566886, member: 651086" Ob/gyns generally recommend you to wait three months before trying to get pregnant again
[/QUOTE]

With all due respect, this is not necessarily true.

If you are AMA (advanced maternal age, 35 y/o or older), OB’s want you to continue trying ASAP......now how successful one will be is a different matter as alluded to in the rest of your post (hormones, etc.) as it can take a few months to normalize.

I’m over 35, miscarried in Aug/Sep 2020, was told to “hurry and keep trying”, now 3rd trimester pregnant due in July 2021. 

Thus, M’s story/timeline makes sense to me.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe she is busy ‘advising’ on this show:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lifetime movie stars recreate Meghan and Prince Harry's home video
> 
> 
> Sydney Morton, who is portraying Meghan Markle, 39, in the upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, was pictured with a fake baby bump while on-set in Vancouver on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *PIC EXCLUSIVE: A family affair! Actress playing Meghan in Lifetime's Megxit movie cradles her baby bump while filming on the beach with Prince Harry and Archie actors - as stars recreate candid home video from Sussexes' bombshell Oprah interview*
> 
> *Sydney Morton, who is portraying Meghan Markle, 39, in the upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, was pictured with a fake baby bump while on-set in Vancouver on Tuesday *
> *The actress was joined on the beach by Jordan Dean, who is playing Prince Harry, and the little boy who stars as Archie, as well as Melanie Nicholls-King, who is taking on the role of Meghan's mother Doria Ragland *
> *Morton and Dean were pictured on-set for the first time last week, when they were caught on camera filming several different scenes, including a few that appear to be set during Harry and Meghan's 2019 Africa tour *
> *These latest on-set snaps were taken on the beach and appear to show Dean and Morton recreating footage from a home video that Harry and Meghan shared during their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March *
> *The clip shared by the Sussexes is thought to have been taken by Harry, 36, and shows Meghan and Archie on a beach in California with one of their two dogs*
> *Dean and Morton were seen playing with the same blue Chuckit! dog toy that Meghan and Archie held *


Lifetime is really pulling out the big guns for this one! (Eye roll)


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I hate to think Newsweek sells to PR companies. More likely the writer is anti-monarchy and found something ugly from the past that would offend everyone like it just happened.


Certain people and PR companies seem to have very influential connections, I wouldn't discard the possibility.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> Beautifully said Chanbal. Thank you.  As I had shared several pages ago, my mother and I during my youth, was discriminated. So to not repeat the same mistakes in the present or future is dear to my heart across ALL races. I am proud being half asian AND YES being half caucasian.  Why shouldn't I be proud of my multi-racial family.  I embrace all cultures. period


Yes 100%. I believe we will all be mixed race one day. Our affinities have nothing to do with skin color. Discrimination is pure ignorance imo. People like MM seem to have an interest in perpetuating a divisive environment and in delaying progress.


----------



## DeMonica

SpicyTuna13 said:


> [QUOTE="DeMonica, post: 34566886, member: 651086" Ob/gyns generally recommend you to wait three months before trying to get pregnant again



With all due respect, this is not necessarily true.

If you are AMA (advanced maternal age, 35 y/o or older), OB’s want you to continue trying ASAP......now how successful one will be is a different matter as alluded to in the rest of your post (hormones, etc.) as it can take a few months to normalize.

I’m over 35, miscarried in Aug/Sep 2020, was told to “hurry and keep trying”, now 3rd trimester pregnant due in July 2021.

Thus, M’s story/timeline makes sense to me.
[/QUOTE]
First of all, good luck with your pregnancy. 
As you might see I mentioned "generally". You might have missed that I was also speaking from experience. I had two miscarriages (both well over 35). I was advised to wait three months both times by my ob/gyn and my father who was also an ob/gyn. Your doctor's approach was obviously different but what you mentioned is not a rule, because not all ob/gyns urge their patients to start trying right away. The reason is that there are different studies and theories on how long is the ideal time between the miscarriage and the new pregnancy and recommendations vary.  Of course, how long you're recommended to wait also depends on many factors e.g., how far along you were when you miscarried, your maternal age, or the cause of the miscarriage.
Of course, we don't know how far along Megs was or when she got pregnant again - or if we can trust anything Megs says or shows.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't have a chance to watch the entire video yet. It's about information removed from the net and a certain criminal record of 2001.



By the way, Lady C's petition has already over 50,000 signatures!


----------



## xincinsin

SpicyTuna13 said:


> With all due respect, this is not necessarily true.
> 
> If you are AMA (advanced maternal age, 35 y/o or older), OB’s want you to continue trying ASAP......now how successful one will be is a different matter as alluded to in the rest of your post (hormones, etc.) as it can take a few months to normalize.
> 
> I’m over 35, miscarried in Aug/Sep 2020, was told to “hurry and keep trying”, now 3rd trimester pregnant due in July 2021.
> 
> Thus, M’s story/timeline makes sense to me.


Congratulations, SpicyTuna!


----------



## needlv

Another interesting blind gossip...






						Blind Item #6
					

Several months ago, this north of the border celebrity mentioned to the alliterate one that the alliterate one should publicly put it out to...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I didn't have a chance to watch the entire video yet. It's about information removed from the net and a certain criminal record of 2001.
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, Lady C's petition has already over 50,000 signatures!



Lady C's petition got a story in the Singapore press too, which was pretty amazing since the local media has mostly paid little attention to the antics of Methane & Hazard.

When international travel opens up again, I wonder if Methane will expect private jets and red carpet welcomes like she enjoyed while she was a royal, or at least like the A-lister that she craved becoming.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> I didn't have a chance to watch the entire video yet. It's about information removed from the net and a certain criminal record of 2001.
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, Lady C's petition has already over 50,000 signatures!



She was on a role! Very little patience for Megan without an H. Listen and you'll know what I'm referring to!  lol


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Lady C's petition got a story in the Singapore press too, which was pretty amazing since the local media has mostly paid little attention to the antics of Methane & Hazard.
> 
> When international travel opens up again, I wonder if Methane will expect private jets and red carpet welcomes like she enjoyed while she was a royal, or at least like the A-lister that she craved becoming.


Haha, they are really famous! Are you in Singapore? Gosh, the food is spicy there.   I miss Orchard street. I hope I'll have a chance to visit again and have a Singapore Sling at Raffles...


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> She was on a role! Very little patience for Megan without an H. Listen and you'll know what I'm referring to!  lol


OK, I'll do it as soon as I'm alone. I don't dare to watch the video near my family, I risk to shock them.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Haha, they are really famous! Are you in Singapore? Gosh, the food is spicy there.   I miss Orchard street. I hope I'll have a chance to visit again and have a Singapore Sling at Raffles...


I'll roll out the red carpet for you


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Someone posted this other possibility on twitter.



They would have to use to tape to make this a silent birth.  There are some cultures that encourage a woman to cry out and scream when in labor.  The belief is that she is getting rid of all the pain and it won't transfer to the baby.  I like that idea a lot better than telling a woman she can't utter a sound.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I'll roll out the red carpet for you


I appreciate the offer, but let's not waste time and go straight to Raffles for the Singapore Sling.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They would have to use to tape to make this a silent birth.  There are some cultures that encourage a woman to cry out and scream when in labor.  The belief is that she is getting rid of all the pain and it won't transfer to the baby.  I like that idea a lot better than telling a woman she can't utter a sound.


The genetic pain?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Don't you love when young web writers get all judgy because (surprise!) at other times in history people didn't conduct themselves by today's standards. Did they learn anything in school?


Youth is wasted on the young.  Oscar Wilde and G.B.Shaw both said it.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Why do I get the feeling that if Meghan were introduced to Bill Gates she'd probably not cut him off and turn her back on him? hmmm..


She would hang onto his every word. Giggle and look adoringly into his eyes.  Place her hand on his arm and/or back and tell him how interested she was in farming and feeding the world as she is a great philanthropist.  Definitely mention her interest in rescue chickens.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> They would have to use to tape to make this a silent birth.  There are some cultures that encourage a woman to cry out and scream when in labor.  The belief is that she is getting rid of all the pain and it won't transfer to the baby.  I like that idea a lot better than telling a woman she can't utter a sound.


Yeah! All things go out the window when you go into labor unless they inject her with pain medication. Like she can predict what’s going to happen lol.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> They would have to use to tape to make this a silent birth.  There are some cultures that encourage a woman to cry out and scream when in labor.  The belief is that she is getting rid of all the pain and it won't transfer to the baby.  I like that idea a lot better than telling a woman she can't utter a sound.


My Ob/Gyn sighed when I wailed and said to the nurse,"It's going to her face." Naturally, I stopped concentrating on giving birth and asked what that meant. She said when I screamed/moaned/cried out, my focus and energy was going towards my vocalisation and she needed me to redirect that towards pushing the baby out. So I yelled less and pushed more.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> They would have to use to tape to make this a silent birth.  There are some cultures that encourage a woman to cry out and scream when in labor.  The belief is that she is getting rid of all the pain and it won't transfer to the baby.  I like that idea a lot better than telling a woman she can't utter a sound.


It will be easy for Meg to have a silent birth if she's not the one in labour.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> I agree jelliedfeels. I think the media has less and less things to pick at, at least until M has her baby or H makes another blundering idiot of himself.


Yes let’s all hope this fallow period of fake-intellectual grandstanding can pass and we can get back to the real news and the jokes it generates.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe she is busy ‘advising’ on this show:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lifetime movie stars recreate Meghan and Prince Harry's home video
> 
> 
> Sydney Morton, who is portraying Meghan Markle, 39, in the upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, was pictured with a fake baby bump while on-set in Vancouver on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *PIC EXCLUSIVE: A family affair! Actress playing Meghan in Lifetime's Megxit movie cradles her baby bump while filming on the beach with Prince Harry and Archie actors - as stars recreate candid home video from Sussexes' bombshell Oprah interview*
> 
> *Sydney Morton, who is portraying Meghan Markle, 39, in the upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, was pictured with a fake baby bump while on-set in Vancouver on Tuesday *
> *The actress was joined on the beach by Jordan Dean, who is playing Prince Harry, and the little boy who stars as Archie, as well as Melanie Nicholls-King, who is taking on the role of Meghan's mother Doria Ragland *
> *Morton and Dean were pictured on-set for the first time last week, when they were caught on camera filming several different scenes, including a few that appear to be set during Harry and Meghan's 2019 Africa tour *
> *These latest on-set snaps were taken on the beach and appear to show Dean and Morton recreating footage from a home video that Harry and Meghan shared during their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March *
> *The clip shared by the Sussexes is thought to have been taken by Harry, 36, and shows Meghan and Archie on a beach in California with one of their two dogs*
> *Dean and Morton were seen playing with the same blue Chuckit! dog toy that Meghan and Archie held *


The same dog toy? You mean that thing that’s in every Poundland or supermarket ever? Sure Jan.

I can’t wait for the lifetime Movie. That is a much better fit for them in terms of taste and accuracy.


Jayne1 said:


> It will be easy for Meg to have a silent birth if she's not the one in labour.


I still think she’d struggle to be quiet and not try and draw attention.


----------



## Lodpah

People on Quora are full steam ahead and don't hold back on Fredo and Meggo. One of the funniest comments I read was asking when do they take Archie out of the cupboard? And what the world is genetic abuse? Like you can choose your parents, descendants? Who the heck comes up with these? If so, then every human being has suffered "genetic abuse."

This article is true suffering.

Do you agree with Dawn Porter director of docuseries "The me you can't see "when she says the criticism prince Harry receives makes her "admire" him even more because he certainly understands how he's going to be treated in some parts of the public?

About 16 years ago, we took a young foster child into our home. We were looking to adopt. He had been in 7 different foster homes before he came to us. We were told they lost his records, so they had no information on him. He stayed 8 years with us. We slowly learned more about his background. His mother had been in and out of jail for the first 5 years of his life. She left him at any crack house she was staying at the time. In those home, he was sexually, mentally and physically abused. At five, he came into the foster care system, where he was transferred from home to home to home for 2 years. Then, he came to us. I would love to say we lived happily ever after but as many times happens in real life we didnt. At fifteen. He ran away with a young girl who lived down the street, because she offered him things we refused to, sex and drugs. We loved him, but he chose to run away time after time. He died at twenty, running a stop sign in a stolen truck. Why do I tell this story. *This is a story of true neglect, no castles no fairytales.*
_*No, I don't respect Harry. He tells lie after lie. His timeline does not match up with what he has said before. His timing is atrocious, putting all this crap on family grieving for their beloved grandfather that he now calls part of the genetic abuse.*_
*Lastly, if you dont want to be criticized don’t choose a public life.*


----------



## Lodpah

Most common sense analysis of the OI.


----------



## Lodpah

People are woke to these two.


----------



## Lodpah

Good point someone brought up (more lies of course) so if it was MM who encouraged Harry to get mental help then . . . . you fill in the rest.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Most common sense analysis of the OI.



I like that part when he says, "we're not going through all ten of these (her claims/revelations/accusations/lies), because she is too annoying"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Most common sense analysis of the OI.




Thank you for this.
Love this guy’s face as he listens to the interview. He is just stunned that anyone with millions of dollars would complain about the job, the lack of funds, the lack of support. Kinda reminds me of a certain tennis player.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> My Ob/Gyn sighed when I wailed and said to the nurse,"It's going to her face." Naturally, I stopped concentrating on giving birth and asked what that meant. She said when I screamed/moaned/cried out, my focus and energy was going towards my vocalisation and she needed me to redirect that towards pushing the baby out. So I yelled less and pushed more.



I'm a bit tired after a very busy day but expressing one's self through the voice takes not take energy away from physical force. Some tennis players are encouraged to match their serve with a vocal sound to encourage force.

Alfred Wolfsohn believed the voice comforts at times of pain. During WW1, he heard men in their death-throws on the battlefield using use their voice as an expression of 'self-soothing' even though mostly dipping in and out of consciousness.

I thought H&M had been silenced by the RF and were happy to have found their united/respective voice/voices. Seems ridiculous M publicly announces the birth-plan in a micro-management scenario that excludes the natural right of women to express themselves deeply and fully. If she doesn't want to scream, fair enough but to premeditate the (non)action is emphatically silencing not only herself but any woman and future girls who may use her as a role model.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> It will be easy for Meg to have a silent birth if she's not the one in labour.



Good point. 

Then I'd rather she'd also shut-up about it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I'm a bit tired after a very busy day but expressing one's self through the voice takes no energy away from physical force. Some tennis players are encouraged to match their serve with a vocal sound to encourage force.
> 
> Alfred Wolfsohn believed the voice comforts at times of pain. During WW1, he heard men in their death-throws on the battlefield using use their voice as an expression of 'self-soothing' even though mostly dipping in and out of consciousness.
> 
> I thought H&M had been silenced by the RF and were happy to have found their united/respective voice/voices. Seems ridiculous M publicly announces the birth-plan in a micro-management scenario that excludes the natural right of women to express themselves deeply and fully. If she doesn't want to scream, fair enough but to premeditate the (non)action is emphatically silencing not only herself but any woman and future girls who may use her as a role model.


Oh wow that self-soothing on the battlefield image is grim. 

I mean this whole announcing her planned silences thing is Just another tasty slice of irony that someone who announced she was losing her voice under the cosh of the royals and it still remains conspicuously absent when it comes to little things like backing up her allegations or clarifying the many inconsistencies in their stories

In my opinion that Atlantic thread is getting a bit personal isn’t it? If I don’t like a thread it’s racist. Perhaps we should all have bios which announce our gender, age, race and nationality at the beginning of every post so we can decide based on who the poster is whether their opinion is worth considering or not. You know, to promote equality and non-judgement.


----------



## Chanbal

This article could be added to the list of ways to induce vomiting! It looks like it was written by MM and her and faithful servant Scoobie...


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh wow that self-soothing on the battlefield image is grim.
> 
> I mean this whole announcing her planned silences thing is Just another tasty slice of irony that someone who announced she was losing her voice under the cosh of the royals and it still remains conspicuously absent when it comes to little things like backing up her allegations or clarifying the many inconsistencies in their stories
> 
> In my opinion that Atlantic thread is getting a bit personal isn’t it? If I don’t like a thread it’s racist. Perhaps we should all have bios which announce our gender, age, race and nationality at the beginning of every post so we can decide based on who the poster is whether their opinion is worth considering or not. You know, to promote equality and non-judgement.


People go out of their way to find racism and xenophobia on everything. The lack of open mindedness is what scares me the most. People like MM seem to thrive in divisive environments. The beauty of this forum is that we (with few exceptions) can find affinities independent of race, gender, age, country... the way it should be. Let's keep some optimism here, cheers!


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Most common sense analysis of the OI.



The Finance part is hilarious.   Thanks for posting this!


----------



## papertiger

Let's not get into commenting on other posters/threads on here.

I like the BRF (Queen Mother's) adage:

Never complain, never explain. 

There is also a saying:

"People in glass houses shouldn't throw bricks", and H&M decided of their own volition to take up residency in the biggest crystal palace  they couldn't afford. Tough. 

I think we have individually and collectively explained enough. It's quite clear that this thread annoys many. There 

There is a 'Ignore' thread button, top-right, over every page and a 'Report' button bottom-left of every post that may break tPF rules.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Let's not get into commenting on other posters/threads on here.
> 
> I like the BRF (Queen Mother's) adage:
> 
> Never complain, never explain.
> 
> There is also a saying:
> 
> "People in glass houses shouldn't throw bricks", and H&M decided of their own volition to take up residency in the biggest crystal palace  they couldn't afford. Tough.
> 
> I think we have individually and collectively explained enough. It's quite clear that this thread annoys many. There
> 
> There is a 'Ignore' thread button, top-right, over every page and a 'Report' button bottom-left of every post that may break tPF rules.


Sententious people need to stop marking others homework IMO.  It’s tiresome, and they seem completely oblivious to their own intolerance.


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> Most common sense analysis of the OI.



Had to lol at the Royal ass wiping part.  Probably more accurate than not.  After all he only has two hands, and he‘s most likely holding a flashlight in one and a map in the other.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> People on Quora are full steam ahead and don't hold back on Fredo and Meggo. One of the funniest comments I read was asking when do they take Archie out of the cupboard? And what the world is genetic abuse? Like you can choose your parents, descendants? Who the heck comes up with these? If so, then every human being has suffered "genetic abuse."
> 
> This article is true suffering.
> 
> Do you agree with Dawn Porter director of docuseries "The me you can't see "when she says the criticism prince Harry receives makes her "admire" him even more because he certainly understands how he's going to be treated in some parts of the public?
> 
> About 16 years ago, we took a young foster child into our home. We were looking to adopt. He had been in 7 different foster homes before he came to us. We were told they lost his records, so they had no information on him. He stayed 8 years with us. We slowly learned more about his background. His mother had been in and out of jail for the first 5 years of his life. She left him at any crack house she was staying at the time. In those home, he was sexually, mentally and physically abused. At five, he came into the foster care system, where he was transferred from home to home to home for 2 years. Then, he came to us. I would love to say we lived happily ever after but as many times happens in real life we didnt. At fifteen. He ran away with a young girl who lived down the street, because she offered him things we refused to, sex and drugs. We loved him, but he chose to run away time after time. He died at twenty, running a stop sign in a stolen truck. Why do I tell this story. *This is a story of true neglect, no castles no fairytales.*
> _*No, I don't respect Harry. He tells lie after lie. His timeline does not match up with what he has said before. His timing is atrocious, putting all this crap on family grieving for their beloved grandfather that he now calls part of the genetic abuse.*_
> *Lastly, if you dont want to be criticized don’t choose a public life.*


you truly did a good thing taking this boy in.  what a risk to your peace at home but he needed help and you stepped up.  So very sorry this ended tragically but you went way beyond.  and you are so right.  the suffering of a boy like this compared to Harry's - there is No Comparison.  Yes, it was sad he lost his mother but he had so much.  Hearing him whine month after month, year after year, is getting so old.
Bless you and your family.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Youth is wasted on the young.  Oscar Wilde and G.B.Shaw both said it.


My father's FAVORITE quote!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Listening to Lady CC's newest while doing some work...she is rather fond of Wallis Simpson.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Let's not get into commenting on other posters/threads on here.
> 
> I like the BRF (Queen Mother's) adage:
> 
> Never complain, never explain.
> 
> There is also a saying:
> 
> "People in glass houses shouldn't throw bricks", and H&M decided of their own volition to take up residency in the biggest crystal palace  they couldn't afford. Tough.
> 
> I think we have individually and collectively explained enough. It's quite clear that this thread annoys many. There
> 
> There is a 'Ignore' thread button, top-right, over every page and a 'Report' button bottom-left of every post that may break tPF rules.


You are right. I was getting a bit heated. I’ve left it too long to delete now unfortunately.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Listening to Lady CC's newest while doing some work...she is rather fond of Wallis Simpson.


I can see style similarities. They love those statement jewels with the centre part and low bun. No political similarities she would hasten to add! 


1LV said:


> Had to lol at the Royal ass wiping part.  Probably more accurate than not.  After all he only has two hands, and he‘s most likely holding a flashlight in one and a map in the other.


Well there’s an image that will haunt me to my grave


----------



## 1LV

jelliedfeels said:


> I can see style similarities. They love those statement jewels with the centre part and low bun. No political similarities she would hasten to add!
> 
> Well there’s an image that will haunt me to my grave


Lol!  Sorry!


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh wow that self-soothing on the battlefield image is grim.
> 
> I mean this whole announcing her planned silences thing is Just another tasty slice of irony that someone who announced she was losing her voice under the cosh of the royals and it still remains conspicuously absent when it comes to little things like backing up her allegations or clarifying the many inconsistencies in their stories
> 
> In my opinion that Atlantic thread is getting a bit personal isn’t it? If I don’t like a thread it’s racist. Perhaps we should all have bios which announce our gender, age, race and nationality at the beginning of every post so we can decide based on who the poster is whether their opinion is worth considering or not. You know, to promote equality and non-judgement.


Of course. Like "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than the others."?


----------



## jelliedfeels

1LV said:


> Lol!  Sorry!


It’s ok, when I got into following Hollywood H and his blushing banshee I should’ve known it was going to get ugly!


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> People on Quora are full steam ahead and don't hold back on Fredo and Meggo. One of the funniest comments I read was asking when do they take Archie out of the cupboard? And what the world is genetic abuse? Like you can choose your parents, descendants? Who the heck comes up with these? If so, then every human being has suffered "genetic abuse."
> 
> This article is true suffering.
> 
> Do you agree with Dawn Porter director of docuseries "The me you can't see "when she says the criticism prince Harry receives makes her "admire" him even more because he certainly understands how he's going to be treated in some parts of the public?
> 
> About 16 years ago, we took a young foster child into our home. We were looking to adopt. He had been in 7 different foster homes before he came to us. We were told they lost his records, so they had no information on him. He stayed 8 years with us. We slowly learned more about his background. His mother had been in and out of jail for the first 5 years of his life. She left him at any crack house she was staying at the time. In those home, he was sexually, mentally and physically abused. At five, he came into the foster care system, where he was transferred from home to home to home for 2 years. Then, he came to us. I would love to say we lived happily ever after but as many times happens in real life we didnt. At fifteen. He ran away with a young girl who lived down the street, because she offered him things we refused to, sex and drugs. We loved him, but he chose to run away time after time. He died at twenty, running a stop sign in a stolen truck. Why do I tell this story. *This is a story of true neglect, no castles no fairytales.*
> _*No, I don't respect Harry. He tells lie after lie. His timeline does not match up with what he has said before. His timing is atrocious, putting all this crap on family grieving for their beloved grandfather that he now calls part of the genetic abuse.*_
> *Lastly, if you dont want to be criticized don’t choose a public life.*


Heartbreaking.

If only someone would sit H down and tell him about the real world and how good he had it. Why does no one do it, all that fawning is pathetic.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> You are right. I was getting a bit heated. I’ve left it too long to delete now unfortunately.



No worries


----------



## 1LV

Jayne1 said:


> Heartbreaking.
> 
> If only someone would sit H down and tell him about the real world and how good he had it. Why does no one do it, all that fawning is pathetic.


He knows.  As dense as he is he knows.  This is what sells for the time being though, and he’s going to push it as long as there’s a camera to be found and a dollar to be had.

ETA  That goes double for his wife.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't know, Kate. You either love Harry A LOT or you are generally a far better woman than I will ever be, because who would want Raptor back at all, ever?


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> This article could be added to the list of ways to induce vomiting! It looks like it was written by MM and her and faithful servant Scoobie...



Or maybe they gave clear instructions to an eager minion.

There are a few things I can't get over. So here is MY  seven:

_"Royal reporter Omid Scobie wrote that he was told by a source that Meghan “made ‘every effort’ to travel but didn’t receive medical clearance from her physician.”
Generally, those pregnant are advised not to fly after 36 weeks, according to Mayo Clinic."_
While I wouldn't push any pregnant woman, or anyone at all, to travel by air at the moment, it's pretty obvious that she was not even close to be 36 weeks pregnant, if she's pregnant at all. I'm not saying that she should have travelled. In fact it was even a decent act to stay home because I'm sure that nobody from the BRF wanted to see that troublemaker No 1 at Prince Philip's coffin. At least they could concentrate on mourning - as much as it was possible in the company of troublemaker No2.

_“Meghan doesn’t feel a big baby shower with gifts is appropriate right now. There is too much strife in the world. She and Harry have been so involved with humanitarian issues, they both feel their time and resources can be used for a better purpose.”_
Isn't this girl just sweet? Her recently emerged empathy is just tugging my heartstrings. The world must have a paradise we lost two years ago, where we knew no poverty or illness or crime with all the candy floss, unicorns and rainbows around. Who would have thought that the world would change that much and she would have to have a career shift from mighty princess to philanthropist. Or just no-one was willing to fork out a fortune to her baby shower this time.

_"Their future leadership depends on the decisions we make and the actions we take now to set them up and to set all of us up for a successful,* equitable, and compassionate* tomorrow.”_
Those who can't do, teach. (Woody Allen)

_"The couple announced they were expecting their second child on Valentine’s day, the same day Prince Harry’s late mother Princess Diana announced her pregnancy with Prince Harry."_
I'm certain now that that baby Diana-Doria-Philippa-Charity will be born on 1st July. Poor child: she will have to live in the shadow of her long dead grandmother.

"_Page Six__ reports that Meghan and Harry’s daughter will become a princess by default when the baby’s grandfather, Prince Charles, becomes king, as all grandchildren are entitled to prince/princess titles then. Archie will also become a prince."_
Unless, their parents' title would be taken away by the time grandpa, whom these children hardly know, inherits the throne.
Again, why do you cling to these titles if you abhor the Firm that gives the titles and and all you experienced while working for the Firm is pain, suffering and humiliation. You ran away from it, but you still want to be attached to it. Isn't it ironic?

_"She added that part of the reason she was upset that “the first member of colour in this family isn’t being titled in the same way as other grandchildren would be…*.Also it’s not their right to take it away. *Even with that convention [that allows all grandchildren of the monarch to be prince and princess], _*they said, ‘I want to change the convention for Archie.’ Well, why?”*
Actually, they make the rules, babe, so it's their decision. Although; there isn't any proof that they really wanted to change it, apart from your word. FYI, his grandpa is not monarch yet. The monarch is great-grandma which you should know and if you don't your extremely bright husband should.
Besides, the monarch has several grandchildren who are not titled as Prince or Princess. It seems that they managed to grow up without it fairly well and safely. Maybe you should ask Princess Anne for a few tips on how to raise a non-princess/prince royal grandchild, since she has experience....if you are on speaking terms with her, which is very unlikely. (OT Peter Philips is so good looking. Poor guy seemed to be so uncomfortable and unhappy walking next to Ginge at the funeral.)

_“They will both take some proper time off,”_ 
It's understandable. Cutting rocks in the mine or ploughing the fields  is so hard for them, so is sitting in front of the camera and coming up with more and more lies. Let's give them credit for their efforts. I hope they'll enjoy their well-deserved break. Hopefully, we will get a rest from them for a while, as well as the BRF. Although; I don't get my hopes too high.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

1LV said:


> He knows.  As dense as he is he knows.  This is what sells for the time being though, and he’s going to push it as long as there’s a camera to be found and a dollar to be had.
> 
> ETA  That goes double for his wife.


He ought to just own up to all of it and register a business "Pain for Profit Inc." Harry Windsor-Markle, Founding President.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> People on Quora are full steam ahead and don't hold back on Fredo and Meggo. One of the funniest comments I read was asking when do they take Archie out of the cupboard? And what the world is genetic abuse? Like you can choose your parents, descendants? Who the heck comes up with these? If so, then every human being has suffered "genetic abuse."
> 
> This article is true suffering.
> 
> Do you agree with Dawn Porter director of docuseries "The me you can't see "when she says the criticism prince Harry receives makes her "admire" him even more because he certainly understands how he's going to be treated in some parts of the public?
> 
> About 16 years ago, we took a young foster child into our home. We were looking to adopt. He had been in 7 different foster homes before he came to us. We were told they lost his records, so they had no information on him. He stayed 8 years with us. We slowly learned more about his background. His mother had been in and out of jail for the first 5 years of his life. She left him at any crack house she was staying at the time. In those home, he was sexually, mentally and physically abused. At five, he came into the foster care system, where he was transferred from home to home to home for 2 years. Then, he came to us. I would love to say we lived happily ever after but as many times happens in real life we didnt. At fifteen. He ran away with a young girl who lived down the street, because she offered him things we refused to, sex and drugs. We loved him, but he chose to run away time after time. He died at twenty, running a stop sign in a stolen truck. Why do I tell this story. *This is a story of true neglect, no castles no fairytales.*
> _*No, I don't respect Harry. He tells lie after lie. His timeline does not match up with what he has said before. His timing is atrocious, putting all this crap on family grieving for their beloved grandfather that he now calls part of the genetic abuse.*_
> *Lastly, if you dont want to be criticized don’t choose a public life.*


I only now had a chance to read your post. It is painful to learn about abused kids, and I admire the altruistic people that have the heart and courage to foster them. I'm very sorry that this particular kid's story was short and it didn't end well. 

I couldn't agree more with your comments about the spoiled and delusional Harry. YES, "*if you don't want to be criticized don’t choose a public life." *


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, Kate. You either love Harry A LOT or you are generally a far better woman than I will ever be, because who would want Raptor back at all, ever?



ITA.  Plus, IMO Uncle Gary should kept away from tabloids. He means well and he's basically right, but he seems to be a bit of a loose cannon.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, Kate. You either love Harry A LOT or you are generally a far better woman than I will ever be, because who would want Raptor back at all, ever?




OR its palace PR to point out that their claims are not true as they aren’t interested in Reconciliation  - only $$$$$


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> He ought to just own up to all of it and register a business "Pain for Profit Inc." Harry Windsor-Markle, Founding President.


I mean they do say no pain no (financial) gain after all  

he’s a bit old to make it as meathead though and those hobbit feet might get him banned from a couple of locker rooms


----------



## Hermes Zen

This is a year out but you never know if they go or not.  I'm thinking they will unless of course M is preg again.  I know H said they only wanted two kids but ... I wouldn't be surprised M is pregnant with twins by the size of her bump or moon bump.   



> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...ont-be-iced-out-queen-platinum-jubilee-report
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle won't be ‘iced out’ of Queen’s Platinum Jubilee: report*


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> OR its palace PR to point out that their claims are not true as they aren’t interested in Reconciliation  - only $$$$$


Yes this article contains the interesting phrase ‘Harry’s truth-bombing’ which I would put up there in plausibility with ‘Gwyneth Paltrow’s mighty meaty mixed grill’ or ‘Disney corporate’s year of less’.

It is a win-win for them. KM looks diplomatic and regal. I know it’s not a popular view but I think they’d have have him and the kids back now in a heartbeat. They would need him to divorce M for the PR if nothing else but I think they operate by stronger together logic in general.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I only now had a chance to read your post. It is painful to learn about abused kids, and I admire the altruistic people that have the heart and courage to foster them. I'm very sorry that this particular kid's story was short and it didn't end well.
> 
> I couldn't agree more with your comments about the spoiled and delusional Harry. YES, "*if you don't want to be criticized don’t choose a public life." *



Dear one, he will say he himself did not *choose* a public life, he was born to it.

ETA: If the BRF wants a reconciliation, then let’s support that.  Family wars never benefit anyone.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> This is a year out but you never know if they go or not.  I'm thinking they will unless of course M is preg again.  I know H said they only wanted two kids but ... I wouldn't be surprised M is pregnant with twins by the size of her bump or moon bump.


I read this first as  iced out as in bumped off by the mafia. Was I confused!

I think they might start giving her the fergie treatment and just not invite her. They have been known to freeze out people they don’t want to associate with but I do strongly think they want H & kids in the fold.
It does irritate me as I’m wondering why he still gets invited to the parties but now he doesn’t even have to judge kings-lynn’s biggest marrow or look vaguely solemn in a hospice anymore?


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I read this first as  iced out as in bumped off by the mafia. Was I confused!
> 
> I think they might start giving her the fergie treatment and just not invite her. They have been known to freeze out people they don’t want to associate with but I do strongly think they want H & kids in the fold.
> It does irritate me as I’m wondering why he still gets invited to the parties but now he doesn’t even have to judge kings-lynn’s biggest marrow or look vaguely solemn in a hospice anymore?



We should trust the BRF knows how to reconcile with grace and aplomb.
This is not just any occasion - it is a jubilee, a historic event for QE and a time of restoration. 









						jubilee | Etymology, origin and meaning of jubilee by etymonline
					

JUBILEE Meaning: "jubilee; anniversary; rejoicing" (14c., Modern French jubilé), from Late Latin iubilaeus "the jubilee… See origin and meaning of jubilee.




					www.etymonline.com
				



*jubilee (n.)*
late 14c., in the Old Testament sense, from Old French jubileu "jubilee; anniversary; rejoicing" (14c., Modern French jubilé), from Late Latin iubilaeus "the jubilee year," originally an adjective, "of the jubilee," from Greek iabelaios, from iobelos, from Hebrew yobhel "jubilee," formerly "a trumpet, ram's horn," literally "ram." The original jubilee was a year of emancipation of slaves and restoration of lands, to be celebrated every 50th year (Levit. xxv:9); it was proclaimed by the sounding of a ram's horn on the Day of Atonement.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I think they might start giving her the fergie treatment and just not invite her. They have been known to freeze out people they don’t want to associate with but I do strongly think they want H & kids in the fold.
> It does irritate me as I’m wondering why he still gets invited to the parties but now he doesn’t even have to judge kings-lynn’s biggest marrow or look vaguely solemn in a hospice anymore?



I think they are smart to continue to invite them to any important events. It eliminates the possibility of them whining through unnamed “sources” to the press if they were excluded. I’ll be surprised if  Meghan goes. She’s not very popular there and she’ll never put herself in a position where she might be booed. Whether Harry is allowed to go will probably depend on her mood at the time.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> I read this first as  iced out as in bumped off by the mafia. Was I confused!
> 
> I think they might start giving her the fergie treatment and just not invite her. They have been known to freeze out people they don’t want to associate with but I do strongly think they want H & kids in the fold.
> It does irritate me as I’m wondering why he still gets invited to the parties but now he doesn’t even have to judge kings-lynn’s biggest marrow or look vaguely solemn in a hospice anymore?



I wonder also. I read an article that PC still wants to mend ways with H.  I guess that's a Father's love and possibly guilt from divorcing D.  Not familiar but also read some where that QE requested/insisted the divorce. If this is true, maybe PC didn't want to but had to.  I'm an American and to be honest still have some anger towards PC and Camilla.


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> I wonder also. I read an article that PC still wants to mend ways with H.  I guess that's a Father's love and possibly guilt from divorcing D.  Not familiar but also read some where that QE requested/insisted the divorce. If this is true, maybe PC didn't want to but had to.  I'm an American and to be honest still have some anger towards PC and Camilla.



i get the feeling those stores are make believe.  Charles ignored H at the funeral and took off to Wales afterwards...  Charles was the one who wanted a “point by point” rebuttal...


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> We should trust the BRF knows how to reconcile with grace and aplomb.
> This is not just any occasion - it is a jubilee, a historic event for QE and a time of restoration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jubilee | Etymology, origin and meaning of jubilee by etymonline
> 
> 
> JUBILEE Meaning: "jubilee; anniversary; rejoicing" (14c., Modern French jubilé), from Late Latin iubilaeus "the jubilee… See origin and meaning of jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etymonline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *jubilee (n.)*
> late 14c., in the Old Testament sense, from Old French jubileu "jubilee; anniversary; rejoicing" (14c., Modern French jubilé), from Late Latin iubilaeus "the jubilee year," originally an adjective, "of the jubilee," from Greek iabelaios, from iobelos, from Hebrew yobhel "jubilee," formerly "a trumpet, ram's horn," literally "ram." The original jubilee was a year of emancipation of slaves and restoration of lands, to be celebrated every 50th year (Levit. xxv:9); it was proclaimed by the sounding of a ram's horn on the Day of Atonement.



sure - invite them.  But don’t add them to the balcony scenes, carriage rides etc.  treat them as the minor royals they are.  If other minor royals don’t get carriage rides, they shouldn’t either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> I wonder also. I read an article that PC still wants to mend ways with H.  I guess that's a Father's love and possibly guilt from divorcing D.  Not familiar but also read some where that QE requested/insisted the divorce. If this is true, maybe PC didn't want to but had to.  I'm an American and to be honest still have some anger towards PC and Camilla.



Save that anger. Life’s too short to let them live in your head - for free.



needlv said:


> i get the feeling those stores are make believe.  Charles ignored H at the funeral and took off to Wales afterwards...  Charles was the one who wanted a “point by point” rebuttal...



Wait and see. He may well get it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

A lot can happen in a year with these two. Who knows where they will be and what they’ll be doing?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> sure - invite them.  But don’t add them to the balcony scenes, carriage rides etc.  treat them as the minor royals they are.  If other minor royals don’t get carriage rides, they shouldn’t either.


Their description is so inconsistent. I've seen them described as ex-royals too. Can one be an *ex-*royal if one is swanning about using the Duke & Duchess of Sussex all over the shop and complaining that their son isn't a prince? *Minor* royals - I like that. Methane would blow a fuse to be considered minor. She is all Max-Gain.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Their description is so inconsistent. I've seen them described as ex-royals too. Can one be an *ex-*royal if one is swanning about using the Duke & Duchess of Sussex all over the shop and complaining that their son isn't a prince? *Minor* royals - I like that. Methane would blow a fuse to be considered minor. She is all Max-Gain.



To be fair, he was, is and will be the second son of the next King. No one can change that. Call him major or minor, he cannot by definition be an ex. He is a Prince. Several other royal families have faced these same issues. They’ll figure it out.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, he was, is and will be the second son of the next King. No one can change that.


Completely true. He really was born into his role as a prince of the realm.

What I didn't like, and what many have pointed out, was that false equivalency spin that was used in the OW interview where they equated being born a prince as leading a risky life as requiring RF/taxpayer-funded security. Maybe with all those millions and a yen for low risk, they should come live in my neck of the woods. The millionaires here dress in shorts and T-shirts and go to food centres to jostle with hoi polloi for the best fried noodles. Pre-Covid, of course


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> i get the feeling those stores are make believe.  Charles ignored H at the funeral and took off to Wales afterwards...  Charles was the one who wanted a “point by point” rebuttal...



It is hard to believe anything about H&M. There's a couple media sources though that I saw reporting PC met with W & H for two hours after PP funeral. Here's one and the other I saw was from Vanity Fair. How true? Don't know. I'd like to think that the three did talk. BUT of course, H returns home and bad mouth his father and grandparents afterwards. 



> https://7news.com.au/entertainment/...t-queen-after-prince-philip-funeral-c-2628355
> 
> *Prince Charles’ ‘two-hour meeting with William and Harry’ as royals agree strategy to support Queen*


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, he was, is and will be the second son of the next King. No one can change that. Call him major or minor, he cannot by definition be an ex. He is a Prince. Several other royal families have faced these same issues. They’ll figure it out.


Just occurred to me. Is Fergie considered an ex-royal since she is divorced? Or the person who married into the royal family has to have the title removed to be considered ex?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Just occurred to me. Is Fergie considered an ex-royal since she is divorced? Or the person who married into the royal family has to have the title removed to be considered ex?



Great question.  If [big if] I understand the Royal rules correctly, she was not born a royal, so is not one now. Diana, too. I’ll have to look this up or wait for @papertiger  to check in.

ETA:  several words get used interchangeably. We should have a dictionary:
royal - from the bloodline; must be a child of a Royal 
style - how person is referred to?
title - granted by the current monarch who can remove it, unless person is born to it ??
HRH - can only be taken away by Parliament
aristocrat - land owner?
commoner - the rest of us?

ETA2:  from Sarah’s Wikipedia
*Titles and styles[edit]*



Royal monogr

1959–1986: _Miss_ Sarah Ferguson
1986–1996: _Her Royal Highness_ The Duchess of York
Since 1996: Sarah, Duchess of York
On 21 August 1996, letters patent declared that former wives of British princes, other than widows who did not remarry, were not entitled to the style of _Her Royal Highness_. Sarah remains a member of the royal family, and is styled _Sarah, Duchess of York_.


----------



## rose60610

Did the Heavily Pregnant One actually say she planned on the quiet delivery? Really? The one who demands privacy and advertised her supposed miscarriage? Yet during the time of this miscarriage there was no indication of her having left the spotlight to spout word salads at every opportunity? I read where M&H are scared to lose their titles and M said to pull back on criticizing the BRF. Title or no title, these two are an embarrassment. I look forward to them practicing their privacy.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Did the Heavily Pregnant One actually say she planned on the quiet delivery? Really? The one who demands privacy and advertised her supposed miscarriage? Yet during the time of this miscarriage there was no indication of her having left the spotlight to spout word salads at every opportunity? I read where M&H are scared to lose their titles and M said to pull back on criticizing the BRF. Title or no title, these two are an embarrassment. I look forward to them practicing their privacy.


I think the quiet delivery bit was gossip from an unreliable source. Same for the scared to lose titles/pull back on criticism.

I'm all for Hazard going on his rants. It will make it much easier for the BRF to NOT do him any favours. As for whether he goes back to the UK for the jubilee, let's see if he goes back for the statue event first. He might decide to carry on throwing his tantrum aka exorcising his ancestral pain.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Dear one, he will say he himself did not *choose* a public life, he was born to it.
> 
> ETA: If the BRF wants a reconciliation, then let’s support that.  Family wars never benefit anyone.


He might say that he did not choose a public life, but it is one more of his many falsehoods. Edward was born as the son of a queen and he lives a relatively private life. Ginger could live a private life if he wanted. However, it's hard to achieve privacy when one (or wife) hires a PR agency, and keeps giving bombastic interviews.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I think the quiet delivery bit was gossip from an unreliable source. Same for the scared to lose titles/pull back on criticism.
> 
> I'm all for Hazard going on his rants. It will make it much easier for the BRF to NOT do him any favours. As for whether he goes back to the UK for the jubilee, *let's see if he goes back for the statue event first. *He might decide to carry on throwing his tantrum aka exorcising his ancestral pain.



He has a ready-made excuse to miss it. The baby is due within a month or two. Look for Harry to send his regrets. I don’t see him making two trips back in just a few months.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> A lot can happen in a year with these two. *Who knows where they will be and what they’ll be doing?*


If we are going to narrow down the list of possibilities, I can assure you that I'll not be inviting them for tea.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Your gif is perfect - always sticking himself into places he doesn’t belong. My disappointment and irritation with these two happens because I expect better behavior, better comments, better everything from them. QE is such a gracious, unflappable professional. PC to some extent. Anne, W&K, Camilla, Sophie seem to be, also. Now that I have learned who these two really are, I have lowered my expectations for them. Very low. Sure, it’s my fault for putting them on a pedestal. Lessons learned, won’t happen again.

ETA:  needed the  



Chanbal said:


> He might say that he did not choose a public life, but it is one more of his many falsehoods. Edward was born as the son of a queen and he lives a relatively private life. Ginger could live a private life if he wanted. However, it's hard to achieve privacy when one (or wife) hires a PR agency, and keeps giving bombastic interviews.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Your gif is perfect - always sticking himself into places he doesn’t belong. My disappointment and irritation with these two happens because I expect better behavior, better comments, better everything from them. QE is such a gracious, unflappable professional. PC to some extent. Anne, W&K, Camilla, Sophie seem to be, also. Now that I have learned who these two really are, I have lowered my expectations for them. Very low. Sure, it’s my fault for putting them on a pedestal. Lessons learned, won’t happen again.
> 
> ETA:  needed the


I don't particularly like their hypocrisy and greed. We can either be annoyed by their multiple press releases or have fun with them. I choose the latter, people in this thread are friendly and have a great sense of humor.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't particularly like their hypocrisy and greed. We can either be annoyed by their multiple press releases or have fun with them. I choose the latter, people in this thread are friendly and have a great sense of humor.



I always thought so, too. Then, I ventured into one of those ‘other’ threads. Had no idea how absolutely hated we are. Totally messed with my head. Eeek.  All better now


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> I always thought so, too. Then, I ventured into one of those ‘other’ threads. Had no idea how absolutely hated we are. Totally messed with my head. Eeek.  All better now



I didn't know. In fact don't even know what thread to look for.    I think we are a nice bunch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh no, oh no, 

_Now, days before the launch, The Telegraph reports that a row between her publisher and Waterstones could hamper the UK release. 

Reportedly, the publisher has limited credit that is extended to Waterstones, meaning the number of books they can buy is limited.

Waterstones responded by pulling Penguin Random House [PRH] titles from displays in its hundreds of stores nationwide.

The publication claims that bosses at the chain gave orders that only a minimal number of PRH titles should stay visible to customers in stores, which could affect sales for upcoming titles such as The Bench.

Waterstones said the measures were to safeguard stock and not as a protest against the publishing house.








						Meghan Markle’s book 'dealt a blow after Waterstones pulls books from displays'
					

The Duchess of Sussex will release her children's book, centred on the special relationship between a father and son, titled 'The Bench' on June 8




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like there is "a row between Britain’s biggest bookseller and the UK's most powerful publisher_,_" which may affect the release of the duchess's masterpiece "_with great fanfare on June 8_." 









						Duchess of Sussex’s writing career could be hampered by publishing row
					

The Duchess of Sussex’s writing career could be hampered by a row between Britain’s biggest bookseller and the UK's most powerful publisher. Her children’s book, The Bench, was expected to be released with great fanfare on June 8, but her publisher Penguin Random House (PRH) has become embroiled...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh no, oh no,
> 
> _Now, days before the launch, The Telegraph reports that a row between her publisher and Waterstones could hamper the UK release.
> 
> Reportedly, the publisher has limited credit that is extended to Waterstones, meaning the number of books they can buy is limited.
> 
> Waterstones responded by pulling Penguin Random House [PRH] titles from displays in its hundreds of stores nationwide.
> 
> The publication claims that bosses at the chain gave orders that only a minimal number of PRH titles should stay visible to customers in stores, which could affect sales for upcoming titles such as The Bench.
> 
> Waterstones said the measures were to safeguard stock and not as a protest against the publishing house.
> https://www.mirror.co.u_http://k/news/us-news/meghan-markles-book-dealt-blow-24246923


I was reading this and posted the same story . I guess no party on June 8.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> I didn't know. In fact don't even know what thread to look for.    I think we are a nice bunch.



I’ll take a page from the H&M manual and never name the thread or the posters.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I was reading this and posted the same story . I guess no party on June 8.



We’ll probably get a lecture from Hazz about the racist bookstores. Not sure if this qualifies for an OW interview.
Wonder if this happened to Diana. If so, then definitely a lecture.  Fun fun fun 

ETA:  this feels like marketing ploy or stunt.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> We’ll probably get a lecture from Hazz about the racist bookstores. Not sure if this qualifies for an OW interview.
> Wonder if this happened to Diana. If so, then definitely a lecture.  Fun fun fun
> 
> ETA:  this feels like marketing ploy or stunt.



Im sure it will miraculously be resolved...


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> sure - invite them.  But don’t add them to the balcony scenes, carriage rides etc.  treat them as the minor royals they are.  If other minor royals don’t get carriage rides, they shouldn’t either.


Yes let them take a taxi! Hopefully they will get stuck in traffic 


xincinsin said:


> Completely true. He really was born into his role as a prince of the realm.
> 
> What I didn't like, and what many have pointed out, was that false equivalency spin that was used in the OW interview where they equated being born a prince as leading a risky life as requiring RF/taxpayer-funded security. Maybe with all those millions and a yen for low risk, they should come live in my neck of the woods. The millionaires here dress in shorts and T-shirts and go to food centres to jostle with hoi polloi for the best fried noodles. Pre-Covid, of course


 I know, the funniest of it all is H&M are among the poor mice compared to the likes of George clooney  and Beyoncé and they somehow manage to move between  houses And countries unseen. I mean the Queen even gets on trains with other people on them.

Of course we also saw that they tried to live in a remote enclave of plutocrats in Canada & they very quickly got sick of not being seen and no evil paparazzi so I don’t think that’s on the cards


Hermes Zen said:


> I didn't know. In fact don't even know what thread to look for.    I think we are a nice bunch.


Aw yes I think it’s a lovely and fun thread with friendly posters  but if we are courting controversy and upsetting others are we not trying to just be a bit more like the inspiration of the thread themselves?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh no, oh no,
> 
> _Now, days before the launch, The Telegraph reports that a row between her publisher and Waterstones could hamper the UK release.
> 
> Reportedly, the publisher has limited credit that is extended to Waterstones, meaning the number of books they can buy is limited.
> 
> Waterstones responded by pulling Penguin Random House [PRH] titles from displays in its hundreds of stores nationwide.
> 
> The publication claims that bosses at the chain gave orders that only a minimal number of PRH titles should stay visible to customers in stores, which could affect sales for upcoming titles such as The Bench.
> 
> Waterstones said the measures were to safeguard stock and not as a protest against the publishing house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s book 'dealt a blow after Waterstones pulls books from displays'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will release her children's book, centred on the special relationship between a father and son, titled 'The Bench' on June 8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Book sellers everywhere are putting their bargain bins back into storage. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> We’ll probably get a lecture from Hazz about the racist bookstores. Not sure if this qualifies for an OW interview.
> Wonder if this happened to Diana. If so, then definitely a lecture.  Fun fun fun
> 
> ETA:  this feels like marketing ploy or stunt.


Yes it does. It sounds like the old ‘limited edition...one of a kind... rare collectible’ line you get from a geezer down the market.
Oh well I suppose it’s been a hard year for Waterstones


----------



## CarryOn2020

[QUOTE="jelliedfeels, post: 34569508, member: 739302"
Aw yes I think it’s a lovely and fun thread with friendly posters  but if we are courting controversy and upsetting others are we not trying to just be a bit more like the inspiration of the thread themselves?

[/QUOTE]

Oh yes, we are, indeed.  
When they stop or reconcile, we will, too. Until then, we gotta keep them honest.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like there is "a row between Britain’s biggest bookseller and the UK's most powerful publisher_,_" which may affect the release of the duchess's masterpiece "_with great fanfare on June 8_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex’s writing career could be hampered by publishing row
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex’s writing career could be hampered by a row between Britain’s biggest bookseller and the UK's most powerful publisher. Her children’s book, The Bench, was expected to be released with great fanfare on June 8, but her publisher Penguin Random House (PRH) has become embroiled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


What fanfare? Fanfare in the literary world usually means the (best-selling) author has book-signing events, maybe gets an interview on morning telly or the book critics run a column in the lifestyle pages. She is so "heavily" pregnant as well as not in the UK. Is her source (Scoobie?) going to do a press release on her behalf?



Sol Ryan said:


> Im sure it will miraculously be resolved...


Her stans put in pre-orders. They can just walk in and collect the books in discreet brown paper bags.



jelliedfeels said:


> Of course we also saw that they tried to live in a remote enclave of plutocrats in Canada & they very quickly got sick of not being seen and no evil paparazzi so I don’t think that’s on the cards
> 
> Aw yes I think it’s a lovely and fun thread with friendly posters  but if we are courting controversy and upsetting others are we not trying to just be a bit more like the inspiration of the thread themselves?


When they said privacy (which IIRC she denied ever using that word), they meant "come when I whistle". 

This thread is fun (and informative). I've dipped my toes in some other threads and almost had my foot snapped off by the crocs.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> It looks like there is "a row between Britain’s biggest bookseller and the UK's most powerful publisher_,_" which may affect the release of the duchess's masterpiece "_with great fanfare on June 8_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex’s writing career could be hampered by publishing row
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex’s writing career could be hampered by a row between Britain’s biggest bookseller and the UK's most powerful publisher. Her children’s book, The Bench, was expected to be released with great fanfare on June 8, but her publisher Penguin Random House (PRH) has become embroiled...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Is the tone of this article going for sarcasm and bathos? Because that’s what I’m getting   


xincinsin said:


> What fanfare? Fanfare in the literary world usually means the (best-selling) author has book-signing events, maybe gets an interview on morning telly or the book critics run a column in the lifestyle pages. She is so "heavily" pregnant as well as not in the UK. Is her source (Scoobie?) going to do a press release on her behalf?
> 
> 
> Her stans put in pre-orders. They can just walk in and collect the books in discreet brown paper bags.
> 
> 
> When they said privacy (which IIRC she denied ever using that word), they meant "come when I whistle".
> 
> This thread is fun (and informative). I've dipped my toes in some other threads and almost had my foot snapped off by the crocs.


If anyone could pull off being M’s body-double it is the black swan Odile himself - they wouldn’t even have to worry about moon bump looking unconvincing 

 The brown paper bags for discretion are killing me  I agree it’s the best thing to do with tasteless and offensive material.

I know we’re not supposed to talk about other threads so Ill leave it at I have no interest in claiming to be a super nice person but I don’t think that discounts my opinion either. I have a great time here


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle sends copy of The Bench to friend with personal note
					

Photographer Gray Malin, from Los Angeles, shared a short video as he opened the book by Meghan Markle, 39, for the first time with his 35k followers on Instagram today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I have no interest in claiming to be a super nice person but I don’t think that discounts my opinion either. I have a great time here


It's hard for me to be charming and sweet when my memory, logic and reason are being offended by their revisionist history. My mind keeps going: "But they said the opposite last year! Which idiot writes letters to her in-laws asking to be used, and then more letters claiming that she can sacrifice herself & her firstborn if they would just pay for security for her hubby?" Has she never heard of the phone or email? Oh, right, she doesn't google or read social media, so all the racist propaganda and death threats she wails about must be coming via snail mail.

If this were a Hollywood movie script, the scriptwriter would get laughed out the door. 
OTOH I must say I look forward to many a satire and skit, even a comedy movie or three, being made out of their life. All slugged "bears no resemblance to any person, living or dead" just to make sure the sue-happy couple does not come after them.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great question.  If [big if] I understand the Royal rules correctly, she was not born a royal, so is not one now. Diana, too. I’ll have to look this up or wait for @papertiger  to check in.
> 
> ETA:  several words get used interchangeably. We should have a dictionary:
> royal - from the bloodline; must be a child of a Royal
> style - how person is referred to?
> title - granted by the current monarch who can remove it, unless person is born to it ??
> HRH - can only be taken away by Parliament
> aristocrat - land owner?
> commoner - the rest of us?
> 
> ETA2:  from Sarah’s Wikipedia
> *Titles and styles[edit]*
> 
> 
> 
> Royal monogr
> 
> 1959–1986: _Miss_ Sarah Ferguson
> 1986–1996: _Her Royal Highness_ The Duchess of York
> Since 1996: Sarah, Duchess of York
> On 21 August 1996, letters patent declared that former wives of British princes, other than widows who did not remarry, were not entitled to the style of _Her Royal Highness_. Sarah remains a member of the royal family, and is styled _Sarah, Duchess of York_.



Fergie _could_ have kept her full title after the divorce, but like Diana the Queen took the HRH away as is her prerogative. She didn't have to consult Parliament. 

The Queen could have also awarded HRH to Wallis, Duchess of Windsor had she so wished. Apart from the actual title, the most obvious difference is the etiquette of deference to the HRH (bow, curtsey, calling HRH 'your Grace' etc). HRH makes you Royal, Duchess/Duke a mere 'aristocrat'. This is all still a grey area because Prince/Princesses are not supposed to get divorced. 

An 'aristocrat' is made by the reigning monarch bestowing a title on someone. If this is a hereditary title, this usually involves a gift of land too. The money from their land (usually collected as rent/leaseholds) meant they basically never had to work again and were often responsible for all land/building titles and even duties towards people that lived on their land, sometimes whole villages. This is the origin of the word 'gentleman' (or 'lady') meaning they didn't have to work. Gentlemen amused themselves socialising and playing sport, hence why so many sports were started/popularised in GB, their amateur status exulted and corresponding professional ones thought inferior (and why we have 2 Rugby leagues).  I own my own house in Scotland and half my land, but I also lease half my land from the 'Estate' which is owned by a Duke. The Duke (under his Marquis title) still owns the mining rights under _my_ entire land/house even though it's freehold, so let's hope they never find gold!  .

In the last century, many impoverished aristocrats chose/had to sell their land and even their grand houses and therefore the title is now on paper only. Some even sold their titles and were bought by strangers (restrictions will apply to the new owners). 

Unlike Sarah's, the Queen would have to consult Parliament if she decided to remove Andrew's HRH though, and MPs would have to vote on it in the House, it would then go through the House of Lords to pass too in order to approve the removal. The same would be true of H.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5100714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sends copy of The Bench to friend with personal note
> 
> 
> Photographer Gray Malin, from Los Angeles, shared a short video as he opened the book by Meghan Markle, 39, for the first time with his 35k followers on Instagram today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Why not 'to little Charlie and Mikey" or if she doesn't know their names "I hope you enjoy this book" or something?

"From one parent to another..." "from my family to yours" sounds really odd esp in a children's book. Did you get that everybody _she_ has a *F A M I L Y*

And 2021 is not a date, it's a publisher's entry.

FFS, so stiff, sooooo pretentious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5100714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sends copy of The Bench to friend with personal note
> 
> 
> Photographer Gray Malin, from Los Angeles, shared a short video as he opened the book by Meghan Markle, 39, for the first time with his 35k followers on Instagram today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can’t get over the flourishes in her handwriting. Need to go google what it means in graphology now


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> Why not 'to little Charlie and Mikey" or if she doesn't know their names "I hope you enjoy this book something
> 
> "From one parent to another..." "from my family to yours" sounds really odd esp in a children's book. Did you get that everybody _she_ has a *F A M I L Y*
> 
> And 2021 is not a date, it's a publisher's entry.
> 
> FFS, so stiff, sooooo pretentious.


Please note the “calligraphy”. Now we know where she’s been - busy signing all the freebies she’s had to send to influencers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The “as ever” did it for me.  Not in common usage over here. Odd, pretentious, ostentatious, all things to stay away from.
As ever … as if!


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Can’t get over the flourishes in her handwriting. Need to go google what it means in graphology now



I was told that what is learned (forced) is not a true representation. Do you think she hasn't endlessly practised what she _wants_ graphologists to perceive along with her 'flourishes'? 

This is why it's hard for graphologists to interpret those that leaned to write formal script or Mary Richards at school.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I was told that what is learned (forced) is not a true representation. Do you think she hasn't endlessly practised what she _wants_ graphologists to perceive along with her 'flourishes'?
> 
> This is why it's hard for graphologists to interpret those that leaned to write formal script or Mary Richards at school.


This is new to me: Mary Richards. A calligraphic style?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Icyjade said:


> Can’t get over the flourishes in her handwriting. Need to go google what it means in graphology now


“poseur”


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This is new to me: Mary Richards. A calligraphic style?



Calligraphic styles are normally cursive.

'Mary Richards' was an even more simplified version of Palmer's D’Nealian style.

My Latin alphabet handwriting is fairly old-fashioned connected-cursive script style so I can't really tell you more. DH has a very similar writing-style to mine (middle-European) and that's because we had to learn it.

A friend's mother was a graphologist and she told me, my writing was too formal for a true reflection reading of my character.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I wish she’d just embrace her obvious mean streak and send copies to the royal family with the ‘from one parent to another...’ inscription because that would be funny.
Unfortunately she’s a simpering, self-righteous sneak so she’s unlikely to give even the slightest intimation she’s anything other than a marginalised, empowered, silent, vocal saint


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Calligraphic styles are normally cursive.
> 
> 'Mary Richards' was an even more simplified version of Palmer's D’Nealian style.
> 
> My Latin alphabet handwriting is fairly old-fashioned connected-cursive script style so I can't really tell you more. DH has a very similar writing-style to mine (middle-European) and that's because we had to learn it.
> 
> A friend's mother was a graphologist and she told me, my writing was too formal for a true reflection reading of my character.


I remember being taught to write like that.  They made us use fountain pens, with which we caused all sorts of mischief.  I can hear it now “form 1a you are THE worst form I’ve EVER had to teach!”  Inky fingered little monsters   
My university boyfriend had 2 completely different hands, one slanted right and the other left and quite different from one another.  He changed depending on his mood.  I don’t know what a graphologist would make of that?


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> I remember being taught to write like that.  They made us use fountain pens, with which we caused all sorts of mischief.  I can hear it now “form 1a you are THE worst form I’ve EVER had to teach!”  Inky fingered little monsters
> My university boyfriend had 2 completely different hands, one slanted right and the other left and quite different from one another.  He changed depending on his mood.  I don’t know what a graphologist would make of that?



My guess is your BF had a persona he wanted to impress with and one for when he was completely relaxed. Bit like switching from formal and casual clothes.

I can write English with both hands and they are very different. One learned cursive script style (right-hand) and the other almost square (with the left - my more natural hand). I can _only_ write French and Norwegian with my Right. I write another alphabet/language only with my left, and Cyrillic, again only with my right.  I like to think I'm not completely crazy


----------



## Icyjade

Found this...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Icyjade said:


> Found this...



Its interesting to look back on the comments given how things turned out.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> Its interesting to look back on the comments given how things turned out.


Wow this is so fascinating ! Bit of a lost art for some. It’s brilliant how bang on the money they seem to be but I guess you could say with a public figure there’s more public info. 

Don’t think I’ll be submitting my own handwriting any time soon- I found getting my colours done too horrifying


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Found this...




Analysing content and not form but "delightful" and "congrats" do not belong in the same letter. Any formal English style software could tell her that. 

Why is she excited by Em's "humanitarian work"?  Better she be_ proud_ of her humanitarian work and _excited_ for her friend's forthcoming trip to Costa Rica. 

It's also bizarre to congratulate someone on their future work ("and beyond") 

M also doesn't know what "perfection" means.

The whole thing sounds excruciatingly patronising, and was obviously meant to be read by an audience (of more than one). 

As I've said before, she writes for posterity not for the one she's writing to. She wants this letter framed and mounted on a wall. 

Classic grandiose narcissist.


----------



## 1LV

Icyjade said:


> Found this...



Can her handwriting be analyzed?  Sure it can.  Pretentious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> I hate to think Newsweek sells to PR companies. More likely the writer is anti-monarchy and found something ugly from the past that would offend everyone like it just happened.


The original article was published in The Guardian, a far left publication who is very anti anything which isn't far right, that includes the monarchy.


----------



## V0N1B2

Icyjade said:


> Found this...



I wouldn't have expected someone who wanted to "modernize the monarchy" to have such old fashioned handwriting. It's not calligraphy, IMO - just cursive with some doodahs and random wingythings sprouting up like weeds in her word salad.


----------



## sgj99

V0N1B2 said:


> I wouldn't have expected someone who wanted to "modernize the monarchy" to have such old fashioned handwriting. It's not calligraphy, IMO - just cursive with some doodahs and random wingythings sprouting up like weeds in her word salad.


And how long did it take her write that letter?


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> I wouldn't have expected someone who wanted to "modernize the monarchy" to have such old fashioned handwriting. It's not calligraphy, IMO - just cursive with some doodahs and random wingythings sprouting up like weeds in her word salad.



OH. MY. GOD. Is that real? You're right that isn't calligraphy. All this time I've been imagining her dipping a calligraphy pen in an ink pot and writing on parchment.  This was done with a modern pen. The swooshes over the tops of letters aren't even part of her pen strokes, she adds them for affectation! I suppose we shouldn't be shocked to find out yet another "fact" about Meghan isn't really the way it was portrayed.

You don't have to be skilled in handwriting analysis to see that the name of the person she was writing to is the smallest thing on the page while she wrote her own name BIG. Hmmm, what does that say?


----------



## Clearblueskies

sgj99 said:


> And how long did it take her write that letter?


Almost as long as it takes to read it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Fergie _could_ have kept her full title after the divorce, but like Diana the Queen took the HRH away as is her prerogative. She didn't have to consult Parliament.
> 
> The Queen could have also awarded HRH to Wallis, Duchess of Windsor had she so wished. Apart from the actual title, the most obvious difference is the etiquette of deference to the HRH (bow, curtsey, calling HRH 'your Grace' etc). HRH makes you Royal, Duchess/Duke a mere 'aristocrat'. This is all still a grey area because Prince/Princesses are not supposed to get divorced.
> 
> An 'aristocrat' is made by the reigning monarch bestowing a title on someone. If this is a hereditary title, this usually involves a gift of land too. The money from their land (usually collected as rent/leaseholds) meant they basically never had to work again and were often responsible for all land/building titles and even duties towards people that lived on their land, sometimes whole villages. This is the origin of the word 'gentleman' (or 'lady') meaning they didn't have to work. Gentlemen amused themselves socialising and playing sport, hence why so many sports were started/popularised in GB, their amateur status exulted and corresponding professional ones thought inferior (and why we have 2 Rugby leagues).  I own my own house in Scotland and half my land, but I also lease half my land from the 'Estate' which is owned by a Duke. The Duke (under his Marquis title) still owns the mining rights under _my_ entire land/house even though it's freehold, so let's hope they never find gold!  .
> 
> In the last century, many impoverished aristocrats chose/had to sell their land and even their grand houses and therefore the title is now on paper only. Some even sold their titles and were bought by strangers (restrictions will apply to the new owners).
> 
> Unlike Sarah's, the Queen would have to consult Parliament if she decided to remove Andrew's HRH though, and MPs would have to vote on it in the House, it would then go through the House of Lords to pass too in order to approve the removal. The same would be true of H.



I always feel so much smarter after reading your explanations. It would have taken me a lot of time to look up all these details myself, so thank you!


----------



## xincinsin

Someone on Quora is complaining that the words "Meghan Duchess of Sussex" appear 4 times in the 40-page Bench. I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt and imagining where the words appear: front cover, title page, dedication or foreword, and back cover.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Can’t get over the flourishes in her handwriting. Need to go google what it means in graphology now



Look at me, I'm oh so special. To be honest, this bow thing she does annoys me...like her whispy hair.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The “as ever” did it for me.  Not in common usage over here. Odd, pretentious, ostentatious, all things to stay away from.
> As ever … as if!
> 
> View attachment 5100726



What does that even mean? I know the words of course, but I'm still not entirely sure of the actual meaning.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> OH. MY. GOD. Is that real? You're right that isn't calligraphy. All this time I've been imagining her dipping a calligraphy pen in an ink pot and writing on parchment.  This was done with a modern pen. The swooshes over the tops of letters aren't even part of her pen strokes, she adds them for affectation! I suppose we shouldn't be shocked to find out yet another "fact" about Meghan isn't really the way it was portrayed.
> 
> You don't have to be skilled in handwriting analysis to see that the name of the person she was writing to is the smallest thing on the page while she wrote her own name BIG. Hmmm, what does that say?


I hadn’t noticed, but you’re right about how huge her name is compared to the recipient - those M’s are gigantic!  
And looking at the note again I thought how odd that she’s used her surname? If it’s a note to someone you know well you wouldn’t put your surname? And if it’s someone you don’t know well you wouldn’t write such an effusive note would you? It’s all peculiar and artificial feeling


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Found this...




Too bad she is not a professional calligrapher. She writes silly embellished cursive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The whole thing sounds excruciatingly patronising, and was obviously meant to be read by an audience (of more than one).



As usual.


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> You don't have to be skilled in handwriting analysis to see that the name of the person she was writing to is the smallest thing on the page while she wrote her own name BIG. Hmmm, what does that say?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Look at me, I'm oh so special. To be honest, this bow thing she does annoys me...like her whispy hair.



Yeah I find it annoying too, to me the handwriting seems very affected, full of herself and yes completely agree the small name of the addressee and big signature are telltale signs of someone who has a huge ego and doesn’t care for the person who is being writing too. The style to me screams control freak too. Someone who really really cares about their image and how others see them.

I know not everyone believes in graphology and also it’s more of an art than a science but personally I do think it can provide an insight to the personality behind the handwriting.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad she is not a professional calligrapher. She writes silly embellished cursive.



This is what happens when you outgrow dotting your "i"s with little hearts and move on to the next level.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> This is what happens when you outgrow dotting your "i"s with little hearts and move on to the next level.


You mean I should stop doing that? Damnit!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> You mean I should stop doing that? Damnit!



Or at least switch to little smiley faces or something. You don't want your "calligraphy" to stagnate!


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> Or at least switch to little smiley faces or something. You don't want your "calligraphy" to stagnate!



Or add unnecessary flourishes to your letters. I know that it’s unnatural to have swoopy d’s, h’s, b’s... heck, any tall letters really, even f’s, but you’ll be so woke adding them that you won’t even notice how odd they look or how much longer it’s taking you to write stuff.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Or add unnecessary flourishes to your letters. I know that it’s unnatural to have swoopy d’s, h’s, b’s... heck, any tall letters really, even f’s, but you’ll be so woke adding them that you won’t even notice how odd they look or how much longer it’s taking you to write stuff.



All of the flourishes are going over the tops of the letters. If anyone knows about handwriting analysis that's got to mean something.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What does that even mean? I know the words of course, but I'm still not entirely sure of the actual meaning.



Short for 'as ever yours (truly)'


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> All of the flourishes are going over the tops of the letters. If anyone knows about handwriting analysis that's got to mean something.



Very flowery so it means...

Is the writing flowery, with lots of unnecessary lines and flourishes, or is it reduced to its essentials? The more simplified, the higher the intelligence is likely to be.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> All of the flourishes are going over the tops of the letters. If anyone knows about handwriting analysis that's got to mean something.



It doesn't count if you've studied, cultivated and practiced so that you may appear that way


----------



## kemilia

V0N1B2 said:


> I wouldn't have expected someone who wanted to "modernize the monarchy" to have such old fashioned handwriting. It's not calligraphy, IMO - just cursive with some doodahs and random wingythings sprouting up like weeds in her word salad.


I agree. She writes regular cursive and then she goes back and adds the swoops to some letters to make it look fancy. Real calligraphy is difficult (IMO). Methane's handwriting is a stylized way of writing, anyone could do it (EVEN ME!  )


----------



## csshopper

Never got through it, my eyes were crossing after three lines.


----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> I agree. She writes regular cursive and then she goes back and adds the swoops to some letters to make it look fancy. Real calligraphy is difficult (IMO). Methane's handwriting is a stylized way of writing, anyone could do it (EVEN ME!  )


I took calligraphy as one of my courses in art college. It was a mandatory course, called ‘Manuscript Writing’ and is incredibly difficult.

There are rules, sizes, shapes, forms, specialized pens and the worst thing is, if you make a mistake, you have to start all over again.

Anyway what she does is not calligraphy as you said.  Just flourish-y writing.


----------



## DeMonica

needlv said:


> i get the feeling those stores are make believe.  Charles ignored H at the funeral and took off to Wales afterwards...  Charles was the one who wanted a “point by point” rebuttal...


You see it's very difficult to tell because it's a very complex situation. PC is obviously very angry with H and he has reason to be, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he wants to shun him and the grandchildren for the rest of his life. Ginge did a major disservice to the BRF as an institution but the BRF is also a family - an imperfect one as most of the families are - and he used to be a beloved member of his family.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> You see it's very difficult to tell because it's a very complex situation. PC is obviously very angry with H and he has reason to be, but it doesn't necessarily mean that he wants to shun him and the grandchildren for the rest of his life. Ginge did a major disservice to the BRF as an institution but the BRF is also a family - an imperfect one as most of the families are - and he used to be a beloved member of his family.



It's possible Charles may forgive Harry someday but I think that day is a long time from now. What Harry did was a deep betrayal of his family and everything it represents. Harry isn't even asking for forgiveness because he thinks he's done nothing wrong! As far as we know he'll continue to bash his family. 

No, if you stick your hand in a hole and a rattlesnake bites you, you aren't going to keep repeatedly sticking your hand in that hole. That's the situation Charles is in with Harry these days.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> He might say that he did not choose a public life, but it is one more of his many falsehoods. Edward was born as the son of a queen and he lives a relatively private life. Ginger could live a private life if he wanted. However, it's hard to achieve privacy when one (or wife) hires a PR agency, and keeps giving bombastic interviews.



If this was from his ‘random’ stop with Cordon to check out the Prince of Bel Air House and use their ‘loo’, how fortuitous for them that the tree/hedge in front of the window was trimmed back so much.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> It's possible Charles may forgive Harry someday but I think that day is a long time from now. What Harry did was a deep betrayal of his family and everything it represents. Harry isn't even asking for forgiveness because he thinks he's done nothing wrong! As far as we know he'll continue to bash his family.
> 
> No, if you stick your hand in a hole and a rattlesnake bites you, you aren't going to keep repeatedly sticking your hand in that hole. That's the situation Charles is in with Harry these days.


Great analogy bag-mania, he is a snake, one who's attached himself  to a snake charmer, who has him under control, baiting him to strike and strike again.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Never got through it, my eyes were crossing after three lines.


Yes .. as in ..
1.  Seriously?
2.  Uggh, OMG!
3.  I'm getting sick ..
4.  I'm gonna die ..
5.   5. ~ * Dead * ~


----------



## Hermes Zen

Icyjade said:


> Found this...




Did M write like this BEFORE she met H?  I can see M wearing a tiara when she writes.  Just seems odd.  Sorry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5100714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sends copy of The Bench to friend with personal note
> 
> 
> Photographer Gray Malin, from Los Angeles, shared a short video as he opened the book by Meghan Markle, 39, for the first time with his 35k followers on Instagram today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


_That’s_ what she calls calligraphy???


----------



## Jktgal

Wait what....  you haven't seen THE "calligraphy"?? But the bananas ....


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Yes .. as in ..
> 1.  Seriously?
> 2.  Uggh, OMG!
> 3.  I'm getting sick ..
> 4.  I'm gonna die ..
> 5.   5. ~ * Dead * ~
> View attachment 5101173
> View attachment 5101174
> View attachment 5101175
> View attachment 5101177
> View attachment 5101178


You crack me up! Hope you are feeling better.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Trooping the Colour is on June 12 
the US pres meets with QE on June 13

Hmmmm. Is Hazz attending any of this?  It would be a golden opportunity to grab some headlines, shake hands with the powerful.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trooping the Colour is on June 12
> the US pres meets with QE on June 13
> 
> Hmmmm. Is Hazz attending any of this?  It would be a golden opportunity to grab some headlines, shake hands with the powerful.



Not a chance. He’s a loose cannon at the moment and cannot be trusted with the grown ups. Let’s see how he fares after a few years in LA.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Someone on Quora is complaining that the words "Meghan Duchess of Sussex" appear 4 times in the 40-page Bench. I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt and imagining where the words appear: front cover, title page, dedication or foreword, and back cover.


Only 10%? Very modest for a duchess of pretension...


----------



## Icyjade

Found another analysis from 3 years ago..









						meghan markle
					

I must admit my first reaction to Meghan Markle's handwriting was not positive.  I didn't like the showiness of it.  But first impressions can be deceiving, so I was determined to do a proper...



					www.insightgraphology.co.uk
				




Fascinating insights:
“_Regarding her future, I have some questions that will only be answered in the fullness of time:  Will she have the flexibility to listen to others and adapt to changing circumstances?  Will she be able to take a back seat and fall in line according to the needs of ‘the organisation’?  How will she cope when she has to step out of the limelight?_”


----------



## lanasyogamama

How will she cope you ask? Not well!!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Not a chance. He’s a loose cannon at the moment and cannot be trusted with the grown ups. Let’s see how he fares after a few years in LA.


After Haz is here a while, he will get a tattoo and a piercing.  He won't be able to contain himself and be sure to show them off ASAP.  Can't wait.


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> _That’s_ what she calls calligraphy???


It's as fake as her face at this point.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Found another analysis from 3 years ago..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> meghan markle
> 
> 
> I must admit my first reaction to Meghan Markle's handwriting was not positive.  I didn't like the showiness of it.  But first impressions can be deceiving, so I was determined to do a proper...
> 
> 
> 
> www.insightgraphology.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascinating insights:
> “_Regarding her future, I have some questions that will only be answered in the fullness of time:  Will she have the flexibility to listen to others and adapt to changing circumstances?  Will she be able to take a back seat and fall in line according to the needs of ‘the organisation’?  How will she cope when she has to step out of the limelight?_”


Not sure he was right about the "strong and principled lady". I suppose she does have principles, just not the ones which I would appreciate: Max-Gain comes first; what Max-Gain wants, Max-Gain gets; do as Max-Gain says, not as Max-Gain does.



Hermes Zen said:


> Did M write like this BEFORE she met H?  I can see M wearing a tiara when she writes.  Just seems odd.  Sorry.


Her biodata says she had a sideline as a freelance calligrapher.

These 3 lines about part of the interview she did with Esquire have been cut and paste into many websites praising her handwriting.
"_Meghan picked up the profitable hobby during handwriting classes in Catholic school, she told Esquire in 2013.
The Duchess also worked as a freelance calligrapher to support her early acting career.
Some of her big gigs included Paula Patton and Robin Thicke's wedding invitations and Dolce & Gabbana's celebrity correspondences."_








						Meghan Markle Grew Up Around TV Decades Before She Starred on 'Suits'
					

The actress talks about being a Catholic schoolgirl whose father worked on the risqué "Married... With Children."




					www.esquire.com
				



What I found interesting about the interview was proof of another mismatch with reality. Methane has said more than once that she has done waitressing jobs. IIRC she even mentioned it in speeches to demonstrate a connection to the commoners. In that interview, she says it was pseudo-waitressing, because she was actually doing "calligraphy" to make ends meet. 

I also noticed that her use of "authentic" was already evident then: "_And here's the other thing, you have to write in a way that's authentic to you._" So she is authentically showy with excessive flourishes - sounds about right


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Found another analysis from 3 years ago..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> meghan markle
> 
> 
> I must admit my first reaction to Meghan Markle's handwriting was not positive.  I didn't like the showiness of it.  But first impressions can be deceiving, so I was determined to do a proper...
> 
> 
> 
> www.insightgraphology.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fascinating insights:
> “_Regarding her future, I have some questions that will only be answered in the fullness of time:  Will she have the flexibility to listen to others and adapt to changing circumstances?  Will she be able to take a back seat and fall in line according to the needs of ‘the organisation’?  How will she cope when she has to step out of the limelight?_”



The author was especially accurate here. It confirms what some of us already knew, Meghan will never be satisfied or happy. She will always want more than what she has.

“The writer has a desire for control and a need to play an important and prestigious role, as a way of proving her worth.  A proud, ambitious lady, she has the strength to overcome obstacles in her path and strive to reach her goals.  She is demanding of herself and others, and sets high standards that require effort and dedication to maintain. 

She sees the world in simple terms and is not one for delicate nuances or ‘grey areas’.  However, she is patient, meticulous and has strongly-held beliefs, especially concerning what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong.’”


----------



## needlv

Exactly...









						Prince Harry 'should NOT' be involved in Queen's Jubilee celebrations
					

PRINCE HARRY should not be allowed to return to the UK for the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations next year, an Express.co.uk poll has indicated.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gasp! Mercy.
 Top is March, 2018, Belfast trip
Bottom is the Dear Em letter, 2016












						Meghan Markle's signature has changed since she became a duchess — here's what it says about her relationship with Prince Harry
					

We spoke to two graphologists who analyzed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's signatures. According to both experts, Harry's signature, which consistently looks the same, suggests he is confident and private. But Markle's signature has evolved over time as she's settled into her role as a royal.




					www.insider.com
				





From T&C, 2018:
_Those arched strokes that come back over the words in this particular writing are like a symbol of protecting the ego. She’s very people oriented but she’s a little shy so she has to push herself."

_


Spoiler: contradictions



*What Meghan Markle's Handwriting Can Tell Us About Her Personality*
*A forensic handwriting examiner takes a look at her signature.*
By Caroline Hallemann
Mar 27, 2018





Getty Images
When Meghan Markle was just starting out in Hollywood, she earned extra money by doing calligraphy. She even did the invitations for Robin Thicke and Paula Patton's wedding. But Markle's beautiful handwriting can reveal more about soon-to-be-royal than just a former side-hustle. 
We spoke with Sheila Lowe, a court-qualified forensic handwriting examiner, about what Markle's penmanship can tell us about her personality.
First, Lowe compared two of Markle's signatures: the one pictured above, from an AOL event in March of 2016, and a visitors book signed by both Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during their trip to Belfast in March of 2018 (_below_) using a practice called Gestalt graphology, meaning she analyzed the spatial arrangement of letters, what those letters look like (the equivalent of font), and the writing movement, which includes things like rhythm and speed.






Getty Images

Lowe noticed a significant difference. "There was a change in the two signatures, and what the change shows is there’s a greater need for privacy in the second one, which makes perfect sense," Lowe says. "She’s living under a microscope."
"And, of course, she just used her first name, the same as Prince Harry does," Lowe continues. "That allies her with him."
Handwriting can change depending on both life experience and mood, Lowe explained. "It reflects who you are in the moment." But signatures don't tell the whole story. "A signature by itself is your public image. It’s what you want the world to know about you," Lowe says.

"I always use the example it’s like looking at a photograph of somebody’s nose and nothing else. You can tell a little bit about them, but without the context of the whole face, your information is very limited."
So, Lowe also examined a note written by Markle to one of her biggest fans in March of 2016 to see what a larger sample of handwriting could tell her about the future royal.
"*It’s a writing that’s full of contradictions," Lowe concluded of the penmanship in the note. "And it’s a little harder to analyze because it’s not a natural writing." 
Markle's training in calligraphy makes her handwriting difficult to decipher. "It's like wearing a mask," Lowe says of the stylized writing. That said, it still reveals several personality traits to a trained eye like Lowe's.

"Someone who uses a very stylized form of writing is concerned about the way things look. She wants to show the world a very particular, beautiful image. She wants to be perfect really," Lowe says, describing the note.*
"She’s insecure and her public image covers that up. She has strong emotions but she works really hard to control them," she continues. "Those arched strokes that come back over the words in this particular writing are like a symbol of protecting the ego. She’s very people oriented but she’s a little shy so she has to push herself."
And as for her future in the Royal family, Markle will fit right in.
"I would say that she’s comfortable in the spotlight even given the shyness, she wants to be in the center of things, and she takes life seriously," Lowe says. 
"She has a degree of formality and a love of beautiful things, so the palace is the right environment for that."











						What Meghan Markle's Handwriting Can Tell Us About Her Personality
					

A forensic handwriting examiner takes a look at her signature.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, she was the iHeart type. She was simply out of her league on the world stage. Sad.
IMO









						Handwriting analyst reveals Meghan Markle's 'penchant for perfection'
					

EXCLUSIVE: The recently-surfaced letter, from Meghan's high school days, is scrawled in a flawless hand which suggests a 'disciplined and confident' teen, according to a handwriting analyst.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gasp! Mercy.
> Top is March, 2018, Belfast trip
> Bottom is the Dear Em letter, 2016
> 
> 
> View attachment 5101465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's signature has changed since she became a duchess — here's what it says about her relationship with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> We spoke to two graphologists who analyzed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's signatures. According to both experts, Harry's signature, which consistently looks the same, suggests he is confident and private. But Markle's signature has evolved over time as she's settled into her role as a royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From T&C, 2018:
> _Those arched strokes that come back over the words in this particular writing are like a symbol of protecting the ego. She’s very people oriented but she’s a little shy so she has to push herself."
> 
> _
> 
> 
> Spoiler: contradictions
> 
> 
> 
> *What Meghan Markle's Handwriting Can Tell Us About Her Personality*
> *A forensic handwriting examiner takes a look at her signature.*
> By Caroline Hallemann
> Mar 27, 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> When Meghan Markle was just starting out in Hollywood, she earned extra money by doing calligraphy. She even did the invitations for Robin Thicke and Paula Patton's wedding. But Markle's beautiful handwriting can reveal more about soon-to-be-royal than just a former side-hustle.
> We spoke with Sheila Lowe, a court-qualified forensic handwriting examiner, about what Markle's penmanship can tell us about her personality.
> First, Lowe compared two of Markle's signatures: the one pictured above, from an AOL event in March of 2016, and a visitors book signed by both Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during their trip to Belfast in March of 2018 (_below_) using a practice called Gestalt graphology, meaning she analyzed the spatial arrangement of letters, what those letters look like (the equivalent of font), and the writing movement, which includes things like rhythm and speed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Getty Images
> 
> Lowe noticed a significant difference. "There was a change in the two signatures, and what the change shows is there’s a greater need for privacy in the second one, which makes perfect sense," Lowe says. "She’s living under a microscope."
> "And, of course, she just used her first name, the same as Prince Harry does," Lowe continues. "That allies her with him."
> Handwriting can change depending on both life experience and mood, Lowe explained. "It reflects who you are in the moment." But signatures don't tell the whole story. "A signature by itself is your public image. It’s what you want the world to know about you," Lowe says.
> 
> "I always use the example it’s like looking at a photograph of somebody’s nose and nothing else. You can tell a little bit about them, but without the context of the whole face, your information is very limited."
> So, Lowe also examined a note written by Markle to one of her biggest fans in March of 2016 to see what a larger sample of handwriting could tell her about the future royal.
> "*It’s a writing that’s full of contradictions," Lowe concluded of the penmanship in the note. "And it’s a little harder to analyze because it’s not a natural writing."
> Markle's training in calligraphy makes her handwriting difficult to decipher. "It's like wearing a mask," Lowe says of the stylized writing. That said, it still reveals several personality traits to a trained eye like Lowe's.
> 
> "Someone who uses a very stylized form of writing is concerned about the way things look. She wants to show the world a very particular, beautiful image. She wants to be perfect really," Lowe says, describing the note.*
> 
> "She’s insecure and her public image covers that up. She has strong emotions but she works really hard to control them," she continues. "Those arched strokes that come back over the words in this particular writing are like a symbol of protecting the ego. She’s very people oriented but she’s a little shy so she has to push herself."
> And as for her future in the Royal family, Markle will fit right in.
> "I would say that she’s comfortable in the spotlight even given the shyness, she wants to be in the center of things, and she takes life seriously," Lowe says.
> "She has a degree of formality and a love of beautiful things, so the palace is the right environment for that."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Meghan Markle's Handwriting Can Tell Us About Her Personality
> 
> 
> A forensic handwriting examiner takes a look at her signature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Wow. Her signature looks completely different three times in only five months. Creeeepy! She is always tweaking who she is.


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> Not sure he was right about the "strong and principled lady". I suppose she does have principles, just not the ones which I would appreciate: Max-Gain comes first; what Max-Gain wants, Max-Gain gets; do as Max-Gain says, not as Max-Gain does.
> 
> 
> Her biodata says she had a sideline as a freelance calligrapher.
> 
> These 3 lines about part of the interview she did with Esquire have been cut and paste into many websites praising her handwriting.
> "_Meghan picked up the profitable hobby during handwriting classes in Catholic school, she told Esquire in 2013.
> The Duchess also worked as a freelance calligrapher to support her early acting career.
> Some of her big gigs included Paula Patton and Robin Thicke's wedding invitations and Dolce & Gabbana's celebrity correspondences."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Grew Up Around TV Decades Before She Starred on 'Suits'
> 
> 
> The actress talks about being a Catholic schoolgirl whose father worked on the risqué "Married... With Children."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.esquire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I found interesting about the interview was proof of another mismatch with reality. Methane has said more than once that she has done waitressing jobs. IIRC she even mentioned it in speeches to demonstrate a connection to the commoners. In that interview, she says it was pseudo-waitressing, because she was actually doing "calligraphy" to make ends meet.
> 
> I also noticed that her use of "authentic" was already evident then: "_And here's the other thing, you have to write in a way that's authentic to you._" So she is authentically showy with excessive flourishes - sounds about right



WHAT!?!    Seriously her 'calligraphy" from what I've seen so far isn't worth paying for. Maybe I haven't seen her greatest works.  As another poster said, I also took calligraphy in college. I won the college contest to write a building dedication invitation in calligraphy. I did some other invitations and a SF boat name at no charge. I'm not the greatest but come on!  I have friends who are much better than M.  I am totally shocked by what I read !!

Thank you xincinsin for posting this!


----------



## csshopper

The flourishes are the croutons sprinkled on the word salad she has put to paper.


Hermes Zen said:


> WHAT!?!    Seriously her 'calligraphy" from what I've seen so far isn't worth paying for. Maybe I haven't seen her greatest works.  As another poster said, I also took calligraphy in college. I won the college contest to write a building dedication invitation in calligraphy. I did some other invitations and a SF boat name at no charge. I'm not the greatest but come on!  I have friends who are much better than M.  I am totally shocked by what I read !!
> 
> Thank you xincinsin for posting this!


"Calligraphy"? Only in her own mind. The flourishes over the letters are croutons sprinkled on the word salad she has put to paper.


----------



## csshopper

My oh my! Prince Edward and the Countess of Wessex have probably caused a melt down, maybe even premature labor in Montecito,  joking about the Interview is the very last thing Hazard and Methane would have expected. 

*Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex joke over Oprah Harry and Meghan, saying royals are 'still a family'*
Prince Edward and his wife the Countess of Wessex shared a laugh over Harry and Meghan's controversial Oprah interview, as they insisted the royals remain a family 'no matter what happens'.

Speaking in their first major interview together since they married in 1999, the royal couple jokingly asked 'Oprah who?' and 'what interview?' when asked if they watched Harry and Meghan's bombshell sit down with the US chat show host.

They also reflected on Prince Philip a little over a month since his funeral - with Prince Edward describing the 'extremely odd' ceremony, thanks to coronavirusrestrictions. 

In the Wessexes' first public comments since that momentous day, Sophie explained: 'We are still a family no matter what happens, we always will be.' 

The Countess of Wessex also admitted to having a 'lengthy chat' with Harry after the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral in April.


----------



## rose60610

Archie has three living blood grandparents. Too bad he can't spend even 1% of the time with any of them as Meghan and Harry do discussing/fawning over/merching/bringing up dead Grandma Diana. Can Meghan teach Archie how to write correspondence? It might be the only way Archie could contact Grandpa Charles. He could write about crocodiles.


----------



## Chanbal

H and MM donated $73K for charities. Oops, my mistake!


----------



## jelliedfeels

c


gracekelly said:


> After Haz is here a while, he will get a tattoo and a piercing.  He won't be able to contain himself and be sure to show them off ASAP.  Can't wait.


Yes, I can see this happening, a lot of people get tattoos in prison.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Chanbal said:


> H and MM donated $73K for charities. Oops, my mistake!
> View attachment 5101617


This probably doesn't even cover 1 day of PR costs from SS.....


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> c
> 
> Yes, I can see this happening, a lot of people get tattoos in prison.


Lots of roast chicken there too.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> H and MM donated $73K for charities. Oops, my mistake!
> View attachment 5101617


This wouldn’t be the first time Meghan's fans tried to do something more concrete than their idol - who’s only spouting hot air and PR. I feel sorry for them.  I think they’re deluded, but I feel sad for them.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Wow. Her signature looks completely different three times in only five months. Creeeepy! She is always tweaking who she is.
> 
> View attachment 5101494


Most importantly, which one does her bank recognize? I think the last one probably indicates when she decided to start styling herself Methane sans Markle. That huge loop at the end definitely leaves no room for a surname, but could very well integrate with the opening loop of a D if she decides to make Duchess her new surname.

All this talk of calligraphy brings forth a fond memory. About 5 years ago, I had to do a last min job of writing 30 place cards for 3 VIP tables at a company event. The boss yeeted the task at me because I was the only person she had on hand who had learnt calligraphy before. Without a proper calligraphy pen or ink and my experience being in a rather stiff and formal (boring) style, I freehanded a cursive with flourishes using a fine marker pen and yes, she was suitably impressed  Pseudo-waitress!


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Wow. Her signature looks completely different three times in only five months. Creeeepy! She is always tweaking who she is.
> 
> View attachment 5101494


At least we know what she does on her spare time…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Methane has said more than once that she has done waitressing jobs. IIRC she even mentioned it in speeches to demonstrate a connection to the commoners. In that interview, she says it was pseudo-waitressing, because she was actually doing "calligraphy" to make ends meet.



Oh, but she has said in other interviews how she was lucky she never had to wait tables. It's tragic she can't even keep the small lies straight.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, but she has said in other interviews how she was lucky she never had to wait tables. It's tragic she can't even keep the small lies straight.


She was doing calligraphy to make ends meet...
Writing letters to daddy Thomas asking for more money for his favourite daughter!

It’s so funny to me how she lies about her scraping to the top when she’s obviously a trust fund kid who got every penny she could out of dearest daddy before he got blacklisted for being bad PR


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, but she has said in other interviews how she was lucky she never had to wait tables. It's tragic she can't even keep the small lies straight.


Sigh...
From the OW interview:_ I’ve been a waitress, an actress, a princess, a duchess ... I’ve always just still been Meghan, right? So, for me, I’m clear on who I am, independent of all that stuff. And the most important title I will ever have is Mom. _
I'll just take heart that she used the past tense for princess and duchess, and hope the UK grants her her wish to be just Meghan and Mom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Found this...



I know very l8ittle


V0N1B2 said:


> I wouldn't have expected someone who wanted to "modernize the monarchy" to have such old fashioned handwriting. It's not calligraphy, IMO - just cursive with some doodahs and random wingythings sprouting up like weeds in her word salad.


I have ugly handwriting and do think hers is pretty.  but it does have a lot of long whatevers over the tops of letters that are kind of distracting when you look closely.  and as somone said it's interesting that the person's name on top is so much smaller than her name on the bottom


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It's possible Charles may forgive Harry someday but I think that day is a long time from now. What Harry did was a deep betrayal of his family and everything it represents. Harry isn't even asking for forgiveness because he thinks he's done nothing wrong! As far as we know he'll continue to bash his family.
> 
> No, if you stick your hand in a hole and a rattlesnake bites you, you aren't going to keep repeatedly sticking your hand in that hole. That's the situation Charles is in with Harry these days.


I guess it may partly depend on how much guilt Charles has over the divorce, etc.
Wonder what Camilla has to say about H


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Not sure he was right about the "strong and principled lady". I suppose she does have principles, just not the ones which I would appreciate: Max-Gain comes first; what Max-Gain wants, Max-Gain gets; do as Max-Gain says, not as Max-Gain does.
> 
> 
> Her biodata says she had a sideline as a freelance calligrapher.
> 
> These 3 lines about part of the interview she did with Esquire have been cut and paste into many websites praising her handwriting.
> "_Meghan picked up the profitable hobby during handwriting classes in Catholic school, she told Esquire in 2013.
> The Duchess also worked as a freelance calligrapher to support her early acting career.
> Some of her big gigs included Paula Patton and Robin Thicke's wedding invitations and Dolce & Gabbana's celebrity correspondences."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Grew Up Around TV Decades Before She Starred on 'Suits'
> 
> 
> The actress talks about being a Catholic schoolgirl whose father worked on the risqué "Married... With Children."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.esquire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I found interesting about the interview was proof of another mismatch with reality. Methane has said more than once that she has done waitressing jobs. IIRC she even mentioned it in speeches to demonstrate a connection to the commoners. In that interview, she says it was pseudo-waitressing, because she was actually doing "calligraphy" to make ends meet.
> 
> I also noticed that her use of "authentic" was already evident then: "_And here's the other thing, you have to write in a way that's authentic to you._" So she is authentically showy with excessive flourishes - sounds about right


so calligraphy is the same as waitressing?  I guess maybe in the sense she was doing it for pay but seems a bit of a stretch.  why even mention waitressing? Oh - because other actors have done it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Wow. Her signature looks completely different three times in only five months. Creeeepy! She is always tweaking who she is.
> 
> View attachment 5101494


that's strange.  I can see where there may be times when you just scribble and other times - when signing more important docs - you would write more legibly.  but the April and July ones are both pretty legible yet very different from each other


----------



## Katel

V0N1B2 said:


> I wouldn't have expected someone who wanted to "modernize the monarchy" to have such old fashioned handwriting. It's not calligraphy, IMO - just cursive with some doodahs and random wingythings sprouting up like weeds in her word salad.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Look at me, I'm oh so special. To be honest, this bow thing she does annoys me...like her whispy hair.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad she is not a professional calligrapher. She writes silly embellished cursive.


Tried hard to resist posting, but - ugh, so annoying, pretentious and *not* calligraphy - what *are* those things? So cluttery, so “me me me” so AWFUL.


----------



## Icyjade

And JCMH if anyone is interested:





Spoiler: If you don’t want to click the link



Isolation issues show in many places in Harry's writing, which includes very wide word and line spacing. Additional isolation issues show in the vertical to slight left slant, printed capital I's, and small writing.

This reveals an emotional foundation that is strongly introvert where feelings are blocked, intellectualism is activated, and need for personal space.

However, where there is one extreme, the opposite is underneath it. 

If you would look a the lower loops, they are large and full. That means Harry overcompensates his introversion by living as an extrovert. The large loops mean he pulls people into his life. They mean he is very active and can't be still. He is here, there, and everywhere.

These lower loops are also incomplete. They show Harry is still frustrated because his overcompensation continues to leave an empty sense of well-being within the psyche.

Here enters Meghan Markle (from an earlier posting). This is a case of opposites attracting each other. Her writing takes up space. She demands to be notice. And I believe she enmeshed with father in early life, which empowered her to control a man to get what she wants through subtle manipulation or overt control.

Harry is anti-dependent while Meghan is needy and dependent and controlling. She has what Harry has denied, but feels he needs on a personality level. If he gives her everything she demands, I think the marriage stands a chance of being long-term.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> so calligraphy is the same as waitressing?  I guess maybe in the sense she was doing it for pay but seems a bit of a stretch.  why even mention waitressing? Oh - because other actors have done it.


Stretched so far that the elastic is about to snap. I think she just took on that ex-waitress persona because it's a stereotype that she thinks will make her "relevant" to women who do not have a few million in the bank. She bragged in the Esquire interview that her sideline was very lucrative.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad she is not a professional calligrapher. She writes silly embellished cursive.


could it be that this is just her fancy handwriting and she also does calligraphy?


----------



## Chanbal

The Royal Family website has been updated and according to DM, the celebrity couple has been demoted. They are still there, which is more than what they deserve imo.   

_Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been demoted on the Royal Family website since they left their senior roles and moved to the US.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now listed below Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, as well as the Princess Royal and the Duke of York on the official royal site._










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are DEMOTED on Royal Family website
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now listed below Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, as well as the Princess Royal and the Duke of York on the official royal site.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Before (a prominent place near the future king):


After (near the spare that wants to be king):


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The Royal Family website has been updated and according to DM, the celebrity couple has been demoted. They are still there, which is more than what they deserve imo.
> 
> _Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been demoted on the Royal Family website since they left their senior roles and moved to the US.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now listed below Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, as well as the Princess Royal and the Duke of York on the official royal site._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are DEMOTED on Royal Family website
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now listed below Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, as well as the Princess Royal and the Duke of York on the official royal site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before (a prominent place near the future king):
> View attachment 5101933
> 
> After (near the spare that wants to be king):
> View attachment 5101934


good
It wouldn't surprise me if they removed the Duchess title and she continued to use it anyway


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> could it be that this is just her fancy handwriting and she also does calligraphy?


If you google for her calligraphy, this is what you get. Sometimes, when she doesn't overembellish, it does look nice.








						Meghan Markle's Handwriting Is Insanely Perfect
					

Have you seen the Duchess of Sussex's calligraphy skills?




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> And JCMH if anyone is interested:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: If you don’t want to click the link
> 
> 
> 
> Isolation issues show in many places in Harry's writing, which includes very wide word and line spacing. Additional isolation issues show in the vertical to slight left slant, printed capital I's, and small writing.
> 
> This reveals an emotional foundation that is strongly introvert where feelings are blocked, intellectualism is activated, and need for personal space.
> 
> However, where there is one extreme, the opposite is underneath it.
> 
> If you would look a the lower loops, they are large and full. That means Harry overcompensates his introversion by living as an extrovert. The large loops mean he pulls people into his life. They mean he is very active and can't be still. He is here, there, and everywhere.
> 
> These lower loops are also incomplete. They show Harry is still frustrated because his overcompensation continues to leave an empty sense of well-being within the psyche.
> 
> Here enters Meghan Markle (from an earlier posting). This is a case of opposites attracting each other. Her writing takes up space. She demands to be notice. And I believe she enmeshed with father in early life, which empowered her to control a man to get what she wants through subtle manipulation or overt control.
> 
> Harry is anti-dependent while Meghan is needy and dependent and controlling. She has what Harry has denied, but feels he needs on a personality level. If he gives her everything she demands, I think the marriage stands a chance of being long-term.



His handwriting looks a lot less pretentious than hers, but I'm not an expert on the subject.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> His handwriting looks a lot less pretentious than hers, but I'm not an expert on the subject.


his isn't as pretty but it's legible


----------



## bisousx

xincinsin said:


> If you google for her calligraphy, this is what you get. Sometimes, when she doesn't overembellish, it does look nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Handwriting Is Insanely Perfect
> 
> 
> Have you seen the Duchess of Sussex's calligraphy skills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



Kinda makes me want to make my signature prettier


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Stretched so far that the elastic is about to snap. I think she just took on that ex-waitress persona because it's a stereotype that she thinks will make her "relevant" to women who do not have a few million in the bank. She bragged in the Esquire interview that her sideline was very lucrative.


If she meant calligraphy... I don’t see that somehow


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

xincinsin said:


> If you google for her calligraphy, this is what you get. Sometimes, when she doesn't overembellish, it does look nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Handwriting Is Insanely Perfect
> 
> 
> Have you seen the Duchess of Sussex's calligraphy skills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Note that she took an entire page for her signature.  lol


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> Note that she took an entire page for her signature.  lol


that says something doesn't it


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> that says something doesn't it


Same message as elbowing past Haz into the middle of a group of male dignitaries completely eclipsing the Prince she married.

Here I am - declaring I am - THE center of all things - at all times!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that says something doesn't it


Remember, she has this thing about having a voice


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Same message as elbowing past Haz into the middle of a group of male dignitaries completely eclipsing the Prince she married.
> 
> Here I am - declaring I am - THE center of all things - at all times!


Your remark made me think of Yeats
_Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,_


----------



## TC1

xincinsin said:


> Sigh...
> From the OW interview:_ I’ve been a waitress, an actress, a princess, a duchess ... I’ve always just still been Meghan, right? So, for me, I’m clear on who I am, independent of all that stuff. And the most important title I will ever have is Mom. _
> I'll just take heart that she used the past tense for princess and duchess, and hope the UK grants her her wish to be just Meghan and Mom.


I'm sorry..when exactly was she a princess?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

xincinsin said:


> If you google for her calligraphy, this is what you get. Sometimes, when she doesn't overembellish, it does look nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Handwriting Is Insanely Perfect
> 
> 
> Have you seen the Duchess of Sussex's calligraphy skills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Her handwriting is basic chicken scratch at best.
Google real calligraphy and you’ll see the difference.


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "If anything it was Harry who was emotionally detached. The interview they did with Ant and Dec for the Prince's Trust, *when Charles recounted the polo story of how he fell off his horse, got knocked out and ended up in hospital...Harry's reaction to his father lying on the ground was "Papa's having a snore"...*like seriously? Your elderly father just fell from a horse and is unconscious...I would be terrified because my father is only a few years younger than Charles and rides."
> Like...ok, people do have different senses of humour, but that is a weird reaction to your father getting seriously hurt.





Most people would be panicked and worried to see their father knocked out and taken to hospital after falling off a horse, but not JCMH I guess.




Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5098516
> 
> 
> _Royal expert Rupert Bell argued that there came a point where Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle realised that she and Prince Harry would not be in the limelight. While speaking on Talkradio, Mr Bell insisted before the wedding he predicted this the pair would come to this realisation. He said, once both Meghan and Harry realised they would not be important royals they opted to leave the Royal Family._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's desire to be 'in the spotlight' sped up Megxit
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has been attacked for her misunderstanding of what life as a royal would be like and opting out with husband Prince Harry, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


*pretends to be shocked* We've known this for a while now, but you might want to shout it louder for the people at the back.






lallybelle said:


> OMG guys...it's happening!
> *Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself*
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> Posted on June 1, 2021, at 6:51 p.m. ET
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple TV
> In a series of interviews this year, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, has made explosive claims against the royal family — the people and the institution — going into detail about the damaging toll his upbringing has had on his mental health.
> Yet during some of these conversations, Harry takes on the role of revisionist historian, contradicting past statements he’s made about his mental health issues and the support — or lack thereof — he received from the royal family. The picture he paints is that of an uncaring institution ignoring his cries for help, of a man suffering in silence until Meghan Markle came into his life. But his past statements and what he’s saying now don’t always line up.
> FULL ARTICLE BElOW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Is Contradicting Himself
> 
> 
> An examination of interviews that Harry has given over the years shows inconsistencies and omissions in the story he is now telling the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


More stating the obvious.






CarryOn2020 said:


> I always thought so, too. *Then, I ventured into one of those ‘other’ threads. Had no idea how absolutely hated we are*. Totally messed with my head. Eeek.  All better now





Say what now?! Where is this thread you speak of? 




CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5100714
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sends copy of The Bench to friend with personal note
> 
> 
> Photographer Gray Malin, from Los Angeles, shared a short video as he opened the book by Meghan Markle, 39, for the first time with his 35k followers on Instagram today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Icyjade said:


> Can’t get over the flourishes in her handwriting. Need to go google what it means in graphology now


All I see in that weird hook-like thing she has coming out of the words 'another, from, as & her signature' is a scythe:


Whether that means anything, who knows!? 
Her hand writing looks so forced. I bet it takes her forever to write anything and probably several tries to get it 'right'.




Icyjade said:


> Found this...









bag-mania said:


> This is what happens when you outgrow dotting your "i"s with little hearts and move on to the next level.


In her case it's also called:







Icyjade said:


> “_Regarding her future, I have some questions that will only be answered in the fullness of time:  *Will she have the flexibility to listen to others and adapt to changing circumstances?  Will she be able to take a back seat and fall in line according to the needs of ‘the organisation’?  How will she cope when she has to step out of the limelight?*_*”*


That would be a 'big fat no', a 'hell to the no' and 'as bad as you could imagine and then some'.


----------



## rose60610

scarlet555 said:


> At least we know what she does on her spare time…



All Meghan's time is spare time. Her spare time even has spare time.  Except when she orders wreaths sent with details on the symbolism and demands a press release about it.  Perhaps if she took up a positive endeavor of sorts here and there, she wouldn't have so much time to feel sorry for herself. She could actually give an example of a compassionate activation. Sunshine Sachs would first have to think of one for her. Helpful tip: stay out of cemeteries.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, but she has said in other interviews how she was lucky she never had to wait tables. It's tragic she can't even keep the small lies straight.


*BA-ZINGA *.. yup, I remember her saying that as well (and if I recall, it 'tonal' quality of the remark was very snooty)!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> could it be that this is just her fancy handwriting and she also does calligraphy?



Sure. But a) the press is calling it "her signature calligraphy" when it's not and b) I'll believe it when I see a work sample. Otherwise I'll assume it's just another one of her personas she made up to appear interesting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I'm sorry..when exactly was she a princess?



On Archie's birth certificate her occupation is listed as "Princess of the United Kingdom". Of course, she really doesn't care for titles or tiaras, that's why she mentions them at every occasion and specifically asked to take a tiara to her first overseas trip (which was denied and Charles had to break the news to her).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Demoted — a sign of the future?













						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are DEMOTED on Royal Family website
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are now listed below Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, as well as the Princess Royal and the Duke of York on the official royal site.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## redney

Well, when ya step down from being royals it makes sense to be demoted on the family website.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comments are funny!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5101965
> 
> Most people would be panicked and worried to see their father knocked out and taken to hospital after falling off a horse, but not JCMH I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> *pretends to be shocked* We've known this for a while now, but you might want to shout it louder for the people at the back.
> View attachment 5101967
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More stating the obvious.
> View attachment 5101992
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5101998
> 
> Say what now?! Where is this thread you speak of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All I see in that weird hook-like thing she has coming out of the words 'another, from, as & her signature' is a scythe:
> View attachment 5102002
> 
> Whether that means anything, who knows!?
> Her hand writing looks so forced. I bet it takes her forever to write anything and probably several tries to get it 'right'.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5102011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In her case it's also called:
> View attachment 5102001
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a 'big fat no', a 'hell to the no' and 'as bad as you could imagine and then some'.


I live for Lou’s reaction gifs.


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> I live for Lou’s reaction gifs.


Me too .
And it just dawned on me a minute ago, rereading it, that the scythe pictured is like the flourish Methane uses in her faux calligraphy.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> *BA-ZINGA *.. yup, I remember her saying that as well (and if I recall, it 'tonal' quality of the remark was very snooty)!!


It was VERY snooty in light of the fact that many very famous actors have waited tables and were happy to do it and get one meal a day out of it.  A very long time ago, I think right when I realized what she was really like and the stories came out about her fooling around with Harry whilst keeping Cory on a string...I said that her career after Suits was going to go exactly nowhere as she was getting too old for the parts she wanted.  Either she would have to resign herself to playing the mother of teenagers in Lifetime movies, or she could get a job at Cory's (then) restaurant as a hostess.  So folks, she just might have come this close to waiting tables if that hostess job would have been available, after all, sometimes the hostess has to pitch in if things get really busy....


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It was VERY snooty in light of the fact that many very famous actors have waited tables and were happy to do it and get one meal a day out of it.  A very long time ago, I think right when I realized what she was really like and the stories came out about her fooling around with Harry whilst keeping Cory on a string...I said that her career after Suits was going to go exactly nowhere as she was getting too old for the parts she wanted.  Either she would have to resign herself to playing the mother of teenagers in Lifetime movies, or she could get a job at Cory's (then) restaurant as a hostess.  So folks, she just might have come this close to waiting tables if that hostess job would have been available, after all, sometimes the hostess has to pitch in if things get really busy....


she would probably have been lucky to get roles in Lifetime movies


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Me too .
> And it just dawned on me a minute ago, rereading it, that the scythe pictured is like the flourish Methane uses in her faux calligraphy.


\
My description of her handwriting is that it is overwrought.  Overwrought is her typical way of doing everything.  Her clothing, her hair, her plastic surgery and fillers, her reaction to people by ghosting them.  The list goes on and on.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she would probably have been lucky to get roles in Lifetime movies


It would be the mom of the friend of the child who was the friend of the star' child.  1 1/2 scenes.  "Don't forget to do you homework and don't stay out late."  "Your teacher did what!"   Done.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It would be the mom of the friend of the child who was the friend of the star' child.  1 1/2 scenes.  "Don't forget to do you homework and don't stay out late."  "Your teacher did what!"   Done.


kinda like her scene in General Hospital when she was the receptionist


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her handwriting is way prettier than mine, but it just comes across as really fake, like her *personality*.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> \
> My description of her handwriting is that it is overwrought.  Overwrought is her typical way of doing everything.  Her clothing, her hair, her plastic surgery and fillers, her reaction to people by ghosting them.  The list goes on and on.



_Overwrought_ is the perfect word to describe her. 
She dresses, behaves, and looks like how she _thinks _wealthy people dress, behave and look which shows her lack of confidence. All the private schools in the world could not give her the confidence to be herself around the wealthy.   IMO


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Overwrought_ is the perfect word to describe her.
> She dresses, behaves, and looks like how she _thinks _wealthy people dress, behave and look which shows her lack of confidence. All the private schools in the world could not give her the confidence to be herself around the wealthy.   IMO


well, I'm not a fan but she apparently fit in well enough with the London crowd to get introduced to the most eligible bachelor in the country....credit where credit is due


----------



## octopus17

I think that his handwriting is pretty darn good tbh - I like it!

I do remember trying to make my handwriting more 'something' than what it was when at Primary School, but it was just a phase. I just write how I write and it looks nice (imo) and is legible. Both DH and DS have appalling handwriting, it's like small spiders have stepped in some ink and walked across the page, drunk...
Goodness only knows how they have gotten on this far in life - it's quite the feat, lol.

Anyway. I guess what I'm trying to say is who is someone who tries so hard to hone their signature? I just don't understand it, unless they're trying to make it more legible I guess...


----------



## csshopper

The baby is due on the 10th. Questions:
   Will the official picture be b/w or washed out sepia?
    Focused on fingers? Toes?
    How many hours/days will they string out announcing the name?
    How many years until details about the hush hush birth emerge and  (pick a #) how many different versions will there be?
     Will feminists Haz and Methane amend Archwell to include her? Or will she have her own, thus giving her parents 2 sources to milk?
     Who gets to announce her: Scoobie or Aunty Oprah?

Stay tuned for a long summer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is a surprise -








						Prince William replaces his polo ponies with a huge painting
					

TALK OF THE TOWN: After deciding to give up his polo ponies, I can report that the Duke of Cambridge has replaced them with a huge painting made by artist Madeleine de St Pierre Bunbury.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well, I'm not a fan but she apparently fit in well enough with the London crowd to get introduced to the most eligible bachelor in the country....credit where credit is due



Did she, though, fit in?
My impression is that they met during those boozy [drug-filled?] nights at Soho House.  The old saying everyone has ‘beer goggles‘ may apply. I could be wrong, of course.










						People Really Do Look Better When You Drink
					

For the first time, scientists have proven that "beer goggles" are real — other people really do look more attractive to us if we have been drinking.




					www.livescience.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Serious question... Didn't Maleficent of Montecito's official bio on the BRF website used to mention that she's a successful actress? Seems that's gone now.

Also, on the same bio, her official titles are listed i.e. The Duchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness Kilkeel but I don't see the same for Kate, Camilla and Princess Anne. Guess the BRF wants to make sure that she can't claim they took away her titles because she's a WOC and they are all racists


----------



## scarlet555

some tea for yall found it wandering around home goods looking for french press


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> some tea for yall found it wandering around home goods looking for french press
> 
> View attachment 5102485
> View attachment 5102486


ha
$4.99, compare at $7....maybe it will go down to a dollar


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


>



he had a full time job trying to be a royal with her in tow (or in tow with her).....no wonder he left....who TF does she think she is?


----------



## EverSoElusive

One of the posts by this lady somehow ended up on my IG feed. Clicked on her profile and immediately regretted doing so. It's creepy with a capital C. 

She doesn't just copy the exact looks donned by MoM but she tries to pose like her too in most photos


----------



## bisousx

EverSoElusive said:


> One of the posts by this lady somehow ended up on my IG feed. Clicked on her profile and immediately regretted doing so. It's creepy with a capital C.
> 
> She doesn't just copy the exact looks donned by MoM but she tries to pose like her too in most photos




She is a cute lady but wow, some people have a lot of time on their hands...


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she, though, fit in?
> My impression is that they met during those boozy [drug-filled?] nights at Soho House.  The old saying everyone has ‘beer goggles‘ may apply. I could be wrong, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People Really Do Look Better When You Drink
> 
> 
> For the first time, scientists have proven that "beer goggles" are real — other people really do look more attractive to us if we have been drinking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.livescience.com


This beer googles I have witnessed many times. While in the Army overseas bunch of us would go to bars and clubs and guys I knew who would never hook up sober with some girls would hook up with them at the end of the night and then would marry them shortly thereafter and then divorce. I would like Dude you got a girl at home what are you doing? They would say she got pregnant and boom! Their lives change. Some of these girls would rotate with different guys until one got hooked. I mean they would literally do anything. I was in a company of 5 women with 2500 guys on base overseas and it was an eye opening scene to see this. The funny thing is these guys would like be so over protective of us Army girls that if any one approached us they’d be like brothers you wish would go away, so over protective and irritating.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bisousx said:


> She is a cute lady but wow, some people have a lot of time on their hands...



I agree. Frankly, I'd still feel it's creepy if someone tries to copy Kate or anyone else from head to toe.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> I agree. Frankly, I'd still feel it's creepy if someone tries to copy Kate or anyone else from head to toe.


Exactly, creepy no matter who it being copied.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> One of the posts by this lady somehow ended up on my IG feed. Clicked on her profile and immediately regretted doing so. It's creepy with a capital C.
> 
> She doesn't just copy the exact looks donned by MoM but she tries to pose like her too in most photos




Strange to be sure. But no creepier than the Diana cosplay that Meghan has indulged in over the years. It’s much worse when it’s your dead mother-in-law you are copying. Yes, I brought back the dreaded green dress.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Strange to be sure. But no creepier than the Diana cosplay that Meghan has indulged in over the years. It’s much worse when it’s your dead mother-in-law you are copying. Yes, I brought back the dreaded green dress.
> 
> View attachment 5102516



I really can't with her. Everything she does seems too try-hard and like she spends a lot of time planning to emulate Diana. I bet if she could morph into Diana, she would in less than a heartbeat. It's quite pathetic because MoM is decent looking and she should be the best version of herself, not somebody else.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Overwrought_ is the perfect word to describe her.
> She dresses, behaves, and looks like how she _thinks _wealthy people dress, behave and look which shows her lack of confidence. All the private schools in the world could not give her the confidence to be herself around the wealthy.   IMO


In one of her last appearances she seemed to be copying QE...


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> In one of her last appearances she seemed to be copying QE...



Except she has no access to all the tiaras that her heart desires


----------



## Chanbal

@QueenofWrapDress I believe this is one of the videos in which she turns her back to QE.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10. 











						Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
					

According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Strange to be sure. But no creepier than the Diana cosplay that Meghan has indulged in over the years. It’s much worse when it’s your dead mother-in-law you are copying. Yes, I brought back the dreaded green dress.
> 
> View attachment 5102516


A favorite here at TPF


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


>



Oops I didn't see that you had posted this video here. She was very rude, rather vulgar...


----------



## Sol Ryan

scarlet555 said:


> some tea for yall found it wandering around home goods looking for french press
> 
> View attachment 5102485
> View attachment 5102486



Lol, ours had The Queen, Will and Kate, and Diana tea. I hadn’t see the Diana one before…


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> well, I'm not a fan but she apparently fit in well enough with the London crowd to get introduced to the most eligible bachelor in the country....credit where credit is due



100% true what you're saying, I'm unclear exactly how they met. I heard "blind date", so yes, somebody set them up. Considering the recorded footage of Meghan repeatedly barging in front of Harry and cutting off The Queen, my guess once she orchestrated meeting somebody who could introduce her to Harry, Meghan must have put a snapping turtle death grip on the person to make it happen. The rest is history. Conniving Self Pitier meets Royal Dullard, bombards him with compassionate activations and word salad. RD is unable to locate an interpreter for the word salad, even Foreign Language Services in the United Nations is of no help. RD decides word salad recipe is 40% American English, 40% Canadian English, 10% Fluent Spanish learned in 5 minute stay in Argentina and 10% Tignanello induced.  CSP senses positive royal reaction, pours RD more and more and more Tignanello until he, too, engages in word salad. Before we know it, we got Raindrops in Chunga Changa (or is it Changa Chunga?) and Charles (bastard who quit paying for all their expenses) is walking CSP down the aisle. Of course CSP is enthralled and had been enthralled for two years prior to the wedding of all things royal, performed her public duties with aplomb (except the routine elbowing RD in the gut). Once CSP and RD tell the BRF to go to hell, they can't understand why much of their funding has been cut off. Seeking revenge with Oprah's microphones and cameras, the BRF, who Meghan clawed her way into, is "racist" and "traps people". 

So...if the BRF can be bamboozled into accepting CSP, the liaison who bridged CSP with RD, especially under snapping turtle death grip duress, could be seen as a person acting under undue pressures, and didn't stand a chance. Whatever country could take them off our hands should be rewarded with a a lifetime supply of California avocados and Kimberly Clark Kleenex and other paper products.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10.
> View attachment 5102533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
> 
> 
> According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Pip" as a name??? A "Princess Pip" if her grandfather PC decided at some point to bestow a title? 

 "Pip" is a small hard seed. Or a short high sound. Or "PIP" is "Peeing in Pants."


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10.
> View attachment 5102533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
> 
> 
> According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So they're supposedly thinking about naming the baby after somebody from a family they called "racist" and "traps people" ? If H & M didn't have hypocrisy, they'd have nothing.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5101965
> 
> Most people would be panicked and worried to see their father knocked out and taken to hospital after falling off a horse, but not JCMH I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> *pretends to be shocked* We've known this for a while now, but you might want to shout it louder for the people at the back.
> View attachment 5101967
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More stating the obvious.
> View attachment 5101992
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5101998
> 
> Say what now?! Where is this thread you speak of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All I see in that weird hook-like thing she has coming out of the words 'another, from, as & her signature' is a scythe:
> View attachment 5102002
> 
> Whether that means anything, who knows!?
> Her hand writing looks so forced. I bet it takes her forever to write anything and probably several tries to get it 'right'.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5102011
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In her case it's also called:
> View attachment 5102001
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be a 'big fat no', a 'hell to the no' and 'as bad as you could imagine and then some'.


I love your gifs!
Hadn’t thought about queens court in years. I used to like it when Khia was on. The incredulity she could impart from straw-twirling alone was a sight to behold   


CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a surprise -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William replaces his polo ponies with a huge painting
> 
> 
> TALK OF THE TOWN: After deciding to give up his polo ponies, I can report that the Duke of Cambridge has replaced them with a huge painting made by artist Madeleine de St Pierre Bunbury.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5102467


Lovely horse, that arch is a bit too much like a nativity scene for my tastes 


scarlet555 said:


> some tea for yall found it wandering around home goods looking for french press
> 
> View attachment 5102485
> View attachment 5102486


 
Yikes, that tea is close to 3 years old in our time and somewhere between 4-7 years old in Ginger’s time. Think I’ll pass as it might be a bit stale….bit  like what it depicts?


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


>



That hip thrust   
Who greets people nether regions first?
It's also the same pose she used for the b/w photo with H behind her and she clasping her firstborn. I was thinking her bump looked huge because her a*s was tilted to be on the same vertical as her nose.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, this birth is scheduled?  Thought she wanted the natural, at home birth.  I‘m confused.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> This beer googles I have witnessed many times. While in the Army overseas bunch of us would go to bars and clubs and guys I knew who would never hook up sober with some girls would hook up with them at the end of the night and then would marry them shortly thereafter and then divorce. I would like Dude you got a girl at home what are you doing? They would say she got pregnant and boom! Their lives change. Some of these girls would rotate with different guys until one got hooked. I mean they would literally do anything. I was in a company of 5 women with 2500 guys on base overseas and it was an eye opening scene to see this. The funny thing is these guys would like be so over protective of us Army girls that if any one approached us they’d be like brothers you wish would go away, so over protective and irritating.


My MIL told me this weird story. My BIL claims that he met his wife at a church gathering. Very prim and proper. MIL said SIL was one of "those girls" who hung around army camps when the boys book out, hoping to snare a husband. Gave me whiplash comparing the two versions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> That hip thrust
> Who greets people nether regions first?
> It's also the same pose she used for the b/w photo with H behind her and she clasping her firstborn. I was thinking her bump looked huge because her a*s was tilted to be on the same vertical as her nose.



Such an awkward dance. 
Hazz makes the first move away from QE.  Not sure who is walking up behind MM, but Hazz cuts him off. Then the other guy is pushed?  between MM and QE.  Would love to know what was said. QE and Anne look like something smells bad?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this birth is scheduled?  Thought she wanted the natural, at home birth.  I‘m confused.


It's going to be a mystery. Shhhh...
Bump 2 will morph into Baby 2 whenever they say so.
Whether Methane or the surrogate pops early or late, they will announce that it happened on the date they pick.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she, though, fit in?
> My impression is that they met during those boozy [drug-filled?] nights at Soho House.  The old saying everyone has ‘beer goggles‘ may apply. I could be wrong, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People Really Do Look Better When You Drink
> 
> 
> For the first time, scientists have proven that "beer goggles" are real — other people really do look more attractive to us if we have been drinking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.livescience.com


I think so - she pulled a K fed but with a ‘philanthropist’ facade. Only difference is the media is a lot less shy about making fun of ‘druggie rednecks’ Britney and Kev than this persecuted martyr and her ‘tormented’ husband.


EverSoElusive said:


> One of the posts by this lady somehow ended up on my IG feed. Clicked on her profile and immediately regretted doing so. It's creepy with a capital C.
> 
> She doesn't just copy the exact looks donned by MoM but she tries to pose like her too in most photos




Especially as a ‘influencer’


Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10.
> View attachment 5102533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
> 
> 
> According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Not sure on Pip though. The malevolent Middleton clan has a Pippa. On the other hand, they do have form on the faux-naive abbreviation names that were popular 5 years ago


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she, though, fit in?
> My impression is that they met during those boozy [drug-filled?] nights at Soho House.  The old saying everyone has ‘beer goggles‘ may apply. I could be wrong, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People Really Do Look Better When You Drink
> 
> 
> For the first time, scientists have proven that "beer goggles" are real — other people really do look more attractive to us if we have been drinking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.livescience.com


She has enough gloss to pull off being introduced, but she doesn’t have enough to stay the course in the game long term.   The facade cracks quickly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

EverSoElusive said:


> One of the posts by this lady somehow ended up on my IG feed. Clicked on her profile and immediately regretted doing so. It's creepy with a capital C.
> 
> She doesn't just copy the exact looks donned by MoM but she tries to pose like her too in most photos



Thats quite obsessive, must cost her a fortune   


Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10.
> View attachment 5102533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
> 
> 
> According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They might call the baby Diana?  Fancy that?   (Poor kid)


----------



## gracekelly

Now golly gee!  How is it that this baby is now going to appear on June 10th?  Technically, that’s not summer..  If I really believed this was a date determined by the date of her last period, then it could have been shared a long time  ago.   And if PP was still alive, what would the day be?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> Thats quite obsessive, must cost her a fortune
> 
> They might call the baby Diana?  Fancy that?   (Poor kid)


Maybe the brands give her promo freebies as she’s less of a buzz kill than the real thing  
Also let’s be honest- no one could tell you those boring shoes were Stella mc just get the same thing from Payless ( and I like Stella!)

It is the copying the ratty extensions that troubles me - I fear for someone who can have such clear masochistic tendencies. 

I guess it saves having to teach Archie another name 
Maybe they can trademark ‘princess Diana’  then and Wills can never ever talk about mummy again!


----------



## Clearblueskies

I can see why calling the kid Diana would be attractive to the marketing team at Sussex Inc., but I hope they don’t.  It’d be heaping a whole load of crappy baggage on the baby before it’d barely had a chance to draw breath.  Very unfair, well cruel actually.  I hope someone sees sense and they give it a cutesy *sweet* showbizzy name instead.  Roadblock or Avocado Sunshine or something.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe the brands give her promo freebies as she’s less of a buzz kill than the real thing
> Also let’s be honest- no one could tell you those boring shoes were Stella mc just get the same thing from Payless ( and I like Stella!)
> 
> It is the copying the ratty extensions that troubles me - I fear for someone who can have such clear masochistic tendencies.
> 
> I guess it saves having to teach Archie another name
> Maybe they can trademark ‘princess Diana’  then and Wills can never ever talk about mummy again!


I wondered if she was working as a Meg double somewhere?  Although I think the British ones had to look for other employment as the market dried up


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> I agree. Frankly, I'd still feel it's creepy if someone tries to copy Kate or anyone else from head to toe.


I watched a cute ep of Say Yes to The Dress. The bride made a living as a Kate look-alike and she brought along the QE look-alike    She wanted a dress that would not remind anyone of the Duchess of Cambridge.

Fox did a write-up of 3 MM lookalikes. The linda sparkle person is one of them.








						Here are 3 Meghan Markle doppelgangers. Can you tell them apart?
					

On Monday, a Missouri mom’s Instagram post went viral after people said she looked like the Duchess of Sussex.




					www.foxbusiness.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

Meghan Markle is having issues during her second pregnancy lately. 

https://www.geo.tv/amp/353571-meghan-markle-suffers-unpleasant-complications-during-second-pregnancy


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10.
> View attachment 5102533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
> 
> 
> According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If you fancy a flutter 









						Bookies Predict Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Will Name Their Baby Girl After This Royal Family Member
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are expecting a daughter, and UK bookies have Philippa leading the betting odds




					people.com
				




11 May - probably changed a lot since: 

Pippa 3/1 (like someone said though, Kate's sister is a Pippa - so maybe there's a reservation)
Diana 5/1 (same odds 7 days ago - _Metro_)
Elizabeth 10/1
Allegra 10/1
Alexandria 12/1
Grace 16/1
Emma 16/1
Rose 16/1
Alice 16/1
Victoria 16/1 

Personally, after what they've both said about the RF, I would find it the greatest insult of them all if they named their daughter after any member past or present.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this birth is scheduled?  Thought she wanted the natural, at home birth.  I‘m confused.



For somebody perhaps


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> That hip thrust
> Who greets people nether regions first?
> It's also the same pose she used for the b/w photo with H behind her and she clasping her firstborn. I was thinking her bump looked huge because her a*s was tilted to be on the same vertical as her nose.



Everybody is embarrassed. 

My guess is Harry was sent in to set up an op, then backed out, slotting himself behind M so she would then have a clear run to say something 'impressive' in response to QEII. I think he was trying to force a QEII/M moment. She didn't know what to say to the Queen (the Queen ducks her by averting her gaze). M gets so fumbled the Queen won't make eye contact she makes a big celeb display at responding to something H said and sticking to him for comfort etc. That was insecurity. The man who pops in front of QEII, placing his body in front of M's back (body-blocking) says something to make QEII smile and then slides out again obviously saw the dreaded_ faux pas_ and tried to cover M's back literally. Too late mate QEII saw. 

Sometimes scheming backfires


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


>




While Harry scrambles to not turn his back on the Queen. Really, she was so not fit for her role (and not for a lack of training). What does he see in her?


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Everybody is embarrassed.
> 
> My guess is Harry was sent in to set up an op, then backed out, slotting himself behind M so she would then have a clear run to say something 'impressive' in response to QEII. I think he was trying to force a QEII/M moment. She didn't know what to say to the Queen (the Queen ducks her by averting her gaze). M gets so fumbled the Queen won't make eye contact she makes a big celeb display at responding to something H said and sticking to him for comfort etc. That was insecurity. The man who pops in front of QEII, placing his body in front of M's back (body-blocking) says something to make QEII smile and then slides out again obviously saw the dreaded_ faux pas_ and tried to cover M's back literally. Too late mate QEII saw.
> 
> Sometimes scheming backfires


The Queen’s even making it easier for everyone by standing still   
MMs apologists would probably say it’s so _unfair _to expect her to know the protocol.  But when she was at parties in her Suits days did she ever turn her back on a producer or director? I don't think so. Everyone knows this stuff.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Sferics

sdkitty said:


> I know very l8ittle
> 
> I have ugly handwriting and do think hers is pretty.  but it does have a lot of long whatevers over the tops of letters that are kind of distracting when you look closely.  and as somone said it's interesting that the person's name on top is so much smaller than her name on the bottom




It's just...pretentious and forced.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What a mess!

*Prince Harry will have his HRH title removed from displays at new Royal fashion exhibition featuring his mother Princess Diana's wedding dress - as he and Meghan are demoted on Palace website*

Prince Harry to have HRH title expunged from notices at royal fashion display 
Signs at Kensington Palace exhibit said Diana's dresses were lent by her sons
Placards read: 'Lent by HRH the Duke of Cambridge and HRH the Duke of Sussex'
Now the Royal Collection Trust said labels were 'incorrect and will be updated' 

And .. Just speculation, still 


*Kate Middleton 'may step in to attend unveiling of Princess Diana statue next month if Prince Harry cannot attend following birth of his daughter next Thursday', royal expert claims*
Kate Middleton may 'step in' to attend the unveiling of a statue dedicated to Princess Diana next month if Prince Harry cannot make it, according to a royal expert.
The Duke of Sussex is due to fly back to the UK this month for the unveiling on July 1 at Kensington Palace on what would have been Diana's 60th birthday.
He is due to attend the ceremony with Prince William, with whom tensions have been reportedly high following his bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.
But he and his wife Meghan Markle, who live in California, are expecting their second child this Thursday, on what would have been Prince Philip's 100th birthday.
The birth of their baby daughter could derail Harry's plans to attend the event, according to Daily Mirror royal editor Russell Myers.
Speaking to the Pod Save The Queen podcast, Mr Myers said the duke's extraordinary allegations of racism within the Royal Family could make his reunion with his brother William 'very uncomfortable'.









						Harry will have HRH title removed from displays at Diana exhibition
					

Placards at the exhibit described dresses worn by Diana as 'Lent by HRH the Duke of Cambridge and HRH the Duke of Sussex'. The Royal Collection said the labels 'were incorrect and will be updated'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Cornflower Blue said:


> I think that his handwriting is pretty darn good tbh - I like it!
> 
> I do remember trying to make my handwriting more 'something' than what it was when at Primary School, but it was just a phase. I just write how I write and it looks nice (imo) and is legible. Both DH and DS have appalling handwriting, it's like small spiders have stepped in some ink and walked across the page, drunk...
> Goodness only knows how they have gotten on this far in life - it's quite the feat, lol.
> 
> Anyway. I guess what I'm trying to say is who is someone who tries so hard to hone their signature? I just don't understand it, unless they're trying to make it more legible I guess...


I think with all those flourishes it's not legibility she was after....it is pretty though


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I think with all those flourishes it's not legibility she was after....it is pretty though


It's the physical counterpart of her verbal word salad: looks pretty but not written to communicate effectively. Her spoken word sounds impressive but yields little value when dissected.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> One of the posts by this lady somehow ended up on my IG feed. Clicked on her profile and immediately regretted doing so. It's creepy with a capital C.
> 
> She doesn't just copy the exact looks donned by MoM but she tries to pose like her too in most photos



that's pathological


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Oops I didn't see that you had posted this video here. She was very rude, rather vulgar...


yes, this wasn't just rude in terms of royal behavior.  this was rude for anyone


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are planing for Diana Pip to be officially born on June 10.
> View attachment 5102533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's baby daughter 'is due THURSDAY'
> 
> 
> According to Royal insiders in the United States, the Sussexes have thought about naming their newborn Pip after Harry's late grandfather, Lily after his grandmother, or Diana after his later mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It says: _Harry has been discussing the due date and possible names with his close pals and they're talking about it quite openly now it's getting close.'_ 

What close pals? Didn't Methane freeze out all his close friends? Are they referring to Orlando Bloom and his employers Buttercup, Netflix and whatever?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> While Harry scrambles to not turn his back on the Queen. Really, she was so not fit for her role (and not for a lack of training). What does he see in her?


she has a spell on him...witchcraft


----------



## lanasyogamama

Any chance they would name the baby Elizabeth?


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Any chance they would name the baby Elizabeth?


No to Elizabeth, Philippa, Charlotte, Anne, Mary, Diana - not even as middle names

My money is on something offbeat with an IE at the end

There is an outside chance of Lily, after all the Oprah interview dress had a lotus LILY on it, but then before that came the LEMON dress
The latest one was a POPPY dress ???

Named in honor of Princess Poppy of the Trolls - YES !!!!



	

		
			
		

		
	
from Google


Hmmm I am debating whether there will be a press release with the NAME or just an announcement, withholding the name harkens back to the christening unnamed godparents


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> I think so - she pulled a K fed but with a ‘philanthropist’ facade. Only difference is the media is a lot less shy about making fun of ‘druggie rednecks’ Britney and Kev than this persecuted martyr and her ‘tormented’ husband.
> 
> 
> Especially as a ‘influencer’
> 
> View attachment 5102567
> 
> Not sure on Pip though. The malevolent Middleton clan has a Pippa. On the other hand, they do have form on the faux-naive abbreviation names that were popular 5 years ago





RE: The IG lady, she thanked her husband for supporting her obsession  If I did what she did, my husband would think I'm a nutjob


----------



## EverSoElusive

Clearblueskies said:


> Thats quite obsessive, must cost her a fortune
> 
> They might call the baby Diana?  Fancy that?   (Poor kid)




I bet it costs a lot and she said she mixes and matches the outfits so doesn't sound like she resells the items. I wonder how big is her closet.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> RE: The IG lady, she thanked her husband for supporting her obsession  If I did what she did, my husband would think I'm a nutjob


and your husband would be right


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I watched a cute ep of Say Yes to The Dress. The bride made a living as a Kate look-alike and she brought along the QE look-alike    She wanted a dress that would not remind anyone of the Duchess of Cambridge.
> 
> Fox did a write-up of 3 MM lookalikes. The linda sparkle person is one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are 3 Meghan Markle doppelgangers. Can you tell them apart?
> 
> 
> On Monday, a Missouri mom’s Instagram post went viral after people said she looked like the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxbusiness.com



Sorry, but I think they are all obsessive  Linda refers to herself as Meghan Mar-clone (or was it Mar-klone).


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is this a new PR effort?
— what to think of William giving Hazz a ‘copy of the polo painting’?
— changing Hazz’s HRH placard at the Style exhibit — sign of the future removal or a regrettable error?
— announcing the specific date for the _natural_ birth?
— pump - pump ? Really?









						Meghan Markle dedicates children's book to Prince Harry and Archie
					

The touching inscription in the book, reproduced from a hand-written note in the Duchess of Sussex's distinctive calligraphy script, reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Any chance they would name the baby Elizabeth?


Very possible! Lily is 10/1
It looks like there are no bets on Doria's name 
I also didn't see any bets on the name of a certain grandmother who was very close to H's wife.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow!



I wish someone would ask Oprah to comment on this


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Now golly gee!  How is it that this baby is now going to appear on June 10th?  Technically, that’s not summer..  If I really believed this was a date determined by the date of her last period, then it could have been shared a long time  ago.   And if PP was still alive, what would the day be?



They seem now firm on the June date, but if PP was still alive, the could probably try July (Diana's birthday).


----------



## Chanbal

A concerned Scoobie who apparently criticized Kate in the past for her morning sickness...


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think William is trying to remind Harry of his old life by sending him the painting.  Also, a way of maintaining a connection without a difficult conversation.  “A picture is worth a thousand words.” “Actions speak louder than words.”


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> I think William is trying to remind Harry of his old life by sending him the painting.  Also, a way of maintaining a connection without a difficult conversation.  “A picture is worth a thousand words.” “Actions speak louder than words.”


makes sense....don't disconnect totally but don't engage actively to where he can then say you're racist or your conversation was unproductive


----------



## lanasyogamama

Meghan Markle Has Given Birth To A Baby Girl Named Lilibet Diana — BuzzFeed News
					

The baby was born Friday at 11:40 a.m. and is named after her great-grandmother the Queen and grandmother Princess Diana.




					apple.news


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lilibet Diana


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> Lilibet Diana


O. M. G.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan Markle Has Given Birth To A Baby Girl Named Lilibet Diana — BuzzFeed News
> 
> 
> The baby was born Friday at 11:40 a.m. and is named after her great-grandmother the Queen and grandmother Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


I like the name but after what they did to the RF I don't think they have the right to use it
and of course they had to get Diana in there


----------



## Allisonfaye

After the Queen and Diana. Why would you name your baby after a racist institution person?


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I like the name but after what they did to the RF I don't think they have the right to use it
> and of course they had to get Diana in there


If this isn't an eff you to the RF, nothing is.
ETA: IMO, of course.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m cracking up at how much detail they’re sharing this time after the last birth being shrouded in secrecy


----------



## kemilia

Now we await the artsy-fartsy photograph. I'm betting on Archie's little chubby hand holding his new sister's hand. In washed out B&W with sepia tones.


----------



## plastic-fish

Duplicate


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> After the Queen and Diana. Why would you name your baby after a racist institution person?


Not only a 'racist institution person', QE is the head of such institution.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## byzina

Allisonfaye said:


> After the Queen and Diana. Why would you name your baby after a racist institution person?



The racist institution CEO. The head of the family that has never asked if she was OK.


----------



## sdkitty

byzina said:


> The racist institution CEO. The head of the family that has never asked if she was OK.


wonder if this is having the desired effect


----------



## lallybelle

LOL what a suckup they're trying. Using the HM's family nickname.


----------



## Chanbal

DM is on it as well! We are now waiting for Scoobie's input. 

_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child, sister to two-year-old Archie, was born at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, and is now 'settling in at home', the couple said. 

She has been named Lilibet after the family nickname for the Queen, the baby's great-grandmother, while her middle name was chosen to honour her beloved late grandmother, Princess Diana_. 

_In a message of thanks from Meghan and Harry on the Archewell website, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said: 'On June 4, we were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili. 

'She is more than we could have ever imagined, and we remain grateful for the love and prayers we've felt from across the globe. Thank you for your continued kindness and support during this very special time for our family.' 

Their press secretary said: 'The Duke and Duchess thank you for your warm wishes and prayers as they enjoy this special time as a family.' 
_









						Meghan gives birth to baby girl
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## redney

So June 10 went out the window?
And her pregnancy discomfort reported on June 5....also done I guess?
Lilibet Diana. That poor child.

Wonder what Doria thinks?


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I wish someone would ask Oprah to comment on this


I wish the Daily Mail, or other news agencies, would headline it!


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan Markle Has Given Birth To A Baby Girl Named Lilibet Diana — BuzzFeed News
> 
> 
> The baby was born Friday at 11:40 a.m. and is named after her great-grandmother the Queen and grandmother Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


What?!  That’s so awful, I can’t believe they’d do that 
ETA well it’s on the BBC.  It’s in such appalling bad taste I thought it must be a joke   But no, poor little sod.


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> So June 10 went out the window?


June 10, July 1, July 4, they missed all these dates 

They completely ignored Doria's name and the names of MM's grandmothers. I wonder why...


----------



## csshopper

redney said:


> So June 10 went out the window?


Poet Robert Burns said it best in the 1700's: "The best laid schemes o' mice an' men/ Gang aft-agley " or as we quote it in modern times: "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry"

Lili has already asserted her independence by arriving on the 6th and not the 10th as previously decreed.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Poet Robert Burns said it best in the 1700's: "The best laid schemes o' mice an' men/ Gang aft-agley " or as we quote it in modern times: "The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry"
> 
> Lili has already asserted her independence by arriving on the 6th and not the 10th as previously decreed.


I do believe they (H and wife) put out the June 10 just for the headlines.


----------



## gracekelly

Such liars. Why tell the world the baby was expected June 10th when the baby had been born.   Who has a screw loose?


----------



## rose60610

She had the kid June 4th, and we hear about it June 6th. Hmm. I agree with previous post, a big FU to the BRF about the names. That racist institution! They might as well have added "Phillipa" to the mix. Can their suck up sounds be any louder?


----------



## gracekelly

I can’t bring myself to even say that name out loud.  They took a private family name and sullied it.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> She had the kid June 4th, and we hear about it June 6th. Hmm. I agree with previous post, a big FU to the BRF about the names. That racist institution! They might as well have added "Phillipa" to the mix. Can their suck up sounds be any louder?


Even my DH just said they are so desperate to suck up.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> June 10, July 1, July 4, they missed all these dates
> 
> They completely ignored Doria's name and the names of MM's grandmothers. I wonder why...


No money from that quarter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> Such liars. Why tell the world the baby was expected June 10th when the baby had been born.   Who has a screw loose?


Manipulation is the name of the game.  I’m not sure how this is going to go down - using a very personal family name is quite intrusive.  In the UK I don’t think it’ll be seen as a sweet gesture - could be seen differently in the US I suppose


----------



## rose60610

They sure are getting a lot of merching mileage out of dead Diana, new Baby Lilibet Diana is simply another merch machine. If this name doesn't scream "nothing is off limits for publicity and merch whores" nothing does.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

It is odd that they would name their child after the queen, and a very personal nickname considering Harry doesn't appear as close to his grandmother as other grandchildren. I wonder if Princess Beatrice planned on naming her child Elizabeth since she and her sister have always been close to their grandparents. It could be that they wanted to name their child Lilberth because they can't have titles, and naming her Lilberth makes it very obvious she is a product of British royalty. 

Charlottes middle name is Diana too so I think it was a given that H&M wouldn't name her Diana. 

I wonder how Doria feels, since they seem to pay tribute to Harrys family a lot, yet we hardly hear of her mum.


----------



## Clearblueskies

rose60610 said:


> They sure are getting a lot of merching mileage out of dead Diana, new Baby Lilibet Diana is simply another merch machine. If this name doesn't scream "nothing is off limits for publicity and merch whores" nothing does.


I’m really shocked by it.  I feel sorry for the child that’s having this burden shoved on it.  Counting the minutes till we hear about her resemblance to Diana.......Diana’s eyes....etc., etc,  Not to mention the *special bond* the baby has with QE2.  I feel queasy.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I can’t bring myself to even say that name out loud.  They took a private family name and sullied it.


 I don't think QE is pleased, it's her private family name. 
They will likely try to cash in on that name as they do with everything.


----------



## bag-mania

Lilibet Diana? Not since J.K Rowling had Harry Potter name his son after Dumbledore and Snape has a child’s name been so contrived to please the fans.


----------



## Aimee3

So where were the paps if the baby wasn’t born at home?  However did they manage to get to and fro the hospital without being seen?  The ones that complain they have no privacy.


----------



## redney

Using the Queen's personal family nickname. Unbelievable. I hope QE is so offended that it pushes her further toward completely cutting the ties with these awful grifters.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> June 10, July 1, July 4, they missed all these dates
> 
> They completely ignored Doria's name and the names of MM's grandmothers. I wonder why...



1. Please remember us in your will Grandma 

2. We are (re)uniting the RF and Diana


----------



## bisousx

Creepy

As a grandson, Harry wouldn’t have ever called his grandma Lillibet. So he names his daughter with a very private nickname used by QE’s husband (and QE’s siblings), all while in the midst of huge family drama where QE most certainly wouldn’t have approved or appreciated this nod?

And poor Doria. I only hope she isn’t hurt and just wants to be left out of this.


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> So June 10 went out the window?
> And her pregnancy discomfort reported on June 5....also done I guess?
> Lilibet Diana. That poor child.
> 
> *Wonder what Doria thinks?*



It appears that Meghan doesn't allow Doria to think, or say, anything. Doria's purpose is to demonstrate to the world that Meghan hasn't written off 100% of her side of the family. As long as there is one relative that was invited to the wedding and allowed in photos, Meghan can say "Family is everything".


----------



## Genie27

Genie27 said:


> In terms of naming wee sprog #2, my money is now on Betty.


Hahahaha....I was close but this is even worse.


----------



## lulilu

You know they put out the false "difficult pregnancy" and due date of June 10 when baby already born.  And I don't think Lilibet was that well-known as HM's private family name.  A name her DH and parents called her.  How awful for H&M to claim it.  IDK how HM will even address the child with her private nickname.


----------



## Allisonfaye

rose60610 said:


> It appears that Meghan doesn't allow Doria to think, or say, anything. Doria's purpose is to demonstrate to the world that Meghan hasn't written off 100% of her side of the family. As long as there is one relative that was invited to the wedding and allowed in photos, Meghan can say "Family is everything".



Nailed.It.


----------



## Icyjade

lulilu said:


> You know they put out the false "difficult pregnancy" and due date of June 10 when baby already born.  And I don't think Lilibet was that well-known as HM's private family name.  A name her DH and parents called her.  How awful for H&M to claim it.  IDK how HM will even address the child with her private nickname.



Agree and I hate it. Pity the baby for her awful parents


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jess236

bisousx said:


> Creepy
> 
> As a grandson, Harry wouldn’t have ever called his grandma Lillibet. So he names his daughter with a very private nickname used by QE’s husband (and QE’s siblings), all while in the midst of huge family drama where QE most certainly wouldn’t have approved or appreciated this nod?
> 
> And poor Doria. I only hope she isn’t hurt and just wants to be left out of this.



I agree. I don't think they would appreciate this name. Lilibet is not sucking up, it is being offensive.


----------



## lulilu

And of course they didn't consult with the Queen before naming, as is the usual practice?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan Markle Has Given Birth To A Baby Girl Named Lilibet Diana — BuzzFeed News
> 
> 
> The baby was born Friday at 11:40 a.m. and is named after her great-grandmother the Queen and grandmother Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



I came here just for this...I didn't click on the article on Huffpost but wanted to learn from y'all if this was a prank article.

Lilibet Diana, are these people for real? Also we called it weeks ago, we should have all bet money (then again, I laughed back then when I saw it posted because it seemed so...ridiculously _overwrought_, maybe?).


----------



## bag-mania

bisousx said:


> Creepy
> 
> As a grandson, Harry wouldn’t have ever called his grandma Lillibet. So he names his daughter with a very private nickname used by QE’s husband (and QE’s siblings), all while in the midst of huge family drama where QE most certainly wouldn’t have approved or appreciated this nod?
> 
> And poor Doria. I only hope she isn’t hurt and just wants to be left out of this.



Do we believe Harry gets any say in naming his offspring? What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.


----------



## maris.crane

It’s... _a choice._

I don’t love nicknames as actual names.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I came here just for this...I didn't click on the article on Huffpost but wanted to learn from y'all if this was a prank article.
> 
> Lilibet Diana, are these people for real? Also we called it weeks ago, we should have all bet money (then again, I laughed when I saw it posted because it seemed so...ridiculously _overwrought_, maybe?).



It's really kind of infuriating.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Such liars. Why tell the world the baby was expected June 10th when the baby had been born.   Who has a screw loose?



I don't know...people who put out a press release Raptor was in labour the last time around when the baby had already been born and she was allegedly back home with him?


----------



## rose60610

Could naming their baby girl "Lilibet Diana" simply be a Hail Mary pass in effort to save their royal titles? How can The Queen renounce their titles now? I'd love to still see it done. And if done, would M&H change the kid's name?


----------



## kipp

rose60610 said:


> Could naming their baby girl "Lilibet Diana" simply be a Hail Mary pass in effort to save their royal titles? How can The Queen renounce their titles now? I'd love to still see it done. And if done, would M&H change the kid's name?


I thought this was the idea, too.  In addition to the $$$ that might come their way ultimately. 
Kept thinking this move was "dialing for dollars"!


----------



## Kansashalo

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan Markle Has Given Birth To A Baby Girl Named Lilibet Diana — BuzzFeed News
> 
> 
> The baby was born Friday at 11:40 a.m. and is named after her great-grandmother the Queen and grandmother Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Awww, congrats to them on their baby girl!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I am very confused, who is there beef with? 

I mean they say the royal family is racist, doesn't protect them and there was mental health issues resulting from working in the royal family. 

Are they saying its Charles, William or Kate at fault, or the staff hired at the palace. I am honestly confused as to why they would leave the royal family, set up their own path, continue to bash the family (by telling very personal details and blaming others) but then name their offspring after the head of the institution that they left (due to mental health issues).


----------



## TC1

So, they stole George's knickname for Archie and now TQ's nickname for their daughter? They try really hard to be engaged with a family they supposedly can't stand


----------



## gelbergirl

I got here as soon as I could.
My my my, Harry really loves to trade on these names doesn't he.

(I mean it's a nice gesture, but we know what he's up to).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Are they saying its Charles, William or Kate at fault, or the staff hired at the palace. I am honestly confused as to why they would leave the royal family, set up their own path, continue to bash the family (by telling very personal details and blaming others) but then name their offspring after the head of the institution that they left (due to mental health issues).



You are absolutely right, they named the baby the way they did _due do mental health issues_ (I know that's now what you meant, but...).


----------



## Shopaholic2021

I wonder what the occupation will say on the birth certificate for the parents. Or do US birth certificates not have this. 

With Archie they were both listed as Prince and Princess of the UK I think.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

jess236 said:


> I agree. I don't think they would appreciate this name. Lilibet is not sucking up, it is being offensive.



When Meghan calls the shots, it's always A Hit And A Miss! How vile of a person are you to give your own child a name simply to be offensive, though I can see M doing it. It'd be like Harry insisting on naming her "Cressida". 

It also gives Meghan another opportunity to scream "Victim"! She'll be criticized and she'll insist it was Harry's idea or that she was simply trying to honor The Queen. (The head of a "racist" institution.) The Queen. Age 95. Still of sound mind and body. To reinsert H&M into the will. And not take away their titles.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’ve been staying away from this thread but I just cannot stop thinking of the permanent link they made between the Queen and Diana (someone the Queen had no love lost for).

Unusual tribute.

Anyway. Glad she is healthy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pft, it will take more than a stolen nickname to manipulate the Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> So, they stole George's knickname for Archie and now TQ's nickname for their daughter? They try really hard to be engaged with a family they supposedly can't stand



They do that to look sweet and innocent to their fans and the press. They NEED that positive popularity to keep the wheels in motion for their plans.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> They do that to look sweet and innocent to their fans and the press. They NEED that positive popularity to keep the wheels in motion for their plans.


It’s like propaganda


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> I’ve been staying away from this thread but I just cannot stop thinking of the permanent link they made between the Queen and Diana (someone the Queen had no love lost for).
> 
> Unusual tribute.
> 
> Anyway. Glad she is healthy.



To be fair William did it first. Charlotte has both Elizabeth and Diana as middle names. Still using the Queen’s informal family nickname is taking it a few steps beyond a tribute.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Putting all the disdain I feel for both parents aside, I'm happy to read mother and baby are doing well.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> To be fair William did it first. Charlotte has both Elizabeth and Diana as middle names. Still using the Queen’s informal family nickname is taking it a few steps beyond a tribute.



Catherines middle name is Elizabeth too, so I don't know if this was a tribute to the Queen or Catherine herself.


----------



## Sophie-Rose

These two are truly vile.... hope the baby is healthy, but that is such a low blow! Disgraceful!


----------



## creme fraiche

I'm actually horrified by the name.  Lillibet is a nickname conceived out of affection by a father to his daughter and used privately by family members.  For these two numpties who seem determined to rip down the institution of the monarchy represented by the Queen is deeply offensive.  As with everything these 2 do, completely tone deaf and ill conceived.


----------



## rose60610

I wonder if the BRF was given a heads up when the baby was actually born or did they learn about two days later like the rest of us?


----------



## rhyvin

Did they get demoted on the royal website *after* she had given birth and named her daughter? Like..... how dare you do this after all you’ve done to this family? I’m assuming there was a phone call to Buckingham Palace notifying the queen of the birth.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Catherines middle name is Elizabeth too, so I don't know if this was a tribute to the Queen or Catherine herself.



Elizabeth is a popular middle name. My middle name is Elizabeth. And that was done in honor of both of my grandmothers’ middle names being Elizabeth. None of which had anything to do with the Queen.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> To be fair William did it first. Charlotte has both Elizabeth and Diana as middle names. Still using the Queen’s informal family nickname is taking it a few steps beyond a tribute.


But he hasn’t been engaging in a one-sided war attacking the family, he’s carrying on the work and tradition.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if the BRF was given a heads up when the baby was actually born or did they learn about two days later like the rest of us?



Maybe Harry sent Kate a text an hour before the story broke.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> To be fair William did it first. Charlotte has both Elizabeth and Diana as middle names. Still using the Queen’s informal family nickname is taking it a few steps beyond a tribute.


True, but Catherines middle name is Elizabeth and it's her mother's middle name too so that covered honouring both family ties.


----------



## marietouchet

Boy my  guess on the names - what a stinker of a guess ... I SO got it wrong LOL


----------



## daisychainz

I saw that they had a daughter and selected the name. I'm pretty shocked to know they selected a very personal nickname that belongs to someone else as the first name for their child. It is really incredibly bizarre and not something they should have done without some permission. I wonder if QE was told, or asked? I'd be livid if someone took my private nickname as a name for their child, it's horrible. I don't see anything wrong with Diana since it's his mother but the nickname is private to QE. What a hateful couple they are.


----------



## Sharont2305

creme fraiche said:


> I'm actually horrified by the name.  Lillibet is a nickname conceived out of affection by a father to his daughter and used privately by family members.  For these two numpties who seem determined to rip down the institution of the monarchy represented by the Queen is deeply offensive.  As with everything these 2 do, completely tone deaf and ill conceived.


I think it initially started as a toddler Princess Margaret couldn't say Elizabeth, sounded like Lilibet and it stuck. I think her children David and Sarah to this day call her Aunt Lilibet.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I can’t bring myself to even say that name out loud.  They took a private family name and sullied it.



I thought it was a joke at first.  Lilibet?  It's a darling name but that's the Queen's nickname. I wonder if Harry bothered to ask the Queen if she was good with that?


----------



## Clearblueskies

A source will next be telling us all about little Lilibet’s new Corgi puppy


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Could naming their baby girl "Lilibet Diana" simply be a Hail Mary pass in effort to save their royal titles? How can The Queen renounce their titles now? I'd love to still see it done. And if done, would M&H change the kid's name?


This is their ticket to the Jubilee.  On one hand you have the hypocrisy of  naming the child for TQ and the fact that they yanked Archie away from his family. On the other hand they will use this as a way to go back and be treated as if they never left. They will want the full balcony treatment with both children in tow. They will act as if nothing ever happened and nothing was ever said. The children are tools of manipulation 

They are going to defend the decision to deliberately put out false information as the means of insuring their privacy for the birth. Tell people it won’t happen for a week and they won’t sit on your doorstep waiting for you to go to the hospital. I bet they could not come up with the amount of money needed for the fancy Cedar-Sinai maternity suite.


----------



## marietouchet

I remember the story of the origins of the nickname Lilibet ...

My granny was an enormous fan-girl of the BRF in her day ...

My Welsh/English granny had the book written by Marion Crawford - governess to Elizabeth and Margaret - Crawfie as she was called, wrote what we would now call an innocuous account but was scandalous back then, recounting her time with the Princesses.
Terribly louche to own a copy of the book, it was on the equivalent of the BRF's Index of Forbidden books ...

Anyway, Crawfie recounted that M could not pronounce Elizabeth and her garbled sister's name became Lilibet - interesting story of the mispronunciation of the name by a toddler

That the nickname was divulged was a scandal of monstrous proportions according to my Granny - making fun of Margaret's speech and all that ..

PS Another prediction, mine on the name was so way wrong but I shall bravely make another one - she will be called Lily - her real first name will be forgotten like the Rachel and Henry of her parents


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I thought it was a joke at first.  Lilibet?  It's a darling name but that's the Queen's nickname. I wonder if Harry bothered to ask the Queen if she was good with that?


She will say “opinions may vary.”


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I remember the story of the origins of the nickname Lilibet ...
> 
> My Welsh/English granny had the book written by Marion Crawford - governess to Elizabeth and Margaret - Crawfie as she was called, wrote what we would now call an innocuous account but was scandalous at the times, of her time with the Princesses.
> Terribly louche to own a copy of the book, it was on the equivalent of the BRF's Index of Forbidden books ...
> 
> Anyway, Crawfie recounted that M could not pronounce Elizabeth and her garbled sister's name became Lilibet - interesting story of the mispronunciation of the name by a toddler
> 
> That the nickname was divulged was a scandal of monstrous proportions according to my Granny - making fun of Margaret's speech and all that ..


Queen Mum Markled Crawfie after that book. They even took away her grace and favor cottage.


----------



## sdkitty

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I am very confused, who is there beef with?
> 
> I mean they say the royal family is racist, doesn't protect them and there was mental health issues resulting from working in the royal family.
> 
> Are they saying its Charles, William or Kate at fault, or the staff hired at the palace. I am honestly confused as to why they would leave the royal family, set up their own path, continue to bash the family (by telling very personal details and blaming others) but then name their offspring after the head of the institution that they left (due to mental health issues).


it seems the queen is the only one they won't say or imply anything bad about....yet it is charles who pays their bills.  I don't think the queen is going to take that over - or tell charles what to do in that regard


----------



## EverSoElusive

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Catherines middle name is Elizabeth too, so I don't know if this was a tribute to the Queen or Catherine herself.



Kate's own great grandmother was an Elizabeth hence hers and her mom's middle name 

ETA: I suspect that's a tribute to both sides of the family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> it seems the queen is the only one they won't say or imply anything bad about....yet it is charles who pays their bills.  I don't think the queen is going to take that over - or tell charles what to do in that regard



Recollections may vary, but didn't Harry call her basically a bad mother just weeks ago?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe this is why the story came out about Kate going to the Diana tribute instead of Harry.


----------



## Sharont2305

A daughter FOR them. Shade?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Just echoing what others have said already.  It’s the pinnacle of disrespect to the Queen to use her private nickname.  Can you imagine the mermaid calling the Queen “Lilibet” in person?????????????  Its ABSURD!!!!!!! 

It’s completely designed to grate at and minimize the Queen.  

I can already see it.  Mermaid and JCMH eventually bring Lilibet back to see the Queen.  Mermaid finds some reason to chastise baby Lilibet.  “Stop running Lilibet!  You need to walk BEHIND ME, LILIBET!!!!!!!!!!!!!”


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> A daughter FOR them. Shade?


Absolutely, wow.


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> A daughter FOR them. Shade?


I think I loathe Scooobie-dooobie-doo as much as Hap-Hazza and Meghan-o-lo-maniac!  So, Lilibet Diana .. who could have predicted that?!?! (KIDDING BIG-TIME)!


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> I remember the story of the origins of the nickname Lilibet ...
> 
> My granny was an enormous fan-girl of the BRF in her day ...
> 
> My Welsh/English granny had the book written by Marion Crawford - governess to Elizabeth and Margaret - Crawfie as she was called, wrote what we would now call an innocuous account but was scandalous back then, recounting her time with the Princesses.
> Terribly louche to own a copy of the book, it was on the equivalent of the BRF's Index of Forbidden books ...
> 
> Anyway, Crawfie recounted that M could not pronounce Elizabeth and her garbled sister's name became Lilibet - interesting story of the mispronunciation of the name by a toddler
> 
> That the nickname was divulged was a scandal of monstrous proportions according to my Granny - making fun of Margaret's speech and all that ..
> 
> PS Another prediction, mine on the name was so way wrong but I shall bravely make another one - she will be called Lily - her real first name will be forgotten like the Rachel and Henry of her parents


NPR is reporting Lili…









						Meghan And Prince Harry Welcome Their Second Child, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana
					

The second baby for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is officially here: Meghan gave birth to a healthy girl on Friday. Her first name, Lilibet, is a nod to Her Majesty The Queen's nickname.




					www.npr.org


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Just echoing what others have said already.  It’s the pinnacle of disrespect to the Queen to use her private nickname.  Can you imagine the mermaid calling the Queen “Lilibet” in person?????????????  Its ABSURD!!!!!!!
> 
> It’s completely designed to grate at and minimize the Queen.
> 
> I can already see it.  Mermaid and JCMH eventually bring Lilibet back to see the Queen.  Mermaid finds some reason to chastise baby Lilibet.  “Stop running Lilibet!  You need to walk BEHIND ME, LILIBET!!!!!!!!!!!!!”


LOL
I don't know what the intention is but I think they're the last people in the family entitled to do this - and I'm sure without asking


----------



## justwatchin

Shopaholic2021 said:


> It is odd that they would name their child after the queen, and a very personal nickname considering Harry doesn't appear as close to his grandmother as other grandchildren. I wonder if Princess Beatrice planned on naming her child Elizabeth since she and her sister have always been close to their grandparents. It could be that they wanted to name their child Lilberth because they can't have titles, and naming her Lilberth makes it very obvious she is a product of British royalty.
> 
> Charlottes middle name is Diana too so I think it was a given that H&M wouldn't name her Diana.
> 
> I wonder how Doria feels, since they seem to pay tribute to Harrys family a lot, yet we hardly hear of her mum.


Doria doesn’t bring in the money like capitalizing off the BRF does and continues to do.


----------



## Chagall

OMG how predictable was that. Named after the queen and Diana. Those two are just too much. I don’t imagine even the queen likes that.


----------



## justwatchin

Aimee3 said:


> So where were the paps if the baby wasn’t born at home?  However did they manage to get to and fro the hospital without being seen?  The ones that complain they have no privacy.


Just wait…I’m expecting a PEOPLE magazine cover. Follow the money.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

There was no official announcement by the palace, or the queen or Prince Charles. I assume they would have been notified a few hours after the birth. Meghan did say in the interview that she can not just pick up the phone and call the queen and she couldn't do that when she was a working royal due to the people around her/suits.


----------



## jelliedfeels

you know I haven’t been getting any updates on TPF. Then I saw the news and now assume the site is struggling to keep up with demand   


Shopaholic2021 said:


> It is odd that they would name their child after the queen, and a very personal nickname considering Harry doesn't appear as close to his grandmother as other grandchildren. I wonder if Princess Beatrice planned on naming her child Elizabeth since she and her sister have always been close to their grandparents. It could be that they wanted to name their child Lilberth because they can't have titles, and naming her Lilberth makes it very obvious she is a product of British royalty.
> 
> Charlottes middle name is Diana too so I think it was a given that H&M wouldn't name her Diana.
> 
> I wonder how Doria feels, since they seem to pay tribute to Harrys family a lot, yet we hardly hear of her mum.


How often do they hear from mama Doria? I get the impression she’s no longer useful. 


papertiger said:


> 1. Please remember us in your will Grandma
> 
> 2. We are (re)uniting the RF and Diana


3. Trademark the name and claim we came up with it all along 
Just wait for Lilibet the t shirt, lilibet the colouring book, lilibet the lunchbox, lilibet the breakfast cereal, lilibet the flame thrower and finally lilibet the doll…adorable!

if Archie has a money laundry named after him we can only guess what they are going to passively aggressively do with the Queen’s name.

I am just dreading seeing them simpering about how much they love granny


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I do believe they (H and wife) put out the June 10 just for the headlines.


Chanbal, I totally agree and hereby recind my prior post about "best laid plans". Meanwhile the smug parents have toddled back to Montecito laughing at having pulled off another one, aren't they clever.
As for her name, how very ironic the most estranged members of the family co opt the most intimate name in the family, proving yet again how utterly tone deaf they are. I looked a few minutes ago but haven't yet seen a reaction from the family, maybe they are on a Zoom call trying to figure out what to say?


----------



## Traminer

daisychainz said:


> I saw that they had a daughter and selected the name. I'm pretty shocked to know they selected a very personal nickname that belongs to someone else as the first name for their child. It is really incredibly bizarre and not something they should have done without some permission. I wonder if QE was told, or asked? I'd be livid if someone took my private nickname as a name for their child, it's horrible. I don't see anything wrong with Diana since it's his mother but the nickname is private to QE. What a hateful couple they are.


----------



## Traminer

daisychainz said:


> I saw that they had a daughter and selected the name. I'm pretty shocked to know they selected a very personal nickname that belongs to someone else as the first name for their child. It is really incredibly bizarre and not something they should have done without some permission. I wonder if QE was told, or asked? I'd be livid if someone took my private nickname as a name for their child, it's horrible. I don't see anything wrong with Diana since it's his mother but the nickname is private to QE. What a hateful couple they are.




".... the nickname is private to QE."

Exactly!

It is like a protected trademark.

And this does not sound respectful, but  more like some ironic attack.


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> Chanbal, I totally agree and hereby recind my prior post. Meanwhile the smug parents have toddled back to Montecito laughing at having pulled off another one, aren't they clever.
> As for her name, how very ironic the most estranged members of the family co opt the most intimate name in the family, proving yet again how utterly tone deaf they are. I looked a few minutes ago but haven't yet seen a reaction from the family, maybe they are on a Zoom call trying to figure out what to say?


@Sharont2305 posted it a few moments ago, if you go back upthread you’ll see it.


----------



## Traminer

maris.crane said:


> I don’t love nicknames as actual names.



I agree 100 percent! 
Neither do I.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> To be fair William did it first. Charlotte has both Elizabeth and Diana as middle names. Still using the Queen’s informal family nickname is taking it a few steps beyond a tribute.


Yes but it is very common in British society and I assume others to give your child a grandparent’s name as a middle name. Also it’s quite common to give a middle name in tribute of a relative who dies prematurely.( I felt a bit bad actually as I had a relative pass suddenly before I had my baby but I never liked the name and I thought the child might get teased so I just kept hoping the tradition didn’t occur to anyone )
 I think Diana as a middle name was a given. Lilibet on the other hand, I find a bit….odd  or intrusive as far as I know the person who called her that has just died.
 It is just weird too it’s a bit like if my kid named their baby ‘mr jellied’ after what I call my OH  on this forum


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes but it is very common in British society and I assume others to give your child a grandparent’s name as a middle name. Also it’s quite common to give a middle name in tribute of a relative who dies prematurely.( I felt a bit bad actually as I had a relative pass suddenly before I had my baby but I never liked the name and I thought the child might get teased so I just kept hoping the tradition didn’t occur to anyone )
> I think Diana as a middle name was a given. Lilibet on the other hand, I find a bit….odd  or intrusive as far as I know the person who called her that has just died.
> It is just weird too it’s a bit like if my kid named their baby ‘mr jellied’ after what I call my OH  on this forum


this kinda goes with Meghan being pushy doesn't it?  I don't like pushy people or users


----------



## Sharont2305

Just had a thought, poor Archie. Given a normal name with no sentimental family meaning, apart from Harrison being Harry's son, especially as at the time he and his parents were members of the Royal family. Then BOOM, Lilibet arrives and he's down in the pecking order name wise.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Just had a thought, poor Archie. Given a normal name with no sentimental meaning, apart from Harrison being Harry's son, especially as at the time he and his parents were members of the Royal family. Then BOOM, he's down in the pecking order name wise.


and I personally don't like the name Archie.....It's kinda lightweight or something.


----------



## Helventara

Sharont2305 said:


> A daughter FOR them. Shade?


 Sorry, for the non native English speaker among us, can you please explain what this means?  I am very curious.


----------



## V0N1B2

Sharont2305 said:


> Just had a thought, poor Archie. Given a normal name with no sentimental family meaning, apart from Harrison being Harry's son, especially as at the time he and his parents were members of the Royal family. Then BOOM, Lilibet arrives and he's down in the pecking order name wise.


Well, not exactly. Archie was named after his mother (just as the Archewell "charity" was)
ARCHIE 
RACHEL

ARCHEWELL
RACHEL


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## muddledmint

maris.crane said:


> It’s... _a choice._
> 
> I don’t love nicknames as actual names.


Both their kids are named with nicknames. Ugh


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> Both their kids are named with nicknames. Ugh


tacky


----------



## rose60610

DH's reaction: the name is an obvious attempt to keep their titles from being taken away. Whenever he hears of them on TV he refers to them as "What a couple of F Ups."


----------



## Hermes Zen

redney said:


> So June 10 went out the window?
> And her pregnancy discomfort reported on June 5....also done I guess?
> Lilibet Diana. That poor child.
> 
> Wonder what Doria thinks?



Yes, M couldn't hold on a little longer til June 10th to make it a trifecta. QE, D and PP!


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


>




"Wishing them well *at this time"  *

"at this time"??


----------



## Clearblueskies

BVBookshop said:


> Sorry, for the non native English speaker among us, can you please explain what this means?  I am very curious.


You would normally talk about a child as being born TO a couple.  Using the word *for* leaves room for speculation moonbump-wise.  Whether this was intentional or not, I couldn’t possibly say


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> Such liars. Why tell the world the baby was expected June 10th when the baby had been born.   Who has a screw loose?



AND they said birth at home.  Yep, right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

Sharont2305 said:


>



This “artful arrangement of subjects” makes me laugh - Harry is hanging his head, archies completely knackered with hanging out on the moon bump all day, and the only face visible is the magnificent Madonna of Montecito, smug and centered.

Do the Cambs have to pay a royalty for the use of that photo?


----------



## Lodpah

Well a baby being born is a time for celebration. I wish Lilibet Diana the best of health, joy and happiness.


----------



## artax two

redney said:


> So June 10 went out the window?
> And her pregnancy discomfort reported on June 5....also done I guess?
> Lilibet Diana. That poor child.
> 
> Wonder what Doria thinks?


Did she really get Diana as one of her names? Sickening.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


>




Is it me or does that read a bit cold? (not blaming the Cornwalls AT ALL, in fact the Cambridges' and Queen's statement rubbed me entirely the wrong way even though I understand why they wouldn't use a birth announcement to teach a lesson)


----------



## Helventara

Thanks for the explanation. Wow


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> You would normally talk about a child as being born TO a couple.  Using the word *for* leaves room for speculation moonbump-wise.  Whether this was intentional or not, I couldn’t possibly say



I thought the wording of the RF's announcement was interesting too...especially when you compare it with "Princess Eugenie was safely delivered of a boy".


----------



## Sharont2305

I think they should have announced this either yesterday or tomorrow, or even on the actual day she was born.
Today is the 77th Anniversary of the D-day landings in Normandy. A day Harry should be well aware of.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it me or does that read a bit cold? (not blaming the Cornwalls AT ALL, in fact the Cambridges' and Queen's statement rubbed me entirely the wrong way even though I understand why they wouldn't use a birth announcement to teach a lesson)


I agree


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I think they should have announced this either yesterday or tomorrow, or even on the actual day she was born.
> Today is the 77th Anniversary of the D-day landings in Normandy. A day Harry should be well aware of.



But yesterday or tomorrow or her birthday couldn't have stolen the limelight of a historic event!


----------



## 1LV

lulilu said:


> *It's really kind of infuriating*.


Mission accomplished?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought the wording of the RF's announcement was interesting too...especially when you compare it with "Princess Eugenie was safely delivered of a boy".


But the RF wouldn't have made any announcement in this case. They were "responding" to the announcement.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it me or does that read a bit cold? (not blaming the Cornwalls AT ALL, in fact the Cambridges' and Queen's statement rubbed me entirely the wrong way even though I understand why they wouldn't use a birth announcement to teach a lesson)



Well, they don't even have a pic of the new born to accompany their respective messages. 

Must be 'fun' to have one of your brother's (long awaited) photo to accompany the announcement of your birth.


----------



## youngster

artax two said:


> Did she really get Diana as one of her names? Sickening.



Yes, it's Lilibet Diana but, to be fair, Will and Kate named their daughter Charlotte Elizabeth Diana. I don't see anything wrong with using the name Diana as a middle name. Much better than a first name which would have been a cruel thing to do.   A middle name is OK; she is the child's grandmother and both Harry and Will obviously both wanted to honor her memory which is fine.  It's the use of the Queen's private nickname that has me gobsmacked after they trashed the family and the Queen just weeks ago.  

Gotta wonder did the Queen give them permission?  Did they even ask permission or just go ahead and do it so that no one could stop them?  With these two, I'd bet they didn't ask.  They would just assume the Queen would be thrilled lol.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Found a pic of Lili.


----------



## lulilu

Just when I thought I couldn't dislike them more.  What kind of twisted minds to they have?  Can you imagine the discussions about the name?  uuuuuggggghhhhh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> But the RF wouldn't have made any announcement in this case. They were "responding" to the announcement.



I mean the Instagram posting they put out on the official BRF Insta. Can't link because I'm on my laptop and non-cell phone Insta is so annoying to navigate. Statement was probably the wrong word, their congratulatory message?


----------



## maris.crane

muddledmint said:


> Both their kids are named with nicknames. Ugh



I did not think of Archie! I don’t mind the name Archie. And I totally know choosing a baby name is super personal BUT: Archie and Jack (for instance) are both nicknames but they still feel like real names. Lilibet... it doesn’t feel like a real name to me.


----------



## lulilu

rose60610 said:


> Could naming their baby girl "Lilibet Diana" simply be a Hail Mary pass in effort to save their royal titles?


[QUOTE="bag-mania, post: 34573607, member: 49675]
Gotta wonder did the Queen give them permission?  Did they even ask permission or just go ahead and do it so that no one could stop them?  With these two, I'd bet they didn't ask.  They would just assume the Queen would be thrilled lol.
[/QUOTE]

I am confident they just sprung it on everyone.  And I don't think it was a hail mary.  I think it was an fu.


----------



## Chagall

muddledmint said:


> Both their kids are named with nicknames. Ugh


I agree, don’t like their name choices. Gimmicky and odd. Archie sounds like a nick name also. Short for Archibald usually, but not for their son. Harrison also gimmicky (son of Harry, great give me a break). If I was the queen I would yet again be furious at their presumptive behaviour. That was a very private nick name. Did they ask her permission before naming their child after her in that odd way. I doubt it. Because the queen is very conservative and I don’t think she would have agreed. I don’t know, it seems almost like they are trying to make fun of her.


----------



## Sharont2305

I've just read something a Royal correspondent has posted on twitter, The Queen doesn't give permission on naming a baby, she gives her blessing. So Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the wee donkey (for the Brits) will know what she thought of that!


----------



## carmen56

Given the amount of ordure these two have heaped on the RF recently, I don’t know how they have the brass neck to use HMQ’s family nickname for their child.  Talk about sticking two fingers up!


----------



## rose60610

If it was an fu and interpreted by the BRF as an fu, that's all the more reason (and how many reasons are needed?) to yank their titles. ASAP!  M&H are the few people who'd give a child a name simply out of vengeance. Those poor kids. If they ever go back to visit the BRF, you know they'll be programmed and ordered to say certain things just to ruffle feathers.


----------



## Traminer

Chagall said:


> it seems almost like they are trying to make fun of her.



Exactly!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If it was an fu and interpreted by the BRF as an fu, that's all the more reason (and how many reasons are needed?) to yank their titles. ASAP!  M&H are the few people who'd give a child a name simply out of vengeance. Those poor kids. If they ever go back to visit the BRF, you know they'll be programmed and ordered to say certain things just to ruffle feathers.



I wonder if Meghan is trying to force them to do just that so they can pretend they did it as a tribute and the mean old royal family is always trying to hurt them when all they want is to be left in privacy!


----------



## EverSoElusive

I feel really bad for the Queen having to deal with these two knobs who have zero decorum, class and tact. The Queen is probably displeased, maybe even saddened but she has an extraordinary level of self restraint to say anything. 

I wish everything is taken away from them completely, leaving them to be plain ole commoners. No titles and no royal inheritance, other than the money left behind by Diana. 

As long as they retain the Sussex title, corporations (and people) will continue to pay them money and attention just to cash in on the relationship, while these two disrespect and embarrass the BRF.


----------



## CeeJay

carmen56 said:


> Given the amount of ordure these two have heaped on the RF recently, I don’t know how they have the brass neck to use HMQ’s family nickname for their child.  Talk about sticking two fingers up!


.. yup, and it's this one (and if you're a Brit - or know about this, well .. we know what it represents)!!


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> I feel really bad for the Queen having to deal with these two knobs who have zero decorum, class and tact. The Queen is probably displeased, maybe even saddened but she has an extraordinary level of self restraint to say anything.
> 
> I wish everything is taken away from them completely, leaving them to be plain ole commoners. No titles and no royal inheritance, other than the money left behind by Diana.
> 
> As long as they retain the Sussex title, corporations (and people) will continue to pay them money and attention just to cash in on the relationship, while these two disrespect and embarrass the BRF.


HA HA HA .. oh, do I miss my English colleagues and their sayings .. haven't heard KNOBS in some time, but here you go ..


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> I feel really bad for the Queen having to deal with these two knobs who have zero decorum, class and tact. The Queen is probably displeased, maybe even saddened but she has an extraordinary level of self restraint to say anything.
> 
> I wish everything is taken away from them completely, leaving them to be plain ole commoners. No titles and no royal inheritance, other than the money left behind by Diana.
> 
> As long as they retain the Sussex title, corporations (and people) will continue to pay them money and attention just to cash in on the relationship, while these two disrespect and embarrass the BRF.



I think the Queen can put them out of her mind. The woman has remarkable composure and self-discipline.

My gut tells me it’s actually Charles who they are trying to give the f**k you. He stopped the flow of cash and that was unforgivable for the greedy Sussexes. Now they want to show him how powerless he is to stop them from doing whatever they want. Charles couldn’t protect his father from enduring their whining to Oprah in his last days and he cannot protect his mother’s nickname from being appropriated for a future valley girl.


----------



## catlover46

I haven’t posted in a while but how disrespectful to use the name “Lilibet”


----------



## youngster

This has to be so confusing for their stans. For months, these two have been vilifying the family and now they are naming the baby after the Queen?  How do you reconcile that?

So, this is either:
1. A big suck up. _ "Look at our meaningful olive branch to the family! No matter what we said in those interviews we do still love you all so very much that we named our daughter after the Queen, so please don't take our titles away!"_
2. A big FU.  _"We can do anything we want, even use the Queen's private nickname, and you can't stop us."  _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

On the plus side, I’m kind of relieved they didn’t choose any of my picks, that would have been embarrassing as my child is actually due in *late* summer. 

I should’ve known I was going far too high brow with Mercy! Stick to the most obvious thing!


----------



## catlover46

youngster said:


> This has to be so confusing for their stans. For months, these two have been vilifying the family and now they are naming the baby after the Queen?  How do you reconcile that?
> 
> So, this is either:
> 1. A big suck up. _ "Look at our meaningful olive branch to the family! No matter what we said in those interviews we do still love you all so very much that we named our daughter after the Queen, so please don't take our titles away!"_
> 2. A big FU.  _"We can do anything we want, even use the Queen's private nickname, and you can't stop us."  _


On Celebitchy, one of the stans said they’ll just call her Lili and forget the “Betty” association with it plus they still think Harry has a “wonderful” relationship with QEII


----------



## Traminer

Some re-actions elsewhere



> Since that interview, Harry has shared his own sense of trauma, comparing being a member of the Royal Family to “being in a zoo.”  So for many monarchists, the couple’s choice names was yet another example of their scheming, manipulative, disrespectful, thumb-in-the-eye approach to the Windsors.
> 
> Not even three days old, the baby has already attracted outrage. “Of course they explained the name origins, just in case you didn’t know how they were honouring the Royal Family,” wrote one Twitter follower. “Very calculated.” Another chimed in, “They might as well called her cash cow.” Succinctly framing the problem, someone tweeted, “So after all the grief they caused Her Maj they use her pet name. They have no moral compass.” And another argued, “Harry & Meghan name their daughter after the racist #RoyalFamily, esp. the Queen who could let racism rampant in the ‘institution’, was a bad mother, the matriarch of a firm causing genetic pain & the enabler of her family’s suffering, including being trapped in the firm.”



More about it: https://www.motherjones.com/media/2021/06/her-name-is-lilibet-diana-and-apparently-thats-a-problem/


----------



## Jktgal

xincinsin said:


> Any likelihood that she might try to curry favour with TQ and name the bump Diana Lilibet?


Congrats @xincinsin you win the prize!!

I wonder if QE2 is... surprised?


----------



## kipp

youngster said:


> This has to be so confusing for their stans. For months, these two have been vilifying the family and now they are naming the baby after the Queen?  How do you reconcile that?
> 
> So, this is either:
> 1. A big suck up. _ "Look at our meaningful olive branch to the family! No matter what we said in those interviews we do still love you all so very much that we named our daughter after the Queen, so please don't take our titles away!"_
> 2. A big FU.  _"We can do anything we want, even use the Queen's private nickname, and you can't stop us."  _



Why not both?


----------



## bisousx

Naming your daughter after your mom & grandma must be a new therapeutic way to get rid of one’s genetic pain


----------



## Lodpah

I find it strange she names her Lilibet the Queen's nickname but yet trashes the Queen. Also what is up with just the back of the head photo shot? Babies change as they grow and they pretty much look all alike. I wish the baby well but the parents are too extra, extra and more extra. It's like she's playing games with people, childish games.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bisousx said:


> Naming your daughter after your mom & grandma must be a new therapeutic way to get rid of one’s genetic pain


....by dumping it on your kid?  Ugh I’m tired of the games these 2 play


----------



## youngster

kipp said:


> Why not both?


 
Good point!  Harry probably thinks it's a suck up and MM knows its a big FU.


----------



## Jktgal

Heard on Australian radio "for people who wants to fly under the radar, they should've picked the name of one the minor casts of Suits."   
Gosh the car wreck that keeps on dragging.


----------



## plastic-fish

You called it @xincinsin ! Back in April, fantastic insight. Different order but the closest, well done!


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> This has to be so confusing for their stans. For months, these two have been vilifying the family and now they are naming the baby after the Queen?  How do you reconcile that?
> 
> So, this is either:
> 1. A big suck up. _ "Look at our meaningful olive branch to the family! No matter what we said in those interviews we do still love you all so very much that we named our daughter after the Queen, so please don't take our titles away!"_
> 2. A big FU.  _"We can do anything we want, even use the Queen's private nickname, and you can't stop us."  _



Never underestimate the stans ability to rationalize and justify everything they do to keep them high on a pedestal. They’ll come up with some reason why naming a child in tribute to a family they are simultaneously demonizing is wonderful and kind.


----------



## Chagall

Just when I thought they had used their complete arsenal in trying to sock it to TRF they come up with this. If I was QE2 I would be insulted. And what about the little girl, she is going to be teased beyond belief growing up. They are prepared to throw their kids under the bus to meet their ends.


----------



## Traminer

As it happens, I have also been born on a 4th of June.
So I will always easily remember  this little baby's birthday.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Traminer said:


> Some re-actions elsewhere
> 
> 
> 
> More about it: https://www.motherjones.com/media/2021/06/her-name-is-lilibet-diana-and-apparently-thats-a-problem/


Slightly OT but this current journalistic style of ‘apparently we should be outraged at the outrage but we’re not actually bothered as we’re cool etc’ really grates on me. Obviously you are on some level engaged in the story too. Unless we’re to believe that the writers go into some sort of fugue state at work and wind up with 50 articles on regional Canadian ice hockey coverage, celebrity gossip, cheese fondue and the Thai silk industry even though they don’t know or care about these things.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Traminer said:


> As it happens, I have also been born on a 4th of June.
> So I will always easily remember  this little baby's birthday.


Happy birthday to you!


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> wonder if this is having the desired effect


Turning on the money tap? If I was PC or QE I would ask for a bit more from them, e.g., public apology, but it probably wouldn't happen.


----------



## Traminer

I don't know whether somebody has remarked this already -
but little Lilibet Diana can count herself lucky that she was not named "sausage", as Prince Philip used to call his wife.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Such liars. Why tell the world the baby was expected June 10th when the baby had been born.   Who has a screw loose?


They used this recipe last time. I don't know why they had done it then, but I more understand why they did it now. They didn't want anyone know while they were in the hospital. It's not the Cambridges who pose on the hospital step with the new baby for the whole world to see for free - you have to pay a hefty sum to take a pic of this "royal" baby.


----------



## Traminer

jelliedfeels said:


> Happy birthday to you!



Thank you!


----------



## gracekelly

Traminer said:


> I don't know whether somebody has remarked this already -
> but little Lilibet Diana can count herself lucky that she was not named "sausage, as Prince Philip used to call his wife.


Or cabbage.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> Or cabbage.


Or #8


----------



## JY89

It’s just M pushing her luck and seeing how far she can go and get away with everything. And everytime she release a “news” it just gets more absurd than the previous one.. Does she ever shut up?

As much as they trashed or framed the RF, you can never find MH distancing themselves from them. Their (passive-aggressive) actions seems extremely confusing to some but it all boils down to fame, status and money (imo). They still need their status for them to monetise and continue their “royal/ hollywood” life in cali. She’s just trying too hard to stay relevant.. which is pathetic

Well, wait till Lilibet grows up only to learn what her mother did. Don’t think she’s going to be happy to find out that she’s used as a pawn by her mum.


----------



## gracekelly

JY89 said:


> It’s just M pushing her luck and seeing how far she can go and get away with everything. And everytime she release a “news” it just gets more absurd than the previous one.. Does she ever shut up?
> 
> As much as they trashed or framed the RF, you can never find MH distancing themselves from them. Their (passive-aggressive) actions seems extremely confusing to some but it all boils down to fame, status and money (imo). They still need their status for them to monetise and continue their “royal/ hollywood” life in cali. She’s just trying too hard to stay relevant.. which is pathetic
> 
> Well, wait till Lilibet grows up only to learn what her mother did. Don’t think she’s going to be happy to find out that she’s used as a pawn by her mum.


And when she grows up and changes her name the Catherine, but please call me Kate.


----------



## gracekelly

DeMonica said:


> They used this recipe last time. I don't know why they had done it then, but I more understand why they did it now. They didn't want anyone know while they were in the hospital. It's not the Cambridges who pose on the hospital step with the new baby for the whole world to see for free - you have to pay a hefty sum to take a pic of this "royal" baby.


They are negotiating as I write this…….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like they dropped the bomb with the baby's name and went on maternity leave.  

_Buckingham Palace appeared to be caught on the hop by the announcement. It was also unclear whether the couple had consulted the Queen before choosing her family’s pet name.

Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, tweeted that the couple would ‘not be sharing a photograph at this time’ of Lili and that they were now on 'parental leave'.

The Queen, senior royals and the Prime Minister led worldwide tributes, with Boris Johnson tweeting: ‘Many congratulations to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on the birth of their daughter.’

Meghan’s estranged father Thomas Markle, who has met neither Harry nor grandson Archie, said last night: ‘I am very pleased with the announcement of the safe and healthy delivery of my new granddaughter, and I wish her and her mother all my love and best wishes!’

Buckingham Palace officials were unaware the baby had been born until the announcement came out at 5pm last night on social media.

They finally released a statement hailing the ‘happy news’ at 6.34pm, emphasising the gulf that now exists between the Sussexes and the palace.

Buckingham Palace declined to discuss when the Queen was informed of the safe arrival of her newest great-grandchild or whether she was advised of the tribute to her in Lili’s name.

It is less than a month since Harry reportedly upset the Queen by making ‘very personal’ criticisms of her and Prince Charles’s parenting skills. He said in a podcast in the US that he and Prince William had been made to ‘suffer’ as children with their father, telling them: ‘Well, it was like that for me, so it’s going to be like that for you.’

The Buckingham Palace statement came more than an hour after Hollywood stars such as William Shatner had shared their best wishes on Twitter._









						Meghan gives birth to baby girl
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they dropped the bomb with the baby's name and went on maternity leave.
> 
> _Buckingham Palace appeared to be caught on the hop by the announcement. It was also unclear whether the couple had consulted the Queen before choosing her family’s pet name.
> 
> Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, tweeted that the couple would ‘not be sharing a photograph at this time’ of Lili and that they were now on 'parental leave'.
> 
> The Queen, senior royals and the Prime Minister led worldwide tributes, with Boris Johnson tweeting: ‘Many congratulations to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on the birth of their daughter.’
> 
> Meghan’s estranged father Thomas Markle, who has met neither Harry nor grandson Archie, said last night: ‘I am very pleased with the announcement of the safe and healthy delivery of my new granddaughter, and I wish her and her mother all my love and best wishes!’
> 
> Buckingham Palace officials were unaware the baby had been born until the announcement came out at 5pm last night on social media.
> 
> They finally released a statement hailing the ‘happy news’ at 6.34pm, emphasising the gulf that now exists between the Sussexes and the palace.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to discuss when the Queen was informed of the safe arrival of her newest great-grandchild or whether she was advised of the tribute to her in Lili’s name.
> 
> It is less than a month since Harry reportedly upset the Queen by making ‘very personal’ criticisms of her and Prince Charles’s parenting skills. He said in a podcast in the US that he and Prince William had been made to ‘suffer’ as children with their father, telling them: ‘Well, it was like that for me, so it’s going to be like that for you.’
> 
> The Buckingham Palace statement came more than an hour after Hollywood stars such as William Shatner had shared their best wishes on Twitter._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan gives birth to baby girl
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


William Shatner?  Is  he. selling Harry a pony?  Perhaps he is on the short list for godparent?  Sunshine Sanhs is picking client names out of a hat to see who will be given the privilege.


----------



## TC1

It was nice of MM to have Lilibet on the "short list" of names she was allowing Harry to pick from


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't know about this.


----------



## JY89

gracekelly said:


> And when she grows up and changes her name the Catherine, but please call me Kate.



And

Meghan: Kate made me cry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> It was nice of MM to have Lilibet on the "short list" of names she was allowing Harry to pick from


Do you mean the short two-name list?


----------



## Traminer

gracekelly said:


> Or cabbage.



True 



> *Queen's adorable nickname*
> The nickname 'Lillibet' was given to the Queen when she was young by close family members because she couldn’t pronounce her own name Elizabeth. Apart from 'Lillibet', there's another adorable nickname that was given to Queen by none other than her husband. Prince Philip, who married Elizabeth in 1947, affectionately referred to her as "cabbage". It was revealed in the 2006 movie _The Queen_ when Philip in the film tells his wife to "move over, cabbage". It turned out to be true when biographer Robert Lacey confirmed it to The Sunday Times in 2006. She said that she has heard that is how Philip sometimes "referred to her".



https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/uk-news/heres-the-adorable-nickname-late-prince-philip-used-for-queen-elizabeth.html#:~:text=Queen's%20adorable%20nickname&text=Prince%20Philip%2C%20who%20married%20Elizabeth,The%20Sunday%20Times%20in%202006.


And what about "sausage"?


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> Do you mean the short two-name list?


yes


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lodpah said:


> I find it strange she names her Lilibet the Queen's nickname but yet trashes the Queen. Also what is up with just the back of the head photo shot? Babies change as they grow and they pretty much look all alike. I wish the baby well but the parents are too extra, extra and more extra. It's like she's playing games with people, childish games.


Sorry, I was joking, that’s not a real pic.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> William Shatner?  Is  he. selling Harry a pony?  Perhaps he is on the short list for godparent?  Sunshine Sanhs is picking client names out of a hat to see who will be given the privilege.


I would think OW is top of the list!


----------



## Laila619

WOW! Really floored they “went there” with this name. It just feels so tacky, exploitative, and hypocritical. And they sure excluded poor Doria, didn’t they?  I guess nothing they do should surprise me anymore, but the name choice did.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Annawakes said:


> Just echoing what others have said already.  It’s the pinnacle of disrespect to the Queen to use her private nickname.  Can you imagine the mermaid calling the Queen “Lilibet” in person?????????????  Its ABSURD!!!!!!!
> 
> It’s completely designed to grate at and minimize the Queen.
> 
> I can already see it.  Mermaid and JCMH eventually bring Lilibet back to see the Queen.  Mermaid finds some reason to chastise baby Lilibet.  “Stop running Lilibet!  You need to walk BEHIND ME, LILIBET!!!!!!!!!!!!!”



OMGOSH, you have opened my eyes!!  I've not thought it like that.  WHAT A DEPLORABLE round about way to be 100% DISRESPECTFUL to the Queen!!  I can see M with her Fn smirk on her face when she dreamt this up!!  What a Fn B&tcth!!!

I better go take my pills.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this.




If this is true, that the Queen requested no one use her family nickname after Philip's death, then naming the new baby Lilibet would be truly despicable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this.




I didn't know that either. If true...what exactly is wrong with them. I'm sure it's something pathological, no sane person enjoys torturing others like this.


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't know that either. If true...what exactly is wrong with them. I'm sure it's something pathological, no sane person enjoys torturing others like this.


Maybe they didn’t get the memo.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this.



Wow! If that’s true we know those two are so . . . but their hatred, disrespectful attitudes and overall ad humans there are no words. No words. Deplorable is too kind a word. Evil. downright evil is what they are.


----------



## DeMonica

Traminer said:


> As it happens, I have also been born on a 4th of June.
> So I will always easily remember  this little baby's birthday.


Happy belated birthday!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> DM is on it as well! We are now waiting for Scoobie's input.
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child, sister to two-year-old Archie, was born at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, and is now 'settling in at home', the couple said.
> 
> She has been named Lilibet after the family nickname for the Queen, the baby's great-grandmother, while her middle name was chosen to honour her beloved late grandmother, Princess Diana_.
> 
> _In a message of thanks from Meghan and Harry on the Archewell website, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex said: 'On June 4, we were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili.
> 
> 'She is more than we could have ever imagined, and we remain grateful for the love and prayers we've felt from across the globe. Thank you for your continued kindness and support during this very special time for our family.'
> 
> Their press secretary said: 'The Duke and Duchess thank you for your warm wishes and prayers as they enjoy this special time as a family.'
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan gives birth to baby girl
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



June 4 — such liars.

“Harry and Meghan’s daughter will be known as Lili Diana”, so not Lilibet ???? These amatuers mind screw whoever they can, whenever they can.

Settling in at home????  Somewhere I read she had the baby weeks ago, then got a bunch of nips&tucks, and has been recuperating at home.  We shall see.

So obvious what is going on here with the names - major kiss-up, especially after the HRH placard was removed from the Style display.
Wonder if they had to clear the name with Bea?   Crazy times.


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry, I was joking, that’s not a real pic.


Gotcha! But I don’t think you are too far from it being a reality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Laila619 said:


> WOW! Really floored they “went there” with this name. It just feels so tacky, exploitative, and hypocritical. And they sure excluded poor Doria, didn’t they?  I guess nothing they do should surprise me anymore, but the name choice did.


If Meghan truly wanted to be "authentic" and "woke" (and I am focusing on her as I think in all things "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets"  determines the direction in their lives) she would, for once, celebrate being a WOC by acknowledging her genetic heritage as a part of her children's lives through name selection. Instead, IMO, she has demonstrated once again her real aspiration, to be gained at any cost, is maximum white privilege. Usurping the very unique and personal nickname of the ultimate symbol of white privilege in the world, the Queen of England, is her "crowning" achievement as she sees it. 

If "Doria" or "Jeanette," her Maternal Grandmother's name (and supposedly someone Meghan was very close to growing up) were not considered regal enough for the string of names usually given to royal babies at birth, another option could have been Doria's middle name, "Loyce." 

Not only would it have honored her Grandmother Doria's heritage, it also would have fit in with the image Meghan the feminist tries to project. "Loyce," according to several Naming Dictionaries on line, is most often a girl's name of either of French or German origin and means "Renowned warrior."

But, in spite of the word salad potential for articles explaining it, celebrating it, there is not an immediate association with the $$$$ that comes with Lilibet and Diana, so white privilege prevails again. 

A healthy baby is a blessing to be celebrated, may she grow up with the strength to make her own way sans the baggage that comes with her name. If she can ultimately connect with the relatives in the UK, Princess Charlotte, Mia and Lena Tindall, Isla and Savannah Phillips, Princes George and Louis, Lucas Tindall, August Brooksbank, Beatrice's baby, she may be OK. Not sure about her brother Archie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DeMonica said:


> They used this recipe last time. I don't know why they had done it then, but I more understand why they did it now. They didn't want anyone know while they were in the hospital. It's not the Cambridges who pose on the hospital step with the new baby for the whole world to see for free - you have to pay a hefty sum to take a pic of this "royal" baby.



What happened to the home birth???  What happened to the video of the birth???  Answers, we need answers.

ETA: Lili Diana sounds like Little Diana - why do that to someone?  
Gotta follow the ‘cool’ crowd.
_ “A natural birth will cost £10,000 while a Caesarean section is £20,000. Lili is one of 2,400 babies to be delivered at the hospital in the last year.

A local source suggests pop star Katy Perry, neighbour to Meghan and Harry in Montecito, also had her baby Daisy there last August.

The prince recently revealed he is friends with Miss Perry’s film star husband Orlando Bloom.”_








						Meghan gives birth to baby girl
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> If Meghan truly wanted to be "authentic" and "woke" (and I am focusing on her as I think in all things "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets"  determines the direction in their lives) she would, for once, celebrate being a WOC by acknowledging her genetic heritage as a part of her children's lives through name selection. Instead, IMO, she has demonstrated once again her real aspiration, to be gained at any cost, is maximum white privilege. Usurping the very unique and personal nickname of the ultimate symbol of white privilege in the world, the Queen of England, is her "crowning" achievement as she sees it.
> 
> If "Doria" or "Jeanette," her Maternal Grandmother's name (and supposedly someone Meghan was very close to growing up) were not considered regal enough for the string of names usually given to royal babies at birth, another option could have been Doria's middle name, "Loyce."
> 
> Not only would it have honored her Grandmother Doria's heritage, it also would have fit in with the image Meghan the feminist tries to project. "Loyce," according to several Naming Dictionaries on line, is most often a girl's name of either of French or German origin and means "Renowned warrior."
> 
> But, in spite of the word salad potential for articles explaining it, celebrating it, there is not an immediate association with the $$$$ that comes with Lilibet and Diana, so white privilege prevails again.
> 
> A healthy baby is a blessing to be celebrated, may she grow up with the strength to make her own way sans the baggage that comes with her name. If she can ultimately connect with the relatives in the UK, Princess Charlotte, Mia and Lena Tindall, Isla and Savannah Phillips, Princes George and Louis, Lucas Tindall, August Brooksbank, Beatrice's baby, she may be OK. Not sure about her brother Archie.



Feminism, racism...? As many have observed, the only cause she cares about is her own cause. All the other causes are to be used and disposed when not needed.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What happened to the home birth???  What happened to the video of the birth???  Answers, we need answers.


Those were probably part of the fake news to keep them in the limelight. I wonder why they changed their mind about having the birth of the baby on June 10. They will probably release a B&W photo of a hand or foot on that day. I feel sorry for QE.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> Wow! If that’s true we know those two are so . . . but their hatred, disrespectful attitudes and overall ad humans there are no words. No words. Deplorable is too kind a word. Evil. downright evil is what they are.



Worse than the devil himself.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> It is most irritating. When I google PP's funeral, the top hits are all mermaid-related.  Exactly whose funeral was this? I had the awful thought that her friends (sock puppets) would plagiarise Princess Margaret and claim that MM desired for her ashes in future to be placed between TQ and PP. Had to reset my imagination
> 
> Any likelihood that she might try to curry favour with TQ and *name the bump Diana Lilibet?*



Whoa! Great call!  So.....what lottery numbers do you like...?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Who's going to bet Lili's first words would be "great grandma Elizabeth the Queen"?


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> What happened to the home birth???  What happened to the video of the birth???  Answers, we need answers.
> 
> ETA: Lili Diana sounds like Little Diana - why do that to someone?
> Gotta follow the ‘cool’ crowd.
> _ “A natural birth will cost £10,000 while a Caesarean section is £20,000. Lili is one of 2,400 babies to be delivered at the hospital in the last year.
> 
> A local source suggests pop star Katy Perry, neighbour to Meghan and Harry in Montecito, also had her baby Daisy there last August.
> 
> The prince recently revealed he is friends with Miss Perry’s film star husband Orlando Bloom.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan gives birth to baby girl
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I asked my DH about SB Cottage Hospital for he was a physician for a while there. He said it's nice.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Those were probably part of the fake news to keep them in the limelight. I wonder why they changed their mind about having the birth of the baby on June 10. They will probably release a B&W photo of a hand or foot on that day. I feel sorry for QE.


I'm betting on one finger (held by Methane's hand) and a tuft of hair (head supported by H's hand) with everything else obscured by a baby blanket (shopping link can be found in Meghan's Mirror). Any photos of Archie + baby will be suppressed till profitable.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

HOW ****EN DARE THEY.....  
No words.....truly despicable people....no respect at all. UGH


----------



## Hermes Nuttynut

gracekelly said:


> And when she grows up and changes her name the Catherine, but please call me Kate.



Or when she grows up and changes her name to Camilla.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, with Lilibet, the nickname can be Betty. 
Their next kid will be Veronica. I know, I know they say 2 is the limit, but but but they started this triology, they must finish it.


----------



## bisbee

Chanbal said:


> Those were probably part of the fake news to keep them in the limelight. I wonder why they changed their mind about having the birth of the baby on June 10. They will probably release a B&W photo of a hand or foot on that day. I feel sorry for QE.


Maybe she went into labor on the 4th.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, with Lilibet, the nickname can be Betty.
> Their next kid will be Veronica. I know, I know they say 2 is the limit, but but but they started this triology, they must finish it.
> 
> View attachment 5103144


or Jughead LOL


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> If Meghan truly wanted to be "authentic" and "woke" (and I am focusing on her as I think in all things "What Meghan Wants Meghan Gets"  determines the direction in their lives) she would, for once, celebrate being a WOC by acknowledging her genetic heritage as a part of her children's lives through name selection. Instead, IMO, she has demonstrated once again her real aspiration, to be gained at any cost, is maximum white privilege. *Usurping the very unique and personal nickname of the ultimate symbol of white privilege in the world, the Queen of England, is her "crowning" achievement as she sees it.*
> 
> If "Doria" or "Jeanette," her Maternal Grandmother's name (and supposedly someone Meghan was very close to growing up) were not considered regal enough for the string of names usually given to royal babies at birth, another option could have been Doria's middle name, "Loyce."
> 
> Not only would it have honored her Grandmother Doria's heritage, it also would have fit in with the image Meghan the feminist tries to project. "Loyce," according to several Naming Dictionaries on line, is most often a girl's name of either of French or German origin and means "Renowned warrior."
> 
> But, in spite of the word salad potential for articles explaining it, celebrating it, there is not an immediate association with the $$$$ that comes with Lilibet and Diana, so white privilege prevails again.
> 
> A healthy baby is a blessing to be celebrated, may she grow up with the strength to make her own way sans the baggage that comes with her name. If she can ultimately connect with the relatives in the UK, Princess Charlotte, Mia and Lena Tindall, Isla and Savannah Phillips, Princes George and Louis, Lucas Tindall, August Brooksbank, Beatrice's baby, she may be OK. Not sure about her brother Archie.



Excellent comment. MONEY will *ALWAYS *beat wokeness with the Almighty Woke!! You see, it's all about the pretending you give a damn. C-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-caring SO MUCH about causes is wonderful, until there's a buck to made by sucking up to the matriarch of evil white colonialists and racists who TRAP PEOPLE.  Naming the girl Lilibet breaks the Land Speed Record for overcoming GENETIC PAIN! 
I'm sorry, Doria, your name doesn't have nearly the money making ability as the elderly White Privileged QEII, so now it's YOUR TURN to get kicked to the curb. If, however, Meghan and Harry can claim Doria is a racist, then it'll show that Doria has been promoted to a position of importance because you have to slam "the right people". The only way we'll know if Doria has any merch value is if Meghan plays the victim card with her own mother. Anybody put it past her? I don't.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I think the Queen can put them out of her mind. The woman has remarkable composure and self-discipline.
> 
> My gut tells me it’s actually Charles who they are trying to give the f**k you. He stopped the flow of cash and that was unforgivable for the greedy Sussexes. Now they want to show him how powerless he is to stop them from doing whatever they want. Charles couldn’t protect his father from enduring their whining to Oprah in his last days and he cannot protect his mother’s nickname from being appropriated for a future valley girl.



If these two ingrates have any self-respect left, they should stop all the shenanigans. Unless the BRF comes for their reputation (not like they have any good ones left anyways) publicly, they should just live the private life that they claimed they wanted so badly in a quiet manner and do the charitable work like true selfless philanthropists. It shouldn't be about titles, money, shameless self-promotion and calculated attacks on Harry's family. 

And if this is really a F-you for Charles, I hope Charles will do everything in his power when he is king to be rid of them. If Charles wants to slim down the BRF, he definitely needs to set the tone right starting with these ingrates who no longer serve the country as senior royals.


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> *What happened to the home birth???  What happened to the video of the birth???  Answers, we need answers.*
> 
> ETA: Lili Diana sounds like Little Diana - why do that to someone?
> Gotta follow the ‘cool’ crowd.
> _ “A natural birth will cost £10,000 while a Caesarean section is £20,000. Lili is one of 2,400 babies to be delivered at the hospital in the last year.
> 
> A local source suggests pop star Katy Perry, neighbour to Meghan and Harry in Montecito, also had her baby Daisy there last August.
> 
> The prince recently revealed he is friends with Miss Perry’s film star husband Orlando Bloom.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan gives birth to baby girl
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Isn't it more posh to give birth in a luxury hospital where your celeb friends delivered their babies than having a homebirth with only an unfortunate midwife, physician and your husband around? You can play drama in front of a bigger audience.
I wonder when and what _really_ happened, though, because the wording of the announcement of the Buckingham Palace spokesperson makes you think that there's something more behind the scene. The PC and the Cambridges' messages sounded as if they were trying to say the bare minimum on the occasion. I can't blame them, particularly if they were informed of the baby by social media. Albeit the RF might have already known from different sources unofficially.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember, the lovely *Princess* Charlotte Elizabeth Diana Mountbatten-Windsor had these names first. 

Are they kissing up to W&K???











						What Princess Charlotte and Lilibet Diana's Names Have in Common
					

They're both named after two iconic royal women.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> Maybe they didn’t get the memo.



Probably written too simply, and didn't address their HRH-ness and their profound humanitarianism. It should have been _italicised, _with towering first letters & swooping last_, extra superlatives every sentence, and an (over)emphasis on how very, very special they both are._

Lily (Lilliana, Lillian and Lilly, Shoshana and Michelle) is a running name in my family too literally through the centuries. It means perfection/purity. Elizabeth/Betty/Beth/Elisabet is actually a completely_ different_ name altogether, comes from the Old and New Testament and means 'my God is an oath' 

Oh,  I forgot, they don't do research and words are just salad.


----------



## xincinsin

bisousx said:


> Naming your daughter after your mom & grandma must be a new therapeutic way to get rid of one’s genetic pain


Break their hearts and you break the genetic link of pain and suffering.

Every time I think they cannot sink any lower, they find something deeper than the Mariana Trench.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who's going to bet Lili's first words would be "great grandma Elizabeth the Queen"?


Strong possibility! 
I'm adding hippopotamus and rhinoceros to the list.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> My father's FAVORITE quote!!!


My dad's too, LOL!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> "Pip" as a name??? A "Princess Pip" if her grandfather PC decided at some point to bestow a title?
> 
> "Pip" is a small hard seed. Or a short high sound. Or "PIP" is "Peeing in Pants."


As in, "Pip, Pip, Hooray?"


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> Congrats @xincinsin you win the prize!!
> 
> I wonder if QE2 is... surprised?
> View attachment 5103034





plastic-fish said:


> You called it @xincinsin ! Back in April, fantastic insight. Different order but the closest, well done!





rose60610 said:


> Whoa! Great call!  So.....what lottery numbers do you like...?


This was so not the lottery I was hoping to win <<face palm>>

It only goes to show how many narcs I've worked with that I can now predict their next move. My worst narc would do this: slime the boss for being old-fashioned (using a paper diary) and then, when promotion time got closer, start carrying a diary himself to prove solidarity with the boss. No promotion!

@Maggie Muggins You may be right that Hazard & Methane or their "men in merchable suits" are reading this thread. Perhaps I gave them the inspiration. Mea culpa   They probably didn't get much from PP in the will, so they are making a play for QE2's $$$ now. If you look at their lifestyle, they are burning through the millions and Hazard hasn't announced a new job for some time. They will probably announce some high-faluting job posts for her too once she "finishes" maternity leave. And she'll start zoom-bonding with low-income mums because she knows exactly how they feel having to give birth in less than ideal conditions (can't send the bill to the father-in-law now).


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting view!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I do believe they (H and wife) put out the June 10 just for the headlines.


No way, they would never do something like that!!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> As in, "Pip, Pip, Hooray?"


@purseinsanity I see that you didn't get the memo. It's not Doria Pip Diana anymore, they chose Lilibet as in Her Majesty we love our titles.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> A daughter FOR them. Shade?


Or hints of the truth.  A surrogate perhaps?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Kaka_bobo said:


> or Jughead LOL


Jughead is already taken, he's the ginger haired guy in the chicken coup.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> "Wishing them well *at this time"  *
> 
> "at this time"??


...tomorrow they can F off again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @purseinsanity I see that you didn't get the memo. It's not Doria Pip Diana anymore, they chose Lilibet as in Her Majesty we love our titles.



And the $$$$$ we can squeeze out of them.

rose60610 said:
_"Wishing them well at this time"  

"at this time"??_

It is the ‘damn them with faint praise’ strategy. A generic congrats works so well. In today’s world, the short tweets/texts  throw the best shade


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> No way, they would never do something like that!!


You are right! There are people questioning whether the baby was indeed born on June 4, but they would never deceive...


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> Naming your daughter after your mom & grandma must be a new therapeutic way to get rid of one’s genetic pain


LOL, I swear you have the ability to over and over read my mind!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What happened to the home birth???  What happened to the video of the birth???  Answers, we need answers.
> 
> ETA: Lili Diana sounds like Little Diana - why do that to someone?
> Gotta follow the ‘cool’ crowd.
> _ “*A natural birth will cost £10,000 while a Caesarean section is £20,000*. Lili is one of 2,400 babies to be delivered at the hospital in the last year._


Where do they get these numbers from?  I have no idea what midwives charge, but doctors get paid the same by insurance companies for vaginal or c sections.  Are these the hospital costs?  These random prices irritate me, just like when they claim wrong Birkin costs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This story is still developing. Other people have the baby, announce the name, then get off the stage. Not these two. They will be in the news more and more. Ick.

_It is understood the Queen was informed by Prince Harry that her great-grandchild would be named in her honour, ahead of their official announcement which was made on their official website.









						Meghan gives birth to baby girl
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> Where do they get these numbers from?  I have no idea what midwives charge, but doctors get paid the same by insurance companies for vaginal or c sections.  Are these the hospital costs?  These random prices irritate me, just like when they claim wrong Birkin costs.


Where I am C sections cost more than vaginal births.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @purseinsanity I see that you didn't get the memo. It's not Doria Pip Diana anymore, they chose Lilibet as in Her Majesty we love our titles.


Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


----------



## kipp

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


So sorry to hear this @purseinsanity.  Condolences to you and your family.


----------



## Aimee3

Several pages back someone posted what The toxic tarts father said/wrote on the baby’s birth.  He pointedly left out mentioning his son in law H in his good wishes.  Shade!!!


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Excellent comment. MONEY will *ALWAYS *beat wokeness with the Almighty Woke!! You see, it's all about the pretending you give a damn. C-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-caring SO MUCH about causes is wonderful, until there's a buck to made by sucking up to the matriarch of evil white colonialists and racists who TRAP PEOPLE.  Naming the girl Lilibet breaks the Land Speed Record for overcoming GENETIC PAIN!
> I'm sorry, Doria, your name doesn't have nearly the money making ability as the elderly White Privileged QEII, so now it's YOUR TURN to get kicked to the curb. If, however, Meghan and Harry can claim Doria is a racist, then it'll show that Doria has been promoted to a position of importance because you have to slam "the right people". The only way we'll know if Doria has any merch value is if Meghan plays the victim card with her own mother. Anybody put it past her? I don't.


I'm with you. Methane is capable of a n y t h i n g.

 Doria's value is as a facilitator of wokeness about things like  "ancestral healing" and "generational trauma". 

This quote is mind boggling considering the names given the baby. I caught myself literally shaking my head:

"An insider has now claimed that Meghan first introduced Harry to the term ‘ancestral healing’, after she learned about "generational trauma" from her mum Doria Ragland. 

They told DailyMail.com:* ‘Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it’s now up to them to break the cycle once and for all.’*

And then Methane thought: Ooops, maybe we need to re think that, we need Lilibet for funding in our generation.....better extend the cycle another round.


----------



## purseinsanity

kipp said:


> So sorry to hear this @purseinsanity.  Condolences to you and your family.


Thank you so much!


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> I bet it costs a lot and she said she mixes and matches the outfits so doesn't sound like she resells the items. I wonder how big is her closet.


Maybe she has a private deal with MM, and buys over the clothing. Through a 3rd party of course, no direct connection back to the mermaid. Her hubby would definitely approve of the savings on her expensive hobby.



CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is this a new PR effort?
> — what to think of William giving Hazz a ‘copy of the polo painting’?
> — changing Hazz’s HRH placard at the Style exhibit — sign of the future removal or a regrettable error?
> — announcing the specific date for the _natural_ birth?
> — pump - pump ? Really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle dedicates children's book to Prince Harry and Archie
> 
> 
> The touching inscription in the book, reproduced from a hand-written note in the Duchess of Sussex's distinctive calligraphy script, reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


When she writes her next children's book, she will say LD makes her heart go pumpity pump or pitty pat.



Chanbal said:


> She is more than we could have ever imagined


Poor child represents $$$$$$
They will probably claim that it was an olive branch to show that they still loved the BRF (and their money). No hard feelings, you know. We may bash you but we love you. Hmmm, isn't that gaslighting?

Also, they may claim that they named her Lilibet to break with the past and start new positive associations with the name. Just to insult TQ of course.



Chanbal said:


> I don't think QE is pleased, it's her private family name.
> They will likely try to cash in on that name as they do with everything.


If they trademark it for products...
I just had the awful thought that their stans will pick up on it and start naming their baby girls Lilibet too   



Hermes Nuttynut said:


> Or when she grows up and changes her name to Camilla.


They might use that name with a K - Kamila - to hint of a woke connection with the VP



rose60610 said:


> Excellent comment. MONEY will *ALWAYS *beat wokeness with the Almighty Woke!! You see, it's all about the pretending you give a damn. C-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-caring SO MUCH about causes is wonderful, until there's a buck to made by sucking up to the matriarch of evil white colonialists and racists who TRAP PEOPLE.  Naming the girl Lilibet breaks the Land Speed Record for overcoming GENETIC PAIN!
> I'm sorry, Doria, your name doesn't have nearly the money making ability as the elderly White Privileged QEII, so now it's YOUR TURN to get kicked to the curb. If, however, Meghan and Harry can claim Doria is a racist, then it'll show that Doria has been promoted to a position of importance because you have to slam "the right people". The only way we'll know if Doria has any merch value is if Meghan plays the victim card with her own mother. Anybody put it past her? I don't.



I wish to state now that I do not like Methane's style of writing. It is pretentious and overblown. And I say this as someone who has 2 degrees in literature. I've disliked it ever since I read her account of Doria experiencing racism in a car park. "_chocolate knuckles_" Bleah!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.



So sorry to hear this. Take extra-special care now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


My condolences, purseinsanity.
Hubby's niece got married on the day MH370 vanished. Everyone was discussing it during the 8-course dinner.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> So sorry to hear this. Take extra-special care now.


----------



## xincinsin

daisychainz said:


> I saw that they had a daughter and selected the name. I'm pretty shocked to know they selected a very personal nickname that belongs to someone else as the first name for their child. It is really incredibly bizarre and not something they should have done without some permission. *I wonder if QE was told, or asked?* I'd be livid if someone took my private nickname as a name for their child, it's horrible. I don't see anything wrong with Diana since it's his mother but the nickname is private to QE. What a hateful couple they are.


Maybe they used the same underhanded MO as for the Apple mental health thingy, and told TQ that they were naming the babe after her, but didn't say they were appropriating her personal nickname.
ETA: Even if TQ said No, would they have cared? What M wants...


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> Maybe they used the same underhanded MO as for the Apple mental health thingy, and told TQ that they were naming the babe after her, but didn't say they were appropriating her personal nickname.


Yep, that sounds about right.


----------



## A1aGypsy

bag-mania said:


> They do that to look sweet and innocent to their fans and the press. They NEED that positive popularity to keep the wheels in motion for their plans.



Ah, I didn’t realize that. So, I side eye them all then.


----------



## pixiejenna

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this.




This is insanely gone deaf.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


I'm very sorry for your uncle. Sometimes I wonder if we will ever be COVID free. Can't wait for better days to come.


----------



## Chanbal

It's an article, not a video. 










						Piers Morgan mocks Meghan and Harry's move to name baby after Queen
					

The MailOnline editor-at-large took aim at the Duke and Duchess of Sussex after the couple announced the birth of Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor on Sunday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how Doria feels...


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Lilibet Diana


----------



## needlv

Apparently The Queen didn’t know









						The Baby Name Controversy - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] While you may think that naming a baby after a family member is a welcomed gesture of affection, that is not always the case. In this family, names are usually discussed in advance and family members consulted before using their names to ensure that they are comfortable and...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she has a private deal with MM, and buys over the clothing. Through a 3rd party of course, no direct connection back to the mermaid. Her hubby would definitely approve of the savings on her expensive hobby.



Stranger things have happened so this is entirely possible


----------



## muddledmint

maris.crane said:


> I did not think of Archie! I don’t mind the name Archie. And I totally know choosing a baby name is super personal BUT: Archie and Jack (for instance) are both nicknames but they still feel like real names. Lilibet... it doesn’t feel like a real name to me.


I think I posted this before, but I absolutely cannot stand Archie as a full name. Lilibet is even more heinous. It’s like naming your kid Jimmy or Stacy. Jack doesn’t bother me as much either but Jackson or John would still be preferable. Actually, no, Jack is just as bad. Is it that hard to just name the baby Elizabeth and adopt Lilibet as the nickname?!! Geez


----------



## muddledmint

CarryOn2020 said:


> What happened to the home birth???  What happened to the video of the birth???  Answers, we need answers.
> 
> ETA: Lili Diana sounds like Little Diana - why do that to someone?
> Gotta follow the ‘cool’ crowd.
> _ “A natural birth will cost £10,000 while a Caesarean section is £20,000. Lili is one of 2,400 babies to be delivered at the hospital in the last year.
> 
> A local source suggests pop star Katy Perry, neighbour to Meghan and Harry in Montecito, also had her baby Daisy there last August.
> 
> The prince recently revealed he is friends with Miss Perry’s film star husband Orlando Bloom.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan gives birth to baby girl
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's second child was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40am at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara weighing 7lb 11oz, and is said to be settling in at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Lili Diana sounds like a rapper name, like Lil Kim


----------



## jblended

Whilst I can see the thought behind honouring the two most important women in his life, this really smacks of disrespect.
Why not Elizabeth, Beth or simply Lily (which works so well with Archie)? Why take ownership of her personal, private nickname? He is so quick to call her his Commander in Chief, yet he undermines her authority in this manner?

Even if HM knew of the name choice in advance and approved of it, it reads as a desperate attempt to signal that he has an intimate relationship with his grandmother; a connection to her that is somehow deeper than everyone else's. It comes across as a PR move rather than an act of deference to his Commander, Queen and most important familial relation.

Oh Harry, why don't you just piss off now?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Man I love this thread.  Thank you all!


----------



## bag-mania

For two people who keep yammering on about the importance of mental health, H&M certainly try to mindf*ck the royal family at every possible opportunity.

I’m sure they’ve got them all wondering what is next.


----------



## floatinglili

maris.crane said:


> I did not think of Archie! I don’t mind the name Archie. And I totally know choosing a baby name is super personal BUT: Archie and Jack (for instance) are both nicknames but they still feel like real names. Lilibet... it doesn’t feel like a real name to me.


Hehe that’s funny. Perhaps there is a slight cultural difference going on here.
 I was absolutely gobsmacked and floored when the name Archie had been announced - I had honestly never heard of such a sloppy and stupid nick ‘name’ in all my life - the red head from the comic book??
It is not at all a common or even heard of name where I live. I had never known that this crazy comic name was a ‘thing’.

On the other hand I actually like Lilibet as a name, in spite that it’s a diminutive of a more formal established name. It seems familiar, and modern in that sweetly, ultra-personal way lol. An acceptable formal name if feeling creative.
However in this context the use of the name is bizarre. (if George really did originally use the Archie name as a fun nickname then the use of Archie was aggressive and strange in terms of family dynamics, and there is definitely a pattern here.)


----------



## xincinsin

jblended said:


> Whilst I can see the thought behind honouring the two most important women in his life, this really smacks of disrespect.
> Why not Elizabeth, Beth or simply Lily (which works so well with Archie)? Why take ownership of her personal, private nickname? He is so quick to call her his Commander in Chief, yet he undermines her authority in this manner?
> 
> Even if HM knew of the name choice in advance and approved of it, it reads as a desperate attempt to signal that he has an intimate relationship with his grandmother; a connection to her that is somehow deeper than everyone else's. It comes across as a PR move rather than an act of deference to his Commander, Queen and most important familial relation.
> 
> Oh Harry, why don't you just piss off now?


I'm waiting for them to slip into every possible occasion a mention of their special bond with TQ. It probably just dawned on them that with the Platinum Jubilee coming up, they can flog the name for extra cash. I'm sure they already have a line of Lilibet merch lined up and now they can claim that it's their daughter's name, so they can use it with impunity.


----------



## Roxanna

Well, it might be connected  as they claimed that Queen did not own  "Royal ", same goes to the name. Very personal name. What they done sounds  very disrespectful and just owful  not only to the Queen , but  to their daughter too.


----------



## floatinglili




----------



## Icyjade

Whenever I think I cannot dislike the couple more, they go and do something absolutely disgusting. What’s wrong with these people? Why are there people like that??? Mind boggling 

PS thanks for hearing me vent


----------



## Sharont2305

Traminer said:


> I don't know whether somebody has remarked this already -
> but little Lilibet Diana can count herself lucky that she was not named "sausage", as Prince Philip used to call his wife.


LOL, I thought he called her "cabbage"


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Or cabbage.


You beat me to it, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> And when she grows up and changes her name the Catherine, but please call me Kate.


Catherine, the mother I never had.


----------



## gracekelly

muddledmint said:


> Lili Diana sounds like a rapper name, like Lil Kim


Sounds like a line of ladies lingerie.   Lilyette lol!


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I thought he called her "cabbage"


Let’s be woke and update it to organic cabbage.


----------



## Sharont2305

Aimee3 said:


> Where I am C sections cost more than vaginal births.


Where I am, all births are free..... unless you choose to go private.


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> A source will next be telling us all about little Lilibet’s new Corgi puppy


I'm sorry for being mean, but if they get a corgi puppy, I hope it sh*ts on the mermaid's tail. Like to like.



Shopaholic2021 said:


> There was no official announcement by the palace, or the queen or Prince Charles. I assume they would have been notified a few hours after the birth. Meghan did say in the interview that she can not just pick up the phone and call the queen and she couldn't do that when she was a working royal due to the people around her/suits.


She said that, and then was hinting in the run-up to PP's funeral that she was in constant touch with TQ, and HMTQ knew all about how sad she was. It was Me Me Me all the way.



jelliedfeels said:


> 3. Trademark the name and claim we came up with it all along
> Just wait for Lilibet the t shirt, lilibet the colouring book, lilibet the lunchbox, lilibet the breakfast cereal, lilibet the flame thrower and finally lilibet the doll…adorable!
> 
> if Archie has a money laundry named after him we can only guess what they are going to passively aggressively do with the Queen’s name.
> 
> I am just dreading seeing them simpering about how much they love granny


You missed out Lilibet: the jewelry collection, especially the extensive range of tiaras.
The logo will probably be in faux calligraphy with an extra heavy number of curlicues.



V0N1B2 said:


> Well, not exactly. Archie was named after his mother (just as the Archewell "charity" was)
> ARCHIE
> RACHEL
> 
> ARCHEWELL
> RACHEL


I'm thinking they'll set up another faux charity using her. Hopefully their stans will continue directing donation drive money straight to the real charities and not funnel funds through these jokers.



Sharont2305 said:


> I think they should have announced this either yesterday or tomorrow, or even on the actual day she was born.
> Today is the 77th Anniversary of the D-day landings in Normandy. A day Harry should be well aware of.


Maybe Mermaid is planning an invasion to "free" Britain. The idiot Hazard has totally bought into and is upholding the tale of the trapped people there.



Aimee3 said:


> Several pages back someone posted what The toxic tarts father said/wrote on the baby’s birth.  He pointedly left out mentioning his son in law H in his good wishes.  Shade!!!


Well, he's never met the guy. For all he knows, that ginger guy could be an AI construct and his daughter is busy having kids with random rich men.


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> I'm sorry for being mean, but if they get a corgi puppy, I hope it sh*ts on the mermaid's tail. Like to like.
> 
> 
> She said that, and then was hinting in the run-up to PP's funeral that she was in constant touch with TQ, and HMTQ knew all about how sad she was. It was Me Me Me all the way.
> 
> 
> You missed out Lilibet: the jewelry collection, especially the extensive range of tiaras.
> The logo will probably be in faux calligraphy with an extra heavy number of curlicues.
> 
> 
> I'm thinking they'll set up another faux charity using her. Hopefully their stans will continue directing donation drive money straight to the real charities and not funnel funds through these jokers.
> 
> 
> Maybe Mermaid is planning an invasion to "free" Britain. The idiot Hazard has totally bought into and is upholding the tale of the trapped people there.
> 
> 
> Well, he's never met the guy. For all he knows, that ginger guy could be an AI construct and his daughter is busy having kids with random rich men.


I was joking about the puppy, as you were about the names, but we know now there’s no gutter they won’t scrape dry if there’s money to be made out of it. And they simply.do.not.care. if anyone gets hurt in the process.
Meghan isn’t close to the Queen (I’d be surprised if the actual number of their face to face meetings is in double figures) and neither is Harry, they’re only using her for the money and attention her long service to her country brings with it.  None of the family even have up to date photos of the Sussexes to use in their congrats isn’t that telling?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Lilibet shortened to Betty... so Archie and Betty?? (Who is jughead?)

unless they had the Queen’s blessing - I agree with the other posters that MM did this to serve the Queen back for prohibiting them from  merching   using “Royal”.  They will now merch Lilibet - a big FU to the Queen...


----------



## Clearblueskies

I’m thinking it’s a pity our Honours system in the UK doesn’t have the equivalent of the Oscars Razzies to  reward the Grifters for all their effort in chiselling from the country and its Queen


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> William Shatner?  Is  he. selling Harry a pony?  Perhaps he is on the short list for godparent?  Sunshine Sanhs is picking client names out of a hat to see who will be given the privilege.


William Shatner, while not seeming like an obvious choice for a pair of middle aged hipsters who want to pretend they are 20, would be a really fun choice for godparent - but I’m pretty sure he’s Jewish. Don’t they have to be Christian? Eh, what does religion matter at the social event of the century?   


Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this.



Can’t be sure but it does ring true. As someone’s getting closer to the end I can imagine reminders of their youth can be both poignant and upsetting. 


Chanbal said:


> I would think OW is top of the list!



Maybe they took her flip-flopping after the interview to heart- they seem such understanding, compassionate people that seems unlikely though 



Chanbal said:


> Feminism, racism...? As many have observed, the only cause she cares about is her own cause. All the other causes are to be used and disposed when not needed.



In a nutshell, my friend, it is pathetic how they are always begging  for support because of their vulnerabilities then doing backstabbing **** like this. 


papertiger said:


> Probably written too simply, and didn't address their HRH-ness and their profound humanitarianism. It should have been _italicised, _with towering first letters & swooping last_, extra superlatives every sentence, and an (over)emphasis on how very, very special they both are._
> 
> Lily (Lilliana, Lillian and Lilly, Shoshana and Michelle) is a running name in my family too literally through the centuries. It means perfection/purity. Elizabeth/Betty/Beth/Elisabet is actually a completely_ different_ name altogether, comes from the Old and New Testament and means 'my God is an oath'
> 
> Oh,  I forgot, they don't do research and words are just salad.


I *love* Shoshana, can’t get mr jelly round to it though.

yes goodness knows that learning history is a waste of time that could more profitably spent rewriting it.

Isn’t Elizabeth one of those women who claims she miraculously gave birth when she’s really old and no one believes her? At least that seems a little apt for this scenario


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> And the $$$$$ we can squeeze out of them.
> 
> rose60610 said:
> _"Wishing them well at this time"
> 
> "at this time"??_
> 
> It is the ‘damn them with faint praise’ strategy. A generic congrats works so well. In today’s world, the short tweets/texts  throw the best shade


It's very generic. You would send this kind of congratulation to someone you hardly know. Of course, I would be very economic with my efforts if someone had a history of backstabbing me and my family.  Also, it's a granddaughter PC most likely won't know very well. It's a shame, though, the treatment Ginge and Cringe is giving to their families, respectively, is something you would give to your parent if you were very neglected or abused as a child. IMO they have already got more mileage out of their very young off-springs than PC or TM ever did of them.
At the same time PC's message was a bit friendlier on Twitter: it's _at this special time_ there.


----------



## wilding

gracekelly said:


> Sounds like a line of ladies lingerie.   Lilyette lol!



Apparently the Lilyette bras have great reviews!


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


I’m sorry for your loss.

Well, maybe we can’t escape them, but then *they* can’t escape our jokes either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Where do they get these numbers from?  I have no idea what midwives charge, but doctors get paid the same by insurance companies for vaginal or c sections.  Are these the hospital costs?  These random prices irritate me, just like when they claim wrong Birkin costs.



Why wouldn't a c-section be more expensive...it's massive abdominal surgery.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.



I'm so sorry for your loss.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Does anyone but the dullest of dull Stans seriously believe they are "honouring" the Queen? They are gaslighting the BRF, that's what they are doing.


----------



## JY89

Not sure if anyone saw or posted this. But here you go.. 









						Meghan and Harry have 'licenced' Lilibet Diana - New domain created
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have already created a domain for their new daughter Lilibet Diana, a royal biographer has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Seems like they are extremely quick in licensing their daughter name upon birth just confirmed our speculations that she’s now monetising her new cash baby. Honestly, every normal parents would be celebrating the birth of the child and yet every of their moves are extremely scheming and calculated.

I’m absolutely not surprise but utterly disgusted. Poor kid


----------



## DeMonica

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


My deepest sympathy! It must be hard for you and your family
My father's funeral was on my cousin's birthday. Neither of us would forget that day. Still better than my friend's case when her father passed away on her birthday. Since she's a wonderful person, a real fighter, she always adds when it comes up, that her father picked strawberries for her in the morning so it wasn't an entirely awful day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

JY89 said:


> Not sure if anyone saw or posted this. But here you go..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have 'licenced' Lilibet Diana - New domain created
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have already created a domain for their new daughter Lilibet Diana, a royal biographer has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like they are extremely quick in licensing their daughter name upon birth just confirmed our speculations that she’s now monetising her new cash baby. Honestly, every normal parents would be celebrating the birth of the child and yet every of their moves are extremely scheming and calculated.
> 
> I’m absolutely not surprise but utterly disgusted. Poor kid



Oh wow that took me by surprise. Not.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Where do they get these numbers from?  I have no idea what midwives charge, but doctors get paid the same by insurance companies for vaginal or c sections.  Are these the hospital costs?  These random prices irritate me, just like when they claim wrong Birkin costs.


I remember when I was preggers with DS1, the hospital gave us a tour of facilities from basic 2-bed rooms to a top-of-the-line suite. The guide candidly told us that no one booked the suite unless insurance was paying, so only American and Japanese expatriates used it because they had the most lavish insurance plans. I was in basic, and had a regular vaginal birth. The lady in the other bed turned out to be from the same company as me, so that was quite a lark. I can still remember DH muttering that we could fit the whole clan in and throw a mahjong party in the top-of-line suite.


----------



## Clearblueskies

JY89 said:


> Not sure if anyone saw or posted this. But here you go..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have 'licenced' Lilibet Diana - New domain created
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have already created a domain for their new daughter Lilibet Diana, a royal biographer has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like they are extremely quick in licensing their daughter name upon birth just confirmed our speculations that she’s now monetising her new cash baby. Honestly, every normal parents would be celebrating the birth of the child and yet every of their moves are extremely scheming and calculated.
> 
> I’m absolutely not surprise but utterly disgusted. Poor kid


That’s so gross


----------



## chaneljewel

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


Take care. Sorry for your loss.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> yes goodness knows that learning history is a waste of time that could more profitably spent rewriting it.
> 
> *Isn’t Elizabeth one of those women who claims she miraculously gave birth when she’s really old and no one believes her? At least that seems a little apt for this scenario *



That was Sarah - but I know what you mean 

Quote of the day:
 "yes goodness knows that learning history is a waste of time that could more profitably spent rewriting it" = Brilliant


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.



 I am really so sorry


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m thinking it’s a pity our Honours system in the UK doesn’t have the equivalent of the Oscars Razzies to  reward the Grifters for all their effort in chiselling from the country and its Queen


If she tries to get into Hollywood again, it'll likely be via high profile cameos as was done for Vaxx Live. The 2028 LA Olympics for instance (just to show HMTQ that she can headline the Olympics too  ). I'm sure SS will push for it. Then she can be awarded a Razzie and faux-weep about victimisation because she is black/biracial/woman/flavour-of-month.

I cannot believe that either family raised them so badly, so I can only say that in their case, nature overcame nurture - the Disgusting Duo were BORN bad.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Sounds like a line of ladies lingerie.   Lilyette lol!


Hmmm, the betting site isn't far from it, either. Before someone mentions it, I mean no disrespect to Her Majesty. I know that her nickname long predates online betting sites. Maybe the Disney couple could add a h. They probably thought that all the public would fell in love with their patriotic choice of name but as I see the reactions online it's not really happening.


----------



## papertiger

For those that say why not _just_ 'Elizabeth' or 'Lili'? 

*Let's face it 'Lilibet' is for the big ol' search engine in the sky. *

There are only two people on Earth that come-up under that name when you Google 'Lilibet'. They have a perfect company name and trademark right there. So they did do the research.


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> Found a pic of Lili.
> View attachment 5103001



This doesn't look like a new born to me.....look at the "bald" patch, that comes after a bit of lying down, you're not born with it!. All my kids and grandkids had it.

Oops, I just read that the photo  is not Lilibet Diana


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> This doesn't look like a new born to me.....look at the "bald" patch, that comes after a bit of lying down, you're not born with it!. All my kids and grandkids had it.


It was a joke pic. The real Lilibet is still waiting for the right amount of $$$$$ before her mother serves her up on a silver platter. Probably needs a sum like 30 pieces of silver.


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> _*William Shatner, while not seeming like an obvious choice for a pair of middle aged hipsters who want to pretend they are 20, would be a really fun choice for godparent - but I’m pretty sure he’s Jewish. Don’t they have to be Christian? Eh, what does religion matter at the social event of the century? *_
> 
> Can’t be sure but it does ring true. As someone’s getting closer to the end I can imagine reminders of their youth can be both poignant and upsetting.
> 
> Maybe they took her flip-flopping after the interview to heart- they seem such understanding, compassionate people that seems unlikely though
> 
> 
> In a nutshell, my friend, it is pathetic how they are always begging  for support because of their vulnerabilities then doing backstabbing **** like this.
> 
> I *love* Shoshana, can’t get mr jelly round to it though.
> 
> yes goodness knows that learning history is a waste of time that could more profitably spent rewriting it.
> 
> Isn’t Elizabeth one of those women who claims she miraculously gave birth when she’s really old and no one believes her? At least that seems a little apt for this scenario


I'm not Anglican so I don't know for sure, but in the Catholic Church you can be a christening witness which is pretty much like a godparent but you can have different religious affiliation than the parents of the child. Since the Disney couple no longer lives in the UK, they might opt for an alternative ceremony , e.g., something pagan like they can offer her to the fairy of the forest, after all she's named Diana, who is the patron of the hunters. I don't think that they frequently go to church.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> It was a joke pic. The real Lilibet is still waiting for the right amount of $$$$$ before her mother serves her up on a silver platter. Probably needs a sum like 30 pieces of silver.



Or she is waiting for her mom to recover from all the required nips and tucks so she can be Hwood fabulous.


----------



## xincinsin

DeMonica said:


> I'm not Anglican so I don't know for sure, but in the Catholic Church you can be a christening witness which is pretty much like a godparent but you can have different religious affiliation than the parents of the child. Since the Disney couple no longer lives in the UK, they might opt for an alternative ceremony , e.g., something pagan like they can offer her to the fairy of the forest, after all she's named Diana, who is the patron of the hunters. I don't think that they frequently go to church.


They were only interested in Diana, patron of the inheritance. MM is said to be anti-hunting, so Hazard pulled out of some hunting event that was organized by his pals.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or she is waiting for her mom to recover from all the required nips and tucks so she can be Hwood fabulous.


In Chinese cinema terminology, Mermaid is a vase. A pretty hollow thing that dresses up the set.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> It was a joke pic. The real Lilibet is still waiting for the right amount of $$$$$ before her mother serves her up on a silver platter. *Probably needs a sum like 30 pieces of silver.*



Ha.


----------



## DeMonica

papertiger said:


> That was Sarah - but I know what you mean
> 
> Quote of the day:
> "yes goodness knows that learning history is a waste of time that could more profitably spent rewriting it" = Brilliant


Actually St. John the Baptist's mother, Elizabeth (who was a relative of Mary) was also past the childbearing years  and infertile throughout their long marriage when got pregnant with St. John. Her husband, Zechariah, didn't believe the angel who announced him that he would have a son, therefore: the angel took away his ability to speak until the birth.


----------



## RAINDANCE

JY89 said:


> Not sure if anyone saw or posted this. But here you go..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have 'licenced' Lilibet Diana - New domain created
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have already created a domain for their new daughter Lilibet Diana, a royal biographer has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like they are extremely quick in licensing their daughter name upon birth just confirmed our speculations that she’s now monetising her new cash baby. Honestly, every normal parents would be celebrating the birth of the child and yet every of their moves are extremely scheming and calculated.
> 
> I’m absolutely not surprise but utterly disgusted. Poor kid



 I am utterly disgusted by this, too.

What kind of a sick, nasty person merchandises the childhood pet name of a 95 year old woman, before she's even dead !


----------



## drifter

These 2 insufferable fools are really annoying the hell out of me.  With all the pro-level attention seekers like Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Lopez and Bill Gates single, let's see what desperations hazard and methane will have to resort to in order to stay in the news!  Let the games begin!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

DeMonica said:


> Actually St. John the Baptist's mother, Elizabeth (who was a relative of Mary) was also past the childbearing years  and infertile throughout their long marriage when got pregnant with St. John. Her husband, Zechariah, didn't believe the angel who announced him that he would have a son, therefore: the angel took away his ability to speak until the birth.


Uhm... was he silent or silenced?  (I need a zip-mouth emoticon)


----------



## Traminer

DeMonica said:


> I'm not Anglican so I don't know for sure, but in the Catholic Church you can be a christening witness which is pretty much like a godparent but you can have different religious affiliation than the parents of the child.



So it is. 

And I can add a little detail:
When our  first son was christened,  the godmother was a lady that had left the Catholic Church.
Our priest then explained: 
"That is no problem at all. You have been christened once, and nobody can be "de-christened" or "de-baptized". No matter what the legal situation may be, you are a Catholic and will be a fine godmother!"

So the saying is really true: "Once a Catholic - always a Catholic!"


----------



## Traminer

RAINDANCE said:


> I am utterly disgusted by this, too.
> 
> What kind of a sick, nasty person merchandises the childhood pet name of a 95 year old woman, before she's even dead !



That really is sick indeed!


----------



## Traminer

On some other forum somebody wrote: "Lilibet as a first name is perfectly fine".

--------------------

And I answered to that:

It is not fine at all, let alone "perfectly fine".

Perhaps Harry & Meghan will comment on it one day?

I still think it is in very bad taste to use the Queen's private nickname as an ordinary first name.

I remember: When Prince Philip died, the Queen sad that "Lilibet" was her special nickname and only used by Prince Philip (and her father before)
And that now after Prince Philip's death nobody should use it any more.

I think the Queen was "not amused" by this choice of name.
But of course she is much too polite to complain.


----------



## papertiger

DeMonica said:


> Actually St. John the Baptist's mother, Elizabeth (who was a relative of Mary) was also past the childbearing years  and infertile throughout their long marriage when got pregnant with St. John. Her husband, Zechariah, didn't believe the angel who announced him that he would have a son, therefore: the angel took away his ability to speak until the birth.



Connected to silent birth too


----------



## RAINDANCE

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.



My condolences. A covid death when worldwide there seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel must be hard on you and your loved ones.

I feel you pain on the shared anniversaries ! I rarely use expletives but yesterday when I saw the news flash I was furious ! 
At least, for us, the 6th was not *Miss No8*'s actual birthday. My daughter was 18 yesterday.
I am old enough to fully appreciate that whilst one can plan and prepare, no human being can actual control an outcome, and so I actually managed to have my only child on my husband's birthday.


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I am utterly disgusted by this, too.
> 
> What kind of a sick, nasty person merchandises the childhood pet name of a 95 year old woman, before she's even dead !



It depends on the culture but it may read like that in this case.

The Queen is supposed to 'bless' the names of her grandchildren (and allowed to veto the ones she doesn't like).

Mt guess is (and someone before me said) they put 'we'd like to honour your name' and she probably thought Elizabeth. I cannot imagine in any world that is not the kingdom of Cloud Cuckoo land that the name 'Lilibet' would have been 'blessed'.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Traminer said:


> On some other forum somebody wrote: "Lilibet as a first name is perfectly fine".
> 
> --------------------
> 
> And I answered to that:
> 
> It is not fine at all, let alone "perfectly fine".
> 
> Perhaps Harry & Meghan will comment on it one day?
> 
> I still think it is in very bad taste to use the Queen's private nickname as an ordinary first name.
> 
> I remember: When Prince Philip died, the Queen sad that "Lilibet" was her special nickname and only used by Prince Philip (and her father before)
> And that now after Prince Philip's death nobody should use it any more.
> 
> I think the Queen was "not amused" by this choice of name.
> But of course she is much too polite to complain.



I would put money on it that Harry told HMTQ they were going to call Miss No8 Lily and intentionally misled.

It is the biggest F**k You, I have ever come across in my lifetime. 

ALSO, it was my understanding that it is absolutely not the done thing to name a child after a royal relative who is still alive. That is why Zara and Eugenie used Philip as a middle name of their recently born sons.

Just to note however that Charles Spencer's 7th child with his 3rd wife is called Lady Charlotte Diana Spencer (born 30 July 2012)


----------



## gerryt

Traminer said:


> On some other forum somebody wrote: "Lilibet as a first name is perfectly fine".
> 
> --------------------
> 
> And I answered to that:
> 
> It is not fine at all, let alone "perfectly fine".
> 
> Perhaps Harry & Meghan will comment on it one day?
> 
> I still think it is in very bad taste to use the Queen's private nickname as an ordinary first name.
> 
> I remember: When Prince Philip died, the Queen sad that "Lilibet" was her special nickname and only used by Prince Philip (and her father before)
> And that now after Prince Philip's death nobody should use it any more.
> 
> I think the Queen was "not amused" by this choice of name.
> But of course she is much too polite to complain.


i Think the choice is horrendous.  Why not just Lily since that’s what H likes.  Imagine a career woman presenting to the Board and introducing herself as Lilibet.  You should always choose a name that works throughout life.


----------



## RAINDANCE

gerryt said:


> i Think the choice is horrendous.  Why not just Lily since that’s what H likes.  Imagine a career woman presenting to the Board and introducing herself as Lilibet.  You should always choose a name that works throughout life.



I though the classic test was - does the name work with "doctor" before it 
and don't forget to check if the initials spell anything odd !


----------



## gerryt

RAINDANCE said:


> I though the classic test was - does the name work with "doctor" before it
> and don't forget to check if the initials spell anything odd !


Agree!  And nicknames are so personal.  My names Geraldine, known to my parents and brother as Denie because as a child he couldn’t manage the whole thing.  I love it when it comes from one of them, because it contains love somehow.  But only them. I even hate it when my sister in law uses it!


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Where do they get these numbers from?  I have no idea what midwives charge, but doctors get paid the same by insurance companies for vaginal or c sections.  Are these the hospital costs?  These random prices irritate me, just like when they claim wrong Birkin costs.


I know that drives me crazy too & I really don’t understand why I even care- I’m not even into birkins or big shoulder bags!

Maybe it’s because of the tacky jeffre stars of the world claiming they have million dollar bags or something & it’s just an extension of how much I dislike that clique 


Aimee3 said:


> Several pages back someone posted what The toxic tarts father said/wrote on the baby’s birth.  He pointedly left out mentioning his son in law H in his good wishes.  Shade!!!


Well he’s never met him so….  
poor guy there are children who take the grandkids to prison to see their murderer relatives and he’s here getting iced out for doing what they do. 


Clearblueskies said:


> I was joking about the puppy, as you were about the names, but we know now there’s no gutter they won’t scrape dry if there’s money to be made out of it. And they simply.do.not.care. if anyone gets hurt in the process.
> Meghan isn’t close to the Queen (I’d be surprised if the actual number of their face to face meetings is in double figures) and neither is Harry, they’re only using her for the money and attention her long service to her country brings with it.  None of the family even have up to date photos of the Sussexes to use in their congrats isn’t that telling?


It’s really sad. Upsetting to see how something can be warped and whittled away to nothing and that’s just M’s new face  



papertiger said:


> That was Sarah - but I know what you mean
> 
> Quote of the day:
> "yes goodness knows that learning history is a waste of time that could more profitably spent rewriting it" = Brilliant


Thank you very much! It’s amazing what interesting things come up when discussing the most trivial people in the world. 


DeMonica said:


> Actually St. John the Baptist's mother, Elizabeth (who was a relative of Mary) was also past the childbearing years  and infertile throughout their long marriage when got pregnant with St. John. Her husband, Zechariah, didn't believe the angel who announced him that he would have a son, therefore: the angel took away his ability to speak until the birth.


Oh thank you. I had a feeling  Elizabeth was something to do with Christmas carols as well so I looked it up and it seems her getting pregnant was an omen like with Sarah.

It is funny to think that because it was ancient times when they talk about ‘too old to bear children’ they probably still mean younger than M. 


RAINDANCE said:


> I would put money on it that Harry told HMTQ they were going to call Miss No8 Lily and intentionally misled.
> 
> It is the biggest F**k You, I have ever come across in my lifetime.
> 
> ALSO, it was my understanding that it is absolutely not the done thing to name a child after a royal relative who is still alive. That is why Zara and Eugenie used Philip as a middle name of their recently born sons.
> 
> Just to note however that Charles Spencer's 7th child with his 3rd wife is called Lady Charlotte Diana Spencer (born 30 July 2012)


no 8 lily sounds like a le labo scent 
I’ve no doubt if they even ever said anything they lied about it. I find it super rude too and hopefully it’ll get even the stans to realise that this couple who claim they want nothing more than independence and privacy are in fact desperate to leech off the brand.


----------



## xincinsin

gerryt said:


> i Think the choice is horrendous.  Why not just Lily since that’s what H likes.  Imagine a career woman presenting to the Board and introducing herself as Lilibet.  You should always choose a name that works throughout life.


That's why they will trademark it so that the company will be eponymous. Oops, I mean "charity".


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> I though the classic test was - does the name work with "doctor" before it
> and don't forget to check if the initials spell anything odd !


Lucky it wasn't Lilibet Spencer Diana, in that case.


----------



## gerryt

xincinsin said:


> That's why they will trademark it so that the company will be eponymous. Oops, I mean "charity".


Apparently they have done so already!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gerryt said:


> Apparently they have done so already!


Levin said they have claimed the domain. Trademarking is another kettle of fish (and expensive) if they decide to do for it what they did for "Sussex Royal". I'm not familiar with the US Patent and Trademark registration process and how they would view what I'd term a vindictive registration.

ETA: from the US Patent & Trademark website. There is hope!
_If your trademark includes the name, portrait, or signature of a living individual and you do not have their written consent to use and register it, registration of your trademark will be refused. You must provide written consent by that individual in your application. For example, if you include an image of former President Barack ***** in your trademark, you must provide written consent of former President ***** in your application. Or, if your trademark consists of the signature of the founder of your business, you must provide the founder’s written consent in your application._


----------



## RAINDANCE

Lodpah said:


> Well a baby being born is a time for celebration. I wish Lilibet Diana the best of health, joy and happiness.



Now I've stopped clutching my pearls as if my life depends on it   I am glad a healthy baby has been born.
At 40 any pregnancy and birth is not certain to be without complications or difficulties. 

I've posted this months ago but it is my view that being a dad is Harry's greatest pleasure; he finally has something that is his and his alone, and in that respect I can understand his protective instinct and desire to create a secure family unit. I bet Harry is obsessively hands-on and a great dad.

And so, it is so very deeply sad that they are causing so much damage and hurt to his own family, as well as appearing to exclude all of her family.


----------



## Genie27

gerryt said:


> Apparently they have done so already!


Now that the product has been delivered, marketing and pr can go all out on their campaigns. Must hit that ground running, ya know? So much to be done - 
Branding, awareness, saturation...worldwide recognition. 

(Ugh, my stomach hurts thinking this stuff up...these two have chutzpah, that’s for sure)


----------



## chicinthecity777

I just feel so sorry for the kids. There is no way in hell they are going to grow up to be normal! The generational pain continues...


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Now that the product has been delivered, marketing and pr can go all out on their campaigns. Must hit that ground running, ya know? So much to be done -
> Branding, awareness, saturation...worldwide recognition.
> 
> (Ugh, my stomach hurts thinking this stuff up...these two have chutzpah, that’s for sure)


But they’re on Parental Leave remember


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearblueskies said:


> But they’re on Parental Leave remember



‘Yes!  Maybe we will have at least 3 years of peace and quiet from them. They have taken far more than their share of band width in the last 3 years. Enough already. Be gone, live in peace&health, raise your children. Learn to live quietly.


----------



## Traminer

xincinsin said:


> That's why they will trademark it so that the company will be eponymous. Oops, I mean "charity".



They might have named the child:  "Charity"
I think that is a real English  name - and it would be good for  business.
Or perhaps "Caritas" - to put it in Latin.
Better not "Charité" though, as that sonds like the name of a hospital.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Yes!  Maybe we will have at least 3 years of peace and quiet from them. They have taken far more than their share of band width in the last 3 years. Enough already. Be gone, live in peace&health, raise your children. Learn to live quietly.


Meghan is never going to stop hustling for attention and cash


----------



## Traminer

*”WHAT'S IN A NAME? 
THAT WHICH WE CALL A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME WOULD SMELL AS SWEET” 
(QUOTE FROM ROMEO AND JULIET BY WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, CA. 1600)*
Here I dis-agree with good old William.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cringe.
It amazes me that these women who must have done a million of these ‘why calling all women miss and girl is patronising’ debates can’t see how referring to someone by her cutesy love pet name, never mind insisting it’s the same as her name, is patronising. Especially given it’s also associated with someone who just died.
Oh well, it ain’t likely GMB will hire anyone with character or a bit of a brain. Maybe people should start calling them susie-sue and Affy-baby to see how they like it.

The mental gymnastics of the week award though goes to claiming lilibet is actually a tribute to doria though because she used to call her kid ‘flower’ yeah sure and Archie is actually a reference to Prince Philip because he used to drive under bridges.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Traminer said:


> On some other forum somebody wrote: "Lilibet as a first name is perfectly fine".
> 
> --------------------
> 
> And I answered to that:
> 
> It is not fine at all, let alone "perfectly fine".
> 
> *Perhaps Harry & Meghan will comment on it one day?*
> 
> I still think it is in very bad taste to use the Queen's private nickname as an ordinary first name.
> 
> I remember: When Prince Philip died, the Queen sad that "Lilibet" was her special nickname and only used by Prince Philip (and her father before)
> And that now after Prince Philip's death nobody should use it any more.
> 
> I think the Queen was "not amused" by this choice of name.
> But of course she is much too polite to complain.




It probably will be discussed in an OW 2.0 interview    Not that there's one planned but anything is possible with these two. At this point, they should just go on Jerry Springer.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

jelliedfeels said:


> The mental gymnastics of the week award though goes to claiming lilibet is actually a tribute to doria though because she used to call her kid ‘flower’ yeah sure and Archie is actually a reference to Prince Philip because he used to drive under bridges.



In their statement they clearly said she was named after the queen, so anyone claiming the child is named after Doria is just reaching. 

I do think they may use this angle if ever criticized about naming their child after the head of a 'racist' institution.


----------



## gerryt

xincinsin said:


> Levin said they have claimed the domain. Trademarking is another kettle of fish (and expensive) if they decide to do for it what they did for "Sussex Royal". I'm not familiar with the US Patent and Trademark registration process and how they would view what I'd term a vindictive registration.
> 
> ETA: from the US Patent & Trademark website. There is hope!
> _If your trademark includes the name, portrait, or signature of a living individual and you do not have their written consent to use and register it, registration of your trademark will be refused. You must provide written consent by that individual in your application. For example, if you include an image of former President Barack ***** in your trademark, you must provide written consent of former President ***** in your application. Or, if your trademark consists of the signature of the founder of your business, you must provide the founder’s written consent in your application._


Wish the royal family would try and get ahead of her games here - wouldnt it be great if she made a pitch to find William had beaten her to it on all the most likely strategic combinations of names!  I woukd consider that money well spent!


----------



## gerryt

On quora its being reported that the sugars are already calling her Lil Bit.  Not sure Ms thought this through…


----------



## lanasyogamama

I like this analysis.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gerryt said:


> Wish the royal family would try and get ahead of her games here - wouldnt it be great if she made a pitch to find William had beaten her to it on all the most likely strategic combinations of names!  I woukd consider that money well spent!



W&K did.   Sorry, I misunderstood your point. Didn’t realize you were referring to the website domain names.
Clearly, W&K chose the proper forms of the names, not the nicknames. Thus, their daughter has an elegant name.  Most parents want a name that ages well in all settings. Nicknames are fine, but not long term. When she is old enough, let the person decide if she prefers Elizabeth (or some other form) to Lilibet. It should be the person’s choice. This girl will feel ‘trapped’ in this name. IMO.

The Lovely *Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana Mountbatten-Windsor*












						Princess Charlotte celebrates her sixth birthday
					

A photo of the fourth in line to the throne, taken by her mother, is released to mark the day.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## marietouchet

gerryt said:


> On quora its being reported that the sugars are already calling her Lil Bit.  Not sure Ms thought this through…


OK, how do you pronounce LILIBET ?
I dont think LILY-BET is correct 
I have heard it pronounced LIL-UH-BIT by my English granny  - accent on LIL, the BIT is very soft .. that sounds more like an approximation of Elizabeth

Are TV news reporters in the UK all pronouncing it the same ? and how ? Something tells me it is like Eugenie - she has herself alluded to the multiple pronunciations


----------



## xincinsin

gerryt said:


> Wish the royal family would try and get ahead of her games here - wouldnt it be great if she made a pitch to find William had beaten her to it on all the most likely strategic combinations of names!  I woukd consider that money well spent!


You mean, trademark it before they do? I too wish they would. In the UK if nowhere else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO The American pronunciation would be to pronounce each syllable - Lil Lee bet [bet rhymes with set, get, met, debt].

ETA:  LIL-UH-BIT - this sounds beautiful, especially since it is nickname for Elizabeth.  You can almost hear a little child saying “Elizabeth” like that.


----------



## Hermes Nuttynut

Lilibet can run for US president.  She was born in California.  It’s good to know that if she can’t be a princess, there’s another option.  President Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor.


----------



## Traminer

gerryt said:


> On quora its being reported that the sugars are already calling her Lil Bit.



Should  refer to "little bit"?


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> Lili Diana sounds like a rapper name, like Lil Kim


and I doubt they will use both names for actually talking to the child....too long


----------



## RAINDANCE

Traminer said:


> Should  refer to "little bit"?




A little bit of Monica in my life
A little bit of Erica by my side
A little bit of Rita is all I need
A little bit of Tina is what I see
A little bit of Sandra in the sun
A little bit of Mary all night long
A little bit of Jessica, here I am
A little bit of you makes me your man
Mambo Number Five


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Nuttynut said:


> Lilibet can run for US president.  She was born in California.  It’s good to know that if she can’t be a princess, there’s another option.  President Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor.


Would she need to renounce her place in the succession hierarchy?

I think Methane would try for politics herself, especially if the Queen & Parliament take away her titles. She would run on the platform calling for people to rise up against oppression of the blacks - with herself as the prime example of course. If the Dems don't support her, maybe her new BFF will be Marjorie Taylor Greene.


----------



## sdkitty

JY89 said:


> Not sure if anyone saw or posted this. But here you go..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry have 'licenced' Lilibet Diana - New domain created
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have already created a domain for their new daughter Lilibet Diana, a royal biographer has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like they are extremely quick in licensing their daughter name upon birth just confirmed our speculations that she’s now monetising her new cash baby. Honestly, every normal parents would be celebrating the birth of the child and yet every of their moves are extremely scheming and calculated.
> 
> I’m absolutely not surprise but utterly disgusted. Poor kid


wow, monetizing your baby a day or two after she's born....I've never heard of anyone doing that


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> A little bit of Monica in my life
> A little bit of Erica by my side
> A little bit of Rita is all I need
> A little bit of Tina is what I see
> A little bit of Sandra in the sun
> A little bit of Mary all night long
> A little bit of Jessica, here I am
> A little bit of you makes me your man
> Mambo Number Five


I think I've read some Western novels with Lil Bit being the name of the trusty steed.


----------



## sdkitty

what I've seen on US TV so far - one teaser "royal baby born in CA"
and a report on CNN - a British man (don't know who he was) saying Harry fits in well in Montecito....has been seen at the beach, riding his bike, etc.
And someone saying Archie is excited to have a baby sister - yeah right - he's like two?  doesn't even know what a baby sister is yet


----------



## doni

I think to give a kid a nickname as a name is fairly normal nowadays, and when you have stepped out of all the royal thing and have no ”pressure” to be traditional and so, well why not.

What I don’t get is giving a kid a nickname when you are going to use a different nickname for them? What would be the reason for that? Genuine question, I have no idea...

Specially when you know the person whom you are actually honoring (the Queen) is most certainly not going to appreciate it... Wouldn’t Elisabeth (Lily) Diana make more sense?


----------



## Allisonfaye

needlv said:


> Lilibet shortened to Betty... so Archie and Betty?? *(Who is jughead?)*
> 
> unless they had the Queen’s blessing - I agree with the other posters that MM did this to serve the Queen back for prohibiting them from  merching   using “Royal”.  They will now merch Lilibet - a big FU to the Queen...



I think you know.


----------



## Traminer

RAINDANCE said:


>



And why those smilies?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I'm waiting for them to slip into every possible occasion a mention of their special bond with TQ. It probably just dawned on them that with the Platinum Jubilee coming up, they can flog the name for extra cash. I'm sure they already have a line of Lilibet merch lined up and now they can claim that it's their daughter's name, so they can use it with impunity.



The Archewell homepage has already noted the significance of “Lilibet.”


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I think to give a kid a nickname as a name is fairly normal nowadays, and when you have stepped out of all the royal thing and have no ”pressure” to be traditional and so, well why not.
> 
> What I don’t get is giving a kid a nickname when you are going to use a different nickname for them? What would be the reason for that? Genuine question, I have no idea...
> 
> Specially when you know the person whom you are actually honoring (the Queen) is most certainly not going to appreciate it... Wouldn’t Elisabeth (Lily) Diana make more sense?


maybe they thought they were honoring the queen....but Harry should know that he's supposed to ask for her blessing


----------



## mdcx

100% using Lilibet was Meghan’s middle finger to the BRF. Take something private and personal to them and make it pap fodder. She is beyond the bounds of mentally normal imo.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Lilibet shortened to Betty... so Archie and Betty?? (Who is jughead?)



Harry.

No, that’s unfair. Jughead was much smarter.


----------



## doni

sdkitty said:


> maybe they thought they were honoring the queen....but Harry should know that he's supposed to ask for her blessing


I cannot believe Harry thought for a moment that the Queen would appreciate he’d name his kid with her family nickname, which on top is not even intended to be used... I mean, this is the Queen of England, officially naming children with nicknames is not part of her world, she may well tolerate it, but I doubt she would understand it, and even less read it as honor...


----------



## RAINDANCE

@Traminer 
They are "shocked", no smiles here I am afraid !


----------



## sdkitty

doni said:


> I cannot believe Harry thought for a moment that the Queen would appreciate he’d name his kid with her family nickname which they didn’t even intend to use... I mean, this is the Queen of England, officially naming children with nicknames is not part of the world, she may tolerate it, but I doubt would understand it, and even less read it as honor...


I don't know what Harry thinks....seems like he thinks whatever his Wife tells him to think.  If it's true that the queen wasn't consulted and isn't happy about this, then - talk about burning bridges.  the arrogance just goes on and on.  you couldn't make this crap up


----------



## bag-mania

RAINDANCE said:


> What kind of a sick, nasty person merchandises the childhood pet name of a 95 year old woman, before she's even dead !



Someone who isn’t burdened by that thing called conscience.


----------



## youngster

Using the name Lilibet is such a contradiction given their trashing of the family and does seem really hypocritical. Anyone who starts talking about how awful MM was treated now only has to say, well, couldn't have been that bad since they named their daughter after the Queen. 

I'm guessing they realize they went too far in the last few months and ended up creating bad publicity for themselves and lots of sympathy for the Queen and for Prince Charles. Their popularity and image in the UK is terrible and, while they might not care that much, they do want to be invited back for high profile events so they can stand on the balcony and wave,have some pictures taken, and then scurry back to California with their royal shine replenished.  So, this is their rather desperate attempt to backtrack and show that they are still on the inside, very much so, by using her private nickname.  If I were the Queen and the family, I'd be giving them the .  

Of course, if they pulled another bait and switch on a 95 year old lady by telling her that they wanted to name the baby after her and she thought it would be "Elizabeth" then Charles or Will needs to step in and limit their access to her going forward or at least have a family member be a witness to their requests.


----------



## bag-mania

gerryt said:


> i Think the choice is horrendous.  Why not just Lily since that’s what H likes.  Imagine a career woman presenting to the Board and introducing herself as Lilibet.  You should always choose a name that works throughout life.



You never know what could make a name popular. There could be a mini baby boom of Lilibets in the next couple of years. Women are always looking for unique baby names.

Fun fact: auto correct wants to change it to “little bit.”


----------



## Chanbal

drifter said:


> These 2 insufferable fools are really annoying the hell out of me.  With all the pro-level attention seekers like Kim Kardashian, Jennifer Lopez and Bill Gates single, let's see what desperations hazard and methane will have to resort to in order to stay in the news!  Let the games begin!



I wouldn't put them on the same level of JLo, BillG, or even KK. They seem to be in a much higher level of attention seekers, the human perversity. To have licensed QE's special nickname is highly perverse imo. 

I wish QE the strength to deal with one more difficulty with the usual elegance.


----------



## Jayne1

If he's trying to gain favour with the royal family, shouldn't it be with Charles or Will? The long game would be sucking up to Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They planned this name all along. This article was posted 6 days before the birth.  Hmmmm.
From 2019,
_Back when the couple was expecting Archie in 2019, they visited the town of Birkenhead and heard name suggestions from a group of school children.
After a 7-year-old girl named Megan Dudley spoke with the Duchess of Sussex and discovered that their friends both call them "Meg," she offered a name suggestion for the baby. Dudley told reporters, "I asked her whether she would call her baby Amy if she has a girl, and she said, 'That's a really pretty name, I like it. We'll have to think about it.' "

During the same engagement, Harry showed an interest in the name "Lily," asking a mother how she spelled her daughter's flower-inspired name._









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Already Hinted at the Baby Girl Names They Like
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are expecting a baby girl this summer, and they previously hinted at names they liked




					people.com


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> But they’re on Parental Leave remember



That’s why they have staff, dozens of others working hard so they don’t have to!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> If he's trying to gain favour with the royal family, shouldn't it be with Charles or Will? The long game would be sucking up to Charles.



Maybe. Could be he is trying to kiss up to W&K. He modeled this name after Princess Charlotte with the major difference being he chose an informal form of Elizabeth. Whether or not QE likes this choice, it remains a shameless attempt to copy W&K.  Haaaa.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

Harry and Meghan: 'Oprah who?' - Prince Edward and Sophie, Countess of Wessex, joke about bombshell interview
					

The Countess of Wessex also said the royals are "still a family no matter what happens", despite the tensions that have arisen.




					news.sky.com
				




At this point I think MM and H are just trolling us. 

Sophie (Duchess of Wessex) said they will always be family no matter what. Thats generally how most families are, and I think in the end, they will always be there for H, even though they both complain. 

The only reason MM doesn't want to make amends with her father is because he is not useful to her anymore, he doesn't have $$$ or connections she needs. If he was toxic or abusive, I would understand her cutting off all contact.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shopaholic2021 said:


> Harry and Meghan: 'Oprah who?' - Prince Edward and Sophie, Countess of Wessex, joke about bombshell interview
> 
> 
> The Countess of Wessex also said the royals are "still a family no matter what happens", despite the tensions that have arisen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.sky.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this point I think MM and H are just trolling us.
> 
> Sophie (Duchess of Wessex) said they will always be family no matter what. Thats generally how most families are, and I think in the end, they will always be there for H, even though they both complain.
> 
> The only reason MM doesn't want to make amends with her father is because he is not useful to her anymore, he doesn't have $$$ or connections she needs. If he was toxic or abusive, I would understand her cutting off all contact.



Remember, Thomas did visit OW’s house which is in H&M‘s neighborhood. Also, he and Doria are still in touch. So, my guess is he has seen his grandson and will see this new baby. There is more happening behind the gates than we know. Yes, the toxic ones are trolling us and laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## Jayne1

Was this posted?  The thread moves so fast, I might have missed it.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I like this analysis.




Why take from QE one of the very few private things she has in life? An then trademark her name...


----------



## Traminer

RAINDANCE said:


> @Traminer
> They are "shocked", no smiles here I am afraid !



OK!


----------



## Traminer

> SUBSCRIBE MORE
> 
> ABOUT ARCHEWELL
> ARCHEWELL FOUNDATION
> ARCHEWELL PRODUCTIONS
> ARCHEWELL AUDIO
> 
> 
> 
> *Archewell is the organization founded by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.*
> LEARN MORE
> 
> 
> 
> *Uplifting and uniting communities—local and global, online and offline—one act of compassion at a time.*
> LEARN MORE
> 
> 
> 
> *Harnessing the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity, amplifying diverse and inspiring content.*
> LEARN MORE
> 
> 
> 
> *Building community through shared experiences, powerful narratives, and universal values.*
> LEARN MORE
> *Congratulations to The Duke and Duchess of Sussex!*
> ...on the birth of their daughter
> FIND OUT MORE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Compassion in Action*
> Through our non-profit work, as well as creative activations, we drive systemic cultural change across all communities, one act of compassion at a time.
> SEE WHAT WE'RE UP TO



I was curious and just had a look there:

>>> https://archewell.com/


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> I find it strange she names her Lilibet the Queen's nickname but yet trashes the Queen. Also what is up with just the back of the head photo shot? Babies change as they grow and they pretty much look all alike. I wish the baby well but the parents are too extra, extra and more extra. It's like she's playing games with people, childish games.


I sincerely hope that by the time that Archie and "Lili" (_I *REFUSE *to call her Lilibet_) reach their teenage years (_when the teen angst kicks in big-time_), Hap-Hazza and Meghan-o-lo-maniac have enough $$$$$ to get these 2 the *major-league* mental health help they will *100%* need with these two headcases as parents.  Having seen this crap first-hand (_within my own family and others_), it truly breaks my heart that these two kids have such *SELF-SERVING*, *NARCISSISTIC*, *NUT-JOBS* as parents!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> If he's trying to gain favour with the royal family, shouldn't it be with Charles or Will? The long game would be sucking up to Charles.


She’s planning on being divorced before that becomes necessary.


----------



## Chanbal

The website was purchased precisely on the day Doria Pip Diana (aka Lili) was officially born, very intriguing indeed! 

_*The website lilibetdiana.com was bought up in the US on the day Meghan gave birth to her second child - but before the world knew the news, the public register of websites has revealed

*_








						Lilibetdiana.com purchased on day Harry and Meghan's daughter was born
					

The owners of the domain has been kept secret because it was purchased via an intermediary in Scottsdale, Arizona, whose motto is: 'Your identity is nobody's business but ours'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## eunaddict

lanasyogamama said:


> Found a pic of Lili.
> View attachment 5103001



I believe THIS is the actual photo of Lili.


----------



## Chanbal

Omid on Mather Teresa of Montecito  I bet Angela Levin is right!

_And Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, has revealed that the couple are now taking time off work together. He said: *‘We're so used to seeing senior royals going back to work but Harry and Meghan are leading by example they offer up to 20 weeks parental leave at Archewell - it'll be several months off work for the pair of them*’.

Asked if the tribute to Her Majesty could heal the wounds caused by the couple's damaging transatlantic truth bombs in recent weeks, *Mr Scobie added in an interview with Good Morning America: 'I don’t know about an olive branch but it shows how close they've always been with the Queen'*. 

*Experts are split on how the Queen will view the tribute* - some have claimed that Her Majesty will have been unhappy about the choice of name - others believe she will be touched.

Russell Myers, royal editor of the Daily Mirror, said today: 'I am told Harry had said to the Queen he may name a daughter after her and so he didn't really ask for permission as such but it was a nice surprise'. He added: 'It can perhaps have these healing powers, it's been a turbulent time, the truth bombs all the labelling of the royal family as racist - this seems to be a tremendous gesture'. 

*Angela Levin told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Her Majesty will be upset, adding: 'I think she’s desperately unhappy because they were desperately rude about her. I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's quite rude to her Majesty the Queen'*._









						Archie 'excited' at birth of Lilibet and Queen 'surprised by name'
					

The Duke of Sussex is understood to have told his grandmother they may name their daughter after her - but didn't ask the monarch's express permission before she arrived on Friday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

eunaddict said:


> I believe THIS is the actual photo of Lili.
> 
> View attachment 5103626


You are getting there, but I believe this is the one!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Omid on Mather Teresa of Montecito  I bet Angela Levin is right!
> 
> _And Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, has revealed that the couple are now taking time off work together. He said: *‘We're so used to seeing senior royals going back to work but Harry and Meghan are leading by example they offer up to 20 weeks parental leave at Archewell - it'll be several months off work for the pair of them*’.
> 
> Asked if the tribute to Her Majesty could heal the wounds caused by the couple's damaging transatlantic truth bombs in recent weeks, *Mr Scobie added in an interview with Good Morning America: 'I don’t know about an olive branch but it shows how close they've always been with the Queen'*.
> 
> *Experts are split on how the Queen will view the tribute* - some have claimed that Her Majesty will have been unhappy about the choice of name - others believe she will be touched.
> 
> Russell Myers, royal editor of the Daily Mirror, said today: 'I am told Harry had said to the Queen he may name a daughter after her and so he didn't really ask for permission as such but it was a nice surprise'. He added: 'It can perhaps have these healing powers, it's been a turbulent time, the truth bombs all the labelling of the royal family as racist - this seems to be a tremendous gesture'.
> 
> *Angela Levin told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Her Majesty will bLOe upset, adding: 'I think she’s desperately unhappy because they were desperately rude about her. I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's quite rude to her Majesty the Queen'*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archie 'excited' at birth of Lilibet and Queen 'surprised by name'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have told his grandmother they may name their daughter after her - but didn't ask the monarch's express permission before she arrived on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


LOL...taking time off from what?  conspiring with their publicity people to keep their names in the news?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Omid on Mather Teresa of Montecito  I bet Angela Levin is right!
> 
> _And Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, has revealed that the couple are now taking time off work together. He said: *‘We're so used to seeing senior royals going back to work but Harry and Meghan are leading by example they offer up to 20 weeks parental leave at Archewell - it'll be several months off work for the pair of them*’.
> 
> Asked if the tribute to Her Majesty could heal the wounds caused by the couple's damaging transatlantic truth bombs in recent weeks, *Mr Scobie added in an interview with Good Morning America: 'I don’t know about an olive branch but it shows how close they've always been with the Queen'*.
> 
> *Experts are split on how the Queen will view the tribute* - some have claimed that Her Majesty will have been unhappy about the choice of name - others believe she will be touched.
> 
> Russell Myers, royal editor of the Daily Mirror, said today: 'I am told Harry had said to the Queen he may name a daughter after her and so he didn't really ask for permission as such but it was a nice surprise'. He added: 'It can perhaps have these healing powers, it's been a turbulent time, the truth bombs all the labelling of the royal family as racist - this seems to be a tremendous gesture'.
> 
> *Angela Levin told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Her Majesty will be upset, adding: 'I think she’s desperately unhappy because they were desperately rude about her. I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's quite rude to her Majesty the Queen'*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archie 'excited' at birth of Lilibet and Queen 'surprised by name'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have told his grandmother they may name their daughter after her - but didn't ask the monarch's express permission before she arrived on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


" _this seems to be a tremendous gesture_ "
Didn't anyone ask him what gesture it was and if two fingers were involved in said gesture?


----------



## eunaddict

purseinsanity said:


> Where do they get these numbers from?  I have no idea what midwives charge, but doctors get paid the same by insurance companies for vaginal or c sections.  Are these the hospital costs?  These random prices irritate me, just like when they claim wrong Birkin costs.



C-sections are usually more expensive because of the OT costs, equipment costs and personnel costs - the obstetric wards I've been on usually has a midwife +/- doctor on hand for natural births. But for a c-section, you can have as many as 5 people focused on mom (1 surgeon, 1 assistant, 1-3 scrub techs/nurses), at least 1 (midwife or a pediatric/neonatal resident) for baby post-delivery and then someone doing anaesthetics (CRNA or anaesthetics resident).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


> Omid on Mather Teresa of Montecito  I bet Angela Levin is right!
> 
> _And Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, has revealed that the couple are now taking time off work together. He said: *‘We're so used to seeing senior royals going back to work but Harry and Meghan are leading by example they offer up to 20 weeks parental leave at Archewell - it'll be several months off work for the pair of them*’.
> 
> Asked if the tribute to Her Majesty could heal the wounds caused by the couple's damaging transatlantic truth bombs in recent weeks, *Mr Scobie added in an interview with Good Morning America: 'I don’t know about an olive branch but it shows how close they've always been with the Queen'*.
> 
> *Experts are split on how the Queen will view the tribute* - some have claimed that Her Majesty will have been unhappy about the choice of name - others believe she will be touched.
> 
> Russell Myers, royal editor of the Daily Mirror, said today: 'I am told Harry had said to the Queen he may name a daughter after her and so he didn't really ask for permission as such but it was a nice surprise'. He added: 'It can perhaps have these healing powers, it's been a turbulent time, the truth bombs all the labelling of the royal family as racist - this seems to be a tremendous gesture'.
> 
> *Angela Levin told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Her Majesty will be upset, adding: 'I think she’s desperately unhappy because they were desperately rude about her. I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's quite rude to her Majesty the Queen'*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archie 'excited' at birth of Lilibet and Queen 'surprised by name'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have told his grandmother they may name their daughter after her - but didn't ask the monarch's express permission before she arrived on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


“Several months off” - from what?  And they can’t even take their “time off” without having another dig at the RF?  Including the Queen, who has picked up her duty despite her bereavement


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Maybe they can do the world a favour and take the rest of their lives off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

20 weeks, so they’ll be back around October 20th. We can get some much needed rest now  

What matters most about the name is that once again *they imitated W&K.  *Hahahahaha  
Future King’s daughter :: Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana Mountbatten-Windsor ::
Cheap imitation by the disastrous duo - LiliBet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor  [is the B capitalized or is that just on the website?]


----------



## duna

I've been reading comments by Italians and one person calls MM "Mechan" which in French means cruel/nasty, I had a good laugh....very appropriate


----------



## csshopper

Looking forward to hearing Lady C's thoughts on the royal "birth." I am still intrigued by the wording of this statement:

“The Queen, The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall, and The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have been informed and are delighted with the news of the birth of a daughter* for* The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”

If there was a surrogate, how will Methane recycle her moon bumps, the latex is probably toxic in land fills.


----------



## lanasyogamama

eunaddict said:


> I believe THIS is the actual photo of Lili.
> 
> View attachment 5103626





Chanbal said:


> You are getting there, but I believe this is the one!
> View attachment 5103636


You read my mind, I was going to ask if we could add a blur!


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> Looking forward to hearing Lady C's thoughts on the royal "birth." I am still intrigued by the wording of this statement:
> 
> “The Queen, The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall, and The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have been informed and are delighted with the news of the birth of a daughter* for* The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”
> 
> If there was a surrogate, how will Methane recycle her moon bumps, the latex is probably toxic in land fills.


I’ve always been sceptical about the idea they’d lie over using a surrogate.  Not anymore, because there have been so many lies, and so much duplicity from Harry and Meghan.  I don’t think they can walk straight, let alone give an honest account of themselves.  Everything is distorted.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> They told DailyMail.com:* ‘Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it’s now up to them to break the cycle once and for all.’*


Meghan is so full of SH1T .. making that type of statement!!! .. and don't get me started on Hap-Hazza!  Truly, I say .. take the titles away, and then (somehow) .. move them to maybe South Africa .. but NOT the nice parts of Cape Town or J-Burg, and let them REALLY see what pain and suffering is!!!  The TONE-DEAFNESS of these two is just so EPIC; sadly .. a trait that I see a LOT out here in LA .. that 'ole "entitle-itis" ..


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, unfortunately I saw.  My uncle passed away unexpectedly from COVID on June 4, so I was busy with that and now trying to catch up on 50+ pages.  I'll know this kid's birthday forever because of the unfortunate coincidence.  Archie was born on my sister's birthday so I'll forever remember that too.  Ugh, can't escape these two.


Purseinsanity, I am so sorry for your loss. Sending you prayers, strength and condolences to you and your family.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> If he was toxic or abusive, I would understand her cutting off all contact.



If Thomas had been abusive we would’ve heard about it long ago. Meghan doesn’t miss any opportunity to play the victim.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Would she need to renounce her place in the succession hierarchy?



To run for President?

Yes, she would. Her removal of her title 'Princess' would be seen as a renouncement anyway. Unlike H&M that have 'parked' their HRHs, if she gave-up her title - she'd be seen as saying goodbye to her birthright. Not automatically, but in gesture.

Besides, can't be head or figurehead of more than one country - split-loyalty and conflict of interests.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> Specially when you know the person whom you are actually honoring (the Queen) is most certainly not going to appreciate it... Wouldn’t Elisabeth (Lily) Diana make more sense?



 Sense is obviously not her parent's strong point.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> I’ve always been sceptical about the idea they’d lie over using a surrogate.  Not anymore, because there have been so many lies, and so much duplicity from Harry and Meghan.  I don’t think they can walk straight, let alone give an honest account of themselves.  Everything is distorted.



I am skeptical about everything about them. Surrogates, miscarriages, the whole deal. It’s too much effort to sort out the truth when the lies are overwhelming.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I am skeptical about everything about them. Surrogates, miscarriages, the whole deal. It’s too much effort to sort out the truth when the lies are overwhelming.



  
We get 20 weeks to recover, refresh, rejuvenate


----------



## zen1965

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't put them on the same level of JLo, BillG, or even KK. They seem to be in a much higher level of attention seekers, the human perversity. To have licensed QE's special nickname is highly perverse imo.
> 
> I wish QE the strength to deal with one more difficulty with the usual elegance.



The mentioning of KK, JLo and BillG in one breath is quite something in itself without putting the gruesome twosome in the same equation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Omid on Mather Teresa of Montecito  I bet Angela Levin is right!
> 
> _And Omid Scobie, a journalist favoured by Harry and Meghan, has revealed that the couple are now taking time off work together. He said: *‘We're so used to seeing senior royals going back to work but Harry and Meghan are leading by example they offer up to 20 weeks parental leave at Archewell - it'll be several months off work for the pair of them*’.
> 
> Asked if the tribute to Her Majesty could heal the wounds caused by the couple's damaging transatlantic truth bombs in recent weeks, *Mr Scobie added in an interview with Good Morning America: 'I don’t know about an olive branch but it shows how close they've always been with the Queen'*.
> 
> *Experts are split on how the Queen will view the tribute* - some have claimed that Her Majesty will have been unhappy about the choice of name - others believe she will be touched.
> 
> Russell Myers, royal editor of the Daily Mirror, said today: 'I am told Harry had said to the Queen he may name a daughter after her and so he didn't really ask for permission as such but it was a nice surprise'. He added: 'It can perhaps have these healing powers, it's been a turbulent time, the truth bombs all the labelling of the royal family as racist - this seems to be a tremendous gesture'.
> 
> *Angela Levin told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Her Majesty will be upset, adding: 'I think she’s desperately unhappy because they were desperately rude about her. I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's quite rude to her Majesty the Queen'*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archie 'excited' at birth of Lilibet and Queen 'surprised by name'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have told his grandmother they may name their daughter after her - but didn't ask the monarch's express permission before she arrived on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Leading by example?  So the RF should follow their example and take a vacation?  What gall
I guess this is just an extension of how we should all follow their example and listen to what they tell us is right about everything.  I wouldn't know about climate change or anything about race relations if it weren't for H&M.  Uugh


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> We get 20 weeks to recover, refresh, rejuvenate



The chances of them being quiet during that time is zil.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The chances of them being quiet during that time is zil.


you'd think it would be exhausting spending your life trying to be relevant to strangers.....Harry at least had some structure before.  now what does he have?  hope he enjoys his kids


----------



## mellibelly

Aimee3 said:


> Several pages back someone posted what The toxic tarts father said/wrote on the baby’s birth.


I misread this as *the toxic farts father*. The Methane nickname is so good 



CarryOn2020 said:


> _Harry showed an interest in the name "Lily," asking a mother how she spelled her daughter's flower-inspired name._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Already Hinted at the Baby Girl Names They Like
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are expecting a baby girl this summer, and they previously hinted at names they liked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


So he is illiterate!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Meghan is so full of SH1T .. making that type of statement!!! .. and don't get me started on Hap-Hazza!  Truly, I say .. take the titles away, and then (somehow) .. move them to maybe South Africa .. but NOT the nice parts of Cape Town or J-Burg, and let them REALLY see what pain and suffering is!!!  The TONE-DEAFNESS of these two is just so EPIC; sadly .. a trait that I see a LOT out here in LA .. that 'ole "entitle-itis" ..


The people of South Africa have already enough problems, including COVID. QE could perhaps help them settling in an uninhabited island of the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or she is waiting for her mom to recover from all the required nips and tucks so she can be Hwood fabulous.


That’s why they went underground. He is getting hair plugs and she is getting everything from top to toe   Who knows, we may be treated to a celebrity makeover show with these two.  They will be covered in bandages until the big reveal at the Jubulee!


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> I’ve always been sceptical about the idea they’d lie over using a surrogate.  Not anymore, because there have been so many lies, and so much duplicity from Harry and Meghan.  I don’t think they can walk straight, let alone give an honest account of themselves.  Everything is distorted.


Clearly they have no problems lying about everything. They think they are extremely clever and we are all stupid. The fact that they presented outright lies at the Oprah interview shows this and that was the tip of the iceberg.   They are now using this baby who is not even a week old to explain why they kept Archie from his family. How sick is this?


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> I've been reading comments by Italians and one person calls MM "Mechan" which in French means cruel/nasty, I had a good laugh....very appropriate


You inspired me to check out Chinese websites. They don't make a play on her name but they made some rather droll & sarcastic comments such as: 
_Before marriage, Harry never minded being the spare. But after being brainwashed by MM, he and his wife turned their backs on the RF and went to the US to start a new life. 
Elderly mother MM was determined to give birth authentically at home because the older nobility all give birth at home. Then she can be an aristocrat just like QE2. She was unhappy that she missed out on the experience with Archie._
I guess SS and her lawyers don't read Chinese, so they won't get sued.


----------



## PurseUOut

I generally held Harry and Meghan in very high regard and felt that the media was being completely unfair to them as they transitioned to life outside of the royal family. I would REALLY hope they would have not only consulted, but had the enthusiastic permission of the Queen well before naming their daughter such a personal nickname given by the Queen's father and used primarily by her deceased husband.


----------



## bisousx

xincinsin said:


> You inspired me to check out Chinese websites. They don't make a play on her name but they made some rather droll & sarcastic comments such as:
> _Before marriage, Harry never minded being the spare. But after being brainwashed by MM, he and his wife turned their backs on the RF and went to the US to start a new life.
> Elderly mother MM was determined to give birth authentically at home because the older nobility all give birth at home. Then she can be an aristocrat just like QE2. She was unhappy that she missed out on the experience with Archie._
> I guess SS and her lawyers don't read Chinese, so they won't get sued.



Thank you for sharing this, my mood today has been quite _blah _until I read this pettiness   I can hear it in a gossipy auntie’s voice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Disclaimer: I haven't read through the five new pages and I'm even more irritable than usual thanks to an infected tooth that drives me crazyyy (also, when they numbed me they hit the nerve and I went basically blind for 20 mins. Not gonna lie, I panicked).

Buuut...the more I think of it, the more I think they must have completely lost it. There is not one single reason why using a very specific family nickname for your child even without the troublesome two's history with the BRF would be a good idea. At this point I'd love mental health professionals to weigh in because this is neither sweet nor harmless or even normal. In fact I'm sure it's the expression of some pathological condition.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I've posted this months ago but it is my view that being a dad is Harry's greatest pleasure; he finally has something that is his and his alone, and in that respect I can understand his protective instinct and desire to create a secure family unit. I bet Harry is obsessively hands-on and a great dad.



Yeah, but if a secure family unit is your desire maybe don't have children with a raging nutjob.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but if a secure family unit is your desire maybe don't have children with a raging nutjob.


Maybe Nutmeg was the only one eager to bear his fruit. She did say, "I knew that he and I were aligned on all of our _cause driven_ work". Just his bad luck to be turned from his causes, and sucked into her less than lofty ambitions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> You never know what could make a name popular. There could be a mini baby boom of Lilibets in the next couple of years. Women are always looking for unique baby names.
> 
> Fun fact: auto correct wants to change it to “little bit.”



How gross and vulgar. The Queen carried that name for 90+ years and nobody ever thought of naming a baby after it...and now there will be an Armada of sugars following their idol and doing the same. WTFFF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Asked if the tribute to Her Majesty could heal the wounds caused by the couple's damaging transatlantic truth bombs in recent weeks, *Mr Scobie added in an interview with Good Morning America: 'I don’t know about an olive branch but it shows how close they've always been with the Queen'*. _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

mellibelly said:


> I misread this as *the toxic farts father*. The Methane nickname is so good
> 
> 
> So he is illiterate!


To be fair you can spell Lily a few ways. Lillie and Lili are two I know as well as Lily. In Welsh it would be Lili, the flower and the name.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> To be fair you can spell Lily a few ways. Lillie and Lili are two I know as well as Lily. In Welsh it would be Lili, the flower and the name.


Ah ha! So they have spelt it a new and authentic way: Lilibet is pronounced Lili, the "bet" is silent because they bet TQ won't say anything even as they callously usurp her nickname.


----------



## melissatrv

lanasyogamama said:


> I like this analysis.




Yes, this is the perfect analysis.  Thanks for sharing.


----------



## melissatrv

With all the talk of H&M registering the domain, I wonder if that poor sap they had bullied out of releasing the @sussexroyal twitter account got it back.  If memory serves he used it for years before the birth of the H&M Leviathan to tweet about a soccer team


----------



## Aminamina

SureBetDiana


----------



## xincinsin

melissatrv said:


> With all the talk of H&M registering the domain, I wonder if that poor sap they had bullied out of releasing the @sussexroyal twitter account got it back.  If memory serves he used it for years before the birth of the H&M Leviathan to tweet about a soccer team











						Prince Harry and Meghan took my Instagram name
					

Kevin Keiley he feels "flattered" but also "annoyed" at the way his Instagram handle @sussexroyal was taken away.



					www.bbc.com
				



They got his Instagram first.


----------



## PurseUOut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't read through the five new pages and I'm even more irritable than usual thanks to an infected tooth that drives me crazyyy (also, when they numbed me they hit the nerve and I went basically blind for 20 mins. Not gonna lie, I panicked).
> 
> Buuut...the more I think of it, the more I think they must have completely lost it. *There is not one single reason why using a very specific family nickname for your child even without the troublesome two's history with the BRF would be a good idea.* At this point I'd love mental health professionals to weigh in because this is neither sweet nor harmless or even normal. In fact I'm sure it's the expression of some pathological condition.



Yes, even setting aside the accusations of generational trauma - of which, according to them, would "stop" at their kids.

Unless it was the Queen's idea - a nickname, used exclusively and affectionately between two spouses, is entirely too intimate to name their daughter.


----------



## doni

PurseUOut said:


> Unless it was the Queen's idea - a nickname, used exclusively and affectionately between two spouses,



As far as I know, Lilibet is her family nickname, not just vis-a-vis her late husband. For example, in their condolence message after the passing of Prince Philip, the Spanish King addressed Queen Elisabeth as “dear aunt Lillibet”.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't read through the five new pages and I'm even more irritable than usual thanks to an infected tooth that drives me crazyyy (also, when they numbed me they hit the nerve and I went basically blind for 20 mins. Not gonna lie, I panicked).
> 
> Buuut...the more I think of it, the more I think they must have completely lost it. There is not one single reason why using a very specific family nickname for your child even without the troublesome two's history with the BRF would be a good idea. At this point I'd love mental health professionals to weigh in because this is neither sweet nor harmless or even normal. In fact I'm sure it's the expression of some pathological condition.


@QueenofWrapDress Wishing you a fast recovery, toothaches can be unbearable!  
It's impossible not to feel disgusted by what they do, particularly in such a tough time for so many people around the world.


----------



## csshopper

*But the name Lili, which the Sussexes plan to call their daughter, also holds special meaning for Meghan and Doria because the duchess was given the childhood nickname ‘Flower’ by her adoring mother.*

Trolling the internet on behalf of their clients and finding multiple sources of negativity to their clients' abuse of the Queen's very personal nickname "Lilibet, " the Sunshine Sachs team was hurriedly summoned for a "We have got to spin this NOW, it's getting out of hand" Zoom meeting. After much gnashing of teeth, someone said "Lili" and someone else chimed in, "Isn't that a flower" (the usual spelling of the plant name as "Lily" being incosequential).

Methane had a nickname like that, problem solved. Everyone knows Doria meant Lily when she called Methane "Flower."

Type something up and hit the "send" key pronto!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

csshopper said:


> ‘Meghan said both she and Harry come from a long lineage of pain and suffering, generations of genetic baggage and that it’s now up to them to break the cycle once and for all.’



Surely the best way to break this cycle would be to not have children. Or have children only if and when you are mentally stable. I mean they both confessed to having severe mental health issues. So should they not have waited?

I am of the opinion that people shouldn't have children if they cannot look after them. And I don't mean this just from a financial perspective, as there is more to raising a child than having money.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but if a secure family unit is your desire maybe don't have children with a raging nutjob.



In this case both parents are raging nutjobs. It doesn’t give me much hope for the kids.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't read through the five new pages and I'm even more irritable than usual thanks to an infected tooth that drives me crazyyy (also, when they numbed me they hit the nerve and I went basically blind for 20 mins. Not gonna lie, I panicked).
> 
> Buuut...the more I think of it, the more I think they must have completely lost it. There is not one single reason why using a very specific family nickname for your child even without the troublesome two's history with the BRF would be a good idea. At this point I'd love mental health professionals to weigh in because this is neither sweet nor harmless or even normal. In fact I'm sure it's the expression of some pathological condition.


Not a mental health professional, but I would call this passive aggressive behavior.  They have deliberately named this child with a treasured and intimate family name that they do not have the right to use.  Even if Harry was in the bosom of his family, he could not use it to address his grandmother.  It was for the use of The Queen's parents, sister and husband.  Period.  It should not be used to curry curry favor or be used as a dare to gain attention, and that is what it looks like to me by giving the baby this name.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Oh!
> View attachment 5103899



She threatens suicide to manipulate and control those around her. Everybody is going to tiptoe on eggshells if somebody says “I’m suicidal.”


----------



## gracekelly

How Baby Lili's Name Is Also a Nod to Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland
					

The name has a sweet connection to Meghan's childhood




					people.com
				




They are sitting at home reading all the comments on all the sites and tabloids and they had to come up with something to include Doria.  They went running to kneepads to put the "flower" story out there.  How pathetic.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> How Baby Lili's Name Is Also a Nod to Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland
> 
> 
> The name has a sweet connection to Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are sitting at home reading all the comments on all the sites and tabloids and they had to come up with something to include Doria.  They went running to kneepads to put the "flower" story out there.  How pathetic.


I'm sorry, but I have to use this


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## PurseUOut

doni said:


> As far as I know, Lilibet is her family nickname, not just vis-a-vis her late husband. For example, in their condolence message after the passing of Prince Philip, the Spanish King addressed Queen Elisabeth as “dear aunt Lillibet”.



I think that was appropriate given it was the condolence message for her late husband who affectionately used that name for her. If anything it displays the intimacy of that nickname in connection to PP. We all know that. Outside of that context, I don't see any dignitary, perhaps outside of very immediate family (her sister, etc) using that name to reference to the Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> How Baby Lili's Name Is Also a Nod to Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland
> 
> 
> The name has a sweet connection to Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are sitting at home reading all the comments on all the sites and tabloids and they had to come up with something to include Doria.  They went running to kneepads to put the "flower" story out there.  How pathetic.



Ugh, are they ever honest about anything? (That’s a rhetorical question, I know they aren’t.)

She could have named her daughter Flower if that meant anything to her. There are plenty of girl names based on flowers, Violet, Daisy, Rose, etc. There isn’t such a thing as a Lilibet flower. Even their most gullible fans couldn’t fall for the story.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I mean...we know, but seeing it put together like this makes this jerk move all the more insane.


----------



## JY89

Absolutely true!
So much claims for racism and genetic pain bs and yet their actions contradicts the very words that came from their mouths. They  know better that they NEED the RF for their statuses to cash out on. In that case, wouldn’t it be better to stfu(pardon my language) and act a little like the status she was given? 

And most importantly she needs to learn to be grateful for the life the firm had provided  her with. Without them, she wouldn’t be rubbing shoulders with Oprah or any A-lister celebs or living luxuriously in her $15 million mansion cause she’s simply a nobody.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, the lovely *Princess* Charlotte Elizabeth Diana Mountbatten-Windsor had these names first.
> 
> Are they kissing up to W&K???
> 
> View attachment 5103147
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Princess Charlotte and Lilibet Diana's Names Have in Common
> 
> 
> They're both named after two iconic royal women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com




I think MM & H think they outdid W&K - after all, they are using the “insider” family name, so they must be closer to QE and also more important in the family than W&K.  So you see, secretly W&K should be deferring to them, the secretly almighty H and MM.  (Gag....)


----------



## EverSoElusive

They really missed their calling as screenwriters. They seem to be able to churn out new stories every millisecond. Wow they sure got M. Night Shyamalan, Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino beat!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Luvbolide said:


> I think MM & H think they outdid W&K - after all, they are using the “insider” family name, so they must be closer to QE and also more important in the family than W&K.  So you see, secretly W&K should be deferring to them, the secretly almighty H and MM.  (Gag....)



Alas, they can never outdo the Cambridges in the class department


----------



## mellibelly

I'm sure this has been pointed out already, but this seems like a big FU to the Cambridges too. First they took George's nickname of Archie for their son. Then they have to outdo Charlotte Elizabeth Diana and take Elizabeth Diana as their daughter's primary names. But then one up Elizabeth with the more intimate Lillibet. It's all a big FU to the Queen and the Cambridges. These people are mental.

I have a unique nickname only a few close people (I can count them on one hand) use. I would be livid if an estranged family member legally gave their kid my nickname. Can you imagine how *THE QUEEN *feels?! I was talking about this with a Jewish friend and she says in her culture it is just not done to give a baby the same first name as a living relative. It's actually disrespectful and bad luck. It's not "honoring" the relative when they are still alive, it's confusing. So I don't think it's just a royal faux pas. It's an effing human race faux pas!


----------



## RAINDANCE

PurseUOut said:


> I think that was appropriate given it was the condolence message for her late husband who affectionately used that name for her. If anything it displays the intimacy of that nickname in connection to PP. We all know that. Outside of that context, I don't see any dignitary, perhaps outside of very immediate family (her sister, etc) using that name to reference to the Queen.


I had the relationship straight a while ago but Queen Sofia of Spain is a first cousin of Prince Philip and although younger at 80 ish now will have known HMQE since her own childhood. It stand to absolute reason that the Spanish RF would use Lilibet in a personal capacity.


----------



## JY89

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, the lovely *Princess* Charlotte Elizabeth Diana Mountbatten-Windsor had these names first.
> 
> Are they kissing up to W&K???
> 
> View attachment 5103147
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Princess Charlotte and Lilibet Diana's Names Have in Common
> 
> 
> They're both named after two iconic royal women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Honestly, I doubt they are kissing up to W&K given how much drama queen detest her SIL.

It looks more like drama queen is creating a certain form of competition between both. One sounding classy (Princess Charlotte), and one sounding absolutely tacky (not like the child deserve it. But well, she can blame her mum for it in future)

Just another trashy move by drama queen to draw attention onto her and the poor child had to suffer along with it for the rest of her life. Newly born into this world with so much drama and criticisms that her “loving” mother had brought upon her. How unfortunate..


----------



## mellibelly

Luvbolide said:


> I think MM & H think they outdid W&K - after all, they are using the “insider” family name, so they must be closer to QE and also more important in the family than W&K.  So you see, secretly W&K should be deferring to them, the secretly almighty H and MM.  (Gag....)


1000x correct! I was just writing a novel on this when you posted ha!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

JY89 said:


> It looks more like drama queen is creating a certain form of competition between both. One sounding classy (Princess Charlotte), and one sounding absolutely tacky (not like the child deserve it. But well, she can blame her mum for it in future)



Princess Lillibet sounds like a character in a Disney movie


----------



## TC1

gracekelly said:


> How Baby Lili's Name Is Also a Nod to Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland
> 
> 
> The name has a sweet connection to Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are sitting at home reading all the comments on all the sites and tabloids and they had to come up with something to include Doria.  They went running to kneepads to put the "flower" story out there.  How pathetic.


This is 100% what the "parental leave" is for...scour the internet for content  
ETA- They could have totally just named her Lili and not gone all-in on this nickname moniker..and just the inner circle would have known or guessed at the meaning. But nope...


----------



## RAINDANCE

Whilst I absolutely hope this will not ever be the case, it occured to me that IF (big If but he is 70+ ) PC predeceased HMTQ Harry's kids won't ever get Prince/Princess titles as they could not become the grandchildren of the  reigning Monach.   

( I am sure we all recall the incorrect claims made by M about titles. H's kids are great grandchildren and not eligible. )


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hermes Nuttynut said:


> Lilibet can run for US president.  She was born in California.  It’s good to know that if she can’t be a princess, there’s another option.  President Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor.



When PC becomes King will M&H children automatically become prince and princess?  Did I read that somewhere?  I can see M desperately wringing her hands that this would happen so Lilibet becomes Princess Lilibet.  In M's mind, and mine also, see a young Queen Elizabeth playing as Princess Lilibet. M does love to dress like Diana. She'd probably dress her daughter like young QE and post photos of comparisons.  This wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> The people of South Africa have already enough problems, including COVID. QE could perhaps help them settling in an uninhabited island of the UK.
> [/QUOTE
> Lol


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> Princess Lillibet sounds like a character in a Disney movie


Yes, she lives two lily pads away from the area where Methane, the Little Mermaid wannabe, hangs out. 

Her Daddy has experience securing Disney employment for the Suckesses, watch for her name in credits soon.


----------



## purseinsanity

eunaddict said:


> C-sections are usually more expensive because of the OT costs, equipment costs and personnel costs - the obstetric wards I've been on usually has a midwife +/- doctor on hand for natural births. But for a c-section, you can have as many as 5 people focused on mom (1 surgeon, 1 assistant, 1-3 scrub techs/nurses), at least 1 (midwife or a pediatric/neonatal resident) for baby post-delivery and then someone doing anaesthetics (CRNA or anaesthetics resident).


Yes, but in the US at least, if the patient has insurance, that's all factored in to hospital costs, not necessarily costs to the patient.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Purseinsanity, I am so sorry for your loss. Sending you prayers, strength and condolences to you and your family.


Thank you so much @Hermes Zen


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> I think I posted this before, but I absolutely cannot stand Archie as a full name. Lilibet is even more heinous. It’s like naming your kid Jimmy or Stacy. Jack doesn’t bother me as much either but Jackson or John would still be preferable. Actually, no, Jack is just as bad. Is it that hard to just name the baby Elizabeth and adopt Lilibet as the nickname?!! Geez


I'm not a big fan of the name Archie (it's my sister's dog's name, LOL) or Lilibet as I think that was a special name to just the Queen.  My son is named Jack, as I think it used to be a nickname in the past, but to me, it's a free standing name now.  Jackson to me is more trendy.  I don't really care for weird Hollywood names, and these two naming their daughter Lilibet is just kissing up.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Lilibet shortened to Betty... so Archie and Betty?? *(Who is jughead?)*
> 
> unless they had the Queen’s blessing - I agree with the other posters that MM did this to serve the Queen back for prohibiting them from  merching   using “Royal”.  They will now merch Lilibet - a big FU to the Queen...


Harry


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why wouldn't a c-section be more expensive...it's massive abdominal surgery.


I meant cost out of pocket for the patient.  I didn't realize the original poster meant cost in general.


----------



## purseinsanity

gerryt said:


> On quora its being reported that the sugars are already calling her Lil Bit.  Not sure Ms thought this through…


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Harry.
> 
> No, that’s unfair. Jughead was much smarter.


You beat me to it!


----------



## melissatrv

Wow.  This is a such a stretch it is not even f-ing funny.  I agree, these two are pathetic.  If they wanted to honor Doria they would have added "Doria" to the baby's name "Lilibet Doria Diana" etc.  




gracekelly said:


> How Baby Lili's Name Is Also a Nod to Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland
> 
> 
> The name has a sweet connection to Meghan's childhood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are sitting at home reading all the comments on all the sites and tabloids and they had to come up with something to include Doria.  They went running to kneepads to put the "flower" story out there.  How pathetic.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> When PC becomes King will M&H children automatically become prince and princess?  Did I read that somewhere?  I can see M desperately wringing her hands that this would happen so Lilibet becomes Princess Lilibet.  In M's mind, and mine also, see a young Queen Elizabeth playing as Princess Lilibet. M does love to dress like Diana. She'd probably dress her daughter like young QE and post photos of comparisons.  This wouldn't surprise me.


Yes, she will become a princess. However, Charles wants to slim down the monarch and that may change.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

PurseUOut said:


> I think that was appropriate given it was the condolence message for her late husband who affectionately used that name for her. If anything it displays the intimacy of that nickname in connection to PP. We all know that. Outside of that context, I don't see any dignitary, perhaps outside of very immediate family (her sister, etc) using that name to reference to the Queen.



It has been reported in the past that King Juan Carlos customarily addresses (and refers to) the Queen as cousin Lilibet. In fact, that is how I first learnt of that name, long ago. Of course, they are family, and clearly they don‘t interact that often.


----------



## melissatrv

Chanbal said:


> Yes, she will become a princess. However, Charles wants to slim down the monarch and that may change.



I hope it changes.  H&M have trashed the royal family, Meghan never became a UK citizen, Harry is practically a US citizen now and Lily was born in the US. H&M should be stripped of their titles that they only want to use for commercial gain.  It's time.


----------



## VickyB

mdcx said:


> 100% using Lilibet was Meghan’s middle finger to the BRF. Take something private and personal to them and make it pap fodder. She is beyond the bounds of mentally normal imo.


Could not agree more!!!!!!  Also, Charlotte‘s middle names are Elizabeth Diana so not very creative on the part of M and H.


----------



## bag-mania

melissatrv said:


> I hope it changes.  H&M have trashed the royal family, Meghan never became a UK citizen, Harry is practically a US citizen now and Lily was born in the US. H&M should be stripped of their titles that they only want to use for commercial gain.  It's time.



They have to be so careful about how they do it, if they do it. They can’t open the door for another round of public whining and media sympathy.


----------



## needlv

RAINDANCE said:


> Whilst I absolutely hope this will not ever be the case, it occured to me that IF (big If but he is 70+ ) PC predeceased HMTQ Harry's kids won't ever get Prince/Princess titles as they could not become the grandchildren of the  reigning Monach.
> 
> ( I am sure we all recall the incorrect claims made by M about titles. H's kids are great grandchildren and not eligible. )



You are correct.  If Charles were to pass away before the Queen, Harry’s kids do not get the prince/princess titles as it goes to the grandchildren of the monarch (ie would skip over Harry’s kids entirely).

The Queen made an exception to style the Cambridge kids as prince and princess.  

If it were up to me - I  would also introduce a few new rules - like they must be born and educated in the UK.  And I would reserve the Prince/Princess titles for only the first born child of the monarch and their first born (and so on).  Second born can have a different title.  After a while you end up with so many prince/princess titles and elderly relatives / (requiring funding) it does get a bit much...


----------



## VickyB

CeeJay said:


> Meghan is so full of SH1T .. making that type of statement!!! .. and don't get me started on Hap-Hazza!  Truly, I say .. take the titles away, and then (somehow) .. move them to maybe South Africa .. but NOT the nice parts of Cape Town or J-Burg, and let them REALLY see what pain and suffering is!!!  The TONE-DEAFNESS of these two is just so EPIC; sadly .. a trait that I see a LOT out here in LA .. that 'ole "entitle-itis" ..


Breaking the wheel didn’t work too well for Daenerys.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Why take from QE one of the very few private things she has in life? An then trademark her name...



Yes and M talked about the 'firm' when it was used internally with the family.  M wants to look and feel important and over all the little people like me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All 3 women have _other_ names.  No reason to imitate Princess Charlotte, except H&M obsess over W&K.  Toxic tarts, indeed.

_Queen Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor   

Diana Frances Spencer

Doria Loyce Ragland_

ETA:  how is _Lilibet_ gender neutral?


----------



## Goodfrtune

mellibelly said:


> I'm sure this has been pointed out already, but this seems like a big FU to the Cambridges too. First they took George's nickname of Archie for their son. Then they have to outdo Charlotte Elizabeth Diana and take Elizabeth Diana as their daughter's primary names. But then one up Elizabeth with the more intimate Lillibet. It's all a big FU to the Queen and the Cambridges. These people are mental.
> 
> I have a unique nickname only a few close people (I can count them on one hand) use. I would be livid if an estranged family member legally gave their kid my nickname. Can you imagine how *THE QUEEN *feels?! I was talking about this with a Jewish friend and she says in her culture it is just not done to give a baby the same first name as a living relative. It's actually disrespectful and bad luck. It's not "honoring" the relative when they are still alive, it's confusing. So I don't think it's just a royal faux pas. It's an effing human race faux pas!


----------



## Goodfrtune

mellibelly said:


> I'm sure this has been pointed out already, but this seems like a big FU to the Cambridges too. First they took George's nickname of Archie for their son. Then they have to outdo Charlotte Elizabeth Diana and take Elizabeth Diana as their daughter's primary names. But then one up Elizabeth with the more intimate Lillibet. It's all a big FU to the Queen and the Cambridges. These people are mental.
> 
> I have a unique nickname only a few close people (I can count them on one hand) use. I would be livid if an estranged family member legally gave their kid my nickname. Can you imagine how *THE QUEEN *feels?! I was talking about this with a Jewish friend and she says in her culture it is just not done to give a baby the same first name as a living relative. It's actually disrespectful and bad luck. It's not "honoring" the relative when they are still alive, it's confusing. So I don't think it's just a royal faux pas. It's an effing human race faux pas!


It actually depends on what type of “Jewish” your friend is. Some name after those who have passed, some name after the living. Depends on whether you are Ashkenazi, Sephardic or in my case Romaniote. I was named for my grandmother and she was very much alive at the time.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> All 3 women have _other_ names.  No reason to imitate Princess Charlotte, except H&M obsess over W&K.  Toxic tarts, indeed.
> 
> _Queen Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor
> 
> Diana Frances Spencer
> 
> Doria Loyce Ragland_
> 
> ETA:  how is _Lilibet_ gender neutral?


I don't see a reason for not adding Doria to the kids's name, she is also a grandmother. Oh, there is that little detail about money and fame.


----------



## Hermes Zen

melissatrv said:


> With all the talk of H&M registering the domain, I wonder if that poor sap they had bullied out of releasing the @sussexroyal twitter account got it back.  If memory serves he used it for years before the birth of the H&M Leviathan to tweet about a soccer team



OMGOSH, great point!  I hope he got paid a TON for releasing that domain name!!! People should grab whatever variation of the baby's name in case they forgot to purchase one.

*Editing my post. *After calming down with more pills, I realized we were talking about twitter and instagram account names. My apologies for misunderstanding!  BUT STILL, people should pick up more of the domain names!


----------



## Jayne1

Goodfrtune said:


> It actually depends on what type of “Jewish” your friend is. Some name after those who have passed, some name after the living. Depends on whether you are Ashkenazi, Sephardic or in my case Romaniote. I was named for my grandmother and she was very much alive at the time.


Interesting. Never heard of that - it's always honouring a dead relative from what I've known.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> *But the name Lili, which the Sussexes plan to call their daughter, also holds special meaning for Meghan and Doria because the duchess was given the childhood nickname ‘Flower’ by her adoring mother.*
> 
> Trolling the internet on behalf of their clients and finding multiple sources of negativity to their clients' abuse of the Queen's very personal nickname "Lilibet, " the Sunshine Sachs team was hurriedly summoned for a "We have got to spin this NOW, it's getting out of hand" Zoom meeting. After much gnashing of teeth, someone said "Lili" and someone else chimed in, "Isn't that a flower" (the usual spelling of the plant name as "Lily" being incosequential).
> 
> Methane had a nickname like that, problem solved. Everyone knows Doria meant Lily when she called Methane "Flower."
> 
> Type something up and hit the "send" key pronto!


Actually, I'm very sure that when Doria said "Flower", she was referring to the largest flower in the world, the Rafflesia! Google it and you'll figure out why it is so appropriate for Methane (and her ego).


----------



## chaneljewel

Seriously H and M!   What a horrible name to give your daughter!!   It’s a cute nickname but it’s just that.   You’re both so selfish and conceited.  Your daughter will eventually ask you what drugs you were taking when you gave her that as her main name. I can’t believe that I ever watched M on Suits and supported her as an actress.   You are truly repulsive and vindictive individuals who know NOTHING about true suffering.  I’m just amazed at your pathetic actions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

EverSoElusive said:


> Alas, they can never outdo the Cambridges in the class department




Oh very true - thank heaven!


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Actually, I'm very sure that when Doria said "Flower", she was referring to the largest flower in the world, the Rafflesia! Google it and you'll figure out why it is so appropriate for Methane (and her ego).
> View attachment 5104038


Thanks for this. I learned something, wow, what a bloom and parasitic. You were right, so appropriate for a discussion about Methane.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Thanks for this. I learned something, wow, what a bloom and parasitic. You were right, so appropriate for a discussion about Methane.


Did you notice the origins of the colloquial names for this flower?
_The words padma, pakma or patma originate etymologically from the word पद्म (padma), Sanskrit for 'lotus'_
Now we know why she was wearing the chicken sh*t dress - it all ties together!


----------



## bag-mania

We were wondering how Meghan was going to tie this baby’s birthday and herself with Diana. Well here you go.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Did you notice the origins of the colloquial names for this flower?
> _The words padma, pakma or patma originate etymologically from the word पद्म (padma), Sanskrit for 'lotus'_
> Now we know why she was wearing the chicken sh*t dress - it all ties together!


No, I missed that connection, makes it even better!  Again, thanks.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> We were wondering how Meghan was going to tie this baby’s birthday and herself with Diana. Well here you go.
> 
> View attachment 5104119
> View attachment 5104122


WHAT?!?!  All these ties to dates and events CANNOT be a coincidence !  WTFF!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


> I'm sure this has been pointed out already, but this seems like a big FU to the Cambridges too. First they took George's nickname of Archie for their son. Then they have to outdo Charlotte Elizabeth Diana and take Elizabeth Diana as their daughter's primary names. But then one up Elizabeth with the more intimate Lillibet. It's all a big FU to the Queen and the Cambridges. These people are mental.
> 
> I have a unique nickname only a few close people (I can count them on one hand) use. I would be livid if an estranged family member legally gave their kid my nickname. Can you imagine how *THE QUEEN *feels?! I was talking about this with a Jewish friend and she says in her culture it is just not done to give a baby the same first name as a living relative. It's actually disrespectful and bad luck. It's not "honoring" the relative when they are still alive, it's confusing. So I don't think it's just a royal faux pas. It's an effing human race faux pas!



Archie is George's nickname? When did this happened?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> WHAT?!?!  All these ties to dates and events CANNOT be a coincidence !  WTFF!!



Warning, Danger. The Universe is clearly speaking.  
[if you believe in _those _things].


----------



## eunaddict

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, but in the US at least, if the patient has insurance, that's all factored in to hospital costs, not necessarily costs to the patient.



Not an American but from what I understand from a few sources, not all insurances are made equal...and a lot of surgeries still have costs for the patients even with insurance.

I took a quick look and the average costs for c-sections with insurance is 11-12k in California, as of 2017.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Warning, Danger. The Universe is clearly speaking.
> [if you believe in _those _things].
> 
> View attachment 5104129


Should we start panicking? Do I need to get a towel ready?


----------



## Jktgal

The purpose of the day is to acknowledge the pain suffered by children throughout the world who are the victims of physical, _mental_ and _emotional_ abuse. Lil Lili's mom is shining a silent light on this _incredibly_ important day, an effort to break the cycle of genetic destruction.

https://www.un.org/en/observances/child-victim-day


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> WHAT?!?!  All these ties to dates and events CANNOT be a coincidence !  WTFF!!



I don’t trust coincidences. I didn’t include the link but it was from the Chicago Tribune, certainly a respectable newspaper and not a tabloid. It strikes me as unlikely, bordering on impossible, that this information wasn’t given to them.

Was Lilibet born on the 4th? Who knows. Unfortunately you have to give the side eye to almost everything they announce. When you factor in elements like surrogates, scheduled caesarean, or induced labor, anything is possible.


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> The purpose of the day is to acknowledge the pain suffered by children throughout the world who are the victims of physical, _mental_ and _emotional_ abuse. Lil Lili's mom is shining a silent light on this _incredibly_ important day, an effort to break the cycle of genetic destruction.
> 
> https://www.un.org/en/observances/child-victim-day
> 
> View attachment 5104140


Passive aggressive behaviour as performed by mermaids counts as aggression too. Poor baby...


----------



## caramelize126

eunaddict said:


> C-sections are usually more expensive because of the OT costs, equipment costs and personnel costs - the obstetric wards I've been on usually has a midwife +/- doctor on hand for natural births. But for a c-section, you can have as many as 5 people focused on mom (1 surgeon, 1 assistant, 1-3 scrub techs/nurses), at least 1 (midwife or a pediatric/neonatal resident) for baby post-delivery and then someone doing anaesthetics (CRNA or anaesthetics resident).





eunaddict said:


> Not an American but from what I understand from a few sources, not all insurances are made equal...and a lot of surgeries still have costs for the patients even with insurance.
> 
> I took a quick look and the average costs for c-sections with insurance is 11-12k in California, as of 2017.



Its true that insurances in the US arent created equal and some offer more coverage than others. Typically, the patient is only responsible for the copay ( anywhere from 100- 500$ on average). If there is a deductible ( the out of pocket the patient has to pay before insurance kicks in) they will have to pay that as well. So most people with decent health insurance will only pay a fraction of the price quoted above.

Im sure Meg and Harry have health insurance- i believe there is a tax penalty if you don't. They may be eligible through SAG or possibly through one of Harry's new jobs.


----------



## Chanbal

I came across this Lady of Barbados when looking for Lady's C video on the last events. She makes interesting points about OW who apparently never had therapy and is now milking and making money off mental health. Why is OW doing this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I came across this Lady of Barbados when looking for Lady's C video on the last events. She makes interesting points about OW who apparently never had therapy and is now milking and making money off mental health. Why is OW doing this?



Through her old chat show, she has been doing that for a very long time.
She brought us Dr. Phil, Marianne Williamson, and lots of others who discussed ad nauseam our psychic pains. Yes, plural.

ETA: why now? Those chicken coops aren’t cheap. 

_So, how many houses does Oprah own? Again, there isn’t just one Oprah Winfrey house. In fact, the major superstar has houses all over the United States, *at least 8 of them.*

Where does Oprah have homes? She has multiple houses located in Montecito, California, and another in Maui, Hawaii for when she wishes to escape the fast-paced Californian lifestyle. Her main home, however, is *one of the two Montecito mansions* where she spends the majority of her time._








						Oprah Winfrey House: Photos of Her Many Mansions
					

With homes around the world, one would think Oprah Winfrey house was perfection. Well, not quite big enough. We have a map of her massive expansion!




					www.velvetropes.com
				







xincinsin said:


> Should we start panicking? Do I need to get a towel ready?



tin foil - time to invest in tin foil [if the stores still have some]


----------



## csshopper

Random thoughts from a tired mind.

Would they have dared to use the name if Prince Phillip was still alive?

Has anyone seen any acknowledgement or congratulating comments from Oprah?

How long will it be until someone posts a copy of the Birth Certificate? The certified copy would  not be available, but the so called informational copy is public record and available for a fee


----------



## mellibelly

EverSoElusive said:


> Archie is George's nickname? When did this happened?



_The Sun reported in January of 2019 that Prince George had told a passer-by that his name was Archie. The passer-by told The Sun: “I was asked by a police minder not to take a photo of the children, which I didn’t, but George started stroking my dog. Just to be friendly I engaged in a bit of small talk and I asked George what his name was, even though obviously I knew it. To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face._









						Did Meghan and Harry Snub Kate and William By Using the Name Archie?
					

"Archie" had been Prince George's nickname.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## mdcx

csshopper said:


> Random thoughts from a tired mind.
> 
> Would they have dared to use the name if Prince Phillip was still alive?
> 
> Has anyone seen any acknowledgement or congratulating comments from Oprah?
> 
> How long will it be until someone posts a copy of the Birth Certificate? The certified copy would  not be available, but the so called informational copy is public record and available for a fee


Prince Phillip would have summoned all the resources available to him and had Meghan dealt to if she dreamed of using that name while he was living imo.
Given all the secret service type things at the BRFs disposal, Meghan seems extremely reckless to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Random thoughts from a tired mind.
> 
> Would they have dared to use the name if Prince Phillip was still alive?  _IMO yes, they would use the same name._
> 
> Has anyone seen any acknowledgement or congratulating comments from Oprah? _Not yet, I expect she will send her standard gift of books. _
> 
> How long will it be until someone posts a copy of the Birth Certificate? _Since this is a US birth, will there be a royal certificate posted on the palace’s gates?  IDK. _
> 
> The certified copy would  not be available, but the so called informational copy is public record and available for a fee



Would they have dared to use the name if Prince Phillip was still alive?  _IMO yes, they would use the same name._

Has anyone seen any acknowledgement or congratulating comments from Oprah? _Not yet, I expect she will send her standard gift of books. _

How long will it be until someone posts a copy of the Birth Certificate? _Since this is a US birth, will there be a royal certificate posted on the palace’s gates? IDK._


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Through her old chat show, she has been doing that for a very long time.
> She brought us Dr. Phil, Marianne Williamson, and lots of others who discussed ad nauseam our psychic pains. Yes, plural.
> 
> ETA: why now? Those chicken coops aren’t cheap.
> 
> _So, how many houses does Oprah own? Again, there isn’t just one Oprah Winfrey house. In fact, the major superstar has houses all over the United States, *at least 8 of them.*
> 
> Where does Oprah have homes? She has multiple houses located in Montecito, California, and another in Maui, Hawaii for when she wishes to escape the fast-paced Californian lifestyle. Her main home, however, is *one of the two Montecito mansions* where she spends the majority of her time._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey House: Photos of Her Many Mansions
> 
> 
> With homes around the world, one would think Oprah Winfrey house was perfection. Well, not quite big enough. We have a map of her massive expansion!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.velvetropes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tin foil - time to invest in tin foil [if the stores still have some]
> 
> View attachment 5104168


Discussing the psychic pain of others seems to be a good way to make money. 









						Oprah Winfrey On Her Friendship With Gayle King: "I Never Needed Therapy Because I Had You As My Friend" - theJasmineBRAND
					

Oprah Says She Never Needed Therapy Because She Has Gayle King As Her Best Friend Through engagements and marriages, children and award-winning talk




					thejasminebrand.com


----------



## Chanbal

LiliBet Casino Review – Everything you need to know about this Casino!
					

LiliBet offers the best slots, live casino, sports betting and much more! Click here to find everything in this LiliBet Casino review!




					www.top10-casinosites.net


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> Alas, they can never outdo the Cambridges in the class department


Thank god for that.


----------



## Sharont2305

melissatrv said:


> Wow.  This is a such a stretch it is not even f-ing funny.  I agree, these two are pathetic.  If they wanted to honor Doria they would have added "Doria" to the baby's name "Lilibet Doria Diana" etc.


Well, Diana begins with a D like Doria, so there you go. Doria is honoured too


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


>



Thank you Chanbal !!  This gave me a great amount of laughs!        H is definitely M's parrot.


----------



## Deleted 698298

For two people who want to live quiet lives with chickens, keep very private and exist in media only on their terms…they surely take pleasure in infuriating the crowds at every opportunity. Much of England is fuming at the recent developments ie ‘the name drama’. And scary thing is…Harry and Mehgs will get away with anything they do without being held responsible because - mental health! I’m not a fan of monarchy (privileged degenerates some of them!) but have a soft spot for the Q and even to me she is an example of how a person should carry themself/speak/react. How dare those clowns show the Q so little respect?! Gah!


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> They really missed their calling as screenwriters. They seem to be able to churn out new stories every millisecond. Wow they sure got M. Night Shyamalan, Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino beat!


Well if they were screenwriters they could at least be sued for plagiarism and slander and gross misrepresentation and fraud and finally wasting police time


----------



## Clearblueskies

Chanbal said:


>



OMG she is such a BORE!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> We were wondering how Meghan was going to tie this baby’s birthday and herself with Diana. Well here you go.
> 
> View attachment 5104119
> View attachment 5104122


Oh my goodness they both wore shoes on that day too and had a cup of tea!!!
Guys it’s becoming spooky- I’m starting to be convinced the ghost of Diana is reincarnated in Megz  and Haz was right all along about his little candle in the wind!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

With all of their SoHo & hospitality experience, I am guessing they knew all about this.  How low will they go?









						Lilibet Casino Review - Safe or Scam?
					

Lilibet Casino review - read before opening an account with Lilibet Casino. Get today’s bonus.




					www.correctcasinos.com
				





_Launched in 2019, Lilbet offers an interesting mix of casino and virtual entertainment, plus a range of payment options and 24/7 customer service. Further attempting to tantalize players, the site offers the option to play in both approved FIAT and cryptocurrencies. While all positive aspects, there’s nothing that appears particularly unique so far, so let’s find out whether players should venture onto new pastures with Lilibet Casino.









						LiliBet Casino - C$200 Welcome Bonus + 20 Free Spins (2021)
					

LiliBet Casino is a right royal treat. Enjoy the Lilibet Casino bonus + Lilibet Casino free spins. Read on to find out what it has to offer - click here!




					www.playcasinos.ca
				



_


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my goodness they both wore shoes on that day too and had a cup of tea!!!
> Guys it’s becoming spooky- I’m starting to be convinced the ghost of Diana is reincarnated in Megz  and Haz was right all along about his little candle in the wind!!!


I like this sort of thing, it gives me hope!  Meghan’s stretching so hard to force the Diana thing it looks funny/silly - not inspiring the awe and admiration she’s desperately trying for.  I hope pretty soon, or at some point in the not too distant future at least, that everyone wakes up to the joke that is the Markle scam.  Remember the fable about the Emperor with no clothes?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mdcx said:


> Given all the secret service type things at the BRFs disposal, Meghan seems extremely reckless to me.



She trusts they won't strike back to avoid the scandal. Can't wait to see the smug grin wiped off her face the day they decide they're done being polite.


----------



## Straight-Laced

The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf
					

Frank Augstein/AP PhotoThe Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s choice of Lilibet for their daughter misjudges the moodThe naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




"Tone Deaf" - The Times UK comments on the baby name. Leader article published today :

*The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf*
*The Sussexes have taken a very personal nickname and added it to their brand*

The naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For royal families and non-royals alike it strikes a balance between parents, and is often a statement of ambition for the newborn and a tribute to forebears. These criteria apply in the case of Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. Her forenames suggest that her parents want the bonds forged by a royal upbringing to run deeper than the line of succession. It is highly unlikely that there will be a future Queen Lilibet, any more than there will be a King Archie; the parents were therefore under no pressure to come up with a regal moniker.

*There is nonetheless something tone-deaf, even opportunistic about adopting the childhood nickname of the reigning monarch*. The future Queen Elizabeth was dubbed Lilibet by her grandfather George V, who was gently mocking her inability to pronounce her real name. Later her governess, Marion “Crawfie” Crawford, used the name, later still Prince Philip. In a special act of intimacy, she placed a handwritten note marked Lilibet on his coffin. The nickname should perhaps have been buried with him. For the Duke of Sussex, the Queen has always been Gran.

The duke and duchess may argue that they were honouring two strong women, a grandmother and a mother, in the naming of their child. *The suspicion, though, is that they are rather staying true to their brand of royalty on loan to Hollywood and that to secure this status they are looking for ways back into courtly favour*.

If the name was intended as an olive branch, a gesture of reconciliation after a year of bridge-burning, then it misjudges the mood. There is surely more work to do after their hatcheting of the royal family, and more authentic commitment to service to the country and to the integrity of the institution that is so ably represented by the woman they call Lilibet.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Straight-Laced said:


> The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf
> 
> 
> Frank Augstein/AP PhotoThe Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s choice of Lilibet for their daughter misjudges the moodThe naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Tone Deaf" - The Times UK comments on the baby name. Leader article published today :
> 
> *The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf*
> *The Sussexes have taken a very personal nickname and added it to their brand*
> 
> The naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For royal families and non-royals alike it strikes a balance between parents, and is often a statement of ambition for the newborn and a tribute to forebears. These criteria apply in the case of Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. Her forenames suggest that her parents want the bonds forged by a royal upbringing to run deeper than the line of succession. It is highly unlikely that there will be a future Queen Lilibet, any more than there will be a King Archie; the parents were therefore under no pressure to come up with a regal moniker.
> 
> *There is nonetheless something tone-deaf, even opportunistic about adopting the childhood nickname of the reigning monarch*. The future Queen Elizabeth was dubbed Lilibet by her grandfather George V, who was gently mocking her inability to pronounce her real name. Later her governess, Marion “Crawfie” Crawford, used the name, later still Prince Philip. In a special act of intimacy, she placed a handwritten note marked Lilibet on his coffin. The nickname should perhaps have been buried with him. For the Duke of Sussex, the Queen has always been Gran.
> 
> The duke and duchess may argue that they were honouring two strong women, a grandmother and a mother, in the naming of their child. *The suspicion, though, is that they are rather staying true to their brand of royalty on loan to Hollywood and that to secure this status they are looking for ways back into courtly favour*.
> 
> If the name was intended as an olive branch, a gesture of reconciliation after a year of bridge-burning, then it misjudges the mood. There is surely more work to do after their hatcheting of the royal family, and more authentic commitment to service to the country and to the integrity of the institution that is so ably represented by the woman they call Lilibet.


Bingo  Love that they finish off with the word Authentic - something of a side-swipe there


----------



## Traminer

Straight-Laced said:


> The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf
> 
> 
> Frank Augstein/AP PhotoThe Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s choice of Lilibet for their daughter misjudges the moodThe naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Tone Deaf" - The Times UK comments on the baby name. Leader article published today :
> 
> *The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf*
> *The Sussexes have taken a very personal nickname and added it to their brand*
> 
> The naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For royal families and non-royals alike it strikes a balance between parents, and is often a statement of ambition for the newborn and a tribute to forebears. These criteria apply in the case of Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. Her forenames suggest that her parents want the bonds forged by a royal upbringing to run deeper than the line of succession. It is highly unlikely that there will be a future Queen Lilibet, any more than there will be a King Archie; the parents were therefore under no pressure to come up with a regal moniker.
> 
> *There is nonetheless something tone-deaf, even opportunistic about adopting the childhood nickname of the reigning monarch*. The future Queen Elizabeth was dubbed Lilibet by her grandfather George V, who was gently mocking her inability to pronounce her real name. Later her governess, Marion “Crawfie” Crawford, used the name, later still Prince Philip. In a special act of intimacy, she placed a handwritten note marked Lilibet on his coffin. The nickname should perhaps have been buried with him. For the Duke of Sussex, the Queen has always been Gran.
> 
> The duke and duchess may argue that they were honouring two strong women, a grandmother and a mother, in the naming of their child. *The suspicion, though, is that they are rather staying true to their brand of royalty on loan to Hollywood and that to secure this status they are looking for ways back into courtly favour*.
> 
> If the name was intended as an olive branch, a gesture of reconciliation after a year of bridge-burning, then it misjudges the mood. There is surely more work to do after their hatcheting of the royal family, and more authentic commitment to service to the country and to the integrity of the institution that is so ably represented by the woman they call Lilibet.



Thanks for this article! 

Here is the link: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-harry-and-meghans-baby-name-tone-deaf-5wqhxnbt6

But as I see one cannot read the whole article there as a non-subscriber.


----------



## xincinsin

Straight-Laced said:


> The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf
> 
> 
> Frank Augstein/AP PhotoThe Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s choice of Lilibet for their daughter misjudges the moodThe naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Tone Deaf" - The Times UK comments on the baby name. Leader article published today :
> 
> *The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf*
> *The Sussexes have taken a very personal nickname and added it to their brand*
> 
> The naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For royal families and non-royals alike it strikes a balance between parents, and is often a statement of ambition for the newborn and a tribute to forebears. These criteria apply in the case of Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. Her forenames suggest that her parents want the bonds forged by a royal upbringing to run deeper than the line of succession. It is highly unlikely that there will be a future Queen Lilibet, any more than there will be a King Archie; the parents were therefore under no pressure to come up with a regal moniker.
> 
> *There is nonetheless something tone-deaf, even opportunistic about adopting the childhood nickname of the reigning monarch*. The future Queen Elizabeth was dubbed Lilibet by her grandfather George V, who was gently mocking her inability to pronounce her real name. Later her governess, Marion “Crawfie” Crawford, used the name, later still Prince Philip. In a special act of intimacy, she placed a handwritten note marked Lilibet on his coffin. The nickname should perhaps have been buried with him. For the Duke of Sussex, the Queen has always been Gran.
> 
> The duke and duchess may argue that they were honouring two strong women, a grandmother and a mother, in the naming of their child. *The suspicion, though, is that they are rather staying true to their brand of royalty on loan to Hollywood and that to secure this status they are looking for ways back into courtly favour*.
> 
> If the name was intended as an olive branch, a gesture of reconciliation after a year of bridge-burning, then it misjudges the mood. There is surely more work to do after their hatcheting of the royal family, and more authentic commitment to service to the country and to the integrity of the institution that is so ably represented by the woman they call Lilibet.


Bravo! If this was an olive branch, it has mutated into something with thorns.
Omid Scobie probably sniffed at this article with his mutated nose, and will disparage it as stupid people not appreciating the graciousness of his slave mistress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I hear you, Tori.


----------



## JY89

melissatrv said:


> Wow.  This is a such a stretch it is not even f-ing funny.  I agree, these two are pathetic.  If they wanted to honor Doria they would have added "Doria" to the baby's name "Lilibet Doria Diana" etc.


 
Unfortunately, that name Doria doesn’t hold any monetising value or royal-ness as we all know. 

We can clearly see what drama queen is up to. Licensing her daughter name upon birth speaks volumes of her intentions. What a “loving mother” she is.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Telegraph today ....

*The Bench review: the Duchess of Sussex’s semi-literate vanity project leaves Harry holding the baby*

The Duchess's first children's book is all bland parenting 'wisdom' and no story – and it's hard to imagine any child enjoying it

ByClaire Allfree8 June 2021 • 9:22am

Poor Prince Harry. He's moved half way across the Earth, leaving behind everything he has ever known, and for what? A humble bench in a garden, according to the opening line of *The Bench* (Puffin, £12.99), his wife's debut book for children, published today and addressed throughout its 34 pages to him.
“This is your bench,” it begins, accompanied by a watery illustration of a man with ginger hair sitting on a bench looking adoringly into the eyes of a baby. “Where life will begin/For you and our son.”
Leaving aside that unfortunate image – did the Sussex's family life really begin on a bench? Surely not – the connotations are clear. Poor Harry's role in this marriage is to sit on his bench holding the baby while Meghan gets on and conquers the world, one act of compassion at a time.

The Bench, published worldwide today and apparently based on a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, is presented as a story for children. But it's nothing of the sort, not least since it's not a story. Rather it's a series of imperatives disguised as loving verse in which Meghan offers words of wisdom to Harry (represented throughout as a sort of racially inclusive, everyman paternal figure) and by implication to the rest of us, on how to handle the tricky business of loving a child.

Each page consists of a generic "bonding" moment between father and son on a different bench (park benches, garden benches, random grey benches), illustrated by Christian Robinson's amazingly benign water colours and accompanied by a couple of tender lines of advice. So, after a hard day tending the chickens, our father figure Harry will “rest” on his bench and “see the growth of our boy”.

As the “son” learns to ride a bike, our hero Harry will “watch on with pride”. And should the son playfully pop on a tutu, our father is helpfully told to be his “supporter”. Because any male child who playfully dresses up in a tutu obviously needs support, right?
Sometimes, the demands of scansion and rhyme defeat Meghan, so she resorts to either reconfiguring words or mutilating them instead. “He'll run and he'll fall/And he'll take it in stride,” reads one line. Eh? “With daddy and son/where you'll never be 'lone,” goes the book's immortal final line. Oh ouch!

Meanwhile, Meghan herself pops up at the end, tending the vegetable patch (I just don't believe this bit – surely the Sussexes have a gardener to pull the potatoes?) and, natch, holding a child, presumably young Lilibet.
*One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it. But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.*


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> Telegraph today ....
> 
> *The Bench review: the Duchess of Sussex’s semi-literate vanity project leaves Harry holding the baby*
> 
> The Duchess's first children's book is all bland parenting 'wisdom' and no story – and it's hard to imagine any child enjoying it
> 
> ByClaire Allfree8 June 2021 • 9:22am
> 
> Poor Prince Harry. He's moved half way across the Earth, leaving behind everything he has ever known, and for what? A humble bench in a garden, according to the opening line of *The Bench* (Puffin, £12.99), his wife's debut book for children, published today and addressed throughout its 34 pages to him.
> “This is your bench,” it begins, accompanied by a watery illustration of a man with ginger hair sitting on a bench looking adoringly into the eyes of a baby. “Where life will begin/For you and our son.”
> Leaving aside that unfortunate image – did the Sussex's family life really begin on a bench? Surely not – the connotations are clear. Poor Harry's role in this marriage is to sit on his bench holding the baby while Meghan gets on and conquers the world, one act of compassion at a time.
> 
> The Bench, published worldwide today and apparently based on a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, is presented as a story for children. But it's nothing of the sort, not least since it's not a story. Rather it's a series of imperatives disguised as loving verse in which Meghan offers words of wisdom to Harry (represented throughout as a sort of racially inclusive, everyman paternal figure) and by implication to the rest of us, on how to handle the tricky business of loving a child.
> 
> Each page consists of a generic "bonding" moment between father and son on a different bench (park benches, garden benches, random grey benches), illustrated by Christian Robinson's amazingly benign water colours and accompanied by a couple of tender lines of advice. So, after a hard day tending the chickens, our father figure Harry will “rest” on his bench and “see the growth of our boy”.
> 
> As the “son” learns to ride a bike, our hero Harry will “watch on with pride”. And should the son playfully pop on a tutu, our father is helpfully told to be his “supporter”. Because any male child who playfully dresses up in a tutu obviously needs support, right?
> Sometimes, the demands of scansion and rhyme defeat Meghan, so she resorts to either reconfiguring words or mutilating them instead. “He'll run and he'll fall/And he'll take it in stride,” reads one line. Eh? “With daddy and son/where you'll never be 'lone,” goes the book's immortal final line. Oh ouch!
> 
> Meanwhile, Meghan herself pops up at the end, tending the vegetable patch (I just don't believe this bit – surely the Sussexes have a gardener to pull the potatoes?) and, natch, holding a child, presumably young Lilibet.
> *One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it. But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.*


I set my expectations very low after I read the preview blurbs. Once again Methane has defied expectations and gone even lower.
Are the publications which fawn on her (People, Vanity Fair) giving this faux book good reviews?


----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


> _The Sun reported in January of 2019 that Prince George had told a passer-by that his name was Archie. The passer-by told The Sun: “I was asked by a police minder not to take a photo of the children, which I didn’t, but George started stroking my dog. Just to be friendly I engaged in a bit of small talk and I asked George what his name was, even though obviously I knew it. To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan and Harry Snub Kate and William By Using the Name Archie?
> 
> 
> "Archie" had been Prince George's nickname.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Oh I didn't know that! ☺️ Thank you for sharing.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She trusts they won't strike back to avoid the scandal. Can't wait to see the smug grin wiped off her face the day they decide they're done being polite.


Classic bully behaviour. 
Lord help her kids because Hazard is following her example whatever she does. They won't have any good role models except the chickens.


----------



## Traminer

EverSoElusive said:


> Oh I didn't know that! ☺ Thank you for sharing.



That is really  a telling point!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Traminer

mellibelly said:


> _The Sun reported in January of 2019 that Prince George had told a passer-by that his name was Archie. The passer-by told The Sun: “I was asked by a police minder not to take a photo of the children, which I didn’t, but George started stroking my dog. Just to be friendly I engaged in a bit of small talk and I asked George what his name was, even though obviously I knew it. To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan and Harry Snub Kate and William By Using the Name Archie?
> 
> 
> "Archie" had been Prince George's nickname.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Good point!


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> Well if they were screenwriters they could at least be sued for plagiarism and slander and gross misrepresentation and fraud and finally wasting police time



I'd like to see them get sued because they've sued enough people since they got together


----------



## EverSoElusive

Not sure if y'all know about this       Tempted to watch on Hulu but will not.


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## 1LV

Lili. . .  Flower . . . Doria.  

Sure.

Work it, girl!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

What happened to that hilarious series about the British Royals, "The Windsors"? There seems to be new episodes coming out but I thought the BRF reality had gotten so mad the script writers felt they just couldn't top it and had given up the show.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> *The Bench review: the Duchess of Sussex’s semi-literate vanity project leaves Harry holding the baby*



Ouch.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO The American pronunciation would be to pronounce each syllable - Lil Lee bet [bet rhymes with set, get, met, debt].
> 
> ETA:  LIL-UH-BIT - this sounds beautiful, especially since it is nickname for Elizabeth.  You can almost hear a little child saying “Elizabeth” like that.


Yes ! Thanks
Getting a Lily out of that is a bit of a stretch since there is no LILY in the UK pronunciation where the second I (vowel)  becomes a soft sound


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Not sure if y'all know about this       Tempted to watch on Hulu but will not.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5104370


So the parents step back/down/whatever as senior royals but the newborn is a "senior royal baby"? Is this Deborah Roberts on par with Omid and Gayle? Same low quality coverage?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Wow, the press is really reaching on this one. The Chicago Tribune has a story that the royal baby was born on Diana's 25th anniversary of her visit to Northwestern.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry and Meghan to take 20 weeks’ leave... from whatever it is they do after birth of first daughter
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Straight-Laced said:


> The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf
> 
> 
> Frank Augstein/AP PhotoThe Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s choice of Lilibet for their daughter misjudges the moodThe naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Tone Deaf" - The Times UK comments on the baby name. Leader article published today :
> 
> *The Times view on Harry and Meghan’s baby name: Tone-Deaf*
> *The Sussexes have taken a very personal nickname and added it to their brand*
> 
> The naming of babies is an act of diplomacy. For royal families and non-royals alike it strikes a balance between parents, and is often a statement of ambition for the newborn and a tribute to forebears. These criteria apply in the case of Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. Her forenames suggest that her parents want the bonds forged by a royal upbringing to run deeper than the line of succession. It is highly unlikely that there will be a future Queen Lilibet, any more than there will be a King Archie; the parents were therefore under no pressure to come up with a regal moniker.
> 
> *There is nonetheless something tone-deaf, even opportunistic about adopting the childhood nickname of the reigning monarch*. The future Queen Elizabeth was dubbed Lilibet by her grandfather George V, who was gently mocking her inability to pronounce her real name. Later her governess, Marion “Crawfie” Crawford, used the name, later still Prince Philip. In a special act of intimacy, she placed a handwritten note marked Lilibet on his coffin. The nickname should perhaps have been buried with him. For the Duke of Sussex, the Queen has always been Gran.
> 
> The duke and duchess may argue that they were honouring two strong women, a grandmother and a mother, in the naming of their child. *The suspicion, though, is that they are rather staying true to their brand of royalty on loan to Hollywood and that to secure this status they are looking for ways back into courtly favour*.
> 
> If the name was intended as an olive branch, a gesture of reconciliation after a year of bridge-burning, then it misjudges the mood. There is surely more work to do after their hatcheting of the royal family, and more authentic commitment to service to the country and to the integrity of the institution that is so ably represented by the woman they call Lilibet.


Brilliant, thanks for posting it!


----------



## Chanbal

RAINDANCE said:


> Telegraph today ....
> 
> *The Bench review: the Duchess of Sussex’s semi-literate vanity project leaves Harry holding the baby*
> 
> The Duchess's first children's book is all bland parenting 'wisdom' and no story – and it's hard to imagine any child enjoying it
> 
> ByClaire Allfree8 June 2021 • 9:22am
> 
> Poor Prince Harry. He's moved half way across the Earth, leaving behind everything he has ever known, and for what? A humble bench in a garden, according to the opening line of *The Bench* (Puffin, £12.99), his wife's debut book for children, published today and addressed throughout its 34 pages to him.
> “This is your bench,” it begins, accompanied by a watery illustration of a man with ginger hair sitting on a bench looking adoringly into the eyes of a baby. “Where life will begin/For you and our son.”
> Leaving aside that unfortunate image – did the Sussex's family life really begin on a bench? Surely not – the connotations are clear. Poor Harry's role in this marriage is to sit on his bench holding the baby while Meghan gets on and conquers the world, one act of compassion at a time.
> 
> The Bench, published worldwide today and apparently based on a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, is presented as a story for children. But it's nothing of the sort, not least since it's not a story. Rather it's a series of imperatives disguised as loving verse in which Meghan offers words of wisdom to Harry (represented throughout as a sort of racially inclusive, everyman paternal figure) and by implication to the rest of us, on how to handle the tricky business of loving a child.
> 
> Each page consists of a generic "bonding" moment between father and son on a different bench (park benches, garden benches, random grey benches), illustrated by Christian Robinson's amazingly benign water colours and accompanied by a couple of tender lines of advice. So, after a hard day tending the chickens, our father figure Harry will “rest” on his bench and “see the growth of our boy”.
> 
> As the “son” learns to ride a bike, our hero Harry will “watch on with pride”. And should the son playfully pop on a tutu, our father is helpfully told to be his “supporter”. Because any male child who playfully dresses up in a tutu obviously needs support, right?
> Sometimes, the demands of scansion and rhyme defeat Meghan, so she resorts to either reconfiguring words or mutilating them instead. “He'll run and he'll fall/And he'll take it in stride,” reads one line. Eh? “With daddy and son/where you'll never be 'lone,” goes the book's immortal final line. Oh ouch!
> 
> Meanwhile, Meghan herself pops up at the end, tending the vegetable patch (I just don't believe this bit – surely the Sussexes have a gardener to pull the potatoes?) and, natch, holding a child, presumably young Lilibet.
> *One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it. But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.*



Excellent book review, thanks for sharing it.  The Times published a similar review entitled:*The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm *by Alex O’Connell

_*The story, so lacking in action and jeopardy you half wonder if the writing job was delegated to a piece of furniture,* charts the relationship between a father and son seen through the eyes of a mother. The action takes place around the said bench, the daddies and boys changing from page to page, allowing for a diverse cast: a Sikh dad and his son play football, a father and son with plaited hair watch..._









						The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
					

Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> Wow, the press is really reaching on this one. The Chicago Tribune has a story that the royal baby was born on Diana's 25th anniversary of her visit to Northwestern.


With such statement, one could think that SS has a connection at The Chicago T.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I received my Hold Still yesterday. It will be an excellent reminder of 2020. The photos push the book to a new level! Bravo, Kate 
Of course, the books are targeted for vastly different audiences which could account for MM’s sluggish sales (being generous here)








						Meghan Markle's The Bench fails to make the bestseller list
					

On the day it was released in the UK, Meghan Markle's The Bench has been slated by critics, with The Times ' Alex Connell calling it a 'self-help manual for needy parents'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Wishing we had a *snort* smilie for these headlines


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't read through the five new pages and I'm even more irritable than usual thanks to an infected tooth that drives me crazyyy (also, when they numbed me they hit the nerve and I went basically blind for 20 mins. Not gonna lie, I panicked).
> 
> Buuut...the more I think of it, the more I think they must have completely lost it. There is not one single reason why using a very specific family nickname for your child even without the troublesome two's history with the BRF would be a good idea. At this point I'd love mental health professionals to weigh in because this is neither sweet nor harmless or even normal. In fact I'm sure it's the expression of some pathological condition.


and yet all the US media (TV at least) is gushing about their wonderful tribute to grandma


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is a first for me. Only the author’s name is on the spine, not the book’s title. Not even the illustrator. Wow!  








						The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
					

Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> and yet all the US media (TV at least) is gushing about their wonderful tribute to grandma



Um,  they named this daughter after the casino, not the Queen.  Ya kno, they are just so cool like that.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't read through the five new pages and I'm even more irritable than usual thanks to an infected tooth that drives me crazyyy (also, when they numbed me they hit the nerve and I went basically blind for 20 mins. Not gonna lie, I panicked).
> 
> Buuut...the more I think of it, the more I think they must have completely lost it. There is not one single reason why using a very specific family nickname for your child even without the troublesome two's history with the BRF would be a good idea. At this point I'd love mental health professionals to weigh in because this is neither sweet nor harmless or even normal. In fact I'm sure it's the expression of some pathological condition.


oh - sorry about the tooth.  dental pain and dental work are the worst.  hitting a nerve - ouch.  I have to go in for a crown soon and I'm dreading it.  not the pain, just being in that chair for an hour or two.  hope you tooth is better


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles are sneaky, but transparent to many! Sarah Vine is one of the very many... 

*Isn’t this the Lilibet that Harry made out to be a lousy mother? SARAH VINE asks if the Sussexes are paying a touching tribute or royally presumptuous after all their barbs*

_But it is perhaps because Lilibet is such a very rare and special name that no other royal children have thought to use it.

Even if they had wanted to, they might well have felt – out of respect for Her Majesty – that it was overstepping an invisible line, presuming rather too much.

Not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, though. As ever, they are not preoccupied with protocol and propriety, and the gesture has naturally won them plenty of praise from fans.

It is seen as a rapprochement, a ‘reaching out’, an ‘olive branch’ extended across the Atlantic to the folks back home – an emotional act of typical generosity by two people who, as ever, have been harshly judged by a cynical media.

Quite apart from the strange juxtaposition of the two names – which in itself is an entire psychodrama – *isn’t this Lilibet the same person who according to Prince Harry was a lousy mother to Prince Charles, and who passed on her lousy parenting skills to him so he in turn was a lousy father to Harry?*

Isn’t this the same Lilibet who, so Harry and Meghan suggested in that Oprah Winfrey interview, presided over a bigoted, dysfunctional family of emotional pygmies?

The same Lilibet who allowed Diana to be frozen out, who failed to ensure Meghan was given the support she needed when she was struggling to cope with her royal role?

Harry and Meghan’s supporters have rushed to point out that the couple reportedly asked the Queen for permission to use Lilibet, and she approved. But she couldn’t exactly have said no, could she? Not without the fear of another TV interview in which she would no doubt be accused of snubbing them.

Given everything that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have said and implied about the Queen over the past few months, you might have thought she was the last person they would want to name their precious baby daughter after.

*Indeed if she was to be named after a relative, then surely Meghan’s own mother Doria, who as far as I can tell has been a constant and selfless source of strength to her daughter, might have been more appropriate.

Oprah, too, would have been a possibility given how the queen of interviews has been playing such a dramatic role in the couple’s lives.*

But the actual Queen, this supposed villainess, this heart- less matriarch? Doesn’t it seem rather odd, not to mention more than a little opportunistic? Because, let’s be honest, all Harry and Meghan’s criticism of the royals hasn’t actually gone as well as they thought it would.
In fact, it’s fair to say there’s been a bit of a backlash.

Of course, they could have just openly and honestly apologised; but why do that when you can turn your misjudgements to strategic advantage?

*Because Lilibet Diana, as a name, certainly has its benefits.
By calling their daughter after the Queen herself, and using the most intimate and private name by which she is known, they have ensured that however frosty and distant relations with the royals back home become, in the eyes of the public the association with the British Royal Family will never be forgotten.

Whatever the future now holds, the Queen will be forever a part of their lives. And, crucially, of Brand Sussex.*_









						SARAH VINE: Isn't this the Lilibet Harry made out to be lousy mother?
					

I always felt the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would choose Diana for their first daughter - after all, so much of Prince Harry's life has been defined by the memory of his mother.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5104447
> 
> 
> This is a first for me. Only the author’s name is on the spine, not the book’s title. Not even the illustrator. Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
> 
> 
> Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


Speechless! 
Are we sure Penguin Random House paid her? Maybe SS paid the publisher to engage an illustrator, print and distribute the book. All to make Methane appear multi-talented.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mellibelly said:


> _The Sun reported in January of 2019 that Prince George had told a passer-by that his name was Archie. The passer-by told The Sun: “I was asked by a police minder not to take a photo of the children, which I didn’t, but George started stroking my dog. Just to be friendly I engaged in a bit of small talk and I asked George what his name was, even though obviously I knew it. To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan and Harry Snub Kate and William By Using the Name Archie?
> 
> 
> "Archie" had been Prince George's nickname.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



I don’t believe this. That’s not how American two year old boys speak.


----------



## sdkitty

oh, fyi, apparently Hulu is streaming a special about the American royal baby......they sure seem to have the US media eating out of their hands
American royal is an oxymoron.   we fought a war to be free from the royals

Watch The American Royal Baby Streaming Online | Hulu (Free Trial) 

Meghan looks just like her mom in that photo


----------



## Chanbal

*Trolling the Queen *was the tittle chosen by an Aussie author to inform that
"_The Ginger and the Whinger have welcomed a daughter into the world, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor._"   








						Trolling the Queen | The Spectator Australia
					

The Ginger and the Whinger have welcomed a daughter into the world, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. We should all be thanking our lucky stars that they didn’t call her Georgina Floyd or…




					www.spectator.com.au


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> *Trolling the Queen *was the tittle chosen by an Aussie author to inform that
> "_The Ginger and the Whinger have welcomed a daughter into the world, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trolling the Queen | The Spectator Australia
> 
> 
> The Ginger and the Whinger have welcomed a daughter into the world, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. We should all be thanking our lucky stars that they didn’t call her Georgina Floyd or…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.com.au


I don't think they're trolling.....I think they're trying to stay as royal as they can - without doing any of the work


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan Markle's The Bench fails to make the bestseller list
> 
> 
> On the day it was released in the UK, Meghan Markle's The Bench has been slated by critics, with The Times ' Alex Connell calling it a 'self-help manual for needy parents'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


*The Bench doesn't make the top 200 on Amazon UK - while Kate Middleton's Hold Still photography book reached number two on the day it was released*
And that is after weeks of promotion and pre-order windows! 
IMO, the book shouldn't be in the children's book section, it should be in the "self-help" section!


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5104447
> 
> 
> This is a first for me. Only the author’s name is on the spine, not the book’s title. Not even the illustrator. Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
> 
> 
> Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


This is hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!  I’ve never seen this before either.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> oh, fyi, apparently Hulu is streaming a special about the American royal baby......they sure seem to have the US media eating out of their hands
> American royal is an oxymoron.   we fought a war to be free from the royals
> 
> Watch The American Royal Baby Streaming Online | Hulu (Free Trial)
> 
> Meghan looks just like her mom in that photo


She still looks just like her mom except for all her plastic surgery!


----------



## RAINDANCE

I seriously hope the BRF conspire as a whole team to call their bluff and NEVER use the child's full name, and use Lili in/on everything !

I noted that William did so on the congratulatory message: I expect he is furious with Harry.

I still can't wrap my brain around naming your child your grandparent's pet name. The bizarreness (?) of expecting your elderly relative to use their own name to address your child.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> Princess Lillibet sounds like a character in a Disney movie



Well, since her mother likens herself to a Disney mermaid, I guess it's in keeping with the cartoon/merch op theme.

Lowest common denominator marketing


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Yes, she lives two lily pads away from the area where Methane, the Little Mermaid wannabe, hangs out.
> 
> Her Daddy has experience securing Disney employment for the Suckesses, watch for her name in credits soon.



Sorry, great minds think alike 

Master Archie (which my autocorrect wants to change to Mister Archive) and Prince Jughead. 

I could do my own cartoon story.› 'Princess Lillibet' is not trademarked - yet.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> They have to be so careful about how they do it, if they do it. They can’t open the door for another round of public whining and media sympathy.



At this point, who cares?

They're always going to whine. Better to whine at something real than fiction. Win, win. 

Should have done it a while ago IMHO


----------



## bag-mania

There are a number of positive reviews on Amazon, but only one person willing to speak the truth about _The Bench_. Way to go Rachel, whoever you are! 




Rachel Cutler
_1.0 out of 5 stars_ How did this become a children’s book?
Reviewed in the United States on June 8, 2021

This book is bland. No characters, no story, no substance. Shallow like the author. I guess it makes sense as she ghosted her own father. Two thumbs down.
86 people found this helpful


----------



## jelliedfeels

Gotta day it strikes me this whole criticising each of these royal generation’s parenting kind of feels like a moot point anyway as we all know the childcare is heavily weighted towards nanny and boarding school anyway - you can say you feel a sense of deprivation that daddy would hand you over to nanny and that’s fair to an extent but making out that you were neglected in the sense of being completely deprived of human contact is just ridiculous- it’s just a different model than the nuclear family. To be honest I’m sure that they’ve got a nanny or two at their home anyway


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Speechless!
> Are we sure Penguin Random House paid her? Maybe SS paid the publisher to engage an illustrator, print and distribute the book. All to make Methane appear multi-talented.


I mean I find it absolutely amazing, in a world where so many in Hollywood are triple-threats and top public schools have the best teaching talent available to hot house their pupils to greatness that these two are so utterly lacking in any discernible talent   
They are just utterly terrible at everything the turn their hand to aren’t they? I guess that’s why they are grifters.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> At this point, who cares?
> 
> They're always going to whine. Better to whine at something real than fiction. Win, win.
> 
> Should have done it a while ago IMHO



Even the BRF has to be mindful of PR. There is still a blackmail element to the whole thing. Harry and Meghan have a Netflix contract and we can only imagine what vengeful, self-serving tripe they will come up with if they feel further "offended." I don't believe Harry has ever had real insider information about the family workings (i.e. secrets and dirty laundry) but the Netflix viewing audience will believe he does. H&M are in a prime position to give the family a brutal beating in publicity for the next few years.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Not sure if y'all know about this       Tempted to watch on Hulu but will not.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5104370


Anyone knows when this photo of the Disgusting Duo was taken? That white dress has that strangling cape detail around her neck like the horrid green dress.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Anyone knows when this photo of the Disgusting Duo was taken? That white dress has that strangling cape detail around her neck like the horrid green dress.


her face looks fuller...maybe she was pregnant?


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones waiting for it, here it is! I'll try to watch it as soon as I have a few (long) minutes free...


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5104447
> 
> 
> This is a first for me. Only the author’s name is on the spine, not the book’s title. Not even the illustrator. Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
> 
> 
> Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



 I think the title is on the other end of the spine, but having the author listed before the title tells us all we need to know about who their audience is. If we had any doubt the review below confirms it.




Kykuit100
_3.0 out of 5 stars_ Expensive and written to an adult audience
Reviewed in the United States on June 8, 2021

Very expensive and not a child’s book. Neither the rhymes nor the illustrations held my child’s interest. More of a souvenir for followers of Ms. Markle.
58 people found this helpful


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> So the parents step back/down/whatever as senior royals but the newborn is a "senior royal baby"? Is this Deborah Roberts on par with Omid and Gayle? Same low quality coverage?


Checked her out. She seems to be a serious journalist and not merely a "TV personality" like Gayle King. Let's see if she demonstrates journalistic chops or she has been brainwashed too.


----------



## carmen56

xincinsin said:


> Anyone knows when this photo of the Disgusting Duo was taken? That white dress has that strangling cape detail around her neck like the horrid green dress.



I believe it was on their official trip to Morocco.  Isn’t the raptor wearing the £10,000 Dior kaftan?


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Anyone knows when this photo of the Disgusting Duo was taken? That white dress has that strangling cape detail around her neck like the horrid green dress.


Morocco February 2019


----------



## Traminer

I have never been a friend of turning nicknames into official first names.
Then they lose their character  as nicknames, without becoming  real first names.
And in this case I do not like it at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

carmen56 said:


> I believe it was on their official trip to Morocco.  Isn’t the raptor wearing the £10,000 Dior kaftan?


You beat me to it, lol.


----------



## Pivoine66

Sharont2305 said:


> Morocco February 2019


Does anyone know who paid for the dress/kaftan, her wardrobe in her about 18 months in UK as a so working Royal?

In my circle in Europe, no one had ever heard of Prince Harry's wife before they officially became a couple. We were surprised to see a photo of her as a Briefcase girl and then the interview posted here with Mr Craig Ferguson in this - hm - different looking dress.  We were surprised, too, by her completely different demeanour (interview Mr. Ferguson vs OW?) Perhaps it would be helpful to show more photos like these of her career here of Prince Harry's wife and ones that show her career that she gave up and of her achievements before the Prince?  Was she an activist, campaigner for women's rights and WOC, apart from the children's letter?


----------



## zen1965

RAINDANCE said:


> Telegraph today ....
> 
> *The Bench review: the Duchess of Sussex’s semi-literate vanity project leaves Harry holding the baby*
> 
> The Duchess's first children's book is all bland parenting 'wisdom' and no story – and it's hard to imagine any child enjoying it
> 
> ByClaire Allfree8 June 2021 • 9:22am
> 
> 
> *(...) One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it. But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.*



Ouch.
And bravo!


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Anyone knows when this photo of the Disgusting Duo was taken? That white dress has that strangling cape detail around her neck like the horrid green dress.



She was pregnant with Archie during the Morocco visit


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5104447
> 
> 
> This is a first for me. Only the author’s name is on the spine, not the book’s title. Not even the illustrator. Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
> 
> 
> Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



I’m a fan of Home Improvement shows and often in a re do of a home the “Powder Room” ”Guest Bathroom” gets some special treatment to make it more fun/dramatic. 

In Montecito the Markle Mansion has many options available to choose from.

One could be selected to be refitted with floor to ceiling shelves filled with hundreds and hundreds, maybe thousands of copies since it’s a skinny volume, of The Bench lined up, spine out of course, to showcase Methane’s name. She could sit on “the throne” and admire herself ad nauseum.

I sometimes wonder how she stays upright, carrying her *HUMONGOUS* ego around.


----------



## sdkitty

Pivoine66 said:


> Does anyone know who paid for the dress/kaftan, her wardrobe in her about 18 months in UK as a so working Royal?
> 
> In my circle in Europe, no one had ever heard of Prince Harry's wife before they officially became a couple. We were surprised to see a photo of her as a Briefcase girl and then the interview posted here with Mr Craig Ferguson in this - hm - different looking dress.  We were surprised, too, by her completely different demeanour (interview Mr. Ferguson vs OW?) Perhaps it would be helpful to show more photos like these of her career here of Prince Harry's wife and ones that show her career that she gave up and of her achievements before the Prince?  Was she an activist, campaigner for women's rights and WOC, apart from the children's letter?


Not many people in the US knew of her before Harry either.  She was a supporting actress on a basic cable TV show - not something the masses watched.  she had a somewhat successful blog (I think -  not sure how many followed her).  I don't think she was much of an activist.  Nabbing the prince is her claim to fame.  Period.


----------



## Pivoine66

sdkitty said:


> Not many people in the US knew of her before Harry either.  She was a supporting actress on a basic cable TV show - not something the masses watched.  she had a somewhat successful blog (I think -  not sure how many followed her).  I don't think she was much of an activist.  Nabbing the prince is her claim to fame.  Period.


Wow. Thank you!


----------



## melissatrv

sdkitty said:


> Not many people in the US knew of her before Harry either.  She was a supporting actress on a basic cable TV show - not something the masses watched.  she had a somewhat successful blog (I think -  not sure how many followed her).  I don't think she was much of an activist.  Nabbing the prince is her claim to fame.  Period.


 Yep as Kathy Griffin used to say Meghan  was on the D-list before Harry


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> Yep as Kathy Griffin used to say Meghan  was on the D-list before Harry


or as @CeeJay says, Z-list


----------



## bag-mania

I don't believe any of the American publications are reviewing _The Bench_ yet. They might be following that old adage that if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. Fortunately, the British papers are braver.

"It reads as if it has been penned as a self-help manual for needy parents rather than as a story to entertain small kids," writes Alex O'Connell in the Times. 

The arts editor goes on to condemn Meghan for placing 'a therapy couch' built for adults at the center of the book, rather than creating a story of 'darkness and light' for children below the age of 7. 

"It lacks the crucial ingredients for a successful tale for this age group: a good story and basic rhythm," she argues. 

"Inevitably, spotting the roman à clef becomes the main point of interest for adult readers."


----------



## lanasyogamama

Are they taking 20 weeks off from all their gigs? Even the supposedly paid ones like Netflix, Spotify (CANNOT WAIT FOR EPISODE TWO), and Chief Pain Officer?


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t believe this. That’s not how American two year old boys speak.


I was raised by a British mother and that is how she spoke "she is called xxx" or "he is called X" rather than "her name is xxxx".  Is that what you are talking about?  I think it is normal.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Are they taking 20 weeks off from all their gigs? Even the supposedly paid ones like Netflix, Spotify (CANNOT WAIT FOR EPISODE TWO), and Chief Pain Officer?


forgot about those "jobs"
nice of them to give the rest of us an example of how to take time off....like the average person is gonna get a 20-week LOA from their job


----------



## lulilu

I find all this very depressing?  I don't believe in karma and think they will get away with whatever they do or say.


----------



## CeeJay

[/QUOTE]
OMG .. seriously?!?!?!  When will people WAKE-UP (duh - you're all supposed to be 'WOKE' if you follow Meghan-o-lo-maniac!!!) .. and


Chanbal said:


> The people of South Africa have already enough problems, including COVID. QE could perhaps help them settling in an uninhabited island of the UK.


Actually, I've said this before .. and I should have just repeated myself .. they should get moved to *Tristan de Cunha*, that super remote island in the southern part of the Atlantic Ocean!!!  Sorry .. shouldn't have said South Africa, because yes .. (_and sadly_) you have other problems to deal with!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> *But the name Lili, which the Sussexes plan to call their daughter, also holds special meaning for Meghan and Doria because the duchess was given the childhood nickname ‘Flower’ by her adoring mother.*
> 
> Trolling the internet on behalf of their clients and finding multiple sources of negativity to their clients' abuse of the Queen's very personal nickname "Lilibet, " the Sunshine Sachs team was hurriedly summoned for a "We have got to spin this NOW, it's getting out of hand" Zoom meeting. After much gnashing of teeth, someone said "Lili" and someone else chimed in, "Isn't that a flower" (the usual spelling of the plant name as "Lily" being incosequential).
> 
> Methane had a nickname like that, problem solved. Everyone knows Doria meant Lily when she called Methane "Flower."
> 
> Type something up and hit the "send" key pronto!


.. oh, because she was the *VENUS FLYTRAP*?!?!?!?!!?!?


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> She threatens suicide to manipulate and control those around her. Everybody is going to tiptoe on eggshells if somebody says “I’m suicidal.”


She better be *VERY* careful doing that crap .. because when it's done constantly, it becomes the "*crying wolf*" (_since we all know she would never truly follow-through on it_).  I had a major "attention-seeking" neighbor (_in my youth_) who pulled this stunt a number of times, primarily to get her parents to pay attention to her .. but more importantly, to get something that she really wanted (_so - yes, she got a beautiful sports-car when she got her driving license at age 16_).  Well, she continued to pull her stunts with the coup-de-grace being that she absolutely, positively HAD to go to the fancy debutante ball (_this was in Connecticut_).  Unfortunately, she didn't play her cards right that time; she had thought that her mother would be home to "save" her .. but alas, that didn't happen and as such, she died a very young woman (at age 18).


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Even the BRF has to be mindful of PR. There is still a blackmail element to the whole thing. Harry and Meghan have a Netflix contract and we can only imagine what vengeful, self-serving tripe they will come up with if they feel further "offended." I don't believe Harry has ever had real insider information about the family workings (i.e. secrets and dirty laundry) but the Netflix viewing audience will believe he does. H&M are in a prime position to give the family a brutal beating in publicity for the next few years.



They're doing it anyway.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> forgot about those "jobs"
> nice of them to give the rest of us an example of how to take time off....like the average person is gonna get a 20-week LOA from their job


Dunno about LOA but women here in the UK get up to 12 months maternity leave max.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Yes, she will become a princess. However, Charles wants to slim down the monarch and that may change.


Regardless of what Charles does (_and I do hope that he takes those titles away_), we in the US *DO NOT HONOR* those titles as we fought and won a war to rid ourselves of a Monarchy!  See below .. 

*No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State*.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lulilu said:


> I was raised by a British mother and that is how she spoke "she is called xxx" or "he is called X" rather than "her name is xxxx".  Is that what you are talking about?  I think it is normal.


Yes that is what I was referring to. I know that’s a normal speech pattern for British people, but even though dad is British, I believe he will speak with an American style and an American accent. My parents are from Ireland, and I was raised in the states, and besides a couple odd words, I was much more influenced by my surroundings and how I speak. My husband is always teasing me that I should have a cool accent!


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Well, Diana begins with a D like Doria, so there you go. Doria is honoured too



Great, my mother was honoured too then


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> They're doing it anyway.



At least one door closed on them as far is Netflix is concerned. The creators of The Crown have stated that there will be two more seasons and the series will end having been taken up to the early 2000s. That means no Meghan and Harry drama on that show. They will have to produce their own shows and we can only hope the way they lose interest and their general flakiness will mean nothing actually gets done.


----------



## zen1965

Sharont2305 said:


> Dunno about LOA but women here in the UK get up to 12 months maternity leave max.


Same in other European countries (in some even more).


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles are sneaky, but transparent to many! Sarah Vine is one of the very many...
> 
> *Isn’t this the Lilibet that Harry made out to be a lousy mother? SARAH VINE asks if the Sussexes are paying a touching tribute or royally presumptuous after all their barbs*
> 
> _But it is perhaps because Lilibet is such a very rare and special name that no other royal children have thought to use it.
> 
> Even if they had wanted to, they might well have felt – out of respect for Her Majesty – that it was overstepping an invisible line, presuming rather too much.
> 
> Not the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, though. As ever, they are not preoccupied with protocol and propriety, and the gesture has naturally won them plenty of praise from fans.
> 
> It is seen as a rapprochement, a ‘reaching out’, an ‘olive branch’ extended across the Atlantic to the folks back home – an emotional act of typical generosity by two people who, as ever, have been harshly judged by a cynical media.
> 
> Quite apart from the strange juxtaposition of the two names – which in itself is an entire psychodrama – *isn’t this Lilibet the same person who according to Prince Harry was a lousy mother to Prince Charles, and who passed on her lousy parenting skills to him so he in turn was a lousy father to Harry?*
> 
> Isn’t this the same Lilibet who, so Harry and Meghan suggested in that Oprah Winfrey interview, presided over a bigoted, dysfunctional family of emotional pygmies?
> 
> The same Lilibet who allowed Diana to be frozen out, who failed to ensure Meghan was given the support she needed when she was struggling to cope with her royal role?
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s supporters have rushed to point out that the couple reportedly asked the Queen for permission to use Lilibet, and she approved. But she couldn’t exactly have said no, could she? Not without the fear of another TV interview in which she would no doubt be accused of snubbing them.
> 
> Given everything that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have said and implied about the Queen over the past few months, you might have thought she was the last person they would want to name their precious baby daughter after.
> 
> *Indeed if she was to be named after a relative, then surely Meghan’s own mother Doria, who as far as I can tell has been a constant and selfless source of strength to her daughter, might have been more appropriate.
> 
> Oprah, too, would have been a possibility given how the queen of interviews has been playing such a dramatic role in the couple’s lives.*
> 
> But the actual Queen, this supposed villainess, this heart- less matriarch? Doesn’t it seem rather odd, not to mention more than a little opportunistic? Because, let’s be honest, all Harry and Meghan’s criticism of the royals hasn’t actually gone as well as they thought it would.
> In fact, it’s fair to say there’s been a bit of a backlash.
> 
> Of course, they could have just openly and honestly apologised; but why do that when you can turn your misjudgements to strategic advantage?
> 
> *Because Lilibet Diana, as a name, certainly has its benefits.
> By calling their daughter after the Queen herself, and using the most intimate and private name by which she is known, they have ensured that however frosty and distant relations with the royals back home become, in the eyes of the public the association with the British Royal Family will never be forgotten.
> 
> Whatever the future now holds, the Queen will be forever a part of their lives. And, crucially, of Brand Sussex.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Isn't this the Lilibet Harry made out to be lousy mother?
> 
> 
> I always felt the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would choose Diana for their first daughter - after all, so much of Prince Harry's life has been defined by the memory of his mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If only they had named her after Oprah! That would be so fitting considering the money grabs she has sent their way.


----------



## TC1

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes that is what I was referring to. I know that’s a normal speech pattern for British people, but even though dad is British, I believe he will speak with an American style and an American accent. My parents are from Ireland, and I was raised in the states, and besides a couple odd words, I was much more influenced by my surroundings and how I speak. My husband is always teasing me that I should have a cool accent!


The article was talking about George referring to himself as Archie (hence the manner of speaking) Which was a nickname (supposedly) that he called himself. Then H & M stole it for their child.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> She better be *VERY* careful doing that crap .. because when it's done constantly, it becomes the "*crying wolf*" (_since we all know she would never truly follow-through on it_).  I had a major "attention-seeking" neighbor (_in my youth_) who pulled this stunt a number of times, primarily to get her parents to pay attention to her .. but more importantly, to get something that she really wanted (_so - yes, she got a beautiful sports-car when she got her driving license at age 16_).  Well, she continued to pull her stunts with the coup-de-grace being that she absolutely, positively HAD to go to the fancy debutante ball (_this was in Connecticut_).  Unfortunately, she didn't play her cards right that time; she had thought that her mother would be home to "save" her .. but alas, that didn't happen and as such, she died a very young woman (at age 18).



I don’t believe Meghan was or ever will be a true suicide risk. I think it’s an act she plays for sympathy and to get what she wants.

Meghan does not have a self-harming personality. She absolutely loves herself. Now Harry on the other hand…


----------



## lanasyogamama

TC1 said:


> The article was talking about George referring to himself as Archie (hence the manner of speaking) Which was a nickname (supposedly) that he called himself. Then H & M stole it for their child.


Ooohh!! That makes sense. I thought this was another one of the Harkles claiming that little Archie was saying things like “grandma Diana”.


----------



## Annawakes

Such a shame about the baby’s name.  Lily Diana would have been so sweet and acceptable. But they just HAD to make it an issue by naming the poor girl Lilibet Diana.


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> She better be *VERY* careful doing that crap .. because when it's done constantly, it becomes the "*crying wolf*" (_since we all know she would never truly follow-through on it_).  I had a major "attention-seeking" neighbor (_in my youth_) who pulled this stunt a number of times, primarily to get her parents to pay attention to her .. but more importantly, to get something that she really wanted (_so - yes, she got a beautiful sports-car when she got her driving license at age 16_).  Well, she continued to pull her stunts with the coup-de-grace being that she absolutely, positively HAD to go to the fancy debutante ball (_this was in Connecticut_).  Unfortunately, she didn't play her cards right that time; she had thought that her mother would be home to "save" her .. but alas, that didn't happen and as such, she died a very young woman (at age 18).


damn


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

sdkitty said:


> or as @CeeJay says, Z-list


Absolutely Z-list! Kathy Griffin calls herself D-list and I knew her from her standup and show on Bravo. Never heard of that nobody Markle.


----------



## mellibelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Ooohh!! That makes sense. I thought this was another one of the Harkles claiming that little Archie was saying things like “grandma Diana”.


Yes it was George who said he was called Archie. I believe he was five at the time. Here’s the original article from the Sun.








						Prince George tells a surprised dog walker that he is actually called Archie
					

PRINCE George has told a stranger that his name is Archie – sparking a mystery over whether it’s a family nickname or his own choice. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s five-year-old son was…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I came across this Lady of Barbados when looking for Lady's C video on the last events. She makes interesting points about OW who apparently never had therapy and is now milking and making money off mental health. Why is OW doing this?



Rather ironic IMO, that Oprah is doing this .. given how she treated some of her former employees!  My friend that worked for her (and got fired for really nothing) .. is STILL going to a counselor because what Oprah did to her?!?! .. constant berating, telling her that she was stupid and lazy (which she was anything but) .. well, after a while .. the person starts thinking "gee, maybe she's right".  It's really sad ..


----------



## jelliedfeels

Traminer said:


> *”WHAT'S IN A NAME?
> THAT WHICH WE CALL A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME WOULD SMELL AS SWEET”
> (QUOTE FROM ROMEO AND JULIET BY WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, CA. 1600)*
> Here I dis-agree with good old William.


Everything connected with the pair winds up smelling fishy   


Shopaholic2021 said:


> In their statement they clearly said she was named after the queen, so anyone claiming the child is named after Doria is just reaching.
> 
> I do think they may use this angle if ever criticized about naming their child after the head of a 'racist' institution.





xincinsin said:


> Passive aggressive behaviour as performed by mermaids counts as aggression too. Poor baby...


Yes straight out of the Joan ‘Mommie dearest’ Crawford playbook. 





mellibelly said:


> _The Sun reported in January of 2019 that Prince George had told a passer-by that his name was Archie. The passer-by told The Sun: “I was asked by a police minder not to take a photo of the children, which I didn’t, but George started stroking my dog. Just to be friendly I engaged in a bit of small talk and I asked George what his name was, even though obviously I knew it. To my astonishment he said ‘I’m called Archie’ with a big smile on his face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan and Harry Snub Kate and William By Using the Name Archie?
> 
> 
> "Archie" had been Prince George's nickname.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


It’s weird they stick with the name George when apparently none of the windsors like it. George 5 was known as Bertie as well. 


mdcx said:


> Prince Phillip would have summoned all the resources available to him and had Meghan dealt to if she dreamed of using that name while he was living imo.
> Given all the secret service type things at the BRFs disposal, Meghan seems extremely reckless to me.


I dunno, the morals of it might give them some pause. I don’t think these current royals have that Tudor streak.  Though I’ve always thought this was quite a good counter to the idea they didn’t want him to marry her it’s like….not to be horrible but do you have any idea how easily they could have had her whacked? 


bag-mania said:


> I don't believe any of the American publications are reviewing _The Bench_ yet. They might be following that old adage that if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. Fortunately, the British papers are braver.
> 
> "It reads as if it has been penned as a self-help manual for needy parents rather than as a story to entertain small kids," writes Alex O'Connell in the Times.
> 
> The arts editor goes on to condemn Meghan for placing 'a therapy couch' built for adults at the center of the book, rather than creating a story of 'darkness and light' for children below the age of 7.
> 
> "It lacks the crucial ingredients for a successful tale for this age group: a good story and basic rhythm," she argues.
> 
> "Inevitably, spotting the roman à clef becomes the main point of interest for adult readers."


Guys, we really shouldn’t be too harsh on her. After all this was just an amateur effort, really just a private gift, but she submitted it as an inexpensive novelty to raise money for mental health and children’s charities so you have to take that into account…..oh wait 


sdkitty said:


> forgot about those "jobs"
> nice of them to give the rest of us an example of how to take time off....like the average person is gonna get a 20-week LOA from their job


I think it’s like when actors say they are ‘resting’ personally


----------



## mellibelly

If I were to believe the lie of Lilli being a nod to the name flower Doria used for young Nutmeg, how is that a tribute to Doria? The flower in this scenario is Nutmeg. So it’s a tribute to herself. “From MM, To MM”


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> If I were to believe the lie of Lilli being a nod to the name flower Doria used for young Nutmeg, how is that a tribute to Doria? The flower in this scenario is Nutmeg. So it’s a tribute to herself. “From MM, To MM”



That Meghan would honor herself is clearly the only part of that story which is plausible.


----------



## bag-mania

Today's biggest lie is brought to you by _People_. Whatever Sunshine Sachs is charging H&M it isn't nearly enough for this level of "creativity."

P.S. This article is still claiming Harry is going to the statue unveiling in a few weeks. They may be a little too optimistic about that.

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Introduced Baby Lilibet to Queen in Video Call: 'They Couldn't Wait'*
Not long after Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor was born on June 4, she had a very important meeting on the books - the introduction to her namesake, Queen Elizabeth.

The daughter of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, who has already made history in her first week as the first child of senior members of the royal family to be born in America, met the Queen via a video call.

According to a source in this week's issue of PEOPLE, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, "were very excited and couldn't wait to share that their daughter arrived" as soon as they returned home from Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, not far from the family's home in Montecito, California.

The couple had shared the baby's name ahead of her birth with his grandmother, whose childhood nickname provided inspiration for Prince Harry, 36, and his wife, 39. For Lili's middle name, they looked to Harry's late mother, Princess Diana. And the name also serves a loving nod to Meghan's mother Doria Ragland, who gave Meghan the childhood nickname "Flower."

According to royal historian Robert Lacey, Prince Harry and Queen Elizabeth share a "remarkable bond" that has grown in the years since Diana's sudden and shocking 1997 death.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Introduced Baby Lilibet to Queen in Video Call: 'They Couldn't Wait'
					

After the Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed their daughter Lili into the world on June 4, she had a very important engagement to attend with her namesake, Queen Elizabeth




					people.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry and Meghan to take 20 weeks’ leave... from whatever it is they do after birth of first daughter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk



After the 20 weeks, just in time to take time off for the holidays!


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> Sorry, great minds think alike
> 
> Master Archie (which my autocorrect wants to change to Mister Archive) and Prince Jughead.
> 
> I could do my own cartoon story.› 'Princess Lillibet' is not trademarked - yet.



Checked GoDaddy and Princesslilibet.com is taken. We'll hear about that in the future.


----------



## eunaddict

Annawakes said:


> Such a shame about the baby’s name.  Lily Diana would have been so sweet and acceptable. But they just HAD to make it an issue by naming the poor girl Lilibet Diana.



I was thinking even splitting the name up if they HAD to have Elizabeth in there somehow - Lily Beth Diana M-W or Lily Diana Beth M-W.

Afterall, don't most of the royals have like 5 names? 

---
Articles keep saying Lilibet was "inspired by Gran" - but like, inspired is when you use something as a spring board for something else, this is something else entirely.


----------



## bag-mania

As I mentioned earlier, I still contend it's all a big power play against Charles. Ever H&M's mouthpiece, today's _Vanity Fair_ article backs up my theory. They want to make it perfectly clear to everyone they just love the Queen, but with Charles they are playing the victim card again. IT'S ALL CHARLES' FAULT! EVERYTHING!! SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles*
A year and a half after stepping down as senior royals and moving to America, *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* are reportedly still troubled over the lack of support and communication they received from the royal family, particularly *Prince Charles*, but are trying to move forward by focusing on their newborn daughter and the family they’re building in California.

Princess Diana’s former voice coach, *Stewart Pearce*, explained to _Us Weekly_ that the couple’s fallout with the royal family began because, “They were ‘troubled’ by the lack of support received from the ‘men in grey suits,’ namely the household staff, and then the unfortunate lapse of contact with his father [Prince Charles].” He added, “Charles is well known for distancing himself from emotional heightened situations as he is a very caring, sensitive man, and therefore chooses to wait to let strong feelings settle down before responding.”

Harry has previously spoken about his tense relationship with his father in both his March interview with Oprah and on Dax Shepard’s podcast last month, saying that his father stopped taking his calls shortly before he and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, and that learning about the “pain and suffering” his parents experienced inspired him to try and break that cycle of harm for his own family. “I think Charles has been quite devastated by some of the things Harry has said,” a friend of the Prince of Wales told _Vanity Fair_ at the time. “He is such a gentle man and a dedicated father first and foremost. Knowing him, he’ll be feeling wretched and will take no joy or happiness in what’s going on within the family. But he will also want to seek a reconciliation. He is not vindictive at all, and he wants to make peace with Harry.”

Despite these strained royal relationships, following the birth of their daughter *Lili*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are turning their attention back to their own family and their new home in California. “This baby solidifies that they are creating roots here in the States,” a close friend of the couple told _People_, adding that the newborn “completes” their family and they “are so happy.” The decision to name the baby after Queen Elizabeth’s childhood nickname is also a tribute to Harry’s enduring connection to his grandmother, according to royal historian *Robert Lacey*. After the death of his mother Princess Diana, the monarch “was a sort of stepmother for both Harry and *William*,” Lacey explains. “We have all focused on her coaching of William as the future King, but we are realizing now the importance of the emotional bonds that she’s been able to establish with Harry, and their ability to talk to each other directly. That affection remains.”

After returning home from the hospital, Harry and Meghan video called the Queen to introduce her to her eleventh great-grandchild, and according to the source, “They were very excited and couldn’t wait to share that their daughter arrived.” They’re now both planning to take several months off from working on their Archewell Foundation to take care of their newborn and two-year-old, *Archie*. The couple’s friend, *Dean Stott*, told _People_, “Lili becomes the fourth generation of amazing, strong women in the family—behind Meghan, Diana and her Majesty the Queen. Harry and Meghan now have their complete family. It’s their time to be in the moment.”









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles
					

But with the arrival of their new daughter, the couple are trying “to be in the moment” and focus on “their complete family.”




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> As I mentioned earlier, I still contend it's all a big power play against Charles. Ever H&M's mouthpiece, today's _Vanity Fair_ article backs up my theory. They want to make it perfectly clear to everyone they just love the Queen, but with Charles they are playing the victim card again. IT'S ALL CHARLES' FAULT! EVERYTHING!! SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles*
> A year and a half after stepping down as senior royals and moving to America, *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* are reportedly still troubled over the lack of support and communication they received from the royal family, particularly *Prince Charles*, but are trying to move forward by focusing on their newborn daughter and the family they’re building in California.
> 
> Princess Diana’s former voice coach, *Stewart Pearce*, explained to _Us Weekly_ that the couple’s fallout with the royal family began because, “They were ‘troubled’ by the lack of support received from the ‘men in grey suits,’ namely the household staff, and then the unfortunate lapse of contact with his father [Prince Charles].” He added, “Charles is well known for distancing himself from emotional heightened situations as he is a very caring, sensitive man, and therefore chooses to wait to let strong feelings settle down before responding.”
> 
> Harry has previously spoken about his tense relationship with his father in both his March interview with Oprah and on Dax Shepard’s podcast last month, saying that his father stopped taking his calls shortly before he and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, and that learning about the “pain and suffering” his parents experienced inspired him to try and break that cycle of harm for his own family. “I think Charles has been quite devastated by some of the things Harry has said,” a friend of the Prince of Wales told _Vanity Fair_ at the time. “He is such a gentle man and a dedicated father first and foremost. Knowing him, he’ll be feeling wretched and will take no joy or happiness in what’s going on within the family. But he will also want to seek a reconciliation. He is not vindictive at all, and he wants to make peace with Harry.”
> 
> Despite these strained royal relationships, following the birth of their daughter *Lili*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are turning their attention back to their own family and their new home in California. “This baby solidifies that they are creating roots here in the States,” a close friend of the couple told _People_, adding that the newborn “completes” their family and they “are so happy.” The decision to name the baby after Queen Elizabeth’s childhood nickname is also a tribute to Harry’s enduring connection to his grandmother, according to royal historian *Robert Lacey*. After the death of his mother Princess Diana, the monarch “was a sort of stepmother for both Harry and *William*,” Lacey explains. “We have all focused on her coaching of William as the future King, but we are realizing now the importance of the emotional bonds that she’s been able to establish with Harry, and their ability to talk to each other directly. That affection remains.”
> 
> After returning home from the hospital, Harry and Meghan video called the Queen to introduce her to her eleventh great-grandchild, and according to the source, “They were very excited and couldn’t wait to share that their daughter arrived.” They’re now both planning to take several months off from working on their Archewell Foundation to take care of their newborn and two-year-old, *Archie*. The couple’s friend, *Dean Stott*, told _People_, “Lili becomes the fourth generation of amazing, strong women in the family—behind Meghan, Diana and her Majesty the Queen. Harry and Meghan now have their complete family. It’s their time to be in the moment.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles
> 
> 
> But with the arrival of their new daughter, the couple are trying “to be in the moment” and focus on “their complete family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


what a couple of POSs


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> what a couple of POSs



They have taken whining to an epic new level. To think there are people who actually feel sorry for these multimillionaire spoiled brats.


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> Ooohh!! That makes sense. I thought this was another one of the Harkles claiming that little Archie was saying things like “grandma Diana”.


Glad that was straightened out.  But I wouldn't put it past them to make claims Archie spoke that way either.


----------



## lulilu

mellibelly said:


> If I were to believe the lie of Lilli being a nod to the name flower Doria used for young Nutmeg, how is that a tribute to Doria? The flower in this scenario is Nutmeg. So it’s a tribute to herself. “From MM, To MM”


Does anyone actually believe that Doria always called M "flower?"  I don't.

And if they could call the queen, why not call his own father to introduce him to the new baby.  What a crock of sh1t.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> As I mentioned earlier, I still contend it's all a big power play against Charles. Ever H&M's mouthpiece, today's _Vanity Fair_ article backs up my theory. They want to make it perfectly clear to everyone they just love the Queen, but with Charles they are playing the victim card again. IT'S ALL CHARLES' FAULT! EVERYTHING!! SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles*
> A year and a half after stepping down as senior royals and moving to America, *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* are reportedly still troubled over the lack of support and communication they received from the royal family, particularly *Prince Charles*, but are trying to move forward by focusing on their newborn daughter and the family they’re building in California.
> 
> Princess Diana’s former voice coach, *Stewart Pearce*, explained to _Us Weekly_ that the couple’s fallout with the royal family began because, “They were ‘troubled’ by the lack of support received from the ‘men in grey suits,’ namely the household staff, and then the unfortunate lapse of contact with his father [Prince Charles].” He added, “Charles is well known for distancing himself from emotional heightened situations as he is a very caring, sensitive man, and therefore chooses to wait to let strong feelings settle down before responding.”
> 
> Harry has previously spoken about his tense relationship with his father in both his March interview with Oprah and on Dax Shepard’s podcast last month, saying that his father stopped taking his calls shortly before he and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, and that learning about the “pain and suffering” his parents experienced inspired him to try and break that cycle of harm for his own family. “I think Charles has been quite devastated by some of the things Harry has said,” a friend of the Prince of Wales told _Vanity Fair_ at the time. “He is such a gentle man and a dedicated father first and foremost. Knowing him, he’ll be feeling wretched and will take no joy or happiness in what’s going on within the family. But he will also want to seek a reconciliation. He is not vindictive at all, and he wants to make peace with Harry.”
> 
> Despite these strained royal relationships, following the birth of their daughter *Lili*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are turning their attention back to their own family and their new home in California. “This baby solidifies that they are creating roots here in the States,” a close friend of the couple told _People_, adding that the newborn “completes” their family and they “are so happy.” The decision to name the baby after Queen Elizabeth’s childhood nickname is also a tribute to Harry’s enduring connection to his grandmother, according to royal historian *Robert Lacey*. After the death of his mother Princess Diana, the monarch “was a sort of stepmother for both Harry and *William*,” Lacey explains. “We have all focused on her coaching of William as the future King, but we are realizing now the importance of the emotional bonds that she’s been able to establish with Harry, and their ability to talk to each other directly. That affection remains.”
> 
> After returning home from the hospital, Harry and Meghan video called the Queen to introduce her to her eleventh great-grandchild, and according to the source, “They were very excited and couldn’t wait to share that their daughter arrived.” They’re now both planning to take several months off from working on their Archewell Foundation to take care of their newborn and two-year-old, *Archie*. The couple’s friend, *Dean Stott*, told _People_, “Lili becomes the fourth generation of amazing, strong women in the family—behind Meghan, Diana and her Majesty the Queen. Harry and Meghan now have their complete family. It’s their time to be in the moment.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles
> 
> 
> But with the arrival of their new daughter, the couple are trying “to be in the moment” and focus on “their complete family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



Where's a yawning emoji when you need one?


----------



## mellibelly

eunaddict said:


> Articles keep saying Lilibet was "inspired by Gran" - but like, inspired is when you use something as a spring board for something else, this is something else entirely.


Like a designer “inspired” handbag...more like a designer knockoff!


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> *Does anyone actually believe that Doria always called M "flower?"  I don't.*
> 
> And if they could call the queen, why not call his own father to introduce him to the new baby.  What a crock of sh1t.



This is the only "mother" I know who called her daughter _my flower._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait...what? What the hell is "making my heart go pump-pump"? Was she suffering a stroke while finishing the book? Not sure if I want to laugh or cry about this rape of the English language.



> *'Dedicated to the man and boy who make my heart go pump-pump': First look at Meghan Markle's children's book The Bench reveals Prince Harry feeding chickens with Archie and even an appearance from Baby Lilibet*


*


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...look-Meghan-Markles-childrens-book-Bench.html*


----------



## mellibelly

Goodfrtune said:


> It actually depends on what type of “Jewish” your friend is. Some name after those who have passed, some name after the living. Depends on whether you are Ashkenazi, Sephardic or in my case Romaniote. I was named for my grandmother and she was very much alive at the time.


That is so interesting about the differences. She is Ashkenazi.


----------



## bag-mania

Um, let's just say I don't think there will be a big bidding war between publishing houses for her next book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Anyone knows when this photo of the Disgusting Duo was taken? That white dress has that strangling cape detail around her neck like the horrid green dress.



Oh...this, my dear people, is the pregnancy Dior caftan she had made to wear to a dinner in Morocco for what, 90 mins? And. It. Cost. 90000. British Pounds Sterling.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> Does anyone actually believe that Doria always called M "flower?"  I don't.
> 
> And if they could call the queen, why not call his own father to introduce him to the new baby.  What a crock of sh1t.


they are disgusting


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...what? What the hell is "making my heart go pump-pump"? Was she suffering a stroke while finishing the book? Not sure if I want to laugh or cry about this rape of the English language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...look-Meghan-Markles-childrens-book-Bench.html*



When I read this I think of all the aspiring writers out there who have received rejection letters for their submissions because publishers _cannot afford to take a chance on a new author. _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t believe this. That’s not how American two year old boys speak.



It was 5yo British upperclass boy George, though. (not that I'd know how he'd word it in that case)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s weird they stick with the name George when apparently none of the windsors like it. George 5 was known as Bertie as well.



But that's because his first name was actually Albert. Albert Frederick Arthur George.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> According to royal historian Robert Lacey, Prince Harry and Queen Elizabeth share a "remarkable bond" that has grown in the years since Diana's sudden and shocking 1997 death.



Was that before or after Oprah?


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Today's biggest lie is brought to you by _People_. Whatever Sunshine Sachs is charging H&M it isn't nearly enough for this level of "creativity."
> 
> P.S. This article is still claiming Harry is going to the statue unveiling in a few weeks. They may be a little too optimistic about that.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Introduced Baby Lilibet to Queen in Video Call: 'They Couldn't Wait'*
> Not long after Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor was born on June 4, she had a very important meeting on the books - the introduction to her namesake, Queen Elizabeth.
> 
> The daughter of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, who has already made history in her first week as the first child of senior members of the royal family to be born in America, met the Queen via a video call.
> 
> According to a source in this week's issue of PEOPLE, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, "were very excited and couldn't wait to share that their daughter arrived" as soon as they returned home from Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, not far from the family's home in Montecito, California.
> 
> The couple had shared the baby's name ahead of her birth with his grandmother, whose childhood nickname provided inspiration for Prince Harry, 36, and his wife, 39. For Lili's middle name, they looked to Harry's late mother, Princess Diana. And the name also serves a loving nod to Meghan's mother Doria Ragland, who gave Meghan the childhood nickname "Flower."
> 
> According to royal historian Robert Lacey, Prince Harry and Queen Elizabeth share a "remarkable bond" that has grown in the years since Diana's sudden and shocking 1997 death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Introduced Baby Lilibet to Queen in Video Call: 'They Couldn't Wait'
> 
> 
> After the Duke and Duchess of Sussex welcomed their daughter Lili into the world on June 4, she had a very important engagement to attend with her namesake, Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Really?!   This reads like a schoolgirl princess fantasy - oh right, yeah, that’s because that’s all it is. What a load of b*llocks. But the stans will LOVE it  ka-ching $$$$$


bag-mania said:


> As I mentioned earlier, I still contend it's all a big power play against Charles. Ever H&M's mouthpiece, today's _Vanity Fair_ article backs up my theory. They want to make it perfectly clear to everyone they just love the Queen, but with Charles they are playing the victim card again. IT'S ALL CHARLES' FAULT! EVERYTHING!! SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles*
> A year and a half after stepping down as senior royals and moving to America, *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* are reportedly still troubled over the lack of support and communication they received from the royal family, particularly *Prince Charles*, but are trying to move forward by focusing on their newborn daughter and the family they’re building in California.
> 
> Princess Diana’s former voice coach, *Stewart Pearce*, explained to _Us Weekly_ that the couple’s fallout with the royal family began because, “They were ‘troubled’ by the lack of support received from the ‘men in grey suits,’ namely the household staff, and then the unfortunate lapse of contact with his father [Prince Charles].” He added, “Charles is well known for distancing himself from emotional heightened situations as he is a very caring, sensitive man, and therefore chooses to wait to let strong feelings settle down before responding.”
> 
> Harry has previously spoken about his tense relationship with his father in both his March interview with Oprah and on Dax Shepard’s podcast last month, saying that his father stopped taking his calls shortly before he and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, and that learning about the “pain and suffering” his parents experienced inspired him to try and break that cycle of harm for his own family. “I think Charles has been quite devastated by some of the things Harry has said,” a friend of the Prince of Wales told _Vanity Fair_ at the time. “He is such a gentle man and a dedicated father first and foremost. Knowing him, he’ll be feeling wretched and will take no joy or happiness in what’s going on within the family. But he will also want to seek a reconciliation. He is not vindictive at all, and he wants to make peace with Harry.”
> 
> Despite these strained royal relationships, following the birth of their daughter *Lili*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are turning their attention back to their own family and their new home in California. “This baby solidifies that they are creating roots here in the States,” a close friend of the couple told _People_, adding that the newborn “completes” their family and they “are so happy.” The decision to name the baby after Queen Elizabeth’s childhood nickname is also a tribute to Harry’s enduring connection to his grandmother, according to royal historian *Robert Lacey*. After the death of his mother Princess Diana, the monarch “was a sort of stepmother for both Harry and *William*,” Lacey explains. “We have all focused on her coaching of William as the future King, but we are realizing now the importance of the emotional bonds that she’s been able to establish with Harry, and their ability to talk to each other directly. That affection remains.”
> 
> After returning home from the hospital, Harry and Meghan video called the Queen to introduce her to her eleventh great-grandchild, and according to the source, “They were very excited and couldn’t wait to share that their daughter arrived.” They’re now both planning to take several months off from working on their Archewell Foundation to take care of their newborn and two-year-old, *Archie*. The couple’s friend, *Dean Stott*, told _People_, “Lili becomes the fourth generation of amazing, strong women in the family—behind Meghan, Diana and her Majesty the Queen. Harry and Meghan now have their complete family. It’s their time to be in the moment.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles
> 
> 
> But with the arrival of their new daughter, the couple are trying “to be in the moment” and focus on “their complete family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Er, lapse in contact with Thomas???  The other grandfather??  Oh, but he doesn’t have any money does he?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> As I mentioned earlier, I still contend it's all a big power play against Charles. Ever H&M's mouthpiece, today's _Vanity Fair_ article backs up my theory. They want to make it perfectly clear to everyone they just love the Queen, but with Charles they are playing the victim card again. IT'S ALL CHARLES' FAULT! EVERYTHING!! SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS



They are not very bright though, are they? He'll be pulling the strings soon enough (but also, I feel their biggest problem will be William...he won't forgive their a*sholiness).


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are not very bright though, are they? He'll be pulling the strings soon enough (but also, I feel their biggest problem will be William...he won't forgive their a*sholiness).


William has their measure for sure.  It’ll be the best scarfing ever


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Er, lapse in contact with Thomas???  The other grandfather??  Oh, but he doesn’t have any money does he?



Nope, got invested in a new face and a Mrs. degree for Meghan (completely unnecessary though, all it took was a pee in the woods!).


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are not very bright though, are they? He'll be pulling the strings soon enough (but also, I feel their biggest problem will be William...he won't forgive their a*sholiness).



I don't think they care. They are really pissed at Charles (him cutting off their free ride is my guess).


----------



## Lounorada

Saw this on Instagram today, made me instantly think of Meghan Narc-kle


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was 5yo British upperclass boy George, though. (not that I'd know how he'd word it in that case)


Yeah, that was my mistake. I thought they claimed Archie said it.


----------



## Lodpah

I look at her popularity this way she ain’t on no major magazine covers, not even a Demi Moore pregnancy like cover. As vain as she is she would have jumped on it but maybe just maybe she used a surrogate. There are people out there on take on the symptoms of someone pregnant even though they are not. I can’t remember what it’s called. Maybe her PR can’t afford the push to place her on those coveted magazines.


----------



## Clearblueskies

I don’t understand why there’s never any commentary about the way Meghan discarded her family on meeting Harry.  She’s been very callous in that regard, seems to me.  No Doria tribute to mark the one remaining family contact she has left is included in her daughters names.
What was Thomas Markles great, unforgivable offence exactly?  So he tried to make a few quid out of the Royal connection that suddenly dropped in his lap.  Not laudable sure, but how is it different from what his daughter’s been doing ever since she latched onto Harry?


----------



## 1LV

Clearblueskies said:


> I don’t understand why there’s never any commentary about the way Meghan discarded her family on meeting Harry.  She’s been very callous in that regard, seems to me.  No Doria tribute to mark the one remaining family contact she has left is included in her daughters names.
> What was Thomas Markles great, unforgivable offence exactly?  So he tried to make a few quid out of the Royal connection that suddenly dropped in his lap.  Not laudable sure, but how is it different from what his daughter’s been doing ever since she latched onto Harry?


Maybe the apple didn’t fall as far from the tree as she would have everyone - including herself - believe.


----------



## Hermes Zen

What I don't get is how BetterUp can promote H and get clients. Don't these professionals see what personal craziness H promotes? I would not respect someone with those traits.  Why would I want to hire H to help peak performances and mental fitness? As I mentioned pages ago, I see executives hiring H to say that they met with H and possibly as a side show. It sounds cruel but I don't get it.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...what? What the hell is "making my heart go pump-pump"? Was she suffering a stroke while finishing the book? Not sure if I want to laugh or cry about this rape of the English language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...look-Meghan-Markles-childrens-book-Bench.html*



I see H's wife's personal messages written in a few books sent to friends somehow managed to get photographed and sent to the press. Guess that whole wanting 'privacy thing' is still a work in progress.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...what? What the hell is "making my heart go pump-pump"? Was she suffering a stroke while finishing the book? Not sure if I want to laugh or cry about this rape of the English language.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...look-Meghan-Markles-childrens-book-Bench.html*


Lily has barely exited someone’s birth canal and she’s already being merched.


----------



## eunaddict

mellibelly said:


> Like a designer “inspired” handbag...more like a designer knockoff!



See, this is another reason why it's such a bad pick for a name. There's a reason none of the other great-grand children have Elizabeth (or derivatives) as their first name. Respect is probably one of them but also can you imagine having to live up to QE2 and being compared to her?


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> What I don't get is how BetterUp can promote H and get clients. Don't these professionals see what personal craziness H promotes? I would not respect someone with those traits.  Why would I want to hire H to help peak performances and mental fitness? As I mentioned pages ago, I see executives hiring H to say that they met with H and possibly as a side show. It sounds cruel but I don't get it.



Three months ago nobody had heard of BetterUp. By signing Harry they got a windfall of free publicity. They are counting on shaking down major corporations for big bucks in seminars and training. Time will tell if the ploy works.


----------



## xincinsin

Pivoine66 said:


> Does anyone know who paid for the dress/kaftan, her wardrobe in her about 18 months in UK as a so working Royal?


Prince Charles paid for her very expensive wardrobe, bill said to be a million GBP. It wouldn't be so bad if she at least looked good in her outfits, but she displayed crap taste many times. I'd say about equal numbers of hits and misses. She looked better in her merching photos on her blog, so it could be that she just can't figure out how to dress as a Royal (regal and no sexy overtones), and used the strategy that the more expensive it was, the more Royal it was.



CeeJay said:


> She better be *VERY* careful doing that crap .. because when it's done constantly, it becomes the "*crying wolf*" (_since we all know she would never truly follow-through on it_).


Oh, she would never really harm herself. It's just tactical. Staged cry fests. Weepy clinginess in bed. Strategically placed doctor's reports and bottles of pills or webpages opened to frightening browser history. Hazard will swallow it all unquestioningly, especially if she starts doing it near the kids. 

Those hints of suicide ideation are likely why Trevor Engelson was said to be broken-hearted when she dumped him by mail - probably really believed her and her protestations of undying love. 

IIRC one of the graphology experts commented that the marriage may last long-term if Hazard can carry on giving her everything she wants. Methane is probably using the Chinese narcissistic technique: first you weep, then you throw a tantrum, last resort threaten suicide. I had a close relative use that on me almost all my life. I finally told her to go ahead with Step 3 about 3 years ago. It has been bliss since then, although I suspect she is still using the technique on my sister.



justwatchin said:


> If only they had named her after Oprah! That would be so fitting considering the money grabs she has sent their way.


Oprah's money stays in Oprah's pocket, when it is big money. She's not going to leave them anything in her will.



TC1 said:


> The article was talking about George referring to himself as Archie (hence the manner of speaking) Which was a nickname (supposedly) that he called himself. Then H & M stole it for their child.


Thank you. I was getting confused by the comments.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I know most believe the name is referring to QE, but perhaps it is referring to this action figure or the online casino. Both provide a lil bit of plausible deniability   Once the media emphasizes these connections, the toxic tarts may decide to change the name.  











						Designer Lilibet
					

Epic Seven Wiki, Database, News, Strategy, and Community for the Epic Seven Player.




					gamepress.gg


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Great Title!  *BEL MOONEY: The trouble with Meghan Markle's book? It isn't for children - it's for Prince Harry*








						BEL MOONEY: The trouble with Meghan Markle's book?
					

BEL MOONEY: Many people believe they have a book within them, and (worse) usually imagine that a children's book is the easy-peasy option.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> If I were to believe the lie of Lilli being a nod to the name flower Doria used for young Nutmeg, how is that a tribute to Doria? The flower in this scenario is Nutmeg. So it’s a tribute to herself. “From MM, To MM”


Do you notice how often the media uses "nod" to describe what she does? I know her head isn't on straight, but it is so mean of them to harp on it, right?


----------



## Chanbal

The only thing with value in the book are the illustrations. Who would buy the audio version? 

_And the audio version of the novel, narrated by Meghan, was on sale yesterday for £10.49, making it more expensive word for word than Richard Osman's 12-hour audiobook of his bestselling book The Thursday Murder Club._









						Meghan Markle's book is consigned to half-price bargain sale
					

Meghan Markle's debut children's book The Bench was part of a 'buy one get one half price' deal at a WHSmith in Newcastle city centre - just hours after it was first released in the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Icyjade

Was she sitting on the said bench in this?



Vs



Anyone else who wondered why the bench looks so weathered when they just moved in? Furniture that came along with the house or artfully weathered?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The only thing with value in the book are the illustrations. *Who would buy the audio version? *
> 
> _And the audio version of the novel, narrated by Meghan, was on sale yesterday for £10.49, making it more expensive word for word than Richard Osman's 12-hour audiobook of his bestselling book The Thursday Murder Club._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's book is consigned to half-price bargain sale
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's debut children's book The Bench was part of a 'buy one get one half price' deal at a WHSmith in Newcastle city centre - just hours after it was first released in the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Someone who wanted to make fun of her overdramatic narration?


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> As I mentioned earlier, I still contend it's all a big power play against Charles. Ever H&M's mouthpiece, today's _Vanity Fair_ article backs up my theory. They want to make it perfectly clear to everyone they just love the Queen, but with Charles they are playing the victim card again. IT'S ALL CHARLES' FAULT! EVERYTHING!! SHOUT IT FROM THE ROOFTOPS
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles*
> A year and a half after stepping down as senior royals and moving to America, *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* are reportedly still troubled over the lack of support and communication they received from the royal family, particularly *Prince Charles*, but are trying to move forward by focusing on their newborn daughter and the family they’re building in California.
> 
> Princess Diana’s former voice coach, *Stewart Pearce*, explained to _Us Weekly_ that the couple’s fallout with the royal family began because, “They were ‘troubled’ by the lack of support received from the ‘men in grey suits,’ namely the household staff, and then the unfortunate lapse of contact with his father [Prince Charles].” He added, “Charles is well known for distancing himself from emotional heightened situations as he is a very caring, sensitive man, and therefore chooses to wait to let strong feelings settle down before responding.”
> 
> Harry has previously spoken about his tense relationship with his father in both his March interview with Oprah and on Dax Shepard’s podcast last month, saying that his father stopped taking his calls shortly before he and Meghan announced they were stepping down as senior royals, and that learning about the “pain and suffering” his parents experienced inspired him to try and break that cycle of harm for his own family. “I think Charles has been quite devastated by some of the things Harry has said,” a friend of the Prince of Wales told _Vanity Fair_ at the time. “He is such a gentle man and a dedicated father first and foremost. Knowing him, he’ll be feeling wretched and will take no joy or happiness in what’s going on within the family. But he will also want to seek a reconciliation. He is not vindictive at all, and he wants to make peace with Harry.”
> 
> Despite these strained royal relationships, following the birth of their daughter *Lili*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are turning their attention back to their own family and their new home in California. “This baby solidifies that they are creating roots here in the States,” a close friend of the couple told _People_, adding that the newborn “completes” their family and they “are so happy.” The decision to name the baby after Queen Elizabeth’s childhood nickname is also a tribute to Harry’s enduring connection to his grandmother, according to royal historian *Robert Lacey*. After the death of his mother Princess Diana, the monarch “was a sort of stepmother for both Harry and *William*,” Lacey explains. “We have all focused on her coaching of William as the future King, but we are realizing now the importance of the emotional bonds that she’s been able to establish with Harry, and their ability to talk to each other directly. That affection remains.”
> 
> After returning home from the hospital, Harry and Meghan video called the Queen to introduce her to her eleventh great-grandchild, and according to the source, “They were very excited and couldn’t wait to share that their daughter arrived.” They’re now both planning to take several months off from working on their Archewell Foundation to take care of their newborn and two-year-old, *Archie*. The couple’s friend, *Dean Stott*, told _People_, “Lili becomes the fourth generation of amazing, strong women in the family—behind Meghan, Diana and her Majesty the Queen. Harry and Meghan now have their complete family. It’s their time to be in the moment.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Troubled” by the “Lapse of Contact” With Prince Charles
> 
> 
> But with the arrival of their new daughter, the couple are trying “to be in the moment” and focus on “their complete family.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


From the looks of recent news reports, Dean Stott sounds like he is making money off his connection to Harry. Methane's type of people?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh...this, my dear people, is the pregnancy Dior caftan she had made to wear to a dinner in Morocco for what, 90 mins? And. It. Cost. 90000. British Pounds Sterling.


Is this Morocco trip the one that she was told to go on when she was planning to skip town to attend the Oscars? 



Lodpah said:


> I look at her popularity this way she ain’t on no major magazine covers, not even a Demi Moore pregnancy like cover. As vain as she is she would have jumped on it but maybe just maybe she used a surrogate. There are people out there on take on the symptoms of someone pregnant even though they are not. I can’t remember what it’s called. Maybe her PR can’t afford the push to place her on those coveted magazines.


Phantom pregnancy or pseudocyesis: supposedly a rare condition, but we all know how special she is. Maybe H is also one of those daddies who will have sympathetic lactation.



Icyjade said:


> Was she sitting on the said bench in this?
> View attachment 5105118
> 
> 
> Vs
> View attachment 5105119
> 
> 
> Anyone else who wondered why the bench looks so weathered when they just moved in? Furniture that came along with the house or artfully weathered?


If it didn't get merched, then it came with the house.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Someone who wanted to make fun of her overdramatic narration?


DM will likely provide enough samples for entertainment. 

The book is showing as a Best Seller on am*zon, I wonder how many copies the Arch*w*ll Foundation purchased to donate to schools, libraries... around the world.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> DM will likely provide enough samples for entertainment.
> 
> The book is showing as a Best Seller on am*zon, I wonder how many copies the Arch*w*ll Foundation purchased to donate to schools, libraries... around the world.


IIRC the stans set up a Buy-Bench-For-Your-Library donation site.


----------



## Annawakes

Golly, does she have *that* many stans though?  I seriously wonder what kind of people they are.  Are they all tweens or what?  Grown women?  I don’t use any other forums or sites other than this one, and I don’t want to expend the energy to find out.

Also, everything they do, everything she does, is just so hilarious.  So stupid and disgusting I just laugh and laugh.  The book spine….and the audio version???  Gimme a break


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> IIRC the stans set up a Buy-Bench-For-Your-Library donation site.


haha, bingo!
That explains the Best Seller...


----------



## Lodpah

I want to say Thomas Marks is troubled by being discarded by Mm. 




			Redirect Notice


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> From the looks of recent news reports, Dean Stott sounds like he is making money off his connection to Harry. Methane's type of people?
> 
> 
> Is this Morocco trip the one that she was told to go on when she was planning to skip town to attend the Oscars?
> 
> 
> Phantom pregnancy or pseudocyesis: supposedly a rare condition, but we all know how special she is. Maybe H is also one of those daddies who will have sympathetic lactation.
> 
> 
> If it didn't get merched, then it came with the house.


Check out the Diana/Charles on the bench. It’s creepy, these two copying them.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Golly, does she have *that* many stans though?  I seriously wonder what kind of people they are.  Are they all tweens or what?  Grown women?  I don’t use any other forums or sites other than this one, and I don’t want to expend the energy to find out.
> 
> Also, everything they do, everything she does, is just so hilarious.  So stupid and disgusting I just laugh and laugh.  The book spine….and the audio version???  Gimme a break


Works both ways. If you only go on websites that are pro-Sussex, you would probably open your wallet. I'm sure SS has identified media outlets which are either pro or neutral and they feed them enough positive spin to ensure the echo chamber keeps on running.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> IIRC the stans set up a Buy-Bench-For-Your-Library donation site.











						#SussexSquadBookDrive - Gift a Copy of Meghan Markle's The Bench
					

Let's do some good to celebrate the announcement of Meghan Markle's new children's book The Bench!  Buy a copy of The Bench or any other children's book from the options at the bottom of this page, and then donate it to an organization of your choosing, such as a school, library, hospital, or...




					bookshop.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> #SussexSquadBookDrive - Gift a Copy of Meghan Markle's The Bench
> 
> 
> Let's do some good to celebrate the announcement of Meghan Markle's new children's book The Bench!  Buy a copy of The Bench or any other children's book from the options at the bottom of this page, and then donate it to an organization of your choosing, such as a school, library, hospital, or...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bookshop.org



Add this to your cart, too.  Anyone know the author, Rachel Rose?  




*Description*
From acting, to providing humanitarian aid to those in need, to marrying a prince. Meghan Markle's life may sound like a fairy tale, but it is also filled with a lot of hard work. Find out how this exceptional woman has done it all.
*Product Details*
Price  $26.99
Publisher. Bearcub Books
Publish Date  August 01, 2020
*Pages  24*
Dimensions  7.8 X 7.5 X 0.3 inches | 0.5 pounds
Language English
Type Library Binding
EAN/UPC 9781642809794
*BISAC Categories:*
Readers - Beginner
Biography & Autobiography - Women
Girls & Women


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> I want to say Thomas Marks is troubled by being discarded by Mm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice


Thomas and Samantha are very quiet, I wonder if they received a  visit from the Harkles's people.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Add this to your cart, too.  Anyone know the author, Rachel Rose?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5105161
> 
> *Description*
> From acting, to providing humanitarian aid to those in need, to marrying a prince. Meghan Markle's life may sound like a fairy tale, but it is also filled with a lot of hard work. Find out how this exceptional woman has done it all.
> *Product Details*
> Price  $26.99
> Publisher. Bearcub Books
> Publish Date  August 01, 2020
> *Pages  24*
> Dimensions  7.8 X 7.5 X 0.3 inches | 0.5 pounds
> Language English
> Type Library Binding
> EAN/UPC 9781642809794
> *BISAC Categories:*
> Readers - Beginner
> Biography & Autobiography - Women
> Girls & Women


I bet that Rachel Rose is a pseudonym for Rachel Flower and her loyal servant Scoobie-doo...


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> #SussexSquadBookDrive - Gift a Copy of Meghan Markle's The Bench
> 
> 
> Let's do some good to celebrate the announcement of Meghan Markle's new children's book The Bench!  Buy a copy of The Bench or any other children's book from the options at the bottom of this page, and then donate it to an organization of your choosing, such as a school, library, hospital, or...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bookshop.org


It's amazing! I wonder how many copies they donated to Salvation Army, Goodwill... 
I love The Little Free Library, it's such a great idea. I have some books to donate this week and I hope the little bookcases will not be stuffed with benches.

"_We encourage you to contact places within your own community that may accept book donations, such as schools, libraries, shelters, and hospitals, so that we can spread the love to as many locations as possible!  In addition, here are a few wonderful children's organizations that welcome--and need--your support:
The Little Free Library is the world's largest book-sharing program.  Use this map to find a Little Free Library in your community!_"


----------



## creme fraiche

Just heard on Radio 4 that Buck Palace are saying that Two Numpties did NOT pre inform the Queen about using her pet name for their daughter daughter despite their "friends" (aka, their PR) saying that they first got permission from her.  I am even more disgusted.


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone know the author, Rachel Rose


Nom de plume of Meghan- Rachel (Flower of Doria)?


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> I bet that Rachel Rose is a pseudonym for Rachel Flower and her loyal servant Scoobie-doo...


I see I should read posts before replying.


----------



## rose60610

Prince Philip's body was barely cold when Meghan sent a wreath already in merch mode full of symbolism detail of every ingredient. I mean, one can't simply say: "With sympathy", right? Doesn't everyone's sympathy card/flowers/wreath come packaged with symbolism explanations?

So.....WHY the delay in explaining that "Flower" was Doria's nickname for Meghan? A post 20 or so pages back said it best: they had to spin the blowback on "Lilibet". And pull SOMETHING out of their a$$e$. They really must have thought the entire world was going to engage them in loving embrace over "Lilibet".

If M&H were already in divorce mode, I could see Meghan having added "Wilhelmina" as another middle name (feminine version of "William") so when introduced to Bill Gates, she could say that he inspired her so much that she named her daughter after him. I've given up on guessing to what lengths Meghan would go for self promotion. NOTHING is off limits for her.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Add this to your cart, too.  Anyone know the author, Rachel Rose?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5105161
> 
> *Description*
> From acting, to providing humanitarian aid to those in need, to marrying a prince. Meghan Markle's life may sound like a fairy tale, but it is also filled with a lot of hard work. Find out how this exceptional woman has done it all.
> *Product Details*
> Price  $26.99
> Publisher. Bearcub Books
> Publish Date  August 01, 2020
> *Pages  24*
> Dimensions  7.8 X 7.5 X 0.3 inches | 0.5 pounds
> Language English
> Type Library Binding
> EAN/UPC 9781642809794
> *BISAC Categories:*
> Readers - Beginner
> Biography & Autobiography - Women
> Girls & Women


There is a Rachel Rose who is an award-winning poet, no sign of children's books in her works.

I think this Rachel Rose who writes a lot of children's books under the Bearcub imprint does not exist. It is a collective pseudonym, meaning Bearcub books pays many people to ghostwrite these. That's how the Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys books were published: many authors but all the stories were published under one name.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal   LCC is on to something with the birth announcement.  They had 2 full days to get the wording right. The ‘surrogate’ door is wide open.  Plus, Doria wasn’t even there.  Hmmm.


The Royal way:





The Sussex way:


----------



## xincinsin

creme fraiche said:


> Just heard on Radio 4 that Buck Palace are saying that Two Numpties did NOT pre inform the Queen about using her pet name for their daughter daughter despite their "friends" (aka, their PR) saying that they first got permission from her.  I am even more disgusted.


Unfortunately, it just says "palace source".








						Harry and Meghan did not ask Queen to use Lilibet name - Palace source
					

But a spokesperson for Prince Harry and Meghan insists the Queen was asked, and was supportive.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Thomas and Samantha are very quiet, I wonder if they received a  visit from the Harkles's people.



Thomas isnt quiet!!!

this interview is coming up  in Australia...


----------



## Clearblueskies

creme fraiche said:


> Just heard on Radio 4 that Buck Palace are saying that Two Numpties did NOT pre inform the Queen about using her pet name for their daughter daughter despite their "friends" (aka, their PR) saying that they first got permission from her.  I am even more disgusted.


I’m disgusted too - shameless opportunism and greed from Brand Sussex


xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately, it just says "palace source".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan did not ask Queen to use Lilibet name - Palace source
> 
> 
> But a spokesperson for Prince Harry and Meghan insists the Queen was asked, and was supportive.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


I heard it on the BBC news this morning.  They said they had spoken to a BP source.  The Queen must be very angry/upset for this to be being aired.  Shame on Harry and Meghan for lying.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately, it just says "palace source".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan did not ask Queen to use Lilibet name - Palace source
> 
> 
> But a spokesperson for Prince Harry and Meghan insists the Queen was asked, and was supportive.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


Lady C in her latest report from Castle Goring says her Royal sources tell her the reaction to ”Lilibet” was COLD FURY. She points out however what we know: the RF will not let on and, of course, this is what Methane counts on.

Lady C was also furious, she compared Methane to a notorious French entertainer, Le Petomane, famous for his farting. He was once the highest paid act at the Moulin Rouge with his flatulist act. Lady C said Methane’s insulting actions were the equivalent of farting in the face of the RF, and at one point could hardly find enough words to describe her disgust of Haz and Methane. She mocks Sunshine Sachs, they must loath her, she tells it straight.


----------



## mellibelly

My since passed on sweet pug’s middle name was Le Petomane because of his tooting issue

He was called Alfie though his given name was Alfred. Even my dog was named properly!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> My since passed on sweet pug’s middle name was Le Petomane because of his tooting issue
> 
> He was called Alfie though his given name was Alfred. Even my dog was named properly!


Le Petomane had such amazing sphincter control he could “toot” La Marseilles and fart at will. He only retired when age caught up with him and his muscle tone deteriorated.

Up until today listening to Lady C I had never heard of him. Google has all kinds of links, there have been several movies about him.

Lady C was very clear: Meaghan puts out hot odious air, and hearing Lady C’s drawn out pronouncements in her very proper manner makes it even more entertaining. Like others, I listen to her while doing chores.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Lady C in her latest report from Castle Goring says her Royal sources tell her the reaction to ”Lilibet” was COLD FURY. She points out however what we know: the RF will not let on and, of course, this is what Methane counts on.



This is pretty much what I thought to myself. Ugh, the longer I see this drama unfold, the more the only expression to describe her is "POS" in my mind. 

(then again...where's Harry? Is he so drugged up he can't find one clear thought anymore, does he want to kill his grandmother by being as unbearable as possible, or what is his freaking deal? He knew she would not feel "honoured".)


----------



## xincinsin

I have so many theories running in my mind:
1. They are still throwing tantrums at not getting half-in/half-out, so they are purposely needling the RF to punish them.
2. They think that if they act up enough, they can bully the RF into submission. It didn't work so far, so they've upped the ante and are going after HMTQ herself.
3. They are stupid and arrogant, and they think no one will fact-check them because no matter what they say, Sunshine Sachs will twist and spin it to sound good.
Maybe they are all true. When will their stans wake up?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I have so many theories running in my mind:
> 1. They are still throwing tantrums at not getting half-in/half-out, so they are purposely needling the RF to punish them.
> 2. They think that if they act up enough, they can bully the RF into submission. It didn't work so far, so they've upped the ante and are going after HMTQ herself.
> 3. They are stupid and arrogant, and they think no one will fact-check them because no matter what they say, Sunshine Sachs will twist and spin it to sound good.
> Maybe they are all true. When will their stans wake up?



Those theories seem very plausible.  Here’s another one:
#4. When Hazz goes to the statue reveal, QE has invited him to _lunch.  _That may be when all the papers get signed - renounce titles, renounce succession, renounce any & all land holdings.


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those theories seem very plausible.  Here’s another one:
> #4. When Hazz goes to the statue reveal, QE has invited him to _lunch.  _That may be when all the papers get signed - renounce titles, renounce succession, renounce any & all land holdings.


  I don’t think it’ll be a cosy chat!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those theories seem very plausible.  Here’s another one:
> #4. When Hazz goes to the statue reveal, QE has invited him to _lunch.  _That may be when all the papers get signed - renounce titles, renounce succession, renounce any & all land holdings.


Oh, I hope so!
Let's see if they will knuckle down and make a honest living after that. If they weren't so keen to be with the A-listers and lead a Kardashian lifestyle, the money Diana and the Queen Mother left Hazard would be more than enough to last them a lifetime.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately, it just says "palace source".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan did not ask Queen to use Lilibet name - Palace source
> 
> 
> But a spokesperson for Prince Harry and Meghan insists the Queen was asked, and was supportive.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



BBC, 'Palace source' means _their (usual)_ Palace source. Even leaving the Bashir fiasco aside, the source is likely to be legitimate and would have come from an official Palace rep.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Lady CC says Harry did mention a while ago they wanted to name the girl after the Queen...only that the Queen, like any sane person, assumed it would be Elizabeth.

What kind of sick, twisted person would do that? I am not even surprised Raptor would, but I have simply NO explanation as to why Harry hates his grandmother so much. Not even his mother's untimely death, sorry.


----------



## papertiger

Recollections may vary 









						Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
					

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*"Harry claims he DID tell Queen new baby would be called Lilibet after senior palace source categorically tells BBC Prince and Meghan did NOT consult the Queen about naming their daughter". *


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Lady CC says Harry did mention a while ago they wanted to name the girl after the Queen...only that the Queen, like any sane person, assumed it would be Elizabeth.
> 
> What kind of sick, twisted person would do that? I am not even surprised Raptor would, but I have simply NO explanation as to why Harry hates his grandmother so much. Not even his mother's untimely death, sorry.



Hating and using are different. 

He obviously got away with far too much when he was younger.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Hating and using are different.
> 
> He obviously got away with far too much when he was younger.



But the deception. I just can't.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those theories seem very plausible.  Here’s another one:
> #4. When Hazz goes to the statue reveal, QE has invited him to _lunch.  _That may be when all the papers get signed - renounce titles, renounce succession, renounce any & all land holdings.



I hope he is expecting sympathy and understanding from HMTQ and gets the shock of his life and is told OUT means OUT and he's gone too far now.

I think M thinks HMTQ is a simple, old lady. I hope H is presented with the cold, hard fact that if _Parliament, due to public pressure,_ start the process of removing their tittles; HMTQ can't stop this. (This is my understanding but, as ever, stand corrected if wrong )

H&M need to be told that from now on every single press release or interview or anything they do will be responded to by a BP statement saying *"Harry & Meghan (no titles) are private individuals and BP has no comment on their private life as it does not relates to the Monarchy and they are not senior working royals"*

There is IMO no way back for them now in the UK until William is King - it needs 20 year time at the very least.
Preferably when they know a bit about parenting !

Also, I disagree with the general clamour for renouncing the Sussex titles unless he also renounces PRINCE because Meghan will then be* Princess Henry and that is truly, truly unacceptable to me.*

Tape the meeting and offer him £25 million (plus the diamond earrings they have already stolen) to go away and then leak his response !

And make sure NO-ONE in the RF EVER uses the baby's full name.

I bet they would not have used Lilibet if PP was still alive. I presume they "asked" HMTQ in the zoom call on Friday as in, "we're calling her L - hope you don't mind" Pretty sure PP would have turned the air blue had he ben there.


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> Also, I disagree with the general clamour for renouncing the Sussex titles unless he also renounces PRINCE because Meghan will then be* Princess Henry and that is truly, truly unacceptable to me.*


What she wants is to be Princess Meghan. Deplorable excuse for a human being.

Some of their stans are arguing that Methane cannot be blamed for what is happening. Hazard is an adult and should be responsible for his own actions. IMO, Methane is that voice in his ear urging him on, the hand slipping the knife into his grasp. Sure, she will weep and cry victim, but I think Hazard might have left the RF without her urging, but he would not have turned on his family without her influence.


----------



## Lenna.V

Clearblueskies said:


> Meghan is never going to stop hustling for attention and cash



Well I might add, so is Harry. I came to realize how much he likes publicity now.


----------



## RAINDANCE

xincinsin said:


> *What she wants is to be Princess Meghan*. Deplorable excuse for a human being.
> 
> Some of their stans are arguing that Methane cannot be blamed for what is happening. Hazard is an adult and should be responsible for his own actions. IMO, Methane is that voice in his ear urging him on, the hand slipping the knife into his grasp. Sure, she will weep and cry victim, but I think Hazard might have left the RF without her urging, but he would not have turned on his family without her influence.


 
I agree and that is so, so problematic because then Meghan will be the only Princess wife, and at a quick glance looks to outrank both Camilla and Kate as Duchess. Which is presumably what she wants.

The HRH needs to be properly stripped and the Queen can do this I think ?

Currently, Camilla is actually Princess of Wales but out of respect to Diana and sensitive to the feelings of the British public does not go by that title. It is unfortunate that we don't use "Crown Prince" in the BRF as that clearly denotes who is who.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> Oh, I hope so!
> Let's see if they will knuckle down and make a honest living after that. If they weren't so keen to be with the A-listers and lead a Kardashian lifestyle, the money Diana and the Queen Mother left Hazard would be more than enough to last them a lifetime.


Thats difficulty - they don’t have any skills, and they don’t have the work ethic to make an independent living. Flogging the RF connection to the US is all they have, unless Charles picks up their bills on condition they stfu.  I don’t think he can afford them, and Meghan will never stop blabbing about herself, so here we are.  Stuck.


papertiger said:


> Recollections may vary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"Harry claims he DID tell Queen new baby would be called Lilibet after senior palace source categorically tells BBC Prince and Meghan did NOT consult the Queen about naming their daughter". *


I know who my money’s on


----------



## xincinsin

Lenna.V said:


> Well I might add, so is Harry. I came to realize how much he likes publicity now.


I see him as weak-willed. He will do whatever the people around him are doing or egging him on to do. He wants to belong. And hence the nudity in Vegas, the Nazi uniform, his party lifestyle. His greatest influence now is Methane, and supposedly her mother. And they want money and fame. We're going to have to suffer Her Royal Heinous for a long time.

In case you think this is farfetched, I had a subordinate like him. Put her with a team of hardworking people and she too is hardworking. My boss really liked her. Then she was transferred to another unit where the team leader's aim in life was to do as little as possible and push work away as much as possible. My boss couldn't believe the change in her and how unhelpful she became. Spineless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> I hope he is expecting sympathy and understanding from HMTQ and gets the shock of his life and is told OUT means OUT and he's gone too far now.
> 
> I think M thinks HMTQ is a simple, old lady. I hope H is presented with the cold, hard fact that if _Parliament, due to public pressure,_ start the process of removing their tittles; HMTQ can't stop this. (This is my understanding but, as ever, stand corrected if wrong )
> 
> H&M need to be told that from now on every single press release or interview or anything they do will be responded to by a BP statement saying *"Harry & Meghan (no titles) are private individuals and BP has no comment on their private life as it does not relates to the Monarchy and they are not senior working royals"*
> 
> There is IMO no way back for them now in the UK until William is King - it needs 20 year time at the very least.
> Preferably when they know a bit about parenting !
> 
> Also, I disagree with the general clamour for renouncing the Sussex titles unless he also renounces PRINCE because Meghan will then be* Princess Henry and that is truly, truly unacceptable to me.*
> 
> Tape the meeting and offer him £25 million (plus the diamond earrings they have already stolen) to go away and then leak his response !
> 
> And make sure NO-ONE in the RF EVER uses the baby's full name.
> 
> I bet they would not have used Lilibet if PP was still alive. I presume they "asked" HMTQ in the zoom call on Friday as in, "we're calling her L - hope you don't mind" Pretty sure PP would have turned the air blue had he ben there.



Since he was born a Prince and will always the son of the next King, can he give that up? Maybe the BRF can stop him from using the word _Prince_, but won‘t he always be one?  IDK - QE had to deal with her uncle and Wallis, surely she can handle this jerk. The best way, IMO, would be to cut the finances. Surely by now he has talked all the trash he is going to talk. Surely his employers see what we all see and realize the toxic tarts won‘t bring in too many viewers or clicks. As for the baby’s name, sadly, they have saddled this person with a casino‘s name and an anime character.  Sure, sure, they can _claim_ it’s an honor for QE, but QE never used it. Only a few people ever used it for her - maybe 3 or 4. But, a casino? An anime character?  How common can they be. It’s a cheap shot.

ETA:  seems this is a developing story:


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> *I don’t believe Meghan was or ever will be a true suicide risk*. I think it’s an act she plays for sympathy and to get what she wants.
> 
> Meghan does not have a self-harming personality. She absolutely loves herself. Now Harry on the other hand…



I don't think so either, more likely she drives others to suicide....


----------



## Lenna.V

xincinsin said:


> I see him as weak-willed. He will do whatever the people around him are doing or egging him on to do. He wants to belong. And hence the nudity in Vegas, the Nazi uniform, his party lifestyle. His greatest influence now is Methane, and supposedly her mother. And they want money and fame. We're going to have to suffer Her Royal Heinous for a long time.
> 
> In case you think this is farfetched, I had a subordinate like him. Put her with a team of hardworking people and she too is hardworking. My boss really liked her. Then she was transferred to another unit where the team leader's aim in life was to do as little as possible and push work away as much as possible. My boss couldn't believe the change in her and how unhelpful she became. Spineless.



Yeah, he is spineless and a man child. So they both would do anything to keep themselves relevant, sadly.


----------



## duna

I love this meme 

Translated in English: "To thank them I'll bomb California"

Sorry for all you CA ladies and gents


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> View attachment 5105523
> 
> I love this meme
> 
> Translated in English: "To thank them I'll bomb California"
> 
> Sorry for all you CA ladies and gents


Quite politically incorrect, but I think HMTQ can hold on for a while. Methane's fart bombs are poisoning the Cali air already.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@AussieWithLove
·
2h
Replying to
@RoyalReporter
I think "Most may think" is more accurate than "some" from the looks of social media and comments on media articles. Most intelligent people know bull **** when they smell it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really?  Wow.









						Meghan Markle's 'indispensable' mum Doria's role with Lilibet amid absent royals
					

Doria Ragland has proven herself to be a very 'hands on' grandmother with Archie, even reportedly taking £5,000 grandparenting lessons, so will also play a vital part in her newborn grandchild's life




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## duna

xincinsin said:


> *Quite politically incorrect*, but I think HMTQ can hold on for a while. Methane's fart bombs are poisoning the Cali air already.



LOL, there's not much political correctness here in Italy, satyre reigns!


----------



## Clearblueskies

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really?  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'indispensable' mum Doria's role with Lilibet amid absent royals
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland has proven herself to be a very 'hands on' grandmother with Archie, even reportedly taking £5,000 grandparenting lessons, so will also play a vital part in her newborn grandchild's life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Doria is the nanny


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, Hazzie, through Omid, claims the palace is lying. Right.   
always the ****s$ow with the toxic tarts


_Today

*· 6.30am*: BBC Radio 4's Today programme quotes a Buckingham Palace source saying that Harry and Meghan didn't ask permission from the Queen to use the name 'Lilibet'

*· 8am:* Harry and Meghan's biographer Omid Scobie quotes a Sussex source saying the Queen was 'the first family Harry called after Lilibet's birth and during that conversation, he shared the couple's hope of naming their daughter in her honour'

*· 9am:* A palace source tells ITV News that they are not denying the BBC's report this morning_









						Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
					

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gelbergirl

T - 21 days until Diana’s birthday observation July 1


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazzie, through Omid, claims the palace is lying. Right.
> always the ****s$ow with the toxic tarts



There is a vast difference between clearly and formally asking HMTQ's permission which they could have done at any time since the positive pregnancy test in September and the birth in June to springing it on her in a zoom call.

It would not surprise me if Harry spoke such nonsense word salad HMTQ could not understand what he was asking!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really?  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'indispensable' mum Doria's role with Lilibet amid absent royals
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland has proven herself to be a very 'hands on' grandmother with Archie, even reportedly taking £5,000 grandparenting lessons, so will also play a vital part in her newborn grandchild's life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



5000 pounds grandparent lessons? To make up for the parenting experience she didn't have or what? I just can't with these people.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really?  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'indispensable' mum Doria's role with Lilibet amid absent royals
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland has proven herself to be a very 'hands on' grandmother with Archie, even reportedly taking £5,000 grandparenting lessons, so will also play a vital part in her newborn grandchild's life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


That's lessons to break generational trauma so that Doria doesn't accidentally pass it on to the babies? Never knew that you needed a  5000 GBP psychiatric reset to be a grandparent.


----------



## Pivoine66

xincinsin said:


> Prince Charles paid for her very expensive wardrobe, bill said to be a million GBP. It wouldn't be so bad if she at least looked good in her outfits, but she displayed crap taste many times. I'd say about equal numbers of hits and misses. She looked better in her merching photos on her blog, so it could be that she just can't figure out how to dress as a Royal (regal and no sexy overtones), and used the strategy that the more expensive it was, the more Royal it was.
> 
> 
> Oh, she would never really harm herself. It's just tactical. Staged cry fests. Weepy clinginess in bed. Strategically placed doctor's reports and bottles of pills or webpages opened to frightening browser history. Hazard will swallow it all unquestioningly, especially if she starts doing it near the kids.
> 
> Those hints of suicide ideation are likely why Trevor Engelson was said to be broken-hearted when she dumped him by mail - probably really believed her and her protestations of undying love.
> 
> IIRC one of the graphology experts commented that the marriage may last long-term if Hazard can carry on giving her everything she wants. Methane is probably using the Chinese narcissistic technique: first you weep, then you throw a tantrum, last resort threaten suicide. I had a close relative use that on me almost all my life. I finally told her to go ahead with Step 3 about 3 years ago. It has been bliss since then, although I suspect she is still using the technique on my sister.
> 
> 
> Oprah's money stays in Oprah's pocket, when it is big money. She's not going to leave them anything in her will.
> 
> 
> Thank you. I was getting confused by the comments.


Thank you for your answer, Xincinsin. I am - once again - deeply shocked by the behaviour of the two.
When will they finally be freed from the burden of carrying the titles of British Royals so that they can enjoy their private lives in California?


----------



## EverSoElusive

The verdict is in, we are obsessed with MoM. She's minding her own business and we're still after her 

ETA: Keep swiping left so you can see the other two slides.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> Thomas and Samantha are very quiet, I wonder if they received a  visit from the Harkles's people.


Isn't Thomas doing an interview with Australian Sky News? I'm sure I saw a teaser for it a few days ago.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Add this to your cart, too.  Anyone know the author, Rachel Rose?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5105161
> 
> *Description*
> From acting, to providing humanitarian aid to those in need, to marrying a prince. Meghan Markle's life may sound like a fairy tale, but it is also filled with a lot of hard work. Find out how this exceptional woman has done it all.
> *Product Details*
> Price  $26.99
> Publisher. Bearcub Books
> Publish Date  August 01, 2020
> *Pages  24*
> Dimensions  7.8 X 7.5 X 0.3 inches | 0.5 pounds
> Language English
> Type Library Binding
> EAN/UPC 9781642809794
> *BISAC Categories:*
> Readers - Beginner
> Biography & Autobiography - Women
> Girls & Women


Looks something that would have been available during book fair week when I was in *junior high.

*13-14 years old audience


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5104447
> 
> 
> This is a first for me. Only the author’s name is on the spine, not the book’s title. Not even the illustrator. Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bench by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex review — lacking a good story and basic rhythm
> 
> 
> Writing good picture books for small children is far harder than it looks. A fact only reinforced after reading The Bench, the debut from Meghan, the Duchess of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


I'm writing I can't believe it but yes, I can. Just like I can't believe they named the new baby Lilibet but didn't name her Doria after Meghan's mother, you know, Meghan's black heritage being of such importance to her and all. But yes, again I can. If what I read of Doria elsewhere is true, she doesn't mind though. No free milk give-away from this mother daughter duo 


Why do these two still have titles and royal privileges?!? I think if the BRF don't do something about that very soon, the public opinion is going to change from support to open disdain for them. You need to show strength so bring forth Anne if you can't do it, Charles. I think there's maybe some blackmail going on and if so I despise Harry on a yet again newfound level. Unless your family has committed crimes against you, if you just don't like them, you move away from home and build your own life. Especially if you're a bearded middle aged alleged father of two.

I'm trying to wean myself off of this thread but "they" don't make it easy


----------



## drifter

I can't believe crap like this got published for a 500K advance!!!  Nothing makes any sense and her grammar is atrocious!  

From the dailymail article:
This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin >  conceived or born on a bench?
From here you will rest, see the growth of our boy > "from here you will rest"?!  Sounds like he's lying in a grave
You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter > commands from Queen Methane
When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order > how can life "feels in shambles"?  Life should be "in shambles" or "life feels like its in shambles", like her grammar.
You'll sit on his bench, as his giving tree > ooooo....money-giving tree?
He'll feel happiness, sorrow, one day be heartbroken. You'll tell him 'I love you,' those words always spoken > can you stop prophesying heartbreak for whoever "he" is???
Looking out at my love and our beautiful boy. And here in the window I'll have tears of great joy…>


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am surprised she didn’t do all the morning chat shows promoting the book.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Icyjade said:


> Was she sitting on the said bench in this?
> View attachment 5105118
> 
> 
> Vs
> View attachment 5105119
> 
> 
> Anyone else who wondered why the bench looks so weathered when they just moved in? Furniture that came along with the house or artfully weathered?


I think it was aged up to make them look more down to earth   
speaking of alterations- her face is completely unrecognisable here! She looks more like rhony’s Sonja Morgan than the woman in the infamous wedding dress.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

needlv said:


> Thomas isnt quiet!!!
> 
> this interview is coming up  in Australia...



I didn't see your post before posting today about a coming interview, but yes, thank you, this is the teaser I saw. I think I'll actually watch this one


----------



## xincinsin

drifter said:


> I can't believe crap like this got published for a 500K advance!!!  Nothing makes any sense and her grammar is atrocious!
> 
> From the dailymail article:
> This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin >  conceived or born on a bench?


  
I had the same thought: wench on the bench. 
Anyone got pics of the benches at Nott Cott or Frogmore? 
The next book for the new babe will be 
The Swing. 
This is your swing, 
Where we had our fling
Doing that thing
That keeps my heart pumping


----------



## Aimee3

Crass as this may be, every time they do something so despicable, I can’t help it but this thought just won’t go away: She must be damn amazing in bed to have H under her thumb.
Slinking back under my rock….


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Crass as this may be, every time they do something so despicable, I can’t help it but this thought just won’t go away: She must be damn amazing in bed to have H under her thumb.
> Slinking back under my rock….


Practice makes perfect


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Dunno about LOA but women here in the UK get up to 12 months maternity leave max.


people can correct me if I'm wrong but here most companies I think give a few months to the mother but not to both parents


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> Like a designer “inspired” handbag...more like a designer knockoff!


Don’t do Michael Kors dirty like that! JK


bag-mania said:


> This is the only "mother" I know who called her daughter _my flower._
> 
> View attachment 5104881


I’ve never seen this movie but I like the witch’s hair better tbh


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh...this, my dear people, is the pregnancy Dior caftan she had made to wear to a dinner in Morocco for what, 90 mins? And. It. Cost. 90000. British Pounds Sterling.


I usually love Grazia Churi’s Dior so I’m choosing to believe she’s also trolling the raptor. She’s one of us!


QueenofWrapDress said:


> But that's because his first name was actually Albert. Albert Frederick Arthur George.


Ah thanks I forgot.


Lodpah said:


> I look at her popularity this way she ain’t on no major magazine covers, not even a Demi Moore pregnancy like cover. As vain as she is she would have jumped on it but maybe just maybe she used a surrogate. There are people out there on take on the symptoms of someone pregnant even though they are not. I can’t remember what it’s called. Maybe her PR can’t afford the push to place her on those coveted magazines.


Hey! She was in the prestigious People wasn’t she? That’s basically the same as vogue lol


Clearblueskies said:


> Doria is the nanny


They wouldn’t dare let someone the media might listen to into the inner sanctum. No, the nannies are an endless stream of inexperienced girls who get fired before they can find Bluebeard’s secret room I think.  





SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm writing I can't believe it but yes, I can. Just like I can't believe they named the new baby Lilibet but didn't name her Doria after Meghan's mother, you know, Meghan's black heritage being of such importance to her and all. But yes, again I can. If what I read of Doria elsewhere is true, she doesn't mind though. No free milk give-away from this mother daughter duo
> 
> 
> Why do these two still have titles and royal privileges?!? I think if the BRF don't do something about that very soon, the public opinion is going to change from support to open disdain for them. You need to show strength so bring forth Anne if you can't do it, Charles. I think there's maybe some blackmail going on and if so I despise Harry on a yet again newfound level. Unless your family has committed crimes against you, if you just don't like them, you move away from home and build your own life. Especially if you're a bearded middle aged alleged father of two.
> 
> I'm trying to wean myself off of this thread but "they" don't make it easy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



I can't go there


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Golly, does she have *that* many stans though?  I seriously wonder what kind of people they are.  Are they all tweens or what?  Grown women?  I don’t use any other forums or sites other than this one, and I don’t want to expend the energy to find out.
> 
> Also, everything they do, everything she does, is just so hilarious.  So stupid and disgusting I just laugh and laugh.  The book spine….and the audio version???  Gimme a break


the stans act like teenagers but some of them are grown working women


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



those were nasty tweets
on the one hand this is a bit surprising as she was the founder of the firm.  but she didn't lose her job - just got suspended


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is pretty much what I thought to myself. Ugh, the longer I see this drama unfold, the more the only expression to describe her is "POS" in my mind.
> 
> (then again...where's Harry? Is he so drugged up he can't find one clear thought anymore, does he want to kill his grandmother by being as unbearable as possible, or what is his freaking deal? He knew she would not feel "honoured".)


I don't know if he knew.....If Meghan said it was a good idea he probably thought it was.  I could be wrong but it seems to be that she is probably pulling the strings and he just goes along with whatever she wants


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely someone asked why they were naming their daughter after a casino and anime character? 
Well, this explains it:

_What seems clear is that the Queen and the Royal Family knew about the name before the rest of the world were told, but it is much less clear whether permission to use Lilibet was sought in advance.









						Did Harry and Meghan ask the Queen's permission to use Lilibet for their baby? | ITV News
					

Lilibet is a very personal nickname, which was first used by the Queen’s own parents when she was a small girl.




					www.itv.com
				



_


----------



## Annawakes

Has this been posted?
*Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*









						Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
					

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really?  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'indispensable' mum Doria's role with Lilibet amid absent royals
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland has proven herself to be a very 'hands on' grandmother with Archie, even reportedly taking £5,000 grandparenting lessons, so will also play a vital part in her newborn grandchild's life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Doria has been a mother so what did she need lessons for? to tell her Meghan is the boss and just do what she says?


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh no.  Not again.  Is this a credible source?


----------



## Annawakes

sdkitty said:


> Oh no.  Not again.  Is this a credible source?


I found the article while reading another article that was posted here…..I don’t know how credible this is, but another lawsuit doesn’t surprise me!


----------



## CarryOn2020

There goes a quiet summer 

ETA: after reading the article, the confusion is understandable, especially considering H&M are involved.  IMO they deliberately word their statements to create confusion. Typical behavior of people who enjoy creating drama. :yawn:


----------



## Annawakes

Do you know what though?  The Queen is a very very sensible woman.  She likely *did* “approve” of the name.  (Not saying she liked the idea, but she likely allowed it to happen.). If she didn’t we would be hearing them crying about it.  Now that they’ve named their baby, basically the whole world is feeling righteous indignation on her behalf.  It’s kind of a win win for her actually.  The grifters have nothing to complain about, and they also dig themselves deeper in public disgust.  What’s the saying?  Give them enough rope….

After all, it is just a name.  I can see her saying that.  It’s just a name.  Let them have it!


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I found the article while reading another article that was posted here…..I don’t know how credible this is, but another lawsuit doesn’t surprise me!


I guess we are all supposed to be impressed that Harry is protecting his Wife and Family.  but angry all the time isn't a good look to me.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> those were nasty tweets
> on the one hand this is a bit surprising as she was the founder of the firm.  but she didn't lose her job - just got suspended


I didn't read the tweets, but it's rather remarkable to see the many people linked to this couple that lost their jobs or got suspended... Piers, Osbourne, nannies... the list keeps growing.


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wonder if H expects the queen to be called to testify. He shows little respect for his grandmother.   Buying a fight with BBC might be different than going after DM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> those were nasty tweets
> on the one hand this is a bit surprising as she was the founder of the firm.  but she didn't lose her job - just got suspended


I don’t get what’s so bad about doprah it’s just a joke about these portmanteau names and then it also sounds a bit like dopey isn’t it? 
Am I missing something?
Lots of people are commenting that M’s neglected her side of the family but wants to ‘honour’ the side they are feuding with. 

I think burchhill’s tweet was in poor taste but why even acknowledge a total has-been? That’s just giving her what she wants.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I didn't read the tweets, but it's rather remarkable to see the many people linked to this couple that lost their jobs or got suspended... Piers, Osbourne, nannies... the list keeps growing.


the tweets were clearly racist.....people should keep that kinda stuff to themselves or talk to like minded friends if they must....not but it out there in public


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t get what’s so bad about doprah it’s just a joke about these portmanteau names and then it also sounds a bit like dopey isn’t it?
> Am I missing something?
> Lots of people are commenting that M’s neglected her side of the family but wants to ‘honour’ the side they are feuding with.
> 
> I think burchhill’s tweet was in poor taste but why even acknowledge a total has-been? That’s just giving her what she wants.


Georgina Floyd? nothing funny about the george floyd murder


----------



## Jktgal

The Tree

This is the tree
where I went to pee
and snagged thee


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jktgal said:


> The Tree
> 
> This is the tree
> where I went to pee
> and snagged thee


You should offer Meggie some poetree lessons


----------



## Jktgal

lol @Clearblueskies. I was inspired by @xincinsin's poetree. I had such a laugh, this thread gives me life.
Maybe we should self publish our poetree inspired by Harree and his wifey.


----------



## youngster

drifter said:


> I can't believe crap like this got published for a 500K advance!!!  Nothing makes any sense and her grammar is atrocious!
> 
> From the dailymail article:
> This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin >  conceived or born on a bench?
> From here you will rest, see the growth of our boy > "from here you will rest"?!  Sounds like he's lying in a grave
> You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter > commands from Queen Methane
> When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order > how can life "feels in shambles"?  Life should be "in shambles" or "life feels like its in shambles", like her grammar.
> You'll sit on his bench, as his giving tree > ooooo....money-giving tree?
> He'll feel happiness, sorrow, one day be heartbroken. You'll tell him 'I love you,' those words always spoken > can you stop prophesying heartbreak for whoever "he" is???
> Looking out at my love and our beautiful boy. And here in the window I'll have tears of great joy…>



This isn't a children's book. It's an instruction manual on how to parent for Harry.


----------



## Genie27

So I’m imagining a Harlequin-meets-Princess Diaries style plot for baby Lili, fiercely independent secret princess who grows up without any knowledge of her regal heritage, other than the fact that she was named after her illustrious great grandmother, the reigning Queen of a country far, far away. After some hi-jinks involving decorum and protocols, she will realize her true destiny and take the throne from her cousin the dastardly Crown Prince.

There’s also a sub-plot of her hapless beach bum elder brother who shows up at the end to offer support and sage advice. Supporting characters include a bit part for the adoring mother who raised her to be strong and fiercely independent, and some ginger haired guy who hangs out on the bench in the back yard.

I’m taking requests for bit parts in this novella - cheery Starbucks barista who gives our Princess her daily half caff soy milk latte, friendly pigeons outside her window, and of course the fiesty common-sense spouting BFF whose only reason for existence is to support our fair maiden.

Kidding aside - I feel sorry for this child - so much family fighting and negativity from day one (or 5, who knows, really). I can’t imagine the weight these two dipsh1ts will put on her.


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> LOL, I thought he called her "cabbage"


 

 It sounds much better in French!  I know of others who have used “mon petite Chou” as a diminutive.  Heaven knows why!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> We were wondering how Meghan was going to tie this baby’s birthday and herself with Diana. Well here you go.
> 
> View attachment 5104119
> View attachment 5104122


Was the flower she received a Lily?


----------



## purseinsanity

caramelize126 said:


> Its true that insurances in the US arent created equal and some offer more coverage than others. Typically, the patient is only responsible for the copay ( anywhere from 100- 500$ on average). If there is a deductible ( the out of pocket the patient has to pay before insurance kicks in) they will have to pay that as well. So most people with decent health insurance will only pay a fraction of the price quoted above.
> 
> Im sure Meg and Harry have health insurance- i believe there is a tax penalty if you don't. They may be eligible through SAG or possibly through one of Harry's new jobs.


Thank you for eloquently stating what I was trying to say (and did a horrible job of LOL!).


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh good, we haven’t had a new lawsuit in weeks!


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve never seen this movie but I like the witch’s hair better tbh



Brief synopsis: In the Disney movie Mother Gothel uses a magical flower to keep her forever young. That flower was taken away and used to save the Queen's life when she was pregnant with Rapunzel. The baby was born with hair containing the same healing magical properties as the flower. Gothel steals the baby to raise and uses her hair to keep her young. And she calls Rapunzel "flower" as a nickname.

It's just as self-serving as Meghan coming up with the Doria/Flower nickname story a few days after the baby was born after people started asking "what about Doria?"


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Was the flower she received a Lily?



You know I actually blew up the photo and tried to figure that out when I posted it.   

I honestly cannot tell. I'm not a flower expert but if it is we know Meghan has been researching the hell out of the Diana archives.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I


sdkitty said:


> Georgina Floyd? nothing funny about the george floyd murder


 I said the Georgina floyd one was in poor taste and my point was that they are feeding the troll (burchill) by publicising her in the article (should’ve left her out) whereas I didn’t get what was wrong with saying doprah so I was asking whether there was another context I didn’t get.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Thomas isnt quiet!!!
> 
> this interview is coming up  in Australia...



He looks very frail, he should try to let it go imo. Unless he is doing this for the money, and I wouldn't blame him at this point. The Harkles seem to have only compassion for themselves. What they were given in the past by either T or C is history. It's all about what they can still get from the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

Should he still be in line for the crown after this comment?


----------



## purseinsanity

Pivoine66 said:


> Does anyone know who paid for the dress/kaftan, her wardrobe in her about 18 months in UK as a so working Royal?
> 
> In my circle in Europe, no one had ever heard of Prince Harry's wife before they officially became a couple. We were surprised to see a photo of her as a Briefcase girl and then the interview posted here with Mr Craig Ferguson in this - hm - different looking dress.  We were surprised, too, by her completely different demeanour (interview Mr. Ferguson vs OW?) Perhaps it would be helpful to show more photos like these of her career here of Prince Harry's wife and ones that show her career that she gave up and of her achievements before the Prince?  *Was she an activist, campaigner for women's rights and WOC, apart from the children's letter?*


None of the above.


----------



## purseinsanity

melissatrv said:


> Yep as Kathy Griffin used to say Meghan  was on the D-list before Harry


As Kathy Griffin would also say, MM has had many trips to the "dentist"


----------



## Chanbal

If this is true, where is Doria? Aren't they considering her also an amazing and strong woman? Let's see how they are going to show here a nod to Doria, any guesses?


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> You know I actually blew up the photo and tried to figure that out when I posted it.
> 
> I honestly cannot tell. I'm not a flower expert but if it is we know Meghan has been researching the hell out of the Diana archives.


She missed the fact that Diana's coffin was laden with lilies as well as a wreath of roses from the boys. 
There you go... Lily Rose


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, occasionally I take one for the team and look at the Archewell web site. We called this weeks ago. She is "donating" 2,000 copies of _The Bench_ to libraries. Way to artificially inflate her sales numbers!

In their typical self-promoting way, they also have a post about children reading that comes a day after Meghan's book release and they are piggybacking on another charity's hard work distributing books to low-income school kids. 

I know the illustrator is apparently well-known, but I hate to think this book is an example of his best efforts.

*Nourishing Our Communities Through Reading*

As Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, _The Bench,_ releases worldwide, she and her husband, Prince Harry, along with all of us at Archewell are taking a moment to recognize and support the amazing changemakers who are fostering community, compassion, and connection for every child.



After more than a year of unprecedented challenges for schoolkids and families everywhere, The Duchess believes the path ahead must include a focus on well-being—and nourishing our communities through food, education, and emotional and mental health support. 

At Archewell, that is often centered on food and essential needs (as evidenced by our partnership with organizations like World Central Kitchen) but also nourishment through learning and connection (as seen in The Duchess’s support of last year’s Save With Stories initiative to raise funds for educational resources like books, toys, and worksheets). 

As an example of this belief system, The Duchess and Archewell have received the support of the publisher of _The Bench_ to distribute 2,000 copies at no cost to libraries, community centers, schools, and nonprofit programs across the country. 

Those receiving free copies include vital organizations like Assistance League® of Los Angeles*,* which has served the local community for more than 100 years and which The Duke and Duchess visited twice last year to spend time with the children at the organization’s Preschool Learning Center. 

To make this happen, Archewell is working with the team at First Book, a nonprofit social enterprise that’s distributed more than 200 million books and educational resources to programs and schools serving kids in low-income communities in the United States and Canada. Reaching an average of 5 million kids per year, the First Book Network operates in classrooms, afterschool programs, libraries, community programs, military support programs, and more.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, occasionally I take one for the team and look at the Archewell web site. We called this weeks ago. She is "donating" 2,000 copies of _The Bench_ to libraries. Way to artificially inflate her sales numbers!
> 
> In their typical self-promoting way, they also have a post about children reading that comes a day after Meghan's book release and they are piggybacking on another charity's hard work distributing books to low-income school kids.
> 
> I know the illustrator is apparently well-known, but I hate to think this book is an example of his best efforts.
> 
> *Nourishing Our Communities Through Reading*
> 
> As Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, _The Bench,_ releases worldwide, she and her husband, Prince Harry, along with all of us at Archewell are taking a moment to recognize and support the amazing changemakers who are fostering community, compassion, and connection for every child.
> 
> View attachment 5105753
> 
> After more than a year of unprecedented challenges for schoolkids and families everywhere, The Duchess believes the path ahead must include a focus on well-being—and nourishing our communities through food, education, and emotional and mental health support.
> 
> At Archewell, that is often centered on food and essential needs (as evidenced by our partnership with organizations like World Central Kitchen) but also nourishment through learning and connection (as seen in The Duchess’s support of last year’s Save With Stories initiative to raise funds for educational resources like books, toys, and worksheets).
> 
> As an example of this belief system, The Duchess and Archewell have received the support of the publisher of _The Bench_ to distribute 2,000 copies at no cost to libraries, community centers, schools, and nonprofit programs across the country.
> 
> Those receiving free copies include vital organizations like Assistance League® of Los Angeles*,* which has served the local community for more than 100 years and which The Duke and Duchess visited twice last year to spend time with the children at the organization’s Preschool Learning Center.
> 
> To make this happen, Archewell is working with the team at First Book, a nonprofit social enterprise that’s distributed more than 200 million books and educational resources to programs and schools serving kids in low-income communities in the United States and Canada. Reaching an average of 5 million kids per year, the First Book Network operates in classrooms, afterschool programs, libraries, community programs, military support programs, and more.


The word salad is bizarre  “As an example of this belief system...”    wtf?


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> Not sure if y'all know about this       Tempted to watch on Hulu but will not.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5104370


Seriously?!?! .. I may just *drop* Hulu for this NONSENSE!!!!  

They are *NO LONGER* Senior Royals 
There is *NO SUCH THING* as a "Royal" in the US!!!!  
*What is wrong with these people?* .. are they really that under-educated?  Deborah Roberts used to be a respected journalist; is she yet another one who just wants the $$$$??!?!?!?!?!


----------



## gracekelly

Pivoine66 said:


> Does anyone know who paid for the dress/kaftan, her wardrobe in her about 18 months in UK as a so working Royal?
> 
> In my circle in Europe, no one had ever heard of Prince Harry's wife before they officially became a couple. We were surprised to see a photo of her as a Briefcase girl and then the interview posted here with Mr Craig Ferguson in this - hm - different looking dress.  We were surprised, too, by her completely different demeanour (interview Mr. Ferguson vs OW?) Perhaps it would be helpful to show more photos like these of her career here of Prince Harry's wife and ones that show her career that she gave up and of her achievements before the Prince?  Was she an activist, campaigner for women's rights and WOC, apart from the children's letter?


Soho House escort.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I find all this very depressing?  I don't believe in karma and think they will get away with whatever they do or say.


The Queen just slapped their wrists regarding the name. She is not happy.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> The word salad is bizarre  “As an example of this belief system...”    wtf?



Do you think she writes the posts herself?   

What I got out of that sentence was it is the publisher who is donating the books and Archewell is taking credit for it.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Do you think she writes the posts herself?
> 
> What I got out of that sentence was it is the publisher who is donating the books and Archewell is taking credit for it.


I’m certain of it, aren’t you?  It’s the language of a grandiose narcissist IMO.


----------



## Jayne1

Anyone have a link to Lady C's newest rant?  I love watching straight through without the ads.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Do you think she writes the posts herself?
> 
> What I got out of that sentence was it is the publisher who is donating the books and Archewell is taking credit for it.


Absolutely. There is no way a communications professional is writing that nonsense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, occasionally I take one for the team and look at the Archewell web site. We called this weeks ago. She is "donating" 2,000 copies of _The Bench_ to libraries. Way to artificially inflate her sales numbers!
> 
> In their typical self-promoting way, they also have a post about children reading that comes a day after Meghan's book release and they are piggybacking on another charity's hard work distributing books to low-income school kids.
> 
> I know the illustrator is apparently well-known, but I hate to think this book is an example of his best efforts.
> 
> *Nourishing Our Communities Through Reading*
> 
> As Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, _The Bench,_ releases worldwide, she and her husband, Prince Harry, along with all of us at Archewell are taking a moment to recognize and support the amazing changemakers who are fostering community, compassion, and connection for every child.
> 
> View attachment 5105753
> 
> After more than a year of unprecedented challenges for schoolkids and families everywhere, The Duchess believes the path ahead must include a focus on well-being—and nourishing our communities through food, education, and emotional and mental health support.
> 
> At Archewell, that is often centered on food and essential needs (as evidenced by our partnership with organizations like World Central Kitchen) but also nourishment through learning and connection (as seen in The Duchess’s support of last year’s Save With Stories initiative to raise funds for educational resources like books, toys, and worksheets).
> 
> As an example of this belief system, The Duchess and Archewell have received the support of the publisher of _The Bench_ to distribute 2,000 copies at no cost to libraries, community centers, schools, and nonprofit programs across the country.
> 
> Those receiving free copies include vital organizations like Assistance League® of Los Angeles*,* which has served the local community for more than 100 years and which The Duke and Duchess visited twice last year to spend time with the children at the organization’s Preschool Learning Center.
> 
> To make this happen, Archewell is working with the team at First Book, a nonprofit social enterprise that’s distributed more than 200 million books and educational resources to programs and schools serving kids in low-income communities in the United States and Canada. Reaching an average of 5 million kids per year, the First Book Network operates in classrooms, afterschool programs, libraries, community programs, military support programs, and more.


This is nothing more than self promotion and it’s very crass.  Tooting your own horn is no bueno. They never give anything directly and manipulate others into doing it for them.  The Assistance League used to be in the social pages of the LA Times back when they still had social pages. Meghan is trying to be society adjacent.  She is probably p*ssed that they didn’t ask her to be a debutante back in the day.  She is still living in the past.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> This is nothing more than self promotion and it’s very crass.  Tooting your own horn is no bueno. They never give anything directly and manipulate others into doing it for them.  The Assistance League used to be in the social pages of the LA Times back when they still had social pages. Meghan is trying to be society adjacent.  She is probably p*ssed that they didn’t ask her to be a debutante back in the day.  She is still living in the past.



She is counting on the fact that the media will never out her. Through the efforts of their teams of publicists they have carefully bought and fostered the image of being philanthropists. The vast majority of the public doesn't follow them but they will hear and absorb that Meghan and Harry are giving this-or-that every few weeks.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Absolutely. There is no way a communications professional is writing that nonsense.


Not only that it is written on a defensive tone. It definitely came from her.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Do you think she writes the posts herself?
> 
> What I got out of that sentence was it is the publisher who is donating the books and Archewell is taking credit for it.


That’s also what I got from it.


----------



## csshopper

Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The "Sueing Suckesses" are at it again. Nine months for planning a name and they make a post delivery call and drop a bomb. Then cannot admit their duplicity and run for the lawyers amid further heartache for the Queen.

She should NOT have lunch with the DESPICABLE one in July unless Charles and William are included, a move that would probably cause the emasculated man child to wet his pants. 

*THE MOST HYPOCRITICAL, CONNIVING, MANIPULATIVE PARENTS IN THE WORLD DUMPING GENERATIONAL PAIN ON AN INNOCENT CHILD LESS THAN ONE WEEK OLD.*


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She is counting on the fact that the media will never out her. Through the efforts of their teams of publicists they have carefully bought and fostered the image of being philanthropists. The vast majority of the public doesn't follow them and they will only hear and absortb that Meghan and Harry are giving this-or-that every fews weeks.


Eventually there will be a slip up and the real source of a donation will come forward. People don’t like be used.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> The "Sueing Suckesses" are at it again. Nine months for planning a name and they make a post delivery call and drop a bomb. Then cannot admit their duplicity and run for the lawyers amid further heartache for the Queen.
> 
> She should NOT have lunch with the DESPICABLE one in July unless Charles and William are included, a move that would probably cause the emasculated man child to wet his pants.
> 
> *THE MOST HYPOCRITICAL, CONNIVING, MANIPULATIVE PARENTS IN THE WORLD DUMPING GENERATIONAL PAIN ON AN INNOCENT CHILD LESS THAN ONE WEEK OLD.*


They are running scared and trying to control the media per usual. The Queen is not having at all. They stepped on her precious memories. Not a wise move.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Eventually there will be a slip up and the real source of a donation will come forward. People don’t like be used.



I think that must be why we haven't seen too many repeat collaborations with other groups. It's usually one-and-done.


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> Should he still be in line for the crown after this comment?



Probably doesn’t care about his number in line for the throne but you can bet he wants and needs his title. Let’s face it, without it he’s just as ordinary as the rest of us.


----------



## csshopper

The day just got even more interesting, posted on the Daily Mail.  Going to be fun watching Sunshine Sachs spinning this. 


*Prince Harry's biographer asks if royal 'doesn't want to be British anymore' after Meghan Markle's children's book featured illustration of him in US military uniform*

*Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin has questioned royal's bond with Britain *
*Referred to red-headed soldier donning US-style army uniform in The Bench*
*Question whether illustration means Harry doesn't 'want to be British anymore?'*


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> Probably doesn’t care about his number in line for the throne but you can bet he wants and needs his title. Let’s face it, without it he’s just as ordinary as the rest of us.


right
and she is even worse in this regard.  she - an American who married a prince and bailed in two years - loves that duchess title.  one of the articles I was reading earlier today referred to her as duchess meghan or whatever formerly known as Meghan Markle.  I say she should be known as meghan markle again.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh good!  Another lawsuit!


----------



## marietouchet

gobsmacked, how do they to make a mega gossip fest about everything ?

1. the provenance of first child
2. now the brouhaha over the name of second child , permission or not ? 

lots of celebrities pick unusual names, have unusual births, have difficult issues with family but it goes under the radar … 
thank you for the 20 weeks of family leave policy at Archewell, maybe they can keep their feet out of it for a bit …


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...what? What the hell is "making my heart go pump-pump"? Was she suffering a stroke while finishing the book? Not sure if I want to laugh or cry about this rape of the English language.
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...look-Meghan-Markles-childrens-book-Bench.html*


Did anyone else see this?!?! .. so, let's teach our children in-proper English?!?!   See the bottom of the page - "Where you'll never be *'lone*."??????  Also, notice how they depict Archie as having Red Hair, yet .. the most recent pictures of him appear to show that he is, in fact, very much a brunette?!?!?!


----------



## Clearblueskies

CeeJay said:


> Did anyone else see this?!?! .. so, let's teach our children in-proper English?!?!   See the bottom of the page - "Where you'll never be *'lone*."??????  Also, notice how they depict Archie as having Red Hair, yet .. the most recent pictures of him appear to show that he is, in fact, very much a brunette?!?!?!
> View attachment 5105838


She must be gutted.  I think it explains all the monochrome they’ve honoured us with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> If this is true, where is Doria? Aren't they considering her also an amazing and strong woman? Let's see how they are going to show here a nod to Doria, any guesses?
> 
> View attachment 5105744


Diana was many things, but "strong" is not an adjective I'd use for her.  The Queen, yes.  Meghan?  Meghan doesn't follow in that lineage.  They really are stretching a molehill into a mountain, aren't they?


----------



## bag-mania

There must be teams of stans or bots writing glowing reviews of her book on Amazon. It has 4.5 stars! 

I found this gem though.




Laila
_1.0 out of 5 stars_ Not a book for children
Reviewed in the United States on June 8, 2021

I'm a children's librarian, and I'm chagrined this book will now be part of our library. It is not a book for children, as there are no characters, no fun, no adventures. It's barely a book at all actually, just a set of poorly-rhyming platitudes on how to parent. I would be shocked if anyone gave this 5 stars if the author was an anonymous person (actually, the book wouldn't have gotten published at all). It distresses me that Meghan (excuse me, "the duchess") reportedly received a half-million dollar advance for this drivel, when there are so many well-deserving authors who struggle to make ends meet. Please, try their works out instead. If you need help, your local library would be delighted to offer suggestions
1,304 people found this helpful


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, occasionally I take one for the team and look at the Archewell web site. We called this weeks ago. *She is "donating" 2,000 copies of The Bench to libraries.* Way to artificially inflate her sales numbers!
> 
> In their typical self-promoting way, they also have a post about children reading that comes a day after Meghan's book release and they are piggybacking on another charity's hard work distributing books to low-income school kids.
> 
> I know the illustrator is apparently well-known, but I hate to think this book is an example of his best efforts.
> 
> *Nourishing Our Communities Through Reading*
> 
> As Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, _The Bench,_ releases worldwide, she and her husband, Prince Harry, along with all of us at Archewell are taking a moment to recognize and support the amazing changemakers who are fostering community, compassion, and connection for every child.
> 
> View attachment 5105753
> 
> After more than a year of unprecedented challenges for schoolkids and families everywhere, The Duchess believes the path ahead must include a focus on well-being—and nourishing our communities through food, education, and emotional and mental health support.
> 
> At Archewell, that is often centered on food and essential needs (as evidenced by our partnership with organizations like World Central Kitchen) but also nourishment through learning and connection (as seen in The Duchess’s support of last year’s Save With Stories initiative to raise funds for educational resources like books, toys, and worksheets).
> 
> As an example of this belief system, The Duchess and Archewell have received the support of the publisher of _The Bench_ to distribute 2,000 copies at no cost to libraries, community centers, schools, and nonprofit programs across the country.
> 
> Those receiving free copies include vital organizations like Assistance League® of Los Angeles*,* which has served the local community for more than 100 years and which The Duke and Duchess visited twice last year to spend time with the children at the organization’s Preschool Learning Center.
> 
> To make this happen, Archewell is working with the team at First Book, a nonprofit social enterprise that’s distributed more than 200 million books and educational resources to programs and schools serving kids in low-income communities in the United States and Canada. Reaching an average of 5 million kids per year, the First Book Network operates in classrooms, afterschool programs, libraries, community programs, military support programs, and more.


I told you so! Sorry, it was very tempting.  
Looking at their website requires a strong stomach, thanks for doing that.
Compassion????


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> gobsmacked, how do they to make a mega gossip fest about everything ?
> 
> 1. the provenance of first child
> 2. now the brouhaha over the name of second child , permission or not ?
> 
> lots of celebrities pick unusual names, have unusual births, have difficult issues with family but it goes under the radar …
> *thank you for the 20 weeks of family leave policy at Archewel*l, maybe they can keep their feet out of it for a bit …



I'm wondering how many employees there are at Archewell?  Maybe 5 or 10 including MM and Harry?  So, they rewarded themselves with 20 weeks of family leave, possibly continuing to draw their salaries from their own "foundation" or "charity" or whatever it is.  Wonder if any of the other employees are of an age range or life situation to ever take advantage of this generous family leave policy themselves?


----------



## DebbieAnn

*These two are completely certified.  I am sick of seeing them on magazine covers & constantly in the news.*


----------



## Chanbal

DebbieAnn said:


> *These two are completely certified.  I am sick of seeing them on magazine covers & constantly in the news.*


You are not alone. This thread helps to release the annoyance of their many press releases.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> You are not alone. This thread helps to release the annoyance of their many press releases.


 They are also a diet aid, reading about them often causes me to lose my appetite.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry is suing over whether the Palace knew of the name or not, can't this be easily proven since they're on record as recording conversations? If there's no recording of this very important conversation, then Harry is digging his own hole. He's the one who has to prove he told the Palace, not the other way around. And since Harry and Meghan pride themselves as having recorded all kinds of Palace conversations, he'd better have a recording of THAT. DH suggested Harry probably purposely emailed to an email address that's no longer used by The Palace so he can claim he "told them".  Anyone put such slimy behavior past them?


----------



## Pivoine66

purseinsanity said:


> Diana was many things, but "strong" is not an adjective I'd use for her.  The Queen, yes.  Meghan?  Meghan doesn't follow in that lineage.  They really are stretching a molehill into a mile, aren't they?


I do not understand the author of the posted article. How could anyone even think of mentioning Prince Harry's wife in the same line as the most dutiful, modest, self-sacrificing Queen, who has worked hard day after day for more than 70 years, always putting her personal interests and wishes aside. A former briefcasegirl and actress who does not even show manners nor respect for the Royal Family and the legendary Institution and does not even show the slightest compassion for her own father who seems to be in frail health, constantly spreading alternative truths in public, putting herself at the centre of everything and taking the liberty of calling on others to show "compassion"?


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> If Harry is suing over whether the Palace knew of the name or not, can't this be easily proven since they're on record as recording conversations? If there's no recording of this very important conversation, then Harry is digging his own hole. He's the one who has to prove he told the Palace, not the other way around. And since Harry and Meghan pride themselves as having recorded all kinds of Palace conversations, he'd better have a recording of THAT. DH suggested Harry probably purposely emailed to an email address that's no longer used by The Palace so he can claim he "told them".  Anyone put such slimy behavior past them?



No, they are sewer dwellers.

However, the legal Birth Certificate gives the time of birth which their announcement stated as "11:40 AM". If her name was recorded as "Lilibet Diana" on the Birth Certificate, but they waited until they were home to contact the Queen, her name was already a "fait accompli".


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Brief synopsis: In the Disney movie Mother Gothel uses a magical flower to keep her forever young. That flower was taken away and used to save the Queen's life when she was pregnant with Rapunzel. The baby was born with hair containing the same healing magical properties as the flower. Gothel steals the baby to raise and uses her hair to keep her young. And she calls Rapunzel "flower" as a nickname.
> 
> It's just as self-serving as Meghan coming up with the Doria/Flower nickname story a few days after the baby was born after people started asking "what about Doria?"
> 
> View attachment 5105682


Thank you for explaining - yes this leeching off anyone she comes into contact with seems to be a shared skill. I can’t help thinking of Evie the emotional vampire 



csshopper said:


> They are also a diet aid, reading about them often causes me to lose my appetite.


I find them a brilliant appetite suppressant too. Not to mention it’s really dampened my interest in Givenchy - then that Alix guy put the final nail in the coffin- so I’m saving there too


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Anyone have a link to Lady C's newest rant?  I love watching straight through without the ads.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Le Petomane had such amazing sphincter control he could “toot” La Marseilles and fart at will. He only retired when age caught up with him and his muscle tone deteriorated.
> 
> Up until today listening to Lady C I had never heard of him. Google has all kinds of links, there have been several movies about him.
> 
> Lady C was very clear: Meaghan puts out hot odious air, and hearing Lady C’s drawn out pronouncements in her very proper manner makes it even more entertaining. Like others, I listen to her while doing chores.


OMG .. I just HOWLED with laughter at this!!!!  We absolutely MUST find someone here in the US who can do the same (well - the US Anthem) to these two .. it would be especially great if they were seated in the front row!!!  HA HA HA HA HA


----------



## Hermes Zen

Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So much for H&M taking peaceful time off with Lilibet.


----------



## Hermes Zen

This just out by FOX News - 

*Meghan Markle's relative talks family divide: 'We won't ever talk again'*
A relative of Meghan Markle's tells Fox News a reunion on the west coast of California will likely never happen.
Read in Fox News: https://apple.news/ATX9FisGkSt22j2Jb0VwIWA


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Le Petomane had such amazing sphincter control he could “toot” La Marseilles and fart at will. He only retired when age caught up with him and his muscle tone deteriorated.
> 
> Up until today listening to Lady C I had never heard of him. Google has all kinds of links, there have been several movies about him.
> 
> Lady C was very clear: Meaghan puts out hot odious air, and hearing Lady C’s drawn out pronouncements in her very proper manner makes it even more entertaining. Like others, I listen to her while doing chores.



now I remember where I heard it! 
Mel Brooks in Blazing Saddles..........Gov William J Le Petomane


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Do you think she writes the posts herself?
> 
> What I got out of that sentence was it is the publisher who is donating the books and Archewell is taking credit for it.


Got to unload them somehow.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> people can correct me if I'm wrong but here most companies I think give a few months to the mother but not to both parents



They can share it (UK) 'shared parental leave'


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> She missed the fact that Diana's coffin was laden with lilies as well as a wreath of roses from the boys.
> There you go... Lily Rose



White lilies and white roses are traditional at many formal funerals though.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, occasionally I take one for the team and look at the Archewell web site. We called this weeks ago. She is "donating" 2,000 copies of _The Bench_ to libraries. Way to artificially inflate her sales numbers!
> 
> In their typical self-promoting way, they also have a post about children reading that comes a day after Meghan's book release and they are piggybacking on another charity's hard work distributing books to low-income school kids.
> 
> I know the illustrator is apparently well-known, but I hate to think this book is an example of his best efforts.
> 
> *Nourishing Our Communities Through Reading*
> 
> As Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, _The Bench,_ releases worldwide, she and her husband, Prince Harry, along with all of us at Archewell are taking a moment to recognize and support the amazing changemakers who are fostering community, compassion, and connection for every child.
> 
> View attachment 5105753
> 
> After more than a year of unprecedented challenges for schoolkids and families everywhere, The Duchess believes the path ahead must include a focus on well-being—and nourishing our communities through food, education, and emotional and mental health support.
> 
> At Archewell, that is often centered on food and essential needs (as evidenced by our partnership with organizations like World Central Kitchen) but also nourishment through learning and connection (as seen in The Duchess’s support of last year’s Save With Stories initiative to raise funds for educational resources like books, toys, and worksheets).
> 
> As an example of this belief system, The Duchess and Archewell have received the support of the publisher of _The Bench_ to distribute 2,000 copies at no cost to libraries, community centers, schools, and nonprofit programs across the country.
> 
> Those receiving free copies include vital organizations like Assistance League® of Los Angeles*,* which has served the local community for more than 100 years and which The Duke and Duchess visited twice last year to spend time with the children at the organization’s Preschool Learning Center.
> 
> To make this happen, Archewell is working with the team at First Book, a nonprofit social enterprise that’s distributed more than 200 million books and educational resources to programs and schools serving kids in low-income communities in the United States and Canada. Reaching an average of 5 million kids per year, the First Book Network operates in classrooms, afterschool programs, libraries, community programs, military support programs, and more.


That's wonderful but will M donate towards this if she doesn't publish another children's book?  Or, is it *only* when she is promoting her book? It would be great if she will continue support but we all know how it usually goes.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> That's wonderful but will M donate towards this if she doesn't publish another children's book?  *Or, is it only when she is promoting her book? *It would be great if she will continue support but we all know how it usually goes.



You already know the answer. I cannot imagine how much she had to pay to get some pretty big promos for the awful thing.

Here Entertainment Tonight features _The Bench_ as the first book listed in an article about the best children's books written by celebrities. Exactly how low is that bar set?


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> White lilies and white roses are traditional at many formal funerals though.


I know. But to her it'd be a connection to Diana.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> You already know the answer. I cannot imagine how much she had to pay to get some pretty big promos for the awful thing.
> 
> Here Entertainment Tonight features _The Bench_ as the first book listed in an article about the best children's books written by celebrities. Exactly how low is that bar set?
> 
> View attachment 5105999



I think they meant "...and the best _publicised_ children's books...


----------



## Aimee3

Maureen Callahanof the New York Post wrote a great article about the disgusting duo today.  Am I allowed to post the link to it?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

See if this works.................https://nypost.com/2021/06/09/just-keep-digging-harry-and-meghan/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

drifter said:


> I can't believe crap like this got published for a 500K advance!!!  Nothing makes any sense and her grammar is atrocious!
> 
> From the dailymail article:
> This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin >  conceived or born on a bench?
> From here you will rest, see the growth of our boy > "from here you will rest"?!  Sounds like he's lying in a grave
> You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter > commands from Queen Methane
> When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order > how can life "feels in shambles"?  Life should be "in shambles" or "life feels like its in shambles", like her grammar.
> You'll sit on his bench, as his giving tree > ooooo....money-giving tree?
> He'll feel happiness, sorrow, one day be heartbroken. You'll tell him 'I love you,' those words always spoken > can you stop prophesying heartbreak for whoever "he" is???
> Looking out at my love and our beautiful boy. And here in the window I'll have tears of great joy…>



It really is so bad.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I told you so! Sorry, it was very tempting.
> Looking at their website requires a strong stomach, thanks for doing that.
> Compassion????


That’s why they have to remind you to leave every 15minutes to stop people - medical and legal necessity   


1LV said:


> Got to unload them somehow.


Well, it’ll be bonfire season soon enough. i feel sorry for all these poor trees that are being put to such ignominious use. 


poopsie said:


> now I remember where I heard it!
> Mel Brooks in Blazing Saddles..........Gov William J Le Petomane


Hello Poopsie, long time no see! I love a good old Mel Brooks.


----------



## Aimee3

Here we go:  hope this link works!








						Just keep digging, Harry and Meghan!
					

Three months after Harry and Meghan sat with Oprah to tell the world that the Queen’s racist palace drove Meghan to suicidal impulses, these two go and name their daughter after the 95-year-old Que…




					nypost.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Here we go:  hope this link works!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just keep digging, Harry and Meghan!
> 
> 
> Three months after Harry and Meghan sat with Oprah to tell the world that the Queen’s racist palace drove Meghan to suicidal impulses, these two go and name their daughter after the 95-year-old Que…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Spot on!  I think the author is a poster here.


----------



## bag-mania

Put on your tin foil hats, girls, let's take another look at the timing of Lilibet's birth. The release date for _The Bench_ was determined by the publisher weeks/months? in advance. What are the odds of the baby being born the weekend before that release date? And then there just happens to be a cute little illustration unveiling baby Lilibet being swaddled by Meghan at the end of the book. 

Do you think Meghan induced labor (or had the surrogate do it) in order to time the birth of her child to maximize media attention and boost her book sales?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> You already know the answer. I cannot imagine how much she had to pay to get some pretty big promos for the awful thing.
> 
> Here Entertainment Tonight features _The Bench_ as the first book listed in an article about the best children's books written by celebrities. Exactly how low is that bar set?
> 
> View attachment 5105999


 Pretty LOW.


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> Put on your tin foil hats, girls, let's take another look at the timing of Lilibet's birth. The release date for _The Bench_ was determined by the publisher weeks/months? in advance. What are the odds of the baby being born the weekend before that release date? And then there just happens to be a cute little illustration unveiling baby Lilibet being swaddled by Meghan at the end of the book.
> 
> Do you think Meghan induced labor (or had the surrogate do it) in order to time the birth of her child to maximize media attention and boost her book sales?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5106034



I wouldn't put it past her.


----------



## Aimee3

In my neck of the woods, obstetricians tell you your due date and let you know if you don’t go into labor by then naturally, they might give you another day or two to see what develops, but if not, they induce you. I think it’s crazy and I believe it’s cause the doctor doesn’t want to be bothered on the weekends!  Nearly everyone I know (top doctors) was induced or c section, and never on the weekend!  Good for the doctor but I’m not sure how good for the baby.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Here we go:  hope this link works!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just keep digging, Harry and Meghan!
> 
> 
> Three months after Harry and Meghan sat with Oprah to tell the world that the Queen’s racist palace drove Meghan to suicidal impulses, these two go and name their daughter after the 95-year-old Que…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


basically what we've been saying but very few in US media are criticizing them in any way


----------



## rose60610

So.....The Bench is about fathers and sons, and Harry and Archie are in it. OK.

So when Meghan "writes a book" about mothers and daughters it'll be titled either: The Pedestal, or, The Throne And How It Was Stolen From Me. It'll have pictures of only Meghan. It'll say "Mommy can do no wrong", and "Mommy rules the world".


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> basically what we've been saying but very few in US media are criticizing them in any way



Seems it is coming out now here... The more they talk/publicize tidbits, the more it seems people in the US are catching on to their nonsense. 

I am sure their publicists will be working overtime while these two entitled, spoiled, self-important, lying a-holes take a lengthy time off from doing nothing. Hopefully it will only continue to enlighten people in the US and abroad about how phoney these two are!


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Seems it is coming out now here... The more they talk/publicize tidbits, the more it seems people in the US are catching on to their nonsense.
> 
> I am sure their publicists will be working overtime while these two entitled, spoiled, self-important, lying a-holes take a lengthy time off from doing nothing. Hopefully it will only continue to enlighten people in the US and abroad about how phoney these two are!


hope so


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Put on your tin foil hats, girls, let's take another look at the timing of Lilibet's birth. The release date for _The Bench_ was determined by the publisher weeks/months? in advance. What are the odds of the baby being born the weekend before that release date? And then there just happens to be a cute little illustration unveiling baby Lilibet being swaddled by Meghan at the end of the book.
> 
> Do you think Meghan induced labor (or had the surrogate do it) in order to time the birth of her child to maximize media attention and boost her book sales?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5106034


I think she had a c section based on the time.  Reminds me of a gyn I used to know who had a set schedule everyday of a 7:30am surgery then go to office and see patients and then back to hospital for his 12pm surgery and then back to office for afternoon patients.


----------



## Lodpah

NVM


----------



## chicinthecity777

Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


 here we go again! We were told they didn't read anything in the press about them! Clearly they care so much! I wonder how many plates have been smashed in the 19-bathroom mansion! And I bet the blood pressure is through the roof too! They will never be happy! They lose! They can't just quietly enjoy the beautiful little girl! And their lawyers are laughing to the bank! Extra extra emergency therapy sessions scheduled!


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> here we go again! We were told they didn't read anything in the press about them! Clearly they care so much! I wonder how many plates have been smashed in the 19-bathroom mansion! And I bet the blood pressure is through the roof too! They will never be happy! They lose! They can't just quietly enjoy the beautiful little girl! And their lawyers are laughing to the bank! Extra extra emergency therapy sessions scheduled!


It is really pathological at this point.  I think they are beyond plates and moved into expanding rooms by knocking holes in walls.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> basically what we've been saying but very few in US media are criticizing them in any way



Yes, the NY Post is considered to be more on the tabloid end of the scale and even so this appears as an opinion piece. All of the mainstream publications are still being supportive or else being silent. None of them want to go on record as being the least bit critical.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, the NY Post is considered to be more on the tabloid end of the scale and even so this appears as an opinion piece. All of the mainstream publications are still being supportive or else being silent. None of them want to go on record as being the least bit critical.


yep
the ladies on the view were pretty much onboard with the baby naming but not quite as passionately on their side as they were right after the O interview


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> I think she had a c section based on the time.  Reminds me of a gyn I used to know who had a set schedule everyday of a 7:30am surgery then go to office and see patients and then back to hospital for his 12pm surgery and then back to office for afternoon patients.



I'm not sure about the timing but if they went home the same day, it wasn't Meghan who had the C-section.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yep
> the ladies on the view were pretty much onboard with the baby naming but not quite as passionately on their side as they were right after the O interview


In the US people are used to creative type names and weird spellings.  They don't have a clue as to the real significance of the name or why it is hurtful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I'm not sure about the timing but if they went home the same day, it wasn't Meghan who had the C-section.



My understanding, even under Covid restrictions, was that a mother and newborn were to stay at the hospital 24 hours.  Things can happen to mother and/or baby even after delivery.  I thought the ruling in California was instituted several years ago when there were cases of mothers being dumped out of hospitals prematurely.  If she delivered at 11:40am , she should have stayed overnight and gone home the next day.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> They are also a diet aid, reading about them often causes me to lose my appetite.


Unfortunately they are not working as a diet aid for me.   I gained some weight. 
Though, I've been missing several of the sale promotions. I wonder if Saks, NM or BG have a case to sue this benevolent couple.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> now I remember where I heard it!
> Mel Brooks in Blazing Saddles..........Gov William J Le Petomane


@poopsie Welcome back! I thought that you had packed, moved and forgotten us.


----------



## gracekelly

*Palace refuses to back Sussexes in row over baby Lilibet’s name*
Royal sources fail to deny that Queen was ‘never asked’, as lawyers for couple say it was 'false and defamatory' for the BBC to suggest this



www.telegraph.co.uk

*Buckingham Palace has refused to back the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in a row with the BBC over whether the couple sought the Queen’s permission to name their daughter Lilibet.*
Lawyers instructed by Harry and Meghan said it was “false and defamatory” for the BBC to suggest the couple did not ask Her Majesty if they could use her highly personal pet name for their second child.
The Duke and Duchess claimed they would not have used the name if the Queen had not been “supportive” of their choice.
But rather than confirming the Duke and Duchess’s version of events, the Palace refused to deny suggestions that the Queen was “never asked”.
The Telegraph understands the Queen was “told” about the name after the baby was born last Friday, rather than her permission being sought in advance.
It suggests that if the Duke and Duchess chose the name to curry favour with the Queen and the wider Royal family, the tactic has backfired badly.
It also left the Queen, 95, in the unwelcome position of being at the centre of a row between her grandson on one side and the BBC and her own officials on the other.
Although there is little formal protocol around choosing baby names, particularly with great-grandchildren of the monarch, royal sources suggested there was a difference between the couple choosing to name their daughter Elizabeth, in tribute to the Queen, and using her pet name, which had only ever been used by her parents, Prince Philip and a handful of her closest friends and relatives.
Relations between the Sussexes and the Royal family have become strained in the wake of a series of interviews in which the couple have levelled accusations of racism, neglect and bad parenting against the House of Windsor.
And on a day of extraordinary claim and counter-claim, each side hardened its position rather than making any attempt to agree on a settled version of events.
The Duke and Duchess’s daughter was born in California on Friday morning, and it is understood that the couple told the Queen about their choice of name between the baby’s birth and the public announcement of it on Sunday.
On Monday reports in US publications including the New York Post claimed Prince Harry called the Queen and “sought permission before his baby’s birth” to use the name Lilibet.
On Wednesday morning, BBC Radio 4’s Today programme reported that the Queen “was not asked” about using her pet name.
Within 90 minutes of the report being aired, the author Omid Scobie, a high-profile cheerleader for the Sussexes, rebutted the BBC report after being briefed that the Queen had supported the decision to use the name Lilibet.
Then, shortly after 8am (or 1am in California, where the Sussexes live) the row escalated as the London law firm Schillings, acting on behalf of the Sussexes, issued a warning to media organisations not to repeat the BBC’s claims, which were “false and defamatory”.
Crucially, however, Buckingham Palace refused to deny the BBC’s version of events, meaning the Duke and Duchess’s libel claims were ignored by the media at large.
Some within palace walls are said to have taken offence at the claims made in the US and attributed to friends of the Sussexes that the monarch had been consulted about the use of her name.
It emerged on Wednesday night that the internet domain name lilidiana.com was registered on May 31, several days before the birth, raising questions about whether the couple had already settled on the baby name by that stage.
Even the couple’s spokeswoman stopped short of suggesting the Queen had been told about the Lilibet name, or asked for permission to use it, before the baby was born.
She said: “The Duke spoke with his family in advance of the announcement, in fact his grandmother was the first family member he called.
“During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name.”
Royal sources drew a distinction between being told of the name and being asked. It suggests the Queen was put in a position where she had a choice of either giving her approval, tacitly or explicitly, or ordering the couple to change their daughter’s name.
Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, who will be known as Lili, was born at 11.40am on Friday June 4 at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in California weighing 7lb 11oz.
The Queen was introduced to her latest great-granddaughter on a video call when the Duke and Duchess returned home from hospital. It is not known when the Queen or other members of the Royal family will meet her in person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Reposting this because IMO it proves they used a surrogate. Never have they said MM safely delivered this baby. 
LCC is right.



CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal   LCC is on to something with the birth announcement.  They had 2 full days to get the wording right. The ‘surrogate’ door is wide open.  Plus, Doria wasn’t even there.  Hmmm.
> 
> 
> The Royal way:
> 
> View attachment 5105189
> View attachment 5105190
> 
> 
> The Sussex way:
> View attachment 5105191


----------



## gracekelly

RICHARD KAY: Only they could call in lawyers over a baby's name
					

RICHARD KAY: Is there nothing Harry and Meghan do that doesn't involve a row? How desperately sad that even something so uplifting as the birth of their new baby is accompanied by thundering controversy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Too late for the Harkles.  It is already being used.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reposting this because IMO it proves they used a surrogate. Never have they said MM safely delivered this baby.
> LCC is right.


Maybe we didn't see Meg because she had the surrogate under 24/7 surveillance at the Casa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5106156
> 
> 
> Too late for the Harkles.  It is already being used.



Do they even know how to Google????

Crown included - https://blog.lilibet.com/













						Designer Lilibet Character Review | Epic Seven Wiki for Beginners
					

Designer Lilibet is a Dark Warrior with the Horoscope Cancer that you can summon from the Moonlight Summon.




					epic7x.com


----------



## Chanbal

This is good!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Put on your tin foil hats, girls, let's take another look at the timing of Lilibet's birth. The release date for _The Bench_ was determined by the publisher weeks/months? in advance. What are the odds of the baby being born the weekend before that release date? And then there just happens to be a cute little illustration unveiling baby Lilibet being swaddled by Meghan at the end of the book.
> 
> Do you think Meghan induced labor (or had the surrogate do it) in order to time the birth of her child to maximize media attention and boost her book sales?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5106034


Well, you may want to read this!


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do they even know how to Google????
> 
> Crown included - https://blog.lilibet.com/
> 
> View attachment 5106169
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designer Lilibet Character Review | Epic Seven Wiki for Beginners
> 
> 
> Designer Lilibet is a Dark Warrior with the Horoscope Cancer that you can summon from the Moonlight Summon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> epic7x.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5106170



I am guessing their attorneys do, and the lawsuit will be forthcoming. Win or lose, seems lawsuits are the only consistent gig they've got.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Well, you may want to read this!




It just occurred to me the incredible irony of these two and their publicity seeking stunts resulting in bad press---which was what they were trying to avoid all along.  It's just getting worse by the minute.


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan Markle Has Given Birth To A Baby Girl Named Lilibet Diana — BuzzFeed News
> 
> 
> The baby was born Friday at 11:40 a.m. and is named after her great-grandmother the Queen and grandmother Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


The Queen's private & personal childhood nickname as the name for your child?









creme fraiche said:


> I'm actually horrified by the name.  Lillibet is a nickname conceived out of affection by a father to his daughter and used privately by family members.  For these two numpties who seem determined to rip down the institution of the monarchy represented by the Queen is deeply offensive.  As with everything these 2 do, completely tone deaf and ill conceived.





daisychainz said:


> I saw that they had a daughter and selected the name. I'm pretty shocked to know they selected a very personal nickname that belongs to someone else as the first name for their child. It is really incredibly bizarre and not something they should have done without some permission. I wonder if QE was told, or asked? I'd be livid if someone took my private nickname as a name for their child, it's horrible. I don't see anything wrong with Diana since it's his mother but the nickname is private to QE. What a hateful couple they are.


Agreed.






lanasyogamama said:


> I like this analysis.









csshopper said:


> *But the name Lili, which the Sussexes plan to call their daughter, also holds special meaning for Meghan and Doria because the duchess was given the childhood nickname ‘Flower’ by her adoring mother.*





What a load of bullsh*t  There's hundreds of thousands of different types of flowers in the world 
They're like Stretch Armstrong with all the reaching.




bag-mania said:


> We were wondering how Meghan was going to tie this baby’s birthday and herself with Diana. Well here you go.
> 
> View attachment 5104119
> View attachment 5104122










bag-mania said:


> There are a number of positive reviews on Amazon, but only one person willing to speak the truth about _The Bench_. Way to go Rachel, whoever you are!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rachel Cutler
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ How did this become a children’s book?
> Reviewed in the United States on June 8, 2021
> This book is bland. No characters, no story, no substance. Shallow like the author. I guess it makes sense as she ghosted her own father. Two thumbs down.
> 86 people found this helpful









Sharont2305 said:


> Morocco February 2019


Most expensive (and fugly) bed-sheet-turned dress in the history of bed sheets.




Annawakes said:


> Has this been posted?
> *Harry wages war with BBC: Furious prince threatens legal action over claim he did not consult Queen before naming his daughter Lilibet - as extraordinary briefing row breaks out between Sussexes, Palace and broadcaster*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'NEVER asked' Queen about naming daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced the birth and name of their new daughter, it was widely reported the couple had spoken to the Queen first.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





My god, it is quite the sensitive ego he has. What a ridiculously stupid thing to threaten legal action over and the easiest way to make himself (& his wife) look like the guilty part here. Them threatening legal action over something that stupid confirms for me that they did_ *not*_ ask the Queen if it was OK to use *HER *private nickname as the name for their new baby. If they were telling the truth, they wouldn't give a sh*t about some story reported in the media.
"The *idiots* doth protest too much, methinks"


----------



## gracekelly

Harry thinks that he will have public opinion on his side if he fights the BBC because of what happened with the Bashir interview.  This is a whole other ball of wax.  This isn't a case of an interviewer chasing and goading a subject into an interview.  This is straight up reporting.  I noticed that the Daily Mail story about this had three reporters for the original story and two for the update.  That many people are not going to  put their names on a story if they think there is a chance of it not being true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Put on your tin foil hats, girls, let's take another look at the timing of Lilibet's birth. The release date for _The Bench_ was determined by the publisher weeks/months? in advance. What are the odds of the baby being born the weekend before that release date? And then there just happens to be a cute little illustration unveiling baby Lilibet being swaddled by Meghan at the end of the book.
> 
> Do you think Meghan induced labor (or had the surrogate do it) in order to time the birth of her child to maximize media attention and boost her book sales?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5106034


Yes, wouldn't put it past her.
The timing is just too "coincidental".
OTOH I also wouldn't put it past her conniving partners-in-crime SS to research a series of "coincidences" for the week before and after the expected due date. As in, June 4th - significant event A happened, June 5th - significant event B happened, etc. So that no matter which day it happened, they would be able to leak a good story.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is what I understand from this article on Page Six: H wanted to name a future daughter after his mom, and his wife convinced him that he didn't want Diana to be her first name.   
Diana would make her a bigger target for the media, but not Lilibet Diana... 

“_Harry had wanted to name his future daughter after his mom long before he met Meghan [Markle],” a source told us. “Meghan was cognizant and fully supportive of that when they discussed potential names._”

"_A source previously told Page Six that Harry and Meghan did not want their daughter’s first name to be Diana because they feared it would “make her a bigger target for the media,” like the People’s Princess was in the final years of her life._"









						Harry wanted to name daughter after Diana ‘long before he met’ Meghan
					

The Duke of Sussex always had his late mother, Princess Diana, in mind when thinking of names for his baby girl.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


>



"Welcome Lilibet. What is her other name again. I’ve completely forgotten."   

Thanks for the link!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Here is what I understand from this article on Page Six: H wanted to name a future daughter after his mom, and his wife convinced him that he didn't want Diana to be her first name.
> Diana would make her a bigger target for the media, but not Lilibet Diana...
> 
> “_Harry had wanted to name his future daughter after his mom long before he met Meghan [Markle],” a source told us. “Meghan was cognizant and fully supportive of that when they discussed potential names._”
> 
> "_A source previously told Page Six that Harry and Meghan did not want their daughter’s first name to be Diana because they feared it would “make her a bigger target for the media,” like the People’s Princess was in the final years of her life._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry wanted to name daughter after Diana ‘long before he met’ Meghan
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex always had his late mother, Princess Diana, in mind when thinking of names for his baby girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


He discussed baby names with every woman he dated? No wonder he had no takers till Methane came along with her world domination goals.

I wouldn't be worried about the media. By naming her the way they did, she is going to be name-shamed her entire life. The current controversy is going to be mentioned every time someone writes about her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is a great line from that article.
“Quietly but clearly, the Queen is making it known she has no more tolerance for these two.”


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> This is a great line from that article.
> “Quietly but clearly, the Queen is making it known she has no more tolerance for these two.”


I really hope this is true.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Walking down a airplane stairs holding hands instead of holding the railing is the stupidest thing I’ve seen all day.


----------



## FreeSpirit71

gracekelly said:


> Harry thinks that he will have public opinion on his side if he fights the BBC because of what happened with the Bashir interview.  This is a whole other ball of wax.  This isn't a case of an interviewer chasing and goading a subject into an interview.  This is straight up reporting.  I noticed that the Daily Mail story about this had three reporters for the original story and two for the update.  That many people are not going to  put their names on a story if they think there is a chance of it not being true.


Oh please, this is the Daily Fail we're talking about.  The use of the title "reporter" for what those folks do is tenuous at best - as is their grip on grammar.


----------



## lulilu

Clearblueskies said:


> Doria is the nanny





QueenofWrapDress said:


> 5000 pounds grandparent lessons? To make up for the parenting experience she didn't have or what? I just can't with these people.





xincinsin said:


> That's lessons to break generational trauma so that Doria doesn't accidentally pass it on to the babies? Never knew that you needed a  5000 GBP psychiatric reset to be a grandparent.


Does anyone think Doria needed to take Scientology lessons in how to grandparent?  What other reason?  She already is Archie's grandparent.


----------



## csshopper

I think they hoped for the birth to occur on June 10 as they publicized a week ago. They probably had all kinds of Press Releases  prepared to spin the name Lilbet to honor both the Queen and Prince Phillip since Lilibet would have been born on the his Birthday and he was the one who most used the treasured nick name. But the baby was ready to appear and the surrogate  said "Nope, not going to delay this, we're giving birth on the 4th" so gears shifted and the merching with the Book got ramped up instead.  

Harry has made a drastic error I hope. The BBC will see this as an avenue to repair their tarnished reputation and support the Monarchy. Bashir/Diana damaged them, but by God and Country no one messes with the Sovereign and they will go to the mat to support her. God, and the BBC, Save the Queen!


----------



## youngster

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oh please, this is the Daily Fail we're talking about.  The use of the title "reporter" for what those folks do is tenuous at best - as is their grip on grammar.



I think the DM generally has a better grip on grammar than Meghan does in her children's book lol.   I was almost embarrassed for her reading the text. She will make a lot of money on it of course which was the whole point, so the quality didn't matter, just getting it out quickly before Father's Day in the U.S. and timing it with her delivery.


----------



## CarryOn2020

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oh please, this is the Daily Fail we're talking about.  The use of the title "reporter" for what those folks do is tenuous at best - as is their grip on grammar.



The message remains regardless of the messenger, no?


----------



## Sol Ryan

Okay…. This made me laugh. I’ve always loved Oasis and wished they could work out their issues.









						Noel Gallagher SLAMS Prince Harry for 'dissing his family'
					

Noel Gallagher has branded Prince Harry a 'f*****g woke snowflake' for publicly criticising the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Shopaholic2021

They're really trigger happy with the lawsuits. As soon as someone says something that they deem as criticism they get the lawyers out. They must have a lawyer on retainer on both sides of the Atlantic. 

One of the complaints they made about the BRF was failure to refute false stories, and since the palace has refused to comment, will they blame the Queen for this? It could be that the Queen was informed of the naming of the child, but she wasn't asked for permission. To ask for permission and inform is two very different things. The queen cannot really say no to the naming of a child, especially when they are no longer working royals. 

I still don't understand the rationale of naming your child after someone who you called a 'bad parent' and the cause of your fathers bad parenting. Really weird.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Yes, wouldn't put it past her.
> The timing is just too "coincidental".
> OTOH I also wouldn't put it past her conniving partners-in-crime SS to research a series of "coincidences" for the week before and after the expected due date. As in, June 4th - significant event A happened, June 5th - significant event B happened, etc. So that no matter which day it happened, they would be able to leak a good story.



It was a risk putting an illustration of Lilibet in the book before she was born. I’m sure everyone assumed the birth would be fine but still.

I guess she wanted to prep the world for the sequel book about her relationship with her daughter. I’ll look into the future and call it _The Slamming Door_.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

kipp said:


> I'm not sure about the timing but if they went home the same day, it wasn't Meghan who had the C-section.



Unless it was a laparoscopic c-section.  JK!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Put on your tin foil hats, girls, let's take another look at the timing of Lilibet's birth. The release date for _The Bench_ was determined by the publisher weeks/months? in advance. What are the odds of the baby being born the weekend before that release date? And then there just happens to be a cute little illustration unveiling baby Lilibet being swaddled by Meghan at the end of the book.
> 
> Do you think Meghan induced labor (or had the surrogate do it) in order to time the birth of her child to maximize media attention and boost her book sales?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5106034


I don't know about y'all, but just because this child was born does not give me one more iota of desire to buy this piece of trash.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> In my neck of the woods, obstetricians tell you your due date and let you know if you don’t go into labor by then naturally, they might give you another day or two to see what develops, but if not, they induce you. I think it’s crazy and I believe it’s cause the doctor doesn’t want to be bothered on the weekends!  Nearly everyone I know (top doctors) was induced or c section, and never on the weekend!  Good for the doctor but I’m not sure how good for the baby.


Here, they consider up to 2 weeks past the due date "safe".  After 42 weeks, no bueno.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> It is really pathological at this point.  I think they are beyond plates and moved into expanding rooms by knocking holes in walls.


At some point, I can imagine MM punching Haz.


----------



## mellibelly

Sol Ryan said:


> Okay…. This made me laugh. I’ve always loved Oasis and wished they could work out their issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noel Gallagher SLAMS Prince Harry for 'dissing his family'
> 
> 
> Noel Gallagher has branded Prince Harry a 'f*****g woke snowflake' for publicly criticising the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Me too! One commenter called the toxic farts the Skid Markles and I’m dying!!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> *Palace refuses to back Sussexes in row over baby Lilibet’s name*
> 
> It suggests that if the Duke and Duchess chose the name to curry favour with the Queen and the wider Royal family, *the tactic has backfired badly.*


This part of the sentence sums it up for me.  For all their conniving, wheeling and dealing, crying victim, giving false interviews, contradictions, slandering everyone else, etc., everything they do seems to *BACKFIRE BADLY*!


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It was a risk putting an illustration of Lilibet in the book before she was born. I’m sure everyone assumed the birth would be fine but still.
> 
> I guess she wanted to prep the world for the sequel book about her relationship with her daughter. I’ll look into the future and call it _The Slamming Door_.


Her stans were up in arms when someone commented on the illus of a redhead soldier in US combat fatigues coming home with witchy woman weeping in the window. They said it wasn't Harry - the pics were of all fathers - universal theme. If the book was issued before the birth, they would loyally say it was a universal concept of a baby carried by a universal concept of a mother.

We should contribute poetry and create our own version of her next book. Their life is now on par with Loki having a cross-cultural liaison with Morgan le Fay.


----------



## xincinsin

"_Lawyers for the duke and duchess have now sent a letter to some media organisations, saying the BBC article was "false and defamatory" and the allegations should not be repeated._"
They can try to silence the media, but the story is already out there and _social_ media isn't silenced. (I'm sure OW really regrets coining that meme-able phrase since she too is so fond of silencing people.)

If Harry can't even get his father on the phone, are we supposed to believe that he can call HMTQ any time he likes? And she is going to take his video call without anyone with her to verify what is said? After the BRF have witnessed the way the leaky ship Sussex sails? If she approved, the Disgusting Duo would be issuing the recording of the video calls. BTW, the more I hear of sock puppet Omid Scobie, the less I can tolerate him.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm always amazed by so many creative minds...


----------



## csshopper

When Whiny called the Lawyers, it screamed guilty and cover up. 

21 days to the Diana dedication. Odds on attendance?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> "_Lawyers for the duke and duchess have now sent a letter to some media organisations, saying the BBC article was "false and defamatory" and the allegations should not be repeated._"
> They can try to silence the media, but the story is already out there and _social_ media isn't silenced. (I'm sure OW really regrets coining that meme-able phrase since she too is so fond of silencing people.)
> 
> If Harry can't even get his father on the phone, are we supposed to believe that he can call HMTQ any time he likes? And she is going to take his video call without anyone with her to verify what is said? After the BRF have witnessed the way the leaky ship Sussex sails? If she approved, the Disgusting Duo would be issuing the recording of the video calls. BTW, the more I hear of sock puppet Omid Scobie, the less I can tolerate him.


They are being bullies. The need to control is maniacal.  My google feed has 5 stories relating to them all from different sources. Their  PR bill has to be the budget of a small country and the legal bills keep mounting.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> When Whiny called the Lawyers, it screamed guilty and cover up.
> 
> 21 days to the Diana dedication. Odds on attendance?


Zip. Though he could show up to be a prick to everyone


----------



## xincinsin

Yahoo decided that there is yet another floral connection to link to the baby's name. Maybe Methane and Hazard will argue that with that spiderweb of multiple links, the notion that she was named after TQ is really quite secondary and so HM's blessing doesn't matter.









						We Almost Missed This Hidden Connection Between Meghan Markle’s Baby Name Choice and Her Wedding Day
					

When we first learned that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry named their daughter Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, we...




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Zip. Though he could show up to be a prick to everyone


And then publicly complain that he doesn't understand why his family is so cold and distant to him. Haven't they made him suffer enough? Isn't it his right to bash them? He is only protecting his family from them, right? Sanctimonious Sussexes.


----------



## Chanbal

This is crazy! 

"_So it was an American who cancelled our Queen at Oxford University.

Should we be surprised? Hell no!

This was always the risk of the corrosive narrative spread by Harry and Meghan’s diehard Yank supporters like Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King, who seem cravenly obsessed with linking the modern-day Royal Family to racism without any evidence to back up such claims.

Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman – who tabled the motion to remove the ‘unwelcoming’ portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's Middle Common Room (MCR) – is the epitome of US privilege.

The 25-year-old is the son of a lawyer who lives in a £4 million mansion in Washington DC_."









						DAN WOOTTON: Over-privileged, over-woke and over here
					

Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman - who tabled the motion to remove the 'unwelcoming' portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's common room (MCR) - is the epitome of US privilege.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

Aimee3 said:


> In my neck of the woods, obstetricians tell you your due date and let you know if you don’t go into labor by then naturally, they might give you another day or two to see what develops, but if not, they induce you. I think it’s crazy and I believe it’s cause the doctor doesn’t want to be bothered on the weekends!  Nearly everyone I know (top doctors) was induced or c section, and never on the weekend!  Good for the doctor but I’m not sure how good for the baby.



It was a while back, but I did some reading when I was pregnant and there have been studies that shows that there is a higher risk of losing the baby/stillborn for past due babies, especially past the 42 week mark. The placenta does deteriorate with time and the baby may have other complications especially if they get too big, have reduced amniotic fluid, etc.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I was googling and this came up. M's Painting for sale.  She's beautiful but.  It stopped me in my tracks!!    There's t-shirts too!


Sorry couldn't copy the photo.


> https://www.redbubble.com/i/poster/...cpc&utm_campaign=g.pla+notset&country_code=US
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Features*
> 
> Blank walls suck, so bring some life to your dorm, bedroom, office, studio, wherever
> Printed on 185gsm semi gloss poster paper
> Custom cut - refer to size chart for finished measurements
> Includes a 3/16 inch (5mm) white border to assist in framing
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## CarryOn2020

They were registering domain names at the end of May.  Why?  Here again, we have more suspicions and questions than answers. 
A really disruptive couple.


----------



## Sharont2305

June 10th, what would've been the 100th birthday of The Duke of Edinburgh. 
What do we think? Photo of baby Lilibet? I wouldn't put it past them tbh.


----------



## zen1965

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Oh please, this is the Daily Fail we're talking about.  The use of the title "reporter" for what those folks do is tenuous at best - as is their grip on grammar.



So what do think of „The Bench“ and the grip on grammar and rhyme displayed therein?

And, no, not just The Daily Fail (I fully support your assessment  regarding that rag!): The Telegraph - by no means a tabloid - picked up on the BBC story, too.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy!
> 
> "_So it was an American who cancelled our Queen at Oxford University.
> 
> Should we be surprised? Hell no!
> 
> This was always the risk of the corrosive narrative spread by Harry and Meghan’s diehard Yank supporters like Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King, who seem cravenly obsessed with linking the modern-day Royal Family to racism without any evidence to back up such claims.
> 
> Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman – who tabled the motion to remove the ‘unwelcoming’ portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's Middle Common Room (MCR) – is the epitome of US privilege.
> 
> The 25-year-old is the son of a lawyer who lives in a £4 million mansion in Washington DC_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Over-privileged, over-woke and over here
> 
> 
> Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman - who tabled the motion to remove the 'unwelcoming' portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's common room (MCR) - is the epitome of US privilege.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I am mortified by this presumptuous a-hole.


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s why they have to remind you to leave every 15minutes to stop people - medical and legal necessity
> 
> Well, it’ll be bonfire season soon enough. i feel sorry for all these poor trees that are being put to such ignominious use.
> 
> Hello Poopsie, long time no see! I love a good old Mel Brooks.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They were registering domain names at the end of May.  Why?  Here again, we have more suspicions and questions than answers.
> A really disruptive couple.



Recollections definitely vary. Wouldn’t it be great if there was a transcription of the call?  If there was a call. Perhaps he spoke with her when he went back for the funeral. That would have been the wrong time for her to be making decisions about  anything and he could have take advantage of her


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> I was googling and this came up. M's Painting for sale.  She's beautiful but.  It stopped me in my tracks!!    There's t-shirts too!
> 
> 
> Sorry couldn't copy the photo.


But why? Why would someone buy this? I guess to each his/her own.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> I am mortified by this presumptuous a-hole.


Typical of the woke generation. Speak first think second   Never considering consequences.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> But why? Why would someone buy this? I guess to each his/her own.



Agree!  WHY??  I was surprised but there are fans out there who might purchase this ... as it was suggested for dorm rooms ..


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> @poopsie Welcome back! I thought that you had packed, moved and forgotten us.



LOL
Nah------just been so busy. Turning 65 this year and contemplating retirement, getting pension estimates, SS, etc. Trying to get as much done as possible while I still have employer health/dental insurance. All while working and trying to get the cat to a vet that could help him. Three had turned him down before I FINALLY got him in on Monday. I'd been trying to get him neutered since last year but the pandemic cancelled all elective surgeries. He has breathing issues and the previous vets didn't feel comfortable putting him under.


----------



## poopsie

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree!  WHY??  I was surprised but there are fans out there who might purchase this ... as it was suggested for dorm rooms ..



I don't think Farrah would have had anything to worry about


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree!  WHY??  I was surprised but there are fans out there who might purchase this ... as it was suggested for dorm rooms ..


It seems the artist created the Methane painting for her sorority. Then it was publicised when Beyonce used it as a backdrop in a video. Perhaps they think members of her sorority will want to display a portrait of her dressed in racist trappings 

ETA maybe the woke computer lecturer will propose it for the common room as a portrait of compassion, inclusivity, authenticity, multiracialism and a general FU to the monarch of the country he is trying to reform one woke action at a time.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> I am mortified by this presumptuous a-hole.


Its disgusting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

M



rose60610 said:


> So.....The Bench is about fathers and sons, and Harry and Archie are in it. OK.
> 
> So when Meghan "writes a book" about mothers and daughters it'll be titled either: The Pedestal, or, The Throne And How It Was Stolen From Me. It'll have pictures of only Meghan. It'll say "Mommy can do no wrong", and "Mommy rules the world".


Yes might be harder for her to get her didactic point across than when she’s telling H not to go full Cartman if his boy puts on a tutu.
She might need a ghostwriter for that one. Perhaps Lil will have to ‘write’ it about their wonderful relationship.

 LD can talk about how mommie  and her have fun swimming competitions,  how she teaches her how to maintain your clothes, be charitable by giving all your birthday presents away and, finally, how to clean properly.

lady CC says the poor girl will only be spared if she’s plain as porridge, personally,  I suspect the raptor would manage to find a personal insult pretty or plain.  Especially if the kid has the audacity to have her original teeth or nose.


xincinsin said:


> He discussed baby names with every woman he dated? No wonder he had no takers till Methane came along with her world domination goals.
> 
> I wouldn't be worried about the media. By naming her the way they did, she is going to be name-shamed her entire life. The current controversy is going to be mentioned every time someone writes about her.


Yeah the discussing Diana thing gives me the creeps. I get the vibe he cries after sex. If not before and during.
This is why I don’t think that M is some kind of a sexpert because I feel like they’d be a bit more content with life 

I agree it’s a horrible choice. She’s going to have such a complex. 


Icyjade said:


> It was a while back, but I did some reading when I was pregnant and there have been studies that shows that there is a higher risk of losing the baby/stillborn for past due babies, especially past the 42 week mark. The placenta does deteriorate with time and the baby may have other complications especially if they get too big, have reduced amniotic fluid, etc.


Yes I was told that when I was induced last time & it definitely made me want to do it - no regrets my end. I think the standard varies from country to country as I was told by someone who lived in France they were reluctant induce her at 42.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> At some point, I can imagine MM punching Haz.


There’s pictures of Hazmat in the limousine with scratches like Dept scratches as if someone gouged him. The one with her wearing that hideous red dress. Just sayin. . .


----------



## Hermes Zen

poopsie said:


> I don't think Farrah would have had anything to worry about
> View attachment 5106323



Totally agree!


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


> June 10th, what would've been the 100th birthday of The Duke of Edinburgh.
> What do we think? Photo of baby Lilibet? I wouldn't put it past them tbh.


This is why they’re so mad about the Palace refuting their story.  I’m sure they were planning pictures of the baby for today.


----------



## needlv

Palace PR deserves a standing ovation.

The Queen must have allowed a leak from a senior palace official to the BBC.  BBC duly issues the story about the Queen not being asked.

Sussex PR fires back and also asks lawyers to send letters regarding “false and defamatory” statements... and instructing the press not to repeat the BBC story.  Which makes it more of a story....

since then, the RF has not denied the original source NOR confirmed the Sussex side of the story.  But leaking to the BBC implies it was official.

The Palace PR knew the Sussex duo  would object to the BBC story and accurately predicted a clap-back.  This entire story blew up the Sussex narrative that they are close with the Queen, they FaceTime, the Queen approved etc. 

All before a week of good PR for the Queen.  She has PP’s birthday, trooping of the colour, meeting ***** and Ascot coming up this week.  These PR events are something the Sussexes would have inserted themselves daily into the headlines again by saying how close they are to the Queen, how they wished they could be there but want to spend family time.  ... 

instead Palace PR blew up the Sussex strategy.  The Queen is not impressed with their baby name and they are NOT close to the Queen.  Relations are cold and the  dastardly duo are being frozen out.  

Any stories released this week from Sussex camp are going to be damage control.
well played Palace PR.  Well played....


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy!
> 
> "_So it was an American who cancelled our Queen at Oxford University.
> 
> Should we be surprised? Hell no!
> 
> This was always the risk of the corrosive narrative spread by Harry and Meghan’s diehard Yank supporters like Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King, who seem cravenly obsessed with linking the modern-day Royal Family to racism without any evidence to back up such claims.
> 
> Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman – who tabled the motion to remove the ‘unwelcoming’ portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's Middle Common Room (MCR) – is the epitome of US privilege.
> 
> The 25-year-old is the son of a lawyer who lives in a £4 million mansion in Washington DC_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Over-privileged, over-woke and over here
> 
> 
> Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman - who tabled the motion to remove the 'unwelcoming' portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's common room (MCR) - is the epitome of US privilege.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Reminds me of the WW2 saying: Brits saying: "You Americans are oversexed, overpaid and over here." and the Americans' retort: 
"You Brits are underpaid, underdressed, undersexed and—under Eisenhower! No offense. Just a comic relief.  I guess MM is trying to start an international war between two allies. Families are not enough. A worm is never satisfied. She will keep going and going until she turns into Lady Bathory.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy!
> 
> "_So it was an American who cancelled our Queen at Oxford University.
> 
> Should we be surprised? Hell no!
> 
> This was always the risk of the corrosive narrative spread by Harry and Meghan’s diehard Yank supporters like Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King, who seem cravenly obsessed with linking the modern-day Royal Family to racism without any evidence to back up such claims.
> 
> Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman – who tabled the motion to remove the ‘unwelcoming’ portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's Middle Common Room (MCR) – is the epitome of US privilege.
> 
> The 25-year-old is the son of a lawyer who lives in a £4 million mansion in Washington DC_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Over-privileged, over-woke and over here
> 
> 
> Computer science lecturer Matthew Katzman - who tabled the motion to remove the 'unwelcoming' portrait of the Queen from Magdalen's common room (MCR) - is the epitome of US privilege.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’m going to defend this, University is meant to be a place where people swop ideas and debate even issues that seem distasteful and controversial to us. Also it’s meant to encourage people to learn rhetoric and public speaking. The purpose of something like a union debate isn’t meant to be a declarative statement of what the university body thinks but who argued better at the debate.
What actually happened with the vote and the picture removal seems a bit garbled, but to me, the aim should be to table a more convincing motion for the portrait to stay there next meeting rather than saying that this man has no right to suggest it.

what I object to is when universities minimise teaching time and become a hive mind of regurgitating their lectures of acceptable opinion to keep the degree factory in business.

I’d also say lots of people were saying way worse things about the royals in unis of the 70s and 80s - it’s definitely not a new debate


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Reminds me of the WW2 saying: Brits saying: "You Americans are oversexed, overpaid and over here." and the Americans' retort:
> "You Brits are underpaid, underdressed, undersexed and—under Eisenhower! No offense. Just a comic relief.  I guess MM is trying to start an international war between two allies. Families are not enough. A worm is never satisfied. She will keep going and going until she turns into Lady Bathory.



Even with a new baby, they are still threatening law suits. Almost all parents with newbies spend at least the first week completely enraptured by and focused on the *bébé*” (or “bay-bay”).  _What is wrong with these two?  

_


----------



## Lodpah

To our Brit posters here. Please forgive the perpetuated myth of the Ugly American via you know who. 

American Woman by the Guess Who sung by Lenny Kravitz. Notice the word "sparkle"?

American woman, I'm gonna mess your mind
American woman, you gonna mess your mind
American woman, I'm gonna mess your mind
American woman, I'm gonna mess your mind
Say A, say M, say E
Say R, say I, C
Say A, N
American woman, I'm gonna mess your mind
American woman, you gonna mess your mind
American woman, I'm gonna mess your mind
American woman, stay away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Don't come a hangin' around my door
I don't want to see your face no more
I got more important things to do
Than spend my time growin' old with you
Now woman, I said stay away
American woman, listen what I say
American woman, get away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Don't come a knockin' around my door
Don't want to see your shadow no more
Colored lights can hypnotize
Sparkle someone else's eyes
Now woman, I said get away
American woman, listen what I say-ay-ay-ay
American woman, said get away
American woman, listen what I say
Don't come a hangin' around my door
Don't want to see your face no more
I don't need your war machines
I don't need your ghetto scenes
Colored lights can hypnotize
Sparkle someone else's eyes
Now woman, get away from me
American woman, mama let me be
Go, gotta get away, gotta get away now go, go, go
I'm gonna leave you woman
Gonna leave you woman
Bye-bye bye-bye, bye-bye, bye-bye
You're no good for me
I'm no good for you
Gonna look you right in the eye
Tell you what I'm gonna do
You know I'm gonna leave
You know I'm gonna go
You know I'm gonna leave
You know I'm gonna go-o, woman
I'm gonna leave you woman
Goodbye American woman
Source: LyricFind

American Woman by the Guess Who.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Even with a new baby, they are still threatening law suits. Almost all parents with newbies spend at least the first week completely enraptured by and focused on the *bébé*” (or “bay-bay”).  _What is wrong with these two?  _


She's not human and he's so dumb and getting dumber by the second.


----------



## xincinsin

I keep having this scene in my mind...

Hazard: And so, we're going to call her Lilibet.
HMTQ: No.
Hazard (whines): But we've already bought up the domain and started the licencing and trademark applications!
HMTQ: (stunned, 2 seconds of silence) ...
Hazard: (turns to yell to Methane) She didn't say No! That means it's a Yes! We got the name! Tell SS full speed ahead!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Even with a new baby, they are still threatening law suits. Almost all parents with newbies spend at least the first week completely enraptured by and focused on the *bébé*” (or “bay-bay”).  _What is wrong with these two?
> View attachment 5106333
> _


I’m sure nanny#53 sends hourly updates on the kid’s progress so they get the best of both worlds 



xincinsin said:


> I keep having this scene in my mind...
> 
> Hazard: And so, we're going to call her Lilibet.
> HMTQ: No.
> Hazard (whines): But we've already bought up the domain and started the licencing and trademark applications!
> HMTQ: (stunned, 2 seconds of silence) ...
> Hazard: (turns to yell to Methane) She didn't say No! That means it's a Yes! We got the name! Tell SS full speed ahead!


I can see this happening verbatim 
Bang on the money!


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> I keep having this scene in my mind...
> 
> Hazard: And so, we're going to call her Lilibet.
> HMTQ: No.
> Hazard (whines): But we've already bought up the domain and started the licencing and trademark applications!
> HMTQ: (stunned, 2 seconds of silence) ...
> Hazard: (turns to yell to Methane) She didn't say No! That means it's a Yes! We got the name! Tell SS full speed ahead!


I think they're bullies so no nannies. It's Doria who's the nanny.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sure nanny#53 sends hourly updates on the kid’s progress so they get the best of both worlds
> 
> 
> 
> But not through the night though, M needs to rest her brain from all the conniving she does in the daytime, ready for the next day's conniving.
Click to expand...


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Earl steps up - graciously:
_Edward was also asked how he viewed that 'very public' row in a sit-down with the BBC and replied: 'It's very sad' before adding: 'I stay way out of it. It's much the safest place to be'. 

He added: 'We've all had that same spotlight shone on our lives. We've all been subjected to massive intrusion and all the rest of it. We all had to deal with it in different ways'. 

When asked if he was sad he said: 'Of course, you know. I mean it's…There are all sorts of issues and circumstances there but we've all been there' - but dodged what he thought about the choice of name Lilibet.  

In a wide-ranging interview Edward spoke about how 'difficult' his parents had found shielding at Windsor Castle during lockdown, and then his father's funeral on April 17.

He said: 'It was an experience that so many other families have had to go through during this past year or 18 months and so in that sense, it was particularly poignant.

'There are an awful lot of people who haven't been able to express the respect that they would like to have done. I think many people would have liked to have been there to support the Queen.' 








						Prince Edward admits sadness over Harry and Meghan rift
					

The Earl of Wessex  dodged what he thought of the Sussexes naming their daughter Lilibet after the Queen in an interview on what would have been his father Prince Philip's 100th birthday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

Happily this mornings news shows nice pictures of the Queen accepting a new rose named after Philip and not pictures of Brand Sussex presenting their baby to the world as if she were the sole salve and consolation to the Queens grieving heart.  (See Meghan, we’re all getting the hang of this PR malarkey now   )


----------



## RAINDANCE

Clearblueskies said:


> This is why they’re so mad about the Palace refuting their story.  I’m sure they were planning pictures of the baby for today.


 I expect there will be a series of photos released throughout today for PP 100th birthday. Do we think H&M will be in any of them ?

Even if they release super cute baby & family photos later today, they will be slated for the timing.


----------



## Clearblueskies

RAINDANCE said:


> I expect there will be a series of photos released throughout today for PP 100th birthday. Do we think H&M will be in any of them ?
> 
> Even if they release super cute baby & family photos later today, they will be slated for the timing.


Good question, I think there might’ve been some editing in the last couple of days


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> I expect there will be a series of photos released throughout today for PP 100th birthday. Do we think H&M will be in any of them ?
> 
> Even if they release super cute baby & family photos later today, they will be slated for the timing.



Nothing says cool like a family photo.  From this point forward, all their photos will look like:


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sol Ryan said:


> Okay…. This made me laugh. I’ve always loved Oasis and wished they could work out their issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noel Gallagher SLAMS Prince Harry for 'dissing his family'
> 
> 
> Noel Gallagher has branded Prince Harry a 'f*****g woke snowflake' for publicly criticising the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Spoken like a true mancunian - "That Lad" - made me smile.
A lot sweary, but that's both the Gallagher's for you. 

_“Prince Harry, surely no one takes him seriously? He’s just a mad little kid,” he said._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> people can correct me if I'm wrong but here most companies I think give a few months to the mother but not to both parents



Let me brag for a moment: in Germany, you have 3 years and can take it as you see fit...mom can take the whole 3 years, it can be split to whatever proportion between parents (even something slightly inconvenient for the emloyer like mom 1st and 3rd year, dad 2nd), and you get paid a share of your former salary (a little less if you take the full 3 years, more if you only take off  months).


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nothing says cool like a family photo.  From this point forward, all their photos will look like:
> View attachment 5106372


We will get ear hole pics, a toe maybe and if we are lucky, a wisp of one hair. Listen, I'm happy about the baby and wish her all the joy in the world (she will need it) but frankly they should just enjoy their wee one, privately. Get to know her, stop being busy coordinating with their PR).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There's 12 pages ahead of me, so bare with me if it has been posted. No clue how good a reader that woman is, but everything she says sounds extremely plausible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Lodpah

I'm a big believer in numbers, not numerology, but numbers mean a lot spiritually. Their numbers, Haz and Maz? not good. Not good at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pausing to honor the quintessential husband, father and gentleman.
‘Happy Heavenly Birthday, Sir.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> If this is true, where is Doria? Aren't they considering her also an amazing and strong woman? Let's see how they are going to show here a nod to Doria, any guesses?
> 
> View attachment 5105744



This is not how generations work, is it? Because Raptor can't be the link to her MIL.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nothing says cool like a family photo.  From this point forward, all their photos will look like:
> View attachment 5106372


I suspect that today would be a "perfect" day to release proper photos of Archie with Lili, no arty farty partial shots etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> In my neck of the woods, obstetricians tell you your due date and let you know if you don’t go into labor by then naturally, they might give you another day or two to see what develops, but if not, they induce you. I think it’s crazy and I believe it’s cause the doctor doesn’t want to be bothered on the weekends!  Nearly everyone I know (top doctors) was induced or c section, and never on the weekend!  Good for the doctor but I’m not sure how good for the baby.



Fun fact, in France, babies are never overdue because they calculate the due date differently. Inducing a two days after a due date seems extreme overkill to me, but I don't have kids, so what do I know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think she had a c section based on the time.  Reminds me of a gyn I used to know who had a set schedule everyday of a 7:30am surgery then go to office and see patients and then back to hospital for his 12pm surgery and then back to office for afternoon patients.



But are you released the same day? In Germany, a c-section keeps you at the hospital for 5 days.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Carryon2020.
Lovely! He is sorely missed.

I think if Prince Phillip were alive they would not have dared to exploit the Queen . He would have smacked them down for trying to use Lilibet.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is not how generations work, is it? Because Raptor can't be the link to her MIL.


And Diana can't be the link to HMTQ.
Dean Stott looks like another H&M mouthpiece.
Read the article. His wife too saw the "anger" in Dean, just as Methane saw the "anger" in Hazard. Maybe their therapist does a one-for-one deal, so with the 2 men already using his/her services, the "frugal" Methane has no recourse for mental health aid 








						Prince Harry's Former Military Training Partner Dean Stott on the Harry 'People Haven't Seen'
					

Prince Harry's former military training partner, Dean Stott, opens up about their friendship




					people.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> I'm a big believer in numbers, not numerology, but numbers mean a lot spiritually. Their numbers, Haz and Maz? not good. Not good at all.



Being part asian I believe in numbers too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Walking down a airplane stairs holding hands instead of holding the railing is the stupidest thing I’ve seen all day.



The constant handholding was so freaking childish and devious. I say was because guess what, when they're out and about in Hollywood not expecting paps they don't hold hands. How...interesting.


----------



## RAINDANCE

My little theory today is that H&M had decided on Lily Diana but it was the backlash about their wreath merchandising that has been the instrument behind using the Queens' private name. ( I can't bear to type it )
It was widely reported that HMTQ's note on the wreath was signed as Lilibet but this was not visible, as you would expect of something so deeply private and personal.
It would be very interesting to know EXACTLY when Lilibet came up as a suggested name (and by whom) and, as I said before, why they did not approach HMTQ in the EIGHT months they had to think of a name ? 

It is increasingly apparent just what a spoilt man-child Harry is. He seems to expect that everyone will say yes to his wants and has no sense at all of good manners* and etiquette despite his background. Harry's _perception_ of his childhood may be that he was neglected but his _behavior _consistently tells a story of overindulgence and lack of accountability. 

*Just veering of topic -  My MIL has a holiday house on the coast where we stay when we visit Ireland. Neither DH or I would ever dream of calling MIL and _telling her_ we will be over on x date or in fact calling to say we're here already at her house (we do have our own set of keys). Each and every time, we and any other family members ask permission to use HER house beforehand.


----------



## Traminer

Traminer said:


> I have never been a friend of turning nicknames into official first names.
> Then they lose their character  as nicknames, without becoming  real first names.
> And in this case I do not like it at all.



What is interesting for me to see:  
THIRTEEN members agree!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Icyjade

_e_


QueenofWrapDress said:


> But are you released the same day? In Germany, a c-section keeps you at the hospital for 5 days.



3 years maternity leave and this? I want to be pregnant in Germany too. Over here I think is like 3 days for c-section. I had a traumatic forceps delivery and was sent home after 3 days - that after I nearly cried when they wanted to discharge me the day before.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> 3 years maternity leave and this? I want to be pregnant in Germany too. Over here I think is like 3 days for c-section. I had a traumatic forceps delivery and was sent home after 3 days - that after I nearly cried when they wanted to discharge me the day before.



Also, the co-pay for said c-section is 50 bucks...10 bucks per night in the hospital. Health care is depending on your salary, and your employer pays half...my health insurance is like 150 bucks a month our of my pocket, and that covers all doctor's visits unless it's a private practice, most medication, most procedures (e.g. for teeth you have a choice between basic and advanced methods...I have a reasonable extra insurance that covers 80 % of professional cleansing twice a year plus 90 % of advanced procedures, and this year I'll use multiple of what I paid into it due to my two botched teeth that need extensive revision). Also, there are nearly unlimited sick days...any sickness up to 6 weeks you get your full salary while staying home, after that health insurance kicks in and pays you a percentage up to 18 months (between 70 and 90 %, but don't ask me the specifics).

ETA: and parents get 10 paid sick days in case the kids are sick before they have to dig into their vacation days.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> But why? Why would someone buy this? I guess to each his/her own.





Hermes Zen said:


> Agree!  WHY??  I was surprised but there are fans out there who might purchase this ... as it was suggested for dorm rooms ..




This diehard fan has that picture of MoM on her wall which could be seen in multiple pictures posted on her creepy IG


----------



## EverSoElusive

Before all the extra plastic surgery, Botox or whatever. MoM looked like Trevity Trev Trev here.


----------



## doni

Icyjade said:


> 3 years maternity leave and this? I want to be pregnant in Germany too. Over here I think is like 3 days for c-section. I had a traumatic forceps delivery and was sent home after 3 days - that after I nearly cried when they wanted to discharge me the day before.


I had two C-sections in Germany and was sent home after 3 days.
It is not all sunshine and roses with the maternity leave either. Yes, you are given (some) pay if you take maternity up to 3 years. But if you decide that’s not what you want and that you wish to go back to work before that time... well, first good luck finding childcare. Then, if you do, be hopeful you can afford it. Finally, if you are a mother, be ready to put up with being looked at in horror and pointed at because you abandoned your children. I went back to work after _9 months_ full maternity leave with each of my children, and I have been called a “rabbenmutter” (raven mother, a common expression for mothers who work), and been given more side glances and snarky comments that I can count of the type: you are so brave to trust strangers with your kid, or, I would never want anyone but my wife to feed our child...

Sorry for the rant. Fortunately things are changing. Plus looking back I wish I had been more German I worked a bit less and enjoyed time off a bit more! 

And sorry for the OT, back to topic, what I don’t get about name gate is, how do you get it so wrong that you manage to offend someone by trying to honor them? This is not Meghan’s fault. Harry is a royal born and bred, how can he be so clueless?



EverSoElusive said:


> Before all the extra plastic surgery, Botox or whatever. MoM looked like Trevity Trev Trev here.




I think she looks very pretty...


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nothing says cool like a family photo.  From this point forward, all their photos will look like:
> View attachment 5106372


One hopes!


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Before all the extra plastic surgery, Botox or whatever. MoM looked like Trevity Trev Trev here.



Brown strap sandals with some sort of draped black shift, exposed lace slip and a black patent skinny belt ? 
Then there’s that hair…. 

Has she ever had a glam squad that didn’t clearly hate her?

That’s kind of telling.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5106394


I must google this rose!
Totally OT, but let's take a break from the Tone-deaf Twosome.
I want to try eating roses. I heard that apart from smelling good, they taste good. There's a website that ranks them by how tasty they are


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m going to defend this, University is meant to be a place where people swop ideas and debate even issues that seem distasteful and controversial to us. Also it’s meant to encourage people to learn rhetoric and public speaking. The purpose of something like a union debate isn’t meant to be a declarative statement of what the university body thinks but who argued better at the debate.
> What actually happened with the vote and the picture removal seems a bit garbled, but to me, the aim should be to table a more convincing motion for the portrait to stay there next meeting rather than saying that this man has no right to suggest it.
> 
> what I object to is when universities minimise teaching time and become a hive mind of regurgitating their lectures of acceptable opinion to keep the degree factory in business.
> 
> I’d also say lots of people were saying way worse things about the royals in unis of the 70s and 80s - it’s definitely not a new debate



Agreed, but it should be a Brit. Just as I don't like H telling Americans what to think/do/who to vote for/opinions on on the Constitution & Amendments.


----------



## Traminer

doni said:


> how do you get it so wrong that you manage to offend someone by trying to honor them? This is not Meghan’s fault.



I am not so sure that Meghan's intention really was to "honour" the Queen by stealing her very personal nickname.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Being part asian I believe in numbers too.



My culture is obsessed!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> Finally, if you are a mother, be ready to put up with being looked at in horror and pointed at because you abandoned your children. I went back to work after _9 months_ full maternity leave with each of my children, and I have been called a “rabbenmutter” (raven mother, a common expression for mothers who work), and been given more side glances and snarky comments that I can count of the type: you are so brave to trust strangers with your kid, or, I would never want anyone but my wife to feed our child...



I really think that's something women can't escape. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. It doesn't even stop with childcare, strangers have an opinion if you breastfeed or not, if you have too many children or the lone only child, if you become a mother too early or too late in life. It sucks.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really think that's something women can't escape. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. It doesn't even stop with childcare, strangers have an opinion if you breastfeed or not, if you have too many children or the lone only child, if you become a mother too early or too late in life. It sucks.


Amen.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really think that's something women can't escape. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. It doesn't even stop with childcare, strangers have an opinion if you breastfeed or not, if you have too many children or the lone only child, if you become a mother too early or too late in life. It sucks.


That is for sure! But this particular one does not necessarily happen in other countries. My French and Spanish friends were amazed I took 9 months maternity leave, they were like wow, 9 months?, that is soooo long. And I am thinking, if you only knew what my neighbours are saying... Depending on which country I found myself in I was the supermom carelessly sacrificing her career, or the ruthless career chick nonchalantly sacrificing her children, as you say, you can’t win.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really think that's something women can't escape. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. It doesn't even stop with childcare, strangers have an opinion if you breastfeed or not, if you have too many children or the lone only child, if you become a mother too early or too late in life. It sucks.


Mothers get 16 weeks maternity leave with full salary in my country and they can share part of it with fathers. I've had team mates extend it to half a year by using their own vacation leave (4 to 6 weeks), childcare entitlement days and a few weeks of no-pay leave. Some who are not wanting for income even take a year off (we have colleagues who are independently wealthy and don't really need to work).

As a supervisor in these Covid times when many are working from home, I was quite stunned when a new mum under my charge didn't plan any childcare arrangements. She quite naively thought that she could work from home forever and take care of her baby. Maybe it would have been possible if she was doing flexitime work or results-based tasks, but she is working a support job that requires her to be online and interacting with others from 8.30am to 6pm. I can't even adjust her role and offer her some form of flexitime because she has a history of poor time management and going MIA on the job


----------



## Icyjade

doni said:


> I went back to work after _9 months_ full maternity leave with each of my children, and I have been called a “rabbenmutter” (raven mother, a common expression for mothers who work), and been given more side glances and snarky comments that I can count of the type: you are so brave to trust strangers with your kid, or, I would never want anyone but my wife to feed our child...



That sounds super sexist! In my part of the world maternity leave is only 4 months so people just go back to work whether they are ready or not. And lots of women work so it’s more sympathetic nods from other women and the men… I do find reactions vary depending on whether their wives work or not. The old fashioned ones… well, let’s not talk about them.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> He discussed baby names with every woman he dated? No wonder he had no takers till Methane came along with her world domination goals.
> 
> I wouldn't be worried about the media. By naming her the way they did, she is going to be name-shamed her entire life. The current controversy is going to be mentioned every time someone writes about her.


Yes, I feel so sorry about the awkwardness of the name ... and the baby has two controversial names, neither is without baggage - she could not easily use her middle name instead

Diana's brother had two daughters named Kitty and Katia, well, after a few years Katia chose to use her middle name of Amelia to avoid confusion

There should always be a non controversial name in the list ... just in case


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Agreed, but it should be a Brit. Just as I don't like H telling Americans what to think/do/who to vote for/opinions on on the Constitution & Amendments.


Agree, it is awkward for a person of one culture to comment on another ...

I say that from experience - lived  in the US - where I picked up American English on the street as my 3rd language, and I had maybe two slim years of US history with the Constitution 
Raised by an English Welsh granny who taught me the queen's English English table manners and the magna charta
But went to a French language school for 12 years due to Swiss family, French is my first language, learned the French national anthem and Napoleonic/French code of laws (it is still relevant)

I know a lot about each culture - I know more about the Napoleonic code than most Americans, but not as much as a native French person 
You should watch me at a dinner table ... I try to figure out whether American, French or English table manners are being used by most of the others, and then adapt, complicated


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Agree, it is awkward for a person of one culture to comment on another ...
> 
> I say that from experience - lived  in the US - where I picked up American English on the street as my 3rd language, and I had maybe two slim years of US history with the Constitution
> Raised by an English Welsh granny who taught me the queen's English English table manners and the magna charta
> But went to a French language school for 12 years due to Swiss family, French is my first language, learned the French national anthem and Napoleonic/French code of laws (it is still relevant)
> 
> I know a lot about each culture - I know more about the Napoleonic code than most Americans, but not as much as a native French person
> You should watch me at a dinner table ... I try to figure out whether American, French or English table manners are being used by most of the others, and then adapt, complicated


English Welsh granny?


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> Does anyone think Doria needed to take Scientology lessons in how to grandparent?  What other reason?  She already is Archie's grandparent.


is she a Scientologist?


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah the discussing Diana thing gives me the creeps.* I get the vibe he cries after sex*. If not before and during.
> This is why I don’t think that M is some kind of a sexpert because I feel like they’d be a bit more content with life



Now I have the image of Harry sitting on the edge of the bed sobbing like a little girl. I DID NOT need that!


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> LOL
> Nah------just been so busy. Turning 65 this year and contemplating retirement, getting pension estimates, SS, etc. Trying to get as much done as possible while I still have employer health/dental insurance. All while working and trying to get the cat to a vet that could help him. Three had turned him down before I FINALLY got him in on Monday. I'd been trying to get him neutered since last year but the pandemic cancelled all elective surgeries. He has breathing issues and the previous vets didn't feel comfortable putting him under.


Many people are being 'persuaded' to retire by this pandemic. One of my very career oriented friends that never wanted to talk about the possibility of retiring, is now very excited planning it. There is life after work.  Hope all goes well with pension calculations and the neutering of the cat.
On topic, Cringe and Ginger may need a fat pension from the BRF. The way they spend money is


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Before all the extra plastic surgery, Botox or whatever. MoM looked like Trevity Trev Trev here.



her hair looks lighter - makes her look a bit like JLo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Mothers get 16 weeks maternity leave with full salary in my country and they can share part of it with fathers. I've had team mates extend it to half a year by using their own vacation leave (4 to 6 weeks), childcare entitlement days and a few weeks of no-pay leave. Some who are not wanting for income even take a year off (we have colleagues who are independently wealthy and don't really need to work).
> 
> As a supervisor in these Covid times when many are working from home, I was quite stunned when a new mum under my charge didn't plan any childcare arrangements. She quite naively thought that she could work from home forever and take care of her baby. Maybe it would have been possible if she was doing flexitime work or results-based tasks, but she is working a support job that requires her to be online and interacting with others from 8.30am to 6pm. I can't even adjust her role and offer her some form of flexitime because she has a history of poor time management and going MIA on the job


I've had 2 C sections.  Both times I was sent home post op day 2, and got 6 weeks off.  With the first "leave", due to an HR screw up, I didn't get paid at all.  The second one, I actually timed between switching jobs so I could get 8 weeks off.  My new job tried to get me to come in at 2 weeks post surgery!  For the first time in my life, I stood up for myself and said no way.  They threatened they'd move on and find someone else!  I basically told them to F off.  I got 6 weeks, but they made my life hell for a couple years after that.  Call me callous, but I don't have much sympathy for the women that bi**h they "only" had a year off.  I would've loved even 4 months off.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> her hair looks lighter - makes her look a bit like JLo




Agree but look at her face side by side with Trevor's, you'll see what I'm talking about  And in OW interview, she looked like J Law with smoky eye makeup  What a natural beauty!


----------



## eunaddict

papertiger said:


> Agreed, but it should be a Brit. Just as I don't like H telling Americans what to think/do/who to vote for/opinions on on the Constitution & Amendments.



Agreed. As someone born in one country, raised in another and now living and working in a 3rd; sometimes when you're a guest, it's better to stay out of anything political or really anything that might divide your peers over...it's not really your place and you don't have the same amount of knowledge of the country and culture as those born and raised there to really grasp any nuances on these issues. At least wait until you've actually lived there a while,; learn a little, live a little and start understanding the little bits and pieces that make up the country, then sure, start entering those conversations. But until you've committed to that country and that society and that culture...don't.

You can have an opinion but that doesn't mean you have to shove it in everyone's face.


----------



## bag-mania

eunaddict said:


> Agreed. As someone born in one country, raised in another and now living and working in a 3rd; sometimes when you're a guest, it's better to stay out of anything political or really anything that might divide your peers over...it's not really your place and you don't have the same amount of knowledge of the country and culture as those born and raised there to really grasp any nuances on these issues.
> 
> You can have an opinion but that doesn't mean you have to shove it in everyone's face.



Yes, and students like him do it to feed their egos and hope to get famous for accomplishing something they consider to be daring. Society is encouraging it with all of the "be an instrument of change" rhetoric that is constantly being pushed on us.

Not all change is necessary or good. And just because you want to change something that has been around for a long time doesn't automatically mean you should be admired. (Boy, am I in the right thread for that statement.)


----------



## lanasyogamama

H looks miserable and Camilla is asking for help!


----------



## sdkitty

and the H&M love from American tv continues....turned on TV and the Today Show was on (I don't watch that show but it popped up).  Al Roker and some woman cast member (WOC) were talking about the baby naming.  I just caught the tail end but she said something like she named her kid after her grandma and told grandma after the fact.  the woman and al agreed this is an honor and said (half joking i guess) "we don't want to hear from the BBC"

I don't think her grandma is the queen of England 

Gawd


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Now I have the image of Harry sitting on the edge of the bed sobbing like a little girl. I DID NOT need that!



My image is fetal position sucking thumb as he blubbers on.......and on.......and on


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> and the H&M love from American tv continues....turned on TV and the Today Show was on (I don't watch that show but it popped up).  Al Roker and some woman cast member (WOC) were talking about the baby naming.  I just caught the tail end but she said something like she named her kid after her grandma and told grandma after the fact.  the woman and al agreed this is an honor and said (half joking i guess) "we don't want to hear from the BBC"
> 
> I don't think her grandma is the queen of England
> 
> Gawd


reminds me of the story about H after D died - all the flowers irritated him because "they did not know her", sometimes reactions are not what you expect
in general, are family members thrilled or aghast after children being/not being named after them ? It varies, it is a family thing ...
Roker has a right to perceive this as an honor ... it is HIS truth ... however, opinions may vary


----------



## TC1

It's early in the day yet..I wonder what slap in the face they are cooking up for today's media release to coincide with PP 100th


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Happily this mornings news shows nice pictures of the Queen accepting a new rose named after Philip and not pictures of Brand Sussex presenting their baby to the world as if she were the sole salve and consolation to the Queens grieving heart.  (See Meghan, we’re all getting the hang of this PR malarkey now   )


Notice that she was wearing a granny like cardigan. It was good for the warm,and  cozy granny look. How could you look at this woman and not love and want to hug her?  A good contrast to the mean and senile portrait that the Harkles are  trying to push.   They are the meanies keeping two children from knowing her.  Elizabeth Diana Doria would have been a fine name and they should have used it.


----------



## gracekelly

Traminer said:


> I am not so sure that Meghan's intention really was to "honour" the Queen by stealing her very personal nickname.


It was payback for stealing her HRH.


----------



## Sharont2305

It's a wonder she hasn't pimped out the fact that Lili is the first great grandchild to be born after Philip passed away. 


gracekelly said:


> Notice that she was wearing a granny like cardigan. It was good for the warm,and  cozy granny look. How could you look at this woman and not love and want to hug her?  A good contrast to the mean and senile portrait that the Harkles are  trying to push.   They are the meanies keeping two children from knowing her.  Elizabeth Diana Doria would have been a fine name and they should have used it.


Yes, the cardigan, looking lopsided on her right shoulder as though she just put it on and not had time to adjust it.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> H looks miserable and Camilla is asking for help!



Death stare. He wasn’t happy.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> It's a wonder she hasn't pimped out the fact that Lili is the first great grandchild to be born after Philip passed away.
> 
> Yes, the cardigan, looking lopsided on her right shoulder as though she just put it on and not had time to adjust it.


I don’t think I have ever seen her in anything, but formally dressed in suit and hat for any presentation.   They wanted this to look like the personal moment it was.


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> It's early in the day yet..I wonder what slap in the face they are cooking up for today's media release to coincide with PP 100th


A pic of baby next to a pic of the wreath she sent for the funeral.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

poopsie said:


> My image is fetal position sucking thumb as he blubbers on.......and on.......and on


This was mine too...with Nutmeg big spooning him


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> This was mine too...with Nutmeg big spooning him


Begging for a roast chicken?


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think I have ever seen her in anything, but formally dressed in suit and hat for any presentation.   They wanted this to look like the personal moment it was.


I’m not convinced QE2 does PR, I think she just does QE2


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think I have ever seen her in anything, but formally dressed in suit and hat for any presentation.   They wanted this to look like the personal moment it was.


This picture tugged at my heart. Endearingly "real", a very elderly lady probably flooded with memories and longing as she is presented with a touching tribute to her late husband, her "constant strength and guide." How sorely she must be especially missing him as she continues to be bombarded by her nasty grandson and wife.

It would be fitting for media to publish this along side one of the many options available showing a smirky/snide looking Hazard and Methane for contrast and to emphasize they are bullies.


----------



## purseinsanity

eunaddict said:


> Agreed. As someone born in one country, raised in another and now living and working in a 3rd; sometimes when you're a guest, it's better to stay out of anything political or really anything that might divide your peers over...it's not really your place and you don't have the same amount of knowledge of the country and culture as those born and raised there to really grasp any nuances on these issues.
> *
> You can have an opinion but that doesn't mean you have to shove it in everyone's face.*


Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone should have one, but doesn't mean we all need to see it.


----------



## zen1965

Icyjade said:


> That sounds super sexist! In my part of the world maternity leave is only 4 months so people just go back to work whether they are ready or not. And lots of women work so it’s more sympathetic nods from other women and the men… I do find reactions vary depending on whether their wives work or not. The old fashioned ones… well, let’s not talk about them.



Different folks, different strokes.
13 years ago I took paid maternity leave in Germany (14 months) and had a completely different experience to @doni . Most women in Germany I knew then went  back to work at around the one-year-mark. I think perception of maternity varies largely acc. to location, area of work and other socio-economic factors.


----------



## mellibelly

gracekelly said:


> Begging for a roast chicken?


Premasticated roast chicken for the crying bébé


----------



## Lenna.V

doni said:


> Sorry for the rant. Fortunately things are changing. Plus looking back I wish I had been more German I worked a bit less and enjoyed time off a bit more!



As a Germany neighbor this shock me hahaha we are over here expecting they are working harder than us.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

For what it's worth (which is pretty much nothing), a niece named her daughter after me, and her nickname is what my father used to call me.  It was after my father died.  My niece asked permission to use both my name and my father's nickname for me, and honestly, it's brought me great joy.  But then, she's not broadcasting nasty crap about generational angst within our family.  So, similar, but certainly not the same.


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> My culture is obsessed!



And reading the lines in your palms. My mother read mine before getting married years ago and it’s been spot on. Wonder what M’s palm ✋ read? Okay, won’t go there! I started to and deleted it.


----------



## Aimee3

Do we know why the dastardly duo were asked to leave Charles’ garden party?


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Agree but look at her face side by side with Trevor's, you'll see what I'm talking about  And in OW interview, she looked like J Law with smoky eye makeup  What a natural beauty!


That's exactly it. She used to have an oval, flat-ish, pretty face and now she has those Jennifer Lawrence projecting cheeks and fuller lips. (J Law has also had her fair share of facial surgery, but that's another story.)


lanasyogamama said:


> H looks miserable and Camilla is asking for help!



Camilla immediately fit in.  I was watching from the beginning and she's a natural for the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Do we know why the dastardly duo were asked to leave Charles’ garden party?



There has been so much speculation. No one knows. It was too awkward and weird for it to be nothing.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> reminds me of the story about H after D died - all the flowers irritated him because "they did not know her", sometimes reactions are not what you expect
> in general, are family members thrilled or aghast after children being/not being named after them ? It varies, it is a family thing ...
> Roker has a right to perceive this as an honor ... it is HIS truth ... however, opinions may vary


yes Roker has a right to his opinion.  I don't think H&M intended this to be disrespectful.  what I think is (just my opinion) they wanted it to look like they were honoring the queen.  and to use this as a way to "stay royal"


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> And reading the lines in your palms. My mother read mine before getting married years ago and it’s been spot on. Wonder what M’s palm ✋ read? Okay, won’t go there! I started to and deleted it.


You know, I'm not really superstitious and I don't put my stock into palm readers, but I had mine read for fun at 19.  Although I put no stock into what was said at the time, when I look back and think about it, I'm shocked at how much actually came true!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Cavalier Girl said:


> For what it's worth (which is pretty much nothing), a niece named her daughter after me, and her nickname is what my father used to call me.  It was after my father died.  My niece asked permission to use both my name and my father's nickname for me, and honestly, it's brought me great joy.  But then, she's not broadcasting nasty crap about generational angst within our family.  So, similar, but certainly not the same.


I think those are the biggest differences: actually asking you for permission, and (I'm assuming) no backstabbing of you constantly.  My SIL has an absolutely wonderful nickname, and their neighbor loved it so much, she gave her newborn daughter the same name and nickname without asking.  Granted, not the same family, but my SIL was not amused. 
My husband's first cousins truly annoyed me.  One stole the first name I was going to use for my firstborn if it had been a girl, then proceeded to name her son the same first AND middle name as my son!  Her sister then used the same first and middle names for her daughter as my daughter!  My daughter's middle name is a family name from my side of the family, and being from a different culture, has absolutely nothing to do with the cousin's daughter.  I was actually shocked.  Haven't these people ever heard of baby name books???  WTF?!    And no, neither asked our permission.  My husband's grandmother had 2 sets of great grandchildren with the exact damn names.

Edited: great grandchildren


----------



## purseinsanity

Prince William, More Royals Remember Late Prince Philip on 100th Birthday
					

Prince Philip died in April 2021 at the age of 99, just two months shy of his 100th birthday — see tributes to the late royal




					www.usmagazine.com
				




I don't see Cringe and Ginge as having acknowledged him yet, especially given how CLOSE they were to PP.


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> Before all the extra plastic surgery, Botox or whatever. MoM looked like Trevity Trev Trev here.



No, she had already had her nose done, but it definitely appears "thinner" now .. so, she likely had another nose job after this one.  I'm intrigued by her hair color here; a much lighter brown (with - blonde? highlights).  Hmmmm .. was she trying NOT to look like a WOC here?


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> You know, I'm not really superstitious and I don't put my stock into palm readers, but I had mine read for fun at 19.  Although I put no stock into what was said at the time, when I look back and think about it, I'm shocked at how much actually came true!



I'm shocked how accurate it was too.  I've never had my palm read before or since but apparently where my mother was from, they did before one's wedding and she used a paperback book to understand the lines in the hand. She also double checked the wedding date (here is an example of numbers ) we picked and there were other traditions that I wasn't aware of until I got married.

Sorry for off topic stuff but very interesting.  Still wonder what M's would have said though.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes Roker has a right to his opinion.  I don't think H&M intended this to be disrespectful.  what I think is (just my opinion) they wanted it to look like they were honoring the queen.  and to use this as a way to "stay royal"



I think they care more about whether casual observers think they were trying to honor the Queen than if the Queen herself believed it. They are all consumed with the smoke and mirrors of manipulating public opinion and they forget that some people will always be able to see through them. Maybe they don't care as long as most people believe it. Apparently Al Roker is firmly on their side for what that's worth.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Do we know why the dastardly duo were asked to leave Charles’ garden party?


I never completely figured it out, but it was so close to the wedding that I thought that she was trying to make Charles' BD party about her. She was sashaying around like she owned the place.   The grey men were watching her and didn't like it and informed Charles who doesn't like his limelight taken away so off they were sent!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I never completely figured it out, but it was so close to the wedding that I thought that she was trying to make Charles' BD party about her. She was sashaying around like she owned the place.   The grey men were watching her and didn't like it and informed Charles who doesn't like his limelight taken away so off they were sent!


I like that theory


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> I’m not convinced QE2 does PR, I think she just does QE2


I meant that when she does meet and greet etc she is more dressed up and doesn't wear something as casual as a cardigan.  You only see her dress very casually when she is in the country.


----------



## bellecate

..


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I think those are the biggest differences: actually asking you for permission, and (I'm assuming) no backstabbing of you constantly.  My SIL has an absolutely wonderful nickname, and their neighbor loved it so much, she gave her newborn daughter the same name and nickname without asking.  Granted, not the same family, but my SIL was not amused.
> My husband's first cousins truly annoyed me.  One stole the first name I was going to use for my firstborn if it had been a girl, then proceeded to name her son the same first AND middle name as my son!  Her sister then used the same first and middle names for her daughter as my daughter!  My daughter's middle name is a family name from my side of the family, and being from a different culture, has absolutely nothing to do with the cousin's daughter.  I was actually shocked.  Haven't these people ever heard of baby name books???  WTF?!    And no, neither asked our permission.  My husband's grandmother had 2 sets of grandchildren with the exact damn names.


How ridiculous!  What does the poor woman do to differentiate between them?  Jane 1 and Jane2?  Do they have different nicknames?  I think it really sucks lemons when people are so unimaginative that they have to steal.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I never completely figured it out, but it was so close to the wedding that I thought that she was trying to make Charles' BD party about her. She was sashaying around like she owned the place.   The grey men were watching her and didn't like it and informed Charles who doesn't like his limelight taken away so off they were sent!



Like maybe she marched in to the party thinking it would be such a treat for the old folks to see how vibrant and wonderful she was? Never once considering that she looked like a pushy show-off who was trying to upstage everyone else, including her host. That sounds about right.

Still, I can't help but wonder if it was something even worse.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> How ridiculous!  What does the poor woman do to differentiate between them?  Jane 1 and Jane2?  Do they have different nicknames?  I think it really sucks lemons when people are so unimaginative that they have to steal.


LOL, insane right?  Our sons are both Jack, so no difference there!  DH's uncle's granddaughter's nickname is "Alex" and he calls my daughter Alex as well, which drives her nuts, since we don't use that nickname.


----------



## Genie27

jelliedfeels said:


> Brown strap sandals with some sort of draped black shift, exposed lace slip and a black patent skinny belt ?
> Then there’s that hair….
> 
> Has she ever had a glam squad that didn’t clearly hate her?
> 
> That’s kind of telling.


Well, it was for Madewell...


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> That's exactly it. She used to have an oval, flat-ish, pretty face and now she has those Jennifer Lawrence projecting cheeks and fuller lips. (J Law has also had her fair share of facial surgery, but that's another story.)
> 
> Camilla immediately fit in.  I was watching from the beginning and she's a natural for the BRF.


I think coming from an upper class British family definitely helps quite a bit.  Meghan was like a fish out of water to start with, but then was like salmon swimming the wrong way the entire time.  She did succeed in spawning.


----------



## Traminer

Sharont2305 said:


> English Welsh granny?



I also asked  myself: What does that mean now?
English or Welsh?
Or half English and half Welsh?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Like maybe she marched in to the party thinking it would be such a treat for the old folks to see how vibrant and wonderful she was? Never once considering that she looked like a pushy show-off who was trying to upstage everyone else, including her host. That sounds about right.
> 
> Still, I can't help but wonder if it was something even worse.


Can't remember if this was the party, but at one she was overheard telling Haz, within a very short time after arrival,  that she was "bored and why couldn't they leave?"


----------



## Traminer

marietouchet said:


> Raised by an English Welsh granny



English or Welsh?


----------



## marietouchet

Traminer said:


> English or Welsh?



Both .. her maiden name was Jones, the family Bible is in Welsh - I still have it, but she grew up just outside of Wales, in England - near Liverpool
She eventually cultivated a posh accent, losing the hybrid Welsh/scouser accent of her youth


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Can't remember if this was the party, but at one she was overheard telling Haz, within a very short time after arrival,  that she was "bored and why couldn't they leave?"



I remember that too. I can certainly believe she was bored but I'd be surprised if she'd allow anyone to overhear her saying it. That's the kind of thing where she would desperately clutch Harry's arm and urgently whisper it into his ear.   

I don't think Charles would be so annoyed if it was only that they put in a brief appearance and left. And Harry wouldn't have any reason to be annoyed about it.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Can't remember if this was the party, but at one she was overheard telling Haz, within a very short time after arrival,  that she was "bored and why couldn't they leave?"


Yes it was. You can count the number of parties they went to on one hand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> (we have colleagues who are independently wealthy and don't really need to work).



If I was independently wealthy I'd be a lady who lunches and rescues all the kittens LOL


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Like maybe she marched in to the party thinking it would be such a treat for the old folks to see how vibrant and wonderful she was? Never once considering that she looked like a pushy show-off who was trying to upstage everyone else, including her host. That sounds about right.
> 
> Still, I can't help but wonder if it was something even worse.


That is a good description!  She wiggled her hips something fierce too  She was still slim and looked good.  I think she also made some comments to people that she was speaking with and the courtiers overheard.  It must have been something inappropriate.  I also think that "inappropriate" on a royal level is not the same as "inappropriate" on the level of we little people.  She may not have realized that what she said was no bueno.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> And reading the lines in your palms. My mother read mine before getting married years ago and it’s been spot on. Wonder what M’s palm ✋ read? Okay, won’t go there! I started to and deleted it.



"That thing's not human."


----------



## Sophisticatted

Two things I recall hearing about the garden party and why they were asked to leave:
1) M did that cutesy stick out her tongue thing to Camilla, which Charles found intolerably disrespectful.
2) M was overheard trying to make some sort of business/merch type deals with other party attendants, which is strictly against protocol and is also bad manners, and so they were asked to leave.  

perhaps #2 happened, and H&M were being reprimanded in the video clip, and then M passive aggressively did a tongue stick out on the lawn afterwards, thinking she would get away with it, when Charles had them removed from the premises.


----------



## Traminer

Sharont2305 said:


> English Welsh granny?



@Sharont2305 

I see that you asked the same question as me.
And   I realize you are from North Wales.
Yes, we do care about these details, that are part of our identity.
Same here.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> That's exactly it. She used to have an oval, flat-ish, pretty face and now she has those Jennifer Lawrence projecting cheeks and fuller lips. (J Law has also had her fair share of facial surgery, but that's another story.)



I find the one-size-fits-all plastic surgery to be disturbing. It seems like the doctors/surgeons do the same things and looks for everyone   

Look up Dorothy Wang on IG, she looks like Chrissy T and Kimora Lee in some of her pictures


----------



## Traminer

marietouchet said:


> Both .. her maiden name was Jones, the family Bible is in Welsh - I still have it, but she grew up just outside of Wales, in England - near Liverpool


Fine - that explains it!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t wait to watch this!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Dying over her description of Omid Scobie. Comedy gold.


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dying over her description of Omid Scobie. Comedy gold.



Associating him with Joseph Goebbels.  hahahaha!

ETA:  I got my Nazi guys confused lol!


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> I find the one-size-fits-all plastic surgery to be disturbing. It seems like the doctors/surgeons do the same things and looks for everyone
> 
> Look up Dorothy Wang on IG, she looks like Chrissy T and Kimora Lee in some of her pictures


I remember the original Dorothy Wang face, not the new one!


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's 12 pages ahead of me, so bare with me if it has been posted. No clue how good a reader that woman is, but everything she says sounds extremely plausible.



This is interesting! I read tarot so watched the whole thing. While there’s a certain amount of projection from the reader (she clearly can’t stand Methane!) the cards were very clear. 

Now what was wild was towards the end of the reading she predicted divorce and it would then come out that Lili wasn’t royal. Archie is but not Lili. She implied Lili wasn’t Harry’s?! That’s so far fetched I don’t quite believe it. But if she was born by surrogate, does that affect her royal standing?


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> This is interesting! I read tarot so watched the whole thing. While there’s a certain amount of projection from the reader (she clearly can’t stand Methane!) the cards were very clear.
> 
> Now what was wild was towards the end of the reading she predicted divorce and it would then come out that Lili wasn’t royal. Archie is but not Lili. She implied Lili wasn’t Harry’s?! That’s so far fetched I don’t quite believe it. *But if she was born by surrogate, does that affect her royal standing?*



All those rules were created long before IVF and surrogates became a thing. Still, I assume as long as it was Harry’s sperm that was used, the baby is Royal. I don’t think this kind of situation has been addressed yet.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dying over her description of Omid Scobie. Comedy gold.




Another one so soon! Thanks for the link! Love this woman.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> I remember the original Dorothy Wang face, not the new one!



IIRC, Dorothy Wang was already pretty before all her plastic surgeries. Wish she never went under the knife. Now she's so plastic surgery generic


----------



## Jayne1

mellibelly said:


> Now what was wild was towards the end of the reading she predicted divorce and it would then come out that Lili wasn’t royal. Archie is but not Lili. She implied Lili wasn’t Harry’s?! That’s so far fetched I don’t quite believe it. But if she was born by surrogate, does that affect her royal standing?


The first kid is all Harry. Can't imagine they wouldn't use Harry's sperm for the 2nd.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also I love reading through comments, there are always a few gems. The one of today was someone calling the troublesome two "The Merchants of Montecito" haha.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If I was independently wealthy I'd be a lady who lunches and rescues all the kittens LOL




You sound just like what my sister would do


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If I was independently wealthy I'd be a lady who lunches and rescues all the kittens LOL


They liked the job. It was creative and earned them lots of recognition. But it was very fast-paced and so, many of the people gave it their all and burnt out. Those who could afford it would quit and chill, or take a couple of years' sabbatical to recharge. They were good at what they did, so they were welcomed back. Those who could not afford to stop working usually asked for a transfer to a slower-paced team.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> Two things I recall hearing about the garden party and why they were asked to leave:
> 1) M did that cutesy stick out her tongue thing to Camilla, which Charles found intolerably disrespectful.
> 2) M was overheard trying to make some sort of business/merch type deals with other party attendants, which is strictly against protocol and is also bad manners, and so they were asked to leave.
> 
> perhaps #2 happened, and H&M were being reprimanded in the video clip, and then M passive aggressively did a tongue stick out on the lawn afterwards, thinking she would get away with it, when Charles had them removed from the premises.


One of the rumours at that time was that she started collecting gifts on PC's behalf as if she were the lady of the house. So PC was offended. I am doubtful about that since she didn't stay that long and there is no footage of her accepting anything from the other guests. Behaving obnoxiously as if she were the star of the party, that I can believe, since she is hungry for attention.

@gracekelly I remember the vulgar hip wiggling. Especially as she departed.


----------



## bag-mania

Gag, now we begin the months of hearing the rehashing of the birth. Sounds like they used a fancy little boutique hospital for the very rich.


*Inside Meghan Markle's Ultra-Private Birth Plan: 'They Could Enjoy the Birth in Peace,' Says Source*

On June 4, Meghan Markle welcomed her baby girl, Lilibet Diana, at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, a short drive from Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito, California, home.

"They looked at several hospitals before they settled on the Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital," a source tells PEOPLE in this week's issue. "Meghan loves that it's female-founded."

Meghan's care was overseen by Dr. Melissa Drake, with remote support from Dr. Gowri Motha in the U.K., who helped oversee the care during the birth of Archie at London's Portland Hospital.

The facility's state-of-the-art childbirth center offers a family-centered, individualized approach to birth. (In addition to a menu to order room service and a comfy sofa for Harry!)

"Security and privacy were also priorities," the source adds. "They had a big security team that the hospital needed to accommodate."

In March, the couple spoke to Oprah Winfrey about the stress of introducing their son Archie to the world just days after his 2019 birth in the U.K.; this time Meghan was able to quietly deliver the baby two days before sharing the news, with no pressure for a public press conference.

"Meghan and Harry are both very thankful for how smoothly things went," the source adds. "They could enjoy the birth in peace."

In keeping with the 20-week paid parental leave policy of their Archewell Foundation, both Meghan and Harry plan to take several months off to spend time with their daughter, Lili.

Still, their ongoing projects remain in high gear, including an upcoming docuseries for Netflix on Harry's Invictus Games and the release of Meghan's first children's book, _The Bench_, which was inspired by a Father's Day poem she wrote for Harry after they welcomed Archie ("the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," as she writes in the book's dedication).


But as they embrace their new status as a family of four, they plan to concentrate on life at home for a while.

"Meghan and Harry are taking time off to focus on their family," the source adds. "They want to have a long summer break together as a family."





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I remember that too. I can certainly believe she was bored but I'd be surprised if she'd allow anyone to overhear her saying it. That's the kind of thing where she would desperately clutch Harry's arm and urgently whisper it into his ear.
> 
> I don't think Charles would be so annoyed if it was only that they put in a brief appearance and left. And Harry wouldn't have any reason to be annoyed about it.


Lady C talked about this in one of her Chats. I think the sequence was one of her acquaintances had overheard it, shared the story at a luncheon to a scandalized audience who thought it was very poor form and did not take kindly to the attitude. And, this was early on before the toxic Methane really asserted herself and the rest, as we are living, is history.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> No, she had already had her nose done, but it definitely appears "thinner" now .. so, she likely had another nose job after this one.  I'm intrigued by her hair color here; a much lighter brown (with - blonde? highlights).  Hmmmm .. was she trying NOT to look like a WOC here?


are those big bags under her eyes ? Or is it just a makeup fail ?


----------



## marietouchet

Traminer said:


> What is interesting for me to see:
> THIRTEEN members agree!


The little girl will grow up in the US where her first name will be constantly misspelled and mispronounced 
OK .. she will ditch the first name and be called Lili, also misspelled …

I am assuming Lili is pronounced Lily not Lil - uh as in the first two syllables of the first name, am I wrong ?

maybe Lili is pronounced French style as in LeeLee Rose Depp


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> The first kid is all Harry. Can't imagine they wouldn't use Harry's sperm for the 2nd.


I think the first kid looks like mom , especially the eyes, he has her strabismus and curls, but then all babies have wayward hair mit curls
I am on the fence about his exact hair color since he is always seen in B&W - high is fine  , it might be ginger like dad’s but I don’t know for certain

AND
what planet have I been on ??? a just saw photo of Meghan as child with her mother’s family - see murky Meg Twitter feed , no source given for photo of ID of the people
I did not know there was family on Doria’s side


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The little girl will grow up in the US where her first name will be constantly misspelled and mispronounced
> OK .. she will ditch the first name and be called Lili,



Maybe she won’t like her first name and she will reinvent herself and use her middle name instead, like her mother did.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Gag, now we begin the months of hearing the rehashing of the birth. Sounds like they used a fancy little boutique hospital for the very rich.
> 
> 
> *Inside Meghan Markle's Ultra-Private Birth Plan: 'They Could Enjoy the Birth in Peace,' Says Source*
> 
> On June 4, Meghan Markle welcomed her baby girl, Lilibet Diana, at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, a short drive from Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito, California, home.
> 
> "They looked at several hospitals before they settled on the Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital," a source tells PEOPLE in this week's issue. "Meghan loves that it's female-founded."
> 
> Meghan's care was overseen by Dr. Melissa Drake, with remote support from Dr. Gowri Motha in the U.K., who helped oversee the care during the birth of Archie at London's Portland Hospital.
> 
> The facility's state-of-the-art childbirth center offers a family-centered, individualized approach to birth. (In addition to a menu to order room service and a comfy sofa for Harry!)
> 
> "Security and privacy were also priorities," the source adds. "They had a big security team that the hospital needed to accommodate."
> 
> In March, the couple spoke to Oprah Winfrey about the stress of introducing their son Archie to the world just days after his 2019 birth in the U.K.; this time Meghan was able to quietly deliver the baby two days before sharing the news, with no pressure for a public press conference.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry are both very thankful for how smoothly things went," the source adds. "They could enjoy the birth in peace."
> 
> In keeping with the 20-week paid parental leave policy of their Archewell Foundation, both Meghan and Harry plan to take several months off to spend time with their daughter, Lili.
> 
> Still, their ongoing projects remain in high gear, including an upcoming docuseries for Netflix on Harry's Invictus Games and the release of Meghan's first children's book, _The Bench_, which was inspired by a Father's Day poem she wrote for Harry after they welcomed Archie ("the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," as she writes in the book's dedication).
> 
> 
> But as they embrace their new status as a family of four, they plan to concentrate on life at home for a while.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry are taking time off to focus on their family," the source adds. "They want to have a long summer break together as a family."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOTE
> *But as they embrace their new status as a family of four, they plan to concentrate on life at home for a while.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry are taking time off to focus on their family," the source adds. "They want to have a long summer break together as a family."*
> 
> Well, this serenity lasted less than a week, or maybe they are in communication with lawyers so frequently they've become "family."


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Gag, now we begin the months of hearing the rehashing of the birth. Sounds like they used a fancy little boutique hospital for the very rich.
> 
> 
> *Inside Meghan Markle's Ultra-Private Birth Plan: 'They Could Enjoy the Birth in Peace,' Says Source*
> 
> On June 4, Meghan Markle welcomed her baby girl, Lilibet Diana, at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital, a short drive from Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito, California, home.
> 
> "They looked at several hospitals before they settled on the Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital," a source tells PEOPLE in this week's issue. "Meghan loves that it's female-founded."
> 
> Meghan's care was overseen by Dr. Melissa Drake, with remote support from Dr. Gowri Motha in the U.K., who helped oversee the care during the birth of Archie at London's Portland Hospital.
> 
> The facility's state-of-the-art childbirth center offers a family-centered, individualized approach to birth. (In addition to a menu to order room service and a comfy sofa for Harry!)
> 
> "Security and privacy were also priorities," the source adds. "They had a big security team that the hospital needed to accommodate."
> 
> In March, the couple spoke to Oprah Winfrey about the stress of introducing their son Archie to the world just days after his 2019 birth in the U.K.; this time Meghan was able to quietly deliver the baby two days before sharing the news, with no pressure for a public press conference.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry are both very thankful for how smoothly things went," the source adds. "They could enjoy the birth in peace."
> 
> In keeping with the 20-week paid parental leave policy of their Archewell Foundation, both Meghan and Harry plan to take several months off to spend time with their daughter, Lili.
> 
> Still, their ongoing projects remain in high gear, including an upcoming docuseries for Netflix on Harry's Invictus Games and the release of Meghan's first children's book, _The Bench_, which was inspired by a Father's Day poem she wrote for Harry after they welcomed Archie ("the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," as she writes in the book's dedication).
> 
> 
> But as they embrace their new status as a family of four, they plan to concentrate on life at home for a while.
> 
> "Meghan and Harry are taking time off to focus on their family," the source adds. "They want to have a long summer break together as a family."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


This doesn’t sound true to me.  In the US if for example if you decide to use Dr A, Dr A can only deliver you at the hospital where s/he has “hospital privileges” , not necessarily the hospital you’ve picked.  I’ve never heard of anyone looking at hospital delivery places.  You might shop around for the obstetrician but not the hospital. (Unless you did shop around for a hospital, then you’d have to choose from whatever obstetricians have privileges there)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Another honest review. 









						Meghan Markle has written a children’s book. It’s awful
					

The Bench apparently began as a message to Harry. It should have stayed between them




					www.irishtimes.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t wait to watch this!




So this guy thought they were getting along pretty well at Wimbledon and the first Christmas, not so well by the second Christmas, the Narkles had bailed by the third Christmas, an obviously things were awful by the church service in the green dress.


----------



## xincinsin

Just checked my local public library catalogue to see if they wasted money on The Bench or (shudder) were gifted a copy. Nothing - so far, so good. But I did find a pre-wedding book by an American publisher, written by author Elizabeth Krajnik who writes mainly children's books. I find the title so contradictory - there is no royalty in the USA, but I guess Disney has made fairytale princesses very desirable.

MEGHAN MARKLE: AMERICAN ROYAL
_Actress Meghan Markle is set to marry Prince Harry of Britain in May 2018. As a biracial actress, she faced a fair deal of struggles conforming to Hollywood's expectations of how she should look, dress, and speak. After landing a role in the hit show Suits in 2011, Meghan started to use her fame to speak out about equality. This biography explores Meghan's path to royalty and the challenges she faced on her journey. Age-appropriate text supports full-color photographs to catch the reader's eye, while *quotes from Meghan illustrate her character*._

Those quotes might now be seen as misleading


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m going to defend this, University is meant to be a place where people swop ideas and debate even issues that seem distasteful and controversial to us. Also it’s meant to encourage people to learn rhetoric and public speaking. The purpose of something like a union debate isn’t meant to be a declarative statement of what the university body thinks but who argued better at the debate.
> What actually happened with the vote and the picture removal seems a bit garbled, but to me, the aim should be to table a more convincing motion for the portrait to stay there next meeting rather than saying that this man has no right to suggest it.
> 
> what I object to is when universities minimise teaching time and become a hive mind of regurgitating their lectures of acceptable opinion to keep the degree factory in business.
> 
> I’d also say lots of people were saying way worse things about the royals in unis of the 70s and 80s - it’s definitely not a new debate


I agree with you. Universities are supposed to be a protected place where all ideas can be discussed in a respectful manner. Though, a certain 'cancel culture' is changing that. Many people are afraid that their comments are taken out of context or misinterpreted.


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s another example of why I hate how fixated the US press is on Harry and Meghan. CNN interviewed Edward, supposedly about his father’s Duke of Edinburgh's Award. In reality CNN made the first half of the story about Meghan and Harry. Eventually they get around to the actual topic. I wonder if Edward felt a bit blindsided.









						'That's families for you.' Prince Edward discusses the Sussexes, the bereaved Queen and his father's legacy | CNN
					

Edward, Earl of Wessex, pops his head around the door of the room in St James's Palace and chuckles at the numerous cameras set up for the interview. "Do you have enough?" he laughs.




					www.google.com


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Here’s another example of why I hate how fixated the US press is on Harry and Meghan. CNN interviewed Edward, supposedly about his father’s Duke of Edinburgh's Award. In reality CNN made the first half of the story about Meghan and Harry. Eventually they get around to the actual topic. I wonder if Edward felt a bit blindsided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'That's families for you.' Prince Edward discusses the Sussexes, the bereaved Queen and his father's legacy | CNN
> 
> 
> Edward, Earl of Wessex, pops his head around the door of the room in St James's Palace and chuckles at the numerous cameras set up for the interview. "Do you have enough?" he laughs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


The couple keeps courting controversy and hogging the limelight. But do you think the situation is exacerbated because Methane is American and the US press is therefore particularly fixated on her?


----------



## needlv

story from the Telegraph

Headline: For the Queen to back BBC over her  grandson is not just awkward, it marks a turning point.



			https://archive.vn/oILCv


----------



## Chanbal

Harry being reminded of his falsehoods! 










						Charles hops on a bike after Harry claims he never went on rides with his dad
					

PRINCE Charles was seen grinning from ear to ear today as he hopped on a bike for a charity cycle – just months after Prince Harry claimed they never went on rides together. The Prince of Wal…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tomorrow QE, Charles, Camilla, William and Kate will bring the charm to the G7.
QE, Charles, Camilla, William and Kate = the Charm Team


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> This doesn’t sound true to me.  In the US if for example if you decide to use Dr A, Dr A can only deliver you at the hospital where s/he has “hospital privileges” , not necessarily the hospital you’ve picked.  I’ve never heard of anyone looking at hospital delivery places.  You might shop around for the obstetrician but not the hospital. (Unless you did shop around for a hospital, then you’d have to choose from whatever obstetricians have privileges there)


Interesting. I wish someone would do a deep dive on this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## AB Negative

Jayne1 said:


> Interesting. I wish someone would do a deep dive on this.


I would not be surprised if it is true that they shopped hospitals.  As a former Californian I can tell you that normal rules do NOT apply to celebraties. 

"Did you know Dr.  So and So delivered The Duchess of Sussex' daughter?" is worth a lot of money in the Golden State.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Jayne1 said:


> Interesting. I wish someone would do a deep dive on this.



I agree with @Aimee3. That's how I heard how it works. BTW, M's doctor is one of the 19 ob/gyn in the SB Cottage Hospital.


----------



## Hermes Zen

A few pages back we were wondering if Archie was in preschool when we saw the pap photo of heavily pregnant M carrying Archie on her bump. This article says M recently enrolled him -


Meghan also apparently recently enrolled 2-year-old Archie in a morning program at a preschool a few days a week. The source said, “He is big enough that he is now starting to have his own life too. He enjoys preschool and outdoor activities.” 



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...onship-royal-family-focused-on-lilibet-archie
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Reportedly “Trying Their Utmost to Maintain a Good Relationship” With the Royal Family*
> *The couple apparently feel that the birth of their daughter is “almost like a new beginning.”*
> By Emily Kirkpatrick
> June 10, 2021


----------



## Icyjade

Hermes Zen said:


> A few pages back we were wondering if Archie was in preschool when we saw the pap photo of heavily pregnant M carrying Archie on her bump. This article says M recently enrolled him -
> 
> 
> Meghan also apparently recently enrolled 2-year-old Archie in a morning program at a preschool a few days a week. The source said, “He is big enough that he is now starting to have his own life too. He enjoys preschool and outdoor activities.”



“_*The couple apparently feel that the birth of their daughter is “almost like a new beginning.”*_”

Who are they kidding?


----------



## floatinglili

Erk I’m almost feeling bad posting this one. I would be at plate smashing stage if I read this gossip about me…
Posting for the sake of the record of this thread….


----------



## csshopper

floatinglili said:


> Erk I’m almost feeling bad posting this one. I would be at plate smashing stage if I read this gossip about me…
> Posting for the sake of the record of this thread…
> 
> Spotify? Netflix?
> The Apple TV production with Oprah and the James Cordon and Dax Shepherd escapades must have pissed people off, since they thought they had contracts?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> All those rules were created long before IVF and surrogates became a thing. Still, I assume as long as it was Harry’s sperm that was used, the baby is Royal. I don’t think this kind of situation has been addressed yet.



As long as the antiquated rule is not declared null and void it is still in place. Not that it matters in this case, as those children will never come close enough to the throne to see the decorations on it .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

floatinglili said:


> Erk I’m almost feeling bad posting this one. I would be at plate smashing stage if I read this gossip about me…
> Posting for the sake of the record of this thread….



Uh oh.


----------



## xincinsin

floatinglili said:


> Erk I’m almost feeling bad posting this one. I would be at plate smashing stage if I read this gossip about me…
> Posting for the sake of the record of this thread….


Wow! I hope it isn't true for the sake of their kids. 

I don't think Methane would go around without her moon bump so openly. She might get her sizes mixed up, but to be seen as totally non-preggers would be taking a risk.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> I never completely figured it out, but it was so close to the wedding that I thought that she was trying to make Charles' BD party about her. She was sashaying around like she owned the place.   The grey men were watching her and didn't like it and informed Charles who doesn't like his limelight taken away so off they were sent!


This would weirdly  fit with those stories that Charles didn’t like Diana taking his spotlight (go figure, she was  beautiful and Charismatic and he’s like a nerdy anteater) 
Now he doesn’t like sharing it with H&M during their popular phase.

Who knew he was the Norma Desmond of the royals?  
Now I picture him strutting around in a turban and pearls.

I don’t know, wouldn’t the etiquette of the situation be to ignore them if they were being a bit OTT.  I think throwing them out would be poor manners. I think it’d either have to be really egregious or they decided to go


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> A few pages back we were wondering if Archie was in preschool when we saw the pap photo of heavily pregnant M carrying Archie on her bump. This article says M recently enrolled him -
> 
> 
> Meghan also apparently recently enrolled 2-year-old Archie in a morning program at a preschool a few days a week. The source said, “He is big enough that he is now starting to have his own life too. He enjoys preschool and outdoor activities.”


I don't like Emily Kirkpatrick's reports in Vanity Fair on the Terrible Twosome. There is a hollowness to her writing, as if she is restraining herself from full-blown stan-dom and trying to appear vaguely objective. This article especially is all about the victimhood of the saintly pair who are described as trying to keep the peace, despite bashing the BRF repeatedly. I feel ill reading her writing. If you look at it, all she does is string together saccharine quotes from some insider (is that you, Gayle? Or is that Dean?).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here are some videos of this garden & birthday party - recollections may vary:



			https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=charles+birthday+meghan+and+harry


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dying over her description of Omid Scobie. Comedy gold.




Tip-top form.

And we learned about Jamaican history too, things I never knew


----------



## papertiger

From https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...not-just-Harry-stolen-Queens-crown-jewel.html

*"JAN MOIR: Lilibet is not just a name... Harry has stolen the Queen's crown jewel *
By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 00:07, 11 June 2021 | UPDATED: 09:39, 11 June 2021 


During a life devoted to public service and being on almost permanent display, Lilibet was the one thing the Queen had that was entirely her own.
It was hers, and hers alone.
Spoken aloud, it was the affectionate nickname first bestowed upon her by her grandfather, King George V, adopted by her beloved father and mother, and an echo of the past that she must still hear, whispered down the hallways and by the firesides of Balmoral and Sandringham.
It was also a private endearment uttered throughout more than 70 years of marriage by her husband who, may I remind certain parties, is recently deceased.
Elizabeth may Regina, but Lilibet was something more sublime.
No, it does not appear on patents or seals or official documents, but it was her signature on the most personal of correspondences. It was the cipher that spoke of the bonds of family and also of the flesh and blood woman behind the throne, under the crown, beyond the castle moat.
Its use was restricted. It was a tender diminutive spoken only by those who knew and loved her.
Lilibet was as much a part of the Queen’s personal identity as her Sunday hats and buckled shoes, her tweeds in the country and her cornflakes in Tupperware.
And now it is no longer hers, its emotional exclusivity shattered; targeted and then blown apart like a clay pigeon. If we all instinctively understand its importance to HM, if even Noel Gallagher gets it — someone who is hardly a poster boy for the delicacies of family unity himself — why can’t Meghan and Harry understand the enormity of what they have done?






During a life devoted to public service and being on almost permanent display, Lilibet was the one thing the Queen (pictured right) had that was entirely her own
Thanks to their perhaps well-meaning but thoughtless cradle- snatch of the Queen’s childhood nickname, Lilibet has been devalued faster than a cryptocurrency.
Once only used in intimate royal circles, now it is in the mouths of American TV hosts and radio shock jocks. It is on BBC bulletins and in newspaper headlines. It is the subject of furious legal letters and at the heart of an unedifying briefing war involving gloat and counter-gloat.


Lilibet is now spoken of as a truculence, an affront, a protocol ram-raid, a misstep.
The jury is still out on whether using the name for the new baby Sussex is a deliberate act of marketing strategy and self-interest or an innocent tribute from a loving grandson that has gone awry. No matter whose side you are on it is clear that whatever it was, it no longer is — its private significance lost forever to the braying world.
When it comes to Lilibet, all bets are off.
You have to wonder what the Queen must think of the loss of this term of endearment, on the eve of her official birthday and in the week that Prince Philip would have celebrated his 100th.
She turned 95 in April, four days after burying her husband at Windsor Castle. Newly widowed and grieving, she could be forgiven for hoping for an extended period of peace and tranquillity in these late years of her life. God knows she has earned it.





What is puzzling is that if the Sussexes (centre and right) wanted to name their baby in honour of the Queen — and what a lovely thing to do — there are many non-contentious Elizabethan options
Yet through no fault of her own she is pitched from one Sussex-mangled calamity to the next.
Poor Lilibet! She has conducted herself with impeccable discretion and good sense during a faultless 69-year-reign, but once more she is dragged into the bear pit by Harry and Meghan who somehow always do so much harm, under the guise of trying to do so much good.
Baby Lilibet? It is the biggest case of name-napping since a friend introduced her daughter Apple to Mr and Mrs Gwyneth Paltrow, who then harvested the fruity moniker for their own child.
What is puzzling is that if the Sussexes wanted to name their baby in honour of the Queen — and what a lovely thing to do — there are many non-contentious Elizabethan options.
Heavens to Betsy! I lost count at 20, including Thea, Tess and Isabella, not to mention the lovely Scottish Elspeth and Ailsa, the French Elise plus a solid Beth, Liza with a Z, Busy Lizzie and Betty Boop to boot.
But no, nothing would do but the one name that would do untold damage, the one name that should have been off-limits, the one name that anyone with a drop of sense would realise was personal, untouchable, just let it go.





It was the affectionate nickname first bestowed upon her by her grandfather, King George V (left), adopted by her beloved father and mother, and an echo of the past that she must still hear
Like jewel thieves stealthily reaching in to unshackle the Cullinan Diamond from the grip of the State Crown, the Sussexes only wanted the best for themselves, the choice royal plum in the Windsor pudding.
Despite their recent protestations about how much they hate the monarchy and all it represents, about how Harry felt trapped in his role as a prince and of his suffering because of the inadequate parenting practised by the Queen and bled down through the generations, here he still is, clutching at royal straws, determined to cling on to the ties that bind.
Seasoned royal watchers know the use of Lilibet grants a dramatic royal presence in this child’s life. It also suggests the couple may want to associate themselves with the Queen and all she represents.
HM’s duties are almost over, while theirs as a royal unit in exile are just beginning; an existence thronged with prospects and throbbing with opportunity.
Even now, the Sussexes still don’t seem to grasp the essential divergence between celebrity and monarchy and that different rules apply, but they will take whatever they can get.
The plunder of the name Lilibet was their solution to a complex problem of status and prestige, but the audacity might rebound on them yet."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone is screaming in Cali:




https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...all-discuss-female-empowerment-education.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rude US reporter gets a lesson in royalty:
From Chris Ship’s Twitter:


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> "JAN MOIR: Lilibet is not just a name... Harry has stolen the Queen's crown jewel



When the duke and his wife had a baby
They proceeded to do something shady
Being hungry for fame
They stole Granny's nickname
And now they are going straight to Hades

Why do I think limericks are the most appropriate form of poetry for these two?


----------



## Chanbal

Very good point!


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Interesting. I wish someone would do a deep dive on this.


Agree, in the US - where there is no NHS, you pick a la-di-da surgeon who has privileges at a hospital and knows that his hospital caters to press-shy celebs - MM could have asked her buddy David Foster's wife who just gave birth for the name of a doctor
If you pick a Beverly Hills surgeon, for ex, your hospital will not be in central LA

We need to find the birth cert, and find out who signed ...

This is like the wedding , find out who signed the wedding cert and ask him/her why he stated a certain date


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> From https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...not-just-Harry-stolen-Queens-crown-jewel.html
> 
> *"JAN MOIR: Lilibet is not just a name... Harry has stolen the Queen's crown jewel *
> By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> 
> PUBLISHED: 00:07, 11 June 2021 | UPDATED: 09:39, 11 June 2021
> 
> 
> During a life devoted to public service and being on almost permanent display, Lilibet was the one thing the Queen had that was entirely her own.
> It was hers, and hers alone.
> Spoken aloud, it was the affectionate nickname first bestowed upon her by her grandfather, King George V, adopted by her beloved father and mother, and an echo of the past that she must still hear, whispered down the hallways and by the firesides of Balmoral and Sandringham.
> It was also a private endearment uttered throughout more than 70 years of marriage by her husband who, may I remind certain parties, is recently deceased.
> Elizabeth may Regina, but Lilibet was something more sublime.
> No, it does not appear on patents or seals or official documents, but it was her signature on the most personal of correspondences. It was the cipher that spoke of the bonds of family and also of the flesh and blood woman behind the throne, under the crown, beyond the castle moat.
> Its use was restricted. It was a tender diminutive spoken only by those who knew and loved her.
> Lilibet was as much a part of the Queen’s personal identity as her Sunday hats and buckled shoes, her tweeds in the country and her cornflakes in Tupperware.
> And now it is no longer hers, its emotional exclusivity shattered; targeted and then blown apart like a clay pigeon. If we all instinctively understand its importance to HM, if even Noel Gallagher gets it — someone who is hardly a poster boy for the delicacies of family unity himself — why can’t Meghan and Harry understand the enormity of what they have done?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During a life devoted to public service and being on almost permanent display, Lilibet was the one thing the Queen (pictured right) had that was entirely her own
> Thanks to their perhaps well-meaning but thoughtless cradle- snatch of the Queen’s childhood nickname, Lilibet has been devalued faster than a cryptocurrency.
> Once only used in intimate royal circles, now it is in the mouths of American TV hosts and radio shock jocks. It is on BBC bulletins and in newspaper headlines. It is the subject of furious legal letters and at the heart of an unedifying briefing war involving gloat and counter-gloat.
> 
> 
> Lilibet is now spoken of as a truculence, an affront, a protocol ram-raid, a misstep.
> The jury is still out on whether using the name for the new baby Sussex is a deliberate act of marketing strategy and self-interest or an innocent tribute from a loving grandson that has gone awry. No matter whose side you are on it is clear that whatever it was, it no longer is — its private significance lost forever to the braying world.
> When it comes to Lilibet, all bets are off.
> You have to wonder what the Queen must think of the loss of this term of endearment, on the eve of her official birthday and in the week that Prince Philip would have celebrated his 100th.
> She turned 95 in April, four days after burying her husband at Windsor Castle. Newly widowed and grieving, she could be forgiven for hoping for an extended period of peace and tranquillity in these late years of her life. God knows she has earned it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is puzzling is that if the Sussexes (centre and right) wanted to name their baby in honour of the Queen — and what a lovely thing to do — there are many non-contentious Elizabethan options
> Yet through no fault of her own she is pitched from one Sussex-mangled calamity to the next.
> Poor Lilibet! She has conducted herself with impeccable discretion and good sense during a faultless 69-year-reign, but once more she is dragged into the bear pit by Harry and Meghan who somehow always do so much harm, under the guise of trying to do so much good.
> Baby Lilibet? It is the biggest case of name-napping since a friend introduced her daughter Apple to Mr and Mrs Gwyneth Paltrow, who then harvested the fruity moniker for their own child.
> What is puzzling is that if the Sussexes wanted to name their baby in honour of the Queen — and what a lovely thing to do — there are many non-contentious Elizabethan options.
> Heavens to Betsy! I lost count at 20, including Thea, Tess and Isabella, not to mention the lovely Scottish Elspeth and Ailsa, the French Elise plus a solid Beth, Liza with a Z, Busy Lizzie and Betty Boop to boot.
> But no, nothing would do but the one name that would do untold damage, the one name that should have been off-limits, the one name that anyone with a drop of sense would realise was personal, untouchable, just let it go.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was the affectionate nickname first bestowed upon her by her grandfather, King George V (left), adopted by her beloved father and mother, and an echo of the past that she must still hear
> Like jewel thieves stealthily reaching in to unshackle the Cullinan Diamond from the grip of the State Crown, the Sussexes only wanted the best for themselves, the choice royal plum in the Windsor pudding.
> Despite their recent protestations about how much they hate the monarchy and all it represents, about how Harry felt trapped in his role as a prince and of his suffering because of the inadequate parenting practised by the Queen and bled down through the generations, here he still is, clutching at royal straws, determined to cling on to the ties that bind.
> Seasoned royal watchers know the use of Lilibet grants a dramatic royal presence in this child’s life. It also suggests the couple may want to associate themselves with the Queen and all she represents.
> HM’s duties are almost over, while theirs as a royal unit in exile are just beginning; an existence thronged with prospects and throbbing with opportunity.
> Even now, the Sussexes still don’t seem to grasp the essential divergence between celebrity and monarchy and that different rules apply, but they will take whatever they can get.
> The plunder of the name Lilibet was their solution to a complex problem of status and prestige, but the audacity might rebound on them yet."


This is one more great article by J Moir, thanks for posting it. She is right, "_The plunder of the name Lilibet was their solution to a complex problem of status and prestige, but the audacity might rebound on them yet._" I wonder what the next step will be.


----------



## marietouchet

I keep thinking ... who cares how the kids were conceived or  born ? It does not matter any more, we need to be accepting & inclusive. The only way this might possibly matter is in the UK succession laws and realistically H does not have a choice of getting to the throne - so non issue. 

Like stories of gay and lesbian actors who refused to answer the question. Jodie Foster was quiet and never allowed the subject to come up in her interviews - she handled it with grace, dignity and privacy. Kevin Spacey was not so discreet - he liked to bait reporters - so the topic grew.  Interesting the difference in how they handled the topic, your PR person should be able to handle the matter in the way a celeb chooses. 

I blame SS for a lot of the brouhaha and buzz. I do so hope the maternity/paternity leave is time spent quietly but the Diana garden will be the next opportunity for gossip.


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> Erk I’m almost feeling bad posting this one. I would be at plate smashing stage if I read this gossip about me…
> Posting for the sake of the record of this thread….


LOL...was this written by a PF member?  hope it's true


----------



## marietouchet

May have been posted before  ..
Samantha M did a social media post  - sorry dont remember where - that MM/Archewell received a $900k advance for the book. Not sure who the exact recipient was...

Not a lot of money in the scheme of things - federal income tax, California taxes, staff expenses, book illustrator fees  - paid by writer not publisher , legal team to vet the book, PR team to garner social media posts ...

A million dollars does not go very far in Montecito

PS yes the rich sometimes pay no taxes, because their expenses ate away at the profit - that says they had lots of staff


----------



## youngster

needlv said:


> story from the Telegraph
> 
> Headline: For the Queen to back BBC over her  grandson is not just awkward, it marks a turning point.
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/oILCv



There are some real gems in this opinion piece:
*This is what happens when the Royals start believing their own publicity. This is the result of thinking they’re special not because of the institution of the monarchy but because of who they are individuals.

One thing we’ve learned over the last few months is that both Harry and Meghan have experienced significant blows to their mental health. In Meghan’s case, suicide has even been mentioned. And regardless of how privileged and wealthy they may be, they have my complete sympathy. But instead of concentrating on getting the help they so obviously need, they appear to be spending their energies on waging an unwinnable PR battle.

The Windsors versus the Sussexes? For God’s sake, it’s Real Madrid versus Ashby-de-la-Zouch.

Here’s my advice, and it won’t cost him a dime. Just stop digging. Jettison all these advisors in their LA suits. Sort out your health challenges away from the celebs and the cameras. Be humble. Even normal. *


----------



## sdkitty

delete


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The couple keeps courting controversy and hogging the limelight. But do you think the situation is exacerbated because Methane is American and the US press is therefore particularly fixated on her?



Yes, that's part of it. Although at this point the story has blown up so spectacularly and scandalously I think they would be reporting it even if Meghan had a different nationality. The mainstream media is as gossipy as the tabloid rags, only they try to hide it under the pretense of putting a newsy spin on it.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder how a certain person is feeling today that the Duchess of Cambridge is the first Royal to greet and share an engagement today with the FLOTUS? I'm thinking it's quite an honour for Catherine that it's her and not Camilla.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder how a certain person is feeling today that the Duchess of Cambridge is the first Royal to greet and share an engagement today with the FLOTUS? I'm thinking it's quite an honour for Catherine that it's her and not Camilla.


wonder if H&M are steaming since H was supposedly such good friends with Jill....oh well, they made their choices


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> This doesn’t sound true to me.  In the US if for example if you decide to use Dr A, Dr A can only deliver you at the hospital where s/he has “hospital privileges” , not necessarily the hospital you’ve picked.  I’ve never heard of anyone looking at hospital delivery places.  You might shop around for the obstetrician but not the hospital. (Unless you did shop around for a hospital, then you’d have to choose from whatever obstetricians have privileges there)



I have no problem believing she shopped around for hospitals. She is a control freak and choosing where her baby would be born is something she'd do.

If nothing else she had to find the right hospital to fit her brand so she could have SS tell _People_, "Meghan loves that it's female-founded."


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder if H&M are steaming since H was supposedly such good friends with Jill....oh well, they made their choices



I bet they are trying their best to finagle an invitation to the White House. Too bad for them Covid has canceled or postponed most events. I'm thinking they have tarnished their reputations in those circles. Everyone knows they are indiscreet. What famous person wants to be around a couple who have Oprah's personal number on the Favorites lists of their phones?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I bet they are trying their best to finagle an invitation to the White House. Too bad for them Covid has canceled or postponed most events. I'm thinking they have tarnished their reputations in those circles. Everyone knows they are indiscreet. What famous person wants to be around a couple who have Oprah's personal number on the Favorites lists of their phones?


we'll see....they have no official status but if they were to be able to contact Jill directly it might be awkward for her to say no.  there was something on Huffpost this morning I couldn't copy here.  basically some "reporter" talking about the visit to london and inserting H&M into the conversation.  making the fact that H&M live in the US somehow relevant to their visit with the queen?  I swear a lot of americans see M as a disney princess and won't give it up


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> we'll see....they have no official status but if they were to be able to contact Jill directly it might be awkward for her to say no.  there was something on Huffpost this morning I couldn't copy here.  basically some "reporter" talking about the visit to london and inserting H&M into the conversation.  making the fact that H&M live in the US somehow relevant to their visit with the queen?  *I swear a lot of americans see M as a disney princess and won't give it up*



Yes, they fell in love with the carefully crafted tale of an ordinary American woman who meets a prince (she didn't know anything about him!) falls in love and marries, and then they give up the royal life because _luuuuuv_. How many cheesy movies on the Hallmark Channel are based on a similar sappy premise?

The Americans who still buy into that nonsense don't want to see them as they are, so they won't.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, they fell in love with the carefully crafted tale of an ordinary American woman who meets a prince (she didn't know anything about him!) falls in love and marries, and then they give up the royal life because _luuuuuv_. How many cheesy movies on the Hallmark Channel are based on a similar sappy premise?
> 
> The Americans who still buy into that nonsense don't want to see them as they are, so they won't.


yes, she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince!


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> yes, she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince!



I think she fell in love with the idea of being a princess. If he was a ordinary nice guy, she would not have given him another look. He clearly had issues and she was aware, don't think she would have put up with it if it had not been for his social standing.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince!



Yes, because everyone is willing to spend thousands of dollars to fly to another country to meet a blind date! It happens all the time.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> That is a good description!  She wiggled her hips something fierce too  She was still slim and looked good.  I think she also made some comments to people that she was speaking with and the courtiers overheard.  It must have been something inappropriate.  I also think that "inappropriate" on a royal level is not the same as "inappropriate" on the level of we little people.  She may not have realized that what she said was no bueno.


I could be totally wrong about this, but wasn't she also 'caught' taking pictures of areas that she wasn't supposed to even be in?  How about her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car?!?! .. was it at the party that she did that (_and yes - there are pictures somewhere which show her be-booping in Harry's trunk - HA, some innuendos here_?!?!)  ..


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> All those rules were created long before IVF and surrogates became a thing. Still, I assume as long as it was Harry’s sperm that was used, the baby is Royal. I don’t think this kind of situation has been addressed yet.


Apparently not. The child born from a surrogate would be illegitimate and therefore unable to inherit. This does follow our law that the woman who gives birth is the mother. This is why the surrogacy thing is more controversial for them than it would be in America. I believe, however, that if they had ivf the child would still be legitimate provided it was made out of their material. 
This is quite a rarefied problem really. 


marietouchet said:


> I think the first kid looks like mom , especially the eyes, he has her strabismus and curls, but then all babies have wayward hair mit curls
> I am on the fence about his exact hair color since he is always seen in B&W - high is fine  , it might be ginger like dad’s but I don’t know for certain
> 
> AND
> what planet have I been on ??? a just saw photo of Meghan as child with her mother’s family - see murky Meg Twitter feed , no source given for photo of ID of the people
> I did not know there was family on Doria’s side


M’s not really cross-eyed she’s just trying to keep an eye on all the wealthy men in the room at once


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Apparently not. *The child born from a surrogate would be illegitimate and therefore unable to inherit.* This does follow our law that the woman who gives birth is the mother. This is why the surrogacy thing is more controversial for them than it would be in America. I believe, however, that if they had ivf the child would still be legitimate provided it was made out of their material.
> This is quite a rarefied problem really.
> 
> M’s not really cross-eyed she’s just trying to keep an eye on all the wealthy men in the room at once



Really? Does it matter if the egg was from the mother and the child has the mother's DNA?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I could be totally wrong about this, but wasn't she also 'caught' taking pictures of areas that she wasn't supposed to even be in?  How about her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car?!?! .. was it at the party that she did that (_and yes - there are pictures somewhere which show her be-booping in Harry's trunk - HA, some innuendos here_?!?!) ..



I vaguely remember the trunk incident but I am thinking it was a different party. They were married by the time of the garden party so it wouldn't seem like she was overstepping if she was messing around her husband's car.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Really? Does it matter if the egg was from the mother and the child has the mother's DNA?


If it is born from the surrogate it’s legally the surrogate’s child until she signs it over in British law regardless of the genetics of the egg I believe. It might be why we don’t have much of a surrogacy industry - that and they legally limit how much you can get paid


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I could be totally wrong about this, but wasn't she also 'caught' taking pictures of areas that she wasn't supposed to even be in?  How about her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car?!?! .. was it at the party that she did that (_and yes - there are pictures somewhere which show her be-booping in Harry's trunk - HA, some innuendos here_?!?!)  ..


None of this happened at the birthday party.


----------



## AbbytheBT

Don’t know why, but am actually really fascinated with this surrogacy issue. Having been pregnant three times myself, I don’t see how just a bump would fool others who saw her IRL. On the one hand, I fully support this process for all parties, but on the other, how hard would it have been for the couple to just lay low until the birth?
I mean - the pathos that it would take to fake the real thing in so many public situations blows my mind.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> we'll see....they have no official status but if they were to be able to contact Jill directly it might be awkward for her to say no.  there was something on Huffpost this morning I couldn't copy here.  basically some "reporter" talking about the visit to london and inserting H&M into the conversation.  making the fact that H&M live in the US somehow relevant to their visit with the queen?  I swear a lot of americans see M as a disney princess and won't give it up


Well, if the "reporter" actually did some research, they will know that the ***** are not (as far as I know, I haven't seen the itinerary) visiting London. They are in the county of Cornwall and will meet The Queen at Windsor, which is in Berkshire, not London.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Well, if the "reporter" actually did some research, they will know that the ***** are not (as far as I know, I haven't seen the itinerary) visiting London. They are in the county of Cornwall and will meet The Queen at Windsor, which is in Berkshire, not London.


I guess for the foreseeable future we will not be able to escape hearing about them.  this morning I was listening to a serious report on the bidens visit to England (on NPR radio).  they talked about meetings with government officials, etc.  
then the subject of the queen came up.  I didn't hear exactly what words were said but seems that they will be meeting the queen in some beautiful place and in that context H&M were mentioned.  something about their wedding.....

point is it seems for now even with serious news sources they are worthy of mention....because she's American I guess....Uugh


----------



## marietouchet

IF (and a big IF) the first child was born via surrogate in the UK, he would be illegitimate. So, unable to be a prince and/or future Duke of Sussex, interesting. Even if born in the US, he could not inherit all the UK titles that the alliterative one seems to hold so dear.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> point is it seems for now even with serious news sources they are worthy of mention....because she's American I guess....Uugh



I think it is because of the drama that they caused rather than her nationality. She was never that big in America, she was not 'hollywood', she was a cable TV actress and even then, she wasn't the star. The drama they created is what has made them famous, along with riding on the coattails of 'I am Princess Dianas son'. And the constant need to rebut everything written about them garners more attention. They really should choose their battles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She claimed she was looking for her phone  
1 car incident - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6664849/meghan-markle-prince-harry-polo-audi-cup/



I haven’t seen this photo before, Louie 
_While Kate wasn't looking, cheeky Louis decided to toddle off and play with the car door!
Photo: © Samir Hussein/WireImage_


----------



## gerryt

CeeJay said:


> I could be totally wrong about this, but wasn't she also 'caught' taking pictures of areas that she wasn't supposed to even be in?  How about her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car?!?! .. was it at the party that she did that (_and yes - there are pictures somewhere which show her be-booping in Harry's trunk - HA, some innuendos here_?!?!)  ..


If you search ‘Meghan rummaging though Harry’s car’ on you tube, up it comes.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> IF (and a big IF) the first child was born via surrogate in the UK, he would be illegitimate. So, unable to be a prince and/or future Duke of Sussex, interesting. Even if born in the US, he could not inherit all the UK titles that the alliterative one seems to hold so dear.


but weren't these rules made before there was such a thing as surrogacy?  and since medical records are confidential no one could find out - unless they did DNA testing to determine if it was Harry's child?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Louis used to crack me up with his mad face. He outgrew it though.


----------



## bag-mania

I am amazed at how good the Amazon reviews are for her book today. It has a 95% 5-star rating. 

There are several reviews saying they are buying multiple copies to give away to friends and family. Some absolutely gush over it. These are people listed as verified purchasers. Say what you will, the intense emotional investment fans have made in supporting H&M is surprising.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Louis used to crack me up with his mad face. He outgrew it though.



It’s a close call.
 





IMO George wins


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> but weren't these rules made before there was such a thing as surrogacy?  and since medical records are confidential no one could find out - unless they did DNA testing to determine if it was Harry's child?


The laws about royal children exist to confirm that the child is from the wife’s body- it basically exists to ice bastard children out of the line.

There’s been loads of sons of kings who have been known to be so but they aren’t the wife’s kid so they have no chance of entering the succession without a war Historically, if the father says acknowledges a baby as his it is his but it needs to be born in wedlock to inherit. (So this is one of the reasons why Elizabeth the 1st was initially controversial as she was declared illegitimate as Henry annulled his marriage to Anne B)

technically the birth of royal children needs to be witnessed by a government official to confirm it really did come from the royal tuppence. In the case of M she did not have an official witness.

There was also all this business with the warming pan baby story - which was a rumour that James the second’s son was a peasant baby smuggled in after the real royal child was stillborn.





						The Warming Pan Scandal | Stuarts Online
					






					stuarts-online.com
				




Hence why they started needing an official witness. This story was also a bit of an obvious wrangle to get rid of the Catholics.

Add on - as to the dna testing, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did dna test all the kids these days but in royal law if it’s not born from the wife it’s classed as the same as if he had a child out of wedlock - even if the kid is genetically the wife’s, it’s just the way they organised it. Obviously this is not a problem for normal people as you don’t need to be genetically related to anyone to inherit their money normally if you are recognised as their child or named as an heir - this only applies to the line of succession.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Yes, because everyone is willing to spend thousands of dollars to fly to another country to meet a blind date! It happens all the time.



A good ROI !


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> A good ROI !



True, it did pan out well for her. Much better than the average blind date meeting at a local coffee shop.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> but weren't these rules made before there was such a thing as surrogacy?  and since medical records are confidential no one could find out - unless they did DNA testing to determine if it was Harry's child?



Has to be M's child too


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> The laws about royal children exist to confirm that the child is from the wife’s body- it basically exists to ice bastard children out of the line.
> 
> There’s been loads of sons of kings who have been known to be so but they aren’t the wife’s kid so they have no chance of entering the succession without a war Historically, if the father says acknowledges a baby as his it is his but it needs to be born in wedlock to inherit. (So this is one of the reasons why Elizabeth the 1st was initially controversial as she was declared illegitimate as Henry annulled his marriage to Anne B)
> 
> technically the birth of royal children needs to be witnessed by a government official to confirm it really did come from the royal tuppence. In the case of M she did not have an official witness.
> 
> There was also all this business with the warming pan baby story - which was a rumour that James the second’s son was a peasant baby smuggled in after the real royal child was stillborn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Warming Pan Scandal | Stuarts Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stuarts-online.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hence why they started needing an official witness. This story was also a bit of an obvious wrangle to get rid of the Catholics.
> 
> Add on - as to the dna testing, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did dna test all the kids these days but in royal law if it’s not born from the wife it’s classed as the same as if he had a child out of wedlock - even if the kid is genetically the wife’s, it’s just the way they organised it. Obviously this is not a problem for normal people as you don’t need to be genetically related to anyone to inherit their money normally if you are recognised as their child or named as an heir - this only applies to the line of succession.



You got there first


----------



## csshopper

The following information explains Surrogacy in CA.
The Sussexes would, I assume, have had Gestational Surrogacy and have had a Pre Birth Order in place. 
They reside in a Surrogacy friendly state and it all works to their advantage.
Don't know how this might be interpreted by the stately wigged Barristers in the UK based on its relationship to the Royal Family. 

Source: 
*What is a Pre-Birth Order? - California Surrogacy Center*
https://californiasurrogacycenter.c...a-pre-birth-order-and-why-is-it-so-important/ - 196k - 

If you are considering using gestational surrogacy, or becoming a surrogate mother yourself, the decision-making process should always begin with thorough research to make sure that it is the right option for you. In doing your research, you will likely see the term “pre-birth order” come up often. You may find yourself asking, “What is a pre-birth order?” This is a perfectly normal and reasonable question. Pre-birth order is a legal document that establishes the intended parent(s) as the legal parent(s) of the child are before the surrogate gives birth. And understanding how this works and why it is important is a crucial step in the surrogacy process.

*Understanding Surrogacy & the Law*
Historically, the legal ramifications of surrogacy have been rather messy. Traditional surrogacy required the surrogate mother to become artificially inseminated with the sperm of the intended father or a sperm donor, and that surrogate would become biologically related to the child. Today, gestational surrogacy is the most popular type of surrogacy, and it is the only type that we offer here at California Surrogacy Center. Gestational surrogacy works hand-in-hand with the pre-birth order to protect the rights of the intended parent(s).

Gestational surrogacy uses in vitro fertilization (IVF) to insert the egg of the intended mother, or of an egg donor, into the surrogate. The surrogate is, therefore, in no way biologically related to the child. This makes it more difficult for the surrogate mother to claim parentage of the child.

A pre-birth order is an agreement signed by the surrogate and the intended parent(s) before the child is born, declaring the intended parent(s) as the legal parent(s) of the child. In the state of California, once this agreement is signed, the hospital where the child is delivered will become required to put the names of the intended parent(s) on the child’s birth certificate.

With both gestational surrogacy and a pre-birth order in place, the intended parent(s) can rest assured that their parentage is settled in the eyes of the law. That said, it is important to note that both gestational surrogacy and pre-birth order is not yet legal in all 50 states. California is known for being at the forefront of surrogacy law so, if you work with California Surrogacy Center, this should not be a concern. If you are considering surrogacy elsewhere, we advise reviewing a list of the surrogacy laws in your state.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> She claimed she was looking for her phone
> 1 car incident - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6664849/meghan-markle-prince-harry-polo-audi-cup/
> 
> 
> 
> I haven’t seen this photo before, Louie
> _While Kate wasn't looking, cheeky Louis decided to toddle off and play with the car door!
> Photo: © Samir Hussein/WireImage_
> View attachment 5107630




Love your saying.  
*Karma says:*
*If you focus on the hurt, you will continue to suffer.*
*If you focus on the lesson, you will continue to grow. *


----------



## Chanbal

I don't think this video has been posted here. Rather old news, but for the records...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

The New York Times review of The Bench. They didn't trash it but they sure didn't love it. The comments on the other hand, most NYT readers apparently still adore Meghan and believe everything she says.

*The Tortured Rhyme and Reason of Meghan Markle’s Picture Book Debut*
THE BENCH
By Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex
Illustrated by Christian Robinson

The duchess formerly known as Meghan Markle brings a boatload of baggage to “The Bench,” a picture book about fathers and sons (and benches), starting with her uneasy position as a sort-of royal living in exile. There is also her status as Public Enemy No. 1 in the British tabloids, some of which seemed thrilled at the publication of a work that gave them an opportunity to rain fresh criticism upon her.

And there is the fact that she’s an actress, not a writer.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Many celebrities write books; even more celebrities write children’s books. (Maybe there should be a quota.) Some of them are great. But it goes without saying that being famous does not automatically bestow literary brilliance upon a person, as the public learned years ago after reading the “Budgie the Helicopter” series by another (now ex-) royal wife, the Duchess of York, a.k.a. Fergie.

To its credit, “The Bench” is a sweet little tale. Dedicated to “the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump,” it began as a poem Meghan wrote on Father’s Day for her husband, Prince Harry, soon after the birth of their son, Archie. (They have just had a second child, a daughter named Lilibet Diana.) It lovingly explores the emotional connection between fathers and their sons.

The bench — or benches; there are an array of them — plays a strong supporting role, as a seat, as a table, as a prop. It’s a slightly weird idea that a father would spend so much time on or near a bench, like a grandparent who never leaves his rocking chair, or an athlete stuck on the sidelines. But Meghan has envisioned the bench as a place for fathers to cradle their baby boys and maybe drift off to sleep, to put bandages on toddlers’ skinned knees, to provide comfort and encouragement.

The illustrations, in gentle watercolor, are by the talented and prolific Caldecott and Coretta Scott King honoree Christian Robinson, and they’re beautiful. Love pours out of them. Because Meghan wanted to be inclusive, according to the publisher, the book features a variety of fathers: Black fathers and white fathers, a father in a wheelchair, a Sikh father in a turban, a military father returning from a tour of duty (the mother observes the homecoming from a window, tears in her eyes). There’s even a father wearing a frilly pink tutu over a manly plaid shirt and brown pants, using the bench as a barre alongside his similarly tutu-ed son.

The benches throughout are likewise ********ic, painted in a variety of colors and styles and appearing in suburban backyards, in public parks, on sidewalks, on the beach and, in two cases, indoors.







Image Credit...Christian Robinson

Meghan’s message is heartfelt, establishing that life is happy and sad, and that a father can be there for it all. But a heavier editing hand would have been a big help. There is no excuse, in a book of fewer than 200 words, for every syllable not to be just right. Even a tiny discordant note can throw the whole thing into disarray.

This is even more true with rhyming books. Force-feeding words into unlikely configurations just to eke out a tortured rhyme works about as well as stuffing a foot into a too-small glass slipper and passing it off as a perfect fit. “You’ll love him. / You’ll listen. / You’ll be his supporter. / When life feels in shambles / You’ll help him find order,” Meghan writes. It’s not terrible, but it’s not terrific. What she does in the last line of the book, though — contracting “alone” into “’lone” in order to get it to rhyme with “home” — should be illegal.








Still, gentleness prevails, and alert readers will notice that several illustrations are cunning simulacra of a bearded Prince Harry himself, with his ginger hair and piercing blue eyes. Harry’s recent complaints about his own father’s emotionally distant parenting style lend poignancy to the exercise, as if the book were written specifically to help a lost prince heal his psychic wounds.

It’s heartening to think of Harry and Archie happily feeding their rescue chickens together in California, as they do at the end, while Meghan (she’s seen from the back, but I’m pretty sure it’s her) swaddles the baby and does a bit of gardening. But as the book suggests, a father’s love is universal, royal or not.









						The Tortured Rhyme and Reason of Meghan Markle’s Picture Book Debut (Published 2021)
					

In “The Bench,” the Duchess of Sussex takes on “the special relationship” of fathers and sons, and the daunting challenge of rhyming verse.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I am amazed at how good the Amazon reviews are for her book today. It has a 95% 5-star rating.
> 
> There are s*everal reviews saying they are buying multiple copies to give away to friends and family*. Some absolutely gush over it. These are people listed as verified purchasers. Say what you will, the intense emotional investment fans have made in supporting H&M is surprising.



There are women out there who are living their Disney princess fantasy through her.  To them, it doesn't matter that she and Harry are on the outside now and will likely never get to do anything actually "royal" again.  They are going to carry on with their fantasy.   It's the Emperor's New Clothes come to life!  Meghan Markle wrote a mediocre children's book with no story, poor grammar, which doesn't even rhyme, but her devoted fans insist that the book is amazing.  I know someone who is buying multiple copies even though she doesn't like Harry or MM's attacks on the family and was really upset at the interviews and their behavior, but she is still buying copies to give away.   She couldn't explain why to me but she is the kind of person who buys all kinds of junk, reads tons of romance* novels, and isn't very emotionally resilient. She doesn't have any children herself.  No husband or boyfriend. I just told her that I hoped she enjoyed it and enjoyed giving it away to others.  What can you say? 

I just can't imagine spending $150 or $200 of your hard earned money on copies of this book to help two multi-millionaires pay their water bill while real, talented writers have to work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet.  I think this kind of devotion will wear away over time, though it might take years for some. 

* Btw, nothing against romance novels, I think they can be fun. Outlander anyone?


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I could be totally wrong about this, but wasn't she also 'caught' taking pictures of areas that she wasn't supposed to even be in?  How about her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car?!?! .. was it at the party that she did that (_and yes - there are pictures somewhere which show her be-booping in Harry's trunk - HA, some innuendos here_?!?!) ..


I read about the videos/pictures taken at Buckingham and watched a video showing "her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car." I wanted to post it here, but that twitter account has been suspended. I wonder why!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If we all instinctively understand its importance to HM, if even Noel Gallagher gets it — someone who is hardly a poster boy for the delicacies of family unity himself — why can’t Meghan and Harry understand the enormity of what they have done?



I usually agree with Jan, but not here. They know exactly what they've done, they wanted to strike where it hurt and in true narcisstic gaslighting mode then claimed it was their way to honor the Queen when in fact it's two middle fingers stuck up into her face.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I am amazed at how good the Amazon reviews are for her book today. It has a 95% 5-star rating.
> 
> There are several reviews saying they are buying multiple copies to give away to friends and family. Some absolutely gush over it. These are people listed as verified purchasers. Say what you will, the intense emotional investment fans have made in supporting H&M is surprising.


Their foundation seemed to have acquired copies, they probably have someone there just writing  reviews from 9 to 5.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> *I just can't imagine spending $150 or $200 of your hard earned money on copies of this book to help two multi-millionaires pay their water bill* while real, talented writers have to work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet.  I think this kind of devotion will wear away over time, though it might take years for some.
> 
> * Btw, nothing against romance novels, I think they can be fun. Outlander anyone?



I have a feeling many of the people who are buying them are those who can least afford it. There was one Meghan supporter who tried to read it to her 4-year-old son and he walked away. You can't force a kid to like something because it's "sweet" or "nice." Little kids are too honest for that.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If someone was better behaved, they would have been part of this group of wonderful working senior royals. Just sayin'


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Their foundation seemed to have acquired copies, they probably have someone there just writing  reviews from 9 to 5.



That could account for some of it but not all. I believe the foundation got the publisher to donate 2,000 copies for distribution to libraries. They wouldn't be going through Amazon for those.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I could be totally wrong about this, but wasn't she also 'caught' taking pictures of areas that she wasn't supposed to even be in?  How about her snooping in the trunk of Harry's car?!?! .. was it at the party that she did that (_and yes - there are pictures somewhere which show her be-booping in Harry's trunk - HA, some innuendos here_?!?!) ..



Nope and nope. The picture taking incident happened before the engagement when they were just dating, and the rummaging through the trunk was during a polo match.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I usually agree with Jan, but not here. They know exactly what they've done, they wanted to strike where it hurt and in true narcisstic gaslighting mode then claimed it was their way to honor the Queen when in fact it's two middle fingers stuck up into her face.



After just watching the vid where Megs was told* NO *when she was part of the official RF, I would not be surprised. She has a damn screw loose, as does her thicko husband.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> There’s been loads of sons of kings who have been known to be so but they aren’t the wife’s kid so they have no chance of entering the succession without a war Historically, if the father says acknowledges a baby as his it is his but it needs to be born in wedlock to inherit. (So this is one of the reasons why Elizabeth the 1st was initially controversial as she was declared illegitimate as Henry annulled his marriage to Anne B)



There's one heir to a non-royal dukedom that has a son with his (female) partner of many years. The kid won't be able to inherit the dukedom, and ever since I've read about it I wondered what exactly made these two decide to not quickly run to the courthouse (like the Marquess and Marquise of Cholmondeley did when she was five months pregnant...juicy! They also weirdly picked the heavier one of their twin boys to be the heir instead of, you know, the firstborn? LOL). 



> Add on - as to the dna testing, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did dna test all the kids these days but in royal law if it’s not born from the wife it’s classed as the same as if he had a child out of wedlock - even if the kid is genetically the wife’s, it’s just the way they organised it. Obviously this is not a problem for normal people as you don’t need to be genetically related to anyone to inherit their money normally if you are recognised as their child or named as an heir - this only applies to the line of succession.



I mean, as I said earlier: it's not really a problem for the Sussexes either


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That could account for some of it but not all. I believe the foundation got the publisher to donate 2,000 copies for distribution to libraries. They wouldn't be going through Amazon for those.


I wouldn't be very surprised if they used some of the non-profit foundation's funds to buy a few hundred copies from Am*z*n for donation. All good and lawful...


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't be very surprised if they used some of the non-profit foundation's funds to buy a few hundred copies from Am*z*n for donation. All good and lawful...



Could be. I looked on the Barnes and Noble site and they only have 22 reviews. I thought this one was particularly telling because it showed even a Meghan fan couldn't bring herself to pretend it was good. 

☆☆2 out of 5 stars.
· 3 days ago  
*Sorry, No*
Initially was excited to purchase as I am a huge H&M fan. I guess that's the only reason it's two stars instead of one. The book itself is bland, boring, definitely not for kids and had no real plot-just a bad poem with subpar watercolors.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I have a feeling *many of the people who are buying them are those who can least afford* it. There was one Meghan supporter who tried to read it to her 4-year-old son and he walked away. You can't force a kid to like something because it's "sweet" or "nice." Little kids are too honest for that.



Yep, exactly, the person I know who is buying multiple copies has a decent but not great job and isn't living large by any stretch. This money should go to her 401k plan or to an emergency fund instead of into Prince Harry and MM's pockets.


----------



## Chanbal

It seems this is a must read.  










						Satirist CRAIG BROWN pens a re-write of Meghan Markle's The Bench
					

The Mail's incomparable satirist CRAIG BROWN takes a jovial stab at his own interpretation of Meghan's poetry after her hotly anticipated children's book The Bench was released this week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




1. This is my desk

Where I think up verses

That I can never quite make scan

Oh, curses!

But at least they rhyme

Quite a bit of the time

And if you think they don’t

Well, that’s your opinion, not mine.

Or would that ‘mine’ be better as ‘grime’

To rhyme with ‘time’

Or ‘lime’, or ‘mime’, or ‘slime’?

Writing kids’ verse is so tricky, I’m

Tempted to call it a day

And devote all my energy

To saving our planet

Rather than just copying those Janet

And John books

I read as a kid

Don’t say I didn’t

’Cos my truth is I did.

This is my desk

Where I phone my friends Serena

Oprah, Amal, the Beckhams and Barack

‘Hey guys! Great idea! Let’s make our world greener!’

This is my desk

Where I take calls from the Queen

‘Hey! Meg! How’s it going?

What’s new, babe? Where yo’ been?’

2. We talk about everything, HM and me —

Kanye, lip gloss, sushi and fashion

Personal growth, box-sets, book deals and TV,

And how to spread love, peace, truth and compassion.

HM asks my advice

On how to be authentic

I tell her it means speaking

Almost like you meant it.

‘You must smile more, and wave,

Be true to your roots.

Act kind of sincere —

That’s a trick I learnt on Suits.

‘And when the love flows

It’ll be like heaven, you

Will be showered with awards

As well as boosting your revenue.’

And it’s around this time I tell her

I’ve taken a silly bet

That I’ll make out we’re besties,

By naming my girl Lilibet.

3. This is the hen house

Where we feed our pet chicks

They're all under contract

To look cute on Netflix. 

4. This is your desk
Where the critics cannot hurt you
And you can spend all day
Signalling your virtue.
This is the desk
For papa and son, when he gets older
Though not MY papa —
No, I gave him the cold shoulder.
Nor will I speak to my sister,
That viper, shark, panther:
You may talk of compassion but
Don’t mention Samantha.
Right here on my desk,
The place you’ll call home
With daddy and son
Where you’ll never be ’lone
Oh jeez, I can’t make ’lone
Rhyme with home.
My kiddy verse has unfurled
But at least as a proud mother, wife, feminist, Duchess and activist I remain determined to uplift and unite communities, spread compassion, attend premieres, dress smart/casual and tell our truth
To the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> There are women out there who are living their Disney princess fantasy through her.  To them, it doesn't matter that she and Harry are on the outside now and will likely never get to do anything actually "royal" again.  They are going to carry on with their fantasy.   It's the Emperor's New Clothes come to life!  Meghan Markle wrote a mediocre children's book with no story, poor grammar, which doesn't even rhyme, but her devoted fans insist that the book is amazing.  I know someone who is buying multiple copies even though she doesn't like Harry or MM's attacks on the family and was really upset at the interviews and their behavior, but she is still buying copies to give away.   She couldn't explain why to me but she is the kind of person who buys all kinds of junk, reads tons of romance* novels, and isn't very emotionally resilient. She doesn't have any children herself.  No husband or boyfriend. I just told her that I hoped she enjoyed it and enjoyed giving it away to others.  What can you say?
> 
> I just can't imagine spending $150 or $200 of your hard earned money on copies of this book to help two multi-millionaires pay their water bill while real, talented writers have to work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet.  I think this kind of devotion will wear away over time, though it might take years for some.
> 
> * Btw, nothing against romance novels, I think they can be fun. Outlander anyone?


Right? It will be but one get 5 free pretty soon.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> This doesn’t sound true to me.  In the US if for example if you decide to use Dr A, Dr A can only deliver you at the hospital where s/he has “hospital privileges” , not necessarily the hospital you’ve picked.  I’ve never heard of anyone looking at hospital delivery places.  You might shop around for the obstetrician but not the hospital. (Unless you did shop around for a hospital, then you’d have to choose from whatever obstetricians have privileges there)


ITA.  I never understood how Khloe Kardashian's OB flew from CA to deliver her in Ohio.  Made no sense that she'd have had privileges or even gotten them just for KK, or that the hospital would even grant her privileges.  One article said MM's OB from London "called in to supervise" her delivery?  WTH?  Like FaceTimed??  If I was her OB here, I would've been insulted.  Not like she's Kate Middleton or anything!


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> “_*The couple apparently feel that the birth of their daughter is “almost like a new beginning.”*_”
> 
> Who are they kidding?


Themselves.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I never understood how Khloe Kardashian's OB flew from CA to deliver her in Ohio.  Made no sense that she'd have had privileges or even gotten them just for KK, or that the hospital would even grant her privileges.  One article said MM's OB from London "called in to supervise" her delivery?  WTH?  Like FaceTimed??  If I was her OB here, I would've been insulted.  Not like she's Kate Middleton or anything!


I think there was more going on.  Supervised over the phone?  What about liability.  Deliveries are big liability issues and law suits abound.  An OB here is going to do what an unknown OB tells them to do over the phone?  Was there some huge problem? If there was, it would be doubtful that they would have allowed her to go home so quickly.   I think this is nothing more than MM trying to make herself more important and that she needed an international consultation in the delivery room.  She had exaggerated security as well. Did they think that the baby would be kidnapped once it popped out of her.  Did they post guards with machine guns in the nursery?  This is all too ridiculous for words.  The sugars eat this stuff up and believe it.  It makes my eyeballs spin.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> If someone was better behaved, they would have been part of this group of wonderful working senior royals. Just sayin'



And Catherine, Camilla and QEII look like a TEAM ….


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> I think there was more going on.  Supervised over the phone?  What about liability.  Deliveries are big liability issues and law suits abound.  An OB here is going to do what an unknown OB tells them to do over the phone?  Was there some huge problem? If there was, it would be doubtful that they would have allowed her to go home to quickly.   I think this is nothing more than MM trying to make herself more important and that she needed an international consultation in the delivery room.  She had exaggerated security as well. Did they think that the baby would be kidnapped once it popped out of her.  Did they post guards with machine guns in the nursery?  This is all too ridiculous for words.  The sugars eat this stuff up and believe it.  It makes my eyeballs spin.


She went home because I’m not sure H’s wife was the one who gave birth!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> And Catherine, Camilla and QEII look like a TEAM ….


They all look comfortable with one another and like each other as well.  Perfect example of men marrying women who wanted to fit into the role.  It's not for everyone, but if you are going to marry into a family like this, you should be willing to do it and for the long term.  I think the same about Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden and her husband.  He has been the perfect partner for her.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> She went home because I’m not sure H’s wife was the one who gave birth!


I know.  I didn't want to go there lol!  The entire thing is so screwy.  I could see the need for security if you are trying to keep the world from finding out that it was another woman who actually had the baby.  The only other thing I can think of in regard to this and the need for for another OB who is in another country is that the surrogate started under that Ob's care in UK before coming to CA.  Why would Meghan need an OB located out of the country if her entire second pregnancy was in CA?  What could that phone call provide that wasn't already in her medical records from the birth of Archie?  Perhaps this woman was the same surrogate for Archie?  It's all odd.


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> And Catherine, Camilla and QEII look like a TEAM ….




They sure look like a tight knit bunch


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I never understood how Khloe Kardashian's OB flew from CA to deliver her in Ohio.  Made no sense that she'd have had privileges or even gotten them just for KK, or that the hospital would even grant her privileges.  One article said MM's OB from London "called in to supervise" her delivery?  WTH?  Like FaceTimed??  If I was her OB here, I would've been insulted.  Not like she's Kate Middleton or anything!


I thought it was because the baby daddy was based there with his team and she wanted to deliver where he was.  Could be wrong about this.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I think there was more going on.  Supervised over the phone?  What about liability.  Deliveries are big liability issues and law suits abound.  An OB here is going to do what an unknown OB tells them to do over the phone?  Was there some huge problem? If there was, it would be doubtful that they would have allowed her to go home so quickly.   I think this is nothing more than MM trying to make herself more important and that she needed an international consultation in the delivery room.  She had exaggerated security as well. Did they think that the baby would be kidnapped once it popped out of her.  Did they post guards with machine guns in the nursery?  This is all too ridiculous for words.  The sugars eat this stuff up and believe it.  It makes my eyeballs spin.


It doesn't make any sense. Was her OB a resident? In that case, the resident would have been supervised by an attending here and not by an OB from London. The surrogate theory might not be a bad one.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It doesn't make any sense. Was her OB a resident? In that case, the resident would have been supervised by an attending here and not by an OB from London. The surrogate theory might not be a bad one.


One possibility is MM just planting idiotic things to seem more important, not realizing people know how medical training and practice works here.  She probably thought she'd toss some word salad and everyone would just believe it.


----------



## Chanbal

This is unbelievable! 
*Lifetime's Megxit movie recreates Princess Diana's deadly Paris car crash: Film about the Sussexes' 'escape from the palace' dredges up painful memory for Princes Harry and William as crew are seen setting up the moment their mother died in 1997*










						Lifetime's Megxit movie recreates Princess Diana's deadly car crash
					

Cast and crew from Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace were seen filming in an underpass in Canada, where a smashed Mercedes-Benz could be seen flipped over on the road.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

If true, it's hilarious.


----------



## Mendocino

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder how a certain person is feeling today that the Duchess of Cambridge is the first Royal to greet and share an engagement today with the FLOTUS? I'm thinking it's quite an honour for Catherine that it's her and not Camilla.



What I thought about when reading the coverage of today's events is that Jill and Kate must have had a lot to talk about seeing that early childhood education is a huge part of Kate's focus and Jill has a doctorate in education.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> If true, it's hilarious.
> View attachment 5107922



Like Amazon needs some outside PR people to tell them how to market books. Amazon knows they have to move those rhyming paperweights out of the warehouses in the first two weeks or they’ll be stuck with them once word of how awful it is becomes common knowledge.

It could be evidence for your theory that her PR agencies are having employees buy up books on Amazon so they can inflate the number of 5-star reviews.

Why is everything about her ripe for a conspiracy?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I thought it was because the baby daddy was based there with his team and she wanted to deliver where he was.  Could be wrong about this.


He was there, but how/why would her LA Obstetrician want to/be able to deliver at a hospital in Ohio where she's not privileged?


----------



## wilding

Chanbal said:


> If true, it's hilarious.


Get that coin girl   

Was just reading this article over on news.com.au









						Harry and Meghan’s cold Queen move
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au
				




and it seems they have stayed quite on PP's birthday?


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if this will please the Harkles. G7


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> He was there, but how/why would her LA Obstetrician want to/be able to deliver at a hospital in Ohio where she's not privileged?


There must have been a local MD present and her LA OB was there as an “observer” like visiting a professor, especially if this was a teaching hospital.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> One possibility is MM just planting idiotic things to seem more important, not realizing people know how medical training and practice works here.  She probably thought she'd toss some word salad and everyone would just believe it.


It is a given that they believe  the rest of us are stupid.


----------



## csshopper

wilding said:


> Get that coin girl
> 
> Was just reading this article over on news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s cold Queen move
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it seems they have stayed quite on PP's birthday?



I've lost count of the times I've thought they must have depleted their supply of nastiness, only to be proven wrong. How petty and mean spirited to have ignored Prince Phillip's birthday. Smacks of an "We'll show you" since recent interviews and pictures show the RF is moving on quite nicely without them.


----------



## xincinsin

wilding said:


> Get that coin girl
> 
> Was just reading this article over on news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s cold Queen move
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it seems they have stayed quite on PP's birthday?


Guess H is feeling too petulant to say anything about Grandpa, since he didn't get away with stealing Grandpa's nickname for Grandma.
And Methane's special bond with PP expired once she couldn't find any more ways to merch the connection. 
I know it's not fair to the sellers, but I would be reluctant to buy anything from the florist and the latte company that Methane is promoting.


----------



## wilding

xincinsin said:


> Guess H is feeling too petulant to say anything about Grandpa, since he didn't get away with stealing Grandpa's nickname for Grandma.
> And Methane's special bond with PP expired once she couldn't find any more ways to merch the connection.
> *I know it's not fair to the sellers, but I would be reluctant to buy anything from the florist and the latte company that Methane is promoting.*



I'm the same with a lot of influencers. I hear you. Completely grubby. Hope it makes sense, makes sense in my head but... I would give one heartbeat to wish my Pa one last happy birthday. I didn't get to attend his funeral, lot of baggage with my family and highly doubt i'll make my nana's. I see the Queen and i picture mine.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> There must have been a local MD present and her LA OB was there as an “observer” like visiting a professor, especially if this was a teaching hospital.


Like being in a Zoo being observed? *How pretentious of MM.* Billions of women give birth, heck in some countries, women working in fields squat down, give birth and move on. And yes, it's still happening in some parts of the world.


----------



## Chanbal

_Dickie Arbiter, who was previously the press secretary for the Queen, said the couple needed to "put up or shut up".

He told The Sun: "They left this country because they wanted privacy.

"They wanted away from the publicity. And since they left this country, the UK, *they’ve done nothing but seek publicity.*

"*Now they are saying Harry is taking five months paternity leave and hopefully he will stay quiet in those five months.

"Quite frankly, to put it simply they need to put up or shut up.*"_









						Harry and Meghan have 'done nothing but seek publicity', says Queen's former press chief
					

Dickie Arbiter said the couple should 'put up or shut up'.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Lodpah

Great point:

So, if the duke and duchess can move with such agility and urgency when it comes to calling in their retinue of legal bigwigs, why not the same forcefulness and energy when it comes to publicly showing their support for Her Majesty?


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Not sure if this will please the Harkles. G7
> View attachment 5107994


With the handbag.
I need to know what in the James Bond Hell is in there, 'cause she's never seen without it. Like, ever.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> The laws about royal children exist to confirm that the child is from the wife’s body- it basically exists to ice bastard children out of the line.
> 
> There’s been loads of sons of kings who have been known to be so but they aren’t the wife’s kid so they have no chance of entering the succession without a war Historically, if the father says acknowledges a baby as his it is his but it needs to be born in wedlock to inherit. (So this is one of the reasons why Elizabeth the 1st was initially controversial as she was declared illegitimate as Henry annulled his marriage to Anne B)
> 
> technically the birth of royal children needs to be witnessed by a government official to confirm it really did come from the royal tuppence. In the case of M she did not have an official witness.
> 
> There was also all this business with the warming pan baby story - which was a rumour that James the second’s son was a peasant baby smuggled in after the real royal child was stillborn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Warming Pan Scandal | Stuarts Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stuarts-online.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hence why they started needing an official witness. This story was also a bit of an obvious wrangle to get rid of the Catholics.
> 
> Add on - as to the dna testing, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did dna test all the kids these days but in royal law if it’s not born from the wife it’s classed as the same as if he had a child out of wedlock - even if the kid is genetically the wife’s, it’s just the way they organised it. Obviously this is not a problem for normal people as you don’t need to be genetically related to anyone to inherit their money normally if you are recognised as their child or named as an heir - this only applies to the line of succession.


It’s where the name Fitzroy comes from, it means “of the king” or “kings son” and was given to acknowledged illegitimate sons of kings.  Henry VIII had a son, Henry Fitzroy, who was given a Dukedom.  He died young - of malaria if I remember rightly.


----------



## Clearblueskies

V0N1B2 said:


> With the handbag.
> I need to know what in the James Bond Hell is in there, 'cause she's never seen without it. Like, ever.


I’ve read she uses it to signal for help from ladies in waiting - its a get this boring idiot away from me now device


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

gracekelly said:


> I know.  I didn't want to go there lol!  The entire thing is so screwy.  I could see the need for security if you are trying to keep the world from finding out that it was another woman who actually had the baby.  The only other thing I can think of in regard to this and the need for for another OB who is in another country is that the surrogate started under that Ob's care in UK before coming to CA.  Why would Meghan need an OB located out of the country if her entire second pregnancy was in CA?  What could that phone call provide that wasn't already in her medical records from the birth of Archie?  Perhaps this woman was the same surrogate for Archie?  It's all odd.




I thought (s)he might have been doubled as a witness to the birth. As in, yup...that's the Sussex baby.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> _Dickie Arbiter, who was previously the press secretary for the Queen,
> *"Quite frankly, to put it simply they need to put up or shut up.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have 'done nothing but seek publicity', says Queen's former press chief
> 
> 
> Dickie Arbiter said the couple should 'put up or shut up'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



We can only pray


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> I’ve read she uses it to signal for help from ladies in waiting - its a get this boring idiot away from me now device



Those handbags could have 2 threads of their own, one in the handbag forum and one in the celebs


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> There must have been a local MD present and her LA OB was there as an “observer” like visiting a professor, especially if this was a teaching hospital.


Maybe, but nowadays, they won't let just anyone in any more regardless of credentials, unless you're part of that hospital.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Those handbags could have 2 threads of their own, one in the handbag forum and one in the celebs


Or *Candid thoughts from the Her Majs handbag* would make a great blog!


----------



## purseinsanity

wilding said:


> Get that coin girl
> 
> Was just reading this article over on news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s cold Queen move
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and it seems they have stayed quite on PP's birthday?


I think it's truly time to cut these two out of the BRF for good.  Enough is enough.  They don't have any respect for the institution and certainly no respect for Haz's own family members, to whom they constantly claimed to be "close to".  They steal TQ's personal nickname, then ignore what would've been the milestone birthday for her beloved husband.  They are callous and mean.  Remove the titles and they have nothing.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> With the handbag.
> I need to know what in the James Bond Hell is in there, 'cause she's never seen without it. Like, ever.


I have to admit, it reminds me of Sophia and her constant handbag on The Golden Girls.


----------



## Hermes Zen

V0N1B2 said:


> With the handbag.
> I need to know what in the James Bond Hell is in there, 'cause she's never seen without it. Like, ever.



Right?!?  Starting to sound like M&H.  Here's some info I found. 

The Queen sees her handbag as *an integral part of her outfit*, whether indoors or outdoors, so carries it wherever she goes. We don't blame her…Buckingham Palace is huge; imagine leaving your bag in one wing then needing something from it and having to trek over to the other wing to get it. It's just not practical, plus it completes her look and ensures she's ready for any guest who may pop through the palace doors.

*So what does the monarch carry in her bag? *It's thought it holds her reading glasses, handkerchief, mints, a fountain pen and a portable hook to hang the bag under tables.

Phil Dampier, the author of _What's In The Queen's Handbag: And Other Royal Secrets,_ told *HELLO!* she also carries treats for her corgis, the occasional crossword puzzle, a diary, camera and a handy penknife. It is believed the bag contains a small mirror, some family photographs and lipstick, too.

Full Article:



> https://www.hellomagazine.com/fashi.../why-the-queen-carries-launer-handbag-inside/
> 
> *THIS is why the Queen carries her handbag indoors*


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Right?!?  Starting to sound like M&H.  Here's some info I found.
> 
> The Queen sees her handbag as *an integral part of her outfit*, whether indoors or outdoors, so carries it wherever she goes. We don't blame her…Buckingham Palace is huge; imagine leaving your bag in one wing then needing something from it and having to trek over to the other wing to get it. It's just not practical, plus it completes her look and ensures she's ready for any guest who may pop through the palace doors.
> 
> *So what does the monarch carry in her bag? *It's thought it holds her reading glasses, handkerchief, mints, a fountain pen and a portable hook to hang the bag under tables.
> 
> Phil Dampier, the author of _What's In The Queen's Handbag: And Other Royal Secrets,_ told *HELLO!* she also carries treats for her corgis, the occasional crossword puzzle, a diary, camera and a handy penknife. It is believed the bag contains a small mirror, some family photographs and lipstick, too.
> 
> Full Article:


LOL, I'm still going to pretend she (like Sophia) steals the Sweet & Low from restaurants and throws it in there too!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This is unbelievable!
> *Lifetime's Megxit movie recreates Princess Diana's deadly Paris car crash: Film about the Sussexes' 'escape from the palace' dredges up painful memory for Princes Harry and William as crew are seen setting up the moment their mother died in 1997*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lifetime's Megxit movie recreates Princess Diana's deadly car crash
> 
> 
> Cast and crew from Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace were seen filming in an underpass in Canada, where a smashed Mercedes-Benz could be seen flipped over on the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well I’m glad there’s no chance of them exploiting the more gruesome aspects of the story like those evil journalists did- that would really be tacky and hypocritical.

Add on - also no concern for how they are forcing the poor families of Dodi Al Fayed  and Henri Paul to relieve the trauma of their Loved one’s deaths I see.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> With the handbag.
> I need to know what in the James Bond Hell is in there, 'cause she's never seen without it. Like, ever.


While it’s not confirmed, I’ve heard she has some sort of tracking device/ personal alarm in there in case she’s ever threatened


----------



## Lodpah

I heard a saying, don't wrestle with a pig, they get down and dirty and like it. Maybe that's why the BRF don't respond to their antics? They have no one to blame. We are watching in real time how shallow and low they go. Who needs a Lifetime Movie? The drama is being played out for real by these two . . . don't know what to call them anymore.


----------



## drifter

the tarot card reading video - sounds like lilibet will turn out like MM.  How tiresome for us to have to continue this thread to the next generation........


----------



## creme fraiche

Clearblueskies said:


> It’s where the name Fitzroy comes from, it means “of the king” or “kings son” and was given to acknowledged illegitimate sons of kings.  Henry VIII had a son, Henry Fitzroy, who was given a Dukedom.  He died young - of malaria if I remember rightly.



Yes, The Duke of Richmond who died at 17 of what they think was TB, but aren't certain.  There are some great scenes in the third of the Thomas Cromwell books by Hillary Mantel (Bring Up the Bodies) where we can imagine something of his personality.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

Hermes Zen said:


> I was googling and this came up. M's Painting for sale.  She's beautiful but.  It stopped me in my tracks!!    There's t-shirts too!
> 
> 
> Sorry couldn't copy the photo.


Curiosity got the best of me and I read some of the reviews…one lady said she hung it up in her kitchen , a handful of women said they bought it for their sons, and one lady said she bought it for her husband and he loved it…WTH?!?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Well I’m glad there’s no chance of them exploiting the more gruesome aspects of the story like those evil journalists did- that would really be tacky and hypocritical.
> 
> Add on - also no concern for how they are forcing the poor families of Dodi Al Fayed  and Henri Paul to relieve the trauma of their Loved one’s deaths I see.


Will too, a revival of the traumatic events must be very difficult for him.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Will too, a revival of the traumatic events must be very difficult for him.


No! Only Harry!


----------



## sdkitty

I am now a fan of Bill Maher - the one and only liberal American TV personality (as far as I know) who will say something negative about H&M.  Last night he said (I'm paraphrasing) - Duchess Meghan gave birth to a baby girl.  Now there will be even more pissing and whining from Montecito.


----------



## EverSoElusive

wilding said:


> Get that coin girl
> 
> Was just reading this article over on news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s cold Queen move
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *and it seems they have stayed quite on PP's birthday?*



They just need to stay quiet. Period.


----------



## xincinsin

The Refinery wrote an article about anti-MM hatred. 








						I Went Undercover In The Sinister World Of Meghan Markle Hate Accounts
					

There are corners of the internet obsessed with tearing down the Duchess of Sussex. But what exactly is driving them?




					www.refinery29.com
				




I'm in two minds about it. I think the writer tried to be non-biased, but due to the extremes of view, this is not a topic easy for balanced reporting. I didn't get through all the comments, some responses were getting too battleground bloody for my taste. But one MM supporter made a very revisionist comment: said Hazard and Methane moved away and led a quiet life for 4 years, not bothering anyone, so the constant criticism is unfair. Four years?


----------



## Hermes Zen

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> Curiosity got the best of me and I read some of the reviews…one lady said she hung it up in her kitchen , a handful of women said they bought it for their sons, and one lady said she bought it for her husband and he loved it…WTH?!?!


Thanks @sweetasc6h12o6!


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> The Refinery wrote an article about anti-MM hatred.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Went Undercover In The Sinister World Of Meghan Markle Hate Accounts
> 
> 
> There are corners of the internet obsessed with tearing down the Duchess of Sussex. But what exactly is driving them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.refinery29.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm in two minds about it. I think the writer tried to be non-biased, but due to the extremes of view, this is not a topic easy for balanced reporting. I didn't get through all the comments, some responses were getting too battleground bloody for my taste. But one MM supporter made a very revisionist comment: said Hazard and Methane moved away and led a quiet life for 4 years, not bothering anyone, so the constant criticism is unfair. Four years?


Was that after the four years they tried to make it work in the RF? Where does the time go!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe, but nowadays, they won't let just anyone in any more regardless of credentials, unless you're part of that hospital.


I thought about it more and the LA MD could have applied for temporary medical privileges well in advance if that was the plan to have her deliver there.  





						000002257
					

What are the requirements for granting temporary privileges ?




					www.jointcommission.org
				



.


----------



## redney

Perhaps her OB has privileges at the two SB hospitals that are part of the same system (SB Cottage and Goleta Valley Cottage)? So they decided to make a PR thing of it saying they toured hospitals. :eyeroll:


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> The Refinery wrote an article about anti-MM hatred.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Went Undercover In The Sinister World Of Meghan Markle Hate Accounts
> 
> 
> There are corners of the internet obsessed with tearing down the Duchess of Sussex. But what exactly is driving them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.refinery29.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm in two minds about it. I think the writer tried to be non-biased, but due to the extremes of view, this is not a topic easy for balanced reporting. I didn't get through all the comments, some responses were getting too battleground bloody for my taste. But one MM supporter made a very revisionist comment: said Hazard and Methane moved away and led a quiet life for 4 years, not bothering anyone, so the constant criticism is unfair. Four years?


i too did not get through it all, i skipped the nasty bits on both sides
the 4 years bit was taken out of context by the supporter, H&M have been together for somewhere over 4 years, but they did not move away 4 years ago, it is arguable they have been quiet for four years


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The Refinery wrote an article about anti-MM hatred.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Went Undercover In The Sinister World Of Meghan Markle Hate Accounts
> 
> 
> There are corners of the internet obsessed with tearing down the Duchess of Sussex. But what exactly is driving them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.refinery29.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm in two minds about it. I think the writer tried to be non-biased, but due to the extremes of view, this is not a topic easy for balanced reporting. I didn't get through all the comments, some responses were getting too battleground bloody for my taste. But one MM supporter made a very revisionist comment: said Hazard and Methane moved away and led a quiet life for 4 years, not bothering anyone, so the constant criticism is unfair. Four years?



The article is indeed interesting. It tries to cover both sides, but ultimately sums up the crowd who dislikes H&M as “But as experts on anti-fandom also write, anti-fandom shouldn’t be seen as a cover for what is at its core: obsessive online hatred.”   IMO that is a simplistic view of the issues with H&M which is so typical of the media. Always the ‘either-or’ argument rather than the ‘both-and’ approach.  We need more balance, more honesty and more appreciation for the complexity of human beings.


----------



## lulilu

marietouchet said:


> i too did not get through it all, i skipped the nasty bits on both sides
> the 4 years bit was taken out of context by the supporter, H&M have been together for somewhere over 4 years, but they did not move away 4 years ago, it is arguable they have been quiet for four years




I gave up after a bit.  It was ostensibly even handed but not really.  I am not interested in another HM apologist operating under the guise of an educational article.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.

I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The article is indeed interesting. It tries to cover both sides, but ultimately sums up the crowd who dislikes H&M as “But as experts on anti-fandom also write, anti-fandom shouldn’t be seen as a cover for what is at its core: obsessive online hatred.”   IMO that is a simplistic view of the issues with H&M which is so typical of the media. Always the ‘either-or’ argument rather than the ‘both-and’ approach.  We need more balance, more honesty and more appreciation for the complexity of human beings.



The article ignores the subject of the article, Meghan. The fans and anti-fans don’t exist in a vacuum. Meghan’s actions and behavior inspires the overzealousness.

There is too much rhetoric from Scobie’s perspective to consider the article an honest  attempt to look at both sides.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The article ignores the subject of the article, Meghan. The fans and anti-fans don’t exist in a vacuum. Meghan’s actions and behavior inspires the overzealousness.
> 
> There is too much rhetoric from Scobie’s perspective to consider the article an honest  attempt to look at both sides.



Yes, way too much vitriol about the anti-fans‘ “obsessive online hatred”.  Plus, the criticisms are no longer about M. Now, more people realize Hazz‘s dysfunction has been the problem all along. Happily, H&M have been quiet this weekend that celebrates QE’s birthday


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.



I feel for you. I'm glad to hear you are feeling much better! OMGOSH the pain!  Happy to hear it's under control now.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


That sounds awful, I hope you feel 100% soon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


oh jeez that sounds like the sequel to the marathon man - the marathon Queen?
Poor you- I hope it gets better soon. 

Of course I couldn’t agree more with your sentiments! Royals are more than just celebs. Also these articles always seem to conveniently avoid the absolute roasting Harry ( and many of us other royals too) gets  because it doesn’t fit the narrative .


----------



## bag-mania

Personally I am glad that they didn’t say or do anything on Philip’s birthday. Their participation wasn’t needed or wanted. They are supposed to be on maternity/paternity leave and privately focusing on their children. For once they did the right thing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.



Ouch! So sorry to hear about this. Seems like nothing is easy these days.
We have missed you and happily welcome you back. 

ETA: Marathon Man - the most painful movie ever. Hwood deserves lots of blame for our psychic pain


----------



## Traminer

CarryOn2020 said:


> this weekend that celebrates QE’s birthday


----------



## jelliedfeels

Re the refinery29 article 
This is just my humble opinion, of course, and I don’t want to criticise my American friends too much, but I honestly think a big part of why duchess Disney’s story sells so well to the US audience is because it gives them a chance to feel progressive and superior in terms of racial relations than another country.
I can’t help notice that us articles I read about black  American celebs talking about American racial politics tend to be more guarded in their terms whereas it seems to be accepted as wholesale the British are prejudiced. I certainly can’t imagine the US media happily accepting the statement ‘the press is racist’ with quite the same alacrity they repeated this same view regarding the British media, for example.
If the reader can picture the British as a regressive, discriminatory people obsessed with wacky traditions like monarchy - then the us comes off better by comparison and unfortunately, people rarely question things when they are being told what they want to hear.


----------



## marietouchet

t


QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


glad you are better … I feel your pain .. had surgery earlier in year … i know your pain


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> This is just my humble opinion, of course, and I don’t want to criticise my American friends too much, but I honestly think a big part of why duchess Disney’s story sells so well to the US audience is because it gives them a chance to feel progressive and superior in terms of racial relations than another country.
> I can’t help notice that us articles I read about black  American celebs talking about American racial politics tend to be more guarded in their terms whereas it seems to be accepted as wholesale the British are prejudiced. I certainly can’t imagine the US media happily accepting the statement ‘the press is racist’ with quite the same alacrity they repeated this same view regarding the British media, for example.
> If the reader can picture the British as a regressive, discriminatory people obsessed with wacky traditions like monarchy - then the us comes off better by comparison and unfortunately, people rarely question things when they are being told what they want to hear.


About possibly racist American press ….
US press, hard core news, lean pretty far left except for one channel, so most are unlikely to be perceived as racist by anyone in the US
actually, I would say they choose not to cover stories That are favorable to the other side - are one sided - left wing -  in their coverage
yes I can see they would be on team H&M
now, does the US press have an accurate perception of racism in the population and press of the UK? I don’t think so …  but then they have inaccurate  views of the French, Germans etc


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> About possibly racist American press ….
> US press, hard core news, lean pretty far left except for one channel, so most are unlikely to be perceived as racist by anyone in the US
> actually, I would say they choose not to cover stories That are favorable to the other side - are one sided - left wing -  in their coverage
> now, does the US press have an accurate perception of racism in the population and press of the UK? I don’t think so …  but then they have inaccurate  views of the French, Germans etc


Well I certainly agree that they may not have the most accurate views of other countries issues either, I do think there is some logic in it being a ‘feelgood’ story for the US press. I’m not saying they the US press are racist themselves to be clear and I don’t think I ought to try to categorise their political leanings.


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> Well I certainly agree that they may not have the most accurate views of other countries issues either, I do think there is some logic in it being a ‘feelgood’ story for the US press. I’m not saying they the US press are racist themselves to be clear and I don’t think I ought to try to categorise their political leanings.


Agree .. I hated using the R word in my post, and used the euphemisms of left and right wing, also inexact and overarching 


DEEP THOUGHT HERE, a generalization
Women’s TV is shown at the manicurists when I go during the day, things like Gayle and The View, which have been discussed here
Oprah used to be on day time Tv and is now known as the buddy of Gayle King who is on morning TV
Well, US women’s TV is definitely on team H&M, based on my deep insightful studies while getting nails done LOL


----------



## marietouchet

I keep thinking about whether one should/should not be talking the moonbump theory - is it too gauche ?
then, I think back to all the historical crises about royal inheritance based on birth, not merit, so, I guess the topic is fair game given the stakes in play
i find the most intriguing bit is that UK laws would deny inheritance to a child born from surrogacy , fascinating …
wonder if the move to the US had something to do with its different laws on surrogacy ???


----------



## Miss Liz

Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
https://mol.im/a/9680303

Who knows how accurate this piece in the Daily Mail will turn out to be but supposedly the baby naming issue went too far, and  the Queen “will no longer let mistruths go unchallenged”.


----------



## sdkitty

we lost connection to our cable TV today.  while trying to fix the cable problem and watching the limited channels we had available, bumped into a Hallmark movie starring Meghan Markle.  It was a rom com and she seemed to be the star....watched for maybe five minutes...guess she was ok for what it was...kind of pablum stuff...she was realizing she loved a guy who was marrying someone else....I could guess the ending but didn't stay tuned


----------



## CarryOn2020

Miss Liz said:


> Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
> https://mol.im/a/9680303
> 
> Who knows how accurate this piece in the Daily Mail will turn out to be but supposedly the baby naming issue went too far, and  the Queen “will no longer let mistruths go unchallenged”.



*Team Queen rules! Game, set, match.*

_However, there was further irritation at the Palace when friends of Harry and Meghan suggested to US journalists that the Queen had been introduced to Lilibet over a video call.

The insider last night denied that, stating, ‘*No video call has taken place’, adding: ‘Friends of the Sussexes appear to have given misleading briefings to journalists about what the Queen had said and that took the whole thing over the edge. The Palace couldn’t deny the story that this was a mistruth.’ *Ironically, Harry has spoken out against the ‘barrage of mistruths’ on social media.









						Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
					

The Queen, pictured, has ordered courtiers to abandon the traditional policy of 'never complain, never explain' following the increasingly bitter briefing war between the palace and Los Angeles.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
H&M crossed the line. Enough is enough.  Getting the popcorn and drinks ready.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


I, for one, am really glad you're back to your 'snarky self' and wish you all the best - what you've been through sounds really awful and hope you're on the mend.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Enjoy that luncheon, Hazzie.











						Queen Elizabeth II, Amateur Detective (Published 2021)
					

This week’s crime fiction column includes SJ Bennett’s new novel, “The Windsor Knot,” in which the monarch investigates a murder at Windsor Castle.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.



Glad to hear you are on the mend!


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle passed over by UK soccer star before meeting Prince Harry: source*

Meghan Markle was reportedly on the hunt for a British beau long before meeting hubby, Prince Harry.

Markle’s old friend, English radio personality Lizzie Cundy, claims she attempted to set the 39-year-old former “Suits” actress up with UK soccer star Ashley Cole, back in 2013.

Apparently, the athlete-turned-sports commentator wasn’t interested.

“Meghan said she loved London, and would love an English boyfriend, so I went through my phone to see who I knew that might be a good fit,” Cundy, 53, told Grazia.


“I tried to find her a boyfriend – Ashley Cole wasn’t so keen – but I did try to fix her up, which is funny looking back.”
Cole, 40, is considered one of the best left-backs of his generation, playing for Premier League clubs Chelsea and Arsenal before retiring to coach and provide commentary on the sport.

Despite Cole’s disinterest, Cundy admits that she can see why Harry would become smitten with the former television star, whom she met at a party in 2013.

“She was a real girl’s girl: full of energy,” Cundy said. “She didn’t stop talking, and we had a big giggle. There was just something special about her. We just got on, and immediately swapped numbers. I looked at her and thought ‘you have something special.’ She makes you feel at home straight away and it felt like I’d known her all my life. I can see why Harry fell in love with her.”

On Sunday, Harry and Markle — who are currently residing in a $14 million Montecito, Calif., mansion post-Megxit — announced the birth of their second child.

Harry, 36, and Markle split from the royal family in early 2020. In March of this year, the couple, who also share 2-year-old son Archie, aired their grievances about royal life in a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.









						Meghan Markle passed over by UK soccer star before meeting Prince Harry: source
					

Markle’s old friend, English radio personality Lizzie Cundy, claims she attempted to set the former “Suits” actress up with UK soccer star Ashley Cole back in 2013.




					www.google.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

Miss Liz said:


> Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
> https://mol.im/a/9680303
> 
> Who knows how accurate this piece in the Daily Mail will turn out to be but supposedly the baby naming issue went too far, and  the Queen “will no longer let mistruths go unchallenged”.




If this is indeed true, it's about time the Palace corrects the Troublesome Duo


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Team Queen rules! Game, set, match.*
> 
> _However, there was further irritation at the Palace when friends of Harry and Meghan suggested to US journalists that the Queen had been introduced to Lilibet over a video call.
> 
> The insider last night denied that, stating, ‘*No video call has taken place’, adding: ‘Friends of the Sussexes appear to have given misleading briefings to journalists about what the Queen had said and that took the whole thing over the edge. The Palace couldn’t deny the story that this was a mistruth.’ *Ironically, Harry has spoken out against the ‘barrage of mistruths’ on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
> 
> 
> The Queen, pictured, has ordered courtiers to abandon the traditional policy of 'never complain, never explain' following the increasingly bitter briefing war between the palace and Los Angeles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> H&M crossed the line. Enough is enough.  Getting the popcorn and drinks ready.


Wow! Everyone has a line.


----------



## Mendocino

CarryOn2020 said:


> Enjoy that luncheon, Hazzie.
> 
> View attachment 5108679
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II, Amateur Detective (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> This week’s crime fiction column includes SJ Bennett’s new novel, “The Windsor Knot,” in which the monarch investigates a murder at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



I love British cosy mysteries and I've read "Princess Elizabeth's Spy" which features Elizabeth and Margaret when they were sent to Windsor Castle for their safety during the Blitz.  I will be looking up this new book. Thank you so much!


----------



## Kaka_bobo

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle passed over by UK soccer star before meeting Prince Harry: source*



Dammit Ashley! Should have took one for the team...I mean Country.


----------



## poopsie

Miss Liz said:


> Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
> https://mol.im/a/9680303
> 
> Who knows how accurate this piece in the Daily Mail will turn out to be but supposedly the baby naming issue went too far, and  the Queen “will no longer let mistruths go unchallenged”.


I dunno if this is wise.
What's the saying?
Never argue with a fool. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


So glad you are feeling better! I had a cracked tooth last year and my dentist and the dental surgeon both told me to take my time deciding on which course of treatment I wanted (crown vs implant) because it was going to be expensive and longterm. Lived on ibuprofen for weeks.

I don't like MM because she lies like a rug. I'm not even white, so it's not their version of white vs non-white racism. I don't need to like the BRF to dislike MM for her lack of integrity and hypocrisy.



bag-mania said:


> The article ignores the subject of the article, Meghan. The fans and anti-fans don’t exist in a vacuum. Meghan’s actions and behavior inspires the overzealousness.
> 
> There is too much rhetoric from Scobie’s perspective to consider the article an honest  attempt to look at both sides.


I didn't like it that it ignored the OW interview and her victimhood which is the defining characteristic of her behaviour. Even when she champions women who are underprivileged, she always slides in her "poor me, just like you" attitude.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Enjoy that luncheon, Hazzie.
> 
> View attachment 5108679
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II, Amateur Detective (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> This week’s crime fiction column includes SJ Bennett’s new novel, “The Windsor Knot,” in which the monarch investigates a murder at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


I immediately put in a reservation at my local library. They have electronic copies, but I'm old-fashioned and like paperbacks which are actually paper


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So after 14+ days of excrutiating pain from an infected jawbone, overdosing several painkillers (which didn't cut it but made the difference between unbearable and barely hanging on if I took them like every three hours when the usual intervall would have been eight) and one round of useless antibiotics the 2nd one seems to finally help, so the past few hours I've been nearly back to my snarky self.
> 
> I WANT TO SAY THAT I STRONGLY REJECT THE IDEA WE "HATE" ON RAPTOR RANDOMLY WHEN SHE IS NOTHING SHORT OF ANGELIC. We have plenty of reasons to be, uh, critical, and we have receipts.


Hope you're feeling better!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle passed over by UK soccer star before meeting Prince Harry: source*
> 
> Meghan Markle was reportedly on the hunt for a British beau long before meeting hubby, Prince Harry.
> 
> Markle’s old friend, English radio personality Lizzie Cundy, claims she attempted to set the 39-year-old former “Suits” actress up with UK soccer star Ashley Cole, back in 2013.
> 
> Apparently, the athlete-turned-sports commentator wasn’t interested.
> 
> “Meghan said she loved London, and would love an English boyfriend, so I went through my phone to see who I knew that might be a good fit,” Cundy, 53, told Grazia.
> 
> 
> “I tried to find her a boyfriend – Ashley Cole wasn’t so keen – but I did try to fix her up, which is funny looking back.”
> Cole, 40, is considered one of the best left-backs of his generation, playing for Premier League clubs Chelsea and Arsenal before retiring to coach and provide commentary on the sport.
> 
> Despite Cole’s disinterest, Cundy admits that she can see why Harry would become smitten with the former television star, whom she met at a party in 2013.
> 
> “She was a real girl’s girl: full of energy,” Cundy said. “She didn’t stop talking, and we had a big giggle. There was just something special about her. We just got on, and immediately swapped numbers. I looked at her and thought ‘you have something special.’ She makes you feel at home straight away and it felt like I’d known her all my life. I can see why Harry fell in love with her.”
> 
> On Sunday, Harry and Markle — who are currently residing in a $14 million Montecito, Calif., mansion post-Megxit — announced the birth of their second child.
> 
> Harry, 36, and Markle split from the royal family in early 2020. In March of this year, the couple, who also share 2-year-old son Archie, aired their grievances about royal life in a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle passed over by UK soccer star before meeting Prince Harry: source
> 
> 
> Markle’s old friend, English radio personality Lizzie Cundy, claims she attempted to set the former “Suits” actress up with UK soccer star Ashley Cole back in 2013.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Ashley Cole is one smart man!


----------



## Hermes Zen

This is getting more interesting ... Where's the popcorn!?!

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s War With the Royals Hits Fever Pitch Over Lilibet*

The ongoing war of words over the queen knowing—or not—about Lilibet’s name leaves the Sussexes and the Windsors in a state of open warfare, as Harry plans his return to the U.K.

Documentation seen by The Daily Beast shows Meghan and Harry arguing that the claims made to the BBC on behalf of the queen, were “false and defamatory.”

“Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges.”

*This leaves Harry and Meghan less than half a step away from accusing the queen of being a liar.* Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges. This leaves a very real risk they could actually start briefing friendly US media in the next few days and actively escalating hostilities.


Full article below:


> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...with-the-royals-hits-fever-pitch-over-lilibet


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> This is getting more interesting ... Where's the popcorn!?!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s War With the Royals Hits Fever Pitch Over Lilibet*
> 
> The ongoing war of words over the queen knowing—or not—about Lilibet’s name leaves the Sussexes and the Windsors in a state of open warfare, as Harry plans his return to the U.K.
> 
> Documentation seen by The Daily Beast shows Meghan and Harry arguing that the claims made to the BBC on behalf of the queen, were “false and defamatory.”
> 
> “Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges.”
> 
> *This leaves Harry and Meghan less than half a step away from accusing the queen of being a liar.* Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges. This leaves a very real risk they could actually start briefing friendly US media in the next few days and actively escalating hostilities.
> 
> 
> Full article below:


Time for the big bucket with Jason!


----------



## needlv

I think the Queen responding (via BBC) then not backing Harry’s story is a warning shot to the Harkles.  They should not make up stories about zoom meetings with the Queen, naming the child after the Queen as a “sweet nod” etc.

if they continue speaking for / on behalf of - the Queen by making up stories, the press secretary can just confirm “no, that’s not true.” and leave it there.

So they have been warned.

Im waiting for the next explosion (probably Will’s birthday they will have to try to outdo his PR).  Scobie tried today by hinting that the Archie skin colour comment was either Charles or Will but no one cares.   MM said so many lies during the Oprah interview her credibility is lacking.  Even Oprah is backing away...

I have never seen two people self destruct their own images so effectively.  And Archewell is about compassion.... sure, maybe demonstrate that with your own families and in-laws before commenting further...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for the big bucket with Jason!
> 
> View attachment 5108842
> View attachment 5108843



We will need a big bucket for each of us with the popcorn machine next to us for refills!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice how she delights in using the sword.  
She is a strong, inspirational ruler.  God save the Queen. 
H&M are nuts to trifle with the QE.  They ought to be on their knees begging for forgiveness.


----------



## Icyjade

I’m so glad to see the BRF adopt a new stance on correcting the toxic twosome’s (or their “friends”) statements. Them against the BRF? Ha!


----------



## needlv

I took one for the team and watched the Thomas Markle interview with 60 mins Australia.

Top points: 

* Thomas wasn’t informed of the birth of Lili.  He found out via the media.
* Confirmed MM was born 40 years ago this August (so her age has been confirmed)
* Showed some more home videos of younger MM and some photos.
*  He is disappointed he can’t meet / hold grandchildren.  
* Asked where compassion is And wants forgiveness. Said he made a dumb mistake by working with paps For those staged photos before their wedding
* said Oprah is playing MM and H and is using them... taking advantage of H and getting him to say things he shouldn’t say.
* Says he feels sorry for PC.
* says he still loves MM.  He hasn’t spoken to her since two days before H and MM got married.  He desperately wants to talk to her again.
* Thomas believes he may not be around for much longer due to poor health / age and desperately wants to see his grandchildren.
* Doesn’t understand that if MM was suicidal why a call wasn’t made to a doctor.
* He thinks their biggest mistake was leaving the royals.  When they did that they walked away from the people too.
* When asked to give advice to H, TM told H to stop talking about the royals and giving away secrets.  Told H to love children, his wife and his family.

* He came across as quite sad and hurt.  He invited them to come visit Him and/or reach out to talk.  He said he was sorry...


----------



## CarryOn2020

My feeling is TM has already seen Archie. we know he hand-delivered a ‘note’ to OW.  We know DR texted him  about Archie’s birth. I am guessing she did the same about new bay-bee, too.









						Meghan's mother Doria texted Thomas Markle after Archie’s birth
					

DORIA RAGLAND texted Thomas Markle after Meghan Markle gave birth to her son Archie, but the Duchess "didn't want to know" if her father replied to the message, according to a biography.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I keep thinking about whether one should/should not be talking the moonbump theory - is it too gauche ?
> then, I think back to all the historical crises about royal inheritance based on birth, not merit, so, I guess the topic is fair game given the stakes in play
> i find the most intriguing bit is that UK laws would deny inheritance to a child born from surrogacy , fascinating …
> wonder if the move to the US had something to do with its different laws on surrogacy ???



Just easier to avoid scrutiny IMO

I had no idea Archie's birth was contentious too. Now I can see that if it ever came down to it, the UK would have good grounds to reject Archie and Lilli as heirs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M crossed the line. Enough is enough.  Getting the popcorn and drinks ready.



One can only hope! I feel the Sussexes only could come out seemingly having the upper hand because the Palace wouldn't react as per usual. I feel tears may flow if said Palace changes their modus operandi and actually sets out to run them over.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> This is getting more interesting ... Where's the popcorn!?!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s War With the Royals Hits Fever Pitch Over Lilibet*
> 
> The ongoing war of words over the queen knowing—or not—about Lilibet’s name leaves the Sussexes and the Windsors in a state of open warfare, as Harry plans his return to the U.K.
> 
> Documentation seen by The Daily Beast shows Meghan and Harry arguing that the claims made to the BBC on behalf of the queen, were “false and defamatory.”
> 
> “Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges.”
> 
> *This leaves Harry and Meghan less than half a step away from accusing the queen of being a liar.* Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges. This leaves a very real risk they could actually start briefing friendly US media in the next few days and actively escalating hostilities.
> 
> 
> Full article below:


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> We will need a big bucket for each of us with the popcorn machine next to us for refills!



Ready in 30 secs my dear friends


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Enjoy that luncheon, Hazzie.
> 
> View attachment 5108679
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II, Amateur Detective (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> This week’s crime fiction column includes SJ Bennett’s new novel, “The Windsor Knot,” in which the monarch investigates a murder at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



There's also another one out set during WW2 when for the sake of the story the Queen and Margaret as children are evacuated to rural Ireland or something. I'll have to look up the original title as I only saw the German one in a magazine that brings out a summer reading special each year.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> *This leaves Harry and Meghan less than half a step away from accusing the queen of being a liar.* Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges. This leaves a very real risk they could actually start briefing friendly US media in the next few days and actively escalating hostilities.



Oh yeah, bring it on. I'm still waiting on Raptor's receipts on the racist shenanigans of the BRF. I'd LOVE to see them, but it's a bit like The Emperor's New Clothes, isn't it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mendocino said:


> I love British cosy mysteries and I've read "Princess Elizabeth's Spy" which features Elizabeth and Margaret when they were sent to Windsor Castle for their safety during the Blitz.  I will be looking up this new book. Thank you so much!



Haha, that was the one! So if you liked it I might get it for my summer reading...I think for the first time in ages I'll take a proper few weeks off (the only free time I'm super strict with is that between December 23rd and January whatever is the first working day after New Year I don't work, do research, finish stuff, discuss projects at all) to refresh my mind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Scobie tried today by hinting that the Archie skin colour comment was either Charles or Will but no one cares.



He really is a one trick pony, is he. I don't buy for a minute that the man who has publicly said he would back his children and love them all the same if they turned out to be LBTG (and one of them is after all an heir to the throne) would think twice about a brown baby LOL




> MM said so many lies during the Oprah interview her credibility is lacking.  Even Oprah is backing away...



Has she said anything or is she just pulling an Amal Clooney?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Icyjade said:


> I’m so glad to see the BRF adopt a new stance on correcting the toxic twosome’s (or their “friends”) statements. Them against the BRF? Ha!



Harry effective called the Queen (the Head of State) a liar last week when he threated to sue the BBC, the State Broadcaster. IMO This is not purely a response to the name of Baby Beti but a wider response to the damage H&M are causing to the British Constitution by implying the Queen is a doddery old lady and HER staff at the palace are lying. (Why would they?)

I don't think the Palace will backtrack to refute the specific lies that are already out in the public domain, but they will not tolerate any more spin from either the UK media or US sources and will clarify if any old lies resurface.

It makes me wonder if the external investigation into the bullying claim at the Palace is completed ?

I firmly believe that Harry blindsided HMTQ yet again and did not ask explicit permission in advance of a telephone call to tell HMTQ the baby had been born and what they were naming her. I would be pretty sure H&M did not at any time in the 8 months since the +ve pregnancy test run the name past his brother, father or any cousins. Do we think Zara would have said "yeah, that's a great idea Haz" 

But here's the thing: How many times do we think Meghan was in a function or party or whatever where she heard the name used ? No more than twice, three times ? No children or grandchildren used it, so it can only be at Sandringham (at Christmas which they only did twice) or when with other older family members and European cousins (like the Kents/Goucester's or the Greek and Spanish RFs) and may be TQ's oldest friends.  Remember they didn't bother to ever go to Scotland for the summer visit.

I still think that it was not until PP's funeral that Baby Beti's name came into consideration and that behind it is M  feeling humiliated about their wreath. Megan got slated about the wreath and I do have some sympathy, in that thought was obviously given to the flowers and meaning etc, BUT why oh why was the name of the florist and the wreath details on the news that same evening. EXACTLY who OK'd that ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Ready in 30 secs my dear friends
> 
> View attachment 5108872



Can you do special orders, though...I'm fond of caramel corn with roasted nuts or even better, I recently found caramel corn with pretzel bites. OMG.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I would be pretty sure H&M did not at any time in the 8 months since the +ve pregnancy test run the name past his brother, father or any cousins. Do we think Zara would have said "yeah, that's a great idea Haz"



If I had to make a guess Zara is in the group of relatives who'd have a lot to say to Harry if given the chance, actually. She doesn't strike me as someone who gladly suffers fools.



> I still think that it was not until PP's funeral that Baby Beti's name came into consideration and that behind it is M  feeling humiliated about their wreath. Megan got slated about the wreath and I do have some sympathy, in that thought was obviously given to the flowers and meaning etc, BUT why oh why was the name of the florist and the wreath details on the news that same evening. EXACTLY who OK'd that ?



Entirely possible...the Narc's mind works in wondrous ways. And as you say, she was not slated for the wreath (besides it HAVING to stand out colourwise) or putting thought into it, she was slated for giving all the details to the press before Prince Philip was even cold and that was well deserved. What would Lady CC say? Vulgar


----------



## xincinsin

poopsie said:


> I dunno if this is wise.
> What's the saying?
> Never argue with a fool. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience


They went too far when they started targeting TQ. Before this, they were selling the narrative that the unknown nebulous Firm was treating them badly and an unknown nebulous family member questioned Archie's skin colour. But they were on great terms with TQ, and Hazard claimed once that he spoke more with his grandma after leaving than before. I found that quite unbelievable. The longer the BRF let Hazard and Methane carry on spinning false tales, the harder it will be to refute the lies.

I found this article - not sure if it can be believed as it quotes an anonymous relative, but it sure sounds convincing as to why Doria's family is completely ignored by the compassionate and inclusive duo.









						Meghan Markle’s relative explains why they ‘won’t ever talk again’
					

“We’re clearly in different social classes.”




					www.google.com


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can you do special orders, though...I'm fond of caramel corn with roasted nuts or even better, I recently found caramel corn with pretzel bites. OMG.



Special orders are my speciality - only for VIPs, but certainly you qualify many times over


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> Harry effective called the Queen (the Head of State) a liar last week when he threated to sue the BBC, the State Broadcaster. IMO This is not purely a response to the name of Baby Beti but a wider response to the damage H&M are causing to the British Constitution by implying the Queen is a doddery old lady and HER staff at the palace are lying. (Why would they?)
> 
> I don't think the Palace will backtrack to refute the specific lies that are already out in the public domain, but they will not tolerate any more spin from either the UK media or US sources and will clarify if any old lies resurface.
> 
> It makes me wonder if the external investigation into the bullying claim at the Palace is completed ?
> 
> I firmly believe that Harry blindsided HMTQ yet again and did not ask explicit permission in advance of a telephone call to tell HMTQ the baby had been born and what they were naming her. I would be pretty sure H&M did not at any time in the 8 months since the +ve pregnancy test run the name past his brother, father or any cousins. Do we think Zara would have said "yeah, that's a great idea Haz"
> 
> But here's the thing: How many times do we think Meghan was in a function or party or whatever where she heard the name used ? No more than twice, three times ? No children or grandchildren used it, so it can only be at Sandringham (at Christmas which they only did twice) or when with other older family members and European cousins (like the Kents/Goucester's or the Greek and Spanish RFs) and may be TQ's oldest friends.  Remember they didn't bother to ever go to Scotland for the summer visit.
> 
> I still think that it was not until PP's funeral that Baby Beti's name came into consideration and that behind it is M  feeling humiliated about their wreath. Megan got slated about the wreath and I do have some sympathy, in that thought was obviously given to the flowers and meaning etc, BUT why oh why was the name of the florist and the wreath details on the news that same evening. EXACTLY who OK'd that ?


Yes, good point, no one except PP was left from the previous generation that used the nickname, the Queen Mum and Margaret were gone, and PP was not around a lot either, he had retired 
The Kents and Gloucester  families are quite a bit younger than HM, and would show deference to elders never using nicknames, first names maybe, nicknames no
This all started with the wreath ...


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Just easier to avoid scrutiny IMO
> 
> I had no idea Archie's birth was contentious too. Now I can see that if it ever came down to it, the UK would have good grounds to reject Archie and Lilli as heirs.


I think there is a key piece to the puzzle ... 
MM thought that HM could/would/should change the rules for her children at will, eg sprinkle with fairy dust and poof ! Archie is a legitimate prince - sitting with a ducal crown in the House of Lords 
The idea that there is something like UK law in the way did not occur to MM, and she never got over it


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> Yes, good point, no one except PP was left from the previous generation that used the nickname, the Queen Mum and Margaret were gone, and PP was not around a lot either, he had retired
> The Kents and Gloucester  families are quite a bit younger than HM, and would show deference to elders never using nicknames, first names maybe, nicknames no
> This all started with the wreath ...


I believe the Spanish and probably the Greek RF's use the name.
The Spanish RF condolence note by King Felipe was addressed to Aunt Lilibet - Queen Sofia who was Princess of Denmark and Greece before her marriage  is a direct cousin of Prince Philip ( Her grandfather was King of Greece and Philip's mother's brother)


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> I believe the Spanish and probably the Greek RF's use the name.
> The Spanish RF condolence note by King Felipe was addressed to Aunt Lilibet - Queen Sofia who was Princess of Denmark and Greece before her marriage  is a direct cousin of Prince Philip ( Her grandfather was King of Greece and Philip's mother's brother)


Good point - but Felipe is a King - an equal to QEII, he gets to use nicknames ....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has the name now changed to Lili?

"Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales."









						Prince Harry hinted at liking the name ‘Lily’ years before daughter’s birth
					

Prince Harry hinted that he liked the name Lily for a girl years before welcoming daughter with Meghan Markle




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




ETA: I’m too disinterested to check, it seems to me several of QE’s great grandchildren have Elizabeth in their name.  Why these two create such drama is way beyond my level of understanding - I choose the path of least resistance


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I think there is a key piece to the puzzle ...
> MM thought that HM could/would/should change the rules for her children at will, eg sprinkle with fairy dust and poof ! Archie is a legitimate prince - sitting with a ducal crown in the House of Lords
> The idea that there is something like UK law in the way did not occur to MM, and she never got over it


I'm coming round to believing Methane when she said she didn't Google the BRF - she didn't Google the traditions and "job role". She probably only Googled how much $$$$$ Hazard was entitled to and the rest of the "good stuff". Duties and responsibilities? Don't be silly! Princesses ride around on unicorns or magic carpets all day and look cute.


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> I took one for the team and watched the Thomas Markle interview with 60 mins Australia.
> 
> Top points:
> 
> * Thomas wasn’t informed of the birth of Lili.  He found out via the media.
> * Confirmed MM was born 40 years ago this August (so her age has been confirmed)
> * Showed some more home videos of younger MM and some photos.
> *  He is disappointed he can’t meet / hold grandchildren.
> * Asked where compassion is And wants forgiveness. Said he made a dumb mistake by working with paps For those staged photos before their wedding
> * said Oprah is playing MM and H and is using them... taking advantage of H and getting him to say things he shouldn’t say.
> * Says he feels sorry for PC.
> * says he still loves MM.  He hasn’t spoken to her since two days before H and MM got married.  He desperately wants to talk to her again.
> * Thomas believes he may not be around for much longer due to poor health / age and desperately wants to see his grandchildren.
> * Doesn’t understand that if MM was suicidal why a call wasn’t made to a doctor.
> * He thinks their biggest mistake was leaving the royals.  When they did that they walked away from the people too.
> * When asked to give advice to H, TM told H to stop talking about the royals and giving away secrets.  Told H to love children, his wife and his family.
> 
> * He came across as quite sad and hurt.  He invited them to come visit Him and/or reach out to talk.  He said he was sorry...




On behalf of the posters here, we greatly appreciate you taking one for the team. We love you @needlv


----------



## Chanbal

So this is another falsehood ????


----------



## Chanbal

The quote of the day! 



_*Thomas Markle*__* has launched an extraordinary attack on Oprah Winfrey as he criticised the megastar for 'using' Harry and Meghan to promote her new TV ventures.*_









						Thomas Markle breaks silence in explosive 60 Minutes interview
					

Speaking publicly for the first time since the birth of Meghan and Harry's daughter Lilibet, Thomas Markle begged them to let him meet his grandchildren in an explosive interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Good point - but Felipe is a King - an equal to QEII, he gets to use nicknames ....



I doubt that's how it works. He's younger than her youngest son, she was Queen before he was even born. He didn't suddenly start using a family nickname once he was crowned.

Margaret's children - most definitely the next generation plus non-royals - are said to call her Aunt Lilibet too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> They went too far when they started targeting TQ. Before this, they were selling the narrative that the unknown nebulous Firm was treating them badly and an unknown nebulous family member questioned Archie's skin colour. But they were on great terms with TQ, and Hazard claimed once that he spoke more with his grandma after leaving than before. I found that quite unbelievable. T



The weird thing is they are still trying to keep up that narrative while publicly attacking her. Are they too stupid to see that, or do they think everyone else is?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One can only hope! I feel the Sussexes only could come out seemingly having the upper hand because the Palace wouldn't react as per usual. I feel tears may flow if said Palace changes their modus operandi and actually sets out to run them over.


The way they have been going on, it's a sure bet that they were banking on the BRF staying mum as usual.



RAINDANCE said:


> I still think that it was not until PP's funeral that Baby Beti's name came into consideration and that behind it is M  feeling humiliated about their wreath. Megan got slated about the wreath and I do have some sympathy, in that thought was obviously given to the flowers and meaning etc, BUT why oh why was the name of the florist and the wreath details on the news that same evening. EXACTLY who OK'd that ?


Do you think Methane sat down with a book on The Language of Flowers? Or was the floral selection done by the florist? And Ms Florist's proposal looked so good that the PR machine promptly released it as proof of Her Heinous's special bond with PP?



needlv said:


> I think the Queen responding (via BBC) then not backing Harry’s story is a warning shot to the Harkles.  They should not make up stories about zoom meetings with the Queen, naming the child after the Queen as a “sweet nod” etc.
> 
> I have never seen two people self destruct their own images so effectively.  And Archewell is about compassion.... sure, maybe demonstrate that with your own families and in-laws before commenting further...


They are making a joke of Archewell.

I really cannot stand all these "nods" that they give to this, that and the other!!!! Before the Tiresome Twosome started their marathon compassionate campaign, I rarely saw the usage of "nods", sweet or otherwise. Now I keep reading of them nodding all over the shop! There were so many articles in my news feed about The Bench being a nod to Hazard, Archie, and Lili. Methane wrote the d*mn book. It's about her and her idea of father-son relationships. There doesn't need to be any nodding involved! (Excuse the rant  )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s not let Harry off the hook about the name. Meghan wouldn’t have known it’s personal significance without him. At this point he is every bit as accountable as she is for their publicity stunts, perhaps more. His motivation? He’s angry and wants to hurt his family. What else could it be?


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The weird thing is they are still trying to keep up that narrative while publicly attacking her. Are they too stupid to see that, or do they think everyone else is?


Everyone else.  They (along with my son-in-law) think they are smarter than everyone else and can do no wrong.
.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Everyone else.  They (along with my son-in-law) think they are smarter than everyone else and can do no wrong.



Maybe they are smarter. They realized the US media would never dare criticize them once they said it was the “racist UK media” that drove them away. The US press will look the other way and ignore any inconsistencies in what they say rather than to be called racist. H&M pretty much own the press here.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they are smarter. They realized the US media would never dare criticize them once they said it was the “racist UK media” that drove them away. The US press will look the other way and ignore any inconsistencies in what they say rather than to be called racist. H&M pretty much own the press here.


I hope this will change if the Palace does in fact call them out on the falsehoods they spout with regularity.

Would be wonderful if it would lead to an understanding that the Heinous Harry and Methane are no better than school yard bullies and beating up on a 95 year old Granny is not fair game.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they are smarter. They realized the US media would never dare criticize them once they said it was the “racist UK media” that drove them away. The US press will look the other way and ignore any inconsistencies in what they say rather than to be called racist. H&M pretty much own the press here.


I think luck and timing has had more to do with it than intelligence.  They’ve made some really stupid moves.  I couldn’t agree with you more about the press.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has the name now changed to Lili?
> 
> "Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hinted at liking the name ‘Lily’ years before daughter’s birth
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hinted that he liked the name Lily for a girl years before welcoming daughter with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: I’m too disinterested to check, it seems to me several of QE’s great grandchildren have Elizabeth in their name.  Why these two create such drama is way beyond my level of understanding - I choose the path of least resistance



Don't buy it. 
That's evidence? More drivel. 
He asked a girl how her name was spelled, that's it. 
I bet he said that to most little girls and boys on visits, it lets them know you're a) listening b) keeps the spotlight on them. 
It's also an old meet and greet trick everyone's taught at beginner leadership skill sessions for networking to focus/remember names and faces. 

That's _not_ the same as overhearing him say 'if I had a daughter I'd call her Lilly/Lily/Lilli' or 'that's my favourite girl's name'.


----------



## CeeJay

Shopaholic2021 said:


> I think she fell in love with the idea of being a princess. If he was a ordinary nice guy, she would not have given him another look. He clearly had issues and she was aware, don't think she would have put up with it if it had not been for his social standing.


Could not agree with this more, but IMO .. she fell "in love" (personally - I'm not convinced that she truly loves him) .. with the notion that she could: 

Expand her list of folks that she could USE, STEP-ON and GRIFT off of on her continuous quest to household-name FAME 
Make a LOT of $$$ using the "titles" and her "connection" with the BRF 
Bottom line, she wants to be "recognized" (you know .. HER VOICE) and all that crap, in addition to becoming a very rich 'thing'!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Let’s not let Harry off the hook about the name. Meghan wouldn’t have known it’s personal significance without him. At this point he is every bit as accountable as she is for their publicity stunts, perhaps more. His motivation? He’s angry and wants to hurt his family. What else could it be?


MM was just the impetus to get this jerk sliding down the slope of self destruction.  I don't think any strong minded person just "lets" their significant other drive a wedge between themselves and their "beloved" family, if they are truly close.  He has probably always been an angry, stupid, bitter, entitled a$$hole, and she just lit a fire under his butt.  She eggs on someone who doesn't need much convincing to hurt his family every step of the way.  She's not close to any of her family, so she probably paints is as an "Us against the world" type of mentality.


----------



## Hermes Zen

And M knows how to please H with her ways  and provided children. He's hooked, line and sinker.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> *And M knows how to please H with her ways*  and provided children. He's hooked, line and sinker.


Who would've thought it was through public urination?!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Precious HMTQ as the loving grandmother  I wish the traitor wasn't in the shot but it certainly proved that he was loved by HMTQ so it's utterly unacceptable for everything that he's putting his elderly grandmother through.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Who would've thought it was through public urination?!


There's an old phrase that describes them perfectly: 
"piss and moan"
(to whine, complain or ***** about something in an annoying and aggravating manner)


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I think luck and timing has had more to do with it than intelligence.  They’ve made some really stupid moves.  I couldn’t agree with you more about the press.



It’s a diabolical intelligence. She knows how to manipulate people, both as individuals and groups. She makes lots of mistakes but as long as the media doesn’t report them most people will never know.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> It’s a diabolical intelligence. She knows how to manipulate people, both as individuals and groups. She makes lots of mistakes but as long as the media doesn’t report them most people will never know.


Absolutely!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Precious HMTQ as the loving grandmother  I wish the traitor wasn't in the shot but it certainly proved that he was loved by HMTQ so it's utterly unacceptable for everything that he's putting his elderly grandmother through.



Notable how many include Harry.  He's cruel.  Such sweet pictures.  I love the one where she's going past the troops and she and William smile at each other.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> And M knows how to please H with her ways  and provided children. He's hooked, line and sinker.



I don't that's it. 

I think he's very possessive, as in 'she's_ my_ wife'. I am one of those that think that it's likely she didn't provide him with children (in the trad. sense) but he's maxed-out on puffed-up macho pride by posterising a the big man of the 19-toilet house. He is nuts. 

She pretends she fights for whatever cause is hot topic du jour, and he supports 'whatever' equally randomly and ignorantly, but his _rea_l cause is her (because his real cause is himself, he _thinks_ he's being a chivalrous knight). 

Folie à deux:  Haz-been & faux-Di, a comic and hammy tale from _Don_ _Quixote,_ but both without charm or a moral compass.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I don't that's it.
> 
> I think he's very possessive, as in 'she's_ my_ wife'. I am one of those that think that it's likely she didn't provide him with children (in the trad. sense) but he's maxed-out on puffed-up macho pride by posterising a the big man of the 19-toilet house. He is nuts.
> 
> She pretends she fights for whatever cause is hot topic du jour, and he supports 'whatever' equally randomly and ignorantly, but his _rea_l cause is her (because his real cause is himself, he _thinks_ he's being a chivalrous knight).
> 
> Folie à deux: Haz-been & faux-Di, a comic and hammy tale from _Don_ _Quixote,_ but both without charm or a moral compass.



That was perfect insight!


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Has she said anything or is she just pulling an Amal Clooney?



Yes Oprah backed off by saying she didn’t know they were going to share.  Allegedly only swapping text messages before the interview (yeah right!)

She still tried to back their claims but sidestepped herself (probably to protect her own reputation...?) by saying she didn’t know what they were going to share.









						Oprah says she didn't know Meghan Markle interview would have such a 'reverberating impact'
					

In a new interview, Oprah Winfrey says she was “surprised” at how impactful Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview was and shared their intentions.




					www.stuff.co.nz


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> I don't that's it.
> 
> I think he's very possessive, as in 'she's_ my_ wife'. I am one of those that think that it's likely she didn't provide him with children (in the trad. sense) but he's maxed-out on puffed-up macho pride by posterising a the big man of the 19-toilet house. He is nuts.
> 
> She pretends she fights for whatever cause is hot topic du jour, and he supports 'whatever' equally randomly and ignorantly, but his _rea_l cause is her (because his real cause is himself, he _thinks_ he's being a chivalrous knight).
> 
> Folie à deux: Haz-been & faux-Di, a comic and hammy tale from _Don_ _Quixote,_ but both without charm or a moral compass.



Interesting perspective! I wish I could be a fly on the wall to see how they interact when they are truly alone. H as possessive chivalrous knight or M as controlling, nail digging beeaach. Hmmm be interesting to see them both this way.  This could be a perfect match.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Yes Oprah backed off by saying she didn’t know they were going to share.  Allegedly only swapping text messages before the interview (yeah right!)
> 
> She still tried to back their claims but sidestepped herself (probably to protect her own reputation...?) by saying she didn’t know what they were going to share.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah says she didn't know Meghan Markle interview would have such a 'reverberating impact'
> 
> 
> In a new interview, Oprah Winfrey says she was “surprised” at how impactful Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview was and shared their intentions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stuff.co.nz



Once the criticisms and merching  began, it was really kinda funny [in that snarky way] how quickly all parties walked back their participation in the interview.  None of them realized they would be held accountable for their words.  Haaahaaaaa.



Hermes Zen said:


> Interesting perspective! I wish I could be a fly on the wall to see how they interact when they are truly alone. H as possessive chivalrous knight or M as controlling, nail digging beeaach. Hmmm be interesting to see them both this way.  This could be a perfect match.



Hazz ‘retreats‘ to his cave, plays his video games and watches porn.  
MM and her mom get to feed the kids, do the grocery shopping, clean those bathrooms, etc.  Definitely not the glamor life.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz ‘retreats‘ to his cave, plays his video games and watches porn.
> *MM and her mom get to feed the kids, do the grocery shopping, clean those bathrooms, etc.  Definitely not the glamor life.*


Hard as I try, I cannot imagine MM on her knees scrubbing a toilet.  That just ain't happening.  She may be making Doria do it, but she sure is not!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Yes Oprah backed off by saying she didn’t know they were going to share.  Allegedly only swapping text messages before the interview (yeah right!)
> 
> She still tried to back their claims but sidestepped herself (probably to protect her own reputation...?) by saying she didn’t know what they were going to share.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah says she didn't know Meghan Markle interview would have such a 'reverberating impact'
> 
> 
> In a new interview, Oprah Winfrey says she was “surprised” at how impactful Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview was and shared their intentions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stuff.co.nz



Too bad the cutting room was broken that day, hu?


----------



## Aimee3

Funny, I can imagine H’s wife on her knees…but not scrubbing toilets!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Interesting perspective! I wish I could be a fly on the wall to see how they interact when they are truly alone. H as possessive chivalrous knight or M as controlling, nail digging beeaach. Hmmm be interesting to see them both this way.  This could be a perfect match.



I think she perfectly uses the "dark corners" of his character to her advantage. She IS a controlling, nail digging b*tch that plays mommy to him, but she also fed into his saviour complex of the damsel in distress from early on. The family she never had anyone?


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rude US reporter gets a lesson in royalty:
> From Chris Ship’s Twitter:
> View attachment 5107362





So tacky. Of all the important topical questions they should and could have asked, that was not one of them. 
Way to lower the tone, whoever the journalist was.




Chanbal said:


> Very good point!
> View attachment 5107364


JCMH is a:


Someone should be keeping a record of all his hypocritical statements and actions because the list must be long enough by now to circle planet earth twice.
And she calls him 'Haz'?






CarryOn2020 said:


> *Team Queen rules! Game, set, match.*
> _However, there was further irritation at the Palace when friends of Harry and Meghan suggested to US journalists that the Queen had been introduced to Lilibet over a video call.
> The insider last night denied that, stating, ‘*No video call has taken place’, adding: ‘Friends of the Sussexes appear to have given misleading briefings to journalists about what the Queen had said and that took the whole thing over the edge. The Palace couldn’t deny the story that this was a mistruth.’ *Ironically, Harry has spoken out against the ‘barrage of mistruths’ on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's war on Harry and Meghan's LA spin machine
> 
> 
> The Queen, pictured, has ordered courtiers to abandon the traditional policy of 'never complain, never explain' following the increasingly bitter briefing war between the palace and Los Angeles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _H&M crossed the line. Enough is enough.  Getting the popcorn and drinks ready.


Is this another lie from Pinky and the Brain?!


Asked with the most obviously over-the-top sarcastic tone.



Hermes Zen said:


> This is getting more interesting ... Where's the popcorn!?!
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s War With the Royals Hits Fever Pitch Over Lilibet*
> 
> The ongoing war of words over the queen knowing—or not—about Lilibet’s name leaves the Sussexes and the Windsors in a state of open warfare, as Harry plans his return to the U.K.
> 
> Documentation seen by The Daily Beast shows Meghan and Harry arguing that the claims made to the BBC on behalf of the queen, were “false and defamatory.”
> 
> “Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges.”
> 
> *This leaves Harry and Meghan less than half a step away from accusing the queen of being a liar.* Clearly the Sussexes are unbelievably angry about the way their daughter’s birth has become tabloid fodder for the feud narrative. Clearly they feel the queen’s spinners have misrepresented their exchanges. This leaves a very real risk they could actually start briefing friendly US media in the next few days and actively escalating hostilities.
> Full article below:









CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for the big bucket with Jason!
> 
> View attachment 5108842
> View attachment 5108843


Cardi B and a bucket of popcorn is my mood right now


----------



## bisousx

*Thomas Markle accuses Oprah Winfrey of 'playing Harry and Meghan to build her network' by 'taking advantage of a very weakened man' in explosive 60 Minutes interview - and says his daughter is treating him worse than an axe murderer*



With his ailing health continuing to deteriorate, Thomas said he fears he will never get to meet Archie, 2, or baby Lilibet, who was born on June 4.

'I'll be very disappointed that I don't get to hold my granddaughter,' he said.

'On July 18, I'll be 77 years old. Most of the Markle men don't make it much past 80.

'I might never see my grandchildren. I'm not looking for pity. I'm just saying that's a reality.

He also weighed on the couple's highly publicised and controversial television interview with Oprah in March by accusing the US talk show host of cashing in on the couple.

'I have things to say. Oprah Winfrey, for one, I think is playing Harry and Meghan,' he said.

'I think she is using them to build her network and build her new shows and I think she’s taken advantage of a very weakened man and has got him to say things that you just shouldn’t be saying on television.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...g-like-axe-murderer-60-Minutes-interview.html


----------



## Aimee3

Thomas Markle is sounding more and more sane as time goes on!


----------



## csshopper

JCMH is a:
View attachment 5109289

Someone should be keeping a record of all his hypocritical statements and actions because the list must be long enough by now to circle planet earth twice.
And she calls him 'Haz'?
View attachment 5109290




Is this another lie from Pinky and the Brain?!
View attachment 5109308

Asked with the most obviously over-the-top sarcastic tone.


View attachment 5109296




Cardi B and a bucket of popcorn is my mood right now 
View attachment 5109297

[/QUOTE]



Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5109262
> 
> *So tacky. Of all the important topical questions they should and could have asked, that was not one of them.
> Way to lower the tone, whoever the journalist was.*
> Sorry to say it was someone I used to respect up until now, NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, Andrea Mitchell.
> Kudos to Kate for her gracefulness as always, and her answer was insightful.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Yes Oprah backed off by saying she didn’t know they were going to share.  Allegedly only swapping text messages before the interview (yeah right!)
> 
> She still tried to back their claims but sidestepped herself (probably to protect her own reputation...?) by saying she didn’t know what they were going to share.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah says she didn't know Meghan Markle interview would have such a 'reverberating impact'
> 
> 
> In a new interview, Oprah Winfrey says she was “surprised” at how impactful Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's interview was and shared their intentions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stuff.co.nz


I've never understood this claim about the interview: "They wanted to be able to tell their story and tell it in such a way that allowed them to be as truthful as possible." If you reverse that, OW is saying that if their truth were told in another way, it would be as untruthful as possible. That's how I read it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it possible they were looking for a cutesy Hwood name to compete with Orlando and Katie’s daughter - Daisy Dove. 
David Foster’s kid also uses an old family name. Hmmmm.
LiliBet, Rennie, and Daisy Dove. La di da.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Aimee3 said:


> Funny, I can imagine H’s wife on her knees…but not scrubbing toilets!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Proof she's on her knees to keep Harry charmed


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


>



Jeez her "acting" is wooden.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Jeez her "acting" is wooden.




She's Pinocchio after all


----------



## CarryOn2020

Princess Pinocchio!   She’s a P R I N C E S S


----------



## mdcx

bisousx said:


> *Thomas Markle accuses Oprah Winfrey of 'playing Harry and Meghan to build her network' by 'taking advantage of a very weakened man' in explosive 60 Minutes interview - and says his daughter is treating him worse than an axe murderer*
> 
> 
> 
> With his ailing health continuing to deteriorate, Thomas said he fears he will never get to meet Archie, 2, or baby Lilibet, who was born on June 4.
> 
> 'I'll be very disappointed that I don't get to hold my granddaughter,' he said.
> 
> 'On July 18, I'll be 77 years old. Most of the Markle men don't make it much past 80.
> 
> 'I might never see my grandchildren. I'm not looking for pity. I'm just saying that's a reality.
> 
> He also weighed on the couple's highly publicised and controversial television interview with Oprah in March by accusing the US talk show host of cashing in on the couple.
> 
> 'I have things to say. Oprah Winfrey, for one, I think is playing Harry and Meghan,' he said.
> 
> 'I think she is using them to build her network and build her new shows and I think she’s taken advantage of a very weakened man and has got him to say things that you just shouldn’t be saying on television.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...g-like-axe-murderer-60-Minutes-interview.html


Thomas knows too much about the real Meghan, all her fakery and manipulation, the real timelines of her relationships, the fact that he treated her like a princess, paid for her college etc. Meghan never wants H and Thomas to meet imo!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> She's Pinocchio after all
> 
> View attachment 5109480



She has a wooden heart too!  Thomas doesn't:




Lyrics

Can't you see I love you?
Please don't break my heart in two
That's not hard to do
'Cause I don't have a wooden heart
And if you say goodbye
Then I know that I would cry
Maybe I would die
'Cause I don't have a wooden heart
There's no strings upon this love of mine
It was always you from the start
Treat me nice, treat me good
Treat me like you really should
'Cause I'm not made of wood
And I don't have a wooden heart
Muß i' denn, muß i' denn
Zum Städtele hinaus
Städtele hinaus
Und du mein Shatz bleibst hier
Muß i' denn, muß i' denn
Zum Städtele hinaus
Städtele hinaus
Und du mein Shatz bleibst hier
There's no strings upon this love of mine
It was always you from the start
Sei mir gut, sei mir gut
Sei mir wie
Wie du
'Cause I don't have a wooden heart


----------



## xincinsin

mdcx said:


> Thomas knows too much about the real Meghan, all her fakery and manipulation, the real timelines of her relationships, the fact that he treated her like a princess, paid for her college etc. Meghan never wants H and Thomas to meet imo!


It probably also galls her that her father worked in Hollywood and she never really made the cut. Her mother likely doesn't have the same effect as she has been out of Hollywood longer than she has been in. And Methane aligns herself with Doria, saying it's them against the world (pre-Hazard). The kids are probably going to be brought up with that "world bad, Mummy good" mentality.


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Lol



Methane will probably quote this as a death threat that keeps her sobbing at night.

IMO Methane belongs to that category of Ugly Americans who roam the world sneering at why other countries aren't just like home where they can do as they please and say whatever they like. The people who scream, "You can't arrest me! I'm American!"


----------



## Hermes Zen

Not sure how true this is.  Posting it any way.  Enjoy the short read.



> https://www.marieclaire.com/celebri...eton-instead-of-prince-william-lilibet-birth/
> 
> *Prince Harry Reportedly Texted Kate Middleton Instead of Prince William When Lilibet Was Born*
> By
> Jun 13, 2021


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> David Foster’s kid also uses an old family name. Hmmmm.



Does that mean he intends to keep McPhee as his wife?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Not sure how true this is.  Posting it any way.  Enjoy the short read.



Well. If that's how the family learned of the name, Kate was a safe bet. I wouldn't put it past William to go ballistic on the tick that is his brother (small, no real use, toxic, a leech) while he could be sure mellow Kate would say congrats and leave it at that.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> I don't that's it.
> 
> I think he's very possessive, as in 'she's_ my_ wife'. I am one of those that think that it's likely she didn't provide him with children (in the trad. sense) but he's maxed-out on puffed-up macho pride by posterising a the big man of the 19-toilet house. He is nuts.
> 
> She pretends she fights for whatever cause is hot topic du jour, and he supports 'whatever' equally randomly and ignorantly, but his _rea_l cause is her (because his real cause is himself, he _thinks_ he's being a chivalrous knight).
> 
> Folie à deux: Haz-been & faux-Di, a comic and hammy tale from _Don_ _Quixote,_ but both without charm or a moral compass.


I think you’re spot on.  Harry reminds me a lot of Princess Margaret, they both liked to think of themselves as Royal Rebels.  Both chummy and familiar one minute and standing on their dignity the next.  Never letting go of their Royal status or privileges, whilst slumming it with the oiks.  Both married people they thought would get a reaction from the Family, both disappointed not to get one!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it possible they were looking for a cutesy Hwood name to compete with Orlando and Katie’s daughter - Daisy Dove.
> David Foster’s kid also uses an old family name. Hmmmm.
> LiliBet, Rennie, and Daisy Dove. La di da.



These cutesy names are not empowering females at all IMO. 

OK, till they're 3, but that's why we have diminutive forms.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

Deleted


----------



## needlv

So Meghan got her apology then.... lol 









						Harry and Meghan 'have no Oprah regrets' but want 'peace' with royals
					

Insiders have told Us Magazine that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'trying their utmost to maintain a good relationship' with the Queen.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> So Meghan got her apology then.... lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'have no Oprah regrets' but want 'peace' with royals
> 
> 
> Insiders have told Us Magazine that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'trying their utmost to maintain a good relationship' with the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Things have gone quiet……


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Methane will probably quote this as a death threat that keeps her sobbing at night.
> 
> IMO Methane belongs to that category of Ugly Americans who roam the world sneering at why other countries aren't just like home where they can do as they please and say whatever they like. The people who scream, "You can't arrest me! I'm American!"



This comment reminded me of the wife of the former Belgian Ambassador to South Korea. The wife recently slapped 2 store associates in South Korea and claimed diplomatic immunity so she could avoid police charges. Next thing you know, her husband got removed from his post AND the Belgian government waived *her* diplomatic immunity to force her to cooperate in the police investigation  Now imagine that happening to MoM! But again, she hasn't claimed diplomatic immunity due to her "being a princess of the UK" other than using her PR machine for smear campaign + incessant self-promotion and attorneys for lawsuits.

ETA: Forgot to add the news links:









						Belgian ambassador's wife claims diplomatic immunity after slapping a Seoul store assistant | CNN
					

Security footage shows her getting into an altercation with two clothing store staff, after one asked about a jacket she was wearing, believing she might have stolen it.




					www.cnn.com
				












						Belgium recalls ambassador to South Korea after his wife is filmed slapping a shop assistant | CNN
					

Belgium is recalling its ambassador to South Korea following an incident in which his wife was recorded striking a woman in Seoul.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## xincinsin

They want peace? Their idea of peace is leaving everyone else in pieces.

What they really want is to be top dog.

I'm seriously wondering how the Aspen Institute is viewing this. Who in their right mind would nominate Hazard for a commission to study info disorder? It's like putting Harvey Weinstein in charge of a study of moral behaviour in Hollywood.


----------



## LibbyRuth

needlv said:


> So Meghan got her apology then.... lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'have no Oprah regrets' but want 'peace' with royals
> 
> 
> Insiders have told Us Magazine that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'trying their utmost to maintain a good relationship' with the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



My take away from this is that Harry and Meghan believe sucking up and flattering the queen is more effective than falling in line and respecting the tradition of the BRF. And that their motivation for sucking up is not love and respect, but rather protecting their personal status.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> This comment reminded me of the wife of the former Belgian Ambassador to South Korea. The wife recently slapped 2 store associates in South Korea and claimed diplomatic immunity so she could avoid police charges. Next thing you know, her husband's got removed from his post AND the Belgian government waived *her* diplomatic immunity to force her to cooperate in the police investigation  Now imagine that happening to MoM! But again, she hasn't claimed diplomatic immunity due to her "being a princess of the UK" other than using her PR machine for smear campaign + incessant self-promotion and attorneys for lawsuits.
> 
> ETA: Forgot to add the news links:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Belgian ambassador's wife claims diplomatic immunity after slapping a Seoul store assistant | CNN
> 
> 
> Security footage shows her getting into an altercation with two clothing store staff, after one asked about a jacket she was wearing, believing she might have stolen it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Belgium recalls ambassador to South Korea after his wife is filmed slapping a shop assistant | CNN
> 
> 
> Belgium is recalling its ambassador to South Korea following an incident in which his wife was recorded striking a woman in Seoul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


I'm sure the UK government would be more than happy to waive any immunity she has.

Theoretically speaking, if HMTQ takes away the royal titles, Hazard would still be a prince by birth, but can they withhold from Methane the title of Princess Henry? Meaning she would remain commoner Rachel Meghan Markle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> So Meghan got her apology then.... lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'have no Oprah regrets' but want 'peace' with royals
> 
> 
> Insiders have told Us Magazine that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'trying their utmost to maintain a good relationship' with the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Aw, do they? They have a weird way of showing this. Also, has someone delivered the message their temper tantrums won't bring them anywhere or what?


----------



## Pivoine66

needlv said:


> So Meghan got her apology then.... lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'have no Oprah regrets' but want 'peace' with royals
> 
> 
> Insiders have told Us Magazine that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'trying their utmost to maintain a good relationship' with the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They want peace ? (and don't regret their OW interview)? Perhaps they fear the loss of their titles and their or Prince Harry's inheritance? Perhaps they also fear closer investigations into whether Prince Harry's wife was really pregnant herself ? She may also be thinking of future invitations and photos with her daughter and the Queen (including herself, of course) to finally see her daughter's name and royal status, and therefore hers, immortalised, and forever bound in one thought with the Queen and remain relevant.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw, do they? They have a weird way of showing this. Also, has someone delivered the message their temper tantrums won't bring them anywhere or what?


 It’s a pretty immature carry on from these two isn’t it?!


----------



## Aimee3

If they do lose their titles and other perks because of this, every time they utter their daughter’s name it’ll remind them what it cost!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does that mean he intends to keep McPhee as his wife?


I think it simply means he intends to keep the kid.


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> Not sure how true this is.  Posting it any way.  Enjoy the short read.


The source, Marie Claire, is a HM enamored site I think, so probably true,


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Monday to all!
If you have a sensitive stomach, you may want to avoid this post. 
@csshopper it will help with weight loss.


Spoiler: Click at your own risk!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> These cutesy names are not empowering females at all IMO.
> 
> OK, till they're 3, but that's why we have diminutive forms.


The Mirror UK reports…..drum roll….Lily is now the new #1 girl’s name. It will be very common, guess they did not consider that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Happy Monday to all!
> If you have a sensitive stomach, you may want to avoid this post.
> @csshopper it will help with weight loss.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Click at your own risk!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5109809


Chanbal
Definitely causing Acid Reflux!
My mother, an Anglophile , would have said “let’s use this to line the bottom of the bird cage.”


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> The Mirror UK reports…..drum roll….Lily is now the new #1 girl’s name. It will be very common, guess they did not consider that.



Lilly/Lily/Lilli/Lili has been very popular for decades. 

As my niece Lilly (now 2) will tell you _very_ loudly


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Happy Monday to all!
> If you have a sensitive stomach, you may want to avoid this post.
> @csshopper it will help with weight loss.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Click at your own risk!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5109809


----------



## Clearblueskies

csshopper said:


> Chanbal
> Definitely causing Acid Reflux!
> My mother, an Anglophile , would have said “let’s use this to line the bottom of the bird cage.”


 No tabloids and no gossip rags in the US then 
It’s enough to stop any self respecting canary in mid song


----------



## Chanbal

Clearblueskies said:


> No tabloids and no gossip rags in the US then
> It’s enough to stop any self respecting canary in mid song


Absolutely, no tabloids in the US (only in the UK)!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well. If that's how the family learned of the name, Kate was a safe bet. I wouldn't put it past William to go ballistic on the tick that is his brother (small, no real use, toxic, a leech) while he could be sure mellow Kate would say congrats and leave it at that.


William has his phone set up to put anything from Harry on ignore or send it to the spam box.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Things have gone quiet……


The two of them were put into a medically induced coma to keep them from self harming   Not to worry, the kids are with Doria and the nanny.


----------



## rose60610

bisousx said:


> 'On July 18, I'll be 77 years old. Most of the Markle men don't make it much past 80.



When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan. A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> William has his phone set up to put anything from Harry on ignore or send it to the spam box.



and reported as phishing


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan. A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.



She already said she "lost" her father and we know she can't tell fact from fiction so presumably she's already gone though the grieving process already


----------



## lanasyogamama

Where the heck did they find a pic of Haz been smiling?


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> *When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan.* A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.



Her reaction will be relief. No longer have to worry about anything he says or any looming obligation to be empathetic and mend the relationship for the sake of her kids. Then she can control the narrative 100% without him getting in the way.


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> Where the heck did they find a pic of Haz been smiling?


They probably had to crop Kate out


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> Proof she's on her knees to keep Harry charmed
> 
> View attachment 5109456



Shall we all chip in and send her a pair of hockey goalie knee pads? I know. Low blow. Considering the bilge and accusations she spews out about the BRF after she clawed her way into it, she isn't deserving of much respect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Her reaction will be relief. No longer have to worry about anything he says or any looming obligation to be empathetic and mend the relationship for the sake of her kids. Then she can control the narrative 100% without him getting in the way.



Absolutely, but that can't be her public response because heartless.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Lilly/Lily/Lilli/Lili has been very popular for decades.
> 
> As my niece Lilly (now 2) will tell you _very_ loudly


Your niece is out ahead of the pack, and if she's like her aunt, a leader. Any Lily girls after 2021 will have to keep up with her.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely, but that can't be her public response because heartless.



Of course! She will remain the stoic victim


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Your niece is out ahead of the pack, and if she's like her aunt, a leader. Any Lily girls after 2021 will have to keep up with her.




Thank you. 

She is an absolute powerhouse _and_ a sweetie.


----------



## Hermes Zen

LittleStar88 said:


> Her reaction will be relief. No longer have to worry about anything he says or any looming obligation to be empathetic and mend the relationship for the sake of her kids. Then she can control the narrative 100% without him getting in the way.


I hope he spills his guts before that happens!  Since I saw his young M home video that included her giving him a nasty look, I have been giving her a side eye!!  She started to change when she was young. Don't know what made her change to be an evil evil person but what a demonic person!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So what's the bet on when the troublesome two will re-emerge? I can see how SS told them to lay low during their parental leave, but I also don't think Raptor will survive 5 months being incarcerated with two small children without enough narcisstic supply to keep her sustained.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Happy Monday to all!
> If you have a sensitive stomach, you may want to avoid this post.
> @csshopper it will help with weight loss.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Click at your own risk!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5109809


_'America's First Princess'_








Chanbal said:


> Absolutely, no tabloids in the US (only in the UK)!
> 
> View attachment 5109883






Is this cover recent? If so, I'm waiting for them to file a lawsuit against Life & Style magazine because if any British newspaper or magazine printed this on their front cover (especially the bullet points) they would be suing them in the blink of an eye and playing their favourite role of victim. I can't remember the DM ever announcing  on the front cover that JCMH is battling with substance abuse and is about to have a mental breakdown. Oh, but it's just the British media who are eViL


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So what's the bet on when the troublesome two will re-emerge? I can see how SS told them to lay low during their parental leave, but I also don't think Raptor will survive 5 months being incarcerated with two small children without enough narcisstic supply to keep her sustained.



Right. My bet is on a family photo with Archie holding Lili. They'd make a fortune selling that photo and the People magazines of the world would be happy to pay it.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan. A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.


He gets a wreath
they still have some of the spiny purple artichoke foliage used for PP


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan. A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.


She'll have her PR people (pretending to be an anonymous source) say how she reunited with him on his death bed and all is forgiven. Lots of love all around.

Many celebs with famous feuds use that narrative, which may or may not be true.


----------



## Chanbal

Thanks for letting us know!


----------



## Chanbal

DM cartoon: British humor


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for letting us know!
> View attachment 5110175



I never noticed before how closely set his eyes are


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Shall we all chip in and send her a pair of hockey goalie knee pads? I know. Low blow. Considering the bilge and accusations she spews out about the BRF after she clawed her way into it, she isn't deserving of much respect.



I would so chip in. We do have Archewell's business suite address anyways


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So what's the bet on when the troublesome two will re-emerge? I can see how SS told them to lay low during their parental leave, but I also don't think Raptor will survive 5 months being incarcerated with two small children without enough narcisstic supply to keep her sustained.


I am betting - Williams birthday...  they couldn’t let that go by.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Is this old or new?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Is this old or new?




 Is that really him? I thought they didn’t want photos showing his face to be released.


----------



## justwatchin

rose60610 said:


> Right. My bet is on a family photo with Archie holding Lili. They'd make a fortune selling that photo and the People magazines of the world would be happy to pay it.


I figure the most they’ll release will be a photo of the new baby’s hand gripping onto Archie’s finger


----------



## justwatchin

EverSoElusive said:


> Is this old or new?



If it is, I see a cease and desist being fired off to get those photos taken off immediately. Their lawyers must be on speed dial.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wasn't that released a few weeks ago...on their website or something? I can't remember, my brain can only process so many petty little details.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Is that really him? I thought they didn’t want photos showing his face to be released.





justwatchin said:


> If it is, I see a cease and desist being fired off to get those photos taken off immediately. Their lawyers must be on speed dial.




IF this is Archie, this might be Team Sussexes' own drop. Can't be a paparazzi shot from this angle  Not to mention the stylized effect! No paparazzi does that!!! Troublesome Duo might be trying to stop people from harping on baby girl's name.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't that released a few weeks ago...on their website or something? I can't remember, my brain can only process so many petty little details.



Me either. That's why I had to ask


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> IF this is Archie, this might be Team Sussexes' own drop. Can't be a paparazzi shot from this angle  Not to mention the stylized effect! No paparazzi does that!!! Troublesome Duo might be trying to stop people from harping on baby girl's name.



GIVING AWAY THE MILK FOR FREE?!?!?! 

if true, desperate times do indeed call for desperate measures


----------



## EverSoElusive

Umm pump pump?? Like there are no better words


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm pump pump?? Like there are no better words




Well...................after bidi bidi bom bom what else is there?


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> Well...................after bidi bidi bom bom what else is there?



Cray cray is perfect for a loonie


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Well...................after bidi bidi bom bom what else is there?


cash cash


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wouldn’t “thump thump” sound less… gross?


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Wouldn’t “thump thump” sound less… gross?



Maybe hump hump since they love all the Urban Dictionary references


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm pump pump?? Like there are no better words




Whoa now! Who are we to question HER ART? If it doesn’t make sense to us then it must mean there is something lacking in us because it sure can’t mean she is flawed!


----------



## rose60610

Meghan thought British palaces were a dump dump
After she married the man of her heart pump pump 
So she took her Prince
While all of us winced
Because he was nothing more than a chump chump


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Whoa now! Who are we to question HER ART? If it doesn’t make sense to us then it must mean there is something lacking in us because it sure can’t mean she is flawed!



*BLASPHEMY*


----------



## Chanbal

Trouble in paradise? 

_And the aforementioned tensions between Harry and Markle have reached a boiling point. *According to the report, Harry never intended to hurt his grandmother Queen Elizabeth, *and fear of losing his relationship with her has him flailing*. Since the queen has allegedly expressed her desire to see baby Archie once more, Harry is determined to take his son to England, but Markle is not having it.*

*Prince Harry Stands Up To Meghan Markle?*
The source explains, *“He’s a devoted husband and usually goes along with whatever Meghan says, but for once, he stood up to her. She wasn’t having any of it. Meghan totally flipped out at him.” The fight that followed is described as “devastating,” and, “the fight to end all fights.”*

The source spills all the gritty details: “Harry stormed out of the house to get some breathing space and cool off,” adding, “Meghan tried reaching him – there were loads of missed calls on his cellphone – but he just wouldn’t answer.” Although Harry returned, the couple was unable to reach common ground. “Now they’re talking about going to couples counseling to help them get through this stressful period,” insists the source.

The tabloid then recaps Harry’s experience with therapy as well as his previous struggle with substance abuse. The magazine wraps the story by implying his turbulent relationship with Markle may very well send him over the edge. “But Harry swears he’s fine and doesn’t want anyone worrying about him and Meghan, that all marriages have their highs and lows. In fact, *Harry says he’s confident that the birth of their daughter will bring him and Meghan closer together,”* concludes the source._









						Prince Harry ‘On Verge Of Total Breakdown’ After ‘Huge Fights’ With Meghan Markle?
					

Is Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's marriage at a breaking point after having an explosive fight? That's the story one tabloid's pushing this week. Gossip




					www.gossipcop.com


----------



## Straight-Laced

Lilibet is a power play many will recognise
					

Keen supporter as I am of the monarchy, it’s not often that I find the home life of our own dear Queen actually mirrors my own. Yet Her Majesty’s apparent irrit




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




Great comment piece in The Times (UK) today!

MELANIE PHILLIPS 15 June 2021

*Lilibet is a power play many will recognise*
*Names are personal and the Sussexes’ misappropriation of the Queen’s moniker is manipulative*​
Keen supporter as I am of the monarchy, it’s not often that I find the home life of our own dear Queen actually mirrors my own.
Yet Her Majesty’s apparent irritation over the gesture of giving baby Sussex the name Lilibet has struck a personal chord.

Nicknames or diminutives can be used for very different purposes depending on the context. What is a term of affection in the mouths of some can turn into something less pleasant in the mouths of others.

Our names are personal to us. We may call ourselves what we want; and if others call us by names we don’t want, either because this is inappropriate or disobliging or worse, this is tantamount to treating us with disrespect. It can also be a way of cutting someone down to size, which is a form of aggression.

Such a tactic is sometimes employed by powerful people. The US president George W Bush bestowed endless nicknames on world leaders, politicians and journalists. Thus, the White House correspondents for NBC, Bloomberg News and The Washington Times were, respectively, dubbed “Little Stretch”, “Stretch”, and “Super Stretch”, according to their height. They were put in their place, literally.

I once worked for an editor who used nicknames as a manipulative means of control over his staff. Some of these nicknames or diminutives were his own invention, while others were ones used by the individual’s friends. When this man used them, in meetings or within the earshot of others, this often created a faint but perceptible feeling of unease and discomfort.

This was because it felt inappropriate. He was our employer, yet he was presuming a familiarity that did not exist. The nicknames sought to mask that difference in rank and create instead an impression of mateyness, of being one of us. But he wasn’t. Moreover, the jocular way he used these nicknames often had an element of mockery, which felt like malice. All this vaguely disorientated us. Were we his friends or his employees? Was he being affectionate or undermining us? It caught us off balance. And that was the point.

He didn’t throw his weight around by shouting or rows; indeed, he tended to avoid confrontation. A subtle kind of guy, he used more manipulative means of control. Catching us off balance, even mildly, was a way of keeping us guessing about his meaning and motives, and thus preventing us from presenting any challenge to him or disruption of what he wanted to do. Using the terms of address of a close relationship which didn’t exist was a way of owning us. It was a power thing.

To that editor, I was always Mel. Some of my friends called me Mel, but in his mouth it felt as if what was intended by my friends as a sign of affection had been hijacked and used for a different purpose altogether. Subsequently, this nominative hijack developed a life of its own. I am repeatedly addressed as Mel in print by people I have never met but who take issue with my opinions, and who use this presumptuous familiarity as a weapon of insult. Affection has thus been repurposed as aggression, all in the deployment of a name.

So when it was announced that baby Sussex was to be called Lilibet, it felt to me as if the Queen had been punched in the stomach. Lilibet was what she was called by her family as a child — arising from how she had mispronounced her name when very young — and in later life by her husband. It was a nickname borne out of her unique experience and her relationship with those closest to her, and it was particular to her alone.

Yet now it had been appropriated for use by someone else, denuded of the personal associations it represented for the Queen. This amounted to the theft of a private part of herself and its redeployment as an exhibit, or trophy, in the public arena.

Of course, it’s possible that the Sussexes believed they were paying the Queen the highest compliment in choosing this name. But it’s hard not to conclude that at least one of them was doing something similar to what my old editor had done — unconsciously and almost reflexively using their baby’s name as a form of manipulative power-play.

For by choosing this particular name, which purported to be an act of homage, the Sussexes snatched part of the Queen’s most private self into their own orbit. By this stroke of appropriation, they sought to own the Queen herself and thus effectively wipe out their own loss of status within the royal family.

Except it hasn’t quite worked out like that. The gesture appears instead to embody arrogance, insensitivity and insult in equal measure. After all, true homage would have been to call the baby Elizabeth. “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” said Shakespeare’s Juliet. Well actually, not always. Juliet may have wanted Romeo’s identity as a Montague to be irrelevant to their romance, but names matter.

Our names and nicknames anchor our biography. They are markers of our individual personhood and our sense of me-ness. They are how we think of ourselves. If people get them wrong, misspell or mispronounce them, this can make us irritated or angry. We are entitled not to have them weaponised against us. We are entitled not to have their unique significance for our own lives appropriated for someone else. We are entitled to retain a part of ourselves that is entirely personal and protected. Even if one is the Queen.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Dontcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me?


----------



## AB Negative

xincinsin said:


> It probably also galls her that her father worked in Hollywood and she never really made the cut. Her mother likely doesn't have the same effect as she has been out of Hollywood longer than she has been in. And Methane aligns herself with Doria, saying it's them against the world (pre-Hazard). The kids are probably going to be brought up with that "world bad, Mummy good" mentality.



I think I read that her father had also won an Emmy for his work.  That has to gaul her to no end.




EverSoElusive said:


> Dontcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me?




Pure trash.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Coming straight from Youtube, so has this been discussed / has anyone seen the tweets? The Tarot woman posted this:



> Another juicy tweet has been made about the birth mother being keen on the baby.  Cottage Hospital employees are leaking she did not give birth( Markle).  That the girl is under 21.  Has not handed over the child as of yet.



Don't know, you'd have to be an idiot extraordinaire to make a huge fuss with birth and name announcements if you didn't have the baby in your possession me thinks.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Dontcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me?




Nothing wrong with that pic IMO - just usual showbiz PR still


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm pump pump?? Like there are no better words




Nothing sweet about a grown woman who talks like a toddler.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Daisy Lili Rose Camilla
Perfect names for a girls group.



papertiger said:


> Nothing wrong with that pic IMO - just usual showbiz PR still



The neck wrinkles look odd to me. No question she has a beautiful face.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Nothing sweet about a grown woman who talks like a toddler.



Um, I don’t believe this is toddler talk.  check urban dictionary 
I will tiptoe out of the room, now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Coming straight from Youtube, so has this been discussed / has anyone seen the tweets? The Tarot woman posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know, you'd have to be an idiot extraordinaire to make a huge fuss with birth and name announcements if you didn't have the baby in your possession me thinks.



With these two, nothing would surprise me.  Rumors are all over the place about her disappearing act since March/April. The most likely one IMO is a full body rejuvenation.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Daisy Lili Rose Camilla
> 
> 
> The neck wrinkles look odd to me. No question she has a beautiful face.



The photographer should have told her to put her shoulder down and back, her neck would have appeared more elongated. 

Some photographers only understand/are concerned with technical aspects and not aesthetics, that's why a shoot director is sometimes needed too.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> With these two, nothing would surprise me.  Rumors are all over the place about her disappearing act since March/April. *The most likely one IMO is a full body rejuvenation*.



Thant's what I need! 

Lucky for them they have the time


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Thant's what I need!
> 
> Lucky for them they have the time



I am ready for one, too.  On this, Hwood seems to have the right idea


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am ready for one, too.  On this, Hwood seems to have the right idea



I mean, if not now, when then. I finally took the plunge with Retin-A (for anti-aging, not acne) because I felt I could deal with the peeling (and man did I peel for nearly 5 months) if I never left the house anyway and if so, masked up haha. I started the day after my only out-of-the-house workday for 2020 last fall.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Coming straight from Youtube, so has this been discussed / has anyone seen the tweets? The Tarot woman posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know, you'd have to be an idiot extraordinaire to make a huge fuss with birth and name announcements if you didn't have the baby in your possession me thinks.


If they really went the surrogate route and then announced the birth without securing the babe, it would be a major misstep. I'd have thought they would have followed in their mentor's footsteps and made everyone in the hospital sign an ironclad NDA no matter who popped the kid.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Viscount and Lady Weymouth had a surrogate in California specifically because the laws there are more secure regarding the fact that the surrogate cannot make claims on a child she gives birth to.  I doubt this story is true.

The Queen wanting to see Archie:  wouldn’t it be funny if the family is plotting to have him on British soil in the event of a divorce/custody battle?  Maybe that’s why the rumor of the surrogate/hospital keeping the baby are existing; a plan is in play:  Operation Recoup and Regroup.


----------



## needlv

Has anyone seen this?  If forgot how many times MM barged in front of H


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




Everyone with half a brain knows that was just a very convenient occasion for her to get rid of overweight, poor, unelegant middle class dad. Rumour has it he was set up so she could have her reason to cut him off.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Everyone with half a brain knows that was just a very convenient occasion for her to get rid of overweight, poor, unelegant middle class dad. Rumour has it he was set up so she could have her reason to cut him off.


What did the Ragland family do or not do to be cast into the void of her disregard? It's like Doria materialized out of nothing. And yet Methane claims they have a long lineage of ancestral pain. Poppycock!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> What did the Ragland family do or not do to be cast into the void of her disregard? It's like Doria materialized out of nothing. And yet Methane claims they have a long lineage of ancestral pain. Poppycock!



There was an article a few days ago about an anonymous family member speaking out, but I didn't read it. It was something like "Why we'll never speak again". 

None of them did anything (not even bigmouthed Samantha), they just didn't fit her narrative and her supposedly posh new circumstances anymore (and with that I mean once she licked that little drop of fame Suits gave her, way before scoring big with Harry).


----------



## CarryOn2020

More speculation, more shifting the chairs on the Titantic?

_So when accounting for their assets and lucrative deals, Harry and Meghan's net worth is thought to be around £96 million.    

He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.

As superstars of the international circuit, the couple are expected to command fees of up to £1million for speeches and appearances.

Neighbours and locals in Prince Santa Barbara have speculated Harry and Meghan could become the next couple to join the ranks of other celebrities to open their own winery.

*Insiders say the move would make a lot of sense if they were to add a winery to their $14million mansion.*

The idea could especially pique the interest of Meghan, who is also known to be a huge wine fan and named her now-defunct lifestyle blog The Tig after her favorite red wine.  









						Prince Harry and Meghan 'plan to hire Nicole Scherzinger's consultant'
					

Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, who are living in their $14 million mansion in California, have been trying to sign up Ollie Ayling, 30, a source told The Sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## lanasyogamama

I could absolutely be wrong, but to me it seems like the vast majority of these business deals they are making don’t have legs.


----------



## eunaddict

Chanbal said:


> So this is another falsehood ????




I have to say, she looks amazing in that photo! Black/really dark blues seem to really suit her!


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Thant's what I need!
> *
> Lucky for them they have the time*



And the money thanks to the business deals they have made in the past year.


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> _He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'plan to hire Nicole Scherzinger's consultant'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, who are living in their $14 million mansion in California, have been trying to sign up Ollie Ayling, 30, a source told The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


This must be a joke! I highly doubt the Queen's wealth is a paltry 350 million, while the Harkles will be billionaires - that must be like Kylie's billion. 

I did read an article about how mega CEOS basically live on their company dime though, so I can see how they are 'worth' a billion.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> More speculation, more shifting the chairs on the Titantic?
> 
> _So when accounting for their assets and lucrative deals, Harry and Meghan's net worth is thought to be around £96 million.
> 
> He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.
> 
> As superstars of the international circuit, the couple are expected to command fees of up to £1million for speeches and appearances._



I think this is just an attempt to make them seem important in order to drum up interest in them as public speakers.  (Gotta wonder why any company would want such a troubled, dim fellow as Harry giving them a speech.  He isn't really that good as a speaker and there will be a lot of companies in the U.S. who will not want someone who referred to the 1st amendment as "bonkers" giving them a speech.)  Still, even if all their deals make them the maximum possible amount, it's really difficult to accumulate a massive amount of wealth, a billion dollars no less, from fees for speeches, children's picture books, payments for producing documentaries, etc. They'll owe huge amount of tax to both the U.S. federal government as well as California for those earnings. No clue what they'll owe to the UK on top of that.  I'm sure they'll try to shelter as much as possible in their foundation/tax-dodge and run as many expenses as possible through that but they'll also be under a lot of scrutiny.  Most billionaires have created a highly successful publicly traded company where most of their wealth is in the stock. Harry and MM also have huge personal expenses, it must take many millions per year to run that estate, pay their staff, pay their attorneys who are on speed dial, pay their PR firm, pay their security, and all that.


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> More speculation, more shifting the chairs on the Titantic?
> 
> _So when accounting for their assets and lucrative deals, Harry and Meghan's net worth is thought to be around £96 million.
> 
> He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.
> 
> As superstars of the international circuit, the couple are expected to command fees of up to £1million for speeches and appearances.
> 
> Neighbours and locals in Prince Santa Barbara have speculated Harry and Meghan could become the next couple to join the ranks of other celebrities to open their own winery.
> 
> *Insiders say the move would make a lot of sense if they were to add a winery to their $14million mansion.*
> 
> The idea could especially pique the interest of Meghan, who is also known to be a huge wine fan and named her now-defunct lifestyle blog The Tig after her favorite red wine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'plan to hire Nicole Scherzinger's consultant'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, who are living in their $14 million mansion in California, have been trying to sign up Ollie Ayling, 30, a source told The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


A winery….alcohol wins every time. Betting the bottles will have a crown on the label.


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> I could absolutely be wrong, but to me it seems like the vast majority of these business deals they are making don’t have legs.



ITA...I think it's just their PR who try to push them and make them seem successful. I don't believe a word they say (the Harkles AND the PR)!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I think this is just an attempt to make them seem important in order to drum up interest in them as public speakers.  (Gotta wonder why any company would want such a troubled, dim fellow as Harry giving them a speech.  He isn't really that good as a speaker and there will be a lot of companies in the U.S. who will not want someone who referred to the 1st amendment as "bonkers" giving them a speech.)  Still, even if all their deals make them the maximum possible amount, it's really difficult to accumulate a massive amount of wealth, a billion dollars no less, from fees for speeches, children's picture books, payments for producing documentaries, etc. They'll owe huge amount of tax to both the U.S. federal government as well as California for those earnings. No clue what they'll owe to the UK on top of that.  I'm sure they'll try to shelter as much as possible in their foundation/tax-dodge and run as many expenses as possible through that but they'll also be under a lot of scrutiny.  Most billionaires have created a highly successful publicly traded company where most of their wealth is in the stock. Harry and MM also have huge personal expenses, it must take many millions per year to run that estate, pay their staff, pay their attorneys who are on speed dial, pay their PR firm, pay their security, and all that.



All true. Plus, haven‘t we already heard his thoughts on almost everything?  I do not need nor want to hear more. Whoever hires him will do it to seek favors from Charles and Will.  Remember he had lunch with Wallis Annenberg.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> More speculation, more shifting the chairs on the Titantic?
> 
> _So when accounting for their assets and lucrative deals, Harry and Meghan's net worth is thought to be around £96 million.
> 
> He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.
> 
> As superstars of the international circuit, the couple are expected to command fees of up to £1million for speeches and appearances.
> 
> Neighbours and locals in Prince Santa Barbara have speculated Harry and Meghan could become the next couple to join the ranks of other celebrities to open their own winery.
> 
> *Insiders say the move would make a lot of sense if they were to add a winery to their $14million mansion.*
> 
> The idea could especially pique the interest of Meghan, who is also known to be a huge wine fan and named her now-defunct lifestyle blog The Tig after her favorite red wine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'plan to hire Nicole Scherzinger's consultant'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, who are living in their $14 million mansion in California, have been trying to sign up Ollie Ayling, 30, a source told The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



So why were they whining about being financially cut off from the BRF if they're going to be worth a billion? Doesn't add up. Then again, nothing ever does with them.


----------



## caramelize126

rose60610 said:


> So why were they whining about being financially cut off from the BRF if they're going to be worth a billion? Doesn't add up. Then again, nothing ever does with them.



i think most if not all of these articles have no purpose other than to hype H&M and make them seem more in demand and popular than they actually are. From her PR to drum up publicity and entice companies to make deals before other companies snatch them up. I cant imagine any company at this point would be stupid enough to take them... unless they were desperate.  At this rate, all I can see is Harry doing endorsements or commercials for random products. Milk? Toilet paper? Apps for virtual therapists?

_"superstars of the international circuit". _LOL


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> A winery….alcohol wins every time. Betting the bottles will have a crown on the label.



That would be another faux pas, as without the ability to use HRH they should never imply they are Crown.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> That would be another faux pas, as without the ability to use HRH they should never imply they are Crown.


Cue MM saying the RF doesn’t own the word “crown”.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Meghan thought British palaces were a dump dump
> After she married the man of her heart pump pump
> So she took her Prince
> While all of us winced
> Because he was nothing more than a chump chump


*LOVE, LOVE, LOVE this!!!!  *


----------



## jelliedfeels

eunaddict said:


> I thought (s)he might have been doubled as a witness to the birth. As in, yup...that's the Sussex baby.


I don’t think that’d count if she wasn’t there in person. I’ve also got the impression that at least one witness had to be a government official like Home Secretary or something. 

Sorry I deleted the top of this message and can’t find it….
Hazz ‘retreats‘ to his cave, plays his video games and watches porn. 
MM and her mom get to feed the kids, do the grocery shopping, clean those bathrooms, etc.  Definitely not the glamor life.

I severely doubt that they do their own chores  surely if you have a 10+ house you have a team of servants as part of the lifestyle/status symbol of it all.

I also don’t think you can keep a 4+ bedroom house clean and tidy without a cleaner to help at least myself but maybe I’m lazy 



Pivoine66 said:


> They want peace ? (and don't regret their OW interview)? Perhaps they fear the loss of their titles and their or Prince Harry's inheritance? Perhaps CV they also fear closer investigations into whether Prince Harry's wife was really pregnant herself ? She may also be thinking of future invitations and photos with her daughter and the Queen (including herself, of course) to finally see her daughter's name and royal status, and therefore hers, immortalised, and forever bound in one thought with the Queen and remain relevant.


_si vis pacem para bellum_ is clearly the only bit of Latin old whinge retains from his years of high quality, expensive schooling 



csshopper said:


> The Mirror UK reports…..drum roll….Lily is now the new #1 girl’s name. It will be very common, guess they did not consider that.


It’s been extremely popular for years 
Just ask Lily Allen, Lily Collins, Lily Savage (lol) and Lily James for starters. It’s the same as with Archie they are following the trend rather than sparking it 


rose60610 said:


> When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan. A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.


I’m personally hoping that by the time his time comes the gruesome twosome have sunk into deserved obscurity & we won’t have to hear about any of it 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, if not now, when then. I finally took the plunge with Retin-A (for anti-aging, not acne) because I felt I could deal with the peeling (and man did I peel for nearly 5 months) if I never left the house anyway and if so, masked up haha. I started the day after my only out-of-the-house workday for 2020 last fall.


Good for you. I’m keen to start too x


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Everyone with half a brain knows that was just a very convenient occasion for her to get rid of overweight, poor, unelegant middle class dad. Rumour has it he was set up so she could have her reason to cut him off.


Indeed, he and his bank statements  are very embarrassing to her as they belie her ‘self-raising flower’ image. Now she’s got a better piggy bank she has no need of him anyway. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> More speculation, more shifting the chairs on the Titantic?
> 
> _So when accounting for their assets and lucrative deals, Harry and Meghan's net worth is thought to be around £96 million.
> 
> He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.
> 
> As superstars of the international circuit, the couple are expected to command fees of up to £1million for speeches and appearances.
> 
> Neighbours and locals in Prince Santa Barbara have speculated Harry and Meghan could become the next couple to join the ranks of other celebrities to open their own winery.
> 
> *Insiders say the move would make a lot of sense if they were to add a winery to their $14million mansion.*
> 
> The idea could especially pique the interest of Meghan, who is also known to be a huge wine fan and named her now-defunct lifestyle blog The Tig after her favorite red wine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'plan to hire Nicole Scherzinger's consultant'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, who are living in their $14 million mansion in California, have been trying to sign up Ollie Ayling, 30, a source told The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I can’t help thinking of the Lehman Brothers for some reason. 
 These numbers are just ludicrous. The queen’s personal jewellery alone is probably worth £350 mill. Never mind the amount of land, the businesses, the property, the art she owns. She’s insanely wealthy. Absolutely beyond our comprehension.  I would be amazed if even the richest people in Hollywood are vaguely close to her.

Also even if the pair did become billionaires (which seems to be truly Enron accounting to me) that’s…. not that much…. a billion dollars isn’t keeping up with the Kardashians considering just one of them is apparently a billionaire at 21

But by all means, make that vineyard money, I’m sure their hooves and spiked tails will make trampling grapes a breeze


----------



## lanasyogamama

Retin A is really amazing. I’ve never had Botox or fillers, but I live and die for my tret rx. Also my Nu Face device.

How long before MM’s “sources” shares her skincare secrets?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I could absolutely be wrong, but to me it seems like *the vast majority of these business deals they are making don’t have legs.*



Particularly the business deals which require them to actually do something. They have a deal with Spotify supposedly worth $25 million and they only did one Spotify-produced "coming soon" podcast and then... crickets. It's been six months and there is no sign of a second episode. Was the "deal" a publicity stunt to boost interest in Spotify that fell apart? Or, more likely Harry and Meghan took the upfront money and have been putting Spotify off with one excuse after another for why they can't do any podcasts yet.


----------



## csshopper

Once again their ignorance and colossal conceit is on display unless they think you spit some grape seeds in the ground and viola! a winery pops up. Have family friends in 3 Counties in CA who are vintners and know through them what a huge undertaking it is. The Suckesses could possibly purchase an existing one, more than ever may be for sale in the years ahead. The vines are stressed and it’s not getting any better with diminishing water (one wine producing town near me already is under mandatory 40% reduction of water) plus increasing periods of extreme heat.

As for the Tarot card lady and gossip about the surrogate keeping the baby, she needs to shuffle her cards. I‘m not an attorney, but my posting #65748 about the law in CA explains why the gossip does’t have merit. They would have had Gestational Surrogacy: Methane’s egg + Heinous Harry’s sperm with the surrogate as the carrier. A Pre Birth Order would have been in place naming them as parents on the Birth Certificate, the surrogate having no rights at all. With all at stake in a Royal birth, it would have to be under those conditions.

She got her bump in publicity for The Bench by having stans and the Foundation purchase books, but the Bench is “rotting“ a week later. Reduced price and 3 copies for the price of 2 and still sliding down the Amazon rankings to #227, well out of the Top 100.  Barnes&Noble, a US chain shows it at ”Sales Rank: 1453 today. So they need to generate other business.

 Neither of them can stand to be out of the spotlight, their parental leave will probably be filled with these publicity generating items, the S’s: $ussex, $cobie, and $unshine $achs all need the $$$$. People may get weary and it will have been counterproductive.


----------



## jelliedfeels

justwatchin said:


> A winery….alcohol wins every time. Betting the bottles will have a crown on the label.


 I don’t doubt the crown!
It’s funny though as profitable as the wine industry is - I wouldn’t count Agriculture and Manufacturing among the top industries where you can wing your way to success with little to no professional experience.

I think they would fold pretty quick in a business with a margin to it even ignoring their history of getting experts in and then laying them off remarkably quickly


CarryOn2020 said:


> All true. Plus, haven‘t we already heard his thoughts on almost everything?  I do not need nor want to hear more. Whoever hires him will do it to seek favors from Charles and Will.  Remember he had lunch with Wallis Annenberg.


That had such ‘my dad got me this internship’ energy.
I cringe at the fact this man is nearly 40 but some people really do never grow up.


lanasyogamama said:


> Retin A is really amazing. I’ve never had Botox or fillers, but I live and die for my tret rx. Also my Nu Face device.
> 
> How long before MM’s “sources” shares her skincare secrets?


I don’t think she’ll get a lot of offers. Her rictus grin may make people assume the products contain formaldehyde.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Neither of them can stand to be out of the spotlight, their parental leave will probably be filled with these publicity generating items, the S’s: $ussex, $cobie, and $unshine $achs all need the $$$$. *People may get weary and it will have been counterproductive*.



With everything opening back up it will more likely be that people are going to be too busy getting out and living their lives to pay attention to these idjits.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> She got her bump in publicity for The Bench by having stans and the Foundation purchase books, but the Bench is “rotting“ a week later. Reduced price and 3 copies for the price of 2 and still sliding down the Amazon rankings to #227, well out of the Top 100.  Barnes&Noble, a US chain shows it at ”Sales Rank: 1453 today. So they need to generate other business.



The book still has a 94% 5-star rating on Amazon. Unbelievable. 

Still the occasional 1-star review makes up for the dozens of shills. 




Anonymous
_1.0 out of 5 stars_ Bought this book for my nephew DISAPPOINTED!!!
Reviewed in the United States on June 9, 2021
Verified Purchase
Wow is all I can say about this book and not in a good way. I get it’s supposed to be a poem/book but what’s the story? It skips around to multiple people with no real significance to the story line. Then it shows what I assume is supposed to be her husband and her son in the back of the book him coming back from a tour in the military . Sorry but when did he leave her or their son and join the military? The illustrations in the book are also hard to look at. Listen I will be the first to give any book and chance and am alway looking for new kids book but there isn’t a single thing written in this book to hold a child’s attention much less the parents. Sorry but I only wish I had more info prior to placing my order or else I would have saved my money. Meghan don’t waste your time trying this o write again and I will most certainly save my money next time as well. Disappointed!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> More speculation, more shifting the chairs on the Titantic?
> 
> _So when accounting for their assets and lucrative deals, Harry and Meghan's net worth is thought to be around £96 million.
> 
> He and Meghan are predicted to become the world’s highest-earning celebrity couple with a fortune potentially stretching to $1billion (£700million) within a decade. That compares to the Queen’s wealth which is estimated at £350million.
> 
> As superstars of the international circuit, the couple are expected to command fees of up to £1million for speeches and appearances.
> 
> Neighbours and locals in Prince Santa Barbara have speculated Harry and Meghan could become the next couple to join the ranks of other celebrities to open their own winery.
> 
> *Insiders say the move would make a lot of sense if they were to add a winery to their $14million mansion.*
> 
> The idea could especially pique the interest of Meghan, who is also known to be a huge wine fan and named her now-defunct lifestyle blog The Tig after her favorite red wine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan 'plan to hire Nicole Scherzinger's consultant'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 39, who are living in their $14 million mansion in California, have been trying to sign up Ollie Ayling, 30, a source told The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


HA! .. well, good look with that on a number of points .. try to find the appropriate land there (most of it is already in the hands of other wine-makers), secondly .. think about the fires (there was a mega fire a few years back which destroyed a good part of the Napa Valley).  California is in a MAJOR drought; many officials are very concerned that we are going to have an epic fire season (yippee - NOT) .. heck, look at the recent pictures of the Hoover Dam!!!  The Colorado River provides water to many of the Southwestern states and it is at an all-time low .. you don't think grapes need water?!!??!


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s funny though as profitable as the wine industry is - *I wouldn’t count Agriculture and Manufacturing among the top industries where you can wing your way to success with little to no professional experience.*



They probably think to emulate the success that Clooney had with his tequila but he had Cindy Crawford's husband as a partner and Cindy herself to pitch it. I think Princess Eugenie's husband was involved with it as a brand ambassador too.  It's also supposedly a pretty good tequila. So, the Montecito pair likely think this will be easy. Just buy a vineyard, throw a bunch of grapes in a tub, get Meghan to stomp on them like Lucille Ball, bottle it, sell it for a year or two, sell the company for a billion.  See.  Easy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The part about the narcisstic control (starts around 30 mins) is super interesting.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> They probably think to emulate the success that Clooney had with his tequila but he had Cindy Crawford's husband as a partner and Cindy herself to pitch it. I think Princess Eugenie's husband was involved with it as a brand ambassador too.  It's also supposedly a pretty good tequila. So, the Montecito pair likely think this will be easy. Just buy a vineyard, throw a bunch of grapes in a tub, get Meghan to stomp on them like Lucille Ball, bottle it, sell it for a year or two, sell the company for a billion.  See.  Easy!


Oh, I'm sure that is what they think, but .. I don't see good times coming up for the Wine industry here in CA .. especially this year and who knows about next year!  Personally, I'm not a fan of the Napa Valley wines and when .. heck (and even in Napa Valley itself), you can get a fine and CHEAPER bottle of French or Italian Wine in the markets and the Restaurants?!?! .. well sorry, I'll go with that!


----------



## Chanbal

It's hilarious!


----------



## justwatchin

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this?  If forgot how many times MM barged in front of H



Still enjoy seeing her rummaging thru his car trunk and get busted


----------



## rose60610

Meghan's inflammatory accusation that the BRF drove her to be suicidal had a two fold purpose: 1. To slander the BRF and, 2. Keep Harry on a leash and trapped with HER. If he wanted to leave her, all she'd have to do is claim she's suicidal and he's trapped. If their marriage falls apart, it'll be on her terms. If QEII threatens to take away their titles, voila! she's suicidal again! It'll either be that racist suicide driving BRF or that suicide driving Harry when things don't go Meghan's way. Fear not, she's an expert on mental health and really concerned for all of us. We're just all mindless little raindrops dependent on her profound wisdom  .


----------



## mellibelly

Blind item about the Skid Markles and the Gates








						Her Brilliant Plan - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] Come sit on the bench next to BG and we will tell you an interesting story about two famous couples! Actress and Baldy have been married for just a few years. Brilliant and Mrs. Brilliant have been married for many years. We knew that Brill cheated on Mrs. Brill, but that behavior...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this?  If forgot how many times MM barged in front of H




LOVE WATCHING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN.  THANK YOU!!


----------



## marietouchet

How COVID changes things … 
 a sandwich shop used to have a bus boy who called my 8 mo old GD by the name LIL BIT , he was a jewel, and I miss him deeply, just a bus boy, but gracious and friendly … the best 

I had not heard the nickname LIL BIT til then …


----------



## lanasyogamama

mellibelly said:


> Blind item about the Skid Markles and the Gates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her Brilliant Plan - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] Come sit on the bench next to BG and we will tell you an interesting story about two famous couples! Actress and Baldy have been married for just a few years. Brilliant and Mrs. Brilliant have been married for many years. We knew that Brill cheated on Mrs. Brill, but that behavior...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com


Wait, who are the Brills?


----------



## michellem

lanasyogamama said:


> Wait, who are the Brills?


Bill and Melinda Gates


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Meghan's inflammatory accusation that the BRF drove her to be suicidal had a two fold purpose: 1. To slander the BRF and, 2. Keep Harry on a leash and trapped with HER. If he wanted to leave her, all she'd have to do is claim she's suicidal and he's trapped. If their marriage falls apart, it'll be on her terms. If QEII threatens to take away their titles, voila! she's suicidal again! It'll either be that racist suicide driving BRF or that suicide driving Harry when things don't go Meghan's way. Fear not, she's an expert on mental health and really concerned for all of us. We're just all mindless little raindrops dependent on her profound wisdom  .



Let me add a #3, her admitted suicidal impulses revealed her own mental instability which has never been addressed or treated. How can she put herself up as an expert when only two years ago she claims she was thinking about ending her life (and Archie’s too). That shouldn’t give her leverage in a custody battle.

Unless of course it was all made up for manipulation purposes as you said, which still shows she has a form of mental illness.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Blind item about the Skid Markles and the Gates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her Brilliant Plan - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] Come sit on the bench next to BG and we will tell you an interesting story about two famous couples! Actress and Baldy have been married for just a few years. Brilliant and Mrs. Brilliant have been married for many years. We knew that Brill cheated on Mrs. Brill, but that behavior...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



What was the charitable cause, anyone know?


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> LOVE WATCHING THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN.  THANK YOU!!


Impossible to have any respect for the gingered wimp when he lets himself be trampled, repeatedly.


----------



## bisousx

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this?  If forgot how many times MM barged in front of H




Weird and obvious that no one (except Harry) gravitates towards her on film. She gets ignored and distanced by so many, including Serena’s mom.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The part about the narcisstic control (starts around 30 mins) is super interesting.



I could listen to her everyday!  Thanks for the link!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> When Thomas Markle dies, I wonder what reaction we'll get out of Meghan. A wreath full of symbolism? Non-acknowledgement? Wailing buckets of alligator tears? Placing blame: "It's so unfortunate that he never made the effort to see his grandchildren"? Will she attend his funeral service? Or will she have to skip it because she's just sooo important and will use security concerns as an excuse? Even though she pops up everywhere else to open her big mouth full of word salad.


I think her reaction will be the same as during his recent life: ignore.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Crossposted.

HMTQ cracks me up


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Dontcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me?



LOLOL.  My son was very young when the Pussycat Dolls' song came out.  He asked me why anyone would want their girlfriend to be "hot like meat"?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Coming straight from Youtube, so has this been discussed / has anyone seen the tweets? The Tarot woman posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't know, you'd have to be an idiot extraordinaire to make a huge fuss with birth and name announcements if you didn't have the baby in your possession me thinks.


Whatever the situation, if hospital employees are leaking information like that, it's a huge HIPAA violation and they could easily be fired.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I think her reaction will be the same as during his recent life: ignore.


It is in the post-death period that she will "merch" him, contrasting him (Bad Parent) with Diana (Saint). She will start including stories about him in her million-dollar inspirational speeches: How I Became A Success & Married A Prince Despite Abusive Parent.


----------



## bag-mania

Check out this pathetic headline. No matter what the subject, it always comes back to Harry and Meghan. Even when the topic is Charles wearing a 37-year-old suit. 

Although I have to laugh at the thought of Charles wearing a suit that’s older than his son.


----------



## plastic-fish

CarryOn2020 said:


> Daisy Lili Rose Camilla
> Perfect names for a girls group.
> 
> 
> 
> The neck wrinkles look odd to me. No question she has a beautiful face.


I think that’s the neck strap of the dress, halter style… Or maybe just strange neck wrinkles…


----------



## Hermes Zen

mellibelly said:


> Blind item about the Skid Markles and the Gates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her Brilliant Plan - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] Come sit on the bench next to BG and we will tell you an interesting story about two famous couples! Actress and Baldy have been married for just a few years. Brilliant and Mrs. Brilliant have been married for many years. We knew that Brill cheated on Mrs. Brill, but that behavior...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



I'm in the PNW and a little protective of the G's.  Very unhappy with BG for what he had done.    BUT I don't want M to try her evil ways here!!  _*growl ... hiss hiss ...*_


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> Impossible to have any respect for the gingered wimp when he lets himself be trampled, repeatedly.



You know for quite some time that's how I had been thinking about this. Now I'm wondering if M taught H to be respectful, of a woman/her as an american, to allow her to go before him like through a door way for example. HOWEVER, M SHOULD know the royal rules! It is disrespectful to H !!!  In privacy okay but not in public!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps the BillG gossip has to do with _Catherine St-Laurent, former Senior Communications Officer of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Chief of Staff
Article from May, 2021








						What Catherine St-Laurent Learned As Meghan Markle's Chief of Staff
					

"It's not been a challenge for me to be distracted by outside noise," she tells ELLE.com.




					www.elle.com
				



_
Are they really that competitive? Sad, if true.  BG certainly had ties to JeffE who had ties to Andrew, so it kinda makes sense BG would be their ‘go-to’ person. Kinda. 








						Prince William’s meeting with Bill Gates as Duke ‘raced to beat Harry'
					

PRINCE WILLIAM has now met with Bill Gates three times and developed a "friendship" with the Microsoft founder in an attempt to lock him down before his brother Prince Harry gets there first, according to a royal commentator.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

plastic-fish said:


> I think that’s the neck strap of the dress, halter style… Or maybe just strange neck wrinkles…



I can see your point of a neck strap but I saw M's buddy Chrissy T on the news tonight with a similar head turn with wrinkled neck pose. I thought wtf?


----------



## Chanbal

DM published a very unsettling article about Cringe's big supporter, Chrissy Teigen. Who are these people?  



Spoiler: Wow












						Project Runway's Michael Costello says Chrissy Teigen bullied him
					

Costello, 38, said that Teigen, 35, tormented him amid a misunderstanding that he had used a racial slur online, which he denied, and tried to explain to her at the time to no avail.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

I have no respect for Chrissy T after hearing all the hateful things she has done. I wouldn't be surprised M would stay clear away from her because of this publicity.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> You know for quite some time that's how I had been thinking about this. Now I'm wondering if M *taught *H to be respectful, of a woman/her as an american, to allow her to go before him like through a door way for example. HOWEVER, M SHOULD know the royal rules! It is disrespectful to H !!!  In privacy okay but not in public!


Maybe the right word is TRAINED. She has overcome 30+ years of royal rules instilled into him ,and with a touch of a hand, has him stopping dead in his tracks so that she can swarm ahead.


----------



## rose60610

Hermes Zen said:


> You know for quite some time that's how I had been thinking about this. Now I'm wondering if M taught H to be respectful, of a woman/her as an american, to allow her to go before him like through a door way for example. HOWEVER, M SHOULD know the royal rules! It is disrespectful to H !!!  In privacy okay but not in public!



Good point. It appears M said: "I'm not only wearing the pants, I'm wearing the chaps, boots, and spurs. Sharp spurs. AND WHAT I WANT I GET!", which is what Harry tells us. Even to the point of throwing his family under the bus, telling the world that the BRF is  "trapped" and moving to Montecito. Mind control at its best. Like a cheetah going after a wounded gazelle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

I opened a food magazine today and an ad for Royals issue fell out.  LOVED the cover!!  *Kate the Great !* M must be fuming seeing this!! Had to share. 

AND H&M are mentioned off to the side!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> You know for quite some time that's how I had been thinking about this. Now I'm wondering if M taught H to be respectful, of a woman/her as an american, to allow her to go before him like through a door way for example. HOWEVER, M SHOULD know the royal rules! It is disrespectful to H !!!  In privacy okay but not in public!



IMO she pushes him aside to show her ‘female power‘. She probably orders her own food, too.  Without realizing it, she diminishes herself and him. Gloria Steinem et al have much to answer for this attitude and much more. They got it wrong. Girls, women should know that letting the male enter the room first does not takes away from her entrance. In fact, her female power is enhanced when she is the last to enter. [Hint: that is why men have always preferred it.]

_“Oh, I should steer clear of May. Marry in May, rue the day.”_

*








						50 of Maggie Smith's best quotes as the Dowager Countess in 'Downton Abbey'
					

The role of Lady Violet Crawley won Dame Maggie Smith three Emmys, her first non-ensemble Screen Actors Guild Award and her third Golden Globe award. The Dowager Countess may not have been central to many Downton




					britishperioddramas.com
				



*


Spoiler: Lady Grantham



The role of Lady Violet Crawley won Dame Maggie Smith three Emmys, her first non-ensemble Screen Actors Guild Award and her third Golden Globe award.



The Dowager Countess may not have been central to many Downton Abbey storylines during the period drama’s six seasons – and the actress has admitted she’s never even watched the show.

But that didn’t stop Smith stealing every scene she was in with a reliably memorable stream of caustic insults, dubious advice and witty asides.

Here are some of our favourite quotes from Violet:



*On romance
“I do think a woman’s place is eventually in the home, but I see no harm in her having some fun before she gets there.”

“In my day, a lady was incapable of feeling physical attraction until she had been instructed to do so by her mama.”

“Every woman goes down the aisle with half the story hidden.”

“I am not a romantic. But even I will concede that the heart does not exist solely for the purpose of pumping blood.”

“I know several couples who are perfectly happy. Haven’t spoken in years.”

Mary: “I was only going to say Sybil that is entitled to her opinions.”
Violet: “No, she isn’t, until she is married. And then her husband will tell her what her opinions are.”

“Every woman goes down the aisle with half the story hidden.”

“Oh, I should steer clear of May. Marry in May, rue the day.”

“Give him a date for when Mary’s out of mourning. No one wants to kiss a girl in black.”

“My dear, love is a far more dangerous motive than dislike.”*



*On technology and change
“First electricity, now telephones. Sometimes I feel as if I were living in an H.G. Wells novel.”

“What is a weekend?”

[On the new telephone] “Is this an instrument of communication or torture?”

[On jazz musicians] “Do you think that any of them know what the others are playing?”*



*On life
“Life is a game, where the player must appear ridiculous.”

“No life appears rewarding if you think about it too much.”

“Hope is a tease, designed to prevent us accepting reality.”

Carson: “Hard work and diligence weigh more than beauty in the real world.”
Violet: “If only that were true.”

Isobel: “How you hate to be wrong.”
Violet: “I wouldn’t know, I’m not familiar with the sensation.”*



*On growing old
“Just because you’re an old widow, I see no necessity to eat off a tray.”

“At my age, one must ration one’s excitement.”

“All life is a series of problems which we must try and solve, first one and then the next and then the next, until at last we die.”*



*On social etiquette
Violet: “I’m afraid Tom’s small talk is very small indeed.”
Robert: “Not everyone can be Oscar Wilde.”
Violet: “What a relief.”

“Vulgarity is no substitute for wit.”

“Principles are like prayers; noble, of course, but awkward at a party.”

“You know me: never complain, never explain.”*



*On Americans
“Why does every day involve a fight with an American?”

Cora: “I might send her over to visit my aunt. She could get to know New York.”
Violet: “Oh, I don’t think things are quite that desperate.”

[To Cora] “I’m so looking forward to seeing your mother again. When I’m with her, I’m reminded of the virtues of the English.”

Cora: “I hope I don’t hear sounds of a disagreement.”
Violet: “Is that what they call discussion in New York?”

“Try not to let those Yankees drive you mad.”*



*On class
“Don’t be defeatist, dear. It is very middle class.”

“The presence of strangers is our only guarantee of good behaviour.”

“Edith, you are a Lady, not Toad of Toad Hall.”

Isobel: “Servants are human beings too.”
Violet: “Yes. But preferably only on their days off.”

“Nothing succeeds like excess.”

Martha: “I have no wish to be a Great Lady.”
Violet: “No, a decision that must be reinforced whenever you look in the glass.”*



*On the English
“Last night, he looked so well. Of course it would happen to a foreigner. No Englishman would dream of dying in someone else’s house.”

“If I were to search for logic, I would not look for it among the English upper class.”

“Rosamund has no interest in French. If she wishes to be understood by a foreigner, she shouts.”*



*On dealing with other people
“An unlucky friend is tiresome enough, an unlucky acquaintance is intolerable.”

Isobel: “You take everything as a compliment.”
Violet: “I advise you to do the same, it saves many an awkward moment.”

Robert: “I thought you didn’t like him.”
Violet: “So what? I have plenty of friends I don’t like.”

Isobel: “I suspect she’s quite a tough nut.”
Violet: “And I’m quite a tough nutcracker.”

“I don’t dislike him. I just don’t like him, which is quite different.”

“I do hope I’m interrupting something…”

“You’re a woman with a brain and reasonable ability. Stop whining and find something to do.”

“There’s nothing simpler than avoiding people you don’t like. Avoiding one’s friends, that’s the real test.”

“No guest should be admitted without the date of their departure settled.”

Cora: “I take that as a compliment.”
Violet: “I must have said it wrong.”*


----------



## Hermes Zen

Tell me this is not true!  



> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...harry-meghan-markle-royals-poll-b1866753.html
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle voted ‘most respected’ royals after the Queen by young people*
> *‘To earn the respect of young people today you don’t need to earn a fortune or have good looks’*
> Peony Hirwani1 hour ago


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Tell me this is not true!



It's _not_ true


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> DM published a very unsettling article about Cringe's big supporter, Chrissy Teigen. Who are these people?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Wow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Project Runway's Michael Costello says Chrissy Teigen bullied him
> 
> 
> Costello, 38, said that Teigen, 35, tormented him amid a misunderstanding that he had used a racial slur online, which he denied, and tried to explain to her at the time to no avail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I am NOT fond of Teigen - I found her vulgar, loud and an oversharer before I ever heard of her pedo tweets and her treatment of Stodden -, but Costello is an a*shole who's stolen the work of other designers and has used the n-word in tweets and as one of the designers, a black woman, claims, in person. And I only know that because people on Twitter are doing the Lord's work and putting together details I had never heard of because I can't focus on more than a handful of celebrities and their shenanigans  So really not sure why he of all people felt he should jump the bandwagon and whine publicly.


----------



## Chagall

CarryOn2020 said:


> Daisy Lili Rose Camilla
> Perfect names for a girls group.
> 
> 
> 
> The neck wrinkles look odd to me. No question she has a beautiful face.


Yes her surgeons created a nice face for her.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.

*MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*









						Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
					

Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry



					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Pivoine66

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


A perfect narcissist knows how to turn every self-serving act into one of compassion and selflessness. So perfect  - that anyone who sees through it - is seen by others as maliciously insinuating.
How could the BRF say now NO to her attendance ? They would be called out as heartless , leaving poor suffering H without the selfless help of his so beloved supporting wife.
And if she appeared and was booed, the evil discriminatory racist British/BRF card would be pulled again.
I am left speechless, yet again.


----------



## Pivoine66

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


If she were really discreet and sincerely loved her husband and really wanted the best for him and really wanted "peace", would she not - if at all - really accompany him secretly? Wouldn't she make sure that nobody - least of all the press - found out about it, as she had perfectly managed to do regarding the birth of the children ?


----------



## needlv

Pivoine66 said:


> A perfect narcissist knows how to turn every self-serving act into one of compassion and selflessness. So perfect  - that anyone who sees through it - is seen by others as maliciously insinuating.
> How could the BRF say now NO to her attendance ? They would be called out as heartless , leaving poor suffering H without the selfless help of his so beloved supporting wife.
> And if she appeared and was booed, the evil discriminatory racist British/BRF card would be pulled again.
> I am left speechless, yet again.


This could be one of those stories that PR puts out to test reactions?  She would not be welcome in the Uk and there would be a steady stream of stories on body language etc if she did attend.  and they would get a lecture from the Queen...

i don’t think she would have the guts to attend in person.  Instead she will upstage from the USA - releasing a picture of Archie and Lili and herself etc.


----------



## Pivoine66

needlv said:


> This could be one of those stories that PR puts out to test reactions?  She would not be welcome in the Uk and there would be a steady stream of stories on body language etc if she did attend.  and they would get a lecture from the Queen...
> 
> i don’t think she would have the guts to attend in person.  Instead she will upstage from the USA - releasing a picture of Archie and Lili and herself etc.


You are probably right. I hadn't thought of that. 
(My next post about questionable discretion and support for H overlapped with yours).


----------



## needlv

Ascot today...  Look what H and MM are missing...


----------



## xincinsin

Pivoine66 said:


> A perfect narcissist knows how to turn every self-serving act into one of compassion and selflessness. So perfect  - that anyone who sees through it - is seen by others as maliciously insinuating.
> How could the BRF say now NO to her attendance ? They would be called out as heartless , leaving poor suffering H without the selfless help of his so beloved supporting wife.
> And if she appeared and was booed, the evil discriminatory racist British/BRF card would be pulled again.
> I am left speechless, yet again.


She is going to pull the racist card whatever happens, so the British should make the best of the situation and boo her loudly.


----------



## needlv

Oooh -just in case MM does turn up to the statue unveiling... who here wants to try this?


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I'm befuddled. A guest is someone invited by the host. A "secret" guest is just a party-crasher - which we know she has lots of experience with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hold up. 

— Thought the lockdown was extended. Doesn’t that mean the unveiling show is off?
— has she lost the weight????? For the sake of vanity, she should not appear until it is off. Comparisons will be made.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think in this case, Prince William should put his foot down. This is not a Royal Family event, it's going to be personal to William, Harry and Diana's family (if indeed they are there) Unfortunately, I'm hoping Catherine doesn't go just to show Meghan she doesn't need to be there either, just so she can't turn around and say she wasn't allowed but the evil Catherine was.


----------



## needlv

Sharont2305 said:


> I think in this case, Prince William should put his foot down. This is not a Royal Family event, it's going to be personal to William, Harry and Diana's family (if indeed they are there) Unfortunately, I'm hoping Catherine doesn't go just to show Meghan she doesn't need to be there either, just so she can't turn around and say she wasn't allowed but the evil Catherine was.


Catherine’s just needs to turn up with all three kids at the statue unveiling and the media would be like ”Meghan who?”


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is this another backtrack? 








						Prince Harry Reportedly Texted Kate Middleton Instead of Prince William When Lilibet Was Born
					

The move is seen as "cementing her role as a bridge between him and his brother."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## Pivoine66

xincinsin said:


> She is going to pull the racist card whatever happens, so the British should make the best of the situation and boo her loudly.


I'm afraid you might be right.
I feel a little awkward. It would probably be more appropriate for me to keep a low profile. I am neither from the UK nor the US, I am from the EU. However, for me, the Queen represents everything one could wish for in terms of moral decency and fulfillment of duty and of dignity. And to me the number of narcissists, in all positions seems to be increasing. They seem - in my perception - to get away with far too much far too often. As a still idealist "we are one world", this behaviour of H's wife and the perception of her being a "role model" for so many still,  leaves me quite worried.


----------



## eunaddict

needlv said:


> Catherine’s just needs to turn up with all three kids at the statue unveiling and the media would be like ”Meghan who?”




I know gifs are not the highest quality, but that face never moved. What is emoting?

Also, all 3 Cambridge kids paying tribute to Grandma Diana would be amazing. If that happens, there will definitely be a temper tantrum.

Heck, I'm guessing H wanted to bring Archie back and MM decided if they're going, so is she....or she thinks the Cambridge kids will be in attendance and therefore so must the Sussex kids. Can't let all that press go to waste.


----------



## papertiger

Pivoine66 said:


> I'm afraid you might be right.
> I feel a little awkward. It would probably be more appropriate for me to keep a low profile. I am neither from the UK nor the US, I am from the EU. However, for me, the Queen represents everything one could wish for in terms of moral decency and fulfillment of duty and of dignity. And to me the number of narcissists, in all positions seems to be increasing. They seem - in my perception - to get away with far too much far too often. As a still idealist "we are one world", this behaviour of H's wife and the perception of her being a "role model" for so many still,  leaves me quite worried.



Don't be worried it's all just pantomime. 

Boo if you want to, don't if you feel it's more dignified. 

Personally, I won't be anywhere near. I'll be doing something really important like filing my nails  

And actually, no narcissists are _ever_ happy no matter how well they do or whoever loves/follows them.


----------



## justwatchin

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


That would be really ballsy if she shows up.


----------



## 1LV

Hermes Zen said:


> Tell me this is not true!


Young people.  Ask them again in a few years.


----------



## Chanbal

Godparents?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Godparents?



Has the Markle been Markled?!


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Young people.  Ask them again in a few years.



Are we certain H&M are not connected to this group?
Feels like we are going in circles like on the Isle of Man -










						British drivers baffled by bizarre roundabout painted on road
					

Isle of Man drivers are being baffled by a new roundabout painted in the middle of a downtown intersection. The oval-shaped feature is unlike anything they've seen before.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Yes, she is on a mission to make peace between H and his family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yes, she is on a mission to make peace between H and his family.
> 
> View attachment 5111736



More likely, QE is demanding they both sign the papers, so she can remove it all. 
‘Happy lunch!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Has the Markle been Markled?!


Naming the kid Lilibet is rather embarrassing for OW and GK imo. They are probably giving some time until they see a good opportunity to chime in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Yes, she is on a mission to make peace between H and his family.
> 
> View attachment 5111736


The victimhood they profess is revolting. Can't they just stay in their very expensive mansion and doing their family-of-4 bonding?


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Meh. I’ll believe it when I see it. Meghan never knowingly puts herself in an uncomfortable position. Remember how she skedaddled back to Canada and left Harry to pick up the pieces once Megxit was announced? She isn’t going back. She won’t show up anywhere she is so universally disliked.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I assume “secret guest” means she intends to be “in the crowd” in the hopes of the cameras being turned on her to watch her being an adoring, faithful wife instead of being on the statues and the unveilers.  She expects the cameras to play “Where’s Waldo?” with her.  She anticipates taking attention away from the main attraction.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Tell me this is not true!



So they are admired by children. That makes sense. It takes time and experience to learn how to be discerning and notice manipulation and deception.


----------



## djuna1




----------



## bag-mania

djuna1 said:


>




And she's a coward. They left that part out.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Meh. I’ll believe it when I see it. Meghan never knowingly puts herself in an uncomfortable position. Remember how she skedaddled back to Canada and left Harry to pick up the pieces once Megxit was announced? She isn’t going back. She won’t show up anywhere she is so universally disliked.



It's true, she is hypersensitive to even the merest hint of criticism or being ignored (perceived, intended or completely imagined).

Even H had difficulty following protocol at PP's funeral, she wouldn't stand a chance.

I saw the video of 'most awkward M moments'. OMG, when you put it all together, she was hopeless at protocol and hapless at etiquette. Even someone from the sticks of nowhere with a smidgeon of common-sense would have behaved more appropriately and hence saved themselves from embarrassment.


----------



## Chanbal

djuna1 said:


>



haha, I wonder if someone with ties to the Palace is the author of the above news. A nice way to convey the message: don't come, you are not welcome here.


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> It's true, she is hypersensitive to even the merest hint of criticism or being ignored (perceived, intended or completely imagined).
> 
> Even H had difficulty following protocol at PP's funeral, she wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> I saw the video of 'most awkward M moments'. OMG, when you put it all together, *she was hopeless at protocol and hapless at etiquette*. Even someone from the sticks of nowhere with a smidgeon of common-sense would have behaved more appropriately and hence saved themselves from embarrassment.


She was (is) like a bull in a china shop.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> It's true, she is hypersensitive to even the merest hint of criticism or being ignored (perceived, intended or completely imagined).
> 
> Even H had difficulty following protocol at PP's funeral, she wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> I saw the video of 'most awkward M moments'. OMG, when you put it all together, she was hopeless at protocol and hapless at etiquette. Even someone from the sticks of nowhere with a smidgeon of common-sense would have behaved more appropriately and hence saved themselves from embarrassment.



The biggest joke in that article was that Meghan wanted to support Harry. Since when? Is there one example of her going out of her way to do something in support of Harry unless she was benefitting from it too? Absolutely nothing comes to mind.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> It's true, she is hypersensitive to even the merest hint of criticism or being ignored (perceived, intended or completely imagined).
> 
> Even H had difficulty following protocol at PP's funeral, she wouldn't stand a chance.
> 
> I saw the video of 'most awkward M moments'. OMG, when you put it all together, she was hopeless at protocol and hapless at etiquette. Even someone from the sticks of nowhere with a smidgeon of common-sense would have behaved more appropriately and hence saved themselves from embarrassment.



when people used to talk about how she couldn’t handle the etiquette stuff, I used to always wonder if I would’ve been able to handle it in the same position. But looking at the video, even if I wasn’t raised as a royal, I would never shove myself in front of my husband or pull him back to that I could go ahead of him. She is unbelievable.


----------



## marietouchet

djuna1 said:


>





djuna1 said:


>



she won’t go , the fuss of an agenda around the presumed  breastfeeding schedule as was done during Africa trip will not fly, no one is going to adjust their schedule for her


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think she put the rumor that she was going out there just so she could squash it?


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think she put the rumor that she was going out there just so she could squash it?


Yes, anything to get attention.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> haha, I wonder if someone with ties to the Palace is the author of the above news. A nice way to convey the message: don't come, you are not welcome here.


Now *THIS *I believe!!!  I really don't think that Meghan will ever set foot in the UK again; she knows how *HATED *she is (_rightly so_)!  IMO, the only time she would ever set foot back in the UK, would be if Harry took the children .. because, heaven forbid, he go back to the BRF with her meal tickets!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think she put the rumor that she was going out there just so she could squash it?



I don't think so. At this point I think the press is as obsessed with her as her stans and they need to keep the story alive. They get advertising money for clicks and she is such a divisive figure her articles get loads of clicks.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think she put the rumor that she was going out there just so she could squash it?



Wouldn't be the first time. 

Another well know PR stunt. 

Basically, it's all about the clicks. Double them for a denial/rebuttal/response.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am NOT fond of Teigen - I found her vulgar, loud and an oversharer before I ever heard of her pedo tweets and her treatment of Stodden -, but Costello is an a*shole who's stolen the work of other designers and has used the n-word in tweets and as one of the designers, a black woman, claims, in person. And I only know that because people on Twitter are doing the Lord's work and putting together details I had never heard of because I can't focus on more than a handful of celebrities and their shenanigans  *So really not sure why he of all people felt he should jump the bandwagon and whine publicly.*



Revenge? He wants to watch Chrissy go through what he went through.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


They mean she doesn't want Haz to have all of the attention.


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> when people used to talk about how she couldn’t handle the etiquette stuff, I used to always wonder if I would’ve been able to handle it in the same position. But looking at the video, even if I wasn’t raised as a royal, I would never shove myself in front of my husband or pull him back to that I could go ahead of him. She is unbelievable.



....because you're a normal person and normal people, even if they haven't been brought up in royal circles, know pretty much how to behave in different circomstances. It's only good manners, which normal people have been taught by their parents and teach their kids.

MM is not a normal person, she's a narcisist who thinks the whole world rotates around her


----------



## rose60610

Hermes Zen said:


> Source has told Radar that Meghan "knows how hard it was to attend his grandfather’s funeral alone" and that she doesn't want that to happen again.
> 
> *MM to be secret guest to Diana Statue Unveiling Article*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'to be secret guest' as Princess Diana statue is unveiled in UK
> 
> 
> Duchess of Sussex Meghan is believed to be contemplating putting a pause to her maternity leave in June so that she can attend the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue alongside husband Harry
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Isn't it pretty bad that you have to describe yourself as a "secret guest" at your own late mother-in-law's event? So....nobody invited Meghan therefore she has to crash it?


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan and Harry are "favorite royals" after TQ for young people, why is Meghan staying home and not basking in all that worship? 
   C-c-c-c-c-could it be that they AREN'T favorite royals? Was Baby Lilibet's birthday timed so Meghan "couldn't" go to Diana's unveiling? All that cosplaying going to waste...        Maybe she'll send a wreath. And make Harry hit up the Queen for the Vladimir Tiara. And a hundred million pounds.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Meh. I’ll believe it when I see it. Meghan never knowingly puts herself in an uncomfortable position. Remember how she skedaddled back to Canada and left Harry to pick up the pieces once Megxit was announced? She isn’t going back. She won’t show up anywhere she is so universally disliked.



She might not be able to fathom that she is disliked.
But then again she was booed and not fawned over when she was last there.  Okay, you’re right, she’s not going back. And I would have gotten too much enjoyment out of the boo’s and a small (very small) part of me might have felt bad for her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m surprised she hasn’t made Hazz buy her some serious jewelry to make up for the fact that she doesn’t have access to the BRF collection.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> I think in this case, Prince William should put his foot down. This is not a Royal Family event, it's going to be personal to William, Harry and Diana's family (if indeed they are there) Unfortunately, I'm hoping Catherine doesn't go just to show Meghan she doesn't need to be there either, just so she can't turn around and say she wasn't allowed but the evil Catherine was.



Hi Sharont2305!  Hope you don't mind, I'm just starting to read the thread and not caught up.  

Thought to add ... I read weeks back an article (if I find it I'll post later)  that H told W that M wanted to give a speech at the unveiling.    The answer was loudly *NO, absolutely NOT* !!!  I was waiting to hear more about that but never did see more.  If anyone know more, would love to hear.  

Thanks Sharont2305!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised she hasn’t made Hazz buy her some serious jewelry to make up for the fact that she doesn’t have access to the BRF collection.




Toddler Harry cannot afford it if we are talking about multiple pieces    Their wealth is depleting FAST with no consistent sources of income. Whatever they said they were gonna do with Spotify, that still didn't happen


----------



## Hermes Zen

Here’s a couple articles on Harry demanding M be part of Do’s statue unveiling I had mentioned …

https://www.theroyalobserver.com/p/...arkle-be-part-princess-diana-statue-unveiling


Sources said that if the former actress won’t be allowed to participate in the official ceremony, Harry’s family back in Britain thinks he could do the 'unthinkable' and not attend









						Prince Harry ‘demands Meghan Markle be part’ of Diana statue unveiling ceremony or he won’t come, say insiders
					

Sources said that if the former actress won’t be allowed to participate in the official ceremony, Harry’s family back in Britain thinks he could do the 'unthinkable' and not attend




					meaww.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> Here’s a couple articles on Harry demanding M be part of Do’s statue unveiling I had mentioned …
> 
> https://www.theroyalobserver.com/p/...arkle-be-part-princess-diana-statue-unveiling
> 
> 
> Sources said that if the former actress won’t be allowed to participate in the official ceremony, Harry’s family back in Britain thinks he could do the 'unthinkable' and not attend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘demands Meghan Markle be part’ of Diana statue unveiling ceremony or he won’t come, say insiders
> 
> 
> Sources said that if the former actress won’t be allowed to participate in the official ceremony, Harry’s family back in Britain thinks he could do the 'unthinkable' and not attend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> meaww.com



This monster does not deserve to stand among the BRF. She's a disgrace. She shouldn't even set foot on the British soil. Just sayin'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Meh. I’ll believe it when I see it. Meghan never knowingly puts herself in an uncomfortable position. Remember how she skedaddled back to Canada and left Harry to pick up the pieces once Megxit was announced? She isn’t going back. She won’t show up anywhere she is so universally disliked.



That was my take and I agreed the articles claiming she's travelling to the UK were just PR fluff. But the more I think about it...if Lilibet was any indication, that woman has gone off the deep end completely.


----------



## 1LV

Am I the only one who doesn’t understand why Diana, long divorced from Prince Charles and deceased, gets a statue?  Is it just because Wm & H want it, or are there statues of other “royal” moms I’m unaware of?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised she hasn’t made Hazz buy her some serious jewelry to make up for the fact that she doesn’t have access to the BRF collection.



He can't afford it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Am I the only one who doesn’t understand why Diana, long divorced from Prince Charles and deceased, gets a statue?  Is it just because Wm & H want it, or are there statues of other “royal” moms I’m unaware of?



It was something William and Harry initiated.


----------



## CeeJay

You know, quite honestly .. Harry could get off easy by not attending, since he could say that he is "supporting" his wife and their 2nd baby.  I just can't see William 'allowing' Meghan any time at this unveiling; yeah .. maybe a wreath or something, but to give a talk!?!? .. nope, don't think it will happen.  Could Harry then make a fuss and say that the BRF "refused" his wife's participation and (of course) use the race card to justify his comments? .. yup, sure .. he could .. but I'm not so sure that the Palace is going to continue to keep mum on these 2 constant lies anymore!


----------



## Hermes Zen

We can start keeping track of M’s personal jewelry collection as it grows. Here’s info of what she has already. I have no doubt H (via M’s demands) will/have gotten something for the birth of Lilibet. He did when Archie was born.
Enjoy looking at the beautiful pieces.

*Every Piece Of Jewellery Meghan And Kate Have Inherited From Princess Diana*

https://www.marieclaire.com.au/kate-middleton-meghan-markle-diana-jewellery


*All the jewellery Meghan Markle has been gifted or borrowed from the royal family*

_*How lovely of PC.* 

Cartier diamond tennis bracelet_
The Duchess sported a white gold Cartier diamond tennis bracelet on the first day of her Fiji tour, which is said to have been a wedding gift from Prince Charles. She also reportedly wore the bracelet the evening before her May 19 nuptials, along with to the 70th birthday of Prince Charles.  

https://www.vogue.com.au/fashion/ac...mage-gallery/86266c652b22e82e5ed4fab8d4dc2c7c


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Am I the only one who doesn’t understand why Diana, long divorced from Prince Charles and deceased, gets a statue?  Is it just because Wm & H want it, or are there statues of other “royal” moms I’m unaware of?



Diana was more than just a royal mom to many people. She was insanely popular, alive and dead.

Her sons wanted the statue as a tribute to her, which is fine, but that was before Hurricane Meghan blew in and destroyed their relationship. Now what should have been a nice but inconsequential event has become a big ordeal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> *Every Piece Of Jewellery Meghan And Kate Have Inherited From Princess Diana*



Oh how I hate sloppy journalism. None of them inherited anything, William and Harry did and then either gifted or loaned their wives pieces (I sure hope Harry was smart enough to loan them, I just don't think so).


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Toddler Harry cannot afford it if we are talking about multiple pieces   Their wealth is depleting FAST with no consistent sources of income. Whatever they said they were gonna do with Spotify, that still didn't happen



Don’t let the sugars hear you say they aren’t making gobs and gobs of money!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> _Cartier diamond tennis bracelet_
> The Duchess sported a white gold Cartier diamond tennis bracelet on the first day of her Fiji tour, which is said to have been a wedding gift from Prince Charles. She also reportedly wore the bracelet the evening before her May 19 nuptials, along with to the 70th birthday of Prince Charles.



Interesting. So where did the diamond bracelet (and matching earrings) she wore to the wedding ceremony come from? I'd have thought it could have been a gift from the groom, but this specific groom is very cheap with his own money and the bracelet alone is nearly 160000 Euros.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was something William and Harry initiated.


Thanks.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> We can start keeping track of M’s personal jewelry collection as it grows. Here’s info of what she has already. I have no doubt H (via M’s demands) will/have gotten something for the birth of Lilibet. He did when Archie was born.
> Enjoy looking at the beautiful pieces.
> 
> *Every Piece Of Jewellery Meghan And Kate Have Inherited From Princess Diana*
> 
> https://www.marieclaire.com.au/kate-middleton-meghan-markle-diana-jewellery
> 
> 
> *All the jewellery Meghan Markle has been gifted or borrowed from the royal family*
> 
> _*How lovely of PC.*
> 
> Cartier diamond tennis bracelet_
> The Duchess sported a white gold Cartier diamond tennis bracelet on the first day of her Fiji tour, which is said to have been a wedding gift from Prince Charles. She also reportedly wore the bracelet the evening before her May 19 nuptials, along with to the 70th birthday of Prince Charles.
> 
> https://www.vogue.com.au/fashion/ac...mage-gallery/86266c652b22e82e5ed4fab8d4dc2c7c



It's nice that both wives have inherited pieces that they can pass down to their girls (and boys). 

Even though I am so happy that most women (and men) buy their own jewellery and don't wait for gifts, I'm a big fan of heirloom jewellery. There really is something very magical about wearing something from my family. I even have the etched silver-topped canes my GGGrandfathers respectively owned (one ebony and the other maple).


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting. So where did the diamond bracelet (and matching earrings) she wore to the wedding ceremony come from? I'd have thought it could have been a gift from the groom, but this specific groom is very cheap with his own money and the bracelet alone is nearly 160000 Euros.


Is it the Cartier diamond bracelet from Charles you are think about?  One of the articles said he gave it to M as wedding gift.  Not sure if it included the matching earrings.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Diana was more than just a royal mom to many people. She was insanely popular, alive and dead.
> 
> Her sons wanted the statue as a tribute to her, which is fine, but that was before Hurricane Meghan blew in and destroyed their relationship. Now what should have been a nice but inconsequential event has become a big ordeal.


Thanks.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Don’t let the sugars hear you say they aren’t making gobs and gobs of money!!



Oh, yer, potencial billionaires.

_They_ may believe it. Whatever. 

More interesting to me is their tax status. Not particularly how much, but certainly to which country? 

H's diplomatic passport points to the UK, her (only) nationality and location suggests US.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Don’t let the sugars hear you say they aren’t making gobs and gobs of money!!



Instead of plates breaking, I bet they are down to breaking toilet bowls from their 16 bathrooms now


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Oh, yer, potencial billionaires.
> 
> _They_ may believe it. Whatever.
> 
> More interesting to me is their tax status. Not particularly how much, but certainly to which country?
> 
> H's diplomatic passport points to the UK, her (only) nationality and location suggests US.



If so, is he on record making all the money, and she, the world's most enlightened feminist, is supported by her husband so less taxes are paid to the IRS and CA State Franchise Tax Board???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Is it the Cartier diamond bracelet from Charles you are think about?  One of the articles said he gave it to M as wedding gift.  Not sure if it included the matching earrings.



No...the Charles bracelet is a simple tennis bracelet according to the article. Depending on size of the stones it is between 22000 and 45000 bucks. The one she wore to the ceremony is some elaborate design with brilliant and emerald or baguette cuts and costs 157000 Euros. She also has the matching earrings, she wore them for the evening reception.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I thought she had this one (€ 157000). 




But online sources say it's in fact this one, which is a modest €274000. No, I didn't add an accidental 0.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I thought she had this one (€ 157000).
> 
> View attachment 5112030
> 
> 
> But online sources say it's in fact this one, which is a modest €274000. No, I didn't add an accidental 0.
> 
> View attachment 5112031


----------



## Aimee3

Where oh where will she wear these pieces now.  Doubt she’ll be dining with heads of countries anymore.  They burned those bridges a while ago.
Hope the chickens like bling.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I thought she had this one (€ 157000).
> 
> View attachment 5112030
> 
> 
> But online sources say it's in fact this one, which is a modest €274000. No, I didn't add an accidental 0.
> 
> View attachment 5112031


YOU GOT ME CURIOUS!!  I did some searching and found this article ...

Markle's wedding day jewelry also included a Cartier bracelet worth $322,211, according to The Mail, and $80,000 Cartier earrings that were a gift from Prince Harry, W reports.




> https://www.insider.com/meghan-markle-jewelry-collection-worth-engagement-ring-tiara-photos-2018-6
> 
> *Meghan Markle now has more than $700,000 worth of jewelry — not including the $600,000 tiara she wore at her wedding*
> Katie Warren
> Jun 4, 2018, 10:29 AM
> 
> *Meghan Markle's jewelry collection is now worth more than $700,000, according to W Magazine.*
> *That's not counting the tiara loaned to her by the Queen for the royal wedding, which is worth more than $600,000, The Daily Mail reported.*
> *Markle's engagement ring, designed by Prince Harry, is reportedly worth at least $187,000.*
> *She has also worn a $322,211 bracelet and $80,000 earrings, both from Cartier. *


----------



## 1LV

Who’s the guy who declined an invitation to meet her?  He dodged a bullet, but she hit pay dirt.


----------



## TC1

The internet was killing me with the sword memes


----------



## jelliedfeels

Pivoine66 said:


> I'm afraid you might be right.
> I feel a little awkward. It would probably be more appropriate for me to keep a low profile. I am neither from the UK nor the US, I am from the EU. However, for me, the Queen represents everything one could wish for in terms of moral decency and fulfillment of duty and of dignity. And to me the number of narcissists, in all positions seems to be increasing. They seem - in my perception - to get away with far too much far too often. As a still idealist "we are one world", this behaviour of H's wife and the perception of her being a "role model" for so many still,  leaves me quite worried.


Don’t worry about that, you don’t have to be from anywhere in particular to enjoy a good gossip and to see a pair of snakes coming from a mile away  
I think a lot of people who aren’t as interested as us will just blandly agree with what seem like nice sentiments rather than think the pair are saying anything particularly profound or at least I hope! 


1LV said:


> Am I the only one who doesn’t understand why Diana, long divorced from Prince Charles and deceased, gets a statue?  Is it just because Wm & H want it, or are there statues of other “royal” moms I’m unaware of?


I know other people have addresses the fact that Diana is the royal family’s big seller and is massively more popular than Charles even now, but just out of interest, she’s not the only consort with a statue.
Queen Victoria also commemorated what a babe Albert was….








						Albert Memorial - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



I can’t decide whether this latest statue will be even uglier, as you can see, the bar is set pretty high 


lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised she hasn’t made Hazz buy her some serious jewelry to make up for the fact that she doesn’t have access to the BRF collection.





EverSoElusive said:


> Toddler Harry cannot afford it if we are talking about multiple pieces   Their wealth is depleting FAST with no consistent sources of income. Whatever they said they were gonna do with Spotify, that still didn't happen


Oh come on guys she’s got those  dainty chains off some famous woman from Instagram and um, an ugly pink sapphire - that’s evens isn’t it? They are billionaires after all not like the pathetic millionaire Queen 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I thought she had this one (€ 157000).
> 
> View attachment 5112030
> 
> 
> But online sources say it's in fact this one, which is a modest €274000. No, I didn't add an accidental 0.


Am I the only one who is underwhelmed by these? They both look kind of shoddily slapped together and basic….oh.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh come on guys she’s got those  dainty chains off some famous woman from Instagram and um, an ugly pink sapphire - that’s evens isn’t it? They are billionaires after all not like the pathetic millionaire Queen



MoM has the best and most royal jewelry collection  Ain't nobody can beat that.









Not.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Am I the only one who is underwhelmed by these? They both look kind of shoddily slapped together and basic….oh.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I thought she had this one (€ 157000).
> 
> View attachment 5112030
> 
> 
> But online sources say it's in fact this one, which is a modest* €274000*. No, I didn't add an accidental 0.
> 
> View attachment 5112031



For that money I'd want them to throw in the Vladimir Tiara too (please)


----------



## rose60610

Diana's statue no doubt has been in the works for a long time, when Meghan was actually popular and well liked. They probably thought it'd be a nice event with Diana's sons and pretty wives. Guess not. I wonder how many digs Harry will get in and how they affected his mental health. Living with Meghan surely he's learned how to make any event all about HIM. Think Elton John will be there to sing Candle in the Wind?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> YOU GOT ME CURIOUS!!  I did some searching and found this article ...
> 
> Markle's wedding day jewelry also included a Cartier bracelet worth $322,211, according to The Mail, and $80,000 Cartier earrings that were a gift from Prince Harry, W reports.



Oh wow, he splurged!

But also, they better not included the QUEEN's tiara in the round-up of the riches Raptor hoarded during her short career with the BRF.

ETA: the article refers to the ceremony earrings. I was talking about the reception earrings which seem to match the bracelet. He really went all out, didn't he.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Diana's statue no doubt has been in the works for a long time, when Meghan was actually popular and well liked. They probably thought it'd be a nice event with Diana's sons and pretty wives. Guess not. I wonder how many digs Harry will get in and how they affected his mental health. Living with Meghan surely he's learned how to make any event all about HIM. Think Elton John will be there to sing Candle in the Wind?



The planning for the statue predates Meghan. The earliest reference I've seen was the official announcement of it in February 2017. Harry would have met and been dating Meghan by then but their engagement was still several months away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Am I the only one who is underwhelmed by these? They both look kind of shoddily slapped together and basic….oh.



I actually prefer the cheaper one by far, but if I had that much money to spend on jewelry it would not be on any of these two pieces.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> The planning for the statue predates Meghan. The earliest reference I've seen was the official announcement of it in February 2017. Harry would have met and been dating Meghan by then but their engagement was still several months away.



Right, I saw that. Meghan probably figured from the get-go that she'd outshine everyone and be the star of the event. She'll still try to find a way to make it about her, even if she has to Zoom it in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Right, I saw that. Meghan probably figured from the get-go that she'd outshine everyone and be the star of the event. She'll still try to find a way to make it about her, even if she has to Zoom it in.



I'm not convinced she'll allow Harry to go. They have a BABY after all. Surely they will have their own Santa Barbara tribute that will be publicized to the hilt. My guess is it will be something incredibly cheesy which their fans will think is super sweet. Maybe they will release a video of little Archie saying how much he wuvs Grandma Diana even though he has no idea who she was.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle's Book is Awful, According to Critics
					

By nearly all accounts, Meghan Markle’s new children's book 'The Bench' lacks a good story and basic rhythm. But hey! It's still a best-seller.




					airmail.news
				






Spoiler: Finally, a sensible move.



*The Bench Strikes a Bum Note*
*Meghan Markle’s new book lacks a good story and basic rhythm. But, hey, it’s still a best-seller!*
Stuart Heritage
June 12, 2021

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Take it from me, publicizing a new children’s book is hard work. The newspapers ignore you, the bookstores ghettoize you, and, given the imbalance of the marketplace, you’ll have trouble finding shelf space among the acres of 30-year-old “classics” and scribblings by well-known people who aren’t actually writers.
So full marks to Meghan Markle, who this week launched her new children’s book, _The Bench,_ by embarking on a magnificent three-pronged media assault. If you need reminding … those prongs were:

1. Already being internationally renowned.

2. Naming her newborn daughter after two women even more internationally renowned than she is.

And …

3. Threatening to sue the BBC in a blaze of all-consuming fury, for what might genuinely count as the least consequential reason of all time.

Perhaps we should start with the last one, given that it is so berserk. On the Friday before last, Meghan gave birth to a daughter. Touchingly, the baby is named after her paternal grandmother and great-grandmother. Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor is a beautifully chosen name, invoking not only Prince Harry’s mother but also the childhood nickname of the Queen that was given to her by her grandfather George V, when she had trouble saying her full name. It’s a sweet and charmingly informal tribute that comes as an olive branch, cooling down the fraught hostility that has existed between the couple and the royal family since long before the Oprah interview. *Finally, a sensible move.*

Then, a few days later, the BBC’s _Today_ program innocuously happened to mention that Harry hadn’t sought permission from the Queen for the name. Which, again, is fine. Lots of children are named after their grandparents, and it isn’t necessarily something that has to be formally ratified beforehand. If anything, it’s a nice surprise.

But Prince Harry failed to see it like that. Instead, just 90 minutes after the BBC’s report, the couple’s quasi-journalist and quasi-mouthpiece Omid Scobie was telling the world that Harry called the Queen soon after the birth. Just in case that wasn’t enough, then came the lawyers. A furious missive from Schillings—Harry’s solicitors—accused the report of being “false and defamatory” and threatened the BBC with legal action.







According to _The New Statesman,_ “it is mind-boggling, really, how bad the book is.” 
It is the legal equivalent of setting your house on fire to get rid of an insect, not least because the BBC is sticking to its guns, adamant that its source is trustworthy. Because, really, who cares if the Queen knew about the name or not? You don’t. Nobody you know does. I don’t, and I’m being paid to write about it. It’s a nothing story that Prince Harry has attacked with a nuclear weapon, and as a result of his tantrum he looks even more petulant, whiny, and childish than ever before. If that is possible.
Still, the timing is impeccable. After all, Meghan’s book came out this week. Originating from a poem that Meghan wrote for Harry on Father’s Day, _The Bench_ is described as “a thoughtful and heartwarming read-aloud” that “beautifully captures the special relationship between father and son, as seen through a mother’s eyes.”

Why _The Bench_? It could be because Prince Harry and his son, Archie, have a special little bench to bond on. Or it could be an allusion to Napoleon’s quote: “A throne is only a bench covered in velvet.” Perhaps we’ll never know.



> A furious missive from Schillings—Harry’s solicitors—accused the report of being “false and defamatory” and threatened the BBC with legal action.


For once, the headlines might be helpful to her since, by all accounts, the book isn’t terrific. Despite being filled with very pretty watercolors by Caldecott-winning Christian Robinson, Meghan’s book has been roundly criticized by the press.

In what may count as its most positive review, _The Independent _noted that “the language and sentiment does feel like it’s aimed more at the adults reading than the children being read to,” which is generally the last thing that kids want in a book. _The Times _of London echoed the sentiment, calling it “a self-help manual for needy parents,” while adding that “it lacks the crucial ingredients for a successful tale for this age group: a good story and basic rhythm.”

_The Telegraph,_ meanwhile, pulled even fewer punches, using its one-star review to label it “a grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies.” Basically, an inauthentic and moralizing lecture.

_The New Statesman_ exclaimed that “it is mind-boggling, really, how bad the book is,” while the review in _The Irish Times—_written by a journalist who formerly worked in children’s publishing—forensically dismantled its narrative, its lack of consistency, its broken meter, its clumsy rhyming scheme, and its terrible ending. The review concludes with a weary sigh at the inevitability of Lilibet Diana inspiring a sequel, “which will be equally bad.”

Still, this is all beside the point, because the book is a success. At the time of this writing, _The Bench_ was Amazon’s fifth-best-selling children’s book, and Meghan has announced plans to off-load 2,000 copies to school libraries so that children everywhere can learn what bad poetry looks like. Perhaps we could all take something from Meghan’s P.R. shamanship. When my second children’s book comes out next year, I now realize that I have no choice but to angrily soil myself as noisily as possible in public. It seems to be working for the Sussexes.

Stuart Heritage is a Kent, U.K.–based Writer at Large for_ AIR MAIL. _His first children’s book is Jonathan the Magic Pony

Photo: Carl Recine/Reuters/Alamy (Harry and Meghan)


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I'm not convinced she'll allow Harry to go. They have a BABY after all. *Surely they will have their own Santa Barbara tribute that will be publicized to the hilt*. My guess is it will be something incredibly cheesy which their fans will think is super sweet. Maybe they will release a video of little Archie saying how much he wuvs Grandma Diana even though he has no idea who she was.


A tribute to her!  Not to be outdone, she probably already has a crew chiseling a statue of herself to be erected in the Montecito garden.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> A tribute to her!  Not to be outdone, she probably already has a crew chiseling a statue of herself to be erected in the Montecito garden.



I wouldn’t be at all surprised. If she had lived 70 years ago she would probably have a giant oil portrait of herself hanging in the foyer of the mansion so that it was the first thing anyone visiting would see. If they had visitors that is.


----------



## sdkitty

I started to read an article in VF.  It was about the royals and the trouble between Will & Harry.  Started off talking about all of Meghan's accomplishments before Harry.  Made her sound pretty good. Did you know she went on a USO tour in 2014?  Interesting to me as I doubt any of the soldiers knew who she was but I guess someone thought she was hot.   The article went on with basically a long story biased in favor of H&M.  I couldn't finish it.
I think they even implied that Will & Kate were bland or boring compared to H&M.
I'm not enjoying VF as much with the current editor.  She is all about POC, which is fine I guess.  But when it gets to the point where you are showing bias like that I don't like it.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn’t be at all surprised. If she had lived 70 years ago she would probably have a giant oil portrait of herself hanging in the foyer of the mansion so that it was the first thing anyone visiting would see. If they had visitors that is.


In the meantime she has the icky, to me, painting women are buying for their husbands and stans are hanging in school lockers or something like that. Can't find the post, we've been on power drive here recently, but someone shared it a few days ago.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I suspect the “secret support” comment was leaked by her as a threat to the RF, probably in a reaction to not being included.  They probably threatened something back, now that the gloves are off.  Hence, the retraction.  OR, the RF retracted the story by calling in favors and/or leaking some facts.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> In the meantime she has the icky, to me, painting women are buying for their husbands and stans are hanging in school lockers or something like that. Can't find the post, we've been on power drive here recently, but someone shared it a few days ago.



It was the one with the tiara/crown wasn’t it? I remember the t-shirts.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I started to read an article in VF.  It was about the royals and the trouble between Will & Harry.  Started off talking about all of Meghan's accomplishments before Harry.  Made her sound pretty good. Did you know she went on a USO tour in 2014?  Interesting to me as I doubt any of the soldiers knew who she was but I guess someone thought she was hot.   The article went on with basically a long story biased in favor of H&M.  I couldn't finish it.
> I think they even implied that Will & Kate were bland or boring compared to H&M.
> I'm not enjoying VF as much with the current editor.  She is all about POC, which is fine I guess.  But when it gets to the point where you are showing bias like that I don't like it.


VF is so pro-Methane that I don't bother to click any more.
Is that the same with Vogue now?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan Markle's Book is Awful, According to Critics
> 
> 
> By nearly all accounts, Meghan Markle’s new children's book 'The Bench' lacks a good story and basic rhythm. But hey! It's still a best-seller.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> airmail.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Finally, a sensible move.
> 
> 
> 
> *The Bench Strikes a Bum Note*
> *Meghan Markle’s new book lacks a good story and basic rhythm. But, hey, it’s still a best-seller!*
> Stuart Heritage
> June 12, 2021
> 
> Reading Time: 4 minutes
> 
> Take it from me, publicizing a new children’s book is hard work. The newspapers ignore you, the bookstores ghettoize you, and, given the imbalance of the marketplace, you’ll have trouble finding shelf space among the acres of 30-year-old “classics” and scribblings by well-known people who aren’t actually writers.
> So full marks to Meghan Markle, who this week launched her new children’s book, _The Bench,_ by embarking on a magnificent three-pronged media assault. If you need reminding … those prongs were:
> 
> 1. Already being internationally renowned.
> 
> 2. Naming her newborn daughter after two women even more internationally renowned than she is.
> 
> And …
> 
> 3. Threatening to sue the BBC in a blaze of all-consuming fury, for what might genuinely count as the least consequential reason of all time.
> 
> Perhaps we should start with the last one, given that it is so berserk. On the Friday before last, Meghan gave birth to a daughter. Touchingly, the baby is named after her paternal grandmother and great-grandmother. Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor is a beautifully chosen name, invoking not only Prince Harry’s mother but also the childhood nickname of the Queen that was given to her by her grandfather George V, when she had trouble saying her full name. It’s a sweet and charmingly informal tribute that comes as an olive branch, cooling down the fraught hostility that has existed between the couple and the royal family since long before the Oprah interview. *Finally, a sensible move.*
> 
> Then, a few days later, the BBC’s _Today_ program innocuously happened to mention that Harry hadn’t sought permission from the Queen for the name. Which, again, is fine. Lots of children are named after their grandparents, and it isn’t necessarily something that has to be formally ratified beforehand. If anything, it’s a nice surprise.
> 
> But Prince Harry failed to see it like that. Instead, just 90 minutes after the BBC’s report, the couple’s quasi-journalist and quasi-mouthpiece Omid Scobie was telling the world that Harry called the Queen soon after the birth. Just in case that wasn’t enough, then came the lawyers. A furious missive from Schillings—Harry’s solicitors—accused the report of being “false and defamatory” and threatened the BBC with legal action.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to _The New Statesman,_ “it is mind-boggling, really, how bad the book is.”
> It is the legal equivalent of setting your house on fire to get rid of an insect, not least because the BBC is sticking to its guns, adamant that its source is trustworthy. Because, really, who cares if the Queen knew about the name or not? You don’t. Nobody you know does. I don’t, and I’m being paid to write about it. It’s a nothing story that Prince Harry has attacked with a nuclear weapon, and as a result of his tantrum he looks even more petulant, whiny, and childish than ever before. If that is possible.
> Still, the timing is impeccable. After all, Meghan’s book came out this week. Originating from a poem that Meghan wrote for Harry on Father’s Day, _The Bench_ is described as “a thoughtful and heartwarming read-aloud” that “beautifully captures the special relationship between father and son, as seen through a mother’s eyes.”
> 
> Why _The Bench_? It could be because Prince Harry and his son, Archie, have a special little bench to bond on. Or it could be an allusion to Napoleon’s quote: “A throne is only a bench covered in velvet.” Perhaps we’ll never know.
> 
> 
> For once, the headlines might be helpful to her since, by all accounts, the book isn’t terrific. Despite being filled with very pretty watercolors by Caldecott-winning Christian Robinson, Meghan’s book has been roundly criticized by the press.
> 
> In what may count as its most positive review, _The Independent _noted that “the language and sentiment does feel like it’s aimed more at the adults reading than the children being read to,” which is generally the last thing that kids want in a book. _The Times _of London echoed the sentiment, calling it “a self-help manual for needy parents,” while adding that “it lacks the crucial ingredients for a successful tale for this age group: a good story and basic rhythm.”
> 
> _The Telegraph,_ meanwhile, pulled even fewer punches, using its one-star review to label it “a grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies.” Basically, an inauthentic and moralizing lecture.
> 
> _The New Statesman_ exclaimed that “it is mind-boggling, really, how bad the book is,” while the review in _The Irish Times—_written by a journalist who formerly worked in children’s publishing—forensically dismantled its narrative, its lack of consistency, its broken meter, its clumsy rhyming scheme, and its terrible ending. The review concludes with a weary sigh at the inevitability of Lilibet Diana inspiring a sequel, “which will be equally bad.”
> 
> Still, this is all beside the point, because the book is a success. At the time of this writing, _The Bench_ was Amazon’s fifth-best-selling children’s book, and Meghan has announced plans to off-load 2,000 copies to school libraries so that children everywhere can learn what bad poetry looks like. Perhaps we could all take something from Meghan’s P.R. shamanship. When my second children’s book comes out next year, I now realize that I have no choice but to angrily soil myself as noisily as possible in public. It seems to be working for the Sussexes.
> 
> Stuart Heritage is a Kent, U.K.–based Writer at Large for_ AIR MAIL. _His first children’s book is Jonathan the Magic Pony
> 
> Photo: Carl Recine/Reuters/Alamy (Harry and Meghan)


They may need to improve their sales pitch. Buy 1 book and get 1 free bench for your garden.


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> In the meantime she has the icky, to me, painting women are buying for their husbands and stans are hanging in school lockers or something like that. Can't find the post, we've been on power drive here recently, but someone shared it a few days ago.





Let me help.  Here is my post of that painting and t-shirts.  






						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> VF is so pro-Methane that I don't bother to click any more.
> Is that the same with Vogue now?


IDK...I get the actual VF magazine subscription....don't read Vogue


----------



## Chanbal

OW's new popular show: 'your truth'


----------



## Chanbal

What we do for a photo-op.


----------



## eunaddict

Chanbal said:


> OW's new popular show: 'your truth'




I think Oprah will do it. Having John Legend and Kris Jenner owe you favours isn't such a bad deal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> OW's new popular show: 'your truth'



This may be a new avenue of revenue for Oprah. With all the controversy drama that seems to be a constant now, she would have a never-ending supply of people who want to tell "their truth".


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I started to read an article in VF.  It was about the royals and the trouble between Will & Harry.  Started off talking about all of Meghan's accomplishments before Harry.  Made her sound pretty good. *Did you know she went on a USO tour in 2014?*  Interesting to me as I doubt any of the soldiers knew who she was but I guess someone thought she was hot.   The article went on with basically a long story biased in favor of H&M.  I couldn't finish it.
> I think they even implied that Will & Kate were bland or boring compared to H&M.
> I'm not enjoying VF as much with the current editor.  She is all about POC, which is fine I guess.  But when it gets to the point where you are showing bias like that I don't like it.


I remember when I read her Wiki bio, 2014 was when she started doing this non-profit work. I'm looking for the article which gave the timeline of when she instructed her PR people to remake her image. She wanted to get out of acting and into lifestyle programmes, and she wanted to be seen as a philanthropist/humanitarian. The video of MM awkward moments that was shared has footage of other performers on a USO tour seemingly edging away from her. Could be you are right and they had no clue who she was.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> OW's new popular show: 'your truth'



A lot depends on Oprah’s ego. If she has a messianic complex then she will believe that her golden touch will rehab any fallen person. Good luck with  Chrissy, Oprah.


----------



## Jayne1

I think Oprah will be meaner to Chrissy -- a little tougher. 

She's always that way with those she thinks are beneath her and have nothing to offer, other than an interview for ratings.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> IDK...I get the actual VF magazine subscription....don't read Vogue



UK Vogue is more like a young Elle now - not sure about US version. Anyway, online is actually better now, straight to the fashion shows and don't have to even browse the rest (which tends to just be puff pieces on celebs).


----------



## Hermes Zen

Short article regarding H going and M & children are not attending Diana's ceremony.  I've pasted all of it below.  

Also if true, Harry has been invited to a one-on-one lunch with *Queen Elizabeth.* “It’s a typically magnanimous gesture by Her Majesty,” a courtier said. “The lunch will be a chance for them to talk things through.”



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/06/meghan-markle-not-traveling-to-england
> 
> *Meghan Markle Won’t Join Prince Harry in England Next Month*
> *Despite speculation that the duchess, who welcomed daughter Lili on June 4, would join for a ceremony honoring Princess Diana, she is planning to remain in California.*
> June 16, 2021
> Though *Prince Harry* is flying to England to celebrate what would have been Princess Diana’s 60th birthday early next month, he reportedly won’t be joined by his wife, *Meghan Markle,* and their two children, *Archie* and *Lili.* Despite one report claiming that the duchess, who gave birth to daughter Lili on June 4, planned to accompany Harry on his trip, an insider told the _Daily Mirror_ that she is staying behind in California.
> “Meghan is not going to travel,” a source close to the couple told the tabloid. “She has just had a baby and Harry will travel alone.”
> On July 1, Harry will give a speech at a Kensington Palace ceremony unveiling the sculpture of Diana that he commissioned alongside *Prince William* back in 2017. William is reportedly planning to give a separate speech. According to the _Daily Mail__,_ Harry has also been invited to a one-on-one lunch with *Queen Elizabeth.* “It’s a typically magnanimous gesture by Her Majesty,” a courtier said. “The lunch will be a chance for them to talk things through.”
> When Harry returned to Windsor for Prince Philip’s funeral in April, Meghan also stayed behind at the couple’s estate in Montecito. If Meghan were to come along, it would be her first reunion with the royal family since the pair’s last official engagements at the palace in March 2020. The couple’s relationship with *Prince Charles* remains tense after Harry told *Oprah Winfrey* he thought his father and brother were “trapped,” though at a June 8 event at a BMW Mini factory, Charles said that the birth of Lili, his fifth grandchild, was “such happy news.”


----------



## doni

I find it a tad ironic that a book about fathers’ love is the bestseller of a writer who doesn’t talk to theirs...


----------



## doni

1LV said:


> Am I the only one who doesn’t understand why Diana, long divorced from Prince Charles and deceased, gets a statue?  Is it just because Wm & H want it, or are there statues of other “royal” moms I’m unaware of?



It is a her sons initiative. She is not being honored for being the ex-wife of Charles, but for being the mother of a (future) King. That is more than an honor in itself.

I think it makes sense Meghan is not going, she just had a baby. Which possibly comes handy as it avoids awkwardness. But whatever is going on, it is for Harry to take responsibility. Like the name Lilibet. Meghan may or not have realized that it might have been less than appropiate towards the Queen, but Harry should have known. It is his grandmother, he is the one who has been brought up as a royal, he is not 15, he is the only one responsible in my view.


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> Short article regarding H going and M & children are not attending Diana's ceremony.  I've pasted all of it below.
> 
> Also if true, Harry has been invited to a one-on-one lunch with *Queen Elizabeth.* “It’s a typically magnanimous gesture by Her Majesty,” a courtier said. “The lunch will be a chance for them to talk things through.”


Hope there are witnesses.


----------



## poopsie

Sharont2305 said:


> Hope there are witnesses.



And a tape/video recorder


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> I think it makes sense Meghan is not going, she just had a baby. Which possibly comes handy as it avoids awkwardness. But whatever is going on, it is for Harry to take responsibility. Like the name Lilibet. Meghan may or not have realized that it might have been less than appropiate towards the Queen, but Harry should have known. It is his grandmother, he is the one who has been brought up as a royal, he is not 15, he is the only one responsible in my view.



Unless Raptor is developmentally delayed I'm growing slightly tired of the "She couldn't possibly have known" narrative. Only a small percentage of her mishaps can be accounted to not having grown up royal or in the UK for that matter. The rest, like hijacking a childhood nickname or not ellbowing your husband in the stomach so you can go first is just common sense and basic manners.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn’t be at all surprised. If she had lived 70 years ago she would probably have a giant oil portrait of herself hanging in the foyer of the mansion so that it was the first thing anyone visiting would see. If they had visitors that is.


I personally want her to have one of herself in a shepherdess gown at the top of the dramatic staircase that her obsessive housekeeper polishes everyday - then she can haunt the house long after she’s gone  


xincinsin said:


> VF is so pro-Methane that I don't bother to click any more.
> Is that the same with Vogue now?


Well U.K. vogue has got themselves in something of a bind as they went so hard for her at the beginning but they do seek out a lot of royals for pieces so they seem to be just ignoring her existence ATM which I think is the safest strategy.


Chanbal said:


> OW's new popular show: 'your truth'



Honestly, Chrissy needs to get on the red table talk - Her and Jada trying to out-sex  each other and explain away their *****iness would be such a mess you couldn’t stop watching 

add on - I’ve learnt so much about trashy talk shows, jewellery and the constitution since joining this thread. It truly is the gift that keeps on giving.


Chanbal said:


> What we do for a photo-op.
> View attachment 5112304


Maybe I’m being overly critical but why go to kiss other people’s kids  at all? Seems a bit invasive. What’s wrong with a nice hug?


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I started to read an article in VF.  It was about the royals and the trouble between Will & Harry.  Started off talking about all of Meghan's accomplishments before Harry.  Made her sound pretty good. Did you know she went on a USO tour in 2014?  Interesting to me as I doubt any of the soldiers knew who she was but I guess someone thought she was hot.   The article went on with basically a long story biased in favor of H&M.  I couldn't finish it.
> I think they even implied that Will & Kate were bland or boring compared to H&M.
> I'm not enjoying VF as much with the current editor.  She is all about POC, which is fine I guess.  But when it gets to the point where you are showing bias like that I don't like it.


I agree, all this partisan identity politics is destructive.  The thing that gets me is that these media types say they want to promote ‘black excellence’ but there is nothing excellent about M - she’s just a bad actress who married a more famous person.

Meanwhile, there’s so many talented people trying to break into the mainstream who actually have creativity and something to say. They would absolutely capitalise on the publicity of VF and instead we have to watch H&M fumble every pass even when it’s handed to them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I personally want her to have one of herself in a shepherdess gown at the top of the dramatic staircase that her obsessive housekeeper polishes everyday - then she can haunt the house long after she’s gone



Like that scene in Harry Potter where Sirius' mother's portrait is moaning and b*tching and her elf has to appease her?


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I personally want her to have one of herself in a shepherdess gown at the top of the dramatic staircase that her obsessive housekeeper polishes everyday - then she can haunt the house long after she’s gone


Ugh! I'd read biblical undertones into it and cringe at the thought of her leading the global flock to the knacker's yard.

If she had gone to the statue unveiling, do you think she would have cosplayed Diana again? 
Maybe now we will get a posed pic of her with Archie or babe in Montecito that will remind everyone of one of Diana's pics with Harry, and the media sheep will all go "sweet nod" again


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Maybe now we will get a posed pic of her with Archie or babe in Montecito that will remind everyone of one of Diana's pics with Harry, and the media sheep will all go "sweet nod" again



She's probably waiting for some glossy magazine offering big bucks for a special spread. And then there will be a little leak to the press how Mother Teresa donated that money (obviously into her own pocket, but nobody will ever know).


----------



## needlv

She has to leak something during the statue unveiling.  She had the details of the wreath leaked during PP”s funeral to make it all about her.

she isn’t going to miss an opportunity about Diana to turn into a MM moment...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today’s Word of the Day - cannot make this stuff up!









						Word of the Day: Annus Mirabilis
					

To British poet John Dryden, the 'year of wonders' was 1666. That was the year of a great British naval victory over the Dutch, as well as the date of the great London fire. When he titled his 1667




					www.merriam-webster.com
				




*Definition*
1 : to make a pillaging or destructive raid on : assault
2 : to force to move along by harassing
3 : to torment by or as if by constant attack

*Did You Know?*
Was there once a warlike man named Harry who is the source for the English verb the name mirrors? One particularly belligerent Harry does come to mind: William Shakespeare once described how "famine, sword, and fire" accompanied "the warlike Harry," England's King Henry the Fifth. But neither this king nor any of his namesakes are the source for the verb harry. Rather, harry (or a word resembling it) has been a part of English for as long as there has been anything that could be called English. It took the form hergian in Old English and harien in Middle English, passing through numerous variations before finally settling into its modern spelling. The word's Old English ancestors are related to Old High German words heriōn ("to devastate or plunder") and heri("host, army").


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Ugh! I'd read biblical undertones into it and cringe at the thought of her leading the global flock to the knacker's yard.
> 
> If she had gone to the statue unveiling, do you think she would have cosplayed Diana again?
> Maybe now we will get a posed pic of her with Archie or babe in Montecito that will remind everyone of one of Diana's pics with Harry, and the media sheep will all go "sweet nod" again


Oh gosh you know she would probably have worn the revenge dress outfit or something but yes we’re probably going to get a ‘sweet’ picture - you know merchandising! merchandising! where the real money  is made! Also if the event takes place in London she has to put up with the evil British tabloids making money from their appearance rather than their US lapdogs


needlv said:


> She has to leak something during the statue unveiling.  She had the details of the wreath leaked during PP”s funeral to make it all about her.
> 
> she isn’t going to miss an opportunity about Diana to turn into a MM moment...


Do I foresee ‘calligraphic’ notes to Diana being launched into heaven by a surprise dove release situated conveniently near William?
How was she to know those birds had been fed nothing but hot sauce for days prior?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> A lot depends on Oprah’s ego. If she has a messianic complex then she will believe that her golden touch will rehab any fallen person. Good luck with  Chrissy, Oprah.


Someone noticed that O and Gayle did not post public congratulations about the birth of Lili, lying low ???
Maybe they are rethinking their role in what is nearly a toxic BRF matter


----------



## lanasyogamama

Looks like MM bought herself a NYT Bestseller title.


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> What we do for a photo-op.
> View attachment 5112304


She’s kissing her own thumb.  No way is she going to let her hallowed lips touch some messy kid.


----------



## Chanbal

doni said:


> I find it a tad ironic that a book about fathers’ love is the bestseller of a writer who doesn’t talk to theirs...


This is their motto and it says it all: Pure Hypocrisy!


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> And a tape/video recorder


One will probably be in Ginger's pocket...


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like MM bought herself a NYT Bestseller title.


You are right! "Model a new world" with that mediocre book... 
*Meghan Markle reveals VERY lofty ideas for her new children's book The Bench claiming it could help 'model a new world' and shows 'another side of masculinity' as she thanks readers for making it a New York Times bestseller*

*Duchess has posted message to Archewell website to thank fans for support *
*Said that the 'other side of masculinity' shown in her book can help to shape a new world *
*The Bench is number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books *
*Book was inspired by a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born*
*£12.99 children's book explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'*
*It was the UK's best-selling picture book after being released on June 8 but didn't make the overall Top 50*
*However experts said book could still make fortune by being sold worldwide in English and other languages *









						Meghan Markle says The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity'
					

In a statement on the Archewell website, the Duchess said the poem 'began as a love letter to my husband and son'. It has topped The New York Times Bestseller list for children's picture books.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aimee3

doni said:


> I find it a tad ironic that a book about fathers’ love is the bestseller of a writer who doesn’t talk to theirs...


You can’t make this stuff up!  The truth is stranger than fiction was never more true.


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> You are right! "Model a new world" with that mediocre book...
> *Meghan Markle reveals VERY lofty ideas for her new children's book The Bench claiming it could help 'model a new world' and shows 'another side of masculinity' as she thanks readers for making it a New York Times bestseller*
> 
> *Duchess has posted message to Archewell website to thank fans for support *
> *Said that the 'other side of masculinity' shown in her book can help to shape a new world *
> *The Bench is number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books *
> *Book was inspired by a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born*
> *£12.99 children's book explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'*
> *It was the UK's best-selling picture book after being released on June 8 but didn't make the overall Top 50*
> *However experts said book could still make fortune by being sold worldwide in English and other languages *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity'
> 
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website, the Duchess said the poem 'began as a love letter to my husband and son'. It has topped The New York Times Bestseller list for children's picture books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Such a scam ‍SMH. At this level of hypocrisy and faking intelligence she’s on par with Ukrainian president. How sad is  that “masses” make such characters rise to the top.


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> You are right! "Model a new world" with that mediocre book...
> *Meghan Markle reveals VERY lofty ideas for her new children's book The Bench claiming it could help 'model a new world' and shows 'another side of masculinity' as she thanks readers for making it a New York Times bestseller*
> 
> *Duchess has posted message to Archewell website to thank fans for support *
> *Said that the 'other side of masculinity' shown in her book can help to shape a new world *
> *The Bench is number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books *
> *Book was inspired by a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born*
> *£12.99 children's book explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'*
> *It was the UK's best-selling picture book after being released on June 8 but didn't make the overall Top 50*
> *However experts said book could still make fortune by being sold worldwide in English and other languages *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity'
> 
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website, the Duchess said the poem 'began as a love letter to my husband and son'. It has topped The New York Times Bestseller list for children's picture books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk






Word salad!!!

Does Oprah still have a book club? Just curious if the “bestie” will help out (but can’t imagine why she would).


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> You are right! "Model a new world" with that mediocre book...
> *Meghan Markle reveals VERY lofty ideas for her new children's book The Bench claiming it could help 'model a new world' and shows 'another side of masculinity' as she thanks readers for making it a New York Times bestseller*
> 
> *Duchess has posted message to Archewell website to thank fans for support *
> *Said that the 'other side of masculinity' shown in her book can help to shape a new world *
> *The Bench is number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books *
> *Book was inspired by a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born*
> *£12.99 children's book explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'*
> *It was the UK's best-selling picture book after being released on June 8 but didn't make the overall Top 50*
> *However experts said book could still make fortune by being sold worldwide in English and other languages *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity'
> 
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website, the Duchess said the poem 'began as a love letter to my husband and son'. It has topped The New York Times Bestseller list for children's picture books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> However experts said book could still make fortune by being sold worldwide in English and other languages


I feel bad for the poor translators having to make sense of this refuse.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5112635
> 
> 
> Word salad!!!
> 
> Does Oprah still have a book club? Just curious if the “bestie” will help out (but can’t imagine why she would).


The company where I work did a TV commercial to drum up support for our adopted charity. I was very proud when I listened critically to what the spokesperson was saying and heard no word salad. He didn't spout empty pretty phrases. Not once did he use Methane's pet keywords like inclusivity and compassion.


----------



## rose60610

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5112635
> 
> 
> Word salad!!!
> 
> Does Oprah still have a book club? Just curious if the “bestie” will help out (but can’t imagine why she would).



"...another side of masculinity" ???? You mean training your husband to take one in the gut every time you want to get in front of him and making him insult and alienate his whole family?  Turning your husband into a door mat after you pilfer all you can from his family, then whine about not getting even more money?  Making him stop hunting with the boys so he can stay home and drink oat milk and talk to rescue chickens? 

I think I'll take a pass.


----------



## duna

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5112635
> 
> 
> Word salad!!!
> 
> Does Oprah still have a book club? Just curious if the “bestie” will help out (but can’t imagine why she would).



The hypocrisy has NO LIMITS!!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very positive energy from Peter Phillips 
‘Does he need his own thread?
Zara looks lovely, too. 








						Peter Phillips looks cheerful with Natalie Pinkham at Royal Ascot
					

The Queen's eldest grandson Peter Phillips, 43,appeared to be in good spirits today as he attended Ladies Day at Royal Ascot alongside sister Zara and F1 presenter Natalie Pinkham




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				







Happy days:


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> You are right! "Model a new world" with that mediocre book...
> *Meghan Markle reveals VERY lofty ideas for her new children's book The Bench claiming it could help 'model a new world' and shows 'another side of masculinity' as she thanks readers for making it a New York Times bestseller*
> 
> *Duchess has posted message to Archewell website to thank fans for support *
> *Said that the 'other side of masculinity' shown in her book can help to shape a new world *
> *The Bench is number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books *
> *Book was inspired by a poem Meghan wrote for Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born*
> *£12.99 children's book explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'*
> *It was the UK's best-selling picture book after being released on June 8 but didn't make the overall Top 50*
> *However experts said book could still make fortune by being sold worldwide in English and other languages *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity'
> 
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website, the Duchess said the poem 'began as a love letter to my husband and son'. It has topped The New York Times Bestseller list for children's picture books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



One word, *DELUSIONAL*.


----------



## zen1965

Goodness, she is so full of herself.
Anybody in his right mind sees that this „poem“ is utterly cringeworthy. If this was the best I could come up with in form of a love letter I would crawl under a rock. While this talentless ex-actress seems to think she is the reincarnation of Sylvia Plath…
Despicable. And infuriating.
Instead of droning on and on about compassion, universal love and service she‘d better closely inspect the state of her family relations.


----------



## lanasyogamama

zen1965 said:


> Goodness, she is so full of herself.
> Anybody in his right mind sees that this „poem“ is utterly cringeworthy. If this was the best I could come up with in form of a love letter I would crawl under a rock. While this talentless ex-actress seems to think she is the reincarnation of Sylvia Plath…
> Despicable. And infuriating.
> Instead of droning on and on about compassion, universal love and service she‘d better closely inspect the state of her family relations.


Fun fact: Sylvia Plath grew up down the street from my house.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

zen1965 said:


> Goodness, she is so full of herself.
> Anybody in his right mind sees that this „poem“ is utterly cringeworthy. If this was the best I could come up with in form of a love letter I would crawl under a rock. While this talentless ex-actress seems to think she is the reincarnation of Sylvia Plath…
> Despicable. And infuriating.
> Instead of droning on and on about compassion, universal love and service she‘d better closely inspect the state of her family relations.



What, have you never had tears of great joy?


----------



## Hermes Zen

M always has to add something about her!    Wish for once she doesn't and leave it about others and their accomplishments.

Love cats and dogs ... anything furry.   *Have a great day everyone!*

M article and quote from it - 

'Meghan concluded her note by highlighting some of the positive aspects 2020 provided, such as a heightened sense of community and closeness with loved ones.'



> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...ghan-markle-reflects-on-2020-in-mayhew-essay/
> 
> *Meghan Markle Calls 2020 a Year of "Community and Connection" in a New Essay*
> *The Duchess of Sussex penned a powerful letter for one of her dearest patronages.*
> By Bianca Betancourt
> Jun 17 2021, 12:13 pm EDT


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I started to read an article in VF.  It was about the royals and the trouble between Will & Harry.  Started off talking about all of Meghan's accomplishments before Harry.  Made her sound pretty good. Did you know she went on a USO tour in 2014?  Interesting to me as I doubt any of the soldiers knew who she was but I guess someone thought she was hot.   The article went on with basically a long story biased in favor of H&M.  I couldn't finish it.
> I think they even implied that Will & Kate were bland or boring compared to H&M.
> I'm not enjoying VF as much with the current editor.  She is all about POC, which is fine I guess.  But when it gets to the point where you are showing bias like that I don't like it.





xincinsin said:


> I remember when I read her Wiki bio, 2014 was when she started doing this non-profit work. I'm looking for the article which gave the timeline of when she instructed her PR people to remake her image. She wanted to get out of acting and into lifestyle programmes, and she wanted to be seen as a philanthropist/humanitarian. The video of MM awkward moments that was shared has footage of other performers on a USO tour seemingly edging away from her. Could be you are right and they had no clue who she was.


.. and did you see the video of her at that USO show?!?!?!?  OMG ... talk about awkward for sure .. she just kept on looking around at the other folks and NONE of them seemed to be interested in engaging her!!!  It made me think that I betcha she pulled one of her "Princess Biatch" routines as was reported when she worked on Suits!  Seriously, she looks SO out-of-place ..


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> Honestly, Chrissy needs to get on the red table talk - Her and Jada trying to out-sex  each other and explain away their *****iness would be such a mess you couldn’t stop watching


I agree with this because I don't think that Jada would take her sh!t, and even more so .. Jada's mother!!!  I used to actually kind of like Chrissy a while back, but now?!!? .. WOW, she truly is a mega-league a$$hole!  IMO .. she needs to just stay in her house and STFU and get off of all social media!


----------



## Chanbal

OW is a "godmother by default", how nice. Are there any guesses on the "something really special"? 

_When asked about the rumours, she said, "I don't need to be a godmother, I'm a godmother by default." 

"I'm a neighbour, I'm a friend and all that, you probably need someone younger to be the godmother!"

She also said she "loved" the name Lilibet Diana and would "*send them something really special for Father's Day".*_









						Oprah Winfrey rejects Lilibet Diana's godmother role
					

OPRAH Winfrey brushed off questions about becoming Lilibet Diana's godmother, saying she is already "a godmother by default" to the newborn baby girl.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is so weird to me. In Germany, for father's day you give a gift to your actual father and your baby daddy, that's it.

I just hope Raptor doesn't write the poor guy another poem.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very positive energy from Peter Phillips
> ‘Does he need his own thread?
> Zara looks lovely, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peter Phillips looks cheerful with Natalie Pinkham at Royal Ascot
> 
> 
> The Queen's eldest grandson Peter Phillips, 43,appeared to be in good spirits today as he attended Ladies Day at Royal Ascot alongside sister Zara and F1 presenter Natalie Pinkham
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5112744
> 
> 
> Happy days:
> 
> View attachment 5112745



was Natalie Pinkham the one that H used to cheat on Chelsey with??


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so weird to me. In Germany, for father's day you give a gift to your actual father and your baby daddy, that's it.
> 
> I just hope Raptor doesn't write the poor guy another poem.


same in the US....I never heard of a friend giving a father's day gift


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> same in the US....I never heard of a friend giving a father's day gift



I’m thinking it’s fake. Oprah was in the news this week promoting her network’s show on black dads and announcing her current book club selection (spoiler: it’s not The Bench). There’s nothing in the US media about her sending them anything for Father’s Day.


----------



## sdkitty

we are all so fortunate to have them model what a person - man or woman - should be
Meghan Markle Sends A Message To Supporters After 'The Bench' Hits #1 | HuffPost


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> same in the US....I never heard of a friend giving a father's day gift


She has a lot of money to burn I guess.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> we are all so fortunate to have them model what a person - man or woman - should be
> Meghan Markle Sends A Message To Supporters After 'The Bench' Hits #1 | HuffPost



Yuck, I’m not surprised Huffington Post is in the tank for them but do they have to be so obsequious? At least have the decency to pretend you aren’t hopelessly biased.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yuck, I’m not surprised Huffington Post is in the tank for them but do they have to be so obsequious? At least have the decency to pretend you aren’t hopelessly biased.


well, in their defense, they are quoting what she said - not giving their opinion
Don't get me wrong - I would LOVE to see more criticism of these two grifters


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, in their defense, they are quoting what she said - not giving their opinion
> Don't get me wrong - I would LOVE to see more criticism of these two grifters



Yes, but in what way is it news? I can understand the magazine, tabloid, and gossip sites using it, they live for that stuff. But a celebrity thanking her fans for buying her book isn’t news by any definition.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so weird to me. In Germany, for father's day you give a gift to your actual father and your baby daddy, that's it.
> 
> I just hope Raptor doesn't write the poor guy another poem.


The couch, the chair, the rocking chair... I bet she will write another best seller. I fee sorry for the people that buy that crap.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> The couch, the chair, the rocking chair... I bet she will write another best seller. I fee sorry for the people that buy that crap.




She should just write about The Coffin. Maybe The Mausoleum is more to her taste


----------



## needlv

Lol.


----------



## sdkitty

Just had ET on...they were saying Meghan won't be going to the statue ceremony.  they called her Meghan Markle.  maybe there is hope.


----------



## Chanbal

Auntie OW is already promoting the future Pulitzer Prize winner.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Auntie OW is already promoting the future Pulitzer Prize winner.
> View attachment 5113350



How do you get on that list? Because I thought Archewell announced that it had purchased 2000 books to give to libraries etc. surely that’s bumping sales herself....

And how narrow is the topic/ category of which she is the “best seller”?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> we are all so fortunate to have them model what a person - man or woman - should be
> Meghan Markle Sends A Message To Supporters After 'The Bench' Hits #1 | HuffPost



On FB, they prefaced the article with "What Meghan has to say after her newest success". As if she's harvesting milestones left and right


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What, have you never had tears of great joy?


Only when reading this thread.


Hermes Zen said:


> M always has to add something about her!    Wish for once she doesn't and leave it about others and their accomplishments.
> 
> Love cats and dogs ... anything furry.   *Have a great day everyone!*
> 
> M article and quote from it -
> 
> 'Meghan concluded her note by highlighting some of the positive aspects 2020 provided, such as a heightened sense of community and closeness with loved ones.'


What happened to those beloved dogs of hers? Probably roaming the grounds like Cujo.


CeeJay said:


> I agree with this because I don't think that Jada would take her sh!t, and even more so .. Jada's mother!!!  I used to actually kind of like Chrissy a while back, but now?!!? .. WOW, she truly is a mega-league a$$hole!  IMO .. she needs to just stay in her house and STFU and get off of all social media!


Oh I don’t think the red table crew would be interested in rehabilitating Chrissy at all! . (I don’t think anyone wants to take on that particular Herculean labour)
The dream is to get the John legend ‘escaping the hidden monster’ interview 


sdkitty said:


> same in the US....I never heard of a friend giving a father's day gift


Well not unless you are sharing more than recipes


----------



## Lodpah

I'm getting more embarrassed for her every day. Her thirst is so real. I think her PR is going to bankrupt them. That USO tour is so cringe . . . the dude with the air drum just totally ignores her. Yawn . . . I guess if you have to work so hard, i.e., paying to be relevant says everything. 

BTW, when is the unveiling?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5112635
> 
> 
> Word salad!!!
> 
> Does Oprah still have a book club? Just curious if the “bestie” will help out (but can’t imagine why she would).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Leaving you with this gem:



> The Queen is playing a dangerous game here. The popularity of the British Royal Family relies to a large extent on its connection to Meghan and Harry. If the Sussex Family decide to sever ties the majority of the global community will likely follow them.



I'm not sure if I fear for those people or if I'm jealous they are able to warp their reality like this


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Leaving you with this gem:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if I fear for those people or if I'm jealous they are able to warp their reality like this


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Oprah part didn't interest me all that much, but she has a thing or two to say about Harry's relationship with the BRF (mainly Charles and Kate), the dynamics of that unholy marriage, and Harry path down mental illness. It does sound plausible, and it's not pretty.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Leaving you with this gem:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if I fear for those people or if I'm jealous they are able to warp their reality like this


I'm sure Methane and Hazard firmly believe that they are the under-appreciated stars of the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Oprah part didn't interest me all that much, but she has a thing or two to say about Harry's relationship with the BRF (mainly Charles and Kate), the dynamics of that unholy marriage, and Harry path down mental illness. It does sound plausible, and it's not pretty.




The comments  The one about this birth via surrogate or adoption. _Since the birth mother has 6 months to change her mind, no photos of the baby can be taken._ Another commenter said they want to christen this baby at the Palace, but were told no.

Wow! These two really know how to generate the rumors, especially during their ‘family time’.  Haaaa.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW did Harry really say Charles will never be around his kids?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> BTW, when is the unveiling?



Which unveiling? You have to be more specific. That could refer to baby Lilibet, the Diana statue, or Meghan’s “post-pregnancy” body.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW did Harry really say Charles will never be around his kids?



I think it's an interpretation/decoding of word salad pickings/stream of consciousness that H meant as both crapiola for the masses and/or a thinly disguised threat to a few. 

“He’s been through something similar. He knows what pain feels like. And Archie is his grandson. I will always love him, but there is a lot of hurt that has happened.”

When people can't talk in straight lines everything is open to interpretation - good and bad


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Which unveiling? You have to be more specific. That could refer to baby Lilibet, the Diana statue, or Meghan’s “post-pregnancy” body.



Post-pregnancy?


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I'm getting more embarrassed for her every day. Her thirst is so real. I think her PR is going to bankrupt them. That USO tour is so cringe . . . the dude with the air drum just totally ignores her. Yawn . . . I guess if you have to work so hard, i.e., paying to be relevant says everything.
> 
> BTW, when is the unveiling?


I hate to watch videos of her but now you have be curious about the USO thing


----------



## Icyjade

I actually feel really sorry for the two kids. With a narcissist mum and an unstable dad, it will be a very difficult childhood for them.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments  The one about this birth via surrogate or adoption. _Since the birth mother has 6 months to change her mind, no photos of the baby can be taken._ Another commenter said they want to christen this baby at the Palace, but were told no.
> 
> Wow! These two really know how to generate the rumors, especially during their ‘family time’.  Haaaa.


christening at Palace ? 
Honestly, H&M are now royals like (of similar level to) Zara and Mike , Beatrice and Edo, Eugenia and Jack … 
no one has publicized plans to christen August or Lucas, Lily’s christening is no big deal anymore, a private thing …


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everything we know about the Princess Diana's statue unveiling on July 1
					






					honey.nine.com.au


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Post-pregnancy?



Well... someone was pregnant and Meghan wants to look good.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Well... someone was pregnant and Meghan wants to look good.



‘Post-surgery - rumor is she had a full body lift, maybe just a tummy-tuck.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> christening at Palace ?
> Honestly, H&M are now royals like (of similar level to) Zara and Mike , Beatrice and Edo, Eugenia and Jack …
> no one has publicized plans to christen August or Lucas, Lily’s christening is no big deal anymore, a private thing …



H&M will make certain it is indeed a bigger than big deal because because *they are the most important people on the planet.  *We all need to remember that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If true, how silly to say it a few days before H heads over there.









						Meghan Markle WILL return to UK next year, friend Omid Scobie reveals
					

Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes' biography Finding Freedom, was speaking at an event at the Foreign Press Association in London where he made more incendiary comments.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





*When asked about claims of Harry's racist relative, Mr Scobie said there several chats about Archie's skin*
*He said the couple began to feel 'well it's not just this one person, it's others as well and it becomes a much bigger issue' *






Mr Scobie said that the Queen's statement was designed to make people question the Sussexes' account and did not go far enough to condemn racism


----------



## marietouchet

sorry we must have been posting at same time … and agree … why say this just before the statue hoopla

Oh dear they are not letting go of this racism claim …  now it is several people …. They made their point, this will not help get to any reconciliation ..

first law of holes: if you are in one,  stop digging

who cares about her travel plans for next year … I am not marking my calendar yet

Meghan Markle WILL return to UK next year, friend Omid Scobie reveals











						Meghan Markle WILL return to UK next year, friend Omid Scobie reveals
					

Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes' biography Finding Freedom, was speaking at an event at the Foreign Press Association in London where he made more incendiary comments.




					mol.im


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> sorry we must have been posting at same time …
> 
> Oh dear they are not letting go of this racism claim …  now it is several people …. They made their point, this will not help get to any reconciliation ..
> 
> first law of holes: if you are in one,  stop digging
> 
> who cares about her travel plans for next year … I am not marking my calendar yet
> 
> Meghan Markle WILL return to UK next year, friend Omid Scobie reveals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle WILL return to UK next year, friend Omid Scobie reveals
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie, who wrote the Sussexes' biography Finding Freedom, was speaking at an event at the Foreign Press Association in London where he made more incendiary comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


the whole thing with them is so ridiculous....she (the z-list cable actress) got her huge wedding with the long veil over her face, charles walking her down the aisle....she liked that just fine....liked becoming a household name.  but everything wasn't perfect so now they are in the position of having to "work" to keep themselves famous/relevant.  
I can hardly wait for the day when the US media decides they are boring and irrelevant.


----------



## bag-mania

She is never going back. I don't care what she has her little lapdog Scobie tell the press.


----------



## Aimee3

M@Marie Touché just love that line: priceless!
<First rule of holes: if you’re in one, stop digging!>

since everything the dastardly duo say is a lie, they really need to write the lies down so they can keep them straight.
First “m” wasn’t present for the skin color comment and heard about it from “h” and now there were several conversations about it???


----------



## gracekelly

They are rehashing the racism claims and magnifying them because they have nothing else currently. Kate came out with her new Centre for Early Childhood and they had to come up with something to draw attention.   I also noticed that the photo used of Scobie in the DM had him with a significantly darker skin  than his standard photo with alabaster complexion.   Very curious  that he has referred to himself as a PoC as he is half Iranian and half Scottish.  Am I missing something?


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so weird to me. In Germany, for father's day you give a gift to your actual father and your baby daddy, that's it.
> 
> I just hope Raptor doesn't write the poor guy another poem.


It's the same here, not sure why Oprah is sending them something .. unless she is, indeed, the Godmother of Lili .. which wouldn't surprise me one bit given Meghan's NEED to get attached to people like Oprah.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I hate to watch videos of her but now you have be curious about the USO thing


Worth a look. Even worse than the similar one where from the World Cup where Serena's Mom is ignoring her as Methane ends up talking to herself and gesturing to nothingness. In the USO one she looks adrift, like someone with really bad BO, or a repulsive personality, no one is even acknowledging her, not even standing close enough to get one of her infamous elbow jabs.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Post-surgery - rumor is she had a full body lift, maybe just a tummy-tuck.


I had to have one post Hernia repair (the 5th one in a 2-3 year timeframe!) .. and let me tell you, post-op?!?! .. it hurts like hell!!!  Plus, the a-hole Surgeon that I had eff'd mine up big-time such that it took an entire year for one opening (he didn't stitch it up correctly) to close .. and I still have a huge scar (basically a dark 'hole' of sorts at my bottom abdomen).  I know a lot of women do it, that and a boob-lift at the same time, but man .. the pain is epic!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> They are rehashing the racism claims and magnifying them because they have nothing else currently. Kate came out with her new Centre for Early Childhood and they had to come up with something to draw attention.   I also noticed that the photo used of Scobie in the DM had him with a significantly darker skin  than his standard photo with alabaster complexion.   Very curious  that he has referred to himself as a PoC as he is half Iranian and half Scottish.  Am I missing something?
> 
> View attachment 5113901


This was really botched surgery, not only is one eyebrow higher, one lid is droopier. And the pancake make up fades away at the neckline. He needs to adjust his scarf, maybe Prince William could give him a lesson.


----------



## CeeJay

Hmmmm .. well, this is interesting, and rightfully so if (indeed) Netflix and Spotify ponied up that $$$$$ beforehand!!!  I would laugh my a$$ off if they get sued and have to return that money!  
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ify-just-35-minutes-content-far-18m-deal.html


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> They are rehashing the racism claims and magnifying them because they have nothing else currently. Kate came out with her new Centre for Early Childhood and they had to come up with something to draw attention.   I also noticed that the photo used of Scobie in the DM had him with a significantly darker skin  than his standard photo with alabaster complexion.   Very curious  that he has referred to himself as a PoC as he is half Iranian and half Scottish.  Am I missing something?
> 
> View attachment 5113901


Seriously?!?! .. since when do Persians consider themselves PoC?  I have tons of Persian friends out here in LA and never once have any of them stated that they are PoC!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Seriously?!?! .. since when do Persians consider themselves PoC?  I have tons of Persian friends out here in LA and never once have any of them stated that they are PoC!


well, I don't know if they consider themselves POC but I had a Persian friend (dark skinned from India) and I witnessed racism toward her at least a couple of times when we were together.  It was a real eye opener for me.  I mean overt racism.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I had to have one post Hernia repair (the 5th one in a 2-3 year timeframe!) .. and let me tell you, post-op?!?! .. it hurts like hell!!!  Plus, the a-hole Surgeon that I had eff'd mine up big-time such that it took an entire year for one opening (he didn't stitch it up correctly) to close .. and I still have a huge scar (basically a dark 'hole' of sorts at my bottom abdomen).  I know a lot of women do it, that and a boob-lift at the same time, but man .. the pain is epic!


what is a full body lift anyway?  tummy, breasts? buttocks?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Auntie OW is already promoting the future Pulitzer Prize winner.


Seriously, what is in it for Oprah?

She got her media attention and clicks with the interview.

Isn't she a smart woman? Can't she see through bullsh*t?  Aren't there better and more deserving personalities to champion?


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Seriously?!?! .. since when do Persians consider themselves PoC?  I have tons of Persian friends out here in LA and never once have any of them stated that they are PoC!



I suppose it depends on where they live.

My mother's Zoroastrian Persian friends wouldn't call themselves PoC either, but mine (half-Sahih, half-Bahai and call themselves British-Iranian) would.

PoC is just becoming an updated version of 'ethnic minority' (IMO EM is actually less problematic).


And what a way to address a duchess! It should be the Duchess of Sussex.

We have better Royal commentators on this thread, and he gets paid for his clap-trap (presumably)

Still, good to know M and her army of PR could only get one person to interview her about her certifiable (sic) book


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what is a full body lift anyway?  tummy, breasts? buttocks?



It's when you throw away all your Moonbumps at once


----------



## EverSoElusive

Here's proof for future reference just in case Harry says he never gets to go into a pool as a child    Swipe left to see the second picture of him with Will and Charles. He's smiling and not very "trapped".


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> well, I don't know if they consider themselves POC but I had a Persian friend (dark skinned from India) and I witnessed racism toward her at least a couple of times when we were together.  It was a real eye opener for me.  I mean overt racism.


Oh trust me, I've seen it as well .. and what really surprised me, is that my African-American friend is a BIG Man .. at 6'8" and a weight of over 300 lbs (he's not fat .. he's solid as heck).  I have to give him credit, coming from a military background (his Dad was a General in the Air Force), he kept his cool .. I, on the other hand, really had it out with this guy such that he ended up leaving the restaurant/bar .. calling me crazy, but that was EXACTLY what I wanted him to think!  Thank goodness that everyone in the restaurant saw it and clapped loudly when he left!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> what is a full body lift anyway?  tummy, breasts? buttocks?


A friend back in Boston had lost a ton of weight (she had the Gastric Bypass surgery), so her "full" body lift consisted of: 

Tummy tuck 
Breast lift 
Butt lift 
Upper Arms - fat removal & skin tightening 
Upper Thighs - fat removal & skin tightening 
It took over a year for her to have all that surgery; personally .. I thought she was nuts (especially since she would finally feel better and then 'under-the-knife' again), but she was in the Entertainment/Music business and wanted to make sure she "stood" out more than before.  Unfortunately, after the "full" body-lift, she started having other Plastic Surgery (nose, lips, face-lift, etc.) .. such that she didn't even look the same .. and most unfortunate was that IMO, she did not look better at all.  I know you've likely seen the horrible Plastic Surgery "Barbie" faces down in SD; you sure see them here in LA!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> A friend back in Boston had lost a ton of weight (she had the Gastric Bypass surgery), so her "full" body lift consisted of:
> 
> Tummy tuck
> Breast lift
> Butt lift
> Upper Arms - fat removal & skin tightening
> Upper Thighs - fat removal & skin tightening
> It took over a year for her to have all that surgery; personally .. I thought she was nuts (especially since she would finally feel better and then 'under-the-knife' again), but she was in the Entertainment/Music business and wanted to make sure she "stood" out more than before.  Unfortunately, after the "full" body-lift, she started having other Plastic Surgery (nose, lips, face-lift, etc.) .. such that she didn't even look the same .. and most unfortunate was that IMO, she did not look better at all.  I know you've likely seen the horrible Plastic Surgery "Barbie" faces down in SD; you sure see them here in LA!


yes, occasionally I will see a woman who is clearly elderly with big fish lips....looks ridiculous
Of course there are Many women with boob jobs here....One I know has very large implants.  she wants them lifted - says she doesn't like the natural looking breasts, likes them to look fake.  she's in her 30's and has been botoxing for years.  what a culture we live in

personally, I'm kinda scared of PS.  a woman at my work told me about a friend of hers who had a face lift.  came out very nice.  she wasn't satisfied so later had another one.  that one paralyzed one side of her face.  this may be a small percentage and having a good surgeon is important but there is still a risk.

as far as Meghan, she is thin with a boxy waist.  she's already had her nose done and I guess fillers.  I don't see where she would need a lot more, esp since she is now an "activist", not an actress, right?


----------



## Sferics

I can't wait for the divorce, for THAT divorce...so will be so messy and entertaining...Man, I can hardly wait


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *When asked about claims of Harry's racist relative, Mr Scobie said there several chats about Archie's skin*
> *He said the couple began to feel 'well it's not just this one person, it's others as well and it becomes a much bigger issue' *



So Omid knows more than Harry, who by his own account was the only one present when one person brought it allegedly up one time? Interesting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sferics said:


> I can't wait for the divorce, for THAT divorce...so will be so messy and entertaining...Man, I can hardly wait



I honestly won't enjoy that. I would enjoy Karma slapping Duchess Disney in the face and I'm all in for the divorce, but she'll strip Harry naked before he even knows it and also children shouldn't be able to read up on all of their crazy parents' drama online.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Seriously?!?! .. since when do Persians consider themselves PoC?  I have tons of Persian friends out here in LA and never once have any of them stated that they are PoC!


Of course they don’t consider themselves PoC!  He just tries to identify with her as much as he can. Such a noob!


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> yes, occasionally I will see a woman who is clearly elderly with big fish lips....looks ridiculous
> Of course there are Many women with boob jobs here....One I know has very large implants.  she wants them lifted - says she doesn't like the natural looking breasts, likes them to look fake.  she's in her 30's and has been botoxing for years.  what a culture we live in
> 
> personally, I'm kinda scared of PS.  a woman at my work told me about a friend of hers who had a face lift.  came out very nice.  she wasn't satisfied so later had another one.  that one paralyzed one side of her face.  this may be a small percentage and having a good surgeon is important but there is still a risk.
> 
> as far as Meghan, she is thin with a boxy waist.  she's already had her nose done and I guess fillers.  I don't see where she would need a lot more, esp since she is now an "activist", not an actress, right?


A relative married a woman who requested $$$ as her wedding shower gift so she could have “another” cosmetic surgery procedure to make sure the wedding pictures were perfect. She wanted her gums trimmed ! The interesting part is in every picture seen of her, her gums don’t show at all, never had.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, I don't know if they consider themselves POC but I had a Persian friend (dark skinned from India) and I witnessed racism toward her at least a couple of times when we were together.  It was a real eye opener for me.  I mean overt racism.


I suspect it is anti- Arab feeling. It’s not pretty however you look at it.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

So Harry said in the interview that it was one person (who he refused to name) that commented on the potential darkness in skin color of his child with MM.

Immediately after the interview M and H made it clear that they are more concerned about the lack of protection, inclusion and support given to them by the BRF. M had not received any communication with the BRF and H had a 'unproductive' conversation with Charles (message relayed to the world via Gayle King).

Now Scombie alleges that the racism comment was more than just a simple comment, and that more people in the family were in agreement with this 'concern'. 

It seems like they are now just trying to come up with new stuff everyday to keep themselves relevant and in the news.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I suspect it is anti- Arab feeling. It’s not pretty however you look at it.



Parcee (if she came from Indian) 

Persians are not Arabs


----------



## csshopper

I took one for the team, June 21 issue of US magazine. In a voluminous catalog of gagable articles, this is near the top. Take a deep breath and read on.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> It seems like they are now just trying to come up with new stuff everyday to keep themselves relevant and in the news.



It doesn't make any sense for them to stir that pot yet again. Not that I expect them to make sense but repeating the same stuff makes them look like whiners who are incapable of moving on even though they told Oprah how happy they are now.

Is it possible Scobie is going rogue to try to keep himself relevant? His one and only claim to fame is being Meghan's #1 cheerleader/biographer. He seems like the kind of emotion-driven guy who could go off script when he's feeling full of self-importance.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

bag-mania said:


> It doesn't make any sense for them to stir that pot yet again. Not that I expect them to make sense but repeating the same stuff makes them look like whiners who are incapable of moving on even though they told Oprah how happy they are now.
> 
> Is it possible Scobie is going rogue to try to keep himself relevant? His one and only claim to fame is being Meghan's #1 cheerleader/biographer. He seems like the kind of emotion-driven guy who could go off script when he's feeling full of self-importance.



If Scobie is going off script and stirring things up himself, surely the Sussex's would have tired to shut him up with a legal warning. They did that to the BBC when someone claimed that the Queen was not asked for permission, just informed of the naming of Lilibet.


----------



## poopsie

Shopaholic2021 said:


> If Scobie is going off script and stirring things up himself, surely the Sussex's would have tired to shut him up with a legal warning. They did that to the BBC when someone claimed that the Queen was not asked for permission, just informed of the naming of Lilibet.


Maybe Scobie-wan has receipts


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> If Scobie is going off script and stirring things up himself, surely the Sussex's would have tired to shut him up with a legal warning. They did that to the BBC when someone claimed that the Queen was not asked for permission, just informed of the naming of Lilibet.



True. They wouldn't have to threaten him with legal action though. Meghan would just give him a good talking-to and let him know how disappointed she was in him. Then he would apologize to her profusely and cry himself to sleep.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t help but wonder if Scabies latest allegations are to take away from Catherine’s latest successful initiative, launching today.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I suspect it is anti- Arab feeling. It’s not pretty however you look at it.


this was many years ago (way before 9/11...coul)d have been anti-Arab but I wasn't aware of a lot of middle eastern people in the area back then....now there are many and a lot of people do have issues  with them

funny thing is this friend of mine was very aggressive and got into a lot of arguments and feuds with friends and family but she never confronted the racism as I recall


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> I took one for the team, June 21 issue of US magazine. In a voluminous catalog of gagable articles, this is near the top. Take a deep breath and read on.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5114173
> View attachment 5114175
> View attachment 5114178



"Meghan will see how she feels"

We wait with bated breath. Not. 
Perhaps baited breath is closer for her stans.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> A relative married a woman who requested $$$ as her wedding shower gift so she could have “another” cosmetic surgery procedure to make sure the wedding pictures were perfect. She wanted her gums trimmed ! The interesting part is in every picture seen of her, her gums don’t show at all, never had.


such a quest for perfection these days....everyone wants to look alike.  there was a thread here on the PF where this very young woman wanted to do some PS.  I forget exactly what it was.  I think she thought her neck chords were unattractive.  she posted a picture and several of us told her she looked very pretty and didn't need to worry.  I don't think she ever came back.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Parcee (if she came from Indian)
> 
> Persians are not Arabs


you're right....but people don't necessarily know the difference...they see the dark skin


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> "Meghan will see how she feels"
> 
> We wait with bated breath. Not.
> Perhaps baited breath is closer for her stans.



I'm not buying the "they want to soak up this blissful feeling for as long as they can."

The last word I'd use to describe what either of them is feeling is "blissful."


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> They are rehashing the racism claims and magnifying them because they have nothing else currently. Kate came out with her new Centre for Early Childhood and they had to come up with something to draw attention.   I also noticed that the photo used of Scobie in the DM had him with a significantly darker skin  than his standard photo with alabaster complexion.   Very curious  that he has referred to himself as a PoC as he is half Iranian and half Scottish.  Am I missing something?
> 
> View attachment 5113901


Oh you know this and any other photo of him  has been filtered to heaven & back - clearly the media squad  were all feeling the vintage sepia tones   



EverSoElusive said:


> Here's proof for future reference just in case Harry says he never gets to go into a pool as a child    Swipe left to see the second picture of him with Will and Charles. He's smiling and not very "trapped".



I mean at this point  it feels like Haz will be submitting scenes from Werner herzog movies and claiming he was kept in isolation for 14 years while his insane father went on murderous rampages


bag-mania said:


> True. They wouldn't have to threaten him with legal action though. Meghan would just give him a good talking-to and let him know how disappointed she was in him. Then he would apologize to her profusely and cry himself to sleep.


He would, then he would smile and order more fillers and comb his Meggy wig and bide his time….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> you're right....but people don't necessarily know the difference...they see the dark skin



Very true. 

And why many different ethnic minorities may feel like PoC in one country/location and not another.


----------



## bag-mania

*What to expect when Harry heads back to London*

*London (CNN) -- *Death brings the living together, they say. It was at their grandfather's funeral that we last saw William and Harry together and it will be at the unveiling next month of a memorial to their mother -- Diana, Princess of Wales -- that we see them reunite once more.

The brothers co-commissioned the statue from British sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley -- whose portrait of the Queen appears on all British coins -- to "allow all those who visit Kensington Palace to remember and celebrate her life and legacy." It's been given prime position in the palace's Sunken Garden, which Diana enjoyed when she lived there.

That quote was from 2017 -- in the days when the princes were still issuing joint statements. Nobody could have predicted how their relationship would break down to the point where they now live on separate continents and are barely on speaking terms.

Ahead of the unveiling there will be much talk of the body language between the two, how Meghan couldn't make it and what all of it may or may not mean for the monarchy. But these are two men who know the media better than anyone, having grown up in the shadows of the most famous women in the world.

Their position is unenviable. They blame the media for their mother's death. Yet, they have to allow cameras in to capture the moment the statue is revealed for the first time. That's because they also accept, and indeed celebrate, their mother's legacy and public role.

She wasn't just a celebrity, she was for many years a senior royal who leveraged her profile for her philanthropic efforts, particularly for her work on raising awareness of AIDS and the scourge of disused landmines.

In that 2017 joint statement, the princes said, "it is clear the significance of her work is still felt by many in the UK and across the world, even 20 years after her death."



It's now almost 24 years since Diana died, and while the brothers' relationship is not what it once was, they still agree on one thing: the importance of keeping her memory alive. That's what the July 1 unveiling is about. The princes will use their profiles to bring attention to the event, before using their experience of being in front of the cameras to keep attention focused on Diana, on what would have been her 60th birthday.

Several memorials have been erected around London since Diana's death in 1997, including the White Garden at Kensington Palace and the nearby Diana Memorial Playground, as well as the Diana Memorial Fountain in Hyde Park, and the Diana Memorial Walk at St. James's Palace.

Ahead of Prince Philip's funeral, there was much written about the tension between the pair, and they managed to take the air out of that by entering the church separately and exiting it chatting. Nobody expected that, and it meant they didn't draw focus away from the event.

There is nothing you can teach these brothers about optics, and they will find a way to keep the attention away from themselves at the unveiling and on their mother. That doesn't mean there won't be any tension between them, just don't expect to see it.









						What to expect when Harry heads back to London | CNN
					

Royal-watchers are turning their attention to the Duke of Sussex's upcoming trip.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm not buying the "they want to soak up this blissful feeling for as long as they can."
> 
> The last word I'd use to describe what either of them is feeling is "blissful."


I think of her as not having any real feelings - unless you count ambition or maybe anger as a feeling.  But I don't know her.  I could be wrong.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I think of her as not having any real feelings - unless you count ambition or maybe anger as a feeling.  But I don't know her.  I could be wrong.



I imagine her prevalent feeling to be wounded pride. Followed by narcisstic rage.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Very true.
> 
> And why many different ethnic minorities may feel like PoC in one country/location and not another.


This is slightly OT but this ties into why I agree with you that ethnic minority is a better term than POC in some ways because to me, POC focuses on one aspect of being seen as ‘the other’ but for a lot of people their skin tone isn’t actually very different from what we might call white skin tones. What I think ethnic minority got across that there are lots of visual signifiers of heritage and that it might even be a visible cultural difference rather than a physical trait. I dunno, I suppose the terminology will probably change again within our lifetimes to reflect this.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I think of her as not having any real feelings - unless you count ambition or maybe anger as a feeling.  But I don't know her.  I could be wrong.



I'm sure has feelings but everything plays second fiddle to her first violins - as you say blind ambition. She literally thinks she owns the World and can't see why every other person on the planet doesn't understand that too. It must be hell to be consumed with that constant 'injustice'. 

How else can we reason why she should thrice push in front of the Queen? After being told twice, she didn't understand why she should follow QEII and continued to push, push, push, until there was no other option but to be allowed get in the car first before the Monarch. 

I'm sure that I speak for most here when I say I'd have allowed any woman clearly my senior to go before me let alone the Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think of her as not having any real feelings - unless you count ambition or maybe anger as a feeling.  But I don't know her.  I could be wrong.





papertiger said:


> I'm sure has feelings but everything plays second fiddle to her first violins - as you say blind ambition. She literally thinks she owns the World and can't see why every other person on the planet doesn't understand that too. It must be hell to be consumed with that constant 'injustice'.
> 
> How else can we reason why she should thrice push in front of the Queen? After being told twice, she didn't understand why she should follow QEII and continued to push, push, push, until there was no other option but to be allowed get in the car first before the Monarch.
> 
> I'm sure that I speak for most here when I say I'd have allowed any woman clearly my senior to go before me let alone the Queen.



Oh, she has feelings. The only feelings that matter to her are HER feelings. While she likes to pretend she cares about others, one thing is certain, it's always Meghan first.


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Unless Raptor is developmentally delayed I'm growing slightly tired of the "She couldn't possibly have known" narrative. Only a small percentage of her mishaps can be accounted to not having grown up royal or in the UK for that matter. The rest, like hijacking a childhood nickname or not ellbowing your husband in the stomach so you can go first is just common sense and basic manners.


Agree 150%!


----------



## Debbini

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t help but wonder if Scabies latest allegations are to take away from Catherine’s latest successful initiative, launching today.


Lol@ Scabies!


----------



## rose60610

Why must the public be made aware that "Meghan will go to London next year"??? It's June. Will she send us all a "Save the Date" card for when she schedules the exact day? So we can watch her boarding a plane on TV? Or are we supposed to hold off everything and quake in our boots for the entire year until Duchess Dimwit boards a private jet where she'll pen a calligraphy note on a banana about climate change? When she lands, how many hours do we give her before she cuts off the Queen? And why would she even want to go back to a family that she claims is racist anyway? And trapped? Does she plan on "rescuing" them to live with her chickens? You know she loves rescuing things. And then putting them in a caged coop .  Is she running out of things to sue over and needs to go back to England to find some more?


----------



## needlv

Has anyone seen the Times article?  









						Prince William ‘split his household from Prince Harry after Meghan bullying claims’
					

‘So, are you saying,” asked Oprah Winfrey, talking to Meghan and Harry in their famous interview of March 2021, “that there were hints of jealousy?”She was inqu




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




BOOK EXTRACT
*Prince William ‘split his household from Prince Harry after Meghan bullying claims’

Allegations against the Duchess of Sussex led to a bitter row between brothers who were once inseparable, says the author Robert Lacey*


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> Why must the public be made aware that "Meghan will go to London next year"??? It's June. Will she send us all a "Save the Date" card for when she schedules the exact day? So we can watch her boarding a plane on TV? Or are we supposed to hold off everything and quake in our boots for the entire year until Duchess Dimwit boards a private jet where she'll pen a calligraphy note on a banana about climate change? When she lands, how many hours do we give her before she cuts off the Queen? And why would she even want to go back to a family that she claims is racist anyway? And trapped? Does she plan on "rescuing" them to live with her chickens? You know she loves rescuing things. And then putting them in a caged coop .  Is she running out of things to sue over and needs to go back to England to find some more?



 Because she is NOT INVITED.  The RF have closed ranks and the message is that they are OUT.  So she keeps using her PR to drop hints about coming back.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Why must the public be made aware that "Meghan will go to London next year"??? It's June. Will she send us all a "Save the Date" card for when she schedules the exact day? So we can watch her boarding a plane on TV? Or are we supposed to hold off everything and quake in our boots for the entire year until Duchess Dimwit boards a private jet where she'll pen a calligraphy note on a banana about climate change? When she lands, how many hours do we give her before she cuts off the Queen? And why would she even want to go back to a family that she claims is racist anyway? And trapped? Does she plan on "rescuing" them to live with her chickens? You know she loves rescuing things. And then putting them in a caged coop .  Is she running out of things to sue over and needs to go back to England to find some more?


Then she can spin the story for half a year with the Will she, Won't she angle. And Hazard can express more bitterness in interviews about how traumatizing it was for him to return to the UK and he would never subject delicate Flower to that experience lest she join Lili in waking him up every night with crying.


----------



## bag-mania

Didn’t she promise to shut up for a little while to focus on her family? Yeah, I didn’t believe her either. Here’s her latest word salad of encouragement. I hope having her as its patron doesn’t hurt the animal charity.

*Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*
The Duchess of Sussex discussed the "grief, growth and also gratitude" she's experienced amid a tumultuous year


Meghan Markle is looking back on 2020 and pointing to one of the essential sources of joy and support that helped her weather the tumultuous year both in her own home and around the globe.

In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of community and connection. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."


Mayhew is one of two patronages Meghan, 39, has maintained since she and Prince Harry exited their roles as working royals in early 2020. She has also continued to support Smart Works, a U.K. organization that helps unemployed and vulnerable women return to the workplace by providing coaching tips and professional attire for job interviews.

Mayhew is clearly an area of passion for the animal-loving Duchess, who became patron of the U.K. animal welfare charity in January 2019. She praised Mayhew for providing "resources that people and pets need to stay together and persevere through hardships."

Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."

She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in days of crisis and in days of calm. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Parcee (if she came from Indian)
> 
> Persians are not Arabs


I understand, but in the US, people tend to lump other people into groups.  Ethnic identities are mistaken all the time especially in S. California were there are many  people with dark skin tones from many countries.  The sophistication level isn't high enough to understand the differences.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Why must the public be made aware that "Meghan will go to London next year"??? It's June. Will she send us all a "Save the Date" card for when she schedules the exact day? So we can watch her boarding a plane on TV? Or are we supposed to hold off everything and quake in our boots for the entire year until Duchess Dimwit boards a private jet where she'll pen a calligraphy note on a banana about climate change? When she lands, how many hours do we give her before she cuts off the Queen? And why would she even want to go back to a family that she claims is racist anyway? And trapped? Does she plan on "rescuing" them to live with her chickens? You know she loves rescuing things. And then putting them in a caged coop .  Is she running out of things to sue over and needs to go back to England to find some more?



Perhaps she is sending out feelers.  Or doing her usual of saying she is going just to force the invite, which never works in any case.  I have the feeling that if she wants to turn up as Harry's wife, no one is going to stop her.  Will she be treated extra special?  No she won't.  They gave up their status and that is it.


----------



## gracekelly

Prince William 'split households from Harry after row', author claims
					

A friend of the Sussexes said 'William threw Harry out', according to Robert Lacey's book Battle of the Brothers, after staff claimed Meghan 'played the victim, but was a bully'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




It sounded awful.  William decided that a surgical excision of the cancer was required.  He was using the maxim of a surgeon, "when in doubt, cut it out!"  He knew that if they remained connected, it would not be a good look for him and Kate. He must have been horrified by the reports.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> Prince William 'split households from Harry after row', author claims
> 
> 
> A friend of the Sussexes said 'William threw Harry out', according to Robert Lacey's book Battle of the Brothers, after staff claimed Meghan 'played the victim, but was a bully'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounded awful.  William decided that a surgical excision of the cancer was required.  He was using the maxim of a surgeon, "when in doubt, cut it out!"  He knew that if they remained connected, it would not be a good look for him and Kate. He must have been horrified by the reports.



yes - the Times article was not flattering of either H or MM...


_The moment the prince heard the bullying allegations, he related to this friend, he got straight on the phone to talk to Harry — and when Harry flared up in furious defence of his wife, the elder brother persisted. Harry shut off his phone angrily, so William went to speak to him personally. The prince was horrified by what he had just been told about Meghan’s alleged behaviour, and he wanted to hear what Harry had to say.

But now William had seen enough of his sister-in-law to feel sure that, sadly, he did know her and that many of his reservations linked unhappily with what Knauf’s colleagues had alleged. William believed Meghan was following a plan — “agenda” was the word he used to his friend — and the accusations he had just heard were alarming. Kate, he said, had been wary of her from the start.
Meghan was undermining some precious principles of the monarchy, if she really was treating her staff in this way, and William was upset that she seemed to be stealing his beloved brother away from him. Later courtiers would coin a hashtag — #freeHarry. It was only half a joke.
“Meghan portrayed herself as the victim,” recalled one Kensington Palace staffer, “but she was the bully. People felt run over by her. They didn’t know how to handle this woman. *They thought she was a complete narcissist and sociopath — basically unhinged. Which was why the pair of them were drawn to each other in the first place — both damaged goods.”*
William felt deeply wounded. “Hurt” and “betrayed” were the two feelings that he described to his friend. The elder brother had always felt so protective. He had seen it as his job to look out for Harry but this was the moment the protection had to stop. At the end of the day the British crown and all it stood for with its ancient traditions, styles and values — the mission of the monarchy — had to matter more to William than his brother did.
Harry, for his part, was equally furious that William should give credence to the accusations against Meghan, and he was fiercely combative in his wife’s defence. Some sources maintain that in the heat of the argument Harry actually accused someone in the family of concepts that were “racist”. But it must be stressed that neither brother has ever confirmed that the hateful r-word was used face to face_


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she promise to shut up for a little while to focus on her family? Yeah, I didn’t believe her either. Here’s her latest word salad of encouragement. I hope having her as its patron doesn’t hurt the animal charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*
> The Duchess of Sussex discussed the "grief, growth and also gratitude" she's experienced amid a tumultuous year
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is looking back on 2020 and pointing to one of the essential sources of joy and support that helped her weather the tumultuous year both in her own home and around the globe.
> 
> In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of community and connection. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."
> 
> 
> Mayhew is one of two patronages Meghan, 39, has maintained since she and Prince Harry exited their roles as working royals in early 2020. She has also continued to support Smart Works, a U.K. organization that helps unemployed and vulnerable women return to the workplace by providing coaching tips and professional attire for job interviews.
> 
> Mayhew is clearly an area of passion for the animal-loving Duchess, who became patron of the U.K. animal welfare charity in January 2019. She praised Mayhew for providing "resources that people and pets need to stay together and persevere through hardships."
> 
> Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."
> 
> She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in days of crisis and in days of calm. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Cosmopolitan ran this story too with the BS title that Methane was breaking maternity leave silence. MM embodies the sexist insult that when a woman dies, the last part of her body to go cold is her tongue.








						Meghan Markle breaks maternity leave silence to share a statement
					

She wanted to share a sweet message with fans




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				




Is anyone else getting Geo TV articles about the BRF in their news feed? Don't bother clicking if you do. They seem to be some weird tabloid type media company in Pakistan. No journalism capability or integrity whatsoever. They make up stories on par with "Elvis was Kidnapped by Aliens".


----------



## Icyjade

Clearly someone cannot stand Kate being in the news. Jealous and insecure much?


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


>




If true that Bea wanted the name, then she should most definitely use it. Nothing wrong with having two kids with the same name. Or,  Bea could give the child the name ‘Elizabeth’ and use the nickname Lilibet.  It doesn’t matter much what these parents do - once the child becomes an adult, she/he will do as she/he pleases.


----------



## mdcx

I would find it very amusing if one of the other grandchildren did name a baby Elizabeth, and got explicit and enthusiastic approval from the Queen to do so.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I posted this in the wrong thread !   I'm sure I'll hear about that there!  Let me try this again.



Not sure if this was ever posted. I know we've talked about PC wanting/planning to slim down the working royals in the future. There's a part of the article I have pasted here that made me think again, why didn't H&M stay on. Did they/MM think they could make more $$$$$'s on their own and it was easier living than as a working royals? Yep. Obviously H knew what it would take. He was raised/trained for that moment. When I read this I felt like wtf why didn't they just stay on?!? They could have done great things with the rest of the royal family. 


He has long favoured a slimmed-down monarchy, built around him and his wife, Camilla; Prince William and his wife, Kate; and Harry and his wife, Meghan. Princess Anne, his younger sister, also remains a full-time royal. 

But the decision of Harry and Meghan to withdraw from their duties and move to California blew a hole in those plans. There was no sign of a change of heart from Harry, or even much hope for a reconciliation with William, when Harry attended his grandfather’s funeral.  

Read more at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst


----------



## Icyjade

Hmm… is this what is happening?

1. Methane and her plus one announces going on maternity leave
2. Kate announces a new initiative 
3. Methane sends Scabie to make new revised claims about BRF being racists, including that it’s from one of the future monarchs
4. News of Methane being a bully and being excised like cancer from the formerly “Fab 4” is reported 

What next?

I’m ready with popcorn…


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I understand, but in the US, people tend to lump other people into groups.  Ethnic identities are mistaken all the time especially in S. California were there are many  people with dark skin tones from many countries.  The sophistication level isn't high enough to understand the differences.



You are quite right  . Racists are not interested in truth, they operate from preconceptions and fear.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she promise to shut up for a little while to focus on her family? Yeah, I didn’t believe her either. Here’s her latest word salad of encouragement. I hope having her as its patron doesn’t hurt the animal charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*
> The Duchess of Sussex discussed the "grief, growth and also gratitude" she's experienced amid a tumultuous year
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is looking back on 2020 and pointing to one of the essential sources of joy and support that helped her weather the tumultuous year both in her own home and around the globe.
> 
> In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of community and connection. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."
> 
> 
> Mayhew is one of two patronages Meghan, 39, has maintained since she and Prince Harry exited their roles as working royals in early 2020. She has also continued to support Smart Works, a U.K. organization that helps unemployed and vulnerable women return to the workplace by providing coaching tips and professional attire for job interviews.
> 
> Mayhew is clearly an area of passion for the animal-loving Duchess, who became patron of the U.K. animal welfare charity in January 2019. She praised Mayhew for providing "resources that people and pets need to stay together and persevere through hardships."
> 
> Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."
> 
> She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in days of crisis and in days of calm. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



I wish the charity well (and all animal charities) - but the word salad - I can't


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> yes - the Times article was not flattering of either H or MM...
> _ *They thought she was a complete narcissist and sociopath — basically unhinged. Which was why the pair of them were drawn to each other in the first place — both damaged goods.”*_



Thank you for C&P this. I'd have to sign-in through work SSO to read the story. I dread the work email notification 'pings' coz then I have to read them ha. 

All I can say is WOW, that's defiantly 'out there' for the RF 

Omid put out another tweet yesterday that was basically being bitichy about some work Kate did and censorship of the RF (I'm not going to copy it) after the article about K's work disappeared from the Net (scope of the century?  ). All to insinuate the 'legitimacy' of H&M's 'grievances' against the RF. These tactics are definitely being instigated by H&M. On BAZAAR he does 'Royal Reporter at Large', but his tweets are just a mouthpiece for the Sussexes.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Thank you for C&P this. I'd have to sign-in through work SSO to read the story. I dread the work email notification 'pings' coz then I have to read them ha.
> 
> All I can say is WOW, that's defiantly 'out there' for the RF
> 
> Omid put out another tweet yesterday that was basically being bitichy about some work Kate did and censorship of the RF (I'm not going to copy it) after the article about K's work disappeared from the Net (scope of the century?  ). All to insinuate the 'legitimacy' of H&M's 'grievances' against the RF. These tactics are definitely being instigated by H&M. On BAZAAR he does 'Royal Reporter at Large', but his tweets are just a mouthpiece for the Sussexes.



that was only a third of the story!  To read the whole thing, click on this link



			https://archive.ph/vDCzZ


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> that was only a third of the story!  To read the whole thing, click on this link
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.ph/vDCzZ


It's interesting how they always use Hollywood vs BRF as the basis of the culture clash, whereas Methane was never Hollywood-grade. I think it was more Diva meets BRF. Methane wanted to be a Royal because she was certainly not getting whatever she wanted in North America.

_So this was a very deep clash of philosophies, with Meghan being used to a Hollywood service culture — getting exactly what she wanted whenever she wanted in that famous way that Harry said._


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO  MM wanted the money, the royals were dim enough to fall for it, end of story. Charles allowed this mess to happen, so he needs to clean it up.  His sons’ unhealthy, sycophantic love for all things Diana is disturbing on many levels. Fine to remember her quietly, but this _statue_ _show_ borderlines on nonsense. The statue has been in the garden since 2019??? Sheesh, the moment has past. Time to let it go. So many more important things to care about now. Stop the back-stabbing drama, continue doing the good works.

The world does not need any more nonsense now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Isn't Lacey the author who had gotten on our collective nerves because he was even defending the troublesome two and understood their wounded little egos? So if he paints a less than flattering picture it's probably not because he hates them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kaka_bobo

xincinsin said:


> It's interesting how they always use Hollywood vs BRF as the basis of the culture clash, whereas Methane was never Hollywood-grade. I think it was more Diva meets BRF. Methane wanted to be a Royal because she was certainly not getting whatever she wanted in North America.
> 
> _So this was a very deep clash of philosophies, with Meghan being used to a Hollywood service culture — getting exactly what she wanted whenever she wanted in that famous way that Harry said._



Hollywood wishes it was on the same level as the BRF. The more "Hollywood" speaks, the more I get turned off by them.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> If true that Bea wanted the name, then she should most definitely use it. Nothing wrong with having two kids with the same name. Or,  Bea could give the child the name ‘Elizabeth’ and use the nickname Lilibet.  It doesn’t matter much what these parents do - once the child becomes an adult, she/he will do as she/he pleases.


Multiple royal cousins with the same first name is a BRF tradition not an innovation


----------



## marietouchet

A bit I picked up from the article … the story is in The new paperback edition of the year old book so suddenly the author is ok with publishing it but was not a year ago





needlv said:


> yes - the Times article was not flattering of either H or MM...
> 
> 
> _The moment the prince heard the bullying allegations, he related to this friend, he got straight on the phone to talk to Harry — and when Harry flared up in furious defence of his wife, the elder brother persisted. Harry shut off his phone angrily, so William went to speak to him personally. The prince was horrified by what he had just been told about Meghan’s alleged behaviour, and he wanted to hear what Harry had to say.
> 
> But now William had seen enough of his sister-in-law to feel sure that, sadly, he did know her and that many of his reservations linked unhappily with what Knauf’s colleagues had alleged. William believed Meghan was following a plan — “agenda” was the word he used to his friend — and the accusations he had just heard were alarming. Kate, he said, had been wary of her from the start.
> Meghan was undermining some precious principles of the monarchy, if she really was treating her staff in this way, and William was upset that she seemed to be stealing his beloved brother away from him. Later courtiers would coin a hashtag — #freeHarry. It was only half a joke.
> “Meghan portrayed herself as the victim,” recalled one Kensington Palace staffer, “but she was the bully. People felt run over by her. They didn’t know how to handle this woman. *They thought she was a complete narcissist and sociopath — basically unhinged. Which was why the pair of them were drawn to each other in the first place — both damaged goods.”*
> William felt deeply wounded. “Hurt” and “betrayed” were the two feelings that he described to his friend. The elder brother had always felt so protective. He had seen it as his job to look out for Harry but this was the moment the protection had to stop. At the end of the day the British crown and all it stood for with its ancient traditions, styles and values — the mission of the monarchy — had to matter more to William than his brother did.
> Harry, for his part, was equally furious that William should give credence to the accusations against Meghan, and he was fiercely combative in his wife’s defence. Some sources maintain that in the heat of the argument Harry actually accused someone in the family of concepts that were “racist”. But it must be stressed that neither brother has ever confirmed that the hateful r-word was used face to face_


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> A bit I picked up from the article … the story is in The new paperback edition of the year old book so suddenly the author is ok with publishing it but was not a year ago


A major change of heart!


----------



## Chanbal

Very possible! 











						Prince William 'did not want Meghan Markle' at Diana statue trip
					

PRINCE WILLIAM has put his foot down and stood up to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a leading royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

For curious minds, here is the number of books purchased by a certain foundation and devoted stans.


----------



## Chloe302225

I think this is KP's way of reminding the Sussex's that if you want to dig up and elaborate on those racism claims, well we can rehash some old news and add in to it too.


----------



## Chanbal

I agree, $5M can buy a very nice house in a great location in Southern California.


----------



## Chanbal

A lot of info is being released today!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie who?












						Beaming Queen arrives at Royal Ascot
					

The Queen looked in great spirits as she arrived at Royal Ascot for the first time since 2019, after being forced to miss the event for the first time in 68 years because of the coronavirus pandemic.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  she is wearing  the Queen Mother Palm Leaf Brooch and made by Cartier in 1938.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> that was only a third of the story!  To read the whole thing, click on this link
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.ph/vDCzZ


This is a very serious article! Can someone send a copy of it to OW, CNN, Netflix, Spotify...?  There is no need to include SS on the list, I bet they are aware of all these claims and many more.


----------



## Icyjade

Chloe302225 said:


> I think this is KP's way of reminding the Sussex's that if you want to dig up and elaborate on those racism claims, well we can rehash some old news and add in to it too.



And I guess if Methane doesn’t sue anyone for the bullying accusations, then it should be true?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she promise to shut up for a little while to focus on her family? Yeah, I didn’t believe her either. Here’s her latest word salad of encouragement. I hope having her as its patron doesn’t hurt the animal charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*
> The Duchess of Sussex discussed the "grief, growth and also gratitude" she's experienced amid a tumultuous year
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is looking back on 2020 and pointing to one of the essential sources of joy and support that helped her weather the tumultuous year both in her own home and around the globe.
> 
> In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of community and connection. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."
> 
> 
> Mayhew is one of two patronages Meghan, 39, has maintained since she and Prince Harry exited their roles as working royals in early 2020. She has also continued to support Smart Works, a U.K. organization that helps unemployed and vulnerable women return to the workplace by providing coaching tips and professional attire for job interviews.
> 
> Mayhew is clearly an area of passion for the animal-loving Duchess, who became patron of the U.K. animal welfare charity in January 2019. She praised Mayhew for providing "resources that people and pets need to stay together and persevere through hardships."
> 
> Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."
> 
> She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in days of crisis and in days of calm. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



"Being forced apart" ?  And who did the "forcing apart"?  This is the type of person who'd sucker punch a stranger square in the face and claim it was THEIR fault. Markle is SICK. And she got Harry trained to bash his own family, she must be so proud.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> A lot of info is being released today!



Covers for what?


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> yes - the Times article was not flattering of either H or MM...
> 
> 
> _The moment the prince heard the bullying allegations, he related to this friend, he got straight on the phone to talk to Harry — and when Harry flared up in furious defence of his wife, the elder brother persisted. Harry shut off his phone angrily, so William went to speak to him personally. The prince was horrified by what he had just been told about Meghan’s alleged behaviour, and he wanted to hear what Harry had to say.
> 
> But now William had seen enough of his sister-in-law to feel sure that, sadly, he did know her and that many of his reservations linked unhappily with what Knauf’s colleagues had alleged. William believed Meghan was following a plan — “agenda” was the word he used to his friend — and the accusations he had just heard were alarming. Kate, he said, had been wary of her from the start.
> Meghan was undermining some precious principles of the monarchy, if she really was treating her staff in this way, and William was upset that she seemed to be stealing his beloved brother away from him. Later courtiers would coin a hashtag — #freeHarry. It was only half a joke.
> “Meghan portrayed herself as the victim,” recalled one Kensington Palace staffer, “but she was the bully. People felt run over by her. They didn’t know how to handle this woman. *They thought she was a complete narcissist and sociopath — basically unhinged. Which was why the pair of them were drawn to each other in the first place — both damaged goods.”*
> William felt deeply wounded. “Hurt” and “betrayed” were the two feelings that he described to his friend. The elder brother had always felt so protective. He had seen it as his job to look out for Harry but this was the moment the protection had to stop. At the end of the day the British crown and all it stood for with its ancient traditions, styles and values — the mission of the monarchy — had to matter more to William than his brother did.
> Harry, for his part, was equally furious that William should give credence to the accusations against Meghan, and he was fiercely combative in his wife’s defence. Some sources maintain that in the heat of the argument Harry actually accused someone in the family of concepts that were “racist”. But it must be stressed that neither brother has ever confirmed that the hateful r-word was used face to face_


this basically says what most of us believe but is it a legit source?  the one part where Meghan supposedly said she wasn't there to coddle the staff seemed maybe a bit off to me - more something a Brit would say?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> It's interesting how they always use Hollywood vs BRF as the basis of the culture clash, whereas Methane was never Hollywood-grade. I think it was more Diva meets BRF. Methane wanted to be a Royal because she was certainly not getting whatever she wanted in North America.
> 
> _So this was a very deep clash of philosophies, with Meghan being used to a Hollywood service culture — getting exactly what she wanted whenever she wanted in that famous way that Harry said._


My friend who knew the Markle family *VERY* well (_when Meghan was in High School & Thomas was working on the well-known TV show Married With Children_) told me that Thomas would oftentimes bring Meghan on set. That is where she saw the Hollywood entitle-itis, butt-licking (the "help"), give-it-to-me-NOW behavior .. and that is what Meghan felt *SHE *deserved even as a *Z-list* non-lead actress on a Cable show that many didn't even know about!   

So .. then marrying Harry and now being part of the BRF; seriously?!?! .. I can SOOOOOOOOOOOOO see her bullying the "help" thinking that she's the STAR of the show!  Uggh ..


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> "Being forced apart" ?  And who did the "forcing apart"?  This is the type of person who'd sucker punch a stranger square in the face and claim it was THEIR fault. Markle is SICK. And she got Harry trained to bash his own family, she must be so proud.


she is basically a former Nobody who became a big Somebody when she nabbed the prince.  I know I'm repeating myself but isn't it a bit ironic that POC (like Oprah) who grew up with hardship are now worshipping this woman who grew up privileged?


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she promise to shut up for a little while to focus on her family? Yeah, I didn’t believe her either. Here’s her latest word salad of encouragement. I hope having her as its patron doesn’t hurt the animal charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*
> The Duchess of Sussex discussed the "grief, growth and also gratitude" she's experienced amid a tumultuous year
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is looking back on 2020 and pointing to one of the essential sources of joy and support that helped her weather the tumultuous year both in her own home and around the globe.
> 
> In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of community and connection. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."
> 
> 
> Mayhew is one of two patronages Meghan, 39, has maintained since she and Prince Harry exited their roles as working royals in early 2020. She has also continued to support Smart Works, a U.K. organization that helps unemployed and vulnerable women return to the workplace by providing coaching tips and professional attire for job interviews.
> 
> Mayhew is clearly an area of passion for the animal-loving Duchess, who became patron of the U.K. animal welfare charity in January 2019. She praised Mayhew for providing "resources that people and pets need to stay together and persevere through hardships."
> 
> Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."
> 
> She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in days of crisis and in days of calm. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Redirect Notice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Eye roll
I’m glad I’m being lectured on animal welfare by someone who abandoned one of her dogs rather than pay the flight and let the other one get run over  I really wouldn’t know how to value canine life otherwise


xincinsin said:


> Cosmopolitan ran this story too with the BS title that Methane was breaking maternity leave silence. MM embodies the sexist insult that when a woman dies, the last part of her body to go cold is her tongue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle breaks maternity leave silence to share a statement
> 
> 
> She wanted to share a sweet message with fans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is anyone else getting Geo TV articles about the BRF in their news feed? Don't bother clicking if you do. They seem to be some weird tabloid type media company in Pakistan. No journalism capability or integrity whatsoever. They make up stories on par with "Elvis was Kidnapped by Aliens".


Now that sounds a bit more entertaining than the current offerings tbh. That tongue thing is sexist but it is kinda funny I have to admit. 


sdkitty said:


> she is basically a former Nobody who became a big Somebody when she nabbed the prince.  I know I'm repeating myself but isn't it a bit ironic that POC (like Oprah) who grew up with hardship are now worshipping this woman who grew up privileged?


I mean she’s far from the only Hollywood hang-a-along to get by on connections over talent but it’s the lying about her background (like about paying her university fees) that I just find so obnoxious!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

rose60610 said:


> "Being forced apart" ?  And who did the "forcing apart"?  This is the type of person who'd sucker punch a stranger square in the face and claim it was THEIR fault. Markle is SICK. And she got Harry trained to bash his own family, she must be so proud.



I agree with your assessment of Nutmeg, but Harry is totally responsible for digging his own grave.  He's made no secret of his disdain for royal life for years.  Long before Nutmeg came along.  Did she speed up the process, YEP!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Very possible!
> View attachment 5114877
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William 'did not want Meghan Markle' at Diana statue trip
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM has put his foot down and stood up to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a leading royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



If only CHARLES had put _his_ foot down years ago. 
Pity they can't skip his ineffectual azz and go straight to William


----------



## Sophisticatted

I feel like M (legend in her own mind) had a narrative she wanted to play out all along.  1. Make accusations f racism, get the world on HER side.  2.  Have the RF bend over backwards to “make it up to her”/“rehabilitate their public opinion 3. Dictate her terms for reconciliation.  

When the RF didn’t respond how she wanted them to, she claimed (via “sources” that she “was ready to forgive”).  Hoping that the RF would get the hint and reach out to her, making her look like the magnanimous, bigger person.  The one whose great selflessness brought the royal family back together and caused healing to happen.  (Roll eye).

Now, she’s spinning her wheels about racism because she still wants to remind people (when the time is right) that she s “ready to forgive”.  Meanwhile, the RF and the world keeps on keeping on.


----------



## bag-mania

Kaka_bobo said:


> Hollywood wishes it was on the same level as the BRF. The more "Hollywood" speaks, the more I get turned off by them.



Hollywood is the land of make believe. There is very little that is genuine there. It’s all a facade, especially the people.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> If only CHARLES had put _his_ foot down years ago.
> *Pity they can't skip his ineffectual azz and go straight to William*



He’s a weakling when it comes to having the personality of a leader. You’ve either got it or you don’t, Charles doesn’t.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> she is basically a former Nobody who became a big Somebody when she nabbed the prince.  I know I'm repeating myself but isn't it a bit ironic that POC (like Oprah) who grew up with hardship are now worshipping this woman who grew up privileged?


The more I think about it, I think Oprah did 'USE' Meghan & Harry to kick-start her career up again.  Let's face it, Gayle .. well, Gayle has always been the 2nd-fiddle and while she may "report" on some H&M things honestly .. no one really listens to her.  I find it interesting that given the negative feedback of the "their truth" show, Oprah has seemed to move away from them (well - exception, the Apple TV Mental Health show .. but how many folks watch Apple TV?!?!?).


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> The more I think about it, I think Oprah did 'USE' Meghan & Harry to kick-start her career up again.  Let's face it, Gayle .. well, Gayle has always been the 2nd-fiddle and while she may "report" on some H&M things honestly .. no one really listens to her.  I find it interesting that given the negative feedback of the "their truth" show, Oprah has seemed to move away from them (well - exception, the Apple TV Mental Health show .. but how many folks watch Apple TV?!?!?).


well Gayle I guess will always be second to O but after that R Kelly interview CBS gave her a big raise and called her their "crown jewel"
So she should be caring about her rep IMO too
Wasn't it just yesterday Oprah said she would be giving H a father's day gift?
the whole thing with them is so ridiculous....they aren't royals and I hope one day sooner not later the US media will stop fawning over them


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> I feel like M (legend in her own mind) had a narrative she wanted to play out all along.  1. Make accusations f racism, get the world on HER side.  2.  Have the RF bend over backwards to “make it up to her”/“rehabilitate their public opinion 3. Dictate her terms for reconciliation.
> 
> When the RF didn’t respond how she wanted them to, she claimed (via “sources” that she “was ready to forgive”).  Hoping that the RF would get the hint and reach out to her, making her look like the magnanimous, bigger person.  The one whose great selflessness brought the royal family back together and caused healing to happen.  (Roll eye).
> 
> Now, she’s spinning her wheels about racism because she still wants to remind people (when the time is right) that she s “ready to forgive”.  Meanwhile, the RF and the world keeps on keeping on.


I find her willingness to forgive hilarious. It's her version of the carrot and the stick, but no one in the UK wants her toxic carrot and she ain't offering it to her own father since there's nothing to gain from that connection.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I find her willingness to forgive hilarious. It's her version of the carrot and the stick, but no one in the UK wants her toxic carrot and she ain't offering it to her own father since there's nothing to gain from that connection.


You make a very valid point. If we imagine that these accusations of racism among family members are true and they are still willing to forgive and we say that Thomas M crossed a boundary by giving those interviews and doing photos….it’s still seems extremely odd that it is the former they are willing to forgive because that one seems far worse than the latter.

then you remember one lives in series of palaces and the other lives in a retirement bungalow


----------



## purseinsanity

zen1965 said:


> Goodness, she is so full of herself.
> Anybody in his right mind sees that this „poem“ is utterly cringeworthy. If this was the best I could come up with in form of a love letter I would crawl under a rock. While this talentless ex-actress seems to think she is the reincarnation of Sylvia Plath…
> Despicable. And infuriating.
> Instead of droning on and on about compassion, universal love and service she‘d better closely inspect the state of her family relations.


The next love letter I write to my husband, I'll write he makes my heart go "pump pump" and wait for the side eye!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Very possible!
> View attachment 5114877
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William 'did not want Meghan Markle' at Diana statue trip
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM has put his foot down and stood up to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a leading royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Good for him. I can only imagine how it pains him to see his brother go completely off the deep and, but the terrorist can't be appeased any longer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For curious minds, here is the number of books purchased by a certain foundation and devoted stans.
> 
> View attachment 5114880



Lady CC's newest video (which I haven't watched because my day only has 24 hours haha) claims the numbers are fake / doctored. If that means downright lying or her buying all the books herself we'll have to find out from the video later.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> this basically says what most of us believe but is it a legit source?  the one part where Meghan supposedly said she wasn't there to coddle the staff seemed maybe a bit off to me - more something a Brit would say?



We're talking about a person who faked a British accent within 5 mins of arriving in London, though. Plus, she's been quoted using "coddled" at least once more.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest video (which I haven't watched because my day only has 24 hours haha) claims the numbers are fake / doctored. If that means downright lying or *her buying all the books herself* we'll have to find out from the video later.


Wonder if their mortgage company will accept a monthly mortgage payment made with excess copies of "The Bench." That $9 million mortgage's gotta get repaid somehow!


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> The next love letter I write to my husband, I'll write he makes my heart go "pump pump" and wait for the side eye!



A side eye? That's nothing. I'm afraid he'd threaten a divorce instead


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> this basically says what most of us believe but is it a legit source?  the one part where Meghan supposedly said she wasn't there to coddle the staff seemed maybe a bit off to me - more something a Brit would say?


She might have been throwing it back as a retort to someone who told her something along the lines of "the staff needs to be coddled a bit more, morale is very low." Of course, she would not have taken anything like an admonishment quietly and I can hear her spouting it back. Just a thought.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I find her willingness to forgive hilarious. It's her version of the carrot and the stick, but no one in the UK wants her toxic carrot and she ain't offering it to her own father since there's nothing to gain from that connection.



It wouldn't be just any carrot. I'm sure it's gonna be something like this


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here to illustrate how the family feels as opposed to the Californian a*sholes.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We're talking about a person who faked a British accent within 5 mins of arriving in London, though. Plus, she's been quoted using "coddled" at least once more.



She's faking a British accent? I thought I had misheard her in videos. Glad I haven't gone crazy or deaf.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> The next love letter I write to my husband, I'll write he makes my heart go "pump pump" and wait for the side eye!


I wonder if a certain sentence was incomplete. Could it be 'makes my heart go pump pump when I open my hand for cash cash'?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here to illustrate how the family feels as opposed to the Californian a*sholes.



Lovely to see this gracious lady having a more prominent public role in the Royal Family, she's the complete opposite to Methane's vulgarity, avarice and hypocrisy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Lovely to see this gracious lady having a more prominent public role in the Royal Family, she's the complete opposite to Methane's vulgarity, avarice and hypocrisy.



I dislike Raptor much more than Harry, but I will never forgive his treatment of his dying grandfather.


----------



## bag-mania

What we’ve all been wondering.

*What’s up with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s $25M Spotify deal?*

Back in December, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry signed the dotted line on a multimillion-dollar deal with Spotify. Six months later, many are craving the content they’ve yet to deliver. 

Through their Archewell Audio imprint, the couple signed a reported $25M deal with the platform to produce podcasts and other programming “that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world.”

Thus far, however, they’ve produced a three-minute trailer and their 34-minute Christmas Special, which premiered shortly after news of the deal went public in December.

The couple are also currently on parental leave after the birth of their daughter Lilibet two weeks ago, leading observers to believe they won’t be providing fresh content anytime soon. 

“We’re being told they’re having up to five months off and people who are paying them a lot of money will expect something in return,” insisted Royal author Phil Dampier to The Sun.


They seem to be using up a lot of ammunition very early and putting a lot of stuff out there in terms of deals and agreements with lots of firms,” he continued. “The question might be asked whether they have too much on their plate.”

That’s certainly a possibility, as raising two children while navigating the royal fallout following Megxit appears to have taken precedence for the Sussexes.

Many struggling musicians who stream through Spotify took issue with the initial deal, believing the couple’s $25 million payday was excessive when others have yet to receive a check from the platform.

“I’ve been writing songs since I was 12 years-old,” singer-songwriter Callum Gardner told the Star in April. “I don’t get paid from Spotify, it’s never broken even from the money I used to put songs on Spotify. It’s hard, I don’t know what we are supposed to do because they have all the power and somehow all of the artists have all agreed.”

Another young musician, Harrison Rhys, said the Spotify deal with the prince and his wife was an “unethical kick in the teeth.”



			Redirect Notice


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Back in December, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry signed the dotted line on a multimillion-dollar deal with Spotify. Six months later, many are craving the content they’ve yet to deliver.



Quite frankly, I'm not amongst those many.


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> The more I think about it, I think Oprah did 'USE' Meghan & Harry to kick-start her career up again.  Let's face it, Gayle .. well, Gayle has always been the 2nd-fiddle and while she may "report" on some H&M things honestly .. no one really listens to her.  I find it interesting that given the negative feedback of the "their truth" show, Oprah has seemed to move away from them (well - exception, the Apple TV Mental Health show .. but how many folks watch Apple TV?!?!?).


I think you’re 100% correct.  Prior to the interview, when was the last time anyone gave any thought to Oprah?


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> this basically says what most of us believe but is it a legit source?  the one part where Meghan supposedly said she wasn't there to coddle the staff seemed maybe a bit off to me - more something a Brit would say?



I could totally see Meghan using "coddle" as well as throwing a fit if the staff didn't thank her profusely for treating them like garbage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> The next love letter I write to my husband, I'll write he makes my heart go "pump pump" and wait for the side eye!



Mine would ring the doctor (he's German and would take it literally)


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> *I could totally see Meghan using "coddle"* as well as throwing a fit if the staff didn't thank her profusely for treating them like garbage.



I agree! She thinks she's British posh


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> She might have been throwing it back as a retort to someone who told her something along the lines of "the staff needs to be coddled a bit more, morale is very low." Of course, she would not have taken anything like an admonishment quietly and I can hear her spouting it back. Just a thought.



I think we're over-thinking 

Someone at the palace probably asked her if she liked her eggs fried, boiled, poached or coddled and she immediately thought that 'coddled' sounded posh and used it everywhere and as much as she could.  

She was recorded/quoted as having used it somewhere else too.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> I agree! She thinks she's British posh



I was just writing when you wrote this  

We have to be thankful 'swaddled' or 'unabridged' wasn't her posh, British word of the day _that_ day


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> We have to be thankful 'swaddled' or 'unabridged' wasn't her posh, British word of the day _that_ day



She saved ”swaddled” for the last page of The Bench. As in that illustration that shows her with the baby swaddled to her while she pretends like she works in the garden.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Lovely to see this gracious lady having a more prominent public role in the Royal Family, she's the complete opposite to Methane's vulgarity, avarice and hypocrisy.


I initially thought Meg would be as gracious as Sophie. Not sure why I thought that now. lol


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> She might have been throwing it back as a retort to someone who told her something along the lines of "the staff needs to be coddled a bit more, morale is very low." Of course, she would not have taken anything like an admonishment quietly and I can hear her spouting it back. Just a thought.





papertiger said:


> I think we're over-thinking
> 
> Someone at the palace probably asked her if she liked her eggs fried, boiled, poached or coddled and she immediately thought that 'coddled' sounded posh and used it everywhere and as much as she could.
> 
> She was recorded/quoted as having used it somewhere else too.


(Sings) 
how do you like your eggs in the morning?
coddled just like my staff

I had completely forgotten about the existence of these things  








						Museum of Royal Worcester | Egg Coddler recipes
					

Egg Coddlers are manufactured in Royal Worcester fireproof hard porcelain. Porcelain is a true cookware material impervious to boiling water with excellent thermal shock resistance properties. During cooking the Egg Coddler should not be totally submerged in boiling water. Stand the Egg Coddler...




					www.museumofroyalworcester.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gloves are off!









						Prince Charles won't let Archie be a prince as he slims down monarchy
					

The heir to the throne has made it clear that Harry and Meghan's son will have no place among frontline Royals as he plans a slimmed-down Monarchy after he becomes King.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gloves are off!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles won't let Archie be a prince as he slims down monarchy
> 
> 
> The heir to the throne has made it clear that Harry and Meghan's son will have no place among frontline Royals as he plans a slimmed-down Monarchy after he becomes King.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Team Charles, but I find it sad that the two lunatics will spin it like "Your grandfather doesn't love you because you're black". Poor kids.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Team Charles, but I find it sad that the two lunatics will spin it like "Your grandfather doesn't love you because you're black". Poor kids.


wonder how they will be raised....from what little we have seen of Archie he will probably be white appearing....and unless something unexpected happens with the genes, Lily will probably also be white.  so will they be told they are POC and that their mom was subjected to racism?


----------



## Sharont2305

I wish there was a recording of Harry from a few years back saying that when I have children I don't want them to have any titles because of xyz.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

It reeks of hypocrisy that she expects compassion and kindness from others yet feels her staff shouldn't be 'coddled'.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

sdkitty said:


> wonder how they will be raised....from what little we have seen of Archie he will probably be white appearing....and unless something unexpected happens with the genes, Lily will probably also be white.  so will they be told they are POC and that their mom was subjected to racism?



I have a feeling they will use the 'I am a POC' and 'they are racist' when they don't get what they want, just like their parents have. Not everything that happens to a POC is because of their race, it can be simply because they are a ****ty person.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

MM implies that Charles wants to change the rules because he doesn't want a POC with a royal title, well she is a POC and she has a title. He can change the rules when he becomes King and not allow ALL grandchildren titles and royal money, which would be good for the British taxpayer, means we can fund the NHS. The Queen changed the rules to allow Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis to have titles. If the Queen wanted Archie and his sister to have a title, surely she would have issued a law to this effect, like she did for Williams other children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> wonder how they will be raised....from what little we have seen of Archie he will probably be white appearing....and unless something unexpected happens with the genes, Lily will probably also be white.  so will they be told they are POC and that their mom was subjected to racism?



_so will they be told they are POC and that their mom was subjected to racism _by the King of England.

Has all of this angst been over a title and security?  Wow. How different the lives of the entitled ones are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

There has been ongoing talk of trimming the monarchy for some time.  MM and H didn’t want their son to have a title.  Win-win.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m shocked at how many US publications are calling Scobie a Royal expert today. Since when does being a celebrity toady mean you are an expert?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m shocked at how many US publications are calling Scobie a Royal expert today. Since when does being a celebrity toady mean you are an expert?


With the talk that Harry wants his "own" journo at the statue unveiling, my bet is that it would be Scobie.  I hope that William says no.  If Scobie were to show up or any journo paid to have the Harry approved POV, the spin will be all about Harry is the only and true son of Saint Diana who can do her work etc.  Every  perceived insult will be documented by this person.  I see no alternative for William, but to make this a totally private event with no coverage.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gloves are off!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles won't let Archie be a prince as he slims down monarchy
> 
> 
> The heir to the throne has made it clear that Harry and Meghan's son will have no place among frontline Royals as he plans a slimmed-down Monarchy after he becomes King.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



"_Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King,' confirmed the source._"
"_The move has incensed the Sussexes and is thought to have prompted the series of bitter accusations the couple have levelled at Charles and the Royal Family from across the Atlantic._"

It's impossible, JCMH and wife don't care about titles...


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> It's impossible, JCMH and wife don't care about titles...


Are you the voice inside my head?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> With the talk that Harry wants his "own" journo at the statue unveiling, my bet is that it would be Scobie.  I hope that William says no.  If Scobie were to show up or any journo paid to have the Harry approved POV, the spin will be all about Harry is the only and true son of Saint Diana who can do her work etc.  Every  perceived insult will be documented by this person.  I see no alternative for William, but to make this a totally private event with no coverage.



You know Meghan must be putting the finishing touches on Harry’s Diana speech by now. Look for a healthy portion of preachy word salad (with a few references to Meghan!) mixed in among the Diana talk.

I don’t see any way they can change the plans at this late date. Canceling it now would cause more drama than going through with it.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Team Charles, but I find it sad that the two lunatics will spin it like "Your grandfather doesn't love you because you're black". Poor kids.



The article basically says that this is what prompted their emotional outburst in the Oprah interview, that shortly before the interview they were told that Prince Charles was planning to go through with what he's been saying for decades, that's he's going to slim down the monarchy, and that means no prince/princess titles for Archie and future sibling ever, even after he becomes King. 

Harry has known this for years. Charles has been in conflict with Andrew over Eugenie and Bea's titles and protection and role in the family for a long time, so Harry's known that his father was serious about this issue. Harry's even said in the past that he didn't want his children to have titles. So, why was this such a "shock" to the two of them?  It's like they exist in their own reality where it doesn't matter what the facts are, or what they are told about how things work, or what it actually means to be #6 in line.  All that matters is what they want and that they get what they want.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> "_Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King,' confirmed the source._"
> "_The move has incensed the Sussexes and is thought to have prompted the series of bitter accusations the couple have levelled at Charles and the Royal Family from across the Atlantic._"
> 
> It's impossible, JCMH and wife don't care about titles...


Good! I saw a comment on DM that even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes . . . Charles is finding his nuts.


----------



## Hermes Zen

youngster said:


> The article basically says that this is what prompted their emotional outburst in the Oprah interview, that shortly before the interview they were told that Prince Charles was planning to go through with what he's been saying for decades, that's he's going to slim down the monarchy, and that means no prince/princess titles for Archie and future sibling ever, even after he becomes King.
> 
> Harry has known this for years. Charles has been in conflict with Andrew over Eugenie and Bea's titles and protection and role in the family for a long time, so Harry's known that his father was serious about this issue. Harry's even said in the past that he didn't want his children to have titles. So, why was this such a "shock" to the two of them?  It's like they exist in their own reality where it doesn't matter what the facts are, or what they are told about how things work, or what it actually means to be #6 in line.  All that matters is what they want and that they get what they want.



I think on their 'public face' M&H says oh no we don't want the titles but deep deep inside they (at least *M*) want the titles and hope the BRF will go ahead and give them. When that happens (better not) M&H will be jumping for joy inside but on the 'public face' say well, we really really didn't want the titles but we will go along with it since the BRF want it that way. I also think if they had stayed as part of the working royals, as mentioned in the article I had posted yesterday, there would have been a chance that PC may have titled Archie and Lilibet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> You know Meghan must be putting the finishing touches on Harry’s Diana speech by now. Look for a healthy portion of preachy word salad (with a few references to Meghan!) mixed in among the Diana talk.
> 
> I don’t see any way they can change the plans at this late date. Canceling it now would cause more drama than going through with it.



I would not hold it against William if he made this sham show private. In fact, I would applaud his leadership.  The ceremony was intended to take place last year. The statue has been in the garden for at least a year.  This is just a make-up show.  Hazz could have done a photo op when he attended Phillip’s funeral. Then, he could have released the photos on Diana’s  birthday. No reason to make 2 trips, especially with a new baby.  Just another example of poor planning on H&M’s part.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Atrocious behavior! Hazz ought to know better.
Even with this ‘expert team’, they still fail.  








						Meet the Sussexes team trying to help them win the royal briefing war
					

After she famously bemoaned the 'men in grey suits', Harry and Meghan have assembled their own LA Spin Machine team of backstairs advisers to help them win the briefing war.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I would not hold it against William if he made this sham show private. In fact, I would applaud his leadership.  *The ceremony was intended to take place last year. The statue has been in the garden for at least a year.  This is just a make-up show.  *Hazz could have done a photo op when he attended Phillip’s funeral. Then, he could have released the photos on Diana’s  birthday. No reason to make 2 trips, especially with a new baby.  Just another example of poor planning on H&M’s part.



While making it private might give Harry less of a forum for whatever he’s going to say, we know they would still make sure everyone knew by giving their speech to the press.

I’m pretty certain the statue unveiling was always intended to be July 2021. It was meant to coincide with what would have been Diana’s 60th birthday. I haven’t seen the statue. I didn’t think it was on display yet.


----------



## youngster

Hermes Zen said:


> I think on their 'public face' M&H says oh no we don't want the titles but deep deep inside they (at least *M*) want the titles and hope the BRF will go ahead and give them. When that happens (better not) M&H will be jumping for joy inside but on the 'public face' say well, we really really didn't want the titles but we will go along with it since the BRF want it that way. *I also think if they had stayed as part of the working royals, as mentioned in the article I had posted yesterday, there would have been a chance that PC may have titled Archie and Lilibet.*



I agree with you.  I think if Harry and MM had stayed as senior working royals, living in the UK, doing their duty, that Charles would maybe give the children titles when he becomes king. But, to have a prince and princess of the UK growing up as Californians with zero connection to the UK?  Charles is right.


----------



## eunaddict

bag-mania said:


> In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of *community and connection*. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."
> 
> Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of *grief, growth and also of gratitude,*" she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."
> 
> She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in *days of crisis and in days of calm*. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."



Someone is REALLY trying to prove she knows how to alliterate. I distinctly remember writing like that way back in high school when we were first told that this was one of the signs of intentional, good writing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> While making it private might give Harry less of a forum for whatever he’s going to say, we know they would still make sure everyone knew by giving their speech to the press.
> 
> I’m pretty certain the statue unveiling was always intended to be July 2021. It was meant to coincide with what would have been Diana’s 60th birthday. I haven’t seen the statue. I didn’t think it was on display yet.



Seems to be confusion about this, too - another reason to keep it private. They can try again on her 65th.

From the article:
_Prince William and Prince Harry will be in attendance at the unveiling of the statue. This has been all but confirmed by one of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's favoured royal reporters Omid Scobie who wrote for Bazaar.com: "Though no plans have been officially confirmed yet, the Duke of Sussex is expected to return to the U.K. this summer for the unveiling of a statue of his late mother, Princess Diana.

"He will join William at Kensington Palace's Sunken Garden for a ceremony *that was rescheduled from summer 2020."*_









						Everything we know about the Princess Diana's statue unveiling on July 1
					






					honey.nine.com.au
				




_First announced by the princes in 2017, the original plan was to unveil the statue later that same year. Then the date got moved to 2019. And then the lockdown in 2020 prevented it from taking place that year. Needless to say, it's been a long time coming, considering that Harry and William initially intended for it to be unveiled for the 20th anniversary of their mother's 1997 death._





__





						Parenting, Baby Names, Celebrities, and Royal News | CafeMom.com
					






					cafemom.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Not 100% accurate, but it is still OK. As a mere D-list (or Z-list @CeeJay)...


----------



## needlv

Has anyone seen this gossip story on Insta?  You have to scroll through ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this gossip story on Insta?  You have to scroll through ...




Is William the ‘big enemy’ or is it someone else?  This all gets so confusing.


----------



## octopus17

papertiger said:


> Mine would ring the doctor (he's German and would take it literally)


Mine would just look at me with his naughty, twinkling eyes - he's incorrigible...


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Atrocious behavior! Hazz ought to know better.
> Even with this ‘expert team’, they still fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Sussexes team trying to help them win the royal briefing war
> 
> 
> After she famously bemoaned the 'men in grey suits', Harry and Meghan have assembled their own LA Spin Machine team of backstairs advisers to help them win the briefing war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Honestly, if they are not stirring sh-t up constantly, they could have saved their pennies and not be bothered with hiring the LA Spin Machine. After all, they said they wanted to live a private life. However, day after day, there's something fed to the press to keep them relevant as though they are senior working royals, celebrities or part of some gigantic company's C-suite. Truthfully, they are *NOTHING*. They haven't really made much impact on any meaningful causes other than highly publicized itty bitty donations for the sake of being in the spotlight. They are shameless, and even that's an understatement   

ETA
Correction: They are *PARASITES *


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to be confusion about this, too - another reason to keep it private. They can try again on her 65th.
> 
> From the article:
> _Prince William and Prince Harry will be in attendance at the unveiling of the statue. This has been all but confirmed by one of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's favoured royal reporters Omid Scobie who wrote for Bazaar.com: "Though no plans have been officially confirmed yet, the Duke of Sussex is expected to return to the U.K. this summer for the unveiling of a statue of his late mother, Princess Diana.
> 
> "He will join William at Kensington Palace's Sunken Garden for a ceremony *that was rescheduled from summer 2020."*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything we know about the Princess Diana's statue unveiling on July 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> honey.nine.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _First announced by the princes in 2017, the original plan was to unveil the statue later that same year. Then the date got moved to 2019. And then the lockdown in 2020 prevented it from taking place that year. Needless to say, it's been a long time coming, considering that Harry and William initially intended for it to be unveiled for the 20th anniversary of their mother's 1997 death._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Parenting, Baby Names, Celebrities, and Royal News | CafeMom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cafemom.com



That’s odd. I can understand not having it last year, but wonder why it got postponed in 2018 and 2019.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that like to watch Lady C's videos about the 2 jokers without ads:


----------



## csshopper

Archie will not be a Prince, and will have to live with a Bench, not the possibility of a throne. That's a hit to  the merching potential of "Archwell." Wonder if it will morph into something using Mommy's name?

It's ludicrous to think of someone with US citizenship as the King of England.
Only the Suckesses would ever even think of it as an option.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> That’s odd. I can understand not having it last year, but wonder why it got postponed in 2018 and 2019.



I agree - _odd_ is the best word. I think but could be wrong, the brothers could not agree on a design.  Much too much has been made of this statue for much too long.
All of this confusion is very negative and reflects poorly on the brothers. They should let their mother rest in peace.

2017 - 20th anniv. of Diana’s death - they couldn’t agree on the design
2018 - H&M married, so they were away during the summer
2019 - were they away on a tour?
2020 - H&M exit and covid
2021 - Diana’s 60th birthday - odd, just odd


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Atrocious behavior! Hazz ought to know better.
> Even with this ‘expert team’, they still fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Sussexes team trying to help them win the royal briefing war
> 
> 
> After she famously bemoaned the 'men in grey suits', Harry and Meghan have assembled their own LA Spin Machine team of backstairs advisers to help them win the briefing war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


No wonder so much about the Suckesses gets confusing. These people are so busy spinning, they’re off balance.

Hang your head in shame Harry, you have become your worst nightmare at the mercy of your own highly paid paps, makes you look more impotent than ever.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is William the ‘big enemy’ or is it someone else?  This all gets so confusing.


 I would say so, yes.


----------



## mdcx

I have to say that MM’s reported rage at discovering Archie and Little Bit won’t get titles has rather put a smile on my dial.


----------



## needlv

The gossip / stories are leaking out now....


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree - _odd_ is the best word. I think but could be wrong, the brothers could not agree on a design.  Much too much has been made of this statue for much too long.
> All of this confusion is very negative and reflects poorly on the brothers. They should let their mother rest in peace.
> 
> 2017 - 20th anniv. of Diana’s death - they couldn’t agree on the design
> 2018 - H&M married, so they were away during the summer
> 2019 - were they away on a tour?
> 2020 - H&M exit and covid
> 2021 - Diana’s 60th birthday - odd, just odd



I found a little more information on it. The statue wasn’t completed until recently. Although they announced their intention to create it back in 2017, apparently there were disagreements between the brothers about what it should look like and the design had to be revised, multiple times!

According to this article the sculpture wasn’t even cast until March or April of this year. Talk about taking it down to the wire. If they had waited any longer it wouldn’t have been ready by July 1.









						William & Harry 'put differences aside' to sign off Princess Diana statue
					

PRINCES William and Harry appear to have put aside their differences to sign off the final design for a statue of their late mother Princess Diana. It is the first indication of a healing of the de…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, statues are so hit or miss, this could be bad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

You know, these two have taken up space in my head way too long.  Sure, it was a diversion during covid, but I'm outta here.  They're not even worth acknowledging.  Sayonara!   Keep on rockin' sisters!   I'll be with you in spirit.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> The gossip / stories are leaking out now....




OK, weird tag. But is it simply the cleaning directions or is there a price on it? I detest Methane as much as many on the thread, but that's a weird place for a price tag. And for a cleaning directions tag for that matter. If it's a real (vs. photoshopped) tag of any kind than it's a real stupid move of the manufacturer.


----------



## Genie27

rose60610 said:


> OK, weird tag. But is it simply the cleaning directions or is there a price on it? I detest Methane as much as many on the thread, but that's a weird place for a price tag. And for a cleaning directions tag for that matter. If it's a real (vs. photoshopped) tag of any kind than it's a real stupid move of the manufacturer.


I thought it was one of those tags they put on prom dresses etc - to prevent wearing and returning.
Or like resale sites - where if you take the tag off you can’t return


----------



## Genie27

I find it ironic that the same guy who was recorded on more than one occasion saying and doing racially insensitive things, is now accusing his family members of the same thing. Nothing like a “reformed” sinner to preach like the most self-righteous.

It seems the BP gloves are off and the anti-Sussex campaign is in full swing.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.


----------



## needlv

Genie27 said:


> I thought it was one of those tags they put on prom dresses etc - to prevent wearing and returning.
> Or like resale sites - where if you take the tag off you can’t return



not photoshop.  She left the tag on in her tour - Tonga I think...

media from the time...









						Meghan Markle Leaves The Tag Showing On Her Dress Just Like Us
					

The Duchess of Sussex just got more relatable on her royal tour during a stop in Tonga.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, statues are so hit or miss, this could be bad.



As long as it actually looks like her it will be fine. Having the right artist is crucial. Several years ago Lucille Ball’s hometown commissioned a statue of her. The result was the scary disaster on the left. It was so universally hated the next year the town had another artist create a much better representation (right).


----------



## needlv

The results of the bullying enquiry are being delayed...

from the Times again... ( not behind a paywall just in case you dint have access)



			https://archive.ph/2021.06.19-230433/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/palace-may-delay-verdict-on-meghan-bullying-claims-until-next-year-f9q2s0kc2


----------



## rose60610

Genie27 said:


> I thought it was one of those tags they put on prom dresses etc - to prevent wearing and returning.
> Or like resale sites - where if you take the tag off you can’t return



Then at the very least, it's low when you wear such a garment WITH the tag so it CAN be returned. Then it's really stupid that Meghan, of all people, didn't at least order her "coddled" staff to put a stitch to attach it and hide it, or just do it herself since she's the conniving idiot (in so many ways) who'd return a garment after it'd been worn for an event. How many other clothes has she done this to? If she returned this dress, then she is basically a shoplifter. Were there any tags showing under her wedding dress?


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> The results of the bullying enquire are being delayed...
> 
> from the Times again... ( not behind a paywall just in case you dint have access)
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.ph/2021.06.19-230433/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/palace-may-delay-verdict-on-meghan-bullying-claims-until-next-year-f9q2s0kc2



Let her sweat


----------



## eunaddict

EverSoElusive said:


> She's faking a British accent? I thought I had misheard her in videos. Glad I haven't gone crazy or deaf.



I heard she was given "dialect/accent" coaching to make her sound a little bit more British royal and a little less California girl.


----------



## EverSoElusive

eunaddict said:


> I heard she was given "dialect/accent" coaching to make her sound a little bit more British royal and a little less California girl.




Never heard about this but thanks for sharing


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> For curious minds, here is the number of books purchased by a certain foundation and devoted stans.
> 
> View attachment 5114880


Why is she still using the duchess title? It’s like she knows nobody knows her other than for marrying Harry ...


----------



## Chanbal

Charles will be in Scotland... 
OUT OF TOWN *Prince Charles ‘has no plans to meet Harry’ when he jets in from US to unveil statue of his mum Diana*










						Prince Charles 'has no plans to meet Harry' when he jets in from US for statue
					

WHEN Prince Harry flies in from the US at the end of the month, one key family member won’t be about for about for a catch up. In an unfortunate clash of the diaries, Prince Charles will be u…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Atrocious behavior! Hazz ought to know better.
> Even with this ‘expert team’, they still fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Sussexes team trying to help them win the royal briefing war
> 
> 
> After she famously bemoaned the 'men in grey suits', Harry and Meghan have assembled their own LA Spin Machine team of backstairs advisers to help them win the briefing war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The BenchAnon


----------



## Chanbal

Omid in 2019


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Then at the very least, it's low when you wear such a garment WITH the tag so it CAN be returned. Then it's really stupid that Meghan, of all people, didn't at least order her "coddled" staff to put a stitch to attach it and hide it, or just do it herself since she's the conniving idiot (in so many ways) who'd return a garment after it'd been worn for an event. How many other clothes has she done this to? If she returned this dress, then she is basically a shoplifter. Were there any tags showing under her wedding dress?


This is really interesting since the item references she got access to the dress for their Tonga tour in March 2018 through JM, assuming that was her BFF Jessica Mulroney, the friend who she later flamed when JM was outed for her treatment in June 2020 of Sasha Exeter, a young black woman. But, there were follow up mentions in articles that MM and JM were still friends behind the scenes and that didn't make sense at the time. Now it does, if this scenario is true. I only float this theory since we are talking about Methane and her hypocritical, manipulative way of life. As a WOC she criticized JM's statements and behavior, supposedly disassociating from her. But in reality, very much behind the scenes, she assured JM everything was really OK and they could still be friends when the time was right. Why? Because JM had knowledge of this scam and MM could not afford to alienate her for fear of being "outed" if she made JM angry for apparently Markling her.

I do remember seeing the picture of the tag hanging from the dress as she and Haz were walking and thought at the time, "How tacky". I went on line to double check the date and the article mentioned this was one of three dresses she wore that day. Poor Charles, his Duchy Original brand must have had to sell a lot of biscuits to keep the money flowing to underwrite her wardrobe.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Omid in 2019
> View attachment 5115498


Caught in another lie. 
Notice this is a pre face lift picture, his eyebrows are aligned instead of the current wonky configuration.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> I found a little more information on it. The statue wasn’t completed until recently. Although they announced their intention to create it back in 2017, apparently there were disagreements between the brothers about what it should look like and the design had to be revised, multiple times!
> 
> According to this article the sculpture wasn’t even cast until March or April of this year. Talk about taking it down to the wire. If they had waited any longer it wouldn’t have been ready by July 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William & Harry 'put differences aside' to sign off Princess Diana statue
> 
> 
> PRINCES William and Harry appear to have put aside their differences to sign off the final design for a statue of their late mother Princess Diana. It is the first indication of a healing of the de…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Reminds me of M's wedding dress multiple revisions.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO  MM wanted the money, the royals were dim enough to fall for it, end of story. Charles allowed this mess to happen, so he needs to clean it up.  His sons’ unhealthy, sycophantic love for all things Diana is disturbing on many levels. Fine to remember her quietly, but this _statue_ _show_ borderlines on nonsense. The statue has been in the garden since 2019??? Sheesh, the moment has past. Time to let it go. So many more important things to care about now. Stop the back-stabbing drama, continue doing the good works.
> 
> The world does not need any more nonsense now.


Yes I think they both manipulate Diana’s good PR for themselves. It seems to me their press teams don’t think either brother can be popular without her. (Also I guess it just shows what a nonentity Charles is he is front and centre and he still doesn’t have the gravitas his ex-wife retains.)

Charles and team we’re definitely seduced by the good PR of having the ‘first royal of colour’ & I think they felt 40year old bitter bachelor Harry was a giant liability for the project so they rushed in where angels fear to tread.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't Lacey the author who had gotten on our collective nerves because he was even defending the troublesome two and understood their wounded little egos? So if he paints a less than flattering picture it's probably not because he hates them.


He’s flogging the paperback edition and he’s smart enough to see which way the tide is going. It seems like only  ‘single white female’ Scobie is unequivocally on their side now. 


needlv said:


> The gossip / stories are leaking out now....



This is very Sonja Morgan   


lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, statues are so hit or miss, this could be bad.


My money is on it being an eye sore as the process reminds me of that saying that a camel is a horse designed by committee.

I think an actual image of her is extremely risky. Much better to opt for some abstract symbolism or her favourite animal or flowers or something. 
London is an absolute treasure trove for hideous vanity statues in general. It’s getting like Vegas


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> The gossip / stories are leaking out now....




If that's true, then we can add fraud to the charges of bullying  

and if it's true that she was fiddling expenses and it's 'out' then she must have got found out.


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> Charles will be in Scotland...
> OUT OF TOWN *Prince Charles ‘has no plans to meet Harry’ when he jets in from US to unveil statue of his mum Diana*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles 'has no plans to meet Harry' when he jets in from US for statue
> 
> 
> WHEN Prince Harry flies in from the US at the end of the month, one key family member won’t be about for about for a catch up. In an unfortunate clash of the diaries, Prince Charles will be u…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Yeah, no way is Charles going to be hanging around anything that commemorates Diana's life, even if she was the mother of his children.  I do give him props, all those years ago, for flying to Paris to collect Diana's remains on behalf of his sons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this gossip story on Insta?  You have to scroll through ...




Just...wow. Everything sounds completely believable (who's the guy with the pet kraken though? I'd think William, not Charles, but they named him as such earlier in the story?). I'm completely unsurprised to learn Zara isn't into Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> The results of the bullying enquiry are being delayed...
> 
> from the Times again... ( not behind a paywall just in case you dint have access)
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.ph/2021.06.19-230433/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/palace-may-delay-verdict-on-meghan-bullying-claims-until-next-year-f9q2s0kc2



Is this a final chance for Methane before the BRF destroy her publicly?

Or just keeping their cards to see what other antics she will get up to?

It’s almost better than a drama, except that sadly it’s real life and people that are going through the angst.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Charles will be in Scotland...
> OUT OF TOWN *Prince Charles ‘has no plans to meet Harry’ when he jets in from US to unveil statue of his mum Diana*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles 'has no plans to meet Harry' when he jets in from US for statue
> 
> 
> WHEN Prince Harry flies in from the US at the end of the month, one key family member won’t be about for about for a catch up. In an unfortunate clash of the diaries, Prince Charles will be u…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Unfortunate clash of calendars, recollections may vary  Sounds so proper, so elegant

The sculptor - he will be criticized regardless of how the statue looks. Guessing he wants this to be over with ASAP 





						Home - Ian Rank-Broadley
					

Ian Rank-Broadley is one of the foremost sculptors working today. His effigy of H.M. Queen Elizabeth II appears on all UK and Commonwealth coinage since 1998. He has recently completed work on one of the most important war memorials since... Read More >




					www.ianrank-broadley.co.uk
				













						Here Are All the Details You Missed From Princess Diana’s Statue Unveiling
					

Harry and William put aside their differences to honor their late mother.




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				



*The Sculptor Is Super Famous*
Princess Diana’s sculpture is being made by Ian Rank-Broadley, whose extremely close-up face you can see below! You might not have heard of Ian, but you’ve definitely seen his work considering he designed the image of the Queen that is used on coins in the UK. 






PA IMAGESGETTY IMAGES


----------



## rose60610

Will Methane order a replica or smaller version of the Diana statue for their own Montecito backyard? She could make a shrine out of it, create a Diana Holiday and have an annual wreath laying ceremony in memory of her late mother-in-law. Of course she'd never publicize such an idea .


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> Is this a final chance for Methane before the BRF destroy her publicly?
> 
> Or just keeping their cards to see what other antics she will get up to?
> 
> It’s almost better than a drama, except that *sadly it’s real life and people that are going through the angst.*



True, the angst is real. Still, they bring it on themselves. Many many many _elites, billionaires, actors. regular people, etc. _live quietly, happily and privately.  It is possible.  So, why don’t they?  IMO they are chasing the $$$$. It’s all about self promotion.

ETA: case in point - shameless self-promotion
*Meghan Markle reveals she bought Harry a bench with an inscribed plaque for his first Father's Day and says her children's book named The Bench is a 'love story' about life with the Royal 'in good times or bad' in interview aired on US radio today*

*Meghan Markle will appear on US radio today to give her only interview about children's book The Bench*
*The Duchess of Sussex will be speaking to NPR Weekend between 1pm and 3pm GMT about £12.99 book *
*Meghan revealed in the pre-recorded interview that the poem was inspired by Prince Harry and Archie*
*It marks her first interview since she and Harry accused the Royal Family of racism in Oprah chat in March *









						Meghan Markle reveals 'voracious' reader Archie, 2, 'loves' her book
					

The Duchess of Sussex will speak to NPR Weekend radio show this afternoon to give what Omid Scobie said will be her first and only interview about her new children's book, The Bench.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She's pretty obsessed with their love story being oh so special. She was quoted in what was it where she gave the interview when she was dating Harry shortly...Vanity Fair? Can't remember. Anyway, she was quoted saying about their relationship "I personally love a great love story". So modest, our Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I am not listening because...Raptor, but...did the bench make it to Montecito or was it left behind in Frogmore? It must pain this really private person to have to reveal such private stories.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Will Methane order a replica or smaller version of the Diana statue for their own Montecito backyard? She could make a shrine out of it, create a Diana Holiday and have an annual wreath laying ceremony in memory of her late mother-in-law. Of course she'd never publicize such an idea .



Surely she could merely make her own.

After all this is a woman that can write cookery books, 'poetry', and all in calligraphy, not to mention, right every wrong man has ever done to man. Surely, a little light sculpting would only be in a morning's work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

How the hell did she decide the image of a father and son hanging around near a BENCH shows they are super close and have a loving relationship? It was a nonsensical, flimsy idea she has tried too hard to make a thing.

I have been waiting for her to come out with her Duchess of Sussex line of exclusive fathers benches.


----------



## Annawakes

What?  She’s doing a radio interview?  Thought they were on “leave” for 5 months.  Wonder what the people at Spotify think about it?  Oh, you can’t produce new content but you have time to go on radio interviews??  Ridiculous!


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> What?  She’s doing a radio interview?  Thought they were on “leave” for 5 months.  Wonder what the people at Spotify think about it?  Oh, you can’t produce new content but you have time to go on radio interviews??  Ridiculous!



I wondered what Netflix thought when they paid all that money for content and Harry and Meghan sold their story to Oprah and CBS. Yeah, I’m sure the documentary about the Invictus games will get just as many viewers.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hi y’all. Finally moved in and still unpacking. Hubby supervised the packing and loading at the old stead and I had no idea what to expect, especially wardrobe boxes labeled ‘Girl Rm’ until I realized they were clothes I kept in one of the other bedroom closets. Giggled like a school girl. 
Frequently checked TPF, only to exclaim, “OMG 50 pages to read” then “OMG 100 pages” and today, 141 pages to read; it will take forever to catch up, but I wanted to say hello before starting that process. BTW, I kept up with news and current events and of course Lilibet. There are no words left to describe this selfish pair, who constantly portray themselves as victims who finally found freedom and yet constantly trash others for ‘victimizing’ them.
To H&M, wake up and smell the latte; the article below is what ‘Finding Freedom’ really means and there are thousands of similar stories about people trying to escape to the free world. Get on with your life and STFU. CBC Article


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hi y’all. Finally moved in and still unpacking. Hubby supervised the packing and loading at the old stead and I had no idea what to expect, especially wardrobe boxes labeled ‘Girl Rm’ until I realized they were clothes I kept in one of the other bedroom closets. Giggled like a school girl.
> Frequently checked TPF, only to exclaim, “OMG 50 pages to read” then “OMG 100 pages” and today, 141 pages to read; it will take forever to catch up, but I wanted to say hello before starting that process. BTW, I kept up with news and current events and of course Lilibet. There are no words left to describe this selfish pair, who constantly portray themselves as victims who finally found freedom and yet constantly trash others for ‘victimizing’ them.
> To H&M, wake up and smell the latte; the article below is what ‘Finding Freedom’ really means and there are thousands of similar stories about people trying to escape to the free world. Get on with your life and STFU. CBC Article



Welcome back  
It’s 100 pages of the same, tiresome drama - nothing really new.  Same song, different verse.  Enjoy your new home


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Anyway, she was quoted saying about their relationship "I personally love a great love story".


And we all know how the best love stories end.


Maggie Muggins said:


> the article below is what ‘Finding Freedom’ really means and there are thousands of similar stories about people trying to escape to the free world. Get on with your life and STFU. CBC Article


I find it particularly galling that the term was used by someone whose family basically enslaved half the world at one time. The sun did finally set on the Empire and this chump has the nerve to whine about his struggles.


----------



## marietouchet

Wow this is all getting so PUBLICLY TOXIC

Been thinking about how a lid was kept on for about the last two years or more
Yeah stories trickled out - MM behavior odd at garden party, Thomas was set aside, W & H foundation is split, kerfuffles at various weddings - but all was handled quietly, people did have videos squirreled away in obscure places on Youtube, but the anger behind the scenes was NOT for discussion
I really hope the Garden event goes well, but H is speaking ... oh dear


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Wow this is all getting so PUBLICLY TOXIC
> 
> Been thinking about how a lid was kept on for about the last two years or more
> Yeah stories trickled out - MM behavior odd at garden party, Thomas was set aside, W & H foundation is split, kerfuffles at various weddings - but all was handled quietly, people did have videos squirreled away in obscure places on Youtube, but the anger behind the scenes was NOT for discussion
> I really hope the Garden event goes well, but H is speaking ... oh dear



Will he speak before or after his ‘lunch’ with QE?
Just wishful thinking, I hope before, so she can have him sign the renunciation papers.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That’s odd. I can understand not having it last year, but wonder why it got postponed in 2018 and 2019.


so if the statue has been in the garden for a while now, has it been photographed?  is it covered?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, the angst is real. Still, they bring it on themselves. Many many many _elites, billionaires, actors. regular people, etc. _live quietly, happily and privately.  It is possible.  So, why don’t they?  IMO they are chasing the $$$$. It’s all about self promotion.
> 
> ETA: case in point - shameless self-promotion
> *Meghan Markle reveals she bought Harry a bench with an inscribed plaque for his first Father's Day and says her children's book named The Bench is a 'love story' about life with the Royal 'in good times or bad' in interview aired on US radio today*
> 
> *Meghan Markle will appear on US radio today to give her only interview about children's book The Bench*
> *The Duchess of Sussex will be speaking to NPR Weekend between 1pm and 3pm GMT about £12.99 book *
> *Meghan revealed in the pre-recorded interview that the poem was inspired by Prince Harry and Archie*
> *It marks her first interview since she and Harry accused the Royal Family of racism in Oprah chat in March *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals 'voracious' reader Archie, 2, 'loves' her book
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex will speak to NPR Weekend radio show this afternoon to give what Omid Scobie said will be her first and only interview about her new children's book, The Bench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I hate that NPR is giving her a forum for her shameless self-promotion


----------



## bag-mania

I am imagining Harry giving a soulful speech full of what he thinks his mother would want. Then it will become over the top self-serving as he says she would want her boys to be close and then he will lay on the innocent “I’m not responsible for this mess” act.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so if the statue has been in the garden for a while now, has it been photographed?  is it covered?



It apparently wasn’t finished until recently (like in the last several weeks).


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I am imagining Harry giving a soulful speech full of what he thinks his mother would want. Then it will become over the top self-serving as he says she would want her boys to be close and then he will lay on the innocent “I’m not responsible for this mess” act.


if he's smart (or his advisors are) he will keep it about his mum....will he say AGAIN how traumatized he was?  how it was the fault of the paps?  hope not.  will he mention his WIFE.  I'd bet on it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> if he's smart (or his advisors are) he will keep it about his mum....will he say AGAIN how traumatized he was?  how it was the fault of the paps?  hope not.  will he mention his WIFE.  I'd bet on it.



You lost me with “if he’s smart.”


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Welcome back
> It’s 100 pages of the same, *tiresome drama* - nothing really new. Same song, different verse. Enjoy your new home


Thank you!It may be tiresome drama, but our fellow bloggers' opinions and interpretations are sometimes too good, too true and too funny to ignore and so, I must read every paragraph and every line.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hi y’all. Finally moved in and still unpacking. Hubby supervised the packing and loading at the old stead and I had no idea what to expect, especially wardrobe boxes labeled ‘Girl Rm’ until I realized they were clothes I kept in one of the other bedroom closets. Giggled like a school girl.
> Frequently checked TPF, only to exclaim, “OMG 50 pages to read” then “OMG 100 pages” and today, 141 pages to read; it will take forever to catch up, but I wanted to say hello before starting that process. BTW, I kept up with news and current events and of course Lilibet. There are no words left to describe this selfish pair, who constantly portray themselves as victims who finally found freedom and yet constantly trash others for ‘victimizing’ them.
> To H&M, wake up and smell the latte; the article below is what ‘Finding Freedom’ really means and there are thousands of similar stories about people trying to escape to the free world. Get on with your life and STFU. CBC Article


Great to have you back! I hope you are enjoying your new home/city.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Great to have you back! I hope you are enjoying your new home/city.



OT but we've been watching Seinfeld lately.....just saw the Elaine dancing episode.  Hilarious!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Great to have you back! I hope you are enjoying your new home/city.



Wow, thank you.  If I could find my old dancing shoes, I'd dance right along with you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you!It may be tiresome drama, but our fellow bloggers' opinions and interpretations are sometimes too good, too true and too funny to ignore and so, I must read every paragraph and every line.



You are so correct! This is the best thread on the internet because of all the witty and clever commenters  
I thought I read the statue was ready last year, but I could be wrong. 


My only question about the Hazz’s speech - will he tear up?  Perhaps his wife is showing him the technique



Spoiler: Those crocodile  tears


----------



## sdkitty

another cloying feature about Duchess in Bazaar...they must be on the payroll
Why Meghan Markle Won't Attend Princess Diana's Statue Unveiling (harpersbazaar.com)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> another cloying feature about Duchess in Bazaar...they must be on the payroll
> Why Meghan Markle Won't Attend Princess Diana's Statue Unveiling (harpersbazaar.com)



I'm deliberately not clicking because I don't care what story she's made up now. She's not going because she's not welcome, not on British soil and not in the BRF.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> She wants to have it both ways so she can use whichever suits her needs at the moment. I* think she would legally change her name to "Duchess" before that comes off of her book*.


Good grief, don't give her any ideas.

PS. Sorry, if someone has already responded in a similar manner. I haven't read to the end of the thread yet.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are so correct! This is the best thread on the internet because of all the witty and clever commenters
> I thought I read the statue was ready last year, but I could be wrong.
> 
> 
> My only question about the Hazz’s speech - will he tear up?  Perhaps his wife is showing him the technique
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Those crocodile  tears
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5115829



Please goddess NO! Spare us.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> You lost me with “if he’s smart.”



I think the closest he ever got to smart was if he shopped for an Apple watch


----------



## Sol Ryan

Ugh… I just deleted the NPR app off my phone. They just sent me a news alert on their Meghan story. I think that’s abusing my permission for breaking news alerts… not sure ”The Bench” or a rich dude is given a bench counts as breaking news….

This hurts as I support my local NPR station… guess I’ll just listen in the car….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gloves are off!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles won't let Archie be a prince as he slims down monarchy
> 
> 
> The heir to the throne has made it clear that Harry and Meghan's son will have no place among frontline Royals as he plans a slimmed-down Monarchy after he becomes King.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Again shows the hypocrisy of these two buffoons.  They publicly declared they don’t want Archie to be titled, then fume when PC plans to ensure that.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I’m shocked at how many US publications are calling Scobie a Royal expert today. Since when does being a celebrity toady mean you are an expert?


Scobie is a celebrity?!!?  He’s more like a hanger-on.  He’s like one in a pack of starving, rabid dogs trying to get the bone.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Scobie is a celebrity?!!?  He’s more like a hanger-on.  He’s like one in a pack of starving, rabid dogs trying to get the bone.



No no, I meant he is a toady to a celebrity! I hope we never reach such a low point where an @ss kisser like him is a celebrity.


----------



## scarlet555

These two are making it too easy for tpf to drag them in mud!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Will Methane order a replica or smaller version of the Diana statue for their own Montecito backyard? She could make a shrine out of it, create a Diana Holiday and have an annual wreath laying ceremony in memory of her late mother-in-law. Of course she'd never publicize such an idea .


Lol reminds me of Hindu temples adorning the statues of Gods.  She could pretend Diana is a diety and adorn her with fresh garlands every day.  Hopefully she remembers to wash the feet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh… I just deleted the NPR app off my phone. They just sent me a news alert on their Meghan story. I think that’s abusing my permission for breaking news alerts… not sure ”The Bench” or a rich dude is given a bench counts as breaking news….
> 
> This hurts as I support my local NPR station… guess I’ll just listen in the car….


I don't think I'd go as far as to delete the app....unless you can also send them a message saying why you did


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> another cloying feature about Duchess in Bazaar...they must be on the payroll
> Why Meghan Markle Won't Attend Princess Diana's Statue Unveiling (harpersbazaar.com)


They are and it is really annoying!  I see multiple articles there on a daily basis.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are so correct! This is the best thread on the internet because of all the witty and clever commenters
> I thought I read the statue was ready last year, but I could be wrong.
> 
> 
> My only question about the Hazz’s speech - will he tear up?  Perhaps his wife is showing him the technique
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Those crocodile  tears
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5115829


 Plus a bit of this


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to be confusion about this, too - another reason to keep it private. They can try again on her 65th.
> 
> From the article:
> _Prince William and Prince Harry will be in attendance at the unveiling of the statue. This has been all but confirmed by one of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's favoured royal reporters Omid Scobie who wrote for Bazaar.com: "Though no plans have been officially confirmed yet, the Duke of Sussex is expected to return to the U.K. this summer for the unveiling of a statue of his late mother, Princess Diana.
> 
> "He will join William at Kensington Palace's Sunken Garden for a ceremony *that was rescheduled from summer 2020."*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything we know about the Princess Diana's statue unveiling on July 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> honey.nine.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _First announced by the princes in 2017, the original plan was to unveil the statue later that same year. Then the date got moved to 2019. And then the lockdown in 2020 prevented it from taking place that year. Needless to say, it's been a long time coming, considering that Harry and William initially intended for it to be unveiled for the 20th anniversary of their mother's 1997 death._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Parenting, Baby Names, Celebrities, and Royal News | CafeMom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cafemom.com


Maybe they will base it on this


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> another cloying feature about Duchess in Bazaar...they must be on the payroll
> Why Meghan Markle Won't Attend Princess Diana's Statue Unveiling (harpersbazaar.com)


They are not alone on the payroll... This is on newsstands now. Will and Kate are staying at the 16 (or 19)-toilet mansion...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She wants to have it both ways so she can use whichever suits her needs at the moment. I think she would legally change her name to "Duchess" before that comes off of her book.


Haha, great minds think alike. I had suggested to legally name the daughter "Princess", but it looks like they ignored my suggestion or missed that post. Now that Charles is going ahead with his plan to slim down the monarchy, I feel like saying 'I told you so!'


----------



## csshopper

Sol Ryan said:


> Ugh… I just deleted the NPR app off my phone. They just sent me a news alert on their Meghan story. I think that’s abusing my permission for breaking news alerts… not sure ”The Bench” or a rich dude is given a bench counts as breaking news….
> 
> This hurts as I support my local NPR station… guess I’ll just listen in the car….


I too am a long time supporter of NPR and PBS and feel like you do. I've sent a factually blistering message in response to their giving her air time and calling out the multiple examples of hypocrisy. Will be interesting to see if I get a response. But I feel better.


----------



## Chanbal

So compassionate! No need to click on this junk, here it is:

_Meghan Markle has spoken out in her first interview since the bombshell revelations with Oprah Winfrey at the beginning of March.

The Duchess of Sussex has written a bestselling children's book, The Bench, and she has revealed that she loves seeing Prince Harry rocking Archie to sleep in a chat with Samantha Balaban on her *NPR Weekend radio show*, The Weekend Edition.

The interview was recorded before the birth of her daughter Lilibet on June 4.

*Meghan shared details about what inspired her to write the book and that how watching Harry with Archie filled her with love as well how Princess Diana was in her mind while writing it.*

Meghan says the poem that runs through the book was inspired by watching her husband and their son, Archie, together.

She said: "I often find, and especially in this past year, I think so many of us realised how much happens in the quiet.

"It was definitely moments like that, watching them from out of the window and watching [my husband] just, you know, rock him to sleep or carry him or, you know ... those lived experiences, from my observation, are the things that I infused in this poem."

She continued: "Growing up, I remember so much how it felt to not see yourself represented.

"Any child or any family hopefully can open this book and see themselves in it, whether that means glasses or freckled or a different body shape or a different ethnicity or religion."

Meghan added: "There are lots of little small moments like that that were personal memories or anecdotes that I wanted infused in there."

This included being inspired by Princess Diana as she said that she has included her favourite flower, as well as her beloved rescue chickens.

"I needed my girls in there," Meghan said
The book is an intimate, personal insight into her family life which she hopes will transcend other families across the globe.

She said: ""It's a love story. It's really just about growing with someone and having this deep connection and this trust so that, be at good times or bad, you know that you had this person.

"I really hope that people can see this as a love story that transcends the story of my family."
After the release of the book, Meghan said in a statement: "While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I'm encouraged to see that* its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.

"In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.*"_









						Meghan Markle on how Harry and Diana inspired book in only interview since Oprah
					

Meghan Markle has given her first interview since welcoming daughter Lilibet, discussing her best-selling children's book The Bench with journalist Samantha Balaban on The Weekend Edition on NPR




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sure Meggie.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> So compassionate! No need to click on this junk, here it is:
> 
> _Meghan Markle has spoken out in her first interview since the bombshell revelations with Oprah Winfrey at the beginning of March.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has written a bestselling children's book, The Bench, and she has revealed that she loves seeing Prince Harry rocking Archie to sleep in a chat with Samantha Balaban on her *NPR Weekend radio show*, The Weekend Edition.
> 
> The interview was recorded before the birth of her daughter Lilibet on June 4.
> 
> *Meghan shared details about what inspired her to write the book and that how watching Harry with Archie filled her with love as well how Princess Diana was in her mind while writing it.*
> 
> Meghan says the poem that runs through the book was inspired by watching her husband and their son, Archie, together.
> 
> She said: "I often find, and especially in this past year, I think so many of us realised how much happens in the quiet.
> 
> "It was definitely moments like that, watching them from out of the window and watching [my husband] just, you know, rock him to sleep or carry him or, you know ... those lived experiences, from my observation, are the things that I infused in this poem."
> 
> She continued: "Growing up, I remember so much how it felt to not see yourself represented.
> 
> "Any child or any family hopefully can open this book and see themselves in it, whether that means glasses or freckled or a different body shape or a different ethnicity or religion."
> 
> Meghan added: "There are lots of little small moments like that that were personal memories or anecdotes that I wanted infused in there."
> 
> This included being inspired by Princess Diana as she said that she has included her favourite flower, as well as her beloved rescue chickens.
> 
> "I needed my girls in there," Meghan said
> The book is an intimate, personal insight into her family life which she hopes will transcend other families across the globe.
> 
> She said: ""It's a love story. It's really just about growing with someone and having this deep connection and this trust so that, be at good times or bad, you know that you had this person.
> 
> "I really hope that people can see this as a love story that transcends the story of my family."
> After the release of the book, Meghan said in a statement: "While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I'm encouraged to see that* its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> "In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle on how Harry and Diana inspired book in only interview since Oprah
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has given her first interview since welcoming daughter Lilibet, discussing her best-selling children's book The Bench with journalist Samantha Balaban on The Weekend Edition on NPR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> So compassionate! No need to click on this junk, here it is:
> 
> _Meghan Markle has spoken out in her first interview since the bombshell revelations with Oprah Winfrey at the beginning of March.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has written a bestselling children's book, The Bench, and she has revealed that she loves seeing Prince Harry rocking Archie to sleep in a chat with Samantha Balaban on her *NPR Weekend radio show*, The Weekend Edition.
> 
> The interview was recorded before the birth of her daughter Lilibet on June 4.
> 
> *Meghan shared details about what inspired her to write the book and that how watching Harry with Archie filled her with love as well how Princess Diana was in her mind while writing it.*
> 
> Meghan says the poem that runs through the book was inspired by watching her husband and their son, Archie, together.
> 
> She said: "I often find, and especially in this past year, I think so many of us realised how much happens in the quiet.
> 
> "It was definitely moments like that, watching them from out of the window and watching [my husband] just, you know, rock him to sleep or carry him or, you know ... those lived experiences, from my observation, are the things that I infused in this poem."
> 
> She continued: "Growing up, I remember so much how it felt to not see yourself represented.
> 
> "Any child or any family hopefully can open this book and see themselves in it, whether that means glasses or freckled or a different body shape or a different ethnicity or religion."
> 
> Meghan added: "There are lots of little small moments like that that were personal memories or anecdotes that I wanted infused in there."
> 
> This included being inspired by Princess Diana as she said that she has included her favourite flower, as well as her beloved rescue chickens.
> 
> "I needed my girls in there," Meghan said
> The book is an intimate, personal insight into her family life which she hopes will transcend other families across the globe.
> 
> She said: ""It's a love story. It's really just about growing with someone and having this deep connection and this trust so that, be at good times or bad, you know that you had this person.
> 
> "I really hope that people can see this as a love story that transcends the story of my family."
> After the release of the book, Meghan said in a statement: "While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I'm encouraged to see that* its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> "In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle on how Harry and Diana inspired book in only interview since Oprah
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has given her first interview since welcoming daughter Lilibet, discussing her best-selling children's book The Bench with journalist Samantha Balaban on The Weekend Edition on NPR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


She wanted her girls in there?  The chickens?!!?


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I too am a long time supporter of NPR and PBS and feel like you do. I've sent a factually blistering message in response to their giving her air time and calling out the multiple examples of hypocrisy. Will be interesting to see if I get a response. But I feel better.



I hope this finally puts to rest that myth about NPR hosts being intelligent people.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I hope this finally puts to rest that myth about NPR hosts being intelligent people.


Schwetty Balls.  Enough said


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> With the talk that Harry wants his "own" journo at the statue unveiling, my bet is that it would be Scobie.  I hope that William says no.  If Scobie were to show up or any journo paid to have the Harry approved POV, the spin will be all about Harry is the only and true son of Saint Diana who can do her work etc.  Every  perceived insult will be documented by this person.  I see no alternative for William, but to make this a totally private event with no coverage.


WOW .. I hadn't heard that; that Hap-Hazza wants his own journo?!?!?!  Yup, you KNOW it would be Obie-dumb-Scadoobie and as such, a whole lot of UN-TRUTHs will be put into place!  I totally agree with you @gracekelly  .. this should be a closed/private event with no journalists at all!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they will base it on this
> 
> View attachment 5115891



If H&M are quick they can buy their own for the garden, an original Franklin Mint and available now on *bay (not my listing I hasten to add) Diana doll on Ebay


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> If H&M are quick they can buy their own for the garden, an original Franklin Mint and available now on *bay (not my listing I hasten to add) Diana doll on Ebay
> 
> View attachment 5115946


I wonder if they could go after the seller to share the profit.


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I agree with you.  I think if Harry and MM had stayed as senior working royals, living in the UK, doing their duty, that Charles would maybe give the children titles when he becomes king. But, to have a prince and princess of the UK growing up as Californians with zero connection to the UK?  Charles is right.


Not even in theory, but we in the US have a *freakin' law that DOES NOT ALLOW a Title* .. period (Article I, Sections 9 + 10)!!!  It is known as the *Titles of Nobility Clause*, and was designed to shield the federal officeholders of the United States against so-called "corrupting foreign influences."  So, an *American citizen* cannot be named a Prince, Duke, or any other noble *title* by our own government.  

Now, could they make a stink and say "well - Archie was born in the UK", sure they could .. but they still cannot use the title here in the US.  We call Prince Harry that because it's really more of a "nice thing to do" as opposed to what we really should be addressing him as and that is "HARRY"!!!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if they could go after the seller to share the profit.



H&M probably hate that FM got there first!


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Not even in theory, but we in the US have a *freakin' law that DOES NOT ALLOW a Title* .. period (Article I, Sections 9 + 10)!!!  It is known as the *Titles of Nobility Clause*, and was designed to shield the federal officeholders of the United States against so-called "corrupting foreign influences."  So, an *American citizen* cannot be named a Prince, Duke, or any other noble *title* by our own government.
> 
> Now, could they make a stink and say "well - Archie was born in the UK", sure they could .. but they still cannot use the title here in the US.  We call Prince Harry that because it's really more of a "nice thing to do" as opposed to what we really should be addressing him as and that is "HARRY"!!!



H is not a US citizen which is why he is entitled (no pun intended) to be called Prince Harry (which _strangely_ he uses since M uses Duchess, but in the US they know him as Prince Harry I guess). It's M that is not entitled to be titled in the US since she is a citizen. If anything she should be called, the Duchess of Sussex (NOT as 'Royal expert' OS called her Duchess Meghan in a bl**dy Tweet) but as you say NOT in the US.


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> I don't think I'd go as far as to delete the app....unless you can also send them a message saying why you did



I sent a message when I did. I just expect when I agree to breaking news it’s actual news and not a pre-recorded interview from weeks ago… :/


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder whether the no titles for H’s kids was a Charles decision only, or whether t was something Prince Phillip advised him in the hospital deathbed conversation.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> I sent a message when I did. I just expect when I agree to breaking news it’s actual news and not a pre-recorded interview from weeks ago… :/


absolutely right....very annoying


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> absolutely right....very annoying



Admittedly, it’s not the first time they’ve done this. It’s been annoying me for a while. I almost deleted it last week for the same reason… if it’s not real news, stop bothering me.


----------



## marietouchet

Just thinking …
happy Father’s Day !
Not a lot of photos of Archie, but in the few we have … not a lot of views of 6 holding, hugging, hand holding Archie , like Diana did with 6


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> So compassionate! No need to click on this junk, here it is:
> 
> _Meghan Markle has spoken out in her first interview since the bombshell revelations with Oprah Winfrey at the beginning of March.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has written a bestselling children's book, The Bench, and she has revealed that she loves seeing Prince Harry rocking Archie to sleep in a chat with Samantha Balaban on her *NPR Weekend radio show*, The Weekend Edition.
> 
> The interview was recorded before the birth of her daughter Lilibet on June 4.
> 
> *Meghan shared details about what inspired her to write the book and that how watching Harry with Archie filled her with love as well how Princess Diana was in her mind while writing it.*
> 
> Meghan says the poem that runs through the book was inspired by watching her husband and their son, Archie, together.
> 
> She said: "I often find, and especially in this past year, I think so many of us realised how much happens in the quiet.
> 
> "It was definitely moments like that, watching them from out of the window and watching [my husband] just, you know, rock him to sleep or carry him or, you know ... those lived experiences, from my observation, are the things that I infused in this poem."
> 
> She continued: "Growing up, I remember so much how it felt to not see yourself represented.
> 
> "Any child or any family hopefully can open this book and see themselves in it, whether that means glasses or freckled or a different body shape or a different ethnicity or religion."
> 
> Meghan added: "There are lots of little small moments like that that were personal memories or anecdotes that I wanted infused in there."
> 
> This included being inspired by Princess Diana as she said that she has included her favourite flower, as well as her beloved rescue chickens.
> 
> "I needed my girls in there," Meghan said
> The book is an intimate, personal insight into her family life which she hopes will transcend other families across the globe.
> 
> She said: ""It's a love story. It's really just about growing with someone and having this deep connection and this trust so that, be at good times or bad, you know that you had this person.
> 
> "I really hope that people can see this as a love story that transcends the story of my family."
> After the release of the book, Meghan said in a statement: "While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I'm encouraged to see that* its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> "In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle on how Harry and Diana inspired book in only interview since Oprah
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has given her first interview since welcoming daughter Lilibet, discussing her best-selling children's book The Bench with journalist Samantha Balaban on The Weekend Edition on NPR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



_ 'its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.'_
_"In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values."  _

_*EXCEPT when it comes to your family and the BRF.    *_


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Just thinking …
> happy Father’s Day !
> Not a lot of photos of Archie, but in the few have … not a lot of views of 6 holding, hugging, hand holding Archie ?


Archie is too busy reading!


----------



## bellecate

I just can’t, s


Chanbal said:


> So compassionate! No need to click on this junk, here it is:
> 
> _Meghan Markle has spoken out in her first interview since the bombshell revelations with Oprah Winfrey at the beginning of March.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has written a bestselling children's book, The Bench, and she has revealed that she loves seeing Prince Harry rocking Archie to sleep in a chat with Samantha Balaban on her *NPR Weekend radio show*, The Weekend Edition.
> 
> The interview was recorded before the birth of her daughter Lilibet on June 4.
> 
> *Meghan shared details about what inspired her to write the book and that how watching Harry with Archie filled her with love as well how Princess Diana was in her mind while writing it.*
> 
> Meghan says the poem that runs through the book was inspired by watching her husband and their son, Archie, together.
> 
> She said: "I often find, and especially in this past year, I think so many of us realised how much happens in the quiet.
> 
> "It was definitely moments like that, watching them from out of the window and watching [my husband] just, you know, rock him to sleep or carry him or, you know ... those lived experiences, from my observation, are the things that I infused in this poem."
> 
> She continued: "Growing up, I remember so much how it felt to not see yourself represented.
> 
> "Any child or any family hopefully can open this book and see themselves in it, whether that means glasses or freckled or a different body shape or a different ethnicity or religion."
> 
> Meghan added: "There are lots of little small moments like that that were personal memories or anecdotes that I wanted infused in there."
> 
> This included being inspired by Princess Diana as she said that she has included her favourite flower, as well as her beloved rescue chickens.
> 
> "I needed my girls in there," Meghan said
> The book is an intimate, personal insight into her family life which she hopes will transcend other families across the globe.
> 
> She said: ""It's a love story. It's really just about growing with someone and having this deep connection and this trust so that, be at good times or bad, you know that you had this person.
> 
> "I really hope that people can see this as a love story that transcends the story of my family."
> After the release of the book, Meghan said in a statement: "While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I'm encouraged to see that* its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> "In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle on how Harry and Diana inspired book in only interview since Oprah
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has given her first interview since welcoming daughter Lilibet, discussing her best-selling children's book The Bench with journalist Samantha Balaban on The Weekend Edition on NPR
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I just can’t, such a nauseating word salad of self glorification. What a wasted opportunity she has tossed away.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> She wanted her girls in there?  The chickens?!!?


I thought she was referring to her boobs


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> Archie is too busy reading!



... on the _bench_!


----------



## scarlet555

WTF NPR?!!? Just lost all my respect for NPR €£#%%}}}<!!!!

compassionate and equitable world?? TF!? Core values?? 
wordsalad 

how about NPR retain their core values and stick to real news not made up $h!t


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Annawakes said:


> What?  She’s doing a radio interview?  *Thought they were on “leave” for 5 months.*  Wonder what the people at Spotify think about it?  Oh, you can’t produce new content but you have time to go on radio interviews??  Ridiculous!



I think MoM is trying to save her credibility because the palace is starting to burn her bit by bit in countering her lies publicly     




lanasyogamama said:


> Archie is too busy reading!



Or changing the first word that he had ever uttered so that his parents can update it all over again in another interview


----------



## EverSoElusive

Dead


----------



## 1LV

^^^^^^
Don’t say it.  Don’t say it. Don’t say it…

*note to self


----------



## poopsie

1LV said:


> ^^^^^^
> Don’t say it.  Don’t say it. Don’t say it…
> 
> *note to self



You're amongst friends
Say it say it say it


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> You're amongst friends
> Say it say it say it


lol, I’m sure I’m not the only one thinking it, but I just can’t!


----------



## Chanbal

They are unstoppable... 

*Details of another private conversation between Prince Harry and members of the Royal Family were leaked yesterday, amid growing frustration at the Palace. *_*The leak revealed that Prince Charles told the Duke of Sussex that he will "never" let his grandson Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor be a Prince*, according to the Mail on Sunday. Charlie Rae, a former royal editor at The Sun, said that *"this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp".*

Mr Rae told talkRADIO: "We have a situation where Harry and Meghan decided they don't want to be members of the royal family anymore.

"They want to live in America and be self-sufficient, which is fine. They can hardly expect Archie to be a Prince.

"Prince Charles has always said he wants a slimmed-down monarchy.

"He wants a small nucleus of people to be the working royals. This would have included Harry and Meghan had they decided to stay."

TalkRADIO host Cristo asked: "Was this as a result of Harry and Meghan saying we don't want to be senior royals anymore, so Charles said 'Well great, that's made my life easier, we won't make your children princes or princess then'. Or was this planned all along?"

Mr Rae responded: "It was the first scenario. Let's not forget that Archie is still technically the Earl of Dumbarton but the couple themselves decided they didn't want to use that title.

"Some people thought they were sitting back, hoping that Archie would one day be prince, but they got that wrong.

"It puts into context that comment Meghan made, that the royals didn't want Archie to be a Prince.
"It's interesting that this has happened.

"*And this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp and now we know why they were so vitriolic in the Oprah Winfrey interview.*"

Leaks from the couple in the past have frustrated officials inside the Palace, with Ingrid Seward, of Majesty magazine, claiming that the royals "hate" their private conversations being leaked to the press.

She said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were going to "really cause a problem" if details of more private chats were revealed in the press.

According to the report in the Mail on Sunday, a source close to the couple said: "Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King.”

Charles reportedly told Harry that he will change a key document preventing his grandson from inheriting a title that would once have been his birthright.

It also explains Meghan's claim to Oprah in March, when she said: They [the Royal Family] were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or a Princess."

A source added: "This is what nobody realised from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright."_









						Harry faces backlash after yet another private conversation leaked
					

PRINCE HARRY faces a backlash ahead of his return to the UK amid ongoing leaks of private conversations between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal Family.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

So they tried to silent this video.


----------



## bisousx

Chanbal said:


> They are unstoppable...
> 
> *Details of another private conversation between Prince Harry and members of the Royal Family were leaked yesterday, amid growing frustration at the Palace. *_*The leak revealed that Prince Charles told the Duke of Sussex that he will "never" let his grandson Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor be a Prince*, according to the Mail on Sunday. Charlie Rae, a former royal editor at The Sun, said that *"this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp".*
> 
> Mr Rae told talkRADIO: "We have a situation where Harry and Meghan decided they don't want to be members of the royal family anymore.
> 
> "They want to live in America and be self-sufficient, which is fine. They can hardly expect Archie to be a Prince.
> 
> "Prince Charles has always said he wants a slimmed-down monarchy.
> 
> "He wants a small nucleus of people to be the working royals. This would have included Harry and Meghan had they decided to stay."
> 
> TalkRADIO host Cristo asked: "Was this as a result of Harry and Meghan saying we don't want to be senior royals anymore, so Charles said 'Well great, that's made my life easier, we won't make your children princes or princess then'. Or was this planned all along?"
> 
> Mr Rae responded: "It was the first scenario. Let's not forget that Archie is still technically the Earl of Dumbarton but the couple themselves decided they didn't want to use that title.
> 
> "Some people thought they were sitting back, hoping that Archie would one day be prince, but they got that wrong.
> 
> "It puts into context that comment Meghan made, that the royals didn't want Archie to be a Prince.
> "It's interesting that this has happened.
> 
> "*And this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp and now we know why they were so vitriolic in the Oprah Winfrey interview.*"
> 
> Leaks from the couple in the past have frustrated officials inside the Palace, with Ingrid Seward, of Majesty magazine, claiming that the royals "hate" their private conversations being leaked to the press.
> 
> She said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were going to "really cause a problem" if details of more private chats were revealed in the press.
> 
> According to the report in the Mail on Sunday, a source close to the couple said: "Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King.”
> 
> Charles reportedly told Harry that he will change a key document preventing his grandson from inheriting a title that would once have been his birthright.
> 
> It also explains Meghan's claim to Oprah in March, when she said: They [the Royal Family] were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or a Princess."
> 
> A source added: "This is what nobody realised from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces backlash after yet another private conversation leaked
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY faces a backlash ahead of his return to the UK amid ongoing leaks of private conversations between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Meh. Archie doesn’t need a title since he’s being raised in California with no relationships or ties to his royal British relatives. The only benefit for Archie to have a noble title in the US is to pick up girls.


----------



## marietouchet

Oprah was payback … badly done by 6

Prince Harry 'agreed to Oprah interview after losing military titles'









						Prince Harry 'agreed to Oprah interview after losing military titles'
					

The Duke of Sussex, 36, is said to have become 'angry' and agreed to the interview after losing a number of his military appointments in the wake of 'Megxit', a source told the Sun.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

1LV said:


> lol, I’m sure I’m not the only one thinking it, but I just can’t!


Bravo, don’t say it, it would be WTMI , and yes we are all thinking it in solidarity with you


----------



## papertiger

bisousx said:


> Meh. Archie doesn’t need a title since he’s being raised in California with no relationships or ties to his royal British relatives. The only benefit for Archie to have a noble title in the US is to pick up girls.



or boys (I'd be down with with a gay Earl)


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> So they tried to silent this video.



Wow, is CNN actually employing a journalist with one ball at least??


----------



## Chanbal

Oh my gosh!  I sincerely don't know what to believe.  Could this be true? 



Spoiler: Don't know what to believe!


----------



## Chanbal

And there is more...   



Spoiler: Shocked


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> And there is more...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Shocked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5116201


No clue if this is true or not, but tea sure tastes great with popcorn!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> They are unstoppable...
> 
> *Details of another private conversation between Prince Harry and members of the Royal Family were leaked yesterday, amid growing frustration at the Palace. *_*The leak revealed that Prince Charles told the Duke of Sussex that he will "never" let his grandson Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor be a Prince*, according to the Mail on Sunday. Charlie Rae, a former royal editor at The Sun, said that *"this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp".*
> 
> Mr Rae told talkRADIO: "We have a situation where Harry and Meghan decided they don't want to be members of the royal family anymore.
> 
> "They want to live in America and be self-sufficient, which is fine. They can hardly expect Archie to be a Prince.
> 
> "Prince Charles has always said he wants a slimmed-down monarchy.
> 
> "He wants a small nucleus of people to be the working royals. This would have included Harry and Meghan had they decided to stay."
> 
> TalkRADIO host Cristo asked: "Was this as a result of Harry and Meghan saying we don't want to be senior royals anymore, so Charles said 'Well great, that's made my life easier, we won't make your children princes or princess then'. Or was this planned all along?"
> 
> Mr Rae responded: "It was the first scenario. Let's not forget that Archie is still technically the Earl of Dumbarton but the couple themselves decided they didn't want to use that title.
> 
> "Some people thought they were sitting back, hoping that Archie would one day be prince, but they got that wrong.
> 
> "It puts into context that comment Meghan made, that the royals didn't want Archie to be a Prince.
> "It's interesting that this has happened.
> 
> "*And this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp and now we know why they were so vitriolic in the Oprah Winfrey interview.*"
> 
> Leaks from the couple in the past have frustrated officials inside the Palace, with Ingrid Seward, of Majesty magazine, claiming that the royals "hate" their private conversations being leaked to the press.
> 
> She said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were going to "really cause a problem" if details of more private chats were revealed in the press.
> 
> According to the report in the Mail on Sunday, a source close to the couple said: "Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King.”
> 
> Charles reportedly told Harry that he will change a key document preventing his grandson from inheriting a title that would once have been his birthright.
> 
> It also explains Meghan's claim to Oprah in March, when she said: They [the Royal Family] were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or a Princess."
> 
> A source added: "This is what nobody realised from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces backlash after yet another private conversation leaked
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY faces a backlash ahead of his return to the UK amid ongoing leaks of private conversations between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Is someone going to explain to the kids one day that their parents gave up that "ultimate" birthright? Exactly why do they want him to be a prince any way? Oops, silly me! It would merch better.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Royal claws are coming out. This is getting so *GOOD*  I cannot wait to see them getting squashed like two lowly roaches. Only victims here are the two babies.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Wow, is CNN actually employing a journalist with one ball at least??



WOW! That IS news! That should be a headline spanning the globe!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They are unstoppable...
> 
> *Details of another private conversation between Prince Harry and members of the Royal Family were leaked yesterday, amid growing frustration at the Palace. *_*The leak revealed that Prince Charles told the Duke of Sussex that he will "never" let his grandson Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor be a Prince*, according to the Mail on Sunday. Charlie Rae, a former royal editor at The Sun, said that *"this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp".*
> 
> Mr Rae told talkRADIO: "We have a situation where Harry and Meghan decided they don't want to be members of the royal family anymore.
> 
> "They want to live in America and be self-sufficient, which is fine. They can hardly expect Archie to be a Prince.
> 
> "Prince Charles has always said he wants a slimmed-down monarchy.
> 
> "He wants a small nucleus of people to be the working royals. This would have included Harry and Meghan had they decided to stay."
> 
> TalkRADIO host Cristo asked: "Was this as a result of Harry and Meghan saying we don't want to be senior royals anymore, so Charles said 'Well great, that's made my life easier, we won't make your children princes or princess then'. Or was this planned all along?"
> 
> Mr Rae responded: "It was the first scenario. Let's not forget that Archie is still technically the Earl of Dumbarton but the couple themselves decided they didn't want to use that title.
> 
> "Some people thought they were sitting back, hoping that Archie would one day be prince, but they got that wrong.
> 
> "It puts into context that comment Meghan made, that the royals didn't want Archie to be a Prince.
> "It's interesting that this has happened.
> 
> "*And this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp and now we know why they were so vitriolic in the Oprah Winfrey interview.*"
> 
> Leaks from the couple in the past have frustrated officials inside the Palace, with Ingrid Seward, of Majesty magazine, claiming that the royals "hate" their private conversations being leaked to the press.
> 
> She said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were going to "really cause a problem" if details of more private chats were revealed in the press.
> 
> According to the report in the Mail on Sunday, a source close to the couple said: "Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King.”
> 
> Charles reportedly told Harry that he will change a key document preventing his grandson from inheriting a title that would once have been his birthright.
> 
> It also explains Meghan's claim to Oprah in March, when she said: They [the Royal Family] were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or a Princess."
> 
> A source added: "This is what nobody realised from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces backlash after yet another private conversation leaked
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY faces a backlash ahead of his return to the UK amid ongoing leaks of private conversations between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


It is just an attempt to blackmail them again.  Basically, they are just reinforcing what Charles et al already know, which is that they can not be trusted to keep anything out of the press.  The only way to handle that is not to speak with them at all.  

Charles made his position clear a while ago about a slimmed down monarchy.  If he is at fault for anything it is not telling Harry that his children would not get the prince/princess title when he made his decision to slim things down several years ago.  Continuing to treat Harry like a special snowflake was a big mistake.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> It is just an attempt to blackmail them again.  Basically, they are just reinforcing what Charles et al already know, which is that they can not be trusted to keep anything out of the press.  The only way to handle that is not to speak with them at all.
> 
> Charles made his position clear a while ago about a slimmed down monarchy.  If he is at fault for anything it is not telling Harry that his children would not get the prince/princess title when he made his decision to slim things down several years ago.  Continuing to treat Harry like a special snowflake was a big mistake.


It could also be that when he talked about the slimmed down version, Methane wasn't even a sparkle in anyone's eye then. Hazard would have been included and they probably assumed that he would marry someone who would be supportive. Instead he brought home a harpy.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> They are unstoppable...
> 
> *Details of another private conversation between Prince Harry and members of the Royal Family were leaked yesterday, amid growing frustration at the Palace. *_*The leak revealed that Prince Charles told the Duke of Sussex that he will "never" let his grandson Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor be a Prince*, according to the Mail on Sunday. Charlie Rae, a former royal editor at The Sun, said that *"this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp".*
> 
> Mr Rae told talkRADIO: "We have a situation where Harry and Meghan decided they don't want to be members of the royal family anymore.
> 
> "They want to live in America and be self-sufficient, which is fine. They can hardly expect Archie to be a Prince.
> 
> "Prince Charles has always said he wants a slimmed-down monarchy.
> 
> "He wants a small nucleus of people to be the working royals. This would have included Harry and Meghan had they decided to stay."
> 
> TalkRADIO host Cristo asked: "Was this as a result of Harry and Meghan saying we don't want to be senior royals anymore, so Charles said 'Well great, that's made my life easier, we won't make your children princes or princess then'. Or was this planned all along?"
> 
> Mr Rae responded: "It was the first scenario. Let's not forget that Archie is still technically the Earl of Dumbarton but the couple themselves decided they didn't want to use that title.
> 
> "Some people thought they were sitting back, hoping that Archie would one day be prince, but they got that wrong.
> 
> "It puts into context that comment Meghan made, that the royals didn't want Archie to be a Prince.
> "It's interesting that this has happened.
> 
> "*And this has been leaked by a friend or a source from the Sussexes camp and now we know why they were so vitriolic in the Oprah Winfrey interview.*"
> 
> Leaks from the couple in the past have frustrated officials inside the Palace, with Ingrid Seward, of Majesty magazine, claiming that the royals "hate" their private conversations being leaked to the press.
> 
> She said that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were going to "really cause a problem" if details of more private chats were revealed in the press.
> 
> According to the report in the Mail on Sunday, a source close to the couple said: "Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a Prince, even when Charles became King.”
> 
> Charles reportedly told Harry that he will change a key document preventing his grandson from inheriting a title that would once have been his birthright.
> 
> It also explains Meghan's claim to Oprah in March, when she said: They [the Royal Family] were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or a Princess."
> 
> A source added: "This is what nobody realised from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces backlash after yet another private conversation leaked
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY faces a backlash ahead of his return to the UK amid ongoing leaks of private conversations between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I think Harry and his wife were the ones that said they were out of there. Why should their children be titled. Greed on their part is the only reason. Also their daughter is American another reason for no titles. Hopefully Charles sticks to his word and pares back the monarchy.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> I think Harry and his wife were the ones that said they were out of there. Why should their children be titled. Greed on their part is the only reason. Also their daughter is American another reason for no titles. Hopefully Charles sticks to his word and pares back the monarchy.


We should start popping the corn now, while Methane writes her opus on how racism is to blame for the deprivation. Her maternity leave sure is fun.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> It is just an attempt to blackmail them again.  Basically, they are just reinforcing what Charles et al already know, which is that they can not be trusted to keep anything out of the press.  The only way to handle that is not to speak with them at all.
> 
> Charles made his position clear a while ago about a slimmed down monarchy.  If he is at fault for anything it is not telling Harry that his children would not get the prince/princess title when he made his decision to slim things down several years ago.  Continuing to treat Harry like a special snowflake was a big mistake.



It's a shame and an embarrassment that Charles seems a little out of his depth. In the beginning of the Camilla revelation I was a bit anti-Camilla, but NOW? I think Camilla is a staunch asset and I'm hoping she can slap some sense into Charles even at this stage. Meghan is doing her best to hijack the BRF after landing Prince Dumba$$. And for a family with a documented 1000 year history to get itself embroiled with a zzzzzzz-list idiot Hollow-wood wannabe is beyond the pale. Archie and Baby Lilibet Diana were bred as meal tickets. Diana has been dead since 1997 but since great grandma is 95 and STILL ALIVE there's more merch mileage to be gained to first name the girl after great grandma, not Saint Grandma Diana of the soon to be unveiled statue that's been in the works for many years. 

What if Charles and Diana had ten kids and 40 grandkids? Surely the monarchy would have to be pared down. Why should AWMFL (Absent With Meghan Forced Leave) Harry insist on his kids having titles, especially since he VOLUNTARILY stepped down from royal life? That's the kind of thing you sort out BEFORE making such a move. When one leaves a firm, one LEAVES a firm. No company car, no free zoo passes, no Friday pastry tray, no company expense account. When you have enough dough to buy a 14 million house in America, it's time to cut the apron strings, not b*tch about goo-goo-gaga-da-da cutting off your allowance. 

Meghan started out favorably with the BRF. We now see that it was all a lie. She's a disaster in so many ways. When one depicts chickens as "my girls", that is just ONE indicator of how far one has fallen. From Windsor to chicken feed in Montecito, it's quite the drop. If M&H were truly wallowing in Netflix and Spotify payouts, why are they even giving the time of day to anything else? I'd buy them another damned chicken if it'd shut them up!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> No clue if this is true or not, but tea sure tastes great with popcorn!


They say where there's smoke there's fire. It's crazy if this is true.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _Leaks from the couple in the past have frustrated officials inside the Palace, with Ingrid Seward, of Majesty magazine, claiming that the royals "hate" their private conversations being leaked to the press._


This is very funny. You don't have to be royal to get furious when your private conversations are leaked. I got very bitter when the HR toady scurried off to tell my boss some matters which I had to share with her to get a transfer out of a toxic team. My boss then was an untouchable blue-eyed boy with a mouth like a sewer.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Don't believe I've seen this here.  Maybe it's on the other thread but since it has M's name in title and in the article, here you go.    
I x'd out some words in hopes this is acceptable to post and not against the rules.  From Article ...  

The royal commentator added that it was *"history-making stuff" from Kate as "no member of the house of Windsor has ever undertaken this sort of meticulously coordinated and staged joint project with a US xxxxxxxxxxxxx before"*.

Ms Elser said: "It is impossible not to wonder how this latest turn of events is going down in Montecito as Harry and Meghan begin their five months of parental leave.


> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-middleton-jill-*****-early-years-development
> 
> 
> *MEGHAN Markle could have a "bitter pill to swallow" after watching Kate bond with xxxx xxxxx, according to a royal expert.*


----------



## Hermes Zen

One more that I have to share ... 

“Sussex needs someone who is more concerned about the welfare and prosperity of the people than two spoilt rich show business stars obsessed with their own ' problems'."

“Maybe the people of Sussex should hold a vote"


> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...e-duke-duchess-sussex-queen-elizabeth-lilibet
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle told to hand Sussex titles to Charlotte and Louis*





> *PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle should be STRIPPED of their Royal titles - with the Queen instead handing the honour to one of his brother Prince William's children, a former diplomat has said.*
> By Ciaran McGrath
> PUBLISHED: 08:30, Sat, Jun 19, 2021 | UPDATED: 11:18, Sat, Jun 19, 2021


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*Meghan shared details about what inspired her to write the book and that how watching Harry with Archie filled her with love as well how Princess Diana was in her mind while writing it.*_



I have just gotten up, I have not have breakfast yet, but I want to throw up. So was Diana exploring her new masculinity, or what is Raptor's f*cking deal?


----------



## doni

In this day and age it is absurd to expect that all the grandchildren of a King are going to be princes. If Harry’s children were to have a right to princehood it would be by reason of Harry being a man. The  law that the Sussex reference is a law that discriminates against the woman line and that no feminist could ever defend. It needs to be abolished. It doesn’t even have anything to do with the Sussexes being working royals or not. The change needed to be implemented anyway.

The solution is not to have the children of the woman line also made princes. Princess Anne, with great dignity, made precisely that point when she did not accept the title for her own kids. The same dignity shown by his brother Prince Edward by renouncing to the birth right of his. The only son of the Queen to keep the princess titles for his daughters was dumb Prince Andrew. For Harry to want to follow the path of his disgusting uncle is unbelievable.

I don’t think there is any modern European monarchy where princehood is dispensed so liberally anymore. It is not in keeping with the times. Harry knows this. Again, his full responsibility.

But Americans do not have to know or understand all these things so they are in fertile ground for seeding confusion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> And there is more...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Shocked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5116201



I mean, I'd love that because that means Karma would finally return from vacation, but...what lawyer gossips about one client's case to another one?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> One more that I have to share ...
> 
> “Sussex needs someone who is more concerned about the welfare and prosperity of the people than two spoilt rich show business stars obsessed with their own ' problems'."
> 
> “Maybe the people of Sussex should hold a vote"



Ok Express, don't be silly. The Cambridge kids don't need a dukedom before they get married...in fact George might already have the Duchy of Cornwall available once he turns 18.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok Express, don't be silly. The Cambridge kids don't need a dukedom before they get married...in fact George might already have the Duchy of Cornwall available once he turns 18.



Oh is Express not a reliable source? I'm not familiar.   Still liked the thought though.


----------



## doni

xincinsin said:


> Is someone going to explain to the kids one day that their parents gave up that "ultimate" birthright? Exactly why do they want him to be a prince any way? Oops, silly me! It would merch better.





xincinsin said:


> It could also be that when he talked about the slimmed down version, Methane wasn't even a sparkle in anyone's eye then. Hazard would have been included and they probably assumed that he would marry someone who would be supportive. Instead he brought home a harpy.



I don’t think so at all. This was in the books long ago. Nothing to do with Meghan or them being working royals. The example to follow was Prince Edward’s, who is a working royal. Not Prince Andrew’s. I am sure this was clear to Harry. But then, I may overestimate his wit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I'd love that because that means Karma would finally return from vacation, but...what lawyer gossips about one client's case to another one?



While I don’t speak for Karma, I’m sure she thought the pandemic was enough to wise everyone up, so her vacay was much needed.
Since that has not happened with H&M, certainly watching Jill and Kate on the global stage was enough to trigger this latest onslaught of sludge. Also, Jill is very much pro military, so maybe H&M thought she needed a reminder of how awful those Cambridges actually are. No way can the terrible two allow anyone to fraternize with this royal enemy. The hatred is real. 

Now, he has to give a speech about his mommy in a place that symbolizes all things Royal.  Have fun with _that_, Hazzie.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Oh my gosh!  I sincerely don't know what to believe.  Could this be true?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Don't know what to believe!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5116200



That would maybe tie-in with the 'irresponsible' and 'unprofessional' nanny that was let go in about 2 days Nanny sacked


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Don't believe I've seen this here.  Maybe it's on the other thread but since it has M's name in title and in the article, here you go.
> I x'd out some words in hopes this is acceptable to post and not against the rules.  From Article ...
> 
> The royal commentator added that it was *"history-making stuff" from Kate as "no member of the house of Windsor has ever undertaken this sort of meticulously coordinated and staged joint project with a US xxxxxxxxxxxxx before"*.
> 
> Ms Elser said: "It is impossible not to wonder how this latest turn of events is going down in Montecito as Harry and Meghan begin their five months of parental leave.



This was the story Omid Tweeted I wouldn't copy/link. OS basically put it out as 'there you go, the RF censors its own' as he'd said the story was killed on the Net because of links to politics and meaning the Palace could make things disappear (I have no doubt they can but still).


----------



## xincinsin

doni said:


> I don’t think so at all. This was in the books long ago. Nothing to do with Meghan or them being working royals. The example to follow was Prince Edward’s, who is a working royal. Not Prince Andrew’s. I am sure this was clear to Harry. But then, I may overestimate his wit.


The knowledge could have been deleted when MM rebooted his life.


----------



## Chanbal

They were not able to silence Piers yet, ‘Princess Pinocchio’ on Page Six:   









						Piers Morgan dubs Meghan Markle ‘Princess Pinocchio’ in latest attack
					

The former tabloid editor came up with the nickname amid rumors he might return to “Good Morning Britain,” the show he quit in March after the Duchess of Sussex made a formal complaint …




					pagesix.com


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> They were not able to silence Piers yet, ‘Princess Pinocchio’ on Page Six:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan dubs Meghan Markle ‘Princess Pinocchio’ in latest attack
> 
> 
> The former tabloid editor came up with the nickname amid rumors he might return to “Good Morning Britain,” the show he quit in March after the Duchess of Sussex made a formal complaint …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


As the saying goes “he who laughs last, laughs best”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They were not able to silence Piers yet, ‘Princess Pinocchio’ on Page Six:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan dubs Meghan Markle ‘Princess Pinocchio’ in latest attack
> 
> 
> The former tabloid editor came up with the nickname amid rumors he might return to “Good Morning Britain,” the show he quit in March after the Duchess of Sussex made a formal complaint …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I feel I must stand up for Pinocchio.  The lies of the disastrous duo make the oft bullied Pinocchio look positively charming.
Can we get him a ‘bench’?










						Pinocchio - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So with all that new tea being spilled I must say: kudos to the BRF who really managed to handle Harry's mental problems well for the past two decades. His little scandals that came to light are nothing compared to the trainwreck we're witnessing right now. I'm also positive he's their Achilles heel...they would have destroyed Raptor a long time ago and never looked back if it weren't for Harry. They might be angry and disappointed and feel betrayed, but he's their kin and they must be worried sick about his downward spiral.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Oh is Express not a reliable source? I'm not familiar.  Still liked the thought though.



I meant Express is silly to ask for the kids to get the dukedom handed down, not you being silly for quoting them! I think they are a tabloid but not one of the worst. Like DM probably.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Oh my gosh!  I sincerely don't know what to believe.  Could this be true?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Don't know what to believe!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5116200


seems farfetched....and what do they mean about a fight at gayle king's?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I feel I must stand up for Pinocchio.  The lies of the disastrous duo make the oft bullied Pinocchio look positively charming.
> Can we get him a ‘bench’?
> View attachment 5116564
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pinocchio - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



So long as the bench is not carved from the wood of poor Pinocchio - we know both H&M can't stand any competition


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hi y’all. Finally moved in and still unpacking. Hubby supervised the packing and loading at the old stead and I had no idea what to expect, especially wardrobe boxes labeled ‘Girl Rm’ until I realized they were clothes I kept in one of the other bedroom closets. Giggled like a school girl.
> Frequently checked TPF, only to exclaim, “OMG 50 pages to read” then “OMG 100 pages” and today, 141 pages to read; it will take forever to catch up, but I wanted to say hello before starting that process. BTW, I kept up with news and current events and of course Lilibet. There are no words left to describe this selfish pair, who constantly portray themselves as victims who finally found freedom and yet constantly trash others for ‘victimizing’ them.
> To H&M, wake up and smell the latte; the article below is what ‘Finding Freedom’ really means and there are thousands of similar stories about people trying to escape to the free world. Get on with your life and STFU. CBC Article


Welcome back .. and can relate to months and months of unpacking, uggh!  Don't worry about the # of pages you missed, I did too after a surgical procedure, but honestly .. you can skip at least 100 and STILL THE SAME UGLY story about these 2 grifters supreme!  They just sicken me day-by-day, but the one that really receives my ire is Hap-Hazza .. wow, he is sure as heck showing his true colors and they aren't pretty!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> seems farfetched....and what do they mean about a fight at gayle king's?


I have no idea about what they mean by a fight at GK's. I would have questioned the all story a few months ago, but after OW's interview I'm starting to think 'where there's smoke, there's fire.' What I know is that the all situation is crazy.


----------



## marietouchet

I checked chronology, yes appointment loss was a catalyst For agreeing to interview and surely also for content

feb 4 announcement that 6 loses military appointments
feb 16 Oprah announces interview

I kept wondering why do the interview during the illness of Prince Philip ? Now I know …

ps sorry for typing, I have given up trying to correct my iPad, it inserts / omits capital letters at will

ps today press has added that 6 used interview possibility as a threat so that titles were not pulled


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Scobie is a celebrity?!!?  He’s more like a hanger-on.  He’s like one in a pack of starving, rabid dogs trying to get the bone.


HA - a celebrity my a$$, he is the definition of *OBSEQUIOUS* to the nth degree!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Welcome back .. and can relate to months and months of unpacking, uggh!  *Don't worry about the # of pages you missed, I did too after a surgical procedure, but honestly .. you can skip at least 100 and STILL THE SAME UGLY story about these 2 grifters supreme! * They just sicken me day-by-day, but the one that really receives my ire is Hap-Hazza .. wow, he is sure as heck showing his true colors and they aren't pretty!


Thank you and hope you're feeling better. I don't mind missing the ugly details, but I so enjoy reading the comments and opinions, but most of all I enjoy the camaraderie that exists between the members on this thread. Cheers!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> seems farfetched....and what do they mean about a fight at gayle king's?



I had to read it several times, but my translation is the following: Harry and Raptor got into a huge fight at GK's house (why they would be there with a two week old baby, who knows) during which Raptor told Harry their marriage is over.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> H is not a US citizen which is why he is entitled (no pun intended) to be called Prince Harry (which _strangely_ he uses since M uses Duchess, but in the US they know him as Prince Harry I guess). It's M that is not entitled to be titled in the US since she is a citizen. If anything she should be called, the Duchess of Sussex (NOT as 'Royal expert' OS called her Duchess Meghan in a bl**dy Tweet) but as you say NOT in the US.


Sorry to say but NO .. the title "Prince" for Harry is NOT REQUIRED here in the US and to be accurate, should NOT be used!  As I said, yes .. many here do say "Prince Harry", but that is because they feel they have to .. when, in fact, they do not.  In addition, an American does not have to bow to the Queen (or other Royals for that matter), but oftentimes .. they do (again) .. out of respect.  Can't remember which Wimbledon .. but the US Winner did not bow to the Royals when they came out on the court!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seems farfetched....and what do they mean about a fight at gayle king's?





Chanbal said:


> I have no idea about what they mean by a fight at GK's. I would have questioned the all story a few months ago, but after OW's interview I'm starting to think 'where there's smoke, there's fire.' What I know is that the all situation is crazy.



It sounds like made up nonsense to me. As entertaining as it is, the source doesn't appear to be reliable.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

TC1 said:


> I'm sorry..when exactly was she a princess?


Maybe she was Daddy's little princess and she took it to a brand new level. Here she is at age five, "Oh Daddy, you're so old fashioned. I was just a queen at my bff's birthday party, but today, I want it all. I wanna be HRH Princess of The Whole World!"


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this gossip story on Insta?  You have to scroll through ...



Where's the rest of the story -- what happened?  Sounds like a nice offer!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I checked chronology, yes appointment loss was a catalyst For agreeing to interview and surely also for content
> 
> feb 4 announcement that 6 loses military appointments
> feb 16 Oprah announces interview
> 
> I kept wondering why do the interview during the illness of Prince Philip ? Now I know …
> 
> ps sorry for typing, I have given up trying to correct my iPad, it inserts / omits capital letters at will


My 2 cents:
The interview with OW was an old agreement, they would have done it anyway. However, part of its content and date were likely affected by the loss of military titles and potential loss of the prince/princess (aka security).


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> The interview with OW was an old agreement, they would have done it anyway. However, part of its content and date were likely affected by the loss of military titles and potential loss of the prince/princess (aka security).


I agree with this because if you see/read other snippets in regards to these 2 and Oprah, apparently, she has been wanted to put together an "interview" for almost 2 years.  Remember, Diana never gave an interview to Oprah (Sarah - Duchess of York did), and apparently, Oprah was kind of pissed off about that (thank god Diana was smart about that)!  

However, as of late .. Oprah hasn't said too much, but I think we all know her by now, she won't be deterred by this in regards to what her "next plans" are!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I agree with this because if you see/read other snippets in regards to these 2 and Oprah, apparently, she has been wanted to put together an "interview" for almost 2 years.  Remember, Diana never gave an interview to Oprah (Sarah - Duchess of York did), and apparently, Oprah was kind of pissed off about that (thank god Diana was smart about that)!
> 
> However, as of late .. Oprah hasn't said too much, but I think we all know her by now, she won't be deterred by this in regards to what her "next plans" are!



I agree, OW will proceed with whatever plans she has for the couple. In any event, H's meltdown during her interview doesn't support much self-discipline on his part. 



Spoiler: meltdown


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I agree, OW will proceed with whatever plans she has for the couple. In any event, H's meltdown during her interview doesn't support much self-discipline on his part.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: meltdown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5116701


This very clearly shows: 

How truly DUMB Harry is - seriously, did he think that he could retain his Military titles whilst living in the United States?  
How spoiled (BRAT) and entitled he truly is 
Even though THEY said that they wanted "financial independence" and "be private" - HA!! .. heck no, they wanted that money from the Duchy and they wanted him to fund THEIR security!!! 
At this point, and given the (rather frequent) stories I'm seeing in regards to Netflix/Spotify being pretty pissed off at them (vis-a-vis - they are not living up to the agreement), makes me wonder .. how much longer can they truly afford that 14-room mansion?


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> However, as of late .. Oprah hasn't said too much, but I think we all know her by now, she won't be deterred by this in regards to what her "next plans" are!



Oprah has invested her valuable time and reputation into these two. Failure is not an option. She doesn't want them to look bad and have it rub off on her.  It's pretty clear Oprah has been advising them for awhile, but whether they always follow her advice is debatable. Or was it really bad advice? Since all of the participants have big egos getting them to cooperate with each other 100% is problematic.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Oprah has invested her valuable time and reputation into these two. Failure is not an option. She doesn't want them to look bad and have it rub off on her.  It's pretty clear Oprah has been advising them for awhile, but whether they always follow her advice is debatable. Or was it really bad advice? Since all of the participants have big egos getting them to cooperate with each other 100% is problematic.


Yes, I agree that Oprah has likely been "advising" them, but .. as we have seen, these 2 simply think they are smarter than anyone else (including Oprah I'm sure).  While Oprah .. yes, does not like Failure and has been able to walk away from some, there have been some that she didn't get to walk away from so easily.  Do I think that these two will be her "downfall" .. NO, I don't -- but I can see Oprah finally realizing that *these* two are of no hope and therefore, she would walk away.  Think about it, it appears as though H'Wood seems to be in no great rush to sidle up to these 2, and let's not forget a former President whose wife was supposedly "best friends" with Meghan .. are they out there "supporting" them per se? .. NOPE ('cos THEY are too smart)!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Opera could create space between her reputation and theirs if she wanted to. She certainly didn’t let that guy who plagiarized a book that she turned into an enormous Bestseller make her look bad.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Opera could create space between her reputation and theirs if she wanted to. She certainly didn’t let that guy who plagiarized a book that she turned into an enormous Bestseller make her look bad.


Nor Hermes or others!  Let's face it, she 100% attempted to use the race card on Hermes, they called her out on it (and were proved to be the accurate party) .. has she "really" taken a lot of crap for that?!?! .. nope.  Yeah, she has Teflon for sure ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO - bottom line : the Dumbartons have failed.

Using Doria, Maryanne Williamson and old fashion $$$, OW/GK signed the duo as soon as M said yes.  Diana was a well-known  failed attempt, Sarah never really measured up, so OW’s bruised ego was not going to let someone else sign them. H&M’s first interview raked in zillions, so most definitely another interview is in the works, probably using footage M took while snooping around the palace. We know H&M lie, so using the patronages as an excuse to unleash drama against QE is pathetic and manipulative, and it is failing. If they lose those titles, there will be more accusations designed to shock, but they will fail because we’ve already heard the worst. Oh sure, they will sputter some sordid nonsense, but it will be meaningless because no one will trust them.  Since Charles has a calendar clash, I’m guessing hoping Hazz will be told on this upcoming trip - no more . Without realizing it, their ‘advisor’ has removed most of their leverage. If they had played their cards correctly, they possibly could have negotiated a much better deal. Possibly.  

At some point, they must realize they have lost.  Game over.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> The interview with OW was an old agreement, they would have done it anyway. However, part of its content and date were likely affected by the loss of military titles and potential loss of the prince/princess (aka security).


Definitely.  Even the children's  book was contracted when they were still royal.  What changed was the tone of the interview.  I think that OW was going to do _ordinary girl becomes a princess overnight _and then the entire tone changed to _they done us wrong!._  Harry knew from day one of Megxit that he was losing the patronages.  He was just posturing about it during the interview.  Fake umbrage.  I bet Oprah was mad that she had to come back and re-do his interview after the news came out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if Hazz understands  this?


----------



## csshopper

Posting this here, even though the subject is William's birthday.
Is some shade being cast on Haz by using an Invictus Games event photo that does not include him, "his" organization? And, one that includes their stepmother, looking very much part of a loving happy group?

From an article in DM:
"Meanwhile the Prince of Wales, 72, also paid tribute to his son on his birthday, sharing a photograph of the pair alongside the Duchess of Cornwall at the Invictus Games opening ceremony in 2014. Prince Harry does not appear in the image."


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I bet Oprah was mad that she had to come back and re-do his interview after the news came out.



I doubt she was mad exactly. The interview was ratings gold, it made her at least $9 million, and it put her name back in the headlines when she had been out of the spotlight for awhile. That's well worth doing some re-shoots. 

I'm sure she wanted to know everything she was dealing with upfront but I don't think she would have done anything differently. The show was supposed to be something like "Meghan and Harry—one year later."  It would have been watched but making it about racism within the royal family made it the talked about story for weeks. Oprah loved that.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO - bottom line : the Dumbartons have failed
> 
> At some point, they must realize they have lost.  Game over.


100% agree on your opinion, but the 2nd part .. not so sure about that.  Will they realize that they have lost?!?! .. hmmmm, don't think Megalo-Maniac will ever .. but even if they do, are they ever going to admit it?!?!  They will just continue playing those VICTIM cards.


----------



## Jayne1

*Archie Harrison and his sister Lili may still be prince and princess after all. And they could have Camilla Parker Bowles to thank for it.*

Prominent royal historian Robert Lacey has told U.K. paper_ The Times_ that the issue has been discussed at the “highest level” and that the queen will not change existing rules, which would ultimately see Archie and Lili named prince and princess, in her lifetime. Any move to deprive the children of their titles would likely have to be made by Charles in the first hours of his reign, when, Lacey expects, he will be too busily focused on getting Camilla elevated to queen to be distracted by such peripheral projects.

Lacey has previously told The Daily Beast that he expects Charles to unilaterally declare Camilla queen the moment he is named king, disregarding a long-standing agreement for her to be known as “princess consort.”

It was reported Sunday that Harry was angered at the time of the Oprah interview because Prince Charles had allegedly made moves to ensure Harry and Meghan’s children could never officially be princes or princesses.

It was reported that a source told the _Mail on Sunday_: “Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a prince, even when Charles becomes king.” The couple were said to have been told this just before they filmed their interview with Winfrey.

The source was quoted as saying: “This is what nobody realized from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright.”

However, now Lacey, whose newly updated book _Battle of Brothers_ is being serialized by _The Times_ in the U.K., told that paper he believes such an outcome is unlikely.

Who will or will not be a prince or princess is essentially in the gift of the reigning monarch, meaning that while Charles could change the rules the moment he becomes king, as things stand right now it would be down to the queen to change the “letters patent,” laid down by George V in 1917, which currently dictate that Archie and his sister Lili will become prince and princess when their grandfather is monarch.

Lacey told _The Times,_ “It is clear to me that the queen and her advisers have discussed this issue at the highest level, and that the future royal status of Archie and Lili is not in jeopardy in her lifetime.

“It is possible that Prince Charles may try to remove royal status from the Sussex children when he comes to the throne but that does not seem likely.

“His priority then will be to gain popular support for upgrading the status of Camilla from princess consort to queen consort, and he is not likely to court unpopularity by removing HRH status from Archie and Lili.”

Hugo Vickers, another constitutional expert, told _The Times,_ “When the queen dies, Archie and Lilibet become prince and princess.”

The interventions come after it was reported on Sunday that Harry and Meghan’s children were set to be denied their “birthright” titles owing to an anticipated intervention by Prince Charles to change the rules.

An infuriated Prince Harry reportedly agreed to do his explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey just 24 hours after being told that part of the price he would pay for leaving the royal family would be to lose his beloved military titles, roles, and associations.

Harry is known to have been dismayed by the removal of his ceremonial army titles, which included Captain General of the Royal Marines, which he was gifted by Prince Philip. The affront was particularly acute as Harry is one of only two living members of the royal family, along with Prince Andrew, to have seen active service. Harry served two tours of duty in Afghanistan.

A source told the _Sun,_ “There was a bust-up just before Oprah, but it wasn’t to do with Archie’s title.

“That had been known and discussed for quite a while.

“Harry and Meghan were very cross before Oprah because the final Megxit separation had just been signed off, which included Harry not keeping military roles.

“That was what made him so angry. He’s very emotional and his military roles were very important to him given that he served.”

The interview caused shockwaves after Harry and Meghan accused an unnamed member of the royal family of making racist queries about the likely color of their future children’s skin.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/archie-harrison-and-lilibet-will-still-be-prince-and-princessthanks-to-camilla-parker-bowles-expert-says?ref=home


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, is this from the masterpiece? 



Spoiler: father's day gift


----------



## Chanbal

One more book review: 


But there is a special category of children's book so unashamedly asinine, so proudly vacuous and so brazenly cynical you actually want to crawl back there. I speak of course of the celebrity children's book. Which brings me to Meghan Markle. Meghan has written a celebrity children's book. Well of course she has. There's gold in them thar hills....                

Don't know about you but four days after the birth of my second child I was exhausted from not sleeping ('if I can't sleep you bloody well can't either!' she said...) and tearing my hair out trying to remember how to tie off the nappy sacks without my hands ending up like James Herriot's on a bad day.

And so four days after squeezing out mini-Sussex No2 Meghan's literary masterwork, her magnum opus, was launched on a grateful public. Ladies and gentlemen I give you the The Bench.

For my money this complex, layered and insightful exposition of fatherhood and the male human condition puts her alongside Tolstoy, Dickens and Dostoyevsky.

I'm sorry I'll read that again.

For my money this steaming pile of mawkish asinine drivel puts her up there with literary chancers Busty Spice (or whatever her name was), Madonna and of course Fergie - celeb mums happy to monetize away their motherhood.

Now, Harry and Meghan have been super quiet about what happens to the profits from this book - are they going to charity or are they going to boost the already impressive Sussex coffers?

I have asked the publishers of course but so far no answer has been forthcoming. Which is all very weird and I guess means we are left to draw our own conclusions.

What we can say for sure is that the book has hardly been over-burdened woith critical acclaim. With admirable economy the Daily Telegraph’s Claire Allfree labelled it a “semi-literate vanity project.”

Got to admire the Sussex girl's drive though, which was clearly wholly undiminshed by having no particular talent for the task at hand.

It's pretty clear that, with some really honourable exceptions, the children's book is the last refuge of the dimwit.

Not for them the hard work of weaving a plot, drawing characters, using grown-up words, or weighting the language to draw difficult and unexpected conclusions and make the reader look at life differently.

Nope, a kids' book can basically be scrawled on the back of a packet of Marlboro Lights then handed over to a publishing team and a talented illustrator and hey presto the moronic takes on a pseudo gravitas in the eyes of the terminally gullible. And people who really ought to know better queue to throw away their money.

(Little parenting tip: Your kid doesn't know or care who Meghan is. Ironically pretty soon this will also apply to the rest of us.)

The Bench is basically about Prince Harry and Archie. Meghan said: “It’s really just about growing with someone and having this deep connection and this trust so that, be at good times or bad, you know that you had this person.”

So far, so humdrum.

But then, talking about illustrator Christian Robinson, Meghan's jaw-dropping lack of self-awareness takes your breath again.

She said: "Christian layered in beautiful and ethereal watercolor illustrations that capture the warmth, joy, and comfort of the relationship between fathers and sons."

Now, I'm going out on a limb here but I'm going to suggest that paternal relations might not be Meghan's specialist subject.

Or Harry's.

Meghan's own relationship with her father is famously, er, strained and, thanks to a TV interview as nasty as it was ill-advised we can now safely assume Harry probably had a more than usually difficult Father's Day yesterday.

One can only begin to wonder what he might have written in his card to Prince Charles.
Last month Meghan's royal nemesis Kate Duchess of Cambridge also co-launched a book Hold Still. The contrast could not be more profound.

Hold Still, actually published by the National Portrait Gallery, is a poignant, grown-up look at Britain coming together and battling through the Covid era. The proceeds of the book are being split between two charities the Gallery itself and mental health specialists MIND.

Just sayin', as our American friends are wont to say.

I'll leave you to judge whether or not there's an Atlantic Ocean-sized gulf in class there.

But fear not, there's a happy ending and god love the British public for it.

While the Yanks have apparently gone nuts for 13 quid a time warmed over gruel that is The Bench, we Brits refuse to be led by the nose and it has barely made the top 50.

Sensibly we'd rather give it a fortnight until the '50p to clear' stickers come out in Tesco.









						Is nothing safe from the vaulting ambition of Meghan Markle? Asks PAUL BALDWIN
					

TO be honest (and speaking as a dad who's read dozens) most children's books make you wonder why we bothered crawling out of the primordial ooze.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> *Archie Harrison and his sister Lili may still be prince and princess after all. And they could have Camilla Parker Bowles to thank for it.*
> 
> Prominent royal historian Robert Lacey has told U.K. paper_ The Times_ that the issue has been discussed at the “highest level” and that the queen will not change existing rules, which would ultimately see Archie and Lili named prince and princess, in her lifetime. Any move to deprive the children of their titles would likely have to be made by Charles in the first hours of his reign, when, Lacey expects, he will be too busily focused on getting Camilla elevated to queen to be distracted by such peripheral projects.
> 
> Lacey has previously told The Daily Beast that he expects Charles to unilaterally declare Camilla queen the moment he is named king, disregarding a long-standing agreement for her to be known as “princess consort.”
> 
> It was reported Sunday that Harry was angered at the time of the Oprah interview because Prince Charles had allegedly made moves to ensure Harry and Meghan’s children could never officially be princes or princesses.
> 
> It was reported that a source told the _Mail on Sunday_: “Harry and Meghan were told Archie would never be a prince, even when Charles becomes king.” The couple were said to have been told this just before they filmed their interview with Winfrey.
> 
> The source was quoted as saying: “This is what nobody realized from the interview. The real thing was that Charles was going to take active steps to strip Archie of his ultimate birthright.”
> 
> However, now Lacey, whose newly updated book _Battle of Brothers_ is being serialized by _The Times_ in the U.K., told that paper he believes such an outcome is unlikely.
> 
> Who will or will not be a prince or princess is essentially in the gift of the reigning monarch, meaning that while Charles could change the rules the moment he becomes king, as things stand right now it would be down to the queen to change the “letters patent,” laid down by George V in 1917, which currently dictate that Archie and his sister Lili will become prince and princess when their grandfather is monarch.
> 
> Lacey told _The Times,_ “It is clear to me that the queen and her advisers have discussed this issue at the highest level, and that the future royal status of Archie and Lili is not in jeopardy in her lifetime.
> 
> “It is possible that Prince Charles may try to remove royal status from the Sussex children when he comes to the throne but that does not seem likely.
> 
> “His priority then will be to gain popular support for upgrading the status of Camilla from princess consort to queen consort, and he is not likely to court unpopularity by removing HRH status from Archie and Lili.”
> 
> Hugo Vickers, another constitutional expert, told _The Times,_ “When the queen dies, Archie and Lilibet become prince and princess.”
> 
> The interventions come after it was reported on Sunday that Harry and Meghan’s children were set to be denied their “birthright” titles owing to an anticipated intervention by Prince Charles to change the rules.
> 
> An infuriated Prince Harry reportedly agreed to do his explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey just 24 hours after being told that part of the price he would pay for leaving the royal family would be to lose his beloved military titles, roles, and associations.
> 
> Harry is known to have been dismayed by the removal of his ceremonial army titles, which included Captain General of the Royal Marines, which he was gifted by Prince Philip. The affront was particularly acute as Harry is one of only two living members of the royal family, along with Prince Andrew, to have seen active service. Harry served two tours of duty in Afghanistan.
> 
> A source told the _Sun,_ “There was a bust-up just before Oprah, but it wasn’t to do with Archie’s title.
> 
> “That had been known and discussed for quite a while.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan were very cross before Oprah because the final Megxit separation had just been signed off, which included Harry not keeping military roles.
> 
> “That was what made him so angry. He’s very emotional and his military roles were very important to him given that he served.”
> 
> The interview caused shockwaves after Harry and Meghan accused an unnamed member of the royal family of making racist queries about the likely color of their future children’s skin.
> 
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/archie-harrison-and-lilibet-will-still-be-prince-and-princessthanks-to-camilla-parker-bowles-expert-says?ref=home


Angry Harry, litigious Harry.....very unattractive


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> 100% agree on your opinion, but the 2nd part .. not so sure about that.  Will they realize that they have lost?!?! .. hmmmm, don't think Megalo-Maniac will ever .. but even if they do, are they ever going to admit it?!?!  They will just continue playing those VICTIM cards.



Slowly but surely, they will admit it. Hazz knows the family is pissed with him. Prince Phillip’s funeral made it clear.  M may try to sputter out more racist claims, but that rings hollow, considering she willingly married into this family. Once Hwood makes it come back from covid, no one will pay attention to them.  They aren’t interesting, Hazz cannot act and she‘s well known as z-list


----------



## bag-mania

That Robert Lacey is cut from the same cloth as Omid Scobie. A self-proclaimed royal expert who throws his opinions out there as if they were relevant.


----------



## rose60610

Right. When everybody comes out of Covid, there will be plenty of lost time to make up, and who's going to prioritize the Woe-is-me Dimwits over enjoying time with friends, family, travel etc?  Meghan is a liability, Harry is a wimp. All they do is feel sorry for themselves and make weird desperate attempts for attention. Meghan will use the excuse "I have two kids to take of" to explain why she and Harry aren't invited anywhere. I wonder if William or Charles have plans to come to the U.S. in the next few years...and if so, would they visit Montecito? Probably not. Even though Meghan announced she'll visit London next year, her reception would be frosty at best. They'll all jet to hell and back but somehow not be able to meet up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

Did Meghan Markle cut a royal visit to Fiji short over 'snub' by UN?
					

At the time, aides blamed the heat, humidity and crowds for the then-pregnant duchess's decision to leave after just eight minutes, disappointing market vendors.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Right. When everybody comes out of Covid, there will be plenty of lost time to make up, and who's going to prioritize the Woe-is-me Dimwits over enjoying time with friends, family, travel etc?  Meghan is a liability, Harry is a wimp. All they do is feel sorry for themselves and make weird desperate attempts for attention. Meghan will use the excuse "I have two kids to take of" to explain why she and Harry aren't invited anywhere. I wonder if William or Charles have plans to come to the U.S. in the next few years...and if so, would they visit Montecito? Probably not. Even though Meghan announced she'll visit London next year, her reception would be frosty at best. They'll all jet to hell and back but somehow not be able to meet up.


dimwits is right....she is so in love with her royal title but doesn't want the responsibility that goes with it....he acts like a spoiled brat with the classic redhead temper.....


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That Robert Lacey is cut from the same cloth as Omid Scobie. A self-proclaimed royal expert who throws his opinions out there as if they were relevant.


I am not buying everything he writes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

doni said:


> As far as I know, Lilibet is her family nickname, not just vis-a-vis her late husband. For example, in their condolence message after the passing of Prince Philip, the Spanish King addressed Queen Elisabeth as “dear aunt Lillibet”.


If Felipe was addressing HM as dear Aunt Lilibet, it should have been sent as a private message since it is her nickname among family members and he still could have sent a formal condolences as King Felipe of Spain.


----------



## bag-mania

The US mainstream media is still determined to show them as being wonderful symbols, facts be damned. They found the narrative they like and they will keep repeating it hoping people will believe it. This one is from NBC. Sadly it is typical of today’s press.

*Meghan and Harry may have stepped down, but they will continue to define the royal family*
As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.

In the American imagination, Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, made the ultimate trade, exchanging rainy London for sunny California and replacing stuffy Buckingham Palace for anything-goes Hollywood.

But according to historians and cultural scholars, the royal existencethe Duke and Duchess of Sussex evidently sought to escape will follow the couple — and the royal family, in turn, is likely to be defined by their new life at the nexus of celebrity, entertainment and activism.

Kehinde Andrews, a professor of Black studies at Birmingham City University in England, said the couple will always be identified as royals even if they are no longer working on behalf of the institution.


"Whether they like it or not, they still seem to represent the monarchy," Andrews said. "He's still Prince Harry. He's still the grandson of the queen. The way they'll be consumed is very much as part of the royals."

Since stepping down from their work as senior working royals last year, Harry and Meghan have emphasized their desire to live a life of public service. They have made a podcast deal with Spotify, recently released a documentary on mental health with Apple TV+ and agreed to produce films, shows and documentaries with Netflix.

And it's not only these larger deals that have kept them in the public eye.

They granted a tell-all interview to Oprah Winfrey, in which they detailed their reasons for leaving their royal roles, including Meghan's suicidal thoughts, and discussed racism in the U.K. Harry also appeared in February on "The Late Late Show with James Corden," and Meghan released a children's book.

That's in addition to the U.K. press continuing its frenzied speculation over the state of royal relations and the circumstances that led to the couple's departure, with fresh reports dominating front pages once again this past weekend.

*Hybridized public figures*
As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path as hybridized public figures — British royals, American celebrities, social activists and aspirational gurus — their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.

"I think it's possible that Harry and Meghan's image make Elizabeth II seem more aloof," said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."

"I think there are parallels to the discourse around Princess Diana. Diana was the shining star that could connect with people and who had empathy, and those qualities put the queen in sharper contrast."


In addition to the influence on the royal brand, Harry and Meghan's departure from the U.K. represents a lost opportunity for the monarchy, especially in regard to making it relevant in a multicultural world where concerns about social justice are increasingly top of mind for young, diverse Britons and Americans.

"Particularly with Harry and Meghan, there was also an element of how much they were appealing to different people, particularly ethnic minorities, and how much that could have helped the monarchy reform or change or appeal to a wider group of people," said Catherine Haddon, a historian and constitutional expert at the Institute for Government in London.

"It's not only about the reaction in this country … but also about how much it affected [the royals'] appeal in places where soft power and the brand of the monarchy is important in diplomatic terms," she said.


Indeed, their position outside the royal family has allowed them to speak freely, not only about their experiences, but also about political causes that they wouldn't necessarily have had the freedom to address inside the monarchy.

During the U.S. presidential election, Meghan encouraged people to vote in comments that were widely interpreted as anti-*****, and the two have also spoken out for racial justice and gender equality.

"What was notable about the Oprah Winfrey interview is that Harry and Meghan made no attempt to distance themselves from those culture wars," said Philip Murphy, the director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London. "Harry and Meghan have positioned themselves as the anti-racist royals, and their cause has been taken up by a range of anti-racist activists. But if that leads to the assumption that the rest of the royal family don't care about racism or actually hold racist attitudes, it will create a serious problem for the image of the British monarchy."

Despite their criticism of their royal life, Harry and Meghan's choice of name for their new baby girl, Lilibet Diana, links the family even more powerfully with the royals in the popular imagination. Just over a year after they quit Britain, they are still often compared to Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, from the way Kate's and Meghan's books have sold to the differing reactions of Harry and William to an investigation into the circumstances surrounding a 1993 BBC interview with their mother.

In some ways, the Sussexes might be following the model of Barack and Michelle *****, who have followed their tenure in the White House with an ambitious entry into the entertainment world, forging similar pacts with Netflix and Spotify.

Whether Harry and Meghan can step away from that royal context and forge a successful and influential independent path is still up in the air, Murphy said.

William and Kate "don't feel they need to engage in politics. They seem to have this idyllic family life. It could be that the comparison with them doesn't reflect well on Meghan and Harry," he said. "But who knows? There's no road map for this."

For the moment, Harry and Meghan's comments about their lives as royals garner more public attention than their advocacy for particular causes. That, however, could change the further they get from their life in London.

Although the couple are no longer working royals, Americans are looking to them for cultural leadership in the same way, said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."

"There's the cliché that celebrities are America's royalty. We look to celebrity figures as icons of success and cultural leadership. In the United States, Harry and Meghan have taken on that role, in some ways," she said.

In the U.K., Harry and Meghan's popularity has tanked since they left, and in particular after their interview with Winfrey; with a YouGov poll showed that Harry's rating had dropped by 15 points over 10 days in March.


At the same time, there are signs that the strong support the monarchy enjoys in the U.K. may be starting to erode among young people. A YouGov poll last month showed that 41 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds surveyed thought Britain should have an elected head of state — a steep change from two years ago, when only a quarter said so.

For royal watchers in the U.K., Harry and Meghan's transition from members of the royal family to American-style celebrities means their long-term influence will take a hit.

"Celebrity is by its very nature ephemeral," said Mike Paterson, a historian and author of "A Brief History of the House of Windsor: The Making of a Modern Monarchy."

"A person who is leading trends today will by definition be replaced in time by someone younger, more beautiful, more charismatic," he said. "The point of the royal family is they are never in fashion and never out of fashion."


Following long-standing royal tradition, the family has steered well clear of commenting on Harry and Meghan's accusations of neglect during their time as royals, other than to say in a statement after the Winfrey interview in March that they were "saddened" to hear of their experiences and that "recollections may vary."

With relations with the royal family back in Britain strained, Meghan and Harry have little left to lose and are free to pursue the projects and causes they want, rather than what's dictated to them by royal protocol, McDonnell said.

"I think there's a sense that they're 'damned if they do, damned if they don't,' so they're going to do what they think is best for themselves and their families," she said.









						Meghan and Harry left London, but they still impact the royal brand
					

As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.




					www.google.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The US mainstream media is still determined to show them as being wonderful symbols, facts be damned. They found the narrative they like and they will keep repeating it hoping people will believe it. This one is from NBC. Sadly it is typical of today’s press.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry may have stepped down, but they will continue to define the royal family*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> In the American imagination, Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, made the ultimate trade, exchanging rainy London for sunny California and replacing stuffy Buckingham Palace for anything-goes Hollywood.
> 
> But according to historians and cultural scholars, the royal existencethe Duke and Duchess of Sussex evidently sought to escape will follow the couple — and the royal family, in turn, is likely to be defined by their new life at the nexus of celebrity, entertainment and activism.
> 
> Kehinde Andrews, a professor of Black studies at Birmingham City University in England, said the couple will always be identified as royals even if they are no longer working on behalf of the institution.
> 
> 
> "Whether they like it or not, they still seem to represent the monarchy," Andrews said. "He's still Prince Harry. He's still the grandson of the queen. The way they'll be consumed is very much as part of the royals."
> 
> Since stepping down from their work as senior working royals last year, Harry and Meghan have emphasized their desire to live a life of public service. They have made a podcast deal with Spotify, recently released a documentary on mental health with Apple TV+ and agreed to produce films, shows and documentaries with Netflix.
> 
> And it's not only these larger deals that have kept them in the public eye.
> 
> They granted a tell-all interview to Oprah Winfrey, in which they detailed their reasons for leaving their royal roles, including Meghan's suicidal thoughts, and discussed racism in the U.K. Harry also appeared in February on "The Late Late Show with James Corden," and Meghan released a children's book.
> 
> That's in addition to the U.K. press continuing its frenzied speculation over the state of royal relations and the circumstances that led to the couple's departure, with fresh reports dominating front pages once again this past weekend.
> 
> *Hybridized public figures*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path as hybridized public figures — British royals, American celebrities, social activists and aspirational gurus — their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> "I think it's possible that Harry and Meghan's image make Elizabeth II seem more aloof," said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "I think there are parallels to the discourse around Princess Diana. Diana was the shining star that could connect with people and who had empathy, and those qualities put the queen in sharper contrast."
> 
> 
> In addition to the influence on the royal brand, Harry and Meghan's departure from the U.K. represents a lost opportunity for the monarchy, especially in regard to making it relevant in a multicultural world where concerns about social justice are increasingly top of mind for young, diverse Britons and Americans.
> 
> "Particularly with Harry and Meghan, there was also an element of how much they were appealing to different people, particularly ethnic minorities, and how much that could have helped the monarchy reform or change or appeal to a wider group of people," said Catherine Haddon, a historian and constitutional expert at the Institute for Government in London.
> 
> "It's not only about the reaction in this country … but also about how much it affected [the royals'] appeal in places where soft power and the brand of the monarchy is important in diplomatic terms," she said.
> 
> 
> Indeed, their position outside the royal family has allowed them to speak freely, not only about their experiences, but also about political causes that they wouldn't necessarily have had the freedom to address inside the monarchy.
> 
> During the U.S. presidential election, Meghan encouraged people to vote in comments that were widely interpreted as anti-*****, and the two have also spoken out for racial justice and gender equality.
> 
> "What was notable about the Oprah Winfrey interview is that Harry and Meghan made no attempt to distance themselves from those culture wars," said Philip Murphy, the director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London. "Harry and Meghan have positioned themselves as the anti-racist royals, and their cause has been taken up by a range of anti-racist activists. But if that leads to the assumption that the rest of the royal family don't care about racism or actually hold racist attitudes, it will create a serious problem for the image of the British monarchy."
> 
> Despite their criticism of their royal life, Harry and Meghan's choice of name for their new baby girl, Lilibet Diana, links the family even more powerfully with the royals in the popular imagination. Just over a year after they quit Britain, they are still often compared to Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, from the way Kate's and Meghan's books have sold to the differing reactions of Harry and William to an investigation into the circumstances surrounding a 1993 BBC interview with their mother.
> 
> In some ways, the Sussexes might be following the model of Barack and Michelle *****, who have followed their tenure in the White House with an ambitious entry into the entertainment world, forging similar pacts with Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Whether Harry and Meghan can step away from that royal context and forge a successful and influential independent path is still up in the air, Murphy said.
> 
> William and Kate "don't feel they need to engage in politics. They seem to have this idyllic family life. It could be that the comparison with them doesn't reflect well on Meghan and Harry," he said. "But who knows? There's no road map for this."
> 
> For the moment, Harry and Meghan's comments about their lives as royals garner more public attention than their advocacy for particular causes. That, however, could change the further they get from their life in London.
> 
> Although the couple are no longer working royals, Americans are looking to them for cultural leadership in the same way, said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "There's the cliché that celebrities are America's royalty. We look to celebrity figures as icons of success and cultural leadership. In the United States, Harry and Meghan have taken on that role, in some ways," she said.
> 
> In the U.K., Harry and Meghan's popularity has tanked since they left, and in particular after their interview with Winfrey; with a YouGov poll showed that Harry's rating had dropped by 15 points over 10 days in March.
> 
> 
> At the same time, there are signs that the strong support the monarchy enjoys in the U.K. may be starting to erode among young people. A YouGov poll last month showed that 41 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds surveyed thought Britain should have an elected head of state — a steep change from two years ago, when only a quarter said so.
> 
> For royal watchers in the U.K., Harry and Meghan's transition from members of the royal family to American-style celebrities means their long-term influence will take a hit.
> 
> "Celebrity is by its very nature ephemeral," said Mike Paterson, a historian and author of "A Brief History of the House of Windsor: The Making of a Modern Monarchy."
> 
> "A person who is leading trends today will by definition be replaced in time by someone younger, more beautiful, more charismatic," he said. "The point of the royal family is they are never in fashion and never out of fashion."
> 
> 
> Following long-standing royal tradition, the family has steered well clear of commenting on Harry and Meghan's accusations of neglect during their time as royals, other than to say in a statement after the Winfrey interview in March that they were "saddened" to hear of their experiences and that "recollections may vary."
> 
> With relations with the royal family back in Britain strained, Meghan and Harry have little left to lose and are free to pursue the projects and causes they want, rather than what's dictated to them by royal protocol, McDonnell said.
> 
> "I think there's a sense that they're 'damned if they do, damned if they don't,' so they're going to do what they think is best for themselves and their families," she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry left London, but they still impact the royal brand
> 
> 
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


BS....they're not fit to shine Michelle and Barak's shoes


----------



## needlv

The Telegraph confirming what we already knew...

they registered the domain names lilibetdiana BEFORE they told the Queen.


Full article here:


			https://archive.ph/RUUJY


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I still have 100 pages to read, but I am so sick of the parasitic duo that I need a little bit of humour.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I still have 100 pages to read, but I am so sick of the parasitic duo that I need a little bit of humour.
> View attachment 5116948


This never gets old!


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> Did Meghan Markle cut a royal visit to Fiji short over 'snub' by UN?
> 
> 
> At the time, aides blamed the heat, humidity and crowds for the then-pregnant duchess's decision to leave after just eight minutes, disappointing market vendors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



"_Meghan does not cope well with what she perceives as rejection.
'She's nice and smiley as can be until you step in her way or don't give her what she hopes for. Then she can be remorseless – heaven help you!_"

 I can't imagine what else she has prepared for the BRF, but it shouldn't be pretty.


----------



## csshopper

Did Harry ignore William’s birthday?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The US mainstream media is still determined to show them as being wonderful symbols, facts be damned. They found the narrative they like and they will keep repeating it hoping people will believe it. This one is from NBC. Sadly it is typical of today’s press.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry may have stepped down, but they will continue to define the royal family*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> In the American imagination, Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, made the ultimate trade, exchanging rainy London for sunny California and replacing stuffy Buckingham Palace for anything-goes Hollywood.
> 
> But according to historians and cultural scholars, the royal existencethe Duke and Duchess of Sussex evidently sought to escape will follow the couple — and the royal family, in turn, is likely to be defined by their new life at the nexus of celebrity, entertainment and activism.
> 
> Kehinde Andrews, a professor of Black studies at Birmingham City University in England, said the couple will always be identified as royals even if they are no longer working on behalf of the institution.
> 
> 
> "Whether they like it or not, they still seem to represent the monarchy," Andrews said. "He's still Prince Harry. He's still the grandson of the queen. The way they'll be consumed is very much as part of the royals."
> 
> Since stepping down from their work as senior working royals last year, Harry and Meghan have emphasized their desire to live a life of public service. They have made a podcast deal with Spotify, recently released a documentary on mental health with Apple TV+ and agreed to produce films, shows and documentaries with Netflix.
> 
> And it's not only these larger deals that have kept them in the public eye.
> 
> They granted a tell-all interview to Oprah Winfrey, in which they detailed their reasons for leaving their royal roles, including Meghan's suicidal thoughts, and discussed racism in the U.K. Harry also appeared in February on "The Late Late Show with James Corden," and Meghan released a children's book.
> 
> That's in addition to the U.K. press continuing its frenzied speculation over the state of royal relations and the circumstances that led to the couple's departure, with fresh reports dominating front pages once again this past weekend.
> 
> *Hybridized public figures*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path as hybridized public figures — British royals, American celebrities, social activists and aspirational gurus — their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> "I think it's possible that Harry and Meghan's image make Elizabeth II seem more aloof," said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "I think there are parallels to the discourse around Princess Diana. Diana was the shining star that could connect with people and who had empathy, and those qualities put the queen in sharper contrast."
> 
> 
> In addition to the influence on the royal brand, Harry and Meghan's departure from the U.K. represents a lost opportunity for the monarchy, especially in regard to making it relevant in a multicultural world where concerns about social justice are increasingly top of mind for young, diverse Britons and Americans.
> 
> "Particularly with Harry and Meghan, there was also an element of how much they were appealing to different people, particularly ethnic minorities, and how much that could have helped the monarchy reform or change or appeal to a wider group of people," said Catherine Haddon, a historian and constitutional expert at the Institute for Government in London.
> 
> "It's not only about the reaction in this country … but also about how much it affected [the royals'] appeal in places where soft power and the brand of the monarchy is important in diplomatic terms," she said.
> 
> 
> Indeed, their position outside the royal family has allowed them to speak freely, not only about their experiences, but also about political causes that they wouldn't necessarily have had the freedom to address inside the monarchy.
> 
> During the U.S. presidential election, Meghan encouraged people to vote in comments that were widely interpreted as anti-*****, and the two have also spoken out for racial justice and gender equality.
> 
> "What was notable about the Oprah Winfrey interview is that Harry and Meghan made no attempt to distance themselves from those culture wars," said Philip Murphy, the director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London. "Harry and Meghan have positioned themselves as the anti-racist royals, and their cause has been taken up by a range of anti-racist activists. But if that leads to the assumption that the rest of the royal family don't care about racism or actually hold racist attitudes, it will create a serious problem for the image of the British monarchy."
> 
> Despite their criticism of their royal life, Harry and Meghan's choice of name for their new baby girl, Lilibet Diana, links the family even more powerfully with the royals in the popular imagination. Just over a year after they quit Britain, they are still often compared to Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, from the way Kate's and Meghan's books have sold to the differing reactions of Harry and William to an investigation into the circumstances surrounding a 1993 BBC interview with their mother.
> 
> In some ways, the Sussexes might be following the model of Barack and Michelle *****, who have followed their tenure in the White House with an ambitious entry into the entertainment world, forging similar pacts with Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Whether Harry and Meghan can step away from that royal context and forge a successful and influential independent path is still up in the air, Murphy said.
> 
> William and Kate "don't feel they need to engage in politics. They seem to have this idyllic family life. It could be that the comparison with them doesn't reflect well on Meghan and Harry," he said. "But who knows? There's no road map for this."
> 
> For the moment, Harry and Meghan's comments about their lives as royals garner more public attention than their advocacy for particular causes. That, however, could change the further they get from their life in London.
> 
> Although the couple are no longer working royals, Americans are looking to them for cultural leadership in the same way, said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "There's the cliché that celebrities are America's royalty. We look to celebrity figures as icons of success and cultural leadership. In the United States, Harry and Meghan have taken on that role, in some ways," she said.
> 
> In the U.K., Harry and Meghan's popularity has tanked since they left, and in particular after their interview with Winfrey; with a YouGov poll showed that Harry's rating had dropped by 15 points over 10 days in March.
> 
> 
> At the same time, there are signs that the strong support the monarchy enjoys in the U.K. may be starting to erode among young people. A YouGov poll last month showed that 41 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds surveyed thought Britain should have an elected head of state — a steep change from two years ago, when only a quarter said so.
> 
> For royal watchers in the U.K., Harry and Meghan's transition from members of the royal family to American-style celebrities means their long-term influence will take a hit.
> 
> "Celebrity is by its very nature ephemeral," said Mike Paterson, a historian and author of "A Brief History of the House of Windsor: The Making of a Modern Monarchy."
> 
> "A person who is leading trends today will by definition be replaced in time by someone younger, more beautiful, more charismatic," he said. "The point of the royal family is they are never in fashion and never out of fashion."
> 
> 
> Following long-standing royal tradition, the family has steered well clear of commenting on Harry and Meghan's accusations of neglect during their time as royals, other than to say in a statement after the Winfrey interview in March that they were "saddened" to hear of their experiences and that "recollections may vary."
> 
> With relations with the royal family back in Britain strained, Meghan and Harry have little left to lose and are free to pursue the projects and causes they want, rather than what's dictated to them by royal protocol, McDonnell said.
> 
> "I think there's a sense that they're 'damned if they do, damned if they don't,' so they're going to do what they think is best for themselves and their families," she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry left London, but they still impact the royal brand
> 
> 
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I would say that Harry and Meghan have defined their role in the role family.  Every family, the Windsors included,  has relatives who are an embarrassment and create problems and Harry and Meghan have defined that role for themselves.  Good for them


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> The US mainstream media is still determined to show them as being wonderful symbols, facts be damned. They found the narrative they like and they will keep repeating it hoping people will believe it. This one is from NBC. Sadly it is typical of today’s press.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry may have stepped down, but they will continue to define the royal family*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> In the American imagination, Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, made the ultimate trade, exchanging rainy London for sunny California and replacing stuffy Buckingham Palace for anything-goes Hollywood.
> 
> But according to historians and cultural scholars, the royal existencethe Duke and Duchess of Sussex evidently sought to escape will follow the couple — and the royal family, in turn, is likely to be defined by their new life at the nexus of celebrity, entertainment and activism.
> 
> Kehinde Andrews, a professor of Black studies at Birmingham City University in England, said the couple will always be identified as royals even if they are no longer working on behalf of the institution.
> 
> 
> "Whether they like it or not, they still seem to represent the monarchy," Andrews said. "He's still Prince Harry. He's still the grandson of the queen. The way they'll be consumed is very much as part of the royals."
> 
> Since stepping down from their work as senior working royals last year, Harry and Meghan have emphasized their desire to live a life of public service. They have made a podcast deal with Spotify, recently released a documentary on mental health with Apple TV+ and agreed to produce films, shows and documentaries with Netflix.
> 
> And it's not only these larger deals that have kept them in the public eye.
> 
> They granted a tell-all interview to Oprah Winfrey, in which they detailed their reasons for leaving their royal roles, including Meghan's suicidal thoughts, and discussed racism in the U.K. Harry also appeared in February on "The Late Late Show with James Corden," and Meghan released a children's book.
> 
> That's in addition to the U.K. press continuing its frenzied speculation over the state of royal relations and the circumstances that led to the couple's departure, with fresh reports dominating front pages once again this past weekend.
> 
> *Hybridized public figures*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path as hybridized public figures — British royals, American celebrities, social activists and aspirational gurus — their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> "I think it's possible that Harry and Meghan's image make Elizabeth II seem more aloof," said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "I think there are parallels to the discourse around Princess Diana. Diana was the shining star that could connect with people and who had empathy, and those qualities put the queen in sharper contrast."
> 
> 
> In addition to the influence on the royal brand, Harry and Meghan's departure from the U.K. represents a lost opportunity for the monarchy, especially in regard to making it relevant in a multicultural world where concerns about social justice are increasingly top of mind for young, diverse Britons and Americans.
> 
> "Particularly with Harry and Meghan, there was also an element of how much they were appealing to different people, particularly ethnic minorities, and how much that could have helped the monarchy reform or change or appeal to a wider group of people," said Catherine Haddon, a historian and constitutional expert at the Institute for Government in London.
> 
> "It's not only about the reaction in this country … but also about how much it affected [the royals'] appeal in places where soft power and the brand of the monarchy is important in diplomatic terms," she said.
> 
> 
> Indeed, their position outside the royal family has allowed them to speak freely, not only about their experiences, but also about political causes that they wouldn't necessarily have had the freedom to address inside the monarchy.
> 
> During the U.S. presidential election, Meghan encouraged people to vote in comments that were widely interpreted as anti-*****, and the two have also spoken out for racial justice and gender equality.
> 
> "What was notable about the Oprah Winfrey interview is that Harry and Meghan made no attempt to distance themselves from those culture wars," said Philip Murphy, the director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London. "Harry and Meghan have positioned themselves as the anti-racist royals, and their cause has been taken up by a range of anti-racist activists. But if that leads to the assumption that the rest of the royal family don't care about racism or actually hold racist attitudes, it will create a serious problem for the image of the British monarchy."
> 
> Despite their criticism of their royal life, Harry and Meghan's choice of name for their new baby girl, Lilibet Diana, links the family even more powerfully with the royals in the popular imagination. Just over a year after they quit Britain, they are still often compared to Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, from the way Kate's and Meghan's books have sold to the differing reactions of Harry and William to an investigation into the circumstances surrounding a 1993 BBC interview with their mother.
> 
> In some ways, the Sussexes might be following the model of Barack and Michelle *****, who have followed their tenure in the White House with an ambitious entry into the entertainment world, forging similar pacts with Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Whether Harry and Meghan can step away from that royal context and forge a successful and influential independent path is still up in the air, Murphy said.
> 
> William and Kate "don't feel they need to engage in politics. They seem to have this idyllic family life. It could be that the comparison with them doesn't reflect well on Meghan and Harry," he said. "But who knows? There's no road map for this."
> 
> For the moment, Harry and Meghan's comments about their lives as royals garner more public attention than their advocacy for particular causes. That, however, could change the further they get from their life in London.
> 
> Although the couple are no longer working royals, Americans are looking to them for cultural leadership in the same way, said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "There's the cliché that celebrities are America's royalty. We look to celebrity figures as icons of success and cultural leadership. In the United States, Harry and Meghan have taken on that role, in some ways," she said.
> 
> In the U.K., Harry and Meghan's popularity has tanked since they left, and in particular after their interview with Winfrey; with a YouGov poll showed that Harry's rating had dropped by 15 points over 10 days in March.
> 
> 
> At the same time, there are signs that the strong support the monarchy enjoys in the U.K. may be starting to erode among young people. A YouGov poll last month showed that 41 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds surveyed thought Britain should have an elected head of state — a steep change from two years ago, when only a quarter said so.
> 
> For royal watchers in the U.K., Harry and Meghan's transition from members of the royal family to American-style celebrities means their long-term influence will take a hit.
> 
> "Celebrity is by its very nature ephemeral," said Mike Paterson, a historian and author of "A Brief History of the House of Windsor: The Making of a Modern Monarchy."
> 
> "A person who is leading trends today will by definition be replaced in time by someone younger, more beautiful, more charismatic," he said. "The point of the royal family is they are never in fashion and never out of fashion."
> 
> 
> Following long-standing royal tradition, the family has steered well clear of commenting on Harry and Meghan's accusations of neglect during their time as royals, other than to say in a statement after the Winfrey interview in March that they were "saddened" to hear of their experiences and that "recollections may vary."
> 
> With relations with the royal family back in Britain strained, Meghan and Harry have little left to lose and are free to pursue the projects and causes they want, rather than what's dictated to them by royal protocol, McDonnell said.
> 
> "I think there's a sense that they're 'damned if they do, damned if they don't,' so they're going to do what they think is best for themselves and their families," she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry left London, but they still impact the royal brand
> 
> 
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Blah, blah, blah…blah, blah. That’s not reporting that spinning ‍ a ridiculous narrative.


----------



## needlv

So blind gossip site says Adele and H are going to be together when H flies back for the statue unveiling?






						Blind Item #2
					

She just bought her next door neighbor's house, but this foreign born one named A+/A lister is set to fly back to her home country for a wee...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				




or is this MM strategy to prepare for separation / divorce?  No doubt another interview with “there were 3 of us in the marriage“ being uttered by MM to cosplay Diana again.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> So blind gossip site says Adele and H are going to be together when H flies back for the statue unveiling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> She just bought her next door neighbor's house, but this foreign born one named A+/A lister is set to fly back to her home country for a wee...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or is this MM strategy to prepare for separation / divorce?  No doubt another interview with “there were 3 of us in the marriage“ being uttered by MM to cosplay Diana again.



Adele is probably hiring a private jet and Harry wants to tagalong so he doesn’t have to pay for his own or fly with the commoners.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> This very clearly shows:
> 
> How truly DUMB Harry is - seriously, did he think that he could retain his Military titles whilst living in the United States?
> How spoiled (BRAT) and entitled he truly is
> Even though THEY said that they wanted "financial independence" and "be private" - HA!! .. heck no, they wanted that money from the Duchy and they wanted him to fund THEIR security!!!
> At this point, and given the (rather frequent) stories I'm seeing in regards to Netflix/Spotify being pretty pissed off at them (vis-a-vis - they are not living up to the agreement), makes me wonder .. how much longer can they truly afford that 14-room mansion?


Didn't they hire some producer/director chap who was known for a revenge movie? I can't imagine Hazard & Methane involved in the nitty gritty of production. Not when they are so busy stirring the pot. After more than half a year, they haven't given producer guy the go-ahead on any programmes? Or are they so lean that they can only work on one thing at a time, and currently that is the Invictus docu.

Being an executive producer of The Me You Can't See means squat. Some EPs just set general direction and don't actually do the work. And being a supporting actress doesn't mean she actually knows how to create podcasts and docus. Same goes for the Ob@mas - I'm sure they put together a team that produces the content. 



Chloe302225 said:


> Did Meghan Markle cut a royal visit to Fiji short over 'snub' by UN?
> 
> 
> At the time, aides blamed the heat, humidity and crowds for the then-pregnant duchess's decision to leave after just eight minutes, disappointing market vendors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wasn't there another excuse given that she hustled off because there was a security issue?


----------



## rose60610

Why doesn't Harry just phone it in? Service is universal. If he mentions anything about "raindrops" I'll vomit.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Why doesn't Harry just phone it in? Service is universal. If he mentions anything about "raindrops" I'll vomit.


He might slip in some reminiscing about how Diana used to sit with him on a BENCH in that very garden.

I hope he just does the necessary and avoid bringing in stupid stuff like how he just knows that his mum would have loved Methane. As it is, the fake reporter Omid is bound to be the yapping ventriloquist puppet for Methane to make sure everyone knows how she would have come if she could.


----------



## Icyjade

csshopper said:


> Did Harry ignore William’s birthday?



Seems like? Didn’t see any messages or did I miss it?


----------



## Lodpah

I tend to be believing of the Youtube report.


----------



## jelliedfeels

It does tickle me that the Bench is apparently defining a new masculinity but H is so obsessed with his honorary military titles when (no offence to soldiers) being a soldier is among the most stereotypically masculine roles out there.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> He might slip in some reminiscing about how Diana used to sit with him on a BENCH in that very garden.
> 
> I hope he just does the necessary and avoid bringing in stupid stuff like how he just knows that his mum would have loved Methane. As it is, the fake reporter Omid is bound to be the yapping ventriloquist puppet for Methane to make sure everyone knows how she would have come if she could.


I hope it is organized so Harry speaks first. I do not believe he can be trusted. This sequence would give William a chance to refocus the messages if necessary. William should be the one to leave the lasting impression of the tribute to their mother. Literally, do not give Harry the last word.

Has there been an announcement of who any guests might be? Are there to be other people present?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Prominent royal historian Robert Lacey has told U.K. paper_ The Times_ that the issue has been discussed at the “highest level” and that the queen will not change existing rules, which would ultimately see Archie and Lili named prince and princess, in her lifetime.



That makes no sense at all, because in HER lifeteime they don't hold the titles.


----------



## doni

Maggie Muggins said:


> If Felipe was addressing HM as dear Aunt Lilibet, it should have been sent as a private message since it is her nickname among family members and he still could have sent a formal condolences as King Felipe of Spain.


In royalty there is no such distinction between public and private. A King is a King at all times. It is not a job. And their family relations are not something distinct from their public persona, they _are_ their family relations. All European royals are related.  Hence, a King does not send a public and then a private message of condolence to a Queen as, say, a plebeian President may do if they had a private relationship with the Queen separate from their (by nature transitory) public position. What the King of Spain did was perfectly appropriate. And he should know because, you know, he is a King, and from one of the oldest dynasties reigning today.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That makes no sense at all, because in HER lifeteime they don't hold the titles.



I think he is got a point, because legally, if the law is not changed under the current Queen, then it will be in force when Charles takes the throne. At that very moment, Archie and Lily would acquire a birth right to the Prince title that Charles cannot take away from them. The natural thing would be for Harry to renounce that right in light of the law being changed, and I am sure that was the plan. Prince Edward had already followed that path. But of course now the situation may be different.


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> I think he is got a point, because legally, if the law is not changed under the current Queen, then it will be in force when Charles takes the throne. At that very moment, Archie and Lily would acquire a birth right to the Prince title that Charles cannot take away from them. The natural thing would be for Harry to renounce that right in light of the law being changed, and I am sure that was the plan. Prince Edward had already followed that path. But of course now the situation may be different.



I think at this point the BRF are not sure whether it is _these_ children's birthright.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, he is headed to the UK today???? and they did register the name before asking the Queen - reporters were correct. 



Prince Harry may arrive back in UK in next 24 hours and is set to stay with Princess Eugenie at Covid-secure Frogmore Cottage ahead of Diana statue unveiling with his brother;
The Duchess of Sussex may have cut short an official visit to a feminist project in Fiji due to a perceived snub by its organisers years earlier. At the time, aides blamed the heat, humidity and crowds. But royal biographer Robert Lacey has now suggested it could have been due to the involvement of UN Women, which hosted the event;
Kate and Prince William did not talk in depth to Prince Harry after Prince Philip's funeral because they feared details would 'go straight back to Meghan to be leaked out via Oprah Winfrey;
Royal expert suggests Prince 'threatened' he would do Oprah 'truth bomb' interview if Queen stripped him of military titles;









						Harry and Meghan bought 'Lilibetdiana.com BEFORE 'approval by Queen'
					

Four days before Lili was born in California the domain LiliDiana.com was registered on May 31 followed by LilibetDiana.com on June 4 - the day their second child arrived.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Aaaah, the 10 day rule:

Prince Harry, 36, to stay in a self-contained area of the five-bed Windsor home 
He is visiting the UK to the unveiling of a statue to his mother Diana next month
The Duke of Sussex is, under current rules, facing 10 day period of self-isolation
The US, where he is living with Meghan Markle, is currently on UK's amber list 
The unveiling of Diana statue is due to take place at Kensington Palace on July 1 
It means Harry will need to arrive in the next 24 hours in order to make the event









						Prince Harry 'to stay at Frogmore Cottage when he returns to UK'
					

It is understood hat the Duke of Sussex, 36, will stay in self-contained accommodation at the Windsor royal home when he jets back from the US for the statue unveiling on June 1.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he is headed to the UK today???? and they did register the name before asking the Queen - reporters were correct.
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may arrive back in UK in next 24 hours and is set to stay with Princess Eugenie at Covid-secure Frogmore Cottage ahead of Diana statue unveiling with his brother;
> The Duchess of Sussex may have cut short an official visit to a feminist project in Fiji due to a perceived snub by its organisers years earlier. At the time, aides blamed the heat, humidity and crowds. But royal biographer Robert Lacey has now suggested it could have been due to the involvement of UN Women, which hosted the event;
> Kate and Prince William did not talk in depth to Prince Harry after Prince Philip's funeral because they feared details would 'go straight back to Meghan to be leaked out via Oprah Winfrey;
> Royal expert suggests Prince 'threatened' he would do Oprah 'truth bomb' interview if Queen stripped him of military titles;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan bought 'Lilibetdiana.com BEFORE 'approval by Queen'
> 
> 
> Four days before Lili was born in California the domain LiliDiana.com was registered on May 31 followed by LilibetDiana.com on June 4 - the day their second child arrived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aaaah, the 10 day rule:
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, to stay in a self-contained area of the five-bed Windsor home
> He is visiting the UK to the unveiling of a statue to his mother Diana next month
> The Duke of Sussex is, under current rules, facing 10 day period of self-isolation
> The US, where he is living with Meghan Markle, is currently on UK's amber list
> The unveiling of Diana statue is due to take place at Kensington Palace on July 1
> It means Harry will need to arrive in the next 24 hours in order to make the event
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'to stay at Frogmore Cottage when he returns to UK'
> 
> 
> It is understood hat the Duke of Sussex, 36, will stay in self-contained accommodation at the Windsor royal home when he jets back from the US for the statue unveiling on June 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

So was there a “happy birthday William” from team Sussex?  I didn’t see anything....


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> So was there a “happy birthday William” from team Sussex?  I didn’t see anything....



Supposedly, they did send wishes ‘privately’. This, though, is clear shade from Team Charles  
then:



now:












						Prince Harry axed from photo shared by Prince Charles to celebrate Prince William's birthday
					

A snap of Charles, Camilla and William was missing Harry, despite him sitting just out of frame.




					www.newshub.co.nz


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> It does tickle me that the Bench is apparently defining a new masculinity but H is so obsessed with his honorary military titles when (no offence to soldiers) being a soldier is among the most stereotypically masculine roles out there.



If you think about his (acting out) behaviour, he_ all_ about the traditional machismo form of masculinity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So that little sh*t tried to blackmail THE QUEEN. And didn't learn anything about his, uh, position when she went ahead and did as planned anyway.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So that little sh*t tried to blackmail THE QUEEN. And didn't learn anything about his, uh, position when she went ahead and did as planned anyway.



and then named his daughter after her baby-name


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> and then named his daughter after her baby-name



I still think that was more Raptor's doing, but everything's possible. He is a petty little man, and he was at least compliant.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I bet Charles has the Frazier Theme Song and his ringtone when H&M call.  LOL.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He is indeed petty, mean and entitled.  The more I look at him now, the more I think he is not Charles’s son.  I know I know, they did dna tests. But. As William and Hazz have aged, they look _nothing_ alike. The photos from Prince Phillip’s funeral - they do not look related at all.  Odd, just, odd.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> I bet Charles has the Frazier Theme Song and his ringtone when H&M call.  LOL.



Hope he makes Hazz go through the switchboard - easy to disconnect him then.  haaaaaa!


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I tend to be believing of the Youtube report.



seems like BS to me.....if staff did snitch on her they would be fired instantly


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> seems like BS to me.....if staff did snitch on her they would be fired instantly



Aaaah, if she is as bad as the rumors say, it would be an honor to be fired. Totally worth it to complain.
Life is too short to put up with an abusive employee - supervisor or co-worker, not worth it.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> If you think about his (acting out) behaviour, he_ all_ about the traditional machismo form of masculinity.


Actually, if you think of royal families in general, to use American slang, they're all jocks - macho sporty types, even the women

For centuries, they rode to war, went hunting, sailing/boating, shooting, hawking
Some were patrons of art - mostly using art as propaganda
Not known for education, personal literary accomplishments (exceptions exist...) 

Examples - Anne & Zara - medals for three day eventing, Philip, Charles, Harry, William - polo, QEII is known for riding and  exceptional racing stable, Queen Mum - enthusiastic fly fisherman, the Kents and Gloucesters all served in the  military etc , Diana & William- enthusiastic swimmers 

Jocks ...


----------



## Chanbal

It's a long article by Dan W, it makes several good points... 

*DAN WOOTTON: The act of crass commercialisation that gives the lie to Meghan and Harry's claim that they asked the Queen's permission to name their daughter after her*

Here's the timeline of events which, in my opinion, make it abundantly clear they didn't give a damn what Her Majesty thought:


May 31: Harry and Meghan buy the website LiliDiana.com.
June 4: Meghan gives birth and the couple immediately purchase LilibetDiana.com.
At some point between June 4 and June 6: Harry claims he speaks to the Queen to seek approval for the use of her pet name.
June 6: The name is announced to the world via press release.
June 9: Palace sources tell the BBC the Queen was NOT asked about naming their daughter Lilibet by Harry and Meghan. She was merely informed.
Now who do you believe?

The Queen commands such respect within her family that there have been a host of unwritten rules throughout her reign that her family members happily follow.

Chief among them is a tradition when it comes to the naming of new members of the family.

While it would be highly unusual for Her Majesty to express an objection, relatives have happily gone through the process of formally asking the monarch for approval of baby names.

Until she knows, no one knows. Certainly not courtiers or officials.

Harry and Meghan like to say at every opportunity that they have the utmost respect for the Queen, but their actions seem to express the exact opposite.









						Dan Wootton on Meghan and Harry's claim about Lilibet's name
					

Even when going through what should be one of the most beautiful, pure and nerve-wracking moments of their lives, the Sussex machine was thinking about bloody websites, writes DAN WOOTTON.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Didn't have a chance to watch the video yet, but it may be interesting...


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> If you think about his (acting out) behaviour, he_ all_ about the traditional machismo form of masculinity.


IDK....he seems more like a big boy having tantrums to me
Maybe in addition to being the "spare" he has a complex due to being red-haired.  Sorry - not saying it's right but there is a certain prejudice against red-headed boys.  Maybe that's the secret sauce to his relationship with his WIFE.  They have both been victims of prejudice


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is indeed petty, mean and entitled.  The more I look at him now, the more I think he is not Charles’s son.  I know I know, they did dna tests. But. As William and Hazz have aged, they look _nothing_ alike. The photos from Prince Phillip’s funeral - they do not look related at all.  Odd, just, odd.



They did??? When and why? I must have totally missed that.

That said, I look nothing like my sister at all, from height to figure to face to natural hair colour. It can happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Didn't have a chance to watch the video yet, but it may be interesting...




If it's any like the new article I read...isn't it funny how we all assumed it was H & M wanting to leave, but in fact it was W & K wanting to be rid of them?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

They got the domain names - based on Lili’s name - before asking … 
silly of them but I don’t care …
now ask me about trademarking a child’s name, arghh 
children are off limits in my thinking


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> seems like BS to me.....if staff did snitch on her they would be fired instantly



Now I do think the claims are over the top (she sh*t she supposedly said sounds like her, but throwing dirty diapers and toys? Then again, one of them is said to have spilled hot tea on staff during a row), but according to the video the employee who leaked already gave their notice.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It's a long article by Dan W, it makes several good points...
> 
> *DAN WOOTTON: The act of crass commercialisation that gives the lie to Meghan and Harry's claim that they asked the Queen's permission to name their daughter after her*
> 
> Here's the timeline of events which, in my opinion, make it abundantly clear they didn't give a damn what Her Majesty thought:
> 
> 
> May 31: Harry and Meghan buy the website LiliDiana.com.
> June 4: Meghan gives birth and the couple immediately purchase LilibetDiana.com.
> At some point between June 4 and June 6: Harry claims he speaks to the Queen to seek approval for the use of her pet name.
> June 6: The name is announced to the world via press release.
> June 9: Palace sources tell the BBC the Queen was NOT asked about naming their daughter Lilibet by Harry and Meghan. She was merely informed.
> Now who do you believe?
> 
> The Queen commands such respect within her family that there have been a host of unwritten rules throughout her reign that her family members happily follow.
> 
> Chief among them is a tradition when it comes to the naming of new members of the family.
> 
> While it would be highly unusual for Her Majesty to express an objection, relatives have happily gone through the process of formally asking the monarch for approval of baby names.
> 
> Until she knows, no one knows. Certainly not courtiers or officials.
> 
> Harry and Meghan like to say at every opportunity that they have the utmost respect for the Queen, but their actions seem to express the exact opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dan Wootton on Meghan and Harry's claim about Lilibet's name
> 
> 
> Even when going through what should be one of the most beautiful, pure and nerve-wracking moments of their lives, the Sussex machine was thinking about bloody websites, writes DAN WOOTTON.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Clearly the BRF has unleashed the kraken ie they are no longer asking that the UK press hold back on stories about H&M


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They did??? When and why? I must have totally missed that.
> 
> That said, I look nothing like my sister at all, from height to figure to face to natural hair colour. It can happen.



All rumors and speculation - Diana’s affair with James Hewitt did not help matters. 









						Report: Prince Harry Definitely Not James Hewitt's Son According To DNA Test
					

A 2003 DNA test reportedly carried out by the News of The World showed Harry and Hewitt are not related



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Clearly the BRF has unleashed the kraken ie they are no longer asking that the UK press hold back on stories about H&M



Which ironically contradicts the troublesome two's complaints about how they weren't protected. They may want to reconsider once they're completely left out in the rain because I feel this is only the beginning.

Don't tickle the dragon if you can't stand the heat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> All rumors and speculation - Diana’s affair with James Hewitt did not help matters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Report: Prince Harry Definitely Not James Hewitt's Son According To DNA Test
> 
> 
> A 2003 DNA test reportedly carried out by the News of The World showed Harry and Hewitt are not related
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



How is this legal? They couldn't possibly have obtained Harry's DNA with his permission, and I am sure he never gave his permission for the test to be done. WTF.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Actually, if you think of royal families in general, to use American slang, they're all jocks - macho sporty types, even the women
> 
> For centuries, they rode to war, went hunting, sailing/boating, shooting, hawking
> Some were patrons of art - mostly using art as propaganda
> Not known for education, personal literary accomplishments (exceptions exist...)
> 
> Examples - Anne & Zara - medals for three day eventing, Philip, Charles, Harry, William - polo, QEII is known for riding and  exceptional racing stable, Queen Mum - enthusiastic fly fisherman, the Kents and Gloucesters all served in the  military etc , Diana & William- enthusiastic swimmers
> 
> Jocks ...



Princess Margret and Di more ballet/theatre/art/hairdressers


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Princess Margret and Di more ballet/theatre/art/hairdressers


that would be me....Jackie Kennedy was another one who didn't participate in all the athletics with the kennedy clan


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> that would be me....Jackie Kennedy was another one who didn't participate in all the athletics with the kennedy clan



I would have been in the horsey set too, following Queen (the band) _and_ the Marx Brothers' I can do _A Night at the Opera _AND_ A Day at the Races _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> that would be me....Jackie Kennedy was another one who didn't participate in all the athletics with the kennedy clan



Yeah...I could do the horse riding part (but I only do ponies haha...one of Her Majesty's Highlanders is as high as I will go) if not too extreme, but hunting, water sports, walking dogs for hours, or even watching tennis? No thanks.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah...I could do the horse riding part (but I only do ponies haha...one of Her Majesty's Highlanders is as high as I will go) if not too extreme, but hunting, water sports, walking dogs for hours, or even watching tennis? No thanks.


hunting is a big no for me....that is one thing I'm in agreement with Meghan on


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> hunting is a big no for me....that is one thing I'm in agreement with Meghan on



Yeah, same for me.

I still do think getting involved with a man who has hunted since he could hold a weapon and then telling them "You're not allowed to" is both silly and overbearing. It's not like he came to the realisation killing something as a hobby is kind of sick, he's just bowing to his dominatrix.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems like Diana did hunt or just attended the festivities?









						Candid photos capture Princess Diana on a shoot
					

These candid photos of a newly-married Princess Diana and Prince Charles belonged to the former housekeeper of Princess Alexandra, the Queen's cousin, in Richmond, west London.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is indeed petty, mean and entitled.  The more I look at him now, the more I think he is not Charles’s son.  I know I know, they did dna tests. But. As William and Hazz have aged, they look _nothing_ alike. The photos from Prince Phillip’s funeral - they do not look related at all.  Odd, just, odd.


They did dna tests?  When, and how do we know this?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> They did dna tests?  When, and how do we know this?





CarryOn2020 said:


> All rumors and speculation - Diana’s affair with James Hewitt did not help matters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Report: Prince Harry Definitely Not James Hewitt's Son According To DNA Test
> 
> 
> A 2003 DNA test reportedly carried out by the News of The World showed Harry and Hewitt are not related
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



ETA: if you Google it, you will find many more stories, I promise.
Also, check out page 1 of this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is indeed petty, mean and entitled.  The more I look at him now, the more I think he is not Charles’s son.  I know I know, they did dna tests. But. As William and Hazz have aged, they look _nothing_ alike. The photos from Prince Phillip’s funeral - they do not look related at all.  Odd, just, odd.


You could also twist that around another way. I think Harry looks almost identical to a young Prince Philip and has the same close set eyes and nose as Charles, whilst also looking like a Spencer. William, to me, looks nothing like Charles at all, looks nothing like a Spencer for the most part but looks exactly like Diana.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is indeed petty, mean and entitled.  The more I look at him now, the more I think he is not Charles’s son.  I know I know, they did dna tests. But. As William and Hazz have aged, they look _nothing_ alike. The photos from Prince Phillip’s funeral - they do not look related at all.  Odd, just, odd.


Have they done DNA tests though?


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> that would be me....Jackie Kennedy was another one who didn't participate in all the athletics with the kennedy clan


Yes, you are correct, she did not do flag football

But, when widowed, she maintained a farm for years, and spent four day weekends there every week - even when working as book editor in New York, so she could ride and hunt in Virginia

And of course, when at the White House, Caroline had a pony named Macaroni - a real live pony for riding, not a hobby horse type of thing


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Have they done DNA tests though?



Page 1 of this thread - bottom line - no one really knows









						Report: Prince Harry Definitely Not James Hewitt's Son According To DNA Test
					

A 2003 DNA test reportedly carried out by the News of The World showed Harry and Hewitt are not related



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> You could also twist that around another way. I think Harry looks almost identical to a young Prince Philip and has the same close set eyes and nose as Charles, whilst also looking like a Spencer. William, to me, looks nothing like Charles at all, looks nothing like a Spencer for the most part but looks exactly like Diana.



True, IMO Hazz‘s anger shows in his face. He has lost the boyish cuteness and become rather unpleasant looking.
Prince Phillip was a gorgeous man, IMO. William and Peter Phillips look a lot alike, especially with a hat on.


----------



## marietouchet

Just thinking of Diana and Jackie 
Widowed, Jackie went back to her old job, book writing and editing, she did that before marriage
Separated then divorced, Diana had no job to return to except the rounds of charities 
Harry, after the divorce from the BRF, also has no job to return to except charities


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, same for me.
> 
> I still do think getting involved with a man who has hunted since he could hold a weapon and then telling them "You're not allowed to" is both silly and overbearing. It's not like he came to the realisation killing something as a hobby is kind of sick, he's just bowing to his dominatrix.


Read an article by fox hunting enthusiast about the adrenaline from the sport, it is a huge addictive rush all that galloping and jumping
Nowadays, you are not supposed to catch the fox, so, that is theoretically not a big rush


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Clearly the BRF has unleashed the kraken ie they are no longer asking that the UK press hold back on stories about H&M



The phrase "unleash the kraken" is perfect for this story.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> You could also twist that around another way. I think Harry looks almost identical to a young Prince Philip and has the same close set eyes and nose as Charles, whilst also looking like a Spencer. William, to me, looks nothing like Charles at all, looks nothing like a Spencer for the most part but looks exactly like Diana.



Harrry looks more and more like Charles as he ages, while I find William is a better version of Charles Spencer.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> All rumors and speculation - Diana’s affair with James Hewitt did not help matters.



Diana didn't meet Hewitt until two years after Harry was born. I know some have been trying for years to make a connection because of the red hair and a passing resemblance but there's no truth to it.



CarryOn2020 said:


> He is indeed petty, mean and entitled.  The more I look at him now, the more I think he is not Charles’s son.  I know I know, they did dna tests. But. As William and Hazz have aged, they look _nothing_ alike. The photos from Prince Phillip’s funeral - they do not look related at all.  Odd, just, odd.



Looks don't mean everything, there are plenty of siblings who look different from each other. There is some family resemblance between Charles and Harry, particularly when you compare Harry to photos of his father as a child and as a young man with a beard. He's Charles' son for sure.





	

		
			
		

		
	
[/QUOTE]


----------



## CarryOn2020

No time to debate the ‘looks’ now. Much appreciation for the photos.

ETA 
To my eye, Windsor genes are strong in these 3:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Read an article by fox hunting enthusiast about the adrenaline from the sport, it is a huge addictive rush all that galloping and jumping
> Nowadays, you are not supposed to catch the fox, so, that is theoretically not a big rush



Nowadays fox hunting (the big spectacle with horses and dogs) is banned in the UK as well as Germany. As in, you are not only not supposed to catch the fox, you cannot chase the poor thing with a pack of dogs just for fun, which I'm very grateful for. That said, shooting them is still fair game.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> The phrase "unleash the kraken" is perfect for this story.


I remember a movie about the gods on Olympus, and Liam Nelson as Zeus telling Poseidon  to release the Kraken

as we sit here, judging the world like the gods from Mount Olympus lol


----------



## Nico61

Hi everyone, new here, first post. 
What are your thoughts on her having a secret child by Joe?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I remember a movie about the gods on Olympus, and Liam Nelson as Zeus telling Poseidon  to release the Kraken
> 
> as we sit here, judging the world like the gods from Mount Olympus lol



I remember the older version of Clash of the Titans from the 80s.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pivoine66 said:


> *Does anyone know who paid for the dress/kaftan, her wardrobe in her about 18 months in UK as a so working Royal?*
> 
> In my circle in Europe, no one had ever heard of Prince Harry's wife before they officially became a couple. We were surprised to see a photo of her as a Briefcase girl and then the interview posted here with Mr Craig Ferguson in this - hm - different looking dress.  We were surprised, too, by her completely different demeanour (interview Mr. Ferguson vs OW?) Perhaps it would be helpful to show more photos like these of her career here of Prince Harry's wife and ones that show her career that she gave up and of her achievements before the Prince?  Was she an activist, campaigner for women's rights and WOC, apart from the children's letter?


Sorry if this has been answered already. Prince Charles paid for her wardrobe while she was a senior royal and this included all her wedding clothes (engagement dress, interview dress, wedding gown, etc.) and the clothes she wore for the royal events she attended.


----------



## Pivoine66

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry if this has been answered already. Prince Charles paid for her wardrobe while she was a senior royal and this included all her wedding clothes (engagement dress, interview dress, wedding gown, etc.) and the clothes she wore for the royal events she attended.


Thanks anyway for taking the time to reply, dear Maggie Muggins.


----------



## purseinsanity

Nico61 said:


> Hi everyone, new here, first post.
> What are your thoughts on her having a secret child by Joe?


Hello!  Welcome!  Who's Joe?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, same for me.
> 
> I still do think getting involved with a man who has hunted since he could hold a weapon and then telling them "You're not allowed to" is both silly and overbearing. It's not like he came to the realisation killing something as a hobby is kind of sick, he's just bowing to his dominatrix.





sdkitty said:


> hunting is a big no for me....that is one thing I'm in agreement with Meghan on



I live on a licensed hunting Ducal estate but I dislike hunting. 

I guess I'm on the fence, my fence. 

I do value rural jobs and the countryside. Without these 'playgrounds for the rich' our 50 000 acres would be concreted over and (foreign owned) wind-farmed to the max (which often comes up in planning). Un-farmable, our (endangered) bird and squirrel populations (kites, short-eared owls and other Strigidae, kestrels, red squirrels - some of the last in the UK) would be decimated if the landscape was industrialised. Green is not always green and perceived animal rights are not always good for wildlife.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry if this has been answered already. Prince Charles paid for her wardrobe while she was a senior royal and this included all her wedding clothes (engagement dress, interview dress, wedding gown, etc.) and the clothes she wore for the royal events she attended.


My mother taught me from childhood on that you don't order the most expensive thing on the menu if someone else is paying!
Apparently Doria never taught her that, or Methane missed the memo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nico61 said:


> Hi everyone, new here, first post.
> What are your thoughts on her having a secret child by Joe?



Welcome! Joe Giuliani? I haven't heard that rumour, but also seeing her with Archie hasn't made me confident she would secretly have a child she didn't even want. That woman is not exactly a glowing example of maternal instinct.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> The couple’s friend, *Dean Stott*, told _People_, *“Lili becomes the fourth generation of amazing, strong women in the family—behind Meghan, Diana and her Majesty the Queen. *Harry and Meghan now have their complete family. It’s their time to be in the moment.*”*


When I visited my uncle's farm as a child, I saw a lot of whatever that guy is spouting off. It's called bull crap.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Diana didn't meet Hewitt until two years after Harry was born. I know some have been trying for years to make a connection because of the red hair and a passing resemblance but there's no truth to it.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks don't mean everything, there are plenty of siblings who look different from each other. There is some family resemblance between Charles and Harry, particularly when you compare Harry to photos of his father as a child and as a young man with a beard. He's Charles' son for sure.
> 
> View attachment 5117387
> 
> View attachment 5117390


Agree, the close-set eyes are very similar, but since the European royal families throughout history had so many cases of close inbreeding, it also makes sense they tend to look alike.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Where's a yawning emoji when you need one?


How about a yawning baby instead?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh...this, my dear people, is the pregnancy Dior caftan she had made to wear to a dinner in Morocco for what, 90 mins? And. It. Cost. 90000. British Pounds Sterling.


I remember this episode because I checked its USD value back then and was floored when I read the results. Today, it would be worth 125549.280 US Dollar. Nothing but the best and most expensive clothes for H's wife.


----------



## bag-mania

In case anyone was wondering why we have been getting so many "royal expert" quotes this week from Robert Lacey, he is releasing an updated version of his book from last year about the relationship between Will and Harry. He added a chapter or two about the Oprah interview and the funeral. Big whoop!


----------



## EverSoElusive

EverSoElusive said:


>





Sorry mods and fellow posters. Meant to post this on W&K thread. Just noticed it now


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> In case anyone was wondering why we have been getting so many "royal expert" quotes this week from Robert Lacey, he is releasing an updated version of his book from last year about the relationship between Will and Harry. He added a chapter or two about the Oprah interview and the funeral. Big whoop!



He has ‘read the room’, realized H&M are no longer welcome, so he _revised_ his book.

ETA:  Any sightings of Hazzie?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Nico61 said:


> Hi everyone, new here, first post.
> What are your thoughts on her having a secret child by Joe?



I think this person meant Prez Joe B's illegitimate child?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Robert Lacey is backpedaling so fast that he is leaving skid marks. He can’t write his revisions fast enough.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I think this person meant Prez Joe B's illegitimate child?


what would be the point of that? (from a brand new member)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> He has ‘read the room’, realized H&M are no longer welcome, so he _revised_ his book.
> 
> ETA:  *Any sightings of Hazzie?*



Thankfully no.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

@rose60610
It was Lord Christopher Geidt I couldn't remember the name of! I knew there was a Lord in the name somehow. I think it was on another forum where I read about Lord Geidt keeping tabs on Meghan and Harry, but I don't remember the details, just that Lord Geidt stopped working for the BRF for some reason.


Hope everyone is well  I've given up on keeping up here because due to using proxy I keep getting logged out canceled  after a few minutes. But I see the Montecito royals are staying as true to form as ever!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I actually saved this one because I want to come back in a few months and see if her predictions are right. I usually watch these for entertainment but that one struck a chord with me. The alleged Meghan / Doria feud is just the opener, she talks a lot about Harry's mental health, their relationship, the relationship to the BRF (e.g. Harry out on his revenge thing because Charles cut the money flow, Raptor realizing that despite of what she was thinking she holds no power over them but is going on a killing spree nevertheless because she can).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> In case anyone was wondering why we have been getting so many "royal expert" quotes this week from Robert Lacey, he is releasing an updated version of his book from last year about the relationship between Will and Harry. He added a chapter or two about the Oprah interview and the funeral. Big whoop!



I'm not impressed with yet another money-grabbing wh*re. A year ago he was a firm believer it was all William's fault for being not compliant enough with their sh*t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I think this person meant Prez Joe B's illegitimate child?



Hu? I can't keep up anymore.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? I can't keep up anymore.


Meh
You've got to just roll with it.........like a twig on the shoulders of a mighty stream


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those theories seem very plausible.  Here’s another one:
> #4. When Hazz goes to the statue reveal, QE has invited him to _lunch.  _That may be when all the papers get signed - renounce titles, renounce succession, renounce any & all land holdings.


Are you saying it won't be a fireside chit chat with Granny? No? Good, I hope all of H's hefty and healthy cousins and his brother are in attendance to protect HMTQ and knock some sense into H. 
Cackling and rubbing my hands together and thinking, "I want to be a fly on the wall".


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Meh
> You've got to just roll with it.........like a twig on the shoulders of a mighty stream



I had to let go of reality a long time ago following these 2. I would think M would love to have H's child - if she could so I don't think there's a soap story there. I would believe they're still waiting for the real mother to hand the child over though. 

Any other Royal couple make sure they show baby ASAP to all as a _fait accompli_, basically that's how hereditary sh*t works. They could have just said, 'never mind, we're going to adopt' and everyone would have loved them all the better for it. 

The couple that had it _all _for real, just had to sit pretty, smile, let everyone else do the work while they took the applause, but they decided their own Disney fantasy in nowhere land would be so much better. 

Once you let go of common sense, authenticity, dignity, truth and beauty, there's less  to be disappointed with and far fewer surprises.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I had to let go of reality a long time ago following these 2. I would think M would love to have H's child - if she could so I don't think there's a soap story there. I would believe they're still waiting for the real mother to hand the child over though.
> 
> Any other Royal couple make sure they show baby ASAP to all as a _fait accompli_, basically that's how hereditary sh*t works. They could have just said, 'never mind, we're going to adopt' and everyone would have loved them all the better for it.
> 
> The couple that had it _all _for real, just had to sit pretty, smile, let everyone else do the work while they took the applause, but they decided their own Disney fantasy in nowhere land would be so much better.
> 
> Once you let go of common sense, authenticity, dignity, truth and beauty, there's less  to be disappointed with and far fewer surprises.



Everything they do is calculated for maximum effect.  I’m sure we will see a vague, no-detail photo of baby Lily-butt as soon as they need something to get them attention. The Diana statue unveiling is keeping things active for now.


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> I think this person meant Prez Joe B's illegitimate child?



I do not think he could father a child at his age (certainly not a healthy one), but it's an interesting way to join a thread!


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> what would be the point of that? (from a brand new member)



No idea. I think the person got the wrong thread too    Besides, someone was asking Joe who so thought I'd share my guess.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? I can't keep up anymore.



Don't get me in trouble for saying the US president's name     Like I said to @sdkitty, I think the new member got the wrong thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Everything they do is calculated for maximum effect.  I’m sure we will see a vague, no-detail photo of baby Lily-butt as soon as they need something to get them attention. The Diana statue unveiling is keeping things active for now.



Agree with @papertiger.  Apparently those surrogate and adoption agreements include a clause that specifies no photos for a stated period of time. It gives the carrier-mother time to change her mind. Could be other issues involved, too.  With all the rumors circulating, this is why I continue to follow these 2.  It was the same for Charles and Diana - few thought those rumors were true, then, bam, truth  turned out to be stranger than fiction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> I do not think he could father a child at his age (certainly not a healthy one), but it's an interesting way to join a thread!



I think so too. Wished I'd had crashed this thread so hard when I was new


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I had the same thought: wench on the bench.
> Anyone got pics of the benches at Nott Cott or Frogmore?
> The next book for the new babe will be
> The Swing.
> This is your swing,
> Where we had our fling
> Doing that thing
> That keeps my heart pumping


Pretty please add this line to make it more personal.

The Swing.
This is your swing,
Where we had our fling
Doing that thing
*In the woods peeing*
That keeps my heart pumping


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Sorry mods and fellow posters. Meant to post this on W&K thread. Just noticed it now


No apology necessary. Frankly, it was a lovely moment to reflect on real royalty, class, grace, intelligence, compassion etc, all those things we don't usually find here in H and M land.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Pretty please add this line to make it more personal.
> 
> The Swing.
> This is your swing,
> Where we had our fling
> Doing that thing
> *In the woods peeing*
> That keeps my heart pumping


Maggie, it is so good to have you back,


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Maggie, it is so good to have you back,


Thanks, I'm so glad to be back that I'm dancing with you.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> He looks very frail, he should try to let it go imo. Unless he is doing this for the money, and I wouldn't blame him at this point. *The Harkles seem to have only compassion for themselves.* What they were given in the past by either T or C is history. It's all about what they can still get from the BRF.


Except their compassion is spelled G-R-E-E-D.


----------



## marietouchet

Any one else feeing sad for a little baby girl in California ? Such a controversial name … I would not wish that on anyone … 
@gracekelly predicted this months ago … I read Tyler Perry has no more crockery … and his employees were all threatening quitting due to tenants


----------



## Chanbal

Can we still be surprised?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can read it but sadly don't understand what is says, but can we appreciate for a moment that even Kurdish Twitter makes fun of the troublesome two?


----------



## Chanbal

They may have regretted the interview after realizing that it didn't bring what they wanted.



_However, Emily Andrews, royal editor of the Mail on Sunday speaking to Channel 5's documentary, 'Charles & Harry: Father and Son Divided', said *the pair had had correspondence after the interview, with Harry attempting to explain the contents of the explosive two-hour talk in a letter*.

She said: "*Before the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, Harry wrote Charles a letter, I think partly apologising for Oprah.*

"But also I think wanting to explain from Harry and Meghan's point of view, they felt none of the Royal Family were listening to them, that's partly one of the reasons they had to literally walk away.

"Of course, at the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, that was the first time that William and Charles had seen Harry for an entire year."

Many shared a similar view to Ms Andrews, believing that the funeral offered a space for Harry to reconcile with the family.

*Yet, not a month after the funeral, Harry appeared in the podcast, 'Armchair Expert', where he delivered yet another blow to the Firm.*

Here, he blamed Charles' upbringing by the Queen and Philip for having negatively tainted his own childhood, describing it as "genetic pain and suffering".

The following week, he spoke during the first episode of his and Oprah's new Apple TV+ series, 'The Me You Can't See', sharing his struggles with mental health growing up as a royal.

Many accused the Duke of throwing his family under the bus again.

Maureen Callahan, writing in the New York Post, said the events had pushed the Queen to make her opposition to their actions publicly known._









						Harry wrote Charles letter apologising' for Oprah interview
					

PRINCE HARRY "wrote Charles a letter" to explain and apologise for his interview with Oprah Winfrey before reuniting with his father at Prince Philip's funeral, a royal author claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

marietouchet said:


> Any one else feeing sad for a little baby girl in California ? Such a controversial name … I would not wish that on anyone …
> @gracekelly predicted this months ago … I read Tyler Perry has no more crockery … and his employees were all threatening quitting due to tenants



Is this last part true?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

justwatchin said:


> Probably doesn’t care about his number in line for the throne but you can bet he wants and needs his title. Let’s face it, *without it he’s just as ordinary as the rest of us*.


We are not like him. He is greedy, manipulative, deplorable, despicable, etc., etc., etc..


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> They may have regretted the interview after realizing that it didn't bring what they wanted.
> View attachment 5117705
> 
> 
> _However, Emily Andrews, royal editor of the Mail on Sunday speaking to Channel 5's documentary, 'Charles & Harry: Father and Son Divided', said *the pair had had correspondence after the interview, with Harry attempting to explain the contents of the explosive two-hour talk in a letter*.
> 
> She said: "*Before the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, Harry wrote Charles a letter, I think partly apologising for Oprah.*
> 
> "But also I think wanting to explain from Harry and Meghan's point of view, they felt none of the Royal Family were listening to them, that's partly one of the reasons they had to literally walk away.
> 
> "Of course, at the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, that was the first time that William and Charles had seen Harry for an entire year."
> 
> Many shared a similar view to Ms Andrews, believing that the funeral offered a space for Harry to reconcile with the family.
> 
> *Yet, not a month after the funeral, Harry appeared in the podcast, 'Armchair Expert', where he delivered yet another blow to the Firm.*
> 
> Here, he blamed Charles' upbringing by the Queen and Philip for having negatively tainted his own childhood, describing it as "genetic pain and suffering".
> 
> The following week, he spoke during the first episode of his and Oprah's new Apple TV+ series, 'The Me You Can't See', sharing his struggles with mental health growing up as a royal.
> 
> Many accused the Duke of throwing his family under the bus again.
> 
> Maureen Callahan, writing in the New York Post, said the events had pushed the Queen to make her opposition to their actions publicly known._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry wrote Charles letter apologising' for Oprah interview
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY "wrote Charles a letter" to explain and apologise for his interview with Oprah Winfrey before reuniting with his father at Prince Philip's funeral, a royal author claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


What is with all these letters?  Don’t they have email???


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Is this last part true?


I don't know if it is true, but here is another post about it.


----------



## Annawakes

Aimee3 said:


> What is with all these letters?  Don’t they have email???


I thought the same, until I remembered that email can be hacked.  So maybe they prefer writing letters instead???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Nico61 said:


> Hi everyone, new here, first post.
> What are your thoughts on her having a secret child by Joe?



Hi and welcome.  I think you are referring to this Quora story where people surmised she may have had a child and it’s with the first - allegedly annulled marriage?  I’m going to say I don’t believe it.  if MM had a child already then Samantha would have blabbed something.

quora link for the other members here which may want to read it!









						Could this be Meghan’s dark secret?  I suppose most of you have heard the rumour that Meghan Markle has married not two but three times. ...
					

Could this be Meghan’s dark secret?  I suppose most of you have heard the rumour that Meghan Markle has married not two but three times. Before Prince Harry and her divorced husband Trevor Engelson she is said to have married a lawyer called Joe Giuliano or in full: Joseph Goldberg-Giuliano. Howe...




					duchessdiaries.quora.com


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can read it but sadly don't understand what is says, but can we appreciate for a moment that even Kurdish Twitter makes fun of the troublesome two?
> View attachment 5117704


Obviously, they strike a universal chord.


----------



## Jayne1

Speaking of Quora - I saw an ad Meg supposedly did, for a bathroom deodorant, to put it nicely. From The Tig, June, 2015, something she was getting paid for if people purchased. 

Anyway, should I post it here?  They say it's legit and it's perfectly respectable, but just not something she would want to show she advertised.


----------



## bisousx

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of Quora - I saw an ad Meg supposedly did, for a *bathroom deodorant*, to put it nicely. From The Tig, June, 2015, something she was getting paid for if people purchased.
> 
> Anyway, should I post it here?  They say it's legit and it's perfectly respectable, but just not something she would want to show she advertised.



Like Poo Pouri?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It's a long article by Dan W, it makes several good points...
> 
> *DAN WOOTTON: The act of crass commercialisation that gives the lie to Meghan and Harry's claim that they asked the Queen's permission to name their daughter after her*
> 
> Here's the timeline of events which, in my opinion, make it abundantly clear they didn't give a damn what Her Majesty thought:
> 
> 
> May 31: Harry and Meghan buy the website LiliDiana.com.
> June 4: Meghan gives birth and the couple immediately purchase LilibetDiana.com.
> At some point between June 4 and June 6: Harry claims he speaks to the Queen to seek approval for the use of her pet name.
> June 6: The name is announced to the world via press release.
> June 9: Palace sources tell the BBC the Queen was NOT asked about naming their daughter Lilibet by Harry and Meghan. She was merely informed.
> Now who do you believe?
> 
> The Queen commands such respect within her family that there have been a host of unwritten rules throughout her reign that her family members happily follow.
> 
> Chief among them is a tradition when it comes to the naming of new members of the family.
> 
> While it would be highly unusual for Her Majesty to express an objection, relatives have happily gone through the process of formally asking the monarch for approval of baby names.
> 
> Until she knows, no one knows. Certainly not courtiers or officials.
> 
> Harry and Meghan like to say at every opportunity that they have the utmost respect for the Queen, but their actions seem to express the exact opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dan Wootton on Meghan and Harry's claim about Lilibet's name
> 
> 
> Even when going through what should be one of the most beautiful, pure and nerve-wracking moments of their lives, the Sussex machine was thinking about bloody websites, writes DAN WOOTTON.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Let me know if Methane ever shows respect for anyone. There are plenty of instances of disrespect towards HMTQ, the whopper she told about the Archbishop, and most of all the pushing and shoving towards her own husband. I think she may equate showing respect to being subservient, and there is no way she is going to be subservient to anyone.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> They did??? When and why? I must have totally missed that.
> 
> That said, I look nothing like my sister at all, from height to figure to face to natural hair colour. It can happen.


My sis and I have worked in the same company (of 3000 people) for 30 years, and in the same department (of 800 people) for 20 years. Less than 50 people know that we are sisters as we look nothing alike.


----------



## Jayne1

bisousx said:


> Like Poo Pouri?


Yes. But this one is called Aesop Post Poo Drops.  Just 3 Drops!

Has anyone else seen this?


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of Quora - I saw an ad Meg supposedly did, for a bathroom deodorant, to put it nicely. From The Tig, June, 2015, something she was getting paid for if people purchased.
> 
> Anyway, should I post it here?  They say it's legit and it's perfectly respectable, but just not something she would want to show she advertised.


Do show! It can't be worse than all those pics of her cosying up with various men and that awful duck-lips pic of her with her stylist (was he the one who dropped by London and that started off Tiaragate?)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> *There must be teams of stans or bots writing glowing reviews of her book on Amazon. It has 4.5 stars! *
> 
> I found this gem though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Laila
> _1.0 out of 5 stars_ Not a book for children
> Reviewed in the United States on June 8, 2021
> 
> I'm a children's librarian, and I'm chagrined this book will now be part of our library. It is not a book for children, as there are no characters, no fun, no adventures. It's barely a book at all actually, just a set of poorly-rhyming platitudes on how to parent. I would be shocked if anyone gave this 5 stars if the author was an anonymous person (actually, the book wouldn't have gotten published at all). It distresses me that Meghan (excuse me, "the duchess") reportedly received a half-million dollar advance for this drivel, when there are so many well-deserving authors who struggle to make ends meet. Please, try their works out instead. If you need help, your local library would be delighted to offer suggestions
> 1,304 people found this helpful


This article from 2019 describes Meghan bots, but I don't know if they are still active.

*Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane'*

Josh Feldberg’s dive into the divisive world of royal social media began after he read a story detailing “how royal correspondents were under attack,” he recounts from London. In particular, the journalists who write about the royals for major British outlets such as the _Telegraph_ and the _Express_ were finding themselves under assault on social media for virtually anything they wrote about Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex.

Accusations of racism, nativism and bullying were being flung with abandon on Twitter. “At least one of my colleagues has called in the police after threats were made to relatives; another was told she deserved to have acid thrown in her face,” Richard Palmer of the _Daily Express_ wrote last July. “We have all faced unpleasant and unfounded accusations of racism towards Meghan.”

Feldberg was curious. He’d never thought about royals as a hotbed for online trolling. But as the the head of digital at 89up, a European consulting firm that has done social media research for a ground-breaking British parliamentary committee investigation into disinformation and fake news, he was the right person to see if there really was anything suspicious in the Meghan Markle Twitter community. His findings were first reported in the _Telegraph_ by Camilla Tominey and Hannah Furness, the paper’s royal correspondent. Tominey, a veteran royal reporter, has been the focus of what 89up called an “orchestrated attack by this network” he discovered.

*Article*


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Hi and welcome.  I think you are referring to this Quora story where people surmised she may have had a child and it’s with the first - allegedly annulled marriage?  I’m going to say I don’t believe it.  if MM had a child already then Samantha would have blabbed something.
> 
> quora link for the other members here which may want to read it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could this be Meghan’s dark secret?  I suppose most of you have heard the rumour that Meghan Markle has married not two but three times. ...
> 
> 
> Could this be Meghan’s dark secret?  I suppose most of you have heard the rumour that Meghan Markle has married not two but three times. Before Prince Harry and her divorced husband Trevor Engelson she is said to have married a lawyer called Joe Giuliano or in full: Joseph Goldberg-Giuliano. Howe...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> duchessdiaries.quora.com



Thank you for posting that! I think many of us were confused about the identity of Joe since we didn’t know the name of the alleged first husband. It seems like someone in the media would have pursued this path and interviewed the poor man. If they have left him alone that shows unusual restraint for the press.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I don't know if it is true, but here is another post about it.


 If I remember didn’t they just kind of disappear from Tyler’s and next thing we knew it was announced they were in Montecito and had been for awhile?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> Unless it was a laparoscopic c-section.  JK!


You must be referring to the sequel to "Honey I Shrunk The Kids" titled "I Shrunk Methane's Kid" coming to a theatre near you.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Any one else feeing sad for a little baby girl in California ? Such a controversial name … I would not wish that on anyone …
> @gracekelly predicted this months ago … I read Tyler Perry has no more crockery … and his employees were all threatening quitting due to tenants


As someone wrote: she will grow up knowing that her name was a means to hurt, and not to heal 
I've read about cases where kids are named after spouses and relatives, and when the relationship goes sour, the anger is vented on the kid. Hope the Lil Babe will be well despite her parents' mental disorders. Pray that she has better role models than them.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> If I remember didn’t they just kind of disappear from Tyler’s and next thing we knew it was announced they were in Montecito and had been for awhile?



It proves they can do things in complete privacy when they choose. When we hear about every dumb little thing they are up to it’s because they want us to know. They want it _desperately._


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Hi and welcome.  I think you are referring to this Quora story where people surmised she may have had a child and it’s with the first - allegedly annulled marriage?  I’m going to say I don’t believe it.  if MM had a child already then Samantha would have blabbed something.
> 
> quora link for the other members here which may want to read it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could this be Meghan’s dark secret?  I suppose most of you have heard the rumour that Meghan Markle has married not two but three times. ...
> 
> 
> Could this be Meghan’s dark secret?  I suppose most of you have heard the rumour that Meghan Markle has married not two but three times. Before Prince Harry and her divorced husband Trevor Engelson she is said to have married a lawyer called Joe Giuliano or in full: Joseph Goldberg-Giuliano. Howe...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> duchessdiaries.quora.com


I haven't seen this before, it is impressive. I don't know if they were married or not, but they had a relationship as there is at least one very blurred picture of them together. The little girl is so cute. Wow so much mystery surrounding this person. I wonder how much the BRF knows about all this, the Firm has plenty of resources to get this story straight.  



Spoiler: possible picture


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Even with a new baby, they are still threatening law suits. Almost all parents with newbies spend at least the first week completely enraptured by and focused on the *bébé*” (or “bay-bay”).  _What is wrong with these two?
> View attachment 5106333
> _


If the baby is from a surrogacy, she may not have the same maternal feelings one develops during pregnancy and delivery. Besides, I think her first loves are money and fame and, as we know, H takes his cue from his wife. They are so pathetic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> I haven't seen this before, it is impressive. I don't know if they were married or not, but they had a relationship as there is at least one very blurred picture of them together. The little girl is so cute. Wow so much mystery surrounding this person. I wonder how much the BRF knows about all this, the Firm has plenty of resources to get this story straight.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: possible picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5117805



That looks more like a prom picture


----------



## EverSoElusive

****ty couple


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> That looks more like a prom picture


According to whatever is out there, they were together at Northwestern. Who knows what type of relationship they had...  I wonder what the BRF knows about all this. The courtiers have plenty of resources to investigate, and I would be surprised if they didn't.


----------



## Chanbal

Without the ads


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> There has been so much speculation. No one knows. It was too awkward and weird for it to be nothing.


I read on another forum that she stuck her tongue out at Camilla and they need proof to post anything on that forum.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> I thought the same, until I remembered that email can be hacked.  So maybe *they prefer writing letters instead*???


In calligraphy


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Any one else feeing sad for a little baby girl in California ? Such a controversial name … I would not wish that on anyone …
> @gracekelly predicted this months ago … I read Tyler Perry has no more crockery … and his employees were all threatening quitting due to tenants


I have a feeling this little girl is going to be subjected to all kinds of "genetic pain" from her two lunatic parents.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I haven't seen this before, it is impressive. I don't know if they were married or not, but they had a relationship as there is at least one very blurred picture of them together. The little girl is so cute. Wow so much mystery surrounding this person. I wonder how much the BRF knows about all this, the Firm has plenty of resources to get this story straight.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: possible picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5117805


This could be a prom picture.  As much as I want to keep painting her as a vilaness (which she is!), not sure if this is true or not.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> This could be a prom picture.  As much as I want to keep painting her as a vilaness (which she is!), not sure if this is true or not.


I think there is proof somewhere that it was a prom pic. As well, there were also stories that the Joe who is supposedly her first husband is fictional and no one can find this person. 

Is she a villainess?  I don't think anyone is pure evil, but I do think she is heartless, manipulative and totally me-first. And Hazard is no dupe. Maybe she (mis)leads, brainwashes, pushes and provokes. But he was willing to go along with her even when he should know better.


----------



## kkfiregirl

xincinsin said:


> And Hazard is no dupe. Maybe she (mis)leads, brainwashes, pushes and provokes. But he was willing to go along with her even when he should know better.



Agree. They seem to have a codependent relationship.


----------



## needlv

Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....


----------



## kkfiregirl

needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....




You’re joking right? This looks like a youtube parody


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....



Wow the actress sounds much like M to me.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....



Dave Chappell and all the comedians can't even come close to making me laugh like this teaser. Is this for real? Man, I needed a good laugh today.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I believe it is the upcoming Lifetime movie they are filming. Here’s People article and shows the actors.


*Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace: Everything We Know About Lifetime's Latest Royal Movie*









						Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace: Everything We Know About Lifetime's Latest Royal Movie
					

Lifetime's third film about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle explores the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's rift with the royal family




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Do show! It can't be worse than all those pics of her cosying up with various men and that awful duck-lips pic of her with her stylist (was he the one who dropped by London and that started off Tiaragate?)



I think that was her hairdresser who flew in from Paris, not Jessica Mulroney her bestie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Thank you for posting that! I think many of us were confused about the identity of Joe since we didn’t know the name of the alleged first husband. It seems like someone in the media would have pursued this path and interviewed the poor man. If they have left him alone that shows unusual restraint for the press.



He's also a lawyer


----------



## xincinsin

kkfiregirl said:


> Agree. They seem to have a codependent relationship.


I see it like this:
M: Da*n your family for sabotaging our plans! We should burn down Buckingham Palace!
H: I'll buy the gasoline.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think that was her hairdresser who flew in from Paris, not Jessica Mulroney her bestie.


You're right. It was her hairdresser.








						Smouldering Meghan Markle pouts for the camera in never before seen selfies
					

The royal-bride-to-be worked the camera as she posed alongside celebrity hair and make-up artist Greg Wencel




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I see it like this:
> M: Da*n your family for sabotaging our plans! We should burn down Buckingham Palace!
> H: I'll buy the gasoline.



Developing the scene:

M: Da*n your family for sabotaging our plans! We should burn down Buckingham Palace!
H: Shall I buy the petrol?
M: What's petrol?
H: Gasoline
M: I knew that
H: Shall I buy it?
M: If you like, and since it was your idea


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Developing the scene:
> 
> M: Da*n your family for sabotaging our plans! We should burn down Buckingham Palace!
> H: Shall I buy the petrol?
> M: What's petrol?
> H: Gasoline
> M: I knew that
> H: Shall I buy it?
> M: If you like, and since it was your idea


Oh definitely! Just like how they generously credited each other for the rescue from royal life. That way, they can later blame each other if the ship capsizes.


----------



## muddledmint

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, IMO Hazz‘s anger shows in his face. He has lost the boyish cuteness and become rather unpleasant looking.
> Prince Phillip was a gorgeous man, IMO. William and Peter Phillips look a lot alike, especially with a hat on.



Yes, Harry always looks miserable and angry now. Even when he smiles, his face/eyes look bitter. He’s lost all his charm and attractiveness after marriage. William was handsome when he was young, then became a boring, prematurely aged type for a while, but now he’s somehow regaining his appeal again.


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> Yes, Harry always looks miserable and angry now. Even when he smiles, his face/eyes look bitter. He’s lost all his charm and attractiveness after marriage. William was handsome when he was young, then became a boring, prematurely aged type for a while, but now he’s somehow regaining his appeal again.



There's a vid on YT that shows H before and after M. Oh boy!


----------



## RAINDANCE

muddledmint said:


> Yes, Harry always looks miserable and angry now. Even when he smiles, his face/eyes look bitter. He’s lost all his charm and attractiveness after marriage. William was handsome when he was young, then became a boring, prematurely aged type for a while, but now he’s somehow regaining his appeal again.


It amuses (and sometimes saddens) me that the Law of Unintended Consequences adheres to H&M with a vice like grip.
Almost all of their actions have a consequence that subsequently needs to be spun favourably or to re-present the initial actions. IMO that's 100% as a result of not having proper experienced advisors or more likely not taking that advice vis a vis the Saudi earrings.

H&M's lies and complaints are contributing to being a King maker for William. Sure he's a Steady Eddie but that's what he any any Monarch needs to be.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....



Evidently this movie will have a fox hunting scene… I can’t wait for M being ‘literally hounded to death’ with Piers M and the grey suits all in red coats tooting their bugles. 

M’s dialogue about being strong and getting things right sounds like south park’s PC principal dialogue.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Any news of Harry being in UK yet?  I saw an article from a couple days ago that stated under current conditions he must stay isolated for 10 days but can leave isolation if he tests negative after five days. July 1st is what 8 days away?  Maybe he’s coming in five/six days before.  I’m curious if anyone in UK has heard anything. Silly question for I know you would have posted it but thought to ask. Thanks!


----------



## Nico61

https://duchessdiaries.quora.com/Co...rkle-has-married-not-two?ch=10&share=4bfc7ce5
Sorry for confusion, I did Not mean the other Joe!!  This was the article I was referring to, talking about a "secret" child, but couldn't find the link.


----------



## xincinsin

Amazon is selling a blank notebook with the pump-pump message <<face-palm>>





						Meghan Markle book, For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump Notebook: great gift for husband: 100 Lined Pages (6 x 9 in.) : book, bendagga's: Amazon.sg: Books
					

Meghan Markle book, For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump Notebook: great gift for husband: 100 Lined Pages (6 x 9 in.) : book, bendagga's: Amazon.sg: Books



					www.amazon.sg
				




And so the merching starts... Wonder if the printer will get sued. Pretty sure Methane wanted to start the Lilibet trading off with something more $$$$$





						GIFT NOTEBOOKS: I LOVE YOU LILIBET DIANA : PUBLISHING PRESS, JAMES FANDOS: Amazon.sg: Books
					

GIFT NOTEBOOKS: I LOVE YOU LILIBET DIANA : PUBLISHING PRESS, JAMES FANDOS: Amazon.sg: Books



					www.amazon.sg


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Developing the scene:
> 
> M: Da*n your family for sabotaging our plans! We should burn down Buckingham Palace!
> H: Shall I buy the petrol?
> M: What's petrol?
> H: Gasoline
> M: I knew that
> H: Shall I buy it?
> M: If you like, and since it was your idea


Keep workshopping and we can sell it to lifetime!


----------



## Deleted 698298

Chanbal said:


> I haven't seen this before, it is impressive. I don't know if they were married or not, but they had a relationship as there is at least one very blurred picture of them together. The little girl is so cute. Wow so much mystery surrounding this person. I wonder how much the BRF knows about all this, the Firm has plenty of resources to get this story straight.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: possible picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5117805


This looks like Prom to me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These Stans are so deranged. If I were the troublesome two I'd be really afraid. Can you imagine if the mob turned against them?


----------



## duna

I know I've already said it, but every time I read Sussex Squad it really makes me cringe: it sounds so violent and bullying...I guess it's true that birds of a feather all flock together!


----------



## chicinthecity777

I literally have many many pages to catch up but I just want to ask, has the "compassion ridden" "love always wins" couple wished their own fathers "happy father's day"? And why are some media outlets calling this "Harry's first father's day"? Archie is 2-year old... ???


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> According to whatever is out there, they were together at Northwestern. Who knows what type of relationship they had...  I wonder what the BRF knows about all this. The courtiers have plenty of resources to investigate, and I would be surprised if they didn't.



He looks pretty harmless.

I'm sure there are many more men that w don't know about from her yacht girl days if she was really a yacht girl in her past life


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> I haven't seen this before, it is impressive. I don't know if they were married or not, but they had a relationship as there is at least one very blurred picture of them together. The little girl is so cute. Wow so much mystery surrounding this person. I wonder how much the BRF knows about all this, the Firm has plenty of resources to get this story straight.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: possible picture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5117805





EverSoElusive said:


> That looks more like a prom picture




It looks like she is holding a bouquet of flowers and I never received bouquets from my prom dates; I had small wrist corsages. I didn't carry a bouquet until I was a bridesmaid and then when I was a bride.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The email in question from my earlier post:


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can read it but sadly don't understand what is says, but can we appreciate for a moment that even Kurdish Twitter makes fun of the troublesome two?
> View attachment 5117704


Excellent investigative reporting, we have such a team ! Thank you


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I literally have many many pages to catch up but I just want to ask, *has the "compassion ridden" "love always wins" couple wished their own fathers "happy father's day"? And why are some media outlets calling this "Harry's first father's day"?* Archie is 2-year old... ???



1. No 
2. Probably because H likes to rewrite H-istory, so with him it could always be the first time for anything


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> If the baby is from a surrogacy, she may not have the same maternal feelings one develops during pregnancy and delivery. Besides, I think her first loves are money and fame and, as we know, H takes his cue from his wife. They are so pathetic.


Welcome back Maggie, appreciate your posts , and everyone else too


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> It looks like she is holding a bouquet of flowers and I never received bouquets from my prom dates; I had small wrist corsages. I didn't carry a bouquet until I was a bridesmaid and then when I was a bride.




t's very odd that all the other girls/women in the pic look like they're wearing coord navy formal (bridesmaid) dresses. Would everyone be in navy at a prom with only M in white?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I never completely figured it out, but it was so close to the wedding that I thought that she was trying to make Charles' BD party about her. She was sashaying around like she owned the place.   The grey men were watching her and didn't like it and informed Charles who doesn't like his limelight taken away so off they were sent!


Garden party , yes there are photos of her sticking her tongue out - they don’t show who it was intended for ? Camilla ?
I don’t remember it being a case of jealousy on Charles part rather bad manners on her part
murky Meg has a video on the party with all the bad behavior such as you described , she was accepting gifts which is a no no, I think the gifts were for Charles … 
it has been suggested that she had a GnT before hand
most importantly, she told Harry she was bored and wanted out , not willing to do her job


----------



## marietouchet

jennlt said:


> It looks like she is holding a bouquet of flowers and I never received bouquets from my prom dates; I had small wrist corsages. I didn't carry a bouquet until I was a bridesmaid and then when I was a bride.


I find it totally implausible that the BRF did not have her fully investigated ahead of time
the Met - London Police - does their security, and this would have been a security related inquiry, so, the BRF would have had serious resources at their disposal


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> t's very odd that all the other girls/women in the pic look like they're wearing coord navy formal (bridesmaid) dresses. Would everyone be in navy at a prom with only M in white?


I noticed the navy dresses, too and looked at the picture again after you said they coordinated and you are absolutely right. Also, M's taste in clothing was very relaxed/casual. Her dress could plausibly be a wedding dress considering her pre-Harry style. Here's her wedding dress from her marriage to Trevor for comparison.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Welcome back Maggie, appreciate your posts , and everyone else too


Thank you. I'm so glad to be back and reading your posts as well. I don't think I will stay away so long next time as there are too many pages to read in a single day. Still have about 50 to go, but I shall persevere as it beats unpacking the remaining boxes from the move.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Amazon is selling a blank notebook with the pump-pump message <<face-palm>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle book, For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump Notebook: great gift for husband: 100 Lined Pages (6 x 9 in.) : book, bendagga's: Amazon.sg: Books
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle book, For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump Notebook: great gift for husband: 100 Lined Pages (6 x 9 in.) : book, bendagga's: Amazon.sg: Books
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.sg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And so the merching starts... Wonder if the printer will get sued. Pretty sure Methane wanted to start the Lilibet trading off with something more $$$$$
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GIFT NOTEBOOKS: I LOVE YOU LILIBET DIANA : PUBLISHING PRESS, JAMES FANDOS: Amazon.sg: Books
> 
> 
> GIFT NOTEBOOKS: I LOVE YOU LILIBET DIANA : PUBLISHING PRESS, JAMES FANDOS: Amazon.sg: Books
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.sg


Pump-pump journal?_*   Exactly *_the gift my husband would want to receive!  (I can see the look of confusion on his face now.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> t's very odd that all the other girls/women in the pic look like they're wearing coord navy formal (bridesmaid) dresses. Would everyone be in navy at a prom with only M in white?


Well good lord.  Because. She’s. Special.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> t's very odd that all the other girls/women in the pic look like they're wearing coord navy formal (bridesmaid) dresses. Would everyone be in navy at a prom with only M in white?



With any other woman, no. But Flower likes to stand out (olive green outfit when the royal briefing for that day was light blue and cream anyone? Red dress at a military occasion?). So who knows!


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> Well good lord.  Because. She’s. Special.



We're all special.
We all have our voice(s)
We all have our unique truth(s)


----------



## marietouchet

jennlt said:


> I noticed the navy dresses, too and looked at the picture again after you said they coordinated and you are absolutely right. Also, M's taste in clothing was very relaxed/casual. Her dress could plausibly be a wedding dress considering her pre-Harry style. Here's her wedding dress from her marriage to Trevor for comparison.
> View attachment 5118077


I SAW IT ... a ways back in the thread but cant find it now ...  maybe less than 5 pages back ?? 

There was a wedding photo, blurry, with a girl in black top left - flower girl ? 

Anyway, that photo might be useful for comparison


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> 1. No
> 2. Probably because H likes to rewrite H-istory, so with him it could always be the first time for anything


right? Just like Archie's first words x 3!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is the full picture BTW. It does look like some formal, and the other girl carries the same bouqet.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophisticatted said:


> Two things I recall hearing about the garden party and why they were asked to leave:
> 1) M did that cutesy stick out her tongue thing to Camilla, which Charles found intolerably disrespectful.
> 2) M was overheard trying to make some sort of business/merch type deals with other party attendants, which is strictly against protocol and is also bad manners, and so they were asked to leave.
> 
> perhaps #2 happened, and H&M were being reprimanded in the video clip, and then M passive aggressively did a tongue stick out on the lawn afterwards, thinking she would get away with it, when Charles had them removed from the premises.


Yes, it was a combination of the above. Plus, like another poster here said, she was overheard saying the party was boring. On the other forum, someone also commented that she accepted some kind of gift without passing it to the courtiers as they are suppose to do. Also, while H was at the podium exalting his father, she fidgeted and touched her hat umpteen times which made me wonder if it was signal for H to speed up his delivery. She definitely wasn't a good fit as a royal.

ET correct spelling


----------



## CarryOn2020

@marietouchet  your CSI team helped the DM take it to the next level - excellent work 
@xincinsin  reposting your link here - thank you 











						Unseen photos of Meghan Markle show the actress enjoying her prom
					

The actress and activist, now 36, can be seen in the 1999 photos posing with a bright smile on her face, donning a bedazzled white gown with her hair pulled into an updo fit for the occasion.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Husbands want the pump pump, no journal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, it was a combination of the above. Plus, like another poster here said, she was overheard saying the party was boring. On the other forum, someone also commented that she accept some kind of gift without passing it to the courtiers as they are suppose to do. Also, while H was at the podium exalting his father, she fidgeted and touched her hat umpteen times which made me wonder if it was signal for H to speed up his delivery. She definitely wasn't a good fit as a royal.



Not to defend her, IMO Hazz did not prepare her, possibly misled her with talk of leaving the UK.  She acted as if she thought it all was very silly, likely because she and Hazz privately mocked it all.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is the full picture BTW. It does look like some formal, and the other girl carries the same bouqet.
> View attachment 5118102


I put our CSI team on it - they enlarged it ... see attached 

OK, black bridesmaids dresses were the rage about 18 years ago, my hairdresser did that .. Everyone is in black except MM, so, I think it is a wedding photo not a prom photo, and who does prom photos with long streamers on bouquets ??? Streamers for weddings - yes 

Bouquets - not sure if they are the same, hard to see MM's white bouquet against her white dress - they could be different bouquets

Interesting bead work on  what I think is a wedding gown


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, it was a combination of the above. Plus, like another poster here said, she was overheard saying the party was boring. On the other forum, someone also commented that she accept some kind of gift without passing it to the courtiers as they are suppose to do. Also, while H was at the podium exalting his father, she fidgeted and touched her hat umpteen times which made me wonder if it was signal for H to speed up his delivery. She definitely wasn't a good fit as a royal.


Gifts have to be screened by security
It would have been someone's job to prep her about that .. maybe she did not listen or did not take the time for the briefing


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I put our CSI team on it - they enlarged it ... see attached
> 
> OK, black bridesmaids dresses were the rage about 18 years ago, my hairdresser did that .. Everyone is in black except MM, so, I think it is a wedding photo not a prom photo, and who does prom photos with long streamers on bouquets ??? Streamers for weddings - yes
> 
> Bouquets - not sure if they are the same, hard to see MM's white bouquet against her white dress - they could be different bouquets
> 
> Interesting bead work on  what I think is a wedding gown


Are these the same photos?








						Unseen photos of Meghan Markle show the actress enjoying her prom
					

The actress and activist, now 36, can be seen in the 1999 photos posing with a bright smile on her face, donning a bedazzled white gown with her hair pulled into an updo fit for the occasion.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> 1. No
> 2. Probably because H likes to rewrite H-istory, so with him it could always be the first time for anything


oh dear, will Haz be in trouble with his keeper, for  evidently forgetting the huge significance of his real first Father’s Day immortalized in a sappy poem?


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> @marietouchet  your CSI team helped the DM take it to the next level - excellent work
> @xincinsin  reposting your link here - thank you
> 
> View attachment 5118126
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unseen photos of Meghan Markle show the actress enjoying her prom
> 
> 
> The actress and activist, now 36, can be seen in the 1999 photos posing with a bright smile on her face, donning a bedazzled white gown with her hair pulled into an updo fit for the occasion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I stand corrected. It wasn't the first time and it won't be the last


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> Yes, Harry always looks miserable and angry now. Even when he smiles, his face/eyes look bitter. He’s lost all his charm and attractiveness after marriage. William was handsome when he was young, then became a boring, prematurely aged type for a while, but now he’s somehow regaining his appeal again.


yes, yes
I agree totally....H has gone from being a somewhat attractive bad boy to a nasty, angry man
Will's pretty boy appeal didn't age that well but he's making up for it with his personality and his beautiful wife


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> He looks pretty harmless.
> 
> I'm sure there are many more men that w don't know about from her yacht girl days if she was really a yacht girl in her past life


some of those men might not even remember her or put together the yacht girl they met back in the day with the Duchess


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, so perhaps tabloid media was always on to the 1st marriage, whereas the mainstream media chose to pretend it never happened. I don't recall seeing this in the supermarket line but it was from back when I wasn't paying attention to them yet.


----------



## bag-mania




----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I think there is proof somewhere that it was a prom pic. As well, there were also stories that the Joe who is supposedly her first husband is fictional and no one can find this person.
> 
> Is she a villainess?  I don't think anyone is pure evil, but I do think she is heartless, manipulative and totally me-first. And Hazard is no dupe. Maybe she (mis)leads, brainwashes, pushes and provokes. But he was willing to go along with her even when he should know better.


Well, in this un fairy tale saga of the BRF, I think Meghan's role is definitely the villainess.  (Ugh, autocorrect keeps changing my spelling to "vileness" ).  She's the wicked stepmother, and Harry is like the supporting wicked stepsister.  I'll put it in Disney terms, since that is what Methane understands.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> some of those men might not even remember her or put together the yacht girl they met back in the day with the Duchess



There was likely a lot of alcohol and drugs consumed on those yachts. Those men might not remember much of anything that happened back then.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Okay, so perhaps tabloid media was always on to the 1st marriage, whereas the mainstream media chose to pretend it never happened. I don't recall seeing this in the supermarket line but it was from back when I wasn't paying attention to them yet.
> 
> View attachment 5118176


I always thought she was married three times before--not that I knew who they were and one was an anulled?


----------



## sdkitty

when you think about the generation the queen and her husband came from, it was really pretty significant that they accepted a thrice-married American WOC to the family.  I think after the Diana debacle the queen didn't really have much choice.  but still - they didn't have to give the huge wedding, etc.
And what was their repayment?  A huge slap in the face from their beloved grandchild.  He should really be ashamed of himself.  But no - he thinks he and his Wife are So Important.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.



Wow I wondered what happened to that … i expected a settlement announcement ..
and if that were settled in her favor, I would expect Thomas to have become off limits to journos but he has done more interviews AND no one would dare publish more of her letters, whicy I think we have recently seen ?
but it was tangentially related to Jason K and bullying allegations which have recently gotten a second wind


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I always thought she was married three times before--not that I knew who they were and one was an anulled?



The name Jason Buttas is being bandied about as possibly being her very first husband. I cannot find anything about him other than claims by questionable sources.

ETA: That would make four. I can understand why she would want to erase a couple of them from her history if she was married that many times by her mid-30s.


----------



## marietouchet

2 previous husbands , who cares ? Wallis had 2 before Edward VIII and she made no secret of them …

I keep coming back to the issue - that all this secrecy, dare I say lack of transparency, is causing a lot of headaches


----------



## CarryOn2020

Geeeesh, these rumors, innuendos from her past.  Was there not another available 30-ish year old who led a more scandal-free life?  Seems like Hazzie went out of his way to find a completely inappropriate *****.   Never realized how sheltered my younger years were until I heard about hers. My college wardrobe looks positively chaste compared to hers.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> 2 previous husbands , who cares ? Wallis had 2 before Edward VIII and she made no secret of them …
> 
> I keep coming back to the issue - that all this secrecy, dare I say lack of transparency, is causing a lot of headaches


but he had to abdicate for Wallace...she was not accepted, right?


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....



The intro "The Movie Event of the Year" alone made me crack up!    
That actress looks nothing like Meghan but sounds a lot like her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> You're right. It was her hairdresser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Smouldering Meghan Markle pouts for the camera in never before seen selfies
> 
> 
> The royal-bride-to-be worked the camera as she posed alongside celebrity hair and make-up artist Greg Wencel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I'm surprised she hasn't sued him yet for releasing the pictures.


----------



## bag-mania

While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.

Anonymous
Answered 1 year ago
Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?

I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.

My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.

However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?

So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.

P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.


----------



## marietouchet

I was wrong, better photos here, it was a prom photo 


Unseen photos of Meghan Markle at prom | Daily Mail Online










						Unseen photos of Meghan Markle show the actress enjoying her prom
					

The actress and activist, now 36, can be seen in the 1999 photos posing with a bright smile on her face, donning a bedazzled white gown with her hair pulled into an updo fit for the occasion.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.
> 
> Anonymous
> Answered 1 year ago
> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?
> 
> I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.
> 
> My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.
> 
> However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?
> 
> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.
> 
> P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.


interesting...true that kids (including college kids) can be cruel.  but turning on people like a switch seems a bit extreme


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> oh dear, will Haz be in trouble with his keeper, for  evidently forgetting the huge significance of his real first Father’s Day immortalized in a sappy poem?


Knowing Haz, he'd try to compete and write a poem about how Meg makes his "Bowels go dump, dump".


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> but he had to abdicate for Wallace...she was not accepted, right?



It was rather more the case that as King, Edward was the head of the Church of England which did not, in the 1950's, accept divorce. So yes, Wallis' past marital history meant Edward could not take up the full responsibilities of the Monarchy and he could not both marry a divorcee and be King. I don't think it was as simple as saying Wallis, herself, her personality and her history was "unsuitable".

If Edward had been a younger brother he probably would have been allowed to marry her. 

_Edward duly signed the instruments of abdication at Fort Belvedere on 10 December 1936 in the presence of his younger brothers: Prince Albert, Duke of York, next in line for the throne; Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester; and Prince George, Duke of Kent._


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> It was rather more the case that as King, Edward was the head of the Church of England which did not, in the 1950's, accept divorce. So yes, Wallis' past marital history meant Edward could not take up the full responsibilities of the Monarchy and he could not both marry a divorcee and be King. I don't think it was as simple as saying Wallis, herself, her personality and her history was "unsuitable".
> 
> If Edward had been a younger brother he probably would have been allowed to marry her.
> 
> _Edward duly signed the instruments of abdication at Fort Belvedere on 10 December 1936 in the presence of his younger brothers: Prince Albert, Duke of York, next in line for the throne; Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester; and Prince George, Duke of Kent._


yes, I realized after I said that, that he was to be King and that's different.  However, I doubt if he had been a prince that they would have thrown a huge wedding for Wallis as they did of Meeghan - different times


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I was wrong, better photos here, it was a prom photo
> 
> 
> Unseen photos of Meghan Markle at prom | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unseen photos of Meghan Markle show the actress enjoying her prom
> 
> 
> The actress and activist, now 36, can be seen in the 1999 photos posing with a bright smile on her face, donning a bedazzled white gown with her hair pulled into an updo fit for the occasion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Now that we can see sharper photos, her prom date was not the mysterious Joe Goldberg-Giuliano she supposedly had the annulment from. It looks like someone tried to make it fit by blurring the photo so the guy was not recognizable.

It doesn't mean there wasn't a first marriage. It would make sense that if there was an annulment due to his parents' insistence, there wouldn't be photos of an actual wedding. If it happened, it could have been a quicky, impulsive courthouse or Vegas-type wedding.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> This could be a prom picture.  As much as I want to keep painting her as a vilaness (which she is!), not sure if this is true or not.


As far as I understood they met in college, and the photo could have been taken at an event there. It's a nice photo despite being blurred.


----------



## muddledmint

bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.
> 
> Anonymous
> Answered 1 year ago
> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?
> 
> I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.
> 
> My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.
> 
> However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?
> 
> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.
> 
> P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.


That’s an interesting and very believable account. I don’t get the impression that meghan is some kind of evil sociopath either. She seems like a relatively normal person, and that was actually her main appeal in the beginning. She basically embodied the “stars … they’re just like us!” thing. Her gaffes and awkwardness and meh career and normal family made her seem relatable and more interesting. However, the reason that I can’t stand her now is because of the hypocrisy and lying and inflated sense of self worth/entitlement that she now displays. If she wants to ruthlessly cut out her family members and bully her staff and demand all the most luxurious things on prince Charles’s dime, I have no real problem with that as long as she doesn’t try to portray herself as a martyred saint and preach to the rest of the world about compassion and service and racial justice.


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> That’s an interesting and very believable account. I don’t get the impression that meghan is some kind of evil sociopath either. She seems like a relatively normal person, and that was actually her main appeal in the beginning. She basically embodied the “stars … they’re just like us!” thing. Her gaffes and awkwardness and meh career and normal family made her seem relatable and more interesting. However, the reason that I can’t stand her now is because of the hypocrisy and lying and inflated sense of self worth/entitlement that she now displays. If she wants to ruthlessly cut out her family members and bully her staff and demand all the most luxurious things on prince Charles’s dime, I have no real problem with that as long as she doesn’t try to portray herself as a martyred saint and preach to the rest of the world about compassion and service and racial justice.


yes, the combo of inflated ego and sense of entitlement is just huge
I do agree with a lot of her opinions but I don't need her to tell me what is right, who I should vote for, etc.  
She doesn't really do anything - just preaches for the most part.  so shut up


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....



It is embarrassing! Hopefully it is giving them the cash they want...


----------



## Genie27

bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora


Gee hon, most people look on Tinder or Bumble for potential former husbands.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> interesting...true that kids (including college kids) can be cruel.  but turning on people like a switch seems a bit extreme



It also gives her a previous reputation for bullying that her fans keep denying.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It also gives her a previous reputation for bullying that her fans keep denying.


and yet after saying all that, this college friend says she's just a normal person, not really nasty or cruel and not pathological....whatever....it does kinda ring true


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.
> 
> Anonymous
> Answered 1 year ago
> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?
> 
> I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.
> 
> My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.
> 
> However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?
> 
> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.
> 
> P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.



IMO this seems to be written by a high schooler. Very nice and very cruel, at the same time = Immature thinking. Very nice/very cruel depending on what you could do for her is more truthful.  The ‘who are you to judge’ shows a lack of understanding of the comments about H&M.  As most have said, she didn’t put much effort into the job, played the victim too many times and then blasts everyone on OW.  Nothing likable there. IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this seems to be written by a high schooler. Very nice and very cruel, at the same time = Immature thinking. Very nice/very cruel depending on what you could do for her is more truthful.  The ‘who are you to judge’ shows a lack of understanding of the comments about H&M.  As most have said, she didn’t put much effort into the job, played the victim too many times and then blasts everyone on OW.  Nothing likable there. IMO.



I think it sounds like someone who could be in her late 30s. She is describing the woman she knew at the time she knew her. She isn't factoring in anything that has happened with Meghan since because she has no firsthand knowledge of it. Being very nice most of the time and very cruel on occasion describes the kind of mercurial, narcissistic personality which I think fits Meghan to a tee.

Since it's Quora we have to take everything with a grain of salt but compared to most comments this one seems valid to me.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?





bag-mania said:


> It all depends on who you were



If her kindness depends on who you are, then she's simply not a nice person. The measure of a person's character is how they treat people (and animals) who have no power or influence.

Thomas B. Macaulay, “The _measure_ of a man's real _character_ is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out.”.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> We're all special.
> We all have our voice(s)
> We all have our unique truth(s)



As usual, recollection may vary     




bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.
> 
> Anonymous
> Answered 1 year ago
> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?
> 
> I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.
> 
> My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.
> 
> However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?
> 
> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.
> 
> P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.



Must be Scoobie Doo pretending to be her friend from NW  Joking!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.
> 
> Anonymous
> Answered 1 year ago
> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?
> 
> I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.
> 
> My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.
> 
> However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?
> 
> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.
> 
> P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.


This certainly might be true, but the writer also admits she has not been in touch with "Rachel" since leaving college.  People change.  That may have been true of MM back then, but she seems to very much NOT be a nice person to me now.


----------



## csshopper

Can’t find printable words right now for the rapacious cretins in Montecito who opened the gates to this crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen:


I know Amazon is not their site, but this crap would not exist were it not for them.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> If her kindness depends on who you are, then she's simply not a nice person. *The measure of a person's character is how they treat people (and animals) who have no power or influence.*
> 
> Thomas B. Macaulay, “The _measure_ of a man's real _character_ is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out.”.


Amen!  My sister used to measure a man by how they treated the waiter, the car attendant, etc.  No matter how good looking, rich, athletic, or whatever, she said if they were an a$$hole to "normal" people just trying to do their job, that was a deal breaker, no matter what.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> If her kindness depends on who you are, then she's simply not a nice person. The measure of a person's character is how they treat people (and animals) who have no power or influence.
> 
> Thomas B. Macaulay, “The _measure_ of a man's real _character_ is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out.”.



Yep, it confirms what we have learned about Meghan using people throughout her life. Perhaps she was nice to the sorority poster because she considered her to be a peer (and maybe someone who could potentially be of use). The poster's two friends were not deemed worthy of being nice to and they got the mean girl treatment.


----------



## RAINDANCE

csshopper said:


> Can’t find printable words right now for the rapacious cretins in Montecito who opened the gates to this crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen:
> View attachment 5118271
> 
> I know Amazon is not their site, but this crap would not exist were it not for them.



*crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen 
+ 1000*


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> Amen!  My sister used to measure a man by how they treated the waiter, the car attendant, etc.  No matter how good looking, rich, athletic, or whatever, she said if they were an a$$hole to "normal" people just trying to do their job, that was a deal breaker, no matter what.


Your sister is a smart woman!


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Can’t find printable words right now for the rapacious cretins in Montecito who opened the gates to this crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen:
> View attachment 5118271
> 
> I know Amazon is not their site, but this crap would not exist were it not for them.



What kind of sociopath would wear one of those?


----------



## csshopper

RAINDANCE said:


> *crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen
> + 1000*


The insulting one with the crown, captioned underneath with "It's a Lilibet Funny," made my eyes water.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> The US mainstream media is still determined to show them as being wonderful symbols, facts be damned. They found the narrative they like and they will keep repeating it hoping people will believe it. This one is from NBC. Sadly it is typical of today’s press.
> 
> *Meghan and Harry may have stepped down, but they will continue to define the royal family*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> In the American imagination, Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan, made the ultimate trade, exchanging rainy London for sunny California and replacing stuffy Buckingham Palace for anything-goes Hollywood.
> 
> But according to historians and cultural scholars, the royal existencethe Duke and Duchess of Sussex evidently sought to escape will follow the couple — and the royal family, in turn, is likely to be defined by their new life at the nexus of celebrity, entertainment and activism.
> 
> Kehinde Andrews, a professor of Black studies at Birmingham City University in England, said the couple will always be identified as royals even if they are no longer working on behalf of the institution.
> 
> 
> "Whether they like it or not, they still seem to represent the monarchy," Andrews said. "He's still Prince Harry. He's still the grandson of the queen. The way they'll be consumed is very much as part of the royals."
> 
> Since stepping down from their work as senior working royals last year, Harry and Meghan have emphasized their desire to live a life of public service. They have made a podcast deal with Spotify, recently released a documentary on mental health with Apple TV+ and agreed to produce films, shows and documentaries with Netflix.
> 
> And it's not only these larger deals that have kept them in the public eye.
> 
> They granted a tell-all interview to Oprah Winfrey, in which they detailed their reasons for leaving their royal roles, including Meghan's suicidal thoughts, and discussed racism in the U.K. Harry also appeared in February on "The Late Late Show with James Corden," and Meghan released a children's book.
> 
> That's in addition to the U.K. press continuing its frenzied speculation over the state of royal relations and the circumstances that led to the couple's departure, with fresh reports dominating front pages once again this past weekend.
> 
> *Hybridized public figures*
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path as hybridized public figures — British royals, American celebrities, social activists and aspirational gurus — their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> "I think it's possible that Harry and Meghan's image make Elizabeth II seem more aloof," said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "I think there are parallels to the discourse around Princess Diana. Diana was the shining star that could connect with people and who had empathy, and those qualities put the queen in sharper contrast."
> 
> 
> In addition to the influence on the royal brand, Harry and Meghan's departure from the U.K. represents a lost opportunity for the monarchy, especially in regard to making it relevant in a multicultural world where concerns about social justice are increasingly top of mind for young, diverse Britons and Americans.
> 
> "Particularly with Harry and Meghan, there was also an element of how much they were appealing to different people, particularly ethnic minorities, and how much that could have helped the monarchy reform or change or appeal to a wider group of people," said Catherine Haddon, a historian and constitutional expert at the Institute for Government in London.
> 
> "It's not only about the reaction in this country … but also about how much it affected [the royals'] appeal in places where soft power and the brand of the monarchy is important in diplomatic terms," she said.
> 
> 
> Indeed, their position outside the royal family has allowed them to speak freely, not only about their experiences, but also about political causes that they wouldn't necessarily have had the freedom to address inside the monarchy.
> 
> During the U.S. presidential election, Meghan encouraged people to vote in comments that were widely interpreted as anti-*****, and the two have also spoken out for racial justice and gender equality.
> 
> "What was notable about the Oprah Winfrey interview is that Harry and Meghan made no attempt to distance themselves from those culture wars," said Philip Murphy, the director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London. "Harry and Meghan have positioned themselves as the anti-racist royals, and their cause has been taken up by a range of anti-racist activists. But if that leads to the assumption that the rest of the royal family don't care about racism or actually hold racist attitudes, it will create a serious problem for the image of the British monarchy."
> 
> Despite their criticism of their royal life, Harry and Meghan's choice of name for their new baby girl, Lilibet Diana, links the family even more powerfully with the royals in the popular imagination. Just over a year after they quit Britain, they are still often compared to Harry's older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate, from the way Kate's and Meghan's books have sold to the differing reactions of Harry and William to an investigation into the circumstances surrounding a 1993 BBC interview with their mother.
> 
> In some ways, the Sussexes might be following the model of Barack and Michelle *****, who have followed their tenure in the White House with an ambitious entry into the entertainment world, forging similar pacts with Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Whether Harry and Meghan can step away from that royal context and forge a successful and influential independent path is still up in the air, Murphy said.
> 
> William and Kate "don't feel they need to engage in politics. They seem to have this idyllic family life. It could be that the comparison with them doesn't reflect well on Meghan and Harry," he said. "But who knows? There's no road map for this."
> 
> For the moment, Harry and Meghan's comments about their lives as royals garner more public attention than their advocacy for particular causes. That, however, could change the further they get from their life in London.
> 
> Although the couple are no longer working royals, Americans are looking to them for cultural leadership in the same way, said Andrea McDonnell, co-author of the book "Celebrity: A History of Fame."
> 
> "There's the cliché that celebrities are America's royalty. We look to celebrity figures as icons of success and cultural leadership. In the United States, Harry and Meghan have taken on that role, in some ways," she said.
> 
> In the U.K., Harry and Meghan's popularity has tanked since they left, and in particular after their interview with Winfrey; with a YouGov poll showed that Harry's rating had dropped by 15 points over 10 days in March.
> 
> 
> At the same time, there are signs that the strong support the monarchy enjoys in the U.K. may be starting to erode among young people. A YouGov poll last month showed that 41 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds surveyed thought Britain should have an elected head of state — a steep change from two years ago, when only a quarter said so.
> 
> For royal watchers in the U.K., Harry and Meghan's transition from members of the royal family to American-style celebrities means their long-term influence will take a hit.
> 
> "Celebrity is by its very nature ephemeral," said Mike Paterson, a historian and author of "A Brief History of the House of Windsor: The Making of a Modern Monarchy."
> 
> "A person who is leading trends today will by definition be replaced in time by someone younger, more beautiful, more charismatic," he said. "The point of the royal family is they are never in fashion and never out of fashion."
> 
> 
> Following long-standing royal tradition, the family has steered well clear of commenting on Harry and Meghan's accusations of neglect during their time as royals, other than to say in a statement after the Winfrey interview in March that they were "saddened" to hear of their experiences and that "recollections may vary."
> 
> With relations with the royal family back in Britain strained, Meghan and Harry have little left to lose and are free to pursue the projects and causes they want, rather than what's dictated to them by royal protocol, McDonnell said.
> 
> "I think there's a sense that they're 'damned if they do, damned if they don't,' so they're going to do what they think is best for themselves and their families," she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry left London, but they still impact the royal brand
> 
> 
> As the couple forges this new and unprecedented path, their words and work are casting the British royal family in a different light, experts say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I know this is slightly OT but it’s a pet peeve of mine when lazy commentators try to package the cult of youth as something new when it’s as old as at least the Ancient Greeks and also far from being governed by the young we currently have the eldest heads of state and governments of all time globally - if anything we are completely ruled by the grey vote.

I also think interest in a republic would exist regardless of H&M I definitely don’t think they deserve credit for that. 


marietouchet said:


> Any one else feeing sad for a little baby girl in California ? Such a controversial name … I would not wish that on anyone …
> @gracekelly predicted this months ago … I read Tyler Perry has no more crockery … and his employees were all threatening quitting due to tenants


Oh I agree, it’s really a cruel name for the poor kid.
interesting about Tyler Perry. He certainly doesn’t seem to have gotten anything out of his kindness that I can see. Perhaps he’s just very altruistic. Poor sucker if so.


sdkitty said:


> yes, yes
> I agree totally....H has gone from being a somewhat attractive bad boy to a nasty, angry man
> Will's pretty boy appeal didn't age that well but he's making up for it with his personality and his beautiful wife


Yes KM definitely does the heavy lifting on the looks



purseinsanity said:


> The intro "The Movie Event of the Year" alone made me crack up!
> That actress looks nothing like Meghan but sounds a lot like her.


She must’ve had to listen to a lot of blink 182 and possibly put some crayons up her nose to get that nasal whine nailed  

the movie event of the year is brilliant! Budget and dialogue-wise it looks more like The Room!


sdkitty said:


> but he had to abdicate for Wallace...she was not accepted, right?


Well…historians do have some debate on the exact reason for the abdication. Certainly, Wallis was the official reason given. However, Wallis was known to be happy to be a mistress not a wife so there’s some argument that there was pressure for Edward the 8th to leave as he was thought to be in favour of capitulation to Germany which would have created an enormous conflict between the king and the government whereas his brother was in support of WW2.
when you watch interviews with him he seems a bit cagey about politics and he got shipped off to the Caribbean from France so I do wonder whether Wallis was a smokescreen tbh. He was less than a year into his reign so it all seems very sudden to say he could’ve married some cousin of his and kept Wallis on the side as was tradition.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5118177



I can definitely believe the rumors about a first husband in her early 20s; it would fit with her pattern of using men for financial support.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Just read it that the Daily Mail's appeal to the summary judgement ruling of their case against MM has been granted today by The Court of Appeal. This means a different judge will reside over the appeal and additional evidence can be submitted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> What kind of sociopath would wear one of those?



Scoobie Doo and members of the Sussex Squad      Maybe OW and GK too!


----------



## rose60610

A comment from another website:

Harriet Markle; The Prince who lost his crown jewels.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> While looking for potential former husbands I found this on Quora. It is interesting and has a ring of truth to it.
> 
> Anonymous
> Answered 1 year ago
> Originally Answered: Is Meghan Markle a nice person?
> 
> I was friends with Meghan Markle in college (Woo go Northwestern!) so I can answer this one.
> 
> My personal opinion is that she could be very nice but also very cruel. It all depends on who you were. To her “crowd” or friends like me, she was very nice and friendly. But to people she disliked or did not care for, or people who displeased her in some way, she could turn like a switch and become very mean. At one point, her bullying of two friends of mine ( I will call them “Sam” and “Katie” ) became so bad, that both friends would refuse to come to events if they knew Rachel was there. One of them considered quitting the sorority because of it.
> 
> However, even though Rachel could have a few bad moments, I do not think she is a horrible person. She could also be very nice and friendly, which is how she was most of the time. What people need to realize is that most people are not 100% kind, compassionate people. Most people are not nice to every single person they meet, and I do not believe it is fair to put her on a pedestal and expect her to act perfectly 100% of the time. Was what Rachel did to my friends wrong? Yes. But most people I knew in college could be quite mean, and could bully others at times, and I am willing to bet the person reading this has been mean to people as well. So who are you to judge?
> 
> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.
> 
> P.S I would like to say I was never a “best” friend of Rachels, though I was involved in the sorority she was in and knew her well enough for us to call each other friends. Also, Im going Anonymous so I dont get death threats or nasty comments from anyone. Sorry, but I will not be answering any questions/comments. And no, Rachel and I are no longer in contact with each other, we went our separate ways after graduation.


Being described as very cruel sounds terrible. I wonder if some of the traits got even worse.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These Stans are so deranged. If I were the troublesome two I'd be really afraid. Can you imagine if the mob turned against them?



yes it would be ugly, it’s so weird honestly, I do wonder though whether some of these people are just paid to run Stan- bot accounts and even they don’t care for the celeb in question especially with these two as I can’t see what’s likeable about them at all 


Genie27 said:


> Gee hon, most people look on Tinder or Bumble for potential former husbands.


I think there’s something to be said for knowing where your spouse stands on key issues like H&M, the moon landing and how to get stains out of the carpet myself. 


csshopper said:


> Can’t find printable words right now for the rapacious cretins in Montecito who opened the gates to this crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen:
> View attachment 5118271
> 
> I know Amazon is not their site, but this crap would not exist were it not for them.


These are bizarre. They make me think of when people buy stuff with Chinese characters they can’t read  and it actually says ‘barbecue-car wash’ on it.


----------



## CeeJay

NM ..


----------



## csshopper

Just when you think you've read it all, the Voice Coach presents this: It's really a tribute to Phillip and Diana would have loved it for not being stuffy...

*Prince Harry's name choice for his daughter 'is ... - Daily Mail*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hoice-daughter-tribute-grandfather-Queen.html - 680k - Cached - Similar pages


*Princess Diana's vocal coach Stewart Pearce says Harry's decision to name new daughter 'Lilibet' is more a tribute to his late grandfather than to the Queen*
*Prince Philip's endearing nickname for his wife Queen Elizabeth II will now live on through the Sussexes' baby girl, born on June 4*
*Pearce, who also served as one of Diana's confidantes, believes the 'informal' name is also a nod to her pushback against the royals' 'emotional aloofness'*
*'I write in my book that Diana gave permission for the formal behavior [among Royals] that stultifies love to be reinvented,' he told DailyMail.com *
*Pearce says that royal insiders tell him the Queen is 'overjoyed' at Lilibet's name, but that she felt it inappropriate to put out a public statement about it *


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Just when you think you've read it all, the Voice Coach presents this: It's really a tribute to Phillip and Diana would have loved it for not being stuffy...
> 
> *Prince Harry's name choice for his daughter 'is ... - Daily Mail*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hoice-daughter-tribute-grandfather-Queen.html - 680k - Cached - Similar pages
> 
> 
> *Princess Diana's vocal coach Stewart Pearce says Harry's decision to name new daughter 'Lilibet' is more a tribute to his late grandfather than to the Queen*
> *Prince Philip's endearing nickname for his wife Queen Elizabeth II will now live on through the Sussexes' baby girl, born on June 4*
> *Pearce, who also served as one of Diana's confidantes, believes the 'informal' name is also a nod to her pushback against the royals' 'emotional aloofness'*
> *'I write in my book that Diana gave permission for the formal behavior [among Royals] that stultifies love to be reinvented,' he told DailyMail.com *
> *Pearce says that royal insiders tell him the Queen is 'overjoyed' at Lilibet's name, but that she felt it inappropriate to put out a public statement about it *



*Another lie ?????  *Shocking!









						Harry and Meghan reject claim Queen not consulted on Lilibet name
					

BBC correspondent says palace source claims Sussexes did not ask for permission to use name for daughter




					www.theguardian.com
				




A spokesperson for the Sussexes insisted the Queen was told in advance about the name and that the couple would not have used it had the monarch disapproved.

The spokesperson said: “The duke spoke with his family in advance of the announcement – in fact, his grandmother was the first family member he called.
“During that conversation, he shared *their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour*. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name.”


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> Amen!  My sister used to measure a man by how they treated the waiter, the car attendant, etc.  No matter how good looking, rich, athletic, or whatever, she said if they were an a$$hole to "normal" people just trying to do their job, that was a deal breaker, no matter what.


Haha I agree except for tsa agents. They don’t deserve any niceness … I’m kidding … kinda


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Just when you think you've read it all, the Voice Coach presents this: It's really a tribute to Phillip and Diana would have loved it for not being stuffy...
> 
> *Prince Harry's name choice for his daughter 'is ... - Daily Mail*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hoice-daughter-tribute-grandfather-Queen.html - 680k - Cached - Similar pages
> 
> 
> *Princess Diana's vocal coach Stewart Pearce says Harry's decision to name new daughter 'Lilibet' is more a tribute to his late grandfather than to the Queen*
> *Prince Philip's endearing nickname for his wife Queen Elizabeth II will now live on through the Sussexes' baby girl, born on June 4*
> *Pearce, who also served as one of Diana's confidantes, believes the 'informal' name is also a nod to her pushback against the royals' 'emotional aloofness'*
> *'I write in my book that Diana gave permission for the formal behavior [among Royals] that stultifies love to be reinvented,' he told DailyMail.com *
> *Pearce says that royal insiders tell him the Queen is 'overjoyed' at Lilibet's name, but that she felt it inappropriate to put out a public statement about it *



Hmm, the "secret" voice coach seems to be a lying piece of sh*t who has eked out a living for himself by telling everyone he was Diana's confidant. Had anyone ever heard of him and how close they supposedly were _before_ her death? Oh, that's right, it was a _secret_. 

I thought Philip was a big believer in protocol. Somehow I doubt he would consider using the name Lilibet to be a tribute.


----------



## lanasyogamama

How dumb do they think we are?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> So while I do not think Rachel is the next Mother Theresa, I do not think she is a horrible human being either. What I think she is, is normal. And I think she should be treated like a normal human being.



Normal is one of the last words I'd use to describe her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I don't think it was as simple as saying Wallis, herself, her personality and her history was "unsuitable".



I was actually surprised to hear Lady CC sing her praises. She insists Wallis was "impeccably bred" (I think she meant brought up, bred sounds like a corgie with great bloodline haha), a true lady, a gracious host, nothing like Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> I don’t get the impression that meghan is some kind of evil sociopath either.



Not trying to change your mind but you might want to look up footage of what her various what I call face malfunctions, when the pretty facade slips for a moment. It is quite frankly unsettling and scary at times (e.g. the various pictures and videos of her staring at Kate's back as if she's fantasizing of stabbing her with a very big knife). She even had one of those at her wedding ceremony. 

Besides all the signs of an classic abuser in her relationship to Harry. If she was a guy I'm sure more people would pick up on it.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Just when you think you've read it all, the Voice Coach presents this: It's really a tribute to Phillip and Diana would have loved it for not being stuffy...
> 
> *Prince Harry's name choice for his daughter 'is ... - Daily Mail*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hoice-daughter-tribute-grandfather-Queen.html - 680k - Cached - Similar pages
> 
> 
> *Princess Diana's vocal coach Stewart Pearce says Harry's decision to name new daughter 'Lilibet' is more a tribute to his late grandfather than to the Queen*
> *Prince Philip's endearing nickname for his wife Queen Elizabeth II will now live on through the Sussexes' baby girl, born on June 4*
> *Pearce, who also served as one of Diana's confidantes, believes the 'informal' name is also a nod to her pushback against the royals' 'emotional aloofness'*
> *'I write in my book that Diana gave permission for the formal behavior [among Royals] that stultifies love to be reinvented,' he told DailyMail.com *
> *Pearce says that royal insiders tell him the Queen is 'overjoyed' at Lilibet's name, but that she felt it inappropriate to put out a public statement about it *


This is from Diana’s “secret” voice coach , an unimpeachable source


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Just read it that the Daily Mail's appeal to the summary judgement ruling of their case against MM has been granted today by The Court of Appeal. This means a different judge will reside over the appeal and additional evidence can be submitted.



Maybe there will be redemption after all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was actually surprised to hear Lady CC sing her praises. She insists Wallis was "impeccably bred" (I think she meant brought up, bred sounds like a corgie with great bloodline haha), a true lady, a gracious host, nothing like Raptor.


IDK
she was allegedly a dominatrix and although she had style and had fabulous jewelry, she had a very hard look to her


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Without the ads



That was a good one - she was a bit annoyed at the copying, but still interesting! Thanks!


----------



## sdkitty

plates will be smashing again....if harry hasn't left already, he may not be allowed to go
Kate Middleton to Reprise Role as Peacemaker When William and Harry Meet to Unveil Diana Statue (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> I put our CSI team on it - they enlarged it ... see attached
> 
> OK, black bridesmaids dresses were the rage about 18 years ago, my hairdresser did that .. Everyone is in black except MM, so, I think it is a wedding photo not a prom photo, and who does prom photos with long streamers on bouquets ??? Streamers for weddings - yes
> 
> Bouquets - not sure if they are the same, hard to see MM's white bouquet against her white dress - they could be different bouquets
> 
> Interesting bead work on  what I think is a wedding gown


I think you are correct and that it’s a wedding.  It’s blurry but the guy she’s with, has a flower in his lapel which appears to be stephanotis(sp) which I think is only worn by a groom.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Without the ads



Chanbal, Thanks so much for taking the time to post these for us,  without the annoying ads it's more enjoyable and easier to follow!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> IDK
> she was allegedly a dominatrix and although she had style and had fabulous jewelry, she had a very hard look to her



Yeah but what people do in the bedroom (unless they abuse their partner) is maybe not an indicator they are a sh*tty person.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Just when you think you've read it all, the Voice Coach presents this: It's really a tribute to Phillip and Diana would have loved it for not being stuffy...
> 
> *Prince Harry's name choice for his daughter 'is ... - Daily Mail*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...hoice-daughter-tribute-grandfather-Queen.html - 680k - Cached - Similar pages
> 
> 
> *Princess Diana's vocal coach Stewart Pearce says Harry's decision to name new daughter 'Lilibet' is more a tribute to his late grandfather than to the Queen*
> *Prince Philip's endearing nickname for his wife Queen Elizabeth II will now live on through the Sussexes' baby girl, born on June 4*
> *Pearce, who also served as one of Diana's confidantes, believes the 'informal' name is also a nod to her pushback against the royals' 'emotional aloofness'*
> *'I write in my book that Diana gave permission for the formal behavior [among Royals] that stultifies love to be reinvented,' he told DailyMail.com *
> *Pearce says that royal insiders tell him the Queen is 'overjoyed' at Lilibet's name, but that she felt it inappropriate to put out a public statement about it *


Yeah, right.  And I'm the Queen of England.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> *I took one for the team and watched the Thomas Markle interview with 60 mins Australia.*
> 
> Top points:
> 
> * Thomas wasn’t informed of the birth of Lili.  He found out via the media.
> * Confirmed MM was born 40 years ago this August (so her age has been confirmed)
> * Showed some more home videos of younger MM and some photos.
> *  He is disappointed he can’t meet / hold grandchildren.
> * Asked where compassion is And wants forgiveness. Said he made a dumb mistake by working with paps For those staged photos before their wedding
> * said Oprah is playing MM and H and is using them... taking advantage of H and getting him to say things he shouldn’t say.
> * Says he feels sorry for PC.
> * says he still loves MM.  He hasn’t spoken to her since two days before H and MM got married.  He desperately wants to talk to her again.
> * Thomas believes he may not be around for much longer due to poor health / age and desperately wants to see his grandchildren.
> * Doesn’t understand that if MM was suicidal why a call wasn’t made to a doctor.
> * He thinks their biggest mistake was leaving the royals.  When they did that they walked away from the people too.
> * When asked to give advice to H, TM told H to stop talking about the royals and giving away secrets.  Told H to love children, his wife and his family.
> 
> * He came across as quite sad and hurt.  He invited them to come visit Him and/or reach out to talk.  He said he was sorry...


The Press Club thanks you for your devotion to the team.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> I think you are correct and that it’s a wedding.  It’s blurry but the guy she’s with, has a flower in his lapel which appears to be stephanotis(sp) which I think is only worn by a groom.


Pls see another post of mine a bit further back, the DM had non-cropped photos of the shindig, and it did look like a prom, rather than a wedding - a few girls in different color gowns, and the distinctive wrist corsages, I got it wrong , but what do you want from an analysis of 300 x 300 pixel cropped photo, I can only do so much LOL 

I was trying to remember if black was ever in style for proms, and yes, it indeed was, about the same time as black for bridesmaids 

It is huge that there will be a new judge in the DM case


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Normal is one of the last words I'd use to describe her.


I do think she probably has a narcissistic personality disorder. It seems like there is a lot of evidence that supports her being a classic bully, mean girl, and social climber as well. However, I guess I have a much more negative view of humanity than you do because I don’t think she is really that far out of the norm. I mean she does land on the more unpleasant end of the spectrum, but it’s not like she’s queen bathory. It’s so annoying though that American media takes her victim/angel persona at face value due to some weird woke agenda just because she is half black and comes from a middle class American background.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah but what people do in the bedroom (unless they abuse their partner) is maybe not an indicator they are a sh*tty person.


OK, but not someone I'd admire either


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> Yeah, right.  And I'm the *Queen of* *England.*


Don't say that in front of *Sharont2305
 *


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was actually surprised to hear Lady CC sing her praises. She insists Wallis was "impeccably bred" (I think she meant brought up, bred sounds like a corgie with great bloodline haha), a true lady, a gracious host, nothing like Raptor.



I think she is is thinking comparatively. No Nazi/Nazi sympathiser could ever be a lady IMO. Even if she only feigned it to become Queen - actually sounding - comparative to Raptor (giving raptors a bad name, birds of prey only take what they need in the way of food and do not obliterate the entire feeding stock).


----------



## V0N1B2

People wear white floor length beaded gowns to a prom? I would be afraid of looking too ‘bridal’.


----------



## needlv

Maggie Muggins said:


> The Press Club thanks you for your devotion to the team.
> 
> View attachment 5118453



Im so honoured.  I would like to say thank you to MM who is such a sociopathic narc that her drama and fall from grace  has kept me endlessly entertained!!  And special thanks to the posters of this thread for the laughs!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Everything you wanted to know about where the money comes from









						Financial reports 2020-21
					

The Royal Household today published its annual financial statement, the Sovereign Grant Report, for the financial year 2020-21.




					www.royal.uk
				




they spent about 90m pounds last year, not an obscene amount, compare to 14m dollars for a house in CA

in the details it says that the income from the duchies is taxed if not paying for official (business) expenses

Travel expenses of about 900k pounds for the year, about 600k of which was for helicopter rides
about 50k pounds of chartered jets and like 20k for scheduled flights
ok, it was COVID and they did not travel much


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> OK, but not someone I'd admire either



You don't have to. I have no horse in that race actually (as in, is Wallis a great person or not...that said, to me her Nazi symathies make her a lot more unlikeable than dominatrix rumours). But to be honest, I don't think that much about other people's kinks unless they take their cosplay or their attraction to bodily fluids out into the public


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You don't have to. I have no horse in that race actually (as in, is Wallis a great person or not...that said, to me her Nazi symathies make her a lot more unlikeable than dominatrix rumours). But to be honest, I don't think that much about other people's kinks unless they take their cosplay or their attraction to bodily fluids out into the public


agree, being a Nazi sympathizer is worse


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think she is is thinking comparatively. No Nazi/Nazi sympathiser could ever be a lady IMO. Even if she only feigned it to become Queen - actually sounding - comparative to Raptor (giving raptors a bad name, birds of prey only take what they need in the way of food and do not obliterate the entire feeding stock).



Until you mentioned "bird of prey" I was completely unaware raptor is used for birds! I was thinking of the Jurassic park dino haha.


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Pls see another post of mine a bit further back, the DM had non-cropped photos of the shindig, and it did look like a prom, rather than a wedding - a few girls in different color gowns, and the distinctive wrist corsages, I got it wrong , but what do you want from an analysis of 300 x 300 pixel cropped photo, I can only do so much LOL
> 
> I was trying to remember if black was ever in style for proms, and yes, it indeed was, about the same time as black for bridesmaids
> 
> It is huge that there will be a new judge in the DM case


Yes I stand corrected but I wouldn’t put it past her to have lots of skeletons in the closet that we haven’t discovered yet!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> If they do lose their titles and other perks because of this, every time they utter their daughter’s name it’ll remind them what it cost!


AKA poetic justice.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Without the ads



she's pretty funny


----------



## needlv

Just a reminder of how much Charles shelled out for MM’s wardrobe.  And look at the comparison of other royals across Europe









						Meghan Markle spent more on her wardrobe in 2018 than other royals
					

The eye-watering sum - £406,662.55 - is revealed in new research from royal fashion experts at UFO No More, who totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




all that money and MM’s fashion sense was hit and miss (mostly miss)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Clearblueskies said:


> No tabloids and no gossip rags in the US then
> It’s enough to stop any self respecting canary in mid song


In disgust, any self respecting canary will bombard H&M's faces with their tiny rectal pellets.


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> People wear white floor length beaded gowns to a prom? I would be afraid of looking too ‘bridal’.


When my husband and I got married, we were young and broke and all I could afford was a white prom dress for my bridal gown. It was much more modest than M's, though, and didn't have beading. 
Now, I'm paying for my niece's wedding so she can have the wedding that I couldn't afford to have when I got married. Even though the budget is considerably smaller than H & M's, my niece's dress fits much better!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Chanbal, Thanks so much for taking the time to post these for us,  without the annoying ads it's more enjoyable and easier to follow!


You're very welcome!


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Just a reminder of how much Charles shelled out for MM’s wardrobe.  And look at the comparison of other royals across Europe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle spent more on her wardrobe in 2018 than other royals
> 
> 
> The eye-watering sum - £406,662.55 - is revealed in new research from royal fashion experts at UFO No More, who totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> all that money and MM’s fashion sense was hit and miss (mostly miss)


The QUEEN of Spain spent less than 1/10 of what Methane made Charles spend!


----------



## Chanbal

Now they are offending the people of Dumbarton...


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> If they do lose their titles and other perks because of this, every time they utter their daughter’s name it’ll remind them what it cost!


I do pity the baby. But H&M deserve to lose their titles.



kkfiregirl said:


> I can definitely believe the rumors about a first husband in her early 20s; it would fit with her pattern of using men for financial support.


Maybe it wasn't a formal wedding. We might be barking up the wrong tree looking for hard evidence. This is a nutmeg who told the world that personal vows in a backyard = getting married. Maybe her first "marriage" was muttering "I Love You" in a sleeping bag when the guy went camping with her. This wildlife theme might be a thing for her: peeing in woods, beach wedding with Trevor, camping with Hazard.

This is my life
I'll be your wife
Through the peeing
Beach wedding
And Botswana camping
Just give me money, I'll give you strife



lanasyogamama said:


> How dumb do they think we are?


  
I think they only listen to the most rabid stans.
Although I do admire the lady who raised money for charity in Archie's name. She may be daft to adore them, but she doesn't sound like the extremists who are threatening to kill anyone who dislikes H&M.



V0N1B2 said:


> People wear white floor length beaded gowns to a prom? I would be afraid of looking too ‘bridal’.


One of my uni mates was the daughter of a local millionaire. She showed me pics of her debutante ball (didn't even know that existed here). It was a sea of white ballgowns. The only thing comparable was a mass wedding.



needlv said:


> Just a reminder of how much Charles shelled out for MM’s wardrobe.  And look at the comparison of other royals across Europe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle spent more on her wardrobe in 2018 than other royals
> 
> 
> The eye-watering sum - £406,662.55 - is revealed in new research from royal fashion experts at UFO No More, who totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> all that money and MM’s fashion sense was hit and miss (mostly miss)


I'd say hit/miss rate was 50/50, but when it was bad, it was horrible. OTOH if she was quietly selling off the clothes or returning for refund after PC paid for them, then it makes sense why almost nothing fitted well. And why there are no repeats of those items of clothing.



jennlt said:


> When my husband and I got married, we were young and broke and all I could afford was a white prom dress for my bridal gown. It was much more modest than M's, though, and didn't have beading.
> Now, I'm paying for my niece's wedding so she can have the wedding that I couldn't afford to have when I got married. Even though the budget is considerably smaller than H & M's, my niece's dress fits much better!


After watching (too) many episodes of Say Yes to The Dress, it really makes me wonder at how badly fitted that infamous wedding dress was. If I have to understand that the material was "special" and so thick and firm that the dress had to be cut large so that she could move, then I think some time in the future, Omid is going to update that FF fiction to say: "Little did she know that the bonded silk dress, which was so thick and difficult to tailor, would become symbolic of the strait jacket that she found herself in."


----------



## Icyjade

No surprises here if true:






						Blind Item #9
					

In case you didn't notice, the alliterate one is buying ads for her book that look like unbiased reviews.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Dontcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me?



I think that any respectable bf wouldn't want his gf looking like she's trying to peddle her assets to everybody.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Now they are offending the people of Dumbarton...



Doesn't Hazard have a string of secondary titles? None of them were suitable/marketable?


----------



## csshopper

LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE:

*Prince Charles DIDN'T axe Prince Harry's cash: Duke of Sussex said he was 'cut off' financially after leaving royal life... but Prince of Wales spent 'substantial sum' on his son, accounts show*

*Accounts reveal Charles continued to fund the Sussexes until summer 2020 *
*Cash was from £4.4m Clarence House pot used to support sons and families*
*Newly public account contradict Harry's remarks in his Oprah Winfrey interview *
*He told Winfrey that he stopped getting financial support from his family in the 'first quarter' of last year and that his family were living off money left by Diana*
*Findings came as both Clarence House and Buckingham Palace opened up their yearly financial accounts*
 Maybe someday there will come a time when the Earl of DUMBarton makes public pronouncements that are the truth, real truth, not his wife's version or his fantasies, but truth meaning information that is factual and provable, until such time we will continue to experience what is stated above,


----------



## xincinsin

An op-ed by Abigail Disney: some of what she said reminded me of Methane's behaviour, but unlike Disney, Methane would probably never take advice from anyone else.









						I Was Taught From a Young Age to Protect My Dynastic Wealth
					

A common ideology underlies the practices of many ultra-wealthy people: The government can’t be trusted with money.




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> No surprises here if true:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #9
> 
> 
> In case you didn't notice, the alliterate one is buying ads for her book that look like unbiased reviews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


We could provide a few ads for the book, all unbiased I'm sure.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE:
> 
> *Prince Charles DIDN'T axe Prince Harry's cash: Duke of Sussex said he was 'cut off' financially after leaving royal life... but Prince of Wales spent 'substantial sum' on his son, accounts show*
> 
> *Accounts reveal Charles continued to fund the Sussexes until summer 2020 *
> *Cash was from £4.4m Clarence House pot used to support sons and families*
> *Newly public account contradict Harry's remarks in his Oprah Winfrey interview *
> *He told Winfrey that he stopped getting financial support from his family in the 'first quarter' of last year and that his family were living off money left by Diana*
> *Findings came as both Clarence House and Buckingham Palace opened up their yearly financial accounts*
> Maybe someday there will come a time when the Earl of DUMBarton makes public pronouncements that are the truth, real truth, not his wife's version or his fantasies, but truth meaning information that is factual and provable, until such time we will continue to experience what is stated above,


H is so spoiled that he may look at £4.4m as pocket money, and the wife probably tells him that is only petty cash...


----------



## Chanbal

The flowers are beautiful, but QE needs a bigger vase in front of #3! 

_The Queen__ held her weekly audience with Prime Minster Boris Johnson at Buckingham Palace today for the first time in 18-months.   
In an unusual step,  the palace released photos of the pair meeting, showing the audience room is full of rich, historical mementos and sweet family pictures._


Pictured, the Queen meets Boris Johnson today. 1. The Thames from Somerset House Terrace towards the City by Canaletto 2. Princess Anne and Sir Timothy Laurence. 3. Engagement photo of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 4. Zara and Mike Tindall's wedding photo 5. William and Kate's engagement photo 6. Queen with Prince Charles 7. 18th Century English porcelain pheasants valued at £20,000 8. English gilt mirror, from the 19th Century, valued at £30,000 9. White marble and gilt bronze clock, valued at £4,000 10. Two-bar electric fire, approx. cost £29.99 11. French carpet from the 18th Century, value unknown









						Inside the Audience Room at Buckingham Palace
					

Standing on a French carpet from the 17th century beneath a glittering chandelier, Her Majesty pulled out all the stops for her first audience with Boris Johnson in 18 months.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


>



In other words, "recollections may vary"


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haha, that was the one! So if you liked it I might get it for my summer reading...I think for the first time in ages I'll take a proper few weeks off (the only free time I'm super strict with is that between December 23rd and January whatever is the first working day after New Year I don't work, do research, finish stuff, discuss projects at all) to refresh my mind.


 I love mysteries set in the wartime U.K. It's book two in the Maggie Hope Mysteries by Susan Elia MacNeal.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> H is so spoiled that he may look at £4.4m as pocket money, and the wife probably tells him that is only petty cash...


Yes, and he probably has no understanding of budget, expenditues, revenue to know how to track what they spend. And the eye watering amount Methane spent on clothes shows he better start paying attention now that Charles is off the hook.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Umm this is peculiar timing with all the talks about them being told to leave TP's property because of their crappy behavior and treatment towards TP's employees during their stay


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm this is peculiar timing with all the talks about them being told to leave TP's property because of their crappy behavior and treatment towards TP's employees during their stay



The timing is very peculiar indeed. I wonder who asked TP to make this video.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She just can't stop being creepy


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> The timing is very peculiar indeed. I wonder who asked TP to make this video.



I'm wondering about the same


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The timing is very peculiar indeed. I wonder who asked TP to make this video.



Oprah. Isn’t she the one who put Meghan and Harry in touch with him last year?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oprah. Isn’t she the one who put Meghan and Harry in touch with him last year?


You read my mind. OW is their biggest supporter, I wonder until when...


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> You read my mind. OW is their biggest supporter, I wonder until when...



I think Oprah will support them indefinitely. The only reason she would stop is if they stabbed her in the back. Even those two are smart enough to know not to do that.

Tyler was kind enough to do the video featuring Meghan’s book front and center. Notice he didn’t read it to his six-year-old. A child’s lack of interest is impossible to hide.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Came across this about Frogmore and financial independence. What I have underscored below made me question, I thought the Queen gifted it to M&H as a wedding present. Am I wrong? Realize properties stay as Queens properties and not truly M&H but the time frame seems short if the Queen thought they would stay on as senior working royals. There’s other interesting tid bits in the article. Like they paid back Frogmore out of their own pocket.    Enjoy!


“Frogmore Cottage, the home the Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared with son Archie, now 2, before relocating to the U.S., *remains licensed to the couple until March 31, 2022*.”









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Paid $3.3 Million for Frogmore Cottage Rent and Renovations, New Report Reveals
					

A comprehensive update on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Windsor residence, as well as a disclosure of royal staffing diversity targets, was released on Wednesday




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I think Oprah will support them indefinitely. The only reason she would stop is if they stabbed her in the back. Even those two are smart enough to know not to do that.
> 
> Tyler was kind enough to do the video featuring Meghan’s book front and center. Notice he didn’t read it to his six-year-old. A child’s lack of interest is impossible to hide.



They were dumb in rejecting Dumbarton, but will not turn their backs on the goose that lays the golden eggs. Tyler likely removed the book from his son's room immediately after the video. 

I wonder how much help they would get from OW if H didn't have a connection to the BRF, zero zilch, nil, nothing...


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> Came across this about Frogmore and financial independence. What I have underscored below made me question, I thought the Queen gifted it to M&H as a wedding present. Am I wrong? Realize properties stay as Queens properties and not truly M&H but the time frame seems short if the Queen thought they would stay on as senior working royals. There’s other interesting tid bits in the article. Like they paid back Frogmore out of their own pocket.    Enjoy!
> 
> 
> “Frogmore Cottage, the home the Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared with son Archie, now 2, before relocating to the U.S., *remains licensed to the couple until March 31, 2022*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Paid $3.3 Million for Frogmore Cottage Rent and Renovations, New Report Reveals
> 
> 
> A comprehensive update on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Windsor residence, as well as a disclosure of royal staffing diversity targets, was released on Wednesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


They will stop having an official residence in the UK after March 2022, nice... The BRF is just waiting for them to use all their ammunition and then bye bye.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> They will stop having an official residence in the UK after March 2022, nice... The BRF is just waiting for them to use all their ammunition and then bye bye.


Lovely news. Just 9 more months to go. Like maternal gestation


----------



## periogirl28

What I wanna know is, is the Earl of Dumbarton here in quarantine or not.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Don't say that in front of *Sharont2305
> *


LOL, you know me well!!!! That's brilliant


----------



## Hermes Zen

periogirl28 said:


> What I wanna know is, is the Earl of Dumbarton here in quarantine or not.


Yes, asked too. Haven’t seen anything posted or on internet. What I did see if H doesn’t attend unveiling K will attend with W. See what happens. Maybe H snuck in and has been in quarantine.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Yes, asked too. Haven’t seen anything posted or on internet. What I did see if H doesn’t attend unveiling K will attend with W. See what happens. Maybe H snuck in and has been in quarantine.


If he snuck in, was it by private jet? Surely it would have leaked if it were by commercial flight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently Charles gave them a very generous lump sum, yet they - and their sugars - complain no payments were made after March 2020 (why would they), and the sugars throw in complaints about the Cambridges (ya now, another heir to the throne and a couple of fulltime royals who also spent frugally compared to the wannabes).


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> If he snuck in, was it by private jet? Surely it would have leaked if it were by commercial flight.


Agree. If like last time he took a commercial flight from LAX, we’d seen something on it. The other thing maybe he will fly this weekend then after 5 day quarantine be tested. If negative he can leave isolation just in time for the unveiling. BUT from what I’ve read the current status in the UK if I understand correctly coming from the states is under amber conditions and need a 10 day quarantine and after 5 days can be tested. I also read in another article that H would come in just in time for the unveiling and leave quickly afterwards. Not as long for PP funeral. That hints it maybe a shorter quarantine.  I have to much time on my hands trying to figure this out!! Hopefully we’ll get some news soon.


----------



## periogirl28

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree. If like last time he took a commercial flight from LAX, we’d seen something on it. The other thing maybe he will fly this weekend then after 5 day quarantine be tested. If negative he can leave isolation just in time for the unveiling. BUT from what I’ve read the current status in the UK if I understand correctly coming from the states is under amber conditions and need a 10 day quarantine and after 5 days can be tested. I also read in another article that H would come in just in time for the unveiling and leave quickly afterwards. Not as long for PP funeral. That hints it maybe a shorter quarantine.  I have to much time on my hands trying to figure this out!! Hopefully we’ll get some news soon.


He cannot just count on being released after the Day 5 Test to Release. He should plan for the full 10 day quarantine from Amber list USA. Which is why I asked if he has sneaked in. Also vaccination status does not matter right now. You are right about the current requirements. That’s why I am wondering why he isn’t here yet and if he is indeed coming.


----------



## periogirl28

I too have a lot of time on my hands. UK morning news is covering Clarence House expenses and how “recollections are varying” on £4.4 million gifted, and also how “First Quarter” is calculated. Fiscal or otherwise.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Okay one more for the night. LOVE this article. Had to share. It’s from June 19th. 

Time is crunching M&H !  Tick tock. Where’s the popcorn?!?  


*It’s crunch time for Meghan and Harry’s $606,000-per-day Netflix and Spotify deals*









						How Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s Netflix, Spotify paydays could fall apart
					

COMMENT




					amp.news.com.au


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah but what people do in the bedroom (unless they abuse their partner) is maybe not an indicator they are a sh*tty person.



My English grandparents, who were roughly her generation, only a few years younger, used to say that when Wallis was in China she was some kind of "call girl"....my grandparents used other terms of course


----------



## periogirl28

duna said:


> My English grandparents, who were roughly her generation, only a few years younger, used to say that when Wallis was in China she was some kind of "call girl"....my grandparents used other terms of course


The rumours of exotic skills learnt in Hong Kong have been oft repeated.


----------



## periogirl28

Hermes Zen said:


> Okay one more for the night. LOVE this article. Had to share. It’s from June 19th.
> 
> Time is crunching M&H !  Tick tock. Where’s the popcorn?!?
> 
> 
> *It’s crunch time for Meghan and Harry’s $606,000-per-day Netflix and Spotify deals*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s Netflix, Spotify paydays could fall apart
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.news.com.au


Worth reading just for the absolute snark levels.


----------



## Pivoine66

marietouchet said:


> Everything you wanted to know about where the money comes from
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Financial reports 2020-21
> 
> 
> The Royal Household today published its annual financial statement, the Sovereign Grant Report, for the financial year 2020-21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they spent about 90m pounds last year, not an obscene amount, compare to 14m dollars for a house in CA
> 
> in the details it says that the income from the duchies is taxed if not paying for official (business) expenses
> 
> Travel expenses of about 900k pounds for the year, about 600k of which was for helicopter rides
> about 50k pounds of chartered jets and like 20k for scheduled flights
> ok, it was COVID and they did not travel much


Thank you for sharing and especially the effort for summarising the information, dear Marietouchet.


----------



## Pivoine66

needlv said:


> Just a reminder of how much Charles shelled out for MM’s wardrobe.  And look at the comparison of other royals across Europe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle spent more on her wardrobe in 2018 than other royals
> 
> 
> The eye-watering sum - £406,662.55 - is revealed in new research from royal fashion experts at UFO No More, who totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> all that money and MM’s fashion sense was hit and miss (mostly miss)


Thank you for sharing this information, dear Needlv.

This too only leaves me puzzled at the conduct of the former actress. In my opinion, an appropriate response from H's wife would have been to retreat into her private life and show nothing but gratitude and appreciation for Prince Charles and for the British people who invested such incredible sums in her clothing alone.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Okay one more for the night. LOVE this article. Had to share. It’s from June 19th.
> 
> Time is crunching M&H !  Tick tock. Where’s the popcorn?!?
> 
> 
> *It’s crunch time for Meghan and Harry’s $606,000-per-day Netflix and Spotify deals*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s Netflix, Spotify paydays could fall apart
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.news.com.au



More?

OK, self-replenishing until the unveiling (and maybe beyond). 

Help yourselves


----------



## papertiger

periogirl28 said:


> Worth reading just for the absolute snark levels.



Wow, Oz really doesn't seem to like them much (understatement)


----------



## xincinsin

Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you for sharing this information, dear Needlv.
> 
> *This too only leaves me puzzled at the conduct of the former actress.* In my opinion, an appropriate response from H's wife would have been to retreat into her private life and show nothing but gratitude and appreciation for Prince Charles and for the British people who invested such incredible sums in her clothing alone.


If she is indeed a narc like the office narc I endured for 5 years, then nothing will ever be good enough for her. My office narc moaned constantly about how life shortchanged him, and he deserved more, so much more. When he finally resigned, a stan in another office accompanied him into our room after treating him to a farewell lunch and gushed to us about how the simpering idiot was destined for great things! It was quite a speech. I think he was surprised by the dead silence that greeted his effusive congratulatory message.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> My English grandparents, who were roughly her generation, only a few years younger, used to say that when Wallis was in China she was some kind of "call girl"....my grandparents used other terms of course



Didn't she come from money, though.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't she come from money, though.



Her father died when she young of TB and her mother had to rely on family. Her mother married again later and Wallis went to the best schools. She was brought up privileged but not exactly an heiress.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Wow, Oz really doesn't seem to like them much (understatement)



yes.  It was fascinating that right after the Oprah interview -   Most older Australians would side with the Queen (as expected).  Those that are younger (say under 30y)  had sympathy for MM and H.  Trust me I had very robust discussions at the time.  Younger ones bought that MM and H had to leave for their own welfare / privacy and horrid treatment by the RF.  oh and that Archie was denied a title (I tried to explain the law but they just shook their head at me!!!)

since then, most news commentators have changed direction.  Every money grabbing stunt by the two of them is mercilessly mocked on breakfast shows and some on late night tv.  They are not well liked and viewed as lazy / after the $$$$.  Facebook is full of comments by Aussies who just don’t believe them.

so maybe the news and opinion commentators read the room.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If Hazz is in the UK, he is getting skewered by the press  over the ‘cut-off’ lie, the dislike of the Dumbarton title, the bully claims, the cringe-y movie, and whatever else anyone wants to throw at him 

It is officially “Gloves Off” Day    









						Prince Charles paid a 'substantial sum' to Harry and Meghan | ITV News
					

Clarence House’s accounts for 2020-21 show that Prince Charles’ private income paid towards the running of the household of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com
				












						BBC's Nick Robinson appears to poke fun at Harry and Meghan
					

Listeners also enjoyed the funny moment that came weeks after Harry and Meghan declared war on the BBC over their claims that they failed to consult the Queen about using her nickname 'Lilibet'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Social media jest at claims Harry and Meghan Earl of Dumbarton row
					

Many joked the couple may be holding out for the Earl of Wokingham - because the LA-based Sussexes are considered right-on - or whether a dukedom on the Isles of Scilly would be better.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle movie has been branded 'cringeworthy'
					

Social media users have branded a trailer for Lifetime's upcoming movie about Megxit that imagines the very emotional lead-up to the Sussexes' controversial move to the US as 'cringeworthy.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





ETA:  IMO the Brits excel at throwing shade


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shame on OW for perpetuating this nonsense. The world can now see the disastrous duo for the liars they really are. Lying about their baby’s name???!!!!  Crying over not getting more millions - during a pandemic???!!! Sneering at the fine people of Dumbarton???!!!   Pay attention, Hwood.  It will happen to you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is officially “Gloves Off” Day



It's quite fun, isn't it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean...what sane person can sit there and support the troublesome two's whining about being "cut off"?

If you see the BRF at their employer, please show me any company that still pays you after you left (especially when you left in a huff and didn't give proper notice). If you look at is as Charles being H's father, I was under the impression US parents are often of the school of though of leaving their kids to fend for themselves once they turn 18 (as in, expect them to move out or pay rent, put themselves through college). The man is freaking 36 and a multi-millionaire. He could have met a far more cruel fate.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shame on OW for perpetuating this nonsense. The world can now see the disastrous duo for the liars they really are. Lying about their baby’s name???!!!!  Crying over not getting more millions - during a pandemic???!!! Sneering at the fine people of Dumbarton???!!!   Pay attention, Hwood.  It will happen to you.




Really, every time I think my views of Harry can’t get lower… he’s pure trash. There’s no reason, other than their own mismanagement, that Harry’s trust fund couldn’t have gotten them a very nice life. Now we know Charles gave them even more money… ffs….

Grown man demands financial independence, gets mad when dad says okay, gets mad when he has to get a job, gets mad when he has to spend his own money, but is still also still mad when is dad is still giving him money but not enough money somehow? How does this make any sense? They wanted to be independent?


----------



## marietouchet

Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you for sharing and especially the effort for summarising the information, dear Marietouchet.


You are all so welcome, it is fun to be a CSI here - that is my skill, not psychology


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m glad people are starting to notice that they have not produced any content.


----------



## xincinsin

Sol Ryan said:


> Really, every time I think my views of Harry can’t get lower… he’s pure trash. There’s no reason, other than their own mismanagement, that Harry’s trust fund couldn’t have gotten them a very nice life. Now we know Charles gave them even more money… ffs….
> 
> Grown man demands financial independence, gets mad when dad says okay, gets mad when he has to get a job, gets mad when he has to spend his own money, but is still also still mad when is dad is still giving him money but not enough money somehow? How does this make any sense? They wanted to be independent?


I do believe independence in the Sussex dictionary means "freedom to do my own thing with someone else paying the bills". That's the underlying reason for all this bitterness. For him, Daddy has always paid for everything. For her, her father, husband, random men have been footing the bill. I don't believe she could have accrued $2 mil in the bank without offloading a lot of her expenses onto willing victims.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...what sane person can sit there and support the troublesome two's whining about being "cut off"?
> 
> If you see the BRF at their employer, please show me any company that still pays you after you left (especially when you left in a huff and didn't give proper notice). If you look at is as Charles being H's father, I was under the impression US parents are often of the school of though of leaving their kids to fend for themselves once they turn 18 (as in, expect them to move out or pay rent, put themselves through college). The man is freaking 36 and a multi-millionaire. He could have met a far more cruel fate.


In the US it is called a GOLDEN PARACHUTE

A higher-up C-SUITE person might be paid severance pay after leaving the company
It is a kind of good faith gesture to an employee who did well for the company, but management had decided it is time for change eg replacement is paid less, and management can point to its pro-active involvement. Ex company did badly during COVID, so let the previous guy go, so Board of Directors can say we are on it !  Nothing to do with value of employee

Usually it is for a valued employee who leaves on good terms, which is not the case for 6


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I do believe independence in the Sussex dictionary means "freedom to do my own thing with someone else paying the bills". That's the underlying reason for all this bitterness. For him, Daddy has always paid for everything. For her, her father, husband, random men have been footing the bill. I don't believe she could have accrued $2 mil in the bank without offloading a lot of her expenses onto willing victims.



Does anyone remember when they first left? Back then, "financial independence" to them meant giving up the sovereign grant, which accounted for only 5 % of their income. They were still fully expecting Charles to shell out for the remaining 95 %.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does anyone remember when they first left? Back then, "financial independence" to them meant giving up the sovereign grant, which accounted for only 5 % of their income. They were still fully expecting Charles to shell out for the remaining 95 %.


ITA
And the FOC security which he thought was his birthright because he was born into this life of high risk


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is officially “Gloves Off” Day



In honor of the day:

The duke taped a sh*t show then continued to muck it
And caused his dear granny to need her sick bucket
When recollections _did _vary
It was "Sayonara, Harry"
The Queen took off her kid gloves and said "F*ck it"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Waiting to hear from Serena, Orlando, and all their other ‘woke-y’ _friends._
His _lunch_ with QE just became much more interesting.

https://britishheritage.com/royals/queen-elizabeth-eat

*Lunch*
It is worth noting that *the Queen is particularly fond of a gin and Dubonnet cocktail before she tucks into her lunch.*
_{make mine a double, please} _
Following this, it is reported that Queen Elizabeth is fond of some grilled fish or chicken, and tends to stay away from starch for her meal at lunch. It's clearly the simple things, that Queen Elizabeth prefers when it comes to food!

For fish, the Queen loves some Dover Sole with wilted spinach or courgettes. As regards chicken - grilled with a salad.







Queen Elizabeth II lunches with Prince Philip and their children Princess Anne and Prince Charles at Windsor Castle in Berkshire, circa 1969. A camera (left) is set up to film for Richard Cawston's BBC documentary 'Royal Family', which followed the Royal Family over a period of a year and was broadcast on 21st June 1969. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)


ETA:  guessing he will cry like Niagara Falls.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If Hazz is in the UK, he is getting skewered by the press  over the ‘cut-off’ lie, the dislike of the Dumbarton title, the bully claims, the cringe-y movie, and whatever else anyone wants to throw at him
> 
> It is officially “Gloves Off” Day
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles paid a 'substantial sum' to Harry and Meghan | ITV News
> 
> 
> Clarence House’s accounts for 2020-21 show that Prince Charles’ private income paid towards the running of the household of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. | ITV National News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.itv.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC's Nick Robinson appears to poke fun at Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Listeners also enjoyed the funny moment that came weeks after Harry and Meghan declared war on the BBC over their claims that they failed to consult the Queen about using her nickname 'Lilibet'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Social media jest at claims Harry and Meghan Earl of Dumbarton row
> 
> 
> Many joked the couple may be holding out for the Earl of Wokingham - because the LA-based Sussexes are considered right-on - or whether a dukedom on the Isles of Scilly would be better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle movie has been branded 'cringeworthy'
> 
> 
> Social media users have branded a trailer for Lifetime's upcoming movie about Megxit that imagines the very emotional lead-up to the Sussexes' controversial move to the US as 'cringeworthy.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  IMO the Brits excel at throwing shade


Haha great selection of articles, I'm still laughing with the Earl of Wokingham...


----------



## A1aGypsy

I love that Anne is reading a book in that picture. How very Anne with an ‘e’ of her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> In honor of the day:
> 
> The duke taped a sh*t show then continued to muck it
> And caused his dear granny to need her sick bucket
> When recollections _did _vary
> It was "Sayonara, Harry"
> The Queen took off her kid gloves and said "F*ck it"



This took more effort than “The Bench”.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the couple is adding more titles to their royal portfolio...


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> This took more effort than “The Bench”.


It's the first five pages of my upcoming children's book


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

lanasyogamama said:


> This took more effort than “The Bench”.


It's _"The BENCH" by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex _I'll have you know.

At Christmas y'all are each getting a signed copy of the sequel - _"The WENCH on The BENCH"_


----------



## Chanbal

The Dumbarton title was extinct since 1749 and recreated for Harry in 2018 when he married pump-pump, I wonder is there was a hidden message there... 

_Lord Dumbarton was also created Lord Douglas of Ettrick. He was married to Anne Douglas, the first Countess of Dumbarton, who was the sister of Catherine Fitzroy, Duchess of Northumberland. 
Following the death of their only son, the unmarried second Earl, both titles became extinct in January 1749.
The title was recreated in the UK Peerage by the Queen as one of the two subsidiary titles for her grandson Harry, when he married Meghan in May 2018._ 



			https://archive.vn/PCOJq#selection-3291.0-3299.151


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> ITA
> And the FOC security which he thought was his birthright because he was born into this life of high risk



Taking too many drugs and drinking too much has always been high risk, not sure security could ever help with that. 

What else does he do that's high risk? Siting in an arm chair thinking about which toilet to use next and and bark instructions at servants?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Dumbarton title was extinct since 1749 and recreated for Harry in 2018 when he married pump-pump, I wonder is there was a hidden message there...
> 
> _Lord Dumbarton was also created Lord Douglas of Ettrick. He was married to Anne Douglas, the first Countess of Dumbarton, who was the sister of Catherine Fitzroy, Duchess of Northumberland.
> Following the death of their only son, the unmarried second Earl, both titles became extinct in January 1749.
> The title was recreated in the UK Peerage by the Queen as one of the two subsidiary titles for her grandson Harry, when he married Meghan in May 2018._
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/PCOJq#selection-3291.0-3299.151



Another missed opportunity - they could have become active ‘patrons’ of this beautiful historic home in Washington DC. 





						Dumbarton House
					






					dumbartonhouse.org


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> It's _"The BENCH" by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex _I'll have you know.
> 
> At Christmas y'all are each getting a signed copy of the sequel - _"The WENCH on The BENCH"_



I'm gonna compost them and cause a _stench_ from THE BENCH


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Lunch*
> It is worth noting that *the Queen is particularly fond of a gin and Dubonnet cocktail before she tucks into her lunch.*
> _{make mine a double, please} _
> Following this, it is reported that Queen Elizabeth is fond of some grilled fish or chicken, and tends to stay away from starch for her meal at lunch. It's clearly the simple things, that Queen Elizabeth prefers when it comes to food!



A former royal chef with a Youtube channel revealed that Prince Philip enjoyed to eat alone or have his own dinner parties occasionally because he was a much more adventurous eater than the Queen (e.g. enjoyed foreign cuisines and spicy dishes). He also sometimes brought back recipes from his travels and invitations and asked them to recreate them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the couple is adding more titles to their royal portfolio...




It really is so ridiculous. Who are these British upperclass kids making fun of the king's grandson for his title? Yeah, right.

Also, I'm no pro when it comes to British pronunciation, but I'd imagine it's Dum-barton, not Dumb-arton.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Taking too many drugs and drinking too much has always been high risk, not sure security could ever help with that.
> 
> What else does he do that's high risk? Siting in an arm chair thinking about which toilet to use next and and bark instructions at servants?



Living with the predator.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2015:   https://georgetownmetropolitan.com/2015/11/23/dumbarton-or-dunbarton/

*Dumbarton or Dunbarton?*



Last week, William Offut made the case in the Washington Post that the name Dumbarton, as used by various Georgetown locales, is incorrect and that they should all use the name Dunbarton.
Offut’s argument boils down to an assertion that the name is at its heart a joke. Ninian Beall, who came to own all the land that became Georgetown, was a Scotsman who fought for Charles II against Oliver Cromwell after the fall and execution of Charles I. Beall was there when a greatly outnumbered English army destroyed the Scottish army at the Battle of Dunbar. Offut claims that when Beall obtained the land that became Georgetown decades later, he was making a joke on the name Dunbar when he called the plot the “Rock of Dunbarton”
This may be a familiar argument to longtime Georgetown Metropolitan readers. It’s the same one Offut make in a comment here five years ago.
Is it correct though?
It’s hard to tell. As GM wrote five years ago, the name of the street used to sometimes be called Dunbarton. And, old records do refer to the land grant as “Rock of Dunbarton”. But plenty of old records use Dumbarton or Rock of Dumbarton, too.
Interestingly, the switch was reflected back in Scotland too. The town of Dumbarton is in the county of Dunbartonshire. Why’s that? Because prior to the late 19th century, the terms were used interchangeably. Only in the 19th century did many names become “standardized”. This is a common story. It’s why a lot of old sources call it Tennalytown or Potowmack.
It seems that when they decided to settle on a spelling, they looked to the root of the word Dumbarton/Dunbarton, which is the Scottish Gaelic “Dùn Breatainn”(Fort of the British). Since the root was spelled with an “n” the county settled on that spelling. But it seems that more people called the town Dumbarton, and they didn’t feel like changing it, so they stuck with the “m”.

All that happened in the backdrop of when Dunbarton here in Georgetown became Dumbarton. And there definitely was a switch. When you read articles from the 1930s talking about the Rock of Dumbarton or Dumbarton Ave., they frequently mention how it was formerly spelled with an “n”.
But there’s no discussion anywhere that GM has found tying the name back to the Battle of Dunbar. Could it be? Maybe, but you’d have to produce more than a guess to believe it.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Haha great selection of articles, I'm still laughing with the Earl of Wokingham...



I'm going with the Baron of the Scilly isles,   make that the Barren of the Scilly Isles or the Laird Fort William (then he keeps an English and a Scottish title)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'm going with the Baron of the Scilly isles,   make that the Barren of the Scilly Isles or the Laird Fort William (then he keeps an English and a Scottish title)



Can someone explain to me why the Scilly Isles thing is funny? I'm not getting the joke just yet.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> ITA
> And the FOC security which he thought was his birthright because he was born into this life of high risk



It's rather ironic to hear someone complain about "being cut off", then turn around and buy a 14 million dollar mansion plus upkeep.  And if one assumes that his "birthright" entails permanent security, then shouldn't that same birthright dictate he stay as a working royal? Sugars forget that Harry and Meghan VOLUNTARILY stepped down. For H&M to complain they didn't get MORE money and security says they didn't bother to read the fine print of being a royal. Or more probably they assumed they were soooo important and loved that the money spigot from the BRF would just keep flowing, and if it didn't, the backup plan was to play the race and victim cards. And voila! here we are.


----------



## periogirl28

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain to me why the Scilly Isles thing is funny? I'm not getting the joke just yet.


I think it's pronounced "Silly".


----------



## Icyjade

https://amp.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3138409/meghan-markle-broke-3-royal-pregnancy-rules-here-are-9


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

periogirl28 said:


> I think it's pronounced "Silly".



Ohhh...thanks!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> It's the first five pages of my upcoming children's book


Just spit balling here, how would you feel about making it an e-book, and all the illustrations would be gifs, chosen by @Louandra


----------



## marietouchet

Genie27 said:


> It's _"The BENCH" by Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex _I'll have you know.
> 
> At Christmas y'all are each getting a signed copy of the sequel - _"The WENCH on The BENCH"_


I cannot express my gratitude …


----------



## Annawakes

A1aGypsy said:


> I love that Anne is reading a book in that picture. How very Anne with an ‘e’ of her.


And she’s got her elbows on the table .  That was the first rule of table etiquette I learned - no elbows on the table!


----------



## Sol Ryan

rose60610 said:


> It's rather ironic to hear someone complain about "being cut off", then turn around and buy a 14 million dollar mansion plus upkeep.



THIS!!! People act like they HAD to buy that giant house. Why? Like it’s another reason Mister Barefoot-Google-Eco-Speech Harry is full of it. That 16 bathroom house and his Escalade he rides in. Ugh, who has 32 million to live all their days on and spends 16 of it on a house That size that has to be maintained?

(seriously, iPad autocorrect is not my friend today…)

ETA: I’m sounding a bit exuberant today lol…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> And she’s got her elbows on the table .  That was the first rule of table etiquette I learned - no elbows on the table!



in front of her parents


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> THIS!!! People act like they HAD to buy that giant house. Why? Like it’s another reason Mister Barefoot-Google-Eco-Speech Harry is full of it. That 16 bathroom house and his Escalade he rides in. Ugh, who has 32 million to live all their days on and spends 16 of it on a house That size that has to be maintained?
> 
> (seriously, iPad autocorrect is not my friend today…)
> 
> ETA: I’m sounding a bit exuberant today lol…



They just had to hang with the Hwood ‘cool’ crowd.
 Wonder if they know most of the neighbors do not own their houses themselves. It’s all taken care of by the corporations they work for. Maybe  the BRF bought the house and they pay rent?  Naaah, we surely would have heard about it.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Okay one more for the night. LOVE this article. Had to share. It’s from June 19th.
> 
> Time is crunching M&H !  Tick tock. Where’s the popcorn?!?
> 
> 
> *It’s crunch time for Meghan and Harry’s $606,000-per-day Netflix and Spotify deals*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle, Prince Harry’s Netflix, Spotify paydays could fall apart
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.news.com.au


$606,000 A DAY?!!?  Holy $hit.  Puts into perspective how overrated/unworthy these two A holes are.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain to me why the Scilly Isles thing is funny? I'm not getting the joke just yet.



As @periogirl28 said, take no notice I'm just having fun and being Scilly


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2009 - The Joneses.
Beware the _influencers_


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> Just spit balling here, how would you feel about making it an e-book, and all the illustrations would be gifs, chosen by @Louandra


There's no better curator of gifs than @Lounorada!


----------



## 1LV

jennlt said:


> In honor of the day:
> 
> The duke taped a sh*t show then continued to muck it
> And caused his dear granny to need her sick bucket
> When recollections _did _vary
> It was "Sayonara, Harry"
> The Queen took off her kid gloves and said "F*ck it"


Now THAT is T-shirt I’d buy!  Would love to see it next to all the other “royal” stuff on Amazon.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It really is so ridiculous. Who are these British upperclass kids making fun of the king's grandson for his title? Yeah, right.
> 
> Also, I'm no pro when it comes to British pronunciation, but I'd imagine it's Dum-barton, not Dumb-arton.



The title really should be the Earl of Dumba$$es to avoid insulting Dumbarton, and to more accurately reflect the holder of the title.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain to me why the Scilly Isles thing is funny? I'm not getting the joke just yet.


Its pronou Silly, silent C
And in reference to your earlier post it is indeed Dum-barton


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she promise to shut up for a little while to focus on her family? Yeah, I didn’t believe her either. Here’s her latest word salad of encouragement. I hope having her as its patron doesn’t hurt the animal charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*
> The Duchess of Sussex discussed the "grief, growth and also gratitude" she's experienced amid a tumultuous year
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is looking back on 2020 and pointing to one of the essential sources of joy and support that helped her weather the tumultuous year both in her own home and around the globe.
> 
> In her foreword for The Mayhew Foundation's annual review, the Duchess of Sussex wrote, "When I reflect on 2020, I always come back to the importance of community and connection. We may have been forced apart, but we found new ways to be close and to support each other through this shared crisis. For many of us, this was made all the easier with our pets by our side."
> 
> 
> Mayhew is one of two patronages Meghan, 39, has maintained since she and Prince Harry exited their roles as working royals in early 2020. She has also continued to support Smart Works, a U.K. organization that helps unemployed and vulnerable women return to the workplace by providing coaching tips and professional attire for job interviews.
> 
> Mayhew is clearly an area of passion for the animal-loving Duchess, who became patron of the U.K. animal welfare charity in January 2019. She praised Mayhew for providing "resources that people and pets need to stay together and persevere through hardships."
> 
> Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."
> 
> She added, "As we collectively build to the future, my sincere hope is that we do so with ongoing support and appreciation for organizations like Mayhew, who continue their vital work in days of crisis and in days of calm. Their commitment to the cause of animal welfare is steadfast and their effect on our community wellbeing is self-evident."



Word Salad. For example in the paragraph below, she added adjectives like *global* and *overwhelming *and the word *process* just to sound intelligent. But, the best part is that you and I know that *solace* and *comfort* are part of the *therapeutic effect* of having a pet, but she babbled on anyway.

[Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."]


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle Shares One Key to How She Made It Emotionally Through a Year of Being 'Forced Apart'*


Well, she wasn't being "forced apart"! She and Mr Markle chose to be apart from their own families (Doria excepted)! What load of bollox! Excuse my language!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Sol Ryan said:


> THIS!!! People act like they HAD to buy that giant house. Why? Like it’s another reason Mister Barefoot-Google-Eco-Speech Harry is full of it. That 16 bathroom house and his Escalade he rides in. Ugh, who has 32 million to live all their days on and spends 16 of it on a house That size that has to be maintained?
> 
> (seriously, iPad autocorrect is not my friend today…)
> 
> ETA: I’m sounding a bit exuberant today lol…


Can anyone help with the chronology ? I might need to research this idea… it is a question of when did they move relative to when funding dried up …
HandM were in Vancouver and moved out - went to Tyler Perry house
was this around he time Charles cut them off? Were they paying for Vancouver ? Rent too high in Vancouver ??? 
 I have seen it suggested that Oprah set up a loaner from TP but MM bullied TP’s staff, and TP chucked them out, forcing them to buy their 14m Mac mansion 
I don’t know if any of that is true, but it would make a good TV show for the Hallmark channel


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Its pronou Silly, silent C
> And in reference to your earlier post it is indeed Dum-barton


I think Dumbarton is a lovely title , much history there …
if the name sounds odd to foreigners, well, get over it


----------



## marietouchet

chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, she wasn't being "forced apart"! She and Mr Markle chose to be apart from their own families (Doria excepted)! What load of bollox? Excuse my language!


And she/they chose not to all go back together with Archie for Megxit ca. Mar 2020


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Word Salad. For example in the paragraph below, she added adjectives like *global* and *overwhelming *and the word *process* just to sound intelligent. But, the best part is that you and I know that *solace* and *comfort* are part of the *therapeutic effect* of having a pet, but she babbled on anyway.
> 
> [Describing the events of the past year, including the global COVID pandemic, as "an overwhelming process of grief, growth and also of gratitude," she noted "the therapeutic effect of having your animal by your side and the solace and comfort you found in their company."]


_grief, growth and also of gratitude_
Someone earlier noted her fascination with alliteration.
Her writing style is really Much Ado About Nothing.



chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, she wasn't being "forced apart"! She and Mr Markle chose to be apart from their own families (Doria excepted)! What load of bollox? Excuse my language!


Maybe they are "forced" to use separate bathrooms 
It's probably a reflex that they chose a mansion with so many "thrones" after she felt cheated of one (Whaddaya mean I'm never going to be Queen?!!!!) and I think Nott Cott is said to have only one bathroom. Since they suffer from verbal diarrhoea, it's not a great leap to imagine the BS comes out both ways.


----------



## csshopper

Crediting Lady C with giving him this appropriate same: "Scabies"

From the DM, Scabies is spinning so hard he must be dizzier than usual.

*Meghan and Harry's friend Omid Scobie hits back at reports Charles bankrolled them after Megxit as he denies discrepancy in 'timeline of financial support' from Clarence House*


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> she noted "the therapeutic effect of having* your animal by your side* and the solace and comfort you found in their company."]



Wow, even when she's being nice. That's no way to talk about your husband


----------



## papertiger

Warning: 54 mins 

See you on the other side


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m glad people are starting to notice that they have not produced any content.



It should not have taken six months for Spotify and and 10 months for Netflix for them to notice that Harry and Meghan don't really produce anything. They are always being given the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Wow, even when she's being nice. That's no way to talk about your husband


Oh, you're so bad, but I can't stop laughing.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Oh, you're so bad, but I can't stop laughing.



Well, who knows what/who she's talking about... ever


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> THIS!!! People act like they HAD to buy that giant house. Why? Like it’s another reason Mister Barefoot-Google-Eco-Speech Harry is full of it. That 16 bathroom house and his Escalade he rides in. Ugh, *who has 32 million to live all their days on and spends 16 of it on a house That size that has to be maintained?*
> 
> (seriously, iPad autocorrect is not my friend today…)
> 
> ETA: I’m sounding a bit exuberant today lol…



Someone whose wife is not easily appeased and her demands for luxury must be met.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Can anyone help with the chronology ? I might need to research this idea… it is a question of when did they move relative to when funding dried up …
> HandM were in Vancouver and moved out - went to Tyler Perry house
> was this around he time Charles cut them off? Were they paying for Vancouver ? Rent too high in Vancouver ???
> I have seen it suggested that Oprah set up a loaner from TP but MM bullied TP’s staff, and TP chucked them out, forcing them to buy their 14m Mac mansion
> I don’t know if any of that is true, but it would make a good TV show for the Hallmark channel



As I recall Harry and Meghan hurried to get into the US right before the borders closed for Covid, so they arrived in the first or second week of March 2020. They stayed in one of Tyler Perry's homes for approximately 4–5 months. I believe they bought the Montecito estate some time in July and had moved in by August. Not sure whether it's true they were kicked out due to Meghan's behavior or if they were just encouraged to move on after being long term houseguests. In fairness Covid could be a valid excuse for some of the delay. There wasn't a lot getting done for a number of months.


----------



## gracekelly

Sol Ryan said:


> THIS!!! People act like they HAD to buy that giant house. Why? Like it’s another reason Mister Barefoot-Google-Eco-Speech Harry is full of it. That 16 bathroom house and his Escalade he rides in. Ugh, who has 32 million to live all their days on and spends 16 of it on a house That size that has to be maintained?
> 
> (seriously, iPad autocorrect is not my friend today…)
> 
> ETA: I’m sounding a bit exuberant today lol…


They NEEDED a palace so of course they had to by it.  How ironic to buy a palace from a Russian. We know how the last ruling royal family of Russia ended up. If they weren’t shot, they ended up as doormen in  Paris wearing their old uniforms.


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Really, every time I think my views of Harry can’t get lower… he’s pure trash. There’s no reason, other than their own mismanagement, that Harry’s trust fund couldn’t have gotten them a very nice life. Now we know Charles gave them even more money… ffs….
> 
> Grown man demands financial independence, gets mad when dad says okay, gets mad when he has to get a job, gets mad when he has to spend his own money, but is still also still mad when is dad is still giving him money but not enough money somehow? How does this make any sense? They wanted to be independent?


yes he is one Angry man-boy
very unattractive


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It should not have taken six months for Spotify and and 10 months for Netflix for them to notice that Harry and Meghan don't really produce anything. They are always being given the benefit of the doubt.


because if they said or did anything negative it would be called racist?  or because they are "royals"?
but business is business - eventually they will have to produce or lose their contracts?  they probably don't know what to do.  their capabilities are really not that much, right?   Z-list former actress and spoiled man-boy prince.   LOL

maybe Auntie Oprah will help them come up with something


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does anyone remember when they first left? Back then, "financial independence" to them meant giving up the sovereign grant, which accounted for only 5 % of their income. They were still fully expecting Charles to shell out for the remaining 95 %.


YUP!!! .. I remember that because I had a pretty hardy laugh over the fact that .. *OOOOH-OOOOOH-OOOOOH BIGGO-DEAL-IO*, *we will be losing a whopping 5%* .. *but we'll still be getting that 95%*!!!  

Goes to show how greedy these 2 *were/are*, and you bet that if Netflix/Spotify come a-callin' re: "reimburse us" .. the VICTIM cards will be coming out .. the likes we've never likely seen (at this point)!!!  I bet anything that they'll get to keep that $$$$$ and produce nothing, but just whine how "racist" these companies are!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Waiting to hear from Serena, Orlando, and all their other ‘woke-y’ _friends._
> His _lunch_ with QE just became much more interesting.
> 
> https://britishheritage.com/royals/queen-elizabeth-eat
> 
> *Lunch*
> It is worth noting that *the Queen is particularly fond of a gin and Dubonnet cocktail before she tucks into her lunch.*
> _{make mine a double, please} _
> Following this, it is reported that Queen Elizabeth is fond of some grilled fish or chicken, and tends to stay away from starch for her meal at lunch. It's clearly the simple things, that Queen Elizabeth prefers when it comes to food!
> 
> For fish, the Queen loves some Dover Sole with wilted spinach or courgettes. As regards chicken - grilled with a salad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II lunches with Prince Philip and their children Princess Anne and Prince Charles at Windsor Castle in Berkshire, circa 1969. A camera (left) is set up to film for Richard Cawston's BBC documentary 'Royal Family', which followed the Royal Family over a period of a year and was broadcast on 21st June 1969. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)
> 
> 
> ETA:  guessing he will cry like Niagara Falls.


Gin and dubbonet? Blimey that’d give me a h*** of headache. Thinking about it, it’s not that far from Rab C Nesbitt’s vodka with buckfast - a connection over class boundaries?

I also note the flex that a bit of dover sole is considered ‘simple food’ 

Add on - what is the Windsor family’s obsession with chicken? They seem to be eating it at any given opportunity. When I read finding freebies, for my sins,it seemed to be every meal mentioned but I had assumed that was just poor editing and thinking that’s what commoners eat.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> because if they said or did anything negative it would be called racist?  or because they are "royals"?
> but business is business - eventually they will have to produce or lose their contracts?  they probably don't know what to do.  their capabilities are really not that much, right?   Z-list former actress and spoiled man-boy prince.   LOL
> 
> maybe Auntie Oprah will help them come up with something



Oprah won't come up with anything for them unless she gets a healthy cut of it herself. She has already profited from the biggest thing H&M had to offer, a two-hour whinefest.

The only series announced so far is for the Invictus Games. Even that show they are listed as coproducing with the Invictus Games Foundation so who knows if they really had any personal input to it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> The next love letter I write to my husband, I'll write he makes my heart go "*pump pump*" and wait for the side eye!


It's part of the female anatomy in Urban Dictionary.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Living with the predator.


Hey! The predator has much better hair and has the decency to stay invisible most of the time  
She’s really more like a xenomorph always shrieking and lashing out.




Icyjade said:


> https://amp.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3138409/meghan-markle-broke-3-royal-pregnancy-rules-here-are-9


Funnily enough the thing about finding out the sex of the baby is contentious between my families too. I would say it’s pretty split whether you find out whether you’re having a g/b and whether you tell people or not.


chicinthecity777 said:


> Well, she wasn't being "forced apart"! She and Mr Markle chose to be apart from their own families (Doria excepted)! What load of bollox! Excuse my language!


she means from the paps she wants them to know she loves them really 


marietouchet said:


> Can anyone help with the chronology ? I might need to research this idea… it is a question of when did they move relative to when funding dried up …
> HandM were in Vancouver and moved out - went to Tyler Perry house
> was this around he time Charles cut them off? Were they paying for Vancouver ? Rent too high in Vancouver ???
> I have seen it suggested that Oprah set up a loaner from TP but MM bullied TP’s staff, and TP chucked them out, forcing them to buy their 14m Mac mansion
> I don’t know if any of that is true, but it would make a good TV show for the Hallmark channel


I think they probably got a good deal in Vancouver as it is affiliated with the crown. The problem seemed like where they were was an isolated place where you could enjoy privacy and live simply besides all the discreet non-celeb millionaires and billionaires. So, of course, they hated it! 
I still want to know what Tyler Perry is getting out of this. I thought he was insanely rich and popular already anyway


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's part of the female anatomy in Urban Dictionary.



I did not need to know that.


----------



## csshopper

I think friend OW called Tyler and "gently" explained that people on HIS staff had shared potentially damaging information about the Suckesses, and HE needed to produce something to counter it. Viola, there he is and plugging the book as a bonus.

On another topic: where the Suckesses have lived, found this on the Net with interestingly another OW association. I think OW owns them.

*Foster was instrumental in the couple's stay at the £10.7 million Mille Fleurs house in Vancouver, Canada, from November 2019 to March 2020. The house was secured for them by Foster, whose friend owned the house. Harry and Meghan reportedly paid a rent that was 'well below market value'.

Meanwhile, Foster has been friends with Oprah Winfrey for years. Oprah was one of the highest profile stars to travel to Canada to lend wattage to his Miracle Gala in 2017 which celebrated 30 years of charity work by the mogul.  *


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> *Seriously, what is in it for Oprah?*
> She got her media attention and clicks with the interview.
> Isn't she a smart woman? Can't she see through bullsh*t?  Aren't there better and more deserving personalities to champion?











needlv said:


> Has anyone seen the Times article?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William ‘split his household from Prince Harry after Meghan bullying claims’
> 
> 
> ‘So, are you saying,” asked Oprah Winfrey, talking to Meghan and Harry in their famous interview of March 2021, “that there were hints of jealousy?”She was inqu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BOOK EXTRACT
> *Prince William ‘split his household from Prince Harry after Meghan bullying claims’
> Allegations against the Duchess of Sussex led to a bitter row between brothers who were once inseparable, says the author Robert Lacey*





A great read (and both saddening and maddening), thanks for sharing the full article! 




CarryOn2020 said:


> Atrocious behavior! Hazz ought to know better.
> Even with this ‘expert team’, they still fail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Sussexes team trying to help them win the royal briefing war
> 
> 
> After she famously bemoaned the 'men in grey suits', Harry and Meghan have assembled their own LA Spin Machine team of backstairs advisers to help them win the briefing war.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Why do you need an 'LA Spin Machine' team of media advisers if you are off living your _'pRiVaTe LiFe'_ in your Californian mansion with 1,000,000 toilets because you left the RF with the excuse that the media were evil and caused all your problems in life? Oh wait, that was a bullsh*t excuse for you to get out of working for a living and instead be full-time attention seekers, pot-stirrers and perpetual victims.




needlv said:


> Has anyone seen this gossip story on Insta?  You have to scroll through ...









bag-mania said:


> Diana didn't meet Hewitt until two years after Harry was born. I know some have been trying for years to make a connection because of the red hair and a passing resemblance but there's no truth to it.
> Looks don't mean everything, there are plenty of siblings who look different from each other. There is some family resemblance between Charles and Harry, particularly when you compare Harry to photos of his father as a child and as a young man with a beard. He's Charles' son for sure.
> 
> View attachment 5117387
> 
> View attachment 5117390


Wow, those photos really show how much JCMH is like Charles. I wonder does JCMH have issues with the fact that he is Charles' twin and looks nothing like Diana, but William is Diana's twin. 
I wouldn't be surprised if he is jealous of W because of his resemblance to their mother.




Jayne1 said:


> Yes. But this one is called *Aesop Post Poo Drops.*  Just 3 Drops!
> Has anyone else seen this?





Fitting for her really. Although, never mind 3 drops, MM would need a gallon of that stuff with all the bullsh*t she spews daily.




EverSoElusive said:


> ****ty couple









needlv said:


> Oh this is sooo bad... even the preview looks so cringeworthy I started laughing.  I’m embarrassed for the actors....



Da fuq is this mess?






csshopper said:


> Can’t find printable words right now for the rapacious cretins in Montecito who opened the gates to this crass commercialization and disrespect for the Queen:
> View attachment 5118271
> 
> I know Amazon is not their site, but this crap would not exist were it not for them.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Notwithstanding the deliberate vagueness of the date when financial aid was withdrawn in their interview (why not just be ACCURATE and say PC cut me off in JUNE ?) they clearly got a large amount of the £4+ mill for the first quarter of the 2020-21 UK tax year which runs April 20 to March 21

So lets do some sums !
I think we can establish that even if H&M share was let's say 2.5m for a quarter, that's 10M for a full year AFTER taxes so H&M need to bring home £18m +  BEFORE tax ( Fag packet calc at UK highest income tax rate of 45% assuming he's still a UK tax payer)

I can't see them having that kind of combined income generating capacity on an ongoing basis if the Spotify/Nexflix deals go south?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sol Ryan said:


> THIS!!! People act like they HAD to buy that giant house. Why? Like it’s another reason Mister Barefoot-Google-Eco-Speech Harry is full of it. That 16 bathroom house and his Escalade he rides in. Ugh, who has 32 million to live all their days on and spends 16 of it on a house That size that has to be maintained?
> 
> (seriously, iPad autocorrect is not my friend today…)
> 
> ETA: I’m sounding a bit exuberant today lol…



But they had to. They had to upstage the Cambridges' Amner Hall. Y'all are being so insensitive to their needs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A refresher on why they live where they live - from the Dax show
[to keep it short and a bit sweet, I removed the photos]








						Prince Harry hits out at privacy invasion after LA move
					

PRINCE HARRY hit back at the critics who argued he should expect to be harassed because he lives in paparazzi-rich Los Angeles.




					www.express.co.uk
				



*Prince Harry hits out at privacy invasion after LA move 'We didn't mean to live here!'*

By Gerrard Kaonga
 PUBLISHED: 11:35, Tue, May 18, 2021 | UPDATED: 09:14, Thu, May 20, 2021

Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, attacked the people who have insisted he and Meghan Markle should have expected to be hounded by the paparazzi. While speaking on the Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard, he argued there was a multitude of reasons why this was unfair. He also insisted that he and the Duchess of Sussex did not intend to stay in Los Angeles to start a family

Prince Harry said: "The way that I look at it is living here, one hour outside of LA, it is a feeding frenzy here.
"We spent the first three and a half months living at Tyler Perry's house
"The helicopters, the drones, the paparazzi cutting the fence, it was madness.
"People's response was what do you expect if you live in LA."
The Duke of Sussex then outlined the many reasons he felt this was an unfair justification  for his and his families' treatment.
_*He said: "Well, first of all, we didn't mean to live in LA.*_
*"This is sort of staging area before we try and find a house. *[will they move again??]
"Secondly, how sad that if you live in LA and you are well known you just have to accept it. [yes, 10000x yes]
Prince Harry also reflected on the overall treatment of celebrities by the press and paparazzi.
He said: "With the first lot of security, I asked them where the safest place is and they said inside.
"Sorry, just because I am a well-known person I can't go outside anymore? [Sorry, you aren’t in Kansas anymore]
"It is really sad and their argument, the paparazzi and everyone else, is that if you are in a public space it is fine for us to do it.
"So what are human rights as an individual and a family, you are saying the moment you step foot outside our house that it is open season and free game, because of public interest? [yes, get over it]
"There is no public interest in you taking your kids for a walk down the beach.
 [um, yes, there is, it’s for everyone’s safety to know where you are lurking]
"This is not news, this is my issue with it, news should stay as news." [yep, BRF royals should stay in the UK, but hey, here you are.]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mhhh...maybe in hindsight taking part in the royal rota system wasn't all that bad.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> *Meanwhile, Foster has been friends with Oprah Winfrey for years. Oprah was one of the highest profile stars to travel to Canada to lend wattage to his Miracle Gala in 2017 which celebrated 30 years of charity work by the mogul.  *


HUH?!?! .. charity work??? .. to whom??? .. himself????


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mhhh...maybe in hindsight taking part in the royal rota system wasn't all that bad.



Yep, here he is in the USA living the Stockholm Syndrome, a condition in which a hostage (Haz) develops a psychological bond with their captor (Methane) during captivity.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> A refresher on why they live where they live - from the Dax show
> 
> _*He said: "Well, first of all, we didn't mean to live in LA.*_
> *"This is sort of staging area before we try and find a house. *[will they move again??]
> "Secondly, how sad that if you live in LA and you are well known you just have to accept it. [yes, 10000x yes]



What?! It was ALWAYS Meghan's plan for them to live in LA. If she didn't let him in on her scheme then he should take it up with her. Nobody put a gun to his head and forced him to buy a multimillion dollar mansion in LA. (Meghan might have twisted something, but I doubt it was needed.)  

The more he talks the more he contradicts himself. He's either the world's biggest buffoon, a chronic liar, or both.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> if he's smart (or his advisors are) he will keep it about his mum....will he say AGAIN how traumatized he was?  how it was the fault of the paps?  hope not.  will he mention his WIFE.  I'd bet on it.


IMO, Diana spoiled him rotten when he was a child and he never got over the fact that at some point in life, we all have to get on with the job of maturing and behaving like an adult instead of being mollycoddled. I'm not trying to minimize the trauma he suffered from her death, but others have had parents wrenched from their lives at an early age and with proper emotional support, they have learned to cope with the loss and gone on to lead productive lives. It's really a shame that H, on the other hand, seems to hang on to the pain and sorrow instead of trying to mostly remember his mother's love and kindness.


----------



## RAINDANCE

*Telegraph just now ....

Prince Harry's complaints about money just got even more distasteful*
The self-obsessed Duke relies on his father's generosity in private while insulting him in public
ROBERT TAYLOR24 June 2021 • 12:35pm
	

	
	
		
		

		
			






Is there anything more unseemly than rich people complaining about money?

By any normal standards, Harry and Meghan are super wealthy. They have an estimated joint worth of nearly £10 million, and live in a luxury pad in California overlooking the Pacific. They mix with millionaires and billionaires.

Yet Harry saw fit to moan, in that blockbuster interview with Oprah, that his father had “literally” cut him off.

Where do you start with a whine like that? How should we respond to someone worth millions, most of it inherited, saying he should have even more?

Let’s keep in mind that Harry isn’t 19 anymore. He’s 36. His wife’s 39. These are not snotty youngsters. They’re mature adults. Frankly, I’d be ashamed to be living off my parents at that age, however much security I needed to pay for. There comes a time – and it shouldn’t take until 36 – when you need to buy your own dinner.

In any case, we now discover that Prince Charles did not actually cut Harry off at all – at least not financially. Newly released Clarence House records show that Charles gave the Sussexes and Cambridges a whopping £4.5 million during the last financial year.

Just think about that. It’s a huge lottery win. I’m pretty sure that if someone gave me a few million, my first reaction would not be to complain about it. But for Harry and Meghan, different rules obviously apply.

Do they realise just how spoiled it sounds? Do they ever consider that the average person in the UK earns less than 1% of that gift? And do they appreciate just how ungrateful it looks to accept a handout of that scale, and then publicly denigrate the man who gave it, saying he’d cut them off?

No wonder Prince Charles has hit back. In fact, for the second time in just over a week, Harry’s family has contradicted his claims. First we had the matter of Lilibet, and whether Harry had or hadn’t asked the Queen’s permission to use the name. And now this business about cash gifts running to millions.

Given how rare it is for the Palace to weigh in on anything at all, particularly when it’s about family, this all looks terrible for Harry and Meghan. Once again, their attempts at PR have backfired, this time with an even louder bang.

How different it could all have been. Before all these Oprah and California shenanigans, I have two abiding memories of Harry. The first is of that forlorn, grieving 12-year-old walking behind his mother’s coffin. The second is of the adoration in his eyes as he saw Meghan, on Prince Charles’ arm, walking down the aisle towards him. A wedding and a funeral. Both times, I admit to dabbing my eyes, and I’m sure millions of Britons did the same.

We wanted the best for Harry. That’s why no fewer than 30 million of us watched that wedding, wishing him and Meghan a long, happy marriage. Many of us welcomed the new and diverse Royal image, so much so that, even when they left for America, they went with good wishes and sympathy.

But Harry’s attitude since he arrived in LA has eaten up that credit and warmth. He has belittled his own family at a time of grief, made questionable claims, and accused one member of his family of racism – a particularly low blow. And at a time of so much global suffering, he has portrayed himself and Meghan as uniquely victimised.

Harry could have remained silent and dignified. In doing so he would have gained our respect. Instead, he has appeared self-obsessed, disloyal and spoiled. He needs to get a grip.


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> Can anyone help with the chronology ? I might need to research this idea… it is a question of when did they move relative to when funding dried up …
> HandM were in Vancouver and moved out - went to Tyler Perry house
> was this around he time Charles cut them off? Were they paying for Vancouver ? Rent too high in Vancouver ???
> I have seen it suggested that Oprah set up a loaner from TP but MM bullied TP’s staff, and TP chucked them out, forcing them to buy their 14m Mac mansion
> I don’t know if any of that is true, but it would make a good TV show for the Hallmark channel



Man, I reject the notion that someone can be forced to buy a 14 million dollar mansion. Like I watch a lot of HGTV and according to Tarek on Flip or Flop, there are houses in California that cost less than 14 million. They chose to buy a house of their own free will with  16 bathrooms, a stripper pole and a tea room and now they want to whine about daddy cutting off their money... This is disgusting, it’s vile, especially in a pandemic when people are losing their jobs and relatives . It’s not woke… I’m woke. it’s bulls***


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HUH?!?! .. charity work??? .. to whom??? .. himself????


there's something creepy about foster and IDL his wife either.  I'm sure she just happened to fall in love with a very wealthy guy


----------



## chicinthecity777

Hahaha!


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Hahaha!



ha....he keeps using the "wife" word, just like the RL Harry


----------



## creme fraiche

papertiger said:


> Warning: 54 mins
> 
> See you on the other side



GonnoRhegan - love it.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> *
> Warning: 54 mins*
> 
> See you on the other side



LOLOL your warning cracked me up!  I'd love to watch these videos but they're sooooo long!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm having the newest Lady CC on in the background while catching up on some work, and I nearly choked on my own spit. She just said that one of her sources told her that they heard Raptor say with their own ears "We're one plane crash away from the throne".


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm having the newest Lady CC on in the background while catching up on some work, and I nearly choked on my own spit. She just said that one of her sources told her that they heard Raptor say with their own ears "We're one plane crash away from the throne".


They need to be stripped of their titles and Harry eliminated from the order of succession NOW.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

31:26 is the timestamp.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm having the newest Lady CC on in the background while catching up on some work, and I nearly choked on my own spit. She just said that one of her sources told her that they heard Raptor say with their own ears "We're one plane crash away from the throne".



She thinks M's masterplan is to have PC and PW debarred from the throne so H can be Regent. You can be sure there'd be a revolution and a republic before that happens.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She thinks M's masterplan is to have PC and PW debarred from the throne so H can be Regent. You can be sure there'd be a revolution and a republic before that happens.



I'm not really worried I'll see a Tyrannosaurus Queen in my lifetime, it's just...what kind of person thinks this, let alone SAYS it? And Lady CC is usually very careful in choosing words in a way she can't be sued for libel.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not really worried I'll see a Tyrannosaurus Queen in my lifetime, it's just...what kind of person thinks this, let alone SAYS it? And Lady CC is usually very careful in choosing words in a way she can't be sued for libel.



She did call M psychotic and paranoid though


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> A refresher on why they live where they live - from the Dax show
> [to keep it short and a bit sweet, I removed the photos]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hits out at privacy invasion after LA move
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY hit back at the critics who argued he should expect to be harassed because he lives in paparazzi-rich Los Angeles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry hits out at privacy invasion after LA move 'We didn't mean to live here!'*
> 
> By Gerrard Kaonga
> PUBLISHED: 11:35, Tue, May 18, 2021 | UPDATED: 09:14, Thu, May 20, 2021
> 
> Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, attacked the people who have insisted he and Meghan Markle should have expected to be hounded by the paparazzi. While speaking on the Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard, he argued there was a multitude of reasons why this was unfair. He also insisted that he and the Duchess of Sussex did not intend to stay in Los Angeles to start a family
> 
> Prince Harry said: "The way that I look at it is living here, one hour outside of LA, it is a feeding frenzy here.
> "We spent the first three and a half months living at Tyler Perry's house
> "The helicopters, the drones, the paparazzi cutting the fence, it was madness.
> "People's response was what do you expect if you live in LA."
> The Duke of Sussex then outlined the many reasons he felt this was an unfair justification  for his and his families' treatment.
> _*He said: "Well, first of all, we didn't mean to live in LA.*_
> *"This is sort of staging area before we try and find a house. *[will they move again??]
> "Secondly, how sad that if you live in LA and you are well known you just have to accept it. [yes, 10000x yes]
> Prince Harry also reflected on the overall treatment of celebrities by the press and paparazzi.
> He said: "With the first lot of security, I asked them where the safest place is and they said inside.
> "Sorry, just because I am a well-known person I can't go outside anymore? [Sorry, you aren’t in Kansas anymore]
> "It is really sad and their argument, the paparazzi and everyone else, is that if you are in a public space it is fine for us to do it.
> "So what are human rights as an individual and a family, you are saying the moment you step foot outside our house that it is open season and free game, because of public interest? [yes, get over it]
> "There is no public interest in you taking your kids for a walk down the beach.
> [um, yes, there is, it’s for everyone’s safety to know where you are lurking]
> "This is not news, this is my issue with it, news should stay as news." [yep, BRF royals should stay in the UK, but hey, here you are.]


WOW-WOW-WOW and WOW .. he's really *THAT* stupid?????  Meghan must have pulled some seriously deep-knitted (_oh - maybe that beanie made in New Zealand_?) wool over his eyes  -OR-  he is really that STUPID!  Duh - Hap-Hazza, you THOUGHT your life as a royal was intruded upon?? .. HA! .. welcome to the true world of INTRUSION .. aka:  *LOS ANGELES!*  The paps out here will do pretty much *anything* to get that picture of you or the family .. and c'mon, this is *EXACTLY* what Meghan wanted!  Did you not happen to notice when they pap'd her (_and poorly carried Archie_) on that "private walk" when in Vancouver .. but .. amaze-balls, she managed to look right into the camera with a BIG smile on her face (_but was so upset_ ..) .. sure, uh-huh.  This is what she has lived for .. to be "*recognized*" and treated like a "*real*" celebrity (_because in her warped mind, I'm sure she thought that the paps were always so kind to the stars she saw on set as a child_); after all, what she saw on the set of Married with Children (_where her Dad was the Lightening Director_) was that everyone would kiss the feet of the celebrity actors .. they could just snap their fingers and everyone would rush around to get exactly what they wanted/needed!  I really think that Meghan never truly progressed beyond the age of 13 and that image of being fawned over is exactly what she thought she would get via her *Z-List* acting job, but even more importantly, she would *REALLY* get it becoming Harry's wife .. and with that luminous title after all!  These two are the *MOST STUPID PEOPLE I think I've ever seen* .. truly ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sol Ryan said:


> Man, I reject the notion that someone can be forced to buy a 14 million dollar mansion. Like I watch a lot of HGTV and according to Tarek on Flip or Flop, there are houses in California that cost less than 14 million. They chose to buy a house of their own free will with  16 bathrooms, *a stripper pole* and a tea room and now they want to whine about daddy cutting off their money... This is disgusting, it’s vile, especially in a pandemic when people are losing their jobs and relatives . It’s not woke… I’m woke. it’s bulls***



There's a stripper pole for real?


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> There's a stripper pole for real?



All the cool kids have one


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> An op-ed by Abigail Disney: some of what she said reminded me of Methane's behaviour, but unlike Disney, Methane would probably never take advice from anyone else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Was Taught From a Young Age to Protect My Dynastic Wealth
> 
> 
> A common ideology underlies the practices of many ultra-wealthy people: The government can’t be trusted with money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theatlantic.com


This is so interesting and frank. Good find. We have seen this I’m a philanthropist so I don’t need to pay taxes attitude before but it’s interesting to hear it expounded on  



CarryOn2020 said:


> A refresher on why they live where they live - from the Dax show
> [to keep it short and a bit sweet, I removed the photos]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hits out at privacy invasion after LA move
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY hit back at the critics who argued he should expect to be harassed because he lives in paparazzi-rich Los Angeles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry hits out at privacy invasion after LA move 'We didn't mean to live here!'*
> 
> By Gerrard Kaonga
> PUBLISHED: 11:35, Tue, May 18, 2021 | UPDATED: 09:14, Thu, May 20, 2021
> 
> Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, attacked the people who have insisted he and Meghan Markle should have expected to be hounded by the paparazzi. While speaking on the Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard, he argued there was a multitude of reasons why this was unfair. He also insisted that he and the Duchess of Sussex did not intend to stay in Los Angeles to start a family
> 
> Prince Harry said: "The way that I look at it is living here, one hour outside of LA, it is a feeding frenzy here.
> "We spent the first three and a half months living at Tyler Perry's house
> "The helicopters, the drones, the paparazzi cutting the fence, it was madness.
> "People's response was what do you expect if you live in LA."
> The Duke of Sussex then outlined the many reasons he felt this was an unfair justification  for his and his families' treatment.
> _*He said: "Well, first of all, we didn't mean to live in LA.*_
> *"This is sort of staging area before we try and find a house. *[will they move again??]
> "Secondly, how sad that if you live in LA and you are well known you just have to accept it. [yes, 10000x yes]
> Prince Harry also reflected on the overall treatment of celebrities by the press and paparazzi.
> He said: "With the first lot of security, I asked them where the safest place is and they said inside.
> "Sorry, just because I am a well-known person I can't go outside anymore? [Sorry, you aren’t in Kansas anymore]
> "It is really sad and their argument, the paparazzi and everyone else, is that if you are in a public space it is fine for us to do it.
> "So what are human rights as an individual and a family, you are saying the moment you step foot outside our house that it is open season and free game, because of public interest? [yes, get over it]
> "There is no public interest in you taking your kids for a walk down the beach.
> [um, yes, there is, it’s for everyone’s safety to know where you are lurking]
> "This is not news, this is my issue with it, news should stay as news." [yep, BRF royals should stay in the UK, but hey, here you are.]


It’s so funny as a lot of aristocracy have big country estates. Private land. Miles away from anywhere. In remote, little known areas of the world all over the U.K. and the world. Lots of public school kids bond for life and visit  their friends for long leisurely stays in each other’s remote homes. There’s a whole world of balls, polo, hunting and other hobbies that are all but completely  unknown to press and public. isn’t it weird that Harry apparently has no connections to anyone like that despite his background? He didn’t know any old polo friends or distant cousins or the Eton lads …. No one. No old friends. No past. Instead the logical thing to do was to go to LA and live off a celebrity he apparently barely knows in his shining future with raptor…..


also….. mmm sweaty, you tried living in remote Canada first & then you decided to go to LA. It definitely wasn’t the nearest place from you at any point. I’m sure all the golden state tpfers are laughing at the idea one can casually pick up a property in an exclusive area of Cali on a mere whim for the short term decision making 
He was barely photographed in Canada and if he moved to somewhere with very little pap industry say, rural New Zealand or a Scottish island they could go full cover but instead he decides he’s going to seek privacy by living in the  area of the world most saturated in celebrity and showbiz? Makes sense.



Sol Ryan said:


> Man, I reject the notion that someone can be forced to buy a 14 million dollar mansion. Like I watch a lot of HGTV and according to Tarek on Flip or Flop, there are houses in California that cost less than 14 million. They chose to buy a house of their own free will with  16 bathrooms, a stripper pole and a tea room and now they want to whine about daddy cutting off their money... This is disgusting, it’s vile, especially in a pandemic when people are losing their jobs and relatives . It’s not woke… I’m woke. it’s bulls***


Yes completely agree it’s all lip service to these causes and it always has been. The really funny thing is they seem completely late to the bandwagons too- they’ll only make a bold statement about a cause when they are 100% certain it’s got majority support anyway. 
 I suppose we shouldn’t expect any better from the couple who were apparently thinking how drained and put upon they were when they were meeting orphans.

Purely on a real estate note, I don’t believe even a rich person would casually enter into buying a house valued at close to half their net worth. If he had no interest in staying why put so much money into bricks? I think it might be some kind of tax dodge/swindle myself - there was all that mystery who actually bought it - either that or M wants it in the divorce. From what we have seen on the site though it was sold at a loss to them. Which is _interesting_…



papertiger said:


> She thinks M's masterplan is to have PC and PW debarred from the throne so H can be Regent. You can be sure there'd be a revolution and a republic before that happens.


I think at least one of them has been watching kind hearts and coronets on repeat!
I’ll have to watch the video but it doesn’t sound very likely to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They should have cancelled this show.
Life-size statue???   Oh dear.  Wonder which age of Diana they chose?









						Princes William and Harry slash Diana ceremony guest list
					

The brothers were due to put aside their bitter rift to host an elaborate ceremony on July 1 at Kensington Palace, Princess Diana's former home, on what would have been her 60th birthday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Ever since they announced plans for the statue it has been bedevilled by problems. Originally it was hoped to be unveiled in 2017.
But there were delays over the design and, according to insiders, differences of opinion over what period in Diana’s life the statue should represent. 
Such divisions led the committee set up after her death in 1997 in order to find a suitable way to celebrate her life to conclude that a statue would be wrong.
At the time, her family expressed reservations that no sculptor had ever properly ‘caught’ Diana. There were also real fears that a statue would become a shrine.  
Those fears have not subsided but with the passing years, *William and Harry felt the time was right for a life-size figure. *They sought private donations to fund the statue, which has been created by artist Ian Rank-Broadley, whose portrait of the Queen appears on all British coins. 
The statue was finished in 2018, but Harry and Meghan’s wedding and Megxit delayed the unveiling.
Donors including Elton John and David Furnish will now be invited to September’s party along with other friends and family – but there is no guarantee Harry will be there._


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> All the cool kids have one




That's probably how MoM makes her stash-away money by dancing for Harry everyday in the comfort of their own home. Now I wonder if they have a 50 shades of gray kinda dungeon underneath the bazillion bathrooms


----------



## marietouchet

DM says next Thursday garden ceremony will be downscaled due to covid. 
Was supposed to be 100 friends of Diana
Now will be W&H and Spencer relatives
The big shindig is rescheduled to September

that’s one way to figure out what to do with the sticky wicket


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> That's probably how MoM makes her stash-away money by dancing for Harry everyday in the comfort of their own home. Now I wonder if they have a 50 shades of gray kinda dungeon underneath the bazillion bathrooms



Oh hell, I'd believe she has him dancing on the pole for her enjoyment. She's got him where she wants him, she doesn't need to put in much effort anymore.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> DM says next Thursday garden ceremony will be downscaled due to covid.
> Was supposed to be 100 friends of Diana
> Now will be W&H and Spencer relatives
> *The big shindig is rescheduled to September*
> 
> that’s one way to figure out what to do with the sticky wicket



He's unlikely to come back for the September party. Clever. Are they televising the one next week?

If I were one of the Spencer relatives I'd feel awkward being there with two brothers who apparently despise each other.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Uh huh. Who's telling a lie now


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Princes William and Harry slash Diana ceremony guest list
> 
> 
> The brothers were due to put aside their bitter rift to host an elaborate ceremony on July 1 at Kensington Palace, Princess Diana's former home, on what would have been her 60th birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Ever since they announced plans for the statue it has been bedevilled by problems. Originally it was hoped to be unveiled in 2017.
> But there were delays over the design and, according to insiders, differences of opinion over what period in Diana’s life the statue should represent.
> Such divisions led the committee set up after her death in 1997 in order to find a suitable way to celebrate her life to conclude that a statue would be wrong.
> At the time, her family expressed reservations that no sculptor had ever properly ‘caught’ Diana. There were also real fears that a statue would become a shrine.
> Those fears have not subsided but with the passing years, William and Harry felt the time was right for a life-size figure. They sought private donations to fund the statue, which has been created by artist Ian Rank-Broadley, whose portrait of the Queen appears on all British coins.
> The statue was finished in 2018, but Harry and Meghan’s wedding and Megxit delayed the unveiling.
> Donors including Elton John and David Furnish will now be invited to September’s party along with other friends and family – but there is no guarantee Harry will be there._


"They sought private donations to fund the statue, which has been created by artist Ian Rank-Broadley." 

They sought private donations because... ?


----------



## Sol Ryan

EverSoElusive said:


> There's a stripper pole for real?



yeah.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
					

The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




from the summary:

*EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's cut-price palace: Pair got a $9.5m mortgage to buy $14.7m Santa Barbara home known as 'The Chateau' with library, arcade and stripper pole from Russian tycoon Sergey Grishin who wanted $34m for it a few years ago*

*The Sussexes bought the 14,563-sqft home for $14,650,000 on June 18 in the upscale Montecito neighborhood*
*The home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house*
*The mansion, known as 'The Chateau', was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25million in 2009*
*The seller is thought to be Russian tycoon Sergey Grishin, who is also the former owner of a different California estate known as the Scarface mansion because it appeared in the 1983 Al Pacino movie*


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm having the newest Lady CC on in the background while catching up on some work, and I nearly choked on my own spit. She just said that one of her sources told her that they heard Raptor say with their own ears "We're one plane crash away from the throne".



This sounds like exactly what I would expect her to say & think; I’m surprised that you’re surprised.



EverSoElusive said:


> That's probably how MoM makes her stash-away money by dancing for Harry everyday in the comfort of their own home. Now I wonder if they have a 50 shades of gray kinda dungeon underneath the bazillion bathrooms



She probably dances for her only fans page- didn’t I read somewhere on this thread that their house was available to rent to certain _film_ companies?


----------



## kipp

Well, even the Washington Post is writing about Harry's lies: 
(also, sorry that the article is behind a paywall but the title tells it all)


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html


----------



## csshopper

Sol Ryan said:


> yeah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It used to be 14M, that was last year before CA real estate went crazy, wacko, off the charts. Current information on line as of a minute ago is: $19,199,900. 00 USD

9 bd19 ba18,671 sqft
*765 Rockbridge Rd, Montecito, CA 93108*
Sold: $14,650,000Sold on 06/18/20Zestimate®: $19,199,900


Est. refi payment: $62,742/moRefinance your loan


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm having the newest Lady CC on in the background while catching up on some work, and I nearly choked on my own spit. She just said that one of her sources told her that they heard Raptor say with their own ears "We're one plane crash away from the throne".


This is putting me into a panic!  I hate the thought!!! I’d have a heartache and pass out if anything happens to W&K!!  What does that mean exactly?  If Prince G, is to young to become king (not sure what age is to young) would that make H king?!?!?  I’m panicking! I always try to think positive!  This won’t happen but had to share my feelings.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> There's a stripper pole for real?


Yep. Was part of the real estate article.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> Yep. Was part of the real estate article.



The pole would have been useful if she was practising for a role in Hustlers


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should have cancelled this show.
> Life-size statue???   Oh dear.  Wonder which age of Diana they chose?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princes William and Harry slash Diana ceremony guest list
> 
> 
> The brothers were due to put aside their bitter rift to host an elaborate ceremony on July 1 at Kensington Palace, Princess Diana's former home, on what would have been her 60th birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Ever since they announced plans for the statue it has been bedevilled by problems. Originally it was hoped to be unveiled in 2017.
> But there were delays over the design and, according to insiders, differences of opinion over what period in Diana’s life the statue should represent.
> Such divisions led the committee set up after her death in 1997 in order to find a suitable way to celebrate her life to conclude that a statue would be wrong.
> At the time, her family expressed reservations that no sculptor had ever properly ‘caught’ Diana. There were also real fears that a statue would become a shrine.
> Those fears have not subsided but with the passing years, *William and Harry felt the time was right for a life-size figure. *They sought private donations to fund the statue, which has been created by artist Ian Rank-Broadley, whose portrait of the Queen appears on all British coins.
> The statue was finished in 2018, but Harry and Meghan’s wedding and Megxit delayed the unveiling.
> Donors including Elton John and David Furnish will now be invited to September’s party along with other friends and family – but there is no guarantee Harry will be there._


Wonder how much H donated towards the statue?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> Wonder how much H donated towards the statue?



You mean how much he skimmed from it?


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Wonder how much H donated towards the statue?



He assumed Charles would pay his share.


----------



## gracekelly

Princes William and Harry slash Diana ceremony guest list
					

The brothers were due to put aside their bitter rift to host an elaborate ceremony on July 1 at Kensington Palace, Princess Diana's former home, on what would have been her 60th birthday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Just what I thought might happen.  Private with family and a few friends.  I believe that this was Wiliiam's decision and Harry had nothing to say about it.  Do we even know if he really intends to be there?


----------



## Hermes Zen

While reading the DM article on the Diana Statue. Saw this article. Don’t know how reliable of a tabloid source but was waiting for this to happen after CT’s recent publicity blowup. She’s been Markled! 


Meghan Markle ‘Cancels’ Chrissy Teigen Over Courtney Stodden Bullying Claims









						Meghan Markle ‘Cancels’ Chrissy Teigen Over Bullying Claims, Despite Model Playing Mediator Between Duchess & Kim Kardashian
					

Radar has learned Meghan has "ghosted" Chrissy in the wake of controversy.




					radaronline.com
				





Sent from my iPhone


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Well, even the Washington Post is writing about Harry's lies:
> (also, sorry that the article is behind a paywall but the title tells it all)
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html



It is encouraging but there’s still a long way to go. The author is the Post’s London correspondent and I think that makes a difference.

I enjoy reading the comments. As recently as a few weeks ago they were mostly H&M defenders in the Post. Today is just the opposite. Only a handful of devout stans trying their hardest to respond to the hundreds of negative comments about Meghan and Harry. It almost gives me hope.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> He's unlikely to come back for the September party. Clever. Are they televising the one next week?
> 
> If I were one of the Spencer relatives I'd feel awkward being there with two brothers who apparently despise each other.



The Spencers were the only ones in the photo from Archie's christening - the one with secret godparents. They are well aware of any issues that Harry has had, Earl Spencer was rather much of a momma lion to the boys after Diana died - Spencer's eulogy at her funeral was very angry at the BRF (Charles, how they treated Diana ... )

BUT, dont forget it was Earl Spencer who introduced Bashir to Diana. Bashir told him a bunch of nonsense (lies) designed to get the interview. And Earl Spencer kept quiet for over 20 years about the lies, though he kept meticulous notes of the Bashir conversation. 

So, Harry may have got some of his temperament from his mother's side of the family and possibly have sought his uncle's advice about the (nasty) BRF.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> While reading the DM article on the Diana Statue. Saw this article. Don’t know how reliable of a tabloid source but was waiting for this to happen after CT’s recent publicity blowup. She’s been Markled!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘Cancels’ Chrissy Teigen Over Courtney Stodden Bullying Claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘Cancels’ Chrissy Teigen Over Bullying Claims, Despite Model Playing Mediator Between Duchess & Kim Kardashian
> 
> 
> Radar has learned Meghan has "ghosted" Chrissy in the wake of controversy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone


I don't know if it's reliable, since it says Teigen was courting Methane, whereas a few months back, I think I read the reverse. It sure is funny! 

What's up with Methane and her special bonds and sweet nods? Quite revolting.
“_Chrissy was genuinely touched after Meghan reached out to her offering her condolences after the death of her infant son. She felt a special bond with her since they had both lost their babies, as Meghan suffered a miscarriage," the insider says._

Never was a truer word said...
_While it seemed *they shared many of the same values in life, *Teigen’s gnarly public outing about her bullying past caused Markle to recall any future relationship she planned on developing with the supermodel._

So she is willing to show humane compassion only when it's good for her image. Spineless much?
“_While Meghan privately acknowledges the courage it took for Chrissy to publicly apologize to the world, she also accepts that she can’t be associated with her from *an image standpoint*,” another source tells Radar. “*It goes against her inner humanity core. *There’s too much on the line of what she’s building, and all the good she sees her and Harry doing in the world.”_

That's because there are already too many mean girls in her circle. Methane and Teigen would be fighting to be top b*tch.
_“To put it bluntly, there’s no room for a ‘mean girl’ in Meghan’s close-knit circle of friends," adds another insider._


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Gifts have to be screened by security
> It would have been someone's job to prep her about that .. maybe she did not listen or did not take the time for the briefing


ITA. I mentioned in a previous post that she had bragged during an interview that she carried binders of info around to learn all about being a royal. Then I suggested that she should've read the books instead of expecting to learn by osmosis.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> The Spencers were the only ones in the photo from Archie's christening - the one with secret godparents. They are well aware of any issues that Harry has had, Earl Spencer was rather much of a momma lion to the boys after Diana died - Spencer's eulogy at her funeral was very angry at the BRF (Charles, how they treated Diana ... )
> 
> BUT, dont forget it was Earl Spencer who introduced Bashir to Diana. Bashir told him a bunch of nonsense (lies) designed to get the interview. And Earl Spencer kept quiet for over 20 years about the lies, though he kept meticulous notes of the Bashir conversation.
> 
> So, Harry may have got some of his temperament from his mother's side of the family and possibly have sought his uncle's advice about the (nasty) BRF.


I'm not sure that's true about Charles Spencer being a momma lion to the boys after her death.

He was all talk and condemnation towards the BRF at the funeral, but didn't he go back to South Africa and in fact, rarely saw the boys?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> *when you think about the generation the queen and her husband came from, it was really pretty significant that they accepted a thrice-married American WOC to the family.*  I think after the Diana debacle the queen didn't really have much choice.  but still - they didn't have to give the huge wedding, etc.
> And what was their repayment?  A huge slap in the face from their beloved grandchild.  He should really be ashamed of himself.  But no - he thinks he and his Wife are So Important.


ITA. If anyone had behaved like MM (several husbands, yacht girl, etc.) during my HS years (long, long, long time ago), she would've been called a tramp so, I find HM, who is 21 years my senior, very open-minded for her age.


----------



## rhyvin

jelliedfeels said:


> Hey! The predator has much better hair and has the decency to stay invisible most of the time
> She’s really more like a xenomorph always shrieking and lashing out.
> 
> She wants to be a [xenomorph] Queen


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> The pole would have been useful if she was practising for a role in Hustlers



Her _ambition_ and life story would fit right in with the central theme of that movie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lilibet’s b-cert and H&M names used !!


Prince Harry did use his HRH title on the birth certificate of his newly born daughter Lillibet Diana, it has been revealed.

Meanwhile, Meghan Markle's name is written as her birth name 'Rachel Markle' - with Meghan being her middle name.









						Prince Harry styles himself as 'HRH' on Lilibet's birth certificate
					

The birth certificate, uncovered by US news site TMZ , has Prince Harry's last name as 'HRH' and his first as 'The Duke of Sussex'.



					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Sent from my iPhone


----------



## Hermes Zen

OMGosh!!! As you know I’m not a fan of H but seriously this sounds frightening!  Unauthorized car chase at LAX. FBI will get involved.

Do not know if it’s related to H departure to UK or coincidence. More to come. 
PRINCE PANIC *Prince Harry safety scare as cops chase car on LAX runway just as Duke arrives to fly to UK for Diana statue unveiling*

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15389719/prince-harry-lax-car-chase/


----------



## Jayne1

He just had to live in CA didn’t he.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Jayne1 said:


> He just had to live in CA didn’t he.


I bet he was thinking just that!


----------



## Sol Ryan

Hermes Zen said:


> Lilibet’s b-cert and H&M names used !!
> 
> 
> Prince Harry did use his HRH title on the birth certificate of his newly born daughter Lillibet Diana, it has been revealed.
> 
> Meanwhile, Meghan Markle's name is written as her birth name 'Rachel Markle' - with Meghan being her middle name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry styles himself as 'HRH' on Lilibet's birth certificate
> 
> 
> The birth certificate, uncovered by US news site TMZ , has Prince Harry's last name as 'HRH' and his first as 'The Duke of Sussex'.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone


You’ve got to be kidding me… how is that okay here?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sol Ryan said:


> You’ve got to be kidding me… how is that okay here?


Yep, agree. Didn’t Archies b-cert mother’s name get changed afterwards? Maybe this time it will be Fathers name that will get updated.   IDK


----------



## Chanbal

Moir usually writes good articles. I'm too tired, I'll read this one tomorrow. 











						The debt Prince Harry can never repay to the Royal Bank of Dad
					

JAN MOIR: Prince Harry is back in the UK (or will be very soon), returning to the scene of the crime and quarantining at Frogmore before the unveiling of the Princess Diana statue next week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> "They sought private donations to fund the statue, which has been created by artist Ian Rank-Broadley."
> 
> They sought private donations because... ?


The superrich don’t spend their own money after all! They probably could’ve paid for it with petty cash but it’s nice for Elton to get his name on a plaque.
I bet Charles was grinding his teeth at the thought of immortalising his much more popular wife  & facing down her gimlet eye every time he went to that house.  I personally think the whole thing has got a Robert Browning vibe to it. 


Sol Ryan said:


> yeah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's paid $14.7M for their new estate
> 
> 
> The estate in Montecito is 14,563 square feet and features amenities including a gym, sauna, wine cellar, theater and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from the summary:
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's cut-price palace: Pair got a $9.5m mortgage to buy $14.7m Santa Barbara home known as 'The Chateau' with library, arcade and stripper pole from Russian tycoon Sergey Grishin who wanted $34m for it a few years ago*
> 
> *The Sussexes bought the 14,563-sqft home for $14,650,000 on June 18 in the upscale Montecito neighborhood*
> *The home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house*
> *The mansion, known as 'The Chateau', was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25million in 2009*
> *The seller is thought to be Russian tycoon Sergey Grishin, who is also the former owner of a different California estate known as the Scarface mansion because it appeared in the 1983 Al Pacino movie*


A library- well at least we know where all those copies of the bench are! 
I’m not an expert but this house sounds like a total white elephant to me. All in cheap brick with a load of big dark rooms filled with tat like pinball machines & pool tables no one uses.


csshopper said:


> It used to be 14M, that was last year before CA real estate went crazy, wacko, off the charts. Current information on line as of a minute ago is: $19,199,900. 00 USD
> 
> 9 bd19 ba18,671 sqft
> *765 Rockbridge Rd, Montecito, CA 93108*
> Sold: $14,650,000Sold on 06/18/20Zestimate®: $19,199,900
> 
> 
> Est. refi payment: $62,742/moRefinance your loan


Well you know realtor’s estimates - they wanted 34m and sold it for 14ish for it after all. Clearly they want you to believe this couple  can sell anything  
.





Hermes Zen said:


> OMGosh!!! As you know I’m not a fan of H but seriously this sounds frightening!  Unauthorized car chase at LAX. FBI will get involved.
> 
> Do not know if it’s related to H departure to UK or coincidence. More to come.
> PRINCE PANIC *Prince Harry safety scare as cops chase car on LAX runway just as Duke arrives to fly to UK for Diana statue unveiling*
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15389719/prince-harry-lax-car-chase/


Not to be glib, but I thought this sort of stuff happened all the time in America especially Cali. I think it happens more than they’d like us to know in airports generally with all the  cartels. Its got nothing to do with princeish no doubt. Unless…. I wouldn’t be surprised if Haz hired the guy to do it so he could make a point about how much danger he is in no doubt.


----------



## LVLoveaffair

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the couple is adding more titles to their royal portfolio...





Chanbal said:


> It looks like the couple is adding more titles to their royal portfolio...





purseinsanity said:


> $606,000 A DAY?!!?  Holy $hit.  Puts into perspective how overrated/unworthy these two A holes are.


wow! I’m just being educated. I had no idea. I was almost feeling sorry for them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s so funny as a lot of aristocracy have big country estates. Private land. Miles away from anywhere. In remote, little known areas of the world all over the U.K. and the world. Lots of public school kids bond for life and visit  their friends for long leisurely stays in each other’s remote homes. There’s a whole world of balls, polo, hunting and other hobbies that are all but completely  unknown to press and public. isn’t it weird that Harry apparently has no connections to anyone like that despite his background? He didn’t know any old polo friends or distant cousins or the Eton lads …. No one. No old friends. No past. Instead the logical thing to do was to go to LA and live off a celebrity he apparently barely knows in his shining future with raptor…..



I don't think we even have to look that far. Wasn't Margaret quoted saying "We have enough houses, if you don't want to be seen"? 

Also, these poor haunted individuals managed to keep their honeymoon location a secret, how come? Not that I'm too worried, she'll reveal it in due time if she needs some interview fodder


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> This sounds like exactly what I would expect her to say & think; I’m surprised that you’re surprised.



I wouldn't put it past her to think it. But SAY IT OUT LOUD IN COMPANY? Who in their right mind would think that would endear them to anyone, and how come there's no fear it would get back to W & K or the palace?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> This is putting me into a panic!  I hate the thought!!! I’d have a heartache and pass out if anything happens to W&K!!  What does that mean exactly?  If Prince G, is to young to become king (not sure what age is to young) would that make H king?!?!?  I’m panicking! I always try to think positive!  This won’t happen but had to share my feelings.



Well, I understood it as if the whole family were to be on that plane. But in case a minor George was to inherit the throne, he'd still be king, but an adult would be regent until his 18th birthday. Usually that would be the next in line (Harry), but rumour has it the palace has taken precautions so it would be Anne or Edward.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> While reading the DM article on the Diana Statue. Saw this article. Don’t know how reliable of a tabloid source but was waiting for this to happen after CT’s recent publicity blowup. She’s been Markled!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘Cancels’ Chrissy Teigen Over Courtney Stodden Bullying Claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘Cancels’ Chrissy Teigen Over Bullying Claims, Despite Model Playing Mediator Between Duchess & Kim Kardashian
> 
> 
> Radar has learned Meghan has "ghosted" Chrissy in the wake of controversy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com



Of course that is because Raptor is completely opposed to bullying, not because it could tarnish her "brand" by association


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The Spencers were the only ones in the photo from Archie's christening - the one with secret godparents. They are well aware of any issues that Harry has had, Earl Spencer was rather much of a momma lion to the boys after Diana died - Spencer's eulogy at her funeral was very angry at the BRF (Charles, how they treated Diana ... )



Wait, that Spencer who sold her to Bashir and who wouldn't let her live on his estate when she asked to? Asking for a friend.


----------



## eunaddict

needlv said:


> Just a reminder of how much Charles shelled out for MM’s wardrobe.  And look at the comparison of other royals across Europe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle spent more on her wardrobe in 2018 than other royals
> 
> 
> The eye-watering sum - £406,662.55 - is revealed in new research from royal fashion experts at UFO No More, who totted up the amount spent by British royals and their European neighbours.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> all that money and MM’s fashion sense was hit and miss (mostly miss)



I'm definitely surprised Sophie ranked that high up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Found a job for M! - understudy for Queen of Disney (not sure why this one came up in my feed (algorithm)). 



"Frame this one next to your bed, so everyday when you wake-up you can see my face" 

"Mirror mirror...?"


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> “To put it bluntly, there’s no room for a ‘mean girl’ in Meghan’s close-knit circle of friends," adds another insider


NM


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who in their right mind would think that would endear them to anyone



Who in their right mind would do many of the things they’ve done? She’s not afraid of it getting back to W & K because she knows she could deny ever saying it.


----------



## 1LV

^^^
I think the bottom line is she doesn’t care what anyone thinks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> ^^^
> I think the bottom line is she doesn’t care what anyone thinks.



I mean, my motto is "Your opinion of me is no concern of mine", but I still put in minimal effort to not appear like a complete psycho.


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGosh!!! As you know I’m not a fan of H but seriously this sounds frightening!  Unauthorized car chase at LAX. FBI will get involved.
> 
> Do not know if it’s related to H departure to UK or coincidence. More to come.
> PRINCE PANIC *Prince Harry safety scare as cops chase car on LAX runway just as Duke arrives to fly to UK for Diana statue unveiling*
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15389719/prince-harry-lax-car-chase/


is that a Cadillac SUV?  gas guzzler?

edit to say - I wouldn't care much what vehicle he gets driven in if the would not preach to all of us on how to live


----------



## CarryOn2020

So thirsty!  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  *stomps feet, throws plates*  Look at meeeee.

*Prince Harry 'wanted to appear on James Corden's chat show for YEARS' and the royal contacted HIM about doing explosive interview because he wanted to 'cheer people up', producer reveals*

*James Corden and team have revealed how they landed Prince Harry interview *
*Explained Duke was continually offering to 'do something' on the show for years*
*Said Harry contacted team when LA was coming out of lockdown in 2020 *
*Revealed he said: 'We should plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up'*
*








						Prince Harry 'offered to appear on James Corden's chat show for years'
					

According to The Hollywood Reporter, James Corden and his team said the Duke of Sussex, 36, contacted them about appearing on the Late Late Show earlier this year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




Limo in LA black van to pick him up at Heathrow says what we think of him no luxury laid on here


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, my motto is "Your opinion of me is no concern of mine", but I still put in minimal effort to not appear like a complete psycho.


Because you’re not a psycho!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Moir usually writes good articles. I'm too tired, I'll read this one tomorrow.
> View attachment 5119738
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The debt Prince Harry can never repay to the Royal Bank of Dad
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Prince Harry is back in the UK (or will be very soon), returning to the scene of the crime and quarantining at Frogmore before the unveiling of the Princess Diana statue next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I read that one twice … 
I think that Moir is trying to imply that it was Charles, not H&M, that paid the 2.4 M pounds for Frogmore , I am Reading BETWEEN THE LINES here
Moir suggests that H&M got approx 2M pounds in the first six months of 2020, and that number roughly corresponds to the Frogmore debt

i read somewhere else that H&M have paid the lease on FC through about April 2022, that is, they are not planning any long term use of FC , they will be outta there for good in 9 months


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So thirsty!  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  *stomps feet, throws plates*  Look at meeeee.
> 
> *Prince Harry 'wanted to appear on James Corden's chat show for YEARS' and the royal contacted HIM about doing explosive interview because he wanted to 'cheer people up', producer reveals*
> 
> *James Corden and team have revealed how they landed Prince Harry interview *
> *Explained Duke was continually offering to 'do something' on the show for years*
> *Said Harry contacted team when LA was coming out of lockdown in 2020 *
> *Revealed he said: 'We should plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up'*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'offered to appear on James Corden's chat show for years'
> 
> 
> According to The Hollywood Reporter, James Corden and his team said the Duke of Sussex, 36, contacted them about appearing on the Late Late Show earlier this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Yeah but all that fails to talk to the key link …

the interview was on CBS and THE DEAL may have included a bit for Corden
so, I think the Corden appearance would not have happened without Oprah

one thing more - Corden was taped before the loss of the military honors, so, the tone with James was not as vindictive/vengeful as it was with Oprah


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I read that one twice …
> I think that Moir is trying to imply that it was Charles, not H&M, that paid the 2.4 M pounds for Frogmore , I am Reading BETWEEN THE LINES here
> Moir suggests that H&M got approx 2M pounds in the first six months of 2020, and that number roughly corresponds to the Frogmore debt
> 
> i read somewhere else that H&M have paid the lease on FC through about April 2022, that is, they are not planning any long term use of FC , they will be outta there for good in 9 months



I've always assumed Charles paid, but I do believe the 2 millions were on top of that. He also paid them more than William and Kate (not only the next heir to the throne but also a family with three kids) the year they moved to Frog Cott because this couple of millionaires couldn't be expected to dig into their own money.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> is that a Cadillac SUV?  gas guzzler?


They are required for celebs in California, LOL, how else can you haul around your posse ??? the state that is mandating no ICE cars be sold in a few years 
ICE is Internal Combustion Engine ie a gas car


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> They are required for celebs in California, LOL, how else can you haul around your posse ??? the state that is mandating no ICE cars be sold in a few years
> ICE is Internal Combustion Engine ie a gas car


I think that law is several years away but true, CA is the "leader" in environmental stuff related to cars.  that's why we pay so much for gas


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I think that law is several years away but true, CA is the "leader" in environmental stuff related to cars.  that's why we pay so much for gas



Actually, we pay so much in gas thanks to insane taxes added to the price per gallon. Plus the *mystery surcharge* that they were supposed to investigate but never heard another word about it.

In CA, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles . It's not too far away!

Interestingly enough, the local news this morning reported about the car on the runway at LAX but there was zero mention of Harry.

Of course Harry chased after TV time with James Corden. Harry is just as thirsty as Meghan.

Is it just me or does every TV appearance and press quote make Harry seem really dim and generally clueless?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Actually, we pay so much in gas thanks to insane taxes added to the price per gallon. Plus the *mystery surcharge* that they were supposed to investigate but never heard another word about it.
> 
> In CA, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles . It's not too far away!
> 
> Interestingly enough, the local news this morning reported about the car on the runway at LAX but there was zero mention of Harry.
> 
> Of course Harry chased after TV time with James Corden. Harry is just as thirsty as Meghan.
> 
> Is it just me or does every TV appearance and press quote make Harry seem really dim and generally clueless?


fourteen years away for that law and they would have to exclude used cars.  
No it's not just you.  I think Harry seems to be not very bright.  I can easily imagine M leading him around by the nose.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> *Is it just me or does every TV appearance and press quote make Harry seem really dim and generally clueless?*


As the saying goes, he never was the sharpest tool in the box. Often times, he covered up his ignorance by playing the clown. He craved and welcomed  attention while apparently unable to discern between good and bad publicity, but seemingly enjoying being called the bad boy prince.


----------



## sdkitty

behind a pay wall but a US media outlet reporting something that's not worshipping H&M  - Daily Beast
Prince Charles Will Not Stay Silent Over Prince Harry’s Explosive Allegations (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So thirsty!  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  *stomps feet, throws plates*  Look at meeeee.
> 
> *Prince Harry 'wanted to appear on James Corden's chat show for YEARS' and the royal contacted HIM about doing explosive interview because he wanted to 'cheer people up', producer reveals*
> 
> *James Corden and team have revealed how they landed Prince Harry interview *
> *Explained Duke was continually offering to 'do something' on the show for years*
> *Said Harry contacted team when LA was coming out of lockdown in 2020 *
> *Revealed he said: 'We should plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up'*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'offered to appear on James Corden's chat show for years'
> 
> 
> According to The Hollywood Reporter, James Corden and his team said the Duke of Sussex, 36, contacted them about appearing on the Late Late Show earlier this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Harry and Meghan were sitting at home waiting for Hollywood to call... _and they never did. _


----------



## Sophisticatted

General responses to various things said thus far: I read a rumor that Charles offered a quiet estate for the couple as a wedding gift; they refused.  

The HRH on the new birth certificate, would this be considered a “diplomatic title” in this case.  I remember that Harry, if classified as a diplomat, would have to divorce in Great Britain, thus his diplomatic title protects him from Meghan’s machinations in case of divorce.  Perhaps it would also come into play during custody?  If true, I wouldn’t begrudge it in this instance.  It would protect him and the children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Yeah but all that fails to talk to the key link …
> 
> the interview was on CBS and THE DEAL may have included a bit for Corden
> so, I think the Corden appearance would not have happened without Oprah
> 
> one thing more - Corden was taped before the loSS of the military honors, so, the tone with James was not as vindictive/vengeful as it was with Oprah



The key for me was that _Hazz contacted_ Corden. 
The arrogance of this guy oozes out of every syllable.  

_Now his team have spoken on a video panel during a FYC event about how Prince Harry offered for years to 'do something' for the show. 

The Hollywood Reporter told how producer Ben Winston said: '[Harry] said, "We're coming out of lockdown, I'm in L.A., do you think we should *plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up in a way".'*

The team continued to explain that Harry had since  continually offered to 'do something' on the Late, Late Show.

*After the Duke got in contact *with the team in spring 2020, Winston said: 'Obviously, as soon as you say something like that to us and our team, our brains go crazy.' 

During the wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Prince Harry decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'. 

Describing the couple's decision he said: '*It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down.* It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.

And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages, Harry appeared to know what was coming and said: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing.

'As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], *I will never walk away'*._


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The key for me was that _Hazz contacted_ Corden.
> The arrogance of this guy oozes out of every syllable.
> 
> _Now his team have spoken on a video panel during a FYC event about how Prince Harry offered for years to 'do something' for the show.
> 
> The Hollywood Reporter told how producer Ben Winston said: '[Harry] said, "We're coming out of lockdown, I'm in L.A., do you think we should *plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up in a way".'*
> 
> The team continued to explain that Harry had since  continually offered to 'do something' on the Late, Late Show.
> 
> *After the Duke got in contact *with the team in spring 2020, Winston said: 'Obviously, as soon as you say something like that to us and our team, our brains go crazy.'
> 
> During the wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Prince Harry decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'.
> 
> Describing the couple's decision he said: '*It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down.* It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.
> 
> And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages, Harry appeared to know what was coming and said: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing.
> 
> 'As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], *I will never walk away'*._


LOL
his life is public service?
what service?
making people smile? delivering a few sandwiches?


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> but I still put in minimal effort to not appear like a complete psycho



I’m afraid that ship has sailed for our dear MM…

After seeing her writing notes on bananas, and smiling while everyone around her is glum/sad, I’m sure many consider her to be a bit loony.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*After the Duke got in contact with the team **in **spring 2020*, Winston said: 'Obviously, as soon as you say something like that to us and our team, our brains go crazy.' _



Wow, this stands out. He first contacted the Corden show about appearing as a guest as soon as he arrived in America, the same time Covid-19 was spreading throughout the world and everyone was living in fear and uncertainty.

Talk about not being able to read the room. I'm glad the show put him off for several months. They saved his royal @ss from looking as tone deaf and oblivious as he really is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Wow, this stands out. He first contacted the Corden show about appearing as a guest as soon as he arrived in America, the same time Covid-19 was spreading throughout the world and everyone was living in fear and uncertainty.
> 
> Talk about not being able to read the room. I'm glad the show put him off for several months. They saved his royal @ss from looking as tone deaf and oblivious as he really is.



Took the Corden/Hazz team that long to come up with “_something fun  to almost cheer everybody up in a way". _
Their best was mocking Prince Phillip and revealing his kid’s first words were vulgar. What a jerk!


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> They saved his royal @ss from looking as tone deaf and oblivious as he really is.



… a common occurrence throughout his life, hence, his inability to think for himself.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Took the Corden/Hazz team that long to come up with “_something fun to almost cheer everybody up in a way". _



It is absolutely hilarious that they thought people locked down at home would be ‘cheered up’ by them.


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> Actually, we pay so much in gas thanks to insane taxes added to the price per gallon. Plus the *mystery surcharge* that they were supposed to investigate but never heard another word about it.
> 
> In CA, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles . It's not too far away!
> 
> Interestingly enough, the local news this morning reported about the car on the runway at LAX but there was zero mention of Harry.
> 
> Of course Harry chased after TV time with James Corden. Harry is just as thirsty as Meghan.
> 
> Is it just me or does every TV appearance and press quote make Harry seem really dim and generally clueless?


Not just you. I think it's "Reality TV" at its most genuine: he IS really dim and generally clueless.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Not just you. I think it's "Reality TV" at its most genuine: he IS really dim and generally clueless.


really when you think about it this way, in addition to all the greed and misery, he must be an embarrassment to his family....such a fool. 
of course, Charles looked kinda silly too when he wrote to camilla he wanted to be her tampon LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> really when you think about it this way, in addition to all the greed and misery, he must be an embarrassment to his family....such a fool
> of course, *Charles looked kinda silly too when he wrote to camilla he wanted to be her tampon* LOL



Ugh, if that was a typical example of his "sexy talk" it's a wonder the man was ever able to get a woman in his bed more than once. He is so lucky he was born a prince. He doesn't have what it takes to rise up from nothing. Had he been born a commoner I could see him living a quiet life, maybe spending years doing historical research in a library, and barely being noticed by his supervisors.


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> I think the bottom line is she doesn’t care what anyone thinks.



You can do that if the universe revolves around you.


----------



## Sol Ryan

kkfiregirl said:


> It is absolutely hilarious that they thought people locked down at home would be ‘cheered up’ by them.



These are the same people who thought people during the pandemic had free time to become counselors…


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> really when you think about it this way, in addition to all the greed and misery, he must be an embarrassment to his family....such a fool.
> of course, Charles looked kinda silly too when he wrote to camilla he wanted to be her tampon LOL



Difference being Charkes' phone was tapped/taped/letters borrowed without him being aware. 

Harry broadcasts to the World almost every week (except what he was paid to broadcast)


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> You can do that if the universe revolves around you.


Or you believe it does.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _'As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], *I will never walk away'*._



Except if "London is a trigger" I'm happy if H stays away.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've always assumed Charles paid, but I do believe the 2 millions were on top of that. He also paid them more than William and Kate (not only the next heir to the throne but also a family with three kids) the year they moved to Frog Cott because this couple of millionaires couldn't be expected to dig into their own money.


Charles paid about 4.5M for Sussexes and Cambridges in early 2020, I dont think there was 2 M for FC and another 2M for H&M personally, that would leave nothing for Cambridges ... 

But Moir does state that she ASSUMED the Sussexes about half the money so only about 2M, they might have got 3M with the Cambridges getting only 1 M, it was the year of COVID and Cambridge expenses were low, so they might have got by on half the usual amount 

But, I dont think C shelled out secretly for the Sussexes beyond the amounts listed in the official disclosure statements

But, I agree with you, Charles paid the FC bill, it was too embarrassing a bill to leave unpaid - he would have squared things on that disaster 

We chatted about this before, how do you spend $2M on reno in such a short period of time ?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Posting to capture here on thread for those that might be interested ... I have no doubt it was H in *first class* sleeping in the sweats or what look like sweats.  Lot of details of the vehicles and costs etc.  

Those on the West Coast and other hotter than hot record breaking heat here in the states, stay cool !


At Heathrow Airport's Terminal Five this afternoon, one traveller from Los Angeles to London told MailOnline that they could have sworn they saw someone that looked like 'Prince Harry in sweats' on board their flight.
The woman, who gave her name as Natalie, said: 'I was sat in business and I woke up after a nap and got up to stretch my legs. I was walking up and down and I could have sworn I saw a guy in first class, in sweats, asleep.
'It might have been him? But then, it might not have been? When do you see a Prince in sweats? I told my friend I saw someone that looked a lot like him, but she did not believe me at all. If it was him, that's crazy. That's the most English thing ever - sharing a flight to London with Prince Harry.'




> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...fly-London-unveiling-statue-mother-Diana.html
> 
> *Prince Harry arrives at Frogmore Cottage for self-isolation before Diana statue unveiling*
> Prince Harry arrived at Frogmore Cottage this afternoon after flying into Britain to begin his five days of self-isolation ahead of attending the unveiling of a statue of his late mother Princess Diana next Thursday.
> The Duke of Sussex landed in time to serve out his 'amber list' quarantine at his former Windsor home before the event on July 1, on what is his first trip back home since his grandfather Prince Philip's funeral ten weeks ago.
> Harry touched down at London Heathrow Airport at 12.38pm today on a Boeing 777-323 on American Airlines flight AA134, which left Los Angeles International Airport last night at about 7pm local time (3am UK time today).
> Later today, a convoy of royal vehicles including a Range Rover left Heathrow with a police escort, with protection officers having earlier been seen parked at the airport in a 2019 Volkswagen Caravelle worth £47,000 new.
> Those arriving in England from amber list countries must normally quarantine for ten days, but can end this early after five days under 'test to release' if they pay for a Covid-19 test on day five, in addition to a test on day two.
> Harry was pictured yesterday evening in a car on the way to the airport in California, as he prepares for what promises to be an emotional visit to unveil the statue of Diana on what would have been her 60th birthday.
> The Duke, 36, was photographed being driven by a chauffeur in a California-registered 2021 Cadillac Escalade which is worth £55,000 new and can do 0-60mph in 5.9 seconds and has a top speed of 130mph.
> His wife Meghan Markle is remaining at their £11million mansion in Montecito with two-year-old Archie and their second child, Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, who was born 21 days ago at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital.
> Next week, Harry will join his brother Prince William at their first meeting since the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral at Windsor Castle on April 17 amid continuing friction following a series of explosive claims in US interviews.
> Confirming basic details about the event following Harry's arrival, a Kensington Palace spokesman said today: 'Prince William and Prince Harry will attend a small event to mark the unveiling of a statue they commissioned of their mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, in the Sunken Garden at Kensington Palace on Thursday, July 1.
> 'In addition to close family of Diana, Princess of Wales, members of the statue committee, the sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley, and garden designer, Pip Morrison, will also be present. Further details about the statue and garden will be provided on July 1.'
> At Heathrow Airport's Terminal Five this afternoon, one traveller from Los Angeles to London told MailOnline that they could have sworn they saw someone that looked like 'Prince Harry in sweats' on board their flight.
> The woman, who gave her name as Natalie, said: 'I was sat in business and I woke up after a nap and got up to stretch my legs. I was walking up and down and I could have sworn I saw a guy in first class, in sweats, asleep.
> 'It might have been him? But then, it might not have been? When do you see a Prince in sweats? I told my friend I saw someone that looked a lot like him, but she did not believe me at all. If it was him, that's crazy. That's the most English thing ever - sharing a flight to London with Prince Harry.'
> Harry did not exit through the main international arrival gate at Terminal Five, and there was no security personnel or commotion at the airport. Very few people were waiting there, and it was mostly sparse and socially distanced.
> Eric Ponte, 48, from Los Angeles, who works in entertainment reporting, was sat in business class and did not see the Prince. He said: 'I adore him so I'm sure I would have recognised him if he was on the flight. I'm on a trip to see family - but if I can get in a peek of Prince Harry then that wouldn't be half bad. He could have been on my flight. I would have loved to have said 'hello'. I think he's fantastic.'
> Alex Newell, 47, from San Diego, who was sat in business class with his wife Clara and his two young children, said: 'I didn't see Harry. But then I wasn't expecting to see him either. It was a very quiet flight. I didn't take any notice of the people around me.' And a woman, who gave her name as Jennifer, said: 'I walked up and down several times and I didn't see him. It's LA - that's just normal. But that's crazy if he was there. Very cool.'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> *Difference being Charkes' phone was tapped/taped/letters borrowed without him being aware.*
> 
> Harry broadcasts to the World almost every week (except what he was paid to broadcast)


I understood it to be a crime when it happened to Charles, and I find it sad that people still ridicule him while ignoring that his rights to privacy were impinged upon.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I understood it to be a crime when it happened to Charles, and I find it sad that people still ridicule him while ignoring that his rights to privacy were impinged upon.



100%


----------



## kkfiregirl

marietouchet said:


> We chatted about this before, how do you spend $2M on reno in such a short period of time ?



You simply buy the most expensive EVERYTHING and hire the most expensive architects/contractors. Even for normal people’s budgets the costs can add up quickly- when you’re spending someone else’s money, it’s easy to overspend.


----------



## Jayne1

kkfiregirl said:


> You simply buy the most expensive EVERYTHING and hire the most expensive architects/contractors. Even for normal people’s budgets the costs can add up quickly- when you’re spending someone else’s money, it’s easy to overspend.


Exactly. Why spend time getting quotes when you can just hire the most expensive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Charles paid about 4.5M for Sussexes and Cambridges in early 2020, I dont think there was 2 M for FC and another 2M for H&M personally, that would leave nothing for Cambridges ...



That was the funds from the Duchy of Cornwall meant to support the Cambridges and Sussexes when they were working royals, though. But nothing could have held Charles from digging into personal funds to pay off Frogmore, and that wouldn't be listed on the papers circulating right now because private.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan and Harry enjoy discussing why they need so much security, Meghan told Oprah "I see the death threats!". Since they're sooo concerned with "death threats", why volunteer to ride along with James Corden? Even if Harry's security detail followed along, isn't that taking an unnecessary risk? Oh wait, they wallow in hypocrisy. And don't you love it when Harry calls London and the British media "toxic" so he and Meghan can come here to the U.S. and lecture us about racism and all their suffering? How can privacy be so important to them when they're the ones that contact anybody with a camera and a microphone to spew a bunch of crap that never makes any sense?


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> The key for me was that _Hazz contacted_ Corden.
> The arrogance of this guy oozes out of every syllable.
> 
> _Now his team have spoken on a video panel during a FYC event about how Prince Harry offered for years to 'do something' for the show.
> 
> The Hollywood Reporter told how producer Ben Winston said: '[Harry] said, "We're coming out of lockdown, I'm in L.A., do you think we should *plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up in a way".'*
> 
> The team continued to explain that Harry had since  continually offered to 'do something' on the Late, Late Show.
> 
> *After the Duke got in contact *with the team in spring 2020, Winston said: 'Obviously, as soon as you say something like that to us and our team, our brains go crazy.'
> 
> During the wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Prince Harry decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'.
> 
> Describing the couple's decision he said: '*It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down.* It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.
> 
> And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages, Harry appeared to know what was coming and said: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing.
> 
> 'As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], *I will never walk away'*._


  Trying to find an utter disgust button.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Apparently the Queen was round  to visit him as soon as he landed blood is thicker than water I guess


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Apparently the Queen was round  to visit him as soon as he landed blood is thicker than water I guess



Or she wanted to lay down the law. But really, how likely is it that a 90+ yo woman visits a guy who just flew in and is quarantining?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> Trying to find an utter disgust button.


Here, try this one.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Meghan and Harry enjoy discussing why they need so much security, Meghan told Oprah "I see the death threats!". Since they're sooo concerned with "death threats", why volunteer to ride along with James Corden? Even if Harry's security detail followed along, isn't that taking an unnecessary risk? Oh wait, they wallow in hypocrisy. And don't you love it when Harry calls London and the British media "toxic" so he and Meghan can come here to the U.S. and lecture us about racism and all their suffering? How can privacy be so important to them when they're the ones that contact anybody with a camera and a microphone to spew a bunch of crap that never makes any sense?


Harry was sitting on the top level of the bus in full view and a perfect target.  He is such an azz.


----------



## Jayne1

Does he need more security than billionaires and rappers with enemies? He's not that important.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Does he need more security than billionaires and rappers with enemies? He's not that important.


Whaddya mean?  According to Meghan, he is only a plane crash away,,,,,


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Apparently the Queen was round  to visit him as soon as he landed blood is thicker than water I guess



SHE went to him? If anything he should go to her (and beg forgiveness).


----------



## lanasyogamama

It kills me that he thinks he’s entertaining.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> SHE went to him? If anything he should go to her (and beg forgiveness).


No way.  He is in quarantine.  She goes there to walk her dogs.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> It kills me that he thinks he’s entertaining.


The only person that will speak to Hazz is he guy delivering his food and that is to ask him where his tip is.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Not 14. Not 16 either. It's a whole fxking 19 bathrooms! You'd think they have 10 kids. Maybe their free range chickens shxt in the bathrooms too


----------



## bellecate

elvisfan4life said:


> Apparently the Queen was round  to visit him as soon as he landed blood is thicker than water I guess


Hopefully to tell him what a donkey’s rear he’s being and to give him a swift quick in his rear.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Not 14. Not 16 either. It's a whole fxking 19 bathrooms! You'd think they have 10 kids. Maybe their free range chickens shxt in the bathrooms too



The idea of the people who own that home lecturing me on how to be environmentally conscious is unfathomable


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here, try this one.
> View attachment 5120413


Thanks, that’ll do.


----------



## jennlt

Sophisticatted said:


> General responses to various things said thus far: I read a rumor that Charles offered a quiet estate for the couple as a wedding gift; they refused.
> 
> The HRH on the new birth certificate, would this be considered a “diplomatic title” in this case.  I remember that Harry, if classified as a diplomat, would have to divorce in Great Britain, thus his diplomatic title protects him from Meghan’s machinations in case of divorce.  Perhaps it would also come into play during custody?  If true, I wouldn’t begrudge it in this instance.  It would protect him and the children.



 He lost his diplomatic status when he called the First Amendment of the U.S. "bonkers"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMG! 


*'The way that bloody woman treated my staff was merciless': Prince William slammed Meghan Markle when he was told everyone has difficult sister-in-laws, while Prince Harry's friends say she 'can be a 500% nightmare', Royal expert ROBERT LACEY reveals*
But those hopes were dashed within minutes of the siblings getting inside the castle and beyond camera vision. They started quarrelling again.

'There they were, at each other's throats as fiercely as ever,' relates one long-time friend with a tired and helpless shrug.

'The rage and anger between those two has grown so incredibly deep. Too many harsh and wounding things have been said.'

So, sadly no. There was no reconciliation, and no brotherly sit-down or 'mini summit' following Prince Philip's funeral on April 17 — as was incorrectly reported by one newspaper.

William and Kate did the family rounds and said goodbye to the Queen and Prince Charles — then went home to their children.

So there's the bad news. The conflict between Diana's two bitterly divided sons does not seem likely to end any time soon.

But here are the happier tidings. The oh-so-unforgiving and unforgetting brothers are surrounded by a network of devoted friends and a few family members who are working seriously to ease the path to a truce.

And their efforts are matched by deliberate and constructive initiatives being think-tanked inside the Palace.

There is a peace plan in action — several plans, in fact.








						Prince William called Meghan Markle her 'that bloody woman'
					

For nearly three years, friends of Prince William and Prince Harry have been despairing over the animosity between the brothers (pictured at Westminster Abbey) writes ROBERT LACEY.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Do go on, we’d love to hear: 
_To be a *royal rebel *is one thing — to be a *royal reject* is quite another. Would Netflix renew the contract of a modern-day Duke and Duchess of Windsor?

I'm told that Harry has been telling friends he would like to reconcile, and is willing to admit some of the missteps he has made._

{BS}


----------



## bag-mania

^ To think that’s the same Robert Lacey whose first edition of the book blamed William for not helping his brother navigate through the difficulties of being royal. Got to give him credit for pandering first to Harry and Meghan fans and now to William fans with the same book.


----------



## LittleStar88

EverSoElusive said:


> Not 14. Not 16 either. It's a whole fxking 19 bathrooms! You'd think they have 10 kids. Maybe their free range chickens shxt in the bathrooms too




Looking at these pictures and all I can think about is the insane amount of money needed for upkeep of that home: Landscaping, housekeeping, electricity cost, water for the pool, lush green lawn, and many toilets (during an epic drought)... Because you know neither of these two lift a finger to maintain that home.


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> ^ To think that’s the same Robert Lacey whose first edition of the book blamed William for not helping his brother navigate through the difficulties of being royal. Got to give him credit for pandering first to Harry and Meghan fans and now to William fans with the same book.



Yeah. I have to say I think both versions of this book are rubbish.


----------



## csshopper

What Lacey is not addressing is the core of the problem, Methane. Until/unless Haz can WORK to dull, subvert, reeducate, stomp on - not sure how to describe it or what would work so am stuggling here- feel free to jump in and bail me out- Methane's sociopathic narcissistic behaviors there is no hope. I don't believe in men "controlling" their wives, but he's got to find the balls to stand up to her. Harry could do handstands, get on bended knee, pile on apologies and one rogue outburst from her like "William is the racist" and it would all blow up. Haz owes his family for generations for having brought her into the family, really hard to see how they are going to overcome it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If you need proof of life


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need proof of life



What we really need is proof of intelligent life, failing which, proof of sentient life at least.


----------



## mellibelly

Interesting that he drives an Escalade. You’d think he’d drive a Tesla or a hybrid since he apparently cares so much about the environment. Not even a Range Rover? I’d put my money on the car being gifted from Cadillac in a deal set up by the Skid Markles. So effing tacky


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did he self park? I’m so confused


----------



## Hermes Zen

I read H was chauffeured in the Caddy SUV.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Interesting that he drives an Escalade. You’d think he’d drive a Tesla or a hybrid since he apparently cares so much about the environment. Not even a Range Rover? I’d put my money on the car being gifted from Cadillac in a deal set up by the Skid Markles. So effing tacky



He is the prince of hypocrisy. I don’t think GM gave them a car because we haven’t seen them shilling for Cadillac _yet_.

If they have their own vehicle I bet it is a lease. They would naturally choose the most expensive option with the least value available.


----------



## gracekelly

I think Robert Lacey is a joke. He has only one gear and it is reverse.   He has gone from being a sugar to a delusional William fan.  Neither stances are believable.  He is desperate for them to reconcile and there is something really odd about it.  Does he believe that writing about his delusions will make it happen?  Harry and William will never reconcile as long as Meghan is in the picture.


----------



## Aimee3

Nm


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think Robert Lacey is a joke. He has only one gear and it is reverse.   He has gone from being a sugar to a delusional William fan.  Neither stances are believable.  He is desperate for them to reconcile and there is something really odd about it.  Does he believe that writing about his delusions will make it happen?  Harry and William will never reconcile as long as Meghan is in the picture.



When the book came out last year I remember wondering if he had a brother he was estranged from. He seems a little too passionate about the subject of the battling brothers.


----------



## Jayne1

Lady C said he did an about face and lifted what she had already said in her book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> there's something creepy about foster and IDL his wife either.  I'm sure she just happened to fall in love with a very wealthy guy


Ah well, can’t complain with good luck   
I’m usually team gold digger in these things actually. I just look at these gross men going wild for 20 year olds and I think ‘oh come on you must have realised this was transactional, stop playing the victim and pay up’
I make an exception with MM, of course, as she’s just so much more malicious than the average grifter. 


bag-mania said:


> Ugh, if that was a typical example of his "sexy talk" it's a wonder the man was ever able to get a woman in his bed more than once. He is so lucky he was born a prince. He doesn't have what it takes to rise up from nothing. Had he been born a commoner I could see him living a quiet life, maybe spending years doing historical research in a library, and barely being noticed by his supervisors.


I don’t see any male Windsor in academia! Even Cambridge has standards when there’s no royal names involved.

In common  life, Charles would work as a parking warden for 50 years, go on rambling holidays with Camilla (who gets 2 weeks in Spain on her own or else) and be a local busybody type straight from the Handforth parish council meeting. 



EverSoElusive said:


> Not 14. Not 16 either. It's a whole fxking 19 bathrooms! You'd think they have 10 kids. Maybe their free range chickens shxt in the bathrooms too



Was this place designed for someone  incontinent? Why do they need their ‘sitting’ capacity to be more than double their sleeping capacity?
I know these two have chronic verbal diarrhoea but even this seems excessive to their needs. 


EverSoElusive said:


> If you need proof of life



That driver looks more like older Steven Seagal than  Harry… he  is ageing in hamster years. 


bag-mania said:


> When the book came out last year I remember wondering if he had a brother he was estranged from. He seems a little too passionate about the subject of the battling brothers.


Maybe, he thinks it’s a dramatic story that he can spin like Shakespeare  
Evidently he’s starting to see where the wind is blowing and that no one feels at all sorry for Ginger or thinks it’s reasonable to expect your brother to do your job for you as well as your own (imagine if we all tried to that at work with our own siblings). 

I just wish the chumps at itv would pick up too as they’ve been cringing and simpering ever since things got so heated with PM. Don’t they realise the average viewer wants to see H horsewhipped with a real horse?


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> SHE went to him? If anything he should go to her (and beg forgiveness).



Pictures driving into frogmore about 5 mins after he arrived


----------



## elvisfan4life

Harry was always the queens fav she went out of her way to Meghan and seemed to adore Archie - she has lost her beloved husband and maybe just wants to see pics of the new baby and Archie but I hope Harry doesn't take advantage of her being vulnerable now


----------



## RAINDANCE

elvisfan4life said:


> Pictures driving into frogmore about 5 mins after he arrived


HMTQ walks her dogs near Frogmore. She has been pictured driving there a lot recently with her new puppies.  In PP's documentary about Windsor Castle he showed the part of the estate near Frogmore that is her favourite. Press lurking for photos obviously got quite a few shots ( of her driving in April) but I would very much doubt she is going to visit him. Why would she anyway. He's doing his 5 days quarantine.


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> HMTQ walks her dogs near Frogmore. She has been pictured driving there a lot recently with her new puppies.  In PP's documentary about Windsor Castle he showed the part of the estate near Frogmore that is her favourite. Press lurking for photos obviously got quite a few shots ( of her driving in April) but I would very much doubt she is going to visit him. Why would she anyway. He's doing his 5 days quarantine.



Because she is his grandmother and misses him? Who knows


----------



## chicinthecity777

elvisfan4life said:


> Because she is his grandmother and misses him? Who knows


Harry cannot mix with others while self-isolating. The Queen did not visit him.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The only person that will speak to Hazz is he guy delivering his food and that is to ask him where his tip is.


We don't tip here, well we do but it's not compulsory


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Posting to capture here on thread for those that might be interested ... I have no doubt it was H in *first class* sleeping in the sweats or what look like sweats.  Lot of details of the vehicles and costs etc.
> 
> Those on the West Coast and other hotter than hot record breaking heat here in the states, stay cool !
> 
> 
> At Heathrow Airport's Terminal Five this afternoon, one traveller from Los Angeles to London told MailOnline that they could have sworn they saw someone that looked like 'Prince Harry in sweats' on board their flight.
> The woman, who gave her name as Natalie, said: 'I was sat in business and I woke up after a nap and got up to stretch my legs. I was walking up and down and I could have sworn I saw a guy in first class, in sweats, asleep.
> 'It might have been him? But then, it might not have been? When do you see a Prince in sweats? I told my friend I saw someone that looked a lot like him, but she did not believe me at all. If it was him, that's crazy. That's the most English thing ever - sharing a flight to London with Prince Harry.'


a 48-year old man "adores" him? OK


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> We don't tip here, well we do but it's not compulsory


it's not required here either but very bad form not to tip - in restaurants anyway - not so sure about food delivery


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Looking at these pictures and all I can think about is the insane amount of money needed for upkeep of that home: Landscaping, housekeeping, electricity cost, water for the pool, lush green lawn, and many toilets (during an epic drought)... Because you know neither of these two lift a finger to maintain that home.


not to mention CA property tax


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate
					

Prince Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties




					www.geo.tv
				



_*Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate*

Prince Harry came under fire it appeared that the Duke used 'His Royal Highness' title on Lilibet Diana's birth certificate.

Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties. 

According to a representative for the Sussexes, 'The Duke of Sussex' and 'His Royal Highness' is Harry's legal name, which is why it appeared it like that on the document.

As for Meghan, the spokesperson clarified that Meghan Markle's name was listed as 'Rachel Meghan Markle' as "that [is] her maiden name – the document required her maiden name."

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle welcomed their daughter, Lilibet Diana on June 4.

"Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales," their June 6 statement read._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate
> 
> 
> Prince Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate*
> 
> Prince Harry came under fire it appeared that the Duke used 'His Royal Highness' title on Lilibet Diana's birth certificate.
> 
> Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties.
> 
> According to a representative for the Sussexes, 'The Duke of Sussex' and 'His Royal Highness' is Harry's legal name, which is why it appeared it like that on the document.
> 
> As for Meghan, the spokesperson clarified that Meghan Markle's name was listed as 'Rachel Meghan Markle' as "that [is] her maiden name – the document required her maiden name."
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle welcomed their daughter, Lilibet Diana on June 4.
> 
> "Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales," their June 6 statement read._



Are these people stupid? I'm pretty sure his first name is Henry (Charles Albert David), with Duke of Sussex standing in for a last name while HRH is not part of his name at all, but a style. But what do I know. It would have even made more sense to include Prince in front of Henry.

ETA: and why would the birth certificate for a child born to married parents ask for the mother's maiden name, and maiden name alone? Usually, if a form asks for that it's in addition to the married name.


----------



## kipp

I’ve also noticed that the announcements from team Sussex say that they “welcomed” the birth rather than that M gave birth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> I’ve also noticed that the announcements from team Sussex say that they “welcomed” the birth rather than that M gave birth.



That might just be US language, though. I've read that frequently when celebrities had babies, but only the BRF announces expressively that the mother was delivered of a healthy child (so while their wording gave me pause, the one coming from Team Sussex directly would not...after all, Harry already developed a California accent!).


----------



## floatinglili

Sharont2305 said:


> We don't tip here, well we do but it's not compulsory



I hate tipping. It reeks of throwing alms to the poor. I hope it doesn’t become a common thing in Britain. 
Lol I bet Hazza hates tipping too. A Prince would be expected to carry a wad of paper bills two inches thick just to leave the house or get pizza ordered in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That might just be US language, though. I've read that frequently when celebrities had babies, but only the BRF announces expressively that the mother was delivered of a healthy child (so while their wording gave me pause, the one coming from Team Sussex directly would not...after all, Harry already developed a California accent!).


Lady C (love that woman) stressed the BRF used the word baby "for" Meg.  That they did not use the word when congratulating other women in the BRF who gave birth.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Armed forces day - thank goodness for Princess Anne and Commander Tim Lawrence - dignity and service personified


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate
> 
> 
> Prince Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate*
> 
> Prince Harry came under fire it appeared that the Duke used 'His Royal Highness' title on Lilibet Diana's birth certificate.
> 
> Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties.
> 
> According to a representative for the Sussexes, 'The Duke of Sussex' and 'His Royal Highness' is Harry's legal name, which is why it appeared it like that on the document.
> 
> As for Meghan, the spokesperson clarified that Meghan Markle's name was listed as 'Rachel Meghan Markle' as "that [is] her maiden name – the document required her maiden name."
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle welcomed their daughter, Lilibet Diana on June 4.
> 
> "Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales," their June 6 statement read._


The CA Birth Certificate asks for the parent's names and provides 3 spaces to be filled in:FIRST, MIDDLE, LAST BIRTH NAME

FIRST: Rachel     MIDDLE: Meghan    LAST: Markle BIRTH NAME
Meghan's appeared correctly as Rachel Meghan Markle

On Archie's United Kingdom Birth Certificate Harry's name is:"His Royal Highness Henry Charles Albert David Duke of Sussex".

If he had been consistent in entering the same information on Lilibet's that he did on Archie's, hers would read:

FIRST NAME: His Royal Highness:     MIDDLE: Henry etc     LAST: Duke of Sussex

Instead he reversed the first and last names on Lilibet's and left the middle name blank so it reads:
FIRST NAME: The Duke of Sussex     MIDDLE: _________   LAST: His Royal Highness

Probably not a big deal, but why can they seemingly never be consistent in what they do? Why omit his given name and flip the titles on the birth certificates? Maybe too dumb to remember what they filled out the first time?

While looking up the information on his string of names I came across an article describing the confusion of his having a last name other than his royal titles.  While in the Army he used "Captain Wales." Like other family members he could use "Mountbatten-Windsor," or he could use "Sussex". (That might not work if the Queen strips them). But, in the meantime the "Sussex" option would mirror his brother's family where the children are known by the last name "Cambridge" at their schools.


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> The CA Birth Certificate asks for the parent's names and provides 3 spaces to be filled in:FIRST, MIDDLE, LAST BIRTH NAME
> 
> FIRST: Rachel     MIDDLE: Meghan    LAST: Markle BIRTH NAME
> Meghan's appeared correctly as Rachel Meghan Markle
> 
> On Archie's United Kingdom Birth Certificate Harry's name is:"His Royal Highness Henry Charles Albert David Duke of Sussex".
> 
> If he had been consistent in entering the same information on Lilibet's that he did on Archie's, hers would read:
> 
> FIRST NAME: His Royal Highness:     MIDDLE: Henry etc     LAST: Duke of Sussex
> 
> Instead he reversed the first and last names on Lilibet's and left the middle name blank so it reads:
> FIRST NAME: The Duke of Sussex     MIDDLE: _________   LAST: His Royal Highness
> 
> Probably not a big deal, but why can they seemingly never be consistent in what they do? Why omit his given name and flip the titles on the birth certificates? Maybe too dumb to remember what they filled out the first time?
> 
> While looking up the information on his string of names I came across an article describing the confusion of his having a last name other than his royal titles.  While in the Army he used "Captain Wales." Like other family members he could use "Mountbatten-Windsor," or he could use "Sussex". (That might not work if the Queen strips them). But, in the meantime the "Sussex" option would mirror his brother's family where the children are known by the last name "Cambridge" at their schools.


The main thing is they were able to get that HRH in there!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate
> 
> 
> Prince Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate*
> 
> Prince Harry came under fire it appeared that the Duke used 'His Royal Highness' title on Lilibet Diana's birth certificate.
> 
> Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties.
> 
> According to a representative for the Sussexes, 'The Duke of Sussex' and 'His Royal Highness' is Harry's legal name, which is why it appeared it like that on the document.
> 
> As for Meghan, the spokesperson clarified that Meghan Markle's name was listed as 'Rachel Meghan Markle' as "that [is] her maiden name – the document required her maiden name."
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle welcomed their daughter, Lilibet Diana on June 4.
> 
> "Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales," their June 6 statement read._


Typical response of a toady who doesn’t know that the form was filled out incorrectly.   In fact the sad news is that most people struggle with filling out forms.       The form is supposed to have the legal name that was on the parent’s birth certificate.  Meghan’s name is correct The question I have is did a hospital employee struggle with what to call Harry?  Were they told to write that gibberish by Meghan and/or Harry?  I’m betting on Meghan, who wanted to make sure that her daughter was listed for posterity as the daughter of a titled person.


----------



## csshopper

Sending a subtle message to the guest in Frogmore Cottage that real Royals are around to keep an eye on things? 
*Taking the reigns! Lady Louise Windsor drives her grandfather Prince Philip's carriage as she heads out with mother Sophie Wessex in the grounds of Windsor Castle - while Prince Andrew enjoys an early morning horse ride*

*Lady Louise Windsor, 17, spotted driving carriage that belonged to Prince Philip  *
*Sophie Wessex joined daughter as they headed out in grounds of Windsor Castle*
*Prince Andrew, 61, sported a striped rugby shirt as he went for early horse ride*


----------



## kkfiregirl

gracekelly said:


> The question I have is did a hospital employee struggle with what to call Harry? Were they told to write that gibberish by Meghan and/or Harry?



In CA, the parents fill out the information on a ‘worksheet’ & then the staff populates it onto the official birth registry, which later becomes the birth certificate. 

They could have asked for help with the form, but somehow I doubt their egos would allow them to admit that something was confusing.


----------



## scarf1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are these people stupid? I'm pretty sure his first name is Henry (Charles Albert David), with Duke of Sussex standing in for a last name while HRH is not part of his name at all, but a style. But what do I know. It would have even made more sense to include Prince in front of Henry.
> 
> ETA: and why would the birth certificate for a child born to married parents ask for the mother's maiden name, and maiden name alone? Usually, if a form asks for that it's in addition to the married name.


California birth certificates have always just asked mothers maiden name. it also asks for fathers name.  I guess it assumes fathers name never changes.


----------



## gracekelly

scarf1 said:


> California birth certificates have always just asked mothers maiden name. it also asks for fathers name.  I guess it assumes fathers name never changes.


Actually based on my internet research, the opposite is true. There are paternal name changes when it turns out that daddy is not the sperm daddy for one.   How it is handled for surrogacy, I don’t know,

I can just see Meghan struggling over the worksheet and trying to figure out how she can get it all in.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2009 - The Joneses.
> Beware the _influencers_



I remember this movie, I really liked it!


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate
> 
> 
> Prince Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Sussex spokesperson clarifies why Harry used HRH title on Lili's birth certificate*
> 
> Prince Harry came under fire it appeared that the Duke used 'His Royal Highness' title on Lilibet Diana's birth certificate.
> 
> Harry received criticism for using his royal title despite stepping down from his royal duties.
> 
> According to a representative for the Sussexes, 'The Duke of Sussex' and 'His Royal Highness' is Harry's legal name, which is why it appeared it like that on the document.
> 
> As for Meghan, the spokesperson clarified that Meghan Markle's name was listed as 'Rachel Meghan Markle' as "that [is] her maiden name – the document required her maiden name."
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle welcomed their daughter, Lilibet Diana on June 4.
> 
> "Lili is named after her great-grandmother, Her Majesty The Queen, whose family nickname is Lilibet. Her middle name, Diana, was chosen to honor her beloved late grandmother, The Princess of Wales," their June 6 statement read._




HRH is a style. Not a title. Not a name.

Duke is a title. Earl is a title. Mr. is a title.

Henry Charles Albert David are names. If Henry is his only first name, Charles Albert David are his middle names. If all four names are considered his first name (as a British royal), then plain and simple that's his first name.

As for the last name, being a descendant of the Windsor royal family, it is Mountbatten-Windsor. If he isn't using that, then his last name could be Sussex assuming he didn't already lose it, kinda like how his nephew and niece are called George Cambridge and Charlotte Cambridge.

As to mother's maiden name on a birth certificate, that's just something that's asked in some countries. Where I was born, not in the US, my mother's maiden name was asked and listed on my birth certificate. There was not even a box for her married name. I guess maiden name is asked because a woman's last name could be different each time she gets remarried. Therefore listing a mother's maiden name might actually make more sense for future registry search and what not, regardless of who the child's father might be (husband #1 or husband #2 etc).

With Lil Bit's birth certificate being an American birth certificate, HRH, Duke and Prince is frankly inappropriate and irrelevant to be listed on there. However, when they report the birth to the British General Consulate to obtain a UK birth certificate for Lil Bit, then sure, they can list him as HRH Prince Henry Charles Albert David, Duke of Sussex with occupation as Prince of the UK.

Till then they need to get a better spokesperson who knows what he/she is talking about or at least know how to differentiate basic sh"t.


----------



## chicinthecity777

HRH is part of Harry's name?      are they PR team really that stupid?


----------



## scarf1

I don’t know about the worksheet but I was born in California many years ago. My birth certificate has mothers maiden name Only. And yes she was married at the time.
I think birth certificates are reissued in the case of adoptions.. I am not adopted, so don’t know if adopted birth certificates LOOK ANY DIFFERENT.

also, my husband was born in Nevada.  His birth certificate also has ONLY has mother maiden name.and fathers name.

I was surprised the baby birth certificate did not list fathers name as Henry or possibly Prince Henry.  And the last name as Mountbatten Windsor.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> The CA Birth Certificate asks for the parent's names and provides 3 spaces to be filled in:FIRST, MIDDLE, LAST BIRTH NAME
> 
> FIRST: Rachel     MIDDLE: Meghan    LAST: Markle BIRTH NAME
> Meghan's appeared correctly as Rachel Meghan Markle
> 
> On Archie's United Kingdom Birth Certificate Harry's name is:"His Royal Highness Henry Charles Albert David Duke of Sussex".
> 
> If he had been consistent in entering the same information on Lilibet's that he did on Archie's, hers would read:
> 
> FIRST NAME: His Royal Highness:     MIDDLE: Henry etc     LAST: Duke of Sussex
> 
> Instead he reversed the first and last names on Lilibet's and left the middle name blank so it reads:
> FIRST NAME: The Duke of Sussex     MIDDLE: _________   LAST: His Royal Highness
> 
> Probably not a big deal, but why can they seemingly never be consistent in what they do? Why omit his given name and flip the titles on the birth certificates? Maybe too dumb to remember what they filled out the first time?
> 
> While looking up the information on his string of names I came across an article describing the confusion of his having a last name other than his royal titles.  While in the Army he used "Captain Wales." Like other family members he could use "Mountbatten-Windsor," or he could use "Sussex". (That might not work if the Queen strips them). But, in the meantime the "Sussex" option would mirror his brother's family where the children are known by the last name "Cambridge" at their schools.


I don't think Harry has ever used Mountbatten Windsor as a surname. Growing up, both Harry and William used Wales as a surname till they each got married.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> The CA Birth Certificate asks for the parent's names and provides 3 spaces to be filled in:FIRST, MIDDLE, LAST BIRTH NAME
> 
> FIRST: Rachel     MIDDLE: Meghan    LAST: Markle BIRTH NAME
> Meghan's appeared correctly as Rachel Meghan Markle
> 
> On Archie's United Kingdom Birth Certificate Harry's name is:"His Royal Highness Henry Charles Albert David Duke of Sussex".
> 
> If he had been consistent in entering the same information on Lilibet's that he did on Archie's, hers would read:
> 
> FIRST NAME: His Royal Highness:     MIDDLE: Henry etc     LAST: Duke of Sussex
> 
> Instead he reversed the first and last names on Lilibet's and left the middle name blank so it reads:
> FIRST NAME: The Duke of Sussex     MIDDLE: _________   LAST: His Royal Highness
> 
> Probably not a big deal, but why can they seemingly never be consistent in what they do? Why omit his given name and flip the titles on the birth certificates? Maybe too dumb to remember what they filled out the first time?
> 
> While looking up the information on his string of names I came across an article describing the confusion of his having a last name other than his royal titles.  While in the Army he used "Captain Wales." Like other family members he could use "Mountbatten-Windsor," or he could use "Sussex". (That might not work if the Queen strips them). But, in the meantime the "Sussex" option would mirror his brother's family where the children are known by the last name "Cambridge" at their schools.


I do love how they give themselves the coolest last names. Cambridge, Windsor, Sussex, Wessex, Wales...

Can you imagine Archie Saxe or Archie Gotha at his school?  Or Lili Schleswig.

Well, same with Cambridge - Geroge Coburg. Charlotte Battenberg, Louis Hesse*. * Just doesn't have the same ring to it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Jayne1 said:


> I do love how they give themselves the coolest last names. Cambridge, Windsor, Sussex, Wessex, Wales...



I agree, their last names do sound very proper and aristocratic- at least to my American ears …


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> I do love how they give themselves the coolest last names. Cambridge, Windsor, Sussex, Wessex, Wales...
> 
> Can you imagine Archie Saxe or Archie Gotha at his school?  Or Lili Schleswig.
> 
> Well, same with Cambridge - Geroge Coburg. Charlotte Battenberg, Louis Hesse*. * Just doesn't have the same ring to it.



Lol

Leopold hasnt been much used as a boys name since Victoria’s son either!!!


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> The CA Birth Certificate asks for the parent's names and provides 3 spaces to be filled in:FIRST, MIDDLE, LAST BIRTH NAME
> 
> FIRST: Rachel     MIDDLE: Meghan    LAST: Markle BIRTH NAME
> Meghan's appeared correctly as Rachel Meghan Markle
> 
> On Archie's United Kingdom Birth Certificate Harry's name is:"His Royal Highness Henry Charles Albert David Duke of Sussex".
> 
> If he had been consistent in entering the same information on Lilibet's that he did on Archie's, hers would read:
> 
> FIRST NAME: His Royal Highness:     MIDDLE: Henry etc     LAST: Duke of Sussex
> 
> Instead he reversed the first and last names on Lilibet's and left the middle name blank so it reads:
> FIRST NAME: The Duke of Sussex     MIDDLE: _________   LAST: His Royal Highness
> 
> Probably not a big deal, but why can they seemingly never be consistent in what they do? Why omit his given name and flip the titles on the birth certificates? Maybe too dumb to remember what they filled out the first time?
> 
> While looking up the information on his string of names I came across an article describing the confusion of his having a last name other than his royal titles.  While in the Army he used "Captain Wales." Like other family members he could use "Mountbatten-Windsor," or he could use "Sussex". (That might not work if the Queen strips them). But, in the meantime the "Sussex" option would mirror his brother's family where the children are known by the last name "Cambridge" at their schools.


I beg to differ - birth certificates are a big deal, they should be correct, the father’s first name is not on there … bad …

The BRF names don’t work well on US forms, try explaining that to someone at the DMV or  tax office , you might away with that in the UK …. Because they are used to titles maybe 

Oprah’s name came from misspelling on her BC , her name was supposed to be the Biblical Orpah but she got stuck with Oprah …


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> I beg to differ - birth certificates are a big deal, they should be correct, the father’s first name is not on there … bad …
> 
> The BRF names don’t work well on US forms, try explaining that to someone at the DMV air tax office , you might away with that 8n the UK ….
> 
> Oprah’s name came from misspelling on her BC , her name was supposed to be the Biblical Orpah but she got stuck with Oprah …


well she certainly made the best of it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Sending a subtle message to the guest in Frogmore Cottage that real Royals are around to keep an eye on things?
> *Taking the reigns! Lady Louise Windsor drives her grandfather Prince Philip's carriage as she heads out with mother Sophie Wessex in the grounds of Windsor Castle - while Prince Andrew enjoys an early morning horse ride*
> 
> *Lady Louise Windsor, 17, spotted driving carriage that belonged to Prince Philip  *
> *Sophie Wessex joined daughter as they headed out in grounds of Windsor Castle*
> *Prince Andrew, 61, sported a striped rugby shirt as he went for early horse ride*



When Philip died I said "Wouldn't it be lovely if he left the carriage and ponies to Louise" (as far as I know the only one of his grandchildren who shares his hobby), so this warms my heart.


----------



## rose60610

I hope Meghan remembered to pack Harry's butt wipes and sippy cup. And of course, a 20x24 inch photo of herself and wallet sizes of Archie and Lilibet. I wonder if Meghan is making Harry wear a wire-- to keep tabs on him and to record any useful conversation they could use for podcasts or Netflix.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Actually based on my internet research, the opposite is true. There are paternal name changes when it turns out that daddy is not the sperm daddy for one.   How it is handled for surrogacy, I don’t know,



I think what @scarf1  meant was they assume a) fathers don't change their name with marriage and b) mothers do. Quite sexist for a woke state.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are these people stupid? I'm pretty sure his first name is Henry (Charles Albert David), with Duke of Sussex standing in for a last name while HRH is not part of his name at all, but a style. But what do I know. It would have even made more sense to include Prince in front of Henry.
> 
> *ETA: and why would the birth certificate for a child born to married parents ask for the mother's maiden name, and maiden name alone? Usually, if a form asks for that it's in addition to the married name.*


Actually that part is true at least in California; birth certificates ask for the mother's maiden name.  Both of my children were born in CA, and my maiden name is specifically listed on their birth certificates.   Maybe with all the marriages/divorces/etc., and some women changing their names often, their maiden name will always be constant.  Maybe that's the logic?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Oprah’s name came from misspelling on her BC , her name was supposed to be the Biblical Orpah but she got stuck with Oprah …



Reminds me of a family friend...I think in Germany before everything became computer operated the parents had to actually go to the city hall to announce the birth of their baby, the hospital didn't automatically do it for them. Or they might have had a homebirth, I really have no clue. So the dad had forgotten which name they'd agreed on upon arrival, so he put his hunting dog's name *facepalm*

The kid (now a middle aged guy) has never once been called that, but it's his official name in his passport.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Actually based on my internet research, the opposite is true. There are paternal name changes when it turns out that daddy is not the sperm daddy for one.   How it is handled for surrogacy, I don’t know,
> 
> I can just see Meghan struggling over the worksheet and trying to figure out how she can get it all in.


What's interesting is that in CA, mothers provide the father's name, which can lead to multiple issues.  The mother can choose to leave it blank as well.  My DH didn't want to come into my second CS because he said it was too difficult to see me in agony during my first.  I threatened I wouldn't name him on the birth certificate if he wasn't by my side.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> HRH is part of Harry's name?      are they PR team really that stupid?


Yes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What's interesting is that in CA, mothers provide the father's name, which can lead to multiple issues.  The mother can choose to leave it blank as well.  My DH didn't want to come into my second CS because he said it was too difficult to see me in agony during my first.  I threatened I wouldn't name him on the birth certificate if he wasn't by my side.



Poor thing, SOMEONE ELSE was in pain, someone bring him a candy! Men   Also, is CS c-section? I'd hope you'd be numbed before they cut into you


----------



## CeeJay

mellibelly said:


> Interesting that he drives an Escalade. You’d think he’d drive a Tesla or a hybrid since he apparently cares so much about the environment. Not even a Range Rover? I’d put my money on the car being gifted from Cadillac in a deal set up by the Skid Markles. So effing tacky


I'm pretty sure they also have a Range Rover (Gray color I believe), as there was a picture some months back with Hazza driving, Meghan in the passenger side and Doria in the back (w/ Archie I assume).


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> The CA Birth Certificate asks for the parent's names and provides 3 spaces to be filled in:FIRST, MIDDLE, LAST BIRTH NAME
> 
> FIRST: Rachel     MIDDLE: Meghan    LAST: Markle BIRTH NAME
> Meghan's appeared correctly as Rachel Meghan Markle
> 
> On Archie's United Kingdom Birth Certificate Harry's name is:"His Royal Highness Henry Charles Albert David Duke of Sussex".
> 
> If he had been consistent in entering the same information on Lilibet's that he did on Archie's, hers would read:
> 
> FIRST NAME: His Royal Highness:     MIDDLE: Henry etc     LAST: Duke of Sussex
> 
> Instead he reversed the first and last names on Lilibet's and left the middle name blank so it reads:
> FIRST NAME: The Duke of Sussex     MIDDLE: _________   LAST: His Royal Highness
> 
> Probably not a big deal, but why can they seemingly never be consistent in what they do? Why omit his given name and flip the titles on the birth certificates? Maybe too dumb to remember what they filled out the first time?
> 
> While looking up the information on his string of names I came across an article describing the confusion of his having a last name other than his royal titles.  While in the Army he used "Captain Wales." Like other family members he could use "Mountbatten-Windsor," or he could use "Sussex". (That might not work if the Queen strips them). But, in the meantime the "Sussex" option would mirror his brother's family where the children are known by the last name "Cambridge" at their schools.


Ummmmm .. last time I remembered, this kid (Lili) was born here in the US and since we DO NOT RECOGNIZE TITLES from foreign Countries, why did dumb-Hazz even use the "His Royal Highness" and "Duke of Sussex" .. 'cos they are BOTH WRONG!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Ummmmm .. last time I remembered, this kid (Lili) was born here in the US and since we DO NOT RECOGNIZE TITLES from foreign Countries, why did dumb-Hazz even use the "His Royal Highness" and "Duke of Sussex" .. 'cos they are BOTH WRONG!


as with everything they want it both ways....don't want the royal responsibility but do want the titles and money


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> What's interesting is that in CA, mothers provide the father's name, which can lead to multiple issues.  The mother can choose to leave it blank as well.  My DH didn't want to come into my second CS because he said it was too difficult to see me in agony during my first.  I threatened I wouldn't name him on the birth certificate if he wasn't by my side.


We had a patient who believed for several years that he had fathered a son with a short-term girlfriend.   Turned out that he was sterile and the DNA proved it wasn't his.  He was heartbroken because he loved a the boy.  He did take legal action and had his name removed from the birth certificate.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I beg to differ - birth certificates are a big deal, they should be correct, the father’s first name is not on there … bad …
> 
> The BRF names don’t work well on US forms, try explaining that to someone at the DMV air tax office , you might away with that 8n the UK ….
> 
> Oprah’s name came from misspelling on her BC , her name was supposed to be the Biblical Orpah but she got stuck with Oprah …





sdkitty said:


> well she certainly made the best of it




After all the lies come out from the interview, she may reverse her name and go by Harpo


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> After all the lies come out from the interview, she may reverse her name and go by Harpo


we'll see
I think she may consider it a win - created a lot of buzz even if it wasn't all positive


----------



## bellecate

1LV said:


> The main thing is they were able to get that HRH in there!


Then which is Lilibet's last name, 'Markle' or 'His Royal Highness'. Does a child's last name not match one of the parent's last names?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> What's interesting is that in CA, mothers provide the father's name, which can lead to multiple issues.  The mother can choose to leave it blank as well.  My DH didn't want to come into my second CS because he said it was too difficult to see me in agony during my first.  I threatened I wouldn't name him on the birth certificate if he wasn't by my side.


I hope you had a Birkin handy so you could give him a bag slap.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> we'll see
> I think she may consider it a win - created a lot of buzz even if it wasn't all positive


If all she cared about was rating, then yes it would be a positive for her  If she cared about her reputation as a reporter, then it was a huge fail.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> If all she cared about was rating, then yes it would be a positive for her  If she cared about her reputation as a reporter, then it was a huge fail.


I think it was a negative but don't know what she thinks....she seems to be committed to continuing to support these two grifters


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Then which is Lilibet's last name, 'Markle' or 'His Royal Highness'. Does a child's last name not match one of the parent's last names?


Apparently not.  In this state, you are free to give your child a different last name.  Jane Fonda did that with her son Troy and gave him the last name of Garity, his paternal grandmother,  because she felt he might be burdened in the future with Fonda or Hayden.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think it was a negative but don't know what she thinks....she seems to be committed to continuing to support these two grifters


She is between a rock and a hard place.  I don't she can turn on them right now.  If they do something even more egregious in the future, she might have to.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She is between a rock and a hard place.  I don't she can turn on them right now.  If they do something even more egregious in the future, she might have to.


I hope you're right but so far it seems the race card has been played very successfully


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> Then which is Lilibet's last name, 'Markle' or 'His Royal Highness'. Does a child's last name not match one of the parent's last names?


You would think so, right?  Very little makes sense with these two.  Maybe because these two have very little sense.


----------



## mellibelly

CeeJay said:


> I'm pretty sure they also have a Range Rover (Gray color I believe), as there was a picture some months back with Hazza driving, Meghan in the passenger side and Doria in the back (w/ Archie I assume).



You’re right. I found this from the Daily Mail:

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been spotted driving around California in a £170,000 Range Rover - just like the ones favoured by royals from the Queen and Prince Philip to the Cambridges. However, while the company has a lease agreement with the royal household which allows them to use a fleet of its new vehicles, it is not known if the couple still make use of this given they are no longer working royals.

So the woke hypocrites who only had 2 kids because of the environmental impact  live in a 15,000 sf, 19 bath mansion and drive Escalades and Range Rovers?


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When Philip died I said "Wouldn't it be lovely if he left the carriage and ponies to Louise" (as far as I know the only one of his grandchildren who shares his hobby), so this warms my heart.



Yes! I like that Sophie also took up the sport so the horses will get lots of exercise, love and attention from family members. I'm sure that the stable employees love those horses too.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Then which is Lilibet's last name, 'Markle' or 'His Royal Highness'. Does a child's last name not match one of the parent's last names?


This is really funny!  You are the first person to mention that poor little Lili has no last name!  Maybe she does, but her parents are keeping it private! lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> You’re right. I found this from the Daily Mail:
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been spotted driving around California in a £170,000 Range Rover - just like the ones favoured by royals from the Queen and Prince Philip to the Cambridges. However, while the company has a lease agreement with the royal household which allows them to use a fleet of its new vehicles, it is not known if the couple still make use of this given they are no longer working royals.
> 
> So the woke hypocrites who only had 2 kids because of the environmental impact  live in a 15,000 sf, 19 bath mansion and drive Escalades and Range Rovers?


He should be driving a Prius.  Meghan wouldn't be caught dead in one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> Ummmmm .. last time I remembered, this kid (Lili) was born here in the US and since we DO NOT RECOGNIZE TITLES from foreign Countries, why did dumb-Hazz even use the "His Royal Highness" and "Duke of Sussex" .. 'cos they are BOTH WRONG!



I agree. I believe his first name should be noted as Henry, his middle name (actually name(s) in this case) as Albert Charles David and his last name as Mountbatten-Windsor.

Or Wales, the names both he and William have used.


----------



## Sol Ryan

mellibelly said:


> You’re right. I found this from the Daily Mail:
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been spotted driving around California in a £170,000 Range Rover - just like the ones favoured by royals from the Queen and Prince Philip to the Cambridges. However, while the company has a lease agreement with the royal household which allows them to use a fleet of its new vehicles, it is not known if the couple still make use of this given they are no longer working royals.
> 
> So the woke hypocrites who only had 2 kids because of the environmental impact  live in a 15,000 sf, 19 bath mansion and drive Escalades and Range Rovers?



I mean isn’t that the whole point of Harry’s travel initiative? We don’t get to go cool places so rich people like him can  keep using private jets… he’s important, he NEEDS private jets. Don’t you understand?! 

Your post reminded my of this article lol









						We must reduce our carbon footprints so Prince Harry can still (occasionally) use his private jet
					

Every Hollywood star should have a person from the lower orders nominated using some kind of postal lottery to offset their personal carbon impact




					spectator.us


----------



## Canturi lover

Queen extends an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle


https://mol.im/a/9728883


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd hope you'd be numbed before they cut into you



Yes, numbed but awake, so she can see the baby being born


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> I mean isn’t that the whole point of Harry’s travel initiative? We don’t get to go cool places so rich people like him can  keep using private jets… he’s important, he NEEDS private jets. Don’t you understand?!
> 
> Your post reminded my of this article lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We must reduce our carbon footprints so Prince Harry can still (occasionally) use his private jet
> 
> 
> Every Hollywood star should have a person from the lower orders nominated using some kind of postal lottery to offset their personal carbon impact
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectator.us



H&M thinking = The rules do not apply to royalty. We peasants must make the necessary changes, not them.

Reality = so far, this is true. Although times are a-changing, right?  Covid has been an excellent teacher.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Canturi lover said:


> Queen extends an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9728883



Harry and his brother would have to fix their relationship before Meghan attends this. I don’t think she can handle being ignored or receiving the cold shoulder from the family- I’m pretty sure she’s already planning a good excuse for why she can’t attend.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor thing, SOMEONE ELSE was in pain, someone bring him a candy! Men   Also, is CS c-section? I'd hope you'd be numbed before they cut into you


Haha, yes.  Sorry C section.  I had a spinal, but still hurt when the doctor was reaching inside.  He tried to pull the "it hurt me just as much as you" crap.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> This is really funny!  You are the first person to mention that poor little Lili has no last name!  Maybe she does, but her parents are keeping it private! lololol!


Maybe they think Lili will be soooo important (being their spawn and all) that she can just go by one name, like Cher or Madonna.


----------



## xincinsin

kkfiregirl said:


> Harry and his brother would have to fix their relationship before Meghan attends this. I don’t think she can handle being ignored or receiving the cold shoulder from the family- I’m pretty sure she’s already planning a good excuse for why she can’t attend.


Maybe she will arrange another "Oops, I'm preggers again" incident because it's obvious that she was born to be a mother (excuse me while I go puke).
It would be very convenient. They could tell Netflix etc that she can't work full time because of the imminent baby, then Hazard proudly produces a few lacklustre productions.


----------



## gracekelly

Canturi lover said:


> Queen extends an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9728883


I think that invitation is sailing on the HMS Pinafore to the PO in Montecito. I won't hold my breath about it arriving.


----------



## gracekelly

kkfiregirl said:


> Harry and his brother would have to fix their relationship before Meghan attends this. I don’t think she can handle being ignored or receiving the cold shoulder from the family- I’m pretty sure she’s already planning a good excuse for why she can’t attend.


Post partum depression?  Hurt her back doing yoga poses? Has to cook a chicken?  Washing her hair extensions? Can't afford the ticket.  I'm going with the last two.


----------



## kkfiregirl

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she will arrange another "Oops, I'm preggers again" incident because it's obvious that she was born to be a mother



I had a similar thought! A high risk pregnancy would be a convenient excuse for the entire year …


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I had a similar thought! A high risk pregnancy would be a convenient excuse for the entire year …



It could also be used to excuse her from doing any work for Netflix, Spotify, and Archewell for another year. Genius!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> She is between a rock and a hard place.  I don't she can turn on them right now.  If they do something even more egregious in the future, she might have to.


Pardon my lack of compassion, but Oprah put herself there - between the devil woman and the dim (royal) blue twit.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Canturi lover said:


> Queen extends an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9728883


Dear QE,

Please don’t let them on the balcony.

love,
LYM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Post partum depression?  Hurt her back doing yoga poses? Has to cook a chicken?  Washing her hair extensions? Can't afford the ticket.  I'm going with the last two.


At the last minute the chickens flew the coop and being the most woke person on the planet, she has to stay home to re-rescue them.


----------



## bag-mania

Hell will freeze over before she goes back to England. She’s got what she wants. She isn’t going to make any unnecessary effort. I’m sure she’ll send a nice flower arrangement though.


----------



## rose60610

It'll be interesting to see if Harry recites a pre-written script for the unveiling or if he'll say something stupid about HIS suffering and how Meghan wanted to be there. If Kate and kids are there it'll kill Meghan. She'll scheme to visit the statue at a later date, kids in tow, and will surely be kneeling and sobbing for the cameras.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she will arrange another "Oops, I'm preggers again" incident because it's obvious that she was born to be a mother (excuse me while I go puke).
> It would be very convenient. They could tell Netflix etc that she can't work full time because of the imminent baby, then Hazard proudly produces a few lacklustre productions.


Or better yet, she'll "have a miscarriage"!


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> It'll be interesting to see if Harry recites a pre-written script for the unveiling or if he'll say something stupid about HIS suffering and how Meghan wanted to be there. If Kate and kids are there it'll kill Meghan. She'll scheme to visit the statue at a later date, kids in tow, and will surely be kneeling and sobbing for the cameras.


I am expecting the full Monty. The paps killed her and they ruined his life forever. London and the paps are a trigger yada yada yada His wife is so like her and they will do their best to raise little Lili in her sainted image.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Or better yet, she'll "have a miscarriage"!


Twins


----------



## Icyjade

lanasyogamama said:


> Dear QE,
> 
> Please don’t let them on the balcony.
> 
> love,
> LYM



Is there a side balcony? They don’t deserve to be on the main one and it will be sort of fun to see them trying to control their expression when they are shunted to the minor royal balcony.

Ok I’m mean but really they are not working royals and should not be on the main balcony.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if H got a copy to read during his flight...


----------



## Chanbal

This is not news for us here at TPF


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> I do love how they give themselves the coolest last names. Cambridge, Windsor, Sussex, Wessex, Wales...
> 
> Can you imagine Archie Saxe or Archie Gotha at his school?  Or Lili Schleswig.
> 
> Well, same with Cambridge - Geroge Coburg. Charlotte Battenberg, Louis Hesse*. * Just doesn't have the same ring to it.


Lili Schleswig sounds like blazing saddles 


gracekelly said:


> We had a patient who believed for several years that he had fathered a son with a short-term girlfriend.   Turned out that he was sterile and the DNA proved it wasn't his.  He was heartbroken because he loved a the boy.  He did take legal action and had his name removed from the birth certificate.


Did he carry on seeing the kid? If not
I personally don’t get it because if you love the child why are deprive them of the relationship when it’s not their fault their mum’s a slag?


Canturi lover said:


> Queen extends an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9728883


Hello canturi lover! Love your jewellery. We will see. They need to get a bit of a spine. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M thinking = The rules do not apply to royalty. We peasants must make the necessary changes, not them.
> 
> Reality = so far, this is true. Although times are a-changing, right?  Covid has been an excellent teacher.


I don’t think Covid has done that much to the rich tbh - I’d anything some of them seem to be profiting from it. H&M certainly have.


purseinsanity said:


> Haha, yes.  Sorry C section.  I had a spinal, but still hurt when the doctor was reaching inside.  He tried to pull the "it hurt me just as much as you" crap.


Oh Jesus I don’t want a c section eeek!


----------



## needlv

Lol








						Meghan and Harry's Netflix hopes crushed after US rejection
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's Netflix dreams were crushed after a US columnist claimed "no one wants to watch" the content they produce.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Canturi lover

jelliedfeels said:


> Hello canturi lover! Love your jewellery. We will see. They need to get a bit of a spine.
> Thanks


----------



## floatinglili

^^ OT but apparently even the makers of home genetic test kits were astonished by the scale of paternity fraud going on in the community.

Surely DNA testing of newborns should be considered as a standard practice. Would take the heat out of the topic for all parties, and introduce some much needed honesty.



jelliedfeels said:


> Did he carry on seeing the kid? If not
> I personally don’t get it because if you love the child why are deprive them of the relationship when it’s not their fault their mum’s a slag?


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Unlikely allies...Angela Levin and Murky Meg.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mendocino said:


> I agree. I believe his first name should be noted as Henry, his middle name (actually name(s) in this case) as Albert Charles David and his last name as Mountbatten-Windsor.
> 
> Or Wales, the names both he and William have used.



If you grant him the use of Wales (his father's highest title), he can just as well use Sussex (his own highest title).


----------



## floatinglili

So stupid I hate the entitled use of titles the heyday of princely exploitation of the masses is over. Having titles on a US birth certificate is ridiculous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is not news for us here at TPF




Why, didn't her publisher give her advanced copies? Should have negotiated that contract better


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Did he carry on seeing the kid? If not
> I personally don’t get it because if you love the child why are deprive them of the relationship when it’s not their fault their mum’s a slag?



Especially as he'll never have bio kids.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




Are these people for real? Also, note they are not even denying it, just trying to find lame excuses.


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> Actually that part is true at least in California; birth certificates ask for the mother's maiden name.  Both of my children were born in CA, and my maiden name is specifically listed on their birth certificates.   Maybe with all the marriages/divorces/etc., and some women changing their names often, their maiden name will always be constant.  Maybe that's the logic?



This thing of a woman's maiden name always amazes me... Here in Italy, which is theoretically light years away from "civilized" Britain or USA, a woman ALWAYS keeps her maiden name for all official uses: documents, at work ect...so the only thing that changes after your married is that you're Mrs Mary Smith (just an example) instead of being Miss Mary Smith. In the UK you have Ms which doesn't specify if you're married or not, I don't know about the US. It amazes me because UK and US are much more forward regarding gender equality compared to Italy but then, once you're married, you're always know with your husband's name and your own just dissapears.
Even if you divorce you still keep your ex husband's surname until you marry again....if you ever do. The UK even takes it one step further, during your marriage you're know as Mrs. John Smith and only when you divorce you get your first name back. I've always found it very degrading for us women, so one of the few things I like about Italy is that you keep your maiden name, always.

Having said all this, I haven't lived in the UK for a long time and never in the US, so maybe things have changed.....


----------



## floatinglili

^^ - OT so excuse me -
My maiden name erases the efforts of my mother, my grand mothers etc so I don’t feel much attachment from a feminist perspective.
When I was in the depths of mothering I did like having the same name as my children.
It is interesting to hear it the Italian tradition - do the children take on daddy’s name? Perhaps a conversation for another day??
I know back in grandmas day it was formal manners to use Mrs John smith’  in correspondence etc. 



duna said:


> This thing of a woman's maiden name always amazes me... Here in Italy, which is theoretically light years away from "civilized" Britain or USA, a woman ALWAYS keeps her maiden name for all official uses: documents, at work ect...so the only thing that changes after your married is that you're Mrs Mary Smith (just an example) instead of being Miss Mary Smith. In the UK you have Ms which doesn't specify if you're married or not, I don't know about the US. It amazes me because UK and US are much more forward regarding gender equality compared to Italy but then, once you're married, you're always know with your husband's name and your own just dissapears.
> Even if you divorce you still keep your ex husband's surname until you marry again....if you ever do. The UK even takes it one step further, during your marriage you're know as Mrs. John Smith and only when you divorce you get your first name back. I've always found it very degrading for us women, so one of the few things I like about Italy is that you keep your maiden name, always.
> 
> Having said all this, I haven't lived in the UK for a long time and never in the US, so maybe things have changed.....


----------



## duna

floatinglili said:


> ^^ - OT so excuse me -
> My maiden name erases the efforts of my mother, my grand mothers etc so I don’t feel much attachment from a feminist perspective.
> When I was in the depths of mothering I did like having the same name as my children.
> It is interesting to hear it the Italian tradition - do the children take on daddy’s name? Perhaps a conversation for another day??
> I know back in grandmas day it was formal manners to use Mrs John smith’  in correspondence etc.



Kids here take their father's name usually but you can add the mother's name aswell, so it becomes a double surname.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are these people for real? Also, note they are not even denying it, just trying to find lame excuses.



I assume this means there are 30 pages of accusations then... and that’s a huge problem.  One or two accusations - you can dismiss as disgruntled ex employees / different recollections.  But 30 pages...!?!?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I assume this means there are 30 pages of accusations then... and that’s a huge problem.  One or two accusations - you can dismiss as disgruntled ex employees / different recollections.  But 30 pages...!?!?




I mean, it could just be our special snowflakes felt the need to elaborate on their truth, but...you do have a point.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, it could just be our special snowflakes felt the need to elaborate on their truth, but...you do have a point.


It’ll be 30 pages of word salad and be impossible to understand, if the two of them wrote it.


----------



## BlackOrchid

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if they could go after the seller to share the profit.


Hahaha


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why, didn't her publisher give her advanced copies? Should have negotiated that contract better


Would those have been counted towards the bestseller list? Maybe that’s why Archewell purchased on an institutional level to distribute to the less fortunate among us.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Pardon my lack of compassion, but Oprah put herself there - between the devil woman and the dim (royal) blue twit.



Practically shoehorned her way in. 

All 3 are (should be) accountable for their actions/decisions/words.


----------



## floatinglili

Genie27 said:


> Would those have been counted towards the bestseller list? Maybe that’s why Archewell purchased on an institutional level to distribute to the less fortunate among us.


Of course it’s all about propping up the sales figures!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

30 pages? The Palace wins the credibility contest with "recollections may vary". Did H&M really take THIRTY pages? or was it 30 bananas with calligraphy?


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> 30 pages? The Palace wins the credibility contest with "recollections may vary". Did H&M really take THIRTY pages? or was it 30 bananas with *calligraphy*?



Um, I believe you mean Faux-lligraphy, written in the McMansion with the faux-farm chickens.  Guessing they will add a faux-Diana statue soon.  H&M = the faux-royals


----------



## marietouchet

bellecate said:


> Then which is Lilibet's last name, 'Markle' or 'His Royal Highness'. Does a child's last name not match one of the parent's last names?


Jane Fonda gave her son the last name Garrity - her mother’s maiden name, if I remember, but not Fonda or Hayden for the father, political activist  Tom Hayden
it may be different in diff states, but parents get to pick, I think
Jane did not want the baggage of Fonda or Hayden for her child


----------



## Sophisticatted

Angelina Jolie’s mother did the same thing.  Her brother has a different last name from her, IIRC.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Post partum depression?  Hurt her back doing yoga poses? Has to cook a chicken?  Washing her hair extensions? Can't afford the ticket.  I'm going with the last two.


Agree but how times have changed …  all that stuff is necessary for mental health … 
Britney complained about no mani pedis, hairdos, massages during the year of COVID , I guess she did not get the memo..
Nancy ****** was savaged for clandestinely getting a haircut , having the salon open just for her illegally


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> This thing of a woman's maiden name always amazes me... Here in Italy, which is theoretically light years away from "civilized" Britain or USA, a woman ALWAYS keeps her maiden name for all official uses: documents, at work ect...so the only thing that changes after your married is that you're Mrs Mary Smith (just an example) instead of being Miss Mary Smith. In the UK you have Ms which doesn't specify if you're married or not, I don't know about the US. It amazes me because UK and US are much more forward regarding gender equality compared to Italy but then, once you're married, you're always know with your husband's name and your own just dissapears.
> Even if you divorce you still keep your ex husband's surname until you marry again....if you ever do. The UK even takes it one step further, during your marriage you're know as Mrs. John Smith and only when you divorce you get your first name back. I've always found it very degrading for us women, so one of the few things I like about Italy is that you keep your maiden name, always.
> 
> Having said all this, I haven't lived in the UK for a long time and never in the US, so maybe things have changed.....


I kept my maiden name after marriage in the USA, hard to pronounce and spell Swiss name but I am proud of my Swiss roots
anyway, years later, people have issues with my last name being different to that of DH and of DS, at DS school I accepted being called by his last name 
It galls me that financial stuff seems to morph magically ALWAYS into being filed by DH last name despite incessant corrections
it is just easier for the bank, businesses when there is only one last name involved, not that DH Walloon/Belgian last name is easier to spell or pronounce


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Practically shoehorned her way in.
> 
> All 3 are (should be) accountable for their actions/decisions/words.



As close as _they_ say Hazzie was to Eug and Bea, it seems odd he did not learn from Sarah‘s OW experience. 
Simply said, OW is in it for OW.


----------



## sdkitty

floatinglili said:


> So stupid I hate the entitled use of titles the heyday of princely exploitation of the masses is over. Having titles on a US birth certificate is ridiculous.


if they loved those titles so much they should have stayed in GB


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I kept my maiden name after marriage in the USA, hard to pronounce and spell Swiss name but I am proud of my Swiss roots
> anyway, years later, people have issues with my last name being different to that of DH and of DS, at DS school I accepted being called by his last name
> It galls me that financial stuff seems to morph magically ALWAYS into being filed by DH last name despite incessant corrections
> it is just easier for the bank, businesses when there is only one last name involved, not that DH Walloon/Belgian last name is easier to spell or pronounce



#MeToo 
My dentist kept her name, too. That is one thing I give credit to the women‘s movement - they made it possible (not necessarily acceptable) for women to keep their names after marriage. It was certainly a red flag and deal-breaker for me if a man insisted on my changing my name.  Pffft, good-by. Yes, there has been confusion, even snide comments from other women, but, I tell ya, every day I am happy with my decision. I have also had many women tell me they wish they had kept their names, too.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> #MeToo
> My dentist kept her name, too. That is one thing I give credit to the women‘s movement - they made it possible (not necessarily acceptable) for women to keep their names after marriage. It was certainly a red flag and deal-breaker for me if a man insisted on my changing my name.  Pffft, good-by. Yes, there has been confusion, even snide comments from other women, but, I tell ya, every day I am happy with my decision. I have also had many women tell me they wish they had kept their names, too.



I kept my name too

MM could have easily not joined the RF and kept her own name. She chose to go for traditional, non-feminist route. That's another reason why I don't believe a single word she says. Basically, if you want to b the Disney princess/mermaid when you're in your late-30s feminism never touched you. She had choices (I'm pro-choice) but she's always gone with the most pro$it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> if they loved those titles so much they should have stayed in GB



No way he ever intended to be a commoner - gasp, the horror.  He got his half-in/half-out choice. 
IMO  The BRF needs to handle this better or it will lose public support.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> No way he ever intended to be a commoner - gasp, the horror.  He got his half-in/half-out choice.
> IMO  The BRF needs to handle this better or it will lose public support.




The public is def pushing for hardline action. All we're getting is soap opera.


----------



## periogirl28

I sorted this last name rubbish by getting a professional degree AND a Masters so that I will always be Dr Periogirl28 and not Mrs DH. Hahahah.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why, didn't her publisher give her advanced copies?



Didn’t you hear? She’s not good at filling out confusing forms.


----------



## Icyjade

duna said:


> This thing of a woman's maiden name always amazes me... Here in Italy, which is theoretically light years away from "civilized" Britain or USA, a woman ALWAYS keeps her maiden name for all official uses: documents, at work ect...so the only thing that changes after your married is that you're Mrs Mary Smith (just an example) instead of being Miss Mary Smith. In the UK you have Ms which doesn't specify if you're married or not, I don't know about the US. It amazes me because UK and US are much more forward regarding gender equality compared to Italy but then, once you're married, you're always know with your husband's name and your own just dissapears.
> Even if you divorce you still keep your ex husband's surname until you marry again....if you ever do. The UK even takes it one step further, during your marriage you're know as Mrs. John Smith and only when you divorce you get your first name back. I've always found it very degrading for us women, so one of the few things I like about Italy is that you keep your maiden name, always.
> 
> Having said all this, I haven't lived in the UK for a long time and never in the US, so maybe things have changed.....



Same!! Am from Singapore (Chinese) and the only people I know who took on their husband’s name are those who married non-Asians (e.g. Americans). 

It’s so odd that the custom is still to take on the husband’s last name after marriage (even with all the women’s right and what not). I mean, why must the woman change their identity after marriage. You are still you. Not too mention how troublesome the paper work is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!



Nupty  new to me word...fits them


----------



## Chanbal

Business advice for Ginger and wife!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!




Just like OW, a couple of former presidents, Ted Turner, and numerous others. Again showing how dim they really are - network tv is a relic of the past. The world has moved on.


----------



## Chanbal

Almost there! 











						Sign the Petition
					

Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance




					www.change.org


----------



## jennlt

Icyjade said:


> Same!! Am from Singapore (Chinese) and the only people I know who took on their husband’s name are those who married non-Asians (e.g. Americans).
> 
> It’s so odd that the custom is still to take on the husband’s last name after marriage (even with all the women’s right and what not). I mean, why must the woman change their identity after marriage. You are still you. Not too mention how troublesome the paper work is.


I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father" who broke my nose when I was nine and laughed about it. I was never given medical attention for it until I  was an adult. When my parents divorced, he stole an insurance settlement I had received from an accident I was in at age four. He also hadn't paid the mortgage or utilities in almost a year and kept on the move to avoid paying child support. I couldn't get rid of his name fast enough!
Don't worry, I have a great life now and a long, happy marriage. I just wanted to give a perspective as to why a feminist might be willing to take her husband's last name. I did walk down the aisle by myself at my wedding and no one "gave me" to my husband.
And I would be thrilled to be Thomas Markle's _least _favorite child lol


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father" who broke my nose when I was nine and laughed about it. I was never given medical attention for it until I  was an adult. When my parents divorced, he stole an insurance settlement I had received from an accident I was in at age four. He also hadn't paid the mortgage or utilities in almost a year and kept on the move to avoid paying child support. I couldn't get rid of his name fast enough!
> Don't worry, I have a great life now and a long, happy marriage. I just wanted to give a perspective as to why a feminist might be willing to take her husband's last name. I did walk down the aisle by myself at my wedding and no one "gave me" to my husband.
> And I would be thrilled to be Thomas Markle's _least _favorite child lol


good for you....some abused people sink and others rise...you rose


----------



## periogirl28

jennlt said:


> I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father" who broke my nose when I was nine and laughed about it. I was never given medical attention for it until I  was an adult. When my parents divorced, he stole an insurance settlement I had received from an accident I was in at age four. He also hadn't paid the mortgage or utilities in almost a year and kept on the move to avoid paying child support. I couldn't get rid of his name fast enough!
> Don't worry, I have a great life now and a long, happy marriage. I just wanted to give a perspective as to why a feminist might be willing to take her husband's last name. I did walk down the aisle by myself at my wedding and no one "gave me" to my husband.
> And I would be thrilled to be Thomas Markle's _least _favorite child lol


It’s all about choice and I am so glad you found strength and happiness.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The public is def pushing for hardline action. All we're getting is soap opera.


I have been convinced that action in the 6 matter is linked to action in the Andrew matter - which remains unresolved
the point being that some will argue they should be treated equally eg if 6 loses title then A should too
is there any indication in The Uk press that the A matter is coming to a close ?  All we hear of in the US is the Ghislaine has asked for bail for the 5th time and been denied? How does the UK feel about A?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!



Hello !  this is a National Enquirer article , the folks that tell us all about alien space babies … impeccable journalistic credentials


----------



## kipp

marietouchet said:


> Hello !  this is a National Enquirer article , the folks that tell us all about alien space babies … impeccable journalistic credentials


True---but this seems like something they would want to do (and also send out a trial balloon!).


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> It’s so odd that the custom is still to take on the husband’s last name after marriage (even with all the women’s right and what not). I mean, *why must the woman change their identity after marriage. *You are still you. Not too mention how troublesome the paper work is.


Yes! My grandmother questioned that zillions of years ago, and her husband (my grandfather) was a wonderful person.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> No way he ever intended to be a commoner - gasp, the horror.  He got his half-in/half-out choice.
> IMO  The BRF needs to handle this better or it will lose public support.


guess in time we will see what's more important to the RF.  Public opinion or blood?  The queen was influenced by public opinion when diana died


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t know much about the statue unveiling but I’m pretty sure Kate and her kids won’t be there.  Kate is much smarter than that.  She knows not to draw attention to herself.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> guess in time we will see what's more important to the RF.  Public opinion or blood?  The queen was influenced by public opinion when diana died


Going back to Diana, here is a valid point!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yes! My grandmother questioned that zillions of years ago, and her husband (my grandfather) was a wonderful person.



My grandmother insisted on writing her maiden name on every piece of paper she signed, even if she had take up more than the allotted space. She also supported the suffragettes when she was in college. And yet, she never learned to drive a car!  My grandfather, too, was wonderfully supportive of her. At the time, though, I had no idea how _radical_ they were. They seemed very old-fashioned to us young-uns.  Then, I started dating and  quickly learned how intolerant many people were.  My husband, too, is a rare jewel of a man who happily supports my choices.  As has been said, it is all about *choices*.  This is why H&M’s half-in/half-out is so irritating - make a ***** decision and stick to it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> ^^ OT but apparently even the makers of home genetic test kits were astonished by the scale of paternity fraud going on in the community.
> 
> Surely DNA testing of newborns should be considered as a standard practice. Would take the heat out of the topic for all parties, and introduce some much needed honesty.


I disagree, I think it’s just punishing  kids by fostering suspicion and invasiveness about their very existence. Lots of people adopt or raise non-biological children. I know I’ve never had to worry about knowing if I was my kids’ biological parent but I think the issue of these tests is it should be the sexual betrayal and working that out that’s issue between the adults but it is ends up making a child into a burden. 


Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!



Lol. Well they’ve done such a fabulous job of producing must-watch content so far   
I know the national enquirer gets a bad rep but what’s wrong with a little entertainment now and then. 
 And they’ve been right a lot more than you’d think


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!




Honestly, I feel at this point everyone has heard they are problematic (be is that they are drama queens, don't possess any loyalty, leak like a faulty faucet, have no work ethic, treat their staff poorly or that the public might start to turn on them). I kind of doubt people are just as willing to throw millions after them like they were just a year ago.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> good for you....some abused people sink and others rise...you rose





periogirl28 said:


> It’s all about choice and I am so glad you found strength and happiness.



Thanks so much!  

You know those kids who think it's their fault when their parents divorce? I was _not _one of them lol

I forgot to mention that when my husband and I took our vows, I would only say "obey" if my husband said it, too. He's much better at it than I am!


----------



## floatinglili

jelliedfeels said:


> I disagree, I think it’s just punishing  kids by fostering suspicion and invasiveness about their very existence. Lots of people adopt or raise non-biological children. I know I’ve never had to worry about knowing if I was my kids’ biological parent but I think the issue of these tests is it should be the sexual betrayal and working that out that’s issue between the adults but it is ends up making a child into a burden.


Perhaps I should have been clearer in my post, specifying it as an impersonal hospital test alongside administration of many other official requirements such as vitamin k vaccines etc. 
It is a thought provoking topic. 
In old fashioned language a young man defrauded in raising a child not his own would be called a cuckold. 
But essentially we are off topic. My apologies.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Netflix hopes crushed after US rejection
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's Netflix dreams were crushed after a US columnist claimed "no one wants to watch" the content they produce.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Shocking.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


>



It's only 30 pages?  With the amount of word salad they spew out, that's a pretty low number of pages.  Will this "dossier" become a best seller as well?


----------



## gracekelly

Icyjade said:


> Is there a side balcony? They don’t deserve to be on the main one and it will be sort of fun to see them trying to control their expression when they are shunted to the minor royal balcony.
> 
> Ok I’m mean but really they are not working royals and should not be on the main balcony.


They will be standing on a ladder to the side.


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> This thing of a woman's maiden name always amazes me... Here in Italy, which is theoretically light years away from "civilized" Britain or USA, a woman ALWAYS keeps her maiden name for all official uses: documents, at work ect...so the only thing that changes after your married is that you're Mrs Mary Smith (just an example) instead of being Miss Mary Smith. In the UK you have Ms which doesn't specify if you're married or not, I don't know about the US. It amazes me because UK and US are much more forward regarding gender equality compared to Italy but then, once you're married, you're always know with your husband's name and your own just dissapears.
> Even if you divorce you still keep your ex husband's surname until you marry again....if you ever do. The UK even takes it one step further, during your marriage you're know as Mrs. John Smith and only when you divorce you get your first name back. I've always found it very degrading for us women, so one of the few things I like about Italy is that you keep your maiden name, always.
> 
> Having said all this, I haven't lived in the UK for a long time and never in the US, so maybe things have changed.....


In the US, women can do whatever they want.  You can keep your maiden name if you choose, hyphenate, or change it, especially if you're a professional.  I have many friends whose diplomas state their maiden name (one said her parents helped her pay for her schooling, and her in laws had nothing to do with it, so why would she honor them by using their last name on her diploma!), and socially go by married names.  I know in many Asian cultures, women don't change their names even after marriage.  In some Indian states, not only does your last name get changed, but your husband picks your new first name and your middle name is your new husband's first name!  It's like you never existed....


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Going back to Diana, here is a valid point!



It has been predicted that the statue has D sitting on a bench …


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> I disagree, I think it’s just punishing  kids by fostering suspicion and invasiveness about their very existence. Lots of people adopt or raise non-biological children. I know I’ve never had to worry about knowing if I was my kids’ biological parent but I think the issue of these tests is it should be the sexual betrayal and working that out that’s issue between the adults but it is ends up making a child into a burden.
> 
> Lol. Well they’ve done such a fabulous job of producing must-watch content so far
> I know the national enquirer gets a bad rep but what’s wrong with a little entertainment now and then.
> And they’ve been right a lot more than you’d think


Agree, no making kids feel uncomfortable … 
agree, the NE has been good for a giggle recently


----------



## duna

jennlt said:


> I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father" who broke my nose when I was nine and laughed about it. I was never given medical attention for it until I  was an adult. When my parents divorced, he stole an insurance settlement I had received from an accident I was in at age four. He also hadn't paid the mortgage or utilities in almost a year and kept on the move to avoid paying child support. I couldn't get rid of his name fast enough!
> Don't worry, I have a great life now and a long, happy marriage. I just wanted to give a perspective as to why a feminist might be willing to take her husband's last name. I did walk down the aisle by myself at my wedding and no one "gave me" to my husband.
> And I would be thrilled to be Thomas Markle's _least _favorite child lol



I'm sorry for what you went through: as in all things in life there are all sorts of different experiences.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!



Heehee, the first line sums it up:  "The power mad Sussexes". 
I can only imagine the programmes:

-The Importance of Benches
-Backstabbing 101 
-How to Start and Keep a Chicken Coop
-Daily Affirmations from Your Staff
-Rules for Thee and Not for Me
-Variety Show of the Many Talents of Meg and Haz

And oh so many more titillating ones to come!


----------



## jelliedfeels

floatinglili said:


> Perhaps I should have been clearer in my post, specifying it as an impersonal hospital test alongside administration of many other official requirements such as vitamin k vaccines etc.
> It is a thought provoking topic.
> In old fashioned language a young man defrauded in raising a child not his own would be called a cuckold.
> But essentially we are off topic. My apologies.


Yes it is. Thank you that is sweet of you and I took no offence 

To bring it back to H&M a lot of people are calling for a dna test for Harry and the kids but I think some sort of sanity test for both parents might be more illuminating! 


purseinsanity said:


> It's only 30 pages?  With the amount of word salad they spew out, that's a pretty low number of pages.  Will this "dossier" become a best seller as well?


Truly it takes the poet of our times to find so many different ways to say ‘they just don’t like me because they are small-minded and prejudiced and I am the real victim here!’
The thing that gets me is when they talk about the palace staff they make it sound like they are all stuffy 299 year old gorgons but when you see pictures of some of the staff they had they are all younger than the couple, trendy and usually international-background  to boot


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Heehee, the first line sums it up:  "The power mad Sussexes".
> I can only imagine the programmes:
> 
> -The Importance of Benches
> -Backstabbing 101
> -How to Start and Keep a Chicken Coop
> -Daily Affirmations from Your Staff
> -Rules for Thee and Not for Me
> -Variety Show of the Many Talents of Meg and Haz
> 
> And oh so many more titillating ones to come!


Well they will need to do their own version of ground force where they just install a bench and a chicken coop (chickens hired separately) that just writes itself   

I assume some bland documentary on natural beauty with M’s chop and change hack-job nose poking into other people’s lives without an ounce of irony would be an obvious choice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My grandmother insisted on writing her maiden name on every piece of paper she signed, even if she had take up more than the allotted space. She also supported the suffragettes when she was in college. And yet, she never learned to drive a car!  My grandfather, too, was wonderfully supportive of her. At the time, though, I had no idea how _radical_ they were. They seemed very old-fashioned to us young-uns.



My great-grandfather insisted his daughters learned a trade because he said the boy would always find a way but the girls would be other people's servants if something bad were to happen. Not sure if he already saw WW2 looming but sure enough, he happened to be right.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> It has been predicted that the statue has D sitting on a bench …



which explains why MM wrote the poem/book and did not release it until recently.
They’ve had all of this nonsense planned out from day 1 - whenever that was


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

If that turns out to be true I am really fearing for this woman's mental state. Something is not wired correctly up there.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> Hell will freeze over before she goes back to England. She’s got what she wants. She isn’t going to make any unnecessary effort. I’m sure she’ll send a nice flower arrangement though.


Hmmm….honestly I think she would go back so she and H both can have a part 2 with Oprah prime time special…they returned to “heal the rift” and were rebuffed, ignored, etc….she’s got the balls, Harry doesn’t


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Going back to Diana, here is a valid point!



Bottom right - D on a bench !!! oh my gosh ... will we see this on Thursday ???


----------



## Sol Ryan

floatinglili said:


> ^^ OT but apparently even the makers of home genetic test kits were astonished by the scale of paternity fraud going on in the community.
> 
> Surely DNA testing of newborns should be considered as a standard practice. Would take the heat out of the topic for all parties, and introduce some much needed honesty.



OT as well, but I’ve always thought the Mother‘s day and Father’s day ads for those kits are so weird… its like let’s give your dad the gift of finding out mom was seeing the milk man on the side!


----------



## kkfiregirl

jennlt said:


> I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father"



I’m sorry to hear about your father; I too, had a similar ‘father’. 

I was happy to take DH’s last name for this reason and would probably keep my name the same if there was a divorce …


----------



## kkfiregirl

justwatchin said:


> Hmmm….honestly I think she would go back so she and H both can have a part 2 with Oprah



This is a good point! Do you think Oprah would be up for round 2?


----------



## redney

kkfiregirl said:


> This is a good point! Do you think Oprah would be up for round 2?


For sure if $$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## kkfiregirl

redney said:


> For sure if $$$$$$$$$$$$



There would be $$$$ involved, I think many people believe these two are victims of the RF.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Jane Fonda gave her son the last name Garrity - her mother’s maiden name, if I remember, but not Fonda or Hayden for the father, political activist  Tom Hayden
> it may be different in diff states, but parents get to pick, I think
> Jane did not want the baggage of Fonda or Hayden for her child


Garrity was maiden name of the mother of Tom Hayden.


----------



## gracekelly

I am waiting for the anvil to fall at the statue unveiling.  I don't expect Harry to have traveled all that way to do it quietly.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I have been convinced that action in the 6 matter is linked to action in the Andrew matter - which remains unresolved
> the point being that some will argue they should be treated equally eg if 6 loses title then A should too
> is there any indication in The Uk press that the A matter is coming to a close ?  All we hear of in the US is the Ghislaine has asked for bail for the 5th time and been denied? How does the UK feel about A?



A has been swept under the Palace carpet. 

Nothing will ever done with Andrew IMO.


----------



## redney

gracekelly said:


> I am waiting for the anvil to fall at the statue unveiling.  I don't expect Harry to have traveled all that way to do it quietly.


Such a shame since the Diana statue is *not about him* but he will make it so. Hope someone is paying attention to cut power to his microphone.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they want to have their own network. Please spare us!





How do I really feel?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

periogirl28 said:


> I sorted this last name rubbish by getting a professional degree AND a Masters so that I will always be Dr Periogirl28 and not Mrs DH. Hahahah.



Me too

Pity the women that took a Doctorate/Medical degree when they'd already taken the name of their husband. A friend did this and even when she got divorced she's still stuck with his name for her professional life.


----------



## CeeJay

jennlt said:


> I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father" who broke my nose when I was nine and laughed about it. I was never given medical attention for it until I  was an adult. When my parents divorced, he stole an insurance settlement I had received from an accident I was in at age four. He also hadn't paid the mortgage or utilities in almost a year and kept on the move to avoid paying child support. I couldn't get rid of his name fast enough!
> Don't worry, I have a great life now and a long, happy marriage. I just wanted to give a perspective as to why a feminist might be willing to take her husband's last name. I did walk down the aisle by myself at my wedding and no one "gave me" to my husband.
> And I would be thrilled to be Thomas Markle's _least _favorite child lol


@jennlt  - so sorry to hear this, but .. alas, I can very much relate to this.  My mother was harassed by my father's relatives to have another child (even when told by her Doctor that she shouldn't because of her mental health diseases).  I was to be the "BOY" to carry on the family's name, since my Father was the last in the line.  Well, 'lo and behold .. when I was born, my Father went into a tirade .. which, of course, set my mother off.  Needless to say (don't want to bore everyone), my father treated me like a boy (had to do all the men's work in/outside of the house), was present for only 1 birthday during the time that I lived with my parents, my mother spent most of my childhood in various mental institutions and my father traveled "for work", hardly ever home.  Thank goodness that I had 2 older sisters, but it wasn't fair to them to have to "raise" me per se .. so I was lucky that I had many friends whose parents would take me in for a bit.  Needless to say, it got to the point with my parents that I "divorced" them; I did keep in touch with my mother (we would talk about Italy, speak Italian), but my father?!!? .. nope.  Unfortunately, I still have his last name .. have thought many times of changing it to my (Italian) Grandmother's maiden name since SHE was the biggest influence in my young life.  I will be applying for Italian citizenship, and that is when it's likely that I will change my last name.  I know my sisters (look just like the Irish side - my Dad) will get upset, but frankly .. I don't care.  They got the good side of my Father; I did not .. and he could be quite ruthless.  I've always been of the "whatever doesn't kill you - makes you stronger" .. and that's me for sure.  My Father sure saw that side of me when he tried to pull a stunt later in his life and my comment to him was "yeah .. see Dad, I learned VERY WELL from YOU!" .. enough said!


----------



## 1LV

justwatchin said:


> Hmmm….honestly I think she would go back so she and H both can have a part 2 with Oprah prime time special…they returned to “heal the rift” and were rebuffed, ignored, etc….*she’s got the balls, Harry doesn’t*


What neither of them have is common sense.


----------



## doni

Icyjade said:


> Same!! Am from Singapore (Chinese) and the only people I know who took on their husband’s name are those who married non-Asians (e.g. Americans).
> 
> It’s so odd that the custom is still to take on the husband’s last name after marriage (even with all the women’s right and what not). I mean, why must the woman change their identity after marriage. You are still you. Not too mention how troublesome the paper work is.


Same here. In Spain and all over Latin America, a woman does not take her husband’s name, it was never the case. This seems to be a North European tradition transplanted into the US. But the fact that in this day and age this continues to be normal and the standard in those countries never ceases to amaze me.

In Germany people puzzle at us not having a “family name”. Many in the world can cope without one, surely it is not such big of a deal. I joke that I wanted to take my husband’s name but my father wouldn’t allow it   .
Me I puzzle at established professional women who go through all the hassle of changing the name with which they have built a successful career for their husband’s name and even keep it when divorced . But hey,  it continues to be normal, so Meghan is in no way exceptional in this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wth??









						Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over royal racism claims is fraud
					

Alexander Jackson Maier, an African-American student, claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers in the UK and US of his new title.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over claims of royal racism confesses he's a FRAUD: US student, 22, who proclaimed he was '11th Marquess of Annaville' apologises after lies exposed*

*Alexander Jackson Maier claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers of his new title*
*He wrote in The Independent arguing that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was right in saying there is racism in the Royal family*
*Maier wrote a column in a US newspaper claiming he was a Marquess and Lord *
*But experts have since revealed that Maier had made up the titles and peerag*


----------



## jennlt

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m sorry to hear about your father; I too, had a similar ‘father’.
> 
> I was happy to take DH’s last name for this reason and would probably keep my name the same if there was a divorce …



I'm so sorry you had to go through the same kind of experience.

I'm with you on keeping DH's name no matter what happens. This name is with me for the long haul; you could probably pry Duchess off MM more easily than you could get me to go back to my old name


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wth??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over royal racism claims is fraud
> 
> 
> Alexander Jackson Maier, an African-American student, claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers in the UK and US of his new title.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over claims of royal racism confesses he's a FRAUD: US student, 22, who proclaimed he was '11th Marquess of Annaville' apologises after lies exposed*
> 
> *Alexander Jackson Maier claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers of his new title*
> *He wrote in The Independent arguing that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was right in saying there is racism in the Royal family*
> *Maier wrote a column in a US newspaper claiming he was a Marquess and Lord *
> *But experts have since revealed that Maier had made up the titles and peerag*



Is he being criticized in social media for appropriating another culture?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> @jennlt  - so sorry to hear this, but .. alas, I can very much relate to this.  My mother was harassed by my father's relatives to have another child (even when told by her Doctor that she shouldn't because of her mental health diseases).  I was to be the "BOY" to carry on the family's name, since my Father was the last in the line.  Well, 'lo and behold .. when I was born, my Father went into a tirade .. which, of course, set my mother off.  Needless to say (don't want to bore everyone), my father treated me like a boy (had to do all the men's work in/outside of the house), was present for only 1 birthday during the time that I lived with my parents, my mother spent most of my childhood in various mental institutions and my father traveled "for work", hardly ever home.  Thank goodness that I had 2 older sisters, but it wasn't fair to them to have to "raise" me per se .. so I was lucky that I had many friends whose parents would take me in for a bit.  Needless to say, it got to the point with my parents that I "divorced" them; I did keep in touch with my mother (we would talk about Italy, speak Italian), but my father?!!? .. nope.  Unfortunately, I still have his last name .. have thought many times of changing it to my (Italian) Grandmother's maiden name since SHE was the biggest influence in my young life.  I will be applying for Italian citizenship, and that is when it's likely that I will change my last name.  I know my sisters (look just like the Irish side - my Dad) will get upset, but frankly .. I don't care.  They got the good side of my Father; I did not .. and he could be quite ruthless.  I've always been of the "whatever doesn't kill you - makes you stronger" .. and that's me for sure.  My Father sure saw that side of me when he tried to pull a stunt later in his life and my comment to him was "yeah .. see Dad, I learned VERY WELL from YOU!" .. enough said!


sorry you had a really tough childhood but seems it made you strong


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Going back to Diana, here is a valid point!




I hope not. All we need is Meghan fans insisting that William stole _her_ idea.

I wonder if the reason it took so long for the brothers to agree on a design was “bench or no bench”?


----------



## nom de guerre

bag-mania said:


> Is he being criticized in social media for appropriating another culture?



It seems like he and Meghan share the same _delusions of grandeur_.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> @jennlt  - so sorry to hear this, but .. alas, I can very much relate to this.  My mother was harassed by my father's relatives to have another child (even when told by her Doctor that she shouldn't because of her mental health diseases).  I was to be the "BOY" to carry on the family's name, since my Father was the last in the line.  Well, 'lo and behold .. when I was born, my Father went into a tirade .. which, of course, set my mother off.  Needless to say (don't want to bore everyone), my father treated me like a boy (had to do all the men's work in/outside of the house), was present for only 1 birthday during the time that I lived with my parents, my mother spent most of my childhood in various mental institutions and my father traveled "for work", hardly ever home.  Thank goodness that I had 2 older sisters, but it wasn't fair to them to have to "raise" me per se .. so I was lucky that I had many friends whose parents would take me in for a bit.  Needless to say, it got to the point with my parents that I "divorced" them; I did keep in touch with my mother (we would talk about Italy, speak Italian), but my father?!!? .. nope.  Unfortunately, I still have his last name .. have thought many times of changing it to my (Italian) Grandmother's maiden name since SHE was the biggest influence in my young life.  I will be applying for Italian citizenship, and that is when it's likely that I will change my last name.  I know my sisters (look just like the Irish side - my Dad) will get upset, but frankly .. I don't care.  They got the good side of my Father; I did not .. and he could be quite ruthless.  I've always been of the "whatever doesn't kill you - makes you stronger" .. and that's me for sure.  My Father sure saw that side of me when he tried to pull a stunt later in his life and my comment to him was "yeah .. see Dad, I learned VERY WELL from YOU!" .. enough said!



 so sorry about all of this - love and hugs to you and your family.


----------



## rose60610

jennlt said:


> I was happy to take my husband's last name because I had an abusive "father" who broke my nose when I was nine and laughed about it. I was never given medical attention for it until I  was an adult. When my parents divorced, he stole an insurance settlement I had received from an accident I was in at age four. He also hadn't paid the mortgage or utilities in almost a year and kept on the move to avoid paying child support. I couldn't get rid of his name fast enough!
> Don't worry, I have a great life now and a long, happy marriage. I just wanted to give a perspective as to why a feminist might be willing to take her husband's last name. I did walk down the aisle by myself at my wedding and no one "gave me" to my husband.
> And I would be thrilled to be Thomas Markle's _least _favorite child lol



Brava!


----------



## jennlt

CeeJay said:


> @jennlt  - so sorry to hear this, but .. alas, I can very much relate to this.  My mother was harassed by my father's relatives to have another child (even when told by her Doctor that she shouldn't because of her mental health diseases).  I was to be the "BOY" to carry on the family's name, since my Father was the last in the line.  Well, 'lo and behold .. when I was born, my Father went into a tirade .. which, of course, set my mother off.  Needless to say (don't want to bore everyone), my father treated me like a boy (had to do all the men's work in/outside of the house), was present for only 1 birthday during the time that I lived with my parents, my mother spent most of my childhood in various mental institutions and my father traveled "for work", hardly ever home.  Thank goodness that I had 2 older sisters, but it wasn't fair to them to have to "raise" me per se .. so I was lucky that I had many friends whose parents would take me in for a bit.  Needless to say, it got to the point with my parents that I "divorced" them; I did keep in touch with my mother (we would talk about Italy, speak Italian), but my father?!!? .. nope.  Unfortunately, I still have his last name .. have thought many times of changing it to my (Italian) Grandmother's maiden name since SHE was the biggest influence in my young life.  I will be applying for Italian citizenship, and that is when it's likely that I will change my last name.  I know my sisters (look just like the Irish side - my Dad) will get upset, but frankly .. I don't care.  They got the good side of my Father; I did not .. and he could be quite ruthless.  I've always been of the "whatever doesn't kill you - makes you stronger" .. and that's me for sure.  My Father sure saw that side of me when he tried to pull a stunt later in his life and my comment to him was "yeah .. see Dad, I learned VERY WELL from YOU!" .. enough said!



I'm really sorry for all you went through as a child! I say if changing your last name will make you happy then that is exactly what you should do. Your grandmother sounds like a strong, fantastic person and taking her maiden name would be a great way to honor her. Her maiden name is probably also much more indicative of your own strong spirit. 

Let's all hope Archie and Lili have inner strength for they will surely need it!


----------



## plastic-fish

redney said:


> Such a shame since the Diana statue is *not about him* but he will make it so. Hope someone is paying attention to cut power to his microphone.


I’m sure he’ll mention something about MM’s bench book if Diana is seated on a bench. Something like, “my mother is seated on a bench, supported, just like my wife supports me, and did I mention, Meghan wrote a book? She does voiceover work too.” Blah blah blah. Okay, maybe not quite so obvious… haha….


----------



## Annawakes

I wonder if he was pushing for Diana on a bench as the pose of the statue, even before the book was published…..because mermaid told him to.  That might explain the reports that the brothers couldn’t agree on the design.  Will was probably wondering why 6 was so adamant about having the bench. All is now explained lol

(just to add I have no idea what the statue looks like but I am looking forward to finding out),  gonna come here straightaway lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

papertiger said:


> Me too
> 
> Pity the women that took a Doctorate/Medical degree when they'd already taken the name of their husband. A friend did this and even when she got divorced she's still stuck with his name for her professional life.


After I got my medical degree, I got married to another physician in the same specialty and I didn't want there to be any confusion about who was who so I kept my maiden name.


----------



## Chanbal

periogirl28 said:


> I sorted this last name rubbish by getting a professional degree AND a Masters so that I will always be Dr Periogirl28 and not Mrs DH. Hahahah.





papertiger said:


> Me too
> 
> Pity the women that took a Doctorate/Medical degree when they'd already taken the name of their husband. A friend did this and even when she got divorced she's still stuck with his name for her professional life.


Me three


----------



## rose60610

I kept my maiden name, besides, I had numerous professional licenses at the time. So all my legal stuff-- DL, passport, etc of course is correct, socially I don't care how I'm addressed. Depending on the situation, I introduce myself as rose60610 DH's last name especially if it's unlikely I'll see those people again. Unimportant mail, holiday cards, etc are split 50/50. As long as my name is correct when it comes to legal and financial stuff, whatever friends and acquaintances want to call me is fine. 

If Harry makes any reference to Raptor's book and the Diana statue sitting on a bench, I'm going to  . It'll be interesting if H is invited to Kensington Palace.


----------



## Chanbal

Let's see what Lady C has to say... (without ads)


----------



## CeeJay

jennlt said:


> I'm really sorry for all you went through as a child! I say if changing your last name will make you happy then that is exactly what you should do. Your grandmother sounds like a strong, fantastic person and taking her maiden name would be a great way to honor her. Her maiden name is probably also much more indicative of your own strong spirit.
> 
> *Let's all hope Archie and Lili have inner strength for they will surely need it!*


I really feel sorry for those 2 children with the parents that they have!  Sadly, I think they will both need a fair amount of mental health assistance in the future; so much for not carrying on the "genetic pain" Hap-Hazza!


----------



## csshopper

kipp said:


> After I got my medical degree, I got married to another physician in the same specialty and I didn't want there to be any confusion about who was who so I kept my maiden name.


Good for you, you earned the degree completely independent of your husband!  And based on a prior experience of a Father - Daughter combo that often caused confusion, I'm sure your patients are appreciative.


----------



## gelbergirl

Any schedule of events published yet for July 1?
what can we expect and what time and who?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> Any schedule of events published yet for July 1?
> what can we expect and what time and who?



Slowly, oh so slowly, details emerge.
imo it will be Diana seated with the young boys.








						Kate and Prince William 'will visit his mother Diana's statue'
					

The Duke of Cambridge is expected to view the memorial with his family privately in Kensington Palace's Sunken Garden before joining his brother Prince Harry for the official event on Thursday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






*Kate and Prince William 'will visit his mother Diana's statue with George, Charlotte and Louis ahead of official unveiling on Thursday'*

*Princes William and Harry will unveil a statue of their mother Diana on Thursday*
*Duke of Cambridge will visit memorial with family for quite moment this week*
*Harry is currently quarantining in Windsor after flying in from California*
*Plans for the unveiling have been dramatically scaled back and guests cut down to just family members*


----------



## kipp

csshopper said:


> Good for you, you earned the degree completely independent of your husband!  And based on a prior experience of a Father - Daughter combo that often caused confusion, I'm sure your patients are appreciative.


Thank you, @csshopper!  
My father also was a physician so we had that too!  But he practiced in a different city so it wasn't so much of an issue.


----------



## kipp

rose60610 said:


> I kept my maiden name, besides, I had numerous professional licenses at the time. So all my legal stuff-- DL, passport, etc of course is correct, socially I don't care how I'm addressed. Depending on the situation, I introduce myself as rose60610 DH's last name especially if it's unlikely I'll see those people again. Unimportant mail, holiday cards, etc are split 50/50. As long as my name is correct when it comes to legal and financial stuff, whatever friends and acquaintances want to call me is fine.
> 
> If Harry makes any reference to Raptor's book and the Diana statue sitting on a bench, I'm going to  . It'll be interesting if H is invited to Kensington Palace.


Totally agree with this!


----------



## EverSoElusive

chicinthecity777 said:


> HRH is part of Harry's name?      are they PR team really that stupid?



Yes, they are    What an embarrassment!




scarf1 said:


> I don’t know about the worksheet but I was born in California many years ago. My birth certificate has mothers maiden name Only. And yes she was married at the time.
> I think birth certificates are reissued in the case of adoptions.. I am not adopted, so don’t know if adopted birth certificates LOOK ANY DIFFERENT.
> 
> also, my husband was born in Nevada.  His birth certificate also has ONLY has mother maiden name.and fathers name.
> 
> I was surprised the baby birth certificate did not list fathers name as Henry or possibly Prince Henry.  And the last name as Mountbatten Windsor.



They care more about dropping the HRH on there more than having accurate information. 




Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think Harry has ever used Mountbatten Windsor as a surname. Growing up, both Harry and William used Wales as a surname till they each got married.



I'm glad you pointed this out!! Totally forgot that it should be Wales seeing how he's Charles' son therefore it isn't Sussex. Sussex is meant for his kids instead 




marietouchet said:


> I beg to differ - birth certificates are a big deal, they should be correct, the father’s first name is not on there … bad …
> 
> The BRF names don’t work well on US forms, try explaining that to someone at the DMV or  tax office , you might away with that in the UK …. Because they are used to titles maybe
> 
> Oprah’s name came from misspelling on her BC , her name was supposed to be the Biblical Orpah but she got stuck with Oprah …



I agree 100%. Having undergone the US immigration process, I can confirm that a birth certificate with accurate and correct information is very important. If it's incorrect or mismatched, correction must be done before anything can move forward, which in turn creates unnecessary delay to get approval and issuance of whatever one's trying to get issued. Not sure about other countries but it's a huge deal in the US.




purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they think Lili will be soooo important (being their spawn and all) that she can just go by one name, like Cher or Madonna.



The spawn can be Lil Bit  Nothing more nor legendary.




xincinsin said:


> Maybe she will arrange another "Oops, I'm preggers again" incident because it's obvious that she was born to be a mother (excuse me while I go puke).
> It would be very convenient. They could tell Netflix etc that she can't work full time because of the imminent baby, then Hazard proudly produces a few lacklustre productions.





purseinsanity said:


> Or better yet, she'll "have a miscarriage"!



Wouldn't put it past MoM. Both are totally possible


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm married and retained my maiden name. My husband doesn't care that I don't take his last name. He said whatever makes me happy and comfortable.

Other than that, I wanted to make sure my name matches along the way during my US immigration process to avoid unnecessary delay. 

My window to apply for citizenship opens at the end of 2021. During this step, I can change my name for free. I've considered shortening my 3 first names into 1 first name followed by my husband's last name. However, I'm leaning towards shortening my 3 first names to 1 first name followed by my maiden name since it's just 2 letters. I'm tired of writing long a^s names 

Practicality aside, I really want to keep my last name because that is my personal identity  I don't think my personal identity (in terms of names) should be reduced to nothing just because I'm married.


----------



## bag-mania

CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Slowly, oh so slowly, details emerge.
> imo it will be Diana seated with the young boys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate and Prince William 'will visit his mother Diana's statue'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Cambridge is expected to view the memorial with his family privately in Kensington Palace's Sunken Garden before joining his brother Prince Harry for the official event on Thursday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5122262
> 
> *Kate and Prince William 'will visit his mother Diana's statue with George, Charlotte and Louis ahead of official unveiling on Thursday'*
> 
> *Princes William and Harry will unveil a statue of their mother Diana on Thursday*
> *Duke of Cambridge will visit memorial with family for quite moment this week*
> *Harry is currently quarantining in Windsor after flying in from California*
> *Plans for the unveiling have been dramatically scaled back and guests cut down to just family members*


Diana seated with her two kids?  I think that's an awful idea. She should be alone, not that I think a statue is even necessary.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Me too
> 
> Pity the women that took a Doctorate/Medical degree when they'd already taken the name of their husband. A friend did this and even when she got divorced she's still stuck with his name for her professional life.


My mum had a friend who married when she was still in the uni. All her degrees are in her first name + husband's surname. He cheated on her, they divorced and she is still stuck with his name on her degrees which she displays at her clinic.

OTOH my own friend couldn't wait to take on her husband's surname. I suspect her relationship with her parents wasn't that great. They were very rich and she enjoyed all the perks growing up, but there was always frost in the air when I visited her. I remember her complaining long and loud that the bank refused to issue her a credit card in her preferred name and insisted that it had to be in her maiden name as reflected on her identity card. Now of course, the banks here actually ask you what name you want on the card, even if the name in the bank system still has to match your birth certificate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.
> 
> View attachment 5122321


Thank you for the good laugh 

Maybe they are shooting stars and will crash land somewhere in Montecito.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.
> 
> View attachment 5122321




CBS is either influenced by OW and/or GK OR approached by the Sucksesses' spin team. Maybe even both. They are obviously in need of some serious damage control with all the dumb stunts they've been pulling and lies they've been telling. With the BRF hitting back left and right, they finally realized that they've dug a hole so deep that they are having trouble crawling back out   Maybe an avalanche should happen so that they are buried all the way with no way out while the kids go into Will and Kate's loving care.


----------



## xincinsin

Do you think that Lil Babe's birth certificate is that way because Hazard wasn't the one who filled in the details? Maybe some underling was assigned the task and didn't know Hazard's real name (and was too dumb to check the internet).


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> CBS is either influenced by OW and/or GK OR approached by the Sucksesses' spin team. Maybe even both. They are obviously in need of some serious damage control with all the dumb stunts they've been pulling and lies they've been telling. With the BRF hitting back left and right, they finally realized that they've dug a hole so deep that they are having trouble crawling back out   Maybe an avalanche should happen so that they are buried all the way with no way out while the kids go into Will and Kate's loving care.



What gets me is this comes from CBS News and not the entertainment wing of CBS. They are doubling down on their support.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> What gets me is this comes from CBS News and not the entertainment wing of CBS. They are doubling down on their support.



CBS News is equivalent to Fox News in this instance. They pretty much proved money is king because they are a business and at some point, they will choose money over journalism integrity.


----------



## needlv

Well MM loves to sue...


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Do you think that Lil Babe's birth certificate is that way because Hazard wasn't the one who filled in the details? Maybe some underling was assigned the task and didn't know Hazard's real name (and was too dumb to check the internet).



This could be a possible scenario. Alas, lazy or dumb, neither is inexcusable. 

Had Harry hired better qualified people to serve him, this faux pas wouldn't have occurred. But again, MoM probably has the final say on who they are hiring and she's all for Hollywood spin doctors instead of someone that's well informed to be a private secretary to take care of their household and administration matters.


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Well MM loves to sue...




Now don't put ideas into MoM's head


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.
> 
> View attachment 5122321



Their PR team is worth its weight in gold, however at some point they’ll have to actually pony up content beyond complaining about the constant abuse and racism the poor dears experienced. There’s only so much money PR stories can generate, and media companies don’t pay money for long for no content or content that generates no audience interest. So either they go the route of the Kardashian and start to expose every detail of their life on social media and merch it to death, or if they maintain their “privacy” they’ll have to at some point produce something. I don’t see this actually working out for them beyond the next year max.


----------



## xincinsin

Dear QE and PC,

Please DO NOT take Methane back, no matter how many times she instructs Hazard to grovel. They will turn on you once they scam enough $$$$ or get sufficient juice for another tell-all.

With Much Love
xcs


----------



## xincinsin

tiktok said:


> Their PR team is worth its weight in gold, however at some point they’ll have to actually pony up content beyond complaining about the constant abuse and racism the poor dears experienced. There’s only so much money PR stories can generate, and media companies don’t pay money for long for no content or content that generates no audience interest. So either they go the route of the Kardashian and start to expose every detail of their life on social media and merch it to death, or if they maintain their “privacy” they’ll have to at some point produce something. I don’t see this actually working out for them beyond the next year max.


ITA
Maybe they work on a profit-sharing model. I can't imagine how the Tiresome Twosome are going to make the millions stretch otherwise.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger and Cringe's PR machine working overtime...


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Ginger and Cringe's PR machine working overtime...
> View attachment 5122368


  
Will they ever get it through their heads that Methane is disliked not because she is American/(sort-of, when convenient) black/woke but because she is rotten at the core?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wth??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over royal racism claims is fraud
> 
> 
> Alexander Jackson Maier, an African-American student, claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers in the UK and US of his new title.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over claims of royal racism confesses he's a FRAUD: US student, 22, who proclaimed he was '11th Marquess of Annaville' apologises after lies exposed*
> 
> *Alexander Jackson Maier claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers of his new title*
> *He wrote in The Independent arguing that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was right in saying there is racism in the Royal family*
> *Maier wrote a column in a US newspaper claiming he was a Marquess and Lord *
> *But experts have since revealed that Maier had made up the titles and peerag*



With such Stans you really don't need haters


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> With such Stans you really don't need haters


Wondering what Alexander Jackson Maier got out of it. 15 minutes of fame? He claims to have a hard time being black, gay and conservative. Is he really a stan, or is he also just looking to make a quick buck?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Will they ever get it through their heads that Methane is disliked not because she is American/(sort-of, when convenient) black/woke but because she is rotten at the core?


Exactly, I could not give a s"#t where she's from, America or Mars and is black, green, pink or blue, as long as she learnt what being a member of the Royal Family meant by doing what she was told, behaved in an appropriate manner and kept quiet and most definitely not disrespect anyone who is of a higher rank than you, including a little girl who is most definitely a higher rank who behaves more graciously than you, even when she is doing this to her Grandpa Michael.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, I could not give a s"#t where she's from, America or Mars and is black, green, pink or blue, as long as she learnt what being a member of the Royal Family meant by doing what she was told, behaved in an appropriate manner and kept quiet and most definitely not disrespect anyone who is of a higher rank than you, including a little girl who is most definitely a higher rank who behaves more graciously than you, even when she is doing this to her Grandpa Michael.
> 
> View attachment 5122386


The proper place for tongues-sticking-out: little kids! Not a middle-aged wannabe-cutie.


----------



## periogirl28

xincinsin said:


> The proper place for tongues-sticking-out: little kids! Not a middle-aged wannabe-cutie.


Agree. So pathetic, uncool and SO Un- Duchess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It's a narc thing. The narc in my life still acts all cute in front of men and they are in their mid 60s. I'm convinced they think that's master grade flirting and manipulation.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's a narc thing. The narc in my life still acts all cute in front of men and they are in their mid 60s. I'm convinced they think that's master grade flirting and manipulation.


This awful thought just intruded into my mind: maybe they rank it on par with licking their lips, which is supposedly sexy. I'm afraid I'm not very clued in. A man once shook my hand and used his finger to tickle my palm. I innocently asked him why he did that, and he got quite flustered. Later, an older colleague drew me aside and told me that the lechers here use it as a signal meaning "Let's have sex".


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Ginger and Cringe's PR machine working overtime...
> View attachment 5122368



Is the word 'is' missing from that headline? I'm having trouble translating Global word-salad.

Also, are CBS also proclaiming the Earth is flat? Coz seriously it's less difficult to believe than a) the Royal Family are missing H&M at _all_, and b) M&H have/are stars and/or power.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This awful thought just intruded into my mind: maybe they rank it on par with licking their lips, which is supposedly sexy. I'm afraid I'm not very clued in. A man once shook my hand and used his finger to tickle my palm. I innocently asked him why he did that, and he got quite flustered. Later, an older colleague drew me aside and told me that the lechers here use it as a signal meaning "Let's have sex".



I'm gonna try not to remember that


----------



## chicinthecity777

International best seller???
Via IG.


----------



## needlv

So Jessica was markled...maybe she should do a tell-all book.  That would be interesting!









						Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney posts about 'losing friends'
					

The Canadian stylist, 41, from Toronto, who met Meghan Markle when she worked on Suits, posted a quote on Instagram yesterday about 'life changes' and becoming a 'stronger, wiser' person.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## justwatchin

Jayne1 said:


> Diana seated with her two kids?  I think that's an awful idea. She should be alone, not that I think a statue is even necessary.


So they are on a bench?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A German entertainment magazine (not a complete yellow press rag, but also not super serious press) titles the following:

"Harry told William: "If you don't won't to become king, I'll do it"."



Now the incident was a childhood thing Diana told a journalist only weeks before her untimely death, so it's not really scandalous...but I do find it extremely telling the press is starting to put out less than flattering clickbait like this.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Jayne1 said:


> Diana seated with her two kids?  I think that's an awful idea. She should be alone, *not that I think a statue is even necessary.*



I agree, and I read it's going to be private so that's even weirder, although should prevent it becoming some kind of shrine.
I wonder whose vanity project it really was - who was the main driving force  ? 
Harry's "family of origin" issues are IMO deeply rooted in his beatification of his mother and not his father's parenting.


----------



## needlv

Has everyone forgotten that Thomas Markle Jr wrote to Harry before the wedding and urged him to call it off... and warned the royals it would be a huge mistake?  Re-reading this knowing what we do now is enlightening!!!









						Meghan Markle's Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry
					

In a handwritten letter shared exclusively with In Touch, Meghan Markle’s estranged brother, Thomas Markle Jr., tells Prince Harry that it’s ‘not too late’ to not marry his sister. “As more time passes...




					www.intouchweekly.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Diana seated with her two kids?  I think that's an awful idea. She should be alone, not that I think a statue is even necessary.



Agree, the idea of a Diana sculpture is awful. This one has caused more conflict with the brothers - they couldn’t agree on what it should look like. Which Diana do they use - married or divorced? Standing or sitting? Daytime Diana or evening? Diana with the boys or with the public or alone? So, something like the FDR and Churchill sculpture seems plausible imo. I won’t be surprised if she is sitting on a bench which explains MM’s book.









						Allies Sculpture
					

Bronze sculpture celebrating the relationship between Churchill and Roosevelt.




					www.atlasobscura.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, that letter. Spot on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wth??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over royal racism claims is fraud
> 
> 
> Alexander Jackson Maier, an African-American student, claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers in the UK and US of his new title.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Black 'Irish Lord' who backed Meghan over claims of royal racism confesses he's a FRAUD: US student, 22, who proclaimed he was '11th Marquess of Annaville' apologises after lies exposed*
> 
> *Alexander Jackson Maier claimed he had the title of Lord Alexander, 11th Marquess of Annaville and convinced newspapers of his new title*
> *He wrote in The Independent arguing that Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, was right in saying there is racism in the Royal family*
> *Maier wrote a column in a US newspaper claiming he was a Marquess and Lord *
> *But experts have since revealed that Maier had made up the titles and peerag*


This sounds crazy! 


chicinthecity777 said:


> International best seller???
> Via IG.
> View attachment 5122404


Lol they are too cheap to even buy up their own books   


needlv said:


> Has everyone forgotten that Thomas Markle Jr wrote to Harry before the wedding and urged him to call it off... and warned the royals it would be a huge mistake?  Re-reading this knowing what we do now is enlightening!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> In a handwritten letter shared exclusively with In Touch, Meghan Markle’s estranged brother, Thomas Markle Jr., tells Prince Harry that it’s ‘not too late’ to not marry his sister. “As more time passes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intouchweekly.com


My god, I wasn’t following the story then but he made so many good points. Crikey, they really rushed in where angels fear to tread with this whole thing didn’t they? 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, the idea of a Diana sculpture is awful. This one has caused more conflict with the brothers - they couldn’t agree on what it should look like. Which Diana do they use - married or divorced? Standing or sitting? Daytime Diana or evening? Diana with the boys or with the public or alone? So, something like the FDR and Churchill sculpture seems plausible imo. I won’t be surprised if she is sitting on a bench which explains MM’s book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allies Sculpture
> 
> 
> Bronze sculpture celebrating the relationship between Churchill and Roosevelt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.atlasobscura.com


Oh gosh, this statue is going to be so hideous isn’t it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Samantha and Tom were telling it like it is...but nobody believed them.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Samantha and Tom were telling it like it is...but nobody believed them.


Hmmm thinking ... the Tom kerfuffle prior to marriage ... would he / would he not come ? 

Ok, Charles wound up walking her down the aisle ..

Wonder if PC called TM prior to wedding ... interesting thought ... likely the PC staff called TM to tell him how things would work out for wedding, PC is gracious enough to have done that


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> This could be a possible scenario. Alas, lazy or dumb, neither is inexcusable.
> 
> Had Harry hired better qualified people to serve him, this faux pas wouldn't have occurred. But again, *MoM* probably has the final say on who they are hiring and she's all for Hollywood spin doctors instead of someone that's well informed to be a private secretary to take care of their household and administration matters.


Every time I see M's name abbreviated MoM, I think of Milk of Magnesia and her verbal diarrhea and I can see her taking it so she can use all of her 16 bathrooms.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Has everyone forgotten that Thomas Markle Jr wrote to Harry before the wedding and urged him to call it off... and warned the royals it would be a huge mistake?  Re-reading this knowing what we do now is enlightening!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> In a handwritten letter shared exclusively with In Touch, Meghan Markle’s estranged brother, Thomas Markle Jr., tells Prince Harry that it’s ‘not too late’ to not marry his sister. “As more time passes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intouchweekly.com


WOW! TM Jr reads MM like a book and I must give him credit for trying to prevent the disaster that we see unfolding with this duo. It also makes me wonder if he can read other people so easily, he could make a fortune at it.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Has everyone forgotten that Thomas Markle Jr wrote to Harry before the wedding and urged him to call it off... and warned the royals it would be a huge mistake?  Re-reading this knowing what we do now is enlightening!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> In a handwritten letter shared exclusively with In Touch, Meghan Markle’s estranged brother, Thomas Markle Jr., tells Prince Harry that it’s ‘not too late’ to not marry his sister. “As more time passes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intouchweekly.com


I remember to hear about this letter, but I don't remember to have read it before. TM Jr was spot on. "_Using her own father until he is bankrupt, then forgets about him...like she never knew him_", and he predicted that she "_will make a joke of you and the Royal Family Heritage._"  What type of person can do such things as these?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, the idea of a Diana sculpture is awful. This one has caused more conflict with the brothers - they couldn’t agree on what it should look like. Which Diana do they use - married or divorced? Standing or sitting? Daytime Diana or evening? Diana with the boys or with the public or alone? So, something like the FDR and Churchill sculpture seems plausible imo. I won’t be surprised if she is sitting on a bench which explains MM’s book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Allies Sculpture
> 
> 
> Bronze sculpture celebrating the relationship between Churchill and Roosevelt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.atlasobscura.com


My bet is also on Diana sitting on a bench overlooking a beautiful garden...


----------



## Annawakes

Arghhhh I’m already predicting all the “nods” to mermaid’s book


----------



## sdkitty

so wonder what's up with CNN....last night I had the TV on that channel and it happened to be on some show about Meghan & Harry.  they were going on about what a great activist she was before Harry, etc.  They described her as a lead in Suits (which I understand her role was supporting) and said Suits was a huge success.
  Before the commercial break, they said Harry had been drinking heavily (assume this was before being rescued by the goddess).  I left the room at that point.  But when I went to look for it this morning to share with you all, I found this....another CNN show coming July 4?  what is making them so interested?

CNN Special Report: Royal Revolution: Harry & Meghan | Free Internet Radio | TuneIn


----------



## Chanbal

No surprises here:

"_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been accused of wanting to see 'the money rolling in' without doing much in return, by a royal biographer._"









						Harry and Meghan 'want money rolling in for little in return' author claims
					

A royal biographer has criticised the apparent lack of output from the couple despite signing multi million pound deals with companies like Spotify




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Under the thumb of MM, a nice way to put it!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Under the thumb of MM, a nice way to put it!



remember the Rolling Stones song?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> But when I went to look for it this morning to share with you all, I found this....another CNN show coming July 4? * what is making them so interested?*
> 
> CNN Special Report: Royal Revolution: Harry & Meghan | Free Internet Radio | TuneIn


Oprah et al.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Oprah et al.


and who is their target audience?
maybe people Meghan and Harry's age cause I don't think young people watch CNN


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Before the commercial break, they said Harry had been drinking heavily (assume this was before being rescued by the goddess).  I left the room at that point.  But when I went to look for it this morning to share with you all, I found this....another CNN show coming July 4?  *what is making them so interested?*
> 
> CNN Special Report: Royal Revolution: Harry & Meghan | Free Internet Radio | TuneIn



The decision makers at CNN love the idea that an American WOC actress might be the instrument that brings down the stuffy old British monarchy, which they disdain.

Since it doesn't appear to be happening the way they hoped, they keep pushing it along.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> so wonder what's up with CNN....last night I had the TV on that channel and it happened to be on some show about Meghan & Harry.  they were going on about what a great activist she was before Harry, etc.  They described her as a lead in Suits (which I understand her role was supporting) and said Suits was a huge success.
> Before the commercial break, they said Harry had been drinking heavily (assume this was before being rescued by the goddess).  I left the room at that point.  But when I went to look for it this morning to share with you all, I found this....another CNN show coming July 4?  what is making them so interested?
> 
> CNN Special Report: Royal Revolution: Harry & Meghan | Free Internet Radio | TuneIn



Maybe she bought shares in the company?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> No surprises here:
> 
> "_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been accused of wanting to see 'the money rolling in' without doing much in return, by a royal biographer._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'want money rolling in for little in return' author claims
> 
> 
> A royal biographer has criticised the apparent lack of output from the couple despite signing multi million pound deals with companies like Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



You think?  

I'd like to give this quote the understatement of the year award


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Do you think that Lil Babe's birth certificate is that way because Hazard wasn't the one who filled in the details? Maybe some underling was assigned the task and didn't know Hazard's real name (and was too dumb to check the internet).


I think MM & H knew exactly how it was being filled out, and MM would have turned the form sideways and written in the margin if that had been the only way to get HRH on the paper.


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm thinking ... the Tom kerfuffle prior to marriage ... would he / would he not come ?
> 
> Ok, Charles wound up walking her down the aisle ..
> 
> Wonder if PC called TM prior to wedding ... interesting thought ... likely the PC staff called TM to tell him how things would work out for wedding, PC is gracious enough to have done that


I have a feeling that Harry’s wife had no intention of her father be at her wedding, let alone walking her down the aisle. She would have found a reason to create drama so he would be unable to make it. Can’t have someone meet her new family whose memories may vary from what she has said.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and who is their target audience?
> maybe people Meghan and Harry's age cause I don't think young people watch CNN



Multiple choice question:

When you say "age", do you mean?:

a) real (39/36)
b) perceived (25/15) 
c) mind of (10/04)


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> The decision makers at CNN love the idea that an American WOC actress might be the instrument that brings down the *stuffy old British monarchy, which they disdain.*
> 
> Since it doesn't appear to be happening the way they hoped, they keep pushing it along.


The problem with that narrative is the British monarchy has nothing to do with the U.S.A. You guys fought hard to be out of it. It's irrelevant to most in the U.S. Apart from identity politics fanatics, no one really cares! No interests means no money...


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> The problem with that narrative is the British monarchy has nothing to do with the U.S.A. You guys fought hard to be out of it. It's irrelevant to most in the U.S. Apart from identity politics fanatics, no one really cares! No interests means no money...


I think there was a lot of interest around the time of the engagement/wedding but probably not so much now.....except for those who became her stans


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> The problem with that narrative is the British monarchy has nothing to do with the U.S.A. You guys fought hard to be out of it. It's irrelevant to most in the U.S. Apart from identity politics fanatics, no one really cares! No interests means no money...



Everything you said is true. That doesn't mean certain news outlets here don't have a rooting interest. They totally bought into H&M's racist British press/racist Royal Family narrative. I cannot think of another plausible reason why CNN and CBS (among others) are pushing MEGHAN'S TRUTH so hard even though there is more holes in it than Swiss cheese.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm thinking ... the Tom kerfuffle prior to marriage ... would he / would he not come ?
> 
> Ok, Charles wound up walking her down the aisle ..
> 
> Wonder if PC called TM prior to wedding ... interesting thought ... likely the PC staff called TM to tell him how things would work out for wedding, PC is gracious enough to have done that


I think TM has said he didn’t hear a word from the royals either and he is understandably a bit offended by their dismissal of him. 
so to be fair to the BRF back then, it’s clear they were fed some story about TM being a bad dad and I can see that they wouldn’t want to interfere with painful dynamics or seem like they didn’t believe their new daughter in law, especially as they thought she was going to be such a wonderful PR asset at the time.

Now that the dust has settled I have to say I think it is a bit rude of the royals that they’ve never apologised to either the markles or the raglands for not st least suggesting they should’ve been invited to the grand wedding event


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Everything you said is true. That doesn't mean certain news outlets here don't have a rooting interest. They totally bought into H&M's racist British press/racist Royal Family narrative. I cannot think of another plausible reason why CNN and CBS (among others) are pushing MEGHAN'S TRUTH so hard even though there is more holes in it than Swiss cheese.


Don't forget media interests don't equal audience interests. Time and time again, it's been proven that a lot of the times it's the complete opposite.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Don't forget media interests don't equal audience interests. Time and time again, it's been proven that a lot of the times it's the complete opposite.


hopefully CNN will find they don't get ratings from this crap


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Don't forget media interests don't equal audience interests. Time and time again, it's been proven to be the complete opposite.



Oh I realize that. But that has never stopped the media from trying to use their influence to sway the thinking of the masses.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> *The decision makers at CNN love the idea that an American WOC actress might be the instrument that brings down the stuffy old British monarchy, which they disdain.*
> 
> Since it doesn't appear to be happening the way they hoped, they keep pushing it along.


I'll never understand, why the antimonarchists of the world don't mind their own businesses and leave the decision to UK citizens on whether or not they want to keep their monarchy. CNN= too much ego and not enough common sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> hopefully CNN will find they don't get ratings from this crap



Has this already aired?  Always check the OW angle - she has been in this relationship from the beginning, even before that with Sarah.









						Oprah Winfrey and Prince Harry hosting a follow-up town hall | CNN
					

Oprah Winfrey and Prince Harry are set to continue their conversation on mental health.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> This awful thought just intruded into my mind: maybe they rank it on par with licking their lips, which is supposedly sexy. I'm afraid I'm not very clued in. A man once shook my hand and used his finger to tickle my palm. I innocently asked him why he did that, and he got quite flustered. Later, an older colleague drew me aside and told me that the lechers here use it as a signal meaning "Let's have sex".


LOL totally off topic but when DH and I first started hanging out (not yet dating in my clueless mind), he spent the evening telling me what an awful apartment complex he was living in, there were gun shots outside the night before, and somehow we were chatting about how women shouldn't easily just trust men.  When it was time to leave, he walked me out to my car, but I walked so fast that he claimed he had to practically jog to keep up with me.  I was so focused on getting into my car (and not possibly getting shot) and he was trying to give me a hug goodbye.  He wound up hugging me from behind and I moved at the last minute so that his arm wound up across my neck.  I froze, convinced he was going to strangle me and trying to figure out what Taekwondo move I could do to beat him up.  He quickly realized and backed off.  It was quite awkward then, but has made for a funny story years later.  Our kids laugh about when their eventual mother thought their eventual father was going to murder her!  My husband still calls me utterly clueless, because I have no clue if someone is flirting with me or not.  He still tells me "Not all men are nice and just want to be friends!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Every time I see M's name abbreviated MoM, I think of Milk of Magnesia and her verbal diarrhea and I can see her taking it so she can use all of her 16 bathrooms.


OMG Me too!!


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'll never understand, why the antimonarchists of the world don't mind their own businesses and leave the decision to UK citizens on whether or not they want to keep their monarchy. CNN= too much ego and not enough common sense.



 Exactly. In too many instances "journalists" are nothing more than narrative promoting whores who delight in sucking off anybody willing to appear on their shows to support fabricated or twisted narratives. Uh oh! Here come the How Dare you Attack the Media Poleeth!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Every time I see M's name abbreviated MoM, I think of Milk of Magnesia and her verbal diarrhea and I can see her taking it so she can use all of her 16 bathrooms.




She doesn't deserve my extra time typing out Maleficent of Montecito   

I'd like to add ghost pepper to all her food!


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> LOL totally off topic but when DH and I first started hanging out (not yet dating in my clueless mind), he spent the evening telling me what an awful apartment complex he was living in, there were gun shots outside the night before, and somehow we were chatting about how women shouldn't easily just trust men.  When it was time to leave, he walked me out to my car, but I walked so fast that he claimed he had to practically jog to keep up with me.  I was so focused on getting into my car (and not possibly getting shot) and he was trying to give me a hug goodbye.  He wound up hugging me from behind and I moved at the last minute so that his arm wound up across my neck.  I froze, convinced he was going to strangle me and trying to figure out what Taekwondo move I could do to beat him up.  He quickly realized and backed off.  It was quite awkward then, but has made for a funny story years later.  Our kids laugh about when their eventual mother thought their eventual father was going to murder her!  My husband still calls me utterly clueless, because I have no clue if someone is flirting with me or not.  He still tells me "Not all men are nice and just want to be friends!"


Love it!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> You think?
> 
> I'd like to give this quote the understatement of the year award



OT: Where did you find that emoji? 




purseinsanity said:


> OMG Me too!!



Y'all too funny. Thanks for making my day! Work is crazy today


----------



## lulilu

purseinsanity said:


> Actually that part is true at least in California; birth certificates ask for the mother's maiden name.  Both of my children were born in CA, and my maiden name is specifically listed on their birth certificates.   Maybe with all the marriages/divorces/etc., and some women changing their names often, their maiden name will always be constant.  Maybe that's the logic?





Chanbal said:


> Me three



All the doctors and lawyers I know kept their maiden names.  Makes more sense, professionally.  My DD and I both did.

I find it interesting to learn of the number of countries where women regularly keep their names.  E.g., I didn't know it was common in Asia.  And some European countries.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



could this be coincidence?  if not, it's pathological....she didn't do the side eye though


----------



## CarryOn2020

: presents :   No space between : and p


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> I think TM has said he didn’t hear a word from the royals either and he is understandably a bit offended by their dismissal of him.
> so to be fair to the BRF back then, it’s clear they were fed some story about TM being a bad dad and I can see that they wouldn’t want to interfere with painful dynamics or seem like they didn’t believe their new daughter in law, especially as they thought she was going to be such a wonderful PR asset at the time.
> 
> Now that the dust has settled I have to say I think it is a bit rude of the royals that they’ve never apologised to either the markles or the raglands for not st least suggesting they should’ve been invited to the grand wedding event


I bet a lot of people would have done things differently had they known ... 

There are times when one takes the path of least resistance eg I dont have to worry about inviting them that is the responsibility of the bride ... wedding invitation lists are always such bones of contention


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




to be fair, it is not a perfect copy, more of a sloppy copy 
Diana’s shirt was tucked into her skirt and, perhaps most importantly, was neatly pressed, maybe starched.

ETA:  this, though, looks to be deliberate - again, a sloppy copy because Diana used her eyes to look up, not her head. MM tilts her head.  Diana’s scarf beautifully matched her dress. MM, not so much.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> could this be coincidence?  if not, it's pathological....she didn't do the side eye though


Pathological.  There’s too many of these types of photos to be a coincidence.


----------



## lulu212121

She's so creepy.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Everything you said is true. That doesn't mean certain news outlets here don't have a rooting interest. They totally bought into H&M's racist British press/racist Royal Family narrative. I cannot think of another plausible reason why CNN and CBS (among others) are pushing MEGHAN'S TRUTH so hard even though there is more holes in it than Swiss cheese.



Could be the reason they are pushing it, is that it aligns with the being a victim, the flavor of the day.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> could this be coincidence?  if not, it's pathological....she didn't do the side eye though



Not with her history of copying Diana's outfits, looks, and poses. It's possible she did have some side eye shots done but she looked better in the one they used so they went with it.

I found an article with a few examples of Meghan's most dramatic Diana cosplay moments.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Not with her history of copying Diana's outfits, looks, and poses. It's possible she did have some side eye shots done but she looked better in the one they used so they went with it.
> 
> I found an article with a few examples of Meghan's most dramatic Diana cosplay moments.
> 
> View attachment 5122705
> View attachment 5122706
> View attachment 5122707
> View attachment 5122708
> View attachment 5122709



Creepy, but definitely in keeping with Meghan's plagiarism use.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Not with her history of copying Diana's outfits, looks, and poses. It's possible she did have some side eye shots done but she looked better in the one they used so they went with it.
> 
> I found an article with a few examples of Meghan's most dramatic Diana cosplay moments.
> 
> View attachment 5122705
> View attachment 5122706
> View attachment 5122707
> View attachment 5122708
> View attachment 5122709




Wow. So many.  Ok, I agree, it is pathological, creepy, and downright disturbing.
Wonder if Diana’s sisters will wear a “Diana look” to the statue reveal?  Nah, they are too self-assured to cosplay.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana’s niece - Celia McCorquodale








						Doesn't she look like Diana! Princess of Wales' niece on wedding day
					

PRINCESS Diana’s niece got married in a lavish country wedding this weekend, attended by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, and the beautiful bride stunned in the same dazzling tiara worn by her auntie at her Royal Wedding to Prince Charles.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Not with her history of copying Diana's outfits, looks, and poses. It's possible she did have some side eye shots done but she looked better in the one they used so they went with it.
> 
> I found an article with a few examples of Meghan's most dramatic Diana cosplay moments.
> 
> View attachment 5122705
> View attachment 5122706
> View attachment 5122707
> View attachment 5122708
> View attachment 5122709


I'm old fashioned and I prefer royals coiffed in an updo and no sloppy side tendrils when they wear a hat or a tiara.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm old fashioned and I prefer royals coiffed in an updo and no sloppy side tendrils when they wear a hat or a tiara.


Diana's hair was awful on her wedding day.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana’s niece - Celia McCorquodale
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't she look like Diana! Princess of Wales' niece on wedding day
> 
> 
> PRINCESS Diana’s niece got married in a lavish country wedding this weekend, attended by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, and the beautiful bride stunned in the same dazzling tiara worn by her auntie at her Royal Wedding to Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5122734



I always liked the Spencer tiara. Celia looked good and what's the point in having a family tiara if you can't use it for your wedding? I wish we all had a tiara.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I always liked the Spencer tiara. Celia looked good and what's the point in having a family tiara if you can't use it for your wedding? I wish we all had a tiara.


Sweet!


----------



## EverSoElusive

I wonder if MoM has already commissioned someone to add her to the statue's bench for when she passes on


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> I wonder if MoM has already commissioned someone to add her to the statue's bench for when she passes on


When she passes on?  So you think she’ll wait?


----------



## CarryOn2020

My favorite, too  








						Princess Diana's Spencer Tiara Will Be Exhibited in London
					

The family heirloom that Diana wore on her wedding day will go on public view for the first time in 50 years.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.
> 
> View attachment 5122321


I saw this yesterday and .. UGGH, thoroughly disgusted with CBS and will NEVER, EVER watch ANYTHING on that vile network again!!!  I think we can all say that it appears as though Gayle is looking for some "news" on them, in essence .. kissing their a$$es so that CBS can get something out of this.  I used to like Gayle, but now?!?!? .. NOPE!  Wondering if she picked up some of the BS that Oprah did to her employees (I do not like Oprah as I know more than a few folks that used to work for her and when they told me about some of her antics??? .. WOW).


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I always liked the Spencer tiara. Celia looked good and what's the point in having a family tiara if you can't use it for your wedding? I wish we all had a tiara.





CarryOn2020 said:


> My favorite, too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's Spencer Tiara Will Be Exhibited in London
> 
> 
> The family heirloom that Diana wore on her wedding day will go on public view for the first time in 50 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



I know where they keep the Spencer tiara if you ever want to borrow


----------



## bag-mania

Here are a few more examples of Meghan's Diana fantasy. 

sdkitty, she did do the side eye for the one with the pink suit. How's that for accuracy?


----------



## EverSoElusive

1LV said:


> When she passes on?  So you think she’ll wait?



Now you're just talking crazy    I'm sure she's patient as a saint because she's St. Meghan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> to be fair, it is not a perfect copy, more of a sloppy copy
> Diana’s shirt was tucked into her skirt and, perhaps most importantly, was neatly pressed, maybe starched.
> 
> ETA:  this, though, looks to be deliberate - again, a sloppy copy because Diana used her eyes to look up, not her head. MM tilts her head.  Diana’s scarf beautifully matched her dress. MM, not so much.
> 
> View attachment 5122682



And Di's hair was done. This must have been the most respectless appearance ever. She looked like she had just rolled out of bed with that rag draped around unkempt hair visiting a house of worship. Then compaire it to Kate who was in Pakistan around the same time and looked impeccable visiting a mosque, not a hair out of place.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Here are a few more examples of Meghan's Diana fantasy.
> 
> sdkitty, she did do the side eye for the one with the pink suit. How's that for accuracy?
> 
> View attachment 5122762
> View attachment 5122763
> View attachment 5122764
> View attachment 5122765
> View attachment 5122766



How does one have so much time to research and copy someone else? I wish I had more time to do anything but that


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> Diana's hair was awful on her wedding day.



Who knew?
I never got past THAT DRESS!!!! THAT VEIL!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana’s niece - Celia McCorquodale
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't she look like Diana! Princess of Wales' niece on wedding day
> 
> 
> PRINCESS Diana’s niece got married in a lavish country wedding this weekend, attended by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, and the beautiful bride stunned in the same dazzling tiara worn by her auntie at her Royal Wedding to Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5122734



*sigh* It's not aunt's tiara, it's uncle's. Diana didn't own it, she borrowed it whenever she wore it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe I have a blind spot because of the era, but I don’t think Diana had great style.  **runs away**

That is way too many coincidences given how short a time frame MM actually was part of TRF.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> How does one have so much time to research and copy someone else? I wish I had more time to do anything but that



When you have a goal and you are 100% committed to making it happen, you make every effort. A lot of her Diana mimicry occurred during the engagement period. She thought she was being subtle because she never expected anyone to go through all of her imitations and post them side by side. 



lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe I have a blind spot because of the era, but I don’t think Diana had great style.  **runs away**
> 
> That is way too many coincidences given how short a time frame MM actually was part of TRF.



I don't think it was about fashion style as much as it was Meghan trying to link herself with Diana on a subconscious level in the public's mind. I think she has managed to do that with Harry in some darker, more twisted way.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> When you have a goal and you are 100% committed to making it happen, you make every effort. A lot of her Diana mimicry occurred during the engagement period. She thought she was being subtle because she never expected anyone to go through all of her imitations and post them side by side.



She definitely psycho Harry all the way to make sure he's hooked. He misses his mom and voila! MoM is a mirror of his mom


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I always liked the Spencer tiara. Celia looked good and what's the point in having a family tiara if you can't use it for your wedding? *I wish we all had a tiara*.


HM is temporarily lending you her favourite tiara. Hope you like it.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe I have a blind spot because of the era, but I don’t think Diana had great style.  **runs away**


It's the era, 80s big hair, shoulder pads etc never aged well. Her wedding dress was awful to me.


----------



## Chanbal

H did all his homework at home before his flight. The surprise speech was filmed in the 16 (or 19) toilet-mansion. 

_"Prince Harry has made his first official appearance since landing in the UK last week in a surprise speech at the virtual Diana Award ceremony_."









						Harry makes first appearance at award ceremony since arriving in UK
					

Harry made a surprise video appearance at the virtual Diana Awards - his first since landing in the UK. The charity was set up in his mother's memory to recognise remarkable young people




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe I have a blind spot because of the era, but I don’t think Diana had great style.  **runs away**
> 
> That is way too many coincidences given how short a time frame MM actually was part of TRF.



I'm not over fond of many of Di's outfits, but she did have a million of them and some of them were gorgeous. On the other hand, the 80's and 90's had some real weird fashion moments in general. At the time I thought she was glamorous because naive me believed all the magazines and papers that said so   .


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe I have a blind spot because of the era, but I don’t think Diana had great style.  **runs away**


I have the same blind spot. We were pregnant at the same time, but that was the only aspect I could relate to.

Her early Sloan Ranger stuff was accessible, fun and straight off the racks, so quite common. Her later outfits were very princess proper, bit unattractive and not inspirational or aspirational at all.

At times, her hair looked like a poodle.

Nevertheless, she was entertaining to watch and read about.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> How does one have so much time to research and copy someone else? I wish I had more time to do anything but that


Ah doncha you know that M never researched the RF or Diana and that Diana's sense of fashion came naturally to M as well.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> H did all his homework at home before his flight. The surprise speech was filmed in the 16 (or 19) toilet-mansion.
> 
> _"Prince Harry has made his first official appearance since landing in the UK last week in a surprise speech at the virtual Diana Award ceremony_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry makes first appearance at award ceremony since arriving in UK
> 
> 
> Harry made a surprise video appearance at the virtual Diana Awards - his first since landing in the UK. The charity was set up in his mother's memory to recognise remarkable young people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"And Meg and I fundamentally believe that our world is at the cusp of change, real change for the good of all."

_The cusp of change, real change for the good of all??_  Well, it hasn't happened yet, in the past millennia, so I'm wondering who the hell do they think they are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> H did all his homework at home before his flight. The surprise speech was filmed in the 16 (or 19) toilet-mansion.
> 
> _"Prince Harry has made his first official appearance since landing in the UK last week in a surprise speech at the virtual Diana Award ceremony_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry makes first appearance at award ceremony since arriving in UK
> 
> 
> Harry made a surprise video appearance at the virtual Diana Awards - his first since landing in the UK. The charity was set up in his mother's memory to recognise remarkable young people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



*This* is exactly what we do here, every single day:

_'Never be afraid to do what's right. Stand up for what you believe in and trust that when you live by truth and in service to others, people will see that just as they did with my mum.'_

So, you are welcome, Hazzie. 

btw - he couldn’t find a more attractive corner in that McMansion?  It looks like the wall is cracking.

ETA: Prim and proper and Peter Pan collar-Diana did not have great style herself, but she hung out with people who did.
Catherine Walker, gorgeous clothes.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> H did all his homework at home before his flight. The surprise speech was filmed in the 16 (or 19) toilet-mansion.
> 
> _"Prince Harry has made his first official appearance since landing in the UK last week in a surprise speech at the virtual Diana Award ceremony_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry makes first appearance at award ceremony since arriving in UK
> 
> 
> Harry made a surprise video appearance at the virtual Diana Awards - his first since landing in the UK. The charity was set up in his mother's memory to recognise remarkable young people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"I wanna" 
"twenny one" 
I was waiting for him to say Mom instead of Mum.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looking back at Hazz’s speech in 2007 - definitely common themes:





						Diana memorial service: Speeches in full - CNN.com
					

Prince Harry led tributes to Diana, Princess of Wales on the 10th anniversary of her death, describing her as "the best mother in the world" in a speech at a memorial service.



					edition.cnn.com
				






Spoiler: 2007 The speeches



*LONDON, England (CNN)* -- Prince Harry led tributes to Diana, Princess of Wales on the 10th anniversary of her death, describing her as "the best mother in the world" in a speech at a memorial service.

*Here is his speech in full:*

William and I can separate life into two parts. There were those years when we were blessed with the physical presence beside us of both our mother and father.

Princes Harry and William greet guests at a thanksgiving service in memory of their mother.
And then there are the 10 years since our mother's death. When she was alive, we completely took for granted her unrivaled love of life, laughter, fun and folly. She was our guardian, friend and protector.

She never once allowed her unfaltering love for us to go unspoken or undemonstrated.

She will always be remembered for her amazing public work. But behind the media glare, to us, just two loving children, she was quite simply the best mother in the world.

We would say that, wouldn't we.

But we miss her. She kissed us last thing at night. Her beaming smile greeted us from school. She laughed hysterically and uncontrollably when sharing something silly she might have said or done that day. She encouraged us when we were nervous or unsure.
*
She -- like our father -- was determined to provide us with a stable and secure childhood.*

To lose a parent so suddenly at such a young age, as others have experienced, is indescribably shocking and sad. It was an event which changed our lives forever, as it must have done for everyone who lost someone that night.

But what is far more important to us now, and into the future, is that we remember our mother as she would have wished to be remembered as she was: fun-loving, generous, down-to-earth, entirely genuine.

We both think of her every day.

We speak about her and laugh together at all the memories.

Put simply, she made us, and so many other people, happy. May this be the way that she is remembered.

*Prince William's reading from St Paul's letter to the Ephesians:*

I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth takes its name.

I pray that, according to the riches of His glory, He may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through His Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love. 

I pray that you may have the power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. 

Now to Him who by the power at work within us is able to accomplish abundantly far more than all we can ask or imagine, to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, for ever and ever. Amen. 

Thanks be to God.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ah doncha you know that M never researched the RF or Diana and that Diana's sense of fashion came naturally to M as well.




Then I must say she has a horrible sense of fashion


----------



## purseinsanity

*"She -- like our father -- was determined to provide us with a stable and secure childhood."*
...says Haz.  The same father that inflicted generational pain on you, poor Harry, and never took you for a bike ride or anything?


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> "I wanna"
> "twenny one"
> I was waiting for him to say Mom instead of Mum.



 It reminds me of back when Madonna lived in the UK and was talking in a weird hybrid accent that was her attempt to sound British.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> *"She -- like our father -- was determined to provide us with a stable and secure childhood."*
> ...says Haz.  The same father that inflicted generational pain on you, poor Harry, and never took you for a bike ride or anything?



You see poor Harry didn't realize back then how trapped and full of suffering he was. He needed Meghan to teach him how his life didn't really begin until the day he met her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Then I must say she has a horrible sense of fashion


Yes, I was being diplomatic, but I don't care for either D's or M's fashion sense although both have some items that I like.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I was being diplomatic, but I don't care for either D's or M's fashion sense although both have some items that I like.



I know you were 

As a whole, her creepiness bothers me more than her fashion sense


----------



## bag-mania

The good news is the box covering the statue pre-unveiling is vertical and narrow. That hopefully means it will be a standing statue and there is no chance of a bench being involved.


----------



## EverSoElusive

How very British of William with his choice of words! Even more so when spoken in his British accent     

Tip Hero is not my news source but thought the headline was somewhat funny


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> "And Meg and I fundamentally believe that our world is at the cusp of change, real change for the good of all."
> 
> _The cusp of change, real change for the good of all??_  Well, it hasn't happened yet, in the past millennia, so I'm wondering who the hell do they think they are.



IKR!
This song came out over FIFTY years ago..........might as well be 50 minutes ago


One, two, one, two, three, four, ow
People moving out, people moving in
Why, because of the color of their skin
Run, run, run but you sure can't hide
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth
Vote for me and I'll set you free
Rap on, brother, rap on
Well, the only person talking about love thy brother is the preacher
And it seems nobody's interested in learning but the teacher
Segregation, determination, demonstration, integration
Aggravation, humiliation, obligation to our nation
Ball of confusion
Oh yeah, that's what the world is today
Woo, hey, hey
The sale of pills are at an all time high
Young folks walking round with their heads in the sky
The cities ablaze in the summer time
And oh, the beat goes on
Evolution, revolution, gun control, sound of soul
Shooting rockets to the moon, kids growing up too soon
Politicians say more taxes will solve everything
And the band played on
So, round and around and around we go
Where the world's headed, nobody knows
Oh, great googa-looga, can't you hear me talking to you
Just a ball of confusion
Oh yeah, that's what the world is today
Woo, hey
Fear in the air, tension everywhere
Unemployment rising fast, the Beatles new record's a gas
And the only safe place to live is on an Indian reservation
And the band played on
Eve of destruction, tax deduction, city inspectors, bill collectors
Mod clothes in demand, population out of hand, suicide, too many bills
Hippies moving to the hills, people all over the world are shouting, end the war
And the band played on
Great googa-looga, can't you hear me talking to you
Sayin' ball of confusion
That's what the world is today, hey, hey
Let me hear ya, let me hear ya, let me hear ya
Sayin', ball of confusion
That's what the world is today, hey, hey
Let me hear ya, let me hear ya, let me hear ya, let me hear ya, let me hear ya
Ball of confusion


----------



## Aimee3

Sharont2305 said:


> "I wanna"
> "twenny one"
> I was waiting for him to say Mom instead of Mum.


Looks like H picked up his wife’s annoying hand gesturing constantly as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The good news is the box covering the statue pre-unveiling is vertical and narrow. That hopefully means it will be a standing statue and there is no chance of a bench being involved.
> 
> View attachment 5122839



Could be a standing statue, idk. It is going in the Sunken Garden where H&M announced the engagement.  Difficult for me to figure out the width of that space.


----------



## periogirl28

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be a standing statue, idk. It is going in the Sunken Garden where H&M announced the engagement.  Difficult for me to figure out the width of that space.
> 
> View attachment 5122854


I’ll go have a look after July 1st and let you all know.


----------



## rose60610

I hope Harry is going to wear something other than a drab grey polo. William looks every bit of a King-to-be, Harry is scruffy even on his best day.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *sigh* It's not aunt's tiara, it's uncle's. Diana didn't own it, she borrowed it whenever she wore it.


Not the Spencer tiara?  Does Charles get to veto someone in the family wanting to wear it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> She definitely psycho Harry all the way to make sure he's hooked. He misses his mom and voila! MoM is a mirror of his mom


that witchcraft again


----------



## marietouchet

lots of good detail, and amazingly the article dates to 2018, was not written post Megxit

King Edward VIII and Aspergers Syndrome or Wallis Simpson and Narcissistic Personality Disorder - HubPages










						King Edward VIII and Aspergers Syndrome or Wallis Simpson and Narcissistic Personality Disorder
					

Publically King Edward VIII was seen the world’s most eligible bachelor in 1936. While in reality the new King had been conducting a very open affair with an American divorcee known as Wallis Simpson




					discover.hubpages.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> that witchcraft again


Frank Sinatra. OMG, I can hear him crooning in my head. 

*Frank Sinatra Lyrics*

*"Witchcraft"*

Those fingers in my hair
That sly come-hither stare
That strips my conscience bare
It's witchcraft

And I've got no defense for it
The heat is too intense for it
What good would common sense for it do?

'cause it's witchcraft, wicked witchcraft
And although I know it's strictly taboo
When you arouse the need in me
My heart says "Yes, indeed" in me
"Proceed with what you're leadin' me to"

It's such an ancient pitch
But one I wouldn't switch
'cause there's no nicer witch than you

_[instrumental]_

'cause it's witchcraft, that crazy witchcraft
And although I know it's strictly taboo
When you arouse the need in me
My heart says "Yes, indeed" in me
"Proceed with what you're leadin' me to"

It's such an ancient pitch
But one I'd never switch
'cause there's no nicer witch than you


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> that witchcraft again



She must have learned from the best down in the bayou in LA (as in Louisiana and not Los Angeles)


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe I have a blind spot because of the era, but I don’t think Diana had great style.  **runs away**
> 
> That is way too many coincidences given how short a time frame MM actually was part of TRF.


I think Diana looked very sophisticated in her later years, not so much when she was younger.  but she had a fresh faced look as a young girl


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.
> 
> View attachment 5122321


I've heard that BS from at least three sources recently - The View, CBS and CNN.  H&M were the glittery stars and Will & Kate are bland in comparison.  One of them said that Will & Kate's advisors were having them put on a media campaign to look somehow better and that the video from that looked like a commercial for an insurance company.  Well, to me they look like a beautiful happy family performing their royal duties with grace.  and Kate is just as beautiful as Meghan.  In fact, to me, as far as wearing clothes, she's better - tall and slender, where Meghan has that boxy waist and wears ill-filling outfits.  And she has her own beautiful hair.
But M is the American WOC Duchess.


----------



## octopus17

bag-mania said:


> The good news is the box covering the statue pre-unveiling is vertical and narrow. That hopefully means it will be a standing statue and there is no chance of a bench being involved.
> 
> View attachment 5122839


Holy mackerel, it looks like a portal into another world!!! (I'm obviously watching too much Netflix!)


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I think Diana looked very sophisticated in her later years, not so much when she was younger.  but she had a fresh faced look as a young girl


She was more sophisticated, but I didn't know anyone who wanted that Elvis dress with bugle beads or those one shoulder sequin gowns with big ruffles (gowns a  Real Housewife would love for the reunion show) or the bright blue shiny satin gown with shoulder wings sticking up to her ears, or even that "revenge" dress with the tail hanging behind her. Or the red wallpaper gown with one long sleeve. I could go on...

Her casual style was great though! She could certainly look fabulous in those bicycle shorts!


----------



## bag-mania

Cornflower Blue said:


> Holy mackerel, it looks like a portal into another world!!! (I'm obviously watching too much Netflix!)



Lol, nothing bad could come out of a mysterious black box, could it?


----------



## Chanbal

Make sure you have plenty of and for July 1st!  


"_The Duchess of Sussex, who did not travel to UK with her husband for the the special event, will reportedly join him via Zoom at the heart-wrenching ceremony of Kensington Palace.

Meghan - who had to remain in the US for taking care of their children due to crisis to his trip to London - is reportedly willing to honour the Harry's late mom_."


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> H did all his homework at home before his flight. The surprise speech was filmed in the 16 (or 19) toilet-mansion.
> 
> _"Prince Harry has made his first official appearance since landing in the UK last week in a surprise speech at the virtual Diana Award ceremony_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry makes first appearance at award ceremony since arriving in UK
> 
> 
> Harry made a surprise video appearance at the virtual Diana Awards - his first since landing in the UK. The charity was set up in his mother's memory to recognise remarkable young people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Jayne1 said:


> "And Meg and I fundamentally believe that our world is at the cusp of change, real change for the good of all."
> 
> _The cusp of change, real change for the good of all??_  Well, it hasn't happened yet, in the past millennia, so I'm wondering who the hell do they think they are.



one word:  barf


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I've heard that BS from at least three sources recently - The View, CBS and CNN.  H&M were the glittery stars and Will & Kate are bland in comparison.  One of them said that Will & Kate's advisors were having them put on a media campaign to look somehow better and that the video from that looked like a commercial for an insurance company.  Well, to me they look like a beautiful happy family performing their royal duties with grace.  and Kate is just as beautiful as Meghan.  In fact, to me, as far as wearing clothes, she's better - tall and slender, where Meghan has that boxy waist and wears ill-filling outfits.  And she has her own beautiful hair.
> But M is the American WOC Duchess.


ITA. William and Kate always act with decorum as befits royals whereas H&M look like ordinary folks riding the 'train of life' looking for stardom, but missing the Hollywood exit and landing unprepared on the royal stage.


----------



## Lounorada

csshopper said:


> LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE:
> 
> *Prince Charles DIDN'T axe Prince Harry's cash: Duke of Sussex said he was 'cut off' financially after leaving royal life... but Prince of Wales spent 'substantial sum' on his son, accounts show*
> 
> *Accounts reveal Charles continued to fund the Sussexes until summer 2020 *
> *Cash was from £4.4m Clarence House pot used to support sons and families*
> *Newly public account contradict Harry's remarks in his Oprah Winfrey interview *
> *He told Winfrey that he stopped getting financial support from his family in the 'first quarter' of last year and that his family were living off money left by Diana*
> *Findings came as both Clarence House and Buckingham Palace opened up their yearly financial accounts*
> Maybe someday there will come a time when the Earl of DUMBarton makes public pronouncements that are the truth, real truth, not his wife's version or his fantasies, but truth meaning information that is factual and provable, until such time we will continue to experience what is stated above,


Charles when the yearly financial accounts are released:











Chanbal said:


> It looks like the couple is adding more titles to their royal portfolio...











RAINDANCE said:


> *Telegraph just now ....
> Prince Harry's complaints about money just got even more distasteful*
> The self-obsessed Duke relies on his father's generosity in private while insulting him in public
> ROBERT TAYLOR24 June 2021 • 12:35pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there anything more unseemly than rich people complaining about money?
> 
> By any normal standards, Harry and Meghan are super wealthy. They have an estimated joint worth of nearly £10 million, and live in a luxury pad in California overlooking the Pacific. They mix with millionaires and billionaires.
> 
> Yet Harry saw fit to moan, in that blockbuster interview with Oprah, that his father had “literally” cut him off.
> 
> Where do you start with a whine like that? How should we respond to someone worth millions, most of it inherited, saying he should have even more?
> 
> Let’s keep in mind that Harry isn’t 19 anymore. He’s 36. His wife’s 39. These are not snotty youngsters. They’re mature adults. Frankly, I’d be ashamed to be living off my parents at that age, however much security I needed to pay for. There comes a time – and it shouldn’t take until 36 – when you need to buy your own dinner.
> 
> In any case, we now discover that Prince Charles did not actually cut Harry off at all – at least not financially. Newly released Clarence House records show that Charles gave the Sussexes and Cambridges a whopping £4.5 million during the last financial year.
> 
> Just think about that. It’s a huge lottery win. I’m pretty sure that if someone gave me a few million, my first reaction would not be to complain about it. But for Harry and Meghan, different rules obviously apply.
> 
> Do they realise just how spoiled it sounds? Do they ever consider that the average person in the UK earns less than 1% of that gift? And do they appreciate just how ungrateful it looks to accept a handout of that scale, and then publicly denigrate the man who gave it, saying he’d cut them off?
> 
> No wonder Prince Charles has hit back. In fact, for the second time in just over a week, Harry’s family has contradicted his claims. First we had the matter of Lilibet, and whether Harry had or hadn’t asked the Queen’s permission to use the name. And now this business about cash gifts running to millions.
> 
> Given how rare it is for the Palace to weigh in on anything at all, particularly when it’s about family, this all looks terrible for Harry and Meghan. Once again, their attempts at PR have backfired, this time with an even louder bang.
> 
> How different it could all have been. Before all these Oprah and California shenanigans, I have two abiding memories of Harry. The first is of that forlorn, grieving 12-year-old walking behind his mother’s coffin. The second is of the adoration in his eyes as he saw Meghan, on Prince Charles’ arm, walking down the aisle towards him. A wedding and a funeral. Both times, I admit to dabbing my eyes, and I’m sure millions of Britons did the same.
> 
> We wanted the best for Harry. That’s why no fewer than 30 million of us watched that wedding, wishing him and Meghan a long, happy marriage. Many of us welcomed the new and diverse Royal image, so much so that, even when they left for America, they went with good wishes and sympathy.
> 
> But Harry’s attitude since he arrived in LA has eaten up that credit and warmth. He has belittled his own family at a time of grief, made questionable claims, and accused one member of his family of racism – a particularly low blow. And at a time of so much global suffering, he has portrayed himself and Meghan as uniquely victimised.
> 
> Harry could have remained silent and dignified. In doing so he would have gained our respect. Instead, he has appeared self-obsessed, disloyal and spoiled. He needs to get a grip.









CarryOn2020 said:


> So thirsty!  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  Look at meeeee.  *stomps feet, throws plates*  Look at meeeee.
> *Prince Harry 'wanted to appear on James Corden's chat show for YEARS' and the royal contacted HIM about doing explosive interview because he wanted to 'cheer people up', producer reveals*
> 
> *James Corden and team have revealed how they landed Prince Harry interview *
> *Explained Duke was continually offering to 'do something' on the show for years*
> *Said Harry contacted team when LA was coming out of lockdown in 2020 *
> *Revealed he said: 'We should plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up'*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'offered to appear on James Corden's chat show for years'
> 
> 
> According to The Hollywood Reporter, James Corden and his team said the Duke of Sussex, 36, contacted them about appearing on the Late Late Show earlier this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *





CarryOn2020 said:


> The key for me was that _Hazz contacted_ Corden.
> The arrogance of this guy oozes out of every syllable.
> 
> _Now his team have spoken on a video panel during a FYC event about how Prince Harry offered for years to 'do something' for the show.
> 
> The Hollywood Reporter told how producer Ben Winston said: '[Harry] said, "We're coming out of lockdown, I'm in L.A., do you think we should *plan something fun to almost cheer everybody up in a way".'*
> 
> The team continued to explain that Harry had since  continually offered to 'do something' on the Late, Late Show.
> 
> *After the Duke got in contact *with the team in spring 2020, Winston said: 'Obviously, as soon as you say something like that to us and our team, our brains go crazy.'
> 
> During the wide-ranging chat mostly carried out on an open-top bus, an off the leash Prince Harry decided open up to James about his relationship with Meghan, his son Archie and their decision to quit as frontline royals, saying the pressure of being in London was 'destroying my mental health', branding Britain's media 'toxic'.
> 
> Describing the couple's decision he said: '*It was never walking away. It was stepping back rather than stepping down.* It was a really difficult environment, which I think a lot of people saw. So I did what any father or husband would do and thought: 'How do I get my family out of there'. But we never walked away'.
> 
> And while the interview was carried out before the Queen stripped the Sussexes of their royal patronages, Harry appeared to know what was coming and said: 'My life is public service, so wherever I am in the world it's going to be the same thing.
> 
> 'As far as I'm concerned, whatever decisions are made on that side [in Britain], *I will never walk away'*._


JCMH:







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or she wanted to lay down the law. But really, how likely is it that a 90+ yo woman visits a guy who just flew in and is quarantining?


I like to imagine QEII doing a bit of this as she's driving past wherever JCMH is staying







needlv said:


> Has everyone forgotten that Thomas Markle Jr wrote to Harry before the wedding and urged him to call it off... and warned the royals it would be a huge mistake?  Re-reading this knowing what we do now is enlightening!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> In a handwritten letter shared exclusively with In Touch, Meghan Markle’s estranged brother, Thomas Markle Jr., tells Prince Harry that it’s ‘not too late’ to not marry his sister. “As more time passes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intouchweekly.com





Tom Jr brought the factuals to the table but unfortunately no one bothered to listen to him.





sdkitty said:


> so wonder what's up with CNN....last night I had the TV on that channel and it happened to be on some show about Meghan & Harry.  they were going on about what a great activist she was before Harry, etc.  They described her as a lead in Suits (which I understand her role was supporting) and said Suits was a huge success.
> Before the commercial break, they said Harry had been drinking heavily (assume this was before being rescued by the goddess).  I left the room at that point.  But when I went to look for it this morning to share with you all, I found this....another CNN show coming July 4?  what is making them so interested?
> 
> CNN Special Report: Royal Revolution: Harry & Meghan | Free Internet Radio | TuneIn


_'Royal Revolution'_







QueenofWrapDress said:


>









Chanbal said:


> H did all his homework at home before his flight. The surprise speech was filmed in the 16 (or 19) toilet-mansion.
> 
> _"Prince Harry has made his first official appearance since landing in the UK last week in a surprise speech at the virtual Diana Award ceremony_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry makes first appearance at award ceremony since arriving in UK
> 
> 
> Harry made a surprise video appearance at the virtual Diana Awards - his first since landing in the UK. The charity was set up in his mother's memory to recognise remarkable young people
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That must be the only room in the house that they could afford to re-decorate with the money they have left over after paying their mortgage and huge bills because it's the only room they ever seem to use for their videos. They've used it so much that they are now using every corner of the room to make it look different 




CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be a standing statue, idk. It is going in the Sunken Garden where H&M announced the engagement.  Difficult for me to figure out the width of that space.
> 
> View attachment 5122854





That smug look on her face, the walk like she's Naomi Campbell on the catwalk and the awkward hand placement to flash the jackpot ring


----------



## xincinsin

lulilu said:


> All the doctors and lawyers I know kept their maiden names.  Makes more sense, professionally.  My DD and I both did.
> 
> I find it interesting to learn of the number of countries where women regularly keep their names.  E.g., I didn't know it was common in Asia.  And some European countries.


When I first got married, I refused to let my HR know. The people there had this weird notion that the single women were "Miss XXX", but the moment you were married, you became "Madam XXX". They didn't even use "Mrs Hubby Name". And many of the female staffers actually liked it. I've been introduced to countless Madam XXX, YYY, ZZZ in this company.  

I wanted to be just xincinsin, and stayed that way till #1 baby came along and I had to declare my marital status to get maternity leave. Luckily by then, there was a Ms option and I avoided the Madam. Wonder if this is a local quirk or it happens in other former British colonies too.


----------



## lulilu

xincinsin said:


> When I first got married, I refused to let my HR know. The people there had this weird notion that the single women were "Miss XXX", but the moment you were married, you became "Madam XXX". They didn't even use "Mrs Hubby Name". And many of the female staffers actually liked it. I've been introduced to countless Madam XXX, YYY, ZZZ in this company.
> 
> I wanted to be just xincinsin, and stayed that way till #1 baby came along and I had to declare my marital status to get maternity leave. Luckily by then, there was a Ms option and I avoided the Madam. Wonder if this is a local quirk or it happens in other former British colonies too.


I've never heard anyone in the US referred to as "Madam."  Except in old time movies.  Or houses of "ill repute."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Here are a few more examples of Meghan's Diana fantasy.
> 
> sdkitty, she did do the side eye for the one with the pink suit. How's that for accuracy?
> 
> View attachment 5122762
> View attachment 5122763
> View attachment 5122764
> View attachment 5122765
> View attachment 5122766


Maybe even that see-through skirt that displayed her undies was cosplay. When Diana was first outed as the Chosen One, didn't the paps descend upon her and snap a pic of her in a skirt which wasn't see-through, but became diaphanous because of the strong sunlight shining on her?



Jayne1 said:


> "And Meg and I fundamentally believe that our world is at the cusp of change, real change for the good of all."
> 
> _The cusp of change, real change for the good of all??_  Well, it hasn't happened yet, in the past millennia, so I'm wondering who the hell do they think they are.


Why do they need to "fundamentally" believe? So many superfluous words in what they say.



EverSoElusive said:


> I know you were
> 
> As a whole, her creepiness bothers me more than her fashion sense


Hear hear! Wearing similar clothes, no big deal. Striking similar poses too - ugh, doppelganger nightmares.



bag-mania said:


> The good news is the box covering the statue pre-unveiling is vertical and narrow. That hopefully means it will be a standing statue and there is no chance of a bench being involved.
> 
> View attachment 5122839





Cornflower Blue said:


> Holy mackerel, it looks like a portal into another world!!! (I'm obviously watching too much Netflix!)


They should have used a blue police box 



Chanbal said:


> Make sure you have plenty of and for July 1st!
> 
> 
> "_The Duchess of Sussex, who did not travel to UK with her husband for the the special event, will reportedly join him via Zoom at the heart-wrenching ceremony of Kensington Palace.
> 
> Meghan - who had to remain in the US for taking care of their children due to crisis to his trip to London - *is reportedly willing to honour the Harry's late mom*_."



That sounds so condescending. OTOH the English is really bad, so maybe I shouldn't lay this at her doorstep.
ETA: it's a quote from that wacko Pakistani media outfit Geo.tv


----------



## EverSoElusive

Let's take a commercial break from these 2 cartoons


----------



## lanasyogamama

I did like this Princess Diana look/moment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

An oldie, still adorable:


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I did like this Princess Diana look/moment.
> View attachment 5123103



I do too! That dress is so famous it has its own Wikipedia page.









						Travolta dress - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> An oldie, still adorable:




You almost forget how refreshing it is to see sane, responsible people.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I do too! That dress is so famous it has its own Wikipedia page.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travolta dress - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


I just read the entry. She wore it 4 times and then it was sold for charity.

Until Methane coughs up all those expensive dresses that she charged to PC, I'm going to "fundamentally" believe that she returned them to the designers for under-the-table cash or perks, or sold them to that cosplaying stan. It's quite creepy, isn't it? Methane cosplays her dead MIL. And a stan is cosplaying her.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> An oldie, still adorable:




Their chemistry is so natural and loving, I dont care if they are acting… great actors if they are, such wonderful clip  when compared to Douchess and Douche‘s interactions we have seen so far.  Douchess is really a z-list actress!!!


----------



## rose60610

Since "the unveiling" had been already postponed several years/times, why couldn't they just wait another couple of months for the No Longer Heavily Pregnant One and gather up the Montecito Fam for a full throated tribute unveiling, complete with all five grandkids? I mean, considering all the shutting-up and sucking-it-up the BRF household staffs had to go through when Raptor was rapturing, why wasn't the Great Unveiling done when Her Majesty Methane of Montecito was able to attend?  I think we all know full damn well they're doing it without Ms. Harkle as the boo's from the crowds wouldn't look good to the Netflix or Spotify gods.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Since "the unveiling" had been already postponed several years/times, why couldn't they just wait another couple of months for the No Longer Heavily Pregnant One and gather up the Montecito Fam for a full throated tribute unveiling, complete with all five grandkids? I mean, considering all the shutting-up and sucking-it-up the BRF household staffs had to go through when Raptor was rapturing, why wasn't the Great Unveiling done when Her Majesty Methane of Montecito was able to attend?  I think we all know full damn well they're doing it without Ms. Harkle as the boo's from the crowds wouldn't look good to the Netflix or Spotify gods.


I'm wondering if she will be so tone-deaf as to let one of her "sources" tell the media that she didn't attend because she didn't want to be the star of the show - you know, like when she was competing with Prince Philip for the spotlight at his funeral. Maybe she suffers from necrophilia and is attracted to dead people? Or brain-dead people (yoo-hoo, Harry!).


----------



## CarryOn2020

I just read somewhere that she is going to zoom in.  Is that a rumor?

ETA:  looks like a  rumor








						Meghan Markle, Archie, Lili likely to attend the unveiling of Diana's statue via Zoom
					

Meghan and kids may virtually join Prince Harry and William to pay tribute to Princess Diana




					www.geo.tv
				



_Meghan Markle may virtually join Prince Harry and Prince William to pay homage to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana at the special event of unveiling her statue on Thursday (July 1). 

Emotions run high as the statue of the Princess of Wales has arrived at Kensington Palace ahead of its official unveiling. It has reportedly been stored in a box on the ground at the palace.

The Duchess of Sussex, who did not travel to UK with her husband for the the special event, will reportedly join him via Zoom at the heart-wrenching ceremony of Kensington Palace.

Meghan - who had to remain in the US for taking care of their children due to crisis to his trip to London - is reportedly willing to honour the Harry's late mom.

The special ceremony will take place to commemorate the late Princess of Wales in honour of what would have been her 60th birthday.

William and Harry will both be in attendance, in their first joint engagement since their grandfather Prince Philip's funeral in April. They would also share words to defuse tension and regain the trust of each other to strengthen their relationship.

On the other hand, the Queen has reportedly extended an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle by inviting them to the Platinum Jubilee celebrations next year.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly responded positively and accepted the invitation to join the Royal family at Trooping the Colour and the Queen’s official birthday parade in London next summer.

_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just read somewhere that she is going to zoom in.  Is that a rumor?


If she does, is there an option to mute her? 
Earlier there was also a story that Hazard was demanding that they run a video of Methane during the unveiling. Was that clickbait or an actual deranged demand?


----------



## needlv

scarlet555 said:


> Their chemistry is so natural and loving, I dont care if they are acting… great actors if they are, such wonderful clip  when compared to Douchess and Douche‘s interactions we have seen so far.  Douchess is really a z-list actress!!!



yes you could tell they were having fun.  It was joyful...


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> If she does, is there an option to mute her?
> Earlier there was also a story that Hazard was demanding that they run a video of Methane during the unveiling. Was that clickbait or an actual deranged demand?



MM has been very quiet recently.  I’m wondering if her PR told her to stop with the constant leaking / hit back at reports...

 or whether the Queen and RF saying they will respond to mistruths / Lilibet scandal has meant she has to rethink her mode going forward.  No more leaking about how close they are to the Queen... because they are NOT.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just read somewhere that she is going to zoom in.  Is that a rumor?
> 
> ETA:  looks like a  rumor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Archie, Lili likely to attend the unveiling of Diana's statue via Zoom
> 
> 
> Meghan and kids may virtually join Prince Harry and William to pay tribute to Princess Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Meghan Markle may virtually join Prince Harry and Prince William to pay homage to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana at the special event of unveiling her statue on Thursday (July 1).
> 
> Emotions run high as the statue of the Princess of Wales has arrived at Kensington Palace ahead of its official unveiling. It has reportedly been stored in a box on the ground at the palace.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, who did not travel to UK with her husband for the the special event, will reportedly join him via Zoom at the heart-wrenching ceremony of Kensington Palace.
> 
> Meghan - who had to remain in the US for taking care of their children due to crisis to his trip to London - is reportedly willing to honour the Harry's late mom.
> 
> The special ceremony will take place to commemorate the late Princess of Wales in honour of what would have been her 60th birthday.
> 
> William and Harry will both be in attendance, in their first joint engagement since their grandfather Prince Philip's funeral in April. They would also share words to defuse tension and regain the trust of each other to strengthen their relationship.
> 
> On the other hand, the Queen has reportedly extended an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle by inviting them to the Platinum Jubilee celebrations next year.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly responded positively and accepted the invitation to join the Royal family at Trooping the Colour and the Queen’s official birthday parade in London next summer._


It's Geo.tv, a very untrustworthy source with no journalistic integrity and constant flights of fancy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just read somewhere that she is going to zoom in.  Is that a rumor?
> 
> ETA:  looks like a  rumor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Archie, Lili likely to attend the unveiling of Diana's statue via Zoom
> 
> 
> Meghan and kids may virtually join Prince Harry and William to pay tribute to Princess Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Meghan Markle may virtually join Prince Harry and Prince William to pay homage to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana at the special event of unveiling her statue on Thursday (July 1).
> 
> Emotions run high as the statue of the Princess of Wales has arrived at Kensington Palace ahead of its official unveiling. It has reportedly been stored in a box on the ground at the palace.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, who did not travel to UK with her husband for the the special event, will reportedly join him via Zoom at the heart-wrenching ceremony of Kensington Palace.
> 
> Meghan - who had to remain in the US for taking care of their children due to crisis to his trip to London - is reportedly willing to honour the Harry's late mom.
> 
> The special ceremony will take place to commemorate the late Princess of Wales in honour of what would have been her 60th birthday.
> 
> William and Harry will both be in attendance, in their first joint engagement since their grandfather Prince Philip's funeral in April. They would also share words to defuse tension and regain the trust of each other to strengthen their relationship.
> 
> On the other hand, the Queen has reportedly extended an olive branch to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle by inviting them to the Platinum Jubilee celebrations next year.
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly responded positively and accepted the invitation to join the Royal family at Trooping the Colour and the Queen’s official birthday parade in London next summer._



Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if MM somehow is inserted into the proceedings.  I remember well at the Queen's birthday celebration/concert at Royal Albert Hall in 2018 that when Harry left the Royal Box to go onstage to talk about the Commonwealth Trust, MM also left with him (even though she didn't go onstage with him).  I was puzzled then why he couldn't go by himself---almost like he was a toddler who needed his mother to go with him to the WC.   In retrospect now, it's totally in keeping with her MO.


----------



## needlv

kipp said:


> Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if MM somehow is inserted into the proceedings.  I remember well at the Queen's birthday celebration/concert at Royal Albert Hall in 2018 that when Harry left the Royal Box to go onstage to talk about the Commonwealth Trust, MM also left with him (even though she didn't go onstage with him).  I was puzzled then why he couldn't go by himself---almost like he was a toddler who needed his mother to go with him to the WC.   In retrospect now, it's totally in keeping with her MO.



she will do something.  She couldn’t let PP’s funeral go by without leaking about their wreath...

so should we expect a blurry foot photo of lili?


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Since "the unveiling" had been already postponed several years/times, why couldn't they just wait another couple of months for the No Longer Heavily Pregnant One and gather up the Montecito Fam for a full throated tribute unveiling, complete with all five grandkids? I mean, considering all the shutting-up and sucking-it-up the BRF household staffs had to go through when Raptor was rapturing, why wasn't the Great Unveiling done when Her Majesty Methane of Montecito was able to attend?  I think we all know full damn well they're doing it without Ms. Harkle as the boo's from the crowds wouldn't look good to the Netflix or Spotify gods.


It's Diana's birthday. They think like teenagers.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> It reminds me of back when Madonna lived in the UK and was talking in a weird hybrid accent that was her attempt to sound British.


OT, I thought Madonna sounded fairly good actually. But don't get me started on Catherine Zeta Jones, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Not the Spencer tiara?  Does Charles get to veto someone in the family wanting to wear it?


Charles has nothing to do with that tiara, it belongs to Earl Spencer and is only worn by Spencer women.


----------



## Lodpah

Ok for so long, that photo of MM walking Archie, I kinda left it alone. UNTIl I watched this doll expert explain. She actually has blown up photos and she said she went on Youtube to refute all the naysayers but she can't anymore. The string that ties "Archie's" right hand to her body is just so strange. If you want to watch it she goes into details around the 10 minute mark but she actually shows you babies you can't tell if it's a doll or not. Not saying Archie is not real but saying photos the Devious Duo put out might not be Archie after all, at least in the early pics. Watch at your own risk lol. There's something seriously disturbed about the Hyenna and the Jackal.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Ok for so long, that photo of MM walking Archie, I kinda left it alone. UNTIl I watched this doll expert explain. She actually has blown up photos and she said she went on Youtube to refute all the naysayers but she can't anymore. The string that ties "Archie's" right hand to her body is just so strange. If you want to watch it she goes into details around the 10 minute mark but she actually shows you babies you can't tell if it's a doll or not. Not saying Archie is not real but saying photos the Devious Duo put out might not be Archie after all, at least in the early pics. Watch at your own risk lol. There's something seriously disturbed about the Hyenna and the Jackal.



I watched this yesterday. I could only pick out 2 in her parade of pics that I was sure were dolls.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Not the Spencer tiara?  Does Charles get to veto someone in the family wanting to wear it?



Seeing it's his, probably. It was part of the estate he inherited.

ETA: referring to Charles Spencer, not Charles Wales.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Charles has nothing to do with that tiara, it belongs to Earl Spencer and is only worn by Spencer women.



But Earl Spencer's first name is Charles as well!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But Earl Spencer's first name is Charles as well!


Ah, yes of course, I just automatically thought it was Prince Charles


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing it's his, probably. It was part of the estate he inherited.
> 
> ETA: referring to Charles Spencer, not Charles Wales.


Like I said, it's only Spencer women who could wear it, as in his wife, his daughters, or his sisters daughters as has been shown in a previous post. The only non Spencer who will wear it is the woman who will marry Earl Spencer's son Louis because he is the next Earl. Victoria Lockwood wore it when she married Charles Spencer for that reason.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Like I said, it's only Spencer women who could wear it, as in his wife, his daughters, or his sisters daughters as has been shown in a previous post. The only non Spencer who will wear it is the woman who will marry Earl Spencer's son Louis because he is the next Earl. Victoria Lockwood wore it when she married Charles Spencer for that reason.



I still figure if he had beef with his niece he could refuse to lend the tiara as it's not common property but his.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, does anyone know how (or rather, WHY) Lady CC owns a whole wardrobe of tiaras she even lends out to the daughters of titled friends who are not as lucky? She was married to Campbell for a hot minute.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, does anyone know how (or rather, WHY) Lady CC owns a whole wardrobe of tiaras she even lends out to the daughters of titled friends who are not as lucky? She was married to Campbell for a hot minute.



Could be families', hers and/or his, but they can easily be bought. There were many around in the Victorian, Edwardian and Deco periods and then they fell out of fashion apart from the royals. We forget now but women didn't usually buy their own jewels and anything that came into the family was inherited or commissioned, one-of-a-kind pieces bought by the husband at major outlay.

Tiaras are not the costliest pieces at auction and many were bought 'cheaply' in the later 20 C to be broken up and made into other jewellery. So even though the pieces are/were relative antique bargains, if you needed one you'd have to find someone who owned one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Could be families', hers and/or his, but they can easily be bought. There were many around in the Victorian, Edwardian and Deco periods and then they fell out of fashion apart from the royals. We forget now but women didn't usually buy their own jewels and anything that came into the family was inherited or commissioned, one-of-a-kind pieces bought by the husband at major outlay.
> 
> Tiaras are not the costliest pieces at auction and many were bought 'cheaply' in the later 20 C to be broken up and made into other jewellery. So even though the pieces are/were relative antique bargains, if you needed one you'd have to find someone who owned one.



I know, I follow Bentley & Skinner  They regularly have tiaras or whole parures.

I still have so many questions. Like, most people who are not royal or snag those evening invitations regularly would not invest in a bunch of tiaras, but then again Lady CC is extra 

Also, I'd be totally into a husband who buys me lots of bling  (not claiming to be a woke suffragette though)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know, I follow Bentley & Skinner  They regularly have tiaras or whole parures.
> 
> I still have so many questions. Like, most people who are not royal or snag those evening invitations regularly would not invest in a bunch of tiaras, but then again Lady CC is extra
> 
> Also, I'd be totally into a husband who buys me lots of bling  (not claiming to be a woke suffragette though)


She bought a castle. Tiaras probably complete her.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> She was more sophisticated, but I didn't know anyone who wanted that Elvis dress with bugle beads or those one shoulder sequin gowns with big ruffles (gowns a  Real Housewife would love for the reunion show) or the bright blue shiny satin gown with shoulder wings sticking up to her ears, or even that "revenge" dress with the tail hanging behind her. Or the red wallpaper gown with one long sleeve. I could go on...
> 
> Her casual style was great though! She could certainly look fabulous in those bicycle shorts!


Me me I wanted the Elvis dress


----------



## elvisfan4life

lulilu said:


> one word:  barf


Boak bugle or other variants


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know, I follow Bentley & Skinner  They regularly have tiaras or whole parures.
> 
> I still have so many questions. Like, most people who are not royal or snag those evening invitations regularly would not invest in a bunch of tiaras, but then again Lady CC is extra
> 
> Also, I'd be totally into a husband who buys me lots of bling  (not claiming to be a woke suffragette though)



Many of them could be converted into other pieces of jewellery, I think those are best. I would have loved this one almost 10 years ago:






						A sapphire and diamond tiara/necklace
					






					www.christies.com
				




Too little and light and they look like bridal/junior dance comp accessory. Too much would be too, too (tutu) much. Serious enough but not oversize 'crown', weighing a ton would be perfect. 

I have have an appointment with Cartier later, shall enquire on your behalf?  

Can you imagine M chaining herself to the Palace gates in protest to get the vote? - I can't


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Me me I wanted the Elvis dress





Thank _you_!

Me too.

I think the dress itself was a perfectly classic, off-white, strapless sheath number with back vent, and then the matching jacket was worn over. It was the jacket that had the 'Elvis' collar which was very fashionable in the late-1950s/early-'60s in lady's cocktail wear. She wore it very well, but if she'd have worn the pieces separately, she could have worn it more often. I guess everything she wore became almost too iconic.

I'm turning my Levis denim jacket collar up this weekend in honour (of the dress, not particularly Di).


----------



## A1aGypsy

The eighties and nineties did no one any favours fashion wise and some things don’t age well. Just as certain trends from the 2000s and 2010s haven’t and things from the 2020s won’t either. Also, Diana had to contend with some pretty strict rules - she really did stand out amongst the stuffier outfits of many of the royals at the time (and all that drama over not outshining Charles). And BP had more control back then. I think, she was wearing a lot of things that were picked for her. Although, I think the “Elvis” dress was beautifully iconic. 

There was a very obvious change once things went sideways publicly in her marriage and after the divorce. Her style game really picked up later in life - who knows if that was the eighties influence dying or a reflection of the change in her matrimonial situation and the fact that she was no longer married to the future king. 

IMHO no one rocked a white shirt and a Cartier watch as well as she did and I thought she had great style. Shame she didn’t get to live long enough to see where she would take it.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think this is one of my favourite gowns she wore. It was very swishy. 
Worn to the Cannes Film Festival


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Charles has nothing to do with that tiara, it belongs to Earl Spencer and is only worn by Spencer women.


Charles Spencer, the brother with all the wives.

I guess I’m a bit surprised that the girls are nobodys in the family and he inherited everything - not just the title and the land, but he gets to control who can wear the darn tiara.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know, I follow Bentley & Skinner  They regularly have tiaras or whole parures.
> 
> I still have so many questions. Like, most people who are not royal or snag those evening invitations regularly would not invest in a bunch of tiaras, but then again Lady CC is extra
> 
> Also, I'd be totally into a husband who buys me lots of bling  (not claiming to be a woke suffragette though)


If you need one and dont have one, you borrow the tiara these days
Jamie Curtis is married to Chris Guest ie Baron Haden Guest. The couple attended the House of Lords once (opening of Parliament?) in full regalia. She had a good giggle about the experience and was wearing a borrowed Lorraine Schwarz tiara
JC is a fan of LS jewels and did a PR release in exchange for the borrow.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> It's Diana's birthday. They think like teenagers.



Even though it's Di's b-day they still could have held off. You're right, they think like teenagers .  And THIS WAY Meghan gets to send a HUGE bunch of mylar balloons! One will say "We miss you and love you so much Grandma!". Another will have a picture of both Diana and Meghan on it, others with a yellow happy face, a big red heart, and might as well throw a Hello Kitty balloon in there. Oh, and a wreath with several pages of explanations of all the symbolism on it.


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Ok for so long, that photo of MM walking Archie, I kinda left it alone. UNTIl I watched this doll expert explain. She actually has blown up photos and she said she went on Youtube to refute all the naysayers but she can't anymore. The string that ties "Archie's" right hand to her body is just so strange. If you want to watch it she goes into details around the 10 minute mark but she actually shows you babies you can't tell if it's a doll or not. Not saying Archie is not real but saying photos the Devious Duo put out might not be Archie after all, at least in the early pics. Watch at your own risk lol. There's something seriously disturbed about the Hyenna and the Jackal.



Oh I like that video. I wish she had spent more time talking over the actual photos she was referencing, rather than us just staring at her face, but I did find this video very interesting. Thanks!

I like how she talked about Meg’s claw hold on Harry. Funny.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> I watched this yesterday. I could only pick out 2 in her parade of pics that I was sure were dolls.


As realistic as those dolls looked, they all had a deadness to the eyes. 

Quite creepy really.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> If you need one and dont have one, you borrow the tiara these days
> Jamie Curtis is married to Chris Guest ie Baron Haden Guest. The couple attended the House of Lords once (opening of Parliament?) in full regalia. She had a good giggle about the experience and was wearing a borrowed Lorraine Schwarz tiara
> JC is a fan of LS jewels and did a PR release in exchange for the borrow.


So off-topic, but because they didn’t have their own biological children, what happens to the title I wonder.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I  this dress. And that choker! 

Haven’t seen anything this strikingly lovely from the younger royals. She had the body, the ‘it’ girl factor to carry it off. Swoon.


----------



## Chanbal

Cringe's minister of propaganda seems to be currently working in the censure office.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> It's Diana's birthday. They think like teenagers.


If it weren't for the pandemic and closed borders, I would prefer going to         Ottawa to celebrate Canada Day instead.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Charles Spencer, the brother with all the wives.
> 
> I guess I’m a bit surprised that the girls are nobodys in the family and he inherited everything - not just the title and the land, but he gets to control who can wear the darn tiara.


That's nobility for ya!


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that may have missed such profound speech:


----------



## CarryOn2020

A little history of the dress 
- over 20,000 pearls
- sold at auction for $150,000
- Travolta dress sold for $220,000

Speaking of tiaras:









						Which Royal Family has the most expensive tiara collection in the world?
					

The top slot is shared by two royal dynasties




					www.tatler.com


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> So off-topic, but because they didn’t have their own biological children, what happens to the title I wonder.



_If_ it's a hereditary title, adopted kids can't inherit. 

Next in line may go to nephew, cousin, American grandchild etc - think Downton


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> A little history of the dress
> - over 20,000 pearls
> - sold at auction for $150,000
> - Travolta dress sold for $220,000



Update on the Travolta dress. It has been auctioned a couple more times, most recently in 2019 when it went for $325,317.


----------



## Genie27

Sharont2305 said:


> I think this is one of my favourite gowns she wore. It was very swishy.
> Worn to the Cannes Film Festival


Charles looks quite dashing here as well!


CarryOn2020 said:


> A little history of the dress
> - over 20,000 pearls
> - sold at auction for $150,000
> - Travolta dress sold for $220,000
> 
> Speaking of tiaras:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which Royal Family has the most expensive tiara collection in the world?
> 
> 
> The top slot is shared by two royal dynasties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com



I must say she carried that tiara and dress off quite well. All the bling could overpower a smaller personality. And in a candid shot as well - not posed and filtered like we are now accustomed to seeing on covers. Not saying it hasn;t been photoshopped to make it look cover-worthy, but it hasn't been botox-filtered if you know what I mean.


----------



## Hermes Zen

H is ready to admit fault BUT M won’t budge!!  IMHO she will never give in.  I hope W will stay strong and not give in to her.  

Here’s article without photos. Apologies for spacing probs. Not sure why. 


> https://www.newsweek.com/prince-har...iation-meghan-markle-wont-budgeauthor-1603730
> 
> *Prince Harry Wants Prince William Reconciliation but Meghan Markle Won't Budge—Author*
> By Jack Royston On 6/29/21 at 5:25 AM EDT
> Prince Harry is ready to admit mistakes of "sheer temper"—but Meghan Markle and Prince William will not give ground in efforts to mend the royal rift, a historian tells _Newsweek_.
> The two princes will see each other on Thursday after Prince Philip's funeral reportedly failed to meaningfully repair their damaged relationship.
> The brothers will be side-by-side at the unveiling of a statue in their mother's honor at Kensington Palace, creating a new opportunity for progress in negotiations.
> Robert Lacey charted the royal rift in his bombshell biography _Battle of Brothers_, which detailed how William threw Harry out of Kensington Palace over bullying allegations against Meghan.
> However, out of the three royals it is Prince Harry who is most ready to admit fault, the historian said.
> He told _Newsweek_: "What's interesting is that on one side we've got William who doesn't seem prepared to concede anything and on the other side friends have told me that Harry wouldn't mind reconciling and then it's Meghan who is sticking to her guns on this issue."
> "It should surely be possible," he continued, "for both sides to say the past is in the past. It's very regrettable that Meghan doesn't withdraw just a little. Why can't she say it was the pressure? 'I was getting used to this incredibly complicated system, I was just pregnant, I couldn't sleep.'
> "'I was wandering about all night firing off emails. Perhaps in retrospect I went over the top about it.'"
> Meghan was accused of bullying two PAs out of the royal household and targeting a third member of staff in an email sent by communications secretary Jason Knauf in October 2018.
> A story leaked to the _Sunday Times_ that December suggested Meghan's staff found her difficult to work for and stated she would fire off email demands as early as 5 a.m.
> More recently there have been reports in U.K. newspapers of staff left shaking or in tears after a dressing down from Meghan.
> Lacey's book details how internally the bullying allegations caused a fierce argument between William, who backed his staff, and Harry, who backed his wife.
> _Battle of Brothers_ quoted a friend who said it led to William throwing Harry and Meghan out of Kensington Palace, with the Sussexes splitting off to form a new office at Buckingham Palace in March 2019.
> However, even Harry and Meghan's exit from royal life did not put the issue behind them as Meghan returned to the dispute during her court case against U.K. newspaper the _Mail on Sunday_.
> Lawyers for the duchess told the High Court in London she was left unprotected by the institution while she was pregnant in summer 2020.
> When the couple's Oprah Winfrey interview was announced earlier this year Knauf's email alleging bullying was leaked to _The Times_.
> Meghan then leveled damning allegations in the prime time tell-all, accusing the palace of leaking false stories about her and denying her access to a mental hospital while she was suicidal.
> Despite the explosive allegations on both sides, Lacey says Harry is prepared to concede mistakes privately to friends.
> He told _Newsweek_: "Harry is prepared to acknowledge the role that just sheer temper played at unfortunate moments—notably in the so-called blindsiding early in 2020. He actually is prepared to admit, in a way that William doesn't seem to be, the fact that both of them are irascible both of them are short-tempered, both of them are Spencers [Princess Diana's family name] if you like."
> Harry was accused of blindsiding Queen Elizabeth II by sources quoted in the British media when he published his plans to quit the royal family at short notice in January 2020.
> However, Lacey said the time had come for the two brothers and Meghan to put the past, including the bullying allegations, behind them.
> "There must be a way of playing it down surely and just moving forward," Lacey continued. "It's not as if Meghan's employing any royal staff anymore, she's living in a different country. It's not a live issue so it would be good, it seems to me, if she could find a way of putting it to bed."
> However, the author also suggested William and Kate may feel vindicated in relation to the doubts they had early in Harry's relationship.
> _Battle of Brothers_ describes how William urged Harry to slow down early in the relationship with Meghan, but the advice did not go down well.
> Lacey told _Newsweek_: "We know now that William had his doubts from a very early stage about at least whether Meghan would fit into the system, whether Meghan had the right personality for the system and the situation and that's the sort of thing he would have discussed with Kate and she endorsed it.
> "Kate shared his doubts and question mark from the beginning. Events would seem to have born them out. Meghan wasn't the right sort of person to fit into the protocols of the British royal family. There's a very fair case to say why should she? She's a self-made woman and why should she put up with it all?"


----------



## bag-mania

That Robert Lacey. I think 95% of the time he's just talking out of his @ss. I doubt many people who actually know what's going on are talking to him.


----------



## kkfiregirl

I see that the ‘self-made’ woman narrative is still around, but I’m sure if they called Thomas Markle, he would say ‘_some recollections may vary_.’

Meghan isn’t close to anyone in her own family, so why would she care about destroying Harry’s family bonds? Someone on this thread once said that if MM won’t be queen, she will try her best to destroy the monarchy— keeping Will and Harry apart is probably step number 2 in those plans.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> If it weren't for the pandemic and closed borders, I would prefer going to         Ottawa to celebrate Canada Day instead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5123483


Yeah me too.  One day I'll take the road trip. lol


----------



## Jayne1

Genie27 said:


> I must say she carried that tiara and dress off quite well. All the bling could overpower a smaller personality. And in a candid shot as well - not posed and filtered like we are now accustomed to seeing on covers. Not saying it hasn;t been photoshopped to make it look cover-worthy, but it hasn't been botox-filtered if you know what I mean.


But it really has been altered a lot. 

No pores, whiter teeth than what she (or everyone else) had at the time... I think they even shrunk her nose a tad. Not even any smile lines.

It isn't what we're used to seeing when we see photos of her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I have have an appointment with Cartier later, shall enquire on your behalf?



I'd like to know where the Drapérie line went! I've been trying to snag a bracelet for ages.

I think it's Moira Fine Jewelry who had one that could be dismantled into a necklage and two bracelets just months ago. It wasn't quite as affordable though, more in the realms of an apartment.



> Can you imagine M chaining herself to the Palace gates in protest to get the vote? - I can't



Naw, she'd probably try to secude someone to get her way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Charles Spencer, the brother with all the wives.
> 
> I guess I’m a bit surprised that the girls are nobodys in the family and he inherited everything - not just the title and the land, but he gets to control who can wear the darn tiara.



It does make sense though. Those big estates wouldn't be big (and sustainable) anymore if everyone got their slice of it. Same with the family jewelry.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> But it really has been altered a lot.
> 
> No pores, whiter teeth than what she (or everyone else) had at the time... I think they even shrunk her nose a tad. Not even any smile lines.
> 
> It isn't what we're used to seeing when we see photos of her.


Yes, details matter. I bet you'd have no problem identifying a perpetrator in a lineup.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> So off-topic, but because they didn’t have their own biological children, what happens to the title I wonder.



It goes to a relative, and if there isn't one, it dies and can be created again by the monarch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Prince Harry is ready to admit mistakes of "sheer temper"_.
Therein, right there, lies *the* issue. He is delusional if he believes ‘sheer temper’ caused the rifts. QE and Prince Charles will enable Hazz’s delusions unless they push him to renounce the titles. Things have gone way beyond ‘sheer temper’. He lives on US soil now. That changes everything.

===
@Jayne1 so true, there is lots of photoshopping there. The whites of her eyes have always been touched up. Sometimes they look creepy. Still, I doubt she used the fillers. She had the rosacea, so I believe she did microdermabrasion and peels. The sun ruined her skin. All that said, her look was iconic, original. She may have had multiple mental health issues, but she and most of the Spencers have the generational aristocratic looks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that may have missed such profound speech:




He does not look healthy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He does not look healthy.



The beard - ewww.
He’d look 100% better with a clean shave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The beard - ewww.
> He’d look 100% better with a clean shave.



Not even that for me (I think he's one of the men who benefit from a bit of facial hair). But he always looks swollen and puffy and hungover.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not even that for me (I think he's one of the men who benefit from a bit of facial hair). But he always looks swollen and puffy and hungover.



Agreed, some men look very handsome with facial hair. Since he has the fuzzy head hair, the fuzzy face looks silly imo. He thinks the beard hides his rosacea, but it doesn’t. It contributes to the bloated, sad look. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Jayne1

So, who will be there for the unveiling...

I read that only Diana’s close family, the statue committee, the sculptor, garden designer and someone from the UK Telegraph will be there.

Not exactly the hoopla that Harry was going for, I think.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So...remember when Lady CC revealed she had been told someone heard Meghan say "We're only one planecrash away from the throne"?

Apparently others have received the same info. Not sure who that bookworm person is, but apparently she comments frequently on our favourite subject. From 12:45.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok, this is as gossipy as it gets, but...uh oh.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, this is as gossipy as it gets, but...uh oh.
> 
> View attachment 5123661
> 
> 
> View attachment 5123662


Oh this is interesting and sounds so reasonably true.

I would never, ever give away my baby name if it meant so much to me that no one else should use it.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So...remember when Lady CC revealed she had been told someone heard Meghan say "We're only one planecrash away from the throne"?
> 
> Apparently others have received the same info. Not sure who that bookworm person is, but apparently she comments frequently on our favourite subject. From 12:45.




Eek. I didn't believe that could possibly be true. If it is and Harry didn't run away from her screaming when she said it then we have to assume he is every bit as vile as she is (and I was already leaning that way).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I fell down a Reddit rabbit hole...these people are committed to digging up stuff!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Eek. I didn't believe that could possibly be true. If it is and Harry didn't run away from her screaming when she said it then we have to assume he is every bit as vile as she is (and I was already leaning that way).



I posted the link before even watching the part of the video. She did not say "Fingers crossed", did she


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> I  this dress. And that choker!
> 
> Haven’t seen anything this strikingly lovely from the younger royals. She had the body, the ‘it’ girl factor to carry it off. Swoon.
> 
> View attachment 5123474





CarryOn2020 said:


> A little history of the dress
> - over 20,000 pearls
> - sold at auction for $150,000
> - Travolta dress sold for $220,000
> 
> Speaking of tiaras:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which Royal Family has the most expensive tiara collection in the world?
> 
> 
> The top slot is shared by two royal dynasties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com








That's one of my favourite fashion moments of Diana's and I was lucky enough to see it in person years ago at an exhibition at the V&A in London. It was absolutely exquisite in person, the craftmanship was beautiful and I couldn't get over how tiny the waist was on the dress!
I must be in the minority because I think a lot of her fashion looks were great and I might not have loved all of the clothes individually but she wore clothes so fantastically well, like Kate does, that she made the clothes look better than they were. She made them a 'look', rather than just an outfit.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> He does not look healthy.


He looks dreadful. Not sure if he's gained weight/bloated or it's just a bad camera angle.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Agreed, some men look very handsome with facial hair. Since he has the fuzzy head hair, the fuzzy face looks silly imo. He thinks the beard hides his rosacea, but it doesn’t. It contributes to the bloated, sad look. Just my 2 cents.


He looked good years ago when he first appeared with a beard (pre-MM), it was the only time I thought he was kind of attractive and then then that feeling died and went away quicker than blink of an eye once he started to show his true ignorant colours. No beard can hide the fact that you're an a**hole.



Chanbal said:


> For the ones that may have missed such profound speech:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> He looked good years ago when he first appeared with a beard (pre-MM), it was the only time I thought he was kind of attractive and then then that feeling died and went away quicker than blink of an eye once he started to show his true ignorant colours. *No beard can hide the fact that you're an a**hole.*



That kind of fits my ex to a T haha.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I posted the link before even watching the part of the video. She did not say "Fingers crossed", did she



She did. I don't know if it was supposed to be a joke, but even if it was, it was sick and shows a lack of taste and common sense.


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> Thank _you_!
> 
> Me too.
> 
> I think the dress itself was a perfectly classic, off-white, strapless sheath number with back vent, and then the matching jacket was worn over. It was the jacket that had the 'Elvis' collar which was very fashionable in the late-1950s/early-'60s in lady's cocktail wear. She wore it very well, but if she'd have worn the pieces separately, she could have worn it more often. I guess everything she wore became almost too iconic.
> 
> I'm turning my Levis denim jacket collar up this weekend in honour (of the dress, not particularly Di).


And in honour of E!!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> I  this dress. And that choker!
> 
> Haven’t seen anything this strikingly lovely from the younger royals. She had the body, the ‘it’ girl factor to carry it off. Swoon.
> 
> View attachment 5123474


I would even sleep in that jacket they could bury me in it !!!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, this is as gossipy as it gets, but...uh oh.
> 
> View attachment 5123661
> 
> 
> View attachment 5123662


.. but wait, why is it that Harry always stays with Eugenie and Jack?  Is it because "technically" H&M still 'own' Frogmore?


----------



## CeeJay

Saw this on Quora .. hmmmm, kinda interesting .. 
https://www.quora.com/Have-you-noti...upporters-Do-you-think-this-presages-anything


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I've heard that BS from at least three sources recently - The View, CBS and CNN.  H&M were the glittery stars and Will & Kate are bland in comparison.  One of them said that Will & Kate's advisors were having them put on a media campaign to look somehow better and that the video from that looked like a commercial for an insurance company.  Well, to me they look like a beautiful happy family performing their royal duties with grace.  and Kate is just as beautiful as Meghan.  In fact, to me, as far as wearing clothes, she's better - tall and slender, where Meghan has that boxy waist and wears ill-filling outfits.  And she has her own beautiful hair.
> But M is the American WOC Duchess.


TBH think K might have a bit of help from the extension fairies as well but the difference is that they’ve matched her colour, weight and texture very well whereas whoever is picking out M’s pieces… while it’s maybe harder to find a match…. I do suspect they just don’t like her.

well that and probably M won’t be told she doesn’t suit something because we all know she’s such a stunning natural beauty she can carry off any kind of extension especially something like what Kate wears 


bag-mania said:


> That Robert Lacey. I think 95% of the time he's just talking out of his @ss. I doubt many people who actually know what's going on are talking to him.


I wouldn’t considering he’s just going to publish a book saying the exact opposite of what he said in the last one  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not even that for me (I think he's one of the men who benefit from a bit of facial hair). But he always looks swollen and puffy and hungover.


He always looks like he’s having an allergic reaction to something ever since he moved to the states. Wonder what he’s developing a intolerance to?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> CBS is depicting Meghan and Harry as charismatic stars who William and Kate cannot hope to compete with. I’m not even putting the link here because the article was so ridiculous.
> 
> View attachment 5122321


Since when was the BRF supposed to have star power. Aren't they supposed to be boring and proper. 

I can't imagine the UK wanting to pay for the BRF living glitzy, empty, Hollywood-style lives.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That Robert Lacey. I think 95% of the time he's just talking out of his @ss. I doubt many people who actually know what's going on are talking to him.


He is a desperate man. He is trying to preserve his legacy as biographer and royal reporter.  He is playing both sides depending on which way the wind is blowing when he sticks his toe out the window every morning.  What he would really love is to be credited with getting the two brothers back together. That tells you how big his delusion and ego happens to be.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> .. but wait, why is it that Harry always stays with Eugenie and Jack?  Is it because "technically" H&M still 'own' Frogmore?


H&M paid the rent on Frogmore Cottage until March 31, 2022. Eugenie and Jack live at Frogmore, which has been split in half to allow Harry to stay there while in England and I'm guessing that makes it twice now. You can read all about it in this Sun article


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course, Hazzie wants to be included in the joyous celebrations.  Of course he does.  Everyone wants to be on the side that is winning, without doing any of hard work.

IMO Hazz’s pitiful excuse of ‘sheer temper’ reflects how he has always weaseled out of difficulties. Notice he puts himself as the one ready to make peace, blames William and MM for continuing the riff.  Such a jerk. 









						Prince George steals the show during national anthem at Wembley
					

Prince George, seven, stole the limelight as he joined his parents the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to watch England play Germany in the European Football Championship last night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, this is as gossipy as it gets, but...uh oh.
> 
> View attachment 5123661
> 
> 
> View attachment 5123662


Arghhh the internet press ... was reading something today about how well Eugenie gets along with Harry

Ok, she might still get along with H though estranged from M, but honestly, I doubt either story is accurate

Also, stories that Eugenie & family are sharing Frogmore Cottage with H, in two separate halves to the house ??? I dont think we know the full story on that either


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> TBH think K might have a bit of help from the extension fairies as well but the difference is that they’ve matched her colour, weight and texture very well whereas whoever is picking out M’s pieces… while it’s maybe harder to find a match…. I do suspect they just don’t like her.
> 
> well that and probably M won’t be told she doesn’t suit something because we all know she’s such a stunning natural beauty she can carry off any kind of extension especially something like what Kate wears
> 
> I wouldn’t considering he’s just going to publish a book saying the exact opposite of what he said in the last one
> 
> He always looks like he’s having an allergic reaction to something ever since he moved to the states. Wonder what he’s developing a intolerance to?


He could very well have allergies.  There are many things blowing around that grow in the hillside brush.  My morning isn't complete unless I have a rash of sneezes, and usage of many tissues.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, Hazzie wants to be included in the joyous celebrations.  Of course he does.  Everyone wants to be on the side that is winning, without doing any of hard work.
> 
> IMO Hazz’s pitiful excuse of ‘sheer temper’ reflects how he has always weaseled out of difficulties. Notice he puts himself as the one ready to make peace, blames William and MM for continuing the riff.  Such a jerk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince George steals the show during national anthem at Wembley
> 
> 
> Prince George, seven, stole the limelight as he joined his parents the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to watch England play Germany in the European Football Championship last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don't mean to sound snarky, but this was a calculated effort to reinforce the line-up to the throne.  Dressing him like dad, and cheering on the UK team was all very good PR.  It sent a message to Harry as well, i.e.  give all the Zoom speeches you like and negative interviews, but the fact remains that you are #6 and the people are happy with #'s 2, 3 4 and 5.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, Hazzie wants to be included in the joyous celebrations.  Of course he does.  Everyone wants to be on the side that is winning, without doing any of hard work.
> 
> IMO Hazz’s pitiful excuse of ‘sheer temper’ reflects how he has always weaseled out of difficulties. Notice he puts himself as the one ready to make peace, blames William and MM for continuing the riff.  Such a jerk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince George steals the show during national anthem at Wembley
> 
> 
> Prince George, seven, stole the limelight as he joined his parents the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to watch England play Germany in the European Football Championship last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Harry is baiting William.  It's a p*ssing contest and who will blink first.  It certainly won't be William.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> H&M paid the rent on Frogmore Cottage until March 31, 2022. Eugenie and Jack live at Frogmore, which has been split in half to allow Harry to stay there while in England and I'm guessing that makes it twice now. You can read all about it in this Sun article


Which makes me wonder if that story that Meghan wanted Eugenie and Jack to pay 10k a month rent is true.  I don't see how the house was split in two in a formal fashion.  If Harry is there at all, it has to be in a wing of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I don't mean to sound snarky, but this was a calculated effort to reinforce the line-up to the throne.  Dressing him like dad, and cheering on the UK team was all very good PR.  It sent a message to Harry as well, i.e.  give all the Zoom speeches you like and negative interviews, but the fact remains that you are #6 and the people are happy with #'s 2, 3 4 and 5.


UK team? *cough


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Which makes me wonder if that story that Meghan wanted Eugenie and Jack to pay 10k a month rent is true.  I don't see how the house was split in two in a formal fashion.  If Harry is there at all, it has to be in a wing of it.


I don't think it's big enough to have a wing. I thought Eugenie and Jack are with Sarah and her father, I'm sure their house is big enough for them to be living in a wing. Lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I don't mean to sound snarky, but this was a calculated effort to reinforce the line-up to the throne.  Dressing him like dad, and cheering on the UK team was all very good PR.  It sent a message to Harry as well, i.e.  give all the Zoom speeches you like and negative interviews, but the fact remains that you are #6 and the people are happy with #'s 2, 3 4 and 5.


Not snarky at all.  Spot on, IMO. 
It worked, too.  William can play the George card anytime and always win.  H&M have nothing but secrecy.  Ewww.

Fathers and sons.  Take note, Hazz, this is how it’s done.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Becks looks on with pride.  Meanwhile, something has caught George’s eye - um, scantily clad women, perhaps?  
Kate does not approve. William awaits the questions.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Becks looks on with pride.  Meanwhile, something has caught George’s eye - um, scantily clad women, perhaps?
> Kate does not approve. William awaits the questions.
> 
> View attachment 5123737



You are an expert at analyzing photos!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He does not look healthy.


He looks puffy, like he's been hitting the bottle a wee bit too much.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, this is as gossipy as it gets, but...uh oh.
> 
> View attachment 5123661
> 
> 
> View attachment 5123662


Wasn't Misha Noor the one who supposedly introduced MM to Haz?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Becks looks on with pride.  Meanwhile, something has caught George’s eye - um, scantily clad women, perhaps?
> Kate does not approve. William awaits the questions.
> 
> View attachment 5123737


Who's that picking her nose?


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think it's big enough to have a wing. I thought Eugenie and Jack are with Sarah and her father, I'm sure their house is big enough for them to be living in a wing. Lol


A while ago I posited that it he could be staying in the nanny quarter.  It should have a small kitchentte and a bathroom.  The more I think about it, he is not there at all and at another cottage.  He is so hell bent on privacy, why would The Duke of Privacy allow paps to know where he is staying?  It is the same stunt they pulled when she was about to give birth to Archie.


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> Just spit balling here, how would you feel about making it an e-book, and all the illustrations would be gifs, chosen by @Louandra


Sounds great! Count me in






jennlt said:


> There's no better curator of gifs than @Lounorada!


  





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, this is as gossipy as it gets, but...uh oh.
> 
> View attachment 5123661
> 
> 
> View attachment 5123662


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not snarky at all.  Spot on, IMO.
> It worked, too.  William can play the George card anytime and always win.  H&M have nothing but secrecy.  Ewww.
> 
> Fathers and sons.  Take note, Hazz, this is how it’s done.
> 
> View attachment 5123734



Is that David Beckham?

(remember that one time Raptor accused Victoria of spilling to the tabloids about her? Fun!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Wasn't Misha Noor the one who supposedly introduced MM to Haz?



Yeah, or a noblewoman Harry grew up with or Eugenie herself depending on where the wind blows from that day.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> UK team? *cough


So sorry lol!  I'm just a bloody yank!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Wasn't Misha Noor the one who supposedly introduced MM to Haz?


One of many who made the introduction.  It's a lottery, take you pick.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Which makes me wonder if that story that Meghan wanted Eugenie and Jack to pay 10k a month rent is true.  I don't see how the house was split in two in a formal fashion.  If Harry is there at all, it has to be in a wing of it.


COVID requirements are strict in the UK, and scrutinized for compliance  see  story about Boris’ minister who had affair during COVID and was forced to quit
I remember the house being boxy , without wings , what do I know ? Maybe 6 is staying in his own bubble in the stables ? 
I have suspected that Charles paid the Frogmore bill on behalf of 6, but negotiated use by Eugenie in exchange for the payment, someone has to be there to supervise the renovation , 6 was gone , renovation is a slow process in the UK


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Harry is baiting William.  It's a p*ssing contest and who will blink first.  It certainly won't be William.


True. William is dedicated to the monarchy.  H is not.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think it's big enough to have a wing. I thought Eugenie and Jack are with Sarah and her father, I'm sure their house is big enough for them to be living in a wing. Lol


That is another story that I too have seen, Andrew lives near Frogmore 
Agree, all these stories don’t make a lot of sense , I lack confidence in all the reporting, not super accurate


----------



## EverSoElusive

Just in case y'all need a giggle


----------



## Chanbal

This gentleman makes always good points on the subject of this thread!


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> So off-topic, but because they didn’t have their own biological children, what happens to the title I wonder.


I read that it would go to Chris Guest's brother.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> It does make sense though. Those big estates wouldn't be big (and sustainable) anymore if everyone got their slice of it. Same with the family jewelry.


That's what happened to many Chinese family estates pre-Communist times. Every son, sometimes every male descendant, got a share. After a couple of generations, all anyone inherited was a sliver of a once-huge bonanza.



Jayne1 said:


> So, who will be there for the unveiling...
> 
> I read that only Diana’s close family, the statue committee, the sculptor, garden designer and someone from the UK Telegraph will be there.
> 
> Not exactly the hoopla that Harry was going for, I think.


There was some report that said Harry demanded a member of the foreign media, and I was thinking "Omid doesn't count as 'foreign' - yay!"



gracekelly said:


> He is a desperate man. He is trying to preserve his legacy as biographer and royal reporter.  He is playing both sides depending on which way the wind is blowing when he sticks his toe out the window every morning.  What he would really love is to be credited with getting the two brothers back together. That tells you how big his delusion and ego happens to be.


Sort of like an earlier generation of Omid?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, or a noblewoman Harry grew up with or Eugenie herself depending on where the wind blows from that day.


No matter who set up the so-called blind date, I'm betting that it was that SoHo guy who pulled the strings for her. I'm sure Methane's criteria were easy to meet: British, rich, famous and a patsy.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I fell down a Reddit rabbit hole...these people are committed to digging up stuff!



Keep passing it on



marietouchet said:


> Arghhh the internet press ... was reading something today about how well Eugenie gets along with Harry
> Ok, she might still get along with H though estranged from M, but honestly, I doubt either story is accurate
> Also, stories that Eugenie & family are sharing Frogmore Cottage with H, in two separate halves to the house ??? I dont think we know the full story on that either



Are they now suggesting it underwent even more renovation to make it a two family house?  Unless it's a MIL or nanny suit....



gracekelly said:


> Which makes me wonder if that story that Meghan wanted Eugenie and Jack to pay 10k a month rent is true.  I don't see how the house was split in two in a formal fashion.  If Harry is there at all, it has to be in a wing of it.



Agree


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Just in case y'all need a giggle



Finally figured out why M's pic makes me LOL. Her hair reminds me of Gladys Ormphby from Laugh-In, except Gladys is a classier lady than M.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> Which makes me wonder if that story that Meghan wanted Eugenie and Jack to pay 10k a month rent is true.  I don't see how the house was split in two in a formal fashion.  If Harry is there at all, it has to be in a wing of it.


I doubt it.  There are houses in my neighborhood getting $9k a month, she’d have to go way higher than that for the honor of living in her home.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not snarky at all.  Spot on, IMO.
> It worked, too.  William can play the George card anytime and always win.  H&M have nothing but secrecy.  Ewww.
> 
> Fathers and sons.  Take note, Hazz, this is how it’s done.
> 
> View attachment 5123734


Wait, dad’s don’t need a bench?


----------



## csshopper

RE: Modification to Frogmore so H can isolate there:
This appeared in an article in the Mirror earlier this month:

“*The cottage is now literally split into two, meaning Harry can isolate in one half of the house without ever coming into contact with his cousin and her family.

“It has been set up for his return after last-minute plans seemed to work when he was back for the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral in April.”*


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Finally figured out why M's pic makes me LOL. Her hair reminds me of Gladys Ormphby from Laugh-In, except Gladys is a classier lady than M.
> View attachment 5123969



Oh my word! That's tragic


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m surprised that with Meg’s dad being a lighting professional, she doesn’t bring in some lighting expertise to make their zoom appearances from home look better.


----------



## Annawakes

lanasyogamama said:


>



The cat is definitely cuter.


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> Just in case y'all need a giggle




What I read in M’s eyes … oh h I now have your jewels in my hand.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised that with Meg’s dad being a lighting professional, she doesn’t bring in some lighting expertise to make their zoom appearances from home look better.


She knows better than any lighting expert (you may replace "lighting" with any other profession or non-profession - peeing, birthing, etc etc ).


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised that with Meg’s dad being a lighting professional, she doesn’t bring in some lighting expertise to make their zoom appearances from home look better.



Nah, she’s the best at everything, so why would she take improvement advice from anyone else?


----------



## kkfiregirl

xincinsin said:


> She knows better than any lighting expert (you may replace "lighting" with any other profession or non-profession - peeing, birthing, etc etc ).


 
Jinx! We posted similar thoughts at the same time


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> The beard - ewww.
> He’d look 100% better with a clean shave.



The only Royal who looks good with a beard is this one... Prince Carl Philip of Sweden.  Everyone else needs to shave....



			https://cdn-img.instyle.com/sites/default/files/styles/684xflex/public/migrated_assets/15/07/_main_picture_jamie.jpg?itok=hdizfVmT


----------



## Chanbal

Cringe is '_Refusing To Take Part In Meetings Or Dress Rehearsals_' 



_“This is just not the way they do things. *Harry won’t show them his speech and is refusing to take part in meetings or dress rehearsals,” a source revealed*. “He seems to want to just wing it. To just turn up and see what happens. They don’t even know what he is planning to wear.”

“William is anxious for everything to be perfect. Not only will he be standing there as the future of the monarchy without the Queen, his father Prince Charles, or his wife and children, he will be standing there honoring his mom. He wants to make his mum proud,” another source added."_


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Cringe is '_Refusing To Take Part In Meetings Or Dress Rehearsals_'
> 
> 
> 
> _“This is just not the way they do things. *Harry won’t show them his speech and is refusing to take part in meetings or dress rehearsals,” a source revealed*. “He seems to want to just wing it. To just turn up and see what happens. They don’t even know what he is planning to wear.”
> 
> “William is anxious for everything to be perfect. Not only will he be standing there as the future of the monarchy without the Queen, his father Prince Charles, or his wife and children, he will be standing there honoring his mom. He wants to make his mum proud,” another source added."_




I hope that isn’t true. It sounds like he’s planning to make a scene and give a speech that is inappropriate and self-serving, doesn’t it?

He doesn’t need a dress rehearsal. Meghan probably had him rehearse his speech several times before he left. I’ll assume she wrote it for him as well.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if more details are provided here, I'll watch it tomorrow.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> He could very well have allergies.  There are many things blowing around that grow in the hillside brush.  My morning isn't complete unless I have a rash of sneezes, and usage of many tissues.


Aw poor you. I do wonder he just looks so puffy and squinting all the time he’s either reacting to something or he’s on a heck of a comedown most days  


needlv said:


> The only Royal who looks good with a beard is this one... Prince Carl Philip of Sweden.  Everyone else needs to shave....
> 
> 
> 
> https://cdn-img.instyle.com/sites/default/files/styles/684xflex/public/migrated_assets/15/07/_main_picture_jamie.jpg?itok=hdizfVmT


Well he has the distinct advantage of being quite handsome whereas I don’t think anyone could accuse the W family of being overburdened with conventional beauty.


Chanbal said:


> I wonder if more details are provided here, I'll watch it tomorrow.



Oh my gosh this episode was so boring I switched off after 7mins.
In all honesty part of the reason why I think they are making such a meal of the statue and the speeches is so Will looks better by comparison. The statue thing is such a non event really   It reeks of a PR stunt for W.
And in a way I don’t blame them, they’ve got to shove him to the front as much as possible given his dad is such a charisma vacuum & they want everyone to forget about the dodgy uncle.


----------



## needlv

Such an ego that MM has....  Unless you watched suits, no one had a clue who she was...









						Meghan claimed she had larger 'profile’ than Kate in surprise rebuttal
					

MEGHAN MARKLE told Kate Middleton she would not be able to understand the depth of the scrutiny she was receiving because the Duchess of Sussex had more of a "profile" than her sister-in-law before becoming a royal, according to reports.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> RE: Modification to Frogmore so H can isolate there:
> This appeared in an article in the Mirror earlier this month:
> 
> “*The cottage is now literally split into two, meaning Harry can isolate in one half of the house without ever coming into contact with his cousin and her family.
> 
> “It has been set up for his return after last-minute plans seemed to work when he was back for the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral in April.”*



Why would Eugenie and Jack agree to that. I'd rather pay my own rent or live in my father's vast estate instead of splitting a not very big house into two so my a*shole cousin and his toxic wife could claim part of it. Plus, how very likely is that...for one, they'd have to install more kitchens?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Such an ego that MM has....  Unless you watched suits, no one had a clue who she was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claimed she had larger 'profile’ than Kate in surprise rebuttal
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE told Kate Middleton she would not be able to understand the depth of the scrutiny she was receiving because the Duchess of Sussex had more of a "profile" than her sister-in-law before becoming a royal, according to reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I suppose in her eyes, it was a contest between Waity Katie and Flagrant Meghan?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Such an ego that MM has....  Unless you watched suits, no one had a clue who she was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claimed she had larger 'profile’ than Kate in surprise rebuttal
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE told Kate Middleton she would not be able to understand the depth of the scrutiny she was receiving because the Duchess of Sussex had more of a "profile" than her sister-in-law before becoming a royal, according to reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



The nerve this woman has. If anything, Kate was thrust into the spotlight overnight while Meghan had taken a sip - if a tiny one - of it already. And I'll maintain Kate suffered worse harrassment from the press than Raptor ever has. I was really shocked reviewing old footage with Kate being swarmed by paparazzi who tried to get her to pose for them which in my honest opinion would have been ruled coercion by any judge. 

They trailed behind her when she walked down the street - literally a pack of them, nothing subtle -, they camped out at her workplace. Raptor only wishes anyone was ever that interested in her.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Well, let's see what happens in August!  For your convenience I pasted my fav part of the article ...

"They don't want to pay anything, they want to get the money rolling in with doing very little in return, that has been shown up with Spotify.

"They were offered an £18million contract, *they have done one extremely boring podcast for half an hour *where people like Elton John were complaining that they could not take their private planes.

"They were not questioned by Meghan and Harry, they just had to send in a five or ten-minute [clip].

"I think Spotify is going to take action in August unless they make up their minds."




> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...t-Royal-Family-news-Duke-Duchess-of-Sussex-vn
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry warned Spotify could 'take action' over £18million deal*
> *MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have been warned by a royal commentator that Spotify could "take action" against them over their podcast for the streaming service.*
> *Meghan and Harry 'desperate to make millions' says Levin*


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would Eugenie and Jack agree to that. I'd rather pay my own rent or live in my father's vast estate instead of splitting a not very big house into two so my a*shole cousin and his toxic wife could claim part of it. Plus, how very likely is that...for one, they'd have to install more kitchens?



You'd think there're are no hotels or palaces in London.

Sorry, forgot, "London is a trigger"


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I suppose in her eyes, it was a contest between Waity Katie and Flagrant Meghan?





Was that autocorrect and you originally meant fragrant?

Flagrant works better though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would Eugenie and Jack agree to that. I'd rather pay my own rent or live in my father's vast estate instead of splitting a not very big house into two so my a*shole cousin and his toxic wife could claim part of it. Plus, how very likely is that...for one, they'd have to install more kitchens?


And how's the poor fella' going to cope with a much reduced bathroom situation...


----------



## zen1965

Hermes Zen said:


> "I think Spotify is going to take action in August unless they make up their minds."



But, but they are on parental leave! That‘s bullying!
#irony


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Was that autocorrect and you originally meant fragrant?
> 
> Flagrant works better though


Nope, I definitely meant Flagrant. The meaning was just so appropriate: adjective describing an action considered wrong or immoral, conspicuously or obviously offensive.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Well, let's see what happens in August!  For your convenience I pasted my fav part of the article ...
> 
> "They don't want to pay anything, they want to get the money rolling in with doing very little in return, that has been shown up with Spotify.
> 
> "They were offered an £18million contract, *they have done one extremely boring podcast for half an hour *where people like Elton John were complaining that they could not take their private planes.
> 
> "They were not questioned by Meghan and Harry, they just had to send in a five or ten-minute [clip].
> 
> "I think Spotify is going to take action in August unless they make up their minds."



They want companies to give them lots of money and not expect anything in return. That’s why they created Archewell. They probably assumed they would have millions in corporate donations to live on by now and it wouldn’t matter that they didn’t fulfill their other contracts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sign the Petition
					

Stop Omid Scobie’s Bullying!




					www.change.org
				




Omid Scobie, the Royal Contributor for Harper’s Bazaar, TheSocialCTV, Good Morning Britain, ABC, and Good Morning America, was confronted by GMB for publicly ordering targeted harassment and bullying against people on Twitter. Good Morning Britain addressed Omid’s actions live on the air. Since then, Omid Scobie has been privately launching attack campaigns against other Twitter users who do not blindly agree with his “reporting”. Omid has been sending DM’s on Twitter, slandering accounts and calling for his followers to report people who disagree to YouTube & Twitter in order to silence those accounts, essentially bullying and cancelling those users. This is a violation of FREE SPEECH; his followers even went so far as to stalk one account:  YankeeWally2 on Twitter and on YouTube. He is trying to silence other accounts under false claims of racism. This behavior needs to be stopped, especially since Scobie shares on behalf of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have publicly asked for compassion. Omid Scobie should not be a Royal Contributor or journalist without his employers knowing the truth. Bullying is never ok.


2,035 have signed. Let’s get to 2,500!
At 2,500 signatures, this petition is more likely to get picked up by local news!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC kills me. "Bring it down a notch...or five."       (re: Harry's pre-recorded speech for that youth organisation)


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Such an ego that MM has....  Unless you watched suits, no one had a clue who she was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claimed she had larger 'profile’ than Kate in surprise rebuttal
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE told Kate Middleton she would not be able to understand the depth of the scrutiny she was receiving because the Duchess of Sussex had more of a "profile" than her sister-in-law before becoming a royal, according to reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


MM makes a valid point about having a bigger profile than Kate. Kate was a recent college graduate in the UK when she married Will, whereas MM was already in her 2nd or 3rd marriage coming all the way from the US to find her prince without knowing that there is a monarchy in the UK... And, if we add all the other stories to her background, wow!!!! She is right!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"The shirt looked clean - which hasn't always been the case -, the suit looked pressed - which hasn't always been the case -, the hair was combed - which usually isn't the case -, so good luck to him and full marks for appearing to be well groomed." (which emphasis on "appearing")

The shade!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would Eugenie and Jack agree to that. I'd rather pay my own rent or live in my father's vast estate instead of splitting a not very big house into two so my a*shole cousin and his toxic wife could claim part of it. Plus, how very likely is that...for one, they'd have to install more kitchens?


I believe Eugenie and Jack are the real 'owners' of the house, but the BRF is allowing Ginger to keep the appearance of having a residence in the UK until things settle down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Buckle up,  he’s out and about!









						Prince Harry leaves self-isolation after five days at Frogmore Cottage
					

The event, which celebrates young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow Harry to attend.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Look how happy he is with his new life!!

Also, is someone a nail biter?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Look how happy he is with his new life!!
> 
> Also, is someone a nail biter?
> 
> View attachment 5124487
> View attachment 5124488



Possibly mad b/c he didn’t get the rover with extra window tint. 
Commenters are upset he still gets to be chauffeured around.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Well he has the distinct advantage of being quite handsome whereas *I don’t think anyone could accuse the W family of being overburdened with conventional beauty*.



Oh, the snark!  LOLOLOL I am so here for it!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Cringe is '_Refusing To Take Part In Meetings Or Dress Rehearsals_'
> 
> 
> 
> _“This is just not the way they do things. *Harry won’t show them his speech and is refusing to take part in meetings or dress rehearsals,” a source revealed*. “He seems to want to just wing it. To just turn up and see what happens. They don’t even know what he is planning to wear.”
> 
> “William is anxious for everything to be perfect. Not only will he be standing there as the future of the monarchy without the Queen, his father Prince Charles, or his wife and children, he will be standing there honoring his mom. He wants to make his mum proud,” another source added."_



is this true?


needlv said:


> Such an ego that MM has....  Unless you watched suits, no one had a clue who she was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claimed she had larger 'profile’ than Kate in surprise rebuttal
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE told Kate Middleton she would not be able to understand the depth of the scrutiny she was receiving because the Duchess of Sussex had more of a "profile" than her sister-in-law before becoming a royal, according to reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


oh, yes, she was definitely a household name in the US from her huge role in Suits - probably on a level with Jen Aniston in Friends


----------



## bag-mania

Is the statue unveiling being televised? We'll need a few of our UK members to volunteer to give us a play by play report of any drama if it is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They want companies to give them lots of money and not expect anything in return. That’s why they created Archewell. They probably assumed they would have millions in corporate donations to live on by now and it wouldn’t matter that they didn’t fulfill their other contracts.


but isn't it supposed to be a charitable organization...there are laws....guess you're saying their intent was money laundering?  or stealing from their own foundation?
they could legally take fairly large salaries but how far would $400K get them with their lifestyle?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but isn't it supposed to be a charitable organization...there are laws....guess you're saying their intent was money laundering?  or stealing from their own foundation?
> they could legally take fairly large salaries but how far would $400K get them with their lifestyle?



It happens. There are plenty of sketchy non-profits out there. Not that I believe Archewell is successful enough for them to siphon any funds from at this time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It happens. There are plenty of sketchy non-profits out there. Not that I believe Archewell is successful enough for them to siphon any funds from at this time.


I hope the IRS will keep an eye on them


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Well he has the distinct advantage of being quite handsome whereas I don’t think anyone could accuse the W family of being overburdened with conventional beauty.


OT. After hubby and I were married, MIL and I had some wonderful chats, usually while looking at her photo albums. When I commented that hubby was a real cutie as a baby, she told this little anecdote. One day while shopping with baby hubby in stroller, some old lady stopped to chat and before going on her way, told MIL, "You must've married a really handsome man to have such a beautiful baby."  Having seen pics of MIL, I know that she was a very attractive woman when hubby was child and as an older woman. Beauty is really in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Buckle up,  he’s out and about!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry leaves self-isolation after five days at Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> The event, which celebrates young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow Harry to attend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I'll be on lookout at my local Lidl and M&S


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Is the statue unveiling being televised? We'll need a few of our UK members to volunteer to give us a play by play report of any drama if it is.



I'm sure it will...
be televised 

There will be... 
drama 

We will  
but you may be asleep


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'll be on lookout at my local Lidl and M&S



For a date in the freezer isle? Don't let Mr. Papertiger and RagingRaptor find out!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> but isn't it supposed to be a charitable organization...there are laws....guess you're saying their intent was money laundering?  or stealing from their own foundation?
> they could legally take fairly large salaries but how far would $400K get them with their lifestyle?


They could live off Archewell. Are American charities subject to audit?

One of the most respected charities in my country was left with its reputation in tatters after the head of the organisation was found to be milking it in kind. His salary was high but not outrageous. However, he was given massive bonuses and every increase in salary was backdated many months to muddy the waters. The charity picked up his tab for first class travel to Las Vegas, paid for his luxury cars and generally funded his lavish lifestyle. He spent most of his time at home, having quality time with his family. His downfall started when it was noticed and reported that he had installed gold-plated taps in his office.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> They could live off Archewell. Are American charities subject to audit?
> 
> One of the most respected charities in my country was left with its reputation in tatters after the head of the organisation was found to be milking it in kind. His salary was high but not outrageous. However, he was given massive bonuses and every increase in salary was backdated many months to muddy the waters. The charity picked up his tab for first class travel to Las Vegas, paid for his luxury cars and generally funded his lavish lifestyle. He spent most of his time at home, having quality time with his family. His downfall started when it was noticed and reported that he had installed gold-plated taps in his office.


yes, the IRS can audit them....I don't know if their is a limit on the size of their salaries but flying to Vegas would be a no-no


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For a quick date in the freezer isle? Don't let Mr. Papertiger and RagingRaptor find out!



LOL 

Mr. PT is in Scotland 
RR/MM is in Cali 

But I wouldn't - I like handsome, clever, talented men that greet each day as a gift (not a burden)


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> They could live off Archewell. Are American charities subject to audit?
> 
> One of the most respected charities in my country was left with its reputation in tatters after the head of the organisation was found to be milking it in kind. His salary was high but not outrageous. However, he was given massive bonuses and every increase in salary was backdated many months to muddy the waters. The charity picked up his tab for first class travel to Las Vegas, paid for his luxury cars and generally funded his lavish lifestyle. He spent most of his time at home, having quality time with his family. His downfall started when it was noticed and reported that he had installed gold-plated taps in his office.



Gonna have to switch back those new gold-plated taps now - oh bother


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC claims the invitation of the troublesome two for the Queen's platinum jubilee is entirely a fabrication of SS, and I'm inclined to believe her because her reasoning is very simple: the BRF doesn't issue invitations until much closer to the event and certainly not a year out.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> yes, the IRS can audit them....I don't know if their is a limit on the size of their salaries but flying to Vegas would be a no-no


He flew to Vegas more than once with an entourage, stayed in swanky hotels, and watched the sell-out shows for "research". He was later sued and had to pay back Singapore $4mil to the charity (his friends helped him pay it off). Also spent some time in prison. The last I heard, he still claims to have done nothing wrong.

I totally see Methane and Hazard going that route as some sort of televangelist espousing compassion and inclusivity, click the button to donate $50 and, in fine print, $45 will be used for "admin and related costs".


----------



## EverSoElusive

Umm???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Is the statue unveiling being televised? We'll need a few of our UK members to volunteer to give us a play by play report of any drama if it is.


Not me I’d rather drink bleach while poking my eyes with a sharp stick


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I had read about the land controversy a while ago and thought it was pretty unwoke of them to go through with the purchase, but what do I know. The water controversy is new to me, though.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm???



They have no choice. All that pee would stink up the garden if they don't flush the grounds with water every day


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC claims the invitation of the troublesome two for the Queen's platinum jubilee is entirely a fabrication of SS, and I'm inclined to believe her because her reasoning is very simple: the BRF doesn't issue invitations until much closer to the event and certainly not a year out.



They _really_ want to be there don't they?


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm???



ooh, how will the woke couple respond?  probably story won't have enough legs to require it


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> ooh, how will the woke couple respond?  probably story won't have enough legs to require it



They might just make a $2000 donation to a Native American charity as an apology because they are oh so sorry  But of course this news will be on every tabloid's front page to exhibit their generosity when others have failed to help Native Americans


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> ooh, how will the woke couple respond?  probably story won't have enough legs to require it


They will probably ignore it and hope it will go away, unless the Chumash really insist on a meeting, then it might get more press.

The story has already gone round the world. The link given: "todayonline" is from my country in Asia. The story also made it to news sites in Europe and New Zealand, and was translated into Chinese on various China websites.

This one from Anhui province is particularly droll.
Their headline reads: _*The couple are back in the news again - Native Americans Worry that Harry and Meghan are watering their garden with Holy Water*._ And the first line dryly notes that "_*Fame brings many problems*_". The last line was quite funny: _*Although their house is very secluded and far from the paps, there are disadvantages too - they are being plagued by bears.*_ I didn't know they had bear problems 





						你似乎来到了没有知识存在的荒原 - 知乎
					

知乎，中文互联网高质量的问答社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，于 2011 年 1 月正式上线，以「让人们更好的分享知识、经验和见解，找到自己的解答」为品牌使命。知乎凭借认真、专业、友善的社区氛围、独特的产品机制以及结构化和易获得的优质内容，聚集了中文互联网科技、商业、影视、时尚、文化等领域最具创造力的人群，已成为综合性、全品类、在诸多领域具有关键影响力的知识分享社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，建立起了以社区驱动的内容变现商业模式。




					zhuanlan.zhihu.com


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> They will probably ignore it and hope it will go away, unless the Chumash really insist on a meeting, then it might get more press.
> 
> The story has already gone round the world. The link given: "todayonline" is from my country in Asia. The story also made it to news sites in Europe and New Zealand, and was translated into Chinese on various China websites.
> 
> This one from Anhui province is particularly droll.
> Their headline reads: _*The couple are back in the news again - Native Americans Worry that Harry and Meghan are watering their garden with Holy Water*._ And the first line dryly notes that "_*Fame brings many problems*_". The last line was quite funny: _*Although their house is very secluded and far from the paps, there are disadvantages too - they are being plagued by bears.*_ I didn't know they had bear problems
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 你似乎来到了没有知识存在的荒原 - 知乎
> 
> 
> 知乎，中文互联网高质量的问答社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，于 2011 年 1 月正式上线，以「让人们更好的分享知识、经验和见解，找到自己的解答」为品牌使命。知乎凭借认真、专业、友善的社区氛围、独特的产品机制以及结构化和易获得的优质内容，聚集了中文互联网科技、商业、影视、时尚、文化等领域最具创造力的人群，已成为综合性、全品类、在诸多领域具有关键影响力的知识分享社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，建立起了以社区驱动的内容变现商业模式。
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zhuanlan.zhihu.com



its possible they are paying for city water and not using the water the NA's are worried about....in that case they can respond


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC claims the invitation of the troublesome two for the Queen's platinum jubilee is entirely a fabrication of SS, and I'm inclined to believe her because her reasoning is very simple: the BRF doesn't issue invitations until much closer to the event and certainly not a year out.


I did think the timing of the invite was very early.  Especially with these two, literally anything could happen between now and the event.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Buckle up,  he’s out and about!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry leaves self-isolation after five days at Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> The event, which celebrates young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow Harry to attend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


As it should be, as it was pre MM. 
Thank God she wasn't there.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> They want companies to give them lots of money and not expect anything in return. That’s why they created Archewell. They probably assumed they would have millions in corporate donations to live on by now and it wouldn’t matter that they didn’t fulfill their other contracts.


True but have those millions come in from the corps. At a minimum I hope this puts more stress on them for grabbing the $$$$$$$$’s and not putting out beyond the spew coming out of their mouths.


----------



## periogirl28

papertiger said:


> I'll be on lookout at my local Lidl and M&S


And I at my local Whole Foods, High St Ken.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> They might just make a $2000 $200 donation to a Native American charity as an apology because they are oh so sorry  But of course this news will be on every tabloid's front page to exhibit their generosity when others have failed to help Native Americans



I think this was a typo. I fixed it for you.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> They will probably ignore it and hope it will go away, unless the Chumash really insist on a meeting, then it might get more press.
> 
> The story has already gone round the world. The link given: "todayonline" is from my country in Asia. The story also made it to news sites in Europe and New Zealand, and was translated into Chinese on various China websites.
> 
> This one from Anhui province is particularly droll.
> Their headline reads: _*The couple are back in the news again - Native Americans Worry that Harry and Meghan are watering their garden with Holy Water*._ And the first line dryly notes that "_*Fame brings many problems*_". The last line was quite funny: _*Although their house is very secluded and far from the paps, there are disadvantages too - they are being plagued by bears.*_ I didn't know they had bear problems
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 你似乎来到了没有知识存在的荒原 - 知乎
> 
> 
> 知乎，中文互联网高质量的问答社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，于 2011 年 1 月正式上线，以「让人们更好的分享知识、经验和见解，找到自己的解答」为品牌使命。知乎凭借认真、专业、友善的社区氛围、独特的产品机制以及结构化和易获得的优质内容，聚集了中文互联网科技、商业、影视、时尚、文化等领域最具创造力的人群，已成为综合性、全品类、在诸多领域具有关键影响力的知识分享社区和创作者聚集的原创内容平台，建立起了以社区驱动的内容变现商业模式。
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zhuanlan.zhihu.com


Not defending them but this house was built decades ago. Why didn’t the NA complain about it then?  Looking for money from the oh so fabulously rich Harkles?  This is what happens when you tell the world about your big bucks contracts.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5124545



Off topic, but anyone who names their son "Danger" is just asking for years of childhood accidents and injuries.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I think this was a typo. I fixed it for you.



Or they might just donate more beanies and The Bench


----------



## periogirl28

elvisfan4life said:


> Not me I’d rather drink bleach while poking my eyes with a sharp stick


Yeap. I have an appointment at Hermes tomorrow. Might go look at statue after a few days though.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Or they might just donate more beanies and The Bench



I imagine one of the bedrooms in their mansion is stacked floor to ceiling with boxes of The Bench, just waiting for distribution to lucky charities and libraries.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Off topic, but anyone who names their son "Danger" is just asking for years of childhood accidents and injuries.



Is Danger maybe pronounced differently in some non-English languages? Just curious because I only know the English danger


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Is Danger maybe pronounced differently in some non-English languages? Just curious because I only know the English danger



Nope, Danger means danger. This was the first thing I thought of when I read it.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Nope, Danger means danger. This was the first thing I thought of when I read it.
> 
> View attachment 5124673


Me too!!!     
Honestly, reading the list, I somehow glossed over "Danger" altogether until it was pointed out!  I was too focused on the variations of The Queen's nickname and all the Roman-esque names.  I'm surprised "Diana" isn't on there.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Nope, Danger means danger. This was the first thing I thought of when I read it.
> 
> View attachment 5124673



Well, I think the duo should have named their kid American Danger Mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Cringe is '_Refusing To Take Part In Meetings Or Dress Rehearsals_'
> 
> _“This is just not the way they do things. *Harry won’t show them his speech and is refusing to take part in meetings or dress rehearsals,” a source revealed*. “He seems to want to just wing it. To just turn up and see what happens. They don’t even know what he is planning to wear.”
> “William is anxious for everything to be perfect. Not only will he be standing there as the future of the monarchy without the Queen, his father Prince Charles, or his wife and children, he will be standing there honoring his mom. He wants to make his mum proud,” another source added."_



JCMH:


That would be a no.
I hate that type of petulant, spoilt behaviour. Especially when it's coming from a grown a$$ man[child].
Listen here, Hazmat- do as you're told and show some common courtesy, it costs you absolutely nothing to be polite. It's a freebie! Something which you would think you'd enjoy, seeing as you don't like spending any of your own money.


Because i'm pretty sure no one invited you.




needlv said:


> Such an ego that MM has....  Unless you watched suits, no one had a clue who she was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan claimed she had larger 'profile’ than Kate in surprise rebuttal
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE told Kate Middleton she would not be able to understand the depth of the scrutiny she was receiving because the Duchess of Sussex had more of a "profile" than her sister-in-law before becoming a royal, according to reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





The delusions of this woman!



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would Eugenie and Jack agree to that. I'd rather pay my own rent or live in my father's vast estate instead of splitting a not very big house into two so my a*shole cousin and his toxic wife could claim part of it. Plus, how very likely is that...for one, they'd have to install more kitchens?


This. It makes _no _sense for H&M to be using FC as their occasional accommodation a couple of times a year when there is an endless amount of Royal properties he could stay in. I don't understand how he and MM decided to leave the UK with obviously no intention to be coming back very often (given all the bridges they have burned with the RF), yet they are still holding on to FC as their UK residence and supposedly paying rent for it when only one of them has stepped foot in twice in the last year? Like, WTF!
Let Eugenie and her husband have the house to themselves and f*ck off and find somewhere else to stay when you bother to come home, every once in a blue moon.
Any time they hear he's coming back to the UK it must feel like huge dark cloud looming over them.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Buckle up,  he’s out and about!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry leaves self-isolation after five days at Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> The event, which celebrates young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow Harry to attend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I clicked on that DM link and as I scrolled down I was reminded of that appearance he and MM made at that childrens charity event where he gave that weird speech where he inappropriately started laughing and snorted but tried to make it look like he was crying- the worst fake crying i've ever seen. Sooooo odd.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5124545





The knock-on effect of their selfishness and arrogance.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> They _really_ want to be there don't they?


Major elbow jabs to get to the front of the line. 

Best scenario is they show up and are ushered to a back corner of an obscure balcony.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> JCMH:
> View attachment 5124619
> 
> That would be a no.
> I hate that type of petulant, spoilt behaviour. Especially when it's coming from a grown a$$ man[child].
> Listen here, Hazmat- do as you're told and show some common courtesy, it costs you absolutely nothing to be polite. It's a freebie! Something which you would think you'd enjoy, seeing as you don't like spending any of your own money.
> View attachment 5124607
> 
> Because i'm pretty sure no one invited you.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5124624
> 
> The delusions of this woman!
> 
> 
> This. It makes _no _sense for H&M to be using FC as their occasional accommodation a couple of times a year when there is an endless amount of Royal properties he could stay in. I don't understand how he and MM decided to leave the UK with obviously no intention to be coming back very often (given all the bridges they have burned with the RF), yet they are still holding on to FC as their UK residence and supposedly paying rent for it when only one of them has stepped foot in twice in the last year? Like, WTF!
> Let Eugenie and her husband have the house to themselves and f*ck off and find somewhere else to stay when you bother to come home, every once in a blue moon.
> Any time they hear he's coming back to the UK it must feel like huge dark cloud looming over them.
> 
> 
> I clicked on that DM link and as I scrolled down I was reminded of that appearance he and MM made at that childrens charity event where he gave that weird speech where he inappropriately started laughing and snorted but tried to make it look like he was crying- the worst fake crying i've ever seen. Sooooo odd.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5124645
> 
> The knock-on effect of their selfishness and arrogance.


I love your posts!  I am always in awe of how you have the perfect arsenal of GIFs


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5124545


Sure nameberry - probably a few people trying to work out what then hell it means. Still I guess there’s no accounting for taste 


EverSoElusive said:


> Umm???



That house is bad vibes central. In fact it seems like the whole neighbourhood is on top of what should be either a native town or an archaeological site. 


periogirl28 said:


> And I at my local Whole Foods, High St Ken.


Ooh that’s a good one. Big too, make sure he doesn’t try and hide in some obscure gluten free pasta shapes corner. 


gracekelly said:


> Not defending them but this house was built decades ago. Why didn’t the NA complain about it then?  Looking for money from the oh so fabulously rich Harkles?  This is what happens when you tell the world about your big bucks contracts.


Well to be fair to the NA they probably have been complaining for years but this is the first time the story has gotten any publicity.

I also bet that no media outlet would dare accuse Oprah or some of the other heavy hitters of abusing native land even if she has the same setup in her Monte mcmansion but they will run it for the disaster artists.


bag-mania said:


> Nope, Danger means danger. This was the first thing I thought of when I read it.
> 
> View attachment 5124673


How many people are making that exact joke with their kids’ names lol?
Austen/Austin is a reasonable popular name too now I think about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

New shoes, new clothes, my my, someone wishes to change his image. Still, he’s not a kid, put on a jacket.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hands on hips - Gotta make himself look ‘bigger’ and more powerful than he is


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oooh, new jumper Harry!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5124706
> 
> 
> New shoes, new clothes, my my, someone wishes to change his image. Still, he’s not a kid, put on a jacket.


Hint to 6: borrow style tips from nephew George at football game - coat and rep stripe tie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So...remember when Lady CC revealed she had been told someone heard Meghan say "We're only one planecrash away from the throne"?
> 
> Apparently others have received the same info. Not sure who that bookworm person is, but apparently she comments frequently on our favourite subject. From 12:45.




Considering the explosive accusations Meghan has hurled at the BRF, the "We're only one plane crash away from the throne" remark coming from Meghan is very believable. And NO ONE in the BRF is backing Meghan, but several are backing reports of Meghan's bullying. Nobody has anything to gain by saying Meghan had been cruel. Her track record of burning bridges is international. She is utterly twisted and her reputation is toast.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger is on a business trip!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Ginger is on a business trip!



Good comment from Tootie fruity:  the visor still says ‘AIRBAG’...thought it would’ve said ‘SCUMBAG’.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Ginger is on a business trip!




Always the smug jerk.
Why is QE not taking strong action?  Maybe a vote in Scotland will be her wake-the-hell-up call.

ETA:  they changed the date to accommodate him!!!!  Gross, just gross. 
_The event, which celebrates inspirational young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow the Duke of Sussex - the charity's patron since 2007 - to attend.  _


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> *Harry won’t show them his speech and is refusing to take part in meetings or dress rehearsals,” a source revealed*.


I wonder what nasty little surprise (sorry, secret sweet nod) the devious duo have planned? Is M going to pop out from behind a bush to stand next to W and lay a wreath at the statue?


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> That house is bad vibes central. In fact it seems like the whole neighbourhood is on top of what should be either a native town or an archaeological site.
> *Well to be fair to the NA they probably have been complaining for years but this is the first time the story has gotten any publicity.*
> 
> I also bet that no media outlet would dare accuse Oprah or some of the other heavy hitters of abusing native land even if she has the same setup in her Monte mcmansion but they will run it for the disaster artists.



The Chumash have a casino. Trust me, they have plenty of political clout-----the NA lobby is very powerful in CA.


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> The Chumash have a casino. Trust me, they have plenty of political clout-----the NA lobby is very powerful in CA.


In that case, H&M should definitely sort out a sprinkler system and maybe give a ‘generous donation’, given she’s going to be president and all


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always the smug jerk.
> Why is QE not taking strong action?  Maybe a vote in Scotland will be her wake-the-hell-up call.
> 
> ETA:  they changed the date to accommodate him!!!!  Gross, just gross.
> _The event, which celebrates inspirational young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow the Duke of Sussex - the charity's patron since 2007 - to attend.  _


I think most charities have learned to be accommodating - a word not in 6 or M's vocab


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I think most charities have learned to be accommodating - a word not in 6 or M's vocab



IMO he does not deserve that kind of respect.  These charities should drop him. Is he really helping them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Off topic, but anyone who names their son "Danger" is just asking for years of childhood accidents and injuries.



Should have been my cousin's middle name. I can't tell how many times my dad - not even a surgeon but another specialty - had to sew that kid together from when he started to walk into early adulthood, many times in our dining room.


----------



## CeeJay

Genie27 said:


> I wonder what nasty little surprise (sorry, secret sweet nod) the devious duo have planned? Is M going to pop out from behind a bush to stand next to W and lay a wreath at the statue?


I bet ANYTHING that he will (somehow) mention Meghan in his "speech", it's the words that will be used that will be interesting.  After all, if he's refusing to meet with anyone, you gotta believe that it's because he's got Meghan mentioned and who knows what else word salad that she's written!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> I bet ANYTHING that he will (somehow) mention Meghan in his "speech", it's the words that will be used that will be interesting.  After all, if he's refusing to meet with anyone, you gotta believe that it's because he's got Meghan mentioned and who knows what else word salad that she's written!



He'll definitely talk about Meghan. The real questions are 1) _how many times will he mention her?,_ and 2) _in what ways will he compare her to his mother?_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> He'll definitely talk about Meghan. The real questions are 1) _how many times will he mention her?,_ and 2) _in what ways will he compare her to his mother?_


I don't care for Diana, but I wouldn't insult anyone who does and I hope there will be repercussions if H doesn't behave well.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't care for Diana, but I wouldn't insult anyone who does and I hope there will be repercussions if H doesn't behave well.
> View attachment 5124865



I think she would be shocked and appalled that her sons were at odds with each other, especially after having grown up being so close.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wait, hold up. The article said there would not be speeches. Has that changed?


Are they playing us?   









						England' victory helps thaw icy relations between William and Harry
					

After barely speaking in the past 18 months, Princes William and Harry have shared messages about England's historic victory over Germany in the Euros on Tuesday afternoon.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> I love your posts!  I am always in awe of how you have the perfect arsenal of GIFs





Thanks hun! You can't beat a good gif to express your true reaction to something said or done, especially with Pinky & the Brain and all their shady shenanigans! Glad they bring so many of you so much enjoyment 



CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5124706
> 
> New shoes, new clothes, my my, someone wishes to change his image. Still, he’s not a kid, put on a jacket.


OMG, they are the newest looking new shoes I have ever seen. It's like they haven't even left the factory yet, they're so shiny






Chanbal said:


> Ginger is on a business trip!





JCMH:
Oh yes, I must document the eViL British paparazzi who are following me and taking my picture from a long distance away as I make my way to an official engagement, they are so intrusive. Wah wah.
Also JCMH:
Yet I NEVER document the American paparazzi who also follow me, invade my privacy and take my picture while out with my pRiVaCy obsessed wife, doing non-work related things. British=bad. American=good.

Yet all paparazzi are the same, doing the same job. Ahh the hypocrisy


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Not defending them but this house was built decades ago. Why didn’t the NA complain about it then?  Looking for money from the oh so fabulously rich Harkles?  This is what happens when you tell the world about your big bucks contracts.


maybe they're not fans of the Harkles and want to expose them for hypocrisy


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> maybe they're not fans of the Harkles and want to expose them for hypocrisy


I hope so. I mean, we can't be the only ones (TPF bloggers) who can predict and expose the despicable duo's machinations.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> maybe they're not fans of the Harkles and want to expose them for hypocrisy


I think the other comments are probably correct.  The NA probably have complained before, but no one listened.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> He'll definitely talk about Meghan. The real questions are 1) _how many times will he mention her?,_ and 2) _*in what ways will he compare her to his mother?*_


If he does that, I wonder will it be steam that comes out of William's ears or full blown fire. I would be expecting fire and I would totally understand why.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He'll definitely talk about Meghan. The real questions are 1) _how many times will he mention her?,_ and 2) _in what ways will he compare her to his mother?_


he should just talk about his mother, his love for her, her good qualities -  not about her death, the paps or his poor victim WIFE.
we'll see


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> he should just talk about his mother, his love for her, her good qualities -  not about her death, the paps or his poor victim WIFE.
> we'll see


You are absolutely right.  About all of it.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Is Danger maybe pronounced differently in some non-English languages? Just curious because I only know the English danger


In Chinese, Dan-Ge means procrastination


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> he should just talk about his mother, his love for her, her good qualities -  not about her death, the paps or his poor victim WIFE.
> we'll see



I hope that’s what he does. I’ve come to assume the worst with them and I shouldn’t always do that. Even Harry deserves the chance to NOT be an ass.


----------



## marietouchet

Ed Sheehan was behind William at football and with Harry at child charity, good


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm sure the nannies are the ones that suffer  

When was Lil Bit born??? She can sit already??? Even their kid is an overachiever


----------



## Genie27

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure the nannies are the ones that suffer
> 
> When was Lil Bit born??? She can sit already??? Even their kid is an overachiever



Her first word was somnambulist.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure the nannies are the ones that suffer
> 
> When was Lil Bit born??? She can sit already??? Even their kid is an overachiever



Few weeks old and already sitting.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> Few weeks old and already sitting.




Maybe Lil Bit's real age doesn't match the fake date of birth and that's why the kid hasn't been shown to the world yet  Perhaps she will start showing off a Lil Bit lifelike doll like she allegedly did with Archie. Dead!


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> Few weeks old and already sitting.



Figured out quickly that her parents are hot messes. Probably trying to get up and walking so she can get the heck out of there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> Few weeks old and already sitting.




And her first word will be onomatopoeia


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> When was Lil Bit born??? She can sit already??? Even their kid is an overachiever



Well the date she was born and the date we were told she was born may not match but I doubt it could be that far off. Harry has obviously adopted his wife’s habit of never telling the truth when a lie makes you sound special.


----------



## Chanbal

True or False?


----------



## needlv

Wow SS PR desperately trying to thaw the ice....









						Duchess Kate Has Been 'Reaching Out' to Meghan More Since Daughter's Birth
					

Duchess Kate and Meghan Markle have had a rocky relationship following Prince Harry and Prince William's rift — all the details




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Duchess Catherine is doing quite fine without MM... so I think this is a fake story planted by MM’s PR machine...


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5124708
> 
> 
> Hands on hips - Gotta make himself look ‘bigger’ and more powerful than he is


It’s nice to know he’s finally been able to buy himself a second outfit and some shoes with his millions  
unfortunately Gant has now had to declare bankruptcy again due to overnight poisoning of the brand

it is funny though, as much as I like that style of jumper I can’t not associate it with the druggie, troublemaker f***boys of Eton and Stowe at university . So I guess he’s on brand if 15 years too old for it


Chanbal said:


> True or False?
> View attachment 5125171


Aw like most devoted parents he doesn’t have a picture of his baby on his phone I guess 
I guess she must be getting restrung or they haven’t finalised on the hair yet.

The doll thing sounded silly at first but I suppose it is fitting princess Pinocchio would have baby puppets. Harry is more like Kermit - dead limp without someone’s hand controlling him.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I think she would be shocked and appalled that her sons were at odds with each other, especially after having grown up being so close.


I still think that if she was still here, there would be no Meghan.


----------



## rose60610

So if Harry recoiled at the innocuous question from a child about Lilibet, what else is he hiding? Does he have to phone in to Meghan and cowardly ask "What do I do in situations like these"?


----------



## Hermes Zen

I have some hope that W&H will try their best to get beyond their differences because it's their mother's 60th.  What an appropriate touching time to do this.  Right?  We can hope. Will see what happens.  Looking forward to seeing the statue!


Princes William and Harry will meet in private following the unveiling of a statue in memory of their mother in a sign of reconciliation between the royal brothers.


> https://news.yahoo.com/princes-william-harry-hold-private-145712515.html
> 
> *Princes William and Harry to hold private meeting after Diana statue unveiled*
> Tue, June 29, 2021, 7:57 AM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> True or False?
> View attachment 5125171



I mean, maybe that mom should raise her child  to not ask intrusive questions (I am a very private person for real, not as shtick, and I hate personal questions and would probably not show private pictures TBH). But yes, he could have handled it a bit (or A LOT) better than a 3yo who's been asked to eat his spinach.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Duchess Catherine is doing quite fine without MM... so I think this is a fake story planted by MM’s PR machine...



Duchess Catherine also saw through that snake from the beginning and has only been confirmed seeing how Raptor threw her under the bus. I'm Team Fake News as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I still think that if she was still here, there would be no Meghan.



This so much.


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> I have some hope that W&H will try their best to get beyond their differences because it's their mother's 60th.  What an appropriate touching time to do this.  Right?  We can hope. Will see what happens.  Looking forward to seeing the statue!
> 
> 
> Princes William and Harry will meet in private following the unveiling of a statue in memory of their mother in a sign of reconciliation between the royal brothers.


Hope there are witnesses.


----------



## Hermes Zen

The title caught my attention ... 'Diana statue to *stand* in redesigned garden at Kensington Palace.'  We've been wondering if Diana would be seated on a bench or standing.  Whether the Guardian had advance hint of it standing or a guess, we shall find out soon!  



> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...and-in-redesigned-garden-at-kensington-palace
> 
> *Diana statue to stand in redesigned garden at Kensington Palace*
> *Prince William and Prince Harry will be at unveiling on Thursday, which would have been her 60th birthday*
> Caroline Davies


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> The title caught my attention ... 'Diana statue to *stand* in redesigned garden at Kensington Palace.'  We've been wondering if Diana would be seated on a bench or standing.  Whether the Guardian had advance hint of it standing or a guess, we shall find out soon!


Probably just general terminology. I've heard it used here maybe when talking about furniture "put it to stand there" or "it'd be better stood there" 
Another way of saying "will be put" "put it there" 
Hope that makes sense.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> Probably just general terminology. I've heard it used here maybe when talking about furniture "put it to stand there" or "it'd be better stood there"
> Another way of saying "will be put" "put it there"
> Hope that makes sense.


It does. I didn't see other media state it that way so wondered. Thanks!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> It does. I didn't see other media state it that way so wondered. Thanks!


You're welcome. We shall soon see if she is standing or indeed on a bench. 
Any idea what time the unveiling is?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> You're welcome. We shall soon see if she is standing or indeed on a bench.
> Any idea what time the unveiling is?


Unfortunately I haven’t seen any mention on a time. I’m on the west coast of the US. I look forward to hearing all about it when I wake up. Rest assured I will be running to my computer to read all about it here!


----------



## Hermes Zen

I just found this. Not sure what time this would be London time. Nite!


The *statue* is set *to be unveiled* at 1am New Zealand *time*, July 2, which would have been *Diana's* 60th birthday. Royal watchers and fans are expecting to see the brothers come together after a fraught couple of years of feuding in the public eye.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyl...and-its-unveiling/KULL5GDDCON4SVKAMUMO3KJX5Q/


----------



## RAINDANCE

Can someone explain to me how the narrative is suddenly "William and Harry's rift" ? I seem to recall that what started all this was H&M attacked the whole BRF because they were not allowed to keep the high profile & glamorous gigs and wanted to be free to merch their "brand" and set up their own royalty*? Ie. do want they wanted with out any financial or other (apolitical) oversight ?

*I can believe that M didn't understand what a CONSTITUTIONAL MONACHY was but Harry ... 
Would anyone really want someone that unintelligent as Head of State ?

I presume the worry today is that H will go off on an Earl Spencer rant ?
I don't have time just now to write what I think about Spencer but he's another one full of hypocrisy and fully capable using his dead sister when it's convenient.

I have huge sympathy for Prince Charles at times. I can't imagine how it must be to have your Ex rearing her/his head regularly years after the relationship ended and everything raked up time and time again. 

And here's another thing. All the Diana evangelists assume she would still be glamourous and involved with charity if she were alive today. There's no way of knowing that, at all. She could have remarried, several times, or moved to a remote part of Scotland like her mother or gone down the plastic surgery route or had weight issues. 

And finally, not 2 months ago Harry said he hated being a Royal and didn't enjoy appearances etc. Has he any idea how he disrespects those charity workers and attendees at functions now. Everyone yesterday has got to be wondering whether he really wanted to be there, notwithstanding the report it was rearranged to accommodate his visit ?


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> Buckle up,  he’s out and about!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry leaves self-isolation after five days at Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> The event, which celebrates young people living with serious illnesses, was originally scheduled for September, but the organisers changed the date to allow Harry to attend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ah yes! That is totally the unhappy face of someone who has been trapped into making appearances and living the life of a working royal. 

Seriously though, how can anyone take his appearance at a charity organization well after he came out and said all those things about being forced into smiling and a life of service?


----------



## gelbergirl

What goes on when he arrives back in England?  He probably goes right back to having a valet, and all that.
Is everyone still bowing to him, calling him Sir.


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> I just found this. Not sure what time this would be London time. Nite!
> 
> 
> The *statue* is set *to be unveiled* at 1am New Zealand *time*, July 2, which would have been *Diana's* 60th birthday. Royal watchers and fans are expecting to see the brothers come together after a fraught couple of years of feuding in the public eye.
> 
> https://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyl...and-its-unveiling/KULL5GDDCON4SVKAMUMO3KJX5Q/


Ah, so that would be 2pm here in the UK.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Princes William and Harry will meet in private following the unveiling of a statue in memory of their mother in a sign of reconciliation between the royal brothers.





Sharont2305 said:


> Hope there are witnesses.



Hope it's being recorded!


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> I have some hope that W&H will try their best to get beyond their differences because it's their mother's 60th.  What an appropriate touching time to do this.  Right?  We can hope. Will see what happens.  Looking forward to seeing the statue!
> Princes William and Harry will meet in private following the unveiling of a statue in memory of their mother in a sign of reconciliation between the royal brothers.





RAINDANCE said:


> Can someone explain to me how the narrative is suddenly "William and Harry's rift" ? I seem to recall that what started all this was H&M attacked the whole BRF because they were not allowed to keep the high profile & glamorous gigs and wanted to be free to merch their "brand" and set up their own royalty*? Ie. do want they wanted with out any financial or other (apolitical) oversight ?
> 
> *I can believe that M didn't understand what a CONSTITUTIONAL MONACHY was but Harry ...
> Would anyone really want someone that unintelligent as Head of State ?
> 
> I presume the worry today is that H will go off on an Earl Spencer rant ?
> I don't have time just now to write what I think about Spencer but he's another one full of hypocrisy and fully capable using his dead sister when it's convenient.
> 
> I have huge sympathy for Prince Charles at times. I can't imagine how it must be to have your Ex rearing her/his head regularly years after the relationship ended and everything raked up time and time again.
> 
> And here's another thing. All the Diana evangelists assume she would still be glamourous and involved with charity if she were alive today. There's no way of knowing that, at all. She could have remarried, several times, or moved to a remote part of Scotland like her mother or gone down the plastic surgery route or had weight issues.
> 
> And finally, not 2 months ago Harry said he hated being a Royal and didn't enjoy appearances etc. Has he any idea how he disrespects those charity workers and attendees at functions now. Everyone yesterday has got to be wondering whether he really wanted to be there, notwithstanding the report it was rearranged to accommodate his visit ?



ITA, it's like someone punches you in the face - and then everyone goes around calling it a brawl or a fight.

If we are to believe M&H bullied their staff (which I do) it makes 2 punches from one side, and still people are calling  it a fight between brothers.

I'll never forgive H for all the lies/supporting lies and resultant terrible reputation internationally he's given this country, let alone his family and for his own personal own gain. Everyone in GB should boo him wherever he goes, Di statue/Bday or not.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Why do I picture this event going down a bit like this?!? 
tbh it’d be nice to get a bit of entertainment out of them after the dry spell this statue story has been


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Ah, so that would be 2pm here in the UK.


So, that would be 9am EDT about 1/2 hour from now.

ET oops to change EST to EDT


----------



## Cavalier Girl

New Zealand has several time zones, but I'd assume they mean the time in Auckland, and 9:00am. EDT.


----------



## Sharont2305

The Spencer family


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Sharont2305

I'm hoping Harry doesn't mention that his and M engagement press conference was in the same garden


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please hold my sick bucket. From Google News:




"Duchess Meghan: Private memories & tears for Diana! Her biographer tells all"

Ok, Scobie isn't all that gifted in the brain department, but even he must be aware Raptor never met Diana, so probably did not make "private memories"? 

(I don't have it in me to read the article right now)


----------



## creme fraiche

Well, it's not a bench.


----------



## Sharont2305

"Obviously" the children are Archie and Lilibet


----------



## creme fraiche

Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
					

The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I'm not crazy about the statue- more like a "meh" feeling.  Might be the way she is dressed.


----------



## eunaddict

^Not sure if it's just because it's on TV but the proportions look off.

Also, interesting body language.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, maybe that mom should raise her child  to not ask intrusive questions (I am a very private person for real, not as shtick, and I hate personal questions and would probably not show private pictures TBH). But yes, he could have handled it a bit (or A LOT) better than a 3yo who's been asked to eat his spinach.


I'm also very private, but in this case I think it's understandable. H was talking about his kids, so it's almost natural (and polite) asking if he had pictures of them imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO that is one ugly statue.  Maybe there was just so much hype. 
Are these supposed to be Hazz’s kids?  What a s$itshow.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## papertiger

Underwhelmed - for me no art to it at all - looks like a Disney 3D-printing


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Why do I picture this event going down a bit like this?!?
> tbh it’d be nice to get a bit of entertainment out of them after the dry spell this statue story has been




If only. I was just hoping there would be a fist fight. A big budget musical number would be better.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please hold my sick bucket. From Google News:
> 
> View attachment 5125361
> 
> 
> "Duchess Meghan: Private memories & tears for Diana! Her biographer tells all"
> 
> Ok, Scobie isn't all that gifted in the brain department, but even he must be aware Raptor never met Diana, so probably did not make "private memories"?
> 
> (I don't have it in me to read the article right now)


MM didn't even know about the BRF before meeting Ginger... Omid must be senile!


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that is one ugly statue.  Maybe there was just so much hype.
> Are these supposed to be Hazz’s kids?  What a s$itshow.



Nah, I think they represent the many children she worked with while she was alive - the girl is barefoot and neither look...royal.

But I'm sure someone will be along shortly to twist the image.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that is one ugly statue.  Maybe there was just so much hype.
> *Are these supposed to be Hazz’s kids?  *What a s$itshow.



I think they are supposed to represent a "children of the world" kind of theme. Diana always cared about children.


----------



## Sharont2305

I think the face looks quite masculine


----------



## papertiger

At least both brothers wore a suit and tie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Underwhelmed - for me no art to it at all - looks like a Disney 3D-printing
> 
> View attachment 5125408



Taking a second look, it’s quite frightening. A tall, lurking white woman with barefoot kids????


----------



## lanasyogamama

I told you statues are hard to get right!!


----------



## bag-mania

I have to see a closeup of the face to be certain, but it doesn't really look like her.


----------



## Sharont2305

I watched the delayed "live" footage of them walking out, quite happy to be in each others company, its the most relaxed I've seen Harry since pre M.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a second look, it’s quite frightening. A tall, lurking white woman with barefoot kids????



Barefoot is code for 'poor' - she is 'protector of the poor little children'. 

Heavily romanticised which is why I feel her persona has become Di-Disney-fied, and deified


----------



## Sharont2305

Sharont2305 said:


> I watched the delayed "live" footage of them walking out, quite happy to be in each others company, its the most relaxed I've seen Harry since pre M.


And refreshing to see no one pushing in before the higher rank.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Barefoot is code for 'poor' - she is 'protector of the poor little children'.
> 
> Heavily romanticised which is why I feel her persona has become Di-Disney-fied, and deified



The Royal savior??  Such awful messaging.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Barefoot is code for 'poor' - she is 'protector of the poor little children'.
> 
> Heavily romanticised which is why I feel her persona has become Di-Disney-fied, and deified



All I can think is it took them almost five years and this is the best they could come up with? It's like neither brother got the statue he wanted but this is the only version they could agree on.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


>



I think that if she would be sitting on a bench alone (smiling) and contemplating the lake/garden in front of her would have been a lot nicer. Sorry about the bench, but I'm not allowing bench appropriation by Ginger and Cringe, the hypocrites.


----------



## lazeny

lanasyogamama said:


> I told you statues are hard to get right!!



Maybe because of the color? I actually expected Diana's statue would be made of lighter material, marble like maybe? That would be more appealing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazz is way too thirsty.  William handles it with aplomb.









						Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
					

The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The heavyweight belt??? Her weird collar?  The barefoot girl is just offensive, as is the boy in a hoodie. Too many stereotypes.


----------



## Sharont2305

Alert, text message hurling over right now from across the pond
"H, you looked too happy, don't get too comfortable, get home now! Duchess"


----------



## bag-mania

Were there any speeches? I want my dramatic fist fight ending with William tossing Harry into a reflection pool.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Sharont2305 said:


>



Both arms - but the right arm especially - are unnaturally long.  So she could touch her toes standing up - who knew?

Perhaps a bit of weathering’ll improve it.  Or perhaps it’ll be like the Edstone and quietly disappear one day


----------



## duna

Yes they both looked pretty relaxed: I guess when MM is not around Harry is more relaxed.

I have mixed feelings about the statue: it does look like her in her last years, maybe a bit underwelming. I guess the 2 children with her represent her love for kids and also all her charities child related. If I'm not mistaken the boy looks like a coloured/black ( sorry, I'm not sure what the correct wording is today, I'm rather ancient!) child, while the girl looks more Caucasian. Maybe to underline that the RF is NOT racist?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> *Barefoot is code for 'poor' *- she is 'protector of the poor little children'.
> 
> Heavily romanticised which is why I feel her persona has become Di-Disney-fied, and deified



Aha, so that's why Harry was photographed barefoot in his Montecito garden - he was signaling to the world that he was indigent after he'd been (allegedly) cut off financially by his father!


----------



## Chanbal

The gentleman that was not invited, RIP.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is way too thirsty.  William handles it with aplomb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The heavyweight belt??? Her weird collar?  The barefoot girl is just offensive, as is the boy in a hoodie. Too many stereotypes.
> View attachment 5125422


I didn't notice there was a third child


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't notice there was a third child



I just saw it too, and was about to post it.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I didn't notice there was a third child



I just noticed the third child behind the girl. He or she is pointing to something.


----------



## periogirl28

Wow was not expecting this statue.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a beautiful picture of Diana!


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> This is a beautiful picture of Diana!




Yes I agree. if I remember correctly there was a series of photos of her taken by Mario Testino.


----------



## eunaddict

Chanbal said:


> I think that if she would be sitting on a bench alone (smiling) and contemplating the lake/garden in front of her would have been a lot nicer. Sorry about the bench, but I'm not allowing bench appropriation by Ginger and Cringe, the hypocrites.


 
Or if they were going to use the stairs, why not just have her sitting directly on the steps - reading, contemplating etc., something softer and more natural than...that.


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> Yes I agree. if I remember correctly there was a series of photos of her taken by Mario Testino.


They were stunning.


----------



## youngster

Ugh.  I really dislike this statue.


----------



## Sharont2305

These are beautiful


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana Reborn
					

Princess Diana’s decision to auction 79 of the dresses she wore as the wife of England’s future King is a powerful symbol of her changing life. Cathy Horyn delves into the story behind the clothes, while Diana, modeling her favorites one last time for Mario Testino, makes it clear that the...




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is way too thirsty.  William handles it with aplomb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The heavyweight belt??? Her weird collar?  The barefoot girl is just offensive, as is the boy in a hoodie. Too many stereotypes.
> View attachment 5125422


I'm not a fan of the statue, but I wonder why Ginger is so happy... Did he get more material for his shows in the US? Was he assured about titles? A money transfer, perhaps... Or, is the MM's effect fainting with the distance?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love love this quote:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

youngster said:


> Ugh.  I really dislike this statue.


Me too.  Its all Saint Diana gloopy sentimentality, pity they didn’t do something stylish.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> These are beautiful


Mario Testino's pictures are amazing. They are a wonderful tribute to Diana.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


>




I'll admit it made me a bit emotional seeing them sign it with Prince William and Prince Harry. Like...can you imagine what could have been had he married someone a bit more like Kate - a stable, calming influence with family sense and willing to do the freaking job - instead of a raging lunatic? (I realize Harry is problematic, but she's fueling it and bringing out the worst in him)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Underwhelmed - for me no art to it at all - looks like a Disney 3D-printing
> 
> View attachment 5125408



I'm not familiar with the place, but did they place it in the middle of existing stairs?


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the face looks quite masculine


Agree and her top half looks quite wide for lack of a better word.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaa???  Her final days were spent on a yacht, in a swimsuit, with a billionaire playboy, in St. Tropez. She had disconnected from most of her charities.   This revisionist history needs to stop.

*Revealed: Diana statue 'depicting princess in final period of her life' by sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley aiming to reflect her 'warmth, elegance and energy' *

ETA:  Where is the elegance? The 80s belt looks silly. Warmth?  Noooo, she looks cold, devoid of emotion.  Energy?  No.


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> I think that if she would be sitting on a bench alone (smiling) and contemplating the lake/garden in front of her would have been a lot nicer. Sorry about the bench, but I'm not allowing bench appropriation by Ginger and Cringe, the hypocrites.



a recreation of the Taj Mahal sitting would have been great! Then tourists could sit next to Diana and snap pics


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaa???  Her final days were spent on a yacht, in a swimsuit, with a billionaire playboy, in St. Tropez. She had disconnected from most of her charities.   This revisionist history needs to stop.
> 
> *Revealed: Diana statue 'depicting princess in final period of her life' by sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley aiming to reflect her 'warmth, elegance and energy' *



… and making calls to the paps to her future whereabouts


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not familiar with the place, but did they place it in the middle of existing stairs?


Yes


----------



## Cosmopolitan

I'm not crazy about the statue, but it's not surprising that the brothers chose to focus the theme on their mother's supposed humanitarian impact on the world, helping children, etc... Did people expect she'd be depicted wearing a glamorous ball gown and a tiara?

from the DM:

Kensington Palace said the princes 'wanted the statue to recognise her positive impact in the UK and around the world, and help future generations understand the significance of her place in history'.

'The statue aims to reflect the warmth, elegance and energy of Diana, Princess of Wales, in addition to her work and the impact she had on so many people,' it added.

The portrait and style of dress featured was based on the 'final period of her life as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes', they said. It added that the statue 'aims to convey her character and compassion'.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Those are great photos. She definitely knew her shoulders and collarbone were great features to show off.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is way too thirsty.  William handles it with aplomb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The heavyweight belt??? Her weird collar?  The barefoot girl is just offensive, as is the boy in a hoodie. Too many stereotypes.
> View attachment 5125422


I think they could have found a more timeless outfit for her...and I don't think she looks pretty


----------



## youngster

Yikes, that statue.  That outfit looks like something worn to the office circa 1990.  It's hard enough to get the face and body of one person done properly in a statue, let alone 3 people. I think it should just have been of Diana, no children. She should have been seated or maybe standing, but wearing something different, something less business-like. I wouldn't want the statue in a ball gown or something glamorous but just something better than what they decided on. Her face should have been softer, less masculine and less harsh looking. It's kind of a scary face honestly in its current state. ETA:  Her shoulders look rather large and that should be toned down as well.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I think the could have found a more timeless outfit for her...and I don't think she looks pretty


Agree. Something like this (obviously without the body armour and the Red Cross badge)


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Agree. Something like this (obviously without the body armour and the Red Cross badge)



Yes, something like this (without the body armour and badge as you said).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not familiar with the place, but did they place it in the middle of existing stairs?



The plinth blends in with existing stairs in front of a walkway. 

The base will hopefully weather to blend in more in time.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Honestly I’ve never been crazy about statues and didn’t have high hopes about this one. Seems rare that the subject memorialized comes across as realistic, nevermind pretty (or handsome as the case may be).


----------



## Clearblueskies

Noticeable how frequently Harry looked at William.  Harry looked very nervous to me.  William much cooler towards Harry, polite but not playing along.  I’m glad *they* de-dramatised the whole shebang.  Now Harry can slink back to Happyville and (let’s hope) stay there.


----------



## duna

youngster said:


> Yikes, that statue.  *That outfit looks like something worn to the office circa 1990.*  It's hard enough to get the face and body of one person done properly in a statue, let alone 3 people. I think it should just have been of Diana, no children. She should have been seated or maybe standing, but wearing something different, something less business-like. I wouldn't want the statue in a ball gown or something glamorous but just something better than what they decided on. Her face should have been softer, less masculine and less harsh looking. It's kind of a scary face honestly in its current state. ETA:  Her shoulders look rather large and that should be toned down as well.



Yes the outfit is pretty drab: I suppose they wanted her to look down to earth and not princesslike with expensive looking clothes....

How long do you guys think we'll have to wait for Princess Pinocchio to wear a similar outfit?? As soon as she gets her figure back into shape I imagine......


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> Agree. Something like this (obviously without the body armour and the Red Cross badge)


Great point, that outfit was actually timeless.


----------



## bag-mania

This statue wouldn't have received the press coverage it is getting if it wasn't for all the drama about ill feelings between the brothers. People have their eyes glued on them, analyzing every move and gesture. The statue itself is secondary.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The sculptor is not well known for sculpting feminine bodies.  As another commenter said, cover the face and the body looks male. Diana had a womanly body. This makes her look like a guy.  Generations from now will have no idea of her significance.

A large marble heart (maybe entwined with 2 others) would fit well in this garden and would be a more fitting memorial. Or maybe a large topiary heart. Heck, it’s a beautiful garden, keep it beautiful.  A small plaque could explain who she is.  This should have, could have been done so much better.   Hoping William has it quietly moved.

ETA:  is she wearing ‘the’ ring??

ETA2:  to reflect her properly, it should ‘bring oxygen into the room’.  This, like Hazz, sucks it out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am not super fond of the statue, but eh...if it makes the boys happy I can deal with it, and I'm saying that without any snark. It's not like they had any impact on how they wanted to design her actual grave.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The sculptor is not well known for sculpting feminine bodies.  As another commenter said, cover the face and the body looks male. Diana had a womanly body. This makes her look like a guy.  Generations from now will have no idea of her significance.



They needed to get that woman sculptor who made the replacement for the "scary Lucy" statue. That woman knew how to do female bodies. I don't think they are worried about what future generations know. The significance of the subjects of most statues are forgotten over time.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

From the backstories I’ve read it sounds like Will and Harry really micromanaged and secondguessed the whole process and I doubt the sculptor had much artistic leeway at all.


----------



## bag-mania

Cosmopolitan said:


> From the backstories I’ve read it sounds like Will and Harry *really micromanaged and secondguessed the whole process* and I doubt the sculptor had much artistic leeway at all.



That is what usually destroys commissioned artwork.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## lanasyogamama

lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 5125484


Could be the statue or MM’s wedding dress!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Ugh.  I really dislike this statue.


It’s awful. Very difficult to really capture a person in statuary, but it is possible. Would have preferred her alone.  This is too busy.


----------



## youngster

RAINDANCE said:


> And here's another thing. All the Diana evangelists assume she would still be glamourous and involved with charity if she were alive today. There's no way of knowing that, at all. She could have remarried, several times, or moved to a remote part of Scotland like her mother or gone down the plastic surgery route or had weight issues.



I think it's a natural tendency when someone dies suddenly and tragically at a very young age to assume that the person would have gone on to live their best possible life and conquered all demons.  I think it's more likely that they would have continued on the same path they were on at the time of their sudden, tragic death whether it was a good path, or not. 

In Diana's case, at the time of her death, she was still trying to figure her life out post-royal. She apparently was trying to make the man she really wanted jealous by dating Dodi Fayed and was still using the press as they used her.  She probably would have continued down this path.  She might eventually have settled down, matured, gotten some psychological help, mellowed, maybe found a man who could make her happy.  On the other extreme, she might have bounced from relationship to relationship, become obsessed with preserving her youth and beauty, become obsessed with upstaging Charles and Camilla at every opportunity, become obsessed with remaining one of the most famous women in the world.  If she didn't mellow and mature by around age 50, I could see her being utterly addicted to social media and her instagram following to this day.    

One thing for sure though is that if she had not died so young and in such a way, Harry wouldn't be carrying around such a load of anger and pain about it.  He would be a different person and would not have been so vulnerable.  Diana would have likely made sure to introduce Harry to all sorts of women she liked and approved of when he was in his 20's and early 30's.  She would have made sure that any woman who married Harry understood royal life and their position in the family.  She would have likely helped Harry figure out and accept his role too, or helped him figure out another path that would not have resulted in frosty estrangement from his brother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh my god.         It’s hilarious! I actually cracked up!

It looks like a statue of Bruno!


	

		
			
		

		
	
Complete with kids as accessories. Seriously, the orphans are so cheesy.

I mean it goes without saying they’ve made one of the most photogenic women of her generation look like a man in bad drag and what is she wearing? It also reminds me of Rupert Everett in the st trinians movie




Oh god. Well we all knew it was a bad idea from the start but I can’t believe the Windsors have managed to out - tacky the famously ostentatious nouveau riche and proud Mohamed Al Fayed that takes some doing! It’s more of an eyesore than the Harrod’s statue. 
here I was thinking Will was bland when he is actually as camp as Christmas. 
Oh god my ribs!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I think that if she would be sitting on a bench alone (smiling) and contemplating the lake/garden in front of her would have been a lot nicer. Sorry about the bench, but I'm not allowing bench appropriation by Ginger and Cringe, the hypocrites.



I am sooooooo glad there's no damn bench. 

There may have been a version of the 'Taj moment' or similar bench-setting in the planning stages and M hedged her bets (no pun intended). It would have been a reminder of D's sadness, Cs infidelity & C's 'brazenness' so I'm sure it was pretty soon off the table.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Agree. Something like this (obviously without the body armour and the Red Cross badge)



To me this was her moment that shined brightest.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM:
_Its design was top secret and appears to be inspired by Diana's official 1993 Christmas card - her first sent without Prince Charles - where she wears the same open ribbed shirt, skirt and belt as she smiles lovingly at her two sons, who said today the statue reflects the 'final period of her life as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes'._


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Why didn't just install a humongous tv with a looped video of Diana from birth on, titled "Diana, Princess of Wales. Her Real Life ."


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _Its design was top secret and appears to be inspired by Diana's official 1993 Christmas card - her first sent without Prince Charles - where she wears the same open ribbed shirt, skirt and belt as she smiles lovingly at her two sons, who said today the statue reflects the 'final period of her life as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes'._
> 
> View attachment 5125496



What an interesting pose.  Will is looking straight at the camera.  She is looking fondly at Will and even leaning towards him.  Harry looks up lovingly at Mum almost like "_pay attention to me_".


----------



## bag-mania

I bet it was Harry who insisted there be multiracial children with her and have her in that almost Jesus-like pose embracing them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a second look, it’s quite frightening. A tall, lurking white woman with barefoot kids????


Diana as slender man/la llorona/bloody Mary lol 


lanasyogamama said:


> I told you statues are hard to get right!!


I know but to get it this wrong takes some doing.
I think some artists are better at beautiful faces and others are better at ‘character’ faces and this guy is clearly used to dealing with the latter. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> The Royal savior??  Such awful messaging.


It’s horrendous isn’t it? So tone deaf. It is straight out of Sacha baron Cohen or curb your enthusiasm. 


bag-mania said:


> All I can think is it took them almost five years and this is the best they could come up with? It's like neither brother got the statue he wanted but this is the only version they could agree on.


They should’ve gone with a nice camel instead 


duna said:


> Yes they both looked pretty relaxed: I guess when MM is not around Harry is more relaxed.
> 
> I have mixed feelings about the statue: it does look like her in her last years, maybe a bit underwelming. I guess the 2 children with her represent her love for kids and also all her charities child related. If I'm not mistaken the boy looks like a coloured/black ( sorry, I'm not sure what the correct wording is today, I'm rather ancient!) child, while the girl looks more Caucasian. Maybe to underline that the RF is NOT racist?


I think so. Definitely not racist is the motto of the moment, especially the princess of hearts. The literal
Honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if it started playing ‘Ebony & Ivory’ when you walk on a certain slab - it’s that headbangingly obvious.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> Why didn't just install a humongous tv with a looped video of Diana from birth on, titled "Diana, Princess of Wales. Her Real Life ."


Those outside TVs are super affordable now!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _Its design was top secret and appears to be inspired by Diana's official 1993 Christmas card - her first sent without Prince Charles - where she wears the same open ribbed shirt, skirt and belt as she smiles lovingly at her two sons, who said today the statue reflects the 'final period of her life as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes'._
> 
> View attachment 5125496


Cue MM searching online for a big belt to buy.


----------



## bag-mania

The _New York Times_ take on it.

*Unveiling of Diana Statue Reunites William and Harry, Briefly*
The estranged princes put aside their differences for a ceremony at Kensington Palace in London on what would have been their mother’s 60th birthday.

Bonded by childhood grief, sundered by adult quarrels, Prince William and Prince Harry came together briefly on Thursday to dedicate a statue of their mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, on what would have been her 60th birthday.

For a few fleeting minutes in the Sunken Garden at Kensington Palace, the two brothers set aside a season of acrimony — the anguished charges, and angry denials, of racism and callous treatment — to pay tribute to a woman whose sudden death 24 years ago ended her own turbulent history in the royal family.

Gently pulling two green cords, they unveiled a bronze statue that depicted Diana with children gathered in her outstretched arms. The memorial, they said, was meant to honor “her love, strength and character.”

“Every day, we wish she were still with us,” the brothers said a rare joint statement.

But this was no cathartic reconciliation: William and Harry, by all accounts, are still barely on speaking terms.

The elder brother, William, royal watchers say, is still deeply aggrieved at his younger brother, Harry, for a series of interviews in which he and his wife, Meghan, described royal life as a kind of gilded prison and said family members held retrograde views on mental health and racial issues.

“It’s going to take a lot for this rift to be healed,” said Penny Junor, the author of several books about the royal family. “The initiative has to come from Harry, and it doesn’t seem to me that he is in any mood to do so.”

While the brothers labored to present a united front — smiling occasionally — they kept a palpable distance from each other as they gazed at the statue. A handful of Diana’s family members watched from across the redesigned garden, planted with a riot of forget-me-nots, sweet peas, tulips, roses and other flowers that she loved.

The Sunken Garden, below the apartment where she lived, was a refuge for Diana, according to officials at Buckingham Palace. She often played there with William and Harry, who later had their own quarters in Kensington Palace, before Harry abruptly announced in 2020 that he and Meghan, a biracial American former actress, would withdraw from official duties and move away from Britain.

The couple settled in Montecito, Calif., where Meghan recently gave birth to their second child, Lilibet Diana, whose name pays tribute both to Harry’s mother and to his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II (her childhood nickname was Lilibet). Meghan did not fly to London for the unveiling, and Harry was not scheduled to stay around long after the 30-minute ceremony.

Harry and William were last reunited in April at the funeral of the queen’s husband, Prince Philip, walking behind their grandfather’s coffin much as they had walked together as young boys behind their mother’s funeral cortege. This time, one of their cousins walked conspicuously between them.

As William and Harry departed the service in St. George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle, the British press scrutinized their body language for evidence that they had broken the ice. Aside from a few cursory words and glances, there were few signs of a thaw, and Harry quickly flew back to California.

The brothers managed to stay on the same page in excoriating the BBC last month after it published the results of an internal investigation into a sensational 1995 interview given by Diana to the journalist, Martin Bashir. It concluded that Mr. Bashir had used deceitful means to obtain the interview, in which Diana spoke about the adultery that destroyed her marriage to Prince Charles.

William accused the BBC of making “lurid and false claims about the royal family, which played on her fears and fueled paranoia.” Harry, referring to a “culture of exploitation and unethical practices” by the news media, said, “our mother lost her life because of this, and nothing has changed.”

Even then, though, their statements spoke to their lives apart and different worldviews. While William condemned what he called “fake news,” he reaffirmed the importance of a free press and public service broadcasting. Harry put the interview in the context of a systemically broken press and drew a direct link from it to his mother’s death in a car crash in Paris in 1997.

Days earlier, Harry said on a podcast that he thought the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which protects a free press, was “bonkers.” He added that he did not know much about it, given his recent arrival in the country. Some royal watchers interpreted William’s statement as a subtle dig at Harry for his much-criticized comments.



The rift between the brothers, which opened around the time Harry and Meghan were married, deepened after the couple’s interview with Oprah Winfrey in March. They claimed that before the birth of their first child, Archie, a member or members of the family had expressed anxiety about the skin color of Meghan’s unborn baby.

“We’re very much not a racist family,” William said, when asked about his brother’s allegations.

The social distancing restrictions imposed by the pandemic kept the ceremony exclusive and private, which royal watchers said was a blessing because it reduced scrutiny of William and Harry. Neither the queen, Charles nor William’s wife, Kate, took part. But Diana’s brother, Charles Spencer, and her two sisters, Sarah McCorquodale and Jane Fellowes, were on hand.

A small crowd gathered near Kensington Palace, some with balloons and posters wishing Diana a happy 60th birthday. But the ceremony was hidden behind a tall hedge. The garden will be open to the public starting Friday.

The statue was designed by the sculptor Ian Rank-Broadley, whose likeness of the queen has been stamped on coins in Britain since 1998. The Sunken Garden, conceived by King Edward VII in 1908, was remodeled for the occasion by Pip Morrison, a landscape architect who specializes in historic gardens.

In a statement, Mr. Morrison said he aimed to create “a calming place for people to visit Kensington Palace to remember the princess.”









						Unveiling of Diana Statue Reunites William and Harry, Briefly (Published 2021)
					

The estranged princes put aside their differences for a ceremony at Kensington Palace in London on what would have been their mother’s 60th birthday.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder what the Earl has to say?  His aunt’s reaction gives it away


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Why didn't just install a humongous tv with a looped video of Diana from birth on, titled "Diana, Princess of Wales. Her Real Life ."


If it played candle in the wind in the background Elton could recoup his donations in royalties  

We all owe Al Fayad a giant apology 


At least that Diana was a woman!
I also like to imagine the eagle was originally holding Charles’ liver in its claws too


----------



## lulu212121

WoW! JCMH, aka Hazbeen is really losing his hair.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really quite telling that all of the children are turned away from the Royal intruder.  Hmmmm.
Don’t recall Diana wearing shoes like that.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder what the Earl has to say?  His aunt’s reaction gives it away
> 
> View attachment 5125519



Those Spencer women all have a nice thick head of hair on them, don't they?


----------



## Genie27

duna said:


> As soon as she gets her figure back into shape I imagine......


Spongebob square shape?

Edit: she can just grab the belt off H’s Santa costume from last year.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> What an interesting pose.  Will is looking straight at the camera.  She is looking fondly at Will and even leaning towards him.  Harry looks up lovingly at Mum almost like "_pay attention to me_".


Spot on analysis.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulu212121 said:


> WoW! JCMH, aka Hazbeen is really losing his hair.



William is a master at positioning himself and other people 

A comment from the DM: 
_
CubanSugar, Sugar Town, United States, 5 minutes ago

*William scarfed old Rachel WITH a scarf. Now he scarfed #6 with NO scarf. *_
_*To scarf someone with NO a scarf is the epitome of genius! Ha ha*_


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I'm not a fan of the statue, but I wonder why Ginger is so happy... Did he get more material for his shows in the US? Was he assured about titles? A money transfer, perhaps... Or, is the MM's effect fainting with the distance?


William stands respectfully, dare I say "kingly" with hands folded in front of him. His brother, repeating a posture used a day or two ago, stands with hands on hips, elbows jutting trying to look, as someone previously posted, larger and more important. Methane , she of the jutting elbows, probably made him stand in front of one of the bathroom mirrors and practice until he got just the right angles. 

I would hate to be a person stuck in the seat next to him on a transatlantic flight, he would be the seat bully fighting to be all over the armrest for the duration.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is way too thirsty.  William handles it with aplomb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The heavyweight belt??? Her weird collar?  The barefoot girl is just offensive, as is the boy in a hoodie. Too many stereotypes.
> View attachment 5125422


You can sorta see in the photo
Boy at left wears shoes
Girl at right and boy - right behind - are barefoot
Must be some deep significance  ...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Genie27 said:


> Spongebob square shape?
> 
> Edit: *she can just grab the belt off H’s Santa costume from last year.*


Or wait for this year and elbow a few of Santa's Helpers on her way to the belt buckle.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Finally brought to mind what this schmaltzy thing reminds me of.  It’s those Michael Jackson heal the world/we are the world type videos. Rainbow of cute kids, fluffy animals, heroic central figure, MJ statue floating down the Thames, etc etc.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t tend to put on a tinfoil hat very often but one does wonder if the three children privately represent her three children... interesting choice.

Anyway, not as bad as I expected and I hope it brings the boys some peace.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> William stands respectfully, dare I say "kingly" with hands folded in front of him. His brother, repeating a posture used a day or two ago, stands with hands on hips, elbows jutting trying to look, as someone previously posted, larger and more important. Methane , she of the jutting elbows, probably made him stand in front of one of the bathroom mirrors and practice until he got just the right angles.
> 
> I would hate to be a person stuck in the seat next to him on a transatlantic flight, he would be the seat bully fighting to be all over the armrest for the duration.



IMO he was high as a kite.  They say he left for a ‘lads lunch’ that he had arranged.  Waiting for the drunken photo……so crass.


----------



## Sol Ryan

BBC America appears to be showing Diana documentaries today, just a heads up.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he was high as a kite.  They say he left for a ‘lads lunch’ that he had arranged.  Waiting for the drunken photo……so crass.
> 
> View attachment 5125575


William is talking to the Sculptor, while Haz the azz makes a fool of himself. Some things never change.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gelbergirl said:


> a recreation of the Taj Mahal sitting would have been great! Then tourists could sit next to Diana and snap pics


Oh that would’ve been so funny, genius even, love it! 
charles would never live that down though


A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t tend to put on a tinfoil hat very often but one does wonder if the three children privately represent her three children... interesting choice.
> 
> Anyway, not as bad as I expected and I hope it brings the boys some peace.


Three kids? Do explain!     
So is Will the girl because there’s a big coverup?


CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he was high as a kite.  They say he left for a ‘lads lunch’ that he had arranged.  Waiting for the drunken photo……so crass.
> 
> View attachment 5125575


He does look a bit gone in those pics! champagne breakfast just like Christmas we think? With gin and dubonnet chasers?


----------



## Suncatcher

I’m in the minority here but I quite like the statue from what I can see! I think it looks lovely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

No no. It just plays a central role in the conspiracy theories surrounding her death. There has been a long held  theory that she was pregnant at the time of her death. Some go further and suggest that is what led to her death.


----------



## lanasyogamama

third pictures is cute


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> I’m in the minority here but I quite like the statue from what I can see! I think it looks lovely.



It’s fine. I don’t think anything could have lived up to expectations because everyone has different expectations.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> The sculptor is not well known for sculpting feminine bodies.  As another commenter said, cover the face and the body looks male. Diana had a womanly body. This makes her look like a guy.


I never thought she had a womanly body, more of an athletic build - tall, slim, no hips, a wider waist considering she was so slim, broad shoulders and long legs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone on another site pointed out-
these belts were designed to sit high on the waist, the sculptor put this belt too low. It throws off the look.

A refresher:https://www.wikihow.com/Wear-Wide-Belts
*Choose where you want the belt to sit on your waist.* If you place a wide belt directly under your bustline, you'll emphasize your chest. You'll also make your curves stand out more and highlight your waist. *Most wide belts are worn higher above the hip bones on your waist. This can help define large midsections by breaking up your torso.*

If you have a shorter torso, you may find that a wide belt takes up too much of your torso. You may need to wear a slightly thinner belt.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> third pictures is cute



The 4th photo is iconic IMO.  Such positive energy!
She launched thousands of black one pieces — I know


----------



## poopsie

He REALLY needs to stop


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is how I would want my mom remembered -  laughing with her boys!


----------



## Jayne1

nm


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _Its design was top secret and appears to be inspired by Diana's official 1993 Christmas card - her first sent without Prince Charles - where she wears the same open ribbed shirt, skirt and belt as she smiles lovingly at her two sons, who said today the statue reflects the 'final period of her life as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes'._
> 
> View attachment 5125496



She looks beautiful here, but not in the statue...


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> I watched the delayed "live" footage of them walking out, quite happy to be in each others company, its the most relaxed I've seen Harry since pre M.



I agree. But my first thought was, did M teach H to do the Hwood smile? He hasn’t been seen smiling much since leaving BRF and yes it’s his mother’s 60th and statue unveiling, but with his intense hate, it came across a little fake. Sorry folks my two cents.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I never thought she had a womanly body, more of an athletic build - tall, slim, no hips, a wider waist considering she was so slim, broad shoulders and long legs.


Apologies, I meant womanly as in _skinny curvy_. She was trim, athletic, slim,  but never boyish. She had curves.  Ian makes her look boyish, square. She was never that.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he was high as a kite.  They say he left for a ‘lads lunch’ that he had arranged.  Waiting for the drunken photo……so crass.
> 
> View attachment 5125575



Harry needs to look up the definition of “dignity.”


----------



## 1LV

The statue.  Geez Louise.  

Am I the only one seeing Seth Myers in a dress?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> third pictures is cute



They better be good pictures.  She called the paps and was posing for them.  To make the heart surgeon jealous, as everyone knows.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5125513


If I were Will, I would have this statue replaced ASAP. While Mario Testino captured Diana's beauty, the author of this thing made her look unattractive.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Can we just agree she probably didn’t look like this


----------



## poopsie

It said they took _donations_ for that?  I would be asking for a refund
Does anyone seriously think Di would have wanted _any_ of this? Or would be pleased at how she looks?
This statue truly should have remained a private family tribute.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> _Its design was top secret and appears to be inspired by Diana's official 1993 Christmas card - her first sent without Prince Charles - where she wears the same open ribbed shirt, skirt and belt as she smiles lovingly at her two sons, who said today the statue reflects the 'final period of her life as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes'._
> 
> View attachment 5125496


That's a gorgeous photo. Very soft.  The outfit is so much nicer here than translated into a bronze statue, with a cold patina.

I've noticed that Diana would often look at Will in these types of photos while H would be starring directly at her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> They better be good pictures.  She called the paps and was posing for them.  To make the heart surgeon jealous, as everyone knows.



The first 3 photos are from her last summer with billionaire playboy.
The black swimsuit photos are from her summer on Richard Branson’s island. 
It all looked so fun, so happy, so healthy. 








						Princess Diana in the Caribbean
					

No, she has not been seen lately . . . this is not a post about revenants or wandering ghosts. Princess Diana, I hope, is not interested in haunting us. But with royalty in the news this weekend . …




					repeatingislands.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder what the Earl has to say?  His aunt’s reaction gives it away
> 
> View attachment 5125519


I find Ginger very unattractive, particularly now that his greedy personality is surfacing...


----------



## CarryOn2020

When they were young - beautiful mom and 3 daughters


----------



## elvisfan4life

creme fraiche said:


> Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not crazy about the statue- more like a "meh" feeling.  Might be the way she is dressed.


It looks more like Elvis


----------



## VickyB

Geez.  It’s hideous and creepy.  
on another note, looks like H has less hair Han William.


----------



## Chanbal

This is almost hilarious...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he was high as a kite.  They say he left for a ‘lads lunch’ that he had arranged.  Waiting for the drunken photo……so crass.
> 
> View attachment 5125575



That is...odd.


----------



## Laila619

Jayne1 said:


> I never thought she had a womanly body, more of an athletic build - tall, slim, no hips, a wider waist considering she was so slim, broad shoulders and long legs.



Yes, she wasn’t particularly curvy. Tall, willowy and elegant, yes. I actually like the statue and find it touching. It was never going to live up to expectations but I think it’s quite sweet.

Haz on the other hand, not so much.


----------



## 1LV

Jayne1 said:


> That's a gorgeous photo. Very soft.  The outfit is so much nicer here than translated into a bronze statue, with a cold patina.
> 
> I've noticed that Diana would often look at Will in these types of photos while H would be starring directly at her.


It really is gorgeous photo, but there’s something that strikes me as sad about it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hermes Zen said:


> I agree. But my first thought was, did M teach H to do the Hwood smile? He hasn’t been seen smiling much since leaving BRF and yes it’s his mother’s 60th and statue unveiling, but with his intense hate, it came across a little fake. Sorry folks my two cents.


He seemed like he was trying very hard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> No no. It just plays a central role in the conspiracy theories surrounding her death. There has been a long held  theory that she was pregnant at the time of her death. Some go further and suggest that is what led to her death.


Don't believe that.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Don't believe that.


And this is the ring Dodi bought shortly before his death to propose to Diana with.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Separation announced in 1992.
The Christmas photo was taken in 1993.
Divorce finalized in 1996.
Death in 1997.

Are they throwing shade at Charles?  



1LV said:


> It really is gorgeous photo, but there’s something that strikes me as sad about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> No no. It just plays a central role in the conspiracy theories surrounding her death. There has been a long held  theory that she was pregnant at the time of her death. Some go further and suggest that is what led to her death.



Haven’t heard this rumor. According to Hazz, it was Dodi’s skin color.    
Most believe it was because she got in a car with a drunk driver and was not wearing a seat belt.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO she had Bond girl curves.











						Princess Diana: Throwback pictures of royal on the beach
					

PRINCESS of Diana is often remembered for her glamorous evening dresses and Sloane Ranger style - but these throwback images show the stunning royal as you’ve rarely seen her, relaxed and happy on the beach.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And this is the ring Dodi bought shortly before his death to propose to Diana with.



Not impressed.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not impressed.



Oh, I don’t know. It beats any gift I ever got from a guy I had only dated for a month. I’m not buying that it was an engagement ring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I don’t know. It beats any gift I ever got from a guy I had only dated for a month. I’m not buying that it was an engagement ring.



It might be expensive, but it's freaking ugly.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> What an interesting pose.  Will is looking straight at the camera.  She is looking fondly at Will and even leaning towards him.  Harry looks up lovingly at Mum almost like "_pay attention to me_".



It's a formal set-up.

The future King looks straight ahead.
The mother of the future King looks lovingly at the future PoW/King
The future King's brother looks lovingly at the mother of the future King


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Most believe it was because she got in a car with a drunk driver and was not wearing a seat belt.


That and letting the paps know she'd be vacationing in Paris. Which made the driver speed irresponsibly. He didn't have to speed at all.

Anyway, I don't care for the statue and is H leaving for CA now?


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> And this is the ring Dodi bought shortly before his death to propose to Diana with.



That's a nothing ring for Dodi, def not an engagement then


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It might be expensive, but it's freaking ugly.


It truly is hideous


----------



## Genie27

I guess it makes sense that the statue is not too attractive.  Better that it’s something only her children and most devoted fans could love. Then it can quietly be moved to a private location once the initial flurry dies down.


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> BBC America appears to be showing Diana documentaries today, just a heads up.



I caught the very end of this show, covering the funeral. It was a reminder of what an emotional time that was. There was footage of so many people who were absolutely sobbing as the casket went by. They didn’t know her but they were incredibly moved by her death. I don’t remember anything quite like it in my lifetime.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I don’t know. It beats any gift I ever got from a guy I had only dated for a month. I’m not buying that it was an engagement ring.


No, I don't think it was an engagement ring either


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> That and letting the paps know she'd be vacationing in Paris. Which made the driver speed irresponsibly. He didn't have to speed at all.
> 
> Anyway, I don't care for the statue and is H leaving for CA now?


I would bet anything that he's on a flight back to LA .. American Airlines #6984, 4:10pm departure from LHR .. gets into LAX at 6:39PDT (there's also a flight at 6:50pm from LHR <-> LAX).  Most of the transatlantic flights from LHR leave at/around 4pm (god knows, I was a regular on British Airways from LHR <-> Boston)!!   I thought I read that Hazza zipped out of there pretty quickly after the 'viewing'.

I don't like the sculpture AT ALL; agree with many of you that it makes Diana look manly .. and what's with the 3rd kid behind the little girl?  Don't get that, you can barely see it when you are looking at the statue straight on!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> And this is the ring Dodi bought shortly before his death to propose to Diana with.


Prefer Dodi's ring to the blue sapphire. Sorry Charles...


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> It truly is hideous


No problem, I'll take it!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> That's a nothing ring for Dodi, def not an engagement then


Agree, not an engagement ring.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers on Diana...


_I'm assured that the division between the brothers runs very deep and very furiously.

How could it not - given how viciously Harry and his wife Meghan have publicly trashed the Royal Family on global television this year?

If one of my brothers suddenly went rogue and appeared on TV with his wife to spray-gun the rest of the Morgans as a bunch of nasty uncaring racists, he wouldn't be getting a Christmas card any time soon.

But the one thing that may bring them back together, and it would be the same in my family, is their mother.

Princess Diana could be fabulous but difficult, mischievous but sensitive, compassionate but unforgiving, kind but stubborn, hilarious but contrary, loyal but uncompromising, vulnerable but manipulative.

That, in a sense, was her magic.

She was an unpredictable, high-energy whirlwind of radiantly beautiful, hugely charismatic drama.

It's hard to believe it's been 24 years since that horrific night in Paris when Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed died at the hands of a drunken, speeding French driver, pursued by the paparazzi with whom she had such a love-hate relationship.

It's also hard to imagine what such an iconic beauty would have been like as an older lady entering her seventh decade. I think she'd have loathed the ageing process.

But it's not so hard to guess what she would have wanted most for her big birthday: peace and harmony between her sons.

William and Harry's feud would have broken Diana's heart.
She lived for those boys and showered them in constant love and affection, and she'd have been devastated to see them shower each other in vitriol and hatred these past few years.

I'm sure she would have stopped it had she still been alive.

But she's not.

So, it's left to them to sort it out between themselves.

As one of three brothers, we used to resolve things in my family by fighting until someone begged for mercy.

And I was informed by an impeccable royal source this week that at one point before Megxit William and Harry did indeed revert to a physical method of argument during their bitter, ugly falling-out.

But now they live on separate continents, scrapping out their differences isn't really an option...
_










						PIERS MORGAN: Diana would want William and Harry to bury the hatchet
					

PIERS MORGAN: Diana lived for those boys and showered them in love and affection, and she'd have been devastated to see them shower each other in vitriol and hatred.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Prefer Dodi's ring to the blue sapphire. Sorry Charles...



He didn't pick it though, Diana did. He did much better with Camilla's ring.


----------



## Chanbal

One of the revealing pictures of the day...










						DAN WOOTTON: Watching Diana's two sons was heart-breaking
					

DAN WOOTTON: The moment warring brothers Prince William and Harry managed to put their differences aside to reveal the statue of Diana at her Kensington Palace home, my eyes welled up.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Roxanna

I am not sure but that sculpture is sort of bothering me. Not only Diana's figure is kind of androgynous,  but figures of kids are of adult proportions. Especially girls. It's like larger than life Diana with ordinary people of different races...barefoot.  I don't know...however  obviously they wanted it to be this way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Piers on Diana...



Who knew Piers could be sensitive? Beautifully said.



> _And I was informed by an impeccable royal source this week that at one point before Megxit William and Harry did indeed revert to a physical method of argument during their bitter, ugly falling-out._



Well. That's maybe cute for teenagers, not so much for grown men.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He didn't pick it though, Diana did. He did much better with Camilla's ring.


Love blue sapphires, but not that particular ring. Diana's taste improved a lot as she got older.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a reminder of the 3rd person in this story - the American Kelli Fisher.  Dodi gave this engagement ring to her.  Life is tough in the billionaire club 

Never heard this before:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4184386/princess-diana-dodi-fayed-marry-church-muslim/

The full story:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/05/dunne200805

Kelli Fisher news conference:


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4325380/kelly-fisher-dumped-dodi-fayed-princess-diana-photos/
_She had featured on the front covers of Elle and W before meeting Dodi in Paris in July 1996. She says he convinced her to give up her lucrative work and gave her a £2,000-a-day allowance.
He also bought her a £5million home in Malibu where she thought they would live together, and gave her a *£180,000 engagement ring *in February 1997.
After learning of Dodi’s romance with Diana, Kelly phoned her ex to vent her fury. A 20-minute recording of the call was played in London in 2007 during the inquest into Diana’s death. It captures

Kelly fuming: “You even flew me down to St Tropez to sit on a boat while you seduced Diana all day and f***ed me all night.”_


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who knew Piers could be sensitive? Beautifully said.
> 
> 
> 
> Well. That's maybe cute for teenagers, not so much for grown men.


Piers is trying to give a balanced opinion. 
MM and H's absurds can make people lose their minds.


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty this is for you


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Love blue sapphires, but not that particular ring. Diana's taste improved a lot as she got older.


IIRC, Diana was quoted as saying that Charles told her that he was bringing a selection of rings from which to choose so Diana asked a friend what to do. The friend suggested she choose the biggest ring in the collection. Hence she chose the sapphire.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree with commenters who say the face is manly with no smile.  
Looking at Ian himself, it seems he sculpted the nose to look like his own.
So much wrong with this entire ordeal. 









						An awkward, lifeless shrine – the Diana statue is a spiritless hunk of nonsense | Jonathan Jones
					

The only provocative thing about Ian Rank-Broadley’s characterless sculpture is how shamelessly it plays up to mawkish Diana worship




					www.theguardian.com
				




_Instead, he’s let it all hang out in a different way. The sentiment splurges across the flower beds like an uncontrolled wail of artistically absurd pathos. A larger than life Diana, who stands in an awkward, stiff, lifeless pose and has a face that’s more manly than I remember, modelled apparently with thickly gloved hands and no photo to consult, protects two children in her arms while a third lurks behind her. _


> _This sculpture invites us to see Diana as a modern Mary – and they say they don’t want it to be a shrine?_


_It is a religious image that shamelessly plays up to the most mawkish aspects of Diana worship. She deserves to be remembered. But does she need to be turned into a colossal divine protectress of all children? If that is how Harry and William think of her that’s up to them. But this looks like the art of a new religion. For the maternal shielding blatantly echoes one of the greatest images of the Virgin Mary in Christian art, by Piero della Francesca, of the holy mother protecting an entire community under her robe. Even without that specific allusion the image of mother and child has been a Catholic mainstay for over a millennium and before that featured in Egyptian religious art. So this sculpture invites us to see Diana as a modern Mary, or even Isis with her son Horus. And they say they don’t want it to be a shrine?_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Piers is trying to give a balanced opinion.
> MM and H's absurds can make people lose their minds.



I'm not picking on him, I really thought that was a nice article.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Never heard this before:
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4184386/princess-diana-dodi-fayed-marry-church-muslim/



Uhm...shouldn't a priest be more discreet?


----------



## gelbergirl

youngster said:


> Yikes, that statue.  That outfit looks like something worn to the office circa 1990.  It's hard enough to get the face and body of one person done properly in a statue, let alone 3 people. I think it should just have been of Diana, no children. She should have been seated or maybe standing, but wearing something different, something less business-like. I wouldn't want the statue in a ball gown or something glamorous but just something better than what they decided on. Her face should have been softer, less masculine and less harsh looking. It's kind of a scary face honestly in its current state. ETA:  Her shoulders look rather large and that should be toned down as well.



yeah, office clothes with kids in the middle of a park. Weird.


----------



## EverSoElusive

My .02 about the statue. Not the best looking statue but it isn't as horrifying as some Madam Tussauds wax figures out there for sure (though they are two different things). However, my first thought was, who are those children? They sure didn't look like William and Harry so what in the actual fxck?  So much anticipation, even more disappointment.


----------



## kemilia

Awful, just awful. Of all the outfits she wore, this awful outfit won? The giant belt buckle? And why is a kid hiding in back? 

Oh well, at least this is over. H looked as high as a kite and never has to return to the UK again. And really, there are only so many excuses M can come up with as to why she "can't" go.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I glanced at the sculptors website.  He likes to do a lot of male nudes….

As someone else said, he was probably not the best person for the job.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5125724
> 
> 
> Just a reminder of the 3rd person in this story - the American Kelli Fisher.  Dodi gave this engagement ring to her.  Life is tough in the billionaire club
> 
> Never heard this before:
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4184386/princess-diana-dodi-fayed-marry-church-muslim/
> 
> The full story:
> https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/05/dunne200805
> 
> Kelli Fisher news conference:
> 
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4325380/kelly-fisher-dumped-dodi-fayed-princess-diana-photos/
> _She had featured on the front covers of Elle and W before meeting Dodi in Paris in July 1996. She says he convinced her to give up her lucrative work and gave her a £2,000-a-day allowance.
> He also bought her a £5million home in Malibu where she thought they would live together, and gave her a *£180,000 engagement ring *in February 1997.
> After learning of Dodi’s romance with Diana, Kelly phoned her ex to vent her fury. A 20-minute recording of the call was played in London in 2007 during the inquest into Diana’s death. It captures
> 
> Kelly fuming: “You even flew me down to St Tropez to sit on a boat while you seduced Diana all day and f***ed me all night.”_



It was all over the news at the time, especially CNN, which I watched more of back in the day. Gloria Allred knew how to get the media's attention.


----------



## csshopper

Sophisticatted said:


> I glanced at the sculptors website.  He likes to do a lot of male nudes….
> 
> As someone else said, he was probably not the best person for the job.


He’s quoted in an article saying he had never met her and relied on others for input, another Royal example of “recollections may vary”


----------



## youngster

One thing that popped out at me is that Harry is really losing his hair rapidly. Bald can still be very attractive but, on Harry, I don't think so.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> It was all over the news at the time, especially CNN, which I watched more of back in the day. Gloria Allred knew how to get the media's attention.



Let me clarify - I had never heard of the priest before.  I did know about Kelli.  As you say, her story was all over the news.

ETA: I had not heard that Diana contacted a priest about marrying Dodi. Wonder if this was her ‘big’ news she was planning on announcing. There continues to be much speculation about whether she would have married Dodi. Hazz seemed to indicate she might have.


----------



## gelbergirl

kemilia said:


> Awful, just awful. Of all the outfits she wore, this awful outfit won? *The giant belt buckle*? And why is a kid hiding in back?
> 
> Oh well, at least this is over. H looked as high as a kite and never has to return to the UK again. And really, there are only so many excuses M can come up with as to why she "can't" go.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he was high as a kite.  They say he left for a ‘lads lunch’ that he had arranged.  Waiting for the drunken photo……so crass.
> 
> View attachment 5125575


His behavior …. So sad … this photo will be around for a long time


----------



## Maggie Muggins

youngster said:


> One thing that popped out at me is that Harry is really losing his hair rapidly. *Bald can still be very attractive* but, on Harry, I don't think so.


Yes, but such a man must also possess that special "Je ne sais quoi" to pull it off. Someone like my favourite bald man, Yul Brynner.


----------



## A1aGypsy

gracekelly said:


> Don't believe that.


 

Few do.


----------



## gelbergirl

Anyone know if there is an original photo of this particular Diana outfit


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> Anyone know if there is an original photo of this particular Diana outfit


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Christmas card background is the same as this dress:



old article:








						Diana: A Decade On
					

She started out in puff-sleeved knits and ended up in body-baring gowns. On the 10th anniversary of her death, Bazaar trails the striking evolution of a style icon.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




ETA: the tapestry is in the Drawing Room at KP








						Take a Peek Inside Princess Diana's Private Apartments at Kensington Palace
					

Romantic interiors fit for a princess.




					www.veranda.com


----------



## octopus17

I've been to and fro about the statue - and I've decided that's it's OK. I would've liked more of a smile there and less of a message. I know that statues are, more often than not, erected to purvey a message but I feel those children are a bit extraneous tbh. 

I would have been happy just with a statue of her...

It seems that it is less about about her, and more telling about those she left behind. But if that's what they want, so be it.


----------



## Glitterandstuds

I don't know why I checked Twitter but damn did it irk me. 
People wishing Diana a HBD and then going on to say how Harry is only true son etc.etc Then there is a tag SussexSquad 
and ooooof what lunatics. The fact that they just dismiss William is so annoying


----------



## KellyObsessed

I think the statue looks like the sculptur (sp) in the photo of him standing in front of it.   He seemed to have captured his face in his work.


----------



## lulu212121

KellyObsessed said:


> I think the statue looks like the sculptur (sp) in the photo of him standing in front of it.   He seemed to have captured his face in his work.


You"re right, it really does!


----------



## Chanbal

This is nice...


----------



## Chanbal

@Glitterandstuds


----------



## Maggie Muggins

KellyObsessed said:


> I think the statue looks like the sculptur (sp) in the photo of him standing in front of it.   He seemed to have captured his face in his work.


The statue's left hand is very similar to the sculptor's left hand as well. WTH, did he stand in front of a mirror and copy himself into a statue. This could be the reason why so many people think it looks like a man. It's so uncanny!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Wow, I wasn’t expecting this. Diana had a pretty face but this statue is a disappointment. What’s surprising and the reason for higher expectation is the sculptor had done the Queens portrait British coin and won many awards.  Below is an article about the artist. 

Agree with others here with what’s been shared today. All I can say is wow wow wow. 


*Renowned sculptor behind Diana statue: Gifted artist Ian Rank-Broadley whose portrait of the Queen is used on British coins boasts award-winning portfolio that also includes bronze male nudes *








						Sculptor behind Diana statue boasts award-winning portfolio
					

Ian Rank-Broadley is one of the most renowned British sculptors. Not only is he behind the statue of Princess Diana unveiled in London today, he has an award-winning portfolio of work.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mentha

The statue is all white saviour of the world, not very pleasant. They should just made a small photo museum with different phases of her life with her iconic pics and some personal memorabilia, clothes etc. I am sure people would have enjoyed looking at that.


----------



## Chanbal

Is he back?


----------



## Chanbal

One more.... time to


----------



## scarlet555

Diana‘s statue looks very odd, first the sculptor may be specializing in male sculpting, from the way the statue looks-very masculine. (I can only draw women so if someone told me to draw a prince, I would probably pass, am no artist.  As an artist, you have to know your limits and what is being asked of you). The children appear proportionate to their own bodies but don’t seem size proportionate to Diana’s body.  And, she does not look pretty, it’s not that she was super pretty, but she did have an elegance and beauty and commanded more than what the statue offered.  I don’t expect her in a princess night gown, but I don’t find the statue deserving of her legacy.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is way too thirsty.  William handles it with aplomb.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry arrives for reunion with William at Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers stood shoulder-to-shoulder before revealing a sculpture created in Princess Diana's honour and placed in the Sunken Garden of Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The heavyweight belt??? Her weird collar?  The barefoot girl is just offensive, as is the boy in a hoodie. Too many stereotypes.
> View attachment 5125422


I wonder if MM is annoyed the camera was more on William?  And why does Haz look giddy?  Isn’t this a solemn occasion??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> I caught the very end of this show, covering the funeral. It was a reminder of what an emotional time that was. There was footage of so many people who were absolutely sobbing as the casket went by. They didn’t know her but they were incredibly moved by her death. I don’t remember anything quite like it in my lifetime.


Elvis Presley’s funeral?  and the candle lit vigil that happens every year since at midnight until 6am when his fans walk up to the grave to show our undying love. People died at the funeral when a lunatic crashed a car into them and over the years fans have died in the sweltering August heat queuing for hours to attend the vigil - that’s devotion on a much larger scale 43 years and counting


----------



## Hermes Zen

We said it here first!  Of course M helped. The speech sounded as if M was saying it.  



> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...meghan-markle-diana-award-speech-angela-levin
> 
> *Prince Harry had 'help' from Meghan Markle with Diana speech, royal expert claims*
> *PRINCE HARRY's speech at the Diana Awards was "written with Meghan's help", a royal expert has claimed.*
> By Katie Harris
> PUBLISHED: 14:43, Thu, Jul 1, 2021 | UPDATED: 15:19, Thu, Jul 1, 2021


----------



## elvisfan4life

CeeJay said:


> I would bet anything that he's on a flight back to LA .. American Airlines #6984, 4:10pm departure from LHR .. gets into LAX at 6:39PDT (there's also a flight at 6:50pm from LHR <-> LAX).  Most of the transatlantic flights from LHR leave at/around 4pm (god knows, I was a regular on British Airways from LHR <-> Boston)!!   I thought I read that Hazza zipped out of there pretty quickly after the 'viewing'.
> 
> I don't like the sculpture AT ALL; agree with many of you that it makes Diana look manly .. and what's with the 3rd kid behind the little girl?  Don't get that, you can barely see it when you are looking at the statue straight on!


Will perpetuate the idiotic rumours she a) had a love child to one of her lovers b) was pregnant at the time of her death

as for Harry hope he’s gone and never comes back


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> @Glitterandstuds




I might be in the minority, but I don't think that's cute in any form or shape. Children shouldn't be burdened with all of their parents' internal struggles.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Y


Chanbal said:


> If I were Will, I would have this statue replaced ASAP. While Mario Testino captured Diana's beauty, the author of this thing made her look unattractive.


Hopefully they can get a good price for scrap & just get a nice fountain or something instead- Haz can help them fill it with the Chumash’s water & his and the raptor’s tears to make it even more special 


Sharont2305 said:


> And this is the ring Dodi bought shortly before his death to propose to Diana with.


It’s alright, bit 80’s pave explosion, but how many girls was Dodi proposing to? He sounds like a bigamist truck driver from Take a Break with a wife  near every service station 


Chanbal said:


> One more.... time to



Soothe us to sleep lady C!


scarlet555 said:


> Diana‘s statue looks very odd, first the sculptor may be specializing in male sculpting, from the way the statue looks-very masculine. (I can only draw women so if someone told me to draw a prince, I would probably pass, am no artist.  As an artist, you have to know your limits and what is being asked of you). The children appear proportionate to their own bodies but don’t seem size proportionate to Diana’s body.  And, she does not look pretty, it’s not that she was super pretty, but she did have an elegance and beauty and commanded more than what the statue offered.  I don’t expect her in a princess night gown, but I don’t find the statue deserving of her legacy.


I agree, he clearly took a project which isn’t in his wheelhouse. It doesn’t mean he’s not a great artist or whatever, I mean, I love Michael Angelo but you can tell he preferred the guys from his madonnas


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might be in the minority, but I don't think that's cute in any form or shape. Children shouldn't be burdened with all of their parents' internal struggles.


Given William as a child had to witness his mother’s increasing paranoia and comfort her (and even pass the tissues under the toilet door to her )it’s a wonder it’s Harry who has the mental health issues !!!


----------



## needlv

yikes.... trying to find the right word that describes the statue.... ahhh .... ghastly.  It’s ghastly!!!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5125724
> 
> 
> Just a reminder of the 3rd person in this story - the American Kelli Fisher.  Dodi gave this engagement ring to her.  Life is tough in the billionaire club
> 
> Never heard this before:
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4184386/princess-diana-dodi-fayed-marry-church-muslim/
> 
> The full story:
> https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/05/dunne200805
> 
> Kelli Fisher news conference:
> 
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4325380/kelly-fisher-dumped-dodi-fayed-princess-diana-photos/
> _She had featured on the front covers of Elle and W before meeting Dodi in Paris in July 1996. She says he convinced her to give up her lucrative work and gave her a £2,000-a-day allowance.
> He also bought her a £5million home in Malibu where she thought they would live together, and gave her a *£180,000 engagement ring *in February 1997.
> After learning of Dodi’s romance with Diana, Kelly phoned her ex to vent her fury. A 20-minute recording of the call was played in London in 2007 during the inquest into Diana’s death. It captures
> 
> Kelly fuming: “You even flew me down to St Tropez to sit on a boat while you seduced Diana all day and f***ed me all night.”_



I remember this from when it happened. I thought then as I do now, I believe part of the story but not the engagement part. To coincidental that the ring is very much like Diana's engagement ring. 
Same with the Dodi Diana ring, I remember Dodis father and a smarmy jeweller coming out with this story about Dodi buying the ring to propose to Diana with. I don't believe that either.


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I wonder if MM is annoyed the camera was more on William?  And why does Haz look giddy?  Isn’t this a solemn occasion??


When you look at the footage, it wasn't a solemn occasion at all, plenty of happy smiles with everyone.


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## doni

Why is she walking around with three kids? I do not get this at all, who are these three kids? Why is one of them lagging behind? Plus the children themselves are very weird, they have adult body proportions, with a relatively small head to the body, whereas the head of Diana is so big. So bizarre.
If they wanted to emphasize her activism they could have had her in her landmine walk gear which was so iconic or something. This doesn’t make any sense at all.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> We said it here first!  Of course M helped. The speech sounded as if M was saying it.


Trust me, H, I know way more about how to eulogise your late mum I never met than you do  


doni said:


> Why is she walking around with three kids? I do not get this at all, who are these three kids? Why is one of them lagging behind? Plus the children themselves are very weird, they have adult body proportions, with a relatively small head to the body, whereas the head of Diana is so big. So bizarre.
> If they wanted to emphasize her activism they could have had her in her landmine walk gear which was so iconic or something. This doesn’t make any sense at all.


This is a bit cynical, but thinking about it, that landmine  moment was one of the many highlights of Diana’s public life and it was really very brave and powerful….
I wonder if Charles was jealous he has never had such an iconic moment and is unlikely to get one now and couldn’t stand the thought of his ex staring him down in her prime. So they went with some random kids which is way less powerful and dynamic & is actually a bit patronising.

I mean, how would you immortalise Charles’ actions in a statue? Have him biting into an organic biscuit or chatting to a plant?


----------



## doni

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, how would you immortalise Charles’ actions in a statue? Have him biting into an organic biscuit or chatting to a plant?



Well I tell you, he was on the organic farming game long before it was fashionable, we absolutely have to give him that.


----------



## Clearblueskies

doni said:


> Well I tell you, he was on the organic farming game long before it was fashionable, we absolutely have to give hime that.


I agree.  He took a lot of flack, and it was courageous - in a different way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

doni said:


> Why is she walking around with three kids? I do not get this at all, who are these three kids? Why is one of them lagging behind? Plus the children themselves are very weird, they have adult body proportions, with a relatively small head to the body, whereas the head of Diana is so big. So bizarre.
> If they wanted to emphasize her activism they could have had her in her landmine walk gear which was so iconic or something. This doesn’t make any sense at all.



I don't understand the 3 children either.....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe it looks better in person?  
If it looked as awful as many think, the Earl would have complained - loudly.  He seems happy with it.
Looking at Diana’s siblings, she may not have aged too well. The Earl is 57, which is just 20 yrs older than Hazz.


----------



## jelliedfeels

doni said:


> Well I tell you, he was on the organic farming game long before it was fashionable, we absolutely have to give him that.


I don’t want to sound like I’m always down on the guy but he founded duchy originals in 1990 as a farm shop essentially. There has been an organic food farm and retail movement since the late 70s at least in Britain to my knowledge and it was well enough known for people to making jokes about it in posy simmonds cartoons and the young ones. 
I mean by the mid 90s even the supermarkets were cottoning on to organic and anti-GMO stuff.
I think it might be reinventing history a little to say he was on the vanguard but I think he definitely did well with a growing trend.


----------



## doni

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t want to sound like I’m always down on the guy but he founded duchy originals in 1990 as a farm shop essentially. There has been an organic food farm and retail movement since the late 70s at least in Britain to my knowledge and it was well enough known for people to making jokes about it in posy simmonds cartoons and the young ones.
> I mean by the mid 90s even the supermarkets were cottoning on to organic and anti-GMO stuff.
> I think it might be reinventing history a little to say he was on the vanguard but I think he definitely did well with a growing trend.


I believe he converted the Duchy to full on organic farming already in the mid-80s and he would have needed to be into it well before that. I appreciate that he was not the initiator of the movement, but he was one of the first believers. He is the first high profile figure I ever heard talking about organic farming... And he was much criticized at the time, when it was not seen as a trend but something backwards and even quaint by many. But he banged on. I am not a Prince Charles fan or anything, but I acknowledge that the times caught up with him on that one.


----------



## 1LV

Cornflower Blue said:


> I've been to and fro about the statue - and I've decided that's it's OK. I would've liked more of a smile there and less of a message. I know that statues are, more often than not, erected to purvey a message but I feel those children are a bit extraneous tbh.
> 
> I would have been happy just with a statue of her...
> 
> It seems that it is less about about her, and more telling about those she left behind. But if that's what they want, so be it.


I don’t understand the role of the children either.  Could it have something to do with Diana being a kindergarten teacher before marrying Charles?


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> I don’t understand the role of the children either.  Could it have something to do with Diana being a kindergarten teacher before marrying Charles?


Don't think so, she was a playgroup pre school assistant and the children were practically toddlers. I don't get the children in the statue either


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> Don't think so, she was a playgroup pre school assistant and the children were practically toddlers. I don't get the children in the statue either


You’re right.  Well hells bells.  I give up.


----------



## Sharont2305

A friend of mine is at Wimbledon today and she's posted this, something like this would have been nicer I think. Looks like it's a water feature.


----------



## jelliedfeels

To me the kids are just an incredibly literal way of showing she was a nice, not racist person - she loved kids look at her supporting these shoeless kids of every creed and colour. 
This isn’t meant to be a comparison to her morals but it reminds me of the opening of this film in the Simpsons 

Its such a cliche the Simpsons are ripping it in the 90s- show you are nice and not prejudiced by standing with some kids who represent ‘_almost _all the peoples of the world’


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Trust me, H, I know way more about how to eulogise your late mum I never met than you do
> 
> This is a bit cynical, but thinking about it, that landmine  moment was one of the many highlights of Diana’s public life and it was really very brave and powerful….
> I wonder if Charles was jealous he has never had such an iconic moment and is unlikely to get one now and couldn’t stand the thought of his ex staring him down in her prime. So they went with some random kids which is way less powerful and dynamic & is actually a bit patronising.
> 
> I mean, how would you immortalise Charles’ actions in a statue? Have him biting into an organic biscuit or chatting to a plant?



He's actually helped thousands for decades with the Prince's Trust and other interests.

He saved Dumfries house with his own money which also had the knock-on effect of retaining/creating many local jobs and adding to the local economy. There are prob. more.

The fact that these don't make international headlines shouldn't matter. They are very real acts of productive involvement to the people of the UK and have changed lives here.

I admire Diana's work with HIV/AIDS patients and trying to rid the World of hateful Land Mines. Real global issues that needed drawing attention to, but the PoW has his hands tied politically and has to careful what/who he gets involved with publicly and what he says. I like he puts his money where his mouth is (conservation, opportunities for people to help themselves) and so I applaud his work too, even if it's more low key, it's continuous and not just for headlines and photo ops (not that I'm against if it works for the cause).

Seems M&H go for the international grabbing headlines as they want to emulate Di.

Shame they couldn't do the everyday, 'show-up and greet' work that _both_ H's parents did for years in their Senior Royals role M&H proclaimed as their intention.  They have never knowingly put their own money towards any cause besides a token gesture - and publicise the heck out of it after for their own gain.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> A friend of mine is at Wimbledon today and she's posted this, something like this would have been nicer I think. Looks like it's a water feature.



Agreed - perhaps a peace garden with lots of red and white flowers that attract birds and insects and other wildlife (AIDS charity, Red Cross and white dove of peace). 

A statue tribute seems out of place this year generally.


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> To me the kids are just an incredibly literal way of showing she was a nice, not racist person - she loved kids look at her supporting these shoeless kids of every creed and colour.
> This isn’t meant to be a comparison to her morals but it reminds me of the opening of this film in the Simpsons
> 
> Its such a cliche the Simpsons are ripping it in the 90s- show you are nice and not prejudiced by standing with some kids who represent ‘_almost _all the peoples of the world’



Yes I think the children are to remind us of her work, I am thinking the two without shoes are third world children


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Yes I think the children are to remind us of her work, I am thinking the two without shoes are third world children



I think you're right but an imperialist signifier of the 'poor are always with us' if ever there was one


----------



## CAH

jelliedfeels said:


> Trust me, H, I know way more about how to eulogise your late mum I never met than you do
> 
> This is a bit cynical, but thinking about it, that landmine  moment was one of the many highlights of Diana’s public life and it was really very brave and powerful….
> I wonder if Charles was jealous he has never had such an iconic moment and is unlikely to get one now and couldn’t stand the thought of his ex staring him down in her prime. So they went with some random kids which is way less powerful and dynamic & is actually a bit patronising.
> 
> I mean, how would you immortalise Charles’ actions in a statue? Have him biting into an organic biscuit or chatting to a plant?


A sculpture of a tampon would be appropriate for him...


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think you're right but an imperialist signifier of the 'poor are always with us' if ever there was one


Yes, I have no idea how to depict the unfortunate anymore ... nothing is politically correct anymore 
Thinking of all the statues in indigenous attire that are being removed, if you show one culture and not another - bad, show a culture that was oppressed - very bad


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

marietouchet said:


> Yes, I have no idea how to depict the unfortunate anymore ... *nothing is politically correct anymore*
> Thinking of all the statues in indigenous attire that are being removed, if you show one culture and not another - bad, show a culture that was oppressed - very bad


So true.  I can’t keep up anymore.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Yes, I have no idea how to depict the unfortunate anymore ... nothing is politically correct anymore
> Thinking of all the statues in indigenous attire that are being removed, if you show one culture and not another - bad, show a culture that was oppressed - very bad



Don't get me started


----------



## marietouchet

1LV said:


> So true.  I can’t keep up anymore.


They want to remove the beautiful horseback medieval-style statue of Saint Louis in front of the St Louis Art Museum - cant remember the issues with Louis anymore
They are removing all references to Christopher Columbus in the US ...   I used to joke ... well all that  Columbus stuff was wrong anyway  - the Vikings and / or the Chinese sailed here first, not to mention all the people who walked the ice bridge from Siberia to Alaska, they count too

Was thinking of Diana's good works - one could not depict the landmine work - see recent stories that Tories growled about that just prior to her death and, AIDS - well I guess one could put Freddie Mercury in the statue - he met her at Live Aid, I think ... none of that will work
One could use a single White Rose, but then people would complain of promoting an Elton John song

I am not in love with the statue, but, they did well given the times


----------



## Aimee3

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, how would you immortalise Charles’ actions in a statue? Have him biting into an organic biscuit or chatting to a plant?


How about Charles with a tampon?  Going back into the corner now, but I really do think of him that way


----------



## Chanbal

Well done Auntie Sarah


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> How about Charles with a tampon?  Going back into the corner now, but I really do think of him that way



I refuse to make fun of that because it feels like victim blaming. It is gross and I would prefer to not know, but his phone was tapped and a private, intimate conversation made public.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Well done Auntie Sarah




Major posturing from H. Insecurity provoking an exhibition of needless gestures of self comfort and feigned dominance


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> How about Charles with a tampon?  Going back into the corner now, but I really do think of him that way



Try to train your mind away from such smutty (British) public school 'humour'. Only Camila could find that funny/put up with it.

The rest of don't want to know, and it's not Chaz' fault we did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Major posturing from H. Insecurity provoking an exhibition of needless gestures of self comfort and feigned dominance



It's like he's desperately trying to catch William's attention, but he's iceberging him.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's like he's desperately trying to catch William's attention, but he's iceberging him.



ITA. I put it on full screen.

Def on the back foot with Will. Seems to me, Will's the immovable force here, not the statue. See H back away and look small even as he tries to move forward and take up space.

Not sure there's going to be any reconciliation this side of 'the divorce' and a total recantation of all accusations.


----------



## jennlt

marietouchet said:


> *Yes, I have no idea how to depict the unfortunate anymore *... nothing is politically correct anymore
> Thinking of all the statues in indigenous attire that are being removed, if you show one culture and not another - bad, show a culture that was oppressed - very bad


Like this, maybe? That's certainly how they see themselves   And he is barefoot...


----------



## 1LV

jennlt said:


> Like this, maybe? That's certainly how they see themselves
> View attachment 5126202


Nailed it!


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> Well done Auntie Sarah




Gosh, JCMH is balding fast.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Gosh, JCMH is balding fast.



He’s only a few years behind his brother. But where William has given in to the inevitable, I fully expected Harry to fight it with plugs or Rogaine. Maybe he has tried and it didn’t take.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diana statue - why not 3 entwined hearts? Could be made in flowering plants or topiary or marble or wood. Would look stunning in the garden.


Iceberging Hazz?  William is a master of positioning. He scarfed MM with his scarf, but yesterday he took _scarfing_ to a new level. He ‘scarfed’ Hazzie without even wearing a scarf. He made sure his back was to the camera, thus focus was on the bald spots  He made sure to keep his distance, not to laugh with Hazzie‘s juvenile jokes, and to maintain his dignity.

He gave a master class in _scarfing_.   

ETA: Diana’s image is all over London and beyond.  Did they really need another one?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I finally noticed , the boy at left front has curly short cropped hair 
the girl and shorter boy seem to have short parted straight hair


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana statue - why not 3 entwined hearts? Could be made in flowering plants or topiary or marble or wood. Would look stunning in the garden.
> View attachment 5126233
> 
> Iceberging Hazz?  William is a master of positioning. He scarfed MM with his scarf, but yesterday he took _scarfing_ to a new level. He ‘scarfed’ Hazzie without even wearing a scarf. He made sure his back was to the camera, thus focus was on the bald spots  He made sure to keep his distance, not to laugh with Hazzie‘s juvenile jokes, and to maintain his dignity.
> 
> He gave a master class in _scarfing_.


Is "scarfing" the real Royal version of markling?


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Is "scarfing" the real Royal version of markling?


Please define scarfing for me 
this is a term that I need to add to my vocab …
going to google to see if it knows


----------



## Clearblueskies

CAH said:


> A sculpture of a tampon would be appropriate for him...





Aimee3 said:


> How about Charles with a tampon?  Going back into the corner now, but I really do think of him that way


Think of the most embarrassing, cringeworthy thing you’ve ever said in a private phone call and imagine it blasted worldwide for everyone to sneer at.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I refuse to make fun of that because it feels like victim blaming. It is gross and I would prefer to not know, but his phone was tapped and a private, intimate conversation made public.


I agree, it’s an appalling invasion of personal privacy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I finally noticed , the boy at left front has curly short cropped hair
> the girl and shorter boy seem to have short parted straight hair



Highly inappropriate and unnecessary IMO.



marietouchet said:


> Please define scarfing for me
> this is a term that I need to add to my vocab …
> going to google to see if it knows



Notice how William avoids MM by ‘adjusting’ his scarf?  That is scarfing - successfully avoiding someone or an unpleasant encounter. Charles does it by looking at his tie or shoes.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe it looks better in person?
> If it looked as awful as many think, the Earl would have complained - loudly.  He seems happy with it.
> Looking at Diana’s siblings, she may not have aged too well. The Earl is 57, which is just 20 yrs older than Hazz.



Those two siblings looks so similar!  It’s like my little toy as a kid…the cutout that has various cutout outfits that I would change around.  It’s the same person…one in a suit, then in a dress!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana statue - why not 3 entwined hearts? Could be made in flowering plants or topiary or marble or wood. Would look stunning in the garden.
> View attachment 5126233
> 
> Iceberging Hazz?  William is a master of positioning. He scarfed MM with his scarf, but yesterday he took _scarfing_ to a new level. He ‘scarfed’ Hazzie without even wearing a scarf. He made sure his back was to the camera, thus focus was on the bald spots  He made sure to keep his distance, not to laugh with Hazzie‘s juvenile jokes, and to maintain his dignity.
> 
> He gave a master class in _scarfing_.
> 
> ETA: Diana’s image is all over London and beyond.  Did they really need another one?



Even Gucci is bringing back the Diana bag next week


----------



## doni

papertiger said:


> Even Gucci is bringing back the Diana bag next week


Now _that_ is a fitting tribute


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> He’s only a few years behind his brother. But where William has given in to the inevitable, I fully expected Harry to fight it with plugs or Rogaine. Maybe he has tried and it didn’t take.


This is completely non-scientific but I heard from a ginger friend of mine that red hair does not work well with plugs or drugs so he is resigned to his fate. Will being sort of ash blonde  he may well have a better chance of regrouping his losses.

Nonetheless I think trying to hide balding is always a mixed bag as it can go wrong easily and the press will absolutely rip you for it if it does. Poor old men don’t get to wear wigs either.

still I think baldness can be really appealing actually.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> Gosh, JCMH is balding fast.


When I tease hubby about his bald spot that looks exactly like a religious tonsure, he responds that hair doesn't grow on brain then I usually reply that it doesn't grow on rock either.


----------



## sdkitty

Mentha said:


> The statue is all white saviour of the world, not very pleasant. They should just made a small photo museum with different phases of her life with her iconic pics and some personal memorabilia, clothes etc. I am sure people would have enjoyed looking at that.


maybe a statue just wasn't the way to go for a modern woman.  people can see videos and photos of her, unlike the ancient people who we are used to seeing in statues.  I agree her clothing, etc. is more interesting than this awful thing.  and unfortunately it will probably stand there forever with it's ugly costume and random children


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I refuse to make fun of that because it feels like victim blaming. It is gross and I would prefer to not know, *but his phone was tapped and a private, intimate conversation made public.*



You are a nice person. Back when I first heard about "tampongate" it made me wonder what other crazy things he was saying to her! His mind must go to very strange places.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Agreed - perhaps a peace garden with lots of red and white flowers that attract birds and insects and other wildlife (AIDS charity, Red Cross and white dove of peace).
> 
> A statue tribute seems out of place this year generally.


I think it was a mistake and maybe they now realize it.  but there it is.  for posterity


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> You are a nice person. Back when I first heard about "tampongate" it made me wonder what other crazy things he was saying to her! His mind must go to very strange places.


It's not just about being nice. Illegally tapping a phone and recording conversations without a person's consent was a crime back then as it is today in most countries and people don't seem to realize that an invasion of privacy is a civil rights violation.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the kids are meant to represent the children of the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's not just about being nice. Illegally tapping a phone and recording conversations without a person's consent was a crime back then as it is today in most countries and people don't seem to realize that an invasion of privacy is a civil rights violation.



Oh, I'm not saying it wasn't wrong or illegal. It absolutely was. But it is out there now and it cannot be wiped from the memory.


----------



## LittleStar88

I think the intention behind the statue was nice, but the execution went wrong.

I feel like the children alongside her are to show who she was to them/the work she did for children in general - a nice sentiment but everyone knows this already about her and it really didn't need to be included - takes away from Diana. I would have liked it better if it were just her, and in a different outfit. Statue looks decent in the face but could use improvement. Overall it was absolutely not what I expected, and didn't wow me at all, but there is it so I am getting used to it. I see the intention behind what they were trying to say with it.

As for Harry and his wacky behavior... I think it is more a matter of Harry always seeming to slide off the rails and always having had handlers to keep him somewhat on track. But now he doesn't so he lets it all hang out - and looks immature, obnoxious, and an attention-seeker. He must be such an exhausting energy vampire to be around.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> You are a nice person. Back when I first heard about "tampongate" it made me wonder what other crazy things he was saying to her! His mind must go to very strange places.


That’s kind of saying two wrongs make a right?  
I feel uncomfortable with this thread lately.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the kids are meant to represent the children of the world.



That's what I thought too. It's obvious they took great pains to try to represent different children, but they could have put a dozen kids in the statue and somebody would have found a race/culture that was left out and complained.

It's only a statue, it doesn't need to have a profound message. It makes me wonder what some of the other designs the artist offered looked like. I bet the first few rounds of designs were much better. The brothers probably picked at it and tinkered with it and argued about the concept to the point where the sculptor was just happy to be done with the whole ordeal.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the intention behind the statue was nice, but the execution went wrong.
> 
> I feel like the children alongside her are to show who she was to them/the work she did for children in general - a nice sentiment but everyone knows this already about her and it really didn't need to be included - takes away from Diana. I would have liked it better if it were just her, and in a different outfit. Statue looks decent in the face but could use improvement. Overall it was absolutely not what I expected, and didn't wow me at all, but there is it so I am getting used to it. I see the intention behind what they were trying to say with it.
> 
> As for Harry and his wacky behavior... I think it is more a matter of Harry always seeming to slide off the rails and always having had handlers to keep him somewhat on track. But now he doesn't so he lets it all hang out - and looks immature, obnoxious, and an attention-seeker. He must be such an exhausting energy vampire to be around.


I was busy living life yesterday and didn't keep up.  what did harry do?  was it just body language or did he make say something inappropriate?


----------



## CaviarChanel

Totally .. wish it was just a statue of Diana...  the 'hidden message' by adding the boys n girls is a distraction .. 




LittleStar88 said:


> I think the intention behind the statue was nice, but the execution went wrong.
> 
> I feel like the children alongside her are to show who she was to them/the work she did for children in general - a nice sentiment but everyone knows this already about her and it really didn't need to be included - takes away from Diana. I would have liked it better if it were just her, and in a different outfit. Statue looks decent in the face but could use improvement. Overall it was absolutely not what I expected, and didn't wow me at all, but there is it so I am getting used to it. I see the intention behind what they were trying to say with it.
> 
> As for Harry and his wacky behavior... I think it is more a matter of Harry always seeming to slide off the rails and always having had handlers to keep him somewhat on track. But now he doesn't so he lets it all hang out - and looks immature, obnoxious, and an attention-seeker. He must be such an exhausting energy vampire to be around.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> That’s kind of saying two wrongs make a right?
> I feel uncomfortable with this thread lately.



Where did I say that? I am not defending phone tapping, but it happened and we know about it. The only way we know anything about famous people is from what we hear via the press. Those things can be good or bad.


----------



## redney

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the kids are meant to represent the children of the world.


That's my take on it too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

David Spade is getting messages that it looks like him!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I refuse to make fun of that because it feels like victim blaming. It is gross and I would prefer to not know, but his phone was tapped and a private, intimate conversation made public.


a bit OT but Hugh Grant was talking about this in an interview.  said the paps went so far as to actually break into his apartment.  talk about invasion of privacy.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Where did I say that? I am not defending phone tapping, but it happened and we know about it. The only way we know anything about famous people is from what we hear via the press. Those things can be good or bad.


Because a private exchange illegally obtained is public knowledge it’s ok to use it to make a joke? I don’t think so. But I’m out of step with this thread obviously.


----------



## bag-mania

Clearblueskies said:


> Because a private exchange illegally obtained is public knowledge it’s ok to use it to make a joke? I don’t think so. But I’m out of step with this thread obviously.



I didn't think it was a joke. I thought it was gross and a little creepy TBH.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Even Gucci is bringing back the Diana bag next week


The lady Dior seems to be getting more and more hyped at the moment too. I believed in the  Spencer commencer or the Lady Di must buy much more than this much vaunted markle sparkle


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Even Gucci is bringing back the Diana bag next week


It's a beautiful bag. 








						Gucci Has Reinvented The Classic Handbag That Was Princess Diana’s Favourite In The ’90s
					

The chic bamboo tote is synonymous with Lady Di’s free-spirited style in the early ’90s




					www.vogue.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Clearblueskies said:


> Because a private exchange illegally obtained is public knowledge it’s ok to use it to make a joke? I don’t think so. But I’m out of step with this thread obviously.


Anything can be a joke.

This thread has had a laissez faire attitude on jokes about mental health and other serious issues with H&M because It seems like we can all take a joke even if we personally find it in poor taste. 

I think you are being a bit harsh on bagmania tbh they aren’t saying it was right they are just joking about something from 10 years ago. I feel like C probably has bigger fish to fry with his vindictive son anyways.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> David Spade is getting messages that it looks like him!


LOL
kinda resembles Kaitlyn Jenner to me


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I was busy living life yesterday and didn't keep up.  what did harry do?  was it just body language or did he make say something inappropriate?



He was just being an attention-seeking loudmouth during the unveiling. Didn't seem thoughtful or somber about it at all.


----------



## marietouchet

Another nit about statue …
The third child , smaller boy- who is behind the tall girl - you cant see him at all in a straight frontal view of the statue
it is like putting the 6 ft tall delphiniums at the front of the perennial border and the 4 ft tall roses behind


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It's a beautiful bag.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gucci Has Reinvented The Classic Handbag That Was Princess Diana’s Favourite In The ’90s
> 
> 
> The chic bamboo tote is synonymous with Lady Di’s free-spirited style in the early ’90s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.co.uk


didn't she also like Tods?


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> They want to remove the beautiful horseback medieval-style statue of Saint Louis in front of the St Louis Art Museum - cant remember the issues with Louis anymore
> They are removing all references to Christopher Columbus in the US ...   I used to joke ... well all that  Columbus stuff was wrong anyway  - the Vikings and / or the Chinese sailed here first, not to mention all the people who walked the ice bridge from Siberia to Alaska, they count too
> 
> Was thinking of Diana's good works - one could not depict the landmine work - see recent stories that Tories growled about that just prior to her death and, AIDS - well I guess one could put Freddie Mercury in the statue - he met her at Live Aid, I think ... none of that will work
> One could use a single White Rose, but then people would complain of promoting an Elton John song
> 
> I am not in love with the statue, but, they did well given the times


Here in Canada, there are calls to remove the Sir John A. Macdonald statues, our first Prime Minister.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana statue - why not 3 entwined hearts? Could be made in flowering plants or topiary or marble or wood. Would look stunning in the garden.
> View attachment 5126233


Oh, I like that!


----------



## redney

Such a shame for Harry to have jetted out on the same day as the statue event. Wonder if he attempted to make plans to see the Queen or his father and was rebuffed, or just blew everyone off.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> Anything can be a joke.
> 
> This thread has had a laissez faire attitude on jokes about mental health and other serious issues with H&M because It seems like we can all take a joke even if we personally find it in poor taste.
> 
> I think you are being a bit harsh on bagmania tbh they aren’t saying it was right they are just joking about something from 10 years ago. I feel like C probably has bigger fish to fry with his vindictive son anyways.


Well you just made my point for me.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> He was just being an attention-seeking loudmouth during the unveiling. Didn't seem thoughtful or somber about it at all.


guess he's a case of arrested development....all the more easy for Meghan to manipulate


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> maybe a statue just wasn't the way to go for a modern woman.  people can see videos and photos of her, unlike the ancient people who we are used to seeing in statues.  I agree her clothing, etc. is more interesting than this awful thing.  and unfortunately it will probably stand there forever with it's ugly costume and random children


Perfect summary!  Statues are not the way to go for modern women, ugly costume (although it looked great in the original photo) and random children. Very succinct.

I followed Diana since the very first pap shot of her as a kindergarten assistant and I never even associated her with children!


sdkitty said:


> didn't she also like Tods?


Tod's was huge back in the day!   And yes, she did.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Perfect summary!  Statues are not the way to go for modern women, ugly costume (although it looked great in the original photo) and random children. Very succinct.
> 
> I followed Diana since the very first pap shot of her as a kindergarten assistant and I never even associated her with children!
> 
> Tod's was huge back in the day!   And yes, she did.


I thought she looked very sophisticated the night she died.  of course that outfit would be attached to sad memories.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> didn't she also like Tods?





Jayne1 said:


> Perfect summary!  Statues are not the way to go for modern women, ugly costume (although it looked great in the original photo) and random children. Very succinct.
> 
> I followed Diana since the very first pap shot of her as a kindergarten assistant and I never even associated her with children!
> 
> Tod's was huge back in the day!   And yes, she did.


Tod’s is great actually and I always forget about it. Diana had some amazing fits. I guess which is why the statue’s weird belt outfit looks kind of incongruous.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Tod’s is great actually and I always forget about it. Diana had some amazing fits. I guess which is why the statue’s weird belt outfit looks kind of incongruous.


right....that belt is just plain ugly


----------



## 1LV

redney said:


> Such a shame for Harry to have jetted out on the same day as the statue event. Wonder if he attempted to make plans to see the Queen or his father and was rebuffed, or just blew everyone off.


Rushing back for 4th of July?


----------



## jelliedfeels

1LV said:


> Rushing back for 4th of July?


We all know he loves celebrating Liberty  

Except he thinks it’s for the shop in London.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Another nit about statue …
> *The third child , smaller boy- who is behind the tall girl - you cant see him at all in a straight frontal view of the statue*
> it is like putting the 6 ft tall delphiniums at the front of the perennial border and the 4 ft tall roses behind


Could it be a reference to the forgotten children of the world or the children that have no one to take care of them?


----------



## redney

1LV said:


> Rushing back for 4th of July?


Because he's an American now?


----------



## chicinthecity777

redney said:


> Because he's an American now?


it would be absolutely crazy to have a British (ex-)royal for the independence day, wouldn't it! I hope he doesn't do something stupid such as saying "xxx amendment is bonkers". I hope the sensible people of American don't buy into this sh1t!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll have what she is having 
Perhaps she knows something we don’t  











						Queen returns to Royal Windsor Horse Show after busy week in Scotland
					

She's had a busy week of engagements in Scotland, but nothing can keep the Queen away from the Royal Windsor Horse Show, said to be Her Majesty's favourite event of the year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll have what she is having
> Perhaps she knows something we don’t
> 
> View attachment 5126360
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen returns to Royal Windsor Horse Show after busy week in Scotland
> 
> 
> She's had a busy week of engagements in Scotland, but nothing can keep the Queen away from the Royal Windsor Horse Show, said to be Her Majesty's favourite event of the year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She’s been told the ginger one has left the country or she has seen that statue or both


----------



## LittleStar88

redney said:


> Such a shame for Harry to have jetted out on the same day as the statue event. Wonder if he attempted to make plans to see the Queen or his father and was rebuffed, or just blew everyone off.



I honestly think he is a pu$$y and couldn't take the heat (plus, no one really wants to talk to him and have those convos shared across the media upon return to the US). And MM probably summoned him home immediately if he couldn't wrangle bags of money, tiaras, or titles to bring back home to Her magesty MoM.




1LV said:


> Rushing back for 4th of July?



Oh, so he can trash the First Amendment some more? Or maybe pick another one to blabber on knowing nothing about? Yes, please hurry back and show your ignorance, Harry!


----------



## LittleStar88

Only somewhat related (statue) - Diana could look more... _Diana_ in her statue, but at least they didn't do to Diana what they did to Lucille Ball for her statue. Poor Lucy looked so bad they had to redo it.


----------



## csshopper

Haz was delivered to Heathrow in a 2019 Volkswagen Caravelle. 

Is the Royal Family making a “non working Royal” statement?


----------



## CarryOn2020

A picture really is 1,000 words - from the DM


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really???  This is what the back looks like????  She looks fat. That boy’s hand needs to be placed closer to his own body.
Why would they do this to their mother?


----------



## TC1

I don't mind the statue. Clearly her family and sons were involved the whole time..so if they are happy *shrug*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> I honestly think he is a pu$$y and couldn't take the heat (plus, no one really wants to talk to him and have those convos shared across the media upon return to the US). *And MM probably summoned him home immediately if he couldn't wrangle bags of money, tiaras, or titles to bring back home to Her magesty MoM.*


Exactly, I bet those were H's marching orders. She must be fuming that she never received a "free" tiara like the ones given to her HM's daughters-in-law and granddaughter-in-law, Kate. I guess the wedding tiara was just a loaner.
HRH Milk of Magnesia Markle, Douchess of Sucksess didn't get a tiara.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> Like this, maybe? That's certainly how they see themselves   And he is barefoot...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5126202



When was this released again? And the due date was early June? She's absolutely enhanced that bump.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> One more.... time to




Gotta say Lady CC has some awesome jewelry!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> You are a nice person. Back when I first heard about "tampongate" it made me wonder what other crazy things he was saying to her! His mind must go to very strange places.



It is definitely not my cup of tea, but I feel bedroom preferences - unless they involve children, animals or any kind of force or violence - should not be up for public discussion. I don't care (and I really do not want to be informed about) whatever floats two consenting adults' boat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When was this released again? And the due date was early June? She's absolutely enhanced that bump.


I was using the picture to illustrate a sarcastic point and it hasn't been re-released as far as I know. The bump really does look enhanced.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> This is completely non-scientific but I heard from a ginger friend of mine that red hair does not work well with plugs or drugs so he is resigned to his fate. Will being sort of ash blonde  he may well have a better chance of regrouping his losses.
> 
> Nonetheless I think trying to hide balding is always a mixed bag as it can go wrong easily and the press will absolutely rip you for it if it does. Poor old men don’t get to wear wigs either.
> 
> still I think baldness can be really appealing actually.



If I may add ... Hwood has incredible ways to add hair temporarily for the movies. They can make it look real. This may be the option H can go after all M has connections!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> didn't she also like Tods?



Yes, I think it was called the 'D' bag. My mother had that (too)


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Could it be a reference to the forgotten children of the world or the children that have no one to take care of them?



You're very kind. 

It would be nice if it was


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> This is completely non-scientific but I heard from a ginger friend of mine that red hair does not work well with plugs or drugs so he is resigned to his fate. Will being sort of ash blonde  he may well have a better chance of regrouping his losses.
> 
> Nonetheless I think trying to hide balding is always a mixed bag as it can go wrong easily and the press will absolutely rip you for it if it does. Poor old men don’t get to wear wigs either.
> 
> still I think baldness can be really appealing actually.


Does anyone know? 6's hair has always been messy - an uncombed kind of look. Does he have curly/wavy/unruly hair ? Or does he simply go overboard with styling products?


----------



## Chanbal

Comfort MM who didn't invite the uncle to her wedding... 

*Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing*
_P*rince Harry* has flown back to his home in Los Angeles to be reunited with his wife *Meghan Markle*, who is *mourning the death of her uncle*, and his two children, Archie, two, and Lilibet._
*








						Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
					

Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

People's creativity never ceases to amaze me: I just read someone refer to her as Voldemeg


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Comfort MM who didn't invite the uncle to her wedding...
> 
> *Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing*
> _P*rince Harry* has flown back to his home in Los Angeles to be reunited with his wife *Meghan Markle*, who is *mourning the death of her uncle*, and his two children, Archie, two, and Lilibet._
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Mourning the death of the uncle she cut out of her life for no good reason? Come on now Hello Mag, don't insult your readers' intelligence like this.


----------



## periogirl28

Overheard at Cartier Bond St today, "I *really* don't like that Diana statue."


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Yes, I think it was called the 'D' bag. My mother had that (too)


I actually had the original Di bag and returned it because the leather made me nervous lol!  It was a leather that was similar to Hermes vache natural and i knew it would stain.  Later models of the Di bag had different leather.  I also recall that it was a rather expensive bag at the time compared to other lines.


----------



## papertiger

periogirl28 said:


> Overheard at Cartier Bond St today, "I *really* don't like that Diana statue."



They don't like it at the Sloane St branch either!


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> A picture really is 1,000 words - from the DM
> 
> View attachment 5126370


I have to say this. When I first saw H enter the gardens yesterday with his jacket wide open it made me  He should have had that jacket buttoned at least one button like W. Understand if it was a bit warm but this demonstrates the class of a royal (W) and non-royal (H). Wow H has changed in a short period of time since he left the BRF.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mourning the death of the uncle she cut out of her life for no good reason? Come on now Hello Mag, don't insult your readers' intelligence like this.


This is so sad.  I wept when I heard she was in mourning for a man that she totally ghosted.  Such hypocrisy.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mourning the death of the uncle the cut out of her life for no good reason? Come on now Hello Mag, don't insult your readers' intelligence like this.


Yes, total BULL**** like most of the crap that comes out of their PR machine, they must have office space at Fantasyland.

Another example: Haz was to have Lunch with the Queen while in town. As anyone who can read will know, her schedule has been full with appointments, and not one was for a traitorous grandson. 

And so much for the lunch with former pals, his controlling the press arrangements by having “his” own rep, him giving a speech.

Hoping someone in the Palace issues a statement  at some point clarifying Invitations to The Jubilee have not been issued yet and shoots that announcement down.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I actually had the original Di bag and returned it because the leather made me nervous lol!  It was a leather that was similar to Hermes vache natural and i knew it would stain.  Later models of the Di bag had different leather.  I also recall that it was a rather expensive bag at the time compared to other lines.



For very long lasting tributes (these bags are still available I believe) so fitting on tPF. 30 years and counting. Better than a statue IMO and showed she had great classic taste in bags (even though they were gifted to her). 

1. Lady Dior (Di-or get it?)
2. The Diana bag 
3. Tod's D bag


----------



## Chanbal

periogirl28 said:


> Overheard at Cartier Bond St today, "I *really* don't like that Diana statue."


Please don't mention Bond St, I miss my travel days...


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Yes, total BULL**** like most of the crap that comes out of their PR machine, they must have office space at Fantasyland.
> 
> Another example: Haz was to have Lunch with the Queen while in town. As anyone who can read will know, her schedule has been full with appointments, and not one was for a traitorous grandson.
> 
> And so much for the lunch with former pals, his controlling the press arrangements by having “his” own rep, him giving a speech.
> 
> Hoping someone in the Palace issues a statement  at some point clarifying Invitations to The Jubilee have not been issued yet and shoots that announcement down.


Plus she has been in Scotland, then at Windsor Royal Horse Show, sorry I cannot remember the exact title for show, not with 6


----------



## periogirl28

Chanbal said:


> Please don't mention Bond St, I miss my travel days...


Sorry.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Yes, total BULL**** like most of the crap that comes out of their PR machine, *they must have office space at Fantasyland.*
> 
> Another example: *Haz was to have Lunch with the Queen while in town. As anyone who can read will know, her schedule has been full with appointments, and not one was for a traitorous grandson.*
> 
> And so much for the lunch with former pals, his controlling the press arrangements by having “his” own rep, him giving a speech.
> 
> Hoping someone in the Palace issues a statement  at some point clarifying Invitations to The Jubilee have not been issued yet and shoots that announcement down.



It fascinates me that the source of these statements has absolutely no problem with  putting them out.  This is not a case of not doing the research and knowing that that The Queen is in Scotland with a full schedule before taking it slower at Balmoral.  This is just out and out fabrication for the masses who are not sophisticated enough to question any of it.  If Harry really wanted to see her, he could have taken the train or a plane up there and stood there and waved with the rest of the peeps on the sidelines.  The average person glancing at the press release will not question or deep dive and turn the page assuming that he did have lunch with his grandmother, so from the PR POV, it was a success.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> For very long lasting tributes (these bags are still available I believe) so fitting on tPF. 30 years and counting. Better than a statue IMO and showed she had great classic taste in bags (even though they were gifted to her).
> 
> 1. Lady Dior (Di-or get it?)
> 2. The Diana bag
> 3. Tod's D bag
> 
> View attachment 5126508
> View attachment 5126509
> View attachment 5126510


Interesting that the bags lasted longer than her fashion choices in clothing.

I still have one in red (of course!) glossy leather.  Funny that last week I was thinking of pulling it out for an airing.


----------



## Chanbal

periogirl28 said:


> Sorry.


Haha, no worries. I'm trying to be optimistic and will go to London... in 2022.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It fascinates me that the source of these statements has absolutely no problem with  putting them out.  This is not a case of not doing the research and knowing that that The Queen is in Scotland with a full schedule before taking it slower at Balmoral.  This is just out and out fabrication for the masses who are not sophisticated enough to question any of it.  If Harry really wanted to see her, he could have taken the train or a plane up there and stood there and waved with the rest of the peeps on the sidelines.  The average person glancing at the press release will not question or deep dive and turn the page assuming that he did have lunch with his grandmother, so from the PR POV, it was a success.



I thought she was returning to Windsor (the Windsor Horse Show is on this week). It started Thurs and finishes on Sunday. I've never known the Queen miss it.


----------



## Chanbal

He does look fake imo.


----------



## Aminamina




----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I thought she was returning to Windsor (the Windsor Horse Show is on this week). It started Thurs and finishes on Sunday. I've never known the Queen miss it.


She did attend it  yesterday with huge smiles. No sign of missing Haz. 
And today met with the retiring German Chancellor, an appointment that has probably been booked for a long time.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I thought she was returning to Windsor (the Windsor Horse Show is on this week). It started Thurs and finishes on Sunday. I've never known the Queen miss it.


You're right .  My error.  In any case it was all wishful thinking by some PR person.


----------



## Chanbal

Each time I see QE with a leader, the word that comes to mind is 'next'. How many world leaders have retired while she keeps on going... Vengefully attacking the monarchy may have been a very costly miscalculation for Ginger and Cringe.   











						The royal wiedersehen: Angela Merkel meets the Queen at Windsor Castle
					

It was the second time they have met within a few weeks, after  they were seen together at the G7 summit in Cornwall last month.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Queen returns to Royal Windsor Horse Show after busy week in Scotland
					

She's had a busy week of engagements in Scotland, but nothing can keep the Queen away from the Royal Windsor Horse Show, said to be Her Majesty's favourite event of the year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



Looks like The Queen and Hazza crossed paths in the skies above.  His apron strings were being tugged and he left yesterday as she was flying in from Scotland to attend the Royal Windsor Horse Show.  Two planes passing in the wind.  Sad.  I could say he ran away.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Each time I see QE with a leader, the word that comes to mind is 'next'. How many world leaders have retired while she keeps on going... Vengefully attacking the monarchy may have been a very costly miscalculation for Ginger and Cringe.
> 
> View attachment 5126560
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The royal wiedersehen: Angela Merkel meets the Queen at Windsor Castle
> 
> 
> It was the second time they have met within a few weeks, after  they were seen together at the G7 summit in Cornwall last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Not to mention 14 Prime Ministers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Does anyone know? 6's hair has always been messy - an uncombed kind of look. Does he have curly/wavy/unruly hair ? Or does he simply go overboard with styling products?


his hair looks pretty coarse to me


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> For very long lasting tributes (these bags are still available I believe) so fitting on tPF. 30 years and counting. Better than a statue IMO and showed she had great classic taste in bags (even though they were gifted to her).
> 
> 1. Lady Dior (Di-or get it?)
> 2. The Diana bag
> 3. Tod's D bag
> 
> View attachment 5126508
> View attachment 5126509
> View attachment 5126510


I would think you can get an older Tods D bag for a good price these days


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Haha, no worries. I'm trying to be optimistic and will go to London... in 2022.


I miss it also. Last time was in 2019.    I hope to be there in 2022 too!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> You're right .  My error.  In any case it was all wishful thinking by some PR person.


LOL,  at 95 she’s hard to keep up with and in the pictures posted yesterday looked happy and energetic.


----------



## needlv

Body language guy breaking down body language between the brothers at the statue unveiling.



william did scarf Harry ... without the scarf....


----------



## sdkitty

a pretty balanced article from Huffpost
The Royal Family Could Use Family Therapy. Here's What Therapists Would Tell Them. | HuffPost Life


----------



## Hermes Zen

Archewell Audio/Spotify news ...



> https://variety.com/2021/digital/ne...ananes-prince-harry-meghan-markle-1235010606/
> 
> *Prince Harry, Meghan Markle’s Archewell Hires Podcast Producer Rebecca Sananes as Head of Audio*
> Todd SpanglerJul 2, 2021 5:09am PT


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really???  This is what the back looks like????  She looks fat. That boy’s hand needs to be placed closer to his own body.
> Why would they do this to their mother?
> 
> View attachment 5126373



It's not my cup of tea but if the family is happy with the statue I have no problem with it. 

But if you think she looks fat from the back please never stand behind me!


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> Body language guy breaking down body language between the brothers at the statue unveiling.
> 
> 
> 
> william did scarf Harry ... without the scarf....



I love this guy.


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Body language guy breaking down body language between the brothers at the statue unveiling.
> 
> 
> 
> william did scarf Harry ... without the scarf....



Thank you! His accent is a little hard to understand but I really appreciate the way he visually highlights the parts of the video he’s talking about.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, Diana’s siblings are satisfied she finally received Royal recognition, even if it is a statue that does not fully capture her. She is now a permanent fixture at KP [unless they move it]. So be it. 

The proportions are simply off on this statue. While they did not give her a Kardashian butt, she did daily workouts to have the great body she had. She used the wide belts to show off her trim waist, her  shoulders were not that much wider than her hips, her shirts were neatly tucked in to those wide belts, her body had a feminine shape.  ymmv

Finally, this chapter has ended. And no one ended up in the pool.



Spoiler: Diana’s back view

















						Diana Spencer
					

Diana Spencer 2023 Height: 5 ft 10 in / 178 cm, Weight: 123 lb / 56 kg, Body Measurements/statistics: 33-22-33 in, Dress Size: 8, Bra size: 33B, Birth date, Hair Color, Eye Color, Nationality




					bodysize.org


----------



## Laila619

I think she was slender, but with broad shoulders and narrowish hips. I have the same body type and hate it!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Laila619 said:


> I think she was slender, but with broad shoulders and narrowish hips. I have the same body type and hate it!


Whaaat?!?  You are so lucky!  I’m short and round!!   Oh if I could only be like my younger years. Oh well.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones trying to guess what Will told Ginger...


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Yes, total BULL**** like most of the crap that comes out of their PR machine, they must have office space at Fantasyland.
> 
> Another example: Haz was to have Lunch with the Queen while in town. As anyone who can read will know, her schedule has been full with appointments, and not one was for a traitorous grandson.


That would be hard considering she's been in Scotland all week, yes, like you said, working.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Deleted 698298

needlv said:


> Body language guy breaking down body language between the brothers at the statue unveiling.
> 
> 
> 
> william did scarf Harry ... without the scarf....



I like that explanation. The guy is good, and I understood him just fine (maybe because English is not my first language either)


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Comfort MM who didn't invite the uncle to her wedding...
> 
> *Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing*
> _P*rince Harry* has flown back to his home in Los Angeles to be reunited with his wife *Meghan Markle*, who is *mourning the death of her uncle*, and his two children, Archie, two, and Lilibet._
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Poor guy to have a respectable career associated with a garbage relative. She really is so trashy. I do feel even the casual observer is picking up on the lies though - they are just spinning too much.


papertiger said:


> For very long lasting tributes (these bags are still available I believe) so fitting on tPF. 30 years and counting. Better than a statue IMO and showed she had great classic taste in bags (even though they were gifted to her).
> 
> 1. Lady Dior (Di-or get it?)
> 2. The Diana bag
> 3. Tod's D bag
> 
> View attachment 5126508
> View attachment 5126509
> View attachment 5126510


I second that motion! If only the BRF had sent every British citizen a lady Dior or a gucci Diana or d bag.  Now that would be a tribute I could get behind! ( I’ll have a lady Dior in amaranth please!)

The bags look great but I’m also struck by how good her middle outfit looks and the lilac colour which has had a big comeback too. Only the first one looks a bit staid but I guess that’s skirt suits in summer for you - they always look a bit uncomfortable to me.


sdkitty said:


> I would think you can get an older Tods D bag for a good price these days


You can! Tods is a bargain at resale in general. I’ve got a tods wallet somewhere and I love that suede and leather  interior too. Really good quality but some of the styles are a bit plain for me. 


Hermes Zen said:


> Archewell Audio/Spotify news ...


They can hire all the talent they want but they need to actually do some work and record something or else the poor woman is going to be stuck doing this…




Laila619 said:


> I think she was slender, but with broad shoulders and narrowish hips. I have the same body type and hate it!


Aw that’s a shame, I’m quite short, weedy and plump and I’d love to be more athletic and elegant. I guess it just shows we always want something else


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> They can hire all the talent they want but they need to actually do some work and record something or else the poor woman is going to be stuck doing this…



I think they just want to do the easy parts like stick their name on for executive producer or voice an intro and links. After all, Methane wrote a foreword and the whole tome became her book. Neither of them are known for being the creative force behind a project.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, Diana’s siblings are satisfied she finally received Royal recognition, even if it is a statue that does not fully capture her. She is now a permanent fixture at KP [unless they move it]. So be it.
> 
> The proportions are simply off on this statue. While they did not give her a Kardashian butt, she did daily workouts to have the great body she had. She used the wide belts to show off her trim waist, her  shoulders were not that much wider than her hips, her shirts were neatly tucked in to those wide belts, her body had a feminine shape.  ymmv
> 
> Finally, this chapter has ended. And no one ended up in the pool.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Diana’s back view
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5126709
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana Spencer
> 
> 
> Diana Spencer 2023 Height: 5 ft 10 in / 178 cm, Weight: 123 lb / 56 kg, Body Measurements/statistics: 33-22-33 in, Dress Size: 8, Bra size: 33B, Birth date, Hair Color, Eye Color, Nationality
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodysize.org



Agreed. Statue proportions are off. Many statue figures are, but usually in a flattering way. 

She had a fabulous, healthy figure in the 1990s, but no way was she those measurements. 

That website is totally incorrect IMO though:
"Breast/Bust size33 in / 84 cmWaist size22 in / 56 cmHips size33 in / 86 cmBra size38B (US) / 85B (EU)Cup sizeB (US)Dress Size8Shoe (Feet) Size9 US"

A 22"waist sounds 'Victorian' and at 5'10" she would have looked emaciated. Even at my thinest in my teens at 94 ponds and 5'5' my waist was 24". Diana's feet were also bigger. We know all this from the charity auction catalogues so why the made up figures.  If they don't know/have evidence, why write crap?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If they don't know/have evidence, why write crap?



Question of my life.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Agreed. Statue proportions are off. Many statue figures are, but usually in a flattering way.
> 
> She had a fabulous, healthy figure in the 1990s, but no way was she those measurements.
> 
> That website is totally incorrect IMO though:
> "Breast/Bust size33 in / 84 cmWaist size22 in / 56 cmHips size33 in / 86 cmBra size38B (US) / 85B (EU)Cup sizeB (US)Dress Size8Shoe (Feet) Size9 US"
> 
> A 22"waist sounds 'Victorian' and at 5'10" she would have looked emaciated. Even at my thinest in my teens at 94 ponds and 5'5' my waist was 24". Diana's feet were also bigger. We know all this from the charity auction catalogues so why the made up figures.  If they don't know/have evidence, why write crap?


Yep. a lot of crap that is. And there is no 33 bra size in the UK. It's either 32 or 34.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Question of my life.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Agreed. Statue proportions are off. Many statue figures are, but usually in a flattering way.
> 
> She had a fabulous, healthy figure in the 1990s, but no way was she those measurements.
> 
> That website is totally incorrect IMO though:
> "Breast/Bust size33 in / 84 cmWaist size22 in / 56 cmHips size33 in / 86 cmBra size38B (US) / 85B (EU)Cup sizeB (US)Dress Size8Shoe (Feet) Size9 US"
> 
> A 22"waist sounds 'Victorian' and at 5'10" she would have looked emaciated. Even at my thinest in my teens at 94 ponds and 5'5' my waist was 24". Diana's feet were also bigger. We know all this from the charity auction catalogues so why the made up figures.  If they don't know/have evidence, why write crap?


I can believe she was those sizes in the early years, she did get so thin. But not in her latter years, like you say she had a fantastic healthy figure.


----------



## Chanbal

We finally know what was MM's subtle nod to Diana...


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Poor guy to have a respectable career associated with a garbage relative. She really is so trashy. I do feel even the casual observer is picking up on the lies though - they are just spinning too much.
> 
> I second that motion! If only the BRF had sent every British citizen a lady Dior or a gucci Diana or d bag.  Now that would be a tribute I could get behind! ( I’ll have a lady Dior in amaranth please!)
> 
> The bags look great but I’m also struck by how good her middle outfit looks and the lilac colour which has had a big comeback too. Only the first one looks a bit staid but I guess that’s skirt suits in summer for you - they always look a bit uncomfortable to me.
> 
> You can! Tods is a bargain at resale in general. I’ve got a tods wallet somewhere and I love that suede and leather  interior too. Really good quality but some of the styles are a bit plain for me.
> 
> They can hire all the talent they want but they need to actually do some work and record something or else the poor woman is going to be stuck doing this…
> 
> 
> 
> Aw that’s a shame, I’m quite short, weedy and plump and I’d love to be more athletic and elegant. I guess it just shows we always want something else



is that the uncle who wasn't invited to the wedding?  she must be devastated!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> is that the uncle who wasn't invited to the wedding?  she must be devastated!


Wonder if there is any truth to the tales that after he pulled strings to get her an internship overseas, she misbehaved.


----------



## Chanbal

The man that changed his mind... He is finally seeing some light...


----------



## Aimee3

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yep. a lot of crap that is. And there is no 33 bra size in the UK. It's either 32 or 34.


Must’ve been written by a man


----------



## carmen56

Slightly O/T, but I have never seen the Queen looking so happy and relaxed as she has just lately.  Perhaps she has finally decided to let Haz and Raptor’s shenanigans wash over her and enjoy the rest of her days (may they be many)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Several things can be true:
- with a manly figure and a stern countenance, the statue is a hideous representation of a beautiful woman who cared greatly about her appearance and how she presented herself to the world
- no one here actually knows Diana’s body measurements, but there are designers who do - she did not have a manly figure
 [but we all know who does]
- the sculptor followed the very specific instructions, perhaps meddling, from the Princes and is relieved his part is over 
- the Spencers are satisfied that Diana is finally recognized on Royal grounds
- not only would the ancient Greeks and Roman sculptors dislike today‘s sculptures, so would the poets.









						Poet lashes out at Princess Diana statue - major errors spotted
					

A POEM accompanying the statue of Princess Diana, unveiled on Thursday, has come under fire from a senior lecturer in literature.




					www.express.co.uk
				












						The poetry on this statue is an embarrassment to Princess Diana’s memory
					

The verse engraved on Kensington Palace’s new statue of the late Princess of Wales is a mangled version of a poor poem. She deserved better




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

carmen56 said:


> Slightly O/T, but I have never seen the Queen looking so happy and relaxed as she has just lately.  Perhaps she has finally decided to let Haz and Raptor’s shenanigans wash over her and enjoy the rest of her days (may they be many)


You're right, she does. Maybe she also had been worrying about the Duke of Edinburghs health in recent years?


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> You're right, she does. Maybe she also had been worrying about the Duke of Edinburghs health in recent years?


I was thinking that too.....she would miss him but also maybe be a bit relieved if he was suffering


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The man that changed his mind... He is finally seeing some light...



Why isn’t this front page news????


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Several things can be true:
> - with a manly figure and a stern countenance, the statue is a hideous representation of a beautiful woman who cared greatly about her appearance and how she presented herself to the world
> - no one here actually knows Diana’s body measurements, but there are designers who do - she did not have a manly figure
> [but we all know who does]
> - the sculptor followed the very specific instructions, perhaps meddling, from the Princes and is relieved his part is over
> - the Spencers are satisfied that Diana is finally recognized on Royal grounds
> - not only would the ancient Greeks and Roman sculptors dislike today‘s sculptures, so would the poets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poet lashes out at Princess Diana statue - major errors spotted
> 
> 
> A POEM accompanying the statue of Princess Diana, unveiled on Thursday, has come under fire from a senior lecturer in literature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The poetry on this statue is an embarrassment to Princess Diana’s memory
> 
> 
> The verse engraved on Kensington Palace’s new statue of the late Princess of Wales is a mangled version of a poor poem. She deserved better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


Was it H&M's bright idea to plagiarize someone else's poem since they seemed accustomed to it or has plagiarism become de facto occurrence?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Was it H&M's bright idea to plagiarize someone else's poem since they seemed accustomed to it or has plagiarism become de facto occurrence?



Good question - who knows? Maybe _the_ truth will come out as time goes on.  The important point is that poets, academics, smart people, regular people, all realize the poem as a cheap imitation of the original.  IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Several things can be true:
> - with a manly figure and a stern countenance, the statue is a hideous representation of a beautiful woman who cared greatly about her appearance and how she presented herself to the world
> - no one here actually knows Diana’s body measurements, but there are designers who do - she did not have a manly figure
> [but we all know who does]
> - the sculptor followed the very specific instructions, perhaps meddling, from the Princes and is relieved his part is over
> - the Spencers are satisfied that Diana is finally recognized on Royal grounds
> - not only would the ancient Greeks and Roman sculptors dislike today‘s sculptures, so would the poets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poet lashes out at Princess Diana statue - major errors spotted
> 
> 
> A POEM accompanying the statue of Princess Diana, unveiled on Thursday, has come under fire from a senior lecturer in literature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The poetry on this statue is an embarrassment to Princess Diana’s memory
> 
> 
> The verse engraved on Kensington Palace’s new statue of the late Princess of Wales is a mangled version of a poor poem. She deserved better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


I just feel very sorry for Will, he probably didn't like it too. There is a gossip video (I'm sorry I'm unable to find its link) suggesting that H's wife may have also had some input on the design of statue. Something like he met her in 2016 and the statue was commissioned in 2017...


----------



## Lounorada

Sharont2305 said:


> The Spencer family



They walked in amongst the public? Could they not have been driven on to the grounds privately? Seems a bit odd 




doni said:


> Why is she walking around with three kids? I do not get this at all, who are these three kids? Why is one of them lagging behind? Plus the children themselves are very weird, they have adult body proportions, with a relatively small head to the body, whereas the head of Diana is so big. So bizarre.
> If they wanted to emphasize her activism they could have had her in her landmine walk gear which was so iconic or something. This doesn’t make any sense at all.





Agreed!




redney said:


> Such a shame for Harry to have jetted out on the same day as the statue event. Wonder if he attempted to make plans to see the Queen or his father and was rebuffed, or just blew everyone off.


JCMH trying to find the nearest exit, the second the statue unveiling was over, like the coward he is:






csshopper said:


> *Haz was delivered to Heathrow in a 2019 Volkswagen Caravelle.*
> Is the Royal Family making a “non working Royal” statement?









Chanbal said:


> Comfort MM who didn't invite the uncle to her wedding...
> *Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing*
> _P*rince Harry* has flown back to his home in Los Angeles to be reunited with his wife *Meghan Markle*, who is *mourning the death of her uncle*, and his two children, Archie, two, and Lilibet._
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *









Glitterandstuds said:


> I don't know why I checked Twitter but damn did it irk me.
> People wishing Diana a HBD and then going on to say how Harry is only true son etc.etc Then there is a tag SussexSquad
> and ooooof what lunatics. The fact that they just dismiss William is so annoying





Their stans are disgraceful. 
The title sussex squad make me roll my eyes any time I see it. It's so aggressive and combative and suits them and their beloved idols perfectly even though they fake preach about compassion and love every chance they get 




Hermes Zen said:


> We said it here first!  Of course M helped. The speech sounded as if M was saying it.


Of course she did, like the control freak she is. Which means most people listening to it were like:


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Agreed. Statue proportions are off. Many statue figures are, but usually in a flattering way.
> 
> She had a fabulous, healthy figure in the 1990s, but no way was she those measurements.
> 
> That website is totally incorrect IMO though:
> "Breast/Bust size33 in / 84 cmWaist size22 in / 56 cmHips size33 in / 86 cmBra size38B (US) / 85B (EU)Cup sizeB (US)Dress Size8Shoe (Feet) Size9 US"
> 
> A 22"waist sounds 'Victorian' and at 5'10" she would have looked emaciated. Even at my thinest in my teens at 94 ponds and 5'5' my waist was 24". Diana's feet were also bigger. We know all this from the charity auction catalogues so why the made up figures.  If they don't know/have evidence, why write crap?


I don't believe those measurements.  Not realistic at all.  After the eating disorder was sorted, she gained weight and muscle and went to the gym. I always thought that one of the reasons she let go of the gowns for auction was because she literally could not fit into them.  Her back broadened for one thing and no way could they be zipped.  I would have expected that there was seam allowance for future alteration, but perhaps not.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> Why isn’t this front page news????



This was interesting to watch. Robert Lacey plus another royal watcher/reporter say that it is noteworthy that the Sussex duo didn't immediately sue the Times over their report on the bullying allegations and revelations, given that they are so incredibly litigious over anything they disagree with.  That's because what the Times reported was true and "can't be argued with".  It likely had been run past the Sussex's attorneys prior to being published as well.  

So, Harry and MM are going to take some serious, serious hits when the details of the bullying are published.   They can issue their 30 page rebuttal trying to rationalize their behavior but the bottom line is that they are the royals, they are adults, they are the ones with all the power and status, and they made the lives of numerous staff members miserable to the point they quit and/or needed therapy, and to the point that Will was so upset he kicked them out of KP.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> This was interesting to watch. Robert Lacey plus another royal watcher/reporter say that it is noteworthy that the Sussex duo didn't immediately sue the Times over their report on the bullying allegations and revelations, given that they are so incredibly litigious over anything they disagree with.  That's because what the Times reported was true and "can't be argued with".  It likely had been run past the Sussex's attorneys prior to being published as well.
> 
> So, Harry and MM are going to take some serious, serious hits when the details of the bullying are published.   They can issue their 30 page rebuttal trying to rationalize their behavior but the bottom line is that they are the royals, they are adults, they are the ones with all the power and status, and they made the lives of numerous staff members miserable to the point they quit and/or needed therapy, and to the point that Will was so upset he kicked them out of KP.


you know they will never admit that
they will continue to say she was the victim forever


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I think they just want to do the easy parts like stick their name on for executive producer or voice an intro and links. After all, Methane wrote a foreword and the whole tome became her book. Neither of them are known for being the creative force behind a project.


They are just automatically able to be both in front of the camera and behind the scenes with no prior experience- that’s how it is when you are THAT talented - you don’t need to study or gain experience or anything 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Several things can be true:
> - with a manly figure and a stern countenance, the statue is a hideous representation of a beautiful woman who cared greatly about her appearance and how she presented herself to the world
> - no one here actually knows Diana’s body measurements, but there are designers who do - she did not have a manly figure
> [but we all know who does]
> - the sculptor followed the very specific instructions, perhaps meddling, from the Princes and is relieved his part is over
> - the Spencers are satisfied that Diana is finally recognized on Royal grounds
> - not only would the ancient Greeks and Roman sculptors dislike today‘s sculptures, so would the poets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poet lashes out at Princess Diana statue - major errors spotted
> 
> 
> A POEM accompanying the statue of Princess Diana, unveiled on Thursday, has come under fire from a senior lecturer in literature.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The poetry on this statue is an embarrassment to Princess Diana’s memory
> 
> 
> The verse engraved on Kensington Palace’s new statue of the late Princess of Wales is a mangled version of a poor poem. She deserved better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


Yes that poem’s metre has been pretty mangled and it sounded like something from a fridge magnet to begin with.

I know this is intellectually snobbish of me but I do find it sad that they both had all those years of the finest schooling and this was the most profound and resonant bit of literature they could find for their mother.

I suppose they felt theyhad to change the pronouns on the poem when they saw the sculpture had made Diana look like the first royal drag Queen.

Also… isn’t all this measure a man not by his creed and background stuff completely inappropriate as a reference to Diana herself anyway given she was a blue blood? Isn’t it sort of shading the Spencers a bit?

I mean it strikes me as a much more appropriate message for a statue commemorating W&H’s wives than their mother - although they may well find that people come out with rather different measurements for the ladies


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Comfort MM who didn't invite the uncle to her wedding...
> 
> *Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing*
> _P*rince Harry* has flown back to his home in Los Angeles to be reunited with his wife *Meghan Markle*, who is *mourning the death of her uncle*, and his two children, Archie, two, and Lilibet._
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> Prince Harry flies back to LA to comfort wife Meghan Markle after sad family passing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


*Are you kidding me?!?!?!!?* .. she markled him ages ago, and now .. here we go again, she is "*mourning*" his death?!?!  How can people not see through her anymore? .. she is *BEYOND PATHETIC* .. honestly, I don't have any words anymore!


----------



## Aimee3

are we going to hear about the wreath she sends (NOT)
Doubt she'd be welcome at that funeral either.


----------



## CeeJay

The more I read about these two .. IMO, Hap-Hazza stopped "growing" (_not physically - mentally_) at age 12 when Diana died, whereas Meghan-o-lo-maniac .. well, she's just sick in the head .. a 100% certifiable narcissist supreme.


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> *Are you kidding me?!?!?!!?* .. she markled him ages ago, and now .. here we go again, she is "*mourning*" his death?!?!  How can people not see through her anymore? .. she is *BEYOND PATHETIC* .. honestly, I don't have any words anymore!


IF there was a single cell of compassion in her, which there is not, it is the perfect moment to actually demonstrate the concept, not just spout it in almost every word salad concoction tossed about, and reach out to her father in sympathy for the loss of his brother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe those measurements.  Not realistic at all.  After the eating disorder was sorted, she gained weight and muscle and went to the gym. I always thought that one of the reasons she let go of the gowns for auction was because she literally could not fit into them.  Her back broadened for one thing and no way could they be zipped.  I would have expected that there was seam allowance for future alteration, but perhaps not.



I don't believe she _ever_ had those measurements. At 5'10" even her bones would measure broader. 

I think she always looked very good in clothes, and her figure suited the times very well.


----------



## scarlet555

Nutty’s truth will come out... just like all the predators In Hollywood did.  And a predator she is...


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Good question - who knows? Maybe _the_ truth will come out as time goes on.  The important point is that poets, academics, smart people, regular people, all realize the poem as a cheap imitation of the original.  IMO.


.. and AT SOME POINT, they will indeed be called out on that!!!  Look at how many artisans (_oftentimes singers/songwriters_) who have plagiarized other's work .. and then at some point ~*BOOM*~ they get caught and FINED big-time!  This will happen if they continue to take other's work, regardless of changing some of the wording around!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *Are you kidding me?!?!?!!?* .. she markled him ages ago, and now .. here we go again, she is "*mourning*" his death?!?!  How can people not see through her anymore? .. she is *BEYOND PATHETIC* .. honestly, I don't have any words anymore!


even the stans would know she had No relatives at the wedding other than doria....so how upset can she be?  this is ridiculous.  and whoever wrote that thing had pretty poor skills - made it sound like archie and Lily died too


----------



## Traminer

scarlet555 said:


> Diana‘s statue looks very odd, first the sculptor may be specializing in male sculpting, from the way the statue looks-very masculine. (I can only draw women so if someone told me to draw a prince, I would probably pass, am no artist.  As an artist, you have to know your limits and what is being asked of you). The children appear proportionate to their own bodies but don’t seem size proportionate to Diana’s body.  And, she does not look pretty, it’s not that she was super pretty, but she did have an elegance and beauty and commanded more than what the statue offered.  I don’t expect her in a princess night gown, but I don’t find the statue deserving of her legacy.



Why not talk about Diana in her own thread?

>>> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-lady-diana-spencer.1013651/

Instead of in Meghan's thread?


----------



## Traminer

papertiger said:


> I don't believe she _ever_ had those measurements. At 5'10" even her bones would measure broader.
> 
> I think she always looked very good in clothes, and her figure suited the times very well.



Diana and Diana and Diana in Meghan's thread.

Why not talk about her there:

>>>> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-lady-diana-spencer.1013651/

I don't get it.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> IF there was a single cell of compassion in her, which there is not, it is the perfect moment to actually demonstrate the concept, not just spout it in almost every word salad concoction tossed about, and reach out to her father in sympathy for the loss of his brother.


seems like her father is dead to her


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> The more I read about these two .. IMO, Hap-Hazza stopped "growing" (_not physically - mentally_) at age 12 when Diana died, whereas Meghan-o-lo-maniac .. well, she's just sick in the head .. a 100% certifiable narcissist supreme.


One. Hundred. Percent.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Traminer said:


> Why not talk about Diana in her own thread?
> 
> >>> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-lady-diana-spencer.1013651/
> 
> Instead of in Meghan's thread?


Did not know she had a thread. Thank you for the info.
I’ve said all I am going to say about the statue. I intend to let Diana rest in happy peace.

As for H&M, until QE announces a change in status or they do something awful to W&K, I have little interest in their lives.  They are boring celebs now. Onward to better topics. Cheers


----------



## poopsie

Traminer said:


> Diana and Diana and Diana in Meghan's thread.
> 
> Why not talk about her there:
> 
> >>>> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-lady-diana-spencer.1013651/
> 
> I don't get it.





Traminer said:


> Diana and Diana and Diana in *Meghan's thread.*
> 
> Why not talk about her there:
> 
> >>>> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-lady-diana-spencer.1013651/
> 
> I don't get it.



Meghans's thread????? MEGHAN'S thread?
When did it become HER thread? It started out as Just Wild About Harry
As Di is HIS mother she is going to be talked about here

I don't get why this is such a big deal...............but if it bothers you that much get a mod to move the offending posts.


----------



## redney

This article explains the 3 children with Diana: https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1457115/Princess-Diana-statue-three-children-meaning-evg

"The statue sees the Princess of Wales surrounded by three children, a detail with a very special meaning. 

After revealing the statue, Kensington Palace said: “The figure of Diana, Princess of Wales, is surrounded by three children who represent the universality and generational impact of the Princess’s work. 

“The portrait and style of dress was based on the final period of her life, as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes and aims to convey her character and compassion.”"


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> This article explains the 3 children with Diana: https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1457115/Princess-Diana-statue-three-children-meaning-evg
> 
> "The statue sees the Princess of Wales surrounded by three children, a detail with a very special meaning.
> 
> After revealing the statue, Kensington Palace said: “The figure of Diana, Princess of Wales, is surrounded by three children who represent the universality and generational impact of the Princess’s work.
> 
> “The portrait and style of dress was based on the final period of her life, as she gained confidence in her role as an ambassador for humanitarian causes and aims to convey her character and compassion.”"


I get it about the children although I don't think it turned out great.....as far as the style of dress, it's unattractive to me....that belt....eww


----------



## papertiger

Traminer said:


> Diana and Diana and Diana in Meghan's thread.
> 
> Why not talk about her there:
> 
> >>>> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-lady-diana-spencer.1013651/
> 
> I don't get it.



We are not so much talking about Diana. 

We are talking about the Statue that was unveiled by Harry (and Will) 2 days ago. The statue flagged-up some discrepancies over artistic licence, likeness and proportions.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> As for H&M, until QE announces a change in status or they do something awful to W&K, I have little interest in their lives.  They are boring celebs now. Onward to better topics. Cheers


No no @CarryOn2020 Ginger and Cringe have always been boring celebrities, nothing new here. There is no excuse to leave this thread, we need your helpful insight. Their minister of propaganda is striking again.


----------



## VickyB

papertiger said:


> Agreed. Statue proportions are off. Many statue figures are, but usually in a flattering way.
> 
> She had a fabulous, healthy figure in the 1990s, but no way was she those measurements.
> 
> That website is totally incorrect IMO though:
> "Breast/Bust size33 in / 84 cmWaist size22 in / 56 cmHips size33 in / 86 cmBra size38B (US) / 85B (EU)Cup sizeB (US)Dress Size8Shoe (Feet) Size9 US"
> 
> A 22"waist sounds 'Victorian' and at 5'10" she would have looked emaciated. Even at my thinest in my teens at 94 ponds and 5'5' my waist was 24". Diana's feet were also bigger. We know all this from the charity auction catalogues so why the made up figures.  If they don't know/have evidence, why write crap?


I bet Kate has a 22 inch waist or smaller.  She’s emaciated.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Moir on Ginger's life journey  

*How the Prince of Piffle went from bloke to woke: He used to live for beer and naked billiards... now Harry's become a master of weird wokespeak. But never fear - JAN MOIR is here to translate*

Once upon a time there was a prince who lived for drinking beer and watching rugby and sometimes running around in the scuddy, occasionally while playing nude billiards with comely young maidens.

He was popular, he was kind, he joined the Army to serve his country in Afghanistan and everyone adored him.

The Harry we used to know and love was a straightforward, straight-talking, two scant A-levels sort of bloke.

Then that all changed. Harry met a girl! He got married. He moved to California and different things became important to him. Things such as climate change, mental health, social media, mindfulness, raindrops, and myriad other subjects he could lecture us on at length, with passion, ad infinitum.

Somewhere along the line, he mutated from cheeky chappie to woke bloke, from devil may care, to caring very, very much indeed. So much so that he wanted you to care, too. And as he changed, so did how he talked.

Over recent years, Prince Harry has become a master of his very own brand of wokespeak. A kind of jargon-led, plum dumb waffle, sugared with an endearing raspberry ripple of his customary mild confusion. The result is an Eton mess of words that entrance his fans but utterly bamboozle the rest of us.

What the hell is he going on about? No wonder that the words ‘Harry’ and ‘clarity’ are rarely used in the same sentence.

In the modern manner, he is now an expert at constructing elaborate, airy sentence soufflés that mask the essential nothingness of what he is saying. In his speeches and utterances, he has become obsessed with key words such as authentic, trapped, lost, truth and oh God, compassion.
The prince has become in cyberspace that most terrifying figure in contemporary life — a man with a mission and a website. On the Archewell site that promotes the global good works undertaken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex he states: ‘I truly believe that good mental fitness is the key to powerful leadership, productive communities and a purpose-driven self.’

Is that like a smart car? Who knows, but the prince has had a lot of therapy. What was that like, Harry? ‘It was like the bubble was burst and I plucked my head out of the sand and gave it a good shake-off.’

Car, ostrich, soap, shake? I’m confused already.

In his infamous interview with Oprah, Harry said that, unlike other members of his family, he wanted to ‘just, like, just be, just be yourself. Just be genuine. Just be authentic.’

But what is that? In a bid to find out, we tiptoe through the tulips of princely verbiage that denote Harry’s great awokening. We stand side by side, the puzzled swine before whom Prince Harry casts his pearls of woke wisdom from his great pulpit of blather and bull.

Here is his incredible journey from yahoo to guru in his own inimitable words . . . 

*Public Apology*
Awkward that one of Prince Harry’s very first public statements — in 2005 — is an apology for wearing a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party.

What he said: ‘I’m very sorry if I caused any offence or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologise.’

What he meant: ‘Whassup! Oh no, do I have to read this boring statement out loud? I don’t know why you are so angry Pater, because Straubs and Skippy thort it was a right laff.’

*Opening Concert for Diana, 2007*
THEN: ‘Hello Wembley! It’s great to see so many of you here tonight. Of course, when William and I first had this idea, we forgot that we’d end up standing here, desperately trying to think up something funny to say. Well, we’ll leave that to the funny people. And Ricky Gervais.’

NOW: Can you imagine a time when Prince Harry would appear in an arena in front of thousands and not lecture them about saving the planet? He even made a joke that is actually funny. Remember when he used to do that? Remember? 

THEN: In 2009, Prince Harry is forced to apologise for calling a fellow cadet at Sandhurst ‘our little P*** friend’. He also accuses another of looking ‘like a raghead’ in racist slurs captured on video in 2006.

NOW: At the Princess Diana Awards last year, Harry seizes the opportunity to lecture us all that ‘institutional racism has no place in our societies, yet it is still endemic’, and that ‘unconscious bias must be acknowledged without blame, to create a better world.’ Yet he did not acknowledge or apologise for his mistakes in this area, nor mention he was sent on a diversity course as a result.

Sometimes what is not said is even more important than what is said, don’t you think?

*THE ENGAGEMENT*
When his engagement to Meghan Markle is announced in 2017, Prince Harry is not long out of the Army. Indeed, he speaks of his fiancee’s entree into the Royal Family as though she were taking part in a military exercise.

‘For me, it’s an added member of the family. It’s another team player . . . what we want to do is be able to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work and try and encourage others in the younger generation to be able to see the world in the correct sense.’

She’s a woman, Harry, not an all-terrain tank. Still, note that use chilling use of ‘correct sense’.’ Already he is moving into the role of jolly green tyrant convinced of the rightness of his views.

And Meghan employs the doltish Californian mindfulness her fiance will soon embrace, too. By marrying him, she is ‘investing time and energy to make it happen’, ‘nurturing our relationship’ and focusing ‘on who we are as a couple’.

*THE MEGHAN INFLUENCE*
Her words, his mouth . . .

2018: ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.’

2018: ‘As my wife said many years ago when working on menstrual health and health education, this is not about periods but potential.’

2019: ‘As my wife often reminds me with one of her favourite quotes by Martin Luther King Jr. — “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”’

2020: ‘You know, when you go into a shop with your children and you only see white dolls, do you even think: “That’s weird, there is not a black doll there?” ’

*GENERAL WOKESPEAK*
March 2021: Harry gets a new job as chief impact officer of mental health firm BetterUp. ‘My goal is to lift up critical dialogues around mental health, build supportive and compassionate communities, and foster an environment for honest and vulnerable conversations. And my hope is to help people develop their inner strength, resilience, and confidence.’

May 2021: Interview with the Armchair Expert podcast about mental health: ‘Any single one of us, whoever we are, wherever we come from, we’re always trying to find some way to be able to mask the actual feeling. And be able to try and make us feel different to how we are actually feeling, perhaps from having a feeling, right?’

May 2021: At the Vax Live concert, Harry even attempts to ‘reunite the world,’ after coronavirus. ‘None of us should be comfortable thinking that we could be fine when so many others are suffering. In reality, and especially with this pandemic, when any suffer, we all suffer. We must look beyond ourselves with empathy and compassion for those we know, and those we don’t.’
*HARRY THE DRIPPING TAP*
‘I believe even more that climate change and mental health are two of the most pressing issues that we’re facing and in many ways, they are linked,’ he declares on The Me You Can’t See documentary aired on Apple TV in May.

‘The connecting line is about our collective wellbeing and when our collective wellbeing erodes that affects our ability to be caretakers of ourselves, of our communities and of our planet ultimately . . . we have to create a more supportive culture for each other where challenges don’t have to live in the dark . . . and where physical and mental health can be treated equally because they are one.’

Sorry to barge in, but did anyone leave the taps running?

‘A lot of people are doing the best they can to try and fix these issues but that whole sort of analogy of walking into the bathroom with a mop when the bath is over-flooding rather than just turning the tap off — are we supposed to accept that these problems are just going to grow and grow and we have to adapt and build resilience . . .’
*NOT A RAY OF SUNSHINE*
‘Every forest, every river, every ocean, every coastline, every insect, every wild animal. Every blade of grass, every ray of sun and every rain drop is crucial to our survival,’,’ says Harry making a speech at WE Day UK youth event in 2019.

‘It is all connected, we are all inter-connected. You in this room understand that and are already making this a safer, healthier and more resilient home for all of us and for generations to come. And for that I applaud you.’

Prince Harry also urges the kidz not to be swayed by social media or the mainstream media ‘distorting the truth.’ The mainstream media have something to say about that.

Is Prince Harry a Puppet? roars ITV’s Good Morning Britain. Meanwhile, queen of daytime TV Lorraine Kelly is understandably muddled. ‘I don’t know what he was talking about, it was gobbledygook,’ she says.

*Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head*
Uh oh. In December 2020, Prince Harry makes a speech to help launch an environmental documentary streaming platform called WaterBear. He wastes no time in calling for ‘affirmative action’ on climate change.

‘Don’t be a hypocrite like me and fly in private jets,’ is exactly what he does not say.

Instead, Harry waffles on about something called ‘sustainable nature-based economic stimulus packages that embrace a One Health approach . . .’. He also touches on ‘training a young generation of talented storytellers to create more inspiration and excitement around those values’.

Who are these budding bards generating thrills with their quills? Answer came there none. Instead it was on to the rain.

‘Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground. What if every single one of us was a raindrop? And if every single one of us cared, which we do, because we have to care because at the end of the day nature is our life source.’

I’m still confused. Clarity, Harry! He gives it his best shot: ‘For me it’s about putting the dos behind the says, and that is something that WaterBear is going to be doing: capitalising on a community of doers. There’s a lot of people that say, but this is about action.’

*How many people can I annoy today?*
October 2020: In an interview to mark Black History Month: ‘The world that we know has been created by white people for white people. I’ve had an awakening as such of my own, because I wasn’t aware of so many of the issues and so many of the problems within the UK, but also globally as well. I thought I did but I didn’t.’

May 2021: Harry takes part in an Armchair Expert podcast with Dax Shepard: ‘I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers. I don’t want to start going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short time. But, you can find a loophole in anything. You can capitalise or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said.’

*THE OPRAH INTERVIEW*
In the infamous interview aired in March, Harry says: ‘I’ve spent many years doing the work and doing my own learning. But my upbringing in the system, of which I was brought up in and what I’ve been exposed to, it wasn’t — I wasn’t aware of it, to start with. But, my God, it doesn’t take very long to suddenly become aware of it.’ 

Author and Daily Mail writer Craig Brown has a theory that Harry confuses the word ‘compassion’, with ‘contempt’. For example, after telling Oprah his father stopped taking his calls and he and his elder brother were ‘on different paths’, and also having hinted that one or other of them might be racist, he says: ‘My father and my brother, they are trapped. They don’t get to leave. And I have huge compassion for that.’

*Harking back to harry the LAD*
2008: During his service with the British Army in Afghanistan: ‘No one really knows where I am and I prefer to keep it that way until I get back in one piece and can tell them where I was. At the moment, they think I’m tucked away, wrapped up in cotton wool.’

2010: Chatting with Prince William about England’s role in the World Cup: ‘A win would be fantastic, but I don’t think we should put a number on it. 1-0? A win’s a win. I’m more of a rugby fan but this seems to be a World Cup full of surprises. Let’s see what happens.’

2011: Before William and Kate’s wedding: ‘I’ve got to know Kate pretty well, but now that she’s becoming part of the family, I’m really looking forward to getting her under my wing — or she’ll be taking me under her wing, probably. She’s a fantastic girl. She really is.’

2013: During his military service in Afghanistan: ‘I’m one of the guys. I don’t get treated any differently.’

*SPOT THE DIFFERENCE*
2015: At a youth centre in Cape Town, South Africa: ‘I would like to have come to a place like this. When I was at school, I wanted to be the bad boy.’

2019: At a youth empowerment launch in London: ‘Be kind to each other. Be kind to yourselves. Have less screen time and more face-to-face time. Exceed expectations . . . Keep empathy alive. Change your thoughts and change the world . . . your role is to shine the light.’









						How the Prince of Piffle went from bloke to woke
					

Harry met a girl! He got married. He moved to California and different things became important to him. Over recent years, Prince Harry has become a master of his very own brand of wokespeak.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> I bet Kate has a 22 inch waist or smaller.  She’s emaciated.


she's thin but I don't think she's unhealthy.....looks great in clothes, esp those beautiful coats


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> she's thin but I don't think she's unhealthy.....looks great in clothes, esp those beautiful coats


I'd agree. Even during her university days, when she was "modeling" in the student show and caught William's eye, her frame was petite.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> No no @CarryOn2020 Ginger and Cringe have always been boring celebrities, nothing new here. This is not an excuse to leave this thread, we need your helpful insight. Their minister of propaganda is striking again.




As if. Even if I thought William would be that kind of a*shole, what was there to be gained by making one of their own look bad (as in, seriously bad, not just a funny little scandal here and there) in the public eye?


----------



## needlv

Gossip on tumblr


----------



## octopus17

^I've tried to read it but I'd really appreciate it if someone could just explain it to me as if I'm a small child


----------



## needlv

Cornflower Blue said:


> ^I've tried to read it but I'd really appreciate it if someone could just explain it to me as if I'm a small child


Lacey wrote a book which mainly backed Harry in the fallout between H and W.  But with the Oprah interview and in an attempt to sell more books, he is now updating that book with more chapters which criticise MM and H.

so with that background

1 MM told Oprah she went to HR for mental health help. H didn’t say anything because he was ashamed.  Lacey alleges the mental health offered by OBGYN or other doctors at the time wasn’t what she wants but instead a trip to a spa in AZ.  AND she found out about bullying accusations so to pre-empt those claims, claimed mental health issues.

2 MM lied in Oprah interview so Laceys book is allegedly going to debunk her claims and H claims.

The rest is self explanatory.  Lacey is still blaming William though.

  Meh, if I was H’s relative that got dragged on worldwide interview I would not be going out of my way to offer “help” afterwards.    

IMHO - W should ask H for a full public apology and retraction before giving any $$$$ or other help.  Just continue to ignore them.  And hit back occasionally when their ridiculous PR stories go too far.


----------



## Shopaholic2021

If her aim was to go away to a spa or a holiday to solve her mental health reasons rather than seeing a psychiatrist, then I have to question if she was truly suicidal or if she just need a break from the scrutiny and criticism she was receiving. It seems like she just needed a break and was possibly burnt out. Its odd that they didn't go into detail about how she was refused help or what kind of help she wanted.


----------



## lulu212121

Chanbal said:


> No no @CarryOn2020 Ginger and Cringe have always been boring celebrities, nothing new here. There is no excuse to leave this thread, we need your helpful insight. Their minister of propaganda is striking again.



I don't see what the big deal would be if true? Hazbeen has been nonstop talking of his own failing mental health, and Megans talks of her own suicidal thoughts while pregnant. I think it shows Prince William knows his brother very well and could see something was/is off.


----------



## bag-mania

Shopaholic2021 said:


> If her aim was to go away to a spa or a holiday to solve her mental health reasons rather than seeing a psychiatrist, then I have to question if she was truly suicidal or if she just need a break from the scrutiny and criticism she was receiving. *It seems like she just needed a break and was possibly burnt out. *Its odd that they didn't go into detail about how she was refused help or what kind of help she wanted.



Burned out from what though? She wasn’t around long enough to be burned out.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Burned out from what though? She wasn’t around long enough to be burned out.




Burned out trying to keep up with all her lies


----------



## bag-mania

*‘It’s almost impossible for Harry to be trusted,’ royal sources say*

Could it get any worse for the Windsor brothers?

Anyone hoping for a détente between Princes William and Harry were sorely disappointed this week after the unveiling of the Princess Diana statue at Kensington Palace as the two princes barely spoke to one another and spent only 20 minutes in the same room after the ceremony.

The once inseparable brothers, who haven’t seen each other since Prince Phillip’s funeral, where William asked to not walk beside Harry, are still “warring” and sources close to the pair told the Mirror: it is “almost impossible for Harry to be trusted.”

The relationship has been particularly frosty since allegations were made that Markle bullied palace staff and the explosive Oprah Winfrey interview Harry and Meghan did this Spring in which they claimed Markle felt suicidal and unprotected during her pregnancy.


Particularly galling to both William and Prince Charles was, after the devastating Oprah interview, Harry continued to dish about private chats to CBS’ Gayle King – prompting the royals to refuse to have “one-on-one” chats with Harry because neither trust him enough to speak with him alone.

“Despite William and Harry coming together this week for the sole cause of commemorating their mother’s legacy, Harry is very much on the outside,” a source told the Mirror.

“They put on a show, did what they had to do to make sure the day went without a hitch and said goodbye.”

Harry, who left for America almost immediately after the statue unveiling, is now back with his wife Meghan, who hasn’t seen her in-laws since Megxit.









						‘It’s almost impossible for Harry to be trusted,’ royal sources say
					

Apparently there’s not much brotherly love in the Royal Family right now as Princes Harry and William barely spoke to one another during the unveiling of the Princess Diana statue at Kensingt…




					www.nypost.com


----------



## Jayne1

Burned out from trying to pretend she was pregnant in front of all those cameras.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Burned out from trying to pretend she was pregnant in front of all those cameras.



Keeping track of all the different sizes of moonbumps could be taxing.


----------



## Chanbal

One more video on the statue, photo request, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> she's thin but I don't think she's unhealthy.....looks great in clothes, esp those beautiful coats


I agree and I love her  - William could not have made a better choice! She does look great in clothes and adore those well fitted coats and coat dresses!!! I do think she is unnaturally thin tho especially for her height and build.


----------



## VickyB

redney said:


> I'd agree. Even during her university days, when she was "modeling" in the student show and caught William's eye, her frame was petite.
> View attachment 5127415


Not much more to say on this , if there is, should we move to the W & C thread? Kate's much smaller now than she was here.


----------



## wilding

Nothing like a good old bait and switch


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Burned out from what though? She wasn’t around long enough to be burned out.



Endless shopping 

Endless phone calls and emails to staff. 

All those dress fittings.

And still nothing fit.


----------



## poopsie

I was shopping yesterday afternoon and saw this on the sale table at B&BW



And this in a store window around the corner



No wonder the damn mall is going out of business

this is regarding the PODCAST comments


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Gossip on tumblr




Yeah, Lacey is a spineless gossip, but I'd still love if all that were true haha. But what's that thing about Princess Michael's cats?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

VickyB said:


> I agree and I love her  - William could not have made a better choice! She does look great in clothes and adore those well fitted coats and coat dresses!!! I do think she is unnaturally thin tho especially for her height and build.



I didn't think much of her when they first got married, but she has grown on me so much and I'm now a firm fan. (that said, came out that she bullies her staff or treats William like sh*t my love would be gone pretty quickly. But for some reason, that woman has been at it for 10+ years and everyone has only nice things to say about her character)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Endless shopping
> 
> Endless phone calls and emails to staff.
> 
> All those dress fittings.
> 
> *And still nothing fit.*



I love a good shade throwing


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ha, my business trip just got cancelled last minute so I won't be kept from talking through the really important things by doing actual work in an actual office environment


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> No no @CarryOn2020 Ginger and Cringe have always been boring celebrities, nothing new here. There is no excuse to leave this thread, we need your helpful insight. Their minister of propaganda is striking again.




I like how William made Harry deal with the tarp when it came off.


----------



## octopus17

needlv said:


> Lacey wrote a book which mainly backed Harry in the fallout between H and W.  But with the Oprah interview and in an attempt to sell more books, he is now updating that book with more chapters which criticise MM and H.
> 
> so with that background
> 
> 1 MM told Oprah she went to HR for mental health help. H didn’t say anything because he was ashamed.  Lacey alleges the mental health offered by OBGYN or other doctors at the time wasn’t what she wants but instead a trip to a spa in AZ.  AND she found out about bullying accusations so to pre-empt those claims, claimed mental health issues.
> 
> 2 MM lied in Oprah interview so Laceys book is allegedly going to debunk her claims and H claims.
> 
> The rest is self explanatory.  Lacey is still blaming William though.
> 
> Meh, if I was H’s relative that got dragged on worldwide interview I would not be going out of my way to offer “help” afterwards.
> 
> IMHO - W should ask H for a full public apology and retraction before giving any $$$$ or other help.  Just continue to ignore them.  And hit back occasionally when their ridiculous PR stories go too far.


Thank you! I don't want to miss out on anything on this thread, so I very much appreciate it


----------



## xincinsin

The whole "cut me off" saga is so confusing. When Methane sued Associated Newspaper, the statement submitted to the court seemed to imply pride that the terror twins were self-reliant:
(From Vanity Fair which appears pro-MM to me)
_The statement also addressed the matter of her and Harry’s public funding, pointing out that since leaving the royal family she and the duke have been financially independent: ‘The purchase of their new home in California and their security were and are both paid for independently by them, and all costs relating to Frogmore Cottage are paid for out of *their own funds.* They have not received any administrative support from Buckingham Palace, nor any financial support from the British taxpayer since stepping back as senior members of the royal family._

And yet a few months after that, Hazard was whining to OW. Perhaps in Oct/Nov 2020, they were still imagining that the spigot would be turned back on? I'm also wondering if "their own funds" actually refers to PC's previous largesse since Hazard has never held a job, his inheritance could not have stretched so far and it's highly unlikely that Methane would have contributed from her estimated $2mil bank account (presumably swollen further by all the purchases charged to PC).


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> This was interesting to watch. Robert Lacey plus another royal watcher/reporter say that it is noteworthy that the Sussex duo didn't immediately sue the Times over their report on the bullying allegations and revelations, given that they are so incredibly litigious over anything they disagree with.  That's because what the Times reported was true and "can't be argued with".  It likely had been run past the Sussex's attorneys prior to being published as well.
> 
> So, Harry and MM are going to take some serious, serious hits when the details of the bullying are published.   They can issue their 30 page rebuttal trying to rationalize their behavior but the bottom line is that they are the royals, they are adults, they are the ones with all the power and status, and they made the lives of numerous staff members miserable to the point they quit and/or needed therapy, and to the point that Will was so upset he kicked them out of KP.


Lacey is bailing the sinking ship like Billy Zane in Titanic!


Chanbal said:


> Moir on Ginger's life journey
> 
> *How the Prince of Piffle went from bloke to woke: He used to live for beer and naked billiards... now Harry's become a master of weird wokespeak. But never fear - JAN MOIR is here to translate*
> 
> Once upon a time there was a prince who lived for drinking beer and watching rugby and sometimes running around in the scuddy, occasionally while playing nude billiards with comely young maidens.
> 
> He was popular, he was kind, he joined the Army to serve his country in Afghanistan and everyone adored him.
> 
> The Harry we used to know and love was a straightforward, straight-talking, two scant A-levels sort of bloke.
> 
> Then that all changed. Harry met a girl! He got married. He moved to California and different things became important to him. Things such as climate change, mental health, social media, mindfulness, raindrops, and myriad other subjects he could lecture us on at length, with passion, ad infinitum.
> 
> Somewhere along the line, he mutated from cheeky chappie to woke bloke, from devil may care, to caring very, very much indeed. So much so that he wanted you to care, too. And as he changed, so did how he talked.
> 
> Over recent years, Prince Harry has become a master of his very own brand of wokespeak. A kind of jargon-led, plum dumb waffle, sugared with an endearing raspberry ripple of his customary mild confusion. The result is an Eton mess of words that entrance his fans but utterly bamboozle the rest of us.
> 
> What the hell is he going on about? No wonder that the words ‘Harry’ and ‘clarity’ are rarely used in the same sentence.
> 
> In the modern manner, he is now an expert at constructing elaborate, airy sentence soufflés that mask the essential nothingness of what he is saying. In his speeches and utterances, he has become obsessed with key words such as authentic, trapped, lost, truth and oh God, compassion.
> The prince has become in cyberspace that most terrifying figure in contemporary life — a man with a mission and a website. On the Archewell site that promotes the global good works undertaken by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex he states: ‘I truly believe that good mental fitness is the key to powerful leadership, productive communities and a purpose-driven self.’
> 
> Is that like a smart car? Who knows, but the prince has had a lot of therapy. What was that like, Harry? ‘It was like the bubble was burst and I plucked my head out of the sand and gave it a good shake-off.’
> 
> Car, ostrich, soap, shake? I’m confused already.
> 
> In his infamous interview with Oprah, Harry said that, unlike other members of his family, he wanted to ‘just, like, just be, just be yourself. Just be genuine. Just be authentic.’
> 
> But what is that? In a bid to find out, we tiptoe through the tulips of princely verbiage that denote Harry’s great awokening. We stand side by side, the puzzled swine before whom Prince Harry casts his pearls of woke wisdom from his great pulpit of blather and bull.
> 
> Here is his incredible journey from yahoo to guru in his own inimitable words . . .
> 
> *Public Apology*
> Awkward that one of Prince Harry’s very first public statements — in 2005 — is an apology for wearing a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party.
> 
> What he said: ‘I’m very sorry if I caused any offence or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologise.’
> 
> What he meant: ‘Whassup! Oh no, do I have to read this boring statement out loud? I don’t know why you are so angry Pater, because Straubs and Skippy thort it was a right laff.’
> 
> *Opening Concert for Diana, 2007*
> THEN: ‘Hello Wembley! It’s great to see so many of you here tonight. Of course, when William and I first had this idea, we forgot that we’d end up standing here, desperately trying to think up something funny to say. Well, we’ll leave that to the funny people. And Ricky Gervais.’
> 
> NOW: Can you imagine a time when Prince Harry would appear in an arena in front of thousands and not lecture them about saving the planet? He even made a joke that is actually funny. Remember when he used to do that? Remember?
> 
> THEN: In 2009, Prince Harry is forced to apologise for calling a fellow cadet at Sandhurst ‘our little P*** friend’. He also accuses another of looking ‘like a raghead’ in racist slurs captured on video in 2006.
> 
> NOW: At the Princess Diana Awards last year, Harry seizes the opportunity to lecture us all that ‘institutional racism has no place in our societies, yet it is still endemic’, and that ‘unconscious bias must be acknowledged without blame, to create a better world.’ Yet he did not acknowledge or apologise for his mistakes in this area, nor mention he was sent on a diversity course as a result.
> 
> Sometimes what is not said is even more important than what is said, don’t you think?
> 
> *THE ENGAGEMENT*
> When his engagement to Meghan Markle is announced in 2017, Prince Harry is not long out of the Army. Indeed, he speaks of his fiancee’s entree into the Royal Family as though she were taking part in a military exercise.
> 
> ‘For me, it’s an added member of the family. It’s another team player . . . what we want to do is be able to carry out the right engagements, carry out our work and try and encourage others in the younger generation to be able to see the world in the correct sense.’
> 
> She’s a woman, Harry, not an all-terrain tank. Still, note that use chilling use of ‘correct sense’.’ Already he is moving into the role of jolly green tyrant convinced of the rightness of his views.
> 
> And Meghan employs the doltish Californian mindfulness her fiance will soon embrace, too. By marrying him, she is ‘investing time and energy to make it happen’, ‘nurturing our relationship’ and focusing ‘on who we are as a couple’.
> 
> *THE MEGHAN INFLUENCE*
> Her words, his mouth . . .
> 
> 2018: ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.’
> 
> 2018: ‘As my wife said many years ago when working on menstrual health and health education, this is not about periods but potential.’
> 
> 2019: ‘As my wife often reminds me with one of her favourite quotes by Martin Luther King Jr. — “Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.”’
> 
> 2020: ‘You know, when you go into a shop with your children and you only see white dolls, do you even think: “That’s weird, there is not a black doll there?” ’
> 
> *GENERAL WOKESPEAK*
> March 2021: Harry gets a new job as chief impact officer of mental health firm BetterUp. ‘My goal is to lift up critical dialogues around mental health, build supportive and compassionate communities, and foster an environment for honest and vulnerable conversations. And my hope is to help people develop their inner strength, resilience, and confidence.’
> 
> May 2021: Interview with the Armchair Expert podcast about mental health: ‘Any single one of us, whoever we are, wherever we come from, we’re always trying to find some way to be able to mask the actual feeling. And be able to try and make us feel different to how we are actually feeling, perhaps from having a feeling, right?’
> 
> May 2021: At the Vax Live concert, Harry even attempts to ‘reunite the world,’ after coronavirus. ‘None of us should be comfortable thinking that we could be fine when so many others are suffering. In reality, and especially with this pandemic, when any suffer, we all suffer. We must look beyond ourselves with empathy and compassion for those we know, and those we don’t.’
> *HARRY THE DRIPPING TAP*
> ‘I believe even more that climate change and mental health are two of the most pressing issues that we’re facing and in many ways, they are linked,’ he declares on The Me You Can’t See documentary aired on Apple TV in May.
> 
> ‘The connecting line is about our collective wellbeing and when our collective wellbeing erodes that affects our ability to be caretakers of ourselves, of our communities and of our planet ultimately . . . we have to create a more supportive culture for each other where challenges don’t have to live in the dark . . . and where physical and mental health can be treated equally because they are one.’
> 
> Sorry to barge in, but did anyone leave the taps running?
> 
> ‘A lot of people are doing the best they can to try and fix these issues but that whole sort of analogy of walking into the bathroom with a mop when the bath is over-flooding rather than just turning the tap off — are we supposed to accept that these problems are just going to grow and grow and we have to adapt and build resilience . . .’
> *NOT A RAY OF SUNSHINE*
> ‘Every forest, every river, every ocean, every coastline, every insect, every wild animal. Every blade of grass, every ray of sun and every rain drop is crucial to our survival,’,’ says Harry making a speech at WE Day UK youth event in 2019.
> 
> ‘It is all connected, we are all inter-connected. You in this room understand that and are already making this a safer, healthier and more resilient home for all of us and for generations to come. And for that I applaud you.’
> 
> Prince Harry also urges the kidz not to be swayed by social media or the mainstream media ‘distorting the truth.’ The mainstream media have something to say about that.
> 
> Is Prince Harry a Puppet? roars ITV’s Good Morning Britain. Meanwhile, queen of daytime TV Lorraine Kelly is understandably muddled. ‘I don’t know what he was talking about, it was gobbledygook,’ she says.
> 
> *Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head*
> Uh oh. In December 2020, Prince Harry makes a speech to help launch an environmental documentary streaming platform called WaterBear. He wastes no time in calling for ‘affirmative action’ on climate change.
> 
> ‘Don’t be a hypocrite like me and fly in private jets,’ is exactly what he does not say.
> 
> Instead, Harry waffles on about something called ‘sustainable nature-based economic stimulus packages that embrace a One Health approach . . .’. He also touches on ‘training a young generation of talented storytellers to create more inspiration and excitement around those values’.
> 
> Who are these budding bards generating thrills with their quills? Answer came there none. Instead it was on to the rain.
> 
> ‘Every single raindrop that falls from the sky relieves the parched ground. What if every single one of us was a raindrop? And if every single one of us cared, which we do, because we have to care because at the end of the day nature is our life source.’
> 
> I’m still confused. Clarity, Harry! He gives it his best shot: ‘For me it’s about putting the dos behind the says, and that is something that WaterBear is going to be doing: capitalising on a community of doers. There’s a lot of people that say, but this is about action.’
> 
> *How many people can I annoy today?*
> October 2020: In an interview to mark Black History Month: ‘The world that we know has been created by white people for white people. I’ve had an awakening as such of my own, because I wasn’t aware of so many of the issues and so many of the problems within the UK, but also globally as well. I thought I did but I didn’t.’
> 
> May 2021: Harry takes part in an Armchair Expert podcast with Dax Shepard: ‘I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers. I don’t want to start going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short time. But, you can find a loophole in anything. You can capitalise or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said.’
> 
> *THE OPRAH INTERVIEW*
> In the infamous interview aired in March, Harry says: ‘I’ve spent many years doing the work and doing my own learning. But my upbringing in the system, of which I was brought up in and what I’ve been exposed to, it wasn’t — I wasn’t aware of it, to start with. But, my God, it doesn’t take very long to suddenly become aware of it.’
> 
> Author and Daily Mail writer Craig Brown has a theory that Harry confuses the word ‘compassion’, with ‘contempt’. For example, after telling Oprah his father stopped taking his calls and he and his elder brother were ‘on different paths’, and also having hinted that one or other of them might be racist, he says: ‘My father and my brother, they are trapped. They don’t get to leave. And I have huge compassion for that.’
> 
> *Harking back to harry the LAD*
> 2008: During his service with the British Army in Afghanistan: ‘No one really knows where I am and I prefer to keep it that way until I get back in one piece and can tell them where I was. At the moment, they think I’m tucked away, wrapped up in cotton wool.’
> 
> 2010: Chatting with Prince William about England’s role in the World Cup: ‘A win would be fantastic, but I don’t think we should put a number on it. 1-0? A win’s a win. I’m more of a rugby fan but this seems to be a World Cup full of surprises. Let’s see what happens.’
> 
> 2011: Before William and Kate’s wedding: ‘I’ve got to know Kate pretty well, but now that she’s becoming part of the family, I’m really looking forward to getting her under my wing — or she’ll be taking me under her wing, probably. She’s a fantastic girl. She really is.’
> 
> 2013: During his military service in Afghanistan: ‘I’m one of the guys. I don’t get treated any differently.’
> 
> *SPOT THE DIFFERENCE*
> 2015: At a youth centre in Cape Town, South Africa: ‘I would like to have come to a place like this. When I was at school, I wanted to be the bad boy.’
> 
> 2019: At a youth empowerment launch in London: ‘Be kind to each other. Be kind to yourselves. Have less screen time and more face-to-face time. Exceed expectations . . . Keep empathy alive. Change your thoughts and change the world . . . your role is to shine the light.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Prince of Piffle went from bloke to woke
> 
> 
> Harry met a girl! He got married. He moved to California and different things became important to him. Over recent years, Prince Harry has become a master of his very own brand of wokespeak.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don’t begrudge H wanting to jettison  the lad image and grow up a bit as he’s nearly 40 after all but would it kill him to either read up on the issues he presumed to speak about and/or to recognise his own highly consumerist, wasteful lifestyle & his own chequered history with racism?

He acts like he was totally naive and now he’s soo informed when we all know that he’s had a great education, a powerful position in international diplomacy from birth - he just didn’t care to listen before it became expedient to him. 

add on - to me, the statement: ‘The world that we know has been created by white people for white people.’ us actually a patronising and small-minded statement. I’d say most countries of the world are culturally autonomous and there is enormous variety in culture and lifestyle - it’s not everyone in the world is desperately trying to be a white American.


needlv said:


> Gossip on tumblr



This is spicy. I do believe the royals are still protecting H&M actually. I want to know more about the catnapping (if you will)


poopsie said:


> I was shopping yesterday afternoon and saw this on the sale table at B&BW
> View attachment 5127678
> 
> 
> And this in a store window around the corner
> View attachment 5127679
> 
> 
> No wonder the damn mall is going out of business


I mean tbf I think they stole that motto from the campaign for gay marriage and from the LGBT community in general.
You know because their love story is about them being alienated by their evil prejudiced family too (after they spent millions on their wedding and sent them around the world on diplomatic missions)

Add on- I wish we had BBW in the U.K. for the memes alone.


----------



## Traminer

@elvisfan4life 

Thank you for your Like. 
I had remembered Diana on her 60th birthday.
And I had thought it a good idea to  also remind others on that day.

Now I am getting attacked for it here by some.

Again: Thank you for your Like


----------



## elvisfan4life

Traminer said:


> @elvisfan4life
> 
> Thank you for your Like.
> I had remembered Diana on her 60th birthday.
> And I had thought it a good idea to  also remind others on that day.
> 
> Now I am getting attacked for it here by some.
> 
> Again: Thank you for your Like



Try not to take it to heart people often carelessly post things without thinking of the impact their words have I know what you meant and often mods  move posts to the more appropriate place as well but it often seems people just like pure volume of posts on this particular thread rather than content - maybe to make H&M appear popular when in reality they are not


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I agree and I love her  - William could not have made a better choice! She does look great in clothes and adore those well fitted coats and coat dresses!!! I do think she is unnaturally thin tho especially for her height and build.


what I appreciate about Catherine … she learns … she did not get it right the first time … but she listened and changed 
for ex, she is tall, I get it, RTW skirts will tend to be above the knee , so early on, her skirts were too short and awkward - a full skirt is better for kneeling down for a photo op 
her later attire had tailored longer skirts for public appearances, I don’t doubt she kept the shorter skirts to wear at home where no one is taking snaps


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> I agree and I love her  - William could not have made a better choice! She does look great in clothes and adore those well fitted coats and coat dresses!!! I do think she is unnaturally thin tho especially for her height and build.


agree, William could not have made a better choice.  I wouldn't mind being unnaturally thin like her


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

poopsie said:


> I was shopping yesterday afternoon and saw this on the sale table at B&BW
> View attachment 5127678
> 
> 
> And this in a store window around the corner
> View attachment 5127679
> 
> 
> No wonder the damn mall is going out of business



“Love Wins“ with rainbow colors generally refers to marriage equality


----------



## Chanbal

Traminer said:


> @elvisfan4life
> 
> Thank you for your Like.
> I had remembered Diana on her 60th birthday.
> And I had thought it a good idea to  also remind others on that day.
> 
> Now I am getting attacked for it here by some.
> 
> Again: Thank you for your Like





elvisfan4life said:


> Try not to take it to heart people often carelessly post things without thinking of the impact their words have I know what you meant and often mods  move posts to the more appropriate place as well but it often seems people just like pure volume of posts on this particular thread rather than content - maybe to make H&M appear popular when in reality they are not



@Traminer Once in a while people come to this thread in 'attack mode', and you were probably taken by one of those people. No worries, and if you enjoy this thread keep posting. The group of members that post here are usually nice people and a lot of fun.

@elvisfan4life I believe many of us became 'friends' here, so we tend to come to this thread to say 'hi, is there anything new?' This happened particularly during the most difficult periods of covid, and Ginger and Cringe were the ones continuously in the news...Their absurds were so many, that it became a habit to come here. You are right, we are likely making this couple more popular than what they are in reality.


----------



## Chanbal

VickyB said:


> I agree and I love her  - William could not have made a better choice! She does look great in clothes and adore those well fitted coats and coat dresses!!! I do think she is unnaturally thin tho especially for her height and build.





marietouchet said:


> what I appreciate about Catherine … she learns … she did not get it right the first time … but she listened and changed
> for ex, she is tall, I get it, RTW skirts will tend to be above the knee , so early on, her skirts were too short and awkward - a full skirt is better for kneeling down for a photo op
> her later attire had tailored longer skirts for public appearances, I don’t doubt she kept the shorter skirts to wear at home where no one is taking snaps


@marietouchet you are quoting the wrong person, I fixed it for you!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> agree, William could not have made a better choice.  I wouldn't mind being unnaturally thin like her


I'm also ready to join the group and shed some pounds.


----------



## creme fraiche

I know several mums at George and Charlotte's school who have met Catherine, and they all only have good things to say about her.  They say that she gets stuck in with the other parents, is down to earth, and helps out with events.  Funny how she is able to do this with nary one report to highlight how helpful she is, unlike her sister in law.


----------



## sdkitty

creme fraiche said:


> I know several mums at George and Charlotte's school who have met Catherine, and they all only have good things to say about her.  They say that she gets stuck in with the other parents, is down to earth, and helps out with events.  Funny how she is able to do this with nary one report to highlight how helpful she is, unlike her sister in law.


good to hear


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ve tried to ignore this story, but it persists on multiple websites.  Couldn’t they give us a few weeks of quiet time?









						Prince Harry 'to return to UK in September for another Diana event'
					

The Duke of Sussex made a flying visit back to the UK this week to take part in the unveiling of his mother's memorial alongside brother Prince William at Kensington Palace.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I'm also ready to join the group and shed some pounds.


Here's to all of us who would like to be trimmer. Substitute a brunette for the blonde and that's me too.


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve tried to ignore this story, but it persists on multiple websites.  Couldn’t they give us a few weeks of quiet time?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'to return to UK in September for another Diana event'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex made a flying visit back to the UK this week to take part in the unveiling of his mother's memorial alongside brother Prince William at Kensington Palace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's not even newsworthy. So he flies in, quarantines, attends event, departs same day. There's no way MM will join him. Nice try at click bait Daily Fail. Zzzzzzzz


----------



## snobville

I started watching Suits because they were in the news all the time.


----------



## Sferics

Lodpah said:


> Dave Chappell and all the comedians can't even come close to making me laugh like this teaser. Is this for real? Man, I needed a good laugh today.



How can this be not a parody? omg...really?


----------



## Sophisticatted

It seems like M s being iced out and she wants back in.  The funeral was during quarantine, so the excuse that there wasn’t enough room for her probably sufficed.  She hinted about being a “secret support guest” during the unveiling, so the event was changed to something much more low key with only VIPs on the project attending.  

At the time of the funeral she was “ready to forgive”.  Now reports are leaking out that “Kate has been reaching out and making overtures, since the birth of LD.”  Now it’s, “there’s another event in the future and THIS TIME M may attend!”  She’s so desperate and thirsty.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This is spicy. I do believe the royals are still protecting H&M actually. I want to know more about the catnapping (if you will)



So do I. Not as staunchly as they would had they stayed senior royals, but IMO the little tidbits reaching the press are just...polite reminders.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's to all of us who would like to be trimmer. Substitute a brunette for the blonde and that's me too.
> View attachment 5127908


Who even knows anymore? I’ve spent my whole life hating my big a$$, and now my daughter’s friends keep telling her that her mom (me) has a good butt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

creme fraiche said:


> I know several mums at George and Charlotte's school who have met Catherine, and they all only have good things to say about her.  They say that she gets stuck in with the other parents, is down to earth, and helps out with events.  Funny how she is able to do this with nary one report to highlight how helpful she is, unlike her sister in law.



The future queen of the UK just doesn't have the same clout as a former cable TV actress.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Harry and TW continue with their tirade of underhand attacks, and have offered no apologies, therefore, there can be no healing of a ‘rift’ when one side continues to attack.
&
Who paid for his airfare from the USA, because if it was WellChild, I think heads may well roll…_









						The Diana Statue Unveiling (finally)
					

1 July 2021, would have been Diana’s 60th birthday, and the long awaited statue to commemorate her legacy was finally unveiled. This was the one event that we knew Harry would not miss, not o…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com
				





If only it were the DM - seems the papers have found their ‘cash cow’:








						Harry may return to UK with Meghan in ten weeks for another Diana ceremony
					

PRINCE Harry is due to return to the UK in ten weeks for another Princess Di ceremony — and Meghan may join him. It comes after last week’s Diana statue unveiling with Prince William “failed to hea…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				












						Britons beg Meghan not to bring children to UK for Diana’s statue
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been urged by Express.co.uk readers not to bring Archie and Lilibet to the UK, to see the new Princess Diana statue.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be sure to vote - bottom right. May the 4th be with you 










						Stars and Scars -- You Be the Judge
					

What a week!!! Bill Cosby was freed, and Britney's conservatorship drama is escalating. So, we gotta ask ...




					www.tmz.com
				




ETA: Team Harry is winning.


----------



## poopsie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> “Love Wins“ with rainbow colors generally refers to marriage equality



Yes, but in this case I was referring to their one and only magnum opus of a podcast


----------



## justwatchin

Sophisticatted said:


> It seems like M s being iced out and she wants back in.  The funeral was during quarantine, so the excuse that there wasn’t enough room for her probably sufficed.  She hinted about being a “secret support guest” during the unveiling, so the event was changed to something much more low key with only VIPs on the project attending.
> 
> At the time of the funeral she was “ready to forgive”.  Now reports are leaking out that “Kate has been reaching out and making overtures, since the birth of LD.”  Now it’s, “there’s another event in the future and THIS TIME M may attend!”  She’s so desperate and thirsty.


The “ready to forgive” comment is irritating and yet to be expected from a narcissist. Im also not believing that Kate has reached out to her other than perhaps a congrats. I do believe that M may indeed show up at this apparently continuing Diana memorialfest. I think she’s got the balls and knows that anything she perceives as a slight can be leaked to her faithful sources and used to her benefit.


----------



## jelliedfeels

snobville said:


> I started watching Suits because they were in the news all the time.


Does it hold up? I don’t know if it was ever shown in U.K. is it serious or soap opera-ish?


poopsie said:


> Yes, but in this case I was referring to their one and only magnum opus of a podcast


It truly is the Wuthering Heights of podcasts


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Does it hold up? I don’t know if it was ever shown in U.K. is it serious or soap opera-ish?
> 
> It truly is the Wuthering Heights of podcasts


IIRC, the whales (not Wales) song podcast rated higher then the desperate duo's podcast.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> One more video on the statue, photo request, etc.



There are many good bits in this.

One is her highlighting the fact W&H began working on plans for a sculpture of their mother in 2017, a year after Haz met Methane. Lady C believes including a young black boy accompanying a Royal Family member, in a statue prominently on display at Kensington Palace for eternity,  is one challenge to the Suckesses assertion of racism. 

When W and H entered the Garden, H’s brown shoes looked odd and out of place to me, like maybe he had packed the wrong pair, meaning to have grabbed a traditional black pair like his brother’s. Instead, little did I know of the long held custom/social grooming standard Harry would have been raised knowing, “no brown in Town” whereby gentlemen wear black shoes in town, brown only in the country. A similar kind of thing as little girls in a wedding party wear tights, ladies accompanying the Queen wear hats when it is ”suggested”, Royal ladies wear pantyhose, Royal births are announced by the Palace not Instagram etc. Lady C’s  interpretation of Haz’s footwear is a deliberate attempt to give the RF the “Margaret Thatcher salute”, which is an F you. So petty, so childish, so Haz and Methane. She also believes he was coached by his puppet master about the overblown gestures used to focus attention on him.

She does a scathing mockery of M “mourning” her Uncle Mike.

Her analysis of the statue is interesting, she uses her perspective as an artist and discusses how using a heavy metal, instead of marble, for example, made a difference.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> There are many good bits in this.
> 
> One is her highlighting the fact W&H began working on plans for a sculpture of their mother in 2017, a year after Haz met Methane. Lady C believes including a young black boy accompanying a Royal Family member, in a statue prominently on display at Kensington Palace for eternity,  is one challenge to the Suckesses assertion of racism.
> 
> When W and H entered the Garden, H’s brown shoes looked odd and out of place to me, like maybe he had packed the wrong pair, meaning to have grabbed a traditional black pair like his brother’s. Instead, little did I know of the long held custom/social grooming standard Harry would have been raised knowing, “no brown in Town” whereby gentlemen wear black shoes in town, brown only in the country. A similar kind of thing as little girls in a wedding party wear tights, ladies accompanying the Queen wear hats when it is ”suggested”, Royal ladies wear pantyhose, Royal births are announced by the Palace not Instagram etc. Lady C’s  interpretation of Haz’s footwear is a deliberate attempt to give the RF the “Margaret Thatcher salute”, which is an F you. So petty, so childish, so Haz and Methane. She also believes he was coached by his puppet master about the overblown gestures used to focus attention on him.
> 
> She does a scathing mockery of M “mourning” her Uncle Mike.
> 
> Her analysis of the statue is interesting, she uses her perspective as an artist and discusses how using a heavy metal, instead of marble, for example, made a difference.


I thought the brown shoes looked off too.  and he did do a lot more gesturing than his brother


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I thought the brown shoes looked off too.  and he did do a lot more gesturing than his brother


They sure did!!!  In the Corporate America world (_especially Financial Services_), the ONLY time Brown shoes would be worn was in the summer when the gentleman would wear tan or khaki suits .. otherwise, it was a Black shoe!  Even the women pretty much did similar * -IF-*  they wore the proverbial "monkey suit" (_frumpy _s_uit like the men_) .. of course, *NOT ME* .. bring on those *RED* accessories .. HA!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I kind of struggle with this childish attitude. Is your mother's memorial really the place to show the establishment the middle finger? I think not.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> They sure did!!!  In the Corporate America world (_especially Financial Services_), the ONLY time Brown shoes would be worn was in the summer when the gentleman would wear tan or khaki suits .. otherwise, it was a Black shoe!  Even the women pretty much did similar * -IF-*  they wore the proverbial "monkey suit" (_frumpy _s_uit like the men_) .. of course, *NOT ME* .. bring on those *RED* accessories .. HA!


wouldn't you think being raised as a royal he would know that?


----------



## Clearblueskies

Brown shoes with a blue suit are perfectly ok.  Tones should match ie, dark blue + dark brown or light blue + lighter brown.  That’s all.


----------



## snobville

jelliedfeels said:


> Does it hold up? I don’t know if it was ever shown in U.K. is it serious or soap opera-ish?
> 
> It truly is the Wuthering Heights of podcasts


Suits is a pretty good show. It is a drama about a law firm. I would say it is serious, some of the stuff is unrealistic but they have to be for TV.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> Brown shoes with a blue suit are perfectly ok.  Tones should match ie, dark blue + dark brown or light blue + lighter brown.  That’s all.


I don't claim to be an expert but I thought Wills black shoes looked much better with a dark suit


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> I don't claim to be an expert but I thought Wills black shoes looked much better with a dark suit


Fair enough, but Harry wasn’t incorrectly dressed.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Brown shoes with a blue suit are perfectly ok.  Tones should match ie, dark blue + dark brown or light blue + lighter brown.  That’s all.


The old school (older men) says no brown shoes with a dress suit and black should be worn, especially in the city.  The new school  (younger men) is that brown works with a blue suit if you are trying to dress it down, but even then, the brown should be dark.  Harry has worn these fugly brown shoes endlessly.  I wonder if he had them resoled, because previously they were holes in them.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't claim to be an expert but I thought Wills black shoes looked much better with a dark suit


It was a formal and solemn occasion.  He was dressed perfectly.


----------



## gracekelly

Clearblueskies said:


> Fair enough, but Harry wasn’t incorrectly dressed.


True, he was wearing a suit.

ETA:  black shoes would have been best.  Dark brown or cordovan would have been better.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> True, he was wearing a suit.
> 
> ETA:  black shoes would have been best.  Dark brown or cordovan would have been better.


there was a time when I might have liked those brown shoes but these days brown shoes with a dark navy or black suit look wrong to me....and as stated, this was a solemn occasion


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Brown shoes with a blue suit are perfectly ok.  Tones should match ie, dark blue + dark brown or light blue + lighter brown.  That’s all.



They might be ok from a sartorial viewpoint (I personally happen to like the look), but it's just not done in the British upper class.


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> True, he was wearing a suit.
> 
> ETA:  black shoes would have been best.  Dark brown or cordovan would have been better.


It was a family event, not a formal one, and described as private.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They might be ok from a sartorial viewpoint (I personally happen to like the look), but it's just not done in the British upper class.


Oh good grief  I’ll hand in my passport then


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> It was a family event, not a formal one, and described as private.



Nothing is private when you invite the press.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Oh good grief  I’ll hand in my passport then



Ok, what's up with everyone being on edge today? You find it silly, fine. Some of us feel that it's another act of defiance given the background, and that's fine too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They might be ok from a sartorial viewpoint (I personally happen to like the look), but it's just not done in the British upper class.



- suit jacket unbuttoned
- no belt
- brown shoes ?
- tie = yes
1 out of 4 does not make a win imo

He looked like he wanted to dance around the pool. He was clearly on something, maybe the quarantine got to him.
He mucked it up for the cameras, as OW/MM told him to.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Nothing is private when you invite the press.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, what's up with everyone being on edge today? You find it silly, fine. Some of us feel that it's another act of defiance given the background, and that's fine too.


You're being very combative, not me.  I just pointed out that in the UK this is an ok combo, and you pounced on me, for reasons best known to yourself.  Calm down.


----------



## gracekelly

I am not British, but in my family, when there is a funeral or memorial service, the men wear a dark suit. Granted this was not a public occasion, however it was well known that pictures would be taken and published.  At least Harry wore a dark suit.  It could have been worse and he could have trotted out that ridiculous light blue suit with the bright green lining.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> - suit jacket unbuttoned
> - no belt
> - brown shoes ?
> - tie = yes
> 1 out of 4 does not make a win imo
> 
> He looked like he wanted to dance around the pool. He was clearly on something, maybe the quarantine got to him.
> He mucked it up for the cameras, as OW/MM told him to.


I do think he took "something" to calm his nerves.  Too bad it didn't work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I am not British, but in my family, when there is a funeral or memorial service, the men wear a dark suit. Granted this was not a public occasion, however it was well known that pictures would be taken and published.  At least Harry wore a dark suit.  It could have been worse and he could have trotted out that ridiculous light blue suit with the bright green lining.



Agree, the gray suit would have broken the internet. Oooh, the fury, the world would have stood up in outrage.


----------



## poopsie

Traminer said:


> @elvisfan4life
> 
> Thank you for your Like.
> I had remembered Diana on her 60th birthday.
> And I had thought it a good idea to  also remind others on that day.
> 
> Now I am getting attacked for it here by some.
> 
> Again: Thank you for your Like




If by "some" you mean me, please say so. I won't feel attacked
If you felt attacked by the comment------after your repeated nudging and _*harrying *_attempts to get us to post where you think we should------
But I can see now where you might feel that way as this post, with it's backhanded bid for sympathy is something that falls into line with the Sussex pattern of playing victim. 
I am not attacking you------no name calling or denigration. Any caps were for emphasis, not volume. 
And with that peace out


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hiiiii, LOVE you, opinions and all. Sending out hugs and cheers to everyone!


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s the Fourth of July, Independence Day, in the USA.  Of course, there would be fireworks.  Love and cheers to all


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s the Fourth of July, Independence Day, in the USA.  Of course, there would be fireworks.  Love and cheers to all
> View attachment 5128085



Ours aren't scheduled to start for another 6-7 hours though


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They might be ok from a sartorial viewpoint (I personally happen to like the look), but it's just not done in the British upper class.


Agree.

Italian men (in Italy) are some of the most stylish in the world and they wear brown shoes, often with no socks and it gives off a certain nonchalance that's so attractive.

But this is the British upper class and they are more straight-laced for city dressing.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.
> 
> Italian men (in Italy) are some of the most stylish in the world and they wear brown shoes, often with no socks and it gives off a certain nonchalance that's so attractive.
> 
> But this is the British upper class and they are more straight-laced for city dressing.


maybe more suitable for a more casual occasion


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't think much of her when they first got married, but she has grown on me so much and I'm now a firm fan. (that said, came out that she bullies her staff or treats William like sh*t my love would be gone pretty quickly. But for some reason, that woman has been at it for 10+ years and everyone has only nice things to say about her character)


Agree. At the beginning, I didn’t care for her at all.


----------



## jelliedfeels

snobville said:


> Suits is a pretty good show. It is a drama about a law firm. I would say it is serious, some of the stuff is unrealistic but they have to be for TV.


Thanks for replying. Apparently it is on U.K. Netflix. I may well try it once I’ve finished murder she wrote. (Well, if that’s even possible  



CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, the gray suit would have broken the internet. Oooh, the fury, the world would have stood up in outrage.


Eek! Let’s not give him ideas!  
I think he’d have gone in Kim K’s break the internet outfit if it would’ve ensured only he got attention - though seeing how he was probably wouldn’t be any champagne left in that bottle.


gracekelly said:


> I am not British, but in my family, when there is a funeral or memorial service, the men wear a dark suit. Granted this was not a public occasion, however it was well known that pictures would be taken and published.  At least Harry wore a dark suit.  It could have been worse and he could have trotted out that ridiculous light blue suit with the bright green lining.


Why do I picture him getting his suits made by the costume dept for Harry Potter?


Hermes Zen said:


> Hiiiii, LOVE you, opinions and all. Sending out hugs and cheers to everyone!


I second this motion.
I love this thread for bringing us so much good cheer and entertainment!    

and a happy Fourth of July to all you bonkers-first-amendment likers!


----------



## Katel

I liked Lady C’s recent video, she didn’t come down too heavily on the sculptor, which I appreciated (even though I dislike the statue). She commented on “some fundamental errors” - that Diana’s hair was too heavy and that the outfit broke up her blocky body frame even more, and that an attire more sweeping and “Hellenic” would have been more appropriate.
As mentioned, she also said the statue should’ve been something light and glowing like marble instead of the heavy green medium (bronze?).
Regarding the shoes, Lady C said that Harry knew the rules of etiquette - “no brown in town” - and that it appeared that it was more a statement of “I can do whatever I want” and buck convention than a bad choice sartorially.


----------



## CarryOn2020

HarkleMarklerSparklers for all.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> I liked Lady C’s recent video, she didn’t come down too heavily on the sculptor, which I appreciated (even though I think it’s terrible). She commented on “two fundamental errors” - that Lady Di’s hair was too heavy and that the outfit broke up her blocky body frame even more, and that some attire more sweeping and “Hellenic” would have been more appropriate.
> As mentioned, she also said the statue should’ve been something light and glowing like marble instead of the heavy green medium (brass?).
> Regarding the shoes, Lady C said that Harry knew the rules of etiquette - “no brown in town” - and that it appeared that it was more a statement of “I can do whatever I want” and buck convention than a bad choice sartorially.


ugly brown shoes seems like an odd way to make a statement.  of course this is her opinion - we don't know why he did it, just that he should have known better
Again, he seems immature (at almost 40)


----------



## Clearblueskies

gracekelly said:


> I am not British, but in my family, when there is a funeral or memorial service, the men wear a dark suit. Granted this was not a public occasion, however it was well known that pictures would be taken and published.  At least Harry wore a dark suit.  It could have been worse and he could have trotted out that ridiculous light blue suit with the bright green lining.


I loathe the light blue suit, it looks so cheap.  I also happen to prefer Williams look. The comments I was responding to were those around the combination never being seen. 
My first job after Uni was in the City of London and I wasn’t allowed to wear trousers to work, or flats, dress was very formal.  I doubt that’s the case now.  Times change.
Ironically Edward VIII was a pioneer when it came to breaking the clothing rules including brown shoes with blue, and of wearing brogues and loud checks in town. Perhaps Harry sees him as a kindred spirit.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I loathe the light blue suit, it looks so cheap.  I also happen to prefer Williams look. The comments I was responding to were those around the combination never being seen.
> My first job after Uni was in the City of London and I wasn’t allowed to wear trousers to work, or flats, dress was very formal.  I doubt that’s the case now.  Times change.
> Ironically Edward VIII was a pioneer when it came to breaking the clothing rules including brown shoes with blue, and of wearing brogues and loud checks in town. Perhaps Harry sees him as a kindred spirit.


while Edward and Wallis may have been fashionable, Harry seeing him as a kindred spirt would seem to be an odd choice.  I doubt the queen was fond of him.  It might be nice though if Harry and his WIFE would go off somewhere and live quietly as I think the duke and duchess of windsor did for the most part.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> HarkleMarklerSparklers for all.
> 
> View attachment 5128119
> View attachment 5128120



I really miss sparklers. We can't have them here----fire danger
Can't say anything good about the snappers. I'd never heard of them until some of the neighborhood brats were throwing them onto my patio at my cats 
Nothing like New York. I interned there one summer. Stayed in a house in Elmont on LI and I had NEVER seen anything like it. Metal trashcans blown up. Class A rockets shot horizontally down the street. I moved my car into the back yard and hid in the house. A life experience for sure


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

sdkitty said:


> while Edward and Wallis may have been fashionable, Harry seeing him as a kindred spirt would seem to be an odd choice.  I doubt the queen was fond of him.  It might be nice though if Harry and his WIFE would go off somewhere and live quietly as I think his uncle did for the most part.


I wasn’t being entirely serious.  But the Establishment was able to effectively shut Edward down.  If he’d had access to social media — who knows?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> You're being very combative, not me.  I just pointed out that in the UK this is an ok combo, and you pounced on me, for reasons best known to yourself.  Calm down.



Recollections may vary.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I really miss sparklers. We can't have them here----fire danger
> Can't say anything good about the snappers. I'd never heard of them until some of the neighborhood brats were throwing them onto my patio at my cats
> Nothing like New York. I interned there one summer. Stayed in a house in Elmont on LI and I had NEVER seen anything like it. Metal trashcans blown up. Class A rockets shot horizontally down the street. I moved my car into the back yard and hid in the house. A life experience for sure


what we're allowed to do here and what some people do are different though.  I know people (friends of friends) who buy full-on professional fireworks and shoot them off in the desert.  And on holidays we hear and see some powerful looking and sounding stuff that isn't from the official venues.


----------



## Jayne1

Katel said:


> I liked Lady C’s recent video, she didn’t come down too heavily on the sculptor, which I appreciated (even though I dislike the statue). She commented on “some fundamental errors” - that Lady Di’s hair was too heavy and that the outfit broke up her blocky body frame even more, and that an attire more sweeping and “Hellenic” would have been more appropriate.
> As mentioned, she also said the statue should’ve been something light and glowing like marble instead of the heavy green medium (bronze?).
> Regarding the shoes, Lady C said that Harry knew the rules of etiquette - “no brown in town” - and that it appeared that it was more a statement of “I can do whatever I want” and buck convention than a bad choice sartorially.


I love that woman -- and she was able to articulate exactly what is wrong with the statue.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> what we're allowed to do here and what some people do are different though.  I know people (friends of friends) who buy full-on professional fireworks and shoot them off in the desert.  And on holidays we hear and see some powerful looking and sounding stuff that isn't from the official venues.



Yes..............for the past week or so that's been a hot topic of discussion on Nextdoor


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Yes..............for the past week or so that's been a hot topic of discussion on Nextdoor


we just accept it on holidays....don't know about those snappers though....never heard of them and I hate animal cruelty.  assume your kitties will be in tonight


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> we just accept it on holidays....don't know about those snappers though....never heard of them and I hate animal cruelty.  assume your kitties will be in tonight


Oh yes. After the same said brats took two of our cats last year (we did get Cosmo Topper back, poor Minnie Mouse is still missing) they don't leave the catio
To bring this back on topic and avoid a visit from the



here's hoping Harry has a safe and _*meaningful*_ first Independence Day in his new home


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Oh yes. After the same said brats took two of our cats last year (we did get Cosmo Topper back, poor Minnie Mouse is still missing) they don't leave the catio
> To bring this back on topic and avoid a visit from the
> View attachment 5128136
> 
> 
> here's hoping Harry has a safe and _*meaningful*_ first Independence Day in his new home


He probably has to have someone explain the significance of it .


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Oh yes. After the same said brats took two of our cats last year (we did get Cosmo Topper back, poor Minnie Mouse is still missing) they don't leave the catio
> To bring this back on topic and avoid a visit from the
> View attachment 5128136
> 
> 
> here's hoping Harry has a safe and _*meaningful*_ first Independence Day in his new home


OMG...hope they didn't harm your cats


----------



## Clearblueskies

poopsie said:


> Oh yes. After the same said brats took two of our cats last year (we did get Cosmo Topper back, poor Minnie Mouse is still missing) they don't leave the catio
> To bring this back on topic and avoid a visit from the
> View attachment 5128136
> 
> 
> here's hoping Harry has a safe and _*meaningful*_ first Independence Day in his new home


He looks spookily like Omid


----------



## kemilia

EverSoElusive said:


> Burned out trying to keep up with all her lies


Wish I could "like" this multiple times!


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> He probably has to have someone explain the significance of it .



If they did he'd _still _think it was bonkers 




sdkitty said:


> OMG...hope they didn't harm your cats



They just threw Cosmo over the fence into the next street. When they saw we got him back they must've taken Minnie further--or worse- because I walked the streets for hours looking for her every night for a month. This was last October, That's how I stumbled onto Nextdoor. I couldn't figure out how they were escaping. Turns out someone found a bolthole on the catio side and they would go out and under the house and squeeze through a gap there. We took corrective measures, but too late for poor Minnie


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> If they did he'd _still _think it was bonkers
> 
> They just threw Cosmo over the fence into the next street. When they saw we got him back they must've taken Minnie further--or worse- because I walked the streets for hours looking for her every night for a month. This was last October, That's how I stumbled onto Nextdoor. I couldn't figure out how they were escaping. Turns out someone found a bolthole on the catio side and they would go out and under the house and squeeze through a gap there




That is awful.  Cruel people everywhere smh.  Our neighbors leave their dogs out while they go and watch the fireworks show. Grrr. Those little dogs are terrified, visibly shaking with fear. We stopped going to those shows a few years ago. Our hearing is just too precious to lose, the weather is hot and the crowds obnoxious.  Sure, the sky looks beautiful, we still prefer the comfort our own home with friends. Tonight we will watch online - love technology.

RE: the snappers.  I am guessing they make a similar sound as the pop guns — that is, loud and annoying.
When thinking of the Harklers, Snappers somehow fit.


----------



## poopsie

Clearblueskies said:


> He looks spookily like Omid



OMG LMAO


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> If they did he'd _still _think it was bonkers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They just threw Cosmo over the fence into the next street. When they saw we got him back they must've taken Minnie further--or worse- because I walked the streets for hours looking for her every night for a month. This was last October, That's how I stumbled onto Nextdoor. I couldn't figure out how they were escaping. Turns out someone found a bolthole on the catio side and they would go out and under the house and squeeze through a gap there. We took corrective measures, but too late for poor Minnie


that is just terrible
I'm thankful the two cats we have no show now interest in getting out the door
So sorry about minnie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is awful.  Cruel people everywhere smh.  Our neighbors leave their dogs out while they go and watch the fireworks show. Grrr. Those little dogs are terrified, visibly shaking with fear. We stopped going to those shows a few years ago. Our hearing is just too precious to lose, the weather is hot and the crowds obnoxious.  Sure, the sky looks beautiful, we still prefer the comfort our own home with friends. Tonight we will watch online - love technology.
> 
> RE: the snappers.  I am guessing they make a similar sound as the pop guns — that is, loud and annoying.
> When thinking of the Harklers, Snappers somehow fit.


people should take care of their animals
my mom had a dog who was terrified of loud noises....her neighbors neglected to tell her they would be working on their furnace...the noise drove the dog to jump from a second floor window.  so sad.  the dog had to be euthanized.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haaaaa!  Take that, Harkle.

*ITV ditches claim about Prince William's staff planting stories about Harry from brothers-at-war documentary at the 11th hour amid fears it was 'defamatory'*

*Omid Scobie, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biographer, suggested palace sources briefed newspapers over concerns about Prince Harry's mental health*
*Prince Harry had spoken with journalist Tom Bradby in 2019 where he admitted to a rift with his brother for the first time*
*Scobie has now said a negative spin was put on that interview by palace sources*
*Claims were cut from ITV's documentary 'Harry and William: What Went Wrong?'*


----------



## EverSoElusive

kemilia said:


> Wish I could "like" this multiple times!



Maybe I should repost this every hour and tag you so that it can be liked


----------



## eunaddict

VickyB said:


> I bet Kate has a 22 inch waist or smaller.  She’s emaciated.



As a size 0, I highly doubt it. Even at my absolute tiniest (5'7" and like <90 lbs - healthy, just always had issues gaining weight, still do), I was never a 22"er. You don't get 22" waists without help or being extreeeemely petite and really sucking it in - we're talking 5'0, size 000 kpop stars' petite.

That being said, she's healthy, you don't get to keep that glowy skin and luscious locks if you're emaciated - I think she always just had a tinier frame. Besides, nothing like a premium diet and access to at-will workouts to keep you looking camera ready.


----------



## VickyB

poopsie said:


> Oh yes. After the same said brats took two of our cats last year (we did get Cosmo Topper back, poor Minnie Mouse is still missing) they don't leave the catio
> To bring this back on topic and avoid a visit from the
> View attachment 5128136
> 
> 
> here's hoping Harry has a safe and _*meaningful*_ first Independence Day in his new home


I am so sorry!!!! That is heartbreaking. Big hugs.What is wrong with people??????!!!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

View attachment 5128083
View attachment 5128084



Clearblueskies said:


> I loathe the light blue suit, it looks so cheap.  I also happen to prefer Williams look. The comments I was responding to were those around the combination never being seen.
> My first job after Uni was in the City of London and I wasn’t allowed to wear trousers to work, or flats, dress was very formal.  I doubt that’s the case now.  Times change.
> Ironically Edward VIII was a pioneer when it came to breaking the clothing rules including brown shoes with blue, and of wearing brogues and loud checks in town. *Perhaps Harry sees him as a kindred spirit.
> *



You bet he does! They both lived in exile of sorts


----------



## gracekelly

eunaddict said:


> As a size 0, I highly doubt it. Even at my absolute tiniest (5'7" and like <90 lbs - healthy, just always had issues gaining weight, still do), I was never a 22"er. You don't get 22" waists without help or being extreeeemely petite and really sucking it in - we're talking 5'0, size 000 kpop stars' petite.
> 
> That being said, she's healthy, you don't get to keep that glowy skin and luscious locks if you're emaciated - I think she always just had a tinier frame. Besides, nothing like a premium diet and access to at-will workouts to keep you looking camera ready.


i  recall my 22in waist vivdly because I had to make a skirt in Home Economics class so I knew my measurement. It was yellow cotton denim.   Did I mention that I was 13 at the time?  I also had a growth spurt that summer and that was the end of 22 and I jumped up to 24.  It was nice while it lasted though I was too young to appreciate it lol!


----------



## xincinsin

Traminer said:


> @elvisfan4life
> 
> Thank you for your Like.
> I had remembered Diana on her 60th birthday.
> And I had thought it a good idea to  also remind others on that day.
> 
> Now I am getting attacked for it here by some.
> 
> Again: Thank you for your Like


Hi, Traminer
I feel it is all right to discuss Diana on this thread if it is relevant to the incident. It would be quite difficult to avoid actually because Hazard and Methane are milking the connection constantly. 

Thanks for the reminder that Diana has her own thread. I'll head on over there, hopefully to read something nice and untainted by the monetizing efforts of the duplicitous couple.


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> and *a happy Fourth of July to all you bonkers-first-amendment likers!*



LOL!  Thank you!


----------



## Jayne1

eunaddict said:


> That being said, she's healthy, you don't get to keep that glowy skin and luscious locks if you're emaciated - I think she always just had a tinier frame. Besides, nothing like a premium diet and access to at-will workouts to keep you looking camera ready.


I thought it was decided that her luscious locks had help with extensions.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> I do think he took "something" to calm his nerves.  Too bad it didn't work.



Harry’s behaviour was odd.  It was supposed to be an occasion to remember his mother.  He was gesturing and joking around - and barely looked at the statue when it was revealed.  Gesturing wildly - perhaps to try to provoke W.  W barely looks H in the eye.

And keep in mind that H has done all these series about mental health and how his mother’s death caused such anguish... then he behaves like a clown at the unveiling of a statue.  He ruined his own brand/prior statements by behaving like a clown.  And it was clear W was distancing himself from H.  I don’t think MM would have been impressed with H acting like an idiot...  maybe H was under instructions to get a photo with W that looks like they are “all forgiven”,  but W was not having it.

and today more leaking about the disastrous duo coming back to the UK.  Surely that’s a test by their PR to see if all would be ok for them to return.  The Answer is still NO.

Lili is going to miss a christening photo with the Queen because of their idiotic tantrums, interviews and constant leaking.  No one wants to know them...


----------



## Jayne1

This is all over Reddit.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> This is all over Reddit.
> View attachment 5128256


I find it very creepy. I'd probably find it funny, if it didn't remind me of those scary tales of female ghosts whose head will detach from the body once you remove the scarf or collar swathed round their neck.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Harry’s behaviour was odd.  It was supposed to be an occasion to remember his mother.  He was gesturing and joking around - and barely looked at the statue when it was revealed.  Gesturing wildly - perhaps to try to provoke W.  W barely looks H in the eye.
> 
> And keep in mind that H has done all these series about mental health and how his mother’s death caused such anguish... then he behaves like a clown at the unveiling of a statue.  He ruined his own brand/prior statements by behaving like a clown.  And it was clear W was distancing himself from H.  I don’t think MM would have been impressed with H acting like an idiot...  maybe H was under instructions to get a photo with W that looks like they are “all forgiven”,  but W was not having it.
> 
> and today more leaking about the disastrous duo coming back to the UK.  Surely that’s a test by their PR to see if all would be ok for them to return.  The Answer is still NO.
> 
> Lili is going to miss a christening photo with the Queen because of their idiotic tantrums, interviews and constant leaking.  No one wants to know them...


May be an attempt to prove to the world that the therapy sanctioned by his wife works, and he has recovered from his trauma. Although it could also be read that, faced with a memorial to his mother, he has reverted to his 12-yo self.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Harry’s behaviour was odd.  It was supposed to be an occasion to remember his mother.  He was gesturing and joking around - and barely looked at the statue when it was revealed.  Gesturing wildly - perhaps to try to provoke W.  W barely looks H in the eye.
> 
> And keep in mind that H has done all these series about mental health and how his mother’s death caused such anguish... then he behaves like a clown at the unveiling of a statue.  He ruined his own brand/prior statements by behaving like a clown.  And it was clear W was distancing himself from H.  I don’t think MM would have been impressed with H acting like an idiot...  maybe H was under instructions to get a photo with W that looks like they are “all forgiven”,  but W was not having it.
> 
> and today more leaking about the disastrous duo coming back to the UK.  Surely that’s a test by their PR to see if all would be ok for them to return.  The Answer is still NO.
> 
> Lili is going to miss a christening photo with the Queen because of their idiotic tantrums, interviews and constant leaking.  No one wants to know them...


Wonder if he was having a moment of hysteria and panic when he  came to the realization that he has used his mother to explain his failures and attempts to make money off her name and memory. The result was some bizarre behavior. On the other hand, he probably isn’t capable of such insight and the answer is he was under the influence.  My bad for thinking he has a conscience


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

Jayne1 said:


> I thought it was decided that her luscious locks had help with extensions.



I don’t think that was ever a firm thing or proven? Yes to hair extensions for the green one but not for Catherine.


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> Although it could also be read that, faced with a memorial to his mother, he has reverted to his 12-yo self.



Yeah, could be that. That man has got problems if he cannot behave with dignity during such a solemn occasion.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> Wonder if he was having a moment of hysteria and panic when he  came to the realization that he has used his mother to explain his failures and attempts to make money off her name and memory. The result was some bizarre behavior. On the other hand, he probably isn’t capable of such insight and the answer is he was under the influence.  My bad for thinking he has a conscience



you could be right...maybe he was high on a substance.  That would explain the jittery behaviour...


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> you could be right...maybe he was high on a substance.  That would explain the jittery behaviour...


I think the body language guy a few pages back had it right.  Harry’s overcompensating for feelings of acute embarrassment and unease at having to face the family.


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> This is all over Reddit.
> View attachment 5128256


In her latest video Lady C referred to it as Methane’s “Green Hornet”  costume.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All these things could be true:
- high on something to calm his nerves
- quarantine got to him
- embarrassed at facing the family
- desperately needing a ‘movie’ moment but being scarfed by William
- overcompensating
- realizing he can no longer justify using mommy as an excuse or that the statue is ugly
- breathing the rarefied Royal air made him lightheaded
- not getting to bring the Royal Christening gown to Cali [one more example of not thinking things through]

Hoping he stays away in Sept. No one wants to relive last week.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> This is all over Reddit.
> View attachment 5128256





xincinsin said:


> I find it very creepy. I'd probably find it funny, if it didn't remind me of those scary tales of female ghosts whose head will detach from the body once you remove the scarf or collar swathed round their neck.



Not that far from her Dior gown if she feels like DIYing it


----------



## Sharont2305

Clearblueskies said:


> Fair enough, but Harry wasn’t incorrectly dressed.


The only thing that stood out for me when you see them initially walk out is that Harry's shirt was too white, lol


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Wonder if he was having a moment of hysteria and panic when he  came to the realization that he has used his mother to explain his failures and attempts to make money off her name and memory. The result was some bizarre behavior. On the other hand, he probably isn’t capable of such insight and the answer is he was under the influence.  My bad for thinking he has a conscience



I think @needlv is right, I think he was angling for a brothers smiling together photo op (that's what his orders were).

I also think Will was onto him and possibly shared his concerns with his aunt who stepped-in, literally into the frame to make sure H didn't (ab)use the opportunity. 

His false mirth makes a mockery of "London is a trigger" (which I admit I have a problem with him thinking, let alone saying). There was a level of inappropriateness of all the hilarity, even though the statue was a celebration. It looked totally fake, most people are not that easy to fool. 

I saw they ditched the speeches, so we were at least spared those (from both brothers).


----------



## chicinthecity777

I have read a lot of people think Harry was high on drugs at the statue revealing. Wouldn't surprise me if it was true.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Not that far from her Dior gown if she feels like DIYing it
> 
> View attachment 5128297
> View attachment 5128298


Why is there a line running round her belly in that Dior gown? Maternity pantyline?
And another line across her boobs? Reminds me of Madonna's JPG bra.


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa!  Take that, Harkle.
> 
> *ITV ditches claim about Prince William's staff planting stories about Harry from brothers-at-war documentary at the 11th hour amid fears it was 'defamatory'*
> 
> *Omid Scobie, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biographer, suggested palace sources briefed newspapers over concerns about Prince Harry's mental health*
> *Prince Harry had spoken with journalist Tom Bradby in 2019 where he admitted to a rift with his brother for the first time*
> *Scobie has now said a negative spin was put on that interview by palace sources*
> *Claims were cut from ITV's documentary 'Harry and William: What Went Wrong?'*



I wish they'd gone ahead and transmitted it, then William could sue the backside off Rat Scabies and leave him without a penny to his name.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Why is there a line running round her belly in that Dior gown? Maternity pantyline?
> And another line across her boobs? Reminds me of Madonna's JPG bra.


You are right. Her underwear is really visible   
her bra looks very tight too- her cup runneth  over.
Wasn’t that dress really expensive too?  I don’t understand how you can spend so much and look so bad. Especially in Dior.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> I wish they'd gone ahead and transmitted it, then William could sue the backside off Rat Scabies and leave him without a penny to his name.




Please don't mistake Mr. Plastic for the Rat 

1. Rat Scabies = Punk legend and musician 
2. Omid Scobie = co-lying and scheming 'writer'


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> I have read a lot of people think Harry was high on drugs at the statue revealing. Wouldn't surprise me if it was true.



I think all the speculated reasons could be true at once. He certainly behaved_ really_ weirdly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Not that far from her Dior gown if she feels like DIYing it
> 
> View attachment 5128297



It takes special talent to be in 90000 pounds custom couture gown and still have your underwear showing.


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It takes special talent to be in 90000 pounds custom couture gown and still have your underwear showing.



And really bad taste too. Come on, I got more flattering and way cheaper maternity wear from H&M and other stores when I was pregnant. The material and cut is just awful, don’t even mention the color.

Ok yeah, I agree it must be a special talent. Most of us will fail spectacularly trying to do the same as her. It’s like taking a table cloth and wrapping all over her. What a horrid waste of money. Imagine how many doses of vaccines that dress can buy.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It takes special talent to be in 90000 pounds custom couture gown and still have your underwear showing.





Icyjade said:


> And really bad taste too. Come on, I got more flattering and way cheaper maternity wear from H&M and other stores when I was pregnant. The material and cut is just awful, don’t even mention the color.
> 
> Ok yeah, I agree it must be a special talent. Most of us will fail spectacularly trying to do the same as her. It’s like taking a table cloth and wrapping all over her. What a horrid waste of money. Imagine how many doses of vaccines that dress can buy.


Maybe we just don't have what it takes to be the Witch of Montecito, the Baba Yaga and her Chicken Legs. If I assume all her couture was later merched for cash, then, following that train of thought, perhaps all those wardrobe malfunctions she has had are really a clumsy attempt to merch her brand of undies !!!


----------



## Annawakes

This is actually the first time I’ve seen the Dior gown.  It’s awful awful awful.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> This is actually the first time I’ve seen the Dior gown.  It’s awful awful awful.


And now we can't unsee it


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> Wonder if he was having a moment of hysteria and panic when he  came to the realization that he has used his mother to explain his failures and attempts to make money off her name and memory. The result was some bizarre behavior. On the other hand, he probably isn’t capable of such insight and the answer is he was under the influence.  My bad for thinking he has a conscience


My thought on his movements was that MM coached him “Make yourself big! Show them that you are doing great!”  
Either that or he was high as a kite.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Why is there a line running round her belly in that Dior gown? Maternity pantyline?
> And another line across her boobs? Reminds me of Madonna's JPG bra.


She’s never been the best at selecting the right underwear.


----------



## sdkitty

It is beyond ridiculous to try to say harry flew back to CA in a hurry due to the death of Meghan's uncle.  Who made this up?
Harry Reportedly Flew Back to California Following News of Meghan's Uncle's Death (yahoo.com)

If it's their people, the should be fired.  If it's Meghan she should be institutionalized.
well maybe not institutionalized....maybe exiled?  somewhere she can't do any more harm


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Why is there a line running round her belly in that Dior gown? Maternity pantyline?
> And another line across her boobs? Reminds me of Madonna's JPG bra.


She used curtain cords to hold the Moonbump in place. I mean, with the lines across her body, she does look like she's wearing curtains/drapes even though it's an expensive Dior gown.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> It is beyond ridiculous to try to say harry flew back to CA in a hurry due to the death of Meghan's uncle.  Who made this up?
> Harry Reportedly Flew Back to California Following News of Meghan's Uncle's Death (yahoo.com)
> 
> If it's their people, the should be fired.  If it's Meghan she should be institutionalized.


The same nutcases who said she was "mourning" the uncle she Markled.


----------



## Jayne1

To me, H was incredibly nervous and uncomfortable and trying to show he was neither. Maybe with the help of a drink or whatever he does or uses. He was overcompensating.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> To me, H was incredibly nervous and uncomfortable and trying to show he was neither. Maybe with the help of a drink or whatever he does or uses. He was overcompensating.


he didn't have his WIFE there to push and pull him in the right direction


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> he didn't have his WIFE there to push and pull him in the right direction


The remote stopped working...


----------



## bag-mania

I'm sure Meghan gave him instructions about making sure he looked happy and without a care in the world. Harry isn't a good enough actor to pull off that level of believable phoniness and went overboard.


----------



## Chanbal

Today on Page Six: "_Meghan Markle did not make a good first impression.

“I was hearing very bad stories from early on that Meghan was upsetting people,” royal expert Penny Junor said on the ITV documentary “Harry and William: What Went Wrong,” adding that Markle’s “showbiz-y approach” to royalty ruffled feathers.

The “Suits” star, 39, was “*not as charming as she seemed*,” she explained."_









						Meghan Markle ‘upset people early on’ when she joined the Firm
					

“I was hearing very bad stories from early on that Meghan was upsetting people,” one royal expert dished.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

I think Harry’s weird behavior was an attempt to bring the old Harry back who was silly, funny and popular.

Our raptor tried to change his image so people can start taking him seriously but that backfired since Harry ended up making a fool of himself. So now most likely she’s trying to make Harry look like the old Harry again and hoping people will start liking him again. 

Let’s see how long they can keep making money by these stupid tactics.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure Meghan gave him instructions about making sure he looked happy and without a care in the world. Harry isn't a *good enough actor* to pull off that level of believable phoniness and went overboard.


According to @CeeJay H's wife is a Z-list actress so, they may both be at the same level.


----------



## sdkitty

the royals are hitting back
Prince William Got Footage Cut From ITV Documentary About Harry and Meghan (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## xeyes

Maggie Muggins said:


> She used curtain cords to hold the Moonbump in place. I mean, with the lines across her body, she does look like she's wearing curtains/drapes even though it's an expensive Dior gown.


This is the first time I’ve seen the notorious Dior caftan, too. It looks as if she wrapped a poly-microfiber-blend bedsheet she found on clearance at Wal-Mart around herself. Maybe the dress would work on somebody else - Dior usually looks better than this, and, even if it’s just not a great dress, there are some people who can make even the ugliest garments look good. But that’s our Megs, who has the opposite talent - making the most expensive clothes look trashy.

(It also does her stylist’s reputation no favors, if she had one at the time - was this perhaps a Jessica Mulroney production, or did Duchess Know-it-all just do what she wanted regardless, perhaps?)

(ETA: No, I’m not getting snobby about Wal-Mart here - it’s one of the few big stores in my area, and I go there as needed like everybody else around here. Doesn’t mean a £££££££££££ Dior gown should look like it came from there.)


----------



## Genie27

She looked great in a few pieces initially - the navy dress, and the blush pink colour off shoulder was flattering and well cut until she yanked it way off her shoulder. And then it's like she spat in her dresser's coffee or something - the Moroccan and Aussie/Fiji trip outfits were horrendous. Maybe her star did shine too bright and needed to be dimmed by the grey suits.

Lets face it though - some designers just don't cut for certain shapes - wide-waist boxes in particular have difficulty with Dior - ask me how many pieces have fit me. And this horrid beige/nude kardashian poly blend bedspread - I'm not sure who could pull this off. Heidi Klum perhaps? It would have looked so much better in ivory. But still not on Megsy with her undie lines.

At least the blue bedspread she wore with the murder earrings was a flattering colour. Not much else I can say about it, though.

Ah to have access to fitters and alterations experts - we know damn well that even Kate's cheapo Zara blazers are tailored to fit her impeccably before she wears them in public.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Today on Page Six: "_Meghan Markle did not make a good first impression.
> 
> “I was hearing very bad stories from early on that Meghan was upsetting people,” royal expert Penny Junor said on the ITV documentary “Harry and William: What Went Wrong,” adding that Markle’s “showbiz-y approach” to royalty ruffled feathers.
> 
> The “Suits” star, 39, was “*not as charming as she seemed*,” she explained."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘upset people early on’ when she joined the Firm
> 
> 
> “I was hearing very bad stories from early on that Meghan was upsetting people,” one royal expert dished.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



These reporters have lost it. When exactly did she ever seem ‘charming’?  Remember these photos from the Jamaican wedding?        Nothing says charming IMO








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle took another big step in their relationship on Friday — he brought her as his date to his best friend's wedding in Montego




					www.popsugar.com


----------



## papertiger

xeyes said:


> This is the first time I’ve seen the notorious Dior caftan, too. It looks as if she wrapped a poly-microfiber-blend bedsheet she found on clearance at Wal-Mart around herself. Maybe the dress would work on somebody else - Dior usually looks better than this, and, even if it’s just not a great dress, there are some people who can make even the ugliest garments look good. But that’s our Megs, who has the opposite talent - making the most expensive clothes look trashy.
> 
> (It also does her stylist’s reputation no favors, if she had one at the time - was this perhaps a Jessica Mulroney production, or did Duchess Know-it-all just do what she wanted regardless, perhaps?)
> 
> (ETA: No, I’m not getting snobby about Wal-Mart here - it’s one of the few big stores in my area, and I go there as needed like everybody else around here. Doesn’t mean a £££££££££££ Dior gown should look like it came from there.)



The stylist was _terrible!_


----------



## LittleStar88

MM likes to dress based on a style or look that she likes, and not what actually looks good or flattering to her figure.

At her age, and with access to so many people who know better and could tailor clothing/help her, she shouldn’t have so many wardrobe mishaps. It really only shows how stubborn and bossy she is. I imagine those around her trying to help eventually threw their hands up and let her do whatever with her clothing.

Like everything else, she can’t just shut up, humble herself, and be open to hearing input that is different from what she thinks for herself, then learn, adapt, and improve.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> These reporters have lost it. When exactly did she ever seem ‘charming’?  Remember these photos from the Jamaican wedding?        Nothing says charming IMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Show Sweet PDA at His Friend's Jamaican Wedding
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle took another big step in their relationship on Friday — he brought her as his date to his best friend's wedding in Montego
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5128538


I looked at all the pictures and there were a lot of them.  She hasn’t had that face in a long time. that was her ‘Suits’ face wasn’t it. 

I wonder when she started adjusting things — maybe when things got serious.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It takes special talent to be in 90000 pounds custom couture gown and still have your underwear showing.


OMG Charles paid for a 124,711.09 USD bed sheet (unflattering Dior gown).


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> MM likes to dress based on a style or look that she likes, and not what actually looks good or flattering to her figure.
> 
> At her age, and with access to so many people who know better and could tailor clothing/help her, she shouldn’t have so many wardrobe mishaps. It really only shows how stubborn and bossy she is. I imagine those around her trying to help eventually threw their hands up and let her do whatever with her clothing.



I think it gives weight to the theory that many of her outfits were worn once and then returned for cash or credit.  She could not have had any piece of clothing altered if the item was to be returned. That perhaps explains the poor fit of many of her outfits.  There are photos of at least one or two of her outfits where the tags were still visibly attached and fluttering about.  That, to me, was just inexcusable on the part of her stylist or dresser and herself, to walk out with tags still visibly attached.


----------



## V0N1B2

Genie27 said:


> She looked great in a few pieces initially - the navy dress, and the blush pink colour off shoulder was flattering and well cut until she yanked it way off her shoulder. And then it's like she spat in her dresser's coffee or something - the Moroccan and Aussie/Fiji trip outfits were horrendous. Maybe her star did shine too bright and needed to be dimmed by the grey suits.
> 
> Lets face it though - some designers just don't cut for certain shapes - wide-waist boxes in particular have difficulty with Dior - ask me how many pieces have fit me. And this horrid beige/nude kardashian poly blend bedspread - I'm not sure who could pull this off. Heidi Klum perhaps? It would have looked so much better in ivory. But still not on Megsy with her undie lines.
> 
> At least the blue bedspread she wore with the murder earrings was a flattering colour. Not much else I can say about it, though.
> 
> Ah to have access to fitters and alterations experts - we know damn well that even Kate's cheapo Zara blazers are tailored to fit her impeccably before she wears them in public.


Right? A $2500 Pucci kaftan would have done the trick. All those strapless bra and panty lines would have been camouflaged by whatever print she chose. Everyone looks good in one of his kaftans - even me. That beige Dior number was just so bland - and it did absolutely nothing for her skin tone.  Wearing a bold print gets you attention (trust me), which is her entire raison d'être, IMO. But, just maybe it's harder to belly cradle when it's well-hidden by the print. The light colour of the Dior disaster ensured everyone could see that she had a bump in the oven.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> To me, H was incredibly nervous and uncomfortable and trying to show he was neither. Maybe with the help of a drink or whatever he does or uses. He was overcompensating.


maybe if he had treated his family better he wouldn't have been so nervous and uncomfortable.....what a mess


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> MM likes to dress based on a style or look that she likes, and not what actually looks good or flattering to her figure.
> 
> At her age, and with access to so many people who know better and could tailor clothing/help her, she shouldn’t have so many wardrobe mishaps. It really only shows how stubborn and bossy she is. I imagine those around her trying to help eventually threw their hands up and let her do whatever with her clothing.
> 
> Like everything else, she can’t just shut up, humble herself, and be open to hearing input that is different from what she thinks for herself, then learn, adapt, and improve.


That reminds me of when chubby 11-year-old me ordered an outfit from the Spiegel catalog, by mail, and waiting with bated breath for it to arrive for weeks and weeks. When it arrived and looked absolutely nothing on me like it did on the model, I was devastated.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xeyes said:


> This is the first time I’ve seen the notorious Dior caftan, too. It looks as if she wrapped a poly-microfiber-blend bedsheet she found on clearance at Wal-Mart around herself. Maybe the dress would work on somebody else - Dior usually looks better than this, and, even if it’s just not a great dress, there are some people who can make even the ugliest garments look good. But that’s our Megs, who has the opposite talent - making the most expensive clothes look trashy.
> 
> (It also does her stylist’s reputation no favors, if she had one at the time - was this perhaps a Jessica Mulroney production, or did Duchess Know-it-all just do what she wanted regardless, perhaps?)
> 
> (ETA: No, I’m not getting snobby about Wal-Mart here - it’s one of the few big stores in my area, and I go there as needed like everybody else around here. Doesn’t mean a £££££££££££ Dior gown should look like it came from there.)



I know its horrible! the point is that for some reasons it’s even more upsetting to know someone paid a fortune to look bad than to know they were just wearing something cheap and looked bad. Well, especially when it was tax payers money lol.

and I don’t get how it would even fit with Dior’s normal aesthetic tbh.
I’ve got to believe Queen MGC was trolling M - she’s one of us! One of us!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

LittleStar88 said:


> *MM likes to dress based on a style or look that she likes, and not what actually looks good or flattering to her figure.*
> 
> At her age, and with access to so many people who know better and could tailor clothing/help her, she shouldn’t have so many wardrobe mishaps. It really only shows how stubborn and bossy she is. I imagine those around her trying to help eventually threw their hands up and let her do whatever with her clothing.
> 
> Like everything else, she can’t just shut up, humble herself, and be open to hearing input that is different from what she thinks for herself, then learn, adapt, and improve.



I will NEVER understand women who do this. 
When I worked retail and a customer asked how something looked I had to find a tactful way of telling them they looked like a featherbed tied in the middle. "I think we can find you something more flattering" was what I usually fell back on. It never ceased to amaze me how many still went with the hot mess option. 
Personally I don't care how "out of style" my clothes are. I feel confident and comfortable when I wear them. When I look good I FEEL good!


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> MM likes to dress based on a style or look that she likes, and not what actually looks good or flattering to her figure.
> 
> At her age, and with access to so many people who know better and could tailor clothing/help her, she shouldn’t have so many wardrobe mishaps. It really only shows how stubborn and bossy she is. I imagine those around her trying to help eventually threw their hands up and let her do whatever with her clothing.
> 
> Like everything else, she can’t just shut up, humble herself, and be open to hearing input that is different from what she thinks for herself, then learn, adapt, and improve.


LittleStar88,

Yes to all you said!

These gowns are a "one and done." Kind of surprising some designers would continue dressing her, but any publicity is good publicity I guess.

Wasn’t her former BFF Jessica touted as her stylist? What a suck up she must have been, and a frenemy too, “Oh, Megs, you look fabulous in that gown. It will be memorable.” Knowing it looked like a rag wrapped around a lumpy pole, thus making it memorable indeed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I will NEVER understand women who do this.
> When I worked retail and a customer asked how something looked I had to find a tactful way of telling them they looked like a featherbed tied in the middle. "I think we can find you something more flattering" was what I usually fell back on. It never ceased to amaze me how many still went with the hot mess option.
> Personally I don't care how "out of style" my clothes are. I feel confident and comfortable when I wear them. When I look good I FEEL good!



Possibly an example of Samuel Johnson’s phrase_ ‘the triumph of hope over experience’_.
Or, wishful thinking.  Interestingly enough, her clothing experiences mirror her marriages and other relationships.  Aspirational, nothing really fits, out of touch with reality.  Same is true for him, too. IMO


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa!  Take that, Harkle.
> 
> *ITV ditches claim about Prince William's staff planting stories about Harry from brothers-at-war documentary at the 11th hour amid fears it was 'defamatory'*
> 
> *Omid Scobie, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biographer, suggested palace sources briefed newspapers over concerns about Prince Harry's mental health*
> *Prince Harry had spoken with journalist Tom Bradby in 2019 where he admitted to a rift with his brother for the first time*
> *Scobie has now said a negative spin was put on that interview by palace sources*
> *Claims were cut from ITV's documentary 'Harry and William: What Went Wrong?'*


Omid is losing a lot of correspondent work isn’t he? Might need to go full time on the MM impersonation.  





Icyjade said:


> I don’t think that was ever a firm thing or proven? Yes to hair extensions for the green one but not for Catherine.


I, personally, think K wears them sometimes especially when she had the very long hair but not all the time. I’m really into extensions myself so it’s not a read   


Genie27 said:


> She looked great in a few pieces initially - the navy dress, and the blush pink colour off shoulder was flattering and well cut until she yanked it way off her shoulder. And then it's like she spat in her dresser's coffee or something - the Moroccan and Aussie/Fiji trip outfits were horrendous. Maybe her star did shine too bright and needed to be dimmed by the grey suits.
> 
> Lets face it though - some designers just don't cut for certain shapes - wide-waist boxes in particular have difficulty with Dior - ask me how many pieces have fit me. And this horrid beige/nude kardashian poly blend bedspread - I'm not sure who could pull this off. Heidi Klum perhaps? It would have looked so much better in ivory. But still not on Megsy with her undie lines.
> 
> At least the blue bedspread she wore with the murder earrings was a flattering colour. Not much else I can say about it, though.
> 
> Ah to have access to fitters and alterations experts - we know damn well that even Kate's cheapo Zara blazers are tailored to fit her impeccably before she wears them in public.


Yeah the more I look at the horror kaftan the more I think it’s meant to be designer modesty wear perhaps like an abaya? I think it’d look good if it was actually loose and flowing on her body (and she had a pop of colour in her accessories or make up) but it’s is NEVER gonna look good if you are wearing something you can see your underwear through  especially if you are trying to look modest and understated - I guess that just went so against every fibre of her being her very body rebelled!


youngster said:


> I think it gives weight to the theory that many of her outfits were worn once and then returned for cash or credit.  She could not have had any piece of clothing altered if the item was to be returned. That perhaps explains the poor fit of many of her outfits.  There are photos of at least one or two of her outfits where the tags were still visibly attached and fluttering about.  That, to me, was just inexcusable on the part of her stylist or dresser and herself, to walk out with tags still visibly attached.


 It makes a lot of sense- it really does- just always order the most expensive thing so you can sell it. It’s just like Sonja Morgan
And that’s not even counting the rumours of sponsored clothing.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly an example of Samuel Johnson’s phrase_ ‘the triumph of hope over experience’_.
> Or, wishful thinking.  Interestingly enough, her clothing experiences mirror her marriages and other relationships.  Aspirational, nothing really fits, out of touch with reality.  Same is true for him, too. IMO



IDK why but every time I hear this song on my workout mix I think of these two


She had a dream
And boy it was a good one
So she chased after her dream
With much desire
But when she get too close
To her expectations
Well the dream burned up
Like paper in fire
Paper in fire
Stinking up the ashtrays
Paper in fire
Smoking up the alleyways
Who's to say the way
A man should spend his days
Do you let them smolder
Like paper in fire
He wanted love
With no involvement
So he chased the wind
That's all his silly life required
And the days of vanity
Went on forever
And he saw his days burn up
Like paper in fire
Paper in fire
Stinking up the ashtrays
Paper in fire
Smoking up the alleyways
Who's to say the way
A man should spend his days
Do you let them smolder
Like paper in fire
There's a good life
Right across the green fields
And each generation
Stares at it from afar
But we keep no check
On our appetites
So the green fields turn to brown
Like paper in fire
Paper in fire
Stinking up the ashtrays
Paper in fire
Smoking up the alleyways
Who's to say the way
A man should spend his days
Do you let them smolder
Like paper in fire


----------



## lanasyogamama

poopsie said:


> IDK why but every time I hear this song on my workout mix I think of these two
> 
> 
> She had a dream
> And boy it was a good one
> So she chased after her dream
> With much desire
> But when she get too close
> To her expectations
> Well the dream burned up
> Like paper in fire
> Paper in fire
> Stinking up the ashtrays
> Paper in fire
> Smoking up the alleyways
> Who's to say the way
> A man should spend his days
> Do you let them smolder
> Like paper in fire
> He wanted love
> With no involvement
> So he chased the wind
> That's all his silly life required
> And the days of vanity
> Went on forever
> And he saw his days burn up
> Like paper in fire
> Paper in fire
> Stinking up the ashtrays
> Paper in fire
> Smoking up the alleyways
> Who's to say the way
> A man should spend his days
> Do you let them smolder
> Like paper in fire
> There's a good life
> Right across the green fields
> And each generation
> Stares at it from afar
> But we keep no check
> On our appetites
> So the green fields turn to brown
> Like paper in fire
> Paper in fire
> Stinking up the ashtrays
> Paper in fire
> Smoking up the alleyways
> Who's to say the way
> A man should spend his days
> Do you let them smolder
> Like paper in fire
> She had a dream
> And boy it was a good one
> So she chased after her dream
> With much desire
> But when she get too close
> To her expectations
> Well the dream burned up
> Like paper in fire
> Paper in fire
> Stinking up the ashtrays
> Paper in fire
> Smoking up the alleyways
> Who's to say the way
> A man should spend his days
> Do you let them smolder
> Like paper in fire
> He wanted love
> With no involvement
> So he chased the wind
> That's all his silly life required
> And the days of vanity
> Went on forever
> And he saw his days burn up
> Like paper in fire
> Paper in fire
> Stinking up the ashtrays
> Paper in fire
> Smoking up the alleyways
> Who's to say the way
> A man should spend his days
> Do you let them smolder
> Like paper in fire
> There's a good life
> Right across the green fields
> And each generation
> Stares at it from afar
> But we keep no check
> On our appetites
> So the green fields turn to brown
> Like paper in fire
> Paper in fire
> Stinking up the ashtrays
> Paper in fire
> Smoking up the alleyways
> Who's to say the way
> A man should spend his days
> Do you let them smolder
> Like paper in fire



Thanks for posting that! I just watched the whole thing.


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> Thanks for posting that! I just watched the whole thing.


 
I could swear he wrote those first verses about them. I know he didn't, but dayum


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Agree.
> 
> Italian men (in Italy) are some of the most stylish in the world and they wear brown shoes, often with no socks and it gives off a certain nonchalance that's so attractive.
> 
> But this is the British upper class and they are more straight-laced for city dressing.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true; honestly .. when I'm in Italy (especially Firenze or Milano) .. my head is like a swivel .. just admiring all those attractive and SO WELL-SUITED men!!!  Alas, my Italian cousin always said to me "_DO NOT MARRY AN ITALIAN MAN .. they are all _*mammone* ! "


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I could swear he wrote those first verses about them. I know he didn't, but dayum



That’s a good one for them. Several songs suit the disastrous duo so well.  With her tendrils and his behavior, this one stands out to me.
"Witchy Woman"

Raven hair and ruby lips
Sparks fly from her fingertips
Echoed voices in the night
She's a restless spirit on an endless flight

Woo hoo witchy woman,
See how high she flies
Woo hoo witchy woman
She got the moon in her eye

She held me spellbound in the night
Dancing shadows and firelight
Crazy laughter in another room
And she drove herself to madness with a silver spoon [!!!!]

Woo hoo witchy woman
See how high she flies
Woo hoo witchy woman
She got the moon in her eye

Well, I know you want a lover,
Let me tell you, brother,
She's been sleeping in the Devil's bed.

And there's some rumors going round
Someone's underground
She can rock you in the nighttime
'Til your skin turns red

Woo hoo witchy woman
See how high she flies
Woo hoo witchy woman
She got the moon in her eye






						Eagles - Witchy Woman Lyrics | AZLyrics.com
					

Eagles "Witchy Woman": Raven hair and ruby lips Sparks fly from her fingertips Echoed voices in the night She's a restless...



					www.azlyrics.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> LittleStar88,
> 
> Yes to all you said!
> 
> These gowns are a "one and done." Kind of surprising some designers would continue dressing her, but any publicity is good publicity I guess.
> 
> Wasn’t her former BFF Jessica touted as her stylist? What a suck up she must have been, and a frenemy too, “Oh, Megs, you look fabulous in that gown. It will be memorable.” Knowing it looked like a rag wrapped around a lumpy pole, thus making it memorable indeed.


Maybe this little scenario happened instead.
M to Jessica, "Get me that Dior gown we discussed earlier."
Jessica, "That material will just cling to your bump and your undergarments. How about something less clingy and more colourful." 
But M, happy at the thought of showing off her bump, interrupts Jessica,  "I insist, get me the Dior. I love the price tag and even better, Charles is paying for it." 
Please forgive me for not writing in word salad lingo like M would.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> I really miss sparklers. We can't have them here----fire danger
> Can't say anything good about the snappers. I'd never heard of them until some of the neighborhood brats were throwing them onto my patio at my cats
> Nothing like New York. I interned there one summer. Stayed in a house in Elmont on LI and I had NEVER seen anything like it. Metal trashcans blown up. Class A rockets shot horizontally down the street. I moved my car into the back yard and hid in the house. A life experience for sure


Well .. okay, going to point out that I lived in Boston for a long time .. so .. 

Going to the Esplanade right next to the Charles River (filled with tons of boats on the 4th), having the Boston Pops play the 1812 overture (complete with the Bells and Cannons) .. and then the Fireworks .. well, IMO .. it's the best in the country.  Patriot's Day and the 4th of July are BIG-TIME holidays in Boston for good reason of course; as a matter of fact .. most of my British colleagues said that they would avoid going out like the plague because the minute they opened their mouth .. well you can imagine the comments!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa!  Take that, Harkle.
> 
> *ITV ditches claim about Prince William's staff planting stories about Harry from brothers-at-war documentary at the 11th hour amid fears it was 'defamatory'*
> 
> *Omid Scobie, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biographer, suggested palace sources briefed newspapers over concerns about Prince Harry's mental health*
> *Prince Harry had spoken with journalist Tom Bradby in 2019 where he admitted to a rift with his brother for the first time*
> *Scobie has now said a negative spin was put on that interview by palace sources*
> *Claims were cut from ITV's documentary 'Harry and William: What Went Wrong?'*


I think it's time that we work on getting Obie Stupid-Ska-Noobie fired for some of his actions!  Inviting H&M's stans to harass other people on social media venues, and then planting sh!t like this?  I know that there is a complain form (I signed), but I do hope that some of these TV stations (hello - CBS!) start pulling him off (but you know, just like Meghan-a-lo-manic, he will shout that they are "racist")!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I think it's time that we work on getting Obie Stupid-Ska-Noobie fired for some of his actions!  Inviting H&M's stans to harass other people on social media venues, and then planting sh!t like this?  I know that there is a complain form (I signed), but I do hope that some of these TV stations (hello - CBS!) start pulling him off (but you know, just like Meghan-a-lo-manic, he will shout that they are "racist")!



On the other hand, we could just sit back, relax, and watch him implode. At the moment he seems quite capable of sinking his own ship 

ETA: His new name, Omid the Imploder.


----------



## creme fraiche

That Dior kaftan is a monstrosity - I’ll fitting, unflattering, and wrinkled!  Here us Kate less than 2 years prior to this horror demonstrating how to do flattering, modest, elegant maternity evening wear:









						Kate Middleton Delivers the Maternity Glamour in Alexander McQueen
					

Kate Middleton revisited one of her favorite designers in Norway, delivering a radiant maternity-fashion moment.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> The same nutcases who said she was "mourning" the uncle she Markled.



yes... I heard a youtuber say “the only thing she should be mourning is her personality and lack of career!”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> MM likes to dress based on a style or look that she likes, and not what actually looks good or flattering to her figure.
> 
> At her age, and with access to so many people who know better and could tailor clothing/help her, she shouldn’t have so many wardrobe mishaps. It really only shows how stubborn and bossy she is. I imagine those around her trying to help eventually threw their hands up and let her do whatever with her clothing.
> 
> Like everything else, she can’t just shut up, humble herself, and be open to hearing input that is different from what she thinks for herself, then learn, adapt, and improve.


I never watched Suits.  With a TV series, she would have been dressed by others and wouldn't have had a say (I don't think).  wonder if her clothes fit better on that show


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I will NEVER understand women who do this.
> When I worked retail and a customer asked how something looked I had to find a tactful way of telling them they looked like a featherbed tied in the middle. "I think we can find you something more flattering" was what I usually fell back on. It never ceased to amaze me how many still went with the hot mess option.
> Personally I don't care how "out of style" my clothes are. I feel confident and comfortable when I wear them. When I look good I FEEL good!


you were probably a rarity....sometimes when I'm trying something on and I'm unsure I'll ask someone's opinion.  Lame as it may sound, I sometimes look for a customer who has good style and ask her.  No one wants to hurt your feelings but at least the customer has nothing to gain by lying and telling you something looks good when it doesn't.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> Right? A $2500 Pucci kaftan would have done the trick. All those strapless bra and panty lines would have been camouflaged by whatever print she chose. Everyone looks good in one of his kaftans - even me. That beige Dior number was just so bland - and it did absolutely nothing for her skin tone.  Wearing a bold print gets you attention (trust me), which is her entire raison d'être, IMO. But, just maybe it's harder to belly cradle when it's well-hidden by the print. The light colour of the Dior disaster ensured everyone could see that she had a bump in the oven.



Pucci 
Why aren’t more women seeing the beauty in his clothes?  Your post inspired me to check out his [well, now LVMH] website.
My oh my, beautiful, elegant, Slim Aarons’ worthy, iconic, easy to wear, even easier to swan about town.



			https://www.emiliopucci.com/en-us/about
		












						German countess, model and film star Veruschka, limbo dancing,...
					

German countess, model and film star Veruschka, limbo dancing, wearing a Pucci printed outfit. She became a photographer of note after her modelling days finished. Her father was executed for...



					www.gettyimages.in
				





ETA:  okaaay, maybe this why people aren’t wearing it -  although she does wear it well in a few of the photos:








						Kris Jenner wears Pucci as Corey fixes her necklace in St Tropez
					

Kris Jenner put on a fashionable display in another colourful Pucci number when she cosied up to boyfriend Corey Gamble on holiday in St Tropez on Thursday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

OMG I'm literally LMAO
I went to a different Marshalls today.
First  I saw this



Then in the checkout line I saw THIS



I put the Mermaid book next to it for shizz and giggles. They want $9.99 for it and it didn't look like any had sold


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> OMG I'm literally LMAO
> I went to a different Marshalls today.
> First  I saw this
> View attachment 5128821
> 
> 
> Then in the checkout line I saw THIS
> View attachment 5128822
> 
> 
> I put the Mermaid book next to it for shizz and giggles. They want $9.99 for it and it didn't look like any had sold


9.99 for the bench?  what is full retail on it?


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> 9.99 for the bench?  what is full retail on it?


Amazon says $18.99 for hardback, but I think it’s been discounted from the beginning.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> 9.99 for the bench?  what is full retail on it?


I have no idea, the line was moving.
The point is that it's already showing up in the chain discount stores


----------



## CarryOn2020

On Amazon, it’s $11.80, 

Best Sellers Rank: #991 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#4 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#26 in Children's Emotions Books
#67 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I have no idea, the line was moving.
> The point is that it's already showing up in the chain discount stores


maybe it will be at the 99-cents store soon


----------



## Lodpah

Wow, you all! These two are still behaving badly. Took a break and am in Madrid, heading to San Sebastian and Barcelona. Major time difference but I'm going to save all these for my read on the plane when I head back.  I have not seen one mention of her here in Spain, nor her books, nothing, nada.


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Wow, you all! These two are still behaving badly. Took a break and am in Madrid, heading to San Sebastian and Barcelona. Major time difference but I'm going to save all these for my read on the plane when I head back.  I have not seen one mention of her here in Spain, nor her books, nothing, nada.


We will miss you while you travel, but have a great time! Loved Spain, has been on the re visit list for years.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> We will miss you while you travel, but have a great time! Loved Spain, has been on the re visit list for years.


Thanks. Omgee the Hermes store is right across from me like 20 steps and they are fully stocked! Sorry I know wrong forum and thread but just wanted to let the Hermes fans know.


----------



## CarryOn2020

US lawyers want explanations   









						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids
					

RICHARD EDEN: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's plans to trademark their entertainment and charity empire have fallen foul of U.S. lawyers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Gina distancing herself?  Or maybe she was markled....









						Gina Torres is no longer in touch with Suits co-star Meghan Markle
					

GINA TORRES confessed she is no longer in touch with her Suits co-star Meghan Markle, despite being invited to her wedding to Prince Harry, and that they are on "different trajectories".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> I never watched Suits.  With a TV series, she would have been dressed by others and wouldn't have had a say (I don't think).  wonder if her clothes fit better on that show



her clothes in suits, suited her figure.  Slim fitting suit dresses and jackets, or high waisted long skirts with button up long sleeve blouses.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly an example of Samuel Johnson’s phrase_ ‘the triumph of hope over experience’_.
> Or, wishful thinking.  Interestingly enough, her clothing experiences mirror her marriages and other relationships.  Aspirational, nothing really fits, out of touch with reality.  Same is true for him, too. IMO


Or, considering the vast number of ill-fitting outfits and undie incidents, as well as her so-called "suicidal ideations", perhaps ...

_Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result._


----------



## purseinsanity

eunaddict said:


> As a size 0, I highly doubt it. Even at my absolute tiniest (5'7" and like <90 lbs - healthy, just always had issues gaining weight, still do), I was never a 22"er. You don't get 22" waists without help or being extreeeemely petite and really sucking it in - we're talking 5'0, size 000 kpop stars' petite.
> 
> That being said, she's healthy, you don't get to keep that glowy skin and luscious locks if you're emaciated - I think she always just had a tinier frame. Besides, nothing like a premium diet and access to at-will workouts to keep you looking camera ready.


My daughter is currently 5'2", about 94 lbs and a 00 in jeans and even her waist is 23".  She's petite all over which is so unlike me, as I can relate to the previously posted cartoon about how everything is behind me.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Not that far from her Dior gown if she feels like DIYing it
> 
> View attachment 5128297


Not trying to judge, but why does her pregnant belly look like a muffin top over some ill fitting Spanx under her Dior bedsheet?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Why is there a line running round her belly in that Dior gown? Maternity pantyline?
> And another line across her boobs? Reminds me of Madonna's JPG bra.


Sorry just saw your post!


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Thanks. Omgee the Hermes store is right across from me like 20 steps and they are fully stocked! Sorry I know wrong forum and thread but just wanted to let the Hermes fans know.


Try not to rub it in tooooooo much.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dear , trademark application stalls, Archewell needs to clarify its services (podcasts, events,books, apps etc ) will be ”entertainment-based”.
What does that really mean ? How does that relate to being a charitable foundation ? Does that mean they need to avoid (say … ) medical or mental-health services ???
Jeez, it seems like they would have submitted the paperwork a while ago, and that it has taken a long time for the ruling, what’s up ?

EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids











						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids
					

RICHARD EDEN: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's plans to trademark their entertainment and charity empire have fallen foul of U.S. lawyers.




					mol.im
				




ps sorry, I just saw someone else posted this …


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear , trademark application stalls, Archewell needs to clarify its services (podcasts, events,books, apps etc ) will be ”entertainment-based”.
> What does that really mean ? How does that relate to being a charitable foundation ? Does that mean they need to avoid (say … ) medical or mental-health services ???
> Jeez, it seems like they would have submitted the paperwork a while ago, and that it has taken a long time for the ruling, what’s up ?
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids
> 
> 
> RICHARD EDEN: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's plans to trademark their entertainment and charity empire have fallen foul of U.S. lawyers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ps sorry, I just saw someone else posted this …



Agree, we need a lawyer to explain  
Perhaps this affects the tax exempt status of a charitable foundation?  In any case, it is one more embarrassment for QE and Charles.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, we need a lawyer to explain
> Perhaps this affects the tax exempt status of a charitable foundation?  In any case, it is one more embarrassment for QE and Charles.



I believe they intended for Archewell Audio to be a separate entity from Archewell, the charitable foundation. I wonder if they wanted to create their own company so then they could take on other peoples’ podcasts to fulfill their podcast contract for Spotify. This delay would be a fly in the ointment for that deal.

They wrote the trademark application to be deliberately vague because they have no idea what they’re going to produce (if anything).


----------



## Annawakes

Pretty sure they don’t view their “content” as “entertainment-based”.  More like “compassion-based”, “authenticity-based”, or whatever word salad they can come up with that disguises what it really is - pompous lecturing on how the rest of us ought to live.  If they come up with anything at all, that is.

So I wonder how they will amend their application.  Good for those trademark lawyers!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think murky meg is an attorney


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if Bill Gates was involved in this.
Bravo, kudos, highest praises and gratitude to all the super-sleuths.  You excel where H&M fail. Take a bow.   


HarrysGreySuit posted this clip to show his gross behavior.  I put it in the spoiler so it doesn’t offend anyone.



Spoiler: Gross


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Not trying to judge, but why does her pregnant belly look like a muffin top over some ill fitting Spanx under her Dior bedsheet?



I suppose she wants to draw the most attention to it, otherwise I'm not sure. 

Useless stylist


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear , trademark application stalls, Archewell needs to clarify its services (podcasts, events,books, apps etc ) will be ”entertainment-based”.
> What does that really mean ? How does that relate to being a charitable foundation ? Does that mean they need to avoid (say … ) medical or mental-health services ???
> Jeez, it seems like they would have submitted the paperwork a while ago, and that it has taken a long time for the ruling, what’s up ?
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sussexes' trademark bid for Archewell hits skids
> 
> 
> RICHARD EDEN: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's plans to trademark their entertainment and charity empire have fallen foul of U.S. lawyers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ps sorry, I just saw someone else posted this …



Not a lawyer, but we had to study Apple Corps v Apple Computer (now Apple Inc) 1978-2007. Using this as an example. Just speculating.

Basically, I think a company needs to define what it does so words don't just get eaten-up globally. Companies don't like to do this, because like Apple which started out as computers (or Virgin that started out as a record company) they may want to move into anything that makes them money longterm. 

Think of any multinational or corps, whereas once upon a time they specialised, suddenly they are branching out, using their brand to cash-in on whatever's happening. For the same reason territories are now sometimes worded to include 'and universe' in case a Martian decides to watch your vid on Neptune. The universe has no collection agencies (but it may one day) so it's future-proofing.

Company owners want the name title to be as vague as possible because they project to a time when they do/own everything everywhere, hence catchall names like 'Foundation' (like 'Enterprises' used to be a favourite for entrepreneurs). However, there a) can be same/similar company names in different territories doing similar things as there are no global legal authorities b) there can be same/similar company names if their businesses are different.

You have to define what you do so others can do what they do. Owning a name should not entitle you just clear-up everything on the table, plus you can't own what was already owned before you.

Apple in the UK was different to Apple in the US. One was predominantly a record company, the other a computer company. Both operated internationally (and universally)

Apple flouted a (British) ruling 1981 that stipulated that Apple Computers/Inc could not become involved with music. It has constantly pushed against that ruling with audio hard/software and hence why Apple Corps/Inc have had to 'seek clarity' on definition on more than one occasion.

No-one really wants these ill-defined boundaries (apart from lawyers) so when creating/registering a company name, one has to define what that company does/intends to do.

If you don't know what you do (H&M) then it's a hard thing to define.

Just wanting to own the World (and the Universe) and everything in it is not helpful for a business plan.


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> I will NEVER understand women who do this.
> When I worked retail and a customer asked how something looked I had to find a tactful way of telling them they looked like a featherbed tied in the middle. "I think we can find you something more flattering" was what I usually fell back on. It never ceased to amaze me how many still went with the hot mess option.
> Personally I don't care how "out of style" my clothes are. I feel confident and comfortable when I wear them. When I look good I FEEL good!


Because of your picture I couldn’t help picturing those clothes as a sci fi tunic and a maid outfit 


sdkitty said:


> maybe it will be at the 99-cents store soon


I think so too. I remember when there was all this row about Zoella’s advent calendar getting repackaged for sale in Poundland so perhaps we should be helpfully thinking of things the bench could be changed to…the belch seems apposite.


Lodpah said:


> Thanks. Omgee the Hermes store is right across from me like 20 steps and they are fully stocked! Sorry I know wrong forum and thread but just wanted to let the Hermes fans know.


I think given the nature of this forum bag news is always on topic!
we’ve got to feed our addictions


papertiger said:


> Not a lawyer, but we had to study Apple Corps v Apple Computer (now Apple Inc) 1978-2007. Using this as an example. Just speculating.
> 
> Basically, I think a company needs to define what it does so words don't just get eaten-up globally. Companies don't like to do this, because like Apple which started out as computers (or Virgin that started out as a record company) they may want to move into anything that makes them money longterm.
> 
> Think of any multinational or corps, whereas once upon a time they specialised, suddenly they are branching out, using their brand to cash-in on whatever's happening. For the same reason territories are now sometimes worded to include 'and universe' in case a Martian decides to watch your vid on Neptune. The universe has no collection agencies (but it may one day) so it's future-proofing.
> 
> Company owners want the name title to be as vague as possible because they project to a time when they do/own everything everywhere, hence catchall names like 'Foundation' (like 'Enterprises' used to be a favourite for entrepreneurs). However, there a) can be same/similar company names in different territories doing similar things as there are no global legal authorities b) there can be same/similar company names if their businesses are different.
> 
> You have to define what you do so others can do what they do. Owning a name should not entitle you just clear-up everything on the table, plus you can't own what was already owned before you.
> 
> Apple in the UK was different to Apple in the US. One was predominantly a record company, the other a computer company. Both operated internationally (and universally)
> 
> Apple flouted a (British) ruling 1981 that stipulated that Apple Computers/Inc could not become involved with music. It has constantly pushed against that ruling with audio hard/software and hence why Apple Corps/Inc have had to 'seek clarity' on definition on more than one occasion.
> 
> No-one really wants these ill-defined boundaries (apart from lawyers) so when creating/registering a company name, one has to define what that company does/intends to do.
> 
> If you don't know what you do (H&M) then it's a hard thing to define.
> 
> Just wanting to own the World (and the Universe) and everything in it is not helpful for a business plan.


Isnt it terrible how these evil laws want to limit the pairs unmatched creativity?  
archewell’s unusual video application has been leaked actually…



sdkitty said:


> the royals are hitting back
> Prince William Got Footage Cut From ITV Documentary About Harry and Meghan (thedailybeast.com)


According to deadline that documentary got just under 2mill viewers - doesn’t sound great.
I don’t even understand  OS’ claims - it seems to me the implication is that claims about mental illness are taboo and damaging but I thought the whole brand of the moment was that H was dispelling mental health taboos   and that the royals were the evil backward types who wanted to hush up mental suffering in the name of face. Bit of inconsistent messaging from the doppelgänger. If he’s not careful he’s going to end up having to do botched to get some money.

add on- saw a comment that Harry had to wear the brown shoes as they are his only pair with a concealed heel to make him as tall as W  

add on add on - I think the logical business thing is to make the a foundation a podcast network and find some undiscovered talents make the products and maybe buy a name or two to drag people in- but the problem is that would let other people be in the limelight which I assume would put M into rage spasms


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Not a lawyer, but we had to study Apple Corps v Apple Computer (now Apple Inc) 1978-2007. Using this as an example. Just speculating.
> 
> Basically, I think a company needs to define what it does so words don't just get eaten-up globally. Companies don't like to do this, because like Apple which started out as computers (or Virgin that started out as a record company) they may want to move into anything that makes them money longterm.
> 
> Think of any multinational or corps, whereas once upon a time they specialised, suddenly they are branching out, using their brand to cash-in on whatever's happening. For the same reason territories are now sometimes worded to include 'and universe' in case a Martian decides to watch your vid on Neptune. The universe has no collection agencies (but it may one day) so it's future-proofing.
> 
> Company owners want the name title to be as vague as possible because they project to a time when they do/own everything everywhere, hence catchall names like 'Foundation' (like 'Enterprises' used to be a favourite for entrepreneurs). However, there a) can be same/similar company names in different territories doing similar things as there are no global legal authorities b) there can be same/similar company names if their businesses are different.
> 
> You have to define what you do so others can do what they do. Owning a name should not entitle you just clear-up everything on the table, plus you can't own what was already owned before you.
> 
> Apple in the UK was different to Apple in the US. One was predominantly a record company, the other a computer company. Both operated internationally (and universally)
> 
> Apple flouted a (British) ruling 1981 that stipulated that Apple Computers/Inc could not become involved with music. It has constantly pushed against that ruling with audio hard/software and hence why Apple Corps/Inc have had to 'seek clarity' on definition on more than one occasion.
> 
> No-one really wants these ill-defined boundaries (apart from lawyers) so when creating/registering a company name, one has to define what that company does/intends to do.
> 
> If you don't know what you do (H&M) then it's a hard thing to define.
> 
> Just wanting to own the World (and the Universe) and everything in it is not helpful for a business plan.


Didn’t H&M run into the same problem when setting up Sussex Royal?  I seem to remember something similar happening.
They want global influence, and universal adoration, through minimal effort and other people’s ideas.  Oh and pots of money.  They struggle to be any more specific, because they really don’t know.  If it were that simple we’d all be doing it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Didn’t H&M run into the same problem when setting up Sussex Royal?  I seem to remember something similar happening.
> They want global influence, and universal adoration, through minimal effort and other people’s ideas.  Oh and pots of money.  They struggle to be any more specific, because they really don’t know.  If it were that simple we’d all be doing it



If they were actually good at something, perhaps just one thing, it may be easier to choose 

At the moment, life-size stand-ins for Actress Barbie and Soldier Ken are sadly not in demand, and even if they were, probe only pay temp, day-rate, average wages.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> - suit jacket unbuttoned
> - no belt
> - brown shoes ?
> - tie = yes
> 1 out of 4 does not make a win imo
> 
> He looked like he wanted to dance around the pool. He was clearly on something, maybe the quarantine got to him.
> He mucked it up for the cameras, as OW/MM told him to.





gracekelly said:


> I do think he took "something" to calm his nerves.  Too bad it didn't work.



To me it seemed like he was conscious of the backlash he’d gotten for trashing his family on TV it’s America’s queen of trash interviews and his equally trash wife. That coupled with his grandfather dying shortly after (Phillips way of possibly giving Harry and Meghan the finger) is what made a lot of people give those two the side-eye.

Wills acted well, he stayed grounded, stayed gracious towards his brother for the cameras, did his job and left.


----------



## needlv

I swear - occasionally MM does a look which makes my skin crawl...

check out this video...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> yes... I heard a youtuber say “the only thing she should be mourning is her personality and lack of career!”




Priceless


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, we need a lawyer to explain
> Perhaps this affects the tax exempt status of a charitable foundation?  In any case, it is one more embarrassment for QE and Charles.


This pertains to the trademark application, not to the charitable status, I think, and this is in the US, diff lawyers
And the US is complicated, each state is different, yet all are under federal law, complicated. I would compare the USA to the complexity of the EU
If they did not have issues setting up SussexRoyal, well, that was done in the UK, with the implicit backing of the crown, wheels were greased


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> I swear - occasionally MM does a look which makes my skin crawl...
> 
> check out this video...




Oh wow. That’s a scary look. She’s mental.


----------



## elvisfan4life

needlv said:


> I swear - occasionally MM does a look which makes my skin crawl...
> 
> check out this video...




Google Meena in Emmerdale a British soap opera they could be twins


----------



## Mendocino

jelliedfeels said:


> Does it hold up? I don’t know if it was ever shown in U.K. is it serious or soap opera-ish?
> 
> It truly is the Wuthering Heights of podcasts


----------



## Mendocino

jelliedfeels said:


> Does it hold up? I don’t know if it was ever shown in U.K. is it serious or soap opera-ish?
> 
> It truly is the Wuthering Heights of podcasts



I saw the first episode of Suits while I was the UK in 2012. It's not a soap opera, I would describe it as a legal drama/comedy with sparkling and snappy dialogue.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I swear - occasionally MM does a look which makes my skin crawl...
> 
> check out this video...




Ah that's the footage I was looking for a few weeks back. The video quality was better so you can really see how she's putting daggers through Kate with her eyes.


----------



## eunaddict

creme fraiche said:


> That Dior kaftan is a monstrosity - I’ll fitting, unflattering, and wrinkled!  Here us Kate less than 2 years prior to this horror demonstrating how to do flattering, modest, elegant maternity evening wear:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton Delivers the Maternity Glamour in Alexander McQueen
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton revisited one of her favorite designers in Norway, delivering a radiant maternity-fashion moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



I wonder how much of that Dior outfit was inspired by Kate's. Considering all the rumours coming out that H & MM saw themselves in constant competition with the Cambridges, and MM in particular with Kate....they're similar in style, shape, colour and MM had her hair up as well.


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> I wonder how much of that Dior outfit was inspired by Kate's. Considering all the rumours coming out that H & MM saw themselves in constant competition with the Cambridges, and MM in particular with Kate....they're similar in style, shape, colour and MM had her hair up as well.


well if she was trying to compete with Kate she failed miserably


----------



## Chagall

That poor Dior caftan didn’t stand a chance. Badly fitting under garments and the wrong accessories. On the right person it could have been beautiful.


----------



## Mendocino

jelliedfeels said:


> Thanks for replying. Apparently it is on U.K. Netflix. I may well try it once I’ve finished murder she wrote. (Well, if that’s even possible



I know what you mean. I got hooked on Murdoch Mysteries and ended up watching it steadily for about a month. I've now watched over 200 episodes.


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spoiler: Gross




Whenever MM isn't around, he seems to fall back into some form of actual proper behaviour - he's a half step behind W, AND there's still a clear hierarchy in terms of who got introduced first, who shook hands first. There wasn't any real jostling for position that we kept seeing previously.

But also come on, in these Covid times, we all know...don't touch your face; but also to be fair, shaking hands is still being actively discouraged, even between fully vaxed people, in most countries...there's no point social distancing if you're still exchanging hand shakes and then touching your face.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

Genie27 said:


> She looked great in a few pieces initially - the navy dress, and the blush pink colour off shoulder was flattering and well cut until she yanked it way off her shoulder. And then it's like she spat in her dresser's coffee or something - the Moroccan and Aussie/Fiji trip outfits were horrendous. Maybe her star did shine too bright and needed to be dimmed by the grey suits.
> 
> Lets face it though - some designers just don't cut for certain shapes - wide-waist boxes in particular have difficulty with Dior - ask me how many pieces have fit me. And this horrid beige/nude kardashian poly blend bedspread - I'm not sure who could pull this off. Heidi Klum perhaps? It would have looked so much better in ivory. But still not on Megsy with her undie lines.
> 
> At least the blue bedspread she wore with the murder earrings was a flattering colour. Not much else I can say about it, though.
> 
> Ah to have access to fitters and alterations experts - we know damn well that even Kate's cheapo Zara blazers are tailored to fit her impeccably before she wears them in public.


I remember hearing about Mindy Kaling saying that she has a lot of her clothes altered--even inexpensive t-shirts. Good fit makes a huge difference.


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> I looked at all the pictures and there were a lot of them.  She hasn’t had that face in a long time. that was her ‘Suits’ face wasn’t it.
> 
> I wonder when she started adjusting things — maybe when things got serious.


These pics show (in addition to other things) how pumped up her lips are now.


----------



## CeeJay

Clearblueskies said:


> I think the body language guy a few pages back had it right.  Harry’s overcompensating for feelings of acute embarrassment and unease at having to face the family.


As he SHOULD, given what he has done!  I know that Prince Philip and the Queen liked Harry very much, but given what he has done?!?! .. I really have to give it to QEII being as nice as she has been .. but I think Prince William and Prince Charles behaviors speaks volumes and I hope that they continue that way!!!  Hap-Hazza needs to learn his lesson, but unfortunately, that also means that he needs to SHUT the Meghan-o-lo-maniac down!


----------



## Aimee3

Mendocino said:


> I remember hearing about Mindy Kaling saying that she has a lot of her clothes altered--even inexpensive t-shirts. Good fit makes a huge difference.


I’m short and I have everything altered.  I just assumed that everyone did that until I had a 5’ 7” friend who would go shopping for an outfit she planned to wear that evening.  She had no worries or expectations that it wouldn’t fit perfectly right off the hanger!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Today on Page Six: "_Meghan Markle did not make a good first impression.
> 
> “I was hearing very bad stories from early on that Meghan was upsetting people,” royal expert Penny Junor said on the ITV documentary “Harry and William: What Went Wrong,” adding that Markle’s “showbiz-y approach” to royalty ruffled feathers.
> 
> The “Suits” star, 39, was “*not as charming as she seemed*,” she explained."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘upset people early on’ when she joined the Firm
> 
> 
> “I was hearing very bad stories from early on that Meghan was upsetting people,” one royal expert dished.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


*Quelle surprise!!* .. this is pretty much EXACTLY what my friends said about her, even during her high school days!  If you "crossed" her (or she FELT that you crossed her), her behavior would become VERY UNBECOMING!!!  I'm pretty sure I noted before that my friend had to pull Meghan aside when she was at their house rehearsing the play with their son, and have a "chat" with her.  She said that, unfortunately, Thomas spoiled her rotten .. so, as has been said "what Meghan wants, Meghan gets".


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to @CeeJay H's wife is a Z-list actress so, they may both be at the same level.


She was truly a HORRIBLE actress; I couldn't watch that stupid show for even 10 minutes!!!  I gotta figure (and I got a wink-wink-nod-nod from my friend who knew Meghan back when), that she likely got on that show due to the 'ole "couch casting" .. if you know what I mean.  There have been numerous stories about her biatchiness on that show and her extremely "Princess" (demanding) behavior.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> the royals are hitting back
> Prince William Got Footage Cut From ITV Documentary About Harry and Meghan (thedailybeast.com)


IMO .. Scobie should be FIRED for doing this; I've signed the petition.  Royal-Reporter my a$$!  He needs TO GO!


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> Hap-Hazza needs to learn his lesson, but unfortunately, that also means that he needs to *SHUT the Meghan-o-lo-maniac down!*


Won't ever happen. Methane makes such a big deal over regaining her voice.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Won't ever happen. Methane makes such a big deal over regaining her voice.


and he doesn't control her....its the other way around


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> She was truly a HORRIBLE actress; I couldn't watch that stupid show for even 10 minutes!!!  I gotta figure (and I got a wink-wink-nod-nod from my friend who knew Meghan back when), that she likely got on that show due to the 'ole "couch casting" .. if you know what I mean.  There have been numerous stories about her biatchiness on that show and her extremely "Princess" (demanding) behavior.


I never watched but she wasn't the star as I understand it....more a supporting role....guess it goes to show how overpaid TV actors are - she was on a basic cable show and was a somewhat minor character yet she got so rich she threw the party and gave her Zara clothing away


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> That reminds me of when chubby 11-year-old me ordered an outfit from the Spiegel catalog, by mail, and waiting with bated breath for it to arrive for weeks and weeks. When it arrived and looked absolutely nothing on me like it did on the model, I was devastated.


I used to order from Spiegel all the time--clothes, blinds, lamps. I miss them.


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> Thanks for posting that! I just watched the whole thing.


Me too! Oh H is so gonna burn some day.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> I swear - occasionally MM does a look which makes my skin crawl...
> 
> check out this video...



Jeez, that's almost Single White Female crazy like.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yet again all these insane glares and morphing into each other despite being clearly different heights & body types has got me wishing for the first prestige A*well production to be a Face/off remake staring M & Omid.    
One of them would obviously need to wear a wig at the beginning to hide the fact they already look the same…details details….

But when they both already smile like this it seems a wasted opportunity not too…


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I never watched Suits.  With a TV series, she would have been dressed by others and wouldn't have had a say (I don't think).  wonder if her clothes fit better on that show


Well, many of the stories of her diva behavior were in response to the clothing that they WANTED to have her wear, but of course, she knew better .. and said "GET ME THIS, NOW"!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Mendocino said:


> I remember hearing about Mindy Kaling saying that she has a lot of her clothes altered--even inexpensive t-shirts. Good fit makes a huge difference.


@Genie27 ‘s comment about Kate’s Zara blazers was a real a ha for me! I was hurting my head about how a cheap blazer could look so good.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, many of the stories of her diva behavior were in response to the clothing that they WANTED to have her wear, but of course, she knew better .. and said "GET ME THIS, NOW"!!!


I don’t see how she would have been in a position to get away with that behavior


----------



## lanasyogamama

I saw on Twitter that Lili is not included in the line of succession. I went on the royal website and verify that she is not listed. I wonder if it’s because she was born in the states?









						Succession
					

The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.




					www.royal.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

No Lili here either.  








						The Duchess of Sussex
					

The Duchess of Sussex, born Rachel Meghan Markle, married Prince Harry at St George's Chapel, Windsor in May 2018. The Duke and Duchess have two children, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. As announced in January 2020, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior...




					www.royal.uk


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw on Twitter that Lili is not included in the line of succession. I went on the royal website and verify that she is not listed. I wonder if it’s because she was born in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk



Possibly. Could it also be because her father stepped down from his position? No sense adding more of Harry's crew to the line of succession since they have quit and walked away.


----------



## poopsie

Chagall said:


> That poor Dior caftan didn’t stand a chance. Badly fitting under garments and the wrong accessories. On the right person it could have been beautiful.



Methinks she suffers from the Kimmy Kakes syndrome


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> No Lili here either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, born Rachel Meghan Markle, married Prince Harry at St George's Chapel, Windsor in May 2018. The Duke and Duchess have two children, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. As announced in January 2020, The Duke and Duchess have stepped back as senior...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk



Could be a surrogate birth or she has not been christened in the Church of England?  Interesting.

ETA:
She is listed here:








						Royal Family tree: King Charles III's closest family and order of succession
					

The King, his siblings, children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Genie27

poopsie said:


> Methinks she suffers from the *Kimmy Kakes syndrome*


I'm not familiar with that. Can you please elaborate. Google only leads me to a service industry uniform apparel company


----------



## poopsie

Genie27 said:


> I'm not familiar with that. Can you please elaborate. Google only leads me to a service industry uniform apparel company



Kim Kardashian has bemused and amused us for years with her dragging pant hems, Spanx lines, poorly fitted bras, bursting seams and general WTFedness of her wardrobe
IMO Kimmy is the undisputed Kween of the delusional dressers


----------



## plumed

papertiger said:


> Not a lawyer, but we had to study Apple Corps v Apple Computer (now Apple Inc) 1978-2007. Using this as an example. Just speculating.
> 
> Basically, I think a company needs to define what it does so words don't just get eaten-up globally. Companies don't like to do this, because like Apple which started out as computers (or Virgin that started out as a record company) they may want to move into anything that makes them money longterm.
> 
> Think of any multinational or corps, whereas once upon a time they specialised, suddenly they are branching out, using their brand to cash-in on whatever's happening. For the same reason territories are now sometimes worded to include 'and universe' in case a Martian decides to watch your vid on Neptune. The universe has no collection agencies (but it may one day) so it's future-proofing.
> 
> Company owners want the name title to be as vague as possible because they project to a time when they do/own everything everywhere, hence catchall names like 'Foundation' (like 'Enterprises' used to be a favourite for entrepreneurs). However, there a) can be same/similar company names in different territories doing similar things as there are no global legal authorities b) there can be same/similar company names if their businesses are different.
> 
> You have to define what you do so others can do what they do. Owning a name should not entitle you just clear-up everything on the table, plus you can't own what was already owned before you.
> 
> Apple in the UK was different to Apple in the US. One was predominantly a record company, the other a computer company. Both operated internationally (and universally)
> 
> Apple flouted a (British) ruling 1981 that stipulated that Apple Computers/Inc could not become involved with music. It has constantly pushed against that ruling with audio hard/software and hence why Apple Corps/Inc have had to 'seek clarity' on definition on more than one occasion.
> 
> No-one really wants these ill-defined boundaries (apart from lawyers) so when creating/registering a company name, one has to define what that company does/intends to do.
> 
> If you don't know what you do (H&M) then it's a hard thing to define.
> 
> Just wanting to own the World (and the Universe) and everything in it is not helpful for a business plan.


I'll weigh in here, as I run a nonprofit that has three trademarked names: the corporate name, a name for a particular site, and a name for an online product. Every trademark requires the selection of specific areas of operation in which to trademark the name, and there must be proof that indeed the "brand" is operating in those areas. Examples: scientific publication, events, merchandise (lots of sub categories, like clothing, publications, housewares, etc.), educational programming, online content in specific areas (research in x subject matter), etc. The categories are very detailed and sometimes a bit inscrutable; they also overlap a bit. Each category is a separate area requiring proof and a filing fee. A trademark application can be accepted in whole or in part. One may not have sufficient proof in a particular category, for instance, or there may be a mismatch between the activity as explained on the application and the intention of the category. In my experience, it is quite normal for the person reviewing the application in the trademark office to ask clarifying questions or for more proof of how the trademark is being used in a specific activity. That's why using a trademark attorney is valuable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

*sigh* If only Harry had remembered rule #1: Bros before hoes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw on Twitter that Lili is not included in the line of succession. I went on the royal website and verify that she is not listed. I wonder if it’s because she was born in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk



Maybe they have just not updated yet. The fact Raptor's entry only mentions Archie kind of hints at that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Kim Kardashian has bemused and amused us for years with her dragging pant hems, Spanx lines, poorly fitted bras, bursting seams and general WTFedness of her wardrobe
> IMO Kimmy is the undisputed Kween of the delusional dressers



I always thought Kim's clothes usually fit, but it's hard to dress such an articifial body well. E.g. this massive behind and enhanced hips just don't look good in pants. Hell, today's fashion often is not especially kind to a naturally hourglassy body.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I always thought Kim's clothes usually fit, but it's hard to dress such an articifial body well. E.g. this massive behind and enhanced hips just don't look good in pants. Hell, today's fashion often is not especially kind to a naturally hourglassy body.


I will never understand why she did that to her behind


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Possibly. Could it also be because her father stepped down from his position? No sense adding more of Harry's crew to the line of succession since they have quit and walked away.


I think Lili is not listed because site has not been updated recently , H and A are on the list


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I think Lili is not listed because site has not been updated recently , H and A are on the list



Under the circumstances I can understand why they are not falling all over themselves to update it.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Under the circumstances I can understand why they are not falling all over themselves to update it.



Imagine Douchess fuming over this...


----------



## xincinsin

plumed said:


> I'll weigh in here, as I run a nonprofit that has three trademarked names: the corporate name, a name for a particular site, and a name for an online product. Every trademark requires the selection of specific areas of operation in which to trademark the name, and there must be proof that indeed the "brand" is operating in those areas. Examples: scientific publication, events, merchandise (lots of sub categories, like clothing, publications, housewares, etc.), educational programming, online content in specific areas (research in x subject matter), etc. The categories are very detailed and sometimes a bit inscrutable; they also overlap a bit. Each category is a separate area requiring proof and a filing fee. A trademark application can be accepted in whole or in part. One may not have sufficient proof in a particular category, for instance, or there may be a mismatch between the activity as explained on the application and the intention of the category. In my experience, it is quite normal for the person reviewing the application in the trademark office to ask clarifying questions or for more proof of how the trademark is being used in a specific activity. That's why using a trademark attorney is valuable.


Adding my 2 cents: trademarks have to be renewed after a certain number of years (validity is for 5 or 10 year periods depending on the country). Sometimes you will be asked to show proof that you actually used the trademark. For instance, the company where I worked had to show photos of the items which were branded with our trademark. In the Gruesome Twosome's previous foray into the world of trademarks, I think one of the excuses/reasons given for applying for trademark protection in numerous categories was to prevent other people from using the Sussex Royal brand. I thought then that it was a silly reason, given that it would be financially crippling to trademark so many categories, and it would not afford global protection even if they secured the trademark in the UK. I could start producing Sussex Royal tampons and adult diapers in my country and they couldn't stop me. Also, when it comes time for renewal and they cannot prove that they are actively using the brand in all those categories, their application for renewal might not be approved.

A comprehensive review of the Sussex Royal trademark incident:








						The end of Sussex Royal: lessons from Meghan and Harry’s trademark trouble
					

As the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announce that they have withdrawn their SUSSEX ROYAL trademark applications, we look at the lessons that IP owners can take from the long-running saga.




					www.worldtrademarkreview.com


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> I think Lili is not listed because site has not been updated recently , H and A are on the list


And Autumn Phillips it still pictured even though she and Peter are officially divorced.

Maybe whoever does this chart was waiting for a picture of Lilibet?


----------



## eunaddict

My eyes have rolled so far back into my head, I've lost them. Currently bringing back those touch-typing skills from primary school.









						Meghan Markle ‘never wanted fame’ before acting and royal marriage
					

MEGHAN MARKLE "never wanted fame", yet ended up in the spotlight due to her acting career and marriage to Prince Harry, according to a royal biographer.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *sigh* If only Harry had remembered rule #1: Bros before hoes.



What does H’s black wrist band say? I only see ‘Master of My Fa’ what? Master of My Favorite Beer? Master of my Family?  Master of My Favorite Universe? OR ??


----------



## eunaddict

Hermes Zen said:


> What does H’s black wrist band say? I only see ‘Master of My Fa’ what? Master of My Favorite Beer? Master of my Family?  Master of My Favorite Universe? OR ??




Invictus by William Ernest Henley

It is one of my favourite poems as well (alongside I am by John Clare), learned it as a teenager and clung to it (still do).


----------



## Hermes Zen

eunaddict said:


> Invictus by William Ernest Henley
> 
> It is one of my favourite poems as well, learned it as a teenager and clung to it (still do).


Oooh. Thanks!  Master of My Fate. Thanks for explaining.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Here's some green outfits for Flower just in case she needs to dry clean the Green Hornet costume. Swipe left for more


----------



## purseinsanity

eunaddict said:


> My eyes have rolled so far back into my head, I've lost them. Currently bringing back those touch-typing skills from primary school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘never wanted fame’ before acting and royal marriage
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE "never wanted fame", yet ended up in the spotlight due to her acting career and marriage to Prince Harry, according to a royal biographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

No one knew her before Harry.  What "fame" did she really achieve.  Haha, thanks for the laugh Express!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> What does H’s black wrist band say? I only see ‘Master of My Fa’ what? Master of My Favorite Beer? Master of my Family?  Master of My Favorite Universe? OR ??


*No *Master of My Fa*me Hungry Wife *is the part we can't see.


----------



## bellecate

eunaddict said:


> My eyes have rolled so far back into my head, I've lost them. Currently bringing back those touch-typing skills from primary school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘never wanted fame’ before acting and royal marriage
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE "never wanted fame", yet ended up in the spotlight due to her acting career and marriage to Prince Harry, according to a royal biographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


As my mother would say, What a load of horse malarkey.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw on Twitter that Lili is not included in the line of succession. I went on the royal website and verify that she is not listed. I wonder if it’s because she was born in the states?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk


I don’t know for sure but I would guess she’s not in the line of succession because her parents left the royal family before she was born. If they aren’t supposed to use their titles then the kid can’t inherit them either. Oh well, titles don’t matter guys and they just want privacy, unless they are going on international tv to discuss how bad it is not having a title. I’m not 100% on this but I think a royal has been born abroad before. The person to ask is lady C on her YouTube- she’d be dying to show off her knowledge of inheritance. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> *sigh* If only Harry had remembered rule #1: Bros before hoes.



I usually hate the casual misogyny of that phrase… but for the raptor I’ll make an exception.


EverSoElusive said:


> Here's some green outfits for Flower just in case she needs to dry clean the Green Hornet costume. Swipe left for more



Jeez, that was their concept, seems a bit literal.


----------



## purseinsanity

Just in case anyone wants to be further irritated, I’m bringing back my “favorite” gif that shows the wide range of acting  and the “talent” of Ms. Sparkleless-Marklemess.  You’re welcome.


----------



## purseinsanity

Someone should have told Meghan that she was using a script for Suits…it wasn’t meant to be a life lesson:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Someone should have told Meghan that she was using a script for Suits…it wasn’t meant to be a life lesson:
> 
> View attachment 5129857


Maybe she is acting out the sequel: Suits Reunion.
_Just take the money and walk away. Then use the ATM card for Bank of Dad and continue drawing a few million pounds a year._

Interesting how they are rewriting history and saying she starred in Suits. The Express link even claims that "By season three, Suits was the highest rated American TV show for ages 18-49."


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> View attachment 5129855
> 
> Just in case anyone wants to be further irritated, I’m bringing back my “favorite” gif that shows the wide range of acting  and the “talent” of Ms. Sparkleless-Marklemess.  You’re welcome.


OMG !!!!!!  You are killing me again with this gif!  It makes me dizzy and sick!!!  I gained speed away from this pages ago!


----------



## Hermes Zen

To add to this    



> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...t-laurent-chief-of-staff-archewell-foundation
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's former chief of staff calls her experience 'incredible'*
> *Markle and Prince Harry's former chief of staff Catherine St-Laurent described her positive experience working for the couple*


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> To add to this



i think that is selective editing from her original statement,.  Didn’t she leave because she was asked to do things outside her job scope but was staying on as consultant?


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> i think that is selective editing from her original statement,.  Didn’t she leave because she was asked to do things outside her job scope but was staying on as consultant?



I believe you recall correctly. Wonder how much she's being paid to say this!


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe they have just not updated yet. The fact Raptor's entry only mentions Archie kind of hints at that.



Perhaps BP is waiting to find out if Lilibet actually exists.


----------



## needlv

carmen56 said:


> Perhaps BP is waiting to find out if Lilibet actually exists.



or if Lilbet is born by surrogate, no place in the line of succession....  Best for the RF not to update anything for a long while!


----------



## xincinsin

This whole secrecy around the birth of their children is just to drum up the drama/photo value. There can be privacy without shouting it out to the world at one extreme, and all this cloak and dagger at the other extreme. I'm sure some enterprising journo is going to write about how Methane's life is so full of drama even though the poor little woman wanted only a quiet life.


----------



## needlv

Uh oh... some people are just crazy.









						'Meghan Markle superfans threatened to kill me, hacked my computer and stole money from my bank account- now I’m buying a gun to defend myself'
					

POLICE are investigating an army of online trolls who hack bank accounts and threaten to kill in the name of Meghan Markle. Calling themselves the  ‘Megulators’, the online vigilantes a…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Under the circumstances I can understand why they are not falling all over themselves to update it.





scarlet555 said:


> Imagine Douchess fuming over this...



M must be "SOMEONE GET THE PASSWORD!!!!!"


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Here's some green outfits for Flower just in case she needs to dry clean the Green Hornet costume. Swipe left for more




Too late they are all now mine (she can have #3 - if she has the spare cash) love them


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t know for sure but I would guess she’s not in the line of succession because her parents left the royal family before she was born. If they aren’t supposed to use their titles then the kid can’t inherit them either. Oh well, titles don’t matter guys and they just want privacy, unless they are going on international tv to discuss how bad it is not having a title. I’m not 100% on this but I think a royal has been born abroad before. The person to ask is lady C on her YouTube- she’d be dying to show off her knowledge of inheritance.
> 
> 
> I usually hate the casual misogyny of that phrase… but for the raptor I’ll make an exception.
> 
> Jeez, that was their concept, seems a bit literal.




but these are Winter florals - totally different


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This whole secrecy around the birth of their children is just to drum up the drama/photo value. There can be privacy without shouting it out to the world at one extreme, and all this cloak and dagger at the other extreme. I'm sure some enterprising journo is going to write about how Methane's life is so full of drama even though the poor little woman wanted only a quiet life.



I used to think that, now I think it's because they need the baby for the photo/info first.


----------



## needlv

MM wasn’t happy with her place in the hierarchy.  Journalists are writing about what we have talked about in this forum for ages...  MM didn’t want to be behind W and C.  She wanted equality.  But that’s not how it works.  










						Meghan Markle bristled at low royal status, her reporter friend and other royal experts say
					

Meghan and Harry were constantly reminded there is a royal ‘hierarchy,’ while they felt they should be on ‘equal footing’ with William and Kate, according to interviews in a…




					www.mercurynews.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> MM wasn’t happy with her place in the hierarchy.  Journalists are writing about what we have talked about in this forum for ages...  MM didn’t want to be behind W and C.  She wanted equality.  But that’s not how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle bristled at low royal status, her reporter friend and other royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were constantly reminded there is a royal ‘hierarchy,’ while they felt they should be on ‘equal footing’ with William and Kate, according to interviews in a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mercurynews.com


Maybe she thought she could modernise the British Monarchy to be like Narnia and there’d be 2 kings and 2 queens?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Too late they are all now mine (she can have #3 - if she has the spare cash) love them



She might have the money but she does not have Kate's body type to pull off these couture gowns, much like she killed the Dior kaftan in 1, 2, 3


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> but these are Winter florals - totally different


Ah you will be a Christmas rose then


Clearblueskies said:


> Maybe she thought she could modernise the British Monarchy to be like Narnia and there’d be 2 kings and 2 queens?


Perhaps that was the research she did before joining? Though reading a book would probably be a bit too much like hard work actually  



EverSoElusive said:


> She might have the money but she does not have Kate's body type to pull off these couture gowns, much like she killed the Dior kaftan in 1, 2, 3


This is what’s so weird about it. Surely you normally don’t need to have any particular figure to carry off a voluminous non-body-conforming outfit - yet somehow she managed to make something that doesn’t need to fit on anything ill-fitting… now that is a skill!


----------



## Chanbal

eunaddict said:


> My eyes have rolled so far back into my head, I've lost them. Currently bringing back those touch-typing skills from primary school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘never wanted fame’ before acting and royal marriage
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE "never wanted fame", yet ended up in the spotlight due to her acting career and marriage to Prince Harry, according to a royal biographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Never wanted fame...


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> maybe H was under instructions to get a photo with W that looks like they are “all forgiven”, but W was not having it.



This just proves that Will was really trained well into becoming the future king and has smarts and smart advisors to help him manage ticks like Harry and Meghan.


----------



## Chanbal

What's going on with MM's fashion advisor? I came across this story twice...


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Never wanted fame...



Goodness gracious that stupid hat … she looks like a church auntie that can never be out of the house without her hat … and the way she flipped it on her large head! I was embarrassed for her.


----------



## justwatchin

carmen56 said:


> Perhaps BP is waiting to find out if Lilibet actually exists.


True as we’ve yet to see the obligatory black and white photo of her foot or hand.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> MM wasn’t happy with her place in the hierarchy.  Journalists are writing about what we have talked about in this forum for ages...  MM didn’t want to be behind W and C.  She wanted equality.  But that’s not how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle bristled at low royal status, her reporter friend and other royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were constantly reminded there is a royal ‘hierarchy,’ while they felt they should be on ‘equal footing’ with William and Kate, according to interviews in a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mercurynews.com


"_The original footage of the show quoted Scobie as saying, “I would say that it was no coincidence that it was shortly after that aired, even the next day, there were source quotes that came from a senior aide at Kensington Palace saying that William was worried about his brother’s mental health.”


The Daily Mail said Kensington Palace threatened legal action if the line “about his brother’s mental health” was not excised. The palace said it was “false and defamatory” and claimed that Scobie had no evidence to support such an assertion. After “carefully considering,” ITV “chose to remove” the mental health reference._"

Scobie-doo's comments are only assuring that Will will keep a distance from his brother...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> My eyes have rolled so far back into my head, I've lost them. Currently bringing back those touch-typing skills from primary school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘never wanted fame’ before acting and royal marriage
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE "never wanted fame", yet ended up in the spotlight due to her acting career and marriage to Prince Harry, according to a royal biographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



That must be the most hilarious thing I've read all year.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

From @Hermes Zen post
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...t-laurent-chief-of-staff-archewell-foundation

Finally, most of the comments from that article are anti despicable duo.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> From @Hermes Zen post
> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...t-laurent-chief-of-staff-archewell-foundation
> 
> Finally, most of the comments from that article are anti despicable duo.


I just checked and you are right...  Is H going broke?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What's going on with MM's fashion advisor? I came across this story twice...




Remember this excuse - “I was inspired by my favorite … “. 

*Mulroney has now updated her post after fans pointed out the similarities - claiming the design was 'inspired by my favorite designers Ralph and Russo' and adding 'without the designer price'*
_








						Jessica Mulroney is accused of ripping off a design by Ralph and Russo
					

Followers on Instagram have accused Jessica Mulroney of ripping off a suit design by British label Ralph and Russo.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

over the comment in the DM report: '_Meghan said friends reflect friends and because of what's at stake she can no longer be associated with Jessica, at least not in public_.' 
Like kids with secret friends. Also, how can she claim to activate compassion on a global scale if she sees her public image as too precious and fragile to attempt to influence her BFF for the better?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> What's going on with MM's fashion advisor? I came across this story twice...



I love all this diet Prada fashion sleuthing! So entertaining.
Seems like they got her absolutely bang to rights on her plagiarism by the looks of it.
I have absolutely no idea why she thought no one would notice that an image is clearly from little known website net-a-Porter and the obscure designers Ralph and Russo.
I’m just a bit confused though - if she’s a stylist why would she be making clothes?
Surely her best defence would just be to say she was trying to sell the suits preloved but she just completely mangled the phrasing?- maybe I should go work in PR 
Oh well now we know why poor R&R folded - I clearly wrongly thought they were tarred by their association with sparkles 


Chanbal said:


> "_The original footage of the show quoted Scobie as saying, “I would say that it was no coincidence that it was shortly after that aired, even the next day, there were source quotes that came from a senior aide at Kensington Palace saying that William was worried about his brother’s mental health.”
> 
> 
> The Daily Mail said Kensington Palace threatened legal action if the line “about his brother’s mental health” was not excised. The palace said it was “false and defamatory” and claimed that Scobie had no evidence to support such an assertion. After “carefully considering,” ITV “chose to remove” the mental health reference._"
> 
> Scobie-doo's comments are only assuring that Will will keep a distance from his brother...



I know I’ve already said this, but even if Will did say that to the press why would that be a bad thing? Isn’t the thing to do nowadays to speak out on the mental health issue to diminish the taboo? I also thought they were previously accused of refusing H&M therapy because they wanted it under wraps. How can they both want to keep things hush and want to be talking to the press about it?  Seems a _bit inconsistent _

of course, the cynic in me might say that now Harry is profiting from these mental health docs, being a CHIMPO and trying to make himself into an activist/advocate he begrudges Will getting a slice of his ‘brand’ and he’s trying to set his attack ferret on him but then that’s not very charitable of me is it?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> I believe you recall correctly. Wonder how much she's being paid to say this!




Either she's getting paid to say that or she knows that she'd be sued if she said otherwise


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> Uh oh... some people are just crazy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Meghan Markle superfans threatened to kill me, hacked my computer and stole money from my bank account- now I’m buying a gun to defend myself'
> 
> 
> POLICE are investigating an army of online trolls who hack bank accounts and threaten to kill in the name of Meghan Markle. Calling themselves the  ‘Megulators’, the online vigilantes a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Well .. remember, Omid Stupid-Sca-doobie .. had a part in this telling their stan-fans to harass those that posted non-flattering things.  He's a nut-bag himself ..


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember this excuse - “I was inspired by my favorite … “.
> 
> *Mulroney has now updated her post after fans pointed out the similarities - claiming the design was 'inspired by my favorite designers Ralph and Russo' and adding 'without the designer price'*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jessica Mulroney is accused of ripping off a design by Ralph and Russo
> 
> 
> Followers on Instagram have accused Jessica Mulroney of ripping off a suit design by British label Ralph and Russo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


“Inspired”


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> “Inspired”


Jessica and MM both use "inspired" as shorthand for "inspired to blatantly copy/plagiarize".


----------



## gracekelly

Is her new business going to consist of knockoff designs of designers who are no longer in business?    If she or MM are the models, she won’t sell a thing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> Jessica and MM both use "inspired" as shorthand for "inspired to blatantly copy/plagiarize".


Maybe she learned to speak out of both sides of her mouth from her FIL, Brian, Canada's 18th PM, who was often accused of double talk. Seems strange because her husband, Ben is supposed to be a very nice person.

ET correct seema to seems


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> Jessica and MM both use "inspired" as shorthand for "inspired to blatantly copy/plagiarize".


Maybe Jessica wanted it to be a “sweet nod” to the original designer!


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe Jessica wanted it to be a “sweet nod” to the original designer!


She could name her new collection "Re-Collections May Vary" and give "sweet nods" to all the designers who "inspire" her by repeating their past collections line for line


----------



## CarryOn2020

Stylist?  Somebody does not understand the meaning of that word.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She’s been mad for plaid for a few years now 









						Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is back on GMA
					

After making her Good Morning America debut this week, the morning show's newest fashion contributor Jessica Mulroney is back dishing out style advice.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

You know that window pane suit would go great with a white Panama hat and a moonbump for a convenient Al Capone costume 


gracekelly said:


> Is her new business going to consist of knockoff designs of designers who are no longer in business?    If she or MM are the models, she won’t sell a thing.


You know, if you don’t mind going to court a fair bit (and we know someone who doesn’t) that’s actually an interesting business plan 
Who wouldn’t want to see these shysters trying to recreate the highs of Marc Jacob’s LV or Phoebe Philo’s celine? 


CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s been mad for plaid for a few years now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is back on GMA
> 
> 
> After making her Good Morning America debut this week, the morning show's newest fashion contributor Jessica Mulroney is back dishing out style advice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5130205


Ah, I see like most great stylists she doesn’t have the clothes hemmed to fit the leg  
Also because I am a clashing fascist the black with blue (and yellow and white and red nails) hurts me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> You know that window pane suit would go great with a white Panama hat and a moonbump for a convenient Al Capone costume
> 
> You know, if you don’t mind going to court a fair bit (and we know someone who doesn’t) that’s actually an interesting business plan
> Who wouldn’t want to see these shysters trying to recreate the highs of Marc Jacob’s LV or Phoebe Philo’s celine?
> 
> Ah, I see like most great stylists she doesn’t have the clothes hemmed to fit the leg
> Also because I am a clashing fascist the black with blue (and yellow and white and red nails) hurts me.



‘The fake tan face next to pale hands = huge pet peeve for me. Painful to see that.


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> Ah, I see like most great stylists she doesn’t have the clothes hemmed to fit the leg
> Also because I am a clashing fascist the black with blue (and yellow and white and red nails) hurts me.



Perhaps it was to hide the glaring white shoes


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stylist?  Somebody does not understand the meaning of that word.
> 
> View attachment 5130204


What stale hell is this? How to look frumpy and dumpy at any size? 

Mud brown suits no one - discuss.  
Ooh, let's change it up by adding a belt.


----------



## V0N1B2

It’s too bad Jess didn’t love her own (original) face as much as those horrid too-long wide-legged pants she’s so fond of wearing.


----------



## Genie27

Please, please, please tell me that abc news 'stylist' photo is a few years old. I know we've all forgotten how to dress thanks to the pandemic, but if this is what is being broadcast as 'inspiration' to get us out of yoga pants, I'm just going to go rip up some old tshirts, pin them back together with safety pins and call it a day. Bonus points for attaching my skirt a la Pretty Woman too.

Who is the audience for this show? Midwestern hausfrau getting dolled up for date night?
.
.
.
.
.
Ooooooohhhhhhhh, wait! It's the Reitman's MM collection, isn't it?!?!?!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Honestly I feel I'll never be back in tailored clothes. Thanks universe for knit dresses which feel like yoga pants but look a bit more polished haha.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly I feel I'll never be back in tailored clothes. Thanks universe for knit dresses which feel like yoga pants but look a bit more polished haha.



Same with make up. Little liner and mascara and good to go. 
Of course I have reached the age where make up can do as much 'harm' as good. I'd most likely feel different if I was younger and more social.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Genie27 said:


> Please, please, please tell me that abc news 'stylist' photo is a few years old. I know we've all forgotten how to dress thanks to the pandemic, but if this is what is being broadcast as 'inspiration' to get us out of yoga pants, I'm just going to go rip up some old tshirts, pin them back together with safety pins and call it a day. Bonus points for attaching my skirt a la Pretty Woman too.
> 
> Who is the audience for this show? Midwestern hausfrau getting dolled up for date night?
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> Ooooooohhhhhhhh, wait! It's the Reitman's MM collection, isn't it?!?!?!?


Is it really? It is HIDEOUS!
I am fascinated by the fact it seems to be almost entirely belted microfibre tunic jumpers and American apparel style disco pants.  Who wants swathe their chunky middle in heavy fabric, then emphasise their waist with a belt before parading their skinny legs in spandex? 
This makes those polyester M&S dresses they farted out for smart works look like Givenchy 
I’m sure M wore both of those collections all the time - so versatile 
The poor Canadians get an undeserved bad rep for their fashion already without this mess.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly I feel I'll never be back in tailored clothes. Thanks universe for knit dresses which feel like yoga pants but look a bit more polished haha.


My hot take is that feminised tailoring is something that most designers struggle with and so the woman  always end up looking a bit…off on a suit v suit basis so women look better either stretching the rules a little or going for more masculinised tailoring.


poopsie said:


> Same with make up. Little liner and mascara and good to go.
> Of course I have reached the age where make up can do as much 'harm' as good. I'd most likely feel different if I was younger and more social.


I think make up is actually quite a skill so there’s a lot of room for error. Not to mention a lot of companies put out horrible products that just don’t work. I don’t wear make up most of the time anymore. I only like doing dramatic Smokey eyes anyway and you can’t wear that to the playground without scaring the toddlers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Same with make up. Little liner and mascara and good to go.
> Of course I have reached the age where make up can do as much 'harm' as good. I'd most likely feel different if I was younger and more social.



I can't remember the last time I wore some. I am happy if I can be bothered to do my lashes and brows every six weeks (lash lift, brow wax, colour to both...I started doing them myself way before Covid).


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> She could name her new collection "Re-Collections May Vary" and give "sweet nods" to all the designers who "inspire" her by repeating their past collections line for line


Bravo!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stylist?  Somebody does not understand the meaning of that word.
> 
> View attachment 5130204


As far as I know, she is totally self named and created as a stylist. I don't believe that she went to any design school or art school. Did she have a lot of retail experience?  I don't think she did any of the above.   This kind of reminds me of a time when any housewife who had someone compliment her on a sofa choice, called herself an interior decorator.  I used to call them an interior dreckorator.

JM's one talent may be talking the talk that gets freebees or loan outs.  That certainly seemed to be the case for MM.  Too bad none of them fit and the choices didn't match her body type.


----------



## gracekelly

I guess I am the outlier here.  I love tailored clothes and feel better dressed up than in sloppy things.  I decided to keep up my make-up skills during Covid and put it on even if I was just going to sit in the car.  I had to cope with my hair the same as everyone else when the salons were closed and that was OK, but as soon as things opened more, I went back.


----------



## Jayne1

I still can't bother to call for a haircut appointment and we've been open now for 2 weeks (after being locked down since last fall.)


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stylist?  Somebody does not understand the meaning of that word.
> 
> View attachment 5130204


Those are real women in the shot and they never look as great in clothes as a model, I'm thinking.

As for her "inspired" pantsuit... as we know, all the high fashion designers do it and copying goes all the way down to Zara.  It's not illegal to copy a clothing design and there's no copyright protection.

Jess is saying her pantsuit is at an affordable price and I'm guessing if H&M and Fashion Nova can bring runway to the masses, so can she... ?


----------



## gracekelly

If she wants to bring out a line of total copies and wannbees, that is fine, but don't use the print ad from another designer.  This ad is misleading the consumer.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Harry is still a slave


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well .. remember, Omid Stupid-Sca-doobie .. had a part in this telling their stan-fans to harass those that posted non-flattering things.  He's a nut-bag himself ..


disgusting


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I guess I am the outlier here.  I love tailored clothes and feel better dressed up than in sloppy things.  I decided to keep up my make-up skills during Covid and put it on even if I was just going to sit in the car.  I had to cope with my hair the same as everyone else when the salons were closed and that was OK, but as soon as things opened more, I went back.


I like wearing makeup if I'm doing anything social or going anywhere I may run into people but not at home.
My hair got very long during lockdown.  I decided I kinda liked it and now I'm getting it trimmed less often.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Genie27 said:


> Please, please, please tell me that abc news 'stylist' photo is a few years old. I know we've all forgotten how to dress thanks to the pandemic, but if this is what is being broadcast as 'inspiration' to get us out of yoga pants, I'm just going to go rip up some old tshirts, pin them back together with safety pins and call it a day. Bonus points for attaching my skirt a la Pretty Woman too.
> 
> Who is the audience for this show? Midwestern hausfrau getting dolled up for date night?
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> Ooooooohhhhhhhh, wait! It's the Reitman's MM collection, isn't it?!?!?!?



Article from 2018 :gasp:
Is it any wonder the universe sent us a pandemic to restore balance?  
Love the _fresh hell  _


----------



## needlv

MM and her PR leaking a wishful thinking story...  

I would think H and MM are almost out of $$$.  So with their business opportunities not working out, they must need the RF $$$$.  I think the RF should ignore and wait for the divorce...










						Prince William and Prince Harry Have ‘Turned a New Page’ After Royal Feud
					

Prince William and Prince Harry ‘started the healing’ process after reuniting for the unveiling of their mother’s statue — exclusive




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> Bravo!


Thanks! They are few and far between but I have my moments


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> Gossip on tumblr









EverSoElusive said:


> Burned out trying to keep up with all her lies


Liar liar pants on fire  







CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa!  Take that, Harkle.
> *ITV ditches claim about Prince William's staff planting stories about Harry from brothers-at-war documentary at the 11th hour amid fears it was 'defamatory'*
> 
> *Omid Scobie, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's biographer, suggested palace sources briefed newspapers over concerns about Prince Harry's mental health*
> *Prince Harry had spoken with journalist Tom Bradby in 2019 where he admitted to a rift with his brother for the first time*
> *Scobie has now said a negative spin was put on that interview by palace sources*
> *Claims were cut from ITV's documentary 'Harry and William: What Went Wrong?'*









papertiger said:


> Not that far from her Dior gown if she feels like DIYing it
> View attachment 5128297
> View attachment 5128298





I _still _can't believe this fake swarovski embellished polyester looking bed sheet wrapped as a dress cost the same amount of money that would buy you a decent house in many countries. What a complete waste of money.



Annawakes said:


> This is actually the first time I’ve seen the Dior gown.  It’s awful awful awful.


Rest in peace Charles' money that paid for it.









eunaddict said:


> My eyes have rolled so far back into my head, I've lost them. Currently bringing back those touch-typing skills from primary school.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘never wanted fame’ before acting and royal marriage
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE "never wanted fame", yet ended up in the spotlight due to her acting career and marriage to Prince Harry, according to a royal biographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk







The delusions! MM believes _all _of her crazy lies.



needlv said:


> MM wasn’t happy with her place in the hierarchy.  Journalists are writing about what we have talked about in this forum for ages...  MM didn’t want to be behind W and C.  She wanted equality.  But that’s not how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle bristled at low royal status, her reporter friend and other royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were constantly reminded there is a royal ‘hierarchy,’ while they felt they should be on ‘equal footing’ with William and Kate, according to interviews in a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mercurynews.com


Oh, MM-






Chanbal said:


> Never wanted fame...









CarryOn2020 said:


> Stylist?  Somebody does not understand the meaning of that word.
> 
> View attachment 5130204


OMG, why did she have to make that poor woman on the far right look like Friar Tuck in a floral skirt.




CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s been mad for plaid for a few years now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's best friend Jessica Mulroney is back on GMA
> 
> 
> After making her Good Morning America debut this week, the morning show's newest fashion contributor Jessica Mulroney is back dishing out style advice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5130205


This woman calls herself a 'stylist'?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> MM wasn’t happy with her place in the hierarchy.  Journalists are writing about what we have talked about in this forum for ages...  MM didn’t want to be behind W and C.  She wanted equality.  But that’s not how it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle bristled at low royal status, her reporter friend and other royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were constantly reminded there is a royal ‘hierarchy,’ while they felt they should be on ‘equal footing’ with William and Kate, according to interviews in a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mercurynews.com


They underestimate her. What she really wanted was to be on equal footing with HMTQ.



Clearblueskies said:


> Maybe she thought she could modernise the British Monarchy to be like Narnia and there’d be 2 kings and 2 queens?





jelliedfeels said:


> Perhaps that was the research she did before joining? Though reading a book would probably be a bit too much like hard work actually


Maybe she watched the movies? 
Just before her son's Literature exam, my HR head of department phoned me to ask if I had the Lord of The Rings DVDs. I spluttered that the movies were very different from the books. He couldn't answer exam questions based on the movies when the school expected him to read the books! After my initial astonishment, my next feeling was jealousy. I never had fun books like LOTR on my reading list when I did my Literature classes.


----------



## bellecate

jelliedfeels said:


> Is it really? It is HIDEOUS!
> I am fascinated by the fact it seems to be almost entirely belted microfibre tunic jumpers and American apparel style disco pants.  Who wants swathe their chunky middle in heavy fabric, then emphasise their waist with a belt before parading their skinny legs in spandex?
> This makes those polyester M&S dresses they farted out for smart works look like Givenchy
> 
> I’m sure M wore both of those collections all the time - so versatile
> The poor Canadians get an undeserved bad rep for their fashion already without this mess.
> ba


Hey, as a Canadian I resemble that remark.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s



Good grief, they probably asked her to look sexy for the pics, but she thought they said, "Look like a sl*t."


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm sure this belt was a sweet nod to Diana, like the one that we saw on the statue


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good grief, they probably asked her to look sexy for the pics, but she thought they said, "Look like a sl*t."



She's got no class nor elegance


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> She's got no class nor elegance


ITA. Some people I know can look elegant in inexpensive clothes while she looks like trash in expensive clothes because she doesn't follow anyone's advice. It's a shame and a waste of money on her.


----------



## csshopper

In a sick sense, and I think MM is a malignancy, it could be said she didn't want "fame" because simple "fame" which means being known or talked about would never be enough to satisfy her psychotic narcissisism . No. She wanted, and set out to get, much much more, at all costs. She didn't just seek people knowing her name, no,  she demanded adoration, idolatry, deification, praises for every single little self serving gesture, homage to her as savior of the monarchy (except she forgot to check and see if it needed saving), and  veneration as THE most important woman in the RF, Queen Who? 

Her role in the attacks on Prince Charles? I think she has been pizzed at him since the wedding because he stepped in to walk her down the aisle, thus stealing her staring role as the poor forlorn daughter with the horrible Father who was going to have to face this alone and isn't she magnificent for bravely getting herself down that long aisle (talk about a red carpet entrance) all by herself?  But those nasty old traditional mopes in the Firm said "no, that's not how it's done here" and undid all her hard work in defaming her Father.

It really struck me hard the other day when we were discussing the Royal Family chart of succession. There are three Duchesses, so titles are equal:  Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Cambridge, Duchess of Sussex. There the similarities end and it is SO unfair, not to the Malignant one,  who works to tear apart the institution that gives her her status, but to Camilla and Catherine who work tirelessly in support of it all. I wish we still had the "beating the dead horse" emoji, Methane needs to stripped of anything connotating royalty. Mrs Harry Wales is even more than she deserves, maybe "that bit player he married" is sufficient.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. Some people I know can look elegant in inexpensive clothes while she looks like trash in expensive clothes because she doesn't follow anyone's advice. It's a shame and a waste of money on her.




It's actually quite unfortunate considering she was afforded all the help that she could need or use. If only she would listen!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

@csshopper  this one?


: b t d h :


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sooooo, Hazzie is 6’1” while William is 6’3.  Apparently, this difference bothers Hazz so much that he wears heels.  He was noticeably taller at the statue show. Check out his heels vs William’s.  Insecurity much?











						Prince William and Prince Harry reunite at Princess Diana statue unveiling
					

The brothers came together to honour their late mother




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

Theme: Braless Sultry, Almost Unzipped The Jeans


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watched the whole thing. Doria speaks!  MM speaks about the wonderful diversity in London. Hmmm.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


>





Wow! Even with Doria? Reminds me of the clip where she slapped the gentleman's hand when he tried to help her out of the car on her wedding day


----------



## EverSoElusive

When everything was rosy, she spoke about carrying binders of notes. Here's proof. But of course her recollection varied during the OW interview saying that no one helped/educated/guided her when she joined the BRF


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Theme: Braless Sultry, Almost Unzipped The Jeans


LOL, She’s Z list standing still.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Theme: Braless Sultry, Almost Unzipped The Jeans




Mr Frank Sinatra video

*Anything Goes* lyrics
In olden days a glimpse of stocking
Was looked on as something shocking,
But now, God knows,
Anything Goes.

Good authors too who once knew better words,
Now only use four letter words
Writing prose, Anything Goes.

The world has gone mad today
And good's bad today,
And black's white today,
And day's night today,
When most guys today
That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that you're bound to answer
When I propose,
Anything goes

When grandmama whose age is eighty
In night clubs is getting matey with gigolo's,
Anything Goes.

When mothers pack and leave poor father
Because they decide they'd rather be tennis pros,
Anything Goes.

If driving fast cars you like,
If low bars you like,
If old hymns you like,
If bare limbs you like,
If Mae West you like
Or me undressed you like,
Why, nobody will oppose!
When every night,
The set that's smart
Is intruding in nudist parties in studios,
Anything Goes.

The world has gone mad today
And good's bad today,
And black's white today,
And day's night today,
When most guys today
That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goes

If saying your prayers you like,
If green pears you like
If old chairs you like,
If back stairs you like,
If love affairs you like
With young bears you like,
Why nobody will oppose!

And though I'm not a great romancer
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goes...
Anything goes!

ETA video


----------



## Annawakes

Don’t forget “mouth hanging open”.  Yuck.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> LOL, She’s Z list standing still.



To me, she's not even worth to be called Z-list. She's more like no list


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Mr Frank Sinatra
> 
> *Anything Goes* lyrics
> In olden days a glimpse of stocking
> Was looked on as something shocking,
> But now, God knows,
> Anything Goes.
> 
> Good authors too who once knew better words,
> Now only use four letter words
> Writing prose, Anything Goes.
> 
> The world has gone mad today
> And good's bad today,
> And black's white today,
> And day's night today,
> When most guys today
> That women prize today
> Are just silly gigolos
> And though I'm not a great romancer
> I know that you're bound to answer
> When I propose,
> Anything goes
> 
> When grandmama whose age is eighty
> In night clubs is getting matey with gigolo's,
> Anything Goes.
> 
> When mothers pack and leave poor father
> Because they decide they'd rather be tennis pros,
> Anything Goes.
> 
> If driving fast cars you like,
> If low bars you like,
> If old hymns you like,
> If bare limbs you like,
> If Mae West you like
> Or me undressed you like,
> Why, nobody will oppose!
> When every night,
> The set that's smart
> Is intruding in nudist parties in studios,
> Anything Goes.
> 
> The world has gone mad today
> And good's bad today,
> And black's white today,
> And day's night today,
> When most guys today
> That women prize today
> Are just silly gigolos
> And though I'm not a great romancer
> I know that I'm bound to answer
> When you propose,
> Anything goes
> 
> If saying your prayers you like,
> If green pears you like
> If old chairs you like,
> If back stairs you like,
> If love affairs you like
> With young bears you like,
> Why nobody will oppose!
> 
> And though I'm not a great romancer
> And though I'm not a great romancer
> I know that I'm bound to answer
> When you propose,
> Anything goes...
> Anything goes!



Let me go YouTube this song since I dunno it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Let me go YouTube this song since I dunno it


Click on *Frank Sinatra *video in my post to hear the song.


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> To me, she's not even worth to be called Z-list. She's more like no list



Would she be listless then?


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> Would she be listless then?




Yes but we all know she'll start her own list on AWell website      She's shameless!


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watched the whole thing. Doria speaks!  MM speaks about the wonderful diversity in London. Hmmm.





All the arm waving and hair twisting/flipping inside the tent where it’s not windy. AND I can’t watch M use her crooked fingers constantly being waved around.  Right?  Am I the only one bothered with that?  Never really watched her videos until now. This is an eye opener, wish I hadn’t seen all that!


----------



## bellecate

NM


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> @csshopper  this one?
> 
> 
> : b t d h :


You are the best, yes, thank you.


----------



## Icyjade

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure this belt was a sweet nod to Diana, like the one that we saw on the statue




this v neck style is much more flattering on her than most of her other clothes


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> this v neck style is much more flattering on her than most of her other clothes


She looks good in some of her outfits. I don't get why she doesn't seem to be able to figure out what looks good on her and what doesn't. Do all her friends tell each other lies and flatter each other even when they look horrible? Does she select outfits based on price? Does she (gasp!) have no choice because she has to wear whatever the designers send over, due to under the table merching agreements?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

gracekelly said:


> I guess I am the outlier here.  I love tailored clothes and feel better dressed up than in sloppy things.  I decided to keep up my make-up skills during Covid and put it on even if I was just going to sit in the car.  I had to cope with my hair the same as everyone else when the salons were closed and that was OK, but as soon as things opened more, I went back.


I totally understand on the makeup! I can’t work due to chronic pain and problems with my spine but I’ll still do makeup to go to doctor appts, the gym,  or grocery shopping because, honestly, those are the only public places I go  Putting it only just makes you feel better, especially if you are feeling real blah


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I guess I am the outlier here.  I love tailored clothes and feel better dressed up than in sloppy things.  I decided to keep up my make-up skills during Covid and put it on even if I was just going to sit in the car.  I had to cope with my hair the same as everyone else when the salons were closed and that was OK, but as soon as things opened more, I went back.



Oh it's not I don't like clothes and m/u, I just completely lacked the energy for a while and I haven't recovered.


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s



‘hasn’t aged a day?’ 
 Recollections may vary…
To me her nose is looking like this now:




EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure this belt was a sweet nod to Diana, like the one that we saw on the statue


 
Lol 
It’s on sale 75% off!
They are promoting something old on sale? Seems weird.
 I hope Carolina Herrera doesn’t get hit with the same rot as Ralph & russo and CWK’s Givenchy - migraine might be able to get her stans to buy a high street frock but she is clearly poison to high end… maybe I’m being unfair to her maybe it is just a harbinger of doom when marketing decide to go with her. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Sooooo, Hazzie is 6’1” while William is 6’3.  Apparently, this difference bothers Hazz so much that he wears heels.  He was noticeably taller at the statue show. Check out his heels vs William’s.  Insecurity much?
> 
> View attachment 5130675
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Prince Harry reunite at Princess Diana statue unveiling
> 
> 
> The brothers came together to honour their late mother
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I read this in the comments that he wears concealed heel shoes. That’s so cringe who cares if you are the shorter one  a lot of guys would kill to get near 6 foot. If he wants to be taller than will I wish he’d just embrace it and start wearing 70s silver platform boots  with his ugly suits that’d at least be interesting and hed avoid the pesky no brown in town rule! 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Watched the whole thing. Doria speaks!  MM speaks about the wonderful diversity in London. Hmmm.



She must have meant London, Ohio because we all know  London, U.K.  is a racist, backward, homogenous place with absolutely no diversity at all where the leadership was clutching their pearls at the thought a biracial person would have a biracial baby because they couldn’t possibly have predicted that. 


EverSoElusive said:


> Wow! Even with Doria? Reminds me of the clip where she slapped the gentleman's hand when he tried to help her out of the car on her wedding day


M to Doria (or indeed anyone):




xincinsin said:


> She looks good in some of her outfits. I don't get why she doesn't seem to be able to figure out what looks good on her and what doesn't. Do all her friends tell each other lies and flatter each other even when they look horrible? Does she select outfits based on price? Does she (gasp!) have no choice because she has to wear whatever the designers send over, due to under the table merching agreements?


I suspect based on price so she can resell them (BNWT worn once!) or there’s a bit of a merch situation going on. What I do find funny is now she’s a free woman in LA she should be able to market all the clothes she wants free from her oppressors but the big brands seem less keen than they used to be - funny that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




WTF. That woman isn't right in the head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> When everything was rosy, she spoke about carrying binders of notes. Here's proof. But of course her recollection varied during the OW interview saying that no one helped/educated/guided her when she joined the BRF




Honestly, even that is not normal. Carry your freaking binders around at home or at the office, but not on official engagement. You managed to learn your Suit lines, I'm sure you can manage to memorize what little info is needed per engagement. It's so astounding to me that she does the most stupid sh*t but somehow thinks it's making her look cute / interested / invested / special.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> this v neck style is much more flattering on her than most of her other clothes



Yeah I liked that outfit a lot. Until I learned what she spent on it to go to a polo tournament for a hot minute.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

EverSoElusive said:


> Theme: Braless Sultry, Almost Unzipped The Jeans




Pamela Anderson called, she wants her eyebrows back


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Angela has a lot of common sense.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Compassion my big behind!  What about compassion for your Father and other family members MM!!  Did you attend your uncles funeral or send flowers/wreath or a sympathy letter?  Haven’t heard that you did.  H you didn’t show compassion for your grandfather during his last days and what you put your grandmother, father, brother and the rest of your RF through!

Not good role models for compassion when you can’t show it for your own flesh and blood!!  

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement shared on their Archewell website*
*The couple updated their official website on Wednesday*


"*Compassion is at the core of everything we do. We hope you'll join us in building a better world, one act of compassion at a time.*"









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement shared on their Archewell website
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement



					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Compassion my big behind!  What about compassion for your Father and other family members MM!!  Did you attend your uncles funeral or send flowers/wreath or a sympathy letter?  Haven’t heard that you did.  H you didn’t show compassion for your grandfather during his last days and what you put your grandmother, father, brother and the rest of your RF through!
> 
> Not good role models for compassion when you can’t show it for your own flesh and blood!!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement shared on their Archewell website*
> *The couple updated their official website on Wednesday*
> 
> 
> "*Compassion is at the core of everything we do. We hope you'll join us in building a better world, one act of compassion at a time.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement shared on their Archewell website
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, even that is not normal. Carry your freaking binders around at home or at the office, but not on official engagement. You managed to learn your Suit lines, I'm sure you can manage to memorize what little info is needed per engagement. It's so astounding to me that she does the most stupid sh*t but somehow thinks it's making her look cute / interested / invested / special.



Doesn't she have a lady-in-waiting with her at official engagements? I think in this set of photos, the blonde haired lady that's ahead of her and to the side of the frame was her lady-in-waiting when she first started out. Pretty sure she could have left her binders in the car.

I'm gonna speculate that she carried the binder around just for show, trying to tell people that she's working hard at learning the ropes of performing royal duties/engagements


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm gonna speculate that she carried the binder around just for show, trying to tell people that she's working hard at learning the ropes of performing royal duties/engagements



Oh, absolutely.


----------



## lazeny

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s





That was 2003? MM's eyebrows were so unfortunately 90's. I have to admit that her style was very early 2000's.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s



That's a face we haven't really seen. Not her suitcase face and not her Suits face... plus implants, but she did have those in her suitcase days.


----------



## youngster

Icyjade said:


> this v neck style is much more flattering on her than most of her other clothes



I agree and I did really like this particular denim dress on her.  It was one of her few really good looks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chagall

Hermes Zen said:


> Compassion my big behind!  What about compassion for your Father and other family members MM!!  Did you attend your uncles funeral or send flowers/wreath or a sympathy letter?  Haven’t heard that you did.  H you didn’t show compassion for your grandfather during his last days and what you put your grandmother, father, brother and the rest of your RF through!
> 
> Not good role models for compassion when you can’t show it for your own flesh and blood!!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement shared on their Archewell website*
> *The couple updated their official website on Wednesday*
> 
> 
> "*Compassion is at the core of everything we do. We hope you'll join us in building a better world, one act of compassion at a time.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement shared on their Archewell website
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle plead with royal fans – read statement
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


She also has a half sister in a wheelchair in very poor health that she has marked. The two of them are the height of hypocrisy.


----------



## Chanbal

@EverSoElusive @CarryOn2020 @QueenofWrapDress ...

 When I opened this thread today, I had to double check if I had clicked on the right link. For a moment, I thought that I had accidentally opened a link of an adult restricted site... All these pictures look so vulgar.


----------



## periogirl28

Chanbal said:


> @EverSoElusive @CarryOn2020 @QueenofWrapDress ...
> 
> When I opened this thread today, I had to double check if I had clicked on the right link. For a moment, I thought that I had accidentally opened a link of an adult restricted site... All these pictures look so vulgar.


Actually I agree. Those poses are simply not sexy and actually rather badly done too. Awkward and unflattering.


----------



## LittleStar88

Anyone in the US remember Barbazon? Looks like a photo session from modeling school...


----------



## Kevinaxx

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she is acting out the sequel: Suits Reunion.
> _Just take the money and walk away. Then use the ATM card for Bank of Dad and continue drawing a few million pounds a year._
> 
> Interesting how they are rewriting history and saying she starred in Suits. The Express link even claims that "By season three, Suits was the highest rated American TV show for ages 18-49."


I actually liked suits season 1 because it started off cool (cases, weed and people showing you can be just as good if not better then someone who went through school touched me in a personal way) but then it just got to be all drama and clothes which still is pretty cool.

that markle wasn’t even a supporting role star, she’s the support supporting role because Harvey and Mike were the main with Jessica, Louis (you got Litt!!) and Donna were the main supports… only because her character got into a romance with Mike did she edge up.

puhhhhhhlease (with her PR folks claiming she’s a star of suits).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Anyone in the US remember Barbazon? Looks like a photo session from modeling school...
> 
> View attachment 5131066



I can't even put my finger on why she looks so cheap, but she does.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't even put my finger on why she looks so cheap, but she does.



Um, I can. Cheap isn’t the word that comes to my mind, though. Still, the shorter hair looks better on her. After looking at these photos, now I understand why she is so insecure.



Kevinaxx said:


> that markle wasn’t even a supporting role star, she’s the support supporting role because Harvey and Mike were the main with *Jessica*, Louis (you got Litt!!) and Donna were the main supports… only because her character got into a romance with Mike did she edge up.



Jessica was the female power star. The show went off the rails after she left. The Rachel character offered nothing to the show, other than wearing very tight clothes.



LittleStar88 said:


> Anyone in the US remember Barbazon? Looks like a photo session from modeling school...



 Ryan Phillips was one, so they must have some standards.




Chanbal said:


> For a moment, I thought that I had accidentally opened a link of an *adult restricted site*



oooooh la la, H&M’s next career move


----------



## Genie27

She looks so wide in many of those shots - just awkward/ungainly - that camera did not love her. I can see why the roles did not come flooding in. 

I see she kept the 'tendrils' though!


----------



## Roxanna

There is good illustration of their understanding of compassion-reaction when Lord Guthrie fell from his horse trooping the colour . Kate reacted very different. Instinctively. They need to do their "homework " if they really care for cause.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Look who went to Wimbledon! Sophie is there, too.









						Pregnant Princess Beatrice lovingly cradles baby bump at Wimbledon
					

Pregnant Princess Beatrice, 32, could be seen cradling her baby bump as she and husband Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi arrived at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships in London today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s



the goal seems to be to look sexy but I don't think she is


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> that black outfit in the second video really shows off her boxy waist



IMO the entire video shows how unsuitable she was for a public life. MM never mastered the art of small talk. The contrast between her and her mother stands out. Doria walks with her head held high, greets people calmly, doesn’t rush. MM slumps, lets her hair cover her face which makes her look like she is trying to hide, she doesn’t remember she introduced to her mother, so she repeatedly asks ‘have you met my mother’ — she is nearly 40 years old, acts like a 5 yr old.  Meanwhile Hazz tries not to overshadow MM but it’s clear that people only want to meet him.


----------



## Genie27

The video 'speech' sounded like one she'd practiced for when she received her Oscar.


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watched the whole thing. Doria speaks!  MM speaks about the wonderful diversity in London. Hmmm.




That laugh at 15:18. That CANNOT be genuine.


----------



## Clearblueskies

eunaddict said:


> That laugh at 15:18. That CANNOT be genuine.


Ugh the PREENING


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> If you need photo poses. Here's some ideas from Mrs. I-will-sue-your-a*s



Ah .. this is when she had her fake boobies (during her Deal or No Deal days).  I guess she had them removed before her Suits Days (or during that time)?


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> Theme: Braless Sultry, Almost Unzipped The Jeans



.. and yet again, the fake boobies .. which, BTW .. THOMAS paid for!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> @EverSoElusive @CarryOn2020 @QueenofWrapDress ...
> 
> When I opened this thread today, I had to double check if I had clicked on the right link. For a moment, I thought that I had accidentally opened a link of an adult restricted site... All these pictures look so vulgar.




When I posted initially, I almost said they looked like soft p0r-n


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> the goal seems to be to look sexy but I don't thing she is




The problem with her is, she tries too hard, so her pictures end up looking awkward as h3ll


----------



## EverSoElusive

CeeJay said:


> Ah .. this is when she had her fake boobies (during her Deal or No Deal days).  I guess she had them removed before her Suits Days (or during that time)?





CeeJay said:


> .. and yet again, the fake boobies .. which, BTW .. THOMAS paid for!!!



Granted I never paid attention if she got fake b00bs but when I looked at the photos, I definitely wondered if they were fake because her b00bs on Suits were smaller and not in your face 

Guess she removed them before or during her Suits stint


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> To me, she's not even worth to be called Z-list. She's more like no list


HA HA HA .. yes indeed .. the Queen of the *NIX* list!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Here’s the daily dive-in from castle Goring


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> that black outfit in the second video really shows off her boxy waist



I usually try to not watch videos of her besides short clips, but I watched about 3 mins from 15:18 and the fake laugh. Her face malfunction with her own mother is seriously even more unsettling in context.


----------



## bagshopr

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How long until someone screams racism because people think it's cute when they see Bea do it once in seven months, but hated Raptor doing it 24/7 for ten? Especially when she rarely casually rested her hands on the belly but grabbed on for dear life. That said, maybe I'm starting to understand her a bit better. It must be hard to try to fake feelings you simply can't understand, so it's probably only natural you miss the mark very often. She tried to act like her weird idea of a royal and grossly missed the mark, and she tried to act like her weird idea of a devoted expectant mother with the same results.


Meghan was holding a fake bump in place!


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Granted I never paid attention if she got fake b00bs but when I looked at the photos, I definitely wondered if they were fake because her b00bs on Suits were smaller and not in your face
> 
> Guess she removed them before or during her Suits stint


They were very obvious during her suitcase (Deal or No Deal) days.


----------



## Chanbal

The amount of crap this couple generates...  



_Although the new trailer is just 30 seconds long, it is packed with plenty of conflict and emotion, with actress Sydney Morton - who plays the part of Meghan - seen questioning whether she 'made the world's biggest mistake' by marrying into the Royal Family, while Prince Harry, depicted by Jordan Dean, insists that he 'will do everything in his power to keep his wife and son safe'..._










						The Queen, William and Kate appear in Lifetime Megxit movie trailer
					

The network released a second trailer for its upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, which is due to be released later this year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> They were very obvious during her suitcase (Deal or No Deal) days.
> View attachment 5131263




She's gonna be like JLo and says she's never gone under the knife and all she did was she wore some Wonder Woman push-up bras


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> They were very obvious during her suitcase (Deal or No Deal) days.
> View attachment 5131263


The teeth are too big as well. She looks like an alligator.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> She's gonna be like JLo and says she's never gone under the knife and all she did was she wore some Wonder Woman push-up bras



Too bad we can see the outline of her implants just like we usually see the outline of her underwear.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Apologies if this video has already been posted. It's a long video, but worth listening to.

*UN snubbed Meghan for her egotistical behaviour.*

Best comment of the video, *"This woman has the morals of an alley cat."*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm gonna speculate that she carried the binder around just for show, trying to tell people that she's working hard at learning the ropes of performing royal duties/engagements


----------



## poopsie

LittleStar88 said:


> Anyone in the US remember Barbazon? Looks like a photo session from modeling school...
> 
> View attachment 5131066
> 
> 
> View attachment 5131065



And Sears Charm School


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> The teeth are too big as well. She looks like an alligator.



Crocodile


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad we can see the outline of her implants just like we usually see the outline of her underwear.



bolt-on bewbs


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How long until someone screams racism because people think it's cute when they see Bea do it once in seven months, but hated Raptor doing it 24/7 for ten? Especially when she rarely casually rested her hands on the belly but grabbed on for dear life. That said, maybe I'm starting to understand her a bit better. It must be hard to try to fake feelings you simply can't understand, so it's probably only natural you miss the mark very often. She tried to act like her weird idea of a royal and grossly missed the mark, and she tried to act like her weird idea of a devoted expectant mother with the same results.


ITA. Enjoyed the article, but the comments are so anti Bea. Stopped reading after the first 10. I feel sorry for Bea and her sister because of the bad PR they receive on account of their parents, as if one could choose their parents. Both were raised properly and both hold decent jobs.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I usually try to not watch videos of her besides short clips, but I watched about 3 mins from 15:18 and the fake laugh. Her face malfunction with her own mother is seriously even more unsettling in context.


Harry must be terrified when "that look" gets cast his way. Same side eye she has been caught giving others. Makes me think of the shots in alien horror movies, when the outer layer of the creature is peeled off and all the ugly oozes out.

Snark aside, this is serious. Both parents have tempers and mental health issues. Isolated from family who might spot aberrant behavior, Archie and Lily are not growing up in a healthy environment IMO. Could be wrong, but I don't view Doria as a person capable of dealing effectively with her daughter and son-in-law.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. Enjoyed the article, but the comments are so anti Bea. Stopped reading after the first 10. I feel sorry for Bea and her sister because of the bad PR they receive on account of their parents, as if one could choose their parents. Both were raised properly and both hold decent jobs.



I didn't even read the comments. I only enjoy jerky comments when the targets are a*sholes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Harry must be terrified when "that look" gets cast his way. Same side eye she has been caught giving others. *Makes me think of the shots in alien horror movies, when the outer layer of the creature is peeled off and all the ugly oozes out.*



Spot on.



> Snark aside, this is serious. Both parents have tempers and mental health issues. Isolated from family who might spot aberrant behavior, Archie and Lily are not growing up in a healthy environment IMO. Could be wrong, but I don't view Doria as a person capable of dealing effectively with her daughter and son-in-law.



I do think she's more dangerous and other than her Harry seems to love being a dad, but even if he doesn't take his issues out on the kids I just don't see him stepping in and defending them against the narc either.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think she's more dangerous and other than her Harry seems to love being a dad, but even if he doesn't take his issues out on the kids I just don't see him stepping in and defending them against the narc either.



Yep. How can he possibly defend them when he can't/won't assert himself with her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The amount of crap this couple generates...
> 
> 
> 
> _Although the new trailer is just 30 seconds long, it is packed with plenty of conflict and emotion, with actress Sydney Morton - who plays the part of Meghan - seen questioning whether she 'made the world's biggest mistake' by marrying into the Royal Family, while Prince Harry, depicted by Jordan Dean, insists that he 'will do everything in his power to keep his wife and son safe'..._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen, William and Kate appear in Lifetime Megxit movie trailer
> 
> 
> The network released a second trailer for its upcoming movie Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, which is due to be released later this year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I can only assume they decided to cast Armando Iannucci as Will to get everyone on the royals side 
I can tell they are trying to act like there’s a 10+ age gap between the brothers from those hairlines

still getting a good likeness can be very hard, probably especially challenging with casting M as she changes her face every week.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too bad we can see the outline of her implants just like we usually see the outline of her underwear.


Good god even silicone bags don’t want to fit her


Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. Enjoyed the article, but the comments are so anti Bea. Stopped reading after the first 10. I feel sorry for Bea and her sister because of the bad PR they receive on account of their parents, as if one could choose their parents. Both were raised properly and both hold decent jobs.


No you can’t choose your parents but you can always disown them once the money runs out  
In all seriousness I think they get the rough deal in getting made fun of by the press (especially about their looks) but they do get to be princesses and much more prominent than Ed’s kids so it’s swings and roundabouts I guess



csshopper said:


> Harry must be terrified when "that look" gets cast his way. Same side eye she has been caught giving others. Makes me think of the shots in alien horror movies, when the outer layer of the creature is peeled off and all the ugly oozes out.
> 
> Snark aside, this is serious. Both parents have tempers and mental health issues. Isolated from family who might spot aberrant behavior, Archie and Lily are not growing up in a healthy environment IMO. Could be wrong, but I don't view Doria as a person capable of dealing effectively with her daughter and son-in-law.


Hopefully she’s so busy conquering the world they are mostly raised by the team of nannies with sporadic bursts of bicycle rides and ‘freedom fun’ with dim old daddy


----------



## lanasyogamama

poopsie said:


> bolt-on bewbs


So strange how they went out of style.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> So strange how they went out of style.


Bolt-ons? So strange that they were ever in style!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> No you can’t choose your parents but you can always disown them once the money runs out
> In all seriousness I think they get the rough deal in getting made fun of by the press (especially about their looks) but they do get to be princesses and much more prominent than Ed’s kids so it’s swings and roundabouts I guess


Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Edward and Sophie chose to use the titles of Viscount and Lady for their children, while in reality, being the grandchildren of the Monarch they are Prince and Princess.

ETA to correct last sentence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Harry must be terrified when "that look" gets cast his way. Same side eye she has been caught giving others. Makes me think of the shots in alien horror movies, when the outer layer of the creature is peeled off and all the ugly oozes out.
> 
> Snark aside, this is serious. Both parents have tempers and mental health issues. Isolated from family who might spot aberrant behavior, Archie and Lily are not growing up in a healthy environment IMO. Could be wrong, but I don't view Doria as a person capable of dealing effectively with her daughter and son-in-law.



Idk, Hazz is probably dealing with the issues the same way his dad did. Just vacate the premises until things have cooled, let the nanny handle it. He seemingly had no difficulty in leaving Archi and Lili for a week or so. She may do the same as well. We’ll never know unless someone takes a photo because they aren’t releasing any photos. Since there are no public functions that they attend as a family, we never see how they interact.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> The teeth are too big as well. She looks like an alligator.



She has to be if she wanted to eat up the entire monarchy to be queen   





poopsie said:


> bolt-on bewbs





lanasyogamama said:


> So strange how they went out of style.





Jayne1 said:


> Bolt-ons? So strange that they were ever in style!



Nobody else's bolt-ons are as famous as Posh Spice's  She has had hers forever. And of course AJ has them too after her double mastectomy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Idk, Hazz is probably dealing with the issues the same way his dad did. Just vacate the premises until things have cooled, let the nanny handle it. He seemingly had no difficulty in leaving Archi and Lili for a week or so. She may do the same as well. We’ll never know unless someone takes a photo because they aren’t releasing any photos. Since there are no public functions that they attend as a family, we never see how they interact.


All true and I agree with you. I do not think Harry would be intentionally hurtful, I think he does have a genuine love for children. My concern would be not being as watchful in certain situations if he was impaired by pharmecuiticals. The nanny is definitely important, hope they have a good one, or two.


----------



## jelliedfeels

U


LittleStar88 said:


> Anyone in the US remember Barbazon? Looks like a photo session from modeling school...
> 
> View attachment 5131066
> 
> 
> View attachment 5131065


You may have to fill us in on this but was it some kind of vanity racket where the aspiring model ended up paying a fortune for a photo shoot and then never heard anything back? 


Jayne1 said:


> The guy knows how to dress.


He has a bit of a Chuck Bass vibe without the creepiness of course (that show is a weird rewatch) 


Maggie Muggins said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Edward and Sophie chose to use the titles of Viscount and Lady for their children, while in reality, being the grandchildren of the Monarch they are Prince and Princess.
> 
> ETA to correct last sentence.


Oh god this isn’t my speciality but Lady C in her videos has implied that it was considered _pushing it_ for A***  to ask for his daughters to be made princesses when she was talking about Archie in the past. Which makes it sound like it’s a weighted choice to me. I honestly am a bit unclear as on paper they are apparently all allowed to style themselves with this royal title stuff once they turn 18 - 








						James, Viscount Severn - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				




to me, the princess vs lady is kind of a moot point as a title is a title but clearly prince/princess is a better brand according to our beloved couple  
What I meant was  that the Y sisters have a very prominent space  in the press even compared to Anne and her children (who actually make a better comparison than E’s kids) but that it comes with the downside that they get a lot of flack,  much more so than certain other people, who may have complained about never being protected


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> U
> 
> You may have to fill us in on this but was it some kind of vanity racket where the aspiring model ended up paying a fortune for a photo shoot and then never heard anything back?



Barbazon school of modeling - you pay them money to take modeling classes. But MoM's poses look like Barbazon School of Modeling-style 

OMG they are still around: https://www.barbizonmodeling.com/

My dad wanted to send me to Barbazon when I was a teen. My mom said no (she went to Charm School @poopsie not sure if it was through Sears but it could have been since it was the early 60's). I am really glad they didn't try to fight it out, I was ok with the no to modeling school 

I knew a few girls who went there in high school but never actually worked as models. They mostly just bragged about it at school.


----------



## doni

jelliedfeels said:


> U
> 
> You may have to fill us in on this but was it some kind of vanity racket where the aspiring model ended up paying a fortune for a photo shoot and then never heard anything back?
> 
> He has a bit of a Chuck Bass vibe without the creepiness of course (that show is a weird rewatch)
> 
> Oh god this isn’t my speciality but Lady C in her videos has implied that it was considered _pushing it_ for A***  to ask for his daughters to be made princesses when she was talking about Archie in the past. Which makes it sound like it’s a weighted choice to me. I honestly am a bit unclear as on paper they are apparently all allowed to style themselves with this royal title stuff once they turn 18 -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> James, Viscount Severn - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> to me, the princess vs lady is kind of a moot point as a title is a title but clearly prince/princess is a better brand according to our beloved couple
> What I meant was  that the Y sisters have a very prominent space  in the press even compared to Anne and her children (who actually make a better comparison than E’s kids) but that it comes with the downside that they get a lot of flack,  much more so than certain other people, who may have complained about never being protected



It is a birth right, all the children of the monarch children in the male line get the Prince/ss title. So Princess Anne’s didn’t (the Queen offered to give her children the title, of her own accord, I.e., no birth right) but the Princess Royal refused.

In so far as the law is not changed, Harry’s children would acquire the title when and if Charles becomes King, and they become the King’s grandchildren.


----------



## Lodpah

Just a drop in. My daughter teaches young kids English in Spain and they had a power point show of random people like Chris Hemsworth, etc. and MM's picture showed. My daughter asked them if they knew who she was. The kids said Queen Isabel (you know, the one who led the Inquisition). My DD asked them as in Queen Elizabeth of England? They said no, Queen Isabel who killed a lot of people. I guess Isabel means Elizabeth in Spanish. The kids said she died a long time ago. Lol, had to pop in here and relate this story.


----------



## poopsie

LittleStar88 said:


> Barbazon school of modeling - you pay them money to take modeling classes. But MoM's poses look like Barbazon School of Modeling-style
> 
> OMG they are still around: https://www.barbizonmodeling.com/
> 
> My dad wanted to send me to Barbazon when I was a teen. My mom said no (she went to Charm School @poopsie not sure if it was through Sears but it could have been since it was the early 60's). I am really glad they didn't try to fight it out, I was ok with the no to modeling school
> 
> I knew a few girls who went there in high school but never actually worked as models. They mostly just bragged about it at school.




LOL. It was late 60's for me.  Just another unspeakable horror of those junior high years


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever is next, it's not good coming from this couple...  

_*Prince William is "dreading" finding out what Meghan Markle and Harry plan to do next as they continue their non-royal lives, an expert has claimed.*

Since quitting the royal family the Sussexes have signed multi-million pound contacts with Netflix and Spotify, and Meghan has released her own children's book.


They've also given two interviews about their time in the royal family, a light-hearted chat with James Corden and a controversial, tell-all sit down with Oprah Winfrey.

The latter sent shockwaves through the royal family and saw the Queen issue a short but firm statement saying "recollections may vary".

Duncan Larcombe believes the couple are still cashing in on the royal brand by continuously talking about it, saying they need to find a new way to work.

He told OK! magazine : "What do they do next? That's a question Prince William is dreading the answer to.

"Ultimately, they have to find a way to do their work in LA while not trading in on the royal brand.

" *Prince Harry** hasn't exactly been subtle. He's revealed to the world that he pretty much hates his family and the whole system is rotten to the core, but by continually talking about the royals, they're cashing in on the brand.*

"If they spend their whole careers selling that royal brand, they'll never speak to William again._"










						Prince William 'dreading' Meghan Markle and Harry's next move, claims expert
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have taken on lots of projects and business deals since quitting the royal family, but the Duke of Cambridge is reportedly nervous about what's to come




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Whatever is next, it's not good coming from this couple...
> 
> _*Prince William is "dreading" finding out what Meghan Markle and Harry plan to do next as they continue their non-royal lives, an expert has claimed.*
> 
> Since quitting the royal family the Sussexes have signed multi-million pound contacts with Netflix and Spotify, and Meghan has released her own children's book.
> 
> 
> They've also given two interviews about their time in the royal family, a light-hearted chat with James Corden and a controversial, tell-all sit down with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The latter sent shockwaves through the royal family and saw the Queen issue a short but firm statement saying "recollections may vary".
> 
> Duncan Larcombe believes the couple are still cashing in on the royal brand by continuously talking about it, saying they need to find a new way to work.
> 
> He told OK! magazine : "What do they do next? That's a question Prince William is dreading the answer to.
> 
> "Ultimately, they have to find a way to do their work in LA while not trading in on the royal brand.
> 
> " *Prince Harry** hasn't exactly been subtle. He's revealed to the world that he pretty much hates his family and the whole system is rotten to the core, but by continually talking about the royals, they're cashing in on the brand.*
> 
> "If they spend their whole careers selling that royal brand, they'll never speak to William again._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William 'dreading' Meghan Markle and Harry's next move, claims expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have taken on lots of projects and business deals since quitting the royal family, but the Duke of Cambridge is reportedly nervous about what's to come
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



You said it earlier = Royal porn stars


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting photo sequence. Where is MA these days?


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Interesting photo sequence. Where is MA these days?




Wait, what? I am all lost on the timeline and relevance for this one... Weren't H & M already dating at this time? What is going on here in these photos - please help explain.

And Harry is sitting with Melania TrumpET? What is going on here?!


----------



## melissatrv

One thing I am surprised about is that they don't try to make money with exclusive photo ops of the children.  For instance, "first pictures of Lilibet" in People magazine.  I know People pays good money for things like that.  And they always showed pictures of Archie in black & white, from a distance, animated, or blurred somehow.  That is one shameless opp these two have not taken advantage of....I would like to think it is because they are trying to protect the children or don't want them to be identifiable in case someone tried to kidnap them etc.  There that is some good in them somewhere.


----------



## LittleStar88

melissatrv said:


> One thing I am surprised about is that they don't try to make money with exclusive photo ops of the children.  For instance, "first pictures of Lilibet" in People magazine.  I know People pays good money for things like that.  And they always showed pictures of Archie in black & white, from a distance, animated, or blurred somehow.  That is one shameless opp these two have not taken advantage of....I would like to think it is because they are trying to protect the children or don't want them to be identifiable in case someone tried to kidnap them etc.  There that is some good in them somewhere.



Or by doing so they contradict the basis of any future "privacy" lawsuits....? Or maybe it is written in their contracts with [enter entity name here] that they can't market themselves in that manner because of entity's exclusive rights to content/BRF asked them not to and they agreed/doing so cheapens brand... 

Nothing these two do have anything other than the intention of protecting their "brand" and future interests. Everything has calculation, thought, and intention.

We've all had a pretty good look at Archie. Living where they do... Privacy was not really at the top of their li$t.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This weekend with Wimbledon and Futbol, well, Hazzi must have major FOMO


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait, what? I am all lost on the timeline and relevance for this one... Weren't H & M already dating at this time? What is going on here in these photos - please help explain.
> 
> And Harry is sitting with Melania TrumpET? What is going on here?!


I've no idea, but H looks uncomfortable looking at her and MA.


----------



## Chanbal

melissatrv said:


> One thing I am surprised about is that they don't try to make money with exclusive photo ops of the children.  For instance, "first pictures of Lilibet" in People magazine.  I know People pays good money for things like that.  And they always showed pictures of Archie in black & white, from a distance, animated, or blurred somehow.  That is one shameless opp these two have not taken advantage of....I would like to think it is because they are trying to protect the children or don't want them to be identifiable in case someone tried to kidnap them etc.  There that is some good in them somewhere.


They could sell the pictures for ~1M, but this wouldn't solve their cash problems. Also, it wouldn't help with the image they want to sell...private victims. They could donate the funds to charity, but I don't think charity is a priority for them. At this point, I agree with the comments I read about their interest in continuing to cash in on the BRF, this is likely a lot more profitable. Their PR and lawyer bills must be very high, they need big money.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait, what? I am all lost on the timeline and relevance for this one... Weren't H & M already dating at this time? What is going on here in these photos - please help explain.
> 
> And Harry is sitting with Melania TrumpET? What is going on here?!



i thought the rumour/story was that MM and Markus did not have tickets, so we’re removed by security.  H did not look happy to see her.

but then they were invited on another night (there were photos of Markus and MM in some type of box for invictus games…)

I could be wrong but that is my recollection….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Her guilty pleasure is the RHOBH. With the way she's acting, she'd fit right in with the cast  

In one of the questions, she mentioned about getting sued. Anyone know the backstory?? Guess now she sues people before they can sue her.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Her guilty pleasure is the RHOBH. With the way she's acting, she'd fit right in with the cast
> 
> In one of the questions, she mentioned about getting sued. Anyone know the backstory?? Guess now she sues people before they can sue her.



This video reminds me I used to think she was stunning and adorable at the same time.

Maybe she was a nicer person back then?


----------



## CarryOn2020

All these stories from the past definitely prove whatever she is involved in turns into a major drama. So many unanswered questions.
Most of us live drama-free lives while for some drama just follows them, usually because of the choices they made.  Ick.


----------



## eunaddict

Posts got mixed up and jumped from Bea's thread to here. Odd.


----------



## EverSoElusive

She looks pretty and seems genuinely nice and fairly normal in this video unlike her Ducka$s persona


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the entire video shows how unsuitable she was for a public life. MM never mastered the art of small talk. The contrast between her and her mother stands out. Doria walks with her head held high, greets people calmly, doesn’t rush. MM slumps, lets her hair cover her face which makes her look like she is trying to hide, she doesn’t remember she introduced to her mother, so she repeatedly asks ‘have you met my mother’ — she is nearly 40 years old, acts like a 5 yr old.  Meanwhile Hazz tries not to overshadow MM but it’s clear that people only want to meet him.


And to add, Doria has the same body shape as her daughter but knows how to dress for it better than Meghan.

It always amazed me how Doria who is this low-key, hippie type woman can dress very well when attending formaloccasions with the British royal family. But her idiot daughter stays looking a mess.


----------



## Annawakes

If that was shortly after meeting H, she probably *was* nice and normal…basking in her conquest…


----------



## RoryX

bag-mania said:


> Yep. How can he possibly defend them when he can't/won't assert himself with her.


Lady C wrote a book about narcissism. Her mother was a maligant narc and her father used to say "Even when your mother is wrong, she is right". I imagine Harry will say the same thing.


----------



## jelliedfeels

LittleStar88 said:


> Wait, what? I am all lost on the timeline and relevance for this one... Weren't H & M already dating at this time? What is going on here in these photos - please help explain.
> 
> And Harry is sitting with Melania TrumpET? What is going on here?!


maybe they are all swingers?
Oh no   why do I think these things?


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> When I posted initially, I almost said they looked like soft p0r-n


I've had that in my mind ever since Methane said she wanted to write books for adults


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Interesting photo sequence. Where is MA these days?




Nothing's amiss here. Typical event planning.

He is the leading public figure at the Games and therefore the publicity needs not to be about H&M but on the event.
She is invited as M +1 and they're escorted to their seats as VIPs (so they don't get lost in throng - common service for VIPs).
They are seated far away so photos of H do not include H & M sitting together.
They are seated in the same eye-line so they can see each other.

However, it would have been more prudent of M to bring a woman friend.
But then M's proved not to be prudent.
And maybe she didn't have any.

Edited: Correcting the autocorrect


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> This video reminds me I used to think she was stunning and adorable at the same time.
> 
> Maybe she was a nicer person back then?



Maybe she was a better actress


----------



## jelliedfeels

LittleStar88 said:


> Barbazon school of modeling - you pay them money to take modeling classes. But MoM's poses look like Barbazon School of Modeling-style
> 
> OMG they are still around: https://www.barbizonmodeling.com/
> 
> My dad wanted to send me to Barbazon when I was a teen. My mom said no (she went to Charm School @poopsie not sure if it was through Sears but it could have been since it was the early 60's). I am really glad they didn't try to fight it out, I was ok with the no to modeling school
> 
> I knew a few girls who went there in high school but never actually worked as models. They mostly just bragged about it at school.



Oh that does sound funny like stage school for kids who can’t act - lots of young egos tussling.
Loved the very 90s advert. 


melissatrv said:


> One thing I am surprised about is that they don't try to make money with exclusive photo ops of the children.  For instance, "first pictures of Lilibet" in People magazine.  I know People pays good money for things like that.  And they always showed pictures of Archie in black & white, from a distance, animated, or blurred somehow.  That is one shameless opp these two have not taken advantage of....I would like to think it is because they are trying to protect the children or don't want them to be identifiable in case someone tried to kidnap them etc.  There that is some good in them somewhere.


I think that we haven’t seen a glossy spread of the kids for the simplest of reasons: people mag et al aren’t actually willing to pay because they know they won’t make money on it & they can just continue publishing puff pieces for free. This idea of exclusive pics of these kids being a million dollar scoop is a myth.

They  already sold the big expose interview and I don’t think ITV and others made the money they thought they would out of it.
Also, Blue ivy and the kardashian kids seem to move around  free from interference. (Not to mention we’ve seen loads of pics of them for free) I doubt anyone is kidnapping celebrity kids these days as all the money & much less risk is in celeb pets.




EverSoElusive said:


> Her guilty pleasure is the RHOBH. With the way she's acting, she'd fit right in with the cast
> 
> In one of the questions, she mentioned about getting sued. Anyone know the backstory?? Guess now she sues people before they can sue her.



I think she might not get on RHOBH - she might be able to swing one of the b-list housewives franchises - maybe that’s why she tried to move to Vancouver. 




Jayne1 said:


> This video reminds me I used to think she was stunning and adorable at the same time.
> 
> Maybe she was a nicer person back then?


I think she’s always been a piece of…. work but when she was a bit player she needed people to like her.
Classic manipulative behaviour. Now she’s an untouchable ‘trophy wife’ she can let it all hang out. 

Pet theory- that bitty-baby-breath voice on an adult is always a giant red flag. The only woman I trust who sounds like that is Jennifer Coolidge


----------



## Clearblueskies

Jayne1 said:


> This video reminds me I used to think she was stunning and adorable at the same time.
> 
> Maybe she was a nicer person back then?


No not nicer, just eager to please.  Narcissists are very engaging when they want to be (and especially when there’s something to be gained from it).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> No not nicer, just eager to please.  *Narcissists are very engaging when they want to be (and especially when there’s something to be gained from it).*


ITA
That has been my experience with the narcs with whom I've had the misfortune to work. One of them just resigned and left to much jubilation. We traded a lot of stories while she was with the company, and the only people to whom she was nice are those who had power & clout or those who could get her well-paying side gigs (she was a TV personality). My own personal Methane


----------



## Clearblueskies

xincinsin said:


> ITA
> That has been my experience with the narcs with whom I've had the misfortune to work. One of them just resigned and left to much jubilation. We traded a lot of stories while she was with the company, and the only people to whom she was nice are those who had power & clout or those who could get her well-paying side gigs (she was a TV personality). My own personal Methane


Once you’ve experienced it you recognise the signs!  The Meg in this video is the woman Harry thought he was marrying.


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> Once you’ve experienced it you recognise the signs!  The Meg in this video is the woman Harry thought he was marrying.



That vid is the woman most of us thought he was marrying too! 

I have since changed my mind about her. 
And I've changed my mind about him. 
I kinda think these 2 are well-matched, and welcome to each other now.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I've had that in my mind ever since Methane said she wanted to write books for adults



Geez what books can they _plagiarize_ for adults???


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> I think she might not get on RHOBH - she might be able to swing one of the b-list housewives franchises - maybe that’s why she tried to move to Vancouver.



Hey maybe she will start the Real Housewives of Buckingham Palace starring _ousted_ housewife of _one  _


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Maybe she was a better actress



Maybe she didn't play victim then


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey maybe she will start the Real Housewives of Buckingham Palace starring _ousted_ housewife of _one _



well she did get evicted… and asked not to return.  So maybe it’s love island or “big brother“?  Either way if they stoop to reality tv we know they have hit desperation for $$

personally I think she is waiting for the right moment to divorce.  As soon as she has someone else lined up…


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> well she did get evicted… and asked not to return.  So maybe it’s love island or “big brother“?  Either way if they stoop to reality tv we know they have hit desperation for $$
> 
> personally I think she is waiting for the right moment to divorce.  As soon as she has someone else lined up…



She is trying to mirror Diana so you may be right about the divorce  Harry's fortune is dwindling fast like his receding hairline, not to mention he has no influence within the BRF as much as she had hoped he did.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> She is trying to mirror Diana so you may be right about the divorce  Harry's fortune is dwindling fast like his receding hairline, not to mention he has no influence within the BRF as much as she had hoped he did.



and they are not the popular power couple they thought they would be either


----------



## marietouchet

eunaddict said:


> Posts got mixed up and jumped from Bea's thread to here. Odd.


You are not alone, I have had that happen to me , I think it has something to do with having multiple windows open ???? You are not imagining things


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I just have to post this exquisite pic of Prince Charles of Luxembourg. During the past few weeks, the HGD couple and Prince Charles visited several nursing homes and interacted with the seniors without seeking million of $$$ for the little prince's photo. Article from the palace


----------



## eunaddict

marietouchet said:


> You are not alone, I have had that happen to me , I think it has something to do with having multiple windows open ???? You are not imagining things



I think admin/mods are moving posts around as they deem fit but not changing the reply links, so if you respond to a post that was moved, it gets posted in the old thread.

I usually only have one tab open 



Maggie Muggins said:


> I just have to post this exquisite pic of Prince Charles of Luxembourg. During the past few weeks, the HGD couple and Prince Charles visited several nursing homes and interacted with the seniors without seeking million of $$$ for the little prince's photo. Article from the palace



This little one has never failed to make me smile. He's just so chubby and happy all the time...in everyone of his mom's photos, he's just delighted to be in them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*Prince William is "dreading" finding out what Meghan Markle and Harry plan to do next as they continue their non-royal lives, an expert has claimed.*_



All of us, Wills.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Interesting photo sequence. Where is MA these days?




As the proud absolvent of a media class on "Information and Opinion"...how do we know from these sequence of pics what Harry and Trudeau were looking at? So far, it's just an opinion  It would be an information if we saw a bigger section of the pic with MA and Raptor prancing around in front of them.


----------



## Chanbal

The king and queen of compassion are preaching on “_what is compassion?_”  

I wish they would have some compassion and spare us from their hypocrisy. 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle call for compassion in rare statement
					

‘We believe that compassion can unleash incredible change across the world,’ reads statement




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

melissatrv said:


> One thing I am surprised about is that they don't try to make money with exclusive photo ops of the children.  For instance, "first pictures of Lilibet" in People magazine.  I know People pays good money for things like that.  And they always showed pictures of Archie in black & white, from a distance, animated, or blurred somehow.  That is one shameless opp these two have not taken advantage of....I would like to think it is because they are trying to protect the children or don't want them to be identifiable in case someone tried to kidnap them etc.  There that is some good in them somewhere.



I'm not as good of a person as you. My thoughts are that either Harry for once put his foot down (unlikely, hu?) or that Raptor is waiting for the big fish who isn't biting. Like People mag is a bit beneath the Lord's gift to the world, but Vogue hasn't made an offer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> This video reminds me I used to think she was stunning and adorable at the same time.
> 
> Maybe she was a nicer person back then?



I have to agree, without the backstory I'd think she's cute and likeable there. With what we know now I do think it's all a charade.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Nothing's amiss here. Typical event planning.
> 
> He is the leading public figure at the Games and therefore the publicity needs not to be about H&M but on the event.
> She is invited as M +1 and they're escorted to their seats as VIPs (so they don't get lost in throng - common service for VIPs).
> They are seated far away so photos of H do not include H & M sitting together.
> They are seated in the same eye-line so they can see each other.
> 
> However, it would have been more prudent of M to bring a woman friend.
> But then M's proved not to be prudent.
> And maybe she didn't have any.
> 
> Edited: Correcting the autocorrect



Oh wow, thank you. I swear I learn so much from this thread because someone always knows something in detail and is kind enough to share


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think she’s always been a piece of…. work but when she was a bit player she needed people to like her.
> Classic manipulative behaviour. Now she’s an untouchable ‘trophy wife’ she can let it all hang out.



I agree.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> Once you’ve experienced it you recognise the signs!  The Meg in this video is the woman Harry thought he was marrying.



I wonder...when did he see the real her, and was it a shocking experience?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> That vid is the woman most of us thought he was marrying too!



Not me. 10 mins of that engagement interview and I knew I didn't care for her and something was off. I'll say I didn't think it would escalate like this.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this video has already been posted. It's a long video, but worth listening to.
> 
> *UN snubbed Meghan for her egotistical behaviour.*
> 
> Best comment of the video, *"This woman has the morals of an alley cat."*



as a cat lover, I resent the comparison


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> as a cat lover, I resent the comparison


If your avatar is a representation of your kitty, unlike MM, s/he appears as well behaved as their master/mistress.


----------



## kemilia

Maggie Muggins said:


> I just have to post this exquisite pic of Prince Charles of Luxembourg. During the past few weeks, the HGD couple and Prince Charles visited several nursing homes and interacted with the seniors without seeking million of $$$ for the little prince's photo. Article from the palace
> View attachment 5131958


That's one cutie pie of a baby!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not me. 10 mins of that engagement interview and I knew I didn't care for her and something was off. I'll say I didn't think it would escalate like this.


Same here, it didn't take very long to see the similarities between her and my narcissistic sister.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not me. 10 mins of that engagement interview and I knew I didn't care for her and something was off. I'll say I didn't think it would escalate like this.



I was a bit slower. 

Took me 'till the wedding 

Then I could see 'it' wasn't about the wedding


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not as good of a person as you. My thoughts are that either Harry for once put his foot down (unlikely, hu?) or that Raptor is waiting for the big fish who isn't biting. Like People mag is a bit beneath the Lord's gift to the world, but Vogue hasn't made an offer.



Since I no longer believe a a single word either of this charade-couple.
Since they make the most of every opportunity as a parade-couple
I say - no photo - it/she/he never happened. 
At least under their control.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I tried so hard to give her the benefit of the doubt. The Africa trip was the last straw for me.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder...when did he see the real her, and was it a shocking experience?


Is there a real her?


----------



## EverSoElusive

I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

needlv said:


> well she did get evicted… and asked not to return.  So maybe it’s love island or “big brother“?  Either way if they stoop to reality tv we know they have hit desperation for $$
> 
> personally I think she is waiting for the right moment to divorce.  As soon as she has someone else lined up…



Bill Gates will be available soon.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Bill Gates will be available soon.



Coz there'll be no competition for that match


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> Bill Gates will be available soon.


He's def smarter than Harry


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> He's def smarter than Harry


You’re absolutely right about that!  Also when did we last hear Bill Gates whining that his daddy stopped giving him an allowance?  Bet he wasn’t pushing 40.


----------



## csshopper

If anyone ever needed an example to illustrate the phrase "he is two faced" Scabies is the man. Since the phrase means someone who is insincere or deceptive, it fits his character. Following his most recent cosmetic surgery resulting in his eyebrows not being aligned and one eye slightly more lifted than the other making him look off balance, his appearance also makes him  "two faced". Messed up inside and out, very well matched as the Sussex Mouthpiece.
Oops. Edited to add: meant to send this as a reply to EverSoElusive's post above.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> You’re absolutely right about that!  Also when did we last hear Bill Gates whining that his daddy stopped giving him an allowance?  Bet he wasn’t pushing 40.



Bill Gates was a billionaire by the time he was 31. So no he wasn’t worried about having an allowance.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not me. 10 mins of that engagement interview and I knew I didn't care for her and something was off. I'll say I didn't think it would escalate like this.


I thought the engagement interview was off, but put it down to nerves.  Alarm bells rang for me in the days ahead of the wedding when all the will he?/won’t he? fuss about Thomas kicked off.  I thought to myself - wtf is this? she doesn’t want him there.  Why doesn’t she want her own father at her wedding?  Is he not photogenic enough?  Seeing her walk down the aisle on her own read Narcissist to me.
After that the coat flickery, and the nonsense surrounding the birth of Archie just finished me off having any good opinion of her.


----------



## Clearblueskies

bag-mania said:


> Bill Gates was a billionaire by the time he was 31. So no he wasn’t worried about having an allowance.


By the time he was 40 he was giving money away not asking for a raise in his pocket money


----------



## Nico61

https://qr.ae/pGkp44  Benjamin smallbrook quora. 
Just. WOW. what a piece of work she is.


----------



## sdkitty

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought the engagement interview was off, but put it down to nerves.  Alarm bells rang for me in the days ahead of the wedding when all the will he?/won’t he? fuss about Thomas kicked off.  I thought to myself - wtf is this? she doesn’t want him there.  Why doesn’t she want her own father at her wedding?  Is he not photogenic enough?  Seeing her walk down the aisle on her own read Narcissist to me.
> After that the coat flickery, and the nonsense surrounding the birth of Archie just finished me off having any good opinion of her.


I think it's odd that she didn't want family there....made her look off.  It seems to me it would have been better for her image to at least find a few relatives (like her uncle who got her the embassy job) to invite.  It's not like she was an orphan


----------



## tiktok

Clearblueskies said:


> By the time he was 40 he was giving money away not asking for a raise in his pocket money



Frankly most of us were financially independent (even if not billionaires) by our 20s, not asking for pocket money in our 30s or 40s… People who aren’t H&M call it “being an adult”.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Frankly most of us were financially independent (even if not billionaires) by our 20s, not asking for pocket money in our 30s or 40s… People who aren’t H&M call it “being an adult”.


but we didn't require private security and 19-bath homes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I tried so hard to give her the benefit of the doubt. The Africa trip was the last straw for me.



Yeah it took a while for me to get to my current stage of disdain too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Is there a real her?



Excellent point. She's like Harry Potter's magic mirror which lets you see whatever you long for (and even in HP it's unhealthy hahaha). The real her is the raging narcissist who doesn't care for anyone but herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it




Is this little bubblegum under our collective shoe suggesting William and Kate don't talk to their staff constantly? I think not. Maybe he was referring to the gardener. 

Does he ever stop and think "Wait a minute, nobody is gonna buy that"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> If anyone ever needed an example to illustrate the phrase "he is two faced" Scabies is the man. Since the phrase means someone who is insincere or deceptive, it fits his character. Following his most recent cosmetic surgery resulting in his eyebrows not being aligned and one eye slightly more lifted than the other making him look off balance, his appearance also makes him  "two faced". *Messed up inside and out, very well matched as the Sussex Mouthpiece.*
> Oops. Edited to add: meant to send this as a reply to EverSoElusive's post above.



Give him a few more years and he might end up like the Mouth of Sauron.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Just saw on the news that this young lady emerged as the first African-American child to win the spelling bee contest. If Ducka$s continues with her regular MO (think Amanda Gorman and the poetry club/association), I bet she'd try to piggyback on this girl's winning, not because she genuinely cares but to amplify the race card


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it



The woman with the creaky voice - I hit the back button.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Just saw on the news that this young lady emerged as the first African-American child to win the spelling bee contest. If Ducka$s continues with her regular MO (think Amanda Gorman and the poetry club/association), I bet she'd try to piggyback on this girl's winning, not because she genuinely cares but to amplify the race card
> 
> View attachment 5132131



Wouldn't that be an excellet opportunity to gift the poor child a copy of The Bench with a not so inspiring inscription?


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Snark aside, this is serious. Both parents have tempers and mental health issues. Isolated from family who might spot aberrant behavior, Archie and Lily are not growing up in a healthy environment IMO. Could be wrong, but I don't view Doria as a person capable of dealing effectively with her daughter and son-in-law.


NO SNARK taken here .. I *100% agree* with you!!!  Sadly, I think those poor children are going to have major issues growing up with these two; I really feel for them!


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I think it's odd that she didn't want family there....made her look off.  It seems to be it would have been better for her image to at least find a few relatives (like her uncle who got her the embassy job one one) to invite.  It's not like she was an orphan



If she could play an orphan to get all the attention, Ducka$s will! She's just that desperate for attention 




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this little bubblegum under our collective shoe suggesting William and Kate don't talk to their staff constantly? I think not. Maybe he was referring to the gardener.
> 
> Does he ever stop and think "Wait a minute, nobody is gonna buy that"?



If there are people that believe Mr. Trumpet's lies, surely there are people that would believe what Ducka$s and Scoobie are peddling     




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wouldn't that be an excellet opportunity to gift the poor child a copy of The Bench with a not so inspiring inscription?



It's probably in the mail already


----------



## Clearblueskies

EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it



I remember how Meghan's sources kept telling us how Meghan was going to ”hit the ground running” and all about her “work ethic”  What a joke.  
Isn’t she the one who went on maternity leave in March 2019 and basically never came back?? They decamped to Canada for a well earned rest from doing nothing here in November 2019. They then went on to the US to have a breather from doing sod all in Canada. And they’re now on another 4 month period of rest and recuperation from doing not a lot in Montecito. In fact Netflix want their money back there’s been so much work ethic flying about from Team Sussex  So much (for) hard work


----------



## EverSoElusive

Clearblueskies said:


> I remember how Meghan's sources kept telling us how Meghan was going to ”hit the ground running” and all about her “work ethic”  What a joke.
> Isn’t she the one who went on maternity leave in March 2019 and basically never came back?? They decamped to Canada for a well earned rest from doing nothing here in November 2019. They then went on to the US to have a breather from doing sod all in Canada. And they’re now on another 4 month period of rest and recuperation from doing not a lot in Montecito. In fact Netflix want their money back there’s been so much work ethic flying about from Team Sussex  So much (for) hard work



Netflix and Spotify both! I hope these companies have spoke to their legal team and started planning their strategy if the Sucka$ses don't produce any content in the next few months


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Excellent point. She's like Harry Potter's magic mirror which lets you see whatever you long for (and even in HP it's unhealthy hahaha). The real her is the raging narcissist who doesn't care for anyone but herself.



Except she always gives herself away with looks and moves when things don't go according to plan or she's feeling insecure. 

There always seems to be anger, indignation and frustration very close to the surface


----------



## LittleStar88

EverSoElusive said:


> Just saw on the news that this young lady emerged as the first African-American child to win the spelling bee contest. If Ducka$s continues with her regular MO (think Amanda Gorman and the poetry club/association), I bet she'd try to piggyback on this girl's winning, not because she genuinely cares but to amplify the race card
> 
> View attachment 5132131



Maybe MoM can hire this smart and beautiful young lady to spell some delicious word salads!


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe MoM can hire this smart and beautiful young lady to spell some delicious word salads!


Too good for those pretenders to the throne


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it



The comments... whoa


----------



## CeeJay

carmen56 said:


> Bill Gates will be available soon.


HA .. you and I think alike on that front!!!  I'm surprised that the 2 of them didn't get an invite to the "Billionaire's" meet-&-greet in the Southwest somewhere (can't remember).  But, that doesn't mean that they won't TRY (very hard) to get an invite to this in the near future!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Bill Gates was a billionaire by the time he was 31. So no he wasn’t worried about having an allowance.



If H had a $B he'd _still_ be moaning Daddy stopped his pocket money


----------



## serene

EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it




I suspected that this might be the reason. Despite of they all speaking english, they still come from different cultures. Americans are very straightforward and some people might think of it as rude or nasty as they go for what they want. I think British are much more laid back and this might have meant that they experienced megan too pushy and demanding. She might not have meant to be like that but this is what they experienced. 
When I first started to work in the UK and we had status meeting with our team and manager, I was very straightforward about not being able to do finalise some of my work because few of my team members did not finish their part (and i'm not american!). My manager said afterwards that my team members I referred to experienced it very rude and I should have just said that I just wasn't able to finish my work yet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

He threw away his chance for QE’s 28billion dollar empire.  She and The Crown own jewels, land (!!!), money, etc.  Why leave that? He and his wife couldn’t show up for 5 minutes, smile, wave, and leave???  BillG wouldn’t have coffee with these clowns.









						Inside ‘The Firm’: How The Royal Family’s $28 Billion Money Machine Really Works
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive interview with the Queen of Media has the Windsors tied in knots. Here's how it affects their 1,000-year-old business.




					www.forbes.com
				




_Being a member of The Firm also comes with high expectations for keeping the moneymaking machine running for generations to come. The crown holds, but cannot sell, nearly $28 billion in assets through the Crown Estate ($19.5 billion), Buckingham Palace (est. $4.9 billion), the Duchy of Cornwall ($1.3 billion), the Duchy of Lancaster ($748 million), Kensington Palace (est. $630 million) and the Crown Estate Scotland ($592 million). Forbes also estimates that Queen Elizabeth has another $500 million in personal assets._











						The mysterious property empire behind the Queen – DW – 06/09/2021
					

One of the largest property groups in Europe is directly tied to Queen Elizabeth II. Strictly speaking, the 95-year-old monarch doesn't own it. But neither does the government, making it complex legally.




					www.dw.com
				



_This is clearly not just any old enterprise. As well as vast tracts of central London, The Crown Estate owns property all across the UK, from castles and cottages to agricultural land and forests plus retail parks and shopping centers. It owns more than half the UK's entire seashore, giving it hugely valuable auction rights for offshore commercial activity, such as wind farms.

Administering real estate worth at least £14.1 billion (€16.4 billion, $17.8 billion), it is one of Europe's largest property groups. The question of who exactly owns the real estate empire is not a straightforward one, though._


----------



## Aimee3

I can’t help but wonder if, knowing what H and his wife know now, whether they still would have left the royal family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t help but wonder if, knowing what H and his wife know now, whether they still would have left the royal family.



Live and learn. Cue music -






Spoiler: Lyrics



Friends all tried to warn me
But I held my head up high
All the time they warned me
But I only passed them by
They all tried to tell me
But I guess I didn't care
I turned my back and
Left them standing there
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Joey tried to help me find a job
A while ago
When I finally got it I didn't want to go
The party Mary gave for me
When I just walked away
Now there's nothing left for me to say
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Years have passed and I keep thinking
What a fool I've been
I look back into the past and
Think of way back then
I know that I lost everything I thought I that could win
I guess I should have listened to my friends
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Burning bridges lost forevermore


----------



## 1LV

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t help but wonder if, knowing what H and his wife know now, whether they still would have left the royal family.


I believe they would have taken longer to plan better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

serene said:


> I suspected that this might be the reason. Despite of they all speaking english, they still come from different cultures. Americans are very straightforward and some people might think of it as rude or nasty as they go for what they want.



The thing is, there were several Americans on her team IIRC...at least Knauf who launched the bullying allegations is. I found that detail interesting because wouldn't he of all people spot if it was just a clash of cultures?


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t help but wonder if, knowing what H and his wife know now, whether they still would have left the royal family.



I think they would still have left because Meghan is incapable of being patient and playing the long game. She craves instant gratification and she couldn't keep her raging ego in check. Everyone else in the family figured her out quickly enough except for Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, about the email thing. I really don't care when people email me, but I honestly don't feel obligated to answer if it's 5 o'clock in the morning, late on a Friday afternoon (or actually, any given evening during the week) or on weekends. I might answer if I'm in the mood, in fact I often work a few hours on the weekends anyway, but unless it was agreed on earlier they contact me at an unconventional time there are business hours for a reason.

I honestly don't think people would have been outraged only because Duchess Difficult got up at 5 and emailed from the yoga mat...she probably threw a fit if she didn't get an answer within 15 mins. Honestly? Unless you pay me for 24 hours a day don't expect me to set an alarm tone for your incoming emails at an ungodly time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I think they would still have left because Meghan is incapable of being patient and playing the long game. She craves instant gratification and she couldn't keep her raging ego in check. Everyone else in the family figured her out quickly enough except for Harry.






EverSoElusive said:


> She looks pretty and seems genuinely nice and fairly normal in this video unlike her Ducka$s persona




In this video, watch how her mouth contorts when her hair falls in her face, around the 19 second mark.  Guessing whenever something does not go perfectly, she physically stresses. She wasn’t ready for public appearances back then. Harry’s ego never let him see it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> In this video, watch how her mouth contorts when her hair falls in her face, around the 19 second mark.  Guessing whenever something does not go perfectly, she physically stresses. She wasn’t ready for public appearances back then. Harry’s ego never let him see it.



The thing is, I don't take issue with someone being not ready, not made out for the public eye etc. But some stupid fame wh*re who had lots of expectations but nothing to show for but a long list of unpleasant behavior? Yeah, no.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, I don't take issue with someone being not ready, not made out for the public eye etc. But some stupid fame wh*re who had lots of expectations but nothing to show for but a long list of unpleasant behavior? Yeah, no.



Agree, this was near the end of the Suits show. She had years of ‘experience’, yet didn’t train herself not to react negatively. 
 IMO that is surprising. Who trained her?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t help but wonder if, knowing what H and his wife know now, whether they still would have left the royal family.



I think they believe (and this may actually happen/who knows) that the Q will leave them $$$$$'s then C for doing absolutely nothing for the RF but give them grief and they will gain $$$$$'s being a non-royal doing their own thing like take advantage of NetFlix, Spotify etc etc etc.  They get the cake and eat it too.  Sorry folks I'm a bit moody today ... I know I don't get a lot of likes on my postings on this thread (thank you to those that have I do notice ... THANK YOU ) anyway I don't trust greedy M&H !


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I think they would still have left because Meghan is incapable of being patient and playing the long game. She craves instant gratification and she couldn't keep her raging ego in check. Everyone else in the family figured her out quickly enough except for Harry.


THIS, THIS and THIS!!!!  Remember, even Harry noticed early on "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets .." and this came from a very early age.


----------



## papertiger

serene said:


> I suspected that this might be the reason. Despite of they all speaking english, they still come from different cultures. Americans are very straightforward and some people might think of it as rude or nasty as they go for what they want. I think British are much more laid back and this might have meant that they experienced megan too pushy and demanding. She might not have meant to be like that but this is what they experienced.
> When I first started to work in the UK and we had status meeting with our team and manager, I was very straightforward about not being able to do finalise some of my work because few of my team members did not finish their part (and i'm not american!). My manager said afterwards that my team members I referred to experienced it very rude and I should have just said that I just wasn't able to finish my work yet



Some of the papers are putting forward this idea that Americans are culturally 'different' that Brits and M's behaviour could have been (mis)interpreted as bullying. 

Straightforward is fine in Britain. And we love the optimism and confidence of Americans (and Australians). 

Being rude to experienced professionals, undermining their working practices and job remits, thinking they're available 24/7 with no life of their own, having insatiable demands with no idea of protocol, and having no clear boundaries at all, are all NOT  American traits. 

They are classed as arrogance, ignorance and dictatorial the World over.


----------



## papertiger

serene said:


> I suspected that this might be the reason. Despite of they all speaking english, they still come from different cultures. Americans are very straightforward and some people might think of it as rude or nasty as they go for what they want. I think British are much more laid back and this might have meant that they experienced megan too pushy and demanding. She might not have meant to be like that but this is what they experienced.
> When I first started to work in the UK and we had status meeting with our team and manager, I was very straightforward about not being able to do finalise some of my work because few of my team members did not finish their part (and i'm not american!). My manager said afterwards that my team members I referred to experienced it very rude and I should have just said that I just wasn't able to finish my work yet



We would love you (where I work)


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Some of the papers are putting forward this idea that Americans are culturally 'different' that Brits and M's behaviour could have been (mis)interpreted as bullying.
> 
> Straightforward is fine in Britain. And we love the optimism and confidence of Americans (and Australians).
> 
> Being rude to experienced professionals, undermining their working practices and job remits, thinking they're available 24/7 with no life of their own, having insatiable demands with no idea of protocol, and having no clear boundaries at all, are all NOT  American traits.
> 
> They are classed as arrogance, ignorance and dictatorial the World over.
> 
> View attachment 5132372



 








						Time to help those poor Americans understand those British niceties... - Horses for Sources | No Boundaries
					

It’s nearly 10 years since I ventured back to these shores, and to celebrate, I decided it was time to...




					www.horsesforsources.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Some of the papers are putting forward this idea that Americans are culturally 'different' that Brits and M's behaviour could have been (mis)interpreted as bullying.
> 
> Straightforward is fine in Britain. And we love the optimism and confidence of Americans (and Australians).
> 
> Being rude to experienced professionals, undermining their working practices and job remits, thinking they're available 24/7 with no life of their own, having insatiable demands with no idea of protocol, and having no clear boundaries at all, are all NOT  American traits.
> 
> They are classed as arrogance, ignorance and dictatorial the World over.
> 
> View attachment 5132372




I  you for this comment all the way!!!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time to help those poor Americans understand those British niceties... - Horses for Sources | No Boundaries
> 
> 
> It’s nearly 10 years since I ventured back to these shores, and to celebrate, I decided it was time to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.horsesforsources.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5132379



Perfect! (US English)

There should be a Google translate between (upper-class) UK English and US English.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> I just have to post this exquisite pic of Prince Charles of Luxembourg. During the past few weeks, the HGD couple and Prince Charles visited several nursing homes and interacted with the seniors without seeking million of $$$ for the little prince's photo. Article from the palace
> View attachment 5131958


Awwwwwwww
IMHO this thread always welcomes cute babies.
and jewellery pics
And bags obviously 


EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it



My god, he looks like a sim or a replicant… I’ve also never heard his voice before I assumed he’d either have a Posh Scottish accent or be a bit Rah…. why is he vaguely Manc?

An example of a comparable work ethic to H&M:


I mean it goes without saying that I don’t buy this idea that she just worked too hard and was just too direct and new for us simple Brits. She was there for a couple of months and got handed several nice trips and a couple of charity projects and empowering speeches- that’s all the royals ever do anyways. Hardly groundbreaking 

the thing that makes me annoyed is seeing people call KM kkkhate and the like. They have no grounds whatever for believing that she’s ever done anything racist but she’s getting marred with that label for no real reason.

add on - these people have not grasped the basics of the concept of primogeniture have they? There’s no possible way H&M can overtake W&K unless H (of all people) created time travel and arranged to be born first. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this little bubblegum under our collective shoe suggesting William and Kate don't talk to their staff constantly? I think not. Maybe he was referring to the gardener.
> 
> Does he ever stop and think "Wait a minute, nobody is gonna buy that"?


I love little bubblegum what a delightful insult 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, about the email thing. I really don't care when people email me, but I honestly don't feel obligated to answer if it's 5 o'clock in the morning, late on a Friday afternoon (or actually, any given evening during the week) or on weekends. I might answer if I'm in the mood, in fact I often work a few hours on the weekends anyway, but unless it was agreed on earlier they contact me at an unconventional time there are business hours for a reason.
> 
> I honestly don't think people would have been outraged only because Duchess Difficult got up at 5 and emailed from the yoga mat...she probably threw a fit if she didn't get an answer within 15 mins. Honestly? Unless you pay me for 24 hours a day don't expect me to set an alarm tone for your incoming emails at an ungodly time.


My OH always says if you can’t get your work done within your working hours it’s a sign you are inefficient not more efficient  

Once I had a boss who was a not-so-secret-coke addict and he would do nothing at work all day  and then start firing the emails out in the middle of the night once he’d got his hit. It took a surprisingly long time for him to get fired. So glad I got out of that dump.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, about the email thing. I really don't care when people email me, but I honestly don't feel obligated to answer if it's 5 o'clock in the morning, late on a Friday afternoon (or actually, any given evening during the week) or on weekends. I might answer if I'm in the mood, in fact I often work a few hours on the weekends anyway, but unless it was agreed on earlier they contact me at an unconventional time there are business hours for a reason.
> 
> I honestly don't think people would have been outraged only because Duchess Difficult got up at 5 and emailed from the yoga mat...she probably threw a fit if she didn't get an answer within 15 mins. Honestly? Unless you pay me for 24 hours a day don't expect me to set an alarm tone for your incoming emails at an ungodly time.


To me, people can email whenever they want, but it’s the expectation of an immediate response that’s a problem.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> the thing that makes me annoyed is seeing people call KM kkkhate and the like.



WTF!



> add on - these people have not grasped the basics of the concept of primogeniture have they? There’s no possible way H&M can overtake W&K unless H (of all people) created time travel and arranged to be born first.



They're only one plane crash away from the throne. Fingers crossed!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wouldn't that be an excellet opportunity to gift the poor child a copy of The Bench with a not so inspiring inscription?


I thought it went without saying that we were all going to stop giving Harry’s wife ideas.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wouldn't that be an excellet opportunity to gift the poor child a copy of The Bench with a not so inspiring inscription?


Looks like the stans and Foundation have run out of $ in their "buy the book" campaign, one month out from publication and here we are:


Best Sellers Rank: *#2,072 in Books* (See Top 100 in Books)

#12 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#75 in Children's Emotions Books
#154 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)
Yawn.


----------



## xincinsin

Clearblueskies said:


> Why doesn’t she want her own father at her wedding?  Is he not photogenic enough?  Seeing her walk down the aisle on her own read Narcissist to me.
> After that the coat flickery, and the nonsense surrounding the birth of Archie just finished me off having any good opinion of her.





sdkitty said:


> I think it's odd that she didn't want family there....made her look off.  It seems to me it would have been better for her image to at least find a few relatives (like her uncle who got her the embassy job) to invite.  It's not like she was an orphan


It wouldn't have fit her self-made millionaire without a supportive family narrative if her clan turned up at the wedding. I suspect she gave Hazard the "single-mother Doria brought me up in extreme hardship" fiction. Having a father to walk her down the aisle was already pushing it. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> In this video, watch how her mouth contorts when her hair falls in her face, around the 19 second mark.  Guessing whenever something does not go perfectly, she physically stresses. She wasn’t ready for public appearances back then. Harry’s ego never let him see it.


If we, the general public, were told multiple times that she was going to hit the ground running, just imagine how many times she swatted him around the head with claims of her prowess. I'd say his ego didn't let him see her mediocrity, but she built up the fantasy till people swallowed her tall tales of stardom and acclaimed speeches to the international community.


----------



## xincinsin

I work in a company that runs 24/7 and has employees from around the world. The most compassionate boss I've ever had was from Australia. The worst boss I ever had was my own countryman. I live in a British colony and lean more British in my way of life, but have had few problems working with Americans, even those who are too American-centric. 

Methane's problem isn't cultural. I too send out emails at 5am sometimes because I am on the overnight shift. But if I do, I don't expect my 8am shift to have already acted on it. I wouldn't be surprised if Methane expected her 5am instructions to be acted on immediately, and hurled abuse when it wasn't. Narcs think the world revolves around them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> If we, the general public, were told multiple times that she was going to hit the ground running, just imagine how many times she swatted him around the head with claims of her prowess. I'd say his ego didn't let him see her mediocrity, but she built up the fantasy till people swallowed her tall tales of stardom and acclaimed speeches to the international community.



Also, most of the Suits ‘stars’ who loudly vouched for her greatness were really not that well known IMO.  Did Gabriel Macht have any lead roles prior to Suits? His character could not have carried this show without the supporting cast. Just now saw the Louis Litt actor in season 5 of Billions. The acting was a joke.

ETA: my point - she did not work with A listers, so she never developed her skills.  The Royals are way out of her league.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Just saw on the news that this young lady emerged as the first African-American child to win the spelling bee contest. If Ducka$s continues with her regular MO (think Amanda Gorman and the poetry club/association), I bet she'd try to piggyback on this girl's winning, not because she genuinely cares but to amplify the race card
> 
> View attachment 5132131


I watched it, and this girl is amazing. I wouldn't be surprised if Cringe tries to piggyback on her victory.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger enjoying the four seasons...


----------



## breakfastatcartier

melissatrv said:


> One thing I am surprised about is that they don't try to make money with exclusive photo ops of the children.  For instance, "first pictures of Lilibet" in People magazine.  I know People pays good money for things like that.  And they always showed pictures of Archie in black & white, from a distance, animated, or blurred somehow.  That is one shameless opp these two have not taken advantage of....I would like to think it is because they are trying to protect the children or don't want them to be identifiable in case someone tried to kidnap them etc.  There that is some good in them somewhere.


There was speculation that Meghan’s greedy self is waiting for a certain amount of money that no one’s willing to pay for those photos.

Plus this could be to spite the Royal family into not letting them see the new additon.

Meghan is not protecting anyone but herself. She doesn’t want attention taken from her, even by her children.


----------



## Clearblueskies

jelliedfeels said:


> My OH always says if you can’t get your work done within your working hours it’s a sign you are inefficient not more efficient
> 
> Once I had a boss who was a not-so-secret-coke addict and he would do nothing at work all day  and then start firing the emails out in the middle of the night once he’d got his hit. It took a surprisingly long time for him to get fired. So glad I got out of that dump.


I had a colleague like this.  He’d miss every deadline, be late for meetings, never be prepared….  But because he sent out emails in the early hours and carried vast quantities of paperwork around looking so harassed, he got a lot of sympathy.  In truth he was just incredibly disorganised, arrogant and rather selfish.  You’d head for a meeting to find the papers you’d waited weeks for had been mailed out at 1am that morning  I think I was the only one who saw through him. I did hear he’d been moved on, but I was long gone by that time


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Methane's problem isn't cultural. I too send out emails at 5am sometimes because I am on the overnight shift. But if I do, I don't expect my 8am shift to have already acted on it. I wouldn't be surprised if Methane expected her 5am instructions to be acted on immediately, and hurled abuse when it wasn't. Narcs think the world revolves around them.



Some people confuse work emails with text messages


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

The team working for BRF are seasoned international professionals. They worked with Americans and other nationalities. The cultural difference hypothesis could only be raised by people with very limited cultural and travel experience.


----------



## poopsie

Jktgal said:


> The team working for BRF are seasoned international professionals. They worked with Americans and other nationalities. The cultural difference hypothesis could only be raised by *people with very limited cultural and travel experience*.



That would be Meghan, wouldn't it


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> The team working for BRF are seasoned international professionals. They worked with Americans and other nationalities. The cultural difference hypothesis could only be raised by people with very limited cultural and travel experience.


Or a person with a very restricted world view, minimal flexibility and no empathy.


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> There was speculation that Meghan’s greedy self is waiting for a certain amount of money that no one’s willing to pay for those photos.
> 
> Plus this could be to spite the Royal family into not letting them see the new additon.
> 
> Meghan is not protecting anyone but herself. She doesn’t want attention taken from her, even by her children.


Years from now, the BRF will be dutifully wishing the 2 kids Happy Birthday using Archie's christening photos. Maybe we should save a file of all those glares that Methane gives so that we can wish her Happy whatever. First dibs on those evil eyes that she sent Hazard even before she got the ring on her finger.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time to help those poor Americans understand those British niceties... - Horses for Sources | No Boundaries
> 
> 
> It’s nearly 10 years since I ventured back to these shores, and to celebrate, I decided it was time to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.horsesforsources.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5132379


Omg I have used and heard those phrases in work and social settings and these are so very spot on!


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> Years from now, the BRF will be dutifully wishing the 2 kids Happy Birthday using Archie's christening photos. Maybe we should save a file of all those glares that Methane gives so that we can wish her Happy whatever. First dibs on those evil eyes that she sent Hazard even before she got the ring on her finger.




ime, time and again I see you staring down at me
Now, then and again I wonder what it is that you see
With those angry eyes
Well, I bet you wish you could cut me down
With those angry eyes
You want to believe that I am not the same as you
And now I can't conceive, oh lord, of what it is you're trying to do
With those angry eyes
Well, I bet you wish you could cut me down
With those angry eyes
What a shot you could be if you could shoot at me
With those angry eyes
You and I must start to realize
Blindness binds us in a false disguise
Can you see me through those angry eyes? 
You try to defend that you are not the one to blame
But I'm finding it hard, my friend, when I 'm in the deadly aim
Of those angry eyes
Well, I bet you wish you could cut me down
With those angry eyes
What a shot you could be if you could shoot at me
With those angry eyes


----------



## carmen56

poopsie said:


> ime, time and again I see you staring down at me
> Now, then and again I wonder what it is that you see
> With those angry eyes
> Well, I bet you wish you could cut me down
> With those angry eyes
> You want to believe that I am not the same as you
> And now I can't conceive, oh lord, of what it is you're trying to do
> With those angry eyes
> Well, I bet you wish you could cut me down
> With those angry eyes
> What a shot you could be if you could shoot at me
> With those angry eyes
> You and I must start to realize
> Blindness binds us in a false disguise
> Can you see me through those angry eyes?
> You try to defend that you are not the one to blame
> But I'm finding it hard, my friend, when I 'm in the deadly aim
> Of those angry eyes
> Well, I bet you wish you could cut me down
> With those angry eyes
> What a shot you could be if you could shoot at me
> With those angry eyes




Raptor’s signature tune.


----------



## wilding

Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.









						Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.




					www.news.com.au
				





UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.


 just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.


----------



## chicinthecity777

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.


Is this a joke? I decided not to have any children, do I get an award too? FFS!


----------



## xincinsin

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.


Oh lord... Do they have to make a public apology if they "accidentally" pop a 3rd bun into the oven? And how trustworthy is this entity giving out the awards?


----------



## wilding

xincinsin said:


> Oh lord... Do they have to make a public apology if they "accidentally" pop a 3rd bin into the oven? *And how trustworthy is this entity giving out the awards?*



I have my thoughts on this, especially the UN peacekeepers. These have gotten me into trouble elsewhere in the past.


----------



## Chanbal

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.





chicinthecity777 said:


> Is this a joke? I decided not to have any children, do I get an award too? FFS!


It's real and ridiculous... 

_Population Matters issued Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with the “Special Award”, claiming the decision means they will reduce their impact on the environment by not having any more children following the birth of their daughter Lilibet Diana last month.

The UK-based charity, which campaigns for a sustainable population, said the couple were being recognised as “a role model for other families."

A spokesman said: “In choosing and publicly declaring their intention to limit their family to two, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are helping to ensure a better future for their children and providing a role model for other families_.









						Harry and Meghan receive award for 'enlightened decision' to only have two kids
					

Population Matters rewarded the couple for lowering their family's potential impact on the environment by making the “enlightened decision” to limit their children to Archie and Lilibet




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Oh lord... Do they have to make a public apology if they "accidentally" pop a 3rd bun into the oven? And how trustworthy is this entity giving out the awards?



How can one hire a surrogate "accidentally"?


----------



## Annawakes

Peel back the onion and I bet that mermaid’s PR team worked tirelessly to set up this ridiculous award.  Hey, we decided to have only one child.  Where’s my award?  I should be even more recognized.  What about those who decided not to have kids?  They are the real environmentalists then!

This “award” had twofold purpose; get them in the news again for doing absolutely nothing (and blowing it up as something), and sticking it to W&K.  Now if W&K were to have another, they’d get criticism for it.  Is there no end to their bitterness?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _A spokesman said: “In choosing and publicly declaring their intention *to limit their family to two*, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are helping to ensure a better future for their children and providing a role model for other families_.



Wouldn't a family of two mean just the couple, though?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wouldn't a family of two mean just the couple, though?


Two progeny, up to 20 bathrooms and a minimum of 14 bedrooms.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Just saw on the news that this young lady emerged as the first African-American child to win the spelling bee contest. If Ducka$s continues with her regular MO (think Amanda Gorman and the poetry club/association), I bet she'd try to piggyback on this girl's winning, not because she genuinely cares but to amplify the race card
> 
> View attachment 5132131
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> s


yes, and she is also a basketball prodigy....wants to go to Harvard....her parents must be glowing with pride


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA .. you and I think alike on that front!!!  I'm surprised that the 2 of them didn't get an invite to the "Billionaire's" meet-&-greet in the Southwest somewhere (can't remember).  But, that doesn't mean that they won't TRY (very hard) to get an invite to this in the near future!


but wouldn't that conflict with his whining about not getting money from daddy for their security?  can they say they are rich and ad the same time say they are in need?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wouldn't a family of two mean just the couple, though?


If only... l'm sure the global genetic pool wouldn't have missed them, since Methane has declared that they are both descended from a long lineage of genetic pain. If they were truly compassionate, they would have had no kids.


----------



## papertiger

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.



Why didn't give me (and DH) an award for having 0? 

Not fair, not fair, I want my darn award _now_, I want _my_ award  sorry, suddenly came over all Methane


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Why didn't give me (and DH) an award for having 0?


me too!


----------



## sdkitty

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.


What BS.....probably one of the reasons they made the decision is she is a geriatric mom....uugh


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> me too!



 

I mean, plllllleeeeeaaaase!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I mean, plllllleeeeeaaaase!


that biatch really caught the golden goose


----------



## EverSoElusive

This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.



I don't even get that.....what was she going for?


----------



## jelliedfeels

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.


China must be fuming!

In all honesty, I find the idea of promoting how many children people ought to have to be anti-Liberty, classist and culturally insensitive.

I also don’t find having only 2 children to be an achievement- I’d say it’s the majority in the U.K. and US
They couldn’t give that reward in Diana’s memory because,of course, they think she should have had only one Kid - Harry


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Why didn't give me (and DH) an award for having 0?
> 
> Not fair, not fair, I want my darn award _now_, I want _my_ award  sorry, suddenly came over all Methane


What pt wants... 

Maybe it is only given to couples who hire a Hollywood PR firm as well as a self-mutilated London-based sock puppet/Royal expert.

It's such a stupid award. Hope someone discovers that it was sponsored by Archewell or its affiliates.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I don't event get that.....what was she going for?



There's probably a child somewhere by the person who took the picture and she probably thought it was the right time to joke with or tease the child with a


----------



## breakfastatcartier

wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> 
> 
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.


This makes me hope that Kate gets pregnant again … Just to spite Meghan and her botched nose and veneers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

EverSoElusive said:


> This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.



She’s probably trying too hard to seem younger than she really is.

This woman is mentally challenged. The perfect bride for Harry.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> What pt wants...
> 
> Maybe it is only given to couples who hire a Hollywood PR firm as well as a self-mutilated London-based sock puppet/Royal expert.
> 
> It's such a stupid award. Hope someone discovers that it was sponsored by Archewell or its affiliates.


what about all the celebs who adopt rather than reproduce? (charlize theron comes to mind)
wouldn't that beat having two kids?

edited to add she doesn't seem like she'd be very maternal.....as I've said before, I don't know her but this is just my impression.  so if that's the case, better that she has few kids or none.  If she only loves herself, then the kids will have to rely on H or the nannies for love and affection


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> Why didn't give me (and DH) an award for having 0?
> 
> Not fair, not fair, I want my darn award _now_, I want _my_ award  sorry, suddenly came over all Methane


Me too!


----------



## csshopper

1.An ill placed slam at the three Cambridge children. Three well adjusted, mentally healthy, raised in a stable loving family children will have a far more powerful positive impact on this world than two whiny, angry, embittered, entitled, raised by mentally unhealthy parents in isolation, who seem destined to need a lot of support, possibly at taxpayer expense. It's about the QUALITY not the QUANTITY in this case.

2. They "win" a $925 "award" which will not begin to offset the $$$ their publicists probably put out to get this desperate item placed in the "news".

3. Does the Surrogate get a cut of the proceeds, after all she did the labor, literally.

4. Saving the cost of further Surrogate/IVF procedures will aid their shrinking income.

5. Their next contribution to the welfare of the environment will be "Duke and Duchess of Sussex Develop New System to Decrease Hazardous Waste Disposal." They stop preaching.


----------



## EverSoElusive

breakfastatcartier said:


> This makes me hope that Kate gets pregnant again … Just to spite Meghan and her botched nose and veneers.



I really would like to see another Cambridge baby  Not so much to spite Ducka$s but because Will and Kate's kids are simply adorable. Even better if they could pop a fraternal pair though Kate already said Will doesn't want more


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Listening to some Youtube videos in the background while doing some desk work...have we ever heard Marcus Anderson is rumoured to have links to Epstein?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.




She did stop sticking out her tongue after the wedding...guess doing it at Charles' party made someone have a word or two.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Anyone ever been or seen this place in person?


----------



## redney

EverSoElusive said:


> Anyone ever been or seen this place in person?



Bet MM is pi$$ed she's positioned behind Haz!


----------



## EverSoElusive

redney said:


> Bet MM is pi$$ed she's positioned behind Haz!




You know it!   Since it's a painting, she could not place her hand on Harry's back to signal him to let her go first


----------



## chicinthecity777

EverSoElusive said:


> Anyone ever been or seen this place in person?



Thank you for the heads up! Now I know where to avoid when I am at Waterloo!


----------



## Clearblueskies

redney said:


> Bet MM is pi$$ed she's positioned behind Haz!


I was just about to say the same thing


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> You know it!   Since it's a painting, she could not place her hand on Harry's back to signal him to let her go first


that pushing, pulling and shoving she has done is the worst


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Crazy Card Lady is saying Raptor and MA are scheming how to get rid of Harry because he wasn't as much of a golden goose as she had hoped (really? The BRF isn't good enough for her LMAO). And it will be ugly and she'll try to smear him and put all the blame on him so she can once again be the innocent victim...HE hated his family, HE wanted to destroy them etc. when it was her who drip-drip-dripfed him all along, and also, did y'all know he's mentally unstable?

I really hope this is not what we'll see.


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> Anyone ever been or seen this place in person?




Da fuq? 
It looks like those black velvet paintings you used to see all over TJ


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Thank you for the heads up! Now I know where to avoid when I am at Waterloo!



Me too! 

Last pub on Earth and I'm still not thirsty


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> that pushing, pulling and shoving she has done is the worst


Absolutely. I'm all for equal marriage etc but in those circles it's just not done. You never saw the Duke of Edinburgh do it, you never saw Diana do it. The husbands/wives of the Queen's children don't, neither do the husbands of the York Princesses. I've seen Catherine do it once, maybe twice, and only because the event was her "thing" like Wimbledon. I didn't see them arrive today but I recall it happened possibly two years ago, she went before William. I think that's acceptable.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Da fuq?
> It looks like those black velvet paintings you used to see all over TJ



Kitschville is not a good place for art. Too easy for postmodernist statement but I shall refrain  

BTW, Black Velvet is a cocktail made with Guinness and and Champagne.  
Tastes like it sounds though  
IMO, a waste of Champers  
At least they'll have plenty of bathrooms to  in at the Duke O Sussex


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Bet MM is pi$$ed she's positioned behind Haz!



She'll be even madder it's only called the Duke of Sussex


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Crazy Card Lady is saying Raptor and MA are scheming how to get rid of Harry because he wasn't as much of a golden goose as she had hoped (really? The BRF isn't good enough for her LMAO). And it will be ugly and she'll try to smear him and put all the blame on him so she can once again be the innocent victim...HE hated his family, HE wanted to destroy them etc. when it was her who drip-drip-dripfed him all along, and also, _did y'all know he's mentally unstable?_
> 
> I really hope this is not what we'll see.



..............and has substance abuse problems etc etc etc
CCL must be following along here because we've been saying all that and more for some time. 
Barring Harry having an unfortunate accident it really is her best option. She's setting it up perfectly. First she dragged him to another continent where he knows absolutely no one. Then she isolates him out in the wilds of Montecito. There is literally nothing to do there and nowhere to go outside of some seafood restaurants in Santa Barbara. The kid is here and California is fully open and they haven't popped up anywhere yet?


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> Kitschville is not a good place for art. Too easy for postmodernist statement but I shall refrain
> 
> BTW, Black Velvet is a cocktail made with Guinness and and Champagne.
> Tastes like it sounds though
> IMO, a waste of Champers
> At least they'll have plenty of bathrooms to  in at the Duke O Sussex



I'm of Irish lineage and I really don't like Guinness. If pressed a Harp will suffice.
What would be _really_ nice is a wee drop o poteen! Slainte


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Listening to some Youtube videos in the background while doing some desk work...have we ever heard Marcus Anderson is rumoured to have links to Epstein?



We haven’t heard anything about Marcus in a long time, he has gone to ground. I can’t imagine how he could be tied up in the Epstein scandal however. That seems too far-fetched.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> I'm of Irish lineage and I really don't like Guinness. If pressed a Harp will suffice.
> What would be _really_ nice is a wee drop o poteen! Slainte



Slainte!


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Me too!
> 
> Last pub on Earth and I'm still not thirsty



You'll get The Bench as a prize if you drink there    You sure you don't want your freebie?


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> You'll get The Bench as a prize if you drink there    You sure you don't want your freebie?



Will they sue me if I leave it behind on the pile with all the others?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> What BS.....probably one of the reasons they made the decision is she is a geriatric mom....uugh


That is throwing shade at the Cambridges since they have three,  Just for that, I hope Kate has another.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Will they sue me if I leave it behind on the pile with all the others?




She won't sue but will probably publish everywhere saying that you're ungrateful


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> She won't sue but will probably publish everywhere saying that *you're ungrateful*



That's OK,_ I am. _

As another Duke said...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie discussed number of kids in *2019*:

_In an interview published this week, he made it clear that he and his wife plan to have no more than two children, a decision that he appeared to link to a greater consideration for the planet.

*“Two maximum!” he said in a conversation with Jane Goodall, the famed British primatologist, *that appeared online on Tuesday and will be published in British Vogue’s September issue.

“We are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,” Prince Harry said, reflecting on humans’ impact on the Earth.









						Prince Harry Plans 2 Children ‘Maximum,’ for the Sake of the Planet (Published 2019)
					

“We are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,” the British royal said in an issue of British Vogue.




					www.nytimes.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Crazy Card Lady is saying Raptor and MA are scheming how to get rid of Harry because he wasn't as much of a golden goose as she had hoped (really? The BRF isn't good enough for her LMAO). And it will be ugly and she'll try to smear him and put all the blame on him so she can once again be the innocent victim...HE hated his family, HE wanted to destroy them etc. when it was her who drip-drip-dripfed him all along, and also, did y'all know he's mentally unstable?
> 
> I really hope this is not what we'll see.



Let them try this, just let them try.
The BRF is far more powerful than these amateurs are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely. I'm all for equal marriage etc but in those circles it's just not done. You never saw the Duke of Edinburgh do it, you never saw Diana do it. The husbands/wives of the Queen's children don't, neither do the husbands of the York Princesses. I've seen Catherine do it once, maybe twice, and only because the event was her "thing" like Wimbledon. I didn't see them arrive today but I recall it happened possibly two years ago, she went before William. I think that's acceptable.


and I'm sure she didn't shove her way in front of him


----------



## Chanbal

Wimbledon 2021- the Cambridges are looking great and have an unexpected guest in the royal box...


----------



## Sharont2305

Tom Cruise was there, sitting amongst the plebs.


----------



## Deleted 698298

Chanbal said:


> It's real and ridiculous...
> 
> _Population Matters issued Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with the “Special Award”, claiming the decision means they will reduce their impact on the environment by not having any more children following the birth of their daughter Lilibet Diana last month.
> 
> The UK-based charity, which campaigns for a sustainable population, said the couple were being recognised as “a role model for other families."
> 
> A spokesman said: “In choosing and publicly declaring their intention to limit their family to two, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are helping to ensure a better future for their children and providing a role model for other families_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan receive award for 'enlightened decision' to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Population Matters rewarded the couple for lowering their family's potential impact on the environment by making the “enlightened decision” to limit their children to Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


I can see what’s going on here…It is true that the Sussex are role models, and to some, celebrities. If people with such recognition openly claim to have small family bcoz of environment then this is only good right? (Unless you don’t believe in global warming and overpopulation). I think the kind of statement is positive, and hopefully the Sussex will stick to their plan 2+2


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> ..............and has substance abuse problems etc etc etc
> CCL must be following along here because we've been saying all that and more for some time.
> Barring Harry having an unfortunate accident it really is her best option. She's setting it up perfectly. First she dragged him to another continent where he knows absolutely no one. Then she isolates him out in the wilds of Montecito. *There is literally nothing to do there and nowhere to go outside of some seafood restaurants in Santa Barbara. The kid is here and California is fully open and they haven't popped up anywhere yet?*


This is vacation time, they may not be in their 16 (or 19) restroom mansion. Why not take OW's private jet and have well deserved time off in a private island... We know how they love private jets and to indulge in luxury...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is vacation time, they may not be in their 16 (or 19) restroom mansion. Why not take OW's private jet and have well deserved time off in a private island... We know how they love private jets and to indulge in luxury...



I believe that is exactly what they’ve done, especially with the Firenado. Notice GK is with the billionaires - wonder where she will decamp to?  Lots of yachts for the 4,[ 5 with D, 8 with 2 nannies, ]to hang out on, especially to lose that baby weight. Does Tyler have a private island?

from 2018:








						Oprah Winfrey Scoops Up $8 Million Estate on Washington's Orcas Island
					

Word percolating on the Pacific Northwest celebrity real estate street is that billionaire media mogul Oprah Winfrey dropped $8.275 million on a secluded compound on Washington State’s postcard-rea…




					variety.com
				




ETA:  looks like a nice hide-out !


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This is vacation time, they may not be in their 16 (or 19) restroom mansion. Why not take OW's private jet and have well deserved time off in a private island... We know how they love private jets and to indulge in luxury...



Why of course they are staying at home. They are immersed in the wonder of having a new baby! They are busy bonding as a stellar example of the perfect nuclear family.

I crack myself up.


----------



## wilding

Edited to add:  Oh, I lost all my quotes. But you know who you are


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Why of course they are staying at home. They are immersed in the wonder of having a new baby! They are busy bonding as a stellar example of the perfect nuclear family.
> 
> I crack myself up.


My bad, they are such great role models. Of course, they are busy bonding in their eco friendly home, and they would never use private jets or huge SUVs...


----------



## needlv

Meanwhile William and Catherine carry on living their best lives.  I wonder if H misses events like this… you know the type of events that only the elite can afford to play…


----------



## needlv

Is Catherine throwing shade at MM’s infamous green dress?  Catherine at Wimbledon showing MM how to wear a green tailored dress?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Wimbledon 2021- the Cambridges are looking great and have an unexpected guest in the royal box...



Awww little priyanka seays where the wind blows … Meghan is useless now for her fame, so she crawls back to true royalty.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Is Catherine throwing shade at MM’s infamous green dress?  Catherine at Wimbledon showing MM how to wear a green tailored dress?




Wonder why the Duke is staring at her feet? Is he unhappy with her shoes?

Nevermind, check this out — burn


----------



## CarryOn2020

DP


----------



## rose60610

How refreshing to see a duchess that isn't psycho staring into the camera, begging for pity, or wearing ill fitting clothes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> How refreshing to see a duchess that isn't psycho staring into the camera, begging for pity, or wearing ill fitting clothes.



Or sticking her tongue out, shoving her partner around, pushing in front of everyone

Anyone else find it odd that there has been a rather prolonged (for them) period with no preemptive strikes? No upstaging, thunder stealing, attention grabbing antics.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie discussed number of kids in *2019*:
> 
> _In an interview published this week, he made it clear that he and his wife plan to have no more than two children, a decision that he appeared to link to a greater consideration for the planet.
> 
> *“Two maximum!” he said in a conversation with Jane Goodall, the famed British primatologist, *that appeared online on Tuesday and will be published in British Vogue’s September issue.
> 
> “We are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,” Prince Harry said, reflecting on humans’ impact on the Earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Plans 2 Children ‘Maximum,’ for the Sake of the Planet (Published 2019)
> 
> 
> “We are the one species on this planet that seems to think that this place belongs to us, and only us,” the British royal said in an issue of British Vogue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



If he really cared, he shouldn’t have kids. Not stay in some 16 room mansion with like a million bathrooms, not have a plastic  kids playground, not take private jets, not drive or be driven in fuel guzzling cars, not do a million hypocritical things and then cast shade on others.

Hypocrite


----------



## Clearblueskies

needlv said:


> Meanwhile William and Catherine carry on living their best lives.  I wonder if H misses events like this… you know the type of events that only the elite can afford to play…



I bet he does   


needlv said:


> Is Catherine throwing shade at MM’s infamous green dress?  Catherine at Wimbledon showing MM how to wear a green tailored dress?



No I don’t think so.  Green and purple are Wimbledon’s colours.  She was also wearing a purple brooch, it’s hidden by her hair.


----------



## Clearblueskies

poopsie said:


> Or sticking her tongue out, shoving her partner around, pushing in front of everyone
> 
> Anyone else find it odd that there has been a rather prolonged (for them) period with no preemptive strikes? No upstaging, thunder stealing, attention grabbing antics.


I think they’re running out of ammo.  When you’ve said the worst possible, most shocking you can think of things, what else is there - except to keep repeating it.  And I think everyone’s getting bored with that?


----------



## Jktgal

poopsie said:


> That would be Meghan, wouldn't it


Anybody who thinks Robbie Williams is a less demanding employer/ have lower standards than Harry's wife is either bonkers or think "demanding" is the lunctime crush at McDonald's.


----------



## chicinthecity777

At least this year, Wimbledon don't have to block off a whole section so MM could watch it without being bother by other "plebs"!    truly good riddance of bad rubbish!!!


----------



## Icyjade

Clearblueskies said:


> I think they’re running out of ammo.  When you’ve said the worst possible, most shocking you can think of things, what else is there - except to keep repeating it.  And I think everyone’s getting bored with that?



Maybe they can’t afford to pay for PR.
Maybe finally realizing that not all PR is good PR.
Maybe lying low cos they are about to be sued for lack of content.
Maybe really enjoying maternity/paternity leave.
Maybe it’s the short calm before another big news…

So many possibilities…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That is throwing shade at the Cambridges since they have three,  Just for that, I hope Kate has another.



Also I do think it's ridiculous to point fingers at completely normal sized families (which for me personally, is like maybe four?). Maybe focus on families in developing countries having 10 kids because it's their form of retirement and they have no access to birth control (as in, improve their living conditions, not wage fingers), or fundamentalists who have 19 entirely by choice because they are brainwashed (looking at you, Duggars...and I live next to a fundu boarding school for girls and there are several kids with 10+ siblings, the biggest family having 21).

I just wonder why that charity got involved in the petty game and took the Sucksesses side. Did they pay them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let them try this, just let them try.
> The BRF is far more powerful than these amateurs are.



By they seem to have been blindsided just by how malicious Raptor is the first time around. But yes, I'd love so see them pulverize her (and him, if he's really getting involved. I mean, this is another category of gossip seeing that for 1 stellar card reader their are hundreds who are just making up sh*t as they go along, and I haven't made up my mind on her yet. She seems to be far off with her ideas on surrogacy, and lots of things she says we have figured out already just from analyzing things...I saved a video or two to get back to in a year to see if her predictions were right).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Anyone else find it odd that there has been a rather prolonged (for them) period with no preemptive strikes? No upstaging, thunder stealing, attention grabbing antics.



Admittedly that makes me uneasy. When they are quiet you know Raptor is scheming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> No I don’t think so.  Green and purple are Wimbledon’s colours.  She was also wearing a purple brooch, it’s hidden by her hair.



Also I doubt she possesses - or has time for - that level of pettiness.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also I doubt she possesses - or has time for - that level of pettiness.


Yeah.  Actually now the statue thing is done, we’re back to seeing very little chatter about the Sussexes in the UK.  I don’t think Meg crossed Kates mind.


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> Is Catherine throwing shade at MM’s infamous green dress?  Catherine at Wimbledon showing MM how to wear a green tailored dress?




Nah. She wears the color often, St Patrick’s day etc.


----------



## Pivoine66

poopsie said:


> Or sticking her tongue out, shoving her partner around, pushing in front of everyone
> 
> Anyone else find it odd that there has been a rather prolonged (for them) period with no preemptive strikes? No upstaging, thunder stealing, attention grabbing antics.


Just my ideas of possibilites/options: Perhaps her highly paid PR team came to the conclusion that this was the only way she could take part in the festivities in honour of Lady Di and next year's Jubilee of the Queen? Experience shows that people forget quickly. By September, (in my personal opinion too much) of H's wife's unbelievable behaviour and demeanour may have been pushed aside, ready to "move on". And pictures of babies and kittens are known to be extremely big magnets. How many would then no longer question the (for me personally highly questionable) claims that the name Lili was chosen in honour of the Queen? Image is apparently everything, and the PR company seems to be really good at that. Maybe they really need the photos of L and A with Queen - L and "her namesake" - These images/photos will be for eternity - and priceless?

Edited: Had forgotten M, of course, only in a supporting role - because having to hold the baby L in the photo and therefore compulsorily, being obliged to - she never wanted to be in the limelight - also had to immortalise herself with "her family", the Queen.


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> Anyone ever been or seen this place in person?





poopsie said:


> Da fuq?
> It looks like those black velvet paintings you used to see all over TJ



I'll take dogs playing poker every time over these two


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kate goes to Wimbledon with her father. My, my, the shade!
It’s coming home


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> Is Catherine throwing shade at MM’s infamous green dress?  Catherine at Wimbledon showing MM how to wear a green tailored dress?



The tennis grand slams are famously on different types of courts
Roland Garros - French - is on red clay
Wimbledon is famously on real grass

Green seems appropriate for the event ?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.






sdkitty said:


> I don't even get that.....what was she going for?


We mustn't forget that she is simply a young and sassy girl at heart.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Or sticking her tongue out, shoving her partner around, pushing in front of everyone
> 
> Anyone else find it odd that there has been a rather prolonged (for them) period with no preemptive strikes? No upstaging, thunder stealing, attention grabbing antics.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Admittedly that makes me uneasy. When they are quiet you know Raptor is scheming.



They are regrouping. I think the whole Lilibet announcement blew up spectacularly in their faces. Whatever they were hoping for and expecting from that, they did not get it.

I suppose they could resort to actually _working_ and come up with wonderful ideas for TV shows for Netflix and/or produce weekly podcasts for Spotify. That’s a lot of effort though, best to leave it for another day.

Dare we hope Meghan has run out of arrows in her quiver?


----------



## Annawakes

They’re being good (by being quiet) for the time being so they can get invited to the Jubilee next year.  Also, I think they’ve run out of ammo.


----------



## Annawakes

I still think she will look completely different the next time she shows.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are regrouping. I think the whole Lilibet announcement blew up spectacularly in their faces. Whatever they were hoping for and expecting from that, they did not get it.
> 
> I suppose they could resort to actually _working_ and come up with wonderful ideas for TV shows for Netflix and/or produce weekly podcasts for Spotify. That’s a lot of effort though, best to leave it for another day.
> 
> Dare we hope Meghan has run out of arrows in her quiver?


they should work and come up with stuff for netflix/spotify but how capable are they?  I think most likely they would have to hire people for that.  Maybe Auntie O can help.


----------



## xincinsin

Consumer2much said:


> I can see what’s going on here…*It is true that the Sussex are role models, *and to some, celebrities. If people with such recognition openly claim to have small family bcoz of environment then this is only good right? (Unless you don’t believe in global warming and overpopulation). I think the kind of statement is positive, and hopefully the Sussex will stick to their plan 2+2


Is it really true that they are role models? They may fancy that they are, but I'm queasy about what kind of role models they are. The choice to have only two kids pales beside their other choices in life. I find it difficult to accept calls for compassion and saccharine messages about paternal love from two people who relish in slagging off their entire families.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> They are regrouping. I think the whole Lilibet announcement blew up spectacularly in their faces. Whatever they were hoping for and expecting from that, they did not get it.
> 
> I suppose they could resort to actually _working_ and come up with wonderful ideas for TV shows for Netflix and/or produce weekly podcasts for Spotify. That’s a lot of effort though, best to leave it for another day.
> 
> Dare we hope Meghan has run out of arrows in her quiver?


Working?! Bite your tongue!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I cannot escape. I'm checking material for the upcoming week, and one of the vegetarian convenience products mentioned is called Raptor. What are the chances


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> they should work and come up with stuff for netflix/spotify but how capable are they?  I think most likely they would have to hire people for that.  Maybe Auntie O can help.



They don’t know what they’re doing. I’m sure they have hired people. But those people expect to be paid regularly and they aren’t cheap. All of H&M’s budget seems to be tied up in public relations and publicity.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Working?! Bite your tongue!



Yeah, I’m really thinking outside the box there.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> Meanwhile William and Catherine carry on living their best lives.  I wonder if H misses events like this… you know the type of events that only the elite can afford to play…




Bingo! Meghan went from yacht girl to private jet palace girl only to throw it all away thinking she would be the Queen Bee toast of Hollywood. Instead she's now just toast and Harry is reduced to feeding rescue chickens. But at least they now have the privacy they so craved. When they're not scheming how to inject their desperate faces into any issue that comes up.


----------



## Deleted 698298

xincinsin said:


> Is it really true that they are role models? They may fancy that they are, but I'm queasy about what kind of role models they are. The choice to have only two kids pales beside their other choices in life. I find it difficult to accept calls for compassion and saccharine messages about paternal love from two people who relish in slagging off their entire families.


Not my role models but undoubtedly they have a large fan base don’t you think? If because what they say about their family model, they inspire some to do the same - I’m happy.
But yeah I agree, they should DO more as they preach, they should lead by example (owning big cars,  a massive house and doing frequent plane trips stinks of hypocrisy - but this goes for all the rich and entitled who love to eco-educate us the masses)


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.





EverSoElusive said:


> There's probably a child somewhere by the person who took the picture and she probably thought it was the right time to joke with or tease the child with a


If you google, there are lots of pics for "Kate Middleton + teeth" but if you use "tongue" instead, the hits are mainly for her with Charlotte sticking out her tongue. Google throws up lots of pics for Methane + tongue. A Quoran found some pics of other royals, including HMTQ, caught mid-word and seemingly sticking out their tongue, arguing that Methane was just unlucky to have that pic snapped when she was mid-word or possibly licking her lips on a cold and dry day. But the Quoran avoids addressing the issue that the numerous occasions with pictorial evidence of Methane and a lolling tongue exceed the chances of it being just bad luck.

I'd like to throw a theory into the hypothesis ring. The other royal with numerous shots of tongue is Harry as a child. Considering Methane's fondness for copycatting (cosplaying her late mother-in-law and plagiarising stuff) and her obvious desire to be seen as a perfect match for Hazard (IIRC she claimed in an interview that they shared common outlook and causes), I'm thinking that it's possible she may deliberately stick out her tongue to appear cute and flirty as well as to subconsciously evoke commonality with her prince.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> I still think she will look completely different the next time she shows.


And she will say it was due to pregnancy weight loss.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Icyjade said:


> Nah. She wears the color often, St Patrick’s day etc.
> 
> View attachment 5133494


Yeah to me it makes sense as dark hair looks great with green IMHO.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I cannot escape. I'm checking material for the upcoming week, and one of the vegetarian convenience products mentioned is called Raptor. What are the chances


I thought both dinosaur and bird  raptors were carnivores so seems like a weird choice for a vegetarian product


----------



## xincinsin

Consumer2much said:


> Not my role models but undoubtedly they have a large fan base don’t you think? If because what they say about their family model, they inspire some to do the same - I’m happy.
> But yeah I agree, they should DO more as they preach, they should lead by example (owning big cars,  a massive house and doing frequent plane trips stinks of hypocrisy - but this goes for all the rich and entitled who love to eco-educate us the masses)


I think they have a strident fan base with extremists on either end. There are the ones who do charity in H&M's name and I applaud them, especially when they send the $$$ direct to the charities and not to Archewell. But there appear to also be a fair number of mentally unbalanced stans, considering the militant notes and death threats that some fans use as their weapon of choice and who respond to mouthpiece Omid's fanning of the flames. The couple's silence when anyone who doesn't sing their praises gets threatened is telling. Their compassion is only for those supporting them.

I'd like to see a factual analysis of how far their reach really is. There probably should be some brand analyses since they market themselves heavily.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Bingo! Meghan went from yacht girl to private jet palace girl only to throw it all away thinking she would be the Queen Bee toast of Hollywood. Instead she's now just toast and Harry is reduced to feeding rescue chickens. But at least they now have the privacy they so craved. When they're not scheming how to inject their desperate faces into any issue that comes up.


I'd like this to be true but while she hasn't gotten any movie roles and they haven't appeared on a red carpet, they're still treated with kid gloves by the US media.  so we'll see.  I wouldn't be surprised to see them at the Met Ball.  hopefully they can't wrangle an invite to be presenters at the Oscars.


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> I'd like this to be true but while she hasn't gotten any movie roles and they haven't appeared on a red carpet, they're still treated with kid gloves by the US media.  so we'll see.  I wouldn't be surprised to see them at the Met Ball.  hopefully they can't wrangle an invite to be presenters at the Oscars.



The Met Ball should be easy, but has lost all its prestige when Kardashians and such started to get invited. Not to mention that Vogue hasn’t been relevant in the last what, 10 years?


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> The Met Ball should be easy, but has lost all its prestige when Kardashians and such started to get invited. Not to mention that Vogue hasn’t been relevant in the last what, 10 years?


well IDK - there's still quite a bit of media attention to that event I think


----------



## xincinsin

tiktok said:


> The Met Ball should be easy, but has lost all its prestige when Kardashians and such started to get invited. Not to mention that Vogue hasn’t been relevant in the last what, 10 years?


Someone predicted no invite would be forthcoming because Anna Wintour is not a fan of the Harkles. Will be keen to see what happens if their PR machine puts out bait to express interest in attending, as they did for the Oscars.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Someone predicted no invite would be forthcoming because Anna Wintour is not a fan of the Harkles. Will be keen to see what happens if their PR machine puts out bait to express interest in attending, as they did for the Oscars.


Oh, I would love it if Wintour wasn't afraid of being accused of racism by H&M


----------



## rose60610

I wasn't aware Wintour isn't a Harkles fan. Does it have something to do with when QEII sat next to her at a fashion show so Wintour doesn't dare tarnish that relationship? Or is it the fact that Meghan can't get her clothes to fit right for the life of her?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Someone predicted no invite would be forthcoming because Anna Wintour is not a fan of the Harkles. Will be keen to see what happens if their PR machine puts out bait to express interest in attending, as they did for the Oscars.


found this.....from 2019
What Anna Wintour Really Thinks About Meghan Markle | Entertainment Tonight (etonline.com)


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> I wasn't aware Wintour isn't a Harkles fan. Does it have something to do with when QEII sat next to her at a fashion show so Wintour doesn't dare tarnish that relationship? Or is it the fact that Meghan can't get her clothes to fit right for the life of her?





sdkitty said:


> found this.....from 2019
> What Anna Wintour Really Thinks About Meghan Markle | Entertainment Tonight (etonline.com)


I'll dig around and try to find where I read about Wintour and the Harkles. Might have been something thrown up in my news feed, which BTW recently also shows me adverts for reversing hair loss - I blame that on Hazard.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> We mustn't forget that she is simply a young and sassy girl at heart.




She's a classless and unscrupulous person who wants nothing but fame and more money. She's not young at heart anything  She's evil to the core.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> She's a classless and unscrupulous person who wants nothing but fame and more money. She's not young at heart anything  She's evil to the core.


Yes, ITA. I was being facetious hence the  emoji.


----------



## bellecate

Icyjade said:


> Nah. She wears the color often, St Patrick’s day etc.
> 
> View attachment 5133494


And she wears it very well.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> We mustn't forget that she is simply a young and sassy girl at heart.


Which puts her on the level of a 4 year old, the age when Princess Charlotte was snapped cheekily sticking her tongue out at her Grandpa Mike during the King's Cup Regatta. 

_"It's since been revealed that Charlotte stuck her tongue out because she'd spotted her granddad *Michael Middleton* down below! The Duchess had in fact wanted to show her children a familiar face in the crowd before they took their places in front of the stage for the prize-giving, and so she pointed her father Michael out for Charlotte to see. The four year-old's response certainly gives a sweet insight into their playful relationship!" _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> Or sticking her tongue out, shoving her partner around, pushing in front of everyone
> 
> Anyone else find it odd that there has been a rather prolonged (for them) period with no preemptive strikes? No upstaging, thunder stealing, attention grabbing antics.





Icyjade said:


> Maybe they can’t afford to pay for PR.
> Maybe finally realizing that not all PR is good PR.
> Maybe lying low cos they are about to be sued for lack of content.
> Maybe really enjoying maternity/paternity leave.
> Maybe it’s the short calm before another big news…
> 
> So many possibilities…



With the BRF fighting back, these two ingrates are probably trying to strategize and scheme carefully. Regardless of what they do, there's always holes in their plans because of their own damn greed   




Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, ITA. I was being facetious hence the  emoji.



I know and I agree with you


----------



## Chanbal

The use of "reaching out" instead of "sticking your nose into other people's business", and some other interesting observations...


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> If you google, there are lots of pics for "Kate Middleton + teeth" but if you use "tongue" instead, the hits are mainly for her with Charlotte sticking out her tongue. Google throws up lots of pics for Methane + tongue. A Quoran found some pics of other royals, including HMTQ, caught mid-word and seemingly sticking out their tongue, arguing that Methane was just unlucky to have that pic snapped when she was mid-word or possibly licking her lips on a cold and dry day. But the Quoran avoids addressing the issue that the numerous occasions with pictorial evidence of Methane and a lolling tongue exceed the chances of it being just bad luck.
> 
> I'd like to throw a theory into the hypothesis ring. The other royal with numerous shots of tongue is Harry as a child. Considering Methane's fondness for copycatting (cosplaying her late mother-in-law and plagiarising stuff) and her obvious desire to be seen as a perfect match for Hazard (IIRC she claimed in an interview that they shared common outlook and causes), I'm thinking that it's possible she may deliberately stick out her tongue to appear cute and flirty as well as to subconsciously evoke commonality with her prince.



I think she was poking her tongue out at all of us. "Got there! Kiss my A$$ - na na na na na"


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> With the BRF fighting back, these two ingrates are probably trying to strategize and scheme carefully. *Regardless of what they do, there's always holes in their plans because of their own damn greed *



And their inability to read a room.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Granted I never paid attention if she got fake b00bs but when I looked at the photos, I definitely wondered if they were fake because her b00bs on Suits were smaller and not in your face
> 
> Guess she removed them before or during her Suits stint


She Markled her fake boobs


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> I think they have a strident fan base with extremists on either end.
> I'd like to see a factual analysis of how far their reach really is. There probably should be some brand analyses since they market themselves heavily.



ITA
I would be very interested in seeing that as well
It has been mentioned that they use bots to boost their perceived popularity.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hey Meghan, people are onto you, not just people who post in this thread


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> She Markled her fake boobs




I would not be surprised if she ends up Markling her kids if they cannot continue to be her cash cows IF they get cut off from the BRF, much like Harry's probable fate at some point AND if she ends up leeching herself onto some dumb billionaire. She's probably thinking she's up there with Liz Taylor


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I would not be surprised if she ends up Markling her kids if they cannot continue to be her cash cows IF they get cut off from the BRF, much like Harry's probable fate at some point AND if she ends up leeching herself onto some dumb billionaire. She's probably thinking she's up there with Liz Taylor



Prince George sums up everyone‘s feelings:



No, I refuse to look.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I thought both dinosaur and bird  raptors were carnivores so seems like a weird choice for a vegetarian product



Exactly! The universe is trolling me.


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> *I would not be surprised if she ends up Markling her kids if they cannot continue to be her cash cows *



yessssssss!!!! 
Look at poor Socks. PMK never could figure out what to do with him


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> I would not be surprised if she ends up Markling her kids if they cannot continue to be her cash cows IF they get cut off from the BRF, much like Harry's probable fate at some point AND if she ends up leeching herself onto some dumb billionaire. She's probably thinking she's up there with Liz Taylor


If you think about it, Tom Cruise markled Suri : (


----------



## Pivoine66

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey Meghan, people are onto you, not just people who post in this thread



It would be so helpful, in my view, if it were seen internationally that even with the best PR, a from my personal perception malignant narcissist cannot get away with everything.

I can imagine that she is doing everything she can to appear in future on the internet only in photos as a member of the Royal Family, mother of the Queen's great-grandchildren and ambassador for all hot topics with invitations to all "super-celebrity events" to which she wants to be seen and remembered as "belonging".

Maybe that's why no photos and no invitation from her real family, certainly not from an uncle from the trailer park (if I read correctly), to whose funeral she might never want to appear from my point of view either. (Unless - to my imagination -" because of privacy" - without photos - only report about her loving devoted participation full of compassion, but maybe that would be too much compassion even for her then, as a young mother ...). The complete lack of recent photos with her family - especially those from Doria's side too - etc. speaks for me.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Exactly! *The universe is trolling me.*



Google is not the Universe. It just thinks it is


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> She Markled her fake boobs



given her penchant for discarding anyone---- and now apparently anything(s)----- that are no longer deemed of use to her, ya gotta wonder what those poor bolt-ons did (or didn't do) to deserve the heave ho


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> If you think about it, Tom Cruise markled Suri : (



Scientology breaks up families. If you're not a Scientologist or speak up against Scientology, you're a suppressive person (as they refer to as SP) and Scientologists are not allowed to have a relationship with you (the SP). I'm glad that Katie H separate her child from Scientology. Scientology is a dangerous cult. Nicole K cannot have a relationship with her kids that she adopted with Tom because of Scientology. The kids are so brainwashed that they just buy the "fact" that she's an SP and an extremely bad influence on them if they did have a relationship with Nicole K.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time to help those poor Americans understand those British niceties... - Horses for Sources | No Boundaries
> 
> 
> It’s nearly 10 years since I ventured back to these shores, and to celebrate, I decided it was time to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.horsesforsources.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5132379


I am personally very sarcastic and my assumption (I may be way off base) has always been that the British, with their lovely accents, sound very polite and educated, and are very sarcastic, especially with humor.  Even as an American, I assumed the correct interpretation for most of those


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Google is not the Universe. It just thinks it is



I wasn't googling, I was screening info material sent to me by a client


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> 1.An ill placed slam at the three Cambridge children*. Three well adjusted, mentally healthy, raised in a stable loving family children will have a far more powerful positive impact on this world than two whiny, angry, embittered, entitled, raised by mentally unhealthy parents in isolation, who seem destined to need a lot of support, possibly at taxpayer expense. It's about the QUALITY not the QUANTITY in this case.*
> 
> 2. They "win" a $925 "award" which will not begin to offset the $$$ their publicists probably put out to get this desperate item placed in the "news".
> 
> 3. Does the Surrogate get a cut of the proceeds, after all she did the labor, literally.
> 
> 4. Saving the cost of further Surrogate/IVF procedures will aid their shrinking income.
> 
> 5. Their next contribution to the welfare of the environment will be "Duke and Duchess of Sussex Develop New System to Decrease Hazardous Waste Disposal." They stop preaching.


And therein lies the rub.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I am personally very sarcastic and my assumption (I may be way off base) has always been that the British, with their lovely accents, sound very polite and educated, and are very sarcastic, especially with humor.  Even as an American, I assumed the correct interpretation for most of those



_I only have a few minor comments _


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> 1.An ill placed slam at the three Cambridge children. Three well adjusted, mentally healthy, raised in a stable loving family children will have a far more powerful positive impact on this world than two whiny, angry, embittered, entitled, raised by mentally unhealthy parents in isolation, who seem destined to need a lot of support, possibly at taxpayer expense. It's about the QUALITY not the QUANTITY in this case.
> 
> 2. They "win" a $925 "award" which will not begin to offset the $$$ their publicists probably put out to get this desperate item placed in the "news".
> 
> 3. Does the Surrogate get a cut of the proceeds, after all she did the labor, literally.
> 
> 4. Saving the cost of further Surrogate/IVF procedures will aid their shrinking income.
> 
> 5. Their next contribution to the welfare of the environment will be "Duke and Duchess of Sussex Develop New System to Decrease Hazardous Waste Disposal." They stop preaching.



PopMatters offer an explanation - did they forget that the Sussexes are in the USA?








						Change Champions and the Sussexes - Population Matters
					

“Giving an eco-award to Harry and Meghan? Why??” That’s what we’ve been hearing from some people who have read headlines about our Change Champion awards. We understand why they’re saying...




					populationmatters.org
				




*WHY THE SUSSEXES?*
_When probably the most famous couple in the world say they choose to stop at two, they help to popularise and normalise that choice. We know in the UK, for instance, that about a quarter of all people want to have more than two children. Everyone is entitled and has a right to the family size they choose, and that should never be limited.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise that when people in high-consuming countries like the UK have bigger families, that has a hugely disproportionate effect on the planet, because of the amount we consume and the emissions we produce.

At Population Matters, we're proud to celebrate the choice to have a smaller family, and it's a vital part of our job to communicate those advantages to people. Our statement supporting the award to the Sussexes did just that, reaching literally millions of people through the media coverage it received. We hope it has contributed to a long term discussion about family size.

At the same time, the Sussexes' choice, helps to normalise the decision to choose two - or less. That's a very healthy thing. We celebrate that choice, and the choice to have one or no children, and you can learn more about that here.

Choosing a small family is far from the end of the matter though. Those of us who are rich in global terms need to cut our consumption, radically, if we're to save our planet. At Population Matters, we don't just talk about families. We also speak out for personal changes in the way we consume, and for the kind of global justice that addresses why some are so rich and others so poor.

The richest have the greatest responsibility, both to change and campaign for change. That's one reason we also gave a Change Champion award to the Footprint Calculator, which gives all of us the opportunity to see the impact our personal choices on consumption are. We hope the Duke and Duchess of Sussex use it, and act as role models by dramatically reducing their own footprint._


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## caramelize126

CarryOn2020 said:


> PopMatters offer an explanation - did they forget that the Sussexes are in the USA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Change Champions and the Sussexes - Population Matters
> 
> 
> “Giving an eco-award to Harry and Meghan? Why??” That’s what we’ve been hearing from some people who have read headlines about our Change Champion awards. We understand why they’re saying...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> populationmatters.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WHY THE SUSSEXES?*
> _When probably the most famous couple in the world say they choose to stop at two, they help to popularise and normalise that choice. We know in the UK, for instance, that about a quarter of all people want to have more than two children. Everyone is entitled and has a right to the family size they choose, and that should never be limited.
> 
> But that doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise that when people in high-consuming countries like the UK have bigger families, that has a hugely disproportionate effect on the planet, because of the amount we consume and the emissions we produce.
> 
> At Population Matters, we're proud to celebrate the choice to have a smaller family, and it's a vital part of our job to communicate those advantages to people. Our statement supporting the award to the Sussexes did just that, reaching literally millions of people through the media coverage it received. We hope it has contributed to a long term discussion about family size.
> 
> At the same time, the Sussexes' choice, helps to normalise the decision to choose two - or less. That's a very healthy thing. We celebrate that choice, and the choice to have one or no children, and you can learn more about that here.
> 
> Choosing a small family is far from the end of the matter though. Those of us who are rich in global terms need to cut our consumption, radically, if we're to save our planet. At Population Matters, we don't just talk about families. We also speak out for personal changes in the way we consume, and for the kind of global justice that addresses why some are so rich and others so poor.
> 
> The richest have the greatest responsibility, both to change and campaign for change. That's one reason we also gave a Change Champion award to the Footprint Calculator, which gives all of us the opportunity to see the impact our personal choices on consumption are. We hope the Duke and Duchess of Sussex use it, and act as role models by dramatically reducing their own footprint._





CarryOn2020 said:


>




If i had had a miscarriage ( as Megs claims to have) I dont think i would want an award like this....


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I think they have a strident fan base with extremists on either end. There are the ones who do charity in H&M's name and I applaud them, especially when they send the $$$ direct to the charities and not to Archewell. But there appear to also be a fair number of mentally unbalanced stans, considering the militant notes and death threats that some fans use as their weapon of choice and who respond to mouthpiece Omid's fanning of the flames. The couple's silence when anyone who doesn't sing their praises gets threatened is telling. Their compassion is only for those supporting them.
> 
> I'd like to see a factual analysis of how far their reach really is. There probably should be some brand analyses since they market themselves heavily.


There are web sites for groups that monitor charities in the US. I haven't verified the credentials of any of monitor groups, pulled up a list on line and randomly selected one, so please keep that in mind.  Web site: https://www.charitynavigator.org 

Charity Navigator stated it was not able to score Archewell due to lack of information. For example in "Finance and Accountability" the website posted it could not score Archwell because "This organization cannot be evaluated by our Encompass Rating methodology because it files Form 990-EZ, as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than $200,000. annual revenue."

Three  "Finance and Accountability", "Impact and Results", and "Culture and Community" of four categories were marked "Not Scored" because of insufficient information. The fourth, "Leadership and Adaptability" was marked "Coming Soon." 

Overall, it seems Archewell has not been operating long enough or doing enough to generate measurable data. I think it is interesting though to see "less than $200,000 annual revenue" at this point. Reads like an organization fueled by "word salads."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

...

Naomi Osaka says Meghan Markle supported her after French Open Exit



> Tennis ace Naomi Osaka has revealed that royal exile Meghan Markle and former first lady Michelle ***** were among the key supporters in her court after her controversial decision to quit the French Open.
> In an essay for Time magazine defending her decision in May, the 23-year-old player thanked “everyone who supported me,” especially “those in the public eye.”
> *“Michelle *****, Michael Phelps, Steph Curry, Novak Djokovic, Meghan Markle, to name a few*,” she wrote of the powerful group.
> She singled out Phelps for telling her that “by speaking up I may have saved a life.”
> “If that’s true, then it was all worth it,” she wrote.
> The four-time Grand Slam winner did not specify exactly what the others did to back her. Markle, 39, has opened up about her own near-suicidal mental health problems, also blaming it on the intense public scrutiny of her royal relationship with Prince Harry.



Fat by me...one of these things isn't like the others. And yet she managed to insert herself once again.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Back pedaling or did they just feel they had some 'splaining to do?
Either way sounds like they must have gotten some serious backlash to feel they had to clarify/justify their choice


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Back pedaling or did they just feel they had some 'splaining to do?
> Either way sounds like they must have gotten some serious backlash to feel they had to clarify/justify their choice


Dare we hope, the sparkle on the Markle is dimming?


----------



## rose60610

So Harkles get an award for the two kid quota? That's all it takes to get an award? When do the award awarders get fired for being so  stupid for rewarding dolts with 7 acres of lawn to water in drought torn CA? When do Archie and Lilibet get awards for putting up with America's most clueless parents?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> PopMatters offer an explanation - did they forget that the Sussexes are in the USA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Change Champions and the Sussexes - Population Matters
> 
> 
> “Giving an eco-award to Harry and Meghan? Why??” That’s what we’ve been hearing from some people who have read headlines about our Change Champion awards. We understand why they’re saying...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> populationmatters.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WHY THE SUSSEXES?*
> _When probably the most famous couple in the world say they choose to stop at two, they help to popularise and normalise that choice. We know in the UK, for instance, that about a quarter of all people want to have more than two children. Everyone is entitled and has a right to the family size they choose, and that should never be limited.
> 
> But that doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise that when people in high-consuming countries like the UK have bigger families, that has a hugely disproportionate effect on the planet, because of the amount we consume and the emissions we produce.
> 
> At Population Matters, we're proud to celebrate the choice to have a smaller family, and it's a vital part of our job to communicate those advantages to people. Our statement supporting the award to the Sussexes did just that, reaching literally millions of people through the media coverage it received. We hope it has contributed to a long term discussion about family size.
> 
> At the same time, the Sussexes' choice, helps to normalise the decision to choose two - or less. That's a very healthy thing. We celebrate that choice, and the choice to have one or no children, and you can learn more about that here.
> 
> Choosing a small family is far from the end of the matter though. Those of us who are rich in global terms need to cut our consumption, radically, if we're to save our planet. At Population Matters, we don't just talk about families. We also speak out for personal changes in the way we consume, and for the kind of global justice that addresses why some are so rich and others so poor.
> 
> The richest have the greatest responsibility, both to change and campaign for change. That's one reason we also gave a Change Champion award to the Footprint Calculator, which gives all of us the opportunity to see the impact our personal choices on consumption are. We hope the Duke and Duchess of Sussex use it, and act as role models by dramatically reducing their own footprint._



I'm sorry, it's just _really_ odd to give this award to a couple who (allegedly) have_ just_ had a baby


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wasn't googling, I was screening info material sent to me by a client



I'm sure, and for you it was prob just a coincidence, but one that you noticed because you had typed the word many times.

But what I'm saying is what we type (every word) and even what we say via our phones (mics active) will 'spookily' turn-up as ads before/during/after vids on YT, on our Insta/FB feed and so on.

In our real lives, we keep some of our 'worlds' apart. Google, FB, Netflix, YT and perhaps even tPF etc. will no longer let that happen despite 'no cookie' options.

If I click on any article about the Harkles (pos or neg) my AI algorithmic 'choices' are then infected by more H&M. The algorithmic pattern assumes I am an H&M fan (because that's the way AI works - it's programmed to sell, sell, sell and not inform).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> I'm sorry, it's just _really_ odd to give this award to a couple who (allegedly) have_ just_ had a baby



Will they take the award back if they have a third kid? I mean saying your only want two before you have kids doesn’t mean your are only having two….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Will they take the award back if they have a third kid? I mean saying your only want two before you have kids doesn’t mean your are only having two….



Or is the happy(?) couple telling us they have taken permanent measures to never have more children?????


----------



## gracekelly

caramelize126 said:


> If i had had a miscarriage ( as Megs claims to have) I dont think i would want an award like this....


Why did they give it to the Harkles?  Here is a thought. Jane Goodall is one of their patrons.  The Harkles could have asked her to put their name in the hat because they are so desperate for positive publicity of any kind.  She did claim not to know them that well, but she knew  them well enough to be part of a photo op at Frog Cottage.  I side eye all of them.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or is the happy(?) couple telling us they have taken permanent measures to never have more children?????


I think that their taking permanent measures will happen at the same time that Caitlynn Jenner has a certain  appendage removed.  Never.


----------



## sdkitty

Pivoine66 said:


> It would be so helpful, in my view, if it were seen internationally that even with the best PR, a from my personal perception malignant narcissist cannot get away with everything.
> 
> I can imagine that she is doing everything she can to appear in future on the internet only in photos as a member of the Royal Family, mother of the Queen's great-grandchildren and ambassador for all hot topics with invitations to all "super-celebrity events" to which she wants to be seen and remembered as "belonging".
> 
> Maybe that's why no photos and no invitation from her real family, certainly not from an uncle from the trailer park (if I read correctly), to whose funeral she might never want to appear from my point of view either. (Unless - to my imagination -" because of privacy" - without photos - only report about her loving devoted participation full of compassion, but maybe that would be too much compassion even for her then, as a young mother ...). The complete lack of recent photos with her family - especially those from Doria's side too - etc. speaks for me.


trailer park....the uncle who died recently was - I thought - the one who got her the embassy job.  so he would not be from a trailer park.....as far as doria's side of the family, I have no idea why she would be proud of her black mother and have a black choir sing at the wedding but not want her black relatives there.....I guess it's possible they were invited and couldn't afford the expensive trip but then she could have helped them out with air fare I think

she is an odd one


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> I would not be surprised if she ends up Markling her kids if they cannot continue to be her cash cows IF they get cut off from the BRF, much like Harry's probable fate at some point AND if she ends up leeching herself onto some dumb billionaire. She's probably thinking she's up there with Liz Taylor


Oh she better not bring the _other_ Queen Elizabeth into this! She is the goddess who *invented* wearing green! 


lanasyogamama said:


> If you think about it, Tom Cruise markled Suri : (


He really is repellent - don’t get me started on him and his freaky ways. Also he’s homely as a worn rag tbh.


CarryOn2020 said:


> PopMatters offer an explanation - did they forget that the Sussexes are in the USA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Change Champions and the Sussexes - Population Matters
> 
> 
> “Giving an eco-award to Harry and Meghan? Why??” That’s what we’ve been hearing from some people who have read headlines about our Change Champion awards. We understand why they’re saying...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> populationmatters.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *WHY THE SUSSEXES?*
> _When probably the most famous couple in the world say they choose to stop at two, they help to popularise and normalise that choice. We know in the UK, for instance, that about a quarter of all people want to have more than two children. Everyone is entitled and has a right to the family size they choose, and that should never be limited.
> 
> But that doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise that when people in high-consuming countries like the UK have bigger families, that has a hugely disproportionate effect on the planet, because of the amount we consume and the emissions we produce.
> 
> At Population Matters, we're proud to celebrate the choice to have a smaller family, and it's a vital part of our job to communicate those advantages to people. Our statement supporting the award to the Sussexes did just that, reaching literally millions of people through the media coverage it received. We hope it has contributed to a long term discussion about family size.
> 
> At the same time, the Sussexes' choice, helps to normalise the decision to choose two - or less. That's a very healthy thing. We celebrate that choice, and the choice to have one or no children, and you can learn more about that here.
> 
> Choosing a small family is far from the end of the matter though. Those of us who are rich in global terms need to cut our consumption, radically, if we're to save our planet. At Population Matters, we don't just talk about families. We also speak out for personal changes in the way we consume, and for the kind of global justice that addresses why some are so rich and others so poor.
> 
> The richest have the greatest responsibility, both to change and campaign for change. That's one reason we also gave a Change Champion award to the Footprint Calculator, which gives all of us the opportunity to see the impact our personal choices on consumption are. We hope the Duke and Duchess of Sussex use it, and act as role models by dramatically reducing their own footprint._


Oh gosh that is embarrassing 
Wrong continent, guys.
Funnily enough, I believe that their actual residence usually does worse than old Blighty on most assessments of contribution to climate change so weird they didn’t take the opportunity to have a little dig at the States too but then I guess we’d be reminded how many intercontinental private flights this eco-conscious couple takes…

On a serious note, I’ve already mentioned my disapproval of this charity but I think they might be just dying for some publicity. As growing trends for smaller families are seen worldwide and also demographers are questioning whether decreasing birth rate is even the logical answer to overpopulation anyway…well they must be desperate for a reason to stay in the public eye and desperate and H&M go together like bread and butter




caramelize126 said:


> If i had had a miscarriage ( as Megs claims to have) I dont think i would want an award like this....


I agree, I would feel  disturbed about it  - but then I wouldn’t also decide to up the dramatic stakes of my trauma with some Julia Roberts roleplay- so I guess we’re just…. different….


csshopper said:


> There are web sites for groups that monitor charities in the US. I haven't verified the credentials of any of monitor groups, pulled up a list on line and randomly selected one, so please keep that in mind.  Web site: https://www.charitynavigator.org
> 
> Charity Navigator stated it was not able to score Archewell due to lack of information. For example in "Finance and Accountability" the website posted it could not score Archwell because "This organization cannot be evaluated by our Encompass Rating methodology because it files Form 990-EZ, as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than $200,000. annual revenue."
> 
> Three  "Finance and Accountability", "Impact and Results", and "Culture and Community" of four categories were marked "Not Scored" because of insufficient information. The fourth, "Leadership and Adaptability" was marked "Coming Soon."
> 
> Overall, it seems Archewell has not been operating long enough or doing enough to generate measurable data. I think it is interesting though to see "less than $200,000 annual revenue" at this point. Reads like an organization fueled by "word salads."


Well that all sounds extremely legitimate 
I hope they get raked over the coals with a nice hard audit.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> ...
> 
> Naomi Osaka says Meghan Markle supported her after French Open Exit
> 
> 
> 
> Fat by me...one of these things isn't like the others. And yet she managed to insert herself once again.


Oh this is so going to get moved to the other thread -  shine on you crazy diamonds.
Seems a bit weird to me to be commenting on this weeks after she went for her break.

The cynic in me wonders whether she can’t quite stand being out of the public eye for the entirety of Wimbledon after all.
Especially now there’s a Barty party going on.

As for M well we knew she’d be dying to whip out her calligraphy again and perhaps a thoughtful gift. Are athletes allowed to eat cross-country lemon cake? Or will the poor girl get a copy of the dreaded and dreadful book from the pile?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Technically, they have had 3 children, yes?
Most families who have had a miscarriage do include that child in the ‘count’ - apologies for the clumsy wording.  The entire topic sickens me. On any level, it is gruesome thinking.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or is the happy(?) couple telling us they have taken permanent measures to never have more children?????


Oh I suspect like any good cult member (if you will) Harry went full heaven’s gate after they had got a good flush of embryos for the surrogates 


gracekelly said:


> Why did they give it to the Harkles?  Here is a thought. Jane Goodall is one of their patrons.  The Harkles could have asked her to put their name in the hat because they are so desperate for positive publicity of any kind.  She did claim not to know them that well, but she knew  them well enough to be part of a photo op at Frog Cottage.  I side eye all of them.


Well caught! The more I here about JG the more I dislike her. Gosh knows how many air miles she’s racked up living her dream of pestering primates & going on tv & then she has the nerve to lecture the common man on selfishly wanting to settle down and have a family. 


sdkitty said:


> trailer park....the uncle who died recently was - I thought - the one who got her the embassy job.  so he would not be from a trailer park.....as far as doria's side of the family, I have no idea why she would be proud of her black mother and have a black choir sing at the wedding but not want her black relatives there.....I guess it's possible they were invited and couldn't afford the expensive trip but then she could have helped them out with air fare I think
> 
> she is an odd one


From what I understand the late former diplomat uncle was also the trailer park resident. TBF it might be more like he downsized to one of those retirement ‘chalet/park homes’ but the press are obviously going to go for the drama.

Recently someone posted an interview with one of the Raglands  said saying they weren’t invited - which fits with what Sam markle said as well. Tbh, even in the unlikely situation that they wouldn’t get their flights paid for as part of the wedding budget  I can’t see George and Amal or Elton sitting idly on their jet if they heard  the poor relatives can’t afford to make the dream wedding-  arriving all together would be dream PR.

I think the simple answer is she only needed one relative to get her message across and that she’d probably told them some lies about being raised from nothing with no family and a load of middle class cousins wandering around would belie the image somewhat


----------



## EverSoElusive

caramelize126 said:


> If i had had a miscarriage ( as Megs claims to have) I dont think i would want an award like this....



To MoM, any attention is good attention therefore as distasteful as this award is, she will gladly accept it to be in the spotlight. This award helps them stay in the news cycle since they are not dropping lies or suing people on a daily basis at the moment


----------



## tiktok

poopsie said:


> Back pedaling or did they just feel they had some 'splaining to do?
> Either way sounds like they must have gotten some serious backlash to feel they had to clarify/justify their choice



Looks like they had to explain why people with humongous mansions are considered award-worthy environmentalists.


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> I'm sorry, it's just _really_ odd to give this award to a couple who (allegedly) have_ just_ had a baby


Right! She (or surrogate) could still have another baby and then what?  The award gets taken away?!?


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Someone predicted no invite would be forthcoming because Anna Wintour is not a fan of the Harkles. Will be keen to see what happens if their PR machine puts out bait to express interest in attending, as they did for the Oscars.


I doubt she's a fan of the Markles - she's a Brit. 

But then again, the woman loves controversy -- sells magazines.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> I doubt she's a fan of the Markles - she's a Brit.
> 
> But then again, the woman loves controversy -- sells magazines.
> View attachment 5134229


Such a cute pic.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> I doubt she's a fan of the Markles - she's a Brit.
> 
> But then again, the woman loves controversy -- sells magazines.
> View attachment 5134229


I imagine Anna W is torn, on the one hand she sympathises with wanting to get away with bullying the staff  but on the other she can’t quite bring herself to like someone who wears designer clothes _that badly_.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> I imagine Anna W is torn, on the one hand she sympathises with wanting to get away with bullying the staff  but on the other she can’t quite bring herself to like someone who wears designer clothes _that badly_.


 Not  so sure AW is a fan. She is a pretty savvy woman and should be able to recognize a social climbing phony when she sees one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or is the happy(?) couple telling us they have taken permanent measures to never have more children?????



At least, if they had, the award may make _some _kind of sense.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> Not  so sure AW is a fan. She is a pretty savvy woman and should be able to recognize a social climbing phony when she sees one.



Anna W is on team Anna W.  Just like Oprah is team Oprah.  Anything that makes them money, is where they will be…. Don’t trust either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Not  so sure AW is a fan. She is a pretty savvy woman and should be able to recognize a social climbing phony when she sees one.



I mean, not only was it pretty early on when she sang Raptor's praises, she was also put on the spot. What was she going to say? One would hope she'd find a way to be not quite as glowing if ever asked again.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ...
> 
> Naomi Osaka says Meghan Markle supported her after French Open Exit
> 
> 
> 
> Fat by me...one of these things isn't like the others. And yet she managed to insert herself once again.


I like that new descriptor for Methane: royal exile, if only because it is used incorrectly. One is exiled from one's home country. Methane is certainly not exiled and she left the UK on her own volition. Like much else about her PR, words are chosen for their bombastic impression and not for their accuracy.

I'd also like to remind everyone that Methane "supported" Teigen with a phone call and then dropped her once there was no value in carrying on the relationship. Whatever else one may say about Teigen, she really did have a miscarriage. If there was any compassion in Methane for a fellow sufferer, she should not have frozen Teigen out. Methane only supports low hanging fruit. She doesn't like putting in any real effort.


----------



## Chanbal

In the Sun on 07/11/21... How are you feeling H?


But their marriage came under strain as Meghan was filming in Toronto for the hit show Suits while he was based in California - and the pair spent little time together.

Filing for divorce in August 2013, Meghan citied “irreconcilable differences” - just as her acting career was taking off.

Meghan had even sent her diamond engagement and wedding ring back to her estranged husband in the mail, according to royal biographer Andrew Morton.

In his book, Meghan: A Hollywood Princess, Morton wrote that the move had shocked Trevor - and he could “barely contain his anger” afterwards.

Morton claims that Engelson told a pal that he went from cherishing Meghan to feeling like “a piece of something stuck to the bottom of Meghan’s shoe”.

Nina Priddy, who was Meghan’s best friend and maid of honour at the wedding, said she didn’t want to “associate herself” with Meghan after the incident.

She told the Express: “The way she handled it, Trevor definitely had the rug pulled out from under him. He was hurt.”

Abby Wathan, a pal of Meghan’s who also worked with her on the movie Random Encounters, told ITV documentary Prince Harry and Meghan: Truly Madly Deeply that they had bonded while both going through a divorce.

She said: “I was destroyed but she was empowered.

“She took her power back. It wasn’t the right relationship for her, so she moved on.”









						Meg's ex felt like 'something stuck to bottom of her shoe' in marriage collapse
					

MEGHAN Markle’s ex-husband Trevor Engelson felt like “something stuck to the bottom of her shoe” as their marriage broke down, it has been reported.  The producer and talent agent told how his…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Roxanna

Interesting  article came today in my news feed. I have no idea how credible this Australian site is , however the story sounds plausible, as many were wondering what's  H&M  are up to next...
I can only imagine what H's family might feel. He is obviously  trying to make money on not exactly Monarchy itself   like talking   for example of extensive heritage , but talking about his own close relatives, who happen to represent it.
https://www.newidea.com.au/prince-harry-records-royal-family
*Shock footage! Prince Harry records royal family*
Suspicions are rife the Sussexes are holding on to secret recordings. - by New Idea Royal Monthly

12 JUL 2021
Under pressure to deliver a product worthy of their $200 million Netflix deal, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are being encouraged to make a revealing documentary about the royals.

Now, palace insiders tell _New Idea_ that Prince Harry may have recorded secret videos during his time back in the UK to unveil Princess Diana’s statue, with a view to use the footage in the project.
While in London, Harry, 36, was seen holding an iPhone in a car as he left a royal engagement in Kew Gardens.
Onlookers say it appeared as though he was recording himself or photographers.
“There have been rumours Harry and Meghan are planning on making a documentary about royal life, so it would make sense if he was filming or recording on his trips home ‘for research purposes’,” says the insider.
Earlier this year, royal biographer Angela Levin hinted that Harry and Meghan, 39, definitely had something up their sleeve.  
In an interview in May, UK-based radio host Mike Graham said, “I thought after the Oprah interview that there wasn’t much more he could do.
"He spilled his guts, they have given everything they have got to give, but he just keeps going on and on and on”.
“There is a lot more!” Angela sharply responded.
I think there is another documentary in the making where they will have taken films of various rooms and maybe even of various conversations.

“I think it will be yet another nail in the coffin of his relationship with his father and his brother. They can’t trust him anymore.”
According to our insider, an “unofficial warning” went around to key staff and members of the family to be very careful about what they say in Harry’s presence.
“Relations are at such a low that anything could be said out of anger, and it would then be open for them to splash it across their next TV interview,” the source says, who insists the couple are currently being pushed by Netflix to “cough up something incredible” to earn their keep with the streaming giant.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ...
> 
> Naomi Osaka says Meghan Markle supported her after French Open Exit
> 
> 
> 
> Fat by me...one of these things isn't like the others. And yet she managed to insert herself once again.


she still seems to have plenty of cred as a WOC in the celeb realm.....getting mentioned with some big names....thanks to her golden goose

but she was called Meghan Markle, not Duchess...wonder if that's a problem


----------



## bag-mania

Roxanna said:


> Interesting  article came today in my news feed. I have no idea how credible this Australian site is , however the story sounds plausible, as many were wondering what's  H&M  are up to next...
> I can only imagine what H's family might feel. He is obviously  trying to make money on not exactly Monarchy itself   like talking   for example of extensive heritage , but talking about his own close relatives, who happen to represent it.
> https://www.newidea.com.au/prince-harry-records-royal-family
> *Shock footage! Prince Harry records royal family*
> Suspicions are rife the Sussexes are holding on to secret recordings. - by New Idea Royal Monthly
> 
> 12 JUL 2021
> Under pressure to deliver a product worthy of their $200 million Netflix deal, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are being encouraged to make a revealing documentary about the royals.
> 
> Now, palace insiders tell _New Idea_ that Prince Harry may have recorded secret videos during his time back in the UK to unveil Princess Diana’s statue, with a view to use the footage in the project.
> While in London, Harry, 36, was seen holding an iPhone in a car as he left a royal engagement in Kew Gardens.
> Onlookers say it appeared as though he was recording himself or photographers.
> “There have been rumours Harry and Meghan are planning on making a documentary about royal life, so it would make sense if he was filming or recording on his trips home ‘for research purposes’,” says the insider.
> Earlier this year, royal biographer Angela Levin hinted that Harry and Meghan, 39, definitely had something up their sleeve.
> In an interview in May, UK-based radio host Mike Graham said, “I thought after the Oprah interview that there wasn’t much more he could do.
> "He spilled his guts, they have given everything they have got to give, but he just keeps going on and on and on”.
> “There is a lot more!” Angela sharply responded.
> I think there is another documentary in the making where they will have taken films of various rooms and maybe even of various conversations.
> 
> “I think it will be yet another nail in the coffin of his relationship with his father and his brother. They can’t trust him anymore.”
> According to our insider, an “unofficial warning” went around to key staff and members of the family to be very careful about what they say in Harry’s presence.
> “Relations are at such a low that anything could be said out of anger, and it would then be open for them to splash it across their next TV interview,” the source says, who insists the couple are currently being pushed by Netflix to “cough up something incredible” to earn their keep with the streaming giant.



I can believe Harry would try to record what was going on. However I seriously doubt he got anything worthy of broadcast. His family already knew he couldn't be trusted and acted accordingly.


----------



## Hermes Zen

In addition to anything H or M may have recorded with the RF,  I think M&H Netflix will include first viewing of Lilibet and home footage of Archie saying his first words, birthday celebration etc etc. That would bring interest.


----------



## rose60610

I agree post #68,811 is plausible yet currently we have no proof. I also think it's plausible that if Harry didn't record (or was prevented from recording) anything, he and Raptor would think nothing of spewing whatever crap they felt like in order to slap together a scathing documentary of BRF. They're in too deep at this point to backtrack on their bombshell allegations despite naming their new baby after the horrific family matriarch that TRAPS its members. Whatever doc they create, it must be full of damning accusations otherwise their pity party with Oprah was for naught. Leave it to Harry to whine that he was prevented from recording any footage about his mother's statue and just not know why. I think the Oprah interview was basically a set up for the doc, full of promise to throw the BRF under the bus and burn them. Raptor must be overcome with glee in her efforts to tear apart one of the world's most famous families. If she had any stature beyond Z-List status and being a re-tread bride before marrying Prince Dimwit she might have a fraction of a sliver of momentary consideration. Seeing how she clawed her way into the BRF, became embedded in the royal circuit of events before crowning herself Mrs. Hazard in a short period of time--her allegations of mistreatment are not credible whatsoever. The only thing she is the authentic author of is her own track record. A total fail.


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> In addition to anything H or M may have recorded with the RF,  I think M&H Netflix will include first viewing of Lilibet and home footage of Archie saying his first words, birthday celebration etc etc. That would bring interest.


For their stans and the curious yes. But it would also emphasize their use of their children for merchandising since Netflix is a paid gig.

In contrast, just this past week there have been adorable pictures on line of royal children in Europe: Prince Charles of Luxenbourg visiting nursing homes with his father and generating lots of smiles (that one was posted here last Friday). Today in the DM a charming picture of the Swedish Royal Family, noted to be a family of 5, (shade?)  including the adorable baby Prince Julian. And last, but not least, the most heartwarming RF pictures of all, William, Kate, and George yesterday. WOW!

The Suckesses seem more weird as time goes on. At this point it feels like massive manipulation for commercial gain and, for me ,photos of their children would generate little more than a glance.

edited for botched grammar


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I agree post #68,811 is plausible yet currently we have no proof. I also think it's plausible that if Harry didn't record (or was prevented from recording) anything, he and Raptor would think nothing of spewing whatever crap they felt like in order to slap together a scathing documentary of BRF. They're in too deep at this point to backtrack on their bombshell allegations despite naming their new baby after the horrific family matriarch that TRAPS its members. Whatever doc they create, it must be full of damning accusations otherwise their pity party with Oprah was for naught. Leave it to Harry to whine that he was prevented from recording any footage about his mother's statue and just not know why. I think the Oprah interview was basically a set up for the doc, full of promise to throw the BRF under the bus and burn them. Raptor must be overcome with glee in her efforts to tear apart one of the world's most famous families. If she had any stature beyond Z-List status and being a re-tread bride before marrying Prince Dimwit she might have a fraction of a sliver of momentary consideration. Seeing how she clawed her way into the BRF, became embedded in the royal circuit of events before crowning herself Mrs. Hazard in a short period of time--her allegations of mistreatment are not credible whatsoever. The only thing she is the authentic author of is her own track record. A total fail.



The only thing that might save us from being subjected to another Harry and Meghan pity-party documentary is that they have been away from the royal family for well over a year. They can whine all they like but as time goes by it gets harder and harder to rationalize their whining. They themselves insisted in their Oprah interview that they were happy and “free” now. They run the risk of revealing their sour grapes and bitterness to their supporters if they keep beating the “Royal family didn’t help us enough” dead horse.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Crazy Card Lady is saying Raptor and MA are scheming how to get rid of Harry because he wasn't as much of a golden goose as she had hoped (really? The BRF isn't good enough for her LMAO). And it will be ugly and she'll try to smear him and put all the blame on him so she can once again be the innocent victim...HE hated his family, HE wanted to destroy them etc. when it was her who drip-drip-dripfed him all along, and also, did y'all know he's mentally unstable?
> 
> I really hope this is not what we'll see.


This wouldn't surprise me one bit ..


----------



## kemilia

EverSoElusive said:


> This woman is UGH   She's so inappropriate. I'm a grown woman and haven't stuck my tongue out like forever even when I play or joke around with children.



You probably haven't worn a hat that looks like a pile of poop ether! (that had to be an excellent joke done to her by her stylist)


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> The only thing that might save us from being subjected to another Harry and Meghan pity-party documentary is that they have been away from the royal family for well over a year. They can whine all they like but as time goes by it gets harder and harder to rationalize their whining. They themselves insisted in their Oprah interview that they were happy and “free” now. They run the risk of revealing their sour grapes and bitterness to their supporters if they keep beating the “Royal family didn’t help us enough” dead horse.



What you say makes perfect sense. But we're talking about clueless tone deaf self-pitying idiots who just can't shut themselves up. Just as Hazard keeps using his dead mother like a toll booth for speeches, they can't shut up about all the supposed torture the BRF put them through. Rationalize? They're not rational people. If their supporters haven't ditched them by now, they'll stand by them no matter what, just like the people who'll always think that the song "Muskrat Love" is an adorable classic. Sorry, but there's no helping those people and they are content to live in their own unicorn kingdom where Ginge and Cringe reign.  Somebody mentioned "Heaven's Gate" before and I had to refresh my memory on that cult and the 1997 disaster. If Hazza and Raptor start selling Nikes on their website, LOOK OUT! When you have sugars that are that dumb, they'll fall for anything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> What you say makes perfect sense. But we're talking about clueless tone deaf self-pitying idiots who just can't shut themselves up. Just as Hazard keeps using his dead mother like a toll booth for speeches, they can't shut up about all the supposed torture the BRF put them through. Rationalize? They're not rational people. If their supporters haven't ditched them by now, they'll stand by them no matter what, just like the people who'll always think that the song "Muskrat Love" is an adorable classic. Sorry, but there's no helping those people and they are content to live in their own unicorn kingdom where Ginge and Cringe reign.  Somebody mentioned "Heaven's Gate" before and I had to refresh my memory on that cult and the 1997 disaster. If Hazza and Raptor start selling Nikes on their website, LOOK OUT! When you have sugars that are that dumb, they'll fall for anything.


----------



## bellecate

The headline on Express.co.uk
Not sure how to link it with my phone while out in the woods.
They have been accused of using ideas posted on their Archewell website posted by the public. No surprise there. 
*Meghan and Harry accused of taking ideas from public through Archewell*


----------



## poopsie

I would hope that *reputable* entities like Netflix would refuse to air subject matter obtained in such a clandestine manner. This wouldn't be a "behind the scenes" peek into the every day goings on of a family where the cameras are set and left to roll and everyone is privy to them beforehand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> What you say makes perfect sense. But we're talking about clueless tone deaf self-pitying idiots who just can't shut themselves up. Just as Hazard keeps using his dead mother like a toll booth for speeches, they can't shut up about all the supposed torture the BRF put them through. Rationalize? They're not rational people. If their supporters haven't ditched them by now, they'll stand by them no matter what, just like the people who'll always think that the* song "Muskrat Love" *is an adorable classic. Sorry, but there's no helping those people and they are content to live in their own unicorn kingdom where Ginge and Cringe reign.  Somebody mentioned "Heaven's Gate" before and I had to refresh my memory on that cult and the 1997 disaster. If Hazza and Raptor start selling Nikes on their website, LOOK OUT! When you have sugars that are that dumb, they'll fall for anything.



??? Whaaaa? Pls educate me. I did find this on the Wiki :

_Despite Captain & Tennille's stated disinterest in highlighting "Muskrat Love" as an item in their repertoire, it was the song they chose to sing at a July 1976 White House dinner honoring Queen Elizabeth II: the press subsequently ran a statement from a dinner guest who opined it was "in very poor taste" to sing of mating muskrats before the Queen. Toni Tennille responded to this charge saying: "only a person with a dirty mind would see something wrong. It's a gentle *Disneyesque* kind of song."_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just heard the rumour that when the Sussexes left a big chunk of change and some heirloom jewelry went missing. I have not yet been able to find out where this comes from. Maybe time to ask Lady CC a question


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> ??? Whaaaa? Pls educate me. I did find this on the Wiki :
> 
> _Despite Captain & Tennille's stated disinterest in highlighting "Muskrat Love" as an item in their repertoire, it was the song they chose to sing at a July 1976 White House dinner honoring Queen Elizabeth II: the press subsequently ran a statement from a dinner guest who opined it was "in very poor taste" to sing of mating muskrats before the Queen. Toni Tennille responded to this charge saying: "only a person with a dirty mind would see something wrong. It's a gentle *Disneyesque* kind of song."_




anyone who was around in the mid/late 70's and had to listen to this piece of nausea inducing treacle on a daily basis will be howling "Noooooooooooooo"
I didn't mind Daryl (the Captain) but Toni took perky waaaaaay too far


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Muskrat Love

It was the 70s.  We were young, maybe a bit unsophisticated, possibly even childish with a whiff of the herbal medicines in the air.
Was QE really offended?  After the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Vietnam War, Watergate, JFK, RFK, MLK, etc., the list is endless, we needed the daft songs to survive. Life was brutal back then. No cell phones, no internet, OMG, there aren’t enough drugs to block out all the horrors from that decade. Peace to the muskrats. We love ya, we really do


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> The headline on Express.co.uk
> Not sure how to link it with my phone while out in the woods.
> They have been accused of using ideas posted on their Archewell website posted by the public. No surprise there.
> *Meghan and Harry accused of taking ideas from public through Archewell*



I believe this but anyone who posts an idea on the Archewell site must’ve expected, and likely wanted, their idea to be used by them. It’s surprising to me if there are many people trying to help them.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> ??? Whaaaa? Pls educate me. I did find this on the Wiki :
> 
> _Despite Captain & Tennille's stated disinterest in highlighting "Muskrat Love" as an item in their repertoire, it was the song they chose to sing at a July 1976 White House dinner honoring Queen Elizabeth II: the press subsequently ran a statement from a dinner guest who opined it was "in very poor taste" to sing of mating muskrats before the Queen. Toni Tennille responded to this charge saying: "only a person with a dirty mind would see something wrong. It's a gentle *Disneyesque* kind of song."_



Wha?? I had no idea it was performed for The Queen! UGH UGH! UGH! I looked up the wiki page and also found this: 

Based on the Captain & Tennille version, "Muskrat Love" has become a staple on "worst song" lists, including a 2006 poll by CNN. Toni Tennille said of Captain & Tennille's "Muskrat Love": "I don’t know why people are so polarized about this tune. People either love it or they loathe it."

IMO, you want to find an alternative to capital punishment? Pipe in "Muskrat Love" into Death Row at a SuperMax prison and by the fifth round inmates will start doing themselves in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Wha?? I had no idea it was performed for The Queen! UGH UGH! UGH! I looked up the wiki page and also found this:
> 
> Based on the Captain & Tennille version, "Muskrat Love" has become a staple on "worst song" lists, including a 2006 poll by CNN. Toni Tennille said of Captain & Tennille's "Muskrat Love": "I don’t know why people are so polarized about this tune. People either love it or they loathe it."
> 
> IMO, you want to find an alternative to capital punishment? Pipe in "Muskrat Love" into Death Row at a SuperMax prison and by the fifth round inmates will start doing themselves in.



2006 poll ???  Many of us felt that way by 1980.  Is it really fair to let the 2006 kiddies vote on our 70s decade? I think not.
Most of the Captain and Tennille songs were below standard.  Yet, they served as an antidote to the 60s angst and help pave the way for the 80s glitz:




ETA:  We knew that stuff was awful. We just did not care. Ask me why.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Muskrat Love
> 
> It was the 70s.  We were young, maybe a bit unsophisticated, possibly even childish with a whiff of the herbal medicines in the air.
> Was QE really offended?  After the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Vietnam War, Watergate, JFK, RFK, MLK, etc., the list is endless, we needed the daft songs to survive. Life was brutal back then. No cell phones, no internet, OMG, there aren’t enough drugs to block out all the horrors from that decade. Peace to the muskrats. We love ya, we really do




The muskrats were contemporaries with Johnny Rotten. Anarchy in the UK!!!!!! 

IDK if rose60610's post intended to link the muskrats specifically to QE. I took it as a reference to the similar mindsets of M's stans and those who were enchanted by the rodents

Hahaha I see @rose60610 responded


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> The muskrats were contemporaries with Johnny Rotten. Anarchy in the UK!!!!!!
> 
> IDK if rose60610's post intended to link the muskrats specifically to QE. I took it as a reference to the similar mindsets of M's stans and those who were enchanted by the rodents
> 
> Hahaha I see @rose60610 responded



Not to  or to  anyone. 
The 60s and 70s were very difficult decades on many levels. Not to short-changed anyone’s angst in today’s world,  the 70s pain was brutal and damaging. Muskrats loving each other was the least of our worries.  








						'70s disaster films: angst of an era
					

'Earthquake,' 'Black Sunday' and others showing in a festival featured A-list stars and special effects.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2006 poll ???  Many of us felt that way by 1980.  *Is it really fair to let the 2006 kiddies vote* on our 70s decade? I think not.
> Most of the Captain and Tennille songs were below standard.  Yet, they served as an antidote to the 60s angst and help pave the way for the 80s glitz:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  We knew that stuff was awful. We just did not care. Ask me why.





Another way of looking at it is that the hatred of "Muskrat Love" ran so deep that even 26 years later those auditory scars were still there! Even the kids who'd later be eating Tide Pods gave ML a thumb's down. I wouldn't doubt that Meghan probably loves it and ranks it up there with "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye"!


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to  or to  anyone.
> The 60s and 70s were very difficult decades on many levels. Not to short-changed anyone’s angst in today’s world,  the 70s pain was brutal and damaging. *Muskrats loving each other was the least of our worries*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> '70s disaster films: angst of an era
> 
> 
> 'Earthquake,' 'Black Sunday' and others showing in a festival featured A-list stars and special effects.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com



Totally agree. However, talk about piling on, "Muskrat Love" was another log on the disaster bonfire.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Another way of looking at it is that the hatred of "Muskrat Love" ran so deep that even 26 years later those auditory scars were still there! Even the kids who'd later be eating Tide Pods gave ML a thumb's down. I wouldn't doubt that Meghan probably loves it and ranks it up there with "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye"!



It shares a ranking with the Farrah Flip and The Wedge. Seriously, we were *the* traumatized generation. I know Hermes et al were around, wonder what they were offering?  We needed escapism to get us through


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hey I LOVED the songs from the 70's!   Wonder what M&H think of these songs.  Some youth do enjoy retro songs.

I know I'm going to get thumbs down emojis for doing this .. For your enjoyment or not ...

Capt & Tennille Muskrat Love Music Video - Tennille hinted WH Performance with the Q.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Another way of looking at it is that the hatred of "Muskrat Love" ran so deep that even 26 years later those auditory scars were still there! Even the kids who'd later be eating Tide Pods gave ML a thumb's down. *I wouldn't doubt that Meghan probably loves it and ranks it up there with "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye*"!




Her exit song? Look out Harry!

I happen to LOVE Steam's version


----------



## CarryOn2020

'Mr. President, It Was Muskrats:' Toni Tennille on the Time She Sang 'Muskrat Love' for Queen Elizabeth – in the White House!
					

It may be the most infamous performance in White House history.  To celebrate the nation's bicentennial in 1976, one of the most popular acts of the era – the Grammy-winning husband-and-wife duo Captain and Tennille – were invited to perform for President Ford, First Lady Betty Ford, Queen...




					finance.yahoo.com
				





Spoiler: It was muskrats!



*'Mr. President, It Was Muskrats:' Toni Tennille on the Time She Sang 'Muskrat Love' for Queen Elizabeth – in the White House!*
March 19, 2016
It may be the most infamous performance in White House history.

To celebrate the nation's bicentennial in 1976, one of the most popular acts of the era – the Grammy-winning husband-and-wife duo Captain and Tennille – were invited to perform for President Ford, First Lady Betty Ford, Queen Elizabeth, Prince Philip and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

But the performance didn't go quite as planned.

Tenille, 75, who opens up for the first time about her 39-year marriage to Daryl "the Captain" Dragon in a new memoir and interview with PEOPLE, also shares the story about that fateful White House visit.



The couple opted to perform their camp classic, "Muskrat Love," after the First Lady personally requested another suggestive song.






'Mr. President, It Was Muskrats:' Toni Tennille on the Time She Sang 'Muskrat Love' for Queen Elizabeth – in the White House!| The British Royals, The Royals, Queen Elizabeth II

"We had two great hits, 'Love Will Keep us Together' and 'The Way I Want to Touch You,' " she recalls. "I thought, 'I probably can't do 'The Way I Want to Touch You.' It might be a little too intimate for the White House.' But then when Mrs. Ford came in and said, 'Are you going to do 'The Way I Want to Touch You?' 

"I said, 'We weren't planning to.' She said, 'Oh you must! It's Gerry and my favorite song.' I went, 'Okay, we'll do that.' Then I said to Daryl, 'We really should do 'Muskrat Love,' too.' It was a huge hit and I thought everyone would get a kick out of it. I thought they seemed like a fun group!"

But with their synthesizer – which Daryl uses in the song to recreate the sound of love-making muskrats – speakers and keyboard set up in the East Room, the volume was high – and not everyone was pleased.





'Mr. President, It Was Muskrats:' Toni Tennille on the Time She Sang 'Muskrat Love' for Queen Elizabeth – in the White House!| The British Royals, The Royals, Queen Elizabeth II

Kissinger in particular seemed miserable throughout the performance, says Tennille (she good-naturedly dedicated the song to him for years after), while the Queen simply nodded off.

Mrs. Ford, on the other hand, smiled, and Tennille says Prince Philip, shook her hand afterward and "was so lovely."

Years later, Tennille recalls that she and Dragon would occasionally cross paths with the former President and First Lady in California.

"Mrs. Ford would say, 'Gerry you remember Toni and Daryl! They performed at the White House.' And the President said, 'Yes, you did the song about the mice.' We said, 'Mr. President, it was muskrats!' "


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Her exit song? Look out Harry!
> 
> I happen to LOVE Steam's version



I see her exit song as having more of a Paul Simon tone to it.


----------



## rose60610

Hermes Zen said:


> Hey I LOVED the songs from the 70's!   Wonder what M&H think of these songs.  Some youth do enjoy retro songs.
> 
> I know I'm going to get thumbs down emojis for doing this .. For your enjoyment or not ...
> 
> Capt & Tennille Muskrat Love Music Video - Tennille hinted WH Performance with the Q.




I braced myself, knowing it was only going to be a matter of time before somebody posted the song, like a leaked crime footage tape. I'm glad you enjoy 70's music , I can take some of it too. I think the thought of somebody having written Muskrat Love while completely sober is what's disconcerting. If the writer were on LSD combined with other things it'd explain a lot.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s the info on the author with a video of him singing his song:








						‘Muskrat Love’ was written and sung by Alabama natives
					

The easy listening song was originally a country tune called "Muskrat Candlelight."




					www.al.com
				



In case anyone needs a refresher:

_“Muskrat Suzie, Muskrat Sam
Do the jitterbug out in Muskrat Land
And they shimmy... Sam is so skinny
And they whirl and they twirl and they tango
Singing and *Jinging a Jango  *
Floating like the heavens above
Looks like Muskrat Love.”

====_
Thank you @rose60610
Never would have thought this week would start off with thoughts of the 70s and Muskrat Love. Love love this thread __


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if they will bring back this scarf?


----------



## poopsie

All this talk of music makes me wonder. 
IMO the music we choose to listen to says more about us than any inkblot. 
Charles was, what---22 when the 70's began. He'd been at the geographical epicenter of the musical revolution of the 60's. Was he a mod or a rocker? A Beatle-freak? A glammer listening to Bowie, The Sweet or Marc Bolan? Or was Middle of the Road's Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep more his cuppa?
 There was room for everything in the 70's. Don Cornelius and Dick Clark. Motown, singer/storytellers/ glam, metal, reggae, swamp, Latin, disco, punk, funk, hip hop......everything. For the most part, everyone had a signature sound. 
What did those boys grow up listening to? My Mom loved Nat King Cole and Andy Williams while Pops was more a fan of the novelty ----think Yes, We Have no Bananas. When the Beatles hit he brought me home every record and said they would last forever.
I get the feeling that Harry and William have different taste in music. 
Of course now days Harry marches to Raptor's tune


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or is the happy(?) couple telling us they have taken permanent measures to never have more children?????


Since we know that M won't have any unnecessary surgeries unless it's PS, she will order H to have the snip snip in the doctor's office which will be a short procedure since M has already crushed his bollocks.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kemilia said:


> You probably haven't worn a hat that looks like a pile of poop ether! (that had to be an excellent joke done to her by her stylist)



Why I'm not fancy nor a socialite    Never had to wear a hat so thank goodness I don't have a pile of poop sitting on my head


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I believe this but anyone who posts an idea on the Archewell site must’ve expected, and likely wanted, their idea to be used by them. It’s surprising to me if there are many people trying to help them.



Didn't they blatantly say "send us your ideas"


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> All this talk of music makes me wonder.
> IMO the music we choose to listen to says more about us than any inkblot.
> Charles was, what---22 when the 70's began. He'd been at the geographical epicenter of the musical revolution of the 60's. Was he a mod or a rocker? A Beatle-freak? A glammer listening to Bowie, The Sweet or Marc Bolan? Or was Middle of the Road's Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep more his cuppa?
> There was room for everything in the 70's. Don Cornelius and Dick Clark. Motown, singer/storytellers/ glam, metal, reggae, swamp, Latin, disco, punk, funk, hip hop......everything. For the most part, everyone had a signature sound.
> What did those boys grow up listening to? My Mom loved Nat King Cole and Andy Williams while Pops was more a fan of the novelty ----think Yes, We Have no Bananas. When the Beatles hit he brought me home every record and said they would last forever.
> I get the feeling that Harry and William have different taste in music.
> Of course now days Harry marches to Raptor's tune



He liked the harmless glamour of MOR, R&B girl groups like The Three Degrees. They are kinda campy fabulous in a world full of grit. 

Guess he had a premonition he'd be singing this to Harry


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they will bring back this scarf?
> 
> View attachment 5134850



Channeling this next time I go bird watching or racing


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> All this talk of music makes me wonder.
> IMO the music we choose to listen to says more about us than any inkblot.
> Charles was, what---22 when the 70's began. He'd been at the geographical epicenter of the musical revolution of the 60's. Was he a mod or a rocker? A Beatle-freak? A glammer listening to Bowie, The Sweet or Marc Bolan? Or was Middle of the Road's Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep more his cuppa?
> There was room for everything in the 70's. Don Cornelius and Dick Clark. Motown, singer/storytellers/ glam, metal, reggae, swamp, Latin, disco, punk, funk, hip hop......everything. For the most part, everyone had a signature sound.
> What did those boys grow up listening to? My Mom loved Nat King Cole and Andy Williams while Pops was more a fan of the novelty ----think Yes, We Have no Bananas. When the Beatles hit he brought me home every record and said they would last forever.
> I get the feeling that Harry and William have different taste in music.
> Of course now days Harry marches to Raptor's tune



So true.
IIRC Diana like the pop music while Charles tended toward classical.

_In 2017, cassette tapes that once belonged to Diana went on display at Buckingham Palace.

The small case contained Diana's eclectic collection, and it included albums by George Michael, Luciano Pavarott, Rod Stewart, Diana Ross, Céline Dion and Lionel Richie._











						What was Princess Diana's favourite music and was Duran Duran really her favourite band?
					

Princess Diana was known to be very passionate about her favourite music, and rubbed shoulders with many top artists during the 1980s and 1990s.




					www.smoothradio.com


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> He liked the harmless glamour of MOR, R&B girl groups like The Three Degrees. They are kinda campy fabulous in a world full of grit.
> 
> Guess he had a premonition he'd be singing this to Harry




Wonder if he listened to When Will I See You Again while dreaming of Camilla


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> He liked the harmless glamour of MOR, R&B girl groups like The Three Degrees. They are kinda campy fabulous in a world full of grit.
> 
> Guess he had a premonition he'd be singing this to Harry




Looks like all 3 popular 70s hair styles are covered - the Farrah flip, the Afro and the wedge.
Gawd, what a decade it was.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> All this talk of music makes me wonder.
> IMO the music we choose to listen to says more about us than any inkblot.
> Charles was, what---22 when the 70's began. He'd been at the geographical epicenter of the musical revolution of the 60's. Was he a mod or a rocker? A Beatle-freak? A glammer listening to Bowie, The Sweet or Marc Bolan? Or was *Middle of the Road's Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep* more his cuppa?
> There was room for everything in the 70's. Don Cornelius and Dick Clark. Motown, singer/storytellers/ glam, metal, reggae, swamp, Latin, disco, punk, funk, hip hop......everything. For the most part, everyone had a signature sound.
> What did those boys grow up listening to? My Mom loved Nat King Cole and Andy Williams while Pops was more a fan of the novelty ----think Yes, We Have no Bananas. When the Beatles hit he brought me home every record and said they would last forever.
> I get the feeling that Harry and William have different taste in music.
> Of course now days Harry marches to Raptor's tune



You had to bring back Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep to my mind after decades. Thank you for the impossible to get out of my head earworm. 

Charles probably preferred classical music. He strikes me as a man born out of his time.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like all 3 popular 70s hair styles are covered - the Farrah flip, the Afro and the wedge.
> Gawd, what a decade it was.



No love for the Shag?


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> You had to bring back Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep to my mind after decades. Thank you for the impossible to get out of my head earworm.
> 
> Charles probably preferred classical music. He strikes me as a man born out of his time.



a late night fall down the Youtube wormhole led me to discover the wonderful world of Top Of The Pops videos. 

@bag-mania cover your ears


----------



## CarryOn2020

@poopsie  Ah, the beloved shag.   Love Klute, too.

Coming ’round again -









						The Jane Fonda-Inspired Haircut That's On Trend For Summer 2021 - The List
					

According to outlets, the Jane Fonda-inspired haircut that many will be requesting this summer is the layered shag haircut, with some combining a mullet, too.




					www.thelist.com


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> @poopsie  Ah, the beloved shag.   Love Klute, too.
> 
> Coming ’round again -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jane Fonda-Inspired Haircut That's On Trend For Summer 2021 - The List
> 
> 
> According to outlets, the Jane Fonda-inspired haircut that many will be requesting this summer is the layered shag haircut, with some combining a mullet, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5134898



With a little less bangs, I wonder if Raptor might be able to pull this one off
I know she sees herself as the messy-sexy vixen (with the wardrobe to match)  but if she ever _did _decide to change and tidy up her look?????


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> It shares a ranking with the Farrah Flip and The Wedge. Seriously, we were *the* traumatized generation. I know Hermes et al were around, wonder what they were offering?  We needed escapism to get us through


well, the Farrah flip may not look good now but she was beautiful back then, hair and all


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> The headline on Express.co.uk
> Not sure how to link it with my phone while out in the woods.
> They have been accused of using ideas posted on their Archewell website posted by the public. No surprise there.
> *Meghan and Harry accused of taking ideas from public through Archewell*


Haven't read the Express article yet, but I mentioned a few weeks ago that the t&c for contributions to Archewell makes the story contents theirs. If you tell them about something that happened in your life, they OWN YOU.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> a late night fall down the Youtube wormhole led me to discover the wonderful world of Top Of The Pops videos.
> 
> @bag-mania cover your ears




Oh poopsie, just for that you get to endure Terry Jacks singing his sappy ballad _Seasons in the Sun. _


----------



## Sol Ryan

bag-mania said:


> Oh poopsie, just for that you get to endure Terry Jacks singing his sappy ballad _Seasons in the Sun. _



Oh god… I couldn’t escape this song on the radio this weekend…. I got out of the car and when I got back in the next day the radio picked up in the same spot…


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the info on the author with a video of him singing his song:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Muskrat Love’ was written and sung by Alabama natives
> 
> 
> The easy listening song was originally a country tune called "Muskrat Candlelight."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.al.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case anyone needs a refresher:
> 
> _“Muskrat Suzie, Muskrat Sam
> Do the jitterbug out in Muskrat Land
> And they shimmy... Sam is so skinny
> And they whirl and they twirl and they tango
> Singing and *Jinging a Jango  *
> Floating like the heavens above
> Looks like Muskrat Love.”
> 
> ====_
> Thank you @rose60610
> Never would have thought this week would start off with thoughts of the 70s and Muskrat Love. Love love this thread __



Note to Pentagon and CIA: forget waterboarding, just recite these lyrics and the people you're interrogating will give you everything you want just to make it stop: 

_“Muskrat Suzie, Muskrat Sam
Do the jitterbug out in Muskrat Land
And they shimmy... Sam is so skinny
And they whirl and they twirl and they tango
Singing and Jinging a Jango  
Floating like the heavens above
Looks like Muskrat Love.”_


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just heard the rumour that when the Sussexes left a big chunk of change and some heirloom jewelry went missing. I have not yet been able to find out where this comes from. Maybe time to ask Lady CC a question



one of the other gossip forums talked about this.  They said besides the merching, MM charges PC full price for the dress and banking the $$ herself but returning the dress or selling it (fraud against PC is unlikely to lead to charges as BRF will cover it up), there was something odd with the Frogmore renovations.

The theory was that H and MM banked the £2M in renovations and did either a cheaper job (knowing she wasn’t staying) or hardly anything at all.  Neighbours of Frogmore did not see contractors coming and going (as you usually do during construction).  Plans filed with council didn’t make sense to be a cost of £2M.  It was then said William or PC wanted a full financial audit of what was going on… and then Mexit happened.  And PC repaid Frogmore via the Sussex allowance (disclosed in the recent financial records).  So when H said he was cut off, it was because PC using their allowance money to repay Frogmore renovation costs, not directing $$ to them based in the USA.  There are no pictures released of the renovated cottage.  Also explains a hasty exit. 

Just a theory discussed On another forum.

another theory is that they were kicked out, ie asked to leave.  to save face they did the Mexit manifesto - ie. you can’t kick us out, we quit! ( but will still take the $$ and return for the fun stuff like carriage rides).  I think this second theory is unlikely.  The manifesto was their attempt to get what they wanted - a half in and half out, fully funded lifestyle out in  the USA.  And the Queen said no.

So they went the nuclear option on Oprah - which worked for a little while in their favour but has now backfired spectacularly.  The RF is where the $ and connections are.  By not being close to the RF they don’t have much to offer by themselves.  That’s why I think H and MM are quiet.  They have to manifest themselves into something else to merch and make $$… or apologise and try to get back with the RF.  Their PR must be working in a new strategy and part of that must be to stay quiet so they aren’t overexposed (ha - too late)


----------



## bag-mania

Sol Ryan said:


> Oh god… I couldn’t escape this song on the radio this weekend…. I got out of the car and when I got back in the next day the radio picked up in the same spot…



When you’re listening to that song you just want to shout “hurry up and die already!”  

I remember it being hugely popular when I was nine.


----------



## xincinsin

These are the significant portions of the Archewell T&C regarding any submissions. They guarantee total protection for Archewell and zero consideration for the person who submitted the story. I doubt their fans would take the time to read the T&C before eagerly submitting their stories.

TL; DR Basically Archewell is saying that anything you submit has to be original. If there is anything that makes reference to a 3rd party, you are responsible for securing agreement for usage. You give all copyright licence to Archewell for worldwide use, in all media and in perpetuity. This includes the right to use your name and photo. Also, Archewell has the right to revise what is submitted, i.e., change your story. They won't pay you or credit you or inform you if they use your story. If they want you to sign off on documents, the T&C you blithely agreed to requires you to give consent. And if Archewell gets sued for using your submission, you will compensate them.

_By submitting material of any kind (Submissions) you represent and warrant that they are original to you, have never been published (online or in hard copy), do not contain any material that would defame or otherwise violate or infringe upon the rights of any third party, including copyrights, trademarks or rights of privacy or publicity, and will not violate any governmental, federal, state or local laws or ordinances. Entrants further warrant and represent that they have secured the requisite consent from any third party referenced or portrayed in their entries and will upon request provide written proof of same third-party agreement to the usage. No third-party consents or permission need to be obtained by Archewell or the Archewell Parties for their exercising of the rights granted in this license.

By submitting material which contains your or any person’s name, biographical material, photograph or likeness you are granting Archewell and the Archewell Parties an irrevocable, royalty free, fully paid up, in perpetuity, worldwide, assignable license, in any media now known or hereafter developed, the right to use the names, likenesses and biographical materials included in the Submission in whole or in part for all purpose it deems, in its sole discretion, appropriate. 

Archewell has the right to edit, revise, abridge, crop, combine, condense, quote selected portion of the Submission as it deems appropriate or necessary.  

You shall not be entitled to any credit, consideration, notice or payments of any kind. You waive any Moral Rights you may have to the Submissions, and agrees that if Archewell or any Archewell Party elects to use the Submissions for any purpose, all rights under copyright or other intellectual property rights which may result from Archewell or Archewell Parties’ use relating to your Submissions shall be the sole property of Archewell. You further agree that if Archewell or the Archewell Parties elect to use your Submissions, you will execute any documents requested regarding the usage. If you violate any of the representations or warranties you have made and as a result a use by Archewell and/or the Archewell Parties of the Submissions causes them to be liable to any third-party, You agree to indemnify Archewell and/or the Archewell Parties and their agents, employees, affiliates, subsidiaries, representative and all related parties from and against any and all damages, costs, judgments and expenses (including reasonable attorney fees) which it incurs as a result of its use of the Submissions. 

No additional compensation of or kind is due you, nor any further consents are required form you, nor are you entitled to any further notice or credits regarding the use of the Submission._


----------



## octopus17

poopsie said:


> All this talk of music makes me wonder.
> IMO the music we choose to listen to says more about us than any inkblot.
> Charles was, what---22 when the 70's began. He'd been at the geographical epicenter of the musical revolution of the 60's. Was he a mod or a rocker? A Beatle-freak? A glammer listening to Bowie, The Sweet or Marc Bolan? Or was Middle of the Road's Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep more his cuppa?
> There was room for everything in the 70's. Don Cornelius and Dick Clark. Motown, singer/storytellers/ glam, metal, reggae, swamp, Latin, disco, punk, funk, hip hop......everything. For the most part, everyone had a signature sound.
> What did those boys grow up listening to? My Mom loved Nat King Cole and Andy Williams while Pops was more a fan of the novelty ----think Yes, We Have no Bananas. When the Beatles hit he brought me home every record and said they would last forever.
> I get the feeling that Harry and William have different taste in music.
> Of course now days Harry marches to Raptor's tune


For some reason I have it in my head that Charles was/is a Status Quo fan  but goodness only knows where I picked that up from ...
I seem to like more seventies music now than perhaps I did then, although my first single was Crazy Horses by The Osmonds and I really liked Sweet. 
I think Harry and William were listening to The Spice Girls back in the day, but what they listen to now would be anyones guess!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> The only thing that might save us from being subjected to another Harry and Meghan pity-party documentary is that they have been away from the royal family for well over a year. They can whine all they like but as time goes by it gets harder and harder to rationalize their whining. They themselves insisted in their Oprah interview that they were happy and “free” now. They run the risk of revealing their sour grapes and bitterness to their supporters if they keep beating the “Royal family didn’t help us enough” dead horse.


Their ONLY interest is _his_ connection to the RF. When they walked away from that it was the beginning of the end. As time goes by and royal life goes on-----conspicuously sans their involvement------it will become harder and harder for them to be able to work that angle. Look at all the fun they missed this past week! No one cares where they were or what plebian thing they were doing.
Now that it is so very obvious that Harry is on the outs, and as a never-been the Raptor has no traction whatsoever, I bet offers like those early ones are going to be scarcer than those rescue hens teeth.
Adding the fact that they've committed social and professional suicide with their behavior. Who is going to want to work or socialize with someone who backstabs and bites the hand that feeds them? Or is documenting everything they see and hear "just in case"? Or who have their attorneys on speed dial, are petty and vindictive beyond belief, have zero sense of loyalty and no sense of shame?


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> These are the significant portions of the Archewell T&C regarding any submissions. They guarantee total protection for Archewell and zero consideration for the person who submitted the story. I doubt their fans would take the time to read the T&C before eagerly submitting their stories.
> 
> TL; DR Basically Archewell is saying that anything you submit has to be original. If there is anything that makes reference to a 3rd party, you are responsible for securing agreement for usage. You give all copyright licence to Archewell for worldwide use, in all media and in perpetuity. This includes the right to use your name and photo. Also, Archewell has the right to revise what is submitted, i.e., change your story. They won't pay you or credit you or inform you if they use your story. If they want you to sign off on documents, the T&C you blithely agreed to requires you to give consent. And if Archewell gets sued for using your submission, you will compensate them.
> 
> _By submitting material of any kind (Submissions) you represent and warrant that they are original to you, have never been published (online or in hard copy), do not contain any material that would defame or otherwise violate or infringe upon the rights of any third party, including copyrights, trademarks or rights of privacy or publicity, and will not violate any governmental, federal, state or local laws or ordinances. Entrants further warrant and represent that they have secured the requisite consent from any third party referenced or portrayed in their entries and will upon request provide written proof of same third-party agreement to the usage. No third-party consents or permission need to be obtained by Archewell or the Archewell Parties for their exercising of the rights granted in this license.
> 
> By submitting material which contains your or any person’s name, biographical material, photograph or likeness you are granting Archewell and the Archewell Parties an irrevocable, royalty free, fully paid up, in perpetuity, worldwide, assignable license, in any media now known or hereafter developed, the right to use the names, likenesses and biographical materials included in the Submission in whole or in part for all purpose it deems, in its sole discretion, appropriate.
> 
> Archewell has the right to edit, revise, abridge, crop, combine, condense, quote selected portion of the Submission as it deems appropriate or necessary.
> 
> You shall not be entitled to any credit, consideration, notice or payments of any kind. You waive any Moral Rights you may have to the Submissions, and agrees that if Archewell or any Archewell Party elects to use the Submissions for any purpose, all rights under copyright or other intellectual property rights which may result from Archewell or Archewell Parties’ use relating to your Submissions shall be the sole property of Archewell. You further agree that if Archewell or the Archewell Parties elect to use your Submissions, you will execute any documents requested regarding the usage. If you violate any of the representations or warranties you have made and as a result a use by Archewell and/or the Archewell Parties of the Submissions causes them to be liable to any third-party, You agree to indemnify Archewell and/or the Archewell Parties and their agents, employees, affiliates, subsidiaries, representative and all related parties from and against any and all damages, costs, judgments and expenses (including reasonable attorney fees) which it incurs as a result of its use of the Submissions.
> 
> No additional compensation of or kind is due you, nor any further consents are required form you, nor are you entitled to any further notice or credits regarding the use of the Submission._


Not a very enticing group to work for.  Why would anyone do so?


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Oh poopsie, just for that you get to endure Terry Jacks singing his sappy ballad _Seasons in the Sun. _



I prefer the original by Jacques Brel


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Not a very enticing group to work for.  Why would anyone do so?


You are sharing a story of your life with your idols. You're going to be featured on their website. Maybe you might even get a phonecall or Zoom with them! And you definitely didn't read the t&c  

When I was given the employment contract for my first job, there was a clause on page 3 that also used some very scary language stating that the company could make me do any job they wanted, and not the job I was employed to do. I asked the HR lady about it and she looked blankly at me. After 30 years with this company, I've realized that quite a number of the HR people will ask you to sign forms which they themselves have not read. Not my problem if they end up looking like idiots.


----------



## needlv

Ooooh. The freeze out from the RF continues…









						Spinning The Freeze Out - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] We told you that a famous family decided to adopt a new strategy in dealing with its rogue member. They are freezing him out. You may have noticed that Sonny’s family has rarely mentioned him in the past few months. That cold approach was also evident during his recent visit...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## csshopper

Maybe it’s the music discussion that caused me to flash on David Foster and Catherine McPhee.

 It was barely a year ago that he was being referred to as “like a father to Harry” and Catherine as a bestie to Raptor.  Wonder what happened, another “father” cast off?

Haven’t seen anything about the foursome in a long time.


----------



## needlv




----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> Ooooh. The freeze out from the RF continues…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spinning The Freeze Out - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] We told you that a famous family decided to adopt a new strategy in dealing with its rogue member. They are freezing him out. You may have noticed that Sonny’s family has rarely mentioned him in the past few months. That cold approach was also evident during his recent visit...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com




things are going to get reeeally interesting now
Raptor can double down on playing the victim card for Harry-----how tragic that his evil vindictive racist family has Markled him yadda yadda blah blah
Or this will simply speed up her filing for divorce if they (she) can't get the RF to cave in to their (her) demands and welcome them back with open arms and wallets.
The ONLY thing Harry brings to the table is his connection to the RF. Once that is gone so is he.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> It shares a ranking with the Farrah Flip and The Wedge. Seriously, we were *the* traumatized generation. I know Hermes et al were around, wonder what they were offering? We needed escapism to get us through


This is why I don’t feel sorry for 70s kids!  You could buy all the designer goods for way less relative to your earnings than we can with the crazy price hikes of today 



poopsie said:


> All this talk of music makes me wonder.
> IMO the music we choose to listen to says more about us than any inkblot.
> Charles was, what---22 when the 70's began. He'd been at the geographical epicenter of the musical revolution of the 60's. Was he a mod or a rocker? A Beatle-freak? A glammer listening to Bowie, The Sweet or Marc Bolan? Or was Middle of the Road's Chirpy Chirpy Cheep Cheep more his cuppa?
> There was room for everything in the 70's. Don Cornelius and Dick Clark. Motown, singer/storytellers/ glam, metal, reggae, swamp, Latin, disco, punk, funk, hip hop......everything. For the most part, everyone had a signature sound.
> What did those boys grow up listening to? My Mom loved Nat King Cole and Andy Williams while Pops was more a fan of the novelty ----think Yes, We Have no Bananas. When the Beatles hit he brought me home every record and said they would last forever.
> I get the feeling that Harry and William have different taste in music.
> Of course now days Harry marches to Raptor's tune


I’ve got a feeling W listens to Coldplay and Adele sort of stuff. 
While H, being a poseur, probably thinks it’s really cool and obscure to like Drake.


----------



## needlv

poopsie said:


> things are going to get reeeally interesting now
> Raptor can double down on playing the victim card for Harry-----how tragic that his evil vindictive racist family has Markled him yadda yadda blah blah
> Or this will simply speed up her filing for divorce if they (she) can't get the RF to cave in to their (her) demands and welcome them back with open arms and wallets.
> The ONLY thing Harry brings to the table is his connection to the RF. Once that is gone so is he.




Agree.  So maybe RF plan is to freeze out and wait for H’s money to be spent then wait for The inevitable divorce (which will be epic).  The RF plays the long game….  

MM will need to blame H mental health, claim abuse etc.  try to get some of her reputation back by being the victim again...  But with H’s money spent, she will not get a large settlement…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Today I saw several articles how Raptor and Kate are on better terms...me thinks Raptor is getting cold feet as none of her grand plans have worked out so far and is testing the waters.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Wonder if he listened to When Will I See You Again while dreaming of Camilla



I found this very interesting:



P.S. Her saying today's people are prudes...are we, or is it that in her time and social class you didn't necessarily marry your great love, so didn't really care if he fooled around? LOL


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> one of the other gossip forums talked about this.  They said besides the merching, MM charges PC full price for the dress and banking the $$ herself but returning the dress or selling it (fraud against PC is unlikely to lead to charges as BRF will cover it up), there was something odd with the Frogmore renovations.



Also the rumours mentioned that suddenly Doria's bank account looked very cushiony after the wedding (in the high single digit millions). No clue how anyone would know that, though.


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found this very interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. Her saying today's people are prudes...are we, or is it that in her time and social class you didn't necessarily marry your great love, so didn't really care if he fooled around? LOL



It’s what country house parties were all about!
I agree with what she says about The Crown.  Horrifies me that people think it’s an accurate reflection.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Today I saw several articles how Raptor and Kate are on better terms...me thinks Raptor is getting cold feet as none of her grand plans have worked out so far and is testing the waters.




They need to define "better terms"
I agree with the blind article------anything like that has to be coming from the Harkles camp.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> They need to define "better terms"
> I agree with the blind article------anything like that has to be coming from the Harkles camp.



Yeah, I don't think they are talking at all. And I don't blame Kate.


----------



## Lenna.V

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't think they are talking at all. And I don't blame Kate.



If I were Kate, I would have as less contact with these two as possible. Hi and smile when needed. That's all. Ha!


----------



## Deleted 698298

Cornflower Blue said:


> For some reason I have it in my head that Charles was/is a Status Quo fan  but goodness only knows where I picked that up from ...
> I seem to like more seventies music now than perhaps I did then, although my first single was Crazy Horses by The Osmonds and I really liked Sweet.
> I think Harry and William were listening to The Spice Girls back in the day, but what they listen to now would be anyones guess!


HRH Charles faves The full list is:

Givin' Up, Givin' In - The Three Degrees
Don't Rain On My Parade - Barbra Streisand
La Vie En Rose - Edith Piaf
Upside Down - Diana Ross
The Voice - Eimear Quinn
The Click Song - Miriam Makeba
You're A Lady - Peter Skellern
La Mer - Charles Trenet
Bennachie - Old Blind Dogs
Lulu's Back In Town - Dick Powell
They Can't Take That Away From Me - Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.
Tros Y Garreg/Crossing the Stone - Catrin Finch
Tydi a Roddaist - Bryn Terfe
from the BBC site


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Today I saw several articles how *Raptor and Kate are on better terms*...me thinks Raptor is getting cold feet as none of her grand plans have worked out so far and is testing the waters.





poopsie said:


> *They need to define "better terms"*
> I agree with the blind article------anything like that has to be coming from the Harkles camp.



That was obviously a typo; it should have said "bitter terms"


----------



## TimeToShop

Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.

I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?


----------



## xincinsin

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?


Hilarious, isn't it? 
I suppose Hazard was just too embarrassed to assist. 
And doesn't anyone notice how this weak victim act is at odds with Methane's strong independent self-made woman image? She has more masks than a Venetian carnival.


----------



## papertiger

Consumer2much said:


> HRH Charles faves The full list is:
> 
> Givin' Up, Givin' In - The Three Degrees
> Don't Rain On My Parade - Barbra Streisand
> La Vie En Rose - Edith Piaf
> Upside Down - Diana Ross
> The Voice - Eimear Quinn
> The Click Song - Miriam Makeba
> You're A Lady - Peter Skellern
> La Mer - Charles Trenet
> Bennachie - Old Blind Dogs
> Lulu's Back In Town - Dick Powell
> They Can't Take That Away From Me - Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.
> Tros Y Garreg/Crossing the Stone - Catrin Finch
> Tydi a Roddaist - Bryn Terfe
> from the BBC site



Told you so!    






I have. brilliant mind for remembering completely and useless information


----------



## TimeToShop

xincinsin said:


> Hilarious, isn't it?
> I suppose Hazard was just too embarrassed to assist.
> And doesn't anyone notice how this weak victim act is at odds with Methane's strong independent self-made woman image? She has more masks than a Venetian carnival.



I just don’t get the dingbat duo. It’s like they’re trying to destroy the only thing that makes them relevant. He has the most to lose.

She’ll surely divorce him when he’s no longer of any use. His downward spiral will speed up - no friends, family giving him the cold shoulder, the public is against him, neither smart nor talented enough to stand out in any way. He’ll end up a lonely old man with substance abuse issues, dependent upon the kindness of his brother for living expenses. How far he will have fallen from being the cheeky fun uncle.


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?


when oh when will the US media stop promoting her?  I guess she came along at the right time with the BLM movement....but she has not - as far as I can tell - lived the life of a black woman.  so the only suffering she has endured (that I'm aware of) is the British tabloids.  Yes, would have been Harry's job to defend her, not William's.  But I guess opinions may vary on that.


----------



## rose60610

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?



 The nerve! What was William supposed to protect Methane FROM? Harry AND Meghan refused to name the people who supposedly said racist things about them. William later stated after Oprah interview "We are not a racist family", so at that point there was an opening to finger somebody but that never happened. Little Ms Burn All Bridges Poor Me Me Me Me had a royal husband who is now a mental health expert () with a pair of gonads and didn't need to rely on big brother to defend his wife. Omid should be embarrassed. And you think GMA would follow up with "where was Harry"? Of course not, that would presume GMA had some kind of journalistic standard.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> The nerve! What was William supposed to protect Methane FROM? Harry AND Meghan refused to name the people who supposedly said racist things about them. William later stated after Oprah interview "We are not a racist family", so at that point there was an opening to finger somebody but that never happened. Little Ms Burn All Bridges Poor Me Me Me Me had a royal husband who is now a mental health expert () had a pair of gonads and didn't need to rely on big brother to defend his wife. Omid should be embarrassed. And you think GMA would follow up with "where was Harry"? Of course not, that would presume GMA had some kind of journalistic standard.


GMA - can't stand that show.  The only place in US media (outside of maybe right wing or conservative outlets) I've seen them criticized is Bill Mahar wisecracking and one or two British sources commenting on CNN.
Seems they can do no wrong.  Americans want an American princess?


----------



## TimeToShop

sdkitty said:


> GMA - can't stand that show.  The only place in US media (outside of maybe right wing or conservative outlets) I've seen them criticized is Bill Mahar wisecracking and one or two British sources commenting on CNN.
> Seems they can do no wrong.  Americans want an American princess?



No we don’t. We like an underdog but can’t stand a whiner.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> when oh when will the US media stop promoting her?  I guess she came along at the right time with the BLM movement....but she has not - as far as I can tell - lived the life of a black woman.  so the only suffering she has endured (that I'm aware of) is the British tabloids.  Yes, would have been Harry's job to defend her, not William's.  But I guess opinions may vary on that.


Of course she has suffered  She was a failure in the States - never did make it big as an actor. At some point in time, she will start blaming her Z-list career on racism too.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Of course she has suffered  She was a failure in the States - never did make it big as an actor. At some point in time, she will start blaming her Z-list career on racism too.


oh no.  she was the star of a big TV series doncha know


----------



## EverSoElusive

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?




What's there to defend? The BRF that they insinuated is racist includes William   Scoobie Doo is too dense for his own good. TV networks and Scoobie himself need to stop referring to him as a royal correspondent. He does not know the inside of his underpants from the outside. Clueless at best!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

What a fxcking joke!


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> At some point in time, she will start blaming her Z-list career on racism too.



Didn’t she say so before? Recall reading her saying that she wasn’t “white enough” and so didn’t get some roles.


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> No we don’t. We like an underdog but can’t stand a whiner.


you don't and I don't but apparently some people do


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> What a fxcking joke!



Bawahahaha!  Non fiction special!  That interview was total fiction!


----------



## EverSoElusive

This trumps their fictional interview


----------



## gracekelly

Icyjade said:


> Didn’t she say so before? Recall reading her saying that she wasn’t “white enough” and so didn’t get some roles.


Funny how she doesn’t mention that her acting wasn’t good enough to get the role.


----------



## rose60610

Unless something drastic happens their delusions of grandeur aren't panning out to the scale they wanted. But maybe they are. It's appearing their entire plan was to play the race and victim cards over and over to get what they want. And as long as networks and shows such as GMA can be guilted into protecting them, they're laughing all the way to the Whine Bank. They must continue to hurl accusations against the BRF and think of new ways to be victims because at this point a deck full of race/victims cards is all they got. Oh, and the rescue chickens, because Meghan loves rescuing things. Except her reputation. I'm waiting for them to complain and blame racism when they don't get invited to fun occasions at Buckingham Palace even though their current career is throwing the BRF under the bus.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the BBC should  get an award for PP’s funeral.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Funny how she doesn’t mention that her acting wasn’t good enough to get the role.


from what I can surmise what she's good at is networking and witchcraft


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Unless something drastic happens their delusions of grandeur aren't panning out to the scale they wanted. But maybe they are. It's appearing their entire plan was to play the race and victim cards over and over to get what they want. And as long as networks and shows such as GMA can be guilted into protecting them, they're laughing all the way to the Whine Bank. They must continue to hurl accusations against the BRF and think of new ways to be victims because at this point a deck full of race/victims cards is all they got. Oh, and the rescue chickens, because Meghan loves rescuing things. Except her reputation. I'm waiting for them to complain and blame racism when they don't get invited to fun occasions at Buckingham Palace even though their current career is throwing the BRF under the bus.


The thing is that the public gets bored easily. They need to come up with new material or people will lose interest. As long as the family ices them out there will be nothing new.   All they can do is rehash.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> from what I can surmise what she's good at is networking and witchcraft


Yes it appears she makes a good first impression because she loves you up, but what‘s after?  If you don’t come through for her, she dumps you.


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> What a fxcking joke!




              
Actually, the Emmy nomination should go to M&H, not Oprah, since they're the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and Oprah was simply the willing plant dupe to broadcast it. What a nauseating nomination. Can we expect M&H to be nominated for a Nobel and "The Bench" to be nominated for a Pulitzer? Sadly, it could happen.


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Actually, the Emmy nomination should go to M&H, not Oprah, since they're the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and Oprah was simply the willing plant dupe to broadcast it. What a nauseating nomination. Can we expect M&H to be nominated for a Nobel and "The Bench" to be nominated for a Pulitzer? Sadly, it could happen.



I am sure it is in the works already   Let's see when that's announced


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Actually, the Emmy nomination should go to M&H, not Oprah, since they're the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and Oprah was simply the willing plant dupe to broadcast it. What a nauseating nomination. Can we expect M&H to be nominated for a Nobel and "The Bench" to be nominated for a Pulitzer? Sadly, it could happen.


Cover of Time Magazine for B*tch and Sap of the Year?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Actually, the Emmy nomination should go to M&H, not Oprah, since they're the ones who orchestrated the whole thing and Oprah was simply the willing plant dupe to broadcast it. What a nauseating nomination. Can we expect M&H to be nominated for a Nobel and "The Bench" to be nominated for a Pulitzer? Sadly, it could happen.


What?  Uugh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO this is all Oprah.  I see serious competition, so I doubt Oprah will win. Remember how many lies were proven, how O was criticized for sloppy questions, etc. Lots and lots of negatives associated with that s$itshow.
When they lose, and they will, think of the celebrations 

Check out the other nominees:

*Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series Or Special*

*My Next Guest Needs No Introduction With David Letterman *• NePtaflgixe 3•8Zero Point Zero Production and Worldwide Pants
Tom Keaney, Executive Producer
Mary Barclay, Executive Producer
Chris Cechin-De La Rosa, Executive Producer Alexandra Lowry, Executive Producer
Helen Cho, Producer
Michael Steed, Producer
*Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special • CBS • Harpo Productions*
Tara Montgomery, Executive Producer Terry Wood, Executive Producer
Brian Piotrowicz, Co-Executive Producer Brad Pavone, Co-Executive Producer Lindsay Flader, Producer
Oprah Winfrey, Host
*Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy • CNN • CNN Original Series, RAW*
Stanley Tucci, Executive Producer/Host Adam Hawkins, Executive Producer Eve Kay, Executive Producer
Amy Entelis, Executive Producer
Lyle Gamm, Executive Producer
Jon Adler, Supervising Producer
Molly Harrington, Supervising Producer
*United Shades Of America With W. Kamau Bell • CNN • CNN Original Series, Zero Point Zero Production*
W. Kamau Bell, Executive Producer/Host Lydia Tenaglia, Executive Producer Morgan Fallon, Executive Producer Sandra Zweig, Executive Producer
Raza Naqvi, Producer
Jane Jo, Producer
Dwayne Kennedy, Supervising Producer
*Vice • Showtime • SHOWTIME Presents and Vice Media*
Beverly Chase, Executive Producer Subrata De, Executive Producer
Craig Thomson, Co-Executive Producer Robert Booth, Supervising Producer Paula Salhanny, Supervising Producer Greg Wright, Supervising Producer Amanda Pisetzner, Supervising Producer



			https://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Downloads/73rd-nominations-list-v1.pdf?q=1&q1=


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> when oh when will the US media stop promoting her?  I guess she came along at the right time with the BLM movement....but she has not - as far as I can tell - lived the life of a black woman.  so the only suffering she has endured (that I'm aware of) is the British tabloids.  Yes, would have been Harry's job to defend her, not William's.  But I guess opinions may vary on that.



when Oprah and GK [fresh from the Billionaires Summer Camp], when they stop supporting the disastrous duo. Most of the world has moved on, the OW/CBS crowd just doesn’t realize it yet.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> What a fxcking joke!



The back story of the slime in which this deal was cut would be fascinating to know, if only Lady C's influence extended to here in the US.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found this very interesting:
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. Her saying today's people are prudes...are we, or is it that in her time and social class you didn't necessarily marry your great love, so didn't really care if he fooled around? LOL



Thanks for this vid. I almost feel vindicated because my impressions of Diana were so similar to Lady C's descriptions of C's & D's marriage. I always thought she was a consummate actress always trying to outshine C and while discussing her with friends, I would often refer to her as Prima Donna and never thought she was "Sainte Diana."


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> The nerve! What was William supposed to protect Methane FROM? *Omid should be embarrassed.* And you think GMA would follow up with "where was Harry"? Of course not, that would presume GMA had some kind of journalistic standard.



Scoobie Doo-Doo has firmly latched on to the Toxic Twosome. They are all he has. No matter how he tries to rearrange the deck chairs the ship will sink and all the lifeboats will have sailed and he will go down with the ship.


----------



## poopsie

TimeToShop said:


> No we don’t. We like an underdog but *can’t stand a whiner*.



Oh how I wish that were still true. 
Maybe----hopefully---- things are different in other parts of the country but where I am there is a lot of "ya gotta whine to win" going on. 
It's mostly the younger crowd, but I have seen plenty of it from the 30-somethings (the Harkles demographic) as well.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> The back story of the slime in which this deal was cut would be fascinating to know, *if only Lady C's influence extended to here in the US.*


It will take time, but here is her last video:


----------



## jelliedfeels

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?


Quite right, if men apparently have to speak up for us defenceless little women it should at least start with our husbands.


papertiger said:


> papertiger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Told you so!
> 
> View attachment 5135380
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have. brilliant mind for remembering completely and useless information
> 
> 
> 
> This is great, it’s like Top of the pops 2 when the little facts flash onscreen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rose60610 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The nerve! What was William supposed to protect Methane FROM? Harry AND Meghan refused to name the people who supposedly said racist things about them. William later stated after Oprah interview "We are not a racist family", so at that point there was an opening to finger somebody but that never happened. Little Ms Burn All Bridges Poor Me Me Me Me had a royal husband who is now a mental health expert () with a pair of gonads and didn't need to rely on big brother to defend his wife. Omid should be embarrassed. And you think GMA would follow up with "where was Harry"? Of course not, that would presume GMA had some kind of journalistic standard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He was meant to protect her from all those awful articles which were photoshopped for Oprah and never actually existed in that form in the British press. He is also meant to shut down any criticism of her in anyway online.
> No wonder their team was so tired!
Click to expand...


----------



## Chanbal

By the way, Lady C is asking for more signatures for her petition. She needs about 2000 more to get to 75K. 









						Sign the Petition
					

Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance




					www.change.org


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting info about the co-writer...


----------



## poopsie

Cornflower Blue said:


> For some reason I have it in my head that Charles was/is a Status Quo fan  but goodness only knows where I picked that up from ...
> I seem to like more seventies music now than perhaps I did then, although my first single was Crazy Horses by The Osmonds and* I really liked Sweet.*
> I think Harry and William were listening to The Spice Girls back in the day, but what they listen to now would be anyones guess!




Sadly Steve passed away earlier this year. That leaves Andy as the last member standing


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> What a fxcking joke!




Oh wow. I thought the Emmies were a journalism award. Apparently you don't have to follow even basic journalistic guidelines to be nominated. THEY F*CKING DOCTORED HEADLINES.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this is all Oprah.  I see serious competition, so I doubt Oprah will win. Remember how many lies were proven, how O was criticized for sloppy questions, etc. Lots and lots of negatives associated with that s$itshow.
> When they lose, and they will, think of the celebrations
> 
> Check out the other nominees:
> 
> *Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series Or Special*
> 
> *My Next Guest Needs No Introduction With David Letterman *• NePtaflgixe 3•8Zero Point Zero Production and Worldwide Pants
> Tom Keaney, Executive Producer
> Mary Barclay, Executive Producer
> Chris Cechin-De La Rosa, Executive Producer Alexandra Lowry, Executive Producer
> Helen Cho, Producer
> Michael Steed, Producer
> *Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special • CBS • Harpo Productions*
> Tara Montgomery, Executive Producer Terry Wood, Executive Producer
> Brian Piotrowicz, Co-Executive Producer Brad Pavone, Co-Executive Producer Lindsay Flader, Producer
> Oprah Winfrey, Host
> *Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy • CNN • CNN Original Series, RAW*
> Stanley Tucci, Executive Producer/Host Adam Hawkins, Executive Producer Eve Kay, Executive Producer
> Amy Entelis, Executive Producer
> Lyle Gamm, Executive Producer
> Jon Adler, Supervising Producer
> Molly Harrington, Supervising Producer
> *United Shades Of America With W. Kamau Bell • CNN • CNN Original Series, Zero Point Zero Production*
> W. Kamau Bell, Executive Producer/Host Lydia Tenaglia, Executive Producer Morgan Fallon, Executive Producer Sandra Zweig, Executive Producer
> Raza Naqvi, Producer
> Jane Jo, Producer
> Dwayne Kennedy, Supervising Producer
> *Vice • Showtime • SHOWTIME Presents and Vice Media*
> Beverly Chase, Executive Producer Subrata De, Executive Producer
> Craig Thomson, Co-Executive Producer Robert Booth, Supervising Producer Paula Salhanny, Supervising Producer Greg Wright, Supervising Producer Amanda Pisetzner, Supervising Producer
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Downloads/73rd-nominations-list-v1.pdf?q=1&q1=



I hope Stanley wins.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I hope Stanley wins.



Stanley’s was interesting and heartfelt. I still need to watch Vice and United Shades…, IMO, since _there were so many proven lies and deceitful editing,_ OW should withdraw this show. It reflects terribly on her.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stanley’s was interesting and heartfelt. I still need to watch Vice and United Shades…, IMO, since _there were so many proven lies and deceitful editing,_ OW should withdraw this show. It reflects terribly on her.


I loved Stanley's show; it was heartfelt and ACCURATE!  I don't think OW cares anymore about her "reputation" per se; it's all about the semolians $$$$$ now!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

poopsie said:


> Sadly Steve passed away earlier this year. That leaves Andy as the last member standing



Arrrggghhhh. I did not know. Sad.
Steve was funny. Brilliant sense of humour. Personally, I never cared for Andy Scott but naturally had a crush on Brian and Mick as a teen.

Back to Megs: „the lies in your eyes“ should be her favourite song.


----------



## TimeToShop

CeeJay said:


> I loved Stanley's show; it was heartfelt and ACCURATE!  I don't think OW cares anymore about her "reputation" per se; it's all about the semolians $$$$$ now!



I agree. Stanley’s show was wonderful except it always made me so hungry!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this is all Oprah.  I see serious competition, so I doubt Oprah will win. Remember how many lies were proven, how O was criticized for sloppy questions, etc. Lots and lots of negatives associated with that s$itshow.
> When they lose, and they will, think of the celebrations
> 
> Check out the other nominees:
> 
> *Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series Or Special*
> 
> *My Next Guest Needs No Introduction With David Letterman *• NePtaflgixe 3•8Zero Point Zero Production and Worldwide Pants
> Tom Keaney, Executive Producer
> Mary Barclay, Executive Producer
> Chris Cechin-De La Rosa, Executive Producer Alexandra Lowry, Executive Producer
> Helen Cho, Producer
> Michael Steed, Producer
> *Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special • CBS • Harpo Productions*
> Tara Montgomery, Executive Producer Terry Wood, Executive Producer
> Brian Piotrowicz, Co-Executive Producer Brad Pavone, Co-Executive Producer Lindsay Flader, Producer
> Oprah Winfrey, Host
> *Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy • CNN • CNN Original Series, RAW*
> Stanley Tucci, Executive Producer/Host Adam Hawkins, Executive Producer Eve Kay, Executive Producer
> Amy Entelis, Executive Producer
> Lyle Gamm, Executive Producer
> Jon Adler, Supervising Producer
> Molly Harrington, Supervising Producer
> *United Shades Of America With W. Kamau Bell • CNN • CNN Original Series, Zero Point Zero Production*
> W. Kamau Bell, Executive Producer/Host Lydia Tenaglia, Executive Producer Morgan Fallon, Executive Producer Sandra Zweig, Executive Producer
> Raza Naqvi, Producer
> Jane Jo, Producer
> Dwayne Kennedy, Supervising Producer
> *Vice • Showtime • SHOWTIME Presents and Vice Media*
> Beverly Chase, Executive Producer Subrata De, Executive Producer
> Craig Thomson, Co-Executive Producer Robert Booth, Supervising Producer Paula Salhanny, Supervising Producer Greg Wright, Supervising Producer Amanda Pisetzner, Supervising Producer
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Downloads/73rd-nominations-list-v1.pdf?q=1&q1=


I haven't watched TV in years. Who are the nominators and are they different for each category? Is is possible for someone to say, "Grease my palm and I'll nominate you even though your show was full of sh**t and lies."


----------



## poopsie

zen1965 said:


> Arrrggghhhh. I did not know. Sad.
> Steve was funny. Brilliant sense of humour. Personally, *I never cared for Andy Scott* but naturally had a crush on Brian and Mick as a teen.
> 
> Back to Megs: „the lies in your eyes“ should be her favourite song.



OMG same here
I know Brian had his issues, but wasn't Andy the driving force behind kicking him out of his own band?

Sound familiar


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It will take time, but here is her last video:



Chanbal, thank you again for posting access to Lady C without the noxious ads interrupting her dialog! Fun to learn she has relatives in Missouri and loves the down to earth people there. Thank goodness she has experience to know we Americans are not all like Methane.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Chanbal, thank you again for posting access to Lady C without the noxious ads interrupting her dialog! Fun to learn she has relatives in Missouri and loves the down to earth people there. Thank goodness she has experience to know *we Americans are not all like Methane.*


You're so right and I should know since I've been married to one for 42 years and we're still together.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I haven't watched TV in years. Who are the nominators and are they different for each category? Is is possible for someone to say, "Grease my palm and I'll nominate you even though your show was full of sh**t and lies."



It is exactly what happens. Nowadays it’s all a bit more discreet and subtle, usually involves expensive vacations, treatments, etc.





						Primetime Emmy Awards - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





*Rules*
Among the Primetime Emmy Award rules, a show must originally air on American television during the eligibility period between June 1 and May 31 of any given year. In order to be considered a _national primetime_ show, the program must air between 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m., and to at least 50 percent of the country. A show that enters into the Primetime Emmy Awards cannot also be entered into the Daytime Emmy Awards or any other national Emmy competition. For shows in syndication, whose air times vary between media markets, they can either be entered in the Daytime or Primetime Emmy Awards (provided they still reach the 50 percent national reach), but not in both. For game shows that reach the 50 percent threshold, they can be entered into the Daytime Emmy Awards if they normally air before 8 p.m (including the former "access hour" from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.); otherwise, they are only eligible for the Primetime Emmy Awards. For web television programs, they must be available for downloading or streaming to more than 50 percent of the country, and like shows in syndication they can only enter in one of the national Emmy competitions.

Shows that are offered for pre-sale to consumers, whether on home video devices or via the Web, are ineligible if the pre-sale period starts more than 7 days before the show's initial airing. Also, a show that receives what the Academy calls a "general theatrical release" before its first airing (either via television or the Internet) is ineligible. The definition of this phrase excludes limited releases for the specific purpose of award qualification, such as screenings at film festivals or the one-week releases in Los Angeles (and, for documentaries, New York City as well) required for Oscar eligibility.[2]

Entries must be submitted by the end of April, even if a show is not scheduled to originally air until the following month when the eligibility period ends in May. Most award categories also require entries to include DVDs or tape masters of the show. For most series categories, any six episodes that originally aired during the eligibility period must be submitted (programs that were cancelled before airing their sixth episode are thus ineligible). For most individual achievement categories, only one episode is required to be submitted; if an episode is a two-parter, both parts may be included on the submitted DVD.

Ballots to select the nominations are sent to Academy members in June. For most categories, members from each of the branches vote to determine the nominees only in their respective categories. All members can however vote for nominations in the best program categories. The final voting poll to determine the winners is held in August, and is done by judging panels. In June, the Academy solicits volunteers among its active members to serve on these panels. All active members may serve on the program panels; otherwise they are restricted to those categories within their own branch.


----------



## octopus17

poopsie said:


> Sadly Steve passed away earlier this year. That leaves Andy as the last member standing


All dying too young. I remember seeing an interview with Brian Connelly and it was so sad to see - shaking and barely able to speak. Alcohol wrecked him, poor fella . I reckon if they showed that interview now, it might help people on the same path...

It really wrecked him, and ultimately killed him. Tragic.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is exactly what happens. Nowadays it’s all a bit more discreet and subtle, usually involves expensive vacations, treatments, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Primetime Emmy Awards - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Rules*
> Among the Primetime Emmy Award rules, a show must originally air on American television during the eligibility period between June 1 and May 31 of any given year. In order to be considered a _national primetime_ show, the program must air between 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m., and to at least 50 percent of the country. A show that enters into the Primetime Emmy Awards cannot also be entered into the Daytime Emmy Awards or any other national Emmy competition. For shows in syndication, whose air times vary between media markets, they can either be entered in the Daytime or Primetime Emmy Awards (provided they still reach the 50 percent national reach), but not in both. For game shows that reach the 50 percent threshold, they can be entered into the Daytime Emmy Awards if they normally air before 8 p.m (including the former "access hour" from 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.); otherwise, they are only eligible for the Primetime Emmy Awards. For web television programs, they must be available for downloading or streaming to more than 50 percent of the country, and like shows in syndication they can only enter in one of the national Emmy competitions.
> 
> Shows that are offered for pre-sale to consumers, whether on home video devices or via the Web, are ineligible if the pre-sale period starts more than 7 days before the show's initial airing. Also, a show that receives what the Academy calls a "general theatrical release" before its first airing (either via television or the Internet) is ineligible. The definition of this phrase excludes limited releases for the specific purpose of award qualification, such as screenings at film festivals or the one-week releases in Los Angeles (and, for documentaries, New York City as well) required for Oscar eligibility.[2]
> 
> Entries must be submitted by the end of April, even if a show is not scheduled to originally air until the following month when the eligibility period ends in May. Most award categories also require entries to include DVDs or tape masters of the show. For most series categories, any six episodes that originally aired during the eligibility period must be submitted (programs that were cancelled before airing their sixth episode are thus ineligible). For most individual achievement categories, only one episode is required to be submitted; if an episode is a two-parter, both parts may be included on the submitted DVD.
> 
> Ballots to select the nominations are sent to Academy members in June. For most categories, members from each of the branches vote to determine the nominees only in their respective categories. All members can however vote for nominations in the best program categories. The final voting poll to determine the winners is held in August, and is done by judging panels. In June, the Academy solicits volunteers among its active members to serve on these panels. All active members may serve on the program panels; otherwise they are restricted to those categories within their own branch.


Submitting an entry to the Emmys is not cheap. And they are classed as a non-profit. Does this equate to some form of charity?


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'd rather this granny get nominated for an Emmy    She's funnier, more interesting and authentic than these phonies


----------



## needlv




----------



## zen1965

Cornflower Blue said:


> All dying too young. I remember seeing an interview with Brian Connelly and it was so sad to see - shaking and barely able to speak. Alcohol wrecked him, poor fella . I reckon if they showed that interview now, it might help people on the same path...
> 
> It really wrecked him, and ultimately killed him. Tragic.



Was it „Don‘t leave me this way“? I remember watching that many years ago and being shocked seeing my former teen crush hobbling around at the age of 50 like a geriatric. Tragic, indeed.


----------



## needlv

Apparently a friend trying to help him…


----------



## Lenna.V

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?




Yeah, I got attacked by just pointed out William is the president of English Football so it is his duty to defend those players.


----------



## poopsie

@Cornflower Blue and @zen1965 
My bad! Steve actually died in June 2020! My gawd where does the time go

Back to our regularly scheduled programming


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Lenna.V said:


> Yeah, I got attacked by just pointed out William is the president of English Football so it is his duty to defend those players.



That's awful!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

TimeToShop said:


> Good Morning America just did a story on the abuse those poor soccer/futbol players have suffered for missing their kicks. They segued to the mattress actress complaining to Oprah about all she endured. The big ending was Omid asking why William could defend the players but not his sister-in-law.
> 
> I’ve seen that a lot over the past couple of days. That it’s all Williams’s fault for not protecting her. Wouldn’t that have been hapless Harry’s job to defend his wife?



Meghans deluded fans claim that there’s sexual tension between Wills and Meghan, and he’s so obsessed with her that he was jealous Harry had her and that made him banish Meghan and Harry since he couldn’t have Meghan to himself!

Imagine being the future king of England, upholding Diana’s good deeds and charities, being married to kate (who’s endured harsh media and public criticism since she was dating William) … imagine all that being in love with something like Meghan.

Meghan is a white passing woman that only pulls the race card to diverge attention from her problematic ways. She never really spoke on issues that affect the black community in the US and the UK.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

xincinsin said:


> Of course she has suffered  She was a failure in the States - never did make it big as an actor. At some point in time, she will start blaming her Z-list career on racism too.



Don’t forget, moved closer to Hollywood and is still waiting for their call.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Apparently a friend trying to help him…




Yeah, but tweeting about it won't help the cause of keeping it from Raptor.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Nobody will watch the Emmys. Covid killed all those award shows.  Nice try Oprah and MM.


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> Don’t forget, moved closer to Hollywood and is still waiting for their call.


If they don't call, then they must be racist, sexist or something equally horrendous. Or she will blame it on those smear campaigns impugning her virtuous self.

Hang on, didn't she plan to ditch her acting "career" to become a humanitarian and do lifestyle shows? Maybe she will start that Lilibet merching website to hawk those oat lattes, and add successful entrepreneur to her growing list of accomplishments. You know, "humanitarian" was to hook the Harry Fish; "entrepreneur" is to claim commonality with the billionaire she is eyeing next.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> If they don't call, then they must be racist, sexist or something equally horrendous. Or she will blame it on those smear campaigns impugning her virtuous self.
> 
> Hang on, didn't she plan to ditch her acting "career" to become a humanitarian and do lifestyle shows? Maybe she will start that Lilibet merching website to hawk those oat lattes, and add successful entrepreneur to her growing list of accomplishments. You know, "humanitarian" was to hook the Harry Fish; "entrepreneur" is to claim commonality with the billionaire she is eyeing next.


I don't think a billionaire could get her the attention she so craves.....Harry being a Prince is the ticket....she needs the money and also the fame


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> By the way, Lady C is asking for more signatures for her petition. She needs about 2000 more to get to 75K.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sign the Petition
> 
> 
> Invitation to Prince Harry to request that The Queen put his titles into abeyance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.change.org


Done, thanks for posting.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> I haven't watched TV in years. Who are the nominators and are they different for each category? Is is possible for someone to say, "Grease my palm and I'll nominate you even though your show was full of sh**t and lies."


Unfortunately, YES .. big-time!  According to friends in the industry, this happens WAY TOO OFTEN (good example - Gwyneth Paltrow getting 'Best Actress' for Shakespeare in Love) .. need I say more???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Unfortunately, YES .. big-time!  According to friends in the industry, this happens WAY TOO OFTEN (good example - *Gwyneth Paltrow* getting 'Best Actress' for Shakespeare in Love) .. need I say more???


I predicted that Oscar! I used to tell hubby that the Oscar winner will be the one who bares it all or even just her little titties in the movie.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I predicted that Oscar! I used to tell hubby that the Oscar winner will be the one who bares it all or even just her little titties in the movie.


shakespeare in love had nudity?


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> I predicted that Oscar! I used to tell hubby that the Oscar winner will be the one who bares it all or even just her little titties in the movie.





sdkitty said:


> shakespeare in love had nudity?


Well, the 'selection' that year was pretty abysmal to begin with, but .. her Godfather is Stephen Spielberg, so she had an "automatic" in to begin with.  In addition, both of her parents were well-known in the BIZ .. so that didn't hurt either. 

@sdkitty  - I've never watched it because I simply cannot 'stomach' Gwyneth Paltrow, especially after my Barneys NY "encounter" with her (in NYC - Madison Avenue).  Last time I saw her in-person was at the Barneys NY - Beverly Hills store, and when she saw me, she recognized me for sure .. but did NOT engage given the tongue lashing she got in the prior encounter!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> shakespeare in love had nudity?


I don’t recall any. I didn’t think she was that bad in the movie.  I thought most of the actors were chewing the scenery. Ben Affeck‘s casting was the bigger shocker for  me.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> shakespeare in love had nudity?





CeeJay said:


> Well, the 'selection' that year was pretty abysmal to begin with, but .. her Godfather is Stephen Spielberg, so she had an "automatic" in to begin with.  In addition, both of her parents were well-known in the BIZ .. so that didn't hurt either.


I didn't watch it either because I don't care for GP, but somehow I saw the scene where she gets "unwrapped" in the movie. Hubby or my sons must've been watching the movie at home.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I don’t recall any. I didn’t think she was that bad in the movie.  I thought most of the actors were chewing the scenery. Ben Affeck‘s casting was the bigger shocker for  me.


Weren't they dating at that time?  Can't stand him either .. another "don't you know who I AM"???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Weren't they dating at that time?  Can't stand him either .. another "don't you know who I AM"???


did she date Ben?...I recall Brad Pitt but not Ben...


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I don't think a billionaire could get her the attention she so craves.....Harry being a Prince is the ticket....she needs the money and also the fame



Harry is a prince but his family is icing him out and his personal fortune is depleting, none of which is working in Ducka$s' favor and needs. There's a high probability of her divorcing Harry's little butt at some point if she scores someone richer. Even if a billionaire is not a prince to get her the attention she wants, she will use her spin doctors to make sure that the spotlight is on her, good or bad.


----------



## poopsie

breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghans deluded fans claim that there’s sexual tension between Wills and Meghan, and he’s so obsessed with her that he was jealous Harry had her and that made him banish Meghan and Harry since he couldn’t have Meghan to himself!



Man, what ever it is they're smoking I hope they brought enough for everybody


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Harry is a prince but his family is icing him out and his personal fortune is depleting, none of which is working in Ducka$s' favor and needs. There's a high probability of her divorcing Harry's little butt at some point if she scores someone richer. Even if a billionaire is not a prince to get her the attention she wants, she will use her spin doctors to make sure that the spotlight is on her, good or bad.


I don't know what she could do to keep herself interesting....yes, she has the stans but she needs more than just them.  How good can her spin doctors be?  Maybe she should call PMK.


----------



## poopsie

breakfastatcartier said:


> Don’t forget, moved closer to Hollywood and is still waiting for their call.


 "if everybody wants you, why isn't anybody callin?"


Gloria, you're always on the run now
Running after somebody, you gotta get him somehow
I think you've got to slow down before you start to blow it
I think you're headed for a breakdown, so be careful not to show it
You really don't remember, was it something that he said?
Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?
Gloria, don't you think you're fallin'?
If everybody wants you, why isn't anybody callin'?
You don't have to answer
Leave them hangin' on the line, oh oh oh, calling Gloria
Gloria (Gloria), I think they got your number (Gloria)
I think they got the alias (Gloria) that you've been living under (Gloria)
But you really don't remember, was it something that they said?
Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?
A ha ha, a ha ha, Gloria, how's it gonna go down?
Will you meet him on the main line, or will you catch him on the rebound?
Will you marry for the money, take a lover in the afternoon?
Feel your innocence slipping away, don't believe it's comin' back soon
And you really don't remember, was it something that he said?
Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?
Gloria, don't you think you're fallin'?
If everybody wants you, why isn't anybody callin'?
You don't have to answer
Leave them hangin' on the line, oh-oh-oh, calling Gloria
Gloria (Gloria), I think they got your number (Gloria)
I think they got the alias (Gloria) that you've been living under (Gloria)
But you really don't remember, was it something that they said?
Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?


----------



## Chanbal

Something isn't adding up...


----------



## Chanbal

Nice video...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BUUUURN.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She problem will sue for cruelty or something now, though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Something isn't adding up...




Yeah, according to Wikipedia, _Entries must be submitted by the end of April, even if a show is not scheduled to originally air until the following month when the eligibility period ends in May._


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yeah, according to Wikipedia, _Entries must be submitted by the end of April, even if a show is not scheduled to originally air until the following month when the eligibility period ends in May._



More here:








						Winter TV Awards Schedule 2021-’22: Key Dates for Guilds, Critics Choice, and More
					

The 2021-’22 TV Awards schedule is just beginning, but here are some key dates on the long road to the Emmys.




					www.indiewire.com
				



The below dates are subject to change. More information about the 2021 Emmy calendar will be added as time and information permits.

Thursday, May 13, 2021
Emmy Awards entry deadline for ALL entries that were originally presented 6 p.m. – 2 a.m., June 1, 2020 – May 31, 2021 (including hanging episodes).
Emmy Awards upload deadline for all entry materials.

Thursday, June 17, 2021
Emmy Awards nominations-round voting begins.

Monday, June 28, 2021
Emmy Awards nominations-round voting ends, at 10 p.m. PT.

Tuesday, July 13, 2021
Emmy Awards nominations announced.

Tuesday, July 27, 2021
Deadline for errors and omissions to the Emmy Awards nominations.

Friday, August 13, 2021
Final-round Emmy Awards videos available for viewing.

Thursday, August 19, 2021
Emmy Awards final-round voting begins.

Monday, August 30, 2021
Emmy Awards final-round voting ends, at 10 p.m. PT.

September 2021
Creative Arts Emmy Awards and Ball, at TBD.
CBS Primetime Emmy Awards telecast and Governors Ball, at TBD.


----------



## TimeToShop

breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghans deluded fans claim that there’s sexual tension between Wills and Meghan, and he’s so obsessed with her that he was jealous Harry had her and that made him banish Meghan and Harry since he couldn’t have Meghan to himself!
> 
> Imagine being the future king of England, upholding Diana’s good deeds and charities, being married to kate (who’s endured harsh media and public criticism since she was dating William) … imagine all that being in love with something like Meghan.
> 
> Meghan is a white passing woman that only pulls the race card to diverge attention from her problematic ways. She never really spoke on issues that affect the black community in the US and the UK.



I always thought Haz was sweet on Kate. Another reason for Meggy to dislike her.

I’m sure Megsy tried to flirt with William but he knew a harpy when he saw one.


----------



## VickyB

poopsie said:


> yessssssss!!!!
> Look at poor Socks. PMK never could figure out what to do with him


So true and it says tons.  PMK is known for
 finding the diamond in the *&$&&*.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what she could do to keep herself interesting....yes, she has the stans but she needs more than just them.  How good can her spin doctors be?  Maybe she should call PMK.


Sorry ive missed this, who is PMK?


breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghans deluded fans claim that there’s sexual tension between Wills and Meghan, and he’s so obsessed with her that he was jealous Harry had her and that made him banish Meghan and Harry since he couldn’t have Meghan to himself!
> 
> Imagine being the future king of England, upholding Diana’s good deeds and charities, being married to kate (who’s endured harsh media and public criticism since she was dating William) … imagine all that being in love with something like Meghan.
> 
> Meghan is a white passing woman that only pulls the race card to diverge attention from her problematic ways. She never really spoke on issues that affect the black community in the US and the UK.


They’d have to be the Beatrice and benedict of the royals given W always looked like he couldn’t stand M and M is always being passive aggressive to him.

Even then it’s a bit of a jump to say just because you have sexual tension with someone when you are both already attached you would go on a mission to oust that person from your life even if it also means sacrificing your brother in the process…. In my experience most people just keep their head down and get over the crush… but I guess that’s not very dramatic.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Sorry ive missed this, who is PMK?
> 
> They’d have to be the Beatrice and benedict of the royals given W always looked like he couldn’t stand M and M is always being passive aggressive to him.
> 
> Even then it’s a bit of a jump to say just because you have sexual tension with someone when you are both already attached you would go on a mission to oust that person from your life even if it also means sacrificing your brother in the process…. In my experience most people just keep their head down and get over the crush… but I guess that’s not very dramatic.


PMK - Chris Jenner - Pimp Mama Kris


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> "if everybody wants you, why isn't anybody callin?"
> 
> 
> Gloria, you're always on the run now
> Running after somebody, you gotta get him somehow
> I think you've got to slow down before you start to blow it
> I think you're headed for a breakdown, so be careful not to show it
> You really don't remember, was it something that he said?
> Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?
> Gloria, don't you think you're fallin'?
> If everybody wants you, why isn't anybody callin'?
> You don't have to answer
> Leave them hangin' on the line, oh oh oh, calling Gloria
> Gloria (Gloria), I think they got your number (Gloria)
> I think they got the alias (Gloria) that you've been living under (Gloria)
> But you really don't remember, was it something that they said?
> Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?
> A ha ha, a ha ha, Gloria, how's it gonna go down?
> Will you meet him on the main line, or will you catch him on the rebound?
> Will you marry for the money, take a lover in the afternoon?
> Feel your innocence slipping away, don't believe it's comin' back soon
> And you really don't remember, was it something that he said?
> Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?
> Gloria, don't you think you're fallin'?
> If everybody wants you, why isn't anybody callin'?
> You don't have to answer
> Leave them hangin' on the line, oh-oh-oh, calling Gloria
> Gloria (Gloria), I think they got your number (Gloria)
> I think they got the alias (Gloria) that you've been living under (Gloria)
> But you really don't remember, was it something that they said?
> Are the voices in your head calling, Gloria?



Wow this gives a whole mew meaning, LOL!  I LOVED this song as a kid.  I usually paid no attention to the words and often sang  whatever I thought was being sung


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Weren't they dating at that time?  Can't stand him either .. another "don't you know who I AM"???


I guess they did date for awhile before he got with JLo


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Something isn't adding up...



Says there’s a late fee of $50.  I’m sure Oprah can afford it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> PMK - Chris Jenner - Pimp Mama Kris


You know even though I couldn’t get the initials to fit I had a feeling Mephistopheles  herself had something to do with it.  

so I take it socks is the useless boy kardashian?


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> You know even though I couldn’t get the initials to fit I had a feeling Mephistopheles  herself had something to do with it.
> 
> so I take it socks is the useless boy kardashian?


that I don't know


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> You know even though I couldn’t get the initials to fit I had a feeling Mephistopheles  herself had something to do with it.
> 
> so I take it socks is the useless boy kardashian?



Yes. Socks is Rob
The only thing Kris could line up for him to attach his name to was a limited run of mens socks that were featured at Neiman's or some such.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I guess they did date for awhile before he got with JLo
> View attachment 5136905


Honestly women looking frustrated with Ben Affleck could be it’s own thread and it’d always be top in recent posts. 




EverSoElusive said:


> Harry is a prince but his family is icing him out and his personal fortune is depleting, none of which is working in Ducka$s' favor and needs. There's a high probability of her divorcing Harry's little butt at some point if she scores someone richer. Even if a billionaire is not a prince to get her the attention she wants, she will use her spin doctors to make sure that the spotlight is on her, good or bad.


Its a shame Elon Musk is spoken for as he clearly likes them crazy


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> Yes. Socks is Rob
> The only thing Kris could line up for him to attach his name to was a limited run of mens socks that were featured at Neiman's or some such.





sdkitty said:


> that I don't know


Thank you, I’ve not kept up with them but I did know there is a brother Kris can’t mould with the finesse she has the sisters.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Honestly women looking frustrated with Ben Affleck could be it’s own thread and it’d always be top in recent posts.
> 
> 
> 
> Its a shame Elon Musk is spoken for as he clearly likes them crazy


IDK much about Elon Musk but my impression is he must be smart if he is so successful but crazy for the way he named his baby


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Thank you, I’ve not kept up with them but I did know there is a brother Kris can’t mould with the finesse she has the sisters.


I never watched the show so what I know if from the PF but I think part of it was he was too fat?


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> I never watched the show so what I know if from the PF but I think part of it was he was too fat?



Rob wasn't always overweight. Personally I think his weight gain was reactionary


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Rob wasn't always overweight. Personally I think his weight gain was reactionary
> View attachment 5136924


getting back at Mama?


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> getting back at Mama?



Most likely
Rob graduated from USC business school a few years after KUWTK premiered. What he might have done had he not been sucked into that s#!t storm we'll never know. I'm sure there was a lot of pressure on him to toe the brand line and perform


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Harry is a prince but his family is icing him out and his personal fortune is depleting, none of which is working in Ducka$s' favor and needs. There's a high probability of her divorcing Harry's little butt at some point if she scores someone richer. Even if a billionaire is not a prince to get her the attention she wants, she will use her spin doctors to make sure that the spotlight is on her, good or bad.



What does Meghan have to offer a billionaire? An aging ex-actress with no particular skills beyond stirring up trouble. She’s not exactly a catch.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> What does Meghan have to offer a billionaire? An aging ex-actress with no particular skills beyond stirring up trouble. She’s not exactly a catch.


well, she may be able to use witchcraft on someone

wait - first networking - using Oprah to get introduced?  then witchcraft


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Well, the 'selection' that year was pretty abysmal to begin with, but .. her Godfather is Stephen Spielberg, so she had an "automatic" in to begin with.  In addition, both of her parents were well-known in the BIZ .. so that didn't hurt either.
> 
> @sdkitty  - I've never watched it because I simply cannot 'stomach' Gwyneth Paltrow, especially after my Barneys NY "encounter" with her (in NYC - Madison Avenue).  Last time I saw her in-person was at the Barneys NY - Beverly Hills store, and when she saw me, she recognized me for sure .. but did NOT engage given the tongue lashing she got in the prior encounter!


Also, she was Harvey Weinstein's favourite girl for a few years - he cast her often and then promoted her, but it was all so above board you know...


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> well, she may be able to use witchcraft on someone



A little midnight visit to the crossroads?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Also, she was Harvey Weinstein's favourite girl for a few years - he cast her often and then promoted her, but it was all so above board you know...


I can't imagine she got involved with him sexually....but what do I know?


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Rob wasn't always overweight. Personally I think his weight gain was reactionary
> View attachment 5136924


he looks kinda cute in that pic


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> What does Meghan have to offer a billionaire? An aging ex-actress with no particular skills beyond stirring up trouble. She’s not exactly a catch.



Hold up.  She is BFF with QE, ya kno the daily calls [according to her].


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I can't imagine she got involved with him sexually....but what do I know?


Well, she's stunning and remarkably talented, able to disappear in various characters, so why would she need the casting couch to get cast in so many Hollywood rolls...


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Well, the 'selection' that year was pretty abysmal to begin with, but .. her Godfather is Stephen Spielberg, so she had an "automatic" in to begin with.  In addition, both of her parents were well-known in the BIZ .. so that didn't hurt either.
> 
> @sdkitty  - I've never watched it because I simply cannot 'stomach' Gwyneth Paltrow, especially after my Barneys NY "encounter" with her (in NYC - Madison Avenue).  Last time I saw her in-person was at the Barneys NY - Beverly Hills store, and when she saw me, she recognized me for sure .. but did NOT engage given the tongue lashing she got in the prior encounter!



There’s a Barney’s encounter?  I think I missed a post


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Well, she's stunning and remarkably talented, able to disappear in various rolls, so why would she need the casting couch...


right, and as someone said, she came from a prominent family with stephen speilberg as her godfather


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> did she date Ben?...I recall Brad Pitt but not Ben...


Yes, and she famously said he gave her expensive jewelry, but too similar to expensive jewelry she already owned, so he wasn't attentive enough for her to waste her time in a relationship.


----------



## poopsie

Has this been mentioned anywhere else









						Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
					

THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.




					www.express.co.uk
				




*Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
*THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
 These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what she could do to keep herself interesting....yes, she has the stans but she needs more than just them.  How good can her spin doctors be?  Maybe she should call PMK.




She isn't very interesting even right now but they still manage to stay in the spotlight and being talked about by us plus others on a daily basis because of a variety of lame-o and/or fake stories they plant out there. She doesn't care that it's bad press as long as they are in the press and social media   This is why I believe she is going to do what she's doing now, with or without Harry in her life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Has this been mentioned anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
> 
> 
> THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
> *THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *





Like that?  It’s a fun game [kinda], been out for years.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> It's a shame Elon Musk is spoken for as he clearly likes them crazy



Elon is crazy himself


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Has this been mentioned anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
> 
> 
> THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
> *THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *


and the arrogance goes on:
The Duke and Duchess said: “Our lives, both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit, of courage, resilience and the need for connection.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> What does Meghan have to offer a billionaire? An aging ex-actress with no particular skills beyond stirring up trouble. She’s not exactly a catch.



She's not a catch but there are also billionaires who aren't very smart or perhaps have mommy issues like Harry, who will be captivated by her evil charm


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

TimeToShop said:


> I always thought Haz was sweet on Kate. Another reason for Meggy to dislike her.
> 
> I’m sure Megsy tried to flirt with William but he knew a harpy when he saw one.



Our Ducka$s got scarfed by William instead      I bet she was mad when William wouldn't give her time of day even for small talk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Almost all the tv movies make it clear that billionaire husbands can be very difficult in the ‘love’ area. Maybe they have some odd(?) or weird(?) preferences. As many have said,  whatever money the women get, they have _earned_ it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That show sounds boring.  And I’m sure they’ll claim great ratings even though Netflix doesn’t release that data.


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> Its a shame Elon Musk is spoken for as he clearly likes them crazy



Elon doesn't have 16 toilets so I am guessing MoM will pass...









						Elon Musk Now Lives in a $50,000 Prefab Tiny House in Texas
					

After selling most of his real estate portfolio, the multibillionaire is now living in a 400-square-foot unit on his SpaceX Texas site




					www.architecturaldigest.com
				





And I am willing to bet he doesn't want anything to do with her, either - she is fairly useless where he is concerned. Stale wedding cake and nothing of substance to offer (I actually like Grimes and think she is talented, and she & Elon seem to be a good match).


----------



## marietouchet

poopsie said:


> Has this been mentioned anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
> 
> 
> THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
> *THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *


David Furnish - Elton John’s husband - is also producing


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Has this been mentioned anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
> 
> 
> THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
> *THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *


Oh goody, someone else to sit on the Bench!


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> She's not a catch but there are also billionaires who aren't very smart or perhaps have mommy issues like Harry, who will be captivated by her evil charm



There’s a lot of competition for single billionaires. Apparently there wasn’t a line of eligible ladies lining up to be Harry’s missus.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> The Duke and Duchess said: “Our lives, both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit, of courage, resilience and *the need for connection.*


Connection? From the woman who breaks all connections she deems unhelpful.

How can people be so duped by this woman?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and the arrogance goes on:
> The Duke and Duchess said: “Our lives, both independent of each other and as a couple, have allowed us to understand the power of the human spirit, of courage, resilience and the need for connection.


 
So. Much. Word. Salad.

Created by Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, _Pearl_ (working title) is a family series that centers on a 12-year-old girl's "heroic adventure as she learns to step into her power and finds inspiration from influential women throughout history," Netflix shared in a new press release.









						Meghan Markle Announces New Animated Series about a 12-Year-Old Girl 'on a Journey of Self-Discovery'
					

Meghan Markle will executive produce an animated series called Pearl for Netflix, about a 12-year-old girl's 'journey of self-discovery'




					www.google.com


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, she may be able to use witchcraft on someone
> 
> wait - first networking - using Oprah to get introduced?  then witchcraft



She has to get close to her target first. She needs to get a few hairs or some nail clippings to work her love spell.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> So. Much. Word. Salad.
> 
> Created by Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, _Pearl_ (working title) is a family series that centers on a 12-year-old girl's "heroic adventure as she learns to step into her power and finds inspiration from influential women throughout history," Netflix shared in a new press release.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Announces New Animated Series about a 12-Year-Old Girl 'on a Journey of Self-Discovery'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will executive produce an animated series called Pearl for Netflix, about a 12-year-old girl's 'journey of self-discovery'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



Pearl’s  Peril.
It sounds like a variation of this game. Mystery and adventure! Wonder if any Royal women will appear.  Hmmm.








						Pearl’s Peril – Hidden Object Adventure
					

A stunningly beautiful hidden object adventure game set in the golden age of mystery and adventure!




					www.wooga.com
				




*A Hidden Object Game Full of Romance and Mystery*
_Join Pearl as her glamorous social life grinds to a halt with her father's mysterious death. Discover a wonderful island, perilous secrets, true friends, and deadly rivals. Download today and enjoy a story-filled with mystery and adventure._


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Pearl’s  Peril.
> It sounds like a variation of this game. Mystery and adventure! Wonder if any Royal women will appear.  Hmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pearl’s Peril – Hidden Object Adventure
> 
> 
> A stunningly beautiful hidden object adventure game set in the golden age of mystery and adventure!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wooga.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *A Hidden Object Game Full of Romance and Mystery*
> _Join Pearl as her glamorous social life grinds to a halt with her father's mysterious death. Discover a wonderful island, perilous secrets, true friends, and deadly rivals. Download today and enjoy a story-filled with mystery and adventure._



I can’t imagine it’ll be that interesting or popular. If you are going to try to disguise a history lesson as an entertaining cartoon you had better find the best writers. Meghan probably thinks she can write it herself like The Bench.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I can’t imagine it’ll be that interesting or popular. If you are going to try to disguise a history lesson as an entertaining cartoon you had better find the best writers. Meghan probably thinks she can write it herself like The Bench.



Oh, absolutely,  H&M will cheapen the idea of  12 yr old girls on a self-discovery journey. Sad that EJ’s partner isn’t more creative.
None of this sounds like an original idea. 









						Meghan Markle will executive produce new animated series for Netflix
					

The 39-year-old will 'create and produce' the animated show, which is called Pearl, as part of Archewell Productions' lucrative contract with Netflix.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_Filmmaker David, 58, will also serve as an executive producer on the series, called Pearl, which will 'weave together fantasy and history' while focusing 'on the adventures of a 12-year-old girl' as she attempts to 'overcome life's daily challenges'. _


----------



## Sophisticatted

Sounds a bit like Xavier Riddle and the Secret Museum


----------



## VickyB

purseinsanity said:


> Wow this gives a whole mew meaning, LOL!  I LOVED this song as a kid.  I usually paid no attention to the words and often sang  whatever I thought was being sung


Bit of trivia. Gloria was written and first recorded in Italian by Umberto Tozzi!! Branigan also recorded his song Ti Amo in English too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

VickyB said:


> Bit of trivia. Gloria was written and first recorded in Italian by Umberto Tozzi!! Branigan also recorded his song Ti Amo in English too


----------



## xincinsin

poopsie said:


> Has this been mentioned anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
> 
> 
> THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
> *THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *


Do you think it will have "autobiographical" elements?


----------



## bag-mania

It came right off of their website. You can tell her she wrote it herself and is proud of it. It must be what she was working on while Harry was across the world unveiling statues.

*Archewell Productions*
Archewell Productions was created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to produce programming that informs, elevates, and inspires. Through its creative partnership with Netflix — the world’s leading streaming entertainment service with more than 195 million members —Archewell Productions will utilize the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and duty to truth through a compassionate lens.

Archewell Productions has announced two exciting projects:

Heart of Invictus

Heart of Invictus is a docu-series that will showcase powerful stories of resilience and hope from competitors on their journey to Invictus Games The Hague 2020, now set to take place in 2022. This series is being produced in partnership with The Invictus Games Foundation and comes from the Oscar-winning team of director Orlando von Einsiedel and producer Joanna Natasegara (The White Helmets, Virunga, Evelyn). Since 2014, The Invictus Games has brought together wounded, injured, or sick servicemembers and veterans from across the world to participate internationally in a premier sporting competition — showing us how the power of sport can inspire and heal us all.

“Since the very first Invictus Games back in 2014, we knew that each competitor would contribute in their own exceptional way to a mosaic of resilience, determination, and resolve. This series will give communities around the world a window into the moving and uplifting stories of these competitors on their path to the Netherlands next year. As Archewell Productions’ first series with Netflix, in partnership with the Invictus Games Foundation, I couldn’t be more excited for the journey ahead or prouder of the Invictus community for continuously inspiring global healing, human potential and continued service.”
– The Duke of Sussex, Co-Founder of Archewell Productions and Founder of The Invictus Games and The Invictus Games Foundation

Pearl

Pearl (working title) is an animated series that centers on the heroic adventures of a 12-year-old girl who is inspired by influential women from history. The Duchess of Sussex will serve as an executive producer alongside David Furnish (Rocketman, Gnomeo & Juliet), Carolyn Soper (Sherlock Gnomes, Tangled), and Emmy Award®-winning filmmakers Liz Garbus (I’ll Be Gone in the Dark, What Happened, Miss Simone?), and Dan Cogan (Icarus, The Apollo). Amanda Rynda (DC Super Hero Girls, The Loud House) will serve as showrunner and executive producer.

“Like many girls her age, our heroine Pearl is on a journey of self-discovery as she tries to overcome life’s daily challenges. I’m thrilled that Archewell Productions, partnered with the powerhouse platform of Netflix, and these incredible producers, will together bring you this new animated series, which celebrates extraordinary women throughout history. David Furnish and I have been eager to bring this special series to light, and I am delighted we are able to announce it today.”
– Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, Co-Founder of Archewell Productions









						Archewell Productions | Programming that Informs, Elevates, Inspires
					

Archewell Productions harnesses the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity.




					archewell.com


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She has to get close to her target first. She needs to get a few hairs or some nail clippings to work her love spell.


Pee. Probably has a vial or two available so if they’re not in the woods it can still cast its spell.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It came right off of their website. You can tell her she wrote it herself and is proud of it. It must be what she was working on while Harry was across the world unveiling statues.
> 
> *Archewell Productions*
> Archewell Productions was created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to produce programming that informs, elevates, and inspires. Through its creative partnership with Netflix — the world’s leading streaming entertainment service with more than 195 million members —Archewell Productions will utilize the power of storytelling to _*embrace our shared humanity and duty to truth through a compassionate lens.*_
> 
> Archewell Productions has announced two exciting projects:
> 
> Heart of Invictus
> 
> Heart of Invictus is a docu-series that will showcase powerful stories of resilience and hope from competitors on their journey to Invictus Games The Hague 2020, now set to take place in 2022. This series is being produced in partnership with The Invictus Games Foundation and comes from the Oscar-winning team of director Orlando von Einsiedel and producer Joanna Natasegara (The White Helmets, Virunga, Evelyn). Since 2014, The Invictus Games has brought together wounded, injured, or sick servicemembers and veterans from across the world to participate internationally in a premier sporting competition — showing us how the power of sport can inspire and heal us all.
> 
> “Since the very first Invictus Games back in 2014, we knew that each competitor would contribute in their own exceptional way to a mosaic of resilience, determination, and resolve. This series will give communities around the world a window into the moving and uplifting stories of these competitors on their path to the Netherlands next year. As Archewell Productions’ first series with Netflix, in partnership with the Invictus Games Foundation, I couldn’t be more excited for the journey ahead or prouder of the Invictus community for continuously inspiring global healing, human potential and continued service.”
> – The Duke of Sussex, Co-Founder of Archewell Productions and Founder of The Invictus Games and The Invictus Games Foundation
> 
> Pearl
> 
> Pearl (working title) is an animated series that centers on the heroic adventures of a 12-year-old girl who is inspired by influential women from history. The Duchess of Sussex will serve as an executive producer alongside David Furnish (Rocketman, Gnomeo & Juliet), Carolyn Soper (Sherlock Gnomes, Tangled), and Emmy Award®-winning filmmakers Liz Garbus (I’ll Be Gone in the Dark, What Happened, Miss Simone?), and Dan Cogan (Icarus, The Apollo). Amanda Rynda (DC Super Hero Girls, The Loud House) will serve as showrunner and executive producer.
> 
> “Like many girls her age, our heroine Pearl is on a journey of self-discovery as she tries to overcome life’s daily challenges. I’m thrilled that Archewell Productions, partnered with the powerhouse platform of Netflix, and these incredible producers, will together bring you this new animated series, which celebrates extraordinary women throughout history. David Furnish and I have been eager to bring this special series to light, and I am delighted we are able to announce it today.”
> – Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, Co-Founder of Archewell Productions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell Productions | Programming that Informs, Elevates, Inspires
> 
> 
> Archewell Productions harnesses the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


I'm already uninspired when I read "duty to truth".


----------



## poopsie

.oooops
NM


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Do you think it will have "autobiographical" elements?


Oh yeah!


----------



## Chanbal

It's all about pearls and diamonds


----------



## xincinsin

I'm betting that Pearl is going to meet Orca and Methane because they are "extraordinary women". 
It's going to be a Mary Sue extravaganza.


----------



## Monoi

I just read this news and rolled my eyes. I think the public is going to tire of them real quick if they keep this pace of releasing. Its too much.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Do you think it will have "autobiographical" elements?


Yes the main nemesis is going to be her evil ex-friend Mate who always copies pearl’s outfit is in league with the tights/hose industry to force all girls to cover their legs  
other villains include her cheapskate father; a senile, woman-hating giant caterpillar who talks to plants; and a witch in brooches and a hat who keeps setting her small dogs on Pearl.


bag-mania said:


> It came right off of their website. You can tell her she wrote it herself and is proud of it. It must be what she was working on while Harry was across the world unveiling statues.
> 
> *Archewell Productions*
> Archewell Productions was created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to produce programming that informs, elevates, and inspires. Through its creative partnership with Netflix — the world’s leading streaming entertainment service with more than 195 million members —Archewell Productions will utilize the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and duty to truth through a compassionate lens.
> 
> Archewell Productions has announced two exciting projects:
> 
> Heart of Invictus
> 
> Heart of Invictus is a docu-series that will showcase powerful stories of resilience and hope from competitors on their journey to Invictus Games The Hague 2020, now set to take place in 2022. This series is being produced in partnership with The Invictus Games Foundation and comes from the Oscar-winning team of director Orlando von Einsiedel and producer Joanna Natasegara (The White Helmets, Virunga, Evelyn). Since 2014, The Invictus Games has brought together wounded, injured, or sick servicemembers and veterans from across the world to participate internationally in a premier sporting competition — showing us how the power of sport can inspire and heal us all.
> 
> “Since the very first Invictus Games back in 2014, we knew that each competitor would contribute in their own exceptional way to a mosaic of resilience, determination, and resolve. This series will give communities around the world a window into the moving and uplifting stories of these competitors on their path to the Netherlands next year. As Archewell Productions’ first series with Netflix, in partnership with the Invictus Games Foundation, I couldn’t be more excited for the journey ahead or prouder of the Invictus community for continuously inspiring global healing, human potential and continued service.”
> – The Duke of Sussex, Co-Founder of Archewell Productions and Founder of The Invictus Games and The Invictus Games Foundation
> 
> Pearl
> 
> Pearl (working title) is an animated series that centers on the heroic adventures of a 12-year-old girl who is inspired by influential women from history. The Duchess of Sussex will serve as an executive producer alongside David Furnish (Rocketman, Gnomeo & Juliet), Carolyn Soper (Sherlock Gnomes, Tangled), and Emmy Award®-winning filmmakers Liz Garbus (I’ll Be Gone in the Dark, What Happened, Miss Simone?), and Dan Cogan (Icarus, The Apollo). Amanda Rynda (DC Super Hero Girls, The Loud House) will serve as showrunner and executive producer.
> 
> “Like many girls her age, our heroine Pearl is on a journey of self-discovery as she tries to overcome life’s daily challenges. I’m thrilled that Archewell Productions, partnered with the powerhouse platform of Netflix, and these incredible producers, will together bring you this new animated series, which celebrates extraordinary women throughout history. David Furnish and I have been eager to bring this special series to light, and I am delighted we are able to announce it today.”
> – Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, Co-Founder of Archewell Productions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell Productions | Programming that Informs, Elevates, Inspires
> 
> 
> Archewell Productions harnesses the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


It sounds like a pretty generic set-up for a kids show. What is the USP here?
Also does it not look bad to announce something with a working title? Sounds like it’s a bit early to be announcing it.

back to the USP, perhaps we can take a hint from the heroine’s name, and she’s going to travel back to meet famous people in history by trying on notable jewellery e.g:
1. She tries on la peregrina and meets Liz Taylor.
2. she pops on mexican silver rings and meets Frida Khalo
3. A verdura cuff takes her to Coco Chanel
4. She (finally) gets to wear an emerald tiara and meets the Russian royals
5. And in the very special series finale, a pair of diamond chandelier earrings leads her to meet an intrepid journalist


----------



## Clearblueskies

Monoi said:


> I just read this news and rolled my eyes. I think the public is going to tire of them real quick if they keep this pace of releasing. Its too much.


I agree, and there’s no end to the moralising tone.  I’ll decide for myself if I’m inspired or uplifted, thanks.  I don’t want Meg telling me.  It’s like going to a restaurant and the chef telling you how much you enjoyed the meal before you lifted your fork.


----------



## needlv

I’m surprised she used Pearl.  I thought she would use lilibet…


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> I’m surprised she used Pearl.  I thought she would use lilibet…


Perhaps that will be the name of the pet sidekick.

Interestingly,Margaret means Pearl, but I’m sure it’s just the literal pearls are hidden treasures formed by trauma reading.

Incidentally, pearls can also be very easily be faked, artificially enhanced, and mass- produced   

We probably shouldn’t be putting all these insults disguised as ideas down; the team are probably combing the internet looking for stuff to steal as we speak.


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> I’m surprised she used Pearl.  I thought she would use lilibet…


Lilibet (tm)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Clearblueskies said:


> I agree, and there’s no end to the moralising tone.  I’ll decide for myself if I’m inspired or uplifted, thanks.  I don’t want Meg telling me.  It’s like going to a restaurant and the chef telling you how much you enjoyed the meal before you lifted your fork.



Prices alone should tell you how much you enjoyed eating your meal without the chef lifting his mixing spoon 

My tolerance level for 'meaningful' deliberate social worthiness in films/music/art/SWP/fashion ATM is currently 0. 

Pearl sounds about as appetising as a HUGE bowl of porridge made with recycled water, artificial sweetener and no salt.  

Pippi Longstocking was much more fun. If I was 12, I'd want girl rebels who ride horses backwards, possesses superhuman strength and the power of flight and doesn't long to meet any celeb adults (especially duchesses) but makes fun of them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am very interested to learn where the rumour that Charles won't give the Dukedom of Edinburgh to Edward because he is jealous of the Wessexes comes from. Because I don't believe it for a second, and I vividly remember other occasions where someone we know too well was rumoured to have used unflattering rumours as a weapon of choice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
  
*The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*









						REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
					

The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Created by Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, _Pearl_ (working title) is a family series that centers on a 12-year-old girl's "heroic adventure as she learns to step into her power and finds inspiration from influential women throughout history," Netflix shared in a new press release.



Did they mean to say "Created by a team Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, doesn't really have the money to pay"?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am very interested to learn where the rumour that Charles won't give the Dukedom of Edinburgh to Edward comes from because he is jealous of the Wessexes. Because I don't believe it for a second, and I vividly remember other occasions where someone we know too well was rumoured to have used unflattering rumours as a weapon of choice.


Rumors on other sites are he wants to offer it to Hazz.
These rumors are really making Charles look awful.  Has anyone seen QE lately?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh yeah!




OMG that little sh*t. Isn't she a bit young to give her dad an attitude like this.


----------



## Clearblueskies

papertiger said:


> Prices alone should tell you how much you enjoyed eating your meal without the chef lifting his mixing spoon
> 
> My tolerance level for 'meaningful' deliberate social worthiness in films/music/art/SWP/fashion ATM is currently 0.
> 
> Pearl sounds about as appetising as a HUGE bowl of porridge made with recycled water, artificial sweetener and no salt.
> 
> Pippi Longstocking was much more fun. If I was 12, I'd want girl rebels who ride horses backwards, possesses superhuman strength and the power of flight and doesn't long to meet any celeb adults (especially duchesses) but makes fun of them.


I was a Beano fan as a kid - Minnie the Minx is my fave!


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG that little sh*t. Isn't she a bit young to give her dad an attitude like this.


I thought the same - treating her father with disdain even then   The look on her face….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors on other sites are he wants to offer it to Hazz.
> These rumors are really making Charles look awful.  Has anyone seen QE lately?



Which makes even less sense. Harry already has a dukedom for life, why would he need a second one? Especially the one inherited from a grandfather he treated like sh*t in his last months?

ETA: she was at Windsor Horse Show last week.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clearblueskies said:


> I thought the same - treating her father with disdain even then   The look on her face….



I'm seriously apalled and not because it's Junior Raptor, but because that's no way for a child to behave towards an elder.


----------



## chicinthecity777

breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghans deluded fans claim that there’s sexual tension between Wills and Meghan, and he’s so obsessed with her that he was jealous Harry had her and that made him banish Meghan and Harry since he couldn’t have Meghan to himself!


Is that why William "scarf-ed" MM?


----------



## Annawakes

Looking at the list of experienced collaborators on this animated show, part of me feels like they might be able to propel it to success….since their names are attached to it. No one wants a flop associated with their name.  And, I’m thinking they ought to have strong personalities too.

On the other hand, if M the DoS (it’s hilarious how that’s her name now, when she could very well just be referred to as MM) is the EP, she will think she knows better than everyone else (who have far more experience).  So it will turn out to be a flop after all.  We will see.


----------



## duna

EverSoElusive said:


> She's not a catch but there are also billionaires who aren't very smart or perhaps have mommy issues like Harry, who will be captivated by her evil charm


... Or some billionaire 70/80 yearold sugar daddy....


----------



## chicinthecity777

poopsie said:


> Has this been mentioned anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix
> 
> 
> THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle to produce animated series 'Pearl' on Netflix - new statement*
> *THE DUCHESS of Sussex will produce a new animated show for Netflix, following the adventures of a young girl.
> These will be made by Archewell Productions, a company Prince Harry and Meghan Markle own. In a statement, the company said: “Archewell Productions today announced that it is developing a new animated series for Netflix. *


A mis-leading headline as usual! She's not to produce anything. On Netflix announcement, she was one of the named executive producers, which in reality, it's producer in name only. I guess Netflix has to protect their investment! As usual, MM won't need to do a thing and she will take all the credit, like everything else she has "achieved" in her life lately!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm seriously apalled and not because it's Junior Raptor, but because that's no way for a child to behave towards an elder.


Lucky not to get wet feet IMO


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
> 
> *The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
> 
> 
> The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My guess is she will do a voice over for the girl!


----------



## xincinsin

chicinthecity777 said:


> My guess is she will do a voice over for the girl!


Well, it would be a perfect match: Hazard reverts to 12 yo when stressed; Methane voices a 12 yo imaginary heroine.


----------



## drifter

what girl wants to watch a boring cartoon about some self-absorbed middle-aged Z-list actress's younger self "overcoming challenges"?  There are far more exciting animations about girls overcoming challenges in the market.  I don't remember being interested in any self-discovery or influential women at that age.  Unless the said self-discovery involved fashion, makeup and boys and the influential women were the Spice Girls/Beyonce/Rihanna.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors on other sites are he wants to offer it to Hazz.
> These rumors are really making Charles look awful.  Has anyone seen QE lately?


The source of such rumors is likely the same of the other rumors/press releases put out almost daily...


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'm already uninspired when I read "duty to truth".


and "elevate"....really? again - we all need them to tell us how to be better


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Prices alone should tell you how much you enjoyed eating your meal without the chef lifting his mixing spoon
> 
> My tolerance level for 'meaningful' deliberate social worthiness in films/music/art/SWP/fashion ATM is currently 0.
> 
> Pearl sounds about as appetising as a HUGE bowl of porridge made with recycled water, artificial sweetener and no salt.
> 
> Pippi Longstocking was much more fun. If I was 12, I'd want girl rebels who ride horses backwards, possesses superhuman strength and the power of flight and doesn't long to meet any celeb adults (especially duchesses) but makes fun of them.


my girl hero is greta thunberg....I hope she keeps her distance from these two phonies


----------



## papertiger

post: 34642816 said:
			
		

> My guess is she will do a voice over for the girl!



Won't they need an actress for that?


----------



## marietouchet

Discussion topic .... recent stories about Pss Anne having counseled against the engagement ..  that MM would not fit in - or words to that effect. 

OK we know a lot more about MM  these days  but what was really known BEFORE the engagement?  I remember having generally positive thoughts about MM. I thought her experience with press and red carpets would be a plus.  MM would have been on best behavior prior to engagement , I doubt she would have shown her true colors then ...

OK, yes, the firm commissioned some sort of background check on MM. She has strained relations with family would have shown up, previous boyfriends / husbands - that was well known by time of engagement. But the bullying, narcissism, extravagant spending came come to light AFTER the engagement ... 

What did Anne see back then ???? was her counsel just  GENERAL PURPOSE caution that would apply to anyone dating H?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG that little sh*t. Isn't she a bit young to give her dad an attitude like this.


Our two sons were 12 and 10 that year. Some of the older children were quite impertinent and whenever you asked them a question that required a negative answer they responded with, "No, duh!" in a condescending manner. The first time our eldest son tried it with us, we put a stop to it.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
> 
> *The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
> 
> 
> The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm shuddering at the Welsh connection


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> my girl hero is greta thunberg....I hope she keeps her distance from these two phonies


Well, they are in contact with fake Greta!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

chicinthecity777 said:


> Is that why William "scarf-ed" MM?


Yes that’s a possibility. Remember how some people speculated that, during the Diana statue unveiling, when Harry turned and walked towards Wills, wills never turned to Harry to avoid the cameras capturing a certain moment between the brothers.

William must’ve sensed something from Meghan before the infamous “scarf incident”. And chose to avoid all forms of interaction with those two since.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm shuddering at the Welsh connection


She’s so shameless.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

chicinthecity777 said:


> A mis-leading headline as usual! She's not to produce anything. On Netflix announcement, she was one of the named executive producers, which in reality, it's producer in name only. I guess Netflix has to protect their investment! As usual, MM won't need to do a thing and she will take all the credit, like everything else she has "achieved" in her life lately!


I had a feeling nobody was going to trust her with enough responsibility to produce a show in the serious form.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
> 
> *The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
> 
> 
> The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t she been “39” since 2018?


----------



## EverSoElusive

duna said:


> ... Or some billionaire 70/80 yearold sugar daddy....



Like Mr. Thomas Girardi?    Even this guy is outsmarting his outgoing young wife by going into conservatorship so that she cannot squeeze him dry. They cited neurocognitive disorder to make the conservatorship official


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Like Mr. Thomas Girardi?    Even this guy is outsmarting his outgoing young wife by going into conservatorship so that she cannot squeeze him dry. They cited neurocognitive disorder to make the conservatorship official


You know my normal stance on this is pro the gold digger actually.
I just feel if you want a glamorous transactional relationship you should be prepared to pay the bill for it.

it’s not something I’d want for myself, but it’s clear there are plenty of people willing to pay for a fantasy relationship and I think it’s a bit rotten to try & weasel out of paying - bit like not paying your hotel/restaurant  bill.


----------



## gracekelly

Dickie Arbiter





That Prince Edward will become The Duke of Edinburgh in the next reign was his father's and is his mother's wishes and Prince Charles won't go against those. It won't happen immediately but by 2029, when Edwards turns 65, it will. Time for speculation, without substance, to cease

I hope this puts the rumors started by the Sussex to rest


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Dickie Arbiter
> 
> 
> View attachment 5137670
> 
> 
> That Prince Edward will become The Duke of Edinburgh in the next reign was his father's and is his mother's wishes and Prince Charles won't go against those. It won't happen immediately but by 2029, when Edwards turns 65, it will. Time for speculation, without substance, to cease
> 
> I hope this puts the rumors started by the Sussex to rest


So to be clear, is this a big deal because the person named the  DofE gets to run the youth award scheme or because it’s what the late Philip was called or is it because it’s in Scotland?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Oh yeah!




THAT'S the home video showing her attitude towards her father that immediately turned me off since!  Shame shame shame MM!  At that age shows her high and mighty attitude.  It should have been squashed.  Look what she turned into.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> So to be clear, is this a big deal because the person named the  DofE gets to run the youth award scheme or because it’s what the late Philip was called or is it because it’s in Scotland?


This is a big deal because the title belonged to PP who is Edward’s father. The awards are secondary.


----------



## gracekelly

It is diplomatic to say that Edward will get it by age 65. The Queen has to pass before he gets it and Charles can bestow it.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
> 
> *The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
> 
> 
> The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


How *SHOCKING*    .. *NOT*!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> You know my normal stance on this is pro the gold digger actually.
> I just feel if you want a glamorous transactional relationship you should be prepared to pay the bill for it.
> 
> it’s not something I’d want for myself, but it’s clear there are plenty of people willing to pay for a fantasy relationship and I think it’s a bit rotten to try & weasel out of paying - bit like not paying your hotel/restaurant  bill.


actually, I don't think Meeegan is that beautiful so why would a billionaire pay for her companionship?  don't they usually want a trophy.  Oh wait, McPhee isn't that beautiful either IMO
but foster is only worth $150 mil


----------



## Silverplume

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG that little sh*t. Isn't she a bit young to give her dad an attitude like this.


My Dad would have _murdered_ that child. I wouldn’t have the guts to act like that.


----------



## Aimee3

Silverplume said:


> My Dad would have _murdered_ that child. I wouldn’t have the guts to act like that.


As the saying goes “a leopard doesn’t change its spots”.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> actually, I don't think Meeegan is that beautiful so why would a billionaire pay for her companionship?  don't they usually want a trophy.  Oh wait, McPhee isn't that beautiful either IMO
> but foster is only worth $150 mil


You know what they say beauty is in the eye of the account holder


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> You know my normal stance on this is pro the gold digger actually.
> I just feel if you want a glamorous transactional relationship you should be prepared to pay the bill for it.
> 
> it’s not something I’d want for myself, but it’s clear there are plenty of people willing to pay for a fantasy relationship and I think it’s a bit rotten to try & weasel out of paying - bit like not paying your hotel/restaurant  bill.



Yeah, I was pretty shocked when the Hugh Hefner didn't leave his newest wife anything. Not even a house, not even a small amount of money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> THAT'S the home video showing her attitude towards her father that immediately turned me off since!  Shame shame shame MM!  At that age shows her high and mighty attitude.  It should have been squashed.  Look what she turned into.



Yeah, the doting dad didn't do her any favours.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> This is a big deal because the title belonged to PP who is Edward’s father. The awards are secondary.


Thanks for answering. The callback to Philip of course makes sense. But does it mean Edward gets to run the scheme because I think it’s a pretty cool scheme.  I suppose, in a way, Charles already has his mother’s former title because he’s PofW.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I was pretty shocked when the Hugh Hefner didn't leave his newest wife anything. Not even a house, not even a small amount of money.


Thinking about it, it’s quite similar to the attitude these guys who get mail order brides have where they are offended that the woman is cold. Dude, you ordered her like a product from a catalogue based on what she looks like, how deep a connection were you expecting?  



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, the doting dad didn't do her any favours.


Unfortunately the poor sucker did her so many favours he’s now out of cash.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, the doting dad didn't do her any favours.


Yup .. now everyone can see what I've been saying all along, that her father spoiled her .. and add that to her narcissism extreme , well .. that's the SH1T recipe that we can all very well see now!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Discussion topic .... recent stories about Pss Anne having counseled against the engagement ..  that MM would not fit in - or words to that effect.
> 
> OK we know a lot more about MM  these days  but what was really known BEFORE the engagement?  I remember having generally positive thoughts about MM. I thought her experience with press and red carpets would be a plus.  MM would have been on best behavior prior to engagement , I doubt she would have shown her true colors then ...
> 
> OK, yes, the firm commissioned some sort of background check on MM. She has strained relations with family would have shown up, previous boyfriends / husbands - that was well known by time of engagement. But the bullying, narcissism, extravagant spending came come to light AFTER the engagement ...
> 
> What did Anne see back then ???? was her counsel just  GENERAL PURPOSE caution that would apply to anyone dating H?



Yes, Anne saw what others saw. Take a peek at this thread, around *page 46*.  The hypocrisy was there from the beginning, the same ‘pity-me’ song was being sung, the same ‘mental health‘ woes, the same ‘mean media’ stuff.  Not much has changed in H&M‘s “truth”. 

*Page 46 - first article of their relationship*

_The prince, 32, also follows the actress on the picture sharing website Instagram using a pseudonym, the Mail can reveal.

Intriguingly, Harry, who publicly professes to hate social media, is one of her million followers and she also follows him.

The revelation is telling because the prince has a private account and only 'follows' a few close friends and charities, suggesting the pair know each other fairly well. 

The Prince is said to be besotted with Meghan after meeting in Toronto during the summer as Harry promoted his Invictus Games._

*Page 47 - the back-off letter to the press*

_boo hoo....sorry if this is callous but if the B-level actress can't stand the heat, she can get out of the relationship

From the Daily Beast:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-time-off-work-struggling-with-attention.html_

*Page 50 - Hazz mental health issues*


----------



## csshopper

As with so many other things Methane is not original, perhaps the following has prompted her foray into children's programming on Netflix:

*Michelle ***** to star in Netflix children's show Waffles + ...*
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56002696 - 232k - Cached - Similar pages 
Feb 9, 2021 *...* *Michelle ****** to star in *Netflix children's show* Waffles + Mochi · *Michelle ****** is to star alongside puppets in a *Netflix show* that aims to ...

She is an M wannabe and it's never going to happen IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Thanks for answering. The callback to Philip of course makes sense. But does it mean Edward gets to run the scheme because I think it’s a pretty cool scheme.  I suppose, in a way, Charles already has his mother’s former title because he’s PofW.



The Queen was never Prince of Wales (or Princess, for that matter) as she was never heir apparent. For the same reason she never held the Duke of Cornwall title (but she is the Duke - not Duchess - of Lancaster as the reigning monarch).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> As with so many other things Methane is not original, perhaps the following has prompted her foray into children's programming on Netflix:
> 
> *Michelle ***** to star in Netflix children's show Waffles + ...*
> https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56002696 - 232k - Cached - Similar pages
> Feb 9, 2021 *...* *Michelle ****** to star in *Netflix children's show* Waffles + Mochi · *Michelle ****** is to star alongside puppets in a *Netflix show* that aims to ...
> 
> She is an M wannabe and it's never going to happen IMO.



It's a food program and actually entertaining though. Raptor's might turn out ok if she lets the professionals do the work, but the pitch didn't hook me.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops!


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Thanks for answering. The callback to Philip of course makes sense. But does it mean Edward gets to run the scheme because I think it’s a pretty cool scheme.  I suppose, in a way, Charles already has his mother’s former title because he’s PofW.


I suppose he would run it, but I also see the possibility of Anne doing it with him.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen was never Prince of Wales (or Princess, for that matter) as she was never heir apparent. For the same reason she never held the Duke of Cornwall title (but she is the Duke - not Duchess - of Lancaster as the reigning monarch).


 She was the heir to her father, but she did not hold those titles because she was considered the _heiress presumptive.  _There existed the possibility that her father would have a son. (Wonder what his wife thought about that!)  Charles did not get it automatically either and was invested in 1969.  Apparently it is not an inherited title and has to be given.


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> A mis-leading headline as usual! She's not to produce anything. On Netflix announcement, she was one of the named executive producers, which in reality, it's producer in name only. I guess Netflix has to protect their investment! As usual, MM won't need to do a thing and she will take all the credit, like everything else she has "achieved" in her life lately!


don't executive producers usually put up money?


----------



## sdkitty

Silverplume said:


> My Dad would have _murdered_ that child. I wouldn’t have the guts to act like that.


seems like part of of the problem with her is her daddy spoiled her


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> don't executive producers usually put up money?


They usually have something that they are contributing.  In this case, it is her name *smirk*  and the story that she wrote that letter when she was a kid.  That story needs a rest at this point.  It's a real re-tread.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They usually have something that they are contributing.  In this case, it is her name *smirk*  and the story that she wrote that letter when she was a kid.  That story needs a rest at this point.  It's a real re-tread.


so she comes up with a one-sentence idea and then others do all the rest and she gets to be called exec producer....all because she snagged the prince.
Oh excuse me - she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Connection? From the woman who breaks all connections she deems unhelpful.
> 
> How can people be so duped by this woman?


I've sadly come to realize most people truly are just sheep, and will believe WTF BS is fed to them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Do you think it will have "autobiographical" elements?


I'm sure it'll rely heavily on plagiarized materials!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
> 
> *The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
> 
> 
> The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm SHOCKED that Megain is paying homage to herself.  SHOCKED.


----------



## Chloe302225

gracekelly said:


> I suppose he would run it, but I also see the possibility of Anne doing it with him.



Edward already runs the scheme and has been doing so for a few years now.


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


> Edward already runs the scheme and has been doing so for a few years now.


Thanks!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm SHOCKED that Megain is paying homage to herself.  SHOCKED.


She loves to rewrite history so I am expecting some visits to the White House and conferences with the Joints Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary 
General of the UN.


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> so she comes up with a one-sentence idea and then others do all the rest and she gets to be called exec producer....all because she snagged the prince.
> Oh excuse me - she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince



But what advice can she give to young girls?  Use your looks to attract a guy, use his connections whilst they are useful to you, then Ghost him when you no longer need him?

Oh - I forgot - always marry up.  She certainly did NOT break any barriers / glass ceilings for women.  She did it by marrying men with connections or higher status than her.


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> But what advice can she give to young girls?  Use your looks to attract a guy, use his connections whilst they are useful to you, then Ghost him when you no longer need him?
> 
> Oh - I forgot - always marry up.  She certainly did NOT break any barriers / glass ceilings for women.  She did it by marrying men with connections or higher status than her.



AND *don't give away the milk for free*.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> But what advice can she give to young girls?  Use your looks to attract a guy, use his connections whilst they are useful to you, then Ghost him when you no longer need him?
> 
> Oh - I forgot - always marry up.  She certainly did NOT break any barriers / glass ceilings for women.  She did it by marrying men with connections or higher status than her.


oh, but she's been an activist since she was twelve


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> actually, I don't think Meeegan is that beautiful so why would a billionaire pay for her companionship?  don't they usually want a trophy.  Oh wait, McPhee isn't that beautiful either IMO
> but foster is only worth $150 mil


Isn’t he on his 16th wife? Perhaps he has lowered his standards?


----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> Isn’t he on his 16th wife? Perhaps he has lowered his standards?


yes, in the looks dept I think he has....some may think McPhee is talented but I'm not a fan


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watched the whole thing. Doria speaks!  MM speaks about the wonderful diversity in London. Hmmm.





She always looks so painfully fake any time I see videos of her speaking in public. It's always as if, every time in her head she is trying too hard and acting her a$$ of for that starring role that will win her an Oscar.
Someone should tell her this is real life, real people she's talking to and it's not a movie role.
Also, someone should tell her she's sh*t at acting. Like, unbelievably sh*t.





EverSoElusive said:


> I didn't watch the video because Scoobie Doo's face creeped me out so just sharing the video if you guys can stomach it



"BeInG a PaRt Of ThIs FaMiLy AnD tHe PlAtFoRm ThAt CoMeS wItH tHaT iS aN iNcReDiBlE rEsPoNsIbIlItY tHaT i TaKe ReAlLy SeRiOuSlY"







wilding said:


> Reading news.com.au and came across this... I know I know the source and all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry win award for decision to only have two kids
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a huge declaration about their family, announcing that they will only have two children, Archie and Lilibet. The “enlightened decision” has won the couple an award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UN’s World Population Day on Saturday.
> Each recipient will receive a $925 donation for a charity of their choice.
> just one more thing to make him "strut like a peacock" so to speak.





Oh great, more fuel for the narcissists bottomless tank.
WhoTF comes up with these insensitive, ridiculous bullsh*t 'awards'?
Why is 2 kids the perfect number? Are the people who just have 1 kid or the ones who choose to have no kids not worthy? Are the people who have 3+ kids terrible people who need to be ashamed for putting the environment in a dangerous place?
You actually couldn't make this crazy nonsense up.





poopsie said:


> I'm of Irish lineage and I really don't like Guinness. If pressed a Harp will suffice.
> What would be _really_ nice is a wee drop o poteen! Slainte





papertiger said:


> Slainte!


Don't forget the fada over the 'A' when typing 'Sláinte', it's important 
I'm half Irish and I totally agree about Guinness, I can't stand it as a drink, but love it included in certain food recipes!





Roxanna said:


> Interesting  article came today in my news feed. I have no idea how credible this Australian site is , however the story sounds plausible, as many were wondering what's  H&M  are up to next...
> I can only imagine what H's family might feel. He is obviously  trying to make money on not exactly Monarchy itself   like talking   for example of extensive heritage , but talking about his own close relatives, who happen to represent it.
> https://www.newidea.com.au/prince-harry-records-royal-family
> *Shock footage! Prince Harry records royal family*
> Suspicions are rife the Sussexes are holding on to secret recordings. - by New Idea Royal Monthly
> 
> 12 JUL 2021
> Under pressure to deliver a product worthy of their $200 million Netflix deal, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are being encouraged to make a revealing documentary about the royals.
> 
> Now, palace insiders tell _New Idea_ that Prince Harry may have recorded secret videos during his time back in the UK to unveil Princess Diana’s statue, with a view to use the footage in the project.
> While in London, Harry, 36, was seen holding an iPhone in a car as he left a royal engagement in Kew Gardens.
> Onlookers say it appeared as though he was recording himself or photographers.
> “There have been rumours Harry and Meghan are planning on making a documentary about royal life, so it would make sense if he was filming or recording on his trips home ‘for research purposes’,” says the insider.
> Earlier this year, royal biographer Angela Levin hinted that Harry and Meghan, 39, definitely had something up their sleeve.
> In an interview in May, UK-based radio host Mike Graham said, “I thought after the Oprah interview that there wasn’t much more he could do.
> "He spilled his guts, they have given everything they have got to give, but he just keeps going on and on and on”.
> “There is a lot more!” Angela sharply responded.
> I think there is another documentary in the making where they will have taken films of various rooms and maybe even of various conversations.
> “I think it will be yet another nail in the coffin of his relationship with his father and his brother. They can’t trust him anymore.”
> According to our insider, an “unofficial warning” went around to key staff and members of the family to be very careful about what they say in Harry’s presence.
> “Relations are at such a low that anything could be said out of anger, and it would then be open for them to splash it across their next TV interview,” the source says, who insists the couple are currently being pushed by Netflix to “cough up something incredible” to earn their keep with the streaming giant.





SMDH. If this is true then he is utterly despicable.




CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this is all Oprah.  I see serious competition, so I doubt Oprah will win. Remember how many lies were proven, how O was criticized for sloppy questions, etc. Lots and lots of negatives associated with that s$itshow.
> When they lose, and they will, think of the celebrations
> Check out the other nominees:
> *Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series Or Special*
> *My Next Guest Needs No Introduction With David Letterman *• NePtaflgixe 3•8Zero Point Zero Production and Worldwide Pants
> Tom Keaney, Executive Producer
> Mary Barclay, Executive Producer
> Chris Cechin-De La Rosa, Executive Producer Alexandra Lowry, Executive Producer
> Helen Cho, Producer
> Michael Steed, Producer
> *Oprah With Meghan And Harry: A CBS Primetime Special • CBS • Harpo Productions*
> Tara Montgomery, Executive Producer Terry Wood, Executive Producer
> Brian Piotrowicz, Co-Executive Producer Brad Pavone, Co-Executive Producer Lindsay Flader, Producer
> Oprah Winfrey, Host
> *Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy • CNN • CNN Original Series, RAW*
> Stanley Tucci, Executive Producer/Host Adam Hawkins, Executive Producer Eve Kay, Executive Producer
> Amy Entelis, Executive Producer
> Lyle Gamm, Executive Producer
> Jon Adler, Supervising Producer
> Molly Harrington, Supervising Producer
> *United Shades Of America With W. Kamau Bell • CNN • CNN Original Series, Zero Point Zero Production*
> W. Kamau Bell, Executive Producer/Host Lydia Tenaglia, Executive Producer Morgan Fallon, Executive Producer Sandra Zweig, Executive Producer
> Raza Naqvi, Producer
> Jane Jo, Producer
> Dwayne Kennedy, Supervising Producer
> *Vice • Showtime • SHOWTIME Presents and Vice Media*
> Beverly Chase, Executive Producer Subrata De, Executive Producer
> Craig Thomson, Co-Executive Producer Robert Booth, Supervising Producer Paula Salhanny, Supervising Producer Greg Wright, Supervising Producer Amanda Pisetzner, Supervising Producer
> 
> 
> https://www.emmys.com/sites/default/files/Downloads/73rd-nominations-list-v1.pdf?q=1&q1=





They must have been short a decent show or ten this year to choose as a nominee instead of that trainwreck of a fictional whine-fest with OW. That nomination is an embarrassment for the Emmy's and just goes to show what a pile or nonsense all of these awards shows are nowadays.
I'm also cheering for Stanley to win! Loved his show, he made me want to move to Italy and just spend my days eating incredible food to my hearts content 




Chanbal said:


> Nice video...










purseinsanity said:


> Says there’s a late fee of $50.  I’m sure Oprah can afford it.


H&M certainly can't afford it. All their money is tied up in a multi-million $ mortgage, paying for their 50 toilets to be filled with water after every flush and paying their PR teams to do a really bad job every day.





bag-mania said:


> So. Much. Word. Salad.
> Created by Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, _Pearl_ (working title) is a family series that centers on a 12-year-old girl's "heroic adventure as she learns to step into her power and finds inspiration from influential women throughout history," Netflix shared in a new press release.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Announces New Animated Series about a 12-Year-Old Girl 'on a Journey of Self-Discovery'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle will executive produce an animated series called Pearl for Netflix, about a 12-year-old girl's 'journey of self-discovery'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Me anytime I try to read their word salad:







CarryOn2020 said:


> What did we do to deserve this fresh layer of awfulness?
> 
> *The Meghan show! Duchess of Sussex drops major hint that new animated Netflix series will be based on HER by calling its 12-year-old 'heroine' Pearl - the Welsh meaning of her own name*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: Meghan Markle named new Netflix show after herself
> 
> 
> The 39-year-old announced on Wednesday that she is creating and producing an animated series for Netflix as part of the Sussexes' lucrative deal with the site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Oh FFS  Of course it's going to be based on her. She is Gods gift to the world in her eyes, she needs all the attention and praise she can get.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> AND *don't give away the milk for free*.


Gotta be honest, I was also given this advice as a young lady, BUT it was also implied to not take the dairy farmer for all he's got then sell the farm, but rather produce my own milk and store it for use when needed.  

I just realized my son would be so grossed out if he read that.


----------



## needlv

So any bets on whether Pearl will have freckles???


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> So any bets on whether Pearl will have freckles???



And who will be included in her posse?

Another copy?? Ooopsie!







The box set includes a “She persisted“ around the world and one for Olympians. Also, a club called “She persisted”.  
Ooooooh, Netflix, you thirsty thing.


----------



## csshopper

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5137934
> 
> She always looks so painfully fake any time I see videos of her speaking in public. It's always as if, every time in her head she is trying too hard and acting her a$$ of for that starring role that will win her an Oscar.
> Someone should tell her this is real life, real people she's talking to and it's not a movie role.
> Also, someone should tell her she's sh*t at acting. Like, unbelievably sh*t.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "BeInG a PaRt Of ThIs FaMiLy AnD tHe PlAtFoRm ThAt CoMeS wItH tHaT iS aN iNcReDiBlE rEsPoNsIbIlItY tHaT i TaKe ReAlLy SeRiOuSlY"
> View attachment 5137948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5137971
> 
> Oh great, more fuel for the narcissists bottomless tank.
> WhoTF comes up with these insensitive, ridiculous bullsh*t 'awards'?
> Why is 2 kids the perfect number? Are the people who just have 1 kid or the ones who choose to have no kids not worthy? Are the people who have 3+ kids terrible people who need to be ashamed for putting the environment in a dangerous place?
> You actually couldn't make this crazy nonsense up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't forget the fada over the 'A' when typing 'Sláinte', it's important
> I'm half Irish and I totally agree about Guinness, I can't stand it as a drink, but love it included in certain food recipes!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5137984
> 
> SMDH. If this is true then he is utterly despicable.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5137987
> 
> They must have been short a decent show or ten this year to choose as a nominee instead of that trainwreck of a fictional whine-fest with OW. That nomination is an embarrassment for the Emmy's and just goes to show what a pile or nonsense all of these awards shows are nowadays.
> I'm also cheering for Stanley to win! Loved his show, he made me want to move to Italy and just spend my days eating incredible food to my hearts content
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5137999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> H&M certainly can't afford it. All their money is tied up in a multi-million $ mortgage, paying for their 50 toilets to be filled with water after every flush and paying their PR teams to do a really bad job every day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Me anytime I try to read their word salad:
> View attachment 5138007
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5138013
> 
> Oh FFS  Of course it's going to be based on her. She is Gods gift to the world in her eyes, she needs all the attention and praise she can get.


Lounorada, Great to have you back to comment and illustrate! Hope you had a good trip and Hermes did not disappoint.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Melocoton

My first thoughts about this animated series:  MM overworked that thesaurus hard to promote this animated series.  So many adjectives, so poorly written.  Secondly, Pearl is the name of the daughter of Hester Prynne in the novel, The Scarlet Letter.  Uncreative choice by MM.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> So any bets on whether Pearl will have freckles???


Any bets on Pearl being non-white?
Gotta drive home the inclusivity, compassion and elevation.


----------



## Silverplume

Melocoton said:


> My first thoughts about this animated series:  MM overworked that thesaurus hard to promote this animated series.  So many adjectives, so poorly written.  Secondly, Pearl is the name of the daughter of Hester Prynne in the novel, The Scarlet Letter.  Uncreative choice by MM.


I have a suspicious mind and immediately wondered if Wife of #6 was trying to connect herself to Wales…the Princess of Wales in particular.
Probably Wo#6 is uncreative and I’m just suspicious of anything she does.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Posting for the record on the thread and in case someone is interested in watching this ... I'm not 

Lifetime's _Escaping the Palace_ premiere's on September 6th


> https://people.com/royals/prince-ha...scaping-the-palace-new-trailer-premiere-date/
> 
> *Lifetime's Harry and Meghan Hit Their Breaking Point Before Escaping the Palace in New Trailer*
> Lanford Beard
> July 15, 2021 02:00 PM


----------



## Hermes Zen

Here's another I haven't seen yet posted ...  It mentions 'public access for both spring Charity Open Days, in which admission prices go toward worthy causes and August tour groups.' Does this mean it's only open to the public on those days or are there other public days that's not going to charity? If so, who pockets the $$'s ...M&H? Hope not! 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Wedding Venue Is Reopening to the Public*
Frogmore House, where the Duke and Duchess held their reception, will welcome visitors in 2022, after two years of closure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Here's another I haven't seen yet posted ...  It mentions 'public access for both spring Charity Open Days, in which admission prices go toward worthy causes and August tour groups.' Does this mean it's only open to the public on those days or are there other public days that's not going to charity? If so, who pockets the $$'s ...M&H? Hope not!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Wedding Venue Is Reopening to the Public*
> Frogmore House, where the Duke and Duchess held their reception, will welcome visitors in 2022, after two years of closure.



Why would they, they have no tie to it other than Charles hosting their reception there. Frogmore House is the big and stately house they claimed they needed to establish their own court, what they got was Frogmore Cottage   The money probably goes to the crown estate or whoever owns that thing for maintenance.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> But what advice can she give to young girls?  Use your looks to attract a guy, use his connections whilst they are useful to you, then Ghost him when you no longer need him?
> 
> Oh - I forgot - always marry up.  She certainly did NOT break any barriers / glass ceilings for women.  She did it by marrying men with connections or higher status than her.


You forgot get your dad to pay for the surgery to get ‘looks’ and the admission to elite schools and showbiz  to meet well-off people. Then proceed as suggested but don’t forget to abandon your family when you want to rewrite yourself as a struggling near-orphan Annie who paid her own way sniff sniff.


----------



## jelliedfeels

So here’s the latest chapter of the neverending story. I must say I am not enamoured with this t shirt voyage LCC is going on. It’s very reminiscent of that series of Ruview where Raven always wore the bikini t shirt. Though I suppose she can’t really be rocking the cashmere in July.


----------



## needlv

Meghan and Harry under huge financial pressure despite Netflix coup
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry are under pressure to deliver on their Netflix and Spotify deals, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk
				




meanwhile at bank of Dad


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> Meghan and Harry under huge financial pressure despite Netflix coup
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry are under pressure to deliver on their Netflix and Spotify deals, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> meanwhile at bank of Dad




Meghan is too busy spying on Kate and calculating her next move to outshine the royals …


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Any bets on Pearl being non-white?
> Gotta drive home the inclusivity, compassion and elevation.


I am on the request for the DNA test


----------



## Sharont2305

Teamwork matters. Yes indeed Your Majesty.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> *Teamwork matters. Yes indeed Your Majesty.*



 to HMQ and  to the merching duo, who could have accomplished so much as working royals.


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Filmmaker David, 58, will also serve as an executive producer on the series, called Pearl, which will 'weave together fantasy and history' while focusing 'on the adventures of a 12-year-old girl' as she attempts to 'overcome life's daily challenges'. _



So basically, this will be about Meghan and that letter she wrote to...Procter & Gamble? Plus fiction of what Meghan believes she did/should have done/imagined she'd done?...

I mean, this entire series feels too predictable to watch. I've got Netflix and I'll be interested to see where it ranks after release, and if it gets pushed to me on my home page - considering I use it mainly for Narcos and the occasional K-drama binge.


----------



## Sol Ryan

eunaddict said:


> So basically, this will be about Meghan and that letter she wrote to...Procter & Gamble? Plus fiction of what Meghan believes she did/should have done/imagined she'd done?...
> 
> I mean, this entire series feels too predictable to watch. I've got Netflix and I'll be interested to see where it ranks after release, and if it gets pushed to me on my home page - considering I use it mainly for Narcos and the occasional K-drama binge.


Of course it will be on everyone’s homepage…. They’ve got too much invested in them for it to fail…

Its like when Harry’s stupid Apple thing came up, all Apple could talk about was total viewership. I was watching Ted Lasso for the third time…. first time I’ve regretted it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> You forgot get your dad to pay for the surgery to get ‘looks’ and the admission to elite schools and showbiz  to meet well-off people. Then proceed as suggested but don’t forget to abandon your family when you want to rewrite yourself as a struggling near-orphan Annie who paid her own way sniff sniff.


Oh .. it wasn't just her Dad that she pestered to **MEET** celebrities/musicians, etc. .. she pestered the H-E-L-L out of my friends in the Music BIZ to introduce her to one of their (_and wait .. 'cos these words are important_) .. *MOST FAMOUS* musicians!!!  What galled my friends are a number of things: 

That she thought she was that damn special to meet a "*MOST FAMOUS*" musician (_her reasoning to them was that ~possibly~ said MOST FAMOUS musician might have some pointers on how best to sing her part in her Senior Year High School Play .. sure, sure Meg-a-lo-maniac_)! 
That my friends and the "*MOST FAMOUS*" musician would just drop what they were doing .. to go meet *HER*!  After all, she was just so darn special! 
That my friends and the "*MOST FAMOUS*" musician would be sooooooooooo honored to bestow her this meet-up! 
Of course, my friends ignored her request until such time that she pestered them SO MUCH that they simply said (_and which is true_), that they DO NOT ask/request any of their musicians to meet up with anyone because they have a confidentiality clause in their contract!


----------



## TC1

Pearl will most definitely have a best friend named Lily.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> You forgot get your dad to pay for the surgery to get ‘looks’ and the admission to elite schools and showbiz  to meet well-off people. Then proceed as suggested but don’t forget to abandon your family when you want to rewrite yourself as a struggling near-orphan Annie who paid her own way sniff sniff.


I still don't get that.  why would one want to deny they have a family?


----------



## Canturi lover

Uh Oh....
Harry and Meghan want Lilibet to be christened at Windsor


https://mol.im/a/9796561


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I still don't get that.  why would one want to deny they have a family?



She's probably ashamed because her family members aren't from the high society and they may not act and talk all classy  Now if she was from the Hilton family, you bet all the family members would have been at the wedding and socializing with her at KP or FC.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I still don't get that.  why would one want to deny they have a family?


I think it's because she has rewritten her history and family might forget that and actually talk about her real history.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> She's probably ashamed because her family members aren't from the high society and they may not act and talk all classy  Now if she was from the Hilton family, you bet all the family members would have been at the wedding and socializing with her at KP or FC.


wouldn't you think an uncle who had connections to get her an embassy job would be presentable?  
and as far as Doria's side of the family, wouldn't they be as presentable as Doria?


----------



## CarryOn2020

These two are seriously disturbed.  QE needs to act now. 

IMO this explains why Diana’s siblings kept their distance from him. 








						Harry and Meghan want Lilibet to be christened at Windsor
					

I hear that Prince Harry and Meghan want a royal christening for their baby, Lilibet, held in the presence of the Queen, writes RICHARD EDEN.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_They've accused the Queen of handing down 'genetic pain and suffering' and charged unnamed relations with racism, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are apparently eager to cling on to the perks of life in the Royal Family.

I hear that Prince Harry and Meghan want a royal christening for their baby, Lilibet, held in the presence of the Queen.

The California-based couple's intentions are said to have been made clear during Harry's visit to this country for the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue earlier this month.

'Harry told several people that they want to have Lili christened at Windsor, just like her brother,' a royal source tells me. 'They are happy to wait until circumstances allow.'_


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> These two are seriously disturbed.  QE needs to act now.
> 
> IMO this explains why Diana’s siblings kept their distance from him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan want Lilibet to be christened at Windsor
> 
> 
> I hear that Prince Harry and Meghan want a royal christening for their baby, Lilibet, held in the presence of the Queen, writes RICHARD EDEN.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _They've accused the Queen of handing down 'genetic pain and suffering' and charged unnamed relations with racism, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are apparently eager to cling on to the perks of life in the Royal Family.
> 
> I hear that Prince Harry and Meghan want a royal christening for their baby, Lilibet, held in the presence of the Queen.
> 
> The California-based couple's intentions are said to have been made clear during Harry's visit to this country for the unveiling of Princess Diana's statue earlier this month.
> 
> 'Harry told several people that they want to have Lili christened at Windsor, just like her brother,' a royal source tells me. 'They are happy to wait until circumstances allow.'_


Ugh, why are they allowing this?


----------



## needlv

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, why are they allowing this?


MM wants that money shot with the Queen before she… is no longer with us. 

RF should continue the ice out strategy.  just ignore and keep saying “we understand your genetic pain and triggers, and do not wish to cause any harm”.

edit to add - you can see MM‘s fingers all over this press release via their PR.  She got told no or that they were fully booked, so leaks a story about how badly they want the christening in Windsor to pressure the RF into doing it.  RF should continue to ignore them.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, why are they allowing this?


Who said it is being allowed?  They (Harkles) are just saying that they want this.  To whom did Harry  make it clear when he was last in England, that this was what he and the wife wanted?  The Queen never saw him, Charles never saw him and William talked about the weather at best.  The truth is the Harkles just keep putting out these statements.  They will twist them into a victim scenario however this turns out.  This is just strategy to keep them in the news in a victim mode.  They do it to continue the narrative of the Windsors being the big bad wolves.  Unless Meghan has has nerves of steel, she is not going back to be roundly snubbed.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> MM wants that money shot with the Queen before she… is no longer with us.
> 
> RF should continue the ice out strategy.  just ignore and keep saying “we understand your genetic pain and triggers, and do not wish to cause any harm”.


She isn't going to get it.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Who said it is being allowed?  They (Harkles) are just saying that they want this.  To whom did Harry  make it clear when he was last in England, that this was what he and the wife wanted?  The Queen never saw him, Charles never saw him and William talked about the weather at best.  The truth is the Harkles just keep putting out these statements.  They will twist them into a victim scenario however this turns out.  This is just strategy to keep them in the news in a victim mode.  They do it to continue the narrative of the Windsors being the big bad wolves.  Unless Meghan has has nerves of steel, she is not going back to be roundly snubbed.


Agree, no one is currently going along with this story that was surely floated by HM‘s PR machine
I read somewhere, and the story is plausible, that Lili cannot be in the line of succession until baptized in the COE, thus, the BRF website has not been updated to include her, and the sudden interest in religion in California
I do know L would be excluded if baptized in any other religion eg Catholic


----------



## octopus17

Nm


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't you think an uncle who had connections to get her an embassy job would be presentable?
> and as far as Doria's side of the family, wouldn't they be as presentable as Doria?



The late uncle (blessed his heart) who got her the job was certainly presentable enough but it seemed like Ducka$s made up her mind fairly early on about wanting to separate herself from both sides of her family. Besides shame, I personally suspect she looks down on her own family members now because she's a Ducka$s and a so-called royalty while they are simply lowly peasants.

Doria was just a short term display until after the wedding. Where is she now? She's no longer being paraded around by Ducka$s because she's not really valuable in her royal play now. 

Again, I'm purely speculating. I'm not supporting what she did at all. I feel bad for her family members completely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> The late uncle (blessed his heart) who got her the job was certainly presentable enough but it seemed like Ducka$s made up her mind fairly early on about wanting to separate herself from both sides of her family. Besides shame, I personally suspect she looks down on her own family members now because she's a Ducka$s and a so-called royalty while they are simply lowly peasants.
> 
> Doria was just a short term display until after the wedding. Where is she now? She's no longer being paraded around by Ducka$s because she's not really valuable in her royal play now.
> 
> Again, I'm purely speculating. I'm not supporting what she did at all. I feel bad for her family members completely.


It looks to me like the Great Divide is at the pre-Suits/post-Suits juncture. Once she had a bit of fame & fortune, and the physical distance to separate herself from her family, she started to re-write history. Harder to fact-check someone in Toronto if the people who have varied recollections are in California. 

Harry's minders should have done a better background check, but I wouldn't blame them. Narcs like her are very good at keeping their true colours under wraps till they have gotten their claws deep into their target (unfortunately speaking from personal experience).


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Agree, no one is currently going along with this story floated by HM PR a machine
> I read somewhere, and the story is plausible, that Lili cannot be in the line of succession until baptized in the COE, thus, the BRF website has not been updated to include her, and the sudden interest in religion in California
> i do know L would be excluded if baptized in any other religion eg Catholic


How picayune do they get? Does it have to Church of England?  If so, I think they are out of luck because in the US it is the either the Anglican Church or the Episcopal Church. (There are slight differences between the latter two, but not going to discuss them here.)


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Agree, no one is currently going along with this story that was surely floated by HM‘s PR machine
> I read somewhere, and the story is plausible, that Lili cannot be in the line of succession until baptized in the COE, thus, the BRF website has not been updated to include her, and the sudden interest in religion in California
> I do know L would be excluded if baptized in any other religion eg Catholic


Ok, christening At Windsor , officiated by the Archbishop of Canterbury ? That is kinda the norm … 
Wonder if he would accept the gig? after all the ridiculous stories of his marrying them 3 days early … Granny might have to ask him personally …


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> How picayune do they get? Does it have to Church of England?  If so, I think they are out of luck because in the US it is the either the Anglican Church or the Episcopal Church. (There are slight differences between the latter two, but not going to discuss them here.)


Well, see Wiki on the intricacies of the Anglican communion … I could not begin to get it right … 
Baptism in a US Protestant church  might be technically OK - PSS Alexandra of Hanover was baptized in a German Protestant Church, but was still 24567th (or whatever) in the English  line of succession until she converted to Catholicism 
But, the COE a is a big symbol,  almost every Royal shindig has at least a short bit in Church or referencing the religion


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Ok, christening At Windsor , officiated by the Archbishop of Canterbury ? That is kinda the norm …
> Wonder if he would accept the gig? after all the ridiculous stories of his marrying them 3 days early … Granny might have to ask him personally …


Maybe H and wife will do their own christening in a garden in England à la how they were married 3 days before the big public wedding. (Wheres the vomit meme?)


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> It looks to me like the Great Divide is at the pre-Suits/post-Suits juncture. Once she had a bit of fame & fortune, and the physical distance to separate herself from her family, she started to re-write history. Harder to fact-check someone in Toronto if the people who have varied recollections are in California.
> 
> Harry's minders should have done a better background check, but I wouldn't blame them. Narcs like her are very good at keeping their true colours under wraps till they have gotten their claws deep into their target (unfortunately speaking from personal experience).


I firmly believe that a full background check was done by the Met, since they do royal security, the real issue is not the quality of the detective work, but, rather whether 6 ever read the report or worse shrugged off the executive summary he was given as inaccurate, biased, not relevant etc


----------



## lanasyogamama

I didn’t realize TQ didn’t agree, PHEW.


----------



## needlv

And ANOTHER lie was uncovered from the interview…









						Meghan Markle pitched Netflix pre-Megxit, despite Harry’s claims
					

In March Prince Harry insisted he and Markle had never thought of teaming up with Netflix and Spotify until they were cut off financially by his family.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Clearblueskies

lanasyogamama said:


> I didn’t realize TQ didn’t agree, PHEW.


I doubt she’s even been asked.  It’s just another fluff piece to keep them in the news and remind everyone how “Royal” they are.  And the Queen didn’t attend Archie’s christening anyway - I’m sure she can find a few more prior commitments up her sleeve to avoid this one


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> don't executive producers usually put up money?


Not likely, most (if not all) projects are pitched to investors. They put up other people's money.


----------



## Clearblueskies

This is astonishing!  A (very clever) lady has _*knitted *_Sandringham   (Sorry (not sorry) for the OT)

*Knitted Sandringham tribute goes on display at Queen's home*
Published1 hour ago
Share






IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL 
image captionMargaret Seaman says it is "lovely" to see her knitted Sandringham, in Sandringham
*A knitted tribute to one of the Queen's estates is going on display at the location that inspired the work.*
It took two years for Margaret Seaman, from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, to make her version of the Sandringham Estate. 
The 18ft (5.5m) by 6ft (1.8m) creation is now on display in the Ballroom of the Queen's home in Norfolk.
Mrs Seaman, 92, said it was "absolutely wonderful" to see here tribute in situ and said "it would be the icing on the cake" if the Queen got to see it too.
The knitted work features Sandringham House, St Mary Magdalene Church, the Nest summer house, the estate's gardens, miniature woollen visitors and members of the Royal Family. 





image captionMargaret Seaman used much of her time during the first lockdown to work on the knitted model
Mrs Seaman's work was previously on display at the Norfolk Makers' Festivalin the Forum, Norwich, and raised £8,000 for three Norfolk NHS hospital charity funds. 
She said she had no plans to create anything else as big, as "I have lots of other things still to do". 
"I'm going to have a bit of a rest," she added. 





IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL 
image captionMrs Seaman visited Sandringham many times to get her work exactly right





IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL 
image captionShe also worked from sketches and photographs
Sandringham Estate said it was "delighted" with the "woolly wonders".
It said it had been "in regular contact with Margaret throughout her project and followed her progress closely so it will be a 'knitting' tribute to her impressive handiwork and dedication to the project".

'Royal' knitter creates homage to Queen's estate
'It's the jewel in the crown of the seafront'
How Covid-19 has left Royal fans 'disappointed'
Jayne Evans, event producer of the Norfolk Makers' Festival, and Mrs Seaman's "unofficial agent", said: "This is a glorious moment that we've dreamed of happening. 
"It has already wowed thousands and thousands of people.
"She is my role model, icon and my hero."





IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL 
image captionMrs Seaman said she worked on the project "on average about 10 to 12 hours a day"
Ms Evans hopes the new exhibition will raise even more money for the NHS and "double" the amount raised. 
The creations are on display in the Ballroom until 14 October. 





image captionIt was previously on display at the Forum in Norwich


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _I hear that Prince Harry and Meghan want a royal christening for their baby, Lilibet, held in the presence of the Queen._



The Queen didn't even attend Archie's christening, not out of spite but because she had another commitment and quite frankly, she has a lot of great-grandchildren.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


----------



## SusieAugusta

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Good luck for all those that have been hit by the floodings!


----------



## Clearblueskies

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


I couldn’t believe what was seeing on the news last night, it’s a tragedy.  Very best wishes to you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

Clearblueskies said:


> This is astonishing!  A (very clever) lady has _*knitted *_Sandringham   (Sorry (not sorry) for the OT)
> 
> *Knitted Sandringham tribute goes on display at Queen's home*
> Published1 hour ago
> Share
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMargaret Seaman says it is "lovely" to see her knitted Sandringham, in Sandringham
> *A knitted tribute to one of the Queen's estates is going on display at the location that inspired the work.*
> It took two years for Margaret Seaman, from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, to make her version of the Sandringham Estate.
> The 18ft (5.5m) by 6ft (1.8m) creation is now on display in the Ballroom of the Queen's home in Norfolk.
> Mrs Seaman, 92, said it was "absolutely wonderful" to see here tribute in situ and said "it would be the icing on the cake" if the Queen got to see it too.
> The knitted work features Sandringham House, St Mary Magdalene Church, the Nest summer house, the estate's gardens, miniature woollen visitors and members of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> image captionMargaret Seaman used much of her time during the first lockdown to work on the knitted model
> Mrs Seaman's work was previously on display at the Norfolk Makers' Festivalin the Forum, Norwich, and raised £8,000 for three Norfolk NHS hospital charity funds.
> She said she had no plans to create anything else as big, as "I have lots of other things still to do".
> "I'm going to have a bit of a rest," she added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMrs Seaman visited Sandringham many times to get her work exactly right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionShe also worked from sketches and photographs
> Sandringham Estate said it was "delighted" with the "woolly wonders".
> It said it had been "in regular contact with Margaret throughout her project and followed her progress closely so it will be a 'knitting' tribute to her impressive handiwork and dedication to the project".
> 
> 'Royal' knitter creates homage to Queen's estate
> 'It's the jewel in the crown of the seafront'
> How Covid-19 has left Royal fans 'disappointed'
> Jayne Evans, event producer of the Norfolk Makers' Festival, and Mrs Seaman's "unofficial agent", said: "This is a glorious moment that we've dreamed of happening.
> "It has already wowed thousands and thousands of people.
> "She is my role model, icon and my hero."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMrs Seaman said she worked on the project "on average about 10 to 12 hours a day"
> Ms Evans hopes the new exhibition will raise even more money for the NHS and "double" the amount raised.
> The creations are on display in the Ballroom until 14 October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> image captionIt was previously on display at the Forum in Norwich


thank you for sharing this marvelous art work!  Exceptional talent and patience, love it.


----------



## needlv

Another story about their financial woes… breaking it down into a spend of over $20M.  









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have lost $22 million since Megxit
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au
				





MM will be asking for more donations to archewell soon…


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen didn't even attend Archie's christening, not out of spite but because she had another commitment and quite frankly, she has a lot of great-grandchildren.


She didn't attend Prince Louis christening either, probably for the same reason, busy.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Please take care, thinking of you all


----------



## Annawakes

Just to say I’ve never seen a three dimensional knitted item before!  When I hear “knit”, I’m thinking scarves and blankets.  It’s wonderful and I hope TQ recognizes it.

Back on topic, that article about their living expenses is too funny.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Another story about their financial woes… breaking it down into a spend of over $20M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have lost $22 million since Megxit
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM will be asking for more donations to archewell soon…



There was a link in the financial woes story that goes to a gossipy tale speculating Priyanka Chopra snubbed W&K because she is Team Rotten. Was that really the Royal box, and how do people score an invite to it if they are anti-BRF?








						Meghan’s friend snubs Kate and Will
					

Loyalty over royalty?




					www.news.com.au


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Too lazy to read, does that factor in the McMansion or is it just money they wasted because they thought they can?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Stay safe!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> There was a link in the financial woes story that goes to a gossipy tale speculating Priyanka Chopra snubbed W&K because she is Team Rotten. Was that really the Royal box, and how do people score an invite to it if they are anti-BRF?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s friend snubs Kate and Will
> 
> 
> Loyalty over royalty?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


LOLOL like W&K were falling all over themselves to engage with Mrs. Jonas


----------



## marietouchet

Anyone know how and where the Queen’s great-grand children have been baptized ?
Ok, we know about William’s three and Archie ..
What about Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena? Anyone heard the plans for August and Lucas ?
just saw Sharon’s  post, HW did not attend Louis’ baptism …

oh and just another photo of Mrs Jonas , after scarf fiddling during arrival of W and K rather than applauding, she horned in on them as they left - wanting to be part of the photo op … it takes skill to be noticed like that …

ps I would not want a public baptism given the recent hazing of George (no, no, no … a child is off limits )


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh, why are they allowing this?


what BS
If you really believe in Christening (at least as the Catholics do), then you don't wait until "circumstances allow"

 If you don't really believe in it, then it's just a show....as is everything they do.  I really think they are living a very unauthentic life.  She seems like an empty shell and H must be lonely.  Just my impression,


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> There was a link in the financial woes story that goes to a gossipy tale speculating Priyanka Chopra snubbed W&K because she is Team Rotten. Was that really the Royal box, and how do people score an invite to it if they are anti-BRF?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s friend snubs Kate and Will
> 
> 
> Loyalty over royalty?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


I would love nothing more than to see them move into a three-bedroom home on a small lot in the suburbs and live like "regular people"


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.



The footage of the floods is horrifying and the loss of life is tragic but it's good to hear that you are safe. I hope the floodwaters recede and the dams hold, too.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


hope you stay safe....what a nightmare


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Stay safe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

sdkitty said:


> what BS
> If you really believe in Christening (at least as the Catholics do), then you don't wait until "circumstances allow"
> 
> If you don't really believe in it, then it's just a show....as is everything they do.  I really think they are living a very unauthentic life.  She seems like an empty shell and H must be lonely.  Just my impression,


I'm Catholic and was baptized when I was only a few days old. It was considered imperative that it be done as soon as possible.


----------



## Genie27

Clearblueskies said:


> This is astonishing!  A (very clever) lady has _*knitted *_Sandringham   (Sorry (not sorry) for the OT)
> 
> *Knitted Sandringham tribute goes on display at Queen's home*
> Published1 hour ago
> Share
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMargaret Seaman says it is "lovely" to see her knitted Sandringham, in Sandringham
> *A knitted tribute to one of the Queen's estates is going on display at the location that inspired the work.*
> It took two years for Margaret Seaman, from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, to make her version of the Sandringham Estate.
> The 18ft (5.5m) by 6ft (1.8m) creation is now on display in the Ballroom of the Queen's home in Norfolk.
> Mrs Seaman, 92, said it was "absolutely wonderful" to see here tribute in situ and said "it would be the icing on the cake" if the Queen got to see it too.
> The knitted work features Sandringham House, St Mary Magdalene Church, the Nest summer house, the estate's gardens, miniature woollen visitors and members of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> image captionMargaret Seaman used much of her time during the first lockdown to work on the knitted model
> Mrs Seaman's work was previously on display at the Norfolk Makers' Festivalin the Forum, Norwich, and raised £8,000 for three Norfolk NHS hospital charity funds.
> She said she had no plans to create anything else as big, as "I have lots of other things still to do".
> "I'm going to have a bit of a rest," she added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMrs Seaman visited Sandringham many times to get her work exactly right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionShe also worked from sketches and photographs
> Sandringham Estate said it was "delighted" with the "woolly wonders".
> It said it had been "in regular contact with Margaret throughout her project and followed her progress closely so it will be a 'knitting' tribute to her impressive handiwork and dedication to the project".
> 
> 'Royal' knitter creates homage to Queen's estate
> 'It's the jewel in the crown of the seafront'
> How Covid-19 has left Royal fans 'disappointed'
> Jayne Evans, event producer of the Norfolk Makers' Festival, and Mrs Seaman's "unofficial agent", said: "This is a glorious moment that we've dreamed of happening.
> "It has already wowed thousands and thousands of people.
> "She is my role model, icon and my hero."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMrs Seaman said she worked on the project "on average about 10 to 12 hours a day"
> Ms Evans hopes the new exhibition will raise even more money for the NHS and "double" the amount raised.
> The creations are on display in the Ballroom until 14 October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> image captionIt was previously on display at the Forum in Norwich


Oh wow, this is incredible! Thanks for posting it. I took up amigurumi (crochet version of this type of art) this January and ended up making a few large dolls and small figurines. I was obsessed from Jan to May, but then it got too hot for me to touch yarn so I’ve put it aside until the urge gets me again.

Back on topic - ugh these two.


----------



## Genie27

needlv said:


> Another story about their financial woes… breaking it down into a spend of over $20M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have lost $22 million since Megxit
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM will be asking for more donations to archewell soon…



“Koi ponds don’t clean themselves” - apparently life lesson 7835 for H in the Annus horribilis that was 2020. While the rest of us were dealing with other insignificant issues.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> “Koi ponds don’t clean themselves” - apparently life lesson 7835 for H in the Annus horribilis that was 2020. While the rest of us were dealing with other insignificant issues.


I thought it a good article, it highlights how foolish and thoughtlessly entitled they are.


----------



## Clearblueskies

Genie27 said:


> Oh wow, this is incredible! Thanks for posting it. I took up amigurumi (crochet version of this type of art) this January and ended up making a few large dolls and small figurines. I was obsessed from Jan to May, but then it got too hot for me to touch yarn so I’ve put it aside until the urge gets me again.
> 
> Back on topic - ugh these two.
> 
> View attachment 5139597
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5139616


 I love these


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Stay safe! Sending positive vibes!


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> I would love nothing more than to see them move into a three-bedroom home on a small lot in the suburbs and live like "regular people"


They should move to Calabasas and try to horn in on some Kardashian Hulu show.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I still don't get that.  why would one want to deny they have a family?


Well I think there’s several reasons why she


QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Im really sorry about what is happening. I’m thinking of you and all the Germans. Let me know if there’s anything I can do for you.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Please please please stay safe!  Sending positive thoughts to all affected and for this to pass soon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> How picayune do they get? Does it have to Church of England?  If so, I think they are out of luck because in the US it is the either the Anglican Church or the Episcopal Church. (There are slight differences between the latter two, but not going to discuss them here.)


Love that word picayune - this thread is so educational 


Sharont2305 said:


> She didn't attend Prince Louis christening either, probably for the same reason, busy.


I’m starting to think she doesn’t like christenings - too early for a gun and dubonnet  lol 


purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL like W&K were falling all over themselves to engage with Mrs. Jonas


I’m not trying to be shady but I wouldn’t even say she’s known in U.K. I mean what does she do?
I know she’s married to a Jonas and they are like one direction for Christian youth or something but other than that ???? Shrug 


sdkitty said:


> what BS
> If you really believe in Christening (at least as the Catholics do), then you don't wait until "circumstances allow"
> 
> If you don't really believe in it, then it's just a show....as is everything they do.  I really think they are living a very unauthentic life.  She seems like an empty shell and H must be lonely.  Just my impression,


Yeah! They don’t believe a word of Christianity - I don’t think anyone thought they did! But it’s very noticeable they clearly have no belief in environmentalism either. How exactly is multiple intercontinental private flights with security more environmentally friendly than daring to have three kids & maybe go to Spain once a year again? 


Genie27 said:


> Oh wow, this is incredible! Thanks for posting it. I took up amigurumi (crochet version of this type of art) this January and ended up making a few large dolls and small figurines. I was obsessed from Jan to May, but then it got too hot for me to touch yarn so I’ve put it aside until the urge gets me again.
> 
> Back on topic - ugh these two.
> 
> View attachment 5139597
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5139616


These are so lovely! There’s a lady here who makes lovely crochet toys for charity  & I absolutely can’t resist buying them for the kids     


Genie27 said:


> “Koi ponds don’t clean themselves” - apparently life lesson 7835 for H in the Annus horribilis that was 2020. While the rest of us were dealing with other insignificant issues.


All while squatting in the chicken coop and pretending they tended them themselves as part of their millionaire simple life


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> I firmly believe that a full background check was done by the Met, since they do royal security, the real issue is not the quality of the detective work, but, rather whether 6 ever read the report or worse shrugged off the executive summary he was given as inaccurate, biased, not relevant etc


That’s what I think. H was so in love, he ignored absolutely everything.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Another story about their financial woes… breaking it down into a spend of over $20M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have lost $22 million since Megxit
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM will be asking for more donations to archewell soon…



  
speaking of the dreaded McMansion’s features - I remember seeing on _begin_ _japanology_ that a traditional Japanese tea house has a low door so you have to enter in a crawling position to establish that everyone is equal in the tea house and that the ceremony will be conducted with a quiet humility and grace……

so that was probably the first thing they renovated




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Too lazy to read, does that factor in the McMansion or is it just money they wasted because they thought they can?


They factored in the McMansion’s mortage payments & estimated the deposit to be $7 mills
Still it’s an investment…. Once new buyers know you can bake THE lemon cake in the kitchen they will be flocking.

Honestly it sounds and looks like a holiday camp to me… arcade, pool, tennis court, tea room, patio…
who knew HM had such a taste for the _Dirty Dancing_ life


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Anyone know how and where the Queen’s great-grand children have been baptized ?
> Ok, we know about William’s three and Archie ..
> What about Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena? Anyone heard the plans for August and Lucas ?
> just saw Sharon’s  post, HW did not attend Louis’ baptism …
> 
> oh and just another photo of Mrs Jonas , after scarf fiddling during arrival of W and K rather than applauding, she horned in on them as they left - wanting to be part of the photo op … it takes skill to be noticed like that …
> 
> ps I would not want a public baptism given the recent hazing of George (no, no, no … a child is off limits )



Interesting question. It will require some more research; meanwhile, here is an old article:








						24 family photos show Queen Elizabeth was more than just a monarch — she was also a regular grandma
					

The Queen's eight grandchildren and 12 great-grandchildren kept her busy over the years, from christening ceremonies to weddings.




					www.insider.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Anyone know how and where the Queen’s great-grand children have been baptized ?
> Ok, we know about William’s three and Archie ..
> What about Savannah, Isla, Mia, Lena? Anyone heard the plans for August and Lucas ?



August's just got cancelled due to Covid. Haven't heard of plans for Lucas.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I would love nothing more than to see them move into a three-bedroom home on a small lot in the suburbs and live like "regular people"



They'd never...they probably calculate that at that point the BRF will pick up the tab instead of letting them publicly get evicted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing H&M will demand the Lily Font:









						British Royal Christenings: House of Windsor
					

by Susan Flantzer © Unofficial Royalty 2019 Children of the British Royal Family are christened following the Holy Baptism rite of the Church of England of which the monarch is the Supreme Governor…




					www.unofficialroyalty.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> If you really believe in Christening (at least as the Catholics do), then you don't wait until "circumstances allow"



Right? The super staunch catholics do an "emergency baptism" (layperson, tap water...usually done when the baby is actually dying or very poorly) right after birth just in case the child *could* die until the baptism even if nothing points into that direction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> Oh wow, this is incredible! Thanks for posting it. I took up amigurumi (crochet version of this type of art) this January and ended up making a few large dolls and small figurines. I was obsessed from Jan to May, but then it got too hot for me to touch yarn so I’ve put it aside until the urge gets me again.



I find those so cute! I've taken up crocheting baby blankets as I never learned to knit more than one basic stitch (and the uglier one at that). I did a lot last summer after my cat died because the counting forced me to focus instead of thought-spiraling. I mainly do the ones where the pattern is made from holes.


----------



## LittleStar88

needlv said:


> Another story about their financial woes… breaking it down into a spend of over $20M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have lost $22 million since Megxit
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM will be asking for more donations to archewell soon…




Harry definitely didn’t benefit from having been coddled, protected, and spoiled his whole life. These are things most people figure out in their 20’s. Hard lesson to be learning (against his will) when you’re pushing 40.

I can’t imagine trying to project a big boy persona while still wearing diapers. Poor Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QE missed Prince Louie’s Christening, too.  









						Why the Queen Will Not Attend Archie Harrison's Christening
					

There's been a royal diary clash.




					www.marieclaire.com
				



_Before you go reading between the lines, it’s not the huge deal that headlines might have you believe. In fact, the Queen hasn’t been able to attend all of her great-grandchildren’s christenings previously, either. While she did make the big day for Prince George and Princess Charlotte, the Queen also missed Prince Louis’ baptism last year. It's no real biggie but, according to sources, the Queen “would have liked to be present for the first big celebration for Harry’s first child.”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

updated the post below


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> “Koi ponds don’t clean themselves” - apparently life lesson 7835 for H in the Annus horribilis that was 2020. While the rest of us were dealing with other insignificant issues.



My brother's friend fished 11 koi carps from the flooded main street. They probably got flushed out from their pond. At least those 11 won't die like countless fish who are left behind at river banks when the water begins to recede   I don't even want to think about the consequences for wildlife and pets as very responsible (not) pet owners evacuated without them. I am judging so hard, when our house was on fire I didn't have a jacket for myself on a very cold and wet early spring day, or my master's certificate, or my work laptop, but I had my handicapped kitten who was firmly wrapped into his favourite blanket.  

In fact, we're still nowhere near evacuating as we're nestled on a mountain top where we'll never be completely flooded and started looking for practical solutions as we only have one cat carrier, but three cats who hate each other (plus they are a bit clunky to take...maybe a soft box or one of these pet backpacks?).


----------



## 1LV

needlv said:


> MM wants that money shot with the Queen before she… is no longer with us.
> 
> RF should continue the ice out strategy.  *just ignore and keep saying “we understand your genetic pain and triggers, and do not wish to cause any harm”.*
> 
> edit to add - you can see MM‘s fingers all over this press release via their PR.  She got told no or that they were fully booked, so leaks a story about how badly they want the christening in Windsor to pressure the RF into doing it.  RF should continue to ignore them.


Love it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This article gives the location of the Christening, Godparents [if known]:









						The private christenings of the British royals
					

In contrast to some other monarchies the christenings of the British royals are rather private occasions. They often taken place in royal chapels or even in the




					www.nettyroyal.nl
				




The great-grandchildren, so far:

*Name [listed in birth order]  - Current Age - QE attended:*

1. Savannah Phillips - 10 - yes

2. Isla Phillips - 9 - unknown

3. Prince George - 7 - yes

4. Mia Tindall - 7 - yes

5. Princess Charlotte - 6 -yes

6. Prince Louis - 3 -no

7. Lena Tyndall -2 - yes

8. Archie M-W - 2 -no

9. August Brooksbank - 4 mos - postponed

10. Lucas Tindall - 2 mos - postponed

11. Lili M-W - 1 mo - no details

12. Princess Bea’s baby - soon to arrive  - no details


----------



## CeeJay

Can they even "request" the christening .. given that this child was born in the US?!?!?!  I think the two of them keep on forgetting that there are laws on the books here in the US .. that you CANNOT have a foreign title!!!  Also, if I recall correctlly, the BRF will not allow an American-born to be in the line of succession .. so what do they really want???? .. HA, I think we all know .. Chuckie's $$$$$!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.



I'm so sorry .

I have many friends and family in that area and it's obviously the most nerve wracking time for all. 

I have been flooded twice, each time it took weeks to even see the floor. While I live near the sea on a flood plane (sandbags at the ready) in one of my houses, it's the house on top of a mountain that flooded (due to frozen/thawed pipes bursting). I wouldn't wish it on anyone, fingers crossed the dams hold.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what BS
> If you really believe in Christening (at least as the Catholics do), then you don't wait until "circumstances allow"
> 
> If you don't really believe in it, then it's just a show....as is everything they do.  I really think they are living a very unauthentic life.  She seems like an empty shell and H must be lonely.  Just my impression,



I know.

Demanding a christening at a time of a Global pandemic thousands of miles away from your home doesn't seem very sustainable/eco-friendly/woke


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My brother's friend fished 11 koi carps from the flooded main street. They probably got flushed out from their pond. At least those 11 won't die like countless fish who are left behind at river banks when the water begins to recede   I don't even want to think about the consequences for wildlife and pets as very responsible (not) pet owners evacuated without them. I am judging so hard, when our house was on fire I didn't have a jacket for myself on a very cold and wet early spring day, or my master's certificate, or my work laptop, but I had my handicapped kitten who was firmly wrapped into his favourite blanket.
> 
> In fact, we're still nowhere near evacuating as we're nestled on a mountain top where we'll never be completely flooded and started looking for practical solutions as we only have one cat carrier, but three cats who hate each other (plus they are a bit clunky to take...maybe a soft box or one of these pet backpacks?).


Hang in there! Your heart is in the right place!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I'm so sorry .
> 
> I have many friends and family in that area and it's obviously the most nerve wracking time for all.
> 
> I have been flooded twice, each time it took weeks to even see the floor. While I live near the sea on a flood plane (sandbags at the ready) in one of my houses, it's the house on top of a mountain that flooded (due to frozen/thawed pipes bursting). I wouldn't wish it on anyone, fingers crossed the dams hold.



Hugs to all.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm so sorry .
> 
> I have many friends and family in that area and it's obviously the most nerve wracking time for all.
> 
> I have been flooded twice, each time it took weeks to even see the floor. While I live near the sea on a flood plane (sandbags at the ready) in one of my houses, it's the house on top of a mountain that flooded (due to frozen/thawed pipes bursting). I wouldn't wish it on anyone, fingers crossed the dams hold.


I too have had a month of awful flash floods, no major damage
but I check and clean  out the storm drains weekly , a dirty task but I am not fussing at all
i wish peace for all those affected by the recent storms an Floods


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Good thoughts to all those affected by the floods.  The pictures on TV are rather impressive and scary.


----------



## Hermes Zen

The Q & PC were said to be unhappy that they were not consulted about the Netflix deal.  In hot water again 



> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...y-news-netflix-queen-prince-charles-pearl-spt
> 
> *Meghan and Harry 'in hot water' after Netflix deal angered Queen and Charles*
> *MEGHAN MARKLE AND PRINCE HARRY found themselves "in hot water" after their Netflix deal reportedly angered Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Charles.*


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> The Q & PC were said to be unhappy that they were not consulted about the Netflix deal.  In hot water again


unfortunately someone posted a very racist comment at the bottom of the page......giving Meghan ammo to say what a victim she is


----------



## CarryOn2020

IIRC  MM and a photographer were ‘caught’ filming various rooms in the palace. They were asked to leave, she was told not to return unless accompanied by a family member.  QE and PC can be as angry as they wish. Until they take action, this stuff will continue.  A few months from now we will find out what H&M really want - they typically toss out some distractions before we find out what is really going on. Tiresome, oh so tiresome. 



Apparently, Prince George has received numerous ugly comments over his appearance at the game.  
Perhaps people need a reminder - he is 7.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m not trying to be shady but I wouldn’t even say she’s known in U.K. I mean what does she do?
> I know she’s married to a Jonas and they are like one direction for Christian youth or something but other than that ???? Shrug


LOL, she was a Miss India or something and actress in Bollywood before coming to Hollywood.  I kept thinking as I read the description that she was adjusting her scarf to avoid W&K, that she stole that right from William!  She was trying to scarf the person who invented the move!


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> The Q & PC were said to be unhappy that they were not consulted about the Netflix deal.  In hot water again


For God's sake, just strip them of their titles already!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, she was a Miss India or something and actress in Bollywood before coming to Hollywood.  I kept thinking as I read the description that she was adjusting her scarf to avoid W&K, that she stole that right from William!  She was trying to scarf the person who invented the move!


Priyanka had a US network TV show that lasted 3 seasons. I watched it and season 1 was pretty good and she did a decent job.  She received good reviews.   Season 2 was so-so and by Season 3, I gave up on it.  Her acting ability was limited  and most of the shots just had her running away from trouble or running to trouble.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Priyanka had a US network TV show that lasted 3 seasons. I watched it and season 1 was pretty good and she did a decent job.  She received good reviews.   Season 2 was so-so and by Season 3, I gave up on it.  Her acting ability was limited  and most of the shots just had her running away from trouble or running to trouble.


Quantico?
her IMBD list is pretty long actually...wouldn't say she's a huge star but she was known before the marriage


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> There was a link in the financial woes story that goes to a gossipy tale speculating Priyanka Chopra snubbed W&K because she is Team Rotten. Was that really the Royal box, and how do people score an invite to it if they are anti-BRF?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s friend snubs Kate and Will
> 
> 
> Loyalty over royalty?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


highly doubtful IMO that they cared about chopra


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Quantico?
> her IMBD list is pretty long actually...wouldn't say she's a huge star but she was known before the marriage


She was very well known in India.  Quantico put her in the bigger leagues.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She was very well known in India.  Quantico put her in the bigger leagues.


their wedding was OT


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> The Q & PC were said to be unhappy that they were not consulted about the Netflix deal.  In hot water again



I honestly doubt they did expect to be consulted on anything by the troublesome two. They are probably happy it's not a show on how they supposedly wronged them or with private hidden camera footage from the palace.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IIRC  MM and a photographer were ‘caught’ filming various rooms in the palace.



Oh wow. I had read she was caught taking pictures, but she brought in a photographer???



> Apparently, Prince George has received numerous ugly comments over his appearance at the game.
> Perhaps people need a reminder - he is 7.



People can be such a*sholes. I thought he looked adorable (and even not, as you said, it's a 7yo child).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, she was a Miss India or something and actress in Bollywood before coming to Hollywood.  I kept thinking as I read the description that she was adjusting her scarf to avoid W&K, that she stole that right from William!  She was trying to scarf the person who invented the move!



It takes a certain kind of impertinence to avoid acknowleding your host, though. If you hate them so much, don't sit your behind in the Royal Box.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Priyanka had a US network TV show that lasted 3 seasons. I watched it and season 1 was pretty good and she did a decent job.  She received good reviews.   Season 2 was so-so and by Season 3, I gave up on it. * Her acting ability was limited  and most of the shots just had her running away from trouble or running to trouble.*



Kindred spirits, hu?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Priyanka annoys me because she trashed the other high school in my hometown claiming she received racist bullying.  My hometown is extremely progressive and I have my doubts.  Reminds me of someone else we know.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Did the nickname originated from here?


----------



## Lodpah

Wow! Let's give the woman some support. 








						Why I’m Writing A BOOK On Meghan’s Racial Appropriation Of Black Women
					

A lot is written about Cultural Appropriation, and it provokes so much anger, especially within black communities, yet nothing is ever written about people who steal racial identities in order to b…




					jeangasho.com


----------



## jehaga

Lodpah said:


> Wow! Let's give the woman some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I’m Writing A BOOK On Meghan’s Racial Appropriation Of Black Women
> 
> 
> A lot is written about Cultural Appropriation, and it provokes so much anger, especially within black communities, yet nothing is ever written about people who steal racial identities in order to b…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeangasho.com


She’s good.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> Wow! Let's give the woman some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I’m Writing A BOOK On Meghan’s Racial Appropriation Of Black Women
> 
> 
> A lot is written about Cultural Appropriation, and it provokes so much anger, especially within black communities, yet nothing is ever written about people who steal racial identities in order to b…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeangasho.com



OMGosh!!!  I LOVE this woman. I would read her book!  Thanks for posting Lodpah.

There's one sentence that made me stop me in my tracks and she may have said it this way as speculation instead of factual ... don't I wish it's the later!  Here is the sentence. I've bolded the word ...

'Because her foundation is based on lies, all her attempts have not achieved any results in changing the society, so much that now she’s resorted to naming her own *adopted* daughter after the woman she claimed runs a racist institution that made her want to end her life when she was pregnant.'


----------



## Canturi lover

TALK OF THE TOWN: Prince Harry using exclusive private airport service


----------



## EverSoElusive

She cannot play poker    Watch the whole clip. I find the slow mo part amusing.


----------



## needlv

Has anyone posted this?  It’s pretty savage to H and M









						The Emmys finally recognize Meghan Markle's acting
					

Oprah is one of the most influential women on the planet. Meghan Markle was the cunning Northwestern graduate who went from B-list cable supporting actress to marrying an underwhelming prince.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Canturi lover said:


> TALK OF THE TOWN: Prince Harry using exclusive private airport service



Yeah, yeah, he soooo hates being a Royal.  Baller, indeed.
Seriously, we all knew he would never give up his privileges, nope, nay, never.  What a hypocrite.

_Members, who sign up for $4,500 (£3,250) a year and then pay another $3,450 per trip, are invited to exit the plane on their own private stairs before any other passenger, then are loaded into the back of their own SUV and driven to a private terminal where they get to collect their luggage and go through passport control in splendid isolation.

The PS website describes itself as 'a private airport experience' and says: 'PS reimagines the airport experience for the seasoned and discerning traveller.'

It is run by Gavin de Becker, who has been widely reported as running Harry and Meghan's security at their home in Montecito. 

He is known as the 'bodyguard to the stars' and his discreet company is known to hire former staff from the Israeli secret service Mossad._

Perhaps Harry is learning that life without plodding Met Police protection officers is much more flashy – after all, PS guards have black wraparound glasses and conspicuous earpieces.

_But then Harry is in a whole new world now. *One of my LA sources describes him as a 'baller' – slang for those with great wealth who don't mind spending it.*

She says he runs with a non-famous crowd of tech billionaires. 'He's not in with the showbiz lot as people would expect. 

'Rather than spending time with Adele or James Corden, Harry and Meghan are hanging with the LA rich set: owners of big companies, jet-set types with private planes.

'He spends time in Malibu, Montecito and Beverly Hills.

'Harry seems really relaxed being the star in the room. He's usually the only famous person at the parties he goes to, and it seems to suit him that he's the one everyone flocks to.'_


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yeah, yeah, he soooo hates being a Royal.  Baller, indeed.
> Seriously, we all knew he would never give up his privileges, nope, nay, never.  What a hypocrite.
> 
> _Members, who sign up for $4,500 (£3,250) a year and then pay another $3,450 per trip, are invited to exit the plane on their own private stairs before any other passenger, then are loaded into the back of their own SUV and driven to a private terminal where they get to collect their luggage and go through passport control in splendid isolation.
> 
> The PS website describes itself as 'a private airport experience' and says: 'PS reimagines the airport experience for the seasoned and discerning traveller.'
> 
> It is run by Gavin de Becker, who has been widely reported as running Harry and Meghan's security at their home in Montecito.
> 
> He is known as the 'bodyguard to the stars' and his discreet company is known to hire former staff from the Israeli secret service Mossad._
> 
> Perhaps Harry is learning that life without plodding Met Police protection officers is much more flashy – after all, PS guards have black wraparound glasses and conspicuous earpieces.
> 
> _But then Harry is in a whole new world now. *One of my LA sources describes him as a 'baller' – slang for those with great wealth who don't mind spending it.*
> 
> She says he runs with a non-famous crowd of tech billionaires. 'He's not in with the showbiz lot as people would expect.
> 
> 'Rather than spending time with Adele or James Corden, Harry and Meghan are hanging with the LA rich set: owners of big companies, jet-set types with private planes.
> 
> 'He spends time in Malibu, Montecito and Beverly Hills.
> 
> 'Harry seems really relaxed being the star in the room. He's usually the only famous person at the parties he goes to, and it seems to suit him that he's the one everyone flocks to.'_



this smells like M and H PR… trying to drum up business with tech billionaires since Hollywood rejected them.  Putting out feelers looking for invites to parties etc.


----------



## scarlet555

Waiting patiently… for the world to catch up or to ‘dare’ post their true thoughts on this sham show…


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> this smells like M and H PR… trying to drum up business with tech billionaires since Hollywood rejected them.  Putting out feelers looking for invites to parties etc.



Could be. Also, his mental health company, BetterUp, is from Silicon Valley.








						Prince Harry joins Silicon Valley mental health start-up
					

Prince Harry has joined Silicon Valley start-up BetterUp as its chief impact officer.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## Icyjade

lanasyogamama said:


> Priyanka annoys me because she trashed the other high school in my hometown claiming she received racist bullying.  My hometown is extremely progressive and I have my doubts.  Reminds me of someone else we know.



I read about her affairs with married men in Bollywood before she went to the US (apparently became persona non grata due to the affairs), so don’t have a high opinion of her.








						Priyanka Chopra Ex Boyfriends - 7 Men That Priyanka Chopra ‘Allegedly’ Dated
					

Priyanka Chopra Ex Boyfriends - 7 Men That Priyanka Chopra Allegedly Dated




					m.desimartini.com


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Did the nickname originated from here?



I believe Piers was the one that started calling her Princess Pinocchio...


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if this will be interesting, but just in case...


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting point on the win-win situation...


----------



## Hermes Zen

Late at night and I made the mistake in reading this article on Lucky's Steakhouse in Montecito California where H&M had a date night. I would go there if I'm ever in the area.  



> https://www.insider.com/luckys-stea...oved-everything-i-ate-at-luckys-steakhouse-11
> 
> *I went to the Montecito restaurant where Meghan Markle and Prince Harry had a rare public date and ate a meal fit for a celebrity*
> Anneta Konstantinides
> 18 hours ago


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Interesting point on the win-win situation...



Yes this is coming across as blackmail.  RF should ignore this PR trap.  If pushed respond with direct quotes from H and M - they do not want to further any genetic pain or triggers, and as H and M are no longer working royals it’s not appropriate to comment further….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Wow! Let's give the woman some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I’m Writing A BOOK On Meghan’s Racial Appropriation Of Black Women
> 
> 
> A lot is written about Cultural Appropriation, and it provokes so much anger, especially within black communities, yet nothing is ever written about people who steal racial identities in order to b…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeangasho.com



I would definitely buy that book and I look forward to reading it. 

I was a bit worried it would be only fuelled by frustration against a woman that could 'pass', but it seems it'll be thoughtful, very well informed, balanced and insightful through personal experience.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Lodpah said:


> Wow! Let's give the woman some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I’m Writing A BOOK On Meghan’s Racial Appropriation Of Black Women
> 
> 
> A lot is written about Cultural Appropriation, and it provokes so much anger, especially within black communities, yet nothing is ever written about people who steal racial identities in order to b…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeangasho.com



I applaud this brave black woman who’s calling out Meghan for wearing blackface when she desires.

So many biracials have embraced both their black and white sides with no discrimination or disrespect. Meghan hasn’t.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I would definitely buy that book and I look forward to reading it.
> 
> I was a bit worried it would be only fuelled by frustration against a woman that could 'pass', but it seems it'll be thoughtful, very well informed, balanced and insightful through personal experience.


I was a tad taken aback by one of the comments. The would-be author is from Zimbabwe. The comment dismisses what the author plans to write about, and said that African blacks have no idea of what American blacks face. I read it as claiming that American blacks experience greater racism and thus know more about racism than African blacks.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I was a tad taken aback by one of the comments. The would-be author is from Zimbabwe. The comment dismisses what the author plans to write about, and said that African blacks have no idea of what American blacks face. I read it as claiming that American blacks experience greater racism and thus know more about racism than African blacks.



That's a shame because the author clearly set out class/geographical differences applied to the Black experience.

I'm sure that there are cultural differences between growing-up/living in Zimbabwe, the US or UK. 

Which is why, when US wokness gets peddled out en masse without taking the clear and nuanced differences of culture/geography/history it sounds so dumb and dictatorial. As dumb and high-handed as someone who did _everything_ she could to become a princess (of whatever kind) and now constantly moans about her lot in life as one.


----------



## A1aGypsy

CeeJay said:


> Can they even "request" the christening .. given that this child was born in the US?!?!?!  I think the two of them keep on forgetting that there are laws on the books here in the US .. that you CANNOT have a foreign title!!!  Also, if I recall correctlly, the BRF will not allow an American-born to be in the line of succession .. so what do they really want???? .. HA, I think we all know .. Chuckie's $$$$$!



I thought the titles of Nobility Amendment was never passed? So, you can have a foreign title, but Americans are not required to recognize or abide by it (ie. other than being respectful - you can have no benefit or control as a result of it). And there is a prohibition against establishing an American nobility.

Can someone help me out with this? Not an American but fascinated.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

xincinsin said:


> I was a tad taken aback by one of the comments. The would-be author is from Zimbabwe. The comment dismisses what the author plans to write about, and said that African blacks have no idea of what American blacks face. I read it as claiming that American blacks experience greater racism and thus know more about racism than African blacks.



Unfortunately even Africans look down on black Americans simply because they’re “Americans” which, to people outside America … are whiny, over-dramatic, entitled.
When we as outsiders see Americans, we see privileged people. So this plight of black Americans has recently began to be more and more known to the rest of the modern world thanks to social media and social outcry of the injustices faced by black Americans in the USA.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Yes this is coming across as blackmail.  RF should ignore this PR trap.  If pushed respond with direct quotes from H and M - they do not want to further any genetic pain or triggers, and as H and M are no longer working royals it’s not appropriate to comment further….


Their PR and fueled stans keep hitting new lows. The BRF need to use the ignore button with these people.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> Their PR and fueled stans keep hitting new lows. The BRF need to use the ignore button with these people.



I had the look at GlobLett's timeline. The person is clearly unhinged and I don't believe anybody is taking them seriously. Their posts have mostly zero likes. I wouldn't bother with that account if I was the BRF.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Their PR and fueled stans keep hitting new lows. The BRF need to use the ignore button with these people.




The "spate" is welcome to her


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGosh!!!  I LOVE this woman. I would read her book!  Thanks for posting Lodpah.
> 
> There's one sentence that made me stop me in my tracks and she may have said it this way as speculation instead of factual ... don't I wish it's the later!  Here is the sentence. I've bolded the word ...
> 
> 'Because her foundation is based on lies, all her attempts have not achieved any results in changing the society, so much that now she’s resorted to naming her own *adopted* daughter after the woman she claimed runs a racist institution that made her want to end her life when she was pregnant.'


I wish she would get more attention but doubt this will be picked up by mainstream media....she's saying what we've been saying here - Meghan decided to "be black" when it became helpful for her


----------



## papertiger

breakfastatcartier said:


> Unfortunately even Africans look down on black Americans simply because they’re “Americans” which, to people outside America … are whiny, over-dramatic, entitled.
> When we as outsiders see Americans, we see privileged people. So this plight of black Americans has recently began to be more and more known to the rest of the modern world thanks to social media and social outcry of the injustices faced by black Americans in the USA.



Africa is a HUGE continent, full of different countries, cultures, tribes, allegiances and religions. Not are all so called third World/developing countries, and not all Africans are poor. Even for rich Africans of all nationalities, the US still represents a fantasy of wealth and freedom.

It's always a surprise - if not shock for many non-US people to actually go to the States and see such poverty. That's not how the US was sold to us.

This is a reason why Harry would accept going on a date with a a WOC from the Land of Disney, but not drive 5 miles up up the road from Buck Palace to some inner-city London enclave and go on dates with British WOCs who grew-up there. They both married fantasies if you ask me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> I thought the titles of Nobility Amendment was never passed? So, you can have a foreign title, but Americans are not required to recognize or abide by it (ie. other than being respectful - you can have no benefit or control as a result of it). And there is a prohibition against establishing an American nobility.
> 
> Can someone help me out with this? Not an American but fascinated.



She can be American and be inline to the throne - it's her linage that counts, not where she was born.

Obviously, there are many who may doubt her linage - this is another reason H and M want her Christened at Windsor, officially blessed by CofE Archbishop, it adds weight to her 'claim'. The Monarch as we know would also be the Head of the (Anglican) Church.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> She can be American and be inline to the throne - it's her linage that counts, not where she was born.
> 
> Obviously, there are many who may doubt her linage - this is another reason H and M want her Christened at Windsor, officially blessed by CofE Archbishop, it adds weight to her 'claim'. The Monarch as we know would also be the Head of the (Anglican) Church.


it makes no sense to me.....they want be be in and out....despicable....if you wanted to be part of the family you should have stayed and performed your duties....you wanted "freedom"...now live with it


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> She can be American and be inline to the throne - it's her linage that counts, not where she was born.
> 
> Obviously, there are many who may doubt her linage - this is another reason H and M want her Christened at Windsor, officially blessed by CofE Archbishop, it adds weight to her 'claim'. The Monarch as we know would also be the Head of the (Anglican) Church.



Got that. I was talking about the idea that it is illegal to hold a foreign title in the US (from the American perspective)


----------



## Chagall

I can’t believe she has the nerve to want her child christened at Windsor. They left England and all their duties behind. Now they come creeping back making demands. They never fail to amaze me.


----------



## sdkitty

Chagall said:


> I can’t believe she has the nerve to want her child christened at Windsor. They left England and all their duties behind. Now they come creeping back making demands. They never fail to amaze me.


as I've said before, I don't know her but she appears to be just a phony user with no feelings for anyone but herself....and H appears to be a weakling just following whatever she wants him to do....you couldn't make this sheet up


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Got that. I was talking about the idea that it is illegal to hold a foreign title in the US (from the American perspective)



Ah OK, is it illegal to hold it, or use it?

At the moment they are are operating under heavy grey area.

He's on a diplomat passport so he's afforded the privileges of his nation i.e. Prince/Duke. She on the other hand, although married to which makes her a Duchess, shouldn't be using the 'Duchess' at all since she's not a British citizen and living in the US.

As for A and L. They will presumably be duel citizens. No idea is a baby/toddler can be a diplomat but probably. 

I guess they do what they wanna do since there's no precedent.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Ah OK, is it illegal to hold it, or use it?
> 
> At the moment they are are operating under heavy grey area.
> 
> He's on a diplomat passport so he's afforded the privileges of his nation i.e. Prince/Duke. She on the other hand, although married to which makes her a Duchess, shouldn't be using the 'Duchess' at all since she's not a British citizen and living in the US.
> 
> As for A and L. They will presumably be duel citizens. No idea is a baby/toddler can be a diplomat but probably.
> 
> I guess they do what they wanna do since there's no precedent.


and no one in the US is going to enforce it...except maybe the IRS if they try to take advantage of his status on their taxes.  don't even know if that's possible


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and no one in the US is going to enforce it...except maybe the IRS if they try to take advantage of his status on their taxes.  don't even know if that's possible



What's the point of a law you can't enforce?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> What's the point of a law you can't enforce?


why would anyone bother to try to legally prevent them from using their titles? except for the RF - they should enforce it from their end IMO.  these two grifters don't deserve to use his former royal status.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> why would anyone bother to try to legally prevent them from using their titles? except for the RF - they should enforce it from their end IMO.  these two grifters don't deserve to use his former royal status.



According to wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Emoluments_Clause based on a series about the US Constitution the whole area is still gray (sic) because it's based on a negative clause (Clause 8).

They tried to introduce an amendment at the beginning of the 19C to ensure that any US citizens that accepted a title of nobility would be stripped of their US citizenship. Unfortunately it seems that there would need to be a ratification of 26 states for the amendment to be adopted (see below)

*"Titles of Nobility Amendment*
Main article: Titles of Nobility Amendment
In 1810, ********ic–********** Senator Philip Reed of Maryland[38] introduced a Constitutional amendment expanding upon this clause's ban on titles of nobility. Under the terms of this amendment any United States citizen who accepted, claimed, received or retained any title of nobility from a foreign government would be stripped of their U.S. citizenship. After being approved by the Senate on April 27, 1810, by a vote of 19–5[39] and the House of Representatives on May 1, 1810, by a vote of 87–3,[40] the amendment, titled _"Article Thirteen"_, was sent to the state legislatures for ratification. On two occasions between 1812 and 1816 it was within two states of the number needed to become a valid part of the Constitution.[41] As Congress did not set a time limit for its ratification, the amendment is still technically pending before the states. Currently, ratification by an additional 26 states would be necessary for this amendment to be adopted.[42]"


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> According to wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Emoluments_Clause based on a series about the US Constitution the whole area is still gray (sic) because it's based on a negative clause (Clause 8).
> 
> They tried to introduce an amendment at the beginning of the 19C to ensure that any US citizens that accepted a title of nobility would be stripped of their US citizenship. Unfortunately it seems that there would need to be a ratification of 26 states for the amendment to be adopted (see below)
> 
> *"Titles of Nobility Amendment*
> Main article: Titles of Nobility Amendment
> In 1810, ********ic–********** Senator Philip Reed of Maryland[38] introduced a Constitutional amendment expanding upon this clause's ban on titles of nobility. Under the terms of this amendment any United States citizen who accepted, claimed, received or retained any title of nobility from a foreign government would be stripped of their U.S. citizenship. After being approved by the Senate on April 27, 1810, by a vote of 19–5[39] and the House of Representatives on May 1, 1810, by a vote of 87–3,[40] the amendment, titled _"Article Thirteen"_, was sent to the state legislatures for ratification. On two occasions between 1812 and 1816 it was within two states of the number needed to become a valid part of the Constitution.[41] As Congress did not set a time limit for its ratification, the amendment is still technically pending before the states. Currently, ratification by an additional 26 states would be necessary for this amendment to be adopted.[42]"


ha...maybe someone should strip her of her citizenship...then she'd have another thing to complain about


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> ha...maybe someone should strip her of her citizenship...then she'd have another thing to complain about



*No, please, then she'd apply to become British *

Unfortunately because 26 states did not amend they'd probably not make it stick anyway.

It would be a rod to beat her with though as she obviously trading on her privilege (Clause 8) so you could start. a campaign to enforce the negative clause and bring about the amendments. Especially if she ever chose to run for any public office.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Africa is a HUGE continent, full of different countries, cultures, tribes, allegiances and religions. Not are all so called third World/developing countries, and not all Africans are poor. Even for rich Africans of all nationalities, the US still represents a fantasy of wealth and freedom.
> 
> It's always a surprise - if not shock for many non-US people to actually go to the States and see such poverty. That's not how the US was sold to us.
> 
> This is a reason why Harry would accept going on a date with a a WOC from the Land of Disney, but not drive 5 miles up up the road from Buck Palace to some inner-city London enclave and go on dates with British WOCs who grew-up there. They both married fantasies if you ask me.


I am imagining him asking the female blind date friend, "Is she kind? Is she nice?"  And she replies, "Oh, she is inclusive, compassionate and a humanitarian/millionaire/activist. Right up your alley."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Their PR and fueled stans keep hitting new lows. The BRF need to use the ignore button with these people.




I honestly wish the Royals weren't so freaking decent. I would strip that stupid grifter naked in front of the world, I'm sure she has not a closet but a whole vacation home full of skeletons. And I still believe she planted the Rose rumour.


----------



## Tyler_JP

I can't fathom the level of hatred on this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tyler_JP said:


> I can't fathom the level of hatred on this thread.



Welcome!

At least none of us is out there harrassing people in real life, sending death threats to journalists or throwing our family under the bus on national TV.


----------



## sdkitty

Tyler_JP said:


> I can't fathom the level of hatred on this thread.


rather than just reacting to what you perceive as hate you could respond to specific posts and tell us why we are wrong


----------



## Tyler_JP

sdkitty said:


> rather than just reacting to what you perceive as hate you could respond to specific posts and tell us why we are wrong


I mean... they aren't criminals. At least neither of them has (allegedly) slept with an underaged sex-trafficked girl... I suppose for me, I think ire at the Royal Family would be more productive if pointed elsewhere.


----------



## sgj99

sdkitty said:


> as I've said before, I don't know her but she appears to be just a phony user with no feelings for anyone but herself....and H appears to be a weakling just following whatever she wants him to do....you couldn't make this sheet up


I wonder how long it will take H to regret his marriage and his departure from the RF?


----------



## sdkitty

sgj99 said:


> I wonder how long it will take H to regret his marriage and his departure from the RF?


hard to say
we really don't know if he wanted out before he met her
Or what spell she cast on him 
I still think he's a fish out of water in So Cal though


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> According to wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Emoluments_Clause based on a series about the US Constitution the whole area is still gray (sic) because it's based on a negative clause (Clause 8).
> 
> They tried to introduce an amendment at the beginning of the 19C to ensure that any US citizens that accepted a title of nobility would be stripped of their US citizenship. Unfortunately it seems that there would need to be a ratification of 26 states for the amendment to be adopted (see below)
> 
> *"Titles of Nobility Amendment*
> Main article: Titles of Nobility Amendment
> In 1810, ********ic–********** Senator Philip Reed of Maryland[38] introduced a Constitutional amendment expanding upon this clause's ban on titles of nobility. Under the terms of this amendment any United States citizen who accepted, claimed, received or retained any title of nobility from a foreign government would be stripped of their U.S. citizenship. After being approved by the Senate on April 27, 1810, by a vote of 19–5[39] and the House of Representatives on May 1, 1810, by a vote of 87–3,[40] the amendment, titled _"Article Thirteen"_, was sent to the state legislatures for ratification. On two occasions between 1812 and 1816 it was within two states of the number needed to become a valid part of the Constitution.[41] As Congress did not set a time limit for its ratification, the amendment is still technically pending before the states. Currently, ratification by an additional 26 states would be necessary for this amendment to be adopted.[42]"



This is how I understood it. That it actually isn’t illegal. Thanks!


----------



## Chagall

Tyler_JP said:


> I mean... they aren't criminals. At least neither of them has (allegedly) slept with an underaged sex-trafficked girl... I suppose for me, I think ire at the Royal Family would be more productive if pointed elsewhere.


Well it’s not really ire at the royal family. It’s ire at a small segment of ‘used to be royals’ who treated the remaining RF with great discourtesy, and immense disrespect, who are now making demands they by no means deserve.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Tyler_JP said:


> I mean... they aren't criminals. At least neither of them has (allegedly) slept with an underaged sex-trafficked girl... I suppose for me, I think ire at the Royal Family would be more productive if pointed elsewhere.



There is a separate thread for that.  This isn't that thread.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Wow! Let's give the woman some support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I’m Writing A BOOK On Meghan’s Racial Appropriation Of Black Women
> 
> 
> A lot is written about Cultural Appropriation, and it provokes so much anger, especially within black communities, yet nothing is ever written about people who steal racial identities in order to b…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeangasho.com


LOVE this woman!  So nice to see she agrees with many of our views here, and no one can claim she's being racist!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> She cannot play poker    Watch the whole clip. I find the slow mo part amusing.



I swear, it's like she has Dissociative identity Disorder, and she can only suppress the evil personalities for so long before they make their appearances!  She truly is an awful actress.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Has anyone posted this?  It’s pretty savage to H and M
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Emmys finally recognize Meghan Markle's acting
> 
> 
> Oprah is one of the most influential women on the planet. Meghan Markle was the cunning Northwestern graduate who went from B-list cable supporting actress to marrying an underwhelming prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.washingtonexaminer.com



Savagely HONEST!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yeah, yeah, he soooo hates being a Royal.  Baller, indeed.
> Seriously, we all knew he would never give up his privileges, nope, nay, never.  What a hypocrite.
> 
> _Members, who sign up for $4,500 (£3,250) a year and then pay another $3,450 per trip, are invited to exit the plane on their own private stairs before any other passenger, then are loaded into the back of their own SUV and driven to a private terminal where they get to collect their luggage and go through passport control in splendid isolation.
> 
> The PS website describes itself as 'a private airport experience' and says: 'PS reimagines the airport experience for the seasoned and discerning traveller.'
> 
> It is run by Gavin de Becker, who has been widely reported as running Harry and Meghan's security at their home in Montecito.
> 
> He is known as the 'bodyguard to the stars' and his discreet company is known to hire former staff from the Israeli secret service Mossad._
> 
> Perhaps Harry is learning that life without plodding Met Police protection officers is much more flashy – after all, PS guards have black wraparound glasses and conspicuous earpieces.
> 
> _But then Harry is in a whole new world now. *One of my LA sources describes him as a 'baller' – slang for those with great wealth who don't mind spending it.*
> 
> She says he runs with a non-famous crowd of tech billionaires. 'He's not in with the showbiz lot as people would expect.
> 
> 'Rather than spending time with Adele or James Corden, Harry and Meghan are hanging with the LA rich set: owners of big companies, jet-set types with private planes.
> 
> 'He spends time in Malibu, Montecito and Beverly Hills.
> 
> 'Harry seems really relaxed being the star in the room. He's usually the only famous person at the parties he goes to, and it seems to suit him that he's the one everyone flocks to.'_


Don't you have to have balls to be a baller?


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> I read about her affairs with married men in Bollywood before she went to the US (apparently became persona non grata due to the affairs), so don’t have a high opinion of her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Priyanka Chopra Ex Boyfriends - 7 Men That Priyanka Chopra ‘Allegedly’ Dated
> 
> 
> Priyanka Chopra Ex Boyfriends - 7 Men That Priyanka Chopra Allegedly Dated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> m.desimartini.com


Sounds like someone else that uses men to advance themselves...
Side note....What's up with these stupid nicknames?  "His wife Twinkle..."??  Twinkle?  My parents had friends whose two daughters were named Silky and Milky.  Like WTF, silky and milky??  Why would you do that to your kids?


----------



## sdkitty

Tyler_JP said:


> I mean... they aren't criminals. At least neither of them has (allegedly) slept with an underaged sex-trafficked girl... I suppose for me, I think ire at the Royal Family would be more productive if pointed elsewhere.


the article attached to post 69,264 written by a WOC might give you some insight if you're interested


----------



## CeeJay

Canturi lover said:


> TALK OF THE TOWN: Prince Harry using exclusive private airport service


I saw that this morning .. not that I'm surprised, but yet again .. these 2 mega-hypocrites will be blathering on about the environment and "too many people" and .. blah blah blah.  The media needs to start writing THE TRUTH about these two grifters!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Evening all, 
This video is really interesting  for the logistics and politics of miss world as well as learning  a bit more on who Priyanka C is - though main Priyanka will remain the winner of RPDR Canada to me…


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> I thought the titles of Nobility Amendment was never passed? So, you can have a foreign title, but Americans are not required to recognize or abide by it (ie. other than being respectful - you can have no benefit or control as a result of it). And there is a prohibition against establishing an American nobility.
> 
> Can someone help me out with this? Not an American but fascinated.


I've posted this before, it IS part of our Constitution .. 

*Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8: * 
*No Title* of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.


----------



## Tyler_JP

sdkitty said:


> the article attached to post 69,264 written by a WOC might give you some insight if you're interested


I saw it... All of this is beyond malicious and frankly irrational to me.


----------



## sdkitty

Tyler_JP said:


> I saw it... All of this is beyond malicious and frankly irrational to me.


oh, ok
guess some of us think that people who believe H&M are victims are irrational
you're entitled to your opinion


----------



## Debbini

Tyler_JP said:


> I saw it... All of this is beyond malicious and frankly irrational to me.


You could ask an admin to start a fan age for them maybe?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Personally, I don’t think there’s anything malicious about this thread at all. Malicious against whom? A couple who are apparently so blessed and busy they will never read it? Surely that’s the nature of every celebrity gossip forum?

I think this thread is only 50% ish posts about H&M and the rest is just the regulars talking.
I personally enjoy it because I like the other posters and, honestly, I think if H&M vanished right now in a puff of smoke the thread would just carry on as a chat thread regardless. But if it’s not for you then that’s just how it is.


----------



## gracekelly

There is a difference between hatred and disappointment.  The major feeling I have had with Harry and Meghan is disappointment.  That word pretty much covers everything they have done from not being truthful, being unkind to their respective families and most of all, not using the opportunities given to both of them to really achieve something meaningful and instead becoming opportunistic people who talk a big talk, but walk none  it.  This thread started out with high hopes for them.  The tone of the thread changed simply because they changed or they  just revealed their true colors.


----------



## Chanbal

It's rather funny!


----------



## A1aGypsy

CeeJay said:


> I've posted this before, it IS part of our Constitution ..
> 
> *Article 1, Section 9, Clause 8:
> No Title* of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.



See, I read that as saying two things, first, that a person who has a particular office in America (office of profit or trust) cannot hold a foreign title or accept gifts from a foreign entity. I don’t think it would apply to a mere citizen. Secondly, I read it as saying that America cannot establish a monarchy or bestow non-elected titles. So, the President couldn’t wake up tomorrow and say, “I want to make ***** the Duke of LA”.

Anyway, interesting stuff that a war was fought over this and the 13th Amendment did not get approved. Thanks for indulging me!


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> I wonder how long it will take H to regret his marriage and his departure from the RF?



I bet there are moments where he regrets it now. Everything was easier for him before. He understood where his place was in the world. He gave it all up for her. Now it is too late and he has burned his bridges to dust. He can never have his old life back. Meghan is his future so I hope he thinks she was worth it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t hate them, I just think they’re very annoying!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t hate them, I just think they’re very annoying!


The poster may not understand the definition of _hate_  
Ya  kno, recollections and understandings may vary.


----------



## xincinsin

Speaking only for myself, my main feeling towards them is disbelief plus side helpings of disgust and anger. But then that is how I feel towards all the narcs who blighted my life. Only difference is that the ones physically in my life do me more damage - it hurts to have to restrain myself from rolling my eyes right out of my head. 

There are plenty of conmen out there, but few who have an international platform for their con job.


----------



## sgj99

bag-mania said:


> I bet there are moments where he regrets it now. Everything was easier for him before. He understood where his place was in the world. He gave it all up for her. Now it is too late and he has burned his bridges to dust. He can never have his old life back. Meghan is his future so I hope he thinks she was worth it.


I think he’ll eventually go limping home with his tail tucked under his behind.  It’s just a matter of when he jumps of the Crazy Train (of his own making).


----------



## wilding

At least this thread is honest. A parenting forum had a similar thread, but it felt more like a kissing up to the boss kind of thing almost as if they were on her payroll. If you said something deemed mean etc you were racist etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> I think he’ll eventually go limping home with his tail tucked under his behind.  It’s just a matter of when he jumps of the Crazy Train (of his own making).



I think he is too stubborn and proud to admit he made a big mistake. And he isn’t particularly smart. She has somehow convinced him that she is the only person in the world who truly loves and understands him. He thinks he needs her.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I think he is too stubborn and proud to admit he made a big mistake. And he isn’t particularly smart. She has somehow convinced him that she is the only person in the world who truly loves and understands him. He thinks he needs her.


And there are two kids. She will always have a hold on him because of them. So long as the kids represent value to her, she is unlikely to dump them or him.


----------



## Chanbal

US pressure mounting on Harry and Meghan's work ethic
					

PRESSURE in the US is mounting on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a leading royal expert, who warned Spotify and Netflix will soon be "wondering where the money has gone".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Votes have been tallied.   











						Harry and Meghan's Emmy nom slammed: 'It was a spectacle of hate'
					

OPRAH WINFREY'S groundbreaking interview with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has been nominated for an Emmy award, but according to a poll, the programme does not deserve to a prize.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Their PR and fueled stans keep hitting new lows. The BRF need to use the ignore button with these people.




It baffles me how meghans fans think William wants this:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have a feeling William would have gotten rid of Kate so fast had she disrespected his family and embarrassed him like Raptor. Not that I think Harry feels embarrassment regarding her many misbehaviours.


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> It baffles me how meghans fans think William wants this:
> View attachment 5141011
> 
> View attachment 5141012
> 
> View attachment 5141013



What Meghan represents to her fans as being admirable or desirable is mystifying. I am assuming they only pay attention to the publicity machine and disregard anything that doesn’t fit with the Hallmark Channel-type romance narrative they fell in love with.

Maybe it is because Meghan is the kind of woman her fans want to be themselves, which is scary as sh*t.


----------



## papertiger

breakfastatcartier said:


> It baffles me how meghans fans think William wants this:
> View attachment 5141011
> 
> View attachment 5141012
> 
> View attachment 5141013



I can see your point regarding 1 & 2 (1.scary as f*ck and 2. smug as f*ck)


But what's wrong with yoga (apart from she's not doing the Standing Bow impressively - so why pose for a photo doing it?)?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> What Meghan represents to her fans as being admirable or desirable is mystifying. I am assuming they only pay attention to the publicity machine and disregard anything that doesn’t fit with the Hallmark Channel-type romance narrative they fell in love with.
> 
> Maybe it is because Meghan is the kind of woman her fans want to be themselves, which is scary as sh*t.


“Scary” is right, because as a former admirer of this crazy woman, I quickly caught on to her spirit. Right before the wedding, I’ve noticed some things in her that were unsettling.

This is why I don’t believe she has “fans”, just people as rotten as she that live vicariously through her since she represents their hope that you can be ugly inside and out and still marry into power and money.

That’s my opinion.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

papertiger said:


> I can see you're point regarding 1 & 2 (1.scary as f*ck and 2. smug as f*ck)
> 
> 
> But what's wrong with yoga (apart from she's not doing the Standing Bow impressively - so why pose for a photo doing it?)?


Some people have said that she’s possibly double jointed, and can easily do those poses even without being a regular practitioner of yoga. notice how her chest is not spread… I can’t explain it perfectly but if you know anything about yoga maybe you’ll see what I’m seeing.

What’s funny to me about this photo was that someone said that Meghan was looking to market her “long luscious legs” and posted this funny photo of her with her chicken legs and I found it funny ever since.


----------



## Genie27

Yeah her yoga “poses” are fashion facsimiles of the real thing. There’s no way she does yoga regularly or correctly - she lacks the grace and posture regular yoga generates on your body.

(not currently practicing but for a while I was very serious about it - hoping to get back into it again).


----------



## marietouchet

Not getting titles they could/should have gotten … I am finally seeing a trend ..

- it was announced, at the time of marriage, that Camilla would not be Queen, she has done good work but her popularity is low 
- 6’s kids are not HRHs today due to being great grand kids of monarch, will Charles change the rule the rule ??? Stayed tuned … 
- Edward has not gotten Edinburgh even BP announced 20 yes ago that he would. 

The crown is just not giving away titles, like it used to

I think the key but is that Camilla and Edward are SENIOR royals. The list of SENIORS can change at will, since it is not cast in concrete like a decree, it is a more flexible system than titles 

The real question is what Is done to recognize the SENIORs. Will Edward get to go before 6? BP would not announce that … it would just happen


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> - Edward has not gotten Edinburgh even BP announced 20 yes ago that he would.



It's a hereditary title, so obviously it went to the eldest son, Charles. When Charles becomes king, it will merge with the crown, and at that point, he can create it again for Edward. There is simply no way to make Edward Duke of Edinburgh as long as Her Majesty is still alive.



> The real question is what Is done to recognize the SENIORs. Will Edward get to go before 6? BP would not announce that … it would just happen



#6 still outranks Edward who's #8, senior royal or not.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's a hereditary title, so obviously it went to the eldest son, Charles. When Charles becomes king, it will merge with the crown, and at that point, he can create it again for Edward. There is simply no way to make Edward Duke of Edinburgh as long as Her Majesty is still alive.
> 
> 
> 
> #6 still outranks Edward who's #8, senior royal or not.


Agree, but , I was thinking more along the lines that SENIOR ROYAL 8 might get invites not sent to 6, totally avoiding the issue of who goes first in the processions at the event
And agree, about the technicalities of Edinburgh transfer, cant be done today, but BP could explain that to the masses - as a mark of respect to 8, OK, I realize the never explain policy ...


----------



## papertiger

breakfastatcartier said:


> Some people have said that she’s possibly double jointed, and can easily do those poses even without being a regular practitioner of yoga. notice how her chest is not spread… I can’t explain it perfectly but if you know anything about yoga maybe you’ll see what I’m seeing.
> 
> What’s funny to me about this photo was that someone said that Meghan was looking to market her “long luscious legs” and posted this funny photo of her with her chicken legs and I found it funny ever since.



Ah OK.

Well, it looks harder than it is. But, the way she's doing it is neither the Dancer's pose (classic /B.K.S. Iyanga where the arm forward reaches up, the goal to hold both hands round the raised leg over the head) nor the Standing Bow (mostly Bikram, the hand goes round the other way round the ankle and the forward arm is parallel to the floor - goal is to straighten the stretched leg and stand like a bow and arrow) and therefore her pose looks strange, especially considering I'm supposing she's showing off. Either way her foot should be pointed at the back and her shoulders down. 

She's not double jointed (hyper-mobility) otherwise her knee joint would bow backwards or she'd be pulling up the knee joint to make sure it doesn't. It doesn't even look the standing leg is engaged (easier to see because she's wearing white). 

I like she does yoga, and obviously she is much slimmer here than we've seen her recently. Her legs don't look too skinny IMO because her body looks fairly in proportion, She's obviously put on weight since she's met H (pregnant or not) and she obviously is more very 'apple' shape when she puts some on. I don't think she has a bad figure at all, she just doesn't dress very well for the figure she has.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Tyler_JP said:


> I can't fathom the level of hatred on this thread.



IMO, finding someone's behaviour disgusting and deplorable is not equivalent to hatred.


----------



## Chanbal

Is he demanding this? This reads like an intimidation imo.


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> Some people have said that she’s possibly double jointed, and can easily do those poses even without being a regular practitioner of yoga. notice how her chest is not spread… I can’t explain it perfectly but if you know anything about yoga maybe you’ll see what I’m seeing.
> 
> What’s funny to me about this photo was that someone said that Meghan was looking to market her “long luscious legs” and posted this funny photo of her with her chicken legs and I found it funny ever since.


I don't know...I'd still love to have her chicken legs.  (Basically the ONLY thing about her that I'd like to have myself.  Certainly not "Price" Hazbeen.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Too bad #6's wishes really don't matter in the grand scheme of things, and he is not the boss of the Queen to demand she is present.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Ah OK.
> 
> Well, it looks harder than it is. But, the way she's doing it is neither the Dancer's pose (classic /B.K.S. Iyanga where the arm forward reaches up, the goal to hold both hands round the raised leg over the head) nor the Standing Bow (mostly Bikram, the hand goes round the other way round the ankle and the forward arm is parallel to the floor - goal is to straighten the stretched leg and stand like a bow and arrow) and therefore her pose looks strange, especially considering I'm supposing she's showing off. Either way her foot should be pointed at the back and her shoulders down.
> 
> She's not double jointed (hyper-mobility) otherwise her knee joint would bow backwards or she'd be pulling up the knee joint to make sure it doesn't. It doesn't even look the standing leg is engaged (easier to see because she's wearing white).
> 
> I like she does yoga, and obviously she is much slimmer here than we've seen her recently. Her legs don't look too skinny IMO because her body looks fairly in proportion, She's obviously put on weight since she's met H (pregnant or not) and she obviously is more very 'apple' shape when she puts some on. I don't think she has a bad figure at all, she just doesn't dress very well for the figure she has.


She looks like someone trying to sell yoga clothes, not practice yoga.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Is he demanding this? This reads like an intimidation imo.
> 
> View attachment 5141112


again, so arrogant....he thinks he can abandon his duties and still have the privileges?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Votes have been tallied.
> 
> View attachment 5140963
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Emmy nom slammed: 'It was a spectacle of hate'
> 
> 
> OPRAH WINFREY'S groundbreaking interview with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has been nominated for an Emmy award, but according to a poll, the programme does not deserve to a prize.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





 

I'd like to see Netflix/Spotify shareholders at the next meeting


----------



## gerryt

H has PCs nose without a doubt.


----------



## Jktgal

Tyler_JP said:


> I mean... they aren't criminals. At least neither of them has (allegedly) slept with an underaged sex-trafficked girl... I suppose for me, I think ire at the Royal Family would be more productive if pointed elsewhere.


And  in this age of economic hardship where people die from hunger and cold, thousands of $ shouldn't be spent on a bag and or identical me-too bracelets. Irrational and immoral.


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a feeling William would have gotten rid of Kate so fast had she disrespected his family and embarrassed him like Raptor. Not that I think Harry feels embarrassment regarding her many misbehaviours.



I dunno, most men probably would run the other way when a woman send messages on bananas. To sex workers.
[clearly I have an irrational fixation on banana-gate]


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know...I'd still love to have her chicken legs.  (Basically the ONLY thing about her that I'd like to have myself.  Certainly not "Price" Hazbeen.)


Oh gosh, I can't blame you! Who would want Hazbeen at this point? After so many apparent surgeries, the 'chicken legs', or whatever they are called, are likely within a restricted number of original parts.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Not getting titles they could/should have gotten … I am finally seeing a trend ..
> 
> - it was announced, at the time of marriage, that Camilla would not be Queen, she has done good work but her popularity is low
> - 6’s kids are not HRHs today due to being great grand kids of monarch, will Charles change the rule the rule ??? Stayed tuned …
> *- Edward has not gotten Edinburgh even BP announced 20 yes ago that he would.*
> 
> The crown is just not giving away titles, like it used to
> 
> I think the key but is that Camilla and Edward are SENIOR royals. The list of SENIORS can change at will, since it is not cast in concrete like a decree, it is a more flexible system than titles
> 
> The real question is what Is done to recognize the SENIORs. Will Edward get to go before 6? BP would not announce that … it would just happen


IIRC, it has been stated that HM cannot bestow the title during her lifetime and that it has reverted to Charles, who, after ascending to the throne, will confer it on Edward. The title is meant to honour PP, and I hope it doesn't become a comparison between E and  PP because  it would be near impossible for E to achieve even half of Prince Philip's lifetime accomplishments.

ETA: Sorry @QueenofWrapDress I just read your post.


----------



## Icyjade

Tyler_JP said:


> I can't fathom the level of hatred on this thread.



Much like how I can’t fathom why people still like her I guess. Btw I don’t think most of us hate the whiny duo.

Personally I just find them immensely irritating as they behave like bad mannered spoilt brats. Mind you, I started off being thrilled for JCMH that he finally found his special someone.


----------



## Chanbal

One more falsehood that seems to be well-established now. 










						Meghan planned Netflix project YEARS before Megxit
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has pulled the rug from under Prince Harry's claim that working with Netflix was "never part of the plan", as her new animated TV series was reportedly in the pipeline years ago.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> And there are two kids. She will always have a hold on him because of them. So long as the kids represent value to her, she is unlikely to dump them or him.


.. and *DA-DING* .. yup, she is set for 18 years (at least), the proverbial "meal Ticket" for 2 no less!  Even if they were to split up, there is no way in hell that Meghan would allow Harry to take those children!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Is he demanding this? This reads like an intimidation imo.
> 
> View attachment 5141112


Gee .. if he doesn't get "his" way, I wonder if he would drop to the floor and bang his hands and feet .. you know, a real temper tantrum?!?!  That would be a great meme!!


----------



## gracekelly

Breaking news from the Daily Mail

*BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*

*Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
*It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
*The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments



Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.


I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.


There goes an invite to hold the christening at Windsor....


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> IIRC, it has been stated that HM cannot bestow the title during her lifetime and that it has reverted to Charles, who, after ascending to the throne, will confer it on Edward. The title is meant to honour PP, and I hope it doesn't become a comparison between E and  PP because  it would be near impossible for E to achieve even half of Prince Philip's lifetime accomplishments.
> 
> ETA: Sorry @QueenofWrapDress I just read your post.


You are both absolutely correct that Edinburgh cannot be transferred today, my bad ..


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> There goes an invite to hold the christening at Windsor....


They are not even going to be embarrassed by being caught in such a bold faced lie


----------



## gracekelly

I am going to amend my prior post #69277 to add *disgust* to disappointment


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> Breaking news from the Daily Mail
> 
> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.
> 
> 
> I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.


Well at least it’s being written by a ghost writer. I doubt H can put two coherent sentences together on his own!
But it’s despicable!!!!


----------



## Chloe302225

And so it begins again


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> Well at least it’s being written by a ghost writer. I doubt H can put *two* coherent sentences together on his own!
> But it’s despicable!!!!


Hell, he can't even write one coherent sentence let alone two.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chloe302225 said:


> And so it begins again




What a whining hypocrite? Some Man.. gonna be a bunch of slinging blame about how none of his decisions are his fault... ssdd…


----------



## papertiger

Chloe302225 said:


> And so it begins again




Well, he told us he wasn't well. This proves it.

Of course he is also an Idiot 

Let's hope he gets help with more than writing the book.


----------



## marietouchet

Chloe302225 said:


> And so it begins again



Fall 2022 release date ... per Harpers ... another year of tension ...

Well, he is not feeding it all to Omid this time, OS is getting cut out of the deal


----------



## lanasyogamama

Fall 2022. Ugh, we have 15 months of buildup on this?


----------



## chicinthecity777

What real man complaints about being cut off financially by his father in their late 30s? What a joke!

I don't hate him, I pity him and am embarrassed for him!

I am sure his book will do just as well as Then Bench!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Goddamit is all this talk of chicken legs making me hungry for some southern fried stuff.  




gracekelly said:


> Breaking news from the Daily Mail
> 
> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.
> 
> 
> I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.


Finally a Christmas present which really reflects my love for my family!

I’m sure it’ll have granny filled with festive cheer  

We shall see if it shifts better numbers than their last few attempts at best sellers. One hopes this Pulitzer winning ghost is slightly more literate than Omidiocre & raptor proved to be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well. The man he has become is pretty pathetic. Also I want to know who the ghostwriter is and how much they earn.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well. *The man he has become* is pretty pathetic. Also I want to know who the ghostwriter is and how much they earn.



Oh, a seer has peered into the crystal globe and has actually seen H eventually maturing into adulthood? Pray tell us in what century this occurs because we haven't noticed it yet.  

ETA: @QueenofWrapDress My post is addressed to the ghost writer and I totally agree with your opinion.


----------



## poopsie

Chloe302225 said:


> And so it begins again


----------



## Sol Ryan

I wonder if the real play here is to have the book turned into a movie?

eta- has Archwell Productions already bought the rights to Harry’s book?


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


> And so it begins again



"_I can help show that no matter where we come from, we have more in common than we think._”

I'm trying to understand what he really means with the above statement. I wonder if he is talking about having in common the 16 (or 19) bathrooms, the ultra exclusive airport service at LAX, the several million dollar deals without having credentials or experience to do the job... He is even hiring a ghostwriter because he is likely unskillful to write a book chapter.


----------



## marietouchet

Yesterday’s story was that Netflix and Spotify are not pleased with the lack of product ie H&M need to get to work …
But, a memoir  sounds like a major time commitment
Their product to date has been a Bench, lawsuits, televised BRF bashing
it is like they got the order wrong … you are supposed to  write book, do the TV shows to sell more books …
And why let Omid write the book first ???
they have forums - Netflix and Spotify - why not use them to communicate the message …
I sense the lack of a plan , the story has been told … horse has left the stables


----------



## Chanbal

I wouldn't like to miss this one.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well. The man he has become is pretty pathetic. Also I want to know who the ghostwriter is and how much they earn.





*It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
What a nasty piece of work H has become. Between he and his wife, it's getting hard to say which is the most wretched. Those/that poor children/child what a sad life ahead.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well. The man he has become is pretty pathetic. Also I want to know who the ghostwriter is and how much they earn.



Harry's truth!  
“_I’m deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I’ve learned over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read *a firsthand account of my life that’s accurate and wholly truthful*._”
“_In *an intimate and heartfelt memoir from one of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time*, Prince Harry will share, for the very first time, the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him._”









						Prince Harry writing explosive memoir about his life in the royal family
					

Prince Harry has been secretly writing a memoir for nearly a year, and he’s sold it to Penguin Random House.




					pagesix.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Most authors don’t need to stress that their memoir will be truthful.


----------



## melissatrv

OMG, I was just coming to post about this!  I believe this guy is single-handedly trying to bring down the monarchy because none of them fell all over his idiot wife.   Well should not say single-handedly because we all know she had her hands, feet and everything else all over this.   Maybe she will even star in the musical in an attempt to revive her <cough> acting career.


----------



## Sol Ryan

marietouchet said:


> Yesterday’s story was that Netflix and Spotify are not pleased with the lack of product ie H&M need to get to work …
> But, a memoir  sounds like a major time commitment
> Their product to date has been a Bench, lawsuits, televised BRF bashing
> it is like they got the order wrong … you are supposed to  write book, do the TV shows to sell more books …
> And why let Omid write the book first ???
> they have forums - Netflix and Spotify - why not use them to communicate the message …
> I sense the lack of a plan , the story has been told … horse has left the stables



 What version of their truth will we get now? How did they get engaged this time? How will Ina feel?


----------



## Chanbal

He may need help choosing a title. The delusional memoirs of a nincompoop...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Harry's truth!
> “_I’m deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I’ve learned over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read *a firsthand account of my life that’s accurate and wholly truthful*._”
> “_In *an intimate and heartfelt memoir from one of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time*, Prince Harry will share, for the very first time, the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry writing explosive memoir about his life in the royal family
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been secretly writing a memoir for nearly a year, and he’s sold it to Penguin Random House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Shocking about the truthful part. Will he tell about his experiences with sex workers? especially the ones he allegedly beat up? Will he tell how Chels and Cress rejected him? Will he tell how many drugs he has done? And which ones? Will he tell how he really met MM? Did they use surrogates? So much truth, so little time.  My guess — his truth will be the sanitized, syrupy, saccharine HS.

BTW:  Netflix and Spotify want their money back.

ETA:  The timing of this to coincide with QE’s Platinum celebrations - now, will she take his titles away?

ETA2: if ever there was a time for Jason,


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

Sol Ryan said:


> What version of their truth will we get now? How did they get engaged this time? How will Ina feel?



Recollections may vary


----------



## kipp

lanasyogamama said:


> Most authors don’t need to stress that their memoir will be truthful.


Was thinking exactly the same thing!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



The book is supposed to be released only at the end of next year, this will give him plenty of time to make demands, including the titles.


----------



## melissatrv

I cannot get enough of that gif!   But agree, what else has to happen to the Queen to take their damn Duke and Duchess titles away.  Charles does not have the balls to do it so I am hoping she does.  




CarryOn2020 said:


> Shocking about the truthful part. Will he tell about his experiences with sex workers? especially the ones he allegedly beat up? Will he tell how Chels and Cress rejected him? Will he tell how many drugs he has done? And which ones? Will he tell how he really met MM? Did they use surrogates? So much truth, so little time.  My guess — his truth will be the sanitized, syrupy, saccharine HS.
> 
> BTW:  Netflix and Spotify want their money back.
> 
> ETA:  The timing of this to coincide with QE’s Platinum celebrations - now, will she take his titles away?
> 
> ETA2: if ever there was a time for Jason,
> View attachment 5141359


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Breaking news from the Daily Mail
> 
> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.
> 
> 
> I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.


What more can he possibly say? He's got Diana's need to divulge every little thought and emotion, I think.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Breaking news from the Daily Mail
> 
> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.
> 
> 
> I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.


Well, he can kiss his a$$ .. because I simply cannot see him ever being let back in .. other than for the funerals, and that would have to be more of the "close" family kind.  I do wish that the Queen would take those titles away, or at least .. put them in abeyance such that neither of them can utilize them.  How utterly DISGUSTING that he's done this .. and for a year??? .. WOW!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely, the Sept. glorification of Diana’s [ugly?] statue will be cancelled.  
If it is not cancelled, William will look complicit in giving H&M another event to upstage.



Chanbal said:


> The book is supposed to be released only at the end of next year, this will give him plenty of time to make demands, including the titles.



He will use the celebration and its goodwill to merch his stuff.  Shameful that he does it. Even more shameful the BRF puts up with it.


----------



## melissatrv

We have to find a way for one one of us to buy a copy and post excerpts to the group.  No way we should give them any of our money.  Of course they will say all or a "percentage" will go to Archewell


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Well, he can kiss his a$$ .. because I simply cannot see him ever being let back in .. other than for the funerals, and that would have to be more of the "close" family kind.  I do wish that the Queen would take those titles away, or at least .. put them in abeyance such that neither of them can utilize them.  How utterly DISGUSTING that he's done this .. and for a year??? .. WOW!


I wouldn't count on being allowed back for funerals.  He will be told politely not to show up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

melissatrv said:


> We have to find a way for one one of us to buy a copy and post excerpts to the group.  No way we should give them any of our money.  Of course they will say all or a "percentage" will go to Archewell



Rest assured there will be a constant drip-drip of the book’s (?) content.  Anytime something positive is written about QE, PC, and the BRF, we can count of H&M releasing a salacious paragraph. The toxic two really know how to drain the oxygen out of a room  celebration.


----------



## Chanbal

melissatrv said:


> We have to find a way for one one of us to buy a copy and post excerpts to the group.  No way we should give them any of our money.  Of course they will say all or a "percentage" will go to Archewell


No worries, DM will do that for us.


----------



## Sharont2305

At which point will he actually wake up and realise that this is his family he's trying to destroy?


----------



## CarryOn2020

*J.R. Moehringer is Harry's ghostwriter for the as-yet untitled memoir that Penguin Random House has bought the rights to *
The perfect title - *A$$hole*


----------



## gracekelly

What gets me is the hypocrisy of knowing the press release was coming out at the same time saying he wanted to mend fences.  It is pretty obvious that the rule of opposites applies to either of them for all  say and do. Not to mention that they can't be trusted.   Sensationalism sells and that is what they are going for. This book will be filled with delusional tales of his military bravery and kindness to the indigenous peoples of the world.  Not to mention the greatest love  story ever told having taken place at the Soho House bar.  If this author is all that good, he will fact check and prevent total lies from being written.  In light of what happened with the Oprah interview, he should be very careful about attaching  his name to it. 

Whatever blackmail they tried, didn't work.  This book was started before Prince Philip's passing.  I wonder if the family knew about it at the funeral.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> At which point will he actually wake up and realise that this is his family he's trying to destroy?


He knows exactly what he is doing.  They are smarter than he is.  This behavior will result in consequences to him that he can't imagine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Sensationalism sells and that is what they are going for.



Yep, and this author seems to know all about tragic childhoods:









						Memories of 'The Tender Bar'
					

Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist J.R.  Moehringer's new memoir, The Tender Bar, centers on his youth in his hometown pub in Manhasset, Long Island.




					www.npr.org
				



_Moehringer took those wistful feelings and turned them into a memoir, "The Tender Bar." It's about growing up without a father, finding a world of substitute fathers here and eventually finding himself. The story begins with J.R. as an eight-year-old in 1974 and continues through his teen and college years, his first job as a copy boy at The New York Times and his decision to leave town in 1990. Moehringer writes that as a young man the bar was the only place he felt safe.

ETA:  how long before we find out this guy is connected to OW?  _


----------



## melissatrv

They will get tons of mileage out this....Scobie Doo will talk about it forever, Oprah's book club,  a Lifetime movie with Exec Producer credit, paid appearances and more.   

I used to find Harry attractive.  But now I find him ugly, angry, and miserable to look at.


----------



## Jayne1

I'm writing this not as a prince.... signed Prince Harry.


----------



## TimeToShop

melissatrv said:


> We have to find a way for one one of us to buy a copy and post excerpts to the group.  No way we should give them any of our money.  *Of course they will say all or a "percentage" will go to Archewell*



Well charity does begin at home!


----------



## youngster

A memoir?  Really?  At age 37.  People used to write their memoirs after a long life lived, reflecting back after decades, when they were older, hopefully wiser and usually a bit more objective about events and people. 

But, hapless Harry really has nothing else to sell, just his life story told over and over again.  Now, of course, the memoir could also be a not so subtle threat to the family: give Harry what he wants whenever he asks or he'll throw them under the bus yet again with some half-truth, half-baked grievances.  This time in writing!  Of course, it is timed too, to be released after the Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June 2022 so he'll definitely be wanting that invitation and those photo ops.  He'll want to get his picture taken as often as possible to refresh his connection to the family, to show that he's still on the inside, still a much loved family member despite his appalling behavior, and so those photo ops can be used in the PR of his memoir. Of course, now the Queen and Charles and BP know about the memoir and they have plenty of time to decide how to handle him before June 2022.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the new thing is it’s ok to spew venom as long as you donate the *proceeds *to charity [after you take your share] 

*Prince Harry's memoir ghostwriter is Pulitzer-winning author behind Andre Agassi's Open and Nike co-founder's Shoe Dog - as experts say Harry was paid $20m advance 'at least' and will earn millions more - which he says he'll give to charity*

*Publishing experts say Harry will have been paid at least a $20million advance*
*He could earn far more in sales once the book is released next year *
*In a statement on his website, he said he'll be donating the proceeds of the book to charity*
*Barack and Michelle ***** were given a joint $65million advance for their memoirs by Penguin Random House in 2017  *
*J.R. Moehringer is Harry's ghostwriter for the as-yet untitled memoir that Penguin Random House has bought the rights to A$$hole, nothing else fits*
*Moehringer is a Pulitzer-winning journalist who previously worked for the LA Times  another meaningless award*
*His past celebrity biographies include Andre Agassi's Open and Shoe Dog, by Nike co-founder Phil Knight*
*It's unclear how the partnership with Harry came about - Moehringer lives in Berkley, 300 miles from Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion hint: 2 words, OW*
*Since quitting royal life, the pair have formed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify and Meghan has written children's books*
*They have also taken payment in speaking fees for firms like JP Morgan *


----------



## lanasyogamama

melissatrv said:


> We have to find a way for one one of us to buy a copy and post excerpts to the group.  No way we should give them any of our money.  Of course they will say all or a "percentage" will go to Archewell


Maybe a library borrow instead.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> A memoir?  Really?  At age 37.  People used to write their memoirs after a long life lived, reflecting back after decades, when they were older, hopefully wiser and usually a bit more objective about events and people.
> 
> But, hapless Harry really has nothing else to sell, just his life story told over and over again.  Now, of course, the memoir could also be a not so subtle threat to the family: give Harry what he wants whenever he asks or he'll throw them under the bus yet again with some half-truth, half-baked grievances.  This time in writing!  Of course, it is timed too, to be released after the Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June 2022 so he'll definitely be wanting that invitation and those photo ops.  He'll want to get his picture taken as often as possible to refresh his connection to the family, to show that he's still on the inside, still a much loved family member despite his appalling behavior, and so those photo ops can be used in the PR of his memoir. Of course, now the Queen and Charles and BP know about the memoir and they have plenty of time to decide how to handle him before June 2022.


What an appalling thought.  Yes they will hold the presses to get that picture with The Queen in there.  They will have to photoshop it because I don't think it is going to happen.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Breaking news from the Daily Mail
> 
> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.
> 
> 
> I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.


well, if this is true about the book, then it would be utterly ridiculous to think that baby could be christened at Windsor


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> They will get tons of mileage out this....Scobie Doo will talk about it forever, Oprah's book club,  a Lifetime movie with Exec Producer credit, paid appearances and more.
> 
> I used to find Harry attractive.  But now I find him ugly, angry, and miserable to look at.


yes, he used to be the fun prince - now it seems he is just an angry attention-hungry man-boy

Oh and extremely litigious


----------



## sdkitty

I was listening to a serial killer podcast in the car.  just heard part of it but they said that parents who give their children too much praise - basically teaching them that they are better than everyone else and deserve special treatment - can inadvertently create a narcissist.  Hmm....not saying that M is a narcissist for sure but if she is, maybe this is how she got there


----------



## Maggie Muggins

melissatrv said:


> I cannot get enough of that gif!   But agree, what else has to happen to the Queen to take their damn Duke and Duchess titles away.  Charles does not have the balls to do it so I am hoping she does.


It has nothing to do with balls. Charles cannot presently confer or remove titles as he is not the sovereign. HM can bestow titles that are then approved by Parliament. Similarly she cannot remove them without Parliamentary approval. 
*To UK posters*, 
Did the West Sussex MP get anywhere with the probe (Sept 9, 2020) into having the titles removed? Article


----------



## Laila619

Guess that bs about “healing rifts” with the family was a crock of crap on his part.

What a joke! He is shameless.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> What more can he possibly say? He's got Diana's need to divulge every little thought and emotion, I think.


ITA, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, although Diana was a little kinder to the RF than her son.


----------



## youngster

It will be interesting to see if Penguin makes their $20 million back.  That's a lot of money so a whole lot of copies need to be sold, more than a million at full price, for them to make that advance back plus printing costs plus the cost of the ghostwriter.  I guess they might sell a million copies.  The last sales figures I saw for MM's picture book was around 30,000 copies sold.  Of course, more people would be interested in Harry than a child's picture book but what new information is he going to reveal?  They wouldn't let them christen the baby at Windsor during a pandemic?  He wasn't in the front row for the Platinum Jubilee? His father still isn't taking his calls?  Perhaps he'll rehash his entire childhood and Megexit yet again in excruciating detail and for what reason?  Money of course.  That's top of the list. But, yes, he'll keep telling us that he's doing this to "help others".  Who are these people he's helping?  Am I forgetting about a legion of oppressed multi-millionaire princes out there in need of encouragement to escape from their horrific lives?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> It has nothing to do with balls. Charles cannot presently confer or remove titles as he is not the sovereign. HM can bestow titles that are then approved by Parliament. Similarly she cannot remove them without Parliamentary approval.
> *To UK posters*,
> Did the West Sussex MP get anywhere with the probe (Sept 9, 2020) into having the titles removed? Article



Time to get that Parliament approval, IMO.  
If not, we can expect H&M to merch the book at the Platinum celebrations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Am I forgetting about a legion of oppressed multi-millionaire princes out there in need of encouragement to escape from their horrific lives?



Only the ones with serious Mommy, Daddy and Granny issues.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTH, he really did tweet "Princess Harry".


----------



## jennlt

For a person who thinks the First Amendment is "bonkers", he certainly does enjoy exercising his freedom of speech.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry's memoir ghostwriter is Pulitzer-winning author behind Andre Agassi's Open and Nike co-founder's Shoe Dog - as experts say Harry was paid $20m advance 'at least' and will earn millions more - which he says he'll give to charity*



I'm honestly starting to wonder what these people live off, seeing they claim to either not get paid at all or donating the proceeds to charity for what little actual work they've done.


----------



## marietouchet

melissatrv said:


> We have to find a way for one one of us to buy a copy and post excerpts to the group.  No way we should give them any of our money.  Of course they will say all or a "percentage" will go to Archewell


Speaking of which .. my financial analysis of the loot from the book

$20m supposedly paid upfront, which is in the ballpark - Michelle and husband B got something like $65m for a pair of books, but I think $20m is too high , reality might have been $15m???

publisher says “profits” will go to charity  HA ! profits are what is left after you reimburse publisher for the initial outlay
6 got the max money upfront - paid to self, there will be no profits - paid to charity

and Pulitzer winning ghost writers don’t come cheap …dying to know if writer is paid by publisher or 6 ??? Any thoughts?

thinking of how we can scrounge copy for free, there is time to send someone to journalism school, then off to work for publisher …


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Partial quote from Harry, “I’m deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I’ve learned over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read a firsthand account of my life that’s *accurate* and wholly *truthful*.”
Accurate: Synonyms
Truthful: Synonyms 
Since both words have approximately the same meaning, it would seem that H is promising an exact account of his life.  However I believe that his memoirs will be as inaccurate and untruthful as the lies he told OW. I also wonder if he will he omit his drunken brawls, naked parties, racist nicknames for his army buddies and 'bad boy prince' attitude and if not, will he blame all these gaffes on the generational pain he suffered at the hands of his family.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm honestly starting to wonder what these people live off, seeing they claim to either not get paid at all or donating the proceeds to charity for what little actual work they've done.


It will likely be a percentage of the proceeds after deducting the $20M advance, ghostwriter's fees, PR fees, lawyers... Using their currency, I estimate a donation of about 50 hats and a lemon cake.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Partial quote from Harry, “I’m deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I’ve learned over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read a firsthand account of my life that’s *accurate* and wholly *truthful*.”
> Accurate: Synonyms
> Truthful: Synonyms
> Since both words have approximately the same meaning, it would seem that H is promising an exact account of his life.  However I believe that his memoirs will be as inaccurate and untruthful as the lies he told OW. I also wonder if he will he omit his drunken brawls, naked parties, racist nicknames for his army buddies and 'bad boy prince' attitude and if not, will he blame all these gaffes on the generational pain he suffered at the hands of his family.



Don't forget he's "excited for (other) people" to be reading a "firsthand account" of _his _life.

Why so _excited _anyway? - is it just a way of inserting the word excitement into the sentence? 

and "firsthand" - with a ghostwriter?


Accurate and wholly truthful?:

1. Nothing H& M have said so far then
2. Does he know what that actually means?
3. Sounds like the oath witnesses take before court
4. Partly truthful means?

Actually, I'm more excited and too busy to be living my own life than reading a fictional account of his.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> I wouldn't count on being allowed back for funerals.  He will be told politely not to show up.


One can only hope.


----------



## gelbergirl

The book will say nothing, it will rehash what we already know.
the bulk will be about his therapy and meeting Markle


----------



## CarryOn2020

They have enabled this spoiled brat far too long.
Title suggestions:  Spoiled Brat; Royal Ingrate; Selfish. 



gelbergirl said:


> the bulk will be about his therapy and *meeting Markle*



A _truthful_ account of that would be interesting. Do tell us about the SoHo yacht girl


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm honestly starting to wonder what these people live off, seeing they claim to either not get paid at all or donating the proceeds to charity for what little actual work they've done.


Damn lotus eaters



marietouchet said:


> thinking of how we can scrounge copy for free, there is time to send someone to journalism school, then off to work for publisher …


Maybe the DM will publish excerpts so we don’t have to contribute to their nest egg.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Blindsided again! 


_A spokesman for Harry last night said he told his family including the Queen about the book only “very recently”.
But a source said: “Harry scrambled to contact his family only when he knew the story was coming out  —  just moments before it became public.”
Senior royals were blindsided by the news.

Harry delivered it on the first day in 15 months that Clarence House announced Charles and Camilla were on a public engagement.
The Sun broke the news to Clarence House aides while Charles was at a reception in Lostwithiel, Cornwall, at 6.30pm.
It was clear aides had no idea the book was being written or even being announced. One said simply: “Oh gosh.”
Prince Charles was said to have been “surprised”.
Well-placed sources said Buckingham Palace officials had been unaware of the book. 
It is not known if Harry — who met brother William at their mother Diana’s statue unveiling this month — previously told The Queen about it.








						Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
					

PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They have enabled this spoiled brat far too long.
> Title suggestions:  Spoiled Brat; Royal Ingrate; Selfish.
> 
> 
> 
> A _truthful_ account of that would be interesting. Do tell us about the SoHo yacht girl


Oh yes yes yes!!!  A* WHOLLY TRUTHFUL *account would be appreciated.  I want to hear all about Markus Anderson setting them up at the Soho House Bar.  I want to hear all about the circumstances around the birth or Archie.  I want to hear how in the world Harry thought that he could reap the money and merch the title at the same time.  I want to hear all about the deals Harry and Meghan made before he even left.  I want to hear how Harry thought it was perfectly normal that his wife had ONE family member at the wedding and how it is OK to treat her family and his family so shabbily.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
					

PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




I don't think he really blindsided the family at all.  I think that the courtiers have been expecting this, especially after the Oprah interview.  This was another reason why he was iced at the PP's funeral and William barely spoke to him at the unveiling and another reason why Kate was kept away.  William did not want even small talk to  appear in any manner shape or form in relation to Harry.  He is a total pariah at this point and deserves it.  I think that if things ever change and Harry wants to go back without his wife, this book will nix that completely. Chunga Chunga is getting a hut ready for him.

I have seen Princess Anne in full military regalia and she wears a sword.  I bet she knows how to use it.


----------



## needlv

Sadly this is not unexpected.  I feel sorry for William and PC as the Family will get trashed as will the institution.

This is just Act three in their money making adventures.  What else do they have to sell but H’s story?  It will also be an attempt to get ahead of bullying accusations, and to rewrite some of Robert Laceys recent bombshells to spin it.  MM just cannot handle criticism and must always strike back.  Be sure this will have her fingerprints all over it particularly the Mexit era.

This is why the family shouldnt contact them.  No answering calls or texts. Just an occasional “hope you had a nice birthday/Christmas Day” card and that’s that.  No christening, Diana statue party or jubilee invite should be extended as it just gives them more content to sell.

The RF won’t strip titles.  Diana had a secret book, Sarah F got caught selling access to PA and took money from Epstein, PA got caught taking seedy money from dodgy oligarch and has all the Epstein scandal… Sarah also did a book, Oprah interview and weight watchers.   None of them had their titles stripped. So based on past behaviour, H and MM get to keep their titles.

The only thing H has to sell is his memoirs and his connection.  And then of course MM may do the same by having a book with HER story (officially - as finding freedom as unofficially hers).  Then they will use the book(s) as content for Netflix and/or Spotify.


----------



## Suncatcher

I’m so confused. I thought they already have a book called finding freedom? How is this new book any different and if this new book is going to be accurate and truthful then was finding freedom not?  I also thought they shared all in the Oprah interview? Finally I thought they wanted privacy?


----------



## bellecate

gelbergirl said:


> The book will say nothing, it will rehash what we already know.
> the bulk will be about his therapy and meeting Markle


But which version of meeting her, or will we get a new version.


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> I’m so confused. I thought they already have a book called finding freedom? *How is this new book any different *and if this new book is going to be accurate and truthful then was finding freedom not?  I also thought they shared all in the Oprah interview? Finally I thought they wanted privacy?



They hired a real writer this time instead of having a celebrity-worshiping hack like Scobie.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Harry's truth!
> “_I’m deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I’ve learned over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read *a firsthand account of my life that’s accurate and wholly truthful*._”


LOLOL.  Their "truth" is often easily proven to be utter lies.  I'm not sure he's learned much over the course of his life.  Despite his immense opportunities to learn and obtain wisdom, he's spent his 30+ years becoming one of the most spoiled, whiniest man child possible.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> They hired a real writer this time instead of having a celebrity-worshiping hack like Scobie.



A real writer whose own story includes a missing father, after spending much of his childhood at the bar, he struggled to identify/connect with finding his place [although he graduated from Yale ]. Also, wrote Agassi’s book - Andre only played tennis to receive his dad’s approval.  Perhaps he has a preference for the stories of ‘daddy’ issues. 

 Will there be an audience for this whingeing ? After or during a pandemic?  Methinks the world has moved onward.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Since quitting royal life, the pair have formed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify and Meghan has written children's books*




"Books"?  Now she's written "books"??  Is there a Bench sequel?  What's it called?  Splintered?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blindsided again!
> 
> 
> _A spokesman for Harry last night said he told his family including the Queen about the book only “very recently”.
> But a source said: “Harry scrambled to contact his family only when he knew the story was coming out  —  just moments before it became public.”
> Senior royals were blindsided by the news.
> 
> Harry delivered it on the first day in 15 months that Clarence House announced Charles and Camilla were on a public engagement.
> The Sun broke the news to Clarence House aides while Charles was at a reception in Lostwithiel, Cornwall, at 6.30pm.
> It was clear aides had no idea the book was being written or even being announced. One said simply: “Oh gosh.”
> Prince Charles was said to have been “surprised”.
> Well-placed sources said Buckingham Palace officials had been unaware of the book.
> It is not known if Harry — who met brother William at their mother Diana’s statue unveiling this month — previously told The Queen about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


That can't be true!!  We all know Harry Zoomed Grandmama months ago and specifically got her permission to spill every nasty detail about the BRF!


----------



## needlv

The Deux Moi sounds like MM actually wrote it… it seriously does sound like her smacking back (similar to the “queen doesn’t own the word royal” or “service is universal”).
edit click on the deux moi picture to see the whole post.


----------



## needlv

So the words from Deux Moi are:

“It doesn’t have to do with the Platinum Jubilee, *Harry and Meghan know they are invited no matter what: family is family. * But it’s not an issue for them that the book will be released after celebrations.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps the BRF will negotiate with him to renounce his titles for a guaranteed monthly sum.  The sort of arrangement Wallis’s husband got.  He, too, wrote a book, A King’s Story.  Diana wrote a book. Sarah wrote a book.  Did Margaret? 

Yawn, these privileged people really are tiresome.

Amazon’s ratings:

Best Sellers Rank: #796,790 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#1,554 in Royalty Biographies
#6,115 in Great Britain History (Books)
#31,160 in World History (Books)

I see a strong resemblance - that arse personality really sticks out in certain people.



_Edward received approximately £300,000 (equivalent to between £20.5 and £134.4 million in 2019) for both residences which was paid to him in yearly instalments. In the early days of George VI's reign the Duke telephoned daily, importuning for money and urging that the Duchess be granted the style of Royal Highness, until the harassed king ordered that the calls not be put through.









						Edward VIII - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh, we see you, Clooney.
The very well known _ghost-writer _has a movie coming out. George Clooney is director. Ben Afflect is the ‘star’. 









						Did George Clooney introduce Prince Harry to his ghostwriter?
					

Moehringer's previous books include Andre Agassi's biography, Open, and Nike co-founder Phil Knight's Shoe Dog. Page Six first reported that he was working with Harry on his book.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





The Olympics anti-sex beds are far more interesting.


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> So the words from Deux Moi are:
> 
> “It doesn’t have to do with the Platinum Jubilee, *Harry and Meghan know they are invited no matter what: family is family. * But it’s not an issue for them that the book will be released after celebrations.”



Like they would really want to show up and be iced? Booed by the crowd?  Don't think so.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> So the words from *Deux Moi* are:
> 
> “It doesn’t have to do with the Platinum Jubilee, *Harry and Meghan know they are invited no matter what: family is family. * But it’s not an issue for them that the book will be released after celebrations.”



According to the verbiage on their site, they don't necessarily tell the truth either.

"DEUXMOI.WORLD PUBLISHES RUMORS & CONJECTURE, NOT FACTS. IN ADDITION TO INFORMATION REPORTED DIRECTLY FROM SOURCES,  CERTAIN CHARACTERS, SITUATIONS, AND EVENTS PORTRAYED ON THIS WEBSITE ARE EITHER PRODUCTS OF THE AUTHORS IMAGINATION OR CONJECTURE. INFORMATION ON THIS WEBSITE MAY CONTAIN INACCURACIES. THE PROPRIETOR OF THIS WEBSITE DOES NOT MAKE WARRANTY AS TO THE RELIABILITY, VALIDITY OR CORRECTNESS OF THE CONTENT OF THE SITE’S CONTENT OR OF THE INFORMATION SENT DIRECTLY FROM SOURCES. MATERIALS PUBLISHED ON THIS SITE SENT DIRECTLY FROM OTHER SOURCES ARE NOT THE RESPSONSIBILTY OF DEUXMOI.WORLD. 
2021 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. POWERED BY DEUXMOI WORLDWIDE."


----------



## breakfastatcartier

gracekelly said:


> Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think he really blindsided the family at all.  I think that the courtiers have been expecting this, especially after the Oprah interview.  This was another reason why he was iced at the PP's funeral and William barely spoke to him at the unveiling and another reason why Kate was kept away.  William did not want even small talk to  appear in any manner shape or form in relation to Harry.  He is a total pariah at this point and deserves it.  I think that if things ever change and Harry wants to go back without his wife, this book will nix that completely. Chunga Chunga is getting a hut ready for him.
> 
> I have seen Princess Anne in full military regalia and she wears a sword.  I bet she knows how to use it.



To be honest, ever since his marriage to that alligator mouth gold digger he calls his wife, every time news comes out about certain plans he’s made, I read it in his wife’s name, not his.


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blindsided again!
> 
> 
> _A spokesman for Harry last night said he told his family including the Queen about the book only “very recently”.
> But a source said: “Harry scrambled to contact his family only when he knew the story was coming out  —  just moments before it became public.”
> Senior royals were blindsided by the news.
> 
> Harry delivered it on the first day in 15 months that Clarence House announced Charles and Camilla were on a public engagement.
> The Sun broke the news to Clarence House aides while Charles was at a reception in Lostwithiel, Cornwall, at 6.30pm.
> It was clear aides had no idea the book was being written or even being announced. One said simply: “Oh gosh.”
> Prince Charles was said to have been “surprised”.
> Well-placed sources said Buckingham Palace officials had been unaware of the book.
> It is not known if Harry — who met brother William at their mother Diana’s statue unveiling this month — previously told The Queen about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Wow what a nasty little man.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> The Deux Moi sounds like MM actually wrote it… it seriously does sound like her smacking back (similar to the “queen doesn’t own the word royal” or “service is universal”).
> edit click on the deux moi picture to see the whole post.




Poor meggy wants the racists to christen her “colored” baby girl ? Or will she blame it all on Harry after the divorce?


----------



## Genie27

I am a strong proponent of establishing firm boundaries with family if they are toxic to you. But there’s no need to have an extended whingefest about it in public. That’s what therapy is for. 

I would have had a great deal more respect for these two if their OW interview focused even one second on the positive actions they were taking -charity, philanthropy etc. But oh no….all they yammered on about was **** that happened (or didn’t) three years ago.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps the BRF will negotiate with him to renounce his titles for a guaranteed monthly sum.  The sort of arrangement Wallis’s husband got.  He, too, wrote a book, A King’s Story.  Diana wrote a book. Sarah wrote a book.  *Did Margaret*?


Princess Margaret: A Life of Contrasts, an authorized biography by Christopher Warwick.
When they become redundant, they write or authorize their biography.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to the verbiage on their site, they don't necessarily tell the truth either.
> 
> "DEUXMOI.WORLD PUBLISHES RUMORS & CONJECTURE, NOT FACTS. IN ADDITION TO INFORMATION REPORTED DIRECTLY FROM SOURCES,  CERTAIN CHARACTERS, SITUATIONS, AND EVENTS PORTRAYED ON THIS WEBSITE ARE EITHER PRODUCTS OF THE AUTHORS IMAGINATION OR CONJECTURE. INFORMATION ON THIS WEBSITE MAY CONTAIN INACCURACIES. THE PROPRIETOR OF THIS WEBSITE DOES NOT MAKE WARRANTY AS TO THE RELIABILITY, VALIDITY OR CORRECTNESS OF THE CONTENT OF THE SITE’S CONTENT OR OF THE INFORMATION SENT DIRECTLY FROM SOURCES. MATERIALS PUBLISHED ON THIS SITE SENT DIRECTLY FROM OTHER SOURCES ARE NOT THE RESPSONSIBILTY OF DEUXMOI.WORLD.
> 2021 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. POWERED BY DEUXMOI WORLDWIDE."


So they are as "wholly truthful" as Harry?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Princess Margaret: A Life of Contrasts, an authorized biography by Christopher Warwick.
> When they become redundant, they write or authorize their biography.


Yep!  It's what thirsty people do when the crowd is no longer paying attention.


----------



## gracekelly

Genie27 said:


> Wow what a nasty little man.


And those elevator shoes are making him any taller.


----------



## justwatchin

Have there been any photos of Baby Lilibet or any of her appendages?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5141647


This NYT cover is amazing!


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> Have there been any photos of Baby Lilibet or any of her appendages?



No, maybe they don’t take possession of this baby until after she is weaned.


----------



## Chanbal

Dan Wootton makes very good points!  'his truly awful wife'


----------



## bag-mania

Nobody likes a backstabber. Harry and Meghan are going to have trouble finding famous people who want to be associated with them. When they happily throw their own families under the bus, imagine how loyal they would be to celebrity acquaintances.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Nobody likes a backstabber. Harry and Meghan are going to have trouble finding famous people who want to be associated with them. *When they happily throw their own families under the bus, *imagine how loyal they would be to celebrity acquaintances.


H needs money, lots of money. PR, lawyers, security, surgeries...cost a lot of money. This is in supermarkets this week:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, we see you, Clooney.
> The very well known _ghost-writer _has a movie coming out. George Clooney is director. Ben Afflect is the ‘star’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did George Clooney introduce Prince Harry to his ghostwriter?
> 
> 
> Moehringer's previous books include Andre Agassi's biography, Open, and Nike co-founder Phil Knight's Shoe Dog. Page Six first reported that he was working with Harry on his book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Olympics anti-sex beds are far more interesting.
> 
> View attachment 5141651


Well it’s lucky no one ever has a restless night before a big event or we could see million dollar limbs being dumped roughly on the floor right before their competition  
(I’m sure there will be a work around for the stars)


----------



## Chanbal

Piers's reaction to the news:











						Piers Morgan fumes as Prince Harry announces ‘intimate’ memoir
					

PIERS MORGAN has been left fuming after news was announced about Prince Harry landing a memoir book deal.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Canturi lover

What bombshells will Prince Harry reveal in his tell-all book?


https://mol.im/a/9803789


----------



## gracekelly

Canturi lover said:


> What bombshells will Prince Harry reveal in his tell-all book?
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9803789


The Queen  uses three lumps in her tea?


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Don't forget he's "excited for (other) people" to be reading a "firsthand account" of _his _life.
> 
> Why so _excited _anyway? - is it just a way of inserting the word excitement into the sentence?
> 
> and "firsthand" - with a ghostwriter?
> 
> 
> Accurate and wholly truthful?:
> 
> 1. Nothing H& M have said so far then
> 2. Does he know what that actually means?
> 3. Sounds like the oath witnesses take before court
> 4. Partly truthful means?
> 
> Actually, I'm more excited and too busy to be living my own life than reading a fictional account of his.


Us Brits don't use the word excited like that. We would say "I'm looking forward to..."
Meghan again.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think he really blindsided the family at all.  I think that the courtiers have been expecting this, especially after the Oprah interview.  This was another reason why he was iced at the PP's funeral and William barely spoke to him at the unveiling and another reason why Kate was kept away.  William did not want even small talk to  appear in any manner shape or form in relation to Harry.  He is a total pariah at this point and deserves it.  I think that if things ever change and Harry wants to go back without his wife, this book will nix that completely. Chunga Chunga is getting a hut ready for him.
> 
> I have seen Princess Anne in full military regalia and she wears a sword.  I bet she knows how to use it.


ITA.  After their "unauthorized" book telling their story, their rushed departure without any forewarning, their constant shots against the BRF with the interviews, the genetic pain, lack of sympathy for suicidal ideations, the horror of a "colored" baby, etc., etc., etc., it was only a matter of time.  They will milk every.single.angle of the Prince title while all the while claiming titles aren't important, how they're just like the rest of us, etc.  I'm sure the BRF anticipated this nonsense as well as whatever more they can sling.  The BRF is probably just sadly shocked Harry is proving their fears correct.


----------



## Icyjade

Canturi lover said:


> What bombshells will Prince Harry reveal in his tell-all book?
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9803789



Wonder who will read a book that’s all about whining. Is anyone taking one for the team here? Am definitely not reading it.

Then again, pretty sure the contents will be drip fed to the media over the next few months and the news will summarize the most salacious bits.


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> Have there been any photos of Baby Lilibet or any of her appendages?



Still haggling over the price probably


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Wonder who will read a book that’s all about whining. Is anyone taking one for the team here? Am definitely not reading it.
> 
> Then again, pretty sure the contents will be drip fed to the media over the next few months and the news will summarize the most salacious bits.



Can't


----------



## papertiger

...and of course it will come out for the Plat Jubilee  

However, I think people are already completely bored with both H&M and love QEII more and more with every twist of the knife and whiney tantrum   .

Can you imagine the boos/frost if they come back for the celebrations? These 2 are better than a pantomime at Christmas. Look out they're behind you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the BRF knew all about this book and the others. I still believe they have very sophisticated intel on the terrible two. H&M may have been surprised by the announcement, but not the BRF. Penguin [appropriate Hazz would choose them] and RH want to keep in the good graces of the RF, so they will make sure the proper people are informed. Clearly a case of the BRF letting them sink their own ship. Haven’t seen any positive comments on Penguin Books social media. Hazzie is definitely not popular.




__





						Penguin Books UK | Official Website
					

Explore the world of Penguin Books. Lose yourself in a book, find your next read and hear from the authors you love.




					www.penguin.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I know Harry is the BRF's Achilles heel and they don't want to destroy him. But at some point the empire needs to strike back, and I feel this is the time to amputate the festering limb, as painful as it may be. Bring on the leaks of Raptor's many skeletons, and if she takes Harry with her, be it.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They'd never...they probably calculate that at that point the BRF will pick up the tab instead of letting them publicly get evicted.


They will downsize if push comes to shove, and PR it as (fake) concern for the environment or some other BS. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> *Since quitting royal life, the pair have formed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify and Meghan has written children's books*


That plural is so telling of how truthful this book will be. Maybe it's a sly reference to Pearl - some articles claim that Pearl is based on a book that Methane wrote when she was in grade school. 



gelbergirl said:


> The book will say nothing, it will rehash what we already know.
> the bulk will be about his therapy and meeting Markle


Act 1 will be about Mummy. Act 2 his tortured life of neglect and abuse. Act 3 will be the transformation when he meets Chicken Legs. Act 4 will focus on poor bullied suicidal Lady Macbeth. Act 5 will be his rebirth as The Wimp Who Has to Start Paying Bills. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Blindsided again!
> 
> 
> _A spokesman for Harry last night said he told his family including the Queen about the book only “very recently”.
> But a source said: “Harry scrambled to contact his family only when he knew the story was coming out  —  just moments before it became public.”
> _


_
Riiiight, he had no control over when his own PR "leaked" the news. If you believe that, I have a bridge you might want to buy. 



gracekelly said:



			Oh yes yes yes!!!  A* WHOLLY TRUTHFUL *account would be appreciated.  I want to hear all about Markus Anderson setting them up at the Soho House Bar.  I want to hear all about the circumstances around the birth or Archie.  I want to hear how in the world Harry thought that he could reap the money and merch the title at the same time.  I want to hear all about the deals Harry and Meghan made before he even left.  I want to hear how Harry thought it was perfectly normal that his wife had ONE family member at the wedding and how it is OK to treat her family and his family so shabbily.
		
Click to expand...

Oh Yes!!!
I want to know all about how they got Instagram to seize the Sussex Royal account for them, why he thought he was entitled to a free banquet plus security for life. 

And when Methane takes her turn to write her memoirs, (after all, she is older than him and has had more years to grow wise), let's see if recollections will vary because she will definitely reword, refine and recreate whatever he said that she thinks could be said more in their favour 



Genie27 said:



			I am a strong proponent of establishing firm boundaries with family if they are toxic to you. But there’s no need to have an extended whingefest about it in public. That’s what therapy is for.

I would have had a great deal more respect for these two if their OW interview focused even one second on the positive actions they were taking -charity, philanthropy etc. But oh no….all they yammered on about was **** that happened (or didn’t) three years ago.
		
Click to expand...

Lots of people cut ties with toxic family members, and that's fine. But they don't after that try to merch the relationship or carry on whining about it for years. If you want out, you should stay out. This actually proves that the terrible twosome is still trying to mutate their out into a half-in/half-out._


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know Harry is the BRF's Achilles heel and they don't want to destroy him. But at some point the empire needs to strike back, and I feel this is the time to amputate the festering limb, as painful as it may be. Bring on the leaks of Raptor's many skeletons, and if she takes Harry with her, be it.


This.  It’s time…. Release the hounds…


----------



## needlv

I wonder if this is why H rushed the book press release?









						Changes to the Regency Act imminent as Prince Harry becomes unable to fulfil his constitutional duties
					

Changes to the Regency Act are likely to be imminent following the Duke of Sussex’s decision to write an ‘explosive’ memoir about The Royal Family. The provisions of the Regency Act have long neede…




					royalcentral.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

gracekelly said:


> The Queen  uses three lumps in her tea?


More likely "The Queen taught me to put three lumps in my tea, which my mom thought was so cute.  But my horrible dad questioned if it was good for me to have so much sugar.  He's horrible and was always out to get me!  And William just sat there smugly only putting one lump in his tea. He'll do anything to go against me"


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> I wonder if this is why H rushed the book press release?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act imminent as Prince Harry becomes unable to fulfil his constitutional duties
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act are likely to be imminent following the Duke of Sussex’s decision to write an ‘explosive’ memoir about The Royal Family. The provisions of the Regency Act have long neede…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalcentral.co.uk



If that is true, then "One cannot help but wonder whether Harry’s announcement is an attempt to supersede an imminent statement from Buckingham Palace." can only be a good thing.


----------



## papertiger

LibbyRuth said:


> More likely "The Queen taught me to put three lumps in my tea, which my mom thought was so cute.  But my horrible dad questioned if it was good for me to have so much sugar.  He's horrible and was always out to get me!  And William just sat there smugly only putting one lump in his tea. He'll do anything to go against me"



O.M.G this is totally how I can see it reading too 

After all, this is what he constantly sounds like now


----------



## doni

So he claimed he wanted privacy and to be free of the scrutiny of the press and the judgments of social media etc etc and the two main milestones of his life since quiting working royalty are going to be an interview with Ophra and a tell-all memoir?
Yes, those are exactly the right moves for someone seeking privacy.

What I will be curious about is how he will explain his decision-making process when picking up a SS official uniform to attend a party (where do you even _find_ such a thing?! Tell us the insights Harry), and his constant use of racial slurs. Or perhaps the question is, whom will he blame for it all?


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> This.  It’s time…. Release the hounds…



All I can think of is … Game of Thrones … Sansa and her abusive husband whose name I have forgotten … she loosed the hounds on him


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> I wonder if this is why H rushed the book press release?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act imminent as Prince Harry becomes unable to fulfil his constitutional duties
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act are likely to be imminent following the Duke of Sussex’s decision to write an ‘explosive’ memoir about The Royal Family. The provisions of the Regency Act have long neede…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalcentral.co.uk


Yesterday, DM hinted that a reporter got hold of the book story, and 6 rushed to tell Granny before it hit the press , so book reveal was unintentional ?
the Regency Act can/should be updated and 6 will smart, although it would not be a vengeful thing to do, the Act only goes into effect in contingencies, so probably will never be used, yet, it should get an update


----------



## marietouchet

More stories yesterday , 6 is hurting for money … too many expenses … 

Staff of millions of people - yes, I buy that , and two nannies I bet 

House - mortgage is nothing, but if they want to put in $2m of reno - see Frogmore Cottage - well that is a big bite and the house is not brand new 

Security - some say $3-5m per year , I think that is a bit high, and an area where they could costs … except that security seems to be a sore spot for 6, he needs only because of the family he was born into … hmmm 

Honestly, the Bench is not going to pay for those recurring costs and the Netflix and Spotify advances were spent last year 

The Netflix series about Pearl is not going to pay that much , heck wife of 6 is one of like half a dozen producers


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I wonder if this is why H rushed the book press release?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act imminent as Prince Harry becomes unable to fulfil his constitutional duties
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act are likely to be imminent following the Duke of Sussex’s decision to write an ‘explosive’ memoir about The Royal Family. The provisions of the Regency Act have long neede…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalcentral.co.uk


"_As such, we must expect an amendment to the 1937 Act to safeguard the monarchy in such an event, as unlikely as it may be. There are indications that Harry is well aware of what is coming.

In the promo for his new book, the Duke said: “I’m writing this not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become.”

One cannot help but wonder whether Harry’s announcement is an attempt to supersede an imminent statement from Buckingham Palace_."

Yes, it all makes sense now. Looking forward to it!


----------



## chicinthecity777

If his book doesn't cover his own racist incidents then it's not accurate nor truthful!


----------



## Chanbal

The Mirror is putting together the potential book chapters, so far they anticipate 8 bombshells. The release of this book and the videos that they did while in the UK will help them to cash in on the monarchy for a couple of more years. The BRF should be done with them after that. 









						8 bombshells Harry could drop in new book - racism, rifts and Lilibet's name
					

Prince Harry has said that his new book will be an accurate and wholly truthful first-hand account of his life - so what unanswered questions might be address in it?




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## melissatrv

It’s time…. Release the hounds…



Oh we are waaay past hounds....


----------



## melissatrv

I am sure there will be "exclusive never before seen" photos of Harry with Diana.  He has to milk the poor me orphan angle.  Honestly I am surprised he has not gone so far as to accuse the BRF staff of a murder conspiracy . Nothing this moron does surprises me anymore.  

I look forward to the day Meghan leaves his ass once she has squeezed him for all he is worth.  He won't even see it coming


----------



## lanasyogamama

melissatrv said:


> I am sure there will be "exclusive never before seen" photos of Harry with Diana.  He has to milk the poor me orphan angle.  Honestly I am surprised he has not gone so far as to accuse the BRF staff of a murder conspiracy . Nothing this moron does surprises me anymore.
> 
> I look forward to the day Meghan leaves his ass once she has squeezed him for all he is worth.  He won't even see it coming


That’s what I was thinking, that there will be a lot of information about his memory of being told about her death, the days that followed, the impact on his childhood and teenage years etc.

I also think he will share details about his own drug and alcohol use so that he can claim that he spilled his own dirty laundry as well as BRFs.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a must read!   

*PIERS MORGAN: Harry's turned the Queen's motto of 'never complain, never explain' into 'always complain, always explain, never stop whining'. Now she must turn Prince Poison and Princess Pinocchio into plain Mr and Mrs Grifter*

_The statement from his publishers Random House was comical in its delusion. 'In an intimate and heartfelt memoir from one of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time…' Sorry, WHAT? When I think of the most fascinating and influential global figures of my time, I think of people like Nelson Mandela, Muhammad Ali, Steve Jobs, Marie Curie, Mother Teresa, Pablo Picasso, Malala Yousafzai and the Beatles. I don't think of a spoiled, self-obsessed hypocritical royal brat born into staggering privilege with no discernible current skill other than an ability to ruthlessly exploit his royal status for money_









						PIERS MORGAN: Harry's tell-all memoirs are a betrayal too far
					

The Queen Mother had a strict maxim: 'Never complain, never explain, and rarely be heard speaking in public.' But the Queen's grandson Prince Harry sadly didn't get the discretion memo.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

Gone are the good old days when people only write memoirs when they have lived most of their lives and achieved something! He's only 37 and has been supported financially by his family until last year. What has he achieved that is worth writing a book for and it hasn't been said in 45 other versions of books and interviews and press releases?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

OMG I honestly don't know how he can even show his face in the UK ever again at this point. He really, truly believes his own BS, doesn't he?


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Wonder who will read a book that’s all about whining. *Is anyone taking one for the team here? *Am definitely not reading it.
> 
> Then again, pretty sure the contents will be drip fed to the media over the next few months and the news will summarize the most salacious bits.


I love you all, but I'm sorry, I just can't


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> All I can think of is … Game of Thrones … Sansa and her abusive husband whose name I have forgotten … she loosed the hounds on him


Me too!!! I was actually trying to figure out how to photoshop Meg's smug face onto Ramsey's just before the hounds get him!


----------



## bellecate

On a ferry in British Columbia, Canada. So nice to see a photo of the Queen at the bow of the boat.
I so don’t understand the spoiled prince and his wife’s animosity towards the Royal family.


----------



## poopsie

LibbyRuth said:


> More likely "The Queen taught me to put three lumps in my tea, which my mom thought was so cute.  But my horrible dad questioned if it was good for me to have so much sugar.  He's horrible and was always out to get me!  And William just sat there smugly only putting one lump in his tea. He'll do anything to go against me"



This. Exactly.
I think Harry has always been petulant, angry and resentful about his place in the scheme of things.  And that hits the dynamic of him and William to a T.
Since he would have never been able to break away on his own (and none of his previous girlfriends showed any interest in helping him do so) we had to wait for Raptor's appearance to see the REAL Harry.


----------



## Icyjade

Wonder what will be said about this:





__





						Prince Harry said ‘I’ll be King’ after Prince William said he didn’t want throne | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
					

PRINCE HARRY 'often' said he would be happy to be King after Prince William insisted he did not want the throne, Princess Diana told Jeremy Paxman.




					www.express.co.uk
				





“_We talked about our children and she said William often told her that he didn’t really want to be King, and then Harry would say, ‘If you don’t want the job I’ll have it’.”

William seems to have accepted his future role now, although he told BBC News in 2019 that he is not eager to be King, because it means his grandmother and father will have died.

He said: “I don’t lie awake waiting to be King, because sadly that means my family will have moved on and I don’t want that.”

Harry has also changed his tune since they were children, saying in a 2017 interview with Newsweek: “Is there any one of the Royal Family who wants to be King or Queen?

“I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time.”_

————
Will he admit that he wanted to be king or rewrite history and say that he never wanted to be king?


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> This. Exactly.
> I think Harry has always been petulant, angry and resentful about his place in the scheme of things.  And that hits the dynamic of him and William to a T.
> Since he would have never been able to break away on his own (and none of his previous girlfriends showed any interest in helping him do so) we had to wait for Raptor's appearance to see the REAL Harry.



I also wonder at the H-only show.

PR probably telling M her popularity is way down atm and too many are blaming her completely,  so H has to make it clear he was suffering soooooooooooooooooooo much and it was his idea to leave the BRF.

That, and probably, the BRF are on the verge of shutting him off completely.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a reminder of Hazzie past - guessing he’ll touch on this stuff in his tome:


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a reminder of Hazzie past - guessing he’ll touch on this stuff in his tome:




says, he doesn't like England, doesn't trust people from the UK and is triggered by London. 

And yet, he blames others for making him (and M) leave. He could have lived elsewhere years and years ago. 

I think he just likes whining 

And boy, for someone who hates the press, he can't seem to stop feeding them stories - almost every single day.


----------



## lanasyogamama

What a brat.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Oh yes yes yes!!!  A* WHOLLY TRUTHFUL *account would be appreciated.  I want to hear all about Markus Anderson setting them up at the Soho House Bar.  I want to hear all about the circumstances around the birth or Archie.  I want to hear how in the world Harry thought that he could reap the money and merch the title at the same time.  I want to hear all about the deals Harry and Meghan made before he even left.  I want to hear how Harry thought it was perfectly normal that his wife had ONE family member at the wedding and how it is OK to treat her family and his family so shabbily.


yes, yes, yes to all of that


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nobody likes a backstabber. Harry and Meghan are going to have trouble finding famous people who want to be associated with them. When they happily throw their own families under the bus, imagine how loyal they would be to celebrity acquaintances.


we can hope


----------



## xincinsin

The publisher is describing Hazard as "fascinating and influential"?
Oh yeah, he's fascinating. Like watching a train wreck in slow mo.
And influential indeed, because many people will hold him up as an example of how NOT TO BE.


----------



## sdkitty

melissatrv said:


> I am sure there will be "exclusive never before seen" photos of Harry with Diana.  He has to milk the poor me orphan angle.  Honestly I am surprised he has not gone so far as to accuse the BRF staff of a murder conspiracy . Nothing this moron does surprises me anymore.
> 
> I look forward to the day Meghan leaves his ass once she has squeezed him for all he is worth.  He won't even see it coming


seems he is under her control and also has lost his mind.  didn't seem that smart to begin with now he has totally lost it.  William and Charles must be wishing they could speak their minds now.  they should cut him off totally.  that's what he's asking for.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> seems he is under her control and also has lost his mind.  didn't seem that smart to begin with now he has totally lost it.  William and Charles must be wishing they could speak their minds now.  they should cut him off totally.  that's what he's asking for.



He always been this way - always complaining about the annoying press while he revels in being the ‘rebellious’ bad-boy. Maybe Diana enjoyed, perhaps encouraged, the sibling rivalry, we now know how unhealthy that can be. There does, though, seem to be something about certain members of _this_ royal family that thrives on complaining.  Monaco has its share of complaints. Any others?









						How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his 1951 autobiography
					

Described at the time as a work that was 'unique in the history of literature', the Edward's autobiography was published just months before his brother King George VI's death.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Responding to comments from @LibbyRuth @poopsie and the article and comments  @Icyjade ITA. I've always seen H as the young boy, who arrives late to a party, where they have already crowned a prince (W) and most of the presents have been allotted. He whines that he wanted to be the prince and that he wanted W's presents too. There is no reasoning with him as goes into a tantrum, grabbing at the prince's crown and tearing away at the presents. He yells and screams, "I want to be him (W) and I want to be king or I'll destroy everything in sight."

PS. I could see H seething at and after his mother's funeral and told hubby that H would try to destroy the Queen for "killing his mother" and every stunt he later pulled was an act of defiance against HM.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> He always been this way - always complaining about the annoying press while he revels in being the ‘rebellious’ bad-boy. Maybe Diana enjoyed, perhaps encouraged, the sibling rivalry, we now know how unhealthy that can be. There does, though, seem to be something about certain members of _this_ royal family that thrives on complaining.  Monaco has its share of complaints. Any others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his 1951 autobiography
> 
> 
> Described at the time as a work that was 'unique in the history of literature', the Edward's autobiography was published just months before his brother King George VI's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Diana wasn't a perfect person but I doubt she encouraged sibling rivalry.  I think she loved her boys.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> He always been this way - always complaining about the annoying press while he revels in being the ‘rebellious’ bad-boy. Maybe Diana enjoyed, perhaps encouraged, the sibling rivalry, we now know how unhealthy that can be. There does, though, seem to be something about certain members of _this_ royal family that thrives on complaining.  Monaco has its share of complaints. Any others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his 1951 autobiography
> 
> 
> Described at the time as a work that was 'unique in the history of literature', the Edward's autobiography was published just months before his brother King George VI's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Thanks for posting this.  Yesterday, I read about the Duke of Windsor's memoir as it came up in an article about Harry's upcoming book.   I had never heard of this memoir but, apparently, it was a media sensation in 1951.  The Duke of Windsor's "explosive" book is now probably only useful to a few historians and reporters who study him and his era and his abdication but not exactly widely discussed or remembered today.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> Diana wasn't a perfect person but I doubt she encouraged sibling rivalry.  I think she loved her boys.


I'm sure she loved her sons, but I have difficulty accepting the fact that she used William, who was still a boy, as her confidant during the worst period in her life.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm sure she loved her sons, but I have difficulty accepting the fact that she used William, who was still a boy, as her confidant during the worst period in her life.


ITA!  And God only knows if and how much she trashed PC to their sons.  Regardless of how awful a spouse is, I firmly believe that one parent should not bash the other parent to their mutual children.  Most children will see their parents for what they really are, as they themselves grow up and mature.  Haz has never grown up or matured, so he probably believes whatever awful things Diana told him about PC, the Queen and the BRF.


----------



## poopsie

Agreeing with the above posts re Diana.
IMO she was desperate for unconditional love and relied heavily on her son's for it. Not the healthiest dynamic even with kittens and puppies


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Diana wasn't a perfect person but I doubt she encouraged sibling rivalry.  I think she loved her boys.



Oh, I’m not questioning that. She was a very young mother who was tasked with a huge responsibility. What she may have thought was cute or endearing behavior from Hazz, really was someone struggling with many issues. Fighting at school is a good indicator of someone with serious issues. There are many examples of his bad behavior when he was young. This one from 2019 is about Eton:









						Royal rage: How Harry was on crutches after fight over girl
					

PRINCE HARRY may now be best-known for being one half of the Sussex double act with his wife Meghan Markle, but years before he met her the Duke found himself in a fight over a girl he fancied, according to an unearthed biography.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> He always been this way - always complaining about the annoying press while he revels in being the ‘rebellious’ bad-boy. Maybe Diana enjoyed, perhaps encouraged, the sibling rivalry, we now know how unhealthy that can be. There does, though, seem to be something about certain members of _this_ royal family that thrives on complaining.  Monaco has its share of complaints. Any others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his 1951 autobiography
> 
> 
> Described at the time as a work that was 'unique in the history of literature', the Edward's autobiography was published just months before his brother King George VI's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Complaining royals … i can’t think of any to add … 
to me, several royal houses fall more into the “misbehave til you get caught, then go radio silent category”, not complainers at all


----------



## marietouchet

Did D create or worsen the W-H silbling rivalry ? 
Maybe ... she was quite aware of what it meant to be the heir vs the spare.  She made a point in her divorce of saying her assets ie anything from divorce would go to Harry since W would get Cornwall. 

Paradoxically, H might have had a bigger nest egg than W - H got the money from D, but W has not yet gotten Cornwall..


----------



## byzina

gracekelly said:


> Charles 'surprised' by Harry's tell-all memoir as Palace had no idea about book
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles was “surprised” by news Prince Harry was writing an explosive tell-all memoir. Harry yesterday announced an unprecedented publishing deal for the memoir — timed for relea…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Haven't they told-ALL in the interview?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> ITA!  And God only knows if and how much she trashed PC to their sons.  Regardless of how awful a spouse is, I firmly believe that one parent should not bash the other parent to their mutual children.  Most children will see their parents for what they really are, as they themselves grow up and mature.  Haz has never grown up or matured, so he probably believes whatever awful things Diana told him about PC, the Queen and the BRF.


According to Lady C, Diana was very controlling and domineering, always trying to outshine Charles during their marriage, something I firmly believe and leads me to think that she had narcissistic tendencies (NPD can occur in combination with Bulimia). Lady C also indicated that Charles took the marital problems seriously unlike the BS Diana recounted during her interviews and that he didn't reconnect with Camilla until late in the marriage. I wonder if Diana thought that divorcing Charles was a demotion, (an unacceptable insult for a narcissist) and therefore badmouthed Charles to the boys as payback. In the end, H chose a person like his mother, controlling and domineering.

ET correct NPD


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a reminder of Hazzie past - guessing he’ll touch on this stuff in his tome:



He sounds like a very troubled person. He may be a 'nasty little man' as described by someone here, but the people that are encouraging him against his family are not better than him.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to Lady C, Diana was very controlling and domineering, always trying to outshine Charles during their marriage, something I firmly believe and leads me to think that she had narcissistic tendencies (NDP can occur in combination with Bulimia). Lady C also indicated that Charles took the marital problems seriously unlike the BS Diana recounted during her interviews and that he didn't reconnect with Camilla until late in the marriage. I wonder if Diana thought that divorcing Charles was a demotion, (an unacceptable insult for a narcissist) and therefore badmouthed Charles to the boys as payback. In the end, H chose a person like his mother, controlling and domineering.


Agree, Charles did not reconnect with Camilla until later in the marriage.  This point is often overlooked. 
They were close friends early in the marriage, when Camilla knew Charles better than Diana. Diana always knew that C & C had been an item.
In his TV interview, C said he did not reconnect until the marriage was irreparably broken, ie later on.

Charles was with Diana during her bulimia. By the time, she overcame that, both she and Charles had moved on.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Don't forget he's "excited for (other) people" to be reading a "firsthand account" of _his _life.


I keep saying this -- he's so much like his mother who was so exited to tell the world her problems, she spoke at length into a tape recorder with her story.

At least Will doesn't seem to have that demon.  Good thing he was first born.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to Lady C, Diana was very controlling and domineering, always trying to outshine Charles during their marriage, something I firmly believe and leads me to think that she had narcissistic tendencies (NDP can occur in combination with Bulimia). Lady C also indicated that Charles took the marital problems seriously unlike the BS Diana recounted during her interviews and that he didn't reconnect with Camilla until late in the marriage. I wonder if Diana thought that divorcing Charles was a demotion, (an unacceptable insult for a narcissist) and therefore badmouthed Charles to the boys as payback. In the end, H chose a person like his mother, controlling and domineering.


I'm old enough to remember all the Diana hoopla, which was always fun to read at the grocery store checkout.

I saw right through her and it was a very unpopular opinion! But people just wanted to adore her and focus on only one thing, that Charles did not love her. That's all they saw or cared about. 

But then, I'm Canadian and always liked the monarchy, not the destruction of it.  (Diana did say Charles was 'unfit' to be king.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

byzina said:


> Haven't they told-ALL in the interview?



Apparently 
There 
Always 
Seems 
To 
Be 
MORE...
...and 
MORE


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that need an update on the last Montecito drama, it is summarized here in an entertaining manner...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> I'm old enough to remember all the Diana hoopla, which was always fun to read at the grocery store checkout.
> 
> *I saw right through her and it was a very unpopular opinion! But people just wanted to adore her and focus on only one thing, that Charles did not love her. That's all they saw or cared about.*
> 
> But then, I'm Canadian and always liked the monarchy, not the destruction of it.  (Diana did say Charles was 'unfit' to be king.)


ITA and I never discussed it with co-workers and I think Diana was totally wrong in voicing her anti-Charles rhetoric.  

Same here, I'm Canadian and I have the highest respect for HM because of her unselfish devotion to her country, the monarchy and the commonwealth, but I don't believe that Canada necessarily needs a king/queen as head of state.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## VickyB

Icyjade said:


> Wonder who will read a book that’s all about whining. Is anyone taking one for the team here? Am definitely not reading it.
> 
> Then again, pretty sure the contents will be drip fed to the media over the next few months and the news will summarize the most salacious bits.


I'll do it for the team!!!!!!


----------



## VickyB

melissatrv said:


> It’s time…. Release the hounds…
> 
> 
> 
> Oh we are waaay past hounds....
> 
> View attachment 5142007



DRACARYS


----------



## Chanbal

Well put, it's time for them to be stripped of royal titles!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




We won't need this model again.

Please dispose of this broken model carefully and do not add to landfill

Thankfully yours, the UK


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Well put, it's time for them to be stripped of royal titles!




This f*cking rudeness and impertinence of these two. Who SAYS that. I don't need my grandmother's permission for anything (and she doesn't even run the family business I have never worked for...), but I would never feel the need to point that out in such a bratty way. Then again, we already learned the Queen doesn't own the word "royal", hu?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> We won't need this model again.
> 
> Please dispose of this broken model carefully and do not add to landfill
> 
> Thankfully yours, the UK



Maybe he could be the first  Royal-not-Royal *lost* in space. Branson should make that happen.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I swore I had seen M and H's wikipedia a while ago but wow it has grown since.  I bet their PR team is keeping these updated or M's keeping busy during her 5 month leave.   It says it was last updated 20 hrs ago probably to add the July 2021 law suits and more.  I've never seen wiki's this extensive but well, we are talking about M&H here.



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex
> 
> *Meghan, Duchess of Sussex*





> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Harry,_Duke_of_Sussex
> 
> *Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex*


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe he could be the first  Royal-not-Royal  in space. Branson should make that happen.



Branson is another self-entitled ass IMO.

But the good thing with space, is that since there's no air, there's no sound. So even if Harry or Richard gave endless speeches no one could hear them - at all


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Branson is another self-entitled ass IMO.
> 
> But the good thing with space, is that since there's no air, there's no sound. So even if Harry or Richard gave endless speeches no one could hear them - at all



I meant _lost_ in space  but left out the ‘lost’ part.  
Agree, Branson comes off as an ass, but he was a good friend of Diana and ‘her boys’. His kids are (were?) friends  with Bea. I could see this working.  Bezos and Musk are too smart to put up with him.


----------



## marietouchet

They are definitely loaded for bear … and aiming for the big targets , whether unconsciously or not 

the interview is timed when Philip is dying
The book is timed for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee

i cannot imagine doing this to one’s family


----------



## catlover46

Sad that he threw away his family for a trashy narc.
She wants to get rid of the BRF because they won’t let her merch and thinks they are racist but yet names her child the pet name of “racist grandma”. GMAB.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree, Charles did not reconnect with Camilla until later in the marriage.  This point is often overlooked.
> They were close friends early in the marriage, when Camilla knew Charles better than Diana. Diana always knew that C & C had been an item.
> In his TV interview, C said he did not reconnect until the marriage was irreparably broken, ie later on.
> 
> Charles was with Diana during her bulimia. By the time, she overcame that, both she and Charles had moved on.



All I know is Charles went to Camilla two days before marrying Diana and hand-delivered a gold bracelet to her that was engraved with the initials of their pet names for each other, supposedly a “farewell” gift. Diana found out about it (but not from Charles) and was understandably upset and hurt. It was a bad omen for the fate of the marriage.

I never understand why women in this thread stick up for Charles doing things in his marriage that they would never have tolerated and would be huge red flags in their own relationships.

Harry was 12 when his mother died and he and William were extremely close for more than 20 years after. She didn’t turn them against each other.


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> All I know is Charles went to Camilla two days before marrying Diana and hand-delivered a gold bracelet to her that was engraved with the initials of their pet names for each other, supposedly a “farewell” gift. Diana found out about it (but not from Charles) and was understandably upset and hurt. It was a bad omen for the fate of the marriage.
> 
> I never understand why women in this thread stick up for Charles doing things in his marriage that they would never have tolerated and would be huge red flags in their own relationships.
> 
> Harry was 12 when his mother died and he and William were extremely close for more than 20 years after. She didn’t turn them against each other.



Agree.  PC is also a whiny self entitled @ss.  I posted an account from a friend that had to organise PR for their trip in Australia and she said PC was the worst, self entitled person she has met.  He treated Diana horribly because the press wanted photos of her dress and asked Charles to move aside to get the photos and he raged ‘“I AM THE PRINCE” then belittled Diana (until she was in tears) the rest of the night.  Horrible man.  He may have softened as he was older, but the Harry you see as a self-entitled @ss does not come solely from Diana… it definitely comes from PC’s own behaviour.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not a defender or supporter of either parent. Both Charles and Diana have/had issues that affected their children. IMO 

Also, not too sure of how close Hazz and Wills actually were.  Sure, lots of photos of them vacationing with their mom, some with Charles. They did attend various charity events together. None of that means they are close. While they did attend the same schools, William went to college and Hazz went into the army. Seems they spent many years physically apart. Now they may have called each other frequently, maybe partied together (any photos?), does that make them really close?  By almost all accounts, they have very different personalities, very different life goals, very different friends, so it could be this ‘closeness’ has some media hype in it. 
Again, IMO.




needlv said:


> Agree.  PC is also a whiny self entitled @ss.






bag-mania said:


> It was a bad omen for the fate of the marriage.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> All I know is Charles went to Camilla two days before marrying Diana and hand-delivered a gold bracelet to her that was engraved with the initials of their pet names for each other, supposedly a “farewell” gift. Diana found out about it (but not from Charles) and was understandably upset and hurt. It was a bad omen for the fate of the marriage.
> 
> I never understand why women in this thread stick up for Charles doing things in his marriage that they would never have tolerated and would be huge red flags in their own relationships.
> 
> Harry was 12 when his mother died and he and William were extremely close for more than 20 years after. She didn’t turn them against each other.



I'm not on Charles' side, but nor on Diana's either. Another couple that couldn't keep their mouths shut about a whole lot of stuff no-one wanted to know about. Endless drama. 

We don't not what _really_ happened. I couldn't have lived with either C or D. I would like to think I would not have been so naive marrying into the BRF, even at 19. I wasn't great at history at school, but good enough to know what would be expected of me and the 'arrangements' that are usual in such circles, and if I didn't like it, didn't agree with it, hated the very thought of it, I wouldn't have gone through with it. Diana was an aristocrat, I cannot believe she thought it would be happy ever after for ever and ever, but it seems she did. 

It was a shame C&C didn't get it together or were allowed to marry (before meeting Diana). Charles and Camilla only married after his beloved grandmother died. I think Charles would have been happier. Not that I like Camila much either, but I do wish them happiness. 

I wish H&M happiness too, but all they seem to do is spit out hate, moan about everything, and chase $$s. 

At least Charles and Di were united of wanting to always be of service to others. Even tried to outdo each other. H&M are two of the meanest self-serving hypocrites I've come across.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> At least Charles and Di were united of wanting to always be of service to others. Even tried to outdo each other. H&M are two of the meanest self-serving hypocrites I've come across.



I think that is something all of us (except possibly a few lurkers) can agree on.


----------



## needlv




----------



## VickyB

I haven't attached a file in years! Hope this works.
It's an oldie but a goodie. Hope I am not breaking any forum rules!!!

Rats! I need to fiddle more with the file so it will open.

Hoping this works!


----------



## needlv

Some of the commentary on Twitter is so funny…

had to share this one…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Found this lil story - interesting if true. 


_According to The Cut, an old schoolmate named Jim (who graduated in 2004) revealed that William had an easier time fitting in than Harry.
“William was very integrated,” Jim said. “There’s this sort of society in your top year where if you’re kind of popular or beloved by teachers and boys alike you get voted into the Eton society, which is known as ‘Pop,’ and you got to choose your own waistcoat and wear special trousers. William was a Pop so he was like a homecoming-king type, but Harry wasn’t — I think Harry probably had it harder finding his way.”









						Prince Harry Didn't Fit in at School While Prince William Was a 'Homecoming King Type,' Old Schoolmate Said
					

Prince William and Prince Harry attended the same schools growing up, but they had different experiences there.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



_


----------



## LittleStar88

VickyB said:


> I haven't attached a file in years! Hope this works.
> It's an oldie but a goodie. Hope I am not breaking any forum rules!!!
> 
> Rats! I need to fiddle more with the file so it will open.
> 
> Hoping this works!


----------



## lanasyogamama

VickyB said:


> I haven't attached a file in years! Hope this works.
> It's an oldie but a goodie. Hope I am not breaking any forum rules!!!
> 
> Rats! I need to fiddle more with the file so it will open.
> 
> Hoping this works!


Eww!!!


----------



## Chanbal

I feel sorry for Charles, but he should have listened to Thomas Markle Jr's advice.   

_Friends of the future King believe his youngest son seems “bizarrely hellbent” on trashing his father’s reputation, which they say Charles has worked hard to restore over two decades following his spectacular fallout and subsequent divorce from Princess Diana.

One royal source said: “Sure, Charles can certainly be accused of being somewhat old school in his emotions at times, but he loves both his sons dearly and has done the very best for them throughout their lives._









						Prince Harry 'bizarrely hellbent' on trashing dad Charles' reputation fear pals
					

EXCLUSIVE: Friends of the Prince of Wales believe his youngest son seems 'bizarrely hellbent' on trashing his father’s reputation while the future King believes harry is at a 'crossroads'




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Wise words!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Wise words!




We could add OW to the ‘fool’ list, too. Interesting that the book announcement came shortly after the Emmy announcement.


Wow, completely missed that (!) photo.



Chanbal said:


> One royal source said: “Sure, Charles can certainly be accused of being somewhat old school in his emotions at times, but he loves both his sons dearly and has done the very best for them throughout their lives.


Is the Royal source being funny?  That (!) photo is Charles’s very best???  Okaaay


----------



## Hermes Zen

Just had dinner with my DH.  We were talking and he said, I bet I know how I can get your head spinning and spewing out words in the next few minutes ... ahhh ... He proceeded to tell me the latest of H's Memoir which I already knew from you all here. But as we started to talk more and more, my voice got louder and louder and I started to move my head and arms around and spewing profanity etc. etc.  WELL, he was correct ... he won.   My DH is a physician and spoke very professional. He ended it by saying, H has a lot of anger issues ... maybe he needs to be under a conservatorship (half jokingly) and gives me a look to see my reaction! Well, you know where I went from there like a rocket! I added yes, M as conservator.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5142492


Thanks for fixing my attachment, Littlestar!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## VickyB

needlv said:


> Some of the commentary on Twitter is so funny…
> 
> had to share this one…



Excellent!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *I feel sorry for Charles, but he should have listened to Thomas Markle Jr's advice. *
> 
> _Friends of the future King believe his youngest son seems “bizarrely hellbent” on trashing his father’s reputation, which they say Charles has worked hard to restore over two decades following his spectacular fallout and subsequent divorce from Princess Diana.
> 
> One royal source said: “Sure, Charles can certainly be accused of being somewhat old school in his emotions at times, but he loves both his sons dearly and has done the very best for them throughout their lives._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'bizarrely hellbent' on trashing dad Charles' reputation fear pals
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Friends of the Prince of Wales believe his youngest son seems 'bizarrely hellbent' on trashing his father’s reputation while the future King believes harry is at a 'crossroads'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


TM Jr sent the letter to Harry. Do we know if H shared it with his father?

*Meghan Markle’s Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry*

Article with letter included.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> We could add OW to the ‘fool’ list, too. Interesting that the book announcement came shortly after the Emmy announcement.
> 
> 
> Wow, completely missed that (!) photo.
> 
> 
> Is the Royal source being funny?  That (!) photo is Charles’s very best???  Okaaay


I wouldn't add OW to the 'fool' list, she is very aware of what's going on imo. I understand that she made ~$9M with the interview, and she will likely keep profiting with this situation.

The book announcement is on the second part of this video. There was a question about to which charity they will be donating the proceeds of the book, Montecito mortgage or Arch*w*ll Foundation.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> TM Jr sent the letter to Harry. Do we know if H shared it with his father?
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry*
> 
> Article with letter included.


It would be interesting to know when Charles learned about the letter, I've no idea.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> There was a question about to which charity they will be donating the proceeds of the book, *Montecito mortgage or Arch*w*ll Foundation.*




Is there a difference?


----------



## Chanbal

It seems to be all about money. I'm posting here an intriguing comment on this video about Arch*w*ll being registered in DE.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It seems to be all about money. I'm posting here an intriguing comment on this video about Arch*w*ll being registered in DE.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5142521




Yep, from Archewell’s wiki page:


On March 3, 2020, an International Class 35[3] trademark application for the name 'Archewell' was submitted for registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office(USPTO)[10] by "Cobblestone Lane LLC, which is registered in Delawarebut linked to the Beverly Hills offices of a Hollywood lawyer, who has worked for Meghan for years."[11] The description of services for Trademark Class 35 'Advertising and Business' is advertising, business management, business administration and office functions.[3] The Duke and Duchess reportedly "filed paperwork to create ‘their own charity and volunteering services, wide-ranging website, and sharing ‘education and training materials’ via films, podcasts and books’ and requested to trademark a number of things including motion picture films and branded objects."[10]

On May 26, USPTO assigned an examiner to review the application, and an ‘Irregularity notice’ was reportedly sent "addressing a catalogue of errors, including the vague nature of the proposed charitable work, according to documents". Such notice read: ‘The wording “providing a website featuring content relating to philanthropy, monetary giving, volunteer and career opportunities” in International Class 35 is also indefinite and over broad, and must be clarified to specify the nature of the content provided.’[10][12] The notice allowed until August for changes to be made.[10]

Archewell's website was "officially launched" in October 2020.[13]Although it was reported in April 2020 that Archewell would focus on issues including "conservation, female empowerment, and gender equality",[14] this has not been confirmed by the organization. At the end of December 2020, the website was updated to reflect the nature of their charitable and commercial endeavors.[15] In July 2021, the organization was told their trademark applications would require further revisions.[16] Among them was requested clarification that the group's audio branch would provide "entertainment-based services"; lawyers were also asked to "specify the nature" of "live stage performances" included in its list of prospective activities.[16] Their foundation was also asked to "define the kind of web apps they wish to provide" as listed in their purpoted functions.[16]


----------



## Chanbal

No need to wait for the book, OW's interview should have been the last straw. 

_*Prince Harry was facing anger from the royal households last night as his tell-all book threatens to take the shine off the Queen's historic Platinum Jubilee.*

Having already been writing for a year, the prince is set to turn in a manuscript, which he promised will be a 'first-hand account of my life that's accurate and wholly truthful', by the end of this year. It is set to hit the shelves in 2022.

*The Royal Family are fully focused on making the year a joyous occasion, when the Queen will become the first British monarch to celebrate 70 years on the throne, but now fear Harry, and any bombshell revelations, will overshadow it.*

Some insiders were last night even predicting that the Queen's invitation for Harry, Meghan and their children to join the Royal Family on the balcony at Buckingham Palace to mark her milestone next June could be rescinded.

One said: '*Her Majesty has been at great pains to try to keep her relationship with her grandson and his family separate from the decisions she needs to make professionally, so to speak.* And the invitation for them to join her next year was a genuine one.

'Although things have been very difficult, there was a small, but enduring hope that enough time would have elapsed for things to heal. But *the feeling internally [now] is that this book will be the last straw.*_









						Queen could CANCEL Harry and Meghan's Platinum Jubilee invitation
					

Royal sources told the Mail that inside Buckingham Palace and the other royal households, there was an increasing sense of anger and frustration.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ladies, you are faster than I am.  @Chanbal the Australian morning tv show did say that H&M’s charity of choice is Archewellian, so the money won’t be traceable to the public.  As with Diana, anyone who thinks these books and the interview were the end of the H&M drivel, well, I too can  sell ya a painting that could be worth millions. 



Maggie Muggins said:


> TM Jr sent the letter to Harry. Do we know if H shared it with his father?
> 
> *Meghan Markle’s Estranged Brother Writes a Letter to Prince Harry*
> 
> Article with letter included.



So, this letter‘s story should be included in the truthful tell-all, right? Right.



Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't add OW to the 'fool' list, she is very aware of what's going on imo. I understand that she made ~$9M with the interview, and she will likely keep profiting with this situation.



Ok, although advertised as a ‘tell-all’, Oprah referred to it as a ‘bombshell interview’ where all 3 were aligned in telling the truth.  We know they lied, recollections vary, etc.  Several networks did advertise the interview as a tell-all. Still, we live in a world where words don’t really matter because recollections vary. Finding Freedom was billed as a tell-all, too.

My point - in this post-pandemic world, Corporations  will pay extra-super-sized amounts for tell-all’s, bombshells, various recollections.    Just as before the pandemic, being a corporate shill (w$ore) is the path to billions.  The Faustian bargain remains in tact.

Hmm, good to know. I have numerous recollections. Call me, Netflix.









						Oprah Had Meghan & Harry Agree to This One Thing Before the Tell-All
					

Oprah shared what she requested of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry prior to their "powerful" tell-all interview.




					bestlifeonline.com
				



_On the show, she touched on the idea of always trying to see if she can align her intentions for an interview with those of the person she's speaking with. "I don't want you to finish an interview and at the end of the interview you say, 'I wish I had said,'" Oprah explained of talking to her subjects._






__





						Oprah with Meghan and Harry - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_*Winfrey initially denied reports of a "tell-all interview" in January 2020*. ITV News first reported that Meghan and Harry were finalizing an interview deal in February 2021, and it was subsequently confirmed by CBS. The Wall Street Journal reported that CBS paid "a license fee of between $7 million and $9 million" for the broadcasting rights. The network also sought $325,000 for 30 seconds of commercial advertising time during the broadcast. Meghan and Harry were not paid for the interview._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> No need to wait for the book, OW's interview should have been the *last straw.*



Is the* last* straw the end of the tell-all? Asking for a friend


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't add OW to the 'fool' list, she is very aware of what's going on imo. I understand that she made ~$9M with the interview, and she will likely keep profiting with this situation.
> 
> The book announcement is on the second part of this video. There was a question about to which charity they will be donating the proceeds of the book, Montecito mortgage or Arch*w*ll Foundation.



I do like those blunt Aussies.  lol


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is the* last* straw the end of the tell-all? Asking for a friend


I think there’s one left on the camels back.

I wonder how much more untold hardship this poor disadvantaged man has endured.


----------



## Genie27

Not to worry - I’m sure he will tell us soon enough.


----------



## needlv

A couple of thoughts:

1.  There is no invitation to the Jubilee to rescind… there was no Invitation sent…The RF wouldn’t send out invites this early given The Queens advancing age and COVID;

2.  Timing of the release of press about the book is odd and doesn’t fit their recent MM PR about wanting Lili christened at Windsor with the Queen in attendance... 

 Was it rushed because RF found out and forced their hand…?

 or was it rushed because H and MM are broke and now rushing out trying to Find $$ and need to tell banks etc that they have $$$ coming…?  

or rushed because H and MM know of another bombshell coming out which hurts them (bullying accusations, another authors tell all book (?), removal of line of service or something  else? 
or is this pure revenge because RF said no royal christening for lilibucks? And MM’s narc rage then throws the Harry  book back as revenge for not giving into their demand$

Regardless this book would have come out.  Even if the RF gave H and MM everything they wanted, both H and MM would/will release a tell-all.  They wanted that half in/out so badly and the funds from PC that they haven’t stopped throwing tantrums.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

This article is short so I have included it below without photos.  Also bolded and underscored the main point. 


*Buckingham Palace Released a Statement About Prince Harry's Upcoming Memoir*

The Duke of Sussex is writing an "accurate and wholly truthful" account of his life.
By Kimberly Truong
Jul 20, 2021 @ 2:36 pm


Following news that Prince Harry will be publishing an "accurate and wholly truthful" account of his life, Buckingham Palace has responded with a statement.

A spokesperson told _People_ that the *Duke of Sussex spoke privately with the royal family "very recently" about the book's publication, adding that he would not be expected to obtain permission from the palace for the project.*

Buckingham Palace declined to comment further, telling _People_, "Any clarification about the book would be a question for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex."

On Monday, Penguin Random House announced that Prince Harry is working on a memoir, due for release in late 2022.
"I'm writing this not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become," Harry said in a statement. "I've worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively, and my hope is that in telling my story — the highs and lows, the mistakes, the lessons learned — I can help show that no matter where we come from, we have more in common than we think."


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not a defender or supporter of either parent. Both Charles and Diana have/had issues that affected their children. IMO
> 
> Also, not too sure of how close Hazz and Wills actually were.  Sure, lots of photos of them vacationing with their mom, some with Charles. They did attend various charity events together. None of that means they are close. While they did attend the same schools, William went to college and Hazz went into the army. Seems they spent many years physically apart. Now they may have called each other frequently, maybe partied together (any photos?), does that make them really close?  By almost all accounts, they have very different personalities, very different life goals, very different friends, so it could be this ‘closeness’ has some media hype in it.
> Again, IMO.


William went to University, not college.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> A spokesperson told _People_ that the *Duke of Sussex spoke privately with the royal family "very recently" about the book's publication, adding that he would not be expected to obtain permission from the palace for the project.*



Wow! So, we can’t trust anything from either side. Words simply do not matter to these people. The palace could have ended all the debate yesterday. Hmmm, shady on all sides. IMO  Loss of credibility leads to loss of support. No wonder MM struggled - did people speak to her in a clear manner? Or did the palace waffle - one day, the answer is no; next day, it is yes. 



Sharont2305 said:


> William went to University, not college.



Ut oh, my apologies, seems it’s a cultural difference (kinda).









						What is the Difference Between College and University? - College Rank
					

College Rank is invested in your future, so invest some time to check out our article which explains the differences between a college and university.



					www.collegerank.net
				



Depending on what country you are in, the difference between college and university are how the terms are used differently. In the United States, the two terms are used interchangeably, and both mean a school at the postsecondary level. Otherwise, the term university usually means a large institution that offers graduate and doctorate programs while college means undergraduate degrees or associate degrees.

In the United Kingdom, colleges are schools found with a university and they do not award degrees or are a part of the program that the university used to award a degree. Colleges can even be something other than a learning institution and can be related to the facilities or accommodations in a university. Sometimes, the term college will refer to a secondary education institution where students can earn advanced qualifications.

In Canada, the term college will usually refer to vocational, artistic, technical and scientific third state education. There is also a term in Canada of University college which means a college that is not recognized as being completely independent the same way as a university is.

In Australia, the term college means secondary education and is not commonly used for specific vocational schools or schools inside a university. The term faculty is more often used instead of college at the third level of education.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> William went to University, not college.



Not American but I believe in the US collage means uni


----------



## Jktgal

needlv said:


> Some of the commentary on Twitter is so funny…
> 
> had to share this one…



Social media comments are the best entertainment. It's like you're privy to a global talent of amateur standup comics. Lady C's Youtube comments are also hilarious - I don't bother with her videos but the comments are gold.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Following news that Prince Harry will be publishing an "accurate and wholly truthful" account of his life, Buckingham Palace has responded with a statement.
> 
> A spokesperson told _People_ that the *Duke of Sussex spoke privately with the royal family "very recently" about the book's publication, adding that he would not be expected to obtain permission from the palace for the project.*
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment further, telling _People_, "Any clarification about the book would be a question for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex."


Are they drawing a line and saying they have nothing to do with this latest money-grubbing project?


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> Are they drawing a line and saying they have nothing to do with this latest money-grubbing project?


It is a bit confusing isn’t it.  Did the palace tell H that he doesn’t need their permission or H saying he doesn’t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5142492



Those implants are horrendous.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Not American but I believe in the US collage means uni


I know, but here it's a University


----------



## gelbergirl

Some here eluded to the christening - will baby Diana head over to the UK for a visit and a christening?


----------



## Helventara

papertiger said:


> We won't need this model again.
> 
> Please dispose of this broken model carefully and do not add to landfill
> 
> Thankfully yours, the UK


Hilarious!  This is why I follow this thread. Everyone is so witty!


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the United Kingdom, colleges are schools found with a university and they do not award degrees or are a part of the program that the university used to award a degree. Colleges can even be something other than a learning institution and can be related to the facilities or accommodations in a university. Sometimes, the term college will refer to a secondary education institution where students can earn advanced qualifications.


Where I am at, college means mostly university accommodation units or an educational institution can't quite make it as a university.


----------



## Lenna.V

Honestly, I need privacy from these two.


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> We won't need this model again.
> 
> Please dispose of this broken model carefully and do not add to landfill
> 
> Thankfully yours, the UK


Even, this is not the model we ordered and we want our money back!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Not American but I believe in the US collage means uni





Sharont2305 said:


> I know, but here it's a University



Yes, the definitions differ country to country. My apologies.

_Depending on what country you are in, the difference between college and university are how the terms are used differently. *In the United States, the two terms are used interchangeably, and both mean a school at the postsecondary level. *Otherwise, the term university usually means a large institution that offers graduate and doctorate programs while college means undergraduate degrees or associate degrees.

In the United Kingdom, colleges are schools found with a university and they do not award degrees or are a part of the program that the university used to award a degree. Colleges can even be something other than a learning institution and can be related to the facilities or accommodations in a university. Sometimes, the term college will refer to a secondary education institution where students can earn advanced qualifications.








						What is the Difference Between College and University? - College Rank
					

College Rank is invested in your future, so invest some time to check out our article which explains the differences between a college and university.



					www.collegerank.net
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> It is a bit confusing isn’t it.  Did the palace tell H that he doesn’t need their permission or H saying he doesn’t.



My interpretation is a spokesperson from the palace confirmed that Hazz did indeed inform some of the Royal family and that Hazz is *not* required to obtain permission from the palace for his projects.

So, all the fussing and complaining about Hazz being rude to Granny and the family is false.  The palace‘s initial comments were wrong/misleading/unaware of the facts. Whichever palace person commented initially made a huge mistake that created a firestorm. They really need to get it together IMO.


----------



## limom

This is so funny. NSFW


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yep, from Archewell’s wiki page:
> 
> 
> On March 3, 2020, an International Class 35[3] trademark application for the name 'Archewell' was submitted for registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office(USPTO)[10] by "Cobblestone Lane LLC, which is registered in Delawarebut linked to the Beverly Hills offices of a Hollywood lawyer, who has worked for Meghan for years."[11] The description of services for Trademark Class 35 'Advertising and Business' is advertising, business management, business administration and office functions.[3] The Duke and Duchess reportedly "filed paperwork to create ‘their own charity and volunteering services, wide-ranging website, and sharing ‘education and training materials’ via films, podcasts and books’ and requested to trademark a number of things including motion picture films and branded objects."[10]
> 
> On May 26, USPTO assigned an examiner to review the application, and an ‘Irregularity notice’ was reportedly sent "addressing a catalogue of errors, including the vague nature of the proposed charitable work, according to documents". Such notice read: ‘The wording “providing a website featuring content relating to philanthropy, monetary giving, volunteer and career opportunities” in International Class 35 is also indefinite and over broad, and must be clarified to specify the nature of the content provided.’[10][12] The notice allowed until August for changes to be made.[10]
> 
> Archewell's website was "officially launched" in October 2020.[13]Although it was reported in April 2020 that Archewell would focus on issues including "conservation, female empowerment, and gender equality",[14] this has not been confirmed by the organization. At the end of December 2020, the website was updated to reflect the nature of their charitable and commercial endeavors.[15] In July 2021, the organization was told their trademark applications would require further revisions.[16] Among them was requested clarification that the group's audio branch would provide "entertainment-based services"; lawyers were also asked to "specify the nature" of "live stage performances" included in its list of prospective activities.[16] Their foundation was also asked to "define the kind of web apps they wish to provide" as listed in their purpoted functions.[16]


so maybe she never had any sincere desire to be Harry's princess, but just wanted to monetize the fame that would come with the big wedding, etc.
If that's the case and he was naive and really in love with her, it's pathetic.  but he is still a grown man and responsible for his actions


----------



## sdkitty

so what I've seen last day or so on American TV.  The cast of The Talk all agreed it's great for Harry to tell his truth - may be cathartic for him.  
Another show - ET or similar - reported he's writing a book and that could cause trouble with his family.


----------



## 1LV

Harry’s truth.  Meghan‘s truth.  My truth.  Your truth.  What the hell happened to THE truth???


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> so what I've seen last day or so on American TV.  The cast of The Talk all agreed it's great for Harry to tell his truth - may be cathartic for him.
> Another show - ET or similar - reported he's writing a book and that could cause trouble with his family.



I’m sure he’s writing the book for the cathartic experience and not the $20M. The Talk is on point as always.


----------



## Sharont2305

1LV said:


> Harry’s truth.  Meghan‘s truth.  My truth.  Your truth.  What the hell happened to THE truth???


I know, I absolutely hate that expression.


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, I absolutely hate that expression.


I think it’s a “cover your butt” expression.


----------



## marietouchet

The coverup is worse than the crime ... that is a mantra often applied to US presidents' peccadilloes. I think it applies to the saga of 6. 

IMHO, not wanting to be part of the BRF is not a crime ... Exploring income options (Netflix) prior to exit is a good game plan. 
I do think they failed miserably in assessing their expenses post Megxit - security costs, Frogmore Cottage reno, moving costs. Whose fault is that? Theirs. It is called a budget. None of that is a crime .... 

But, it has been the silly explanations (lies) by H&M that are the issue (eg Oprah & legal defense for letter to Thomas). The coverup has been worse than the actions.

I think their only real marketable asset has become the ability to do sensational tell-alls (Oprah & 2022 book) because none of their explanations has done any good.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> Responding to comments from @LibbyRuth @poopsie and the article and comments  @Icyjade ITA. I've always seen H as the young boy, who arrives late to a party, where they have already crowned a prince (W) and most of the presents have been allotted. He whines that he wanted to be the prince and that he wanted W's presents too. There is no reasoning with him as goes into a tantrum, grabbing at the prince's crown and tearing away at the presents. He yells and screams, "I want to be him (W) and I want to be king or I'll destroy everything in sight."
> 
> PS. I could see H seething at and after his mother's funeral and told hubby that H would try to destroy the Queen for "killing his mother" and every stunt he later pulled was an act of defiance against HM.



Like the obnoxious little brat Joffrey in game of thrones


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, but here it's a University



And college here is a lower form of education


----------



## elvisfan4life

I won’t be buying the book period


----------



## xincinsin

1LV said:


> Harry’s truth.  Meghan‘s truth.  My truth.  Your truth.  What the hell happened to THE truth???


Some day, an enterprising scriptwriter will write a play or movie script about them based on the Rashomon model.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Some day, an enterprising scriptwriter will write a play or movie script about them based on the Rashomon model.



I need to watch that movie!


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Some day, an enterprising scriptwriter will write a play or movie script about them based on the Rashomon model.


I would buy a ticket!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> My interpretation is a spokesperson from the palace confirmed that Hazz did indeed inform some of the Royal family and that Hazz is *not* required to obtain permission from the palace for his projects.
> 
> So, all the fussing and complaining about Hazz being rude to Granny and the family is false.  The palace‘s initial comments were wrong/misleading/unaware of the facts. Whichever palace person commented initially made a huge mistake that created a firestorm. They really need to get it together IMO.


Messaging on this topic was awkward/bad, AGREE

It seems that a reporter had the story, was going to break it, 6 and the BRF were caught off guard. 

And Charles was doing a walkabout in Devon , when the topic came up inconveniently


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> The coverup is worse than the crime ... that is a mantra often applied to US presidents' peccadilloes. I think it applies to the saga of 6.
> 
> IMHO, not wanting to be part of the BRF is not a crime ... Exploring income options (Netflix) prior to exit is a good game plan.
> I do think they failed miserably in assessing their expenses post Megxit - security costs, Frogmore Cottage reno, moving costs. Whose fault is that? Theirs. It is called a budget. None of that is a crime ....
> 
> But, it has been the silly explanations (lies) by H&M that are the issue (eg Oprah & legal defense for letter to Thomas). The coverup has been worse than the actions.
> 
> I think their only real marketable asset has become the ability to do sensational tell-alls (Oprah & 2022 book) because none of their explanations has done any good.


It will be interesting to see what happens when they run out of material.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> My interpretation is a spokesperson from the palace confirmed that Hazz did indeed inform some of the Royal family and that Hazz is *not* required to obtain permission from the palace for his projects.
> 
> So, all the fussing and complaining about Hazz being rude to Granny and the family is false.  The palace‘s initial comments were wrong/misleading/unaware of the facts. Whichever palace person commented initially made a huge mistake that created a firestorm. They really need to get it together IMO.



It’s a big year next year for the BRF given the 70th anniversary. There should be *nothing* to distract from the celebrations. That is how the BRF works, and JCMH should know. He *broke protocol* and people are miffed. He needs to get it together.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I think it’s a “cover your butt” expression.



And a pretentious way to say “I’m so important you MUST believe everything I say.”


----------



## Chanbal

*"Duke of Sussex spoke privately with the royal family "very recently" about the book's publication, adding that he would not be expected to obtain permission from the palace for the project."*


CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow! So, we can’t trust anything from either side. Words simply do not matter to these people. The palace could have ended all the debate yesterday. Hmmm, shady on all sides. IMO  Loss of credibility leads to loss of support. No wonder MM struggled - did people speak to her in a clear manner? Or did the palace waffle - one day, the answer is no; next day, it is yes.





Hermes Zen said:


> It is a bit confusing isn’t it.  Did the palace tell H that he doesn’t need their permission or H saying he doesn’t.



I think the message from the Palace is OK. They were likely informed about the book just before the rest of the world, and H probably told them that he doesn't need their permission to write such book. The Palace can't force him to ask permission to do whatever he wants to do. So I think this is a way to say that the Palace didn't know about the book and has nothing to do with it, my 2 cents.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, but here it's a University


In the US both terms are often used in the same way. For example, you could have graduated from Harvard University, and say I went to college in Boston.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

elvisfan4life said:


> Like the obnoxious little brat Joffrey in game of thrones


I've never watched Game of Thrones so I googled him and then I understood your comparison after reading just the first paragraph. A little hellion!


----------



## bellecate

lanasyogamama said:


> It will be interesting to see what happens when they run out of material.


They’ll just make up more. That’s been there modus operandi so far.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> My interpretation is a spokesperson from the palace confirmed that Hazz did indeed inform some of the Royal family and that Hazz is *not* required to obtain permission from the palace for his projects.
> 
> So, all the fussing and complaining about Hazz being rude to Granny and the family is false.  The palace‘s initial comments were wrong/misleading/unaware of the facts. Whichever palace person commented initially made a huge mistake that created a firestorm. They really need to get it together IMO.



Hazz's previous approach was to inform that whatever he was doing was with the permission of QE (e.g. Lilibet's name). He likely didn't ask permission for anything. So the Palace is now trying to be more 'transparent', and informed that Hazz is not expected to ask permission for his projects. He is flying 'solo'.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> so maybe she never had any sincere desire to be Harry's princess, but just wanted to monetize the fame that would come with the big wedding, etc.
> If that's the case and he was naive and really in love with her, it's pathetic.  but he is still a grown man and responsible for his actions



I think Harry is forever trapped as having the emotional IQ of a 12 year old boy due to trauma of his mom's death that he never got proper help for, compounded by being so coddled, spoiled, and sheltered... He just wants a mom figure.

Meghan just wanted an opportunity (laser-focused on it and able to overlook his immaturity), whereas the women before her were likely looking for a legitimate partner. Not sure how they put up with him as I imagine he needs a lot of _mothering_ (it's exhausting to be in a relationship with a man who needs more of a mom and not so much of a partner).


----------



## Chanbal

Well didn't Hazz say that he loves his brother to pieces during OW's interview? Opinions may vary!  

"_*Prince Harry does not consider his $20 million memoir to be a “f–k you” to the royal family, Page Six is told.*

As we revealed, our royal exclusive on Harry’s book deal left the palace in uproar on Monday after the renegade royal left them in the dark about his plans.

But we’re told that the Duke of Sussex feels he will simply be telling his “truth” in the memoir that will be released at the end of next year.

*We’re told that Harry says he is not writing the book to deliberately hurt his family, including his brother Prince William and father Prince Charles, insisting that he has approached it as a way to reflect on his life and correct misinformation.*

It is not part of a plan to leave his family behind once and for all, they say.

However, royal insiders see it rather differently, as one said: “*On what planet does Harry think that this is not a ‘f–k you’ to the family?”*

Even those in the family closest to Harry, including his cousin Princess Eugenie and Zara Phillips, are less than thrilled about the book, other sources tell us._"










						Prince Harry tell-all not meant to be a ‘f–k you’ to royal family — honest!
					

We’re told that the Duke of Sussex feels he will simply be telling his “truth” in the memoir that will be released at the end of next year.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Monoi

Both of them are doing too much for people who dont want to be in the public eye. People soon will be fed up with them.

I get trying to earn a living but what is this desperation? Is this that 'hit the ground running' or however Harry said it in that engagement interview.


----------



## sdkitty

Monoi said:


> Both of them are doing too much for people who dont want to be in the public eye. People soon will be fed up with them.
> 
> I get trying to earn a living but what is this desperation? Is this that 'hit the ground running' or however Harry said it in that engagement interview.


publicizing themselves and his royalty is all they've got....they're trying their best to monetize it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

H's smug and calculating witch of a darling wife hides in the background sits peacefully at home plotting and orchestrating planning these events because we all know H doesn't have the brain power to come up with these underhanded schemes great ideas. She plans to destroy the BRF modernize the BRF and if they do, they will be tarred and feathered and ran out of the country on a rail crowned King and Queen and hailed as heroes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Even those in the family closest to Harry, including his cousin Princess Eugenie and Zara Phillips, are less than thrilled about the book, other sources tell us._"



The same Zara who doesn't give the impression to suffer fools gladly and who is said to hate Raptor? You bet that one was eliminated from Harry's closest circle first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> H's smug and calculating witch of a darling wife hides in the background sits peacefully at home plotting and orchestrating planning these events because we all know H doesn't have the brain power to come up with these underhanded schemes great ideas. She plans to destroy the BRF modernize the BRF and if they do, they will be tarred and feathered and ran out of the country on a rail crowned King and Queen and hailed as heroes.



Remember crazy card lady...she said Raptor's current occupation is setting Harry up big time. And I'm starting to see it...it is not normal behaviour for her to be oh so quiet.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Remember crazy card lady...she said Raptor's current occupation is setting Harry up big time. And I'm starting to see it...it is not normal behaviour for her to be oh so quiet.


I'd love to *like* your post a hundred more times, because I've felt that way about her for a long time. She is too arrogant and too conniving to be idle behind the scenes.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Remember crazy card lady...she said Raptor's current occupation is setting Harry up big time. And I'm starting to see it...it is not normal behaviour for her to be oh so quiet.





Maggie Muggins said:


> I'd love to *like* your post a hundred more times, because I've felt that way about her for a long time. She is too arrogant and too conniving to be idle behind the scenes.


I bet many of us could have said that without cards.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> I bet many of us could have said that without cards.
> 
> View attachment 5143100



Aww I can’t read the caption….


----------



## Chanbal

_"One of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time" _has an emoji


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> _"One of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time" _has an emoji



LOL. The Toxic Twosome are all prepared,recycle Methane's for 6.


----------



## purseinsanity

Obie Scobie should write their sequel book as well!
_
From Finding Freedom to Finding Funding_


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> Harry’s truth.  Meghan‘s truth.  My truth.  Your truth.  What the hell happened to THE truth???



According to Methane and Hazardous Waste (plagiarizing Jack Nicholson per usual):
We can't handle the truth!!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> _"One of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time" _has an emoji



Love the satire.  Fox sure has turned it around since being so pro H&M in the beginning.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> And college here is a lower form of education


Indeed.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> _"One of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time" _has an emoji




nope… don’t get it… what’s wrong with the emoji?


----------



## Sharont2305

Icyjade said:


> It’s a big year next year for the BRF given the 70th anniversary. There should be *nothing* to distract from the celebrations. That is how the BRF works, and JCMH should know. He *broke protocol* and people are miffed. He needs to get it together.


Exactly, it's rumoured that William and Catherine postponed starting a family so it didn't clash with all that was going on in 2012, Her Majesty's Diamond Jubilee and the London Olympics.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Love the satire.  Fox sure has turned it around since being so pro H&M in the beginning.


Let's hope CNN does the same. It's time to show Hazz and wife the way they really are, hypocrites imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> I’m sure he’s writing the book for the cathartic experience and not the $20M. The Talk is on point as always.



But of course. He is donating the proceeds to charity. Please pass the grey poupon, dear.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> It will be interesting to see what happens when they run out of material.



IMO that’ll be a long time away. Taking a page from the Hwood playbook, each tell-all requires a sequel.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> It’s a big year next year for the BRF given the 70th anniversary. There should be *nothing* to distract from the celebrations. That is how the BRF works, and JCMH should know. He *broke protocol* and people are miffed. He needs to get it together.



Not according to the palace. What Hazz did was fine. Sure, his book will be a distraction, just like previous books have been.  QE just needs to dust off the top-notch jewels to calm the nerves.


----------



## Chanbal

Yep, I can see the irony, hypocrisy...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Indeed.





elvisfan4life said:


> And college here is a lower form of education



Always remember the country of the speaker matters.  This could be exactly what MM had to deal with while in the UK.  The listeners heard her comments in their own language rather than remembering she is not from that country.  She meant one thing, they heard another. imo


----------



## Chanbal

The headlines don't look very favorable for Hazz today. 












						'Prince Harry risks more than exposing his own hypocrisy with new tell-all book'
					

Prince Harry is running low on personal anecdotes after flogging off his 'genetic pain' to the highest bidder - what more is there to say, argues Russell Myers




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> It will be interesting to see what happens when they run out of material.



They have already run out of material, which is why they have to make it up


----------



## V0N1B2

marietouchet said:


> Agree, Charles did not reconnect with Camilla until later in the marriage.  This point is often overlooked.
> They were close friends early in the marriage, when Camilla knew Charles better than Diana. Diana always knew that C & C had been an item.
> In his TV interview, C said he did not reconnect until the marriage was irreparably broken, ie later on.
> 
> Charles was with Diana during her bulimia. By the time, she overcame that, both she and Charles had moved on.


Charles has been married to Camilla now longer than he was married to Diana. But people still want it to be Diana! Diana! Diana! all the time. It reminds me of the Brad Pitt/Jennifer/Angelina saga. The media was still going on and on about Brad & Jen even when he’d already been with Angelina for more than 10 years. 
I guess the Meghan & Trevor eternal love story headlines will hit the supermarket tabloids as soon as she dumps “Haz”. Or was it “H”? I mean, who can keep track anymore of the 753678 interviews this very private couple have given.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> They have already run out of material, which is why they have to make it up



The BRF has a long history, so the material is there.
They will stop when consumers stop buying it.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always remember the country of the speaker matters.  This could be exactly what MM had to deal with while in the UK.  The listeners heard her comments in their own language rather than remembering she is not from that country.  She meant one thing, they heard another. imo


Quite right, and vice versa


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not according to the palace. What Hazz did was fine. Sure, his book will be a distraction, just like previous books have been.  *QE just needs to dust off the top-notch jewels to calm the nerves.*


Please Your Majesty wear the gorgeous Vladimir Emeralds to make M salivate, cry, rant and rave. IOW she can have a good old fashion tantrum while the rest of the world including my TPF friends and I will celebrate with you.


----------



## Annawakes

My thoughts on the new book:
“_my hope is that in telling my story — the highs and lows, the mistakes, the lessons learned — I can help show that no matter where we come from, we have more in common than we think_."

It seems to me that he’s desperate to show that he’s “just like us”.  Which is exactly what the RF has NOT been about as far as I know.  It is so strange to me that he/they could’ve just left the RF because that life wasn’t for them….ok….but it’s so obvious they are hellbent on destroying the monarchy.  So so strange. I wonder if they are being used by other, more powerful political forces.  Who stands to gain the most if the monarchy were to cease?


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> *It seems to me that he’s desperate to show that he’s “just like us”. * Which is exactly what the RF has NOT been about as far as I know.  It is so strange to me that he/they could’ve just left the RF because that life wasn’t for them….ok….but it’s so obvious they are hellbent on destroying the monarchy.  So so strange. *I wonder if they are being used by other, more powerful political forces.  Who stands to gain the most if the monarchy were to cease?*


For Hazz to be "just like us", he has to achieve a lot more on his own. I hope I'm wrong, but he sounds like a spoiled, greedy, arrogant, pompous and mediocre person.

You might be onto something, it's very possible that he is being used by 'more powerful political forces.'


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> For Hazz to be "just like us", he has to achieve a lot more on his own. I hope I'm wrong, but he sounds like a spoiled, greedy, arrogant, pompous and mediocre person.
> 
> You might be onto something, it's very possible that he is being used by 'more powerful political forces.'


IDK about him being used by political forces but I agree with the first part......what a nasty spoiled brat he's turned out to be.  Yes, he lost his mom but does he have any appreciation for all the privilege he has had?

Edit to say - he isn't like me.  I've worked for what I have


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always remember the country of the speaker matters.  This could be exactly what MM had to deal with while in the UK.  The listeners heard her comments in their own language rather than remembering she is not from that country.  She meant one thing, they heard another. imo



Her American head of staff?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> They have already run out of material, which is why they have to make it up



Sadly I think that is what it has come to, total and complete fabrication. By the time the book is released Harry will have lived away from the royal family for nearly three years, if you count them running away to Canada months before their official Megxit.

There is nothing he can say that hasn't already been rehashed many times. What can he do to top the "an unnamed family member wondered about Archie's skin color" accusation that Meghan baited Oprah with during the interview?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Sadly I think that is what it has come to, total and complete fabrication. By the time the book is released Harry will have lived away from the royal family for nearly three years, if you count them running away to Canada months before their official Megxit.
> 
> There is nothing he can say that hasn't already been rehashed many times. What can he do to top the "an unnamed family member wondered about Archie's skin color" accusation that Meghan baited Oprah with during the interview?


and who is going to want to read a whole book about him?  people will get the "highlights" from media.....he isn't inspirational so what does he really have to say?  He met his WIFE and his whole world changed?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and who is going to want to read a whole book about him?  people will get the "highlights" from media.....he isn't inspirational so what does he really have to say?  He met his WIFE and his whole world changed?



I'm not a writer but it pisses me off that he and Meghan are handed millions by big publishing companies when there are thousands of talented writers out there with great stories to tell who cannot get their foot in the door or get their manuscripts read. We live in such a sick, celebrity-worshipping social climate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her American head of staff?



Yes, the USA is a huge place. The northeast has its own language as does the southwest as does the south as does northwest, etc.  Listeners must consider where the speaker is from. Many disputes really do stem from cultural misunderstandings.

ETA: Texas is a language all to itself


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Sadly I think that is what it has come to, total and complete fabrication. By the time the book is released Harry will have lived away from the royal family for nearly three years, if you count them running away to Canada months before their official Megxit.
> 
> There is nothing he can say that hasn't already been rehashed many times. What can he do to top the "an unnamed family member wondered about Archie's skin color" accusation that Meghan baited Oprah with during the interview?



Oh, there is a lot he can say that has not been said. Lots.  He won‘t because they now say the book won’t be a ***









						Prince Harry tell-all not meant to be a ‘f–k you’ to royal family — honest!
					

We’re told that the Duke of Sussex feels he will simply be telling his “truth” in the memoir that will be released at the end of next year.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the media duped us again. They pitched the book as a _tell-all _when what they meant was it will be Hazzie _telling all _of us how to live.  In other words, a lecture.  Another example of how listeners hear what they want.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They stole our idea. 
_except Branson needs to do it, IMO. _


----------



## Allisonfaye

LittleStar88 said:


> I think Harry is forever trapped as having the emotional IQ of a 12 year old boy due to trauma of his mom's death that he never got proper help for, compounded by being so coddled, spoiled, and sheltered... He just wants a mom figure.
> 
> Meghan just wanted an opportunity (laser-focused on it and able to overlook his immaturity), whereas the women before her were likely looking for a legitimate partner. Not sure how they put up with him as I imagine he needs a lot of _mothering_ (it's exhausting to be in a relationship with a man who needs more of a mom and not so much of a partner).



Can you imagine? He wouldn't know how to do anything for himself. Maybe she washes him in the shower, too.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the USA is a huge place. The northeast has its own language as does the southwest as does the south as does northwest, etc.  Listeners must consider where the speaker is from. Many disputes really do stem from cultural misunderstandings.
> 
> ETA: Texas is a language all to itself


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  I grew up in Connecticut, then worked/lived in Washington DC and then worked/lived in Boston; different accents and different words for the same thing.  I've been out in California now since 2013, and I can't even say how many times people will say that "I have an accent" .. huh?!!?  I do know that I use terms/slang that they don't know because folks in New England .. well, we may use some of the same words as the Brits which they simply don't know out here.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> Can you imagine? He wouldn't know how to do anything for himself. Maybe she washes him in the shower, too.


nah
probably just keeps control of him using witchcraft or sex


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> But of course. He is donating the proceeds to charity. Please pass the grey poupon, dear.
> View attachment 5143167



I think by 'charity' he means HIS foundation?


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> I think by 'charity' he means HIS foundation?


have we heard of anything significant Archewell has done?  bringing sandwiches to staff at charitable organizations?  giving away some hats?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> and who is going to want to read a whole book about him?  people will get the "highlights" from media.....he isn't inspirational so what does he really have to say?  *He met his WIFE and his whole world changed?*


You could say that.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> have we heard of anything significant Archewell has done?  bringing sandwiches to staff at charitable organizations?  giving away some hats?


Wasn't there something about a cake?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Wasn't there something about a cake?


Yes, she mailed one to kitchen volunteers, but give zero money.

*Meghan Markle Baked A Lemon Olive Oil Cake For World Central Kitchen Volunteers

Article*


----------



## marietouchet

Doing research … alienated members of the BRF all write memoirs eg Duke of Windsor, Fergie authored two - refused NDA as part of divorce ..  Diana did Bashir interview instead . The Morton book contributions by D were long before she was officially sidelined
I guess the BRF solved the issue of memoirs by employees - Crawfie , governess to Elizabeth and Margaret - NDAs do the trick
The BRF will survive the latest memoir by one of its own


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Wasn't there something about a cake?


how could I forget that....and of course there was the visit to deliver food during the pandemic when she pulled her mask down so he recipient could see her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Doing research … alienated members of the BRF all write memoirs eg Duke of Windsor, Fergie authored two - refused NDA as part of divorce ..  Diana did Bashir interview instead . The Morton book contributions by D were long before she was officially sidelined
> I guess the BRF solved the issue of memoirs by employees - Crawfie , governess to Elizabeth and Margaret - NDAs do the trick
> The BRF will survive the latest memoir



Wonder if he will borrow from OW’s book:


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if he will borrow from OW’s book:
> View attachment 5143348



I assume the ghost writer will avoid plagiarism since his professional reputation is on the line. Hopefully that will keep the word salad to a minimum as well.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I assume the ghost writer will avoid plagiarism since his professional reputation is on the line. Hopefully that will keep the word salad to a minimum as well.


I read that the going rate for ghost writers of this caliber is about 1M$ , it comes out of the advance, is not paid by the publisher


----------



## needlv

Looks like William thinks the gloves are off…. And (allegedly) will be willing to sue over inaccuracies…









						Prince William and The Palace Will Push Back Against Lies In Prince Harry’s Book, Determined To Take Control Of Narrative
					

"Harry has crossed a line," a source tells Radar.




					radaronline.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

This summarizes their toxic relationship/marriage succinctly  Not sure why Big Baby Harry still can't see what we see.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> I'm not a writer but it pisses me off that he and Meghan are handed millions by big publishing companies when there are thousands of talented writers out there with great stories to tell who cannot get their foot in the door or get their manuscripts read. We live in such a sick, celebrity-worshipping social climate.


I agree. This author/podcaster I like just wrote a great book, and she really wanted to make the NYT bestsellers list, worked so hard to promote the book, etc, and it didn’t happen.  From what I’ve read that NYT list is not really based on numbers, which makes it more annoying.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I assume the ghost writer will avoid plagiarism since his professional reputation is on the line. Hopefully that will keep the word salad to a minimum as well.



Some ‘life lessons’ are universal.
Examples: 
_from Prince Phillip
enjoy what you do both work and hobby wise; 
be humble, a necessary lesson for many people today especially loud-mouth gauche reality stars; 
provide a loving support to your spouse and family_

Winston Churchill

Loyalty and Love. Churchill loved the British Empire, his monarch and his country.
Standing up for what you believe. 
Perseverance. ... 
Adventurous. ... 
Erudite. ..
Supreme Confidence. ... 
Belief in the Greater Good.
Of course, the Bible provides many. Lots of sources he can pull from. His ‘ghost-writer’ learned his life lessons at the bar, so perhaps Hazzie will draw on those experiences.    Guarantee it will be pablum, lacking depth and sincerity.  The cartoon versions circulating on Twitter aren’t wrong IMO.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Looks like William thinks the gloves are off…. And (allegedly) will be willing to sue over inaccuracies…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and The Palace Will Push Back Against Lies In Prince Harry’s Book, Determined To Take Control Of Narrative
> 
> 
> "Harry has crossed a line," a source tells Radar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com



Tough talk, almost no action. H&M will still get the invites, still get $$$, still get pampered as needed.  Nothing has changed, IMO.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always remember the country of the speaker matters.  This could be exactly what MM had to deal with while in the UK.  The listeners heard her comments in their own language rather than remembering she is not from that country.  She meant one thing, they heard another. imo


This would be an issue faced by everyone who works internationally. I once had to mediate a dispute between two colleagues who argued over the word "confirmation". This was with regards to booking an air ticket. The British guy "confirmed" the trip and expected the ticket to be issued. The Asian woman argued that he only "confirmed" the itinerary was correct but did not "confirm" that the trip was going ahead.

If this was the root cause of the problems MM faced as well as the accusations of her bullying behaviour, what I'd find strange is, Methane is supposedly a humanitarian working on an international platform, who gave a speech to the UN and travelled to many countries. She should have factored in a common communication issue like this. And she married into the BRF - a longterm commitment which would see her travelling extensively and meeting many foreigners. It's a given that her support staff would be briefing her on cultural nuances. Did she expect all the adjustment to come from others?



bag-mania said:


> Sadly I think that is what it has come to, total and complete fabrication. By the time the book is released Harry will have lived away from the royal family for nearly three years, if you count them running away to Canada months before their official Megxit.
> 
> There is nothing he can say that hasn't already been rehashed many times. What can he do to top the "an unnamed family member wondered about Archie's skin color" accusation that Meghan baited Oprah with during the interview?


He might go with Methane's version of the tale since they contradicted each other during that infamous interview.

I think for future monetizing purposes, his book is going to create more questions than provide answers. Huge swathes of his life will be glossed over. Tribute will be paid to Methane. The ghost writer, if he values his reputation and future, would not create a life cut from whole cloth, unless that is all that is provided to him to craft the story. 

Interestingly, I found a collection of quotes from Scabies' book which claims Methane and Hazard both checked each other out online. I suppose Mr Cheerleader's version is just fiction?

_‘He liked what he saw but didn’t necessarily think of drinks as anything more than a chance to be introduced to a woman he found attractive. He certainly could not have foreseen she would be the woman he would one day marry. What Meghan may have seen online could have easily convinced her to call the whole thing off.’

– The scene is painted for Meghan and Harry’s first date as they both check each other out online before they meet._

And for those who say M is his H's pseudo-mom, there is also a weird piece of praise that he was impressed because she could pack a bag really efficiently. Dare I say Hazard has never had to pack his own suitcase before? So he was enchanted by "domestic goddess" skills?








						The 26 most toe-curling Finding Freedom quotes on Harry and Meghan
					

Controversial new Harry and Meghan biography Finding Freedom has finally been released, but eyebrows have been raised by the fullsome praise heaped on the couple in the book




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Looks like William thinks the gloves are off…. And (allegedly) will be willing to sue over inaccuracies…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and The Palace Will Push Back Against Lies In Prince Harry’s Book, Determined To Take Control Of Narrative
> 
> 
> "Harry has crossed a line," a source tells Radar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


Love this line:
"Harry needs to know that he is entitled to his own feelings but not his own facts.”


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree. This author/podcaster I like just wrote a great book, and she really wanted to make the NYT bestsellers list, worked so hard to promote the book, etc, and it didn’t happen.  From what I’ve read that NYT list is not really based on numbers, which makes it more annoying.


For many reasons, I don't have any faith in the NYT any more, whatsoever.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> This would be an issue faced by everyone who works internationally. I once had to mediate a dispute between two colleagues who argued over the word "confirmation". This was with regards to booking an air ticket. The British guy "confirmed" the trip and expected the ticket to be issued. The Asian woman argued that he only "confirmed" the itinerary was correct but did not "confirm" that the trip was going ahead.
> 
> If this was the root cause of the problems MM faced as well as the accusations of her bullying behaviour, what I'd find strange is, Methane is supposedly a humanitarian working on an international platform, who gave a speech to the UN and travelled to many countries. She should have factored in a common communication issue like this. And she married into the BRF - a longterm commitment which would see her travelling extensively and meeting many foreigners. It's a given that her support staff would be briefing her on cultural nuances. Did she expect all the adjustment to come from others?
> 
> 
> He might go with Methane's version of the tale since they contradicted each other during that infamous interview.
> 
> I think for future monetizing purposes, his book is going to create more questions than provide answers. Huge swathes of his life will be glossed over. Tribute will be paid to Methane. The ghost writer, if he values his reputation and future, would not create a life cut from whole cloth, unless that is all that is provided to him to craft the story.
> 
> Interestingly, I found a collection of quotes from Scabies' book which claims Methane and Hazard both checked each other out online. I suppose Mr Cheerleader's version is just fiction?
> 
> _‘He liked what he saw but didn’t necessarily think of drinks as anything more than a chance to be introduced to a woman he found attractive. He certainly could not have foreseen she would be the woman he would one day marry. What Meghan may have seen online could have easily convinced her to call the whole thing off.’_
> 
> _*– The scene is painted for Meghan and Harry’s first date as they both check each other out online before they meet.*_
> 
> And for those who say M is his H's pseudo-mom, there is also a weird piece of praise that he was impressed because she could pack a bag really efficiently. Dare I say Hazard has never had to pack his own suitcase before? So he was enchanted by "domestic goddess" skills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 26 most toe-curling Finding Freedom quotes on Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Controversial new Harry and Meghan biography Finding Freedom has finally been released, but eyebrows have been raised by the fullsome praise heaped on the couple in the book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I thought it was a blind date and Megain had no idea who he was?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I thought it was a blind date and Megain had no idea who he was?



Recollections may vary.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I thought it was a blind date and Megain had no idea who he was?


It's so complicated that it's giving everyone a migraine because here, we have a situation that involves his truth, her truth, their truth, our truth, the media truth, google search truth, SoHo House truth, anybody's truth, everybody's truth. Hell, I forgot, my dog's truth, someone dog's truth, someone's cat's truth etc..


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> If this was the root cause of the problems MM faced as well as the accusations of her bullying behaviour, what I'd find strange is, Methane is supposedly a humanitarian working on an international platform, who gave a speech to the UN and travelled to many countries. She should have factored in a common communication issue like this. And she married into the BRF - a longterm commitment which would see her travelling extensively and meeting many foreigners. It's a given that her support staff would be briefing her on cultural nuances. Did she expect all the adjustment to come from others?



Agree in theory. In reality, when people are stressed-out as she surely would have been, I believe the experts say people revert to their  most familiar (?) communication styles.  IDK H or M and I have no idea why she struggled. I mentioned  the communication issue because it reminded me of this clip from my favorite show -  hope everyone gets a chuckle out of it:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tough talk, almost no action. H&M will still get the invites, still get $$$, still get pampered as needed.  Nothing has changed, IMO.



I am still hopeful that their shelflife will expire as they go “stale” as celebrities. When you put them under the microscope they have really accomplished nothing in a year and a half other than a bunch of contracts they haven’t delivered on and a tell-all interview full of lies.

They aren’t getting any invites from other celebrities in Hollywood. I can’t think of a single movie star or famous producer who is publicly supporting them anymore. Meghan and Harry will either sink or swim and there are definite signs of floundering.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I am still hopeful that their shelflife will expire as they go “stale” as celebrities. When you put them under the microscope they have really accomplished nothing in a year and a half other than a bunch of contracts they haven’t delivered on and a tell-all interview full of lies.
> 
> They aren’t getting any invites from other celebrities in Hollywood. I can’t think of a single movie star or famous producer who is publicly supporting them anymore. Meghan and Harry will either sink or swim and there are definite signs of floundering.


IMO she doesn't have star power....their big asset is his royalty.  we'll see how long they can retain interest using that while attacking his royal family


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree in theory. In reality, when people are stressed-out as she surely would have been, I believe the experts say people revert to their  most familiar (?) communication styles.  IDK H or M and I have no idea why she struggled. I mentioned  the communication issue because it reminded me of this clip from my favorite show -  hope everyone gets a chuckle out of it:



Loved the clip!
As for why Methane struggled, my view is that first, she or her PR team built her up to be more than she was capable of achieving, and she had trouble living up to her hype. She expected a meteoric rise to fame and that was what happened. Sustaining that fame was the problem as, despite many promises to hit the ground running, she didn't achieve much. The second reason, which IIRC she herself mentioned in the OW interview, was that she was expecting the BRF to be equivalent to Hollywood stardom, and she wasn't happy that it wasn't. She may, as narcs would do, even feel that she was conned into being a civil servant with a tiara.


----------



## Sol Ryan

xincinsin said:


> Loved the clip!
> As for why Methane struggled, my view is that first, she or her PR team built her up to be more than she was capable of achieving, and she had trouble living up to her hype. She expected a meteoric rise to fame and that was what happened. Sustaining that fame was the problem as, despite many promises to hit the ground running, she didn't achieve much. The second reason, which IIRC she herself mentioned in the OW interview, was that she was expecting the BRF to be equivalent to Hollywood stardom, and she wasn't happy that it wasn't. She may, as narcs would do, even feel that she was conned into being a civil servant with a tiara.



And it was a loaned tiara….


----------



## Vintage Leather

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree. This author/podcaster I like just wrote a great book, and she really wanted to make the NYT bestsellers list, worked so hard to promote the book, etc, and it didn’t happen.  From what I’ve read that NYT list is not really based on numbers, which makes it more annoying.



The NYT list does not claim to be an accurate representation of sales. They actually had a court case in 1983 that went up to the Supreme Court where they argued that they weren’t responsible for any inaccuracies and that the lists are an “editorial product.”

 The list is based on “weekly sales reports from independent, chain and wholesalers”. 

So The Man He Has Become and his wife can’t just buy 18,000 books on amazon and make the list. You have to buy case lots across the country to get on the list. 

There was a huge brouhaha in Young Adult Lit back eight, maybe 10 years ago when a truly awful book hit #1 on the list. Twitter found receipts, found evidence that the author had in fact hired a company to buy each and every copy of the book (to give out at cons, as one does) and NYT removed it from the list. (I remember it because it was such a terrible book. It made Twilight look like Shakespeare. Heck, by comparison, The Bench was almost palatable. And no one could believe it could knock the (excellent book that’s still being read today and whose name I just can’t recall right now) out of the number 1 spot. So KidLitTwitter went researching and literally found the receipts)


Turns out, there are businesses who will game the system for you, and buy enough books at enough of the right places to get you on the list. It used to cost about $250,000 to get onto the list - however, you can help yourself along a bit if you agree to accept book purchases as a part of your speaker fees (aka, a corporation will pay you $50,000 to speak, payable in $40,000 cash and $10,000 worth of books distributed to attendees)


----------



## Canturi lover

Haha wonder what they will say about this. 
Meghan Markle's brother Thomas Markle Jr joins Big Brother VIP


https://mol.im/a/9812763


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Canturi lover said:


> Haha wonder what they will say about this.
> Meghan Markle's brother Thomas Markle Jr joins Big Brother VIP
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/9812763



Channel 7 here in Australia are really scraping the bottom of the barrel with these nobodies.  First Katie Hopkins (who was deported swiftly for flouting our quarantine laws) now this loser who''s been previously charged with holding a gun to a woman's head during an argument, domestic violence and alcohol issues.

I predict the ratings to be as high as this guy's score on the celeb-ometer.


----------



## xincinsin

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Channel 7 here in Australia are really scraping the bottom of the barrel with these nobodies.  First Katie Hopkins (who was deported swiftly for flouting our quarantine laws) now this loser who''s been previously charged with holding a gun to a woman's head during an argument, domestic violence and alcohol issues.
> 
> I predict the ratings to be as high as this guy's score on the celeb-ometer.


Could Channel 7 be aiming for controversy and scandal to boost ratings?


----------



## chicinthecity777

This is interesting. If MM doesn't sue then this is definitely true.


----------



## chicinthecity777

From YouGov - credible pollster.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  I grew up in Connecticut, then worked/lived in Washington DC and then worked/lived in Boston; different accents and different words for the same thing.  I've been out in California now since 2013, and I can't even say how many times people will say that "I have an accent" .. huh?!!?  I do know that I use terms/slang that they don't know because folks in New England .. well, we may use some of the same words as the Brits which they simply don't know out here.



Yeah, but are we really going to maintain that it was all a huge misunderstanding because poor Raptor had to learn British? I've lived abroad and dated someone from a culture very different to mine, and it took me very little time to adjust. All it takes is a little effort and goodwill.


----------



## needlv

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Channel 7 here in Australia are really scraping the bottom of the barrel with these nobodies.  First Katie Hopkins (who was deported swiftly for flouting our quarantine laws) now this loser who''s been previously charged with holding a gun to a woman's head during an argument, domestic violence and alcohol issues.
> 
> I predict the ratings to be as high as this guy's score on the celeb-ometer.



not only channel 7 but Tom Arnold was paid a lot of money to sit on “I’m a celebrity get me out of here.”  And he is just as big of an @ss.

just tv channels trying desperately for bombshells or scandal.  Nothing new.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but are we really going to maintain that it was all a huge misunderstanding because poor Raptor had to learn British? I've lived abroad and dated someone from a culture very different to mine, and it took me very little time to adjust. All it takes is a little effort and goodwill.


Effort and goodwill are anathema to her.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always remember the country of the speaker matters.  This could be exactly what MM had to deal with while in the UK.  The listeners heard her comments in their own language rather than remembering she is not from that country.  She meant one thing, they heard another. imo



And it is polite to learn and adopt the rules traditions and customs of where you visit as an outsider not impose your own  wherever you go because you perceive them to be right or superior or because you neglect to research if there are any differences


----------



## elvisfan4life

Annawakes said:


> My thoughts on the new book:
> “_my hope is that in telling my story — the highs and lows, the mistakes, the lessons learned — I can help show that no matter where we come from, we have more in common than we think_."
> 
> It seems to me that he’s desperate to show that he’s “just like us”.  Which is exactly what the RF has NOT been about as far as I know.  It is so strange to me that he/they could’ve just left the RF because that life wasn’t for them….ok….but it’s so obvious they are hellbent on destroying the monarchy.  So so strange. I wonder if they are being used by other, more powerful political forces.  Who stands to gain the most if the monarchy were to cease?



He is even less like us than ever the BRF do not vulgarly flaunt their wealth and privilege except on ceremonial occasions


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## periogirl28

Prince Hazard not like me and I am not like him. Apparently I’ve been told I have brains and I earn my own keep.
Also. Memoirs? I couldn’t care less.


----------



## Sharont2305

Not reading The Bench, I see. MM will take offence I'm sure.


----------



## marietouchet

The more I think about it ... the book by 6 will be a sticky wicket during Jubilee Year but BRF will survive a book.  

Fall 2022 publication - for Xmas sales - but will be excerpted in People long before that and there will be leaks. I think the timing will be a HUGE issue - does Granny deserve this NOW ? Impact on much needed 1 billion pound travel business.  Rather like wedding planning headaches  - too much to go wrong and everyone wants it to  be perfect - but you get over it, the BRF has done it before 

The real issue for the family is A - Ghislaine goes to trial this fall and that is about criminal activities not just being dunderheads. Spain seems to have survived Juan Carlos and Inaki's criminal activities, but the king did it by cutting out his father and step-brother ENTIRELY.  Whereas, QEII did manage to eke out a few ceremonies with the Duke of Windsor, and gave him a posting - Governor of Bahamas. QEII plays the long game, hoping they will come back to fold quietly - Sarah was included in the B&E weddings


----------



## Chanbal

I've no further comments! 



_Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.

He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.

"Meghan's got a great story to tell.

“She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._









						Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
					

MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> _“She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like people are trying to help Hazz with some of his old memories.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


what crap
Michelle O and her husband advising them?  Clever to imply this without saying it is actually happening.  
very successful actress - I guess compared to starving actors who are waiting tables but not compared to A-list actors
story to tell?  will she tell why she has ghosted everyone in her family? (plus lots of other people)


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always remember the country of the speaker matters.  This could be exactly what MM had to deal with while in the UK.  The listeners heard her comments in their own language rather than remembering she is not from that country.  She meant one thing, they heard another. imo


I’ve been weighing up whether or not to wade in on this college/uni debate with a bit of pedantry but I feel like I might as well.

To say that college is the name given for a lower form of education, as well as being a bit intellectually snobbish,  is not actually true.

I believe the reason why the two terms even exist is that technically a university is a postgraduate institution and a college is an undergraduate institution. So you only actually technically join the university of Cambridge when you get your bachelors degree and you are just affiliated with, say, Kings before that. More modern universities obviously did away with all of this collegiate system - so the vast majority of students attended the university of x (usually the name of a place.)

Thus in both British and Irish tradition the world college has been used for varying institutions that provide education at varying ages:

1. A school that takes pupils below the age of 18 e.g.  Eton college - these are usually independent schools.

2. Institutions that provide tuition in a levels and equivalent for 17-18/9 year olds e.g. The Hills Sixth form college.

3. An institution that provides specialised training for adults e.g. agricultural and catering colleges - these may or may not award degrees but they will provide some form of certification.

4. Institutions within a body of a university which provide tuition and accommodation for adult students & which they actually officially join e.g. Christchurch college, Oxford. However, the degrees themselves are awarded by the University of Oxford.

5. institutions that provided higher education but have a connection with a university to provide the degree  certification e.g. the now defunct Heythrop College.

I think the fact that these terms have historically been used in varying and interchangeable ways is best illustrated by the case of Trinity College, Dublin which is the only college of the university of Dublin so  say you attend both college and university at the same time 








						University of Dublin - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



.



I believe a lot of older universities around the Americas especially are modelled on the collegiate systems of Oxbridge hence why we tend to say Harvard College as the name of the institution their undergraduates join because this is following the old undergrad = college/ postgrad= university split.

I hope this clears up any confusion of people getting annoyed by people saying college - it’s actually a complicated and confusing system.

add on: I just looked this up out of interest and W attended St Andrew’s - which has a reliquary of a collegiate system. 
Therefore, if we were being SUPER pedantic, we could say that W attended United College, St Andrew’s while he was an undergraduate and fully joined the University of St Andrews upon obtaining his degree.  However, it would be more usual parlance to say: W did geography at St Andrew’s.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> From YouGov - credible pollster.
> View attachment 5143746


Might make good kindling?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “*She's obviously a very successful actress* in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I love the constant need to re-write history to suit their narrative.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


who is this professor?  sounds like propaganda to me


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Another non-story. Either he's H&M's PR mouthpiece or nobody else apart from himself believe what he says here.


----------



## periogirl28

chicinthecity777 said:


> Another non-story. Either he's H&M's PR mouthpiece or nobody else apart from himself believe what he says here.


I agree. The delusion is *REAL. *


----------



## redney

Thanks, Google! British Talent Manager. Guessing he's on the PR payroll.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did anyone know the actual definition of a scoby? A bacterial yeast.  Seems fitting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

redney said:


> Thanks, Google! British Talent Manager. Guessing he's on the PR payroll.
> View attachment 5143887


The piece in the Express strikes me as one of those feeler press pieces, they put it out there via an "insider" see how the public react to it. If negative then retract later on.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> Wasn't there something about a cake?








sdkitty said:


> how could I forget that....and of course there was the visit to deliver food during the pandemic when she pulled her mask down so he recipient could see her








Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, she mailed one to kitchen volunteers, but give zero money.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Baked A Lemon Olive Oil Cake For World Central Kitchen Volunteers
> 
> Article*


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Did anyone know the actual definition of a scoby? A bacterial yeast.  Seems fitting.
> 
> View attachment 5143888



I shouldn't laugh, I actually_ love_ kimchi, 

Scobie not so much


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I shouldn't laugh, I actually_ love_ kimchi,


Me too!!! Right this moment, I have 3 jars of different kimchi in our fridge!


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Me too!!! Right this moment, I have 3 jars of different kimchi in our fridge!



I'll be over


----------



## papertiger

Vintage Leather said:


> The NYT list does not claim to be an accurate representation of sales. They actually had a court case in 1983 that went up to the Supreme Court where they argued that they weren’t responsible for any inaccuracies and that the lists are an “editorial product.”
> 
> The list is based on “weekly sales reports from independent, chain and wholesalers”.
> 
> So The Man He Has Become and his wife can’t just buy 18,000 books on amazon and make the list. You have to buy case lots across the country to get on the list.
> 
> There was a huge brouhaha in Young Adult Lit back eight, maybe 10 years ago when a truly awful book hit #1 on the list. Twitter found receipts, found evidence that the author had in fact hired a company to buy each and every copy of the book (to give out at cons, as one does) and NYT removed it from the list. (I remember it because it was such a terrible book. It made Twilight look like Shakespeare. Heck, by comparison, The Bench was almost palatable. And no one could believe it could knock the (excellent book that’s still being read today and whose name I just can’t recall right now) out of the number 1 spot. So KidLitTwitter went researching and literally found the receipts)
> 
> 
> Turns out, there are businesses who will game the system for you, and buy enough books at enough of the right places to get you on the list. It used to cost about $250,000 to get onto the list - however, you can help yourself along a bit if you agree to accept book purchases as a part of your speaker fees (aka, a corporation will pay you $50,000 to speak, payable in $40,000 cash and $10,000 worth of books distributed to attendees)



Sounds like how the music industry and the charts has operated since the 1920s  

So many creative industries have operate like this as a matter of course 

Which also makes me possibly think Oprah may have bought her Emmy nomination


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve been weighing up whether or not to wade in on this college/uni debate with a bit of pedantry but I feel like I might as well.
> 
> To say that college is the name given for a lower form of education, as well as being a bit intellectually snobbish,  is not actually true.
> 
> I believe the reason why the two terms even exist is that technically a university is a postgraduate institution and a college is an undergraduate institution. So you only actually technically join the university of Cambridge when you get your bachelors degree and you are just affiliated with say Kings before that. More modern universities obviously did away with all of this collegiate system - so the vast majority of students attended the university of x (usually the name of a place.)
> 
> Thus in both British and Irish tradition the world college has been used for varying institutions that provide education at varying ages:
> 
> 1. A school that takes pupils below the age of 18 e.g.  Eton college - these are usually independent schools.
> 
> 2. Institutions that provide tuition in a levels and equivalent for 17-18/9 year olds e.g. The Hills Sixth form college.
> 
> 3. An institution that provides specialised training for adults e.g. agricultural and catering colleges - these may or may not award degrees but they will provide some form of certification.
> 
> 4. Institutions within a body of a university which provide tuition and accommodation for adult students & which they actually officially join e.g. Christchurch college, Oxford. However, the degrees themselves are awarded by the University of Oxford.
> 
> 5. institutions that provided higher education but have a connection with a university to provide the degree  certification e.g. the now defunct Heythrop College.
> 
> I think the fact that these terms have historically been used in varying and interchangeable ways is best illustrated by the case of Trinity College, Dublin which is the only college of the university of Dublin so it is equally true to say you attend both college and university at the same time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> University of Dublin - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> I believe a lot of older universities around the Americas especially are modelled on the collegiate systems of Oxbridge hence why we tend to say Harvard College as the name of the institution their undergraduates join because this is following the old undergrad = college/ postgrad= university split.
> 
> I hope this clears up any confusion of people getting annoyed by people saying college - it’s actually a complicated and confusing system.


Nice comment. Harvard College is indeed used to refer to the undergraduate division of Harvard University. Not all universities in the US have a college system. The use of the terms 'college' and 'university' in the US can lead to some confusion, particularly for international students. For the curious ones on this subject, here is an article that attempts to clarify the difference between college and university in the US and addresses some of the misconceptions.



			https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2018-02-14/understand-the-difference-between-a-college-and-university-in-the-us


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> This is interesting. If MM doesn't sue then this is definitely true.




If Meghan wanted to be a London girl she shouldn't have married a man who was "triggered" by the place


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> who is this professor?  sounds like propaganda to me


Never heard of him.  



chicinthecity777 said:


> Another non-story. Either he's H&M's PR mouthpiece or nobody else apart from himself believe what he says here.



My vote goes to H&M's PR mouthpiece.


----------



## lanasyogamama

*Prince Harry's team wants him to establish himself as a leader that is "in the same league as self-made billionaires and former presidents."*









						Royal expert predicts the real motivation behind Prince Harry's upcoming memoir – Exclusive — The List
					

[embedgallery=137779]




					apple.news
				





Royal expert predicts the real motivation behind Prince Harry's upcoming memoir – Exclusive


By virtue of his position within the royal family, Prince Harry has always been in the public eye, from growing up to coming into his own as an individual. But over the past few years, eyes have been on the prince ever more intensely — and more critically — since the start of his relationship with Meghan Markle. In the nail-biting tell-all with Oprah Winfrey in which Harry and Meghan came forward to discuss their rationale for leaving their royal duties behind, it seems like the public can't get enough of the couple. And indeed, despite his incredibly honest confessions on the tell-all, it would appear that Harry has lots more to say.


Sometime in late 2022, Prince Harry will be releasing a memoir that he calls "wholly truthful," per CNN. His publishing company, Penguin Random House, explained that the memoir will share the "the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him," something that will be publicly discussed "for the very first time."


But what else can we expect from this memoir? And even more -- what is the true motivation behind such a project? In an exclusive interview with The List, royal expert Kinsey Schofield seeks to answer this question.


Does Prince Harry's team want him reestablished as a leader?


Kinsey Schofield is an Los Angeles-based entertainment reporter and the founder of To Di For Daily, a site that offers a pop-culture perspective of the royal family. First of all, Schofield admits that Prince Harry's decision to release a memoir serves as quite the contradiction to his usual decisions, as he almost always prioritizes his privacy and that of his family above all else — but that's why this decision must be a significant one that he put a lot of thought into. Schofield believes Prince Harry's team wants him to establish himself as a leader that is "in the same league as self-made billionaires and former presidents."


She adds, "The publication of this book will help launch him into that club. He needs to stop fixating on the past and utilize this platform to promote change through positive actions. This will move him towards the public speaking and motivational circuit, which is a multi-million dollar industry."


Schofield says there are rumors that certain members of the royal family are unhappy with the prospect of Harry's memoir, but that the duke sees it as a "necessary evil." But many experts believe the family has nothing to worry about, and that the prince will address his narrative respectively and peacefully. Indeed, as sources told Page Six, the memoir is not meant to serve as a "f*** you" to the royal family.


Harry and Meghan might have the same desire as Princess Diana in this specific way


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle seem to have an emphasis on controlling the narrative surrounding their lives, which is certainly logical due to the press and public often creating their own narrative about them. Schofield believes it's for this reason that the Sussexes decided to address the public the way they did via their interview with Oprah — and indeed, Schofield believes this overwhelming desire is reminiscent of Prince Harry's mother, Diana. Schofield says, "I think it is fair to compare Prince Harry's memoir with that of 'Diana: Her True Story,' the book that Diana secretly co-authored with Andrew Morton." She added that Morton always insisted that Diana was obsessed with the notion of "clearing her name" and asserting "her voice," which Schofield believes is exactly what Harry is attempting to accomplish with his memoir.


But there is one thing that has left Schofield feeling stumped. She explains that since Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah, it seems as if their teams are "branding the Duke and Duchess of Sussex separately." Schofield thinks it would be wise of Meghan and Harry to be branded as a solid unit, as opposed to separate entities. "However," Schofield adds, "having grown up under the title 'the spare,' I'm sure Prince Harry is enjoying coming into his own."


Only time will tell if the release of Prince Harry's highly anticipated memoir will accomplish what he had hoped it would.


Read this next: Did Prince Harry blindside the palace with his new memoir?


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Doing research … alienated members of the BRF all write memoirs eg Duke of Windsor, Fergie authored two - refused NDA as part of divorce ..  Diana did Bashir interview instead . The Morton book contributions by D were long before she was officially sidelined
> I guess the BRF solved the issue of memoirs by employees - Crawfie , governess to Elizabeth and Margaret - NDAs do the trick
> The BRF will survive the latest memoir by one of its own


Gosh Fergie’s biographies must have been grade A examples  of selective truth eh?
They might make for interesting reading now.

Edward 8 might not have been entirely frank, either, all things considered.

I don’t think they are a significant challenge to the BRF, aside from anything else, he’s not proven himself the most credible at recollection either.


EverSoElusive said:


> This summarizes their toxic relationship/marriage succinctly  Not sure why Big Baby Harry still can't see what we see.



It’s crazy this is an advertisement for some sort of marital private eye though  . I can imagine my husband reading a report on me and being like… “why is she on that bl**dy forum so much? Probably going to buy another bag”(and he’d be partially right )


xincinsin said:


> This would be an issue faced by everyone who works internationally. I once had to mediate a dispute between two colleagues who argued over the word "confirmation". This was with regards to booking an air ticket. The British guy "confirmed" the trip and expected the ticket to be issued. The Asian woman argued that he only "confirmed" the itinerary was correct but did not "confirm" that the trip was going ahead.
> 
> If this was the root cause of the problems MM faced as well as the accusations of her bullying behaviour, what I'd find strange is, Methane is supposedly a humanitarian working on an international platform, who gave a speech to the UN and travelled to many countries. She should have factored in a common communication issue like this. And she married into the BRF - a longterm commitment which would see her travelling extensively and meeting many foreigners. It's a given that her support staff would be briefing her on cultural nuances. Did she expect all the adjustment to come from others?
> 
> 
> He might go with Methane's version of the tale since they contradicted each other during that infamous interview.
> 
> I think for future monetizing purposes, his book is going to create more questions than provide answers. Huge swathes of his life will be glossed over. Tribute will be paid to Methane. The ghost writer, if he values his reputation and future, would not create a life cut from whole cloth, unless that is all that is provided to him to craft the story.
> 
> Interestingly, I found a collection of quotes from Scabies' book which claims Methane and Hazard both checked each other out online. I suppose Mr Cheerleader's version is just fiction?
> 
> _‘He liked what he saw but didn’t necessarily think of drinks as anything more than a chance to be introduced to a woman he found attractive. He certainly could not have foreseen she would be the woman he would one day marry. What Meghan may have seen online could have easily convinced her to call the whole thing off.’
> 
> – The scene is painted for Meghan and Harry’s first date as they both check each other out online before they meet._
> 
> And for those who say M is his H's pseudo-mom, there is also a weird piece of praise that he was impressed because she could pack a bag really efficiently. Dare I say Hazard has never had to pack his own suitcase before? So he was enchanted by "domestic goddess" skills?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 26 most toe-curling Finding Freedom quotes on Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Controversial new Harry and Meghan biography Finding Freedom has finally been released, but eyebrows have been raised by the fullsome praise heaped on the couple in the book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Haven’t you heard? M has a degree in IR, clearly she was communicating perfectly, everyone else was just too malicious and too stupid to understand her!

Oh I suspect MM can turn on the maternal charm with this lost ginger pup when necessary… just call me mother indeed.

Again FF is another great example of a book which reads very differently




Vintage Leather said:


> The NYT list does not claim to be an accurate representation of sales. They actually had a court case in 1983 that went up to the Supreme Court where they argued that they weren’t responsible for any inaccuracies and that the lists are an “editorial product.”
> 
> The list is based on “weekly sales reports from independent, chain and wholesalers”.
> 
> So The Man He Has Become and his wife can’t just buy 18,000 books on amazon and make the list. You have to buy case lots across the country to get on the list.
> 
> There was a huge brouhaha in Young Adult Lit back eight, maybe 10 years ago when a truly awful book hit #1 on the list. Twitter found receipts, found evidence that the author had in fact hired a company to buy each and every copy of the book (to give out at cons, as one does) and NYT removed it from the list. (I remember it because it was such a terrible book. It made Twilight look like Shakespeare. Heck, by comparison, The Bench was almost palatable. And no one could believe it could knock the (excellent book that’s still being read today and whose name I just can’t recall right now) out of the number 1 spot. So KidLitTwitter went researching and literally found the receipts)
> 
> 
> Turns out, there are businesses who will game the system for you, and buy enough books at enough of the right places to get you on the list. It used to cost about $250,000 to get onto the list - however, you can help yourself along a bit if you agree to accept book purchases as a part of your speaker fees (aka, a corporation will pay you $50,000 to speak, payable in $40,000 cash and $10,000 worth of books distributed to attendees)


I love this post! It is so interesting. It’s like the ‘bundle’ controversy in the music industry.  I think we can assume that there are plenty of promotional copies of H&M’s work available


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> *Prince Harry's team wants him to establish himself as a leader that is "in the same league as self-made billionaires and former presidents."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert predicts the real motivation behind Prince Harry's upcoming memoir – Exclusive — The List
> 
> 
> [embedgallery=137779]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert predicts the real motivation behind Prince Harry's upcoming memoir – Exclusive
> 
> 
> By virtue of his position within the royal family, Prince Harry has always been in the public eye, from growing up to coming into his own as an individual. But over the past few years, eyes have been on the prince ever more intensely — and more critically — since the start of his relationship with Meghan Markle. In the nail-biting tell-all with Oprah Winfrey in which Harry and Meghan came forward to discuss their rationale for leaving their royal duties behind, it seems like the public can't get enough of the couple. And indeed, despite his incredibly honest confessions on the tell-all, it would appear that Harry has lots more to say.
> 
> 
> Sometime in late 2022, Prince Harry will be releasing a memoir that he calls "wholly truthful," per CNN. His publishing company, Penguin Random House, explained that the memoir will share the "the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him," something that will be publicly discussed "for the very first time."
> 
> 
> But what else can we expect from this memoir? And even more -- what is the true motivation behind such a project? In an exclusive interview with The List, royal expert Kinsey Schofield seeks to answer this question.
> 
> 
> Does Prince Harry's team want him reestablished as a leader?
> 
> 
> Kinsey Schofield is an Los Angeles-based entertainment reporter and the founder of To Di For Daily, a site that offers a pop-culture perspective of the royal family. First of all, Schofield admits that Prince Harry's decision to release a memoir serves as quite the contradiction to his usual decisions, as he almost always prioritizes his privacy and that of his family above all else — but that's why this decision must be a significant one that he put a lot of thought into. Schofield believes Prince Harry's team wants him to establish himself as a leader that is "in the same league as self-made billionaires and former presidents."
> 
> 
> She adds, "The publication of this book will help launch him into that club. He needs to stop fixating on the past and utilize this platform to promote change through positive actions. This will move him towards the public speaking and motivational circuit, which is a multi-million dollar industry."
> 
> 
> Schofield says there are rumors that certain members of the royal family are unhappy with the prospect of Harry's memoir, but that the duke sees it as a "necessary evil." But many experts believe the family has nothing to worry about, and that the prince will address his narrative respectively and peacefully. Indeed, as sources told Page Six, the memoir is not meant to serve as a "f*** you" to the royal family.
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan might have the same desire as Princess Diana in this specific way
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle seem to have an emphasis on controlling the narrative surrounding their lives, which is certainly logical due to the press and public often creating their own narrative about them. Schofield believes it's for this reason that the Sussexes decided to address the public the way they did via their interview with Oprah — and indeed, Schofield believes this overwhelming desire is reminiscent of Prince Harry's mother, Diana. Schofield says, "I think it is fair to compare Prince Harry's memoir with that of 'Diana: Her True Story,' the book that Diana secretly co-authored with Andrew Morton." She added that Morton always insisted that Diana was obsessed with the notion of "clearing her name" and asserting "her voice," which Schofield believes is exactly what Harry is attempting to accomplish with his memoir.
> 
> 
> But there is one thing that has left Schofield feeling stumped. She explains that since Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah, it seems as if their teams are "branding the Duke and Duchess of Sussex separately." Schofield thinks it would be wise of Meghan and Harry to be branded as a solid unit, as opposed to separate entities. "However," Schofield adds, "having grown up under the title 'the spare,' I'm sure Prince Harry is enjoying coming into his own."
> 
> 
> Only time will tell if the release of Prince Harry's highly anticipated memoir will accomplish what he had hoped it would.
> 
> 
> Read this next: Did Prince Harry blindside the palace with his new memoir?



I wish these articles would stop referring to any individual who has a passing interest in the royal family as being a royal expert. At this point we are as much royal experts as the people they are quoting.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> who is this professor?  sounds like propaganda to me





chicinthecity777 said:


> Another non-story. Either he's H&M's PR mouthpiece or nobody else apart from himself believe what he says here.





periogirl28 said:


> I agree. The delusion is *REAL. *





redney said:


> Thanks, Google! British Talent Manager. Guessing he's on the PR payroll.
> View attachment 5143887



You are all correct his 'professorship' is an honorary title*, in which case it should _not_ be used without mentioning the honorary nature of it if at all.

From what I can see he has no qualifications, in fact you can practically buy a title from a collage by paying for their bar or sports equipment.

*honorary professorship[4] in 2012 by Henley Business School of Reading University (wikk)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Quote from article posted by @Chanbal 
_“She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world."_

Nah! She might be better remembered in this role.


----------



## Sol Ryan

lanasyogamama said:


> *Prince Harry's team wants him to establish himself as a leader that is "in the same league as self-made billionaires and former presidents."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert predicts the real motivation behind Prince Harry's upcoming memoir – Exclusive — The List
> 
> 
> [embedgallery=137779]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert predicts the real motivation behind Prince Harry's upcoming memoir – Exclusive
> 
> 
> By virtue of his position within the royal family, Prince Harry has always been in the public eye, from growing up to coming into his own as an individual. But over the past few years, eyes have been on the prince ever more intensely — and more critically — since the start of his relationship with Meghan Markle. In the nail-biting tell-all with Oprah Winfrey in which Harry and Meghan came forward to discuss their rationale for leaving their royal duties behind, it seems like the public can't get enough of the couple. And indeed, despite his incredibly honest confessions on the tell-all, it would appear that Harry has lots more to say.
> 
> 
> Sometime in late 2022, Prince Harry will be releasing a memoir that he calls "wholly truthful," per CNN. His publishing company, Penguin Random House, explained that the memoir will share the "the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him," something that will be publicly discussed "for the very first time."
> 
> 
> But what else can we expect from this memoir? And even more -- what is the true motivation behind such a project? In an exclusive interview with The List, royal expert Kinsey Schofield seeks to answer this question.
> 
> 
> Does Prince Harry's team want him reestablished as a leader?
> 
> 
> Kinsey Schofield is an Los Angeles-based entertainment reporter and the founder of To Di For Daily, a site that offers a pop-culture perspective of the royal family. First of all, Schofield admits that Prince Harry's decision to release a memoir serves as quite the contradiction to his usual decisions, as he almost always prioritizes his privacy and that of his family above all else — but that's why this decision must be a significant one that he put a lot of thought into. Schofield believes Prince Harry's team wants him to establish himself as a leader that is "in the same league as self-made billionaires and former presidents."
> 
> 
> She adds, "The publication of this book will help launch him into that club. He needs to stop fixating on the past and utilize this platform to promote change through positive actions. This will move him towards the public speaking and motivational circuit, which is a multi-million dollar industry."
> 
> 
> Schofield says there are rumors that certain members of the royal family are unhappy with the prospect of Harry's memoir, but that the duke sees it as a "necessary evil." But many experts believe the family has nothing to worry about, and that the prince will address his narrative respectively and peacefully. Indeed, as sources told Page Six, the memoir is not meant to serve as a "f*** you" to the royal family.
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan might have the same desire as Princess Diana in this specific way
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle seem to have an emphasis on controlling the narrative surrounding their lives, which is certainly logical due to the press and public often creating their own narrative about them. Schofield believes it's for this reason that the Sussexes decided to address the public the way they did via their interview with Oprah — and indeed, Schofield believes this overwhelming desire is reminiscent of Prince Harry's mother, Diana. Schofield says, "I think it is fair to compare Prince Harry's memoir with that of 'Diana: Her True Story,' the book that Diana secretly co-authored with Andrew Morton." She added that Morton always insisted that Diana was obsessed with the notion of "clearing her name" and asserting "her voice," which Schofield believes is exactly what Harry is attempting to accomplish with his memoir.
> 
> 
> But there is one thing that has left Schofield feeling stumped. She explains that since Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah, it seems as if their teams are "branding the Duke and Duchess of Sussex separately." Schofield thinks it would be wise of Meghan and Harry to be branded as a solid unit, as opposed to separate entities. "However," Schofield adds, "having grown up under the title 'the spare,' I'm sure Prince Harry is enjoying coming into his own."
> 
> 
> Only time will tell if the release of Prince Harry's highly anticipated memoir will accomplish what he had hoped it would.
> 
> 
> Read this next: Did Prince Harry blindside the palace with his new memoir?



What part of Harry is self-made?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





I know what section we can find this book once it's published...


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> If Meghan wanted to be a London girl she shouldn't have married a man who was "triggered" by the place


But but she can't help it that she just happened to fall in love with a prince! Love always wins babes!


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> What part of Harry is self-made?


leader?
ridiculous....Brits don't like what he is doing and we yanks don't need him or his WIFE to lead us
Putting him in the same sentence with a former President is blasphemy
I don't see how Gayle or O could get behind this comparison.  These two are a big nothingburger and have no right whatsoever to be compared to people who are highly educated and have actually accomplished big things

Again - the arrogance is staggering


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> If Meghan wanted to be a London girl she shouldn't have married a man who was "triggered" by the place



Harry didn't know he was triggered until Meghan told him. There are many things about himself he didn't know until she enlightened him.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> who is this professor?  sounds like propaganda to me


I thought I knew the name. An honourary Professor. 








						Jonathan Shalit - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I wish these articles would stop referring to any individual who has a passing interest in the royal family as being a royal expert.* At this point we are as much royal experts as the people they are quoting.*


You are so right and I apologize for being remiss in my duties.

The Press Club is issuing the following Press Release:
Having acquired the necessary qualifications, our TPF Royal Correspondents are graduating to Royal Expert level. Congratulations to all.  




ETA: Sorry I just caught where I misspelled "Henceforth"


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


So another fictional story then…probably titled “Recollections May Vary”


----------



## TC1

What happened to his Silicon Valley job at BetterUp? Oh, instead of the facade of "helping people" he's just going to "help himself" to the royalties to this made up memoir?


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> You are all correct his 'professorship' is an honorary title*, in which case it should _not_ be used without mentioning the honorary nature of it if at all.
> 
> From what I can see he has no qualifications, in fact you can practically buy a title from a collage by paying for their bar or sports equipment.
> 
> *honorary professorship[4] in 2012 by Henley Business School of Reading University (wikk)





Maggie Muggins said:


> You are so right and I apologize for being remiss in my duties.
> 
> The Press Club is issuing the following Press Release:
> Having acquired the necessary qualifications, our TPF Royal Correspondents are graduating to Royal Expert level. Congratulations to all.
> 
> View attachment 5143981
> 
> 
> ETA: Sorry I just caught where I misspelled "Henceforth"


I will hereafter be referring to myself in my message footers as ‘Noted Royal Expert JelliedFeels BSC (bronze swimming certificate), MBA (Most Brownie Awards) and QC (Questionable Credentials)


Sol Ryan said:


> What part of Harry is self-made?


Hopefully his downfall


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> If Meghan wanted to be a London girl she shouldn't have married a man who was "triggered" by the place


Yep, and hightailed it out of there herself!


----------



## bag-mania

I thought of Harry and Meghan  and “their truth” when I saw this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> ETA: Sorry I just caught where I misspelled "Henceforth"



It looked like the British spelling to me 
Thank you for the kind honor.



purseinsanity said:


> Yep, and hightailed it out of there herself!


When will we know the exact nature of the Markus connection?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *It looked like the British spelling to me*
> Thank you for the kind honor.
> 
> 
> When will we know the exact nature of the Markus connection?


Thanks for the vote of confidence, but it won't fly.
And, you're most welcome.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> When will we know the exact nature of the Markus connection?



We’ll know about that five minutes after never. Everything about Markus is locked up in the vault, including possibly Markus himself. He has disappeared as near as I can tell.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wish these articles would stop referring to any individual who has a passing interest in the royal family as being a royal expert. *At this point we are as much royal experts as the people they are quoting*.


You bet!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> What part of Harry is self-made?


Falsehood-teller???


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> What happened to his Silicon Valley job at BetterUp? Oh, instead of the facade of "helping people"* he's just going to "help himself" to the royalties to this made up memoir?*


It sounds like a plan to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

TC1 said:


> What happened to his Silicon Valley job at BetterUp? Oh, instead of the facade of "helping people" he's just going to "help himself" to the royalties to this made up memoir?


I'm starting to think that among other things, Harry has ADD.  Not one cause holds his (or Meg's) attention for more than a New York minute.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I'm starting to think that among other things, Harry has ADD.  *Not one cause holds his (or Meg's) attention for more than a New York minute.*


Except maybe several of these bundles.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve been weighing up whether or not to wade in on this college/uni debate with a bit of pedantry but I feel like I might as well.
> 
> To say that college is the name given for a lower form of education, as well as being a bit intellectually snobbish,  is not actually true.
> 
> I believe the reason why the two terms even exist is that technically a university is a postgraduate institution and a college is an undergraduate institution. So you only actually technically join the university of Cambridge when you get your bachelors degree and you are just affiliated with, say, Kings before that. More modern universities obviously did away with all of this collegiate system - so the vast majority of students attended the university of x (usually the name of a place.)
> 
> Thus in both British and Irish tradition the world college has been used for varying institutions that provide education at varying ages:
> 
> 1. A school that takes pupils below the age of 18 e.g.  Eton college - these are usually independent schools.
> 
> 2. Institutions that provide tuition in a levels and equivalent for 17-18/9 year olds e.g. The Hills Sixth form college.
> 
> 3. An institution that provides specialised training for adults e.g. agricultural and catering colleges - these may or may not award degrees but they will provide some form of certification.
> 
> 4. Institutions within a body of a university which provide tuition and accommodation for adult students & which they actually officially join e.g. Christchurch college, Oxford. However, the degrees themselves are awarded by the University of Oxford.
> 
> 5. institutions that provided higher education but have a connection with a university to provide the degree  certification e.g. the now defunct Heythrop College.
> 
> I think the fact that these terms have historically been used in varying and interchangeable ways is best illustrated by the case of Trinity College, Dublin which is the only college of the university of Dublin so  say you attend both college and university at the same time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> University of Dublin - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> I believe a lot of older universities around the Americas especially are modelled on the collegiate systems of Oxbridge hence why we tend to say Harvard College as the name of the institution their undergraduates join because this is following the old undergrad = college/ postgrad= university split.
> 
> I hope this clears up any confusion of people getting annoyed by people saying college - it’s actually a complicated and confusing system.
> 
> add on: I just looked this up out of interest and W attended St Andrew’s - which has a reliquary of a collegiate system.
> Therefore, if we were being SUPER pedantic, we could say that W attended United College, St Andrew’s while he was an undergraduate and fully joined the University of St Andrews upon obtaining his degree.  However, it would be more usual parlance to say: W did geography at St Andrew’s.





Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> 
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> 
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> 
> “She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


NM


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Quote from article posted by @Chanbal
> _“She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world."_
> 
> Nah! She might be better remembered in this role.



And the Emmy for "Best Year's Hair Flip" goes to what's her name.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought I knew the name. An honourary Professor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan Shalit - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Also noticed Sir Elton John's name listed  among those Shallit has worked with.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but are we really going to maintain that it was all a huge misunderstanding because poor Raptor had to learn British? I've lived abroad and dated someone from a culture very different to mine, and it took me very little time to adjust. All it takes is a little effort and goodwill.


100% totally agree .. I always put in the effort because, frankly, it was of interest to me to learn about a different culture, their language, their food, etc. -- but, you know Meg-a-lo-maniac .. she doesn't put effort into anything, she expects that things will be handed to her on a silver platter.  The fact that her uncle got her a job in the US Embassy in Argentina, and she eff'd it up so bad that they got her out of there?!?! .. seriously?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> This reads like a well placed "plant" by *Sunshine Sucks* and the rest of the *Markley Sparkly Squad*.


I wish someone would compile a list of these (and all similar) sweet and tender endearments bestowed on our favourite wayward couple. They just roll off the tip my tongue as I LOL, but can never remember them.


----------



## bellecate

TC1 said:


> What happened to his Silicon Valley job at BetterUp? Oh, instead of the facade of "helping people" he's just going to "help himself" to the royalties to this made up memoir?


Parental leave. That comes in handy when you want the job title without wanting to put in the work needed to earn it.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I'm starting to think that among other things, Harry has ADD.  Not one cause holds his (or Meg's) attention for more than a New York minute.


Poor Hazz, it looks like he failed one of his missions during the last visit to the UK.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Poor Hazz, it looks like he failed one of his missions during the last visit to the UK.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wish someone would compile a list of these (and all similar) sweet and tender endearments bestowed on our favourite wayward couple. They just roll off the tip my tongue as I LOL, but can never remember them.


Your wish is my command!

*Sunshine Sucks
Markley Sparkly Squad
The Sucksexxes
Methane
Megain
Haz
HazBeen
Hazardous Waste
Ginge and Cringe
Princess Pinocchio
(And some I just made up ):
The Di-Nameic Duo 
Ball-less Wonder 

Anyone else feel free to add.  I'm sure I've missed a lot!*


----------



## V0N1B2

purseinsanity said:


> Your wish is my command!
> 
> *Sunshine Sucks*
> *Markley Sparkly Squad
> The Sucksexxes
> Methane
> Megain
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Ginge and Cringe
> Princess Pinocchio
> (And some I just made that one up ):
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> Ball-less Wonder
> 
> Anyone else feel free to add.  I'm sure I've missed a lot!*


Don’t forget about Tungsten. The nickname given to her by her second - or is it third - father-in-law Prince Charles. It’s cute she thought of it as a compliment.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@purseinsanity  Copied & Pasted names to my notes. Many thanks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Your wish is my command!
> 
> *Sunshine Sucks
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> The Sucksexxes
> Methane
> Megain
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Ginge and Cringe
> Princess Pinocchio
> (And some I just made that one up ):
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> Ball-less Wonder
> 
> Anyone else feel free to add.  I'm sure I've missed a lot!*


Found this for your list:
_Dirty Harry_ & _Meghan_ Me Me









						Dirty Prince Harry! Our team of unrivalled experts unpick the secret story behind THAT explosive memoir
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> @purseinsanity  Copied & Pasted names to my notes. Many thanks.
> View attachment 5144267


OMG your awards are the best!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Found this for your list:
> _Dirty Harry_ & _Meghan_ Me Me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dirty Prince Harry! Our team of unrivalled experts unpick the secret story behind THAT explosive memoir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk



OK, I can accept Dirty Prince Harry, but can we imagine the man-child uttering Dirty Harry's famous line?!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, I can accept Dirty Prince Harry, but can we imagine the man-child uttering Dirty Harry's famous line?!



I see, but I googled this and it looks like Haz has also been known as 'Dirty Harry' for quite some time now. He could have some famous lines too. 







__





						'Dirty Harry' pictures make headlines
					

'Dirty Harry' pictures make headlines in Britain




					gulfnews.com


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Poor Hazz, it looks like he failed one of his missions during the last visit to the UK.



They are keeping little Lili so secret, that she may not even attend her own christening!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, I can accept Dirty Prince Harry, but can we imagine the man-child uttering Dirty Harry's famous line?!



In my mind, our Haz's line would be more like, "Go ahead, pee my way."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

V0N1B2 said:


> Don’t forget about *Tungsten*. The nickname given to her by her second - or is it third - father-in-law Prince Charles. It’s cute she thought of it as a compliment.


Added to my notes, thanks.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I see, but I googled this and it looks like Haz has also been known as 'Dirty Harry' for quite some time now. He could have some famous lines too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Dirty Harry' pictures make headlines
> 
> 
> 'Dirty Harry' pictures make headlines in Britain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gulfnews.com



Yes, I understand. Too bad H is contaminating good movie lines.
Many thanks for your help.


----------



## Hermes Zen

YES, Father Markle!!  WAY to go ... FIGHT BACK!    Yep, not surprised M said she wants to be famous when she was 12 yrs old, especially seeing her smuggle face around that age in the home video. 



> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...d-father-thomas-markle-grandchildren-petition
> 
> *Meghan Markle's estranged father Thomas reveals moment she discovered stardom: 'Daddy, I want to be famous'*
> *The former Hollywood lighting director also said he will be petitioning the California courts to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's two children*
> Stephanie Nolasco4 hours ago


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Your wish is my command!
> 
> *Sunshine Sucks
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> The Sucksexxes
> Methane
> Megain
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Ginge and Cringe
> Princess Pinocchio
> (And some I just made that one up ):
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> Ball-less Wonder
> 
> Anyone else feel free to add.  I'm sure I've missed a lot!*



Terrible twosome, ToxicTwo, Disastrous Duo, HarkleSparkler
Pearl


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has no one told him the kids do not exist?









						Thomas Markle: I'll take Meghan to COURT to see my grandchildren
					

Speaking at his Rosarito, Mexico home, Thomas Markle said he was ready to take his estranged daughter Meghan to court in order to see his grandchildren Archie and Lilibet.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has no one told him the kids do not exist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle: I'll take Meghan to COURT to see my grandchildren
> 
> 
> Speaking at his Rosarito, Mexico home, Thomas Markle said he was ready to take his estranged daughter Meghan to court in order to see his grandchildren Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Can he though?

what would be better: Completely uncork and spill on Meghan. She will never make amends so why not? I’m sure he’s got some dirt. Sell it and forget it.


----------



## Genie27

@Maggie Muggins i believe @QueenofWrapDress is particularly fond of the term Raptor

And I like Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Terrible twosome, ToxicTwo, Disastrous Duo, HarkleSparkler
> Pearl


Added and saved to my notes. Thank you very much.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Genie27 said:


> @Maggie Muggins i believe @QueenofWrapDress is particularly fond of the term Raptor
> 
> And I like Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince.


Copied and thanks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I understand. Too bad H is contaminating good movie lines.
> Many thanks for your help.
> View attachment 5144320


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Maggie Muggins,
Thank you,
Love,
TPF’s PH&MM thread*


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> YES, Father Markle!!  WAY to go ... FIGHT BACK!    Yep, not surprised M said she wants to be famous when she was 12 yrs old, especially seeing her smuggle face around that age in the home video.


DM is on this as well. It is crazy that she is not allowing her father to see his grandchildren. Before Haz, she had only praises for her father. It's cruel. 









						Thomas Markle: I'll take Meghan to COURT to see my grandchildren
					

Speaking at his Rosarito, Mexico home, Thomas Markle said he was ready to take his estranged daughter Meghan to court in order to see his grandchildren Archie and Lilibet.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Heartfelt thanks to all here who have sacrificed, inspired, and through their diligent efforts, as well as creative activations and significant word manipulations, have  done something of meaning and something of purpose, across all time zones, one act of compassion at a time.  Keep a’going. *

*inspired by the Archwellian statement of purpose according to Google*


----------



## xeyes

@Maggie Muggins Has anyone mentioned JCMH (Just Call Me Harry) yet?


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> YES, Father Markle!!  WAY to go ... FIGHT BACK!    Yep, not surprised M said she wants to be famous when she was 12 yrs old, especially seeing her smuggle face around that age in the home video.


sorry to say I think maybe Thomas created this narcissist (not intentionally of course)....now he's be repaid for spoiling her and teaching her that she was not only as good as everyone else but better and deserved more


----------



## csshopper

Duchess Disney
Duchess Moaning Markle
Meggypoo
St. Meghan
Douchess
She Who Shall Remain Nameless
Harkles
Grifters
Harry the Horrible

edited to add- only skimmed back to about early 3000 posts


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> sorry to say I think maybe Thomas created this narcissist (not intentionally of course)....now he's be repaid for spoiling her and teaching her that she was not only as good as everyone else but better and deserved more


The last narc I had to endure was completely spoilt by his mother, and he was scheming to abandon her and migrate to Canada by hooking up with a boyfriend who had family in Canada to sponsor him to migrate there. Not sure if his plan would have worked but, last I heard, he was still here in Asia. In short, narcs don't have any concept of family loyalty.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> sorry to say I think maybe Thomas created this narcissist (not intentionally of course)....now he's be repaid for spoiling her and teaching her that she was not only as good as everyone else but better and deserved more


TM may have some responsibility in such creation, but the merit is mostly of Haz's wife imo and we shouldn't forget the parent who instilled in her daughter the motto 'don't give the milk away for free.'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Maggie Muggins,
> Thank you,
> Love,
> TPF’s PH&MM thread*
> View attachment 5144399


*WOW! *Thank you for the brilliant star. I love to visit this thread because there's always something new to learn. I hope you all laugh as much as I do because (yes, here comes my favourite saying again) "Laughter helps to heal the body, the mind and the soul." Thank you @CarryOn2020 The drinks are on me!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xeyes said:


> @Maggie Muggins Has anyone mentioned JCMH (Just Call Me Harry) yet?


I had forgotten name altogether so thank you for reminding me.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Meggypoo
> St. Meghan
> Douchess
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> Harkles
> Grifters
> Harry the Horrible
> 
> edited to add- only skimmed back to about early *3000 posts*


Dear @csshopper, for a whomping 3000 posts and nine nicknames, you have my sincerest thanks and the SUN in the sky.


----------



## Stansy

Does the list already include
#6
the wife ?

I am mostly lurking here but enjoy the witty comments and the calling out of M+H‘s shameless behavior of you all


----------



## Katel

A list is brilliant 

I always enjoyed Me Gain


----------



## purseinsanity

Stansy said:


> Does the list already include
> #6
> the wife ?
> 
> I am mostly lurking here but enjoy the witty comments and the calling out of M+H‘s shameless behavior of you all


Welcome!  I come more for the company and the witty comments than anything else, at this point.  Meg and Haz bore me to tears.  Hope you enjoy it here as much as I do!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

csshopper said:


> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Meggypoo
> St. Meghan
> Douchess
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> Harkles
> Grifters
> Harry the Horrible
> 
> edited to add- only skimmed back to about early 3000 posts





Maggie Muggins said:


> Dear @csshopper, for a whomping 3000 posts and nine nicknames, you have my sincerest thanks and the SUN in the sky.
> 
> View attachment 5144495


You're all welcome! This is a team effort.  I don't think I have the stamina to go back and start at the beginning, but even a cursory review of so many pages makes it clear why her stans call us the meanies and don't like us. We hold (insert all of the name options here) those residents of Montecito accountable, many do the research, dig for the facts and publish the real truth about them. Anyone who wants to write a real book about them could use this as source material. Some things that became apparent, it is widely assumed both here and in the the media sources referenced, that H's "truth" will be fabrications and he will  m e r c h his mother's death as if he is the only one in the world who "owns" her memory. As to M, interesting, but not surprising in none of the speculations about her next husband did anyone (that I could find, please correct me if I missed it) suggest it might be a MOC, seems like folks think only white privelege would interest her.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Welcome!  I come more for the company and the witty comments than anything else, at this point.  Meg and Haz bore me to tears.  Hope you enjoy it here as much as I do!


Yes, absolutely! I love the international contributions and the discussions that are tangents sometimes, but filled with interesting information. I've learned a lot and appreciate the Mods give us some slack, recognizing I hope, that we always pull ourselves back on topic. More times than I can count I have laughed out loud when reading the posts.


----------



## Hermes Zen

sdkitty said:


> sorry to say I think maybe Thomas created this narcissist (not intentionally of course)....now he's be repaid for spoiling her and teaching her that she was not only as good as everyone else but better and deserved more



I agree but unfortunately nothing he can do to undo that.  I'm happy he's no longer sitting there and taking M's sh$t and going to court to see his grandchildren. An attorney either approached him or he went searching to see if he has a chance to do something.  I hope he wins and gets to see A & L. I said pages and pages ago that M would do this out of spite on both sides of the family. That beeeeach!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We also need to give credit to Piers as he coined the infamous "Princess Pinocchio".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: Thomas taking Raptor to court, dunno. As much as I dislike her and wish for karma to kick her in the face I do believe parents have the right to not let grandparents see the kids if they wish so. It is sad (though much sadder in case of the BRF only because there are tons of cousins the same age, and their social standing makes it so these family relations might be the only people they can ever fully trust), but I do think it opens doors for more nonsense - next we see grandparents are taking their children to court because they dislike how the DIL is raising the kids.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lanasyogamama said:


> I think a lot of women in their 40s have a soft spot for Oprah because she was on tv when we came home from school as kids.


I was a teen in the early 2000s and the guests on her show were sometimes topics discussed amongst me and my classmates in school or sleepovers… but she wasn’t really “respected”.
There were so many parodies made of her mean and rude behavior towards guests, and it’s not like we saw her as a respected talk show host.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Thomas taking Raptor to court, dunno. As much as I dislike her and wish for karma to kick her in the face I do believe parents have the right to not let grandparents see the kids if they wish so. It is sad (though much sadder in case of the BRF only because there are tons of cousins the same age, and their social standing makes it so these family relations might be the only people they can ever fully trust), but I do think it opens doors for more nonsense - next we see grandparents are taking their children to court because they dislike how the DIL is raising the kids.


There are laws in California regarding grandparents' rights of visitation. I don't know if Thomas' suit will be successful, though.




__





						Grandparent visitation in California | California Courts | Self Help Guide
					

If you're raising your grandchild  and you want custody of the child, find out about guardianships.




					www.courts.ca.gov


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> I was a teen in the early 2000s and the guests on her show were sometimes topics discussed amongst me and my classmates in school or sleepovers… but she wasn’t really “respected”.
> There were so many parodies made of her mean and rude behavior towards guests, and it’s not like we saw her as a respected talk show host.


Often, it's not respect that they are gunning for, it's $$$ and viewership numbers. You can be the most respected talkshow host, but if you aren't drawing in the eyes or the advertising dollars, you won't be on air.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> There are laws in California regarding grandparents' rights of visitation. I don't know if Thomas' suit will be successful, though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grandparent visitation in California | California Courts | Self Help Guide
> 
> 
> If you're raising your grandchild  and you want custody of the child, find out about guardianships.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.courts.ca.gov



Yeah, but aren't these if grandparents have an established relationship and then suddenly the parents decide they are not into it anymore? The man has never even seen the children.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but aren't these if grandparents have an established relationship and then suddenly the parents decide they are not into it anymore? The man has never even seen the children.


OTOH How many people have ever seen the children? It's just going to draw attention to their claims of wanting privacy. Methane might send Hazard out on an interview with a friendly host (Hi, Gayle!) to bluster about how they have a right to protect their kids.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Stansy said:


> Does the list already include
> #6
> the wife ?
> 
> I am mostly lurking here but enjoy the witty comments and the calling out of M+H‘s shameless behavior of you all


Copied and thank you. Great to have you with us and hope you keep enjoying yourself as much as I do.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Thomas taking Raptor to court, dunno. As much as I dislike her and wish for karma to kick her in the face I do believe parents have the right to not let grandparents see the kids if they wish so. It is sad (though much sadder in case of the BRF only because there are tons of cousins the same age, and their social standing makes it so these family relations might be the only people they can ever fully trust), but I do think it opens doors for more nonsense - next we see grandparents are taking their children to court because they dislike how the DIL is raising the kids.


I just think it would be awkward for him to see the kids.  now they're too young to really know him and later they will be under the influences of their mother.  she's wouldn't encourage them to be loving toward their grandfather.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> A list is brilliant
> 
> I always enjoyed Me Gain


Copied and thank you Katel. All members are wonderful here and with their cooperation, the list is now a page long.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Thomas taking Raptor to court, dunno. As much as I dislike her and wish for karma to kick her in the face I do believe parents have the right to not let grandparents see the kids if they wish so. It is sad (though much sadder in case of the BRF only because there are tons of cousins the same age, and their social standing makes it so these family relations might be the only people they can ever fully trust), but I do think it opens doors for more nonsense - next we see grandparents are taking their children to court because they dislike how the DIL is raising the kids.


My concern is that the children are being deprived of knowing their relatives and not given the choice of either accepting or rejecting them. I wonder if later on as young adults, they would even try to connect with relatives if they are subjected to negative influence now.  As for Thomas, I see him as also wanting bragging rights that he is the grandfather of two royal children.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but aren't these if grandparents have an established relationship and then suddenly the parents decide they are not into it anymore? The man has never even seen the children.


That's right. That's why I said I didn't know if he would be successful. He has a rough road ahead of him but California is a state that believes in grandparents' rights and many other states are much more restrictive with granting visitation. There is no federal law and state laws vary greatly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> My concern is that the children are being deprived of knowing their relatives and not given the choice of either accepting or rejecting them. I wonder if later on as young adults, they would even try to connect with relatives if they are subjected to negative influence now.  As for Thomas, I see him as also wanting bragging rights that he is the grandfather of two royal children.


the kids may want to connect with relatives later in life but by that time, Thomas may be gone


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> the kids may want to connect with relatives later in life but by that time, Thomas may be gone


ITA and I wasn't denying the fact that Thomas should have access to the children, but saying that all the relatives should as well.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> OTOH How many people have ever seen the children? It's just going to draw attention to their claims of wanting privacy. Methane might send Hazard out on an interview with a friendly host (Hi, Gayle!) to bluster about how they have a right to protect their kids.


The kids - ohhh dearrrr - they are in the middle of the maelstrom


----------



## catlover46

Chanbal said:


> No need to wait for the book, OW's interview should have been the last straw.
> 
> _*Prince Harry was facing anger from the royal households last night as his tell-all book threatens to take the shine off the Queen's historic Platinum Jubilee.*
> 
> Having already been writing for a year, the prince is set to turn in a manuscript, which he promised will be a 'first-hand account of my life that's accurate and wholly truthful', by the end of this year. It is set to hit the shelves in 2022.
> 
> *The Royal Family are fully focused on making the year a joyous occasion, when the Queen will become the first British monarch to celebrate 70 years on the throne, but now fear Harry, and any bombshell revelations, will overshadow it.*
> 
> Some insiders were last night even predicting that the Queen's invitation for Harry, Meghan and their children to join the Royal Family on the balcony at Buckingham Palace to mark her milestone next June could be rescinded.
> 
> One said: '*Her Majesty has been at great pains to try to keep her relationship with her grandson and his family separate from the decisions she needs to make professionally, so to speak.* And the invitation for them to join her next year was a genuine one.
> 
> 'Although things have been very difficult, there was a small, but enduring hope that enough time would have elapsed for things to heal. But *the feeling internally [now] is that this book will be the last straw.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen could CANCEL Harry and Meghan's Platinum Jubilee invitation
> 
> 
> Royal sources told the Mail that inside Buckingham Palace and the other royal households, there was an increasing sense of anger and frustration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I know it’s family but seriously he should be banned from attending his grandmother’s funeral and father’s coronation.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA and I wasn't denying the fact that Thomas should have access to the children, but saying that all the relatives should as well.


IDK
As much as I find H&M annoying, they are the parents.  If they were forced to allow all relatives to have access, then what about other parents?  there are people who have legit reasons for not wanting to have a relationship with relatives....this could be a slippery slope


----------



## bag-mania

Look who is raising them. What are the chances the kids grow up to be anything other than self-serving? They aren't going to care if they meet the ordinary non-rich, non-celebrity relatives on Meghan's side (other than maybe Doria). On the other hand they will be eager to connect with their royal cousins, if only to exploit the connections.


----------



## marietouchet

catlover46 said:


> I know it’s family but seriously he should be banned from attending his grandmother’s funeral and father’s coronation.


It is kind of a hallmark for QEII to allow previously disgraced family members to return to the fold after they have been quiet for a bit
Sarah got to attend her daughters wedding. The Duke of Windsor attended his mother's funeral. 
But, in this case, the brouhaha will not be dying down anytime soon - let Granny have her day, she has earned it


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> It is kind of a hallmark for QEII to allow previously disgraced family members to return to the fold after they have been quiet for a bit
> Sarah got to attend her daughters wedding. The Duke of Windsor attended his mother's funeral.
> But, in this case, the brouhaha will not be dying down anytime soon - let Granny have her day, she has earned it


I don't see how or why Sarah would have been excluded from her daughters' weddings


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Look who is raising them. What are the chances the kids grow up to be anything other than self-serving? They aren't going to care if they meet the ordinary non-rich, non-celebrity relatives on Meghan's side (other than maybe Doria). On the other hand they will be eager to connect with their royal cousins, if only to exploit the connections.


I had a friend who died in an accident at a very young age.  She had a baby and the baby's dad (her husband) didn't like her parents.  So the grandparents didn't see the baby has he was growing up.
  When the boy (baby at time of her death) was a teenager, he reached out to his grandparents and got to know them.  So you never know.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I don't see how or why Sarah would have been excluded from her daughters' weddings


Memoir writing ??


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I had a friend who died in an accident at a very young age.  She had a baby and the baby's dad (her husband) didn't like her parents.  So the grandparents didn't see the baby has he was growing up.
> When the boy (baby at time of her death) was a teenager, he reached out to his grandparents and got to know them.  So you never know.



I'm thinking because all these kids will ever know is living in multimillion dollar mansions and having luxury everything. Growing up spoiled in Lala land isn't going to result in grounded young people who become introspective about their "poor" relations.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Memoir writing ??


oh, ok but still, they are her kids and she still lives with their father, right?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm thinking because all these kids will ever know is living in multimillion dollar mansions and having luxury everything. Growing up spoiled in Lala land isn't going to result in grounded young people who become introspective about their "poor" relations.


well, true maybe but in the case I cited the boy was raised by someone who disliked his grandparents and could not have had much good to say about them and he still reached out.
Was he raised in a "grounded" way?  I don't know as I didn't keep in touch 
The boy's father was raised by a very cruel mother (pitted her kids against each other, played favorites, etc.) so not sure how good a parent he son would have been.


----------



## jelliedfeels

On a serious note, I really do hope those kids get to spend time with some other relatives because even annoying family members give you perspective on the world around you & help you understand who you are.

It does horrify me how they cut the Markles & seemingly most of the Raglands out for the crime of being too uncouth & common - what kind of example is that?

I feel like if those kids are just isolated in _their _gilded cage with their childish brat parents & a team of servants too afraid to say a word they are going to miss out on a lot of growth and be emotionally stunted. 

It sort of makes me hope they are dolls/ actors tbh even if that also makes me sound a bit crazy


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> It is kind of a hallmark for QEII to allow previously disgraced family members to return to the fold after they have been quiet for a bit
> Sarah got to attend her daughters wedding. The Duke of Windsor attended his mother's funeral.
> But, in this case, the brouhaha will not be dying down anytime soon - let Granny have her day, she has earned it


Sarah may be immature and silly, but she has never spoken badly about HM or the BRF and she is quoted as saying that HM is the most forgiving person she knows. She occasionally attends functions with her daughters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Look who is raising them. What are the chances the kids grow up to be anything other than self-serving? They aren't going to care if they meet the ordinary non-rich, non-celebrity relatives on Meghan's side (other than maybe Doria). On the other hand they will be eager to connect with their royal cousins, if only to exploit the connections.


I don't like either of them but I think there could be some hope that Harry could show the kids some love....he's dense but may still have some humanity left in him


----------



## CarryOn2020

QE gives a master class in carrying on:









						Queen leaves for Balmoral for first holiday without Philip
					

The Queen, 95, is likely to remain at the 50,000-acre estate until early October and will be joined by family members including the Cambridges, the Wessexes during her stay.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

I just got back on since last night and I'm happy my posting gained further discussion of Father Markle gaining visitation rights to see A & L.  I LOVE the diverse opinions agreeing and not from everyone!    

Happy Friday and have a wonderful weekend all.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I don't see how or why Sarah would have been excluded from her daughters' weddings


No, I don't either.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.

Nasty Duo Nicknames
#6
Ball-less Wonder
Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
Disastrous Duo
Douchess
Duchess Disney
Duchess Moaning Markle
Grifters
Ginge and Cringe
Harkles
HarkleSparkler
Harry the Horrible
Haz
HazBeen
Hazardous Waste
Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
Markley Sparkly Squad
Me Gain
Megain
Meggypoo
Methane
Pearl
Princess Pinocchio
Raptor
She Who Shall Remain Nameless
St. Meghan
Terrible twosome
The Di-Nameic Duo
The Sucksexxes
the wife
ToxicTwo
Tungsten

PR Teams Nicknames
Sunshine Sucks

*Hip hip hooray for the team!*




Addendum#1
Submission from @poopsie who was diligently working and couldn't participate in our little quest.
*he Maleficent of Montecito?
*Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince

Addendum#2
@LittleStar88 has submitted Dastardly Duo


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't like either of them but I think there could be some hope that Harry could show the kids some love....he's dense but may still have some humanity left in him



I hope you're right. If you had asked me five years ago if Harry would ever do the things he has already done, I would have said not a chance. Now I think everything we were shown about Harry before was a carefully cultivated image projected by the BRF and their PR machine (and they certainly DO have PR).

Knowing what hypocrites they are, he could talk all day long about the importance of being a good parent and for all we know he goes home and plays video games while leaving 99.9% of the child care duties to the nannies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> IDK
> As much as I find H&M annoying, they are the parents.  If they were forced to allow all relatives to have access, then what about other parents?  there are people who have legit reasons for not wanting to have a relationship with relatives....this could be a slippery slope



I agree. Parental rights top the rights of grandparents or other relatives, if I like the parents or not.


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Methane
> Pearl
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> *Hip hip hooray for the team!*
> 
> View attachment 5144986




It's not on there? The Maleficent of Montecito?
Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince?

Sorry to be late..........back to working full time. Uggghhhhh


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree. Parental rights top the rights of grandparents or other relatives, if I like the parents or not.



Remember, TM ceremoniously dropped a note off at OW’s house. What was the result of that?  Nothing, afaik.   Is this planned by SS to keep the H&M side in the news ? Maybe we shouldn’t fall for TM’s  ‘poor, pitiful me’ routine. Many grandparents face this issue because often new parents become full of themselves, lose perspective about their privileged baby’s impact on the world, develop grandiose ideas And the parents dislike the gp’s.  It’s ok, life goes on. Most of us do not care where the privileged baby is baptized, what gown the privileged baby wears, etc. As with all babies, absolutely we want them to be well cared for, but we aren’t willing to beg or pay for a photo or care about this litigious family. Hard pass on these egotistical celebs, especially in a pandemic. Hard pass. IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I hope you're right. If you had asked me five years ago if Harry would ever do the things he has already done, I would have said not a chance. Now I think everything we were shown about Harry before was a carefully cultivated image projected by the BRF and their PR machine (and they certainly DO have PR).
> 
> Knowing what hypocrites they are, he could talk all day long about the importance of being a good parent and for all we know he goes home and plays video games while leaving 99.9% of the child care duties to the nannies.


quite possible...hope they have good nannies


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, TM ceremoniously dropped a note off at OW’s house. *What was the result of that?  *Nothing, afaik.   Is this planned by SS to keep the H&M side in the news ? Maybe we shouldn’t fall for TM’s  ‘poor, pitiful me’ routine. Many grandparents face this issue because often new parents become full of themselves, lose perspective about their privileged baby’s impact on the world, develop grandiose ideas And the parents dislike the gp’s.  It’s ok, life goes on. Most of us do not care where the privileged baby is baptized, what gown the privileged baby wears, etc. As with all babies, absolutely we want them to be well cared for, but we aren’t willing to beg or pay for a photo or care about this litigious family. Hard pass on these egotistical celebs, especially in a pandemic. Hard pass. IMO.



I'm sure Oprah blew off Thomas and the letter, if it existed, was disposed of quickly.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Methane
> Pearl
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> *Hip hip hooray for the team!*
> 
> View attachment 5144986
> 
> 
> Addendum:
> Submission from @poopsie who was diligently working and couldn't participate in our little quest.
> *he Maleficent of Montecito?
> *Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince




How about Dastardly Duo?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> It's not on there? The Maleficent of Montecito?
> Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince?
> 
> Sorry to be late..........back to working full time. Uggghhhhh


Thank you! No need to be sorry, you were busy working unlike me.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> How about Dastardly Duo?


Added to the list and thank you.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure Oprah blew off Thomas and the letter, if it existed, was disposed of quickly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Methane
> Pearl
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> *Hip hip hooray for the team!*
> 
> View attachment 5144986
> 
> 
> Addendum#1
> Submission from @poopsie who was diligently working and couldn't participate in our little quest.
> *he Maleficent of Montecito?
> *Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince
> 
> Addendum#2
> @LittleStar88 has submitted Dastardly Duo



Looks great but I think we're missing NutMeg?


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sarah may be immature and silly, but she has never spoken badly about HM or the BRF and she is quoted as saying that HM is the most forgiving person she knows. She occasionally attends functions with her daughters.


Great point - she has never spoken badly about the family


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> Looks great but I think we're missing NutMeg?


Thank you. It's a really good nickname because M is often called NutMeg. I believe I was too hasty in posting the first list so I will repost the entire list once we're sure there are no more submissions.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure Oprah blew off Thomas and the letter, if it existed, was disposed of quickly.


unlikely O was even there....but I guess if some staff told her about it, she would have told them to ignore him


----------



## Hermes Zen

WOW I just noticed the new response emoji options that were uploaded today!!  This is great !!  Sorry OT but back to H&M now.


----------



## GottaPrada

Fredo


----------



## Annawakes

I have a late submission!  How about Mermaid?  
 Thank you all, this is my favorite thread.  (And not because of the dastardly duo).  I read it often, every day!


----------



## Annawakes

And I know we have names for Omid.  Scooby-doo is my favorite!


----------



## Annawakes

And scabies


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I hope you're right. If you had asked me five years ago if Harry would ever do the things he has already done, I would have said not a chance. *Now I think everything we were shown about Harry before was a carefully cultivated image projected by the BRF and their PR machine (and they certainly DO have PR).


Ready for more surprises? 

*Harry's deal is for FOUR books - and one won't be released until after The Queen has died: Duke oversaw bidding war of up to '$40m' and Meghan will write a 'wellness' book' as part of mega-deal*

The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen’s platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.

Harry’s wife Meghan is to pen a ‘wellness’ guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.

The Mail has been told the prince, 36, ‘led’ negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.


Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the ‘auction’ by video call, sources say.

‘*He conducted negotiations – he had a very “take it or leave it” attitude,’ said an impeccably-placed source in the publishing industry*. 

‘His starting price was $25million (£18m) and the final figure was way north of that, possibly as much as $35-40million (£25-29m).

‘*Those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands: $25million*.

‘In Britain, publishing is still a rather “gentlemanly” industry. It’s high stakes, but is still conducted in very genteel terms.’

The source added: ‘The final contract was actually for a four-book deal, with Harry writing another “when his granny dies”.

‘Meghan will write a wellness-type book and people are unsure what the fourth will be. But what is most shocking, frankly, is Harry’s suggestion that the second book won’t be published until the Queen is no longer here.

‘People [will] start asking, naturally: what has he got, who is he going to target?

‘*The very idea of this unexploded bomb, hanging about waiting for the Queen to pass, is just extraordinary and may strike many as being in very bad taste.*’

The Royal Family has been left deeply concerned by Harry’s decision to secretly collaborate with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter JR Moehringer on what his publishers described as ‘the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him’.









						Harry's deal is for FOUR books - including one after The Queen's death
					

In news sure to alarm Buckingham Palace, industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled as part of a four-book deal by Prince Harry earlier this week is only the 'tip of the iceberg'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Ready for more surprises?
> 
> *Harry's deal is for FOUR books - and one won't be released until after The Queen has died: Duke oversaw bidding war of up to '$40m' and Meghan will write a 'wellness' book' as part of mega-deal*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's deal is for FOUR books - including one after The Queen's death
> 
> 
> In news sure to alarm Buckingham Palace, industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled as part of a four-book deal by Prince Harry earlier this week is only the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Every day we get a different story. Now it's four books? Is any of it true?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Every day we get a different story. Now it's four books? Is any of it true?


DM seems to be well informed, and I believe he will publish a book after QE dies.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Your wish is my command!
> 
> *Sunshine Sucks
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> The Sucksexxes
> Methane
> Megain
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Ginge and Cringe
> Princess Pinocchio
> (And some I just made up ):
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> Ball-less Wonder
> 
> Anyone else feel free to add.  I'm sure I've missed a lot!*


I call her *Meg-a-lo-maniac* and *Hap-Hazza* ..


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Enough is enough with the ingrates!


----------



## Hermes Zen

All because of their titles.  They must be wringing their hands thinking this is easy $$$$$$$$$'s !  AND mentioning the Q!!  Don't get me started !!!  THE B.st.rds!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> Ready for more surprises?
> 
> *Harry's deal is for FOUR books - and one won't be released until after The Queen has died: Duke oversaw bidding war of up to '$40m' and Meghan will write a 'wellness' book' as part of mega-deal*
> 
> The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen’s platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.
> 
> Harry’s wife Meghan is to pen a ‘wellness’ guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.
> 
> The Mail has been told the prince, 36, ‘led’ negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> 
> Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the ‘auction’ by video call, sources say.
> 
> ‘*He conducted negotiations – he had a very “take it or leave it” attitude,’ said an impeccably-placed source in the publishing industry*.
> 
> ‘His starting price was $25million (£18m) and the final figure was way north of that, possibly as much as $35-40million (£25-29m).
> 
> ‘*Those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands: $25million*.
> 
> ‘In Britain, publishing is still a rather “gentlemanly” industry. It’s high stakes, but is still conducted in very genteel terms.’
> 
> The source added: ‘The final contract was actually for a four-book deal, with Harry writing another “when his granny dies”.
> 
> ‘Meghan will write a wellness-type book and people are unsure what the fourth will be. But what is most shocking, frankly, is Harry’s suggestion that the second book won’t be published until the Queen is no longer here.
> 
> ‘People [will] start asking, naturally: what has he got, who is he going to target?
> 
> ‘*The very idea of this unexploded bomb, hanging about waiting for the Queen to pass, is just extraordinary and may strike many as being in very bad taste.*’
> 
> The Royal Family has been left deeply concerned by Harry’s decision to secretly collaborate with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter JR Moehringer on what his publishers described as ‘the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's deal is for FOUR books - including one after The Queen's death
> 
> 
> In news sure to alarm Buckingham Palace, industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled as part of a four-book deal by Prince Harry earlier this week is only the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


First I thought wth has 6 got to say that’ll fill 4 books and then I realized the books will be pure fiction; so he can just keep making crap up to keep filling the pages.


----------



## Hermes Zen

@Maggie Muggins does 'Those B.st.rds!! qualify on your list?  Sorry I'm not very creative and everyone else are so fast. Wanted to help.


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Methane
> Pearl
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> *Hip hip hooray for the team!*
> 
> View attachment 5144986
> 
> 
> Addendum#1
> Submission from @poopsie who was diligently working and couldn't participate in our little quest.
> *he Maleficent of Montecito?
> *Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince
> 
> Addendum#2
> @LittleStar88 has submitted Dastardly Duo



WHOOOOOHOOOO - and alphabetized too!



Annawakes said:


> And I know we have names for Omid.  Scooby-doo is my favorite!





Annawakes said:


> And scabies



Lady C calls him “Ahmed Scabies”


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> @Maggie Muggins does 'Those B.st.rds!! qualify on your list?  Sorry I'm not very creative and everyone else are so fast. Wanted to help.


 With the abbreviation, no one but us will know the meaning. So, very cunning! Besides, I'm not into censorship; I leave that to the mods and admins. I've added the nickname to the list that will be posted when we've gathered all the remaining suggestions. Thank you so much for an à propos description of the duo!


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> I love the constant need to re-write history to suit their narrative.


I think they intended something else - to have a say on Oprah, have it be accepted, zoom to the top of the popularity charts
but now they are pressed for money, and yes, I believe might be two books , publisher did not think enough to gamble on a pair of books initially, they probably have a lock on second book, if the first does well

ps I wrote this not having seen the post about 4 books , but I think they have an advance on one only, they are contracted for 4 if sales are good,  so, 6 is going with a Pulitzer winning ghost writer to boost sales and lock in the 3 other books

funny, they were going to be video and podcast producers, now, they have morphed into authors


----------



## csshopper

Aimee3 said:


> First I thought wth has 6 got to say that’ll fill 4 books and then I realized the books will be pure fiction; so he can just keep making crap up to keep filling the pages.


Maybe the plan is to wait for the blow ups in reaction to Book #1, aggravate and agitate and alienate even more people post publication and then write about all of that in Book #2.

Surprise, surprise he was cold blooded and not a gentleman in negotiations???

If the details of this deal are in fact a real "truth" as opposed to what often is presented as "truth" then it seems abundantly clear there will never be a reunited RF because "happiness" will not sell .

Time to ban them and pull the Titles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope he has to answer to the queen personally on his plans for a book planned for after she dies.


----------



## csshopper

Sitting here wondering if al a the Disney deal where (chose your favorite name from the list) the husband got the wife a job doing a voice over, he demanded she be part of the publication deal. It seems doubtful publishers would be pursuing her on her own since less than 2 months post publication of The Bench it continues to rot:

From Amazon today: 

Best Sellers Rank: #3,108 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#24 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#110 in Children's Emotions Books
#220 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Ready for more surprises?
> 
> *Harry's deal is for FOUR books - and one won't be released until after The Queen has died: Duke oversaw bidding war of up to '$40m' and Meghan will write a 'wellness' book' as part of mega-deal*
> 
> The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen’s platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.
> 
> Harry’s wife Meghan is to pen a ‘wellness’ guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.
> 
> The Mail has been told the prince, 36, ‘led’ negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> 
> Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the ‘auction’ by video call, sources say.
> 
> ‘*He conducted negotiations – he had a very “take it or leave it” attitude,’ said an impeccably-placed source in the publishing industry*.
> 
> ‘His starting price was $25million (£18m) and the final figure was way north of that, possibly as much as $35-40million (£25-29m).
> 
> ‘*Those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands: $25million*.
> 
> ‘In Britain, publishing is still a rather “gentlemanly” industry. It’s high stakes, but is still conducted in very genteel terms.’
> 
> The source added: ‘The final contract was actually for a four-book deal, with Harry writing another “when his granny dies”.
> 
> ‘Meghan will write a wellness-type book and people are unsure what the fourth will be. But what is most shocking, frankly, is Harry’s suggestion that the second book won’t be published until the Queen is no longer here.
> 
> ‘People [will] start asking, naturally: what has he got, who is he going to target?
> 
> ‘*The very idea of this unexploded bomb, hanging about waiting for the Queen to pass, is just extraordinary and may strike many as being in very bad taste.*’
> 
> The Royal Family has been left deeply concerned by Harry’s decision to secretly collaborate with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter JR Moehringer on what his publishers described as ‘the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's deal is for FOUR books - including one after The Queen's death
> 
> 
> In news sure to alarm Buckingham Palace, industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled as part of a four-book deal by Prince Harry earlier this week is only the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe I missed it, but when did all parties sign the paperwork on this 4-book deal ?  Before Phillip’s funeral, after? Before the statue reveal?  The DM said it was done over a Zoom call. Hmmm, much easier to be a tough negotiator on those calls rather than eye-to-eye.  Who else was in the room?  

The only way to stop the EgoDuo is to not buy their products.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> With the abbreviation, no one but us will know the meaning. So, very cunning! Besides, I'm not into censorship; I leave that to the mods and admins. I've added the nickname to the list that will be posted when we've gathered all the remaining suggestions. Thank you so much for an à propos description of the duo!
> View attachment 5145229


LOVE THIS!  Thank you!!  You made me so happy @Maggie Muggins!


----------



## mellibelly

Adding to the list @Maggie Muggins 
Hazmat
Skid Markle


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe I missed it, but when did all parties sign the paperwork on this 4-book deal ?  Before Phillip’s funeral, after? Before the statue reveal?  The DM said it was done over a Zoom call. Hmmm, much easier to be a tough negotiator on those calls rather than eye-to-eye.  Who else was in the room?
> 
> The only way to stop the EgoDuo is to not buy their products.


so who is going to buy this crap?
I guess the publishers think it will sell - if this story is accurate
Again - so arrogant.  I'm beyond disappointment in the "man" he has turned into


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> I have a late submission!  How about *Mermaid*?
> Thank you all, this is my favorite thread.  (And not because of the dastardly duo).  I read it often, every day!





Annawakes said:


> And I know we have names for Omid.  *Scooby-doo* is my favorite!





Annawakes said:


> And *scabies*


Mermaid added to the list and a new list started for the aliases (Scooby-doo and scabies) of that useless so-called author of Funding Freebies. Thank you.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> I call her *Meg-a-lo-maniac* and *Hap-Hazza* ..


Nicknames that truly describe them added to the list. Thank you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> so who is going to buy this crap?
> I guess the publishers think it will sell - if this story is accurate
> Again - so arrogant.  I'm beyond disappointment in the "man" he has turned into



Notice how this story has been drip-fed to us. So insulting. In pandemic times, we the people *must* demand better products, better performances, better writers, better music, better every little thing. If we continue buying the same cheap crap these entitled few spew at us, we will never heal. If ‘the bench’ is any indication of what we can expect from the terrible two, then Penguin/RH books aren’t worth the paper they printed on.

Set the standards high; otherwise save your money.


----------



## Genie27

*I’m on a diet so these all look like beautifully iced sugar cookies to me. *


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> WHOOOOOHOOOO - and alphabetized too!
> Lady C calls him “Ahmed Scabies”


Ahmed Scabies added to his list of nicknames. Thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So it's not only us growing suspicious because Raptor is oh so quiet. You know how any parent breaks out in cold sweat when they suddenly don't hear a peep from their small children? They are probably writing on the wall, cutting their sibling's hair or painting the white couch.

(took that from the comments of a tweet on Harry wanting to destroy the monarchy the minute his grandmother dies)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe I missed it, but when did all parties sign the paperwork on this 4-book deal ?  Before Phillip’s funeral, after? Before the statue reveal?  The DM said it was done over a Zoom call. Hmmm, much easier to be a tough negotiator on those calls rather than eye-to-eye.  Who else was in the room?
> 
> The only way to stop the EgoDuo is to not buy their products.



It seems they have been writing book #1 for quite a while, so it's possible that these deals started while Philip was still alive. Per DM, two of the publishers attended in-person and the others via zoom. 

Here is my bet for the 4 books:
1) The Prelude 
2) The Revenge 
3) The Cure (officially authored by the wife)
4) The Rebirth 

The order of the books may vary depending on QE's longevity. 

My 2 cents on the book to be published after QE dies (the Revenge): I think it will be about the strong connection they had with QE, Hazz's wife and QE's were soulmate. They will likely go in detail about all the memories Hazz, wife and kids had from those many phone calls... don't let the facts ruin a good story. Charles, Will, and Kate may get a few very accusatory chapters. The size of those chapters may depend on how much Charles will do for the Montecito couple.

Hope Charles and Will have excellent lawyers, they are going to need them imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It seems they have been writing book #1 for quite a while, so it's possible that these deals started while Philip was still alive. Per DM, two of the publishers attended in-person and the others via zoom.
> 
> Here is my bet for the 4 books:
> 1) The Prelude
> 2) The Revenge
> 3) The Cure (officially authored by the wife)
> 4) The Rebirth
> 
> The order of the books may vary depending on QE's longevity.
> 
> My 2 cents on the book to be published after QE dies (the Revenge): I think it will be about the strong connection they had with QE, Hazz's wife and QE's were soulmate. They will likely go in detail about all the memories Hazz, wife and kids had from those many phone calls... don't let the facts ruin a good story. Charles, Will, and Kate may get a few very accusatory chapters. The size of those chapters may depend on how much Charles will do for the Montecito couple.
> 
> Hope Charles and Will have excellent lawyers, they are going to need them imo.



‘Thank you - missed the in-person publishers. Would like to know which publishers were involved. Hope the BRF removes any royal warrants they may have and discontinues working with them. Acta non verba.

Hope he is wrong.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> Adding to the list @Maggie Muggins
> Hazmat
> Skid Markle


Thank you. Both nicknames will be added to the final list.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So it's not only us growing suspicious because Raptor is oh so quiet. You know how any parent breaks out in cold sweat when they suddenly don't hear a peep from their small children? They are probably writing on the wall, cutting their sibling's hair or painting the white couch.
> 
> (took that from the comments of a tweet on Harry wanting to destroy the monarchy the minute his grandmother dies)
> 
> View attachment 5145360


He has nothing more to give after the four books. His wife will write a fifth book, the Divorce.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They chose _this week_ to ruin (haaaa, as if) George’s birthday and QE’s vacation. 
Didn’t work, Z listers.


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> He has nothing more to give after the four books. His wife will write a fifth book, the Divorce.


And that book won't even sell 1,000 copies - because WHO CARES?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Thank you - missed the in-person publishers. Would like to know which publishers were involved. Hope the BRF removes any royal warrants they may have and discontinues working with them. Acta non verba.


You bet. The BRF needs to remove them from everything linked to the monarchy, gloves are off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Thank you - missed the in-person publishers. Would like to know which publishers were involved. Hope the BRF removes any royal warrants they may have and discontinues working with them. Acta non verba.
> 
> Hope he is wrong.




Clearly, the young and older ones of us have the wisdom.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He has told us repeatedly who he is - believe him.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> He has told us repeatedly who he is - believe him.



He sounds like a very jealous and nasty little man!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yassss, let’s get the real truth.  Love the comment about including a DNA test to make the book/pamphlet a best seller.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Never thought I would say this, thank you Omid
must have been ginormous pushback to the rumors for them to address them


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Never thought I would say this, thank you Omid
> must have been ginormous pushback to the rumors for them to address them



Hold up. Is there a 4 book deal or not? Was ‘the bench’ book 1? Will he _write_ a book after QE passes?
What does “tell-all” mean?  1 book, 2 books, 3 books, 4?


----------



## octopus17

I was just telling (ranting to) DH how tasteless this all was, and he said "it's just business..."

I find it absolutely appalling and beyond the pale.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you. Both nicknames will be added to the final list.
> View attachment 5145380


Sorry @Maggie Muggins I've not been contributing much to the list. I had a busy day and I'm still in shock by the announcement of the four books. 

It looks like Hazz is also known as BunkerBoy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cornflower Blue said:


> I was just telling (ranting to) DH how tasteless this all was, and he said "it's just business..."
> 
> I find it absolutely appalling and beyond the pale.



Ya kno, he is not wrong.  As long as people give their hard-earned money to these grifters, they will take it.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Never thought I would say this, thank you Omid
> must have been ginormous pushback to the rumors for them to address them


Between Omid and DM, I'll go with DM. 
I don't think DM would risk a lawsuit with this.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how this story has been drip-fed to us. So insulting. In pandemic times, we the people *must* demand better products, better performances, better writers, better music, better every little thing. If we continue buying the same cheap crap these entitled few spew at us, we will never heal. If ‘the bench’ is any indication of what we can expect from the terrible two, then Penguin/RH books aren’t worth the paper they printed on.
> 
> Set the standards high; otherwise save your money.


I would not do anything to enrich these two grifters


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up. Is there a 4 book deal or not? Was ‘the bench’ book 1? Will he _write_ a book after QE passes?
> What does “tell-all” mean?  1 book, 2 books, 3 books, 4?


I don't think the Bench is part of the deal, but I believe there is a deal for a book after QE passes away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another Z lister trash show?


Young couple keeping eyes closed and looking concentrated while meditating among flying books in the air with cloudy skyscape on background.









						Stock Photo - Young couple keeping eyes closed and looking concentrated while meditating among flying books in the air with cloudy skyscape on background
					

Download this stock image: Young couple keeping eyes closed and looking concentrated while meditating among flying books in the air with cloudy skyscape on background. - PGYN6N from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos, illustrations and vectors.




					www.alamy.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @Maggie Muggins I've not been contributing much to the list. I had a busy day and I'm still in shock by the announcement of the four books.
> 
> It looks like Hazz is also known as BunkerBoy.



Don't fret @Chanbal you have already contributed and I can add BunkerBoy to the final list. Just concentrate on relaxing and staying well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @Maggie Muggins I've not been contributing much to the list. I had a busy day and I'm still in shock by the announcement of the four books.
> 
> It looks like Hazz is also known as BunkerBoy.




My dear, you have earned numerous stars as well as hearts.  To recognize your extraordinary contributions during the world’s worst pandemic and to give you our sincerest thanks,  we, on behalf of the vacationing QE, honor you with the Cullinan Heart:
     3 Cheers!   










						The fascinating history of the Queen’s Cullinan V diamond brooch
					

The monarch wears the jewel in the new image released for Prince Philip’s 99th birthday




					www.tatler.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmmm.









						Prince Harry’s belongings taken from Frogmore Cottage & placed in storage
					

PRINCE Harry’s remaining belongings have been taken from Frogmore Cottage and placed in storage. Windsor Castle staff stripped his and wife Meghan’s living quarters and bedroom after he flew back t…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> My dear, you have earned numerous stars as well as hearts.  To recognize your extraordinary contributions during the world’s worst pandemic and to give you our sincerest thanks,  we, on behalf of the vacationing QE, honor you with the Cullinan Heart:
> 3 Cheers!
> View attachment 5145417
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fascinating history of the Queen’s Cullinan V diamond brooch
> 
> 
> The monarch wears the jewel in the new image released for Prince Philip’s 99th birthday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com



I'm speechless, you are all very kind. This is the best thread on TPF. Many Thanks!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> He has told us repeatedly who he is - believe him.



I want him to talk about the "blue on blue" action that got him sent home.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I want him to talk about the "blue on blue" action that got him sent home.



Oh my, I have heard about the prostitutes, but have not heard about this. Please do tell.









						blue-on-blue
					

1. relating to an attack in which soldiers, etc. are injured or killed by their…




					dictionary.cambridge.org
				



relating to an attack in which soldiers, etc. are injured or killed by their own army or by soldiers on the same side as them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Never thought I would say this, thank you Omid
> must have been ginormous pushback to the rumors for them to address them



Don’t believe a word Scobie says. Everything that comes out of his mouth is coming from Meghan and Harry, so it’s safe to assume it is a lie.


----------



## Chanbal

Their intentions are clear to many...


----------



## byzina

sdkitty said:


> so who is going to buy this crap?
> I guess the publishers think it will sell - if this story is accurate
> Again - so arrogant.  I'm beyond disappointment in the "man" he has turned into



probably, the publishers don't expect the book to pay off immediately. it might be a long-running story. people have been interested in Edward and Wallis for eighty years. even if the majority of people ignore the book now, in 20-30 years some may have fun reading it. I bet we will even have a movie or a series devoted to this scandal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> He has told us repeatedly who he is - believe him.




He is saying Wills is jealous he gets to be in active duty, not that he's jealous of Wills for being #2. I mean, I love the gossip as much as anyone else, but please be just a little bit diligent. (not CarryOn, the Twitter girl)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Never thought I would say this, thank you Omid
> must have been ginormous pushback to the rumors for them to address them



Yeah, the thing is, they lie when they open their mouths. Maybe there is no such a big contract and they just dripfed that to make themselves more important, maybe there is and they feel for the time being it's better to keep mum about it because the public is outraged...or there is a clause that book *could* come to live, but nothing is decided yet, and they were testing the waters. Who knows.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I want him to talk about the "blue on blue" action that got him sent home.



What's that?

ETA: found it. My bad, I should have take a page out of Raptor's book and make British military history a huge thing of mine. I can't stop laughing she came up with this...I wonder if anyone believed her at that time. Probably not Philip.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He is saying Wills is jealous he gets to be in active duty, not that he's jealous of Wills for being #2. I mean, I love the gossip as much as anyone else, but please be just a little bit diligent. (not CarryOn, the Twitter girl)



Sure, it is easy for him to say it’s ok for others to be shot at because we all know how well protected he himself was.  He reeks of  serious mental health issues even then.  Head-spinning stuff right there. IMO


----------



## Sharont2305

I really have no words re the 'not being published till after the Queen dies' 
Actually, I have many but they will probably get me banned from this forum for life if I post them.


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> Ready for more surprises?
> 
> *Harry's deal is for FOUR books - and one won't be released until after The Queen has died: Duke oversaw bidding war of up to '$40m' and Meghan will write a 'wellness' book' as part of mega-deal*
> 
> The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen’s platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.
> 
> Harry’s wife Meghan is to pen a ‘wellness’ guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.
> 
> The Mail has been told the prince, 36, ‘led’ negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> 
> Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the ‘auction’ by video call, sources say.
> 
> ‘*He conducted negotiations – he had a very “take it or leave it” attitude,’ said an impeccably-placed source in the publishing industry*.
> 
> ‘His starting price was $25million (£18m) and the final figure was way north of that, possibly as much as $35-40million (£25-29m).
> 
> ‘*Those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands: $25million*.
> 
> ‘In Britain, publishing is still a rather “gentlemanly” industry. It’s high stakes, but is still conducted in very genteel terms.’
> 
> The source added: ‘The final contract was actually for a four-book deal, with Harry writing another “when his granny dies”.
> 
> ‘Meghan will write a wellness-type book and people are unsure what the fourth will be. But what is most shocking, frankly, is Harry’s suggestion that the second book won’t be published until the Queen is no longer here.
> 
> ‘People [will] start asking, naturally: what has he got, who is he going to target?
> 
> ‘*The very idea of this unexploded bomb, hanging about waiting for the Queen to pass, is just extraordinary and may strike many as being in very bad taste.*’
> 
> The Royal Family has been left deeply concerned by Harry’s decision to secretly collaborate with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter JR Moehringer on what his publishers described as ‘the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him’.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's deal is for FOUR books - including one after The Queen's death
> 
> 
> In news sure to alarm Buckingham Palace, industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled as part of a four-book deal by Prince Harry earlier this week is only the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The reports of how he carried on the negotiations/bidding truly reflect what an ******** he is.  He has no manners.  He has no business acuity.  He only has this overblown sense of who he is (or wishes he was).  And of course, he is guided only by greed and a desperate need for money to show how important he is.



CarryOn2020 said:


> He has told us repeatedly who he is - believe him.



I can't believe the self delusion and illusions of grandeur this moron has.  He really wants W to be jealous of him.  And the fact that he was constantly protected but wanted W to go up and get shot at is laughable.


----------



## Sharont2305

Have the Bar Stewards been added to the name list?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Thank you - missed the in-person publishers. Would like to know which publishers were involved. Hope the BRF removes any royal warrants they may have and discontinues working with them. Acta non verba.
> 
> Hope he is wrong.




Poll says "How interested Britons are in *reading* Prince Harry’s memoirs". 

I doubt it would be 1% if yhr survey had asked 'How interested Britons are in *BUYING* Prince Harry’s memoirs'


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> DM is on this as well. It is crazy that she is not allowing her father to see his grandchildren. Before Haz, she had only praises for her father. It's cruel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle: I'll take Meghan to COURT to see my grandchildren
> 
> 
> Speaking at his Rosarito, Mexico home, Thomas Markle said he was ready to take his estranged daughter Meghan to court in order to see his grandchildren Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I am betting eventually she will claim he molested her or something.


----------



## justwatchin

Sharont2305 said:


> I really have no words re the 'not being published till after the Queen dies'
> Actually, I have many but they will probably get me banned from this forum for life if I post them.


Exactly because the implication is clear that he plans on this being a tell all and in my opinion very vindictive.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lulilu said:


> The reports of how he carried on the negotiations/bidding truly reflect what an ******** he is.  He has no manners.  He has no business acuity.  He only has this overblown sense of who he is (or wishes he was).  And of course, he is guided only by greed and a desperate need for money to show how important he is.
> 
> 
> I can't believe the self delusion and illusions of grandeur this moron has.  He really wants W to be jealous of him.  And the fact that he was constantly protected but wanted W to go up and get shot at is laughable.


He forgot “Kindness ALWAYS wins” that day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I really have no words re the 'not being published till after the Queen dies'
> Actually, I have many but they will probably get me banned from this forum for life if I post them.


 
I feel entirely the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Poll says "How interested Britons are in *reading* Prince Harry’s memoirs".
> 
> I doubt it would be 1% if yhr survey had asked 'How interested Britons are in *BUYING* Prince Harry’s memoirs'


Way way fewer people actually buy and read books than you’d think.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Allisonfaye said:


> I am betting eventually she will claim he molested her or something.



When Lady CC was writing her book she received a phonecall from a "friend" suggesting that direction. She thought it was a "one swipe, two flies" thing to discredit Thomas and getting her sued so she didn't bite...but she was thoroughly disgusted anyone would even try to go there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I think at this point she's completely over him...but as it doesn't get much better than the UK's next king's son she has nowhere to go really. 

I have the dreadful feeling she wouldn't be all that sad if something happened to him - she could be rid of his annoyingly needy personality und his business unsaviness but would be a royal widow instead of once again a divorcée.


----------



## Chanbal

Lawyers apparently replied 'no comments' to the 4 book story but later changed their statement to 'false and defamatory.' DM may have triggered an important thing here...


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Way way fewer people actually buy and read books than you’d think.



But asking if people are interested in reading is different than buying. 

I think Penguin Random House are planning 'newspaper' serialisation and selling for 'dramatisation'


----------



## CarryOn2020

As typical with H&M, much of the story does not add up:
— when did his ghostwriter(not) write this tell-all(not) ?  
Thought the article said he has been working on for awhile, completion in 2022.
— did he show the publishers samples?  
— how did he arrive at the $25million price? Did his {really OW’s} lawyers advise him? 
— exactly how many books should we expect?  does 1 memoir mean 1 volume or 4?  Does “planned by Harry” mean someone else could step in and write the others? This is what it has come to with these grifters - question everything, parse every word. Ick.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I really have no words re the 'not being published till after the Queen dies'
> Actually, I have many but they will probably get me banned from this forum for life if I post them.


I'm not a monarchist, but I could probably use your words to describe the disgusting actions of the Montecito couple. 
I respect and admire QE's dedication to her country, and I see Will following in QE's footsteps. People in the UK seem overall happy by having a monarchy. This couple has no right to destroy all this.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Have the Bar Stewards been added to the name list?


 at the Urban Dictionary definition and very apt description of the duo. "A way of getting away with calling someone a b*st*rd in polite company, like in front of your Mum." Added to the list with pleasure. Thank you!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> As typical with H&M, much of the story does not add up:
> — when did his ghostwriter(not) write this tell-all(not) ?
> Thought the article said he has been working on for awhile, completion in 2022.
> — did he show the publishers samples?
> — how did he arrive at the $25million price? Did his {really OW’s} lawyers advise him?
> — exactly how many books should we expect?  does 1 memoir mean 1 volume or 4?  Does “planned by Harry” mean someone else could step in and write the others? This is what it has come to with these grifters - question everything, parse every word. Ick.


I believe in the 4 book story. It goes well with their 'self-serving behavior'... 

*Prince Charles's biographer Jonathan Dimbleby accuses Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of 'vicious, cruel and horribly self-serving' behaviour over their interview with Oprah Winfrey*









						Prince Charles's biographer Jonathan Dimbleby slams Harry and Meghan
					

Jonathan Dimbleby said it was a 'great shame' that the couple went ahead with the broadcast earlier this year while speaking at the Buxton International Festival in Derbyshire this week.




					dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I believe in the 4 book story. It goes well with their 'self-serving behavior'...
> 
> *Prince Charles's biographer Jonathan Dimbleby accuses Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of 'vicious, cruel and horribly self-serving' behaviour over their interview with Oprah Winfrey*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles's biographer Jonathan Dimbleby slams Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Jonathan Dimbleby said it was a 'great shame' that the couple went ahead with the broadcast earlier this year while speaking at the Buxton International Festival in Derbyshire this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailymail.co.uk


I particularly like this quote, "I believe a lot of the insinuations he made were not consistent with fact."  
IMO, we need the media to keep correcting their lies and publishing the truth.


----------



## Pivoine66

Chanbal said:


> Their intentions are clear to many...
> View attachment 5145511


And I have the impression that H's wife still wants the photos with the Queen and children and on the balcony (future self-promotion and cash-in for herself and her children), pushes H forward as the "bad boy" so that her image is restored in such a way that "her truths" and back stabbing are forgotten and she can receive the longed-for invitations to big events, celebrities and the rich of America. The first book will be surprisingly mild in my opinion, she will already continue to be portrayed as a victim by H. Then in the second book - with her credibility restored - comes the real payback (revenge for her as a presumed narcissist, not victim) with K and above all his father and William and their supposed "mistreatment" in the Royal Family, of course again H fronted, so that if a divorce ever takes place she - the victim and H did spill all out - can stay in Montecito with all the invitations etc.. Moreover, this way H earns the money and she and her children have maintenance claims, which in doubt H, if he can no longer sell his stories, may yet receive from the Royal Family as son/brother of the future King, since as such he maybe cannot be dropped completely.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up. Is there a 4 book deal or not? Was ‘the bench’ book 1? Will he _write_ a book after QE passes?
> What does “tell-all” mean?  1 book, 2 books, 3 books, 4?


Omid does speak in word salad style


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC's newest. 

"I do not think Meghan is entirely responsible for Harry going rogue. Harry always had the potential for going rogue. If he didn't have the potential to go rogue, he wouldn't have gone rogue, that's really important. This is...his rogueishness, his maverick behaviour, his alternatives - let's be polite about it - were always there, were always a part of his personality, co-existing with other parts of his personality. It might be simpler to think of it as two seperate personalities, in fact it's one with compartments, but for the sake of ease let's think of it like that. What Meghan has done...she has released in him his potential. She has given him permission. I think not only has she given him actual permission, which alcohol or another drug wouldn't actually give you permission, it would give you permission to give yourself permission if you see what I mean...but it wouldn't actually give you permission. But a human being to whom you are addicted can give you permission. The whole principle of permission is really an interesting one psychologically because whether it is a person or a drug taking the stopper off the bottle and releasing the acid and causing the stink of acid being released...it doesn't matter. What matters is that the person wants that permission. They seek it. And this is what folie à deux is all about."

I fully do believe had he married someone not as a vindictive nutjob, someone who would have soothed his demons instead of feeding them, he'd probably happily still be #6 and walk a step behind his brother always...or he'd sit on a farm in Africa and watch the zebras.


----------



## Annawakes

If the next book is not to be published until after QE passes……What. A. Coward.

6, if you’re going to go nuclear have the balls to do it while the Queen still lives.  Oh wait, you still need her for photo ops and such.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest.
> 
> "I do not think Meghan is entirely responsible for Harry going rogue. Harry always had the potential for going rogue. If he didn't have the potential to go rogue, he wouldn't have gone rogue, that's really important. This is...his rogueishness, his maverick behaviour, his alternatives - let's be polite about it - were always there, were always a part of his personality, co-existing with other parts of his personality. It might be simpler to think of it as two seperate personalities, in fact it's one with compartments, but for the sake of ease let's think of it like that. What Meghan has done...she has released in him his potential. She has given him permission. I think not only has she given him actual permission, which alcohol or another drug wouldn't actually give you permission, it would give you permission to give yourself permission if you see what I mean...but it wouldn't actually give you permission. But a human being to whom you are addicted can give you permission. The whole principle of permission is really an interesting one psychologically because whether it is a person or a drug taking the stopper off the bottle and releasing the acid and causing the stink of acid being released...it doesn't matter. What matters is that the person wants that permission. They seek it. And this is what folie à deux is all about."
> 
> I fully do believe had he married someone not as a vindictive nutjob, someone who would have soothed his demons instead of feeding them, he'd probably happily still be #6 and walk a step behind his brother always...or he'd sit on a farm in Africa and watch the zebras.





That necklace!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> As typical with H&M, much of the story does not add up:
> — when did his ghostwriter(not) write this tell-all(not) ?
> Thought the article said he has been working on for awhile, completion in 2022.
> — did he show the publishers samples?
> — how did he arrive at the $25million price? Did his {really OW’s} lawyers advise him?
> — exactly how many books should we expect?  does 1 memoir mean 1 volume or 4?  Does “planned by Harry” mean someone else could step in and write the others? This is what it has come to with these grifters - question everything, parse every word. Ick.


I read that the first book is supposed to be mostly about his mother.

If true, that’s really really sad. He and Kanye just have to get over it.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz may have wanted to be the Crown Prince, but instead he is being seen by some people as...


----------



## Hermes Zen

I think there’s truth in a four book deal. Because the news got out whether intentional or by accident, H got a rash of xxxx from the RF especially about the Q, the news is being retracted to cover up. Eventually/a ways down the road we will hear more.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> With the abbreviation, no one but us will know the meaning. So, very cunning! Besides, I'm not into censorship; I leave that to the mods and admins. I've added the nickname to the list that will be posted when we've gathered all the remaining suggestions. Thank you so much for an à propos description of the duo!
> View attachment 5145229


Did you get mine on the list? .. *Meg-a-lo-maniac*  -and-   *Hap-Hazz**a *???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Maggie Muggins said:


> Nicknames that truly describe them added to the list. Thank you.
> View attachment 5145324





CeeJay said:


> Did you get mine on the list? .. *Meg-a-lo-maniac*  -and-   *Hap-Hazz**a *???


Yes. I'm sorry you missed the post with your star. See the attachment in the quote above.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hermes Zen said:


> I think there’s truth in a four book deal. Because the news got out whether intentional or by accident, H got a rash of xxxx from the RF especially about the Q, the news is being retracted to cover up. Eventually/a ways down the road we will hear more.


I agree. There was something super fishy about Skid Row’s statement.


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC's newest.
> 
> "I do not think Meghan is entirely responsible for Harry going rogue. Harry always had the potential for going rogue. If he didn't have the potential to go rogue, he wouldn't have gone rogue, that's really important. This is...his rogueishness, his maverick behaviour, his alternatives - let's be polite about it - were always there, were always a part of his personality, co-existing with other parts of his personality. It might be simpler to think of it as two seperate personalities, in fact it's one with compartments, but for the sake of ease let's think of it like that. What Meghan has done...she has released in him his potential. She has given him permission. I think not only has she given him actual permission, which alcohol or another drug wouldn't actually give you permission, it would give you permission to give yourself permission if you see what I mean...but it wouldn't actually give you permission. But a human being to whom you are addicted can give you permission. The whole principle of permission is really an interesting one psychologically because whether it is a person or a drug taking the stopper off the bottle and releasing the acid and causing the stink of acid being released...it doesn't matter. What matters is that the person wants that permission. They seek it. And this is what folie à deux is all about."
> 
> I fully do believe had he married someone not as a vindictive nutjob, someone who would have soothed his demons instead of feeding them, he'd probably happily still be #6 and walk a step behind his brother always...or he'd sit on a farm in Africa and watch the zebras.




Harry’s addiction - Me Gain - gave him “permission” to release the potential that already existed of his jealousy/anger/etc., his rogue behavior ... folie a deux - so interesting, thank you.
(starts a couple seconds before  the five minute mark)





__





						Leopold and Loeb - Folie a Deux
					

By: Menschenleer  1924 held America enthralled when two wealthy teenage boys remorselessly bludgeoned an innocent young child to death in t...




					serialkillercentral.blogspot.com
				












						10 Highly Unusual Examples Of Folie A Deux Or Shared Psychosis - Listverse
					

Folie a deux ("madness of two") is also known as shared psychosis. Without getting too much into the medical terminology or in any way implying that this




					listverse.com


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Methane
> Pearl
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> *Hip hip hooray for the team!*
> 
> View attachment 5144986
> 
> 
> Addendum#1
> Submission from @poopsie who was diligently working and couldn't participate in our little quest.
> *he Maleficent of Montecito?
> *Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince
> 
> Addendum#2
> @LittleStar88 has submitted Dastardly Duo


May I add?

The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
Nope and Dope
She who Shouldn't be Obeyed
Flowerpot and Hardly There
The Earl of Dunnothing
Baron of Hesaheel


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> May I add?
> 
> The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
> Nope and Dope
> She who Shouldn't be Obeyed
> Flowerpot and Hardly There
> The Earl of Dunnothing
> Baron of Hesaheel


You must be a Rumpole of the Bailey fan … thumb way up


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> You must be a Rumpole of the Bailey fan … thumb way up


When the DH pulls out a bottle of wine and serves it with a disclaimer, my response is from R of the B and I call it the house plonk hahaha!


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Lawyers apparently replied 'no comments' to the 4 book story but later changed their statement to 'false and defamatory.' DM may have triggered an important thing here...
> View attachment 5145674



Have a careful look at the words being used in the denial.

only one *memoir by Harry *but doesn’t outright deny a four book deal.  Doesn’t stop MM from having her own memoir as part of the four book deal.

Scooby said *Harry* is its not doing a mullti titled book  *co*-*ordinated* around HMTQ passing.  But what if it is MM - and the release is planned in 5-6 years?  So it’s not coordinated and it’s not Harry….

VERY CAREFUL wording - and I bet both statements were done by the lawyers.


----------



## Lounorada

csshopper said:


> Lounorada, Great to have you back to comment and illustrate! Hope you had a good trip and Hermes did not disappoint.


Thank you and sorry for the late reply @csshopper, every time I popped in to this thread there were always 25-30 pages to read and I'd slowly exit hoping to catch up at a later date! Unfortunately I haven't been away on a trip recently and haven't been to Hermes (sadly), just been busy with work these past few weeks and haven't had the time to sit down and catch up/post on here.
All is back to normal now after a busy period so I will hopefully be keeping up-to-date on this fast moving thread!




Canturi lover said:


> Uh Oh....
> Harry and Meghan want Lilibet to be christened at Windsor
> https://mol.im/a/9796561


Buckingham Palace & QEII:








Clearblueskies said:


> This is astonishing!  A (very clever) lady has _*knitted *_Sandringham   (Sorry (not sorry) for the OT)
> 
> *Knitted Sandringham tribute goes on display at Queen's home*
> Published1 hour ago
> Share
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMargaret Seaman says it is "lovely" to see her knitted Sandringham, in Sandringham
> *A knitted tribute to one of the Queen's estates is going on display at the location that inspired the work.*
> It took two years for Margaret Seaman, from Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, to make her version of the Sandringham Estate.
> The 18ft (5.5m) by 6ft (1.8m) creation is now on display in the Ballroom of the Queen's home in Norfolk.
> Mrs Seaman, 92, said it was "absolutely wonderful" to see here tribute in situ and said "it would be the icing on the cake" if the Queen got to see it too.
> The knitted work features Sandringham House, St Mary Magdalene Church, the Nest summer house, the estate's gardens, miniature woollen visitors and members of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> image captionMargaret Seaman used much of her time during the first lockdown to work on the knitted model
> Mrs Seaman's work was previously on display at the Norfolk Makers' Festivalin the Forum, Norwich, and raised £8,000 for three Norfolk NHS hospital charity funds.
> She said she had no plans to create anything else as big, as "I have lots of other things still to do".
> "I'm going to have a bit of a rest," she added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMrs Seaman visited Sandringham many times to get her work exactly right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionShe also worked from sketches and photographs
> Sandringham Estate said it was "delighted" with the "woolly wonders".
> It said it had been "in regular contact with Margaret throughout her project and followed her progress closely so it will be a 'knitting' tribute to her impressive handiwork and dedication to the project".
> 
> 'Royal' knitter creates homage to Queen's estate
> 'It's the jewel in the crown of the seafront'
> How Covid-19 has left Royal fans 'disappointed'
> Jayne Evans, event producer of the Norfolk Makers' Festival, and Mrs Seaman's "unofficial agent", said: "This is a glorious moment that we've dreamed of happening.
> "It has already wowed thousands and thousands of people.
> "She is my role model, icon and my hero."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE COPYRIGHTKEIRON TOVELL
> image captionMrs Seaman said she worked on the project "on average about 10 to 12 hours a day"
> Ms Evans hopes the new exhibition will raise even more money for the NHS and "double" the amount raised.
> The creations are on display in the Ballroom until 14 October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> image captionIt was previously on display at the Forum in Norwich





That is amazing!!




QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I'm right at the edge of the German flooding (as in, we're mainly ok, just very bad weather and what comes with it, but 15 km in the one or the other direction people are anxiously waiting to see if the dams hold), so if you don't see me for a few days we're probably out of power or internet or both.


Late reply, but hoping things have calmed down where you are now! Watching that dreadfully scary weather on the news was heartbreaking for everyone involved and affected by it. Sending nothing but best wishes your way 




needlv said:


> Another story about their financial woes… breaking it down into a spend of over $20M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have lost $22 million since Megxit
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM will be asking for more donations to archewell soon…



$20m in a little over a year?! I believe it, but damnnnnn! Such a waste of money with nothing but bitterness to show for it.







xincinsin said:


> There was a link in the financial woes story that goes to a gossipy tale speculating Priyanka Chopra snubbed W&K because she is Team Rotten. Was that really the Royal box, and how do people score an invite to it if they are anti-BRF?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s friend snubs Kate and Will
> 
> 
> Loyalty over royalty?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


W&K:







Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5140902
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US pressure mounting on Harry and Meghan's work ethic
> 
> 
> PRESSURE in the US is mounting on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a leading royal expert, who warned Spotify and Netflix will soon be "wondering where the money has gone".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The money is going here:






gracekelly said:


> Breaking news from the Daily Mail
> *BREAKING NEWS: Prince Harry 'has written shock Megxit MEMOIR which could hit shelves before Christmas' in new bombshell to rock the Royal Family*
> 
> *Prince Harry has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year*
> *It is thought he has been working with Pulitzer-winning writer J. R. Moehringer*
> *The first draft of the manuscript is said to be almost completely written *By RAVEN SAUNT FOR MAILONLINEPUBLISHED: 13:28 EDT, 19 July 2021 | UPDATED: 13:48 EDT, 19 July 2021
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...written-bombshell-Megxit-MEMOIR.html#comments
> 
> Prince Harry has written an explosive memoir about his life in the royal family which could hit shelves before Christmas, it has been revealed.
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, has reportedly been secretly working on the book for nearly a year which he has sold to Penguin Random House.
> Prince Harry has been working with Pulitzer-winning ghostwriter J. R. Moehringer.
> I am going to speculate wildly and say that all those press releases about getting back with the family for all upcoming events and a christening at Windsor was the biggest pile of steaming HS ever.





He's such a hypocritical POS.



Chanbal said:


> Harry's truth!
> *“*_*I’m deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I’ve learned over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read a firsthand account of my life that’s accurate and wholly truthful*._”
> “_In *an intimate and heartfelt memoir from one of the most fascinating and influential global figures of our time*, Prince Harry will share, for the very first time, the definitive account of the experiences, adventures, losses, and life lessons that have helped shape him._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry writing explosive memoir about his life in the royal family
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been secretly writing a memoir for nearly a year, and he’s sold it to Penguin Random House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com









Jayne1 said:


> View attachment 5141373
> 
> I'm writing this not as a prince.... signed Prince Harry.





Wow! They (especially JCMH) are so dumb and delusional.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> May I add?
> 
> The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
> Nope and Dope
> She who Shouldn't be Obeyed
> Flowerpot and Hardly There
> The Earl of Dunnothing
> Baron of Hesaheel


Yes, by all means and thank you.  It may be a while before I post the final list because as most of us have already gathered, TPF posters have such fertile imaginations that the suggestions keep coming in. But then, the zany, crazy, funny, and you-name-it nicknames should keep us entertained for some time.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, by all means and thank you.  It may be a while before I post the final list because as most of us have already gathered, TPF posters have such fertile imaginations that the suggestions keep coming in. But then, the zany, crazy, funny, and you-name-it nicknames should keep us entertained for some time.
> View attachment 5146092


No one liked my epithet - the glimmer twins - a name given to Jagger and Richards when they went into tax exile to make more money 
Some thought that using the epithet to describe H&M was disrespectful to that upstanding citizen Keith Richards so I stopped using it LOL


----------



## Chanbal

Great article by SV 

*SARAH VINE: It's time for Harry to take a long hard look in a mirror*

Admittedly I am not a publisher but I do know a little about the book trade. *And one thing I can say for certain: you don’t get a four-book deal with an advance approaching £30 million if the person signing the cheque doesn’t know for sure there’s some seriously juicy stuff on offer.*

The revelation that Prince Harry is working on a tell-all autobiography in collaboration with Pulitzer Prize-winning ghostwriter J.R. Moehringer would have been nerve-racking enough for the Queen, given his recent track record with Oprah et al.

Now it transpires there are three more books in the pipeline. Admittedly one is a ‘wellness’ tome, to be penned by the Duchess herself, so probably more of the sub-Gwyneth Paltrow guff about the importance of self-love.

But the other two remain a mystery –save for the fact that Volume 2 will reportedly be held back until after the Queen dies.

If this turns out to be the case, then inevitably there will be speculation as to why. And given the Prince’s recent string of attacks on his family, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to assume the worst.

There have been many jaw-dropping moments over the past few months in relation to Harry, but this sets a new bar.

Because however uncharitable it may be, it’s hard to dismiss the notion that the Queen, who has never been anything other than forgiving of her grandson’s behaviour, is now little more than an inconvenient obstacle in his mission to cash in on his past life as a Royal.

What’s more, one can’t help wondering: is it possible that Prince Harry might not actually be the rather sweet, generous-hearted man he always seemed to be – or even the emotional, bleeding heart Prince of Woke he likes to project?

We’ve seen glimpses of this over the past few years. *His aggression towards the press, the petty rows with his brother, the way he and Meghan deliberately targeted the Duchess of Cambridge in that Oprah interview, his decision to fly home straight after his grandfather’s funeral rather than stay a few extra hours to celebrate the Queen’s 95th birthday.

The further Harry steps out from behind the protective screen of the Monarchy, the more his true character seems to emerge.* And it’s not all sunshine and rainbows. Details about how he ‘led’ contract negotiations from his £11 million mansion in Montecito are in themselves quite revealing. *According to a source in publishing, he had a ‘very take-it-or-leave-it’ attitude, and ‘those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands’.

His starting price was £18 million; the bidding apparently ended around the £29 million mark. *That’s the kind of deal Gordon ‘greed is good’ Gekko would be proud of.

*It’s certainly a far cry from the touchy-feely persona Harry likes to present in carefully engineered photoshoots and interviews.

But ultimately you have only to look at the way Harry continually ambushes the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family with bombshells like this, never giving them fair warning of what he’s planning, to see that this is a man who, while he talks a lot about compassion and caring, often behaves in exactly the opposite manner.

Uncertainty and living under constant fear of attack are classic stress triggers, and that is exactly what Harry is doing to the Queen.

And now she knows that it won’t even stop when she’s dead – that, in fact, her passing will unlock another clause in the multi-million-pound contract.*

Harry claims that in writing this memoir he will have a chance to address the world ‘not as a Prince but as the man I’ve become’.

Might I respectfully suggest, Sir, that as that man you take a long, hard look in the mirror…









						SARAH VINE: It's time for Harry to take a long hard look in a mirror
					

SARAH VINE: There have been many jaw-dropping moments over the past few months in relation to Harry, but this sets a new bar.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Have a careful look at the words being used in the denial.
> 
> only one *memoir by Harry *but doesn’t outright deny a four book deal.  Doesn’t stop MM from having her own memoir as part of the four book deal.
> 
> Scooby said *Harry* is its not doing a mullti titled book  *co*-*ordinated* around HMTQ passing.  But what if it is MM - and the release is planned in 5-6 years?  So it’s not coordinated and it’s not Harry….
> 
> VERY CAREFUL wording - and I bet both statements were done by the lawyers.


Yep, it's obvious that the lawyers are playing with words. The deal is for four books and this is why they went from 'no comments' to a statement that can have different meanings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is the publishing deal a result of _that_ lunch with WallisA?










						Most Influential Family Owned Businesses 2019: THE ANNENBERG FOUNDATION - Los Angeles Business Journal
					

The Annenberg Foundation is a family foundation that provides funding and support to nonprofit organizations in the United States and globally.




					labusinessjournal.com


----------



## 1LV

Whether written or spoken only a dolt would take what H or MM said with more than a grain of salt at this point. Truth is obviously not their strong suit.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> No one liked my epithet - the glimmer twins - a name given to Jagger and Richards when they went into tax exile to make more money
> Some thought that using the epithet to describe H&M was disrespectful to that upstanding citizen Keith Richards so I stopped using it LOL


I think we're a pretty tolerant bunch here, so IMO, if you like the nickname, just use it. Anyway, I've added it to the list. Thank you.  Just so you know, I really enjoy reading all your informative posts.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, the new thing is it’s ok to spew venom as long as you donate the *proceeds *to charity [after you take your share]
> *Prince Harry's memoir ghostwriter is Pulitzer-winning author behind Andre Agassi's Open and Nike co-founder's Shoe Dog - as experts say Harry was paid $20m advance 'at least' and will earn millions more - which he says he'll give to charity*
> 
> *Publishing experts say Harry will have been paid at least a $20million advance*
> *He could earn far more in sales once the book is released next year *
> *In a statement on his website, he said he'll be donating the proceeds of the book to charity*
> *Barack and Michelle ***** were given a joint $65million advance for their memoirs by Penguin Random House in 2017  *
> *J.R. Moehringer is Harry's ghostwriter for the as-yet untitled memoir that Penguin Random House has bought the rights to A$$hole, nothing else fits*
> *Moehringer is a Pulitzer-winning journalist who previously worked for the LA Times  another meaningless award*
> *His past celebrity biographies include Andre Agassi's Open and Shoe Dog, by Nike co-founder Phil Knight*
> *It's unclear how the partnership with Harry came about - Moehringer lives in Berkley, 300 miles from Harry and Meghan's Montecito mansion hint: 2 words, OW*
> *Since quitting royal life, the pair have formed lucrative deals with Netflix and Spotify and Meghan has written children's books*
> *They have also taken payment in speaking fees for firms like JP Morgan *


Someone is paying this fool $20million to talk utter bullsh*t and spit out an endless amount of contradictions and lies in a mEmOiR (better titled 'MoirMeMeMe')? I can't with this world anymore


Interesting that a few days ago it was reported they have spent $20mil since running away from their Royal responsibilities for an iNdEpEnDeNt life and now all of a sudden $20mil is coming straight back into their joint bank account It's as if they knew this money was coming to them for a long time, making it possible to spend $20mil in the space of a little over a year, without a care in the world and no actual real work being done/source of steady income coming in.





jennlt said:


> For a person who thinks the First Amendment is "bonkers", he certainly does enjoy exercising his freedom of speech.


THIS!!!! This needed to be said again!






Suncatcher said:


> I’m so confused. I thought they already have a book called finding freedom? How is this new book any different and if this new book is going to be accurate and truthful then was finding freedom not?  I also thought they shared all in the Oprah interview? Finally I thought they wanted privacy?


I know, this whole sh*tshow is so confusing.
Well, one thing we do know is that freedom was _NOT _found. Lots of lies and plenty of hatred, spite and jealousy was very much found and they should just go ahead and call this book:






gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5141647


That's hilarious!






needlv said:


> I wonder if this is why H rushed the book press release?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act imminent as Prince Harry becomes unable to fulfil his constitutional duties
> 
> 
> Changes to the Regency Act are likely to be imminent following the Duke of Sussex’s decision to write an ‘explosive’ memoir about The Royal Family. The provisions of the Regency Act have long neede…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalcentral.co.uk


Interesting






papertiger said:


> says, he doesn't like England, doesn't trust people from the UK and is triggered by London.
> And yet, he blames others for making him (and M) leave. He could have lived elsewhere years and years ago.
> I think he just likes whining
> *And boy, for someone who hates the press, he can't seem to stop feeding them stories - almost every single day.*









needlv said:


>









needlv said:


> Some of the commentary on Twitter is so funny…
> had to share this one…









Chanbal said:


> Well didn't Hazz say that he loves his brother to pieces during OW's interview? Opinions may vary!
> "_*Prince Harry does not consider his $20 million memoir to be a “f–k you” to the royal family, Page Six is told.*
> As we revealed, our royal exclusive on Harry’s book deal left the palace in uproar on Monday after the renegade royal left them in the dark about his plans.
> But we’re told that the Duke of Sussex feels he will simply be telling his “truth” in the memoir that will be released at the end of next year.
> *We’re told that Harry says he is not writing the book to deliberately hurt his family, including his brother Prince William and father Prince Charles, insisting that he has approached it as a way to reflect on his life and correct misinformation.*
> It is not part of a plan to leave his family behind once and for all, they say.
> However, royal insiders see it rather differently, as one said: “*On what planet does Harry think that this is not a ‘f–k you’ to the family?”*
> Even those in the family closest to Harry, including his cousin Princess Eugenie and Zara Phillips, are less than thrilled about the book, other sources tell us._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry tell-all not meant to be a ‘f–k you’ to royal family — honest!
> 
> 
> We’re told that the Duke of Sussex feels he will simply be telling his “truth” in the memoir that will be released at the end of next year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com









Chanbal said:


> I've no further comments!
> View attachment 5143846
> 
> _Professor Jonathan Shalit, founder of InterTalent Rights Group, said a book about the former actress’ life could be “fascinating”.
> He told Newsweek: "I think the world's very interested in their story so I think there could be a Meghan memoir, but I suspect much of Harry's story will include Meghan's story, they've become intertwined.
> "Meghan's got a great story to tell.
> “*She's obviously a very successful actress in terms of Suits and loved by many people around the world.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle tipped to write 'fascinating' memoir
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could soon follow in Prince Harry's footsteps and release her own memoir, it has been suggested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


 the delusions! Also, she has nothing important or interesting to say. Shut up please and live your 'private' life.





LittleStar88 said:


> I know what section we can find this book once it's published...
> View attachment 5143946


They should create a new section especially for this book and all books they release in the future:
_'Fiction So Fictional You Couldn't Actually Make It Up'_




Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone for participating in my little quest. Here's the final list if anyone else is interested. I will print it and keep it on my desk.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Methane
> Pearl
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> *Hip hip hooray for the team!*
> 
> View attachment 5144986
> 
> 
> Addendum#1
> Submission from @poopsie who was diligently working and couldn't participate in our little quest.
> *he Maleficent of Montecito?
> *Or The Douche Formally Known as a Prince
> 
> Addendum#2
> @LittleStar88 has submitted Dastardly Duo


I would like to add one of my favourites that I don't think has been mentioned yet, 'Pinky & The Brain'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lounorada said:


> I would like to add one of my favourites that I don't think has been mentioned yet, 'Pinky & The Brain'


Your nickname has been added it to the list, but this inquiring mind wants to know which of two is the Brain.  Thanks!


----------



## needlv

Sounds like H is receiving warnings from others that could be in the book. 









						Prince Harry's old Eton, Army friends warn him not to reveal secrets
					

Many of Harry's older friends are worried his book could cause them huge embarrassment and some have warned they are ready to dish the dirt if his book exposes them.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Sounds like H is receiving warnings from others that could be in the book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's old Eton, Army friends warn him not to reveal secrets
> 
> 
> Many of Harry's older friends are worried his book could cause them huge embarrassment and some have warned they are ready to dish the dirt if his book exposes them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


From one of the commenters: " A wellness book by Meghan Markle the Duchess of Dumbarton is the height of contradiction. The publishers must have been aiming for the comedy section books."


----------



## Annawakes

Here’s something.  I was telling my husband about the 4 book deal, which he was disgusted about when I said they were to be held back till the Queen passes.

His response?

1. “What could he possibly have to say that would fill 4 books”.  And,
2. “No way is he writing them himself.” (At that point I told him about the ghostwriter, and that Mermaid is going to do a book about wellness)
3. “Wellness?  How about Hellness”?   ‘Cause that’s where they’re living


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, by all means and thank you.  It may be a while before I post the final list because as most of us have already gathered, TPF posters have such fertile imaginations that the suggestions keep coming in. But then, the zany, crazy, funny, and you-name-it nicknames should keep us entertained for some time.
> View attachment 5146092


Thank you for my star!


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Sounds like H is receiving warnings from others that could be in the book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's old Eton, Army friends warn him not to reveal secrets
> 
> 
> Many of Harry's older friends are worried his book could cause them huge embarrassment and some have warned they are ready to dish the dirt if his book exposes them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It is time for *all* of them to speak out.  There is absolutely no reason to protect the fussy fusser.


ETA: one of the commenters said Hazz’s ex-es were required to sign NDAs.  Really???  Wow.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Close bond??? Neither William nor Hazz attended Lady Kitty Spencer’s wedding.   Um, ok.









						Did Prince William and Kate Middleton attend Lady Kitty Spencer's wedding?
					

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were not among the high-profile guests at Lady Kitty Spencer and Michael Lewis' wedding in Rome




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



_The model, 30, shares a close bond with her royal cousins, *Prince William* and *Prince Harry*, but despite Italian journalist Fabio Polli revealing that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were expected to arrive in the city on Saturday morning, it seems neither royal brother was in attendance._


----------



## Hermes Zen

We already knew this but it's nice to see it in writing ... 

"*Meghan's storyline* about not really ever being close to her Markle family members *is "bulls--t," *said the source, adding that Markle was previously present for family events, including the funeral of her grandmother attended by other relatives, in the years leading up to her fame.

"She was seen by her family during that time. She knows her family. She knows her half-siblings," the source continued.




> https://www.foxnews.com/entertainme...saster-not-telling-prince-harry-sooner-source
> 
> *Meghan created her own family disaster by not telling them about Prince Harry sooner, source says*
> *Markle has been estranged from her father Thomas Markle Sr. since the week of her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry*
> Melissa Roberto20 hours ago


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Close bond??? Neither William nor Hazz attended Lady Kitty Spencer’s wedding.   Um, ok.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Prince William and Kate Middleton attend Lady Kitty Spencer's wedding?
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were not among the high-profile guests at Lady Kitty Spencer and Michael Lewis' wedding in Rome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The model, 30, shares a close bond with her royal cousins, *Prince William* and *Prince Harry*, but despite Italian journalist Fabio Polli revealing that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were expected to arrive in the city on Saturday morning, it seems neither royal brother was in attendance._



Maybe don't have a destination wedding during a pandemic if you expect people - especially people with a busy schedule - to attend.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> We already knew this but it's nice to see it in writing ...
> 
> "*Meghan's storyline* about not really ever being close to her Markle family members *is "bulls--t," *said the source, adding that Markle was previously present for family events, including the funeral of her grandmother attended by other relatives, in the years leading up to her fame.
> 
> "She was seen by her family during that time. She knows her family. She knows her half-siblings," the source continued.



Uhm. She used her paternal grandmother on her blog saying she used to make jam with her during summer, which Samantha seemed to have a _varied recollection_ of...she said that at the time Meghan was at the right age grandma had long stopped making jam due to old age and / or health concerns.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe don't have a destination wedding during a pandemic if you expect people - especially people with a busy schedule - to attend.



‘Certainly could explain why her father, the Earl, did not attend.  Still, fingers crossed, she wore the Spencer tiara.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I just read only 13,6 % of the world's population is fully vaccinated, with only 1,1 % of people in lower income countries having received even one vaccine. No wonder this freaking virus is still making a fool of us.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Certainly could explain why her father, the Earl, did not attend.  Still, fingers crossed, she wore the Spencer tiara.



Aw, I was hoping the article had pics!


----------



## CarryOn2020

No photo yet.  She did indeed look spectacular at H&M wedding.










						Lady Kitty Spencer  ties the knot
					

Lady Kitty Spencer, 30, has tied the knot with 62-year-old Michael Lewis.




					www.wfmz.com
				



Kitty - who is a global ambassador for Dolce & Gabbana - reportedly wore a dress designed by the Italian brand, as did a number of guests, including Viscountess Weymouth, DJ Marjorie Gubelmann and fashion designer Jade Holland Cooper, according to The Mail On Sunday newspaper.


Live updates here: https://www.hellomagazine.com/brides/20210724118218/lady-kitty-spencer-rome-wedding-best-photos/
Guests look gorgeous *swoon*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That said, wasn't it rumoured Earl Spencer wasn't a fan of the groom being older than him?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Kitty - who is a global ambassador for Dolce & Gabbana - reportedly wore a dress designed by the Italian brand, as did a number of guests, including Viscountess Weymouth, DJ Marjorie Gubelmann and fashion designer Jade Holland Cooper, according to The Mail On Sunday newspaper.



Viscountess Weymouth has been the Marchioness of Bath for a while. But I understand it's hard to fact check your stuff (it always enrages me to see blatant mistakes because it had to go through at least two sets of hands...the original writer's and the editor's, and none of them apparently excels at their job).


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Viscountess Weymouth has been the Marchioness of Bath for a while. But I understand it's hard to fact check your stuff (it always enrages me to see blatant mistakes because it had to go through at least two sets of hands...the original writer's and the editor's, and none of them apparently excels at their job).



She wore a beautiful red dress. Looked like a real princess  











						Princess Diana's niece Lady Kitty Spencer weds tycoon Michael Lewis
					

Princess Diana 's niece, 30, has spent the last week in Italy with pals, getting ready for her wedding to South Africa-born 62-year-old multi-millionaire Michael Lewis.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chagall

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, wasn't it rumoured Earl Spencer wasn't a fan of the groom being older than him?


The groom is 5 years older than the father of the bride, Earl Spencer. Over 30 years older than the bride. I hate to be mean, but he is a billionaire.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chagall said:


> The groom is 5 years older than the father of the bride, Earl Spencer. Over 30 years older than the bride. I hate to be mean, but he is a billionaire.



True love, for sure.   

ETA: seriously, though, she has become beautiful with age, unlike some of the other Spencers.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Have a careful look at the words being used in the denial.
> 
> only one *memoir by Harry *but doesn’t outright deny a four book deal.  Doesn’t stop MM from having her own memoir as part of the four book deal.
> 
> Scooby said *Harry* is its not doing a mullti titled book  *co*-*ordinated* around HMTQ passing.  But what if it is MM - and the release is planned in 5-6 years?  So it’s not coordinated and it’s not Harry….
> 
> VERY CAREFUL wording - and I bet both statements were done by the lawyers.


Yeah I agree they probably are wary about saying too much about exactly how many & how much they are paying for it.
They don’t want a James Cameron’s avatar scenario where absolutely no one cares & they are producing 10 films at once  

ultimately it wouldn’t be difficult for them to fart out a coffee table book of snaps of him inspiring orphans or or her doing wonky yoga if the tell all doesn’t sell like they hoped or they run out of ammo/ get in legal trouble.


----------



## lulilu

needlv said:


> Sounds like H is receiving warnings from others that could be in the book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's old Eton, Army friends warn him not to reveal secrets
> 
> 
> Many of Harry's older friends are worried his book could cause them huge embarrassment and some have warned they are ready to dish the dirt if his book exposes them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk






Now, whenever I see photos like this, the look on his scowling face makes me know what a phony he's always been -- here he is playing at being a soldier.


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> She wore a beautiful red dress. Looked like a real princess
> 
> View attachment 5146445
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's niece Lady Kitty Spencer weds tycoon Michael Lewis
> 
> 
> Princess Diana 's niece, 30, has spent the last week in Italy with pals, getting ready for her wedding to South Africa-born 62-year-old multi-millionaire Michael Lewis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wonder how much of the cost of the wedding was covered by D&G marketing/PR budget? Do really rich/famous people pay for anything if they can get it sponsored or donated by firms eager for the exposure?


----------



## Chanbal

Good question!


----------



## Chanbal

Well-placed sources must have a lot to say about the Montecito couple. Why would senior clerics be mystified? They should have known about a higher authority, the Montecito couple.  

_*The Archbishop of Canterbury was forced to leave the most important meeting in the Church of England calendar because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose to baptise their son during the General Synod.*

Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.

Such was the secrecy surrounding the christening of Harry and Meghan's son Archie that senior bishops only learnt why the Archbishop was absent after Palace officials released two photographs after the service.
_
*A well-placed source said the sudden change in the Archbishop's diary raised eyebrows: 'The Sussexes certainly didn't consult others as to what date might suit best... that just wasn't a consideration.'*









						Christening of Archie caused chaos for Archbishop of Canterbury
					

Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

He’s holding the books back because he’s a coward.  And because he still needs photo ops with the Queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

And to build nonexistent suspense.  People are going to forget about it.  And who is going to read his book when the whole world is mourning the Queen?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for my star!


It was a pleasure.


----------



## Chanbal

An explanation why Hazz is working on his memoir at the age of 36. Well an attempt to destroy the monarchy sounds like an impact. 

_Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_









						Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
					

Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Good question!



The book mess ...   1 ? 4 ? After granny ??? 

Omid tweeted a denial (of sorts) about the 4 book deal - see one of my recent posts .

OS has low credibility, has been Markled, but I dont think he would have weighed in without thinking he has been given something by the 6 team, maybe he was conned and the 6 them has not its act together 

BUT agree this book story is far more inflammatory than needs be - WHO CARES if she writes a wellness book, that I AM NOT GOING to BUY ?


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> It was a pleasure.


I came across _M*ghan Misunderstood_. I guess it was put out by the subjects of _Our Queen_ and it belongs to the _M*ghan the Victim_ category.  Not good designations imo, but dear Om*d would likely approve.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The book mess ...   1 ? 4 ? After granny ???
> 
> Omid tweeted a denial (of sorts) about the 4 book deal - see one of my recent posts .
> 
> OS has low credibility, has been Markled, but I dont think he would have weighed in without thinking he has been given something by the 6 team, maybe he was conned and the 6 them has not its act together
> 
> BUT agree this book story is far more inflammatory than needs be - WHO CARES if she writes a wellness book, that I AM NOT GOING to BUY ?


It wasn't Om*d that acknowledged the contribution of the Montecito couple to his Funding Freedom book, and then issued a strong denial to support the couple's privacy case?


----------



## Chanbal

Duke of Montecito @Maggie Muggins


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I came across _M*ghan Misunderstood_. I guess it was put out by the subjects of _Our Queen_ and it belongs to the _M*ghan the Victim_ category.  Not good designations imo, but dear Om*d would likely approve.


Who are they going to pay to read this tripe?! 



*Meghan Misunderstood*
by Sean Smith (Goodreads Author)

3.62  ·   Rating details ·  60 ratings  ·  18 reviews
*Meghan Misunderstood *is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
Meghan Markle was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.
Meghan’s wedding to Harry was a joyful occasion, marking happiness at last for the Queen’s grandson who had captured our hearts twenty years earlier when he bravely walked behind his mother Diana’s coffin. Theirs was a story that the screenwriters of Hollywood – where Meghan had made her name – could scarcely have imagined.
The rom-com fantasy, however, soon turned into disturbing drama: any expectation of a life happily-ever-after was cruelly dashed by bullying tabloid newspapers and their allies, both on social media and within the walls of the Palace itself.
Meghan was targeted for her gender, her race, her nationality and her profession. The abuse became so bad that seventy-two female MPs signed a letter of solidarity against the ‘often distasteful and misleading press’, calling out the ‘outdated colonial undertones’ of the stories.
Now, Sean Smith, the UK’s leading celebrity biographer, pulls no punches as he reveals the remarkable and powerful story of this self-made, intelligent American woman with a strong social conscience who has made such an impact on our lives.

*Here is the rest of the info on this swill. Book Info  (Nov 12, 2020)


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> It seems they have been writing book #1 for quite a while, so it's possible that these deals started while Philip was still alive. Per DM, two of the publishers attended in-person and the others via zoom.
> 
> Here is my bet for the 4 books:
> 1) The Prelude
> 2) The Revenge
> 3) The Cure (officially authored by the wife)
> 4) The Rebirth
> 
> The order of the books may vary depending on QE's longevity.
> 
> My 2 cents on the book to be published after QE dies (the Revenge): I think it will be about the strong connection they had with QE, Hazz's wife and QE's were soulmate. They will likely go in detail about all the memories Hazz, wife and kids had from those many phone calls... don't let the facts ruin a good story. Charles, Will, and Kate may get a few very accusatory chapters. The size of those chapters may depend on how much Charles will do for the Montecito couple.
> 
> Hope Charles and Will have excellent lawyers, they are going to need them imo.





bag-mania said:


> Every day we get a different story. Now it's four books? Is any of it true?


one to colour in 
one to join the dots
One to paste stickers in
One ghost written by septic peg


----------



## Chagall

Annawakes said:


> He’s holding the books back because he’s a coward.  And because he still needs photo ops with the Queen.


Well waiting for the Queen to die is ghoulish under any circumstances. Nobody wants to think of their impending death even at her age. And then to have the added worry of why he is holding the book until then. He certainly is making the Queens last years  really hard. What an absolute jerk.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Who are they going to pay to read this tripe?!
> 
> The book was published 7 months ago and based on the Amazon #'s posted on the site today, there isn't much Sparkle to Ms Markle.
> YAWN.
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: *#246,824 in Books *(See Top 100 in Books)
> 
> #360 in Environmentalist & Naturalist Biographies
> #596 in Royalty Biographies
> #615 in Social Activist Biographies


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Duke of Montecito @Maggie Muggins



I would'nt want to be on the receiving end of her humorous critique, but I am  at the expense of the useless one. Adding Duke of Montecito to the List.      Thanks @Chanbal


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> On a serious note, I really do hope those kids get to spend time with some other relatives because even annoying family members give you perspective on the world around you & help you understand who you are.
> 
> It does horrify me how they cut the Markles & seemingly most of the Raglands out for the crime of being too uncouth & common - what kind of example is that?
> 
> I feel like if those kids are just isolated in _their _gilded cage with their childish brat parents & a team of servants too afraid to say a word they are going to miss out on a lot of growth and be emotionally stunted.
> 
> It sort of makes me hope they are dolls/ actors tbh even if that also makes me sound a bit crazy


Meg seems to have forgotten she comes from Markles and Raglands.  If she considers them "uncouth", maybe she should take a good, deep look at herself in the mirror.  Genetics are very strong!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> An explanation why Hazz is working on his memoir at the age of 36. Well an attempt to destroy the monarchy sounds like an impact.
> 
> _Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
> 
> 
> Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Because being the next Anne is too much work.  Roll eyes.  He will still have William to reckon with, no matter what.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Great article by SV
> 
> *SARAH VINE: It's time for Harry to take a long hard look in a mirror*
> 
> Admittedly I am not a publisher but I do know a little about the book trade. *And one thing I can say for certain: you don’t get a four-book deal with an advance approaching £30 million if the person signing the cheque doesn’t know for sure there’s some seriously juicy stuff on offer.*
> 
> The revelation that Prince Harry is working on a tell-all autobiography in collaboration with Pulitzer Prize-winning ghostwriter J.R. Moehringer would have been nerve-racking enough for the Queen, given his recent track record with Oprah et al.
> 
> Now it transpires there are three more books in the pipeline. Admittedly one is a ‘wellness’ tome, to be penned by the Duchess herself, so probably more of the sub-Gwyneth Paltrow guff about the importance of self-love.
> 
> But the other two remain a mystery –save for the fact that Volume 2 will reportedly be held back until after the Queen dies.
> 
> If this turns out to be the case, then inevitably there will be speculation as to why. And given the Prince’s recent string of attacks on his family, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to assume the worst.
> 
> There have been many jaw-dropping moments over the past few months in relation to Harry, but this sets a new bar.
> 
> Because however uncharitable it may be, it’s hard to dismiss the notion that the Queen, who has never been anything other than forgiving of her grandson’s behaviour, is now little more than an inconvenient obstacle in his mission to cash in on his past life as a Royal.
> 
> What’s more, one can’t help wondering: is it possible that Prince Harry might not actually be the rather sweet, generous-hearted man he always seemed to be – or even the emotional, bleeding heart Prince of Woke he likes to project?
> 
> We’ve seen glimpses of this over the past few years. *His aggression towards the press, the petty rows with his brother, the way he and Meghan deliberately targeted the Duchess of Cambridge in that Oprah interview, his decision to fly home straight after his grandfather’s funeral rather than stay a few extra hours to celebrate the Queen’s 95th birthday.
> 
> The further Harry steps out from behind the protective screen of the Monarchy, the more his true character seems to emerge.* And it’s not all sunshine and rainbows. Details about how he ‘led’ contract negotiations from his £11 million mansion in Montecito are in themselves quite revealing. *According to a source in publishing, he had a ‘very take-it-or-leave-it’ attitude, and ‘those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands’.
> 
> His starting price was £18 million; the bidding apparently ended around the £29 million mark. *That’s the kind of deal Gordon ‘greed is good’ Gekko would be proud of.
> 
> *It’s certainly a far cry from the touchy-feely persona Harry likes to present in carefully engineered photoshoots and interviews.
> 
> But ultimately you have only to look at the way Harry continually ambushes the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family with bombshells like this, never giving them fair warning of what he’s planning, to see that this is a man who, while he talks a lot about compassion and caring, often behaves in exactly the opposite manner.
> 
> Uncertainty and living under constant fear of attack are classic stress triggers, and that is exactly what Harry is doing to the Queen.
> 
> And now she knows that it won’t even stop when she’s dead – that, in fact, her passing will unlock another clause in the multi-million-pound contract.*
> 
> Harry claims that in writing this memoir he will have a chance to address the world ‘not as a Prince but as the man I’ve become’.
> 
> Might I respectfully suggest, Sir, that as that man you take a long, hard look in the mirror…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: It's time for Harry to take a long hard look in a mirror
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: There have been many jaw-dropping moments over the past few months in relation to Harry, but this sets a new bar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Maybe I’m getting a little suspicious in my old age but I can’t help think Sarah Vine is on the side of the (LA) ‘angels’ here. Certainly taking this story about a bidding war at face value is rather flattering to them - I personally believe that as much as I’d believe they clean out the chickens.


Chanbal said:


> An explanation why Hazz is working on his memoir at the age of 36. Well an attempt to destroy the monarchy sounds like an impact.
> 
> _Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
> 
> 
> Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’ve always said this is one of the reasons why they rushed the wedding- they knew 40 year-old busted, boozy bachelor Harry was not a good look.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Who are they going to pay to read this tripe?!
> 
> View attachment 5146555
> 
> *Meghan Misunderstood*
> by Sean Smith (Goodreads Author)
> 
> 3.62  ·   Rating details ·  60 ratings  ·  18 reviews
> *Meghan Misunderstood *is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
> Meghan Markle was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.
> Meghan’s wedding to Harry was a joyful occasion, marking happiness at last for the Queen’s grandson who had captured our hearts twenty years earlier when he bravely walked behind his mother Diana’s coffin. Theirs was a story that the screenwriters of Hollywood – where Meghan had made her name – could scarcely have imagined.
> The rom-com fantasy, however, soon turned into disturbing drama: any expectation of a life happily-ever-after was cruelly dashed by bullying tabloid newspapers and their allies, both on social media and within the walls of the Palace itself.
> Meghan was targeted for her gender, her race, her nationality and her profession. The abuse became so bad that seventy-two female MPs signed a letter of solidarity against the ‘often distasteful and misleading press’, calling out the ‘outdated colonial undertones’ of the stories.
> Now, Sean Smith, the UK’s leading celebrity biographer, pulls no punches as he reveals the remarkable and powerful story of this self-made, intelligent American woman with a strong social conscience who has made such an impact on our lives.
> 
> *Here is the rest of the info on this swill. Book Info  (Nov 12, 2020)


Lol, I love how the fans have to enumerate every little charitable act MM has ever done as justifications of her impeachable virtue.
Perhaps next time this thread is called spiteful or bullying we should all rush in with justifications of our supreme saintliness e.g.
Poster 1:- I donated a  bag of clothes to a charity shop ( not the designer stuff I could resell obviously, thanks Carolina).
Poster 2:- I did a sponsored bike ride for my charity which empowers women like me (very like me.)
Poster 3:- I once bought a homeless man an oat milk latte.
Poster 4:- I got a dog from a shelter for a whole year even though it still smelled of poor.
Poster 5:- I bought my friend a copy of the b*nch for Christmas to empower her.
Poster 6:- I regifted a copy of the b*nch so I, um saved paper or something.

Just joking, of course, we should get our PR firms to do that for us.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Bet this is the wedding and life M wanted


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe I’m getting a little suspicious in my old age but I can’t help think Sarah Vine is on the side of the (LA) ‘angels’ here. Certainly taking this story about a bidding war at face value is rather flattering to them - I personally believe that as much as I’d believe they clean out the chickens.
> 
> I’ve always said this is one of the reasons why they rushed the wedding- they knew 40 year-old busted, boozy bachelor Harry was not a good look.
> 
> Lol, I love how the fans have to enumerate every little charitable act MM has ever done as justifications of her impeachable virtue.
> Perhaps next time this thread is called spiteful or bullying we should all rush in with justifications of our supreme saintliness e.g.
> Poster 1:- I donated a  bag of clothes to a charity shop ( not the designer stuff I could resell obviously, thanks Carolina).
> Poster 2:- I did a sponsored bike ride for my charity which empowers women like me (very like me.)
> Poster 3:- I once bought a homeless man an oat milk latte.
> Poster 4:- I got a dog from a shelter for a whole year even though it still smelled of poor.
> Poster 5:- I bought my friend a copy of the b*nch for Christmas to empower her.
> Poster 6:- I regifted a copy of the b*nch so I, um saved paper or something.
> 
> Just joking, of course, we should get our PR firms to do that for us.


CORRECTION
Of course poster 3 should send the oat milk latte to their dear neighbour instead as we all know the homeless don’t have much of an Instagram following.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> Bet this is the wedding and life M wanted



Obsessed.  I just stared a thread for her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Bet this is the wedding and life M wanted



Oh no, I think she got exactly the wedding she wanted and some staff might have the scars to prove it.
she’s _direct……_ it’s the American way


----------



## justwatchin

Annawakes said:


> He’s holding the books back because he’s a coward.  And because he still needs photo ops with the Queen.


As well as making sure he’s not dropped from her will.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is time for *all* of them to speak out.  There is absolutely no reason to protect the fussy fusser.
> 
> 
> ETA: one of the commenters said Hazz’s ex-es were required to sign NDAs.  Really???  Wow.


Absolutely!  His status as a senior royal protected him, but if he is going to be "just Harry" than all the gloves should come off.  If he exposes them, then they should expose him.  The publishers need to set the attorneys on whatever he writes or there will be lawsuits.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Duke of Montecito @Maggie Muggins



On one level, I can see the humor behind calling him “the Duke of Montecito”, still, on another level, it is not funny at all.
We the people do not want British royalty claiming our lands.  Didn’t want them in the 1700s, do not want them now. Kindly keep your entitled royalty, such as H&M, on your UK shores. Only send the lovely royals


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> As well as making sure he’s not dropped from her will.


The ghost writer better fact check or egg on his face too.


----------



## justwatchin

Chanbal said:


> An explanation why Hazz is working on his memoir at the age of 36. Well an attempt to destroy the monarchy sounds like an impact.
> 
> _Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
> 
> 
> Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well apparently his “impact” is self-indulgence, gossip and creating controversy. So congrats to the Royal Twit for succeeding.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Well-placed sources must have a lot to say about the Montecito couple. Why would senior clerics be mystified? They should have known about a higher authority, the Montecito couple.
> 
> _*The Archbishop of Canterbury was forced to leave the most important meeting in the Church of England calendar because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose to baptise their son during the General Synod.*
> 
> Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.
> 
> Such was the secrecy surrounding the christening of Harry and Meghan's son Archie that senior bishops only learnt why the Archbishop was absent after Palace officials released two photographs after the service._
> 
> *A well-placed source said the sudden change in the Archbishop's diary raised eyebrows: 'The Sussexes certainly didn't consult others as to what date might suit best... that just wasn't a consideration.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christening of Archie caused chaos for Archbishop of Canterbury
> 
> 
> Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm sure he is sorry now that he didn't say no.  They really threw him a curve ball by stating he married them 3 days prior to church wedding.  It took him a while to respond because he was in a state of shock.  This was such manipulative behavior and really unnecessary in the scheme of things.  It was all done for Harry's ego to show that he could push the man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Obsessed.  I just stared a thread for her.



Lovely idea! Thank you for doing that.  She does indeed seem to have the multi-millionaire/billionaire life that H&M are thirsty for. Plus, her own father did not show up at the wedding extravaganza. Drama!

ETA: Hazz worries about being Andrew????  Does this mean Hazz with MM and MA were indeed friends of JeffE?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> An explanation why Hazz is working on his memoir at the age of 36. Well an attempt to destroy the monarchy sounds like an impact.
> 
> _Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
> 
> 
> Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


IMO he is the chief engineer of limiting his shelf life. He will be thought of in the unkindest terms and people won't want to hear about him at all.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Bet this is the wedding and life M wanted



In Meghan's imagination, this is what she really looks like. She points the finger at everyone and calls them racist and in reality, she is the biggest racist of all.


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> As well as making sure he’s not dropped from her will.


I don't believe there is anything to drop him from.  Charles will get everything.  If there are personal items she wants to leave to specific people, like Prince Philip did with his carriage to Lady Louise, then he will get something.  There will not be monetary bequests.


----------



## Hermes Zen

justwatchin said:


> As well as making sure he’s not dropped from her will.



I'm hoping if there's anything the Q or any other RF leaves H that it's based on stipulations like wait 20 years before he has possession OR *even better yet* ... That he receives once he divorces M and returns to the UK under RF's conservatorship (if there is such a thing in the UK) !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Great article by SV
> 
> *SARAH VINE: It's time for Harry to take a long hard look in a mirror*
> 
> Admittedly I am not a publisher but I do know a little about the book trade. *And one thing I can say for certain: you don’t get a four-book deal with an advance approaching £30 million if the person signing the cheque doesn’t know for sure there’s some seriously juicy stuff on offer.*
> 
> The revelation that Prince Harry is working on a tell-all autobiography in collaboration with Pulitzer Prize-winning ghostwriter J.R. Moehringer would have been nerve-racking enough for the Queen, given his recent track record with Oprah et al.
> 
> Now it transpires there are three more books in the pipeline. Admittedly one is a ‘wellness’ tome, to be penned by the Duchess herself, so probably more of the sub-Gwyneth Paltrow guff about the importance of self-love.
> 
> But the other two remain a mystery –save for the fact that Volume 2 will reportedly be held back until after the Queen dies.
> 
> If this turns out to be the case, then inevitably there will be speculation as to why. And given the Prince’s recent string of attacks on his family, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to assume the worst.
> 
> There have been many jaw-dropping moments over the past few months in relation to Harry, but this sets a new bar.
> 
> Because however uncharitable it may be, it’s hard to dismiss the notion that the Queen, who has never been anything other than forgiving of her grandson’s behaviour, is now little more than an inconvenient obstacle in his mission to cash in on his past life as a Royal.
> 
> What’s more, one can’t help wondering: is it possible that Prince Harry might not actually be the rather sweet, generous-hearted man he always seemed to be – or even the emotional, bleeding heart Prince of Woke he likes to project?
> 
> We’ve seen glimpses of this over the past few years. *His aggression towards the press, the petty rows with his brother, the way he and Meghan deliberately targeted the Duchess of Cambridge in that Oprah interview, his decision to fly home straight after his grandfather’s funeral rather than stay a few extra hours to celebrate the Queen’s 95th birthday.
> 
> The further Harry steps out from behind the protective screen of the Monarchy, the more his true character seems to emerge.* And it’s not all sunshine and rainbows. Details about how he ‘led’ contract negotiations from his £11 million mansion in Montecito are in themselves quite revealing. *According to a source in publishing, he had a ‘very take-it-or-leave-it’ attitude, and ‘those involved were actually very shocked by his approach, which was to look at them coldly and state his demands’.
> 
> His starting price was £18 million; the bidding apparently ended around the £29 million mark. *That’s the kind of deal Gordon ‘greed is good’ Gekko would be proud of.
> 
> *It’s certainly a far cry from the touchy-feely persona Harry likes to present in carefully engineered photoshoots and interviews.
> 
> But ultimately you have only to look at the way Harry continually ambushes the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family with bombshells like this, never giving them fair warning of what he’s planning, to see that this is a man who, while he talks a lot about compassion and caring, often behaves in exactly the opposite manner.
> 
> Uncertainty and living under constant fear of attack are classic stress triggers, and that is exactly what Harry is doing to the Queen.
> 
> And now she knows that it won’t even stop when she’s dead – that, in fact, her passing will unlock another clause in the multi-million-pound contract.*
> 
> Harry claims that in writing this memoir he will have a chance to address the world ‘not as a Prince but as the man I’ve become’.
> 
> Might I respectfully suggest, Sir, that as that man you take a long, hard look in the mirror…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: It's time for Harry to take a long hard look in a mirror
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: There have been many jaw-dropping moments over the past few months in relation to Harry, but this sets a new bar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk









Maggie Muggins said:


> Your nickname has been added it to the list, but this inquiring mind wants to know which of two is the Brain.  Thanks!
> 
> View attachment 5146277


 Well, I see the names as interchangeable seeing as sometimes MM looks like the 'brains' behind this whole fiasco and then other times it seems to be JCMH. Yet they are both dumb enough to be Pinky at the same time 
Thanks for my gold star!









needlv said:


> Sounds like H is receiving warnings from others that could be in the book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's old Eton, Army friends warn him not to reveal secrets
> 
> 
> Many of Harry's older friends are worried his book could cause them huge embarrassment and some have warned they are ready to dish the dirt if his book exposes them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Seeing how disgusting he has treated his own 94/95yo Grandmother and his Grandfather in his final months alive, I don't think his ex-fRiEnDs stand a chance at having their secrets spared. I hope they sue JCMH if/when he tells lies about them in his More-Me (Memoir)




CarryOn2020 said:


> No photo yet.  She did indeed look spectacular at H&M wedding.
> View attachment 5146438
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer  ties the knot
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer, 30, has tied the knot with 62-year-old Michael Lewis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wfmz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kitty - who is a global ambassador for Dolce & Gabbana - reportedly wore a dress designed by the Italian brand, as did a number of guests, including Viscountess Weymouth, DJ Marjorie Gubelmann and fashion designer Jade Holland Cooper, according to The Mail On Sunday newspaper.
> Live updates here: https://www.hellomagazine.com/brides/20210724118218/lady-kitty-spencer-rome-wedding-best-photos/
> Guests look gorgeous *swoon*





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, wasn't it rumoured Earl Spencer wasn't a fan of the groom being older than him?


She got married to a guy who is older than her father? 






Chanbal said:


> Well-placed sources must have a lot to say about the Montecito couple. Why would senior clerics be mystified? They should have known about a higher authority, the Montecito couple.
> 
> _*The Archbishop of Canterbury was forced to leave the most important meeting in the Church of England calendar because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose to baptise their son during the General Synod.*
> 
> Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.
> 
> Such was the secrecy surrounding the christening of Harry and Meghan's son Archie that senior bishops only learnt why the Archbishop was absent after Palace officials released two photographs after the service._
> 
> *A well-placed source said the sudden change in the Archbishop's diary raised eyebrows: 'The Sussexes certainly didn't consult others as to what date might suit best... that just wasn't a consideration.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christening of Archie caused chaos for Archbishop of Canterbury
> 
> 
> Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





They must not have came across the word 'COMPASSION' on their word of the day calendar until later down the line.



Maggie Muggins said:


> Who are they going to pay to read this tripe?!
> 
> View attachment 5146555
> 
> *Meghan Misunderstood*
> by Sean Smith (Goodreads Author)
> 
> 3.62  ·   Rating details ·  60 ratings  ·  18 reviews
> *Meghan Misunderstood *is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
> Meghan Markle was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.
> Meghan’s wedding to Harry was a joyful occasion, marking happiness at last for the Queen’s grandson who had captured our hearts twenty years earlier when he bravely walked behind his mother Diana’s coffin. Theirs was a story that the screenwriters of Hollywood – where Meghan had made her name – could scarcely have imagined.
> The rom-com fantasy, however, soon turned into disturbing drama: any expectation of a life happily-ever-after was cruelly dashed by bullying tabloid newspapers and their allies, both on social media and within the walls of the Palace itself.
> Meghan was targeted for her gender, her race, her nationality and her profession. The abuse became so bad that seventy-two female MPs signed a letter of solidarity against the ‘often distasteful and misleading press’, calling out the ‘outdated colonial undertones’ of the stories.
> Now, Sean Smith, the UK’s leading celebrity biographer, pulls no punches as he reveals the remarkable and powerful story of this self-made, intelligent American woman with a strong social conscience who has made such an impact on our lives.
> 
> *Here is the rest of the info on this swill. Book Info  (Nov 12, 2020)





I burst out laughing at '_Meghan Misunderstood_ is a pioneering book' 
Was this written by MM herself because the delusions and exaggerations are off the scale ridiculous!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> The groom is 5 years older than the father of the bride, Earl Spencer. Over 30 years older than the bride. I hate to be mean, but he is a billionaire.



True, but Kitty is a stunning beauty from a noble family with close ties to the royals. I don't think if money was what she was after she couldn't have found someone in her age group.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*The Archbishop of Canterbury was forced to leave the most important meeting in the Church of England calendar because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose to baptise their son during the General Synod.*_



Are these people for real. But also...interesting it comes out now, two years after the fact. They may come to wish for the days back when the BRF "wasn't protecting them".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> He’s holding the books back because he’s a coward.  And because he still needs photo ops with the Queen.



Wondering if it's the publishing house who developed a little bit of cold feet and not this human wrecking ball. We all saw how he didn't care at all that his grandfather was lying on his deathbed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_



I mean...whose fault is it that two people who could have done anything with their life achieved nothing, hu? That said, I'm not that familiar with Andrew, but didn't he at least have a real military career?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> On one level, I can see the humor behind calling him “the Duke of Montecito”, still, on another level, it is not funny at all.
> We the people do not want British royalty claiming our lands.  Didn’t want them in the 1700s, do not want them now. Kindly keep your entitled royalty, such as H&M, on your UK shores. Only send the lovely royals


Have you done a tour of San Francisco with Emperor Norton? It's a lot of fun. Think about  a tour of Santa Barbara with the Duke of Montecito...


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...whose fault is it that two people who could have done anything with their life achieved nothing, hu? That said, I'm not that familiar with Andrew, but didn't he at least have a real military career?


Don't know much about Randy Andy. Compared to Hazz, the prima donna, he seems to be living a rather private life these days.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...whose fault is it that two people who could have done anything with their life achieved nothing, hu? That said, I'm not that familiar with Andrew, but didn't he at least have a real military career?



Andrew was a Naval officer and saw action in the Falklands war back in the early 80s.  He was a helicopter pilot, I believe.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm hoping if there's anything the Q or any other RF leaves H that it's based on stipulations like wait 20 years before he has possession OR *even better yet* ... That he receives once he divorces M and returns to the UK under RF's conservatorship (if there is such a thing in the UK) !



I’d be surprised if the Queen leaves anything more than sentimental trinkets to her grandchildren.

Charles doesn’t pay inheritance taxes. All of the other children and grandchildren pay 40% of anything over £325k


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...whose fault is it that two people who could have done anything with their life achieved nothing, hu? That said, I'm not that familiar with Andrew, but didn't he at least have a real military career?


I would be absolutely amazed if any royal or even nobility in the military has ever been within 50 miles of greater danger than stubbing their toe.

I think it’s an open secret their careers are very much the deluxe edition of military life. I mean the fact they all seem to qualify for cushy numbers like helicopter training is a bit of a giveaway. Not to mention they all get medals like pens at a conference.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Well-placed sources must have a lot to say about the Montecito couple. Why would senior clerics be mystified? They should have known about a higher authority, the Montecito couple.
> 
> _*The Archbishop of Canterbury was forced to leave the most important meeting in the Church of England calendar because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose to baptise their son during the General Synod.*
> 
> Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.
> 
> Such was the secrecy surrounding the christening of Harry and Meghan's son Archie that senior bishops only learnt why the Archbishop was absent after Palace officials released two photographs after the service._
> 
> *A well-placed source said the sudden change in the Archbishop's diary raised eyebrows: 'The Sussexes certainly didn't consult others as to what date might suit best... that just wasn't a consideration.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christening of Archie caused chaos for Archbishop of Canterbury
> 
> 
> Senior clerics were mystified when, without explanation, Justin Welby pulled out of the Saturday session of the four-day meeting in York in July 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I just checked, QEII is not in the snaps, so, she did not attend, so, her busy calendar was not the driving force behind selection of date, you cannot blame it on her


----------



## Hermes Zen

Vintage Leather said:


> I’d be surprised if the Queen leaves anything more than sentimental trinkets to her grandchildren.
> 
> Charles doesn’t pay inheritance taxes. All of the other children and grandchildren pay 40% of anything over £325k


Yes and I hope no royal family member ever gives him anything after what he's done to them.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Certainly could explain why her father, the Earl, did not attend.  Still, fingers crossed, she wore the Spencer tiara.


The tiara was absent in the photos - you have to see the veil - from the backside - GLORIOUS .... I cannot seem to find the photos right now, I bet they are in the royal clothes thread here

As to guest list - hampered by COVID ??

Have foreign friend isolating in a London hotel for 2 weeks - he might be done by now ... rules are strict these days and maybe that was why Earl Spencer could not come and bring tiara with him ??? Does he still live in South Africa ?? He was in London for the garden opening

W & K could not be seen to use some sort of diplomatic covid get out of jail card for just a wedding and the optics of a private jet ... they would have to fly commercial


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> An explanation why Hazz is working on his memoir at the age of 36. Well an attempt to destroy the monarchy sounds like an impact.
> 
> _Speaking to The Sunday Times, the companion said: 'Harry has always been in such a rush to make an "impact", because he thinks he has a limited shelf-life before the public want to hear more from George and his siblings and he worries that after that, he’ll turn into his uncle.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
> 
> 
> Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


.. but, but, but .. they just *HAD TO HAVE THEIR PRIVACY* ..!!!!! 

.. and yet, they court the media day-in and day-out!!  *Privacy my a$$* .. he is just spitting nails that William and his family will get quite a bit of publicity (_and Meg-a-lo-maniac can't stand that Kate gets all that publicity and glowing commentary_) .. and that *that *publicity will likely be *very favorable*!  

These two *pathetic narcissistic wimps* .. just can't stand that they are seated in the *Z-List row*; we lowly cretans *MUST* know their "truths" and hear them blather about how we should do this & do that (_all of which they don't do_) .. and *HEAVEN FORBID* the media not write glowing comments about them ('_cos 'ya know - they are so racist_)!!   

I really have to give QEII major props, that she doesn't just shut them down once & for all!  Take away the titles (_yes - he would still have the Prince title_), and take them off the line of succession .. *they wanted out of the Royal Family, well here 'ya go*!


----------



## Vintage Leather

jelliedfeels said:


> I would be absolutely amazed if any royal or even nobility in the military has ever been within 50 miles of greater danger than stubbing their toe.
> 
> I think it’s an open secret their careers are very much the deluxe edition of military life. I mean the fact they all seem to qualify for cushy numbers like helicopter training is a bit of a giveaway. Not to mention they all get medals like pens at a conference.



As the “spare”, George IV, Queen Elizabeth’s father manned the gun turrets aboard the HMS Collingwood at the Battle of Jutland. 

After his father realized he was in actual danger, he got promoted awfully quickly and ended up an Admiral. But he was shot at in World War I


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> The tiara was absent in the photos - you have to see the veil - from the backside - GLORIOUS .... I cannot seem to find the photos right now, I bet they are in the royal clothes thread here
> 
> As to guest list ...
> 
> Have foreign friend isolating in a London hotel for 2 weeks - he might be done by now ... rules are strict these days and maybe that was why Earl Spencer could not come and bring tiara with him ??? Does he still live in South Africa ?? He was in London for the garden opening
> 
> W & K could not be seen to use some sort of diplomatic get out of jail card for just a wedding and the optics of a private jet ... they would have to fly commercial


Earl Spencer lives at Althorp. Quarantine rules are strict here if you've travelled from abroad so maybe he didn't go because of work commitments.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Earl Spencer lives at Althorp. Quarantine rules are strict here if you've travelled from abroad so maybe he didn't go because of work commitments.



The last sentence could be subtle shade, difficult to know 








						Charles Spencer didn't walk daughter Kitty down the aisle - this is why
					

Charles Spencer's oldest daughter Lady Kitty Spencer got married at the weekend




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



_While the reason the Earl did not walk Kitty down the aisle hasn't been made public, he did reveal last month in an interview with MSN that he was suffering from a painful shoulder injury which was affecting his freedom of movement.

The 57-year-old, who had hoped to accompany divers on an expedition that would have looked for evidence from the sinking of The White Ship, the subject of his bestselling book, shared that his doctor advised him not to undertake the dive.


He said: "It sounds like a pretty feeble excuse but is really quite painful and unpleasant. I asked my doctor ‘can I dive?’ and he said, 'only if you want to drown'. I decided that would be taking the authenticity of the adventure too far."

No doubt his children were delighted that he chose not to take the risky trip!_


----------



## jelliedfeels

Vintage Leather said:


> As the “spare”, George IV, Queen Elizabeth’s father manned the gun turrets aboard the Collingwood at the Battle of Jutland.
> 
> After his father realized he was in actual danger, he got promoted awfully quickly but he was shot at


That proves my point I’d say.
That was also 100 years ago, during ww1 one of deadliest conflicts ever.
I clearly didn’t mean that no royal in history has ever been in danger in conflict. (Obviously Richard the third got killed in battle.)
I meant that our contemporary royal family are given extremely favourable access to the benefits of the military and a panegyric treatment of their work while being protected from all foreseeable risk in a way unthinkable for the average soldier.

add on- thinking about it the thing that shows what I mean quite well is that Andrew was apparently trying to get an upgrade to admiral so he could look better at his dad’s funeral- the fact he even considered this shows what a joke rank & file is with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> panegyric treatment



Points and kudos for having the presence of mind to use the _adult words_ during a pandemic


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Points and kudos for having the presence of mind to use the _adult words_ during a pandemic


I think I get a bit blunt about this because I am set off by (what I perceive as) the slight rehabilitation of Andrew as some sort of hardworking simpleton who has been tarred by a bad association (essentially Boxer the horse) it is something I do not like about lady C at all.

My view is that Andrew is_ at best _a cosseted brat who expects credit for an existence entirely supported by the largesse of others & despite all he should have learnt about duty and morality had no problem turning a blind eye to those who clearly needed help. And _at worst_… well….

Well that & I am bound to note the class politics of it all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I think I get a bit blunt about this because I am set off by (what I perceive as) the slight rehabilitation of Andrew as some sort of hardworking simpleton who has been tarred by a bad association (essentially Boxer the horse) it is something I do not like about lady C at all.
> 
> My view is that Andrew is_ at best _a cosseted brat who expects credit for an existence entirely supported by the largesse of others & despite all he should have learnt about duty and morality had no problem turning a blind eye to those who clearly needed help. And _at worst_… well….
> 
> Well that & I am bound to note the class politics of it all.



Well said.  Andrew’s mess was bad enough with Sarah, then the ‘selling favors’ stuff, then this JeffE stuff - he has pushed ‘unsettling behavior’ to another level. Remembering Hazz’s Vegas show and other drunken escapades, it wouldn‘t surprise me to know this how the privileged elite party.  If we only knew what went on and goes on behind closed doors, we would understand the need for 19 bathrooms.

ETA: He is already irrelevant.








						Prince Harry worried he would 'turn into Andrew' as a working royal
					

Speaking to the Sunday Times, an insider claimed the Duke of Sussex, 36, has 'always been in a rush to make an impact' before he slips down the pecking order of the royal family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Things the petulant prince needs to, but does not have the intellectual capacity, think about and factor into his rush to "make an impact" by publishing a "memoir":

   1. There is longevity in the RF, the Queen Mother did not die until she was 101, so his Gran could conceivably have 6 more years on the throne. By then the world could be asking "Harry WHO?"

   2. When she does die, he loses the buffer that has probably kept him from being stripped of more than just his Military patronages, since it is frequently quoted that she continues to refer to the Toxic Twosome as "beloved members of the family." That will be long gone if he has further trashed the family during this time.

   3. There is always the possibility Charles might pass before his Mother, meaning King William would ascend to the throne when the Queen died.

   4. William, being astute to the real Meghan Markle early on, probably quietly focused on her behaviors to see if they supported his hesitations about her suitability as a sister-in-law and may have a log of material that has not yet been revealed, but could be when/if needed to bring the Suckesses to heel. This could be internal, not necessarily something made public.

   5. William has already signaled through his vociferous rebuttal to the "racism" claim, and his deliberative handling of the Diana Statue unveiling that his brother is to be handled carefully to protect the Monarchy. And to be challenged, if necessary.

   6. William puts the Monarchy and family first, his brother not at all, he is completely self serving. In protecting the Monarchy/family, William will be acting not only as future King, but as a husband in a loving, supportive, stable marriage and a loving father guiding a future King, George, to ensure the stability of the Firm. I believe he will be fierce in this and his brother will have underestimated his strength and his anger if H attacks with his "truths". William will be ready with factual photos, quotes to refute the misrepresentations and will make them public.

   7. H always points to his military service with pride, yet there were reports during his service of his special treatment and there was resentment in some units towards him, it was not all glory. He uses Invictus Games to polish his image with his mates. But he has abandoned them and probably dismisses in his own mind the important fact that (from an article on line) _"Yes, the 95-year-old monarch is Commander-in-Chief of the United Kingdom’s entire military force! All British soldiers must swear an oath to her before officially joining the armed forces."  _Denigrating his Grandmother will not be well received by the legions who swore this oath and take pride in it.

   8. His long time, now many former friends, are quoted as saying they will fight back if he tells stories in his book about them that could harm their families or careers. He's been called hypocritical. I think he overestimates their current allegiances to him.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are these people for real. But also...interesting it comes out now, two years after the fact. They may come to wish for the days back when the BRF "wasn't protecting them".


Little stories like this will come out in small doses to illustrate Harry's  true character.  I put this all on him.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lounorada said:


> Well, I see the names as interchangeable seeing as sometimes MM looks like the 'brains' behind this whole fiasco and then other times it seems to be JCMH. Yet they are both dumb enough to be Pinky at the same time
> *Thanks for my gold star!*


Welcome!  

Let me get this straight... When M is Pinky, Harry is Brain? But isn't it a universal truth that H is brainless!?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Let me get this straight... When M is Pinky, Harry is Brain? But isn't it a universal truth that H is brainless!?
> 
> View attachment 5146870
> View attachment 5146871


I think it could be a case of Pinky X 2 and they are looking to hire a brain.


----------



## Lounorada

Maggie Muggins said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Let me get this straight... When M is Pinky, Harry is Brain? But isn't it a universal truth that H is brainless!?
> 
> View attachment 5146870
> View attachment 5146871


Yeah, but even brainless, dumb people can be capable of doing terrible things and being utterly vindictive.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I just checked, QEII is not in the snaps, so, she did not attend, so, her busy calendar was not the driving force behind selection of date, you cannot blame it on her


I don't think QE would ask the Archbishop of Canterbury to leave his most important Church meeting. Only people that have no consideration for others would do such thing imo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> I would be absolutely amazed if any royal or even nobility in the military has ever been within 50 miles of greater danger than stubbing their toe.
> 
> I think it’s an open secret their careers are very much the deluxe edition of military life. I mean the fact they all seem to qualify for cushy numbers like helicopter training is a bit of a giveaway. Not to mention they all get medals like pens at a conference.


H didn’t hear the open secret! He thinks he is just the same as the others.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lounorada said:


> Yeah, but even brainless, dumb people can be capable of doing terrible things and being utterly vindictive.


You are so right and I've always believed that H is jealous and vengeful enough to get even with anyone and everyone he sees as harming his reputation, which isn't that great to begin. He covers his true feelings with that stupid grin and by playing the clown.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> You are so right and I've always believed that H is jealous and vengeful enough to get even with anyone and everyone he sees as harming his reputation, which isn't that great to begin. He covers his true feelings with that stupid grin and by playing the clown.



Re: *stupid grin and by playing the clown* ... Just like M ... Two of a kind.   Thanks Maggie Muggins for saying this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Vintage Leather

Maggie Muggins said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Let me get this straight... When M is Pinky, Harry is Brain? But isn't it a universal truth that H is brainless!?
> 
> View attachment 5146870
> View attachment 5146871



They’ve had so many moronic failed schemes to take over the world, one of them has got to be the Brain. 

Now, which one is the schemer and which one just wants tasty pancakes? I was giving Meghan the credit, but this last month is showing Harry is not as innocent as he likes to pretend.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Vintage Leather said:


> They’ve had so many moronic failed schemes to take over the world, one of them has got to be the Brain.
> 
> Now, which one is the schemer and which one just wants tasty pancakes? I was giving Meghan the credit, but this last month is showing Harry is not as innocent as he likes to pretend.


I've known and worked with people like JCMH, who weren't all that smart, but who could plan all kinds of schemes, just to get even with people they had perceived as having been unfair to them.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Who are they going to pay to read this tripe?!
> 
> View attachment 5146555
> 
> *Meghan Misunderstood*
> by Sean Smith (Goodreads Author)
> 
> 3.62  ·   Rating details ·  60 ratings  ·  18 reviews
> *Meghan Misunderstood *is a pioneering book that sets the record straight on the most talked about, unfairly vilified and misrepresented woman in the world.
> Meghan Markle was eleven when she first advocated for women’s rights; a teenager when she worked in a soup kitchen feeding the homeless; a popular actress when she campaigned for clean water in Africa and passionately championed gender equality in a speech to a United Nations Women’s Conference. Even before she met Prince Harry, hers was an extraordinarily accomplished life.
> Meghan’s wedding to Harry was a joyful occasion, marking happiness at last for the Queen’s grandson who had captured our hearts twenty years earlier when he bravely walked behind his mother Diana’s coffin. Theirs was a story that the screenwriters of Hollywood – where Meghan had made her name – could scarcely have imagined.
> The rom-com fantasy, however, soon turned into disturbing drama: any expectation of a life happily-ever-after was cruelly dashed by bullying tabloid newspapers and their allies, both on social media and within the walls of the Palace itself.
> Meghan was targeted for her gender, her race, her nationality and her profession. The abuse became so bad that seventy-two female MPs signed a letter of solidarity against the ‘often distasteful and misleading press’, calling out the ‘outdated colonial undertones’ of the stories.
> Now, Sean Smith, the UK’s leading celebrity biographer, pulls no punches as he reveals the remarkable and powerful story of this self-made, intelligent American woman with a strong social conscience who has made such an impact on our lives.
> 
> *Here is the rest of the info on this swill. Book Info  (Nov 12, 2020)


The reviews range from outright MM love to 1 star. Big void in between.

I was more interested in checking out the author since this Sean Smith guy is described as a big deal celebrity author.  To me, it's obviously a scam as almost every online description of him goes "Sean Smith is the UK's leading celebrity biographer" which says that it's a copy-paste job from some PR bio, repeated enough to make the public believe that it's true. He specializes in unauthorized biographies of "famous people" (churns them out by the truckload) and is quoted saying "Megxit. It’s a flippant, smartass title". I suppose Meghan Misunderstood is a highbrow title?  This is a book written to get $$$$ from the MM stans and the curious. It includes, as do all esteemed biographies  , an astrological chart at the end.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Short yet accurate


----------



## needlv

Oooh yes… those love eyes for William.  Maybe she made a pass and got shut down?  Would explain part of her rage.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Oooh yes… those love eyes for William.  Maybe she made a pass and got shut down?  Would explain part of her rage.



Oh yes, her rage is big. She will make sure Will pays a huge price for that shut down. 

_"Ms Seward said this afternoon: *"William is the one who will come out of this the worst of all.*

"There is the row between William and Harry, and basically if Harry says things that are inappropriate about the monarchy, that is William's future.

"It is not Harry's future, he is out of it now, but it is William's future."_









						Royal biographer on how Harry is making William pay
					

ROYAL FAMILY biographer Ingrid Seward has said that Prince William will come out of Prince Harry's memoir "the worst of all" as the brother's row could feature in the surprise book deal.




					express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh yes, her rage is big. She will make sure Will pays a huge price for that shut down.
> 
> _"Ms Seward said this afternoon: *"William is the one who will come out of this the worst of all.*
> 
> "There is the row between William and Harry, and basically if Harry says things that are inappropriate about the monarchy, that is William's future.
> 
> "It is not Harry's future, he is out of it now, but it is William's future."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal biographer on how Harry is making William pay
> 
> 
> ROYAL FAMILY biographer Ingrid Seward has said that Prince William will come out of Prince Harry's memoir "the worst of all" as the brother's row could feature in the surprise book deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> express.co.uk



Ooooh, let them talk. W&K have and are doing an excellent job. They have put in the time, the effort, the care and will reap the goodwill.  Let the Bickersons of Montecito continue their rant. In fact, let them wallow in it, 24/7.  Have fun living that bitter life.


ETA: in 2021, this is living - real, genuine, heartfelt:


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, let them talk. W&K have and are doing an excellent job. They have put in the time, the effort, the care and will reap the goodwill.  Let the Bickersons of Montecito continue their rant. In fact, let them wallow in it, 24/7.  Have fun living that bitter life.
> 
> 
> ETA: in 2021, this is living - real, genuine, heartfelt:
> View attachment 5147024


Beautiful wedding in Florence. It seems the new husband is a billionaire, so they don't need to sell the family. One almost feels sorry for Hazz's wife, she has to come up with Hazz's memories to put bread on the table.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The new power couple — books being thrown in MonteVito, bickering continues 
Emma and Kitty are BFF, but MM couldn’t make it work.  Louder bickering is heard.










						Lady Kitty Spencer & husband’s eye-watering net worth
					

LADY KITTY Spencer, the niece of Princess Diana, has just married the multi-millionaire Michael Lewis in Rome.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_Kitty, 30, was raised in an aristocratic household and Eternal Lifestyle estimates that before she was married she was worth around £72 million herself.

Michael’s estimated net worth is over £80 million ($111 million), which puts the power couple at a combined net worth of over $200 million_


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, let them talk. W&K have and are doing an excellent job. They have put in the time, the effort, the care and will reap the goodwill.  Let the Bickersons of Montecito continue their rant. In fact, let them wallow in it, 24/7.  Have fun living that bitter life.
> 
> 
> ETA: in 2021, this is living - real, genuine, heartfelt:
> View attachment 5147024
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5147027



Kitty Spencer didn't even rush to get married and actually dated this guy a little longer than MoM did with JCMH.


----------



## wilding

I'm a bit behind with this thread as i closed all my tabs by accident and cannot be bothered catching up, but (and i do not promote violence towards children.),


----------



## CarryOn2020

wilding said:


> I'm a bit behind with this thread as i closed all my tabs by accident and cannot be bothered catching up, but (and i do not promote violence towards children.),



Who does promote violence against children?


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new power couple — books being thrown in MonteVito, bickering continues
> Emma and Kitty are BFF, but MM couldn’t make it work.  Louder bickering is heard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer & husband’s eye-watering net worth
> 
> 
> LADY KITTY Spencer, the niece of Princess Diana, has just married the multi-millionaire Michael Lewis in Rome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Kitty, 30, was raised in an aristocratic household and Eternal Lifestyle estimates that before she was married she was worth around £72 million herself.
> 
> Michael’s estimated net worth is over £80 million ($111 million), which puts the power couple at a combined net worth of over $200 million_



Raptor must be tearing out her hair extensions.


----------



## Hermes Zen

^ I hope so!  BUT I have a feeling she's reassuring herself that her wedding was better because she had all those people lined the streets as they paraded by in a beautiful horse and carriage like a prince and princess.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Ok… don’t care about anything except the title of the documentary… “Meghan at 40: The Climb to Power”









						Meghan and Harry did the Oprah interview to 'press nuclear button
					

Speaking in Meghan at 40: The Climb to Power, which airs on Channel 5 on Saturday, US-born Viscountess Hinchingbrooke said Meghan 'couldn't switch off the American dream'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




For the ”young” that’s gonna sting…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Kitty Spencer didn't even rush to get married and actually dated this guy a little longer than MoM did with JCMH.


Blinded by love, MoM may have rushed into marriage.


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> When the DH pulls out a bottle of wine and serves it with a disclaimer, my response is from R of the B and I call it the house plonk hahaha!



I love Rumpole of the Bailey, in fact, it still makes me laugh when I remember how Rumpole referred to Hilda as "She who must be obeyed".


----------



## Chanbal

A nice summary of the last adventures of the Montecito couple. 

_So after insulting the family repeatedly, dragging them on the world stage, stealing your grandmother’s private nickname for your sprog and then announcing you’re going to ‘dish more dirt’ on them in four subsequent books, you then apparently think this is a good time to use granny’s home to christen your second child, whom she has never met.

*








						Royal Round-Up: 25th July
					

Hello everyone! Feels good to be back!!! Firstly, my deepest apologies for the silence; I’ve had quite a few messages asking if I was taken ill and I really appreciate the concern (and apolog…




					thecrownsofbritain.com
				



*_


----------



## papertiger

Vintage Leather said:


> They’ve had so many moronic failed schemes to take over the world, one of them has got to be the Brain.
> 
> Now, which one is the schemer and which one just wants tasty pancakes? I was giving Meghan the credit, but this last month is showing Harry is not as innocent as he likes to pretend.



But we've always said this, no? 

Not a brain cell between them - unless you count scheming, motivated by greed to be clever. They are both text book chronic narcissists. 

For 2 people who have had more undeserved luck than probably _any_ others, they clearly have overestimated their worth to the world. One thing that gets lucky people into trouble is to think all the good 'stuff' was duly earned by skill/effort. Millions of amateur gamblers will tell you the same - at GA. They have no self-awareness. Even Andrew (boo-hiss  ) has the sense to step into the shadows and keep quiet as possible (after shooting his privileged a$$ off in that car-crash interview).

They hire brain/effort, but they also fire brain/effort continuously. People who have no brains nor understand the concept of longterm effort are impossible to please because they crave the impossible. Love, admiration and respect for just breathing. 

There is even an example of them arriving at a show when people were already applauding something, as they're shown to their seats they clearly think the applause is for them. It isn't, but they expect it so they make it so. That's them.


----------



## wilding

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who does promote violence against children?



Oh nothing, I just didn't want anyone to take the jandal/ brush meme the wrong way as last time i posted it somewhere it ruffled a few feathers (not on this board)


----------



## needlv

With looks like these I wouldn’t be surprised if Kate is carrying garlic or a wooden stake in her handbag.  Yikes


----------



## xincinsin

Sol Ryan said:


> Ok… don’t care about anything except the title of the documentary… “Meghan at 40: The Climb to Power”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry did the Oprah interview to 'press nuclear button
> 
> 
> Speaking in Meghan at 40: The Climb to Power, which airs on Channel 5 on Saturday, US-born Viscountess Hinchingbrooke said Meghan 'couldn't switch off the American dream'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the ”young” that’s gonna sting…


I enjoyed the article. Rolled my eyes at her 40th birthday described as "landmark". Landmark for who? The plastic surgeons? 

Not sure about MM having trouble switching off the American Dream. Not being American myself, I had to look up what it was. And in none of the definitions and descriptions I found, all of which were very positive and aspirational, was there the notion that to achieve her dream, she was entitled to trample on everyone else.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> I enjoyed the article. Rolled my eyes at her 40th birthday described as "landmark". Landmark for who? The plastic surgeons?
> 
> Not sure about MM having trouble switching off the American Dream. Not being American myself, I had to look up what it was. And in none of the definitions and descriptions I found, all of which were very positive and aspirational, was there the notion that to achieve her dream, she was entitled to trample on everyone else.



Turning 40 is hard on women.  I did not take it well.  And I am not a crazy eyed narc… so MM is NOT going to like it one bit.  And she is almost too old to move in to a billionaire replacement to H.  She is stuck with the idiot!

Edit to add: Hermes got the benefit of my slight melt down…


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Turning 40 is hard on women.  I did not take it well.  And I am not a crazy eyed narc… so MM is NOT going to like it one bit.  And she is almost too old to move in to a billionaire replacement to H.  She is stuck with the idiot!
> 
> Edit to add: Hermes got the benefit of my slight melt down…


Shhhh... I stopped counting the years after 35. Literally. My friends are still shocked when I have to pause and use my fingers to calculate my age


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Blinded by love, MoM may have rushed into marriage.



"#lovewins but now I'm plotting a sneaky divorce and Harry doesn't know it", says Ducka$s, reported by _ROYAL_ correspondent EverSoElusive a.k.a not Scoobie Doo


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> "#lovewins but now I'm plotting a sneaky divorce and Harry doesn't know it", says Ducka$s, reported by _ROYAL_ correspondent EverSoElusive a.k.a not Scoobie Doo



MM has been very quiet while H blows up his remaining family connections.  Last time we saw her was that vax conference wearing that awful dress (orange with flowers?)

All this info H is going to confess in interviews and books will help her during a custody dispute.  Mental health, drug abuse, alcohol abuse etc

Edit to add - she is going to claim she’s a victim (again) and had to leave H because of his abusive anger issues etc


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I enjoyed the article. Rolled my eyes at her 40th birthday described as "landmark". Landmark for who? The plastic surgeons?
> 
> Not sure about MM having trouble switching off the American Dream. Not being American myself, I had to look up what it was. And in none of the definitions and descriptions I found, all of which were very positive and aspirational, was there the notion that to achieve her dream, she was entitled to trample on everyone else.


Yes I’d say she embodies the scarface  interpretation of the American dream.

Every day that nose stays on is a blessing at this point.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Shhhh... I stopped counting the years after 35. Literally. My friends are still shocked when* I have to pause and use my fingers to calculate my age*



I honestly stopped thinking about my age after 25 and I thought it was just me that had to do mental arithmetic to figure my own age  Glad that I'm not alone!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> MM has been very quiet while H blows up his remaining family connections.  Last time we saw her was that vax conference wearing that awful dress (orange with flowers?)
> 
> All this info H is going to confess in interviews and books will help her during a custody dispute.  Mental health, drug abuse, alcohol abuse etc
> 
> Edit to add - she is going to claim she’s a victim (again) and had to leave H because of his abusive anger issues etc



When the time comes, she will probably claim that she has PTSD from her marriage to Harry and into the racist BRF


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> When the time comes, she will probably claim that she has PTSD from her marriage to Harry and into the racist BRF



PTSD wouldn't work in her favour keeping the kids in a British courts (it would be going through the British legal system*). 

*I'm not sure she realises this yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> PTSD wouldn't work in her favour keeping the kids in a British courts (it would be going through the British legal system*).
> 
> *I'm not sure she realises this yet.



She does now since you mentioned it   I'm sure she's writing it down furiously and have to rethink her strategy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *Blinded by love*, MoM may have rushed into marriage.


Blinded by love of fame and money, she rushed to marry the one she thought could fulfill all her dreams of avarice and stardom.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Oooh yes… those love eyes for William.  Maybe she made a pass and got shut down?  Would explain part of her rage.




I mean...not even Raptor is delusional enough to believe the future king would leave his wife and three children to ride into the sunset with his brother's gf. Right?


----------



## Annawakes

She must be sooo jealous of Lady Kitty and her multi- millionaire husband.  Lady Kitty is a real philanthropist, as far as I’ve read.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Beautiful wedding in Florence. It seems the new husband is a billionaire, so they don't need to sell the family. One almost feels sorry for Hazz's wife, she has to come up with Hazz's memories to put bread on the table.



Kitty's wedding was in Frascati, outside Rome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'll be honest, it bothers me how this wicked woman weaseled her way into the line of succession via her children, and to see Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor written out like this really drives home the point how rude bordering on cruel she is (because my gut feeling really is she forced that one...I'd be surprised if Harry was all over that idea).


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> Kitty's wedding was in Frascati, outside Rome.


You are absolutely right, it was Frascati and not Florence. It must have been a beautiful wedding.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but Kitty is a stunning beauty from a noble family with close ties to the royals. I don't think if money was what she was after she couldn't have found someone in her age group.


The Spencers are land rich but not sure how liquid they are.

In any case, finding a husband with loads of money seems like what an aristocratic woman with limited funds would do.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be honest, it bothers me how this wicked woman weaseled her way into the line of succession via her children, and to see Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor written out like this really drives home the point how rude bordering on cruel she is (because my gut feeling really is she forced that one...I'd be surprised if Harry was all over that idea).




I wouldn't worry, when any of Will's kids have kids of their own, they'd so far down the list it wouldn't even register.

Plus, there would be a constitutional crisis if ether Archie of Lilli would ascend to the Throne. It would make a mockery of all British tradition, the Head of Anglican Church having only once (or never) been to a CofE church. You either take the monarchy seriously or you do away with it altogether, I mean let's face it, it's game over for Game of Thrones.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> The Spencers are land rich but not sure how liquid they are.
> 
> In any case, finding a husband with loads of money seems like what an aristocratic woman with limited funds would do.



Now that you quote me I see I made a typo...what I wanted to say is that if she wanted money she COULD have found someone in her age group and didn't HAVE to marry someone older than her father.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't worry, when any of Will's kids have kids of their own, they'd so far down the list it wouldn't even register.
> 
> Plus, there would be a constitutional crisis if ether Archie of Lilli would ascend to the Throne. It would make a mockery of all British tradition, the Head of Anglican Church having only once (or never) been to a CofE church. You either take the monarchy seriously or you do away with it altogether, I mean let's face it, it's game over for Game of Thrones.



Agreed. I'm not worried, and I don't have a problem with these poor kids...but their mother is totally undeserving of any recognition IMO.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> The Spencers are land rich but not sure how liquid they are.
> 
> In any case, finding a husband with loads of money seems like what an aristocratic woman with limited funds would do.



I wish him and her well and trust that they married for love/compatibility and not asset management merger reasons. She has no estate at Althorp it all goes to Louis, but you _know _what I mean.

I would be more impressed if any of the aristocracy, socialites, rich-rich or celebs if they dated/married people not linked to great fame/wealth. After all, Kitty already gets her clothes/accessories/make-up/jewellery for free and she has plenty of money of her own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that you quote me I see I made a typo...what I wanted to say is that if she wanted money she COULD have found someone in her age group and didn't HAVE to marry someone older than her father.



On her own, she is a millionaire. She doesn’t need a husband for money. He, too, is a millionaire - not a billionaire. Together they are multi-millionaires   I know it is not a popular opinion, but perhaps they really do love each other.  Neither one needed the other’s money or status or fame.    How refreshing, especially the contrast with the despicable duo.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that you quote me I see I made a typo...what I wanted to say is that if she wanted money she COULD have found someone in her age group and didn't HAVE to marry someone older than her father.


Oh, I agree!  But this guy is not just rich, he's fabulously rich. Maybe that's harder to find.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The new power couple — books being thrown in MonteVito, bickering continues 
Emma and Kitty are BFF, but MM couldn’t make it work.  Louder bickering is heard.










						Lady Kitty Spencer & husband’s eye-watering net worth
					

LADY KITTY Spencer, the niece of Princess Diana, has just married the multi-millionaire Michael Lewis in Rome.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_Kitty, 30, was raised in an aristocratic household and Eternal Lifestyle estimates that before she was married she was worth around £72 million herself.

Michael’s estimated net worth is over £80 million ($111 million), which puts the power couple at a combined net worth of over $200 million_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but Kitty is a stunning beauty from a noble family with close ties to the royals. I don't think if money was what she was after she couldn't have found someone in her age group.


Well, the older the groom, hopefully the less time you actually have to live with him.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...not even Raptor is delusional enough to believe the future king would leave his wife and three children to ride into the sunset with his brother's gf. Right?


If her crazed stans believe it, then I’m sure she does.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I enjoyed the article. Rolled my eyes at her 40th birthday described as "landmark". Landmark for who? The plastic surgeons?
> 
> Not sure about MM having trouble switching off the American Dream. Not being American myself, I had to look up what it was. And in none of the definitions and descriptions I found, all of which were very positive and aspirational, was there the notion that to achieve her dream, she was entitled to trample on everyone else.


"The American Dream" was basically the notion that "America" is a land of opportunity, and for those who are hard working, one can achieve whatever it is they dream of.  Sadly, the "American Dream" is now practically nonexistent in America, as there are too many entitled, lazy Americans who think everyone else owes them simply for existing.  You know, like Meg and Haz...
(And I'm American.  I can call out my own compadres )


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Turning 40 is hard on women.  I did not take it well.  And I am not a crazy eyed narc… so MM is NOT going to like it one bit.  And she is almost too old to move in to a billionaire replacement to H.  She is stuck with the idiot!
> 
> Edit to add: Hermes got the benefit of my slight melt down…


I was so upset at the thought of turning 40, I was practically in tears.  I was whining to my mother (who's 23 years older than me), and she listening patiently to me until I was done.  Then she said, "Who cares?!!?  Age is just a number.  What you do with your years on earth is what's important.  Consider yourself fortunate to have lived this long, and hopefully, you'll have at least another 40 glorious years to go!"  Still didn't make turning 40 any easier, but as I march towards 50, I realize more that what she said was true.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I was so upset at the thought of turning 40, I was practically in tears.  I was whining to my mother (who's 23 years older than me), and she listening patiently to me until I was done.  Then she said, "Who cares?!!?  Age is just a number.  What you do with your years on earth is what's important.  Consider yourself fortunate to have lived this long, and hopefully, you'll have at least another 40 glorious years to go!"  Still didn't make turning 40 any easier, but as I march towards 50, I realize more that what she said was true.


When I turned that particular number, I recall to have fully embraced the concept that "40s are the new 30s", and have been stuck there for the last several years.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> When I turned that particular number, I recall to have fully embraced the concept that "40s are the new 30s", and have been stuck there for the last several years.


It's nice to see women like Demi Moore (not her face any more unfortunately), JLo (thanks to olive oil ), Kate Winslet, Elizabeth Hurley, Halle Berry, Christie Brinkley, Angela Bassett, etc., etc., etc., rocking it into their 50s, 60s, and beyond.  (PS help or not!)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new power couple — books being thrown in MonteVito, bickering continues
> Emma and Kitty are BFF, but MM couldn’t make it work.  Louder bickering is heard.
> 
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...-worth-billionaire-lewis-italy-princess-diana_Kitty, 30, was raised in an aristocratic household and Eternal Lifestyle estimates that before she was married she was worth around £72 million herself.
> 
> Michael’s estimated net worth is over £80 million ($111 million), which puts the power couple at a combined net worth of over $200 million_


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for keeping us updated on the numbers. With only $111M, he is certainly not a billionaire. I'm already starting to feel concerned for their families.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 for keeping us updated on the numbers. With only $111M, he is certainly not a billionaire. I'm already starting to feel concerned for their families.



We may need to set up a gofundme. How will they survive?


----------



## csshopper

This may seem off topic, but stay with me.

Read two articles on line this morning, one about the beautiful, intelligent, young Black poet, Amanda Gorman, whose reading of a poem at the Inauguration launched both a publishing and a modeling career, and one about the September 2021 Met Gala Chairmanships announced recently. The first article mentioned how Amanda has been supported in dealing with her "new found fame" by her friend Oprah, who interviewed her in March for "The Oprah Conversation" series.

The second article talked about Amanda's reactions to being personally invited by Anna Wintour via a Zoom call to be one of the Co Chairs of the September 2021 Met Gala.

Regarding one of the subject's of this Thread, Anna Wintour was quoted in multiple articles in 2019 praising Methane for a variety of things including being an influencer of Anna taking a fresh look at wearing suits in formal occasions. Anna also supported Methane's work style and took some snarky shots at the Firm: "I read somewhere that there were members of the royal household that were confused and upset that she woke up so early, at 5:00 a.m.,” Wintour says in the video, released on Tuesday. “She’s a normal California girl who gets up early and does yoga and meditates. She also sent a lot of text messages. I mean, what did they expect? That she was going to send messages via pigeon? I think she’s amazing.” 

Also in 2019:
In an interview with NBC's _Today_ show Friday, Wintour revealed that her dream guests for the gala would be none other than British royals Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, aka the Duchesses of Sussex and Cambridge, respectively.
“I would love to have the duchess of Sussex and the duchess of Cambridge together," Wintour said. "That would be my dream couple."
But she says she's not so keen on their husbands, princes Harry and William.
"They could leave their husbands at home," she said. "It’s the two of them I want.”

Prediction:  Methane will definitely be on the September Met Gala Invitation list and may even be spending her "parental leave" time planning which designer's gown to wear.  She will get mega exposure from friend Anna. There will be multiple photo ops of Methane-Amanda, with or without the tag along husband.

Spurred by the connection of Oprah-Methane-Oprah-Amanda, supported by the connection of Anna Wintour to both Methane and Amanda, Methane will emerge being promoted as having a new "bestie" Amanda Gorman.

IMO Amanda Gorman is a gracious, charming, gifted young woman, light years beyond the grubby middle aged narcissist in Montecito but I do not trust two puppet mistresses like Oprah and Anna to not try to use her to enhance Methane's image. If they do, I hope they fail.


----------



## Chanbal

To cash in on family is certainly '_shameful and tasteless_.'  

*DAN WOOTTON: Will Harry's self-serving book finally free Palace staff to set the record straight about how they survived working for the Sussexes?*

*Furious former staff members who worked for Prince Harry and Meghan during their time in the Royal Family are hoping the Duke's tell-all autobiography will finally allow them to speak out against the royal couple without the fear of repercussions.*

The small band of staffers – the so-called 'survivors' – and royal courtiers are currently considering the ramifications of Harry's decision to write about his life.

They keep in touch on a semi-regular basis to swap stories and discuss the latest in the world of the Sussexes.

Most royal staff are bound by understandably draconian confidentiality provisions, including the Official Secrets Act.

However, some of Harry and Meghan's ex-staffers have become increasingly incensed over what they believe is a false narrative being promoted about how they were treated by the institution.

This situation was exacerbated by the sensational and damaging interview with Oprah Winfrey in March, as well as the bombshell public release of claims Meghan had bullied staff members, and the launch of an official investigation by Buckingham Palace. The Sussexes denied bullying claims and said they were victims of a 'calculated smear campaign'.

But the autobiography – for which Harry is expected to receive a £14.7 million advance from Penguin Random House – risks taking the acrimony to another level.

Last night my royal insider revealed: 'Harry and Meghan's former staff members are convinced that this book is being written to settle scores and will likely include a lot of detail about their time within the Royal Family.

'Based on the Oprah Winfrey interview, some of these ex-workers simply do not trust that a full and accurate picture will be presented.

*Most royal staff are bound by understandably draconian confidentiality provisions, including the Official Secrets Act, writes Dan Wootton *

'Conversations have already started about what steps they might be able to take to protect their own reputation and that of the monarchy post-publication.'

It remains unlikely that there would be any official overturning of the confidentiality rules because of their importance in protecting members of the Royal Family from damaging leaks over the years.

But an insider added:* 'There may be a provision given to staff members to respond to any claims that they consider to be inaccurate.

'Maybe a blind eye could be turned if staff members used friends or family members to correct the record on their behalf.*

'These are the sorts of conversations going on at the moment and, of course, legal remedies are always available too if the book smears any individual staff members unfairly.'

Harry and Meghan's staff hold the key to exposing their experiences about many of their most explosive claims about the Royal Family, so it is a shame they could remain silenced.

Another royal source added: 'These are, on the whole, very good people who wanted the best for Harry and Meghan.

*'But many of the secrets they know are explosive and would blow up much of the victim narrative so carefully crafted by those two.*

'*For example, some of these staff members were aware of commercial conversations that were going on when they were still full-time royals – they were clearing the way to make millions long before Megxit was revealed.*

'*The way they tried to publicly discredit staff who they took against has been particularly distasteful and left a bad taste in the mouth of many courtiers past and present.*

'All options have to stay on the table because we are in unprecedented times. There is literally no precedent for this situation.'

During their time in the Royal Family, a host of staff members left the employ of Harry and Meghan.

They included private secretaries Samantha Cohen and Amy Pickerill, two PAs, including Melissa Touabti, and two nannies.

At least ten former staff members are reported to be wanting to give evidence to the Buckingham Palace investigation into Meghan's alleged bullying behind palace walls.

Harry and Meghan's then communications secretary Jason Knauf alerted Prince William's private secretary Simon Case in an email, leaked to The Times in the days before the Oprah chat was broadcast.

He wrote: 'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X was totally unacceptable.

'The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence.

'We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'

Meghan described the bullying allegations as a 'calculated smear campaign'.

The Mail on Sunday revealed at the weekend that Prince Harry's old friends are also horrified that Harry is writing a book and are considering speaking out too.

A source told the newspaper: 'If Harry slams any of his old school and military buddies in his new book they have pledged to break ranks to tell their story.'

Last week I revealed the 'growing sense of shock and fury' among the royal palaces and the Duke of Sussex's own family members about his book plan, which a senior royal source told me could be 'the final nail in the coffin of the Royal Family's relationship with Harry'.

Insiders close to the Prince of Wales confirmed he did not know about Harry's book, even though he has been working on it for the past year and Clarence House is believed to be worried about what Harry might write about his stepmother Camilla.

The source said: 'Let's be honest, Harry has never been close to the Duchess of Cornwall. If he documents their fraught relationship in the book it could be very damaging at a time when Charles is laying the groundwork for her to become Queen.'

While there is still hope that Charles and Harry's relationship will be able to recover, courtiers do not believe a rapprochement with William is possible.

A royal insider explained: 'This is the end of any close relationship with the Duke of Cambridge. There's nothing more that can be said on that front. *William believes his behaviour is shameful and tasteless.'*

The publication of the book – being ghost written by J.R. Moehringer – in 2022 has also worried courtiers because it risks overshadowing a trio of significant royal milestones, notably the Queen's Platinum Jubilee.

Announcing the news of the book, Prince Harry said in a statement: 'I'm writing this not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become. I've worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively, and my hope is that in telling my story – the highs and lows, the mistakes, the lessons learnt – I can help show that no matter where we come from, we have more in common than we think.

'I'm deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I've learnt over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read a firsthand account of my life that's accurate and wholly truthful.'

*But as my royal source concluded: 'Many of Prince Harry and Meghan's former staff doubt the book will be 'wholly truthful' because, if it was, Harry and Meghan would come out of it looking terrible.'*









						DAN WOOTTON: Will Harry's book free Palace staff to speak out?
					

The small band of staffers - the so-called 'survivors' - and royal courtiers are currently considering the ramifications of Harry's decision to write about his life




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

The parasitic duo must be totally appalled that the media is calling Kitty, "niece of Princess Diana" instead of saying "Lady Kitty Spencer, cousin of the world renowned philanthropists, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex."  After so many slights and so much pain to bear, they must be trashing everything in sight, so much so, that their entire house is in shambles now.


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> Oooh yes… those love eyes for William.  Maybe she made a pass and got shut down?  Would explain part of her rage.




How does Harry not see this? It is out there for all and sundry. 
What does she do? Pat him on his empty pointed head and say "I was thinking of youuuuuuu"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new power couple — books being thrown in MonteVito, bickering continues
> Emma and Kitty are BFF, but MM couldn’t make it work.  Louder bickering is heard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer & husband’s eye-watering net worth
> 
> 
> LADY KITTY Spencer, the niece of Princess Diana, has just married the multi-millionaire Michael Lewis in Rome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Kitty, 30, was raised in an aristocratic household and Eternal Lifestyle estimates that before she was married she was worth around £72 million herself.
> 
> Michael’s estimated net worth is over £80 million ($111 million), which puts the power couple at a combined net worth of over $200 million_



And so far, they are a _scandal-free_ power couple.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> To cash in on family is certainly '_shameful and tasteless_.'
> 
> *DAN WOOTTON: Will Harry's self-serving book finally free Palace staff to set the record straight about how they survived working for the Sussexes?*
> 
> *Furious former staff members who worked for Prince Harry and Meghan during their time in the Royal Family are hoping the Duke's tell-all autobiography will finally allow them to speak out against the royal couple without the fear of repercussions.*
> 
> The small band of staffers – the so-called 'survivors' – and royal courtiers are currently considering the ramifications of Harry's decision to write about his life.
> 
> They keep in touch on a semi-regular basis to swap stories and discuss the latest in the world of the Sussexes.
> 
> Most royal staff are bound by understandably draconian confidentiality provisions, including the Official Secrets Act.
> 
> However, some of Harry and Meghan's ex-staffers have become increasingly incensed over what they believe is a false narrative being promoted about how they were treated by the institution.
> 
> This situation was exacerbated by the sensational and damaging interview with Oprah Winfrey in March, as well as the bombshell public release of claims Meghan had bullied staff members, and the launch of an official investigation by Buckingham Palace. The Sussexes denied bullying claims and said they were victims of a 'calculated smear campaign'.
> 
> But the autobiography – for which Harry is expected to receive a £14.7 million advance from Penguin Random House – risks taking the acrimony to another level.
> 
> Last night my royal insider revealed: 'Harry and Meghan's former staff members are convinced that this book is being written to settle scores and will likely include a lot of detail about their time within the Royal Family.
> 
> 'Based on the Oprah Winfrey interview, some of these ex-workers simply do not trust that a full and accurate picture will be presented.
> 
> *Most royal staff are bound by understandably draconian confidentiality provisions, including the Official Secrets Act, writes Dan Wootton *
> 
> 'Conversations have already started about what steps they might be able to take to protect their own reputation and that of the monarchy post-publication.'
> 
> It remains unlikely that there would be any official overturning of the confidentiality rules because of their importance in protecting members of the Royal Family from damaging leaks over the years.
> 
> But an insider added:* 'There may be a provision given to staff members to respond to any claims that they consider to be inaccurate.
> 
> 'Maybe a blind eye could be turned if staff members used friends or family members to correct the record on their behalf.*
> 
> 'These are the sorts of conversations going on at the moment and, of course, legal remedies are always available too if the book smears any individual staff members unfairly.'
> 
> Harry and Meghan's staff hold the key to exposing their experiences about many of their most explosive claims about the Royal Family, so it is a shame they could remain silenced.
> 
> Another royal source added: 'These are, on the whole, very good people who wanted the best for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> *'But many of the secrets they know are explosive and would blow up much of the victim narrative so carefully crafted by those two.*
> 
> '*For example, some of these staff members were aware of commercial conversations that were going on when they were still full-time royals – they were clearing the way to make millions long before Megxit was revealed.*
> 
> '*The way they tried to publicly discredit staff who they took against has been particularly distasteful and left a bad taste in the mouth of many courtiers past and present.*
> 
> 'All options have to stay on the table because we are in unprecedented times. There is literally no precedent for this situation.'
> 
> During their time in the Royal Family, a host of staff members left the employ of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> They included private secretaries Samantha Cohen and Amy Pickerill, two PAs, including Melissa Touabti, and two nannies.
> 
> At least ten former staff members are reported to be wanting to give evidence to the Buckingham Palace investigation into Meghan's alleged bullying behind palace walls.
> 
> Harry and Meghan's then communications secretary Jason Knauf alerted Prince William's private secretary Simon Case in an email, leaked to The Times in the days before the Oprah chat was broadcast.
> 
> He wrote: 'I am very concerned that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year. The treatment of X was totally unacceptable.
> 
> 'The Duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights. She is bullying Y and seeking to undermine her confidence.
> 
> 'We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards Y.'
> 
> Meghan described the bullying allegations as a 'calculated smear campaign'.
> 
> The Mail on Sunday revealed at the weekend that Prince Harry's old friends are also horrified that Harry is writing a book and are considering speaking out too.
> 
> A source told the newspaper: 'If Harry slams any of his old school and military buddies in his new book they have pledged to break ranks to tell their story.'
> 
> Last week I revealed the 'growing sense of shock and fury' among the royal palaces and the Duke of Sussex's own family members about his book plan, which a senior royal source told me could be 'the final nail in the coffin of the Royal Family's relationship with Harry'.
> 
> Insiders close to the Prince of Wales confirmed he did not know about Harry's book, even though he has been working on it for the past year and Clarence House is believed to be worried about what Harry might write about his stepmother Camilla.
> 
> The source said: 'Let's be honest, Harry has never been close to the Duchess of Cornwall. If he documents their fraught relationship in the book it could be very damaging at a time when Charles is laying the groundwork for her to become Queen.'
> 
> While there is still hope that Charles and Harry's relationship will be able to recover, courtiers do not believe a rapprochement with William is possible.
> 
> A royal insider explained: 'This is the end of any close relationship with the Duke of Cambridge. There's nothing more that can be said on that front. *William believes his behaviour is shameful and tasteless.'*
> 
> The publication of the book – being ghost written by J.R. Moehringer – in 2022 has also worried courtiers because it risks overshadowing a trio of significant royal milestones, notably the Queen's Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> Announcing the news of the book, Prince Harry said in a statement: 'I'm writing this not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become. I've worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively, and my hope is that in telling my story – the highs and lows, the mistakes, the lessons learnt – I can help show that no matter where we come from, we have more in common than we think.
> 
> 'I'm deeply grateful for the opportunity to share what I've learnt over the course of my life so far and excited for people to read a firsthand account of my life that's accurate and wholly truthful.'
> 
> *But as my royal source concluded: 'Many of Prince Harry and Meghan's former staff doubt the book will be 'wholly truthful' because, if it was, Harry and Meghan would come out of it looking terrible.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Will Harry's book free Palace staff to speak out?
> 
> 
> The small band of staffers - the so-called 'survivors' - and royal courtiers are currently considering the ramifications of Harry's decision to write about his life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Now that they are no longer senior royals, I wonder if the confidentiality agreements will be loosened considerably. You know Harry, be careful what you wish for, because if you start slinging mud, they can sling it right back at ya.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I wish him and her well and trust that they married for love/compatibility and not asset management merger reasons. She has no estate at Althorp it all goes to Louis, but you _know _what I mean.
> 
> I would be more impressed if any of the aristocracy, socialites, rich-rich or celebs if they dated/married people not linked to great fame/wealth. After all, Kitty already gets her clothes/accessories/make-up/jewellery for free and she has plenty of money of her own.


I suspect she was looking for stability in a marriage. Her father’s history with three wives isn’t great. Her grandmother left her grandfather.  Her aunt…..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> To cash in on family is certainly '_shameful and tasteless_.'
> 
> *DAN WOOTTON: Will Harry's self-serving book finally free Palace staff to set the record straight about how they survived working for the Sussexes?*
> 
> *But as my royal source concluded: 'Many of Prince Harry and Meghan's former staff doubt the book will be 'wholly truthful' because, if it was, Harry and Meghan would come out of it looking terrible.'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Will Harry's book free Palace staff to speak out?
> 
> 
> The small band of staffers - the so-called 'survivors' - and royal courtiers are currently considering the ramifications of Harry's decision to write about his life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




*Yes, yes, yes, by golly, *it is time for all to talk. Purge those secrets. It’s the only way to let the healing begin. That _is_ why they are doing this, right? To heal. We all need to heal, so 
 

ETA:  none of us need to see more of the Ben-LO suntan application.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...not even Raptor is delusional enough to believe the future king would leave his wife and three children to ride into the sunset with his brother's gf. Right?



Oh I dunno..........she needs look no further than her FIL. See how happy he is now that he has his True Love


----------



## bag-mania

At first I wondered if anyone will care what Harry has to say in his book next year. So much can happen in that time. Then it occurred to me that Meghan and Harry's brand is drama and drama never goes away completely.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> "The American Dream" was basically the notion that "America" is a land of opportunity, and for those who are hard working, one can achieve whatever it is they dream of.  Sadly, the "American Dream" is now practically nonexistent in America, as there are too many entitled, lazy Americans who think everyone else owes them simply for existing.  You know, like Meg and Haz...
> (And I'm American.  I can call out my own compadres )



As another American I'd like to point out that the "dream" is also unattainable for many hard working citizens too. Without equal opportunity (for education or housing which impacts employment) many dual income families are simply unable to earn a living wage. I work with many of these parents and can assure you they are the opposite of entitled and lazy.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I suspect she was looking for stability in a marriage. Her father’s history with three wives isn’t great. Her grandmother left her grandfather.  Her aunt…..


..... her cousin


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new power couple — books being thrown in MonteVito, bickering continues
> Emma and Kitty are BFF, but MM couldn’t make it work.  Louder bickering is heard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer & husband’s eye-watering net worth
> 
> 
> LADY KITTY Spencer, the niece of Princess Diana, has just married the multi-millionaire Michael Lewis in Rome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Kitty, 30, was raised in an aristocratic household and Eternal Lifestyle estimates that before she was married she was worth around £72 million herself.
> 
> Michael’s estimated net worth is over £80 million ($111 million), which puts the power couple at a combined net worth of over $200 million_


I dont buy for a second that Kitty is worth 72 M pounds on her own, she has not earned that much modeling, and the Spencer estate goes to her brother 
Kate Moss is worth about 70M pounds, but has been modeling for donkeys years 
Yes, the article mentions a 20M pound London mansion ... do they own or rent ??? 
I might believe she is worth 5-10 M pounds on her own, maybe, come on, how much a D&G ambassador earn ? they get lots of free clothes though


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I dont buy for a second that Kitty is worth 72 M pounds on her own, she has not earned that much modeling, and the Spencer estate goes to her brother
> Kate Moss is worth about 70M pounds, but has been modeling for donkeys years
> Yes, the article mentions a 20M pound London mansion ... do they own or rent ???
> I might believe she is worth 5-10 M pounds on her own, maybe, come on, how much a D&G ambassador earn ? they get lots of free clothes though


I agree. I don't know why they inflate the numbers.  They have been living together for 2 years.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> I dont buy for a second that Kitty is worth 72 M pounds on her own, she has not earned that much modeling, and the Spencer estate goes to her brother
> Kate Moss is worth about 70M pounds, but has been modeling for donkeys years
> Yes, the article mentions a 20M pound London mansion ... do they own or rent ???
> I might believe she is worth 5-10 M pounds on her own, maybe, come on, how much a D&G ambassador earn ? they get lots of free clothes though



I am guessing she has enough money and associations not to have to marry for money at all, though more never hurts!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Kitty may have hit it big in the stock market and other investments.


----------



## bellecate

nm


----------



## Hermes Zen

bellecate said:


> nm


Hi, I need to learn this. I’ve seen it on this thread. What does nm mean?  Appreciate you educating me. Thanks!


----------



## poopsie

Hermes Zen said:


> Hi, I need to learn this. I’ve seen it on this thread. What does nm mean?  Appreciate you educating me. Thanks!




nm= never mind


----------



## Hermes Zen

poopsie said:


> nm= never mind


Thank you @poopsie !!


----------



## poopsie

Hermes Zen said:


> Thank you @poopsie !!


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Kitty’s money

She has 2 high-end brand ambassador (?) jobs  - D&G, Bulgari - plus other modeling gigs.  Based on her Wiki page, she has been well prepared for this role. Guessing she is a master influencer, too. Still, she has some of the Diana look and seems very poised. Her sister may be next to wed. Who knows?  The photos look good enough, but the pandemic has destroyed my standard. It is low - Ben&Jlo low, Courtney&that guy low. So tired of seeing their butts.  So need a day at Hermes. 





__





						Lady Kitty Spencer - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_She was raised in Cape Town, South Africa, where she attended Reddam House, a private school. After her parents divorced in 1997, Spencer spent her time between her native United Kingdom with her father and South Africa with her mother.

In 2009 *Spencer was presented as a debutante at the Hôtel de Crillon's le Bal des Débutantes in Paris.*

Spencer studied psychology, politics, and English literature at the University of Cape Town. She later studied art history and Italian in Florence, Italy, before completing a master's degree in luxury brand management from the European Business School London at Regent's University London.

_
*Modelling*
_In 1992, when Spencer was one year old, she appeared with her mother on the cover of Harper's Bazaar UK. Spencer is signed with Storm Model Management, and made her professional modelling debut in 2015 in the December issue of Tatler. In September 2017 she walked for Dolce & Gabbana in a fashion show during Milan Fashion Week.  She was the 2017 June covergirl of Hello Fashion Monthly, and was featured on the cover of Vogue Japan. She walked the runway for Dolce & Gabbana in their 2017 Christmas show at Harrods.In 2018, Spencer was a featured model in Dolce & Gabbana's Venetian spring/summer print campaign. During 2018 Milan Fashion Week Spencer walked in Dolce & Gabbana's Secrets & Diamonds fashion show.

In May 2018 BVLGARI announced that Spencer would be the new face of the jewellery brand, working as their newest brand ambassador.  She had previously modelled for the jewellery designer, modelling the brand's "Diva's Dream" diamond necklace.

On 23 September 2018 Spencer walked in a fashion show in Milan for Dolce & Gabbana's Spring 2019 collection. She also appeared in editorials for Marie Claire Spain and Elle Russia, and graced the covers of L'Officiel Brazil and Tatler, the latter alongside Helena Christensen.
_
*Philanthropy and charity work*
_Spencer is an ambassador for Centrepoint, a charity that supports homeless youth, and a trustee and patron for the military charity Give Us Time.

In June 2017 Spencer helped raise £140,000 for the Elton John AIDS Foundation. She also has raised funds for Save the Children._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Pfft…


----------



## rose60610

When a book has to written like "Meghan Misunderstood", it underscores the fact that, no, she is not "misunderstood".  I hope it mentions that the media were ga-ga and gloated over her until she went on her pity tour. And if Harry really thought his family was bad enough that he wanted to leave it all behind, then why did he marry a woman and bring her into it? Once again, their claims don't add up. Like "needing privacy" then inserting themselves into numerous situations. If anything, Meghan is trying to become a Kris Jenner--Kris took (at the time) Bruce and resurrected his fame as a Decathlon gold medalist, then leveraged him into a sought after speaker. Meghan started out with a famous man and is leveraging his fame to build her empire. When Lilibet starts walking, I predict she'll start hawking the kids, like Kris. The BRF was her cash register.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*Spencer studied psychology, politics, and English literature at the University of Cape Town. She later studied art history and Italian in Florence, Italy, before completing a master's degree in luxury brand management from the European Business School London at Regent's University London.*_




Not sure what's her GPA but she's definitely well read. Beauty and brains, someone is breaking more plates and toilet bowls in Palais de Montecito as we speak right now


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Pfft…



Have they reached the end or are they still digging their way to the bottom of the sewer to find more sh**t to write about? Could she be hypocritical enough to write that she was shedding tears re Prince Philip illness, death and funeral instead of admitting they were crocodile tears?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Have they reached the end or are they still digging their way to the bottom of the sewer to find more sh**t to write about? Could she be hypocritical enough to write that she was shedding tears re Prince Philip illness, death and funeral instead of admitting they were crocodile tears?



Anything is possible with them. Next thing you know there's a book about The Bullies of TPF causing her to want to roll herself down the stairs  She just needs to leave those poor babies the hell alone.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Pfft…



Confirmation they have 3 kids. 
Give back that sham award!


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


>



It looks like when the Sunday Times published this in April, it was vehemently denied by Om*d. Om*d and his denials/falsehoods...


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> It looks like when the Sunday Times published this in April, it was vehemently denied by Om*d. Om*d and his denials/falsehoods...
> 
> View attachment 5147728



Soon it will be Finding Scoobie after MoM has banished him to the Cold Palace for not doing a good job at making her look perfect and like a saint


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Have they reached the end or are they still digging their way to the bottom of the sewer to find more sh**t to write about? Could she be hypocritical enough to write that she was shedding tears re Prince Philip illness, death and funeral instead of admitting they were crocodile tears?


I don’t get it … 
Why dole out new material to Omid for his book, when 6 has one in the works ? 6 needs to have a bestseller and should be hoarding all the new dirt for himself


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really? This kind of drama during a pandemic?    
Clearly they are so jealous of the goodwill that Kitty received.  All of those “Diana’s beautiful niece” headlines must have stung.  
Take another sip of the bitter tea, H&M - you have put every foot wrong again and again.



Chanbal said:


> It looks like when the Sunday Times published this in April, it was vehemently denied by Om*d. Om*d and his denials/falsehoods...
> 
> View attachment 5147728


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Have they reached the end or are they still digging their way to the bottom of the sewer to find more sh**t to write about? *Could she be hypocritical enough to write that she was shedding tears re Prince Philip illness, death and funeral instead of admitting they were crocodile tears?*



Oh I think that's pretty much a given. Except I doubt she cried over Philip. More like rubbing her hands together and hoping he left her a bundle of cash. Surely she'll write about how she felt suicidal living in luxury. So how did she plan to kill herself? And then expect us to believe she couldn't access mental help but had all this time and means to plan her own demise. 

If one reads the reviews on Amazon about "Meghan Misunderstood", it's a gag fest. Reviews are favorable and supposedly believe her claims. I'm convinced her handlers/lawyers/finance people planted the reviews as fodder to spark for further deals. Anyone who buys her book is a dupe.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@marietouchet  said 
"I don’t get it …
Why dole out new material to Omid for his book, when 6 has one in the works ? 6 needs to have a bestseller and should be hoarding all the new dirt for himself" 

Is it possible that Scabies already knows the contents of H's book (x4) because he may have been originally chosen as H's ghostwriter until H's PR team realized they needed a competent author so now, Scabies is riding on H's coat tails by adding the already acquired new info to his paperback book.

Edited to post the correct quote.


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> I don’t get it …
> Why dole out new material to Omid for his book, when 6 has one in the works ? *6 needs to have a bestseller* and should be hoarding all the new dirt for himself



Their books will only be bestsellers because they call it and they buy the inventory themselves  They have no substance to make bestsellers. I think they should start their own bestsellers list on Archewell. Top 100 books are all written by the ingrates and Scoobie  They can also write fake reviews for their conceit!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Patience, dear ones. It is only Monday.
The rest of the week will be spent walking back, walking sideways on everything they posted today.  This seems to be their pattern now.

ETA: did H&M get a lovely video with perfect music, graceful poses, handsome brothers walking down the aisle?  Oooooh, they must be bitter!

ETA2:  Kitty is real royalty, too — Diana’s niece


----------



## needlv

Sunshine Sachs leaking to Deux Moi?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooh, dear, did Lady Kitty steal the limelight?  We need GossipGirl on this xoxo
ETA: Gasp, horror thought:   Did MM think William would walk her down the aisle???
ETA2:  Lady or Duchass (Sussex)  eww, I know which title I prefer









						Lady Kitty Spencer speaks honestly about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal wedding
					

Princess Diana's niece Lady Kitty Spencer has given a new interview to Town & Country magazine, and the model has been honest about the impact of the Duke and Duchesses royal wedding in 2018.




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



_Speaking to the lifestyle magazine, Kitty said: "I woke up the next day and looked at my phone and thought, 'Whoops, did I take someone else's by mistake?'."

This is because her Instagram following skyrocketed from 37,000 to a whopping half a million overnight. She added: "It was very weird, and a little bit overwhelming."


The model's flawless outfit on the Duke and Duchess' big day must have been one of the reasons behind the surge in attention, as she looked unreal in a hand-painted D&G dress with a matching fascinator and bright orange accessories.

Kitty is the daughter of Earl Charles Spencer, who is the brother of the late Princess Diana. Charles also attended the royal wedding, along with his wife Karen Spencer._







*Lady Kitty Spencer looked incredible at the royal wedding*


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Sunshine Sachs leaking to Deux Moi?




Umm this is not a reference book for science. Why would there be a revision? So they can fix the holes in their stories???


----------



## Sol Ryan

needlv said:


> Sunshine Sachs leaking to Deux Moi?




Wonder how that’s going to play with the Mail getting another day in court?



CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooh, dear, did Lady Kitty steal the limelight?  We need GossipGirl on this xoxo
> ETA: Gasp, horror thought:   Did MM think William would walk her down the aisle???
> ETA2:  Lady or Duchass (Sussex)  eww, I know which title I prefer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer speaks honestly about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's royal wedding
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's niece Lady Kitty Spencer has given a new interview to Town & Country magazine, and the model has been honest about the impact of the Duke and Duchesses royal wedding in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Speaking to the lifestyle magazine, Kitty said: "I woke up the next day and looked at my phone and thought, 'Whoops, did I take someone else's by mistake?'."
> 
> This is because her Instagram following skyrocketed from 37,000 to a whopping half a million overnight. She added: "It was very weird, and a little bit overwhelming."
> 
> 
> The model's flawless outfit on the Duke and Duchess' big day must have been one of the reasons behind the surge in attention, as she looked unreal in a hand-painted D&G dress with a matching fascinator and bright orange accessories.
> 
> Kitty is the daughter of Earl Charles Spencer, who is the brother of the late Princess Diana. Charles also attended the royal wedding, along with his wife Karen Spencer._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Lady Kitty Spencer looked incredible at the royal wedding*



Again, my issues with D&G aside, she looks stunning there. Like a doll almost….. she almost looks unreal….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sol Ryan said:


> Wonder how that’s going to play with the Mail getting another day in court?
> Again, my issues with D&G aside, she looks stunning there. Like a doll almost….. she almost looks unreal….



Yes, to all of that, esp D&G issues.  My questions are:
-did Lady Kitty steal H&M’s thunder? In a green dress, too.
-did MM expect William to walk her down the aisle? Is that why there is so much drama around W&K and H&M?  IMO that explains what the dust-up was really about and why the chatter won’t stop. William, for all the right reasons, said no.  Hazzie had to kiss up to the dad he hates. Hmmmm.


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Turning 40 is hard on women.  I did not take it well.  And I am not a crazy eyed narc… so MM is NOT going to like it one bit.  And she is almost too old to move in to a billionaire replacement to H.  She is stuck with the idiot!
> 
> Edit to add: Hermes got the benefit of my slight melt down…


If you're upset now... it gets worse, much worse. But what can you do...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Patience, dear ones. It is only Monday.
> The rest of the week will be spent walking back, walking sideways on everything they posted today.  This seems to be their pattern now.
> 
> ETA: did H&M get a lovely video with perfect music, graceful poses, handsome brothers walking down the aisle?  Oooooh, they must be bitter!
> 
> ETA2: * Kitty is real royalty, too *— Diana’s niece



The Spencer family members are part of the Nobility/Aristocracy, which is the highest class below Royalty.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> If you're upset now... it gets worse, much worse. But what can you do...



Much worse how?


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> If you're upset now... it gets worse, much worse. But what can you do...



keep shopping at Hermes?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> The Spencer family members are part of the Nobility/Aristocracy, which is the highest class below Royalty.



Yes, all the perks without the _horrible hassles of royalty, _as Hazzie has indicated.
Lady Kitty, of course, was born to it, just like Lady Di.

_The dictionary definition of lady explains the complex ways the word is used in British high society, where it usually corresponds to the use of lord for men. For example, it's used when referring to women who hold certain titles: marchioness, countess, viscountess, or baroness. It can also be used of the wife of a lower-ranking noble, such as a baron, baronet, or knight.

Lady is also the courtesy title for the daughters of higher-ranking nobles: duke, marquess, or earl. (Earl is the British equivalent of count in European nobility). The daughters of viscounts and barons are referred to as "The Honorable," and daughters of baronets or knights are simply called "Miss."_


----------



## Annawakes

I thought M wanted to walk down the aisle herself, all alone, the poor young thing with no father or family to lean on.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Patience, dear ones. It is only Monday.
> The rest of the week will be spent walking back, walking sideways on everything they posted today.  This seems to be their pattern now.
> 
> ETA: did H&M get a lovely video with perfect music, graceful poses, handsome brothers walking down the aisle?  Oooooh, they must be bitter!
> 
> ETA2:  Kitty is real royalty, too — Diana’s niece




OMGGGGG I passed out !  The gown, the jewels, the setting ... She looked perfectly stunning!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, to all of that, esp D&G issues.  My questions are:
> -did Lady Kitty steal H&M’s thunder? In a green dress, too.
> -*did MM expect William to walk her down the aisle?* Is that why there is so much drama around W&K and H&M?  IMO that explains what the dust-up was really about and why the chatter won’t stop. William, for all the right reasons, said no.  Hazzie had to kiss up to the dad he hates. Hmmmm.


From what I've read, M tried to contravene the rules for a COE wedding:
1. No bare shoulders in the church
2. Widows and divorcee must wear off-white colours
3. No veils for divorcees or widows
4. All brides must be escorted down the aisle

M was trying to create a fairytale as in covered head to toe with in white veil, walking her pure virginal self down the aisle to meet her prince. When they realized her strategy, Charles intervened and walked her down the aisle.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really? This kind of drama during a pandemic?
> Clearly they are so jealous of the goodwill that Kitty received.  All of those “Diana’s beautiful niece” headlines must have stung.
> Take another sip of the bitter tea, H&M - you have put every foot wrong again and again.



Hazz and wife are clearly very jealous, but I think their targets are primarily Will&Kate. Kitty is beautiful, rich, married a multi-millionaire, but she will likely never be a queen or an important figure in politics. Will and Kate are not only a beautiful and very rich couple, but they are also respected and have a very prominent role ahead of them. 

Lacey updated his book with MM's bulling and other claims. Om*d is also updating his book to convey MM's response to the last events. My 2 cents.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> @marietouchet  said
> "I don’t get it …
> Why dole out new material to Omid for his book, when 6 has one in the works ? 6 needs to have a bestseller and should be hoarding all the new dirt for himself"
> 
> Is it possible that Scabies already knows the contents of H's book (x4) because he may have been originally chosen as H's ghostwriter until H's PR team realized they needed a competent author so now, Scabies is riding on H's coat tails by adding the already acquired new info to his paperback book.
> 
> Edited to post the correct quote.


Hazz's wife can't wait 1 year to convey her responses to the last events. Also, Omid can test the waters with some comments that, if not successfully denied, can be used as facts in Hazz's book(s).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Hazz's wife can't wait 1 year to convey her responses to the last events. Also, Omid can test the waters with some comments that, if not successfully denied, can be used as facts in Hazz's book(s).


Yes, that's another possibility. I hope they get so mixed up in their stories and lies that they are thoroughly chastised by the media and then they have to hide in their little mansion for a few years. What I would give to see the fur fly! I am so ready!


----------



## Chanbal

What's the problem with Hazz's aunt?


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, that's another possibility. I hope they get so mixed up in their stories and lies that they are thoroughly chastised by the media and then *they have to hide in their little mansion for a few years*. *What I would give to see the fur fly! I am so ready!*
> 
> View attachment 5147854


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What's the problem with Hazz's aunt?
> View attachment 5147858



Um, Andrew?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Sunshine Sachs leaking to Deux Moi?



The comments are gold. I learnt a new word: philodox! 
And so many comments were squawking: Work? They did work? What work? LOL


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Chanbal said:


> What's the problem with Hazz's aunt?
> View attachment 5147858



How long have you got?  

Took money from Epstein to pay her bills.
Filmed by News of the World in a cash-for-access scandal. £500,000 for access to Prince Pedo.
Sued and summoned to the UK courts for hundreds of thousands of pound of unpaid bills.
Continues to support her ex and say how much of a good bloke he is...
A multitude of crimes against fashion.


----------



## Jayne1

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Took money from Epstein to pay her bills.
> *Filmed by News of the World in a cash-for-access scandal. £500,000 for access to Prince Pedo.*
> Sued and summoned to the UK courts for hundreds of thousands of pound of unpaid bills.
> Continues to support her ex and say how much of a good bloke he is...
> A multitude of crimes against fashion.


With his blessing though. Most of the sh*t hit her, but not Andrew so much.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M do *not* have it. They try to hard, always missing the mark.

W&K do, so does Lady Kitty. 
Prince George - born with it
Princess Charlotte - born with it
Prince Louis - born with it 
Edward&Sophie = have
Lady Louise - born with it
Andrew&Sarah = never
Princess Anne has a doctorate in it. 


_It's all about *sprezzatura*, the art of studied nonchalance, which the Italians practically invented in the Renaissance, and have been perfecting ever since. _
from Town&Country


Spoiler: spezzatura :baci:



What We Can Learn from Lady Gaga's Gucci Movie Wardrobe
BY ALESSANDRA CODINHA
JUN 21, 2021

You didn’t have to spend much time sifting through the swooning commentary to see that after all the hideous trials of 2020, and this year’s strenuous strides toward recovery, *we are all in desperate need of some big-time, grown-up glamour, and for that there’s really only one place to look. 

It was Italy that gave rise to the kaleidoscopic color wheels of Emilio Pucci and the zigzag zealotry of Missoni, the supermodel armor of Gianni and Donatella Versace, the va-va-voom decadence of Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, the streamlined soigné of Giorgio Armani, the feathered flounce of Valentino, and the cool confidence of Prada. Nowhere else really comes close, even now. Perhaps especially now, after a year of elastic waistbands and Zoom fits. [Ouch!]*


“Italian style is joyous, happy,” says Margherita Missoni. “It’s quite outspoken, not shy. To me it is bold: solid colors and gold.” To this day, she and her husband can identify European nationalities just based on wardrobe. Italians are easy. “The style is always quite luxurious, quite dressed.”

Italians have been known for their sartorial skills since well before the author Baldassare Castiglione coined the term sprezzatura in 1528, though what they called it until then is anybody’s guess. Later, Guccio Gucci was among the craftsmen who set up their businesses in the aftermath of World War I and helped Italy rebuild its economy following the devastation of World War II thanks to such signature items as the Bamboo bag, which went straight from the gilded Florentine salas of the 1950s into the arms, and era, of the dolce vita jet-set.

By the 1970s, when Gucci, the founder’s grandson, and Reggiani met and married, the world’s attention had shifted to Milan, where a ready-to-wear revolution was underway, led by the likes of Armani (founded in 1975) and Versace (1978), which were designing clothes for café society to see and, more important, to be seen in. The ’80s and ’90s only pumped up the volume, fortissimo.


“Italians have a real pride for beauty and style,” says J.J. Martin, the California-born, Milan-based designer behind La DoubleJ. That’s true of their country’s outlook in general, she says; Italians take their sensual pleasures seriously, whether it’s what they put on their bodies or on their dining tables. “I grew up skiing Mammoth Mountain. It was not chic at all. My family would have their tuna fish sandwiches squished in their fanny packs for lunch,” she says. The Guccis après-ski in St. Moritz it was not.

Meanwhile, Francesca Ruffini, the founder of the world’s most elegant pajama brand, For Restless Sleepers, grew up in Como, where she learned to host and entertain with a bit more…panache. As Italians, “we are surrounded with beauty,” she says. “We are raised with traditions that have handed down strong values and the need to preserve beauty and its integrity. To make this happen, we have to be elegant in the soul. This fascinates and enchants everyone.”

In other words, the rapturous international reception to the candid images of Gaga and Driver on set—in close-cut cashmere, with ’70s stripes, checks, and florals, and heaps of gold and pearls, no less—is rooted in a kind of arrested wish fulfillment: We want to go there, subito.

“It’s about the package,” says Bianca Arrivabene, the Venice doyenne and deputy chair of Christie’s Italy. “In Italy you get the blue skies, the beautiful beaches, the beautiful art, the Duomo di Firenze, the Piazza San Marco, the piazza in Naples, la Costiera Amalfitana, Palermo… These places touch all your senses at the same time.”

Italians reacted less to the Hollywood take on the ill-fated Guccis, a lurid tabloid tale still fresh in the minds of many, than to the bravado of the period, a boom time for an industry that is celebrated as a source of national pride.

“There still was a freedom then for designers to create what came from their hearts, not obliged to respond to what the market wanted,” Arrivabene says. “Less Excel sheets and market research, more instinct and creativity.”

As for those of us looking to take a page from the Italians and appear a little different from the rest of the pack post-quarantine, take heart (and a floral headscarf).

Arrivabene, who is planning to vacation this summer in Greece with a small group of friends, is packing new red Prada sandals and her gold Madina Visconti necklaces to dress up her shorts and bikinis. She says she hopes for a more sustainable approach going forward—“to fashion, to writing emails, to driving our cars,” to buying things that are bello e ben fatto: beautiful and well made.

More immediately, Arrivabene anticipates a feeling Venetians know well: euphoria. “I think that’s what’s going to happen to all of us. We’re going to be dancing and having fun and hugging each other like mad,” she says.

One thing you can count on: The Italians will be dressed for the occasion. “I rarely wear high heels,” Missoni tells T&C, “and I just bought a pair of lime-green pumps, because I cannot wait to go out.”


----------



## xincinsin

FreeSpirit71 said:


> How long have you got?
> 
> Took money from Epstein to pay her bills.
> Filmed by News of the World in a cash-for-access scandal. £500,000 for access to Prince Pedo.
> Sued and summoned to the UK courts for hundreds of thousands of pound of unpaid bills.
> Continues to support her ex and say how much of a good bloke he is...
> *A multitude of crimes against fashion.*


Her lack of taste is indeed criminal.


----------



## lazeny

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, to all of that, esp D&G issues.  My questions are:
> -did Lady Kitty steal H&M’s thunder? In a green dress, too.
> -did MM expect William to walk her down the aisle? Is that why there is so much drama around W&K and H&M?  IMO that explains what the dust-up was really about and why the chatter won’t stop. William, for all the right reasons, said no.  Hazzie had to kiss up to the dad he hates. Hmmmm.



Why on earth would William ever walk her down the aisle. Lol!


----------



## Sharont2305

Hermes Zen said:


> OMGGGGG I passed out !  The gown, the jewels, the setting ... She looked perfectly stunning!!!


And, everything FIT!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lazeny said:


> Why on earth would William ever walk her down the aisle. Lol!



In her mind and only her mind, my theory [and it is only that] is: she thought having William walk her down the aisle would cement her place in history, showing she was completely embraced by the family.  She could spin the narrative that she captured both of Diana’s sons by including W, George and Charlotte in her wedding [Kate left out], blah blah. Her narc personality means she must be the center of everything. Guessing she was furious that Charles volunteered.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> What's the problem with Hazz's aunt?
> View attachment 5147858


I’d love to see her build up more of resemblance to Mandela…..
in that she gets locked up for years and years.


needlv said:


> Pfft…





rose60610 said:


> Oh I think that's pretty much a given. Except I doubt she cried over Philip. More like rubbing her hands together and hoping he left her a bundle of cash. Surely she'll write about how she felt suicidal living in luxury. So how did she plan to kill herself? And then expect us to believe she couldn't access mental help but had all this time and means to plan her own demise.
> 
> If one reads the reviews on Amazon about "Meghan Misunderstood", it's a gag fest. Reviews are favorable and supposedly believe her claims. I'm convinced her handlers/lawyers/finance people planted the reviews as fodder to spark for further deals. Anyone who buys her book is a dupe.


I think these fart’em out unofficial biographies get a lot of solicited reviews for free copies & it’s going to be a self- selecting audience anyway.


EverSoElusive said:


> Umm this is not a reference book for science. Why would there be a revision? So they can fix the holes in their stories???


It’s quite suggestive that even after an explosive ‘tell all interview’ and a first run of this cursed book they still need a revised second edition to get their story straight   

What it really reminds me of is ‘suicide squad’ in that they made such an awful failure the first time round they’ve just decided to completely rehash it & bring it out again to try & recoup their losses


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> When a book has to written like "Meghan Misunderstood", it underscores the fact that, no, she is not "misunderstood".  I hope it mentions that the media were ga-ga and gloated over her until she went on her pity tour. And if Harry really thought his family was bad enough that he wanted to leave it all behind, then why did he marry a woman and bring her into it? Once again, their claims don't add up. Like "needing privacy" then inserting themselves into numerous situations. If anything, Meghan is trying to become a Kris Jenner--Kris took (at the time) Bruce and resurrected his fame as a Decathlon gold medalist, then leveraged him into a sought after speaker. Meghan started out with a famous man and is leveraging his fame to build her empire. When Lilibet starts walking, I predict she'll start hawking the kids, like Kris. The BRF was her cash register.



Too bad Kris is way better at what she does, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Confirmation they have 3 kids.
> Give back that sham award!



I don't know if I'd hold up a miscarriage over their heads as having three kids (and this coming from a person who doesn't even believe it happened).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Sunshine Sachs leaking to Deux Moi?




Sure. Next time my family informs me someone is dying I'll just not take it for what it's worth and then complain if they have the audacity to actually die.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> And, everything FIT!!


And they didn't need to use special bonded silk that the bride has to totter around in! What a miracle!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know if I'd hold up a miscarriage over their heads as having three kids (and this coming from a person who doesn't even believe it happened).


In my experience, most parents who have been through a miscarriage do include the child in their number of kids.  They consider it as a real pregnancy, a real person and a real death with real grief. This is partly why it is so difficult to move on. Since H&M accepted the award, they may not include it. Who knows. IMO this reinforces their callousness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> In my experience, most parents who have been through a miscarriage do include the child in their number of kids.  They consider it as a real pregnancy, a real person and a real death with real grief. This is partly why it is so difficult to move on. Since H&M accepted the award, they may not include it. Who knows.



Sure, but a dead child doesn't take up ressources, which was the whole deal of that stupid award.


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> As another American I'd like to point out that the "dream" is also unattainable for many hard working citizens too. Without equal opportunity (for education or housing which impacts employment) many dual income families are simply unable to earn a living wage. I work with many of these parents and can assure you they are the opposite of entitled and lazy.


ITA, that’s why I simply said “there are too many”.  I didn’t imply everyone was entitled.  COVID has created more entitled people as well as hardworking people who can’t make ends meet.  I’m sure that’s probably happened worldwide.


----------



## needlv

'What you have done sir is quite frankly despicable': Letter to Harry
					

Sir, I am an ordinary citizen of the United Kingdom, a loyal and patriotic subject of Her Majesty the Queen of England.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## needlv




----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s quite suggestive that even after an explosive ‘tell all interview’ and a first run of this cursed book they still need a revised second edition to get their story straight
> 
> What it really reminds me of is ‘suicide squad’ in that they made such an awful failure the first time round they’ve just decided to completely rehash it & bring it out again to try & recoup their losses



You know how we say someone really needs to stop while they are ahead? Well, they are not exactly ahead but they REALLY need to stop now! 

They are looking more and more foolish every time they do something. Perhaps MoM will not regret her actions and burning all the bridges with the BRF because she's probably planning her explosive divorce (like their OW interview and Finding Scoobie, oops I meant Finding Freedom book) but for JCMH? He will be so fxcked when MoM kicks him to the curb and clean out whatever's left in their bank accounts (plus her additional ridiculous demands) and he has to crawl back to the BRF begging to belong so that he could be someone and something, just to have some dignity again.

Now even if MoM does not divorce him, JCMH will be alienated completely once good ole granny dies because neither Charles nor William has time for his BS, causing the BRF so much embarrassment and pain. The children aside, is this witch really worth it?


----------



## EverSoElusive

lazeny said:


> Why on earth would William ever walk her down the aisle. Lol!



Had this happened, it would be splashed across the tabloid with the headline - William is in love with MoM.


----------



## carmen56

FreeSpirit71 said:


> How long have you got?
> 
> Took money from Epstein to pay her bills.
> Filmed by News of the World in a cash-for-access scandal. £500,000 for access to Prince Pedo.
> Sued and summoned to the UK courts for hundreds of thousands of pound of unpaid bills.
> Continues to support her ex and say how much of a good bloke he is...
> A multitude of crimes against fashion.



Not forgetting the toe sucking episode!  The woman is a walking disaster and a huge embarrassment.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It looks like when the Sunday Times published this in April, it was vehemently denied by Om*d. Om*d and his denials/falsehoods...
> 
> View attachment 5147728



When I read Scobie asked "Why let facts get in the way of a spicy story" I honestly almost fell off my chair!


----------



## jennlt

needlv said:


> Sunshine Sachs leaking to Deux Moi?



I thought H&M denied any involvement with the first_ Finding Freedom _but now she wants to say her piece in an addendum to a book she had nothing to do with? At least they are consistent in their hypocrisy  









						Harry and Meghan 'did not contribute' to new book Finding Freedom
					

Finding Freedom claims there was tension between Harry and Meghan and other royal households.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## papertiger

Interesting H didn't go to his cousin's wedding(?)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M do *not* have it. They try to hard, always missing the mark.
> 
> W&K do, so does Lady Kitty.
> Prince George - born with it
> Princess Charlotte - born with it
> Prince Louis - born with it
> Edward&Sophie = have
> Lady Louise - born with it
> Andrew&Sarah = never
> Princess Anne has a doctorate in it.
> 
> 
> _It's all about *sprezzatura*, the art of studied nonchalance, which the Italians practically invented in the Renaissance, and have been perfecting ever since. _
> from Town&Country
> 
> 
> Spoiler: spezzatura :baci:
> 
> 
> 
> What We Can Learn from Lady Gaga's Gucci Movie Wardrobe
> BY ALESSANDRA CODINHA
> JUN 21, 2021
> 
> You didn’t have to spend much time sifting through the swooning commentary to see that after all the hideous trials of 2020, and this year’s strenuous strides toward recovery, *we are all in desperate need of some big-time, grown-up glamour, and for that there’s really only one place to look.
> 
> It was Italy that gave rise to the kaleidoscopic color wheels of Emilio Pucci and the zigzag zealotry of Missoni, the supermodel armor of Gianni and Donatella Versace, the va-va-voom decadence of Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, the streamlined soigné of Giorgio Armani, the feathered flounce of Valentino, and the cool confidence of Prada. Nowhere else really comes close, even now. Perhaps especially now, after a year of elastic waistbands and Zoom fits. [Ouch!]*
> 
> 
> “Italian style is joyous, happy,” says Margherita Missoni. “It’s quite outspoken, not shy. To me it is bold: solid colors and gold.” To this day, she and her husband can identify European nationalities just based on wardrobe. Italians are easy. “The style is always quite luxurious, quite dressed.”
> 
> Italians have been known for their sartorial skills since well before the author Baldassare Castiglione coined the term sprezzatura in 1528, though what they called it until then is anybody’s guess. Later, Guccio Gucci was among the craftsmen who set up their businesses in the aftermath of World War I and helped Italy rebuild its economy following the devastation of World War II thanks to such signature items as the Bamboo bag, which went straight from the gilded Florentine salas of the 1950s into the arms, and era, of the dolce vita jet-set.
> 
> By the 1970s, when Gucci, the founder’s grandson, and Reggiani met and married, the world’s attention had shifted to Milan, where a ready-to-wear revolution was underway, led by the likes of Armani (founded in 1975) and Versace (1978), which were designing clothes for café society to see and, more important, to be seen in. The ’80s and ’90s only pumped up the volume, fortissimo.
> 
> 
> “Italians have a real pride for beauty and style,” says J.J. Martin, the California-born, Milan-based designer behind La DoubleJ. That’s true of their country’s outlook in general, she says; Italians take their sensual pleasures seriously, whether it’s what they put on their bodies or on their dining tables. “I grew up skiing Mammoth Mountain. It was not chic at all. My family would have their tuna fish sandwiches squished in their fanny packs for lunch,” she says. The Guccis après-ski in St. Moritz it was not.
> 
> Meanwhile, Francesca Ruffini, the founder of the world’s most elegant pajama brand, For Restless Sleepers, grew up in Como, where she learned to host and entertain with a bit more…panache. As Italians, “we are surrounded with beauty,” she says. “We are raised with traditions that have handed down strong values and the need to preserve beauty and its integrity. To make this happen, we have to be elegant in the soul. This fascinates and enchants everyone.”
> 
> In other words, the rapturous international reception to the candid images of Gaga and Driver on set—in close-cut cashmere, with ’70s stripes, checks, and florals, and heaps of gold and pearls, no less—is rooted in a kind of arrested wish fulfillment: We want to go there, subito.
> 
> “It’s about the package,” says Bianca Arrivabene, the Venice doyenne and deputy chair of Christie’s Italy. “In Italy you get the blue skies, the beautiful beaches, the beautiful art, the Duomo di Firenze, the Piazza San Marco, the piazza in Naples, la Costiera Amalfitana, Palermo… These places touch all your senses at the same time.”
> 
> Italians reacted less to the Hollywood take on the ill-fated Guccis, a lurid tabloid tale still fresh in the minds of many, than to the bravado of the period, a boom time for an industry that is celebrated as a source of national pride.
> 
> “There still was a freedom then for designers to create what came from their hearts, not obliged to respond to what the market wanted,” Arrivabene says. “Less Excel sheets and market research, more instinct and creativity.”
> 
> As for those of us looking to take a page from the Italians and appear a little different from the rest of the pack post-quarantine, take heart (and a floral headscarf).
> 
> Arrivabene, who is planning to vacation this summer in Greece with a small group of friends, is packing new red Prada sandals and her gold Madina Visconti necklaces to dress up her shorts and bikinis. She says she hopes for a more sustainable approach going forward—“to fashion, to writing emails, to driving our cars,” to buying things that are bello e ben fatto: beautiful and well made.
> 
> More immediately, Arrivabene anticipates a feeling Venetians know well: euphoria. “I think that’s what’s going to happen to all of us. We’re going to be dancing and having fun and hugging each other like mad,” she says.
> 
> One thing you can count on: The Italians will be dressed for the occasion. “I rarely wear high heels,” Missoni tells T&C, “and I just bought a pair of lime-green pumps, because I cannot wait to go out.”



@CarryOn2020 = born with it


----------



## Annawakes

OT: bea and Eugenie seem to have turned out well, despite their nutty parents.  At least, I haven’t heard embarrassing (or entitled) stories about them.  Maybe they were raised by governesses.

On topic, is MoM (Maleficent of Montecito) on the list of names @Maggie Muggins?  That’s a good one!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> Not forgetting the toe sucking episode!  The woman is a walking disaster and a huge embarrassment.



I'd almost forgotten that disaster of a pap shot. To be a little bit fair to Fergie, they always insisted he was kissing her instep and wasn't actually sucking her toes. Does that make a difference? Probably not, but it shows the tabloid media will always create a headline that is a little extra.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz's wife was hopping for an apology after OW's interview. I wonder what she is now hopping for after Hazz's book(s), which announcement "_has sparked a tsunami of fear in royal circles_". 

_Tom, author of Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir, told the Channel 5 documentary Meghan at 40: The Climb To Power: "*I think she was hoping for an apology*, I think she was hoping they would phone and say, 'We are really sorry, we now see that we pushed you too far. We should have behaved differently, we should have sat down as a family and discussed your mental health issues'.

“I think she was horrified afterward that the reaction was so negative from the family and they didn't respond in the way that she wanted.”_








						Meghan was 'hoping for an apology' after Oprah interview, royal expert claims
					

A royal author has said that Meghan may have been actually looking for sympathy from the royals after giving the interview and did not want to upset them




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

Hermes Zen said:


> Hi, I need to learn this. I’ve seen it on this thread. What does nm mean?  Appreciate you educating me. Thanks!


It means never mind. I went to reply to someone and when I went on later in the day it hadn’t posted and was no longer relevant so I removed the content and put in nm. 
Out camping and cell service is flaky. Sorry H, there is no peeing in the woods on this trip so far.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> OT: bea and Eugenie seem to have turned out well, despite their nutty parents.  At least, I haven’t heard embarrassing (or entitled) stories about them.  Maybe they were raised by governesses.
> 
> On topic, is MoM (*Maleficent of Montecito*) on the list of names @Maggie Muggins?  That’s a good one!


Yes it is. Will post the list when I'm sure we've got all the nicknames available, if that's at all possible.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know all kids have their moments, but this still made me laugh.


----------



## Genie27

lanasyogamama said:


> I know all kids have their moments, but this still made me laugh.



Ah, back whe we matched lemon yellow pants with lemon yellow tops and earrings and called it fashion.


----------



## Chanbal

Not new, but I only saw this today.  All crocodile tears...


----------



## Genie27

Chanbal said:


> Hazz's wife was hopping for an apology after OW's interview. I wonder what she is now hopping for after Hazz's book(s), which announcement "_has sparked a tsunami of fear in royal circles_".
> 
> _Tom, author of Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir, told the Channel 5 documentary Meghan at 40: The Climb To Power: "*I think she was hoping for an apology*, I think she was hoping they would phone and say, 'We are really sorry, we now see that we pushed you too far. We should have behaved differently, we should have sat down as a family and discussed your mental health issues'.
> 
> “I think she was horrified afterward that the reaction was so negative from the family and they didn't respond in the way that she wanted.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan was 'hoping for an apology' after Oprah interview, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> A royal author has said that Meghan may have been actually looking for sympathy from the royals after giving the interview and did not want to upset them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


She was hoping for a groundswell of American approval of her decision to vacate BRF due to their heinous treatment. Right?!? I mean, they are so awful, no one even asked her if she was OK.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Hazz's wife was hopping for an apology after OW's interview. I wonder what she is now hopping for after Hazz's book(s), which announcement "_has sparked a tsunami of fear in royal circles_".
> 
> _Tom, author of Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir, told the Channel 5 documentary Meghan at 40: The Climb To Power: "*I think she was hoping for an apology*, I think she was hoping they would phone and say, 'We are really sorry, we now see that we pushed you too far. We should have behaved differently, we should have sat down as a family and discussed your mental health issues'.
> 
> “I think she was horrified afterward that the reaction was so negative from the family and they didn't respond in the way that she wanted.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan was 'hoping for an apology' after Oprah interview, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> A royal author has said that Meghan may have been actually looking for sympathy from the royals after giving the interview and did not want to upset them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


IMHO she wanted an apology but more importantly, in her mind, a SINCERE apology would entail CAVING to their demands eg reinstating the military appointments, prince title for A , maybe more, I dont think any phone call, not matter how humble, from how many (QEII, C, W , K ie  the world) would do it , a compromise would not cut it a full knuckling under would be required


----------



## Chanbal

Genie27 said:


> She was hoping for a groundswell of American approval of her decision to vacate BRF due to their heinous treatment. Right?!? I mean, no one even asked her if she was OK.


See previous post, their reaction after the interview. The sad faces & tears were FAKE as almost everything coming from Montecito these days...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Not new, but I only saw this today.  All crocodile tears...




I never saw this one. She is a such an awful human being.


----------



## youngster

FreeSpirit71 said:


> How long have you got?
> 
> Took money from Epstein to pay her bills.
> Filmed by News of the World in a cash-for-access scandal. £500,000 for access to Prince Pedo.
> Sued and summoned to the UK courts for hundreds of thousands of pound of unpaid bills.
> Continues to support her ex and say how much of a good bloke he is...
> *A multitude of crimes against fashion.*



I laughed so hard at this! Thank you!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never saw this one. She is a such an awful human being.


Both were awful imo. She was laughing and he was hiding a smile. They looked thrilled by their fake pantomime. OW looked also 'very happy', but she could have been thinking about the $9M.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I laughed so hard at this! Thank you!


I know. I’m thinking this may be the top reason.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Both were awful imo. She was laughing and he was hiding a smile. They looked thrilled by their fake pantomime. OW looked also 'very happy', but she could have been thinking about the $9M.



I thought he looked more flustered than anything, like it suddenly dawned to him what he'd done. Then again, seeing what he continues to do you might be completely right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Not new, but I only saw this today.  All crocodile tears...




Those B.st.rds!!  I hope this vid gets seen by the RF!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> See previous post, their reaction after the interview. The sad faces & tears were FAKE as almost everything coming from Montecito these days...


Put this full screen on my monitor and viewed it in slow motion: it's fleeting but at the very end after MoM dips her head towards 6 and grins with glee at what has just been unleashed, at the very last second of the clip, smiling broadly, she turns toward Oprah who is sitting across from her with an equally big old grin on her face as she moves to heft herself out of her seat.

Can only imagine the self congratulatory conversation that followed. They are a Menage a trois: two beeches and a eunuch.

Ooops,  this thread moves fast, QueenofWrapDresses astutely posted same observation as I was typing this.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Hazz's wife was hopping for an apology after OW's interview. I wonder what she is now hopping for after Hazz's book(s), which announcement "_has sparked a tsunami of fear in royal circles_".
> 
> _Tom, author of Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir, told the Channel 5 documentary Meghan at 40: The Climb To Power: "*I think she was hoping for an apology*, I think she was hoping they would phone and say, 'We are really sorry, we now see that we pushed you too far. We should have behaved differently, we should have sat down as a family and discussed your mental health issues'.
> 
> *“I think she was horrified afterward that the reaction was so negative from the family and they didn't respond in the way that she wanted.”*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan was 'hoping for an apology' after Oprah interview, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> A royal author has said that Meghan may have been actually looking for sympathy from the royals after giving the interview and did not want to upset them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



no. I think she was ENRAGED


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Both were awful imo. She was laughing and he was hiding a smile. They looked thrilled by their fake pantomime. OW looked also 'very happy', but she could have been thinking about the $9M.


Was he hiding a smile or looking ashamed?? I need the body language guy to tell us!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I saw another nickname for Meghan today that I very much enjoyed. “Meh”!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Not new, but I only saw this today.  All crocodile tears...



They look like a couple of smug teenagers, who are giggling with satisfaction after pulling a terrible prank on someone. During my youth, they would have been called punks and no decent human being would have hung around with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the 1987 holiday.  The stare from Charles, Diana’s gold shoes and Felipe, the hunk    love the 80s, fun times.

Video from 1986.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw another nickname for Meghan today that I very much enjoyed. “*Meh*”!!!


Thanks @lanasyogamama you just made my day especially after watching this hideous creature's latest OW vid. Nickname added to the list with pleasure.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the 1987 holiday.  The stare from Charles, Diana’s gold shoes and Felipe, the hunk    love the 80s, fun times.
> 
> Video from 1986.
> 
> View attachment 5148229
> 
> 
> View attachment 5148232




You could still rock that 1 shoulder dress today…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe this is why we got the stories about the 4 books - they didn’t get titles for the 2 kids.  Ooooh.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Not new, but I only saw this today.  All crocodile tears...




You know how some stuff ends up in every newspaper, social media platform and hundreds of different Twitter feeds?  This needs to broadcast the same.  Netflix, Spotify and publishers need to cancel their contracts with these lying snakes. Their claims are toast and they're just greedy low-life fame whores who'd slander their own family for a nickel. Oh wait, that's how they make their living.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> You know how some stuff ends up in every newspaper, social media platform and hundreds of different Twitter feeds?  This needs to broadcast the same.  Netflix, Spotify and publishers need to cancel their contracts with these lying snakes. Their claims are toast and they're just greedy low-life fame whores who'd slander their own family for a nickel. Oh wait, that's how they make their living.



Manipulative maniacs, imo.  They are disrespecting not just the BRF but all of us with these lies.
All of these USA losses at the Olympics due to mental health are now known as the _Sussex effect. _


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @lanasyogamama you just made my day especially after watching this hideous creature's latest OW vid. Nickname added to the list with pleasure.
> View attachment 5148265


You made MY day!


----------



## Jayne1

Not knowing if the children were actually of Meg's body, they were added to the LOS - but if it ever comes down to actually ascending the throne, there would have to be a paternity test, I assume...


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw another nickname for Meghan today that I very much enjoyed. “Meh”!!!



Harry’s first wife
Harry’s ex wife
The ex Duchess of Sussex


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sol Ryan said:


> You could still rock that 1 shoulder dress today…


Oh yeah she’s killing that jacquemus vibe with the big gold earrings too.

I’m always amazed how much shiny polyester people used to wear in the 80s especially in the sun.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Not knowing if the children were actually of Meg's body, they were added to the LOS - but if it ever comes down to actually ascending the throne, there would have to be a paternity test, I assume...



I'm sure they were smart enough to use Harry's sperm. If Meghan's eggs were not used would that matter as far as ascension? A DNA test would determine that.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh yeah she’s killing that jacquemus vibe with the big gold earrings too.
> 
> I’m always amazed how much shiny polyester people used to wear in the 80s especially in the sun.



Shiny polyester was so popular in the 80s. Looking back 35 years later it's hard to admit she was right in fashion.   

Of course everyone will be saying horrible things about today's fashion trends in 30 years.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Not knowing if the children were actually of Meg's body, they were added to the LOS - but if it ever comes down to actually ascending the throne, there would have to be a paternity test, I assume...


I’ve seen people asking for this and I don’t understand how a paternity test would prove anything. Surely any kind of DNA test wouldn’t show whether they used a surrogate provided they used HM’s egg & sperm?
(I don’t believe she’s be stupid enough to kill the golden goose by getting pregnant by someone else.)

It seems to me that the only thing that could possibly settle this is if a surrogate came forward or there was some sort of medical testimony of the birth but I would assume they would be in very hot legal water if these witnesses did speak out so it seems unlikely they’d prove it either way.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure they were smart enough to use Harry's sperm. If Meghan's eggs were not used would that matter as far as ascension? A DNA test would determine that.


Yeah they wouldn’t be legitimate if they weren’t from M’s dna too so they couldn’t join the line of succession. This is why I don’t think a dna test would prove anything.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Shiny polyester was so popular in the 80s. Looking back 35 years later it's hard to admit she was right in fashion.
> 
> Of course everyone will be saying horrible things about today's fashion trends in 30 years.


It’s not that I don’t think it doesn’t look good, I like the lemon ensemble, but my gosh does it look sweat inducing!

I’m saying harsh things about the cycle shorts and the cutout midriff dress trends now & I have no intention of stopping!


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s not that I don’t think it doesn’t look good, I like the lemon ensemble, *but my gosh does it look sweat inducing!*
> 
> I’m saying harsh things about the cycle shorts and the cutout midriff dress trends now & I have no intention of stopping!



Now you know fashion has never been about comfort!   

Polyester has sure come a long way from those heavy knits of the 60s and 70s. The 80s was the beginning of the nicer synthetics and designers were using it everywhere to save on costs.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

elvisfan4life said:


> Harry’s first wife
> Harry’s ex wife
> The ex Duchess of Sussex


Thanks @elvisfan4life  I've added 'Harry's first wife' to the "Nasty Duo Nicknames" on The List and the other two to a new category called "Nicknames For Later Use" and hoping that the 'The ex Duchess of Sussex' nickname will soon become a reality.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Not knowing if the children were actually of Meg's body, they were added to the LOS - but if it ever comes down to actually ascending the throne, there would have to be a paternity test, I assume...


A paternity test wouldn't address the surrogate. They would need to give authorization for the hospital to release the birth records imo.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Not sure if anyone is watching LCC at moment. I haven’t watched her for a few weeks- she seems a bit vague atm.
I am enjoying leilani of Barbados but she doesn’t upload that much. Her stuff about miss world is just interesting anyway IMO.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> OT: bea and Eugenie seem to have turned out well, despite their nutty parents.  At least, I haven’t heard embarrassing (or entitled) stories about them.  Maybe they were raised by governesses.
> *
> On topic, is MoM (Maleficent of Montecito) on the list of names *@Maggie Muggins?  That’s a good one!


I believe it is, although I always read it as "Milk of Magnesia", which works as well, since this woman probably causes constipation for many in the BRF with her antics.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve seen people asking for this and I don’t understand how a paternity test would prove anything. Surely any kind of DNA test wouldn’t show whether they used a surrogate provided they used HM’s egg & sperm?
> (I don’t believe she’s be stupid enough to kill the golden goose by getting pregnant by someone else.)
> 
> It seems to me that the only thing that could possibly settle this is if a surrogate came forward or there was some sort of medical testimony of the birth but I would assume they would be in very hot legal water if these witnesses did speak out so it seems unlikely they’d prove it either way.


I'm sure if there was any surrogate, there was an NDA signed, and if the hospital, doctor, staff etc., dared say anything, they can be sued for HIPPA violations.  And you're talking about two lawsuit happy people to start off with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure if there was any surrogate, there was an NDA signed, and if the hospital, doctor, staff etc., dared say anything, they can be sued for HIPPA violations.  And you're talking about two lawsuit happy people to start off with.


And to be fair to them, I completely defend their right to medical privacy.
I am not personally concerned with who the babies were birthed by. 
 I am more concerned by how someone can leave the BRF & still gain the right of succession for their offspring and it makes me wonder how much we the British taxpayers are still paying for these people who apparently aren’t in the job anymore (& that goes for Andrew too)


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is the publishing deal a result of _that_ lunch with WallisA?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most Influential Family Owned Businesses 2019: THE ANNENBERG FOUNDATION - Los Angeles Business Journal
> 
> 
> The Annenberg Foundation is a family foundation that provides funding and support to nonprofit organizations in the United States and globally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> labusinessjournal.com


correct me if I'm missing something but is harry's book supposed to be giving profits to charity?
or are the Annenbergs involved in publishing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Wouldn't one think that if mom and dad no longer wanted anything to do with the BRF (except, of course, sponge all the money they could) then they'd also want their kids off the LOS?   Privacy, you know .


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Wouldn't one think that if mom and dad no longer wanted anything to do with the BRF (except, of course, sponge all the money they could) then they'd also want their kids off the LOS?   Privacy, you know .



Except they WANT IT ALL. They can say they don't care about it, but heaven help anyone who tries to take it away.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> *And to be fair to them, I completely defend their right to medical privacy.*
> I am not personally concerned with who the babies were birthed by.
> I am more concerned by how someone can leave the BRF & still gain the right of succession for their offspring and it makes me wonder how much we the British taxpayers are still paying for these people who apparently aren’t in the job anymore (& that goes for Andrew too)


ITA!  Even felons are entitled to medical privacy, so Meg and Haz have that right as well.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Not new, but I only saw this today.  All crocodile tears...





Chanbal said:


> See previous post, their reaction after the interview. The sad faces & tears were FAKE as almost everything coming from Montecito these days...



I was hoping I wouldn't have to watch it. 

And then I did.

It's basically impossible to underestimate these 2.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Not knowing if the children were actually of Meg's body, they were added to the LOS - but if it ever comes down to actually ascending the throne, there would have to be a paternity test, I assume...



There would have to be a maternity test too (otherwise they may be born the 'wrong side of the blanket'). In fact Because no Crown appointed doctors were allowed to be present at the birth, it will always be iffy if we're strict about it. And We are.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure they were smart enough to use Harry's sperm. If Meghan's eggs were not used would that matter as far as ascension? A DNA test would determine that.



Yes. They'd be illegitimate.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure they were smart enough to use Harry's sperm. If Meghan's eggs were not used would that matter as far as ascension? A DNA test would determine that.



I would expect that MM's eggs and Hazz's sperm were used with or without a surrogate.  

According to what I understood from Lady C, MM would have to give birth (not enough to be an egg donor) for the baby to be in the succession line. 

This law is probably old, before DNA testing was used to confirm paternity.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve seen people asking for this and I don’t understand how a paternity test would prove anything. Surely any kind of DNA test wouldn’t show whether they used a surrogate provided they used HM’s egg & sperm?
> (I don’t believe she’s be stupid enough to kill the golden goose by getting pregnant by someone else.)
> 
> It seems to me that the only thing that could possibly settle this is if a surrogate came forward or there was some sort of medical testimony of the birth but I would assume they would be in very hot legal water if these witnesses did speak out so it seems unlikely they’d prove it either way.


Yes, the parties involved would have to give authorization for the hospital to release the birth records to the people that want such confirmation.

If HM’s egg & sperm were used, a paternity test will confirm that they are the biological parents of the baby. It will not provide any information whether they used or not a surrogate.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Except they WANT IT ALL. They can say they don't care about it, but heaven help anyone who tries to take it away.




Just a plane crash away


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Just a plane crash away



It's still hard to believe she said that aloud.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels gave you the video, I'll add the customary quote:

"You think the Queen should disown him? I've got news for you: various members of the royal family, various aristocrats, various courtiers, several people at the palace, various members of both major political parties and a third minor political party all agree...ALL agree."


----------



## EverSoElusive

Did anyone read this yet? Sounds like a plant


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> It's still hard to believe she said that aloud.



Uncouth is her middle name 

PS: I meant MoM, not Lady C.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> There would have to be a maternity test too (otherwise they may be born the 'wrong side of the blanket'). In fact Because no Crown appointed doctors were allowed to be present at the birth, it will always be iffy if we're strict about it. And We are.



And you have every right to be (if we is UK citizens...if we is us, of course we're being iffy   ). The thing is: sure they do not have to bare their medical records...I also found it silly when people where enraged William didn't update them via live ticker on his catching Covid. But a place in the line of succession goes along with so much privilege, public funding etc. that I don't see anything wrong with expecting the beneficiaries of the system to go to some discomfort as having an appointed doctor present. I'm sure if he really disturbs your birthing flow he could just sit at the door and watch that nobody smuggles a baby in. If you are bratty enough to refuse (or have something to hide...and honestly, how bold would it be to KNOW of the rules and still hire a surrogate and blatantly lie to the BRF's face for advantages), don't complain if you're stripped of privileges as a result.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Did anyone read this yet? Sounds like a plant




Yeah right. The York girls are smarter than leaking to the press.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It's still hard to believe she said that aloud.



It is. But Lady CC is very careful what she says so she can't be sued, so I believe whoever told her would be willing to repeat it in court.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is. But Lady CC is very careful what she says so she can't be sued, so I believe whoever told her would be willing to repeat it in court.


IDK....I take most of what I read about them with a grain of salt


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


>



Thank you - love this woman and her jewellery.


----------



## LittleStar88

EverSoElusive said:


> Did anyone read this yet? Sounds like a plant




If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I believe it is, although I always read it as "*Milk of Magnesia*", which works as well, since this woman probably causes constipation for many in the BRF with her antics.


That's how I interpret MoM because I see it as giving her verbal diarrhea and we know that she is full of...


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's how I interpret MoM because I see it as giving her verbal diarrhea and we know that she is full of...
> View attachment 5148589



I love that gif


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> I love that gif


I found it on a google search so I promise I won't cry if you C&P it to your heart's content!


----------



## Vintage Leather

marietouchet said:


> I dont buy for a second that Kitty is worth 72 M pounds on her own, she has not earned that much modeling, and the Spencer estate goes to her brother
> Kate Moss is worth about 70M pounds, but has been modeling for donkeys years
> Yes, the article mentions a 20M pound London mansion ... do they own or rent ???
> I might believe she is worth 5-10 M pounds on her own, maybe, come on, how much a D&G ambassador earn ? they get lots of free clothes though




Now, I don't know how much one can trust the internet. Using Forbes, Business Insider, and the Internet WayBack Machine, I decided to investigate. 

Most of the sites that estimate net worth say that Lady Kitty was worth 30-40mil at the time of W&K wedding, mostly from shares in the family furniture business, in a trust from her step-grandmother, and other Spencer ventures in the 90s. Is it true? :shrug: That’s between Lady Kitty, God and her bankers. The 72mil is the sum of her initial money, capital gains, and then 15-20 mil from modeling. But that’s where the 72mil estimate came from. 

Eugene and Beatrice, on the other hand, the majority of their net worth comes from a trust inherited from their great-grandmother (The Queen Mum) worth approximately 6mil each. 

Will and Kate inherited 17 mil from Diana’s estate when he turned 30 (same as Harry). They receive 4.3 mil from Charles as their salary for being working Royals each year. And Will has several investments that pay 500k per year. 

But since this is the thread of the Madmen of Montecito, I dug a little deeper.  Up until 2019, Harry received the same. He got an increase when he married for Megan’s expenses. 
 In March of 2020, H&M’s combined net worth was estimated at 30mil.  Today, it’s closer to 10mil. There’s the 16 bathrooms. And then their annual maintenance and staffing costs are 3.7 mil per year, and 4.3 for security. There is some debate as to if Charles is paying for security for his grandchildren.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> correct me if I'm missing something but is harry's book supposed to be giving profits to charity?
> or are the Annenbergs involved in publishing?



Yes, last week someone said Hazz would donate the proceeds to charity, [whatever that actually means].

Wallis did work at her father’s company, Triangle Publications, which published mostly magazines. If she does not know a publisher directly, she certainly would have friends and friends of friends in the industry. At some point, all the [shady] connections will leak — who made the introductions, when, etc.  It would be surprising to learn that Wallis really supported Hazz’s anti-Royal position.









						Wallis Annenberg - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## needlv

Interesting.  I though book deals are usually paid over four instalments…


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's how I interpret MoM because I see it as giving her verbal diarrhea and we know that she is full of...
> View attachment 5148589



From The Tig, apparently. Sponsored? But since scrubbed, I assume.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> I found it on a google search so I promise I won't cry if you C&P it to your heart's content!



And you know I will "plagiarize" you within this thread


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And you have every right to be (if we is UK citizens...if we is us, of course we're being iffy   ). The thing is: sure they do not have to bare their medical records...I also found it silly when people where enraged William didn't update them via live ticker on his catching Covid. But a place in the line of succession goes along with so much privilege, public funding etc. that I don't see anything wrong with expecting the beneficiaries of the system to go to some discomfort as having an appointed doctor present. I'm sure if he really disturbs your birthing flow he could just sit at the door and watch that nobody smuggles a baby in. If you are bratty enough to refuse (or have something to hide...and honestly, how bold would it be to KNOW of the rules and still hire a surrogate and blatantly lie to the BRF's face for advantages), don't complain if you're stripped of privileges as a result.



Is that why Meghan stated she wanted or at least considered having a doula to deliver her baby?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, last week someone said Hazz would donate the proceeds to charity, [whatever that actually means].
> 
> Wallis did work at her father’s company, Triangle Publications, which published mostly magazines. If she does not know a publisher directly, she certainly would have friends and friends of friends in the industry. At some point, all the [shady] connections will leak — who made the introductions, when, etc.  It would be surprising to learn that Wallis really supported Hazz’s anti-Royal position.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wallis Annenberg - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


I doubt she supported his anti-royal position.  As a matter of fact I wonder if all the americans who are so impressed with his royalty are ok with his trashing the RF.  doesn't make sense to me.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> From The Tig, apparently. Sponsored? But since scrubbed, I assume.
> View attachment 5148655


is this for real?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> is this for real?


Apparently.  From The Tig, which was cleaned up when she met Harry.  But the internet never forgets.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Interesting.  I though book deals are usually paid over four instalments…



I believe they made a deal with the publisher in the order of several million dollars, but how much they were paid in advance is unclear. The same with Netflix and Spotify. I read somewhere that all these deals were done prior to their embarrassing interview with OW, so I wonder if they are now considered some sort of damaged goods by their 'employers'.  

_"Royal expert Duncan Larcombe has now claimed that *Harry and Meghan's status is becoming solidified in history as the couple who "betrayed" the Royal Family.*

"This betrayal, especially from Harry as a brother, son and grandson, will be something that haunts them, their careers and their reputations forever, and will probably overshadow any charity work they do."_

“_I think Meghan will be known in history as the woman who took a pot shot at the royals and ran off with Harry, more than being an actress or philanthropist_.”

_US media personality Perez Hilton has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are in danger of ruining their reputations with the release of the Duke of Sussex's memoir.

Speaking to Closer, Mr Perez said: “Harry and Meghan’s popularity has waned recently because I think we’ve all realised that Prince Harry is just a bit boring.

They are cashing in left and right with so many projects, one thing after another.

“But they’re walking a fine line right now they’re making all this money and doing all of these different projects, but I think with all that their popularity will take a nose dive eventually_.”









						Harry and Meghan's 'betrayal will haunt them forever' expert warns
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle's betrayal of the Royal Family will "haunt them forever", warns a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> _"This betrayal, especially from Harry as a brother, son and grandson, will be something that haunts them, their careers and their reputations forever, and will probably overshadow any charity work they do."_



And it didn't have to be seen as a "betrayal". MeGain and Hazza just could have said they'd like to step down from Royal Life and be done with it. I think most people would have been ok with THAT.  But noooooo, they still expected to rake in BRF cash and have their security footed by the family they no longer wanted to have anything to do with. And notice how the accusations of "racism" didn't surface until AFTER their demands were not met. Not before. If they had any credible balls at all, they'd have stated from the beginning  that they were stepping down as a result of bla bla bla. Since they're cashing in on those lies, brace yourselves for far more slanderous and libelous claims of harm, like felonious harm. I'd imagine garbage like "I had a feeling that so-and-so was going to/capable of [insert crime here] me."  I mean, come on, the grifters gotta pay the bills. And lying is the only way they know how.


----------



## needlv

And that bullying report is yet to be released.  When employees of H and MM start stepping forward saying how bad both of them were - surely we must see a shift in perspectives from the media...

 I also think they are spending huge  money with all their staff, PR, and running costs of a ridiculously sized mansion.   If they haven’t run out of $$ yet, it will be soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _Speaking to Closer, Mr Perez said: “Harry and Meghan’s popularity has waned recently because I think we’ve all realised that Prince Harry is just a bit boring.
> 
> They are cashing in left and right with so many projects, one thing after another._


SussexSyndrome - aspirational couples try to cash in with so many projects, yet nothing to show for it. Always looking for the next cash cow 



rose60610 said:


> And lying is the only way they know how.



Exactly, so never believe these articles. Rumors are stuff is happening behind the scenes, I don’t even believe that. Let’s watch how the SeptemberDianaStatueShow goes. This HiHo {half in/half out} couple must enjoy causing angst to the BRF and us.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Is that why Meghan stated she wanted or at least considered having a doula to deliver her baby?


In the US, a doula can't deliver a baby.  They're there more to support the mother during labor than anything else.  I like to call them the "baby whisperers" LOL.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I believe they made a deal with the publisher in the order of several million dollars, but how much they were paid in advance is unclear. The same with Netflix and Spotify. I read somewhere that all these deals were done prior to their embarrassing interview with OW, so I wonder if they are now considered some sort of damaged goods by their 'employers'.
> 
> _"Royal expert Duncan Larcombe has now claimed that *Harry and Meghan's status is becoming solidified in history as the couple who "betrayed" the Royal Family.*
> 
> "This betrayal, especially from Harry as a brother, son and grandson, will be something that haunts them, their careers and their reputations forever, and will probably overshadow any charity work they do."_
> 
> “_I think Meghan will be known in history as the woman who took a pot shot at the royals and ran off with Harry, more than being an actress or philanthropist_.”
> 
> _US media personality Perez Hilton has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are in danger of ruining their reputations with the release of the Duke of Sussex's memoir.
> 
> Speaking to Closer, Mr Perez said: “Harry and Meghan’s popularity has waned recently because I think we’ve all realised that Prince Harry is just a bit boring.
> 
> They are cashing in left and right with so many projects, one thing after another.
> 
> “But they’re walking a fine line right now they’re making all this money and doing all of these different projects, but I think with all that their popularity will take a nose dive eventually_.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's 'betrayal will haunt them forever' expert warns
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle's betrayal of the Royal Family will "haunt them forever", warns a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


If there was a morals clause in his contract as a royal, he could be thrown out based on his betraying them all.


----------



## purseinsanity

Here comes the fake backtracking denial that won't be a true denial in the future...









						Prince Harry Denies 2nd Tell-All Book Will Come Out After Queen's Death
					

Prince Harry is releasing a memoir in late 2022, but his second book will not be contingent upon Queen Elizabeth II's death — details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Vintage Leather

rose60610 said:


> And it didn't have to be seen as a "betrayal". MeGain and Hazza just could have said they'd like to step down from Royal Life and be done with it. I think most people would have been ok with THAT.  But noooooo, they still expected to rake in BRF cash and have their security footed by the family they no longer wanted to have anything to do with. And notice how the accusations of "racism" didn't surface until AFTER their demands were not met. Not before. If they had any credible balls at all, they'd have stated from the beginning  that they were stepping down as a result of bla bla bla. Since they're cashing in on those lies, brace yourselves for far more slanderous and libelous claims of harm, like felonious harm. I'd imagine garbage like "I had a feeling that so-and-so was going to/capable of [insert crime here] me."  I mean, come on, the grifters gotta pay the bills. And lying is the only way they know how.



I think that’s the most annoying think about them. They were so bloody stupid. There’s no reason at all that they couldn’t have had their “half-in half-out” life with a little planning and better impulse control.

Remember when Edward and Sophie were going to be TV producers? They got one of the largest royal estates (for their studio, you know) and they put out three documentaries. Now, they go to royal weddings and most of the European events. There’s a precedent for the life that Me-gain wanted.

If Harry and Megan said in February 2020, “we want to step back to help out our charities,” we’d have said, “sure, seems legit.” 

When Will and Kate jaunted off to be a small family where he’s a helicopter pilot? Sure, the press called her “Duchess Dolittle.” But 80% of the population? Totally fine with it. 

They make a charity. They explain to the Firm it’s because they don’t want to justify every line item to the taxpayers. People who have spent the last 60 years justifying their budget to taxpayers would probably totally get why they want to do this. They use this to skim money.

And then they are filming a documentary with all their celebrity friends about the Invictus Games. Basically, same thing they are doing now - but with Royal Family backing. And, hey, they’re spending a lot of time in LA, working on these projects. So they need a house. Would they end up with the ridiculous stripper pole? Probably not, because I’m pretty sure the BRF has a few real estate experts who could help them find something decent. And Charles probably would have paid for it. Discretely.

They make a documentary where they talk about mental health. And hire someone to talk about what it means.  And then Megan can center herself in the story.

Does it give you as much attention or revenge as you think you deserve? Probably not. But, does it consistently give you a seven figure income, access to one of the largest jewelry collections, protection from most of your own stupidity, and global recognition? Yes, yes it does.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Here comes the fake backtracking denial that won't be a true denial in the future...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Denies 2nd Tell-All Book Will Come Out After Queen's Death
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is releasing a memoir in late 2022, but his second book will not be contingent upon Queen Elizabeth II's death — details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



So they confirmed the four-book deal, which was recently denied by Om*d. I believe that the rest of DM's article is also true, including a publication planned for after the queen's passing. They are just trying to do some damage control because titles and other perks are likely still unsure.   

_"According to the spokesperson the claims published by the Daily Mail that Harry, 36, agreed to a “lucrative four-book deal — with the second due out only after the Queen has died,” is inaccurate. *Harry does have a four-book deal,* but none of the memoirs’ releases are contingent upon the queen’s health or passing."_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> So they confirmed the four-book deal, which was recently denied by Om*d. I believe that the rest of DM's article is also true, including a publication planned for after the queen's passing. They are just trying to do some damage control because titles and other perks are likely still unsure.
> 
> _"According to the spokesperson the claims published by the Daily Mail that Harry, 36, agreed to a “lucrative four-book deal — with the second due out only after the Queen has died,” is inaccurate. *Harry does have a four-book deal,* but none of the memoirs’ releases are contingent upon the queen’s health or passing."_



How difficult is it for these ‘professional‘ publishers to issue a correct statement?  Better yet, don’t say anything until the ink is dry.
During QE’s 70 year reign, *never* has she caused as much aggravation and trouble as these two <insert profanity here>.


----------



## needlv

It’s starting to get to the point of elder abuse.  HMTQ does NOT need this - she is in her 90’s

Both H and MM are coming across as the bullies, not the RF


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It would be surprising to learn that Wallis really supported Hazz’s anti-Royal position.



I will go a step further and say I feel most people of a certain wealth / certain status don't even care if the BRF tied the troublesome two up in the Tower each Sunday for fun. They will find their conduct extremely distasteful, whether their complaints are rightful or not.

BTW Lady CC says if Harry dares to spill the beans on some of his friends he'll open the floodgates of hell for himself because the one thing these people (very rich, very old families) don't forgive is indiscretion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Interesting.  I though book deals are usually paid over four instalments…




Depends entirely on your contract. I've co-written five books, I sent the bill the day I turned in the final version, then got a delivery of books after it came back from the printer (which I cold have sold at full price as per my contract, but I just gave them away to family and friends). But you could obviously negotiate differently.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Is that why Meghan stated she wanted or at least considered having a doula to deliver her baby?



A doula doesn't deliver a baby, a doula is there to support the mother by advocating for her and stuff like massages, hip compressions and cool compresses.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _US media personality Perez Hilton has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are in danger of ruining their reputations with the release of the Duke of Sussex's memoir.
> 
> Speaking to Closer, Mr Perez said: “Harry and Meghan’s popularity has waned recently because I think we’ve all realised that Prince Harry is just a bit boring.
> 
> They are cashing in left and right with so many projects, one thing after another.
> 
> “But they’re walking a fine line right now they’re making all this money and doing all of these different projects, but I think with all that their popularity will take a nose dive eventually_.”



Not sure how what he said can necessarily be interpreted as "That memoir will ruin their reputation", but when even Perez is the voice of reason you know it's bad.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> From The Tig, apparently. Sponsored? But since scrubbed, I assume.
> View attachment 5148655



What does she mean shame? Not getting this. 

We are supposed to feel shame for going to the bathroom


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> SussexSyndrome - aspirational couples try to cash in with so many projects, yet nothing to show for it. Always looking for the next cash cow
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, so never believe these articles. Rumors are stuff is happening behind the scenes, I don’t even believe that. Let’s watch how the SeptemberDianaStatueShow goes. This HiHo {half in/half out} couple must enjoy causing angst to the BRF and us.



SussexSyndrome! Expect a YT vid on this shortly. 

Fits in nicely with codependent stans, narcism and people you can't help


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> What does she mean shame? Not getting this.
> 
> We are supposed to feel shame for going to the bathroom


Normal people should….
obviously M’s **** doesn’t stink.


----------



## EverSoElusive

@Maggie Muggins Are you the one keeping tabs on the nicknames for these Toxic Duo?

I just created a new one: Royal Ingrates of Montecito


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine (entertainment but not complete gossip rag) titles:

"The Queen: Harry not welcome at Balmoral anymore"

Guess he might not be a quite as beloved family member these days. Also note how Raptor apparently doesn't even exist to them anymore.


----------



## rose60610

Money making suggestion for Dense Duchess: create a TV show titled "Real Whiny Housewife of Montecito". This would fulfill all her wishes: M would actually get to be a star of a show, cameras would be on her at all times, she could whine about all her hardships and demand pity season after season, and have the show pay for all her expensive ill-fitting clothes. Advertisers of Depends, Pepto Bismal, Alka Seltzer, Kleenex and manufacturers of migraine aspirin and sympathy cards would sponsor it.


----------



## Annawakes

@CarryOn2020 ”the HiHo couple” is genius and hilarious!


----------



## sdkitty

not sure if this has been posted before.....seems odd to me that Harry who had everything money could buy all his life would be interested in going out and making money....
Meghan and Harry Planned Money-Making Schemes Long Before They Left the Royal Fold, Embittered Staffers Claim (yahoo.com)


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> not sure if this has been posted before.....seems odd to me that Harry who had everything money could buy all his life would be interested in going out and making money....
> Meghan and Harry Planned Money-Making Schemes Long Before They Left the Royal Fold, Embittered Staffers Claim (yahoo.com)


This is my understanding, Hazz had about $40M (mostly from his mother, money that he didn't want to spend) and an allowance from Charles about a couple of millions/year. While this is a lot of money, it's not big enough money to fund their wished celebrity lifestyle. I believe they started to explore money-making schemes as soon as Ms. M realized that instead of being a VIP celebrity, she was more like a 'civil servant in a tiara.' A very expensive tiara, but there are people that are only capable of serving themselves. My 2 cents.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure how what he said can necessarily be interpreted as "That memoir will ruin their reputation", but when even Perez is the voice of reason you know it's bad.


I also don't understand what he means by ruining their reputation, I thought that OW's interview did that. Though, I agree with him on Hazz being boring.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A doula doesn't deliver a baby, a doula is there to support the mother by advocating for her and stuff like massages, hip compressions and cool compresses.



That sounds right up Meghan's alley. Having someone be at her beck and call to comfort her while she is lying there about to GIVE BIRTH would be highly desirable to a narcissist. Personally I think she had Harry fill that role. It would be another way to make him feel guilty.

Look at me, acting like it was Meghan who actually gave birth.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> What does she mean shame? Not getting this.
> 
> We are supposed to feel shame for going to the bathroom


I think it means since “everyone poos”, avoid the embarrassment of the odor by using the deodorizer she’s promoting.  Maybe she has a few drops in her nose at all times, so she can’t smell the $hit constantly coming out of her mouth?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I also don't understand what he means by ruining their reputation, I thought that OW's interview did that. Though, I agree with him on Hazz being boring.





Chanbal said:


> Royal expert Duncan Larcombe has now claimed that *Harry and Meghan's status is becoming solidified in history as the couple who "betrayed" the Royal Family.*
> 
> "This betrayal, especially from Harry as a brother, son and grandson, will be something that haunts them, their careers and their reputations forever, and will probably overshadow any charity work they do."



Yes, the OW interview was the beginning of the ruined reputation. Some thought that interview was not the end itself, that they could have salvaged their reputations. The daughter’s name and now these ‘tell-all books’ will complete the idea that they are the betrayers. Ouch.


----------



## Chanbal

Cancel culture? 



The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's tell-all interview with Oprah sent shockwaves around the world as the pair made a number of incendiary claims against the Royal Family. *But the Society of Editors, a UK group fighting for media freedom, were quick to condemn Meghan and Harry for describing the UK press as "bigoted" during the two-hour interview. *The lengthy statement by the industry body denied the existence of racism and sparked a huge backlash amongst journalists.

The furore surrounding the response later prompted the Society's executive director to stand now.

Now, almost five months after the dispute, *Meghan and Harry have posted a statement on their Archewell website discussing the matter.*

Under the heading 'Archewell recognises coalition of UK journalists calling for change', the couple said they are a "proud support of journalistic diversity".

They added: *"For these reasons, we are seeking to bring awareness to a coalition of UK journalists calling for stronger initiatives to combat the underrepresentation, inequity and racial bigotry that still persist in this important industry."*

Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah aired in the UK on March 8 and saw the pair describe the UK tabloid media as "bigoted", which creates a "toxic environment" of "control and fear".

The Duke said: "Unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society."

*The Society of Editors immediately responded to the claims and criticised the couple for accusing the media of racism without "any supporting evidence".*

The body said the media is not bigoted and is holding the "rich and powerful to account".









						Meghan and Harry turn on Society of Editors after Oprah criticism
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have posted a statement condemning the Society of Editors after the industry body spoke out against the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is my understanding, Hazz had about $40M (mostly from his mother, money that he didn't want to spend) and an allowance from Charles about a couple of millions/year. While this is a lot of money, it's not big enough money to fund their wished celebrity lifestyle. I believe they started to explore money-making schemes as soon as Ms. M realized that instead of being a VIP celebrity, she was more like a 'civil servant in a tiara.' A very expensive tiara, but there are people that only capable of serving themselves. My 2 cents.


you know what they say - money can't buy happiness.....IDK but I doubt these two are very happy or ever will be...graspy, greedy, whiny, arrogant "victims" that they are


----------



## xincinsin

A lighthearted post: I finished reading the "HMTQ as detective" novel, recommended on this thread a few months ago! Found it at the local library! Tons better than The Bench  
Here's the book with my Buckingham Palace corgi scarf!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> @Maggie Muggins Are you the one keeping tabs on the nicknames for these Toxic Duo?
> 
> I just created a new one: *Royal Ingrates of Montecito*


Yes, nickname added to The List. They are indeed terrible ingrates. Thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Cancel culture?
> View attachment 5149031



Do those idiots realize that Oprah ignored basic principles of journalism and violated the code of honor by freaking faking headlines? Also, not even you two a*sholes get to lie in public in a very unclever way and then ugly-cry because you got called out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> you know what they say - money can't buy happiness.....IDK but I doubt these two are very happy or ever will be...graspy, greedy, whiny, arrogant "victims" that they are



Like crazy card lady (whom I've since abandoned because she insisted Kate was pregnant four months ago which should be one of the easier things to predict) said: "They'll never feel abundant", and that one I believe. These kind of people are never happy because it's never enough for them. If they were granted anything they desire today tomorrow, they'd find something else that made them unhappy or that they need to get into their possession.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I think it means since “everyone poos”, avoid the embarrassment of the odor by using the deodorizer she’s promoting.  Maybe she has a few drops in her nose at all times, so *she can’t smell the $hit constantly coming out of her mouth?*



That's funny (peculiar) coz I can smell it from the other side of the Atlantic (and she's Pacific coast)


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Cancel culture?
> View attachment 5149031
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's tell-all interview with Oprah sent shockwaves around the world as the pair made a number of incendiary claims against the Royal Family. *But the Society of Editors, a UK group fighting for media freedom, were quick to condemn Meghan and Harry for describing the UK press as "bigoted" during the two-hour interview. *The lengthy statement by the industry body denied the existence of racism and sparked a huge backlash amongst journalists.
> 
> The furore surrounding the response later prompted the Society's executive director to stand now.
> 
> Now, almost five months after the dispute, *Meghan and Harry have posted a statement on their Archewell website discussing the matter.*
> 
> Under the heading 'Archewell recognises coalition of UK journalists calling for change', the couple said they are a "proud support of journalistic diversity".
> 
> They added: *"For these reasons, we are seeking to bring awareness to a coalition of UK journalists calling for stronger initiatives to combat the underrepresentation, inequity and racial bigotry that still persist in this important industry."*
> 
> Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah aired in the UK on March 8 and saw the pair describe the UK tabloid media as "bigoted", which creates a "toxic environment" of "control and fear".
> 
> The Duke said: "Unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society."
> 
> *The Society of Editors immediately responded to the claims and criticised the couple for accusing the media of racism without "any supporting evidence".*
> 
> The body said the media is not bigoted and is holding the "rich and powerful to account".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry turn on Society of Editors after Oprah criticism
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have posted a statement condemning the Society of Editors after the industry body spoke out against the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



How can those 2 be supportive of journalistic diversity? They're both Royal, titled, spoilt-rich and over-privileged.

_Viva la Revolution_!

  Sorry, H&M, you can't cancel *THE* truth. What you say doesn't make sense let alone make it believable.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This is my understanding, *Hazz had about $40M* (mostly from his mother, money that he didn't want to spend) and an allowance from Charles about a couple of millions/year. While this is a lot of money, it's not big enough money to fund their wished celebrity lifestyle. I believe they started to explore money-making schemes as soon as Ms. M realized that instead of being a VIP celebrity, she was more like a '*civil servant in a tiara.' A very expensive tiara,* but there are people that are only capable of serving themselves. My 2 cents.


I wonder how much of that $40M went towards buying her an expensive tiara that she felt entitled to wear since she is after all a not so Royal Duchass. I mean, having so many thrones in one's house, one simply must look the part.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> A lighthearted post: I finished reading the "HMTQ as detective" novel, recommended on this thread a few months ago! Found it at the local library! Tons better than The Bench
> Here's the book with my Buckingham Palace corgi scarf!
> View attachment 5149045



LOVE this scarf. Where did you get it?


----------



## sdkitty

I'm beginning to think that Harry is trying to somehow out-do his brother, the future king by making money in the US. 
so what who cares gif - Google Search


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like crazy card lady (whom I've since abandoned because she insisted Kate was pregnant four months ago which should be one of the easier things to predict) said: "They'll never feel abundant", and that one I believe. These kind of people are never happy because it's never enough for them. If they were granted anything they desire today tomorrow, they'd find something else that made them unhappy or that they need to get into their possession.


yes, she wants to be the most famous and admired person in the world and he wants to be better and more important than his brother.....not gonna happen


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> A lighthearted post: I finished reading the "HMTQ as detective" novel, recommended on this thread a few months ago! Found it at the local library! Tons better than The Bench
> Here's the book with my Buckingham Palace corgi scarf!
> View attachment 5149045


I love this scarf! I was about to say Corgis are such funny looking dogs then I remembered our own family pet (a dachshund-cross) isn’t exactly un-comical in appearance


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Cancel culture?
> View attachment 5149031
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's tell-all interview with Oprah sent shockwaves around the world as the pair made a number of incendiary claims against the Royal Family. *But the Society of Editors, a UK group fighting for media freedom, were quick to condemn Meghan and Harry for describing the UK press as "bigoted" during the two-hour interview. *The lengthy statement by the industry body denied the existence of racism and sparked a huge backlash amongst journalists.
> 
> The furore surrounding the response later prompted the Society's executive director to stand now.
> 
> Now, almost five months after the dispute, *Meghan and Harry have posted a statement on their Archewell website discussing the matter.*
> 
> Under the heading 'Archewell recognises coalition of UK journalists calling for change', the couple said they are a "proud support of journalistic diversity".
> 
> They added: *"For these reasons, we are seeking to bring awareness to a coalition of UK journalists calling for stronger initiatives to combat the underrepresentation, inequity and racial bigotry that still persist in this important industry."*
> 
> Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah aired in the UK on March 8 and saw the pair describe the UK tabloid media as "bigoted", which creates a "toxic environment" of "control and fear".
> 
> The Duke said: "Unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society."
> 
> *The Society of Editors immediately responded to the claims and criticised the couple for accusing the media of racism without "any supporting evidence".*
> 
> The body said the media is not bigoted and is holding the "rich and powerful to account".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry turn on Society of Editors after Oprah criticism
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have posted a statement condemning the Society of Editors after the industry body spoke out against the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Interesting how Archewell is used to bring attention to anything that the Harkles personally don’t like.

Re money:  The money making schemes came from  Meghan. Harry was probably fine rolling along when dad and the crown paid for everything including his loo paper. Monstercito is all on her. She had to return to CA and show all the people who rejected her that she could live as well if not better than they do.  Bankruptcy looms. These large companies they signed with, and the publishing contracts  we’re all negotiated when it looked like Harry could spill the secrets and actually do something. It is now apparent that they have nothing to offer and a dwindling number of secrets to spill and they produce substandard work.  I don’t believe their retraction about a fourt book coming out after TQ passes. I think that was what got them the deal in the first place. Tha presumption was that he would be free to say many things that he could not when she was alive about PP and TQ They are never going to get anything close to the money that has been described.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> From The Tig, apparently. Sponsored? But since scrubbed, I assume.
> View attachment 5148655



Is anyone surprised that Woke Meghan was telling everyone how they should wipe their a$$? And did she take Aesop Post Poo Drops into the woods when she turned on Harry by squatting? Was Aesop the Love Potion #9 of the relationship? No wonder Harry was ga-ga over her, if she tells everyone what their butt hygiene should be, it's no wonder he is happy to be treated like a doormat and agreed to throw his own family under the bus.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Cancel culture?
> View attachment 5149031
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's tell-all interview with Oprah sent shockwaves around the world as the pair made a number of incendiary claims against the Royal Family. *But the Society of Editors, a UK group fighting for media freedom, were quick to condemn Meghan and Harry for describing the UK press as "bigoted" during the two-hour interview. *The lengthy statement by the industry body denied the existence of racism and sparked a huge backlash amongst journalists.
> 
> The furore surrounding the response later prompted the Society's executive director to stand now.
> 
> Now, almost five months after the dispute, *Meghan and Harry have posted a statement on their Archewell website discussing the matter.*
> 
> Under the heading 'Archewell recognises coalition of UK journalists calling for change', the couple said they are a "proud support of journalistic diversity".
> 
> They added: *"For these reasons, we are seeking to bring awareness to a coalition of UK journalists calling for stronger initiatives to combat the underrepresentation, inequity and racial bigotry that still persist in this important industry."*
> 
> Meghan and Harry's interview with Oprah aired in the UK on March 8 and saw the pair describe the UK tabloid media as "bigoted", which creates a "toxic environment" of "control and fear".
> 
> The Duke said: "Unfortunately if the source of information is inherently corrupt or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society."
> 
> *The Society of Editors immediately responded to the claims and criticised the couple for accusing the media of racism without "any supporting evidence".*
> 
> The body said the media is not bigoted and is holding the "rich and powerful to account".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry turn on Society of Editors after Oprah criticism
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry have posted a statement condemning the Society of Editors after the industry body spoke out against the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




probably more her need to clap back at any and everyone who dares to say anything remotely critical.
I mean......The Society of Editors? I had never heard of them before. And most likely never would have if Meh and Huh hadn't drawn attention to them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> probably more her need to clap back at any and everyone who dares to say anything remotely critical.
> I mean......The Society of Editors? I had never heard of them before. And most likely never would have if Meh and Huh hadn't drawn attention to them.


The clapback has become so knee jerk that it is pathological.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> What does she mean shame? Not getting this.
> 
> We are supposed to feel shame for going to the bathroom
> [/QUOTE
> Hilariously hypocritical coming from a woman who pees in the woods!
> 
> Also an early word salad indication of how she crafts rhymes that make no sense. Bodily functions are not a "game" and there is no "shame," in them.
> 
> Malificent is the kind of woman my Mother, who lived by the Golden Rule, could not tolerate.  37 years after her death I can still hear her saying, in a most disdainful tone,  "She thinks she's so special her s*** doesn't smell."


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> you know what they say - money can't buy happiness.....IDK but I doubt these two are very happy or ever will be...graspy, greedy, whiny, arrogant "victims" that they are


They absolutely do not look happy.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> LOVE this scarf. Where did you get it?


Be my twin, pt!





						Official Royal Gifts and Souvenirs - Royal Collection Shop
					

Royal shop for gifts, collections and commemorative souvenirs commissioned by Buckingham Palace.  Buy Online.  Delivered worldwide.




					www.royalcollectionshop.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Be my twin, pt!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Official Royal Gifts and Souvenirs - Royal Collection Shop
> 
> 
> Royal shop for gifts, collections and commemorative souvenirs commissioned by Buckingham Palace.  Buy Online.  Delivered worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royalcollectionshop.co.uk



Found this for M's birthday. Perhaps her stans could have a belated whip-round


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone else wonder if they are blackmailing Charles in some way and they are still receiving money from him? Unlike Will, he has been extremely quiet through all this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone else wonder if they are blackmailing Charles in some way and they are still receiving money from him? Unlike Will, he has been extremely quiet through all this.



I really do think blackmailing Charles would be taking it entirely too far for those two. He might be so quiet because a) his mother told him to be regal (wasn't there rumours he wanted to do a press released debunking all the lies after Oprah?) or b) he's just so deeply hurt he doesn't even want to touch the subject.

Re: money, who knows? I'd have thought it wasn't entirely impossible he still quietly funded them partially from his private funds, but now after them hurling insults for months? I really doubt it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really do think blackmailing Charles would be taking it entirely too far for those two. He might be so quiet because a) his mother told him to be regal (wasn't there rumours he wanted to do a press released debunking all the lies after Oprah?) or b) he's just so deeply hurt he doesn't even want to touch the subject.
> 
> Re: money, who knows? I'd have thought it wasn't entirely impossible he still quietly funded them partially from his private funds, but now after them hurling insults for months? I really doubt it.


my guess is he is being appropriate in the royal way by not getting down into the mud with the two grifters.  also that nasty little man is his son and he may have some guilt over Diana - and hope that he son will return to the fold


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW two extremely busy days ahead and then I will take off 10 glorious days instead of giving in to last minute demands and projects, and I fully plan on spending them reading thrillers, crocheting baby blankets, training my food photography and going out for breakfast. Maybe for my own sanity I should detox from the toxic duo as well!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW two extremely busy days ahead and then I will take off 10 glorious days instead of giving in to last minute demands and projects, and I fully plan on spending them reading thrillers, crocheting baby blankets, training my food photography and going out for breakfast. Maybe for my own sanity I should detox from the toxic duo as well!


enjoy


----------



## Hermes Zen

papertiger said:


> What does she mean shame? Not getting this.
> 
> We are supposed to feel shame for going to the bathroom



I agree with you. I think (now don't you all give me a thumbs down emoji   ) M was brave to be the face of this subject when she was trying to be an upcoming star. As we know everyone does this. She looked beautiful btw. 

OMGosh whats happened to me this morning!?!  Where's my DH with my pills?


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Money making suggestion for Dense Duchess: create a TV show titled "Real Whiny Housewife of Montecito". This would fulfill all her wishes: M would actually get to be a star of a show, cameras would be on her at all times, she could whine about all her hardships and demand pity season after season, and have the show pay for all her expensive ill-fitting clothes. Advertisers of Depends, Pepto Bismal, Alka Seltzer, Kleenex and manufacturers of migraine aspirin and sympathy cards would sponsor it.



Don't forget Milk of Magnesia for Maleficent of Montecito too  





Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5149046



The book should say Sulky Prince


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> A lighthearted post: I finished reading the "HMTQ as detective" novel, recommended on this thread a few months ago! Found it at the local library! Tons better than The Bench
> Here's the book with my Buckingham Palace corgi scarf!
> View attachment 5149045


I too LOVE your scarf!     Wish to add to my collection.  Appreciate knowing where you purchased.  Hope it's still available.  Thanks!!


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A doula doesn't deliver a baby, a doula is there to support the mother by advocating for her and stuff like massages, hip compressions and cool compresses.


You can have a midwife deliver your baby at home, here in Canada.  Or at least Ontario.

My daughter-in-law did that. I thought it was the riskiest thing, but she didn’t want an OB/GYN and wanted a home birth. There were absolutely no problems, thank goodness, but I was very nervous.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> I agree with you. I think (now don't you all give me a thumbs down emoji   ) M was brave to be the face of this subject when she was trying to be an upcoming star. As we know everyone does this. She looked beautiful btw.
> 
> *OMGosh whats happened to me this morning!?!  *Where's my DH with my pills?



If it makes you feeling any better, she kind of plagiarized by saying "Everyone poos" which was damned close to "Everyone Poops," which was a well known children's book she probably had herself as a child.  









						Everyone Poops - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone else wonder if they are blackmailing Charles in some way and they are still receiving money from him? Unlike Will, he has been extremely quiet through all this.





[SIZE=4]QueenofWrapDress[/SIZE] said:


> I really do think blackmailing Charles would be taking it entirely too far for those two. He might be so quiet because a) his mother told him to be regal (wasn't there rumours he wanted to do a press released debunking all the lies after Oprah?) or b) he's just so deeply hurt he doesn't even want to touch the subject.
> 
> Re: money, who knows? I'd have thought it wasn't entirely impossible he still quietly funded them partially from his private funds, but now after them hurling insults for months? I really doubt it.


Charles must be very hurt, he seems to have tried to be a good father and father-in-law. Blackmail is a very strong word, but it doesn't seem totally out of place in this scenario. Hope Charles and Will are talking with very good lawyers. They should be able to show that the duke of Montecito and his wife are not credible sources.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really do think blackmailing Charles would be taking it entirely too far for those two. He might be so quiet because a) his mother told him to be regal (wasn't there rumours he wanted to do a press released debunking all the lies after Oprah?) or b) he's just so deeply hurt he doesn't even want to touch the subject.
> 
> Re: money, who knows? I'd have thought it wasn't entirely impossible he still quietly funded them partially from his private funds, but now after them hurling insults for months? I really doubt it.



I hope you're right but I've given up believing there is anything that is out of bounds to them. If they think they can get away with it, they'll try it.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Charles must be very hurt, he seems to have tried to be a good father and father-in-law. Blackmail is a very strong word, but it doesn't seem totally out of place in this scenario. Hope Charles and Will are talking with very good lawyers. They should be able to show that the duke of Montecito and his wife are not credible sources.



I have to remind myself that we don't actually know what these people are like in private. Was Charles the one who talked to Harry about Archie's skin color? He could have asked a purely innocent question, but that isn't the way Meghan portrayed it to Oprah. Maybe to keep the payments coming they are hanging that out there like "Keep us happy or we'll tell the world it was YOU. Oh, by the way I am writing a book that is coming out next year, so did I mention to keep the money coming?"


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Charles must be very hurt, he seems to have tried to be a good father and father-in-law. Blackmail is a very strong word, but it doesn't seem totally out of place in this scenario. Hope Charles and Will are talking with very good lawyers. They should be able to show that the duke of Montecito and his wife are not credible sources.


I think he has info on Charles and Camilla that is prior to their marriage.  I am still hoping that Harry sticks his foot into the Official Secrets Act and gets caught.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I have to remind myself that we don't actually know what these people are like in private. Was Charles the one who talked to Harry about Archie's skin color? He could have asked a purely innocent question, but that isn't the way Meghan portrayed it to Oprah. Maybe to keep the payments coming they are hanging that out there like "Keep us happy or we'll tell the world it was YOU. Oh, by the way I am writing a book that is coming out next year, so did I mention to keep the money coming?"


Actually thinking that Charles is not only too well bred and polite to ask such a question, but so are the rest of them.  What is said between husband and wife is something else.


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> But we've always said this, no?
> Not a brain cell between them - unless you count scheming, motivated by greed to be clever. They are both text book chronic narcissists.
> For 2 people who have had more undeserved luck than probably _any_ others, they clearly have overestimated their worth to the world. One thing that gets lucky people into trouble is to think all the good 'stuff' was duly earned by skill/effort. Millions of amateur gamblers will tell you the same - at GA. They have no self-awareness. Even Andrew (boo-hiss  ) has the sense to step into the shadows and keep quiet as possible (after shooting his privileged a$$ off in that car-crash interview).
> They hire brain/effort, but they also fire brain/effort continuously. People who have no brains nor understand the concept of longterm effort are impossible to please because they crave the impossible. Love, admiration and respect for just breathing.
> There is even an example of them arriving at a show when people were already applauding something, as they're shown to their seats they clearly think the applause is for them. It isn't, but they expect it so they make it so. That's them.









needlv said:


> With looks like these I wouldn’t be surprised if Kate is carrying garlic or a wooden stake in her handbag.  Yikes



If I was Kate, I'd just turn around and be like:






needlv said:


> Pfft…





So basically he is turning "Didn't Find What We Were Looking For" into a yearly Newsletter for the stans of the Moaning Muppets, with updates of all their (mostly) failures from that year?
Scooby Doo is clearly trying to make a few extra $$$ before all interest in them dries up and everyone starts to ignore them.




Chanbal said:


> It looks like when the Sunday Times published this in April, it was vehemently denied by Om*d. Om*d and his denials/falsehoods...
> 
> View attachment 5147728









Chanbal said:


> What's the problem with Hazz's aunt?
> View attachment 5147858





Terrifying. She always looks unhinged.




Chanbal said:


> Hazz's wife was hopping for an apology after OW's interview. I wonder what she is now hopping for after Hazz's book(s), which announcement "_has sparked a tsunami of fear in royal circles_".
> _Tom, author of Kensington Palace: An Intimate Memoir, told the Channel 5 documentary Meghan at 40: The Climb To Power: "*I think she was hoping for an apology*, I think she was hoping they would phone and say, 'We are really sorry, we now see that we pushed you too far. We should have behaved differently, we should have sat down as a family and discussed your mental health issues'.
> “I think she was horrified afterward that the reaction was so negative from the family and they didn't respond in the way that she wanted.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan was 'hoping for an apology' after Oprah interview, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> A royal author has said that Meghan may have been actually looking for sympathy from the royals after giving the interview and did not want to upset them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk









QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.



Well, that's what the publishers get when they make a business deal with someone who doesn't know how to:







CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, last week someone said Hazz would donate the proceeds to charity, [whatever that actually means].


See, that got me thinking, is he just going to donate the money made from people buying the books or is he going to donate all those 10's of millions $$ he's supposedly being paid for creating these stupid books? It would be much more impressive if he donated those millions going into _his _bank account, but that won't happen because they spend money like it's burning a hole in their pockets and also they don't seem to like sharing.






Chanbal said:


> So they confirmed the four-book deal, which was recently denied by Om*d. I believe that the rest of DM's article is also true, including a publication planned for after the queen's passing. They are just trying to do some damage control because titles and other perks are likely still unsure.
> 
> _"According to the spokesperson the claims published by the Daily Mail that Harry, 36, agreed to a *“lucrative four-book deal — with the second due out only after the Queen has died,” *is inaccurate. Harry does have a four-book deal, but none of the memoirs’ releases are contingent upon the queen’s health or passing."_












Man, that really doesn't sit well with me, at all. The fact that this is being made known now, while his grandmother is still alive and well and is being repeated over and over, tells _everyone _how unbelievably sh*tty the things JCMH is going to say in this bOoK will be.
The fact that you are telling everyone that some of these won't be released until after her passing is not only going to cause pain and stress then, it's also causing unnecessary pain and stress for her (and the family) _now_. They will be wondering and worrying what lies this idiot is going to say to help him stay in his perpetual victim role.
He truly is a pathetic, spineless, petty, intolerable, bitter, childish and inexcusable human being.
I hope their downfall is fast approaching because all these rewards for terrible behavior is utterly disgusting.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Actually thinking that Charles is not only too well bred and polite to ask such a question, but so are the rest of them.  What is said between husband and wife is something else.



Who knows if the outward personality we see matches the one behind closed doors? What was said between a father and son likely twisted by the daughter-in-law, who wasn't there for the conversation. Assuming such a conversation happened at all, who else would H&M be alternately protecting by not naming names yet still threatening by making the racist claim?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Who knows if the outward personality we see matches the one behind closed doors? What was said between a father and son likely twisted by the daughter-in-law, who wasn't there for the conversation. Assuming such a conversation happened at all, who else would H&M be alternately protecting by not naming names yet still threatening by making the racist claim?



Well, if M wasn't there, it maybe H that's the bare faced liar and it never happened


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone else wonder if they are blackmailing Charles in some way and they are still receiving money from him? Unlike Will, he has been extremely quiet through all this.


It feels like it doesn’t it?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> They absolutely do not look happy.


ITA. I see H scowling at the Commonwealth ceremony in Westminster Abbey and since then he looks a mess. The missus, however, looked so smug in that ugly green hornet outfit and ditto in that bird-crap black dress with OW and thereafter she just looked so fake when promoting her crap du jour.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Well, if M wasn't there, it maybe H that's the bare faced liar and it never happened



Or Harry told her something that was said which was relatively benign, but then she exaggerated it to maximum effect for the Oprah interview.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Weeeeell I opened an email and this came up!   I love Trina Turk but stopped breathing for a sec when I saw it. Contributing to the fans of the M green dress outfit.  A green pant outfit for M!


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Weeeeell I opened an email and this came up!   I love Trina Turk but stopped breathing for a sec when I saw it. Contributing to the fans of the M green dress outfit.  A green pant outfit for M!
> 
> View attachment 5149357



Stop killing green as colour for me


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Duke said: "Unfortunately if *the source of information is inherently corrupt *or racist or biased then that filters out to the rest of society."



The joke is on him.  Surely he must see his own inherent corruption, right?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW two extremely busy days ahead and then I will take off 10 glorious days instead of giving in to last minute demands and projects, and I fully plan on spending them reading thrillers, crocheting baby blankets, training my food photography and going out for breakfast. Maybe for my own sanity I should detox from the toxic duo as well!



 This will be a well-earned respite.  
From my own experience, every time I try to avoid the _H&M hole, _somehow they do or say something so horrendous that I must come to TPF for therapy.   Still, enjoy


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Well, if M wasn't there, it maybe H that's the bare faced liar and it never happened


and it's possible that if someone speculated about what color the baby's skin would be it wasn't malicious.....some celeb (whoopi?) said black people often have this kind of conversation....just wondering how a baby will come out.    the way they said it to Oprah it seemed totally scandalous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I have to remind myself that we don't actually know what these people are like in private. Was Charles the one who talked to Harry about Archie's skin color? He could have asked a purely innocent question, but that isn't the way Meghan portrayed it to Oprah. Maybe to keep the payments coming they are hanging that out there like "Keep us happy or we'll tell the world it was YOU. Oh, by the way I am writing a book that is coming out next year, so did I mention to keep the money coming?"


I may be wrong, but I don't think Charles would care about the skin color of his grandkids. If he didn't like MM, I don't believe he would use skin color to dissuade Hazz.  He could have mentioned differences in culture, but not in race imo. 
If it is true that someone mentioned the skin color of Hazz's future kids (not Archie, since Hazz said that particular conversation occurred before the wedding), it could have been just a silly comment (not malicious or racist). Hazz is a ginger, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was was brought up in talks about future kids.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I may be wrong, but I don't think Charles would care about the skin color of his grandkids. If he didn't like MM, I don't believe he would use skin color to dissuade Hazz.  He could have mentioned differences in culture, but not in race imo.
> If it is true that someone mentioned the skin color of Hazz's future kids (not Archie, since Hazz said that particular conversation occurred before the wedding), it could have been just a silly comment (not malicious or racist). Hazz is a ginger, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was was brought up in talks about future kids.



I hope you are right. Was the entire color of the baby story fabricated or was there a nugget of truth to it? For the past two years it appears to me like Harry truly despises his father. Not sure where Charles stands on Harry, but considering he hasn’t made any attempt to see him we can safely assume they are estranged.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if there is a typo here.  Bad, bad Canadians! 

_In the Channel 5 documentary *Meghan at 50: The Climb to Power*, royal expert Tom Quinn discussed that Harry and Meghan did not "expect" to pay for their security and repay for the Frogmore Cottage refurbishment.
_
*PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle were "upset and astonished" when they learnt that Canadians were not willing to foot the bill for their security.*









						Harry and Meghan 'astonished and upset' Canadians wouldn't pay for their security
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle were "upset and astonished" when they learnt that Canadians were not willing to foot the bill for their security.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I may be wrong, but I don't think Charles would care about the skin color of his grandkids. If he didn't like MM, I don't believe he would use skin color to dissuade Hazz.  He could have mentioned differences in culture, but not in race imo.
> If it is true that someone mentioned the skin color of Hazz's future kids (not Archie, since Hazz said that particular conversation occurred before the wedding), it could have been just a silly comment (not malicious or racist). Hazz is a ginger, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was was brought up in talks about future kids.


Could it have been about ginger coloration ? To me, that is a definite maybe … recall a bit from the book that Morton ghost wrote for Diana …
Charles was disappointed when he first learned he had a redhead as a son …  the Spencer’s are known for redheads … not the Mountbatten-Windsors

and this is Diana’s account via Morton, we really don’t know how the topic came up or the actual response


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Could it have been about ginger coloration ? To me, that is a definite maybe … recall a bit from the book that Morton ghost wrote for Diana …
> Charles was disappointed when he first learned he had a redhead as a son …  the Spencer’s are known for redheads … not the Mountbatten-Windsors
> 
> and this is Diana’s account via Morton, we really don’t know how the topic came up or the actual response



Also Charles being disappointed that Harry was a boy when he was hoping for a girl.


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Weeeeell I opened an email and this came up!   I love Trina Turk but stopped breathing for a sec when I saw it. Contributing to the fans of the M green dress outfit.  A green pant outfit for M!
> 
> View attachment 5149357


that does look nice....of course it helps that the model is thin and gorgeous


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> I too LOVE your scarf!     Wish to add to my collection.  Appreciate knowing where you purchased.  Hope it's still available.  Thanks!!


The link is in Post 70,234. It's still available - and on sale!
The quality, natch, is not on par with Hermes, but then the price too is not stratospheric. Maybe one day, H will do a corgi scarf. Kluska is cute, but not the same


----------



## needlv

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wonder how much of that $40M went towards buying her an expensive tiara that she felt entitled to wear since she is after all a not so Royal Duchass. I mean, having so many thrones in one's house, one simply must look the part.



Just curious - but has H actually bought MM any jewellery other than the engagement ring, then the eternity (push present) ring?  

There was speculation she was wearing Diana’s jewellery but that was debunked by jewellery aficionados who pointed out they were either copies or the watch was MM’s own Cartier tank…

Dont you think MM would make a big splash of it if H bought some eye candy in jewellery?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Also Charles being disappointed that Harry was a boy when he was hoping for a girl.


poor harry - not only the spare but the wrong gender and a ginger.....was there another child in the world so unfortunate?


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Just curious - but has H actually bought MM any jewellery other than the engagement ring, then the eternity (push present) ring?
> 
> There was speculation she was wearing Diana’s jewellery but that was debunked by jewellery aficionados who pointed out they were either copies or the watch was MM’s own Cartier tank…
> 
> Dont you think MM would make a big splash of it if H bought some eye candy in jewellery?



I don’t think Meghan is as into jewelry as she is with other things, like designer clothes.

If she wanted to be basking in jewels, she would be. What Meghan wants Meghan gets.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Meghan is as into jewelry as she is with other things, like designer clothes.
> 
> If she wanted to be basking in jewels, she would be. What Meghan wants Meghan gets.



I noticed her jewelry style is more minimalistic and dainty. The only time she wore anything that have large jewels were those she wanted people to think they belonged to Diana   She sure doesn't deserve any of Queen E's jewels. Glad she cannot loan them


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is a new tidbit:









						Oprah sells Orcas Island estate for $14 million
					

Benefiting from the region’s hot real estate market, Oprah Winfrey and a business associate sold the 40-acre Orcas Island waterfront estate for more than one-and-a-half times the roughly $8.3 million they paid in 2018.




					www.seattletimes.com
				



_Oprah Winfrey cashed in on an Orcas Island investment this week, selling a 40-acre waterfront estate for $14 million. 

Winfrey and a business associate bought the property in 2018, when her broker described the property as a “passive” investment. Benefiting from the region’s hot real estate market, Winfrey’s LLC sold the property for more than one-and-a-half times the roughly $8.3 million they paid in 2018.

ETA: 
The buyer is staying private for now. 

Jen Cameron, the Bellevue-based Coldwell Banker Bain agent who represented the buyer, declined to say who purchased the property or whether they plan to live at the estate. *County records list an LLC registered in Delaware.*

The sale was off-market, meaning the property was not listed for sale._


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I noticed her jewelry style is more minimalistic and dainty. The only time she wore anything that have large jewels were those she wanted people to think they belonged to Diana   She sure doesn't deserve any of Queen E's jewels. Glad she cannot loan them



She has _those _earrings, right?
_The sparkling yellow diamond earrings, *worth over $650,000 *which Meghan paired with a blue maternity gown during a state dinner in Fiji, were a wedding gift from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who was behind the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.








						Untangling the Provenance of Meghan Markle's Controversial Diamond Earrings Gifted By Saudi Prince
					

What the Sussexes have called a “calculated smear campaign” against them ahead of Meghan Markle‘s interview with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday included the claim that the Duchess of Sussex wore a controversial pair of tiered diamond earrings while touring Fiji in 2018.The sparkling yellow diamond...




					parade.com
				



_


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> poor harry - not only the spare but the wrong gender and a ginger.....was there another child in the world so unfortunate?



Yeap, his own two kids. Born to a set of psycho parents and being hidden like they are an old king's illegitimate children


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has _those _earrings, right?
> _The sparkling yellow diamond earrings, *worth over $650,000 *which Meghan paired with a blue maternity gown during a state dinner in Fiji, were a wedding gift from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who was behind the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untangling the Provenance of Meghan Markle's Controversial Diamond Earrings Gifted By Saudi Prince
> 
> 
> What the Sussexes have called a “calculated smear campaign” against them ahead of Meghan Markle‘s interview with Oprah Winfrey on Sunday included the claim that the Duchess of Sussex wore a controversial pair of tiered diamond earrings while touring Fiji in 2018.The sparkling yellow diamond...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> parade.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



She's out for the BRF's blood so it is only fitting that she has a pair of blood diamond earrings


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Just curious - but has H actually bought MM any jewellery other than the engagement ring, then the eternity (push present) ring?
> 
> There was speculation she was wearing Diana’s jewellery but that was debunked by jewellery aficionados who pointed out they were either copies or the watch was MM’s own Cartier tank…
> 
> Dont you think MM would make a big splash of it if H bought some eye candy in jewellery?



If Harry has any money, you bet it would be controlled by MoM. He probably cannot make a purchase without her OK


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Could it have been about ginger coloration ? To me, that is a definite maybe … recall a bit from the book that Morton ghost wrote for Diana …
> Charles was disappointed when he first learned he had a redhead as a son …  the Spencer’s are known for redheads … not the Mountbatten-Windsors
> 
> and this is Diana’s account via Morton, we really don’t know how the topic came up or the actual response


This was all from Diana when she was angry and speaking into tape recorders. It may or may not have been true.  Lady C said she was known to twist the truth to her advantage.


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> If Harry has any money, you bet it would be controlled by MoM. He probably cannot make a purchase without her OK



According to this Blind item, MM takes 15% of whatever H earns as she is acting as his manager…





__





						Blind Item #6
					

Speaking of love them or hate them A list celebrities, this little nugget takes the cake It is a chef's kiss and any other cliché, that come...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> According to this Blind item, MM takes 15% of whatever H earns as she is acting as his manager…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> Speaking of love them or hate them A list celebrities, this little nugget takes the cake It is a chef's kiss and any other cliché, that come...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Harry definitely needs to be managed because he has no clue what to do having grown up with help at every turn


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> This was all from Diana when she was angry and speaking into tape recorders. It may or may not have been true.  Lady C said *she was known to twist the truth to her advantage.*



Sounds like somebody else that we know


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> According to this Blind item, MM takes 15% of whatever H earns as she is acting as his manager…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> Speaking of love them or hate them A list celebrities, this little nugget takes the cake It is a chef's kiss and any other cliché, that come...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I guess this keeps it all in the family, but still - ewww. Shady stuff, IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Meghan is as into jewelry as she is with other things, like designer clothes.
> 
> If she wanted to be basking in jewels, she would be. What Meghan wants Meghan gets.


well she did get those huge diamond earrings as a gift from someone in the Middle East


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> According to this Blind item, MM takes 15% of whatever H earns as she is acting as his manager…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> Speaking of love them or hate them A list celebrities, this little nugget takes the cake It is a chef's kiss and any other cliché, that come...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



You could make the case she acts more as his conservator, à la Britney. He’s not allowed to make decisions without her say so. I wonder if there will ever be a Free Harry movement.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well she did get those huge diamond earrings as a gift from someone in the Middle East



Ah yes, the blood diamonds she still owns.


----------



## rose60610

Jewelry? Recall Meghan had her engagement ring redone. What a kick in the face to the BRF. She was telling Harry she wears the pants and nothing he or the BRF does is good enough.


----------



## AB Negative

California is a community property state so she gets more than 15% of his , plus the house is in her name, right?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> You could make the case she acts more as his conservator, à la Britney. He’s not allowed to make decisions without her say so. I wonder if there will ever be a Free Harry movement.


Maybe she is stashing funds in anticipation of "Finding Freedom II", post divorce.
A Free Harry movement assumes there is someone who would want him, he's pathetic with lots of baggage, could be a hard sell.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Weeeeell I opened an email and this came up!  I love Trina Turk but stopped breathing for a sec when I saw it. Contributing to the fans of the M green dress outfit. A green pant outfit for M!
> 
> View attachment 5149357





papertiger said:


> Stop killing green as colour for me


I agree, please don’t let the hustler have green! It’s my favourite. I do see what you mean about it being awfully tight on the body and then a big swoosh of shawl collar at the top though. Not well cut at all. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> The joke is on him.  Surely he must see his own inherent corruption, right?
> 
> 
> 
> This will be a well-earned respite.
> From my own experience, every time I try to avoid the _H&M hole, _somehow they do or say something so horrendous that I must come to TPF for therapy. Still, enjoy
> 
> View attachment 5149400


It’s so bloody patronising as well. If there’s a prejudiced comment out there obviously you peasants are too stupid to see racial bias & need big brain Harry to point it out to you. Doesn’t occur to him that working people might be more aware of the nuances of the system than someone who has been the  golden boy (or maybe the white elephant) his entire life?


xincinsin said:


> The link is in Post 70,234. It's still available - and on sale!
> The quality, natch, is not on par with Hermes, but then the price too is not stratospheric. Maybe one day, H will do a corgi scarf. Kluska is cute, but not the same


For one awful moment I thought you meant Haz not Hermes.
I’m actually surprised they haven’t brought out a commemorative silk scarf collection considering that’s something the queen likes.

They could have a chain d’ancre print with H&M in the middle shattering the bonds of oppression. Then a dog print scarf with corgis (because the Queen doesn’t own them either) plus the ghosts of their own dogs. Then an equestrian print that I will leave to your imaginations.


bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Meghan is as into jewelry as she is with other things, like designer clothes.
> 
> If she wanted to be basking in jewels, she would be. What Meghan wants Meghan gets.


She does merch her Insta-gold vermeil on occasion. (The kind of stuff where they try to convince you the $500 price tag is worth it because they will give $1 to save the dolphins & it may take over a month to arrive from their artisanal craftsmen at the Amazon factory.)

I don’t know if they can afford anything show-stopping tbh.
Running a PR war and maintaining camp wannasellout must take a lot of ready cash.

High-end jewellers in general seem less ready to do celeb rentals than the garment industry in general.

And even then…. I must say we haven’t seen her in a lot of designer fits since she lost the clothing allowance.
Dior and Givenchy don’t seem to be calling….
She wore an ugly Carolina dress but what else? (Carolina is in the wilderness anyway. I think she’s only clinging on with perfume sales which is a pity.)

I also think this where TPF may have warped me a little bit lol. There’s lots of normal people out there who have great style and amazing pieces - so it’s harder for a z list celeb with no taste to compete…
Obviously we were meant to be impressed by her having the tank like Diana but pffft everyone on the Cartier forum has 2.  
Then oh wow, a de la renta dress, how sensational yawn….. have you seen the eye candy on the OOTD & jewellery threads?

I think the bar might be so high she’s not competing tbh. Trying to convince us she’s a simple girl who isn’t about the money which is lucky because they are running out of it.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> For one awful moment *I thought you meant Haz not Hermes*.
> I’m actually surprised they haven’t brought out a commemorative silk scarf collection considering that’s something the queen likes.
> 
> They could have a chain d’ancre print with H&M in the middle shattering the bonds of oppression. Then a dog print scarf with corgis (because the Queen doesn’t own them either) plus the ghosts of their own dogs. Then an equestrian print that I will leave to your imaginations.


 
I think the perfect Hazmat and Methane scarf should feature bulls, hyenas and chickens (bull crap, hyena for her, and chicken for him). 
It will be sold for $1000, made from bonded silk like the infamous dress, is too stiff to be folded and will be worn simply curved over the head like a piece of floppy cardboard. A percentage will be given to charity (Archewell) after 20% is deducted for production cost and 79% for copyright licence (owned by Lilibet LLC).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> According to this Blind item, MM takes 15% of whatever H earns as she is acting as his manager…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> Speaking of love them or hate them A list celebrities, this little nugget takes the cake It is a chef's kiss and any other cliché, that come...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Even Kris only takes a 10 % cut.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Something like this?














						Tortoiseshell Mini Guaria
					

ABOUT These structured shapes were inspired by the hanging planters and pots used at the Montunas Orchid House. The scarf handle can be worn two ways, long or short, and is removable along with the internal pouch.  DETAILS L18cm x W7.5cm x H13cm Body: 100% acetate Internal pouch: 100% silk...




					montunas.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Something like this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tortoiseshell Mini Guaria
> 
> 
> ABOUT These structured shapes were inspired by the hanging planters and pots used at the Montunas Orchid House. The scarf handle can be worn two ways, long or short, and is removable along with the internal pouch.  DETAILS L18cm x W7.5cm x H13cm Body: 100% acetate Internal pouch: 100% silk...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montunas.com


Oh wow is that a mess! It is bad when you’re trying to be designer & it looks like a rejected Skinny Dip design  

Actually, it’s use occurred to me, wasn’t one of the late dogs called something like Scooby or Boogie…. How serendipitous they didn’t even have to learn a new name to call Omid to heel.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I think the perfect Hazmat and Methane scarf should feature bulls, hyenas and chickens (bull crap, hyena for her, and chicken for him).
> It will be sold for $1000, made from bonded silk like the infamous dress, is too stiff to be folded and will be worn simply curved over the head like a piece of floppy cardboard. A percentage will be given to charity (Archewell) after 20% is deducted for production cost and 79% for copyright licence (owned by Lilibet LLC).


That’s brilliant. It doubles as a reusable cake plate for when you are sharing your great gifts with the Foodbank too.
And a rotten tomato shield for other public events…


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Sounds like somebody else that we know


Except these two twist lies to their advantage


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> The link is in Post 70,234. It's still available - and on sale!
> The quality, natch, is not on par with Hermes, but then the price too is not stratospheric. Maybe one day, H will do a corgi scarf. Kluska is cute, but not the same


Thank you!  I plan to purchase one. Twins! And I love your idea of h doing a corgi scarf.


----------



## Lodpah

Rude Boy Harry Mon, you be singing this soon. You should have left that punani when she smiled all up on you in the beginning. Nah! You two deserve each other's miserable and whiny lives.

Vamos a tequila, senorita, Bonita
I really need it now
I ain't got no tengo dinero, caballero
Say can we work it out

First time I meet her, I wanted to greet her
Nobody could've been sweeter
I was wrong should have bought a bombita
But, now she gone

I don't know where she go
Me, I'm frustrated down so and the other men miss her
I guess I surely know that, baby
Where did she gone?

Where the rose bush rise up
Are you wicked than bandolero then better wise up
Or we go, ash to ash and dust onto the dust
You just big up a chest and go loco

Vamos a tequila, senorita, Bonita
I really need it now
I ain't got no tengo dinero, caballero
Say can we work it out

Smile up on the face
Make the next plan
Wiggle the bottom to attract the next man
Rude boys, beware


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if there is a typo here.  Bad, bad Canadians!
> 
> _In the Channel 5 documentary *Meghan at 50: The Climb to Power*, royal expert Tom Quinn discussed that Harry and Meghan did not "expect" to pay for their security and repay for the Frogmore Cottage refurbishment._
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle were "upset and astonished" when they learnt that Canadians were not willing to foot the bill for their security.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'astonished and upset' Canadians wouldn't pay for their security
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle were "upset and astonished" when they learnt that Canadians were not willing to foot the bill for their security.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Actually I believe this. Hazard's bills have been paid for him all his life. And Methane always had Daddy, husband, BF or some form of sugar daddy supporting her. It must have been a rude shock to their delicate VIP systems to hear that they were expected to pay for security.

ETA: OMG, I just noticed the typo. It says the programme was called "Meghan at *50*: The Climb to Power".



needlv said:


> Just curious - but has H actually bought MM any jewellery other than the engagement ring, then the eternity (push present) ring?
> 
> There was speculation she was wearing Diana’s jewellery but that was debunked by jewellery aficionados who pointed out they were either copies or the watch was MM’s own Cartier tank…
> 
> Dont you think MM would make a big splash of it if H bought some eye candy in jewellery?


He designed the engagement ring which was soon re-designed. She probably doesn't trust his taste in heavyweight jewellery.
Did he give her any jewellery before the engagement? Surely he wooed her with something? Or was he too skint to give her any good stuff? There were stories that he expected Chelsea and Cressida to pay their own way when they were dating him.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree, please don’t let the hustler have green! It’s my favourite. I do see what you mean about it being awfully tight on the body and then a big swoosh of shawl collar at the top though. Not well cut at all.
> 
> It’s so bloody patronising as well. If there’s a prejudiced comment out there obviously you peasants are too stupid to see racial bias & need big brain Harry to point it out to you. Doesn’t occur to him that working people might be more aware of the nuances of the system than someone who has been the  golden boy (or maybe the white elephant) his entire life?
> 
> For one awful moment I thought you meant Haz not Hermes.
> I’m actually surprised they haven’t brought out a commemorative silk scarf collection considering that’s something the queen likes.
> 
> They could have a chain d’ancre print with H&M in the middle shattering the bonds of oppression. Then a dog print scarf with corgis (because the Queen doesn’t own them either) plus the ghosts of their own dogs. Then an equestrian print that I will leave to your imaginations.
> 
> She does merch her Insta-gold vermeil on occasion. (The kind of stuff where they try to convince you the $500 price tag is worth it because they will give $1 to save the dolphins & it may take over a month to arrive from their artisanal craftsmen at the Amazon factory.)
> 
> I don’t know if they can afford anything show-stopping tbh.
> Running a PR war and maintaining camp wannasellout must take a lot of ready cash.
> 
> High-end jewellers in general seem less ready to do celeb rentals than the garment industry in general.
> 
> And even then…. I must say we haven’t seen her in a lot of designer fits since she lost the clothing allowance.
> Dior and Givenchy don’t seem to be calling….
> She wore an ugly Carolina dress but what else? (Carolina is in the wilderness anyway. I think she’s only clinging on with perfume sales which is a pity.)
> 
> I also think this where TPF may have warped me a little bit lol. There’s lots of normal people out there who have great style and amazing pieces - so it’s harder for a z list celeb with no taste to compete…
> Obviously we were meant to be impressed by her having the tank like Diana but pffft everyone on the Cartier forum has 2.
> Then oh wow, a de la renta dress, how sensational yawn….. have you seen the eye candy on the OOTD & jewellery threads?
> 
> I think the bar might be so high she’s not competing tbh. Trying to convince us she’s a simple girl who isn’t about the money which is lucky because they are running out of it.



Hermes have issued commemorative QEII scarves, most have been ltd ed UK only. I have 2 out of 4 I bought new (haven't got the 1977 Siver Jubilee or the 2002 Gold Jubilee - but even though I could have bought them preloved, I'm not so keen on those).


----------



## xincinsin

Snickering here.
@Maggie Muggins For the namelist.
One of the comments in the express article called the duo Needy and Greedy  So apt!

Petition to remove them from the line of succession - only Brits can sign, unfortunately.








						Petition: Remove non-working royals from the line of succession to the Throne
					

Remove all royals who have ever ceased to be active, working members of the royal family from the line of succession. This will ensure only those royal family members who have demonstrated true commitment to proudly serving the nation be allowed to sit on the Throne, thus preserving its dignity.




					petition.parliament.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> Hermes have issued commemorative QEII scarves, most have been ltd ed UK only. I have 2 out of 4 I bought new (haven't got the 1977 Siver Jubilee or the 2002 Gold Jubilee - but even though I could have bought them preloved, I'm not so keen on those).


I have one of them!


----------



## needlv

Yep because H’s trust fund and having everything paid for them in the UK wasn’t enough $$$.  Why do the work with peasants when you can take off the the USA and make a fortune…?









						Meg & Harry 'forced aides to keep deals secret' to pave way to make millions
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry forced royal aides to keep their commercial deals a secret, a source has claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex used mega-deals with Netflix and Spotify – with…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Anyone else notice sarah feels particularly emboldened lately about her own money making schemes.  So dodgy…





__





						Sarah Ferguson Offered to Consult for Her Character on 'The Crown'
					

The Duchess of York opens up about the Netflix drama in a new interview with T&C.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Yep because H’s trust fund and having everything paid for them in the UK wasn’t enough $$$.  Why do the work with peasants when you can take off the the USA and make a fortune…?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg & Harry 'forced aides to keep deals secret' to pave way to make millions
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry forced royal aides to keep their commercial deals a secret, a source has claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex used mega-deals with Netflix and Spotify – with…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk




OT: I love, love, love Schitt's Creek. Never a dull moment. Makes me laugh every time


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> OT: I love, love, love Schitt's Creek. Never a dull moment. Makes me laugh every time



But they hit the skids with comedy and fortitude. Plus, they owned the town.

These these 2 act like they own the town (MoM/Hollywouldn't) but they are nasteeee


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> According to this Blind item, MM takes 15% of whatever H earns as she is acting as his manager…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> Speaking of love them or hate them A list celebrities, this little nugget takes the cake It is a chef's kiss and any other cliché, that come...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


15 percent that would be a pay cut ... LOL 
California is a community property state - half of what he gets is hers by law


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> 15 percent that would be a pay cut ... LOL
> California is a community property state - half of what he gets is hers by law



If he's on a diplomat's passport, divorce and all assets will be divided under British law.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> If he's on a diplomat's passport, divorce and all assets will be divided under British law.


Just musing. Passports expire, don't they? When he renews it, would they deny him a diplomat's passport and issue him a regular Joe version?

And if they do, will he cry blue murder and say he is entitled to it by birth, like his FOC security for life?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Just musing. Passports expire, don't they? When he renews it, would they deny him a diplomat's passport and issue him a regular Joe version?
> 
> And if they do, will he cry blue murder and say he is entitled to it by birth, like his FOC security for life?



They wouldn't. They still want his money to stay in the family


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Hermes have issued commemorative QEII scarves, most have been ltd ed UK only. I have 2 out of 4 I bought new (haven't got the 1977 Siver Jubilee or the 2002 Gold Jubilee - but even though I could have bought them preloved, I'm not so keen on those).





chicinthecity777 said:


> I have one of them!


You learn so much on this thread… 

so is this the silver ?




__





						Hermès Scarf The Queen's Silver Jubilee 1977 Queen Elizabeth II UK London RARE at 1stDibs | queen elizabeth hermes scarf
					

View this item and discover similar  for sale at 1stDibs - RARE Authentic Hermès Scarf Pattern: 'The Queen's Silver Jubilee' Designed by Françoise de la Perrière in 1977, special edition to celebrate the 25th anniversary




					www.1stdibs.co.uk
				



And  this the golden jubilee?








						HERMÈS Scarf Carré Régina Limited Edition Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee 2002 - Chelsea Vintage Couture
					

HERMÈS Scarf Carré Régina Limited Edition Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee 2002. This Hermès scarf 'Régina' is inspired by our Royal Queen...




					chelseavintagecouture.com
				




I’d love to see the ones you got! 


papertiger said:


> If he's on a diplomat's passport, divorce and all assets will be divided under British law.


Aren’t we usually 50/50 for divorce?  though I suspect the BRF will have a way out of that. 




xincinsin said:


> Just musing. Passports expire, don't they? When he renews it, would they deny him a diplomat's passport and issue him a regular Joe version?
> 
> And if they do, will he cry blue murder and say he is entitled to it by birth, like his FOC security for life?


Hopefully, I mean I feel he very much falls under the Tamburlaine model of diplomacy & that’s just not really what we want to go for at the moment.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> You learn so much on this thread…
> 
> so is this the silver ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hermès Scarf The Queen's Silver Jubilee 1977 Queen Elizabeth II UK London RARE at 1stDibs | queen elizabeth hermes scarf
> 
> 
> View this item and discover similar  for sale at 1stDibs - RARE Authentic Hermès Scarf Pattern: 'The Queen's Silver Jubilee' Designed by Françoise de la Perrière in 1977, special edition to celebrate the 25th anniversary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.1stdibs.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And  this the golden jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HERMÈS Scarf Carré Régina Limited Edition Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee 2002 - Chelsea Vintage Couture
> 
> 
> HERMÈS Scarf Carré Régina Limited Edition Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee 2002. This Hermès scarf 'Régina' is inspired by our Royal Queen...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chelseavintagecouture.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’d love to see the ones you got!
> 
> Aren’t we usually 50/50 for divorce?  though I suspect the BRF will have a way out of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully, I mean I feel he very much falls under the Tamburlaine model of diplomacy & that’s just not really what we want to go for at the moment.



Not a lawyer and studied completely different law at uni.

Britain: Different in each case. So case by case.

It's usually 50/50 _after _what was brought into the pot after marriage. He'll prob keep his initial 'capital'. If that's held in trust they can't divi that up anyway and I read somewhere that yields max 500K per annum and the rest can't be touched. That'll be an off-shore account somewhere in the grey-zone/Bermuda Triangle where no-one can quite govern. So Trust untouchable for either beyond what the trust stipulates and appointed trustees say.

If the home is in her name she may get to keep it as the family home, it will be borne in mind what he paid in in terms of what he owes her/she owes him, but it will make no diff to the status of the property, it's hers. If PC is paying the mortgage, that may stop.

To see who pays who alimony/maintenance, it will be the chief earner at the time of the breakup. Could be her or him. After breakup, she can only ask him for money from what he earns per annum (unless he owns other assets) but not the family in general. She will have no claim to the Privy Purse, Duchy Estates or any other Crown revenue.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Meghan is as into jewelry as she is with other things, like designer clothes.
> 
> If she wanted to be basking in jewels, she would be. What Meghan wants Meghan gets.


I respectfully disagree, I think she is into bling. Those gorgeous $1M earrings, the beautiful tiara with emeralds, the pieces from Hazz's mother collection... She is probably just waiting for the right time to wear her bling here. Some time ago, I read somewhere about bling that was brought to America by Hazz's wife, but could have been just gossip. On a gossip note, it was recently posted on tweeter a Blind Gossip article from 10/26/20 entitled _Famous Son Got Very Rough_ and if there is even a little truth in it...


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Actually, it’s use occurred to me, *wasn’t one of the late dogs called something like Scooby or Boogie….* How serendipitous they didn’t even have to learn a new name to call Omid to heel.



It was Bogart, the rescue dog she got to schmooze Ellen DeGeneres at a dog adoption charity event they were both attending. Meghan quickly booted him out before she moved to England by claiming vets said the five- or six-year-old dog was "too old" to safely make the trip. Bullsh*t of course.

Supposedly she gave him to friends but since we know she doesn't really have friends, it seems more likely she just gave him away to whoever. Hopefully Bogart is still alive somewhere and lives with someone who loves him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Not a lawyer and studied completely different law at uni.
> 
> Britain: Different in each case. So case by case.
> 
> It's usually 50/50 _after _what was brought into the pot after marriage. He'll prob keep his initial 'capital'. If that's held in Trust they can't divi that up anyway and I read somewhere that yields max 500K per annum and the rest can't be touched. That'll be an off-shore account somewhere in the grey-zone/Bermuda Triangle where no-one can quite govern. So Trust untouchable for either beyond what the trust stipulates and appointee trustees say.
> 
> If the home is in her name she may get to keep it as the family home, it will be borne in mind what he paid in in terms of what he owes her/she owes him, but it will make no diff to the status of the property, it's hers. If PC is paying the mortgage, that may stop.
> 
> To see who pays who alimony/maintenance, it will be the chief earner at the time of the breakup. Could be her or him. After breakup, he can only ask him for money from what he earns per annum (unless he owns other assets) but not the family in general. She will have no claim to the Privy Purse, Duchy Estates or any other Crown revenue.


Thank you for this great reply.
 I wouldn’t be surprised if the frankenhouse would be the main asset she could lay claim to & he’d just hand it over & haul out & tbh that’d be considered a pretty easy escape for him.

In terms of earnings vs expenditure they might be the only couple in the world to be comparing negative income between them when trying to figure out who is the main earner


----------



## rose60610

As for trusts, I question if our Ruthless Conniving Duchess forced Harry to add her as a co-trustee to his trust(s). Harry's advisors would have said "No way!", but what Meghan wants, Meghan gets. I can see it. He'd be forced to go along with everything she demands just to keep his initial capital, including throwing his own family under the bus and concurring with her accusations of BRF racism.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> As for trusts, I question if our Ruthless Conniving Duchess forced Harry to add her as a co-trustee to his trust(s). Harry's advisors would have said "No way!", but what Meghan wants, Meghan gets. I can see it. He'd be forced to go along with everything she demands just to keep his initial capital, including throwing his own family under the bus and concurring with her accusations of BRF racism.



He doesn't get to choose. Diana or whoever set-up the account chose. 

Trusts were set up to make them gold-digger proof.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I respectfully disagree, I think she is into bling. Those gorgeous $1M earrings, the beautiful tiara with emeralds, the pieces from Hazz's mother collection... She is probably just waiting for the right time to wear her bling here. Some time ago, I read somewhere about bling that was brought to America by Hazz's wife, but could have been just gossip. On a gossip note, it was recently posted on tweeter a Blind Gossip article from 10/26/20 entitled _Famous Son Got Very Rough_ and if there is even a little truth in it...



 









						Meghan Markle took the princess's jewelry from the palace! He refuses to return them - Archyde
					

Prince Harry’s eternally rebellious wife, Meghan Markle, allegedly escaped from the royal family with Princess Diana’s jewelry worth $ 10 million! And since leaving the ... Read more




					www.archyde.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I respectfully disagree, I think she is into bling. Those gorgeous $1M earrings, the beautiful tiara with emeralds, the pieces from Hazz's mother collection... She is probably just waiting for the right time to wear her bling here. Some time ago, I read somewhere about bling that was brought to America by Hazz's wife, but could have been just gossip. On a gossip note, it was recently posted on tweeter a Blind Gossip article from 10/26/20 entitled _Famous Son Got Very Rough_ and if there is even a little truth in it...


I agree, she’s probably pacing herself
till after she’s exhausted the Covid finger-wagging/empower the peasants angle  then she’ll get the diamonds and a nice bedsheet out for the Emmys.



bag-mania said:


> It was Bogart, the rescue dog she got to schmooze Ellen DeGeneres at a dog adoption charity event they were both attending. Meghan quickly booted him out before she moved to England by claiming vets said the five- or six-year-old dog was "too old" to safely make the trip. Bullsh*t of course.
> 
> Supposedly she gave him to friends but since we know she doesn't really have friends, it seems more likely she just gave him away to whoever. Hopefully Bogart is still alive somewhere and lives with someone who loves him.


Thank you! The internet never forgets. Yes it’s all coming back to me now. It was Labrador type dog she abandoned so she could rush to her ‘whirlwind’ romance & then it was a beagle that got mysteriously run over. Pretty dark really. Hopefully bogart got a lucky escape- I’m sure there’d be a lot of takers who wouldn’t abandon him to go gold-digging.

Bogie is quite like scobie… must be fate.


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> He doesn't get to choose. Diana or whoever set-up the account chose.
> 
> Trusts were set up to make them gold-digger proof.



One would hope so. There are numerous ways trusts can be set up. I'd also like to think Harry's trust is "gold digger proof".  It all depends on how the trust was set up. One would think that Diana's advisors realized her sons would be prized targets and set up the trusts accordingly. Unless Harry is forbidden to spend more than what the trust spins off in income, he could easily move assets outside of the trust, liquidate them, spend them, stare cross-eyed at them for 2 days and move them back into the trust if he wanted, etc. Ultimately, what we're dealing with is a Prince who is dim-witted and whose buttons are easily pushed by emotion. Unless his trust was set up like a steel trap (for his sake let's hope it was--and it probably was if a 1000 year family history was any influence), Duchess Digger likely considers it hers. In a divorce setting, she'd pull out all the stops of the acting craft and put on a real show. Wouldn't matter. This thread has covered some of Diana's unsavory faults and if it takes one to know one, then, yes, I'd agree that Diana wanted to protect her sons from the Markle's of the world. If Harry's trust had one single loose thread, Meghan has already exploited it.


----------



## Chanbal

Is Teigan's Pearl named after Hazz's wife? It's such a cute puppy.


----------



## Chanbal

Om*d explanation why his April post was not a falsehood. He is adding an epilogue and not a chapter to Funding Freedom...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I respectfully disagree, I think she is into bling. Those gorgeous $1M earrings, the beautiful tiara with emeralds, the pieces from Hazz's mother collection... She is probably just waiting for the right time to wear her bling here. Some time ago, I read somewhere about bling that was brought to America by Hazz's wife, but could have been just gossip. On a gossip note, it was recently posted on tweeter a Blind Gossip article from 10/26/20 entitled _Famous Son Got Very Rough_ and if there is even a little truth in it...



I think when she was an actress, she was into the Jennifer Meyer look, probably got gifted quite a bit of it, and what wasn’t gifted was fairly affordable. 

I think she absolutely planned to wear much larger stones once she married into the royal family, heck I probably would as well!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Om*d explanation why his April post was not a falsehood. He is adding an epilogue and not a chapter to Funding Freedom...




Nice try, Omid. An epilogue is a chapter, the final chapter.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> One would hope so. There are numerous ways trusts can be set up. I'd also like to think Harry's trust is "gold digger proof".  It all depends on how the trust was set up. One would think that Diana's advisors realized her sons would be prized targets and set up the trusts accordingly. Unless Harry is forbidden to spend more than what the trust spins off in income, he could easily move assets outside of the trust, liquidate them, spend them, stare cross-eyed at them for 2 days and move them back into the trust if he wanted, etc. Ultimately, what we're dealing with is a Prince who is dim-witted and whose buttons are easily pushed by emotion. Unless his trust was set up like a steel trap (for his sake let's hope it was--and it probably was if a 1000 year family history was any influence), Duchess Digger likely considers it hers. In a divorce setting, she'd pull out all the stops of the acting craft and put on a real show. Wouldn't matter. This thread has covered some of Diana's unsavory faults and if it takes one to know one, then, yes, I'd agree that Diana wanted to protect her sons from the Markle's of the world. If Harry's trust had one single loose thread, Meghan has already exploited it.


I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Worst case scenario is he does get bled dry and then he will have to go home & tell daddy how sorry he is for being a silly boy….not to mention how it’s actually daddy’s fault he acts this way because he divorced mummy and he never took him on bike rides. 
It’s not like he’ll actually have to work to support himself or anything.

Just noticed I wrote worse rather than worst- weird


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently.  From The Tig, which was cleaned up when she met Harry.  But the internet never forgets.


One thing I have been hoping for is if the men in grey suits or whoever it was (if indeed it happened) "scrubbed" the internet of her questionable history/actions would just remove those barriers or whatever and whatever there was (yacht girl, 3 marriages, super glue eyeliner on sorority sister) would just "be there" again. Protections gone.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Is Teigan's Pearl named after Hazz's wife? It's such a cute puppy.



That’s the woman that bullies other women for their looks? Hmpf.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Snickering here.
> @Maggie Muggins For the namelist.
> One of the comments in the express article called the duo Needy and Greedy  So apt!


Nickname added to The List and so apt indeed! Thanks.


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Worse case scenario is he does get bled dry and then he will have to go home & tell daddy how sorry he is for being a silly boy….not to mention how it’s actually daddy’s fault he acts this way because he divorced mummy and he never took him on bike rides.
> It’s not like he’ll actually have to work to support himself or anything.



 So true! And Harry will always have the rescue chickens. Oh wait. They gave him the brush off, too .


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Is Teigan's Pearl named after Hazz's wife? It's such a cute puppy.



Ah yes straight out of the Mr Burns school of trying to convince people to trust you. As we were just discussing it worked with M…




Chanbal said:


> Om*d explanation why his April post was not a falsehood. He is adding an epilogue and not a chapter to Funding Freedom...



I love how he thinks this constitutes drama as well. No b*tch everyone knows you are lying and still no one cares about your stupid book- even the subjects have washed their hands of it. Where exactly is the spice in that?



lanasyogamama said:


> I think when she was an actress, she was into the Jennifer Meyer look, probably got gifted quite a bit of it, and what wasn’t gifted was fairly affordable.
> 
> I think she absolutely planned to wear much larger stones once she married into the royal family, heck I probably would as well!


I would definitely say ‘fairly affordable’ was her aesthetic back in the actress days 
 Now she’s going for ‘high price to conceal deep structural issues.’ 
She’s the glass-filled ruby of the jewellery box.


V0N1B2 said:


> That’s the woman that bullies other women for their looks? Hmpf.


Well damn her skin is gonna look even worse after that burn


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> *If the home is in her name she may get to keep it as the family home, it will be borne in mind what he paid in in terms of what he owes her/she owes him, but it will make no diff to the status of the property, it's hers. If PC is paying the mortgage, that may stop.*
> 
> Real estate prices have sky rocketed in CA post Covid.
> As of today, according to on line site Zillow, the Montecito mansion purchased for $14,650,000, in June 2020 now has an estimated value of $20,439,800.


----------



## papertiger

Valuation means nothing 'till it's sold. 

She would need money to run it - and the security staff. All she could do was to sell it to fund another to realise the value.


----------



## jelliedfeels

To echo papertiger’s point, didn’t the Russian guy who had it last have it valued at double what he actually sold it to them for?

If I were to name the kind of former royal who I think would rush full-tilt into a costly mistake with something that is rotten beneath the superficial gloss and heavily marketed description… 

Also just think of the amount of work that  house needs doing to it since it changed hands.  The walls alone have had to withstand a volley of projectiles unseen since the days of siege warfare.


----------



## xeyes

jelliedfeels said:


> To echo papertiger’s point, didn’t the Russian guy who had it last have it valued at double what he actually sold it to them for?
> 
> If I were to name the kind of former royal who I think would rush full-tilt into a costly mistake with something that is rotten beneath the superficial gloss and heavily marketed description…
> 
> Also just think of the amount of work that  house needs doing to it since it changed hands.  The walls alone have had to withstand a volley of projectiles unseen since the days of siege warfare.



Popping out of lurkdom to say that, as I skimmed this page of posts, I started reading this one without context and it took me a little while (before I saw the “house” part) to realize this is about the Montecito property and not its prospective post-divorce occupant. (Totally not your fault, *jelliedfeels*!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not cool, not funny, just not.  I applaud the pushback on this show. The privileged elitist Gary Janetti does not need to pick on children. Using Orlando Bloom for George’s Hazz voice tells me Hazz helped out.  Hoping no one watches.  #CancelJanetti







The Patriotess
@Patriotess1976
·
2m

Replying to
@RunBritRun
The series is from markle & harry & their minions. Proof: 1) markle is only one not made fun of 2) harry is gently mocked for being “elite” which markle & harry live for 3) their neighbor & new best friend Orlando Bloom is voicing harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Time to cancel Katie Perry, too.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not cool, not funny, just not.  I applaud the pushback on this show. Gary Janetti does not need to pick on children. Using Orlando Bloom for George’s Hazz voice tells me Hazz helped out.  Hoping no one watches.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Patriotess
> @Patriotess1976
> ·
> 2m
> 
> Replying to
> @RunBritRun
> The series is from markle & harry & their minions. Proof: 1) markle is only one not made fun of 2) harry is gently mocked for being “elite” which markle & harry live for 3) their neighbor & new best friend Orlando Bloom is voicing harry.



I think Gary Janetti is on par with what litters MM’s chicken coop.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> To echo papertiger’s point, didn’t the Russian guy who had it last have it valued at double what he actually sold it to them for?
> 
> If I were to name the kind of former royal who I think would rush full-tilt into a costly mistake with something that is rotten beneath the superficial gloss and heavily marketed description…
> 
> Also just think of the amount of work that  house needs doing to it since it changed hands.  The walls alone have had to withstand a volley of projectiles unseen since the days of siege warfare.



Kudos to Rob Lowe for moving out of the MontecitoMess.  Who will be next?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not cool, not funny, just not.  I applaud the pushback on this show. The privileged elitist Gary Janetti does not need to pick on children. Using Orlando Bloom for George’s Hazz voice tells me Hazz helped out.  Hoping no one watches.  #CancelJanetti
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Patriotess
> @Patriotess1976
> ·
> 2m
> 
> Replying to
> @RunBritRun
> The series is from markle & harry & their minions. Proof: 1) markle is only one not made fun of 2) harry is gently mocked for being “elite” which markle & harry live for 3) their neighbor & new best friend Orlando Bloom is voicing harry.




Janetti, like the rest of the entertainment media and Hollywood, will absolutely not touch Meghan for fear of being called a racist. She will continue to get a free pass.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal  

This is so cringe-y.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal
> 
> This is so cringe-y.



Yep, it's easy to be the most popular person when one has stans and bots.  An article that I posted some time ago proved that M has a huge network of bots working for her. She is worse than chicken shi**t.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal
> 
> This is so cringe-y.




Isn’t it coming from a site which panders to girls/young women? I’d be surprised if anyone over 25 voted.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

EverSoElusive said:


> Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal
> 
> This is so cringe-y.



Look at how Meghan made prince William only 3% popular! This is so hilarious!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped




Sunshine Sachs is very good at what they do. I’d love to know what H&M pay them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped




Jealousy runs through it. This author is a PR hack.
Still, it makes MM look so thirsty - another 50 and she may bag a billionaire-wannabe 

ETA - just remember Kitty actually knew Diana - ya kno that’s gotta sting!




Pressure is on the new kid, what’s her name?









						Lady Kitty Spencer & Princess Charlotte Look So Alike
					

Kitty's 1992 snap revealed the striking family resemblance.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## breakfastatcartier

EverSoElusive said:


> Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped



On another note, look at how different Meghan looks in this old photo. Still the same evil beady eyes, but everything else… and she’s so “white passing” here, looks almost like Demi Moore.


----------



## sgj99

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but Kitty is a stunning beauty from a noble family with close ties to the royals. I don't think if money was what she was after she couldn't have found someone in her age group.


I think she’s looking for stability.  Her parents divorced while she was young. The divorce was very contentious.  The Earl is a notorious womanizer.  His second marriage ended rather badly too with allegations he propositioned a good friend’s wife.  Kitty’s groom may be older than her father but he’s probably more grounded and not as selfish as the Earl seems to be.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jealousy runs through it. This author is a PR hack.
> Still, it make MM look so thirsty - another 50 and she may bag a billionaire-wannabe



She is the thirstiest dracula I've ever known! Tsk tsk tsk.

Kitty is so cute    I'm surprised MoM didn't already try to leak a picture of Lil Bit to show how much she looks like Diana.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is very good at what they do. I’d love to know what H&M pay them.



Probably almost all their fortune since SS works so hard for them everyday with just planting stories. Geez they could use the money for better things for sure


----------



## EverSoElusive

breakfastatcartier said:


> On another note, look at how different Meghan looks in this old photo. Still the same evil beady eyes, but everything else… and she’s so “white passing” here, looks almost like Demi Moore.



Nah, she's a proud WOC and we're just racist


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> On another note, look at how different Meghan looks in this old photo. Still the same evil beady eyes, but everything else… and she’s so “white passing” here, looks almost like Demi Moore.



Or her friend, Abigail something.  Sadly, this is a common look in Hwood - long shiny dark hair, red lips.  Very Amal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not cool, not funny, just not.  I applaud the pushback on this show. The privileged elitist Gary Janetti does not need to pick on children. Using Orlando Bloom for George’s Hazz voice tells me Hazz helped out.  Hoping no one watches.  #CancelJanetti
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Patriotess
> @Patriotess1976
> ·
> 2m
> 
> Replying to
> @RunBritRun
> The series is from markle & harry & their minions. Proof: 1) markle is only one not made fun of 2) harry is gently mocked for being “elite” which markle & harry live for 3) their neighbor & new best friend Orlando Bloom is voicing harry.



I totally believe H and his wife had a very, very large hand in this. I have found their conduct concerning the royal family to this point horrid. Didn’t think they could sink much lower, but oh my goodness did they prove me wrong. All I can say is how foul they have shown themselves to be and leave it at that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sgj99 said:


> I think she’s looking for stability.  Her parents divorced while she was young. The divorce was very contentious.  The Earl is a notorious womanizer.  His second marriage ended rather badly too with allegations he propositioned a good friend’s wife.  Kitty’s groom may be older than her father but he’s probably more grounded and not as selfish as the Earl seems to be.



It’s ok with me if they get a divorce tomorrow, this ‘show wedding’ has raised the bar for the wealthy weddings. About time, too. No more Messica beach weddings with stringy hair, string-y bikinis, and dodgy drunks.

Post pandemic, it’s about
-stunning venues with gorgeous floral sculpture,
-several -at least 5 [unless Granny’s well-preserved gown is one of them] exquisite, works-of-art gowns,
-jewels beyond compare,
-professional make-up with the subtle touch because each of those ladies had flawless skin
-perfectly crafted and presented delectables, etc.

Yep, a new era of elegance is upon us.  Thank you, Kitty, thank you.

ETA: it was such a brilliant idea IMO - all bridesmaids and guests wear the same designer, not the same dress. Clever, kudos to Italy.
ETA2 - in 2021, how cute is the name Kitty. The Earl and his wife did a good thing there.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

EverSoElusive said:


> She is the thirstiest dracula I've ever known! Tsk tsk tsk.
> 
> Kitty is so cute    I'm surprised MoM didn't already try to leak a picture of Lil Bit to show how much she looks like Diana.


Because little “Lilibet” looks nothing like Diana … poor thing has two ugly parents. 

I’m still praying for her and her brother.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> On another note, look at how different Meghan looks in this old photo. *Still the same evil beady eyes,* but everything else… and she’s so “white passing” here, looks almost like Demi Moore.


Scary isn't it?! When the smile doesn't reach the eyes, one can almost feel a chill run down one's back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> Because little “Lilibet” looks nothing like Diana … poor thing has two ugly parents.
> 
> I’m still praying for her and her brother.



IMO, before the OW J-Law face, MM had a beautiful face. No idea what she looks like now.  Hazz always has suffered from the rosacea which the alcohol did not help.  The problem he faces is now that the blush of youth has faded, what’s left is his personality.  Without some filters, anger is definitely not a pretty sight.


----------



## amante

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not cool, not funny, just not.  I applaud the pushback on this show. The privileged elitist Gary Janetti does not need to pick on children. Using Orlando Bloom for George’s Hazz voice tells me Hazz helped out.  Hoping no one watches.  #CancelJanetti
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Patriotess
> @Patriotess1976
> ·
> 2m
> 
> Replying to
> @RunBritRun
> The series is from markle & harry & their minions. Proof: 1) markle is only one not made fun of 2) harry is gently mocked for being “elite” which markle & harry live for 3) their neighbor & new best friend Orlando Bloom is voicing harry.




Found this thread just now and binge-reading it, but what the h happened to Gary Janetti? He used to mock Meghan on his IG to the point that that was all he did on his account. Until H&M's South Africa "Are you okay?" documentary, that is. To me, the seemingly light touch H&M get from The Prince and the zero-hype launch indicates that someone high up in HBO withdrew support for this project. Is it because HBO exec/s are placing their bets on the H&M brand and they don't want to upset H&M?


----------



## amante

EverSoElusive said:


> Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal
> 
> This is so cringe-y.



Well, this isn't surprising because truthfully Meghan is more popular in the States compared to other members of the BRF. For one she's actually in the United States and proximity matters (out of sight out of mind); Suits is/was a popular show even though critically derided; and to be honest Perez Hilton's wrong. Meghan won the Oprah Winfrey interview in the States, which is the big fat market that matters, country and family be damned.


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> Found this thread just now and binge-reading it, but what the h happened to Gary Janetti? He used to mock Meghan on his IG to the point that that was all he did on his account. Until H&M's South Africa "Are you okay?" documentary, that is. To me, the seemingly light touch H&M get from The Prince and the zero-hype launch indicates that someone high up in HBO withdrew support for this project. Is it because HBO exec/s are placing their bets on the H&M brand and they don't want to upset H&M?



The privileged elitist Janetti is using pre-pandemic humor in almost-post-pandemic times.  Hwood needs to understand this cheap trick won’t work. Recycling the same old tiresome formulaic writing is unforgivable.  It is new world now. We are wiser, much wiser.
Do better, Janetti.


ETA:  IMO To quote Disney about one of its stars, the same applies to Janetti picking on children:  _calling it '_*sad and distressing'*_, with _*'callous disregard for the horrific global effects of COVID'. * Take note, Hazz.  The world is developing zero tolerance for this entitled, petulant behavior.


----------



## Jayne1

amante said:


> Found this thread just now and binge-reading it, but what the h happened to Gary Janetti? He used to mock Meghan on his IG to the point that that was all he did on his account. Until H&M's South Africa "Are you okay?" documentary, that is. To me, the seemingly light touch H&M get from The Prince and the zero-hype launch indicates that someone high up in HBO withdrew support for this project. Is it because HBO exec/s are placing their bets on the H&M brand and they don't want to upset H&M?


He used to be funny. His George posts on Instagram were satirical and clever, but I watched the trailer for his new show and it's not cute. And hasn't it been done before in the UK?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jealousy runs through it. This author is a PR hack.
> Still, it makes MM look so thirsty - another 50 and she may bag a billionaire-wannabe
> 
> ETA - just remember Kitty actually knew Diana - ya kno that’s gotta sting!
> 
> View attachment 5150780
> 
> 
> Pressure is on the new kid, what’s her name?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Kitty Spencer & Princess Charlotte Look So Alike
> 
> 
> Kitty's 1992 snap revealed the striking family resemblance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5150782


Oh no, I think M is quite glad she never met Di - what if she didn’t like her? (& there’s a good chance she wouldn’t) 
Then she couldn’t win H from mama & what could she do?
 Call the Queen of hearts a racist? Even if D’s star power was a tenth what it was in her youth everyone would just call M a lying Fame whore. 

As it is, I’m sure M has been able to sell the myth they’d be besties.



amante said:


> Found this thread just now and binge-reading it, but what the h happened to Gary Janetti? He used to mock Meghan on his IG to the point that that was all he did on his account. Until H&M's South Africa "Are you okay?" documentary, that is. To me, the seemingly light touch H&M get from The Prince and the zero-hype launch indicates that someone high up in HBO withdrew support for this project. Is it because HBO exec/s are placing their bets on the H&M brand and they don't want to upset H&M?


I agree 100% he probably got muzzled for attacking the golden turkeys.

There’s a small chance that when she brought out the depression line he felt he should back off as we all know it’s the hot button issue now.

But I can’t help feeling even a bad writer couldn’t help noticing there’s a deep well of irony in complaining about how hard being a princess is surrounded by orphans & rape victims. So I’d be amazed if he wasn’t still somewhat tempted to make a joke until he got the memo from corporate. 







CarryOn2020 said:


> The privileged elitist Janetti is using pre-pandemic humor in almost-post-pandemic times.  Hwood needs to understand this cheap trick won’t work. Recycling the same old tiresome formulaic writing is unforgivable.  It is new world now. We are wiser, much wiser.
> Do better, Janetti.
> 
> 
> ETA:  IMO To quote Disney about one of its stars, the same applies to Janetti picking on children:  _calling it '_*sad and distressing'*_, with _*'callous disregard for the horrific global effects of COVID'. * Take note, Hazz.  The world is developing zero tolerance for this entitled, petulant behavior.


I agree with the sentiment- however I am struck by the irony that _Disney_ are telling people off for bullying child stars.


----------



## Katel

papertiger said:


> Hermes have issued commemorative QEII scarves, most have been ltd ed UK only. I have 2 out of 4 I bought new (haven't got the 1977 Siver Jubilee or the 2002 Gold Jubilee - but even though I could have bought them preloved, I'm not so keen on those).





chicinthecity777 said:


> I have one of them!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> He used to be funny. His George posts on Instagram were satirical and clever, but I watched the trailer for his new show and it's not cute. And hasn't it been done before in the UK?


There’s a ongoing tradition of satire about the royals with the sketch show _The Windsors (_but I’d say the main character of that is Charles- Harry Enfield) and all our political comedy tv shows. What Id say is that some comedians are very sharp and some comedians are very gentle & that’s all fine but they have never really focused on the children.

If they really wanted to do a royal child show they could’ve at least given him a fake name I feel. This is a real child they are making out to be an a**hole. It’s just bullying tbh.

Also I just feel like all these jokes about a posh British kid saying adult b*tchy things have been done to death already with Stewie Griffin.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## jelliedfeels

Katel said:


> View attachment 5150879


That’s a lovely shade of blue. Is it the golden jubilee?


----------



## Hermes Zen

My post for the night. Here's a recent article from BetterUp. I think we can guess who might be involved in the UK expansion.  I've pasted a section below of the article that smelt of some resemblance to M while a senior royal ... the staff didn't understand M and her american sayings and ways.   I totally can see how that could happen but not convinced that was the situation with M.

BetterUp’s expansion is an opportunity to devote more support and services to the U.K. and German markets specifically and to create a deeper understanding of our Members’ needs across Europe. The *cultural context and sociopolitical environments of each region can produce differences in mindsets, behaviors, and challenges*. This shows up in our Member’s priorities and the different topics they focus on in their coaching sessions:


*Germany Members are more likely to seek coaching guidance on:**U.K. Members are more likely to seek coaching guidance on:*Communication and CollaborationInfluence and AssertivenessManaging Difficult Conversations and ConflictPublic Speaking and Presentation SkillsImproving Physical HealthStrategic PlanningManaging a Career TransitionIncreasing Visibility and Personal BrandStress Management and Self-CareCareer Planning





> https://www.betterup.com/blog/betterup-expands-in-europe-help-workers-worldwide-lead-live-better
> 
> *BetterUp expands in Europe to help workers worldwide lead better and live better*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

EverSoElusive said:


> Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal
> 
> This is so cringe-y.



This account is pro-MM so anybody follows the account is more likely to be pro-MM hence the poll base is completed skewed to pro-MM. It's like polling voting intention within one party members entirely! Means nothing! For a poll to actually mean something, you need an independent pollster to poll randomly selected base.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> That’s the woman that bullies other women for their looks? Hmpf.



I had to look twice, too. TBH I haven't found her very attractive for a while, her supermodel days are long gone.


----------



## chicinthecity777

V0N1B2 said:


> That’s the woman that bullies other women for their looks? Hmpf.


I don't normally comment on people's looks but you got the very valid point there! Oh the irony!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped




This marriage really helped her out, hu? He went in with 40 millions, she with 3, but now she owns half of the complete net worth?


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is very good at what they do. I’d love to know what H&M pay them.



I read on another thread - $1M per month for the basic package gets two positive articles per week.  

does not include crisis management PR (eg bad press for bullying, lilibet, oprah interview falsehoods etc)

this is why I think they are running in empty in $$$.  They spent it on their mansion, nannies, archwell staff and PR and lawyers


----------



## chicinthecity777

needlv said:


> I read on another thread - $1M per month for the basic package gets two positive articles per week.
> 
> does not include crisis management PR (eg bad press for bullying, lilibet, oprah interview falsehoods etc)
> 
> *this is why I think they are running in empty in $$$.*  They spent it on their mansion, nannies, archwell staff and PR and lawyers


I agree! i don't see how they are making ends meet, without dipping into his inheritance money. Unless those "mega deals" materialise soon, they are burning real fast and will not last long!


----------



## carmen56

In between his 5 months paternity leave and writing his memoir, when does H find the time for his CHIMPO duties?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Maggie Muggins said:


> Scary isn't it?! When the smile doesn't reach the eyes, one can almost feel a chill run down one's back.
> View attachment 5150814


Nothing scared me more than meghans smirk after leaving the church on Harry’s wedding day (I say Harry’s because he was who the world tuned in for) … my God this woman is so dark and ugly inside that it shows when she’s not careful.
I’m surprised the church didn’t burn down with her presence there.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped





bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs is very good at what they do. I’d love to know what H&M pay them.





CarryOn2020 said:


> ...it makes MM look so thirsty - another 50 and she may bag a *billionaire-wannabe*



I'm not a math genius but $1B = 1000 x $1M.

So many flash the B-signage after 100 x $1M. Still a crazy amount that would hard for a 'normal' person to spend in one lifetime (unless they visit TPF for ideas  ) but still, all that money and they still can't count(?)

All very unwoke. Money is a finite resource, and the more one person/family has and keeps the less there is to go around to others. Very short sighted economic model especially in a capitalist society.

Happy to see H&M have to spend so much on stroking their own ego though. At least they spend on something, coz it's sure not going to charity!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m glad the Gary Janetti conversation came up. I used to find his Instagram hilarious, maybe he didn’t have a big hand in the writing of the show or it just doesn’t work on television versus Instagram.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Has anyone seen the discussion online about how there is no Lilibet birth registered in the state of California around the dates they say she was born? However supposedly there was a Diana Mountbatten Windsor birth? I didn’t get too deep into it but could be interesting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> Nothing scared me more than meghans smirk after leaving the church on Harry’s wedding day (I say Harry’s because he was who the world tuned in for) … my God this woman is so dark and ugly inside that it shows when she’s not careful.
> I’m surprised the church didn’t burn down with her presence there.



My scary wedding moment was when her face slipped MID-CEREMONY, in front of all the cameras (she wanted to overdo the annoying handholding and he wouldn't comply).

At this point I'd be only semi-surprised if it was leaked she is only 50 % human, or pictures of her sporting horns or black wings in her backyard showed up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I'm not a math genius but $1B = 1000 x $1M.
> 
> So many flash the B-signage after 100 x $1M. Still a crazy amount that would hard for a 'normal' person to spend in one lifetime (unless they visit TPF for ideas  ) but still, all that money and they still can't count(?)
> 
> All very unwoke. Money is a finite resource, and the more one person/family has and keeps the less there is to go around to others. Very short sighted economic model especially in a capitalist society.
> 
> Happy to see H&M have to spend so much on stroking their own ego though. At least they spend on something, coz it's sure not going to charity!



Agree, at this point, they aren’t “rich” and have a long way to go to reach the billionaire club. 





__





						The Difference Between a Millionaire and Billionaire | Kahler Financial
					

Fee-only financial planner Rick Kahler: Equating "fair share" for millionaires and billionaires is not a fair shake; one billion is one thousand million




					kahlerfinancial.com
				



_What’s the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire?
Three zeroes and a comma.

The point here is that in today’s world, a millionaire, especially one who is retired, isn’t “rich.” Accumulating a net worth of $1 million dollars by age 65 is a completely reasonable and achievable goal for anyone wanting a comfortable and secure retirement.

Lumping “millionaires and billionaires” together might roll off the tongue with a rhythm that makes a nice sound bite. That doesn’t mean it makes sense. For anyone willing to do the math, the comparison is ludicrous. There’s a world of difference in earnings, wealth, and potential lifestyle in those extra three zeroes._

Compared to W&K, H&M will always be a step behind -








						Prince Harry Revealed He Was Financially Cut Off from the Royal Family
					

Here's how the Sussexes and Cambridges are making their money.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lanasyogamama said:


> Has anyone seen the discussion online about how there is no Lilibet birth registered in the state of California around the dates they say she was born? However supposedly there was a Diana Mountbatten Windsor birth? I didn’t get too deep into it but could be interesting.


I’m disappointed because I truly believed she was stupid enough to give her child that stupid name, but I’m not surprised that “Lilibet” was a stupid attempt at kissing granny’s old ass for some of that inheritance since Meghan and her veneers and botched nose are waiting for her to kick the bucket… little does she know that the queen outlives every one … an ok just kidding, lol.

I hope Archie and Diana grow up to be decent people and get to grow up with Kate, William and their sweet cousins.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Watching Lady CC's newest...she says there's a lot going on behind the scenes she can't share just yet, but that we better believe the palace taking their sweet time to add Lilibet (or Diana or whatever that poor child's name really is) to the line of succession was not at all an accident, owed to vacation time or else. She says it was a suble message to the terrible two, and it royally p*ssed off Raptor haha.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe I’m too conspiracy minded, but I still kind of think they are being financed by a stronger political power that is invested in eliminating the monarchy, for whatever reason.  That would be the only explanation for them not going bankrupt in the near future.  We will have to wait and see.


----------



## Chanbal

Disgusting!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Disgusting!
> View attachment 5151046



Yay! Glad to know the hypocrisy is being loudly noted. (about time).


----------



## Chanbal

I'm speechless...


----------



## Katel

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s a lovely shade of blue. Is it the golden jubilee?



Queen’s Golden 2002, Regina.

(I loved that scarf entirely except for the lovely shade of green, which I couldn’t wear, sadly ... I kept a purple one and a blue.)


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> On another note, look at how different Meghan looks in this old photo. Still the same evil beady eyes, but everything else… and she’s so “white passing” here, looks almost like Demi Moore.


when has she ever really looked like a POC?  when she was a child with her natural hair?


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless...
> View attachment 5151048


National Enquirer and a lot of other media outlets are just putting out sensationalised headlines for clicks etc. They are giving H&M way too much credibility. Seriously, they are mostly irrelevant as far as British public is concerned. They don't even live here! By the time his book comes out, he will be even more irrelevant. Very few people would be reading his book, let alone believing anything it it. The BRF will prevail and he and his wife will not change that.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m a bit slow on the uptake…..so there is now a tv show starring Orlando Bloom as Harry, where he makes fun of Prince George?!?!?!?

OVER THE LINE.  TOO FAR.

Poor George!!!  If I were W&K I would be breathing fire.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s ok with me if they get a divorce tomorrow, this ‘show wedding’ has raised the bar for the wealthy weddings. About time, too. No more Messica beach weddings with stringy hair, string-y bikinis, and dodgy drunks.
> 
> Post pandemic, it’s about
> -stunning venues with gorgeous floral sculpture,
> -several -at least 5 [unless Granny’s well-preserved gown is one of them] exquisite, works-of-art gowns,
> -jewels beyond compare,
> -professional make-up with the subtle touch because each of those ladies had flawless skin
> -perfectly crafted and presented delectables, etc.
> 
> Yep, a new era of elegance is upon us.  Thank you, Kitty, thank you.
> 
> ETA: it was such a brilliant idea IMO - all bridesmaids and guests wear the same designer, not the same dress. Clever, kudos to Italy.
> *ETA2 - in 2021, how cute is the name Kitty. The Earl and his wife did a good thing there.*


You had me until the last line.  Kitty (besides the obvious similar expression for female genitalia) reminds me of (for those of you old enough to remember the Brady Bunch) Kitty Carryall, one of the most annoying episodes of all time


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had to look twice, too. TBH I haven't found her very attractive for a while, her supermodel days are long gone.


Without the makeup plastered on, Chrissy isn’t anything special.  Plus, I think the ugliness inside that’s obviously been there for years, has boiled to the surface.


----------



## 1LV

chicinthecity777 said:


> National Enquirer and a lot of other media outlets are just putting out sensationalised headlines for clicks etc. They are giving H&M way too much credibility. Seriously, they are mostly irrelevant as far as British public is concerned. They don't even live here! By the time his book comes out, he will be even more irrelevant. Very few people would be reading his book, let alone believing anything it it. The BRF will prevail and he and his wife will not change that.


Totally agree with you.  They don’t have and will never have enough power to topple a monarchy.  Imbeciles.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I’m a bit slow on the uptake…..so there is now a tv show starring Orlando Bloom as Harry, where he makes fun of Prince George?!?!?!?
> 
> OVER THE LINE.  TOO FAR.
> 
> Poor George!!!  If I were W&K I would be breathing fire.


I just watched the HBO trailer.....pretty much makes fun of all the royals, including Harry.  I doubt I'd watch and wonder how many Americans will .....unless it's really entertaining


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This marriage really helped her out, hu? He went in with 40 millions, she with 3, but now she owns half of the complete net worth?


She was already working with PR agencies, so I doubt that she had $3M. However, he went with a lot more than $40M imo; his link to the BRF seems to be providing many millions. Are we forgetting the several millions in jewelry? Haute couture...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> She was already working with PR agencies, so I doubt that she had $3M. However, he went with a lot more than $40M imo; his link to the BRF seems to be providing many millions. Are we forgetting the several millions in jewelry? Haute couture...



Before MM, he didn’t really need to work for it. He had the free housing, free food, free security, free cars, plenty of access to real wealth and its perks.  When the free life ended,  understandably it must have been a huge shock to realize how much things cost. Now, with the kiddies, it will really set in. Doubt he will ever admit it, on some level, he must miss his old lifestyle. Now, he is reduced to hanging out with Hwood actors who have had to work for their money. Ewww, the horrors.

ETA: Free to him. We know who really funded that lifestyle.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, at this point, they aren’t “rich” and have a long way to go to reach the billionaire club.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Difference Between a Millionaire and Billionaire | Kahler Financial
> 
> 
> Fee-only financial planner Rick Kahler: Equating "fair share" for millionaires and billionaires is not a fair shake; one billion is one thousand million
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kahlerfinancial.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _What’s the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire?
> Three zeroes and a comma.
> 
> The point here is that in today’s world, a millionaire, especially one who is retired, isn’t “rich.” Accumulating a net worth of $1 million dollars by age 65 is a completely reasonable and achievable goal for anyone wanting a comfortable and secure retirement.
> 
> Lumping “millionaires and billionaires” together might roll off the tongue with a rhythm that makes a nice sound bite. That doesn’t mean it makes sense. For anyone willing to do the math, the comparison is ludicrous. There’s a world of difference in earnings, wealth, and potential lifestyle in those extra three zeroes._
> 
> Compared to W&K, H&M will always be a step behind -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Revealed He Was Financially Cut Off from the Royal Family
> 
> 
> Here's how the Sussexes and Cambridges are making their money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


The article claims that Kate is independently wealthy, and was so before her marriage. Don't pro-Methane articles always claim that she was the only person who was already wealthy before marrying into the BRF? Presumably to head off any implications of her gold-digging.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

It will be interesting to see how Janetti, and the show biz industry in general, rationalize parodying a real 8-year-old. Aren't they supposed to be on the anti-bullying bandwagon?  Wouldn't this qualify as being bullying more than a Twitter post like Teigen's? More people will see it.

It is also tasteless under the circumstances. There are apparently scenes depicting Philip as a doddering old man which were left in. The cartoon was originally supposed to be released in the spring but was delayed a few months when Philip died.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It will be interesting to see how Janetti, and the show biz industry in general, rationalize parodying a real 8-year-old. Aren't they supposed to be on the anti-bullying bandwagon?  Wouldn't this qualify as being bullying more than a Twitter post like Teigen's? More people will see it.
> 
> It is also tasteless under the circumstances. There are apparently scenes depicting Philip as a doddering old man which were left in. The cartoon was originally supposed to be released in the spring but was delayed a few months when Philip died.


hopefully there will be little interest and this will be a lesson to others thinking Americans want to watch spoofs of the RF


----------



## Vintage Leather

Chanbal said:


> She was already working with PR agencies, so I doubt that she had $3M. However, he went with a lot more than $40M imo; his link to the BRF seems to be providing many millions. Are we forgetting the several millions in jewelry? Haute couture...



From my research, he had about 30 mil gbp as of last year - BUT, he also had a free house, and a 4.3 mil allowance from his daddy that covered all his expenses. Security came with the house, and grandma paid for the PR team. 

That 50 mil assumes that Spotify, Netflix and Penguin RandomHouse have all paid them, the house is an asset, and I really don’t think it’s counting average capital outlays. 

Around the clock security in SoCal for a family of 4 is a little over 4 mil usd (3mil gbp) per year.  Gardening, house maintenance, nannies and secretaries are 3mil USD per year. SunshineSucks can be as much as 1mil USD.  

Jewelry and clothing are seldom counted in net worth because they aren’t easily fungible. 

Business Insider calculated their current net worth as being closer to 10mil, with considerable “loans against securities” (aka, not pulling from the trust but taking a loan against the assets)


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The article claims that Kate is independently wealthy, and was so before her marriage. Don't pro-Methane articles always claim that she was the only person who was already wealthy before marrying into the BRF? Presumably to head off any implications of her gold-digging.



Coming from non-wealthy families, Kate’s parents built a successful business, provided the upper crust life for their kids and themselves - a very future oriented outlook. It seems MM’s family took a different path - one that was a very ‘right now’ immediate gratification outlook.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> hopefully there will be little interest and this will be a lesson to others thinking Americans want to watch spoofs of the RF



The biggest problem is the show isn't very funny. I haven't read a single good review of it. A couple of the reviews implied there is a second season in the works, not sure whether that is true or not.


----------



## 1LV

Can’t wait to see what fun Gary Janetti pokes at Archie!  (You couldn’t pay him enough.)


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The biggest problem is the show isn't very funny. I haven't read a single good review of it. A couple of the reviews implied there is a second season in the works, not sure whether that is true or not.


Considering how woke and concerned the world is at this moment about mental health and criticism of people in general, one would think that a mean show about a child would get the cancel  culture reaction.


----------



## bag-mania

I'll be surprised if the US mainstream media will pick this up, but at least someone is pointing out celebrity hypocrisy.

*Sophie Turner is being called a 'hypocrite' for playing Princess Charlotte in a new cartoon series parodying the British royal family*

Sophie Turner is being called out by some fans for her latest role.

Turner voices 6-year-old Princess Charlotte in the new animated series "The Prince," which parodies the royal family and portrays some of them in a negative light.

The HBO Max cartoon makes fun of several royal family members, including 8-year-old Prince George and his parents Prince William, who is voiced by Turner's former "Game of Thrones" costar Iwan Rheon, and Kate Middleton, who is voiced by Lucy Punch.






England's royals are parodied in HBO Max's "The Prince." HBO MaxWhen Turner shared a poster of the series on Instagram, hundreds commented criticizing her decision to take part in it.

Many pointed out that the former "Game of Thrones" actress has asked for privacy for her own child, but is parodying the young Princess Charlotte in the new show, calling this decision hypocritical.

E! News reported in May that Turner posted a since-deleted video to her Instagram slamming the paparazzi who took photos of her then-10-month-old daughter Willa.

"I just want to say that the reason that I am not posting pictures of my daughter and making sure that we can avoid paparazzi at all costs is because I explicitly do not want those photos out there," Turner said, according to E! News. In the video, she also called it "f--king creepy" that "grown old men" are taking pictures of her baby, who "did not ask for this life."

"I'm sickened, I'm disgusted, and I'm respectfully asking everyone to stop following us around and stop trying to take pictures of our daughter and especially printing them," she said.

Several commenters on Turner's Instagram post about "The Prince" asked how she would feel if her own daughter was being "mocked" like Princess Charlotte is in the animated show.

The criticism also spread beyond the comments section of Turner's post. On Twitter, fans called both Turner and Orlando Bloom, who voices Prince Harry in the show, hypocrites.

One person tweeted: "Sophie Turner wants privacy for her own child but thinks it's ok to be part of something that makes fun of and spreads lies about other children of famous people."




The show has been met with severe backlash and a huge amount of negative press.

Insider reached out to Turner's representatives for comment but didn't immediately hear back.









						Sophie Turner is being called a 'hypocrite' for playing Princess Charlotte in a new cartoon series parodying the British royal family
					

Fans have pointed out that Sophie Turner wants privacy for her own child, but is parodying Princess Charlotte in "The Prince."




					www.insider.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, before the OW J-Law face, MM had a beautiful face. No idea what she looks like now.  Hazz always has suffered from the rosacea which the alcohol did not help.  The problem he faces is now that the blush of youth has faded, what’s left is his personality.  Without some filters, anger is definitely not a pretty sight.


She was a normal looking girl before surgeries. The surgeries were helpful, but she should have stopped them a while ago. Hazz is also a normal looking man, not what I would call a handsome man. Both of them lack genuine kindness, which makes them even more unattractive imo.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The biggest problem is the show isn't very funny. I haven't read a single good review of it. A couple of the reviews implied there is a second season in the works, not sure whether that is true or not.


today is the first I've heard of it


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> National Enquirer and a lot of other media outlets are just putting out sensationalised headlines for clicks etc. They are giving H&M way too much credibility. Seriously, they are mostly irrelevant as far as British public is concerned. They don't even live here! By the time his book comes out, he will be even more irrelevant. Very few people would be reading his book, let alone believing anything it it. The BRF will prevail and he and his wife will not change that.


I fully agree with you about the sensationalism from the NE and other media outlets, but it shouldn't perhaps be totally ignored after the many falsehoods released during OW's interview.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> today is the first I've heard of it


I have the ability to watch, but I don’t think I will. The entire concept is so distasteful. Janetti’s sense of humor may make him amusing in some ways, but his attitude towards children is a fail. His view of what is acceptable is twisted and someone with common sense should have nipped this series in the bud.


----------



## gracekelly

Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex?  What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite. Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.

Daily  Mail

*Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'*

*Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book*
*She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press*
*She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives' *
*Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day' *
*Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895*
*She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time' *
*Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a Bridgerton-style fictional series *


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Janetti - as @Chanbal said, this show is a rehash of Stewie from Family Guy. Janetti simply phoned it in. Call me old school, I never thought little kids cussing or showing bad manners or mouthing off to adults is funny. It is a cheap trick to cover up a lack of creativity. I felt so strongly about this issue that I put a #CancelJanetti on my Twitter, insta, etc.  There’s a line, HBOMax crossed it.  

RE: Sarah - must be desperate for $$$ - her face lifts aren’t cheap. Perhaps Andrew’s legal expenses are piling up.


----------



## luckiegirl

Out of curiosity, I just watched the first episode. Super lame.  I know comedy is subjective, but I'd be surprised if anyone found it funny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex?  What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite. Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.
> 
> Daily  Mail
> 
> *Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'*
> 
> *Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book*
> *She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press*
> *She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives' *
> *Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day' *
> *Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895*
> *She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time' *
> *Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a Bridgerton-style fictional series *


Maybe Sunshine Sucks is paying her a fee to "find her voice" and support their clients.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Janetti - as @Chanbal said, this show is a rehash of Stewie from Family Guy. Janetti simply phoned it in. Call me old school, I never thought little kids cussing or showing bad manners or mouthing off to adults is funny. It is a cheap trick to cover up a lack of creativity. I felt so strongly about this issue that I put a #CancelJanetti on my Twitter, insta, etc.  There’s a line, HBOMax crossed it.
> 
> RE: Sarah - must be desperate for $$$ - her face lifts aren’t cheap. Perhaps Andrew’s legal expenses are piling up.


My MIL taught my toddler to curse. I was so upset. She muttered that she thought it was cute. I've never really forgiven her for her imbecility (even after 24 years!).


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have the ability to watch, but I don’t think I will. The entire concept is so distasteful. Janetti’s sense of humor may make him amusing in some ways, but his attitude towards children is a fail. His view of what is acceptable is twisted and someone with common sense should have nipped this series in the bud.


I have HBO too and I'm really not interested in watching that show...I'm not really into animated stuff anyway


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex?  What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite. Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.
> 
> Daily  Mail
> 
> *Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'*
> 
> *Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book*
> *She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press*
> *She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives' *
> *Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day' *
> *Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895*
> *She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time' *
> *Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a Bridgerton-style fictional series *


she's probably trying to jump onto their bandwagon for the publicity


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> today is the first I've heard of it



In this wacky world we live in the controversy will likely get more people streaming it than it would have had otherwise.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Janetti - as @Chanbal said, this show is a rehash of Stewie from Family Guy. Janetti simply phoned it in. Call me old school, I never thought little kids cussing or showing bad manners or mouthing off to adults is funny. It is a cheap trick to cover up a lack of creativity. I felt so strongly about this issue that I put a #CancelJanetti on my Twitter, insta, etc.  There’s a line, HBOMax crossed it.
> 
> RE: Sarah - must be desperate for $$$ - her face lifts aren’t cheap. Perhaps Andrew’s legal expenses are piling up.


She p*sses away money as soon as she earns it.  She has had many ventures that brought in $$ over the years and a responsible person would have a nest egg.  She has spent on endless holidays and taught her daughters to do the same.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she's probably trying to jump onto their bandwagon for the publicity


That too.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> I fully agree with you about the sensationalism from the NE and other media outlets, but it shouldn't perhaps be totally ignored after the many falsehoods released during OW's interview.


Erhhh... they are tabloids. Enough said! No serious publication has published anything like this. Maybe it's just me, I just read tabloids as tabloids.


----------



## bag-mania

Meh, the Daily Mail grossly exaggerated Fergie's "support." If you watch the segment in question, it's the interviewer who inserts Harry and Meghan in and Fergie gives a diplomatic reply saying she wishes them the best and moves on. She wasn't trying to connect herself with H&M and she didn't bring it up. Fergie was only there to plug her new book but she has to deal with the American press' obsession with Meghan.









						Sarah Ferguson talks about new book, ‘Her Heart for a Compass’
					

Ferguson’s first novel is based on the unconventional and determined Lady Margaret, her distant relative, and is set in the Victorian Era.




					www.goodmorningamerica.com


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> Just because we pointed out that Kitty has her own millions and we're just talking about the ingrates running low on funds, of course this headline had to be dropped




A lousy 50 million for Meh? Chicken feed. She has her sights set on billions. She's turned being a victim into a business.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> In this wacky world we live in the controversy will likely get more people streaming it than it would have had otherwise.


well, maybe some people will tune in once and then not return.....not my thing


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, maybe some people will tune in once and then not return.....not my thing



I actually enjoy cartoon satire, and it's not my thing either!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> when has she ever really looked like a POC?  when she was a child with her natural hair?


I’m mixed as well as my father so when I first saw her, I could sense she was biracial but I was surprised she was half black and not 1/4… after all her surgeries she resembles her white half sister Samantha (whom she admired so much growing up).

It disgusts me how she picks a time to “be black” when it suits her.


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’m mixed as well as my father so when I first saw her, I could sense she was biracial but I was surprised she was half black and not 1/4… after all her surgeries she resembles her white half sister Samantha (whom she admired so much growing up).
> 
> It disgusts me how she picks a time to “be black” when it suits her.


yes, thank you......it seems she didn't care to appear to "be black" until very recently when she found she could use it to her benefit


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I actually enjoy cartoon satire, and it's not my thing either!


guess for some reason I'm not into animated shows....some tv critic rated The Simpsons as the number one show of all time.  I never watched.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> guess for some reason I'm not into animated shows....some tv critic rated The Simpsons as the number one show of all time.  I never watched.



The first ten years of The Simpsons was hilarious with great writing. Unfortunately, it has been on the air for 30 years.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Ah yes straight out of the Mr Burns school of trying to convince people to trust you. As we were just discussing it worked with M…
> View attachment 5150448



Speaking of The Simpsons, did anyone else look at this image and think "You look just like Rory Calhoun."

I'll show myself out if I am the only nerd here.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex? * What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite.* Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.
> 
> Daily  Mail
> 
> *Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'*
> 
> *Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book*
> *She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press*
> *She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives' *
> *Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day' *
> *Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895*
> *She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time' *
> *Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a intelligence fictional series *


I wouldn't think that she has much to gain, but Fergie's level of intelligence is comparable to Hazz's imo. She probably wants to be on the couple of Montecito's good side, both Randy Andy and Fergie have plenty of material for a couple of books. I read in one of the gossip sites months ago that there is a strong link between Randy Andy and MA, so they are probably trying to protect themselves.


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> Erhhh... they are tabloids. Enough said! No serious publication has published anything like this. Maybe it's just me, I just read tabloids as tabloids.


I never paid any attention to tabloids before the Montecito Couple moved to LA. However, this couple's adventures or ventures are all tabloid material/quality imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Murky Meg has been a great source of info about the couple of Montecito. I wish her a fast recovery in case she is also a member here (I don't have a tweeter account).


----------



## amante

1. tbh, Prince George wasn't an (main) object of ridicule in the 2 minute preview I watched of HBO's The Prince. Just a sassy kid ala Stewie from Family Guy . It's strange, a touch uncomfortable but supremely boring so I don't think the show is that harmful since the show basically irrelevant. Sophie Turner and Orlando Bloom were nonetheless hypocrites for taking on the projects though. Kate takes a lot of pains to protect her children (like very carefully releasing photos of them).

2. Re: conspiracy theory about H&M backed by anti-monarchists
Such a good conspiracy theory! I'd watch a show/read a novel about that. I think it has legs. It's not so much outright toppling of the monarchy but in the same way as Russian disinformation works the goal is to sow confusion and doubt and mistrust of government and civic institutions. If I were Black British or any other non-white minority British and only started paying attention to the BRF because of H&M, I'd side with MM be pretty pissed at the monarchy.

3. Re: Sunshine Sachs $1M for 2 weekly articles
That can't be right, too expensive. Even political consultants during election campaigns aren't paid that much. ***** paid his PRESIDENTIAL campaign manager $20k/month. That job is 80+ hours a week on the road.

4. Fergie is publicity-hungry trash. She'll say whatever makes her look good (inasmuch as she can look good) and gets her attention. I'm sure she's a good mom and a fun friend, but she's self-centered and money-grabbing. She's more known in the States (Weight watchers), so my guess is that she senses there's more money to be made by supporting H&M.
Remember when she was caught with a hidden camera and fake sheik selling access to Andrew? And late for her daughter's wedding!!! (I wonder what happened? Passed out drunk? Into harder stuff? Long night entertaining $omeone $pecial? Who knows...)

5. To give MM the benefit of doubt, sometimes we're all just following the crowd trying to get by. I can imagine that it was hard to say biracial because then people would have said she was playing down being fully black. Or sometimes you don't have the words to express inchoate thoughts. Or sometimes you're trying to fit in and be cool and get your career going and racial theory wasn't mainstream cool until recently.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Murky Meg has been a great source of info about the couple of Montecito. I wish her a fast recovery in case she is also a member here (I don't have a tweeter account).
> 
> View attachment 5151476


Oh that’s sad.  And I hope the Sugars aren’t so low as to be glad for her pain.


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> 1. tbh, Prince George wasn't an (main) object of ridicule in the 2 minute preview I watched of HBO's The Prince. Just a sassy kid ala Stewie from Family Guy . It's strange, a touch uncomfortable but supremely boring so I don't think the show is that harmful since the show basically irrelevant. Sophie Turner and Orlando Bloom were nonetheless hypocrites for taking on the projects though. Kate takes a lot of pains to protect her children (like very carefully releasing photos of them).
> 
> 2. Re: conspiracy theory about H&M backed by anti-monarchists
> Such a good conspiracy theory! I'd watch a show/read a novel about that. I think it has legs. It's not so much outright toppling of the monarchy but in the same way as Russian disinformation works the goal is to sow confusion and doubt and mistrust of government and civic institutions. If I were Black British or any other non-white minority British and only started paying attention to the BRF because of H&M, I'd side with MM be pretty pissed at the monarchy.
> 
> 3. Re: Sunshine Sachs $1M for 2 weekly articles
> That can't be right, too expensive. Even political consultants during election campaigns aren't paid that much. ***** paid his PRESIDENTIAL campaign manager $20k/month. That job is 80+ hours a week on the road.
> 
> 4. Fergie is publicity-hungry trash. She'll say whatever makes her look good (inasmuch as she can look good) and gets her attention. I'm sure she's a good mom and a fun friend, but she's self-centered and money-grabbing. She's more known in the States (Weight watchers), so my guess is that she senses there's more money to be made by supporting H&M.
> Remember when she was caught with a hidden camera and fake sheik selling access to Andrew? And late for her daughter's wedding!!! (I wonder what happened? Passed out drunk? Into harder stuff? Long night entertaining $omeone $pecial? Who knows...)
> 
> 5. To give MM the benefit of doubt, sometimes we're all just following the crowd trying to get by. I can imagine that it was hard to say biracial because then people would have said she was playing down being fully black. Or sometimes you don't have the words to express inchoate thoughts. Or sometimes you're trying to fit in and be cool and get your career going and racial theory wasn't mainstream cool until recently.



1. IMO The Brits have their own Royal comedies - since they live with and understand the Royal world, it is better for them to handle that humor.  Janetti, Bloom and the rest are Hwood elitist hypocrites of the worst kind. Pre-pandemic they gave us very few high quality programs. Post-pandemic it looks like they are lowering the quality even more. We the people must demand better. We get what we settle for. 

2. Not into conspiracies.  

3. No idea who is getting paid what. With H&M, there is no way to know. Somehow they manage to keep that info private, very private.
Hmmmmm. 

4. Fergie -  tries so hard, always missing the mark.  

5. This article [written by MM] has been linked and posted before. It is from 2016 - before the Hazz. It is well worth reading to understand MM. IMO








						Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
					

'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman




					www.elle.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Murky Meg has been a great source of info about the couple of Montecito. I wish her a fast recovery in case she is also a member here (I don't have a tweeter account).



So sorry to hear that she is not recovering _and_ _that she feels she let us down_. Noooo. She absolutely has *not* let us down.  
Wishing her a speedy recovery.


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty is not going to like this article.   No worries, it's one more case of plagiarism.  Hazz wouldn't be able to graduate from community college here, much less from Occidental College or Columbia. Though, Hazz's wife with her experience as a top paralegal is almost there... 

*From Windsor to the White House? Harry and Meghan have followed the Ob*m*s' careers as they share a publisher, all have Netflix deals and were interviewed by Oprah Winfrey - so could the former Royals have their eye on the presidency next?*









						From Windsor to the White House?
					

Meghan is a huge admirer of the former U.S. First Lady, secretly attending a talk Michelle gave in London in 2018.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: The illustration.


----------



## amante

@CarryOn2020 Thank you for the link to the Elle article. I've heard of the anecdotes of her life but never read the original essay. Well there you go. To whomever said that she started labeling herself biracial only recently when it benefited her, this article shows that she's been grappling with representing her race at least since 2015. 

(Somewhat unrelated, but I really hate her writing style. I tried reading The Tig back in the day but it's unreadable. This Elle essay suffers from the same problems: too emphatic about small details, too many trendy hip references that takes attention away from the main point. (Huh, interesting pattern!) The ironic thing about The Tig was that MM liked the eponymous wine because of its structure but the namesake was such a mishmash of random nothingburger articles.

I'd hardly say Fergie tries so hard. More like mooches off so hard.

I generally think keeping finances private is good. I don't want even my relatives to know how much I make and spend, so person-to-person I relate to H&M on that point. 

I'm really curious to see what's next for H&M especially income-wise. I thought The Bench was a smart move and could open up a new market and persona for H&M as parent-influencers. Maybe they can launch children's toys and be the next Melissa and Doug. They can start by selling mixed race family doll sets ala MM's childhood Heart Family dolls that she mentioned in her Elle essay. Next they could make a mommy doll that charges the daddy doll 15% manager's commission. (I totally believe Enty and CDAN.)


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty is not going to like this article.   No worries, it's one more case of plagiarism.  Hazz wouldn't be able to graduate from community college here, much less from Occidental College or Columbia. Though, Hazz's wife with her experience as a top paralegal is almost there...
> 
> *From Windsor to the White House? Harry and Meghan have followed the Ob*m*s' careers as they share a publisher, all have Netflix deals and were interviewed by Oprah Winfrey - so could the former Royals have their eye on the presidency next?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From Windsor to the White House?
> 
> 
> Meghan is a huge admirer of the former U.S. First Lady, secretly attending a talk Michelle gave in London in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The illustration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5151527



How can you represent a foreign government and be president? They’re a titled part of the BRF…


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> How can you represent a foreign government and be president? They’re a titled part of the BRF…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty is not going to like this article.   No worries, it's one more case of plagiarism.  Hazz wouldn't be able to graduate from community college here, much less from Occidental College or Columbia. Though, Hazz's wife with her experience as a top paralegal is almost there...
> 
> *From Windsor to the White House? Harry and Meghan have followed the Ob*m*s' careers as they share a publisher, all have Netflix deals and were interviewed by Oprah Winfrey - so could the former Royals have their eye on the presidency next?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From Windsor to the White House?
> 
> 
> Meghan is a huge admirer of the former U.S. First Lady, secretly attending a talk Michelle gave in London in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The illustration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5151527


you are right @Chanbal 
It pisses me off when these two get compared to the former president and his wife....I have no more words.....uugh


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> you are right @Chanbal
> It pisses me off when these two get compared to the former president and his wife....I have no more words.....uugh



This other article may addresses your post. 

*'Self-indulgent pretentious nonsense!' Harry and Meghan's latest projects suffer backlash*

_MailPlus' Palace Confidential host Jo Elvin said: "There are now reports in America that suggest that there will be further books from Meghan and Harry, on leadership, philanthropy, and wellness. What are their qualifications?"

Mr Pierce responded: "*Exactly! Who made them experts? What do they know about leadership? What sort of leadership?*

He added: *"It sounds like the usual self-indulgent pretentious nonsense."*_









						'Who made them experts?' Harry and Meghan's latest projects criticised
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's future projects have been criticised for "advising people" on wellness, philanthropy, and leadership "when they are not experts".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Sol Ryan said:


> How can you represent a foreign government and be president? They’re a titled part of the BRF…


Mere technicalities as far as HazMeg is concerned.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> you are right @Chanbal
> It pisses me off when these two get compared to the former president and his wife....I have no more words.....uugh


I don’t even understand how this was written and printed. Too ridiculous for words.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> you are right @Chanbal
> It pisses me off when these two get compared to the former president and his wife....I have no more words.....uugh



If we get pissed by it, it must send the O’s into a fury.  IMO the media is tacky for suggesting this.
That said, go ahead, let H&M run for office, any office is fine. The people will decide this one very quickly. Hell, no.


----------



## needlv

There is no way I would want to work for them…


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> There is no way I would want to work for them…



Doesn’t she look a bit like M?  A mini me?


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, at this point, they aren’t “rich” and have a long way to go to reach the billionaire club.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Difference Between a Millionaire and Billionaire | Kahler Financial
> 
> 
> Fee-only financial planner Rick Kahler: Equating "fair share" for millionaires and billionaires is not a fair shake; one billion is one thousand million
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kahlerfinancial.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _What’s the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire?
> Three zeroes and a comma.
> 
> The point here is that in today’s world, a millionaire, especially one who is retired, isn’t “rich.” Accumulating a net worth of $1 million dollars by age 65 is a completely reasonable and achievable goal for anyone wanting a comfortable and secure retirement.
> 
> Lumping “millionaires and billionaires” together might roll off the tongue with a rhythm that makes a nice sound bite. That doesn’t mean it makes sense. For anyone willing to do the math, the comparison is ludicrous. There’s a world of difference in earnings, wealth, and potential lifestyle in those extra three zeroes._
> 
> Compared to W&K, H&M will always be a step behind -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Revealed He Was Financially Cut Off from the Royal Family
> 
> 
> Here's how the Sussexes and Cambridges are making their money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Very true. Just from perusing the forums here, I can believe there are lots of millionaires on Purse Forum. Some are asset rich millionaires (still very good) and some liquidity and some are very comfortable normal people millionaires, working each day and "thriving."


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My scary wedding moment was when her face slipped MID-CEREMONY, in front of all the cameras (she wanted to overdo the annoying handholding and he wouldn't comply).
> 
> At this point I'd be only semi-surprised if it was leaked she is only 50 % human, or pictures of her sporting horns or black wings in her backyard showed up.


From the very beginning I sensed from her an evil presence. From my first post.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> There is no way I would want to work for them…



She will be releasing her "exit" shortly thereafter to pursue "other interests" once Moronic Meg gets on her nerve.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of The Simpsons, did anyone else look at this image and think "You look just like Rory Calhoun."
> 
> I'll show myself out if I am the only nerd here.


I quote the classic Simpsons all the time! It’s a perfectly cromulent show. I do also think about this when we’re talking about how the royals look vs how Americans look:


Yes I do feel like it’s become a joke even with the writers that the show has been running too long e.g. m
‘They’ll never stop the Simpsons, have no fears we’ve got stories for years.”
But I hate a lot of comedy & I still think the Simpsons is better than the majority of what gets produced.




Hermes Zen said:


> Doesn’t she look a bit like M?  A mini me?


Omid must be fuming after he just got done paying off his latest round of fillers that this girl just waltzes in.

Mini me maybe, or maybe they like to have an army of identical femme bots for protection.


All identical employees  must also all be willing to say ‘I’m Spartacus, sorry, I mean Meghan Markle ’ if the fraud squad ever appears.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I'm not a math genius but $1B = 1000 x $1M.
> 
> So many flash the B-signage after 100 x $1M. Still a crazy amount that would hard for a 'normal' person to spend in one lifetime (unless they visit TPF for ideas  ) but still, all that money and they still can't count(?)
> 
> All very unwoke. Money is a finite resource, and the more one person/family has and keeps the less there is to go around to others. Very short sighted economic model especially in a capitalist society.
> 
> Happy to see H&M have to spend so much on stroking their own ego though. At least they spend on something, coz it's sure not going to charity!



To do a more serious post, I am so disappointed this is where them leaving the royal family led to. I had great respect for the idea of wanting a normal life & having the character being willing to give up the trappings of great wealth for that.

Now, even if they’d just hauled out to the states for a bit & sold coffee & poo perfume & opened a slightly dubious charity - well it’d be tacky but not that different from any other vacuous celebrity.
The other great advantage would be because all of Hollywood does that it wouldn’t get that much media attention.

The problem for me is these two have some sort of martyr complex and are investing an enormous amount of money in ‘winning’ every argument & constantly pushing themselves forward at the expensive of others and of the truth.
Sad really.


xincinsin said:


> The article claims that Kate is independently wealthy, and was so before her marriage. Don't pro-Methane articles always claim that she was the only person who was already wealthy before marrying into the BRF? Presumably to head off any implications of her gold-digging.



Personally I hate this comparing their wads and their family money & trying to prove who was richer before because I hate the implication (& I think it is a widely believed one in British society) that a poor girl or a girl from a unstable family background poses a threat to the wealthy lover’s assets in a way a girl closer to his own bank balance doesn’t.

Golddiggers can have any bank balance because greed isn’t proportional. If M’s existence doesn’t show that certain little tyrants who get everything handed to them on a plate will just order bigger plates… I don’t know what does.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

gracekelly said:


> Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex?  What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite. Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.
> 
> Daily  Mail
> 
> *Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'*
> 
> *Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book*
> *She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press*
> *She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives' *
> *Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day' *
> *Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895*
> *She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time' *
> *Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a Bridgerton-style fictional series *



Didn’t Fergie and Diana have a falling out a few years before Diana’s death? Fergie comes off as tone deaf… and it’s strange that she sides with her nephew whose wife tried to take the attention of guests at her daughter’s wedding by telling every one she was pregnant.

Like a previous poster said, Fergie is not stupid. Maybe she’s doing this to gain something.

And I hope that’s the case.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Annawakes said:


> Maybe I’m too conspiracy minded, but I still kind of think they are being financed by a stronger political power that is invested in eliminating the monarchy, for whatever reason.  That would be the only explanation for them not going bankrupt in the near future.  We will have to wait and see.





gracekelly said:


> Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex?  What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite. Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.
> 
> Daily  Mail
> 
> Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'
> 
> Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book
> She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press
> She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives'
> Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day'
> Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895
> She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time'
> Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a Bridgerton-style fictional series


As to fergie-       ghastly. Just ghastly. The march of Merch is upon us. This woman needs to be in the yard with Ghislaine if you ask me.

As to the conspiracy theory/ resurgence of the other unloveable ginger former royal…..

I don’t think there’s an outside force causing all this. I think the black sheep are being abetted the royal family as a whole  & that the royals are contributing to their own fall from grace with their own desire for publicity & to be ‘modern.’

I’ve been criticised for being harsh about them showing their emotions publicly but I completely stand by it. Selling your pain and suffering is diminishing returns as rather than having stoicism & mystery & representing the traditional British culture you just join the swampy soup of super-rich celebs with a sob story sold by instalment.

It is so clear both H & the royals desire the positive PR Diana got & they are copying everything she ever did.
I think they are utterly obsessed with PR. To the extent that they ran past some very obvious red flags to have the news of ‘making history with a biracial bride’ & ended up bringing a host of trouble on themselves. 

 Not to mention selling Diana’s name. Will was as much a hand in that ugly statue as H and he was the one publicising that his kids write cards to a granny they never met. To me it is just so tacky & all they are doing is making themselves look hopeless and uninteresting without their late MVP.

We have to bear in mind that this family inarguably has an immense degree of control over their image and the press despite their protestations they keep out of it. 
Given all this, I fear that with the emergence of _The crown _and _The prince_ (a title which defames the good name of Machiavelli) not to mention the royal instagrams and the fact that every day seems to be another royal book release indicates that the whole lot of them are going full pedal to the metal for the era of royals as celebs.


----------



## papertiger

amante said:


> 1. tbh, Prince George wasn't an (main) object of ridicule in the 2 minute preview I watched of HBO's The Prince. Just a sassy kid ala Stewie from Family Guy . It's strange, a touch uncomfortable but supremely boring so I don't think the show is that harmful since the show basically irrelevant. Sophie Turner and Orlando Bloom were nonetheless hypocrites for taking on the projects though. Kate takes a lot of pains to protect her children (like very carefully releasing photos of them).
> 
> 2. Re: conspiracy theory about H&M backed by anti-monarchists
> Such a good conspiracy theory! I'd watch a show/read a novel about that. I think it has legs. It's not so much outright toppling of the monarchy but in the same way as Russian disinformation works the goal is to sow confusion and doubt and mistrust of government and civic institutions. If I were Black British or any other non-white minority British and only started paying attention to the BRF because of H&M, I'd side with MM be pretty pissed at the monarchy.
> 
> 3. Re: Sunshine Sachs $1M for 2 weekly articles
> That can't be right, too expensive. Even political consultants during election campaigns aren't paid that much. ***** paid his PRESIDENTIAL campaign manager $20k/month. That job is 80+ hours a week on the road.
> 
> 4. Fergie is publicity-hungry trash. She'll say whatever makes her look good (inasmuch as she can look good) and gets her attention. I'm sure she's a good mom and a fun friend, but she's self-centered and money-grabbing. She's more known in the States (Weight watchers), so my guess is that she senses there's more money to be made by supporting H&M.
> Remember when she was caught with a hidden camera and fake sheik selling access to Andrew? And late for her daughter's wedding!!! (I wonder what happened? Passed out drunk? Into harder stuff? Long night entertaining $omeone $pecial? Who knows...)
> 
> 5. To give MM the benefit of doubt, sometimes we're all just following the crowd trying to get by. I can imagine that it was hard to say biracial because then people would have said she was playing down being fully black. Or sometimes you don't have the words to express inchoate thoughts. Or sometimes you're trying to fit in and be cool and get your career going and racial theory wasn't mainstream cool until recently.



I agree with you on MM maybe not wanting to put down black/biracial/POC on a form because of the reasons given. People who can pass get hate from all sides whatever they do or say. However, it's also possible she used 'passing' to her advantage, knowingly when it suited her, and many POC are sensitive to that because not only is it a denial of self, family and ancestors, but a form of cooperative racism (statement of privilege that is gone along with) it also flies in the face of her seemingly found wokeness of professing  her WOC-ness at_ every_ opportunity now she's officially a Duchess (and in real terms untouchable - whatever the noise) this is why people (of all kinds) are wary of her recent protestations. Because of her past choices, she appears as though she does whatever suits. In all fairness, that's what most public figures do.

Regards 2: I don't know if you're from/live/work the UK or US, but most British Black-British/POC support the monarchy, especially the CoE church-going community, family tends to be very important, even if the reality (of family) doesn't live up to the ideal (and it certainly doesn't in the BRF ATM). My friends were first pleased (as most in the UK) for H&M but now are almost embarrassed by her, think she's a "flash American princess" (APOLOGIES) and not _their _Princess. I've actually noticed that more of my friends who are not from/live in the UK (whatever heritage) think she's been hard done by. As I've said before some  friends are also PO and enraged for H, not for defending his WOC wife, but for what they see as actively exploiting and co-opting M's blackness for his own profit/agenda.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> 1. IMO The Brits have their own Royal comedies - since they live with and understand the Royal world, it is better for them to handle that humor.  Janetti, Bloom and the rest are Hwood elitist hypocrites of the worst kind. Pre-pandemic they gave us very few high quality programs. Post-pandemic it looks like they are lowering the quality even more. We the people must demand better. We get what we settle for.
> 
> 2. Not into conspiracies.
> 
> 3. No idea who is getting paid what. With H&M, there is no way to know. Somehow they manage to keep that info private, very private.
> Hmmmmm.
> 
> 4. Fergie -  tries so hard, always missing the mark.
> 
> 5. This article [written by MM] has been linked and posted before. It is from 2016 - before the Hazz. It is well worth reading to understand MM. IMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



That Elle interview is very good, obviously given _before_ she a) hated/ghosted her family b) disguised meaning in word-salads.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> 1. IMO The Brits have their own Royal comedies - since they live with and understand the Royal world, it is better for them to handle that humor.  Janetti, Bloom and the rest are Hwood elitist hypocrites of the worst kind. Pre-pandemic they gave us very few high quality programs. Post-pandemic it looks like they are lowering the quality even more. We the people must demand better. We get what we settle for.
> 
> 2. Not into conspiracies.
> 
> 3. No idea who is getting paid what. With H&M, there is no way to know. Somehow they manage to keep that info private, very private.
> Hmmmmm.
> 
> 4. Fergie -  tries so hard, always missing the mark.
> 
> 5. This article [written by MM] has been linked and posted before. It is from 2016 - before the Hazz. It is well worth reading to understand MM. IMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


I have not been following the saga of the new cartoon show since I am obnoxed by using G and C
so, I may have missed something, this is a US or U.K. produced show ? Just curious 

agree the U.K. sense of humor is different , but, real kids , noooooooooo, please


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty is not going to like this article.   No worries, it's one more case of plagiarism.  Hazz wouldn't be able to graduate from community college here, much less from Occidental College or Columbia. Though, Hazz's wife with her experience as a top paralegal is almost there...
> 
> *From Windsor to the White House? Harry and Meghan have followed the Ob*m*s' careers as they share a publisher, all have Netflix deals and were interviewed by Oprah Winfrey - so could the former Royals have their eye on the presidency next?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From Windsor to the White House?
> 
> 
> Meghan is a huge admirer of the former U.S. First Lady, secretly attending a talk Michelle gave in London in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The illustration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5151527


This is so absurd it’s laughable. There is no meaningful comparison between these two couples.

in reality the O’s have been mostly quiet about the Toxic Twosome. Their oldest daughter is in a relationship with a British young man and, through Rory,  may have gained a more realistic view of MM and H than what their PR team pumps out.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we get pissed by it, it must send the O’s into a fury.  IMO the media is tacky for suggesting this.
> That said, go ahead, let H&M run for office, any office is fine. The people will decide this one very quickly. Hell, no.





csshopper said:


> This is so absurd it’s laughable. There is no meaningful comparison between these two couples.
> 
> in reality the O’s have been mostly quiet about the Toxic Twosome. Their oldest daughter is in a relationship with a British young man and, through Rory,  may have gained a more realistic view of MM and H than what their PR team pumps out.



My 2 cents:
I don't think the Ob*m*s care. They were fast in assessing the situation and were smart in keeping a distance. The comparison is so ridiculous, that they may find it amusing at this point.

However, the couple of Montecito cares a lot about it imo, and the media is just reminding us about their political aspirations. Keep in mind that hour-long video meeting with the Governor California.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry had meeting with CA Gov. Gavin Newsom: report
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were a little more involved in American politics than previously thought, according to a report.




					pagesix.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This article [written by MM] has been linked and posted before. It is from 2016 - before the Hazz. It is well worth reading to understand MM. IMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


I find it interesting that she was already using phrases like “finding my voice” and “speak my own truth”, “draw your own box”.  Foreshadowing at its best!


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, Hazz's consideration for his family is  Simple solution, remove their titles and let them know 30 min before releasing the official news to the public.

*PRINCE HARRY briefed the Royal Family regarding his upcoming memoirs just "half an hour" before it was announced to the public, according to a royal commentator.*









						Prince Harry briefed royals '30 minutes' before public as Duke keeps family 'on back foot'
					

PRINCE HARRY briefed the Royal Family regarding his upcoming memoirs just "half an hour" before it was announced to the public, according to a royal commentator.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Wow, Hazz's consideration for his family is  Simple solution, remove their titles and let them know 30 min before releasing the official news to the public.
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY briefed the Royal Family regarding his upcoming memoirs just "half an hour" before it was announced to the public, according to a royal commentator.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry briefed royals '30 minutes' before public as Duke keeps family 'on back foot'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY briefed the Royal Family regarding his upcoming memoirs just "half an hour" before it was announced to the public, according to a royal commentator.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Modeling the groundswell of compassion!


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> Wow, Hazz's consideration for his family is  Simple solution, remove their titles and let them know 30 min before releasing the official news to the public.
> 
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY briefed the Royal Family regarding his upcoming memoirs just "half an hour" before it was announced to the public, according to a royal commentator.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry briefed royals '30 minutes' before public as Duke keeps family 'on back foot'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY briefed the Royal Family regarding his upcoming memoirs just "half an hour" before it was announced to the public, according to a royal commentator.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



He’s really lost perspectives, you don’t have to like your family, and you don’t have to publicly be an ar$e to them as well.  You want to be left alone, get some f-King therapy.  We all know by now those claims wanting to be left alone by Paparazzi is BS 
From prince to royal British jester this one ...


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> I have not been following the saga of the new cartoon show since I am obnoxed by using G and C
> so, I may have missed something, this is a US or U.K. produced show ? Just curious
> 
> agree the U.K. sense of humor is different , but, real kids , noooooooooo, please


As far as I can see it’s an American production for the US network HBO with some British voice actors. 

I dunno what channel it’d be on here….maybe sky? I don’t have it. 

The main guy- Janetti - is an American comedy writer who has worked on family guy (surprise surprise) among other shows.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gotta love Lady CC's followers. One of today's questions: "Could the Queen not lock them up in the Tower of London and have the tourists pay to look at them? Just wondering."


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we get pissed by it, it must send the O’s into a fury.  IMO the media is tacky for suggesting this.
> That said, go ahead, let H&M run for office, any office is fine. The people will decide this one very quickly. Hell, no.


I suspect the O's may be more forgiving than us.....but really, comparing them is totally ridiculous.  the only things they have in common are the spotify and netflix contracts.
One couple:  both attorneys, one former President, other former, FL.  Both wrote their own books.  have been black all their lives.

couple number two:  former z-list actress, husband born with silver spoon, former bad boy, now angry boy.  "wrote" or will write books with help from ghostwriters, etc.
She just "decided" she was black when it became lucrative.


----------



## amante

papertiger said:


> As I've said before some friends are also PO and enraged for H, not for defending his WOC wife, but for what they see as actively exploiting and co-opting M's blackness for his own profit/agenda.



This is interesting. To assume that H would exploit M's blackness for his own profit would insinuate that H is some sort of Machiavellian strategist. If so, what would have been his goal? Eclipsing his brother and sister-in-law in popularity? I personally don't believe it. I don't think Harry is that smart, cunning or ambitious. Is he? Or am I missing the point here?

Yeah, I find it grating that she talks big talk when she herself passed and used it to her advantage. She reminds me a little of the UK PM BoJo: waits to see the way the crowd is running then dashes in front and acts as if he's been leading the crowd all along. MM is not qualified to lead this movement. She can contribute, but not lead. Also, little humility from the ex-trainee royal would have been appreciated.

While there are Black Britons who are very straight-laced and support church and monarchy, that might be an older generation. I have little to no expertise here but this: "Meghan's racism claims come as no surprise to Black Britons." https://apnews.com/article/meghan-harry-oprah-interview-racism-fdee9570666fd6a9dff6215ba7882fa8

(I do believe H&M that there were moments that had a tinge of racism in the BRF and household. But I'm not convinced they were totally malicious situations. There was definitely antipathy to her from the household. I have guesses why, but I myself am not satisfied with my proof.)

Actually this ties quite nicely back to the conspiracy theory. A non-zero number of those fan groups on IG and twitter for and against Meghan are definitely bots, so not completely impossible is the chance that they're Russian bots trying to destabilize the western world order, no? Not quite the original theory and not as simple and direct as an anti-monarchist group/individual bankrolling H&M, but i wouldn't rule some version of a conspiracy theory, even in a minor sideshow capacity


----------



## sdkitty

amante said:


> This is interesting. To assume that H would exploit M's blackness for his own profit would insinuate that H is some sort of Machiavellian strategist. If so, what would have been his goal? Eclipsing his brother and sister-in-law in popularity? I personally don't believe it. I don't think Harry is that smart, cunning or ambitious. Is he? Or am I missing the point here?
> 
> Yeah, I find it grating that she talks big talk when she herself passed and used it to her advantage. She reminds me a little of the UK PM BoJo: waits to see the way the crowd is running then dashes in front and acts as if he's been leading the crowd all along. MM is not qualified to lead this movement. She can contribute, but not lead. Also, little humility from the ex-trainee royal would have been appreciated.
> 
> While there are Black Britons who are very straight-laced and support church and monarchy, that might be an older generation. I have little to no expertise here but this: "Meghan's racism claims come as no surprise to Black Britons." https://apnews.com/article/meghan-harry-oprah-interview-racism-fdee9570666fd6a9dff6215ba7882fa8
> 
> (I do believe H&M that there were moments that had a tinge of racism in the BRF and household. But I'm not convinced they were totally malicious situations. There was definitely antipathy to her from the household. I have guesses why, but I myself am not satisfied with my proof.)
> 
> Actually this ties quite nicely back to the conspiracy theory. A non-zero number of those fan groups on IG and twitter for and against Meghan are definitely bots, so not completely impossible is the chance that they're Russian bots trying to destabilize the western world order, no? Not quite the original theory and not as simple and direct as an anti-monarchist group/individual bankrolling H&M, but i wouldn't rule some version of a conspiracy theory, even in a minor sideshow capacity


interesting theory but I think the Russians have "bigger fish to fry"


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I suspect the O's may be more forgiving than us.....but really, comparing them is totally ridiculous.  the only things they have in common are the spotify and netflix contracts.
> One couple:  both attorneys, one former President, other former, FL.  Both wrote their own books.  have been black all their lives.
> 
> couple number two:  former z-list actress, husband born with silver spoon, former bad boy, now angry boy.  "wrote" or will write books with help from ghostwriters, etc.
> She just "decided" she was black when it became lucrative.


ITA. I think BO learnt a long time ago how to deal with stupid and foolish people as I'm sure he met his fair share during his campaigns and presidency. He would no doubt know how to deal with greater fools like the despicable duo.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. I think BO learnt a long time ago how to deal with stupid and foolish people as I'm sure he met his fair share during his campaigns and presidency. He would no doubt know how to deal with greater fools like the despicable duo.


they are far too gracious to say anything negative about the terrible twosome but hopefully they will keep their distance


----------



## papertiger

amante said:


> This is interesting. To assume that H would exploit M's blackness for his own profit would insinuate that H is some sort of Machiavellian strategist. If so, what would have been his goal? Eclipsing his brother and sister-in-law in popularity? I personally don't believe it. I don't think Harry is that smart, cunning or ambitious. Is he? Or am I missing the point here?
> 
> Yeah, I find it grating that she talks big talk when she herself passed and used it to her advantage. She reminds me a little of the UK PM BoJo: waits to see the way the crowd is running then dashes in front and acts as if he's been leading the crowd all along. MM is not qualified to lead this movement. She can contribute, but not lead. Also, little humility from the ex-trainee royal would have been appreciated.
> 
> While there are Black Britons who are very straight-laced and support church and monarchy, that might be an older generation. I have little to no expertise here but this: "Meghan's racism claims come as no surprise to Black Britons." https://apnews.com/article/meghan-harry-oprah-interview-racism-fdee9570666fd6a9dff6215ba7882fa8
> 
> (I do believe H&M that there were moments that had a tinge of racism in the BRF and household. But I'm not convinced they were totally malicious situations. There was definitely antipathy to her from the household. I have guesses why, but I myself am not satisfied with my proof.)
> 
> Actually this ties quite nicely back to the conspiracy theory. A non-zero number of those fan groups on IG and twitter for and against Meghan are definitely bots, so not completely impossible is the chance that they're Russian bots trying to destabilize the western world order, no? Not quite the original theory and not as simple and direct as an anti-monarchist group/individual bankrolling H&M, but i wouldn't rule some version of a conspiracy theory, even in a minor sideshow capacity



Leaving the 'evil' Russians aside - I think it's more common than you may imagine for POC to have spouses/partners/friends that use their 'otherness' to make themselves look better/woke/inclusive. Unfortunately, I've had family/friends/colleagues on both sides of that weirdness. I've been 'paraded' to parents as an act of 'rebellion' by an ex to his parents when I had no idea this was a 'thing'.

That Harry thinks that he can now distance himself from his documented racist behaviour in the past and speak with authority about diversity, representation and inclusivity reenacting Game of Thrones all day from a Ducal throne, in endless mansion, flashing a diplomatic passport is preposterous.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I


amante said:


> This is interesting. To assume that H would exploit M's blackness for his own profit would insinuate that H is some sort of Machiavellian strategist. If so, what would have been his goal? Eclipsing his brother and sister-in-law in popularity? I personally don't believe it. I don't think Harry is that smart, cunning or ambitious. Is he? Or am I missing the point here?
> 
> Yeah, I find it grating that she talks big talk when she herself passed and used it to her advantage. She reminds me a little of the UK PM BoJo: waits to see the way the crowd is running then dashes in front and acts as if he's been leading the crowd all along. MM is not qualified to lead this movement. She can contribute, but not lead. Also, little humility from the ex-trainee royal would have been appreciated.
> 
> While there are Black Britons who are very straight-laced and support church and monarchy, that might be an older generation. I have little to no expertise here but this: "Meghan's racism claims come as no surprise to Black Britons." https://apnews.com/article/meghan-harry-oprah-interview-racism-fdee9570666fd6a9dff6215ba7882fa8
> 
> (I do believe H&M that there were moments that had a tinge of racism in the BRF and household. But I'm not convinced they were totally malicious situations. There was definitely antipathy to her from the household. I have guesses why, but I myself am not satisfied with my proof.)
> 
> Actually this ties quite nicely back to the conspiracy theory. A non-zero number of those fan groups on IG and twitter for and against Meghan are definitely bots, so not completely impossible is the chance that they're Russian bots trying to destabilize the western world order, no? Not quite the original theory and not as simple and direct as an anti-monarchist group/individual bankrolling H&M, but i wouldn't rule some version of a conspiracy theory, even in a minor sideshow capacity


I  mean, tbh, that Ap news article doesn’t even make sense. It refers to one guy who claims the British don’t want to have a conversation about our racist history which has got nothing to do with whether something was said to H&M or not as far as I can see.
Also this same man’s profession is he has a show _on the BBC _about Black British History & there’s also a banner for all shows they’ve made for U.K. black history month- so tbh I don’t think the topics he’s discussing are exactly dwelling in obscurity personally.
It’s just part of this push my product with divisive rhetoric that seems to be gaining so much traction all over the globe.

As to H, I think that on a personal level if someone makes an offensive comment about a loved one I’d think usually the person should be able to defend them even if they are thick as concrete- otherwise the bar for support is pretty low in that relationship.

Also Harry doesn’t need to be a strategist himself as he’s been managed by PR teams his entire adult life and at least one of them will have mentioned that representation is the zeitgeist issue of the last decade  & of course M is undoubtedly aware of this herself as it’s pretty obvious & we just saw her Elle piece on representing her biracial identity.

edit - missed a they


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## amante

Sometimes a story or tweet would be ignored for a few days, then, without warning, an avalanche of negative attacks would begin. One royal watcher went through 89up’s list of the top interconnected Meghan hive accounts and realized she’d blocked almost every one of them for abusive language.​​Feldberg isn’t discounting the possibility that some super fans might be caught up in the Meghan hive. As he wrote in the report, “It is not impossible that there is just a fanatical community of people online who are tweeting all day content about the duchess, but the scale of the community and the amount of content they are sharing should make us suspicious.”​​The big question is why. Feldberg isn’t sure, though the suspicious nature of the linked accounts suggests a more nefarious reason. As he wrote in the report, “The prevalence of strange Twitter user names and the overlap between accounts that tweet primarily about politics but also tweet extensively about the duchess could point to an orchestrated campaign to manipulate public opinion by an organization or state.”​​While it’s too early to know the ultimate aims, discrediting the media and national institutions, such as the monarchy, would be a logical outcome of such campaigns.​​https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/ (Macleans is a Canadian news magazine, very serious, kind of high brow, I'd say credible)

Oh yeahhh, I am all in with some sort of conspiracy theory, sorry @papertiger et al who are not into conspiracy theories. Normally I hate conspiracy theories myself but sometimes the truth is weirder than fiction. Again, I don't think it's necessarily the driving force but an element in this drama nonetheless. Be careful with your media consumption TPFers! Don't believe everything you read on social media! And even other sources because social media trickles down to everything nowadays. And don't get sucked into twitter/IG comment wars!


----------



## papertiger

amante said:


> Sometimes a story or tweet would be ignored for a few days, then, without warning, an avalanche of negative attacks would begin. One royal watcher went through 89up’s list of the top interconnected Meghan hive accounts and realized she’d blocked almost every one of them for abusive language.​​Feldberg isn’t discounting the possibility that some super fans might be caught up in the Meghan hive. As he wrote in the report, “It is not impossible that there is just a fanatical community of people online who are tweeting all day content about the duchess, but the scale of the community and the amount of content they are sharing should make us suspicious.”​​The big question is why. Feldberg isn’t sure, though the suspicious nature of the linked accounts suggests a more nefarious reason. As he wrote in the report, “The prevalence of strange Twitter user names and the overlap between accounts that tweet primarily about politics but also tweet extensively about the duchess could point to an orchestrated campaign to manipulate public opinion by an organization or state.”​​While it’s too early to know the ultimate aims, discrediting the media and national institutions, such as the monarchy, would be a logical outcome of such campaigns.​​https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/ (Macleans is a Canadian news magazine, very serious, kind of high brow, I'd say credible)
> 
> Oh yeahhh, I am all in with some sort of conspiracy theory, sorry @papertiger et al who are not into conspiracy theories. Normally I hate conspiracy theories myself but sometimes the truth is weirder than fiction. Again, I don't think it's necessarily the driving force but an element in this drama nonetheless. Be careful with your media consumption TPFers! Don't believe everything you read on social media! And even other sources because social media trickles down to everything nowadays. And don't get sucked into twitter/IG comment wars!



For the record, I'm neither for against conspiracy theories.

For me, all theories of all kinds, need to be proven, that's all.

Thank you @amante for your explanation for which you base your assessment on, it's certainly food for thought


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not into conspiracy theories either, but I have wondered before how a basically nobody has such a refined strategy to harm. It doesn't quite add up to me. And that bot army? That's quite insane.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I
> 
> I  mean, tbh, that Ap news article doesn’t even make sense. It refers to one guy who claims the British don’t want to have a conversation about our racist history which has got nothing to do with whether something was said to H&M or not as far as I can see.
> Also this same man’s profession is he has a show _on the BBC _about Black British History & there’s also a banner for all shows they’ve made for U.K. black history month- so tbh I don’t think the topics he’s discussing are exactly dwelling in obscurity personally.
> It’s just part of this push my product with divisive rhetoric that seems to be gaining so much traction all over the globe.
> 
> As to H, I think that on a personal level if someone makes an offensive comment about a loved one I’d think usually the person should be able to defend them even if are thick as concrete- otherwise the bar for support is pretty low in that relationship.
> 
> Also Harry doesn’t need to be a strategist himself as he’s been managed by PR teams his entire adult life and at least one of them will have mentioned that representation is the zeitgeist issue of the last decade  & of course M herself is undoubtedly aware of this herself as it’s pretty obvious & we just saw her Elle piece on representing her biracial identity.



Yup. Nail. Head. 

Everyone loves a little extra boost via search engines for their product's/content's reach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not into conspiracy theories either, but I have wondered before how a basically nobody has such a refined strategy to harm. It doesn't quite add up to me. And that bot army? That's quite insane.



I give the credit to SoHoHouse Markus Anderson who knew JeffE.  No conspiracy, just simple business networking.


----------



## jelliedfeels

amante said:


> Sometimes a story or tweet would be ignored for a few days, then, without warning, an avalanche of negative attacks would begin. One royal watcher went through 89up’s list of the top interconnected Meghan hive accounts and realized she’d blocked almost every one of them for abusive language.​​Feldberg isn’t discounting the possibility that some super fans might be caught up in the Meghan hive. As he wrote in the report, “It is not impossible that there is just a fanatical community of people online who are tweeting all day content about the duchess, but the scale of the community and the amount of content they are sharing should make us suspicious.”​​The big question is why. Feldberg isn’t sure, though the suspicious nature of the linked accounts suggests a more nefarious reason. As he wrote in the report, “The prevalence of strange Twitter user names and the overlap between accounts that tweet primarily about politics but also tweet extensively about the duchess could point to an orchestrated campaign to manipulate public opinion by an organization or state.”​​While it’s too early to know the ultimate aims, discrediting the media and national institutions, such as the monarchy, would be a logical outcome of such campaigns.​​https://www.macleans.ca/royalty/meghan-markles-twitter-bot-network-the-whole-thing-is-a-bit-insane/ (Macleans is a Canadian news magazine, very serious, kind of high brow, I'd say credible)
> 
> Oh yeahhh, I am all in with some sort of conspiracy theory, sorry @papertiger et al who are not into conspiracy theories. Normally I hate conspiracy theories myself but sometimes the truth is weirder than fiction. Again, I don't think it's necessarily the driving force but an element in this drama nonetheless. Be careful with your media consumption TPFers! Don't believe everything you read on social media! And even other sources because social media trickles down to everything nowadays. And don't get sucked into twitter/IG comment wars!





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not into conspiracy theories either, but I have wondered before how a basically nobody has such a refined strategy to harm. It doesn't quite add up to me. And that bot army? That's quite insane.



To me this isn’t a conspiracy theory in of itself - bots are just part of the reality of online media.

This isn’t my area of computing, but I’m pretty sure it’s not actually that difficult to create and manage a load of bot Twitter accounts if you are just focusing on retweets & messaging on the same core subject. They don’t have to create AI that seem like real people or respond or anything - they just have to flood the hashtags with their messages & get high on trending.

I think the leap that this has to do with the Russians or some bigger organisation is where the leap too far lies.

The reality is that these things exist and part of this just happens when something is trending/popular. I remember someone created a bot that spammed the vote for RPDR season 10s miss congeniality as a joke. Of course lots of people create these things for political reasons too- but my point is it’s lots of people creating bots for various reasons.

To me the problem lies in that people are not aware how common these things are and are unable to recognise them & therefore are misled by what the ‘majority’ thinks. 

I think the media&governments in general could do a lot more to explain how these things actually work rather than being scared to broach the issue for fear of being accused of using them.
I think the media&governments in general could do a lot more to explain how these things actually work rather than being scared to broach the issue for fear of being accused of using them.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I think he has info on Charles and Camilla that is prior to their marriage.  I am still hoping that Harry sticks his foot into the Official Secrets Act and gets caught.


Thank you for mentioning that .. I've been wondering .. just HOW MUCH can they really spill???  I would think (to a certain degree and our UK colleagues - please correct me if I'm wrong) .. that they would have to sign an NDA (of sorts)??  I just read an article on Quora (they are also NOT fans of these 2 grifters), that noted that their "popularity" is ~ 14 to 20% in both the US and UK!  Yes, Hap-Hazza may have gotten a good 'deal' on this book, but at the end of the day, I don't see that it's going to help their popularity one bit.  It's a good thing he has a ghostwriter, but .. I can just see the 2 of them saying "NO - PUT IT IN THERE!" (the book).  Their hypocrisy and greed is what will (hopefully) put an end to them!


----------



## amante

also re: Russians having a bigger fish to fry, I think the BRF is a pretty big fish. I mean the UK has been riven by Brexit (another proven Russian disinformation campaign), and the monarchy has traditionally been a unifying elment for the British to rally around therefore is a natural next target. I don't think Megxit was top-down orchestrated by nefarious Russian spies and hackers but I can see them adding fuel to the flames. (Brexit was not orchestrated by Russia either just to be clear but campaigned to make Brexit more divisive and hate-filled.)



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not into conspiracy theories either, but I have wondered before how a basically nobody has such a refined strategy to harm. It doesn't quite add up to me. And that bot army? That's quite insane.


The article states that accounts start off with one topic (for example in this case MM) then once the accounts have enough followers and built a rapport with them, pivots to the real motive that normally would have been off the radar of the followers.



> He wonders if they could be building up followings over time, engaging with real people across the political divide, then, when they want to focus on a particular campaign (political or social), they change the subject to the one they really want to focus on. It’s a classic bot/troll disinformation and destabilization strategy that has been seen before, particular from Russians, who are attacking institutions across the West.



If you're talking about MM ("basically nobody has such a refined strategy to harm"), I don't think she had this all planned out from the start. No one is insinuating she's some Red Sparrow spy agent that the Russians groomed. Just that the social media drama about her and BRF is in part amplified by a bot army of suspicious unknown origins.



jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, tbh, that Ap news article doesn’t even make sense. It refers to one guy who claims the British don’t want to have a conversation about our racist history which has got nothing to do with whether something was said to H&M or not as far as I can see.



I think he means that racist behavior is normalized and not flagged up, so 1.) it happens  and 2.) when it happens (non-POCs behave in racist ways) they don't think it's bad at all and POCs are expected to just suck it up and 3.) when racist behavior finally does get pointed out non-POCs act all surprised and deny being racist.




papertiger said:


> I think it's more common than you may imagine for POC to have spouses/partners/friends that use their 'otherness' to make themselves look better/woke/inclusive.


H's friends don't seem to get along with MM (MM forbade H from joining shooting parties in Sandringham(?) over one Xmas. I can imagine said friends were pissed off and leaked that to the tabloids. Also their courtship was very just the two of them (romantic safaris in Botswana, chicken dinner engagement) and not a lot of involvement from friends and family, so I can't see how H could have used MM to show off how he's cooler/such a rebel/woke to his friends and family. I don't think the British upper classes care about being woke tbh. If he deliberately dated/married MM because he wanted to piss off his family, there was no indication that he was antagonistic towards his family prior to H&M. 

Prince Harry as a secret narcissist who wants to maintain his status as coolest member of the BRF? Does he also have a Google alert for his name just like Kim K? haha, just kidding. Sure, maybe. People have weird complicated motives for doing things. I think something more prosaic like maybe he found MM exciting and different and maybe he thought he could marry her and move to Botswana since there was talk about moving to one of the Commonwealth countries around the time of the wedding. I can't see H exploiting MM's blackness as a dominant motivating factor for him. It's within the realm of possibility (in the same way as my Russian disinformation campaign is I suppose).

Oh! Maybe when William warned H to not marry MM that motivated him even more? Being ordered around by W who can be a pompous ass as I've read (King Billy his friends mock him behind is back supposedly. From Tatler I think) could have set him off down this Megxity path, maybe.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> I don't think the Ob*m*s care. They were fast in assessing the situation and were smart in keeping a distance. The comparison is so ridiculous, that they may find it amusing at this point.
> 
> However, the couple of Montecito cares a lot about it imo, and the media is just reminding us about their political aspirations. Keep in mind that hour-long video meeting with the Governor California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry had meeting with CA Gov. Gavin Newsom: report
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were a little more involved in American politics than previously thought, according to a report.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Aligning with a governor facing the likelihood of being recalled is a bit like tethering oneself to a sinking ship. Gavin may represent their political leanings but glomming onto this particular politician just looks sad and desperate.


----------



## amante

LittleStar88 said:


> Aligning with a governor facing the likelihood of being recalled is a bit like tethering oneself to a sinking ship. Gavin may represent their political leanings but glomming onto this particular politician just looks sad and desperate.


All of Newsom's partymates are lining behind Newsom. For once they're acting like a unified party!

ETA: The name of the blue donkey political party in America was automatically censored/placed in asterisks


----------



## Jayne1

breakfastatcartier said:


> Didn’t Fergie and Diana have a falling out a few years before Diana’s death? Fergie comes off as tone deaf… and it’s strange that she sides with her nephew whose wife tried to take the attention of guests at her daughter’s wedding by telling every one she was pregnant.


Yes they did and weren't speaking at the time of Diana's death.  Apparently Diana did that a lot.


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Yes they did and weren't speaking at the time of Diana's death.  Apparently Diana did that a lot.


Don't think Fergie is really siding with 6, my take was she was deflecting a sticky question that she could not/would not to answer in earnest

Fergie also has to pay the bills, she lost money on her chalet in Verbier and is trying to get back in the book writing game, she too is on the fringes of the family doing an awkward balancing act ... she may have headaches as a fall out of the Andrew mess

As someone else said here, F is an airhead, she complained about the size of her divorce settlement (obviously relative to that for Diana) but has never badmouthed the Queen and the family


----------



## amante

I didn't read the Fergie article (I prefer not to click through to the Express/tabloid website), but this might explain why:



> The lion’s share of audience support went to Duchess Sarah Ferguson, who, it was popularly understood, had been invited at Prince Harry’s insistence despite being divorced from his uncle.











						I Also Went to the Royal Wedding (Published 2018)
					

And all I got was a devastating reminder of my own insignificance.




					www.nytimes.com
				




Crowd cheered for Fergie during H&M's wedding. I suppose Fergie also owes H back if above is true hence good word from her. For reference Fergie was not invited to W&K wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Thank you for mentioning that .. I've been wondering .. just HOW MUCH can they really spill???  I would think (to a certain degree and our UK colleagues - please correct me if I'm wrong) .. that they would have to sign an NDA (of sorts)??  I just read an article on Quora (they are also NOT fans of these 2 grifters), that noted that their "popularity" is ~ 14 to 20% in both the US and UK!  Yes, Hap-Hazza may have gotten a good 'deal' on this book, but at the end of the day, I don't see that it's going to help their popularity one bit.  It's a good thing he has a ghostwriter, but .. I can just see the 2 of them saying "NO - PUT IT IN THERE!" (the book).  Their hypocrisy and greed is what will (hopefully) put an end to them!


I am very interested to see how the ghost writer Moehringer handles this. He has his own reputation to consider. Guessing when he took the job he had no clue about what he was getting into.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> To me this isn’t a conspiracy theory in of itself - bots are just part of the reality of online media.



These are two different subjects to me.

A virtual nobody showed up (and I still have no satisfying answer as to what exactly she was doing in the UK of all places...because she liked British men???), took the prince by storm and then proceeded to stomp all over the BRF like Godzilla. Maybe she just got lucky and is especially ruthless, but if you think about it, it is curious.

The bots, I'm not especially worried about these, it's just that nobody utilizes them like her (and as usually, overdoes it).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> I didn't read the Fergie article (I prefer not to click through to the Express/tabloid website), but this might explain why:
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Also Went to the Royal Wedding (Published 2018)
> 
> 
> And all I got was a devastating reminder of my own insignificance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crowd cheered for Fergie during H&M's wedding. I suppose Fergie also owes H back if above is true hence good word from her. For reference Fergie was not invited to W&K wedding.



I did think it was harsh to exclude her and a very public slap in the face. But also, I didn't know Harry insisted on having her and this is probably the nicest thing I've heard about him in years (without any snark).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I am very interested to see how the ghost writer Moehringer handles this. He has his own reputation to consider. Guessing when he took the job he had no clue about what he was getting into.



Amen. Harry can't pay him enough to risk his professional reputation just to please the troublesome two.


----------



## amante

According to Harpers Bazaar, Finding Freedom states that they met in July 2016 in London. Maybe MM was just being a tourist and in town to see the sights. I can't determine if the object of the trip was the blind date though. It seems like it could have been.

She definitely wasn't there for Suits since Suits doesn't air in the UK afaik. I doubt it would be for one of her charities (World Vision/UN Women) because wrong place and wrong season.

This is a little unsavory but Enty of Crazy Days and Nights asserts that MM was a yacht girl. If so, maybe she was there to service clients who're in London for the summer season (Wimbledon, Goodwood, Grand Prix, Glastonbury, etc)









						Harry & Meghan Had Instant Chemistry & "Palpable Attraction" on Their First Dates
					

"Almost immediately they were almost obsessed with each other," a source revealed in 'Finding Freedom.'




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



yacht girl: escort/prostitute


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These are two different subjects to me.
> 
> A virtual nobody showed up (and I still have no satisfying answer as to what exactly she was doing in the UK of all places...because she liked British men???), took the prince by storm and then proceeded to stomp all over the BRF like Godzilla. Maybe she just got lucky and is especially ruthless, but if you think about it, it is curious.
> 
> The bots, I'm not especially worried about these, it's just that nobody utilizes them like her (and as usually, overdoes it).


Yes when you put it like that it is interesting…. I think @CarryOn2020 is right that the soho house were working their connections for all they’ve got to hook H up with ‘hot girls’ & they finally struck gold with M.
It seems to me to be a perfect storm that no one could have predicted though:-
As I see it….
1.the wedding kicks off with a neurotic royal family increasingly hooked on PR & social media & anxious about its ongoing popularity
2. h is creeping towards 40 with no kids and is getting restive and moody with his lot in life
3. there is a political moment for diversity and representation & the?firm know they are considered to be backward
4. H still has the ugly shadow of the nazi costume and his previous racism hanging over his head- if only he could prove he is now anti-racist
5. I know he has his supporters on the thread but I just don’t think Charles is that well liked by the public & I think they thought that popularity for H&M would be popularity for him. (Turns out they don’t want to share)
6. on a prosaic note,  there was a need for a big flagpole event after a bit of a royal quiet period
7. right in the centre of it all we have an actress whose manipulative personality means she knows how to appear as the combo of philanthropist and media darling the royal PR have been not so secretly coveting.

Add on- I can’t help wondering if even at this point someone in the team must’ve realised that a massive karma s**tstorm was heading for Andrew & they wanted to get some good news out before it ( I do think that H&M’s highly publicised bad behaviour has been very expedient for him- let’s say.) 

With all that, the royals  overlook her little white lies about her family and her past - marry off the wayward boy quickly & expensively & settle in for the good times….


Then the problems set in.


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> Didn’t Fergie and Diana have a falling out a few years before Diana’s death? Fergie comes off as tone deaf… and it’s strange that she sides with her nephew whose wife tried to take the attention of guests at her daughter’s wedding by telling every one she was pregnant.
> 
> Like a previous poster said, Fergie is not stupid. Maybe she’s doing this to gain something.
> 
> And I hope that’s the case.



In this case Fergie did absolutely nothing wrong. I posted the link to the actual interview and she said nothing that was objectionable. The DM wrote their story to make it sound like one sentence was Fergie trying to latch onto the Harry and Meghan story in some way and it isn’t true. Just because we don’t like these people doesn’t mean we have to believe everything that was written about them. The press lies and exaggerates as much as the people they write about.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So basically Harry was right when he insisted "The stars aligned"...just not in the way he meant it.

ETA: this was in reply to @jelliedfeels.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So basically Harry was right when he insisted "The stars aligned"...just not in the way he meant it.
> 
> ETA: this was in reply to @jelliedfeels.


He actually put it very concisely there  
I suppose the other big thing is he’d scared off all the eligible women of his own class/social circle  long ago so if he was to marry (& they wanted him to) it’d e have to be someone he met on the (triggering) London private club social scene which pretty much cuts the choice of royal bride down to c list actresses, a professional woman so much smarter than him she’d lapse into permanent Catatonia by the second date  or whoever’s still single in little mix.


----------



## V0N1B2

amante said:


> According to Harpers Bazaar, Finding Freedom states that they met in July 2016 in London. Maybe MM was just being a tourist and in town to see the sights. I can't determine if the object of the trip was the blind date though. It seems like it could have been.
> 
> She definitely wasn't there for Suits since Suits doesn't air in the UK afaik. I doubt it would be for one of her charities (World Vision/UN Women) because wrong place and wrong season.
> 
> This is a little unsavory but Enty of Crazy Days and Nights asserts that MM was a yacht girl. If so, maybe she was there to service clients who're in London for the summer season (Wimbledon, Goodwood, Grand Prix, Glastonbury, etc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan Had Instant Chemistry & "Palpable Attraction" on Their First Dates
> 
> 
> "Almost immediately they were almost obsessed with each other," a source revealed in 'Finding Freedom.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yacht girl: escort/prostitute


ALL of these points have been discussed ad nauseam for the last three years or approx. 60,000 posts on this thread.
Meghan was not "being a tourist", she befriended Lizzie Cundy (and promptly ghosted her upon meeting Harry), and told her how much she loved England and wanted to meet an English guy. Meghan used - and when I say used, I mean that in every sense of the word - all of her and other people's connections to get in with Harry's circle. It was no accident.

The faux philanthropy and charity work? All a ruse to hook a rich and connected man, IMO.
Yeah, she really cares about Africa and the plight of that nation's poorest people. *side-eye*

As for the *gasp* yacht girl rumours? Who knows - again, it's been discussed several thousand times in the last three years. 

The only thing you can believe coming out of Meghan's mouth is lies, more lies, some backtracking, a little scrub-a-dub here and there, and more lies.


----------



## amante

bag-mania said:


> In this case Fergie did absolutely nothing wrong. I posted the link to the actual interview and she said nothing that was objectionable. The DM wrote their story to make it sound like one sentence was Fergie trying to latch onto the Harry and Meghan story in some way and it isn’t true. Just because we don’t like these people doesn’t mean we have to believe everything that was written about them. The press lies and exaggerates as much as the people they write about.


Oops, sorry Fergie. You're not a publicity-hungry shill _this time around._

I watched the short interview and she was very diplomatic when asked about H&M and honestly she's right. Diana would have been proud of her boys and their wives. The vibe I get from Diana is that she's a mama bear fiercely protective of her children and could see no wrong in them.

Also Fergie is right about (tabloid) media pitting two females against each other. Fergie vs Diana, even Britney vs Christina. Drama sells. 

Again, sorry Fergie!


----------



## amante

V0N1B2 said:


> ALL of these points have been discussed ad nauseam for the last three years or approx. 60,000 posts on this thread.
> Meghan was not "being a tourist", she befriended Lizzie Cundy (and promptly ghosted her upon meeting Harry), and told her how much she loved England and wanted to meet an English guy. Meghan used - and when I say used, I mean that in every sense of the word - all of her and other people's connections to get in with Harry's circle. It was no accident.
> 
> The faux philanthropy and charity work? All a ruse to hook a rich and connected man, IMO.
> Yeah, she really cares about Africa and the plight of that nation's poorest people. *side-eye*
> 
> As for the *gasp* yacht girl rumours? Who knows - again, it's been discussed several thousand times in the last three years.
> 
> The only thing you can believe coming out of Meghan's mouth is lies, more lies, some backtracking, a little scrub-a-dub here and there, and more lies.


Thanks for pointing me towards Lizzie Cundy. She seems credible. 

MM has been volunteering since she was a little girl though. So in some part of her, she really cares about helping people. She did major in International Relations (as well as Drama) in college after all. 

According to her official biography in royal.uk circa 2018 (check it out using archive.org) she did go to missions to Rwanda, once for UN Woman and another for World Vision. Africa is a continent made up of many individual sovereign nations, btw. 

I can imagine that she was in her mid- later-30s and her acting career was stalling and marrying well was the next logical step. I mean even Miranda Kerr dated 1MDB swindler extraordinaire Jho Low and that crazy Aussie billionaire that Mariah Carey tried to latch on. I have a hard time imagining that she had her target set specifically on Prince Harry though. That's such a small hoop to jump through.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> Question of the Day:  Why is Sarah Ferguson supporting the Sussex?  What does she have to gain from this?  She’s a hypocrite. Prince Philip had it just right when he said he would never be under the same roof as SF. She sold her soul like Judas.
> 
> Daily  Mail
> 
> *Fergie says Diana would be 'so proud' of Harry and Meghan who 'shouldn't be judged' and claims she 'destroyed herself' over Epstein scandal but is 'done being a people pleaser'*
> 
> *Sarah, Duchess of York, appeared on Good Morning America on Friday to promote her new book*
> *She said 'there should be no judgement of race, creed, color or any other denomination' when asked on how Meghan had been treated in the press*
> *She added Diana would be 'so proud of her sons and their wives' *
> *Fergie also said she and Diana endured tough media scrutiny in 'their day' *
> *Her book,  Her Heart for a Compass: A Novel, is about a royal rebel in 1895*
> *She says it's her way of 'finding her voice' and speaking out 'for the first time' *
> *Fergie is said to be in talks to turn the book into a Bridgerton-style fictional series *





bag-mania said:


> Meh, the Daily Mail grossly exaggerated Fergie's "support." If you watch the segment in question, it's the interviewer who inserts Harry and Meghan in and Fergie gives a diplomatic reply saying she wishes them the best and moves on. She wasn't trying to connect herself with H&M and she didn't bring it up. Fergie was only there to plug her new book but she has to deal with the American press' obsession with Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Ferguson talks about new book, ‘Her Heart for a Compass’
> 
> 
> Ferguson’s first novel is based on the unconventional and determined Lady Margaret, her distant relative, and is set in the Victorian Era.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodmorningamerica.com





bag-mania said:


> In this case Fergie did absolutely nothing wrong. I posted the link to the actual interview and she said nothing that was objectionable. The DM wrote their story to make it sound like one sentence was Fergie trying to latch onto the Harry and Meghan story in some way and it isn’t true. Just because we don’t like these people doesn’t mean we have to believe everything that was written about them. The press lies and exaggerates as much as the people they write about.



Lying and exaggerating are DM specialities    But I think the other problem is many posters only read and share information from the headlines which tend to be even more misleading than the articles themselves.


----------



## needlv

MM turning forty in a few days (remember Thomas M interview where he confirmed she turns 40 this year).  The sun has a helpful reminder of all her lies.  Seeing it summarised, I can’t believe how much drama she (and now H) have caused.









						As Meghan Markle turns 40 today, here's 40 ways she has upset the Royals
					

MEGHAN Markle turns 40 today – and she’ll be celebrating her landmark birthday in LA with husband Harry and children Archie and Lilibet. The Duchess of Sussex met her future husband in …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I did think it was harsh to exclude her and a very public slap in the face. But also, I didn't know Harry insisted on having her and this is probably the nicest thing I've heard about him in years (without any snark).



Or…
did OW insist [politely, of course] that H&M invite her?  Remember OW and H&M were close back then.  
All of them knew what the plan was - from day 1.  Also, I see this as Hazz’s way of annoying Prince Phillip.
Nothing that we see is accurate, credible, or authentic. It may seem random to us, but consider that these people  have well-thought out plans. Not a conspiracy, but calculated plans. Clooney’s  next movie is the autobiography of Hazz’s ghostwriter. Coinky dink? Nope, the  connections are real.


----------



## bag-mania

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Lying and exaggerating are DM specialities    But I think the other problem is many posters *only read and share information from the headlines which tend to be even more misleading* than the articles themselves.



This is true for pretty much every news story on the web. Many Covid articles are misleading if you only read the headline.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chagall said:


> *Well waiting for the Queen to die is ghoulish under any circumstances.* Nobody wants to think of their impending death even at her age. And then to have the added worry of why he is holding the book until then. He certainly is making the Queens last years  really hard. What an absolute jerk.



True but I suspect this goes on a lot in the RF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Lying and exaggerating are DM specialities    But I think the other problem is many posters only read and share information from the headlines which tend to be even more misleading than the articles themselves.



Hmmmm, Eug’s husband
ETA: Clooney’s old company - does he still have connections?
_Mr Brooksbank is a brand ambassador for Casamigos tequila, a sponsor of last night's invitation-only Unicef Summer Gala, where tickets are priced from £8,000 to £25,000.

_
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...morous-women-Princess-Eugenie-stays-home.html


ETA2: Unicef is involved in this party??? Wow.


----------



## needlv

What a shock, MM doesn’t want to go back to acting… (*because no one is asking her to…*)









						Meghan 'focused on producing' and rejects return to acting career
					

MEGHAN MARKLE will not be returning to her 'acting roots' and will instead focus on building her experience as a producer, according to the co-CEO of Netflix.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## needlv

turn the sound on for this one and watch it all the way through…


----------



## amante

Why did Kate where "buttercup yellow" aka cream to H&M's wedding? It really photographed as white/cream.


----------



## amante

Luisaviaroma is the official host of the party and the beneficiary is UNICEF. Jaime Xie of Netflix Bling Empire went to the one last year (yep, they still held one last year closer to September though if memory serves me right) I think she might have a vlog of the event on her YT channel


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Aligning with a governor facing the likelihood of being recalled is a bit like tethering oneself to a sinking ship. Gavin may represent their political leanings but glomming onto this particular politician just looks sad and desperate.


They are in California, so he was their best bet to open doors for them at the time. If they can't get someone higher in the political arena, they will target the next governor as well...


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I am very interested to see how the *ghost writer Moehringer* handles this. *He has his own reputation to consider.* Guessing when he took the job he had no clue about what he was getting into.


This is a very good point. If he is not careful, he risks not be taken seriously after this book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a very good point. If he is not careful, he risks not be taken seriously after this book.



Clooney’s next movie is The Tender Bar, this ghostwriter’s autobiography.  This guy will be ok.









						The Tender Bar (film) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Clooney’s next movie is The Tender Bar, this ghostwriter’s autobiography.  This guy will be ok.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tender Bar (film) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



Not sure how true this is, but it was apparently Clooney who hooked up this author with his “good friend” Harry. If the writer manages to make Harry appear interesting, intelligent, and sympathetic (without showing his true whiny-ass self) then he deserves all of the writer’s awards available.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Not sure how true this is, but it was apparently Clooney who hooked up this author with his “good friend” Harry. *If the writer manages to make Harry appear interesting, intelligent, and sympathetic* (without showing his true whiny-ass self) then he deserves all of the writer’s awards available.


The writer will deserve to be a winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The writer will deserve to be a winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction.



IMO If the ‘Book’ does not include a bibliography, an index, footnotes, and confirmation from the Palace [which we know they will not do],  then I will consider it Hazzie’s trash talk - just like the OW interview.  I certainly am not interested in reading a child’s recollections of a deceased parent. Those should be kept private.  Sure, once someone passes away, it is easy to make all sorts of claims. If the claims aren’t made when the person is alive, it’s false.  Everyone has a right to defend themselves.

ETA: The people of ChungaChanga can support that nonsense.


----------



## needlv

Catherine gets one of Harry’s patronage’s…


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> Catherine gets one of Harry’s patronage’s…




I love a sporty Kate moment.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO If the ‘Book’ does not include a bibliography, an index, footnotes, and confirmation from the Palace [which we know they will not do],  then I will consider it Hazzie’s trash talk - just like the OW interview.  I certainly am not interested in reading a child’s recollections of a deceased parent. Those should be kept private.  Sure, once someone passes away, it is easy to make all sorts of claims. If the claims aren’t made when the person is alive, it’s false.  Everyone has a right to defend themselves.



It's going to be very difficult to believe in whatever will be on that memoir. Hazz and wife don't have much credibility in this thread. We have observed their hypocrisy and ridiculous photo-ops since they moved to California, and OW's interview was the icing on the cake.


----------



## needlv

lanasyogamama said:


> I love a sporty Kate moment.



Yes and rumour has it Princess Anne gets Captain General of the Royal Marines.

meanwhile at montecito….



full read here if you don’t want the paywall



			Attention Required!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Would this be coincidence, lack of imagination or...


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Would this be coincidence, lack of imagination or...




the freaky ones for me are the Diana pose on the right and the black and white pics above.  The rest may be coincidence -given royal dressing rules and number of outfits generally etc.

She was definitely trying to emulate Diana with the pose and the sunglasses.  Epic fail


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> the freaky ones for me are the Diana pose on the right and the black and white pics above.  The rest may be coincidence -given royal dressing rules and number of outfits generally etc.
> 
> She was definitely trying to emulate Diana with the pose and the sunglasses.  Epic fail



Yeah, the Diana pose and the 2 B&W sets don't look coincidence.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Clooney’s next movie is The Tender Bar, this ghostwriter’s autobiography.  This guy will be ok.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tender Bar (film) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Movies don’t seem to be quite as important as they used to be. Theaters are closing because people don’t want to go.  It may just end up on streaming and cable and even if it’s a good movie, it could just die on the vine.   The author still feels the need to keep his day job, I.e. ghost writer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Movies don’t seem to be quite as important as they used to be. Theaters are closing because people don’t want to go.  It may just end up on streaming and cable and even if it’s a good movie, it could just die on the vine.   The author still feels the need to keep his day job, I.e. ghost writer.



The movie does star the man of the moment (?), Ben Affleck. Iirc Amazon is involved, so it may go straight to streaming.
 Unlike the women currently suing the mouse, streaming could be a good thing for him - he does have some misses in his IMDb file.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The movie does star the man of the moment (?), Ben Affleck. Iirc Amazon is involved, so it may go straight to streaming.
> Unlike the women currently suing the mouse, streaming could be a good thing for him - he does have some misses in his IMDb file.


Currently he rates as a paid boy toy.  Don’t even get why he agreed. It’s all pretty desperate


----------



## csshopper

Just for the heck of it: Another reason there is no comparison between MM and MO:

 Slightly less than 2 months after publication of her "Best Seller," Methane's mundane work, The Bench, has continued to tank and is now:

Best Sellers Rank: *#4,635 in Books *(See Top 100 in Books)
#34 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#162 in Children's Emotions Books
#365 in Children's Family Life Books 


Meantime, Michelle's book, Becoming,  2 years and 8 months following publication in November 2018 is still selling robustly in multiple formats and is actually #19 this week on the Amazon Biography and Memoirs Best Seller List.
Best Sellers Rank: #514 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#3 in Lawyer & Judge Biographies
#6 in Black & African American Biographies
#8 in U.S. State & Local History

Customer Reviews: 
4.8 out of 5 stars    115,513 ratings


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or…
> did OW insist [politely, of course] that H&M invite her?  Remember OW and H&M were close back then.



Dunno, that seems like reaching.


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting video on Fergie's daughters. Their loyalty is with QE as it seems.


----------



## Chanbal

Was Hazz's girlfriend wearing his cap and boots and using a front gate at Kensington? Was she trying to call attention to herself?


----------



## Chanbal

I bet this will be selected for TPF's book club. 











						Most-feared biographer vows to 'tell truth about Duchess
					

Britain's most feared biographer is racing to complete his bombshell book on the Duchess of Sussex , vowing that it will "tell the truth" about her life. Investigative journalist Tom Bower has reportedly signed a six-figure advance to pen an unauthorised account.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I bet this will be selected for TPF's book club.
> 
> View attachment 5152884
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most-feared biographer vows to 'tell truth about Duchess
> 
> 
> Britain's most feared biographer is racing to complete his bombshell book on the Duchess of Sussex , vowing that it will "tell the truth" about her life. Investigative journalist Tom Bower has reportedly signed a six-figure advance to pen an unauthorised account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I’ll bring snacks to the meeting!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I bet this will be selected for TPF's book club.
> 
> View attachment 5152884
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most-feared biographer vows to 'tell truth about Duchess
> 
> 
> Britain's most feared biographer is racing to complete his bombshell book on the Duchess of Sussex , vowing that it will "tell the truth" about her life. Investigative journalist Tom Bower has reportedly signed a six-figure advance to pen an unauthorised account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Lawyers are standing by.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.  










						Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Shame, I'm busy that day/night


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sounds super low key and chill.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

amante said:


> MM has been volunteering since she was a little girl though. So in some part of her, she really cares about helping people. She did major in International Relations (as well as Drama) in college after all.



Those excursions were mostly class groups and extra curricular activities to earn credit. She only cares about Rachel Meghan.she’s only pledged £10 to a dog pound from her own pocket while other “donations” were made in her name through organizations that she couldn’t profit from.

And I don’t understand mentioning the “IR and Drama majors”… she’s a bad actress and hasn’t done any volunteering unless there’s some benefit for her.
Remember when she cried for herself on camera in South Africa while a whole slum with people living below poverty line was behind her?


----------



## marietouchet

amante said:


> Thanks for pointing me towards Lizzie Cundy. She seems credible.
> 
> MM has been volunteering since she was a little girl though. So in some part of her, she really cares about helping people. She did major in International Relations (as well as Drama) in college after all.
> 
> According to her official biography in royal.uk circa 2018 (check it out using archive.org) she did go to missions to Rwanda, once for UN Woman and another for World Vision. Africa is a continent made up of many individual sovereign nations, btw.
> 
> I can imagine that she was in her mid- later-30s and her acting career was stalling and marrying well was the next logical step. I mean even Miranda Kerr dated 1MDB swindler extraordinaire Jho Low and that crazy Aussie billionaire that Mariah Carey tried to latch on. I have a hard time imagining that she had her target set specifically on Prince Harry though. That's such a small hoop to jump through.


Volunteering is good  ... but it is hard to day what someone's real motivation is ... it is complicated
Parents routinely haul children to good activities hoping it will stick
US sororities have always had a philanthropic bent, you join and you are expected to do a fundraiser every semester, but women join them for lots of social reasons (parties) too ,  MM did the sorority thing in college
Celebrity philanthropy - Angelina Jolie turned around her bad girl rep with major philanthropic works, and set a tone for Hollywood celebrities - they endorse a charity or five - they are expected to do so now


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> the freaky ones for me are the Diana pose on the right and the black and white pics above.  The rest may be coincidence -given royal dressing rules and number of outfits generally etc.
> 
> She was definitely trying to emulate Diana with the pose and the sunglasses.  Epic fail



the black and white ones on the stool are strikingly similar


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Are the 65 guests people she’s never met before, like a number of the wedding guests?


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She has 65 friends?  Assuming all the nannies, gardeners, maids, chickens, and Lilibet's surrogate will count into that 65. Sunshine Sachs is probably tasked to round up paid extras and maybe an Archwell employee or two. Too bad social media bots aren't real to be invited.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Of course. You can bet 100% of the expenses for catering and putting on this affair will be written off as part of the foundation’s expenses come tax time next year. And if some of their curious, rich & famous guests want to give a generous donation to Archewell or offer them another multimillion dollar contract, well, it’s all for charity.


----------



## Annawakes

65 guests may be invited but 65 won’t show up…


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> 65 guests may be invited but 65 won’t show up…



It depends who they invite. I doubt many A-listers will show but others might purely out of curiosity.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Yes they did and weren't speaking at the time of Diana's death.  Apparently Diana did that a lot.


IIRC, the first fallout happened some time after one of Sarah's daughter's birth when Sarah's popularity was very good and, Diana couldn't stand the competition. The story goes that Sarah left her young child with nannies to visit Andrew, wherever he was posted. When the story hit the news that Sarah had "abandoned" her young child to visit husband and off course, no one knew who leaked it, her popularity was adversely affected. Diana also took the opportunity to give a speech on motherhood. Sly D: my favourite name for Diana.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> An interesting video on Fergie's daughters. Their loyalty is with QE as it seems.



I mean, on a personal note, they shouldn’t be asked to take sides & should be able to have a familial relationship with the black sheep and still be on good terms with the rest of the family if they want to.

On a pragmatic note - they’d have to be nuts to side against the BRF who keep them and their creepy parents famous and comfortable no matter what.
Whereas H&M have a tendency to toss people like worn rags.
I’m sure they realise this.


Chanbal said:


> Was Hazz's girlfriend wearing his cap and boots and using a front gate at Kensington? Was she trying to call attention to herself?
> View attachment 5152877


Wow she couldn’t resist the urge to put his clothes on eh? She must be London’s lowest effort drag king.

I’m giggling at the idea of her strutting back and forth outside the gates looking nonchalant like a background extra on a set. Probably about the level of her acting ability too.
Im sure we’ve all bought charity stuff and it’s good to promote a good cause but the giant letters bragging about her benevolence are a bit funnily on the nose for me.


Chanbal said:


> I bet this will be selected for TPF's book club.
> 
> View attachment 5152884
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most-feared biographer vows to 'tell truth about Duchess
> 
> 
> Britain's most feared biographer is racing to complete his bombshell book on the Duchess of Sussex , vowing that it will "tell the truth" about her life. Investigative journalist Tom Bower has reportedly signed a six-figure advance to pen an unauthorised account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





Jeez the advances are ludicrous aren’t they? NGL I think TPF book club would be hilarious & so fun.



papertiger said:


> Shame, I'm busy that day/night


I was invited too (maybe it is doubling as some sort of roast/intervention) but I just don’t think it is environmentally ethical to fly back & forth on intercontinental flights for social events and PR stunts & I’m sure my hosts would agree


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> MM has been volunteering since she was a little girl though. So in some part of her, she really cares about helping people. She did major in International Relations (as well as Drama) in college after all.
> 
> According to her official biography in royal.uk circa 2018 (check it out using archive.org) she did go to missions to Rwanda, once for UN Woman and another for World Vision. Africa is a continent made up of many individual sovereign nations, btw.
> 
> I can imagine that she was in her mid- later-30s and her acting career was stalling and marrying well was the next logical step. I mean even Miranda Kerr dated 1MDB swindler extraordinaire Jho Low and that crazy Aussie billionaire that Mariah Carey tried to latch on. I have a hard time imagining that she had her target set specifically on Prince Harry though. That's such a small hoop to jump through.


Her education reflects badly on her alma mater. After all that emphasis on her degree in International Relations, she claims ignorance of the BRF, and couldn't or didn't want to learn the protocol for her new life as a royal. 

I think she knew her chances of hooking a big fish in the US were low, so she tried other "markets". Her bestie Markus Anderson was providing her with a room at the Soho House establishments and likely pulling strings for her. Hazard just happened to fall into her lobster pot. IIRC he escaped once but she reeled him back in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Prince Harry fumed at criticism coming his way: 'Why is everyone so miserable and angry?'

Well, Harry...that's what we wonder as well, we really do.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> the freaky ones for me are the Diana pose on the right and the black and white pics above.  The rest may be coincidence -given royal dressing rules and number of outfits generally etc.
> 
> She was definitely trying to emulate Diana with the pose and the sunglasses.  Epic fail




With the Diana pose, it’s so funny how the expression on Meghan’s face is saying: Jeez why did I come to this dump? While Diana looked genuinely willing to find a solution to help the people in need.


----------



## amante

I mentioned her international relations major because I know others who majored IR and they tend to be the "be the change you wish to see in the world" types (ala paraphrased-to-the-extreme gandhi quote). I think Meghan is the same.

MM does seem quick to take credit for the good things she does, but hey she actually does them right? In her official royal.uk bio circa May 2018, it said that she'd been volunteering in a soup kitchen since she was 13 and has continued while on break from college. Volunteering in a soup kitchen is not glamorous. I've tried it once. Homeless people tend to have mental health issues so it's a little bit depressing especially compared to volunteering with children. She was Kappa Kappa Gamma and I think its philanthropy is St Jude's Children's Cancer Hospital so volunteering at this soup kitchen is on top of required philanthropy hours. She put in the work, for whatever motive ulterior or otherwise, so I don't want to begrudge her of that. I know this isn't a MM fan forum, but credit where credit's due?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> She has 65 friends?  Assuming all the nannies, gardeners, maids, chickens, and Lilibet's surrogate will count into that 65. Sunshine Sachs is probably tasked to round up paid extras and maybe an Archwell employee or two. Too bad social media bots aren't real to be invited.


since she seems to have Markled most of her friends, that leaves the A-list people like Serena Williams....didn't she even drop her friend Jennifer Meyer?  Maybe O and Gayle will show up.  they seem to want to keep these two in the public eye


----------



## CarryOn2020

Her party is Wednesday? ???  As in Aug. 4???
Oooooh, so H&M did not score an invite to O’s 60th ?? on the Vineyard???  Rumor is OW and Clooney will attend his.  
https://www.capecodtimes.com/story/...ed-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/5428910001/
*Partying with the stars: ***** to reportedly host celeb-studded birthday bash on Martha's Vineyard*
Eric Williams
Cape Cod Times

It probably won't be sheet cake on paper plates. With the big 6-0 coming up on the birthday odometer, former President Barack ***** is reportedly hosting a bash at his swanky Edgartown manse on Martha's Vineyard, and celebrity pals may add glitz to the candle-snuffing.
According to The Hill, the ex-prez is expecting dozens of cheery chums to join him at his waterfront pad, a sweet 7-bedroom, 7,000 square foot home in the Katama section of town. ***** turns 60 on Wednesday, and guests may include heavy hitters such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney, The Hill reports.






Guests are reportedly going to be asked to take a COVID-19 test before the festivities. And it won't be the first time that the former president has hobnobbed with celebrities on his special day. Guests including Chris Rock, Jay-Z, Tom Hanks and Stevie Wonder helped ***** celebrate his 50th birthday at the White House in 2011, according to The Hill.
Before they bought a home in Edgartown, the former First Family spent frequent summer vacations on Martha's Vineyard, trading the heat of Washington D.C., for cool ocean breezes and refreshing swims. ***** was a fixture at Vineyard golf courses, with partners that included former President Bill ******* and basketball great Ray Allen.





While the Obamas generally maintained a low profile on the island during presidential vacations, the frothy hubbub around their presence was unavoidable at times, particularly when they noshed in already congested Oak Bluffs. The Sweet Life Cafe on Circuit Avenue was an ***** fave for fancy dining, but the president also had a taste for take-out from Nancy's Restaurant on Oak Bluffs Harbor.
The Obamas took advantage of Vineyard bike trails, including the 14-mile loop that runs through the Manuel F. Correllus State Forest in the center of the island. They also toured the Gay Head Light in Aquinnah and attended fireworks shows in Oak Bluffs.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her party is Wednesday? ???  As in Aug. 4???
> Oooooh, so H&M did not score an invite to O’s 60th ?? on the Vineyard???  Rumor is OW and Clooney will attend his.
> https://www.capecodtimes.com/story/...ed-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/5428910001/
> *Partying with the stars: ***** to reportedly host celeb-studded birthday bash on Martha's Vineyard*
> Eric Williams
> Cape Cod Times
> 
> It probably won't be sheet cake on paper plates. With the big 6-0 coming up on the birthday odometer, former President Barack ***** is reportedly hosting a bash at his swanky Edgartown manse on Martha's Vineyard, and celebrity pals may add glitz to the candle-snuffing.
> According to The Hill, the ex-prez is expecting dozens of cheery chums to join him at his waterfront pad, a sweet 7-bedroom, 7,000 square foot home in the Katama section of town. ***** turns 60 on Wednesday, and guests may include heavy hitters such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney, The Hill reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guests are reportedly going to be asked to take a COVID-19 test before the festivities. And it won't be the first time that the former president has hobnobbed with celebrities on his special day. Guests including Chris Rock, Jay-Z, Tom Hanks and Stevie Wonder helped ***** celebrate his 50th birthday at the White House in 2011, according to The Hill.
> Before they bought a home in Edgartown, the former First Family spent frequent summer vacations on Martha's Vineyard, trading the heat of Washington D.C., for cool ocean breezes and refreshing swims. ***** was a fixture at Vineyard golf courses, with partners that included former President Bill ******* and basketball great Ray Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the Obamas generally maintained a low profile on the island during presidential vacations, the frothy hubbub around their presence was unavoidable at times, particularly when they noshed in already congested Oak Bluffs. The Sweet Life Cafe on Circuit Avenue was an ***** fave for fancy dining, but the president also had a taste for take-out from Nancy's Restaurant on Oak Bluffs Harbor.
> The Obamas took advantage of Vineyard bike trails, including the 14-mile loop that runs through the Manuel F. Correllus State Forest in the center of the island. They also toured the Gay Head Light in Aquinnah and attended fireworks shows in Oak Bluffs.


well if both parties are on the same day and O is invited to both, I can guess which one she will attend - even if it means travelling


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well if both parties are on the same day and O is invited to both, I can guess which one she will attend - even if it means travelling



East Coast vs West Coast -  battle of the birthdays









						Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## c18027

amante said:


> I mentioned her international relations major because I know others who majored IR and they tend to be the "be the change you wish to see in the world" types (ala paraphrased-to-the-extreme gandhi quote). I think Meghan is the same.
> 
> MM does seem quick to take credit for the good things she does, but hey she actually does them right? In her official royal.uk bio circa May 2018, it said that she'd been volunteering in a soup kitchen since she was 13 and has continued while on break from college. Volunteering in a soup kitchen is not glamorous. I've tried it once. Homeless people tend to have mental health issues so it's a little bit depressing especially compared to volunteering with children. She was Kappa Kappa Gamma and I think its philanthropy is St Jude's Children's Cancer Hospital so volunteering at this soup kitchen is on top of required philanthropy hours. She put in the work, for whatever motive ulterior or otherwise, so I don't want to begrudge her of that. I know this isn't a MM fan forum, but credit where credit's due?


The philanthropy of Kappa Kappa Gamma is Reading is Fundamental.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It’s just struck me that it’s really funny they are hiring a _party planner_ to have a buffet for 60 people in their back garden - I mean talk about overkill 
I suppose we wouldn’t know it was a small, intimate affair for these very private people if he wasn’t here to tell us.
I am also struck by how cr*p a celeb event planner  he must be if he didn’t know Oprah & the rest of the a list would be at another high profile event that day……
 unless of course he did & that’s why he suggested it


----------



## redney

Oh, this is good. Lots of dish throwing in Montecito again today!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm honestly surprised she even wants to celebrate. At age 40, pulling off that "Ain't I cute and basically teenaged" shtick gets really hard I'd imagine.


----------



## csshopper

How thoughtful of the former President to schedule his party to conflict on the same day, thus providing the Suckesses an excuse for not attending, as opposed to admitting, not invited.


----------



## jelliedfeels

c18027 said:


> The philanthropy of Kappa Kappa Gamma is Reading is Fundamental.


Haha.
good one
Ultimately, we can debate whether there is any true altruism all day long but a 40year old woman taking credit for some charity work she did 20 years ago as part of some social club she was in seems particularly pathetic  to me.

I don’t suppose any of you are gagging to hear about when I ran a charity bake sale when I was 16 but then I’m not a famed philanthropist I guess


----------



## c18027

jelliedfeels said:


> Haha.
> good one
> Ultimately, we can debate whether there is any true altruism all day long but a 40year old woman taking credit for some charity work she did 20 years ago as part of some social club she was in seems particularly pathetic  to me.
> 
> I don’t suppose any of you are gagging to hear about when I ran a charity bake sale when I was 16 but then I’m not a famed philanthropist I guess


What joke am I missing?


----------



## jelliedfeels

c18027 said:


> What joke am I missing?


I took your ‘reading is fundamental’ comment to mean it sounds like they are encouraging Children’s literacy but they are actually encouraging being b*tchy. Was that not the joke?

I was also sort of stream of consciousness following it with saying how weird it is she brags about stuff she did as a student in general - given that it’s been such a long time.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> How thoughtful of the former President to schedule his party to conflict on the same day, thus providing the Suckesses an excuse for not attending, as opposed to admitting, not invited.


Au contraire, M is expecting BO to charter a private jet to fly him and his entourage to LA to wish her a happy birthday, because she is after all more important than an ex-president. I mean she's a world renowned philanthropist, a royal, and a duchess to boot.


----------



## c18027

jelliedfeels said:


> I took your ‘reading is fundamental’ comment to mean it sounds like they are encouraging Children’s literacy but they are actually encouraging being b*tchy. Was that not the joke?
> 
> I was also sort of stream of consciousness following it with saying how weird it is she brags about stuff she did as a student in general - given that it’s been such a long time.


Ha, ha! No — Reading is Fundamental is actually a real non-profit organization that Kappa Kappa Gamma supports through its philanthropic activities. Meghan hasn’t taken credit for that … yet!


----------



## redney

Maggie Muggins said:


> Au contraire, M is expecting BO to charter a private jet to fly him and his entourage to LA to wish her a happy birthday, because she is after all more important than an ex-president. I mean she's a world renowned philanthropist, a royal, and a duchess to boot.


Don't forget she's the wife of the 6th in line! "Only a plane crash away" as she is alleged to have said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

c18027 said:


> Ha, ha! No — Reading is Fundamental is actually a real non-profit organization that Kappa Kappa Gamma supports through its philanthropic activities. Meghan hasn’t taken credit for that … yet!


Ah right! Oh this is totally lost in translation then. I only know the expression from Rupaul’s drag race where it’s the name of the challenge where they roast/insult each other. I had guessed it was probably a catchphrase from American schools but I didn’t realise it was a real organisation. You learn something new everyday.

good for them- I wonder if she did any of it


----------



## K.D.

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, on a personal note, they shouldn’t be asked to take sides & should be able to have a familial relationship with the black sheep and still be on good terms with the rest of the family if they want to.
> 
> On a pragmatic note - they’d have to be nuts to side against the BRF who keep them and their creepy parents famous and comfortable no matter what.
> Whereas H&M have a tendency to toss people like worn rags.
> I’m sure they realise this.
> 
> Wow she couldn’t resist the urge to put his clothes on eh? She must be London’s lowest effort drag king.
> 
> I’m giggling at the idea of her strutting back and forth outside the gates looking nonchalant like a background extra on a set. Probably about the level of her acting ability too.
> Im sure we’ve all bought charity stuff and it’s good to promote a good cause but the giant letters bragging about her benevolence are a bit funnily on the nose for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeez the advances are ludicrous aren’t they? *NGL I think TPF book club would be hilarious & so fun.*
> 
> 
> I was invited too (maybe it is doubling as some sort of roast/intervention) but I just don’t think it is environmentally ethical to fly back & forth on intercontinental flights for social events and PR stunts & I’m sure my hosts would agree





c18027 said:


> Ha, ha! No — *Reading is Fundamental is actually a real non-profit organization that Kappa Kappa Gamma supports* through its philanthropic activities. Meghan hasn’t taken credit for that … yet!



It's written in the stars, there should be a TPF Royal Correspondents Book Club


----------



## c18027

K.D. said:


> It's written in the stars, there should be a TPF Royal Correspondents Book Club


Meghan’s first book choice would be:


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her party is Wednesday? ???  As in Aug. 4???
> Oooooh, so H&M did not score an invite to O’s 60th ?? on the Vineyard???  Rumor is OW and Clooney will attend his.
> https://www.capecodtimes.com/story/...ed-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/5428910001/
> *Partying with the stars: ***** to reportedly host celeb-studded birthday bash on Martha's Vineyard*
> Eric Williams
> Cape Cod Times
> 
> It probably won't be sheet cake on paper plates. With the big 6-0 coming up on the birthday odometer, former President Barack ***** is reportedly hosting a bash at his swanky Edgartown manse on Martha's Vineyard, and celebrity pals may add glitz to the candle-snuffing.
> According to The Hill, the ex-prez is expecting dozens of cheery chums to join him at his waterfront pad, a sweet 7-bedroom, 7,000 square foot home in the Katama section of town. ***** turns 60 on Wednesday, and guests may include heavy hitters such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney, The Hill reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guests are reportedly going to be asked to take a COVID-19 test before the festivities. And it won't be the first time that the former president has hobnobbed with celebrities on his special day. Guests including Chris Rock, Jay-Z, Tom Hanks and Stevie Wonder helped ***** celebrate his 50th birthday at the White House in 2011, according to The Hill.
> Before they bought a home in Edgartown, the former First Family spent frequent summer vacations on Martha's Vineyard, trading the heat of Washington D.C., for cool ocean breezes and refreshing swims. ***** was a fixture at Vineyard golf courses, with partners that included former President Bill ******* and basketball great Ray Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the Obamas generally maintained a low profile on the island during presidential vacations, the frothy hubbub around their presence was unavoidable at times, particularly when they noshed in already congested Oak Bluffs. The Sweet Life Cafe on Circuit Avenue was an ***** fave for fancy dining, but the president also had a taste for take-out from Nancy's Restaurant on Oak Bluffs Harbor.
> The Obamas took advantage of Vineyard bike trails, including the 14-mile loop that runs through the Manuel F. Correllus State Forest in the center of the island. They also toured the Gay Head Light in Aquinnah and attended fireworks shows in Oak Bluffs.


I just got back from the Vineyard, glad I missed the craziness.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Haha.
> good one
> Ultimately, we can debate whether there is any true altruism all day long but a 40year old woman taking credit for some charity work she did 20 years ago as part of some social club she was in seems particularly pathetic  to me.
> 
> I don’t suppose any of you are gagging to hear about when I ran a charity bake sale when I was 16 but then I’m not a famed philanthropist I guess





jelliedfeels said:


> I took your ‘reading is fundamental’ comment to mean it sounds like they are encouraging Children’s literacy but they are actually encouraging being b*tchy. Was that not the joke?
> 
> I was also sort of stream of consciousness following it with saying how weird it is she brags about stuff she did as a student in general - given that it’s been such a long time.



After misguidedly leaving out vital info from my CV for many years:

I'd like it to be known publicly I was:

Head Girl and House Captain of my senior (high) school. Can you believe these honours did not come with a stipend or security? 

Happy to_ make_ all my teachers presents for Christmas every year for 5 years (mostly petit four / mulled wine) not a single reward except a crafty taste and underage tipple now and again. 

Leader at the carol services for our local old age peoples home. And we had to walk there, no limos, no cavalcades, no press. It's a wonder I survived. 

Editor for the school magazine. For this alone I should be a named author. 

Co-producer, director and choreographer for a dance show to raise money for the girl we sponsored in Lesotho so she could become a teacher. Therefore, I should now be known as 'former star and impresario of the stage, Papertiger' 

A volunteer in a charity shop for 2 years. Not a single banana in the store but plenty of mice in the basement. 



 

I thought this was all part of life, completely normal and mostly fun, _now_ I find I actually qualify to sainthood  .

If someone could just pass this on to Buck Palace I'd like to be made a Dame of the Realm (pref before it's dismantled).


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s just struck me that it’s really funny they are hiring a _party planner_ to have a buffet for 60 people in their back garden - I mean talk about overkill


These people don't even apply their own makeup, so a party planner seems normal.


----------



## justwatchin

Still no photos of the mysterious Baby Lilibet?


----------



## redney

justwatchin said:


> Still no photos of the mysterious Baby Lilibet?


Guess the tabloids aren't lining up with competing $$$$ quotes for a first photo


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Leader at the carol services for our local old age peoples home. And we had to walk there, no limos, no cavalcades, no press. It's a wonder I survived.



OMG! During elementary school I was part of a Christmas choir that sang for seniors as well. We even dressed up as little angels! I have somewhat failed to mention it on my CV as well.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG! During elementary school I was part of a Christmas choir that sang for seniors as well. We even dressed up as little angels! I have somewhat failed to mention it on my CV as well.



See    these oversights and modesty is what's been holding us back all these years.

If we'd only known, we could ruling the World by now


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> Still no photos of the mysterious Baby Lilibet?



Cheque hasn't cleared


----------



## CarryOn2020

K.D. said:


> It's written in the stars, there should be a TPF Royal Correspondents Book Club



I’m in.
Will we have Cliffs’ Notes - because, ya kno, it’s a pandemic 



justwatchin said:


> Still no photos of the mysterious Baby Lilibet?



Kitty Spencer, Diana’s lovely, kinda look-alike niece, caused H&M to think again before posting photos of the *“bébé”* (”bay-bay,”). 
They do not want their *“bébé”* ( “bay-bay”) to be compared to anyone in the BRF.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> After misguidedly leaving out vital info from my CV for many years:
> 
> I'd like it to be known publicly I was:
> 
> Head Girl and House Captain of my senior (high) school. Can you believe these honours did not come with a stipend or security?
> 
> Happy to_ make_ all my teachers presents for Christmas every year for 5 years (mostly petit four / mulled wine) not a single reward except a crafty taste and underage tipple now and again.
> 
> Leader at the carol services for our local old age peoples home. And we had to walk there, no limos, no cavalcades, no press. It's a wonder I survived.
> 
> Editor for the school magazine. For this alone I should be a named author.
> 
> Co-producer, director and choreographer for a dance show to raise money for the girl we sponsored in Lesotho so she could become a teacher. Therefore, I should now be known as 'former star and impresario of the stage, Papertiger'
> 
> A volunteer in a charity shop for 2 years. Not a single banana in the store but plenty of mice in the basement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought this was all part of life, completely normal and mostly fun, _now_ I find I actually qualify to sainthood  .
> 
> If someone could just pass this on to Buck Palace I'd like to be made a Dame of the Realm (pref before it's dismantled).





QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG! During elementary school I was part of a Christmas choir that sang for seniors as well. We even dressed up as little angels! I have somewhat failed to mention it on my CV as well.


This is what’s so unendingly funny to me about the extremely underwhelming but not under-sung charitable endeavours of the gruesome twosome.

Not to be jingoistic, but when you think about it, the U.K. has thousands of charity shops where the vast majority of the staff work for free. We have hundreds of animal shelters where people do the unglamorous jobs for free. Our entire network of hospices are supported by donations. As are some other prestigious organisations. I could go on. The point is it clearly _can’t _be that statistically uncommon to be charitable or to volunteer if all these places can keep going.

_Maybe_ the British just have an extremely high bar for charity and it was just an innocent clash of cultures that dear old Megs expected us to be blown away by her handing out a couple of old shirts and some sandwiches or indeed, (rather than actually doing anything) her telling us about how she helped at a soup kitchen 10 years ago and she once wrote a stiff letter about sexism and  soap.

However, I kind of suspect that assuming that might be doing the US and the rest of the world a disservice. 

add on- I’m sorry papertiger but reading your summary you said you enjoyed doing it. Charity is only noble if you are immensely tortured internally the entire time & meeting others is agony for you because they don’t recognise _your pain._ 
Furthermore, you do not seem to have at any point activated ‘a groundswell of compassion’ so I’m afraid it’s ‘do not pass go’ on your entry into the montecito gentry.

It’s looking better for you,  Queen of the wrap dress,  because it sounds  like you looked exceptionally cute  while you were doing your saintly works as is the example of our great and youthful leader. If we can find some footage of you sticking your tongue out there may be hope for you yet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe we need some inspiration or hot water:











						Meghan Markle’s High School Yearbook Photo Proves She Has Always Been A Fighter
					

Check out what she said in her caption, plus other images from before she joined the Royal Family.




					www.bet.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

This has a very loud ring of truth. It fits with his chain-puller/trouble maker personality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe we need some inspiration or hot water:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s High School Yearbook Photo Proves She Has Always Been A Fighter
> 
> 
> Check out what she said in her caption, plus other images from before she joined the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bet.com



Thanks @CarryOn2020  for M's yearbook quote: “Women are like teabags; they don’t realize how strong they are until they’re in hot water."
More plagiarism from the duchess. Taken from Eleanor Roosevelt's version 1949.
Eleanor Roosevelt


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Is it considered plagiarism when the source is quoted?


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Is it considered plagiarism when the source is quoted?
> 
> View attachment 5153326



Looks like she misquoted Eleanor.  Hmmmm, as usual, the original makes more sense.
_Eleanor Roosevelt liked to say, “A woman is like a tea bag. You never know how strong *it* is until *it’s* in hot water.”










						“A Woman is Like a Tea Bag”: Eleanor Roosevelt, and Radical Women of the 20s and 30s   3-26 – The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Foundation
					






					fdrfoundation.org
				













						What false quotes tell us about ourselves
					

I’m a huge fan of quotations. When writing an essay or addressing a group, it’s lovely to be able to pull out a couple of sentences by someone famous that neatly summarize the situation…




					engagethefox.wordpress.com
				



_


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

It seems there are quite a few variations, to me they all make sense. It also may not have originated with Eleanor Roosevelt so that may explain the discrepancies. 





__





						People are Like Tea Bags. You Never Know How Strong They Are Until You Put Them in Hot Water – Quote Investigator
					






					quoteinvestigator.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps this is why we distinguish between  the truth, their truth, your truth, my truth, his truth, her truth. 
Recollections may vary, blah, blah. This I know for sure -  The world has lost its sense of sanity.
 Chugachunga may be the only safe place.  

Found this on the internet - no idea if Mencken actually said it  
“The truth, indeed, is something that mankind, for some mysterious reason, instinctively dislikes. Every man who tries to tell it is unpopular, and even when, by the sheer strength of his case, he prevails, he is put down as a scoundrel.”
— H. L. Mencken


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> MM does seem quick to take credit for the good things she does, but hey she actually does them right? In her official royal.uk bio circa May 2018, it said that she'd been volunteering in a soup kitchen since she was 13 and has continued while on break from college. Volunteering in a soup kitchen is not glamorous. I've tried it once. Homeless people tend to have mental health issues so it's a little bit depressing especially compared to volunteering with children. She was Kappa Kappa Gamma and I think its philanthropy is St Jude's Children's Cancer Hospital so volunteering at this soup kitchen is on top of required philanthropy hours. She put in the work, for whatever motive ulterior or otherwise, so I don't want to begrudge her of that. I know this isn't a MM fan forum, but credit where credit's due?


IMO she does have a charitable heart. She volunteered at Hubb Kitchen at the start without making a big fuss over it. The ladies there have a good opinion of her. 

But once money gets involved, it gets shady. For instance, the cookbook which was a joint project. Methane wrote the foreword but the PR material regularly claims it as HER book. The funds raised were to "help the Hubb Community Kitchen to strengthen lives and communities through cooking", but some of the funds were donated elsewhere in her name. 

I'm wondering if it is a narc thing. My office narc was in his 30s but he loved to brag about getting top marks in his primary school. And when we had company events with high profile guests, he would try to impress on them that it was HIS event.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe we need some inspiration or hot water:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s High School Yearbook Photo Proves She Has Always Been A Fighter
> 
> 
> Check out what she said in her caption, plus other images from before she joined the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bet.com



All I could think of was the difference between the yearbook face and her ongoing mutating face.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> IMO she does have a charitable heart. She volunteered at Hubb Kitchen at the start without making a big fuss over it. The ladies there have a good opinion of her.
> 
> But once money gets involved, it gets shady. For instance, the cookbook which was a joint project. Methane wrote the foreword but the PR material regularly claims it as HER book. The funds raised were to "help the Hubb Community Kitchen to strengthen lives and communities through cooking", but some of the funds were donated elsewhere in her name.
> 
> I'm wondering if it is a narc thing. My office narc was in his 30s but he loved to brag about getting top marks in his primary school. And when we had company events with high profile guests, he would try to impress on them that it was HIS event.
> 
> 
> All I could think of was the difference between the yearbook face and her ongoing mutating face.



I do not blame MM for this nonsense with H&M. Although this is not a defence, she did what any child raised in Hwood studios and elite private schools would do. None of her behavior surprises me. IMO the blame is solely on Hazz with the BRF as enablers.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her party is Wednesday? ???  As in Aug. 4???
> Oooooh, so H&M did not score an invite to O’s 60th ?? on the Vineyard???  Rumor is OW and Clooney will attend his.
> https://www.capecodtimes.com/story/...ed-birthday-bash-marthas-vineyard/5428910001/
> *Partying with the stars: ***** to reportedly host celeb-studded birthday bash on Martha's Vineyard*
> Eric Williams
> Cape Cod Times
> 
> It probably won't be sheet cake on paper plates. With the big 6-0 coming up on the birthday odometer, former President Barack ***** is reportedly hosting a bash at his swanky Edgartown manse on Martha's Vineyard, and celebrity pals may add glitz to the candle-snuffing.
> According to The Hill, the ex-prez is expecting dozens of cheery chums to join him at his waterfront pad, a sweet 7-bedroom, 7,000 square foot home in the Katama section of town. ***** turns 60 on Wednesday, and guests may include heavy hitters such as Oprah Winfrey and George Clooney, The Hill reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guests are reportedly going to be asked to take a COVID-19 test before the festivities. And it won't be the first time that the former president has hobnobbed with celebrities on his special day. Guests including Chris Rock, Jay-Z, Tom Hanks and Stevie Wonder helped ***** celebrate his 50th birthday at the White House in 2011, according to The Hill.
> Before they bought a home in Edgartown, the former First Family spent frequent summer vacations on Martha's Vineyard, trading the heat of Washington D.C., for cool ocean breezes and refreshing swims. ***** was a fixture at Vineyard golf courses, with partners that included former President Bill ******* and basketball great Ray Allen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While the Obamas generally maintained a low profile on the island during presidential vacations, the frothy hubbub around their presence was unavoidable at times, particularly when they noshed in already congested Oak Bluffs. The Sweet Life Cafe on Circuit Avenue was an ***** fave for fancy dining, but the president also had a taste for take-out from Nancy's Restaurant on Oak Bluffs Harbor.
> The Obamas took advantage of Vineyard bike trails, including the 14-mile loop that runs through the Manuel F. Correllus State Forest in the center of the island. They also toured the Gay Head Light in Aquinnah and attended fireworks shows in Oak Bluffs.



The Obamas party is supposed to take place next weekend.  But maybe Meghan’s will be then as well. Not many people want go to Wednesday night parties.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do not blame MM for this nonsense with H&M. Although this is not a defence, *she did what any child raised in Hwood studios and elite private schools would do. *None of her behavior surprises me. IMO the blame is solely on Hazz with the BRF as enablers.


Oh, do tell! (Since I'm not from Hwood nor attended elite private schools, I'm curious.)
And when it comes to enablers, I think Methane too had enablers galore.


----------



## rose60610

Did Rake-It-In-Rachel write the party invites on caligraphied bananas? Whaddaya wanna make a bet her gift requests will be donations to Archewell? What will Harry get her? Another rescue chicken?


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Did Rake-It-In-Rachel write the party invites on caligraphied bananas? Whaddaya wanna make a bet her gift requests will be donations to Archewell? What will Harry get her? Another rescue chicken?



Harry probably needs to buy her more plates since she has broke all of them whenever some news or someone is against her or overshadows her


----------



## rose60610

Each one of her 60 guests should ask her if she's "okay", and is she just existing, or living?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Oh, do tell! (Since I'm not from Hwood nor attended elite private schools, I'm curious.)
> And when it comes to enablers, I think Methane too had enablers galore.



I have no personal knowledge of that lifestyle, so it’s *only my opinion*. I can look at the school’s website and make some conclusions. Hazz’s private school education may have been very different due to his father being the heir. Speaking truth to power is difficult for most of us.  Interesting article from 2012 on Hazz’s upbringing - the outrage seems real.




__





						Outrage at Nazi Harry
					

Prince Harry should not be allowed to join the Army after being pictured dressed up as a Nazi soldier, a leading politician said today.




					www.standard.co.uk
				








__





						Immaculate Heart | A Private Catholic Day School for Girls, Los Angeles CA
					

Located In Los Angeles, CA, Immaculate Heart is a Private College Preparatory School For Girls in Grades 6 through 12.




					www.immaculateheart.org
				



Private school = Small class sizes, all girls, uniforms, undoubtedly manners and study skills were emphasized, strong academics, lovely environment, etc.
Public schools = large class size (1,200+), boys and girls together, wear whatever, certain manners emphasized but expect profanity, highly competitive academically but free to choose your own path, institutional environment, etc.

Hwood sets = for a child, it could be an interesting learning environment around lots of adults, or it could also be a disaster. Probably lots of quiet time. My guess is early on she developed the ability to read people, saw lots of diva behavior, and didn‘t get taken advantaged of. IMO.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Did Rake-It-In-Rachel write the party invites on caligraphied bananas? Whaddaya wanna make a bet her gift requests will be donations to Archewell? What will Harry get her? Another rescue chicken?


Would not be surprised if each guest departed with…..drum roll….a signed copy of “The Bench”. There must be stacks of boxes of them.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe we need some inspiration or hot water:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s High School Yearbook Photo Proves She Has Always Been A Fighter
> 
> 
> Check out what she said in her caption, plus other images from before she joined the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bet.com



Oh gosh, this is so profound.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

_*"Megan wants a small gathering. About 65 people are invited, her closest friends and family.* Colin was recommended to her by Oprah who always puts on fabulous parties."_

Is this time that the R*glands and the M*rkles are going to be invited by Hazz's wife? 
_
*"Her next steps are to conquer America, then the world.*

"*Critics carp that Meghan’s megalomania has no limits*. Her admirers retort that she is purposely fulfilling the American Dream."
_
 









						Meg humiliated critics & humbled Royals - now she'll conquer world, says writer
					

MEGHAN Markle “humiliated her critics and humbled the Royal Family”, according to a biographer. Tom Bower believes Meghan’s next step is to “conquer the world” ahead o…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## oldbag

Meghan's quote from school is actually a quote by Eleanor Roosevelt. I knew I had read that somewhere


Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, this is so profound.



else. Did she credit the former first lady?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> her closest friends and family



To most of us that means ‘closest friends and closest family’.  To H&M, that may mean just ‘closest friends’ and the family, as in Doria or anyone they consider family.  Just because someone gets an invite doesn’t mean they’ll go, unless they are paid staff.  See, it is always messy with them.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe we need some inspiration or hot water:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s High School Yearbook Photo Proves She Has Always Been A Fighter
> 
> 
> Check out what she said in her caption, plus other images from before she joined the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bet.com



Okie dokie, then.  Reminds me of when my 8 year old son came home innocently asking me "Mummy, what is tea bagging??  So and so was talking about it at school"...about the same time I had a voice mail from the headmaster furiously apologizing about the incident, "Saying this is NOT what we teach at school" and that the child giving unauthorized education was swiftly dealt with.  
Sorry Meg, you can say you're like tea bags.  I'll pass, thank you very much!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _*"Megan wants a small gathering. About 65 people are invited, her closest friends and family.* Colin was recommended to her by Oprah who always puts on fabulous parties."_
> 
> Is this time that the R*glands and the M*rkles are going to be invited by Hazz's wife?
> 
> _*"Her next steps are to conquer America, then the world.*
> 
> "*Critics carp that Meghan’s megalomania has no limits*. Her admirers retort that she is purposely fulfilling the American Dream."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg humiliated critics & humbled Royals - now she'll conquer world, says writer
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle “humiliated her critics and humbled the Royal Family”, according to a biographer. Tom Bower believes Meghan’s next step is to “conquer the world” ahead o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



She has family? Wow! Amazing! 

I didn't know the American Dream was to be a conqueror. So this is what she does "purposely". I guess all the missteps and failures are what she does "accidentally".


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> IMO she does have a charitable heart. She volunteered at Hubb Kitchen at the start without making a big fuss over it. The ladies there have a good opinion of her.
> 
> But once money gets involved, it gets shady. For instance, the cookbook which was a joint project. Methane wrote the foreword but the PR material regularly claims it as HER book. The funds raised were to "help the Hubb Community Kitchen to strengthen lives and communities through cooking", but some of the funds were donated elsewhere in her name.
> 
> I'm wondering if it is a narc thing. My office narc was in his 30s but he loved to brag about getting top marks in his primary school. And when we had company events with high profile guests, he would try to impress on them that it was HIS event.
> 
> 
> All I could think of was the difference between the yearbook face and her ongoing mutating face.





CarryOn2020 said:


> I do not blame MM for this nonsense with H&M. Although this is not a defence, she did what any child raised in Hwood studios and elite private schools would do. None of her behavior surprises me. IMO the blame is solely on Hazz with the BRF as enablers.



I think this is a little unfair to people from the upper classes, personally, there’s clearly a lot of nature as well as nurture going on here.

There are lots of people in H’wood like  Jamie lee Curtis, Zoe kravitz & drew Barrymore who are just born showbiz royalty & clearly never struggled getting into acting (not to say they are not talented as well.)

Realistically the vast majority of every level of Showbiz performers get in by connections but I’ve never seen most of  them engage in the manipulation & narcissism M has or publicly defame their own family & a foreign country for views. 

As to H, I think he views his elite education as a dreadful trauma especially how he was treated better than everyone else & they basically did his exams for him. (TBF he’s not the only royal who whined about getting the best education taxes could buy either). He would also say that they kept him so naive of politics that basically forced him to put on that nazi outfit and say slurs as so many innocent children do 

There are lots of people who go to elite schools and it gives them a giant leg up in university/work. The majority are aware of this as well. Some people are a little blasé about how money works or what life is like for the poor, sure, but l I think you need to be a vindictive opportunistic petty tyrant  to come out a vindictive opportunistic petty tyrant.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have no personal knowledge of that lifestyle, so it’s *only my opinion*. I can look at the school’s website and make some conclusions. Hazz’s private school education may have been very different due to his father being the heir. Speaking truth to power is difficult for most of us.  Interesting article from 2012 on Hazz’s upbringing - the outrage seems real.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Outrage at Nazi Harry
> 
> 
> Prince Harry should not be allowed to join the Army after being pictured dressed up as a Nazi soldier, a leading politician said today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Immaculate Heart | A Private Catholic Day School for Girls, Los Angeles CA
> 
> 
> Located In Los Angeles, CA, Immaculate Heart is a Private College Preparatory School For Girls in Grades 6 through 12.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.immaculateheart.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Private school = Small class sizes, all girls, uniforms, undoubtedly manners and study skills were emphasized, strong academics, lovely environment, etc.
> Public schools = large class size (1,200+), boys and girls together, wear whatever, certain manners emphasized but expect profanity, highly competitive academically but free to choose your own path, institutional environment, etc.
> 
> Hwood sets = for a child, it could be an interesting learning environment around lots of adults, or it could also be a disaster. Probably lots of quiet time. My guess is early on she developed the ability to read people, saw lots of diva behavior, and didn‘t get taken advantaged of. IMO.


I know public/private mean different things in different countries.  My children grew up in the US in almost exclusively private schools, but even the Episcopalian/Catholic schools they went to were coed.  (My daughter only now is in an all girls Catholic high school.  Just the stereotype alone has me scared!).  I grew up in public schools, and my education was completely on par with DH's private school upbringing.  I know this can vary greatly according to region/state in the US.  My son went to a public school for 10th grade for the first time in his life, and he was shocked at the amount of disrespect teachers had to put up with.  That would never have been tolerated in my public school 30 years ago.  Times they are a changing.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, this is so profound.





purseinsanity said:


> Okie dokie, then.  Reminds me of when my 8 year old son came home innocently asking me "Mummy, what is tea bagging??  So and so was talking about it at school"...about the same time I had a voice mail from the headmaster furiously apologizing about the incident, "Saying this is NOT what we teach at school" and that the child giving unauthorized education was swiftly dealt with.
> Sorry Meg, you can say you're like tea bags.  I'll pass, thank you very much!


The weird thing is, I thought she didn’t even like tea, wasn’t that the reason she threw it at that staffer?

maybe we can personalise this for her…
M- A duchess is like the Starbucks frappe _you_ should’ve brought me an hour ago…. Cool, modern and expensive.

Or maybe packaged in plastic, artificially sweetened & full of ice


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> The weird thing is, I thought she didn’t even like tea, wasn’t that the reason she threw it at that staffer?
> 
> maybe we can personalise this for her…
> M- A duchess is like the Starbucks frappe _you_ should’ve brought me an hour ago…. Cool, modern and expensive.
> 
> Or maybe packaged in plastic, artificially sweetened & full of ice


Or packaged to fool the buyer into thinking they're getting more than what's actually provided, with second rate coffee beans and more marketing and PR than quality.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> *She has family? Wow! Amazing!*
> 
> I didn't know the American Dream was to be a conqueror. So this is what she does "purposely". I guess all the missteps and failures are what she does "accidentally".


Yes, she has Haz, Archie, and the mysterious newborn.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _*"Her next steps are to conquer America, then the world.*
> 
> "*Critics carp that Meghan’s megalomania has no limits*. Her admirers retort that she is purposely fulfilling the American Dream."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg humiliated critics & humbled Royals - now she'll conquer world, says writer
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle “humiliated her critics and humbled the Royal Family”, according to a biographer. Tom Bower believes Meghan’s next step is to “conquer the world” ahead o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Just read the article in The Sun. Now wondering how out of context are the phrases. The article claims that Tom Bower says Methane aims to conquer the world by her 40th birthday   Unless she postpones the birthday, there is no way she is going to make the deadline.

There is a link in the article to an opinion piece written by Bower, from which the quotes are extrapolated.








						Meghan will get no birthday congrats from small army of ex-pals she's shunned
					

BLOWING out the 40 candles on her birthday cake on Wednesday, Meghan Markle will be rightly thrilled about her phenomenal triumph. At her milestone age, the Duchess of Sussex can congratulate hers…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I think this is a little unfair to people from the upper classes, personally, there’s clearly a lot of nature as well as nurture going on here.
> 
> There are lots of people in H’wood like  Jamie lee Curtis, Zoe kravitz & drew Barrymore who are just born showbiz royalty & clearly never struggled getting into acting (not to say they are not talented as well.)
> 
> Realistically the vast majority of every level of Showbiz performers get in by connections but I’ve never seen most of  them engage in the manipulation & narcissism M has or publicly defame their own family & a foreign country for views.
> 
> As to H, I think he views his elite education as a dreadful trauma especially how he was treated better than everyone else & they basically did his exams for him. (TBF he’s not the only royal who whined about getting the best education taxes could buy either). He would also say that they kept him so naive of politics that basically forced him to put on that nazi outfit and say slurs as so many innocent children do
> 
> There are lots of people who go to elite schools and it gives them a giant leg up in university/work. The majority are aware of this as well. Some people are a little blasé about how money works or what life is like for the poor, sure, but l I think you need to be a vindictive opportunistic petty tyrant  to come out a vindictive opportunistic petty tyrant.



There’s the SoHoHouse class, the upper classes, the old money class, high society, then the Royals.  Where someone fits depends on their willingness to go-along/get-along and the spouse. Seems that no one really wanted Hazz hanging around, so they happily pushed him away [or let him go]. Looking back, it all seems to have happened easily.   He probably doesn’t realize that he was let go. Not yet. Someday it will sink in.  IMO MM has realized it which creates the rage-athon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Okie dokie, then.  Reminds me of when my 8 year old son came home innocently asking me "Mummy, what is tea bagging??  So and so was talking about it at school"...about the same time I had a voice mail from the headmaster furiously apologizing about the incident, "Saying this is NOT what we teach at school" and that the child giving unauthorized education was swiftly dealt with.
> Sorry Meg, you can say you're like tea bags.  I'll pass, thank you very much!



As soon as I saw the quote in the high school yearbook, I thought it had to be a joke. Ya kno, how high schoolers love to do - snark snark wink wink. They are the first to know those Urban Dictionary definitions and laugh themselves silly over it.  Then, when no one here commented on it, I thought I’m the only one [eeek] who thinks this way, my mind must have fallen into the gutter so I kept quiet. Thank you for ‘getting it’ too. I feel liberated now 

ETA: tea bag,  Haaaaa.  There are laws about putting women in hot water. 


ETA2:  O’s Martha Vineyard party is now 500 invitees and 200 staff. Surely H&M got an invite. I need to check my mailbox, too.  Yesss, this is exactly the kind of joy we need! Welcome to the over 60 club.  
_An official familiar with the plans told Axios that there are now 475 confirmed guests for the party - including Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney and Steven Spielberg - with more than 200 staff members._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This has a very loud ring of truth. It fits with his chain-puller/trouble maker personality.




That honestly makes a whole lot more sense than a random member feeling the need to share they were worried about Archie being too dark.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That honestly makes a whole lot more sense than a random member feeling the need to share they were worried about Archie being too dark.


I have this premonition that Hazard's "tell-all and then tell-some-more" memoir will have a great many memories recast to show his family in a poor light. Stuff like HMTQ sending trusted advisers to assist in Methane's culture ease-in will probably be looked at in an offensive manner: the BRF looked down on his GF and didn't trust that an intelligent worldly wise woman would be smart enough to learn aristocratic ways on her own, those advisers were spies and lousy teachers who couldn't understand that Methane's way was better than traditional ways. The therapists recommended by W&K were conmen and of course he couldn't let any of them treat his precious preggers prima donna. And so on...


----------



## justwatchin

rose60610 said:


> Did Rake-It-In-Rachel write the party invites on caligraphied bananas? Whaddaya wanna make a bet her gift requests will be donations to Archewell? What will Harry get her? Another rescue chicken?


And, will guests need to hand over their phones and sign a non-disclosure before partaking in the birthday buffet? Can’t take chances of photos/videos of the children, chickens or the multiple bathrooms ending up on TMZ


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



I'll just go out on a limb here and say that Methane wants to run for President because she wants to stay in the WHITE house  

One of the Daily Express stories was headlined that Methane has a chance in politics because she has "guts and self-belief". I didn't even click in to read it as it was so absurd. She cannot take criticism and likes to portray herself as a victim. If she gets into politics and wins a seat somewhere, it will be because she has scammed enough votes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why do this?  It really shows who Hazz is. Ick.   

*Death of Prince Philip 'mocked' in new animated satire: Late royal is shown drooling, vacant and eating pureed food in The Prince starring Harry's pal Orlando Bloom*

*HBO Max has released controversial animated Royal Family satire The Prince*
*Series was created by Family Guy producer Gary Janetti and revolves around a fictional version of Prince George as a young tyrannical prince*
*Trailer shows the Queen shooting dead a butler for startling her, Prince William being carried to the toilet and Prince Charles declaring 'it's my turn' to be king*
*Prince Philip, who died in April, is seen drooling and collapsing on the floor *
*Show has been criticised for parodying George, Charlotte and Louis *









						The Prince is criticised for mocking the Duke of Edinburgh
					

The Prince, created by Family Guy producer Gary Janetti, centres around a fictional version of Prince George as a child tyrant. It depicts Prince Philip as drooling and vacant.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

oldbag said:


> Meghan's quote from school is actually a quote by Eleanor Roosevelt. I knew I had read that somewhere else. Did she credit the former first lady?



Yes


----------



## rose60610

Meghan bailed on the BRF after it became clear she couldn't dislodge William to make room for Harry on the throne. So why would she settle for anything lower than President? Representative and Senator are lowly positions in comparison. She isn't allowed to commingle Archewell with a campaign fund. Her slogan could be "Ask me if I'm okay" and brag she has a degree in International Relations so her foreign policy strategy is "If I don't get my way I'll cry and accuse you of racism". Her domestic policy? Easy. "I've broken up my own plus one of the world's oldest families so I'm a pro at creating even more division" and the media will love her for it.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Is it considered plagiarism when the source is quoted?
> 
> View attachment 5153326


you're right; she did acknowledge the source


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Did Rake-It-In-Rachel write the party invites on caligraphied bananas? Whaddaya wanna make a bet her gift requests will be donations to Archewell? What will Harry get her? Another rescue chicken?


wonder if People magazine or Bazaar will be there for photos


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do this?  It really shows who Hazz is. Ick.
> 
> *Death of Prince Philip 'mocked' in new animated satire: Late royal is shown drooling, vacant and eating pureed food in The Prince starring Harry's pal Orlando Bloom*
> 
> *HBO Max has released controversial animated Royal Family satire The Prince*
> *Series was created by Family Guy producer Gary Janetti and revolves around a fictional version of Prince George as a young tyrannical prince*
> *Trailer shows the Queen shooting dead a butler for startling her, Prince William being carried to the toilet and Prince Charles declaring 'it's my turn' to be king*
> *Prince Philip, who died in April, is seen drooling and collapsing on the floor *
> *Show has been criticised for parodying George, Charlotte and Louis *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince is criticised for mocking the Duke of Edinburgh
> 
> 
> The Prince, created by Family Guy producer Gary Janetti, centres around a fictional version of Prince George as a child tyrant. It depicts Prince Philip as drooling and vacant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I don't really care about this satire but I think they are going over the line with Phillip.....I wonder what kind of viewership this is getting?  Even reading this and seeing how controversial it is doesn't raise my curiosity enough to make me want to watch it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

oldbag said:
Meghan's quote from school is actually a quote by Eleanor Roosevelt. I knew I had read that somewhere else. Did she credit the former first lady?

Yes, she did, but - it turns out the quote is falsely attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt.   

Looks like she misquoted Eleanor. Hmmmm, as usual, the original makes more sense.
_Eleanor Roosevelt liked to say, “A woman is like a tea bag. You never know how strong *it* is until *it’s* in hot water.”










						“A Woman is Like a Tea Bag”: Eleanor Roosevelt, and Radical Women of the 20s and 30s   3-26 – The Franklin Delano Roosevelt Foundation
					






					fdrfoundation.org
				












						What false quotes tell us about ourselves
					

I’m a huge fan of quotations. When writing an essay or addressing a group, it’s lovely to be able to pull out a couple of sentences by someone famous that neatly summarize the situation…




					engagethefox.wordpress.com
				



_


----------



## c18027

I wonder if her yearbook quote should have been something like this?

”My future marriage will be like an oat latte — an odd combination of an overbearing element capable of causing mental and physical discomfort, and a weaker, colder element without nuts.”


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Is it considered plagiarism when the source is quoted?
> 
> View attachment 5153326


It's not one of my favorite quotes, but she is correctly providing its author. The picture was what grabbed my attention, she looked so different back then.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do not blame MM for this nonsense with H&M. Although this is not a defence, she did what any child raised in Hwood studios and elite private schools would do. None of her behavior surprises me. IMO the blame is solely on Hazz with the BRF as enablers.


I agree with you. The projects she did when growing up were (and are) very common in catholic private schools, nothing special imo. Students stop referring to them after submitting their college applications. However, it seems that they were used and magnified to build a charitable/activist profile when she joined the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's not one of my favorite quotes, but she is correctly providing its author. The picture was what grabbed my attention, she looked so different back then.



Eeeeek, Mrs. Roosevelt did *not* say it.  This is an example of one of those quotes falsely attributed to a famous person. It happens frequently to Shakespeare and Churchill and many others.  Not sure who said (!), if you’re going to quote me, please quote me correctly.

Maybe this will help:








						The Big List of 47 Famous Misquotes That Have Fooled You
					

The internet is filled with misquotes. Some of the more frequently used quotes, which are attributed to famous people, are wrong. The inaccuracy is due to..




					innovativewealth.com


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I don't really care about this satire but I think they are going over the line with Phillip.....I wonder what kind of viewership this is getting?  Even reading this and seeing how controversial it is doesn't raise my curiosity enough to make me want to watch it.


I realize these episodes were made before Prince Philip died, but we’ve known for years that the time is coming, so why put themselves in a mess like this with episodes that make them look so bad for mocking him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eeeeek, Mrs. Roosevelt did *not* say it.  This is an example of one of those quotes falsely attributed to a famous person. It happens frequently to Shakespeare and Churchill and many others.  Not sure who said (!), if you’re going to quote me, please quote me correctly.
> 
> Maybe this will help:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Big List of 47 Famous Misquotes That Have Fooled You
> 
> 
> The internet is filled with misquotes. Some of the more frequently used quotes, which are attributed to famous people, are wrong. The inaccuracy is due to..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> innovativewealth.com


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I realize these episodes were made before Prince Philip died, but we’ve known for years that the time is coming, so why put themselves in a mess like this with episodes that make them look so bad for mocking him.


but H&M aren't involved with this, right?  just their neighbor, Orlando?


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I realize these episodes were made before Prince Philip died, but we’ve known for years that the time is coming, so *why put themselves in a mess like this with episodes that make them look so bad for mocking him.*



It was likely for the same reasons as with other productions, MONEY.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I am very interested to see how the ghost writer Moehringer handles this. He has his own reputation to consider. Guessing when he took the job he had no clue about what he was getting into.


Same here .. then again, how many times have we seen someone QUIT after having worked with these 2???  Time will tell, after all, the novella isn't going to be out until next year, right?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Same here .. then again, how many times have we seen someone QUIT after having worked with these 2???  Time will tell, after all, the novella isn't going to be out until next year, right?


I just wonder how long the public will be interested in these two.  they aren't doing any new podcasts?  nothing yet on netflix?  if she appears on red carpets I doubt she will outshine actresses and other entertainers.  she's no Rhianna.  so....she has the Prince, that seems to be it.  the kids aren't that interesting and they haven't used them (yet)
Are people always going to be interested in H because he's a (fallen) prince?


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5153680


This would be a terrific prompt for a LOTR/SW:ANH/HP crossover fanfic. 

I've been bingeing on Miraculous Ladybug fanfic because one of the characters is a Methane clone and the take-downs are very enjoyable.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I just wonder how long the public will be interested in these two.  they aren't doing any new podcasts?  nothing yet on netflix?  if she appears on red carpets I doubt she will outshine actresses and other entertainers.  she's no Rhianna.  so....she has the Prince, that seems to be it.  the kids aren't that interesting and they haven't used them (yet)
> Are people always going to be interested in H because he's a (fallen) prince?


Likely Sunshine Sucks' brief includes finagling invites to red carpet events. I wonder if it will also include convincing designers to sponsor her clothes and jewelry.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020  for M's yearbook quote: “Women are like teabags; they don’t realize how strong they are until they’re in hot water."
> More plagiarism from the duchess. Taken from Eleanor Roosevelt's version 1949.
> Eleanor Roosevelt


Interesting , the straight hair and thin eyebrows date back at least to 1999, 18 years old

something odd about the photos even taking into account all the subsequent “work done”


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Is it considered plagiarism when the source is quoted?
> 
> View attachment 5153326


Wow, the other version for the year book photo cropped out the attribution

and, just in case, someone is thinking that rummaging for yearbook photos is a little much (invasive) … I found my dad and mom’s school photos, every year, at a genealogy web site, they are public domain


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


.. and meanwhile, LA is experiencing a high volume of new COVID (Delta variant) cases such that the hospitals are getting inundated with new patients!  Real smart Meg-a-lo-manic; and besides .. who is really going to come (other than Harpo and Gayle)????


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and meanwhile, LA is experiencing a high volume of new COVID (Delta variant) cases such that the hospitals are getting inundated with new patients!  Real smart Meg-a-lo-manic; and besides .. who is really going to come (other than Harpo and Gayle)????


IDK about Gayle but O will probably go to the other party (maybe she will bring her BFF)


----------



## lanasyogamama

I will be absolutely shocked if we don’t hear about how they were invited to *****’s party but decided not to go.


----------



## redney

lanasyogamama said:


> I will be absolutely shocked if we don’t hear about how they were invited to *****’s party but decided not to go.


100% We know the excuses.
"We are on parental leave"
"We are bonding so well with baby Lilibet/as a family of 4, we just couldn't leave during this precious family time"
Blah blah blah


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> *100% We know the excuses.*
> "We are on parental leave"
> "We are bonding so well with baby Lilibet/as a family of 4, we just couldn't leave during this precious family time"
> Blah blah blah



It wasn't that long ago that she was "heavily pregnant", so.... she's in process of getting over being so *heavily pregnant. *


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> .. and meanwhile,* LA is experiencing a high volume of new COVID (Delta variant) cases* such that the hospitals are getting inundated with new patients!  Real smart Meg-a-lo-manic; and besides .. who is really going to come (other than Harpo and Gayle)????



True, but comparatively the Obamas party is more risky. Nearly 500 people have already confirmed they are attending and there will be about 200 staff working the event. Yes, it is said the guests have to have been vaccinated or tested before but I don’t believe for a minute staff will refuse to let in any A-list celebrity who doesn’t provide proof.

With Meghan’s party there’s unlikely to be more than 5-10 attendees tops. Possible transmission will be contained.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I think this is a little unfair to people from the upper classes, personally, there’s clearly a lot of nature as well as nurture going on here.
> 
> There are lots of people in H’wood like  Jamie lee Curtis, Zoe kravitz & drew Barrymore who are just born showbiz royalty & clearly never struggled getting into acting (not to say they are not talented as well.)
> *
> There are lots of people who go to elite schools and it gives them a giant leg up in university/work. The majority are aware of this as well. *Some people are a little blasé about how money works or what life is like for the poor, sure, but l I think you need to be a vindictive opportunistic petty tyrant  to come out a vindictive opportunistic petty tyrant.


So true!  My niece and nephews all went to elite, private boarding schools and while they are very intelligent, it didn't hurt that my BIL, their father, holds a very high powered job in finance and knows everyone who knows everyone.  The education is top notch, no doubt, but the connections they have (I think of it as bought) are priceless.  My kids will never be flying on private jets with Rockefellers like they do.  It's a very elusive and odd world.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I'll just go out on a limb here and say that Methane wants to run for President because she wants to stay in the WHITE house
> 
> One of the Daily Express stories was headlined that Methane has a chance in politics because she has "guts and self-belief". I didn't even click in to read it as it was so absurd. She cannot take criticism and likes to portray herself as a victim. *If she gets into politics and wins a seat somewhere, it will be because she has scammed enough votes.*


Well, then, she'll be in good company.  A lot of politicians probably get their seats that way.


----------



## oldbag

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5153680


My mistake. I went on my search engine and that was the first thing which came up about Mrs. Roosevelt and that quote. No offense to you on my part intended


----------



## bag-mania

oldbag said:


> My mistake. I went on my search engine and that was the first thing which came up about Mrs. Roosevelt and that quote. No offense to you on my part intended



No worries, I was not offended in any way. It is funny to see how far astray the internet can take us.


----------



## rose60610

Even I'll give Meh some slack about her hs yearbook quote. Could even be her English teacher gave her the idea to use the quote, who knows? HS is full of dopey things people say. But somebody put her on the word salad path so it's just as well she used a quote instead.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Even I'll give Meh some slack about her hs yearbook quote. Could even be her English teacher gave her the idea to use the quote, who knows? HS is full of dopey things people say. But somebody put her on the word salad path so it's just as well she used a quote instead.


I was on yearbook staff and there was a book we used that was nothing but quotes and profound sayings


----------



## rose60610

Meghan and her sugars believe word salad is really profound. All those creative activations!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> but H&M aren't involved with this, right?  just their neighbor, Orlando?


Yes, I talking about Gary Janetti, who was so funny on Instagram, but then HBO greenlit his satirical animated show and he lost the plot, so to speak.

I stopped following him months ago. lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I talking about Gary Janetti, who was so funny on Instagram, but then HBO greenlit his satirical animated show and he lost the plot, so to speak.
> 
> *I stopped following him months ago.* lol



Me, too.   This show is way below his creative level IMO. Just a bunch of hackneyed cheap shots.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I was on yearbook staff and there was a book we used that was nothing but quotes and profound sayings



Remember to include this on your CV/resume.  

ETA: not to brag, I “worked“ my up to editor in my senior year.  Happily, I didn’t have to claw my way up because no one else wanted the job. Fwiw, I have never put that on my CV.  Of course, nowadays the schools use the yearbook company’s  software for everything. What we did by hand, today’s kids do on the computer. Pfffft.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Here's The List completed at last. Thank you so much to everyone who participated.   If I've missed anyone, who has contributed, but hasn't received a star, please tell me so that I can make it to you.

Nasty Duo Nicknames
#6
Ball-less Wonder
Baron of Hesaheel
Bar Stewards
Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
BunkerBoy
Dastardly Duo
Disastrous Duo
Douchess
Duchess Disney
Duchess Moaning Markle
Duke of Montecito
Flowerpot and Hardly There
Grifters
Ginge and Cringe
Hap-Hazza
Harkles
HarkleSparkler
Harry the Horrible
Haz
HazBeen
Hazardous Waste
Hazmat
Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
Maleficent of Montecito
Markley Sparkly Squad
Me Gain
Meg-a-lo-maniac
Megain
Meggypoo
Meh
Mermaid
Methane
Needy and Greedy
NutMeg
Nope and Dope
Pearl
Pinky & The Brain
Princess Pinocchio
Raptor
Royal Ingrates of Montecito
She Who Shall Remain Nameless
Skid Markle
St. Meghan
Terrible twosome
THE B.st.rds
The Di-Nameic Duo
The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
The Douche Formallly Known as a Prince
The Earl of Dunnothing
the glimmer twins
The Sucksexxes
the wife
Those B.st.rds
ToxicTwo
Tungsten

PR Teams Nicknames
Ahmed Scabies
Omid Scooby-doo
scabies
Sunshine Sucks

Nicknames For Later Use
Harry’s ex wife
The ex Duchess of Sussex

Great effort everyone!  The Muppets/Fraggles are singing our song; just substitute TPF and sing along. Cheers!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's The List completed at last. Thank you so much to everyone who participated.   If I've missed anyone, who has contributed, but hasn't received a star, please tell me so that I can make it to you.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Baron of Hesaheel
> Bar Stewards
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> BunkerBoy
> Dastardly Duo
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Duke of Montecito
> Flowerpot and Hardly There
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Hap-Hazza
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Hazmat
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Maleficent of Montecito
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Meg-a-lo-maniac
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Meh
> Mermaid
> Methane
> Needy and Greedy
> NutMeg
> Nope and Dope
> Pearl
> Pinky & The Brain
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> Royal Ingrates of Montecito
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> Skid Markle
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> THE B.st.rds
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
> The Douche Formallly Known as a Prince
> The Earl of Dunnothing
> the glimmer twins
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> Those B.st.rds
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Ahmed Scabies
> Omid Scooby-doo
> scabies
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> Nicknames For Later Use
> Harry’s ex wife
> The ex Duchess of Sussex
> 
> Great effort everyone!  The Muppets/Fraggles are singing our song; just substitute TPF and sing along. Cheers!




Bravo, @Maggie Muggins, please have a seat and relax.  We are in awe of your skills and thoughtfulness and we bow to your greatness.


Now it’s time to plaaaaay.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bravo, @Maggie Muggins, please have a seat and relax.  We are in awe of your skills and thoughtfulness and we bow to your greatness.
> View attachment 5154122
> 
> Now it’s time to plaaaaay.


Thank you!
I think you know by now that I enjoy TPF. All the hoopla adds to the fun of reading and posting. I'm always up for good TPF fun.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tee hee!









						Meghan Markle Demands English County of Sussex is Moved to California - Daily Squib
					

MONTECITO - USA - Meghan Markle the Duchess of Sussex has sent a letter of demand to the Queen demanding the English County of Sussex be moved to California.




					dailysquib.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I talking about Gary Janetti, who was so funny on Instagram, but then HBO greenlit his satirical animated show and he lost the plot, so to speak.
> 
> I stopped following him months ago. lol


Ditto.  I thought he was funny at first, and witty with the satirical George account, but after awhile it felt like the same thing over and over and I didn't find it funny at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Tee hee!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Demands English County of Sussex is Moved to California - Daily Squib
> 
> 
> MONTECITO - USA - Meghan Markle the Duchess of Sussex has sent a letter of demand to the Queen demanding the English County of Sussex be moved to California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysquib.co.uk


I know this is tongue in cheek, but somehow, it's probably not too far from the truth.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Tee hee!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Demands English County of Sussex is Moved to California - Daily Squib
> 
> 
> MONTECITO - USA - Meghan Markle the Duchess of Sussex has sent a letter of demand to the Queen demanding the English County of Sussex be moved to California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysquib.co.uk


haha, she should have settled for Dumbarton; there is already Dumbarton Bridge in CA.


----------



## Chanbal

Plans have changed, here is what I understood from the Page Six article: 

"_The Sussexes are not planning to attend Ob*ma’s party_."

It looks like Hazz and wife were not invited to the party of the year. 

"_While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening._"

The A-listers are likely busy with the other party, and unfortunately can't attend the one in Montecito. 









						Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘low-key’ 40th birthday plans
					

While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Plans have changed, here is what I understood from the Page Six article:
> 
> "_The Sussexes are not planning to attend Ob*ma’s party_."
> 
> It looks like Hazz and wife were not invited to the party of the year.
> 
> "_While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening._"
> 
> The A-listers are likely busy with the other party, and unfortunately can't attend the one in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘low-key’ 40th birthday plans
> 
> 
> While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



OMG, she has not lost the baby weight yet!
 So, no to a Montecito party, no to O’s party - what about the super-expensive icing-less cake Hazz bought???
No???? Really??? No grazing tables???
These are definitley *not* fun people.  Ewwww.  



https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15758267/meghan-markle-40th-birthday-cake-prince-harry-bespoke-bakery/


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Plans have changed, here is what I understood from the Page Six article:
> 
> "_The Sussexes are not planning to attend Ob*ma’s party_."
> *
> It looks like Hazz and wife were not invited to the party of the year. *
> 
> "_While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening._"
> 
> The A-listers are likely busy with the other party, and unfortunately can't attend the one in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘low-key’ 40th birthday plans
> 
> 
> While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Poor, poor Meg.  Maybe we should all send her new sets of dishes to smash as her birthday presents from her favorite tPF thread?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Poor, poor Meg.  Maybe we should all send her new sets of dishes to smash as her birthday presents from her favorite tPF thread?



We can take a page from their playbook - say we will, then cancel.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Plans have changed, here is what I understood from the Page Six article:
> 
> "_The Sussexes are not planning to attend Ob*ma’s party_."
> 
> It looks like Hazz and wife were not invited to the party of the year.
> 
> "_While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening._"
> 
> The A-listers are likely busy with the other party, and unfortunately can't attend the one in Montecito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s ‘low-key’ 40th birthday plans
> 
> 
> While it was rumored that Markle is having a grand bash with Oprah Winfrey’s A-list party planner Colin Cowie at the helm, this is absolutely not happening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I guess she really has Markled her Canadian BFF as the article states that ALL her best friends are in the US.

Maybe this was a trial balloon sent up to gauge the response if she really threw a party. It's been an eye-opener for me: never knew 40 was such a milestone and I was teetering on cliff edges. I'm sooooo overdue to take over the world!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> We can take a page from their playbook - say we will, then cancel.


Ooooh, even better: let's all bake her lemon olive cakes and mail them en masse!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kudos to whoever posted that they have no “closest friends and family“. 
Golly, this is really a very sad vibe.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, she has not lost the baby weight yet!
> So, no to a Montecito party, no to O’s party - what about the super-expensive icing-less cake Hazz bought???
> No???? Really??? No grazing tables???
> These are definitley *not* fun people.  Ewwww.
> View attachment 5154278
> 
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15758267/meghan-markle-40th-birthday-cake-prince-harry-bespoke-bakery/


I know, I'm also shocked. Poor Hazz, he likely had to cancel his super-expensive icing-less cake and order a couple of cupcakes instead.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I know, I'm also shocked. Poor Hazz, he likely had to cancel his super-expensive icing-less cake and order a couple of cupcakes instead.


He really should just use the olives and lemons from their sustainable garden and bake an icing less lemon olive oil cake himself!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> We can take a page from their playbook - say we will, then cancel.


Yep! They love to spread rumors and mislead people imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yep! They love to spread rumors and mislead people imo.



Tatler posted the story. Doubt they like being made a fool.  H&M are just one PR disaster after another.  Sheesh.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tatler posted the story. Doubt they like being made a fool.  H&M are just one PR disaster after another.  Sheesh.


They have to use everything they can, that birthday will have to provide a few more stories.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I know, I'm also shocked. Poor Hazz, he likely had to cancel his super-expensive icing-less cake and order a couple of cupcakes instead.


These would be perfect


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is a great article by TOM BOWER. I wonder when this type of articles will be published in the US. 

_*Meghan Markle will get no birthday congratulations from small army of ex-pals she’s shunned*_

*CRUDELY IGNORED*
_A darker cloud is her birthday party guest list.

The Sussexes’ celebrity neighbours, agents, lawyers and PR spin doctors will flock to their Montecito haven, but there will be no birthday cards from Meghan’s father and siblings, nor probably from her in-laws in London.

There will certainly be no adoring congratulations from the small army of former friends the Duchess has shunned over the past 15 years, including her ex-husband, childhood confidants and discarded London associates.

Sincere family love, wishing her another 40 healthy years, will be limited to her mother, the permanently silent Doria. Yet Meghan probably won’t care a jot.

*Self-important Meghan seems to believe her needs are more important than those of others *— most famously her father Thomas Markle.

America and Britain are dotted with people baffled by her abrupt termination of their previously close relationship.

Meghan appears to show little remorse about hurting them.

Admiration and respect is Meghan’s principal demand from others. Her importance in Hollywood is seemingly all that counts.

That’s not new. *For years, she sought “status*”.

*BIBLE OF THE PRIVILEGED*
I truly believe that within six months of the marriage, the plans for the couple to exit the UK were already under way.

Siding with Meghan, Harry agreed with her strategy to “go back home”. The actress left London, furiously complaining through a gaggle of PR men and lawyers about the invasion of her privacy by Britain’s “racist” media — then promptly signed up for revelatory appearances on television, social media platforms and books.

Blessed with two healthy children and no royal responsibilities, going for broke promises to be a great success for Harry and Meghan.

Contrary to those waiting for Harry’s humiliating return to Britain, the couple have defied the critics and adore life among California’s royalty — a move that threatens to undermine and perhaps fatally ruin the staid British monarch and her heirs.

The question posed by Meghan’s enemies will be whether the couple’s disloyalty to the Queen lives up to her principles of compassion.

And what about the next 40 years? *Once Harry has finished promoting his books, will Meghan launch her own global campaign to engage in the swirling muck of American politics?*

Just as she seduced the Royal Family, will she tempt California’s power brokers to promote her own political ambitions to the Senate and possibly beyond, via her friendship ..._









						Meghan will get no birthday congrats from small army of ex-pals she's shunned
					

BLOWING out the 40 candles on her birthday cake on Wednesday, Meghan Markle will be rightly thrilled about her phenomenal triumph. At her milestone age, the Duchess of Sussex can congratulate hers…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Perfect theme song for her!


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


>




FYI the one on the right is former prime minister of Australia, Julia Gillard


----------



## needlv

Oh this is just classic Megs (10 second video - sound on)


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a low-key fundraising event sponsored by Arch*w*ll? In lieu of gifts please donate to... This is just speculation, DM will enlighten those who didn't make the 65-guest list.
> View attachment 5152889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires Oprah's party planner for 40th birthday party
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 39, has asked top celebrity wedding and event planner Colin Cowie, to organise her 40th birthday celebration with a low-key party this week, a source claimed to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


M's expecting to collect many high-end presents from the 65 celebrities she only knows their name.  The guests will want to attend to see the side show and tell their friends they went to M's birthday party.  No doubt M made H purchase something very nice.  After all she's birthed two children for him and guided him to greatness!


----------



## zen1965

Chanbal said:


>




Thank you for this.
This was an engagement where she was clearly out of her depth, and her contributions to the high-powered panel discussion were rather lame and did not make her look all that intelligent.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe we need some inspiration or hot water:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s High School Yearbook Photo Proves She Has Always Been A Fighter
> 
> 
> Check out what she said in her caption, plus other images from before she joined the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bet.com




Hmmmm M, you are NOT creative ...    Quote from Eleanor Roosevelt.


A woman is like a tea bag - you can't tell how strong she is until you put her in hot water.

Eleanor Roosevelt


EDITED:  Oops I'm catching up and I see others have already posted this!


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> Hmmmm M, you are NOT creative ...    Quote from Eleanor Roosevelt.
> 
> 
> A woman is like a tea bag - you can't tell how strong she is until you put her in hot water.
> 
> Eleanor Roosevelt
> 
> 
> EDITED:  Oops I'm catching up and I see others have already posted this!


Lol


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> M's expecting to collect many high-end presents from the 65 celebrities she only knows their name.  The guests will want to attend to see the side show and tell their friends they went to M's birthday party.  No doubt M made H purchase something very nice.  After all she's birthed two children for him and guided him to greatness!


Freak show is more like it to me. They are living in a glass bubble. Carnival hucksters at best drawing in people to gape at them.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Re MM's 40th birthday bash with 65 close family and friends -
1. Like another poster said, what family??? And friends?   they would be lucky to count those on one hand!
2. Who wants to go to a party where what you say may be used against you later on Oprah?


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Perfect theme song for her!



Sing to the Barney theme song. 

MM's Ode to Herself

I love me, he loves me
we are a happy family
we hate you we love me
it's all about me, me, me


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Poor, poor Meg.  Maybe we should all send her new sets of dishes to smash as her birthday presents from her favorite tPF thread?


I think she's graduated to slinging and biting poor  Harry.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Yep! They love to spread rumors and mislead people imo.


Except us TPFers . . . in this forum.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Ooooh, even better: let's all bake her lemon olive cakes and mail them en masse!!


I would but prices are going up .  .  . but don't want to waste good olive oil . . . .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> He really should just use the olives and lemons from their sustainable garden and bake an icing less lemon olive oil cake himself!



No icing, no cake


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> We can take a page from their playbook - say we will, then cancel.



Public announcements on jobs we're 'considering' but then...don't take


----------



## Lodpah

What a sad life she leads. Selling her soul (family, friends, people, etc.) for fame and fortune. What miserable human beings both of them are to slingshot everyone who has helped them. One thing for sure, they are not getting younger and bitterness is their balm right now but as time goes on and it goes fast what was the cost? Fame and money cannot replace the warmth of true friends and family. Yeah the money is good for them now but those they mocked, it will return them sevenfold.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Dress code for panel:
Black and white early '90s vibe.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Oh this is just classic Megs (10 second video - sound on)




Did she just say "I worked in politics"? LMAO. If I start to count my internships and students jobs, I've worked for the government several times, was a professional model, ya da ya da.


----------



## pukasonqo

needlv said:


> FYI the one on the right is former prime minister of Australia, Julia Gillard


Wonder if Meghan realised she was sitting next to the first female Australian PM…


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> Oh this is just classic Megs (10 second video - sound on)



“Working in politics”


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Wonder if Meghan realised she was sitting next to the first female Australian PM…



Do you think that would matter to her?


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's The List completed at last. Thank you so much to everyone who participated.   If I've missed anyone, who has contributed, but hasn't received a star, please tell me so that I can make it to you.
> 
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Baron of Hesaheel
> Bar Stewards
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> BunkerBoy
> Dastardly Duo
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Duke of Montecito
> Flowerpot and Hardly There
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Hap-Hazza
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Hazmat
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Maleficent of Montecito
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Meg-a-lo-maniac
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Meh
> Mermaid
> Methane
> Needy and Greedy
> NutMeg
> Nope and Dope
> Pearl
> Pinky & The Brain
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> Royal Ingrates of Montecito
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> Skid Markle
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> THE B.st.rds
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
> The Douche Formallly Known as a Prince
> The Earl of Dunnothing
> the glimmer twins
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> Those B.st.rds
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Ahmed Scabies
> Omid Scooby-doo
> scabies
> Sunshine Sucks
> 
> Nicknames For Later Use
> Harry’s ex wife
> The ex Duchess of Sussex
> 
> Great effort everyone!  The Muppets/Fraggles are singing our song; just substitute TPF and sing along. Cheers!



Can this be made into a sticky?  So we can easily find it when needed?!?  Thanks for doing this!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Swiss magazine titles "Harry: Kate takes away his project of the heart".

Uhm...he abandoned his beloved project when he basically deserted, and I'm sure Kate, a busy working mother of 3, could have done without the extra workload.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> FYI *the one on the right is former prime minister of Australia*, Julia Gillard


And she does look polite but bored. The one on the left is not even hiding how bored she is.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Chanbal said:


> And she does look polite but bored. T*he one on the left is not even hiding how bored she is.*


This!


----------



## rose60610

Kate's 40th is in January, Will's 40th is next June. Surely their celebrations will include guests who actually like them and don't need to be bought.


----------



## Chanbal

As someone else has asked, what exactly is Arch*w*ll?


----------



## bag-mania

So was the possibility of a Meghan 40th birthday party a fabricated media rumor? Because I do not believe for a minute Meghan would want to celebrate hitting the big 4–0. She is not going to age gracefully, more like she'll be dragged into it kicking and screaming.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> As someone else has asked, what exactly is Arch*w*ll?
> 
> View attachment 5154534


Old news from a month ago maybe , the story of issues trademarking the name Archewell, their trademark lawyers need to do a better job 
this text makes the story seem a lot more scandalous


----------



## marietouchet

New news , Invictus is considering bids from host venues for next years games , Canada is an option , and if chosen it would be a winter hybrid (summer and winter combined ??) games

sounds like things are less than on firm ground if the scope of the games is under discussion - as that impacts which athletes might consider competing


----------



## zen1965

papertiger said:


> Dress code for panel:
> Black and white early '90s vibe.



Not quite… 



It was a panel on International Women‘s Day in 2019, and Meghan‘s performance was meh.

But it gave her another opportunity to cradle her bump publicly with both hands (totally unnatural pose IMHO)


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did she just say "I worked in politics"? LMAO. If I start to count my internships and students jobs, I've worked for the government several times, was a professional model, ya da ya da.


Well, I’ve been posting on the unpopular opinion threads for months now, so I consider myself fully immersed in the field of diplomacy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> So was the possibility of a Meghan 40th birthday party a fabricated media rumor? Because I do not believe for a minute Meghan would want to celebrate hitting the big 4–0. She is not going to age gracefully, more like she'll be dragged into it kicking and screaming.



You really would wonder. If you were throwing a party of any size that includes catering there is a lot of planning, contracts, etc. that go into it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

zen1965 said:


> Not quite…
> View attachment 5154574
> 
> Imagine if everyone was though it’d look like an all female  ‘the hives’ tribute band
> It was a panel on International Women‘s Day in 2019, and Meghan‘s performance was meh.
> 
> But it gave her another opportunity to cradle her bump publicly with both hands (totally unnatural pose IMHO)


Oh, that must have been on one of the many occasions when the royal family were robbing her of her voice.

I’m sure out-of-work cable actresses are often invited to those kind of gigs even without advantageous marriages  ( which is pretty ironic in itself given its international women’s day)


----------



## K.D.

Aimee3 said:


> Can this be made into a sticky?  So we can easily find it when needed?!?  Thanks for doing this!!!



It should be mandatory reading for all members of the TPF Royal Correspondents Book Club 



marietouchet said:


> New news , Invictus is considering bids from host venues for next years games , Canada is an option , and if chosen it would be a winter hybrid (summer and winter combined ??) games
> 
> sounds like things are less than on firm ground if the scope of the games is under discussion - as that impacts which athletes might consider competing



So does this mean The Hague has been/is going to be cancelled? I was supposed to be volunteering for when it would be the 2020 Games, but alas. Already did a preparation session late 2019. It somehow feels I could better spend my time on another organisation I'm already active for that doesn't have a spokesperson that is workshy themselves after the shenanigans of early 2020 and Megxit... Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh. I work full time and would've taken up vacation days in order to volunteer that week.


----------



## Hermes Zen

> This just out 10 mins ago.  Removed the photo of M for you.   Not having that elaborate bday party (probably didn't get many people accepting or they were smart and rethought the covid situation) and donated pallets of diapers last month to a L.A. based organization.
> 
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...-meghan-markle-is-spending-her-40th-birthday/
> 
> *How Meghan Markle Is Planning to Celebrate Her 40th Birthday*
> *No, she did not hire Oprah Winfrey's personal party planner.*
> By Bianca Betancourt
> Aug 3 2021, 1:07 pm EDT
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is turning 40!
> Meghan will celebrate her birthday tomorrow, but contrary to previous reports, she isn't planning a lavish affair to mark the milestone. A source close to the duchess revealed that she is planning to spend her special day "privately" at home with her husband, Prince Harry, and their two children, Archie and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, at their home in Montecito, California.
> 
> As expected, the duchess has kept a low profile since welcoming her second child back in June, since both she and Harry opted to take parental leave following baby Lili's birth. The couple confirmed their extended time away from work in a statement on the website for their foundation, Archewell.
> 
> 
> "While the Duke and Duchess are on parental leave, Archewell will continue to do important work and publish stories on the site," read a brief note at the end of Lili's birth announcement. "We look forward to seeing you!"





> The couple have continued managing their charitable endeavors even while away from the spotlight. Last month, they donated a generous amount of diapers to Harvest Home, a Los Angeles-based organization that helps support unhoused mothers and their children.





> "Pallets and pallets of diapers ... we are so grateful!" Harvest Home wrote on Instagram about the donation. "These diapers recently arrived at our new Pico-Robertson Home and we could not be more thankful to Archewell Foundation, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and @proctergamble and @pampersus for the incredible donation through their Million Acts of Love Campaign. Thank you helping us ensure our resident and alumnae families' needs are met!"


----------



## bellecate

zen1965 said:


> Not quite…
> View attachment 5154574
> 
> 
> It was a panel on International Women‘s Day in 2019, and Meghan‘s performance was meh.
> 
> But it gave her another opportunity to cradle her bump publicly with both hands (totally unnatural pose IMHO)



So unnatural. It's like she's outlining her bump to show the size rather than laying a tender hand on it naturally.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> So unnatural. It's like she's outlining her bump to show the size rather than laying a tender hand on it naturally.



That made me wonder about the surrogate stories as much as anything. It’s like she was always belly cradling to prove to everyone she was pregnant.

Or she was trying to hold the Moonbump in place so it didn’t shift to a weird position.


----------



## amante

Hermes Zen said:


> "Pallets and pallets of diapers ... we are so grateful!" Harvest Home wrote on Instagram about the donation. "These diapers recently arrived at our new Pico-Robertson Home and we could not be more thankful to Archewell Foundation, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and @proctergamble and @pampersus for the incredible donation through their Million Acts of Love Campaign. Thank you helping us ensure our resident and alumnae families' needs are met!"


So wrong on so many levels. So the diaper donation was forced #sponcon? As in the charity was given diapers in exchange for a shout out for H&M and Pampers? So exploitative. And Pampers the company already had a charity campaign called Million Acts of Love going on so what exactly were H&M's and Arch-w-ll's roles? So BoJo-like: "waits to see the way the crowd is running and then dashes in front."  (I guess that makes her qualified for politics then)


----------



## csshopper

K.D. said:


> So does this mean The Hague has been/is going to be cancelled? I was supposed to be volunteering for when it would be the 2020 Games, but alas. Already did a preparation session late 2019. It somehow feels I could better spend my time on another organisation I'm already active for that doesn't have a spokesperson that is workshy themselves after the shenanigans of early 2020 and Megxit... Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh. I work full time and would've taken up vacation days in order to volunteer that week.



You are not being harsh, you sound very reasonable with reasonable expectations. The problem is the titular head of the organization, who has never had to work a day in his life, and, therefore, does not understand the impact of decisions on the lives of people who do. 

But, if there is a problem H will be sure to blame it on someone else.


----------



## amante

lanasyogamama said:


> You really would wonder. If you were throwing a party of any size that includes catering there is a lot of planning, contracts, etc. that go into it.


I imagine it will be like a re-do of her royal wedding: lots of random zero-prior-relationship celeb guests for networking purposes. At least this time around it's not on the government's dime and not exploiting the goodwill of the public. I hope Jessica Mulroney, Omid and Lainey get invites, it would be such a slap on their faces if they don't.

It would be nice to see pictures of the event, let's see if MM buddy Priyanka Chopra gave her tips on how to #sponcon the whole event.


----------



## rose60610

If nobody sponsors Meghan's 40th party, they'll just send the bill to Charles. It could be his contribution to her birthday since he can't attend (wasn't invited). After all, Meghan sent a wreath to Philip's funeral.


----------



## Annawakes

Wait. So now she’s NOT having a birthday party?  I wonder why!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Why is she having a party and inviting 65 of her closest friends and family well-connected people she doesn't really know and only using to social climb when covid is running rampant? In this environment, 65 people is not a small party but a superspreader event.

As for paying for it, I am sure she will just write it off the taxes as a business event. Or, being that we are in a water shortage in CA, she can sell water to her nephew for his weed farm from the 16 toilets to pay for the party.

ETA: There are some weed farms in CA (illegal or not, don't know) that are stealing water from produce farms and from hydrants to water their grows in case that last bit didn't make much sense. That's how bad the water situation is out here.


----------



## needlv

Annawakes said:


> Wait. So now she’s NOT having a birthday party?  I wonder why!



Distraction because she wasn’t invited to a certain former presidents party…


----------



## bag-mania

I think the press is having a field day with Meghan birthday speculations for the sole purpose of getting clicks.

We will undoubtedly be barraged with fictitious tales about the wonderful way Meghan spent her birthday and how Harry showered her with expensive gifts and all of the A-list celebrity well-wishes she received.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Why is she having a party and inviting 65 of her closest friends and family well-connected people she doesn't really know and only using to social climb when covid is running rampant? In this environment, 65 people is not a small party but a superspreader event.
> 
> As for paying for it, I am sure she will just write it off the taxes as a business event. Or, being that we are in a water shortage in CA, she can sell water to her nephew for his weed farm from the 16 toilets to pay for the party.
> 
> ETA: There are some weed farms in CA (illegal or not, don't know) that are stealing water from produce farms and from hydrants to water their grows in case that last bit didn't make much sense. That's how bad the water situation is out here.


It's been done before and by the rich and famous.  This totally changed my opinion of him as a person. This happened in 2015








						Tom Selleck 'stole water for ranch'
					

Actor Tom Selleck is accused of stealing water in parched California by raiding a public hydrant for his avocado ranch.



					www.bbc.com
				



.
Actor Tom Selleck has been accused of stealing water for his ranch in parched California *by raiding a public hydrant*. The Calleguas Municipal Water District in Ventura County claims a tanker truck filled up more than a dozen times over the past two years.Jul 9, 2015


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute, she isn't having a party? I was so looking forward to choice of ill-fitting fashion for the big day.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I think the press is having a field day with Meghan birthday speculations for the sole purpose of getting clicks.
> 
> We will undoubtedly be barraged with fictitious tales about the wonderful way Meghan spent her birthday and how Harry showered her with expensive gifts and all of the A-list celebrity well-wishes she received.


There will be nothing at this party that she paid for.  Everything will be given to be merched with mentions of the purveyor.  

Of course it remains to be seen if a party will actually take place.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute, she isn't having a party? I was so looking forward to choice of ill-fitting fashion for the big day.



Perhaps we will get a close-up, fuzzed out photo of a baby's ear and Scobie will tell us it belongs to Lilibet.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Why is she having a party and inviting 65 of her closest friends and family well-connected people she doesn't really know and only using to social climb when covid is running rampant? In this environment, 65 people is not a small party but a superspreader event.



To be honest...I love the O's and they have a hard time doing anything wrong in my eyes, but what exactly made them think a 500+ people party was a good idea? Even if it was safe (which I think it is not even with precautions), people still look to them for guidance / a good example and this ain't one.


----------



## csshopper

Scabies, the "Royal Reporter" has been strangely silent on the topic of the Big 40.

If this has been all Sunshine Sucks' work, they have made The Suckesses look really foolish in the process. 

1. "65 guests" "Oprah's Party Planner" "Grazing Tables of food" are pretty specific details, although at least one site attributed the party planner to the Kardashians and claimed Ryan Seacrest and Oprah would be in attendance (Birminghamnews). This morphed into:

2. The  40 balloons deflated and we have the quiet private party at home due to "parental leave" and/or Haz whisking her off for a private celebration. 

This type of media manipulation should be used as a case study in the Communications courses their hacks probably aced in their Uni days in how to generate interest with speculation and misdirection. Hear those "clicks" in the background?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> There will be nothing at this party that she paid for.  Everything will be given to be merched with mentions of the purveyor.
> 
> Of course it remains to be seen if a party will actually take place.



They always want to incite speculation and attention. Will they have a party? Won't they? Who is coming? We'll tell you all about it after it is over and there is no evidence it ever happened!


----------



## gracekelly

I always have a throw back memory to the movie Jean de Florette where the mean guy blocks the ability of Manon's father to get water for his farm.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They always want to incite speculation and attention. Will they have a party? Won't they? Who is coming? We'll tell you all about it after it is over and there is no evidence it ever happened!


Yes, and I feel like a dope because I fell for it.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Yes, and I feel like a dope because I fell for it.



We all do. EVERY DAMN TIME.


----------



## rose60610

What would guests do besides graze on oat lattes, organic crudités, vegan chips and barrels of vodka anyway? They'd be forced to gush over Meghan's expensive outfit that just doesn't quite fit and ask about the kids, like, where are they? They'd all get a word salad lecture on how every $100,000 donation to Archewell will help save the world.


----------



## jelliedfeels

K.D. said:


> It should be mandatory reading for all members of the TPF Royal Correspondents Book Club
> 
> 
> 
> So does this mean The Hague has been/is going to be cancelled? I was supposed to be volunteering for when it would be the 2020 Games, but alas. Already did a preparation session late 2019. It somehow feels I could better spend my time on another organisation I'm already active for that doesn't have a spokesperson that is workshy themselves after the shenanigans of early 2020 and Megxit... Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh. I work full time and would've taken up vacation days in order to volunteer that week.


I think it’s great you took the initiative to take up with a big event like that - I find myself exhausted filling in one of their bible length application forms.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Tatler posted the story. Doubt they like being made a fool.  H&M are just one PR disaster after another.  Sheesh.


As Monique once said 
“When you do clownery the clowns come back to bite.”
They can’t complain about the lack of room once they and the other tame newshounds are crammed in H&M’s wacky car.


Chanbal said:


> They have to use everything they can, that birthday will have to provide a few more stories.


Yeah it’s just empty speculation in the story no one was asking about, 

I hope all the awful people like us are getting the message that they aren’t having a party: _even though they could have an elite party with a showbiz planner and elite guests if they wanted just like the Os but they are just far too busy being wonderful parents and doing charity work and its very basic of you to assume they are going to have a party_ just because there was clearly a press release saying there would be 

Why won’t we give these shy little bunnies some privacy already eh?

Well not so much privacy that their charity donations are anonymous of course…..Those charities better show they are grateful for those gifts or a*well come & take them back even if little A&L actually are dolls 


gracekelly said:


> It's been done before and by the rich and famous.  This totally changed my opinion of him as a person. This happened in 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Selleck 'stole water for ranch'
> 
> 
> Actor Tom Selleck is accused of stealing water in parched California by raiding a public hydrant for his avocado ranch.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Actor Tom Selleck has been accused of stealing water for his ranch in parched California *by raiding a public hydrant*. The Calleguas Municipal Water District in Ventura County claims a tanker truck filled up more than a dozen times over the past two years.Jul 9, 2015


First Burt Reynold’s look and now this!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Well, I’ve been posting on the unpopular opinion threads for months now, so I consider myself fully immersed in the field of diplomacy.


I think you are very correct!  In fact I would venture to say that many comments here are extremely diplomatic.  Quelle horreur as to what they could have been!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> We all do. EVERY DAMN TIME.


Thank you for this lolololol!


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Distraction because she wasn’t invited to a certain former presidents party…


Nail on the head as always needlv.
Obviously they still want to suck up to the Os or they could have said something shady about covid or carbon footprints. Probably hoping they are high up on the back up list


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


>



Knowing Her, she will call the wrong Pope and get the guy who is retired, Pope Benedict.


----------



## AbbytheBT

[QUOTE="zen1965, post: 34677083, member: 418325"

But it gave her another opportunity to cradle her bump publicly with both hands (totally unnatural pose IMHO)
[/QUOTE]

OMG - I. just. cannot. with the bump cradle!!!! 

 How in the world did this become a thing?  Ok - really dating myself I know - but the LAST thing I wanted to do in a public/professional setting when I was  pregnant three times in the 90s was draw attention to being pregnant!!! - Yes — I am glad women don’t feel pressured to jump into “maternity wear” for professional settings - i only had one maroon coatdress that I felt proper in - lol - and wore my share of wide collar drop waists. Ugg!

 But in a very, very weird way I feel like this cradle behavior and wearing regular dresses clearly too small to accommodate the changed body shape while in a professional setting disrespects all that women before them who worked so hard to prove that pregnancy in public was normal, temporary, did not define us and did not diminish our brain power!!! 

Ok - thanks for letting me rant . I am just so disgusted by this behavior ( in public/professional settings) which (IMO) takes women back to the days of us being seen as primarily baby makers  

If women want to send pregnancy pics to their friends/relatives to mark their progress then go for it! But stop with the bump focus in work settings! Which IMHO is wherever MM is/was representing HMTQ or (currently) their  Arche foundation.


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


>




Priceless


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Nail on the head as always needlv.
> Obviously they still want to suck up to the Os or they could have said something shady about covid or carbon footprints. Probably hoping they are high up on the back up list


I seriously doubt if the names of those two was ever passed even in a fleeting thought by the O's.  They just don't compute.  If they did for a nanosecond, all Pres. Barry would have to do is glance at the picture of himself and Mrs. O with little George in his bathrobe.  That would get his head straight ASAP as to whom the important people are.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


>




I love the name "Moaning Markle." It fits our whiner so well.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> It's been done before and by the rich and famous.  This totally changed my opinion of him as a person. This happened in 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Selleck 'stole water for ranch'
> 
> 
> Actor Tom Selleck is accused of stealing water in parched California by raiding a public hydrant for his avocado ranch.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Actor Tom Selleck has been accused of stealing water for his ranch in parched California *by raiding a public hydrant*. The Calleguas Municipal Water District in Ventura County claims a tanker truck filled up more than a dozen times over the past two years.Jul 9, 2015



OMG! He could afford to pay for it.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I love the name "Moaning Markle." It fits our whiner so well.


Brings Moaning Myrtle from Harry Potter to mind.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG! He could afford to pay for it.


Exactly and that is what really frosted me over at the time.  I couldn't stop talking about it to the DH.  Now when I see him flogging some reverse mortgage company on the TV, I want to throw up.


----------



## jelliedfeels

formatting nightmare repeat


----------



## jelliedfeels

AbbytheBT said:


> OMG - I. just. cannot. with the bump cradle!!!!
> 
> How in the world did this become a thing?  Ok - really dating myself I know - but the LAST thing I wanted to do in a public/professional setting when I was  pregnant three times in the 90s was draw attention to being pregnant!!! - Yes — I am glad women don’t feel pressured to jump into “maternity wear” for professional settings - i only had one maroon coatdress that I felt proper in - lol - and wore my share of wide collar drop waists. Ugg!
> 
> But in a very, very weird way I feel like this cradle behavior and wearing regular dresses clearly too small to accommodate the changed body shape while in a professional setting disrespects all that women before them who worked so hard to prove that pregnancy in public was normal, temporary, did not define us and did not diminish our brain power!!!
> 
> Ok - thanks for letting me rant . I am just so disgusted by this behavior ( in public/professional settings) which (IMO) takes women back to the days of us being seen as primarily baby makers
> 
> If women want to send pregnancy pics to their friends/relatives to mark their progress then go for it! But stop with the bump focus in work settings! Which IMHO is wherever MM is/was representing HMTQ or (currently) their  Arche foundation.



Come on ladies let’s be fair to the very maternal Meg.

Every pregnancy is unique and special….
And _naturally_ hers were even more unique & special than most in that she appeared to be 8 months/full term pregnant for the entire duration both times!

no wonder she needed a hand carrying it. 

I don’t know whether I just have bad swelling but I have been unable to wear the vast majority of my normal clothes and shoes during pregnancy from about 2nd trimester (as it either rides up/squeezes too tight) so I for one love and appreciate maternity clothes with all that extra material & ruching!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

AbbytheBT said:


> If women want to send pregnancy pics to their friends/relatives to mark their progress then go for it! But stop with the bump focus in work settings! Which IMHO is wherever MM is/was representing HMTQ or (currently) their  Arche foundation.



This was my main complaint with the obsessive hand-holding too. Those two freaks were AT WORK. They can hold hands all they want in their spare time and / or at private events, but in a professional setting, please carry yourself accordingly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did she just say "I worked in politics"? LMAO. If I start to count my internships and students jobs, I've worked for the government several times, was a professional model, ya da ya da.


She sure did.  Taking a page out of Me's playbook:
1. I was a candy striper in middle school, which now makes me a physician.
2. I did the lighting for a high school play, which makes me now a famous Broadway stage producer
3. I followed a YouTube video to fold napkins into Christmas tree shapes a few years ago, so I'm now Martha Stewart (Happy 80th BTW, wow she looks amazing!)
4. I took a law school class in college and got an A, so I'm now a qualified attorney...
...and on and on and on.
Damn, I'm pretty accomplished!


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Wait. So now she’s NOT having a birthday party?  I wonder why!


No one RSVP'ed "yes"?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Brings Moaning Myrtle from Harry Potter to mind.



She was wonderful!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Any Happy Birthday wishes to The Douchess from the BRF?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Any Happy Birthday wishes to The Douchess from the BRF?



It's August 3rd, 11 p.m. in the UK...so not yet. Wouldn't it be epic if they for once didn't take the high road!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> New news , Invictus is considering bids from host venues for next years games , Canada is an option , and if chosen it would be a winter hybrid (summer and winter combined ??) games
> 
> sounds like things are less than on firm ground if the scope of the games is under discussion - as that impacts which athletes might consider competing



If these Olympics are any indication, athletes are really struggling now. Why put added stress on these military athletes?  Cancel  and try again after the pandemic. Didn’t whoever was in charge in 2019 tell us this covid thing would end some time in 2022? They knew.



rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute, she isn't having a party? I was so looking forward to choice of ill-fitting fashion for the big day.



Was this one of those stories planted by Hazz to test a ‘friend’s’ loyalty?  Haaa, it backfired spectacularly.  The original story was posted in Tatler, not a publication to trifle with. As @csshopper said, they gave us lots and lots of details, even the tasteless _nude_ cake.

Today‘s fake news is that Hazz is going to whisk her away as a ‘surprise’ - to an undisclosed location, of course.  HeeHeee.


purseinsanity said:


> No one RSVP'ed "yes"?



Should we email SunshineSacks that we do _plan_ to attend?  _Plan_, not _will.  _
[yes, I know some junior high children - they think stuff like that is hilarious].


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's August 3rd, 11 p.m. in the UK...so not yet. Wouldn't it be epic if they for once didn't take the high road!



Didn’t H&M blow off Will’s birthday without a mention? I guess birthday greetings are only expected to go one way.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's August 3rd, 11 p.m. in the UK...so not yet. Wouldn't it be epic if they for once didn't take the high road!


Oh that's right.  I keep thinking it's Wednesday already!  One week of vacation and I already don't know what day it is.  Retirement will  be heaven!!


----------



## needlv

Watch George in this video… lol


----------



## AB Negative

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG! He could afford to pay for it.


During droughts landowners contract with private water people to supply the needed water, whether for plants, trees, or even swimming pools.  Rather than the supplier buying the water, he obviously stole it and still charged Tom Sellick for it.  Tom is a decent man...don't confuse him with JCMH.


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> I seriously doubt if the names of those two was ever passed even in a fleeting thought by the O's.  They just don't compute.  If they did for a nanosecond, all Pres. Barry would have to do is glance at the picture of himself and Mrs. O with little George in his bathrobe.  That would get his head straight ASAP as to whom the important people are.
> 
> View attachment 5154987



This is one of my favorite BRF photos. George is adorable in his pajamas, robe and slippers.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> If these Olympics are any indication, athletes are really struggling now. Why put added stress on these military athletes?  Cancel  and try again after the pandemic. Didn’t whoever was in charge in 2019 tell us this covid thing would end some time in 2022? They knew.
> 
> 
> 
> Was this one of those stories planted by Hazz to test a ‘friend’s’ loyalty?  Haaa, it backfired spectacularly.  The original story was posted in Tatler, not a publication to trifle with. As @csshopper said, they gave us lots and lots of details, even the tasteless _nude_ cake.
> 
> Today‘s fake news is that Hazz is going to whisk her away as a ‘surprise’ - to an undisclosed location, of course.  HeeHeee.
> 
> 
> Should we email SunshineSacks that we do _plan_ to attend?  _Plan_, not _will.  _
> [yes, I know some junior high children - they think stuff like that is hilarious].


But Harry owes Netflix a 2022 documentary on Invictus …


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> But Harry owes Netflix a 2022 documentary on Invictus …



We all have had to make sacrifices due to covid. Hazzie can do it, too.
[if anyone has had bad timing, this guy,,, born 2nd, had to marry an older woman (!), left his country one month before a global pandemic, the downward spiral continues, wow.]


----------



## Jayne1

zen1965 said:


> Not quite…
> View attachment 5154574
> 
> 
> It was a panel on International Women‘s Day in 2019, and Meghan‘s performance was meh.
> 
> But it gave her another opportunity to cradle her bump publicly with both hands (totally unnatural pose IMHO)


Now that I think about it - that's how she held the baby when he was finally born.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest...I love the O's and they have a hard time doing anything wrong in my eyes, but what exactly made them think a 500+ people party was a good idea? Even if it was safe (which I think it is not even with precautions), people still look to them for guidance / a good example and this ain't one.


Not just the huge party during a pandemic, but only inviting the elite. Oh well, I guess like all celebs, that's who their friends are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Even Reese Witherspoon  has rejected the Duchass‘ business ideas






						Blind Item #4
					

The alliterate one invited this A+ list mostly movie actress to her wedding. The actress said no because she didn't know the alliterate one....




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				




*Blind Item #4*

The alliterate one invited this A+ list mostly movie actress to her wedding. The actress said no because she didn't know the alliterate one. The alliterate one tried to get a deal done with the production company of the actress. The actress said no because the projects pitched were not interesting. While the alliterate one sees herself as some kind of media kingpin, our actress with a recent sale, is pretty close to being a billionaire.


----------



## Annawakes

Jayne1 said:


> Now that I think about it - that's how she held the baby when he was finally born.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155257


Ugh, I can never get over how awkward this looks!!!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Yes, and I feel like a dope because I fell for it.


This time I went along with the story about the party, but didn't believe it. It looks like Hazz & wife release a few fake stories prior to whatever event they are involved.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This time I went along with the story about the party, but didn't believe it. It looks like Hazz & wife release a few fake stories prior to whatever event they are involved.



Is this strategy supposed to win them friends and fans? People who will spend hard-earned cash for the junk they merch? If this is the _*new*_ business strategy being taught in schools, it’s safe to say that strategy won’t work. Did it ever make celebs popular?  Unreal, it could explain why the universe sent us a global pandemic. We gotta wise up.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this strategy supposed to win them friends and fans? People who will spend hard-earned cash for the junk they merch? If this is the _*new*_ business strategy being taught in schools, it’s safe to say that strategy won’t work. Did it ever make celebs popular?  Unreal, it could explain why the universe sent us a global pandemic. We gotta wise up.


They need to be in the news, it's very important for their income. So they will keep releasing more stories. According to Page Six, Hazz might be now organizing an 'intimate getaway' to celebrate the big 4-0.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz & wife seem to have given up trying to get invitations to Martha's Vineyard. They have popped up in so many zoom events during this last year, I wonder if they are planning to crash this party. 

_According to the publication, she would also prefer to keep things small considering the rising number of coronavirus cases in her home state of California. *That’s likely why Meghan and Harry won’t attend **Bar*ck Ob*ma’s upcoming 60th birthday party*, either, which is scheduled to take place the weekend of Aug. 7 at his Martha’s Vineyard home._









						Meghan Markle's Reported 40th Birthday Plans Are So Chill
					

Despite rumors saying she'll have a huge party, Meghan Markle will reportedly spend her 40th birthday at home.




					www.elitedaily.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Will Prince Harry whisk Meghan Markle away for her 40th?
					

The Duchess of Sussex turns 40 on August 4, and contrary to previous reports , the couple are not planning a party for 65 people at their £11million Montecito mansion, according to Page Six.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*Will Prince Harry whisk Meghan Markle away for her 40th? Duke is planning an 'intimate' surprise trip - and a party for 65 people is 'absolutely not happening', sources tell Page Six*

*Previously reported that the Sussexes were planning 'low-key' birthday party*
*Sources claim Harry may whisk Meghan away on Wednesday, August 4*
*Reportedly not planning to attend former President *****'s birthday party *
*Royal experts speculating they may choose to release a family photo to mark it*


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maybe H bought O’s Orcas Island home and is surprising M with a trip to the Pacific NW.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They need to be in the news, it's very important for their income. So they will keep releasing more stories. According to Page Six, Hazz might be now organizing an 'intimate getaway' to celebrate the big 4-0.


Yep. An  Intimate getaway to the Holiday Inn in Bakersfield. Motel Six in Barstow?


----------



## Hermes Zen

TV execs are keen for the pair to attend the A-list event in downtown LA. They may even try to persuade M&H to present an award.

If there’s any truth in this I doubt it will take any arm twisting to do this. M&H want/need the PR! 

*Prince Harry and Meghan lined up to make Hollywood debut and present Emmy award next month *









						Harry & Meg lined up to make Hollywood debut & present Emmy award next month
					

EMMY awards bosses want Prince Harry and wife Meghan to make their Hollywood debuts at the ceremony next month. TV execs are keen for the pair to attend the A-list event in downtown LA. They may ev…



					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Lodpah

Annawakes said:


> Ugh, I can never get over how awkward this looks!!!


This reminds me of people being given their baby to hold and this is how some of them hold the baby.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apparently, someone decided to make Aug. 4 … Cambridge Day! 




			https://twitter.com/hashtag/CambridgeDay?src=hashtag_click


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Not just the huge party during a pandemic, but only inviting the elite. Oh well, I guess like all celebs, that's who their friends are.



I mean, they shouldn't be forced to invite random people to a private function for the sake of diversity. I am sure their families are there and possibly people they've worked with in the past.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Maybe H bought O’s Orcas Island home and is surprising M with a trip to the Pacific NW.



He's not that liquid.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> As someone else has asked, what exactly is Arch*w*ll?
> 
> View attachment 5154534


They probably weren't listening when their legal staff tried to explain about copyright and trademark. They might have been under the novice impression that it was like staking a claim and buying insurance (and would allow them to sue people for big bucks for infringement). I'm wondering if this was also one of the problems they faced when they tried to trademark Sussex Royal. Are they making any moves to trademark Lilibet? I think someone found a company registered under the babe's name?



bag-mania said:


> So was the possibility of a Meghan 40th birthday party a fabricated media rumor? Because I do not believe for a minute Meghan would want to celebrate hitting the big 4–0. She is not going to age gracefully, more like she'll be dragged into it kicking and screaming.


Definitely not gracefully. She's still holding on to her cute teens and hasn't mentally matured to 20 yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they shouldn't be forced to invite random people to a private function for the sake of diversity. I am sure their families are there and possibly people they've worked with in the past.


That worked for H&M’s wedding!
Remember all the charity workers who were ‘rewarded’ with invitations  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's not that liquid.


They might have to downgrade to dogfish islet or maybe even the krill bill.
Maybe she would’ve lent him it before the sale but now she knows what they did to Tyler Perry’s best tea set.



Hermes Zen said:


> TV execs are keen for the pair to attend the A-list event in downtown LA. They may even try to persuade M&H to present an award.
> 
> If there’s any truth in this I doubt it will take any arm twisting to do this. M&H want/need the PR!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan lined up to make Hollywood debut and present Emmy award next month *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg lined up to make Hollywood debut & present Emmy award next month
> 
> 
> EMMY awards bosses want Prince Harry and wife Meghan to make their Hollywood debuts at the ceremony next month. TV execs are keen for the pair to attend the A-list event in downtown LA. They may ev…
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


Quick everyone dig out your best bedsheets!!!

(Or maybe a hermes Avalon if you live somewhere chilly.)

Sunshine Sachs are working overtime this week  this is straight out of house of cards/the thick of it:
‘I’d like to announce that the rumours of people begging me to take this honorary position are completely untrue! I have never before expressed an interest in this role.’

So true about her trying to act like a teenager - shes so mutton dressed as lamb.  
I suppose her husband has the awareness of a particularly silly toddler so she’s still the elegant older woman comparatively.


----------



## Sharont2305

From the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and one from Prince Charles


----------



## Hermes Zen

Fans raised more than $46,000 for a menstruation charity. 

*Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday As Fans Raise $46,000 for Charity*









						Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday As Fans Raise $46,000 for Charity
					

Meghan Markle celebrates her milestone 40th birthday after a year of royal revelations, briefing wars and new career moves—but her fans have a present for a cause she supports.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Sharont2305

From the Royal Family official Instagram account


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Fans raised more than $46,000 for a menstruation charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday As Fans Raise $46,000 for Charity*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday As Fans Raise $46,000 for Charity
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle celebrates her milestone 40th birthday after a year of royal revelations, briefing wars and new career moves—but her fans have a present for a cause she supports.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I really admire her fans (the ones raising funds for charity). They worship a clay idol, but they are really doing good, unlike her.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Hermes Zen said:


> Fans raised more than $46,000 for a menstruation charity.
> 
> *Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday As Fans Raise $46,000 for Charity*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday As Fans Raise $46,000 for Charity
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle celebrates her milestone 40th birthday after a year of royal revelations, briefing wars and new career moves—but her fans have a present for a cause she supports.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


She only ever donates other people's money! Classy!


----------



## xincinsin

chicinthecity777 said:


> She only ever donates other people's money! Classy!


Could it be her mindset? The no giving milk for free philosophy that she supposedly grew up with? If a transactional mentality was instilled into her from birth, then it is no wonder that donations should only come out of other people's wallets while she contributes her "encouragement". 

After all, Archewell is all about unleashing compassion and creative activation. Not a word is said about coming up with something as sordid as money. We've got to look at this aspirationally!


----------



## needlv

All the royal accounts “well wishes” mention she is 40!   That was deliberate…. Let’s remind everyone how old she is!


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder what she would have thought of her great grandson's wife. 
I'd forgotten it's her birthday today as well


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder what she would have thought of her great grandson's wife.
> I'd forgotten it's her birthday today as well




I have a basic idea, and it's not pretty.


----------



## Annawakes

Sharont2305 said:


> From the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and one from Prince Charles
> 
> View attachment 5155441
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155447


I find this slightly shady as they included “40th” in the birthday wishes.  As in, don’t anybody forget she’s 40 y’all!


----------



## lanasyogamama

***** canceled his party!


----------



## sdkitty

she still has celebs in her corner....and surprise - she apparently has a sense of humor
Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday In Hilarious Video With 'Bestie' Melissa McCarthy | HuffPost


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> ***** canceled his party!



Or at least greatly reduced it. That was the right thing to do. You cannot tell others to be careful if you cannot do the same. There is no way they would be asking all of those celebrities and political donors to show their vaccination cards at the door.

Former President Barack O**** is "significantly" scaling back his 60th birthday bash for this weekend on Martha’s Vineyard.

Hundreds of guests were expected to attend, including many Hollywood stars, O**** administration officials and ********ic donors. Some invitees had already arrived on the island, the New York Times reported, days after President Joe ***** admitted that the pandemic has resurged.

But recent trends led to a last-minute change of plans.

"Due to the new spread of the delta variant over the past week, the President and Mrs. O**** have decided to significantly scale back the event to include only family and close friends. President O**** is appreciative of others sending their birthday wishes from afar and looks forward to seeing people soon," Hannah Hankins, a spokesperson for O****, said in a statement to NBC News Wednesday morning.

The change also comes after internal documents surfaced from within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that shows the delta variant is as contagious as chickenpox and may be more dangerous than other versions. U.S. health officials are now considering changing advice on how the nation fights the coronavirus.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/nationa...-back-vineyard-birthday-bash-reports/2707432/


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> she still has celebs in her corner....and surprise - she apparently has a sense of humor
> Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday In Hilarious Video With 'Bestie' Melissa McCarthy | HuffPost


She changes besties like she changes underwear ... OTOH we know how well-used her underwear is... I'll look for another descriptor.

ETA the way McCarthy was dressed was obvious mockery of the BRF. I guess that's why Methane thinks nothing of the cartoon mocking her in-laws and especially her nephew.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> she still has celebs in her corner....and surprise - she apparently has a sense of humor
> Meghan Markle Celebrates 40th Birthday In Hilarious Video With 'Bestie' Melissa McCarthy | HuffPost



Oh man! I really like Melissa McCarthy! Whyyyyy is she doing this with MM?! 

But... This photo caption made me laugh. Court jester in the background


----------



## bag-mania

Here's the link to the actual video (if you don't mind giving Archewell the hits). In the "outtakes" at the end Harry is juggling in the window.









						40×40 | Archewell
					

A special message from Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, on her 40th birthday.




					archewell.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Here's the link to the actual video (if you don't mind giving Archewell the hits). In the "outtakes" at the end Harry is juggling in the window.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 40×40 | Archewell
> 
> 
> A special message from Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, on her 40th birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


I'll pass on giving them a hit


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh man! I really like Melissa McCarthy! Whyyyyy is she doing this with MM?!
> 
> But... This photo caption made me laugh. Court jester in the background
> 
> View attachment 5155597


she sure is getting a lot of mileage from her marriage to the guy she fell in love with who just happened to be a prince.  I see she still has one Beagle.  wonder how much time the dog is in the house.  just for photo ops?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'll pass on giving them a hit



Don't worry, I took one for the team. The production values were good. They have actual professionals working for them now. Not like those Zoom calls during Covid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Her face is  puffy, very puffy. Hmmm.











						Meghan Markle launches initiative to help mothers get back to work
					

Speaking in a video shared on the Archewell website, Meghan launched 40x40, an initiative encouraging people to  support women going back to work.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she sure is getting a lot of mileage from her marriage to the guy she fell in love with who just happened to be a prince.  I see she still has one Beagle.  wonder how much time the dog is in the house.  just for photo ops?



It is such a weird concept "I'm turning 40 so I'm asking 40 friends to donate 40 minutes of their time to help another woman." What?! First, she doesn't have 40 friends and how much of a difference does 40 minutes of mentoring or whatever really make?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Here's the link to the actual video (if you don't mind giving Archewell the hits). In the "outtakes" at the end Harry is juggling in the window.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 40×40 | Archewell
> 
> 
> A special message from Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, on her 40th birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


I refuse to give them a click.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is such a weird concept "I'm turning 40 so I'm asking 40 friends to donate 40 minutes of their time to help another woman." What?! First, she doesn't have 40 friends and how much of a difference does 40 minutes of mentoring or whatever really make? she


well, I guess it would be nice to have a zoom call with a celeb but she's talking about thousands of women and helping 40?  did I miss something?  are the 40 friends supposed to get another 40 friends each involved - like a pyramid scheme?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, I guess it would be nice to have a zoom call with a celeb but she's talking about thousands of women and helping 40?  did I miss something?  are the 40 friends supposed to get another 40 friends each involved - like a pyramid scheme?



To be honest I didn't pay attention that closely. I was fascinated by how clean her office set was and how it reminded me of a page out of a decorator's magazine or the showroom at a furniture store. I completely missed that she has her laptop poised on the top of a stack of copies of The Bench. They actually do have tons of those lying around the house. Or was that the joke and someone Photoshopped them in there? If it is a joke, what are they really?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> To be honest I didn't pay attention that closely. I was fascinated by how clean her office set was and how it reminded me of a page out of a decorator's magazine or the showroom at a furniture store. I completely missed that she has her laptop poised on the top of a stack of copies of The Bench. They actually do have tons of those lying around the house. Or was that the joke and someone Photoshopped them in there? If it is a joke, what are they really?



See the photo above. The always helpful DM has identified everything, except Hazzie.

ETA: Now _this _is the really awful story of the day IMO:
Jennifer Aniston  'Usually. I'm good at that. I can have one M&M, one chip. I know, that's so annoying.'








						Jennifer Aniston shares her '15-15-15' workout plan
					

The Morning Show actress knows it is 'annoying' she has so much self-control when it comes to unhealthy foods and even if she's opened a bag of potato chips to ease her feelings.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> To be honest I didn't pay attention that closely. I was fascinated by how clean her office set was and how it reminded me of a page out of a decorator's magazine or the showroom at a furniture store. I completely missed that she has her laptop poised on the top of a stack of copies of The Bench. They actually do have tons of those lying around the house. Or was that the joke and someone Photoshopped them in there? If it is a joke, what are they really?



And here I thought I was fancy to use my empty Louis Vuitton boxes to raise my laptop!

At least she found a good use for her books. Either use as a laptop raiser or a doorstop. And when it gets cold she can always toss a few into that giant fireplace for kindling!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> See the photo above. The always helpful DM has identified everything, except Hazzie.
> 
> ETA: Now _this _is the really awful story of the day IMO:
> Jennifer Aniston  'Usually. I'm good at that. I can have one M&M, one chip. I know, that's so annoying.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Aniston shares her '15-15-15' workout plan
> 
> 
> The Morning Show actress knows it is 'annoying' she has so much self-control when it comes to unhealthy foods and even if she's opened a bag of potato chips to ease her feelings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Eating one M&M? That is self-control.

The DM's identification in the story isn't perfect, they got the dog's name wrong. They called him Bogart (the one that was dumped in Canada) instead of Guy.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Eating one M&M? That is self-control.
> 
> The DM's identification in the story isn't perfect, they got the dog's name wrong. They called him Bogart (the one that was dumped in Canada) instead of Guy.


and one potato chip....kina annoying


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and one potato chip....kina annoying



Rachel was always my least favorite character on Friends. I never found Jen annoying until now, but at least she is self-aware.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

Hahaha the stacks of 'bench' - A. used as decoration, and B as a riser for the laptop. Is it also C. a seat cushion for added height?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Rachel was always my least favorite character on Friends. I never found Jen annoying until now, but at least she is self-aware.


I always thought she was the most attractive on Friends - great legs


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Hazz & wife seem to have given up trying to get invitations to Martha's Vineyard. They have popped up in so many zoom events during this last year, I wonder if they are planning to crash this party.
> 
> _According to the publication, she would also prefer to keep things small considering the rising number of coronavirus cases in her home state of California. *That’s likely why Meghan and Harry won’t attend **Bar*ck Ob*ma’s upcoming 60th birthday party*, either, which is scheduled to take place the weekend of Aug. 7 at his Martha’s Vineyard home._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Reported 40th Birthday Plans Are So Chill
> 
> 
> Despite rumors saying she'll have a huge party, Meghan Markle will reportedly spend her 40th birthday at home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elitedaily.com


Maybe she's planning on being "The Surprise Guest"


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> Tee hee!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Demands English County of Sussex is Moved to California - Daily Squib
> 
> 
> MONTECITO - USA - Meghan Markle the Duchess of Sussex has sent a letter of demand to the Queen demanding the English County of Sussex be moved to California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysquib.co.uk



No thanks, it's fine where it is!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will Prince Harry whisk Meghan Markle away for her 40th?
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex turns 40 on August 4, and contrary to previous reports , the couple are not planning a party for 65 people at their £11million Montecito mansion, according to Page Six.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Will Prince Harry whisk Meghan Markle away for her 40th? Duke is planning an 'intimate' surprise trip - and a party for 65 people is 'absolutely not happening', sources tell Page Six*
> 
> *Previously reported that the Sussexes were planning 'low-key' birthday party*
> *Sources claim Harry may whisk Meghan away on Wednesday, August 4*
> *Reportedly not planning to attend former President *****'s birthday party *
> *Royal experts speculating they may choose to release a family photo to mark it*


OMG, we are psychics here!  I don't remember who posted this would happen, but kudos!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh my gosh guys did you clock the Hermes Avalon? Now we know what she wants to wear to the emmys


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I always thought she was the most attractive on Friends - great legs



Oh, she was certainly the most attractive and she launched a hair style that dominated the late 90s.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh man! I really like Melissa McCarthy! Whyyyyy is she doing this with MM?!
> 
> But... This photo caption made me laugh. Court jester in the background
> 
> View attachment 5155597


Her face looks...different.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her face is  puffy, very puffy. Hmmm.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...aunches-initiative-help-mothers-work.[/B]html


Why doesn't she show by action and actually DO SOME WORK???


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> OMG, we are psychics here!  I don't remember who posted this would happen, but kudos!



He was probably hoping to whisk her away to Martha's Vineyard, but that isn't happening. You know we'll hear in a day or so about whatever wonderful birthday adventures they had. Their weekly publicity drop happens like clockwork.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh guys did you clock the Hermes Avalon? Now we know what she wants to wear to the emmys



Immediately! Even before seeing H in the window.  I posted here when H&M were spotted in BH’s that they probably stopped by H on rodeo. M’s probably got a Himalayan Birkin in her closet to go with her furniture.


----------



## amante

Well done President and Mrs. O. That was the right call.
I'm so sad that MM isn't having a big bash after all. I wanted to go through the guest list and all the sponcon and see who here allies were. 
Maybe it's not such a good idea to relegate dozens of brand new copies as laptop stand, just saying. Having one copy is standard promotion practice, but all those?! In those extreme quantities, it cheapens their value and they look like unwanted surplus bound.


----------



## purseinsanity

amante said:


> Well done President and Mrs. O. That was the right call.
> I'm so sad that MM isn't having a big bash after all. I wanted to go through the guest list and all the sponcon and see who here allies were.
> Maybe it's not such a good idea to relegate dozens of brand new copies as laptop stand, just saying. Having one copy is standard promotion practice, but all those?! In those extreme quantities, it cheapens their value and they look like unwanted surplus bound.


Can't wait to see The Bench on Overstock.com or at Big Lots.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh man! I really like Melissa McCarthy! Whyyyyy is she doing this with MM?!
> 
> But... This photo caption made me laugh. Court jester in the background
> 
> View attachment 5155597


Who puts their laptop that high?  Wouldn't she be typing with her hands almost at neck level if that were true??  (I'm now picturing a T. rex  

I also am enjoying the symbolism of Harry on the outside, looking in.  He's just the jester/prop to get Meg what she wants.  Seems about right, doesn't it?!!?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Who puts their laptop that high?  Wouldn't she be typing with her hands almost at neck level if that were true??  (I'm now picturing a T. rex



She's answering her fan mail! Each sugar who writes to Meghan gets an 8" X 10" autographed glossy and a copy of The Bench.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Rachel was always my least favorite character on Friends. I never found Jen annoying until now, but at least she is self-aware.



I can have a bar of my favourite chocolate in the cupboard and eat only one square per day.

Not if DH finds it though  coz he can't stop anything with sugar/salt/fat/anything 'till it's gone - and 'thence' blames _me_ for buying it  

Japanese rice crackers are my downfall (nobody send me any please!).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gotta love these blank screens  
Is that the icing-less cake? It looks like a Whole Foods berry cake. Interesting the cake is not personalised. IMO


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh guys did you clock the Hermes Avalon? Now we know what she wants to wear to the emmys



Good. They don't lend. They don't need to. 

Surely she want to support an unknown but emerging and 100% sustainable designer no?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta love these blank screens
> Is that the icing-less cake? It looks like a Whole Foods berry cake. Interesting the cake is not personalised. IMO
> 
> View attachment 5155687
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155688


(Hanging my head in shame) I subjected myself to watching this video.  Meghan can't even act for a "cause".


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta love these blank screens
> Is that the icing-less cake? It looks like a Whole Foods berry cake. Interesting the cake is not personalised. IMO
> 
> View attachment 5155687
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155688



That table is not set it _is_ a set. How hideously calculating do you want to look? 

FFS! I said, NO ICING, NO CAKE!!!  

Give me a chocolate mochi though


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I can have a bar of my favourite chocolate in the cupboard and east only one square per day.
> 
> Not if DH finds it though  coz he can't stop anything with sugar/salt/fat/anything 'till it's gone - and 'thence' blames _me_ for buying it
> 
> Japanese rice crackers are my downfall (nobody send me any please!).


I've seen a meme on IG where it states something like:

"I'm being a good mother by pretending to help my child search for their chocolate that I ate last night."

Describes me to a "T"!


----------



## amante

I watched the video and while I agree with the premise that time is the most valuable gift, and we know that she has a constant desire to be at the forefront of the current issue (in this case, the pandemic has adversely affected women's careers more than men's), couldn't her PR team finesse the message a little better? The whole thing comes across as a random half-baked brain fart. My suggestion would have been to say that she couldn't have a bday party bec of the pandemic but as bad as that sounds, other women have it worse so instead of throwing a party, etc etc.
Plus will the public see her 40 friends doing their 40 minutes? If you're going to name a number, show it.

Ooh, yacht party was mentioned and made into a gag in MM's 40th bday video. Is that in reference to anything in particular, hmmm?

Also, she needs to find a public identity away from her former flash-in-the-pan royal career. Melissa McCarthy's afternoon tea in a hat gag is uncomfortable and not funny even for MM (Melissa, she accused those people of racism and driving her to suicidal ideation, that joke's not funny, okay???)


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I've seen a meme on IG where it states something like:
> 
> "I'm being a good mother by pretending to help my child search for their chocolate that I ate last night."
> 
> Describes me to a "T"!


----------



## Missydora

Another one of those self serving ideas. But get everyone else to do the hard work for her..  if only she should spend 40mins with her father.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On our birthdays, girls just wanna have fun - nothing in those photos says ‘fun’


----------



## rose60610

Her nails are polished in a light color. Did anyone tell her that she is now FREE of all the horrid restrictions of the BRF and can now wear dark polish without all the criticism?  Is the cake somebody's rejected and discounted wedding cake topper? It's so blah. Like her. In ten years she's eligible for AARP.


----------



## purseinsanity

amante said:


> *Ooh, yacht party was mentioned and made into a gag in MM's 40th bday video. Is that in reference to anything in particular, hmmm?*
> 
> Also, she needs to find a public identity away from her former flash-in-the-pan royal career. Melissa McCarthy's afternoon tea in a hat gag is uncomfortable and not funny even for MM (since she accused the BRF of racism??)


Yacht girl was my first thought...like no Melissa, I don't _*need*_ to be on yachts any more!


----------



## bag-mania

amante said:


> Ooh, yacht party was mentioned and made into a gag in MM's 40th bday video. Is that in reference to anything in particular, hmmm?



That was the first thing I thought too, like maybe Melissa was making a little side humor. Then I decided it was a coincidence, otherwise it never would have been left in the video.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The cake is probably a fake show cake with a few fresh berries on top.  She thinks she is a Queen on her throne. The Hermès blanket stands in as embroidery for H’s “vacant” (get out of my shot, this is MY moment) co-throne.

she even has photos in frames, like the Queen does. She is probably hoping the media, peeps on social, try to “decipher” the message/meaning behind them.

Hey!  Who’s holding the baby!  Lol


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Eating one M&M? That is self-control.


I had the oldest People magazine lying around and Jen's father John Aniston was featured (because back in the day, he was a soap star) and they showed his daughter, just getting started in the biz, barefoot, in the kitchen, with a dog.

He said his daughter was obsessed with gaining weight.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Her nails are polished in a light color. Did anyone tell her that she is now FREE of all the horrid restrictions of the BRF and can now wear dark polish without all the criticism?  Is the cake somebody's rejected and discounted wedding cake topper? It's so blah. Like her. In ten years she's eligible for AARP.



This is the whole foods berry cake — yeah, I see what you did there, Hazzie












						Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market
					

Find BAKERY Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market. Get nutrition, ingredient, allergen, pricing and weekly sale information!




					www.wholefoodsmarket.com


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I can have a bar of my favourite chocolate in the cupboard and east only one square per day.
> 
> Not if DH finds it though  coz he can't stop anything with sugar/salt/fat/anything 'till it's gone - and 'thence' blames _me_ for buying it
> 
> Japanese rice crackers are my downfall (nobody send me any please!).


we had a box of expensive chocolates that were a Christmas gift a couple of years ago and didn't touch them for a long time.  I can eat one chocolate.  but not one potato chip


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> Who puts their laptop that high?  Wouldn't she be typing with her hands almost at neck level if that were true??  (I'm now picturing a T. rex
> 
> I also am enjoying the symbolism of Harry on the outside, looking in.  He's just the jester/prop to get Meg what she wants.  Seems about right, doesn't it?!!?


Agree on both counts.

That is not an office for working and Harry looks so bored, he's juggling outside trying to get attention.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s compare:


----------



## amante

H for Hermes, H for Harry?

In case anyone from H&M's team is checking the online chatter: Mackenzie Scott (Bezos) and Melinda French Gates. Think about it. The former has given away $9B in two years. You're welcome.


----------



## Jayne1

I watched Melissa's, so I hope that's not considered a click for MM. It's all very white except for outside the window where it's very green. Must be getting a lot of rain in California.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the whole foods berry cake — yeah, I see what you did there, Hazzie
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155698
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market
> 
> 
> Find BAKERY Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market. Get nutrition, ingredient, allergen, pricing and weekly sale information!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wholefoodsmarket.com



It sure looks similar.  Doubtful it is from POSIES & SUGAR of Santa Barbara.  Has too much icing on it and looks a little lopsided.  Maybe M made it herself! I know it's a lemon and olive oil cake!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Who puts their laptop that high?  Wouldn't she be typing with her hands almost at neck level if that were true??  (I'm now picturing a T. rex



The laptop was placed that high to pretend Meghan was actually having an intimate chat with Melissa through the laptops instead of having professional camera people taping both of them. The illusion didn’t work.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Who the F is the guy at the window, was that Harry? Is she not even letting him into the house now?


----------



## gracekelly

The Hermes blanket is pretty funny to me.  With all her aspirations, is there a secret Birkin in her closet? What happened to the custom cake?  Did Harry mess up the order and he had to go to Whole Foods for one? He decided to leave the top blank because they couldn't fit HRH M D of S completely written out on it?

So typical of her to ASK OTHER PEOPLE to do things.  Such a phony.  The highlight was Melissa mentioned yachting.


----------



## amante

What's up with the bandage on Melissa's lower right neck?


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the whole foods berry cake — yeah, I see what you did there, Hazzie
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155698
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market
> 
> 
> Find BAKERY Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market. Get nutrition, ingredient, allergen, pricing and weekly sale information!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wholefoodsmarket.com


$32! Dipping into that Netflix ca$h!


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who the F is the guy at the window, was that Harry? Is she not even letting him into the house now?




Here, we call that a ‘peeping tom’.  Definitely not something to aspire, too.
See, again, they try oh so hard to be cool, likeable, and fun BUT they continue to fail and fail epically. This beige on beige decor is too dull.  Add some texture, some contrast, some old world paintings along with old world vases.  Finally, get a sweater that fits.

View attachment 5155744


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here, we call that a ‘peeping tom’.  Definitely not something to aspire, too.
> See, again, they try oh so hard to be cool, likeable, and fun BUT they continue to fail and fail epically. This beige on beige decor is too dull.  Add some texture, some contrast, some old world paintings along with old world vases.  Finally, get a sweater that fits.
> 
> View attachment 5155744


I agree, color is back!


----------



## gracekelly

The DM says 40 "Hollywood friends!"   What?  There are 40 people in the entertainment industry who are in actual real speaking terms contact with her?  I want a list!

Harry was let out of the laundry room because they needed to power clean the walls.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan Markle's 40th will see the start of her creating an 'empire'
					

Talent manager Professor Jonathan Shalit OBE, who worked with the couple's friend Elton John, told Closer magazine that Meghan's 40th birthday will see the start of her creating an 'empire'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I understand that  Prof Jonathan Shalit, OBE is attempting to start a comedy career and will be appearing in the Outer Hebrides at a pub, Ye Olde Goat, this weekend.


----------



## CeeJay

Hermes Zen said:


> TV execs are keen for the pair to attend the A-list event in downtown LA. They may even try to persuade M&H to present an award.
> 
> If there’s any truth in this I doubt it will take any arm twisting to do this. M&H want/need the PR!
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan lined up to make Hollywood debut and present Emmy award next month *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg lined up to make Hollywood debut & present Emmy award next month
> 
> 
> EMMY awards bosses want Prince Harry and wife Meghan to make their Hollywood debuts at the ceremony next month. TV execs are keen for the pair to attend the A-list event in downtown LA. They may ev…
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


I haven't watched the Emmys in years, certainly won't plan on watching these 2 bone-heads!!


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Can't wait to see The Bench on Overstock.com or at Big Lots.



Saw it a few weeks ago in Marshalls or Ross


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The DM says 40 "Hollywood friends!"   What?  There are 40 people in the entertainment industry who are in actual real speaking terms contact with her?  I want a list!
> 
> Harry was let out of the laundry room because they needed to power clean the walls.


well as much as I hate to say it, Melissa McCarthy is now her "friend"....so being married to H is working for her
We know none of these A-list celebs would even know who she was when she was the "star" of the big TV series Suits


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well as much as I hate to say it, Melissa McCarthy is now her "friend"....so being married to H is working for her


MM was paid or was coerced by Sunshine Sachs.   I bet she gets her hands slapped about the yachting comment.  MM will not think that is funny as sit hits too close to home.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Saw it a few weeks ago in Marshalls or Ross


Didn't Lady CC report that MM was buying up her books to raise the sales numbers?  Well MM isn't stupid!  She is going to discount stores to buy them so they cost less!


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta love these blank screens
> Is that the icing-less cake? It looks like a Whole Foods berry cake. Interesting the cake is not personalised. IMO
> 
> View attachment 5155687
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155688



Reminds me a little of the sad Kirk Cameron birthday photo...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Eugenie takes part in this silly 40 mins thing. Just...why.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the whole foods berry cake — yeah, I see what you did there, Hazzie
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155698
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market
> 
> 
> Find BAKERY Berry Chantilly Cake 8 Inch at Whole Foods Market. Get nutrition, ingredient, allergen, pricing and weekly sale information!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wholefoodsmarket.com



That looks like 'regular' frosting. Meghan's looked like it was covered in fondant


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> That looks like 'regular' frosting. Meghan's looked like it was covered in fondant



Naw, fondant doesn't have the "ripples" on the sides, and you'll never get such sharp edges on the top with fondant either. I'd vote for some kind of buttercream. That said, that thing doesn't look very professional at all, it's uneven and the "decoration" lacks even for a minimalist look.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Rachel was always my least favorite character on Friends. I never found Jen annoying until now, but at least she is self-aware.


Hubby and I watched it some times and always agreed that Lisa Kudrow had the best acting skills of the bunch.


----------



## bag-mania

McCarthy isn’t represented by Sunshine Sachs. However, I discovered you can “buy” Melissa for personal appearances through her agency. I’m guessing that is exactly what happened here. Melissa was paid for the bit and she did a great job.





__





						Melissa McCarthy | Speaking Fee, Booking Agent, & Contact Info | CAA Speakers
					

Contact Melissa McCarthy's booking agent for speaking fees and availability. CAA Speakers exclusively represents the world's top business, keynote, and motivational speakers.




					www.caa.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> It is such a weird concept "I'm turning 40 so I'm asking 40 friends to donate 40 minutes of their time to help another woman." What?! First, she doesn't have 40 friends and how much of a difference does 40 minutes of mentoring or whatever really make?


So, women of the world will volunteer their time to help other women return to work while the two besties sit on their fanny and take credit for the whole scheme. Sounds like a decent plan.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> So, women of the world will volunteer their time to help other women return to work while the two besties sit on their fanny and take credit for the whole scheme. Sounds like a decent plan.



“Do as I say and not as I do” has always been an accepted strategy throughout history.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Eugenie takes part in this silly 40 mins thing. Just...why.


I bet Haz been guilted her into it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> So, women of the world will volunteer their time to help other women return to work while the two besties sit on their fanny and take credit for the whole scheme. Sounds like a decent plan.


Just like proctor and gamble donating diapers and them getting paid for it, plus getting the credit!!


----------



## Addicted to bags

Opinion | Prince Harry and Meghan could face a ludicrous legal battle over access to their children — NBC News
					

The premise upon which grandparent visitation laws are built is tenuous at best. Sometimes, children are better off having never known their grandparents.




					apple.news


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hubby and I watched it some times and always agreed that Lisa Kudrow had the best acting skills of the bunch.


Lisa Kudrow was funny on that show and she's very smart.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> MM was paid or was coerced by Sunshine Sachs.   I bet she gets her hands slapped about the yachting comment.  MM will not think that is funny as sit hits too close to home.


I didn't watch the video so don't know what the yachting comment was.....but really, Melissa isn't hurting for money so getting paid shouldn't be reason for this....how much could it have been?


----------



## bag-mania

Addicted to bags said:


> Opinion | Prince Harry and Meghan could face a ludicrous legal battle over access to their children — NBC News
> 
> 
> The premise upon which grandparent visitation laws are built is tenuous at best. Sometimes, children are better off having never known their grandparents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



It's what you would expect from an NBC opinion piece. Find someone who transfers all of her deep-seated, personal family issues onto a celebrity and watch while she immediately takes their side and assumes the grandparent is the devil.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch the video so don't know what the yachting comment was.....but really, Melissa isn't hurting for money so getting paid shouldn't be reason for this....how much could it have been?


Actors have the mindset that every job could be their last. Work was pretty scarce last year with things on hold and everyone has expenses. People would be shocked at what these people get for showing up at a restaurant.  Paris Hilton made a lot of money showing up at places for pay.   Rock groups get paid milliions for doing a private concert.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch the video so don't know what the yachting comment was.....but really, Melissa isn't hurting for money so getting paid shouldn't be reason for this....how much could it have been?


Well you know in Hollywood it’s all nudge & influence not money….
Perhaps Melissa is dying  to be offered another ‘serious Oscar contender’ role so she can get another swing at the academy and show she can do both like Robin Williams. Sunshine clearly know a lot of producers and pet writers….. Scratch sunshine’s back and they will scratch yours. 


chicinthecity777 said:


> Who the F is the guy at the window, was that Harry? Is she not even letting him into the house now?
> 
> View attachment 5155744


The moment you see all those copies of the book…. I bet a lot of Brits immediately think of this: 





although she’s nowhere near as likeable as Alan


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch the video so don't know what the yachting comment was.....but really, Melissa isn't hurting for money so getting paid shouldn't be reason for this....how much could it have been?



No idea. If she was paid it would have been through Archewell so it could be written off as an expense. 

Melissa lost 70 lbs. last year on a liquid diet. Maybe she wanted to show it off?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> MM was paid or was coerced by Sunshine Sachs.   I bet she gets her hands slapped about the yachting comment.  MM will not think that is funny as sit hits too close to home.



That was scripted. Not an actual call with ad libs.


----------



## amante

Melissa was giving suggestions for how to celebrate her "bestie" Meghan's bday. She suggested afternoon tea and yacht party. I really think those were deliberate and conscious decisions meant to be shade at all her haterz and the BRF, but be careful MM, you're only surviving on the public's goodwill and curiousity of you and if they see that you can be as mean as you alleged your enemies are...you don't have (that much) money, talent or experience to fall back on


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Well you know in Hollywood it’s all nudge & influence not money….
> Perhaps Melissa is dying  to be offered another ‘serious Oscar contender’ role so she can get another swing at the academy and show she can do both like Robin Williams. Sunshine clearly know a lot of producers and pet writers….. Scratch sunshine’s back and they will scratch yours.
> 
> The moment you see all those copies of the book…. I bet a lot of Brits immediately think of this:
> View attachment 5155882
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155875
> 
> although she’s nowhere near as likeable as Alan


I love me some Alan Partridge!


----------



## amante

sdkitty said:


> I didn't watch the video so don't know what the yachting comment was.....but really, Melissa isn't hurting for money so getting paid shouldn't be reason for this....how much could it have been?


Maybe a voice over role on Pearl


----------



## bag-mania

amante said:


> Melissa was giving suggestions for how to celebrate her "bestie" Meghan's bday. She suggested afternoon tea and yacht party. I really think those were deliberate and conscious decisions meant to be shade at all her haterz and the BRF, but be careful MM, you're only surviving on the public's goodwill and curiousity of you and if they see that you can be as mean as you alleged your enemies are...you don't have (that much) money, talent or experience to fall back on



I'm still skeptical. How well known are those yacht girl rumors? I didn't think they went beyond Quora questions. If Melissa had really wanted to tweak Meghan, she should have asked her about the whereabouts of her alleged baby girl.


----------



## sdkitty

amante said:


> Melissa was giving suggestions for how to celebrate her "bestie" Meghan's bday. She suggested afternoon tea and yacht party. I really think those were deliberate and conscious decisions meant to be shade at all her haterz and the BRF, but be careful MM, you're only surviving on the public's goodwill and curiousity of you and if they see that you can be as mean as you alleged your enemies are...you don't have (that much) money, talent or experience to fall back on


so afternoon tea would seem to be a British thing....that's the place she couldn't wait to bail on....IDK....I just can't wait for the day when no one cares what they do or say


----------



## tiktok

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who the F is the guy at the window, was that Harry? Is she not even letting him into the house now?
> 
> View attachment 5155744



“Just another day in my home office, wearing 4-inch heels, trying to look royal”. She literally could have made this photo look more staged and unnatural if she tried.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Immediately! Even before seeing H in the window.  I posted here when H&M were spotted in BH’s that they probably stopped by H on rodeo. *M’s probably got a Himalayan Birkin in her closet* to go with her furniture.


Ok, now seriously, that would pi$$ me off more than anything else Meg has done (which is saying a lot!).  After being a loyal Hermes customer for years, since my SA left I still don't have a Hima and this hussy goes in and gets one.  All hell is about to break loose!


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Who the F is the guy at the window, was that Harry? Is she not even letting him into the house now?
> 
> View attachment 5155744


I admit, I thought it was a camera guy at first until someone posted it was Haz juggling of all things.  Wear a dunce cap Harry, that'll make it more believable than Meg's feigned "surprise" that he was out there.

And who wears stilettos for a Zoom call?  Wear shorts on the bottom if you're trying to make it more believable, especially talking to a "bestie".


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> “Just another day in my home office, wearing 4-inch heels, trying to look royal”. She literally could have made this photo look more staged and unnatural if she tried.


I think those heels were higher than four inches


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Saw it a few weeks ago in Marshalls or Ross


Was it on clearance, even there?


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> So, women of the world will volunteer their time to help other women return to work while the two besties sit on their fanny and take credit for the whole scheme. Sounds like a decent plan.


How exactly does one "help another woman return to work" in just 40 minutes?    Was someone babysitting Lili so Meg could film this stupid staged Zoom call?  Doria??  Was that your 40 minutes of time helping your daughter "return" to "Work"???


----------



## MommyDaze

Noooooo!  Not Tracee too


----------



## purseinsanity

MommyDaze said:


> Noooooo!  Not Tracee too



I'm losing respect for these women left and right.  First Melissa McCarthy, now Tracee Ross.  Sad day


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh guys did you clock the Hermes Avalon? Now we know what she wants to wear to the emmys


Ok, the Avalon is a blankie, am thinking of Peanuts‘ Schroeder , some people carry their blankets around for years 

ps full disclosure, I had to look up what an Avalon is, too ignorant to know


----------



## marietouchet

Overheard on 6 o clock news , an Olympic winner will buy her mom. A good truck with winnings , thumb way up

tidbit has nothing to do with 6


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm losing respect for these women left and right.  First Melissa McCarthy, now Tracee Ross.  Sad day



I wouldn’t consider either one to be a “thought leader” as described in that post. Seems like it is an ego boost without having to do anything but pay lip service. It isn’t like we can prove whether they personally tried to help anyone.


----------



## amante

bag-mania said:


> I'm still skeptical. How well known are those yacht girl rumors? I didn't think they went beyond Quora questions. If Melissa had really wanted to tweak Meghan, she should have asked her about the whereabouts of her alleged baby girl.


I first read about those yacht girl rumors from the anonymous Enty of Crazy Days and Nights so definitely went beyond Quora. Enty seems to be pretty legit, he broke the Harvey Weinstein and not-all-that-nice Ellen Degeneres gossip before they got mainstream traction. Also supposedly "Hiiiimmmmm" in CDAN comment section is Enty's friend Robert Downey Jr.. Vanity Fair even featured Enty www.vanityfair.com/style/2016/crazy-days-and-nights-enty-interview Basically what I'm trying to say is that Enty is pretty well respected (and probably just as well read) in the LA entertainment circles.

I don't think the shade was from Melissa to Meghan. I think the Meghan signed off on the "jokes" to give the f*** u to her critics


----------



## Annawakes

1. I’m puzzled at how suddenly Melissa McCarthy is a bestie.  Was she even at the wedding? Or the bachelorette party in NYC?  I think she’s looking for easy attention.  

2. Where are all her other besties?  Serena, Amal?  Anything from them?

3. What exactly does 40 minutes of mentorship from a “thought leader” entail?  Is it like resume or CV review/editing?  Or 40 minutes if motivational speaking to an audience of one?  I feel that this is another “cause” of zero substance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Note to self: always check the OW connection -
From 2019,

_As for her dream comedy co-star?

“*Melissa McCarthy. Please!” she gushed. “That's who you want to star with in a comedy, *but you know what she has is that timing thing. I don't know if I have that, especially over and over and over again, but you know that might be fun to do something with he








						EXCLUSIVE: Oprah Winfrey Says She Was 'Scurred' to Take on Her Role in 'Henrietta Lacks'
					

She had to take on the moving role in the new true-life story.




					www.etonline.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> 1. I’m puzzled at how suddenly Melissa McCarthy is a bestie.  Was she even at the wedding? Or the bachelorette party in NYC?  I think she’s looking for easy attention.
> 
> 2. Where are all her other besties?  Serena, Amal?  Anything from them?
> 
> 3. What exactly does 40 minutes of mentorship from a “thought leader” entail?  Is it like resume or CV review/editing?  Or 40 minutes if motivational speaking to an audience of one?  I feel that this is another “cause” of zero substance.



In addition to our intrepid royal reporter role, all of us here at TPF are _thought leaders_. Remember to add that to the CV.


----------



## xeyes

purseinsanity said:


> Who puts their laptop that high?  Wouldn't she be typing with her hands almost at neck level if that were true??  (I'm now picturing a T. rex
> 
> I also am enjoying the symbolism of Harry on the outside, looking in.  He's just the jester/prop to get Meg what she wants.  Seems about right, doesn't it?!!?



Laptop on a stack of _Bench_es is probably a better video angle than laptop down on the table (horizontal instead of up under the chin, which isn’t, um, going to be her best angle at the moment).

Considering how much Harry wanted to no longer be “trapped“ on the inside looking out in his old life, I hope he’s enjoying being on the outside looking in - if things keep going as many here suspect they will, he’d do well to get used to it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Noted the “Bestie” sign off was “See you at 50”. Not likely given  the birthday woman’s track record for friendship.

Clever to do this through Archwell, all the “clicks” will help with trying to sell it as a viable site.

40 minutes of mentoring is ludicrous. Hopefully, it’s a beginning, but it’s typical Succexx, concept sounds good, but no meaningful foundation under it.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> *Noted the “Bestie” sign off was “See you at 50”. *Not likely give the birthday woman’s track record for friendship.
> 
> Clever to do this through Archwell, all the “clicks” will help with trying to sell it as a viable site.
> 
> 40 minutes of mentoring is ludicrous. Hopefully, it’s a beginning, but it’s typical Succexx, concept sounds good, but no meaningful foundation under it.


LOL, I took it to mean, I'm sure I'll be Markled for 10 years after this, and maybe you'll come calling when you need me again in 10 years.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Ok, the Avalon is a blankie, am thinking of Peanuts‘ Schroeder , some people carry their blankets around for years
> 
> ps full disclosure, I had to look up what an Avalon is, too ignorant to know


She will claim she bought the blanket for Harry, after all, it has a big honking H on it.


The 40 people on this list know her as well as the Clooney’s and Oprah did when they were invited to the wedding. That is to say not at all. She repeats everything she does. If the named person doesn’t respond positively, then they will be marked as uncaring. It is a no win for whomever is on the list. Either way they will be markled.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> She will claim she bought the blanket for Harry, after all, it has a big honking H on it.
> 
> 
> The 40 people on this list know her as well as the Clooney’s and Oprah did when they were invited to the wedding. That is to say not at all. She repeats everything she does. If the named person doesn’t respond positively, then they will be marked as uncaring. It is a no win for whomever is on the list. Either way they will be markled.


I was looking at the list of supposed "friends" (no family on there, BTW) and there's not a single nobody.  Biggest bunch of bull ever.  If you add up all the time that 40 minutes from 40 people would provide, it's barely over a day's worth of "Compassion in Action".  I guess that explains why she's been so quiet.  It took a lot to come up with such a "clever" concept.


----------



## Katel

Sharont2305 said:


> From the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and one from Prince Charles
> 
> View attachment 5155441
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155447


Hahaha these are terrible and ordinary pictures of her, and “happy 40th?” Oh TRF shade


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, women of the world, get back to work. I need more Hermes blankets, plates, clothes, bags.
Do as I say, not as I do.


Again, in an almost-post-pandemic, this syrupy-beige crap doesn’t work. Eug is selling herself cheaply.
Is this giggly, scantily-clad woman of the world making porn videos?  Very elaborate set-up for a few zoom-ies. Hmmm.










						Meghan's mentors 'could do more harm than good', warns expert
					

The Duchess of Sussex needs to ensure her team has the right advisers because the wrong one can 'destroy' their clients' self-belief, Hannah Martin from the Talented Ladies Club said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

"We are all raindrops", "creative activations", and now "spend 40 minutes to help another woman"--and all the word salads in between.   It is impossible to surpass these two in terms of sappy, idiotic and shallow speech. 

All this advertising that she's 40--is that a calling card for all the elderly billionaires with one foot in the grave that there's an attractive duchess out there with a history of dumping her husbands/boyfriends when she gets a better offer?


----------



## CarryOn2020

_MEGHAN Markle appeared to copy the Obamas again by launching her "40 x 40" birthday initiative after Barack's "60 for 60" fundraiser. 

Meghan announced her own "40 for 40" drive via her Archewell site asking people to donate "40 minutes of service" by helping or mentoring someone on her August 4 birthday, which she shares with *****._









						Meghan Markle accused of copying Obamas AGAIN with her new program
					

MEGHAN Markle appeared to copy the Obamas again by launching her “40 x 40” birthday initiative after Barack’s “60 for 60” fundraiser. Meghan announced her own “4…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> _MEGHAN *Markle appeared to copy the Obamas again* by launching her "40 x 40" birthday initiative after Barack's "60 for 60" fundraiser.
> 
> Meghan announced her own "40 for 40" drive via her Archewell site asking people to donate "40 minutes of service" by helping or mentoring someone on her August 4 birthday, which she shares with *****._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle accused of copying Obamas AGAIN with her new program
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle appeared to copy the Obamas again by launching her “40 x 40” birthday initiative after Barack’s “60 for 60” fundraiser. Meghan announced her own “4…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk




I'm shocked! Shocked!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I haven’t watched all of it, comments support Samantha.  
Dan Wooton interviews Samantha:


----------



## Jayne1

tiktok said:


> “Just another day in my home office, wearing 4-inch heels, trying to look royal”. She literally could have made this photo look more staged and unnatural if she tried.


Agree.  Where would she wear those heels? To go for a walk around the grounds? Grocery shopping?  Working from home? All the parties she's invited to?

Those heels are for sitting on a chair and being photographed.


----------



## amante

> Celebrities also took up the cause, with Hillary *******, Sarah Paulson, Ciara, Gabrielle Union, Diana Award CEO Tessy Ojo, Katie Couric, Deepak Chopra and Sofia Carson among those who posted about their support on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> According to the Duchess's office, other participants who have committed to the cause include Adele, Amanda Gorman, Amanda Nguyen, Ibram X. Kendi, Gloria Steinem, José Andrés, Dr. Nadine Burke Harris, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau and Stella McCartney.


https://people.com/royals/princess-...pport-meghan-markle-40x40-birthday-challenge/
I feel like a mentoring can be presumptuous. Implicitly the relationship is between one who is superior and an underling. And for just one 40 minute session? So you have to go look for a protege to only abandon after 40 minutes of talking.  Not worth the effort imo. Maybe resume editing service or mock interview or even just a friendly ear to listen to worries, but career advice? Well I guess it doesn't hurt. Tiny credit to them they actually give tips on how to find your 40-minute protege via SmartWorks YWCA and LA Works. (Though in the non-profits I've volunteered/considered, there was a minimum time commitment of a few months, so I'm not sure how this coordinates with the non-profits' objectives.) MM and her team probably spent more time roping in celeb participants than really coordinating with non-profits and considering partner outcomes.

At this point, why don't they just hold a donation drive for Archewell just like President O did for his presidential library? All this maneuvering and half-baked campaigns. They need cash flow to do actual stuff. They're not (working) royals anymore, they can't just be neutral figureheads for goodwill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> They need *cash flow *to do actual stuff. They're not (working) royals anymore, they can't just be _*neutral figureheads for goodwill.*_



Neutral figureheads - I believe _that _is exactly what they are and will be.  It is explains the _neutral_ tones in the house.
Cash flow - if they can afford the Hermes blanket and the sophisticated video equipment, they have plenty of cash.  Their ‘poor-little-me’ show is just that - a show.  Clearly they have plenty.  


A donation drive would mean scrutiny which is what they want to avoid.  This explains how presidential libraries are funded: https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/about/faqs.html


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> I haven’t watched all of it, comments support Samantha.
> Dan Wooton interviews Samantha:



Just watched it. I believe Samantha and I felt pain and sadness especially at the end of the interview. I wish she would do more interviews because we know she knows more about M. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Perhaps the “tea and yacht party” was a veiled threat toward Andrew?  Perhaps that is why Eugenie got involved.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I haven’t watched all of it, comments support Samantha.
> Dan Wooton interviews Samantha:



Thanks @CarryOn2020 
This is a great video. SM sounded very honest when answering the several questions, including that she can't love her sister at this point.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Ok, the Avalon is a blankie, *am thinking of Peanuts‘ Schroeder* , some people carry their blankets around for years
> 
> ps full disclosure, I had to look up what an Avalon is, too ignorant to know



At the risk of nitpicking you are thinking of Linus. Schroeder was the one who was obsessed with Beethoven. 

I keep going back to look at how carefully staged her set was. It fascinates me.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like I'm late to the party and missed the celebrations here at TPF. Need to catch up on several posts...


----------



## mellibelly

Leilani of Barbados saying everything we’re thinking including the yacht reference


----------



## tiktok

One of the commenters on DM said: 
'But it's not even an original idea. Google it. And what about Mandela Day? "On Mandela Day itself, citizens are encouraged to spend 67 minutes of their time in service to others in need. These 67 minutes are in appreciation of the 67 years that Nelson Mandela spent fighting for justice, equality and human rights for all." This is her all over, taking other people's ideas as if nobody thought of them before.'

So I did google it, and it's true. https://www.dw.com/en/67-minutes-in-memory-of-nelson-mandela/a-17793941

*Shocking!* She's never done this before - stolen an idea without credit. Truly unprecedented for her!


----------



## Chanbal

Eugenie seems to be joining her mother in trying to please dear MM. Dear Eugenie, women reentering the workforce are likely very busy trying to take care of their own lives and may not have time to waste 40 min in photo-op events. However, it might be helpful to them if you offer babysitting services for 40 hours, 40 meals that they will not have to cook... 

_"Taking to her Instagram Stories, new mother Eugenie, 31, wrote: '*To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce"*_









						Princess Eugenie shares 40th birthday message to 'dear Meghan'
					

Taking to her Instagram Stories, Eugenie, 31, wrote: 'To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe Eugenie doesn’t want them to kick her family out of Frogmore Cottage. Either that or she is the family spy, keeping tabs on them.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Eugenie doesn’t want them to kick her family out of Frogmore Cottage. Either that or she is the family spy, keeping tabs on them.


I think it has a lot to do with the relationship between Charles and Randy Andy, they seem to have many disagreements. Randy Andy is against Charles's plans of having a slimmed-down monarchy. He wasn't happy when Charles announced several years ago that Beatrice and Eugenie would stop having protection officers  paid by public funds. Recently, Charles seemed to have blocked Randy Andy from using Philip's funeral to rehabilitate his image. Charles is likely not loved by the York family, so supporting MM might be a way to go agains Charles.


----------



## Chanbal

It was all scripted.


----------



## Lodpah

That 40 minute thing from MM is so condescending and so her. Her idea is a slap at women and she does not mean it I believe. She's literally mocking women and acting the ***** she is. Who the hell is she to "mentor" women when her reputation is a low class actress and a gold digger. She's literally mocking women. It's like she's above all women. Women should be outraged. There are many women of substance out there who have accomplished much. She's such an ugly and evil soul.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> It looks like I'm late to the party and missed the celebrations here at TPF. Need to catch up on several posts...



Savage!


----------



## jelliedfeels

MommyDaze said:


> Noooooo!  Not Tracee too



Do you think getting up, putting the slogan t on and her hair in buns then taking the photos counts as her 40mins? 


Chanbal said:


> Eugenie seems to be joining her mother in trying to please dear MM. Dear Eugenie, women reentering the workforce are likely very busy trying to take care of their own lives and may not have time to waste 40 min in photo-op events. However, it might be helpful to them if you offer babysitting services for 40 hours, 40 meals that they will not have to cook...
> 
> _"Taking to her Instagram Stories, new mother Eugenie, 31, wrote: '*To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce"*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie shares 40th birthday message to 'dear Meghan'
> 
> 
> Taking to her Instagram Stories, Eugenie, 31, wrote: 'To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Lodpah said:


> That 40 minute thing from MM is so condescending and so her. Her idea is a slap at women and she does not mean it I believe. She's literally mocking women and acting the ***** she is. Who the hell is she to "mentor" women when her reputation is a low class actress and a gold digger. She's literally mocking women. It's like she's above all women. Women should be outraged. There are many women of substance out there who have accomplished much. She's such an ugly and evil soul.


Yeah between Eug and Megs I’m wondering how they are going to take 40mins to say:
“Be born into a rich family & let them organise everything for you.”

Perhaps M could add-
“Don’t forget to sleep your way to the top.”
Then eug’s husband can give her a virtual high five.

I personally feel like the western world is awash with these short-term flash in the pan wellness & mentoring initiatives and I honestly haven’t seen a lot of anything apart from hot air come out of them.


tiktok said:


> One of the commenters on DM said:
> 'But it's not even an original idea. Google it. And what about Mandela Day? "On Mandela Day itself, citizens are encouraged to spend 67 minutes of their time in service to others in need. These 67 minutes are in appreciation of the 67 years that Nelson Mandela spent fighting for justice, equality and human rights for all." This is her all over, taking other people's ideas as if nobody thought of them before.'
> 
> So I did google it, and it's true. https://www.dw.com/en/67-minutes-in-memory-of-nelson-mandela/a-17793941
> 
> *Shocking!* She's never done this before - stolen an idea without credit. Truly unprecedented for her!


Hahaha a famously oppressed black person too. Well I’m sure he’d appreciate her incredible achievements 

Continuing my point. I’m really not interested in doing things in anyone’s name. What the **** does it even mean?
I would’ve thought this kind of thing was perhaps reserved for when someone died but apparently this needs to be a yearly supplication for these big kahunas.  

What’s wrong with just doing something helpful because you value the cause and maybe, just maybe, not bragging about it? Much less tagging someone more important than you so you can do due deference to what really matters. 

Why is so much publicised altruism and activism reminiscent of a marketing Ponzi scheme or an MLM?

Add - I don’t like it at all because the focus seems to be on these vacuous celebrity faces and we still have no idea what the cause is or what they are trying to achieve.
Viz that article about the sugars money raising spells out raptor’s name in full but the cause is just ‘menstruation charity’ if I don’t click through where’s the publicity for the cause exactly?

actually now I’ve said MLMs I can’t help feeling that M’s mentoring would be reminiscent of a hun’s opening pitch:
‘Hi babe I see you are sparkling as an amazing true star of a woman who is just existing despite how beautiful you are girl  but you can really thrive and live and be empowered  and empower other women too with this amazing new work from home initiative. In just 40 minutes a week…..’

it’s a shame her middle name isn’t Louise (or maybe liar) It’d be closer to the truth.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> It was all scripted.



Harry looks pretty stupid here. This is supposed to be about empowering women back to work yet they make a comedy out of it. J.S.S.P. (just simply stupid people).


----------



## Lodpah

tiktok said:


> One of the commenters on DM said:
> 'But it's not even an original idea. Google it. And what about Mandela Day? "On Mandela Day itself, citizens are encouraged to spend 67 minutes of their time in service to others in need. These 67 minutes are in appreciation of the 67 years that Nelson Mandela spent fighting for justice, equality and human rights for all." This is her all over, taking other people's ideas as if nobody thought of them before.'
> 
> So I did google it, and it's true. https://www.dw.com/en/67-minutes-in-memory-of-nelson-mandela/a-17793941
> 
> *Shocking!* She's never done this before - stolen an idea without credit. Truly unprecedented for her!


Not only is she a liar but a thief too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She does have a point, but...not even sure. Raptor just has no manners whatsoever. McCarthy probably thought she was being funny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW how is Hillary such a fan girl? You'd think a woman with her brain would know better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand....yay?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I'm losing respect for these women left and right.  First Melissa McCarthy, now Tracee Ross.  Sad day



Let's not forget Eugenie (Eugenie! After what they did to the family) and Hillary who has a brain on Einstein level. WTFFF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> I first read about those yacht girl rumors from the anonymous Enty of Crazy Days and Nights so definitely went beyond Quora. Enty seems to be pretty legit, he broke the Harvey Weinstein and not-all-that-nice Ellen Degeneres gossip before they got mainstream traction. Also supposedly "Hiiiimmmmm" in CDAN comment section is Enty's friend Robert Downey Jr.. Vanity Fair even featured Enty www.vanityfair.com/style/2016/crazy-days-and-nights-enty-interview Basically what I'm trying to say is that Enty is pretty well respected (and probably just as well read) in the LA entertainment circles.
> 
> I don't think the shade was from Melissa to Meghan. I think the Meghan signed off on the "jokes" to give the f*** u to her critics



Enty was the one who had a very lengthy segment basically tracing how Raptor planted the cheating rumours of William and Rose Hanbury. I must say it did make a lot of sense the way he put it together.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think it has a lot to do with the relationship between Charles and Randy Andy, they seem to have many disagreements. Randy Andy is against Charles's plans of having a slimmed-down monarchy. He wasn't happy when Charles announced several years ago that Beatrice and Eugenie would stop having protection officers  paid by public funds. Recently, Charles seemed to have blocked Randy Andy from using Philip's funeral to rehabilitate his image. Charles is likely not loved by the York family, so supporting MM might be a way to go agains Charles.



The thing is, these girls - other than Raptor - understand very well how a monarchy works and who's alpha. They can't afford to annoy Charles even if they were petty enough.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020
> This is a great video. SM sounded very honest when answering the several questions, including that she can't love her sister at this point.


She sounded intelligent too, and not the quack we all thought she was in the beginning.


----------



## Lodpah

mellibelly said:


> Leilani of Barbados saying everything we’re thinking including the yacht reference



With that smile of hers she belongs on the short bus (no offense to short bus riders but in her case, a super short bus with restraints inside and outside).


----------



## chicinthecity777

A lot to catch up on...
They finally found some use of The Bench! As a laptop shelf! That's the most you can get out of this book! 
Alan Partridge is much much more likeable than MeGain! 
4 inch heels! Those are the exact shoes women wear when they are at home on zoom calls! She's so relatable!   
I am not surprised those 40 women participated this 40x40 thingy. I mean who in the right mind would turn down a perfect virtue signalling "do-good" opportunity! If you were approached by MM and decline, her PR team will hold that against you for the rest of your life!


----------



## Monoi

Harry literally looks like a clown.


----------



## rose60610

In honor of Meghan's 40th, I thought it'd be nice to give her the benefit of the doubt for 40 minutes, thinking I've been too hard on her.  But it was impossible to ignore all the evidence of her hypocrisy and lies. Nope, couldn't do it.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Overheard on 6 o clock news , an Olympic winner will buy her mom. A good truck with winnings , thumb way up
> 
> tidbit has nothing to do with 6


I wish I could type and the spelling checker would leave me alone - she will buy a FOOD truck for mom


----------



## sdkitty

more not new news about these two.  The asked about having a place in New Zealand and it's turned into they wanted to live in a commonwealth country.  I notice that in one of these pictures Harry is actually wearing black shoes, not the ugly brown ones 
Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Mulled Move To New Zealand, Governor-General Says | HuffPost


----------



## lanasyogamama

I find it hard to believe she didn’t want LA from the start.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She sounded intelligent too, and not the quack we all thought she was in the beginning.


This is the second video I watch from Sam M and she was well articulated in both. I believe she put herself to school and paid for her own master's degree. The father didn't have much money when she was growing up. It looks like he started having a good income only later in life and spent it all on MM.

As someone else said, who are MM, Eugenie et al. to mentor women? They are just using women undergoing less fortunate phases of their lives to promote themselves. This is so disgusting and condescending that makes me  .


----------



## Chanbal

chicinthecity777 said:


> A lot to catch up on...
> *They finally found some use of The Bench! As a laptop shelf!* That's the most you can get out of this book!
> Alan Partridge is much much more likeable than MeGain!
> 4 inch heels! Those are the exact shoes women wear when they are at home on zoom calls! She's so relatable!
> I am not surprised those 40 women participated this 40x40 thingy. I mean who in the right mind would turn down a perfect virtue signalling "do-good" opportunity! If you were approached by MM and decline, her PR team will hold that against you for the rest of your life!


You read my mind!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Monoi said:


> Harry literally looks like a clown.


He is a clown imo.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> more not new news about these two.  The asked about having a place in New Zealand and it's turned into they wanted to live in a commonwealth country.  I notice that in one of these pictures Harry is actually wearing black shoes, not the ugly brown ones
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Mulled Move To New Zealand, Governor-General Says | HuffPost





lanasyogamama said:


> I find it hard to believe she didn’t want LA from the start.


I agree that she wanted LA from the start, but he may not have known that. So asking questions about living in New Zealand was part of the persuasion process to live abroad imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I agree that she wanted LA from the start, but he may not have known that. So asking questions about living in New Zealand was part of the persuasion process to live abroad imo.


and having a place isn't the same as living there FT, right?


----------



## lulilu

I always thought Melissa McCarthy was stupid and unfunny and untalented.  A perfect partner for MM.  I only saw a few seconds of the clip -- MMcC in her stupid outfit and MM with her stupid laugh.  I almost barfed.


----------



## K.D.

Well, 40x40 is easy to reach if I think I've left work 40 minutes early, spend minimum 40 minutes driving, during rush hour, to the military base to hear a 40 minute introduction on the Invictus Games and surely a 40 minute get together with my team of volunteers  to drive back 40 minutes afterwards. I'm salty. Going to spend all my 40 minutes' slots helping elsewhere.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> I always thought Melissa McCarthy was stupid and unfunny and untalented.  A perfect partner for MM.  I only saw a few seconds of the clip -- MMcC in her stupid outfit and MM with her stupid laugh.  I almost barfed.


I see no need to watch it


----------



## lulilu

sdkitty said:


> I see no need to watch it


None.  A short clip was attached to some twitter post.  I think it was the Aussie good morning show and they were really making fun of them.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> He is a clown imo.



Clowns can juggle better.


----------



## sdkitty

Monoi said:


> Harry literally looks like a clown.


I saw a pic from that call with melissa mccarthy that didn't show Harry at the window.  so was that image of him added in as a joke?


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan's mentors 'could do more harm than good', warns expert
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex needs to ensure her team has the right advisers because the wrong one can 'destroy' their clients' self-belief, Hannah Martin from the Talented Ladies Club said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I agree with this headline. I don't care enough to find out the full list of those 40 women who are offering mentoring time but being a celeb/TV or movie star or even a politician doesn't qualify you being a role model, or should be qualified as a mentor, unless you specifically want to do their line of work. I really do feel for naive girls who will fall for this nonsense!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Let's not forget Eugenie (Eugenie! After what they did to the family) and Hillary who has a brain on Einstein level. WTFFF.


I personally think Eugenia popping up on their scheme is just another example of how poorly the royal PR are handling this debacle.

The first law of public disagreements, what I will call the ‘Ja Rule’, is that if you are the senior in status/fame you never acknowledge whatever shade or noise the lower- ranking person is trying to engage you with: the net result is always that _you_ boost _their_ profile and diminish _yours _- sometimes to a disastrous level.

I find the BRF’s current stance towards these two to be absolutely muddled: they came out brilliantly icy with the dismissive ‘recollections may vary’ and barely interact with H at public events so it seemed like he’s getting ignored….then they allow a slew of articles about how rude the name L is (which they would never allow to be said if they weren’t happy with it being said I don’t think)….. but then they post soppy birthday messages for M on Insta, let a baby who was born after they left the RF into the line of succession  & generally play along with these daft schemes.

Looks a bit weak to me.

I will eat own of my many attractive hats if E is doing this as a rebellious gesture. I firmly believe this is part of the royal strategy. I just think it’s absolutely cr*p strategy.

As to Hilary, I don’t want to get political here, but she’s always had a fondness for a celebrity endorsement whether it’s a good idea or not.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think they are just playing the long game. The messages were perfectly polite but not overly endearing. The line of succession cannot be changed without an act of Parliament and throwing Eugenia onto this thing establishes a continued connection without any concern about conversations being recorded etc.

At the end of the day it’s a graceful reminder of who left who that prohibits the refrain of how awful the BRF is while they stay calm and continue on.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, these girls - other than Raptor - understand very well how a monarchy works and who's alpha. They can't afford to annoy Charles even if they were petty enough.


True and showing how stupid they are by their treatment of Catherine. I think they all reached an unspoken agreement dealing with the curtsy question when William isn’t around, which was not to do it.


----------



## gracekelly

Monoi said:


> Harry literally looks like a clown.


His rehearsal for clowning was the James Corden show and sticking his head through a bathroom window.


----------



## gracekelly

Jktgal said:


> Nope, word she used was "nice". I remember because that's the best part of Meggie's interpretation.



If they told her “no” then she figured he would be perfect for her machinations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Monoi said:


> Harry literally looks like a clown.



This is exactly what I thought when I saw that photo of him juggling through the closed window.  That's a photo that has symbolism he may regret.  He traded in his life for that of a clown on the outside looking in.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I saw a pic from that call with melissa mccarthy that didn't show Harry at the window.  so was that image of him added in as a joke?


It was in the out takes at the end.


----------



## gracekelly

Melissa acts like a clown in most of the things she does low slapstick comedy. If Harry is lucky, and wants to improve his skills and make some real money, maybe she will take him on as an apprentice. He can be in Bridesmaids 2


----------



## jelliedfeels

A1aGypsy said:


> I think they are just playing the long game. The messages were perfectly polite but not overly endearing. The line of succession cannot be changed without an act of Parliament and throwing Eugenia onto this thing establishes a continued connection without any concern about conversations being recorded etc.
> 
> At the end of the day it’s a graceful reminder of who left who that prohibits the refrain of how awful the BRF is while they stay calm and continue on.


I appreciate the idea of the long game & of course they are the definition of something so entrenched they can’t be moved without supreme effort but…. 
I don’t get it. I find it really inconsistent rather than restrained. Why basically blank him at the funeral but then do birthday posts from all your accounts for the wife… H&M certainly aren’t posting about the rest of the family’s bdays.
To me, it makes it look like the BRF want to play happy families & it’s H’s grievance that’s holding out ? I don’t get it.

In fact, I wonder if it’s whether they are just so addicted to PR & views at this point they are just happy to be so consistently in the US/international news cycle even if they are getting the villain edit  & they don’t actually have a long term strategy beyond ride the wave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

HuffPost is really the greatest sugar of them all. Also, so that wannabe is the Duchess of Sussex, but the future queen of the UK is Kate Middleton?


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> True and showing how stupid they are by their treatment of Catherine. I think they all reached an unspoken agreement dealing with the curtsy question when William isn’t around, which was not to do it.


What’s the curtesy/Catherine thing?

It’s funny I always think of B&E as totally bland apart from having a wild taste in fascinators & spending too much money on going skiing.

also totally agree Melissa McCarthy is rubbish . She’s yet another fat=funny basically girl James corden




gracekelly said:


> His rehearsal for clowning was the James Corden show and sticking his head through a bathroom window.


His rehearsal for clowning has been his entire adult life


----------



## csshopper

Think of all the scenes through the years of Royals sitting at a desk while filming a segment. Family photos, furniture with pillows you want to curl up in, draperies, a fireplace with some warmth, decor on shelves and table tops to the point that many editors take the time to label them for publication.

And, then yesterday there is the sterile faux Royal, focused on herself, with about 28 copies of unsold books piled front and center, in the midst of a room looking more like an ad in a furniture catalog than a home, which, without her realizing it, personifies her. There is no "soul" to this 40 year old huckster.

All this striving to be "woke" and, like all else they do, it ends up off kilter as the Court Jester lurking outside the window (giggle, giggle) attempts to juggle balls (or maybe lemons on their way to being olive oil cake?).  And drops them just as he does with most of the things they do. The focus of support for women re entering the work force, literally out the window.

The whole thing felt fake and the "yacht" schtick, was I believe, a F U to the Royal Family. A statement in effect that, "yes, so what if I was, no one cares, I got a Prince, throw whatever you want at me, I will annihilate you and come out on top. I am invincible and so much smarter than all of you." It's a wonder she didn't stick her tongue out.


----------



## Genie27

I did note that the b'day wishes posted solo pics of La Douchesse, rather than group or combo shots like the've done in the past - e.g. Will and PC for a b'day photo etc. So the b'day is acknowledged but not a 'family' celebration if that makes sense? And the shade of shouting out 'guess who's 40' in two of the three posts.       

I'm catching up on the Beige Blandness of Montecito in the brand new shoes (not even scuff marks on those soles), with the matching H blanket. And the court jester takes the (olive oil and lemon) cake.


----------



## gracekelly

@jelliedfeels Princesses of Royal blood take precedence over the Duchess aNd the Duchess is supposed to curtsy to them if William is not present. If William is present, Duchess  piggybacks on his rank and they have to curtsy to her. The princesses have to curtsy  to William no matter what.


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> I did note that the b'day wishes posted solo pics of La Douchesse, rather than group or combo shots like the've done in the past - e.g. Will and PC for a b'day photo etc. So the b'day is acknowledged but not a 'family' celebration if that makes sense? And the shade of shouting out 'guess who's 40' in two of the three posts.
> 
> I'm catching up on the *Beige Blandness of Montecito* in the brand new shoes (not even scuff marks on those soles), with the matching H blanket. And the court jester takes the (olive oil and lemon) cake.


@Maggie Muggins here's another to add to your list!  Courtesy @Genie27!


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> What’s the curtesy/Catherine thing?
> 
> It’s funny I always think of B&E as totally bland apart from having a wild taste in fascinators & spending too much money on going skiing.
> 
> also totally agree Melissa McCarthy is rubbish . She’s yet another fat=funny basically girl James corden
> 
> 
> 
> His rehearsal for clowning has been his entire adult life


Amazing description of B&E!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Genie27 said:


> I did note that the b'day wishes posted solo pics of La Douchesse, rather than group or combo shots like the've done in the past - e.g. Will and PC for a b'day photo etc. So the b'day is acknowledged but not a 'family' celebration if that makes sense? And the shade of shouting out 'guess who's 40' in two of the three posts.
> 
> I'm catching up on the Beige Blandness of Montecito in the brand new shoes (not even scuff marks on those soles), with the matching H blanket. And the court jester takes the (olive oil and lemon) cake.


Also, I believe they put the birthday wishes in stories, not in the permanent grid.


----------



## amante

jelliedfeels said:


> I personally think Eugenia popping up on their scheme is just another example of how poorly the royal PR are handling this debacle.
> 
> The first law of public disagreements, what I will call the ‘Ja Rule’, is that if you are the senior in status/fame you never acknowledge whatever shade or noise the lower- ranking person is trying to engage you with: the net result is always that _you_ boost _their_ profile and diminish _yours _- sometimes to a disastrous level.
> 
> I find the BRF’s current stance towards these two to be absolutely muddled: they came out brilliantly icy with the dismissive ‘recollections may vary’ and barely interact with H at public events so it seemed like he’s getting ignored….then they allow a slew of articles about how rude the name L is (which they would never allow to be said if they weren’t happy with it being said I don’t think)….. but then they post soppy birthday messages for M on Insta, let a baby who was born after they left the RF into the line of succession  & generally play along with these daft schemes.
> 
> Looks a bit weak to me.
> 
> I will eat own of my many attractive hats if E is doing this as a rebellious gesture. I firmly believe this is part of the royal strategy. I just think it’s absolutely cr*p strategy.
> 
> As to Hilary, I don’t want to get political here, but she’s always had a fondness for a celebrity endorsement whether it’s a good idea or not.


Personally, I think the household/courtiers have always had a bad strategy of leaking so much gossip about MM. From the petty bridezilla moments to the MBS earrings to the political Irish abortion comment, I mean it's so obvious there's a mole on the inside. You don't need to make MM look bad, she's perfectly capable of that!

Even if H forfeits his succession to the throne (ex he converts to Catholicism) his offspring still are in line


----------



## lanasyogamama

The comments on this are hilarious. Someone said $40k of work by 40!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> @jelliedfeels Princesses of Royal blood take precedence over the Duchess aNd the Duchess is supposed to curtsy to them if William is not present. If William is present, Duchess  piggybacks on his rank and they have to curtsy to her. The princesses have to curtsy  to William no matter what.



Not sure they curtsy to each other at all time anyway unless it's the Queen or Charles...I've seen footage of the Cambridges meeting the Wessexes for an official engagement and the women cheek kissed, no curtsy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> @jelliedfeels Princesses of Royal blood take precedence over the Duchess aNd the Duchess is supposed to curtsy to them if William is not present. If William is present, Duchess  piggybacks on his rank and they have to curtsy to her. The princesses have to curtsy  to William no matter what.



IMO that dust-up over a _curtsy_ is very telling.

Andrew, Sarah, Eug and Bea care very much about BRF protocol and their entitlements. If someone walks in front of them, they groan. If someone doesn’t curtsy to them, they groan. They try very hard to appear to have QE’s favor _and to make Charles look insignificant_. When Andrew fussed about having to pay for B&E’s security, the media took Andrew’s side and joined in the anti-Charles chorus.  Interesting that Hazzie did the same - complained about losing security and his patronages. Clearly he is bitter about it all. My guess is the Yorks are too. While it may be clear in QE’s mind who has the power, these lower tier royals seem to disagree - they insist on using their titles and being noticed. I never have bought the York’s ‘happy family’ narrative. They look anything but happy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> Personally, I think the household/courtiers have always had a bad strategy of leaking so much gossip about MM. From the petty bridezilla moments to the MBS earrings to the political Irish abortion comment, I mean it's so obvious there's a mole on the inside. You don't need to make MM look bad, she's perfectly capable of that!



The earrings weren't leaked by the palace, they were discovered by either some Twitter personality or journalists, can't remember the details. The palace had in fact frantically tried to a) make her not wear them and b) bury that story because its potential damage to the BRF was worse than the damage to #6's wife as a person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The earrings weren't leaked by the palace, they were discovered by either some Twitter personality or journalists, can't remember the details. The palace had in fact frantically tried to a) make her not wear them and b) bury that story because its potential damage to the BRF was worse than the damage to #6's wife as a person.



She _wore_ the earrings — That is when it became a story. Media wondered where she got them. These earrings stood out as a significant chunk of bling, very different from her usual ‘style’. If she had not worn the earrings, no one would have known about them.  Do we know where they are now?


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that dust-up over a _curtsy_ is very telling.
> 
> Andrew, Sarah, Eug and Bea care very much about BRF protocol and their entitlements. If someone walks in front of them, they groan. If someone doesn’t curtsy to them, they groan. They try very hard to appear to have QE’s favor _and to make Charles look insignificant_. When Andrew fussed about having to pay for B&E’s security, the media took Andrew’s side and joined in the anti-Charles chorus.  Interesting that Hazzie did the same - complained about losing security and his patronages. Clearly he is bitter about it all. My guess is the Yorks are too. While it may be clear in QE’s mind who has the power, these lower tier royals seem to disagree - they insist on using their titles and being noticed. I never have bought the York’s ‘happy family’ narrative. They look anything but happy.



Maybe it’s the American in me but the whole curtesy thing seems ridiculous to me. If it’s the queen - sure, she’s essentially a symbol of an institution. If it’s part of some super formal event - sure, let’s honor tradition for the sake of tradition of ceremony. But curtesy to the n-th in line to the throne who’s done nothing but use their privilege of being born to the right family to enjoy themselves without any accountability for their actions - puhleeaaze. And if they insist on that it only shows how small minded they are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Maybe it’s the American in me but the whole curtesy thing seems ridiculous to me. If it’s the queen - sure, she’s essentially a symbol of an institution. If it’s part of some super formal event - sure, let’s honor tradition for the sake of tradition of ceremony. But curtesy to the n-th in line to the throne who’s done nothing but use their privilege of being born to the right family to enjoy themselves without any accountability for their actions - puhleeaaze. And if they insist on that it only shows how small minded they are.



Small minded, petty, difficult,  indeed.
A picture is worth 1000 words — maybe the camera just caught them at an awkward moment:










						Princess Eugenie and Beatrice forced to show 'sign of respect' to Kate
					

PRINCESS EUGENIE and Princess Beatrice's standings in the Royal Family in comparison to their cousin-in-law, Kate, will be significantly shifted when the Duchess of Cambridge assumes a new role, according to commentators.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Small minded, petty, difficult,  indeed.
> A picture is worth 1000 words — maybe the camera just caught them at an awkward moment:
> View attachment 5156680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie and Beatrice forced to show 'sign of respect' to Kate
> 
> 
> PRINCESS EUGENIE and Princess Beatrice's standings in the Royal Family in comparison to their cousin-in-law, Kate, will be significantly shifted when the Duchess of Cambridge assumes a new role, according to commentators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Harry looking like a barrel of laughs as usual.


----------



## jelliedfeels

tiktok said:


> Maybe it’s the American in me but the whole curtesy thing seems ridiculous to me. If it’s the queen - sure, she’s essentially a symbol of an institution. If it’s part of some super formal event - sure, let’s honor tradition for the sake of tradition of ceremony. But curtesy to the n-th in line to the throne who’s done nothing but use their privilege of being born to the right family to enjoy themselves without any accountability for their actions - puhleeaaze. And if they insist on that it only shows how small minded they are.


Oh yeah it’s totally petty pecking order politics and embarrassing but I’m sure they still think it beats being a peasant  

Mind you, there are societies where you are meant to bow to your parents (or your dad at least) & they don’t think it’s weird so I guess it’s just horses for courses.

different points in history too. I’d love to see the shogunate version of the BRF where Andy tried to pull some of his entitled **** and all the Samurai sliced him into a coddled carpaccio or a sheltered sashimi.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> different points in history too. I’d love to see the shogunate version of the BRF where Andy tried to pull some of his entitled **** and all the Samurai sliced him into a coddled carpaccio or a sheltered sashimi.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Small minded, petty, difficult,  indeed.
> A picture is worth 1000 words — maybe the camera just caught them at an awkward moment:
> View attachment 5156680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie and Beatrice forced to show 'sign of respect' to Kate
> 
> 
> PRINCESS EUGENIE and Princess Beatrice's standings in the Royal Family in comparison to their cousin-in-law, Kate, will be significantly shifted when the Duchess of Cambridge assumes a new role, according to commentators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Makes me wonder why apparently they have beef with Kate but Eugenie still sucks up to Raptor at every opportunity. For all we know Kate is low key and polite, which doesn't apply to #6's wife at all.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta love these blank screens
> Is that the icing-less cake? It looks like a Whole Foods berry cake. Interesting the cake is not personalised. IMO
> 
> View attachment 5155687
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155688


Don't know about the rest of you, but this hair sh1t that she constantly wears (what is it supposed to be - tendrils??) .. is just so old and frankly, I think it looks HORRIBLE!  Pull it back for cripes sake!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Don't know about the rest of you, but this hair sh1t that she constantly wears (what is it supposed to be - tendrils??) .. is just so old and frankly, I think it looks HORRIBLE!  Pull it back for cripes sake!!



Haha, I HATE them. They are way too long.


----------



## TC1

MM had to have Eu-Genie (as she called her to Oprah with some French accent) involved somehow..she told the world they were the best of friends and knew each other for years (but didn't know how to curtsy)  That's her story and she's trying to stick to it!


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> That's her story *truth *and she's trying to stick to it!



Had to adjust that a bit for you.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Small minded, petty, difficult,  indeed.
> A picture is worth 1000 words — maybe the camera just caught them at an awkward moment:
> View attachment 5156680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie and Beatrice forced to show 'sign of respect' to Kate
> 
> 
> PRINCESS EUGENIE and Princess Beatrice's standings in the Royal Family in comparison to their cousin-in-law, Kate, will be significantly shifted when the Duchess of Cambridge assumes a new role, according to commentators.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



ha those three pouters in the back!


----------



## sdkitty

Monoi said:


> Harry literally looks like a clown.


Harry at the window makes a fool of him
Who thought of that?
It's like she is the serious worker and he is, as you said, a clown.....if he has any sense, he should be embarrassed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Harry at the window makes a fool of him
> Who thought of that?
> It's like she is the serious worker and he is, as you said, a clown.....if he has any sense, he should be embarrassed



I think we know whose idea it was. It went something like this: “People love outtakes and post credit scenes. We will have Harry stand outside the window and act silly like he spontaneously crashed the zoom meeting to get our attention.”

Two hours later: “That still wasn’t quite right, but almost. TAKE 34, EVERYONE!!”


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure they curtsy to each other at all time anyway unless it's the Queen or Charles...I've seen footage of the Cambridges meeting the Wessexes for an official engagement and the women cheek kissed, no curtsy.


I doubt they do it all the time as well, but if it is an official occasion, they just might.  I don't think that Catherine and Sophie stand on too much ceremony with one another.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Harry at the window makes a fool of him
> *Who thought of that?*
> It's like she is the serious worker and he is, as you said, a clown.....if he has any sense, he should be embarrassed



The dog trainer of course.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh yeah it’s totally petty pecking order politics and embarrassing but I’m sure they still think it beats being a peasant
> 
> Mind you, there are societies where you are meant to bow to your parents (or your dad at least) & they don’t think it’s weird so I guess it’s just horses for courses.
> 
> different points in history too. I’d love to see the shogunate version of the BRF where Andy tried to pull some of his entitled **** and all the Samurai sliced him into a coddled carpaccio or a sheltered sashimi.



Slightly adjacent to the topic of bowing and curtsying and precedence...I have been watched a ton of police procedurals made in the UK.  I have been struck at how important rank is in the Police Dept.  When a superior officer was not addressed by full title and sir or madam, fur started to fly.  If one is brought up with this mindset, then it is probably a more natural thing.  People in the US are not as deferential.  (Yes, that is an understatement! OK some are just downright rude!)


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The dog trainer of course.


I surprised that he wasn't pulling eggs from behind his ear.  Oh, I know why, he flunked out of clown school before that was taught.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta love these blank screens
> Is that the icing-less cake? It looks like a Whole Foods berry cake. Interesting the cake is not personalised. IMO
> 
> View attachment 5155687
> 
> 
> View attachment 5155688


Are those supposed to be the kids in the pictures on her desk. Trying to imitate HRM, needs to have her blurry pictures on display.


----------



## bellecate

TC1 said:


> MM had to have Eu-Genie (as she called her to Oprah with some French accent) involved somehow..she told the world they were the best of friends and knew each other for years (but didn't know how to curtsy)  That's her story and she's trying to stick to it!


"Best of friends" for years with *Princess* Eugenie, but didn't know anything about the Royal family. Yeesh, she needs a Coles notes of her lies to remind herself what she has previously said.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> The comments on this are hilarious. Someone said $40k of work by 40!



Oh the eyes - more open and turned up.  Wonder what it is, that's not botox.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> _MEGHAN Markle appeared to copy the Obamas again by launching her "40 x 40" birthday initiative after Barack's "60 for 60" fundraiser.
> 
> Meghan announced her own "40 for 40" drive via her Archewell site asking people to donate "40 minutes of service" by helping or mentoring someone on her August 4 birthday, which she shares with *****._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle accused of copying Obamas AGAIN with her new program
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle appeared to copy the Obamas again by launching her “40 x 40” birthday initiative after Barack’s “60 for 60” fundraiser. Meghan announced her own “4…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I'm SHOCKED ... *NOT*!


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> Maybe it’s the American in me but the whole curtesy thing seems ridiculous to me. If it’s the queen - sure, she’s essentially a symbol of an institution. If it’s part of some super formal event - sure, let’s honor tradition for the sake of tradition of ceremony. But curtesy to the n-th in line to the throne who’s done nothing but use their privilege of being born to the right family to enjoy themselves without any accountability for their actions - puhleeaaze. And if they insist on that it only shows how small minded they are.


.. Americans, in fact, do not *HAVE* to curtsy to the Queen, but most do as a courtesy to her!


----------



## AB Negative

The article mentioned that Kate and Camilla did not curtsy to the queen.  Wouldn't they only have to curtsy to her the FIRST time they saw her that day and not afterwards?


----------



## Icyjade

The Montecito court.

Better a court jester in Montecito than a prince in UK? Right…


----------



## LittleStar88

Prince Harry attempts to juggle in Meghan Markle’s 40th birthday video
					

The Duchess of Sussex’s video announced the launch of her new mentorship program, 40×40.




					pagesix.com
				




Hehe. Harry the Clown. He has had a lot of practice!

October 2015: https://www.eonline.com/news/703416...-a-little-girl-at-a-charity-gala-see-the-pics

November 2015: https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-visits-circus-zambia-solo-africa-trip/

In 2019: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ince-harry-rebel-dubbed-troublesome-clown-spt

July 2021:https://www.geo.tv/latest/360573-prince-harry-dubbed-an-unappealing-clown-by-experts-report


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> Prince Harry attempts to juggle in Meghan Markle’s 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex’s video announced the launch of her new mentorship program, 40×40.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hehe. Harry the Clown. He has had a lot of practice!
> 
> October 2015: https://www.eonline.com/news/703416...-a-little-girl-at-a-charity-gala-see-the-pics
> 
> November 2015: https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-visits-circus-zambia-solo-africa-trip/
> 
> In 2019: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ince-harry-rebel-dubbed-troublesome-clown-spt
> 
> July 2021:https://www.geo.tv/latest/360573-prince-harry-dubbed-an-unappealing-clown-by-experts-report



It's a shame he had to find out from his wife how unhappy he was. The majority of the photographs of him pre marriage he certainly looked happy with his life. Not perfect but certainly not totally unlikeable.  I don't think he's a good enough actor to have been faking it for 30 plus years. She seems to have brought out the absolute worst in him so that he now is an unhappy, jealous, vengeful, petulant child.


----------



## bag-mania

Now the merching has begun for her birthday “gifts” from various designers. From Town & Country:

The duchess, phoning in from an office in her Montecito home, wore a calming blend of neutrals, including an ivory sweater, white tank top, lounge pants, and brown suede Manolo Blahnik pumps. She completed the look with two delicate astrology-themed necklaces from the Los Angeles-based jewelry brand Logan Hollowell. Both necklaces feature constellations—one of Taurus, and one of Gemini—made of 14k gold and diamond. The pieces are a sweet-yet-subtle tribute to her two children: a Taurus necklace for Archie's star sign, and a Gemini necklace for Lilibet. 




Gemini Constellation Necklace
Geminiloganhollowell.com
$1,785.00


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> @Maggie Muggins here's another to add to your list!  Courtesy @Genie27!


Thank you @purseinsanity and @Genie27 I've added 'Blandness of Montecito' to The List and if we find anymore nicknames, I will post just the changes at a later date because it's too late to edit the original post. Also, I don't have a clue how to sticky the post with 'The List' as some have suggested. Again,  thanks everyone for your help. Here's to y'all!


----------



## csshopper

An article in the DM following the reveal of Megamania's 40 x 40 plan included a single sentence that, probably unintentionally, sums up all they do:

"*It is still unclear as to exactly how the project will work, or whether there will be any way to measure its success."*


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Are those supposed to be the kids in the pictures on her desk. Trying to imitate HRM, needs to have her blurry pictures on display.


All the media outlets are throwing shade on those pictures by pretending that you can actually make out a child in the blur, however the Harkles are still having the last laugh with this because they are getting a ton of PR on “first pictures of Lili”    that they damn well know are worthless.


----------



## Lodpah

@Maggie Muggins May I please add Jezebel and Ahab to the list? 

Thank you,


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> All the media outlets are throwing shade on those pictures by pretending that you can actually make out a child in the blur, however the Harkles are still having the last laugh with this because they are getting a ton of PR on “first pictures of Lili”    that they damn well _*know are worthless  useless. *_



just like the mom and dad


----------



## Sharont2305

AB Negative said:


> The article mentioned that Kate and Camilla did not curtsy to the queen.  Wouldn't they only have to curtsy to her the FIRST time they saw her that day and not afterwards?


Yes, that's right. I remember the Order of the Garter a couple of years ago there was a hoo ha as The Duchess of Cambridge got out of a car and didn't curtsey to Queen Letizia. That's because they'd already met earlier in the day.
Also, on another occasion The Queen arrived at some ceremony in St George's Chapel I think, and several members of the RF were lined up outside to greet her. They all bowed/curtseyed to her, apart from Beatrice and Harry who had obviously already seen her.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CeeJay said:


> Don't know about the rest of you, but this hair sh1t that she constantly wears (what is it supposed to be - tendrils??) .. is just so old and frankly, I think it looks HORRIBLE!  Pull it back for cripes sake!!


That hair bothers me too … there were people in another forum likened it to “slut strands” of the 90s.


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> Oh the eyes - more open and turned up.  Wonder what it is, that's not botox.



is that the eyelid surgery?  There is definitely plastic surgery there…


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> Oh the eyes - more open and turned up.  Wonder what it is, that's not botox.





needlv said:


> is that the eyelid surgery?  There is definitely plastic surgery there…


Yes eye lift surgery. You can get saggy undefined eyelids tucked in etc.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her face is  puffy, very puffy. Hmmm.
> 
> View attachment 5155603
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle launches initiative to help mothers get back to work
> 
> 
> Speaking in a video shared on the Archewell website, Meghan launched 40x40, an initiative encouraging people to  support women going back to work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Why is she dressed like casual wear Beyoncé ? A stretchy knit tank top … I guess someone’s having a mid life crisis.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> is that the eyelid surgery?  There is definitely plastic surgery there…


I’m guessing it’s a psychotic episode from the ecstatic feeling of having the attention all on her.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> An article in the DM following the reveal of Megamania's 40 x 40 plan included a single sentence that, probably unintentionally, sums up all they do:
> 
> "*It is still unclear as to exactly how the project will work, or whether there will be any way to measure its success."*


Perhaps that ambiguity is the attraction for those signing up for her proposal: 
1. Low effort: only needs 40 min of your time, no hard cash to donate
2. Max publicity: because you know Methane and her PR team will boast about this to make you look good
3. Zero responsibility: after 40 min, the person you "helped" is no longer your problem to follow-up


----------



## LibbyRuth

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps that ambiguity is the attraction for those signing up for her proposal:
> 1. Low effort: only needs 40 min of your time, no hard cash to donate
> 2. Max publicity: because you know Methane and her PR team will boast about this to make you look good
> 3. Zero responsibility: after 40 min, the person you "helped" is no longer your problem to follow-up



Bingo!  The chief goal of the Archwell Foundation is to find projects that cannot be measured because it only exists so Harry and Meghan can play "royal" without doing the hard work.


breakfastatcartier said:


> Why is she dressed like casual wear Beyoncé ? A stretchy knit tank top … I guess someone’s having a mid life crisis.


So that people will compare her outfit to Beyonce and she can ride the wave of the comparison convincing herself they are equal?


----------



## Aimee3

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes eye lift surgery. You can get saggy undefined eyelids tucked in etc.


Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
Upper eyelids
Brow lift
Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
Possibly gum surgery (same smile but you no longer see her upper gums when she “smiles”)
Face lift
So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
> Upper eyelids
> Brow lift
> Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
> Possibly gum surgery (same smile but you no longer see her upper gums when she “smiles”)
> Face lift
> So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!



And she became flat.  Stranger than fiction

Some humor:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Here’s a nickname or them: His/Her Royal Heinous.


----------



## papertiger

MommyDaze said:


> Noooooo!  Not Tracee too




Who comes up with this crap? 

Back of envelope job idea as someone's painted into a corner. Farcical! 

And the 'T' is unreadable and pointless, much like the idea 

I am so NOT about age shaming women but, the fact she's admitting to 40 and waves it around so much alerts me and makes me think the many rumours she's actually 45 may be true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> And she became flat.  Stranger than fiction
> 
> Some humor:




We don't know how Bea feels. She doesn't do social media and rarely speaks out on anything.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> @Maggie Muggins May I please add Jezebel and Ahab to the list?
> 
> Thank you,


Thanks @Lodpah I've added 'Jezebel and Ahab' to the list and will post all new suggestions at a later date. Imagine being compared to the wicked king of Israel and his wicked wife, but in this case if the shoes fit, so be it. And here's your star.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, women of the world, get back to work. I need more Hermes blankets, plates, clothes, bags.
> Do as I say, not as I do.
> 
> 
> Again, in an almost-post-pandemic, this syrupy-beige crap doesn’t work. Eug is selling herself cheaply.
> Is this giggly, scantily-clad woman of the world making porn videos?  Very elaborate set-up for a few zoom-ies. Hmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's mentors 'could do more harm than good', warns expert
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex needs to ensure her team has the right advisers because the wrong one can 'destroy' their clients' self-belief, Hannah Martin from the Talented Ladies Club said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



There's only one woman that needs to get work as far as I'm concerned


----------



## papertiger

amante said:


> https://people.com/royals/princess-...pport-meghan-markle-40x40-birthday-challenge/
> I feel like a mentoring can be presumptuous. Implicitly the relationship is between one who is superior and an underling. And for just one 40 minute session? So you have to go look for a protege to only abandon after 40 minutes of talking.  Not worth the effort imo. Maybe resume editing service or mock interview or even just a friendly ear to listen to worries, but career advice? Well I guess it doesn't hurt. Tiny credit to them they actually give tips on how to find your 40-minute protege via SmartWorks YWCA and LA Works. (Though in the non-profits I've volunteered/considered, there was a minimum time commitment of a few months, so I'm not sure how this coordinates with the non-profits' objectives.) MM and her team probably spent more time roping in celeb participants than really coordinating with non-profits and considering partner outcomes.
> 
> At this point, why don't they just hold a donation drive for Archewell just like President O did for his presidential library? All this maneuvering and half-baked campaigns. They need cash flow to do actual stuff. They're not (working) royals anymore, they can't just be neutral figureheads for goodwill.



I'm sure that many of us here have done some official mentoring programmes. 

The opportunity to meet someone famous (or 'famous') once for a one-off session is as far off from mentoring as MM is from a viable role model for working mothers.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We don't know how Bea feels. She doesn't do social media and rarely speaks out on anything.



We have an expression for avoiding the word 'sh*t' in Britain: 'how's ya father?' in Bea's case they are totally equivocal. 

'Someone' must be twisting Bea's (and Fergie's) arm(s) to do stuff/say nice stuff.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophisticatted said:


> Here’s a nickname or them: His/Her Royal Heinous.


Thanks @Sophisticatted Very appropriate nickname, 'His/Her Royal Heinous' has been added to The List and all new suggestions will be posted at a later date. Thanks again and your star awaits you.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Aimee3 said:


> Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
> Upper eyelids
> Brow lift
> Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
> Possibly gum surgery (same smile but you no longer see her upper gums when she “smiles”)
> Face lift
> So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!


You know that's exactly what I thought! I thought she was undergoing surgeries when she went all quiet and all and would reveal her new face next time she resurfaces.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> I'm sure that many of us here have done some official mentoring programmes.
> 
> The opportunity to meet someone famous (or 'famous') once for a one-off session is as far off from mentoring as MM is from a viable role model for working mothers.


Agree. I mentored women exiting military transitioning to the corporate world.  It’s all about building the relationship and trust.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Harry at the window makes a fool of him
> Who thought of that?
> It's like she is the serious worker and he is, as you said, a clown.....if he has any sense, he should be embarrassed



Too stupid to be embarrassed. 

With 18 or 19 toilets you'd think he could find another place to relieve himself


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Agree. I mentored women exiting military transitioning to the corporate world.  It’s all about building the relationship and trust.



Spot on.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Now the merching has begun for her birthday “gifts” from various designers. From Town & Country:
> 
> The duchess, phoning in from an office in her Montecito home, wore a calming blend of neutrals, including an ivory sweater, white tank top, lounge pants, and brown suede Manolo Blahnik pumps. She completed the look with two delicate astrology-themed necklaces from the Los Angeles-based jewelry brand Logan Hollowell. Both necklaces feature constellations—one of Taurus, and one of Gemini—made of 14k gold and diamond. The pieces are a sweet-yet-subtle tribute to her two children: a Taurus necklace for Archie's star sign, and a Gemini necklace for Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gemini Constellation Necklace
> Geminiloganhollowell.com
> $1,785.00



Hideous. 

I'm going to have to go to browse Cartier now just to cleanse my palate and stop seeing this overpriced piece of crapiola


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> @Maggie Muggins May I please add Jezebel and Ahab to the list?
> 
> Thank you,



Don't you mean re-Hab?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> Agree. I mentored women exiting military transitioning to the corporate world.  *It’s all about building the relationship and trust.*


Yes, normal and sane people like yourself can successfully accomplish this, but H&M aren't capable of building relationships and trust with anyone and the proof is in how many people they have already markled.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I may not agree with everything written on this article, but it makes a valid point in showing how ridiculous and pretentious is for MM to propose "_40 minutes of mentorship from her and her rich frien_ds" to "_save women ousted from the workforce._"

*"*_*We knew we were overdue for a Sussex story since the Duke and Duchess of Montecito haven't scored a tabloid headline in a fortnight, when the desperately-in-pursuit-of-privacy Prince Harry announced his memoir*. So it comes as little surprise that, like the wannabe influencer she is, Meghan Markle made sure to capitalize on her 40th birthday for some woke points…_

Stella McCartney, the _Beatles_ baby who signed on as one of Markle's "40," is donating not a thousand suits from her fashion line to women's shelters for job interviews, but instead the time it takes to get a facial. Sophie Trudeau, wife of Canadian Prime Minister Justin, could pledge to donate vaccines from one of the world's most vaccinated nations to women in the developed world, and racial essentialist Ibram Kendi could commit one of his $22,000 speaking fees to classrooms for HEPA filters …

Instead, Markle has decided that she will grace some little person with her (formerly) regal presence. For less than an hour."










						Meghan Markle will save women ousted from the workforce with 40 minutes of mentoring. Really.
					

We knew we were overdue for a Sussex story since the Duke and Duchess of Montecito haven't scored a tabloid headline in a fortnight, when the desperately-in-pursuit-of-privacy Prince Harry announced his memoir. So it comes as little surprise that, like the wannabe influencer she is, Meghan Markle…




					www.washingtonexaminer.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> I'm sure that many of us here have done some official mentoring programmes.
> 
> The opportunity to meet someone famous (or 'famous') once for a one-off session is as far off from mentoring as MM is from a viable role model for working mothers.


Exactly! You cannot mentor someone in 40 mins and be done with it. Mentor-ship is a long term commitment where regular catch up and feedback is required to see real impact. This is just another fluffy initiative started by the world-salary crowd!


----------



## CarryOn2020

chicinthecity777 said:


> Exactly! You cannot mentor someone in 40 mins and be done with it. Mentor-ship is a long term commitment where regular catch up and feedback is required to see real impact. This is just another fluffy initiative started by the world-salary crowd!



Generally, that is true - 40 mins does not a mentor make. The reality is 2 minutes with MM and her ‘mentor-people’ would be 2 minutes too much for most of us. How much of their word-salad can we eat?  Sadly, none of them know what the word means.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Now the merching has begun for her birthday “gifts” from various designers. From Town & Country:
> 
> The duchess, phoning in from an office in her Montecito home, wore a calming blend of neutrals, including an ivory sweater, white tank top, lounge pants, and brown suede Manolo Blahnik pumps. She completed the look with two delicate astrology-themed necklaces from the Los Angeles-based jewelry brand Logan Hollowell. Both necklaces feature constellations—one of Taurus, and one of Gemini—made of 14k gold and diamond. The pieces are a sweet-yet-subtle tribute to her two children: a Taurus necklace for Archie's star sign, and a Gemini necklace for Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gemini Constellation Necklace
> Geminiloganhollowell.com
> $1,785.00


All I can say is Thank Goodness someone finally used a thesaurus and wrote that the necklaces are a sweet "tribute" to the mystery kids. I wanted to  from the excessive use of "sweet nods" with regards to all the cutesy things she does.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> All I can say is Thank Goodness someone finally used a thesaurus and wrote that the necklaces are a sweet "tribute" to the mystery kids. I wanted to  from the excessive use of "sweet nods" with regards to all the cutesy things she does.


so she is a Leo...makes sense.  she certainly seems to be ruling over the Prince


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
> Upper eyelids
> Brow lift
> Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
> Possibly gum surgery (same smile but you no longer see her upper gums when she “smiles”)
> Face lift
> So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!


For this definition of pregnancy, we'll probably see a new "baby(face)" every year, especially if she takes Tom Bower's description to heart and believes that women after 40 are slipsliding down the cliff of wrinkles.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It's been done before and by the rich and famous.  This totally changed my opinion of him as a person. This happened in 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Selleck 'stole water for ranch'
> 
> 
> Actor Tom Selleck is accused of stealing water in parched California by raiding a public hydrant for his avocado ranch.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Actor Tom Selleck has been accused of stealing water for his ranch in parched California *by raiding a public hydrant*. The Calleguas Municipal Water District in Ventura County claims a tanker truck filled up more than a dozen times over the past two years.Jul 9, 2015


now I guess it's official - Tom Selleck is greedy and disgusting.  Bad enough (IMO) that he hawks those reverse mortgages, now he is an outright thief.  I wish this story would get more coverage.  He is a very good "job" a star of a popular TV series.  If other men can be brought down due to inappropriate behavior with women, why not get fired for being a thief?  wonder how green his land is.  Uugh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> now I guess it's official - Tom Selleck is greedy and disgusting.  Bad enough (IMO) that he hawks those reverse mortgages, now he is an outright thief.  I wish this story would get more coverage.  He is a very good "job" a star of a popular TV series.  If other men can be brought down due to inappropriate behavior with women, why not get fired for being a thief?  wonder how green his land is.  Uugh.



Tom has been cleared.  Still, ewww.









						Tom Selleck Paid For The Water He Allegedly Stole
					

Tom Selleck was being accused of stealing water from a hydrant to water his avocado trees, but now the water department is saying the water has been paid for.




					www.heavenlygreens.com
				



_According to several reports, Selleck was sent several Cease and Desist orders which were ignored. The Water District has since filed a lawsuit against Selleck in an attempt to recover over $22,000 it claims to have spent during its investigation. 

In a recent development, *an official has confirmed that the Magnum P.I star was not stealing water because it was already legally purchased.* Jay Spurgin, the public works director for the city of Thousand Oaks, informed the media that the water was paid for as the records indicate a construction company had a city-approved water meter on the hydrant more than 2 years ago. Since that time around 1.4 million gallons of water have been drawn from the hydrant.

This case is still in its very beginning stages and it is still unclear if Selleck or his employee bought the water from the construction company or another source. A tentative settlement between the parties was announced by the district last week and it’s scheduled to be discussed for approval by the water board this week. _


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> now I guess it's official - Tom Selleck is greedy and disgusting.  Bad enough (IMO) that he hawks those reverse mortgages, now he is an outright thief.  I wish this story would get more coverage.  He is a very good "job" a star of a popular TV series.  If other men can be brought down due to inappropriate behavior with women, why not get fired for being a thief?  wonder how green his land is.  Uugh.



from TMZ:

*Tom Selleck*'s forking over $21,000 to put that embarrassing stolen water caper behind him. Shockingly, a P.I. busted Magnum jacking H2O from the state ... just so she could keep his avocado trees in the green.

The cash is nice and all -- but a better settlement would've been free guac for li


wow @gracekelly - all he got was a $21K fine?
and not much bad press?  when I googled him the story didn't even come up - until I added water theft to the search.  I'd like to communicate with his bosses at the network
$21K is a tiny fraction of what he is paid....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> We have an expression for avoiding the word 'sh*t' in Britain: 'how's ya father?' in Bea's case they are totally equivocal.
> 
> 'Someone' must be twisting Bea's (and Fergie's) arm(s) to do stuff/say nice stuff.



But Bea hasn't said anything, it's Eugenie...but whoever made that collage couldn't be bothered to get it right haha.

In fact, I quickly googled and the only thing I found at all is a German gossip article claiming Bea and Eugenie are feuding because Bea is Team BRF and Eugenie is Team Sussex


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> from TMZ:
> 
> *Tom Selleck*'s forking over $21,000 to put that embarrassing stolen water caper behind him. Shockingly, a P.I. busted Magnum jacking H2O from the state ... just so she could keep his avocado trees in the green.
> 
> The cash is nice and all -- but a better settlement would've been free guac for li
> 
> 
> wow @gracekelly - all he got was a $21K fine?
> and not much bad press?  when I googled him the story didn't even come up - until I added water theft to the search.  I'd like to communicate with his bosses at the network
> $21K is a tiny fraction of what he is paid....


I know. Disgusting.   The guy could well afford to buy the water he wanted. I think the reverse mortgage ads are pretty bad too.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I know. Disgusting.   The guy could well afford to buy the water he wanted. I think the reverse mortgage ads are pretty bad too.


right?  he is using his credibility with old people to make money off a product which I think is questionable....again - the greed!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But Bea hasn't said anything, it's Eugenie...but whoever made that collage couldn't be bothered to get it right haha.
> 
> In fact, I quickly googled and the only thing I found at all is a German gossip article claiming Bea and Eugenie are feuding because Bea is Team BRF and Eugenie is Team Sussex


I don't follow these two princesses but I don't see how Eugenie could afford be be team Susssex


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps that ambiguity is the attraction for those signing up for her proposal:
> 1. Low effort: only needs 40 min of your time, no hard cash to donate
> 2. Max publicity: because you know Methane and her PR team will boast about this to make you look good
> 3. Zero responsibility: after 40 min, the person you "helped" is no longer your problem to follow-up


The mentee will have to report back to the Archewell site with their story, which BTW, will no longer be their story because Archewell will own it and use it however they please.   They can big it up to inflate their success and importance. Sound familiar?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps that ambiguity is the attraction for those signing up for her proposal:
> 1. Low effort: only needs 40 min of your time, no hard cash to donate
> 2. Max publicity: because you know Methane and her PR team will boast about this to make you look good
> 3. Zero responsibility: after 40 min, the person you "helped" is no longer your problem to follow-up


and she gets to promote her clothing and home decor items


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Who comes up with this crap?
> 
> Back of envelope job idea as someone's painted into a corner. Farcical!
> 
> And the 'T' is unreadable and pointless, much like the idea
> 
> I am so NOT about age shaming women but, the fact she's admitting to 40 and waves it around so much alerts me and makes me think the many rumours she's actually 45 may be true.


The expression on Tracee’s face tells me that she was blackmailed into doing this.  I can hear her mom on the phone “ girl how could you!”


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I know. Disgusting.   The guy could well afford to buy the water he wanted. I think the reverse mortgage ads are pretty bad too.


for what it's worth (probably not much) I emailed CBS asking how he could keep his job.  Blue Bloods has been renewed.  Interesting because I thought the networks didn't value the older demographic and with him at the star I would assume this how has a very old viewership
I confess I actually watch that show sometimes but if I watch in the future I'll think of his thievery


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But Bea hasn't said anything, it's Eugenie...but whoever made that collage couldn't be bothered to get it right haha.
> 
> In fact, I quickly googled and the only thing I found at all is a German gossip article claiming Bea and Eugenie are feuding because Bea is Team BRF and Eugenie is Team Sussex



I interpreted the collage as a group of people with the noticeably odd and funny hats - did not look for any more meaning than that.  Very little, if any,  of this stuff has much depth.
IMO Being aware of how anti-Charles the Yorks have been, I’m ok with putting Bea on Team Sussex, until she states otherwise. If Bea supports the BRF, that’s because she is smart enough to know which side has the cash, jewels, cars, houses, etc. The Yorks do seem to be in it for themselves, the opposite of Anne and Edward. Sarah with her books [which I have _not_ read]  seems so desperate for any attention. In her OW interviews, she seemed like a decent [but kinda naive] person. She is definitely guilty of over-sharing and not playing the long game. IMO.

ETA: I do not have a Twitter account, so none of those photos are mine.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> for what it's worth (probably not much) I emailed CBS asking how he could keep his job.  Blue Bloods has been renewed.  Interesting because I thought the networks didn't value the older demographic and with him at the star I would assume this how has a very old viewership
> I confess I actually watch that show sometimes but if I watch in the future I'll think of his thievery


Selleck owns the show. It won’t end until he wants to stop


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Selleck owns the show. It won’t end until he wants to stop


well he doesn't own the network....I wish there would be more outrage about what he did


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure they curtsy to each other at all time anyway unless it's the Queen or Charles...I've seen footage of the Cambridges meeting the Wessexes for an official engagement and the women cheek kissed, no curtsy.


There is another wrinkle to the curtsy requirements - a curtsy is required only the first time a pair meets during a day. Sometimes the absent curtsy is due to a previous encounter that same day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well he doesn't own the network....I wish there would be more outrage about what he did



I have more outrage at CBS over the OW interview. They really do seem to be a greedy crowd.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> for what it's worth (probably not much) I emailed CBS asking how he could keep his job.  Blue Bloods has been renewed.  Interesting because I thought the networks didn't value the older demographic and with him at the star I would assume this how has a very old viewership
> I confess I actually watch that show sometimes but if I watch in the future I'll think of his thievery


The water usage was from 2013-2015, the BBC article posted earlier was from July 2015. Still get angry thinking about it, however.
There don't seem to be any more recent articles so, hopefully,  not a repeat offender. Our draught this year is even more dire. Read an article yesterday about farmers having to decide life or death for a herd of cattle, grazing lands are gone and no local water source remains.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well he doesn't own the network....I wish there would be more outrage about what he did


True but he makes them a ton of money and that is all they care about. It’s the same demographic that he appeals to with reverse mortgages


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> The water usage was from 2013-2015, the BBC article posted earlier was from July 2015. Still get angry thinking about it, however.
> There don't seem to be any more recent articles so, hopefully,  not a repeat offender. Our draught this year is even more dire. Read an article yesterday about farmers having to decide life or death for a herd of cattle, grazing lands are gone and no local water source remains.


He probably did what Oprah did, buy a property with a well and then cart that water over.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and she gets to promote her clothing and home decor items


Planning for a future home decor line. The Duchess of Sucks  dreckorates.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> The water usage was from 2013-2015, the BBC article posted earlier was from July 2015. Still get angry thinking about it, however.
> There don't seem to be any more recent articles so, hopefully,  not a repeat offender. Our draught this year is even more dire. Read an article yesterday about farmers having to decide life or death for a herd of cattle, grazing lands are gone and no local water source remains.


I just don't see how a $21k settlement is in any way appropriate, esp considering his wealth


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't follow these two princesses but I don't see how Eugenie could afford be be team Susssex



That's what I think as well (that said, define afford...her husband works). But also...the stupid 40 mins project and "Dear Meghan".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> There is another wrinkle to the curtsy requirements - a curtsy is required only the first time a pair meets during a day. Sometimes the absent curtsy is due to a previous encounter that same day.



Yeah, but I don't usually kiss cheeks each time I meet that day either


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have more outrage at CBS over the OW interview. They really do seem to be a greedy crowd.


I don't like either one but this tom selleck thing is outright criminal


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

For those of you complaining Lady CC's videos are to da*n long (and I agree, I could never watch them in one go, I usually listen while I do something else), here's a 5 min quickie:


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't like either one but this tom selleck thing is outright criminal



Sadly, he is not the only one doing this:
Article from 2016:








						Who pumped millions of gallons of water during California’s drought?
					

Extensive research reveals the water hogs of Bel Air.




					grist.org
				




ETA:  this is from 2015 -








						In California, Stingy Water Users Are Fined in Drought, While the Rich Soak (Published 2015)
					

The contrast between strict enforcement on some struggling to conserve water and unchecked profligacy in places like Bel Air has unleashed anger and indignation.




					www.nytimes.com
				




ETA2: this is from 2019 and pertains to Montecito 








						How Thirsty is Montecito?
					

Under the terms of a tentative agreement with Montecito, the city would produce the extra supply at its $72 million desalination plant on the waterfront, shown here; but the water sold to Montecito would be a blend of city sources. (Photo courtesy of the City of Santa Barbara) By Melinda Burns...




					www.edhat.com
				




_Notwithstanding their efforts to conserve during the drought, Montecitans remain some of the highest water users in California, at 200 gallons per capita per day. Eighty-five percent of their water goes on landscaping. By contrast, Santa Barbarans use an average 75 gallons per capita per day, 50 percent of it on landscaping._


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that dust-up over a _curtsy_ is very telling.
> 
> Andrew, Sarah, Eug and Bea care very much about BRF protocol and their entitlements. If someone walks in front of them, they groan. If someone doesn’t curtsy to them, they groan. They try very hard to appear to have QE’s favor _and to make Charles look insignificant_. When Andrew fussed about having to pay for B&E’s security, the media took Andrew’s side and joined in the anti-Charles chorus.  Interesting that Hazzie did the same - complained about losing security and his patronages. Clearly he is bitter about it all. My guess is the Yorks are too. While it may be clear in QE’s mind who has the power, these lower tier royals seem to disagree - they insist on using their titles and being noticed. I never have bought the York’s ‘happy family’ narrative. They look anything but happy.


That Happy family is fake fake fake.
I mean to be fair to the sisters: would you be happy with those 2 for parents?
I think that in a way they might be a mirror for A&L’s future - growing up in the shadow of their obnoxious parents and warped by it but a little too fond of status & comfort to get out of their orbit.


bag-mania said:


> Now the merching has begun for her birthday “gifts” from various designers. From Town & Country:
> 
> The duchess, phoning in from an office in her Montecito home, wore a calming blend of neutrals, including an ivory sweater, white tank top, lounge pants, and brown suede Manolo Blahnik pumps. She completed the look with two delicate astrology-themed necklaces from the Los Angeles-based jewelry brand Logan Hollowell. Both necklaces feature constellations—one of Taurus, and one of Gemini—made of 14k gold and diamond. The pieces are a sweet-yet-subtle tribute to her two children: a Taurus necklace for Archie's star sign, and a Gemini necklace for Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gemini Constellation Necklace
> Geminiloganhollowell.com
> $1,785.00


You know, I swear I bought the same necklace when I was 10/11 from Claire’s during my horoscopes phase. Bit p*ssed off they sent the ‘billionaire’ duchess one for free and I had to fork out about £4 for it.

Oh wait… it’s meant to be fine jewellery  
I guess MLM is a good match for the brand after all.

@Maggie Muggins  I hate to toot my own horn but I am rather proud of MLM aka Meghan Liar Markle…please can I join the much revered list?




Aimee3 said:


> Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
> Upper eyelids
> Brow lift
> Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
> Possibly gum surgery (same smile but you no longer see her upper gums when she “smiles”)
> Face lift
> So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!


So much work done already!
she’s definitely had her chin filled too- it is very lumpy.
Makes you wonder what there’s going to be left in her dotage…. I’m picturing the face of boe


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I just don't see how a $21k settlement is in any appropriate, esp considering his wealth



His family is well connected via real estate development. They know all the right people.  Chalk this up to another unfair episode of life.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> That Happy family is fake fake fake.
> I mean to be fair to the sisters: would you be happy with those 2 for parents?
> I think that in a way they might be a mirror for A&L’s future - growing up in the shadow of their obnoxious parents and warped by it but a little too fond of status & comfort to get out of their orbit.
> 
> You know, I swear I bought the same necklace when I was 10/11 from Claire’s during my horoscopes phase. Bit p*ssed off they sent the ‘billionaire’ duchess one for free and I had to fork out about £4 for it.
> 
> Oh wait… it’s meant to be fine jewellery
> I guess MLM is a good match for the brand after all.
> 
> @maggiemuggins I hate to toot my own horn but I am rather proud of MLM aka Meghan Liar Markle…please can I join the much revered list?
> 
> 
> 
> So much work done already!
> she’s definitely had her chin filled too- it is very lumpy.
> Makes you wonder what there’s going to be left in her dotage…. I’m picturing the face of boe
> View attachment 5157692


The ugliest thing in that video was that really bad tea cup.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Those _tendrils_ are discussed:








						Meghan Markle's low bun is her go-to for 'taking something seriously'
					

Remarking on her relaxed, natural style, hairdresser Tom Smith told FEMAIL the Duchess of Sussex retains her approachable nature by leaving out the soft strands around her face.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
'Her nose in my opinion looks a little too shiny, and looks a bit greasy in some of the footage,' Laura said.

'But this could be nerves kicking in. She just needs a little bit of blotting powder to be camera ready.'_


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> The ugliest thing in that video was that really bad tea cup.


I know, it’s very insulting to my people to see a good teabag wasted like that 

however, on the other hand, the great natural beauty must have major beef with a lot of the top tea service manufacturers because of things like this…..




So that somewhat limits her options  

On an unrelated note, I think royal doulton & Dior are fabulous companies who know their clientele


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> His family is well connected via real estate development. They know all the right people.  Chalk this up to another unfair episode of life.


as I've said before, "who says money doesn't buy justice?"


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sadly, he is not the only one doing this:
> Article from 2016:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who pumped millions of gallons of water during California’s drought?
> 
> 
> Extensive research reveals the water hogs of Bel Air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> grist.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this is from 2015 -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, Stingy Water Users Are Fined in Drought, While the Rich Soak (Published 2015)
> 
> 
> The contrast between strict enforcement on some struggling to conserve water and unchecked profligacy in places like Bel Air has unleashed anger and indignation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA2: this is from 2019 and pertains to Montecito
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Thirsty is Montecito?
> 
> 
> Under the terms of a tentative agreement with Montecito, the city would produce the extra supply at its $72 million desalination plant on the waterfront, shown here; but the water sold to Montecito would be a blend of city sources. (Photo courtesy of the City of Santa Barbara) By Melinda Burns...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.edhat.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Notwithstanding their efforts to conserve during the drought, Montecitans remain some of the highest water users in California, at 200 gallons per capita per day. Eighty-five percent of their water goes on landscaping. By contrast, Santa Barbarans use an average 75 gallons per capita per day, 50 percent of it on landscaping._


not defending these people but being a water hog and being a thief are two different things, right?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those _tendrils_ are discussed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's low bun is her go-to for 'taking something seriously'
> 
> 
> Remarking on her relaxed, natural style, hairdresser Tom Smith told FEMAIL the Duchess of Sussex retains her approachable nature by leaving out the soft strands around her face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _'Her nose in my opinion looks a little too shiny, and looks a bit greasy in some of the footage,' Laura said.
> 
> 'But this could be nerves kicking in. She just needs a little bit of blotting powder to be camera ready.'_


Ok but the real question is how do those tendrils make her ‘more approachable’ ? Do they pull you in like _tentacles_?

Bit patronising to be categorising hairstyle formality as a personality trait, I think. She could be bald or rapunzel & still be as amicable as anthrax.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Sadly, he is not the only one doing this:
> Article from 2016:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who pumped millions of gallons of water during California’s drought?
> 
> 
> Extensive research reveals the water hogs of Bel Air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> grist.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this is from 2015 -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In California, Stingy Water Users Are Fined in Drought, While the Rich Soak (Published 2015)
> 
> 
> The contrast between strict enforcement on some struggling to conserve water and unchecked profligacy in places like Bel Air has unleashed anger and indignation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA2: this is from 2019 and pertains to Montecito
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Thirsty is Montecito?
> 
> 
> Under the terms of a tentative agreement with Montecito, the city would produce the extra supply at its $72 million desalination plant on the waterfront, shown here; but the water sold to Montecito would be a blend of city sources. (Photo courtesy of the City of Santa Barbara) By Melinda Burns...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.edhat.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Notwithstanding their efforts to conserve during the drought, Montecitans remain some of the highest water users in California, at 200 gallons per capita per day. Eighty-five percent of their water goes on landscaping. By contrast, Santa Barbarans use an average 75 gallons per capita per day, 50 percent of it on landscaping._


At least Tom Selleck was growing avocados which is useful to society. 
A lot of this water is going on useless **** like lawns and pools….both things the noted eco-warriors H&M have…..


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok but the real question is how do those tendrils make her ‘more approachable’ ? Do they pull you in like _tentacles_?
> 
> Bit patronising to be categorising hairstyle formality as a personality trait, I think. She could be bald or rapunzel & still be as amicable as anthrax.
> 
> 
> 
> At least Tom Selleck was growing avocados which is useful to society.
> A lot of this water is going on useless **** like lawns and pools….both things the noted eco-warriors H&M have…..


we don't know what he was doing with the avocados.....selling them for profit?  wasting them? Did also have a nice green lawn (which is almost unheard of in So Cal)?
 I'm not a fan of H&M At All and I guess you can say Selleck doesn't preach to us (unless you count those reverse mortgage commercials where he claims to be so sincere).....but he stole water.....that is just greedy and illegal


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> not defending these people but being a water hog and being a thief are two different things, right?



Not sure about that, especially in a drought. Apparently, what Selleck did was not illegal.  



jelliedfeels said:


> Ok but the real question is how do those tendrils make her ‘more approachable’ ? Do they pull you in like _tentacles_?
> 
> Bit patronising to be categorising hairstyle formality as a personality trait, I think. She could be bald or rapunzel & still be as amicable as anthrax.



Reading between the lines, the entire article seemed to say nothing about her is approachable. Everything in the video/photos screamed “high maintenance“ and “trying much too hard”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> we don't know what he was doing with the avocados.....selling them for profit?  wasting them? Did also have a nice green lawn (which is almost unheard of in So Cal)?
> I'm not a fan of H&M At All and I guess you can say Selleck doesn't preach to us (unless you count those reverse mortgage commercials where he claims to be so sincere).....but he stole water.....that is just greedy and illegal



The article says he does sell the avocados. Interesting, never knew he had a farm.  I’m not a fan on any of these people. Every single one of them is “do as I say, not as I do”.  H&M must fit right in with all the other hypocrites. 









						Tom Selleck Says Working on His 65-Acre California Ranch Keeps Him Sane
					

The actor recently talked to "People" magazine about the Ventura property he's called home since 1988




					www.architecturaldigest.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> we don't know what he was doing with the avocados.....selling them for profit?  wasting them? Did also have a nice green lawn (which is almost unheard of in So Cal)?
> I'm not a fan of H&M At All and I guess you can say Selleck doesn't preach to us (unless you count those reverse mortgage commercials where he claims to be so sincere).....but he stole water.....that is just greedy and illegal


Apparently he sells them, as does Jamie Foxx who also farms avocados next door to him.








						TIL: Tom Selleck and Jamie Foxx are rival avocado-farming neighbours | Movie Feature
					

TIL: Tom Selleck and Jamie Foxx are rival avocado-farming neighbours | Movie Feature at theshiznit.co.uk



					www.theshiznit.co.uk
				



It is weird what goes on.

I remember hearing about the insanities of lawn maintenance in the US sun belt on Penn & Teller Bull****  Lawns & I found it so crazy it has put me off lawns for life.

I agree with you though in principle they are all awful people


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m confused about the whole TS thing. If a construction company had a legit contract with the municipality to use the water and he contracted with them for water, why is he paying any sort of fine?

Not that I think he should be farming avocados during a drought but the whole thing doesn’t make sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> I know, it’s very insulting to my people to see a good teabag wasted like that
> 
> however, on the other hand, the great natural beauty must have major beef with a lot of the top tea service manufacturers because of things like this…..
> View attachment 5157708
> 
> View attachment 5157709
> 
> So that somewhat limits her options
> 
> On an unrelated note, I think royal doulton & Dior are fabulous companies who know their clientele



The wedding figurine is hideous. IRL Meghan is pretty, and this figurine doesn't look like her in the least. It did a decent job on Harry, but just seems to slap a random face on what's supposed to be Meghan. When are Meghan & Harry getting into the avocado business? They're better off growing almonds. They're nut jobs.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> @Maggie Muggins  I hate to toot my own horn but I am rather proud of *MLM aka Meghan Liar Markle*…please can I join the much revered list?


Glad you could join us! Your nickname has been added to The List. Indeed, it describes M, who tells little white lies, outright lies and downright fabrications with a straight face and with as yet no real consequences. Here's hoping the truth eventually catches up with her. We just need more people like you to read TPF and believe us. Thank you!


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> All I can say is Thank Goodness someone finally used a thesaurus and wrote that the necklaces are a sweet "tribute" to the mystery kids. I wanted to  from the excessive use of "sweet nods" with regards to all the cutesy things she does.



The point they must drive home is that it is SWEET! That must be said repeatedly.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I interpreted the collage as a group of people with the noticeably odd and funny hats - did not look for any more meaning than that.  Very little, if any,  of this stuff has much depth.
> IMO Being aware of how anti-Charles the Yorks have been, I’m ok with putting Bea on Team Sussex, until she states otherwise. If Bea supports the BRF, that’s because she is smart enough to know which side has the cash, jewels, cars, houses, etc. The Yorks do seem to be in it for themselves, the opposite of Anne and Edward. Sarah with her books [which I have _not_ read]  seems so desperate for any attention. In her OW interviews, she seemed like a decent [but kinda naive] person. She is definitely guilty of over-sharing and not playing the long game. IMO.
> 
> ETA: I do not have a Twitter account, so none of those photos are mine.



Could Bea and Eugenie be using a good cop, bad cop tactic? One seems to play on QE's team and the other one on the Montecito team, but both sisters are indeed playing only on the York team.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Could Bea and Eugenie be using a good cop, bad cop tactic? One seems to play on QE's team and the other one on the Montecito team, but both sisters are indeed playing only on the York team.


B & E may be pragmatists since they dont know how the Epstein mess will resolve, in the mean time, they hedge their bets 

I think that E moving into Frog Cottage was a win-win, 6 is paying the rent for a bit but has someone to look after things - and maybe pay a bit, and having a redecorated mansion sit idle is bad PR for the BRF.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> The wedding figurine is hideous. IRL Meghan is pretty, and this figurine doesn't look like her in the least. It did a decent job on Harry, but just seems to slap a random face on what's supposed to be Meghan. When are Meghan & Harry getting into the avocado business? They're better off growing almonds. They're nut jobs.


I’m on the modeller’s side on that figurine….
It must be hard for even a genius of portraiture to be putting in the effort to get the elusive likeness- only to check Instagram & see she’s plugged another ton of fillers in her face or the party powder has further blown out her nostrils.
Or, in brief, which of her faces do you choose to depict?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Could Bea and Eugenie be using a good cop, bad cop tactic? One seems to play on QE's team and the other one on the Montecito team, but both sisters are indeed playing only on the York team.


The problem with that strategy is we would need to be able to tell them apart….

If the BRF & H&M are adversaries at this point then I don’t get what a minor royal could be gained by siding with the scammers. I mean what opportunities can they open up for you compared to living the easy life of a royal residence for a home & instant social clout all over the world.
I mean, what would you get from montecito? A thank you tweet & a chance to move to camp wannsellout to replace the beagle as their loyal hound?


----------



## Katel

Sophisticatted said:


> Here’s a nickname or them: His/Her Royal Heinous.



Or, let’s just cut to the chase - His/Her Royal Anus.  



papertiger said:


> Hideous.
> 
> I'm going to have to go to browse Cartier now just to cleanse my palate and stop seeing this overpriced piece of crapiola


Yes! Thank you for articulating my deep feelings of nausea and disgust.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> The problem with that strategy is we would need to be able to tell them apart….
> 
> If the BRF & H&M are adversaries at this point then* I don’t get what a minor royal could be gained by siding with the scammers.* I mean what opportunities can they open up for you compared to living the easy life of a royal residence for a home & instant social clout all over the world.
> I mean, what would you get from montecito? A thank you tweet & a chance to move to camp wannsellout to replace the beagle as their loyal hound?


You make good points. The Yorks don't seem to like Charles, and by siding with the Montecito couple, they may make Charles's life more difficult to implement his measures. There may be an interest in sparing Randy Andy from a potential MM/PR attack. Who knows whatever info Hazz and wife have on Randy Andy. I read somewhere about a relationship between Randy Andy and MA, MM's bff. This is why the sisters may be playing in both teams.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> The wedding figurine is hideous. IRL Meghan is pretty, and this figurine doesn't look like her in the least. It did a decent job on Harry, *but just seems to slap a random face* on what's supposed to be Meghan. When are Meghan & Harry getting into the avocado business? They're better off growing almonds. They're nut jobs.


Maybe they didn't know which face to put on the figurine because it's difficult to remember which face M is wearing. She's had so much PS that she barely resembles her childhood pics.


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> You know that's exactly what I thought! I thought she was undergoing surgeries when she went all quiet and all and would reveal her new face next time she resurfaces.


So Harry is finding out what it’s like to be married to a Beverly Hills housewife.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> I know, it’s very insulting to my people to see a good teabag wasted like that
> 
> however, on the other hand, the great natural beauty must have major beef with a lot of the top tea service manufacturers because of things like this…..
> View attachment 5157708
> 
> View attachment 5157709
> 
> So that somewhat limits her options
> 
> On an unrelated note, I think royal doulton & Dior are fabulous companies who know their clientele


The first thing that I can see that is wrong with the figurine is that the dress fits.  The second thing is that her hair is not falling in her face. Third thing is that she isn't looking at the camera.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe they didn't know which face to put on the figurine because it's difficult to remember which face M is wearing. She's had so much PS that she barely resembles her childhood pics.


Perhaps they updated her features on future production runs?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> So Harry is finding out what it’s like to be married to a Beverly Hills housewife.


She already submitted her name to the producers.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For those of you complaining Lady CC's videos are to da*n long (and I agree, I could never watch them in one go, I usually listen while I do something else), here's a 5 min quickie:



Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for posting this informative video and thanks to Lady C for confirming what most of us had already figured out: H was a jealous little hellion as a child.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Maggie, yes he was a jealous little hellion:


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> The first thing that I can see that is wrong with the figurine is that the dress fits.  The second thing is that her hair is not falling in her face. Third thing is that she isn't looking at the camera.



The fourth thing is that she is not taping and pulling.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure about that, especially in a drought. Apparently, what Selleck did was not illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> Reading between the lines, the entire article seemed to say nothing about her is approachable. Everything in the video/photos screamed “high maintenance“ and “trying much too hard”.


the water authority hired detectives who found sellek's employees stealing water.....not illegal?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for posting this informative video and thanks to Lady C for confirming what most of us had already figured out: H was a jealous little hellion as a child.


I'm thinking that he observed his mother doing things to get his father's attention and he grew up thinking that this is what he had to do to get people to notice him.  Bad behavior always attracts attention.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> Or, let’s just cut to the chase - *His/Her Royal Anus*.


Ok, now I understand why they can sit on their royal thrones in Montecito. Thanks and here's a ribbon to go with your star.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I'm thinking that he observed his mother doing things to get his father's attention and he grew up thinking that this is what he had to do to get people to notice him.  Bad behavior always attracts attention.


Lady C mentions in one vid, that Diana wasn't the shy and retiring young girl that she liked to show the world. She was in fact demanding and domineering with Charles; nice traits a jealous little brat could adopt to get his way.


----------



## amante

Plastic surgery work looks good! I really found her teeth and nose distracting before. (I suppose one way to spin her wonky features was that she was a rare "natural beauty" among all the fakes in Hollywood (er, Toronto).

Reese Witherspoon's production company was just sold and the company received a valuation of $900m. MM was right after all in taking a punt and inviting Reese to her wedding. If only Reese was impressed by the glitz and glam into "mentoring" and opening up her contacts to MM.



gracekelly said:


> The ugliest thing in that video was that really bad tea cup.


Lol, MM's teacup is from Burleigh the same pattern used in all Soho Houses worldwide. Oops, no it isn't. It is from Burleigh but not the one that's used in Soho Houses



QueenofWrapDress said:


> The earrings weren't leaked by the palace, they were discovered by either some Twitter personality or journalists, can't remember the details. The palace had in fact frantically tried to a) make her not wear them and b) bury that story because its potential damage to the BRF was worse than the damage to #6's wife as a person.


The little tidbit about the earrings provenance broke 3 years after she wore them but curiously just right before her big bombshell interview? Hmmm hard to believe.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The article says he does sell the avocados. Interesting, never knew he had a farm.  I’m not a fan on any of these people. Every single one of them is “do as I say, not as I do”.  H&M must fit right in with all the other hypocrites.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Selleck Says Working on His 65-Acre California Ranch Keeps Him Sane
> 
> 
> The actor recently talked to "People" magazine about the Ventura property he's called home since 1988
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.architecturaldigest.com


quote:
The ranch was previously a working avocado farm and still houses more than 1,500 native trees, which Selleck maintains himself.  
unquote

I don't see where it indicates what is done with the avocados now


----------



## Annawakes

I know it’s been said before, but I find her emphasis on TIME and COMPASSION so at odds with her treatment of her own father and family.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Maggie, yes he was a jealous little hellion:
> View attachment 5157828


Diana used to giggle whenever H stuck his tongue out at the reporters which most likely encouraged this bahaviour during their earlier outings or events together.


----------



## V0N1B2

Isn’t it time for Tom Selleck and his avocados to get their own thread?


----------



## EverSoElusive

I was just at Walmart getting some work stationeries and saw this at the very bottom shelf


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> I was just at Walmart getting some work stationeries and saw this at the very bottom shelf
> 
> 
> View attachment 5157885


Thanks for posting this, but I prefer the one below. It's ergonomic and costs about the same on Am*z*n.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> quote:
> The ranch was previously a working avocado farm and still houses more than 1,500 native trees, which Selleck maintains himself.
> unquote
> 
> I don't see where it indicates what is done with the avocados now



Google is our friend. From the article I first posted -
_According to several reports, Selleck was sent several Cease and Desist orders which were ignored. The Water District has since filed a lawsuit against Selleck in an attempt to recover over $22,000 it claims to have spent during its investigation. 

In a recent development, *an official has confirmed that the Magnum P.I star was not stealing water because it was already legally purchased. *Jay Spurgin, the public works director for the city of Thousand Oaks, informed the media that the water was paid for as the records indicate a construction company had a city-approved water meter on the hydrant more than 2 years ago._








						Tom Selleck Paid For The Water He Allegedly Stole
					

Tom Selleck was being accused of stealing water from a hydrant to water his avocado trees, but now the water department is saying the water has been paid for.




					www.heavenlygreens.com
				




The AD article was for human interest. It did confirm that Tom does have an avocado farm.




jelliedfeels said:


> _*Apparently he sells them*_, as does Jamie Foxx who also farms avocados next door to him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TIL: Tom Selleck and Jamie Foxx are rival avocado-farming neighbours | Movie Feature
> 
> 
> TIL: Tom Selleck and Jamie Foxx are rival avocado-farming neighbours | Movie Feature at theshiznit.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> www.theshiznit.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is weird what goes on.



Bottom line: Tom was not stealing, Tom paid the fine, Tom sells avocados.  Using large amounts of water is ok as long as you pay for it. Just like the carbon offset stuff.   Who knew?  All good info to know.


=====
So, Eug is now the go-between ??  Such an unhealthy communication style:
'_Undoubtedly, while tempers are flaring it is good to have a neutral go between such as Eugenie who can with absolute discretion pass on messages that aren't heard by courtiers at large.'_









						How Eugenie and Prince Harry went from childhood pals to royal allies
					

Eugenie and Prince Harry have long been close, and this week the princess publicly backed Meghan's birthday initiative. British royal author Nigel Crawthorne tells FEMAIL about their bond.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5157903



She just wants credit and money without doing any work regardless of what she ventures into.


----------



## Chanbal

This could be us at this thread.


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> for what it's worth (probably not much) I emailed CBS asking how he could keep his job.  Blue Bloods has been renewed.  Interesting because I thought the networks didn't value the older demographic and with him at the star I would assume this how has a very old viewership
> I confess I actually watch that show sometimes but if I watch in the future I'll think of his thievery


I’ve been missing for days.  confused? What have I missed on th blue bloods topic?  I watch the show.  Trying to catch up now on all the posts for the last week! Thanks.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The fourth thing is that she is not taping and pulling.



I know we try not to be mean…. but I can see why she wanted to move away from Kate’s LK Bennett block colour day dress aesthetic after seeing this. 

MLM has caught onto something though…. Why go through the heavy competition of being a sugar baby when apparently you can be the mama without the money 
Her theme song must be:-  ‘when you’re good to mama’


V0N1B2 said:


> Isn’t it time for Tom Selleck and his avocados to get their own thread?


Let’s make it a celebs with handle bar ‘tashes thread and we can also enjoy some Steve Harvey gifs 




Chanbal said:


>



The things they teach them at these elite schools 
This is what I thought of:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

VickyB said:


> I’ve been missing for days.  confused? What have I missed on th blue bloods topic?  I watch the show.  Trying to catch up now on all the posts for the last week! Thanks.


here ya go
Tom Selleck Pays $21,000 Settlement Over California Water Dispute | Fortune


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those _tendrils_ are discussed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's low bun is her go-to for 'taking something seriously'
> 
> 
> Remarking on her relaxed, natural style, hairdresser Tom Smith told FEMAIL the Duchess of Sussex retains her approachable nature by leaving out the soft strands around her face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _'Her nose in my opinion looks a little too shiny, and looks a bit greasy in some of the footage,' Laura said.
> 
> 'But this could be nerves kicking in. She just needs a little bit of blotting powder to be camera ready.'_


Those blotting papers/powder are essential!  As someone with a perennially oily face, I know those well.  I once read those with oily faces have “natural moisturizer” and will look younger in the long run.  As someone older than Meg, it did make me feel good when my daughter’s 15 year old friend recently squished her face close to mine, squinted really hard and asked me, “How do you not have a single wrinkle”?!!?  (Then again, maybe it’s the excess 20 lbs?  )


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The earrings weren't leaked by the palace, they were discovered by either some Twitter personality or journalists, can't remember the details. The palace had in fact frantically tried to a) make her not wear them and b) bury that story because its potential damage to the BRF was worse than the damage to #6's wife as a person.


Adding a few details here. The Prime Minister invites heads of states (presidents, kings, queens, premiers, etc.) or their reps for official/state visits, that are hosted by HMTQ regardless of her personal feelings toward them and gifts are exchanged. When CP Mohammed bin Salman visited UK in March 2018 on some trade mission, he  left H&M's wedding gift (the damned earrings) at BP when he was greeted by HMTQ. BP courtiers warned M re the earrings provenance, but as usual M ignored their advice and from what we now know about M, she probably wore them to embarrass the RF.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Adding a few details here. The Prime Minister invites heads of states (presidents, kings, queens, premiers, etc.) or their reps for official/state visits, that are hosted by HMTQ regardless of her personal feelings toward them and gifts are exchanged. When CP Mohammed bin Salman visited UK in March 2018 on some trade mission, he  left H&M's wedding gift (the damned earrings) at BP when he was greeted by HMTQ. BP courtiers warned M re the earrings provenance, but as usual M ignored their advice and from what we now know about M, she probably wore them to embarrass the RF.


IDK....I think she probably wore them because they were gorgeous and in spite of all her woke preaching, she didn't really care where they came from


----------



## CarryOn2020

_*Thomas Markle* tells TMZ … he sent Meghan flowers for her 40th birthday, along with a personalized card that simply said, "Wishing you a happy birthday and brighter days."_








						Meghan Markle's Dad Sends Flowers to Her for 40th Birthday
					

Meghan Markle's father sends her flowers for her birthday.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Chanbal

In this well balanced article, Daniela Elser explains why the couple of Montecito is not on the guest list for the party in Martha's Vineyard. 

_Do Harry and Meghan have what it takes to cut it as global power players?

…Yes, yes, I hear you. I know they are a bona fide duke and duchess who have the Queen’s mobile phone number, follow George Clooney’s secret Instagram handle and can get the Archbishop of Canterbury on the blower in a trice.

But look a bit closer and things are not quite as golden as they might first appear.

…The only ‘stars’ who now regularly speak out on the Sussexes’ behalf are her former Suits co-stars and her makeup artist Daniel Martin. We’re a long way from 2019 when their wedding guest George Clooney defended them saying that the media’s treatment of the duchess had been “a little unjust,” “a little unfair,” and “unkind”.

Harry’s mate and Montecito neighbour Orlando Bloom signed onto a TV project which mocks the royal family, including Harry, the Queen and the late Prince Philip. (Things are going to be very awkward the next time these blokes bump into each other grabbing an açai bowl after Soul Cycle.)…

The Sussexes might have signed a reported $180 million in business deals but as yet have not produced, released or made anything that puts them on anywhere near a professional par with the sort of names who get invitations to the Ob*m*s’ potluck’n’pinot nights.

Or, to put it another way, *Harry and Meghan are yet to prove themselves and to date, they are still best known because of who his grandmother is*, not what they have personally achieved in the world._









						Meghan and Harry’s Obama party fail
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I'm thinking that he observed his mother doing things to get his father's attention and he grew up thinking that this is what he had to do to get people to notice him.  Bad behavior always attracts attention.


And his mother was adored despite her behavior during her lifetime. After death, she is a goddess on a pedestal.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like someone in Toronto doesn't want to be mentored by Hazz's wife. I wonder why…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> In this well balanced article, Daniela Elser explains why the couple of Montecito is not on the guest list for the party in Martha's Vineyard.
> 
> _Do Harry and Meghan have what it takes to cut it as global power players?
> 
> …Yes, yes, I hear you. I know they are a bona fide duke and duchess who have the Queen’s mobile phone number, follow George Clooney’s secret Instagram handle and can get the Archbishop of Canterbury on the blower in a trice.
> 
> But look a bit closer and things are not quite as golden as they might first appear.
> 
> …The only ‘stars’ who now regularly speak out on the Sussexes’ behalf are her former Suits co-stars and her makeup artist Daniel Martin. We’re a long way from 2019 when their wedding guest George Clooney defended them saying that the media’s treatment of the duchess had been “a little unjust,” “a little unfair,” and “unkind”.
> 
> Harry’s mate and Montecito neighbour Orlando Bloom signed onto a TV project which mocks the royal family, including Harry, the Queen and the late Prince Philip. (Things are going to be very awkward the next time these blokes bump into each other grabbing an açai bowl after Soul Cycle.)…
> 
> The Sussexes might have signed a reported $180 million in business deals but as yet have not produced, released or made anything that puts them on anywhere near a professional par with the sort of names who get invitations to the Ob*m*s’ potluck’n’pinot nights.
> 
> Or, to put it another way, *Harry and Meghan are yet to prove themselves and to date, they are still best known because of who his grandmother is*, not what they have personally achieved in the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s Obama party fail
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



Their lack of A-lister support is being noticed across the world. It’s time for H&M to show what they’ve got and they don’t have much. No charisma, no talent, no innovation, nothing but rechurning old ideas that others have already done better than they can.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It looks like someone in Toronto doesn't want to be mentored by Hazz's wife. I wonder why…



wow....if this is true, it's terrible


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It looks like someone in Toronto doesn't want to be mentored by Hazz's wife. I wonder why…




As much as I hate to give her the benefit of the doubt, I think I might have to in this case. Anyone can post a dramatic anonymous story in comments. Maybe it’s real but there’s a greater possibility it’s not.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Now the merching has begun for her birthday “gifts” from various designers. From Town & Country:
> 
> The duchess, phoning in from an office in her Montecito home, wore a calming blend of neutrals, including an ivory sweater, white tank top, lounge pants, and brown suede Manolo Blahnik pumps. She completed the look with two delicate astrology-themed necklaces from the Los Angeles-based jewelry brand Logan Hollowell. Both necklaces feature constellations—one of Taurus, and one of Gemini—made of 14k gold and diamond. The pieces are a *sweet-yet-subtle* tribute to her two children: a Taurus necklace for Archie's star sign, and a Gemini necklace for Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gemini Constellation Necklace
> Geminiloganhollowell.com
> $1,785.00


Does she have a PR person who writes and submits these articles to magazines and publications?  Is there anything she's done that is not a "sweet" nod, or "sweet" tribute etc?  Nauseating.



Aimee3 said:


> Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
> Upper eyelids
> Brow lift
> Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
> Possibly gum surgery (same smile but you no longer see her upper gums when she “smiles”)
> Face lift
> So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!



I was wondering if those unattractive pieces of hair hanging down were to cover face lift evidence or hair piece evidence.  They are so ugly and straggly and unkempt looking that I can't believe she (and/or her hairdresser) think they are a good, chic look.




xincinsin said:


> All I can say is Thank Goodness someone finally used a thesaurus and wrote that the necklaces are a sweet "tribute" to the mystery kids. I wanted to  from the excessive use of "sweet nods" with regards to all the cutesy things she does.





bag-mania said:


> The point they must drive home is that it is SWEET! That must be said repeatedly.



YES!!!!!  100000%  Makes me gag.


----------



## jelliedfeels

We​


CarryOn2020 said:


> _*Thomas Markle* tells TMZ … he sent Meghan flowers for her 40th birthday, along with a personalized card that simply said, "Wishing you a happy birthday and brighter days."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Dad Sends Flowers to Her for 40th Birthday
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father sends her flowers for her birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


What? No description of the symbolic meaning of the flowers?
Perhaps I can offer my own boutique, bespoke flower-styling services:
( all in white to match the set, sorry lounge, decor) 
Roses - to represent the greatest love story of our time of course….
Carnations - a perennial favourite in bouquets for their longevity: these are guaranteed to outlast most H&M-led charity projects 
Ball chrysanthemums - representing their _direct_ approach  
Lilies - a funereal beauty mourning the death of the couple’s social life 
Orchids - not the most environmentally friendly choice but surely M deserves something to represent her _progress_?
Sea Thistle- because they are both pricks (I’m running low on ideas   )


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> Does she have a PR person who writes and submits these articles to magazines and publications?  Is there anything she's done that is not a "sweet" nod, or "sweet" tribute etc?  Nauseating.



Yes, Sunshine Sachs and possibly another contracted agency provide these insipid stories to the magazines. There is a hard push to sell Meghan as being a wonderful person who can do no wrong. And that means she must be SWEET.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> As much as I hate to give her the benefit of the doubt, I think I might have to in this case. Anyone can post a dramatic anonymous story in comments. Maybe it’s real but there’s a greater possibility it’s not.


I pretty much take everything I read about them with a grain of salt


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> I was wondering if those unattractive pieces of hair hanging down were to cover face lift evidence or hair piece evidence. They are so ugly and straggly and unkempt looking that I can't believe she (and/or her hairdresser) think they are a good, chic look.



This is what happens when the hairdresser doesn’t like the client, same for her glow-y makeup.



jelliedfeels said:


> What? No description of the symbolic meaning of the flowers?



From the article:
_We're told the bouquet *featured a dozen red roses with 2 yellow roses in the middle*, signifying Meghan and Prince Harry's 2 children.
 _


----------



## jelliedfeels

W


CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what happens when the hairdresser doesn’t like the client, same for her glow-y makeup.
> 
> 
> 
> From the article:
> _We're told the bouquet *featured a dozen red roses with 2 yellow roses in the middle*, signifying Meghan and Prince Harry's 2 children.
> _


We all know that’s not enough compared to the deep & meaningful meaning of the couple’s funeral wreath for a guy MLM knew for 18months & was sneak dissing for most of it.
 I’m just giving TM some pointers on how to be _tasteful_  

I seem to remember reading the Victorians considered yellow roses to be unlucky as they were the symbol of ‘gradually declining Affection’…
Perhaps T has been reading his ‘language of flowers’ after all


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> In this well balanced article, Daniela Elser explains why the couple of Montecito is not on the guest list for the party in Martha's Vineyard.
> 
> _Do Harry and Meghan have what it takes to cut it as global power players?
> 
> …Yes, yes, I hear you. I know they are a bona fide duke and duchess who have the Queen’s mobile phone number, follow George Clooney’s secret Instagram handle and can get the Archbishop of Canterbury on the blower in a trice.
> 
> But look a bit closer and things are not quite as golden as they might first appear.
> 
> …The only ‘stars’ who now regularly speak out on the Sussexes’ behalf are her former Suits co-stars and her makeup artist Daniel Martin. We’re a long way from 2019 when their wedding guest George Clooney defended them saying that the media’s treatment of the duchess had been “a little unjust,” “a little unfair,” and “unkind”.
> 
> Harry’s mate and Montecito neighbour Orlando Bloom signed onto a TV project which mocks the royal family, including Harry, the Queen and the late Prince Philip. (Things are going to be very awkward the next time these blokes bump into each other grabbing an açai bowl after Soul Cycle.)…
> 
> The Sussexes might have signed a reported $180 million in business deals but as yet have not produced, released or made anything that puts them on anywhere near a professional par with the sort of names who get invitations to the Ob*m*s’ potluck’n’pinot nights.
> 
> Or, to put it another way, *Harry and Meghan are yet to prove themselves and to date, they are still best known because of who his grandmother is*, not what they have personally achieved in the world._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s Obama party fail
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au




I follow the Cambridges  on Instagram and being a few days late of meghans *49th* birthday, I noticed that neither will and Kate nor “Lillibet” had posted a birthday wish for Meghan like they did last year … I’m so glad they’re finally showing the world that they don’t give a damn for miss “woe is me as a South African center for impoverished and abused South African women and children is behind me” …


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> I follow the Cambridges  on Instagram and being a few days late of meghans *49th* birthday, I noticed that neither will and Kate nor “Lillibet” had posted a birthday wish for Meghan like they did last year … I’m so glad they’re finally showing the world that they don’t give a damn for miss “woe is me as a South African center for impoverished and abused South African women and children is behind me” …



Good, it would be wrong to send birthday wishes they don’t mean and look like hypocrites, that’s a Meghan and Harry thing. Let the Royal social media account make a generic message for her, that’s more than she deserves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> I follow the Cambridges  on Instagram and being a few days late of meghans *49th* birthday, I noticed that neither will and Kate nor “Lillibet” had posted a birthday wish for Meghan like they did last year … I’m so glad they’re finally showing the world that they don’t give a damn for miss “woe is me as a South African center for impoverished and abused South African women and children is behind me” …



They all did send _happy 40_ wishes, didn’t they? Once again, they know how to take the high road. 








						Here's How The Royal Family Celebrated Meghan Markle's Birthday
					

The Duchess of Sussex received birthday wishes from Queen Elizabeth, Prince William, Kate Middleton and more.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> They all did send _happy 40_ wishes, didn’t they? Once again, they know how to take the high road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's How The Royal Family Celebrated Meghan Markle's Birthday
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex received birthday wishes from Queen Elizabeth, Prince William, Kate Middleton and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Yes they did:
“Wishing a happy 40th birthday to the Duchess of Sussex!” Prince William and his wife, the former Kate Middleton, wrote in an Instagram story on their official account, sharing a photo of the former Meghan Markle wearing a flower garland during an official visit to Australia in 2018.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They all did send _happy 40_ wishes, didn’t they? Once again, they know how to take the high road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's How The Royal Family Celebrated Meghan Markle's Birthday
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex received birthday wishes from Queen Elizabeth, Prince William, Kate Middleton and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


they really don't open themselves to criticism....except for some people who think they are dull compared to H&M.....better to be "dull" than be evil AH's


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> wow....if this is true, it's terrible





bag-mania said:


> As much as I hate to give her the benefit of the doubt, I think I might have to in this case. Anyone can post a dramatic anonymous story in comments. Maybe it’s real but there’s a greater possibility it’s not.





bag-mania said:


> Yes, Sunshine Sachs and possibly another contracted agency provide these insipid stories to the magazines. There is a hard push to sell Meghan as being a wonderful person who can do no wrong. And that means she must be SWEET.



Yes to the benefit of the doubt here. Though, where there's smoke, there's fire… The unspeakable ways she treated her father, siblings, the BRF, former friends, former husband… don't support a beautiful soul or a wonderful person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes to the benefit of the doubt here. Though, where there's smoke, there's fire… The unspeakable ways she treated her father, siblings, the BRF, former friends, former husband… don't support a beautiful soul or a wonderful person.


agree, but making a scene in public is a different matter...who knows?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Yes to the benefit of the doubt here. Though, where there's smoke, there's fire… The unspeakable ways she treated her father, siblings, the BRF, former friends, former husband… don't support a beautiful soul or a wonderful person.



Yeah, she isn’t as SWEET as she wants people to believe for sure. I can’t see her flinging a glass of red wine on a waitress like a soap opera queen though. She would have been thrown out of the establishment on her rear in any bar or club I’ve ever been in for a stunt like that.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I wonder if Thomas Markle had Bobby Darin's "18 Yellow Roses" in mind when he ordered two yellow roses for the bouquet. Here's the last verse of the song:
"Cuz eighteen yellow roses
Will wilt and die one day
But a fathers love, will never fade away
Will never fade away"

Anyway you can listen to Bobby and sing along if you wish; just click on Bobby Darin singing below.

*Bobby Darin singing*

*"18 Yellow Roses" *Lyrics by Bobby Darin

Eighteen yellow roses came today
Eighteen yellow roses in a pretty bouquet
When the boy came to the door
I didn't know what to say
But eighteen yellow roses came today

I opened up the card
To see what it said
I couldn't believe my eyes
When I had read
Though you belong to another
I love you anyway
Yes eighteen yellow roses came today

I never doubted your love for a minute
I always thought that you would be true
But now this box and the flowers in it
I guess there's nothing left for me to do
But ask to meet the boy
That's done this thing
And find out if he's got plans
To buy you a ring

Cuz eighteen yellow roses
Will wilt and die one day
But a fathers love, will never fade away
Will never fade away


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> agree, but making a scene in public is a different matter...who knows?





bag-mania said:


> Yeah, she isn’t as SWEET as she wants people to believe for sure. I can’t see her flinging a glass of red wine on a waitress like a soap opera queen though. She would have been thrown out of the establishment on her rear in any bar or club I’ve ever been in for a stunt like that.


Yep, I agree! It's really hard to believe in this type of story, but then again, it's hard to believe in most stories coming from Montecito, including OW's interview. There is also the infamous tea throwing incident, which allegedly happened during the Australia Tour.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I agree! It's really hard to believe in this type of story, but then again, it's hard to believe in most stories coming from Montecito, including OW's interview. There is also the infamous tea throwing incident, which allegedly happened during the Australia Tour.



Harry can be on the receiving end of her temper tantrums these days.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> IMO she does have a charitable heart. She volunteered at Hubb Kitchen at the start without making a big fuss over it. The ladies there have a good opinion of her.
> 
> But once money gets involved, it gets shady. For instance, the cookbook which was a joint project. Methane wrote the foreword but the PR material regularly claims it as HER book. The funds raised were to "help the Hubb Community Kitchen to strengthen lives and communities through cooking", but some of the funds were donated elsewhere in her name.
> 
> I'm wondering if it is a narc thing. My office narc was in his 30s but he loved to brag about getting top marks in his primary school. And when we had company events with high profile guests, he would try to impress on them that it was HIS event.
> 
> 
> All I could think of was the difference between the yearbook face and her ongoing mutating face.


I'm not a fan of her, but the fact is your face changes as you get older. Obviously she is going to look different at 40 than she did as a teen. That said, I think she's got a relatively untouched face by Hollywood standards. You've heard the saying "Black don't crack"?


----------



## bag-mania

I still wonder if we are going to find out there was a party after all next week. It wouldn’t surprise me if they claimed they were going to cancel and then did an about face. It seems a number of A-list celebrities are still going to be with the Ob***s this weekend, including Chrissy Teigen and John Legend, Beyoncé and Jay Z. But Larry David and David Letterman were cut from the invitation list.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/06/style/*****-birthday-party.amp.html


----------



## charlottawill

zen1965 said:


> Thank you for this.
> This was an engagement where she was clearly out of her depth, and her contributions to the high-powered panel discussion were rather lame and did not make her look all that intelligent.


Sounds like she and former first daughter Ivanka would be besties.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> They all did send _happy 40_ wishes, didn’t they? Once again, they know how to take the high road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's How The Royal Family Celebrated Meghan Markle's Birthday
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex received birthday wishes from Queen Elizabeth, Prince William, Kate Middleton and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com





csshopper said:


> Yes they did:
> “Wishing a happy 40th birthday to the Duchess of Sussex!” Prince William and his wife, the former Kate Middleton, wrote in an Instagram story on their official account, sharing a photo of the former Meghan Markle wearing a flower garland during an official visit to Australia in 2018.



I didn’t realize they posted the wishes on their Instagram story … last year they posted photos of Meghan on her birthday and her fans complained as to why the photos were of Meghan without Harry …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> I still wonder if we are going to find out there was a party after all next week. It wouldn’t surprise me if they claimed they were going to cancel and then did an about face. It seems a number of A-list celebrities are still going to be with the Ob***s this weekend, including Chrissy Teigen and John Legend, Beyoncé and Jay Z. But Larry David and David Letterman were cut from the invitation list.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/06/style/*****-birthday-party.amp.html



Oh auntie beyonce isn’t going to be celebrating with Meghan? I thought Meghan was her inspiration…


----------



## charlottawill

tiktok said:


> “Just another day in my home office, wearing 4-inch heels, trying to look royal”. She literally could have made this photo look more staged and unnatural if she tried.


I'm glad someone finally mentioned the stilettos. She also wore them in the Oprah tell all. Totally out of place in both situations. The only charitable reason I could come up with is that maybe wearing them gives her confidence? But I don't think confidence is something she lacks.


----------



## VickyB

sdkitty said:


> here ya go
> Tom Selleck Pays $21,000 Settlement Over California Water Dispute | Fortune


Thanks!


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> I'm not a fan of her, but the fact is your face changes as you get older. Obviously she is going to look different at 40 than she did as a teen. That said, I think she's got a relatively untouched face by Hollywood standards. You've heard the saying "Black don't crack"?


 I get what looks good is subjective but who does she look ‘untouched’ compared to? Mickey Rourke?


----------



## jelliedfeels

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oh auntie beyonce isn’t going to be celebrating with Meghan? I thought Meghan was her inspiration…


Auntie Beyoncé? The shade! She’s both ageing better and she’s younger than M haha.
You don’t get to be Beyoncé clinging on to unsuccessful gimmicks  
I think M is in the discard pile with that pink panther remake.


----------



## Chanbal

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oh auntie beyonce isn’t going to be celebrating with Meghan? I thought *Meghan was her inspiration*…



until she found out that MM doesn't have granny on speed dial. Sorry B, this is just a joke. 

Hopefully, B watched OW's interview and follows unbiased news sources on the subject (e.g. TPF ) .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Sounds like she and former first daughter Ivanka would be besties.


Would this support your comment?


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ok, now I understand why they can sit on their royal thrones in Montecito. Thanks and here's a ribbon to go with your star.
> View attachment 5157858


Is the reason they need so many toilets because they have so much collective royal anus between them?    

Maggie Muggins, I am truly honored, thank you very kindly! Thanks to you, I can never say I didn’t get something nice from this  dastardly duo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I wonder...does she really think it's funny when he makes a fool out of himself like this? Or does she enjoy humiliating him?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, isn't it sad that he even has to be in her birthday video because still nobody cares for her on her own.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I get what looks good is subjective but who does she look ‘untouched’ compared to? Mickey Rourke?



Given MR's childhood and on/off boxing career I'm pleased he can still walk and talk never mind his face.

M had a childhood most can only dream of and never went in the ring (as far as we know). She professes herself a role model, authenticity, feminism, staying true to oneself and 'my truth' and blah-di-blah and then butchers her perfectly pretty face and uses fillers and techno-filters at every op.

On one hand, the pressure to be flawless for women in the public eye must be horrendous. On the other hand she is the worst committer of 'do as I say, not what I do' than anyone - er - other than Mr.  JCMH Markle


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I still wonder if we are going to find out there was a party after all next week. It wouldn’t surprise me if they claimed they were going to cancel and then did an about face. It seems a number of A-list celebrities are still going to be with the Ob***s this weekend, including Chrissy Teigen and John Legend, Beyoncé and Jay Z. But Larry David and David Letterman were cut from the invitation list.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/06/style/*****-birthday-party.amp.html


Larry cut from the list last minute..…


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wonder if Thomas Markle had Bobby Darin's "18 Yellow Roses" in mind when he ordered two yellow roses for the bouquet. Here's the last verse of the song:
> "Cuz eighteen yellow roses
> Will wilt and die one day
> But a fathers love, will never fade away
> Will never fade away"
> 
> Anyway you can listen to Bobby and sing along if you wish; just click on Bobby Darin singing below.
> 
> *Bobby Darin singing*
> 
> *"18 Yellow Roses" *Lyrics by Bobby Darin
> 
> Eighteen yellow roses came today
> Eighteen yellow roses in a pretty bouquet
> When the boy came to the door
> I didn't know what to say
> But eighteen yellow roses came today
> 
> I opened up the card
> To see what it said
> I couldn't believe my eyes
> When I had read
> Though you belong to another
> I love you anyway
> Yes eighteen yellow roses came today
> 
> I never doubted your love for a minute
> I always thought that you would be true
> But now this box and the flowers in it
> I guess there's nothing left for me to do
> But ask to meet the boy
> That's done this thing
> And find out if he's got plans
> To buy you a ring
> 
> Cuz eighteen yellow roses
> Will wilt and die one day
> But a fathers love, will never fade away
> Will never fade away



Cue music (notice the arrangement, very Hollywood does Mariachi)


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also, isn't it sad that he even has to be in her birthday video because still nobody cares for her on her own.


I wonder if Melissa McCarthy was paid to do the birthday video.


----------



## rose60610

Nine bedrooms and sixteen(?) bathrooms in a 18,000 square feet house, and she has to prop up her laptop on top of books? Granted, we know they're not just ANY books, but for much less than the price of a pair of Manolo's she could get a decent laptop stand. But using her own books makes her look...so....grounded.... and down to earth .


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Given MR's childhood and on/off boxing career I'm pleased he scan still walk and talk never mind his face.
> 
> M had a childhood most can only dream of and never went in the ring (as far as we know). She professes herself a role model, authenticity, feminism, staying true to oneself and 'my truth' and blah-di-blah and then butchers her perfectly pretty face and uses filters at every op.
> 
> On one hand, the pressure to be flawless for women in the public eye must be horrendous. On the other hand she is the worst committer of 'do as I say, not what I do' than anyone - er - other than Mr.  JCMH Markle


TBF no one has been more open about how botched MR’s surgery has been than MR himself. He’s also still much more expressive despite it than MLM ever was as an actress.

As you say, it’s the disingenuous presentation that rankles. She sells herself as a role model of ‘knowing your roots’, confidence & humility when she has systematically (and literally in the case of her nose) cut off anything to do with her original self.
I don’t like most celebs less for having had surgery. I think some people have surgery to enhance what they already are & some people have it to pretend they are something they are not & that’s where the trouble sets in. Cher and Dolly just become more like themselves with their face lifts & boob jobs and they are both open about it. Whereas someone like M wants use cosmetic surgery to try and reshape her face to whatever is hot right now because she is always trying to be all things to all men. She basically went  from a knockoff Jennifer Lopez face (I’m so sorry J Lo) to a knockoff Jennifer Lawrence face (I’m so sorry J Law)  & then denies she even got anything done & it’s just very obvious bandwagon jumping.

Ironically, I’d say she was in one of the best gigs in the celebrity as a British royal for not having to be pretty to be ‘in’ & I’d say our beauty standards for actresses are nowhere near as rigid as the US but, alas, she might need _some talent. _


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> until she found out that MM doesn't have granny on speed dial. Sorry B, this is just a joke.
> 
> Hopefully, B watched OW's interview and follows unbiased news sources on the subject (e.g. TPF ) .



Girl you know Bey is all about Bey … the only news she religiously follows is about herself, lol.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I still wonder if we are going to find out there was a party after all next week. It wouldn’t surprise me if they claimed they were going to cancel and then did an about face. It seems a number of A-list celebrities are still going to be with the Ob***s this weekend, including Chrissy Teigen and John Legend, Beyoncé and Jay Z. But Larry David and David Letterman were cut from the invitation list.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/08/06/style/*****-birthday-party.amp.html


My DH said that Larry David will make that a part of an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.  LOL!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Melissa McCarthy was paid to do the birthday video.


Yes, but probably did one of those donate it back to the Archewell Foundation.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Melissa McCarthy was paid to do the birthday video.


A**well money well spent if so surely… Empowering a woman of size to uplift a woman of colour?
I think it’ll be the main project on the yearly statement unless they go really wild & give out ten pairs of socks or something.



rose60610 said:


> Nine bedrooms and sixteen(?) bathrooms in a 18,000 square feet house, and she has to prop up her laptop on top of books? Granted, we know they're not just ANY books, but for much less than the price of a pair of Manolo's she could get a decent laptop stand. But using her own books makes her look...so....grounded.... and down to earth .


I think it’s probably an attempt at 


But as I said before, it’s giving me pulp pile vibes


----------



## jelliedfeels

comment repeat


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Ironically, I’d say she was in one of the best gigs in the celebrity as a British royal for not having to be pretty to be ‘in’ & I’d say our beauty standards for actresses are nowhere near as rigid as the US but, alas, she might need _some talent. _



I'd say that was the best gig she could have landed ever as a middle aged actress who never made it big. Riches, fame, fawning masses, and all she had to do was show up and be pleasant which proved to be too hard for her.


----------



## charlottawill

This thread is vicious. But it sure is entertaining on a dreary Saturday afternoon.

In May 2018 I said ten years, two kids and they'll call it quits. The timeline may be shortened.


jelliedfeels said:


> I get what looks good is subjective but who does she look ‘untouched’ compared to? Mickey Rourke?


----------



## CarryOn2020

from the lady who knows - ouch!
*
Yet another example of the familiar chasm between money and taste.  *

*Best bit of Meghan Markle's dull palace is the chicken coop: ALEXANDRA SHULMAN says room where Duchess's birthday video was filmed exemplifies the chasm between money and taste*









						ALEXANDRA SHULMAN: Best bit of Meghan's dull palace is chicken coop
					

ALEXANDRA SHULMAN: When Meghan spent 40 minutes of her birthday videoing compassionate messages to less advantaged women, no doubt she meant well. It was certainly no crime.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Perhaps the answer is that this is not really their actual study but rather a showroom like the Garden Room at Highgrove where Prince Charles hosts large dinners – a faux space that he makes public rather than the real dining room where he and Camilla entertain their mates.

This might be the same, a place that Meghan and Harry are allowing us to snoop around while the rest of the house is really a riot of interesting art, colourful furniture, and books other than Meghan’s The Bench: a home rather than a catalogue shoot. 

*Even so it’s still depressingly unimaginative.*_


----------



## amante

Maggie Muggins said:


> Adding a few details here. The Prime Minister invites heads of states (presidents, kings, queens, premiers, etc.) or their reps for official/state visits, that are hosted by HMTQ regardless of her personal feelings toward them and gifts are exchanged. When CP Mohammed bin Salman visited UK in March 2018 on some trade mission, he  left H&M's wedding gift (the damned earrings) at BP when he was greeted by HMTQ.* BP courtiers warned M re the earrings provenance, but as usual M ignored their advice* and from what we now know about M, she probably wore them to embarrass the RF.


Oh that nails it, definitely a leak from the palace to cover their own asses. (No, but seriously, how do we learn about what was said between BP and MM unless one party blabs? MM didn't blab about this so the only logical conclusion is...)


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Nine bedrooms and sixteen(?) bathrooms in a 18,000 square feet house, and she has to prop up her laptop on top of books? Granted, we know they're not just ANY books, but for much less than the price of a pair of Manolo's she could get a decent laptop stand. But using her own books makes her look...so....grounded.... and down to earth .


A Manolo shoe box is the right height


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> from the lady who knows - ouch!
> 
> *Yet another example of the familiar chasm between money and taste. *
> 
> *Best bit of Meghan Markle's dull palace is the chicken coop: ALEXANDRA SHULMAN says room where Duchess's birthday video was filmed exemplifies the chasm between money and taste*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ALEXANDRA SHULMAN: Best bit of Meghan's dull palace is chicken coop
> 
> 
> ALEXANDRA SHULMAN: When Meghan spent 40 minutes of her birthday videoing compassionate messages to less advantaged women, no doubt she meant well. It was certainly no crime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Perhaps the answer is that this is not really their actual study but rather a showroom like the Garden Room at Highgrove where Prince Charles hosts large dinners – a faux space that he makes public rather than the real dining room where he and Camilla entertain their mates.
> 
> This might be the same, a place that Meghan and Harry are allowing us to snoop around while the rest of the house is really a riot of interesting art, colourful furniture, and books other than Meghan’s The Bench: a home rather than a catalogue shoot.
> 
> *Even so it’s still depressingly unimaginative.*_


This is a curated room , does not distract from person, not too expensive, nothing controversial or amusing on the bookshelves, room is same color as her attire, neutral in a word
Curated wardrobe, no obvious designer duds with lemons or lilies
my guess, she is letting her handlers calls the shots a lot more, she needs a win and is paying them to score one for her 
the whole Meghan ambiance she projected in UK is much toned down 
bland, yes


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Yes, but probably did one of those donate it back to the Archewell Foundation.


Didn't think about this, but it's a good possibility. A tax deductible donation may cover some PR expenses.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> from the lady who knows - ouch!
> 
> *Yet another example of the familiar chasm between money and taste. *
> 
> *Best bit of Meghan Markle's dull palace is the chicken coop: ALEXANDRA SHULMAN says room where Duchess's birthday video was filmed exemplifies the chasm between money and taste*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ALEXANDRA SHULMAN: Best bit of Meghan's dull palace is chicken coop
> 
> 
> ALEXANDRA SHULMAN: When Meghan spent 40 minutes of her birthday videoing compassionate messages to less advantaged women, no doubt she meant well. It was certainly no crime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Perhaps the answer is that this is not really their actual study but rather a showroom like the Garden Room at Highgrove where Prince Charles hosts large dinners – a faux space that he makes public rather than the real dining room where he and Camilla entertain their mates.
> 
> This might be the same, a place that Meghan and Harry are allowing us to snoop around while the rest of the house is really a riot of interesting art, colourful furniture, and books other than Meghan’s The Bench: a home rather than a catalogue shoot.
> 
> *Even so it’s still depressingly unimaginative.*_



On the chasm between money and taste, what was the Hermes blanket doing in the video? It's a beautiful blanket, but I find it hard to believe that Hermes would use MM to advertise it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> On the chasm between money and taste, what was the Hermes blanket doing in the video? It's a beautiful blanket, but I find it hard to believe that Hermes would use MM to advertise it.



IMO Noooo, Hermes is not using MM to advertise, please say it isn’t so. The blanket adds to the staged look, so matchy-matchy. Hermes makes that blanket in other colors, too, and they make other blankets — why buy what everyone else has? This is a set design rather than a home. Bland, uninspired, mind-numbing dull. Some of the kid’s artwork on the wall would have been endearing, humanizing. Better yet an old world masterpiece, like the palace has    I’m guessing they have all of that and more, but did not want to show it to the public. It would ruin their poor-little-me routine.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I'm not a fan of her, but the fact is your face changes as you get older. Obviously she is going to look different at 40 than she did as a teen. That said, I think she's got a relatively untouched face by Hollywood standards. You've heard the saying "Black don't crack"?


I'll have to disagree on the "untouched face". She was pretty, but not a natural beauty IMHO. Going by all the Youtube analyses of what she has done, I think she did a lot of enhancements and modifications to give herself a leg up in acting. I have no beef with that - it's quite accepted in acting/modelling. I do doubt she is going to accept the marks of age, and she will probably drop out of sight a couple of months every year to go to "the workshop".

"Black don't crack": that's new to me. I'll have to look it up.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> On the chasm between money and taste, what was the Hermes blanket doing in the video? It's a beautiful blanket, but I find it hard to believe that Hermes would use MM to advertise it.


Maybe it is MM using the Hermes blanket to advertise how "blessed" she is (in Oprah's favourite term).
_If you let me and my 40 short-term besties mentor you for 40 minutes, you too can one day sit uncomfortably hunched on a huge chair in a boring but expensively decorated room, staring at a blank laptop screen propped on a pile of unsold books, pretending to video call with a lady in a stupid hat, while your fool of a husband makes like a clown outside the window. _


----------



## CarryOn2020

If true, this is awful!  Why would Melissa participate in this? Ewwww, just ewwww.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Noooo, Hermes is not using MM to advertise, please say it isn’t so. The blanket adds to the staged look, so matchy-matchy. Hermes makes that blanket in other colors, too, and they make other blankets — why buy what everyone else has? This is a set design rather than a home. Bland, uninspired, mind-numbing dull. Some of the kid’s artwork on the wall would have been endearing, humanizing. Better yet an old world masterpiece, like the palace has  I’m guessing they have all of that and more, but did not want to show it to the public. It would ruin* their poor-little-me routine.*



We can't have 'their poor-little-me routine' ruined, she needs all the support she can get from stans. She is living such a beautiful love story that the stans may believe the H on the blanket stands for Hazz.


----------



## rose60610

McCarthy just went down ten notches IMO by spoofing an elderly woman who just lost her husband of more than 70 years. That combined with mysteriously giving a damn about Meghan is very odd. Her net worth is reported to be around 100 million so why does she cheapen herself by chumming up to Meghan? If she hasn't been Markled already, she will be.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> McCarthy just went down ten notches IMO by spoofing an elderly woman who just lost her husband of more than 70 years. That combined with mysteriously giving a damn about Meghan is very odd. Her net worth is reported to be around 100 million so why does she cheapen herself by chumming up to Meghan? If she hasn't been Markled already, she will be.



Her earlier movies were funny and entertaining. The last few I’ve seen have been pitiful with lots of repeat jokes and very little story.  This cabbage stuff is new level of low - for anyone.  Ick.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If true, this is awful!  Why would Melissa participate in this? Ewwww, just ewwww.




Is it a cabbage? It’s leaves don’t look like any I’ve ever seen. I thought it was a funky green-dyed flower.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Is it a cabbage? It’s leaves don’t look like any I’ve ever seen. I thought it was a funky green-dyed flower.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Noooo, Hermes is not using MM to advertise, please say it isn’t so. The blanket adds to the staged look, so matchy-matchy. Hermes makes that blanket in other colors, too, and they make other blankets — why buy what everyone else has? This is a set design rather than a home. Bland, uninspired, mind-numbing dull. Some of the kid’s artwork on the wall would have been endearing, humanizing. Better yet an old world masterpiece, like the palace has    I’m guessing they have all of that and more, but did not want to show it to the public. It would ruin their poor-little-me routine.


Maybe Meghan will resell the blanket on eBay soon?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Avalon blankets are indeed solid choices. It deserves better styling.
Helpful suggestions on making beige work, especially love the idea of using Mother Nature as our guide:
From 2018 - no, I do not know this designer, have never bought anything from her, nor have any connection to her - her website popped up when I did a Google, our friend, search - ymmv








						Beige Decor -- How To Make It Go From Boring To Sensational!
					

It's not that I hate my home, I hate the beige decor. Blah, boring. And, I let her talk me into it. Do you know what it's like when you get something and...




					laurelberninteriors.com
				




*But over-all with a lot of beige decor, the problem isn’t so much the beige, I feel.*

_There are lots of beautiful beiges. The problem is the sameness– the lack of a beautiful, rich, complex color scheme. And usually the lack of both white and black and other dark colors._


----------



## csshopper

Breaking Crockery Alert in Montecito:

Lists showing up on line of the O**** birthday party do not include the Arses of Montecito on either "invited" or "uninvited due to Covid". In other words, NOT invited. I bet that is a real shock to them. The Oprah/ Gayle King/ Clooney connection is evidently not all they hoped it would be and Sunshine Sucks is not all powerful after all. 

And further news is that due to Covid the Emmy awards are in the process of being pared down again. 

Methane must be getting frantic lest the Met Gala be cancelled if the resurgence of Covid continues unchecked.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> On the chasm between money and taste, what was the Hermes blanket doing in the video? It's a beautiful blanket, but I find it hard to believe that Hermes would use MM to advertise it.





CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Noooo, Hermes is not using MM to advertise, please say it isn’t so. The blanket adds to the staged look, so matchy-matchy. Hermes makes that blanket in other colors, too, and they make other blankets — why buy what everyone else has? This is a set design rather than a home. Bland, uninspired, mind-numbing dull. Some of the kid’s artwork on the wall would have been endearing, humanizing. Better yet an old world masterpiece, like the palace has    I’m guessing they have all of that and more, but did not want to show it to the public. It would ruin their poor-little-me routine.


Yeah she’s not a hermes ambassador  - she’s gone to buy it from either the store or a reseller like everyone else. 
I don’t think she’s an ambassador for Manolo either & givenchy don’t seem to be posting much over since they lost Charles’ debit details.

Instagram ‘fine Jewelers’ will send her a necklace or two & maybe she’ll get the odd yoga mat but proctor & gamble are really more her level- you know chemical-filled products that are ruining our environment & you get at the dollar store. 

This is the thing about modern fashion though. If you try & go for labels & status symbols you soon find that a lot of people on the internet can buy them too . A beautiful interior isn’t just putting an Avalon on a chair & calling it a day. Every other Insta stylist has one!

though of course it means more when she has one because she bought it as a ‘sweet’ gesture for her husband not because she wanted to have an easy to recognise designer item or anything 
Someone should tell her you need to buy actual furniture to jump the line for a Birkin though (ALLEGEDLY! I know nothing!) or she’s going to kill the cdc’s appeal by getting them for Haz.



CarryOn2020 said:


> The Avalon blankets are indeed solid choices. It deserves better styling.
> Helpful suggestions on making beige work, especially love the idea of using Mother Nature as our guide:
> From 2018 - no, I do not know this designer, have never bought anything from her, nor have any connection to her - her website popped up when I did a Google, our friend, search - ymmv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beige Decor -- How To Make It Go From Boring To Sensational!
> 
> 
> It's not that I hate my home, I hate the beige decor. Blah, boring. And, I let her talk me into it. Do you know what it's like when you get something and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> laurelberninteriors.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *But over-all with a lot of beige decor, the problem isn’t so much the beige, I feel.*
> 
> _There are lots of beautiful beiges. The problem is the sameness– the lack of a beautiful, rich, complex color scheme. And usually the lack of both white and black and other dark colors._


Beige is actually a beautiful colour- it’s such a warm tone and it occurs in so many natural materials…
Camel wools/seashells/pine/beech/ ash/ baskets/ stoneware
-All individualistic, snug and homely. I just think that they struggle to even artificially generate the vibe of a family home & the fact it’s probably a set because PRIVACY!!!! doesn’t help.

Add on … just browsing the Laurel home site & deep grey with beige always looks very Versailles to me- perhaps a little on the nose for our friends  

Also, my lounge is beige, grey & red but I’d like to think it has a bit of personality


----------



## needlv

The whole room is staged.  I like the table, the flowers and the dog.  But let’s face it, that isn’t a working desk.  The laptop is too high to type/ work from, and there are no drawers to out stuff.  Soooo staged, merching  everything in sight.

in-fact I am amazed she doesn’t see the implied messages she is sending to the women she is supposedly helping.  It’s very much “look at how rich I am!” and “Let them eat cake”

Plus I have to say, what a huge fall from grace.  From part of the Royal family, to influencer selling tea cups and ugly jewellery.  it’s pathetic.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> A Manolo shoe box is the right height



But the wrong name on the box


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> On the chasm between money and taste, what was the Hermes blanket doing in the video? It's a beautiful blanket, but I find it hard to believe that Hermes would use MM to advertise it.




They didn't. Hard to believe I know (coz,  us on tPF here) but most of the world would not recognise that blanket.

I keep my blankets on my office desk and dining room table, doesn't everyone? You never know when the table will get cold. 
It is there, propped-up, for a reason, she wants you to get the *H*


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> *McCarthy* just went down ten notches IMO by spoofing an elderly woman who just lost her husband of more than 70 years. That combined with mysteriously giving a damn about Meghan is very odd. Her net worth is reported to be around 100 million so why does she cheapen herself by chumming up to Meghan? If she hasn't been Markled already, she will be.



I have absolutely no idea who she is.

No one enlighten me, it's OK. My life will go on just fine without knowing


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah she’s not a hermes ambassador  - she’s gone to buy it from either the store or a reseller like everyone else.
> I don’t think she’s an ambassador for Manolo either & givenchy don’t seem to be posting much over since they lost Charles’ debit details.
> 
> Instagram ‘fine Jewelers’ will send her a necklace or two & maybe she’ll get the odd yoga mat but proctor & gamble are really more her level- you know chemical-filled products that are ruining our environment & you get at the dollar store.
> 
> This is the thing about modern fashion though. If you try & go for labels & status symbols you soon find that a lot of people on the internet can buy them too . A beautiful interior isn’t just putting an Avalon on a chair & calling it a day. Every other Insta stylist has one!
> 
> though of course it means more when she has one because she bought it as a ‘sweet’ gesture for her husband not because she wanted to have an easy to recognise designer item or anything
> Someone should tell her you need to buy actual furniture to jump the line for a Birkin though (ALLEGEDLY! I know nothing!) or she’s going to kill the cdc’s appeal by getting them for Haz.
> 
> 
> Beige is actually a beautiful colour- it’s such a warm tone and it occurs in so many natural materials…
> Camel wools/seashells/pine/beech/ ash/ baskets/ stoneware
> -All individualistic, snug and homely. I just think that they struggle to even artificially generate the vibe of a family home & the fact it’s probably a set because PRIVACY!!!! doesn’t help.
> 
> Add on … just browsing the Laurel home site & deep grey with beige always looks very Versailles to me- perhaps a little on the nose for our friends
> 
> Also, my lounge is beige, grey & red but I’d like to think it has a bit of personality



She was definitely merching those hideous necklaces. 

It was more transparent a product placement than most influencers (14K and floor-swept diamonds  to honour your children and worn on your birthday- wha?  ). These, on someone who was 'disappointed' she couldn't make off with the Vladimir tiara. 

I'm surprised there wasn't a live affiliate link 'ticker-taping' the bottom of the screen  .


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> They didn't. Hard to believe I know (coz,  us on tPF here) but most of the world would not recognise that blanket.
> 
> I keep my blankets on my office desk and dining room table, doesn't everyone? You never know when the table will get cold.
> It is there, propped-up, for a reason, she wants you to get the *H*


Wasn’t it such a *sweet *gesture? I bet she didn’t even know it was designer like us shallow TPFers. 

I do think there’s some mileage in my original theory she’s planning to wear it. At 1.2k it’s still much more economical than her last kaftan.
Or maybe as you say, it’ll go on the table because as her book has shown - she is very concerned about the comfort of inanimate objects.

Maybe she’s going to start doing super-Bourgeois yarn bombing with Hermes blankets to uplift her local montecito community & remind us all of the vitally important message that Harry begin with a H? 

Next they’ll be suing H&M for stealing their intellectual propertyz


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> They didn't. Hard to believe I know (coz,  us on tPF here) but most of the world would not recognise that blanket.
> 
> *I keep my blankets on my office desk and dining room table, doesn't everyone? You never know when the table will get cold.*
> It is there, propped-up, for a reason, she wants you to get the *H*



Sorry, forgot the ironic emoji. I'm _joking  _

I do wrap my acoustic guitar in a wool sweater though (regulates the temperature).


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Wasn’t it such a *sweet *gesture? I bet she didn’t even know it was designer like us shallow TPFers.
> 
> I do think there’s some mileage in my original theory she’s planning to wear it. At 1.2k it’s still much more economical  than her last kaftan.



If '*sweet*' = staged, calculated and try-hard then


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> If true, this is awful!  Why would Melissa participate in this? Ewwww, just ewwww.



They're sicker than I thought. Like low down in the dirt sick and I hope everything backfires on these participants. Taking cheap pot shots at the Queen, knowing she just lost her life companion. I do believe people will eventually see how sick and dirty they are.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> I have absolutely no idea who she is.
> 
> No one enlighten me, it's OK. My life will go on just fine without knowing



No idea either


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I have absolutely no idea who she is.
> 
> No one enlighten me, it's OK. My life will go on just fine without knowing


I think the few minutes I've spent looking at posts on this thread with her mugshot in the brassica hat are more than enough time wasted on her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> The whole room is staged.  I like the table, the flowers and the dog.  But let’s face it, that isn’t a working desk.  The laptop is too high to type/ work from, and there are no drawers to out stuff.  Soooo staged, merching  everything in sight.
> 
> in-fact I am amazed she doesn’t see the implied messages she is sending to the women she is supposedly helping.  It’s very much “look at how rich I am!” and “Let them eat cake”
> 
> Plus I have to say, what a huge fall from grace.  From part of the Royal family, to influencer selling tea cups and ugly jewellery.  it’s pathetic.


To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if they hired the dog from an agency because either Guy is too feral to be on camera or they rehomed him once they got bored of the English gentry look. 
After all, it is hard to tell one beagle (or indeed any pedigree with a distinctive look) from another at a distance.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> So much work done already!
> she’s definitely had her chin filled too- it is very lumpy.
> Makes you wonder what there’s going to be left in her dotage…. I’m picturing the face of boe
> View attachment 5157692


Torchwood


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Breaking Crockery Alert in Montecito:
> 
> *Lists showing up on line of the O**** birthday party do not include the Arses of Montecito on either "invited" or "uninvited due to Covid". In other words, NOT invited.* I bet that is a real shock to them. The Oprah/ Gayle King/ Clooney connection is evidently not all they hoped it would be and Sunshine Sucks is not all powerful after all.
> 
> And further news is that due to Covid the Emmy awards are in the process of being pared down again.
> 
> Methane must be getting frantic lest the Met Gala be cancelled if the resurgence of Covid continues unchecked.


----------



## bag-mania

IF the hat had a cabbage on it (and I am not convinced it does), wouldn’t Melissa’s costume have come from Meghan’s people? It’s not like Melissa had the costume and tea cups at her house, the production crew brought all that. Melissa could’ve been sitting in another room at Harry and Meghan‘s house for all we know. I don’t particularly like Melissa one way or the other, but she would not be to blame if it was some not-so-veiled message.


----------



## Chanbal

Would Eugenie help dear MM and dear Hazz with bombshell? 

*Prince Harry 'to ask Princess Eugenie' to help write bombshell new memoir*

_Prince Harry__ could approach Princess Eugenie to help write his bombshell memoir, a source has claimed.

The Duke of Sussex, 36, has been secretly working with American "power ghostwriter" JR Moehringer on the book that is set to be released in late 2022, he confirmed on Monday, July 19.

Harry has promised to tell an "accurate and wholly truthful" account of his "highs and lows, the mistakes, the lessons learned" in the explosive book, which could be packed full of even more claims that could rock Buckingham Palace.

Pulitzer Prize-winning author Moehringer, 56, could bypass formal channels and contact the duke’s inner circle via Harry, The Sun reports.

This could mean him speaking to Eugenie, who is said to be an ally of Prince Harry despite the fallout from his decision to step down as a senior royal last year.

An insider said: "I could only imagine Eugenie talking or being approached as she is someone Harry is still in regular contact with."_









						Prince Harry 'to ask Princess Eugenie' to help write bombshell new memoir
					

The Duke of Sussex announced in July he is set to publish a tell-all memoir which is set to hit the shelves in late 2022 - and reports suggest Eugenie could help write it




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## breakfastatcartier

papertiger said:


> I have absolutely no idea who she is.
> 
> No one enlighten me, it's OK. My life will go on just fine without knowing


You’re blessed, lol.

A few years back she was being constantly shoved down our throats by the media and she was starring in several films playing the same character.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Breaking Crockery Alert in Montecito:
> 
> Lists showing up on line of the O**** birthday party do not include the *Arses of Montecito* on either "invited" or "uninvited due to Covid". In other words, NOT invited. I bet that is a real shock to them. The Oprah/ Gayle King/ Clooney connection is evidently not all they hoped it would be and Sunshine Sucks is not all powerful after all.
> 
> And further news is that due to Covid the Emmy awards are in the process of being pared down again.
> 
> Methane must be getting frantic lest the Met Gala be cancelled if the resurgence of Covid continues unchecked.


 @csshopper for providing us with another nickname, *Arses of Montecito*, that no doubt inspired them to purchase their 16-BR Montecito home. Thanks and added to the short list, that will be posted at a later date.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Given MR's childhood and on/off boxing career I'm pleased he can still walk and talk never mind his face.
> 
> M had a childhood most can only dream of and never went in the ring (as far as we know). She professes herself a role model, authenticity, feminism, staying true to oneself and 'my truth' and blah-di-blah and then butchers her perfectly pretty face and uses fillers and techno-filters at every op.
> 
> On one hand, the pressure to be flawless for women in the public eye must be horrendous. On the other hand she is the worst committer of 'do as I say, not what I do' than anyone - er - other than Mr.  JCMH Markle


IDK about Rourke's childhood.  abused?  He was good looking when he was young.  shame about his face


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! The article below is on the infamous birthday, and some people aren't happy with the birthday wishes from the BRF. 









						4 August 2021 ~ How The Monarchy Lost Respect And Support In A Day
					

Many expected some sort of hype and PR campaign on the day, and there was, but it came and went. The British public wondered whether BP would acknowledge TW’s birthday, bearing in mind that t…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> IF the hat had a cabbage on it (and I am not convinced it does), wouldn’t Melissa’s costume have come from Meghan’s people? It’s not like Melissa had the costume and tea cups at her house, the production crew brought all that. Melissa could’ve been sitting in another room at Harry and Meghan‘s house for all we know. I don’t particularly like Melissa one way or the other, but she would not be to blame if it was some not-so-veiled message.


I agree, I don't think McCarthy is bright enough to participate a very nuanced "dig" at the Queen. I think people are reading too much into her stupid costume.

I am more worried about those 40 women who most likely to have overly inflated self-importance think they can mentor girls just because they are somewhat famous! 

What can MM mentor young girls on? How to meet rich British men? How to be an Z list actress? How to play the victim card? How to play the race card?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Oops! The article below is on the infamous birthday, and some people aren't happy with the birthday wishes from the BRF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 August 2021 ~ How The Monarchy Lost Respect And Support In A Day
> 
> 
> Many expected some sort of hype and PR campaign on the day, and there was, but it came and went. The British public wondered whether BP would acknowledge TW’s birthday, bearing in mind that t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com


The writer refers to MM as TW. Anyone follows this account? What is TW? The Witch? Terrible Woman? Termagant Wretch?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> IDK about Rourke's childhood.  *abused*?  He was good looking when he was young.  shame about his face



Terrible!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> The writer refers to MM as *TW*. Anyone follows this account? What is TW? The Witch? Terrible Woman? Termagant Wretch?


How about The Woke? 

ETA OMG, here we go with the nicknames again!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> How about The Woke?
> 
> ETA OMG, here we go with the nicknames again!


Terminal Whiner?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Oops! The article below is on the infamous birthday, and some people aren't happy with the birthday wishes from the BRF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4 August 2021 ~ How The Monarchy Lost Respect And Support In A Day
> 
> 
> Many expected some sort of hype and PR campaign on the day, and there was, but it came and went. The British public wondered whether BP would acknowledge TW’s birthday, bearing in mind that t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com


I mean this person is taking it_ a bit_ seriously with the declarations of treachery & even the claim the vast majority of people would notice if the royals wished someone happy bday on Insta.

however, I am extremely gratified to see that I’m not the only one who think they looked embarrassingly spineless doing this. Should’ve obeyed the Ja Rule BRF.

also could not agree more they should’ve referred to her by name not the title she’s not even supposed to be using in the grand US of A 

As to the rumour that eugenics plans to consult with H for the book…. I don’t believe that… why would her handlers allow it? Also, why make yourself the perfect scapegoat for the spicier gossip but get none of the royalties?  


She could write her own tell all after all:
Picture this in your local bargain bin….

“You don’t know which one I am: The secret pain of the other other other other spare.”
Cover- glossy photo of eug in ski suit & a Philip treacy lobster gazing sadly at Mont Blanc
Back-
Revelations include:
.Absolutely nothing about my father.
Seriously nothing. Stop asking.

. MY PAIN at being sent to Marlborough aka Halle in habits.

. the AGONY that everyone keeps making fun of my receding chin & My bestie Meg has just gone & put even more fillers in hers. Does the competition ever stop?

. The TRAUMA when I didn’t make the final cut for Ladies of London but that **** caprice did

. The TORTURE that you keep pointing out it’s ironic _my parents of all people_ chose to name me ‘well born’ or ‘good genes’

. Stop asking about my dad! It’s diddly squat I promise you!

. My amazing love story with whoever my husband is. It’s great… honestly 

. ummmm… hats?


----------



## gracekelly

I just realized that  Melissa was wearing a cabbage hat!  What an insult to The Queen!  That was PP’s pet name for her. I now think that entire piece was an insult to the family.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Would Eugenie help dear MM and dear Hazz with bombshell?
> 
> *Prince Harry 'to ask Princess Eugenie' to help write bombshell new memoir*
> 
> _Prince Harry__ could approach Princess Eugenie to help write his bombshell memoir, a source has claimed._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'to ask Princess Eugenie' to help write bombshell new memoir
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex announced in July he is set to publish a tell-all memoir which is set to hit the shelves in late 2022 - and reports suggest Eugenie could help write it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



I can't imagine Eugenie participating in anything that would hurt her grandmother, or her father, for that matter.  Any "memoir" of Harry's would likely need to make some reference to his Uncle Andrew, unless he decides to completely leave that alone.  She also may be staying in contact with Harry in order to keep at least one line of communication open to him and by request of her granny or someone else.


----------



## Vintage Leather

elvisfan4life said:


> No idea either



She’s an American actress who has had a solid b-list career playing the “funny friend”. 
The American Rebel Wilson, if you will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The writer refers to MM as TW. Anyone follows this account? What is TW? The Witch? Terrible Woman? Termagant Wretch?



The Wife?  I _think_ that is how our friends at Harry Markle refer to her.


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> She’s an American actress who has had a solid b-list career playing the “funny friend”.
> The American Rebel Wilson, if you will.


well, I'm not a huge fan of hers but I will say she is pretty well known and talented - much more so than her "new friend"
She made a huge splash in a supporting role in the movie Bridesmaids, has been a lead on a TV series, has made numerous appearances on SNL.  She also had the lead role in a dramatic movie, for which she got good reviews.
Of course, she's not likely to be an a-list lead actress starting at age 50 but she's pretty successul.
So B-list, I guess.  But not D-list or Z-list


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Wife?  I _think_ that is how our friends at Harry Markle refer to her.


Harry is always saying "MY WIFE".....reminds me of a kid with a new toy


----------



## Vintage Leather

sdkitty said:


> well, I'm not a huge fan of hers but I will say she is pretty well known and talented - much more so than her "new friend"
> She made a huge splash in a supporting role in the movie Bridesmaids, has been a lead on a TV series, has made numerous appearances on SNL.  She also had the lead role in a dramatic movie, for which she got good reviews.
> Of course, she's not likely to be an a-list lead actress starting at age 50 but she's pretty successul.
> So B-list, I guess.  But not D-list or Z-list



I tend to rank it as:

A-list : could be the vehicle for a 50 mil dollar movie

B-list : could be the vehicle for a 10 mil dollar movie, or a named on the poster of the ensemble for a more expensive movie

C-list : vehicle for a 1 mil movie, character in a bigger film will have a name and speaking roll. 

D-list : vehicle for a small indie film. Character in a bigger film may or may not have more than 15 minutes in a larger film. 

Z-list : only in the film because they know someone, paid someone, or willing to work cheap.


I said B-list because of The Heat. McCarthy was on the poster, but Bullock was the one whose involvement greenlit the 43 million dollar movie. (And yes, I used to be a fan of the Gilmore Girls, which is why I have an opinion on it)


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> I tend to rank it as:
> 
> A-list : could be the vehicle for a 50 mil dollar movie
> 
> B-list : could be the vehicle for a 10 mil dollar movie, or a named on the poster of the ensemble for a more expensive movie
> 
> C-list : vehicle for a 1 mil movie, character in a bigger film will have a name and speaking roll.
> 
> D-list : vehicle for a small indie film. Character in a bigger film may or may not have more than 15 minutes in a larger film.
> 
> Z-list : only in the film because they know someone, paid someone, or willing to work cheap.
> 
> 
> I said B-list because of The Heat. McCarthy was on the poster, but Bullock was the one whose involvement greenlit the 43 million dollar movie.


agree - people like Brad Pitt who are really known by everyone would be A-list in my mind.  As far as the comparison to Rebel Wilson, I'm not sure how big she is in GB.  I do know who she is but couldn't tell you anything she's been in.  Mainly I know she's lost weight recently


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I just realized that  Melissa was wearing a cabbage hat!  What an insult to The Queen!  That was PP’s pet name for her. I now think that entire piece was an insult to the family.


I didn't think much of her getup when I first saw the video, other than that it was supposed to be McCarthy's idea of a proper British lady having proper tea for MM's bday, but your observation is very astute and makes sense. Very classy


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> I can't imagine Eugenie participating in anything that would hurt her grandmother, or her father, for that matter.  Any "memoir" of Harry's would likely need to make some reference to his Uncle Andrew, unless he decides to completely leave that alone.  She also may be staying in contact with Harry in order to keep at least one line of communication open to him and by request of her granny or someone else.


Yes this is another very valid point. He would be opening an extremely litigious can of worms if he brought anything about A*** & Ferg into his story especially given the case is probably going to be ongoing for years. Also I bet there are a lot of big fish who don’t want associating with that family anymore at all  & would be reading any tell-all _very closely._

With that in mind, bringing in A’s daughter to consult seems the definition of poor planning. What else can she bring to the table?
‘oh yah stiff upper lip is like…so emotionally distant….’


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Noooo, Hermes is not using MM to advertise, please say it isn’t so. The blanket adds to the staged look, so matchy-matchy. Hermes makes that blanket in other colors, too, and they make other blankets — why buy what everyone else has? This is a set design rather than a home. Bland, uninspired, mind-numbing dull. Some of the kid’s artwork on the wall would have been endearing, humanizing. Better yet an old world masterpiece, like the palace has    I’m guessing they have all of that and more, but did not want to show it to the public. It would ruin their poor-little-me routine.


I had thought (I heard this many years ago from the SA in the Rue Faubourg store) that Hermes does not: 

Give ANY discounts to ANY celebrity .. you pay the price, period! 
Do not use Celebrities to "merchandise" their goods (they don't feel they need them and just think about it .. they were probably CRINGING big-time when the K-Klan started wearing them all about)! 
So, if Mega-lo-maniac thinks that she would get $$$ from putting out an H blanket?!? .. she can think again!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Vintage Leather said:


> I tend to rank it as:
> 
> A-list : could be the vehicle for a 50 mil dollar movie
> 
> B-list : could be the vehicle for a 10 mil dollar movie, or a named on the poster of the ensemble for a more expensive movie
> 
> C-list : vehicle for a 1 mil movie, character in a bigger film will have a name and speaking roll.
> 
> D-list : vehicle for a small indie film. Character in a bigger film may or may not have more than 15 minutes in a larger film.
> 
> Z-list : only in the film because they know someone, paid someone, or willing to work cheap.
> 
> 
> I said B-list because of The Heat. McCarthy was on the poster, but Bullock was the one whose involvement greenlit the 43 million dollar movie. (And yes, I used to be a fan of the Gilmore Girls, which is why I have an opinion on it)


This is a great way of explaining it. So as you say she’s definitely B list.

I know of her because I know she was up for an Oscar the year Olivia Colman deservedly won
& of course I remember the terrible ghostbusters remake. So she’s basically starred in small budget & she is in ensemble pieces but to me she is a bit fat=funny rather than actually funny. Perhaps my early comparison to James Corden is a bit harsh though as he really is like dental work. 

dear old MLM was in the ‘full stop after the Z’ list wasn’t she?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I didn't think much of her getup when I first saw the video, other than that it was supposed to be McCarthy's idea of a proper British lady having proper tea for MM's bday, but your observation is very astute and makes sense. Very classy


If they wanted classy, they wouldn't have used Melissa M.  She is a slapstick kind of comedian.  Bathroom humor in Bridesmaids... Hello!  I don't believe for a second that McCarthy thought that get up all by herself.  This was a scripted piece with costumes included.  Someone had to edit it as well as they were never speaking directly to each other.  Since Meggie Moaner always controls whatever she is in, I see her clearly orchestrating that entire piece, insults and all.

Melissa if you are reading (haha!) I thought well of you in your movie Can You Ever Forgive Me and thought you had turned the corner to do some serious acting.  Doing this video was a true step back.  Honey, you really markled yourself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> I'll have to disagree on the "untouched face". She was pretty, but not a natural beauty IMHO. Going by all the Youtube analyses of what she has done, I think she did a lot of enhancements and modifications to give herself a leg up in acting. I have no beef with that - it's quite accepted in acting/modelling. I do doubt she is going to accept the marks of age, and she will probably drop out of sight a couple of months every year to go to "the workshop".
> 
> "Black don't crack": that's new to me. I'll have to look it up.


I can say for 100% certainty that she had a LOT of work, the first being her nose job between her junior & senior years of high school!!  Remember, I know the family and individual who was her male play counterpart (senior year), but also knew her from other gigs that they did.  He told me that many noticed the "thinner" nose .. and the beginning of a LOT of dental work (caps).  Remember, she also had a boob job for the game show and then had them taken out when she landed suits.  Chick is by no means a "natural" beauty; yes, she was somewhat attractive, but she's had a LOT of work done!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I had thought (I heard this many years ago from the SA in the Rue Faubourg store) that Hermes does not:
> 
> Give ANY discounts to ANY celebrity .. you pay the price, period!
> Do not use Celebrities to "merchandise" their goods (they don't feel they need them and just think about it .. they were probably CRINGING big-time when the K-Klan started wearing them all about)!
> So, if Mega-lo-maniac thinks that she would get $$$ from putting out an H blanket?!? .. she can think again!


That blanket was money signaling as in _I can afford to have this from Hermes to throw on a chair and the rest of you are peons.  _She is also the kind of person that thinks that showing it illustrates her good taste.  Alexandra Schulman didn't think so.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I can say for 100% certainty that she had a LOT of work, the first being her nose job between her junior & senior years of high school!!  Remember, I know the family and individual who was her male play counterpart (senior year), but also knew her from other gigs that they did.  He told me that many noticed the "thinner" nose .. and the beginning of a LOT of dental work (caps).  Remember, she also had a boob job for the game show and then had them taken out when she landed suits.  Chick is by no means a "natural" beauty; yes, she was somewhat attractive, but she's had a LOT of work done!


I am hoping she keeps it up and ends up looking like


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I can say for 100% certainty that she had a LOT of work, the first being her nose job between her junior & senior years of high school!!  Remember, I know the family and individual who was her male play counterpart (senior year), but also knew her from other gigs that they did.  He told me that many noticed the "thinner" nose .. and the beginning of a LOT of dental work (caps).  Remember, she also had a boob job for the game show and then had them taken out when she landed suits.  Chick is by no means a "natural" beauty; yes, she was somewhat attractive, but she's had a LOT of work done!


I would agree that she's attractive or pretty but not that beautiful.  To me another bi-racial actress, Halle Berry, is much more beautiful, and talented, and successful.


----------



## redney

gracekelly said:


> That blanket was money signaling as in _I can afford to have this from Hermes to throw on a chair and the rest of you are peons.  _She is also the kind of person that thinks that showing it illustrates her good taste.  Alexandra Schulman didn't think so.


Exactly what I thought.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I just realized that  Melissa was wearing a cabbage hat!  What an insult to The Queen!  That was PP’s pet name for her. I now think that entire piece was an insult to the family.



You are not alone, more people think that the video was indeed an insult to QE. 

_"Commenting on this, Ms Levin wrote to her 13,500 followers on Twitter: "*Anyone else think that Meghan and her friend Melissa McCartney [sic] were mocking the Queen in the birthday video*?

Ms Levin is a highly respected royal author and her damning take on the video is all the more credible due to her close connection to Prince Harry."_










						Fury as Meghan Markle 'mocks Queen' in latest 'publicity stunt'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has been accused of "mocking the Queen" in her birthday video with Melissa McCarthy, with one expert branding her latest venture a "publicity stunt".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I can't imagine Eugenie participating in anything that would hurt her grandmother, or her father, for that matter.  Any "memoir" of Harry's would likely need to make some reference to his Uncle Andrew, unless he decides to completely leave that alone.  She also may be staying in contact with Harry in order to keep at least one line of communication open to him and by request of her granny or someone else.



I was also not expecting that Eugenie would support 'Dear Meghan' on the 40X40 PR stunt. 
I sincerely doubt that H will make any 'difficult' reference to uncle Andy on his selective memoir. Hazz and wife's targets are Charles, Will&Kate, and perhaps QE.


----------



## rose60610

Why would Harry even need any help writing his "memoirs"? It's just going to be a pack of lies anyway, and a ton of "reasons" why everyone should feel sorry for him. He was TRAPPED, you know, until Z-Lister collared him, dragged him to the fifty million dollar altar with a ring that wasn't good enough, gutted Frogmore for their brutal 5 minute life at Windsor, and Found Freedom in Montecito where his main job is replenishing Idiot Ingrate's ice packs for all her plastic work.  Recollections will vary of course.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *If they wanted classy, they wouldn't have used Melissa M. * She is a slapstick kind of comedian.  Bathroom humor in Bridesmaids... Hello!  I don't believe for a second that McCarthy thought that get up all by herself.  This was a scripted piece with costumes included.  Someone had to edit it as well as they were never speaking directly to each other.  Since Meggie Moaner always controls whatever she is in, I see her clearly orchestrating that entire piece, insults and all.
> 
> Melissa if you are reading (haha!) I thought well of you in your movie Can You Ever Forgive Me and thought you had turned the corner to do some serious acting.  Doing this video was a true step back.  Honey, you really markled yourself.


I don't think they could afford Jolie or any other A-list actress…


----------



## rose60610

Meghan and Harry want "classy". Problem is, "classy" doesn't want THEM.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *That blanket was money signaling *as in _I can afford to have this from Hermes to throw on a chair and the rest of you are peons.  _*She is also the kind of person that thinks that showing it illustrates her good taste. * Alexandra Schulman didn't think so.


Well… 










						Meghan’s half-brother warned Harry she would ‘ruin his life’
					

MEGHAN MARKLE'S half-brother has called the Duchess of Sussex "shallow" and said he warned Prince Harry she would "ruin his life".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

I think they want to be “classy” (hence the H blanket) but also be viewed as “fun” or “funny” (hence the stupid clown act and the McCarthy collab).

they so very desperately want people to like them.


----------



## CeeJay

Vintage Leather said:


> I tend to rank it as:
> 
> A-list : could be the vehicle for a 50 mil dollar movie
> 
> B-list : could be the vehicle for a 10 mil dollar movie, or a named on the poster of the ensemble for a more expensive movie
> 
> C-list : vehicle for a 1 mil movie, character in a bigger film will have a name and speaking roll.
> 
> D-list : vehicle for a small indie film. Character in a bigger film may or may not have more than 15 minutes in a larger film.
> 
> Z-list : only in the film because they know someone, paid someone, or willing to work cheap *or it was a "casting-couch" favor*!! .
> 
> *.. I fixed it for you!!*


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I am hoping she keeps it up and ends up looking like
> 
> View attachment 5159280


Right?!?!?! .. or looking like one of those "Barbies" that you see out here (you know what I"m talking about).  Even after living out here for 8 years now, I still gasp every time I see a "Barbie" .. whether young or older.  It's just so pathetic in my opinion ..


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Vintage Leather said:


> (And yes, I used to be a fan of the Gilmore Girls, which is why I have an opinion on it)



Me too! I loved GG and loved that both McCarthy and Alexis Bledel won Emmys in 2017 (for SNL and Handmaids Tale respectively).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?!?! .. or looking like one of those "Barbies" that you see out here (you know what I"m talking about).  Even after living out here for 8 years now, I still gasp every time I see a "Barbie" .. whether young or older.  It's just so pathetic in my opinion ..


LOL!  Gelson's.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I am hoping she keeps it up and ends up looking like
> 
> View attachment 5159280



That is so sad and I blame her doctors big time. They should have gotten their medical license revoked, this is malpractice. (maybe they did? I have no idea)


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> I think they want to be “classy” (hence the H blanket) but also be viewed as “fun” or “funny” (hence the stupid clown act and the McCarthy collab).
> 
> *they so very desperately want people to like them.*


 There you go.  The realization has hit that they are not liked.  If they think that this video made them relatable by using Melissa McCarthy to ridicule The Queen/family they are barking up the wrong tree.  The PR people must have had to do a lot of convincing to make MM do this video.  She could never perceive herself as anything, but loved.  Harry outside the window was just the court fool.  A familiar stance for him apparently according to his cousins.

I don't know what Eugenie is thinking.  Why she thinks either of them deserves it is beyond me.  I think there is more going on and the usual culprit involves money.  If Harry still has a lease on Frog Cott. he might be giving her a break on the rent.  Jack B is never going to be rich doing what he does.  I don't think he is any smarter than his wife.  Nice people, but they are going to get hurt with any association with the Sussex.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That is so sad and I blame her doctors big time. They should have gotten their medical license revoked, this is malpractice. (maybe they did? I have no idea)


I doubt that she went to mainstream plastic surgeons and there are many in countries you would not think of who would do this for her.  Money talks.  That being said, you could ask how Michael Jackson ended up looking the way he did and he went to a known PS in LA.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I would agree that she's attractive or pretty but not that beautiful.  To me another bi-racial actress, Halle Berry, is much more beautiful, and talented, and successful.


Interestingly, I have seen Halle IRL without her makeup and she was very ordinary looking and I had to be told that it was she.  She is definitely beautiful when made up and certainly more talented.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Interestingly, I have seen Halle IRL without her makeup and she was very ordinary looking and I had to be told that it was she.  She is definitely beautiful when made up and certainly more talented.


wow, that makes a good case for makeup I guess


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?!?! .. or looking like one of those "Barbies" that you see out here (you know what I"m talking about).  Even after living out here for 8 years now, I still gasp every time I see a "Barbie" .. whether young or older.  It's just so pathetic in my opinion ..


it's particularly bad when Barbie is in her 70's


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I don't know what Eugenie is thinking. Why she thinks either of them deserves it is beyond me. I think there is more going on and the usual culprit involves money. If Harry still has a lease on Frog Cott. he might be giving her a break on the rent. Jack B is never going to be rich doing what he does. I don't think he is any smarter than his wife. Nice people, but they are going to get hurt with any association with the Sussex.



Agree about the money angle with Hazz. Also, I think the Yorks are willing to do _anything_ to protect Andrew from further ‘BRF exile’, especially with the negative PR of Jack’s handsie party. Not sure what it is, I get smarmy vibes from them - still remember this cover.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree about the money angle with Hazz. Also, I think the Yorks are willing to do _anything_ to protect Andrew from further ‘BRF exile’, especially with the negative PR of Jack’s handsie party. Not sure what it is, I get smarmy vibes from them - still remember this cover.
> 
> View attachment 5159344


Yes, and he may fill his book with Andrew and Diana were such great friends stories.  Make Andy a warm and fuzzy kind of guy.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I am hoping she keeps it up and ends up looking like
> 
> View attachment 5159280


Maybe she'll end up looking like this instead, since this is what she professes to love and care so deeply about:







Are chickens taking over the world? (Image credit: Shutterstock)


----------



## Lodpah

That book His Royal Highness Stupidity is writing we must compare to the biography that Ms. Levin wrote. I understand she had full access to him. There's bound to be tons of lies and mistruths. I'm sure there will be lots of cross-references.  If people didn't get it the first time that video of Manic Meghan was definitely mocking to the Queen and she's playing us like broken fiddle strings. She's the ultimate mean queen.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Why would Harry even need any help writing his "memoirs"? It's just going to be a pack of lies anyway, and a ton of "reasons" why everyone should feel sorry for him. He was TRAPPED, you know, until Z-Lister collared him, dragged him to the fifty million dollar altar with a ring that wasn't good enough, gutted Frogmore for their brutal 5 minute life at Windsor, and Found Freedom in Montecito where his main job is replenishing Idiot Ingrate's ice packs for all her plastic work.  Recollections will vary of course.


That's my question!  Who asks for someone else's help in recalling their own memories?  Like "my truth"?  Puh-leeze.  And we know it'll be anything but the "authentic truth", so just throw in whatever Meg tells you to, Haz!


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> I think they want to be “classy” (hence the H blanket) but also be viewed as “fun” or “funny” (hence the stupid clown act and the McCarthy collab).
> 
> they so very desperately want people to like them.


They are nothing but "Klassy" and I wouldn't be surprised if cheapskate Haz bought a fake Avalon off eBay.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Interestingly, I have seen Halle IRL without her makeup and she was very ordinary looking and I had to be told that it was she.  She is definitely beautiful when made up and certainly more talented.


My black roommate in college couldn't stand Oprah (I liked OW at the time and couldn't understand her strong hatred of her) and always said anyone can look beautiful with the right MUA.  She kept telling me how hideous OW was without makeup, and was so excited to prove her point in some episode of the OW show that highlighted Oprah running a marathon.  I would've never recognized Oprah!  I'm amazed at how different stars look "natural faced" vs done up.  I'd love to see what I looked like after OW's make up artist had his or her way with me!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> My black roommate in college couldn't stand Oprah (I liked OW at the time and couldn't understand her strong hatred of her) and always said anyone can look beautiful with the right MUA.  She kept telling me how hideous OW was without makeup, and was so excited to prove her point in some episode of the OW show that highlighted Oprah running a marathon.  I would've never recognized Oprah!  I'm amazed at how different stars look "natural faced" vs done up.  I'd love to see what I looked like after OW's make up artist had his or her way with me!


Oprah aired footage of herself w/o makeup at least a few times.....she isn't naturally pretty, I'll just leave it at that.  I gave her credit for showing it on air


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Barack *****'s Scaled-Down Birthday Bash Still Has A Lot Of Celebs | HuffPost 

says Oprah volunteered to be uninvited....seems noble of her


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> They are nothing but "Klassy" and I wouldn't be surprised if cheapskate Haz bought a fake Avalon off eBay.



Shhhhh, Amazon has some for $50. Guessing they aren’t as soft, but, it could work for a photo op 







						Amazon.com: Super Soft Blanket Fleece Decoration Sofa Comfortable WarmBed Blanket Suitable for Sofa H Unisex Boy Girl Child Black and White: Kitchen & Dining
					

Amazon.com: Super Soft Blanket Fleece Decoration Sofa Comfortable WarmBed Blanket Suitable for Sofa H Unisex Boy Girl Child Black and White: Kitchen & Dining



					www.amazon.com
				




@jelliedfeels  please tell us more about buying the furniture - ya kno, inquiring minds


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> Breaking Crockery Alert in Montecito:
> 
> Lists showing up on line of the O**** birthday party do not include the *Arses of Montecito *on either "invited" or "uninvited due to Covid". In other words, NOT invited. I bet that is a real shock to them. The Oprah/ Gayle King/ Clooney connection is evidently not all they hoped it would be and Sunshine Sucks is not all powerful after all.
> 
> And further news is that due to Covid the Emmy awards are in the process of being pared down again.
> 
> Methane must be getting frantic lest the Met Gala be cancelled if the resurgence of Covid continues unchecked.


 
TU!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shhhhh, Amazon has some for $50. Guessing they aren’t as soft, but, it could work for a photo op
> View attachment 5159383
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Super Soft Blanket Fleece Decoration Sofa Comfortable WarmBed Blanket Suitable for Sofa H Unisex Boy Girl Child Black and White: Kitchen & Dining
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Super Soft Blanket Fleece Decoration Sofa Comfortable WarmBed Blanket Suitable for Sofa H Unisex Boy Girl Child Black and White: Kitchen & Dining
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @jelliedfeels  please tell us more about buying the furniture - ya kno, inquiring minds


Maybe the fakes are softer    As much as I love Hermes, I always found the wool Avalons so itchy and scratchy I couldn't pull the trigger.  I heard they're cashmere now?  Maybe Meg can let me know, LOL.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> it's particularly bad when Barbie is in her 70's


You mean like this one? 








						Suzanne Somers, 74, and Alan Hamel, 84, have sex ‘three times before noon’
					

“What time is it, like noon? I’ve had sex with him three times so far today.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> You mean like this one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suzanne Somers, 74, and Alan Hamel, 84, have sex ‘three times before noon’
> 
> 
> “What time is it, like noon? I’ve had sex with him three times so far today.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Too much information


----------



## Lounorada

EverSoElusive said:


> Errrrbody is just jealous of MoM, OK? Look how she's the favorite royal
> 
> This is so cringe-y.



That might be true on the day this happens:







Jayne1 said:


> He used to be funny. His George posts on Instagram were satirical and clever, but I watched the trailer for his new show and it's not cute. And hasn't it been done before in the UK?





lanasyogamama said:


> I’m glad the Gary Janetti conversation came up. I used to find his Instagram hilarious, maybe he didn’t have a big hand in the writing of the show or it just doesn’t work on television versus Instagram.


Agree with both of your posts regarding Gary J. My thoughts exactly.
I will add that while his Instagram posts back in the day were funny about George & MM, going as far as making a tv show about an innocent young boy and his family who are all alive and well and able to see it, especially when GJ doesn't even know the family is disgusting and uncalled for.
I'd understand if it was a show about his own family who were all ok with it, but it's creepy when it's about a real little boy that he doesn't know.
Does GJ not have enough imagination to create character(s) that look completely different but are maybe very loosely based on the BRF? Clearly not.
I wouldn't be surprised if H&M are secretly involved with this show in feeding them info for it, their lack of outrage at a show like this being made about a young family member speaks volumes. Yet, if this was a show made about Archie, there would be lawsuits flying in from all corners and the creators would be labelled as evil.





lanasyogamama said:


> Has anyone seen the discussion online about how there is no Lilibet birth registered in the state of California around the dates they say she was born? However supposedly there was a Diana Mountbatten Windsor birth? I didn’t get too deep into it but could be interesting.










Chanbal said:


> Disgusting!
> View attachment 5151046










Chanbal said:


> I bet this will be selected for TPF's book club.
> View attachment 5152884
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most-feared biographer vows to 'tell truth about Duchess
> 
> 
> Britain's most feared biographer is racing to complete his bombshell book on the Duchess of Sussex , vowing that it will "tell the truth" about her life. Investigative journalist Tom Bower has reportedly signed a six-figure advance to pen an unauthorised account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk









Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's The List completed at last. Thank you so much to everyone who participated.   If I've missed anyone, who has contributed, but hasn't received a star, please tell me so that I can make it to you.
> Nasty Duo Nicknames
> #6
> Ball-less Wonder
> Baron of Hesaheel
> Bar Stewards
> Bozo formerly known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince
> BunkerBoy
> Dastardly Duo
> Disastrous Duo
> Douchess
> Duchess Disney
> Duchess Moaning Markle
> Duke of Montecito
> Flowerpot and Hardly There
> Grifters
> Ginge and Cringe
> Hap-Hazza
> Harkles
> HarkleSparkler
> Harry the Horrible
> Haz
> HazBeen
> Hazardous Waste
> Hazmat
> Just Call Me Harry (JCMH)
> Maleficent of Montecito
> Markley Sparkly Squad
> Me Gain
> Meg-a-lo-maniac
> Megain
> Meggypoo
> Meh
> Mermaid
> Methane
> Needy and Greedy
> NutMeg
> Nope and Dope
> Pearl
> Pinky & The Brain
> Princess Pinocchio
> Raptor
> Royal Ingrates of Montecito
> She Who Shall Remain Nameless
> Skid Markle
> St. Meghan
> Terrible twosome
> THE B.st.rds
> The Di-Nameic Duo
> The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo
> The Douche Formallly Known as a Prince
> The Earl of Dunnothing
> the glimmer twins
> The Sucksexxes
> the wife
> Those B.st.rds
> ToxicTwo
> Tungsten
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Ahmed Scabies
> Omid Scooby-doo
> scabies
> Sunshine Sucks
> Nicknames For Later Use
> Harry’s ex wife
> The ex Duchess of Sussex
> Great effort everyone!  The Muppets/Fraggles are singing our song; just substitute TPF and sing along. Cheers!









gracekelly said:


> I seriously doubt if the names of those two was ever passed even in a fleeting thought by the O's.  They just don't compute.  If they did for a nanosecond, all Pres. Barry would have to do is glance at the picture of himself and Mrs. O with little George in his bathrobe.  That would get his head straight ASAP as to whom the important people are.
> View attachment 5154987





This is one of the best pictures ever taken! So adorable. Between George's outfit (especially the robe) and the expression on his face like they've all just interrupted his hectic schedule to speak with him briefly, like they should all be so lucky  I love it!




CarryOn2020 said:


> Her face is  puffy, very puffy. Hmmm.
> View attachment 5155603
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle launches initiative to help mothers get back to work
> 
> 
> Speaking in a video shared on the Archewell website, Meghan launched 40x40, an initiative encouraging people to  support women going back to work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





That table styling is dreadful. Cluttered, messy, forced and just odd.
The stacks of books isn't 'cute' it make you look like you have too many spare books lying around that people haven't bought.
Are both stacks of 'The Bench'? Because the ones under her laptop look different in size and colour to the ones at the front of the table.
The two pointless looking white boxes are an odd choice for the table and then the random glass bottle ready to fall off the edge.
The Hermes blanket screams of something _she _thinks that having it, makes her look super rich. Like it's one of those things you have to have in your house if you're rich and it has to be shown off.
The poor dog looking like he's being held hostage.
The idiot man child gawking in through the window. So creepy.
So. Much. Beige.
There is only two rooms they seem to use for publicity, this 'office' room and the one that looks like a living room. Wouldn't be surprised if they are the only two they have fully decorated specifically for showbiz mode and zoom calls.





Chanbal said:


> As someone else said, who are MM, Eugenie et al. to mentor women? They are just using women undergoing less fortunate phases of their lives to promote themselves. This is so disgusting and condescending that makes me  .










Aimee3 said:


> Not a doctor but it appears from those 2 pictures side by side:
> Upper eyelids
> Brow lift
> Nose shortened (see how the tip of it no longer reaches to her lips when smiling)
> Face lift
> So she was heavily pregnant except not in the traditional meaning of the word.  Her face was “pregnant” and gave birth to a brand new face!


I noticed all of these changes too especially the shorter nose.
Also, it looks like she's wearing contacts in a lighter brown than her natural darker eye colour.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> Barack *****'s Scaled-Down Birthday Bash Still Has A Lot Of Celebs | HuffPost
> 
> says Oprah volunteered to be uninvited....seems noble of her


What is that like I wonder, being disinvited and realizing you're not A list enough.  

So Larry David, David Letterman, Conan O’Brien and a majority of the former staffers were uninvited... while Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, George Clooney, Jennifer Hudson, Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Bradley Cooper, Bruce Springsteen and Steven Colbert are considered more desirable.

Can't be an easy pill to swallow for some and a very elitist thing to do for the host of the party.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> What is that like I wonder, being disinvited and realizing you're not A list enough.
> 
> So Larry David, David Letterman, Conan O’Brien and a majority of the former staffers were uninvited... while Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, George Clooney, Jennifer Hudson, Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Bradley Cooper, Bruce Springsteen and Steven Colbert are considered more desirable.
> 
> Can't be an easy pill to swallow for some and a very elitist thing to do for the host of the party.



I’m not too concerned about the celebrities who didn’t make the cut. But cutting the staffers  to whom he owes his success in order to hang out with the richest and most famous is particularly sh*tty. That shows who he really cares about.

I hope this tarnishes his halo a bit for those who think he can do no wrong and have been singing his praises for years.


----------



## Hermes Zen

chicinthecity777 said:


> I agree, I don't think McCarthy is bright enough to participate a very nuanced "dig" at the Queen. I think people are reading too much into her stupid costume.
> 
> I am more worried about those 40 women who most likely to have overly inflated self-importance think they can mentor girls just because they are somewhat famous!
> 
> What can MM mentor young girls on? How to meet rich British men? How to be an Z list actress? How to play the victim card? How to play the race card?



How not to give away the milk.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I’m not too concerned about the celebrities who didn’t make the cut. But cutting the staffers  to whom he owes his success in order to hang out with the richest and most famous is particularly sh*tty. That shows who he really cares about.
> 
> I hope this tarnishes his halo a bit for those who think he can do no wrong and have been singing his praises for years.


Love how the "scaled down" super spreader event was still "200" of their closest A list friends.


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> That blanket was money signaling as in _I can afford to have this from Hermes to throw on a chair and the rest of you are peons.  _She is also the kind of person that thinks that showing it illustrates her good taste.  Alexandra Schulman didn't think so.



Nobody expects MM not to enjoy luxury items but it is a bit of a slap in the face when you are seeking to help people in dire financial situations and have a luxury item that might be the equivalent of months on low wages
Reminds me of Kylie K tiurning for a photo op ( me bad: to selflessly help i meant) on a soup kitchen w 3 or 4 Cartier Love bracelets stacked
Let them eat cake! It was apocryphally attributed to Marie Antoinette but MM seems to be following that example


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she'll end up looking like this instead, since this is what she professes to love and care so deeply about:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are chickens taking over the world? (Image credit: Shutterstock)


And here she is for y'all, who like M's chicken legs.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I doubt that she went to mainstream plastic surgeons and there are many in countries you would not think of who would do this for her.  Money talks.  That being said, you could ask how Michael Jackson ended up looking the way he did and he went to a known PS in LA.


Remember Joan Rivers , who died during a PS procedure ? effects of anesthesia … she had some 350+ procedures …sounds impossible ? That is about 10 procedures a year for 35 years, not at all impossible … 
and Joan started later in life , maybe 40 years old, not in her early 20s as is done now


----------



## CarryOn2020

After looking online at the many copycat blankets,  I’m not certain that blanket is, in fact, Hermes. Knowing how cheap H&M  are (ie., those very small cash _donations_), it very well could be a fake. If it _is_ Hermes, it was probably a gift.  The Queen does love her Hermes scarves, but blankets? Don’t recall seeing those in any photos.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> After looking online at the many copycat blankets,  I’m not certain that blanket is, in fact, Hermes. Knowing how cheap H&M  are (ie., those very small cash _donations_), it very well could be a fake. If it _is_ Hermes, it was probably a gift.  The Queen does love her Hermes scarves, but blankets? Don’t recall seeing those in any photos.


I remember the photos of Pss Anne , a lady with a modest clothing budget, wearing a TDF cashmere scarf at a horse race …. Her stylist must have found it , turned it to be a fake Hermes  La femme aux semelles cashmere


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> After looking online at the many copycat blankets,  I’m not certain that blanket is, in fact, Hermes. Knowing how cheap H&M  are (ie., those very small cash _donations_), it very well could be a fake. If it _is_ Hermes, it was probably a gift.  The Queen does love her Hermes scarves, but blankets? Don’t recall seeing those in any photos.


I think the H blankie was there by mistake … some stylist found a neutral warm cozy blankie to go with the neutral, distressed wood, country feel and went with it
it was a prop that turned out to be a fake
6 may have been gifted an Hermes blankie at some time, but, I dont think anyone intended to deliberately use a $4000:luxury throw, not the humble message that was intended, they have gotten into too much hot water for their luxury lifestyle 
And Hermes does not need to pay celebrities for product placements, they never do that


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Barack *****'s Scaled-Down Birthday Bash Still Has A Lot Of Celebs | HuffPost
> 
> says Oprah volunteered to be uninvited....seems noble of her



That’s okay. Gayle was there. I’m sure she will give Oprah the highlights.


----------



## LittleStar88

She is bougie enough to buy the real H blanket and make very sure it was prominently displayed in the video.


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Remember Joan Rivers , who died during a PS procedure ? effects of anesthesia … she had some 350+ procedures …sounds impossible ? That is about 10 procedures a year for 35 years, not at all impossible …
> and Joan started later in life , maybe 40 years old, not in her early 20s as is done now


Not that she didn’t have plenty of plastic surgery, but Joan died during a  procedure on her throat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I think the H blankie was there by mistake … some stylist found a neutral warm cozy blankie to go with the neutral, distressed wood, country feel and went with it
> it was a prop that turned out to be a fake
> 6 may have been gifted an Hermes blankie at some time, but, I dont think anyone intended to deliberately use a
> *????? $4000:luxury throw*, not the humble message that was intended, they have gotten into too much hot water for their luxury lifestyle
> And Hermes does not need to pay celebrities for product placements, they never do that



$4K????  It is only $1,550.00 on their website.
H&M’s was either a gift or a fake … or both 



			https://www.hermes.com/us/en/product/avalon-throw-blanket-H102668Mv52/


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> After looking online at the many copycat blankets,  I’m not certain that blanket is, in fact, Hermes. Knowing how cheap H&M  are (ie., those very small cash _donations_), it very well could be a fake. If it _is_ Hermes, it was probably a gift.  The Queen does love her Hermes scarves, but blankets? Don’t recall seeing those in any photos.


I don't think it's fake. I think it's the Avalon baby blanket, and it was likely a gift for Lilib*t.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> $4K????  It is only $1,550.00 on their website.
> H&M’s was either a gift or a fake … or both
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hermes.com/us/en/product/avalon-throw-blanket-H102668Mv52/


$960 if it is the baby blanket.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That’s okay. Gayle was there. I’m sure she will give Oprah the highlights.


Gayle needs to include also Hazz and wife in the press release. MM can bake a lemon cake and they can all have tea while GK delivers the highlights.


----------



## Chanbal

_The founder of 10 Yetis told Closer magazine: "With restrictions easing and things slowly getting back to normal, I suspect Harry and Meghan will take this year by storm.

"They’ve had their second child – and always said they’d only have two – so now, it’s all systems go.

*"I think we’ll see a really heavy focus on their masterplan – solidifying their position as America’s ‘royal family’ – so there will definitely be more TV appearances."*

Within a few years, Mr Barr also said, Meghan and Harry could become "bigger than their A-list peers who are floating around Hollywood right now"._









						Meghan and Harry to 'solidify position as US'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are ready to take the next 12 months "by storm", according to an expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I’ve been watching Fake or Fortune, so I’m using Phillip and Fiona’s techniques:

All photos from Hermes:
Baby blanket - no lines



Avalon III Full size - lines



From the DM: I think I see lines, but I could be wrong




IMO No matter the size or cost, placing the blanket in such an obvious way seems calculated in the worst possible way, especially with Hazz on the other side of the window, we have no choice but to see it. Wannabe  Noveau riche.


----------



## c18027

It appears that the blanket is the Avalon III Throw Blanket in colorway 28 coco/camomille, currently retailing for $1550USD/£1240.


			https://www.hermes.com/uk/en/product/avalon-iii-throw-blanket-H102665Mv28/


----------



## c18027

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I’ve been watching Fake or Fortune, so I’m using Phillip and Fiona’s techniques:
> 
> All photos from Hermes:
> Baby blanket - no lines
> View attachment 5159566
> 
> 
> Avalon III Full size - lines
> View attachment 5159567
> 
> 
> From the DM: I think I see lines, but I could be wrong
> 
> View attachment 5159568
> 
> 
> IMO No matter the size or cost, placing the blanket in such an obvious way seems calculated in the worst possible way, especially with Hazz on the other side of the window.


I was just conducting the same analysis @CarryOn2020! Great minds think alike!


----------



## rose60610

I'd bet it's the real deal blanket. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Don't you realize how much she's suffered?


----------



## Sol Ryan

rose60610 said:


> I'd bet it's the real deal blanket. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Don't you realize how much she's suffered?



FFS of course it is…. Don’t you understand? They had to have it for their tiny 16-19 bathroom mansion… remember? It’s probably the cheapest they could find. Harry told us, he’s been cut off and has to as a grown man with now two children live off his trust fund. It’s all he can afford the poor thing…

Man he makes me sick. To have a trust fund and help…, they are so out of touch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I'd bet it's the real deal blanket. What Meghan wants, Meghan gets. Don't you realize how much she's suffered?


It may have been a wedding gift from one of their celeb friends. Seems like the kind of thing one would have their assistant order online and have sent to the happy couple. It does scream look at me in the photo, but I've seen the same thing in real estate listings. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental seeing how this website is devoted to expensive handbags that we carry as status symbols, myself included.


----------



## rose60610

In M&H's defense, there was only one Avalon blanket, not like, ten. Between M's new Manolo's, Guy's binky, the (umm, empty) moonshine bottle, and the quartz healing crystal, oh, and ALL THAT SECURITY those poor things have to pay for themselves, they could get only one Avalon. So they were forced to include it, staged so nonchalantly, in the photo.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Love how the "scaled down" super spreader event was still "200" of their closest A list friends.


I have always admired the Obamas but this disappointed me. Should have postponed a big shindig until his 65th when hopefully COVID would be in the rear view mirror.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Remember Joan Rivers , who died during a PS procedure ? effects of anesthesia … she had some 350+ procedures …sounds impossible ? That is about 10 procedures a year for 35 years, not at all impossible …
> and Joan started later in life , maybe 40 years old, not in her early 20s as is done now


That's the craziest thing - she did not die during cosmetic surgery, she died while having a procedure (upper gastrointestinal endoscopy) to evaluate her voice changing, and her increasing hoarseness and raspy voice.

Very sad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It may have been a wedding gift from one of their celeb friends. Seems like the kind of thing one would have their assistant order online and have sent to the happy couple. It does scream look at me in the photo, but I've seen the same thing in real estate listings. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental seeing how this website is devoted to expensive handbags that we carry as status symbols, myself included.



IMO our carefully thought-out analysis is intended for the tiresome two, not the blanket itself.
The well-respected blanket has been with us a long time. Their feeble attempt to use the blanket to garner respect - I think not, no, nay, never. 

_The *Birkin* for the home_ -
From 2014








						The Equivalent of a Birkin For The Home
					

Breaking down the allure of the Hermès Avalon blanketa coveted fashion-for-the-home status symbol




					www.elledecor.com
				




_In 1980, Lisa Birnbach's The Official Preppy Handbook gave the definitive spin on achieving the classic, conservative WASP-y lifestyle (albeit, a tongue-in-chic one). When it debuted in 1988, the Hermès Avalon blanket instantly became a design darling that, much like the must-haves mentioned in Birnbach's guide, became a home staple for the fashionable. The blanket was a symbol of the good taste and distinguished upbringings lauded in her semi-serious tome. Hermès is the epitome of French class and refinement, not to mention savoir-faire. 

Below, Nest Casa takes a look at this popular home textile treasure._
From 2021








						How the Hermès Blanket Became a Classic Home Staple
					

The Hermès Avalon's iconic H logo throw blanket belongs in every stylish home. Learn its history and how to style it in yours.




					nestcasa.com


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> That’s okay. Gayle was there. I’m sure she will give Oprah the highlights.


Gayle is more important than BO's former White House senior adviser David Axelrod and most of his former administration officials, who were all cut. Wow.

Well, he's not running for anything anymore, so he doesn't have to pretend.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> It may have been a wedding gift from one of their celeb friends. Seems like the kind of thing one would have their assistant order online and have sent to the happy couple. It does scream look at me in the photo, but I've seen the same thing in real estate listings. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental seeing how this website is devoted to expensive handbags that we carry as status symbols, myself included.



Sure, it could have been a gift. Indeed, they are often seen in real estate listings and Architectural Digest. Meghan loves status symbols, especially the one called "Harry". We pride ourselves on carrying nice handbags but we don't whine about how horrible the world has been to us and how everyone owes us pity. Meghan is quite judgmental given the way she's discarded her whole family and treats the world at large. She and JCMH use dead soldiers as photo ops. If we can't be judgmental toward Meghan, that leaves only the Kardashians a few other noodle heads. Meghan helps us balance it all out. At least she's good for something.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Gayle is more important than BO's former White House senior adviser David Axelrod and most of his former administration officials, who were all cut. Wow.
> 
> Well, he's not running for anything anymore, so he doesn't have to pretend.



You would think the people who worked with him for many years would qualify as being “close friends and family” far more than show business entertainers he has met no more than a handful of times in his life, but no.

My guess is they wanted the wealthiest attendees possible at the party to get big donations for their foundation. Meghan and Harry should pay attention. 40 minutes of mentoring from Melissa looks pathetic by comparison. They need big fish to keep Archewell afloat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> You would think the people who worked with him for many years would qualify as being “close friends and family” far more than show business entertainers he has met no more than a handful of times in his life, but no.
> 
> My guess is they wanted the wealthiest attendees possible at the party to get big donations for their foundation. Meghan and Harry should pay attention. 40 minutes of mentoring from Melissa looks pathetic by comparison. They need big fish to keep Archewell afloat.



It is _his_ birthday.
He is sending a powerful message to all of us - time to celebrate in whatever responsible way we wish.
From her 19 bathroom McMansion, MM, on the other hand, is demanding that women get back to work.


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 You are right, it's not the baby blanket. It's amazing how the beagle was so quiet in the video.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## breakfastatcartier

charlottawill said:


> I'm glad someone finally mentioned the stilettos. She also wore them in the Oprah tell all. Totally out of place in both situations. The only charitable reason I could come up with is that maybe wearing them gives her confidence? But I don't think confidence is something she lacks.


She lacks confidence. You can see it in her constant search for attention and lack of poise and bad posture.

I have a colleague at work like that, she claims she’s confident but will never take the first step in anything.

She can’t even walk alone when we leave work.



Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 You are right, it's not the baby blanket. It's amazing how the beagle was so quiet in the video.
> 
> View attachment 5159625


She probably whips it with those slut strands of hers … on a serious note, I hope the doggy and those poor children get freed from her evil claws some day soon … this demon was in the limelight for only 3 years and has caused so much damage to so many people.



charlottawill said:


> It may have been a wedding gift from one of their celeb friends. Seems like the kind of thing one would have their assistant order online and have sent to the happy couple. It does scream look at me in the photo, but I've seen the same thing in real estate listings. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental seeing how this website is devoted to expensive handbags that we carry as status symbols, myself included.


Maybe one of those celeb friends bought the blanket (along other things) to have a purchase record at Hermès to score their coveted quota bags.


----------



## Sol Ryan

charlottawill said:


> It may have been a wedding gift from one of their celeb friends. Seems like the kind of thing one would have their assistant order online and have sent to the happy couple. It does scream look at me in the photo, but I've seen the same thing in real estate listings. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental seeing how this website is devoted to expensive handbags that we carry as status symbols, myself included.



Yeah, but we aren’t multi-millionaires whining on Oprah about how poor we are now that daddy cut us off for quitting our jobs or trying to convince they world that somehow they’re just like us but somehow better than us…


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 You are right, it's not the baby blanket. It's amazing how the beagle was so quiet in the video.
> 
> View attachment 5159625


These agency dogs are very well trained. Everyone’s talking about their fake babies- I think the dog & chickens are definitely shipped in for the event & shipped back out when they are done  

Any dog of theirs would be a desperate & incontinent attention seeker….


Notice the arty girl  with the Afghan hound is already outdoing H&M with a new Avalon fresh in the Hermes box.

( OT It’s amazing how much better
Disney’s animation used to be. Just look how charming & detailed this is compared to the janky bland sh*t they put out now)


gracekelly said:


> Yes, and he may fill his book with Andrew and Diana were such great friends stories.  Make Andy a warm and fuzzy kind of guy.


I mean, I can believe that he has the _scruples_ to do that but I think the optics would not be what he’s looking for.


sdkitty said:


> Barack *****'s Scaled-Down Birthday Bash Still Has A Lot Of Celebs | HuffPost
> 
> says Oprah volunteered to be uninvited....seems noble of her


Now that is some experienced PR flexing - effortlessly get more publicity for yourself & gently haze the other guests. H&M are seeing a master schemer in action


CarryOn2020 said:


> Shhhhh, Amazon has some for $50. Guessing they aren’t as soft, but, it could work for a photo op
> View attachment 5159383
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Super Soft Blanket Fleece Decoration Sofa Comfortable WarmBed Blanket Suitable for Sofa H Unisex Boy Girl Child Black and White: Kitchen & Dining
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Super Soft Blanket Fleece Decoration Sofa Comfortable WarmBed Blanket Suitable for Sofa H Unisex Boy Girl Child Black and White: Kitchen & Dining
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @jelliedfeels  please tell us more about buying the furniture - ya kno, inquiring minds


I’m sure a lot of influencers who could tell you about how to pose a fake blanket convincingly.

I have never (yet) been in a position to be buying the fine furniture or the Birkin but it’s something I heard on the Hermes unpopular opinions thread (because regardless of what I can afford- I have a lot of opinions)






						What’s your unpopular Hermes opinion?
					

This thread is devoted to unpopular opinions about Hermes and/or their products.  It is quite likely that some members may find others' comments challenging, but please try not to take an unpopular opinion personally. The reason it may be unpopular is because most people will not agree.  Ignore...




					forum.purseblog.com
				



It’s post # 1377
The thing is 880 is such a lovely TPFer I’m sure the SA would want to get her the bag anyway so it might not be a constant- but what is with the Hermes supply?
I mean, it looks like even the con-artist formerly known as Prince Harry has to wait for his CDC choker & matching lead.


purseinsanity said:


> Maybe the fakes are softer    As much as I love Hermes, I always found the wool Avalons so itchy and scratchy I couldn't pull the trigger.  I heard they're cashmere now?  Maybe Meg can let me know, LOL.


I think she needs to get on TPF - She’d learn a thing or two about styling & flexing without being obnoxious.  She might even pick up some PR tips from here - I think a lot of our advice is better than SS’s  


CarryOn2020 said:


> After looking online at the many copycat blankets,  I’m not certain that blanket is, in fact, Hermes. Knowing how cheap H&M  are (ie., those very small cash _donations_), it very well could be a fake. If it _is_ Hermes, it was probably a gift.  The Queen does love her Hermes scarves, but blankets? Don’t recall seeing those in any photos.


Oh no. The royals are apparently tight when it comes to gifts…maybe some Hermes socks if they were really lucky. 
I also think if the queen had given them a designer gift they would have used it as a PR release about how they ARE the FAVOURITES after all before making an even bigger press release about how they cut it into hamster blankets  & donated it to a shelter.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> You would think the people who worked with him for many years would qualify as being “close friends and family” far more than show business entertainers he has met no more than a handful of times in his life, but no.
> 
> My guess is they wanted the wealthiest attendees possible at the party to get big donations for their foundation. Meghan and Harry should pay attention. 40 minutes of mentoring from Melissa looks pathetic by comparison. They need big fish to keep Archewell afloat.


Still thinking about this 40 minutes of mentoring. If she was really serious about making an impact, she should have said 40 days of mentoring.  This just adds to her portfolio of superficiality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

justwatchin said:


> Still thinking about this 40 minutes of mentoring. If she was really serious about making an impact, she should have said 40 days of mentoring.  This just adds to her portfolio of superficiality.


Pearl doesn’t have enough patience or drive for 40 days of anything unless it’s about her …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> You would think the people who worked with him for many years would qualify as being “close friends and family” far more than show business entertainers he has met no more than a handful of times in his life, but no.
> 
> My guess is they wanted the wealthiest attendees possible at the party to get big donations for their foundation. Meghan and Harry should pay attention. 40 minutes of mentoring from Melissa looks pathetic by comparison. They need big fish to keep Archewell afloat.


They need the billionaires to keep Meghan’s pockets full …


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> You mean like this one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suzanne Somers, 74, and Alan Hamel, 84, have sex ‘three times before noon’
> 
> 
> “What time is it, like noon? I’ve had sex with him three times so far today.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Good for them. Gives me something to look forward to


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> After looking online at the many copycat blankets,  I’m not certain that blanket is, in fact, Hermes. Knowing how cheap H&M  are (ie., those very small cash _donations_), it very well could be a fake. If it _is_ Hermes, it was probably a gift.  The Queen does love her Hermes scarves, but blankets? Don’t recall seeing those in any photos.



I would rather die, but obviously H&M don't care about many of the other things they brag about to the entire world that I wouldn't admit to a friend so you could be right, can't see it would break the bank though.

Nothing wrong with a lovely non-designer blanket, cashmere and/or wool (one of mine is Johnstons of Elgin and another from Brora) but the Avalons seem to be a set-dresser favourite. H make some even more fabulous blankets, but I guess those are not as recognisable.

Scotland is famous for wool and cashmere and they have some of the most beautiful blankets ever (coz it's very nearly always cold). I can't imagine the Queen buying them one from France when the British craft industry has the famed best. Absolutely no disrespect to anyone that has (I bought a baby one for my friend's new delivery recently) but H blankets are more KKK than QEII.

Edited to say - a lot of posts have passed since my catching up.


----------



## papertiger

c18027 said:


> It appears that the blanket is the Avalon III Throw Blanket in colorway 28 coco/camomille, currently retailing for $1550USD/£1240.
> 
> 
> https://www.hermes.com/uk/en/product/avalon-iii-throw-blanket-H102665Mv28/
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159572



Good work guys @CarryOn2020 and @c18027


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> These agency dogs are very well trained. Everyone’s talking about their fake babies- I think the dog & chickens are definitely shipped in for the event & shipped back out when they are done
> 
> Any dog of theirs would be a desperate & incontinent attention seeker….
> View attachment 5159654
> 
> Notice the arty girl  with the Afghan hound is already outdoing H&M with a new Avalon fresh in the Hermes box.
> 
> ( OT It’s amazing how much better
> Disney’s animation used to be. Just look how charming & detailed this is compared to the janky bland sh*t they put out now)
> 
> I mean, I can believe that he has the _scruples_ to do that but I think the optics would not be what he’s looking for.
> 
> Now that is some experienced PR flexing - effortlessly get more publicity for yourself & gently haze the other guests. H&M are seeing a master schemer in action
> 
> I’m sure a lot of influencers who could tell you about how to pose a fake blanket convincingly.
> 
> I have never (yet) been in a position to be buying the fine furniture or the Birkin but it’s something I heard on the Hermes unpopular opinions thread (because regardless of what I can afford- I have a lot of opinions)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What’s your unpopular Hermes opinion?
> 
> 
> This thread is devoted to unpopular opinions about Hermes and/or their products.  It is quite likely that some members may find others' comments challenging, but please try not to take an unpopular opinion personally. The reason it may be unpopular is because most people will not agree.  Ignore...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It’s post # 1377
> The thing is 880 is such a lovely TPFer I’m sure the SA would want to get her the bag anyway so it might not be a constant- but what is with the Hermes supply?
> I mean, it looks like even the con-artist formerly known as Prince Harry has to wait for his CDC choker & matching lead.
> 
> I think she needs to get on TPF - She’d learn a thing or two about styling & flexing without being obnoxious.  She might even pick up some PR tips from here - I think a lot of our advice is better than SS’s
> 
> Oh no. The royals are apparently tight when it comes to gifts…maybe some Hermes socks if they were really lucky.
> I also think if the queen had given them a designer gift they would have used it as a PR release about how they ARE the FAVOURITES after all before making an even bigger press release about how they cut it into hamster blankets  & donated it to a shelter.



I would expect the Royal gift card on the desk besides any gifts. Like you say it's all a set (up)


----------



## marietouchet

c18027 said:


> It appears that the blanket is the Avalon III Throw Blanket in colorway 28 coco/camomille, currently retailing for $1550USD/£1240.
> 
> 
> https://www.hermes.com/uk/en/product/avalon-iii-throw-blanket-H102665Mv28/
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159572


The Hermes H blankie is in the shot deliberately - H for Harry, get it ? It took me forever to figure out the symbolism
I had not noticed the crystal bookends before, more new age decorating mumbo jumbo, maybe the crystals are an homage to Doria ?
The set decorator is trying way too hard
My apologies for thinking it was the $4000 adult version of the blankie

Reminds me of a story from the old Rachel Zoe TV show.  Her DH is on a boys weekend, gambling in Las Vegas. He wants to get a HEARTFELT gift for Rachel, so, on camera, he calls the H boutique and asks them to send over something NICE. The SA picks out a $300 Birkin lock - cadenas - which  is SOOOO small potatoes in the pantheon of Hermes giftware. He did not know what was in the box...

I can see one of MM's besties telling her PA to call up the Rodeo Drive H boutique and instruct them to send a NICE baby gift, sight unseen.

PS I may be inaccurate on the RZ  anecdote, her DH may have called the hotel concierge - not the store - and told him/her to get something nice for his wife. 
Accuracy in these gossipy stories is essential 

And to put Hermes giftware in perspective, I remember looking at a $1000 pencil pot, and my GF - who live in Beverly Hills - gasped at the price, and we exploded in laughter. No one uses writing implements anymore, we all type, who needs a  pencil pot ???


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The Hermes H blankie is in the shot deliberately - H for Harry, get it ? It took me forever to figure out the symbolism
> I had not noticed the crystal bookends before, more new age decorating mumbo jumbo, maybe the crystals are an homage to Doria ?
> The set decorator is trying way too hard
> My apologies for thinking it was the $4000 adult version of the blankie
> 
> Reminds me of a story from the old Rachel Zoe TV show.  Her DH is on a boys weekend, gambling in Las Vegas. He wants to get a HEARTFELT gift for Rachel, so, on camera, he calls the H boutique and asks them to send over something NICE. The SA picks out a $300 Birkin lock - cadenas - which  is SOOOO small potatoes in the pantheon of Hermes giftware. He did not know what was in the box...
> 
> I can see one of MM's besties telling her PA to call up the Rodeo Drive H boutique and instruct them to send a NICE baby gift, sight unseen.
> 
> PS I may be inaccurate on the RZ  anecdote, her DH may have called the hotel concierge - not the store - and told him/her to get something nice for his wife.
> Accuracy in these gossipy stories is essential
> 
> And to put Hermes giftware in perspective, I remember looking at a $1000 pencil pot, and my GF - who live in Beverly Hills - gasped at the price, and we exploded in laughter. No one uses writing implements anymore, we all type, who needs a  pencil pot ???


Sending that as a gift would be the perfect passive aggressive way to tell someone you really don't care about them, assuming you have $1000 to burn. It may be perfect for Harry to hold the pens he'll use to write his memoir.


----------



## marietouchet

Tediously writing a paper and putting it through the latest edition - week old?? - of Word, the latter complains about EVERYTHING .. 

Just NOTICED new feature, it will do a PLAGIARISM check for similarity to online sources... 

Now that is a nifty gift idea, know  anyone needing a PLAGIARISM checker ??


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 You are right, it's not the baby blanket. It's amazing how the beagle was so quiet in the video.
> 
> View attachment 5159625


That poor doggie looks like a trussed up turkey ready for the oven.


----------



## Chanbal

justwatchin said:


> Still thinking about this 40 minutes of mentoring. If she was really serious about making an impact, she should have said 40 days of mentoring.  This just adds to her portfolio of superficiality.



Unless she has employment contacts for these women, how could she mentor them?

 She can teach them on how to find a rich husband (lesson 1) and make money by hiring a PR agency (lesson 2).


----------



## csshopper

Methane's vision of "mentoring" is an insult to those who actually do Mentor someone. 40 minutes is barely an introduction. 

If she were "mentoring" someone in Calligraphy that amount of time would barely cover mastery of the first few letters of the alphabet.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> You would think the people who worked with him for many years would qualify as being “close friends and family” far more than show business entertainers he has met no more than a handful of times in his life, but no.
> 
> My guess is they wanted the wealthiest attendees possible at the party to get big donations for their foundation. Meghan and Harry should pay attention. 40 minutes of mentoring from Melissa looks pathetic by comparison. They need big fish to keep Archewell afloat.


Have to admit this puzzles me.  I tried to find an unbiased source for news on this party and found this from TMZ.  Erykah Badu, while very talented, is far from a household name and I doubt she is an intimate friend.  so how was she there while others including staff were uninvited?  maybe she was already enroute so they said "OK come"?
Barack ***** Dances the Night Away at 60th Birthday Bash (tmz.com)


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Hazz


----------



## Chanbal

Courtesy of Artemiss@artemisgoog


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Courtesy of Artemiss@artemisgoog
> View attachment 5159887


Ha
Chrissy only got to be there because her husband was performing


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is _his_ birthday.
> He is sending a powerful message to all of us - time to celebrate in whatever responsible way we wish.


That's right. To hell with the new spread of the Delta variant.*⸮*

I wonder if they had to use porta-potties, or they could go inside.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> That's right. To hell with the new spread of the Delta variant.*⸮*
> 
> I wonder if they had to use porta-potties, or they could go inside.


Definitely port potties, the SS wouldn't let them inside.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> That's right. To hell with the new spread of the Delta variant.*⸮*
> 
> I wonder if they had to use porta-potties, or they could go inside.



Porta-potties. DM had a photo. 
Negative optics, lots of alcohol+, lots of publicity, etc. Gotta wonder if delaying the party would have harmed anyone. 
_Do as I say, not as I do.  _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Courtesy of Artemiss@artemisgoog
> View attachment 5159887



She didn't, though. John did  That's a concept Raptor should understand best.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 You are right, it's not the baby blanket. It's amazing how the beagle was so quiet in the video.
> 
> View attachment 5159625


Interestingly, Rose Byrne did an interview on the Today show this morning and she had the same hairstyle:


It just dawned on me, Byrne was in Bridesmaids with McCarthy. Hmm...a case of six degrees of separation?


----------



## rose60610

The guests at *****'s party were high level profiles and likely all had their own security details as well. So whoever came you could multiply by the # of their own bodyguards. That's lots more people than just the guests and party staff. And still Meg and Haz weren't invited. That's one shindig that won't make it into Hazza'a memoirs. But he'll probably put it in like he was there anyway  .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Interestingly, Rose Byrne did an interview on the Today show this morning and she had the same hairstyle:
> View attachment 5159921



But her whatever you'll call it end above the chin which is an ok look. My main complaint with Raptor's (when it isn't a highly formal  wedding I'm not hating casual hair) is that they are WAY too long.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I would rather die, but obviously H&M don't care about many of the other things they brag about to the entire world that I wouldn't admit to a friend so you could be right, can't see it would break the bank though.
> 
> Nothing wrong with a lovely non-designer blanket, cashmere and/or wool (one of mine is Johnstons of Elgin and another from Brora) but the Avalons seem to be a set-dresser favourite. H make some even more fabulous blankets, but I guess those are not as recognisable.
> 
> Scotland is famous for wool and cashmere and they have some of the most beautiful blankets ever (coz it's very nearly always cold). I can't imagine the Queen buying them one from France when the British craft industry has the famed best. Absolutely no disrespect to anyone that has (I bought a baby one for my friend's new delivery recently) but H blankets are more KKK than QEII.
> 
> Edited to say - a lot of posts have passed since my catching up.


Totally agree about the Queen not gifting an Hermes blanket. I'm sure she only gifts products that represent the best Britain has to offer. Hermes blankets may have represented old money in the past, but today you see them in real estate listings that are clearly new money, usually with an LV and/or Chanel coffee table book nearby. I'm sure the Kardashians have a linen closet full of them along with their closets full of Birkins.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> LOL!  Gelson's.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true - HA!!!!  That and various restaurants in West Hollywood or Santa Monica!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But her whatever you'll call it end above the chin which is an ok look. My main complaint with Raptor's (when it isn't a highly formal  wedding I'm not hating casual hair) is that they are WAY too long.


It would drive me absolutely crazy to have those chunks of hair hanging in my face. I'm guessing some hair stylist told them it frames their face, accentuates their eyes, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Although the blankets are made in Scotland, I, too, doubt QE gave H&M an Hermes blanket.  



			https://www.hermes.com/us/en/product/avalon-iii-throw-blanket-H102665Mv54/
		

Throw blanket in jacquard woven wool and cashmere (90% Merinos wool and 10% cashmere)
Finished with blanket stitch

_Made in Scotland _
Designed by Hermès Studio
Measures 53" x 67"


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Porta-potties. DM had a photo.
> Negative optics, lots of alcohol+, lots of publicity, etc. Gotta wonder if delaying the party would have harmed anyone.
> _Do as I say, not as I do.  _


Like Gavin Newsom attending his friend's birthday dinner at The French Laundry when everyone in LA was being told to stay home.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Interestingly, I have seen Halle IRL without her makeup and she was very ordinary looking and I had to be told that it was she.  She is definitely beautiful when made up and certainly more talented.


*THIS!!!!!*  I saw both Halle Berry and her 1st baby daddy (the male model Gabriel Aubrey) .. and let me say that I literally STOPPED in my tracks seeing Gabriel; he is a VERY handsome man and what was even nicer, was that he was a nice person (we had the table in back of them and I had to say 'excuse me' to get by).  Halle on the other hand?!?! .. she didn't have a lot of make-up on, so yes .. I agree, you wouldn't really single her out per se .. but .. it was the ATTITUDE that made me say "oh geez - that's Halle".  The way she treated the staff was absolutely horribe!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> That's my question!  Who asks for someone else's help in recalling their own memories?  Like "my truth"?  Puh-leeze.  And we know it'll be anything but the "authentic truth", so just throw in whatever Meg tells you to, Haz!


Someone who was either too drunk or high to "remember" said memories!!!  Alas, I've seen that first hand with many of my neighbors growing up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> My black roommate in college couldn't stand Oprah (I liked OW at the time and couldn't understand her strong hatred of her) and always said anyone can look beautiful with the right MUA.  She kept telling me how hideous OW was without makeup, and was so excited to prove her point in some episode of the OW show that highlighted Oprah running a marathon.  I would've never recognized Oprah!  I'm amazed at how different stars look "natural faced" vs done up.  I'd love to see what I looked like after OW's make up artist had his or her way with me!


Many years back (when living in Washington DC), I had the opportunity to "help out" with a Fashion Show that was being held at one of the big & brand-new Malls (in Georgetown).  Well, let me tell you .. many of the models?!? == MEH without any makeup!  Honestly, other them being tall & super-skinny, they were somewhat non-descript .. you really would never think that they were models.  However, once the hair was done and the make-up applied .. WOW, what a difference!!!  Just for fun, after the show (because I wear only a light blush and lip-gloss), the make-up artist INSISTED that she work on me.  So, I figured "okay - why not"!  Well, when I looked at myself, I sure as heck DID NOT look natural .. she applied so much make-up, then the blush, then the lipstick (and I have very small thin lips - so red DOES NOT work on me)!  She did constantly compliment me on my eyelashes (yes - God was generous with them) .. but then slathered on tons of mascara (I don't wear mascara) and then the lip-liner.  Bottom line, in my opinion, I looked like a street-walker!  Unfortunately, no matter how many diets and/or skinny I was, I've NEVER had Cheekbones .. I have a very square face and my hair is very fine (thin) and straight-as-heck .. needless to say, I'm one of those people that look a lot better with minimal make-up!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> What is that like I wonder, being disinvited and realizing you're not A list enough.
> 
> So Larry David, David Letterman, Conan O’Brien and a majority of the former staffers were uninvited... while Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks, George Clooney, Jennifer Hudson, Jay-Z, Beyoncé, Bradley Cooper, Bruce Springsteen and Steven Colbert are considered more desirable.
> 
> Can't be an easy pill to swallow for some and a very elitist thing to do for the host of the party.


Even more disappointing, Chrissy Teigen (well - she had to go because of her husband) ..


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although the blankets are made in Scotland, I, too, doubt QE gave H&M an Hermes blanket.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.hermes.com/us/en/product/avalon-iii-throw-blanket-H102665Mv54/
> 
> 
> Throw blanket in jacquard woven wool and cashmere (90% Merinos wool and 10% cashmere)
> Finished with blanket stitch
> 
> _Made in Scotland _
> Designed by Hermès Studio
> Measures 53" x 67"


Looking at that link led me to this one:


			https://www.hermes.com/us/en/product/yachting-beach-towel-small-model-H102502Mv14/
		

Not beach towels mind you , *yachting* towels. One of these days my eyes are going to roll so far back in my head they'll get stuck there.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Even more disappointing, Chrissy Teigen (well - she had to go because of her husband) ..


OMG yes!  The fact that this bully wasn't uninvited regardless of who her husband is, and yet many staffers that actually worked with O during his terms were, really shows the hypocrisy of most, if not all, politicians.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> That poor doggie looks like a trussed up turkey ready for the oven.


Is it even real?  Everything else in this "office"/set is so contrived, maybe it's just a cutout of a dog Meg once looked at.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

charlottawill said:


> Sounds like she and former first daughter Ivanka would be besties.


Meghan tried to be besties with Ivanka … but you know these old money folk, they only get with people on their level of riches. Not somebody whining about daddy in law cutting off her allowance.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

purseinsanity said:


> OMG yes!  The fact that this bully wasn't uninvited regardless of who her husband is, and yet many staffers that actually worked with O during his terms were, really shows the hypocrisy of most, if not all, politicians.



Imagine Chrissy was invited and not Meghan and Harry, lol. That’s a new level of LOW.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Porta-potties. DM had a photo.
> Negative optics, lots of alcohol+, lots of publicity, etc. Gotta wonder if delaying the party would have harmed anyone.
> _Do as I say, not as I do.  _


They're all hypocrites.  I come from a third world country where the politicians are totally up front with how corrupt they are, unlike their American colleagues that act holier than thou and are probably more corrupt than anyone!


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghan tried to be besties with Ivanka … but you know these old money folk, they only get with people on their level of riches. Not somebody whining about daddy in law cutting off her allowance.


Haha...Ivanka old money?...that's a good one.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> OMG yes!  The fact that this bully wasn't uninvited regardless of who her husband is, and yet many staffers that actually worked with O during his terms were, really shows the hypocrisy of most, if not all, politicians.


well, realistically they couldn't really tell John, who was performing, not to bring his wife


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *THIS!!!!!*  I saw both Halle Berry and her 1st baby daddy (the male model Gabriel Aubrey) .. and let me say that I literally STOPPED in my tracks seeing Gabriel; he is a VERY handsome man and what was even nicer, was that he was a nice person (we had the table in back of them and I had to say 'excuse me' to get by).  Halle on the other hand?!?! .. she didn't have a lot of make-up on, so yes .. I agree, you wouldn't really single her out per se .. but .. it was the ATTITUDE that made me say "oh geez - that's Halle".  The way she treated the staff was absolutely horribe!


sorry to hear Halle was rude to staff....she's my girl crush


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> Imagine Chrissy was invited and not Meghan and Harry, lol. That’s a new level of LOW.


We don't have to imagine!  I'd love to see the number of (fake Hermes) china that has been thrown around the mansion in Montecito!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

purseinsanity said:


> My black roommate in college couldn't stand Oprah (I liked OW at the time and couldn't understand her strong hatred of her) and always said anyone can look beautiful with the right MUA.  She kept telling me how hideous OW was without makeup, and was so excited to prove her point in some episode of the OW show that highlighted Oprah running a marathon.  I would've never recognized Oprah!  I'm amazed at how different stars look "natural faced" vs done up.  I'd love to see what I looked like after OW's make up artist had his or her way with me!


Oprah has had a few plastic surgeries done to her face as well.
I’m sure you’ve seen her bare faced in the early 2000s? The Smokey makeup trend during that era was doing wonders for every one.

On another note, a lot of people didn’t like Oprah … she was rude and condescending to many of her guests on her show. She was known to play play dirty to get the fame she’s achieved. 

Just watch some MADtv skits parodying her … they weren’t exaggerating.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Even more disappointing, Chrissy Teigen (well - she had to go because of her husband) ..


names seem odd to me...bradley cooper?
I doubt there will be an explanation....probably better to let this story die a natural death


----------



## breakfastatcartier

charlottawill said:


> Haha...Ivanka old money?...that's a good one.


Doesn’t ***** come from old money? Excuse my ignorance, I’m not American but I could’ve sworn the Trumps had money long before the “fame”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> names seem odd to me...bradley cooper?
> I doubt there will be an explanation....probably better to let this story die a natural death



I don’t understand why the forum censors certain celeb names? Did I miss something?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I shudder to think about how many private jets were taken to that party.


----------



## lanasyogamama

breakfastatcartier said:


> I don’t understand why the forum censors certain celeb names? Did I miss something?


I think they just automate it to avoid political discussions.


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> I don’t understand why the forum censors certain celeb names? Did I miss something?


as far as I know it's just political people like former presidents and their wives
cause that would be talking politics, which isn't allowed


----------



## Chanbal

_"However, Mr Sacerdoti, a regular commentator on Sky News as well as a contributor to The Spectator, was unconvinced, not least by Harry’s role in proceedings.

He told Express.co.uk: “*What a fall - from being Prince to literally being a jester in the court of Queen Meghan*."_









						Harry the clown! Duke ridiculed as ‘jester at court of Queen Meghan!'
					

PRINCE Harry was reduced to "being a jester in the court of Queen Meghan" in her video last week, a royal expert has suggested.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


>




If you think about it, it is really sad.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> _The founder of 10 Yetis told Closer magazine: "With restrictions easing and things slowly getting back to normal, I suspect Harry and Meghan will take this year by storm.
> 
> "They’ve had their second child – and always said they’d only have two – so now, it’s all systems go.
> 
> *"I think we’ll see a really heavy focus on their masterplan – solidifying their position as America’s ‘royal family’ – so there will definitely be more TV appearances."*
> 
> Within a few years, Mr Barr also said, Meghan and Harry could become "bigger than their A-list peers who are floating around Hollywood right now"._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to 'solidify position as US'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are ready to take the next 12 months "by storm", according to an expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Every time I see something like this, I want to SCREAM .. we in the US *DO NOT WANT a Royal Family* .. we had (_and won_) a war to get rid of anything Royal .. why do the British press continue saying crap like this?!?!?!?!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Have to admit this puzzles me.  I tried to find an unbiased source for news on this party and found this from TMZ.  Erykah Badu, while very talented, is far from a household name and I doubt she is an intimate friend.  so how was she there while others including staff were uninvited?  maybe she was already enroute so they said "OK come"?
> Barack ***** Dances the Night Away at 60th Birthday Bash (tmz.com)



We can assume everything is as it appears. A big star-studded gala was planned to celebrate birthday. The Delta Covid variant rears its ugly head at an inconvenient time. Suddenly it is considered irresponsible to throw a fancy party for hundreds of people where vaccination status is impossible to prove. Rather than cancel, it is announced the party will be "scaled back" and it was, just not as much as we might think would make a difference.

The complaints about the terrible traffic jams on Martha's Vineyard the day of the party speak for themselves. Many people were still invited and they came. They didn't decide to let them in because some were already on their way. Cutting 100–200 people was a way of paying lip service to delta variant concerns while still having the celebrity-filled birthday bash they wanted. There was a giant tent full of unmasked people. Hopefully nobody who attended or worked at the party will get Covid. We can all agree that the optics were horrible and leave it at that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you think about it, it is really sad.



Agree, that juggling outside of the window, sad. Watching this disaster is very unsettling, very uncomfortable.  Still cannot figure out why the BRF is letting them twist in the wind like this. But then, they’ve let others spin off the rails, too.  Guess we are in for more unpleasantness Ugh.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Have to admit this puzzles me.  I tried to find an unbiased source for news on this party and found this from TMZ.  Erykah Badu, while very talented, is far from a household name and I doubt she is an intimate friend.  so how was she there while others including staff were uninvited?  maybe she was already enroute so they said "OK come"?
> Barack ***** Dances the Night Away at 60th Birthday Bash (tmz.com)


Now, mind you .. I liked her early music, but I'm not sure if she is still performing.  I know that she was also working on a "fashion" line, but have to agree with you here .. why was there unless (maybe) she did perform?  

In regards to some of his office staff .. oh, I've seen this before, and happens all the time in Corporate America.  Yeah, you bust your a$$ for them .. but when it comes time to "party" the good results, you aren't even invited (nonetheless, even knowing about it - oftentimes have to find out via the grapevine)!!  I was particularly incensed one time because the reason why we had grown our business 3-fold was because of all the technology "inventions" that I had come up with, to provide our clients with new products.  I found out about the soiree at/about 4pm, but thankfully .. it was not that far away.  You better believe your a$$ that I SHOWED UP .. and MADE SURE to go right up to the BOZO-in-charge to say "hey - thanks for the invite" and then just walked away.  

Little things like giving an employee a big thumbs-up when they've done a great job (likewise, letting them know when they haven't) either that day or the next day, make a huge difference in morale.


----------



## CeeJay

breakfastatcartier said:


> Doesn’t ***** come from old money? Excuse my ignorance, I’m not American but I could’ve sworn the Trumps had money long before the “fame”.


Technically, no .. they may want to think they are, but it was DT's father that made the money.  "Old $$$" usually translates to those that have been in the US since very early times and were oftentimes part of the industrial revolution.  Think Rothschild, Rockefeller, Du Pont, Astor and Vanderbilt .. just to name a few.  Interestingly enough, these type of folks oftentimes shun the media, don't talk about money (per se) and didn't flaunt it (unfortunately - that's changed a bit with social media).  We used to joke in my youth that if the person was a mess, with rips in their clothes and holes in their shoes .. they were likely very wealthy (and it was oftentimes true)!!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> sorry to hear Halle was rude to staff....she's my girl crush


Not the first time I've heard this about her.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> We don't have to imagine!  I'd love to see the number of (fake Hermes) china that has been thrown around the mansion in Montecito!



What is worse is Harry and Meghan didn't even make that first list of 500+ invitees. That is how low their celebrity status is here in the US.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> We can assume everything is as it appears. A big star-studded gala was planned to celebrate birthday. The Delta Covid variant rears its ugly head at an inconvenient time. Suddenly it is considered irresponsible to throw a fancy party for hundreds of people where vaccination status is impossible to prove. Rather than cancel, it is announced the party will be "scaled back" and it was, just not as much as we might think would make a difference.
> 
> The complaints about the terrible traffic jams on Martha's Vineyard the day of the party speak for themselves. Many people were still invited and they came. They didn't decide to let them in because some were already on their way. Cutting 100–200 people was a way of paying lip service to delta variant concerns while still having the celebrity-filled birthday bash they wanted. There was a giant tent full of unmasked people. Hopefully nobody who attended or worked at the party will get Covid. We can all agree that the optics were horrible and leave it at that.


An Uber driver told DailyMail.com that he drove one couple to the party who were turned away by Secret Service because they were cut from the final guest list. 

He picked them up early Saturday evening from Winnetu Oceanside Resort, where ***** attended a pre-game party the previous night. 

'They were dressed to the nines. He was wearing a black suit and tie; she was wearing a luxurious evening gown,' the driver said.

'They were on the original list but not on the reduced list.'

The couple, who'd been invited through a high-level political connection, got past a first checkpoint after presenting their original invite, then were blocked by the second set of guards.

'They thought they were all set when they got past the first point,' the driver said. 

'Then the second set of guards asked again for their credentials. They were embarrassed. They were looking forward to the party. It was a big disappointment. But they understood the security protocol.'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Melissa sounds like a jerk.
She confirmed it was all scripted.









						Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
					

The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*

*Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
*Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Now, mind you .. I liked her early music, but I'm not sure if she is still performing.  I know that she was also working on a "fashion" line, but have to agree with you here .. why was there unless (maybe) she did perform?
> 
> In regards to some of his office staff .. oh, I've seen this before, and happens all the time in Corporate America.  Yeah, you bust your a$$ for them .. but when it comes time to "party" the good results, you aren't even invited (nonetheless, even knowing about it - oftentimes have to find out via the grapevine)!!  I was particularly incensed one time because the reason why we had grown our business 3-fold was because of all the technology "inventions" that I had come up with, to provide our clients with new products.  I found out about the soiree at/about 4pm, but thankfully .. it was not that far away.  You better believe your a$$ that I SHOWED UP .. and MADE SURE to go right up to the BOZO-in-charge to say "hey - thanks for the invite" and then just walked away.
> 
> Little things like giving an employee a big thumbs-up when they've done a great job (likewise, letting them know when they haven't) either that day or the next day, make a huge difference in morale.





csshopper said:


> An Uber driver told DailyMail.com that he drove one couple to the party who were turned away by Secret Service because they were cut from the final guest list.
> 
> He picked them up early Saturday evening from Winnetu Oceanside Resort, where ***** attended a pre-game party the previous night.
> 
> 'They were dressed to the nines. He was wearing a black suit and tie; she was wearing a luxurious evening gown,' the driver said.
> 
> 'They were on the original list but not on the reduced list.'
> 
> The couple, who'd been invited through a high-level political connection, got past a first checkpoint after presenting their original invite, then were blocked by the second set of guards.
> 
> 'They thought they were all set when they got past the first point,' the driver said.
> 
> 'Then the second set of guards asked again for their credentials. They were embarrassed. They were looking forward to the party. It was a big disappointment. But they understood the security protocol.'



"An Uber driver told DailyMail.com..."

Don't believe everything you read in the DM. In fact, don't believe most of it. This sounds totally fabricated.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> An Uber driver told DailyMail.com that he drove one couple to the party who were turned away by Secret Service because they were cut from the final guest list.
> 
> He picked them up early Saturday evening from Winnetu Oceanside Resort, where ***** attended a pre-game party the previous night.
> 
> 'They were dressed to the nines. He was wearing a black suit and tie; she was wearing a luxurious evening gown,' the driver said.
> 
> 'They were on the original list but not on the reduced list.'
> 
> The couple, who'd been invited through a high-level political connection, got past a first checkpoint after presenting their original invite, then were blocked by the second set of guards.
> 
> 'They thought they were all set when they got past the first point,' the driver said.
> 
> 'Then the second set of guards asked again for their credentials. They were embarrassed. They were looking forward to the party. It was a big disappointment. But they understood the security protocol.'


Good thing he's not running for re-election.  Not that he would do such a 'let them eat cake' hoopla if he intended to run.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I have noticed there are a lot of Melania fans (or I guess they're called stans, not really sure what the difference is) on this thread so it makes sense that the discussion would head in this direction but just fyi all state and local guidelines were followed at the party in question.

And hey at least he didn't wear tan pants right?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> We don't have to imagine!  I'd love to see the number of (*fake Hermes*)* china* that has been thrown around the mansion in Montecito!


Or, for target practice.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> An Uber driver told DailyMail.com that he drove one couple to the party who were turned away by Secret Service because they were cut from the final guest list.
> 
> He picked them up early Saturday evening from Winnetu Oceanside Resort, where ***** attended a pre-game party the previous night.
> 
> 'They were dressed to the nines. He was wearing a black suit and tie; she was wearing a luxurious evening gown,' the driver said.
> 
> 'They were on the original list but not on the reduced list.'
> 
> The couple, who'd been invited through a high-level political connection, got past a first checkpoint after presenting their original invite, then were blocked by the second set of guards.
> 
> 'They thought they were all set when they got past the first point,' the driver said.
> 
> 'Then the second set of guards asked again for their credentials. They were embarrassed. They were looking forward to the party. It was a big disappointment. But they understood the security protocol.'



How awkward! Imagine trying to crash a party you were originally invited to and then getting busted when you are almost there. Since they took an Uber instead of a limo I guess they were hoping to get a glimpse at how the rich and famous live. 

One of the DJs posted a few photos before someone spotted him. Everyone was having a great time.









						DJ posts stealth pics of Obama’s ‘epic’ birthday party —  before being forced to delete them
					

Manager TJ Chapman gave his Instagram followers an exclusive behind-the-scenes look at President Barack *****’s 60th birthday party at Martha’s Vineyard.




					nypost.com


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


>



Maybe he was like this in the service as well?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Maybe he was like this in the service as well?
> 
> View attachment 5159976
> View attachment 5159976
> View attachment 5159976



Yikes! I had a childhood phobia of clowns and that photo isn't helping.


----------



## charlottawill

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I have noticed there are a lot of Melania fans (or I guess they're called stans, not really sure what the difference is) on this thread so it makes sense that the discussion would head in this direction but just fyi all state and local guidelines were followed at the party in question.
> 
> And hey at least he didn't wear tan pants right?



I have always admired the Obamas and most certainly am not a fan of the previous first lady, but i believe it was a poor decision to go ahead with this party. Whether they had 500 or 200 vaccinated and tested guests, that's still potentially a superspreader event. We are in uncharted territory with the Delta variant. Even if he is no longer in office, people look up to the Obamas and the optics of this are not good.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> What is worse is Harry and Meghan didn't even make that first list of 500+ invitees. That is how low their celebrity status is here in the US.


maybe they only talk about politics and don't donate


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe they only talk about politics and don't donate



Or it has been noticed how nearly everything they do ends up with some big drama.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Or it has been noticed how nearly everything they do ends up with some big drama.


and everything is just talk, not much action.....unless you count sending lunch to some employees of a non-profit


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> Doesn’t ***** come from old money? Excuse my ignorance, I’m not American but I could’ve sworn the Trumps had money long before the “fame”.


*****'s father earned the money, so ***** is only second generation. That is not considered old money. Rockefellers, Vanderbilts and the like are old money. Part of the "yuge" chip on *****'s shoulder is that he was never accepted into the highest echelons of NY society.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Yikes! I had a childhood phobia of clowns and that photo isn't helping.


I'm sorry for you. Our first grandchild was terrified of clowns as well and I sympathize with anyone who is afraid of clowns. It's difficult to relate to a face that isn't even human looking.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I have always admired the Obamas and most certainly am not a fan of the previous first lady, but i believe it was a poor decision to go ahead with this party. Whether they had 500 or 200 vaccinated and tested guests, that's still potentially a superspreader event. We are in uncharted territory with the Delta variant. Even if he is no longer in office, people look up to the Obamas and the optics of this are not good.


it is a small island, add in 500-700 guests and their PAs, security, chauffeurs, nannies, private jet crews and you have one heck of a parking problem


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> it is a small island, add in 500-700 guests and their PAs, security, chauffeurs, nannies, private jet crews and you have one heck of a parking problem



They clearly showed no consideration for their neighbors, who reportedly were protective of the Obamas' privacy prior to Saturday night. They might not get such a warm reception now.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Technically, no .. they may want to think they are, but it was DT's father that made the money.  "Old $$$" usually translates to those that have been in the US since very early times and were oftentimes part of the industrial revolution.  Think Rothschild, Rockefeller, Du Pont, Astor and Vanderbilt .. just to name a few.  Interestingly enough, these type of folks oftentimes shun the media, don't talk about money (per se) and didn't flaunt it (unfortunately - that's changed a bit with social media).  We used to joke in my youth that if the person was a mess, with rips in their clothes and holes in their shoes .. they were likely very wealthy (and it was oftentimes true)!!



When a granddad/mom makes the dough, the second generation often grows it, but the third generation often pisses it away. If the third generation is successful in growing it then the enterprise is usually in decent hands for even further growth or is in line for a great buyout offer. In my investment career days, yes, some wealthy people looked awful, and some...did reflect their account worth. Of course there's a lot of people who put on a good act but in reality most of their trappings--house, cars, etc are owned by the bank and sometimes they have to borrow to go on vacation. If I had to borrow to go on vacation I wouldn't go anywhere, I couldn't enjoy myself.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> When a granddad/mom makes the dough, the second generation often grows it, but the third generation often pisses it away. If the third generation is successful in growing it then the enterprise is usually in decent hands for even further growth or is in line for a great buyout offer. In my investment career days, yes, some wealthy people looked awful, and some...did reflect their account worth. Of course there's a lot of people who put on a good act but in reality most of their trappings--house, cars, etc are owned by the bank and sometimes they have to borrow to go on vacation. If I had to borrow to go on vacation I wouldn't go anywhere, I couldn't enjoy myself.



As they say in Texas, all hat and no cattle.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm sorry for you. Our first grandchild was terrified of clowns as well and I sympathize with anyone who is afraid of clowns. It's difficult to relate to a face that isn't even human looking.



As an adult it's easy to understand people putting on makeup to entertain kids at parties and at the circus. But as a child, clowns were the creepiest things ever to me. Plus they aren't even funny. 

Of course John Wayne Gacy didn't do much for the reputation of clowns.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> it is a small island, add in 500-700 guests and their PAs, security, chauffeurs, nannies, private jet crews and you have one heck of a parking problem



Sounds like it. But the Secret Service likely had that ironed out. OTOH, there's other huge parties in the neighborhood from time to time and I can't see Ms. Whoever walking a distance in heels from where the car is parked. There has to be valets galore and the parking is the valets' problem. My guess there's a system.


----------



## rose60610

Clowns are creepy. Rodeo clowns, on the other hand, are very skillful and brave people. They distract the bulls from mowing over the bull riders. Harry's appearance outside the window was stupid and did nothing to make anyone say "how cute". It demeaned him. If he and Methane do it as a private joke, fine, but to publicize it? Ugh.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> That might be true on the day this happens:
> View attachment 5159188
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agree with both of your posts regarding Gary J. My thoughts exactly.
> I will add that while his Instagram posts back in the day were funny about George & MM, going as far as making a tv show about an innocent young boy and his family who are all alive and well and able to see it, especially when GJ doesn't even know the family is disgusting and uncalled for.
> I'd understand if it was a show about his own family who were all ok with it, but it's creepy when it's about a real little boy that he doesn't know.
> Does GJ not have enough imagination to create character(s) that look completely different but are maybe very loosely based on the BRF? Clearly not.
> I wouldn't be surprised if H&M are secretly involved with this show in feeding them info for it, their lack of outrage at a show like this being made about a young family member speaks volumes. Yet, if this was a show made about Archie, there would be lawsuits flying in from all corners and the creators would be labelled as evil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159411
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159417
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159418
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159430
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159432
> 
> This is one of the best pictures ever taken! So adorable. Between George's outfit (especially the robe) and the expression on his face like they've all just interrupted his hectic schedule to speak with him briefly, like they should all be so lucky  I love it!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159473
> 
> That table styling is dreadful. Cluttered, messy, forced and just odd.
> The stacks of books isn't 'cute' it make you look like you have too many spare books lying around that people haven't bought.
> Are both stacks of 'The Bench'? Because the ones under her laptop look different in size and colour to the ones at the front of the table.
> The two pointless looking white boxes are an odd choice for the table and then the random glass bottle ready to fall off the edge.
> The Hermes blanket screams of something _she _thinks that having it, makes her look super rich. Like it's one of those things you have to have in your house if you're rich and it has to be shown off.
> The poor dog looking like he's being held hostage.
> The idiot man child gawking in through the window. So creepy.
> So. Much. Beige.
> There is only two rooms they seem to use for publicity, this 'office' room and the one that looks like a living room. Wouldn't be surprised if they are the only two they have fully decorated specifically for showbiz mode and zoom calls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5159469
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I noticed all of these changes too especially the shorter nose.
> Also, it looks like she's wearing contacts in a lighter brown than her natural darker eye colour.


so do you think she tried to lessen the slope on her nose?  she and her husband both have ski slope noses


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Clowns are creepy. Rodeo clowns, on the other hand, are very skillful and brave people. They distract the bulls from mowing over the bull riders. Harry's appearance outside the window was stupid and did nothing to make anyone say "how cute". It demeaned him. If he and Methane do it as a private joke, fine, but to publicize it? Ugh.



Oddly, I love rodeo clowns or bull fighters, as they are called these days. Maybe because they just act like people who happen to be wearing makeup,  they don’t get all into the clown character.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> As an adult it's easy to understand people putting on makeup to entertain kids at parties and at the circus. But as a child, clowns were the creepiest things ever to me. Plus they aren't even funny.
> 
> Of course John Wayne Gacy didn't do much for the reputation of clowns.


funny I don't have a full blown clown phobia but I have a pretty vivid memory of going to a fireman's parade as a child and being terrified of the clown in that parade.  I was crying.  Maybe he was shooting a water pistol or something.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


I would say your fears were unfounded JCMH.  You didn't look "weird"; you just looked like an idiot.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> I have always admired the Obamas and most certainly am not a fan of the previous first lady, but i believe it was a poor decision to go ahead with this party. Whether they had 500 or 200 vaccinated and tested guests, that's still potentially a superspreader event. We are in uncharted territory with the Delta variant. Even if he is no longer in office, people look up to the Obamas and the optics of this are not good.


I think it is much more of an optics thing than actual danger to the people at the party, whether they are working or guests. There are full baseball stadiums every night, so this is tiny in comparison.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I think it is much more of an optics thing than actual danger to the people at the party, whether they are working or guests. There are full baseball stadiums every night, so this is tiny in comparison.


I hope you are right. Time will tell.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*



Not gonna lie, Harry...you did. Time to grow a pair and not let this demon you married make an idiot out of you in front of everyone any longer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I have noticed there are a lot of Melania fans (or I guess they're called stans, not really sure what the difference is) on this thread so it makes sense that the discussion would head in this direction but just fyi all state and local guidelines were followed at the party in question.
> 
> And hey at least he didn't wear tan pants right?



Hu? I haven't noticed that at all.

Stan = the super fan from the Eminem song.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I have always admired the Obamas and most certainly am not a fan of the previous first lady, but i believe it was a poor decision to go ahead with this party. Whether they had 500 or 200 vaccinated and tested guests, that's still potentially a superspreader event. We are in uncharted territory with the Delta variant. Even if he is no longer in office, people look up to the Obamas and the optics of this are not good.



All of this.

We got invited to a wedding of a couple from a community that's known for a) having massive weddings (they don't bat an eyelash at 750 people) and b) not necessarily abiding by the rules (e.g. we were in full lockdown and they were still having dinners with 30+ people in one room because "We're all family" as if that made a difference when it was five households) and they asked for a negative test before attending. We noped out of that so fast. You couldn't pay me enough to go anywhere with hundreds of strangers right now, and I'm fully vaccinated as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> And here she is for y'all, who like M's chicken legs.
> View attachment 5159500


Thank. God. I didn’t have anything in my mouth when I saw this!!!


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Every time I see something like this, I want to SCREAM .. we in the US *DO NOT WANT a Royal Family* .. we had (_and won_) a war to get rid of anything Royal .. why do the British press continue saying crap like this?!?!?!?!


The impression I have is the Hazz and wife have been trying very hard to establish themselves as royals in California. While we DO NOT want a royal family in the US, the British press is unfortunately only stating the obvious imo. It's more than time for the US press start to expose the hypocrisy of the couple of Montecito. It's possible that it's already happening, here are today's headlines on Yahoo:


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, that juggling outside of the window, sad. Watching this disaster is very unsettling, very uncomfortable.  Still cannot figure out why the BRF is letting them twist in the wind like this. But then, they’ve let others spin off the rails, too.  Guess we are in for more unpleasantness Ugh.


I have been rather surprised by the apparent lack of action from the BRF, but I wonder if the family is following the guidance of specialists on how to deal with narcissists and overly ambitious people.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> We can assume everything is as it appears. A big star-studded gala was planned to celebrate birthday. The Delta Covid variant rears its ugly head at an inconvenient time. Suddenly it is considered irresponsible to throw a fancy party for hundreds of people where vaccination status is impossible to prove. Rather than cancel, it is announced the party will be "scaled back" and it was, just not as much as we might think would make a difference.
> 
> The complaints about the terrible traffic jams on Martha's Vineyard the day of the party speak for themselves. Many people were still invited and they came. They didn't decide to let them in because some were already on their way. Cutting 100–200 people was a way of paying lip service to delta variant concerns while still having the celebrity-filled birthday bash they wanted. There was a giant tent full of unmasked people. Hopefully nobody who attended or worked at the party will get Covid. We can all agree that the optics were horrible and leave it at that.


But there isn’t actually any covid related restrictions on the size of gatherings in Massachusetts tho, right? I mean is it okay to shop with 400 people at Costco who may or may not have been vaccinated and/or even wearing a mask, or at an outdoor party where all guests and staff are required to show proof of vaccination? 
I bet 6’s wife wouldn’t want to wear her mask if invited, she’d want to make sure to be grinning straight at the cameras.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> What is worse is Harry and Meghan didn't even make that first list of 500+ invitees. That is how low their celebrity status is here in the US.


Why would they make the list? They don't have any significant accomplishments. She is/was a Z-list actress (@CeeJay ) and being one of the several grandkids of QE is not an achievement. There is also the conflict  of interest, the couple of Montecito seems to be aggressively looking for big donations for their own Arch foundation.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> But there isn’t actually any covid related restrictions on the size of gatherings in Massachusetts tho, right? I mean is it okay to shop with 400 people at Costco who may or may not have been vaccinated and/or even wearing a mask, or at an outdoor party where all guests and staff are required to show proof of vaccination?
> I bet 6’s wife wouldn’t want to wear her mask if invited, she’d want to make sure to be grinning straight at the cameras.



That is true. They didn’t break any restrictions. Any criticism comes from risking possible Covid transmission by bringing a few hundred people from all over the country to their home for something which could be perceived as being rather frivolous, such as a celeb birthday party.

I bet 6’s wife would have strutted around making sure everyone there knew that it was HER birthday too!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I have been rather surprised by the apparent lack of action from the BRF, but I wonder if the family is following the guidance of specialists on how to deal with narcissists and overly ambitious people.


"Once bitten, twice shy" comes to mind and IMO they are listening to their advisors before responding or reacting to the devious duo. 
It's also possible that M named a bunch of 40x40 volunteers without their prior consent thinking they would all accept to avoid bad PR. If so, Eugenie could be going along with the charade to report back to the BRF as I can't see her trusting H after his treachery. She seemed to love and respect her granny too much to betray her in such a manner.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


Here is Melissa's video and the incomplete response to her comments.




Spoiler: response


----------



## Chanbal

Oh wow, is this real? I'm not referring to the earrings.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *. . . solidifying their position as America’s ‘royal family’*



I think most Americans would be equally amused and repelled by this suggestion.  I know I am lol.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Clowns are creepy. Rodeo clowns, on the other hand, are very skillful and brave people. They distract the bulls from mowing over the bull riders. Harry's appearance outside the window was stupid and did nothing to make anyone say "how cute". It demeaned him. If he and Methane do it as a private joke, fine, but to publicize it? Ugh.


It didn't add anything to her message, unless it was to say that the whole 40x40 affair was a joke.



bag-mania said:


> I bet 6’s wife would have strutted around making sure everyone there knew that it was HER birthday too!


I wouldn't put that past her after her history of hijacking other people's important events.



Maggie Muggins said:


> "Once bitten, twice shy" comes to mind and IMO they are listening to their advisors before responding or reacting to the devious duo.
> *It's also possible that M named a bunch of 40x40 volunteers without their prior consent* thinking they would all accept to avoid bad PR. If so, Eugenie could be going along with the charade to report back to the BRF as I can't see her trusting H after his treachery. She seemed to love and respect her granny too much to betray her in such a manner.


They were probably advised not to feed the narcissists.
I don't know if Methane is stupid enough to volunteer people like that. But narcs often live in a world of their own. She may have said she was working on an unspecified project, and if the person responded neutrally "Oh, that's interesting", it translated to a "Yes, count me in" in her mind.



justwatchin said:


> Still thinking about this 40 minutes of mentoring. If she was really serious about making an impact, she should have said 40 days of mentoring.  This just adds to her portfolio of superficiality.


I like that: portfolio of superficiality.
When is this 40 minutes going to happen anyway? Or will it be one of those stories that just die a natural death when there is no follow-up?


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I think it is much more of an optics thing than actual danger to the people at the party, whether they are working or guests. There are full baseball stadiums every night, so this is tiny in comparison.


Is the stadium open or closed? The party was held in a tent.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _The founder of 10 Yetis told Closer magazine: "With restrictions easing and things slowly getting back to normal, I suspect Harry and Meghan will take this year by storm.
> 
> "They’ve had their second child – and always said they’d only have two – so now, it’s all systems go.
> 
> *"I think we’ll see a really heavy focus on their masterplan – solidifying their position as America’s ‘royal family’ – so there will definitely be more TV appearances."*
> 
> Within a few years, Mr Barr also said, Meghan and Harry could become "bigger than their A-list peers who are floating around Hollywood right now"._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to 'solidify position as US'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are ready to take the next 12 months "by storm", according to an expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Is "take this year by storm" going to be the new "hit the ground running"? They have only got 4 months left if they want to create a storm about anything.


----------



## Chanbal

@Maggie Muggins  One more for your list: The madame of Montecito.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> Is the stadium open or closed? The party was held in a tent.


Outside. I see your point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Oh wow, is this real? I'm not referring to the earrings.
> View attachment 5160087


I didn't notice, well I wasn't paying much attention, but I went back and did my own screen grab and yes, this is the nose we saw in the video.

I'd love to know how H feels about the Hollywood style changes.


----------



## rose60610

If she gets any more plastic surgery to change her looks Archie going to say: "Where's Mommy? Did she get eaten by a crocodile?"


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't notice, well I wasn't paying much attention, but I went back and did my own screen grab and yes, this is the nose we saw in the video.
> 
> I'd love to know how H feels about the Hollywood style changes.
> View attachment 5160101
> View attachment 5160115


Who blows a candle like that? She’s so irksome.


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> Who blows a candle like that? She’s so irksome.



She looks like she’s going in for a kiss. I wonder if she practiced it first.


----------



## Katel

CeeJay said:


> Technically, no .. they may want to think they are, but it was DT's father that made the money.  "Old $$$" usually translates to those that have been in the US since very early times and were oftentimes part of the industrial revolution.  Think Rothschild, Rockefeller, Du Pont, Astor and Vanderbilt .. just to name a few.  Interestingly enough, these type of folks oftentimes shun the media, don't talk about money (per se) and didn't flaunt it (unfortunately - that's changed a bit with social media).  We used to joke in my youth that if the person was a mess, with rips in their clothes and holes in their shoes .. they were likely very wealthy (and it was oftentimes true)!!





charlottawill said:


> *****'s father earned the money, so ***** is only second generation. That is not considered old money. Rockefellers, Vanderbilts and the like are old money. Part of the "yuge" chip on *****'s shoulder is that he was never accepted into the highest echelons of NY society.


Still technically new money, but wasn’t it DT’s grandfather who made the family fortune in the AK gold rush, and then started buying real estate in New York? Actually he died young and DT’s grandmother took over the business and made all the money (iirc), with DT’s dad as her young assistant.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> If she gets any more plastic surgery to change her looks Archie going to say: "Where's Mommy? Did she get eaten by a crocodile?"


Maybe her old nose is in the waffle maker that Archie "asked for".


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She looks like she’s going in for a kiss. I wonder if she practiced it first.


You know it!!  Rehearsed at least 40 x 40 times!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> You know it!!  Rehearsed at least 40 x 40 times!



And had the cameraman film it at different angles so she could choose the one she liked best.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't notice, well I wasn't paying much attention, but I went back and did my own screen grab and yes, this is the nose we saw in the video.
> 
> I'd love to know how H feels about the Hollywood style changes.
> View attachment 5160101
> View attachment 5160115


Maybe H loves it: he gets a new wife without having to divorce the old. Old wine, new bottle.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> And had the cameraman film it at different angles so she could choose the one she liked best.



Poor camera PERSON. Probably camera PEOPLE after one after another got exhausted and had to quit. Oh wait. Was it a new camera WOMAN that Meghan gave 40 minutes worth of mentoring to? If so, she went back to her old job after she got fired for not asking Meghan if she was OK.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Poor camera PERSON. Probably camera PEOPLE after one after another got exhausted and had to quit. Oh wait. Was it a new camera WOMAN that Meghan gave 40 minutes worth of mentoring to? If so, she went back to her old job after she got fired for not asking Meghan if she was OK.



I think it went something like this. (I hope I’m not the only fan of old movies here.)


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> She looks like she’s going in for a kiss. I wonder if she practiced it first.


Probably filmed herself a million times to get it right …


----------



## purseinsanity

LOLOL you all are on fire tonight!  
And I am so here for it!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She looks like she’s going in for a kiss. I wonder if *she practiced it first*.


She probably kissed a lot of princes (Trevor, Corey, etc.) before she found her frog.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> She probably kissed a lot of princes (Trevor, Corey, etc.) before she found her frog.



I never saw Suits. Did her character ever have kissing scenes? That experience could have prepared for her for fake blowing on an artificial birthday cake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She looks like she’s going in for a kiss. I wonder if she practiced it first.


I
when I first looked at it I thought she was kissing her image on the monitor screen.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I never saw Suits. Did her character ever have kissing scenes? That experience could have prepared for her for fake blowing on an artificial birthday cake.


I never watched it either.  I'd never heard of her before she snagged Harry.  I have no desire to ever watch it either, LOL!


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> When I first looked at it I thought she was kissing her image on the monitor screen.


She reminds me of a tween kissing a poster of her personal McDreamy on her wall.    

And you're probably right.  She probably was kissing her own image and they photoshopped the fake cake there instead.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz's friend should be proud for his participation on a program that exposes kids to potential bullying.  


	

		
			
		

		
	
From Daily Express.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe her old nose is in the waffle maker that Archie "asked for".


Gosh, I just had a snack.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't notice, well I wasn't paying much attention, but I went back and did my own screen grab and yes, this is the nose we saw in the video.
> 
> I'd love to know how H feels about the Hollywood style changes.
> View attachment 5160101
> View attachment 5160115


So to be clear, the second photo is the before? If so, she appears to have had a bad nose job corrected, no? I mean that's Michael Jackson bad. And I'm not talking about the song.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I think it went something like this. (I hope I’m not the only fan of old movies here.)
> 
> View attachment 5160176


A little more drama tho.  More theatrics:


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Hazz's friend should be proud for his participation on a program that exposes kids to potential bullying.
> View attachment 5160191
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From Daily Express.



Well you know if this show featured the Sussex kids, M&H would sue. As tasteless as the show is, I have confidence that Will and Kate will handle this very well. The Cambridges have class. And the idiots of the show will be happy with the money they're making on it, but the Cambridges will always have a million times MORE. Plus respect. And dignity.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> So to be clear, the second photo is the before? If so, she appears to have had a bad nose job corrected, no? I mean that's Michael Jackson bad. And I'm not talking about the song.


I'd like to see a timeline of her nose, the evolution as it were. Because I think the "bad nose" was not her first/second nose.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Here's from 2006 to 2019 - 52 photos of her.  Few with side profiles.  Amazing to see her face in earlier years like in 2006.



> https://www.allure.com/gallery/meghan-markle-hair-evolution
> 
> *The Evolution of Meghan Markle's Hair Over the Years | Allure*
> September 26, 2019


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting that Hazz is now concerned with looking “weird”. 
 So many poor choices from his past and   >>this<<  is the one he questions?


----------



## Hermes Zen

You ask and you receive even more photos - earlier years as a young girl and more ...



> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5746355/Royal-Wedding-Meghan-Markle-blossomed-years.html
> 
> *Royal Wedding: How Meghan Markle blossomed through the years*


----------



## K.D.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-58101586

The theatre H&M make more podcasts it seems by these pictures than the real ones.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Oh wow, is this real? I'm not referring to the earrings.
> View attachment 5160087


You have to go back to when she was a teen to see her natural nose. It was the first thing that ‘whitened up’ (in both senses of the word) but the pummelling it has suffered has not been kind to it -


sdkitty said:


> Ha
> Chrissy only got to be there because her husband was performing


Isn’t that the only reason she’s ever anywhere?
It’s so funny that she got in over H&M though… that truly is the gift that keeps on giving.


breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghan tried to be besties with Ivanka … but you know these old money folk, they only get with people on their level of riches. Not somebody whining about daddy in law cutting off her allowance.


At the risk of bringing up politics again, what’s the tea on this? When was she trying to charm Iv?


sdkitty said:


> well, realistically they couldn't really tell John, who was performing, not to bring his wife


If my theory is true, they could’ve got him a nice _beefcake_ & he probably wouldn’t have noticed the old bully’s absence.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


It was scripted? I wouldn’t admit that was the final draft if I was a comic- pretend it was all ad-libbed like ghostbusters or there was ketamine in the tea or something.



Hermes Zen said:


> Here's from 2006 to 2019 - 52 photos of her.  Few with side profiles.  Amazing to see her face in earlier years like in 2006.





Hermes Zen said:


> You ask and you receive even more photos - earlier years as a young girl and more ...


Update - thank you @Hermes Zen for the receipts!
Now this is an interesting use of the terms ‘evolution’ and ‘blossomed’
Well perhaps she’s evolved like the xenomorphs and blossomed like algae on a pond


add on - reading the hair article & my god her hair is so crunchy it’s  deep fried. All the money in the world and she still hasn’t got a decent wig  it’s so funny.

She looks like an ‘Aunt Sally’ with her hair up…..





And I’m sure people would be lining up to throw balls at her as well


----------



## madamelizaking

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't notice, well I wasn't paying much attention, but I went back and did my own screen grab and yes, this is the nose we saw in the video.
> 
> I'd love to know how H feels about the Hollywood style changes.
> View attachment 5160101
> View attachment 5160115


Looks like a non surgical nose job with filler.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

jelliedfeels said:


> At the risk of bringing up politics again, what’s the tea on this? When was she trying to charm Iv?



This was before she married Harry. She was copying her style, as soon as Ivanka was seen wearing a particular outfit, Meghan would don the same outfit, do a little photoshoot and post it online tagging the same designer in hopes of being featured.

There were rumors that she reached out to ivanka but was shunned. This could possibly explain Meghans insistence on not wanting to meet ***** when he visited the UK.



csshopper said:


> I
> when I first looked at it I thought she was kissing her image on the monitor screen.


That wouldn’t be far from the truth…



jelliedfeels said:


> You have to go back to when she was a teen to see her natural nose. It was the first thing that ‘whitened up’ (in both senses of the word) but the pummelling it has suffered has not been kind to it -



Notice how she almost looks identical to her big sis Samantha? I always thought after the nose job, Meghan looked similar to her white sister.


----------



## jelliedfeels

breakfastatcartier said:


> This was before she married Harry. She was copying her style, as soon as Ivanka was seen wearing a particular outfit, Meghan would don the same outfit, do a little photoshoot and post it online tagging the same designer in hopes of being featured.
> 
> There were rumors that she reached out to ivanka but was shunned. This could possibly explain Meghans insistence on not wanting to meet ***** when he visited the UK.


Oh wow that’s very interesting!
there is that picture of the layered monochrome dress to my knowledge. You’s think even then that these designers would know brand suicide when they saw it though…

I can totally believe that’s why she didn’t want to meet ***** really but of course she would do some inappropriate political posturing.


breakfastatcartier said:


> Notice how she almost looks identical to her big sis Samantha? I always thought after the nose job, Meghan looked similar to her white sister.


I think it did at one point. TBH I wonder  if Samantha might have had a touch up as well. Those little upturned nose jobs were very 00s.


----------



## Hermes Zen

So laughable about M being Most Influential.       Definitely K is !

In article ...

'Despite stepping down as the senior member of the royal family in 2020 and choosing to charter her own course, she still works with several UK based charities.'

Several ... Really?!?  



> https://www.news18.com/news/lifesty...st-for-their-philanthropic-works-4066457.html
> 
> *Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle On British Vogue's 25 Most Influential Women's List for Their Philanthropic Works*


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> So laughable about M being Most Influential.       Definitely K is !
> 
> In article ...
> 
> 'Despite stepping down as the senior member of the royal family in 2020 and choosing to charter her own course, she still works with several UK based charities.'
> 
> Several ... Really?!?


How nice of her to still show some benevolence to our hovel of a country. I will be in the front row doffing my flat cap 

Well influential in the sense that every time she does something vaguely charitable her team makes several influencer like posts about it & get an article published.

TBH I don’t even see KM in the top 25 most influential- she’s got a lot of clout with her position but I don’t think she’s ever had an incredibly well-known campaign or cause. The closest thing was the mental health thing she did with W and H but that’s hardly taken off like childline.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Here's from 2006 to 2019 - 52 photos of her.  Few with side profiles.  Amazing to see her face in earlier years like in 2006.


2009 to 2012, the nose tip looks a bit lopsided. Wonder if that is natural or the result of an earlier nose job.
It looks to me like she trimmed down the size of her nose and straightened it after 2012.

Rather upset that they compared her hairstyle to Vivien Leigh. Puh-lease! Vivien Leigh was an astounding beauty and Methane could never attain her looks or level of acting skill


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> How nice of her to still show some benevolence to our hovel of a country. I will be in the front row doffing my flat cap
> 
> Well influential in the sense that every time she does something vaguely charitable her team makes several influencer like posts about it & get an article published.
> 
> TBH I don’t even see KM in the top 25 most influential- she’s got a lot of clout with her position but I don’t think she’s ever had an incredibly well-known campaign or cause. The closest thing was the mental health thing she did with W and H but that’s hardly taken off like childline.



Hold up 
She did all those zoom calls and sounded intelligent with no cliches, I know right?
- with jaw-dropping photos, she shows us her 3 well-behaved, well-spoken, gorgeous children
-  enviably thin with perfect makeup and clothes
- a happy smile
- supports the arts
- seems to enjoy her role
- that hair!
Kate#goals


----------



## Lodpah

__





						Meghan and Harry's 'snub' from Obama's 60th birthday list 'no minor blip', says royal expert
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up
> She did all those zoom calls and sounded intelligent with no cliches, I know right?
> - with jaw-dropping photos, she shows us her 3 well-behaved, well-spoken, gorgeous children
> -  enviably thin with perfect makeup and clothes
> - a happy smile
> - supports the arts
> - seems to enjoy her role
> - that hair!
> Kate#goals


Its not shade to her she seems lovely but top 25…  there’s a lot of big charities in the U.K. with female bosses. (Emma Revie of the trussell trust springs immediately to mind. Food banks have grown in prominence enormously since 2018.)
  It feels like she’s been put in because she’s royal but I’d say if you wanted to put a female royal in then I’d say Anne does more but alas she is not _marketable_.

Actually looking at the vogue article it’s more the vague ‘influential’ women list & most of the choices are total jokes. Vivienne Westwood? The ceo of Citigroup? Some no name artistic types & public sector stooges. Really?








						Discover The Extraordinary Women Who Make Up This Year’s Vogue 25
					

From activist Soma Sara to master satirist Marina Hyde to Zara Mohammed, the youngest person and first woman to be elected as secretary general of The Muslim Council of Britain




					www.google.co.uk
				



Also why’s our friend MLM even in the list given she’s a) American and b)  doesn’t live or work in Britain anyway?
Oh yes, it’s because the vogue Editorial staff are deluxe model asskissers.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Hi! What do you agree on?


I think our new friend might be a bot.


----------



## chicinthecity777

charlottawill said:


> As they say in Texas, all hat and no cattle.


As they say in England, all fur coat and no knickers!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> *When a granddad/mom makes the dough, the second generation often grows it, but the third generation often pisses it away. *If the third generation is successful in growing it then the enterprise is usually in decent hands for even further growth or is in line for a great buyout offer. In my investment career days, yes, some wealthy people looked awful, and some...did reflect their account worth. Of course there's a lot of people who put on a good act but in reality most of their trappings--house, cars, etc are owned by the bank and sometimes they have to borrow to go on vacation. If I had to borrow to go on vacation I wouldn't go anywhere, I couldn't enjoy myself.


It must be a trend that cuts across all cultures and ages, because we have the same saying in Chinese 富不过三代 which was adapted from a longer saying by philosopher Mencius (born 372 BC). Some of DH's distant relatives are 3rd gen wealthy, and they are very very careful with their money, so that the saying will not predict their future.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> As they say in England, all fur coat and no knickers!



I think they say that everywhere (do I remember it from a line in Ice Storm 1997(?)). 

YSL/SLP seems to often base multiple collections on that look


----------



## amante

Sol Ryan said:


> Yeah, but we aren’t multi-millionaires whining on Oprah about how poor we are now that daddy cut us off for quitting our jobs or trying to convince they world that somehow they’re just like us but somehow better than us…


Prince Charles officially and publicly promised to support H&M for two years Correction: 12 months* with £2.3 million. Official Clarence House accounts showed that Prince Charles stopped paying H&M's expenses Summer 2020. Whether you think adults whose official jobs are prince and princess of the UK should be funded by a more senior royal doesn't matter. Charlie boy reneged on his word.









						UK's Harry and Meghan to drop titles and retire as working royals
					

Prince Harry and his wife Meghan will no longer be working members of Britain's monarchy and they will pay their own way in life as they embark on an independent future, Buckingham Palace said on Saturday.




					www.reuters.com
				



source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57589216
*Charles financially supported Sussexes until summer of 2020 - Clarence House*

Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey his family "cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020.
A Clarence House spokesman said Prince Charles continued to fund the Sussexes until that summer.
The Sussexes deny there is a difference in timelines.
A spokesperson for them said Prince Harry was referring in his Oprah interview to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period - the period from April to the start of July.
The comments by Clarence House - the office of Prince Charles and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall - were made as the annual royal accounts were published.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


As a former copy editor* I've noticed how DM slices and dices people's words. The way DM words it makes Melissa look like she encouraged H to do the juggling but my hunch is that H did it all on his own and then afterward questioned his action.

*of my college paper, but hey, it was printed on broadsheet and widely circulated around town!



jelliedfeels said:


> I think our new friend might be a bot.


They've even come for us. Be a savvy consumer of information dear TPFers.


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> Prince Charles officially and publicly promised to support H&M for two years with £2.3 million. Official Clarence House accounts showed that Prince Charles stopped paying H&M's expenses Summer 2020. Whether you think adults whose official jobs are prince and princess of the UK should be funded by a more senior royal doesn't matter. Charlie boy reneged on his word.
> 
> source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57589216
> *Charles financially supported Sussexes until summer of 2020 - Clarence House*
> 
> Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey his family "cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020.
> A Clarence House spokesman said Prince Charles continued to fund the Sussexes until that summer.
> The Sussexes deny there is a difference in timelines.
> A spokesperson for them said Prince Harry was referring in his Oprah interview to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period - the period from April to the start of July.
> The comments by Clarence House - the office of Prince Charles and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall - were made as the annual royal accounts were published.


When was the 2-year period? Is it possible that the Montecito Misers used up the £2.3 million early? There was speculation that PC might have used the money to pay off what they owed for the Frogmore reno.

ETA: the BBC said the Frogmore reno cost £2.4 million which would have swallowed up every penny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

amante said:


> Prince Charles officially and publicly promised to support H&M for two years with £2.3 million. Official Clarence House accounts showed that Prince Charles stopped paying H&M's expenses Summer 2020. Whether you think adults whose official jobs are prince and princess of the UK should be funded by a more senior royal doesn't matter. Charlie boy reneged on his word.
> 
> source: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57589216
> *Charles financially supported Sussexes until summer of 2020 - Clarence House*
> 
> Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey his family "cut me off financially" in the first quarter of 2020.
> A Clarence House spokesman said Prince Charles continued to fund the Sussexes until that summer.
> The Sussexes deny there is a difference in timelines.
> A spokesperson for them said Prince Harry was referring in his Oprah interview to the first quarter of the fiscal reporting period - the period from April to the start of July.
> The comments by Clarence House - the office of Prince Charles and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall - were made as the annual royal accounts were published.
> 
> 
> 
> As a former copy editor* I've noticed how DM slices and dices people's words. The way DM words it makes Melissa look like she encouraged H to do the juggling but my hunch is that H did it all on his own and then afterward questioned his action.
> 
> *of my college paper, but hey, it was printed on broadsheet and widely circulated around town!
> 
> 
> They've even come for us. Be a savvy consumer of information dear TPFers.



Well, tit for tat. We have what he promised them but no word of what they promised him. Did they promise not to slag-off the entire BRF (and staff) or embarrass them?

If he promised to pay for a determined period, it sounds like they were asked to leave (and on good grounds) and it was agreed they would say H&M made the decision so they could save face. So much for finding freedom.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> It must be a trend that cuts across all cultures and ages, because we have the same saying in Chinese 富不过三代 which was adapted from a longer saying by philosopher Mencius (born 372 BC). Some of DH's distant relatives are 3rd gen wealthy, and they are very very careful with their money, so that the saying will not predict their future.



_The Chinese proverb “rags to rags in three generations” says that family wealth does not last for three generations. The first generation makes the money, the second spends it and the third sees none of the wealth.

The Chinese aren’t the only ones who acknowledge this as a problem. In the U.S. it is referenced as “shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations,” and in Japan it’s “rice paddies to rice paddies in three generations.”_









						How to Help Your Family Wealth Last for Generations
					

Creating generational wealth takes careful planning and thoughtful sharing of intentions, plus the right investment vehicle.




					www.kiplinger.com


----------



## amante

xincinsin said:


> When was the 2-year period? Is it possible that the Montecito Misers used up the £2.3 million early? There was speculation that PC might have used the money to pay off what they owed for the Frogmore reno.


Not likely because there was some passing reference made to Clarence House paying invoices in summer, so that means £2.3 million wasn't used in one fell swoop

Also, excuse my mistake, 12-month period not two years, I must have dropped the "1" in my head


----------



## needlv

Is this MM?  It’s saying she had Lili via surrogate!









						Pregnancy Story 2 - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] This actress likes to tell people how much she wants to live a private life. Now, we could debate all day long the fact that the kind of life she chose doesn’t exactly lend itself towards privacy. In fact, both her career and her choice of partner pretty much ensure that her life […]




					blindgossip.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> As a former copy editor* I've noticed how DM slices and dices people's words. The way DM words it makes Melissa look like she encouraged H to do the juggling but my hunch is that H did it all on his own and then afterward questioned his action.
> 
> *of my college paper, but hey, it was printed on broadsheet and widely circulated around town!



Listen below to hear Melissa’s actual words. Be sure to count how many times she says “like”.
What is apparent - the H&M video was scripted which means every utterance and staging was well-thought out, Melissa wants to promote her own show, H&M and Melissa could not be more fake. Ymmv.  




_Speaking about the video, Melissa explained, "She's [Meghan] doing such an amazing thing to celebrate her 40th.

"I just love that she is like, 'Oh, what can I do to put some good and help some people out?' Well that is awfully nice," she said in an interview with Access Hollywood.

Sharing exactly how Harry's juggling cameo came about, Melissa revealed, "Then in comes Harry and he's like, 'I can juggle'... Then he's like, 'Is it going to be weird if I stand outside and juggle?'

"I was like, 'Weird in a way that will make me watch it five million times!'"_


----------



## amante

papertiger said:


> Well, tit for tat. We have what he promised them but no word of what they promised him. Did they promise not to slag-off the entire BRF (and staff) or embarrass them?
> 
> If he promised to pay for a determined period, it sounds like they were asked to leave (and on good grounds) and it was agreed they would say H&M made the decision so they could save face. So much for finding freedom.


Fair point, other than not representing HM and relinquishing official patronages, nothing was asked of H&M. 

It seems like the the financial support was for a duration not a specific sum. The £2.3m figure was assumed from 2019's royal accounts of H&M's expenses.









						How Will Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Make Money Now?
					

On Saturday, Buckingham Palace announced the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will abandon their HRH titles as the couple steps back from their roles as senior members of the royal family. While the news is certainly significant, it’s another part of their announcement that has us really talking. In...




					finance.yahoo.com
				



"Though the couple cannot receive public funds, they will still receive private funding from the Duchy of Cornwall via Prince Charles, which included about £2.3 million last year, according to Cornwall Live. "

Well, yes, H&M originally wanted Duchy of Cornwall funding AND Sovereign Grant funding while living half-in and half-out. 12-month review period was the result of pushback from senior royals during Sandringham Summit aka Megxit


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> Prince Charles officially and publicly promised to support H&M for two years Correction: 12 months* with £2.3 million. Official Clarence House accounts showed that Prince Charles stopped paying H&M's expenses Summer 2020. Whether you think adults whose official jobs are prince and princess of the UK should be funded by a more senior royal doesn't matter. Charlie boy reneged on his word.



Did he, though? Didn't the public records show they did indeed receive the money as a lump sum? If they spent it early why would Charles be responsible for opening the purse again...only because he'd done so before? At some point the troublesome two received more money than the heir who also has three kids only so they didn't have to tuck into their own millions to furnish their house.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> Well, yes, H&M originally wanted Duchy of Cornwall funding AND Sovereign Grant funding while living half-in and half-out. 12-month review period was the result of pushback from senior royals during Sandringham Summit aka Megxit



Naw, in their angry manifesto against the Crown published on their Sussex Royal website back then they generously said they'd give up the sovereign grant to become financially independent but failed to say that a) that was only 5 % of their income anyway and b) they fully expected Charles to still shell out.


----------



## lanasyogamama

A bit long, but I always enjoy this guy.


----------



## amante

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he, though? Didn't the public records show they did indeed receive the money as a lump sum? If they spent it early why would Charles be responsible for opening the purse again...only because he'd done so before? At some point the troublesome two received more money than the heir who also has three kids only so they didn't have to tuck into their own millions to furnish their house.


Public records showing that do not exist. I am happy to be proven wrong, but I as a member of the general public cannot find records that demonstrate that. Charles promised to financially support them during their 12-month review period without stating an exact number, therefore a lump sum to be given is not even possible to begin with.




> A senior Clarence House spokesperson said: "As we'll all remember in January 2020 when the duke and duchess announced that they were going to move away from the working royal family, the duke said that they would work towards becoming financially independent.
> 
> "The Prince of Wales allocated a substantial sum to support them with this transition.
> "That funding ceased in the summer of last year. The couple are now financially independent."
> During the couple's interview with Winfrey in March, Harry said "my family literally cut me off financially" in "the first quarter of 2020".
> Quizzed about the timeframes, the Clarence House spokesperson said: "I wouldn't acknowledge that they are dramatically different. All I can tell you are the facts."











						Charles financially supported Sussexes until summer of 2020 - Clarence House
					

Prince Charles supported the couple after they stepped down as senior royals, Clarence House says.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## amante

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw, in their angry manifesto against the Crown published on their Sussex Royal website back then they generously said they'd give up the sovereign grant to become financially independent but failed to say that a) that was only 5 % of their income anyway and b) they fully expected Charles to still shell out.


You're right, they tried to do a bait-and-switch by offering up the Sovereign Grant when really it's just chump change compared to the Duchy of Cornwall's largesse.



> The preference of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex was to continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant.











						Spring 2020 Transition | The Official Website of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex
					

We are pleased to now be able to share with you an update on many of the details agreed at a meeting of The Royal Family in January 2020, which outlines The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new roles, taking effect Spring 2020. We had hoped to be allowed to share these details with you […]




					sussexroyal.com
				




In any case, Prince Charles tried to shortchange them by prematurely cutting H&M off months before the end of the agreed upon 12-month review period and H&M fought back and for however much you dislike them, they do seem to be in the right this time around. I for one have sat front row in many family fights over money and from my perspective they are to be congratulated after getting screwed over but still finding ways to make cash flow.


----------



## Annawakes

I thought this was Jennifer Connelly.  (Actress and LV model) Add that to her list of “Jennifer” faces.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Before I forget, I wish to thank the following posters for their second and third contributions to the nickname list that will be posted as soon as we are positive that we have collected all of them. Thanks! 
 @Chanbal for The madame of Montecito
 @gracekelly for Meggie Moaner
 @xincinsin for Termagent Wretch, Terminal Whiner, Terrible Woman


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Listen below to hear Melissa’s actual words. Be sure to count how many times she says “like”.
> What is apparent - the H&M video was scripted which means every utterance and staging was well-thought out, Melissa wants to promote her own show, H&M and Melissa could not be more fake. Ymmv.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Speaking about the video, Melissa explained, "She's [Meghan] doing such an amazing thing to celebrate her 40th.
> 
> "I just love that she is like, 'Oh, what can I do to put some good and help some people out?' Well that is awfully nice," she said in an interview with Access Hollywood.
> 
> Sharing exactly how Harry's juggling cameo came about, Melissa revealed, "Then in comes Harry and he's like, 'I can juggle'... Then he's like, 'Is it going to be weird if I stand outside and juggle?'
> 
> "I was like, 'Weird in a way that will make me watch it five million times!'"_





Vibes are very strong.

Thinking about it Haz is this character - maybe McCarthy is too.


----------



## Aimee3

All this plastic surgery that M has had, just confirms to me that she did not carry the second baby.  I don’t believe you can have a baby and then go straight into an operating room for all that surgery.  All those procedures require a decent recovery time too, for things to settle etc and it looks to me that she might have done these procedures more than 2 months ago *while the surrogate was actually pregnant.*. 
Thoughts?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5160374
> 
> Vibes are very strong.
> 
> Thinking about it Haz is this character - maybe McCarthy is too.


 um like, it's Ha'ray?......


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> All this plastic surgery that M has had, just confirms to me that she did not carry the second baby.  I don’t believe you can have a baby and then go straight into an operating room for all that surgery.  All those procedures require a decent recovery time too, for things to settle etc and it looks to me that she might have done these procedures more than 2 months ago *while the surrogate was actually pregnant.*.
> Thoughts?



I'm no plastic surgery pro, but I did think her face looked puffy / swollen. If from procedures or a recent pregnancy I can't tell...but I'll say I was extremely surprised when they announced the 2nd pregnancy because never in a million years would I have thought she'd go through all the discomfort again when Archie was her royal anchor already.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm no plastic surgery pro, but I did think her face looked puffy / swollen. If from procedures or a recent pregnancy I can't tell...but I'll say I was extremely surprised when they announced the 2nd pregnancy because never in a million years would I have thought she'd go through all the discomfort again when Archie was her royal anchor already.


Using a surrogate is right up their alley.  Have someone else do all the work, and M takes all the credit.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I didn't notice, well I wasn't paying much attention, but I went back and did my own screen grab and yes, this is the nose we saw in the video.
> 
> I'd love to know how H feels about the Hollywood style changes.
> View attachment 5160101
> View attachment 5160115


so she did mostly get rid of of the Bob Hope nose?  hopefully she's satisfied and won't keep going like Michael Jackson did


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> You're right, they tried to do a bait-and-switch by offering up the Sovereign Grant when really it's just chump change compared to the Duchy of Cornwall's largesse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spring 2020 Transition | The Official Website of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> We are pleased to now be able to share with you an update on many of the details agreed at a meeting of The Royal Family in January 2020, which outlines The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new roles, taking effect Spring 2020. We had hoped to be allowed to share these details with you […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sussexroyal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In any case, Prince Charles tried to shortchange them by prematurely cutting H&M off months before the end of the agreed upon 12-month review period and H&M fought back and for however much you dislike them, they do seem to be in the right this time around. I for one have sat front row in many family fights over money and from my perspective they are to be congratulated after getting screwed over but still finding ways to make cash flow.


I'm trying to find where PC said he would support them for the entire 12-month review period. So far, I have only seen the Clarence House statement that PC would finance their transition. To me, once Hazard and Methane start telling the world that they have megabuck deals, they have achieved their financial independence and PC is no longer obliged to give them money. 

And if it is true that, despite what Hazard claimed in the OW interview, they were already sending out feelers and making deals before Megxit, then the free money spout was doomed to be shut off.


----------



## jinendrajain

MissThing said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed before but I alwasy thought the paternity runopoirs around prince harry and Diana's other lovers were just crazy rumours.  Now I'm not so sure.


None of this actually matters; Prince Charles obviously accepts Harry as his and adores him. Diana is not here to defend her reputation. Anything in the press casting aspersions on his parentage must be extremely hurtful to the entire family. The only other person in this scenario is Hewitt, and he_ *really*_ is utterly irrelevant


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Is this MM?  It’s saying she had Lili via surrogate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnancy Story 2 - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress likes to tell people how much she wants to live a private life. Now, we could debate all day long the fact that the kind of life she chose doesn’t exactly lend itself towards privacy. In fact, both her career and her choice of partner pretty much ensure that her life […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



The surrogate is making more and more sense. Who would have a nose job during a geriatric pregnancy?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The surrogate is making more and more sense. Who would have a nose job during a geriatric pregnancy?


who knows?
do you get full anesthesia for a nose job these days?


----------



## sdkitty

amante said:


> You're right, they tried to do a bait-and-switch by offering up the Sovereign Grant when really it's just chump change compared to the Duchy of Cornwall's largesse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spring 2020 Transition | The Official Website of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> We are pleased to now be able to share with you an update on many of the details agreed at a meeting of The Royal Family in January 2020, which outlines The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new roles, taking effect Spring 2020. We had hoped to be allowed to share these details with you […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sussexroyal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In any case, Prince Charles tried to shortchange them by prematurely cutting H&M off months before the end of the agreed upon 12-month review period and H&M fought back and for however much you dislike them, they do seem to be in the right this time around. I for one have sat front row in many family fights over money and from my perspective they are to be congratulated after getting screwed over but still finding ways to make cash flow.


most families would cut them off completely after the way they've behaved...congratulate them?  not me


----------



## lanasyogamama

Happily surprised to see the negative comments.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> who knows?
> do you get full anesthesia for a nose job these days?


All surgeries have risks (e.g. infection). It's hard to believe that one would add additional risks to a geriatric pregnancy. And yes, general anesthesia is still an option for rhinoplasty surgery.

It's very possible that in preparation for her 40th birthday blast she underwent plastic surgery while someone else carried Lil*bet.


----------



## jelliedfeels

amante said:


> You're right, they tried to do a bait-and-switch by offering up the Sovereign Grant when really it's just chump change compared to the Duchy of Cornwall's largesse.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spring 2020 Transition | The Official Website of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> We are pleased to now be able to share with you an update on many of the details agreed at a meeting of The Royal Family in January 2020, which outlines The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new roles, taking effect Spring 2020. We had hoped to be allowed to share these details with you […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sussexroyal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In any case, Prince Charles tried to shortchange them by prematurely cutting H&M off months before the end of the agreed upon 12-month review period and H&M fought back and for however much you dislike them, they do seem to be in the right this time around. I for one have sat front row in many family fights over money and from my perspective they are to be congratulated after getting screwed over but still finding ways to make cash flow.


IMHO, it’s a little naive to assume we get the full picture of the royal finances from the publicly available records or indeed what is agreed privately it seems.
I also think both father & son are capable of lying but given H has already publicly lied on multiple occasions,  I strugggle to believe this is the absolute truth of their arrangement tbh.

In factthis is pure speculation admittedly, but my instinct suggests that the opposite is more likely. Namely, that daddy is still slipping them cash in some capacity.
Charles has got the spine of a jellyfish and I doubt H would have any trouble guilting him into a bung even now.

Of course, this would be classed as some private expenditure and we the public would never find out about this and because the optics are so disastrous for both sides.

but I mean….It seems much more feasible to me than Charles out-grifting the four-time golddigging champ MLM and it not being the constantly brought up by team SS like that alleged dark baby comment.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> All surgeries have risks (e.g. infection). It's hard to believe that one would add additional risks to a geriatric pregnancy. And yes, general anesthesia is still an option for rhinoplasty surgery.
> 
> It's very possible that in preparation for her 40th birthday blast she underwent plastic surgery while someone else carried Lil*bet.


who knows
and if it was a surrogate, then were the eggs and sperm from H&M?  we will probably never know and I don't care that much


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Is this MM?  It’s saying she had Lili via surrogate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pregnancy Story 2 - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] This actress likes to tell people how much she wants to live a private life. Now, we could debate all day long the fact that the kind of life she chose doesn’t exactly lend itself towards privacy. In fact, both her career and her choice of partner pretty much ensure that her life […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



"_She’s had a health issue for a few years now. Actually, more than one health issue, but the one that made it unsafe for her to to through the pregnancy herself is her dependency on prescription medication._"

If this is true, I wonder if the dependency on prescription medication has to do with multiple surgeries and pain killers.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> who knows
> and if it was a surrogate, then were the eggs and sperm from H&M?  we will probably never know and I don't care that much


I would bet that they used eggs and sperm from M&H.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would bet that they used eggs and sperm from M&H.


probably
I knew a couple who used both eggs and sperm from donors but they were older than H&M


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Happily surprised to see the negative comments.




I went to Insta to read through them and was actually surprised by the sheer amount. 

But also...while reading I had to see Raptor do her spiel and even though I wisely had not unmuted the video, her over-the-top gestures and facial expressions are so unnerving. She is such a bad actress, and yet she is alway, always acting.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> so she did mostly get rid of of the Bob Hope nose?  hopefully she's satisfied and won't keep going like Michael Jackson did


Bob hope nose is the best yet!  

Yes it looks like she’s got the tip cut off again & a little ski jump turn up back but as long as she keeps hitting the powder it’s going to flop back down 


sdkitty said:


> who knows?
> do you get full anesthesia for a nose job these days?








						Anaesthesia Options & Frequently Asked Questions | London
					

Anaesthesia is an important consideration in facial plastic surgery. To find out more about your options, contact our Harley Street centre today.




					www.londonfacialplasticsurgery.co.uk
				



This surgeon seems to be recommending it. I would too if I ever decided to get rid of my beak.
(Not likely as I love my big nose - all the better for prying with )






Chanbal said:


> All surgeries have risks (e.g. infection). It's hard to believe that one would add additional risks to a geriatric pregnancy. And yes, general anesthesia is still an option for rhinoplasty surgery.
> 
> It's very possible that in preparation for her 40th birthday blast she underwent plastic surgery while someone else carried Lil*bet.


I mean either is very believable for her…..

Yes, I think she needed to get it all done by the big day so she could reveal her landmark truth that she is trying to steal Jennifer Lawrence’s look (& probably her career too) almost as much as Scabies is trying to steal hers.


Even better! J law with the tendrils wig…


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went to Insta to read through them and was actually surprised by the sheer amount.
> 
> But also...while reading I had to see Raptor do her spiel and even though I wisely had not unmuted the video, her over-the-top gestures and facial expressions are so unnerving. She is such a bad actress, and yet she is alway, always acting.


Oh, I get it now....all her stans and the rest of us plebeians need to donate 40 minutes of our time....haven't heard whether this is happening


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> (Not likely as I love my big nose - all the better for prying with )



I don't love mine, but I also have a nervous system that goes completely hysterical (like Raptor...all the big, unnecessary gestures LOL) when confronted with pain and despite rarely ever taking painkillers they don't work all that well on me. When I had my gallbladder out I was reading accounts of people who went back to work after 5 days, I was curled up on the couch in agony for 2+ weeks praying I'll never need a c-section. So I guess elective surgery is not my thing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Oh, I get it now....all her stans and the rest of us plebeians need to donate 40 minutes of our time....haven't heard whether this is happening



I had a face malfunction when I read Melissa and Raptor were apparently expecting everyone to drop everything that very day without notice. Like...WTF? People - both those volunteering and those you want to help out - have stuff and schedules.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't love mine, but I also have a nervous system that goes completely hysterical (like Raptor...all the big, unnecessary gestures LOL) when confronted with pain and despite rarely ever taking painkillers they don't work all that well on me. When I had my gallbladder out I was reading accounts of people who went back to work after 5 days, I was curled up on the couch in agony for 2+ weeks praying I'll never need a c-section. So I guess elective surgery is not my thing!


I don't love my nose either but honestly it took me many years to realize it.  This is part of the problem as I see it.  Most of us who are older grew up mostly accepting our faces.  Getting a nose job used to be for people with noticeably large noses.  Now it's become something where people (esp women) with perfectly acceptable noses are looking to make them better.  or make them look like Jennifer Lawrence's or whatever.  and what Hollywood does gets publicized and "regular" women try to do the same.  To me it's kinda sad.  What happened to uniqueness?  everyone now need to have a thin nose and puffy lips?
I admire someone like Lauren Hutton (aging myself here) who refused to fix her tooth gap.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh wow that’s very interesting!
> there is that picture of the layered monochrome dress to my knowledge. You’s think even then that these designers would know brand suicide when they saw it though…
> 
> I can totally believe that’s why she didn’t want to meet ***** really but of course she would do some inappropriate political posturing.
> 
> I think it did at one point. TBH I wonder  if Samantha might have had a touch up as well. Those little upturned nose jobs were very 00s.



That’s possible, Meghan and Samantha were very close up until she tried being “Hollywood” … Samantha was pretty in her youth though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had a face malfunction when I read Melissa and Raptor were apparently expecting everyone to drop everything that very day without notice. Like...WTF? People - both those volunteering and those you want to help out - have stuff and schedules.


But it NEEDS to be on MY BIRTHDAY or else how are people going to know it’s all about MEEEEEE! 
Don’t screw this up for me or else! 
#my40thmyway

Honestly this woman is just the reincarnation of Joan Crawford without the good looks, charisma or acting talent.
Maybe she’s the reincarnation of mommie dearest instead.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> That’s possible, Meghan and Samantha were very close up until she tried being “Hollywood” … Samantha was pretty in her youth though.
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.pinimg.com/736x/e5/94/1c/e5941c12f47eff91e8a039d6f5f8e427.jpg



MM was a gorgeous child though (minus the attitude) that just grew into a not so gorgeous teenager. I think her face might have adjusted naturally again had she just had the patience, a lot of teens look funny. That said, I think her first few surgeries really enhanced her looks without being obvious. At her current rate, she'll be Khloe Kardashian soon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe she’s the reincarnation of mommie dearest instead.



I sometimes fear for those kids. It is extremely straining to grow up with parents that self-absorbed and manipulative.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> MM was a gorgeous child though (minus the attitude) that just grew into a not so gorgeous teenager. I think her face might have adjusted naturally again had she just had the patience, a lot of teens look funny. That said, I think her first few surgeries really enhanced her looks without being obvious. At her current rate, she'll be Khloe Kardashian soon.


I always thought she was funny looking, even as a baby. Especially with those beady eyes … her and Harry were ugly from day 1… I’m sorry.
I remember when I was temporarily a fan (when she was still engaged) and i saw this pic of her and was surprised… not pleasantly, lol.

Poor thing was ugly inside and out from childhood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> I always thought she was funny looking, even as a baby. Especially with those beady eyes … her and Harry were ugly from day 1… I’m sorry.
> I remember when I was temporarily a fan (when she was still engaged) and i saw this pic of her and was surprised… not pleasantly, lol.
> 
> Poor thing was ugly inside and out from childhood.



Haha aw, I feel bad saying a child is ugly LOL Even knowing how she turned out.


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> I always thought she was funny looking, even as a baby. Especially with those beady eyes … her and Harry were ugly from day 1… I’m sorry.
> I remember when I was temporarily a fan (when she was still engaged) and i saw this pic of her and was surprised… not pleasantly, lol.
> 
> Poor thing was ugly inside and out from childhood.


I wouldn't call her ugly in that pic....she looks a lot like her mom there.  from about age 16 you never saw her natural hair and then there was the nose job....so she doesn't look as much like doria now


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> Bob hope nose is the best yet!
> 
> Yes it looks like she’s got the tip cut off again & a little ski jump turn up back but as long as she keeps hitting the powder it’s going to flop back down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anaesthesia Options & Frequently Asked Questions | London
> 
> 
> Anaesthesia is an important consideration in facial plastic surgery. To find out more about your options, contact our Harley Street centre today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.londonfacialplasticsurgery.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This surgeon seems to be recommending it. I would too if I ever decided to get rid of my beak.
> (Not likely as I love my big nose - all the better for prying with )
> View attachment 5160483
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean either is very believable for her…..
> 
> Yes, I think she needed to get it all done by the big day so she could reveal her landmark truth that she is trying to steal Jennifer Lawrence’s look (& probably her career too) almost as much as Scabies is trying to steal hers.
> View attachment 5160484
> 
> Even better! J law with the tendrils wig…
> View attachment 5160491


Well, according to Lorrie Hill, even Jen Lawrence wasn't born looking looking like Jen Lawrence. Lorrie Hill is amazing at showing us what was done, when we weren't aware of it.

I'm in the minority, but I liked the 2nd Markle nose, the one that was slimmed, but still had the upturn.

I thought it was unique, had lots of personality and suited her face ... also lovely in profile with the upturn.

Now as mentioned, she's trying to be an older Jen Lawrence with the cheekbones and nose.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Melissa M with her participation in the 40x40 PR stunt earned a prominent spot on DM.  

_








						Melissa McCarthy dons a blue jumpsuit and shops at a flea market
					

Melissa McCarthy was spotted shopping for vintage clothing at the Rose Bowl Flea Market in Los Angeles. The star, 50, kept it casual in a blue floral print jumpsuit for her outing on Sunday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
"_And Melissa McCarthy was on the hunt for some unique duds, seen shopping for vintage clothing at the Rose Bowl Flea Market in Pasadena, California on Sunday."_

Would Melissa be spending her recently earned cash?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> (Not likely as I love my big nose - all the better for prying with )
> View attachment 5160483


Joan Hickson, my favourite Miss Marple.  I bet she, as Miss Marple of course, could solve all the mysteries surrounding M's pregnancies/surrogacies and other crappy business deals.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Well, according to Lorrie Hill, even Jen Lawrence wasn't born looking looking like Jen Lawrence. Lorrie Hill is amazing at showing us what was done, when we weren't aware of it.
> 
> I'm in the minority, but I liked the 2nd Markle nose, the one that was slimmed, but still had the upturn.
> 
> I thought it was unique, had lots of personality and suited her face ... also lovely in profile with the upturn.
> 
> Now as mentioned, she's trying to be an older Jen Lawrence with the cheekbones and nose.


I think if I had a nose like her first or second one and I wasn't a celeb I'd have been fine with it.  I can understand if you're seeing yourself in photos all the time you could become more self-critical.  As far as the upturn, I personally think it was her worst feature (in profile anyway)


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I think if I had a nose like her first or second one and I wasn't a celeb I'd have been fine with it.  I can understand if you're seeing yourself in photos all the time you could become more self-critical.  As far as the upturn, I personally think it was her worst feature (in profile anyway)


I read that Americans hate noses.  If you look at Hollywood, it seems to be true.  lol

Even Streisand and Streep shortened their noses and no one noticed.  But I did. The tips of their noses used to almost touch their top lip when they smiled and now thy are no where near the top lip.


----------



## Katel

breakfastatcartier said:


> That’s possible, Meghan and Samantha were very close up until she tried being “Hollywood” … Samantha was pretty in her youth though.
> 
> Also @breakfastatcartier never noticed her “beedy eyes” til now lol
> 
> 
> View attachment 5160503
> 
> 
> View attachment 5160504





breakfastatcartier said:


> I always thought she was funny looking, even as a baby. Especially with those beady eyes … her and Harry were ugly from day 1… I’m sorry.
> I remember when I was temporarily a fan (when she was still engaged) and i saw this pic of her and was surprised… not pleasantly, lol.
> 
> Poor thing was ugly inside and out from childhood.



Sons frequently take after their moms and daughters their dads - both girls have Thomas’ nose.
eta: didn’t know she wore glasses / contacts ?

Also @breakfastatcartier never noticed her “beedy eyes” til now lol


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> So laughable about M being Most Influential.       Definitely K is !
> 
> In article ...
> 
> 'Despite stepping down as the senior member of the royal family in 2020 and choosing to charter her own course, she still works with several UK based charities.'
> 
> Several ... Really?!?


I don't get why Vogue has their heads up her butt.  Kate, absolutely.  Meg?  Philanthropic?  With her lemon olive cakes and her minions donating a whole 40 minutes of their time??


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Well, according to Lorrie Hill, even Jen Lawrence wasn't born looking looking like Jen Lawrence. Lorrie Hill is amazing at showing us what was done, when we weren't aware of it.
> 
> I'm in the minority, but I liked the 2nd Markle nose, the one that was slimmed, but still had the upturn.
> 
> I thought it was unique, had lots of personality and suited her face ... also lovely in profile with the upturn.
> 
> Now as mentioned, she's trying to be an older Jen Lawrence with the cheekbones and nose.


oh yeah J Law has definitely had work done as well. Lots of fillers for sure, almost kylie Jenner levels, but now she’s toned that down a bit.

Ultimately it’s completely subjective whether you think any of these women are beautiful & they can do what they want but I just find it funny that M is trying to persuade us she’s the vanguard when she’s trying to copy a blonde woman whose big smash was a few years ago.

I can see why she felt wanted surgery to be a model/hot actress. Ultimately if you are planning a career trading on something as trendy & subjective looks then you can’t really object when the boss says you aren’t what they want/attractive enough.
It does grinds my gears how she also pretends she is some feminist icon who empowers women and is a stance against restrictive beauty standards. But she’s far from the only ‘hottie’ to do this TBF.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> It must be a trend that cuts across all cultures and ages, because we have the same saying in Chinese 富不过三代 which was adapted from a longer saying by philosopher Mencius (born 372 BC). Some of DH's distant relatives are 3rd gen wealthy, and they are very very careful with their money, so that the saying will not predict their future.


When I was about 10, my dad made me read a story about "Kevin", the potato farmer from Ireland who immigrated to the US during the potato famine.  He toiled and made something of himself, his son (also Kevin) grew the business into a huge enterprise, and his son, Kevin III, blew it all with his aimless lifestyle.  While I immigrated to the US myself, my dad was technically the first generation to start something, and I remember thinking, my kids will NOT be Kevin IIIs!


----------



## CarryOn2020

She’s changed so much of herself, physically. Almost in a scary way. 
Trying too hard to be perfect which sets everyone’s nerves on edge.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> I thought this was Jennifer Connelly.  (Actress and LV model) Add that to her list of “Jennifer” faces.


Wow, you're so right!  I love Jennifer Connelly.  Meg, you will never be her!


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> All this plastic surgery that M has had, just confirms to me that she did not carry the second baby.  I don’t believe you can have a baby and then go straight into an operating room for all that surgery.  All those procedures require a decent recovery time too, for things to settle etc and it looks to me that she might have done these procedures more than 2 months ago *while the surrogate was actually pregnant.*.
> Thoughts?


What's interesting is that every article states that the doctor "delivered their baby", not delivered Meg.  The official BRF announcements always state so and so "was delivered of a baby".  Huge difference.  Their baby delivered by the doctor delivering the surrogate still qualifies as the doctor "delivered her baby".


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> I can see why she felt wanted surgery to be a model/hot actress. Ultimately if you are planning a career trading on something as trendy & subjective looks then you can’t really object when the boss says you aren’t what they want/attractive enough.
> It does grinds my gears how she also pretends she is some feminist icon who empowers women and is a stance against restrictive beauty standards. But she’s far from the only ‘hottie’ to do this TBF.


Well, she's long past the model/hot actress stage. It seems unnecessary for a "feminist icon who empowers women' to keep chiseling away.

But moving to Hollywood, where it's common to never stop cutting, adjusting and filling... it's probably the norm to do so.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> What is worse is Harry and Meghan didn't even make that first list of 500+ invitees. That is how low their celebrity status is here in the US.


IMO .. neither B-r-ck nor M-c-e-lle want to deal with them because they are smart and know full well what the deal is with these tro grifters!


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> I don't get why Vogue has their heads up her butt.  Kate, absolutely.  Meg?  Philanthropic?  With her lemon olive cakes and her minions donating a whole 40 minutes of their time??


Exactly what I was thinking!  How does M qualify?    If she had done more, I would be happy to agree BUT NOT what we've seen or heard.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


Well, that's it for me .. Melissa is* OFF MY LIST *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’ve watched to many episodes of “botched” on E! to ever get plastic surgery. It is so scary what can go wrong.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I have always admired the Obamas and most certainly am not a fan of the previous first lady, but i believe it was a poor decision to go ahead with this party. Whether they had 500 or 200 vaccinated and tested guests, that's still potentially a superspreader event. We are in uncharted territory with the Delta variant. Even if he is no longer in office, people look up to the Obamas and the optics of this are not good.


*Could not agree with you more* on this; I'm rather disappointed in them at the moment ..


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> All this plastic surgery that M has had, just confirms to me that she did not carry the second baby.  I don’t believe you can have a baby and then go straight into an operating room for all that surgery.  All those procedures require a decent recovery time too, for things to settle etc and it looks to me that she might have done these procedures more than 2 months ago *while the surrogate was actually pregnant.*.
> Thoughts?


My thoughts exactly. Someone was pregnant and she was having plastic surgery. 

I've asked this before, but what can Harry be thinking about all this.  Fake pregnancies, plastic surgery and nothing to do all day. He has so much on her if he really wants to write a tell-all.  More interesting than daddy was too busy with official functions to coddle me.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I read that Americans hate noses.  If you look at Hollywood, it seems to be true.  lol
> 
> Even Streisand and Streep shortened their noses and no one noticed.  But I did. The tips of their noses used to almost touch their top lip when they smiled and now thy are no where near the top lip.


I thought Barbra refused to get her nose done?
Streep has some of the best PS in my opinion...very natural looking


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> My thoughts exactly. Someone was pregnant and she was having plastic surgery.
> 
> I've asked this before, but what can Harry be thinking about all this.  Fake pregnancies, plastic surgery and nothing to do all day. He has so much on her if he really wants to write a tell-all.  More interesting than daddy was too busy with official functions to coddle me.


harry thinks what she tells him to think


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I thought Barbra refused to get her nose done?
> Streep has some of the best PS in my opinion...very natural looking


See, she says it and people just believe her because celebrities never lie about their plastic surgery. lol

Her tip was much longer, just like Streep's tip was much longer.


----------



## justwatchin

Jayne1 said:


> My thoughts exactly. Someone was pregnant and she was having plastic surgery.
> 
> I've asked this before, but what can Harry be thinking about all this.  Fake pregnancies, plastic surgery and nothing to do all day. He has so much on her if he really wants to write a tell-all.  More interesting than daddy was too busy with official functions to coddle me.


He is not thinking. This is an overly coddled adult prone to pranks and whining. He’s got a wife controlling the narrative and he’s so self centered that he eats it up. He won’t turn on her: he’s too stupid to catch on to her.
I didn’t watch the birthday video but if he was outside a window juggling for attention, it just proves to me that he’s an idiot.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> See, she says it and people just believe her because celebrities never lie about their plastic surgery. lol
> 
> Her tip was much longer, just like Streep's tip was much longer.
> 
> View attachment 5160642
> View attachment 5160644


I'll cut here some slack as she had a very noticeably large nose, as opposed to having a perfectly normal sized one and wanting it to be better.  Just my opinion.  I know I'm old school


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> He is not thinking. This is an overly coddled adult prone to pranks and whining. He’s got a wife controlling the narrative and he’s so self centered that he eats it up. He won’t turn on her: he’s too stupid to catch on to her.
> I didn’t watch the birthday video but if he was outside a window juggling for attention, it just proves to me that he’s an idiot.



She has him right where she wants him. Since marrying her he has become estranged and isolated from everyone who ever cared about him and he is totally dependent on her to make a living in show-biz LaLa land. Last week I joked about Meghan being his conservator, like Britney's dad, but I really do see parallels. At least Harry gets to pretend he's in charge of his life.


----------



## Chanbal

justwatchin said:


> He is not thinking. *This is an overly coddled adult prone to pranks and whining.* He’s got a wife controlling the narrative and he’s so self centered that he eats it up. He won’t turn on her: he’s too stupid to catch on to her.
> I didn’t watch the birthday video but if he was outside a window juggling for attention, it just proves to me that he’s an idiot.


Yeah! 

_"Ms Williams, head of education and culture at Policy Exchange, says the *Duke was "paying the victim card at every possible opportunity."*

She said: "What Meghan and Harry do that's so useful is that they just absolutely verbalise what the zeitgeist is, unintentionally revealing the consequences of a lot of these kinds of woke ideas.

"*You take a couple who, as far as I'm concerned, are the absolute epitome of privilege*, *particularly Harry.*

"You've got a white man - however, you want to play this, whether on identitarian grounds, or somebody who's money has come through inheritance - with huge amounts of wealth, who has had all kinds of doors opened for him, who has lived a life of incredible privilege.

"*And yet he somehow manages to play the victim card at every available opportunity and thinks that his victim status, whether it's through mental health or through racism by proxy because of his relationship to Meghan, allows him to preach to the rest of us.*

"Whether that be about protecting the environment whilst jetting off on private flights, or racism, or mental health._"









						Prince Harry 'plays the victim card every chance he gets', says academic
					

The Duke of Sussex has recently announced he will release a memoir where he will write about his time growing up, royal life and childhood - but one academic says Prince Harry 'plays the victim card'




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She has him right where she wants him. Since marrying her he has become estranged and isolated from everyone who ever cared about him and he is totally dependent on her to make a living in show-biz LaLa land. Last week I joked about Meghan being his conservator, like Britney's dad, but I really do see parallels. At least Harry gets to pretend he's in charge of his life.



I've said for a long time their relationship is abusive. If it was Harry isolating Raptor like this, taking her far away from everyone she was close to, parading her around in public like a dog, using physical touch to control her and making her look like an idiot at every occasion everyone would be up in arms.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said for a long time their relationship is abusive. If it was Harry isolating Raptor like this, taking her far away from everyone she was close to, parading her around in public like a dog, using physical touch to control her and making her look like an idiot at every occasion everyone would be up in arms.



It certainly isn't a healthy relationship. They are dependent on each other. Narcissist Meghan found someone who believes she is as fabulous as she does herself and Harry has a substitute for the mother he lost when he was 12.

I'm convinced Meghan has fewer stans than she did a year ago. Whether that is because they have wised up or maybe they lost interest and moved on to someone else, I don't know. The ones that remain are still very vocal but are slowing down because they are running out of excuses for her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She has him right where she wants him. Since marrying her he has become estranged and isolated from everyone who ever cared about him and he is totally dependent on her to make a living in show-biz LaLa land. Last week I joked about Meghan being his conservator, like Britney's dad, but I really do see parallels. At least Harry gets to pretend he's in charge of his life.


his conservatorship is voluntary


----------



## Chanbal

OW's interview was very good for OW ($9M, Emmy nomination…), but a huge mistake for Hazz and wife. They showed their hypocrisy & falsehoods to a big audience, not everyone follows TPF.  

"_And according to royal expert Camilla Tominey, their absence could be down to the fact that the former president and first lady do not approve of Harry's attacks on the royal family._"

"_When it comes to Harry and Meghan, it seems, the former president and first lady remain firmly of the view that blood is thicker than water."

Meanwhile an insider told Camilla: "The Obamas didn’t like Harry attacking his family. *They value family and certainly aren’t the type of people who would want their children talking to the press.*"_









						Obamas didn't like Prince Harry attacking royal family, royal expert claims
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were said to have a good relationship with Barack and Michelle ***** - but the Sussexes did not attend the former president's 60th birthday party at the weekend




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Chinese proverb “rags to rags in three generations” says that family wealth does not last for three generations. The first generation makes the money, the second spends it and the third sees none of the wealth._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How to Help Your Family Wealth Last for Generations
> 
> 
> Creating generational wealth takes careful planning and thoughtful sharing of intentions, plus the right investment vehicle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.kiplinger.com



Interesting. My understanding and the one I've heard most often as an Asian was that family wealth never lasts 3 generations because the first makes it, the second maintains it, the third squanders it away.

My personal theory is that 1st generation works hard, makes it. 2nd generation spent part of their childhood poor or lower-middle class and learned to work hard and not to be frivolous with money. The 3rd generation have never known what it's like to be "less than rich" and so have no real notion of financing or saving or work ethic.

I'm technically 3rd generation, but so far so good.

Not sure who mentioned it, but it has nothing to do with immigration to developed countries, that's a separate generation count lol.

(catching up to thread now.)


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> _"*And yet he somehow manages to play the victim card at every available opportunity and thinks that his victim status, whether it's through mental health or through racism by proxy because of his relationship to Meghan, allows him to preach to the rest of us.*
> 
> "Whether that be about protecting the environment whilst jetting off on private flights, or racism, or mental health._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'plays the victim card every chance he gets', says academic
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has recently announced he will release a memoir where he will write about his time growing up, royal life and childhood - but one academic says Prince Harry 'plays the victim card'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



and people seem to be lapping it up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> OW's interview was very good for OW ($9M, Emmy nomination…), but a huge mistake for Hazz and wife. They showed their hypocrisy & falsehoods to a big audience, not everyone follows TPF.
> 
> "_And according to royal expert Camilla Tominey, their absence could be down to the fact that the former president and first lady do not approve of Harry's attacks on the royal family._"
> 
> "_When it comes to Harry and Meghan, it seems, the former president and first lady remain firmly of the view that blood is thicker than water."
> 
> Meanwhile an insider told Camilla: "The Obamas didn’t like Harry attacking his family. *They value family and certainly aren’t the type of people who would want their children talking to the press.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obamas didn't like Prince Harry attacking royal family, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were said to have a good relationship with Barack and Michelle ***** - but the Sussexes did not attend the former president's 60th birthday party at the weekend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



I can totally see that. I mean, everyone with half a brain would stay away from the drama (Hillary seems to be the exception), but also the Os have always been close to their families and in general I've never heard them speak ill of anyone in public. If they go low, we go high, and it doesn't get much lower than launching attack after attack on your family while your grandfather is dying.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> and people seem to be lapping it up



People won't do any research for themselves anymore and they believe whatever they hear. If a headline on the web says it, then that's good enough for them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, the formerly underaged girl filed her lawsuit against Andrew today. I wonder what will happen there and if it will affect how the BRF deals with the Sussexes. I also feel for the Queen, that poor woman can't get a break solely due to her jerk family members.

ETA: it's a civil case, but I don't fully understand what that means here. In Germany, a case of SA would automatically be a criminal case, so I'm not sure how that works in the US.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> OW's interview was very good for OW ($9M, Emmy nomination…), but a huge mistake for Hazz and wife. They showed their hypocrisy & falsehoods to a big audience, not everyone follows TPF.
> 
> "_And according to royal expert Camilla Tominey, their absence could be down to the fact that the former president and first lady do not approve of Harry's attacks on the royal family._"
> 
> "_When it comes to Harry and Meghan, it seems, the former president and first lady remain firmly of the view that blood is thicker than water."
> 
> Meanwhile an insider told Camilla: "The Obamas didn’t like Harry attacking his family. *They value family and certainly aren’t the type of people who would want their children talking to the press.*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obamas didn't like Prince Harry attacking royal family, royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were said to have a good relationship with Barack and Michelle ***** - but the Sussexes did not attend the former president's 60th birthday party at the weekend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I think folks are giving the Sussex too much importance.  They just don't rate high enough on the social, celebrity or economic scale to be of any importance.  Look at the people who were disinvited.  They are bigger names or have more political importance or money than the Sussex will ever have.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, the formerly underaged girl filed her lawsuit against Andrew today. I wonder what will happen there and if it will affect how the BRF deals with the Sussexes. I also feel for the Queen, that poor woman can't get a break solely due to her jerk family members.
> 
> ETA: it's a civil case, but I don't fully understand what that means here. In Germany, a case of SA would automatically be a criminal case, so I'm not sure how that works in the US.


I don't believe that A is going to respond to any of this and will continue to lay low in the UK where they can't touch him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that A is going to respond to any of this and will continue to lay low in the UK where they can't touch him.



Does he have immunity or is it solely because of location?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, the formerly underaged girl filed her lawsuit against Andrew today. I wonder what will happen there and if it will affect how the BRF deals with the Sussexes. I also feel for the Queen, that poor woman can't get a break solely due to her jerk family members.
> 
> ETA: it's a civil case, but I don't fully understand what that means here. In Germany, a case of SA would automatically be a criminal case, so I'm not sure how that works in the US.



I would need to see the allegations of this/these specific allegation(s). 

It would depend where the alleged happened (age of consent) and on the evidence presented. Since a US lawyer is being used, I suppose it must be going through the US courts. I also believe Roberts was 17 (our (UK) AoC is 16) so I would think that the allegation would be dependant on Andrew not only knowing, but having evidence of Andrew knowing (thus unable to consent) she was trafficked if citing the incidents in the UK.  Otherwise, the action will be based on her being below the AoC somewhere abroad (presumably Little Saint James).  

The publicity is very bad for Andrew and he'll have to respond or be thought guilty by default, but getting a conviction if defended, will be tough if there's no evidence beyond her word against his as she could be the only witness (as well as alleged victim). 

Any US lawyers here?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that A is going to respond to any of this and will continue to lay low in the UK where they can't touch him.



If he does/says nothing. it's my understanding she wins by default.

He may respond with citing his privileges under diplomatic immunity at that time if the incidents happened abroad (out of the UK). He no longer has these.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, the formerly underaged girl filed her lawsuit against Andrew today. I wonder what will happen there and if it will affect how the BRF deals with the Sussexes. I also feel for the Queen, that poor woman can't get a break solely due to her jerk family members.
> 
> ETA: it's a civil case, but I don't fully understand what that means here. In Germany, a case of SA would automatically be a criminal case, so I'm not sure how that works in the US.


Two points 

1. The BRF has a presumed moral obligation to  treat Andrew and Harry fairly. Ex: diplomatic immunity, income, title removal needs to be done in a consistent way. How can a (hypothetically) convicted York keep his title if Sussex had his removed ... 
Do they both lose diplomatic status?

2. The civil suit case was brought in the US, it is a criminal matter but Andrew is conveniently tucked away in the UK
He will refuse to cooperate with a civil suit given he has refused to cooperate with FBI.
Everyone at BP and on A's legal team are thumbing the manual on royal diplomatic immunity - see item 1, can A be served the papers in the civil suit ? and/or compelled to answer the suit ??? Extradition??? 
The legal system is slow. This has to be costing him A FORTUNE... and he has no real major legal  income 

The real headache for him is that Ghislaine Maxwell goes on trial in the fall, that may cause a break in the legal logjam and add federal charges to the civil charges


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting views.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, the formerly underaged girl filed her lawsuit against Andrew today. I wonder what will happen there and if it will affect how the BRF deals with the Sussexes. I also feel for the Queen, that poor woman can't get a break solely due to her jerk family members.
> 
> ETA: it's a civil case, but I don't fully understand what that means here. In Germany, a case of SA would automatically be a criminal case, so I'm not sure how that works in the US.


But not under age in the UK or maybe that doesn’t matter.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> That blanket was money signaling as in _I can afford to have this from Hermes to throw on a chair and the rest of you are peons.  _She is also the kind of person that thinks that showing it illustrates her good taste.  Alexandra Schulman didn't think so.










charlottawill said:


> I have always admired the Obamas but this disappointed me. Should have postponed a big shindig until his 65th when hopefully COVID would be in the rear view mirror.


Totally agree with you. This just shows the entitlement and ridiculous privilege these celebs have, thinking they are better than the rest of us who are expected to do one thing while they do another. Seen it from so many high profile figures all through this pandemic.







Jayne1 said:


> Gayle is more important than BO's former White House senior adviser David Axelrod and most of his former administration officials, who were all cut. Wow.
> Well, he's not running for anything anymore, so he doesn't have to pretend.





bag-mania said:


> You would think the people who worked with him for many years would qualify as being “close friends and family” far more than show business entertainers he has met no more than a handful of times in his life, but no.
> My guess is they wanted the wealthiest attendees possible at the party to get big donations for their foundation. Meghan and Harry should pay attention. 40 minutes of mentoring from Melissa looks pathetic by comparison. They need big fish to keep Archewell afloat.


That's sickening for all the people who worked their a$$es of for years to get O.bama where he is today, to not get an invite to this big show-off party, yet Gayle King and Chrissy T are there (among other annoying celebs also, I'm sure). Priorities in the gutter.







CarryOn2020 said:


> Melissa sounds like a jerk.
> She confirmed it was all scripted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy reveals how she worked with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The actress who starred with Meghan Markle in her milestone birthday message last week, spoke to Access Hollywood about her appearance in the clip to launch Meghan's  '40x40' campaign.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd 'look weird' if he 'stood outside and juggled' in Meghan's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy reveals as she praises couple for 'carving out their own lives'*
> 
> *Prince Harry was afraid he'd look 'weird' by juggling in the background of Meghan Markle's 40th birthday video, Melissa McCarthy has revealed*
> *Actress said she encouraged Harry to do trick as she'd watch it five million times*


_'carving out their own lives'?_







Chanbal said:


> Yeah!
> 
> _"Ms Williams, head of education and culture at Policy Exchange, says the *Duke was "paying the victim card at every possible opportunity."*
> 
> She said: "What Meghan and Harry do that's so useful is that they just absolutely verbalise what the zeitgeist is, unintentionally revealing the consequences of a lot of these kinds of woke ideas.
> 
> "*You take a couple who, as far as I'm concerned, are the absolute epitome of privilege*, *particularly Harry.*
> 
> "You've got a white man - however, you want to play this, whether on identitarian grounds, or somebody who's money has come through inheritance - with huge amounts of wealth, who has had all kinds of doors opened for him, who has lived a life of incredible privilege.
> 
> "*And yet he somehow manages to play the victim card at every available opportunity and thinks that his victim status, whether it's through mental health or through racism by proxy because of his relationship to Meghan, allows him to preach to the rest of us.*
> 
> "Whether that be about protecting the environment whilst jetting off on private flights, or racism, or mental health._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'plays the victim card every chance he gets', says academic
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex has recently announced he will release a memoir where he will write about his time growing up, royal life and childhood - but one academic says Prince Harry 'plays the victim card'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk





Well said. Now if only more people who would open their eyes to the sh*tty motives of this nasty, bridge burning, twisted pair of fools.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I would need to see the allegations of this/these specific allegation(s).
> 
> It would depend where the alleged happened (age of consent) and on the evidence presented. Since a US lawyer is being used, I suppose it must be going through the US courts. I also believe Roberts was 17 (our (UK) AoC is 16) so I would think that the allegation would be dependant on Andrew not only knowing, but having evidence of Andrew knowing (thus unable to consent) she was trafficked if citing the incidents in the UK.  Otherwise, the action will be based on her being below the AoC somewhere abroad (presumably Little Saint James).
> 
> The publicity is very bad for Andrew and he'll have to respond or be thought guilty by default, but getting a conviction if defended, will be tough if there's no evidence beyond her word against his as she could be the only witness (as well as alleged victim).
> 
> Any US lawyers here?


Yes, she was legally young enough to be a minor but this is a civil suit, a rape case would have to be brought by authorities - federal

This is NOT a criminal case , I got it wrong in previous post, it is a civil case …

so, she is suing for unspecified damages ie money, he will not go to jail, he will owe money and might be ruined

if some proof comes out at the trial then the feds can level criminal charges that require jail time

and as all TV shows inform us, the burden of proof is much lower in a civil case, than in a government case
agsin, citing TV as my authority … hmmm.. only 6/12 jurors need
to find guilt in a civil case

if he were in the NY jurisdiction, he would be served papers to appear to be deposed by her lawyers, I have no clue if that can be done while he stays put in Windsor

my guess is he dares NOT travel anywhere, certainly not out of the UK

i wonder if he could be served if he went to Scotland or Wales ? It is probably safest for him to stay at Windsor just in case


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I think folks are giving the Sussex too much importance.  They just don't rate high enough on the social, celebrity or economic scale to be of any importance.  Look at the people who were disinvited.  They are bigger names or have more political importance or money than the Sussex will ever have.


We know that they don't rank high enough on celebrity or economic scales, but they (Hazz, wife, and PR team) want us to believe otherwise.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The real headache for him is that Ghislaine Maxwell goes on trial in the fall, that may cause a break in the legal logjam and add federal charges to the civil charges



What a mess. I don't feel sorry for him at all, just...is it so hard to think with your freaking BRAIN?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Interesting views.




I somehow fell asleep watching this, but conveniently woke up to a piece of what I thought was good information. Lady CC brought up a valid point re: Charles and his slimmed down monarchy. She said that the monarchy already slimmed down naturally from the amount of royals in the Queen's generation...the Kents, the Gloucesters, Princess Alexandra...none of their children has the right to HRH. 

Anne's children have no royal titles. Andrew's children are women who wouldn't pass on theirs anyway. The only other royals of the next generation are Lady Louise and Viscount Severn, and Viscount Severn's children will lose the HRH as well.

She also said it's really unlikely Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges will be able to handle the workload on their own, so this idea of "Just the heir" is not feasible anyway. So the troublesome twos' panic they could be made redundant as fuel for their decision to leave? Nonsense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> so, she is suing for unspecified damages ie money, he will not go to jail, he will owe money and might be ruined



Doubt it. Charles didn't have enough money to pay off Diana, but money was found in the BRF's purse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a mess. I don't feel sorry for him at all, just...is it so hard to think with your freaking BRAIN?



JeffE did manage to dupe many men - Bill Gates, Bill C., the Victoria Secrets CEO, etc. IMO that is significant - Andrew may not have been the only royal ensnared. Ghislaine’s connection to Andrew came through her father’s connections to the BRF, right?  My understanding [could be wrong] is that Maxwell was a shady figure, maybe that is the part of the story the BRF is really covering up. Does anyone know?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> She also said it's really unlikely Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges will be able to handle the workload on their own, so this idea of "Just the heir" is not feasible anyway. So the troublesome twos' panic they could be made redundant as fuel for their decision to leave? Nonsense.



Perhaps in an effort to cover Hazz’s lack of academic success, the media pushed the ‘spare’ story that conveniently boxed Hazz out of his family — his place was deemed insignificant. Logically in the primogeniture ‘system’, there would be more spares than heirs, so what makes Hazz’s story so different? Because he is the only sibling of the future heir? How many times in BRF history did that happen?  Seems to me that the BRF is ineffective in managing its ‘bench’.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t think Epstein duped anyone. He had many different lures, significant enough to make it worth it for these people to fly close to the flame. And not all of them sexual.

And the “disastrous spare” is a tale as old as time. It’s not just the BRF who has had trouble.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It certainly isn't a healthy relationship. They are dependent on each other. Narcissist Meghan found someone who believes she is as fabulous as she does herself and Harry has a substitute for the mother he lost when he was 12.
> 
> I'm convinced Meghan has fewer stans than she did a year ago. Whether that is because they have wised up or maybe they lost interest and moved on to someone else, I don't know. The ones that remain are still very vocal but are slowing down because they are running out of excuses for her.


Fewer stans but more bots?


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t think Epstein duped anyone. He had many different lures, significant enough to make it worth it for these people to fly close to the flame. And not all of them sexual.
> 
> And the “disastrous spare” is a tale as old as time. It’s not just the BRF who has had trouble.



If I have read the articles correctly, these powerful billionaires have indicated they did indeed feel deceived by JeffE (doubt they’d admit to much else).  Agree, it was not always sexual but there were plenty of women(?) hanging around - honey traps? Looking for the rich husband? Idk, it’s a sordid world.

Agree, the pitiful spare story is an old one. So no one should be surprised by Hazz’s nonsense or his tale of woe. 
Yet, here we are - 4770 pages.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I have read the articles correctly, these powerful billionaires have indicated they did indeed feel deceived by JeffE (doubt they’d admit to much else).  Agree, it was not always sexual but there were plenty of women(?) hanging around - honey traps? Looking for the rich husband? Idk, it’s a sordid world.
> 
> Agree, the pitiful spare story is an old one. So no one should be surprised by Hazz’s nonsense or his tale of woe.
> Yet, here we are - 4770 pages.


Jeff E's dirty story through Randy Andy may stain Will or the future of monarchy. Hazz, instead of supporting his brother, is his biggest nemesis. I feel sorry for Will, he seems to be a decent young man.


----------



## lulilu

IDK if this link will work, but it's a clip of the credits of the OW interview.  I find it upsetting.  M is laughing  and people are debating whether H is embarrassed or trying not to laugh.  They (or at least M) is thrilled to death at their success in trashing the RF -- actually laughing about all the so-called indignities the RF imposed on her and them, all of it.  Disgusting beyond words.  Unless this is a fake?


----------



## gracekelly

Completely commenting here off the the top of my head with no legal knowledge.  I think that Andrew is going to outwait this woman. It is a money grab by her.  I have a hard time thinking it is anything else and she is looking for justice.  How does she explain herself by being there in the first place?  She was 17, and that is not a baby.  It isn't 14 or 15 or 16. I am not excusing his bad judgement and poor choice of friends, but this woman has to answer for herself too.    He is going to sit tight and not respond.  What can they do to him?  Nothing as far as I can see.  So he gets bad press, and doesn't get to play dress up and stand on the balcony or wear a uniform and review the troops, but he is still living a nice life of luxury with plenty of perks.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She has him right where she wants him. *Since marrying her he has become estranged and isolated from everyone who ever cared about him and he is totally dependent on her to make a living *in show-biz LaLa land. Last week I joked about Meghan being his conservator, like Britney's dad, but I really do see parallels. At least Harry gets to pretend he's in charge of his life.


Sounds like a classic abuser/abused situation, doesn't it?


----------



## Lodpah

Ok, I'm gonna say it. MM and Hazz has SS as their PR and allegedly their bill is a million dollars a month (can't confirm) and since Yahoo is not quite at Google level, it makes sense that Yahoo is really an advertising site thus the superfluous articles they put out on these two.  They gotta be paid after all to make money so they have to "advertise" the goods and make it sellable lol. Their "journalists" must be ad writers and not really journalists. They have to sell a product.









						Here’s the Real Reason Why Meghan & Harry Didn’t Attend Obama’s Birthday Party This Year
					

Their absence has raised some questions—and we've got answers.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Sounds like a classic abuser/abused situation, doesn't it?


I think she is an abuser. I read somewhere that every other word out of her mouth is a the F word. Like literally, every other word.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Sounds like a classic abuser/abused situation, doesn't it?


Unless he has her right where he wants her - away from the BRF. 
 Remember her family estrangement didn’t happen until she married him. He uses her as much as she uses him. IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I somehow fell asleep watching this, but conveniently woke up to a piece of what I thought was good information. Lady CC brought up a valid point re: Charles and his slimmed down monarchy. She said that the monarchy already slimmed down naturally from the amount of royals in the Queen's generation...the Kents, the Gloucesters, Princess Alexandra...none of their children has the right to HRH.
> 
> Anne's children have no royal titles. Andrew's children are women who wouldn't pass on theirs anyway. The only other royals of the next generation are Lady Louise and Viscount Severn, and Viscount Severn's children will lose the HRH as well.
> 
> She also said it's really unlikely Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges will be able to handle the workload on their own, so this idea of "Just the heir" is not feasible anyway. So the troublesome twos' panic they could be made redundant as fuel for their decision to leave? Nonsense.


Redundancy might not be an issue but ego would have got in the way. There is no chance that Methane would have settled long term for a supporting role.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Unless he has her right where he wants her - away from the BRF.
> Remember her family estrangement didn’t happen until she married him. He uses her as much as she uses him. IMO


I think she was already estranged from everyone except Thomas.  The wedding was the nail in the coffin for him.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Completely commenting here off the the top of my head with no legal knowledge.  I think that Andrew is going to outwait this woman. It is a money grab by her.  I have a hard time thinking it is anything else and she is looking for justice.  How does she explain herself by being there in the first place?  She was 17, and that is not a baby.  It isn't 14 or 15 or 16. I am not excusing his bad judgement and poor choice of friends, but this woman has to answer for herself too.    He is going to sit tight and not respond.  What can they do to him?  Nothing as far as I can see.  So he gets bad press, and doesn't get to play dress up and stand on the balcony or wear a uniform and review the troops, but he is still living a nice life of luxury with plenty of perks.


I don't have a very good impression of Randy Andy, but it's possible that this woman is after his money. She does look happy posing with him for that infamous photo. I read somewhere that if he doesn't respond, he may be forced to pay several millions.

"_Prince Andrew__ can still face a trial over alleged sex abuse allegations made by Jeffrey Epstein victim Virginia Roberts - even if he never steps foot back in America - and could face damages bill of up to $100million dollars if he loses, legal experts say_."









						Prince Andrew can still be tried over sex abuse claims in civil court
					

Prince Andrew can still face a trial over sex abuse claims made by Virginia Roberts - even if he never steps foot back in the US - and could face damages bill of up to $100million dollars, legal experts say.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Unless he has her right where he wants her - away from the BRF.
> Remember her family estrangement didn’t happen until she married him. He uses her as much as she uses him. IMO





purseinsanity said:


> I think she was already estranged from everyone except Thomas.  The wedding was the nail in the coffin for him.


My 2 cents. He is a nincompoop and doesn't have the brain to use her. She is playing him like a fiddle. She was not estranged from TM, but made sure that he never met Hazz before (or after) the wedding.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Yes, she was legally young enough to be a minor but this is a civil suit, a rape case would have to be brought by authorities - federal
> 
> This is NOT a criminal case , I got it wrong in previous post, it is a civil case …
> 
> so, she is suing for unspecified damages ie money, he will not go to jail, he will owe money and might be ruined
> 
> if some proof comes out at the trial then the feds can level criminal charges that require jail time
> 
> and as all TV shows inform us, the burden of proof is much lower in a civil case, than in a government case
> agsin, citing TV as my authority … hmmm.. only 6/12 jurors need
> to find guilt in a civil case
> 
> if he were in the NY jurisdiction, he would be served papers to appear to be deposed by her lawyers, I have no clue if that can be done while he stays put in Windsor
> 
> my guess is he dares NOT travel anywhere, certainly not out of the UK
> 
> i wonder if he could be served if he went to Scotland or Wales ? It is probably safest for him to stay at Windsor just in case



I think he's in Scotland atm(?)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember her family estrangement didn’t happen until she married him. He uses her as much as she uses him. IMO



I don't think that's true. Her fall-out with her father didn't happen until then, but she had already gotten rid of anyone else as soon as she became a Suits starlet.


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> I think he's in Scotland atm(?)



Yes, Andrew and Fergie arrived at Balmoral yesterday evening.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think that's true. Her fall-out with her father didn't happen until then, but she had already gotten rid of anyone else as soon as she became a Suits starlet.



You are correct.  My error.
For whatever reason, she had not been in contact with Samantha and Thomas Jr. for at least 10 years prior to the wedding. According to this VF article they had financial problems -

_Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information.

The trajectory of her family was moving in other directions. They stopped having holidays together and some eventually stopped speaking to each other. Money problems were a near-constant. Samantha filed for bankruptcy in 2003, joined by Thomas junior in 2012. He claimed at the time that he had $10 in cash and $88,000 in debts. After running into problems with a boutique she’d opened in Los Angeles, Doria also filed for bankruptcy.








						Meghan Markle’s Family Breakdown: The Untold Story
					

Thomas and Samantha Markle have dominated tabloid headlines about the Duchess of Sussex. How did the family create such a fractured, Kardashianified royal fairy tale?




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_
Off to google Violet von Westenholz
ETA: somehow I missed this connection. Here is what I have found so far :
Article from 2109:








						Socialite who is believed to have set up Harry and Meghan gives birth
					

Violet von Westenholz, 36, who is said to have set up Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on their 'blind date' in 2016, and Archie Seymour, 30, recently welcomed a daughter named Lyra.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				









Meghan spent time with Miss von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham at Wimbledon in 2017. Pictured, left to right: Sadie Mantovani, Violet Von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are correct.  My error.
> For whatever reason, she had not been in contact with Samantha and Thomas Jr. for at least 10 years prior to the wedding. According to this VF article they had financial problems -
> 
> _Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information.
> 
> The trajectory of her family was moving in other directions. They stopped having holidays together and some eventually stopped speaking to each other. Money problems were a near-constant. Samantha filed for bankruptcy in 2003, joined by Thomas junior in 2012. He claimed at the time that he had $10 in cash and $88,000 in debts. After running into problems with a boutique she’d opened in Los Angeles, Doria also filed for bankruptcy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Family Breakdown: The Untold Story
> 
> 
> Thomas and Samantha Markle have dominated tabloid headlines about the Duchess of Sussex. How did the family create such a fractured, Kardashianified royal fairy tale?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Off to google Violet von Westenholz
> ETA: somehow I missed this connection. Here is what I have found so far :
> Article from 2109:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialite who is believed to have set up Harry and Meghan gives birth
> 
> 
> Violet von Westenholz, 36, who is said to have set up Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on their 'blind date' in 2016, and Archie Seymour, 30, recently welcomed a daughter named Lyra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan spent time with Miss von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham at Wimbledon in 2017. Pictured, left to right: Sadie Mantovani, Violet Von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham


The blind date story keeps changing. Passing Hazard the contact details is quite different from setting up a blind date for them. I suppose we will have to wait for Hazard's tell-all to read his truth about how they met.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If we can believe FF, it was Mishoo and Markus who set it all up:








						'Finding Freedom': Bombshells About Meghan Markle and Prince Harry
					

The new book documents the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's romance and exit from the royal family.




					www.etonline.com
				




Looking back at all we’ve seen and heard, it has been a slippery slope. I don’t believe any of them.
_The two met in June 2016 on a blind date in London. Prior to the meeting, Meghan attended Wimbledon to cheer on her pal, Serena Williams. The authors said the former Suits actress noticed British actor Dominic Cooper in the VIP bar area at the sporting event and joked that she had a small crush on him. Meghan deliberated going over to Cooper but ultimately decided not to speak to him. Though many reported that Meghan's pal, Violet von Westenholz, set up her blind date with Harry, the book says it was designer Misha Nonoo and Markus Anderson who arranged their date. _


----------



## CarryOn2020

Then again, seems Victoria [who works for RalphL, thus the purse] was the one:












						Countdown to the Royal Wedding: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Secret Matchmaker Finally Revealed - E! Online
					

Why this person knew that the royal and the Suits star would be perfect for each other




					www.eonline.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I don't have a very good impression of Randy Andy, but it's possible that this woman is after his money. She does look happy posing with him for that infamous photo. I read somewhere that if he doesn't respond, he may be forced to pay several millions.
> 
> "_Prince Andrew__ can still face a trial over alleged sex abuse allegations made by Jeffrey Epstein victim Virginia Roberts - even if he never steps foot back in America - and could face damages bill of up to $100million dollars if he loses, legal experts say_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew can still be tried over sex abuse claims in civil court
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew can still face a trial over sex abuse claims made by Virginia Roberts - even if he never steps foot back in the US - and could face damages bill of up to $100million dollars, legal experts say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If she was crying why even let it be taken? The stupid Prince was enough of an idiot to pose for some entrapment but even he wouldn’t knowingly let them take photos of him groping clearly unwilling girls. It definitely doesn’t prove he was unaware of the situation.

I don’t understand this logic- the entire US civil law system is set up that you can seek financial compensation for damages why is it indicative of a false claim when people seek payouts for certain offences but not for others?

Especially in the case of A given his status I doubt there’s any chance they could have him locked up in US jail even if they had truck loads of evidence against him.

I’m certainly not worried about lost sheep A going broke. Millions, even billions, isn’t going to touch the sides of the BRF.
Besides, can you put a price on the Queen’s special lad not only not possibly facing the consequences but never really having to clarify his involvement to the public  at all?

I was hopeful they’d at least have him cooperate at the beginning to show good faith. Now I can see they are happy to do anything to bury it.

I don’t feel at all sorry for the Queen either, she was happy to pose & smile with him at the church straight after the allegations came out rather than showing sense & staying out of it. You can’t indulge a viper & complain it bites.



Chanbal said:


> Jeff E's dirty story through Randy Andy may stain Will or the future of monarchy. Hazz, instead of supporting his brother, is his biggest nemesis. I feel sorry for Will, he seems to be a decent young man.


Being cynical- this is the best possible time for Will this could have come out. Granny is handling the affair as queen, someone who I think the general public trusts, & he can maintain as big a distance as possible.

Whereas if this happened when his father is king there’d be much more pressure on Will to push C for results.

Even H is quite helpful to him (aside from the pain of falling out with a sibling ) as he always looks better by comparison.[/QUOTE]


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are correct.  My error.
> For whatever reason, she had not been in contact with Samantha and Thomas Jr. for at least 10 years prior to the wedding. According to this VF article they had financial problems -
> 
> _Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information.
> 
> The trajectory of her family was moving in other directions. They stopped having holidays together and some eventually stopped speaking to each other. Money problems were a near-constant. Samantha filed for bankruptcy in 2003, joined by Thomas junior in 2012. He claimed at the time that he had $10 in cash and $88,000 in debts. After running into problems with a boutique she’d opened in Los Angeles, Doria also filed for bankruptcy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Family Breakdown: The Untold Story
> 
> 
> Thomas and Samantha Markle have dominated tabloid headlines about the Duchess of Sussex. How did the family create such a fractured, Kardashianified royal fairy tale?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Off to google Violet von Westenholz
> ETA: somehow I missed this connection. Here is what I have found so far :
> Article from 2109:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialite who is believed to have set up Harry and Meghan gives birth
> 
> 
> Violet von Westenholz, 36, who is said to have set up Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on their 'blind date' in 2016, and Archie Seymour, 30, recently welcomed a daughter named Lyra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan spent time with Miss von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham at Wimbledon in 2017. Pictured, left to right: Sadie Mantovani, Violet Von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham


It’s so shady and typical of Vanity fair to juxtapose the family not talking with the M family bankruptcies the implication is the fallout is their fault & it was about money. I’m amazed they even put Doria’s bankruptcy in there though given she’s the one  M still deigns to speak to (or does she? We will never know)

Also why was everyone dressing like they are in a ‘the Hives’ tribute act a couple of years ago?


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does he have immunity or is it solely because of location?


They first need to "serve" him, which isn't going to be easy in itself. As he's clearly hiding. If they can't serve him, I don't believe the case can go ahead.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> don’t understand this logic- the entire US civil law system is set up that you can seek financial compensation for damages why is it indicative of a false claim when people seek payouts for certain offences but not for others?



Just my 2 cents based on reading the news, not a legal degree - people _can_ _and do_ seek financial compensation for anything. Whether or not they *win* is another matter altogether.  Yes, these lawsuits are expensive, so who are her deep pockets?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

gracekelly said:


> Completely commenting here off the the top of my head with no legal knowledge.  I think that Andrew is going to outwait this woman. It is a money grab by her.  I have a hard time thinking it is anything else and she is looking for justice.  How does she explain herself by being there in the first place?  She was 17, and that is not a baby.  It isn't 14 or 15 or 16. I am not excusing his bad judgement and poor choice of friends, but this woman has to answer for herself too.    He is going to sit tight and not respond.  What can they do to him?  Nothing as far as I can see.  So he gets bad press, and doesn't get to play dress up and stand on the balcony or wear a uniform and review the troops, but he is still living a nice life of luxury with plenty of perks.


I don't know all the allegations, a few points regarding consent age in the UK. The consent age here is 16, but if money is changing hands, then the consent age becomes 18. My understanding is her photo was taken in England. She will need to prove either money has changed hands in the UK, or he had sex with her in the U.S. Again, not defending Andrew, who is a complete twat, but I don't know how or what she's trying to achieve.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan spent time with Miss von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham at Wimbledon in 2017. Pictured, left to right: Sadie Mantovani, Violet Von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham



That woman really sticks out like a sore thumb wherever she goes. That's a talent in itself, too.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just my 2 cents based on reading the news, not a legal degree - people _can_ _and do_ seek financial compensation for anything. Whether or not they *win* is another matter altogether.  Yes, these lawsuits are expensive, so who are her deep pockets?


Not just in the States. There was a story a few days ago that a Russian woman is now suing McD because two years ago, their cheeseburger advertisement caused her to break her no-meat Lent fast. The displacement of responsibility is just mind-boggling.


----------



## xincinsin

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know all the allegations, a few points regarding consent age in the UK. The consent age here is 16, but if money is changing hands, then the consent age becomes 18. My understanding is her photo was taken in England. She will need to prove either money has changed hands in the UK, or he had sex with her in the U.S. Again, not defending Andrew, who is a complete twat, but I don't know how or what she's trying to achieve.


If there was intercourse but she had claimed to be older, would that change anything? Teenagers often do claim to be older so that they can get the "perks" of adulthood. Of course it would still be a he say/she say situation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Even H is quite helpful to him (aside from the pain of falling out with a sibling ) as he always looks better by comparison.



Right? I've said several times the Sussexes' behaviour was the best PR Wills and Kate could have asked for because anyone would look good in comparison, and they were doing a fine job and carrying themselves with dignity anyway. I do however not believe they made the idiots look bad to look better, that was all their own doing and I'm sure they'd happily given up the extra popularity for less stress and more peace of mind.


----------



## chicinthecity777

xincinsin said:


> If there was intercourse but she had claimed to be older, would that change anything? Teenagers often do claim to be older so that they can get the "perks" of adulthood. Of course it would still be a he say/she say situation.


After these many years, most of it would be a he said / she said situation. Especially now Epstein is conveniently dead.

Sorry, back to topic.


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> They first need to "serve" him, which isn't going to be easy in itself. As he's clearly hiding. If they can't serve him, I don't believe the case can go ahead.



They know where abouts he is.

It'll be more a case of the housekeeper/butler/valet/PA not knowing where he is on the estate. 

Could take them months for sure


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> They know where abouts he is.
> 
> It'll be more a case of the housekeeper/butler/valet/PA not knowing where he is on the estate.
> 
> Could take them months for sure


They don't have to let the server in the estate. The server would have to track or wait for him to come out. If he's in a car, they can't serve him either. It will cost a lot of money to serve him. And who is funding all this?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Bag or bump envy?  

I know, I know, I know, I'm a beach, but at least I don't dress like a deckchair or have foetal fixation.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Bag or bump envy?
> 
> I know, I know, I know, I'm a beach, but at least I don't dress like a deckchair or have foetal fixation.


Amazing, ain't it? She isn't staring at the camera!


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> They don't have to let the server in the estate. The server would have to track or wait for him to come out. If he's in a car, they can't serve him either. It will cost a lot of money to serve him. And who is funding all this?



It's not criminal (case) so hopefully not us.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Bag or bump envy?
> 
> I know, I know, I know, I'm a beach, but at least I don't dress like a deckchair or have foetal fixation.


what is it RL?
It’s got to be the bag   Our girl wasnt trying to have babies until she’d secured _her bag._

I’m not gonna lie, I actually do wear the burglar stripes on occasion  but when you are all wearing such similar things it does look like a theme party.

Add on - if it was a beetle juice/ the hives themed party I must apologise for being so shady.  

Add on add on- I actually feel a little sorry for these poor ladies, including Violet, little did they know when they were just trying to have a day out several years ago that they’d be back on the internet getting dragged for being with such an _infamous woman _and  Violet probably had no idea what a can of worms she was opening


----------



## needlv

If PA is guilty then I wish her all the best with her case.  He is notoriously bad with money though (remembering the Queen had to bail him and Sarah out for not paying a payment on a chalet)… so I don’t know if he will ever pay it if she wins…

But I do question why she is just chasing PA?  There were many other men that she was allegedly trafficked to - so why is it just PA that has been sued?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> If PA is guilty then I wish her all the best with her case.  He is notoriously bad with money though (remembering the Queen had to bail him and Sarah out for not paying a payment on a chalet)… so I don’t know if he will ever pay it if she wins…
> 
> *But I do question why she is just chasing PA?  There were many other men that she was allegedly trafficked to - so why is it just PA that has been sued?*


I like the way you think.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Amazing, ain't it? She isn't staring at the camera!



This was Wimbledon, 2016, supposedly the day after the blind [cough cough] date with Hazz.  Iirc she was on a Suits promo trip.
Yes, this is a Ralph Lauren bag. The friend in the white skirt is their rep.
Maybe she was not happy with her seat or the (faux?) suede RL dress.





ETA:  one more photo - note the 2 pairs of sunglasses.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

papertiger said:


> It's not criminal (case) so hopefully not us.


No, the accuser would need to fund this upfront. But I don't believe she's wealthy, I don't see how she's funding it. Unless her lawyers are "no win, no fee" type.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Back to H&M, have we got an update of her 40x40 initiative yet? How will it work? How come we never seem to hear any update / result / achievements on any projects these 2 starts and made a big deal of in the media? I won't click on their Archwell website...


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> If PA is guilty then I wish her all the best with her case.  He is notoriously bad with money though (remembering the Queen had to bail him and Sarah out for not paying a payment on a chalet)… so I don’t know if he will ever pay it if she wins…
> 
> But I do question why she is just chasing PA?  There were many other men that she was allegedly trafficked to - so why is it just PA that has been sued?


She was the person who initially pressed the charges against Epstein. Now there will never be justice on that.
I mean, to me, there are two possibilities:
1. we just said how expensive these cases are, how many can they pay to pursue? She might have been advised that going for the person who would bring the most publicity might help her in getting a settlement or in getting the case escalated.

2. It might not be reported if certain other people are being sued by V or other people as it might not be considered news worthy or they might have a better claim to privacy or prejudicing their case than someone who is as clearly public figure = public interest as a Prince is.

add on - as a Brit, I am personally much more interested in finding out whether someone who has just waltzed over for a holiday in Scottish mansion with his supportive family at public expense is a sexual abuser than some shady business men- so I personally am grateful V is pursuing this though I think we will never get the whole story.


----------



## needlv

Easy solved… don’t invite either.









						Victoria Beckham 'worried' about being dragged in Meghan and Harry's feud with royal family
					

Victoria Beckham to make a difficult decision over her son Brooklyn's wedding guest list




					www.geo.tv


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Easy solved… don’t invite either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham 'worried' about being dragged in Meghan and Harry's feud with royal family
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham to make a difficult decision over her son Brooklyn's wedding guest list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv



Basically  

Not to mention there has been no mention of a "feud" and _toute la ville_  are playing it down (at least _this_ town). 

But, meanwhile, let's put it out there 'we' are BF's with either 'side' and were invited to both weddings (still, can't think why). 

If the Becks invite H&M, the couple will expect the royal red carpet treatment from Cali to 'wherever' and be a PITA. 

Inviting the cats from Buck Pally will be less hassle, eat what they're given, dance without donations, and better bet they'll actually show-up and/or sending apologies via 21 news-agencies.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My guess is they would try to find out if W and K would come, and if they wouldn’t, then H and M get the invite.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> My guess is they would try to find out if W and K would come, and if they wouldn’t, then H and M get the invite.



The fiancee is an American and Brooklyn and Hicola bought a house in Beverly Hills,  so my guess is the wedding will be in the US, so W&K are not likely attendees at a posh - to coin a pun - celebrity superspreader


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> Easy solved… don’t invite either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham 'worried' about being dragged in Meghan and Harry's feud with royal family
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham to make a difficult decision over her son Brooklyn's wedding guest list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


Damn … even for her son’s wedding, Meghan is taking away attention from it due to possible drama.
This is the type of reputation she and the spare have made for themselves.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Easy solved… don’t invite either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham 'worried' about being dragged in Meghan and Harry's feud with royal family
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham to make a difficult decision over her son Brooklyn's wedding guest list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


Take with big pinch of salt. The geo.tv website is tabloid news at its lowest. They create news like fiction was going out of fashion.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are correct.  My error.
> For whatever reason, she had not been in contact with Samantha and Thomas Jr. for at least 10 years prior to the wedding. According to this VF article they had financial problems -
> 
> _Meghan also alighted on her fairy godmother: Violet von Westenholz, a British Ralph Lauren public-relations director whose father, an Olympic skier, is besties with Prince Charles. Von Westenholz knew Harry was looking to become serious with the right woman, and passed him Meghan’s contact information.
> 
> The trajectory of her family was moving in other directions. They stopped having holidays together and some eventually stopped speaking to each other. Money problems were a near-constant. Samantha filed for bankruptcy in 2003, joined by Thomas junior in 2012. He claimed at the time that he had $10 in cash and $88,000 in debts. After running into problems with a boutique she’d opened in Los Angeles, Doria also filed for bankruptcy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Family Breakdown: The Untold Story
> 
> 
> Thomas and Samantha Markle have dominated tabloid headlines about the Duchess of Sussex. How did the family create such a fractured, Kardashianified royal fairy tale?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Off to google Violet von Westenholz
> ETA: somehow I missed this connection. Here is what I have found so far :
> Article from 2109:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Socialite who is believed to have set up Harry and Meghan gives birth
> 
> 
> Violet von Westenholz, 36, who is said to have set up Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on their 'blind date' in 2016, and Archie Seymour, 30, recently welcomed a daughter named Lyra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan spent time with Miss von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham at Wimbledon in 2017. Pictured, left to right: Sadie Mantovani, Violet Von Westenholz and Olivia Buckingham



I believe Violet is one of the people she discarded (markled) immediately after starting dating Hazz. 

The family trajectory also agrees with what I read elsewhere, she became distant from her siblings as soon as she started having some success and making money. Wow bankruptcy runs in both sides of the family. I didn't know that Doria has also filed for bankruptcy, she is apparently doing very well now.


----------



## chicinthecity777

needlv said:


> Victoria Beckham 'worried' about being dragged in Meghan and Harry's feud with royal family
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham to make a difficult decision over her son Brooklyn's wedding guest list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


I don't believe this story. I don't think W&K would attend the said wedding.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we can believe FF, it was Mishoo and Markus who set it all up:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Finding Freedom': Bombshells About Meghan Markle and Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The new book documents the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's romance and exit from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back at all we’ve seen and heard, it has been a slippery slope. I don’t believe any of them.
> _The two met in June 2016 on a blind date in London. Prior to the meeting, Meghan attended Wimbledon to cheer on her pal, Serena Williams. The authors said the former Suits actress noticed British actor Dominic Cooper in the VIP bar area at the sporting event and joked that she had a small crush on him. Meghan deliberated going over to Cooper but ultimately decided not to speak to him. Though many reported that Meghan's pal, Violet von Westenholz, set up her blind date with Harry, the book says it was designer Misha Nonoo and Markus Anderson who arranged their date. _


She was likely working on many fronts and leaving nothing to chance…


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Take with big pinch of salt. The geo.tv website is tabloid news at its lowest. They create news like fiction was going out of fashion.



I wouldn't put it past Vikki and Dave to be pushing the 'narrative' either. Let us never forget they had thrones for their nuptials back in the day  

Let's face it, we are dealing with nouveau branded-royals that think want us to pay for T's bearing the name(s) of their children (A) and inbred, vain Royals that future-proof themselves by merching theirs. 

Exhibit A: https://www.victoriabeckham.com/products/brooklyn-t-shirt-in-white


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> If she was crying why even let it be taken? The stupid Prince was enough of an idiot to pose for some entrapment but even he wouldn’t knowingly let them take photos of him groping clearly unwilling girls. It definitely doesn’t prove he was unaware of the situation.
> 
> I don’t understand this logic- the entire US civil law system is set up that you can seek financial compensation for damages why is it indicative of a false claim when people seek payouts for certain offences but not for others?
> 
> Especially in the case of A given his status I doubt there’s any chance they could have him locked up in US jail even if they had truck loads of evidence against him.
> 
> I’m certainly not worried about lost sheep A going broke. Millions, even billions, isn’t going to touch the sides of the BRF.
> Besides, can you put a price on the Queen’s special lad not only not possibly facing the consequences but never really having to clarify his involvement to the public  at all?
> 
> I was hopeful they’d at least have him cooperate at the beginning to show good faith. Now I can see they are happy to do anything to bury it.
> 
> I don’t feel at all sorry for the Queen either, she was happy to pose & smile with him at the church straight after the allegations came out rather than showing sense & staying out of it. You can’t indulge a viper & complain it bites.
> 
> 
> Being cynical- this is the best possible time for Will this could have come out. Granny is handling the affair as queen, someone who I think the general public trusts, & he can maintain as big a distance as possible.
> 
> Whereas if this happened when his father is king there’d be much more pressure on Will to push C for results.
> 
> Even H is quite helpful to him (aside from the pain of falling out with a sibling ) as he always looks better by comparison.


[/QUOTE]
QE is his mother, so it's understandable that she is giving him some support. In contrast to Hazz, Randy Andy didn't turn against his own family. 

JeffE's case stinks and I hope the truth will come out. Randy Andy had probably a case with the woman that is suing him, and he should collaborate to have the situation clarified imo. There are apparently many victims in the JeffE's disgusting story, and it's possible that not everyone claiming to be a victim is actually one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think this particular woman already settled with Maxwell a few years ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Basically
> 
> Not to mention there has been no mention of a "feud" and _toute la ville_  are playing it down (at least _this_ town).
> 
> But, meanwhile, let's put it out there 'we' are BF's with either 'side' and were invited to both weddings (still, can't think why).
> 
> If the Becks invite H&M, the couple will expect the royal red carpet treatment from Cali to 'wherever' and be a PITA.
> 
> Inviting the cats from Buck Pally will be less hassle, eat what they're given, dance without donations, and better bet they'll actually show-up and/or sending apologies via 21 news-agencies.


I didn't read the article, but my guess is that the Becks are trying to find an excuse for not inviting Hazz and wife.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Yes, she was legally young enough to be a minor but this is a civil suit, a rape case would have to be brought by authorities - federal
> 
> This is NOT a criminal case , I got it wrong in previous post, it is a civil case …
> 
> so, she is suing for unspecified damages ie money, he will not go to jail, he will owe money and might be ruined
> 
> if some proof comes out at the trial then the feds can level criminal charges that require jail time
> 
> and as all TV shows inform us, the burden of proof is much lower in a civil case, than in a government case
> agsin, citing TV as my authority … hmmm.. only 6/12 jurors need
> to find guilt in a civil case
> 
> if he were in the NY jurisdiction, he would be served papers to appear to be deposed by her lawyers, I have no clue if that can be done while he stays put in Windsor
> 
> my guess is he dares NOT travel anywhere, certainly not out of the UK
> 
> i wonder if he could be served if he went to Scotland or Wales ? It is probably safest for him to stay at Windsor just in case


according to Wiki age of consent in NY is 17 and 18 in FL.  So, not saying Andy is a good guy, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have asked her age.  and was she 17 anyway?


----------



## Chanbal

Who is paying all these salaries and fringe benefits?


----------



## Sol Ryan

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't put it past Vikki and Dave to be pushing the 'narrative' either. Let us never forget they had thrones for their nuptials back in the day
> 
> Let's face it, we are dealing with nouveau branded-royals that think want us to pay for T's bearing the name(s) of their children (A) and inbred, vain Royals that future-proof themselves by merching theirs.
> 
> Exhibit A: https://www.victoriabeckham.com/products/brooklyn-t-shirt-in-white



Id rather have Posh and Becks than M&H… at least Becks has good taste in Legos….








						David Beckham slowly builds LEGO Technic 42110 Land Rover Defender
					

World famous LEGO fan David Beckham has been building LEGO Technic 42110 Land Rover Defender, with his wife Victoria mocking him during the process.




					www.brickfanatics.com


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Completely commenting here off the the top of my head with no legal knowledge.  I think that Andrew is going to outwait this woman. It is a money grab by her.  I have a hard time thinking it is anything else and she is looking for justice.  How does she explain herself by being there in the first place?  She was 17, and that is not a baby.  It isn't 14 or 15 or 16. I am not excusing his bad judgement and poor choice of friends, but this woman has to answer for herself too.    He is going to sit tight and not respond.  What can they do to him?  Nothing as far as I can see.  So he gets bad press, and doesn't get to play dress up and stand on the balcony or wear a uniform and review the troops, but he is still living a nice life of luxury with plenty of perks.


I was thinking also that Andrews's sin was bad judgement.  Epstein introduced him to the young woman.  she may have been trafficked but it appears she was smiling and acting friendly to Andy so he probably thought she was a cute young woman who liked him/was available.  I doubt he asked a lot of questions.


----------



## marietouchet

breakfastatcartier said:


> Damn … even for her son’s wedding, Meghan is taking away attention from it due to possible drama.
> This is the type of reputation she and the spare have made for themselves.


There are issues with ALL wedding invite lists ... actually, the bride's family does the wedding or maybe that is already an issue for Posh and Becks ... 
Blaming H&M for invite list heartburn and spotlight stealing is a stretch ... heck how well does H&M know Brooklyn and Nicola ?

And weddings are now nightmares due to COVID ... the couple is impatient, rude, thoughtless ... venues may not be able to meet what they signed up to do - WHATTTTTT???? to mask/test/quarantine or not to mask/test/quarantine ???


----------



## lanasyogamama

Plus, we have all seen how Meghan acts at weddings. (Jamaica)


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Plus, we have all seen how Meghan acts at weddings. (Jamaica)


That unbuttoned coat pregnancy announcement to steal the bride's thunder was unforgiveable. Should we blame whichever designer she conned for that coat which was a size too small? No wonder for the supposed preggers deux, she was heavily pregnant all the way.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

marietouchet said:


> There are issues with ALL wedding invite lists ... actually, the bride's family does the wedding or maybe that is already an issue for Posh and Becks ...
> Blaming H&M for invite list heartburn and spotlight stealing is a stretch ... heck how well does H&M know Brooklyn and Nicola ?
> 
> And weddings are now nightmares due to COVID ... the couple is impatient, rude, thoughtless ... venues may not be able to meet what they signed up to do - WHATTTTTT???? to mask/test/quarantine or not to mask/test/quarantine ???


Ok “Pearl”, I need you to calm down.

Go watch your baby now.


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I don't know all the allegations, a few points regarding consent age in the UK. The consent age here is 16, but if money is changing hands, then the consent age becomes 18. My understanding is her photo was taken in England. She will need to prove either money has changed hands in the UK, or he had sex with her in the U.S. Again, not defending Andrew, who is a complete twat, but I don't know how or what she's trying to achieve.


Like many, she will get her book deal and talk show visits unless she is a complete idiot. Someone can write the book for her, but unless she is really stupid she won’t promote it well.

I am surprised that the Sussex lack of being invited to the O party should be as big a thing as it is. Is SS so desperate to get them in the media that they believe promoting this story  is a good thing?

I do believe that she is very unhappy at how her little BD drama played out or they wouldn’t be paying Melissa M more money to try to salvage it. Melissa must realize she should have said no to the video.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> That unbuttoned coat pregnancy announcement to steal the bride's thunder was unforgiveable. Should we blame whichever designer she conned for that coat which was a size too small? No wonder for the supposed preggers deux, she was heavily pregnant all the way.


She went through the entire pregnancy being heavily pregnant. Amazing what a good piece of foam can do for your figure.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> That unbuttoned coat pregnancy announcement to steal the bride's thunder was unforgiveable. Should we blame whichever designer she conned for that coat which was a size too small? No wonder for the supposed preggers deux, she was heavily pregnant all the way.



Spot on. It's a good thing she didn't attend Philip's funeral or she'd have dressed with a black lace veil over her face to overshadow the Queen.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Who is paying all these salaries and fringe benefits?



This chick’s pic shows me she’s just as low down as Meghan … birds of a feather I guess. 
Is it me? Or does she rarely employ black women? Or men?
She’s scared of employing a black woman who’ll see through her BS and not willing to go along with her dirty ways?

She’s only employing Asian and white women who are willing to do her dirty work for her and so if any one calls her out she can claim racism …


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> QE is his mother, so it's understandable that she is giving him some support. In contrast to Hazz, Randy Andy didn't turn against his own family.
> 
> JeffE's case stinks and I hope the truth will come out. Randy Andy had probably a case with the woman that is suing him, and he should collaborate to have the situation clarified imo. There are apparently many victims in the JeffE's disgusting story, and it's possible that not everyone claiming to be a victim is actually one.


I don’t agree. I think that supporting and believing your child as a mother is one thing & she has every right to do that in private. However, I think  she crossed the boundary into her professional life by doing clear PR and  photo opportunities with him both after the allegations surfaced and at the funeral. She should have remained impartial as a representative of our state mother or no mother.
Also, how much support does he need?
He’s a grown man!
Why does he need support from mama in weathering a crisis at 50(?) but a 17 year old girl is fully responsible for handling the seductions of a group of horny men double her age with a lot of money and influence ? (And that is the favourable to Andrew & gang interpretation of what happened!)

The photo ops and burial of the story are just obnoxious & show that they have no interest in assisting justice just in flexing their influence.

I think it is the responsibility of due process to determine whether the claimants are telling the truth or not - my concern is that the influence of this Prince & his family are creating serious obstructions to that ever happening & I feel it’s wrong given these people are representatives of our nation & public servants and they should, as such, be co-operative with the legal system of our ally.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I don't love my nose either but honestly it took me many years to realize it.  This is part of the problem as I see it.  Most of us who are older grew up mostly accepting our faces.  Getting a nose job used to be for people with noticeably large noses.  Now it's become something where people (esp women) with perfectly acceptable noses are looking to make them better.  or make them look like Jennifer Lawrence's or whatever.  and what Hollywood does gets publicized and "regular" women try to do the same.  To me it's kinda sad.  What happened to uniqueness?  everyone now need to have a thin nose and puffy lips?
> I admire someone like Lauren Hutton (aging myself here) who refused to fix her tooth gap.


I didn't love my nose either, but I have this "thing" about doing anything to my face that would make me look different.  I look very much like my Italian Grandmother, whom I loved dearly .. so, I don't want to erase any part of myself that is genetically the same as her.  However, because I had been socked in the nose (get this - teaching the Butterfly swimming stroke), I had a very bad deviated septum where my nose actually pointed to my left side.  After suffering for years with breathing issues and having to take Afrin constantly, I finally went to see an ENT Doctor to get it fixed.  I told him "just fix it -- DO NOT mess with my nose otherwise, NO plastic surgery at all"!!!  He did exactly that, just fixed my nose .. but he also said that because it had been broken, he did have to straighten the bones a bit .. but I'm super satisfied with what he did because my nose is straight on my face now .. no more left lean!!  Even more importantly, I can BREATHE!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> It looks like Melissa M with her participation in the 40x40 PR stunt earned a prominent spot on DM.
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy dons a blue jumpsuit and shops at a flea market
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy was spotted shopping for vintage clothing at the Rose Bowl Flea Market in Los Angeles. The star, 50, kept it casual in a blue floral print jumpsuit for her outing on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> "_And Melissa McCarthy was on the hunt for some unique duds, seen shopping for vintage clothing at the Rose Bowl Flea Market in Pasadena, California on Sunday."_
> 
> Would Melissa be spending her recently earned cash?


When I could walk around like a "semi"-normal person (before the big-time onset of my horrible arthritis), the HB and I used to go to the Rose Bowl Flea market A LOT (since we lived in Pasadena at the time).  Of course, I would see celebrity after celebrity there (my husband just never seems to see any of them) .. and it was always kind of interesting to see them without all the make-up, fancy dress and what they would buy!!!  Of course, you also had some of the "celebs" (typically the reality-show types) that would get all gussied-up with high-heels, their Birkin bags (wide open of course) and their fancy clothes (but still trying to look somewhat "hippy"), and I would HOWL when I would see them walking around (on grass!!!) .. and fall on their a$$es!!!  Always a FUN day!!!


----------



## lulilu

marietouchet said:


> The fiancee is an American and Brooklyn and Hicola bought a house in Beverly Hills,  so my guess is the wedding will be in the US, so W&K are not likely attendees at a posh - to coin a pun - celebrity superspreader





papertiger said:


> I wouldn't put it past Vikki and Dave to be pushing the 'narrative' either. Let us never forget they had thrones for their nuptials back in the day
> 
> Let's face it, we are dealing with nouveau branded-royals that think want us to pay for T's bearing the name(s) of their children (A) and inbred, vain Royals that future-proof themselves by merching theirs.
> Exhibit A: https://www.victoriabeckham.com/products/brooklyn-t-shirt-in-white


I like the tee shirt.  But there are many high street tees with Brooklyn on them (everywhere in NYC).



marietouchet said:


> There are issues with ALL wedding invite lists ... actually, the bride's family does the wedding or maybe that is already an issue for Posh and Becks ...
> Blaming H&M for invite list heartburn and spotlight stealing is a stretch ... heck how well does H&M know Brooklyn and Nicola ?
> And weddings are now nightmares due to COVID ... *the couple is impatient, rude, thoughtless ... venues may not be able to meet what they signed up to do - WHATTTTTT???? to mask/test/quarantine or not to mask/test/quarantine ???*


Not sure if you mean brides/grooms generically or these two????
I would be shocked if the wedding was in the US.  Seems as if all wealthy couples get married in extravaganas at castles in Italy, complete with 3 day events, fireworks etc.  Even a friend of mine (who is very wealthy) did this.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Completely commenting here off the the top of my head with no legal knowledge.  I think that Andrew is going to outwait this woman. It is a money grab by her.  I have a hard time thinking it is anything else and she is looking for justice.  How does she explain herself by being there in the first place?  She was 17, and that is not a baby.  It isn't 14 or 15 or 16. I am not excusing his bad judgement and poor choice of friends, but this woman has to answer for herself too.    He is going to sit tight and not respond.  What can they do to him?  Nothing as far as I can see.  So he gets bad press, and doesn't get to play dress up and stand on the balcony or wear a uniform and review the troops, but he is still living a nice life of luxury with plenty of perks.


This wouldn't be the first time she received a settlement and now, isn't there Epstein compensation for all the victims... so I do wonder about this lady. A lot.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I believe Violet is one of the people she discarded (markled) immediately after starting dating Hazz.
> 
> The family trajectory also agrees with what I read elsewhere, she became distant from her siblings as soon as she started having some success and making money. Wow bankruptcy runs in both sides of the family. I didn't know that Doria has also filed for bankruptcy, she is apparently doing very well now.


I’ve got a feeling Doria has tried a couple of careers out  as this is the first I’ve heard of a boutique- nothing wrong with that but I wish the same courtesy was extended to the Ms rather than bankcruptcy being treated as some sort of damming character flaw. It’s also worth bearing in mind that Sam was already suffering from MS 10 years ago & chronic disability can be absolutely ruinous.



Chanbal said:


> Who is paying all these salaries and fringe benefits?



I assume her plastic surgeon for all the referrals he’s getting and some kind of wig company which specialises in tendrils


Sol Ryan said:


> Id rather have Posh and Becks than M&H… at least Becks has good taste in Legos….
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Beckham slowly builds LEGO Technic 42110 Land Rover Defender
> 
> 
> World famous LEGO fan David Beckham has been building LEGO Technic 42110 Land Rover Defender, with his wife Victoria mocking him during the process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.brickfanatics.com


I agree, I can’t help but like the Beckhams they remind me of the heady joys of the 90s, they’ve actually put good stuff out & had solid careers & they have a sense of humour. 


breakfastatcartier said:


> This chick’s pic shows me she’s just as low down as Meghan … birds of a feather I guess.
> Is it me? Or does she rarely employ black women? Or men?
> She’s scared of employing a black woman who’ll see through her BS and not willing to go along with her dirty ways?
> 
> She’s only employing Asian and white women who are willing to do her dirty work for her and so if any one calls her out she can claim racism …


I mean Rachel dolezal managed it for a surprisingly long time (leading me to theorise that almost everyone currently alive is a better at acting than MLM)  but I think there’s some truth in this.

M has told some varying stories about her interaction with black culture in LA (e.g. where she was during the riot) & I think she would be very concerned that a black LAngel would soon see the wood from the trees and I think LA is a very small place for gossip & as you say what could she say in reply….
Recollections may vary?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t agree. I think that supporting and believing your child as a mother is one thing & she has every right to do that in private. However, I think  she crossed the boundary into her professional life by doing clear PR and  photo opportunities with him both after the allegations surfaced and at the funeral. She should have remained impartial as a representative of our state mother or no mother.



I'll cut her some slack seeing how old she is.



> Also, how much support does he need?
> He’s a grown man!
> Why does he need support from mama in weathering a crisis at 50(?) but a 17 year old girl is fully responsible for handling the seductions of a group of horny men double her age with a lot of money and influence ? (And that is the favourable to Andrew & gang interpretation of what happened!)



Indeed. I don't have much time for people claiming "She was 17, she knew what she did!" Human brains aren't even fully developed until mid 20s.



> The photo ops and burial of the story are just obnoxious & show that they have no interest in assisting justice just in flexing their influence.
> 
> I think it is the responsibility of due process to determine whether the claimants are telling the truth or not - my concern is that the influence of this Prince & his family are creating serious obstructions to that ever happening & I feel it’s wrong given these people are representatives of our nation & public servants and they should, as such, be co-operative with the legal system of our ally.



Jup. He needs to take responsibility either way. Also, let's be real. What will come out of it anyway? So there's a picture of the two together, fully clothed? No DNA, no footage of the deed, probably not even believable witnesses because they wouldn't have been in the room, would they? Also, if she fell over the age of consent at 17, what's the crime...he should have known Epstein coerced her? 

Don't get me wrong, I think he's a disgusting pig whether or not he committed an actual crime, I just wonder if that case has a legal leg to stand on.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> If there was intercourse but she had claimed to be older, would that change anything? Teenagers often do claim to be older so that they can get the "perks" of adulthood. Of course it would still be a he say/she say situation.


Even if the teenager lies about their age, the adult is still criminally liable if the teenager is underage. Saying "But she said was eighteen" or ""She looked older" doesn't cut it with the law in the US.


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> This chick’s pic shows me she’s just as low down as Meghan … birds of a feather I guess.
> Is it me? Or does she rarely employ black women? Or men?
> She’s scared of employing a black woman who’ll see through her BS and not willing to go along with her dirty ways?
> 
> She’s only employing Asian and white women who are willing to do her dirty work for her and so if any one calls her out she can claim racism …


interesting question


----------



## bellecate

My first reaction was " ya right, don't believe this". But then I thought maybe they can't keep up money wise in their life in California and she's realizing she won't attain her 'top of everyone status' she craves where they are so figures to give politics a go.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I didn't love my nose either, but I have this "thing" about doing anything to my face that would make me look different.  I look very much like my Italian Grandmother, whom I loved dearly .. so, I don't want to erase any part of myself that is genetically the same as her.  However, because I had been socked in the nose (get this - teaching the Butterfly swimming stroke), I had a very bad deviated septum where my nose actually pointed to my left side.  After suffering for years with breathing issues and having to take Afrin constantly, I finally went to see an ENT Doctor to get it fixed.  I told him "just fix it -- DO NOT mess with my nose otherwise, NO plastic surgery at all"!!!  He did exactly that, just fixed my nose .. but he also said that because it had been broken, he did have to straighten the bones a bit .. but I'm super satisfied with what he did because my nose is straight on my face now .. no more left lean!!  Even more importantly, I can BREATHE!!!!


glad doctor fixed your nose without changing your face....a new nose can make a huge difference...remember Jennifer Grey?  she looked like a totally different person after she had her nose done.  I think it may have hurt her career.

way back in the day I think some people used to say they had a deviated septum so they wouldn't have to admit they wanted to change their nose


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t agree. I think that supporting and believing your child as a mother is one thing & she has every right to do that in private. However, I think  she crossed the boundary into her professional life by doing clear PR and  photo opportunities with him both after the allegations surfaced and at the funeral. She should have remained impartial as a representative of our state mother or no mother.
> Also, how much support does he need?
> He’s a grown man!
> Why does he need support from mama in weathering a crisis at 50(?) but a 17 year old girl is fully responsible for handling the seductions of a group of horny men double her age with a lot of money and influence ? (And that is the favourable to Andrew & gang interpretation of what happened!)
> 
> The photo ops and burial of the story are just obnoxious & show that they have no interest in assisting justice just in flexing their influence.
> 
> I think it is the responsibility of due process to determine whether the claimants are telling the truth or not - my concern is that the influence of this Prince & his family are creating serious obstructions to that ever happening & I feel it’s wrong given these people are representatives of our nation & public servants and they should, as such, be co-operative with the legal system of our ally.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll cut her some slack seeing how old she is.
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed. I don't have much time for people claiming "She was 17, she knew what she did!" Human brains aren't even fully developed until mid 20s.
> 
> 
> 
> Jup. He needs to take responsibility either way. Also, let's be real. What will come out of it anyway? So there's a picture of the two together, fully clothed? No DNA, no footage of the deed, probably not even believable witnesses because they wouldn't have been in the room, would they? Also, if she fell over the age of consent at 17, what's the crime...he should have known Epstein coerced her?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I think he's a disgusting pig whether or not he committed an actual crime, I just wonder if that case has a legal leg to stand on.


QE dedicated most of her life to her country. She is now 95 and I don't see an issue to have a photo taken with her kids at her husband's funeral. Most parents will support their kids indefinitely, but this doesn't mean that they agree or are complicit with whatever they do. A form of support is also to encourage them to do the right thing. In my view, the right thing is for Randy Andy to collaborate with FB* and stop hiding.

It's deplorable and criminal for older men (or older women) to engage in affairs with underage kids. The girl was old enough to understand that something was very wrong with JeffE's scheme. However, she was still a minor, where were her parents? Did she serve as bait for JeffE's acquaintances? Randy Andy should assume whatever participation he had on this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> My first reaction was " ya right, don't believe this". But then I thought maybe they can't keep up money wise in their life in California and she's realizing she won't attain her 'top of everyone status' she craves where they are so figures to give politics a go.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5161751



Especially him, hu (following in the O's footsteps that is)? Seeing he doesn't even have US citizenship, but what do I know.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> My first reaction was " ya right, don't believe this". But then I thought maybe they can't keep up money wise in their life in California and she's realizing she won't attain her 'top of everyone status' she craves where they are so figures to give politics a go.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5161751


This is likely one more of their fake stories that they release to be in the news.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think folks are giving the Sussex too much importance.  They just don't rate high enough on the social, celebrity or economic scale to be of any importance.  Look at the people who were disinvited.  They are bigger names or have more political importance or money than the Sussex will ever have.


maybe this is giving them a dose of reality....bitter pill to swallow
I thought this VF headline was strange "Colbert claims he was disinvited"?
Claims, rather than says?  makes it seem like they think he was lying.....I preferred Graydon Carter's VF
Stephen Colbert Claims He Was Disinvited From Barack *****’s Birthday Party | Vanity Fair


----------



## jelliedfeels

bellecate said:


> My first reaction was " ya right, don't believe this". But then I thought maybe they can't keep up money wise in their life in California and she's realizing she won't attain her 'top of everyone status' she craves where they are so figures to give politics a go.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5161751


I know this is probably a cooked up story but Im going to run with it and assume Washington is still pretty expensive & competitive.

I mean, I’m struggling to think of somewhere which combines these two’s taste levels with their ambitions for themselves as ‘entertainment entrepreneurs’ and all I can think is….

Is there a cheaper and tackier version of Vegas?

Please enlighten me American TPFers! I’m thinking I’ve heard Atlantic City is like budget Vegas but please tell me whether you think it’ll fit clown & frown’s aesthetics


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I know this is probably a cooked up story but Im going to run with it and assume Washington is still pretty expensive & competitive.
> 
> I mean, I’m struggling to think of somewhere which combines these two’s taste levels with their ambitions for themselves as ‘entertainment entrepreneurs’ and all I can think is….
> 
> Is there a cheaper and tackier version of Vegas?
> 
> Please enlighten me American TPFers! I’m thinking I’ve heard Atlantic City is like budget Vegas but please tell me whether you think it’ll fit clown & frown’s aesthetics


are you kidding?  they probably think Vegas is too tacky for their magnificence - well back in the day it was ok for H but I'm sure he is much more serious now


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> maybe this is giving them a dose of reality....bitter pill to swallow
> I thought this VF headline was strange "Colbert claims he was disinvited"?
> Claims, rather than says?  makes it seem like they think he was lying.....I preferred Graydon Carter's VF
> Stephen Colbert Claims He Was Disinvited From Barack *****’s Birthday Party | Vanity Fair


It looks like he was one of the disinvited guests that ended up going to Martha's Vineyard, and he is taking it with great humor.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> maybe this is giving them a dose of reality....bitter pill to swallow
> I thought this VF headline was strange "Colbert claims he was disinvited"?
> Claims, rather than says?  makes it seem like they think he was lying.....I preferred Graydon Carter's VF
> Stephen Colbert Claims He Was Disinvited From Barack *****’s Birthday Party | Vanity Fair


Am I the only one hoping that Larry David makes a curb episode about this party & the cut list fallout?

I wonder if LD got disinvited after BO found out he was planning to use his M*ga hat to minimise the amount of small talk he had to do at the party … it would’ve definitely put off H&M.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> are you kidding?  they probably think Vegas is too tacky for their magnificence - well back in the day it was ok for H but I'm sure he is much more serious now


Yes you are right, M wouldn’t want to go back to an old stomping ground of his in case he suddenly had a flashback of what fun is. 
She’d have to say ‘Vegas is a trigger, Harry’


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> QE dedicated most of her life to her country. She is now 95 and I don't see an issue to have a photo taken with her kids at her husband's funeral. Most parents will support their kids indefinitely, but this doesn't mean that they agree or are complicit with whatever they do. A form of support is also to encourage them to do the right thing. In my view, the right thing is for Randy Andy to collaborate with FB* and stop hiding.
> 
> It's deplorable and criminal for older men (or older women) to engage in affairs with underage kids. The girl was old enough to understand that something was very wrong with JeffE's scheme. However, she was still a minor, where were her parents? Did she serve as bait for JeffE's acquaintances? Randy Andy should assume whatever participation he had on this.


Giuffre's troubled family situation made her ripe to be recruited by Maxwell. Maxwell looked for girls from troubled backgrounds and befriended them, gained their trust and groomed them for Epstein.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I know this is probably a cooked up story but Im going to run with it and assume Washington is still pretty expensive & competitive.
> 
> I mean, I’m struggling to think of somewhere which combines these two’s taste levels with their ambitions for themselves as ‘entertainment entrepreneurs’ and all I can think is….
> 
> Is there a cheaper and tackier version of Vegas?
> 
> Please enlighten me American TPFers! I’m thinking I’ve heard Atlantic City is like budget Vegas but please tell me whether you think it’ll fit clown & frown’s aesthetics





sdkitty said:


> are you kidding?  they probably think Vegas is too tacky for their magnificence - well back in the day it was ok for H but I'm sure he is much more serious now


I'm liking the idea of them moving to Vegas.   

While I don't believe they are house-hunting in Washington, I wouldn't be surprised if Hazz is already tired of living in the idilic Montecito.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I'm liking the idea of them moving to Vegas.
> 
> While I don't believe they are house-hunting in Washington, I wouldn't be surprised if Hazz is already tired of living in the idilic Montecito.


yes, I wonder how many hours a day he can play with Archie


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Giuffre's troubled family situation made her ripe to be recruited by Maxwell. Maxwell looked for girls from troubled backgrounds and befriended them, gained their trust and groomed them for Epstein.


I really hope the truth will come out.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I really hope the truth will come out.


hard to believe Maxwell won't cooperate to get a lighter sentence....unless she is fearful for her life


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe this is giving them a dose of reality....bitter pill to swallow
> I thought this VF headline was strange "Colbert claims he was disinvited"?
> Claims, rather than says?  makes it seem like they think he was lying.....I preferred Graydon Carter's VF
> Stephen Colbert Claims He Was Disinvited From Barack *****’s Birthday Party | Vanity Fair



Vanity Fair doesn’t know what to do with a story like that. It’s like they want you to think that since Colbert is a comedian he might be joking. He isn’t. VF is so used to kissing up that having an article that isn’t 100% supportive about the O****s is unnatural to them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Vanity Fair doesn’t know what to do with a story like that. It’s like they want you to think that since Colbert is a comedian he might be joking. He isn’t. VF is so used to kissing up that having an article that isn’t 100% supportive about the O****s is unnatural to them.


I don't see where what colbert said was negative....he just told the truth with humor


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure whether this assessment is correct or not, but it should be enough to break a few dishes.  









						Obamas 'will go towards William' amid rift, Harry's biographer claims
					

The Obamas didn't invite Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Barack's 60th birthday party because 'they will go towards William' amid the family's rift, Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin has claimed, speaking to The Sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't see where what colbert said was negative....he just told the truth with humor



In this case the truth, while not negative, isn’t positive either.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Not sure whether this assessment is correct or not, but it should be enough to break a few dishes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obamas 'will go towards William' amid rift, Harry's biographer claims
> 
> 
> The Obamas didn't invite Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Barack's 60th birthday party because 'they will go towards William' amid the family's rift, Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin has claimed, speaking to The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Another “royal expert” heard from. I don’t believe for a minute H&M were ever seriously considered for an invitation, but it’s nice of a Harry biographer to pretend they were.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> … a new nose can make a huge difference...remember Jennifer Grey?  she looked like a totally different person after she had her nose done.  I think it may have hurt her career.


Do you know why Jennifer Grey looks so different other than her nose which shouldn’t change her face completely? She did her eyes at the sane time. 

Her eyes looked so different - that’s what really changed her face and then of course the smaller nose. Funny how people only look at noses and not the rest of the face.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Another “royal expert” heard from. I don’t believe for a minute H&M were ever seriously considered for an invitation, but it’s nice of a Harry biographer to pretend they were.





Chanbal said:


> Not sure whether this assessment is correct or not, but it should be enough to break a few dishes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obamas 'will go towards William' amid rift, Harry's biographer claims
> 
> 
> The Obamas didn't invite Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Barack's 60th birthday party because 'they will go towards William' amid the family's rift, Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin has claimed, speaking to The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




If Meghan had been willing to be the "understudy" to Kate she could have had a very comfortable life. See: the Countess of Wessex.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It looks like he was one of the disinvited guests that ended up going to Martha's Vineyard, and he is taking it with great humor.


I think that most of the uninvited had already made a airplane/hotel reservation and rather than give it up, they decided to to anyway.  They might have lined up other social events as well. That is what Nancy P*el*o*s*i did.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Do you know why Jennifer Grey looks so different other than her nose which shouldn’t change her face completely? She did her eyes at the sane time.
> 
> Her eyes looked so different - that’s what really changed her face and then of course the smaller nose. Funny how people only look at noses and not the rest of the face.


guess in her case the nose was obvious and eyes not so much


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> If Meghan had been willing to be the "understudy" to Kate she could have had a very comfortable life. See: the Countess of Wessex.



What? Comfortable? With only 4 bathrooms?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I'm liking the idea of them moving to Vegas.
> 
> While I don't believe they are house-hunting in Washington, I wouldn't be surprised if Hazz is already tired of living in the idilic Montecito.


When I heard they were buying a house in Montecito I said this won't end well. It was a given that she would cozy up to Oprah.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I know this is probably a cooked up story but Im going to run with it and assume Washington is still pretty expensive & competitive.
> 
> I mean, I’m struggling to think of somewhere which combines these two’s taste levels with their ambitions for themselves as ‘entertainment entrepreneurs’ and all I can think is….
> 
> Is there a cheaper and tackier version of Vegas?
> 
> Please enlighten me American TPFers! I’m thinking I’ve heard Atlantic City is like budget Vegas but please tell me whether you think it’ll fit clown & frown’s aesthetics


Budget Las Vegas is being exceedingly generous.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I really hope the truth will come out.


there is so much speculation about Epstein including that he was some sort of government agent or spy.  It could be  fascinating story but wonder if it will ever be told


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> there is so much speculation about Epstein including that he was some sort of government agent or spy.  It could be  fascinating story but wonder if it will ever be told



maybe he was a useful sleaze - so government adjacent?

what irritates me most is Maxwell.  Allegedly - She trafficked the women and young girls, including acting as a pilot to his island;  was complicit in finding them and recruiting them - and was  a human trafficker in the worst sense.  If found guilty I hope she goes to jail for a long time.  Victims should sue her as well.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> there is so much speculation about Epstein including that he was some sort of government agent or spy.  It could be  fascinating story but wonder if it will ever be told



Over the next 10-20 years I’m betting we will see several authors writing books about Epstein’s life which will contain wild tales. Since he’s dead they can make up whatever they like, although what we know to be true is bad enough.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> maybe he was a useful sleaze - so government adjacent?
> 
> what irritates me most is Maxwell.  Allegedly - She trafficked the women and young girls, including acting as a pilot to his island;  was complicit in finding them and recruiting them - and was  a human trafficker in the worst sense.  If found guilty I hope she goes to jail for a long time.  Victims should sue her as well.


I wonder if she was in love with him or if the relationship was more transactional....one story I heard was he had the money and she had the connections.....apparently after her father died she didn't have so much money


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny 
some internet headline - H&M a team up with FARGO producer for inspirational movies …
ok, I ignored the FARGO TV show and thought immediately of the original movie - that inspired the TV show …
the movie had Frances McDormand as a cop and my memory is of a bad guy tossing a dead body into a wood chipper with all the attendant mess you can imagine 
saw movie long time ago, and recollections may vary 
Yup the movie was very inspirational


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she was in love with him or if the relationship was more transactional....one story I heard was he had the money and she had the connections.....apparently after her father died she didn't have so much money


My money is on her trying an insanity plea , something along the lines of the devil made me do it … 
she might be hospitalized and write her memoirs … oh goody


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Am I the only one hoping that Larry David makes a curb episode about this party & the cut list fallout?
> 
> I wonder if LD got disinvited after BO found out he was planning to use his M*ga hat to minimise the amount of small talk he had to do at the party … it would’ve definitely put off H&M.


I’ve seen Larry David on the Vineyard  so it’s totally possible!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like he was one of the disinvited guests that ended up going to Martha's Vineyard, and he is taking it with great humor.



Or is this his way of dodging the questions? turn the question into a joke? 
Either way, you are right - he takes it with great humor. A lesson for the Monteshito duo


----------



## needlv

Well this is not true.  Poor MM - she wasn’t invited to a former presidents party and her 40x40 was a flop… so now she is getting her PR to release a statement about how she is close to Catherine?  Haha… pathetic.









						Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate Are ‘Closer Than Ever’ After Rocky Year
					

Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton’s relationship has been up and down amid their husbands, Prince Harry and Prince William, ongoing feud — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Another “royal expert” heard from. I don’t believe for a minute H&M were ever seriously considered for an invitation, but it’s nice of a Harry biographer to pretend they were.


In contrast to Om*d, Angela Levin is considered by many to be a respected royal expert. Her comments  about the Madame of Montecito agree with what we have been observing here at TPF imo.  

_The royal expert went on to say that the *Duchess of Sussex 'desperately wanted' to be among those in attendance.*

'I am told that *despite claiming she was unable to attend, Meghan desperately wanted to be the special guest at the *****'s amazing party*,' she said. 'But the fact is, Harry and Meghan were never even on the original list.'_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bellecate said:


> My first reaction was " ya right, don't believe this". But then I thought maybe they can't keep up money wise in their life in California and she's realizing she won't attain her 'top of everyone status' she craves where they are so figures to give politics a go.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5161751



A portrait for Harry’s office playroom in D.C.


----------



## Lodpah

WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.








Tue
DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!





Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
“Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.



Hold up, I do not understand. Is this from her or stans?  Is this a recent post? Why now?
Finally, is that her new nose?


----------



## Hermes Zen

^ And is that H’s new nose?!?  I thought I read on this thread he also has a slope nose. Interesting if true or was true both had similar noses.  Be interesting to see how Archie and Lilibet noses turn out. M’s original nose or H’s or ?


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.


Find the light in her wounds? Really weird metaphor. Like she is radioactive.



Hermes Zen said:


> ^ And is that H’s new nose?!?  I thought I read on this thread he also has a slope nose. Interesting if true or was true both had similar noses.  Be interesting to see how Archie and Lilibet noses turn out. M’s original nose or H’s or ?


If they touched up the photos (is that even an "if"?), it might be noses that only exist in their imagination.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Find the light in her wounds? Really weird metaphor. Like she is radioactive.



I think it's plagiarizing gone wrong. "The wound is the place where the light enters you", Rumi. I don't think there's any light to be found in wounds per se.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


>



Is that fan fiction or did they really put that out?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that fan fiction or did they really put that out?


It was on Quora. I tell you those Quorans are sleuths, way better at finding things than others. I am thinking it was part of her b-day thing.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think it's plagiarizing gone wrong. "The wound is the place where the light enters you", Rumi. I don't think there's any light to be found in wounds per se.


She is the queen of word salad tho.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> It was on Quora. I tell you those Quorans are sleuths, way better at finding things than others. I am thinking it was part of her b-day thing.


So "poetic". It may form the basis for her second book!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it from one of their ”private” IG/Twitter accounts?  Iirc he had several prior to marriage.

from July, 2020:








						Prince Harry Had a Secret Instagram Account With a Hilarious Name
					

And Meghan followed him!




					www.marieclaire.com
				



_What's even more staggering: Prince Harry reportedly named his secret Instagram account after his favorite DJ, Deadmau5, as well as his Facebook alias, Spike Wells. The not at all embarrassing outcome? @SpikeyMau5._


Or is it a photoshop of the Hongi kisses:


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it from one of their ”private” IG/Twitter accounts?  Iirc he had several prior to marriage.
> 
> from July, 2020:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Had a Secret Instagram Account With a Hilarious Name
> 
> 
> And Meghan followed him!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _What's even more staggering: Prince Harry reportedly named his secret Instagram account after his favorite DJ, Deadmau5, as well as his Facebook alias, Spike Wells. The not at all embarrassing outcome? @SpikeyMau5._
> 
> 
> Or is it a photoshop of the Hongi kisses:
> View attachment 5162187


Ooh... look at the profile of the noses!


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.



"...when I don't have the strength to love myself"? "...the mirror doesn't show"? "...deepest darkest wounds"?  AND THIS is supposedly somebody with political aspirations?????  What would her campaign slogan be? "VOTE FOR ME BECAUSE I'M A WOUNDED PERSON AND YOU HAVE TO FEEL SORRY FOR ME. IF YOU DON'T YOU'RE A RACIST AND A MISOGYNIST".


----------



## chicinthecity777

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.


We are still missing the gag reflex emoji as the instant reaction for this!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Spot on. It's a good thing she didn't attend Philip's funeral or she'd have dressed with a black lace veil over her face to overshadow the Queen.


Reminds me of those horror stories on Reddit when the MIL turns up at the son's wedding wearing a white lace gown


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of those horror stories on Reddit when the MIL turns up at the son's wedding wearing a white lace gown


Yeah gown color is so touchy at weddings ... 
MOG is expected to ask MOB what color she (MOB) will wear, so that MOG can wear a different color - the idea being they should not look alike in the photos. 
GF DD just got married. Well, MOG did not ask and chose same color as MOB, it was noticed ... LOL ... who cares in the years of COVID ???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of those horror stories on Reddit when the MIL turns up at the son's wedding wearing a white lace gown



Or red at a military function where that colour was reserved for, ya know, military people.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Yeah gown color is so touchy at weddings ...
> MOG is expected to ask MOB what color she (MOB) will wear, so that MOG can wear a different color - the idea being they should not look alike in the photos.
> GF DD just got married. Well, MOG did not ask and chose same color as MOB, it was noticed ... LOL ... who cares in the years of COVID ???


My MIL wore a clingy gold knit dress and forever after moaned that she looked fat in the photos. My mum wore hot pink


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up, I do not understand. Is this from her or stans?  Is this a recent post? Why now?
> Finally, is that her new nose?



First, I was eating a delicious pastry, and I swallowed the last pieces without savoring them. All these extra calories for nothing. Thanks @Lodpah.

Wow, the new nose demanded a new profile picture to share with the world. How generous of them!


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.



Whose Barfday is it this week then?  

 Don't they ever shut-t-f-up?


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Find the light in her wounds? Really weird metaphor. Like she is radioactive.
> 
> 
> If they touched up the photos (is that even an "if"?), it might be noses that only exist in their imagination.


She is radioactive to many people. I wonder if Hazz is already recognizing the symptoms. 

The photo has touch ups, but the new nose is real. She showed it for the 1st time during the 40X40 video.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Find the light in her wounds? Really weird metaphor. Like she is radioactive.



Mixed metaphor?
Are wounds dark? No
Is the absence of light a wound? No

Both H&M are radioactive & heavily toxic.

We need a musical break from a lady with some marketable talent and who needs some real help.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> She is *radioactive *to many people. I wonder if Hazz is already recognizing the symptoms.
> 
> The photo has touch ups, but the new nose is real. She showed it for the 1st time during the 40X40 video.


I love Imagine Dragons.  Now I have "Radioactive" stuck in my head.  The more appropriate song for these two would be "Demons".


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


>



TBH I lost interest in them personally a while ago (basic & just copy things actual celebs were doing in 2016)….
 but this thread is the gift that just keeps on giving like a waffle iron for my organic mix !


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I love Imagine Dragons.  Now I have "Radioactive" stuck in my head.  The more appropriate song for these two would be "Demons".



I love "Demons." Meghan wants us to believe she has a deep tortured soul when the reality is she is as transparent as a pane of glass.


----------



## rose60610

If she's thanking Harry for making her feel like the most beautiful woman the world every single day, then why did she get all the cosmetic and plastic surgery procedures? Please don't tell me they're going to produce a regular gaggy snuggle-poo-poo photo with nauseating treacly expressions that don't even make any sense. This is so high schoolish puppy love dopey crap that you should die of embarrassment of when you read it later. NOT when you're 40 and married to a royal. And a royal pain in the a$$ at that.


----------



## csshopper

Have had two great belly laughs the past few days, the article proclaiming Meghan as possible Presidential material (did not bother to read the fantasy fiction, the photo captions were enough) and now the ooooozy (sorry, wounds make my mind go there) plastic surgery ad posted today. Did the faux feminist really just admit she is nothing without her pathetic boy princeling? EEEW.

If they donated millions to worthy charities instead of wasting it on such ill advised media releases the world would be a better place.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If she's thanking Harry for making her feel like the most beautiful woman the world every single day,* then why did she get all the cosmetic and plastic surgery procedures? *Please don't tell me they're going to produce a regular gaggy snuggle-poo-poo photo with nauseating treacly expressions that don't even make any sense. This is so high schoolish puppy love dopey crap that you should die of embarrassment of when you read it later. NOT when you're 40 and married to a royal. And a royal pain in the a$$ at that.



Hush now, nobody is supposed to know about that. She is a natural beauty! I'm sure she has hundreds of stans telling her she is beautiful whenever she posts phony, self-pitying nonsense like this. Always grasping for attention any way she can get it, that's our Meg.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'll take "He's been my strength and stay" - after decades of marriage - over that sirupy drivel any day. I don't even believe her...I'd be extremely surprised to learn these two are actually genuinely happy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll take "He's been my strength and stay" - after decades of marriage - over that sirupy drivel any day. I don't even believe her...I'd be extremely surprised to learn these two are actually genuinely happy.


me too
I think she is an empty shell with nothing but ambition and he is a pathetic man-boy....that's harsh and I could be wrong but that is how they appear to me


----------



## Jayne1

Hiding their noses in a profile shot is very frustrating.

I wanted to see her nose in profile and make sure the last video wasn't just a filtered beyond recognition fantasy.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Hiding their noses in a profile shot is very frustrating.
> 
> I wanted to see her nose in profile and make sure the last video wasn't just a filtered beyond recognition fantasy.


yes, pressing the noses together eliminated Harry's ski slope


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.


The most beautiful woman everyday?  Is that before or after you changed your face for the upteenth time?  If they keep this up the divorce lawyers will be dropping their cards off at the front gate.


----------



## bellecate

Now this I can believe. Of course she would think she is the only one that would be able to write H's truth as she sees it. 

Meghan Markle Shock: Duchess Allegedly Ghostwriting Prince Harry’s Memoir (apple.news)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


>



M's killer stare?!
Were M's eyes shooting darts at K's back in the left pic whereas she looks bored in the right pic?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *She is radioactive to many people*. I wonder if Hazz is already recognizing the symptoms.
> 
> The photo has touch ups, but the new nose is real. She showed it for the 1st time during the 40X40 video.


No fear, here's the solution, a couple of radiation monitoring badges.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Apologies if this has already been posted.

*AP Interview: Reddy says Harry, Meghan mulled New Zealand*

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — The queen’s representative in New Zealand said Prince Harry and Meghan discussed moving to the South Pacific country during their 2018 visit, more than a year before the couple stepped back from royal duties and moved to the United States.

Governor-General Patsy Reddy also told The Associated Press in an interview she believes the British monarch should remain New Zealand’s head of state and described the hand-typed letters she sends to Queen Elizabeth II.

Reddy, 67, will leave her largely ceremonial role representing the queen in New Zealand in October after a 5-year term. A lawyer who was given the honorific Dame for her services to arts and business, Reddy officially signs bills into law, presides over many public ceremonies and tours the country, meeting with various groups including Indigenous Maori.

Harry and Meghan visited New Zealand at the end of a hectic 16-day royal tour of the South Pacific, and Reddy recalled the couple as being tired.

“I remember they’d just been down to the Abel Tasman National Park when we sat down and had a drink, and they said that they could imagine living in a place like this and wondered whether we thought it would be theoretically possible. Even possible for them to have a place in New Zealand.

“Of course, we said ‘Sure. It would be fine. There are lots of opportunities to live in New Zealand, but that would be something that they’d have to explore,’” Reddy said. “They were looking at how they might raise their family. And, obviously, they’ve made some decisions since.”

Reddy said she didn’t view it as a formal request for assistance but more of an informal discussion about the couple’s hopes for the future. She said the pair seemed impressed with the access to the outdoors and their interactions with New Zealanders.

Still, the discussion shows the couple were considering options outside of Britain less than six months after they married and well before their eventual move to the U.S.

During a widely watched interview with Oprah Winfrey near the couple’s California home earlier this year, Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, mentioned they’d offered to the royal family to take a step back from royal life in a Commonwealth country such as South Africa or New Zealand.









						AP Interview: Reddy says Harry, Meghan mulled New Zealand
					

WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — The queen's representative in New Zealand said Prince Harry and Meghan discussed moving to the South Pacific country during their 2018 visit, more than a year before the couple stepped back from royal duties and moved to the United States.




					apnews.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hush now, nobody is supposed to know about that. *She is a natural beauty*! I'm sure she has hundreds of stans telling her she is beautiful whenever she posts phony, self-pitying nonsense like this. Always grasping for attention any way she can get it, that's our Meg.


----------



## tiktok

Maggie Muggins said:


> Apologies if this has already been posted.
> 
> *AP Interview: Reddy says Harry, Meghan mulled New Zealand*
> 
> WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — The queen’s representative in New Zealand said Prince Harry and Meghan discussed moving to the South Pacific country during their 2018 visit, more than a year before the couple stepped back from royal duties and moved to the United States.
> 
> Governor-General Patsy Reddy also told The Associated Press in an interview she believes the British monarch should remain New Zealand’s head of state and described the hand-typed letters she sends to Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> Reddy, 67, will leave her largely ceremonial role representing the queen in New Zealand in October after a 5-year term. A lawyer who was given the honorific Dame for her services to arts and business, Reddy officially signs bills into law, presides over many public ceremonies and tours the country, meeting with various groups including Indigenous Maori.
> 
> Harry and Meghan visited New Zealand at the end of a hectic 16-day royal tour of the South Pacific, and Reddy recalled the couple as being tired.
> 
> “I remember they’d just been down to the Abel Tasman National Park when we sat down and had a drink, and they said that they could imagine living in a place like this and wondered whether we thought it would be theoretically possible. Even possible for them to have a place in New Zealand.
> 
> “Of course, we said ‘Sure. It would be fine. There are lots of opportunities to live in New Zealand, but that would be something that they’d have to explore,’” Reddy said. “They were looking at how they might raise their family. And, obviously, they’ve made some decisions since.”
> 
> Reddy said she didn’t view it as a formal request for assistance but more of an informal discussion about the couple’s hopes for the future. She said the pair seemed impressed with the access to the outdoors and their interactions with New Zealanders.
> 
> Still, the discussion shows the couple were considering options outside of Britain less than six months after they married and well before their eventual move to the U.S.
> 
> During a widely watched interview with Oprah Winfrey near the couple’s California home earlier this year, Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, mentioned they’d offered to the royal family to take a step back from royal life in a Commonwealth country such as South Africa or New Zealand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AP Interview: Reddy says Harry, Meghan mulled New Zealand
> 
> 
> WELLINGTON, New Zealand (AP) — The queen's representative in New Zealand said Prince Harry and Meghan discussed moving to the South Pacific country during their 2018 visit, more than a year before the couple stepped back from royal duties and moved to the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com



Let me summarize this for you:
“H&M also pretended to consider a move to NZ in order to not look like the complete money grubbing fame wh*res they truly are.”


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> If she's thanking Harry for making her feel like the most beautiful woman the world every single day, then why did she get all the cosmetic and plastic surgery procedures? Please don't tell me they're going to produce a regular gaggy snuggle-poo-poo photo with nauseating treacly expressions that don't even make any sense. This is so high schoolish puppy love dopey crap that you should die of embarrassment of when you read it later. NOT when you're 40 and married to a royal. And a royal pain in the a$$ at that.


That's something one might write in an anniversary card, not publish for the whole world to see.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> No fear, here's the solution, a couple of radiation monitoring badges.
> View attachment 5162612
> View attachment 5162613


Another nickname for your list!  Radioactive!


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that would like a quick refresher on the topic…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5162639



That snoot of hers just keeps getting smaller.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Another nickname for your list!  Radioactive!


Wow, people are so creative! @Maggie Muggins's list will be endless. 



Spoiler: one more


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> Now this I can believe. Of course she would think she is the only one that would be able to write H's truth as she sees it.
> 
> Meghan Markle Shock: Duchess Allegedly Ghostwriting Prince Harry’s Memoir (apple.news)


As long winded as MM is the book will be at least as long as War and Peace.


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> WARNING: Get your barf bags before you read this drivel. From Quora. Honestly, Harry does not look like he's all into her at all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tue
> DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUKE TODAY? LET ME GIVE YOU A VISUAL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another self promotion of the desperate Non-working Royals. Still stumping their foot for their imagined slights against the BRF and other people who doesn’t mind them. They’re too old to publicly act as lovestruck teenagers.
> “Thank you for loving me even when I don’t have the strength to love myself “ by MEAGAIN. A narcissist who doesn’t love herself. .Another hardcore plagiarizing on MeAgain’s part.


Another for @Maggie Muggins …

The NRWs , the Non Working Royals … love that


----------



## marietouchet

1LV said:


> As long winded as MM is the book will be at least as long as War and Peace.


Will her videos be longer than Lady Colin Campbell’s?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Another nickname for your list!  *Radioactive*!


Thanks @purseinsanity for Radioactive and we should warn all TPf posters to steer clear of both H and the wife and all their stans as they are most likely all contaminated too.


----------



## 1LV

marietouchet said:


> Will her videos be longer than Lady Colin Campbell’s?


Would not surprise me!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5162639


I'm no PS expert, but did M have something done to her chin like a lower jaw adjustment because it looks as short as her nose.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @purseinsanity for Radioactive and we should warn all TPf posters to steer clear of both H and the wife and all their stans as they are most likely all contaminated too.
> View attachment 5162706


I can't take the credit!  Two other posters called her that.  I just like pointing out new nicknames to you.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Another for @Maggie Muggins …
> 
> The NRWs , the *Non Working Royals* … love that


Thanks @marietouchet for your suggestion.  Did someone say the list will be never ending? Nonetheless, the nickname was added to the ever growing shorter list that may eventually exceed the original list.


----------



## csshopper

1LV said:


> As long winded as MM is the book will be at least as long as War and Peace.


Yes, but it will be heavily weighted to the War side, she is not interested in Peace, it doesn't get the attention she craves.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I can't take the credit!  Two other posters called her that.  I just like pointing out new nicknames to you.





	

		
			
		

		
	
 Let that be our little secret so no one else will find out. 

*Seriously, whoever crafted the Radioactive nickname, I apologize for missing your post. Please come forward so you can be acknowledged.*


----------



## Jayne1

tiktok said:


> Let me summarize this for you:
> “H&M also pretended to consider a move to NZ in order to not look like the complete money grubbing fame wh*res they truly are.”


Exactly. They were probably being polite because they had nothing to talk about.


----------



## xincinsin

All this mixed messaging from Methane (I'm alliterating - Hallelujah!)

I'm a strong woman - I can't live without my man
I believe in myself - Without him, I am nothing
I'm the ultimate victim - I can mentor others!

I don't believe this is the result of any supposed insecurity. I think she is just greedily trying to grab every segment of the audience. She wants the people with $$$ to believe she can do wonders (with their money), but she also wants the downtrodden to believe that she is one of them. She wants to be a symbol for feminist power, but she also wants sympathy. I hope Sunshine Sucks is charging her big bucks.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Will her videos be longer than Lady Colin Campbell’s?


You have to hand it to Lady C - long, probably unscripted videos and not one “you know,” *“*like,*” *“ah,” “um,” "I mean, like," "basically," "literally," "right?" or "so, um"...

I'm very impressed with her public speaking abilities!

I listen to a lot of podcasts and the use of so many filler words is extremely distracting.  They're not at the dinner table having a fun conversation, they are in front of a microphone and should be better speakers. Lady C is fabulous.


----------



## Chanbal

Loving person?  Some people can be very loving when they want something. 

_In an interview with Dan Wootton for his GB News evening show, Thomas Markle said: "I really think that Meghan and Harry got into all this Soho Club and a bunch of all those kinds of people and she's changed.

"*She's not the daughter I knew.

"My daughter was a much more giving, loving person than she is now."*_









						Meghan Markle has 'changed' claims father Thomas Markle
					

MEGHAN Markle's estranged father, Thomas Markle, has claimed in a new interview that she is less "giving" and "loving" since marrying Prince Harry.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Yep, it sounds like a joke, but she has the ambition… He may not know his daughter after all. 

_The 77-year-old as been estranged from his youngest daughter Meghan, 40, since before she married into the Royal Family in 2018. Mr Wootton said: "*A lot of people who I have spoken to in recent years who know Meghan very well says she harbours an ambition to become US president.”*

To which Mr Markle responded: “*I think that’s a joke from beginning to end*, I think that’s a complete joke, *I don’t think she has any ambition to become a mayor or a governor or President*, I don’t think that is in her mind at all."_









						Thomas Markle blasts idea of Meghan running for US president
					

THOMAS MARKLE spoke to Dan Wootton on GB News about the rumours his daughter is planning to run for US President.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> You have to hand it to Lady C - long, probably unscripted videos and not one “you know,” *“*like,*” *“ah,” “um,” "I mean, like," "basically," "literally," "right?" or "so, um"...
> 
> I'm very impressed with her public speaking abilities!
> 
> I listen to a lot of podcasts and the use of so many filler words is extremely distracting.  They're not at the dinner table having a fun conversation, they are in front of a microphone and should be better speakers. Lady C is fabulous.


We had a colleague who used "basically" repeatedly. He was a knowledgeable chap and often gave briefings - which my boss had to arrange. She winced every time he prefaced his sentence with "basically". It was around once every four sentences.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Great summery of an excellent social climber.


----------



## xincinsin

The 40x40 initiative: I'm wondering if the time limit was also due to Zoom. For a free Zoom account, if there are more than 2 participants in the call, there is a "convenient" 40 minute cut off. It would certainly be beneficial to Methane's pals to create a burner account for the mentoring session.


----------



## needlv

Um…. No….









						Meghan Markle boasts best voice to calm listeners, expert says
					

Natalie Eastwood, a vocal rehabilitation expert for performing experts, said the Duchess of Sussex, 39, can soothe audiences with her confident Californian accent.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Um…. No….
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle boasts best voice to calm listeners, expert says
> 
> 
> Natalie Eastwood, a vocal rehabilitation expert for performing experts, said the Duchess of Sussex, 39, can soothe audiences with her confident Californian accent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This expert doesn't seem to be very renowned in her field of expertise. Did the DM hire her to do an analysis? There is no reason given as to why she is analysing the voices of dozens of celebrities. 
Natalie Eastwood: Speech and Language Therapist - Expert Practitioner in Voice at The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> This expert doesn't seem to be very renowned in her field of expertise. Did the DM hire her to do an analysis? There is no reason given as to why she is analysing the voices of dozens of celebrities.
> Natalie Eastwood: Speech and Language Therapist - Expert Practitioner in Voice at The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust



Natalie must be desperate for attention, methinks 




xincinsin said:


> The 40x40 initiative: I'm wondering if the time limit was also due to Zoom. For a free Zoom account, if there are more than 2 participants in the call, there is a "convenient" 40 minute cut off. It would certainly be beneficial to Methane's pals to create a burner account for the mentoring session.



Nailed it! Thank you


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> This expert doesn't seem to be very renowned in her field of expertise. Did the DM hire her to do an analysis? There is no reason given as to why she is analysing the voices of dozens of celebrities.
> Natalie Eastwood: Speech and Language Therapist - Expert Practitioner in Voice at The Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust


I wouldn’t have thought that’s what a  NHS speech therapist does. I thought they helped children lose their lisps & things like that. It seems a bit subjective to be a medical matter.

Between this & that quota quote photoshop I’m beginning to feel a bit sorry for the sugars.
I mean I’m sure we’ve all had an intense crush on someone where you thought they could do no wrong & then you wake up one day & nearly die of embarrassment at the thought of it.

I think the stans are going to have something like that but now it’s all over the internet


----------



## Lodpah

Lol, I love this reply from a guy on Quora:



Michael Conner
 · 
Follow 
B.Sc., (hons) PgDl (Law) in PgDip Fraud Management & The College of Law - London, University of Portsmouth, UK (Graduated 1996)Updated 25m ago

During the Oprah interview Meghan said that when she heard that Prince Philip was hospitalised she 'just picked up the phone and called the Queen just to check in' adding that 'that's what we do'. What is the significance of sharing this with Oprah?

Who on Earth is idiotic enough to believe that really happened…….. “Picked up a phone and just called The Queen…that’s what we do.” It’s preposterous. It’s like listening to a child talking, and a stupid child at that.

_*It’s never clear which is the more dominant side of her deranged nature, her malevolence or her fantasising. Either way she’s a liar so can’t stop telling lies.*_


----------



## needlv

Charles spotted heading to Balmoral for crunch talks with Andrew
					

Prince Charles was accompanied by Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall as the senior royals come together at The Queen's Scottish estate in Aberdeen after Andrew's new 'rape' allegations.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## chicinthecity777

*Prince Harry’s Netflix success on brink after Apple TV+ series savaged in review*
The Guardian (very left wing) gave it 2 out of 5!   over to you Netflix! 



			https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1475864/prince-harry-netflix-apple-tv-reviews-royal-family-meghan-markle-spt/amp?__twitter_impression=true


----------



## CarryOn2020

Low bun  


If this style is sending a ‘_taking something seriously_’ message, Tom needs a vacation. 
A good lesson for all: celebrity stylists may not be our friend


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Low bun
> View attachment 5163115
> 
> If this style is sending a ‘_taking something seriously_’ message, Tom needs a vacation.
> A good lesson for all: celebrity stylists may not be our friend



It is hot here and I am pulling my hair back to get it off my neck, and I have messy looking tendrils …. Anyone I can go to for hairdressing help ? My tendrils do not project a serious, strong or elegant vibe


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> It is hot here and I am pulling my hair back to get it off my neck, and I have messy looking tendrils …. Anyone I can go to for hairdressing help ? My tendrils do not project a serious, strong or elegant vibe



Try Tom Smith - he thinks highly of himself. Probably available on Zoomie  
Rest assured, the tendrils aren’t messy - they are powerful, strong, serious, WonderWoman brave :roar:

ETA: the things we tell ourselves


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> All this mixed messaging from Methane (I'm alliterating - Hallelujah!)
> 
> I'm a strong woman - I can't live without my man
> I believe in myself - Without him, I am nothing
> I'm the ultimate victim - I can mentor others!
> 
> I don't believe this is the result of any supposed insecurity. I think she is just greedily trying to grab every segment of the audience. She wants the people with $$$ to believe she can do wonders (with their money), but she also wants the downtrodden to believe that she is one of them. She wants to be a symbol for feminist power, but she also wants sympathy. I hope Sunshine Sucks is charging her big bucks.


don't forget she wants to show off her expensive home decor and Hermes blanket while sympathizing with the "downtrodden"....all those people who can't even afford her old Zara clothes


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Great summery of an excellent social climber.



agree, social networking is her great skill....much as I hate to say it, she must have the ability to be charming.  I doubt she would have been able to force her way into these circles.  I don't know if Harry was her plan from the start.  I think maybe she wanted a wealthy man and exceeded her own expectations when she got the opportunity to nail a Prince.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Low bun
> View attachment 5163115
> 
> If this style is sending a ‘_taking something seriously_’ message, Tom needs a vacation.
> A good lesson for all: celebrity stylists may not be our friend



I have to admit I like the way he colours hair. But it seems he is pretty young (and foolish). She just looks messy, Tom. She's going for the "l had sex before coming here" look. 








						Meet This Year's 30 Under 30 Winner Tom Smith
					






					www.beautylaunchpad.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I believe this is in response to the recent Us Weekly article.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok. I have a hard time believing this because WTF, but if so, I'll take this as proof that that woman is clinically insane.

Also, Netflix isn't all that smart either, are they.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Low bun
> View attachment 5163115
> 
> If this style is sending a ‘_taking something seriously_’ message, Tom needs a vacation.
> A good lesson for all: celebrity stylists may not be our friend



Wow I can’t believe the real Queen of hearts invented the low bun right after inventing charity work, mentoring, lemon cake, Givenchy & solving racism & sexism. 
She truly is the Edison of our times.

Elon Musk must be crying into his vegan pasta space tube.

 To be fair, I suspect she might secretly have invented time travel to go back to the 00s when weaves were  super pricey with awful textures & bad flicks as it’s the only way I can possibly explain how someone with that much money can have such BAD hair.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And that social climbing video was unnerving. I mean, we knew most of it, but seeing all that scheming neatly lined up like this? Mindblowing.


----------



## AbbytheBT

I agree it is a “bed head” wanna be -lol. I know very little about hair weaves, or black hair - but even to me it looks like intentional covering of her hair line around her face.  Not that I expect a woman or man to share their grooming secrets - but trying to sell it as a face framing becoming look is a bit much. i mean - we have all grown out short hairstyles that leave us with the tendrils- but to deliberately cut chunks of hair over and over to make it look like she is growing out bangs for years seems weird


----------



## purseinsanity

The thirstiness knows no bounds:









						Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
					

Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. I have a hard time believing this because WTF, but if so, I'll take this as proof that that woman is clinically insane.
> 
> Also, Netflix isn't all that smart either, are they.



She seems to be pretty delusional. A person that posts about feeling like the most beautiful person in the wold, anticipates an apology from the BRF after calling them racists… It's a long list.
It is also possible that she delivered a few falsehoods, one of her specialties, to Nflix to improve ($$$$) their deal. 



jelliedfeels said:


> Wow I can’t believe the real Queen of hearts invented the low bun right after inventing charity work, mentoring, lemon cake, Givenchy & solving racism & sexism.
> *She truly is the Edison of our times
> To be fair, I suspect she might secretly have invented time travel* to go back to the 00s when weaves were super pricey with awful textures & bad flicks as it’s the only way I can possibly explain how someone with that much money can have such BAD hair.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Great summery of an excellent social climber.



Thanks!  This was really good.  She did a great job and moved it along quickly with succinct explanations.  The one thing that struck me was picture after picture of MM literally physically clinging onto a person.  It was like a stranglehold.  She was squeezing the life out of the person literally and figuratively to get what she wanted.  Want to see how Hazza does after she squeezes him to death.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Thanks!  This was really good.  She did a great job and moved it along quickly with succinct explanations.  The one thing that struck me was picture after picture of MM literally physically clinging onto a person.  It was like a stranglehold.  She was squeezing the life out of the person literally and figuratively to get what she wanted.  *Want to see how Hazza does after she squeezes him to death.*



I think the outcome will be worrisome.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


There is already a response to this article, see post 71,731. 

I wouldn't be surprised that later another PR release or interview will inform us about how rude Kate was by not collaborating with Mother Theresa of Montecito. 

By the way, is Mother Theresa of Montecito already in the list? @Maggie Muggins


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


It's the old piggyback trick again.  Only a moron would believe this.  If a=b and b=c then a=c  If a sugar =deluded person and deluded person =moron then sugar=moron


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think the outcome will be worrisome.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

We are very bored with the couple of Montecito, but coming to this thread is a lot of fun…   



_But, whether fair or unfair, there has always seemed more to Meghan than plain old romance.

*Her road in life has never seemed wholly happy. Indeed it is littered with discards, people in her life who eventually became surplus to her requirements and suddenly found themselves tossed aside without so much as a backward glance.*

Regardless of his ill-advised cooperation with the paparazzi, *Thomas Markle should have been treated with the respect he is due as her father.*
Let’s not forget the almost daily carefully choreographed publicity pumped out of the Sussex spin machine in Lala land. Is that not at least a match in terms of vulgarity?…

In the end Meghan looked like a person who wanted all the trappings but found some of the graft a little unpalatable.

*To make matters worse, both members of Team Sussex keep lobbing grenades at Harry’s family, yet without that link their international celebrity clout would plummet.

Neither Ms Markle nor Prince Harry is especially remarkable when measured against millions of others, but their links to the British Royal Family open doors to untold opportunities.*

The recent announcement of a reported four-book deal with Random House is but one more example of this.

All those corporates with deep pockets and cash to splash do so only for commercial gain. But *where is the tangible value in Brand Sussex going forward? How much mileage can you get from recycling mental health issues as your line of patter? How long can you stage manage your life in its entirety in meticulously choreographed style for the sole purpose of promoting your brand?*
This is not real and one of these days even the most ardent supporters of Team Sussex will cotton on and realise they're just being sold product.
_


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Thanks!  This was really good.  She did a great job and moved it along quickly with succinct explanations.  The one thing that struck me was picture after picture of MM literally physically clinging onto a person.  It was like a stranglehold.  She was squeezing the life out of the person literally and figuratively to get what she wanted.  Want to see how Hazza does after she squeezes him to death.


Pythons squeeze them to death then swallow whole
maybe the wrong metaphor ?
komodo dragons poison their prey


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Pythons squeeze them to death then swallow whole
> maybe the wrong metaphor ?
> komodo dragons poison their prey


She's a black widow!  Mates then discards her partner without a second thought.  Watch out Hazzie!

And like the black widow, she has quite the bump, and a rather small nose.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Great summery of an excellent social climber.



The comments under the video on YouTube are priceless!  I haven't read a single one that is positive about Meg yet.  Maybe the masses are "awake" in a good way!


----------



## Stansy

marietouchet said:


> Pythons squeeze them to death then swallow whole
> maybe the wrong metaphor ?
> komodo dragons poison their prey





well, sometimes the outcome is not successful: in a museum you can see a stuffed anaconda that suffocated while trying to swallow up a pig…


----------



## Chanbal

River on TM's interview. He is a lot of fun.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> komodo dragons poison their prey



Oh yes, and follow them for days watching them die.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. I have a hard time believing this because WTF, but if so, I'll take this as proof that that woman is clinically insane.
> 
> Also, Netflix isn't all that smart either, are they.


All you said!

This is a PR set up to give the beech another excuse to snivel her victim schtick when Catherine does not participate. 

Methane threw Catherine under the bus in the Oprah Interview and now she expects Catherine to lend her star power to her to maybe rehabilitate what appears to be diminishing public opinion as more and more people are catching on to her?????? R E A L L Y????


----------



## carmen56

purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



That’ll be news to the DoC!


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> She was squeezing the life out of the person literally and figuratively to get what she wanted.  Want to see how Hazza does after she squeezes him to death.



I see her more as the drive him to suicide type. He gave up everything he was to be with her. She gave up absolutely nothing to be with him and has only gained from it. At some point even Harry's malfunctioning brain will figure out that nothing she has is good enough, she'll always want and need more. Giving up everything for someone who is impossible to please could drive him over the edge.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> The comments under the video on YouTube are priceless!  I haven't read a single one that is positive about Meg yet.  Maybe the masses are "awake" in a good way!


Should read the comments under this video. There is an overwhelming consensus among the posters that TM is a nice person, but while he loves his daughter, he may not have ever known her very well. They also seem to agree that the Madame of Montecito is a teller of falsehoods.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. I have a hard time believing this because WTF, but if so, I'll take this as proof that that woman is clinically insane.
> 
> Also, Netflix isn't all that smart either, are they.


If it's true that they were already wheeling and dealing with Netflix before Meg it, and the deal was inked before the vitriol that was the OW interview, then Netflix can be forgiven for believing that the Troublesome Twosome could deliver on their promises.


----------



## Chanbal

Comments from a former royal editor on the 40X40 PR stunt:

_Duncan suggested the campaign is ill-judged, adding: '*She has left behind her a trail of devastation, on the Markle side, and now on the Windsor side. *

'*I don't want to see her lecturing young mums having to go back to work* from inside her $11million LA mansion… *This initiative is nonsense*, she should be spending her time trying to build bridges with the very people that she and Harry have betrayed.' 

He added that the issue of the Duke of Susssex's much-anticipated book is also looming over the Windsors.

Duncan described *the pending publication as 'like a sword of Damocles hanging over the Royals now*'.









						Prince Harry's memoir is 'like sword of Damocles hanging over royals'
					

The comments about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who now live in the US, come from former royal editor Duncan Larcombe who appeared on True Royalty TV 's Royal Beat today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

According to this video Will & Kate were on a desired guest list.


----------



## periogirl28

purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com



Wow desperate. Kate so does not need Netflix to spotlight anything but highly likely Duchess DoG (Delusions of Grandeur) has thrown all her plates and now resorts to 'reaching out'. May I suggest begging and a public apology to Kate and Charlotte as a start. I laugh at this 'source'.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


So H&M used access to Kate and William as bargaining chips with Netflix? This "collaboration" will never happen. US Weekly is about as reliable as the DM.


----------



## Lodpah

I can't tell if this is going to be a satire upon Meghan or maybe she wrote it and sold it to Disney. Woke Cinderalla.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If it's true that they were already wheeling and dealing with Netflix before Meg it, and the deal was inked before the vitriol that was the OW interview, then Netflix can be forgiven for believing that the Troublesome Twosome could deliver on their promises.



Not really if they had researched their target that is the BRF for a hot minute. They would have quickly found out they don't do reality TV.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

AB Negative said:


> Also, Maxwell's father was rumored to be part of a foreign intelligence service as is Maxwell herself.  *(How many women do you know that can operate helicopters and submarines and have dual citizenship?) * I personally think that these set ups of powerful people with underage girls was for the purpose of blackmail.  Many of the girls have stated they were being filmed while doing the deed.



I know tons of women with dual citizenship, but I'll admit I don't know even one who can operate a submarine


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not really if they had researched their target that is the BRF for a hot minute. They would have quickly found out they don't do reality TV.


Let's agree to disagree on this. 

The thing about narcs is that they are very smooth. They can convince people of things that their marks should know better than to believe. I saw it happen up close with my office narc. He made so many promises that he never followed through on. And when he made a particularly unbelievable promise and our boss gave in to yet another demand of his, I went to ask her why she was enabling him. She said she had no choice. She was put into a position where, if she denied his request, he could have cried victim and gone to HR. 

I would not be surprised if Methane convinced Netflix that she was on great terms with the BRF and could persuade them to appear in her productions. Add in chicken Harry, a bonafide prince, nodding by her side and she had them hook, line and sinker.


----------



## chicinthecity777

I can understand having cosmetic surgeries to reverse the effects of ageing but to seriously alter one's features suggests to me that that person is deeply unhappy with themselves, e.g. insecurity issues. I don't care what gob ****e H&M peddled out saying "they don't read anything in the media about them" etc. They do care a care a lot about what others think of them. They will soon run out of media outlets to sue. They will never be happy and that in itself is their punishment!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Apologies if this has already been posted.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> If it's true that they were already wheeling and dealing with Netflix before Meg it, and the deal was inked before the vitriol that was the OW interview, then Netflix can be forgiven for believing that the Troublesome Twosome could deliver on their promises.



Consider how many people were duped for a very long time by Hazzie. So many thought he was devoted to Queen and country and family. Even after viewing all those interviews where he himself said how much he detested royal life, some still believe he is devoted to it.  IMO Netflix is indeed all kinds of awful, it’s not because they fell for Hazzie’s bs.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Lodpah said:


> I can't tell if this is going to be a satire upon Meghan or maybe she wrote it and sold it to Disney. Woke Cinderalla.



I think someone confused meghan between Cinderella and Cinderella’s evil step sisters


----------



## breakfastatcartier

chicinthecity777 said:


> Apologies if this has already been posted.



Is that a real picture of Harry? Since when does he do those hand gestures?


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> Consider how many people were duped for a very long time by Hazzie. So many thought he was devoted to Queen and country and family. Even after viewing all those interviews where he himself said how much he detested royal life, some still believe he is devoted to it.  IMO Netflix is indeed all kinds of awful, it’s not because they fell for Hazzie’s bs.


The video I posted above has a theory about Harry's changes. It's intriguing and certainly quite plausible to me.


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> I think someone confused meghan between Cinderella and Cinderella’s evil step sisters


I'd have put her Canadian bestie as the other stepsister, but I think she was already Markled.



breakfastatcartier said:


> Is that a real picture of Harry? Since when does he do those hand gestures?


Is that from the Apple docu? The one where we realized that Hazard should have remained unseen?


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Apologies if this has already been posted.




Yep, this lines up with what I’ve been saying for a long time. Everything she did to make him dependent on her is straight of the narcissist playbook (if there was such a thing). It is instinctual for narcissists to exploit the insecurities of their partners as a means of control.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO they bonded over their hatred of the intrusive media and families [us against the world]. He wanted out of his family, but needed an alternative place to go to. Apparently, the Africa narrative was just a distraction. It seems what he really wanted was to live in a 19 bathroom Mcmansion in one of the wealthiest areas of the US. Who knew?  No wonder his other girlfriends left.


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO they bonded over their hatred of the intrusive media and families [us against the world]. He wanted out of his family, but needed an alternative place to go to.


That's not what the video said and I agree with the video. Harry was largely happy with what he was doing before he met MM. She used his vulnerability around his mother to convince him that he was trapped by the BRF. She changed his mind. It was manipulation by her of a weak man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I understand your point and, in many ways, you are correct. My point is MM cannot be responsible for _all_ that Hazzie has said and done. IMO she is just not _that_ smart or clever.  She may be as disturbed as people say, but … Hazzie does what he wants. In different ways, Hazzie has manipulated her as much as she has him. Hazzie’s lifelong theme has included the ‘victim’ cry.  He was well known as a rebellious child. Plenty of stuff on Google that explains how much of a jerk he was and is. Nevertheless, they are who they are and, as long as they keep tripping over themselves, they don’t pose too much of a threat to QE.  Just my opinion. 

Article from 2008:








						Britain's Prince Harry:" I don't like England much"
					

Britain's Prince Harry, who has been serving on the front lines in Afghanistan for the past 10 weeks, says he doesn't like England that much and dislikes the nonsense British newspapers write.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## chicinthecity777

CarryOn2020 said:


> I understand your point and, in many ways, you are correct. My point is MM cannot be responsible for _all_ that Hazzie has said and done. IMO she is just not _that_ smart or clever.  She may be as disturbed as people say, but … Hazzie does what he wants. In different ways, Hazzie has manipulated her as much as she has him. Hazzie’s lifelong theme has included the ‘victim’ cry.  He was well known as a rebellious child. Plenty of stuff on Google that explains how much of a jerk he was and is. Nevertheless, they are who they are and, as long as they keep tripping over themselves, they don’t pose too much of a threat to QE.  Just my opinion.
> 
> Article from 2008:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry:" I don't like England much"
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry, who has been serving on the front lines in Afghanistan for the past 10 weeks, says he doesn't like England that much and dislikes the nonsense British newspapers write.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


That's OK we all have our theory and I am cool with that. Don't get me wrong, I still think he is a brat. But I also think he is the weaker one and can be easily manipulated. We will never know the whole truth. Only time will tell how they flare.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> I think someone confused meghan between Cinderella and Cinderella’s evil step sisters


I notice at 2:28 of this video Meghan seems to have gotten her nose from Doria.  Funny, she's so proud to be a WOC but not proud of her physical features that come from that, including her hair and her nose.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Only time will tell how they *flare*.



I know this was a typo but I can’t help but think of it as a Freudian slip. There is something so combustible about Meghan and Harry’s relationship that it makes me think of total destruction, like how a disease or a fire flares up.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not really if they had researched their target that is the BRF for a hot minute. They would have quickly found out they don't do reality TV.


I mean TBF they’ve done a fair bit of tv & not always classy stuff at that. They did that 69 documentary.
They did that corona doc. A couple of tv interviews- some more regretted than others. And then let us never forget this gem…


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I notice at 2:28 of this video Meghan seems to have gotten her nose from Doria.  Funny, she's so proud to be a WOC but not proud of her physical features that come from that, including her hair and her nose.


I recall in some video (or article) that Meghan had said that she was so glad that she got Thomas Markle's nose!!!  If you look at the early pictures, you can see the resemblance .. but then she started f#cking with it (in high school) .. AND Thomas paid for it!!!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> I notice at 2:28 of this video Meghan seems to have gotten her nose from Doria.  Funny, she's so proud to be a WOC but not proud of her physical features that come from that, including her hair and her nose.



She’s black when it’s convenient for her … I’ve always gotten “mocking dark skin girls” vibes from her.

Her parents seem to have a similar shaped nose, so she’s probably got a mix of both.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> So H&M used access to Kate and William as bargaining chips with Netflix? This "collaboration" will never happen. US Weekly is about as reliable as the DM.


US Weekly will write whatever they're paid to write.  For a long time, they were basically mouth pieces for the Kardashians, the Teigen bully, and now the Markles.  It's pathetic.


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> She’s black when it’s convenient for her … I’ve always gotten “mocking dark skin girls” vibes from her.
> 
> Her parents seem to have a similar shaped nose, so she’s probably got a mix of both.


My black college roommate (who apparently had a lot of wisdom starting with OW, LOL) used to always say that many people mock "black" features but then turn around and want black features.  She said people get their hair curled, lips injected, and want bigger butts.  And this was in the 90s so times have obviously things have changed, but as far as aesthetics, it's more true now than then, between lip fillers, butt implants, etc.  I guess people always want what they don't have.



CarryOn2020 said:


> I understand your point and, in many ways, you are correct. My point is MM cannot be responsible for _all_ that Hazzie has said and done. IMO she is just not _that_ smart or clever.  She may be as disturbed as people say, but … Hazzie does what he wants. In different ways, Hazzie has manipulated her as much as she has him. Hazzie’s lifelong theme has included the ‘victim’ cry.  He was well known as a rebellious child. Plenty of stuff on Google that explains how much of a jerk he was and is. Nevertheless, they are who they are and, as long as they keep tripping over themselves, they don’t pose too much of a threat to QE.  Just my opinion.
> 
> Article from 2008:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry:" I don't like England much"
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry, who has been serving on the front lines in Afghanistan for the past 10 weeks, says he doesn't like England that much and dislikes the nonsense British newspapers write.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


So sweet that he dislikes the country that literally gave him everything.  He has never earned one thing on his own merit.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean TBF they’ve done a fair bit of tv & not always classy stuff at that. They did that 69 documentary.
> They did that corona doc. A couple of tv interviews- some more regretted than others. And then let us never forget this gem…



WTH was that?!!?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh...I started to watch the Narcissist Victim video and one of the first clips is from the Royal Albert Hall event where she supposedly cried hysterically as soon as the lights went off but miraculously her m/u was pristine and her eyes unpuffy as soon as the lights were turned on again. The event where she had told him beforehand she couldn't be left alone or she would kill herself. He looks noticeably shaken and distressed and that stupid ***** is looking very pleased with herself.


----------



## Lodpah

Just checking in. What's Hazza the Clown and the reincarnation of Leona Helmsley up to today?


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> WTH was that?!!?


Its a royal knockout.
Essentially Prince Edward filmed a variety games with various celebs at a theme park as a charity fundraiser & proposed start of his media career in the 80s but then it ended up being as famous for the rather ungracious interview after.





__





						The Grand Knockout Tournament - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				






groundbreaking stuff


Not naff in any way.


It just goes to show that a lifetime of being brought up on the innate superiority of your blood means even mild little Edward can have his diva moments when his work isn’t praised.


----------



## needlv

Does anyone want to speak to him?









						Prince Harry to return to UK with film crew
					

Prince Harry is set to return to the UK... With a film crew in tow.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## periogirl28

Let’s see if anyone remains at Invictus as “passionate” about him.
“utilise the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and *duty to truth through a compassionate lens*”.
We don’t seem to using the same dictionary.


----------



## needlv

This is an interesting story - and not one I have seen posted.  Does anyone remember this in the news at the time?









						Meghan cut from Will and Kate ceremony
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Does anyone want to speak to him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to return to UK with film crew
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is set to return to the UK... With a film crew in tow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



The ‘visit’ is scheduled for the end of the year.  As we see from current events, much can change between now and then. So, relax, as usual, they have  dreams.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> This is an interesting story - and not one I have seen posted.  Does anyone remember this in the news at the time?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan cut from Will and Kate ceremony
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



I don't even remember reading anything about the ceremony. 

But also, all these people claiming the BRF should have been more welcoming bla bla...don't they realize this is not necessarily how things work? My brother's friend who hails from poor (well, poor. They still have the manor but not enough cash to heat the whole thing during winter) but old German nobility was surprised to learn my parents welcomed a newish relationship for Christmas because their family motto is "If you don't ring it, don't bring it". So why would everyone bend over backwards for some random girlfriend? I also found it bold how they forced the invitation to Pippa's wedding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ‘visit’ is scheduled for the end of the year.  As we see from current events, much can change between now and then. *So, relax, as usual, they have  dreams.*


----------



## dangerouscurves

Worth watching. Tara Mokney is hilarious!


----------



## jehaga

periogirl28 said:


> “utilise the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and *duty to truth through a compassionate lens*”.
> We don’t seem to using the same dictionary.


An exercise in futility in trying to understand this statement:

1. *Tell stories* (utilize the power of storytelling) *to emphasize the fact that we are all humans* (to embrace our shared humanity) *and our obligation to a cruelty-free reality *(and duty to truth through a compassionate lens).

Or,

2. *Tell stories *(utilize the power of storytelling) *that are not cruel *(through a compassionate lens) *to celebrate our sameness *(to embrace our shared humanity) *and our obligation to honesty *(and duty to truth).

Or,

3. *Tell happy tales *(utilize the power of storytelling through a compassionate lens) *to group hug *(to embrace our shared humanity) *and don’t lie *(and duty to truth).

Or,


----------



## purseinsanity

periogirl28 said:


> Let’s see if anyone remains at Invictus as “passionate” about him.
> “utilise the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and *duty to truth through a compassionate lens*”.
> We don’t seem to using the same dictionary.



I think they see “compassionate” as:
“Come”
“Pass”
“I”
“On” and gobble up, ie
“Ate” through your family and friends.


----------



## purseinsanity

Brilliant article (I say brilliant because I think this author did their research here in our forum !):









						Big problem with Meghan Markle’s birthday video
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## sdkitty

maybe this has been posted before.....Meghan's father talking to the media.  I don't like her and don't blame him for being hurt and angry but I also don't agree with him talking the press.
Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle, says he agrees with Piers Morgan's criticism of his daughter: 'She's been lying for a year' (yahoo.com)


----------



## sdkitty

dangerouscurves said:


> Worth watching. Tara Mokney is hilarious!



interesting
not really that funny IMO
I agree her dad shouldn't go public but from what we've seen I think it's unfair to say he did the bare minimum in raising her.  he paid for private school, plastic surgery, basically spoiled her.....maybe in this case she was literally "spoiled" by the entitled and superior attitude that was fostered by one or both of her parents


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I notice at 2:28 of this video Meghan seems to have gotten her nose from Doria.  Funny, she's so proud to be a WOC but not proud of her physical features that come from that, including her hair and her nose.



I've nothing against people who go under the knife for cosmetic purposes, it's just sad when they do it out of insecurity instead of other reasons. MeMe just seems to be snowballing the procedures lately, what will she do in five, ten years? She should work on her personality, not her appearance. She could slice and dice and morph into the most beautiful woman of time, it still wouldn't compensate for her never ending addle-brained Markle-isms and demands for pity.


----------



## carmen56

purseinsanity said:


> My black college roommate (who apparently had a lot of wisdom starting with OW, LOL) used to always say that many people mock "black" features but then turn around and want black features.  She said people get their hair curled, lips injected, and want bigger butts.  And this was in the 90s so times have obviously things have changed, but as far as aesthetics, it's more true now than then, between lip fillers, butt implants, etc.  I guess people always want what they don't have.
> 
> 
> So sweet that he dislikes the country that literally gave him everything.  He has never earned one thing on his own merit.





needlv said:


> Does anyone want to speak to him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to return to UK with film crew
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is set to return to the UK... With a film crew in tow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Hopefully the Queen will be out that day!


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> Hopefully the Queen will be out that day!


IDK if there's any truth to this but I'd think it could be a trap


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> maybe this has been posted before.....Meghan's father talking to the media.  I don't like her and don't blame him for being hurt and angry but I also don't agree with him talking the press.
> Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle, says he agrees with Piers Morgan's criticism of his daughter: 'She's been lying for a year' (yahoo.com)



I do think all the Markles should have not talked so much, and I'd not appreciate my family talking to the press at all, BUT here's the huge BUT...apparently Raptor has no problem talking to the press all day long badmouthing other people. But when her father does it it's somehow akin to treason?

ETA: she gave a Vanity Fair (was it Vanity Fair?) interview gushing about her new relationship with Harry. By her logic, he should have dumped her that very day. Oh, if only he had.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think all the Markles should have not talked so much, and I'd not appreciate my family talking to the press at all, BUT here's the huge BUT...apparently Raptor has no problem talking to the press all day long badmouthing other people. But when her father does it it's somehow akin to treason?
> 
> ETA: she gave a Vanity Fair (was it Vanity Fair?) interview gushing about her new relationship with Harry. By her logic, he should have dumped her that very day. Oh, if only he had.



For hypocrites like Meghan it’s easy for her to rationalize when she trashes people. She’s doing it for her benefit. But other people doing the same thing to her is wrong, because obviously she’s the only person who matters!


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Does anyone want to speak to him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to return to UK with film crew
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is set to return to the UK... With a film crew in tow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The Queen has a last minute  trip to the Orkney Islands so she won’t be available.  She going to an Orkney wedding. Lol couldn’t resist


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I notice at 2:28 of this video Meghan seems to have gotten her nose from Doria.  Funny, she's so proud to be a WOC but not proud of her physical features that come from that, including her hair and her nose.





CeeJay said:


> I recall in some video (or article) that Meghan had said that she was so glad that she got Thomas Markle's nose!!!  If you look at the early pictures, you can see the resemblance .. but then she started f#cking with it (in high school) .. AND Thomas paid for it!!!


Yes, I remember her saying she liked her Markle nose (not that she admitted to slimming it and refining it) but it was still a Markle nose.

I think I'm the only one who liked that distinctive upturn. Unique and fit in so well with her face. I thought she was so pretty at the time and the nose was contributing to that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I remember her saying she liked her Markle nose (not that she admitted to slimming it and refining it) but it was still a Markle nose.
> 
> I think I'm the only one who liked that distinctive upturn. Unique and fit in so well with her face. I thought she was so pretty at the time and the nose was contributing to that.


I agree with you. Unique and pretty, even if it did have some help.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I remember her saying she liked her Markle nose (not that she admitted to slimming it and refining it) but it was still a Markle nose.
> 
> I think I'm the only one who liked that distinctive upturn. Unique and fit in so well with her face. I thought she was so pretty at the time and the nose was contributing to that.


I don't think the nose was so bad that she had to change it but I'm not really a fan of a ski slope nose


----------



## gracekelly

She will continue to tweak her face until the day she dies.  This has jumped into the realm of not being normal and it is an obsession.  The level of self dissatisfaction must be pretty high to keep doing this.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Wow, people are so creative! @Maggie Muggins's list will be endless.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: one more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5162688


Thanks @Chanbal for the nickname MacBish. Congratulations on becoming  Nickname Master.


----------



## rose60610

At some point isn't there going to be so much scar tissue from so many plastic surgeries? She'd better hurry up and find a look she's happy with before the scalpel can't cut anymore. But we know she always wants more more more of everything, including money and fame.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> By the way, is *Mother Theresa of Montecito* already in the list? @Maggie Muggins


It is now. Thanks Nickname Master.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> She's a black widow!  Mates then discards her partner without a second thought.  Watch out Hazzie!
> 
> And like the black widow, she has quite the bump, and a rather small nose.


JCMH should beware as some females have been observed devouring males after mating.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

gracekelly said:


> She will continue to tweak her face until the day she dies.  This has jumped into the realm of not being normal and it is an obsession.  The level of self dissatisfaction must be pretty high to keep doing this.


And watch her stans claim her as being a beautiful woman …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> There is already a response to this article, see post 71,731.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised that later another PR release or interview will inform us about how rude Kate was by not collaborating with Mother Theresa of Montecito.
> 
> By the way, is Mother Theresa of Montecito already in the list? @Maggie Muggins


That’s the whole point … people like Meghan set things like this up for others just to tear them down if they were ignored.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO they bonded over their hatred of the intrusive media and families [us against the world]. He wanted out of his family, but needed an alternative place to go to. Apparently, the Africa narrative was just a distraction. It seems what he really wanted was to live in a 19 bathroom Mcmansion in one of the wealthiest areas of the US. Who knew?  *No wonder his other girlfriends left.*


If I could tell from his behaviour that H was a brat, I'm sure most of his gfs could as well and it's possible they tried unsuccessfully to help him and then refused to marry him under the pretext of being unable to live the royal life rather than blab H's faults to the media. I'm sure some gfs just overlooked his faults to enjoy the glamour/publicity associated with dating a prince.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

xincinsin said:


> I have to admit I like the way he colours hair. But it seems he is pretty young (and foolish). She just looks messy, Tom. She's going for the "l had sex before coming here" look.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet This Year's 30 Under 30 Winner Tom Smith
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.beautylaunchpad.com


Hmmm… another white guy? For a “convenient when it’s black” woman that always talks about uplifting black people, she sure doesn’t like surrounding herself with them.


----------



## rose60610

JCMH had legions of the best of the best of everything and experts in every field at his beck and call if he so chose. Including Special Ops people to "RESCUE" him from his, err, dreaded family. But he hooks up with Ms. Z-Lister who "turns suicidal" and can't hack all the glamour and spoke like they barely escaped London with the clothes on their backs. Therefore they can't fathom why Daddy-O isn't paying for their security. Despite having had all the best of the best he ends up in a coop with rescue chickens and throws his family under the bus with Oprah. Am I the only one who finds this rather odd?

IMO what's really dreadful is that here's a guy with all the resources spouting off to those less fortunate (about 99.99999999999999999% of people), that he and Z-Lister are victims. I'd just like to see somebody punch him in the throat and tell Meghan that she is utterly pathetic and revolting.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> At some point isn't there going to be so much scar tissue from so many plastic surgeries? She'd better hurry up and find a look she's happy with before the scalpel can't cut anymore. But we know she always wants more more more of everything, including money and fame.


The real housewives and some reality folks are far ahead of her in continual plastic surgery.  She's got a few more surgeries before any problems, I would think.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> The real housewives and some reality folks are far ahead of her in continual plastic surgery.  She's got a few more surgeries before any problems, I would think.


I'm waiting for Uncanny Valley to happen.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> interesting
> not really that funny IMO
> I agree her dad shouldn't go public but from what we've seen I think it's unfair to say he did the bare minimum in raising her.  he paid for private school, plastic surgery, basically spoiled her.....maybe in this case she was literally "spoiled" by the entitled and superior attitude that was fostered by one or both of her parents


Yes haven’t watched it yet as it’s still early but aside from all the spending he did… I think it’s a bit naive at best to say that growing up with two parents and visitation with both after divorce and having contact with your wider families & step siblings into adulthood and it seems to have been a pretty stable routine & financially secure environment is the bare minimum of parenting. We all know it can be a lot more difficult.

However,  this is the hypocrisy of some of the fans they like to say the opposition don’t like H&M because we can’t stand the idea of black & biracial people doing well but then they can’t quite stop inventing a struggle/Cinderella narrative & ignoring her comfortable middle class heritage.
Of course M herself encourages this because she’d have you believe black & biracial people were an obscure anomaly in 90s Hollywood & LA


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Monday to all!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Chanbal for the nickname MacBish. Congratulations on becoming  Nickname Master.
> View attachment 5165711


Thank you, but the credit is not mine for this prestigious award. It must be shared with Twitter (very talented tweeters out there), DM, Piers M, Sarah V, J Moir, …and of course all the brilliant TPF members.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes haven’t watched it yet as it’s still early but aside from all the spending he did… I think it’s a bit naive at best to say that growing up with two parents and visitation with both after divorce and having contact with your wider families & step siblings into adulthood and it seems to have been a pretty stable routine & financially secure environment is the bare minimum of parenting. We all know it can be a lot more difficult.
> 
> However,  this is the hypocrisy of some of the fans they like to say the opposition don’t like H&M because we can’t stand the idea of black & biracial people doing well but then they can’t quite stop inventing a struggle/Cinderella narrative & ignoring her comfortable middle class heritage.
> Of course M herself encourages this because she’d have you believe black & biracial people were an obscure anomaly in 90s Hollywood & LA


yes, as I've probably said before, I'm white and I am very willing to acknowledge my white privilege.  But M grew up more privileged than I did.  She may have experienced some second-hand racism involving her mom.  and it's possible there were some micro-aggressions toward her.  But overall from everything I've seen, she had quite a nice childhood and adolescence. Now she wants to claim the rewards of being a POC.  Why not have it both ways?


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes haven’t watched it yet as it’s still early but aside from all the spending he did… I think it’s a bit naive at best to say that growing up with two parents and visitation with both after divorce and having contact with your wider families & step siblings into adulthood and it seems to have been a pretty stable routine & financially secure environment is the bare minimum of parenting. We all know it can be a lot more difficult.
> 
> However,  *this is the hypocrisy of some of the fans they like to say the opposition don’t like H&M because we can’t stand the idea of black & biracial people doing well* but then they can’t quite stop inventing a struggle/Cinderella narrative & ignoring her comfortable middle class heritage.
> Of course M herself encourages this because she’d have you believe black & biracial people were an obscure anomaly in 90s Hollywood & LA



Of course. So what these hypocrites need is for somebody to throw their own duplicitous argument back into their own hypocrite faces. I'll use Candace Owens as just one example. I'll use Dr. Ben Carson as another example. Many of the Meghan/Harry sugars can't stand Owens or Carson, and I've read plenty of nasty and caustic things said about them. They're persons of color also, so aren't their critics racists if the argument is any critique of a POC makes you a racist?  So the race card playing H&M fans can STFU. My guess is that if Meghan were best buds with Owens or Carson, her sugars' heads would explode. So once again, they can STFU. The H&M fans who don't play the race card but simply actually like H&M are probably nice people, maybe a little misguided, but nice, the kind of people who would pet a snarling wolverine because they don't know any better.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> yes, as I've probably said before, I'm white and I am very willing to acknowledge my white privilege.  But M grew up more privileged than I did.  She may have experienced some second-hand racism involving her mom.  and it's possible there were some micro-aggressions toward her.  But overall from everything I've seen, she had quite a nice childhood and adolescence. Now she wants to claim the rewards of being a POC.  Why not have it both ways?



I’m not sure if I mentioned this before, but on another forum consisting mostly of black Americans, someone brought to light the fact that no biracial celeb has ever stood up or spoken for Meghan … it was mostly black American celebs who spoke up in her defense.

And that Mae me think, a lot of biracials realize she’s privileged by being mixed … she can play both sides.

I’m sure Meghan turned her Karen mode on and threatened to sue for not getting her way or getting employed citing racism (even though to many, she’s white passing)…

Either way, she’s like the disgusting wad of gum under our shoes that needs to go away but won’t completely disappear  …


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> The real housewives and some reality folks are far ahead of her in continual plastic surgery.  She's got a few more surgeries before any problems, I would think.


Absolutely right!!! .. quite honestly, I'm surprised she hasn't had the boobies done again with using the excuse "well - you know, I had 2 children so they got bigger *naturally*"!!!  

In regards to the number of Nose Jobs, yes .. having too many can make the nose collapse; remember .. this is what happened to Michael Jackson!  It's happened to other 'reality' stars (or just fixated PS nobs), quite a few of which end up on the Show Botched!  It's really kind of pathetic to continually "tweak" oneself like that .. that is for sure body dysmorphic disorder!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Absolutely right!!! .. quite honestly, I'm surprised she hasn't had the boobies done again with using the excuse "well - you know, I had 2 children so they got bigger *naturally*"!!!
> 
> In regards to the number of Nose Jobs, yes .. having too many can make the nose collapse; remember .. this is what happened to Michael Jackson!  It's happened to other 'reality' stars (or just fixated PS nobs), quite a few of which end up on the Show Botched!  It's really kind of pathetic to continually "tweak" oneself like that .. that is for sure body dysmorphic disorder!



I think she would only get the boob job if she wanted to catch herself another man if/when she's gets bored with Harry.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think she would only get the boob job if she wanted to catch herself another man if/when she's gets bored with Harry.


maybe I'm biased against her but I don't find her sexy at all


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> yes, as I've probably said before, I'm white and I am very willing to acknowledge my white privilege.  But M grew up more privileged than I did.  She may have experienced some second-hand racism involving her mom.  and it's possible there were some micro-aggressions toward her.  But overall from everything I've seen, she had quite a nice childhood and adolescence. Now she wants to claim the rewards of being a POC.  Why not have it both ways?


Well tbh to me it’s not even so much a wider social thing as the insane delusions of grandeur M gives herself & her stans buy into.
M is such a special unicorn that she has to have a grand Cinderella story even if it means throwing everyone in her family under the bus & pushing the bounds of credibility


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm biased against her but I don't find her sexy at all



I wouldn't expect anyone here to think she was beautiful. We know too much about her. Who cares what the outer shell looks like when the core is so rotten?


----------



## bag-mania

Ridiculous story. I don’t know which is the most impossible part, that Kate would ever consider working on a Netflix show with Meghan, or that Meghan would want to do a show featuring Kate’s charitable work. Meghan would never do anything to make someone other than herself look good, EVER. Make Kate look good? Multiply never by one million.  









						Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
					

Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

OMG

A video was posted today on youtube showing TM Jr talking about his sister. Here is the title for the curious ones: "Thomas Jr Rips into Meghan"


----------



## rose60610

What would Kate have to gain by doing a Netflix job with Meghan? Absolutely nothing. Any relationship with Meghan would damage her and the Crown.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Ridiculous story. I don’t know which is the most impossible part, that Kate would ever consider working on a Netflix show with Meghan, or that Meghan would want to do a show featuring Kate’s charitable work. Meghan would never do anything to make someone other than herself look good, EVER. Make Kate look good? Multiply never by one million.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


Well I’m sure we know this isn’t _exactly feasible. _Unless (and it seems unlikely) they somehow have the rights to something they were filming pre-covid which I strongly suspect is what happened with invictus. 
I suppose the press is just recycling the news of the much heralded invictus doc (still hoping it’ll be directed by Christopher Guest )

This got me thinking though… if they are just going to make charity documentaries & biographical stuff like that I’m not seeing how it’s different from the tv the BRF makes (like a certain African tour doc) which I believe has some international broadcast & I don’t think that’s exactly smashing the box office.

The only thing we’ve heard about that isn’t very cheap to produce is this animation series but that’s been a very mixed bag for Netflix so far & it sounds like it’s pretty early stages.

All in all, it comes back to the old chestnut, when are they going to announce that their production company is producing things?


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan and Harry's business model on brink as US to 'like forget them'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's business model was torn apart by a commentator, who claimed the American market will "likely forget them".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> What would Kate have to gain by doing a Netflix job with Meghan? Absolutely nothing. Any relationship with Meghan would damage her and the Crown.



Kate is future Queen of the UK she won’t be doing any US “celeb “ dross


----------



## needlv

Lol





__





						Palace Sources Deny Claim That Meghan and Kate Might Collaborate on a Netflix Project
					





					www.msn.com
				




Catherine is like


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So surprised. Not really.


----------



## needlv

So… the RF is freezing out H and MM…?









						Prince Harry and Meghan will have secret christening for Lilibet in US
					

Richard Fitzwilliam told the Express the Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, are acting on their own terms and said their daughter Lilibet's christening will take place in California.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv




----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> So… the RF is freezing out H and MM…?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan will have secret christening for Lilibet in US
> 
> 
> Richard Fitzwilliam told the Express the Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, are acting on their own terms and said their daughter Lilibet's christening will take place in California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Much Ado About Nothing



needlv said:


>



Apart from rewriting their own history as the orphan Cinderella and the mentally ill Prince, after the 4-volume hazardous memoir, their next project will be to revise the dictionary to reframe it in compassionate and uplifting terms - revision particularly crucial for the word "privacy".


----------



## xincinsin

Our favourite idiots decided to lecture the world again. One comment called them Bandwagon Preachers which is very apt.








						'Speechless' Meghan and Harry issue statement on 'exceptionally fragile' world
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared the statement on their website Archewell and urged people to "put our values into action — together"




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Our favourite idiots decided to lecture the world again. One comment called them Bandwagon Preachers which is very apt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Speechless' Meghan and Harry issue statement on 'exceptionally fragile' world
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared the statement on their website Archewell and urged people to "put our values into action — together"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


We are living very unique and difficult times, and once more they are taking advantage of that for PR releases.
Should see the comments on their PR from TM Jr in the video "Thomas Jr Rips into Meghan" while it's still there. He sounds very angry.


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Comments are as expected.


----------



## Icyjade

lanasyogamama said:


> Comments are as expected.




I read this word salad and felt a bit sick. They nauseate me. How does it even help? What a load of B/S.









						Harry and Meghan say they're speechless about Afghanistan
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have broken their silence on the situation in Afghanistan to say they are 'speechless'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Comments are as expected.



Speechless, the couple of Montecito ??? 
Their comments left me  by so much hypocrisy.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Comments are as expected.



‘Thoughts and prayers’ in a nutshell


----------



## CarryOn2020

The world is not interested in their bs.  Too much serious stuff happening.
No christening in the UK either,


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> ‘Thoughts and prayers’ in a nutshell


With 1000 extra words.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> The world is not interested in their bs.  Too much serious stuff happening.
> No christening in the UK either,


Are they even religious? Why have a “secret” christening that we will hear all the “leaked” details about.


----------



## 1LV

I’m sure we’re all heartbroken to read how this has impacted MM & H.


----------



## Chanbal

On privacy!  

"_The Australian’s media writer Sophie Elsworth says Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are a “woke, narcissistic, privileged” couple who have done nothing but “put themselves in the spotlight” despite protesting for privacy._ "


----------



## youngster

1LV said:


> I’m sure we’re all heartbroken to read how this has impacted MM & H.



Amazing how they are "speechless" yet proceed to issue another world salad press release.  What good does a statement like this do?  Nothing other than get them a People Magazine headline for 10 minutes.  Breaking news:  Harry and MM ask world leaders to do something because these continuing problems and crises are causing people to not pay any attention to them and interfering with their plans to become worldwide media moguls.  They want the world back the way it was when they hatched their plan to abandon the UK in order to make a billion dollars in the U.S. and the world is _not cooperating_.  If they truly want to be "global leaders", they should try doing something other than bleating that they are "speechless" and "are scared".   How about getting out there and offering people hope and some actual concrete solutions? Oops, forgot, they leave that sort of stuff to the grown ups.


----------



## rose60610

Harry's input about Afghanistan sounds more like an infomercial about himself and Invictus more than genuine concern for the situation. It's like he thought "Ooh! I served in Afghanistan and created Invictus so this is a perfect opportunity to promote ourselves". Every natural disaster or geographic conflict is fodder for self-promo opportunities complete with empty utterances. From a couple who yearns for privacy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I really feel like something may be shifting and people are seeing through their empty words.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I wish we had a ‘snore’ button!  These 2 have nothing relevant to add to the serious situations affecting the world today.
Just blah blah noise.


----------



## chicinthecity777

xincinsin said:


> Our favourite idiots decided to lecture the world again. One comment called them Bandwagon Preachers which is very apt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Speechless' Meghan and Harry issue statement on 'exceptionally fragile' world
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared the statement on their website Archewell and urged people to "put our values into action — together"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Speechless yet they are still talking!


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> I really feel like something may be shifting and people are seeing through their empty words.



We can only hope


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Speechless yet they are still talking!


my cat was just now vocalizing in the hallway....he didn't really want anything, just to be noticed...I went there and he ran.  
Quite the like these two.  they have to comment on everything just to get attention.  You care so much?  give over some of your money.


----------



## chicinthecity777

sdkitty said:


> my cat was just now vocalizing in the hallway....he didn't really want anything, just to be noticed...I went there and he ran.
> Quite the like these two.  they have to comment on everything just to get attention.  You care so much?  give over some of your money.


Your cat is 1000% more adorable than H&M!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Speechless yet they are still talking!



All Meghan and Harry have to offer are empty words. There isn't an iota of substance between them.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Are they even religious? Why have a “secret” christening that we will hear all the “leaked” details about.


Murky M makes an excellent point on the "secrete" event.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> All Meghan and Harry have to offer are empty words. There isn't an iota of substance between them.



They see themselves as "world leaders" because they issue statements calling on other people to do stuff.


----------



## chicinthecity777

youngster said:


> Amazing how they are "speechless" yet proceed to issue another world salad press release.  *What good does a statement like this do?  *Nothing other than get them a People Magazine headline for 10 minutes.  Breaking news:  Harry and MM ask world leaders to do something because these continuing problems and crises are causing people to not pay any attention to them and interfering with their plans to become worldwide media moguls.  They want the world back the way it was when they hatched their plan to abandon the UK in order to make a billion dollars in the U.S. and the world is _not cooperating_.  If they truly want to be "global leaders", they should try doing something other than bleating that they are "speechless" and "are scared".   How about getting out there and offering people hope and some actual concrete solutions? Oops, forgot, they leave that sort of stuff to the grown ups.


Apart from screaming "we want attention", nothing! But no good self-important ex-royals should pass up a good old opportunity to virtue signal!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Their statement on Archewell was the equivalent of wringing their hands and crying _think of the children!_

They want to be seen as being LEADERS yet the best they can come up with is pointing out this week's world problems and reducing it all to "someone should do something about this."


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5166947
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's business model on brink as US to 'like forget them'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's business model was torn apart by a commentator, who claimed the American market will "likely forget them".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I mean, if tomorrow the tabloids stopped publishing stories about them and meghans friends and PR stopped posting stupid articles about her, they’ll be forgotten the next day …


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> my cat was just now vocalizing in the hallway....he didn't really want anything, just to be noticed...I went there and he ran.
> Quite the like these two.  they have to comment on everything just to get attention.  You care so much?  give over some of your money.




You took the words out of my mouth. Instead of another bout of juvenile emoting the tiresome twosome should just get their checkbooks out and donate a 250k $ to Afghan refugees and 250k $ to  earthquake victims. ($ / € / £ not olive whatnot cakes, not woollie hats).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You should have seen my face when this email popped up on my phone: "Netflix Sex Education x H&M". Took me a second to realize it's H&M the fashion retailer


----------



## sdkitty

chicinthecity777 said:


> Your cat is 1000% more adorable than H&M!


Yes he is Much cuter than them and I may get flamed for this but I'd say cuter than Archie too


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Their statement on Archewell was the equivalent of wringing their hands and crying _think of the children!_
> 
> They want to be seen as being LEADERS yet the best they can come up with is *pointing out this week's world problems *and reducing it all to "someone should do something about this."


And as usual they’re a day late and a dollar short.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I mean, they aren’t even putting together a donation campaign. They are literally just telling people to go out and do something.

Honest to god, the whole world has gone mad.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Yes he is Much cuter than them and I may get flamed for this but I'd say cuter than Archie too



And I bet he's cuter than Lilibet too (if she really exists).


----------



## gracekelly

breakfastatcartier said:


> I mean, if tomorrow the tabloids stopped publishing stories about them and meghans friends and PR stopped posting stupid articles about her, they’ll be forgotten the next day …


Exactly. Their mission at this point is just to remain in the public consciousness, hence more word salad spew about  the world’s problems.  Who cares what they think?  They have done nothing of substance for the past 20 months.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> Yes he is Much cuter than them and I may get flamed for this but I'd say cuter than Archie too


Yooo leave poor Archie out of this! Lol. That poor baby, it’s not his fault he’s got ugly, Brady eyed parents.

Hopefully Diana’s genes (and spirit) pulls through to save him and his sister.


----------



## gracekelly

breakfastatcartier said:


> Yooo leave poor Archie out of this! Lol. That poor baby, it’s not his fault he’s got ugly, Brady eyed parents.
> 
> Hopefully Diana’s genes (and spirit) pulls through to save him and his sister.


Honestly, I hope those children are raised by a nanny with love and common sense.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And I bet he's cuter than Lilibet too (if she really exists).


ha....didn't include her as I haven't seen an pics


----------



## carmen56

Raptor is patron of Mayhew.  Mayhew is present in Afghanistan and trying to get out, along with the Nowzad veterinary team and animals.  Why isn’t she lobbying on their behalf to bring them home?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ha....didn't include her as I haven't seen an pics



Yeah, not even a blurry shot of the baby's knee. We need to start a new rumor to explain the missing daughter! Let's say that the first surrogate changed her mind and didn't turn over the baby to them. So then they had to scramble and go with another surrogate. They will need to wait several months before showing any photos to allow for the growth of the new baby so that people won't question why Lilibet is so much smaller than she should be. What do you think? Is that crazy enough to prompt them to release a Lili photo?


----------



## Luvbolide

Gee, all day yesterday all I could think when looking at news about Afghanistan was who cares what the Prez and other world leaders are thinking, no - we all need to know WTF H&M think.....NOT!!  I am stunned at their arrogance - why would anyone care what they think.  We already know what they will do...nothing useful - and definitely not anything $$.  Maybe sending her stupid book to refugees.  They surely must have tons of copies lying around!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

1LV said:


> And as usual they’re a day late and a dollar short.



Netflix probably thinks they're a year late and $100 million short.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Their statement on Archewell was the equivalent of wringing their hands and crying _think of the children!_
> 
> They want to be seen as being LEADERS yet the best they can come up with is pointing out this week's world problems and reducing it all to *"someone should do something about this."*



Well, as we all have seen, sometimes it is better to do nothing. 
I tell my customers that all the time........"when in doubt-----DON'T" 
99 times out 100 they end up saving money.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> Yes he is Much cuter than them and I may get flamed for this but I'd say cuter than Archie too



Why would you get flamed for telling the truth?


----------



## Sol Ryan

xincinsin said:


> Our favourite idiots decided to lecture the world again. One comment called them Bandwagon Preachers which is very apt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Speechless' Meghan and Harry issue statement on 'exceptionally fragile' world
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared the statement on their website Archewell and urged people to "put our values into action — together"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



is this a request for a gofundme to get them more security? I mean aren’t they always scared? Wasn’t that the point of “Finding Freedom” and the Oprah interview?


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Why would you get flamed for telling the truth?


well, some people think kids are cuter or better than kitties


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> ha....didn't include her as I haven't seen an pics


Who?


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Who?


Now if it was Charlotte compared to my kitty, that would be different
That little girl is adorable


----------



## Kevinaxx

i 100% agree with the comments…


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> Now if it was Charlotte compared to my kitty, that would be different
> That little girl is adorable


She’s a doll.


----------



## Chanbal

_If only they were speechless_… 



PIERS Morgan has blasted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 218-word essay on the Taliban horrors, saying "if only" they were "speechless."









						Piers blasts Meg & Harry's 218-WORD essay on Taliban saying they're 'speechless'
					

PIERS Morgan has blasted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s 218-word essay on the Taliban horrors, saying “if only” they were “speechless.” Meghan and Harry waded into t…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> I mean, they aren’t even putting together a donation campaign. They are literally just telling people to go out and do something.
> 
> Honest to god, the whole world has gone mad.


People on twitter are bringing back some old family photos about what they do best.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As we all, As we all, As we all ????  



Replying to
@RoyalReporter

Do other celebs in America put out statements like this


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _If only they were speechless_…
> View attachment 5167534
> 
> 
> PIERS Morgan has blasted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 218-word essay on the Taliban horrors, saying "if only" they were "speechless."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers blasts Meg & Harry's 218-WORD essay on Taliban saying they're 'speechless'
> 
> 
> PIERS Morgan has blasted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s 218-word essay on the Taliban horrors, saying “if only” they were “speechless.” Meghan and Harry waded into t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Piers is the gift that keeps on giving. Megaphone is a great one, too @Maggie Muggins.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Piers is the gift that keeps on giving. Megaphone is a great one, too @Maggie Muggins.



Megaphone Markle


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Piers is the gift that keeps on giving. Megaphone is a great one, too @Maggie Muggins.


Is Megaphony taken?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> Piers is the gift that keeps on giving. Megaphone is a great one, too @Maggie Muggins.



I think Piers should have a ⭐


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Gee, all day yesterday all I could think when looking at news about Afghanistan was who cares what the Prez and other world leaders are thinking, no - we all need to know WTF H&M think.....NOT!!  I am stunned at their arrogance - why would anyone care what they think.  We already know what they will do...nothing useful - and definitely not anything $$.  Maybe sending her stupid book to refugees.  They surely must have tons of copies lying around!


Here is the really crazy thing...Harry thinks that the world does care what he thinks. All because he slept peacefully in Afghanistan with guards watching over him.  Can you imagine?  I don't think his wife cares what he thinks.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> I think Piers should have a ⭐


By all means!  Piers should be an honorary member of this thread!


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Are they even religious? Why have a “secret” christening that we will hear all the “leaked” details about.


If we are lucky Erykah Badu - sorry if I got spelling wrong - will be there , like she was at the party on Martha’s Vineyard where she sent photos that were embarrassing for all involved


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan say they're speechless about Afghanistan
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have broken their silence on the situation in Afghanistan to say they are 'speechless'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Never fear, the Sussexes are here! Harry and Meghan wade into Afghanistan crisis with woke 'word salad' statement saying they're 'speechless' (if only)*


----------



## gracekelly

Harry is running to the mess tent as he heard that they had real New York pizza flown in.  (it's the water that makes it better, like the bagels)


----------



## TC1

MM & H love a "cause" to post about. How much did they raise for VaxxLive thought Archewell? that was a cause for a hot minute too...
The "cause" being seeking re-posts from People, ENews etc


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Are they even religious? Why have a “secret” christening that we will hear all the “leaked” details about.



I doubt they are religious, or even spiritual. Unless you count worshipping the almighty dollar.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I doubt they are religious, or even spiritual. Unless you count worshipping the almighty dollar.


I think Doria is probably into the new-age spiritual stuff and I'd guess this might be M's thing too....remember the crystal on the desk?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> _If only they were speechless_…
> View attachment 5167534
> 
> 
> PIERS Morgan has blasted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 218-word essay on the Taliban horrors, saying "if only" they were "speechless."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers blasts Meg & Harry's 218-WORD essay on Taliban saying they're 'speechless'
> 
> 
> PIERS Morgan has blasted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s 218-word essay on the Taliban horrors, saying “if only” they were “speechless.” Meghan and Harry waded into t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


as usual, they think we all need them to tell us how they feel and how we should feel....who cares?  if you want to make a real impression hand over some big money


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comment re: can Kim Kardashian still post sexy pics if she becomes a lawyer.



> I don't think the bikinis are the problem, she did a lot of nude and that doesn't sit well with some career paths like being a lawyer it can be perceived as unprofessional. But who knows the world is so crazy now that we had a first lady who did nudes , a president who had reality TV show, princes are married with divorced actresses so nothing can shock me now ...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think Doria is probably into the new-age spiritual stuff and I'd guess this might be M's thing too....remember the crystal on the desk?



It was quartz wasn't it? Still, I think the crystal's appearance on the desk was more for interior design affectation than it was for energy.

Voodoo is a religion. I'll say she found a love spell to turn the object of her desire into a mindless puppet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I think Doria is probably into the new-age spiritual stuff and I'd guess this might be M's thing too....remember the crystal on the desk?



Iirc, Isn’t Doria _friends_ with MaryAnne Williamson? Along with OW?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc, Isn’t Doria _friends_ with MaryAnne Williamson? Along with OW?


IDK if they are friends...maybe she went to Williamson's "church"....she was just a yoga instructor before her daughter became the duchess


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Is Megaphony taken?


Megaphoney.  Brilliant.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

xincinsin said:


> Our favourite idiots decided to lecture the world again. One comment called them Bandwagon Preachers which is very apt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Speechless' Meghan and Harry issue statement on 'exceptionally fragile' world
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared the statement on their website Archewell and urged people to "put our values into action — together"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Bandwagon Preachers!


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> IDK if they are friends...maybe she went to Williamson's "church"....she was just a yoga instructor before her daughter became the duchess



Here:

_But we can’t give Miz Markle all the credit for the outing, it was actually her momma Doria Ragland who got her interested in the charity, which was founded by former presidential candidate Marianne Williamson.

The confidant explained:_


> _“Meghan was first introduced to the teachings of Marianne by her mom when she was a teenager. That’s when Doria gave her ‘A Return to Love’, one of Marianne’s most famous books.”_







__





						Meghan Markle Found The 'Perfect Fit' In Former Presidential Candidate Marianne Williamson's Charity! - Perez Hilton
					

Meghan Markle is finding her footing in El Lay! As we previously shared, the Duchess of Sussex partook in her first volunteer activity back in her home state while delivering meals in West Hollywood to clients with critical illnesses through Project Angel Food. Related: Meghan Markle & Prince...




					perezhilton.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here:
> 
> _But we can’t give Miz Markle all the credit for the outing, it was actually her momma Doria Ragland who got her interested in the charity, which was founded by former presidential candidate Marianne Williamson.
> 
> The confidant explained:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Found The 'Perfect Fit' In Former Presidential Candidate Marianne Williamson's Charity! - Perez Hilton
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is finding her footing in El Lay! As we previously shared, the Duchess of Sussex partook in her first volunteer activity back in her home state while delivering meals in West Hollywood to clients with critical illnesses through Project Angel Food. Related: Meghan Markle & Prince...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> perezhilton.com


yes, Doria was a follower of Williamson, not a personal friend (I don't think)


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Our favourite idiots decided to lecture the world again. One comment called them Bandwagon Preachers which is very apt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Speechless' Meghan and Harry issue statement on 'exceptionally fragile' world
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shared the statement on their website Archewell and urged people to "put our values into action — together"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Maybe Meg and "friends" will donate their 40 minutes to help coach the Afghan women who are now in fear of getting raped, killed, tortured.  You know, real problems, not just made up ones with an Hermes blanket in a neutral color next to them to sob into.


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> Speechless yet they are still talking!


These two have oral dysentery.  My dad used to say "oral diarrhea", but these schmuks go above and beyond.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> These two have oral dysentery.  My dad used to say "oral diarrhea", but these schmuks go above and beyond.



Meghan is in love with the sound of her own voice word salad.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, I hope those children are raised by a nanny with love and common sense.


Unfortunately a nanny with love and common sense could not last around HazMeg for long.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5167616
> 
> 
> Harry is running to the mess tent as he heard that they had real New York pizza flown in.  (it's the water that makes it better, like the bagels)


I instinctly pictured him in red shorts a la Baywatch, then threw up a little in my mouth.


----------



## Traveladdie

Yikes! Is there a thread for people who like the Prince and Duchess ?


----------



## Chanbal

Traveladdie said:


> Yikes! Is there a thread for people who like the Prince and Duchess ?



I would suggest reading this thread starting about the time the couple of Montecito moved to California. If you still think there is a need for such thread, by all means start one …


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe Meg and "friends" will donate their 40 minutes to help coach the Afghan women who are now in fear of getting raped, killed, tortured.  You know, real problems, not just made up ones with an Hermes blanket in a neutral color next to them to sob into.



They better include a segment on How To Work From Home


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I doubt they are religious, or even spiritual. Unless you count worshipping the almighty dollar.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yes, Doria was a follower of Williamson, not a personal friend (I don't think)


I could see a new age type christening for this child.  Everyone wearing white robes, holding a crystal and offering fruit baskets to the moon.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> On privacy!
> 
> "_The Australian’s media writer Sophie Elsworth says Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are a “woke, narcissistic, privileged” couple who have done nothing but “put themselves in the spotlight” despite protesting for privacy._ "



Oh those Aussies. Telling it like it is.  

Australia is a member of the Commonwealth. We in Canada are also members of the Commonwealth, but the news about H&M  is so polite here, it’s a wee bit pathetic.  I appreciate the Australian straightforwardness.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Oh those Aussies. Telling it like it is.
> 
> Australia is a member of the Commonwealth. We in Canada are also members of the Commonwealth, but the news about H&M  is so polite here, it’s a wee bit pathetic.  I appreciate the Australian straightforwardness.


I believe that the Aussies would be calling Harry a pom. a drongo,  a yobbo  and a dipstick. His sheila would be considered very jumped up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc, Isn’t Doria _friends_ with MaryAnne Williamson? Along with OW?


Isn't the couple of Montecito friends with K*ty P*rry's family? Maybe they are only friends with P*erry's husband Bl*om. 









						Katy Perry's preacher parents spent $178k of charity donations
					

Katy Perry's parents Keith and Mary Hudson parents spent 96% of donations to their charity on expenses including 'retreats' at exclusive Marriott Hotels.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Traveladdie said:


> Yikes! Is there a thread for people who like the Prince and Duchess ?


This thread started off quite fond of them, but there is really nothing left to be fond of. 
The Montecito Morons scuttled their own boat.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> This thread started off quite fond of them, but there is really nothing left to be fond of.
> The Montecito Morons scuttled their own boat.



Familiarity breeds contempt.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Piers is the gift that keeps on giving. *Megaphone* is a great one, too @Maggie Muggins.


Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for the nickname Megaphone.  I'm so happy to finally acknowledge your contributions to the nickname list as I hear that the very appropriate nickname of "Raptor" also belongs to you. Cheers and thanks.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Thank you, but the credit is not mine for this prestigious award. It must be shared with Twitter (very talented tweeters out there), DM, Piers M, Sarah V, J Moir, …and of course all the brilliant TPF members.


Don't be too modest; you did the research and so you should get the credit. 
Besides there will be more Nickname Masters once I finish adding user names with the nicknames, something I should have done at the beginning.  As it is, I've had to review a number of posts to complete the final list of Nicknames plus contributors.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> As we all, As we all, As we all ????
> 
> 
> 
> Replying to
> @RoyalReporter
> 
> Do other celebs in America put out statements like this






Fortunately not!!  And using their stupid titles again - no one cares!  But the horrible thought I had is - OMG, maybe she IS planning to enter politics.  Our senior senator is 88 years old and it is not impossible to think that she may not want to run again when her term is up in 2025 (election would be in Nov. 2024).  I doubt House of Representatives is "good" enough for MM - in her own mind, anyway.  I can't imagine that enough people would be stupid enough to vote for a former suitcase girl whose claim to fame is marrying that upper class twit of the year.  But who knows, California politics is crazy right now! And I say that as a lifelong Californian.


----------



## Traveladdie

xincinsin said:


> This thread started off quite fond of them, but there is really nothing left to be fond of.
> The Montecito Morons scuttled their own boat.


That's too bad. Oh well, there are plenty of other posts to read. Cheers!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



OMG hysterical!


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> Here is the really crazy thing...Harry thinks that the world does care what he thinks. All because he slept peacefully in Afghanistan with guards watching over him.  Can you imagine?  I don't think his wife cares what he thinks.




I get that - I don't care what he thinks, either!  Somehow I think that most people thought- who the hell asked you to speak up?!?!  And quit telling other people what to do - where did either of them get the idea that the world would fall apart if they didn't tell everyone else what to do?  Argh....I may start throwing plates myself!!


----------



## needlv

Well… now the couple has spoken on the subject, everything will go back to normal… right?  (/sarc)

Another statement showing their inflated egos and self-importance.  No one needs their lectures right now.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5167616
> 
> 
> Harry is running to the mess tent as he heard that they had real New York pizza flown in.  (it's the water that makes it better, like the bagels)




Good Lord - did someone let this goofball have a side arm?!?!  Wonder he didn't shoot himself in the foot with it...


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


>



He's very good!  I'd like more!


----------



## poopsie

Luvbolide said:


> Fortunately not!!  And using their stupid titles again - no one cares!  But the horrible thought I had is - OMG, maybe she IS planning to enter politics.  Our senior senator is 88 years old and it is not impossible to think that she may not want to run again when her term is up in 2025 (election would be in Nov. 2024).  I doubt House of Representatives is "good" enough for MM - in her own mind, anyway.  I can't imagine that enough people would be stupid enough to vote for a former suitcase girl whose claim to fame is marrying that upper class twit of the year.  But who knows, California politics is crazy right now! And I say that as a lifelong Californian.



Are you speaking of DF?
She's been using that same photo since Christ was a corporal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Jayne1 said:


> He's very good!  I'd like more!



ask and ... well, you know 
<warning - vulgar for pearl clutchers>


also


----------



## bag-mania

Katel said:


> ask and ... well, you know
> <warning - vulgar for pearl clutchers>




THANK YOU!!


----------



## Chanbal

*Never fear, the Sussexes are here!  *

_Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: '*I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family.

'Like most of their "compassionate" gestures there is no indication about what they themselves will do* and whether any donations will be going through Archewell Foundation.

'Their comment that they want to "alleviate suffering among those we know and those we may never meet – that will prove our humanity," sounds so similar to their recent comment we must be compassionate "to those we know and those we don’t know" *that makes it sound equally phoney.*'  _









						Harry and Meghan say they're speechless about Afghanistan
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have broken their silence on the situation in Afghanistan to say they are 'speechless'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> I think Piers should have a ⭐


@poopsie Since this is your idea, please inform Piers Morgan for us.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> @poopsie Since this is your idea, please inform Piers Morgan for us.
> View attachment 5167843


He will be so pleased!


----------



## gracekelly

I think it is so funny that whenever they come out with these press releases, they are laughed at by so many.  Aren't they embarrassed?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> This thread started off quite fond of them, but there is really nothing left to be fond of.
> *The Montecito Morons* scuttled their own boat.


Thanks and congratulations @xincinsin  With The Montecito Morons and Bandwagon Preachers and your previous suggestions you are now entitled to call yourself Nickname Master.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I think it is so funny that *whenever they come out with these press releases, they are laughed at by so many.*  Aren't they embarrassed?


Yep, here is one more! The Montecito Embassy


----------



## Jayne1

Katel said:


> ask and ... well, you know
> <warning - vulgar for pearl clutchers>
> 
> 
> also



So funny!  Thanks!


----------



## Jayne1

Quite lengthy and the reader already knows so much about them, which to me, spoils the believability of the reading... if anyone actually believes Tarot cards.

It's a fun watch though. No harmony at home:


----------



## Hermes Zen

sdkitty said:


> well, some people think kids are cuter or better than kitties


Not me.  Furry animals are always cuter.


----------



## Vintage Leather

I don’t know why I keep expecting better of JCMH.  His big thing, his brand, used to be veterans services and mental health. And now he’s in the middle of a perfect storm where he might have something interesting to say. And he’s “speechless” with a mouth full of word salad. 

Most veterans I know are having PTSD episodes as more and more news comes out. Veterans Crisis lines are working overtime. 

Instead of being “speechless” he should have said:
It’s been a really tough week to be a veteran of the Afghan war. I’m struggling, as are a lot of my fellow veterans. 
Fighting in Afghanistan was some of the best and worst times of my life. [Insert funny story about people being friends. Bonus points if you some across as a little silly] It was also terrifying and even now [insert PTSD trigger] As I hear the news, I keep thinking of all the friends we lost, all the good men and women who suffered and my mind is spinning with questions and anger and hurt.
There are a lot of really smart people who have important things to say on this subject, so I’ll stop talking. I just wanted to let you know that you’re not alone. You can always reach out to the Veterans Crisis Hotline in the US [say phone number] or [UK equivalent of VCH]. It’s also available to spouses of Veterans. We are pledging X% of Archwell proceeds to [Veterans support group]

See? Simple, interesting and talking about the one thing that is actually on brand for Old Harry. And they don’t even have to do anything after the video. (30% of 0 is… still 0) But did they do this? 


Grrr… I could deal with preachy grifters. It’s the STUPID preachy grifter that gets me every time.


----------



## csshopper

Some days I wonder if the Montecito Moron's pr hacks get whip lash from all the "spinning" on the latest press releases to fit the current environment. 

Example: In anticipation of the fabled 60th Birthday Party held recently we read "product placement" bits, some with photos, about the friendship of the Moron's and the O****'*. Harry and the ex Pres were buds, Harry and M******* bonded over Invictus. Meghan met with M******* at a Conference and afterwards met privately to share ideas. The Morons were following in the O****'s footsteps and were equivalent to the O's with lucrative Lecture fees, Netflix, and Book deals etc etc, These press statements were carefully worded to imply the Morons would not be available to attend the party on Martha's Vineyard, hinting it would their choice if they did not attend. So once that fact they had never been on the Invitation List became public knowledge, how to "manage" the rejection had to be formulated. 

The Spin: From the gossip rag,_ US Weekly, _which spawned the fiction of Megaphony working a Netflix deal with her sister in law, comes this statement about the Moron's absence from the celebration:

*"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle weren't invited, even though Harry has met them a few times" an Insider says. "But they were expecting it. They don't know the family that well."*

From BFF's to not knowing the family that well. Spinning, spinning, always spinning. 

And speaking of PR hacks, where's Scoobie lately. Has he been Markled?


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> I think we'll be saved from her trying to represent us when she looks at the $174,000. salary of a Senator. That would hardly pay for Toilet Tissue in Montecito. Plus as a "newbie" she would be at the bottom of the list for Committee Assignments and probably get stuck with Monitoring the Senate Mail Room. The Title would have to go and the "lucrative" (has anyone ever seen documentation of the million dollar amounts flung around by the Grifters?) deals with Netflix etc would have to be put on hold.
> 
> One benefit to them if they moved to Washington, Haz would have access to the Library of Congress and could study up on the First Amendment.


----------



## Sharont2305

Vintage Leather said:


> I don’t know why I keep expecting better of JCMH.  His big thing, his brand, used to be veterans services and mental health. And now he’s in the middle of a perfect storm where he might have something interesting to say. And he’s “speechless” with a mouth full of word salad.
> 
> Most veterans I know are having PTSD episodes as more and more news comes out. Veterans Crisis lines are working overtime.
> 
> Instead of being “speechless” he should have said:
> It’s been a really tough week to be a veteran of the Afghan war. I’m struggling, as are a lot of my fellow veterans.
> Fighting in Afghanistan was some of the best and worst times of my life. [Insert funny story about people being friends. Bonus points if you some across as a little silly] It was also terrifying and even now [insert PTSD trigger] As I hear the news, I keep thinking of all the friends we lost, all the good men and women who suffered and my mind is spinning with questions and anger and hurt.
> There are a lot of really smart people who have important things to say on this subject, so I’ll stop talking. I just wanted to let you know that you’re not alone. You can always reach out to the Veterans Crisis Hotline in the US [say phone number] or [UK equivalent of VCH]. It’s also available to spouses of Veterans. We are pledging X% of Archwell proceeds to [Veterans support group]
> 
> See? Simple, interesting and talking about the one thing that is actually on brand for Old Harry. And they don’t even have to do anything after the video. (30% of 0 is… still 0) But did they do this?
> 
> 
> Grrr… I could deal with preachy grifters. It’s the STUPID preachy grifter that gets me every time.


That would have been a perfectly acceptable thing to say from Harry. I mean, the old Harry of course.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for the nickname Megaphone.  I'm so happy to finally acknowledge your contributions to the nickname list as I hear that the very appropriate nickname of "Raptor" also belongs to you. Cheers and thanks.
> View attachment 5167693



All the credit belongs to Piers! (and Raptor came from that Secrets site)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Quite lengthy and the reader already knows so much about them, which to me, spoils the believability of the reading... if anyone actually believes Tarot cards.
> 
> It's a fun watch though. No harmony at home:




I'm over her. I thought she had good points at first, but then I found a video from four months back where she INSISTS Kate is pregnant which should be a pretty simple thing to determine if you're worth your salt. Well, four months later and that pregnancy doesn't exist.

And then in this video she once again goes on and on about the adoption of the baby when that makes no sense whatsoever under California surrogacy law which she would know if she'd simply google.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vintage Leather said:


> Instead of being “speechless” he should have said:
> It’s been a really tough week to be a veteran of the Afghan war. I’m struggling, as are a lot of my fellow veterans.
> Fighting in Afghanistan was some of the best and worst times of my life. [Insert funny story about people being friends. Bonus points if you some across as a little silly] It was also terrifying and even now [insert PTSD trigger] As I hear the news, I keep thinking of all the friends we lost, all the good men and women who suffered and my mind is spinning with questions and anger and hurt.
> There are a lot of really smart people who have important things to say on this subject, so I’ll stop talking. I just wanted to let you know that you’re not alone. You can always reach out to the Veterans Crisis Hotline in the US [say phone number] or [UK equivalent of VCH]. It’s also available to spouses of Veterans. We are pledging X% of Archwell proceeds to [Veterans support group]



Maybe they should hire you instead of SS, it would maybe get them back to a level of being publicly tolerated instead of being ridiculed 24/7 (by their own fault, not because everyone is mean).


----------



## Luvbolide

poopsie said:


> Are you speaking of DF?
> She's been using that same photo since Christ was a corporal.



Yes , Mayor Di as we knew her!  Yes, the photo is ancient!


----------



## xincinsin

I'm wondering if Methane was already making empty platitudes from when she was a kid. After all, we have been told umpteen times that she wrote one - one - *ONE* letter to P&G when she was still in school. And that makes her a lifelong social activist? And her paid  rebranding as a humanitarian, I feel it should be as a faux humanitarian since she seems to have made no lasting impact and her PR team exaggerates the response to those few speeches she made on a global stage.

Apart from the repeat donation of beanies, the only charity which she seems to have followed up on is the Myna Mahila Foundation in Mumbai which she visited once before marriage, followed by writing an article about it, asked well-wishers to donate to for her wedding, and I think there was one more later request for her fans to donate to it. What I find to be a hallmark of her charitable efforts is the non-tangible nature of most of her "donations". She will donate her voice, but rarely will she donate her own time, effort and dollar. She is aiming to be the general directing the troops while she stays safely out of the warzone. She could have done so much more than just lip service. That 40x40 idea? The person who donated time and effort by offering 40 minute photo shoots for jobseekers needing headshots - that was a good idea. Methane should have used her Sunshine Sachs money & connections to line up practical help like that, not just give a "go forth and multiply in my honour" command.


----------



## rose60610

As if natural disasters and countries in turmoil aren't bad enough, we get stupidity from M&H to top it all off. Why do they insist on rubbing salt into wounds by opening their senseless and uncaring pie holes like braying donkeys? There's enough suffering in the world without these two losers adding to it.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I could see a new age type christening for this child.  Everyone wearing white robes, holding a crystal and offering fruit baskets to the moon.



OK, but that's not a christening


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> He will be so pleased!



Not unless we pay him


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> As if natural disasters and countries in turmoil aren't bad enough, we get stupidity from M&H to top it all off. Why do they insist on rubbing salt into wounds by opening their senseless and uncaring pie holes like* braying donkeys*? There's enough suffering in the world without these two losers adding to it.



 Careful now, I can see law suits launched by working donkey unions, donkey charities, and celeb animal entertainers.


----------



## lulilu

Vintage Leather said:


> I don’t know why I keep expecting better of JCMH.  His big thing, his brand, used to be veterans services and mental health. And now he’s in the middle of a perfect storm where he might have something interesting to say. And he’s “speechless” with a mouth full of word salad.
> Most veterans I know are having PTSD episodes as more and more news comes out. Veterans Crisis lines are working overtime.
> Instead of being “speechless” he should have said:
> It’s been a really tough week to be a veteran of the Afghan war. I’m struggling, as are a lot of my fellow veterans.
> Fighting in Afghanistan was some of the best and worst times of my life. [Insert funny story about people being friends. Bonus points if you some across as a little silly] It was also terrifying and even now [insert PTSD trigger] As I hear the news, I keep thinking of all the friends we lost, all the good men and women who suffered and my mind is spinning with questions and anger and hurt.
> There are a lot of really smart people who have important things to say on this subject, so I’ll stop talking. I just wanted to let you know that you’re not alone. You can always reach out to the Veterans Crisis Hotline in the US [say phone number] or [UK equivalent of VCH]. It’s also available to spouses of Veterans. We are pledging X% of Archwell proceeds to [Veterans support group]
> See? Simple, interesting and talking about the one thing that is actually on brand for Old Harry. And they don’t even have to do anything after the video. (30% of 0 is… still 0) But did they do this?
> Grrr… I could deal with preachy grifters. It’s the STUPID preachy grifter that gets me every time.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe they should hire you instead of SS, it would maybe get them back to a level of being publicly tolerated instead of being ridiculed 24/7 (by their own fault, not because everyone is mean).



Queen of wrap dress beat me to it, Vintage Leather.  Your draft statement is perfect.  They would do well to hire you to write public statements for them.  Perfectly balanced.  No word salad.  Meaningful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently the aforementioned crazy cardreader is now making up the story the surrogate baby died and so they had to adopt a random baby. I'm sorry, but...LOL Or rather, not LOL because as much as I dislike these people I don't find that the least bit funny.


----------



## chicinthecity777

lulilu said:


> Queen of wrap dress beat me to it, Vintage Leather.  Your draft statement is perfect.  They would do well to hire you to write public statements for them.  Perfectly balanced.  No word salad.  Meaningful.


My problem of all of their statements is that they always ask other people to do things! As if they are the leaders of leaders or something. Who do they think they really are???


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> My problem of all of their statements is that they always ask other people to do things! *As if they are the leaders of leaders or something. Who do they think they really are???*



They think they are _world _leaders of leaders.

Any other people thinking the same would be met with serious intervention(s). _They_ are allowed to spread their delusions, _and_ are often supported for doing so. Which goes to show you if you are convinced enough by your own madness (that word is used literally and advisedly) there will be people that'll be convinced by your manner, even if not your deeds/words.


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> OK, but that's not a christening



They’ll have the “real” christening in the garden, 3 days before the one they’ll show photographic glimpses of that somehow get leaked to the public.


----------



## nyshopaholic

csshopper said:


> And speaking of PR hacks, where's Scoobie lately. Has he been Markled?



Ask and you shall receive!









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry excel in 'moments of human interaction — they need to be on the ground,' Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie tells PEOPLE in this week's issue




					people.com
				



(Copied and pasted so as not to give People magazine any more article clicks.) By Simon Perry

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are ready to take their next steps back into an intentionally public life.

With their parental leave coming to an end, they are preparing for a busy fall and winter as many of the programs they've been working on behind the scenes kick into action.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — who welcomed baby Lilibet Diana (a little sister for brother Archie, 2) in June — are entering "the era of visibility," *Omid Scobie* tells PEOPLE. Scobie co-authored_ Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which will be republished in paperback on August 31 with a new epilogue that's excerpted in this week's issue.

The couple are "really excited" about what is ahead, including working directly with causes aligned with their interests and expanding their in-person charity work through the Archewell Foundation.

"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," says Scobie, who wrote the book with fellow longtime royal reporter Carolyn Durand. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."

_Finding Freedom_, which was published last summer, had chronicled the Sussexes' whirlwind courtship and the mounting tensions that ultimately led Harry, 36, and Meghan, 40, to leave the U.K. and carve a groundbreaking path outside of royal duty.

Now, aided by the financial freedom secured by their multimillion-dollar streaming, speaking and publishing deals, the couple's energy follows a period of turmoil amid their formal departure from life as working royalsand the controversies stemming from the couple's interview with Oprah Winfrey this past March.

One of the key lessons they have learned these past months is to prioritize their mental health and keep "some of the toxicity" at an arm's — and ocean's — length away.

"They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier," Scobie tells PEOPLE. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive — we are now in the thrive chapter."

With the empathy and action they hope will define their legacy, the couple shared a very personal note on the Archewell Foundation site on Tuesday.

"Though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it," they wrote of several generation-defining struggles happening in the world right now. "It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action — together."

Urging followers and leaders alike to recognize and ease others' suffering, they concluded, "the decisions we make now … will prove our humanity."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry excel in 'moments of human interaction — they need to be on the ground,' Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie tells PEOPLE in this week's issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Copied and pasted so as not to give People magazine any more article clicks.) By Simon Perry
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are ready to take their next steps back into an intentionally public life.
> 
> With their parental leave coming to an end, they are preparing for a busy fall and winter as many of the programs they've been working on behind the scenes kick into action.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — who welcomed baby Lilibet Diana (a little sister for brother Archie, 2) in June — are entering "the era of visibility," *Omid Scobie* tells PEOPLE. Scobie co-authored_ Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which will be republished in paperback on August 31 with a new epilogue that's excerpted in this week's issue.
> 
> The couple are "really excited" about what is ahead, including working directly with causes aligned with their interests and expanding their in-person charity work through the Archewell Foundation.
> 
> "They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," says Scobie, who wrote the book with fellow longtime royal reporter Carolyn Durand. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."
> 
> _Finding Freedom_, which was published last summer, had chronicled the Sussexes' whirlwind courtship and the mounting tensions that ultimately led Harry, 36, and Meghan, 40, to leave the U.K. and carve a groundbreaking path outside of royal duty.
> 
> Now, aided by the financial freedom secured by their multimillion-dollar streaming, speaking and publishing deals, the couple's energy follows a period of turmoil amid their formal departure from life as working royalsand the controversies stemming from the couple's interview with Oprah Winfrey this past March.
> 
> One of the key lessons they have learned these past months is to prioritize their mental health and keep "some of the toxicity" at an arm's — and ocean's — length away.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier," Scobie tells PEOPLE. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive — we are now in the thrive chapter."
> 
> With the empathy and action they hope will define their legacy, the couple shared a very personal note on the Archewell Foundation site on Tuesday.
> 
> "Though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it," they wrote of several generation-defining struggles happening in the world right now. "It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action — together."
> 
> Urging followers and leaders alike to recognize and ease others' suffering, they concluded, "the decisions we make now … will prove our humanity."


What load of bollox bullcrap!  Pure comedy!


----------



## youngster

nyshopaholic said:


> Ask and you shall receive!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry excel in 'moments of human interaction — they need to be on the ground,' Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie tells PEOPLE in this week's issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Copied and pasted so as not to give People magazine any more article clicks.) By Simon Perry
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are ready to take their next steps back into an intentionally public life.
> 
> With their parental leave coming to an end, they are preparing for a busy fall and winter as many of the programs they've been working on behind the scenes kick into action.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — who welcomed baby Lilibet Diana (a little sister for brother Archie, 2) in June — are entering "the era of visibility," *Omid Scobie* tells PEOPLE. Scobie co-authored_ Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which will be republished in paperback on August 31 with a new epilogue that's excerpted in this week's issue.
> 
> The couple are "really excited" about what is ahead, including working directly with causes aligned with their interests and expanding their in-person charity work through the Archewell Foundation.
> 
> "They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," says Scobie, who wrote the book with fellow longtime royal reporter Carolyn Durand. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."
> 
> _Finding Freedom_, which was published last summer, had chronicled the Sussexes' whirlwind courtship and the mounting tensions that ultimately led Harry, 36, and Meghan, 40, to leave the U.K. and carve a groundbreaking path outside of royal duty.
> 
> Now, aided by the financial freedom secured by their multimillion-dollar streaming, speaking and publishing deals, the couple's energy follows a period of turmoil amid their formal departure from life as working royalsand the controversies stemming from the couple's interview with Oprah Winfrey this past March.
> 
> One of the key lessons they have learned these past months is to prioritize their mental health and keep "some of the toxicity" at an arm's — and ocean's — length away.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier," Scobie tells PEOPLE. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive — we are now in the thrive chapter."
> 
> With the empathy and action they hope will define their legacy, the couple shared a very personal note on the Archewell Foundation site on Tuesday.
> 
> "Though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it," they wrote of several generation-defining struggles happening in the world right now. "It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action — together."
> 
> Urging followers and leaders alike to recognize and ease others' suffering, they concluded, "the decisions we make now … will prove our humanity."



Oh no, they think they haven't been "visible"?  We're going to see _more _of them in the coming months?   Is the world not "exceptionally fragile"?  Are they not "scared" for the future as they just stated yesterday?  I keep thinking these two can't look more ridiculous and they keep proving me wrong.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Well… now the couple has spoken on the subject, everything will go back to normal… right?  (/sarc)
> 
> Another statement showing their inflated egos and self-importance.  No one needs their lectures right now.


I swear, it's like they publicize every fleeting thought in their head.

Can't imagine how boring my tweets would be:

7 am:  "I should really eat better, so that I'm around longer for my kids!"

7:02 am:  "Oooh, look, a breakfast sandwich!  Diet starts tomorrow, since after all, I'm only living once.  Unless I get reincarnated...I wonder if that's real?"

7:03:  "It's so important to have faith in times like this..."

7:03 and 5 seconds:  "I wonder what bonehead things Meg has said now?"

7:03 and 10 seconds:  "OMG, I haven't checked tPF today...Gasp!  35 notifications?!!?"


----------



## purseinsanity

chicinthecity777 said:


> What load of bollox bullcrap!  Pure comedy!


*Meghan and Harry's 'Thrive Chapter': Why the Sussexes Are Excited to Enter a New 'Era of Visibility'*

Ummm, for real?  Are they implying they've been "Invisible" thus far??


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> *Meghan and Harry's 'Thrive Chapter': Why the Sussexes Are Excited to Enter a New 'Era of Visibility'*
> 
> Ummm, for real?  Are they implying they've been "Invisible" thus far??


I don’t think my eyes and ears can stand much more of them!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I think it is so funny that whenever they come out with these press releases, they are laughed at by so many.  Aren't they embarrassed?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh boy, we’re back to their “behind the scenes” work story.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> Oh no, they think they haven't been "visible"?  We're going to see _more _of them in the coming months?   Is the world not "exceptionally fragile"?  Are they not "scared" for the future as they just stated yesterday?  I keep thinking these two can't look more ridiculous and they keep proving me wrong.


If only they could remain "speechless"...


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> My problem of all of their statements is that they always ask other people to do things! As if they are the leaders of leaders or something. Who do they think they really are???


Didn’t Oprah do that too when her show was on. Donors gave her huge sums of money for her angel charity, but she always got the credit. Or am I wrong?


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm over her. I thought she had good points at first, but then I found a video from four months back where she INSISTS Kate is pregnant which should be a pretty simple thing to determine if you're worth your salt. Well, four months later and that pregnancy doesn't exist.
> 
> And then in this video she once again goes on and on about the adoption of the baby when that makes no sense whatsoever under California surrogacy law which she would know if she'd simply google.


Oh, thanks. Someone sent me that video and I was bored so I watched it, but I really felt there wasn’t anything new and now you’ve discredited her so I’m done. lol


----------



## xincinsin

nyshopaholic said:


> Ask and you shall receive!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry excel in 'moments of human interaction — they need to be on the ground,' Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie tells PEOPLE in this week's issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Copied and pasted so as not to give People magazine any more article clicks.) By Simon Perry
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are ready to take their next steps back into an intentionally public life.
> 
> With their parental leave coming to an end, they are preparing for a busy fall and winter as many of the programs they've been working on behind the scenes kick into action.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — who welcomed baby Lilibet Diana (a little sister for brother Archie, 2) in June — are entering "the era of visibility," *Omid Scobie* tells PEOPLE. Scobie co-authored_ Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which will be republished in paperback on August 31 with a new epilogue that's excerpted in this week's issue.
> 
> The couple are "really excited" about what is ahead, including working directly with causes aligned with their interests and expanding their in-person charity work through the Archewell Foundation.
> 
> "They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," says Scobie, who wrote the book with fellow longtime royal reporter Carolyn Durand. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."
> 
> _Finding Freedom_, which was published last summer, had chronicled the Sussexes' whirlwind courtship and the mounting tensions that ultimately led Harry, 36, and Meghan, 40, to leave the U.K. and carve a groundbreaking path outside of royal duty.
> 
> Now, aided by the financial freedom secured by their multimillion-dollar streaming, speaking and publishing deals, the couple's energy follows a period of turmoil amid their formal departure from life as working royalsand the controversies stemming from the couple's interview with Oprah Winfrey this past March.
> 
> One of the key lessons they have learned these past months is to prioritize their mental health and keep "some of the toxicity" at an arm's — and ocean's — length away.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier," Scobie tells PEOPLE. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive — we are now in the thrive chapter."
> 
> With the empathy and action they hope will define their legacy, the couple shared a very personal note on the Archewell Foundation site on Tuesday.
> 
> "Though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it," they wrote of several generation-defining struggles happening in the world right now. "It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action — together."
> 
> Urging followers and leaders alike to recognize and ease others' suffering, they concluded, "the decisions we make now … will prove our humanity."


Extremely poorly written. Surely, despite the lousy word salad given as the source material, a better article could have been put together. Most of the sentences don't even make sense.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m still waiting for the pudding.


----------



## sdkitty

nyshopaholic said:


> Ask and you shall receive!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry excel in 'moments of human interaction — they need to be on the ground,' Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie tells PEOPLE in this week's issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Copied and pasted so as not to give People magazine any more article clicks.) By Simon Perry
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are ready to take their next steps back into an intentionally public life.
> 
> With their parental leave coming to an end, they are preparing for a busy fall and winter as many of the programs they've been working on behind the scenes kick into action.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — who welcomed baby Lilibet Diana (a little sister for brother Archie, 2) in June — are entering "the era of visibility," *Omid Scobie* tells PEOPLE. Scobie co-authored_ Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which will be republished in paperback on August 31 with a new epilogue that's excerpted in this week's issue.
> 
> The couple are "really excited" about what is ahead, including working directly with causes aligned with their interests and expanding their in-person charity work through the Archewell Foundation.
> 
> "They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," says Scobie, who wrote the book with fellow longtime royal reporter Carolyn Durand. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."
> 
> _Finding Freedom_, which was published last summer, had chronicled the Sussexes' whirlwind courtship and the mounting tensions that ultimately led Harry, 36, and Meghan, 40, to leave the U.K. and carve a groundbreaking path outside of royal duty.
> 
> Now, aided by the financial freedom secured by their multimillion-dollar streaming, speaking and publishing deals, the couple's energy follows a period of turmoil amid their formal departure from life as working royalsand the controversies stemming from the couple's interview with Oprah Winfrey this past March.
> 
> One of the key lessons they have learned these past months is to prioritize their mental health and keep "some of the toxicity" at an arm's — and ocean's — length away.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier," Scobie tells PEOPLE. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive — we are now in the thrive chapter."
> 
> With the empathy and action they hope will define their legacy, the couple shared a very personal note on the Archewell Foundation site on Tuesday.
> 
> "Though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it," they wrote of several generation-defining struggles happening in the world right now. "It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action — together."
> 
> Urging followers and leaders alike to recognize and ease others' suffering, they concluded, "the decisions we make now … will prove our humanity."


she's in the "thrive" chapter....how wonderful for her


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, it's like they publicize every fleeting thought in their head.
> 
> Can't imagine how boring my tweets would be:
> 
> 7 am:  "I should really eat better, so that I'm around longer for my kids!"
> 
> 7:02 am:  "Oooh, look, a breakfast sandwich!  Diet starts tomorrow, since after all, I'm only living once.  Unless I get reincarnated...I wonder if that's real?"
> 
> 7:03:  "It's so important to have faith in times like this..."
> 
> 7:03 and 5 seconds:  "I wonder what bonehead things Meg has said now?"
> 
> 7:03 and 10 seconds:  "OMG, I haven't checked tPF today...Gasp!  35 notifications?!!?"


  that's hilarious


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> Didn’t Oprah do that too when her show was on. Donors gave her huge sums of money for her angel charity, but she always got the credit. Or am I wrong?


I know this might be more of a question to all people in this thread. Personally I don't follow Oprah and her career, the only thing I knew about her was that she was a talk-show host, a billionaire and previously have been "mis-treated" by Hermes (allegedly).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Why, oh why, doesn't _People_ allow you to comment on articles anymore?

"The Lessons They Learned," what a joke. As near as I can tell they have learned nothing.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Why, oh why, doesn't _People_ allow you to comment on articles anymore?
> 
> "The Lessons They Learned," what a joke. As near as I can tell they have learned nothing.


I wonder if they really feel like they are role models or if it's an act.  I think she probably does think she is something special and we can all benefit from what she has to say


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if they really feel like they are role models or if it's an act.  I think she probably does think she is something special and we can all benefit from what she has to say



She is so full of self-importance I'm sure she believes she knows what is best for everyone. Like any egomaniac she thinks she's the smartest person in any room.

Harry is along for the ride. He'll believe whatever she tells him.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> *Meghan and Harry's 'Thrive Chapter': Why the Sussexes Are Excited to Enter a New 'Era of Visibility'*
> 
> Ummm, for real?  Are they implying they've been "Invisible" thus far??



And just as most of the World would like them to disappear


----------



## Sol Ryan

Hehe…









						America’s Royal Baby Is Born
					

It’s a bouncing baby Jost!




					www.vulture.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> All the credit belongs to Piers! (and Raptor came from that Secrets site)


No worries, since this quest involves mostly searching for and retrieving nicknames for the disastrous duo, we take credit for our own inventions and otherwise acknowledge whoever coined them.


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> To see who pays who alimony/maintenance, it will be the chief earner at the time of the breakup.


So....Chimpo then?!? 



nyshopaholic said:


> "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."


Oh goody, an old mouldy megxit pudding from two years ago....


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> And just as most of the World would like them to disappear


Be compassionate, forgive Omid for the goopy thrive update, he is just trying to get back in the news himself before the launch of the revised edition of his book.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I love the name "*Moaning Markle*." It fits our whiner so well.


I'm sorry I missed your post the first time around. Indeed as you say, M is a total whiner. Thanks for the nickname and here's your star.


----------



## bag-mania

It is always someone else's fault. Meghan and Harry are never to blame. Apparently they think if they keep shouting that from the rooftops people will believe it.

*'Royals need to take ownership of Sussex race row': Harry and Meghan's friends take aim at Queen's 'recollections may vary' response to Oprah interview*

*Harry and Meghan 'believe Queen did not take ''full ownership'' of allegations made during Oprah interview' *
*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the allegations *
*Harry and Meghan reeled off string of claims, including allegations of racism and mental health struggles  *
*Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan are entering 'era of visibility' and 'are existing in a different place'  *

Harry and Meghan today poured fuel on the flames of their public feud with Buckingham Palace as friends claim the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the incendiary allegations of racism made during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the claims made during the extraordinary television interview, which was broadcast in March this year and watched by millions of people around the world. 

During the interview, the couple reeled off a string of allegations, including conversations between Harry and a member of the Royal Family about their then unborn son Archie and what colour his skin might be - and 'what that would mean or look like'. 

The Queen responded with a statement 36 hours after the extraordinary interview, saying she was 'saddened by the claims' but that 'some recollections may vary'. 

In a new chapter of Finding Freedom featured in People magazine, authors Omid Scobie - a trusted contact of the Sussexes - and Carolyn Durand say the couple believe the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.

The couple, who live in an £11million mansion in California after quitting royal life last year, apparently believe that the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since. 

During the interview, Meghan alleged that Archie was not made a prince after 'concerns and conversations' about 'how dark' his skin would be when he was born. She went on to claim that she was left feeling suicidal after joining the Royal Family but did not receive help.  

In an extract of the new chapter, Mr Scobie and Ms Durand say the comment 'did not go unnoticed'. They write: 'The Queen's 'recollections may vary' comment 'did not go unnoticed by the couple, who a close source said were 'not surprised' that full ownership was not taken. 'Months later and little accountability has been taken', a pal of Meghan added. 'How can you move forward with that?''

Buckingham Palace has not issued any update beyond its initial statement on the matter. They said at the time: 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.

'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.'









						Harry and Meghan take aim at Queen's response to Oprah interview
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'now in the thrive chapter' of their life as they plan to restart more in-person charity work with their Archewell Foundation, according to biographer Omid Scobie.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm sorry I missed your post the first time around. Indeed as you say, M is a total whiner. Thanks for the nickname and here's your star.
> View attachment 5168673



Aw, thank you! I cannot claim responsibility for creating that name however. I do love it though, it fits her so well.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> It is always someone else's fault. Meghan and Harry are never to blame. Apparently they think if they keep shouting that from the rooftops people will believe it.
> 
> *'Royals need to take ownership of Sussex race row': Harry and Meghan's friends take aim at Queen's 'recollections may vary' response to Oprah interview*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan 'believe Queen did not take ''full ownership'' of allegations made during Oprah interview' *
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the allegations *
> *Harry and Meghan reeled off string of claims, including allegations of racism and mental health struggles  *
> *Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan are entering 'era of visibility' and 'are existing in a different place'  *
> 
> Harry and Meghan today poured fuel on the flames of their public feud with Buckingham Palace as friends claim the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the incendiary allegations of racism made during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the claims made during the extraordinary television interview, which was broadcast in March this year and watched by millions of people around the world.
> 
> During the interview, the couple reeled off a string of allegations, including conversations between Harry and a member of the Royal Family about their then unborn son Archie and what colour his skin might be - and 'what that would mean or look like'.
> 
> The Queen responded with a statement 36 hours after the extraordinary interview, saying she was 'saddened by the claims' but that 'some recollections may vary'.
> 
> In a new chapter of Finding Freedom featured in People magazine, authors Omid Scobie - a trusted contact of the Sussexes - and Carolyn Durand say the couple believe the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.
> 
> The couple, who live in an £11million mansion in California after quitting royal life last year, apparently believe that the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.
> 
> During the interview, Meghan alleged that Archie was not made a prince after 'concerns and conversations' about 'how dark' his skin would be when he was born. She went on to claim that she was left feeling suicidal after joining the Royal Family but did not receive help.
> 
> In an extract of the new chapter, Mr Scobie and Ms Durand say the comment 'did not go unnoticed'. They write: 'The Queen's 'recollections may vary' comment 'did not go unnoticed by the couple, who a close source said were 'not surprised' that full ownership was not taken. 'Months later and little accountability has been taken', a pal of Meghan added. 'How can you move forward with that?''
> 
> Buckingham Palace has not issued any update beyond its initial statement on the matter. They said at the time: 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> 'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan take aim at Queen's response to Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'now in the thrive chapter' of their life as they plan to restart more in-person charity work with their Archewell Foundation, according to biographer Omid Scobie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Whatever


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is always someone else's fault. Meghan and Harry are never to blame. Apparently they think if they keep shouting that from the rooftops people will believe it.
> 
> *'Royals need to take ownership of Sussex race row': Harry and Meghan's friends take aim at Queen's 'recollections may vary' response to Oprah interview*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan 'believe Queen did not take ''full ownership'' of allegations made during Oprah interview' *
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the allegations *
> *Harry and Meghan reeled off string of claims, including allegations of racism and mental health struggles  *
> *Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan are entering 'era of visibility' and 'are existing in a different place'  *
> 
> Harry and Meghan today poured fuel on the flames of their public feud with Buckingham Palace as friends claim the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the incendiary allegations of racism made during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the claims made during the extraordinary television interview, which was broadcast in March this year and watched by millions of people around the world.
> 
> During the interview, the couple reeled off a string of allegations, including conversations between Harry and a member of the Royal Family about their then unborn son Archie and what colour his skin might be - and 'what that would mean or look like'.
> 
> The Queen responded with a statement 36 hours after the extraordinary interview, saying she was 'saddened by the claims' but that 'some recollections may vary'.
> 
> In a new chapter of Finding Freedom featured in People magazine, authors Omid Scobie - a trusted contact of the Sussexes - and Carolyn Durand say the couple believe the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.
> 
> The couple, who live in an £11million mansion in California after quitting royal life last year, apparently believe that the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.
> 
> During the interview, Meghan alleged that Archie was not made a prince after 'concerns and conversations' about 'how dark' his skin would be when he was born. She went on to claim that she was left feeling suicidal after joining the Royal Family but did not receive help.
> 
> In an extract of the new chapter, Mr Scobie and Ms Durand say the comment 'did not go unnoticed'. They write: 'The Queen's 'recollections may vary' comment 'did not go unnoticed by the couple, who a close source said were 'not surprised' that full ownership was not taken. 'Months later and little accountability has been taken', a pal of Meghan added. 'How can you move forward with that?''
> 
> Buckingham Palace has not issued any update beyond its initial statement on the matter. They said at the time: 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> 'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan take aim at Queen's response to Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'now in the thrive chapter' of their life as they plan to restart more in-person charity work with their Archewell Foundation, according to biographer Omid Scobie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She is so full of self-importance I'm sure she believes she knows what is best for everyone. Like any egomaniac she thinks she's the smartest person in any room.
> 
> Harry is along for the ride. He'll believe whatever she tells him.


and also I think the new-found fame she got when the just happened to fall in love with a prince is so intoxicating she will do anything to try to keep it.  apparently she's decided that acting isn't gonna do it so being "woke" or whatever you call it is her tool


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Whatever



This is just an extension of their current tantrum behaviour.  It’s clear the RF have iced them out.  And have proven they don’t need M and H.  So MM’s PR efforts are getting more and more desperate to get ANY response from the RF...like a toddler tantrum.

I rather suspect RF aren’t taking M and H calls, and everything goes via staff or lawyers.

This latest PR follows the ridiculous christening story, the hints about coming back to the UK, the hints about being invited to platinum jubilee etc.  Now they are back to racism claims because the Queens “recollections may vary” was the RF Final public say in the matter… and it didn’t get the traction that MM so desperately wanted.

I hope the RF continues the ice out strategy.  It doesn’t give them any fuel to make stories and continue their PR Onslaught.  

meanwhile the penny hasnt dropped in Montecito that the PR strategy isn’t working and MM is…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan's friends?  Plural?  I think it is just friend.

They are very foolish to attempt an attack on the Windsors or The Queen.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry and Meghan's friends?  Plural?  I think it is just friend.
> 
> They are very foolish to attempt an attack on the Windsors or The Queen.


their arrogance truly knows no bounds


----------



## needlv

Gotta ask though - who was pressuring her?  Is this blaming a staffer???


----------



## Tootsie17

Chanbal said:


>



That video is hilarious!  Thank you for the great chuckles.


----------



## Tootsie17

Katel said:


> ask and ... well, you know
> <warning - vulgar for pearl clutchers>
> 
> 
> also



I LOVE this guy! His videos are so well edited. Thanks for sharing with us.


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> Gotta ask though - who was pressuring her?  Is this blaming a staffer???






Financial pressure?


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Gotta ask though - who was pressuring her?  Is this blaming a staffer???



Was Harry pressuring her because he can't string words in the right order to write it himself?  

Going after the Royals kind of reminds me of nuisance law suits.  Sometimes people institute them just to get attention.  I wonder if that is partially what is going on here.  One part just to say something controversial to stay in the media and the other part to  poke the family.  Even though there are some comments from the Sussex camp that will now be addressed by BP, there are others that they won't stoop down to answer. The Sussex have sunk so low that you really have to bend over to reach down to them.


----------



## bag-mania

I cannot believe anyone was pressuring them to comment. They didn’t get the positive reaction they were hoping to get with their dumb statement so saying they were pushed into it is how they absolve themselves of responsibility.


----------



## poopsie

I couldn't find the link to the blind item. Not sure which statement they are referring to. They make so many


----------



## Vintage Leather

lulilu said:


> Queen of wrap dress beat me to it, Vintage Leather.  Your draft statement is perfect.  They would do well to hire you to write public statements for them.  Perfectly balanced.  No word salad.  Meaningful.



Thank you so very much. In a past life, I did social media management and copywriting. And the Markles are a master class in What Not to Do and How to Destroy a Brand.

If I was their brand manager, they’d probably fire me within a month, because they seem to lack the two essential skills you need to thrive. Patience and vision. They need results and attention NOW, instead of when it would benefit them. 

They needed to sit down three years ago and figure out what their core values are. What is the mission of their brand. 

For example, Kate is: Kids, Sports, Photography and Portraits. Her charities, her public speeches, the groups she spearheaded all fall in those three categories.  William is: Sports, Mental Health, Conservation and Emergency Personnel. Princess Diana was: Gay rights and the AIDS epidemic, world health, Homeless Teens. 

Back 5 years ago, Prince Harry’s brand was: Veterans, Mental Health, and Sports.
He established himself as an authority on those topics, and a bit reckless regarding everything else.

Megan didn’t really establish her values. If I was picking for her, I’d pick racial justice, acting, and if she was serious about wanting to be the next Diana, trans and gay rights (controversial but she can argue and have friction with the BRF because she believes that human rights should not be political). They had six charities as wedding charities but … they aren’t consistent and don’t fit with previous or subsequent actions. Like - Surfers against sewage? Are either of them surfers?



But whatever you establish your self as, that’s an area where you can be considered an “expert.” If only because as a member of the BRF, you have a lot of access to people and causes. When you start talking about things outside your core values, you are talking about things you haven’t established credentials in. So you either need to get hard credentials fast (aka, talk about the tough things like why you wore a Nazi uniform and how you feel about it now) or your brand is that you are an idiot who likes to hear themselves speak. Guess what they picked?


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> I know this might be more of a question to all people in this thread. Personally I don't follow Oprah and her career, the only thing I knew about her was that she was a talk-show host, a billionaire and previously have been "mis-treated" by Hermes (allegedly).


Oprah started her Oprah Angel Network, a charity. She encouraged her viewers to donate to it, so she could spend it and make a difference in the lives of others. 

Of course her viewers and fans donated, but so did some big celebrities and they would come on her show with huge cheques for her.

Oprah got a lot of press and accolades for this. When her show ended, I think she spent the last of it and ceased operation.


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> Well this is not true.  Poor MM - she wasn’t invited to a former presidents party and her 40x40 was a flop… so now she is getting her PR to release a statement about how she is close to Catherine?  Haha… pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate Are ‘Closer Than Ever’ After Rocky Year
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton’s relationship has been up and down amid their husbands, Prince Harry and Prince William, ongoing feud — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com





That is laughable! MM showing her desperation right there.

Meanwhile Catherine is like:






Chanbal said:


> In contrast to Om*d, Angela Levin is considered by many to be a respected royal expert. Her comments  about the Madame of Montecito agree with what we have been observing here at TPF imo.
> _The royal expert went on to say that the *Duchess of Sussex 'desperately wanted' to be among those in attendance.*
> 'I am told that *despite claiming she was unable to attend, Meghan desperately wanted to be the special guest at the *****'s amazing party*,' she said. 'But the fact is, Harry and Meghan were never even on the original list.'_










needlv said:


> Um…. No….
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle boasts best voice to calm listeners, expert says
> 
> 
> Natalie Eastwood, a vocal rehabilitation expert for performing experts, said the Duchess of Sussex, 39, can soothe audiences with her confident Californian accent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





I would rather listen to nails on a chalkboard on repeat than listen to her croaky, monotone voice speaking word salad.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Low bun
> View attachment 5163115
> 
> If this style is sending a ‘_taking something seriously_’ message, Tom needs a vacation.
> A good lesson for all: celebrity stylists may not be our friend





Hey Tom, maybe you should give up the day job?





purseinsanity said:


> The thirstiness knows no bounds:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Duchess Kate May Collaborate on a Netflix Project
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reached out to sister-in-law Kate Middleton about working together on a new venture — exclusive details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


The Cambridges:






needlv said:


> Does anyone want to speak to him?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to return to UK with film crew
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is set to return to the UK... With a film crew in tow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Someone needs to tell him:







jehaga said:


> An exercise in futility in trying to understand this statement:
> 
> 1. *Tell stories* (utilize the power of storytelling) *to emphasize the fact that we are all humans* (to embrace our shared humanity) *and our obligation to a cruelty-free reality *(and duty to truth through a compassionate lens).
> 
> Or,
> 
> 2. *Tell stories *(utilize the power of storytelling) *that are not cruel *(through a compassionate lens) *to celebrate our sameness *(to embrace our shared humanity) *and our obligation to honesty *(and duty to truth).
> 
> Or,
> 
> 3. *Tell happy tales *(utilize the power of storytelling through a compassionate lens) *to group hug *(to embrace our shared humanity) *and don’t lie *(and duty to truth).
> 
> Or,
> 
> 
> View attachment 5165128


----------



## xincinsin

Vintage Leather said:


> *They needed to sit down three years ago and figure out what their core values are. What is the mission of their brand.*


ITA
They seem to think putting out an ambiguous airy-fairy Archewell mission statement will cover all bases. And their scatter-shot approach to taking up causes means they jump on whatever is the latest shiniest bandwagon. 

When I read this statement in the People article, I was howling with laughter. Quotation marks are usually used to indicate a direct quote of significance. "Really excited" is significant for a toddler expecting a new toy. Causes aligned with their interests? Their interests are all over the shop with no focus. "In-person charity work" just equates to photo ops for them.
_The couple are "*really excited*" about what is ahead, including working directly with *causes aligned with their interests* and expanding their *in-person charity work* through the Archewell Foundation._


----------



## sdkitty

Sol Ryan said:


> Hehe…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> America’s Royal Baby Is Born
> 
> 
> It’s a bouncing baby Jost!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vulture.com


where do the get the headline?  she's a famous movie actress and he's on SNL....how does this equal royalty?  Nice for them and I hope they will be happy but I think this is her third husband so I doubt she'll stick with him for long.  Hopefully I'm wrong.


----------



## mellibelly

Just read a great nickname on a YouTube comment...Smirk and Jerk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sol Ryan

sdkitty said:


> where do the get the headline?  she's a famous movie actress and he's on SNL....how does this equal royalty?  Nice for them and I hope they will be happy but I think this is her third husband so I doubt she'll stick with him for long.  Hopefully I'm wrong.



I just thought it would annoy the duo in montecito…lol


----------



## rose60610

The day H&M do anything worthwhile, well, then that really WOULD make headlines. "Harry and Meghan Finally Discover Constructive Action". That would generate hundreds of millions of clicks. People would have to see it to believe it. Don't hold your breath.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It is always someone else's fault. Meghan and Harry are never to blame. Apparently they think if they keep shouting that from the rooftops people will believe it.
> 
> *'Royals need to take ownership of Sussex race row': Harry and Meghan's friends take aim at Queen's 'recollections may vary' response to Oprah interview*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan 'believe Queen did not take ''full ownership'' of allegations made during Oprah interview' *
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the allegations *
> *Harry and Meghan reeled off string of claims, including allegations of racism and mental health struggles  *
> *Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan are entering 'era of visibility' and 'are existing in a different place'  *
> 
> Harry and Meghan today poured fuel on the flames of their public feud with Buckingham Palace as friends claim the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the incendiary allegations of racism made during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly not impressed with the way the Palace handled the claims made during the extraordinary television interview, which was broadcast in March this year and watched by millions of people around the world.
> 
> During the interview, the couple reeled off a string of allegations, including conversations between Harry and a member of the Royal Family about their then unborn son Archie and what colour his skin might be - and 'what that would mean or look like'.
> 
> The Queen responded with a statement 36 hours after the extraordinary interview, saying she was 'saddened by the claims' but that 'some recollections may vary'.
> 
> In a new chapter of Finding Freedom featured in People magazine, authors Omid Scobie - a trusted contact of the Sussexes - and Carolyn Durand say the couple believe the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.
> 
> The couple, who live in an £11million mansion in California after quitting royal life last year, apparently believe that the Queen did not take 'full ownership' of the issues raised and that 'little' has been done since.
> 
> During the interview, Meghan alleged that Archie was not made a prince after 'concerns and conversations' about 'how dark' his skin would be when he was born. She went on to claim that she was left feeling suicidal after joining the Royal Family but did not receive help.
> 
> In an extract of the new chapter, Mr Scobie and Ms Durand say the comment 'did not go unnoticed'. They write: 'The Queen's 'recollections may vary' comment 'did not go unnoticed by the couple, who a close source said were 'not surprised' that full ownership was not taken. 'Months later and little accountability has been taken', a pal of Meghan added. 'How can you move forward with that?''
> 
> Buckingham Palace has not issued any update beyond its initial statement on the matter. They said at the time: 'The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> 'The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately. Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan take aim at Queen's response to Oprah interview
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'now in the thrive chapter' of their life as they plan to restart more in-person charity work with their Archewell Foundation, according to biographer Omid Scobie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So good to see they went straight from such concern about Afghanistan, Haiti, etc., to stomping their feet screaming, "Why was Archie not made a prince?!"


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> ITA
> They seem to think putting out an ambiguous airy-fairy Archewell mission statement will cover all bases. And their scatter-shot approach to taking up causes means they jump on whatever is the latest shiniest bandwagon.
> 
> When I read this statement in the People article, I was howling with laughter. Quotation marks are usually used to indicate a direct quote of significance. "Really excited" is significant for a toddler expecting a new toy. Causes aligned with their interests? Their interests are all over the shop with no focus. "In-person charity work" just equates to photo ops for them.
> _The couple are "*really excited*" about what is ahead, including working directly with *causes aligned with their interests* and expanding their *in-person charity work* through the Archewell Foundation._




So agree...so far their "in-person charity work" seems to involve spending up to about an hour hands-on -- delivering food, planting flowers, whatever other thing they latch on to.  Having done that once,they drift on to something different and never even circle back.  If they selected 1 or 2, maybe 3 charities each and really worked with them, dropped in say weekly to participate hands-on, attend board meetings, whatever.  Educate themselves about the challenges and the goals of the charities they work with.  Just be a part of the damned thing.  Instead, they do a drive-by have the photog that they hired snap a pic and off they are to go home and look for things to be insulted by.

What a miserable duo they are!!


----------



## Luvbolide

Charles needs to start having Cheerios for breakfast - he is going to have a rough ride here for at least the next 18 months or so.  He is going to have to get some control over his lunatic son (and - well, Smirk and Jerk) and he is going to have to force his unimpressive and arrogant brother into a small box.  No talking any more from any of them!  I cant help but wonder how much of this BS Philip would have put up with.  OTOH - Charles is what 75 or something?  He should have had enough practice by now to exert some control and leadership by now himself.  I would hate to see the Queen's Jubilee drown in a sea of scandal/lawsuits/accusations...ugh...


----------



## Chanbal

Spoof listing for Frogmore Cottage. 











						Harry & Meg mocked in spoof listing for '£5k-a-month' Frogmore
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle have been mocked in a spoof listing for Frogmore Cottage. A Facebook prankster has advertised the couple’s UK home as available for rent at £5,000 a month ̵…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## creme fraiche

I do hope the BBC is trolling the Sussex duo; I woke up this morning and switched on Radio 4's morning news show (equivalent to Morning Edition on NPR in the US, but more official) only to hear the headline news that Harry and Meghan are slagging off the Queen about her inadequate response to their Oprah interview - this just 2 minutes after updates on the situation in Afganistan.  Surely any sensible being's response to the juxtaposition of these 2 "news" items is "your having a laugh!".

They look more desperate and silly with every PR release.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




In this case though, silence would have been golden.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Icyjade said:


> I read this word salad and felt a bit sick. They nauseate me. How does it even help? What a load of B/S.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan say they're speechless about Afghanistan
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have broken their silence on the situation in Afghanistan to say they are 'speechless'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Who was waiting for them to break their silence of Afghanistan?
It’d be like waiting for spongebob squarepants to comment on the Dow Jones.



nyshopaholic said:


> Ask and you shall receive!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry excel in 'moments of human interaction — they need to be on the ground,' Finding Freedom co-author Omid Scobie tells PEOPLE in this week's issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Copied and pasted so as not to give People magazine any more article clicks.) By Simon Perry
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are ready to take their next steps back into an intentionally public life.
> 
> With their parental leave coming to an end, they are preparing for a busy fall and winter as many of the programs they've been working on behind the scenes kick into action.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex — who welcomed baby Lilibet Diana (a little sister for brother Archie, 2) in June — are entering "the era of visibility," *Omid Scobie* tells PEOPLE. Scobie co-authored_ Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family_, which will be republished in paperback on August 31 with a new epilogue that's excerpted in this week's issue.
> 
> The couple are "really excited" about what is ahead, including working directly with causes aligned with their interests and expanding their in-person charity work through the Archewell Foundation.
> 
> "They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," says Scobie, who wrote the book with fellow longtime royal reporter Carolyn Durand. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and what we are about to see is that pudding."
> 
> _Finding Freedom_, which was published last summer, had chronicled the Sussexes' whirlwind courtship and the mounting tensions that ultimately led Harry, 36, and Meghan, 40, to leave the U.K. and carve a groundbreaking path outside of royal duty.
> 
> Now, aided by the financial freedom secured by their multimillion-dollar streaming, speaking and publishing deals, the couple's energy follows a period of turmoil amid their formal departure from life as working royalsand the controversies stemming from the couple's interview with Oprah Winfrey this past March.
> 
> One of the key lessons they have learned these past months is to prioritize their mental health and keep "some of the toxicity" at an arm's — and ocean's — length away.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier," Scobie tells PEOPLE. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive — we are now in the thrive chapter."
> 
> With the empathy and action they hope will define their legacy, the couple shared a very personal note on the Archewell Foundation site on Tuesday.
> 
> "Though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it," they wrote of several generation-defining struggles happening in the world right now. "It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action — together."
> 
> Urging followers and leaders alike to recognize and ease others' suffering, they concluded, "the decisions we make now … will prove our humanity."


Oh crap no one say his name again!

This is not The Candyman reboot I was hoping for…


----------



## periogirl28

jelliedfeels said:


> *Who was waiting for them to break their silence of Afghanistan?
> It’d be like waiting for spongebob squarepants to comment on the Dow Jones.*
> 
> 
> Oh crap no one say his name again!
> 
> This is not The Candyman reboot I was hoping for…


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> Oprah started her Oprah Angel Network, a charity. She encouraged her viewers to donate to it, so she could spend it and make a difference in the lives of others.
> 
> Of course her viewers and fans donated, but so did some big celebrities and they would come on her show with huge cheques for her.
> 
> Oprah got a lot of press and accolades for this. When her show ended, I think she spent the last of it and ceased operation.


Thank you for the explanation but it was not really needed, I didn't need to know about Oprah as I simply don't care enough to know. But we are still missing an emoji of eye roll so I can have an instant reaction to this practise!


----------



## chicinthecity777

Vintage Leather said:


> They needed to sit down three years ago and figure out what their core values are. What is the mission of their brand.


Maybe we didn't get the memo, but according to my (very limited) reading, their core values are compassion and love (always wins that is)!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Who was waiting for them to break their silence of Afghanistan?
> It’d be like waiting for spongebob squarepants to comment on the Dow Jones.



Seriously. I have a degree in Mid East Studies, and while I have a somewhat informed opinion, I'm far from an expert on Afghanistan so I just keep quiet besides blasting our idiot politicians who failed to get out the Afghan staff in time and now try to gamble with refugees in wake of the upcoming elections.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: Scoobie, if I didn't use my Twitter with my full name for professional stuff, I'd totally tweet him asking when the Sussexes will take ownership of their blatant lies.


----------



## needlv

Seems like PC has watched the Montecito duo’s antics and is going to ensure the mistakes aren’t repeated.  And a much slimmer monarchy means less and less relevance for their US relatives.









						Prince Charles has 'learned from mistakes he made with Prince Harry'
					

Royal biographer Ingrid Seward told Newsweek that Prince Charles' plans for a 'slimmed down' British monarchy will see Charlotte and Louis have 'a very much less royal existence'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

They are becoming the joke to everyone. 

*'Only Harry and Meghan would break their silence to say they're SPEECHLESS': Moment GB News host Simon McCoy bursts out laughing at Sussexes' response to Afghanistan*

*GB News presenter Simon McCoy apologises after laughing out loud live on air *
*It came during discussion on Harry and Meghan's statement about Afghanistan*
*His co-presenter Kirsty Gallacher said Sussexes were left 'speechless' by chaos*
*McCoy said: 'Only they would break their silence to tell us they are speechless'*
By MARK DUELL FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 10:39, 19 August 2021 | UPDATED: 10:39, 19 August 2021 


GB News presenter Simon McCoy has apologised after laughing out loud live on air at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's statement about the Afghanistan crisis.
The 59-year-old former BBC host chuckled when his co-presenter Kirsty Gallacher said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had been left 'speechless' by the chaos.
Mr McCoy, who has become known for his unenthusiastic delivery of royal news, said that *'only they would break their silence to tell us they are speechless'.*
Speaking during GB News's Great British Breakfast yesterday, the duo discussed the Sussexes' response to the Taliban uprising with royal biographer Angela Levin.
Former Sky Sports presenter Ms Gallacher said: *'Now, Harry and Meghan have broken their silence to say they are speechless about the situation in Afghanistan.'
Moment GB News host laughs at Sussexes' Afghanistan statement*



The Duke and Duchess of Sussex leave Westminster Abbey in London on March 9 last year
But Mr McCoy was unable to hide his amusement and laughed before saying: 'Sorry, only they would break their silence to tell us they are speechless.'

While talking with Ms Levin, Mr McCoy also mocked the couple for commenting on the crisis from their £11million mansion in Montecito, California.
*What did Harry and Meghan's statement on Afghanistan say? *
'The world is exceptionally fragile right now.
'As we all feel the many layers of pain due to the situation in Afghanistan, we are left speechless.
'As we all watch the growing humanitarian disaster in Haiti, and the threat of it worsening after last weekend's earthquake, we are left heartbroken.
'And as we all witness the continuing global health crisis, exacerbated by new variants and constant misinformation, we are left scared.'
Calling on the international community to alleviate suffering, the Sussexes added: 'When any person or community suffers, a piece of each of us does so with them, whether we realise it or not.
'And though we are not meant to live in a state of suffering, we, as a people, are being conditioned to accept it. It's easy to find ourselves feeling powerless, but we can put our values into action - together.
'To start, we encourage you to join us in supporting a number of organisations doing critical work. We also urge those in positions of global influence to rapidly advance the humanitarian dialogues that are expected to take place this fall at multilateral gatherings such as the UN General Assembly and the G20 leaders' summit.
'As an international community, it is the decisions we make now - to alleviate suffering among those we know and those we may never meet - that will prove our humanity.'
THE DUKE & DUCHESS OF SUSSEX 


He said: *'Angela, sorry, but Prince Harry obviously knows better than most of us what's gone on, what's at stake and what the risks are - but it's a bit rich from the Duke and Duchess of Montecito to be telling us the world is in a mess.'*
Ms Levin, author of 2018 book Harry: Conversations with the Prince, replied: 'Well yes, I wrote his biography a few years ago and actually he talked endlessly about Afghanistan and how he had to fight to get there and the front line.'
Today, Mr McCoy again spoke about the Sussexes when discussing the new version of their biography Finding Freedom, from which excerpts of an epilogue have now been revealed.
He told Ms Gallaghter during today's programme: 'Do we need to talk about this? I get myself into trouble every time.'
She said: 'You are in trouble today, there we are. He's in big trouble today, and you know it, and there we are.'
Mr McCoy then held up today's The Sun front page, saying it quoted 'the source close to Harry and Meghan', but overemphasised the word 'source' by making quote mark signs in the air - and said: 'Talking to someone who's written their biography, erm.'
Ms Gallaghter: 'Say no more? I think you shouldn't. Let's move onto another subject, I mean...'
Mr McCoy said: 'The Duke and Duchess of Montecito.'
And Ms Gallaghter: 'Oh gosh, you've said it now. I mean, you know, it's another day for you, another day in the Press.'
Mr McCoy added: 'What was I, "bitter and twisted" yesterday? I wonder what I'll be today?'
It comes after Harry and Meghan issued an extraordinary statement on Tuesday in response to events in Afghanistan – declaring themselves speechless.
Saying that the world is 'exceptionally fragile right now', the couple also pontificated at length about other recent humanitarian disasters.
They said on their Archewell website that they had been left heartbroken and scared by the earthquake in Haiti, new Covid variants and the continuing global health crisis.
On Afghanistan, they wrote of their 'many layers of pain' but made no mention of US President Joe *****, about whom they have been openly supportive.






GB News host Simon McCoy laughs with Kirsty Gallacher while talking about the Sussexes





The hosts discussed the Sussexes' response to the Taliban uprising on GB News yesterday
He and his administration are now being widely blamed for the US abandonment of the country which has triggered an unfolding political and humanitarian catastrophe...

..."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We'll see. A monarchy with just king and queen won't work, they'll need a little help. The Queen to this day has her cousin do tons of appearances. So unless Charles wants to stop monarching the country I really don't see him kicking out basically everyone.

ETA: that was in reply to the articles needlv postet, I wasn't quick enough.


----------



## papertiger

Vintage Leather said:


> They had six charities as wedding charities but … they aren’t consistent and don’t fit with previous or subsequent actions. Like - Surfers against sewage? Are either of them surfers?



They_ are_ experts in surfing. They seem to ride the wave of any heart-rendering tragedy or cause.

They are most definitely an expert in sewage. Every word-salad ends-up as liquid nitrogen.

Edited: autocorrect trikes again


----------



## Icyjade

Wait. Is Daily Mail reading our thread??









						Harry and Meghan say they're speechless about Afghanistan
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have broken their silence on the situation in Afghanistan to say they are 'speechless'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Extract:
*Never fear, the Sussexes are here! Harry and Meghan wade into Afghanistan crisis with woke 'word salad' statement saying they're 'speechless' (if only)*


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have said the Taliban's advance in Afghanistan has left them 'speechless' and 'heartbroken' in a wide-ranging statement that also addresses the Covid-19 crisis and the humanitarian disaster in Haiti.


The lengthy statement, released via the couple's slick Archewell Foundation website, calls on followers to support organisations including the World Central Kitchen, but failed to say how much they would be personally donating or details of how they will help.  

But the couple have been slammed by a royal expert who called it 'another attempt to form an alternate woke royal family'  and by *social media users who branded the statement 'vague publicity seeking word salad' and said it was 'irrelevant' as it doesn't mention how they personally will be helping in the crisis.*

Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: 'I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family.

'Like most of their "compassionate" gestures there is no indication about what they themselves will do and whether any donations will be going through Archewell Foundation.

'Their comment that they want to "alleviate suffering among those we know and those we may never meet – that will prove our humanity," sounds so similar to their recent comment we must be compassionate "to those we know and those we don’t know" that makes it sound equally phoney.'


----------



## needlv

Lol









						Laurence Llewellyn-Bowen branded Meghan 'far too dull'
					

LAURENCE LLEWELLYN-BOWEN said he wouldn't work with Meghan Markle as he claimed she was "too dull".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

To paraphrase the old "Most Interesting Man in the World" commercials: "I don't always break my silence, but when I do it's to feel sorry for myself and roast my 95 year old newly widowed grandmother who's given me absolutely everything".


----------



## Chanbal

creme fraiche said:


> I do hope the BBC is trolling the Sussex duo; I woke up this morning and switched on Radio 4's morning news show (equivalent to Morning Edition on NPR in the US, but more official) only to hear the headline news that *Harry and Meghan are slagging off the Queen about her inadequate response to their Oprah interview* - this just 2 minutes after updates on the situation in Afganistan.  Surely any sensible being's response to the juxtaposition of these 2 "news" items is "your having a laugh!".
> 
> They look more desperate and silly with every PR release.


It seems to be the plan…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

There is a life skill that I am proud to say that I have (almost) mastered - avoid talking politics with anyone but DH, in private, under cover of darkness


----------



## lallybelle

Ah...I knew I needed to check this thread.  I was wondering what riled up the Stans this morning. Tons of *****ing about that the media made up what H & M said blah blah, how they were quiet but the press just loves to talk about them. I did see a lot of people saying how Scooby Doo was responsible because this is all coming from his revised book and he's putting out the excerpts. 

I mean don't their own fans see the little drips & drabs given to People, US etc? I guess it's all good when it's all saccharine.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


>



Tell the truth.  What’s the first thing you thought when you saw the picture?  (Don't answer.)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> Just read a great nickname on a YouTube comment...*Smirk and Jerk*


Thanks @mellibelly for the nickname Smirk and Jerk that truly describes the duo and reminds me of M wearing a smirk and that ugly green dress while accompanying the scowling Jerk at the Commonwealth Service.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aw, poor naive Chris Ship.


----------



## bag-mania

I can absolutely believe the publicists put it out there. They were dumb enough to sign off on a reprint of Finding Freedom and they realized interest in these two is dropping every day. They are getting nervous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I can absolutely believe the publicists put it out there. They were dumb enough to sign off on a reprint of Finding Freedom and they realized interest in these two is dropping every day. They are getting nervous.



I don't find it unbelievable either, but I still wonder what's in for that guy always jumping to their defense. It is totally something they'd leak themselves and have so in the past.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't find it unbelievable either, but I still wonder what's in for that guy always jumping to their defense. It is totally something they'd leak themselves and have so in the past.



These Royal reporters all have favorites among the family. This one really likes them for whatever reason. I prefer to believe that he is being paid for it but maybe his support is genuine.


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> Thank you for the explanation but it was not really needed, I didn't need to know about Oprah as I simply don't care enough to know. But we are still missing an emoji of eye roll so I can have an instant reaction to this practise!


I was comparing what Oprah has done to what the Markels seem to want to do.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5169587


it's ironic really....the only reason they have the money and fame is that he was born into that family....now they think they can just trash the family and come out ahead?  we'll see


----------



## djuna1




----------



## gracekelly

djuna1 said:


>



The book isn’t out and I want to see the cancelled check to the charity after it hits the shelves.

Cant believe she let him out of the house alone.


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Tell the truth.  What’s the first thing you thought when you saw the picture?  (Don't answer.)


Prince Charles was disappointed that Harry wasn’t a girl.  Send him this picture.


----------



## bellecate

Go to sleep, wake up with a new knee and 16 pages of Markle madness to get through. I’ll take it slow and steady and be thankful for their ridiculousness to help pass the time.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Go to sleep, wake up with a new knee and 16 pages of Markle madness to get through. I’ll take it slow and steady and be thankful for their ridiculousness to help pass the time.


Sending good thoughts for your recovery!  Yes they should provide you with a few chuckles. .


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Cant believe she let him out of the house alone.



Maybe she's there too. It's not like she has to stay at home and take care of kids or anything.


----------



## chicinthecity777

djuna1 said:


>



He hasn't made the donation. He said he was going to. Did he write them an IOU? They said a lot of things but very few came to fruition. Why not announce it once you actually have donated?


----------



## chicinthecity777

I have decided to commit to make a donation to my local shelter £10,000 subject to receiving my potential bonus for 2022! And my local shelter is very grateful for the £10k they haven't received! See it's very easy to make these promises!


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> He hasn't made the donation. He said he was going to. They said a lot of things but very few came to fruition. Why not announce it once you actually have donated?



Because they need good publicity now to counteract the "we're speechless" debacle.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> Because they need good publicity now to counteract the "we're speechless" debacle.


If only they can actually stay speechless for a while!


----------



## gracekelly

chicinthecity777 said:


> I have decided to commit to make a donation to my local shelter £10,000 subject to receiving my potential bonus for 2022! And my local shelter is very grateful for the £10k they haven't received! See it's very easy to make these promises!


I am going to donate to the refurbishment of Casa Monstercito. I am giving  2 bilion dollars of the Monopoly money that I am going to win after I buy the game and play it with my brother who lives 3k miles away.   He was always much better at it than I so it might take a while to win those bucks and many trips pass Go.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Go to sleep, wake up with a new knee and 16 pages of Markle madness to get through. I’ll take it slow and steady and be thankful for their ridiculousness to help pass the time.



Get well soon!


----------



## sdkitty

do we have a yawn emoji?
Update: Meghan and Harry Could Christen Lilibet in California to Avoid "Controversy" (yahoo.com) 

I mean as someone said, are they even religious?  what the big deal about the Christening?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> The book isn’t out and I want to see the cancelled check to the charity after it hits the shelves.
> 
> Cant believe she let him out of the house alone.


Agree, it is all in the details ... and the caveats and wording of these word salad financial statements,  if things go well and everybody on the planet buys a book copy, it might inch close to a $1.5M donation BEST CASE


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Agree, it is all in the details ... and the caveats and wording of these word salad financial statements,  if things go well and everybody on the planet buys a book copy, it might inch close to a $1.5M donation BEST CASE


makes for good publicity and that is what they are all about


----------



## zen1965

needlv said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Laurence Llewellyn-Bowen branded Meghan 'far too dull'
> 
> 
> LAURENCE LLEWELLYN-BOWEN said he wouldn't work with Meghan Markle as he claimed she was "too dull".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Ohh. Thank you!
I loved Changing Rooms years ago. Completely bonkers.


----------



## Annawakes

Donations from proceeds of a book that isn’t even published yet?  This is a new form of fakery!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Prince Charles was disappointed that Harry *wasn’t a girl*.  Send him this picture.


I have first-hand experience how these stories might start. We have two boys. When the youngest was born, my sister phoned at the hospital to ask if I was still disappointed that it wasn't a girl (something I would never discussed with her) to which I responded that I was happy with my son and that I knew all along it was a boy.  Later, when hubby and I had a small gathering after the christening, my sister asked the same question again in front of the guests and without waiting for an answer, added that she was pregnant again. I don't know why she made those assumptions, only that she liked to steal other people's thunder.

ETA I think it was mean-spirited of Diana to repeat it even if it's true. Why would a mother want to hurt their child in such a way?


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Donations from proceeds of a book that isn’t even published yet?  This is a new form of fakery!



Right, if he actually cared about the cause he could donate right now. Why make them wait? It’s because he knows the charity isn’t going to go to the news in two or three years to say that he never forked over the cash.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> do we have a yawn emoji?
> Update: Meghan and Harry Could Christen Lilibet in California to Avoid "Controversy" (yahoo.com)
> 
> I mean as someone said, are they even religious?  what the big deal about the Christening?



A heathen child would be excluded from the line of succession they so do not care about but so do. Then again, so would a surrogate baby.

ETA: would it, though? I know about the "of the body of the wife" rule, but when this law was made that was the only way to make kind of sure the baby was related. Today we have paternity tests.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my, Lady CC's newest is over an hour. I don't have the mental capacity right now haha.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> There is a life skill that I am proud to say that I have (almost) mastered - avoid talking politics with anyone but DH, in private, under cover of darkness


Ditto!  Politics, religion, my weight...


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



This reminds me of the Billy Goats Gruff who had to answer the troll's riddle in order to cross the bridge.  Haz is playing the troll.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Go to sleep, wake up with a new knee and 16 pages of Markle madness to get through. I’ll take it slow and steady and be thankful for their ridiculousness to help pass the time.


Get well soon!


----------



## bag-mania

Hold on ... this Sentebale charity was co-founded by Harry. Shouldn't he have been giving them healthy donations for years? 

The Polo Cup is their big fundraiser every year and Harry often participates since he is the group's patron. Telling the world he will be giving money to his own charity isn't really a story, is it?


----------



## rose60610

Right. And it's terrible he's cashing in by bashing the very family that he'd be virtually nothing without. Raptor wouldn't have given him the time of day were it not for the BRF wallet to plunder. Funny how she wanted privacy only after the fawning media started to wonder  why she stews in self pity tirades.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. I had an article pop up on my phone that accused the Queen of having an affair with her childhood friend and manager of her race horses Porchey (who was later Earl of Carnavon...grandson of the Lord Carnavon who found Tutankhamun and owner of Highclere Castle where Downtown Abbey was filmed). It had a ton of gross and bold details and claimed Porchey is Andrew's father. Dug a little and lo and behold, they apparently (can't confirm because I have no interest in watching it) ran with the dirt The Crown generated. Philip should have sued for defamation when they made up he killed his sister, maybe they would have gone broke over this.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A heathen child would be excluded from the line of succession they so do not care about but so do. Then again, so would a surrogate baby.
> 
> ETA: would it, though? I know about the "of the body of the wife" rule, but when this law was made that was the only way to make kind of sure the baby was related. Today we have paternity tests.



It would have to be hers as well as his or it'd be illegitimate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It would have to be hers as well as his or it'd be illegitimate.



Yes, but I wonder where a surrogate baby from their own DNA would fall. Which could probably entertain a whole year of law students or something.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but I wonder where a surrogate baby from their own DNA would fall. Which could probably entertain a whole year of law students or something.



Well, the law is the law until it's changed. It remains 'of the body of the mother' whilst M was supposed to have had her children. 'of the the mother's body' needs to be verified.

If someone proposed the law be changed, and the a law was passed by the Commons _and_ then the House of Lords (still with many hereditary lords/peers of the realm) and as part of that new law was that it could be applied in retrospect (DNA tests can now be applied) then possibly.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Prince Charles was disappointed that Harry wasn’t a girl.


Do we know this for sure or was this an angry Diana saying something to badmouth him as she started to do.


----------



## Jayne1

chicinthecity777 said:


> I have decided to commit to make a donation to my local shelter £10,000 subject to receiving my potential bonus for 2022! And my local shelter is very grateful for the £10k they haven't received! See it's very easy to make these promises!


Ha ha - that’s very good!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Do we know this for sure or was this an angry Diana saying something to badmouth him as she started to do.



Lady CC says the latter, but also...I don't think that's such a horrible crime. Many people secretly wish for one sex over another and then are disappointed for a hot minute before they fall in love with the baby anyway. Most people are just smarter than to say it out loud, and kinder than to leak it to the press.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. I had an article pop up on my phone that accused the Queen of having an affair with her childhood friend and manager of her race horses Porchey (who was later Earl of Carnavon...grandson of the Lord Carnavon who found Tutankhamun and owner of Highclere Castle where Downtown Abbey was filmed). It had a ton of gross and bold details and claimed Porchey is Andrew's father. Dug a little and lo and behold, they apparently (can't confirm because I have no interest in watching it) ran with the dirt The Crown generated. Philip should have sued for defamation when they made up he killed his sister, maybe they would have gone broke over this.


That’s been the rumour for years, I’m surprised everyone didn’t know about it.

Andrew does look a little bit more like Porchey and a lot less like other members of the family, which caused the rumour to have legs.

The Queen was having some marital difficulties and hadn’t gotten pregnant in a long time and then became pregnant and gave birth to a child that looked like Porchey… so who knows.

It’s thought that’s why Andrew has always been her favourite.

ETA - and it's long been assumed there are a number of little Philips running around, if anyone is feeling bad for the Duke of Edinburgh.


----------



## papertiger

There is NO WAY Charles wanted a girl instead of a second boy. Diana's 'job' was for an heir and a spare. At that time girls were not automatically 'heir'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> That’s been the rumour for years, I’m surprised everyone didn’t know about it.
> 
> Andrew does look a little bit more like Porchey and a lot less like other members of the family, which caused the rumour have legs.
> 
> The Queen was having some marital difficulties and hadn’t gotten pregnant in a long time and then became pregnant and gave birth to a child that looked like Porchey… so who knows.
> 
> It’s thought that’s why Andrew has always been her favourite.



Yes, you are correct - that rumor has been around for years. I guess that shows I have been following the royals for far too long  
That said, they can spit out as much venom as they wish. In the scheme of things, they remain extremely insignificant. So many more important worries than their bad noise.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> That’s been the rumour for years, I’m surprised everyone didn’t know about it.
> 
> Andrew does look a little bit more like Porchey and a lot less like other members of the family, which caused the rumour to have legs.
> 
> The Queen was having some marital difficulties and hadn’t gotten pregnant in a long time and then became pregnant and gave birth to a child that looked like Porchey… so who knows.
> 
> It’s thought that’s why Andrew has always been her favourite.
> 
> ETA - and it's long been assumed there are a number of little Philips running around, if anyone is feeling bad for the Duke of Edinburgh.



Sorry, but the Queen did not have an affair. Phillip may have, but the Queen, no, and then with no birth control, sorry, madness.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady CC says the latter, but also...I don't think that's such a horrible crime. Many people secretly wish for one sex over another and then are disappointed for a hot minute before they fall in love with the baby anyway. Most people are just smarter than to say it out loud, and *kinder than to leak it to the press.*


I wonder if Diana was so desperate to get even with C to understand that H's fragile ego couldn't cope with that kind of news.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Here is the really crazy thing...Harry thinks that the world does care what he thinks. All because he slept peacefully in Afghanistan with guards watching over him.  Can you imagine?  I don't think his wife cares what he thinks.


I kind of crack-up each time I see that picture of Hap-Hazza running out of a tent, trying to make it look like he was a "real" soldier!  HA - yeah, right!! .. my English colleagues (one of which in the same unit as Hap-Hazza) said that he had 'special' (in other words - cushy) tasks that he could work on.  Also, they keep on saying that he was a Helicopter Pilot .. FALSE!!!, he took the test but did not pass (3 times) - quelle surprise!  William was a helicopter pilot, Hap-Hazza ?? .. NO!


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> There is NO WAY Charles wanted a girl instead of a second boy. Diana's 'job' was for an heir and a spare. At that time girls were not automatically 'heir'.


That may indeed be the case, but Lady Diana was quoted by many sources that are easily findable, that he wanted a girl and was disappointed.  She claimed that this was a reason the marriage tanked, which is actually a pretty odd reason to me.  Why would she deliberately give out something untrue?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Do we know this for sure or was this an angry Diana saying something to badmouth him as she started to do.


This seems plausible.  She said it enough times.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> That may indeed be the case, but Lady Diana was quoted by many sources that are easily findable, that he wanted a girl and was disappointed.  She claimed that this was a reason the marriage tanked, which is actually a pretty odd reason to me. * Why would she deliberately give out something untrue?*



I don't know, the more I find out about any of them the less I like each.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I don't know, the more I find out about any of them the less I like each.


Well honestly, I have thought for years that she was pretty much of a head case.  Playing the role of victim appears to be a family trait she had and passed to Harry.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> I have first-hand experience how these stories might start. We have two boys. When the youngest was born, my sister phoned at the hospital to ask if I was still disappointed that it wasn't a girl (something I would never discussed with her) to which I responded that I was happy with my son and that I knew all along it was a boy.  Later, when hubby and I had a small gathering after the christening, my sister asked the same question again in front of the guests and without waiting for an answer, added that she was pregnant again. I don't know why she made those assumptions, only that she liked to steal other people's thunder.
> 
> ETA I think it was mean-spirited of Diana to repeat it even if it's true. Why would a mother want to hurt their child in such a way?


When I had my 2nd boy, an unmarried colleague of mine insisted that I should try for a girl - because little girls are so much fun to dress up. Since she works in product sponsorship, I asked her if she would help to get me sponsorships. Have you seen the price of infant formula, diapers and childcare? If she wanted to play dress-up, I could buy her a Barbie.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Well, the law is the law until it's changed. It remains 'of the body of the mother' whilst M was supposed to have had her children. 'of the the mother's body' needs to be verified.
> 
> If someone proposed the law be changed, and the a law was passed by the Commons _and_ then the House of Lords (still with many hereditary lords/peers of the realm) and as part of that new law was that it could be applied in retrospect (DNA tests can now be applied) then possibly.


The way Methane alters her body, they probably have to figure out which version of the mother's body the baby was formed in.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Let's have some fun. I'm almost positive that I've recovered all your suggested nicknames after reviewing a bunch of posts. 

How to calculate the rewards:
1 nickname = star; 3 nicknames = ribbon; 5+ nicknames = plaque (Master)
Remember this is a "search and collect" game and that no one is claiming ownership of nicknames coined by others. I also realize that this wasn't an easy task for anyone to accomplish. 

@purseinsanity Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master for the high score of a dozen nicknames.



@csshopper Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master! You have collected 10 nicknames. 



@CarryOn2020 Thanks and Congratulations Nickname Master.  I owe you two awards for having collected 9 nicknames: a ribbon and a plaque.




@Annawakes Thanks and congratulations for collecting four nicknames, not an easy task by all means.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's have some fun. I'm almost positive that I've recovered all your suggested nicknames after reviewing a bunch of posts.
> 
> How to calculate the rewards:
> 1 nickname = star; 3 nicknames = ribbon; 5+ nicknames = plaque (Master)
> Remember this is a "search and collect" game and that no one is claiming ownership of nicknames coined by others. I also realize that this wasn't an easy task for anyone to accomplish.
> 
> @purseinsanity Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master for the high score of a dozen nicknames.
> View attachment 5170023
> 
> 
> @csshopper Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master! You have collected 10 nicknames.
> View attachment 5170025
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020 Thanks and Congratulations Nickname Master.  I owe you two awards for having collected 9 nicknames: a ribbon and a plaque.
> View attachment 5170029
> View attachment 5170032
> 
> 
> @Annawakes Thanks and congratulations for collecting four nicknames, not an easy task by all means.
> View attachment 5170035


LOLOL, I am truly honored!!!  And, in the spirit of Megalomaniac (has anyone used that yet?? Or is is a new one?) you all may refer to me as *Sensai Purseinsanity* from here on out!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL, I am truly honored!!!  And, in the spirit of Megalomaniac (has anyone used that yet?? Or is is a new one?) you all may refer to me as *Sensai Purseinsanity* from here on out!


@CeeJay spells it Meg-a-lo-maniac in her posts.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> When I had my 2nd boy, an unmarried colleague of mine insisted that I should try for a girl - because little girls are so much fun to dress up. Since she works in product sponsorship, I asked her if she would help to get me sponsorships. Have you seen the price of infant formula, diapers and childcare? If she wanted to play dress-up, I could buy her a Barbie.


I'm a granny X7 now that my youngest son and dil have adopted a baby girl, who is just six days old. We let them worry about nutrition and diapers while we provide the fun stuff.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> Sending good thoughts for your recovery!  Yes they should provide you with a few chuckles. .


Thank you. I thought it was difficult trying to follow their word salad statements with a clear mind. Pretty much impossible while on pain killers.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Get well soon!


Thank you.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Get well soon!


Thank you.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL, I am truly honored!!!  And, in the spirit of Megalomaniac (has anyone used that yet?? Or is is a new one?) you all may refer to me as *Sensai Purseinsanity* from here on out!


Bowing down Sensai! 

In spite of all the excellent names, there are days when none of them seem sufficient to describe the despicableness ("deserving of contempt, scorn or 'vile'") of these two.

Guess we all will have to just keep on trying.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's have some fun. I'm almost positive that I've recovered all your suggested nicknames after reviewing a bunch of posts.
> 
> How to calculate the rewards:
> 1 nickname = star; 3 nicknames = ribbon; 5+ nicknames = plaque (Master)
> Remember this is a "search and collect" game and that no one is claiming ownership of nicknames coined by others. I also realize that this wasn't an easy task for anyone to accomplish.
> 
> @purseinsanity Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master for the high score of a dozen nicknames.
> View attachment 5170023
> 
> 
> @csshopper Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master! You have collected 10 nicknames.
> View attachment 5170025
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020 Thanks and Congratulations Nickname Master.  I owe you two awards for having collected 9 nicknames: a ribbon and a plaque.
> View attachment 5170029
> View attachment 5170032
> 
> 
> @Annawakes Thanks and congratulations for collecting four nicknames, not an easy task by all means.


 Maggie, YOU ARE THE BEST! Thank you for all your work organizing us.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Bowing down Sensai!
> 
> In spite of all the excellent names, there are days when none of them seem sufficient to describe the despicableness ("deserving of contempt, scorn or 'vile'") of these two.
> 
> Guess we all will have to just keep on trying.


We are in the "strive" chapter


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. I had an article pop up on my phone that accused the Queen of having an affair with her childhood friend and manager of her race horses Porchey (who was later Earl of Carnavon...grandson of the Lord Carnavon who found Tutankhamun and owner of Highclere Castle where Downtown Abbey was filmed). It had a ton of gross and bold details and claimed Porchey is Andrew's father. Dug a little and lo and behold, they apparently (can't confirm because I have no interest in watching it) ran with the dirt The Crown generated. Philip should have sued for defamation when they made up he killed his sister, maybe they would have gone broke over this.


Get well soon!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I saw an article somewhere where it said Harry served under ISAF (a rather plush job) and the chaps called it: I Saw Americans Fighting.

As we used to say in the military he was probably "atfu" meaning "Ate the F up." He's such stupid man.


----------



## needlv

Scoobie is in the dog house now…









						Harry and Meghan Hit Back at Claims They Are Stoking Royal Race Feud
					

Couple’s solicitors warn off British newspapers that interpreted Wednesday’s new excerpt from “Finding Freedom” as evidence of them cranking up tensions with the queen.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




his new book chapters must be hurting the MM masterplan to claim they are fine with the Queen… and all is forgiven (*cough recollections may vary *cough)


----------



## xincinsin

Not to defend Scabies, but the Imperial Court of Montecito does keep vacillating on their position regarding the BRF. It's like watching the weather report...


----------



## jelliedfeels

djuna1 said:


>



Maybe I’m overly critical of the little rat but bearing in mind it costs about a million quid per player to play polo….
I feel this is the wrong way round  




Maggie Muggins said:


> I have first-hand experience how these stories might start. We have two boys. When the youngest was born, my sister phoned at the hospital to ask if I was still disappointed that it wasn't a girl (something I would never discussed with her) to which I responded that I was happy with my son and that I knew all along it was a boy.  Later, when hubby and I had a small gathering after the christening, my sister asked the same question again in front of the guests and without waiting for an answer, added that she was pregnant again. I don't know why she made those assumptions, only that she liked to steal other people's thunder.
> 
> ETA I think it was mean-spirited of Diana to repeat it even if it's true. Why would a mother want to hurt their child in such a way?


I’m on Diana’s side here as I’d be really upset if I went through all the rigmarole of pregnancy to be told I gave him the second best option. Especially given the sperm determines the sex anyway….it’s like what Anne Boleyn had to put up with.

Also If Charles is saying that sort of stuff then he’s the one who is being hurtful- she’s just letting people know what he’s like.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> A heathen child would be excluded from the line of succession they so do not care about but so do. Then again, so would a surrogate baby.
> 
> ETA: would it, though? I know about the "of the body of the wife" rule, but when this law was made that was the only way to make kind of sure the baby was related. Today we have paternity tests.


Yeah the christening is definitely a administrative formality rather than a religious event for them - touching isn’t it? 

It is just the eccentricity of British law. The person pregnant with the baby is the mother regardless of whether she is genetically related to foetus. This is why surrogacy is so complicated & not that popular here.

I’ve no doubt they used Ginger juice  in the test tube. The first one, at least, has to be his to secure the bag.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. I had an article pop up on my phone that accused the Queen of having an affair with her childhood friend and manager of her race horses Porchey (who was later Earl of Carnavon...grandson of the Lord Carnavon who found Tutankhamun and owner of Highclere Castle where Downtown Abbey was filmed). It had a ton of gross and bold details and claimed Porchey is Andrew's father. Dug a little and lo and behold, they apparently (can't confirm because I have no interest in watching it) ran with the dirt The Crown generated. Philip should have sued for defamation when they made up he killed his sister, maybe they would have gone broke over this.


The curse of king Tut strikes again!  
I mean, Jeez, who cares, at what point does something become too old to matter?

also, I don’t believe it but male royals have affairs all the time and it’s no big deal. Why this moral outrage for the Queen- doesn’t she have some form of droit de signeur too?


----------



## Lodpah

This lady is so good. Harry ain't got no balls so he's outside juggling balls lol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> That’s been the rumour for years, I’m surprised everyone didn’t know about it.
> 
> Andrew does look a little bit more like Porchey and a lot less like other members of the family, which caused the rumour to have legs.
> 
> The Queen was having some marital difficulties and hadn’t gotten pregnant in a long time and then became pregnant and gave birth to a child that looked like Porchey… so who knows.
> 
> It’s thought that’s why Andrew has always been her favourite.
> 
> ETA - and it's long been assumed there are a number of little Philips running around, if anyone is feeling bad for the Duke of Edinburgh.



I knew of the rumours (don't find them very likely, though), I just found this particular article particularly tasteless, and apparently The Crown made up a ton of extra details.

And to be honest I don't believe either of them has children out of wedlock.

ETA: Porchey was one of the candidates the Queen Mother thought suitable for the Queen. The Queen didn't think so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> There is NO WAY Charles wanted a girl instead of a second boy. Diana's 'job' was for an heir and a spare. At that time girls were not automatically 'heir'.



That's a really good point that makes a lot of sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That may indeed be the case, but Lady Diana was quoted by many sources that are easily findable, that he wanted a girl and was disappointed.  She claimed that this was a reason the marriage tanked, which is actually a pretty odd reason to me.  Why would she deliberately give out something untrue?



That is a really weird reason because what would keep a 25yo to just try for another baby? I mean, if you're so desperate for a girl.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm a granny X7 now that my youngest son and dil have adopted a baby girl, who is just six days old. We let them worry about nutrition and diapers while we provide the fun stuff.



Congratulations grandma!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bellecate said:


> Thank you. I thought it was difficult trying to follow their word salad statements with a clear mind. Pretty much impossible while on pain killers.


Get well soon bellecate and try to enjoy the unique experience of Haz’ level of befuddlement while it lasts.

Perhaps you could get some local D-lister to bark orders at you and a stream  of constantly changing but identical looking staff  while you carry a puppet around in an Avalon for the full experience


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT, but the current Lady Carnavon - a published author - has a really cool blog.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> Not to defend Scabies, but the Imperial Court of Montecito does keep vacillating on their position regarding the BRF. It's like watching the weather report...



scooby could end up getting markled….


----------



## needlv

And now the stans are turning on scooby….


----------



## Annawakes

Thank you @Maggie Muggins ! I’m so honored to receive a ribbon .  I am thoroughly entertained by everyone’s razor sharp wit in this thread every day.  Thank you all!


----------



## marietouchet

Apologize if posted before , will try to find link to photo - CALLING ALL POLO experts - BLOOD on the scene - where is my CSI team when I need them ???? 

At yesterday's game, 6 was on as WHITE horse, and it was obvious that his spurs mad eth horse bleed - big red spots on horse belly

Is this kinda/sorta normal/expected?  You would not see the spots if the horse were brown 

You can tell my ignorance of horses/polo, I dont even know the correct term fro brown - CHESTNUT ????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Apologize if posted before , will try to find link to photo - CALLING ALL POLO experts - BLOOD on the scene - where is my CSI team when I need them ????
> 
> At yesterday's game, 6 was on as WHITE horse, and it was obvious that his spurs mad eth horse bleed - big red spots on horse belly
> 
> Is this kinda/sorta normal/expected?  You would not see the spots if the horse were brown
> 
> You can tell my ignorance of horses/polo, I dont even know the correct term fro brown - CHESTNUT ????



No, that's not normal. It's not a horrible-horrible injury, it will heal quickly and the amount of blood is also due to the fact the horse is moving rapidly and sweating, but no, you are not supposed to break the skin on your horse. In fact, I don't know why spurs are even allowed in polo, hunting, jumping, they are not supposed to speed up the horse but to refine commands (that's totally not the right word, but I don't know it in English) but as usual, are misused a lot.

I personally would cry from guilt if I discovered I made my horse bleed anywhere.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, are you sure that was footage from yesterday? He injured a white horse in 2010 but was cleared from misconduct later. The picture I found that was attributed to yesterday showed him on a brown horse in a turquoise Sentebale shirt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...st-polo-match-Colorado-Sentebale-charity.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So polo is played in four "chukkas", each 7 1/2 mins. There's a 3 min break between chukka 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 and a 5 min break between chukka 2 & 3. A horse must not be ridden for two consecutive chukkas, so you'd need at least two horses for one full play. Most polo players bring three to four, which explains the above pictures.

That said, it's pretty unusual you'd just waltz in and ride three horses you've never seen. So...did he bring his own, or did he train beforehand?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, that's not normal. It's not a horrible-horrible injury, it will heal quickly and the amount of blood is also due to the fact the horse is moving rapidly and sweating tons, but no, you are not supposed to break the skin on your horse. In fact, I don't know why spurs are even allowed in polo, hunting, jumping, they are not supposed to speed up the horse but to refine commands (that's totally not the right word, but I don't know it in English) but as usual, are misused a lot.
> 
> I personally would cry from guilt if I discovered I made my horse bleed anywhere.


Good news , that was OLD news
I found the photo it was from 2010, he was taken to task at the time
yesterdays horse(s) were brown not white
also yesterday’s photos show he was not wearing spurs
MY BAD to misinterpret the photo as being recent


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So polo is played in four "chukkas", each 7 1/2 mins. There's a 3 min break between chukka 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 and a 5 min break between chukka 2 & 3. A horse must not be ridden for two consecutive chukkas, so you'd need at least two horses for one full play. Most polo players bring three to four, which explains the above pictures.
> 
> That said, it's pretty unusual you'd just waltz in and ride three horses you've never seen. So...did he bring his own, or did he train beforehand?



My guess is he used borrowed horses that the host polo club offered him. If he is a good enough rider he should be able to play decently on them. 

I'm pretty sure he left his horses behind in England.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So polo is played in four "chukkas", each 7 1/2 mins. There's a 3 min break between chukka 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 and a 5 min break between chukka 2 & 3. A horse must not be ridden for two consecutive chukkas, so you'd need at least two horses for one full play. Most polo players bring three to four, which explains the above pictures.
> 
> That said, it's pretty unusual you'd just waltz in and ride three horses you've never seen. So...did he bring his own, or did he train beforehand?


So going off this episode of most expensive - it’s sort of like the jockey system in that you have an affiliation with a stable & you can go and train with those horses and you get paid to ride for them if you go pro.


You might have your own horse as well, I guess &  most polo pros are likely from rich backgrounds even  if they don’t get paid that much to play polo. 


I assume Whinger probably has his own horse to go riding on that extremely expensive lawn: he just thinks bikes play better to us poverty ridden peasants.
Also, it does strike me as funny he complained he never got to go bike riding which is blatantly untrue but he’s clearly also had horse riding lessons since he was about 4 but they don’t count


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I knew of the rumours (don't find them very likely, though), I just found this particular article particularly tasteless, and apparently The Crown made up a ton of extra details.
> 
> And to be honest I don't believe either of them has children out of wedlock.
> 
> ETA: Porchey was one of the candidates the Queen Mother thought suitable for the Queen. The Queen didn't think so.


I watched The Crown. They showed a lot of QE's relationship with Porchey and PP was paying attention. The series didn't ever insinuate that Andrew wasn't PP's child.


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> This lady is so good. Harry ain't got no balls so he's outside juggling balls lol.



Thank you for sharing!  I love this woman, I wish I could be her friend. lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I watched The Crown. They showed a lot of QE's relationship with Porchey and PP was paying attention. The series didn't ever insinuate that Andrew wasn't PP's child.



Well, then that article discredited both the Windsors and TC. I don't even know exactly where that magazine came from. It also was in German. Very weird.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> My guess is he used borrowed horses that the host polo club offered him. *If he is a good enough rider he should be able to play decently on them.*
> 
> I'm pretty sure he left his horses behind in England.



Yeah, just like in the Olympic penthatlon


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, just like in the Olympic penthatlon


Omg the poor German morden pentathlon athlete! The horse totally let her down! So unfair to her! The horse had done it to another rider before and after that should have been taken out of the competition! 

Sorry for being OT!


----------



## jelliedfeels

chicinthecity777 said:


> Omg the poor German morden pentathlon athlete! The horse totally let her down! So unfair to her! The horse had done it to another rider before and after that should have been taken out of the competition!
> 
> Sorry for being OT!


Was that where they got disqualified for punching the horse?

Im not a sporty person but this olympics was pretty eventful what with that, then the high jump being a tie for some reason & then Joey Tribiani winning gold for javelin.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Omg the poor German morden pentathlon athlete! The horse totally let her down! So unfair to her! The horse had done it to another rider before and after that should have been taken out of the competition!
> 
> Sorry for being OT!



My sympathy was more with the horse. You could clearly see it was either in pain or in panic....horses don't usually show up thinking "Let's ruin this for my rider, can't wait". They usually have a reason for acting out like this. Should it have been taken out of the competition earlier? Absof*ckinglutely. But it wasn't, and it's a living being, and she as the team partner with the supposed higher IQ should have seen the signs and just given up instead of kicking, hitting and crying hysterically. The girl is a freaking Bundeswehr officer. What does she do when she commands troops during armed conflict and it doesn't go as smoothly as she wants to, have a meltdown? That's dangerous.

Also, I could have somewhat forgiven the action as nerves in a high pressure moment, but I was done with her when she - and her awful trainer who screamed "Hit him! Slap him good!" and punched the horse - gave interview after interview and said "I did nothing wrong". No insight and self-reflection from either of them whatsoever.


----------



## chicinthecity777

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My sympathy was more with the horse. You could clearly see it was either in pain or in panic....horses don't usually show up thinking "Let's ruin this for my rider, can't wait". They usually have a reason for acting out like this. Should it have been taken out of the competition earlier? Absof*ckinglutely. But it wasn't, and it's a living being, and she as the team partner with the supposed higher IQ should have seen the signs and just give up instead of kicking, hitting and crying hysterically. The girl is a freaking Bundeswehr officer. What does she do when she commands troops during armed conflict and it doesn't go as smoothly as she wants to, have a meltdown? That's dangerous.
> 
> Also, I could have somewhat forgiven the action as nerves in a high pressure moment, but I was done with her when she - and her awful trainer who screamed "Hit him! Slap him good!" and punched the horse - gave interview after interview and said "I did nothing wrong". No insight and self-reflection from either of them whatsoever.


Yes the horse was distressed and like I said, should be taken out of the competition! I don't blame the horse but it's not fair on the rider if the horse already did something similar. The horse shouldn't have been put into this ordeal but nor should the rider. She trained for years to compete. It's the organiser's fault.

I didn't watch the interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chicinthecity777

jelliedfeels said:


> Was that where they got disqualified for punching the horse?
> 
> Im not a sporty person but this olympics was pretty eventful what with that, then the high jump being a tie for some reason & then Joey Tribiani winning gold for javelin.


My understanding is the coach asked the rider to punch the horse and was removed and disqualified! I am unclear what the rider did or didn't do and she wasn't removed. The horse should have never be put back into the competition, having had issues previously.

This Olympics had not been a very well organised one.


----------



## poopsie

chicinthecity777 said:


> Yes the horse was distressed and like I said, should be taken out of the competition! I don't blame the horse but it's not fair on the rider if the horse already did something similar. The horse shouldn't have been put into this ordeal but nor should the rider. *She trained for years to compete. *It's the organiser's fault.
> 
> I didn't watch the interview.



And now the bad optics of the incident will follow her and the coach  for the rest of their lives.

I didn't get to see any of the Olympics btw........just going on what was reported here.


----------



## chicinthecity777

poopsie said:


> And now the bad optics of the incident will follow her and the coach  for the rest of their lives.
> 
> I didn't get to see any of the Olympics btw........just going on what was reported here.


Yep! The whole thing was terrible! All in very hot and humid conditions!

Before the incident, she was in gold metal position in the competition.


----------



## chicinthecity777

Anyway, back to topic. Words on Twitter is that H&M fans have now turned on Scobie and his updated book. What's that all about? Anybody can give a summary?


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> This lady is so good. Harry ain't got no balls so he's outside juggling balls lol.



Lodpah, 
  Laundry can wait! Having found PDina thanks to you I am now addicted. She is so good, insightful like the posters here, only presents it orally. Watched this one, and then another, and then another etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I rolled my eyes so hard any time one of these hobby animal activists posted "And now the useless horse will probably go to the butcher!" Do these morons even have a basic idea what a horse on Olympia level costs? Even the most heartless owner - who had no problem riding this very horse over this very parcour earlier - would probably sell it to someone doing amateur sports or just wanting to ride around the forest before selling it for the 800 or so meat price, but let's not be too logical here. 

Oh well. BTW, did Harry win?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Anyway, back to topic. Words on Twitter is that H&M fans have now turned on Scobie and his updated book. What's that all about? Anybody can give a summary?



A few pages back someone posted a Twitter collage...sugars think he is only pretending to be on Raptor's side and is stirring the pot to make her look bad when she would never badmouth her dear family like this at all.


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> I watched The Crown. They showed a lot of QE's relationship with Porchey and PP was paying attention. The series didn't ever insinuate that Andrew wasn't PP's child.


The Crown's creator Peter Morgan has said many times that the show is his imagination, so we can't go by that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> And now the stans are turning on scooby….




@chicinthecity777


----------



## chicinthecity777

Jayne1 said:


> The Crown's creator Peter Morgan has said many times that the show is his imagination, so we can't go by that.


That show is almost pure fiction! Lol!


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I rolled my eyes so hard any time one of these hobby animal activists posted "And now the useless horse will probably go to the butcher!" Do these morons even have a basic idea what a horse on Olympia level costs? Even the most heartless owner - who had no problem riding this very horse over this very parcour earlier - would probably sell it to someone doing amateur sports or just wanting to ride around the forest before selling it for the 800 or so meat price, but let's not be too logical here.
> 
> Oh well. BTW, did Harry win?



There is always the chance of the horse having an 'accident' so the owners can collect what I'm sure would be a hefty insurance settlement. If it happened to Alydar-----one of the most famous thoroughbreds of the 20th century it could surely happen to any horse.
Ferdinand------a Kentucky Derby winner and sire was sent to the slaughterhouse as was Exceller, a top contender who was originally owned by Nelson Bunker Hunt. 
There isn't as much of a market for leisure horses as there used to be. Economics and demographics are conspiring to make ownership less and less feasible for average folk.
I am neither a 'hobby' animal activist nor a moron.
I am a practicing animal activist. As a vegan for the animals I live it every day.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> My understanding is the coach asked the rider to punch the horse and was removed and disqualified! I am unclear what the rider did or didn't do and she wasn't removed. The horse should have never be put back into the competition, having had issues previously.
> 
> This Olympics had not been a very well organised one.



The coach punched the horse and told the rider to do the same. Some riders use physical means to discipline a horse. The horses they usually ride are used to it and probably take such corrections well. A horse who is unaccustomed to being disciplined in such a manner may react badly. That horse was already refusing jumps and hitting it obviously didn't help. 

The pentathlon shows the athletes' ability in five events and it is understandably difficult. Just being able to reach a high level of competition in one sport is hard enough. The other four events have the athlete competing alone. The equestrian event requires the athlete to be able to compete as a partner to a horse he/she doesn't know and hasn't practiced on to show their true riding ability. It was a horsemanship fail in this case. 

The German rider was not the only one to have difficulty. The Brazilian and Italian riders fell off of their mounts and the Irish rider had many refusals, all on other horses. Did they just do a bad job screening the horses to be used for the Olympics? Or were those athletes more expert at the other four events, but they were not the best riders?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> There is always the chance of the horse having an 'accident' so the owners can collect what I'm sure would be a hefty insurance settlement. If it happened to Alydar-----one of the most famous thoroughbreds of the 20th century it could surely happen to any horse.
> Ferdinand------a Kentucky Derby winner and sire was sent to the slaughterhouse as was Exceller, a top contender who was originally owned by Nelson Bunker Hunt.
> There isn't as much of a market for leisure horses as there used to be. Economics and demographics are conspiring to make ownership less and less feasible for average folk.
> I am neither a 'hobby' animal activist nor a moron.
> I am a practicing animal activist. As a vegan for the animals I live it every day.



Yeah, but this is not a million dollar race horse either. My point being, there was absolutely no reason for the drama. The owners have already posted pictures of the horse happily recovering from tournament. They can ride it. It's sole purpose isn't being lent out to other riders. Also, in my area of interest it's quite the opposite, people are buying horses like mad because they have more time or don't do their normal socializing and apparently have not been financially compromised.

But also, if you'd seen the people I was referring to, you'd understand. I'm a huge animal person who is active in rescue etc., but I like to think I don't totally lack common sense. 

Anyway, I'll shut up now or the mods will be after me because I've been off topic most of the day


----------



## LittleStar88

I don't mind being off-topic, but this one hurts my heart for the animal(s). Maybe I don' get it, but I have never felt good about polo, horse racing, etc. Heard too many sad things.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Anyway, I'll shut up now or the mods will be after me because I've been off topic most of the day



Here's a photo of Meghan on a horse with her dad to get things back on topic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## octopus17

Jayne1 said:


> The Crown's creator Peter Morgan has said many times that the show is his imagination, so we can't go by that.


Heck, I read that as Piers Morgan and was beginning to wonder what parallel universe I had walked into!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @chicinthecity777





QueenofWrapDress said:


> A few pages back someone posted a Twitter collage...sugars think he is only pretending to be on Raptor's side and is stirring the pot to make her look bad when she would never badmouth her dear family like this at all.


Not going to lie… I would absolutely love it if Omid _had _been playing the long game sucking up to her but I don’t get what the big payoff is supposed to be. Relaunching your semi-flop book doesn’t seem like it.

Or alternatively, he _was_ her best friend but now he’s going full ‘single white female’ & he’s going to ruin her life & steal her man and her little dog too. 
Now that would be even funnier…..  



The girl in the sequel even looks like MM in one of her tacky ‘suits’ red carpets


xincinsin said:


> The way Methane alters her body, they probably have to figure out which version of the mother's body the baby was formed in.


That’s legit one of the best jokes I’ve heard in ages - I cackled like the witch I am!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He was out defending her a hot minute ago, so even if she did markle him I don't think it has fully sunk in to unleash his "Single White Female" self. But I agree, that would be extremely entertaining. I do wish someone from her past would unearth a huge skeleton just for fun.


----------



## chicinthecity777

bag-mania said:


> The coach punched the horse and told the rider to do the same. Some riders use physical means to discipline a horse. The horses they usually ride are used to it and probably take such corrections well. A horse who is unaccustomed to being disciplined in such a manner may react badly. That horse was already refusing jumps and hitting it obviously didn't help.
> 
> The pentathlon shows the athletes' ability in five events and it is understandably difficult. Just being able to reach a high level of competition in one sport is hard enough. The other four events have the athlete competing alone. The equestrian event requires the athlete to be able to compete as a partner to a horse he/she doesn't know and hasn't practiced on to show their true riding ability. It was a horsemanship fail in this case.
> 
> The German rider was not the only one to have difficulty. The Brazilian and Italian riders fell off of their mounts and the Irish rider had many refusals, all on other horses. Did they just do a bad job screening the horses to be used for the Olympics? Or were those athletes more expert at the other four events, but they were not the best riders?


Last comment about horses. I have not heard any other horses refusing to jump in this event. I only heard that this same horse refused to jump earlier with an athlete from Russia and the athlete got 0 point.


----------



## bag-mania

chicinthecity777 said:


> Last comment about horses. I have not heard any other horses refusing to jump in this event. I only heard that this same horse refused to jump earlier with an athlete from Russia and the athlete got 0 point.



There is supposed to be an inquiry to see if there is a problem with how they screen horses for the pentathlon and how they can fix it, if necessary. That particular horse performed well back when they were choosing them for the Olympics. Clearly he had a horrible day a few weeks ago.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Good news , that was OLD news
> I found the photo it was from 2010, he was taken to task at the time
> yesterdays horse(s) were brown not white
> also yesterday’s photos show he was not wearing spurs
> MY BAD to misinterpret the photo as being recent



Strangely this was supposed to be yesterday too (Metro)









						Harry to appear at polo match after donating £1,000,000 of memoir earnings
					

It's his first public appearance since the birth of his daughter Lilibet.




					metro.co.uk
				




How many ponies did he ride? Above a Bay (brown with black mane and tail) and a chestnut (all red-brown, with the white blaze) is this another (poor) pony below?
Still his reins are held short and hands are *heavy* 




So long as Harry's having fun, I'm sure that all that matters


----------



## papertiger

chicinthecity777 said:


> Omg the poor German morden pentathlon athlete! The horse totally let her down! So unfair to her! The horse had done it to another rider before and after that should have been taken out of the competition!
> 
> Sorry for being OT!



Schleu and her coach were O - if you're an athlete in 5 disciplines you should know/be trained in all 5 and not wing-it. Schleu completely took her anger (dressed as distress) out on the horse who was clearly already traumatised by events earlier. The horse played-up before entering the ring. She had time and permission to change the horse. Then the coach Raisne punched the horse and was disqualified for the remainder of the Games. 

Hard as H is on horses, I think he can at least ride. Polo is relentless, and hard on the ponies. It was first played on elephants. 

Spurs should be banned for polo and jumping.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Strangely this was supposed to be yesterday too (Metro)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry to appear at polo match after donating £1,000,000 of memoir earnings
> 
> 
> It's his first public appearance since the birth of his daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many ponies did he ride? Above a Bay (brown with black mane and tail) and a chestnut (all red-brown, with the white blaze) is this another (poor) pony below?
> Still his reins are held short and hands are *heavy*
> 
> View attachment 5170923
> 
> 
> So long as Harry's having fun, I'm sure that all that matters



Three as far as I could find out (two bays, one chestnut...posted pics a few pages back) but also, their outfits from yesterday were different (very turquoise), so this might be from another Sentebale tournament? Not that it makes it less ugly.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Strangely this was supposed to be yesterday too (Metro)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry to appear at polo match after donating £1,000,000 of memoir earnings
> 
> 
> It's his first public appearance since the birth of his daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many ponies did he ride? Above a Bay (brown with black mane and tail) and a chestnut (all red-brown, with the white blaze) is this another (poor) pony below?
> Still his reins are held short and hands are *heavy*
> 
> View attachment 5170923
> 
> 
> So long as Harry's having fun, I'm sure that all that matters


They said on the doc that 8/10 per person is the norm in polo- so hopefully the poor horses don’t have to put up with him for too long. 

So, from what you are saying with that very apt emoji, after all that _expensive and full education_ he’s bad at riding too? 
 I can understand he can’t entirely help being _not academic _but how is it possible to be so thoroughly immersed in so many things and yet so singularly lack attainment in any of them  ???

Also, we all know that charity work of any kind is not fun for H - it’s a torture remember- he hates publicity and being the centre of attention, riding horses, hobnobbing with the super rich and getting hammered at country clubs. He has to make himself do it for the orphans


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The horse played-up before entering the ring. She had time and permission to change the horse.



She did not get permission to change the horse, this is what her and her useless trainer complain about. Apparently it refused to jump three times under the Russian athlete, but the cut-off for a new horse is at four times. So of course instead of campaigning for a rule change after the fact, let's take it out on an already terrified animal. 



> Spurs should be banned for polo and jumping.



This, this, this.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Three as far as I could find out (two bays, one chestnut...posted pics a few pages back) but also, their outfits from yesterday were different (very turquoise), so this might be from another Sentebale tournament? Not that it makes it less ugly.



The photo with the blood on the gray horse’s side was from a polo match at Guards Polo Club in Windsor Great Park, Berkshire, in July, 2010.

The press used old photos they had and figured the public wouldn’t know the difference. That happens a lot with the media.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did not get permission to change the horse, this is what her and her useless trainer complain about. Apparently it refused to jump three times under the Russian athlete, but the cut-off for a new horse is at four times. So of course instead of campaigning for a rule change after the fact, let's take it out on an already terrified animal.
> 
> 
> 
> This, this, this.



I thought pent athletes could choose an alternative reserve horse. 

At least they don't have to play polo and pretend it's for charity


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Three as far as I could find out (two bays, one chestnut...posted pics a few pages back) but also, their outfits from yesterday were different (very turquoise), so this might be from another Sentebale tournament? Not that it makes it less ugly.



You maybe right because H looks a lot thinner and younger in the pics from the Metro. 

As @bag-mania said, perhaps the media banks on that no one will notice. Bad as fake news if any pic of H on a polo pony will do.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Strangely this was supposed to be yesterday too (Metro)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry to appear at polo match after donating £1,000,000 of memoir earnings
> 
> 
> It's his first public appearance since the birth of his daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many ponies did he ride? Above a Bay (brown with black mane and tail) and a chestnut (all red-brown, with the white blaze) is this another (poor) pony below?
> Still his reins are held short and hands are *heavy*
> 
> View attachment 5170923
> 
> 
> So long as Harry's having fun, I'm sure that all that matters


I think yesterday the team shirt color was blue , maybe the white shirt photo is from a different match , he looks thinner in the white shirt


----------



## marietouchet

3.5 M from a polo match ?   OK! 1.5M of that is the future proceeds from the book
So, that leaves 2M from the match proper.. How does a match generate so much income ? Is there a dinner, ball, concert , raffle ?


For comparison, the Met Ball used to be 500 seats at 25k each , so the take at the gate was 12.5M before expenses , of course Rihanna or equivalent was the entertainment 










						Prince Harry Donates $1.5 Million from Upcoming Memoir (and Scores Two Goals!) at Charity Polo Match
					

The Duke of Sussex flew to Colorado for two days to raise vital funds for Sentebale’s efforts helping children in southern Africa.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

We are the ones that need privacy from Megaphony and Hazz Hypocrite…


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Strangely this was supposed to be yesterday too (Metro)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry to appear at polo match after donating £1,000,000 of memoir earnings
> 
> 
> It's his first public appearance since the birth of his daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How many ponies did he ride? Above a Bay (brown with black mane and tail) and a chestnut (all red-brown, with the white blaze) is this another (poor) pony below?
> Still his reins are held short and hands are *heavy*
> 
> View attachment 5170923
> 
> 
> So long as Harry's having fun, I'm sure that all that matters



Like the comment about the memo… 
Prince of Polo @Maggie Muggins


----------



## Chanbal

One more


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we have the DM’s account of the polo - of course, we all know Hazzie didn’t pay any of his expenses:

_The starting kit alone, which takes in polo-playing essentials like a £500 helmet, £1,200 saddle and £600 specialist boots, costs £6,000 for a basic edition - with prices quickly rising for high-end brands. Then there are the costs of a club membership - which cost somewhere in the region of £1,500, on top of the £400 needed to enter a tournament. 
The greatest expense, of course, is the horse, which cost around £100,000 to buy and £1,200 a month to keep, and around £35,000 to transport.

There is no doubt the Duke of Sussex, 36, who has been playing polo for decades, will have had all of his own equipment to hand. _





and …  ut oh!



Comments are hilarious -








						The eye-watering costs of Prince Harry's VERY pricey hobby
					

Duke of Sussex made a surprise appearance alongside his close friend Nacho Figueras by hosting a charity polo tournament in Aspen for his Sentebale charity,.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

The eco warrior still has no issues using private jets…









						Eco-warrior Harry flies home from polo on millionaire pal's private jet
					

PRINCE Harry took a private jet home from a charity polo event — three months after calling climate change one of society’s “most pressing issues”. The eco-warrior royal boarded a 20-seat plan…




					www.thesun.ie


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's have some fun. I'm almost positive that I've recovered all your suggested nicknames after reviewing a bunch of posts.
> 
> How to calculate the rewards:
> 1 nickname = star; 3 nicknames = ribbon; 5+ nicknames = plaque (Master)
> Remember this is a "search and collect" game and that no one is claiming ownership of nicknames coined by others. I also realize that this wasn't an easy task for anyone to accomplish.
> 
> @purseinsanity Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master for the high score of a dozen nicknames.
> View attachment 5170023
> 
> 
> @csshopper Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master! You have collected 10 nicknames.
> View attachment 5170025
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020 Thanks and Congratulations Nickname Master.  I owe you two awards for having collected 9 nicknames: a ribbon and a plaque.
> View attachment 5170029
> View attachment 5170032
> 
> 
> @Annawakes Thanks and congratulations for collecting four nicknames, not an easy task by all means.
> View attachment 5170035



@Maggie Muggins  How adorable!  I am honored and humbled.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.  
Hoping you are enjoying your new grand bay-bay (Moira)


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we have the DM’s account of the polo - of course, we all know Hazzie didn’t pay any of his expenses:
> 
> _The starting kit alone, which takes in polo-playing essentials like a £500 helmet, £1,200 saddle and £600 specialist boots, costs £6,000 for a basic edition - with prices quickly rising for high-end brands. Then there are the costs of a club membership - which cost somewhere in the region of £1,500, on top of the £400 needed to enter a tournament.
> The greatest expense, of course, is the horse, which cost around £100,000 to buy and £1,200 a month to keep, and around £35,000 to transport.
> 
> There is no doubt the Duke of Sussex, 36, who has been playing polo for decades, will have had all of his own equipment to hand. _
> 
> 
> View attachment 5171011
> 
> 
> and … it oh!
> View attachment 5171012
> 
> 
> Comments are hilarious -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The eye-watering costs of Prince Harry's VERY pricey hobby
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex made a surprise appearance alongside his close friend Nacho Figueras by hosting a charity polo tournament in Aspen for his Sentebale charity,.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



is it just me or is H looking much older and… a little bloated????

edit - adding closer pic


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> is it just me or is H looking much older and… a little bloated????



Fighting those Spencer genes, kinda like cousin Kitty?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins  How adorable!  I am honored and humbled.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.
> Hoping you are enjoying your new grand bay-bay (Moira)


Thank you. I hope to enjoy her in person some day, but for now papa et maman are up in Canada while we're here in southern USA. She's beautiful with a full head of hair, a brunette like her granny.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> is it just me or is H looking much older and… a little bloated????
> 
> edit - adding closer pic




Fixed it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Like the comment about the memo…
> *Prince of Polo* @Maggie Muggins
> View attachment 5171001


Thank you @Chanbal. Good grief, you're already a Master, but you just keep on going like the Energizer Bunny!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> One more
> View attachment 5171010



This is getting downright creepy.  Wonder how many hours she has spent poring over pix of Diana and then sourcing look-alike outfits.  Talk about mental health issues!!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins  How adorable!  I am honored and humbled.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.
> Hoping you are enjoying your new grand bay-bay (Moira)


Congrats on new baby Moira


Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you @Chanbal. Good grief, you're already a Master, but you just keep on going like the Energizer Bunny!
> View attachment 5171042


It's hard not to acknowledge all the titles/names out there for the couple of Montecito.

Congrats to the proud grandmother, wishing Moira and family all the happiness!


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> is it just me or is H looking much older and… a little bloated????
> 
> edit - adding closer pic



Maybe he is happy because he is free of HER for awhile, no one to nudge, tap, hang on him.


----------



## Chanbal

After the £20Million advance, expenses with ghostwriter, private jets… he will likely have a big negative balance. The charity may get zero pounds or dollars,  but Hazz gets his much desired press releases.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> We are the ones that need privacy from Megaphony and Hazz Hypocrite…



She's absolutely stunning.


----------



## Lodpah

Luvbolide said:


> This is getting downright creepy.  Wonder how many hours she has spent poring over pix of Diana and then sourcing look-alike outfits.  Talk about mental health issues!!


She is psycho.


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone post this article? Even after all these months they are still trying to make people feel sorry for them.





__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## V0N1B2

csshopper said:


> Maybe he is happy because he is free of HER for awhile, no one to nudge, tap, hang on him.


Are we sure she’s not in Colorado with him?
I mean, did anyone check around where Harry parked his car?


----------



## rose60610

I think Harry loved polo. Now it's another log on the fire of things Meghan forbade Harry from doing. And where are all these military buddies of his?  Wasn't he in service for ten years or something? You'd think one of them would have visited the Gruesome Twosome, but since their privacy means nothing to them we'd have heard about it by now. Are Harry's military buddies not good enough for Meghan?  If they are of the ability to donate to Archewell, we'd have heard of them nonstop. But if they're plain warm bodies who just put themselves in harms' way and ready to die, I can see how that isn't good enough for Meghan.


----------



## VickyB

chicinthecity777 said:


> Last comment about horses. I have not heard any other horses refusing to jump in this event. I only heard that this same horse refused to jump earlier with an athlete from Russia and the athlete got 0 point.


Thanks for the data! I love watching this Olympic event! Question: don’t the competitors ride their own horses? It sounds as though they don’t.  Thx!


----------



## Chanbal

annus invisibillis…  










						CLAUDIA CONNELL looks back at The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's year
					

Holed up in their Californian mansion, enjoying some well-earned quiet family time, you could be forgiven for forgetting that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex even exist.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> is it just me or is H looking much older and… a little bloated????
> 
> edit - adding closer pic




He looks more bloated (right) than his wife who was supposed to be pregnant and near delivery (left) that's for sure. Perhaps H will give birth this time.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> He looks more bloated (right) than his wife who was supposed to be pregnant and near delivery (left) that's for sure. Perhaps H will give birth this time.


You might on to something. He's be alleviated of his balls, testosterone, manhood, and whatever men have so oh yeah, it's quite possible.


----------



## Lodpah

I finally figured out how Hazza was lured in. The lyrics and actions (well with some imagination if you will on your part) was her magic fishing lure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

VickyB said:


> Thanks for the data! I love watching this Olympic event! Question: don’t the competitors ride their own horses? It sounds as though they don’t.  Thx!



Not for pentathlon. Dressage, jumping and military (dressage, parcour jumping and an off-road course with more jumping, water etc.) competitors do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annus invisibillis    Brilliant.


----------



## needlv

oh so they Don’t have as many followers as William and Catherine?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> is it just me or is H looking much older and… a little bloated????
> 
> edit - adding closer pic



Some of the comments are great. M is referred to as Woko Ono,  Meghag the Camp Guard and My'EGO Markle.


----------



## marietouchet

Polo …
There are polo clubs in California, 6 must have joined one so he can practice, I guess one can rent or borrow ponies from friends
In the UK, his grandfather, father and brother all played and grandmother has huge stables at every house, so, the family must have owned dozens of top notch ponies , a luxury and a farm full of grooms to take care of them and do the mucking out 
i have no clue how an international player like N Figueroa does it, does he have ponies in every country ? I figure he jets a few ponies to each match, just like Jessica Springsteen got hers to Japan, not cheap 
But a whole string of polo ponies ???
the logistics of horses is more than I can handle , tack and polo outfits would fill up all the space in the overhead bins LOL, and there are trucks, trailers, grooms, I can only imagine … 
6 is not used to having to personally cope with all the WORK involved in horses although his aunt Pss Anne is known to delay interviews so she can finish the muck out


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

VickyB said:


> Thanks for the data! I love watching this Olympic event! Question: don’t the competitors ride their own horses? It sounds as though they don’t.  Thx!



No, there is a group of screened horses selected and for fairness the athletes draw the names of the horses they will ride out of a hat. I think this is for two reasons. It shows that the pentathlete is capable of riding any horse, not just the one practiced on. I also suspect it prevents the wealthiest competitors from buying top horses that will make them look better than they really are, while other athletes who cannot afford a top quality horse would be at a disadvantage. As QueenofWrapDress said, this is only for the pentathlon, of which riding represents 20% of the event.


----------



## Chanbal

_*The couple's author pal Omid Scobie will deliver the criticism on their behalf in an updated version of his hagiography Finding Freedom*, co-written with the TV producer Caroline Durand, which comically paints the fame hungry man-eating D-list actress Meghan as a modern-day Mother Teresa.

…He writes of the *Queen's statement: 'Those three words, 'recollections may vary', did not go unnoticed by the couple, who a close source said were 'not surprised' that full ownership was not taken. Months later and little accountability has been taken*,' a pal of Meghan's added. '*How can you move forward without that?*''…

Scobie added: 'There are people within the family who [the Sussexes] are much closer to today than they were a year ago. *But in terms of Harry's relationship with his father and brother, that progress has been very little.* *I think he is quite willing to own his part in everything, but I have been told that he is waiting to see some of that on the other side – and as of now there hasn't been that*.'…

…Now I know how Scobie works; he's an operative for his beloved H&M.

*The idea he would quote sources close to the couple without knowing the Sussexes approve of them is laughable.

But hilariously today the legally trigger-happy Duke and Duchess of Sussex have unleashed their rottweiler lawyers Schillings to try and scare off journalists connecting Finding Freedom to the couple.

If they're so horrified, then why don't Harry and Meghan publicly condemn the book, given they're so inclined to do that about other media coverage with which they're unhappy?

After all, the publishers have even decided to release Finding Freedom Part Two on August 31 – the anniversary of Princess Diana's death.*_

Anyone who knows how all the behind-the-scenes dealing between journalists, royals and the Sussexes work, which I certainly do, knows that this book is published with the silent approval of Harry and Meghan…

*The new book by Scobie concludes: 'As difficult as recent years have been, sources close to the Sussexes say that neither Harry nor Meghan have any regrets about the decisions they have made. What started as a fairytale romance became a story that reinvented the genre – a self-made, independent woman playing an equal role alongside her knight.'

Pass me the sick bucket.*

All the dishonourable duo have achieved by allowing their inner circle to collude with this author is heaping further pain and pressure on the grieving Queen – and that's nothing to be proud of.

_








						DAN WOOTTON: Harry and Meghan 'set the attack dogs on the Queen'
					

DAN WOOTTON: After months of attacking the Royal Family but pretending they weren't targeting the Queen, Harry and Meghan seem to be releasing the dogs on Her Majesty once again.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Polo …
> There are polo clubs in California, 6 must have joined one so he can practice, I guess one can rent or borrow ponies from friends
> In the UK, his grandfather, father and brother all played and grandmother has huge stables at every house, so, the family must have owned dozens of top notch ponies , a luxury and a farm full of grooms to take care of them and do the mucking out
> i have no clue how an international player like N Figueroa does it, does he have ponies in every country ? I figure he jets a few ponies to each match, just like Jessica Springsteen got hers to Japan, not cheap
> But a whole string of polo ponies ???
> the logistics of horses is more than I can handle , tack and polo outfits would fill up all the space in the overhead bins LOL, and there are trucks, trailers, grooms, I can only imagine …
> 6 is not used to having to personally cope with all the WORK involved in horses although his aunt Pss Anne is known to delay interviews so she can finish the muck out



Maybe he _joined_ (_begged for a freebie_) this one?








						Polo - Visit Santa Barbara
					

Pony up for polo! Watch the sport of kings on The American Riviera®.




					santabarbaraca.com


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sounds like Camilla offered plenty of support but was snubbed -how thick do you have to be to ignore the wife of the next King?

 In the days of the last old Henry (8 th) that would have led to beheading


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Sounds like Camilla offered plenty of support but was snubbed -how thick do you have to be to ignore the wife of the next King?
> 
> In the days of the last old Henry (8 th) that would have led to beheading
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5171481


That article said 'much like Meghan' Hmmm, Camilla had it far worse, and for years, whilst being married to her first husband and with two younger children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the creepy duo deserves every bit of criticism they have received.  Whatever good they attempt to do, if any, will be erased by their lies and hypocrisy.

_They publicly attacked the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge in their infamous TV interview with Oprah Winfrey, but Prince Harry and Meghan have a reason to be grateful to the royal couple.

I can disclose that the Duke of Sussex’s charity for injured ex-servicemen has enjoyed its best year ever, thanks to Prince William and Kate.

The Invictus Games Foundation, which former soldier Harry set up in 2014, received a grant of more than £500,000 from the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. 








						Harry's Invictus charity booms... thanks to Will and Kate's generosity
					

RICHARD EDEN: The Invictus Games Foundation, which Harry set up in 2014, received a grant of over £500,000 from the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> oh so they Don’t have as many followers as William and Catherine?




I'm mildly confused, do they even have an Insta? Even for Archewell I could not find an official account.

ETA: my bad, they never deleted Sussex Royal, just stopped posting. Who would want to follow a dead channel.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> This lady is so good. Harry ain't got no balls so he's outside juggling balls lol.



good to see a WOC calling them out.  but I haven't seen one single celeb POC who doesn't defend them and say they are victims of the mean (and boring) RF.....so until we see the American media or celebs turn on them, they are OK I think.  But then again, everyone could just get bored with them


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my, Lady CC's newest is over an hour. I don't have the mental capacity right now haha.


I believe I fell asleep during the last video, but I recall a comment about the beagle. Like Lady C, I was also intrigued by how quiet the dog was during the entire birthday video. Beagles are not the most silent dogs.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I was also intrigued by how quiet the dog was during the entire birthday video. *Beagles are not the most silent dogs.*



Especially when there is a crew of strangers in the room filming him. I think they gave Guy a pill to make him sleepy and then put him by the fireplace like the stage prop he is to them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> That article said 'much like Meghan' Hmmm, Camilla had it far worse, and for years, whilst being married to her first husband and with two younger children.


ITA. People are so afraid of being called racist that they downplay the often horrible treatment others have endured compared to M's lesser problems with the media.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. People are so afraid of being called racist that they downplay the often horrible treatment others have endured compared to M's lesser problems with the media.



I said this right at the start of this thread I disliked her from the getgo but it had nothing to do with her colour or race everything to do with her character or lack of


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fixed it
> 
> View attachment 5171039



Ummmmmm..........................who's his friend?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Ummmmmm..........................who's his friend?



Ignacio Figueras, Argentinian pro polo player and Ralph Lauren model.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Ummmmmm..........................who's his friend?


Just like HS days when some guy stopped in the hallway to chat and then one of his interesting buddies came along to chat him up, your first question was always, "Who's your friend?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> Ummmmmm..........................who's his friend?


I was thinking that too… Who is looking at Harry when this Nacho Fernandez is so dashing!



marietouchet said:


> 3.5 M from a polo match ?   OK! 1.5M of that is the future proceeds from the book
> So, that leaves 2M from the match proper.. How does a match generate so much income ? Is there a dinner, ball, concert , raffle ?
> 
> 
> For comparison, the Met Ball used to be 500 seats at 25k each , so the take at the gate was 12.5M before expenses , of course Rihanna or equivalent was the entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Donates $1.5 Million from Upcoming Memoir (and Scores Two Goals!) at Charity Polo Match
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex flew to Colorado for two days to raise vital funds for Sentebale’s efforts helping children in southern Africa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


It doesn’t seem to me like H is making them any money especially when he should be giving his own charity pretty big donations regularly anyway but what can they do? Fire him? He’d say he gives them golden publicity. 

In terms of money raising in general…. I believe there are pretty generous corporate and private sponsors for polo matches and the audience do wager and bet on matches which raises money too. there will probably be various pushes like auctions, raffles and more gambling at the party afterwards.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we have the DM’s account of the polo - of course, we all know Hazzie didn’t pay any of his expenses:
> 
> _The starting kit alone, which takes in polo-playing essentials like a £500 helmet, £1,200 saddle and £600 specialist boots, costs £6,000 for a basic edition - with prices quickly rising for high-end brands. Then there are the costs of a club membership - which cost somewhere in the region of £1,500, on top of the £400 needed to enter a tournament.
> The greatest expense, of course, is the horse, which cost around £100,000 to buy and £1,200 a month to keep, and around £35,000 to transport.
> 
> There is no doubt the Duke of Sussex, 36, who has been playing polo for decades, will have had all of his own equipment to hand. _
> 
> 
> View attachment 5171011
> 
> 
> and …  ut oh!
> View attachment 5171012
> 
> 
> Comments are hilarious -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The eye-watering costs of Prince Harry's VERY pricey hobby
> 
> 
> Duke of Sussex made a surprise appearance alongside his close friend Nacho Figueras by hosting a charity polo tournament in Aspen for his Sentebale charity,.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This seems a bit of an underrating of the costs tbh. They’ve only counted one horse and you know he’s got a hermes saddle to match his blanket!   




bag-mania said:


> Especially when there is a crew of strangers in the room filming him. I think they gave Guy a pill to make him sleepy and then put him by the fireplace like the stage prop he is to them.


I think that’s an agency dog they get in for PR. Hopefully Guy’s moved on to someone who has time for him. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe he _joined_ (_begged for a freebie_) this one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polo - Visit Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> Pony up for polo! Watch the sport of kings on The American Riviera®.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> santabarbaraca.com


I know some of you are also Agatha Christie fans and when I think of H at the polo club I picture the aristocratic rakish black sheep who has a good family & connections but never pays his fees & is always bumming drinks.

We’re on to you H!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Lady CC says that she is positive Harry will fork over the money because we're not the only ones having noticed that their charitable efforts kind of, uh, lack. According to her, they are slightly panicked donations to Archewell to fund their modest lifestyle will dry up if they don't deliver a bit more than lunch for six people, so she thinks he won't back out of this one.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> I know some of you are also Agatha Christie fans and when I think of H at the polo club I picture the aristocratic rakish black sheep who has a good family & connections but never pays his fees & is always bumming drinks.
> 
> We’re on to you H!
> View attachment 5171843


Yes! Hercule Poirot's little grey cells in action. Read all of Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple books during my teens and then again later in life and watched all their movies.


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ignacio Figueras, Argentinian pro polo player and Ralph Lauren model.


I thought I'd be old enough to be his mother, but no, I'm not....


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I think that’s an agency dog they get in for PR. Hopefully Guy’s moved on to someone who has time for him.



I think it is the same beagle. Here is a rare photo of Guy and Bogart back before she dumped Bogart in Canada because she didn’t want him anymore. As you can see Bogart does not look like an elderly dog incapable of traveling to England like the lying liar Meghan claimed. I hope he is still alive somewhere.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I'm so sad to understand more of what happened to Bogart.  Haven't searched on this subject until now and now I'm so sad.  Found many photos of Bogart and Guy snuggling.  They must have been close buds.  Many comments I read that Bogart wasn't old and may even be younger than Guy.   I would have gave up *H* and not Bogart !


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm so sad to understand more of what happened to Bogart.  Haven't searched on this subject until now and now I'm so sad.  Found many photos of Bogart and Guy snuggling.  They must have been close buds.  Many comments I read that Bogart wasn't old and may even be younger than Guy.   I would have gave up *H* and not Bogart !



Seriously. When I still had my very sick cat all the planning I did included him. I'd have never left him behind for anything, in fact I didn't travel for years because I couldn't bring myself to leave him for no apparent reason when he would have been so confused. 

But also, when my grandfather was dying I spent three days at his bedside instead of giving a TV interview trashing him and grandma, so obviously it's different for these people.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Many moons ago I found a starving stray cat in my yard.  I am very allergic to cats and very much to this stray.  Daily I had blood shot and watering eyes but we loved each other.  I know Hobo was grateful to me and I to her.  Always by my side protecting me for 14 years.  I had to be there for her last breath as she lovingly looked at me.  I am crying as I type ... She's been gone physically but not from my heart for more than 20 years now. It still hurts.

H&M are not loving people except for themselves. Nothing new to us who see threw their black hearts.  Sorry M&H fans.  When I hear people are cruel to animals it angers me!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Many moons ago I found a starving stray cat in my yard.  I am very allergic to cats and very much to this stray.  Daily I had blood shot and watering eyes but we loved each other.  I know Hobo was grateful to me and I to her.  Always by my side protecting me for 14 years.  I had to be there for her last breath as she lovingly looked at me.  I am crying as I type ... She's been gone physically but not from my heart for more than 20 years now. It still hurts.



The hole is so big *hugs*


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> That article said 'much like Meghan' Hmmm, Camilla had it far worse, and for years, whilst being married to her first husband and with two younger children.


As bad as Fergie, I think.  They said the nastiest things, although Camilla stayed far out of the spotlight and Fergie courted it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Especially when there is a crew of strangers in the room filming him. I think they gave Guy a pill to make him sleepy and then put him by the fireplace like the stage prop he is to them.


well, I hope they didn't drug the dog...maybe he's just a mellow beagle


----------



## csshopper

They are 2 of the most loathsome beings on earth. I cancelled PEOPLE, but have access to a copy. Remember the theme of the current issue is “what they have learned.” What they obviously have not learned is even an iota of compassion for anyone beyond their fingertips. Only the self involved, entitled, narcissistic duo would sanctimoniously state the world wide pandemic and the shutdowns as a result “is only going to benefit them in the long run.”


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> They are 2 of the most loathsome beings on earth. I cancelled PEOPLE, but have access to a copy. Remember the theme of the current issue is “what they have learned.” What they obviously have not learned is even an iota of compassion for anyone beyond their fingertips. Only the self involved, entitled, narcissistic duo would sanctimoniously state the world wide pandemic and the shutdowns as a result “is only going to benefit them in the long run.”
> 
> View attachment 5172104


they are loathsome but I have to say there are worse people on the planet (and in the US) than these two hypocrites


----------



## octopus17

I think Harry and Meghan had better watch out - The Sun seems to think that The Royal Family are seriously lawyering up, to do with libel and privacy.


----------



## sdkitty

Cornflower Blue said:


> I think Harry and Meghan had better watch out - The Sun seems to think that The Royal Family are seriously lawyering up, to do with libel and privacy.


hope so


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Especially when there is a crew of strangers in the room filming him. I think they gave Guy a pill to make him sleepy and then put him by the fireplace like the stage prop he is to them.


It crossed my mind that about the dog. Everything sounded so fake on that video.


----------



## Chanbal

Meggy Marbles   Sorry @Maggie Muggins
The video is good.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ignacio Figueras, Argentinian pro polo player and Ralph Lauren model.


He has been out there for a long time and still is just as handsome. He looks younger than harry and is older.  Healthy living?   His wife is stunning as well and they have four children.  Yikes his oldest is 21!


----------



## Chanbal

Both participated on the polo press release


----------



## Chanbal

Meggy Marbles's minister of propaganda on Good Morning America: 

_The Queen’s statement that ‘some recollections may vary’ led Harry and Meghan to believe senior Royals had not taken ‘accountability’ and ‘full ownership’ of the claims, according to the forthcoming new edition.

*But Scobie quickly backtracked, saying that it was the ‘institution’ of the Monarchy, not the Queen personally, who bore the brunt of the Sussexes’ displeasure – even though the statement was issued on behalf of Her Majesty.*

Yesterday, Scobie told Good Morning America: *‘When it comes to that relationship with the Queen, it is as strong as ever. 

They have nothing but love for her. Of course, we saw them name their daughter after the Queen’s very nickname. So that really gives us an insight into that close relationship.*’_









						Meghan and Harry naming baby Lilibet 'proves their closeness to Queen'
					

Omid Scobie said the name offered 'an insight into the close relationship' the Sussexes and the Queen still share. But Palace sources insist Queen was 'told not asked' about name.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## nyshopaholic

Cornflower Blue said:


> I think Harry and Meghan had better watch out - The Sun seems to think that The Royal Family are seriously lawyering up, to do with libel and privacy.



The New York Post has also picked up this story from The Sun. 









						Queen Elizabeth ‘getting lawyered up’ over Harry and Meghan attacks
					

Queen Elizabeth is “getting lawyered up” in response to repeated disses from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a report.




					pagesix.com


----------



## csshopper

No Scooby Do, naming the baby was an “in your face, you don’t own it, we can do whatever we want, you can’t stop us” power play meant to wound. A sharp dagger thrust in stealth. 

Remember their snide response to the Queen, “Service is universal”?

IMO if it had been meant in honor of the Queen there would have been happy family pictures featuring Lilibet with Meghan staring into the camera, not a sequestered infant.

A further sick obsession for control by She Who Emasculates Her Husband.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *Meggy Marbles*   Sorry @Maggie Muggins
> The video is good.



Thanks Master @Chanbal Meggy Marbles has been added to the list. If this keeps up, I'll have to look for better rewards than an Energizer Bunny.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks Master @Chanbal Meggy Marbles has been added to the list. If this keeps up, I'll have to look for better rewards than an Energizer Bunny.


No worries with the awards. Though, I'm concerned with your work adding all those names & titles; the list seems to be endless.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I'm still tabulating your suggestions and The List is now two pages long. Everyone, thanks again for participating in our little game and here are a few more rewards.

Congratulations @gracekelly Thanks Nickname Master for your seven nickname suggestions. 



Congratulations also to @elvisfan4life Thanks for your three suggestions.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> No worries with the awards. Though, I'm concerned with your work adding all those names & titles; the list seems to be endless.


Don't fret Master and Energizer Bunny. As I said in my previous post, The List is now two pages long and I don't mind adding new suggestions. I'm taking my time since I know that none of my fellow tpf posters expect instant gratification (rewards) like Meggie Marbles would.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Both participated on the polo press release



Wait - so she was there?

We can't go into a store without distancing and wearing our masks (fine with me) and they're kissing strangers on the cheek? What year is this?


----------



## Chanbal

nyshopaholic said:


> The New York Post has also picked up this story from The Sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth ‘getting lawyered up’ over Harry and Meghan attacks
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth is “getting lawyered up” in response to repeated disses from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, according to a report.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


The story from the Sun is spreading… 



"_*The Queen’s*__* legal team is said to be consulting libel experts following the series of explosive claims made from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex this year*, the Sun has reported. The royals are also bracing for the publication of Harry's memoirs next year which he has written "not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become".  The newspaper reported that a legal warning was now being considered for publishers Penguin Random House…"_


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Wait - so she was there?
> 
> We can't go into a store without distancing and wearing our masks (fine with me) and they're kissing strangers on the cheek? What year is this?


The video seems to be from 2018, so no masks… I just noticed that now.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm still tabulating your suggestions and The List is now two pages long. Everyone, thanks again for participating in our little game and here are a few more rewards.
> 
> Congratulations @gracekelly Thanks Nickname Master for your seven nickname suggestions.
> View attachment 5172306
> 
> 
> Congratulations also to @elvisfan4life Thanks for your three suggestions.
> View attachment 5172309


I am honored!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

Yup, the backlash continues…



			https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3145843/4-times-meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-shot-themselves
		



*4 times Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shot themselves in the foot in 2021: from their ‘patronising’ and ‘meaningless’ Archewell statement, to throwing shade at Queen Elizabeth*
*
Since leaving the royal family, the couple has taken to social media more than ever to push their point of view – so why is it backfiring so spectacularly?
From that ‘condescending’ statement on Afghanistan and Haiti, to the Lillibet baby name drama and, of course, the Oprah interview that refuses to die
*


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm still tabulating your suggestions and The List is now two pages long. Everyone, thanks again for participating in our little game and here are a few more rewards.
> 
> Congratulations @gracekelly Thanks Nickname Master for your seven nickname suggestions.
> View attachment 5172306
> 
> 
> Congratulations also to @elvisfan4life Thanks for your three suggestions.
> View attachment 5172309



Awww bless you made me smile this morning and that takes some doing these grim days - the sad news in the world makes the ranting and ramblings of this pathetic pair even harder to stomach


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*They have nothing but love for her. Of course, we saw them name their daughter after the Queen’s very nickname. So that really gives us an insight into that close relationship.*’_



Oh shut up Scobie. It proves they are shameless a*sholes, nothing else.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> No Scooby Do, naming the baby was an “in your face, you don’t own it, we can do whatever we want, you can’t stop us” power play meant to wound. A sharp dagger thrust in stealth.



THIS.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Wait - so she was there?
> 
> We can't go into a store without distancing and wearing our masks (fine with me) and they're kissing strangers on the cheek? What year is this?



That was before Megxit. We all loved the Caroline Herrera dress, until we found out it was an average month's salary and she wore it for like 2 hours.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> "_*The Queen’s*__* legal team is said to be consulting libel experts following the series of explosive claims made from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex this year*, the Sun has reported. The royals are also bracing for the publication of Harry's memoirs next year which he has written "not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become".  The newspaper reported that a legal warning was now being considered for publishers Penguin Random House…"_



That might be not a bad idea. You obviously can't reason with these two idiots, but the publishing house doesn't want to lose money and have a public feud with the BRF I'd imagine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From Dan Wootton's DM article on how he had to laugh about claims they didn't encourage Scobie's latest attack.



> Scobie – who has spent the past couple of years acting as a junior PR officer for the couple rather than a credible journalist – has provided an extract to Meghan's favourite fawning magazine People that is published today.



Someone bring Omid some burn ointment


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I actually read the whole thing instead of just skimming...poor delusional Thomas, his precious little girl has been lying and making up stuff for years even before meeting Harry. That said, she's definitely spiraling out of control lately.


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Lady CC says that she is positive Harry will fork over the money because we're not the only ones having noticed that their charitable efforts kind of, uh, lack. According to her, they are slightly panicked donations to Archewell to fund their modest lifestyle will dry up if they don't deliver a bit more than lunch for six people, so she thinks he won't back out of this one.



Thanks for this. I've never seen her with both sons. The left one actually resembles her, doesn't he. Imagine growing up w/ Lady C as your mother.


----------



## papertiger

Jktgal said:


> Thanks for this. I've never seen her with both sons. The left one actually resembles her, doesn't he. Imagine growing up w/ Lady C as your mother.



That's interesting because both boys are adopted (from Russia). 

They often say that you adopt the gestures and mannerisms of your parents/family/'clan' biological or not. If anyone can find the study let me know. I know a 12 y o girl who is the spitting image of her father in every way including voice, laugh and personality - except she is not his biological daughter but was adopted (her mother _is_ her biological-mother).


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Yup, the backlash continues…
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3145843/4-times-meghan-markle-and-prince-harry-shot-themselves
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *4 times Meghan Markle and Prince Harry shot themselves in the foot in 2021: from their ‘patronising’ and ‘meaningless’ Archewell statement, to throwing shade at Queen Elizabeth*
> 
> *Since leaving the royal family, the couple has taken to social media more than ever to push their point of view – so why is it backfiring so spectacularly?*
> *From that ‘condescending’ statement on Afghanistan and Haiti, to the Lillibet baby name drama and, of course, the Oprah interview that refuses to die*


This lightweight journalist Andre Neveling has written many pro-Methane articles before and was quite an Omid clone. Has he seen the light or is he one of those spineless hacks who bend with the wind?


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> The story from the Sun is spreading…
> 
> 
> 
> "_*The Queen’s*__* legal team is said to be consulting libel experts following the series of explosive claims made from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex this year*, the Sun has reported. The royals are also bracing for the publication of Harry's memoirs next year which he has written "not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become".  The newspaper reported that a legal warning was now being considered for publishers Penguin Random House…"_


----------



## nyshopaholic

The NY Post also posted this article about Hap Hazza. Yet another example of do as we say, not as we do. He’ll probably claim it’s a huge security risk for him to fly commercial so he has to fly private instead.  

Eco-warrior Prince Harry flies private jet home from polo match









						Eco-warrior Prince Harry flies private jet home from polo match
					

The decision comes just three months after Harry’s lecturing to the world on climate change.




					nypost.com


----------



## LittleStar88

nyshopaholic said:


> The NY Post also posted this article about Hap Hazza. Yet another example of do as we say, not as we do. He’ll probably claim it’s a huge security risk for him to fly commercial so he has to fly private instead.
> 
> Eco-warrior Prince Harry flies private jet home from polo match
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eco-warrior Prince Harry flies private jet home from polo match
> 
> 
> The decision comes just three months after Harry’s lecturing to the world on climate change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Are we to expect HRH Mr. California Mountbatten-Windsor, Moaner of Montecito, Sixth In Line, to fly with the common folk?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jktgal said:


> Thanks for this. I've never seen her with both sons. The left one actually resembles her, doesn't he. Imagine growing up w/ Lady C as your mother.



Iirc they said due to Covid the left one hadn't been home in 18 months. The other one used to do her videos with her and I always found it endearing that he started every single one with "How are you today, mum?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5172611



It is my firm belief that annoying little pests like the Sussexes really stand no chance once the gloves are off and the BRF tap into their ressources. It's just that for some reason, maybe personal, maybe because of misjudgement, they haven't even really tried yet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

For several reasons, the world has changed and will continue to change.  
The moaning moaners’ time in the spotlight is ending.  
 Rich, entitled moaning moaners just ‘ain’t’ cool.


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> This lightweight journalist Andre Neveling has written many pro-Methane articles before and was quite an Omid clone. Has he seen the light or is he one of those spineless hacks who bend with the wind?



Bending with the wind methinks. But it shows the wind direction has changed isn’t  it?


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Bending with the wind methinks. But it shows the wind direction has changed isn’t  it?


Let's hope.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I think it is the same beagle. Here is a rare photo of Guy and Bogart back before she dumped Bogart in Canada because she didn’t want him anymore. As you can see Bogart does not look like an elderly dog incapable of traveling to England like the lying liar Meghan claimed. I hope he is still alive somewhere.
> 
> View attachment 5171938


I don’t know, not to sound like a conspirator, but it’s much easier to find 2 beagles that look the same than two children.




Hermes Zen said:


> I'm so sad to understand more of what happened to Bogart.  Haven't searched on this subject until now and now I'm so sad.  Found many photos of Bogart and Guy snuggling.  They must have been close buds.  Many comments I read that Bogart wasn't old and may even be younger than Guy.   I would have gave up *H* and not Bogart !


But you see bogart was really more a Canadian style dog and she wanted to play gentry with a beagle. That & she needed to get to U.K. ASAP to shotgun her wedding 


csshopper said:


> They are 2 of the most loathsome beings on earth. I cancelled PEOPLE, but have access to a copy. Remember the theme of the current issue is “what they have learned.” What they obviously have not learned is even an iota of compassion for anyone beyond their fingertips. Only the self involved, entitled, narcissistic duo would sanctimoniously state the world wide pandemic and the shutdowns as a result “is only going to benefit them in the long run.”
> 
> View attachment 5172104


Yeah geez what a heart rendingly ‘beautiful  moment’ & captured on camera for our elucidation too. 

I know they love us to think they are the busiest workers but to me it sounds horrifically irresponsible to get a dog if you don’t have time to walk it without a global shutdown. Never mind two young kids  


papertiger said:


> That's interesting because both boys are adopted (from Russia).
> 
> They often say that you adopt the gestures and mannerisms of your parents/family/'clan' biological or not. If anyone can find the study let me know. I know a 12 y o girl who is the spitting image of her father in every way including voice, laugh and personality - except she is not his biological daughter but was adopted (her mother _is_ her biological-mother).


It does happen quite a bit- I know someone who resembles their adoptive parent a lot too. I think mannerisms and colour choices influence us a lot. 


xincinsin said:


> This lightweight journalist Andre Neveling has written many pro-Methane articles before and was quite an Omid clone. Has he seen the light or is he one of those spineless hacks who bend with the wind?


----------



## poopsie

Cornflower Blue said:


> I thought I'd be old enough to be his mother, but no, I'm not....


I am, but so what


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> they are loathsome but I have to say there are worse people on the planet (and in the US) than these two hypocrites



Isn't the US part of the planet?


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Isn't the US part of the planet?


ha
of course.  But I guess I'm saying not just on the planet but right here in our own country.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Lady CC says that she is positive Harry will fork over the money because we're not the only ones having noticed that their charitable efforts kind of, uh, lack. According to her, they are slightly panicked donations to Archewell to fund their modest lifestyle will dry up if they don't deliver a bit more than lunch for six people, so she thinks he won't back out of this one.



I'll believe it when I see it.  (And since I'll never personally witness it, I don't think he'll ever fork over that much money.  )


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh shut up Scobie. It proves they are shameless a*sholes, nothing else.


And shamelessly sticking a knife in her back whilst kissing her a*s*s. That’s quite a party trick.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It crossed my mind that about the dog. Everything sounded so fake on that video.


I was joking that he was probably a ceramic replica of Guy.  Maybe I wasn't wrong!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'll believe it when I see it.  (And since I'll never personally witness it, I don't think he'll ever fork over that much money.  )


I don’t think they will hand over anything either.   They will rationalize that they worked to hard for it and keep it.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Are we to expect HRH Mr. California Mountbatten-Windsor, Moaner of Montecito, Sixth In Line, to fly with the common folk?


I want to know who the jet belonged to. I bet it was sent to pick him up aNd it flew empty on that run.  Bigger carbon footprint.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> _*But Scobie quickly backtracked, saying that it was the ‘institution’ of the Monarchy, not the Queen personally, who bore the brunt of the Sussexes’ displeasure – even though the statement was issued on behalf of Her Majesty.*
> Yesterday, Scobie told Good Morning America: *‘When it comes to that relationship with the Queen, it is as strong as ever.
> They have nothing but love for her. Of course, we saw them name their daughter after the Queen’s very nickname. So that really gives us an insight into that close relationship.*’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry naming baby Lilibet 'proves their closeness to Queen'
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie said the name offered 'an insight into the close relationship' the Sussexes and the Queen still share. But Palace sources insist Queen was 'told not asked' about name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



All it "proves" is that they are a$$kissing in the hopes that the money keeps coming.  They are idiots in the sense that Charles or William will be King in the not so far future, and they've done nothing but insult them.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of charity polo match 

Classic BRF-style charity event with equines, an upper class sport

i can’t imagine how much this cost 6 - airfare, horses, all those expenses used to be covered by the firm , and I don’t think polo plays to his woke US base 

he was happy on the filed but optics not good ??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> I was joking that he was probably a ceramic replica of Guy.  Maybe I wasn't wrong!


The ceramic dogs can look extremely real. I have a ceramic Lhasa Apso and many a time someone (a repair person, not a friend) would come in and nervously ask me to please hold the dog,  and I’d say “oh he won’t hurt you.  He’s not real!” They would be so embarrassed but also relieved.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Wait - so she was there?
> 
> We can't go into a store without distancing and wearing our masks (fine with me) and they're kissing strangers on the cheek? What year is this?


I think it's from 2018...at least that's what the sign behind them says?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> All it "proves" is that they are a$$kissing in the hopes that the money keeps coming.  They are idiots in the sense that Charles or William will be King in the not so far future, and they've done nothing but insult them.



Also Williams seems a bit more strongwilled than Charles. It might be interesting to see how he'll deal with them, but also, by the time he becomes king the conflict might have fizzled out especially as I still think there will be a divorce at some point.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also *Williams seems a bit more strongwilled than Charles.* It might be interesting to see how he'll deal with them, but also, by the time he becomes king the conflict might have fizzled out especially as I still think there will be a divorce at some point.



You mean William has the backbone his father is lacking. 

From how he treated Harry at the statue event, William does not pretend to forgive his brother.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> That's interesting because both boys are adopted (from Russia).
> 
> They often say that you adopt the gestures and mannerisms of your parents/family/'clan' biological or not. If anyone can find the study let me know. I know a 12 y o girl who is the spitting image of her father in every way including voice, laugh and personality - except she is not his biological daughter but was adopted (her mother _is_ her biological-mother).


The one to her right actually reminds me of Putin.


----------



## purseinsanity

nyshopaholic said:


> The NY Post also posted this article about Hap Hazza. Yet another example of do as we say, not as we do. *He’ll probably claim it’s a huge security risk for him to fly commercial so he has to fly private instead. *
> 
> Eco-warrior Prince Harry flies private jet home from polo match
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eco-warrior Prince Harry flies private jet home from polo match
> 
> 
> The decision comes just three months after Harry’s lecturing to the world on climate change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Yep.  William and Kate can fly with their kids on a commercial flight, but Harry must be protected at all costs.


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not for pentathlon. Dressage, jumping and military (dressage, parcour jumping and an off-road course with more jumping, water etc.) competitors do.


Thanks!


----------



## VickyB

bag-mania said:


> No, there is a group of screened horses selected and for fairness the athletes draw the names of the horses they will ride out of a hat. I think this is for two reasons. It shows that the pentathlete is capable of riding any horse, not just the one practiced on. I also suspect it prevents the wealthiest competitors from buying top horses that will make them look better than they really are, while other athletes who cannot afford a top quality horse would be at a disadvantage. As QueenofWrapDress said, this is only for the pentathlon, of which riding represents 20% of the event.


Thanks!


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> And shamelessly sticking a knife in her back whilst kissing her a*s*s. That’s quite a party trick.


Well he’s had them under observation for a while… I wonder if he also learnt to juggle from Mr and Mrs ‘of course we still love and are extremely close with our racist, abusive family and we will forgive them when they apologise’

As I’ve said before, M should watch out as her shadow is picking up all the tricks of the trade




marietouchet said:


> Thinking of charity polo match
> 
> Classic BRF-style charity event with equines, an upper class sport
> 
> i can’t imagine how much this cost 6 - airfare, horses, all those expenses used to be covered by the firm , and I don’t think polo plays to his woke US base
> 
> he was happy on the filed but optics not good ??


I was thinking this too, the imagery is very inconsistent how he flip-flops from “I was trapped and never went on a bike ride and now I enjoy the simple pleasures of homemade cake and rescue chickens” to “I’m flying cross country to play the most elite game in the world as I have done all my life thanks to my upbringing.”

As we saw in the people magazine also they apparently can’t find time to go to the beach with their toddler without Covid but he’s managed to keep training at semi-pro level - makes sense.


----------



## VickyB

Hermes Zen said:


> Many moons ago I found a starving stray cat in my yard.  I am very allergic to cats and very much to this stray.  Daily I had blood shot and watering eyes but we loved each other.  I know Hobo was grateful to me and I to her.  Always by my side protecting me for 14 years.  I had to be there for her last breath as she lovingly looked at me.  I am crying as I type ... She's been gone physically but not from my heart for more than 20 years now. It still hurts.
> 
> H&M are not loving people except for themselves. Nothing new to us who see threw their black hearts.  Sorry M&H fans.  When I hear people are cruel to animals it angers me!


Hugs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> As we saw in the people magazine also they apparently can’t find time to go to the beach with their toddler without Covid but he’s managed to keep training at semi-pro level - makes sense.



Did he though...for someone who basically grew up on horseback it's probably like...riding a bike, you don't forget how to do it, especially not after only two years.

Not like me who was sat on that horse a while back after 10+ years and had to think hard how to make it do anything LOL Still I think with a few lessons I'll be back at the game quickly as well.


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> Are we to expect HRH Mr. California Mountbatten-Windsor, Moaner of Montecito, Sixth In Line, to fly with the common folk?


Common, sensitive, aware?  Never. There are jets and then there are JETS. It took a 20 passenger one to contain his monumental ego.

"He flew home on a 20-seater Gulfstream *jet* reportedly belonging to one of his polo friends, businessman *Marc Ganzi"*


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he though...for someone who basically grew up on horseback it's probably like...riding a bike, you don't forget how to do it, especially not after only two years.
> 
> Not like me who was sat on that horse a while back after 10+ years and had to think hard how to make it do anything LOL Still I think with a few lessons I'll be back at the game quickly as well.


Im sure he can ride a horse (to some degree- I don’t preclude him from being a talent vacuum at this point) but I would assume more that he’s got to keep up with the agility level and tactics of polo like any sport and as he ages.  Especially if his team mates are pro players- I’m sure they’ll do most of the heavy lifting for him but he probably doesn’t want to embarrass himself (in this case at least  )

Personally, I’m  so bad at riding a bike I seem to have to relearn it every time I get on one.


----------



## Chanbal

Can't wait…


----------



## Chanbal

Good for Kate! Who wants to be associated with humbugs… 

_"The Sussexes recently published a statement responding to the violence in Afghanistan, where *they recommended a list of mental health charities for veterans* to contact if they need help.

But Heads Together, *Kate personal charitable foundation she co-founded with William and Harry in 2017, was nowhere to be found on the list.*

News.au royal columnist Daniela Elser claimed _*this was a clear snub and a betrayal of one of the Royal Family's most hardworking and beloved members…*_"









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed' Kate in statement, royal watcher claims
					

The Sussexes' statement on Afghanistan included a list of mental health charities for veterans – but failed to include Kate Middleton's own, which she co-founded with Harry and Prince William




					www.dailystar.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Common, sensitive, aware?  Never. There are jets and then there are JETS. It took a 20 passenger one to contain his monumental ego.
> 
> "He flew home on a 20-seater Gulfstream *jet* reportedly belonging to one of his polo friends, businessman *Marc Ganzi"*


two-faced twerp  Did Piers get his invitation to join this thread?


----------



## Hermes Zen

VickyB said:


> Hugs.


Thank you!


----------



## chicinthecity777

VickyB said:


> Thanks for the data! I love watching this Olympic event! Question: don’t the competitors ride their own horses? It sounds as though they don’t.  Thx!


Sorry for the late reply. Been travelling. No they don't. There is a pool of hourses and they draw randomly from the pool and was given some time the familiarise themselves with the horses. But clearly I know nothing about the story and I am sorry I even mentioned it.

Separately in replying to Vicky, I would challenge anybody who isn't competing at Olympics level to judge these athletes' decisions and actions without being in their shoes and and seem to know exactly what the athlete should do!    5 years of training should just go down the drain, why not?

Do carry on!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chicinthecity777 said:


> Separately in replying to Vicky, I would challenge anybody who isn't competing at Olympics level to judge these athletes' decisions and actions without being in their shoes and and seem to know exactly what the athlete should do!    5 years of training should just go down the drain, why not?



I mean, meeting your criteria a former Olympia pentathlon gold medallist who also happens to be the culprit's former training partner of several years was watching (not in front of the TV, but sat at the stand) and wasn't exactly supportive of the spectacle. Isabelle Werth, sevenfold Olympia winner who is also the world's most successful horserider based on what else she has won, had pretty harsh things to say.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Common, sensitive, aware?  Never. There are jets and then there are JETS. It took a 20 passenger one to contain his monumental ego.
> 
> "He flew home on a 20-seater Gulfstream *jet* reportedly belonging to one of his polo friends, businessman *Marc Ganzi"*



He had just spent an entire weekend with >shudder< _people. _
He could not be expected to ride in the same plane as the >shudder< _people.  
_Truth be told, he probably was in Colo for a couple of weeks, ya kno, _practicing the polo _


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Good for Kate! Who wants to be associated with humbugs…
> 
> _"The Sussexes recently published a statement responding to the violence in Afghanistan, where *they recommended a list of mental health charities for veterans* to contact if they need help.
> 
> But Heads Together, *Kate personal charitable foundation she co-founded with William and Harry in 2017, was nowhere to be found on the list.*
> 
> News.au royal columnist Daniela Elser claimed _*this was a clear snub and a betrayal of one of the Royal Family's most hardworking and beloved members…*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed' Kate in statement, royal watcher claims
> 
> 
> The Sussexes' statement on Afghanistan included a list of mental health charities for veterans – but failed to include Kate Middleton's own, which she co-founded with Harry and Prince William
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


And yet they claim Meg and Kate "have a much stronger relationship now" and that Kate will help with Netflix.    So laughable.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> Meggy Marbles's minister of propaganda on Good Morning America:
> 
> _The Queen’s statement that ‘some recollections may vary’ led Harry and Meghan to believe senior Royals had not taken ‘accountability’ and ‘full ownership’ of the claims, according to the forthcoming new edition.
> 
> *But Scobie quickly backtracked, saying that it was the ‘institution’ of the Monarchy, not the Queen personally, who bore the brunt of the Sussexes’ displeasure – even though the statement was issued on behalf of Her Majesty.*
> 
> Yesterday, Scobie told Good Morning America: *‘When it comes to that relationship with the Queen, it is as strong as ever.
> 
> They have nothing but love for her. Of course, we saw them name their daughter after the Queen’s very nickname. So that really gives us an insight into that close relationship.*’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry naming baby Lilibet 'proves their closeness to Queen'
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie said the name offered 'an insight into the close relationship' the Sussexes and the Queen still share. But Palace sources insist Queen was 'told not asked' about name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




oh dearie me can’t breathe - loved Dorothy (on Golden Girls) and I can just hear her say that - thank you!  



csshopper said:


> No Scooby Do, naming the baby was an “in your face, you don’t own it, we can do whatever we want, you can’t stop us” power play meant to wound. A sharp dagger thrust in stealth.
> 
> Remember their snide response to the Queen, “Service is universal”?
> 
> IMO if it had been meant in honor of the Queen there would have been happy family pictures featuring Lilibet with Meghan staring into the camera, not a sequestered infant.
> 
> A further sick obsession for control by *She Who Emasculates Her Husband*.



bravo csshopper, another fine name - “She Who Emasculates Her Husband”


----------



## Lodpah

@Maggie Muggins Hey I got another one for you (can't take the credit for coming up with it), I saw it on a comment somewhere else. 

Hazardous Harry and Malicious Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not sure why Scobie, a subject of Her Majesty, does not understand that the Queen IS the monarchy. Also, "the monarchy as an institution" cannot, you know, act, but maybe that's taking it one step too far for a rather simple mind.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> @Maggie Muggins Hey I got another one for you (can't take the credit for coming up with it), I saw it on a comment somewhere else.
> 
> Hazardous Harry and Malicious Meghan.


How about Gullible Ginger and the Treacherous TIG?


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure why Scobie, a subject of Her Majesty, does not understand that the Queen IS the monarchy. Also, "the monarchy as an institution" cannot, you know, act, but maybe that's taking it one step too far for a rather simple mind.



Because he is taking his orders from MM.  She made the same distinction on the Oprah interview…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> @Maggie Muggins Hey I got another one for you (can't take the credit for coming up with it), I saw it on a comment somewhere else.
> 
> *Hazardous Harry and Malicious Meghan*.


Thanks @Lodpah Don't worry, no one is taking credit for nicknames coined by others as we're just collecting them for fun. Hazardous Harry and Malicious Meghan have been added to The List and counted as two separate nicknames which gives you a total of three, good for a ribbon. Congratulations!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *two-faced twerp*  Did Piers get his invitation to join this thread?



Thanks @Chanbal  Nickname added to The List and here's something for an eager beaver.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Chanbal  Nickname added to The List and here's something for an eager beaver.
> View attachment 5173120


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> No Scooby Do, naming the baby was an “in your face, you don’t own it, we can do whatever we want, you can’t stop us” power play meant to wound. A sharp dagger thrust in stealth.
> 
> Remember their snide response to the Queen, “Service is universal”?
> 
> IMO if it had been meant in honor of the Queen there would have been happy family pictures featuring Lilibet with Meghan staring into the camera, not a sequestered infant.
> 
> A further sick obsession for control by *She Who Emasculates Her Husband*.


Thanks @csshopper Nickname "She Who Emasculates Her Husband" added to The List and we have another Energizer Bunny who keeps on going.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> How about *Gullible Ginger and the Treacherous TIG*?


Thanks @charlottawill   Both spot-on nicknames added to the list. Congratulations!


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @charlottawill   Both spot-on nicknames added to the list. Congratulations!
> View attachment 5173157


I'm honored


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @csshopper Nickname "She Who Emasculates Her Husband" added to The List and we have another Energizer Bunny who keeps on going.
> View attachment 5173146


Maggie, you made my day, giving this 77 year old a re charged battery and an energy boost. This whole group does, so many intelligent, insightful, articulate, accomplished, funny women around our world. Look forward every day to reading what’s been posted.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Maggie, you made my day, giving this 77 year old a re charged battery and an energy boost. This whole group does, so many intelligent, insightful, articulate, accomplished, funny women around our world. Look forward every day to reading what’s been posted.



I started off in this thread liking them, which turned into can't stand them, and now, I honestly come more for all of you than them at all!  You all make me laugh, cringe (poor word choice, LOL), and come up with insights I'd never have thought of myself.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> Maggie, you made my day, giving this 77 year old a re charged battery and an energy boost. This whole group does, so many intelligent, insightful, articulate, accomplished, funny women around our world. Look forward every day to reading what’s been posted.


I want to be as witty as you when I'm 77


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> I want to be as witty as you when I'm 77



Ditto


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The crazies are at it again.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry played polo, that means Meghan allowed him to pack and bring his polo gear, boots, etc. Unless he bought all new stuff. Meghan forbade him to go hunting with the boys, remember? so I wonder what happened to his guns, unless they were considered property of the Crown and the family gets their pick of arms.  Clearly Meghan approves of elitist polo matches, while she attempts to claim she's just a regular chicken rescuing plebe like the rest of us. Has she found her voice yet? If so, I wish she'd put it away and lock it up.


----------



## Chanbal

Another PR stunt from the Glorious Hypocrites…



_*"The lengthy statement, released via the couple's slick Archewell Foundation website, *called on followers to support organisations including Women For Afghan Women (WAW), but* failed to say how much they would be personally donating or details of how they will help. *

However, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were slammed by a royal expert who called their statement 'another attempt to form an alternate woke royal family.'_

Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: '*I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family*."


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Another PR stunt from the Glorious Hypocrites…
> 
> 
> 
> _*"The lengthy statement, released via the couple's slick Archewell Foundation website, *called on followers to support organisations including Women For Afghan Women (WAW), but* failed to say how much they would be personally donating or details of how they will help. *
> 
> However, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were slammed by a royal expert who called their statement 'another attempt to form an alternate woke royal family.'_
> 
> Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: '*I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family*."



They have never heard the saying "Charity begins with C not me".


----------



## marietouchet

See DM story on Angelina Jolie new account on IG
she posted about Afghanistan … 
Compare and contrast to H&M word salad … DISCUSS ..


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> If Harry played polo, that means Meghan allowed him to pack and bring his polo gear, boots, etc. Unless he bought all new stuff. Meghan forbade him to go hunting with the boys, remember? so I wonder what happened to his guns, unless they were considered property of the Crown and the family gets their pick of arms.  Clearly Meghan approves of elitist polo matches, while she attempts to claim she's just a regular chicken rescuing plebe like the rest of us. Has she found her voice yet? If so, I wish she'd put it away and lock it up.


Confusingly … there was also a bullying story …
6 hosted a hunting weekend and M bought red blankies as gifts for house guests
PA got blankies in wrong shade of red, so M went ballistic.
no idea if this story is true, but, it is about a hunting weekend, a very BRF thing, Charles hosts them and it is the hottest invite in the UK for hunting enthusiasts
in all fairness, these types of weekend invites are usually sent to donors, magnates, important friends etc, arguably to support the BRF business


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> They have never heard the saying "Charity begins with C not me".



They've also never heard "Charity should be done with intention not for attention".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Maggie, you made my day, giving this 77 year old a re charged battery and an energy boost. This whole group does, so many intelligent, insightful, articulate, accomplished, funny women around our world. Look forward every day to reading what’s been posted.


Likewise, posters like you make this 74 year old visit this thread not just to read about the self-indulgent duo's latest cringeworthy enterprises, but to learn something new and laugh along with everyone else.


----------



## TC1

The Netflix series "Explained" has a new season. One of the episodes in on "Royalty" where they touch on how families have managed to stay relevant in a time where most of the Commonwealth just uses them as figureheads, not governing. It was interesting, I must warn you all..Omid is on for a brief moment adding his 2C   
I'm also not convinced that beagle is not a taxidermy version in that dog bed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Another PR stunt from the Glorious Hypocrites…
> 
> 
> 
> _*"The lengthy statement, released via the couple's slick Archewell Foundation website, *called on followers to support organisations including Women For Afghan Women (WAW), but* failed to say how much they would be personally donating or details of how they will help. *
> 
> However, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were slammed by a royal expert who called their statement 'another attempt to form an alternate woke royal family.'_
> 
> Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: '*I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family*."




So we got reports of people being killed as they tried to hang onto outside parts of airplanes that were taking off, women getting whipped and worse by the Taliban, people being killed indiscriminately in Afghanistan, and thousands desperate to flee the country by any means possible. 
I'd be embarrassed as hell to be bragging about donating to the WAW in such a way that says "Looky ME! I'M donating (won't say how much) and I'm not encouraging other people to do so, I just want to brag and riff off of other people's suffering, torture and desperation so I look good. I could this anonymously, but I want my sugars to know. I'm woke so I'm a genius and better than you". 
Will we get another photo of Meghan pretending to kiss the hand of a victim but actually kisses her own thumb again? Their tone deafness is deafening.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Confusingly … there was also a bullying story …
> 6 hosted a hunting weekend and M bought red blankies as gifts for house guests
> PA got blankies in wrong shade of red, so M went ballistic.
> no idea if this story is true, but, it is about a hunting weekend, a very BRF thing, Charles hosts them and it is the hottest invite in the UK for hunting enthusiasts
> in all fairness, these types of weekend invites are usually sent to donors, magnates, important friends etc, arguably to support the BRF business


I always conjectured that after the "horror" of the blankets in the wrong shade of red, the Duchess of Delicate Constitution could not stomach another epic fail of such magnitude and the incident turned her off hunting totally. She then turned on the waterworks when the Duke of Dumb returned and threatened to off herself if he ever took part in that vile activity again. (tongue firmly in cheek  ) (suicidal ideation is never a laughing matter, but in Methane's world, it's just another weapon in her narc arsenal)


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Confusingly … there was also a bullying story …
> 6 hosted a hunting weekend and M bought red blankies as gifts for house guests
> PA got blankies in wrong shade of red, so M went ballistic.
> no idea if this story is true, but, it is about a hunting weekend, a very BRF thing, Charles hosts them and it is the hottest invite in the UK for hunting enthusiasts
> in all fairness, these types of weekend invites are usually sent to donors, magnates, important friends etc, arguably to support the BRF business




_She saw red — just the wrong shade.

Meghan Markle reportedly went “mental” when embroidered blankets she ordered came back the wrong tint of red — a pattern of abuse that had two personal assistants quitting within months, according to a report.

Markle had ordered the personally embroidered gifts for guests at a shooting party at Queen Elizabeth II’s Sandringham estate soon after her Nov. 27 engagement to Prince Harry, a senior royal source told the Times of London.

“When [the blankets] arrived, they weren’t the right shade of red for Meghan, and she went mental at her [personal assistant],” the insider told the UK paper.

The source said Harry’s own assistant “left within months” of Meghan arriving on the scene as his girlfriend._

More here — https://pagesix.com/2021/03/07/meghan-markle-reportedly-went-mental-over-blanket-color/

ETA:  Does anyone have a photo of these ghastly _red-wrong-red *embroidered* _blankets?
ETA2:  I’m getting a strong Joan Crawford _Mommie Dearest_ vibe -


----------



## Chanbal

People on Twitter are so creative… The Fresh Prince of Hot Air!


----------



## Chanbal

He is certainly the Fresh Prince of Hot Air…  
The Rain Drop here is really worried with the carbon footprint of his last trip by private jet …


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> It is always someone else's fault. Meghan and Harry are never to blame. Apparently they think if they keep shouting that from the rooftops people will believe it.
> 
> *'Royals need to take ownership of Sussex race row': Harry and Meghan's friends [**?? - what friends ?? - they've all been "markled"**]*
> *take aim at Queen's 'recollections may vary' response to Oprah interview*


Didn't even need to read the article because there is a falsehood right in that first line ..


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> I'm also not convinced that beagle is not a taxidermy version in that dog bed.



Luckily, the beagle raises his head and looks around during the juggling scene when Meghan laughs so loud. Guy lives! I hated watching that video again. She believes the louder she laughs, the more people will think it's funny.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _She saw red — just the wrong shade.
> Meghan Markle reportedly went “mental” when embroidered blankets she ordered came back the wrong tint of red — a pattern of abuse that had two personal assistants quitting within months, according to a report._
> ETA:  Does anyone have a photo of these ghastly _red-wrong-red *embroidered* _blankets?
> ETA2:  I’m getting a strong Joan Crawford _Mommie Dearest_ vibe -
> View attachment 5173763



OMG, you've got me feeling sorry for Mz Crawford now, at least she was a grafter - and her workforce was loyal (we won't talk about the kids, let's hope M is nicer to hers)


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Luckily, the beagle raises his head and looks around during the juggling scene when Meghan laughs so loud. Guy lives! I hated watching that video again. She believes the louder she laughs, the more people will think it's funny.


Shhh... Animatronic beagle!

My office narc used the loud laughter tactic too. Sometimes the office would be dead silent as he stood up and guffawed at someone's innocent mistake. When he realized no one was joining in his bullying behaviour, the laughter would cut off suddenly and he would drop down behind his cubicle wall.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> He is certainly the *Fresh Prince of Hot Air*…
> *The Rain Drop* here is really worried with the carbon footprint of his last trip by private jet …



Greetings @Chanbal  Added your two nicknames to The List after listening to the vid. H's voice grates on me as much as the wife's. 
Thanks for finding these nicknames and it looks like I'd have to get up way too early to catch up to you.


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Partner with Aid Organizations in Afghanistan and Haiti
					

Their Archewell Foundation is supporting multiple organizations' aid efforts amid the current turmoil in Afghanistan and Haiti.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




The article says they are "partnering" with other charities to send aid to Afghanistan.  Piggbacking on the efforts of other charities.  They never initiate anything and let others do the work.  All they will be giving is the use of their names.  They are tightfisted because they don't have anything to give.  

BTW, if you open the article there is a great picture of MM merching that fugly black and white tea cup.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Another PR stunt from the Glorious Hypocrites…
> 
> 
> 
> _*"The lengthy statement, released via the couple's slick Archewell Foundation website, *called on followers to support organisations including Women For Afghan Women (WAW), but* failed to say how much they would be personally donating or details of how they will help. *
> 
> However, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were slammed by a royal expert who called their statement 'another attempt to form an alternate woke royal family.'_
> 
> Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: '*I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family*."



So they publicize that they are helping but don't say how much?  who TF cares?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> _She saw red — just the wrong shade.
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly went “mental” when embroidered blankets she ordered came back the wrong tint of red — a pattern of abuse that had two personal assistants quitting within months, according to a report.
> 
> Markle had ordered the personally embroidered gifts for guests at a shooting party at Queen Elizabeth II’s Sandringham estate soon after her Nov. 27 engagement to Prince Harry, a senior royal source told the Times of London.
> 
> “When [the blankets] arrived, they weren’t the right shade of red for Meghan, and she went mental at her [personal assistant],” the insider told the UK paper.
> 
> The source said Harry’s own assistant “left within months” of Meghan arriving on the scene as his girlfriend._
> 
> More here — https://pagesix.com/2021/03/07/meghan-markle-reportedly-went-mental-over-blanket-color/
> 
> ETA:  Does anyone have a photo of these ghastly _red-wrong-red *embroidered* _blankets?
> ETA2:  I’m getting a strong Joan Crawford _Mommie Dearest_ vibe -
> View attachment 5173763


We need a red blankie for our H&M museum/ evidence locker


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _She saw red — just the wrong shade.
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly went “mental” when embroidered blankets she ordered came back the wrong tint of red — a pattern of abuse that had two personal assistants quitting within months, according to a report.
> 
> Markle had ordered the personally embroidered gifts for guests at a shooting party at Queen Elizabeth II’s Sandringham estate soon after her Nov. 27 engagement to Prince Harry, a senior royal source told the Times of London.
> 
> “When [the blankets] arrived, they weren’t the right shade of red for Meghan, and she went mental at her [personal assistant],” the insider told the UK paper.
> 
> The source said Harry’s own assistant “left within months” of Meghan arriving on the scene as his girlfriend._
> 
> More here — https://pagesix.com/2021/03/07/meghan-markle-reportedly-went-mental-over-blanket-color/
> 
> ETA:  Does anyone have a photo of these ghastly _red-wrong-red *embroidered* _blankets?
> ETA2:  I’m getting a strong Joan Crawford _Mommie Dearest_ vibe -
> View attachment 5173763


A quote from a Page Six article linked to this one. It sums up what I've believed about her all along:

_One senior royal source told the UK Times that Markle came into the royal life underestimating how structured it would be, as well as how low she would be in the pecking order.

“She wanted to be ‘A’ list — the royal family is beyond ‘A’ list — but she wanted it the Beyoncé way, without restrictions,” the source insisted. 

“She was never up for royal life. Right from the start, she courted rejection.”_


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Another PR stunt from the Glorious Hypocrites…
> 
> 
> 
> _*"The lengthy statement, released via the couple's slick Archewell Foundation website, *called on followers to support organisations including Women For Afghan Women (WAW), but* failed to say how much they would be personally donating or details of how they will help. *
> 
> However, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were slammed by a royal expert who called their statement 'another attempt to form an alternate woke royal family.'_
> 
> Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told FEMAIL: '*I think Harry and Meghan’s grandiose, comfy and caring comments about the situation in Afghanistan, the disaster in Haiti and new Covid variants is another example of them trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family*."



I find her T-shirt to be typically arrogant. Millions of women are "Raising the Future" with little fanfare (or support) and don't constantly expect a pat on the back for it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Greetings @Chanbal  Added your two nicknames to The List after listening to the vid. H's voice grates on me as much as the wife's.
> Thanks for finding these nicknames and it looks like I'd have to get up way too early to catch up to you.
> View attachment 5173855




You all make this thread very special. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

After the bucolic Montecito, the cosmopolitan NYC…  

*Meghan Markle flees to New York!*
_Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. *As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex*, the former actress, and LA native *planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice…*

However, *due to the pandemic and widespread distaste among the LA elite *for the way Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry, have publicly dissed the royal family, *it hasn’t quite been the glorious homecoming she envisaged.

Now, with her plans to conquer Hollywood dead in the water, enterprising Meghan, 40, has set her eyes on a new prize – moving to New York City *to maintain a residential address that would allow her to make political inroads in Manhattan.

It’s long been reported that Meghan has ambitions to be President of the United States. A political insider with close ties to the current US Vice President, *************, tells New Idea that Meghan could be starting her journey to the White House by running for congress – just not in her native California._









						Meghan Markle flees to New York! - NewsBreak
					

Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex, the former actress, and LA native planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice.




					www.newsbreak.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## needlv

Guess which couple is not on the invite list for the Met Gala (yet)?  Or at least hasn’t leaked it via their PR team…  I wonder if we will see a press release about being unable to attend because of parental leave?









						Here Is Every Celebrity and Influencer Invited to the Met Gala 2021 so Far
					

The Met Gala will return in September after the 2020 event was canceled because of the pandemic, but not everyone is pleased with the guest list.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> After the bucolic Montecito, the cosmopolitan NYC…
> 
> *Meghan Markle flees to New York!*
> _Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. *As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex*, the former actress, and LA native *planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice…*
> 
> However, *due to the pandemic and widespread distaste among the LA elite *for the way Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry, have publicly dissed the royal family, *it hasn’t quite been the glorious homecoming she envisaged.
> 
> Now, with her plans to conquer Hollywood dead in the water, enterprising Meghan, 40, has set her eyes on a new prize – moving to New York City *to maintain a residential address that would allow her to make political inroads in Manhattan.
> 
> It’s long been reported that Meghan has ambitions to be President of the United States. A political insider with close ties to the current US Vice President, *************, tells New Idea that Meghan could be starting her journey to the White House by running for congress – just not in her native California._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle flees to New York! - NewsBreak
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex, the former actress, and LA native planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsbreak.com


Good grief!  Whether this is a trial balloon or actually true, it’s ridiculous!


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Good grief!  Whether this is a trial balloon or actually true, it’s ridiculous!


right
I never know what to believe about these two but this is ridiculous.  What's her experience? the letter she wrote at age 12 to P&G or whoever it was?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> After the bucolic Montecito, the cosmopolitan NYC…
> 
> *Meghan Markle flees to New York!*
> _Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. *As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex*, the former actress, and LA native *planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice…*
> 
> However, *due to the pandemic and widespread distaste among the LA elite *for the way Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry, have publicly dissed the royal family, *it hasn’t quite been the glorious homecoming she envisaged.
> 
> Now, with her plans to conquer Hollywood dead in the water, enterprising Meghan, 40, has set her eyes on a new prize – moving to New York City *to maintain a residential address that would allow her to make political inroads in Manhattan.
> 
> It’s long been reported that Meghan has ambitions to be President of the United States. A political insider with close ties to the current US Vice President, *************, tells New Idea that Meghan could be starting her journey to the White House by running for congress – just not in her native California._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle flees to New York! - NewsBreak
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex, the former actress, and LA native planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsbreak.com


Great.  New York is already in the toilet.  Now she's going to spread her $hit everywhere?  As a Californian though, I must say:  WOOOOOHOOOOO!!!!    Good riddance!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Great.  New York is already in the toilet.  Now she's going to spread her $hit everywhere?  As a Californian though, I must say:  WOOOOOHOOOOO!!!!    Good riddance!


this is insanity....she just had a baby and has only lived in montecito for a year or so?  this is a manic quest to retain the fame she got when she nabbed the prince.  I hope the WOC in new york are smarter than to vote for her if she does run for office.  and not sure who else would vote for her.  A Duchess who was raised in sunny LA going to private school and spending time on tv production sets?


----------



## rose60610

She'd be following in the footsteps of Hillary *******. Carpetbagger. She got elected Senator based on the fame of her husband, too. Ultimately, how well did that work out for the TOP job? Like her or dislike her, at least Hillary had a few brains. Meghan? Her head is  an empty vessel. On the other hand, she has some sugars who believe the louder you can scream "I'm a victim!" and demand pity, the more qualified you are. What's her resume? Z-lister who went to good schools, chased, married and discarded men when somebody better came along, clawed her way into the BRF, burned every bridge there, moved to a house that has more bathrooms than a hotel, cries about lack of privacy then inserts herself everywhere, and claims she can lead? Well, she has one thing right, it's fashionable to be a victim these days and trash the United States. Maybe she will get elected. But if she flames out in NY she can always start a blanket company that makes the right shade of red, create organic vegan chicken feed and hustle oat milk.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> She'd be following in the footsteps of Hillary *******. Carpetbagger. She got elected Senator based on the fame of her husband, too. Ultimately, how well did that work out for the TOP job? Like her or dislike her, at least Hillary had a few brains. Meghan? Her head is  an empty vessel. On the other hand, she has some sugars who believe the louder you can scream "I'm a victim!" and demand pity, the more qualified you are. What's her resume? Z-lister who went to good schools, chased, married and discarded men when somebody better came along, clawed her way into the BRF, burned every bridge there, moved to a house that has more bathrooms than a hotel, cries about lack of privacy then inserts herself everywhere, and claims she can lead? Well, she has one thing right, it's fashionable to be a victim these days and trash the United States. Maybe she will get elected. But if she flames out in NY she can always start a blanket company that makes the right shade of red, create organic vegan chicken feed and hustle oat milk.


really?  I'll just say there is no comparison


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Great.  New York is already in the toilet.  Now she's going to spread her $hit everywhere?  As a Californian though, I must say:  WOOOOOHOOOOO!!!!    Good riddance!



I read somewhere that Madame of Montecito spreads destruction wherever she goes, so good luck New Yorkers!

This type of news release is likely a paid fishing expedition. Yesterday was Washington, today is NYC, so we'll see where they land tomorrow.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> OMG, you've got me feeling sorry for Mz Crawford now, at least she was a grafter - and her workforce was loyal (we won't talk about the kids, let's hope M is nicer to hers)


Yeah I’ve called M mommie dearest before & now I feel like I was being shady to Joan Crawford who had the talent, drive and the guts to pull herself up inHollywood, speak out against the casting couch and make her own comeback after being blacklisted.
In contrast, Meg can’t play a ‘hot babe’ convincingly, can’t build a campaign with either of her million dollar press teams & can’t convince anyone to buy what she’s selling.


gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Partner with Aid Organizations in Afghanistan and Haiti
> 
> 
> Their Archewell Foundation is supporting multiple organizations' aid efforts amid the current turmoil in Afghanistan and Haiti.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The article says they are "partnering" with other charities to send aid to Afghanistan.  Piggbacking on the efforts of other charities.  They never initiate anything and let others do the work.  All they will be giving is the use of their names.  They are tightfisted because they don't have anything to give.
> 
> BTW, if you open the article there is a great picture of MM merching that fugly black and white tea cup.


Yeah it’s shameless isn’t it? Also why just women’s rights? It’s a bit weird. 


needlv said:


> Guess which couple is not on the invite list for the Met Gala (yet)?  Or at least hasn’t leaked it via their PR team…  I wonder if we will see a press release about being unable to attend because of parental leave?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here Is Every Celebrity and Influencer Invited to the Met Gala 2021 so Far
> 
> 
> The Met Gala will return in September after the 2020 event was canceled because of the pandemic, but not everyone is pleased with the guest list.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Anna Wintour’s shady hands do giveth & taketh away. You know they’d make a complete **** up of theme and look like garbage so why bother inviting them 


purseinsanity said:


> Great.  New York is already in the toilet.  Now she's going to spread her $hit everywhere?  As a Californian though, I must say:  WOOOOOHOOOOO!!!!    Good riddance!


NY? Why do they keep up with these crazy ambitions? I think they struggle to be the dynamic ‘it’ couple of a flyover state suburb and heck just think of the lemon trees & bathrooms they could get there for their buck!  
The only way they could get genuine pull is if they move to Alaska and start husky racing.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are so creative… The Fresh Prince of Hot Air!





Wow - is it true that they keep 95% of the donations to Archewell?  If so, I am speechless!  (P.S. to Smirk and Jerk - when I am speechless, I actually stop talking.  Try it out sometime.)


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Guess which couple is not on the invite list for the Met Gala (yet)?  Or at least hasn’t leaked it via their PR team…  I wonder if we will see a press release about being unable to attend because of parental leave?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here Is Every Celebrity and Influencer Invited to the Met Gala 2021 so Far
> 
> 
> The Met Gala will return in September after the 2020 event was canceled because of the pandemic, but not everyone is pleased with the guest list.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Wow. The Met Gala isn't anywhere near as prestigious or important as it once was and they still didn't make the cut. And they pretty much opened the door to all influencers.


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> Wow - is it true that they keep 95% of the donations to Archewell?  If so, I am speechless!  (P.S. to Smirk and Jerk - when I am speechless, I actually stop talking.  Try it out sometime.)


I don't think that would be legal


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> After the bucolic Montecito, the cosmopolitan NYC…
> 
> *Meghan Markle flees to New York!*
> _Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. *As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex*, the former actress, and LA native *planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice…*
> 
> However, *due to the pandemic and widespread distaste among the LA elite *for the way Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry, have publicly dissed the royal family, *it hasn’t quite been the glorious homecoming she envisaged.
> 
> Now, with her plans to conquer Hollywood dead in the water, enterprising Meghan, 40, has set her eyes on a new prize – moving to New York City *to maintain a residential address that would allow her to make political inroads in Manhattan.
> 
> It’s long been reported that Meghan has ambitions to be President of the United States. A political insider with close ties to the current US Vice President, *************, tells New Idea that Meghan could be starting her journey to the White House by running for congress – just not in her native California._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle flees to New York! - NewsBreak
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex, the former actress, and LA native planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsbreak.com




Oh please be true, please be true!  Would so love her to move out of California!!


----------



## csshopper

A Netflix series to meet their dormant contractual obligation: The Malevolent one scurries off to NY seeking elusive adoration, Hazzard truly awakens, sheds his pseudo “woke” persona, and goes on the Polo circuit, while the kids are raised by nannies and the gardener feeds the chickens. Guy, the Beagle, becomes the poster dog for canine adoption and is further exploited for soliciting funds for Archewell. He generates more sympathy than any other family members and brings millions to the coffers.

Totally absurd, but no worse than the utter crap their PR people produce.


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> Oh please be true, please be true!  Would so love her to move out of California!!


YES. Even better if she takes her juggling jester with her. We need him even less than we need her!


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is their house for sale now?  Hmmm.
Surely, they want to be closer to the power couples on Martha’s Vineyard, maybe the Hamptons.


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> I don't think that would be legal




I sure hope not...though it seems like some get into trouble when mishandling foundation $$.  I have no factual basis for saying anything untoward about Archewell, but is just feels scammy to me...wouldn’t put anything past those two.


----------



## Katel

Luvbolide said:


> Wow - is it true that they keep 95% of the donations to Archewell?  If so, I am speechless!  (P.S. to Smirk and Jerk - when I am speechless, I actually stop talking.  Try it out sometime.)





sdkitty said:


> I don't think that would be legal



In Lady C’s recent video, she confirms they take 95% and are only required to donate 5% from their foundation.

(at ~17 below - back up to ~13 for some Harkle book donation info.)

Legal pros here - true?

(Hmmm, makes one wonder about all those other foundations...)

She also that shared a letter where someone called MeGain “Hear Me Again”   

(the question from Ann Lawson [sp?] at 24:34)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is their house for sale now?  Hmmm.
> Surely, they want to be closer to the power couples on Martha’s Vineyard, maybe the Hamptons.



They aren't going to give up that mansion. They'll want a fancy multimillion dollar condo in Manhattan AND keep the California place. What's the point in being a rich celebrity if you don't have multiple residences?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that Madame of Montecito spreads destruction wherever she goes, so good luck New Yorkers!
> 
> This type of news release is likely a paid fishing expedition. Yesterday was Washington, today is NYC, so we'll see where they land tomorrow.
> 
> View attachment 5174363



Who's going to pay for another residence, though? Her husband isn't such a talented breadwinner it seems, and she has lived off the men in her life ever since her dad stopped paying her way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My guess is the BRF owns [or is granted access] to many properties in the US.  Never underestimate the _quid pro quo_ world. 
From Quora [I know, I know] :

_
The Queen owns land privately in the United States and Canada, though not in her capacity as Sovereign of the United Kingdom. She owns a horse farm in Kentucky, and is believed to own prime Park Avenue estate in New York City. Details of ownership will never be confirmed or denied by the Palace, also may not even be known by Her Majesty herself since much of her personal wealth is held in what is known as a blind trust.



			How much land does the British royal family own in the United States? - Quora
		

_


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is the BRF owns [or is granted access] to many properties in the US.  Never underestimate the _quid pro quo_ world.
> From Quora [I know, I know] :
> 
> 
> _The Queen owns land privately in the United States and Canada, though not in her capacity as Sovereign of the United Kingdom. She owns a horse farm in Kentucky, and is believed to own prime Park Avenue estate in New York City. Details of ownership will never be confirmed or denied by the Palace, also may not even be known by Her Majesty herself since much of her personal wealth is held in what is known as a blind trust.
> 
> 
> 
> How much land does the British royal family own in the United States? - Quora
> 
> 
> _


well I certainly hope the RF won't provide NY lodging for these two who wanted their freedom


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> Guess which couple is not on the invite list for the Met Gala (yet)?  Or at least hasn’t leaked it via their PR team…  I wonder if we will see a press release about being unable to attend because of parental leave?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here Is Every Celebrity and Influencer Invited to the Met Gala 2021 so Far
> 
> 
> The Met Gala will return in September after the 2020 event was canceled because of the pandemic, but not everyone is pleased with the guest list.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


They are looking for youthful celebrities to attend, not H&M


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well I certainly hope the RF won't provide NY lodging for these two who wanted their freedom



Since he remains a beloved member of the family, he will get whatever he wants. 
IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is the BRF owns [or is granted access] to many properties in the US.  Never underestimate the _quid pro quo_ world.
> From Quora [I know, I know] :
> 
> 
> _The Queen owns land privately in the United States and Canada, though not in her capacity as Sovereign of the United Kingdom. She owns a horse farm in Kentucky, and is believed to own prime Park Avenue estate in New York City. Details of ownership will never be confirmed or denied by the Palace, also may not even be known by Her Majesty herself since much of her personal wealth is held in what is known as a blind trust.
> 
> 
> 
> How much land does the British royal family own in the United States? - Quora
> 
> 
> _



Yeah, but why would she give them anything at this point?


----------



## Stansy

bag-mania said:


> They aren't going to give up that mansion. They'll want a fancy multimillion dollar condo in Manhattan AND keep the California place. What's the point in being a rich celebrity if you don't have multiple residences?


Which provokes the question about the mode of transport they will use going from place A to place B… for sure it will not be a Greyhound!


----------



## bag-mania

Stansy said:


> Which provokes the question about the mode of transport they will use going from place A to place B… for sure it will not be a Greyhound!



I'm skeptical about the New York story. People in NYC will be even less receptive to H&M's half-assed idea of celebrity than LA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Her ego must be absolutely massive, like in what world does someone think they could enter the politics arena when they couldn't hack it in the Royal Family for not even two years. If she couldn't stand being lower on the pecking order in the RF, how the hail is she going to deal with being the "Jr. Senator from X state"? Laughable.  I can just see her thinking she could tap a certain very senior member of the house on the back and push in front of her to claim her voice at the podium, only to be met with hellfire *snort* Can you imagine 6's wife thinking she can outplay women who've held seats in the senate & house for decades? She really believes she's on the same level as these women. 

When 6's wife said she was gonna hit the ground running in their engagement interview, I guess she actually meant in the US, huh? I think she fancies herself another AOC, but she has nowhere near the drive or stamina to be even close to the same level as her. I see her delivering primped-up, television ads with lots of flowers in the background and soft lighting, spewing word salad to whomever she thinks is her audience instead of walking through the downtrodden districts knocking on doors (with Harry peeking out the window of the armoured SUV at the curb) and really listening to her future constituents.  

She is way too thin-skinned for a career in politics. I don't know which PR agency cooked up this tale, but it needs more salt and less sugar.

If she thought the media were a bunch of meanies and too intrusive before.... man, I mean, wow. SMH
I can't, like I just literally cannot. It's so preposterous


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Her ego must be absolutely massive, like in what world does someone think they could enter the politics arena when they couldn't hack it in the Royal Family for not even two years. If she couldn't stand being lower on the pecking order in the RF, how the hail is she going to deal with being the "Jr. Senator from X state"? Laughable.  I can just see her thinking she could tap a certain very senior member of the house on the back and push in front of her to claim her voice at the podium, only to be met with hellfire *snort* Can you imagine 6's wife thinking she can outplay women who've held seats in the senate & house for decades? She really believes she's on the same level as these women.
> 
> When 6's wife said she was gonna hit the ground running in their engagement interview, I guess she actually meant in the US, huh? I think she fancies herself another AOC, but she has nowhere near the drive or stamina to be even close to the same level as her. I see her delivering primped-up, television ads with lots of flowers in the background and soft lighting, spewing word salad to whomever she thinks is her audience instead of walking through the downtrodden districts knocking on doors (with Harry peeking out the window of the armoured SUV at the curb) and really listening to her future constituents.
> 
> She is way too thin-skinned for a career in politics. I don't know which PR agency cooked up this tale, but it needs more salt and less sugar.
> 
> If she thought the media were a bunch of meanies and too intrusive before.... man, I mean, wow. SMH
> I can't, like I just literally cannot. It's so preposterous


yes, she would have to do a lot more than just post and spew word salad....I don't see it happening


----------



## breakfastatcartier

V0N1B2 said:


> Her ego must be absolutely massive, like in what world does someone think they could enter the politics arena when they couldn't hack it in the Royal Family for not even two years. If she couldn't stand being lower on the pecking order in the RF, how the hail is she going to deal with being the "Jr. Senator from X state"? Laughable.  I can just see her thinking she could tap a certain very senior member of the house on the back and push in front of her to claim her voice at the podium, only to be met with hellfire *snort* Can you imagine 6's wife thinking she can outplay women who've held seats in the senate & house for decades? She really believes she's on the same level as these women.
> 
> When 6's wife said she was gonna hit the ground running in their engagement interview, I guess she actually meant in the US, huh? I think she fancies herself another AOC, but she has nowhere near the drive or stamina to be even close to the same level as her. I see her delivering primped-up, television ads with lots of flowers in the background and soft lighting, spewing word salad to whomever she thinks is her audience instead of walking through the downtrodden districts knocking on doors (with Harry peeking out the window of the armoured SUV at the curb) and really listening to her future constituents.
> 
> She is way too thin-skinned for a career in politics. I don't know which PR agency cooked up this tale, but it needs more salt and less sugar.
> 
> If she thought the media were a bunch of meanies and too intrusive before.... man, I mean, wow. SMH
> I can't, like I just literally cannot. It's so preposterous


Oh don’t worry. Meghan will cook up another “woe is me” video while visiting a slum in a third world country and cry racism and every one will jump to her rescue.


----------



## Lounorada

jelliedfeels said:


> *Who was waiting for them to break their silence of Afghanistan?*










Chanbal said:


>





Yikes. That is horrifyingly hilarious!





needlv said:


> The eco warrior still has no issues using private jets…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eco-warrior Harry flies home from polo on millionaire pal's private jet
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry took a private jet home from a charity polo event — three months after calling climate change one of society’s “most pressing issues”. The eco-warrior royal boarded a 20-seat plan…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie


Hey! JCMH,







Chanbal said:


> The story from the Sun is spreading…
> 
> "_*The Queen’s*__* legal team is said to be consulting libel experts following the series of explosive claims made from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex this year*, the Sun has reported. The royals are also bracing for the publication of Harry's memoirs next year which he has written "not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become".  The newspaper reported that a legal warning was now being considered for publishers Penguin Random House…"_



The Queen when she finally thought 'enough is enough':







LittleStar88 said:


> Are we to expect HRH Mr. California Mountbatten-Windsor, Moaner of Montecito, Sixth In Line, to fly with the common folk?










purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  William and Kate can fly with their kids on a commercial flight, but Harry must be protected at all costs.


JCMH:








Chanbal said:


> Good for Kate! Who wants to be associated with humbugs…
> 
> _"The Sussexes recently published a statement responding to the violence in Afghanistan, where *they recommended a list of mental health charities for veterans* to contact if they need help.
> 
> But Heads Together, *Kate personal charitable foundation she co-founded with William and Harry in 2017, was nowhere to be found on the list.*
> 
> News.au royal columnist Daniela Elser claimed _*this was a clear snub and a betrayal of one of the Royal Family's most hardworking and beloved members…*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed' Kate in statement, royal watcher claims
> 
> 
> The Sussexes' statement on Afghanistan included a list of mental health charities for veterans – but failed to include Kate Middleton's own, which she co-founded with Harry and Prince William
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _





They are two of the most petulant, spiteful and pathetic people I have ever heard of. If they are this bad at ages 40 & nearly 40, then it's only obvious they are never going to change for the better, but only change for the worse.





Chanbal said:


> _Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex, *the former actress, and LA native planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice…*_


----------



## csshopper

While checking some data on line I came across this quote from Methane published in "The Week UK" about her career experience as a Suitcase Girl, which I ironically think was prophetic of her future:

*"Markle recalled that for some reason her box was never chosen by contestants. “I would end up standing up there forever in these terribly uncomfortable and inexpensive five-inch heels just waiting for someone to pick my number so I could go and sit down,” she said.*

Hmmm, like being dissed by Serena's Mum at a tennis match? Elbowing her way to the front of multiple groups to get attention? Being "scarfed" by the Duke of Cambridge as she tried to maneuver herself  to be in camera range with him during a Royal Family outing? Ignored as a potential guest at the party of the year on Martha's Vineyard? Apparently not making the Met Gala invitee list even though she once guest edited Vogue (maybe it's lost in the mail and will turn up later)? 

And other lack of popularity markers that might cause a more rational person to reassess their aspirations to become a New York politician or President of the United States:
      Out of 40 requests for women mentors to participate in her egocentric birthday celebration 40x40, can only find a total of 17 mentioned on line and those are not confirmed: so and so is "thought to have responded". 
      On their _international_ website Archewell Foundation she solicited more birthday recognition asking people to upload her birthday poem. It was widely reported that 24 hours later only 200 had done so.
       Meantime, in less than 3 months since publication, so called hyped Best Seller, "The Bench" continues its downward dive and is currently at #16,619 on the Amazon sales list. (Note she is doing better than Fergi, however, whose historical novel released August 3rd, is at #113,035 (if she was hoping to raise money for the Perv's legal bills, it's not happening). 
     And finally there are those 700,000 Instagram followers who found something better to do. Hard to tell  if the number represents real people or there was a massive bot failure somewhere.

     Not included are the dismal rankings in the UK of Royal Family popularity since they don't vote in our elections. Although that hasn't stopped 6 from running his mouth off about the First Amendment.

     Doubt there is anyone who can penetrate the levels of narcissism leading to making her do a realistic assessment of her tarnishing Markle Sparkle. The outlandish pronouncements will continue to roll out of Montecito via Sunshine Sucks and Scoobie.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> While checking some data on line I came across this quote from Methane published in "The Week UK" about her career experience as a Suitcase Girl, which I ironically think was prophetic of her future:
> 
> *"Markle recalled that for some reason her box was never chosen by contestants. “I would end up standing up there forever in these terribly uncomfortable and inexpensive five-inch heels just waiting for someone to pick my number so I could go and sit down,” she said.*
> 
> Hmmm, like being dissed by Serena's Mum at a tennis match? Elbowing her way to the front of multiple groups to get attention? Being "scarfed" by the Duke of Cambridge as she tried to maneuver herself  to be in camera range with him during a Royal Family outing? Ignored as a potential guest at the party of the year on Martha's Vineyard? Apparently not making the Met Gala invitee list even though she once guest edited Vogue (maybe it's lost in the mail and will turn up later)?
> 
> And other lack of popularity markers that might cause a more rational person to reassess their aspirations to become a New York politician or President of the United States:
> Out of 40 requests for women mentors to participate in her egocentric birthday celebration 40x40, can only find a total of 17 mentioned on line and those are not confirmed: so and so is "thought to have responded".
> On their _international_ website Archewell Foundation she solicited more birthday recognition asking people to upload her birthday poem. It was widely reported that 24 hours later only 200 had done so.
> Meantime, in less than 3 months since publication, so called hyped Best Seller, "The Bench" continues its downward dive and is currently at #16,619 on the Amazon sales list. (Note she is doing better than Fergi, however, whose historical novel released August 3rd, is at #113,035 (if she was hoping to raise money for the Perv's legal bills, it's not happening).
> And finally there are those 700,000 Instagram followers who found something better to do. Hard to tell  if the number represents real people or there was a massive bot failure somewhere.
> 
> Not included are the dismal rankings in the UK of Royal Family popularity since they don't vote in our elections. Although that hasn't stopped 6 from running his mouth off about the First Amendment.
> 
> Doubt there is anyone who can penetrate the levels of narcissism leading to making her do a realistic assessment of her tarnishing Markle Sparkle. The outlandish pronouncements will continue to roll out of Montecito via Sunshine Sucks and Scoobie.


Maybe that's why she always elbows her way to the front, because otherwise no one would give her the time of day?

And yes, I'm a juvenile, so the statement "*her box was never chosen" *seriously gave me a fit of giggles.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's have some fun. I'm almost positive that I've recovered all your suggested nicknames after reviewing a bunch of posts.
> 
> How to calculate the rewards:
> 1 nickname = star; 3 nicknames = ribbon; 5+ nicknames = plaque (Master)
> Remember this is a "search and collect" game and that no one is claiming ownership of nicknames coined by others. I also realize that this wasn't an easy task for anyone to accomplish.
> 
> @purseinsanity Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master for the high score of a dozen nicknames.
> View attachment 5170023
> 
> 
> @csshopper Thanks and congratulations Nickname Master! You have collected 10 nicknames.
> View attachment 5170025
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020 Thanks and Congratulations Nickname Master.  I owe you two awards for having collected 9 nicknames: a ribbon and a plaque.
> View attachment 5170029
> View attachment 5170032
> 
> 
> @Annawakes Thanks and congratulations for collecting four nicknames, not an easy task by all means.
> View attachment 5170035


You are AMAZING .. and so thoughtful to put all our (appropriate) nicknames into a list; we should send it to Piers Morgan .. he would have a field day with it!!!


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe that's why she always elbows her way to the front, because otherwise no one would give her the time of day?
> 
> And yes, I'm a juvenile, so the statement "*her box was never chosen" *seriously gave me a fit of giggles.


I can't stop laughing!


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> I can't stop laughing!


Talk about a Freudian slip. The models were holding briefcases.


----------



## Stansy

bag-mania said:


> I'm skeptical about the New York story. People in NYC will be even less receptive to H&M's half-assed idea of celebrity than LA.


I think that we are all aware that the NY story is just this: a story… I cannot see them there.


----------



## rose60610

M&H would be in agony at the Met Gala. They wouldn't get the attention they believe they're due. She's only on the map due to Harry. Without the BRF he'd be a complete nobody yet he trashes them. Who besides Melissa McCarthy would give them the time of day? If she's even invited. Who does the inviting? Anna Wintour sat beside TQ at a fashion show, I can't see her inviting M&H and tarnish that relationship with TQ and Camilla. She was supposedly on the short list to be ambassador to England with a previous administration. She won't be anymore, but it's more prestigious to be friends with TQ, Camilla and Kate that it is to be seen with the Gruesome Twosome.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> M&H would be in agony at the Met Gala. They wouldn't get the attention they believe they're due. She's only on the map due to Harry. Without the BRF he'd be a complete nobody yet he trashes them. Who besides Melissa McCarthy would give them the time of day? If she's even invited. Who does the inviting? Anna Wintour sat beside TQ at a fashion show, I can't see her inviting M&H and tarnish that relationship with TQ and Camilla. She was supposedly on the short list to be ambassador to England with a previous administration. She won't be anymore, but it's more prestigious to be friends with TQ, Camilla and Kate that it is to be seen with the Gruesome Twosome.


I cannot see her wearing one of the required well-tailored but SOOOOO OVER THE TOP outfits 
and the topic this year is America/US like Tom Ford, the co-chair 
H is off topic


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I'm skeptical about the New York story. People in NYC will be even less receptive to H&M's half-assed idea of celebrity than LA.


Agree NY story is FAKE NEWS 
that would be a HUGELY a expensive move to a more expensive place to live, California is not cheap but NYC is over the top


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Agree NY story is FAKE NEWS
> that would be a HUGELY a expensive move to a more expensive place to live, California is not cheap but NYC is over the top


Well, considering the average price of a gallon of gas is $4.39 in California, and $3.216 in NY, it'd be much cheaper flying on a private jet out of NY!  
(Then again, Haz only bums rides on others' jets, so what does he care any how!)


----------



## Katel

Katel said:


> In Lady C’s recent video, she confirms they take 95% and are only required to donate 5% from their foundation.
> 
> (at ~17 below - back up to ~13 for some Harkle book donation info.)
> 
> Legal pros here - true?
> 
> (Hmmm, makes one wonder about all those other foundations...)
> 
> She also that shared a letter where someone called MeGain “Hear Me Again”
> 
> (the question from Ann Lawson [sp?] at 24:34)




If I may, I stated this incorrectly - what Lady C said (as I understood it) was that foundations are required by law to re-donate only 5% and that they may have access to up to 95% - for “business expenses” etc. 

She said it in her droll way ... (which made my imagination go) - but she never outright said they were doing that - she’s very careful about her legal wording.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> Agree NY story is FAKE NEWS
> that would be a HUGELY a expensive move to a more expensive place to live, California is not cheap but NYC is over the top



is it possible they are using that story as cover - ie. a reason to sell that very expensive mansion where they aren’t earning enough to pay the running costs?

Also she won’t go into politics… that would involve work.  And meeting peasants and attending ribbon ceremonies… which she balked at doing when a member of the RF.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> is it possible they are using that story as cover - ie. a reason to sell that very expensive mansion where they aren’t earning enough to pay the running costs?
> 
> Also she won’t go into politics… that would involve work.  And meeting peasants and attending ribbon ceremonies… which she balked at doing when a member of the RF.


Many Americans could never have imagined ***** would be president, so don't count her political aspirations out. Or maybe it's just great material for a Netflix movie - The President and The Prince?


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> is it possible they are using that story as cover - ie. a reason to sell that very expensive mansion where they aren’t earning enough to pay the running costs?
> 
> Also she won’t go into politics… that would involve work.  And meeting peasants and attending ribbon ceremonies… which she balked at doing when a member of the RF.


Good point, it is a real estate sellers market, might turn a profit 
BUT 
move where ? Prices are going up 
Do you mean DOWNSIZE ???? Less security ??? a less staff, no, surely I am misunderstanding , that could not be right


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Many Americans could never have imagined ***** would be president, so don't count her political aspirations out. Or maybe it's just great material for a Netflix movie - The President and The Prince?


please don't say that


----------



## Chanbal

Stansy said:


> I think that we are all aware that the NY story is just this: a story… I cannot see them there.


They don't have enough cash for a penthouse in Manhattan and a mansion in the Hamptons, but Hazz would be happier in NY. He must be tired from feeding chickens and memorizing word salads.


----------



## rose60610

I agree Hazz would be happier in NY. Wasn't there a belief that Diana wanted to move to NY? Be in the middle of all the hubbub, parties full of people from all walks of life,--instead of hanging with chickens and celebrity neighbors between their stints in rehab. How much word salad can one take? And where are all the invites from the BRF? Oh wait, there aren't any.


----------



## Chanbal

Out of touch and hypocrites, it sounds right to me… 

*PRINCE Harry wants to be "more important" than William - and can't help but "show off", his biographer has claimed.*_

"I don't think he looks like he's enjoying himself at all" - before discussing Harry's private flight.

"It shows that, A, they're out of touch, but also, B, they're huge hypocrites," Angela said.









						'Show-off' Harry 'wants to be more important than Wills' royal author says
					

PRINCE Harry wants to be “more important” than William – and can’t help but “show off”, his biographer has claimed. Angela Levin blasted the Duke of Sussex in a …




					www.thesun.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle to 'alter engagement ring' again
					

MEGHAN MARKLE could update her engagement ring to include a subtle nod to her new daughter, Lilibet.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Brilliant: *‘Do what I say not what I do’ school of activism.   *









						SARAH VINE: Afghanistan horrors should silence eco-zealot hypocrites
					

SARAH VINE: There is more than a touch of the Prince Harrys about Dr Gail Bradbrook, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, the middle-class eco-worrier movement.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

This is a hilarious article. It claims that KM needs Methane to make her look better.








						Kate warned collaboration with Meghan Markle 'so helpful' to Duchess
					

KATE, the Duchess of Cambridge, has been warned that a project with Meghan Markle would be "so good" for her public image, as a "perception" remains that she is not as hard-working as other senior royals.




					www.express.co.uk
				




The "Royal expert" Molly Mulshine spouts so much bs that I think she may be a Methane stooge. I checked out her background but found nothing related to the BRF. One of her credentials is "Host of Space Trash celebrity astrology podcast". One of her claims: " I believe that Kate and Meghan are having a good relationship now because I don't see any reason for them to not to." Right, and we are overrun with alien lizard invaders because I don't see any reason why we are not.


----------



## rose60610

The day Kate needs Meghan to increase her likability is the day we need a serial killers to increase our great choices in friends.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> This is a hilarious article. It claims that KM needs Methane to make her look better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate warned collaboration with Meghan Markle 'so helpful' to Duchess
> 
> 
> KATE, the Duchess of Cambridge, has been warned that a project with Meghan Markle would be "so good" for her public image, as a "perception" remains that she is not as hard-working as other senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "Royal expert" Molly Mulshine spouts so much bs that I think she may be a Methane stooge. I checked out her background but found nothing related to the BRF. One of her credentials is "Host of Space Trash celebrity astrology podcast". One of her claims: " I believe that Kate and Meghan are having a good relationship now because I don't see any reason for them to not to." Right, and we are overrun with alien lizard invaders because I don't see any reason why we are not.



There are two delusional women with the initials "MM".  Mulshine casts herself as a "comic".


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Meghan Markle to 'alter engagement ring' again
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could update her engagement ring to include a subtle nod to her new daughter, Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




There's no need to alter it to include lilibet.  There's two Princess D's diamonds on each side of the center diamond.  One for Archie and the other for Lilibet.  Hey it was planned way in advance by H.   What a crock of ****!  M just wants bigger diamonds than the other Hollywood stars.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Meghan Markle to 'alter engagement ring' again
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could update her engagement ring to include a subtle nod to her new daughter, Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




I mean, by Hollywood standards 3 carats is probably a small diamond. The only royal apart from Kate who has a bigger stone seems to be Camilla. She really couldn't deal with the BRF's understatement, could she. I personally find the honkers e.g. the Kardashians - which I happen to mostly like - wear obscene and also extremely impractical. My hand gets tired just looking at them.

On a funny note, Germany doesn't traditionally do diamond engagement rings but has caught on. But also, diamonds are expensive (moreso than in the US I'd guess) and German men aren't willing to spend that kind of money, so what you see left and right is rings with tiny diamond splinters as a center stone (I'm talking like 10 to 15 pointers), even amongst somewhat celebrities. I'm not materialistic but I'd be insulted, just buy me a plain gold wedding band then


----------



## pukasonqo

Her new ring:




__





						Google Image Result for https://i0.wp.com/www.iluvlollies.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/ring-pops.jpg?fit=350%2C400&ssl=1
					





					images.app.goo.gl


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Meghan Markle to 'alter engagement ring' again
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could update her engagement ring to include a subtle nod to her new daughter, Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Drip Drip Drip








xincinsin said:


> This is a hilarious article. It claims that KM needs Methane to make her look better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate warned collaboration with Meghan Markle 'so helpful' to Duchess
> 
> 
> KATE, the Duchess of Cambridge, has been warned that a project with Meghan Markle would be "so good" for her public image, as a "perception" remains that she is not as hard-working as other senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The "Royal expert" Molly Mulshine spouts so much bs that I think she may be a Methane stooge. I checked out her background but found nothing related to the BRF. One of her credentials is "Host of Space Trash celebrity astrology podcast". One of her claims: " I believe that Kate and Meghan are having a good relationship now because I don't see any reason for them to not to." Right, and we are overrun with alien lizard invaders because I don't see any reason why we are not.


Mmm hmm


----------



## xincinsin

It just occurred to me: KM doesn't NEED Methane to make her look better, but Methane's very existence makes almost everyone else look better!

I mean, even Fergie and Andrew look positively urbane next to the Montecito Nutmeg. I've never seen so many positive comments about Wallis!


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Iirc they said due to Covid the left one hadn't been home in 18 months. The other one used to do her videos with her and I always found it endearing that he started every single one with "How are you today, mum?"


They seem good guys, she did well w/ them. 
An aside - she must be in her 70s but wow that hair.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> I cannot see her wearing one of the required well-tailored but SOOOOO OVER THE TOP outfits
> and the topic this year is America/US like Tom Ford, the co-chair
> H is off topic


Oh well naturally she’d wear some sort of Queen outfit because you Americans love royalty 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, by Hollywood standards 3 carats is probably a small diamond. The only royal apart from Kate who has a bigger stone seems to be Camilla. She really couldn't deal with the BRF's understatement, could she. I personally find the honkers e.g. the Kardashians - which I happen to mostly like - wear obscene and also extremely impractical. My hand gets tired just looking at them.
> 
> On a funny note, Germany doesn't traditionally do diamond engagement rings but has caught on. But also, diamonds are expensive (moreso than in the US I'd guess) and German men aren't willing to spend that kind of money, so what you see left and right is rings with tiny diamond splinters as a center stone (I'm talking like 10 to 15 pointers), even amongst somewhat celebrities. I'm not materialistic but I'd be insulted, just buy me a plain gold wedding band then


Now I’m glad I didn’t marry a German  

Mr Jellied surprised me & I think he did a really good job. My set is Edwardian so it’s tiny by modern US standards.

There seems to be a bit of a tradition for coloured gem engagement rings here & I personally like it as I’m not that bothered about diamonds.

Though I’ve said it before & I’ll say it again Cam got the best royal e ring by a country mile.

Personally I think MM should keep her e ring as it is as after only a few years of marriage it has already been repeatedly adapted into several ideas botched together. Seems kind of apt….


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’m also not opposed to resetting e ring stones or upgrading or changing myself - I don’t think it’s shallow. 
But I do tend to think why not just get a nice eternity or right hand rather than going in on the build of the e ring as you don’t want it to snap


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So my darling browser tells me I'm not logged in, when I want to it tells me I already am, then when I return to my favourite thread it tells me again I can't like and comment because I'm logged out. What is this sorcery. Currently on sh*tty Internet Explorer because it doesn't do that to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Now I’m glad I didn’t marry a German



I can relate 



> Mr Jellied surprised me & I think he did a really good job. My set is Edwardian so it’s tiny by modern US standards.



I love antique and vintage jewelry, they have so much soul.



> Though I’ve said it before & I’ll say it again Cam got the best royal e ring by a country mile.



I do like the Queen's a lot, too. 

Bea's is too generic though not awful, same goes for Zara's, Eugenie's and Fergie's fall both in the same fugly category and look dated, Kate's is way too big and blue, Raptor's even before tampering was unbalanced (side stones too small to make a real three-stone but too big to be mere accent stones. I know, I know, they were DIANA's and as such HAD to be used somehow but I don't think it was very successful), and I dislike the new dainty eternity band. 

I have such specific taste in jewelry, if someone managed to surprise me with something I actually loved I would know we're meant to be


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m also not opposed to resetting e ring stones or upgrading or changing myself - I don’t think it’s shallow.
> But I do tend to think why not just get a nice eternity or right hand rather than going in on the build of the e ring as you don’t want it to snap



Me neither, but most people do that for a 5, 10 or 25 year anniversary and not the minute they thought they'd had secured their spot by falling pregnant. If she hated it so much she could have spoken up before they showed it to the press and have it altered - which I find totally legit for something most people plan to wear daily for a very long time, wearer should love it and not tolerate it.


----------



## Sharont2305

I did like Ms e ring pre tamper but my favourites are The Queens, Camilla (which belonged to the Queen Mother) and Sophie. A previous poster said Zara and Bea's are to generic and I agree, though I like that Bea's looks similar to the Queens. 
I have a fondness for Princess Anne's current e ring, simple but unusual, her e ring from her first marriage was stunning, fit for a proper princess.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> I did like Ms e ring pre tamper but my favourites are The Queens, Camilla (which belonged to the Queen Mother) and Sophie. A previous poster said Zara and Bea's are to generic and I agree, though I like that Bea's looks similar to the Queens.
> I have a fondness for Princess Anne's current e ring, simple but unusual, her e ring from her first marriage was stunning, fit for a proper princess.


Sophie’s looks a lot like the Queen’s.
I think M’s is a similar idea to the queen’s originally but the shape doesn’t fit that well together.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can relate
> 
> 
> 
> I love antique and vintage jewelry, they have so much soul.
> 
> 
> 
> I do like the Queen's a lot, too.
> 
> Bea's is too generic though not awful, same goes for Zara's, Eugenie's and Fergie's fall both in the same fugly category and look dated, Kate's is way too big and blue, Raptor's even before tampering was unbalanced (side stones too small to make a real three-stone but too big to be mere accent stones. I know, I know, they were DIANA's and as such HAD to be used somehow but I don't think it was very successful), and I dislike the new dainty eternity band.
> 
> I have such specific taste in jewelry, if someone managed to surprise me with something I actually loved I would know we're meant to be


Yes its amazing when someone surprises you with the right jewellery but I do find you need to give them very strong pointers  so I did say  repeatedly that I don’t like white gold or pears or Marquis.

I think fergie’s is much nicer than Eug’s because I really dislike all pink sapphires as I think they are a bit glassy and weakly coloured whereas I love rubies for being bold. These gemstone clusters are very British style jewellery I’d say but they can look super-dated. Diana’s is almost camp in how big and 80s so I kind of like it.

Raptor’s just seems like a charm bracelet where she wants to stick more & more ‘sweet gestures’ on it. Very dated already if you ask me. Also Ariana Grande already did the stick a Pearl on a diamond ring thing & every jeweller has already said what a bad idea it is- girl didn’t check the Mohrs scale.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes its amazing when someone surprises you with the right jewellery but I do find you need to give them very strong pointers  so I did say  repeatedly that I don’t like white gold or pears or Marquis.



Ha.



> I think fergie’s is much nicer than Eug’s because I really dislike all pink sapphires as I think they are a bit glassy and weakly coloured whereas I love rubies for being bold. These gemstone clusters are very British style jewellery I’d say but they can look super-dated. Diana’s is almost camp in how big and 80s so I kind of like it.



Interestingly I do find Kate's / Diana's ring aged very well despite being the oldest of the three. But it is cocktail ring sized.



> Raptor’s just seems like a charm bracelet where she wants to stick more & more ‘sweet gestures’ on it. Very dated already if you ask me. Also Ariana Grande already did the stick a Pearl on a diamond ring thing & every jeweller has already said what a bad idea it is- girl didn’t check the Mohrs scale.



That seems to be her theme with most things minus that extra plain wedding dress (which admittedly would have been a classic had it fit and not had such stiff material) or clothing in general.

The AG ring besides pearls being weak is pretty close to my personal nightmare. I know the pearl is sentimental, but the aesthetic is just not mine.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha.
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly I do find Kate's / Diana's ring aged very well despite being the oldest of the three. But it is cocktail ring sized.
> 
> 
> 
> That seems to be her theme with most things minus that extra plain wedding dress (which admittedly would have been a classic had it fit and not had such stiff material) or clothing in general.
> 
> The AG ring besides pearls being weak is pretty close to my personal nightmare. I know the pearl is sentimental, but the aesthetic is just not mine.


I am kinda fascinated with her style 

While in the BRF - minimal, very expensive couture and badly tailored - her own personal style ?? She did rebel against her BRF handlers with all that messy hair - tendrils and low boat neck dresses - off shoulder

Her Montecito style is all over the place - one shoulder blouse, lotus flowers, lemons, t-shirts - as if her handlers were trying new things 

I dont think she is spending less now, but the money no longer goes to couturiers, the money is spent on her PR handlers time in choosing sustainable $200 Rothy shoes


----------



## melissatrv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Me neither, but most people do that for a 5, 10 or 25 year anniversary and not the minute they thought they'd had secured their spot by falling pregnant. If she hated it so much she could have spoken up before they showed it to the press and have it altered - which I find totally legit for something most people plan to wear daily for a very long time, wearer should love it and not tolerate it.



My sister recently got a new ring for her 10th anniversary.  Her previous one had a yellow gold band and she now has a white gold one.  I never understood why Harry went with yellow gold when he could well afford platinum.


----------



## melissatrv

Oh God that wedding dress!!  It really did look like the stiffest and most uncomfortable dress.  When she wore something that the BRF would consider ornate for her engagement photos, I really did expect something over the top or at least MUCH less plain that that ugly dress.  Plus the bad tailoring completely swallowed her up



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha.
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly I do find Kate's / Diana's ring aged very well despite being the oldest of the three. But it is cocktail ring sized.
> 
> 
> 
> That seems to be her theme with most things minus that extra plain wedding dress (which admittedly would have been a classic had it fit and not had such stiff material) or clothing in general.
> 
> The AG ring besides pearls being weak is pretty close to my personal nightmare. I know the pearl is sentimental, but the aesthetic is just not mine.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can relate
> 
> 
> 
> I love antique and vintage jewelry, they have so much soul.
> 
> 
> 
> I do like the Queen's a lot, too.
> 
> Bea's is too generic though not awful, same goes for Zara's, Eugenie's and Fergie's fall both in the same fugly category and look dated, Kate's is way too big and blue, Raptor's even before tampering was unbalanced (side stones too small to make a real three-stone but too big to be mere accent stones. I know, I know, they were DIANA's and as such HAD to be used somehow but I don't think it was very successful), and I dislike the new dainty eternity band.
> 
> *I have such specific taste in jewelry, if someone managed to surprise me with something I actually loved I would know we're meant to be *


LOL same here.  When DH and I were dating, he asked me what I wanted in a ring.  I was not the type of girl who sat around dreaming about my wedding and had never even thought of what I'd want in an engagement ring.  I replied I guess a solitaire on a gold band, since that's what my mother had.  He replied that's not happening.  WTF?  He spent TWO YEARS designing the damn thing to the point I finally asked him are we actually getting engaged or just looking at rings for some sick fantasy of yours?     Well, I must say he outdid himself, incorporating both his grandmother's diamonds into the ring.  It was definitely worth the wait!
I'm very sentimental though, and I personally would never change whatever ring was given to me.  If I didn't care for it, I'd buy another myself, LOL.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> LOL same here.  When DH and I were dating, he asked me what I wanted in a ring.  I was not the type of girl who sat around dreaming about my wedding and had never even thought of what I'd want in an engagement ring.  I replied I guess a solitaire on a gold band, since that's what my mother had.  He replied that's not happening.  WTF?  He spent TWO YEARS designing the damn thing to the point I finally asked him are we actually getting engaged or just looking at rings for some sick fantasy of yours?     Well, I must say he outdid himself, incorporating both his grandmother's diamonds into the ring.  It was definitely worth the wait!
> I'm very sentimental though, and I personally would never change whatever ring was given to me.  If I didn't care for it, I'd buy another myself, LOL.


Sounds lovely, if allowed, would you mind sharing a picture?


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I did like Ms e ring pre tamper but my favourites are The Queens, Camilla (which belonged to the Queen Mother) and Sophie. A previous poster said Zara and Bea's are to generic and I agree, though I like that Bea's looks similar to the Queens.
> I have a fondness for Princess Anne's current e ring, simple but unusual, her e ring from her first marriage was stunning, fit for a proper princess.


I think I like the queen's and Camilla's best.  Sarah's looks like a dept store ring


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Sounds lovely, if allowed, would you mind sharing a picture?


Awww thank you!  I will look for one.  We got engaged in the days before the iPhone so I need to look for a picture!  (I don't wear it often because of my line of work, so it's safe at the bank!)


----------



## gracekelly

I thought that MM redoing her E-ring so soon was in poor taste a d hurtful considering that Harry went to the trouble of designing it. No sentimentality from her. I fully understand that tastes and styles change in jewelry and after some time passes, a woman might want to change the setting. I still love my ring as is and don’t contemplate a change.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

melissatrv said:


> My sister recently got a new ring for her 10th anniversary.  Her previous one had a yellow gold band and she now has a white gold one.  I never understood why Harry went with yellow gold when he could well afford platinum.



I think it was put out at the time (or maybe he said it in the engagement interview? Never saw more than tidbits) that yellow gold is her favourite metal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

melissatrv said:


> Oh God that wedding dress!!  It really did look like the stiffest and most uncomfortable dress.  When she wore something that the BRF would consider ornate for her engagement photos, I really did expect something over the top or at least MUCH less plain that that ugly dress.  Plus the bad tailoring completely swallowed her up



The whole point of the engagement outfit was probably to spend as much of Charles' money as she could. Seeing that ill-fitting wedding dress could have paid for an apartment, I guess mission accomplished.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think it was put out at the time (or maybe he said it in the engagement interview? Never saw more than tidbits) that yellow gold is her favourite metal.


It's a Royal tradition:
*Meghan Markle's Ring Boosts Rare Welsh Gold Sales - Town ...*
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...e-wedding-band-boosts-rare-welsh-gold-demand/ - 231k - Cached - Similar pages 
Aug 29, 2018 *...* The British *royal family* has a long tradition of having *wedding bands*made of *Welsh gold*, and Meghan Markle is no exception.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The whole point of the engagement outfit was probably to spend as much of Charles' money as she could. Seeing that ill-fitting wedding dress could have paid for an apartment, I guess mission accomplished.


Her dress was totally inappropriate. That was my first thought that something was off with her. The second was the interview itself and how she acted.  It was the fact that she “acted” and wasn’t natural at all.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Her dress was totally inappropriate. That was my first thought that something was off with her. The second was the interview itself and how she acted.  It was the fact that she “acted” and wasn’t natural at all.


ITA!!  I still go back to their engagement interviews.  William was seated closer to the interviewer, and taking the lead when answering questions.  Here, Meg was front and center and doing much of the talking, when barely anyone knew who she even was had it not been for Harry.  Even when they did they engagement walk out to the reporters, she was absolutely giddy at all the attention, like this is what she'd been craving her whole life, whereas Kate, even DIANA, seemed to almost recoil at all the attention at the beginning.


----------



## rose60610

There are lists for Best Dressed, Worst Dressed, etc, there should be an Inverse Award for "Who has spent the most money to look the most terrible?" Our favorite hypocrite would win.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> ITA!!  I still go back to their engagement interviews.  William was seated closer to the interviewer, and taking the lead when answering questions.  Here, Meg was front and center and doing much of the talking, when barely anyone knew who she even was had it not been for Harry.  Even when they did they engagement walk out to the reporters, she was absolutely giddy at all the attention, like this is what she'd been craving her whole life, whereas Kate, even DIANA, seemed to almost recoil at all the attention at the beginning.


exactly.  I think the attention and fame gave her what she most wanted all her life.  I can't relate as I'm a person who doesn't like to draw attention to myself.  It seems almost pathological to me.  But I guess there are a lot of actors and actresses who crave fame.


----------



## csshopper

This 2017 article is eerily prophetic, the writer clearly saw what was coming. If only more people had paid attention. 

*Meghan Markle's Sheer Top Was a Sneaky Statement for a ...*
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/fashion/meghan-markle-engagement-portrait-dress.html - Cached - Similar pages 
Dec 22, 2017 *...*


----------



## rose60610

She'd have more favorable fame if she knew how to shut up, but she can't help herself. Maybe a certain level of fame was her end game and it doesn't matter whether she's liked or not. In fact, she enjoys being a flame thrower, burning bridges, and bringing misery to others. "Creative activations", you know. "Service is universal" since she has been a disaster on at least three continents.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> exactly.  I think the attention and fame gave her what she most wanted all her life.  I can't relate as I'm a person who doesn't like to draw attention to myself.  *It seems almost pathological to me.*  But I guess there are a lot of actors and actresses who crave fame.



  Remember that photo taken in the carriage after the wedding ceremony where she's staring straight into the drone camera? Creepy! PATHOLOGICAL is right!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha.
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly I do find Kate's / Diana's ring aged very well despite being the oldest of the three. But it is cocktail ring sized.
> 
> 
> 
> That seems to be her theme with most things minus that extra plain wedding dress (which admittedly would have been a classic had it fit and not had such stiff material) or clothing in general.
> 
> The AG ring besides pearls being weak is pretty close to my personal nightmare. I know the pearl is sentimental, but the aesthetic is just not mine.


I think the Pearl was a nice idea but make it into a necklace or a cocktail ring instead as they say they aren’t strong enough for rings & it’s the responsibility of the craftsman to advise them on making a product that’ll actually last.

yeah I am biased as I love a cocktail ring. I think a ruby cocktail would give Camilla’s big emerald cut a run for it’s money.

I reckon even she didn’t really like that wedding dress. She only wanted it 1. because CWK was the hot ticket 2. it was super pricey & white & a French designer so it went against the BRF paradigm and 3. She was hoping to do a ‘sweet nod’/ rip off to the first royal WOC but no one noticed at the time because she didn’t look good 

I also totally believe rumours that what we saw was some sort of Frankenstein’s monster stitched together after a battle of the egos


marietouchet said:


> I am kinda fascinated with her style
> 
> While in the BRF - minimal, very expensive couture and badly tailored - her own personal style ?? She did rebel against her BRF handlers with all that messy hair - tendrils and low boat neck dresses - off shoulder
> 
> Her Montecito style is all over the place - one shoulder blouse, lotus flowers, lemons, t-shirts - as if her handlers were trying new things
> 
> I dont think she is spending less now, but the money no longer goes to couturiers, the money is spent on her PR handlers time in choosing sustainable $200 Rothy shoes


I believe it’s called not having style 
She flops in the sartorial wind like her tendrils.




sdkitty said:


> I think I like the queen's and Camilla's best.  Sarah's looks like a dept store ring


It probably is…. A**** bought Gold filled cz cluster & put the rest of his ring allowance on his latest scam


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think it was put out at the time (or maybe he said it in the engagement interview? Never saw more than tidbits) that yellow gold is her favourite metal.


Yes. She also loves the U.K., charity work, camping & military history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> And yes, I'm a juvenile, so the statement "*her box was never chosen" *seriously gave me a fit of giggles.


 Like you, I will be young forever. So, it's quite conceivable this also happened when she was a yacht girl.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> You are AMAZING .. and so thoughtful to put all our (appropriate) nicknames into a list; *we should send it to Piers Morgan* .. he would have a field day with it!!!


Thanks!  I think it's a great idea to send the list to Piers Morgan and I hope you're volunteering to do the honours when it's posted.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> They don't have enough cash for a penthouse in Manhattan and a mansion in the Hamptons, but* Hazz would be happier in NY*. He must be tired from feeding chickens and memorizing word salads.



Well. there would certainly be more for him to do.
The isolated wilds of Montecito may have been the perfect place to hunker down during the shut down, but now it must be intolerable. I mean, Tinseltown and the glitterati aren't exactly overwhelming them with invites


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Good for Kate! Who wants to be associated with humbugs…
> 
> _"The Sussexes recently published a statement responding to the violence in Afghanistan, where *they recommended a list of mental health charities for veterans* to contact if they need help.
> 
> But Heads Together, *Kate personal charitable foundation she co-founded with William and Harry in 2017, was nowhere to be found on the list.*
> 
> News.au royal columnist Daniela Elser claimed _*this was a clear snub and a betrayal of one of the Royal Family's most hardworking and beloved members…*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'snubbed' Kate in statement, royal watcher claims
> 
> 
> The Sussexes' statement on Afghanistan included a list of mental health charities for veterans – but failed to include Kate Middleton's own, which she co-founded with Harry and Prince William
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


This is absolutely something a 13-year-old girl would do .. vis-a-vis "I don't like her, so I'm not going to invite her to MY party!".  How utterly pathetic behavior; did anyone call them out on this???


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> There are lists for Best Dressed, Worst Dressed, etc, there should be an Inverse Award for "Who has spent the most money to look the most terrible?" Our favorite hypocrite would win.



She obviously adheres to Dolly Parton's  mantra that it costs a lot of money to look that cheap
Or however it goes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes. She also loves the U.K., charity work, camping & military history.





But also, did she ever say she loved the UK? I thought it was only British men, and rich ones at that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

*double post*


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> After the bucolic Montecito, the cosmopolitan NYC…
> 
> *Meghan Markle flees to New York!*
> _Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. *As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex*, the former actress, and LA native *planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice…*
> 
> However, *due to the pandemic and widespread distaste among the LA elite *for the way Meghan and her husband, Prince Harry, have publicly dissed the royal family, *it hasn’t quite been the glorious homecoming she envisaged.
> 
> Now, with her plans to conquer Hollywood dead in the water, enterprising Meghan, 40, has set her eyes on a new prize – moving to New York City *to maintain a residential address that would allow her to make political inroads in Manhattan.
> 
> It’s long been reported that Meghan has ambitions to be President of the United States. A political insider with close ties to the current US Vice President, *************, tells New Idea that Meghan could be starting her journey to the White House by running for congress – just not in her native California._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle flees to New York! - NewsBreak
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle had a clear vision when she relocated her family back to her old California stomping ground last year. As the newly crowned Duchess of Sussex, the former actress, and LA native planned to rule over Hollywood – a town that once barely looked at her twice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsbreak.com


If she thinks it's tough in CA (especially Hollywood - HA) .. she can think again!!!  I'm from back East (originally Connecticut and then many years in Boston) and worked for a company based in NYC, New Yorkers are big-time straight-shooters and WILL NOT stand for her fakery and won't blink an eye with calling her out on it!  No way in hell would they then vote her into a Congressional seat in/around NYC; she knows NOTHING about the City and if she even tries her BS word salads on the native New Yorkers, well .. let's just say that I would have the popcorn ready for the entertainment!!!  God, she really is beyond STUPID!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe that's why she always elbows her way to the front, because otherwise no one would give her the time of day?
> 
> And yes, I'm a juvenile, so the statement "*her box was never chosen" *seriously gave me a fit of giggles.


Hee hee hee .. me too!!!!  Why she chose that word .. it was a "suitcase" you dumba$$ Mega-lo-maniac!


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks!  I think it's a great idea to send the list to Piers Morgan and I hope you're volunteering to do the honours when it's posted.


I'm now following him on Instagram, maybe I'll send him a PM!!!  I have to say though that he oftentimes pissed me off re: his support of a particular individual here in the US .. but I 100% back him on the *M*aster *M*anipulator (new nickname for her)!!


----------



## Cosmopolitan

I'm a jewelry lover, but definitely not a Meghan Markle lover. Anyway, I can remember at the time of the engagement that it was said Meghan always prefers yellow gold (even before marrying into a royal family that uses Welsh gold in their wedding bands). Prince Harry said that the ring is yellow gold because it is Markle's favorite. She was even credited by some for sparking a trend of yellow gold engagement and wedding bands, after several decades of white gold and platinum being more popular. *eyeroll* FWIW









						The ’90s killed yellow gold engagement rings, but now they’re back
					

Thanks to indie designers and Meghan Markle.




					www.vox.com
				












						How Meghan Markle's Engagement Ring Just Sparked a New Trend
					

Side stones will be all the rage this spring.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Her Montecito style is all over the place - one shoulder blouse, lotus flowers, lemons, t-shirts - as if her handlers were trying new things



I think her style has been all over the place as she is getting most of these clothes for free.  She is finally able to legally accept them which she couldn't do when she was a working royal. She got into huge arguments with the Palace over the clothes sent to her when she was in the UK. She wanted to keep them and the Palace said no, you can't.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cosmopolitan said:


> I'm a jewelry lover, but definitely not a Meghan Markle lover. Anyway, I can remember at the time of the engagement that it was said Meghan always prefers yellow gold (even before marrying into a royal family that uses Welsh gold in their wedding bands). Prince Harry said that the ring is yellow gold because it is Markle's favorite. She was even credited by some for sparking a trend of yellow gold engagement and wedding bands, after several decades of white gold and platinum being more popular. *eyeroll* FWIW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The ’90s killed yellow gold engagement rings, but now they’re back
> 
> 
> Thanks to indie designers and Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle's Engagement Ring Just Sparked a New Trend
> 
> 
> Side stones will be all the rage this spring.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Yeah that’s crazy   in my opinion the cool metals are still more popular by a mile.

I’d also say the ‘Demi fine’ sort of Monica vinader gang have made yellow gold seem a lot more wearable & casual personally & that’s come back into designer jewellers bringing in minimalist YG stuff. 


the other absolute recent runaway success is rose gold anyway & I think a lot of people go for RG now & then maybe think YG goes better with it?


----------



## Jayne1

Stansy said:


> I think that we are all aware that the NY story is just this: a story… I cannot see them there.


Agree. We shouldn't take any of this seriously until they arrive, which I doubt they will.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, by Hollywood standards 3 carats is probably a small diamond. The only royal apart from Kate who has a bigger stone seems to be Camilla. She really couldn't deal with the BRF's understatement, could she. I personally find the honkers e.g. the Kardashians - which I happen to mostly like - wear obscene and also extremely impractical. My hand gets tired just looking at them.


When I see those humungous diamond rings on real housewives and Kardashians, I always think, who do you think you are.  Even royalty isn't as ostentatious.

Not that I believe the housewives rings are real, but they are pretending they are...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> When I see those humungous diamond rings on real housewives and Kardashians, I always think, who do you think you are.  Even royalty isn't as ostentatious.
> 
> Not that I believe the housewives rings are real, but they are pretending they are...


Today's lab-created diamonds are tough to tell from mined from the earth ones and are far more affordable. You can be sure a lot of celebs are wearing them.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Today's lab-created diamonds are tough to tell from mined from the earth ones and are far more affordable. You can be sure a lot of celebs are wearing them.


It's a great idea, I think.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> She obviously adheres to Dolly Parton's  mantra that it costs a lot of money to look that cheap
> Or however it goes.



Except Dolly made her own (money) - plus I think she always looks adorable _and_ they were mostly stage costumes, hence theatrical  not usually real life day/evening wear. 

Plus, M looked cheap in cheap clothes too (_she_ said they were cheap a la sayonara Zara/"cheap shoes"  _not_ me)


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> It's a great idea, I think.



 Let's not go there, sustainability or otherwise. GIA will do a lab-grown report (LGDR) so the industry take them seriously.  But There's a glut of natural diamonds already mined, many already cut, no need to dig for/make more. Sustainability is about less and using what we have already, not creating more.

M doesn't need to buy lab diamonds, she has plenty of diamond jewellery, Royal or otherwise.


----------



## Chanbal

I've no idea who writes these statements, but this one sounds plausible.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> I'm now following him on Instagram, maybe I'll send him a PM!!!  I have to say though that he oftentimes pissed me off re: his support of a particular individual here in the US .. but I 100% back him on the *M*aster *M*anipulator (new nickname for her)!!


I bet he will be happy to hear from a TPF member.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I thought that MM redoing her E-ring so soon was in poor taste a d hurtful considering that Harry went to the trouble of designing it. No sentimentality from her. I fully understand that tastes and styles change in jewelry and after some time passes, a woman might want to change the setting. I still love my ring as is and don’t contemplate a change.


The ring may be a metaphor …
people go out of their way on behalf of others and the effort is discarded by the recipient 
whose life is like that ? Hmmm,


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I've no idea who writes these statements, but this one sounds plausible.
> View attachment 5175572


They have been pretty accurate on these two.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Let's not go there, sustainability or otherwise. GIA will do a lab-grown report (LGDR) so the industry take them seriously.  But There's a glut of natural diamonds already mined, many already cut, no need to dig for/make more. Sustainability is about less and using what we have already, not creating more.
> 
> M doesn't need to buy lab diamonds, she has plenty of diamond jewellery, Royal or otherwise.


If we are talking about Megsie, I don't think she has a lot of diamonds.  From whom? I think all she has a bunch of little unimportant gold jewelry.


----------



## Luvbolide

Katel said:


> If I may, I stated this incorrectly - what Lady C said (as I understood it) was that foundations are required by law to re-donate only 5% and that they may have access to up to 95% - for “business expenses” etc.
> 
> She said it in her droll way ... (which made my imagination go) - but she never outright said they were doing that - she’s very careful about her legal wording.




She is very careful about what she says to avoid potential legal issues.  One of the things I like about her!


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Many Americans could never have imagined ***** would be president, so don't count her political aspirations out. Or maybe it's just great material for a Netflix movie - The President and The Prince?




So that’s how they will get material for their Netflix contract!!


----------



## Cosmopolitan

gracekelly said:


> If we are talking about Megsie, I don't think she has a lot of diamonds.  From whom? I think all she has a bunch of little unimportant gold jewelry.



I mostly agree. Meghan seemed very into the dainty yellow gold jewelry trend. However she does have a Cartier diamond tennis bracelet that was a wedding gift from Prince Charles. Plus some other diamond gifts, including those controversial diamond earrings from the Arab world.












						Meghan Markle Is Wearing a Special Gift from Prince Charles on the Royal Tour
					

And it's worth a jaw-dropping $28,300.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## gracekelly

Cosmopolitan said:


> I mostly agree. Meghan seemed very into the dainty yellow gold jewelry trend. However she does have a Cartier diamond tennis bracelet that was a wedding gift from Prince Charles. Plus some other diamond gifts, including those controversial diamond earrings from the Arab world.
> 
> View attachment 5175614


Yes, and that and her wedding set are about it.  No big diamond necklace. No everyday diamond earrings.  No good pearls.   No tiara, which if they really liked her and expected her to hang around, would have been purchased for her.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Well. there would certainly be more for him to do.
> The isolated wilds of Montecito may have been the perfect place to hunker down during the shut down, but now it must be intolerable. I mean, Tinseltown and the glitterati aren't exactly overwhelming them with invites


Well, OW already got her interview. It's possible that most of the invites are coming from shine S. with a request to pay for their PR statements.

For someone  that used to live in a vibrant city, frequent exclusive clubs… Montecito with its toilets and chickens must be driving him crazy. He doesn't seem to have the cash needed to hope on his own private jet and go out for dinner with the big boys or girls here. I'm almost feeling sorry for him.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Yes, and that and her wedding set are about it.  *No big diamond necklace*. *No everyday diamond* earrings.  *No good pearls*.   *No tiara*, which if they really liked her and expected her to hang around, would have been purchased for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cosmopolitan

gracekelly said:


> No tiara, which if they really liked her and expected her to hang around, would have been purchased for her.



And the tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan seems very modest compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.


----------



## Chanbal

Cosmopolitan said:


> And the *tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan* seems very modest *compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate* as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.
> 
> View attachment 5175625
> View attachment 5175626



You gals are making me cry!


----------



## Chanbal

They are probably saving that info for one of the upcoming books. 

*Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist who asked about Archie's skin colour' in Oprah interview that the Duchess found 'cathartic' and 'liberating', new biography chapter claims *

_*Meghan and Harry considered naming the royal they alleged made a racist remark before their son Archie's birth, it was claimed last night.*

An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up 'sharing this detail' in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.

However Meghan ultimately told Oprah that revealing the individual's identity would be 'very damaging to them'…

The sensational claims made in leaks of the epilogue last night included that:
_

_Members of the Royal Family were 'quietly pleased' that the Duchess of Sussex missed Prince Philip's funeral because they feared she would 'create a spectacle' if she attended;_
_While Harry and his brother have spoken on multiple occasions, Harry and his father Charles were only on 'light speaking terms';_
_The book alleges that palace courtiers had lied to the media over Meghan and Harry's wishes on the issue of Archie not being made a prince, claiming that the couple did in fact want this option;_
_It criticises the monarchy after courtiers ordered an inquiry into claims of bullying against the duchess while the couple's allegations of racism did not receive the same treatment;_
_The book claims Harry was left 'deeply saddened' after he was refused permission to have a wreath laid in his name on Remembrance Sunday last year because he was no longer a 'frontline royal';_
_The authors also offer a new take on Harry's financial situation in the run-up to 'Megxit', saying the couple 'wouldn't have survived' without his inheritance from his mother Diana;_
_The epilogue also claims Meghan had no idea that diamond earrings given to her as a wedding present were from Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi prince accused of ordering the murder of a journalist._
_
Last night, Buckingham Palace declined to comment on the latest claims.

The new epilogue also suggests that Harry and Meghan feared courtiers were trying to damage them even though they have moved to the United States.

It says that more than a year after their decision to leave their royal roles, the couple felt that 'courtiers inside the institution' were still 'appearing to actively undermine Harry and Meghan by deliberately leaking information to discredit them'.

On the issue of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, it says that Meghan hoped to return with Harry but adds: 'In truth, several members of the Royal Family are understood to have been 'quietly pleased' that Meghan stayed in California because they 'didn't want a circus' or, commented a senior royal source, 'the duchess creating a spectacle'.'_









						Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist,' book claims
					

An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up revealing the family member who asked about Archie's skin tone in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Well, OW already got her interview. It's possible that most of the invites are coming from shine S. with a request to pay for their PR statements.
> 
> For someone  that used to live in a vibrant city, frequent exclusive clubs… Montecito with its toilets and chickens must be driving him crazy. He doesn't seem to have the cash needed to hope on his own private jet and go out for dinner with the big boys or girls here. I'm almost feeling sorry for him.




Solution to not being able to afford a private jet- NetJets!! (Hey,it beats Southwest!!!)


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> Solution to not being able to afford a private jet- NetJets!! (Hey,it beats Southwest!!!)


It sounds like a good solution until they get ArcheJets.


----------



## Annawakes

Re: the epilogue: WHO. CARES.  Really.  Who?????????  Y’all, no one is undermining you.  You’re doing that all by yourselves.

Re: the diamond bracelets Kate vs Raptor. Kate’s is WOW!!!!! Raptor, maybe if you didn’t squander hundreds of thousands of pounds on badly fitted designer clothes, maybe you could’ve gotten a bracelet like that. After all, fair’s fair


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> They are probably saving that info for one of the upcoming books.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist who asked about Archie's skin colour' in Oprah interview that the Duchess found 'cathartic' and 'liberating', new biography chapter claims*
> 
> _*Meghan and Harry considered naming the royal they alleged made a racist remark before their son Archie's birth, it was claimed last night.*
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up 'sharing this detail' in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> However Meghan ultimately told Oprah that revealing the individual's identity would be 'very damaging to them'…
> 
> The sensational claims made in leaks of the epilogue last night included that:_
> 
> 
> _Members of the Royal Family were 'quietly pleased' that the Duchess of Sussex missed Prince Philip's funeral because they feared she would 'create a spectacle' if she attended;_
> _While Harry and his brother have spoken on multiple occasions, Harry and his father Charles were only on 'light speaking terms';_
> _The book alleges that palace courtiers had lied to the media over Meghan and Harry's wishes on the issue of Archie not being made a prince, claiming that the couple did in fact want this option;_
> _It criticises the monarchy after courtiers ordered an inquiry into claims of bullying against the duchess while the couple's allegations of racism did not receive the same treatment;_
> _The book claims Harry was left 'deeply saddened' after he was refused permission to have a wreath laid in his name on Remembrance Sunday last year because he was no longer a 'frontline royal';_
> _The authors also offer a new take on Harry's financial situation in the run-up to 'Megxit', saying the couple 'wouldn't have survived' without his inheritance from his mother Diana;_
> _The epilogue also claims Meghan had no idea that diamond earrings given to her as a wedding present were from Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi prince accused of ordering the murder of a journalist._
> 
> _Last night, Buckingham Palace declined to comment on the latest claims.
> 
> The new epilogue also suggests that Harry and Meghan feared courtiers were trying to damage them even though they have moved to the United States.
> 
> It says that more than a year after their decision to leave their royal roles, the couple felt that 'courtiers inside the institution' were still 'appearing to actively undermine Harry and Meghan by deliberately leaking information to discredit them'.
> 
> On the issue of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, it says that Meghan hoped to return with Harry but adds: 'In truth, several members of the Royal Family are understood to have been 'quietly pleased' that Meghan stayed in California because they 'didn't want a circus' or, commented a senior royal source, 'the duchess creating a spectacle'.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist,' book claims
> 
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up revealing the family member who asked about Archie's skin tone in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So several members of the RF were pleased because they didn’t want a circus?  Sounds like Scooby just admitted that H and MM are the clowns…


----------



## EverSoElusive

Cosmopolitan said:


> And the tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan seems very modest compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.
> 
> View attachment 5175625
> View attachment 5175626




You don't say!! Now Nutmeg is gonna be even more pissed off with Charles and she may just name him as the racist who questioned Archie's skin color


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> They are probably saving that info for one of the upcoming books.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist who asked about Archie's skin colour' in Oprah interview that the Duchess found 'cathartic' and 'liberating', new biography chapter claims*
> 
> _*Meghan and Harry considered naming the royal they alleged made a racist remark before their son Archie's birth, it was claimed last night.*
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up 'sharing this detail' in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> However Meghan ultimately told Oprah that revealing the individual's identity would be 'very damaging to them'…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist,' book claims
> 
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up revealing the family member who asked about Archie's skin tone in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I think they won't ever name the person because then that person would likely step forward and deny they ever said anything remotely like what MM and Harry claimed. Or they would clarify and state precisely what they did say, which could turn out to be innocuous. So, they won't risk the story being refuted. Not naming the person means they can repeat the story forever.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> You don't say!! Now Nutmeg is gonna be even more pissed off with Charles and she may just name him as the racist who questioned Archie's skin color


Tough decision, Will is also not a favorite.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting video…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> When I see those humungous diamond rings on real housewives and Kardashians, I always think, who do you think you are.  Even royalty isn't as ostentatious.
> 
> Not that I believe the housewives rings are real, but they are pretending they are...



I follow a doctor who's also a luxury vlogger, she just upgraded to a 4ct oval that on top of this is in a halo setting and honestly, it's just too much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5175572



Oh hi Captain Obvious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> If we are talking about Megsie, I don't think she has a lot of diamonds.  From whom? I think all she has a bunch of little unimportant gold jewelry.



Unless she returned her wedding jewelry...that bracelet can buy you a house.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5175614



Oh wow, she has really sun-damaged hands.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yes, and that and her wedding set are about it.  No big diamond necklace. No everyday diamond earrings.  No good pearls.   No tiara, which if they really liked her and expected her to hang around, would have been purchased for her.



She has several everyday diamond earrings IIRC. And they stopped purchasing tiaras a few brides ago, after Sophie? Kate doesn't own her own tiara, she has several on loan though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For someone  that used to live in a vibrant city, frequent exclusive clubs… Montecito with its toilets and chickens must be driving him crazy. He doesn't seem to have the cash needed to hope on his own private jet and go out for dinner with the big boys or girls here. I'm almost feeling sorry for him.



I mean, London TRIGGERED that poor guy, so maybe cleaning the chicken-coop is therapeutic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


> And the tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan seems very modest compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.
> 
> View attachment 5175625
> View attachment 5175626



I thought that too haha. I think Kate's set even came with a necklace.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _The authors also offer a new take on Harry's financial situation in the run-up to 'Megxit', saying the couple 'wouldn't have survived' without his inheritance from his mother Diana;_



Not sure if I want to laugh hysterically or get mad. Get a grip on life drama queen Omid and spoiled brats of Montecito. You could have tried to get a job, plus most people do not operate on a multi-million dollar inheritance to begin with. That really is "Nobody asked me if I'm ok" in front of women and children subjected to starvation and sexual violence level.



> _The epilogue also claims Meghan had no idea that diamond earrings given to her as a wedding present were from Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi prince accused of ordering the murder of a journalist._



As if.



> _The new epilogue also suggests that Harry and Meghan feared courtiers were trying to damage them even though they have moved to the United States._



They are not trying to damage them, they just want them to shut up and go away. Just a thought.

_



			It says that more than a year after their decision to leave their royal roles, the couple felt that 'courtiers inside the institution' were still 'appearing to actively undermine Harry and Meghan by deliberately leaking information to discredit them'.
		
Click to expand...


Wait...so they are not complaining the discrediting information isn't true, they just take issue that they don't lie and smooth over things on their behalf anymore?




			On the issue of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, it says that Meghan hoped to return with Harry but adds: 'In truth, several members of the Royal Family are understood to have been 'quietly pleased' that Meghan stayed in California because they 'didn't want a circus' or, commented a senior royal source, 'the duchess creating a spectacle'.'
		
Click to expand...

_
I wonder where that assumption of the family members came from. Oh wait.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Unless she returned her wedding jewelry...that bracelet can buy you a house.


That little tennis bracelet? A house where?


----------



## gracekelly

Cosmopolitan said:


> And the tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan seems very modest compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.
> 
> View attachment 5175625
> View attachment 5175626


This is gorgeous!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That little tennis bracelet? A house where?



No...that one. We looked it up on the Cartier website. She also has been seen in the matching earrings (but didn't wear them for the wedding).


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> If we are talking about Megsie, I don't think she has a lot of diamonds.  From whom? I think all she has a bunch of little unimportant gold jewelry.



Well, we're not talking Katherine the Great (of Russia) strong room, or even tPF jewellery forum  ladies' and gent's bling, but M has enough, including the Aqua, the watch, tennis bracelet, _those_ earrings, her E-ring and a few other pieces. It's_ enough_ without resorting to lab-grown (or whatever floats ya boat) which are not that big anyway, all look the same, and have about as much personality as one of H&M bots.

I grant you, if she wears that hideous 14k tinny, tiny, starry, nonsense, she wore in her 40 bday vid people will think she shops on TV jewellery channels  (not that I'm a snob or anything  )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Well, we're not talking Katherine the Great (of Russia) strong room, or even tPF jewellery forum  ladies' and gent's bling, but M has enough [...].



Weren't there calculations she had amassed jewelry in the 1 million pound range within the first year of marriage, and like her wardrobe that was from pieces she was seen in? I'll bet money despite their generous call to donate instead of buying wedding gifts she probably got some pieces of jewelry anyway...and if not given by heads of state, those are hers, not the BRF's. They have just not been worn in public, so we have no knowledge of them.


----------



## Lodpah

From now on, I will be referring to her as Barracuda and him, he's just too stupid for me to bother with right now.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We'ren't there calculations she had amassed jewelry in the 1 million pound range within the first year of marriage, and like her wardrobe that was from pieces she was seen in? I'll bet money despite their generous call to donate instead of buying wedding gifts she probably got some pieces of jewelry anyway...and if not given by heads of state, those are hers, not the BRF's. They have just not been worn in public, so we have no knowledge of them.



Exactly. Amassed 

There was also a rumour of jewellery borrowed and not returned   (don't blame me, I didn't start it)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Exactly. Amassed
> 
> There was also a rumour of jewellery borrowed and not returned   (don't blame me, I didn't start it)



Yes, I read those too. The pieces supposedly slipped into the luggage headed to Montecito (or rather, Canada at that time).


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Well, we're not talking Katherine the Great (of Russia) strong room, or even tPF jewellery forum  ladies' and gent's bling, but M has enough, including the Aqua, the watch, tennis bracelet, _those_ earrings, her E-ring and a few other pieces. It's_ enough_ without resorting to lab-grown (or whatever floats ya boat) which are not that big anyway, all look the same, and have about as much personality as one of H&M bots.
> 
> I grant you, if she wears that hideous 14k tinny, tiny, starry, nonsense, she wore in her 40 bday vid people will think she shops on TV jewellery channels  (not that I'm a snob or anything  )



i thought that Aqua ring was a copy Of Diana’s.  Was the stone in the copy real or fake???


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cosmopolitan said:


> And the tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan seems very modest compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.
> 
> View attachment 5175625
> View attachment 5175626


I like the design of Kate’s better but M’s was Cartier & I think it was in the ball park for price. So I think he tried to be fair …it just looks like he got a bit ripped off second time round… again seems apt. 



Chanbal said:


> It sounds like a good solution until they get ArcheJets.


It will be the most environmentally friendly private airline because they don’t allow more than two children per family or elderly dogs that may require more cushioning. 

also the only drinks are OAT lattes from China


youngster said:


> I think they won't ever name the person because then that person would likely step forward and deny they ever said anything remotely like what MM and Harry claimed. Or they would clarify and state precisely what they did say, which could turn out to be innocuous. So, they won't risk the story being refuted. Not naming the person means they can repeat the story forever.


This is what I hate about it:  it’s not a claim or an accusation it’s trying to start a witch hunt & the more people get dragged through it the better for them.
in my mind if you are the victim you name the perpetrator and what they did  and then they have a chance to refute it. Then your cases stand against each other for judgement in the court or the public eye.

I’m sure a lot of people would want to know if there really is someone racist among the family but we aren’t being given a chance to find out


gracekelly said:


> That little tennis bracelet? A house where?


Dumbarton. The poor place has yet to recover from the shade. 


papertiger said:


> Well, we're not talking Katherine the Great (of Russia) strong room, or even tPF jewellery forum  ladies' and gent's bling, but M has enough, including the Aqua, the watch, tennis bracelet, _those_ earrings, her E-ring and a few other pieces. It's_ enough_ without resorting to lab-grown (or whatever floats ya boat) which are not that big anyway, all look the same, and have about as much personality as one of H&M bots.
> 
> I grant you, if she wears that hideous 14k tinny, tiny, starry, nonsense, she wore in her 40 bday vid people will think she shops on TV jewellery channels  (not that I'm a snob or anything  )



So what you are saying is….
_“QVC presents the Douchesse Dianamond parure….. a very special collection inspired by the real Queen who filled our hearts and her face over these magical years.
Tune in at 2am weekdays to see the electrifying personality herself shower her trademark dianamond gold-plate chandelier earrings with her markle sparkle.
Notice the beautifully crafted pear shape CZ modelled on the delicate tears of the woman who carried on even when no one asked if she was ok and the delicate and fragrant sweat of brow after the press identified the earrings as being from the Saudi embassy. 
Now you too can get your hands on your own for the low low price of £999.99 in six easy installaments. The first fifty orders get an exclusive 40 minute zoom with an agency rescue chicken or the porcelain dog. The first two hundred orders get a copy of the bench. The first five hundred orders get five copies of the bench. The first thousand orders get exclusive pre-order rights to ‘I know why the caged Prince sings’ Harry’s heartbreaking new memoir (please redeem your preorder at www.bargainpoundbooks.com)_

Everyone, I think we might finally have hit on the million dollar idea 
All we need to do is make sure our heroine’s personality isn’t too pushy and grating for a shopping channel….


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> i thought that Aqua ring was a copy Of Diana’s.  Was the stone in the copy real or fake???



I'm sure it was the real. 

I heard some of QEII's tiara's are copies and the real no longer come out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I like the design of Kate’s better but M’s was Cartier & I think it was in the ball park for price. So I think he tried to be fair …it just looks like he got a bit ripped off second time round… again seems apt.
> 
> 
> It will be the most environmentally friendly private airline because they don’t allow more than two children per family or elderly dogs that may require more cushioning.
> 
> also the only drinks are OAT lattes from China
> 
> This is what I hate about it:  it’s not a claim or an accusation it’s trying to start a witch hunt & the more people get dragged through it the better for them.
> in my mind if you are the victim you name the perpetrator and what they did  and then they have a chance to refute it. Then your cases stand against each other for judgement in the court or the public eye.
> 
> I’m sure a lot of people would want to know if there really is someone racist among the family but we aren’t being given a chance to find out
> 
> Dumbarton. The poor place has yet to recover from the shade.
> 
> 
> So what you are saying is….
> _“QVC presents the Douchesse Dianamond parure….. a very special collection inspired by the real Queen who filled our hearts and her face over these magical years.
> Tune in at 2am weekdays to see the electrifying personality herself shower her trademark dianamond gold-plate chandelier earrings with her markle sparkle.
> Notice the beautifully crafted pear shape CZ modelled on the delicate tears of the woman who carried on even when no one asked if she was ok and the delicate and fragrant sweat of brow after the press identified the earrings as being from the Saudi embassy.
> Now you too can get your hands on your own for the low low price of £999.99 in six easy installaments. The first fifty orders get an exclusive 40 minute zoom with an agency rescue chicken or the porcelain dog. The first two hundred orders get a copy of the bench. The first five hundred orders get five copies of the bench. The first thousand orders get exclusive pre-order rights to ‘I know why the caged Prince sings’ Harry’s heartbreaking new memoir (please redeem your preorder at www.bargainpoundbooks.com)_
> 
> Everyone, I think we might finally have hit on the million dollar idea
> All we need to do is make sure our heroine’s personality isn’t too pushy and grating for a shopping channel….



LOL, perfect, although, QVC would be considered _upmarket _to the TV jewellery channels I was thinking of  You are all too classy to know which ones I mean


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I like the design of Kate’s better but M’s was Cartier & I think it was in the ball park for price. So I think he tried to be fair …it just looks like he got a bit ripped off second time round… again seems apt.



The supposed tennis bracelet is around 20000 bucks.

That monstrosity that buys a house we thought Harry had bought (though I am not sure he'd want to spend that amount of his own money...but what Meghan wants, Meghan gets).


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Yes the simple line Cartier tennis bracelet that Charles gave Meghan was estimated at $28,000, see here:








						Meghan Markle Is Wearing a Special Gift from Prince Charles on the Royal Tour
					

And it's worth a jaw-dropping $28,300.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				






Her Cartier wedding day jewelry below was far pricier. I assume it was a loaner because we never heard it was a gift from Harry or anyone else?












						All About the Gorgeous Jewelry Meghan Markle Wore for the Royal Wedding
					

Meghan Markle was dripping in diamonds for the royal wedding




					people.com


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also, did she ever say she loved the UK? I thought *it was only British men, and rich ones at that.*



Right. Her modus operandi--marry a rich Brit and bring him back to California like a prop for Show and Tell.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Right. *Her modus operandi--marry a rich Brit* and bring him back to California like a prop for Show and Tell.


With titles… I read somewhere that at some point she requested a countess title for her mother. And Om*d's book on *Archie’s title debacle continues:*

_The book accuses courtiers of lying to the press over Meghan and Harry's wishes about whether their son Archie would become a prince.

Archie was not made a prince in line with royal protocol, something which Meghan and Harry expressed their displeasure about in their interview with Oprah Winfrey.

The book reads: *"Palace aides were actually instructed to brief the press that the couple did not want a title for Archie.
*_
*“In reality, the couple did want the option, given that it would provide their son with a level of security that only comes with a title.

"The differential treatment the couple felt had been bestowed upon their son was a major sting to Harry and Meghan.*"









						Finding Freedom update: The 3 biggest bombshells in new part of book
					

A NEW epilogue added to the unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom, has revealed all manner of new claims made by the nearest and dearest to the couple.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> With titles… I read somewhere that at some point she requested a countess title for her mother. And Om*d's book on *Archie’s title debacle continues:*
> 
> _The book accuses courtiers of lying to the press over Meghan and Harry's wishes about whether their son Archie would become a prince.
> 
> Archie was not made a prince in line with royal protocol, something which Meghan and Harry expressed their displeasure about in their interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The book reads: *"Palace aides were actually instructed to brief the press that the couple did not want a title for Archie.*_
> 
> *“In reality, the couple did want the option, given that it would provide their son with a level of security that only comes with a title.
> 
> "The differential treatment the couple felt had been bestowed upon their son was a major sting to Harry and Meghan.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom update: The 3 biggest bombshells in new part of book
> 
> 
> A NEW epilogue added to the unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom, has revealed all manner of new claims made by the nearest and dearest to the couple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


what a bunch of crap
edit to say I think what they are doing is really cheapening the monarchy just be being "part of it" even though not really part of it.
Must sadden the queen.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> With titles… I read somewhere that at some point she requested a countess title for her mother. And Om*d's book on *Archie’s title debacle continues:*
> 
> _The book accuses courtiers of lying to the press over Meghan and Harry's wishes about whether their son Archie would become a prince.
> 
> Archie was not made a prince in line with royal protocol, something which Meghan and Harry expressed their displeasure about in their interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The book reads: *"Palace aides were actually instructed to brief the press that the couple did not want a title for Archie.*_
> 
> *“In reality, the couple did want the option, given that it would provide their son with a level of security that only comes with a title.
> 
> "The differential treatment the couple felt had been bestowed upon their son was a major sting to Harry and Meghan.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom update: The 3 biggest bombshells in new part of book
> 
> 
> A NEW epilogue added to the unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom, has revealed all manner of new claims made by the nearest and dearest to the couple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Gosh still whining about that ... There will never be a reconciliation if they cannot get over this .. H&M feel their son got *differential *treatment, H&M wanted the rules *changed *by QEII. The complaint of unfair treatment is leveled directly at the Queen. 

They took aim very high up with that whining.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> I'm now following him on Instagram, maybe I'll send him a PM!!!  I have to say though that he oftentimes pissed me off re: his support of a particular individual here in the US .. but I 100% back him on the *M**aster Manipulator* (new nickname for her)!!


@CeeJay  Thank you in advance for trying to contact Piers Morgan, the Nickname Grand Poobah. Congratulations and here's your ribbon for the nickname, Master Manipulator, that has been added to The List.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> LOL, perfect, although, QVC would be considered _upmarket _to the TV jewellery channels I was thinking of  You are all too classy to know which ones I mean


Hmmm Maybe Kate's set was vintage / used ? 
Charles is known for buying vintage jewels for Camilla
If you buy a Cartier piece, you are buying the label , vintage bling is a much better deal over all, if it is your style


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm Maybe Kate's set was vintage / used ?
> Charles is known for buying *vintage *jewels for Camilla
> If you buy a Cartier piece, you are buying the label , vintage bling is a much better deal over all, if it is your style



This is our (UK) normal practice. 

It's not a question of new or old, it's getting what you want. 

Cartier has some some amazing pre-loved/vintage/antique pieces. I love Cartier - especially their older lines


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> This is our (UK) normal practice.
> 
> It's not a question of new or old, it's getting what you want.
> 
> Cartier has some some amazing pre-loved/vintage/antique pieces. I love Cartier - especially their older lines


when you think about it most diamonds are going to be old or used....of course the piece of jewelry they are mounted in can be new but anyway.....certainly nothing wrong with vintage jewelry


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> when you think about it most diamonds are going to be old or used....of course the piece of jewelry they are mounted in can be new but anyway.....certainly nothing wrong with vintage jewelry



Exactly, 99% of new fine jewellery is recycled from broken-up stones and/or recycled materials.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

rose60610 said:


> Remember that photo taken in the carriage after the wedding ceremony where she's staring straight into the drone camera? Creepy! PATHOLOGICAL is right!


I’ve read on a forum before about this photo but googled it and never found one except an aerial photo of Harry and her looking at the crowd … has it been deleted from the internet?


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> what a bunch of crap
> edit to say I think what they are doing is really cheapening the monarchy just be being "part of it" even though not really part of it.
> Must sadden the queen.



Harry and Meghan are turning a centuries old institution into a soap opera 
and to what end ?

They have no currency other than their connection to the BRF 
I am pretty sure that NO-ONE know the name of the Greek RF spare's wife !


----------



## TC1

Cosmopolitan said:


> And the tennis bracelet that Charles gave to Meghan seems very modest compared to the extravagant art deco white and yellow diamond set that he reportedly gave to Kate as a wedding gift. It included a bracelet, earrings and ring.
> 
> View attachment 5175625
> View attachment 5175626


Charles really does like to commission bracelets now doesn't he?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I just read that MM is furious of photos taken at the medical center allegedly in July after her alleged miscarriage.  I vaguely recall that she was photographed coming out of a fertility clinic and we all assumed ( and some of us might still believe) it was for IVF.


----------



## melissatrv

On Meghan becoming a politician I don't see that happening.  

1.  Because she will not take council from her advisors (or in fact anyone)
2.  She cannot seem to hold on to her staff.  And she certainly does not want to <gasp> do things herself!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I'm sure it was the real.
> 
> I heard some of QEII's tiara's are copies and the real no longer come out.



I’ve heard this, too.
Phillip Mould of _Fake or Fortune _said most of the art in he museums is not the original piece. Those are stored elsewhere.  No idea if this is true. IMO it makes sense to do this. Many have worn fake jewels when travelling, so why not have a fake tiara? Do we really think those are really Diana’s diamonds?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *with a level of security that only comes with a title.
> *




????? There it is. Such massive flawed logic. Where does that come from? Hazz? Andrew? Markus A? Diana had a title but gave up the security [ya kno, she didn’t want the ‘spies’].


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> ????? There it is. Such massive flawed logic. Where does that come from? Hazz? Andrew? Markus A? Diana had a title but gave up the security [ya kno, she didn’t want the ‘spies’].



For °security° read MONEY £££££


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ????? There it is. Such massive flawed logic. Where does that come from? Hazz? Andrew? Markus A? Diana had a title but gave up the security [ya kno, she didn’t want the ‘spies’].



They are just full of it, there is no real logic.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> They are probably saving that info for one of the upcoming books.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist who asked about Archie's skin colour' in Oprah interview that the Duchess found 'cathartic' and 'liberating', new biography chapter claims*
> 
> _*Meghan and Harry considered naming the royal they alleged made a racist remark before their son Archie's birth, it was claimed last night.*
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up 'sharing this detail' in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> However Meghan ultimately told Oprah that revealing the individual's identity would be 'very damaging to them'…
> 
> The sensational claims made in leaks of the epilogue last night included that:_
> 
> 
> _Members of the Royal Family were 'quietly pleased' that the Duchess of Sussex missed Prince Philip's funeral because they feared she would 'create a spectacle' if she attended;_
> _While Harry and his brother have spoken on multiple occasions, Harry and his father Charles were only on 'light speaking terms';_
> _The book alleges that palace courtiers had lied to the media over Meghan and Harry's wishes on the issue of Archie not being made a prince, claiming that the couple did in fact want this option;_
> _It criticises the monarchy after courtiers ordered an inquiry into claims of bullying against the duchess while the couple's allegations of racism did not receive the same treatment;_
> _The book claims Harry was left 'deeply saddened' after he was refused permission to have a wreath laid in his name on Remembrance Sunday last year because he was no longer a 'frontline royal';_
> _The authors also offer a new take on Harry's financial situation in the run-up to 'Megxit', saying the couple 'wouldn't have survived' without his inheritance from his mother Diana;_
> _The epilogue also claims Meghan had no idea that diamond earrings given to her as a wedding present were from Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi prince accused of ordering the murder of a journalist._
> 
> _Last night, Buckingham Palace declined to comment on the latest claims.
> 
> The new epilogue also suggests that Harry and Meghan feared courtiers were trying to damage them even though they have moved to the United States.
> 
> It says that more than a year after their decision to leave their royal roles, the couple felt that 'courtiers inside the institution' were still 'appearing to actively undermine Harry and Meghan by deliberately leaking information to discredit them'.
> 
> On the issue of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, it says that Meghan hoped to return with Harry but adds: 'In truth, several members of the Royal Family are understood to have been 'quietly pleased' that Meghan stayed in California because they 'didn't want a circus' or, commented a senior royal source, 'the duchess creating a spectacle'.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist,' book claims
> 
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up revealing the family member who asked about Archie's skin tone in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Before they go “naming” someone, I still want to know precisely what was said.  Smirk and Jerk believe that everything is rooted in racism.  And that, of course, is simply not true.

The whole idea of trying to peddle Scabies’ not very well received book by slapping a few more of their ridiculous comments/thoughts onto it seems so odd to me.  Who cares?!  Besides, seems as if most of the new epilogue is being dribbled out daily anyway.

I am not sure that I will be able their new active phase without my head exploding!


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Today's lab-created diamonds are tough to tell from mined from the earth ones and are far more affordable. You can be sure a lot of celebs are wearing them.


Can't even say how many celebrities I see at XIV (14) Karats in Beverly HIlls.  They discount everything; however, I have found that they upped their prices and so .. truly, you don't get that much of a bargain.  They have a huge selection of Diamonds and the GIA Cert guy brings you into his office, closes the door .. and they get to look at a LOT of Diamonds!!  

In regards to a 3-carat ring in BH?!?! .. those "certain" types of women (HW of BH) .. would be a pittance!!!  When the HB and I would dine in BH or West Hollywood, the women in the restaurants (patrons) have some serious bling (although many times they inquire about my gold-loaded arms - HA)!!!


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> Let's not go there, sustainability or otherwise. GIA will do a lab-grown report (LGDR) so the industry take them seriously.  But There's a glut of natural diamonds already mined, many already cut, no need to dig for/make more. Sustainability is about less and using what we have already, not creating more.
> 
> M doesn't need to buy lab diamonds, she has plenty of diamond jewellery, Royal or otherwise.


COOL @papertiger  - are you a GIA, IGI, or EGL cert???  I passed the GIA Diamond course, but have yet to delve into the other Gemstones!  I should have never taken that Diamond course because my (previous) favorite gemstone was Ruby .. but after taking the Diamonds course, I just *LOVE *Diamonds now!!!  All of my jewelry (_I design & make_) has tons of colored Diamonds .. which I love (I have only 2 "white" Diamonds - a round VVS1 and a Rose Cut VVS2) .. both of which I purchased in Amsterdam when I worked there (_a colleague's uncle worked in the Bourse_!!!!).


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> If we are talking about Megsie, I don't think she has a lot of diamonds.  From whom? I think all she has a bunch of little unimportant gold jewelry.


.. yes, and OF COURSE, we had to know that she returned the ex-husband's rings .. in a regular envelope via the Canada Post!!!


----------



## rose60610

I'd hope Meghan doesn't whine about the jewelry she was gifted. Was a 50 million dollar wedding, 200K+ gown, perks galore, etc not enough? Oh wait.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> All of my jewelry (_I design & make_) has tons of colored Diamonds .. which I love (I have only 2 "white" Diamonds - a round VVS1 and a Rose Cut VVS2) .. both of which I purchased in Amsterdam when I worked there (_a colleague's uncle worked in the Bourse_!!!!).



Is Amsterdam a good place to buy diamonds? I have heard so many stories of scammers, but it's close enough I could go on a day trip (as is Antwerp).

Also I'm really fond of antique diamonds (not so much Old Mine cut which can be a bit, uh, rough, but Old European and transitional cuts).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> .. yes, and OF COURSE, we had to know that she returned the ex-husband's rings .. in a regular envelope via the Canada Post!!!



Unless he did something really awful, this is such a sh*tty and coward way to end a marriage. Also, why even bother? She didn't have to return the rings, it was just one of these over the top gestures.


----------



## gracekelly

Sorry, I simply do not believe that she has as much jewelry as many of you seem to think.  Granted that Covid has put a halt to fancy dressing, but we really didn't see much before Covid either.  Considering how sentimentality doesn't seem to enter in to much for her regarding jewelry, if something was really worth a lot, I see her selling it.  I think that some jewelry was borrowed and if from a store, like Cartier, it had to be returned.  She might have left with some smaller less expensive things that probably fall under her love for small pieces.  Bottom line is that if I don't see her wearing it, then she doesn't have it.  JMHO.  If she took something that  belonged to  Lady Diana, then I could see Harry refusing to return it.

Prince Charles has excellent taste in jewelry based on his purchases for Camilla.  His bracelet for Kate was amazing.  

Re tiaras:  If there was the possibility of The Queen lending a piece, then I would see no need to purchase.  However, in the case of MM, if Harry wanted her to keep step with the other women in the family, I could have seen him picking up something for her (or leaning on his father to do it) only because it would have been obvious to him that TQ was not ready to lend anything after tiaragate. The fact that MM asked about taking a tiara on that trip to New Zealand, tells me that she had a tiara on her mind to  have/wear.  PC gracefully dealt with that issue by telling her it wasn't appropriate for the trip.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Unless he did something really awful, this is such a sh*tty and coward way to end a marriage. Also, why even bother? She didn't have to return the rings, it was just one of these over the top gestures.


Trevor put it perfectly.  He said he felt like a piece of gum under her shoe.  That was her intention and the message was received loud and clear by him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> If she took something that  belonged to  Lady Diana, then I could see Harry refusing to return it.



He wouldn't need to, though. Her private jewelry was divided between the boys, so he downright owns it.



> Re tiaras:  If there was the possibility of The Queen lending a piece, then I would see no need to purchase.  However, in the case of MM, if Harry wanted her to keep step with the other women in the family, I could have seen him picking up something for her (or leaning on his father to do it) only because it would have been obvious to him that TQ was not ready to lend anything after tiaragate.



The thing is...where would she have worn it, to the supermarket? Nowadays even the royals are more casual and the full regalia is reserved for a few occasions, and she would probably not have been invited seeing William and Kate have only started to attend those affairs during the past few years (and then her tendency to misbehave). I do think she could probably have worn her wedding tiara again had an occasion come up.



> The fact that MM asked about taking a tiara on that trip to New Zealand, tells me that she had a tiara on her mind to  have/wear.  PC gracefully dealt with that issue by telling her it wasn't appropriate for the trip.



Don't you love how she is always too cool to care, but then does something desperate that shows she obviously does.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is Amsterdam a good place to buy diamonds? I have heard so many stories of scammers, but it's close enough I could go on a day trip (as is Antwerp).
> 
> Also I'm really fond of antique diamonds (not so much Old Mine cut which can be a bit, uh, rough, but Old European and transitional cuts).


I found it to be a lot better than New York City (a LOT of attitude there), plus .. that is where one should go if you want the old cuts.  My Rose Cut Diamond (in a pendant) was purchased there; it's BEAUTIFUL!!!  After looking at a number of pieces, I simply had to get out of there because I was drooling like a dog - HA!!!  I found the people there to be very nice and helpful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I found it to be a lot better than New York City (a LOT of attitude there), plus .. that is where one should go if you want the old cuts. My Rose Cut Diamond (in a pendant) was purchased there; it's BEAUTIFUL!!! After looking at a number of pieces, I simply had to get out of there because I was drooling like a dog - HA!!!  I found the people there to be very nice and helpful.



Awsome, thank you! I'm part magpie as well. Will do a bit of research.


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> Before they go “naming” someone, I still want to know precisely what was said.  Smirk and Jerk believe that everything is rooted in racism.  And that, of course, is simply not true.
> 
> The whole idea of trying to peddle Scabies’ not very well received book by slapping a few more of their ridiculous comments/thoughts onto it seems so odd to me.  Who cares?!  Besides, seems as if most of the new epilogue is being dribbled out daily anyway.
> 
> I am not sure that I will be able their new active phase without my head exploding!


I am not sure the EXACT words matter - M was not there when H talked to X (mystery person), M got the story SECOND HAND from H and she was offended

We have enumerated logical possibilities for the interchange of words between X and H eg the topic was red hair for the baby, sex of baby,  brown skin ... (and that is not going to the questions that would come up with fertility treatments...) 
Lady Colin Campbell suggested that Pss Anne (X = Anne) brought up (with 6) the topic of M not being a good fit for the BRF, ie personality issues not skin color 

Have they evolved or do they sound like a broken record ? Will they always be at the point of saying "well, the efforts to date have not been good enough"?  What do they expect in terms of a reply ???


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> COOL @papertiger  - are you a GIA, IGI, or EGL cert???  I passed the GIA Diamond course, but have yet to delve into the other Gemstones!  I should have never taken that Diamond course because my (previous) favorite gemstone was Ruby .. but after taking the Diamonds course, I just *LOVE *Diamonds now!!!  All of my jewelry (_I design & make_) has tons of colored Diamonds .. which I love (I have only 2 "white" Diamonds - a round VVS1 and a Rose Cut VVS2) .. both of which I purchased in Amsterdam when I worked there (_a colleague's uncle worked in the Bourse_!!!!).



 

I'm a GIA AJP  

I tried on a natural green diamond at Asprey, that would be my HG. Even *M*ethane couldn't put me off the colour with that on my hand. 

You will love the coloured stones course, there is so much to learn but it's fascinating. 

I'd like to do more, particularly pearls (which is a whole other world) but I'd need to find extra time.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Sorry, I simply do not believe that she has as much jewelry as many of you seem to think.  Granted that Covid has put a halt to fancy dressing, but we really didn't see much before Covid either.  Considering how sentimentality doesn't seem to enter in to much for her regarding jewelry, if something was really worth a lot, I see her selling it.  I think that some jewelry was borrowed and if from a store, like Cartier, it had to be returned.  She might have left with some smaller less expensive things that probably fall under her love for small pieces.  Bottom line is that if I don't see her wearing it, then she doesn't have it.  JMHO.  If she took something that  belonged to  Lady Diana, then I could see Harry refusing to return it.
> 
> Prince Charles has excellent taste in jewelry based on his purchases for Camilla.  His bracelet for Kate was amazing.
> 
> Re tiaras:  If there was the possibility of The Queen lending a piece, then I would see no need to purchase.  However, in the case of MM, if Harry wanted her to keep step with the other women in the family, I could have seen him picking up something for her (or leaning on his father to do it) only because it would have been obvious to him that TQ was not ready to lend anything after tiaragate. The fact that MM asked about taking a tiara on that trip to New Zealand, tells me that she had a tiara on her mind to  have/wear.  PC gracefully dealt with that issue by telling her it wasn't appropriate for the trip.


In the olden days, tiaras were not lent, a hundred years ago, they were gifted but times change ... 

1. The royal are no longer exempt from deaths duties - Margaret's Poltimore tiara was sold at auction after her death.
2. Gifted tiaras can be sold - everyone expects Sarah's tiara was sold long ago to pay her debts, embarrassing.
2. The Queen's "personal" collection is kinda, sorta considered state property, she could NOT give away some historical pieces eg Vladimir tiara, murky stuff who owns the tiaras. 
3. The Queen does put tiaras on display at the Palaces for visitors. That helps with the issue of letting the people see stuff they kinda, sorta own, rather than put them in the Tower with all the rest of the bling.
3. The Queen has a lot of tiaras and she does not wear most - they collect dust - so she loans for weddings and state dinners


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Right. Her modus operandi--marry a rich Brit and bring him back to California like a prop for Show and Tell.





Chanbal said:


> With titles… I read somewhere that at some point she requested a countess title for her mother. And Om*d's book on *Archie’s title debacle continues:*
> 
> _The book accuses courtiers of lying to the press over Meghan and Harry's wishes about whether their son Archie would become a prince.
> 
> Archie was not made a prince in line with royal protocol, something which Meghan and Harry expressed their displeasure about in their interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The book reads: *"Palace aides were actually instructed to brief the press that the couple did not want a title for Archie.*_
> 
> *“In reality, the couple did want the option, given that it would provide their son with a level of security that only comes with a title.
> 
> "The differential treatment the couple felt had been bestowed upon their son was a major sting to Harry and Meghan.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom update: The 3 biggest bombshells in new part of book
> 
> 
> A NEW epilogue added to the unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom, has revealed all manner of new claims made by the nearest and dearest to the couple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Last year M said of  Gloria Steinem's 'linked not ranked' campaign, "I love this ... It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked" 

No comment


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm a GIA AJP
> 
> I tried on a natural green diamond at Asprey, that would be my HG. Even *M*ethane couldn't put me off the colour with that on my hand.
> 
> You will love the coloured stones course, there is so much to learn but it's fascinating.
> 
> I'd like to do more, particularly pearls (which is a whole other world) but I'd need to find extra time.


I did the whole GIA course of study and adored all the GG stuff, recommend


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I'm a GIA AJP
> 
> I tried on a natural green diamond at Asprey, that would be my HG. Even *M*ethane couldn't put me off the colour with that on my hand.
> 
> You will love the coloured stones course, there is so much to learn but it's fascinating.
> 
> I'd like to do more, particularly pearls (which is a whole other world) but I'd need to find extra time.





marietouchet said:


> I did the whole GIA course of study and adored all the GG stuff, recommend


My husband is constantly on me about finishing the course, and heck .. the GIA Campus is just a few hours down the road (South of me in LA).  I've kind of scared myself on it, given that there are 2 'green' gemstones that I seem to ALWAYS get wrong!  That all being said, I must say that the book "Stoned" by Aja Raden (GREAT book by the way) .. taught me that Emeralds are also prized gemstones; I had no idea that they are a true work of nature!  I'm just not a fan of the color Green, so I won't buy any green gemstones!


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> My husband is constantly on me about finishing the course, and heck .. the GIA Campus is just a few hours down the road (South of me in LA).  I've kind of scared myself on it, given that there are 2 'green' gemstones that I seem to ALWAYS get wrong!  That all being said, I must say that the book "Stoned" by Aja Raden (GREAT book by the way) .. taught me that Emeralds are also prized gemstones; I had no idea that they are a true work of nature!  I'm just not a fan of the color Green, so I won't buy any green gemstones!



and it wasn't even Methane that killed green for you


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> 2. The Queen's "personal" collection is kinda, sorta considered state property, she could NOT give away some historical pieces eg Vladimir tiara, murky stuff who owns the tiaras.



Not really. There are three sets of jewels: the Crown Jewels, jewelry she owns as the reigning monarch, and jewelry she owns as a private individual, so her personal collection is just that, personal. She cannot get rid of Buckingham Palace, but she can do with Balmoral or Sandringham whatever she pleases. The Vladimir tiara was inherited by the Queen only after her grandmother Queen Mary died.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Last year M said of  Gloria Steinem's 'linked not ranked' campaign, "I love this ... It means everything to me on every level; we are linked not ranked"
> 
> No comment



I really have a hard time believing she thought her American mother who isn't even married to a Brit could become a British peer. Then again, her delusion has baffled me more than once.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He wouldn't need to, though. Her private jewelry was divided between the boys, so he downright owns it.


So why  isn't she wearing it?  I think that someone else has pieces under lock and key.  Maybe the aunts?  For a woman who believes that she has Diana's legacy, one would think that she would flaunt Diana's jewelry whenever she could.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really have a hard time believing she thought her American mother who isn't even married to a Brit could become a British peer. Then again, her delusion has baffled me more than once.


I never know if these stories are true....this one is ridiculous


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> So why  isn't she wearing it?  I think that someone else has pieces under lock and key.  Maybe the aunts?  For a woman who believes that she has Diana's legacy, one would think that she would flaunt Diana's jewelry whenever she could.



I don't know. Kate has not been seen in a ton of pieces either, though she has worn things other than her e-ring. Maybe it's like the cash, they only get a few pieces after reaching a certain age, then more at the next milestone?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. Kate has not been seen in a ton of pieces either, though she has worn things other than her e-ring. Maybe it's like the cash, they only get a few pieces after reaching a certain age, then more at the next milestone?


I was thinking the same.  The aunts are very wary and want to see how things play out.  Plus, there may be some pieces that they want the respective wives to be able to share, especially if it is something iconic of Diana.  

On the whole, Kate has been seen in far more jewelry borrowed from TQ or personal simply because she has had many more evening occasions to be able to wear important pieces.  She is also careful in her selections regarding what is appropriate for daytime appearances.


----------



## Luvbolide

marietouchet said:


> I am not sure the EXACT words matter - M was not there when H talked to X (mystery person), M got the story SECOND HAND from H and she was offended
> 
> We have enumerated logical possibilities for the interchange of words between X and H eg the topic was red hair for the baby, sex of baby,  brown skin ... (and that is not going to the questions that would come up with fertility treatments...)
> Lady Colin Campbell suggested that Pss Anne (X = Anne) brought up (with 6) the topic of M not being a good fit for the BRF, ie personality issues not skin color
> 
> Have they evolved or do they sound like a broken record ? Will they always be at the point of saying "well, the efforts to date have not been good enough"?  What do they expect in terms of a reply ???




Of course the exact words matter.  Something they took as racist may not have been.  We can’t rely on what H told M was what was actually said - he is not particularly perceptive and puts his spin on things.  

I believe that M expects a phone call from QE apologizing for her racist family and promising a complete investigation, the results of which will be publicly exposed.  Then M thinks that the “healing” can began.  Which is, of course, preposterous.  QE has already said that recollections differ - and she may well have made efforts to determine who said what to whom, but privately and within the family. She already said that the matter would be addressed within the family.  M needs to quit trying to turn it into some grand expose at every turn.


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Of course the exact words matter.  Something they took as racist may not have been.  We can’t rely on what H told M was what was actually said - he is not particularly perceptive and puts his spin on things.
> 
> I believe that M expects a phone call from QE apologizing for her racist family and promising a complete investigation, the results of which will be publicly exposed.  Then M thinks that the “healing” can began.  Which is, of course, preposterous.  QE has already said that recollections differ - and she may well have made efforts to determine who said what to whom, but privately and within the family. She already said that the matter would be addressed within the family.  M needs to quit trying to turn it into some grand expose at every turn.


If they don't try to blow each thing up out of proportion, they will have nothing to discuss.  Nothing is happening between them and the family so they have to rehash everything.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I never know if these stories are true....this one is ridiculous


Agreed. I'm inclined to believe that most of what the British tabloids print is pure fabrication.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> So why  isn't she wearing it?  I think that someone else has pieces under lock and key.  Maybe the aunts?  For a woman who believes that she has Diana's legacy, one would think that she would flaunt Diana's jewelry whenever she could.


Aunts , yes possible. 
Could this also explain the disappearance of the personal jewelry ?
Diana wore a lot of fakes, and , in those days, no one could identify pieces like they do nowadays …
Ex the earrings with bows and hearts, she was famous for those, but they did not come from Cartier , fashion jewelry surely, no one is going to trot them out today


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. Kate has not been seen in a ton of pieces either, though she has worn things other than her e-ring. Maybe it's like the cash, they only get a few pieces after reaching a certain age, then more at the next milestone?


Kate has like a bazillion Kiki McDonough earrings , not cheap those, but they look alike at a distance of six feet , a small colored stone dangle , maybe halo setting, hanging from a modest stud and the colors are muted, look alike pairs, not statement pieces
Somone on Pinterest compiled collages of like 30-50 pairs





__





						Kate Middleton’s Kiki McDonough Earring Collection – Kate Middleton Review
					






					katemiddletonreview.com
				





Her thing is KM dangles, MM favors plain studs
Kate has borrowed boocoo major bling from the Queen for state dinners, but i remember statement strass on foreign trips eg to Pakistan


----------



## Jayne1

Cosmopolitan said:


> I mostly agree. Meghan seemed very into the dainty yellow gold jewelry trend. However she does have a Cartier diamond tennis bracelet that was a wedding gift from Prince Charles. Plus some other diamond gifts, including those controversial diamond earrings from the Arab world.
> 
> View attachment 5175614
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Wearing a Special Gift from Prince Charles on the Royal Tour
> 
> 
> And it's worth a jaw-dropping $28,300.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I like that you can wear it everyday!


----------



## octopus17

marietouchet said:


> Kate has like a bazillion Kiki McDonough earrings , not cheap those, but they look alike at a distance of six feet , a small colored stone dangle , maybe halo setting, hanging from a modest stud and the colors are muted, look alike pairs, not statement pieces
> Somone on Pinterest compiled collages of like 30-50 pairs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton’s Kiki McDonough Earring Collection – Kate Middleton Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> katemiddletonreview.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her thing is KM dangles, MM favors plain studs
> Kate has borrowed boocoo major bling from the Queen for state dinners, but i remember statement strass on foreign trips eg to Pakistan


I really like the Kiki McDonough dangles and also any plain studs. I'd be very happy with either (or both!). I could I'd wear those day in, day out. I guess if you're attending a State Dinner, you would want to ramp it up a touch though  and my goodness, The Royal Family can *really* ramp it up...


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I am not sure the EXACT words matter - M was not there when H talked to X (mystery person), M got the story SECOND HAND from H and she was offended





Luvbolide said:


> Of course the exact words matter.  Something they took as racist may not have been.  We can’t rely on what H told M was what was actually said - he is not particularly perceptive and puts his spin on things.


I doubt we will ever know what was said. The Montecito Morons will drag it out to milk their stans and sympathetic media of every drop of pity. They will probably drop vague hints now and then to keep the "tragedy" alive. Then they will leak a name via a "friend" and pin it on someone after they are dead so that no one can dispute their account.

Archie is going to be teased and bullied: what colour were you before your mother bleached you?


----------



## xincinsin

Cosmopolitan said:


> I mostly agree. Meghan seemed very into the dainty yellow gold jewelry trend.


I'm biased, but I think that's the type of jewelry being given to her for free to do merching. I notice the same trend of the jewelry not re-appearing no matter how sentimental the spin is.


----------



## needlv

So apparently MM has changed her mind as to who said the “racist” remark…she needs to keep her stories straight…





__





						Blind Item #6
					

The crazy thing is the alliterate one told her official mouthpiece/lapdog reporter one name at first when it came to the racist royal family...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> So apparently MM has changed her mind as to who said the “racist” remark…she needs to keep her stories straight…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The crazy thing is the alliterate one told her official mouthpiece/lapdog reporter one name at first when it came to the racist royal family...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]



The comments are priceless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Kate has like a bazillion Kiki McDonough earrings , not cheap those, but they look alike at a distance of six feet , a small colored stone dangle , maybe halo setting, hanging from a modest stud and the colors are muted, look alike pairs, not statement pieces
> Somone on Pinterest compiled collages of like 30-50 pairs



Yeah, but these she aqcuired herself. I was talking about Diana's jewelry.


----------



## needlv

So she is ok about writing a long very personal story about miscarriage and having it published for the world to read - but not ok to have been papped getting into a Cadillac…









						Harry and Meghan ‘furious’ about being photographed after miscarriage
					

Images of the Sussexes leaving medical appointment ruined  ‘what should have been a deeply personal moment’, according to authors of new biography




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

I think the only thing I can recall Catherine wearing which actually belonged to Diana were the sapphire and diamond stud earrings (part of the Saudi Suite given to Diana as a wedding gift) I believe William gave them to her as a wedding or engagement present to match the ring. She then had it changed to a drop earring. 
Everything else (or most) that we have seen both women wear belong to the Monarch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> So she is ok about writing a long very personal story about miscarriage and having it published for the world to read - but not ok to have been papped getting into a Cadillac…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘furious’ about being photographed after miscarriage
> 
> 
> Images of the Sussexes leaving medical appointment ruined  ‘what should have been a deeply personal moment’, according to authors of new biography
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


Not sure they understand what is a "deeply personal moment" if it doesn't come with a price tag. I think it's a misprint: "Images of the Sussexes leaving medical appointment ruined 'what should have been a *highly profitable* moment'".


----------



## Sharont2305

needlv said:


> So she is ok about writing a long very personal story about miscarriage and having it published for the world to read - but not ok to have been papped getting into a Cadillac…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘furious’ about being photographed after miscarriage
> 
> 
> Images of the Sussexes leaving medical appointment ruined  ‘what should have been a deeply personal moment’, according to authors of new biography
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


What about a deeply upsetting personal moment of making a mother who was either pregnant or very recently given birth cry at a little girls dress fitting? Then leaking it to the press.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> What about a deeply upsetting personal moment of making a mother who was either pregnant or very recently given birth cry at a little girls dress fitting? Then leaking it to the press.



...and twisting it the other way around.


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> So apparently MM has changed her mind as to who said the “racist” remark…she needs to keep her stories straight…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The crazy thing is the alliterate one told her official mouthpiece/lapdog reporter one name at first when it came to the racist royal family...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net





Recollections may vary!  She is so ridiculous.  If she would tell the truth and not embellish and/or lie, she wouldn’t have to work so hard to try to remember the story.


----------



## eunaddict

needlv said:


> So she is ok about writing a long very personal story about miscarriage and having it published for the world to read - but not ok to have been papped getting into a Cadillac…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘furious’ about being photographed after miscarriage
> 
> 
> Images of the Sussexes leaving medical appointment ruined  ‘what should have been a deeply personal moment’, according to authors of new biography
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk




Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

eunaddict said:


> Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.



I do. This woman is a pathological liar who would do anything for attention, and who padded her heartfelt, painful story not only with enough theatrical drama it could fuel Broadway for a season but also managed to plagiarize both a book and a movie in the process.

Call me heartless.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He wouldn't need to, though. Her private jewelry was divided between the boys, so he downright owns it.
> 
> 
> 
> *The thing is...where would she have worn it, to the supermarket?* Nowadays even the royals are more casual and the full regalia is reserved for a few occasions, and she would probably not have been invited seeing William and Kate have only started to attend those affairs during the past few years (and then her tendency to misbehave). I do think she could probably have worn her wedding tiara again had an occasion come up.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you love how she is always too cool to care, but then does something desperate that shows she obviously does.


To answer your question regarding a tiara (*The thing is...where would she have worn it, to the supermarket?*), and keeping in mind who we’re talking about, yep.  The supermarket, the post office, on the beach with Archie & Guy, zoom calls . . .


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do. This woman is a pathological liar who would do anything for attention, and who padded her heartfelt, painful story not only with enough theatrical drama it could fuel Broadway for a season but also managed to plagiarize both a book and a movie in the process.
> 
> *Call me heartless.*


I’m a Tin Man with you!!


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> To answer your question regarding a tiara (*The thing is...where would she have worn it, to the supermarket?*), and keeping in mind who we’re talking about, yep.  The supermarket, the post office, on the beach with Archie & Guy, zoom calls . . .


Especially her idiotic birthday zoom call with the other MM


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> So why  isn't she wearing it?  I think that someone else has pieces under lock and key.  Maybe the aunts?  For a woman who believes that she has Diana's legacy, one would think that she would *flaunt Diana's jewelry whenever she could.*


My 2 cents:
Flaunting Diana's jewelry may not go well with a victim role one wants to play. A retrieving mode needs to be fully accomplished before going into a displaying mode…


----------



## Chanbal

*The Queen has reportedly ordered Palace aides to plan a legal fightback amid Harry and Meghan's attacks — declaring: “Enough is enough.”*
The monarch's legal team is understood to be consulting libel experts.








						Meghan & Harry could face legal action if they name ‘royal racist’
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry may well face a court challenge if they name the royal who allegedly made a racist comment on the colour of son Archie’s skin. A top lawyer says it’s time…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698


Surely there are some PR experts among us ...
Celebs call paps deliberately sometimes to get shots of them in TDF outfit leaving NOBU restaurant ... right ?
Is it possible to call the paps and say lay off today please ??? Maybe if you have a non adversarial relationship ???

That photo... still a mystery to me
1. How do the paps get there just in time to take a snap without advance info ??? They cant camp out at every office in Beverly Hills
2. Why go to BH for a doctor appt, if you live in Montecito ??? I will allow the possibility that some folks have more complicated medical issues and seek specialists.
3. HOW is anyone supposed to know this is a DEEPLY PERSONAL moment if you dont have a PR notice? 

If some  does not know, can they be condemned for hitting a hot spot??? Discuss ...


----------



## marietouchet

It just dawned on me ... 

1. Omid is keeping the flames alive on the skin color story by saying they wanted to tell, lest we forget 
2. They are holding back the name for HIS book, assuming lawyers will allow them to name names


----------



## sdkitty

eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698


She probably got upset because she was photographed wearing an ugly wrinkled dress


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> She probably got upset because she was photographed wearing an ugly wrinkled dress


Really nothing new for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Really nothing new for her.


this one was worse then others though I think


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> Flaunting Diana's jewelry may not go well with a victim role one wants to play. A retrieving mode needs to be fully accomplished before going into a displaying mode…


That’s an interesting POV, but wearing the jewelry could still work into the victimhood. Diana was considered to be victimized by appearing as the young virgin bride led into a loveless marriage.  She played up her husband’s affair during the Bashir interview to look that way.  Wearing her jewelry would be symbolic of what Diana went through.


----------



## LibbyRuth

eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698


One of two things is probably true about this picture.  Either 1) It is a picture of them leaving another appointment and Meghan is twisting around the details to elicit sympathy (likely - she's done such things plenty of times before) or 2) it is actually a picture of them leaving that appointment, but no one knew it until she revealed it.  Either way, it's yet another childish plea for attention.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> It just dawned on me ...
> 
> 1. Omid is keeping the flames alive on the skin color story by saying they wanted to tell, lest we forget
> 2. They are holding back the name for HIS book, assuming lawyers will allow them to name names


Don’t think that they will give a name. It is very dangerous territory and a probable no win for them. If they name a live person, there will be rebuttal. If the name a dead person, all they have is Prince Philip and that won’t go over well.


----------



## LibbyRuth

gracekelly said:


> Don’t think that they will give a name. It is very dangerous territory and a probable no win for them. If they name a live person, there will be rebuttal. If the name a dead person, all they have is Prince Philip and that won’t go over well.


Not only that, but if they gave a name, it would open the door for the person to come forward and give context to the conversation which could indicate that they blew it out of proportion for their own gain.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do. This woman is a pathological liar who would do anything for attention, and who padded her heartfelt, painful story not only with enough theatrical drama it could fuel Broadway for a season but also managed to plagiarize both a book and a movie in the process.
> 
> Call me heartless.



Not to mention, mentioning it _again_ so the photo is reposted_ everywhere_ and we all get to look at it (again - if we ever did in the first place)  

They are bananas!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Surely there are some PR experts among us ...
> Celebs call paps deliberately sometimes to get shots of them in TDF outfit leaving NOBU restaurant ... right ?
> Is it possible to call the paps and say lay off today please ??? Maybe if you have a non adversarial relationship ???
> 
> That photo... still a mystery to me
> 1. How do the paps get there just in time to take a snap without advance info ??? They cant camp out at every office in Beverly Hills
> 2. Why go to BH for a doctor appt, if you live in Montecito ??? I will allow the possibility that some folks have more complicated medical issues and seek specialists.
> 3. HOW is anyone supposed to know this is a DEEPLY PERSONAL moment if you dont have a PR notice?
> 
> If some  does not know, can they be condemned for hitting a hot spot??? Discuss ...


Of course she called the paps. I was going to a little restaurant with the DH and we walked past a group paps waiting for Khole K to arrive at her nail salon, and she did while we entering the restaurant.   There must have been a dozen of these guys and obviously it was all arranged.


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> To answer your question regarding a tiara (*The thing is...where would she have worn it, to the supermarket?*), and keeping in mind who we’re talking about, yep.  The *supermarket,* the *post office*, on the *beach *with Archie & Guy, *zoom calls* . . .



I think you could just 'cover all' by saying photo ops, the rest doesn't matter unless you are actually going to a place to _*do*_ something.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do. This woman is a pathological liar who would do anything for attention, and who padded her heartfelt, painful story not only with enough theatrical drama it could fuel Broadway for a season but also managed to plagiarize both a book and a movie in the process.
> 
> Call me heartless.


Yep!  She got her period and turned it into a soap opera. They have nothing else to trot out. So we are getting replays of everything. It’s boring, sad and pathetic, and also really annoying!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Surely there are some PR experts among us ...
> Celebs call paps deliberately sometimes to get shots of them in TDF outfit leaving NOBU restaurant ... right ?
> Is it possible to call the paps and say lay off today please ??? Maybe if you have a non adversarial relationship ???
> 
> That photo... still a mystery to me
> 1. How do the paps get there just in time to take a snap without advance info ??? They cant camp out at every office in Beverly Hills
> 2. Why go to BH for a doctor appt, if you live in Montecito ??? I will allow the possibility that some folks have more complicated medical issues and seek specialists.
> 3. HOW is anyone supposed to know this is a DEEPLY PERSONAL moment if you dont have a PR notice?
> 
> If some  does not know, can they be condemned for hitting a hot spot??? Discuss ...



I guess we all need to check H&M's astro forecast to check in, reach out and feel compassionate about them whenever Mars squares Uranus and Mercury goes retro


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> She probably got upset because she was photographed wearing an ugly wrinkled dress



Never stopped her from doing it again, and again, and again


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Not to mention, mentioning it _again_ so the photo is reposted_ everywhere_ and we all get to look at it (again - if we ever did in the first place)
> 
> They are bananas!


Speaking reposting pictures. I’m sure you all have noticed that we keep seeing the same 3-5 pictures all the time.   If they can’t make money off a picture then there will be no new ones.


----------



## papertiger

LibbyRuth said:


> Not only that, but if they gave a name, it would open the door for the person to come forward and give context to the conversation which could indicate that they blew it out of proportion for their own gain.



Or say, "Prove it" and hit them with deformation.


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan wore Diana's jewelry often, it'd interfere with her journey of "finding her own voice". But then I'd have to give her credit for an ability to think and I don't want to do that. We've seen a number of photos where M has copied Diana's outfits and poses, there'd then be photos of Diana wearing the same jewels and the inevitable question: "Who wore it best?". Ms. sloppily attired victim with tendrils would lose every time in comparison to Diana's well dressed and compassionate image.


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> I think you could just 'cover all' by saying photo ops, the rest doesn't matter unless you are actually going to a place to _*do*_ something.


So true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Don’t think that they will give a name. It is very dangerous territory and a probable no win for them. If they name a live person, there will be rebuttal. If the name a dead person, all they have is Prince Philip and that won’t go over well.


The whole thing is hearsay - no one has ever claimed there was a third party to the chat between H and X (mystery person). 
X said something, H took it wrong, and it escalated when M heard

Gee whiz, there were lots of folks at the bridal fittings where Ivy (?) was rude to Charlotte as reported by nanny Maria to Kate (pregnant and absent that day), Kate cried or Meghan cried , depending on which story you believe and we still do not have one CLEAR account of that kerfuffle(s), I still dont know if it was only issue or many issues on different days


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> She probably got upset because she was photographed wearing an ugly wrinkled dress


That's what I was thinking! lol


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> That’s an interesting POV, but wearing the jewelry could still work into the victimhood. Diana was considered to be victimized by appearing as the young virgin bride led into a loveless marriage.  She played up her husband’s affair during the Bashir interview to look that way.  Wearing her jewelry would be symbolic of what Diana went through.


Good point - especially if she wore the simple stuff, like the Cartier rolling ring.


----------



## sdkitty

I think they are getting more boring by the day.....she must be in a panic


----------



## octopus17

sdkitty said:


> She probably got upset because she was photographed wearing an ugly wrinkled dress


I was thinking that might be the case too! And those creases on the front look like it's been folded up - maybe new out of a packet?


----------



## sdkitty

Cornflower Blue said:


> I was thinking that might be the case too! And those creases on the front look like it's been folded up - maybe new out of a packet?


I think it's linen, which wrinkles like crazy


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> So apparently MM has changed her mind as to who said the “racist” remark…she needs to keep her stories straight…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The crazy thing is the alliterate one told her official mouthpiece/lapdog reporter one name at first when it came to the racist royal family...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Well then, to me?!?! .. it's a blatant LIE (gee - how surprising - NOT)!!!  If someone did, indeed, make a racist comment to her or Hap-Hazza, then you know darn well that they would remember THAT name!!!


----------



## xeyes

eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698



I’m tempted to speculate about why she might have chosen a dress that many women of childbearing age would _avoid_ during their periods if she was leaving the doctor’s office immediately post-miscarriage, but such speculations would be both ungracious and kinda disgusting...


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> I think it's linen, which wrinkles like crazy



And it’s from a dental appointment.  So someone is rewriting history…


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> So she is ok about writing a long very personal story about miscarriage and having it published for the world to read - but not ok to have been papped getting into a Cadillac…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘furious’ about being photographed after miscarriage
> 
> 
> Images of the Sussexes leaving medical appointment ruined  ‘what should have been a deeply personal moment’, according to authors of new biography
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


Not to make light of their misfortune, but her account of her miscarriage was a bit over the top to me. Maybe she's got a flair for writing romance novels.


----------



## charlottawill

LibbyRuth said:


> One of two things is probably true about this picture.  Either 1) It is a picture of them leaving another appointment and Meghan is twisting around the details to elicit sympathy (likely - she's done such things plenty of times before) or 2) it is actually a picture of them leaving that appointment, but no one knew it until she revealed it.  Either way, it's yet another childish plea for attention.


The hat, sunglasses and mask suggest to me that she might have been hiding evidence of a dermatological procedure. You don't leave the derm after certain treatments with your face exposed to the sun.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Yep!  She got her period and turned it into a soap opera. They have nothing else to trot out. So we are getting replays of everything. It’s boring, sad and pathetic, and also really annoying!


Man this is a tough crowd. But you're probably right. The line about cradling her firstborn as was losing her second made my eyes roll back into my head.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Surely there are some PR experts among us ...
> Celebs call paps deliberately sometimes to get shots of them in TDF outfit leaving NOBU restaurant ... right ?
> Is it possible to call the paps and say lay off today please ??? Maybe if you have a non adversarial relationship ???
> 
> That photo... still a mystery to me
> 1. How do the paps get there just in time to take a snap without advance info ??? They cant camp out at every office in Beverly Hills
> 2. Why go to BH for a doctor appt, if you live in Montecito ??? I will allow the possibility that some folks have more complicated medical issues and seek specialists.
> 3. HOW is anyone supposed to know this is a DEEPLY PERSONAL moment if you dont have a PR notice?
> 
> If some  does not know, can they be condemned for hitting a hot spot??? Discuss ...


The paps do hang out at known celeb hotspots. I've witnessed it visiting my daughter in LA. This may have been a "derm to the stars" and they just got lucky. Harry's hard to miss in LA. Not that many pale gingers. I wouldn't put it past her to spin it as an invasion of their deeply personal loss. She's not going to admit she was at the derm or cosmetic surgeon. She's a natural beauty!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Not to make light of their misfortune, but her account of her miscarriage was a bit over the top to me. *Maybe she's got a flair for writing romance novels.*


 She has a flair for stealing others' work.


----------



## Luvbolide

eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698




Good grief - they are on a public street - how “deeply personal” can that be?!?!  If they didn’t broadcast where they had been, no one would have known.  Once again...Smirk and Jerk invading their own privacy.  

I love the way the recycled book is often being referred to as an “unauthorized biography” - not exactly since MM practically dictated it to Scooby...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698


Not being catty, but that is a really ugly dress-hat combo.


----------



## eunaddict

xeyes said:


> I’m tempted to speculate about why she might have chosen a dress that many women of childbearing age would _avoid_ during their periods if she was leaving the doctor’s office immediately post-miscarriage, but such speculations would be both ungracious and kinda disgusting...



Tbh, this was the point I was trying to make...I would NEVER wear white that week....but yes, was trying to avoid actually having to say it out loud....it's just so gauche to have to say it.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> That’s an interesting POV, but wearing the jewelry could still work into the victimhood. Diana was considered to be victimized by appearing as the young virgin bride led into a loveless marriage.  She played up her husband’s affair during the Bashir interview to look that way.  Wearing her jewelry would be symbolic of what Diana went through.


A bit difficult to cast herself as Diana v.2 when she is neither young or virginal and supposedly in lurve with a doting husband.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I think it's linen, which wrinkles like crazy


I've never understood the appeal of linen. Its natural rumpled state doesn't work for most people and just ends up looking sloppy. I find it scratchy.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I've never understood the appeal of linen. Its natural rumpled state doesn't work for most people and just ends up looking sloppy. I find it scratchy.


I like it (the look of the texture) but as you said, it's not very soft and winkles terribly.  Cooler than cotton though.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I've never understood the appeal of linen. Its natural rumpled state doesn't work for most people and just ends up looking sloppy. I find it scratchy.


It's great for tropical heat, but you have to accept looking wrinkled, and all that ironing  to get it looking good again.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> A bit difficult to cast herself as Diana v.2 when she is neither young or virginal and supposedly in lurve with a doting husband.


Well not THOSE aspects of Diana.


----------



## Lodpah

Awhile back many pages I posted side by side outfits of the Barracuda wearing dresses similar to Angelina Jolie. Tonight I was watching the Tourist with Angelina Jolie. I believe the B's wedding dress was inspired by AJ's dress in one of the scenes. When AJ stands in the dress it's almost an exact replica. Thoughts? Except the flared part.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I feel that's reaching. Material is different, neckline is different, sleeves are puffy, you say the silhouette is different too, and last but not least it was a pretty classic wedding dress style that's been done a million times before, just very poorly executed for the effort and money that went into it.

Also, she's a nutjob, but I can't see her going through AJ movies of all things to get inspired for her wedding outfit.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel that's reaching. Material is different, neckline is different, sleeves are puffy, you say the silhouette is different too, and last but not least it was a pretty classic wedding dress style that's been done a million times before, just very poorly executed for the effort and money that went into it.
> 
> Also, she's a nutjob, but I can't see her going through AJ movies of all things to get inspired for her wedding outfit.


Yeah, maybe you're right but she does tend to emulate her style.


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> Not to make light of their misfortune, but her account of her miscarriage was a bit over the top to me. Maybe she's got a flair for writing romance novels.


Don't give her any ideas, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

Luvbolide said:


> Good grief - they are on a public street - how “deeply personal” can that be?!?!  If they didn’t broadcast where they had been, no one would have known.  Once again...Smirk and Jerk invading their own privacy.


"Deeply personal" to me would equate to sunbathing topless on private property and photographs being taken from a mile away.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Aunts , yes possible.
> Could this also explain the disappearance of the personal jewelry ?
> Diana wore a lot of fakes, and , in those days, no one could identify pieces like they do nowadays …
> Ex the earrings with bows and hearts, she was famous for those, but they did not come from Cartier , fashion jewelry surely, no one is going to trot them out today


I thought those bows and hearts were from butler & Wilson which is kind of like British Kenneth jay lane. 


marietouchet said:


> Kate has like a bazillion Kiki McDonough earrings , not cheap those, but they look alike at a distance of six feet , a small colored stone dangle , maybe halo setting, hanging from a modest stud and the colors are muted, look alike pairs, not statement pieces
> Somone on Pinterest compiled collages of like 30-50 pairs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton’s Kiki McDonough Earring Collection – Kate Middleton Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> katemiddletonreview.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her thing is KM dangles, MM favors plain studs
> Kate has borrowed boocoo major bling from the Queen for state dinners, but i remember statement strass on foreign trips eg to Pakistan


It is amazing how detailed people are this is insanely thorough!


eunaddict said:


> Are they really talking about those photos of her in that *white summer dress* leaving what was reported to be a dermatologist appointment?....Really? Look, I don't doubt her story about the MC, I don't doubt that it was a painful process...but I have my doubts about their claim regarding that photo.
> 
> View attachment 5176698


This is an amazing catch! 


marietouchet said:


> It just dawned on me ...
> 
> 1. Omid is keeping the flames alive on the skin color story by saying they wanted to tell, lest we forget
> 2. They are holding back the name for HIS book, assuming lawyers will allow them to name names


As if they’d give out the name. They would want to profit from that story they wouldn’t scramble their nest egg for the clone’s flop book. 


papertiger said:


> Or say, "Prove it" and hit them with deformation.


That’s harsh but also a great Batman villain origin story & they would suit that 


Cornflower Blue said:


> I was thinking that might be the case too! And those creases on the front look like it's been folded up - maybe new out of a packet?


Just freshly couriered in by the Meggy-merch  people and pulled on in the car then  just the classy look they wanted.


eunaddict said:


> Tbh, this was the point I was trying to make...I would NEVER wear white that week....but yes, was trying to avoid actually having to say it out loud....it's just so gauche to have to say it.


I think it’s a reasonable thing to question whether these two might be appropriating a sensitive issue  to the point of outright lying for gain given that has been their modus operandi so far.


----------



## Annawakes

Can you imagine a romance novel filled with word salad??? That’s a dud of a book right there


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Can you imagine a romance novel filled with word salad??? That’s a dud of a book right there


It would be filled with compassion and uplifting, as well as doubling as a how-to manual for social climbing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> It's great for tropical heat, but you have to accept looking wrinkled, and all that ironing  to get it looking good again.


What is this "ironing" that you speak of?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It would be filled with compassion and uplifting, as well as doubling as a how-to manual for social climbing.



Sounds like a woke Jilly Cooper* novel abridged as a Insta story  

*If you don't know who that is, lucky you


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> What is this "ironing" that you speak of?



 

You and I would get along


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I've never understood the appeal of linen. Its natural rumpled state doesn't work for most people and just ends up looking sloppy. I find it scratchy.


I know.  It looks nice for about five minutes.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> It's great for tropical heat, but you have to accept looking wrinkled, and all that ironing  to get it looking good again.


and then after you iron it, as soon as you sit down, it's wrinkled


----------



## Chanbal

The word _*blackmail*_ is being used…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The word _*blackmail*_ is being used…



Oh dear... Will the Douchess scream "racist"? Is there such a thing as non-race-specific coercion?


----------



## sdkitty

I can't read the whole story but it doesn't seem particularly favorable to me 
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Search for a New Brand, Beyond ‘Royal Feud’ (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Exactly, 99% of new fine jewellery is recycled from broken-up stones and/or recycled materials.


Cant find your previous post about the popularity of vintage jewels in the UK ...
I had OF COURSE assumed the MM stuff came out of the latest Cartier catalog.

In my mind's eye, it went down like this:

Prince Charles to his PA before wedding: Meghan likes Cartier. See if you can get info info from her PA as to a wedding gift that I might offer. Does she like white gold, yellow gold etc?? Baguettes, marquise, collet necklace ?? What length necklace ?? Colored stones ? Diamonds ? no conflict diamonds ?? organic diamonds (LOL)  ??
PC PA to MM PA: please tell me about her taste in jewels, red boxes and Cartier.
MM PA to PC PA: please see this URL


			https://www.cartier.com/en-us/collections/jewelry/collections/diamond-collection/bracelets/h6019817-reflection-de-cartier-bracelet.html


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Cant find your previous post about the popularity of vintage jewels in the UK ...
> I had OF COURSE assumed the MM stuff came out of the latest Cartier catalog.
> 
> In my mind's eye, it went down like this:
> 
> Prince Charles to his PA before wedding: Meghan likes Cartier. See if you can get info info from her PA as to a wedding gift that I might offer. Does she like white gold, yellow gold etc?? Baguettes, marquise, collet necklace ?? What length necklace ??
> PC PA to MM PA: please tell me about her taste in jewels, red boxes and Cartier.
> MM PA to PC PA: please see this URL
> 
> 
> https://www.cartier.com/en-us/collections/jewelry/collections/diamond-collection/bracelets/h6019817-reflection-de-cartier-bracelet.html



PC would only buy from British jewellers he has an account with (at least anything to be seen publicly). By Royal Appointment is taken very seriously. The Royals oil British trade.

I believe her Cartier was lent. Cartier (like others) will hunt celebs etc down if they don't return items lent and are blacklisted. I think they get advantageous terms if they want to buy though.

Edited to say, Cartier does have the PoW patronage so you could be right.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> PC would only buy from British jewellers he has an account with (at least anything to be seen publicly). By Royal Appointment is taken very seriously. The Royals oil British trade.
> 
> I believe her Cartier was lent. Cartier (like others) will hunt celebs etc down if they don't return items lent and are blacklisted. I think they get advantageous terms if they want to buy though.
> 
> Edited to say, Cartier does have the PoW patronage so you could be right.


You are correct, PC would patronize a jeweler with a royal warrant 
But MM likes Cartier, no matter how French (non UK) it is, and M gets what M wants ... 
Red boxes are important (not!), it is not about patronizing UK artisans ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Awhile back many pages I posted side by side outfits of the Barracuda wearing dresses similar to Angelina Jolie. Tonight I was watching the Tourist with Angelina Jolie. I believe the B's wedding dress was inspired by AJ's dress in one of the scenes. When AJ stands in the dress it's almost an exact replica. Thoughts? Except the flared part.
> 
> View attachment 5177476



MM definitely has copied AJ, usually with tragic results. AJ loves those flowing linen dresses, too:








						Meghan Markle’s style guru is Angelina Jolie and here's all the looks she stole
					

MEGHAN Markle’s style has evolved considerably ever since she became a royal. She’s gone from the LA actress in short skirts and plunging dresses, to the chic and sophisticated look of British roya…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM definitely has copied AJ, usually with tragic results. AJ loves those flowing linen dresses, too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s style guru is Angelina Jolie and here's all the looks she stole
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle’s style has evolved considerably ever since she became a royal. She’s gone from the LA actress in short skirts and plunging dresses, to the chic and sophisticated look of British roya…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5177741


wow, it sure looks like intentional copying....so if that's the case then she is apparently pretty insecure about her fashion sense, doesn't have a style of her own.....while at the same time having a huge ego.

edit: found this on Quora

*A person that is insecure may develop a big ego*! Being insecure then can drive an ego because the person need this type of ego to help them feel better about themselves around others! Having a big ego boost causes them to become more than what they really are. They want others to see them greater than another!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> What is this "ironing" that you speak of?


ironing I can do.  don't ask me to sew


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> You are correct, PC would patronize a jeweler with a royal warrant
> But MM likes Cartier, no matter how French (non UK) it is, and M gets what M wants ...
> Red boxes are important (not!), it is not about patronizing UK artisans ...



The Prince of Wales has given Cartier a Royal Warrant, therefore it's OK if not desirable for British trade. Therefore, it'd be considered OK for MM to wear, but prob not Kate. 
The big Cartier was lent though. Personally, I didn't like the trillion diamond design, nor their colour (and the 2 trillions are probably what the future buyers like). Design is important as bling IMO. 

I'm wearing Florentine gold and diamond owls that my father bought on the Ponte Vecchio 25 years ago. They sold him 2 left facing owls (he probably only saw one). I wouldn't swap my clone owls for a piece of Cartier High Jewellery. BTW, does anyone have some owls both facing right bought in Florence 25 years ago?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> I can't read the whole story but it doesn't seem particularly favorable to me
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Search for a New Brand, Beyond ‘Royal Feud’ (thedailybeast.com)



Here you go:https://archive.ph/2021.08.28-16092...ch-for-a-new-brand-beyond-royal-feud?ref=home


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> The Prince of Wales has given Cartier a Royal Warrant, therefore it's OK if not desirable for British trade. Therefore, it'd be considered OK for MM to wear, but prob not Kate.
> The big Cartier was lent though. Personally, I didn't like the trillion diamond design, nor their colour (and the 2 trillions are probably what the future buyers like). Design is important as bling IMO.
> 
> I'm wearing Florentine gold and diamond owls that my father bought on the Ponte Vecchio 25 years ago. They sold him 2 left facing owls (he probably only saw one). I wouldn't swap my clone owls for a piece of Cartier High Jewellery. BTW, does anyone have some owls both facing right bought in Florence 25 years ago?


That’s a sweet story & he was ahead of the owl trend.
I think I’ve said this before but to me that bracelet looks like one of those 30s rhinestone bracelets that has a matching brooch. It’s a bit - underwhelming  despite being stuffed with sparkle- basically tchotchkes.

Yeah I was wondering about this as  we do know the Queen wears Hermes as well as Cornelia James scarves. 
It rankled me a bit they did so much PR for Cartier and Givenchy  at the wedding when they could’ve given it to Asprey and Giles deacon or Molly Goddard rather than LVMH who definitely don’t need it


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> The Prince of Wales has given Cartier a Royal Warrant, therefore it's OK if not desirable for British trade. Therefore, it'd be considered OK for MM to wear, but prob not Kate.


Diana, while still married and working, wore Cartier gold jewelry. I always noticed because I liked and owned some of those pieces.

Which was a bit odd since at the time (while still married) she mostly wore UK fashion, as was expected of her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.

I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!

I may need to take some parental leave


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Diana, while still married and working, wore Cartier gold jewelry. I always noticed because I liked and owned some of those pieces.
> 
> Which was a bit odd since at the time (while still married) she mostly wore UK fashion, as was expected of her.



But Cartier was always fashionable among her set (Sloanes).


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> ironing I can do.  don't ask me to sew


Oh I know how to iron. I just find it to be one of the most useless activities known to mankind.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> But Cartier was always fashionable among her set (Sloanes).


But as a working royal, I thought she was supposed to wear UK brands...


----------



## charlottawill

tiktok said:


> Here you go:https://archive.ph/2021.08.28-16092...ch-for-a-new-brand-beyond-royal-feud?ref=home


Thank you! The author is spot on in his assessment of them.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> But Cartier was always fashionable among her set (Sloanes).


The Duchess of Cambridge regularly wears a Cartier watch. As did Diana.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


And just think, someday you can share your love of handbags with her. Never too early to get her started.


----------



## jennlt

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



Congratulations!!!
And it's not off topic if you named her Lilibet/Lily


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> But as a working royal, I thought she was supposed to wear UK brands...



She did most of the time

I'm beginning to think that Hermes and Cartier were/are considered 'neutral'.  It's very curious that Cartier _can_ be given a Royal Warrant. Wherever the is a 'by appointment', there is a patronage so I guess it's considered OK.

Court life in every country has been heavily influenced by French everything since Louis IVX, they even spoke French. And don't forget, Normandy, parts of Western France used to be Britain and we still have the Channel Islands.


----------



## papertiger

Jewellery Royal Warrants given by members of the BRF https://www.royalwarrant.org/directory?query=jewellery

Among them Cartier


----------



## octopus17

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


Many congratulations!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave





Much love and best wishes to you and your lil' family


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



Congratulations! 

LOL, one way ONT on tpf:
Parental Leave will give you time to visit the H Baby site, and then when out and about, maybe an in person visit to H for Mom to select something in one of the yummy pink leathers to carry along?


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


CONGRATULATIONS Jelliedfeels!!! So very happy for you!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



Congratulations!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The big Cartier was lent though. Personally, I didn't like the trillion diamond design, nor their colour (and the 2 trillions are probably what the future buyers like). Design is important as bling IMO.



Is this confirmed or just our conclusion? I can't help but find it embarrassing. It's one thing to borrow jewelry for an evening occasion because you liked the piece and it fit your dress, but you marry into a family of billionaires and borrow your jewelry because you were too greedy even for their liking and just HAD to show off? 



> I'm wearing Florentine gold and diamond owls that my father bought on the Ponte Vecchio 25 years ago. They sold him 2 left facing owls (he probably only saw one). I wouldn't swap my clone owls for a piece of Cartier High Jewellery. BTW, does anyone have some owls both facing right bought in Florence 25 years ago?



Haha aw.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



Congratulations!   How are you and baby doing?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Jewellery Royal Warrants given by members of the BRF https://www.royalwarrant.org/directory?query=jewellery
> 
> Among them Cartier
> 
> View attachment 5177864



I could read it up, but my mental capacity is kind of drained right now. So what exactly is a royal warrant / what does it do for the businesses which hold one?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I could read it up, but my mental capacity is kind of drained right now. So what exactly is a royal warrant / what does it do for the businesses which hold one?


Companies that provide goods and services to the royal household can apply for one. If granted it's a symbol of prestige for them, and I would assume it brings them more business. People think if it's good enough for the Queen, it's good enough for me.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I could read it up, but my mental capacity is kind of drained right now. So what exactly is a royal warrant / what does it do for the businesses which hold one?



Since the Duke of Ed. death I think only QEII and the PoW can grant them. They have to be applied for by the purveyor of goods and or services.

From the site: https://www.royalwarrant.org/#how-to-apply

Companies can apply for a Royal Warrant after they have supplied the Households of HM The Queen or HRH The Prince of Wales with goods or services for* at least five years out of the past seven.*

Royal Warrants are* not* *granted for professional services* – e.g. bankers, brokers or agents, solicitors, employment agencies, training providers, veterinary services, government agencies – or to newspapers, magazines, journals, periodicals or similar publications.

*Royal Warrants are granted for up to five years and only to companies that provide goods or services to the Royal Household.* Goods purchased for re-sale by souvenir shops run by Royal Collection Enterprises and the Private Estates, and goods or services provided to the Crown Estate, Historic Royal Palaces, the Duchies of Cornwall or Lancaster and Royal Parks do not qualify.

My bolding ^


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Thank you!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Is this confirmed or just our conclusion?* I can't help but find it embarrassing. It's one thing to borrow jewelry for an evening occasion because you liked the piece and it fit your dress, but you marry into a family of billionaires and borrow your jewelry because you were too greedy even for their liking and just HAD to show off?
> 
> 
> 
> Haha aw.



I could find out for sure but it'll take a while as my contact is on holiday.

I'm as sure as I can be as Harpers Bazaar Arabia had the bracelet down as:

"Meghan paired the tiara with Gelanterie de Cartier earrings and a Reflection de Cartier diamond bracelet by the jewellery Maison."

Unlike other jewellery that had provenance (QEII and Diana). The above statement is worded as per usual when used when things are loaned. The mention of the company presumably okayed by the BRF who doesn't allow for freebies. gifts and so on because of not wanting to be seen as 'advertising'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I could find out for sure but it'll take a while as my contact is on holiday.
> 
> I'm as sure as I can be as Harpers Bazaar Arabia had the bracelet down as:
> 
> "Meghan paired the tiara with Gelanterie de Cartier earrings and a Reflection de Cartier diamond bracelet by the jewellery Maison."
> 
> Unlike other jewellery that had provenance (QEII and Diana). The above statement is worded as per usual when used when things are loaned. The mention of the company presumably okayed by the BRF who doesn't allow for freebies. gifts and so on because of not wanting to be seen as 'advertising'.



Channelling Lady C: vulgar. I don't even know why this rubs me so the wrong way, but it does.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Channelling Lady C: vulgar. I don't even know why this rubs me so the wrong way, but it does.



The Daily Mail say she owns it but it would be even more irregular if she did as Harry would have put his hand in in his pocket for £241, 000 and she certainly didn't buy it.

She also wore the matching studs at the ceremony and the larger, longer drops £59, 500 then, to the reception with her second dress (let's face it, _fourth_ wedding dress - the Sella McCartney - since she's been married twice before)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The Daily Mail say she owns it but it would be even more irregular if she did as Harry would have put his hand in in his pocket for £241, 000 and she certainly didn't buy it.
> 
> She also wore the matching studs at the ceremony and the larger, longer drops to the reception with her second dress (let's face it, _fourth_ wedding dress - the Sella McCartney - since she's been married twice before)



I didn't know the studs belonged to the bracelet because I didn't find the style to be very similar, but I knew about the bigger ones. The whole set is probably more in the range of 300000, isn't it.

That was the one thing making me doubt it was a gift from Harry which otherwise would have made the most sense to me: that notoriously stingy man is suddenly shelling out money like there's no tomorrow? Then again...what Meghan wants Meghan gets. But maybe only if his family is footing the bill  And I kind of can't even see indulgent Charles say "Sure, do you want the matching necklace too?"


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Channelling Lady C: vulgar. I don't even know why this rubs me so the wrong way, but it does.


Agreed. It's your marriage to a member of the BRF, not a red carpet event. You can take the girl out of LA but you can't take the LA out of the girl.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't know the studs belonged to the bracelet because I didn't find the style to be very similar, but I knew about the bigger ones. The whole set is probably more in the range of 300000, isn't it.
> 
> That was the one thing making me doubt it was a gift from Harry which otherwise would have made the most sense to me: that notoriously stingy man is suddenly shelling out money like there's no tomorrow? Then again...what Meghan wants Meghan gets. But maybe only if his family is footing the bill  And I kind of can't even see indulgent Charles say "Sure, do you want the matching necklace too?"


Aren't they all rather "thrifty"? And I find it a little odd for a father in law to give a bride expensive jewelry, but maybe that's customary with royals.


----------



## VickyB

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


Congratulations!!!!! So happy for you!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't know the studs belonged to the bracelet because I didn't find the style to be very similar, but I knew about the bigger ones. The whole set is probably more in the range of 300000, isn't it.
> 
> That was the one thing making me doubt it was a gift from Harry which otherwise would have made the most sense to me: that notoriously stingy man is suddenly shelling out money like there's no tomorrow? Then again...what Meghan wants Meghan gets. But maybe only if his family is footing the bill  And I kind of can't even see indulgent Charles say "Sure, do you want the matching necklace too?"



I don't think Charles would have bought her the diamond line 'tennis' bracelet had he _already_ gifted her those. Prob bought her the Line bracelet as consolation because he didn't. And she probably hinted to Cartier that the pieces would be bought and threw a tantrum (I made that up but hey, based entirely on past evidence). I mean whose FIL buys any DIL £300K of diamonds straight off, we don't do dowries anymore. After all wasn't she a major millionaire US actress, why didn't she buy her own?

Harry didn't even pay for his wedding bands so I will eat all my Trinity rings if he did   .

Sounds like we've written another episode of The Crown to me


----------



## VickyB

papertiger said:


> I could find out for sure but it'll take a while as my contact is on holiday.
> 
> I'm as sure as I can be as Harpers Bazaar Arabia had the bracelet down as:
> 
> "Meghan paired the tiara with Gelanterie de Cartier earrings and a Reflection de Cartier diamond bracelet by the jewellery Maison."
> 
> Unlike other jewellery that had provenance (QEII and Diana). The above statement is worded as per usual when used when things are loaned. The mention of the company presumably okayed by the BRF who doesn't allow for freebies. gifts and so on because of not wanting to be seen as 'advertising'.


Why would she need to borrow anything From a source outside the royal family?  She had the tiara.  All she needed was a pair of understated earrings. I’m sure the royal vault must have had something HMTQ would have loaned her. Same with a bracelet.  Or how about that dumb ass Harry buying her something? Wait, weren’t the earrings she wore a gift as she’s worn them post, wedding, no?


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Aren't they all rather "thrifty"? And I find it a little odd for a father in law to give a bride expensive jewelry, but maybe that's customary with royals.



I think you're right. _They_ don't usually pay for f*ck all, why would throw such extravagant things her way all at once?


----------



## papertiger

VickyB said:


> Why would she need to borrow anything From a source outside the royal family?  She had the tiara.  All she needed was a pair of understated earrings. I’m sure the royal vault must have had something HMTQ would have loaned her. Same with a bracelet.  Or how about that dumb ass Harry buying her something? Wait, weren’t the earrings she wore a gift as she’s worn them post, wedding, no?



The studs have been worn elsewhere.


----------



## papertiger

VickyB said:


> Why would she need to borrow anything From a source outside the royal family?  She had the tiara.  All she needed was a pair of understated earrings. I’m sure the royal vault must have had something HMTQ would have loaned her. Same with a bracelet.  Or how about that dumb ass Harry buying her something? Wait, weren’t the earrings she wore a gift as she’s worn them post, wedding, no?



I reckon she borrowed with the lure they'd surely be bought by 'someone' for her. 

We'll see. Surely, we_ will_ see if she wears them again and again. The Met Gala perhaps?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Not to make light of their misfortune, but her account of her miscarriage was a bit over the top to me. *Maybe she's got a flair for writing romance novels.*


I couldn't resist; the devil made me do this! 

Blurb on the back cover of M’s first romance novel with herself as the heroine:
"M, is a gorgeous brunette with long shoulder-length hair and soft tendrils caressing her perfectly oval face. Her gleaming eyes reveal an unmatched, unequalled and incomparable depth of warmth and empathy towards others. As a humanitarian, she spends precious hours researching, developing and promoting schemes to actuate meaningful acts of compassion towards the less privileged and most disadvantaged people of impoverished and destitute areas thereby alleviating the suffering of the less fortunate around the world."


----------



## VickyB

papertiger said:


> I reckon she borrowed with the lure they'd surely be bought by 'someone' for her.
> 
> We'll see. Surely, we_ will_ see if she wears them again and again. The Met Gala perhaps?


And re Met Gala, is it really happening? Seems a tad irresponsible.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


Awww many congratulations on the birth of your little princess!  Happy you are both safe and healthy!  
And I hope you, like MM and Haz, spend your parental leave doing absolutely nothing but cherishing your child!  (Well, I know they're doing absolutely nothing, not sure if they're cherishing their child as much as their nannies, but I digress.)


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> She did most of the time
> 
> I'm beginning to think that Hermes and Cartier were/are considered 'neutral'.  It's very curious that Cartier _can_ be given a Royal Warrant. Wherever the is a 'by appointment', there is a patronage so I guess it's considered OK.
> 
> Court life in every country has been heavily influenced by French everything since Louis IVX, they even spoke French. And don't forget, Normandy, parts of Western France used to be Britain and we still have the Channel Islands.


We've seen Kate and Camilla wear a lot of VCA as well!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> I couldn't resist; the devil made me do this!
> 
> Blurb on the back cover of M’s first romance novel with herself as the heroine:
> "M, is a gorgeous brunette with long shoulder-length hair and soft tendrils caressing her perfectly oval face. Her gleaming eyes reveal an unmatched, unequalled and incomparable depth of warmth and empathy towards others. As a humanitarian, she spends precious hours researching, developing and promoting schemes to actuate meaningful acts of compassion towards the less privileged and most disadvantaged people of impoverished and destitute areas thereby alleviating the suffering of the less fortunate around the world."



I'm pulling a @CeeJay and embellishing parts for you!  

"M, is a gorgeous brunette _*raven haired, genetically diverse and heavenly DNA blessed goddess*_ with long shoulder-length hair and soft tendrils caressing her perfectly oval face *with a constellation of adorable freckles*. Her gleaming eyes *chocolate honey colored* *windows into her angelic soul* reveal an unmatched, unequalled and incomparable depth of warmth and empathy towards others. As a humanitarian, she spends precious hours *plagiarizing, *researching, developing and promoting schemes to actuate meaningful acts _*groundswells of compassion*_ towards the less privileged and most disadvantaged people of impoverished and destitute areas _*(ie people who deserve to have tea thrown at them)* _thereby alleviating the suffering of the less fortunate around the world, _*such as the chickens she, in all her mercy, saved personally by hand picking them from their plight*_."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


Congratulations! I bet she's as beautiful as her mama.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



All the best wishes to you and your “bay-bee” (as Moira says).  
Truly, you are raising the future


----------



## Luvbolide

tiktok said:


> Here you go:https://archive.ph/2021.08.28-16092...ch-for-a-new-brand-beyond-royal-feud?ref=home




Thanks for sharing this - I thought the article was very interesting - and, of course, puts a finger right on the pulse of what is missing in these drive-by charitable "efforts" that H&M seem to be so fond of.  The Invictus Games is something that JCMH should be justifiably proud of, too bad he can't have a meaningful second act.  I thought the phone call with QE and the O*bamas was really cute - sad to see how "fun Harry" has become a whiny, negative, pill who only thinks and talks about negative things.  I used to get a kick out of all of the funny, silly things he did when he was "fun Harry" - now when I see his face I just groan, for surely all he has to say now is negative...or worthless word salad.  Ugh...

I don't think I will be able to get through their new "visibility" without my head exploding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

While this article is about Charles, IMO his attitude is exactly the same as Harry’s. Tone-deaf, irritating, entitled, poor-lil-me.  Ugh. 

*Four-home Prince Charles insists mansions 'are not grand' as he talks from 192-acre estate*
*PRINCE Charles has four main homes and the use of other royal residences including Sandringham but he has insisted he enjoys the simple life.*









						Four-home Prince Charles insists mansions 'are not grand'
					

PRINCE Charles has four main homes and the use of other royal residences including Sandringham but he has insisted he enjoys the simple life.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Oh I know how to iron. I just find it to be one of the most useless activities known to mankind.


Totally OT, but does using a steamer replace ironing? (I hate ironing... Hermes scarves are glorious because creases from regular wear just vanish overnight   )


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


 Congrats!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this confirmed or just our conclusion? I can't help but find it embarrassing. It's one thing to borrow jewelry for an evening occasion because you liked the piece and it fit your dress, but you marry into a family of billionaires and borrow your jewelry because you were too greedy even for their liking and just HAD to show off?


Maybe whatever they offered to lend her or gave her was just too puny for her to pair with that gown 
_Hazard: It's the emeralds or nothing! What Meghan wants...  
HMTQ: So be it. Nothing - as you wish._ 
I guess in her trashy style, a bigger-than-your-size gown deserves humongous stones  She must have felt so cheated by her  engagement ring since she is so obviously NOT SENTIMENTAL.



papertiger said:


> Since the Duke of Ed. death I think only QEII and the PoW can grant them. They have to be applied for by the purveyor of goods and or services.
> 
> From the site: https://www.royalwarrant.org/#how-to-apply
> 
> Companies can apply for a Royal Warrant after they have supplied the Households of HM The Queen or HRH The Prince of Wales with goods or services for* at least five years out of the past seven.*
> 
> Royal Warrants are* not* *granted for professional services* – e.g. bankers, brokers or agents, solicitors, employment agencies, training providers, veterinary services, government agencies – or to newspapers, magazines, journals, periodicals or similar publications.
> 
> *Royal Warrants are granted for up to five years and only to companies that provide goods or services to the Royal Household.* Goods purchased for re-sale by souvenir shops run by Royal Collection Enterprises and the Private Estates, and goods or services provided to the Crown Estate, Historic Royal Palaces, the Duchies of Cornwall or Lancaster and Royal Parks do not qualify.
> 
> My bolding ^


And they can be taken away. IIRC that's what happened to the loose-lips woman who decided to write a tell-all about HMTQ's bra size.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I'm pulling a @CeeJay and embellishing parts for you!
> 
> "M, is a gorgeous brunette _*raven haired, genetically diverse and heavenly DNA blessed goddess*_ with long shoulder-length hair and soft tendrils caressing her perfectly oval face *with a constellation of adorable freckles*. Her gleaming eyes *chocolate honey colored* *windows into her angelic soul* reveal an unmatched, unequalled and incomparable depth of warmth and empathy towards others. As a humanitarian, she spends precious hours *plagiarizing, *researching, developing and promoting schemes to actuate meaningful acts _*groundswells of compassion*_ towards the less privileged and most disadvantaged people of impoverished and destitute areas _*(ie people who deserve to have tea thrown at them)* _thereby alleviating the suffering of the less fortunate around the world, _*such as the chickens she, in all her mercy, saved personally by hand picking them from their plight*_."


After I read about her describing her mother gripping the steering wheel with hands that had "chocolate knuckles", I


----------



## needlv

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



congratulations!  Wishing you all the best!

Now back on topic… rumour has it they are NOT invited to the Met Gala.  Do you really think Anna Wintour wants those two there…?  MM’s style was hit and miss (mostly a crumpled miss).  Anna W most likely said NO to inviting them.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> I couldn't resist; the devil made me do this!
> 
> Blurb on the back cover of M’s first romance novel with herself as the heroine:
> "M, is a gorgeous brunette with long shoulder-length hair and soft tendrils caressing her perfectly oval face. Her gleaming eyes reveal an unmatched, unequalled and incomparable depth of warmth and empathy towards others. As a humanitarian, she spends precious hours researching, developing and promoting schemes to actuate meaningful acts of compassion towards the less privileged and most disadvantaged people of impoverished and destitute areas thereby alleviating the suffering of the less fortunate around the world."





purseinsanity said:


> I'm pulling a @CeeJay and embellishing parts for you!
> 
> "M, is a gorgeous brunette _*raven haired, genetically diverse and heavenly DNA blessed goddess*_ with long shoulder-length hair and soft tendrils caressing her perfectly oval face *with a constellation of adorable freckles*. Her gleaming eyes *chocolate honey colored* *windows into her angelic soul* reveal an unmatched, unequalled and incomparable depth of warmth and empathy towards others. As a humanitarian, she spends precious hours *plagiarizing, *researching, developing and promoting schemes to actuate meaningful acts _*groundswells of compassion*_ towards the less privileged and most disadvantaged people of impoverished and destitute areas _*(ie people who deserve to have tea thrown at them)* _thereby alleviating the suffering of the less fortunate around the world, _*such as the chickens she, in all her mercy, saved personally by hand picking them from their plight*_."



My! What _creative activations!  _ And let's not forget: "Service is universal". Our best selling (?) romance author-to-be, from real life experience, knows what it's like to go from rags to riches, then b*tches about her nightmarish struggles in surviving all the advantages of being part of a world famous royal family.


----------



## EverSoElusive

@jelliedfeels  Congrats on the birth of your baby girl   Lots of hugs and rest well!!


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> While this article is about Charles, IMO his attitude is exactly the same as Harry’s. Tone-deaf, irritating, entitled, poor-lil-me.  Ugh.
> 
> *Four-home Prince Charles insists mansions 'are not grand' as he talks from 192-acre estate*
> *PRINCE Charles has four main homes and the use of other royal residences including Sandringham but he has insisted he enjoys the simple life.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Four-home Prince Charles insists mansions 'are not grand'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles has four main homes and the use of other royal residences including Sandringham but he has insisted he enjoys the simple life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Charles reminds me of the girl in Pulp’s “Common People”


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Totally OT, but does using a steamer replace ironing? (I hate ironing... Hermes scarves are glorious because creases from regular wear just vanish overnight   )


I don't iron but I am a frequent steamer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Taking a page from Charles’s playbook, I have my shoelaces ironed, too. 
 









						Prince Charles Has Two Men Help Him Get Dressed Every Morning and Iron His Shoelaces
					

Find out some of the bizarre things Prince Charles reportedly has his staff do for him and why he is called the "pampered prince."




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


Congrats on the new baby girl, very happy for you!


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Maybe whatever they offered to lend her or gave her was just too puny for her to pair with that gown
> _Hazard: It's the emeralds or nothing! What Meghan wants...
> HMTQ: So be it. Nothing - as you wish._
> I guess in her trashy style, a bigger-than-your-size gown deserves humongous stones  She must have felt so cheated by her  engagement ring since she is so obviously NOT SENTIMENTAL.
> 
> 
> And they can be taken away. IIRC that's what happened to the loose-lips woman who decided to write a tell-all about HMTQ's bra size.



Rigby and Peller 

Such short-sightedness 

Why aren't H&M treated the same way? Strip Harry of his Dukedom


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> congratulations!  Wishing you all the best!
> 
> Now back on topic… rumour has it they are NOT invited to the Met Gala.  Do you really think Anna Wintour wants those two there…?  MM’s style was hit and miss (mostly a crumpled miss).  Anna W most likely said NO to inviting them.




BTW, I was joking about the Met Gala. 

They'd like to be invited, but they are both too much trouble and who wants to party with tell-alls?


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Rigby and Peller
> 
> Such short-sightedness
> 
> Why aren't H&M treated the same way? Strip Harry of his Dukedom



Yes please.  Leave them with Earl and Countess of Dumbarton.  (Apologies to the lovely people of Dumbarton but that’s a harder name to merch)

And while you are at it, please pass a reform so that if you divorce, the non-titled spouse loses the title.  So Sarah F loses out, as does everyone else who “married in” (both male and female).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Totally OT, but does using a steamer replace ironing? (I hate ironing... Hermes scarves are glorious because creases from regular wear just vanish overnight   )


I’m so lazy, I literally run to the dryer the second it’s done and hang up the clothes that technically should be ironed.  I figure that’s wrinkle free enough


----------



## zen1965

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



Fabulous news - congratulations! All the best to you and your family! 
(Particularly calm and restful nights….)


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this confirmed or just our conclusion? I can't help but find it embarrassing. It's one thing to borrow jewelry for an evening occasion because you liked the piece and it fit your dress, but you marry into a family of billionaires and borrow your jewelry because you were too greedy even for their liking and just HAD to show off?
> 
> 
> 
> Haha aw.



Old rich vs nouveau rich. She is just tasteless.


----------



## RAINDANCE

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave



Fantastic news - many congratulations to you and your family.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Old rich vs nouveau rich. She is just tasteless.



She_ tries_ to have/show taste. But even her style and taste are plagiarised.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a page from Charles’s playbook, *I have my shoelaces ironed, too.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles Has Two Men Help Him Get Dressed Every Morning and Iron His Shoelaces
> 
> 
> Find out some of the bizarre things Prince Charles reportedly has his staff do for him and why he is called the "pampered prince."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



Doesn't everyone?


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


congratulations


----------



## rose60610

Considering the flame-throwing accusations M&H have made against the BRF, who would even want to invite them to any event? The host would be opening up himself/herself and the other guests to more slanderous claims by M&H. All M&H have to do is show up anywhere and invent some garbage that "they believe they overheard somebody say bla bla bla" and they, the Oprah's and CBS's of the world make another fortune by broadcasting it. Who would willingly put themselves in a dangerous situation by being in the same room (or ginormous museum) with M&H?  Mingling with our favorite professional victims is to simply invite disaster. Barry and his guests wanted to enjoy his 60th birthday in Martha's Vineyard, not run for cover at the sight of our slithering slanderous cash hounds. The Met Gala and awards events are supposed to be a good time for guests, not a set-up for entrapment. When people realize this, M&H can finally bask in all that privacy they oh-so-crave.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Something smells in Montecito   :
 
*Something in the Californian air! Huge cannabis farm near Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Montecito home sparks fury amongst locals - including one who claims the smell 'affected his driving'*

*Farm near Harry and Meghan's £11 million Montecito home has 20 greenhouses*
*One passerby said the smell is so strong he had to stop driving and pull over*
*Now the facility is installing 'odour control systems' to control the stench *
*








						Harry and Meghan's Montecito home is close to 'smelly' cannabis farm
					

The legal cannabis factory in Montecito has left locals unable to bear the strong smell as plants are cultivated in 20 greenhouses. It lies just ten minutes by car from the Sussexes' home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Something smells in Montecito   :
> 
> *Something in the Californian air! Huge cannabis farm near Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Montecito home sparks fury amongst locals - including one who claims the smell 'affected his driving'*
> 
> *Farm near Harry and Meghan's £11 million Montecito home has 20 greenhouses*
> *One passerby said the smell is so strong he had to stop driving and pull over*
> *Now the facility is installing 'odour control systems' to control the stench *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito home is close to 'smelly' cannabis farm
> 
> 
> The legal cannabis factory in Montecito has left locals unable to bear the strong smell as plants are cultivated in 20 greenhouses. It lies just ten minutes by car from the Sussexes' home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



It’s expensive to be the Royal Moaner of Montecito! Maybe she and her nephew are in on a side hustle. Never could find this one in CA…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Something smells in Montecito   :
> 
> *Something in the Californian air! Huge cannabis farm near Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Montecito home sparks fury amongst locals - including one who claims the smell 'affected his driving'*
> 
> *Farm near Harry and Meghan's £11 million Montecito home has 20 greenhouses*
> *One passerby said the smell is so strong he had to stop driving and pull over*
> *Now the facility is installing 'odour control systems' to control the stench *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Montecito home is close to 'smelly' cannabis farm
> 
> 
> The legal cannabis factory in Montecito has left locals unable to bear the strong smell as plants are cultivated in 20 greenhouses. It lies just ten minutes by car from the Sussexes' home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



I guess the McMansion's worth just dropped.


----------



## rose60610

Sadly, M&H can't be anymore pathetic or dim-witted even if they were under the influence of any substance. I thought woke people welcomed substances that used to be illegal, so what's the problem?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Sadly, M&H can't be anymore pathetic or dim-witted even if they were under the influence of any substance. I thought woke people welcomed substances that used to be illegal, so what's the problem?


isn't it neighbors (not H&M) who are complaining?


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> isn't it neighbors (not H&M) who are complaining?


 You're right, if birds of a feather flock together, their neighbors are likely also as woke as H&M.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@needlv commented
"*please pass a reform so that if you divorce, the non-titled spouse loses the title.  So Sarah F loses out, as does everyone else who “married in” (both male and female)."*

@papertiger re above comment, this enquiring mind needs your expertise on British Law. Would HM need to issue a written order similar to Letters Patent requiring Parliamentary approval to remove titles from all past and present divorcées and divorcés? Must this act name each individual or can it be just a retroactive decree? Thank You.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> @needlv commented
> "*please pass a reform so that if you divorce, the non-titled spouse loses the title.  So Sarah F loses out, as does everyone else who “married in” (both male and female)."*
> 
> @papertiger re above comment, this enquiring mind needs your expertise on British Law. Would HM need to issue a written order similar to Letters Patent requiring Parliamentary approval to remove titles from all past and present divorcées and divorcés? Must this act name each individual or can it be just a retroactive decree? Thank You.



It would have to be put to Parliament by the reining monarch, then read as a proposed bill by an MP. First the House of Commons would have to pass it, and_ then_ the House of Lords. Once passed by both, it would be an Act and become law.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> You're right, if birds of a feather flock together, their neighbors are likely also as woke as H&M.


well, I'm gonna assume you mean "woke" as an insult.  They're in an affluent area so I'm sure there are conservatives living there.


----------



## rose60610

I'm not sure if affluent areas like Hollywood, Bel Air, or Beverly Hills, or Montecito for that matter,  are known bastions of conservatives. CA is a huge state so there are a lot of groups outside of the two current main parties. "Woke" is insulting when applied to Wokesters who are hypocrites like H&M. They preach a good game about being concerned for the environment but love private jet travel, yachts, and 18 bathroom mansions that require lots of landscaping upkeep. A flock of rescue chickens doesn't repair their image. CA, OR, and WA are leading the charge to decriminalize not just marijuana but smaller amounts of heroin and cocaine as well, so it's interesting to hear people in CA complain about a crop that the majority of voters demanded. Question is: Did some of the complaining neighbors move into the area of  "20 greenhouses"  after the greenhouses were already there and THEN complain? A reverse NIMBY. It's like the people who voluntarily move to the country and then complain a neighbor's pig farm stinks. I have another question: Do marijuana plants smell before they're processed? Corn doesn't. Wheat doesn't. Oats don't.  But fields of lavender, yes. Mint, yes. Alfalfa, yes. In good ways one could argue. I don't know about marijuana plants, let alone 20 greenhouses full.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I'm not sure if affluent areas like Hollywood, Bel Air, or Beverly Hills, or Montecito for that matter,  are known bastions of conservatives. CA is a huge state so there are a lot of groups outside of the two current main parties. "Woke" is insulting when applied to Wokesters who are hypocrites like H&M. They preach a good game about being concerned for the environment but love private jet travel, yachts, and 18 bathroom mansions that require lots of landscaping upkeep. A flock of rescue chickens doesn't repair their image. CA, OR, and WA are leading the charge to decriminalize not just marijuana but smaller amounts of heroin and cocaine as well, so it's interesting to hear people in CA complain about a crop that the majority of voters demanded. Question is: Did some of the complaining neighbors move into the area of  "20 greenhouses"  after the greenhouses were already there and THEN complain? A reverse NIMBY. It's like the people who voluntarily move to the country and then complain a neighbor's pig farm stinks. I have another question: Do marijuana plants smell before they're processed? Corn doesn't. Wheat doesn't. Oats don't.  But fields of lavender, yes. Mint, yes. Alfalfa, yes. In good ways one could argue. I don't know about marijuana plants, let alone 20 greenhouses full.


good question.....I would think you'd only smell it when it's lit up.  as far as who lives in that area, there are a lot of conservatives who have money so I think there have to be some in the neighborhood
I agree H&M are hypocrites and I hate having them try to teach or preach to me.  Even if I agree with them, I don't need them to tell me about climate change, etc.


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> I'm not sure if affluent areas like Hollywood, Bel Air, or Beverly Hills, or Montecito for that matter,  are known bastions of conservatives. CA is a huge state so there are a lot of groups outside of the two current main parties. "Woke" is insulting when applied to Wokesters who are hypocrites like H&M. They preach a good game about being concerned for the environment but love private jet travel, yachts, and 18 bathroom mansions that require lots of landscaping upkeep. A flock of rescue chickens doesn't repair their image. CA, OR, and WA are leading the charge to decriminalize not just marijuana but smaller amounts of heroin and cocaine as well, so it's interesting to hear people in CA complain about a crop that the majority of voters demanded. Question is: Did some of the complaining neighbors move into the area of  "20 greenhouses"  after the greenhouses were already there and THEN complain? A reverse NIMBY. It's like the people who voluntarily move to the country and then complain a neighbor's pig farm stinks. I have another question: Do marijuana plants smell before they're processed? Corn doesn't. Wheat doesn't. Oats don't.  But fields of lavender, yes. Mint, yes. Alfalfa, yes. In good ways one could argue. I don't know about marijuana plants, let alone 20 greenhouses full.



Yes, the plants do emit an odor before they’re processed. But that’s overreacting for the neighbor to say he had to pull over from the smell. Unless he thought he ran over a skunk?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Yes, the plants do emit an odor before they’re processed. But that’s overreacting for the neighbor to say he had to pull over from the smell. Unless he thought he ran over a skunk?


maybe he has a problem with the legalization so he's dramatizing


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> maybe he has a problem with the legalization so he's dramatizing



That could be very likely. If true, it's idiotic to complain if he's the only one who is "affected" to the point of having to pull over. Unless there are a lot of complaints, he needs to suck it up and find a hobby.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> I'm not sure if affluent areas like Hollywood, Bel Air, or Beverly Hills, or Montecito for that matter,  are known bastions of conservatives. CA is a huge state so there are a lot of groups outside of the two current main parties. "Woke" is insulting when applied to Wokesters who are hypocrites like H&M. They preach a good game about being concerned for the environment but love private jet travel, yachts, and 18 bathroom mansions that require lots of landscaping upkeep. A flock of rescue chickens doesn't repair their image. CA, OR, and WA are leading the charge to decriminalize not just marijuana but smaller amounts of heroin and cocaine as well, so it's interesting to hear people in CA complain about a crop that the majority of voters demanded. Question is: Did some of the complaining neighbors move into the area of  "20 greenhouses"  after the greenhouses were already there and THEN complain? A reverse NIMBY. It's like the people who voluntarily move to the country and then complain a neighbor's pig farm stinks. I have another question: Do marijuana plants smell before they're processed? Corn doesn't. Wheat doesn't. Oats don't.  But fields of lavender, yes. Mint, yes. Alfalfa, yes. In good ways one could argue. I don't know about marijuana plants, let alone 20 greenhouses full.


.. and GARLIC, big-time!!!  Coming back from Napa to LA, we passed through Gilroy (the Garlic capital), and while I like Garlic (small amounts since my body can't seem to handle it - BOO!) .. WOW-OH-WOW .. it STUNK!!!  We had the car windows closed -and- the A/C on (it was August after all), and still .. WOW!!!  Thank god that I had a small perfume stick in my handbag; I put it on a tissue and put that up to my nose because the smell of the Garlic started getting to me such that I was gagging.  Even my husband who loves Garlic said "WOW - this place reeks!"


----------



## CeeJay

PLEASE let us hope that this becomes the 'truth'!! 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rd-VIII-Wallis-Simpson-film-maker-claims.html


----------



## rose60610

I love garlic, but I can see how fields and fields of it can be a problem. Some of the worst stench can be also be paper mills. And also, fields of freshly harvested peas. They don't smell until the pea viner machines come through. Blech. 
On the other hand, driving past mint fields is wonderful. Roll down the car windows. And I suppose their contracts with the chewing gum companies aren't bad, either   .


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> .. and GARLIC, big-time!!!  Coming back from Napa to LA, we passed through Gilroy (the Garlic capital), and while I like Garlic (small amounts since my body can't seem to handle it - BOO!) .. WOW-OH-WOW .. it STUNK!!!  We had the car windows closed -and- the A/C on (it was August after all), and still .. WOW!!!  Thank god that I had a small perfume stick in my handbag; I put it on a tissue and put that up to my nose because the smell of the Garlic started getting to me such that I was gagging.  Even my husband who loves Garlic said "WOW - this place reeks!"



I live a bit north of Gilroy and can smell the garlic in the early morning in summer (usually June/July). It’s been that way for decades. I actually like the smell (reminds me of the carefree childhood summers). It’s not that strong, very subtle.

But definitely smells stronger as you drive past the garlic processing plant. It’s also farm and agriculture territory so it mixes with the smells of fertilizers and that’s what I smell when I drive by it.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> I love garlic, but I can see how fields and fields of it can be a problem. Some of the worst stench can be also be paper mills. And also, fields of freshly harvested peas. They don't smell until the pea viner machines come through. Blech.
> On the other hand, driving past mint fields is wonderful. Roll down the car windows. And I suppose their contracts with the chewing gum companies aren't bad, either   .


YES .. Paper Mills also stink!!  New England had quite a few of them in the past, and as you came upon the town .. yup, there was that smell.  I had the unfortunate luck to have to provide some consulting to a big Paper Mill Factory in Western Massachusetts; couldn't wait to get the heck out of there and I felt like that smell just stayed in my nose for days!


----------



## Aimee3

I love this thread.  The things I learn when we go OT are just as fascinating (sometimes even more so) than our actual toxic twosome!
Congratulations and much joy to Jelliedfeels on her little girl!


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> I love this thread.  The things I learn when we go OT are just as fascinating (sometimes even more so) than our actual toxic twosome!
> Congratulations and much joy to Jelliedfeels on her little girl!



Off Topic???  You mean, things that are reek stench are Off Topic in the M&H thread? NO!!  They are completely relatable! Can one possibly think of a couple that reeks stench any more than our actual toxic twosome? I can't. Not even Captain & Tennille. Anything stinkier than M&H? Paper mills? Garlic fields? Steamed Cauliflower? Nope. Can't think of any! M&H are at the top of the stink pyramid! At least they get to be the top of something. It sure isn't respect, admiration, common sense or kindness. 

Yes, much joy to Jelliedfeels on her little girl.


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> .. and GARLIC, big-time!!!  Coming back from Napa to LA, we passed through Gilroy (the Garlic capital), and while I like Garlic (small amounts since my body can't seem to handle it - BOO!) .. WOW-OH-WOW .. it STUNK!!!  We had the car windows closed -and- the A/C on (it was August after all), and still .. WOW!!!  Thank god that I had a small perfume stick in my handbag; I put it on a tissue and put that up to my nose because the smell of the Garlic started getting to me such that I was gagging.  Even my husband who loves Garlic said "WOW - this place reeks!"


Wow! I love garlic, and by the time it comes to me in the supermarket in the papery white skins, there's no smell till I peel & slice/chop/smash (essential ingredient in Chinese cooking  ). My family can happily eat chopped raw garlic mixed with rice, but it's definitely an acquired taste which leaves onlookers gasping.
ETA: I eat the raw garlic especially when I'm feeling under the weather. I think it helps with the immune system (or stinks out the bugs  )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> PLEASE let us hope that this becomes the 'truth'!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rd-VIII-Wallis-Simpson-film-maker-claims.html



Wallis married a man who would be King. M married the spare, and the spare _grandson_, not even the bother of the PoW. A world of difference.  

'WE' were bit players, but still had a lifestyle H&M can only dream of, and the jewels (and style) to match. I dislike Wallis but her style was impeccable.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Speaking of garlic, I just got back from a 10 day vacation, and all the garlic we grew that we had hanging to dry out back got eaten by a critter. I’m so disappointed!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> I love garlic, but I can see how fields and fields of it can be a problem. Some of the worst stench can be also be paper mills. And also, fields of freshly harvested peas. They don't smell until the pea viner machines come through. Blech.
> On the other hand, driving past mint fields is wonderful. Roll down the car windows. And I suppose their contracts with the chewing gum companies aren't bad, either   .


My favorite is driving past orange groves when they are in bloom.  It’s heavenly!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> PLEASE let us hope that this becomes the 'truth'!!
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rd-VIII-Wallis-Simpson-film-maker-claims.html


I think it is likely that in ten years no one will be interested in these two.  In my mind, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor are known for two things - his abdication and her jewelry collection.  Of course they lived in the days before social media and IDK if they cared about being well known or famous.   I think Meghan lives for that.  So H&M better hurry up - they won't have this fame forever.
In ten years she will be the 50-year-old mom of two kids so IMO she would be well advised to take a true interest in those two.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Speaking of garlic, I just got back from a 10 day vacation, and all the garlic we grew that we had hanging to dry out back got eaten by a critter. I’m so disappointed!


we have the critter problem too....rabbits and squirrels  
I actually put aging produce in the yard for them but that doesn't stop them from eating our plants


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Wallis married a man who would be King. M married the spare, and the spare _grandson_, not even the bother of the PoW. A world of difference.
> 
> 'WE' were bit players, but still had a lifestyle H&M can only dream of, and the jewels (and style) to match. I dislike Wallis but her style was impeccable.



Interesting....I watched about half of it.  will finish later.  They certainly did have their own style (unlike another relative we know of).  Just the Cartier Panther design is so major.
As far as their great love affair, to me it looks more like the was a supplicant to her.  But she sure got a lot of major jewelry from her slave


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Monday to all!


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a page from Charles’s playbook, I have my shoelaces ironed, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles Has Two Men Help Him Get Dressed Every Morning and Iron His Shoelaces
> 
> 
> Find out some of the bizarre things Prince Charles reportedly has his staff do for him and why he is called the "pampered prince."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com


This is an ancient story.

I remember watching a show about QE's tiaras in which she herself took them out of their boxes and spoke about them.  Fascinating.

Do I recall correctly that QE attended fashion show/s and sat in the front row with Anna?  I doubt she'd risk ruining that relationship over inviting HM to the Met Gala.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> This is an ancient story.
> 
> I remember watching a show about QE's tiaras in which she herself took them out of their boxes and spoke about them.  Fascinating.
> 
> Do I recall correctly that QE attended fashion show/s and sat in the front row with Anna?  I doubt she'd risk ruining that relationship over inviting HM to the Met Gala.


hope your right about the met gala....talk about dishes breaking


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Wallis married a man who would be King. M married the spare, and the spare _grandson_, not even the bother of the PoW. A world of difference.
> 
> 'WE' were bit players, but still had a lifestyle H&M can only dream of, and the jewels (and style) to match. I dislike Wallis but her style was impeccable.




Yes, contrasting to the spare's wife, Wallis had indeed a superb style.

Edward and Wallis received an allowance of about $3M dollars/year (in today's money) and I think the spare and wife were counting with a comparable arrangement. Too bad for them, but these are two different stories.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.



It may be a mixed blessing (for them) if they do. The can't 'control the narrative', they'll just be another couple of bodies on the red carpet being told when to walk and went to pose, they certainly won't be guests of honour or given any special favours.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.


That should have said Anna would be up to the hype, not me!!!


----------



## CeeJay

HA .. remember when we all could not stand Samantha??? .. well, here she is again saying it's just a matter of time before Meg-a-lo-maniac leaves Hap-Hazza.  
https://www.quora.com/Did-Meghan-Markle-leave-Prince-Harry


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> Wow! I love garlic, and by the time it comes to me in the supermarket in the papery white skins, there's no smell till I peel & slice/chop/smash (essential ingredient in Chinese cooking  ). My family can happily eat chopped raw garlic mixed with rice, but it's definitely an acquired taste which leaves onlookers gasping.
> ETA: I eat the raw garlic especially when I'm feeling under the weather. I think it helps with the immune system (or stinks out the bugs  )


Oh believe me, I am very aware of the fact that Chinese cooking has a lot of Garlic (same with Spanish cooking), as I had a Chinese colleague who (it seemed) would always schedule a meeting with me -AFTER- lunch and all I could smell was that garlic!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Happy Monday to all!



The more I see things like this, the more I truly believe that Meghan sold Harry on the notion that the 2 of them WOULD BE "celebrities" of the highest order .. and as such, he (Harry) could then (possibly) outshine William.  Since they blew that big-time, now they have to "stir the pot" (_*Double, double, toil and trouble .. Fire burn and cauldron bubble*_)!!!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.


If that were so, there’s been a D&G show where it looked like “ANY ONE” could get an invite. And princess Harry and “veneers face” couldn’t be there …


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.


I agree.  

If anything, Megs might feel she is far superior to the YouTubers and TikTokers who _did_ get an invite this year.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> I think it is likely that in ten years no one will be interested in these two.  In my mind, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor are known for two things - his abdication and her jewelry collection.  Of course they lived in the days before social media and IDK if they cared about being well known or famous.   I think Meghan lives for that.  So H&M better hurry up - they won't have this fame forever.
> In ten years she will be the 50-year-old mom of two kids so IMO she would be well advised to take a true interest in those two.



Honestly how many people are really interested in these two now?
How many people IRL could recognize Meghan  without Harry?


----------



## lulilu

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.


I did read that celebrities weren't clamoring for invites.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I agree.
> 
> If anything, Megs might feel she is far superior to the YouTubers and TikTokers who _did_ get an invite this year.


Honestly, I think they are old folks compared to the group shown on the invite list.  They really have nothing in common with them  If invited, she might want to go anyway, but there will be a problem about her outfit because Anna W makes those decisions.


----------



## Stansy

papertiger said:


> It may be a mixed blessing (for them) if they do. The can't 'control the narrative', they'll just be another couple of bodies on the red carpet being told when to walk and went to pose, they certainly won't be guests of honour or given any special favours.


I have a hard time imagining the two snowflakes walking and posing when told to do so. They always know better after all, and I can see them cause chaos on the red carpet alone


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, I think they are old folks compared to the group shown on the invite list.  They really have nothing in common with them  If invited, she might want to go anyway, but there will be a problem about her outfit because Anna W makes those decisions.




Oh forgot to add, if Muggins/Hazza  go, and they  sees Bill Nighy there, Hazza will be sure to go up to him and say "Meghan does a British accent, you know."


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, contrasting to the spare's wife, Wallis had indeed a superb style.
> 
> Edward and Wallis received an allowance of about $3M dollars/year (in today's money) and I think the spare and wife were counting with a comparable arrangement. Too bad for them, but these are two different stories.



and she didn't have to look at pics of actresses and copy their outfits


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA .. remember when we all could not stand Samantha??? .. well, here she is again saying it's just a matter of time before Meg-a-lo-maniac leaves Hap-Hazza.
> https://www.quora.com/Did-Meghan-Markle-leave-Prince-Harry


I think it's all about the fame for Meghan.....so if she feels she'll lose that by divorcing him, she may keep him.  but if she sees that everyone is losing interest in them, maybe she will dump him
I don't see this as a love match


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, contrasting to the spare's wife, Wallis had indeed a superb style.
> 
> Edward and Wallis received an allowance of about $3M dollars/year (in today's money) and I think the spare and wife were counting with a comparable arrangement. Too bad for them, but these are two different stories.



one thing they do seem to have in common - in both cases the wife is/was dominant


----------



## Vintage Leather

Jayne1 said:


> Diana, while still married and working, wore Cartier gold jewelry. I always noticed because I liked and owned some of those pieces.
> 
> Which was a bit odd since at the time (while still married) she mostly wore UK fashion, as was expected of her.



When Cartier became a global firm, the three brothers each took a third of the globe, and established their own unique business. Louis (France, Europe and Russia) would design for everyone, Pierre (USA and the Americas) would market for everyone and Jacques (the British Empire) would source stones for everyone - but they were actually three different businesses, committed to training “local artisans in the French way.”  Jacques Cartier, the youngest brother, was the owner and head of Cartier London, and he supervised the design of several pieces (including the Halo bandeau) for the Queen Mum when she was a young bride. All of their staff (except for Jacques), designers and bench jewelers were British.

If you’re interested in Cartier, I strongly recommend the book “Creating Cartier” by Jacques granddaughter, Francesca Cartier Brickell. She also has done a series of webinars on the stories and notes behind specific collections, including one on the BRF with a curator from the Trust


----------



## purseinsanity

Vintage Leather said:


> When Cartier became a global firm, the three brothers each took a third of the globe, and established their own unique business. Louis (France, Europe and Russia) would design for everyone, Pierre (USA and the Americas) would market for everyone and Jacques (the British Empire) would source stones for everyone - but they were actually three different businesses, committed to training “local artisans in the French way.”  Jacques Cartier, the youngest brother, was the owner and head of Cartier London, and he supervised the design of several pieces (including the Halo bandeau) for the Queen Mum when she was a young bride. All of their staff (except for Jacques), designers and bench jewelers were British.
> 
> If you’re interested in Cartier, I strongly recommend the book “Creating Cartier” by Jacques granddaughter, Francesca Cartier Brickell. She also has done a series of webinars on the stories and notes behind specific collections, including one on the BRF with a curator from the Trust


How fascinating!  Thank you!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> If that were so, there’s been a D&G show where it looked like “ANY ONE” could get an invite. And princess Harry and “*veneers face*” couldn’t be there …


Thanks @breakfastatcartier for a new very apt nickname, veneers face, that was added to The List.  Now, which one is called princess Harry so that I can also add it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Whether or not these clowns get a Met Gala invite, one thing for sure, Her Royal Clowness will somehow end up in an ill fitting costume


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Y’all! This is her to the max! Especially when word salading.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Yes, contrasting to the spare's wife, Wallis had indeed a superb style.
> 
> Edward and Wallis received an allowance of about $3M dollars/year (in today's money) and I think the spare and wife were counting with a comparable arrangement. Too bad for them, but these are two different stories.



I think they would sniff at $3M. Methane wants a lifestyle where a million bucks is chump change. They were probably gunning for "send all bills to PC" so that they could be "financially independent" = "don't need to work but will get paid".



CeeJay said:


> Oh believe me, I am very aware of the fact that Chinese cooking has a lot of Garlic (same with Spanish cooking), as I had a Chinese colleague who (it seemed) would always schedule a meeting with me -AFTER- lunch and all I could smell was that garlic!


When I was studying in the UK, a group of us Asians cooked a feast to celebrate the Lunar New Year. Our hostel had a lot of aggressive soccer jocks and one of them came to the common kitchen and stood at the door to scream at us for making smelly food (onions & garlic, I believe). Didn't actually get into our face - maybe the sight of all the knives and choppers was a deterrent against physically attacking us (there were racist attacks on foreigners the year that I was there).


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @breakfastatcartier for a new very apt nickname, veneers face, that was added to The List.  Now, which one is called princess Harry so that I can also add it.
> View attachment 5179886


TBH “princess Harry” was a typo, lol. I have no idea how that happened.


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> TBH “princess Harry” was a typo, lol. I have no idea how that happened.


Very apt since they share one brain cell.


----------



## Sharont2305

So, today is the anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. I wonder we will get a word salad today? How will it be twisted so it will be all about M?


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> So, today is the anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. I wonder we will get a word salad today? How will it be twisted so it will be all about M?


She will probably push Hazard to front it, so that he can be cannon fodder if no one appreciates Diana's living reincarnation aka MM.
Maybe we will get a fuzzy washed out pic of Archie from overhead planting a forget-me-not.
Please - not another pseudo poem to mark the occasion. Archie's First Poem?

_Granny Diana was a crocodile
Who ate waffles in a big pile
Mummy wore her green dress again
It made her look like a rancid brain_


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It may be a mixed blessing (for them) if they do. The can't 'control the narrative', they'll just be another couple of bodies on the red carpet being told when to walk and went to pose, they certainly won't be guests of honour or given any special favours.


The Met ball is all about the red carpet - pictures from inside are verboten after someone took snaps of the ladies room that was full of smokers one year - no smoking please
OK, it is the year of COVID but previous dresses have been a year in the making, people take the dress design seriously, it is not about pushing sustainable anything
Amal Clooney hosted and had two dresses that year - an enormous billowing silver extravaganza for the red carpet and changed into a red Tom Ford inside, I far preferred the TF dress which was of course over the top but a column sheath made of red mirror, pix of her in the red one are HTF
Back to the red carpet, it is a COSTUME ball, the red carpet outfit should be amazing - look who you are going  up against
Honestly H&M dont have the fashion cred to do the red carpet and get noticed


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> The Met ball is all about the red carpet - pictures from inside are verboten after someone took snaps of the ladies room that was full of smokers one year - no smoking please
> OK, it is the year of COVID but previous dresses have been a year in the making, people take the dress design seriously, it is not about pushing sustainable anything
> Amal Clooney hosted and had two dresses that year - an enormous billowing silver extravaganza for the red carpet and changed into a red Tom Ford inside, I far preferred the TF dress which was of course over the top but a column sheath made of red mirror, pix of her in the red one are HTF
> Back to the red carpet, it is a COSTUME ball, the red carpet outfit should be amazing - look who you are going  up against
> Honestly H&M dont have the fashion cred to do the red carpet and get noticed


This red outfit?








						Met Gala 2018 afterparty: Amal Clooney changes into red mosaic gown
					

She has one of the most coveted wardrobes in the world, so it comes as little surprise that Amal Clooney wore not one, but two outfits on Monday night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

If M is capable of keeping her mouth shut on the anniversary of Diana's death, could it possibly be a sign she's gotten wind of how almost everyone wishes she'd just shut up and enjoy her privacy? I don't think M can resist uttering some idiotic word salad for a dead mother-in-law merching opportunity. Since Haz has already thrown the rest of his family under the bus, why not trot out his own mother again for a buck?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If M is capable of keeping her mouth shut on the anniversary of Diana's death, could it possibly be a sign she's gotten wind of how almost everyone wishes she'd just shut up and enjoy her privacy? I don't think M can resist uttering some idiotic word salad for a dead mother-in-law merching opportunity. Since Haz has already thrown the rest of his family under the bus, why not trot out his own mother again for a buck?



At this point they have already milked it for all it's worth. There was the statue unveiling earlier in the summer and that didn't go over that well for Harry and Meghan wasn't even there. Meghan cannot pretend to feel grief over a woman she never met and since she claims she didn't know anything about the royals when she met Harry, anything she says sounds phony. Not that that has ever stopped her before.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Whether or not these clowns get a Met Gala invite, one thing for sure, *Her Royal Clowness* will somehow end up in an ill fitting costume


 Thanks @EverSoElusive for Her Royal Clowness, a very appropriate nickname for M. Just like a circus clown, she tries to entertain us, but as with all her other endeavours, she fails badly and besides, quite a few people including myself don't find clowns funny or entertaining.


----------



## csshopper

If either one of them actually wanted to do something worthwhile in honor of Diana, they could issue a simply stated (probably not possible for them) statement reminding people to make sure their loved ones should always "buckle up" and use a seat belt.

Yes, Diana died traveling in a speeding car driven by a man impaired by alcohol. But, according to post mortem reports done by experts she would have been injured in the crash, BUT, if she had been using her seat belt, would have significantly increased her chance for survival. She "died due to a tiny tear in a vein in one of her lungs. Other than the fatal tear she actually suffered just a few broken bones and a small chest injury, BUT this included a tiny tear in a vein in one of her lungs." (cite: Dr. Richard Palmer, "UK's top Forensic Pathologist".) Because she was not belted in she was "catapulted forward from the back seat." The finding being that if she had been belted in place in the back seat, it would have softened the impact and she would not have struck other objects as she was being thrown forward. Her body guard, who was belted in, was the only one who survived. Diana was initially stable and communicating when the ambulance arrived, the unseen tear, however, was causing an interior bleed that led to her death.

If Hazard could ever have gained the maturity to accept his mother was not a Saint, but a human being capable of making errors in judgement, and have taken up the cause of auto safety as one of his efforts he could have used her death for more than a merchandizing of life long grief and misplaced anger. 

Sorry, end of rant.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> This red outfit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Met Gala 2018 afterparty: Amal Clooney changes into red mosaic gown
> 
> 
> She has one of the most coveted wardrobes in the world, so it comes as little surprise that Amal Clooney wore not one, but two outfits on Monday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


yes !


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> At this point they have already milked it for all it's worth. There was the statue unveiling earlier in the summer and that didn't go over that well for Harry and Meghan wasn't even there. Meghan cannot pretend to feel grief over a woman she never met and since she claims she didn't know anything about the royals when she met Harry, anything she says sounds phony. Not that that has ever stopped her before.



So true! Yet Meghan insists on doubling down on every idiotic thing she's done. At this point, her sugars are as willfully blind as Meghan is ridiculous so M can always count on their support. She'd might as well roll out hand towels and Christmas ornaments with her and Diana's faces on them. The sugars would buy them  .


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> The Met ball is all about the red carpet - pictures from inside are verboten after someone took snaps of the ladies room that was full of smokers one year - no smoking please
> OK, it is the year of COVID but previous dresses have been a year in the making, people take the dress design seriously, it is not about pushing sustainable anything
> Amal Clooney hosted and had two dresses that year - an enormous billowing silver extravaganza for the red carpet and changed into a red Tom Ford inside, I far preferred the TF dress which was of course over the top but a column sheath made of red mirror, pix of her in the red one are HTF
> Back to the red carpet, it is a COSTUME ball, the red carpet outfit should be amazing - look who you are going  up against
> Honestly H&M dont have the fashion cred to do the red carpet and get noticed


but will Covid impact it again?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> If either one of them actually wanted to do something worthwhile in honor of Diana, they could issue a simply stated (probably not possible for them) statement reminding people to make sure their loved ones should always "buckle up" and use a seat belt.
> 
> Yes, Diana died traveling in a speeding car driven by a man impaired by alcohol. But, according to post mortem reports done by experts she would have been injured in the crash, BUT, if she had been using her seat belt, would have significantly increased her chance for survival. She "died due to a tiny tear in a vein in one of her lungs. Other than the fatal tear she actually suffered just a few broken bones and a small chest injury, BUT this included a tiny tear in a vein in one of her lungs." (cite: Dr. Richard Palmer, "UK's top Forensic Pathologist".) Because she was not belted in she was "catapulted forward from the back seat." The finding being that if she had been belted in place in the back seat, it would have softened the impact and she would not have struck other objects as she was being thrown forward. Her body guard, who was belted in, was the only one who survived. Diana was initially stable and communicating when the ambulance arrived, the unseen tear, however, was causing an interior bleed that led to her death.
> 
> If Hazard could ever have gained the maturity to accept his mother was not a Saint, but a human being capable of making errors in judgement, and have taken up the cause of auto safety as one of his efforts he could have used her death for more than a merchandizing of life long grief and misplaced anger.
> 
> Sorry, end of rant.


oh no, it was all the fault of the paps


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why couldn’t they just stay at the Ritz that night?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @EverSoElusive for Her Royal Clowness, a very appropriate nickname for M. Just like a circus clown, she tries to entertain us, but as with all her other endeavours, she fails badly and besides, quite a few people including myself don't find clowns funny or entertaining.



She reminds me of killer clowns that appear in dreams


----------



## justwatchin

I thought the mysterious Baby Lilibet had Diana as part of her name or am I wrong? Otherwise, I’m expecting a photo of some body part along with a message about how Lilibet would have adored her grandmother


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Why couldn’t they just stay at the Ritz that night?


guess that was fate


----------



## sdkitty

more BS
the people who accused Meghan of bullying have rescinded their story? oh wait, it's still under investigation?
'Finding Freedom': New Epilogue Says Staffers Rescinded Bullying Claims Against Meghan Markle (msn.com)


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> more BS
> the people who accused Meghan of bullying have rescinded their story? oh wait, it's still under investigation?
> 'Finding Freedom': New Epilogue Says Staffers Rescinded Bullying Claims Against Meghan Markle (msn.com)



msn? 
aren't they a 'friendly' source


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> msn?
> aren't they a 'friendly' source


IDK but the source is scobie so...


----------



## csshopper

justwatchin said:


> I thought the mysterious Baby Lilibet had Diana as part of her name or am I wrong? Otherwise, I’m expecting a photo of some body part along with a message about how Lilibet would have adored her grandmother


The narcissistic parents will never have thought ahead about their daughter's life, but, someday I predict Lilibet is going to wonder WHY early pictures of her have never been shared, not even in the limited exposure her brother has had. A quick search by her will, of course, turn up all of the wonderful Cambridge, Tyndall, photos and other cousins like August making a mockery of any claimed need for "Privacy." Further, she will have at her finger tips the bowls and bowls of word salads and the nasty family jibes at the RF and the mostly absent black and white families of her mother. And on and on and on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Scoobie is working the press today.  Does he need the money? Is he trying to make H&M relevant? Is his ‘new’ book not selling ?
So many more important real news stories to pay attention to. H&M‘s side show isn‘t interesting at all.  Meanwhile, Lady Kitty continues to  remind us of the beautiful Spencer clan.  FWIW, she isn’t a hanger-on, she actually knew Diana.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> I think they would sniff at $3M. Methane wants a lifestyle where a million bucks is chump change. They were probably gunning for "send all bills to PC" so that they could be "financially independent" = "don't need to work but will get paid".
> 
> 
> When I was studying in the UK, a group of us Asians cooked a feast to celebrate the Lunar New Year. Our hostel had a lot of aggressive soccer jocks and one of them came to the common kitchen and stood at the door to scream at us for making smelly food (onions & garlic, I believe). Didn't actually get into our face - maybe the sight of all the knives and choppers was a deterrent against physically attacking us (there were racist attacks on foreigners the year that I was there).


Yikes, that was not cool at all!!!  However, to prevent issues with food smells, my company had a rule .. eat your breakfast/lunch in the kitchen room!  Of course, I pretty much never got to eat lunch because I was always overbooked re: meetings.  To be honest, though, I would much rather smell garlic than burned microwaved Popcorn .. the WORST smell ever and it just stays in the air for an eternity (it seems)!


----------



## CeeJay

Uggh .. yes, of course Scoobie-Dummy-Doo had to be on TV this morning, 'cos ya know .. he has to sell more copies of his ridiculous book!!!  But, get this .. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...progress-royal-family-Omid-Scobie-claims.html

*New epilogue of bombshell biography Finding Freedom released earlier today *
*Author Omid Scobie appeared on Good Morning America to discuss the book *
*Prince Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, made 'little progress' in reconciling with royals*
*Said for the rift to be repaired they will need 'everyone to take accountability'*
*Scobie revealed the Duke and Duchess don't 'want to disappear or not be seen'   *
Bullet #4 .. shouldn't Meghan & Harry take accountability too???  Bullet #5 - yeah, they may not want to disappear, but we sure as heck hope that they do!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Uggh .. yes, of course Scoobie-Dummy-Doo had to be on TV this morning, 'cos ya know .. he has to sell more copies of his ridiculous book!!!  But, get this .. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...progress-royal-family-Omid-Scobie-claims.html
> 
> *New epilogue of bombshell biography Finding Freedom released earlier today *
> *Author Omid Scobie appeared on Good Morning America to discuss the book *
> *Prince Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, made 'little progress' in reconciling with royals*
> *Said for the rift to be repaired they will need 'everyone to take accountability'*
> *Scobie revealed the Duke and Duchess don't 'want to disappear or not be seen'   *
> Bullet #4 .. shouldn't Meghan & Harry take accountability too???  Bullet #5 - yeah, they may not want to disappear, but we sure as heck hope that they do!!!



#5 - so they want to *preach at us and not be held accountable*, is that it? 
That’s a hard pass for me.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> #5 - so they want to *preach at us and not be held accountable*, is that it?
> That’s a hard pass for me.


EXACTLY .. just like recently where Harry took a private jet to go to his Polo match, but yet .. they want to preach to us about "eco" travel.  The 2 of them are such BS-artists!


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> *Prince Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, made 'little progress' in reconciling with royals*
> *Said for the rift to be repaired they will need 'everyone to take accountability'*
> *Scobie revealed the Duke and Duchess don't 'want to disappear or not be seen'*



Wait, what? "Little progress"?? "for the rift to be repaired"?? Ummmmmm...... it wasn't the BRF that threw mud, it was Cringe and Ginge. When you spew the crap they did, they'd better have tangible proof. They banked on not getting sued for slander, and it's unfortunate they're not. Not in this environment. Scabs doesn't need to tell us that they don't "want to disappear or not be seen" they just can't shut up. When you make part of your income by merching your dead mother and scream for pity in your luxurious surroundings, your credibility is garbage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> The narcissistic parents will never have thought ahead about their daughter's life, but, someday I predict Lilibet is going to wonder WHY early pictures of her have never been shared, not even in the limited exposure her brother has had. A quick search by her will, of course, turn up all of the wonderful Cambridge, Tyndall, photos and other cousins like August making a mockery of any claimed need for "Privacy." Further, she will have at her finger tips the bowls and bowls of word salads and the nasty family jibes at the RF and the mostly absent black and white families of her mother. And on and on and on.


It's occurred to me how different the lives of the Cambridge and Sussex children will be if the rift continues, which I'm guessing it will. I envision H&M shilling a reality show to Bravo in about fifteen years called "The Fresh Prince of Buckingham", where Archie returns to England to attend university, reconnects with his cousins, and as they say, hilarity ensues.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> It's occurred to me how different the lives of the Cambridge and Sussex children will be if the rift continues, which I'm guessing it will. I envision H&M shilling a reality show to Bravo in about fifteen years called "The Fresh Prince of Buckingham", where Archie returns to England to attend university, reconnects with his cousins, and as they say, hilarity ensues.


If Archie were to be in a program (or the daughter for that matter), you KNOW 100% well that Meghan would ABSOLUTELY HAVE to be on it as well.  No way is she going to let either of those children out-fame her!


----------



## Lounorada

breakfastatcartier said:


> TBH “princess Harry” was a typo, lol. I have no idea how that happened.


Even better- I just scrolled past this too quickly and read it as Princess HAIRY. 
I think it suits him.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> If Archie were to be in a program (or the daughter for that matter), you KNOW 100% well that Meghan would ABSOLUTELY HAVE to be on it as well.  No way is she going to let either of those children out-fame her!


I wouldn't be at all surprised if in five years H&M are divorced, he's returned to the royal fold and she is on the RHOBH or RHONY.


----------



## csshopper

Lounorada said:


> Even better- I just scrolled past this too quickly and read it as Princess HAIRY.
> I think it suits him.


*Red-haired people and orangutans originate from common ...*
https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/re...riginate-from-common-ancestor-says-new-study/ - 81k - Cached - Similar pages 
*Orangutans* may be more closely related to *red*-*haired* humans than scientists previously thought, a new genetic study has shown.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Wait, what? "Little progress"?? "for the rift to be repaired"?? Ummmmmm...... it wasn't the BRF that threw mud, it was Cringe and Ginge. When you spew the crap they did, they'd better have tangible proof. They banked on not getting sued for slander, and it's unfortunate they're not. Not in this environment. *Scabs* doesn't need to tell us that they don't "want to disappear or not be seen" they just can't shut up. When you make part of your income by merching your dead mother and scream for pity in your luxurious surroundings, your credibility is garbage.


Scabs.  Love it! Lol!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is Travelyst also dead like the podcast?


----------



## lanasyogamama

And how is the chief feelings officer gig going?


----------



## Chanbal

This article summarizes some (12) of Madame of Montecito' s new claims. 

*Oprah had just days to prepare for chat - and Meghan spoke without royal "shackles"*
_"Now the shackles of the institution’s “never complain, never explain” mantra were off. *It was time to be honest, once and for all…*
As the cameras started recording, *the duchess took a deep breath and started to share her truth*"

*Palace still 'doing their best' to undermine Harry and Meghan*
A friend of the couple told the authors: "Here we go again. It felt like certain individuals at the Palace were doing their very best to undermine and discredit anything they worried the couple may or may not say during the interview."

*'Rare day off' for romantic wedding anniversary*
They write: "With restaurant outings off-limits, the couple had to get a little creative in May for their second-anniversary festivities at home, *spending part of the day looking back at their 2018 with a number of people who had been part of the wedding festivities, including vendors that had helped bring their magical Windsor Castle ceremony to life.*

"They capped off the day with a Southern Californian favorite: Mexican food ordered from a popular local restaurant, washed down with margaritas (alcoholic for him, nonalcoholic for her).

"For gifts, they exchanged cotton-based items, as the tradition suggests.

"*The home celebration was a rare day off for the couple, who focused their new life of freedom around service."*

*Delay in announcing pregnancy*
After the heartbreaking miscarriage, the couple were obviously nervous to share the news that *they were expecting again. *

*Meghan checked on authors after book release*
*Durand and Scobie claim that Meghan went out of her way to check they were okay after their original copy of the books hit the shelves.*

The release came while she was coming to terms with her miscarriage, however they say she still made time to speak to them after they were targeted by cruel online trolls.

They write: *"Those steps forward in the healing process included making sure that others were okay. *It was something those close to her always knew her for doing (even checking in with the co-author of this book over issues with Internet trolls in 2020)."_









						12 new claims in updated Meghan and Harry book- royal 'shackles' & romantic date
					

A new chapter of Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family - an unofficial biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - hits the shelves today, and authors Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie have made a series of fresh claims about the royals




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This article summarizes some (12) of Madame of Montecito' s new claims.
> 
> *Oprah had just days to prepare for chat - and Meghan spoke without royal "shackles"*
> _"Now the shackles of the institution’s “never complain, never explain” mantra were off. *It was time to be honest, once and for all…*
> As the cameras started recording, *the duchess took a deep breath and started to share her truth*"
> 
> *Palace still 'doing their best' to undermine Harry and Meghan*
> A friend of the couple told the authors: "Here we go again. It felt like certain individuals at the Palace were doing their very best to undermine and discredit anything they worried the couple may or may not say during the interview."
> 
> *'Rare day off' for romantic wedding anniversary*
> They write: "With restaurant outings off-limits, the couple had to get a little creative in May for their second-anniversary festivities at home, *spending part of the day looking back at their 2018 with a number of people who had been part of the wedding festivities, including vendors that had helped bring their magical Windsor Castle ceremony to life.*
> 
> "They capped off the day with a Southern Californian favorite: Mexican food ordered from a popular local restaurant, washed down with margaritas (alcoholic for him, nonalcoholic for her).
> 
> "For gifts, they exchanged cotton-based items, as the tradition suggests.
> 
> "*The home celebration was a rare day off for the couple, who focused their new life of freedom around service."*
> 
> *Delay in announcing pregnancy*
> After the heartbreaking miscarriage, the couple were obviously nervous to share the news that *they were expecting again. *
> 
> *Meghan checked on authors after book release*
> *Durand and Scobie claim that Meghan went out of her way to check they were okay after their original copy of the books hit the shelves.*
> 
> The release came while she was coming to terms with her miscarriage, however they say she still made time to speak to them after they were targeted by cruel online trolls.
> 
> They write: *"Those steps forward in the healing process included making sure that others were okay. *It was something those close to her always knew her for doing (even checking in with the co-author of this book over issues with Internet trolls in 2020)."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 12 new claims in updated Meghan and Harry book- royal 'shackles' & romantic date
> 
> 
> A new chapter of Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of A Modern Royal Family - an unofficial biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - hits the shelves today, and authors Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie have made a series of fresh claims about the royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Lol their self-perceived self importance is so laughable. Note: who cares!


----------



## sdkitty

occurs to me that if some day she decides he isn't of use to her anymore he will be Markled


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> _"*The home celebration was a rare day off for the couple, who focused their new life of freedom around service."*_


The single most hilarious sentence in the article.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> The single most hilarious sentence in the article.


LOL
day off from what?  scheming on how to get publicity I guess


----------



## Chloe302225

The last word in victimhood: RICHARD KAY's stinging verdict
					

RICHARD KAY: Unauthorised it may be, but Finding Freedom does provide one valuable service: come what may the Duke and Duchess of Sussex must always have the last word.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## A1aGypsy

So they spent their anniversary with vendors from their wedding? Honestly, he needs to stop talking.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> more BS
> the people who accused Meghan of bullying have rescinded their story? oh wait, it's still under investigation?
> 'Finding Freedom': New Epilogue Says Staffers Rescinded Bullying Claims Against Meghan Markle (msn.com)


Rescinded because it is now upgraded to assault?


----------



## xincinsin

A1aGypsy said:


> So they spent their anniversary with vendors from their wedding? Honestly, he needs to stop talking.


Probably asked them to provide (more) freebies.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> The single most hilarious sentence in the article.


I'm so divided, Omid is such a good writer. 

_ "*It was time to be honest, once and for all…the duchess took a deep breath and started to share her truth*"

_


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> So they spent their anniversary with vendors from their wedding? Honestly, he needs to stop talking.


That is both bizarre and sad. It doesn't make any sense. Vendors who did their wedding in England came to Montecito? Or was it a virtual thing like with Melissa McCarthy? They really need to go radio silent for a while but that's not likely.


----------



## Chanbal

One more of the mysterious messages.


----------



## csshopper

Pages of scathing comments in the Daily Mail about the author and the contents.  And a new name (?) for Meghan: Maggot.

As to Haz wanting a movie made from his book, well, his wife is probably looking for work and by then may need the $$$. She does see herself as the reincarnation of Diana. D-e-l-u-s-I-o-n-a-l Duo those two!


----------



## charlottawill

It is in incredibly poor taste that this was released on the anniversary of Diana's death. I imagine William is livid. So much for mending the rift. The Toxic Twosome strikes again.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> And a new name (?) for Meghan: Maggot.
> 
> She does see herself as the reincarnation of Diana. D-e-l-u-s-I-o-n-a-l Duo those two!



Love the nickname Maggot.

Not a reincarnation since she was alive when Diana was. She’s more of a reproduction, like a counterfeit bag. A cheap, poorly-made copy of the original. She only fools the uninformed and those who lack discerning taste.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Love the nickname Maggot.
> 
> Not a reincarnation since she was alive when Diana was. She’s more of a reproduction, like a counterfeit bag. A cheap, poorly-made copy of the original. She only fools the uninformed and those who lack discerning taste.


Good call, you’re right, not a reincarnation and you describe her perfectly. Thanks!


----------



## VickyB

papertiger said:


> Wallis married a man who would be King. M married the spare, and the spare _grandson_, not even the bother of the PoW. A world of difference.
> 
> 'WE' were bit players, but still had a lifestyle H&M can only dream of, and the jewels (and style) to match. I dislike Wallis but her style was impeccable.



OMG!!! Thanks so much for sharing this video!!!! my mom  has the auction catalogs and I will need to pull them out and ogle all the spectacular pieces!!!!


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> Pages of scathing comments in the Daily Mail about the author and the contents.  And a new name (?) for Meghan: Maggot.
> 
> As to Haz wanting a movie made from his book, well, his wife is probably looking for work and by then may need the $$$. She does see herself as the reincarnation of Diana. D-e-l-u-s-I-o-n-a-l Duo those two!




(Intercom speaker): Purse Forum calling for @Maggie Muggins, ribbon award in order for suitable nickname, "Maggot", courtesy of @csshopper, please report to Prince Harry and Maggot  Meghan Markle Thread.


----------



## Deleted 698298

VickyB said:


> OMG!!! Thanks so much for sharing this video!!!! my mom  has the auction catalogs and I will need to pull them out and ogle all the spectacular pieces!!!!


It made me shiver when I heard this about Edward/Wallis  ‘adoring relationship more like a son to a mother’ …looks like the history repeats itself. but I bet Megain will never be showered with jewels like Wallis was. The opulence in which WE surrounded themselves is shocking, particularly when this’s mentioned ‘king came to VCA with pockets full of gems from all over the empire’ argh!…. Very nice documentary


----------



## Sophie-Rose

Ofcom CLEARS Piers Morgan over his criticism of Meghan Markle: Watchdog calls attempts to silence him a 'chilling restriction on freedom of expression' after he said he 'didn't believe a word' of her claims in Oprah interview


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vintage Leather said:


> If you’re interested in Cartier, I strongly recommend the book “Creating Cartier” by Jacques granddaughter, Francesca Cartier Brickell. She also has done a series of webinars on the stories and notes behind specific collections, including one on the BRF with a curator from the Trust



That book is on my wishlist...but my TBR pile is a mile high at this point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Too late to edit, but get the paperback, not the hardcover. The author has said on Insta that is was updated with extra information.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Like his master… Let's blame on racism the feedback they get from being whatever they are.

*Omid Scobie today said he had been the victim of 'prejudice' from a 'very senior' Royal aide as he was quizzed about the Sussexes' claims of racism at the palace. *

_Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother, was asked by This Morning presenters Rochelle  Humes and Alison Hammond whether he was surprised by the Sussexes' claims of racism. 

He said: 'We knew they had contended with issues surrounding race within the institution.

'I myself have experienced some prejudice from one or two royal aides in the past, so you can kind of know what Meghan was entering. And so it didn't surprise me, but I think for it to mention a family member, that was kind of the moment that even myself, my jaw was on the floor – just like Oprah, it was the same reaction.

Asked to clarify whether he had suffered racism, the Finding Freedom author added: 'I wouldn't say racist, but I just experienced prejudice. I'm mixed race, there aren't many mixed race royal correspondents out there.

'I would not name that person. Someone very senior within the palace who found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do, and that was pretty much how they said it to me…_










						Omid Scobie claims he suffered 'prejudice' from 'very senior' royal
					

The author of Finding Freedom and media ally of Meghan and Harry said an unnamed senior figure 'found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do' as someone who is mixed race.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

_In a column for MailOnline today, Mr Morgan said: 'I'm delighted that Ofcom has so emphatically supported my right to disbelieve the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's incendiary claims to Oprah Winfrey, many of which have since been proved to be untrue. This is a resounding victory for free speech and a resounding defeat for Princess Pinocchios. In light of this decision – do I get my job back?'…

Ofcom today found no rules were breached and backed Mr Morgan's right to 'rigorously challenge' the Duchess's account of suffering suicidal thoughts and claims she experienced racism at the hands of the Royal Family. The decision has led to a flurry of calls demanding he is given his job back, with fans using the hashtag #bringbackpiers claiming the show is 'dying a slow death without him'. 

In complete vindication for the journalist, 56, Ofcom ruled: '*Mr Morgan was entitled to say he disbelieved the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's allegations and to hold and express strong views that rigorously challenged their account*'…_









						Ofcom CLEARS Piers Morgan and GMB over Meghan and Harry's Oprah show
					

The UK's  broadcasting watchdog called attempts to silence him a 'chilling restriction on freedom of expression' after the Duchess of Sussex was among an avalanche of people who complained.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

VickyB said:


> OMG!!! Thanks so much for sharing this video!!!! my mom  has the auction catalogs and I will need to pull them out and ogle all the spectacular pieces!!!!


Wow, I have zero plans to watch a 45 minute YouTube video about Wallace and her jewels this morning, but that’s exactly what I did. It really made me think about the impact she had on the jewelry industry. Also, she sure had a hold over Edward!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _'I would not name that person. Someone very senior within the palace who found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do, and that was pretty much how they said it to me…_



Maybe they were surprised a wax doll could talk.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe they were surprised a wax doll could talk.



I'm a minority but almost 'passing' ("but where are you from _really_?"  ).

Let's face it, it's not _always_ prejudice, NEWSFLASH...NEWSFLASH...some people just don't like ME *shock* *horror*    .


----------



## sgj99

Edward had huge mommy issues.  

Wallace didn’t really want to marry him.  He was head over heels in love.  And she wasn’t.  But she knew she was trapped once he abdicated.

While Harry is the Spare and Edward was King media attention is so much more persuasive now than it was during the Abdication that it’s easy to make comparisons.  And by doing this Harry should be treated by the Firm like Edward was treated i.e. persona-non-grata.  The HRH can’t be taken from Harry but it can M.  Don’t invite them to any appearances such as The Trooping of the Guard were the BRF are on the balcony.  In fact, Edward wasn’t given permission to enter the country but once or twice.  Cut off all financial support, they can live very nicely on his inheritance from his mother.  If Harry whines and complains ignore it.  If Harry has to be given some kind of appointment (Edward was Governor of the Bahamas) than make him the Governor of Antarctica.


----------



## csshopper

A certain "whiny fork tongued actress" would have been much smarter to have sat down, shut up, and ignored Piers Morgan calling her out on the Oprah interview. Instead, she, the avowed feminist, goes straight to the female head of the organization and pleads "as a woman and a mother" demanding to have him removed. There's an expression "this story has legs" meaning one that continues to garner interest. He leaves, the story continues to spool out over the months as ITV #'s fall, the lies and disingenuous statements made by the Suckesses are dismantled, former viewers rally for his reinstatement.  It seems to have contributed to ever more scrutiny of the Toxic Twosome's behaviors, and not in the positive way they pay big bucks to hopefully achieve.

 As of this ruling, Piers and other journalists have their freedom of speech affirmed. He will NEVER let her forget it. Piers: 1 Methane: 0

I don't always like him, but, the outcome of this made me smile.


----------



## LittleStar88

None of us should be surprised here... I don't think Oprah is friends with anyone who can't add financial value to her portfolio. The whole MM/Harry/Oprah thing is just one big ruse - only in it for what they can get out of it. 









						Rose McGowan Vs. Oprah Winfrey: All the Accusations Detailed
					

Winfrey is yet to respond to the accusations made by McGowan about the talk show host's connections to Harvey Weinstein and Russell Simmons.




					www.newsweek.com
				





Rose McGowan has taken aim at Oprah Winfrey in a cutting social media attack.

McGowan caused a big reaction online after making a number of accusations against the actress, host and producer, as she also included an image of Winfrey kissing Harvey Weinstein on the cheek.

*What Did Rose McGowan Say About Oprah Winfrey?*
On Sunday August 29, McGowan made her opinions on Winfrey very clear by tweeting: "I am glad more are seeing the ugly truth of @Oprah. I wish she were real, but she isn't. From being pals with Weinstein to abandoning & destroying Russell Simmon's victims, she is about supporting a sick power structure for personal gain, she is as fake as they come. #lizard"

*What Did Rose McGowan Mean in Her Tweet About Oprah?*
Winfrey has long been considered a national treasure for her popular daytime talk show, her books, her work in Hollywood and for her philanthropy, but McGowan claims Winfrey is "as fake as they come," admitting she wishes she "were real, but she isn't."

McGowan reminded her followers of being "pals" with disgraced Hollywood producer Weinstein by attaching a photo of her kissing him on the cheek.

Weinstein was known to have many established celebrity friends before his checkered history of sexual assault was exposed in 2017.

Winfrey has since spoken out against Weinstein and been a supporter of the Time's Up and MeToo movements, which were born in the wake of this scandal.

McGowan also makes strong accusations that Winfrey was involved in "abandoning & destroying Russell Simmon's victims." This is a reference to the multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape against Simmons, an entrepreneur and co-founder of Def Jam Recordings.


----------



## maris.crane

I don't know if I'd take Rose McGowan seriously as a source against Oprah...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Like his master… Let's blame on racism the feedback they get from being whatever they are.
> 
> *Omid Scobie today said he had been the victim of 'prejudice' from a 'very senior' Royal aide as he was quizzed about the Sussexes' claims of racism at the palace. *
> 
> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother, was asked by This Morning presenters Rochelle  Humes and Alison Hammond whether he was surprised by the Sussexes' claims of racism.
> 
> He said: 'We knew they had contended with issues surrounding race within the institution.
> 
> 'I myself have experienced some prejudice from one or two royal aides in the past, so you can kind of know what Meghan was entering. And so it didn't surprise me, but I think for it to mention a family member, that was kind of the moment that even myself, my jaw was on the floor – just like Oprah, it was the same reaction.
> 
> Asked to clarify whether he had suffered racism, the Finding Freedom author added: 'I wouldn't say racist, but I just experienced prejudice. I'm mixed race, there aren't many mixed race royal correspondents out there.
> 
> 'I would not name that person. Someone very senior within the palace who found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do, and that was pretty much how they said it to me…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie claims he suffered 'prejudice' from 'very senior' royal
> 
> 
> The author of Finding Freedom and media ally of Meghan and Harry said an unnamed senior figure 'found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do' as someone who is mixed race.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


another senior royal who can't be named...these people are just despicable....and he is another who has messed with his face a lot - to make him look less ethnic?  and now wants to claim people treated him differently due to his appearance?  makes a good pairing with Meghan


----------



## LittleStar88

maris.crane said:


> I don't know if I'd take Rose McGowan seriously as a source against Oprah...



I know - she is kind of extra. But in this context + photo... I can buy in to this message.


----------



## Chanbal

Omid is pissed at Ofcom, and he got an answer to "his comments"











						Omid Scobie cites Human Rights Act over Piers Morgan Ofcom ruling
					

Omid Scobie said he was surprised by the decision announced by Ofcom today because 'freedom of expression' under the 1998 Act is subject to the restriction of 'protection of health or morals'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Love the nickname Maggot.
> 
> Not a reincarnation since she was alive when Diana was. She’s more of a reproduction, like a counterfeit bag. A cheap, poorly-made copy of the original. She only fools the uninformed and those who lack discerning taste.


HA HA HA .. love this!!! .. so, that's it folks, a new nickname .. the *Z-bag* (since she was the imminent Z-class actress after all)!!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> None of us should be surprised here... I don't think Oprah is friends with anyone who can't add financial value to her portfolio. The whole MM/Harry/Oprah thing is just one big ruse - only in it for what they can get out of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rose McGowan Vs. Oprah Winfrey: All the Accusations Detailed
> 
> 
> Winfrey is yet to respond to the accusations made by McGowan about the talk show host's connections to Harvey Weinstein and Russell Simmons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rose McGowan has taken aim at Oprah Winfrey in a cutting social media attack.
> 
> McGowan caused a big reaction online after making a number of accusations against the actress, host and producer, as she also included an image of Winfrey kissing Harvey Weinstein on the cheek.
> 
> *What Did Rose McGowan Say About Oprah Winfrey?*
> On Sunday August 29, McGowan made her opinions on Winfrey very clear by tweeting: "I am glad more are seeing the ugly truth of @Oprah. I wish she were real, but she isn't. From being pals with Weinstein to abandoning & destroying Russell Simmon's victims, she is about supporting a sick power structure for personal gain, she is as fake as they come. #lizard"
> 
> *What Did Rose McGowan Mean in Her Tweet About Oprah?*
> Winfrey has long been considered a national treasure for her popular daytime talk show, her books, her work in Hollywood and for her philanthropy, but McGowan claims Winfrey is "as fake as they come," admitting she wishes she "were real, but she isn't."
> 
> McGowan reminded her followers of being "pals" with disgraced Hollywood producer Weinstein by attaching a photo of her kissing him on the cheek.
> 
> Weinstein was known to have many established celebrity friends before his checkered history of sexual assault was exposed in 2017.
> 
> Winfrey has since spoken out against Weinstein and been a supporter of the Time's Up and MeToo movements, which were born in the wake of this scandal.
> 
> McGowan also makes strong accusations that Winfrey was involved in "abandoning & destroying Russell Simmon's victims." This is a reference to the multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape against Simmons, an entrepreneur and co-founder of Def Jam Recordings.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5181118


I've been saying this for some time, that Oprah has been putting on a BIG-TIME act for years!  Knowing 2 people who worked with and for her and the stories that they told me about her abuse?!?! .. SHAMEFUL!  Another one who "considers" herself to be a 'feminist', yet her treatment of other female employees was deplorable.  I cannot stand Oprah would not buy or watch any of her crap!


----------



## xeyes

Enty’s got another one for us (as usual, the comments are fun):





__





						Blind Item #2
					

The botox getting/hair colored "reporter"/mouthpiece for the alliterate one forgot to mention a great story in his book or update about how ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

_Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother,_ 

Persian? _Persian????_
Iran hasn't been called Persia in almost a century. Is that a colonial reference?
Or does it just paint a different picture than saying his mother is Iranian


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother,_
> 
> Persian? _Persian????_
> Iran hasn't been called Persia in almost a century. Is that a colonial reference?
> Or does it just paint a different picture than saying his mother is Iranian


There is a HUGE community of Iranians/Persians here in LA, and not a single time have I heard them refer to themselves as Iranian, it's always Persian.  Personally, I don't care, but I do find it interesting.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5181004
> 
> _In a column for MailOnline today, Mr Morgan said: 'I'm delighted that Ofcom has so emphatically supported my right to disbelieve the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's incendiary claims to Oprah Winfrey, many of which have since been proved to be untrue. This is a resounding victory for free speech and a resounding defeat for Princess Pinocchios. In light of this decision – do I get my job back?'…
> 
> Ofcom today found no rules were breached and backed Mr Morgan's right to 'rigorously challenge' the Duchess's account of suffering suicidal thoughts and claims she experienced racism at the hands of the Royal Family. The decision has led to a flurry of calls demanding he is given his job back, with fans using the hashtag #bringbackpiers claiming the show is 'dying a slow death without him'.
> 
> In complete vindication for the journalist, 56, Ofcom ruled: '*Mr Morgan was entitled to say he disbelieved the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's allegations and to hold and express strong views that rigorously challenged their account*'…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ofcom CLEARS Piers Morgan and GMB over Meghan and Harry's Oprah show
> 
> 
> The UK's  broadcasting watchdog called attempts to silence him a 'chilling restriction on freedom of expression' after the Duchess of Sussex was among an avalanche of people who complained.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Hmmmm, so they've lost viewers and $$$ and thus are now are back pedaling.  Since when is expressing one's thoughts (non violent at least) illegal in the UK?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> _*Someone very senior within the palace who found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do, and that was pretty much how they said it to me…*_


Puh-leeze.  I am 100% NON Caucasian and am an immigrant to the US.  Not ONCE has anyone ever said to me in shock, "My you speak English so well!"  If anything, when I travel back to my mother country, people are shocked I still remember how to speak the language!


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> There is a HUGE community of Iranians/Persians here in LA, and not a single time have I heard them refer to themselves as Iranian, it's always Persian.  *Personally, I don't care, but I do find it interesting.*



Same here
I wonder if it harkens back to the 70's when the Shah was deposed. I was at SDSU at the time and there was a large Iranian student population there at the time. I don't recall them calling themselves persian, but hey........the entire Carter administration was a blur


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother,_
> 
> Persian? _Persian????_
> Iran hasn't been called Persia in almost a century. Is that a colonial reference?
> Or does it just paint a different picture than saying his mother is Iranian


Most Iranians (at least in the US) refer to themselves as Persians.  I think many do because they don't agree with Iran's politics?


----------



## TC1

maris.crane said:


> I don't know if I'd take Rose McGowan seriously as a source against Oprah...


I cannot stand Rose McGowan. That being said..I think both Oprah and Ellen have been (mostly) protected from the hypocrisy they could have both been called out on for YEARS now.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Most Iranians (at least in the US) refer to themselves as Persians.  *I think many do because they don't agree with Iran's politics?*



Now that makes sense.
The Persian reference to Scabies all I could think of was persian cat and his love of PS he was going to be the male version of Jocelyn.
#Katmandon't


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm a minority but almost 'passing' ("but where are you from _really_?"  ).
> 
> Let's face it, it's not _always_ prejudice, NEWSFLASH...NEWSFLASH...some people just don't like ME *shock* *horror*    .


One gets that all over the US, one is from the other part of the country - not here, and trying to pass as a local LOL


----------



## marietouchet

Injustice police where are you ??? LOL 

someone mentioned the Captain and Tenille in the same breath as H&M …

no no no Toni Tennille has major street cred , she sang backup on Pink Floyd’s the Wall, like the biggest selling album of the 80s 

look it up …


----------



## marietouchet

poopsie said:


> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother,_
> 
> Persian? _Persian????_
> Iran hasn't been called Persia in almost a century. Is that a colonial reference?
> Or does it just paint a different picture than saying his mother is Iranian


Thank you for that .. I saw that story … and I could not figure out what was wrong with it … you hit the nail on the head

I keep trying to like OS, he posed for Tatler with a French bulldog, and if a Frenchie is willing to vet you, you must be OK

My two Frenchies are Chuck and Phil AKA Charlemagne and King Louis Philippe , tres francais, I work every day to stay in their good graces , yesterday they went for mani pedis - the vet trimmed the nails since I am so bad at it


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> Injustice police where are you ??? LOL
> 
> someone mentioned the Captain and Tenille in the same breath as H&M …
> 
> no no no Toni Tennille has major street cred , she sang backup on Pink Floyd’s the Wall, like the biggest selling album of the 80s
> 
> look it up …


Wow! My friend also sang back up with them for years and toured with them.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Most Iranians (at least in the US) refer to themselves as Persians.  I think many do because they don't agree with Iran's politics?



UK too. 

But I also think ME countries boundaries do not run in tribal/racial/Persian allegiances. Whichever countries people come from they often refer to themselves as Persians, Arabs, Jews, Druz, Kurds etc it changes depending on whether you ask themselves who they are or where they come from.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> They are probably saving that info for one of the upcoming books.
> *Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist who asked about Archie's skin colour' in Oprah interview that the Duchess found 'cathartic' and 'liberating', new biography chapter claims*
> 
> _*Meghan and Harry considered naming the royal they alleged made a racist remark before their son Archie's birth, it was claimed last night.*
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up 'sharing this detail' in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> However Meghan ultimately told Oprah that revealing the individual's identity would be 'very damaging to them'…
> 
> The sensational claims made in leaks of the epilogue last night included that:_
> 
> 
> _Members of the Royal Family were 'quietly pleased' that the Duchess of Sussex missed Prince Philip's funeral because they feared she would 'create a spectacle' if she attended;_
> _While Harry and his brother have spoken on multiple occasions, Harry and his father Charles were only on 'light speaking terms';_
> _The book alleges that palace courtiers had lied to the media over Meghan and Harry's wishes on the issue of Archie not being made a prince, claiming that the couple did in fact want this option;_
> _It criticises the monarchy after courtiers ordered an inquiry into claims of bullying against the duchess while the couple's allegations of racism did not receive the same treatment;_
> _The book claims Harry was left 'deeply saddened' after he was refused permission to have a wreath laid in his name on Remembrance Sunday last year because he was no longer a 'frontline royal';_
> _The authors also offer a new take on Harry's financial situation in the run-up to 'Megxit', saying the couple 'wouldn't have survived' without his inheritance from his mother Diana;_
> _The epilogue also claims Meghan had no idea that diamond earrings given to her as a wedding present were from Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi prince accused of ordering the murder of a journalist._
> 
> _Last night, Buckingham Palace declined to comment on the latest claims.
> 
> The new epilogue also suggests that Harry and Meghan feared courtiers were trying to damage them even though they have moved to the United States.
> 
> It says that more than a year after their decision to leave their royal roles, the couple felt that 'courtiers inside the institution' were still 'appearing to actively undermine Harry and Meghan by deliberately leaking information to discredit them'.
> 
> On the issue of the Duke of Edinburgh's funeral, it says that Meghan hoped to return with Harry but adds: 'In truth, several members of the Royal Family are understood to have been 'quietly pleased' that Meghan stayed in California because they 'didn't want a circus' or, commented a senior royal source, 'the duchess creating a spectacle'.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'considered naming royal racist,' book claims
> 
> 
> An updated edition of a biography of the couple says they weighed up revealing the family member who asked about Archie's skin tone in their bombshell TV interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hey! Maggot & Princess Hairy, why don't you-







Chanbal said:


> With titles… I read somewhere that at some point she requested a countess title for her mother. And Om*d's book on *Archie’s title debacle continues:*
> 
> _The book accuses courtiers of lying to the press over Meghan and Harry's wishes about whether their son Archie would become a prince.
> 
> Archie was not made a prince in line with royal protocol, something which Meghan and Harry expressed their displeasure about in their interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> The book reads: *"Palace aides were actually instructed to brief the press that the couple did not want a title for Archie.*_
> 
> *“In reality, the couple did want the option, given that it would provide their son with a level of security that only comes with a title.
> 
> "The differential treatment the couple felt had been bestowed upon their son was a major sting to Harry and Meghan.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom update: The 3 biggest bombshells in new part of book
> 
> 
> A NEW epilogue added to the unauthorised biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Finding Freedom, has revealed all manner of new claims made by the nearest and dearest to the couple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





Oh my god they must be exhausting to be around in real life. To repeat themselves over and over and ov.... must be painful to listen to because it sure is painful to see/hear them repeat themselves constantly with their daily whining to the media.

Your kids _weren't _entitled to prince/princess titles. Princess Hairy would have known that being born into the RF, but he is painfully jealous that he is the spare and not the heir and both of you have out of control egos that I'm guessing it left you feeling sour when the Queen didn't *spur of moment* surprise you with titles for your child when he was born because you are both so entitled that you expect everyone to bow down to you and offer you the absolute world and your own way, in _everything_. That's not how the real world works, but they wouldn't know that because they live in an imaginary world not the real world. Instead, they turned on the dramatics, had a tantrum and sought revenge.

Utterly pathetic behavior and seeing how their plans for leaving their royal duties for the Hollywood life was in the planning from day1, their sense of entitlement is off the scale to think they could leave the country, have kids titled prince/princess, come back to the UK when they feel like, do no Royal work and still get paid millions every year and expensive security is just hilariously delusional.






QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do. This woman is a pathological liar who would do anything for attention, and who padded her heartfelt, painful story not only with enough theatrical drama it could fuel Broadway for a season but also managed to plagiarize both a book and a movie in the process.
> Call me heartless.


Agreed!






Chanbal said:


> The word _*blackmail*_ is being used…



Exactly.






CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a page from Charles’s playbook, I have my shoelaces ironed, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles Has Two Men Help Him Get Dressed Every Morning and Iron His Shoelaces
> 
> 
> Find out some of the bizarre things Prince Charles reportedly has his staff do for him and why he is called the "pampered prince."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com









lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like they could get an invite to the met gala, it doesn’t seem as prestigious as it once was, and and I would be up for the hype that they would bring.












lanasyogamama said:


> Is Travelyst also dead like the podcast?





lanasyogamama said:


> And how is the chief feelings officer gig going?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'm a minority but almost 'passing' ("but where are you from _really_?"  ).
> 
> Let's face it, it's not _always_ prejudice, NEWSFLASH...NEWSFLASH...some people just don't like ME *shock* *horror*    .



I have a grandmother from an entirely different ethnicity  and I look exactly like her with all the typical features...but I'm also Caspar the Ghost with green eyes, so nobody can tell haha.

That said, I can absolutely believe Scobie has been met with arrogance like he described (then again, we're mostly women here, aren't we. I bet a lot of us have similar experiences, especially early on in our careers). But I really have a hard time believing staff bullied the DIL of the next king because she is a quarter black.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sgj99 said:


> If Harry has to be given some kind of appointment (Edward was Governor of the Bahamas) than make him the Governor of Antarctica.



I vote Chunga-Changa or whatever he talked about to Greta.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother,_
> 
> Persian? _Persian????_
> Iran hasn't been called Persia in almost a century. Is that a colonial reference?
> Or does it just paint a different picture than saying his mother is Iranian



It's actually Iran's predominant ethnic group (all Persians are Iranian, but not all Iranians are Persian). But also with exiled Iranians it has a certain political ring to it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> There is a HUGE community of Iranians/Persians here in LA, and not a single time have I heard them refer to themselves as Iranian, it's always Persian.  Personally, I don't care, but I do find it interesting.



Jup...ever heard of Tehrangeles?


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother,_
> 
> Persian? _Persian????_
> Iran hasn't been called Persia in almost a century. Is that a colonial reference?
> Or does it just paint a different picture than saying his mother is Iranian


He has nobility in his family.  Like he is Shah adjacent LOL!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup...ever heard of Tehrangeles?


There is a sign on the 405 Freeway that says Persian Square.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> None of us should be surprised here... I don't think Oprah is friends with anyone who can't add financial value to her portfolio. The whole MM/Harry/Oprah thing is just one big ruse - only in it for what they can get out of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rose McGowan Vs. Oprah Winfrey: All the Accusations Detailed
> 
> 
> Winfrey is yet to respond to the accusations made by McGowan about the talk show host's connections to Harvey Weinstein and Russell Simmons.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rose McGowan has taken aim at Oprah Winfrey in a cutting social media attack.
> 
> McGowan caused a big reaction online after making a number of accusations against the actress, host and producer, as she also included an image of Winfrey kissing Harvey Weinstein on the cheek.
> 
> *What Did Rose McGowan Say About Oprah Winfrey?*
> On Sunday August 29, McGowan made her opinions on Winfrey very clear by tweeting: "I am glad more are seeing the ugly truth of @Oprah. I wish she were real, but she isn't. From being pals with Weinstein to abandoning & destroying Russell Simmon's victims, she is about supporting a sick power structure for personal gain, she is as fake as they come. #lizard"
> 
> *What Did Rose McGowan Mean in Her Tweet About Oprah?*
> Winfrey has long been considered a national treasure for her popular daytime talk show, her books, her work in Hollywood and for her philanthropy, but McGowan claims Winfrey is "as fake as they come," admitting she wishes she "were real, but she isn't."
> 
> McGowan reminded her followers of being "pals" with disgraced Hollywood producer Weinstein by attaching a photo of her kissing him on the cheek.
> 
> Weinstein was known to have many established celebrity friends before his checkered history of sexual assault was exposed in 2017.
> 
> Winfrey has since spoken out against Weinstein and been a supporter of the Time's Up and MeToo movements, which were born in the wake of this scandal.
> 
> McGowan also makes strong accusations that Winfrey was involved in "abandoning & destroying Russell Simmon's victims." This is a reference to the multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape against Simmons, an entrepreneur and co-founder of Def Jam Recordings.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5181118


I'm sure Oprah is friends with a lot of people for what they can do for her - financially or otherwise.  And this isn't unusual for people in business as well as show business.
  But to say she isn't friends with anyone who can't help her financially is untrue.  Her BFF Gayle was Much lower in the show-biz pecking order than she was for many many years.  Gayle is famous now but she was known mainly as O's BFF for a long time.  And stedman may serve his purposes but I don't think he makes her richer.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure Oprah is friends with a lot of people for what they can do for her - financially or otherwise.  And this isn't unusual for people in business as well as show business.
> But to say she isn't friends with anyone who can't help her financially is untrue.  Her BFF Gayle was Much lower in the show-biz pecking order than she was for many many years.  Gayle is famous now but she was known mainly as O's BFF for a long time.  And stedman may serve his purposes but I don't think he makes her richer.


I fully understand OW wanting to make money.  Considering how long she knocked around before getting lucky and famous, it would be really sad if she was that hard.


----------



## Chanbal

DM is on fire today! 

*JAN MOIR: Princess Pinocchio has finally had her nose tweaked as at long last a joyful bucket of cold water is thrown on Harry and Meghan's fevered claims by Ofcom verdict exonerating Piers Morgan*
…
_Yet in moment of triumph for freedom of speech, for UK broadcasters and journalists everywhere – but most of all for the former Good Morning Britain host himself – Ofcom ruled that: ‘Mr Morgan was entitled to say he disbelieved the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ allegations and to hold and express strong views that rigorously challenged their account.’

*So he has been entirely vindicated, while the duchess has been accused of being part of a ‘chilling restriction on freedom of expression’.

Oh dear. That is not a good look for a self-styled international humanitarian and do-gooder; a woman who, according to the couple’s Archewell website, wants to ‘unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change’.*

All Meghan seems to have driven is her wheezing old jalopy of self-justification into the brick wall of baloney that has awaited her all this time. For sooner or later, this day of reckoning had to come.

Since the moment they left to forge a new life in America, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been assiduous keepers of their own flame of fame.

From day one they have depicted themselves as victims fleeing from the tyranny of inherited wealth; a couple of rich and privileged pups forever barking about the unfairness of life.

*My daddy won’t give me any money! My daddy talks to the press! It’s all so simply awful.*

From Oprah Winfrey to Instagram statements, from podcasts to Netflix series, from newspaper op-eds to Zoom calls, they have built up their story of suffering and burnished their images without halt.

Then of course there is the Finding Freedom biography, the remarkable unofficial histoire written by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie that largely seems to reflect their every thought and itch.

*Along the way neither of them appear to have minded about any collateral damage caused to the Queen, other members of the royal family, household staff or even poor Thomas Markle.

Then and now one can only gasp at the ultimate vanity of their quest – to have their truth believed at all times, and to never be questioned.*

They have tap-tap-tapped the golden syrup from the tree of fib and glib without pause.

Their vision, their view, their version of events has spooled out behind them in a wallow of words, each one carefully curated.

Somehow the Sussexes have been able to accuse and counter accuse, to complain, to control the momentum and the narrative, to indulge their victimhood. Until now.

The Ofcom ruling is perhaps their first wake-up call. The point will come when they will have to account for themselves and their accusations, which so far are unsupported by any evidence or detail.

Of course, Mr Scobie is already leading the pushback, citing a clause in the Human Rights Act that says free speech must always be compounded by the ‘protection of health and morals’. This, he says, ‘makes me question the Ofcom decision’.

Well he is entirely within his rights to do so, just as Piers Morgan is entirely within his rights to question the duke and duchess’s statements – many of which, incidentally, have been shown to be untrue.

*Until now, to criticise the Duchess of Sussex was to be accused of racism, sexism and worse.

One hopes that the Ofcom ruling will at least allow the occasional cheep of doubt to be raised, without the cheepers being cancelled and sent to woke jail by Meghan’s permanently furious supporters.*

This febrile atmosphere, into which these serious accusations of bigotry are thrown around like noxious confetti, is stoked by the Sussexes themselves.

All this scurrility propounded by annoyance and huff, spiced with a pinch of what looks increasingly like spite.

Surely it doesn’t have to be like this? Why do they seem so determined to crush not just the Royal Family, but anyone of note who disagrees with them along the way?

*We are all entitled to freedom of speech. It is not a gift granted only to those who hold views acceptable to Harry and Meghan.*

When I think about the Sussexes, sometimes it seems like a ghost story they have concocted themselves, one that is brooded over by malevolent wraiths, hurts real or imagined, insults perceived, slights dead and gone.

Many will welcome this cold bucket of water that has been poured over the graveyard of their fevered claims.

*Oh to have been a fly on the Montecito wall when the news came through. I like to imagine the crash of teacup on saucer and then that prolonged scream, echoing down to where the surf rolls onto the shoreline like a benediction.
*_
*And if Harry were still juggling at the window, like the circus clown he is at heart, then surely he would have dropped his balls in shock.*









						JAN MOIR: A bucket of cold water is thrown on Meghan's fevered claims
					

JAN MOIR: One can only imagine how the duchess reacted to the news her complaint against Piers Morgan has been thrown, but anything less than volcanic on the stroppy scale would be a surprise.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Mrs Shy @Maggie Muggins


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> There is a HUGE community of Iranians/Persians here in LA, and not a single time have I heard them refer to themselves as Iranian, it's always Persian.  Personally, I don't care, but I do find it interesting.



My Iranian friend refers to herself and family as Persian. 

Scobie Doo is clearly playing a race card. He's got  no better rebuttal than that. Looks sad and desperate.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Like his master… Let's blame on racism the feedback they get from being whatever they are.
> 
> *Omid Scobie today said he had been the victim of 'prejudice' from a 'very senior' Royal aide as he was quizzed about the Sussexes' claims of racism at the palace. *
> 
> _Mr Scobie, who has a Persian mother, was asked by This Morning presenters Rochelle  Humes and Alison Hammond whether he was surprised by the Sussexes' claims of racism.
> 
> He said: 'We knew they had contended with issues surrounding race within the institution.
> 
> 'I myself have experienced some prejudice from one or two royal aides in the past, so you can kind of know what Meghan was entering. And so it didn't surprise me, but I think for it to mention a family member, that was kind of the moment that even myself, my jaw was on the floor – just like Oprah, it was the same reaction.
> 
> Asked to clarify whether he had suffered racism, the Finding Freedom author added: 'I wouldn't say racist, but I just experienced prejudice. I'm mixed race, there aren't many mixed race royal correspondents out there.
> 
> 'I would not name that person. Someone very senior within the palace who found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do, and that was pretty much how they said it to me…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie claims he suffered 'prejudice' from 'very senior' royal
> 
> 
> The author of Finding Freedom and media ally of Meghan and Harry said an unnamed senior figure 'found it really peculiar that I spoke as well as I do' as someone who is mixed race.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I like seeing a pretty boy but Scoobie Doo is very plastic  




purseinsanity said:


> Puh-leeze.  *I am 100% NON Caucasian and am an immigrant to the US.  Not ONCE has anyone ever said to me in shock, "My you speak English so well!" * If anything, when I travel back to my mother country, people are shocked I still remember how to speak the language!



I'm a non-Caucasian immigrant in the US too but my experience has been completely the opposite  People are generally surprised by the fact that I can speak English and my fluency. Also, people think I literally learned English after I moved to the US. Like seriously?

Funny enough, the same people are also shocked that I speak 6 other languages.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> He has nobility in his family.  Like he is Shah adjacent LOL!


He is a VIP!


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> I like seeing a pretty boy but Scoobie Doo is very plastic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a non-Caucasian immigrant in the US too but my experience has been completely the opposite  People are generally surprised by the fact that I can speak English and my fluency. Also, people think I literally learned English after I moved to the US. Like seriously?
> 
> Funny enough, the same people are also shocked that I speak 6 other languages.


The real shocker to those people is that you speak English better than they do and they were born in the US.


----------



## Katel

Consumer2much said:


> It made me shiver when I heard this about Edward/Wallis  ‘adoring relationship more like a son to a mother’ …looks like the history repeats itself. but I bet Megain will never be showered with jewels like Wallis was. The opulence in which WE surrounded themselves is shocking, particularly when this’s mentioned ‘king came to VCA with pockets full of gems from all over the empire’ argh!…. Very nice documentary



Yes, thanks for this link and the other about their lives/property in France - so interesting.

And yes, I also saw so many parallels between WE and the gruesome twosome - hmmm, we shall see...Wallis’ end sounded dreadful.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Scobie Doo is clearly playing a race card. He's got  no better rebuttal than that. Looks sad and desperate.



He is desperate. All of the money and “fame” he has acquired in the last few years has come from being Meghan’s mouthpiece. He knows the ride is coming to an end and he wants to stop or at least slow it down. He’s not that good a writer and he’s never going to get anything like this again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *And if Harry were still juggling at the window, like the circus clown he is at heart, then surely he would have dropped his balls in shock.*



She really wrote that! I thought for a moment Chanbal had added it and somehow misplaced it within the quote, until I went to look at the article. OMG.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, that nice little insert of the end of the article listing some of my favourite lies from the interview, all refuted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also I just now read that blind item on the ring. Didn't they claim she was sooo surprised when he proposed?


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> The real shocker to those people is that you speak English better than they do and they were born in the US.



Spell and write better too  I have a supervisor who cannot do either to save her life. I'm her ghost writer so to speak. And I have a client who uses me as his spell checker. Both people are born and raised in the US with English as their first language.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> DM is on fire today!
> 
> *JAN MOIR: Princess Pinocchio has finally had her nose tweaked as at long last a joyful bucket of cold water is thrown on Harry and Meghan's fevered claims by Ofcom verdict exonerating Piers Morgan*
> …
> _Yet in moment of triumph for freedom of speech, for UK broadcasters and journalists everywhere – but most of all for the former Good Morning Britain host himself – Ofcom ruled that: ‘Mr Morgan was entitled to say he disbelieved the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ allegations and to hold and express strong views that rigorously challenged their account.’
> 
> *So he has been entirely vindicated, while the duchess has been accused of being part of a ‘chilling restriction on freedom of expression’.
> 
> Oh dear. That is not a good look for a self-styled international humanitarian and do-gooder; a woman who, according to the couple’s Archewell website, wants to ‘unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change’.*
> 
> All Meghan seems to have driven is her wheezing old jalopy of self-justification into the brick wall of baloney that has awaited her all this time. For sooner or later, this day of reckoning had to come.
> 
> Since the moment they left to forge a new life in America, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been assiduous keepers of their own flame of fame.
> 
> From day one they have depicted themselves as victims fleeing from the tyranny of inherited wealth; a couple of rich and privileged pups forever barking about the unfairness of life.
> 
> *My daddy won’t give me any money! My daddy talks to the press! It’s all so simply awful.*
> 
> From Oprah Winfrey to Instagram statements, from podcasts to Netflix series, from newspaper op-eds to Zoom calls, they have built up their story of suffering and burnished their images without halt.
> 
> Then of course there is the Finding Freedom biography, the remarkable unofficial histoire written by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie that largely seems to reflect their every thought and itch.
> 
> *Along the way neither of them appear to have minded about any collateral damage caused to the Queen, other members of the royal family, household staff or even poor Thomas Markle.
> 
> Then and now one can only gasp at the ultimate vanity of their quest – to have their truth believed at all times, and to never be questioned.*
> 
> They have tap-tap-tapped the golden syrup from the tree of fib and glib without pause.
> 
> Their vision, their view, their version of events has spooled out behind them in a wallow of words, each one carefully curated.
> 
> Somehow the Sussexes have been able to accuse and counter accuse, to complain, to control the momentum and the narrative, to indulge their victimhood. Until now.
> 
> The Ofcom ruling is perhaps their first wake-up call. The point will come when they will have to account for themselves and their accusations, which so far are unsupported by any evidence or detail.
> 
> Of course, Mr Scobie is already leading the pushback, citing a clause in the Human Rights Act that says free speech must always be compounded by the ‘protection of health and morals’. This, he says, ‘makes me question the Ofcom decision’.
> 
> Well he is entirely within his rights to do so, just as Piers Morgan is entirely within his rights to question the duke and duchess’s statements – many of which, incidentally, have been shown to be untrue.
> 
> *Until now, to criticise the Duchess of Sussex was to be accused of racism, sexism and worse.
> 
> One hopes that the Ofcom ruling will at least allow the occasional cheep of doubt to be raised, without the cheepers being cancelled and sent to woke jail by Meghan’s permanently furious supporters.*
> 
> This febrile atmosphere, into which these serious accusations of bigotry are thrown around like noxious confetti, is stoked by the Sussexes themselves.
> 
> All this scurrility propounded by annoyance and huff, spiced with a pinch of what looks increasingly like spite.
> 
> Surely it doesn’t have to be like this? Why do they seem so determined to crush not just the Royal Family, but anyone of note who disagrees with them along the way?
> 
> *We are all entitled to freedom of speech. It is not a gift granted only to those who hold views acceptable to Harry and Meghan.*
> 
> When I think about the Sussexes, sometimes it seems like a ghost story they have concocted themselves, one that is brooded over by malevolent wraiths, hurts real or imagined, insults perceived, slights dead and gone.
> 
> Many will welcome this cold bucket of water that has been poured over the graveyard of their fevered claims.
> 
> *Oh to have been a fly on the Montecito wall when the news came through. I like to imagine the crash of teacup on saucer and then that prolonged scream, echoing down to where the surf rolls onto the shoreline like a benediction.*_
> 
> *And if Harry were still juggling at the window, like the circus clown he is at heart, then surely he would have dropped his balls in shock.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: A bucket of cold water is thrown on Meghan's fevered claims
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: One can only imagine how the duchess reacted to the news her complaint against Piers Morgan has been thrown, but anything less than volcanic on the stroppy scale would be a surprise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Aren't these the tenets of wokedom?  "Do as I say, not as I do" and "You may speak as long as you agree; otherwise you shall be labeled a racist, a sexist, a masochist, a T***p lover, etc., and must be silenced"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Read through the royal fashion thread on here and found a slideshow of royal wedding dresses someone had posted a few weeks ago. Well...guess whose veil was embroidered with flowers too? The Queen's.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> My Iranian friend refers to herself and family as Persian.
> 
> Scobie Doo is clearly playing a race card. He's got  no better rebuttal than that. Looks sad and desperate.


If hasn't occurred to him that the race card and the pity card aren't working in this game.  With so much tragedy going on in the world, people don't want to hear petty whining, especially when it comes from people who  shouldn't be doing it.  Scobie grew up in a nice home, I am fairly certain and never wanted for anything.  For him to do this, his parents must be very embarrassed.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Aren't these the tenets of wokedom?  "Do as I say, not as I do" and "You may speak as long as you agree; otherwise you shall be labeled a racist, a sexist, a masochist, a T***p lover, etc., and must be silenced"?


All journalists must be drinking champagne over this.  Meghan going after Piers was just like her going after the DM.  If something is said or printed that doesn't fit into her narrative, she strikes out.  It's very child like behavior.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> The real shocker to those people is that you speak English better than they do and they were born in the US.



Not surprising considering the deplorable state that we have allowed our public education system to sink to


----------



## gracekelly

Mugs must have been furious to see the simple ring Hazza came up with.  It could not have come as a big surprise to him that she would change it as soon as she could.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Not surprising considering the deplorable state that we have allowed our public education system to sink to


They appear to be too busy re-writing history rather than teach the three R's.  Teach the fundamentals, and then you can complain about history.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> He is desperate. All of the money and “fame” he has acquired in the last few years has come from being Meghan’s mouthpiece. He knows the ride is coming to an end and he wants to stop or at least slow it down. He’s not that good a writer and he’s never going to get anything like this again.



He's going to need a new gig.  MM and Harry were his meal ticket but the rest of the BRF won't have anything to do with him, will never speak to him, and aides will simply smile and say "no comment" should he ever ask a question.  Kind of tough to be a royal reporter in the UK under those circumstances.


----------



## csshopper

Not sure if this is a new one or not: A posting from Australia in the Comments section on the Daily Mail: 

                                                    "Pinocchio, the Duchess of Deception".


----------



## xincinsin

The nicknames are so hilarious on some Youtube comments
Markle Debacle
Megamouth
"Invisiblet doesn’t exist, just like her brother Archieficial"


----------



## Chanbal

Why was the juggler presenting the awards? Is there a lack of presenters in London?
Was this the work of shine S?

*The Duke of Sussex, speaking at a surprise virtual appearance at the GQ Awards at the Tate Modern in London, *_delivered a lecturing speech urging governments to do more to vaccinate poorer countries
*Prince Harry blamed 'those who peddle lies and fear' in the news and on social media for vaccine hesitancy*
Harry *later presented the Heroes of the Year Award *to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert, Professor Catherine Green and the team behind the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine at Wednesday evening's GQ Awards in London._









						Prince Harry lectures audience at surprise GQ awards speech
					

The Duke of Sussex, 36, delivered a chiding speech to the GQ audience in London - which included Piers Morgan - as he urged governments to do more to vaccinate poorer nations.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

I suppose Hazard and Methane don't see themselves as lying. They are just peddling alternative facts.


----------



## xincinsin

dupe


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> My Iranian friend refers to herself and family as Persian.
> 
> *Scobie Doo is clearly playing a race card.* He's got  no better rebuttal than that. Looks sad and desperate.


People are responding to his comments using his own words…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> People are responding to his comments using his own words…



Ah, Scabies is one who believes only certain races can experience racism.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> People are responding to his comments using his own words…



In this pair of photos, both parties look the same colour to me.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also I just now read that blind item on the ring. Didn't they claim she was sooo surprised when he proposed?


Maybe he hid the ring in the roast chicken


----------



## carmen56

xincinsin said:


> I suppose Hazard and Methane don't see themselves as lying. They are just peddling alternative facts.



“Creative activations?”


----------



## papertiger

From the DM on recent Ofcom decision


----------



## LittleStar88

OMG you guys are on fire this morning


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> From the DM on recent Ofcom decision
> 
> View attachment 5181807



I mean, I like a good joke on Raptor's expense as well as anyone else. But I find it very telling how they've fallen from graces that stuff like this even makes it out to the mainstream press. And it's all their own doing.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I like a good joke on Raptor's expense as good as anyone else. But I find it very telling how they've fallen from graces that stuff like this even makes it out to the mainstream press. And it's all their own doing.



I even noticed the Pinocchio with full extended nose ref in the cartoon. A picture can be better than 100 words.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I suppose Hazard and Methane don't see themselves as lying. They are just peddling alternative facts.


In the good old days, when dinosaurs walked the earth, before the earth WOKE up, my mother would have said she needs to tone down her hissy fits if she wants to get along with people - kind of a compromise approach


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Why was the juggler presenting the awards? Is there a lack of presenters in London?
> Was this the work of shine S?
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex, speaking at a surprise virtual appearance at the GQ Awards at the Tate Modern in London, *_delivered a lecturing speech urging governments to do more to vaccinate poorer countries
> *Prince Harry blamed 'those who peddle lies and fear' in the news and on social media for vaccine hesitancy*
> Harry *later presented the Heroes of the Year Award *to Professor Dame Sarah Gilbert, Professor Catherine Green and the team behind the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine at Wednesday evening's GQ Awards in London._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lectures audience at surprise GQ awards speech
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, delivered a chiding speech to the GQ audience in London - which included Piers Morgan - as he urged governments to do more to vaccinate poorer nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


again, we all need him to tell us what is right


----------



## Icyjade

sdkitty said:


> again, we all need him to tell us what is right



Yeah, from someone who apparently had to cheat in his art exams to pass… he really doesn’t have much credibility. I mean, what can he do with his life if he wasn’t born into the family that he seems to loathe.


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Yeah, from someone who apparently had to cheat in his art exams to pass… he really doesn’t have much credibility. I mean, what can he do with his life if he wasn’t born into the family that he seems to loathe.




right
all the fame and adulation is only due to an accident of birth....yet somehow he and his Wife think they're better than the family he came from and from which all the fame and money came

I'd love nothing better than to see the RF cut off his money all-together.  They want freedom - let them have it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

VickyB said:


> OMG!!! Thanks so much for sharing this video!!!! my mom  has the auction catalogs and I will need to pull them out and ogle all the spectacular pieces!!!!


I agree, I enjoyed this so much. Thank you for posting!


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## gracekelly

This man is giving the scoop. It just reiterates all that was said about Harry for a long time


----------



## Chloe302225

Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
					

Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

.


sdkitty said:


> again, we all need him to tell us what is right


And he should preface all remarks with "Even though this is something I would never do, I think YOU should..." Pompous azz.

I have no argument with the message of getting vaccinations into as many people worldwide as possible, I just resent that he thinks he will make a difference with his tuxedoed preachy pronouncements from his privileged Montecito mansion. 

Get your semi royal bum on a commercial flight to Lesotho (4.7% vaccinated per data provided by Reuters), Botswana (11.5% vaccinated per data provided by Reuters) and Malawi (2.4% vaccinated per data provided by Reuters), supposedly among your most favorite places on earth. 

Cut off the Duchess of Deception's plastic surgery funds, put a million from your coffers into Sentebale, your once-upon-a-time-to-you-important-charity founded with Prince Seeiso, remember him, Haz? Use that connection to get clinics set up to administer COVID inoculations and lend your scruffy red puss to the pictures if it would help. There will  be claims of it being just another photo op because you have zero credibility with much of the world right now but at least it would be DOING something positive. Leave the wife home to tend the chickens.

Handled correctly it might even _demonstrate _some of the old Harry who showed up pre Maggot full of enthusiasm for helping others in these African nations. The focus then was HIV, but the need for COVID support is even more dire at the moment.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wow. That's so icky! But he was the one who signed the contract and sold his soul... Here's your freedom, Harry! Hope it is worth it!


----------



## Pivoine66

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I am honestly and sincerely shocked at how much hatred and vileness there must be in H. How can one reveal so much bad things about one's own family in public? And showing no respect whatsoever for the monarchy (and the Queen) in which he was allowed to grow up spoilt and could and still can enjoy so many privileges (what would he be without his title, how much money would he then have at his disposal, how would he then have to live and above all work)? I can understand that it is difficult for a child to realise that a parent loves someone else. But that is a private family matter. Besides, he doesn't seem to feel the least bit of "compassion" as he always preaches with his - to me, horrible - wife. Can't he think for a second that for his father, too, life with Lady Di, whatever she may have been, was difficult and unhappy and tragic? How much his brother and grandmother also suffered from the whole situation and now have to suffer all over again? He is also not allowing his brother to ever get over the bad events and memories and finally be able to put them behind him. Both Prince Charles and Prince William have the huge challenge and burden of being King of England for the foreseeable future, with all the immense daily responsibilities and endless personal restrictions and sacrifices for the rest of their lives !!!! And Kate and their perfectly innocent children! How can one be so merciless, ruthless and selfish!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


>




Ouch. But also, all these people have kept quiet for years. Until the Sussexes decided to waltz through life not as absolute soulmates, but as absolute a*sholes, so my sympathy is low.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yeah, because disgraced Burrell knows anything about Harry at all.


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, because disgraced Burrell knows anything about Harry at all.



Exactly. That article is a joke. Paul Burrell is speculating (just like we do), he knows nothing. When you cannot trust the source of the news you cannot trust the information.


----------



## papertiger

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That should please Charles. NOT.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Most Iranians (at least in the US) refer to themselves as Persians.  I think many do because they don't agree with Iran's politics?


I agree with that and to be honest, when they celebrate their holidays, they always refer to them as the Person holidays and Persian food (which I happen to LOVE)!!!   Don't forget too, that there are Christian Persians, Jewish Persians, and Muslim Persians.  Many of the Christian and Jewish Persians had to flee the country after the Shah was deposed .. I've heard many of their stories.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


>




"Harry is traitor" from a veteran's mouth 

There you go!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup...ever heard of Tehrangeles?


Oh yes, for sure!!!  The other interesting thing is that .. where you live in LA is kind of interesting.  There are tons of Persians here in the Valley, then you have BH and the "Hills", but there is also a huge community in Orange County.  I onetime asked a Persian colleague, and she told me "well, the Christian Persians live here, the Jewish Persians live there and the Muslim Persians live over there" .. it was kind of amazing to me, but when I thought about it, it was similar to other places where I've lived .. the immigrants want to be in neighborhoods with like folks so that they can speak their native language, have grocery shops that have their food and restaurants that serve their food .. all makes sense!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This seems like “pearl’s” idea of blackmail, possibly thinking she and her slut strands could scare daddy in law into paying her allowance for more cosmetic procedures.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> "Harry is traitor" from a veteran's mouth
> 
> There you go!


I get the feeling that there was a code of silence with the vets.  The Italians in the mafia  called it "omerta"  and you kept your mouth shut.  Now that it is obvious that Harry is going to use vets and mental health issues to make money off of them, the code of silence is no more.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> The real shocker to those people is that you speak English better than they do and they were born in the US.


AMEN to this!  It irks me that folks here tell me that I have an "accent" and that I use "big words"???  Seriously??? .. so did I pay too much attention in my English Grammar classes???  Yes, I admit that I use more European / British English terms because growing in up New England, well .. let's just say that a fair amount of verbiage that we use came from the Brits!   Also, as the daughter of an Italian-born mother (and Grandmother), well .. we spoke Italian in the house as well (which helped out tremendously when taking Latin and Spanish, but I got screamed at by my French instructor for rolling "R's" .. sheesh)!!!


----------



## gracekelly

Burrell inserts himself whenever he can.  He probably volunteered his services to Harry to give him more dirt.


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> AMEN to this!  It irks me that folks here tell me that I have an "accent" and that I use "big words"???  Seriously??? .. so did I pay too much attention in my English Grammar classes???  Yes, I admit that I use more European / British English terms because growing in up New England, well .. let's just say that a fair amount of verbiage that we use came from the Brits!   Also, as the daughter of an Italian-born mother (and Grandmother), well .. we spoke Italian in the house as well (which helped out tremendously when taking Latin and Spanish, but I got screamed at by my French instructor for rolling "R's" .. sheesh)!!!


You'd be fine learning Welsh, plenty of "R" rolling here.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> You'd be fine learning Welsh, plenty of "R" rolling here.


I can barely spell in English.  Would never be able to handle Welsh!


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Not surprising considering the deplorable state that we have allowed our public education system to sink to


Could NOT agree with you more on this and sadly, I can say that the "home Schooling" (due to COVID) .. well, let's just say that a fair amount of the kids in my neighborhood were sure as heck NOT participating in that ZOOM class .. and to me, that is REALLY sad!


----------



## CeeJay

Chloe302225 said:


> Prince Harry will target Camilla in memoir, Paul Burrell claims
> 
> 
> Speaking to Closer magazine, Princess Diana's former butler, 63, said the Duke of Sussex is 'set to reveal any Camilla secrets' after the Duchess of Cornwall 'stepped into Diana's shoes'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh boy .. if he, in fact, does this??? .. I don't think it will help that rift, if anything .. Charles may just say "ENOUGH" and truly cut them off!  I recently read (can't remember where) that Camilla is #1 in his book so if Hap-Hazza goes after her? .. I don't think (IMO) that Charles will take likely to that and who knows, he may just speak up. 

On another point, sheesh .. c'mon Harry .. GROW UP!!!!!  Yes, okay .. Charles did cheat on your Mother, but my god .. you are an adult now and should have a much better understanding of your parent's marriage!!  There were plenty of rumors about Diana's marital affairs too, but obviously, he's not going to write about that!


----------



## CeeJay

Sharont2305 said:


> You'd be fine learning Welsh, plenty of "R" rolling here.


Oh, good!!!  I now have a major phobia of speaking a non-English language due to that stupid French teacher (he was from Paris, so he would scream at you if you mispronounced a word - yeah, that was a good idea)!!!  The only non-English language that I don't have as much of a phobia is .. of course, Italian.  When I was working in Paris (AXA), thank god that my French colleagues would just laugh at me if I said something wrong .. but YOU KNOW, that HAVE TO correct you (it's a French thing I guess?!?!)


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay's #722,892 post just popped up. Agreed 100%. So Harry is going after Camilla? Really? Granted, it was messy and scandalous for a while. But for Harry at age 36 to go after Camilla, NOW, is quite a bit telling how thirsty Haz and Maggot are for a buck. If true, this will be fun. We might even see Charles grow a pair and defend Camilla or HE will be in the doghouse. Chuck will have to pick--pat Harry on the head for spewing who knows what, or defend Camilla. I think Camilla has a spine of steel and will not take this lightly. I hope she loans part of her spine to Charles so we get to see some major fireworks and Haz & Maggot get put in their place. I wonder what Haz thinks of Maggot's husband hopping--Looking For Mr. Better & Better.


----------



## bag-mania

NOBODY has said Harry is going after Camilla. Only Paul Burrell, so like I said, nobody.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Oh, good!!!  I now have a major phobia of speaking a non-English language due to that stupid French teacher (he was from Paris, so he would scream at you if you mispronounced a word - yeah, that was a good idea)!!!  The only non-English language that I don't have as much of a phobia is .. of course, Italian.  When I was working in Paris (AXA), thank god that my French colleagues would just laugh at me if I said something wrong .. but YOU KNOW, that HAVE TO correct you (it's a French thing I guess?!?!)



Please don't let the memory of that bad teacher influence you, though I'm sure it's hard. Some say that if they tried to be French, they'd get an urge to eat snails and lose a war.


----------



## oldbag

CeeJay said:


> AMEN to this!  It irks me that folks here tell me that I have an "accent" and that I use "big words"???  Seriously??? .. so did I pay too much attention in my English Grammar classes???  Yes, I admit that I use more European / British English terms because growing in up New England, well .. let's just say that a fair amount of verbiage that we use came from the Brits!   Also, as the daughter of an Italian-born mother (and Grandmother), well .. we spoke Italian in the house as well (which helped out tremendously when taking Latin and Spanish, but I got screamed at by my French instructor for rolling "R's" .. sheesh)!!!


One time a co worker accused me of using ten dollar words. I calmly replied I use the same words with everyone in my conversations. I am only a high school graduate but I have always been a heavy reader. If I don't know the defination of a word, I do sonething drastic, I look it up.


----------



## CeeJay

oldbag said:


> One time a co worker accused me of using ten dollar words. I calmly replied I use the same words with everyone in my conversations. I am only a high school graduate but I have always been a heavy reader. If I don't know the defination of a word, I do sonething drastic, I look it up.


Get this .. I had a BOSS (Financial Services) who told me that I needed to write memos and emails at the 8th-grade level!!!!  Then the a$$-wipe tries to give me a bad review, that I wasn't following "his rules" (e.g., insubordinate you jerk)!!!  When that happened, I went to the big-Boss and told him what was going on, and he went nuclear .. that this guy was more concerned about the fact that I was making him look stupid .. he was doing all to himself!  Thank god that the big-boss had me report directly into him, and the next year (Jan-15) .. the a$$hole Boss got the boot (FIRED not laid-off)!!!  I did a happy dance that day!


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Please don't let the memory of that bad teacher influence you, though I'm sure it's hard. Some say that if they tried to be French, they'd get an urge to eat snails and lose a war.


HA!!! .. to be honest, I like Escargot .. but to me, France is the CAPITAL of breads, butter and cheese .. and I LOVE those 3 items dearly!!!  I've never had a bad meal in France, nor in Italy .. but I admit, I am picky and I do my research on various places!


----------



## oldbag

CeeJay said:


> Get this .. I had a BOSS (Financial Services) who told me that I needed to write memos and emails at the 8th-grade level!!!!  Then the a$$-wipe tries to give me a bad review, that I wasn't following "his rules" (e.g., insubordinate you jerk)!!!  When that happened, I went to the big-Boss and told him what was going on, and he went nuclear .. that this guy was more concerned about the fact that I was making him look stupid .. he was doing all to himself!  Thank god that the big-boss had me report directly into him, and the next year (Jan-15) .. the a$$hole Boss got the boot (FIRED not laid-off)!!!  I did a happy dance that day!


Believe it or not, the best teacher I ever had was the great American writer Jack London. He had a character, Martin Eden.He wanted to improve himself and becone a writer. Martin kept a little noebook and wrote down all the words he did not understand in his reading and then looked them up in the dictionary. His vocabulary greatly improved. I picked up his habit in the 80s and still practice it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> HA!!! .. to be honest, I like Escargot .. but to me, France is the CAPITAL of breads, butter and cheese .. and I LOVE those 3 items dearly!!!  I've never had a bad meal in France, nor in Italy .. but I admit, I am picky and I do my research on various places!



Yes, I'll give them that. Kudos to the French for their cuisine, wine, and fashion. They're prominent in aeronautics and pharmaceuticals as well as other industries too. Their exasperation at foreigners' pronunciation of their language probably explains why Meghan has never claimed to speak fluent French. We all know she's an expert in mental health, cooking, fashion, family relationships, mentoring, volunteering, acting, and narrating  .


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Ah, Scabies is one who believes only certain races can experience racism.


Sad world we live in these days, so let's have a few laughs…


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> again, we all need him to tell us what is right


It's ridiculous that he is selling the image of a "global leader". His only credential is to have been born in the BRF. This is wrong in so many ways!


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Convenings* — yeah, baby!  So full of self importance paired with a double dose of holier-than-thou and a huge dash of stupid.  This guy looks uglier and uglier by the day.

_"The image created is of ‘my wife and I’ taking part in global discussions on a regular basis at the highest level: ‘vaccine experts, heads of industry, community advocates and global leaders’ is his role-call and he is careful to call these ‘convenings’ rather than just chats or conversations."

Ms James delved into an analysis of the word "convene", saying: "The choice of the word ‘convenings’ sounds important.

"The dictionary definition is to ‘come together for an official or public purpose, to assemble formally’ suggesting a rather royal or high-status profile and role for Harry here. 








						Prince Harry 'sees himself as global leader' - expert
					

PRINCE HARRY's use of language in his latest public appearance suggests he is pitching himself as a "global leader and expert", a language analyst has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				




A commenter -_
Janetespark
_They got confused, hired the wrong guy on a technicality. He's a *global PLEADER*.  Please give us money, lots of money ...._


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> It's ridiculous that he is selling the image of a "global leader". His only credential is to have been born in the BRF. This is wrong in so many ways!



It’s the ultimate white privilege!!!


----------



## Chanbal

It's such a small amount for them, they probably forgot about it…   


_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex began winding up MWX a year ago, declaring all of its debts would be paid in full within 12 months.

But more than 12 months later and the outstanding amount on the Companies House document remains…

The Sun Online has contacted representatives for the Sussexes to confirm when the overdue sum will be paid, but it is understood the delay could be down to the Charity Commission's now closed investigation.

A probe was launched into the transfer of funds to Travalyst, a private company in which Harry owns 75 per cent of the shares, but the review found it was in line with the governing document and allowed under charity law in May.

The duke and duchess welcomed the outcome, with their spokesperson criticising the "baselessness of the claims".

*The latest paperwork also revealed Meghan, 40, and Harry, 36, will spend £36,000 pulling the plug on the short-lived good cause after moving to the US with large fees due to lawyers and accountants*…_









						Meghan & Harry still owe £78,500 to charity as their foundation finally closes
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle still owe £78,500 to charity as their foundation finally closes – severing their final tie to the UK. The couple’s MWX Foundation, formerly Sussex Royal, …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gasp — she is 44440?????  40?  Wow, she looks - oh, nm.
====
Hate to ask, any word on the September ‘concert’ for the Diana statue?  Iirc, they wanted this to be the ‘big reveal’, bigger than the first big reveal. 
Haaaaaa!


----------



## Lodpah

So pathetic these two. It’s like their mission in life is to bash their families. They’re evil and honestly I don’t think they have much to do at home so they go round and round with their whining and they’re spinning around the same bowl of hatred, lack of compassion and utter miserableness. If these two we’re not together they would probably be happy. They feed off the trough of hatred and revenge. So bottom line they ain’t got anything but their traits above.


----------



## Chanbal

_*Oprah Winfrey*__* must decide whether Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will appear at The Emmys* – with only three tickets to share between the couple and her production crew.

Emmy bosses contacted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex last month after their bombshell CBS interview with Winfrey was shortlisted for Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series or Special.

But organizers for the Hollywood awards event are restricting nominees to just four tickets, leaving Oprah  – and many others – facing a hard decision on who to bring._








						Oprah must decide if Harry and Meghan will be her guests to the Emmys
					

Organizers for the Emmys are restricting nominees to just four tickets. That means Oprah Winfrey must decide whether to bring Prince Harry and Meghan Markle or her production crew.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Already posted by the highly esteemed @gracekelly


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, the opinion of a veteran in the UK…


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> I get the feeling that there was a code of silence with the vets.  The Italians in the mafia  called it "omerta"  and you kept your mouth shut.  Now that it is obvious that Harry is going to use vets and mental health issues to make money off of them, the code of silence is no more.


Right on! As a veteran myself I can almost guarantee that Hazza did not make any command decisions nor had any input in the execution of missions. He didn’t go to war college as those are quite long courses as far as I can tell plus officer school is quite lengthy. He was probably just “putting in time”. He’s like Captain Dike. He was an empty shell of an officer in a uniform. He probably didn’t get down and dirty.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aww... Happy birthday Doria! I'm sure your ungrateful daughter didn't post a sweet nod to you on AW website


----------



## Lodpah

@jelliedfeels congrats on your new baby!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

Oh Doria…she’s such a quiet pond, isn’t she?  In that picture of her I see a lot of her daughter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It's ridiculous that he is selling the image of a "global leader". His only credential is to have been born in the BRF. This is wrong in so many ways!




Sorry, that title will go to William very soon. Because, ya know, he did something with all the priviledge and money he was born into.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Annawakes

Wait.  Her sugars wished Doria a happy birthday?  Not even Raptor herself???


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww... Happy birthday Doria! I'm sure your ungrateful daughter didn't post a sweet nod to you on AW website



Read a People article on Doria's bday, obviously engineered by Sunshine Sachs 

Fair enough but honestly ... she is a private person  .. someone should respect that , not send her a birthday card via People

The actual article says nothing about Doria except she is a devoted grandmother, cool 

The focus of the article, as one might expect, is that D is the mother of someone famous 

I have no words for this


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry, that title will go to William very soon. Because, ya know, he did something with all the priviledge and money he was born into.


You may be onto something!  Henry the Woke @Maggie Muggins


----------



## Chanbal

A response to an ignorant that needs to be ignored! 


But Harry’s latest missive – complaining about inequality in the global distribution of vaccines – cannot be left to pass.








						You're wrong Harry - we are helping world fight Covid, says ROSS CLARK
					

WE have become so used to platitudes issuing from the mouths of Harry and Meghan - such as lecturing us on the need to change our lifestyles to combat climate change while themselves taking a private jet from a polo match - that it is usually best to ignore them.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

So much hypocrisy in a time like this…


----------



## Chanbal

This is sick… 








						Meghan Markle 'lies dying' after car crash at start of new TV film
					

Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV flick from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> right
> all the fame and adulation is only due to an accident of birth....yet somehow he and his Wife think they're better than the family he came from and from which all the fame and money came
> *
> I'd love nothing better than to see the RF cut off his money all-together.  They want freedom - let them have it*



100%!! Give them the “financial freedom” they sought!  The BRF can get it as well!


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> This is sick…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'lies dying' after car crash at start of new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV flick from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So dramatic. Jeez. 

The only photographers that follow them are the ones they call out to do so. And the press has not been more kind to them since moving to the US.

When will these two finally dwindle off into obscurity? I mean, they're the couple who gives us so much fodder to play with but they're jig is getting tired and they're plans are not working as they seem to have intended.

At some point the money will only be trickling in for cheezy video appearances and it won't be enough to keep their (13?, 16?) toilets flowing or pay the crazy property taxes.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Exactly. That article is a joke. Paul Burrell is speculating (just like we do), he knows nothing. When you cannot trust the source of the news you cannot trust the information.


 Thus we cannot trust a word in Hazbeen’s book!


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Oh yes, for sure!!!  The other interesting thing is that .. where you live in LA is kind of interesting.  There are tons of Persians here in the Valley, then you have BH and the "Hills", but there is also a huge community in Orange County.  I onetime asked a Persian colleague, and she told me "well, the Christian Persians live here, the Jewish Persians live there and the Muslim Persians live over there" .. it was kind of amazing to me, but when I thought about it, it was similar to other places where I've lived .. the immigrants want to be in neighborhoods with like folks so that they can speak their native language, have grocery shops that have their food and restaurants that serve their food .. all makes sense!


Wow I never thought of that!  Having lived in CA, I’m guessing the Muslim Persians are in the OC, the Jewish Persians in BH…where are the Christian Persians?  There are also Zoroastrian Persians!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It's such a small amount for them, they probably forgot about it…
> View attachment 5182152
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex began winding up MWX a year ago, declaring all of its debts would be paid in full within 12 months.
> 
> But more than 12 months later and the outstanding amount on the Companies House document remains…
> 
> The Sun Online has contacted representatives for the Sussexes to confirm when the overdue sum will be paid, but it is understood the delay could be down to the Charity Commission's now closed investigation.
> 
> A probe was launched into the transfer of funds to Travalyst, a private company in which Harry owns 75 per cent of the shares, but the review found it was in line with the governing document and allowed under charity law in May.
> 
> The duke and duchess welcomed the outcome, with their spokesperson criticising the "baselessness of the claims".
> 
> *The latest paperwork also revealed Meghan, 40, and Harry, 36, will spend £36,000 pulling the plug on the short-lived good cause after moving to the US with large fees due to lawyers and accountants*…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry still owe £78,500 to charity as their foundation finally closes
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle still owe £78,500 to charity as their foundation finally closes – severing their final tie to the UK. The couple’s MWX Foundation, formerly Sussex Royal, …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


They probably expect Charles to take care of it.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> 100%!! Give them the “financial freedom” they sought!  The BRF can get it as well!


as I've said before I would love nothing better than to see them living in a three-bedroom house in the suburbs like most Americans


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> The actual article says nothing about Doria except she is a devoted grandmother, cool
> I have no words for this


You’ve been “left speechless”?


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> You’ve been “left speechless”?


I was trying to intimate that the People article was really about her daughter, not the Bday girl, may have been way too subtle


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is sick…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'lies dying' after car crash at start of new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV flick from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I was JUST going to post this; I truly have no words on this .. it's DISGUSTING!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Wow I never thought of that!  Having lived in CA, I’m guessing the Muslim Persians are in the OC, the Jewish Persians in BH…where are the Christian Persians?  There are also Zoroastrian Persians!


The Christian Persians are in the Valley where I am ..


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I was JUST going to post this; I truly have no words on this .. it's DISGUSTING!


crap but not their doing, right?  Lifetime?


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I was trying to intimate that the People article was really about her daughter, not the Bday girl, may have been way too subtle


I knew what you were saying.  I was just quoting their idiotic statement on Afghanistan, Haiti, and everything else they know nothing about.


----------



## rose60610

A cut/paste from the US Sun: 

MEGHAN Markle lays dying in car crash wreckage in an outrageous new movie inspired by Princess Diana's death. 

In shocking and insensitive scenes, the actress playing the 40-year-old Duchess is seen lying in the wreckage of an overturned car, surrounded by photographers.
A desperate Harry pushes his way through the mob before pulling the door open, where a seriously injured Meghan pleads with him to “help me.”

But the crash is just a nightmare and Harry wakes up and is comforted to see wife Meghan and baby Archie.

The sickening scenes mirror the real-life tragedy of Harry's late mother, Princess Diana, who died in a car accident in Paris in August 1997.

The footage is part of the third Lifetime TV movie; Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, and sees British actor Jordan Dean and American actress Sydney Morton take over the roles of Harry and Meghan. 

The drama – which will be broadcast in the US on Monday - will explore the “real details” behind the decision that eventually drove the couple to leave their royal life behind.
The two previous films were Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance and Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal.

Ugh. Did Meghan and Harry know about this before it aired? or were they in favor of it? This is about as low as it gets.


----------



## Annawakes

How does anyone think something like that is entertainment.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> A cut/paste from the US Sun:
> 
> MEGHAN Markle lays dying in car crash wreckage in an outrageous new movie inspired by Princess Diana's death.
> 
> In shocking and insensitive scenes, the actress playing the 40-year-old Duchess is seen lying in the wreckage of an overturned car, surrounded by photographers.
> A desperate Harry pushes his way through the mob before pulling the door open, where a seriously injured Meghan pleads with him to “help me.”
> 
> But the crash is just a nightmare and Harry wakes up and is comforted to see wife Meghan and baby Archie.
> 
> The sickening scenes mirror the real-life tragedy of Harry's late mother, Princess Diana, who died in a car accident in Paris in August 1997.
> 
> The footage is part of the third Lifetime TV movie; Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, and sees British actor Jordan Dean and American actress Sydney Morton take over the roles of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> The drama – which will be broadcast in the US on Monday - will explore the “real details” behind the decision that eventually drove the couple to leave their royal life behind.
> The two previous films were Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance and Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal.
> 
> Ugh. Did Meghan and Harry know about this before it aired? or were they in favor of it? This is about as low as it gets.


I'm sure she loved it and saw it as proof that staying in the UK would end up being the death of her.  after all, we all know that they were escaping


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> A cut/paste from the US Sun:
> 
> MEGHAN Markle lays dying in car crash wreckage in an outrageous new movie inspired by Princess Diana's death.
> 
> In shocking and insensitive scenes, the actress playing the 40-year-old Duchess is seen lying in the wreckage of an overturned car, surrounded by photographers.
> A desperate Harry pushes his way through the mob before pulling the door open, where a seriously injured Meghan pleads with him to “help me.”
> 
> But the crash is just a nightmare and Harry wakes up and is comforted to see wife Meghan and baby Archie.
> 
> The sickening scenes mirror the real-life tragedy of Harry's late mother, Princess Diana, who died in a car accident in Paris in August 1997.
> 
> The footage is part of the third Lifetime TV movie; Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, and sees British actor Jordan Dean and American actress Sydney Morton take over the roles of Harry and Meghan.
> 
> The drama – which will be broadcast in the US on Monday - will explore the “real details” behind the decision that eventually drove the couple to leave their royal life behind.
> The two previous films were Harry & Meghan: A Royal Romance and Harry & Meghan: Becoming Royal.
> 
> Ugh. Did Meghan and Harry know about this before it aired? or were they in favor of it? This is about as low as it gets.


If she (Meghan) is in the film, then .. uh, yeah .. they had to know about it.  I won't ever watch these 2 anyhow, but to me .. this is really *SICKENING*, *DISGUSTING*, *PATHETIC*!


----------



## xincinsin

Even if Methane had no part in any of the three tasteless Lifetime movies, she never sued them or spoke out about inaccuracies. She likely sees them as proof of her own box office power. 

The car crash scene? Oh, the scriptwriter must be a soulmate who empathized with her fear of those dreadful merciless paps who don't understand that they should be her obedient lapdogs.


----------



## csshopper

The "Lifeline" movie IS DISGUSTING, but I think they leave themselves open to this kind of crap. Harry supports programs like it "The Crown" because it is "fictional". Never mind that many people don't understand the difference and think they are viewing a documentary.  Netflix refuses to post a disclaimer, which they could easily do if they chose to. Any harm done to the real people involved  due to the half truths and innuendos in the scripts is just collateral damage to the producers and of no concern to Haz. He excuses them by claiming "They don't pretend to be news."

When Harry did his privacy seeking double decker bus trip through Hollywood with James Corden he was asked about his feelings towards the program:

From Town and Country Magazine: 
As it turns out, The Crown doesn't bother Prince Harry, because it doesn't claim to be a documentary. "They don't pretend to be news. It's fictional," he said. "But it's loosely based on the truth. Of course it's not strictly accurate... it gives you a rough idea about what that lifestyle, what the pressure of putting duty and service above family and everything else, what can come from that."
Harry is so at peace with The Crown, in fact, that he has an idea of who could play him: fellow redhead Damian Lewis. Corden then suggested that he could play Prince William, saying, "that's casting."

Fast forward: there is a gross movie from a less than stellar source attempting to make money from, among other things, Meghan's proven obsession with her mother-in-law by having her character die in a car crash. It will not have the production values of Netflix, there will be no "stars" of the caliber of those filling roles on "The Crown" but it might just generate the same level of viewership spurred by morbid curiosity. 

But if the Suckesses cry "foul"  because it really is icky, loose lipped Haz may regret his comments, Lifeline is "fictional" after all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> In *shocking and* insensitive scenes, the actress playing the 40-year-old Duchess is seen lying in the wreckage of an overturned car, surrounded by photographers.



It is insensitive to us viewers,  not at all shocking. 
As @csshopper said, Hazzie’s constant crying about ‘mommy’ as well as loudly shouting his belief that MM will meet the same death - all of that causes Hwood to dramatize it. They bring the negative on themselves.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Congratulations!   How are you and baby doing?


Thank you - we’re doing wonderfully. She’s feeding & sleeping beautifully & she’s absolutely stunning .


A1aGypsy said:


> So they spent their anniversary with vendors from their wedding? Honestly, he needs to stop talking.


This has something of the mafia to it doesn’t it? You think you are simply making up a catering pack of sausage rolls  or lighting some candles in a church but little do you know you are in it forever - you never know when the don will tap your shoulder & ask a favour   



Chanbal said:


> This is sick…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'lies dying' after car crash at start of new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV flick from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It is sick but I’m kind of surprised they decided to do something as dynamic as a car crash.
 I thought it’d be a weepy snooze fest but this sounds like they are going hard on high camp.

Personally I’m hoping the entire movie is the fictional M dodging anvils and spitting out poisoned tea like a looney toon.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Now we have got a quiet moment on the thread wink.
> 
> I hope it’s not OT to announce that I am lucky enough to have had a beautiful baby girl!
> 
> I may need to take some parental leave


Congrats to you and your family!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> The "Lifeline" movie IS DISGUSTING, but I think they leave themselves open to this kind of crap. *Harry supports programs like it "The Crown" because it is "fictional".* Never mind that many people don't understand the difference and think they are viewing a documentary.  Netflix refuses to post a disclaimer, which they could easily do if they chose to. *Any harm done to the real people involved  due to the half truths and innuendos in the scripts is just collateral damage to the producers and of no concern to Haz. He excuses them by claiming "They don't pretend to be news."*
> 
> When Harry did his privacy seeking double decker bus trip through Hollywood with James Corden he was asked about his feelings towards the program:
> 
> From Town and Country Magazine:
> As it turns out, The Crown doesn't bother Prince Harry, because it doesn't claim to be a documentary. "They don't pretend to be news. It's fictional," he said. "But it's loosely based on the truth. Of course it's not strictly accurate... it gives you a rough idea about what that lifestyle, what the pressure of putting duty and service above family and everything else, what can come from that."
> Harry is so at peace with The Crown, in fact, that he has an idea of who could play him: fellow redhead Damian Lewis. Corden then suggested that he could play Prince William, saying, "that's casting."
> 
> Fast forward: there is a gross movie from a less than stellar source attempting to make money from, among other things, Meghan's proven obsession with her mother-in-law by having her character die in a car crash. It will not have the production values of Netflix, there will be no "stars" of the caliber of those filling roles on "The Crown" but it might just generate the same level of viewership spurred by morbid curiosity.
> 
> But if the Suckesses cry "foul"  because it really is icky, loose lipped Haz may regret his comments, Lifeline is "fictional" after all.



And Harry is the same guy who thought the First Amendment was "Bonkers". But this? No problem?


----------



## poopsie

oldbag said:


> Believe it or not, the best teacher I ever had was the great American writer Jack London. He had a character, Martin Eden.He wanted to improve himself and becone a writer. Martin kept a little noebook and wrote down all the words he did not understand in his reading and then looked them up in the dictionary. His vocabulary greatly improved. I picked up his habit in the 80s and still practice it.



I attended a public school in Ohio in the 60's. We were taught French and Latin beginning in the 3rd grade. 
We were also required to have a thesaurus and to read and USE it.


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> I attended a public school in Ohio in the 60's. We were taught French and Latin beginning in the 3rd grade.
> We were also required to have a thesaurus and to read and USE it.



We've gone from teaching Latin and Greek in high school to teaching remedial English in college.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Get this .. I had a BOSS (Financial Services) who told me that I needed to write memos and emails at the 8th-grade level!!!!  Then the a$$-wipe tries to give me a bad review, that I wasn't following "his rules" (e.g., insubordinate you jerk)!!!  When that happened, I went to the big-Boss and told him what was going on, and he went nuclear .. that this guy was more concerned about the fact that I was making him look stupid .. he was doing all to himself!  Thank god that the big-boss had me report directly into him, and the next year (Jan-15) .. the a$$hole Boss got the boot (FIRED not laid-off)!!!  I did a happy dance that day!



Starting in the 3rd grade we were required to research a topic of interest, outline it on 3x5 cards and get up in front of the class and present it.  The class got to grade it not the teacher. 
I will be eternally grateful for the Cleveland public school system of the 1960's. It was an entirely different kettle of fish when we moved to California for my 5th grade year, as I was bored out of my gourd at the dumbed down curriculum.


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> Thank you - we’re doing wonderfully. She’s feeding & sleeping beautifully & she’s absolutely stunning .
> 
> This has something of the mafia to it doesn’t it? You think you are simply making up a catering pack of sausage rolls  or lighting some candles in a church but little do you know you are in it forever - you never know when the don will tap your shoulder & ask a favour
> 
> 
> It is sick but I’m kind of surprised they decided to do something as dynamic as a car crash.
> I thought it’d be a weepy snooze fest but this sounds like they are going hard on high camp.
> 
> Personally I’m hoping the entire movie is the fictional M dodging anvils and spitting out poisoned tea like a looney toon.


*CONGRATULATIONS!!!  *


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> We've gone from teaching Latin and Greek in high school to teaching remedial English in college.



The SAT cheating scandal explains it all to me.  No way my parents have ever been involved in something like that. No way I would have done it for my kids. Nope, they gotta make it on their own. Tough attitude in today’s world.  

The ‘dumbing down’ began long ago and still has not bottomed out.  Long live Latin and Greek!


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Starting in the 3rd grade we were required to research a topic of interest, outline it on 3x5 cards and get up in front of the class and present it.  The class got to grade it not the teacher.
> I will be eternally grateful for the Cleveland public school system of the 1960's. It was an entirely different kettle of fish when we moved to California for my 5th grade year, as I was bored out of my gourd at the dumbed down curriculum.


I hear 'ya .. it's funny because I grew up in a relatively small town in Connecticut (right in the middle of the state).  We always thought of it as a "podunk" .. in other words, the place closed up at 5pm (even earlier in the winter months).  So that meant that you really had to go out of your way to find anything to do at night, but heaven forbid .. you got caught?!?!?!  So, we thought our educational system was 'feh'; my cousins went to school in the neighboring town which was quite large in comparison to ours.  Well, much to our surprise (my sister and I say this constantly), that in fact, we got a VERY good education in our school systems!!!  In addition to having to take language classes, in order to pass .. you had to read & write something in a foreign language and get up in front of the class to recite it (having to do that in my French class had me stressed out big-time).  We also had great English teachers and Science teachers and when my sister and I would be at our cousin's house (holidays), we would always say "man - they don't know half as much as us"!!!  I have to say that I'm not impressed with the system out here, they seem to be way behind what we were studying in certain grades.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> The SAT cheating scandal explains it all to me.  No way my parents have ever been involved in something like that. No way I would have done it for my kids. Nope, they gotta make it on their own. Tough attitude in today’s world.
> 
> The ‘dumbing down’ began long ago and still has not bottomed out.  Long live Latin and Greek!


And "dumbing down" is not just with reading, but writing also. I have a California educated grandson with a MBA who I discovered, by accident, can't read cursive writing! It has to be printed, preferably block letters. The letter I enclosed with a Birthday card had to be "translated" for him. Doesn't spell well either, for which I blame advertising and the Internet. Like @poopsie, was educated in Cleveland Public Schools. For me it was K-12 graduating in '62. It was rigorous, as sophomores we did college level research papers in Biology and were graded on the writing as well as the data. 

Back OT, I sometimes wonder how Archie and Lilibet will be educated when the time comes. Public school, private Catholic school like Methane, home schooled, boarding school abroad (not likely)?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> And "dumbing down" is not just with reading, but writing also. I have a California educated grandson with a MBA who I discovered, by accident, can't read cursive writing! It has to be printed, preferably block letters. The letter I enclosed with a Birthday card had to be "translated" for him. Doesn't spell well either, for which I blame advertising and the Internet. Like @poopsie, was educated in Cleveland Public Schools. For me it was K-12 graduating in '62. It was rigorous, as sophomores we did college level research papers in Biology and were graded on the writing as well as the data.
> 
> Back OT, I sometimes wonder how Archie and Lilibet will be educated when the time comes. Public school, private Catholic school like Methane, home schooled, boarding school abroad (not likely)?



H&M most certainly will send those kids to a small private school. There may be some British schools already in Montecito. First teacher who refuses to ‘promote’ one of the kids will get fired - just like Hazzie did to his teachers.

Article from 2005:








						Prince Harry's sacked teacher wins case
					

Prince Harry's former art teacher at Eton College today won her case for unfair dismissal, but a tribunal rejected her claims that she and other staff had helped the prince to cheat in his A-level art course.




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Starting in the 3rd grade we were required to research a topic of interest, outline it on 3x5 cards and get up in front of the class and present it.  The class got to grade it not the teacher.
> I will be eternally grateful for the Cleveland public school system of the 1960's. It was an entirely different kettle of fish when we moved to California for my 5th grade year, as I was bored out of my gourd at the dumbed down curriculum.


I went to public schools in Ohio and Pennsylvania while my husband went to the best east coast private and boarding schools.  Our educations were damn close; his teachers were former Ivy League professors for the most part, while most of mine were teachers who were passionate about their craft.  My children grew up in CA, and it is horrific how low education has sunk in the US in general, but especially in CA.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> And "dumbing down" is not just with reading, but writing also. I have a California educated grandson with a MBA who I discovered, by accident, can't read cursive writing! It has to be printed, preferably block letters. The letter I enclosed with a Birthday card had to be "translated" for him. Doesn't spell well either, for which I blame advertising and the Internet. Like @poopsie, was educated in Cleveland Public Schools. For me it was K-12 graduating in '62. It was rigorous, as sophomores we did college level research papers in Biology and were graded on the writing as well as the data.
> 
> Back OT, I sometimes wonder how Archie and Lilibet will be educated when the time comes. Public school, private Catholic school like Methane, home schooled, boarding school abroad (not likely)?


They don’t even teach cursive in schools any more!  And I had to send my children back to their grandparents in CT to attend summer school to learn how to write research papers!  My children are excellent at spelling and math only because I, like my immigrant mother, forced them to do “mom’s homework” every weekend in addition to their normal homework.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Back OT, I sometimes wonder how Archie and Lilibet will be educated when the time comes. Public school, private Catholic school like Methane, home schooled, boarding school abroad (not likely)?



They will go to private school, the most expensive and prestigious ones where H&M can get the kids accepted. Nothing less will do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> They will go to private school, the most expensive and prestigious ones where H&M can get the kids accepted. Nothing less will do.



Indeed!  Most of those moms will spend a fortune to get in the good graces of H&M, hoping their kid is chosen for that royal-non-royal wedding. Imagine how much kissing-up H&M will require. Then, in the end, H&M will markle all of them.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Love the nickname Maggot.
> Not a reincarnation since she was alive when Diana was. *She’s more of a reproduction, like a counterfeit bag. A cheap, poorly-made copy of the original.* She only fools the uninformed and those who lack discerning taste.


She's a Canal Street Diana.



purseinsanity said:


> Most Iranians (at least in the US) refer to themselves as Persians.  I think many do because they don't agree with Iran's politics?


Or fear being lumped in with those who do.



gracekelly said:


> Mugs must have been furious to see the simple ring Hazza came up with.  It could not have come as a big surprise to him that she would change it as soon as she could.


I was really shocked about the engagement ring.  What nerve she has to expect royal jewels and throw a fit over not getting them.  He should have tossed her out at that point because his future with her was crystal clear.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I was really shocked about the engagement ring.  What nerve she has to expect royal jewels and throw a fit over not getting them.  *He should have tossed her out at that point because his future with her was crystal clear.*



All I can think is 1) he is dumb as a box of rocks, 2) she has him under her spell (see #1), or 3) he has such deep bitterness and anger towards his family that he wants to destroy them if he can.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> They will go to private school, the most expensive and prestigious ones where H&M can get the kids accepted. Nothing less will do.


I'm sure she's already researching Harvard-Westlake, the school of choice for wealthy LA families. But they'd have to move back to LA.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, yes, yes!




A commenter:
PrincessBee
Replying to 
@hrrysgreysuit
*The movie could be called “Megnocchio”.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has this been posted?

From March, 2021 - https://www.esquire.com/style/mens-...harry-oprah-interview-gray-jcrew-ludlow-suit/
_For his and Meghan Markle's much-anticipated tell-all interview with Oprah, Harry yet again busted out the J.Crew Ludlow suit in a pale *"geyser gray,"* the same suit that J.Crew is selling online with a full size run currently available._


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?
> 
> From March, 2021 - https://www.esquire.com/style/mens-...harry-oprah-interview-gray-jcrew-ludlow-suit/
> _For his and Meghan Markle's much-anticipated tell-all interview with Oprah, Harry yet again busted out the J.Crew Ludlow suit in a pale *"geyser gray,"* the same suit that J.Crew is selling online with a full size run currently available._


She was merching The Gap at the Serena tennis tournament so he is merching J Crew.


----------



## Genie27

gracekelly said:


> She was merching The Gap at the Serena tennis tournament so he is merching J Crew.


What a comedown. From Savile Row bespoke to indochino to off the j crew rack.


----------



## Genie27

Jellied, @jelliedfeels congratulations on your new bébé !!!!


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sure we are all anxious to watch this movie.  Is the couple of Montecito making money with this masterpiece?


----------



## Chanbal

Even Camilla increased her popularity after OW's interview…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Even Camilla increased her popularity after OW's interview…



Despite their self-delusion as freedom seekers, for many, they are mere traitors and pretenders to the throne. I am certain that Methane was aggrieved to find out becoming the next King and Queen was not a popularity contest.


----------



## xincinsin

Genie27 said:


> What a comedown. From Savile Row bespoke to indochino to off the j crew rack.


All the money is going to hire impressive-looking security, discreet plastic surgeons and 24/7 PR, as well as his wifey's cultivation of a Rolodex of besties. Trevor was fortunate that Suits took his bloodsucker across the border before he was sucked dry like her father.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> All the money is going to hire impressive-looking security, discreet plastic surgeons and 24/7 PR, as well as his wifey's cultivation of a Rolodex of besties. Trevor was fortunate that Suits took his bloodsucker across the border before he was sucked dry like her father.



She didn’t have control over Trevor and I think that frustrated her. He probably took care of her but I doubt he ever said “whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets.”


----------



## xincinsin

Don't know that much about Dolly Parton, but when I contrast her modest response to praise for donating money to Covid research vs the hectoring tone of the Montecito Megamouths, she has my respect.









						Dolly Parton thinks she gets too much credit for helping fund Covid-19 vaccine
					

The singer donated $1 million as part of a research programme into the vaccine last year.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Pages of scathing comments in the Daily Mail about the author and the contents.  And a new name (?) for Meghan: *Maggot*.
> 
> As to Haz wanting a movie made from his book, well, his wife is probably looking for work and by then may need the $$$. She does see herself as the reincarnation of Diana. D-e-l-u-s-I-o-n-a-l Duo those two!


Thanks @csshopper for the nickname 'maggot' and with a grand total of 12 nicknames, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> (Intercom speaker): Purse Forum calling for @Maggie Muggins, ribbon award in order for suitable nickname, "Maggot", courtesy of @csshopper, please report to Prince Harry and Maggot  Meghan Markle Thread.


Thanks @rose60610  I replied to @csshopper a few posts ago while trying to catch up on this fast moving thread after taking a couple of days away from the toxic duo.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @csshopper for the nickname 'maggot' and with a grand total of 12 nicknames, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.
> View attachment 5183443


Looking at those teeth reminds me I need to schedule a dental appointment.

So many of the nicknames, like this one, are forwarded from more and more sources which indicates the disgust and loathing for these grifters is becoming more widespread. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving of the disrespect duo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lounorada said:


> Even better- I just scrolled past this too quickly and read it as *Princess HAIRY*.
> I think it suits him.


Thanks @Lounorada for the nickname Princess Hairy. Nickname added to The List.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones experiencing insomnia, the 1st 1/3 of this video about the couple of Montecito is entertaining.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *Mrs Shy* @Maggie Muggins
> View attachment 5181527


Thanks @Chanbal for the nickname Mrs Shy.  If only M would shy away from opening her ever-gaping pie hole. Please join the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Not sure if this is a new one or not: A posting from Australia in the Comments section on the Daily Mail:
> 
> *"Pinocchio, the Duchess of Deception"*.


Thanks @csshopper for the new nickname.  You now have a 13 to your name. Welcome to the Early Bird Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> The nicknames are so hilarious on some Youtube comments
> *Markle Debacle
> Megamouth*
> "Invisiblet doesn’t exist, just like her brother Archieficial"


 Thanks @xincinsin for the nicknames Markle Debacle and Megamouth.
Congratulations in joining the Energizer Bunny Club! 


Question for everyone: just wondering, if we want to add kiddie nicknames to the list since these little babes didn't get to choose their wicked parents?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Thank you @Maggie Muggins for these cute awards and your time keeping track of all the names!  I wanted to send you hugs.  

And, Happy Labor Day Weekend to those that celebrate it this weekend in the states.  Have a great weekend everyone!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ve seen these 2 in some tweets - Invisibet and Archnotwell


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> For the ones experiencing insomnia, the 1st 1/3 of this video about the couple of Montecito is entertaining.



Thank you!  I really enjoyed this.  It was nice to see that those of us on this thread who are not Sussex fans, have been had our long held opinions validated by these professional journalists.  It isn't our imagination working overtime folks!  The woman in red even had MM screaming "Haarrry get down here!"  lololol!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> .
> 
> And he should preface all remarks with "Even though this is something I would never do, I think YOU should..." *Pompous azz*.
> 
> I have no argument with the message of getting vaccinations into as many people worldwide as possible, I just resent that he thinks he will make a difference with his tuxedoed preachy pronouncements from his privileged Montecito mansion.
> 
> Get your semi royal bum on a commercial flight to Lesotho (4.7% vaccinated per data provided by Reuters), Botswana (11.5% vaccinated per data provided by Reuters) and Malawi (2.4% vaccinated per data provided by Reuters), supposedly among your most favorite places on earth.
> 
> Cut off the Duchess of Deception's plastic surgery funds, put a million from your coffers into Sentebale, your once-upon-a-time-to-you-important-charity founded with Prince Seeiso, remember him, Haz? Use that connection to get clinics set up to administer COVID inoculations and lend your scruffy red puss to the pictures if it would help. There will  be claims of it being just another photo op because you have zero credibility with much of the world right now but at least it would be DOING something positive. Leave the wife home to tend the chickens.
> 
> Handled correctly it might even _demonstrate _some of the old Harry who showed up pre Maggot full of enthusiasm for helping others in these African nations. The focus then was HIV, but the need for COVID support is even more dire at the moment.


 Thanks @csshopper for *Pompous Azz*, that indeed describes the guy, who is too big for his britches. Please join the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Lounorada said:


> Even better- I just scrolled past this too quickly and read it as Princess HAIRY.
> I think it suits him.


Think again?


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Mugs must have been furious to see the simple ring Hazza came up with.  It could not have come as a big surprise to him that she would change it as soon as she could.


I'm sure she was. 

She mostly likely assumed that her e-ring was going to be some impressive large stone on the scale of the sapphire ring and then he pulled out this one--if she kept the shock and "are you effing kidding me?" look off her face she is indeed a decent actress (for a moment). The story behind the ring's stones, especially the 2 from Diana's stash, was probably trotted out to save face. 

I've thought from the beginning that Kate having the sapphire and then seeing it over and over made M nuts. All imo, of course. And Kate wears it well.


----------



## charlottawill

No surprise here









						Harry and Meghan sink to all-time low in UK ‘favorability’ rating
					

The research, from polling agency YouGov, surveyed 1,667 UK adults ranging in age from teens to seniors, between August 27 and August 29 of this year.




					pagesix.com


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> I'm sure she was.
> 
> She mostly likely assumed that her e-ring was going to be some impressive large stone on the scale of the sapphire ring and then he pulled out this one--if she kept the shock and "are you effing kidding me?" look off her face she is indeed a decent actress (for a moment). The story behind the ring's stones, especially the 2 from Diana's stash, was probably trotted out to save face.
> 
> I've thought from the beginning that Kate having the sapphire and then seeing it over and over made M nuts. All imo, of course. And Kate wears it well.



Wouldn't be funny if MM's ring was the type of ring that Kate would have preferred?  I have no doubt that whatever MM wanted, it had to be big and showy and scream status to her way of thinking.  

I am still in the camp that believes that Burrell was talking out of his a*s*s* when it came to who wanted what.  I still firmly hold to my memory, at the time of her death,  that William said at the get go, that he wanted his mother's ring.  I really doubt that he would have traded it for a Cartier watch that you can  still buy at the store.  William wanted that ring as a way of bringing a part of his mother to the throne as Queen.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Wouldn't be funny if MM's ring was the type of ring that Kate would have preferred?  I have no doubt that whatever MM wanted, it had to be big and showy and scream status to her way of thinking.
> 
> I am still in the camp that believes that Burrell was talking out of his a*s*s* when it came to who wanted what.  I still firmly hold to my memory, at the time of her death,  that William said at the get go, that he wanted his mother's ring.  I really doubt that he would have traded it for a Cartier watch that you can  still buy at the store.  William wanted that ring as a way of bringing a part of his mother to the throne as Queen.


I would have assumed that as firstborn and the heir Diana's ring would automatically go to William, or at least entitle him to right of first refusal. Did she have a will that specified how she wanted her personal jewelry distributed?


----------



## kemilia

oldbag said:


> One time a co worker accused me of using ten dollar words. I calmly replied I use the same words with everyone in my conversations. I am only a high school graduate but I have always been a heavy reader. If I don't know the defination of a word, I do sonething drastic, I look it up.


I once had a co-worker that used a thesaurus all the time. His cubicle was directly across from mine so when I saw him typing away and using his thesaurus I would think "uh oh, an email is on the way." This guy never used a 50 cent word if he could find a 10 dollar one instead. He was a nice guy too, I guess he just felt the need to impress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> I'm sure she was.
> 
> She mostly likely assumed that her e-ring was going to be some impressive large stone on the scale of the sapphire ring and then he pulled out this one--if she kept the shock and "are you effing kidding me?" look off her face she is indeed a decent actress (for a moment). The story behind the ring's stones, especially the 2 from Diana's stash, was probably trotted out to save face.
> 
> I've thought from the beginning that Kate having the sapphire and then seeing it over and over made M nuts. All imo, of course. And Kate wears it well.


At a total of five carats, from what I've read and seen in pictures, MM's ring is in line with those of other women in the royal family. Kate's is the outlier, but I agree she wears it well. I read that Diana was presented with a tray of rings from one of the royal jewelers and she selected the ring herself.


----------



## Katel

Lounorada said:


> Even better- I just scrolled past this too quickly and read it as Princess HAIRY.
> I think it suits him.



I’ve begun to think of him/them as Princess Hairball


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> At a total of five carats, from what I've read and seen in pictures, MM's ring is in line with those of other women in the royal family. Kate's is the outlier, but I agree she wears it well. I read that Diana was presented with a tray of rings from one of the royal jewelers and she selected the ring herself.


5 carats? It seems much smaller to me but maybe I'm used to seeing the huge celeb rings.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks y'all for participating in creating and compiling nicknames, a quest that is not after all that easy to accomplish and it's time that y'all are recognized for collecting even 7 nicknames.

So today for the big *7*, a gold medal is awarded to @CarryOn2020 for the nickname* “Megnocchio”*_. Thanks and congratulations. 

_

Congratulations to @xincinsin and @gracekelly who have previously collected 7 nicknames as well.  





@purseinsanity you are my hero because you refused to take credit for some of the 12 nicknames you've collected because they were coined by others, but in all honesty, you are only credited for collecting them. As such, please join the Gold Medal, the Energizer Bunny, the Eager Beaver, and the Early Bird Clubs. 






Edit #1 removed duplicates
Edit #2 correct a typo


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> For the ones experiencing insomnia, the 1st 1/3 of this video about the couple of Montecito is entertaining.



but one one in US media will say anything like this
I have seen Brits who are WOC defending Meghan and saying she was a victim.  So why are British TV commentators free to speak the truth?
guess because RF has a lot of support from the public?


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> 5 carats? It seems much smaller to me but maybe I'm used to seeing the huge celeb rings.


Supposedly the center stone is three and the side ones are one carat. At least that's what I read somewhere.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww... Happy birthday Doria! I'm sure your ungrateful daughter didn't post a sweet nod to you on AW website



The wardrobe malfunction pic where one can see Doria's bra and nipples through her top. She & H were accompanying M to "her" cookbook unveiling and luncheon. Like mother like daughter!


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> At a total of five carats, from what I've read and seen in pictures, MM's ring is in line with those of other women in the royal family. Kate's is the outlier, but I agree she wears it well. I read that Diana was presented with a tray of rings from one of the royal jewelers and she selected the ring herself.


If I had a choice, I wouldn’t go near that ring. First of all, I never found it that attractive and second of all, I assumed it was cursed.

Kate probably had no choice but to wear it and if it was cursed, I think she broke it. The curse that is. And it looks pretty on her too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks y'all for participating in creating and compiling nicknames, a quest that is not after all that easy to accomplish and it's time that y'all are recognized for collecting even 7 nicknames.
> 
> So today for the big *7*, a gold medal is awarded to @CarryOn2020 for the nickname* “Megnocchio”*_. Thanks and congratulations.
> View attachment 5183890
> _
> 
> Congratulations to @xincinsin and @gracekelly who have previously collected 7 nicknames as well.
> 
> View attachment 5183909
> View attachment 5183995
> 
> 
> @puseinsanity you are my hero because you refused to take credit for some of the 12 nicknames you've collected because they were coined by others, but in all honesty, you are only credited for collecting them. As such, please join the Gold Medal, the Energizer Bunny, the Eager Beaver, and the Early Bird Clubs.
> View attachment 5183976
> View attachment 5183977
> View attachment 5183980
> View attachment 5183988
> 
> 
> ET remove duplicates



I’m humbled. Thank you a million times. Your kindness continues to enrich me with all good things. 

RE: the ring
She may have wanted an emerald with diamond, like Jackie when she was married to JFK.


	

		
			
		

		
	
\



or the Ari ring -  Onassis gave Jackie a 40-carat Marquise cut Lesotho III diamond ring from Harry Winston—which she kept in a bank vault. After she passed away in 1996 the ring was sold at auction for $2.59 million.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> The wardrobe malfunction pic where one can see Doria's bra and nipples through her top. She & H were accompanying M to "her" cookbook unveiling and luncheon. Like mother like daughter!


This is why I have always worn bras with enough lining to avoid nipple show through. But some women just don't care. I mean it really shouldn't be a big deal, but the fact is it's distracting, people are going to notice and have something to say. I guess it depends on your comfort level.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m humbled. Thank you a million times. Your kindness continues to enrich me with all good things.
> 
> RE: the ring
> She may have wanted an emerald with diamond, like Jackie when she was married to JFK.
> View attachment 5184068
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \
> 
> 
> 
> or the Ari ring -  Onassis gave Jackie a 40-carat Marquise cut Lesotho III diamond ring from Harry Winston—which she kept in a bank vault. After she passed away in 1996 the ring was sold at auction for $2.59 million.
> 
> View attachment 5184070


Damn. Go big or go home.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m humbled. Thank you a million times. Your kindness continues to enrich me with all good things.
> 
> RE: the ring
> She may have wanted an emerald with diamond, like Jackie when she was married to JFK.
> View attachment 5184068
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \
> 
> 
> 
> or the Ari ring -  Onassis gave Jackie a 40-carat Marquise cut Lesotho III diamond ring from Harry Winston—which she kept in a bank vault. After she passed away in 1996 the ring was sold at auction for $2.59 million.
> 
> View attachment 5184070
> 
> 
> 
> CarryOn2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m humbled. Thank you a million times. Your kindness continues to enrich me with all good things.
> 
> RE: the ring
> She may have wanted an emerald with diamond, like Jackie when she was married to JFK.
> View attachment 5184068
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \
> 
> 
> 
> or the Ari ring -  Onassis gave Jackie a 40-carat Marquise cut Lesotho III diamond ring from Harry Winston—which she kept in a bank vault. After she passed away in 1996 the ring was sold at auction for $2.59 million.
> 
> View attachment 5184070
> 
> 
> 
> Check these out. Probably more to MM's liking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.vogue.co.uk/fashion/gallery/elizabeth-taylor-engagement-rings
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> And "dumbing down" is not just with reading, but writing also. I have a California educated grandson with a MBA who I discovered, by accident, can't read cursive writing! It has to be printed, preferably block letters. The letter I enclosed with a Birthday card had to be "translated" for him. Doesn't spell well either, for which I blame advertising and the Internet. Like @poopsie, was educated in Cleveland Public Schools. For me it was K-12 graduating in '62. It was rigorous, as sophomores we did college level research papers in Biology and were graded on the writing as well as the data.
> 
> Back OT, I sometimes wonder how Archie and Lilibet will be educated when the time comes. Public school, private Catholic school like Methane, home schooled, boarding school abroad (not likely)?


I've heard this and to me, it's *UNBELIEVABLE*!!!!!  How can they sign a check for instance, or do they not do that anymore??? 

Like you, I took college-level Biology, Chemistry and Physics, for which I got college credit (I had early admission), since I was enrolling in a Pre-Med curriculum.  Also agree that I see a LOT of "text-speak" in a lot of text that I see on the internet, in addition to emails, etc. that I used to get in work.  The classic one was that a guy (also with an MBA in Finance), sent out an email where he used the word "loo" as opposed to "lieu"!  Well, of course, I had a good laugh at it but when I found out that he sent it outside the firm, I went nuclear!  How the hell did he get through English Comp 101???


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Check these out. Probably more to MM's liking.
> https://www.vogue.co.uk/fashion/gallery/elizabeth-taylor-engagement-rings



Liz was such a simple girl with simple tastes


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Liz was such a simple girl with simple tastes


What a life! There will never be another one like her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure she's already researching Harvard-Westlake, the school of choice for wealthy LA families. But they'd have to move back to LA.


HA!!! .. a dear friend worked there ("billing") and just retired and she is SO HAPPY she is the heck out of there!!!  The stories I heard about the richest actors, musicians, doctors, etc. - NOT paying their freaking bills for their kid's education.  In some cases, she had to inform the parent that if the bill was not paid, their child would not go to the next grade .. or worse, NOT graduate.  She said that in one case (and it's a pretty prominent actor who lives in Studio City), he didn't pay .. so his kid was not able to go to graduation.  He finally paid a few days after because in order for the kid to go to college, he had to have that diploma!  UFB!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady CC is killing me. She's going off on Raptor and "that Mulroney woman"..."It's plastic shoes pretending to be leather."


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> HA!!! .. a dear friend worked there ("billing") and just retired and she is SO HAPPY she is the heck out of there!!!  The stories I heard about the richest actors, musicians, doctors, etc. - NOT paying their freaking bills for their kid's education.  In some cases, she had to inform the parent that if the bill was not paid, their child would not go to the next grade .. or worse, NOT graduate.  She said that in one case (and it's a pretty prominent actor who lives in Studio City), he didn't pay .. so his kid was not able to go to graduation.  He finally paid a few days after because in order for the kid to go to college, he had to have that diploma!  UFB!!!


My daughter was the VP of finance at her sorority at a prominent LA school and had similar experiences getting girls to pay their bills.  She said it was eye opening to see who the "posers" were and who really had money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Scrolling through the Taylor rings...so she got engaged for the first time at 17, then got married at barely 18 to the next guy? She was moving fast. 

That said, apparently fiancé #1 was 12 years her senior, which makes it a bit, uh, predatory.


----------



## madamelizaking

kemilia said:


> 5 carats? It seems much smaller to me but maybe I'm used to seeing the huge celeb rings.


3 Carats for the center stone and 1 carat for each side stone.


----------



## CeeJay

So ladies & gents .. sent a DM to Piers Morgan on IG re: our thread.  Let's see if he checks it out!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> The wardrobe malfunction pic where one can see Doria's bra and nipples through her top. She & H were accompanying M to "her" cookbook unveiling and luncheon. Like mother like daughter!




Wow I didn't know about the bra and nip slip


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CeeJay said:


> HA!!! .. a dear friend worked there ("billing") and just retired and she is SO HAPPY she is the heck out of there!!!  The stories I heard about the richest actors, musicians, doctors, etc. - NOT paying their freaking bills for their kid's education.  In some cases, she had to inform the parent that if the bill was not paid, their child would not go to the next grade .. or worse, NOT graduate.  She said that in one case (and it's a pretty prominent actor who lives in Studio City), he didn't pay .. so his kid was not able to go to graduation.  He finally paid a few days after because in order for the kid to go to college, he had to have that diploma!  UFB!!!


I’ve heard of certain rich people who hold on to their money and expect others to pay for them. 
A friend once complained to me that one of her college mates (who comes from “old money”) bought lunch for the other girls in their group on her (my friend’s) dime!

The original Harry and wife (Edward and Wallis) were said to have had friends and relatives pay thetab for their lodgings and food …

I guess this is how the rich stay rich.


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’ve heard of certain rich people who hold on to their money and expect others to pay for them.
> A friend once complained to me that one of her college mates (who comes from “old money”) bought lunch for the other girls in their group on her (my friend’s) dime!
> 
> The original Harry and wife (Edward and Wallis) were said to have had friends and relatives pay thetab for their lodgings and food …
> 
> I guess this is how the rich stay rich.


Absolutely. Years ago I heard that ***** never carried cash, would hit up an assistant if he needed tip money. That's assuming he even tipped.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Maggie Muggins said:


> The wardrobe malfunction pic where one can see Doria's bra and nipples through her top. She & H were accompanying M to "her" cookbook unveiling and luncheon. Like mother like daughter!


I’ll give it to Doria that she dresses better than her demon seed, even though she seemingly hasn’t mingled with the same people Meghan has and doesn’t seem to have the same aspirations as her daughter.

Ive always liked how she dressed. In fact, there were times when I believed that she was able to put Meghan in her place. Look at archies christening day photo… Doria and Kate seem to be the only ones dressed in a fun pink color (Kate slayed with the bright pink and red and showing off her legs that Harry referred to as “killer”…)


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Scrolling through the Taylor rings...so she got engaged for the first time at 17, then got married at barely 18 to the next guy? She was moving fast.
> 
> That said, apparently fiancé #1 was 12 years her senior, which makes it a bit, uh, predatory.


A different time, and she was not your average 17 yr. old.


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> I’ve begun to think of him/them as Princess Hairball


I’m thinking of them and Prince(SS) Hairbrain!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks y'all for participating in creating and compiling nicknames, a quest that is not after all that easy to accomplish and it's time that y'all are recognized for collecting even 7 nicknames.
> 
> So today for the big *7*, a gold medal is awarded to @CarryOn2020 for the nickname* “Megnocchio”*_. Thanks and congratulations.
> View attachment 5183890
> _
> 
> Congratulations to @xincinsin and @gracekelly who have previously collected 7 nicknames as well.
> 
> View attachment 5183909
> View attachment 5183995
> 
> 
> @purseinsanity you are my hero because you refused to take credit for some of the 12 nicknames you've collected because they were coined by others, but in all honesty, you are only credited for collecting them. As such, please join the Gold Medal, the Energizer Bunny, the Eager Beaver, and the Early Bird Clubs.
> View attachment 5183976
> View attachment 5183977
> View attachment 5183980
> View attachment 5183988
> 
> 
> Edit #1 removed duplicates
> Edit #2 correct a typo


OMG I am beyond flattered!


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’ll give it to Doria that she dresses better than her *demon seed*, even though she seemingly hasn’t mingled with the same people Meghan has and doesn’t seem to have the same aspirations as her daughter.


@Maggie Muggins here’s another from @breakfastatcartier!  *DEMON SEED *


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> I've heard this and to me, it's *UNBELIEVABLE*!!!!!  How can they sign a check for instance, or do they not do that anymore???
> 
> Like you, I took college-level Biology, Chemistry and Physics, for which I got college credit (I had early admission), since I was enrolling in a Pre-Med curriculum.  Also agree that I see a LOT of "text-speak" in a lot of text that I see on the internet, in addition to emails, etc. that I used to get in work.  The classic one was that a guy (also with an MBA in Finance), sent out an email where he used the word "loo" as opposed to "lieu"!  Well, of course, I had a good laugh at it but when I found out that he sent it outside the firm, I went nuclear!  How the hell did he get through English Comp 101???


I must admit for all of my fanaticism about proper spelling, my stupid iPhone sometimes auto-incorrects me and I’ve sent text messages with my correct spelling either misspelled or changed to either a wrong version of the word or possession where there shouldn’t be any.  I always worry I’ll look like an idiot, but most people don’t even notice any more!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> I've heard this and to me, it's *UNBELIEVABLE*!!!!!  How can they sign a check for instance, or do they not do that anymore???
> 
> *A few squiggles on a piece of paper al a most Dr.'s signatures and it's done. *


----------



## sdkitty

my signature is usually illegible but it's based on the letters of my name.  sometimes I will just quickly do squiggles but if it's something like a legal document that doesn't seem right


----------



## Katel

Lady C on  fiyah  in this vid hahaha - here (at approx 17), she calls princess hairball (pronouns he/she) totalitarian dictators ...
earlier she roasts the female head of ITV (Carolyn McCall), calling her a pusilanimous creep - hysterical! 
our Lady C does not mince words lol!


----------



## octopus17

Jayne1 said:


> If I had a choice, I wouldn’t go near that ring. First of all, I never found it that attractive and second of all, I assumed it was cursed.
> 
> Kate probably had no choice but to wear it and if it was cursed, I think she broke it. The curse that is. And it looks pretty on her too.


I know what you mean re. any 'curse' or uncomfortableness wearing such a thing. However, I'm of the belief, if it feels right, it feels right (and also if it feels wrong, it feels wrong) and I apply this to anything I encounter and it has held me in good stead. I am the owner of a relatives engagement ring that other family members didn't want, despite it being quite impressive. They didn't feel comfortable about it at all. Eventually it was offered to me. Now I really liked this relative and she was really dear to me throughout her life. I took the ring and just put it on my finger and that was it. It just felt right and I knew that my late relative was just fine about it all. It had found a good home .


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> You may be onto something!  *Henry the Woke* @Maggie Muggins
> View attachment 5182792


Thanks @Chanbal for Henry the Woke.  Welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> DM is on fire today!
> 
> *JAN MOIR: Princess Pinocchio has finally had her nose tweaked as at long last a joyful bucket of cold water is thrown on Harry and Meghan's fevered claims by Ofcom verdict exonerating Piers Morgan*
> …
> _Yet in moment of triumph for freedom of speech, for UK broadcasters and journalists everywhere – but most of all for the former Good Morning Britain host himself – Ofcom ruled that: ‘Mr Morgan was entitled to say he disbelieved the Duke and Duchess of Sussexes’ allegations and to hold and express strong views that rigorously challenged their account.’
> 
> *So he has been entirely vindicated, while the duchess has been accused of being part of a ‘chilling restriction on freedom of expression’.
> 
> Oh dear. That is not a good look for a self-styled international humanitarian and do-gooder; a woman who, according to the couple’s Archewell website, wants to ‘unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change’.*
> 
> All Meghan seems to have driven is her wheezing old jalopy of self-justification into the brick wall of baloney that has awaited her all this time. For sooner or later, this day of reckoning had to come.
> 
> Since the moment they left to forge a new life in America, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been assiduous keepers of their own flame of fame.
> 
> From day one they have depicted themselves as victims fleeing from the tyranny of inherited wealth; a couple of rich and privileged pups forever barking about the unfairness of life.
> 
> *My daddy won’t give me any money! My daddy talks to the press! It’s all so simply awful.*
> 
> From Oprah Winfrey to Instagram statements, from podcasts to Netflix series, from newspaper op-eds to Zoom calls, they have built up their story of suffering and burnished their images without halt.
> 
> Then of course there is the Finding Freedom biography, the remarkable unofficial histoire written by Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie that largely seems to reflect their every thought and itch.
> 
> *Along the way neither of them appear to have minded about any collateral damage caused to the Queen, other members of the royal family, household staff or even poor Thomas Markle.
> 
> Then and now one can only gasp at the ultimate vanity of their quest – to have their truth believed at all times, and to never be questioned.*
> 
> They have tap-tap-tapped the golden syrup from the tree of fib and glib without pause.
> 
> Their vision, their view, their version of events has spooled out behind them in a wallow of words, each one carefully curated.
> 
> Somehow the Sussexes have been able to accuse and counter accuse, to complain, to control the momentum and the narrative, to indulge their victimhood. Until now.
> 
> The Ofcom ruling is perhaps their first wake-up call. The point will come when they will have to account for themselves and their accusations, which so far are unsupported by any evidence or detail.
> 
> Of course, Mr Scobie is already leading the pushback, citing a clause in the Human Rights Act that says free speech must always be compounded by the ‘protection of health and morals’. This, he says, ‘makes me question the Ofcom decision’.
> 
> Well he is entirely within his rights to do so, just as Piers Morgan is entirely within his rights to question the duke and duchess’s statements – many of which, incidentally, have been shown to be untrue.
> 
> *Until now, to criticise the Duchess of Sussex was to be accused of racism, sexism and worse.
> 
> One hopes that the Ofcom ruling will at least allow the occasional cheep of doubt to be raised, without the cheepers being cancelled and sent to woke jail by Meghan’s permanently furious supporters.*
> 
> This febrile atmosphere, into which these serious accusations of bigotry are thrown around like noxious confetti, is stoked by the Sussexes themselves.
> 
> All this scurrility propounded by annoyance and huff, spiced with a pinch of what looks increasingly like spite.
> 
> Surely it doesn’t have to be like this? Why do they seem so determined to crush not just the Royal Family, but anyone of note who disagrees with them along the way?
> 
> *We are all entitled to freedom of speech. It is not a gift granted only to those who hold views acceptable to Harry and Meghan.*
> 
> When I think about the Sussexes, sometimes it seems like a ghost story they have concocted themselves, one that is brooded over by malevolent wraiths, hurts real or imagined, insults perceived, slights dead and gone.
> 
> Many will welcome this cold bucket of water that has been poured over the graveyard of their fevered claims.
> 
> *Oh to have been a fly on the Montecito wall when the news came through. I like to imagine the crash of teacup on saucer and then that prolonged scream, echoing down to where the surf rolls onto the shoreline like a benediction.*_
> 
> *And if Harry were still juggling at the window, like the circus clown he is at heart, then surely he would have dropped his balls in shock.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: A bucket of cold water is thrown on Meghan's fevered claims
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: One can only imagine how the duchess reacted to the news her complaint against Piers Morgan has been thrown, but anything less than volcanic on the stroppy scale would be a surprise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk












EverSoElusive said:


> I like seeing a pretty boy but Scoobie Doo is very plastic


I find him terrifying to look at







gracekelly said:


>










Chanbal said:


> A response to an ignorant that needs to be ignored!
> View attachment 5182793
> 
> But Harry’s latest missive – complaining about inequality in the global distribution of vaccines – cannot be left to pass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're wrong Harry - we are helping world fight Covid, says ROSS CLARK
> 
> 
> WE have become so used to platitudes issuing from the mouths of Harry and Meghan - such as lecturing us on the need to change our lifestyles to combat climate change while themselves taking a private jet from a polo match - that it is usually best to ignore them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





It's the _audacity _for me, of them hiding in their 90 bath-roomed mansion and thinking they have the right to preach and dictate to the public to do something or react in a certain way *their way* to important issues that arise within society and the world, like they are the leaders of the world with endless amounts of experience in each matter and their words are the holy grail. No and hell to the no. Shut your f**king mouths and stay hidden in your mansion bought with shady money while living this pRiVaTe life you speak of, I will not be force lectured by two petty, clout chasing, childish, delusional, narcissistic idiots. Sick. Of. It.






Chanbal said:


> This is sick…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'lies dying' after car crash at start of new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV flick from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





There are no words for how sick and twisted this is.
Very telling that they haven't filed a lawsuit against this 'movie' yet. This is one thing that would be deserving of one.





Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Lounorada for the nickname Princess Hairy. Nickname added to The List.
> View attachment 5183487


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5184525
> 
> View attachment 5184523
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find him terrifying to look at
> View attachment 5184527
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5184539
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5184546
> 
> It's the _audacity _for me, of them hiding in their 90 bath-roomed mansion and thinking they have the right to preach and dictate to the public to do something or react in a certain way *their way* to important issues that arise within society and the world, like they are the leaders of the world with endless amounts of experience in each matter and their words are the holy grail. No and hell to the no. Shut your f**king mouths and stay hidden in your mansion bought with shady money while living this pRiVaTe life you speak of, I will not be force lectured by two petty, clout chasing, childish, delusional, narcissistic idiots. Sick. Of. It.
> View attachment 5184544
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5184550
> 
> There are no words for how sick and twisted this is.
> Very telling that they haven't filed a lawsuit against this 'movie' yet. This is one thing that would be deserving of one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5184551



RE: Scoobie is terrifying to look at

I'm glad that I'm not the only person feeling this way


----------



## Chanbal

In need of photo-ops…  

*Royal aides have been left stunned by the 'sheer nerve' of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after they asked for a meeting with the Queen.*

_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly hoping to introduce the Queen to their daughter Lilibet, who was born earlier this year on June 4.

However, a source told The Sun that no meeting has been agreed upon yet and that it had left Royal aides 'shocked' given the pair's interview with Oprah just months ago._

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eeting-Queen-leaving-Royal-aides-stunned.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like Prince Phillip was correct —Charles is a rent-a-royal.   
What is _wrong_ with QE’s sons?


_The ‘cash for favours’ scandal centres on how donations for Charles’s cherished scheme to renovate Dumfries House, a Palladian mansion in Scotland, were solicited and what may have been promised in return.









						Prince Charles' closest aide quits after 'cash for favours' scandal
					

Michael Fawcett, CEO of The Prince's Foundation, quit after a 2017 'cash for favours' letter was leaked showing the charity was 'happy and willing' to aid a wealthy Saudi businessman and donor.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Even Camilla increased her popularity after OW's interview…



From a commenter: Toad and Toadette. 
Does it mean that M kissed the prince and turned him into a toad and then the toad kissed M and turned her into toadette?!?


----------



## Jayne1

Cornflower Blue said:


> I know what you mean re. any 'curse' or uncomfortableness wearing such a thing. However, I'm of the belief, if it feels right, it feels right (and also if it feels wrong, it feels wrong) and I apply this to anything I encounter and it has held me in good stead. I am the owner of a relatives engagement ring that other family members didn't want, despite it being quite impressive. They didn't feel comfortable about it at all. Eventually it was offered to me. Now I really liked this relative and she was really dear to me throughout her life. I took the ring and just put it on my finger and that was it. It just felt right and I knew that my late relative was just fine about it all. It had found a good home .


I like that! I agree too, it it feels right, it's the right ring.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> I’ve begun to think of him/them as *Princess Hairball*


Thanks @Katel for this nickname.  It's now on The List with H&M in brackets. That gives you 4 nicknames with only one more to go for the Master award. Good luck!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> In need of photo-ops…
> 
> *Royal aides have been left stunned by the 'sheer nerve' of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after they asked for a meeting with the Queen.*
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly hoping to introduce the Queen to their daughter Lilibet, who was born earlier this year on June 4.
> 
> However, a source told The Sun that no meeting has been agreed upon yet and that it had left Royal aides 'shocked' given the pair's interview with Oprah just months ago._
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eeting-Queen-leaving-Royal-aides-stunned.html


I doubt an in person meeting would take place given the danger of Delta variant.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> This is why I have always worn bras with enough lining to avoid nipple show through. But some women just don't care. I mean it really shouldn't be a big deal, but the fact is it's distracting, people are going to notice and have something to say. *I guess it depends on your comfort level*.


Nudity doesn't bother me, but this was a public engagement for one of M's charities and I would think that a proper attire would be required.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I might find out while reading through the overnight-comments, but...what have the idiots done / demanded now? An audience with the Queen?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> In need of photo-ops…
> 
> *Royal aides have been left stunned by the 'sheer nerve' of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after they asked for a meeting with the Queen.*
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly hoping to introduce the Queen to their daughter Lilibet, who was born earlier this year on June 4.
> 
> However, a source told The Sun that no meeting has been agreed upon yet and that it had left Royal aides 'shocked' given the pair's interview with Oprah just months ago._
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eeting-Queen-leaving-Royal-aides-stunned.html



Ah, and there's my answer.

Is the money running out?

I hope the Queen is busy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@Maggie Muggins the DM comments section never disappoints. Someone just called Raptor Lady MegBeth


----------



## Luvbolide

Vintage Leather said:


> When Cartier became a global firm, the three brothers each took a third of the globe, and established their own unique business. Louis (France, Europe and Russia) would design for everyone, Pierre (USA and the Americas) would market for everyone and Jacques (the British Empire) would source stones for everyone - but they were actually three different businesses, committed to training “local artisans in the French way.”  Jacques Cartier, the youngest brother, was the owner and head of Cartier London, and he supervised the design of several pieces (including the Halo bandeau) for the Queen Mum when she was a young bride. All of their staff (except for Jacques), designers and bench jewelers were British.
> 
> If you’re interested in Cartier, I strongly recommend the book “Creating Cartier” by Jacques granddaughter, Francesca Cartier Brickell. She also has done a series of webinars on the stories and notes behind specific collections, including one on the BRF with a curator from the Trust




I’m glad to hear that you enjoyed the book, I started it last week!


----------



## needlv

Haha


----------



## needlv

Seems the enquires may be strategic.  Running out of content for Netflix, spotify and H’s book?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Haha




She always looked to awkwardly out of place. One of these things is not like the others.


----------



## Icyjade

Not sure if this was posted:









						A Copy Of My Life - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] Let’s talk about an upcoming production about the trials and tribulations of this famous couple! We can’t say whether or not the TV production is any good as we haven’t seen it yet. However, we can tell you that one celebrity is verrry interested in how they are going to be...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Nudity doesn't bother me, but this was a public engagement for one of M's charities and I would think that a proper attire would be required.


I think sometimes women don't realize this is happening until they see a photo. Same with celebrities who have bra/nip show through in flash photos.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, and there's my answer.
> 
> Is the money running out?
> 
> I hope the Queen is busy.


The Queen will definitely not publicly say no, she will let courtiers negotiate details 
The leak about the meeting request - appears to have been from the BRF side - was surely intendeds to gauge public response
The trick will be to not make the Queen look as if she is capitulating lock stock an barrel  - she has an international presence to keep up WHILE H&M have shown no ability or willingness to compromise, they will demand the Queen take ownership of the racism mess as a pre condition ...
Very tricky negotiation esp in light of P Charles chief of staff who resigned yesterday over major malfeasance - honours in exchange for donations to Princes Trust


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> This is sick…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'lies dying' after car crash at start of new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV flick from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Lord have mercy if this isn’t the most pathetic thing I’ve seen… I’m sure Meghans veneers were on full display watching this scene.

It’s so orgasmic to her to have any kind of attention!

Im sure she wrote this scene … Diana would’ve sucker punched that ugly daughter in law of hers if she could.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> In need of photo-ops…
> 
> *Royal aides have been left stunned by the 'sheer nerve' of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after they asked for a meeting with the Queen.*
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are reportedly hoping to introduce the Queen to their daughter Lilibet, who was born earlier this year on June 4.
> 
> However, a source told The Sun that no meeting has been agreed upon yet and that it had left Royal aides 'shocked' given the pair's interview with Oprah just months ago._
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eeting-Queen-leaving-Royal-aides-stunned.html


Oh now she’s “Lilibet” again? So whenever these beady eyed demons want something they’ll use the granddaughter as ammo?

Im pretty sure “Lilibet Diana” looks like Meghan as a baby … so queenie isn’t missing out on anything not seeing her granddaughter.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> Haha



Camilla does have some hilariously “endearing” moments… meghans outfit here always cracks me up.

She looks like a 50 year old, colonial era nurse … that’s miraculously pregnant.


----------



## rose60610

Why would they care about the Queen meeting Lilibet? They didn't care about the BRF seeing Archie for a year when Philip was still alive. They don't want to play with fire and lose out on a photo op with 95 year old Granny?


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> @Maggie Muggins here’s another from @breakfastatcartier!  *DEMON SEED *


Now you've got me thinking about Rosemary's Baby.


----------



## kipp

rose60610 said:


> Why would they care about the Queen meeting Lilibet? They didn't care about the BRF seeing Archie for a year when Philip was still alive. They don't want to play with fire and lose out on a photo op with 95 year old Granny?


So much scheming!  I just can't understand these two! It's exhausting for me to follow what they are doing---can't imagine how exhausting it is for them.  That's no way to live.  But then again, I suppose it's all about the $$$$$$.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Ignore the caption but I think this is all our faces reading the headline a few post above saying the Pathetic Prince and the Avaricious Commoner wanting an audience with the Queen


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Maggie Muggins the DM comments section never disappoints. Someone just called Raptor Lady MegBeth


I like this immensely!
DS1 and I frequently quote from it. Considering Methane's new and much "cleaner" face, she must have told her plastic surgeon "Out, out, d*mn spot!"


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> So much scheming!  I just can't understand these two! It's exhausting for me to follow what they are doing---can't imagine how exhausting it is for them.  That's no way to live.  But then again, I suppose it's all about the $$$$$$.


money and fame....I think that is what drives her....and for him maybe same plus revenge on family for being the "spare"
Sad as he seemed to be enjoying life just fine before M but maybe he wasn't happy


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> money and fame....I think that is what drives her....and for him maybe same plus revenge on family for being the "spare"
> Sad as he seemed to be enjoying life just fine before M but maybe he wasn't happy


We can't begin to know what goes on the in the minds of others, and many would say we're the crazy ones for being fixated on this, but I think pre-MM he was happy to be the carefree spare, with all the perks and none of the responsibilities that will fall on his brother. I think she put the seeds for all this in his mind. She is as manipulative as they come. He seemed pretty much a happy idiot until she came along. Too bad things didn't work out for him and Pippa.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> We can't begin to know what goes on the in the minds of others, and many would say we're the crazy ones for being fixated on this, but I think pre-MM he was happy to be the carefree spare, with all the perks and none of the responsibilities that will fall on his brother. I think she put the seeds for all this in his mind. She is as manipulative as they come. He seemed pretty much a happy idiot until she came along. Too bad things didn't work out for him and Pippa.


as you say, we'll never know....maybe he was a happy idiot but resentful deep down.  Meegain came along and brought the resentment to the surface?


----------



## gracekelly

The Queen is not going to meet with him. She didn’t meet with him after the funeral or after the statue unveiling. The Sussex have realized that they can get a lot of mileage out of saying things like this and there will be no response from TQ.  It no different than when they said they could not go to Balmoral or Sandringham, and they actually weren’t invited.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> We can't begin to know what goes on the in the minds of others, and many would say we're the crazy ones for being fixated on this, but I think pre-MM he was happy to be the carefree spare, with all the perks and none of the responsibilities that will fall on his brother. I think she put the seeds for all this in his mind. She is as manipulative as they come. He seemed pretty much a happy idiot until she came along. Too bad things didn't work out for him and Pippa.


I think he was tired of his situation and didn’t  see it getting better. He was ready to make a big move and she gave him a reason to do it. They were both using each other.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> as you say, we'll never know....maybe he was a happy idiot but resentful deep down.  Meegain came along and brought the resentment to the surface?


He was not happy. He was definitely resentful. If he was happy he would not have done many of the stupid thing he did in public. Drunkeness, Nazi costume, hurting his horse, slapping Kate’s backside on the balcony etc. He was acting out.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The Queen is not going to meet with him. She didn’t meet with him after the funeral or after the statue unveiling. The Sussex have realized that they can get a lot of mileage out of saying things like this and there will be no response from TQ.  It no different than when they said they could not go to Balmoral or Sandringham, and they actually weren’t invited.


True, you won't get any mileage out of a tire if it runs out of air. Which the tabloids keep giving them. They and the Sussexes are codependent.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> So much scheming!  I just can't understand these two! It's exhausting for me to follow what they are doing---can't imagine how exhausting it is for them.  That's no way to live.  But then again, I suppose it's all about the $$$$$$.


That’s why so many mistakes are made. They are so busy planning the next scheme that they don’t completely think out the current one and it goes t*ts up. Then they blame a staff person, fire them and hire a new one.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> He was not happy. He was definitely resentful. If he was happy he would not have done many of the stupid thing he did in public. Drunkeness, Nazi costume, hurting his horse, slapping Kate’s backside on the balcony etc. He was acting out.


Slapping Kate's backside?? How did I miss this?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> True, you won't get any mileage out of a tire if it runs out of air. Which the tabloids keep giving them. They and the Sussexes are codependent.


Absolutely. The tabs live for the Sussex cock ups lol!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Slapping Kate's backside?? How did I miss this?


Yep. He was standing behind her and hit or pinched her and she turned around to give him a look. Very juvenile behavior.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Yep. He was standing behind her and hit or pinched her and she turned around to give him a look. Very juvenile behavior.


Indeed


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Why would they care about the Queen meeting Lilibet? They didn't care about the BRF seeing Archie for a year when Philip was still alive. They don't want to play with fire and lose out on a photo op with 95 year old Granny?


Notice how it is always spoken about TQ seeing the children and never about Charles?  TQ has lots of grand and great grando.  Charles only has the Cambs and the Sussex and he never sees 2 out of 5


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He was not happy. He was definitely resentful. If he was happy he would not have done many of the stupid thing he did in public. Drunkeness, Nazi costume, hurting his horse, slapping Kate’s backside on the balcony etc. He was acting out.


sounds like a case of arrested development but I can't forgive being cruel to an animal


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Yep. He was standing behind her and hit or pinched her and she turned around to give him a look. Very juvenile behavior.



Typical juvenile male power play, IMO — no wonder the other women refused to marry him. 









						Prince Harry Accused of Pinching a 'Shocked' Kate Middleton At Trooping in 2011
					

Amid news of a bitter feud within the royal family, new reports claim that Prince Harry once pinched a 'shocked' Kate Middleton on her bum at Trooping of the Colour.




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’ll give it to Doria that she dresses better than her *demon seed*, even though she seemingly hasn’t mingled with the same people Meghan has and doesn’t seem to have the same aspirations as her daughter.
> 
> Ive always liked how she dressed. In fact, there were times when I believed that she was able to put Meghan in her place. Look at archies christening day photo… Doria and Kate seem to be the only ones dressed in a fun pink color (Kate slayed with the bright pink and red and showing off her legs that Harry referred to as “killer”…)


 Thanks @breakfastatcartier for the *Demon Seed* nickname. Indeed it fits M to a T.  It's now on The List. Please, keep your wonderful creations coming my way.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I’m thinking of them and *Prince(SS) Hairbrain*!


 Thanks @purseinsanity for Prince(ss) Hairbrain which describes all their halfcocked indeavours. Please join the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## VickyB

gracekelly said:


> Yep. He was standing behind her and hit or pinched her and she turned around to give him a look. Very juvenile behavior.


Missed that. When did it supposedly happen?


----------



## rose60610

kipp said:


> So much scheming!  I just can't understand these two! It's exhausting for me to follow what they are doing---can't imagine how exhausting it is for them.  That's no way to live.  But then again, I suppose it's all about the $$$$$$.



It's ALWAYS all about the money! And since it's always all about the money, that's why we get insensitive photos like using dead soldiers for props in the cemetery, Raptor pulling her face mask down while delivering food so the recipient is obligated to know who she is, and countless other loser episodes. You can't put ANYTHING past them! Every day they just get more and more pathetic!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Typical juvenile male power play, IMO — no wonder the other women refused to marry him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Accused of Pinching a 'Shocked' Kate Middleton At Trooping in 2011
> 
> 
> Amid news of a bitter feud within the royal family, new reports claim that Prince Harry once pinched a 'shocked' Kate Middleton on her bum at Trooping of the Colour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



I always thought Harry had a bit of an affection/attraction towards Kate that wasn’t completely brotherly. He liked to get her attention for sure. Meghan made it her first order of business upon arrival to put a wedge between them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I always thought Harry had a bit of an affection/attraction towards Kate that wasn’t completely brotherly. He liked to get her attention for sure. Meghan made it her first order of business upon arrival to put a wedge between them.



To my eye, it looked like jealousy of William which began at a very early age. Hazz didn’t want Kate herself,  he just didn’t want Wiliam to have her. She was one more reminder of what he did not have.  
I’m not a doctor, doesn’t this sibling rivalry typically run in families, mostly due to parents who don’t know how to parent?


----------



## csshopper

Is the request to meet with his Grandmother a signal that Montecito magic is tarnishing and they feel a need to reassert the birthright of Princess Hairy? 

The Suckesses need some good press which they hope the Queen would provide. They could have started closer to home by reaching out to Grandpa Markle to demonstrate some of their "compassion" by allowing him to meet his grandchildren. That would be banner news. But, Maggot, heading straight for the penultimate symbol of white privilege, the Queen of England, wants the reflected glory of an audience with her Majesty. Their hypocrisy never wavers.

Meanwhile, one of M's supposed friends, Beyonce, turned 40 and it was celebrated by Harper's Bazaar. HB employs Scabies as its "Royal Reporter" and has been a Markle mouthpiece, as well as publishing laudatory articles featuring Oprah over the years. So even with 2 major links (Scabies and Oprah) to Harpers, and a supposed friendship with Beyonce, a certain fork tongued former actress was not one of the people Harpers reached out to for celebratory Birthday wishes to forward to Beyonce. Maybe Beyonce's startled reaction to the tacky (Lady CC would say "vulgar") incident where Harry was merching his wife to Bob Eiger for Disney voice over work has lingered in memories?  As an aside, one of the YouTube videos posted here several weeks ago offered the opinion one reason the Suckesses were not on the ***** guest list was a fear they would be crass enough to use the opportunity to attempt to troll other guests for future employment opportunities.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Maggie Muggins the DM comments section never disappoints. Someone just called Raptor *Lady MegBeth*


"Out Damned Spot" sayeth Lady MegBeth for she hath blood on her hands!  Sorry, just recalling HS English class although not very accurately. 

 Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for a nickname that M aptly deserves for trying to destroy others in her 'climb to power'.


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> Seems the enquires may be strategic.  Running out of content for Netflix, spotify and H’s book?



WHOA!! .. now THAT would be very interesting, but we all know that Prince *HAZARDOUS* would never be able to take those children away from Douch-ess *VAINGLORIOUS*!


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Is the request to meet with his Grandmother a signal that Montecito magic is tarnishing and they feel a need to reassert the birthright of Princess Hairy?


No, it's to give the Queen a chance to grovel and apologize in person.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I think sometimes women don't realize this is happening until they see a photo. Same with celebrities who have bra/nip show through in flash photos.



Most celebs have stylists for just this kind of thing. They usually do a with/wo flash photo and rehearsal for the red carpet etc before the event. I would have thought Megabrag 'fashion-A-lista' would have known this even if her 'BF'-stylist didn't.


----------



## papertiger

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oh now she’s “Lilibet” again? So whenever these beady eyed demons want something they’ll use the granddaughter as ammo?
> 
> Im pretty sure “Lilibet Diana” looks like Meghan as a baby … so queenie isn’t missing out on anything not seeing her granddaughter.



I guess we're lucky they didn't actually call her Queenie


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Typical juvenile male power play, IMO — no wonder the other women refused to marry him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Accused of Pinching a 'Shocked' Kate Middleton At Trooping in 2011
> 
> 
> Amid news of a bitter feud within the royal family, new reports claim that Prince Harry once pinched a 'shocked' Kate Middleton on her bum at Trooping of the Colour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



He's lucky it was taken by Kate as jest, in my workplace a woman could call that (sexual) assault and the guy would get at least a written warning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I always thought Harry had a bit of an affection/attraction towards Kate that wasn’t completely brotherly. He liked to get her attention for sure. Meghan made it her first order of business upon arrival to put a wedge between them.


i actually see the pinch as an act of aggression and don't see it as friendly at all. I think it was meant to embarrass her and/or fluster her.  I also think that this type of behavior was fairly common with him.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> i actually see the pinch as an act of aggression and don't see it as friendly at all. I think it was meant to embarrass her and/or fluster her.  I also think that this type of behavior was fairly common with him.



I don’t know. Aggression might be a bit extreme. It seemed attention-seeking and immature but not outright mean.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO, it was indeed aggressive and mean-spirited. He can’t control himself, needs to return to kindergarten. They were at a very public event, she was helping a child, he could have moved or kept his hands to himself. The smirk on his face proves he was showing her his power. 

Wonder which other males behave that disgusting way on the balcony?

ETA: Note the smirk


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> Thank you!  I really enjoyed this.  It was nice to see that those of us on this thread who are not Sussex fans, have been had our long held opinions validated by these professional journalists.  It isn't our imagination working overtime folks!  The woman in red even had MM screaming "Haarrry get down here!"  lololol!



  at "professional journalists"



papertiger said:


> Most celebs have stylists for just this kind of thing. They usually do a with/wo flash photo and rehearsal for the red carpet etc before the event. I would have thought Megabrag 'fashion-A-lista' would have known this even if her 'BF'-stylist didn't.



Agreed but in this case they are referring to her mother who apparently made the mistake of wearing this (if I am understanding the issue correctly)...


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know. Aggression might be a bit extreme. It seemed attention-seeking and immature but not outright mean.


You have a kind heart. I am with @CarryOn2020 on this.  This is the same type of behavior he showed as a child when he rammed his trike into a person at the palace.


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> at "professional journalists"



I knew that would elicit a few laughs on this thread lol!  However, when I compare them to Mr. Scurvy, they are top tier professional journalists


----------



## VickyB

Also when Diana greeted them as young boys on the Britannia.  She greeted William first and Harry kicked William.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> You have a kind heart. I am with @CarryOn2020 on this.  This is the same type of behavior he showed as a child when he rammed his trike into a person at the palace.



Lol, I’m not going to argue too hard on this one. Perhaps you’re right. I was trying not to let my feelings about Harry now be projected onto everything he has ever done. He may always have been a jealous little snot, but I don’t think he was evil. Now I believe he may be, thanks to Meghan teaching him to embrace his dark side.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> at "professional journalists"
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed but in this case they are referring to her mother who apparently made the mistake of wearing this (if I am understanding the issue correctly)...




If this is the sum of it, I think she looks fine. At least her clothes suit her and appear to fit.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Typical juvenile male power play, IMO — no wonder the other women refused to marry him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Accused of Pinching a 'Shocked' Kate Middleton At Trooping in 2011
> 
> 
> Amid news of a bitter feud within the royal family, new reports claim that Prince Harry once pinched a 'shocked' Kate Middleton on her bum at Trooping of the Colour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com


may was being playful but I wonder if Will thought it was funny


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> He's lucky it was taken by Kate as jest, in my workplace a woman could call that (sexual) assault and the guy would get at least a written warning.


she should have reported him to HR, LOL


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> she should have reported him to HR, LOL


It was an obvious micro-aggression although memories may differ


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> It was an obvious micro-aggression although memories may differ


he was in his 30s at the time? old enough to know better


----------



## CarryOn2020

There‘s a time and place to pinch a female’s backside. There’s a time and place to show the nips.  Nobody wants to see stuff like that. 
Remember when Diana and Fergie poked backsides at Ascot or some such place? Yeah, the apple did not fall from the tree. Rude people, especially people of privilege, are disgusting.  If they knew this lady, does it become less disgusting? less bullying?  IMO, no.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Ignore the caption but I think this is all our faces reading the headline a few post above saying the* Pathetic Prince* and the *Avaricious Commoner* wanting an audience with the Queen


Thanks @EverSoElusive  Pathetic Prince and Avaricious Commoner, nicknames that require no further explanation, have been added to The List.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> WHOA!! .. now THAT would be very interesting, but we all know that Prince *HAZARDOUS* would never be able to take those children away from Douch-ess *VAINGLORIOUS*!


Thanks @CeeJay  Both nicknames have been added to The List. Congratulations Nickname Master.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think this is photoshopped? I feel like if she had a Birkin we would have seen more of it.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think this is photoshopped? I feel like if she had a Birkin we would have seen more of it.




Pretty sure she’s carrying a Mulberry bag in that photo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Most celebs have stylists for just this kind of thing. They usually do a with/wo flash photo and rehearsal for the red carpet etc before the event. I would have thought *Megabrag 'fashion-A-lista'* would have known this even if her 'BF'-stylist didn't.


Thanks @papertiger  Wow that's a megabucks nickname. *Megabrag 'fashion-A-lista' *has been added to The List. Glad you could join us.


----------



## LizzieBennett

.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think this is photoshopped? I feel like if she had a Birkin we would have seen more of it.



Mulberry look alike design, was $1000 at duty free at one time


----------



## VickyB

Not a birkin.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> To my eye, it looked like *jealousy of William* which began at a very early age. Hazz didn’t want Kate herself,  he just didn’t want Wiliam to have her. She was one more reminder of what he did not have.
> I’m not a doctor, doesn’t this sibling rivalry typically run in families, mostly due to parents who don’t know how to parent?


I've always understood from H's behaviour (or bad bahaviour) that he was jealous of his brother and it wasn't a surprise when I read that H told W that he would be happy to become king if W didn't want it. It's also no surprise that none of his gfs wanted to marry him. Who in their right mind would want to cope with a lifetime of drama H would bring into the marriage.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Can’t multiquote for some reason, thanks ladies.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

VickyB said:


> Also when Diana greeted them as young boys on the Britannia.  She greeted William first and Harry kicked William.


Diana was probably trying to teach the boys a sense of protocol and precedence at an early age, but H could never tolerate being second best under any circumstance.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> he was in his 30s at the time? old enough to know better


Not that it makes much difference, but it was 2011, so 26 or 27. It's rather ironic considering the picture we've seen of him giving MM dirty looks at the same location for talking during a solemn occasion.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Not that it makes much difference, but it was 2011, so 26 or 27. It's rather ironic considering the picture we've seen of him giving MM dirty looks at the same location for talking during a solemn occasion.


I believe they were playing the National Anthem and as usual the RF members were silently standing at attention, but M just wouldn't shut up. Perhaps no one had explained to M that's it's equivalent to every other nation's national anthem when one stands up and stfu.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she should have reported him to HR, LOL


And for sexual harassment, nonconsensual touching, and bullying!


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think this is photoshopped? I feel like if she had a Birkin we would have seen more of it.



Of course that isn’t a Birkin and it looks like a fake of something else. I detect a bit of a smirk. She is pleased that she caused a stir and garnered attention.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Mulberry Bayswater


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think this is photoshopped? I feel like if she had a Birkin we would have seen more of it.



Wow, if this is true, then it really does show how untrustworthy and money-grubbing she is.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Cosmopolitan said:


> Pretty sure she’s carrying a Mulberry bag in that photo.



Definitely a Mulberry; she had a couple of totes and some clutches back when she was in her "I love all things British" phase of Operation Snare A Rich Brit.

Mulberry bag, Hunter Wellies, Barbour jacket - I think she got them all. Not that there's anything wrong with that; they are all long established British companies and brands and synonymous with British design and quality* frequently seen on other UK royals and plenty of others (myself included !) in the UK. I think HMTQ is often seen off duty in an ancient Barbour wax jacket.

Meghan's mistake IMO was not doing enough research;* She failed to understand the very basic fact that she would be financially accountable to others.* I think when she realised the wealth of Harry and his family (the houses, jewels, paid travel expenses, invitations etc.) were not at her unlimited disposal without accountability and that Harry was not quite as independently wealthy as he appears, she started planning* her financial freedom. *

I am very strongly of the view that money is at the root of Megxit.
Would they have left if she had been able to do the projects she was advised were not politically acceptable or were in another royal's portfolio of causes ? If she had been able to wear all the bling and take freebies, clothes and holidays, without censure ?

Meghans' avarice will be their ultimate downfall. They could have left and, like the Windsors, lived a minor Euro royalty lifestyle; with financial means and opportunities beyond the expectations of most. It's been said here before - she seems to want megastar status and wealth.

She should have looked a bit harder and longer for either a footballer, banker or aristocrat.

* although some may disagree with that - Mulberry is not what is once was !


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @papertiger  Wow that's a megabucks nickname. *Megabrag 'fashion-A-lista' *has been added to The List. Glad you could join us.
> 
> View attachment 5185304



I am so honoured


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> She should have looked a bit harder and longer for either a footballer, banker or aristocrat.


Probably did. Maybe Hazard was the only one who was actually stupid enough to be smitten, and daft enough to pop the question. 
It's quite obvious that she doesn't mind sleeping her way up, but at her age, she was looking for a longterm meal ticket.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> And for sexual harassment, nonconsensual touching, and bullying!


and she could have asked HR to set her up for therapy


----------



## breakfastatcartier

xincinsin said:


> Wow, if this is true, then it really does show how untrustworthy and money-grubbing she is.


I’ve heard this story. She was caught trying to take photos of Kate’s kids too.

And look at that shameless smile … she was probably thinking of the money as she was leaving.


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’ve heard this story. She was caught trying to take photos of Kate’s kids too.
> 
> And look at that shameless smile … she was probably thinking of the money as she was leaving.


She did this after she got together with Harry??   If true that really is shameless.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

charlottawill said:


> Slapping Kate's backside?? How did I miss this?


I remember seeing the video once. You can see Harry do something to Kate behind her and giggling causing her and Camilla to turn around and laugh nervously while exclaiming “Harry!”
I remember there were reports of Harry wanting to toast Will and Kate and mention something about Kate’s “killer legs” (possibly that’s why Meghan told her agent that she wanted her “long luscious legs” insured as they were here important asset, lol).

Harry Probably had a little crush on Kate …


----------



## charlottawill

RAINDANCE said:


> * although some may disagree with that - Mulberry is not what is once was !



That's a shame. I've always said I'll buy a Mulberry bag when I eventually get to London. Another brand you'd recommend instead?


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> Definitely a Mulberry; she had a couple of totes and some clutches back when she was in her "I love all things British" phase of Operation Snare A Rich Brit.
> 
> Mulberry bag, Hunter Wellies, Barbour jacket - I think she got them all. Not that there's anything wrong with that; they are all long established British companies and brands and synonymous with British design and quality* frequently seen on other UK royals and plenty of others (myself included !) in the UK. I think HMTQ is often seen off duty in an ancient Barbour wax jacket.
> 
> Meghan's mistake IMO was not doing enough research;* She failed to understand the very basic fact that she would be financially accountable to others.* I think when she realised the wealth of Harry and his family (the houses, jewels, paid travel expenses, invitations etc.) were not at her unlimited disposal without accountability and that Harry was not quite as independently wealthy as he appears, she started planning* her financial freedom. *
> 
> I am very strongly of the view that money is at the root of Megxit.
> Would they have left if she had been able to do the projects she was advised were not politically acceptable or were in another royal's portfolio of causes ? If she had been able to wear all the bling and take freebies, clothes and holidays, without censure ?
> 
> Meghans' avarice will be their ultimate downfall. They could have left and, like the Windsors, lived a minor Euro royalty lifestyle; with financial means and opportunities beyond the expectations of most. It's been said here before - she seems to want megastar status and wealth.
> 
> She should have looked a bit harder and longer for either a footballer, banker or aristocrat.
> 
> * although some may disagree with that - Mulberry is not what is once was !


yes, but at approaching age 40 and having hooked a prince it would be a real longshot to think she could do better.  When you think about it, never mind the American, divorced, biracial - just her age alone made this a huge story.  A forty year old (almost) bride of a prince from the most famous RF in the world walking down the aisle in a white gown with a long veil over her face in the tradition of virgins!


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> I remember seeing the video once. You can see Harry do something to Kate behind her and giggling causing her and Camilla to turn around and laugh nervously while exclaiming “Harry!”
> I remember there were reports of Harry wanting to toast Will and Kate and mention something about Kate’s “killer legs” (possibly that’s why Meghan told her agent that she wanted her “long luscious legs” insured as they were here important asset, lol).
> 
> Harry Probably had a little crush on Kate …


LOL - long luscious legs?  how about toothpick legs?


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> I remember seeing the video once. You can see Harry do something to Kate behind her and giggling causing her and Camilla to turn around and laugh nervously while exclaiming “Harry!”
> I remember there were reports of Harry wanting to toast Will and Kate and mention something about Kate’s “killer legs” (possibly that’s why Meghan told her agent that she wanted her “long luscious legs” insured as they were here important asset, lol).
> 
> Harry Probably had a little crush on Kate …


More like long scrawny legs. Kate's legs are much better proportioned. But this is the stuff that drives MM crazy, her always less favorable comparisons to Kate.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think this is photoshopped? I feel like if she had a Birkin we would have seen more of it.



She probably rented it … plus that Birkin looks off … or maybe it’s the “Markle Sparkle”, where she makes every thing look tacky. Even luxury bags.

I remember seeing photos of her with a Chanel and a Fendi … but honestly, the beauty of those bags seems to go away when she’s holding them.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> LOL - long luscious legs?  how about toothpick legs?


Not in meghans world …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

marietouchet said:


> Mulberry look alike design, was $1000 at duty free at one time


I had a feeling it was a Mulberry …


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

a story from US media (Cosmopolitan) that isn't particularly positive 
Royal Aides Are "Shocked by the Sheer Nerve" of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Recent Offer to the Queen (yahoo.com)


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> Not in meghans world …
> 
> View attachment 5185612
> View attachment 5185612


hard for me to say I like an image of her but this one is better than most IMO


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, it was indeed aggressive and mean-spirited. He can’t control himself, needs to return to kindergarten. They were at a very public event, she was helping a child, he could have moved or kept his hands to himself. The smirk on his face proves he was showing her his power.
> 
> Wonder which other males behave that disgusting way on the balcony?
> 
> ETA: Note the smirk
> View attachment 5185160


ITA. H always wanted whatever W had, #2 in line to the throne, Cambridge Dukedom, Kate, the children, Kensington Palace, etc.. Instead, H should've desired W's personality and good qualities and tried to emulate him.


----------



## Chanbal

Will & Charles- The apparent villains… And they sill what an audience with QE!?  










						Prince William is villain for 'not speaking on racism' in new TV film
					

Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV movie from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

BRF, veterans, covid vaccines… all good for photo-ops and $$$$


----------



## gracekelly

breakfastatcartier said:


> She probably rented it … plus that Birkin looks off … or maybe it’s the “Markle Sparkle”, where she makes every thing look tacky. Even luxury bags.
> 
> I remember seeing photos of her with a Chanel and a Fendi … but honestly, the beauty of those bags seems to go away when she’s holding them.


It’s not a Birkin Trust me.


----------



## gracekelly

If the story about her taking pictures at KP is really true, how in the world did PC ever think she could be trusted about anything.?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> a story from US media (Cosmopolitan) that isn't particularly positive
> Royal Aides Are "Shocked by the Sheer Nerve" of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Recent Offer to the Queen (yahoo.com)


Sending an email/text to Royal aides letting them know that the word to describe this is *chutzpah*.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Sending an email/text to Royal aides letting them know that the word to describe this is *chutzpah*.


love some of those Yiddish words....kvell and mensch are two of my faves


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> love some of those Yiddish words....kvell and mensch are two of my faves


Yep. And PC should be more of a mensch and I bet he and TQ would kvell if they could see the Sussex children.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yep. And PC should be more of a mensch and I bet he and TQ would kvell if they could see the Sussex children.


ha....I picked up kvell from Bill Handel ....used to listen to him driving to work years ago


----------



## gracekelly

Just had a reply from a Royal Aide in response to my message. Aide said the Sussex are meshugganah.

Hey!  I’m from NY. I know all these words!


----------



## Chanbal

Are they also asking for an audience with TM?
If the Queen is busy, they could try Rosarito…


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Just had a reply from a Royal Aide in response to my message. Aide said the Sussex are meshugganah.
> 
> Hey!  I’m from NY. I know all these words!


yes, I worked for Jewish men in NY and picked up some of the words from them


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Are they also asking for an audience with TM?
> If the Queen is busy, they could try Rosarito…



they should be asked to meet with Charles...he's the one holding their purstrings


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Hoping this is an accurate statement, "shocked by the sheer nerve" because if it is, it's a departure from what might have previously been expected from the Palace, which would have been something like, "Royal Aides are _surprised_..." 

The shift in tone, hopefully, represents a harder line on dealing with the Suckesses, and maybe a little snark?   Their "sheer nerve," as demonstrated repeatedly, has numbed a lot of people from feeling "shocked."  As time goes on reactions to them skip straight to disgust and loathing because crassness and vulgarity are their norm.


----------



## VickyB

breakfastatcartier said:


> She probably rented it … plus that Birkin looks off … or maybe it’s the “Markle Sparkle”, where she makes every thing look tacky. Even luxury bags.
> 
> I remember seeing photos of her with a Chanel and a Fendi … but honestly, the beauty of those bags seems to go away when she’s holding them.


Not a Chanel bag.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> yes, I worked for Jewish men in NY and picked up some of the words from them


 Siri is not able to provide a definition for _meshugganah_ : "I am not able to provide translation for Hebrew yet, Sorry"
Google, however, came through for me. Yes, they are meshugganah. 

They also are a couple of "tuchuses."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> they should be asked to meet with Charles...he's the one holding their purstrings



You have a point there. I find it interesting how they are completely ignoring him. Do they think they can bully the Queen into setting stuff into motion Charles can't undo once it's his turn, or what exactly is their deal?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You have a point there. I find it interesting how they are completely ignoring him. Do they think they can bully the Queen into setting stuff into motion Charles can't undo once it's his turn, or what exactly is their deal?


they think the queen has more prestige?  she isn't a racist?  who knows what these schemers are thinking?  but seems unwise to throw his dad under the bus along with hers.  Hers she has used up and doesn't need anymore but they still want stuff from Charles apparently


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> they think the queen has more prestige?  she isn't a racist?  who knows what these schemers are thinking?  but seems unwise to throw his dad under the bus along with hers.  Hers she has used up and doesn't need anymore but they still want stuff from Charles apparently



I wish William was left to deal with them. I have a feeling he's done with appeasing the terrorists.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> If the story about her taking pictures at KP is really true, how in the world did PC ever think she could be trusted about anything.?



He’s on the take, too. Maybe she refused to cut him in 








						Prince Charles was '100% behind offer to help Saudi gain citizenship'
					

The allegation by William Bortrick - a paid advisor to Dr bin Mahfouz, who is a major donor to Charles's charities - comes as the Prince's former valet Michael Fawcett was forced to step down.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






gracekelly said:


> Just had a reply from a Royal Aide in response to my message. Aide said the Sussex are meshugganah.
> 
> Hey!  I’m from NY. I know all these words!



One who is crazy.
[Yiddish meshugener, meshugene, masculine and feminine sing. of meshuge; see *meshuga*



Chanbal said:


> BRF, veterans, covid vaccines… all good for photo-ops and $$$$



Looks like he is getting skin treatments or serious photoshopping


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Prince Charles Angered Meghan Markle With Royal Family Plans

The nerve of this woman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

100% agree


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> they should be asked to meet with Charles...he's the one holding their purstrings


correction - meant to say "asking", not asked


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prince Charles Angered Meghan Markle With Royal Family Plans
> 
> The nerve of this woman.


if this is true, then it is So Ridiculous....who TF does she think she is?  she and her husband want their freedom but with all the perks of being royal.  
I'd be willing to bet if it wasn't for Harry and his kids being blood relatives the whole family would be fine with saying bye to this biatch.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> I guess we're lucky they didn't actually call her Queenie


HA!! .. that was my nickname at work because when I said "get it done", I meant it!!!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> they should be asked to meet with Charles...he's the one holding their purstrings





QueenofWrapDress said:


> You have a point there. I find it interesting how they are completely ignoring him. Do they think they can bully the Queen into setting stuff into motion Charles can't undo once it's his turn, or what exactly is their deal?


Charles stopped the wire transfers, and QE can still provide many photo-ops/news releases. 

Also, Charles and Will are their favorite targets imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Charles stopped the wire transfers, and QE can still provide many photo-ops/news releases.
> 
> Also, Charles and Will are their favorite targets imo.


I don't get it....do they still think he will give them money?  pay for security/whatever?


----------



## Chanbal

One more of the mysterious messages…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> One more of the mysterious messages…
> 
> View attachment 5185920



I hope there is a strong buffer between the Queen and the greedy whiners. She doesn’t deserve their drama. They are more desperate than ever for attention. I wouldn’t put attempting blackmail or worse past them.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> One more of the mysterious messages…
> 
> View attachment 5185920


This wouldn't surprise me; TQ should just not deal with them anymore!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it....do they still think he will give them money?  pay for security/whatever?


There is the possibility that Charles could give them money to stop them from further trashing the BRF, but they know that his volunteer wire transfers have ended imo.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> There is the possibility that Charles could give them money to stop them from further trashing the BRF, but they know that his volunteer wire transfers have ended imo.


But, in essence, that is like blackmail .. and if he pays them, then they will get an "okay" in their minds that they could continue to do this and each time?!??? .. mo' money, mo' money, 'mo money.   NO, the BRF really needs to just take EVERYTHING away with the exception of Harry's Prince title .. and let them just spit & whine .. because that will show their "TRUTH" - i.e., GRIFTERS SUPREME!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I hope there is a strong buffer between the Queen and the greedy whiners. She doesn’t deserve their drama. They are more desperate than ever for attention. *I wouldn’t put attempting blackmail or worse past them.*





CeeJay said:


> This wouldn't surprise me; TQ should just not deal with them anymore!





CeeJay said:


> But, in essence, that is like blackmail .. and if he pays them, then they will get an "okay" in their minds that they could continue to do this and each time?!??? .. mo' money, mo' money, 'mo money.   NO, the BRF really needs to just take EVERYTHING away with the exception of Harry's Prince title .. and let them just spit & whine .. because that will show their "TRUTH" - i.e., GRIFTERS SUPREME!



The word blackmail is very strong, but it has already been applied to them. QE or Charles shouldn't meet them without her aids and lawyers imo.


----------



## Chanbal

A valid response to their _"joint statement shared on their Archewell website"

Prince Harry and Meghan said: “The world is exceptionally fragile right now.

“As *we all feel the many layers of pain* due to the situation in Afghanistan, *we are left speechless*.”
…
Lee Cohen, senior fellow of the Bow Group think tank, urged the Duchess to stick to “Hollywood gossip” when speaking to the Daily Express website.

He also asked, “why would serious people even tune in?

“I have not seen any reaction from military personnel, _*why would serious people even tune in to what Ms Markle has to say on this or any issue except Hollywood gossip?…*









						Duchess of Sussex urged to stick to ‘Hollywood gossip’ after Taliban comments
					

Meghan Markle has been urged to stick to “Hollywood gossip” after releasing a statement about Afghanistan.




					www.theargus.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The word blackmail is very strong, but it has already been applied to them. QE or Charles shouldn't meet them without her aids and lawyers imo.



Yep, they have that new “biography” being written about them. They have to stir the pot to come up with new material for it. A visit with the Queen would be good for at least three chapters. If they don’t go back again they will have nothing in it that wasn’t in Finding Freedom (mystery child Lilibet aside).


----------



## csshopper

If the Queen is not forthcoming with an invitation it will put them in full victim mode and they will cry being denied and worse yet, their daughter is being cut off from the woman they named her for. The more I think about this, the more it feels like a "set up" and the Queen can't win. This action puts any visit on _their_ terms and may indicate they have realized they may not have an opportunity to turn down Christmas at Sandringham or the Queen's Jubilee Celebration, because they are not being offered an invitation to participate.

    Hmmm. If the Suckesses were to receive a response to their request like this one: "The Queen is unavailable for any appointments beyond those already scheduled in The Royal Calendar. She expects to be fully involved in plans for the modification of Windsor Castle, now her primary residence, soon to be shared in occupancy by The Duke(#2) and Duchess of Cambridge, future heir to the throne Prince George(#3), and his siblings Princess Charlotte(#4) and Prince Louie(#5). Further, planning will accelerate in anticipation of her Jubilee in 2022 and time is scarce. You, (Suckesses) may contact Sir or Lady....(Whoever does all this calendaring) and we will endeavor to schedule a Zoom opportunity for her Majesty to meet her Great Granddaughter and family".

It would be deliciously in their face and the eruption in Montecito might trigger one of the Faults in the earth and cause a minor Quake  
in the chicken coop .


----------



## charlottawill

The Queen hasn't been the monarch for 70+ years for nothing. She may be saddened to see her previously favored grandson fall prey to a manipulative woman like MM, but I doubt she's losing any sleep over this drama. She's dealt with more difficult people during her reign than a mediocre TV actress with delusions of grandeur. MM doesn't realize what she's up against, and that has been her problem since day one.


----------



## charlottawill

VickyB said:


> Not a Chanel bag.


Isn't that a Chanel Gabrielle?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I hope there is a strong buffer between the Queen and the greedy whiners. She doesn’t deserve their drama. They are more desperate than ever for attention. I wouldn’t put attempting blackmail or worse past them.


The Queen hasn't been the monarch for 70+ years for nothing. She may be saddened to see her previously favored grandson fall prey to a manipulative woman like MM, but I doubt she's losing any sleep over this drama. She's dealt with more difficult people during her reign than a mediocre TV actress with delusions of grandeur. MM doesn't realize what she's up against, and that has been her problem since day one. The top palace staffers undoubtedly deal with all the nonsense on The Queen's behalf. I don't think she reads the tabloids with her lunchtime gin. Or maybe she does and just laughs.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You have a point there. I find it interesting how they are completely ignoring him. Do they think they can bully the Queen into setting stuff into motion Charles can't undo once it's his turn, or what exactly is their deal?


Maybe M thinks that the queen will change the line of succession to skip over Charles and William and go straight to H to prove that the RF isn't racist. Or better yet, that HM will change the law to declare M as Queen Regnant and also give her mother a title.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Isn't that a Chanel Gabrielle?


Looks like a Gabrielle to me too, but I can't see it well enough to know if it is a knockoff.  I will tell you that if it is an authentic one and she still has it, Harry better watch out because the base is wood and weighs a ton if she ever aims it at his head.


----------



## gracekelly

Reply from BP  to Prince Harry regarding a private meeting with TQ:

HMTQ is having  extended alterations fittings with Angela Kelly, then with the milliner, then a walk through the Royal Jewelry Collection.  After she is finished she is hosting a tea for her grandchildren and great grandchildren.  Then pony rides in Great Windsor Park. George, Charlotte and Louis are then putting on a little play in honor of their late great grandfather Prince Philip.   After all that she is taking a well deserved nap and then  has to wash her hair.  Sorry her diary is full, please check back next time you are in town.  

Harry reads this and is floored.

Harry's response.  When will I be able to see her?

Reply from BP:  
Is never too soon?


----------



## rose60610

A Z-lister vs a still sharp woman of 95 who's spent her entire life dealing with presidents, dictators, prime ministers, other royalty, sheiks, tsars, emperors, etc?  I feel sorry (not) for the dim, greedy, conniving  race-card playing beesh already. In the end she'll be the groveling pathetic idiot for all the world to see (which everyone on this thread already sees).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

My spidey sense says QE’s meeting spaces have multiple recording devices - for posterity, of course.
No way H&M get any kind of ‘private’ meeting.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> A Z-lister vs a still sharp woman of 95 who's spent her entire life dealing with presidents, dictators, prime ministers, other royalty, sheiks, tsars, emperors, etc?  I feel sorry (not) for the dim, greedy, conniving  race-card playing beesh already. In the end she'll be the groveling pathetic idiot for all the world to see (which everyone on this thread already sees).


This: 
*Harry and Meghan popularity at all-time low with Brits*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's popularity has gone down again as the pair continue to suffer the fallout from their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March, according to polling by YouGov.

Positive opinion of the Duke of Sussex, 36, who lives in an £11 million mansion in Montecito, California, with his wife, has fallen by nine points, from 43 percent in April to 34 per cent now. 

The Duchess of Sussex, 40,* has seen a steady decline in her popularity this year, *with positive opinion at 30 per cent in March, falling to 29 per cent in April, and dropping a further three points to 26 per cent now.  (Bolding is mine made with a smile!)

YouGov blames 'poor responses to their statements surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and the withdrawal from Afghanistan', for the drop.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> My spidey sense says QE’s meeting spaces have multiple recording devices - for posterity, of course.
> No way H&M get any kind of ‘private’ meeting.


I think you are right.  Meetings need to be on the record and recorded for accuracy.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

VickyB said:


> Not a Chanel bag.


Isn’t that a Gabrielle !


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Will & Charles- The apparent villains… And they sill what an audience with QE!?
> View attachment 5185681
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William is villain for 'not speaking on racism' in new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV movie from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


In other words, this TV movie will be pure fiction, a literal turkey. 



gracekelly said:


> If the story about her taking pictures at KP is really true, how in the world did PC ever think she could be trusted about anything.?


She does have crocodile tears down pat. Perhaps she turned on the ocular tap and claimed that she had no idea this wasn't allowed. Then the idiot under her thumb pleaded on her behalf? I could write the next Lifetime Movie 



sdkitty said:


> they think the queen has more prestige?  she isn't a racist?  who knows what these schemers are thinking?  but seems unwise to throw his dad under the bus along with hers.  Hers she has used up and doesn't need anymore but they still want stuff from Charles apparently


They probably think she will be easier to con.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prince Charles Angered Meghan Markle With Royal Family Plans
> 
> The nerve of this woman.


The Nerve & the Nincompoop



Chanbal said:


> One more of the mysterious messages…
> 
> View attachment 5185920


If he can secure an interview with HMTQ, even without camera, the subsequent media releases would twist everything in their favour, because they would be (Lili)betting that TQ won't get into a he-said, she-said row with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> *(Lili)betting *



Love this new word!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> My spidey sense says QE’s meeting spaces have multiple recording devices - for posterity, of course.
> No way H&M get any kind of ‘private’ meeting.


Because we all know how H&M's recollections will vary.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> In other words, *this TV movie will be pure fiction*, a literal turkey.
> 
> 
> She does have crocodile tears down pat. Perhaps she turned on the ocular tap and claimed that she had no idea this wasn't allowed. Then the idiot under her thumb pleaded on her behalf? I could write the next Lifetime Movie



Like every Lifetime movie. I doubt it’s viewers will care if there is any truth to it, as long as it is over-the-top and good for consuming microwave popcorn.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Like every Lifetime movie. I doubt it’s viewers will care if there is any truth to it, as long as it is over-the-top and good for consuming *microwave popcorn.*



Processed microwave popcorn--all I can taste are the chemicals in it. I bought a glass pitcher for the microwave that you put plain kernels into and you can add melted butter, etc if you want. Or I make it on the stove in a heavy bottom stock pot. MUCH better!  Also much better if you're not watching a Lifetime movie with it! Any program with Meghan in it is enough to lose your appetite for anything.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Isn't that a Chanel Gabrielle?


Yes, she had a black Gabrielle in one of the photos. It was probably a gift from Charles, since he was paying all her bills.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Looks like a Gabrielle to me too, but I can't see it well enough to know if it is a knockoff.  I will tell you that if it is an authentic one and she still has it, Harry better watch out because the base is wood and weighs a ton if she ever aims it at his head.


I've the same bag. Compared to Classic Jumbos, Gabrielle is relatively light. So Hazz is probably OK.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Processed microwave popcorn--*all I can taste are the chemicals in it. *I bought a glass pitcher for the microwave that you put plain kernels into and you can add melted butter, etc if you want. Or I make it on the stove in a heavy bottom stock pot. MUCH better!  Also much better if you're not watching a Lifetime movie with it! *Any program with Meghan in it is enough to lose your appetite for anything.*



If I was forced to watch a show about Meghan I’d be happy to eat the chemicals if only for the distraction.


----------



## Lodpah

@Maggie Muggins Can I nominate the name Meghan McBeth? You know, the cruel woman in Shakespeare? Probably says this to Dumb . . . I mean stupid. . . I mean Hazza every night. 

*“Screw your courage to the sticking-place,
And we’ll not fail.”*


----------



## needlv

As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match


----------



## bisbee

csshopper said:


> If the Queen is not forthcoming with an invitation it will put them in full victim mode and they will cry being denied and worse yet, their daughter is being cut off from the woman they named her for. The more I think about this, the more it feels like a "set up" and the Queen can't win. This action puts any visit on _their_ terms and may indicate they have realized they may not have an opportunity to turn down Christmas at Sandringham or the Queen's Jubilee Celebration, because they are not being offered an invitation to participate.
> 
> Hmmm. If the Suckesses were to receive a response to their request like this one: "The Queen is unavailable for any appointments beyond those already scheduled in The Royal Calendar. She expects to be fully involved in plans for the modification of Windsor Castle, now her primary residence, soon to be shared in occupancy by The Duke(#2) and Duchess of Cambridge, future heir to the throne Prince George(#3), and his siblings Princess Charlotte(#4) and Prince Louie(#5). Further, planning will accelerate in anticipation of her Jubilee in 2022 and time is scarce. You, (Suckesses) may contact Sir or Lady....(Whoever does all this calendaring) and we will endeavor to schedule a Zoom opportunity for her Majesty to meet her Great Granddaughter and family".
> 
> It would be deliciously in their face and the eruption in Montecito might trigger one of the Faults in the earth and cause a minor Quake
> in the chicken coop .





gracekelly said:


> Reply from BP  to Prince Harry regarding a private meeting with TQ:
> 
> HMTQ is having  extended alterations fittings with Angela Kelly, then with the milliner, then a walk through the Royal Jewelry Collection.  After she is finished she is hosting a tea for her grandchildren and great grandchildren.  Then pony rides in Great Windsor Park. George, Charlotte and Louis are then putting on a little play in honor of their late great grandfather Prince Philip.   After all that she is taking a well deserved nap and then  has to wash her hair.  Sorry her diary is full, please check back next time you are in town.
> 
> Harry reads this and is floored.
> 
> Harry's response.  When will I be able to see her?
> 
> Reply from BP:
> Is never too soon?


I’m sure the BRF will be grateful for these suggestions!  The scenarios on this thread are much more interesting than the real situation, none of which we will ever know anything about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match




We know Meghan keeps Harry’s balls tightly in her grip. He wouldn’t dare cheat on her. And even if he did, Meghan certainly wouldn’t want to go to the Queen to tattle on him. Hell, at this point Harry’s whole family would be delighted if they heard he had taken up with some random woman at a polo match. Anyone would seem better than the Megalodon.

It’s a fun story though.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> @Maggie Muggins Can I nominate the name *Meghan McBeth*? You know, the cruel woman in Shakespeare? Probably says this to Dumb . . . I mean stupid. . . I mean Hazza every night.
> 
> *“Screw your courage to the sticking-place,
> And we’ll not fail.”*


Thanks @Lodpah  Meghan McBeth has been added to The List. Yes, I know about Lady Macbeth as we studied the tragedy in HS.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match



He is immature enough to cheat on her for the thrill of it, but is she really dumb enough to go complain to TQ? She'll probably go to her friendly media Ken and Barbie (Hi, Omid and Gayle!) if she wanted to play the ultimate victim card (I gave up everything - my career, my life, my figure - for him and he cheated on me! Cue waterproof mascara).


----------



## VickyB

charlottawill said:


> Isn't that a Chanel Gabrielle?





charlottawill said:


> Isn't that a Chanel Gabrielle?


Yes!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> We know Meghan keeps Harry’s balls tightly in her grip. He wouldn’t dare cheat on her. And even if he did, Meghan certainly wouldn’t want to go to the Queen to tattle on him. Hell, at this point Harry’s whole family would be delighted if they heard he had taken up with some random woman at a polo match. Anyone would seem better than the *Megalodon*.
> 
> It’s a fun story though.


Thanks @bag-mania  for the nickname *Megalodon*: an extinct shark species whose name means Big Tooth. Luv it! So, Big Tooth Shark, fits M very well even though she hides her mean b*t*h bite with veneers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more of the mysterious messages…
> 
> View attachment 5185920



Even someone as idiotic as her would know this is illegal, right?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I don't think she reads the tabloids with her lunchtime gin. Or maybe she does and just laughs.



She does. She gets delivered a ton of newspapers daily, and I have seen a picture where the Daily Mail was featured layed out on her table. She might not go in depth on the gossip, but she is not totally out of the loop.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match



Hmm
I don't think he'd dare cheat on her


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> Hmm
> I don't think he'd dare cheat on her


Would anybody even want to be with him?  He’s such a loser in my book.  If he wasn’t royal what would he be doing with his life?  (Not that he’s doing much with it now)


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Would anybody even want to be with him?  He’s such a loser in my book.  If he wasn’t royal what would he be doing with his life?  (Not that he’s doing much with it now)


right....but there are plenty of women who'd be interested in him because he is (or was) royal, and famous


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Would anybody even want to be with him?  He’s such a loser in my book.  If he wasn’t royal what would he be doing with his life?  (Not that he’s doing much with it now)



There are lots of women who are attracted to losers who don't have any money or fame. Good judgment doesn't seem to factor in to the decision when it comes to such matters.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> There‘s a time and place to pinch a female’s backside. There’s a time and place to show the nips.  Nobody wants to see stuff like that.
> Remember when Diana and Fergie poked backsides at Ascot or some such place? Yeah, the apple did not fall from the tree. Rude people, especially people of privilege, are disgusting.  If they knew this lady, does it become less disgusting? less bullying?  IMO, no.
> 
> View attachment 5185233



I remember when this happened!  Both Diana and Fergie got a lot of criticism for this childish behavior, rightfully so.


----------



## Chanbal

Why isn't Cosmopolitan writing about an olive branch for TM? The poor man dedicated his life (and money) to his beloved daughter.


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match




Interesting as several gossip sites have alluded to him cheating on her in the past too.


----------



## rose60610

Considering there are women who actively seek relationships with strange men who are in prison, I don't think Harry would have a shortage of women who'd throw themselves at him and want to shag him, if only for "bragging rights". And Harry would be stupid enough to fall for it. I don't think Meghan would even care as long as she gets to keep her titles and hook in the BRF to make money by throwing lit matches into gasoline. Whatever can line her pockets is fine with her, and the more inflammatory the better. In fact, If Harry cheated on her, she'd love to wallow in the victimhood status it'd give her. I wouldn't put it past her to even frame him. I think that'll be her last bite at the BRF apple, why divorce him when you can easily frame Harry to make another fortune off being a victim--her favorite role to play. She wouldn't miss that opportunity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Why Cosmopolitan is not writing about an olive branch for TM? The poor man dedicated his life (and money) to his beloved daughter.
> View attachment 5186580



How very generous of them.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How very generous of them.


Very generous! An interesting Tweet…


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> This:
> *Harry and Meghan popularity at all-time low with Brits*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's popularity has gone down again as the pair continue to suffer the fallout from their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March, according to polling by YouGov.
> 
> Positive opinion of the Duke of Sussex, 36, who lives in an £11 million mansion in Montecito, California, with his wife, has fallen by nine points, from 43 percent in April to 34 per cent now.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40,* has seen a steady decline in her popularity this year, *with positive opinion at 30 per cent in March, falling to 29 per cent in April, and dropping a further three points to 26 per cent now.  (Bolding is mine made with a smile!)
> 
> YouGov blames 'poor responses to their statements surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and the withdrawal from Afghanistan', for the drop.










The Independent
*Prince Harry is second least popular royal behind Prince Andrew, YouGov poll shows*

Saman Javed
Tue, 7 September 2021, 3:36 pm






Prince Harry during the Global Citizen Vax Live concert in May (Getty Images for Global Citizen )
Prince Harry is the most unpopular member of the royal family after Prince Andrew, a new poll has shown.
A new YouGov survey found that positive opinions of Prince Harry have fallen by nine per cent in a few months, going from 43 per cent in April to 34 per cent in August.
The public’s opinion of Meghan Markle has also declined, from 31 per cent of people saying they think positively of the duchess in March, to 29 per cent in April and 26 per cent now.
The poll, which was conducted between 27 and 29 August, surveyed 1,667 adults from a range of political backgrounds and age groups.

Prince Andrew remains the least popular, with only six per cent of the publicstating that they have a positive opinion of the royal.
YouGov said Harry and Meghan’s ratings have continued to slip since their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March this year, “as well as poor responses to their statements surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic and the [US] withdrawal from Afghanistan”.
On 17 August Harry and Meghan released a statement on their Archwell Foundation website telling fans they were “left speechless” by the situation in Afghanistan, the Haiti earthquake that took place on 14 August and the pandemic.
“The world is exceptionally fragile right now,” their statement began.
“When any person or community suffers, a piece of each of us does so with them, whether we realize it or not,” the couple said, urging the public to support humanitarian organisations.
“As an international community, it is the decisions we make now — to alleviate suffering among those we know and those we may never meet — that will prove our humanity.”
The couple faced backlash from critics shortly after releasing the statement.
Radio host Julia Hartley-Brewer wrote in a tweet: “Thank god ‘speechless’ Harry and Meghan have spoken on the terrible state of the world, so now we all know what we are supposed to feel, say and do.”

Meanwhile, royal biographer Angela Levin accused the couple of “trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family”.
“Like most of their ‘compassionate’ gestures there is no indication about what they themselves will do and whether any donations will be going through Archwell Foundation,” she told _Daily Mail_.
Despite their overall drop in popularity, Harry and Meghan remain the most popular royals among young people.
Among those aged between 18 and 24, 47 per cent have a positive view of Harry, whilst 50 per cent think positively of Meghan.
In contrast, only 13-18 per cent of people over the age of 65 hold the couple in a positive light.
_The Independent_ has contacted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Very generous! An interesting Tweet…
> View attachment 5186597


The poor dear is allergic to truth and breaks out in freckles at the slightest hint of it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Who will Hazbeen blame for his declining popularity?


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> Meanwhile, royal biographer Angela Levin accused the couple of “trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family”.
> “Like most of their ‘compassionate’ gestures there is no indication about what they themselves will do and whether any donations will be going through Archwell Foundation,” she told _Daily Mail_.
> Despite their overall drop in popularity, Harry and Meghan remain the most popular royals among young people.
> *Among those aged between 18 and 24, 47 per cent have a positive view of Harry, whilst 50 per cent think positively of Meghan.
> In contrast, only 13-18 per cent of people over the age of 65 hold the couple in a positive light.*
> _The Independent_ has contacted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.



Those ages 18-24 have their whole careers ahead of them and may be fearful of social and job repercussions for saying they don't think positively of a liberal woke WOC. Those over 65 are typically retired and won't face employment consequences for stating their opinion. Of course, Markle sugars would say this is proof that people who don't support Meghan are racist. I just find it hard to be supportive of anyone, regardless of color, who has had the world with an embarrassment of riches handed to them, passing themself off as a victim and does her best to destroy the very family who gave her everything. Especially after immersing herself in the royal life, living with Harry, and receiving all the perks before she even got the royal wedding. How did the BRF suddenly become "racist" after all that? That timeline destroys her credibility.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> Notice how it is always spoken about TQ seeing the children and never about Charles?  TQ has lots of grand and great grando.  Charles only has the Cambs and the Sussex and he never sees 2 out of 5


He has step grandchildren with Camilla too and they are very close to them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PSA.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> There are lots of women who are attracted to losers who don't have any money or fame. Good judgment doesn't seem to factor in to the decision when it comes to such matters.


I totally agree, but I just find him so unattractive lol!


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match



The problem that I have with this report is that Hazza had to return his balls to Mugging after he  finished juggling with them


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> PSA.



As much as I love Lady C, that was hard to listen to.

Reading from that book was so annoying and Omid Scabies, as she calls him, managed to write many pages and say nothing. Absolutely nothing.

I did love Lady C correcting his grammatical mistakes within the book though.


----------



## csshopper

Lady C got me thinking, Scabies is the CO author of this piece of fiction, yet I do not recall ever hearing, seeing, or reading quotes from the female co author, Carolyn Durand. Maybe I missed them, but they would still be a fraction of his pronouncements if she did speak out. So, another Methane hypocrisy, proclaim feminist empowerment but only let the male mouthpiece spew. 

Poor Scabies, the world does not seem to have been waiting for his paperback update, published August 31. On Amazon it initially ranked in the 800's of over all sales. Today, a week later, it is #3,135 over all. It is #1 in Royal Biographies, probably all those young stans who support them waited for the paperback edition.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Who will Hazbeen blame for his declining popularity?


This thread.  I say we deserve a round of applause!    
(I'm sure they'll blame all the world's racists as well.)


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> Lady C got me thinking, Scabies is the CO author of this piece of fiction, yet I do not recall ever hearing, seeing, or reading quotes from the female co author, Carolyn Durand. Maybe I missed them, but they would still be a fraction of his pronouncements if she did speak out. So, another Methane hypocrisy, proclaim feminist empowerment but only let the male mouthpiece spew.
> 
> Poor Scabies, the world does not seem to have been waiting for his paperback update, published August 31. On Amazon it initially ranked in the 800's of over all sales. Today, a week later, it is #3,135 over all. It is #1 in Royal Biographies, *probably all those young stans who support them waited for the paperback edition*.



Then used their allowance to purchase it.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanlity, yes! Since September 22, 2006!  Almost 5 years of telling the truth.

Took a quick look back and by post 18 we were into a series of photos of a smashed Haz, totally blitzed and in need of support of his handlers. 

Age has not brought maturity to Haz during the ensuing years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> As this is a gossip site.. I thought I would post this.  Although credibility is very low.  Apparently H cheated on M around the time of the polo match



But wait .. there's is the huge *LOVE STORY*!   BWAH-HA-HA-HA


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She does. She gets delivered a ton of newspapers daily, and I have seen a picture where the Daily Mail was featured layed out on her table. She might not go in depth on the gossip, but she is not totally out of the loop.


That actually makes sense, as it is a way to keep a finger on the pulse of her people, so to speak.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Lady C got me thinking, Scabies is the CO author of this piece of fiction, yet I do not recall ever hearing, seeing, or reading quotes from the female co author, Carolyn Durand. Maybe I missed them, but they would still be a fraction of his pronouncements if she did speak out. So, another Methane hypocrisy, proclaim feminist empowerment but only let the male mouthpiece spew.
> 
> Poor Scabies, the world does not seem to have been waiting for his paperback update, published August 31. On Amazon it initially ranked in the 800's of over all sales. Today, a week later, it is #3,135 over all. It is #1 in Royal Biographies, probably all those young stans who support them waited for the paperback edition.



Durand has been consistently _no casa _through this entire book emergence.  She has decided to "step back" (now where did that phrase come from?) and allow Mr. Scabies to enjoy all the limelight.  Wise woman and I bet she regrets everything except her paycheck.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> But wait .. there's is the huge *LOVE STORY*!   BWAH-HA-HA-HA


I thought that *love was never having to say you're sorry*?  I guess The Queen saw that movie, Muggins.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Hmm
> I don't think he'd dare cheat on her


...yet. Give him another year or so.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> ...yet. Give him another year or so.



He’ll never have the opportunity. Meghan runs a tight ship. I’d be surprised if Harry is allowed to speak to other women.


----------



## needlv




----------



## xeyes

So, the alleged conversation about the baby’s skin color might have gone something like this:

Hazmat: *blathers on and on and on and on about how he wants the baby to be dark-skinned because he’ll look SO KEWL*

Unnamed Royal Relative: “Will you _please_ shut up? Whatever color the baby is, all that matters is that it’s healthy.”

Hazmat to Maggot later: “They said the baby’s color doesn’t matter”

Maggot: “They talked about our baby’s skin tone? RAYCESS”

...and there’s your “conversation” about the baby’s skin tone. Yes, it was mentioned, but in nowhere near the manner that they spun it to Oprah.


----------



## csshopper

WHY would she post this????????  Article goes on to say she and Methane are still good friends.

*Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney reveals she has 'full place setting' from designer who sells plates featuring the Queen and Prince Philip with the words 'Hail Satan'*

*Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney, 40, from Toronto, shared plate online*
*The stylist revealed she had the 'full place setting' from designer Wolf Dottir *
*Other plates from store feature 'Hail Satan' with Queen and Prince Philip's face*
*Another item shows the monarch's portrait alongside words 'Eat sh** and die' *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I was reading through the other stuff that Luca guy tweeted and retweeted...remember that embarrassing, sloppy mosque visit? There's more pictures of her hugging and flirting with officials on that very same engagement. This woman has no boundaries.

But what I found really concerning:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> WHY would she post this????????  Article goes on to say she and Methane are still good friends.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney reveals she has 'full place setting' from designer who sells plates featuring the Queen and Prince Philip with the words 'Hail Satan'*
> 
> *Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney, 40, from Toronto, shared plate online*
> *The stylist revealed she had the 'full place setting' from designer Wolf Dottir *
> *Other plates from store feature 'Hail Satan' with Queen and Prince Philip's face*
> *Another item shows the monarch's portrait alongside words 'Eat sh** and die' *



Let me quote Lady CC again: "Plastic shoes pretending to be leather". I'll throw in a "vulgar" for good measure.


----------



## justwatchin

dup post


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> ...yet. Give him another year or so.


But . . . how would he perform the act? He has no balls and I’m sure his you know what has probably be bobbitted only to be released by the Barracuda.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I was reading through the other stuff that Luca guy tweeted and retweeted...remember that embarrassing, sloppy mosque visit? There's more pictures of her hugging and flirting with officials on that very same engagement. This woman has no boundaries.
> 
> But what I found really concerning:



You think M15 or 6 releasing stuff?


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> WHY would she post this????????  Article goes on to say she and Methane are still good friends.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney reveals she has 'full place setting' from designer who sells plates featuring the Queen and Prince Philip with the words 'Hail Satan'*
> 
> *Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney, 40, from Toronto, shared plate online*
> *The stylist revealed she had the 'full place setting' from designer Wolf Dottir *
> *Other plates from store feature 'Hail Satan' with Queen and Prince Philip's face*
> *Another item shows the monarch's portrait alongside words 'Eat sh** and die' *


It’s probably “her truth” or MM is grasping at anything right now. How low can those go?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I was reading through the other stuff that Luca guy tweeted and retweeted...remember that embarrassing, sloppy mosque visit? There's more pictures of her hugging and flirting with officials on that very same engagement. This woman has no boundaries.
> 
> But what I found really concerning:



This is starting to have more drama than an 80's prime time soap opera. Aaron Spelling couldn't have dreamt this up.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> The Independent
> *Prince Harry is second least popular royal behind Prince Andrew, YouGov poll shows*
> 
> Saman Javed
> Tue, 7 September 2021, 3:36 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry during the Global Citizen Vax Live concert in May (Getty Images for Global Citizen )
> Prince Harry is the most unpopular member of the royal family after Prince Andrew, a new poll has shown.
> A new YouGov survey found that positive opinions of Prince Harry have fallen by nine per cent in a few months, going from 43 per cent in April to 34 per cent in August.
> The public’s opinion of Meghan Markle has also declined, from 31 per cent of people saying they think positively of the duchess in March, to 29 per cent in April and 26 per cent now.
> The poll, which was conducted between 27 and 29 August, surveyed 1,667 adults from a range of political backgrounds and age groups.
> 
> Prince Andrew remains the least popular, with only six per cent of the publicstating that they have a positive opinion of the royal.
> YouGov said Harry and Meghan’s ratings have continued to slip since their interview with Oprah Winfrey in March this year, “as well as poor responses to their statements surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic and the [US] withdrawal from Afghanistan”.
> On 17 August Harry and Meghan released a statement on their Archwell Foundation website telling fans they were “left speechless” by the situation in Afghanistan, the Haiti earthquake that took place on 14 August and the pandemic.
> “The world is exceptionally fragile right now,” their statement began.
> “When any person or community suffers, a piece of each of us does so with them, whether we realize it or not,” the couple said, urging the public to support humanitarian organisations.
> “As an international community, it is the decisions we make now — to alleviate suffering among those we know and those we may never meet — that will prove our humanity.”
> The couple faced backlash from critics shortly after releasing the statement.
> Radio host Julia Hartley-Brewer wrote in a tweet: “Thank god ‘speechless’ Harry and Meghan have spoken on the terrible state of the world, so now we all know what we are supposed to feel, say and do.”
> 
> Meanwhile, royal biographer Angela Levin accused the couple of “trying to set up some sort of alternate woke royal family”.
> “Like most of their ‘compassionate’ gestures there is no indication about what they themselves will do and whether any donations will be going through Archwell Foundation,” she told _Daily Mail_.
> Despite their overall drop in popularity, Harry and Meghan remain the most popular royals among young people.
> Among those aged between 18 and 24, 47 per cent have a positive view of Harry, whilst 50 per cent think positively of Meghan.
> In contrast, only 13-18 per cent of people over the age of 65 hold the couple in a positive light.
> _The Independent_ has contacted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.


They’re sewer rats those two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> You think M15 or 6 releasing stuff?



No, just being flabbergasted by their general a*sholeness. 

I wonder if a surrogate could even talk, wouldn't she have signed an NDA?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, just being flabbergasted by their general a*sholeness.
> 
> I wonder if a surrogate could even talk, wouldn't she have signed an NDA?


I’m not sure.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, just being flabbergasted by their general a*sholeness.
> 
> I wonder if a surrogate could even talk, wouldn't she have signed an NDA?



Maybe they haven't paid her either


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love love this thread. I was sitting here quietly minding my own business, then I surfed into this thread. My o my!
Kudos to the best pages on the internet! 



rose60610 said:


> I don't think Meghan would even care as long as she gets to keep her titles and hook in the BRF to make money by throwing lit matches into gasoline. Whatever can line her pockets is fine with her, and the more inflammatory the better. In fact, If Harry cheated on her, she'd love to wallow in the victimhood status it'd give her. I wouldn't put it past her to even frame him. I think that'll be her last bite at the BRF apple, why divorce him when you can easily frame Harry to make another fortune off being a victim--her favorite role to play. She wouldn't miss that opportunity.



THIS, 100 times.    After the 2 kids and lots of missteps, blunders, etc., the bloom is off this romance.



needlv said:


>




100% believe this. 



csshopper said:


> WHY would she post this????????  Article goes on to say she and Methane are still good friends.



Why would anyone spend their hard-earned dollars on this junk?  Even as a ‘gift’, it is really sick.  



Lodpah said:


> You think M15 or 6 releasing stuff?



They have plenty of ‘people’ who do that for them. ::

My question — will they win an Emmy?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Is anyone watching this nonsense?









						How ‘Escaping the Palace’ Handles Harry and Meghan’s Royal Exit
					

Lifetime’s third Sussex-centered film explores the Kensington Palace infighting and British tabloid leaks that led to Meg and Harry’s dramatic departure—and their bombshell Oprah interview.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is anyone watching this nonsense?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How ‘Escaping the Palace’ Handles Harry and Meghan’s Royal Exit
> 
> 
> Lifetime’s third Sussex-centered film explores the Kensington Palace infighting and British tabloid leaks that led to Meg and Harry’s dramatic departure—and their bombshell Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


I happened to be flipping channels and watched it a second or 2. The acting was so bad and the filmography also that I actually thought MM was playing herself.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Lady C got me thinking, Scabies is the CO author of this piece of fiction, yet I do not recall ever hearing, seeing, or reading quotes from the female co author, Carolyn Durand. Maybe I missed them, but they would still be a fraction of his pronouncements if she did speak out. So, another Methane hypocrisy, proclaim feminist empowerment but only let the male mouthpiece spew.
> 
> Poor Scabies, the world does not seem to have been waiting for his paperback update, published August 31. On Amazon it initially ranked in the 800's of over all sales. Today, a week later, it is #3,135 over all. It is #1 in Royal Biographies, probably all those young stans who support them waited for the paperback edition.


I checked her background and it is prominently mentioned that she does work for Oprah. 

I'm wondering too why only Omid gets to claim credit and be the mouthpiece. Is it because of his "credibility" as a person of mixed race? Makes his defense of Methane more "powerful"?


----------



## bag-mania

I am disappointed that the American press still believes everything they say without question, even when in the form of a cheesy Lifetime flick.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I am disappointed that the American press still believes everything they say without question, even when in the form of a cheesy Lifetime flick.


Don't get your hopes up too high, but "_*Royal Expert Kinsey Schofield says Americans are turning on Harry & Meghan*._"


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, just being flabbergasted by their general a*sholeness.
> 
> I wonder if a surrogate could even talk, wouldn't she have signed an NDA?


If they didn't do their part (pay the medical bills), maybe that voids the NDA? After all, it is a transaction, not a gag order from the courts. Although I think it would be exceedingly foolish of them if they didn't do their part. Did the cheque bounce? Maybe the surrogate wanted more money?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is anyone watching this nonsense?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How ‘Escaping the Palace’ Handles Harry and Meghan’s Royal Exit
> 
> 
> Lifetime’s third Sussex-centered film explores the Kensington Palace infighting and British tabloid leaks that led to Meg and Harry’s dramatic departure—and their bombshell Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


I had enough just by watching a couple of videos on Twitter. 
Here is a good question about a statement that wasn't issued:


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


>



 If even partially true, do Archie and Lilibet disappoint him? Isn't simply being a father fulfilling enough for him?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Don't get your hopes up too high, but "_*Royal Expert Kinsey Schofield says Americans are turning on Harry & Meghan*._"




Going by what is being said in the comment section of some of these articles (well, the articles that still allow reader comments), they have definitely lost popularity among ordinary people. The American journalists refuse to challenge the one-sided Lifetime fiction portraying them as being victims of the British press and mean old Firm, but the comments at the end of this Washington Post article give me hope. Oh, it has a few of the same stans defending H&M against everyone who criticizes them but they were really kept busy.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/09/06/harry-meghan-lifetime-movie/


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Going by what is being said in the comment section of some of these articles (well, the articles that still allow reader comments), they have definitely lost popularity among ordinary people. The American journalists refuse to challenge the one-sided Lifetime fiction portraying them as being victims of the British press and mean old Firm, but the comments at the end of this Washington Post article give me hope. Oh, it has a few of the same stans defending H&M against everyone who criticizes them but they were really kept busy.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/09/06/harry-meghan-lifetime-movie/



You are correct! These comments are gold - a sample:


_tklx1p
38 minutes ago

An exhausting series of contrived micro aggressions -- tiresome after a few minutes.

Independent
2 hours ago
Didn't watch the movie.  That's how to become an influencer.  You don't watch, they don't get the ratings.  You want to learn about someone.  Google it in different outlets.  You get the info and provide no ratings.

sage in the usa
3 hours ago
If you sort the comments by "Most Liked", I think it's more than obvious what the majority of intelligent people think about this couple. There are a lot of defensive and false narratives below, but looking at the "Most Liked" comments restores my faith that people's BS meters are still working. I'm bored with H & M now---as well as the relentless "policing" below---so that's it from me! Knock each other out replying. Bye!_


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Annawakes

Those plates…..wtf?????


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



Who in the world thinks this set is funny?  I saw some of the other plates and they are equally  in bad taste.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Going by what is being said in the comment section of some of these articles (well, the articles that still allow reader comments), they have definitely lost popularity among ordinary people. The American journalists refuse to challenge the one-sided Lifetime fiction portraying them as being victims of the British press and mean old Firm, but the comments at the end of this Washington Post article give me hope. Oh, it has a few of the same stans defending H&M against everyone who criticizes them but they were really kept busy.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/09/06/harry-meghan-lifetime-movie/


The comments are incendiary. Anyone who complains about this thread should read that. Methane's stans there are militant in her defense and deride the BRF. There was one comment that especially caught my eye. It was about Methane not following protocol and always racing to get herself in front of the pack. The stan insisted that protocol was bs, so it doesn't matter if Methane didn't follow it. Another stan claimed that the UK was a middle-level country (as compared to the US which tops the global pack, I presume) and the BRF are some relic from the past. And they have raised Methane's profile to multi-millionaire before her marriage to Hazard, because anything above one mil means you can call yourself a multi-millionaire.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just look at his face.  The hate is real, very real - I would not want him or her standing behind me.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Is Mulroney bragging about place settings as a show of support for her soulmate? It certainly doesn't show that she has any sense of style or wit.


----------



## Chanbal

A menace to free speech…


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Who in the world thinks this set is funny?  I saw some of the other plates and they are equally  in bad taste.


I don't know enough about Canadian politics to know what kind of relationship he had with the Crown, but I wonder what her father-in-law, former Prime Minister of Canada thinks about this? 

It sure doesn't reflect well on the Mulroney family.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, just being flabbergasted by their general a*sholeness.
> 
> I wonder if a surrogate could even talk, wouldn't she have signed an NDA?


If they haven’t kept their end of their deal, maybe it’s null and void?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Is Mulroney bragging about place settings as a show of support for her soulmate? It certainly doesn't show that she has any sense of style or wit.


Mulroney reminds me of the kind of woman who is either born into money, married into money, or both.  The kind that doesn’t have a single intelligent brain cell, but acts superior to those around her simply because of sheer luck.  She’s sick if she has these plates, and demented if she’s posting that she does.


----------



## xincinsin

Found an article that says Mulroney was actually bragging about another design: some girl holding a chicken (it's Methane!), and her IG post didn't say she has the satanic set. 









						Why Jessica Mulroney's Bizarre Dinnerware Is Causing A Stir - The List
					

The royal family is involved in anything, even if they're not. Such is the compromise for being the monarch or being related to her.




					www.thelist.com


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> A menace to free speech…




Meghan is fantastic for advocates of free speech. When someone as narcissistic, greedy, thirsty, shameless, and idiotic as Meghan opens her mouth, she demonstrates that free speech runs the gamut from inspiring others to do great things (clearly not in Meghan's case) to (yes, in her case) proving that the speaker is such a disaster and a disgrace that her own actions discredit all she laughably claims to be. This expedites the realization that Meghan is nothing less than an opportunistic, gold-digging fame whore. Of course, I mean it in a nice way .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5187139


Well I find this fascinating.  But I can't imagine not paying the surrogate whatever she wants.

So who was the first surrogate, I wonder.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


>



This not quite deep fake is very funny!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


>



I think Meghan wanted a white passing “black” child too …


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> What a worthless spineless shmack Hazbeen is *shaking my head*


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Mulroney reminds me of the kind of woman who is either born into money, married into money, or both.  The kind that doesn’t have a single intelligent brain cell, but acts superior to those around her simply because of sheer luck.  She’s sick if she has these plates, and demented if she’s posting that she does.



According to Wikipedia, she comes from money. Perhaps she is the type of vain, boring woman who enjoys peeing in the forest.    The article says it is unclear which plates she has. Seeee, once again the drama-lovers wind everyone up with their piss-poor communication skills.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5187139



Uh oh. I wonder if something will come out of this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If they didn't do their part (pay the medical bills), maybe that voids the NDA? After all, it is a transaction, not a gag order from the courts. Although I think it would be exceedingly foolish of them if they didn't do their part. Did the cheque bounce? Maybe the surrogate wanted more money?



Of course it's possible they had a contract that not only included the NDA but also said the contract was void if someone failed to meet their end (I've signed NDAs before and they were an extra form). That said, the woman randomly deciding she wants more money than negotiated is surely no reason to claim the troublesome two didn't fulfill their part.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Somewhere in the Luca tweets was one buried saying she always acts inappropriately sexual and flirty with men. I've definitely seen this behaviour in other narcissists with histrionic traits.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Who in the world thinks this set is funny?  I saw some of the other plates and they are equally  in bad taste.



Gary Janetti and his crowd? Because his cartoon thing is equally gross.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of course it's possible they had a contract that not only included the NDA but also said the contract was void if someone failed to meet their end (I've signed NDAs before and they were an extra form). That said, the woman randomly deciding she wants more money than negotiated is surely no reason to claim the troublesome two didn't fulfill their part.


Might not be a demand for more than negotiated. The deal may have been structured such that the surrogate receives bonuses for meeting certain criteria, and the dispute may be over those bonuses.

And of course the surrogate piping up now may be a conman trying to extort money or sell a made-up tale. The circumstances of the Lil Bit's birth are murky enough that people would take advantage of the situation to make a quick buck.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> The circumstances of the Lil Bit's birth are murky enough that people would take advantage of the situation to make a quick buck.



And to think they brought all of this upon themselves. If the same rumours came up about Kate people wouldn't give it a second thought because it would seem completely absurd (no, not because she's WHITE but because she doesn't constantly create drama and failed attempts at mystery).


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The comments are incendiary. Anyone who complains about this thread should read that. Methane's stans there are militant in her defense and deride the BRF. There was one comment that especially caught my eye. It was about Methane not following protocol and always racing to get herself in front of the pack. The stan insisted that protocol was bs, so it doesn't matter if Methane didn't follow it. Another stan claimed that the UK was a middle-level country (as compared to the US which tops the global pack, I presume) and the BRF are some relic from the past. And they have raised Methane's profile to multi-millionaire before her marriage to Hazard, because anything above one mil means you can call yourself a multi-millionaire.



The level of delusion in the comments was off the charts. One of the stans posting there claimed Kate really wishes she could have had Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Going by what is being said in the comment section of some of these articles (well, the articles that still allow reader comments), they have definitely lost popularity among ordinary people. The American journalists refuse to challenge the one-sided Lifetime fiction portraying them as being victims of the British press and mean old Firm, but the comments at the end of this Washington Post article give me hope. Oh, it has a few of the same stans defending H&M against everyone who criticizes them but they were really kept busy.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/09/06/harry-meghan-lifetime-movie/



Like this one? 

"She doesn’t seem to be particularly interested in fame and status.  And her new life isn’t dependent on fame and status."

Completely delusional.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to Wikipedia, she comes from money. Perhaps she is the type of vain, boring woman who enjoys peeing in the forest.    The article says it is unclear which plates she has. Seeee, once again the drama-lovers wind everyone up with their piss-poor communication skills.


I really hope so!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5187139


so it's looking like there really was a surrogate?  and if so, she walked around with a fake baby bump?  how bizarre.  wonder if she gave birth to Archie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



how low can you go?


----------



## bag-mania

*30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
_A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex_.










						30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's <i>Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace</i>
					

A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




This weekend, Lifetime released its third (yes, third) installment of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fictionalized movies. This one, entitled Harry and Meghan: Escaping the Palace, follows Meghan and Harry as they contemplate and eventually leave their royal duties and move to Santa Barbara.

This movie has everything: dramatic flashbacks of Princess Diana, varyingly successful British accents, royal look-alikes, and many, many furrowed brows. As a writer who often reports on the British royals, I wrote down, in real-time, my thoughts, questions, and concerns. Spoilers ahead.


We start with a heavy-handed recreation of Princess Diana’s car accident, except it’s Meghan (or rather, Sydney Morton as Meghan) inside the car. Subtle as a sledgehammer, folks.
William is being talked into visiting Archie, Meghan, and Harry. Let the family tension begin!
I know that the real Prince Harry looks a bit like Ed Sheeran, but this Prince Harry somehow looks even more like Ed Sheeran. I wonder if they can book the real Ed Sheeran for the next movie?
Harry and William are fighting on a miniature dock by a pond. It seems like a missed opportunity for Harry to push William into the pond, but perhaps that would be too “out-there.”
We’re at Trooping the Colour 2019 and Kate suggests that she wear the outfit from Meghan and Harry’s wedding as a sign of unity. It’s a bit of a wink and a nudge to all the stories about hidden meaning in the royals' clothing choices.
Victoria, the Cambridges’ aid, is painted as “the Firm” and, as such, the villain, likely to avoid ascribing blame to any specific royal.
I did not have horror movie music on my bingo card for this movie.
“He’s the king of the castle and I’m the dirty rascal.” What a moment for a nursery rhyme reference.
The movie spends quite a bit of time on the British Voguestoryline. They let us know Meghan’s a girlboss because she spends a lot of time furiously typing in different outfits.
The Meghan character is often crying; Harry is often furrowing his brow.
Now we’re on the famous Africa trip and we get an almost sex scene. Apparently, these are quite controversial.
Another Diana flashback and she appears to have a Scottish accent? I love an interpretive take.
On a very romantic, maybe CGI sunset backdrop, Harry tells Meghan they have to leave the Firm.
William, Kate, Charles, and Victoria watch Harry and Meghan speak with reporters in Africa and are, needless to say, furious.
The two most iconic pieces of dialogue thus far: “We shall use what is called cancel culture” and William calling Harry and Meghan “the woke bloke and his feminist bride.” 
The Sussexes spend Christmas away and return to England amidst “rumors of an impending pandemic.” Ah, how young and naïve we were.
We meet “Queen Elizabeth” in a summit with Charles, William, and Harry. It seems the Queen is more of an advocate for Harry and Meghan than anyone else.
I’m uncomfortable watching Kate tell William they should have more PDA. They also joke about starting a YouTube channel (wink, nudge, they eventually do!).
The costumes have been pretty accurate thus far, but Meghan’s green hat for the Commonwealth Ceremony is… not it.
More dun dun dunnn music as we approach Westminster Abbey.
Harry approaches William with an exclamatory, “Oi!” I somehow have a hard time picturing this.
Throughout this whole movie, William acts as the villain while Kate is really painted as the peacemaker. That’s all the more evident in the Commonwealth Ceremony scenes.
Harry and Meghan go to Vancouver Island, which is where they eventually find out that their security is being removed. But, Meghan has a plan! Cut to a nontraditional cover of 2Pac’s “California Love.”
The Duke and Duchess lounge at Tyler Perry’s house where Harry quips, “I like American royalty.” He puts on quite an interesting pair of mirrored aviators.
Meghan and Harry then decide to look for a home of their own and, while turning dramatically towards each other, Meghan announces her pregnancy.
We now know that Meghan is feeling at home because she’s emphatically typing again. This time, she’s writing her commencement address for her alma mater.
She also wrote her New York Times op-ed, which, of course, does not go over well across the pond. Especially not with villain Victoria. Wait until they hear about the Oprah interview.
Ah, we come full circle with the Oprah interview, spliced with a recreation of Diana’s BBC interview.
Like all great films, we end with an epilogue in text written across the screen. The movie is pretty up to date, even mentioning the Diana statue unveiling in July.
End text: “Certain characters and dialogue has been fictionalized.” Thank you, Lifetime, for this helpful note. I would have had no idea.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> The comments are incendiary. Anyone who complains about this thread should read that. Methane's stans there are militant in her defense and deride the BRF. There was one comment that especially caught my eye. It was about Methane not following protocol and always racing to get herself in front of the pack. *The stan insisted that protocol was bs, so it doesn't matter if Methane didn't follow it. Another stan claimed that the UK was a middle-level country (as compared to the US which tops the global pack, I presume) and the BRF are some relic from the past. And they have raised Methane's profile to multi-millionaire before her marriage to Hazard, because anything above one mil means you can call yourself a multi-millionaire.*


Yes, this is the real M. She has always felt far superior to any one else in the world and she didn't care a whit about stupid H, but wanted the title and even the children for monetary security. All her relationships so far: her father, ex husbands, friends, the RF and H were just steps on her ladder to the top of the world so to speak.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> *30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> _A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's <i>Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace</i>
> 
> 
> A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This weekend, Lifetime released its third (yes, third) installment of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fictionalized movies. This one, entitled Harry and Meghan: Escaping the Palace, follows Meghan and Harry as they contemplate and eventually leave their royal duties and move to Santa Barbara.
> 
> This movie has everything: dramatic flashbacks of Princess Diana, varyingly successful British accents, royal look-alikes, and many, many furrowed brows. As a writer who often reports on the British royals, I wrote down, in real-time, my thoughts, questions, and concerns. Spoilers ahead.
> 
> 
> We start with a heavy-handed recreation of Princess Diana’s car accident, except it’s Meghan (or rather, Sydney Morton as Meghan) inside the car. Subtle as a sledgehammer, folks.
> William is being talked into visiting Archie, Meghan, and Harry. Let the family tension begin!
> I know that the real Prince Harry looks a bit like Ed Sheeran, but this Prince Harry somehow looks even more like Ed Sheeran. I wonder if they can book the real Ed Sheeran for the next movie?
> Harry and William are fighting on a miniature dock by a pond. It seems like a missed opportunity for Harry to push William into the pond, but perhaps that would be too “out-there.”
> We’re at Trooping the Colour 2019 and Kate suggests that she wear the outfit from Meghan and Harry’s wedding as a sign of unity. It’s a bit of a wink and a nudge to all the stories about hidden meaning in the royals' clothing choices.
> Victoria, the Cambridges’ aid, is painted as “the Firm” and, as such, the villain, likely to avoid ascribing blame to any specific royal.
> I did not have horror movie music on my bingo card for this movie.
> “He’s the king of the castle and I’m the dirty rascal.” What a moment for a nursery rhyme reference.
> The movie spends quite a bit of time on the British Voguestoryline. They let us know Meghan’s a girlboss because she spends a lot of time furiously typing in different outfits.
> The Meghan character is often crying; Harry is often furrowing his brow.
> Now we’re on the famous Africa trip and we get an almost sex scene. Apparently, these are quite controversial.
> Another Diana flashback and she appears to have a Scottish accent? I love an interpretive take.
> On a very romantic, maybe CGI sunset backdrop, Harry tells Meghan they have to leave the Firm.
> William, Kate, Charles, and Victoria watch Harry and Meghan speak with reporters in Africa and are, needless to say, furious.
> The two most iconic pieces of dialogue thus far: “We shall use what is called cancel culture” and William calling Harry and Meghan “the woke bloke and his feminist bride.”
> The Sussexes spend Christmas away and return to England amidst “rumors of an impending pandemic.” Ah, how young and naïve we were.
> We meet “Queen Elizabeth” in a summit with Charles, William, and Harry. It seems the Queen is more of an advocate for Harry and Meghan than anyone else.
> I’m uncomfortable watching Kate tell William they should have more PDA. They also joke about starting a YouTube channel (wink, nudge, they eventually do!).
> The costumes have been pretty accurate thus far, but Meghan’s green hat for the Commonwealth Ceremony is… not it.
> More dun dun dunnn music as we approach Westminster Abbey.
> Harry approaches William with an exclamatory, “Oi!” I somehow have a hard time picturing this.
> Throughout this whole movie, William acts as the villain while Kate is really painted as the peacemaker. That’s all the more evident in the Commonwealth Ceremony scenes.
> Harry and Meghan go to Vancouver Island, which is where they eventually find out that their security is being removed. But, Meghan has a plan! Cut to a nontraditional cover of 2Pac’s “California Love.”
> The Duke and Duchess lounge at Tyler Perry’s house where Harry quips, “I like American royalty.” He puts on quite an interesting pair of mirrored aviators.
> Meghan and Harry then decide to look for a home of their own and, while turning dramatically towards each other, Meghan announces her pregnancy.
> We now know that Meghan is feeling at home because she’s emphatically typing again. This time, she’s writing her commencement address for her alma mater.
> She also wrote her New York Times op-ed, which, of course, does not go over well across the pond. Especially not with villain Victoria. Wait until they hear about the Oprah interview.
> Ah, we come full circle with the Oprah interview, spliced with a recreation of Diana’s BBC interview.
> Like all great films, we end with an epilogue in text written across the screen. The movie is pretty up to date, even mentioning the Diana statue unveiling in July.
> End text: “Certain characters and dialogue has been fictionalized.” Thank you, Lifetime, for this helpful note. I would have had no idea.


Intrigued by the green hat remark. Well, was the recreation better or worse than Methane's original? Was it a closer copy of Diana's so that dense viewers would get the sledgehammer realization that OMG   Methane is exactly like her MIL!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, this is the real M. She has always felt far superior to any one else in the world and she didn't care a whit about stupid H, but wanted the title and even the children for monetary security. All her relationships so far: her father, ex husbands, friends, the RF and H were just steps on her ladder to the top of the world so to speak.
> View attachment 5187656


and I doubt she will ever be satisfied....she was probably "happy" for a short time around the engagement and the wedding....now all her energy probably goes into trying to maintain the fame and money....I wonder how much she has left to give to her children


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> The level of delusion in the comments was off the charts. One of the stans posting there claimed Kate really wishes she could have had Harry.



Instead she had to settle for the responsible, drama-free family guy who'll inherit the throne, oh my.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Instead she had to settle for the responsible, drama-free family guy who'll inherit the throne, oh my.


unless you believe her stans who have accused william of having affairs


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of course it's possible they had a contract that not only included the NDA but also said the contract was void if someone failed to meet their end (I've signed NDAs before and they were an extra form). That said, the woman randomly deciding she wants more money than negotiated is surely no reason to claim the troublesome two didn't fulfill their part.



I read somewhere that a certain surrogate didn't get her expenses paid as expected. It is possibly gossip at this point.

Though, one would think that surrogates don't have much money to pay lawyers, and if such NDA contract exists, it would have been well drafted by the clients' lawyers and difficult to break by the weaker party imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that a certain surrogate didn't get her expenses paid as expected. It is possibly gossip at this point.
> 
> Though, one would think that surrogates don't have much money to pay lawyers, and if such NDA contract exists, it would have been well drafted by the clients' lawyers and difficult to break by the weaker party imo.


TMZ reported on it I think - but then retracted it.  I know a lot here don't like TMZ but they check legal sources


----------



## Chanbal

It's time to start Christmas Wish Lists:   


After recent calls for the couple to release more content via the platforms, *author and publisher Andrew Lownie believes Harry may respond to royal fans sooner than expected*.


He told Express.co.uk how *Harry would release his memoir in time for the Christmas market*.

“My own feeling is that the book will come out sooner [than the Platinum Jubilee], that’s just a faint to put people off the trail and the book will be out by Christmas.

“It’s already written so why would you wait? They’ll go for the Christmas market, it’s written it’s ready to go.

“What’s the advantage of waiting? The publishers will want to get their money back too.

“Why would they wait another year when they’ve put down so much money? They want to get a return. A book will come out this year.”









						Prince Harry’s memoir ‘to be out by Christmas’ as book ‘ready to go'
					

PRINCE HARRY'S memoir will be "out by Christmas" as the book is "written and ready to go" a royal historian claimed in an exclusive interview with Express.co.uk.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> TMZ reported on it I think - but then retracted it.  I know a lot here don't like TMZ but they check legal sources


It took me a long time to believe in the surrogate story, but it's a very possible one imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Many excellent reviews for 'Escaping to Hollywood' or whatever the title is.  










						Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace (TV Movie 2021) - IMDb
					

Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace (TV Movie 2021) on IMDb: Movies, TV, Celebs, and more...




					www.imdb.com


----------



## xincinsin

@Maggie Muggins 
Brilliant nickname for Hazard - found while browsing Twitter: Carbon Footprince


----------



## Stansy

xincinsin said:


> @Maggie Muggins
> Brilliant nickname for Hazard - found while browsing Twitter: Carbon Footprince


Hilarious!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> @Maggie Muggins
> Brilliant nickname for Hazard - found while browsing Twitter: *Carbon Footprince*


@xincinsin  Thanks and welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan used a surrogate for Lilibet, how does she explain her mountainous bump during the Oprah interview? Even if the surrogate got sued by H&M for coming out, is it possible she could make even MORE $$$$$$$ by admitting/proving she was the surrogate and write a TELL-ALL book (and selling the movie rights) about the experience? And her treatment by the royal couple? You know, make the story extremely scandalous. Like, maybe not getting paid or paid the full amount of carrying the baby while getting treated like dirt, having to report every bite of food she ate, not being allowed to go outside, inventing a story about giving the baby up for adoption, I dunno, maybe being threatened with her life by Duchess Do-Gooder if word got out? Not that anyone would ever think of such a thing ... ...


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> *30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> _A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's <i>Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace</i>
> 
> 
> A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This weekend, Lifetime released its third (yes, third) installment of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fictionalized movies. This one, entitled Harry and Meghan: Escaping the Palace, follows Meghan and Harry as they contemplate and eventually leave their royal duties and move to Santa Barbara.
> 
> This movie has everything: dramatic flashbacks of Princess Diana, varyingly successful British accents, royal look-alikes, and many, many furrowed brows. As a writer who often reports on the British royals, I wrote down, in real-time, my thoughts, questions, and concerns. Spoilers ahead.
> 
> 
> We start with a heavy-handed recreation of Princess Diana’s car accident, except it’s Meghan (or rather, Sydney Morton as Meghan) inside the car. Subtle as a sledgehammer, folks.
> William is being talked into visiting Archie, Meghan, and Harry. Let the family tension begin!
> I know that the real Prince Harry looks a bit like Ed Sheeran, but this Prince Harry somehow looks even more like Ed Sheeran. I wonder if they can book the real Ed Sheeran for the next movie?
> Harry and William are fighting on a miniature dock by a pond. It seems like a missed opportunity for Harry to push William into the pond, but perhaps that would be too “out-there.”
> We’re at Trooping the Colour 2019 and Kate suggests that she wear the outfit from Meghan and Harry’s wedding as a sign of unity. It’s a bit of a wink and a nudge to all the stories about hidden meaning in the royals' clothing choices.
> Victoria, the Cambridges’ aid, is painted as “the Firm” and, as such, the villain, likely to avoid ascribing blame to any specific royal.
> I did not have horror movie music on my bingo card for this movie.
> “He’s the king of the castle and I’m the dirty rascal.” What a moment for a nursery rhyme reference.
> The movie spends quite a bit of time on the British Voguestoryline. They let us know Meghan’s a girlboss because she spends a lot of time furiously typing in different outfits.
> The Meghan character is often crying; Harry is often furrowing his brow.
> Now we’re on the famous Africa trip and we get an almost sex scene. Apparently, these are quite controversial.
> Another Diana flashback and she appears to have a Scottish accent? I love an interpretive take.
> On a very romantic, maybe CGI sunset backdrop, Harry tells Meghan they have to leave the Firm.
> William, Kate, Charles, and Victoria watch Harry and Meghan speak with reporters in Africa and are, needless to say, furious.
> The two most iconic pieces of dialogue thus far: “We shall use what is called cancel culture” and William calling Harry and Meghan “the woke bloke and his feminist bride.”
> The Sussexes spend Christmas away and return to England amidst “rumors of an impending pandemic.” Ah, how young and naïve we were.
> We meet “Queen Elizabeth” in a summit with Charles, William, and Harry. It seems the Queen is more of an advocate for Harry and Meghan than anyone else.
> I’m uncomfortable watching Kate tell William they should have more PDA. They also joke about starting a YouTube channel (wink, nudge, they eventually do!).
> The costumes have been pretty accurate thus far, but Meghan’s green hat for the Commonwealth Ceremony is… not it.
> More dun dun dunnn music as we approach Westminster Abbey.
> Harry approaches William with an exclamatory, “Oi!” I somehow have a hard time picturing this.
> Throughout this whole movie, William acts as the villain while Kate is really painted as the peacemaker. That’s all the more evident in the Commonwealth Ceremony scenes.
> Harry and Meghan go to Vancouver Island, which is where they eventually find out that their security is being removed. But, Meghan has a plan! Cut to a nontraditional cover of 2Pac’s “California Love.”
> The Duke and Duchess lounge at Tyler Perry’s house where Harry quips, “I like American royalty.” He puts on quite an interesting pair of mirrored aviators.
> Meghan and Harry then decide to look for a home of their own and, while turning dramatically towards each other, Meghan announces her pregnancy.
> We now know that Meghan is feeling at home because she’s emphatically typing again. This time, she’s writing her commencement address for her alma mater.
> She also wrote her New York Times op-ed, which, of course, does not go over well across the pond. Especially not with villain Victoria. Wait until they hear about the Oprah interview.
> Ah, we come full circle with the Oprah interview, spliced with a recreation of Diana’s BBC interview.
> Like all great films, we end with an epilogue in text written across the screen. The movie is pretty up to date, even mentioning the Diana statue unveiling in July.
> End text: “Certain characters and dialogue has been fictionalized.” Thank you, Lifetime, for this helpful note. I would have had no idea.


This hilarious analysis is the bedrock of this thread, it gave me such a smile


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan used a surrogate for Lilibet, how does she explain her mountainous bump during the Oprah interview? Even if the surrogate got sued by H&M for coming out, is it possible she could make even MORE $$$$$$$ by admitting/proving she was the surrogate and write a TELL-ALL book (and selling the movie rights) about the experience? And her treatment by the royal couple? You know, make the story extremely scandalous. Like, maybe not getting paid or paid the full amount of carrying the baby while getting treated like dirt, having to report every bite of food she ate, not being allowed to go outside, inventing a story about giving the baby up for adoption, I dunno, maybe being threatened with her life by Duchess Do-Gooder if word got out? Not that anyone would ever think of such a thing ... ...


OMG you can conceive better plots than most Hollywood writers. Have you ever thought of offering them your expertise or perhaps  we are already watching some of your movies.  BTW, that's an excellent scenario.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan used a surrogate for Lilibet, how does she explain her mountainous bump during the Oprah interview? Even if the surrogate got sued by H&M for coming out, is it possible she could make even MORE $$$$$$$ by admitting/proving she was the surrogate and write a TELL-ALL book (and selling the movie rights) about the experience? And her treatment by the royal couple? You know, make the story extremely scandalous. Like, maybe not getting paid or paid the full amount of carrying the baby while getting treated like dirt, having to report every bite of food she ate, not being allowed to go outside, inventing a story about giving the baby up for adoption, I dunno, maybe being threatened with her life by Duchess Do-Gooder if word got out? Not that anyone would ever think of such a thing ... ...


wouldn't it be hilarious if there was a lawsuit and it forced her to admit she wore a fake bump?  she'd probably settle out of court to avoid that exposure of her hypocrisy....and Harry?  he was part of this too.   really outrageous


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace*
> _A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30 Thoughts I Had While Watching Lifetime's <i>Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace</i>
> 
> 
> A deep dive into the third installment of the Harry & Meghan series, fictionalizing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This weekend, Lifetime released its third (yes, third) installment of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fictionalized movies. This one, entitled Harry and Meghan: Escaping the Palace, follows Meghan and Harry as they contemplate and eventually leave their royal duties and move to Santa Barbara.
> 
> This movie has everything: dramatic flashbacks of Princess Diana, varyingly successful British accents, royal look-alikes, and many, many furrowed brows. As a writer who often reports on the British royals, I wrote down, in real-time, my thoughts, questions, and concerns. Spoilers ahead.
> 
> 
> We start with a heavy-handed recreation of Princess Diana’s car accident, except it’s Meghan (or rather, Sydney Morton as Meghan) inside the car. Subtle as a sledgehammer, folks.
> William is being talked into visiting Archie, Meghan, and Harry. Let the family tension begin!
> I know that the real Prince Harry looks a bit like Ed Sheeran, but this Prince Harry somehow looks even more like Ed Sheeran. I wonder if they can book the real Ed Sheeran for the next movie?
> Harry and William are fighting on a miniature dock by a pond. It seems like a missed opportunity for Harry to push William into the pond, but perhaps that would be too “out-there.”
> We’re at Trooping the Colour 2019 and Kate suggests that she wear the outfit from Meghan and Harry’s wedding as a sign of unity. It’s a bit of a wink and a nudge to all the stories about hidden meaning in the royals' clothing choices.
> Victoria, the Cambridges’ aid, is painted as “the Firm” and, as such, the villain, likely to avoid ascribing blame to any specific royal.
> I did not have horror movie music on my bingo card for this movie.
> “He’s the king of the castle and I’m the dirty rascal.” What a moment for a nursery rhyme reference.
> The movie spends quite a bit of time on the British Voguestoryline. They let us know Meghan’s a girlboss because she spends a lot of time furiously typing in different outfits.
> The Meghan character is often crying; Harry is often furrowing his brow.
> Now we’re on the famous Africa trip and we get an almost sex scene. Apparently, these are quite controversial.
> Another Diana flashback and she appears to have a Scottish accent? I love an interpretive take.
> On a very romantic, maybe CGI sunset backdrop, Harry tells Meghan they have to leave the Firm.
> William, Kate, Charles, and Victoria watch Harry and Meghan speak with reporters in Africa and are, needless to say, furious.
> The two most iconic pieces of dialogue thus far: “We shall use what is called cancel culture” and William calling Harry and Meghan “the woke bloke and his feminist bride.”
> The Sussexes spend Christmas away and return to England amidst “rumors of an impending pandemic.” Ah, how young and naïve we were.
> We meet “Queen Elizabeth” in a summit with Charles, William, and Harry. It seems the Queen is more of an advocate for Harry and Meghan than anyone else.
> I’m uncomfortable watching Kate tell William they should have more PDA. They also joke about starting a YouTube channel (wink, nudge, they eventually do!).
> The costumes have been pretty accurate thus far, but Meghan’s green hat for the Commonwealth Ceremony is… not it.
> More dun dun dunnn music as we approach Westminster Abbey.
> Harry approaches William with an exclamatory, “Oi!” I somehow have a hard time picturing this.
> Throughout this whole movie, William acts as the villain while Kate is really painted as the peacemaker. That’s all the more evident in the Commonwealth Ceremony scenes.
> Harry and Meghan go to Vancouver Island, which is where they eventually find out that their security is being removed. But, Meghan has a plan! Cut to a nontraditional cover of 2Pac’s “California Love.”
> The Duke and Duchess lounge at Tyler Perry’s house where Harry quips, “I like American royalty.” He puts on quite an interesting pair of mirrored aviators.
> Meghan and Harry then decide to look for a home of their own and, while turning dramatically towards each other, Meghan announces her pregnancy.
> We now know that Meghan is feeling at home because she’s emphatically typing again. This time, she’s writing her commencement address for her alma mater.
> She also wrote her New York Times op-ed, which, of course, does not go over well across the pond. Especially not with villain Victoria. Wait until they hear about the Oprah interview.
> Ah, we come full circle with the Oprah interview, spliced with a recreation of Diana’s BBC interview.
> Like all great films, we end with an epilogue in text written across the screen. The movie is pretty up to date, even mentioning the Diana statue unveiling in July.
> End text: “Certain characters and dialogue has been fictionalized.” Thank you, Lifetime, for this helpful note. I would have had no idea.


So amusing to read, but I disagree on one thing: Harry looks nothing like Ed Sheeran.  He looks more like Burger King to me:
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 5187841


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan used a surrogate for Lilibet, how does she explain her mountainous bump during the Oprah interview? Even if the surrogate got sued by H&M for coming out, is it possible she could make even MORE $$$$$$$ by admitting/proving she was the surrogate and write a TELL-ALL book (and selling the movie rights) about the experience? And her treatment by the royal couple? You know, make the story extremely scandalous. Like, maybe not getting paid or paid the full amount of carrying the baby while getting treated like dirt, having to report every bite of food she ate, not being allowed to go outside, inventing a story about giving the baby up for adoption, I dunno, maybe being threatened with her life by Duchess Do-Gooder if word got out? Not that anyone would ever think of such a thing ... ...


Offering here a convoluted tale:
After that tragic mythical miscarriage, the gruesome twosome decided to hedge their bets by both going at it like rabbits as well as hiring a surrogate. They had to fudge expected delivery timelines because there were 2 babies being gestated. After comparing both offspring, they decided to go with the one Methane popped, and activated the termination clause to pay the surrogate less.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why were they so determined to have the baby born in May?  Seems this pregnancy may have been a rush job.


BTW, has Doria been seen?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why were they so determined to have the baby born in May?  Seems this pregnancy may have been a rush job.
> 
> 
> BTW, has Doria been seen?


she lives in LA, right?  a few hours away? not that she couldn't come stay with them


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> she lives in LA, right?  a few hours away? not that she couldn't come stay with them



I don’t know. Seems the only sighting lately [of anyone in this family] is of Hazz in Colorado.  
Can we be sure they are still a ‘family’?


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Who in the world thinks this set is funny?  I saw some of the other plates and they are equally  in bad taste.



Jess Mulroney, she is really unlikeable. A few months ago, I read an in depth piece on the twitter back and forth between her and that Canadian influencer, the one that got her fired from all her gigs and basically cancelled, and felt a bit of sympathy for her. Now, she turns around and posts something like that.  She's Canadian. Canada is part of the British Commonwealth.  Her former FIL was Prime Minister.  What an idiot she is.


----------



## csshopper

Shopping on the Amazon site and couldn't resist a peek. Scoobie's paperback lost another 1,345 places in sales ranking overnight and is now #4,480.  Lyrics from a Simon and Garfunkel song came to mind:

_"We're workin' our jobs, collect our pay
Believe we're gliding down the highway, when in fact we're *slip sliding away*"_

He is, however, outselling The Bench, ranked #8,303.

Hoping #'s like this reflect a waning interest in the Suckesses.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan used a surrogate for Lilibet, how does she explain her mountainous bump during the Oprah interview? Even if the surrogate got sued by H&M for coming out, is it possible she could make even MORE $$$$$$$ by admitting/proving she was the surrogate and write a TELL-ALL book (and selling the movie rights) about the experience? And her treatment by the royal couple? You know, make the story extremely scandalous. Like, maybe not getting paid or paid the full amount of carrying the baby while getting treated like dirt, having to report every bite of food she ate, not being allowed to go outside, inventing a story about giving the baby up for adoption, I dunno, maybe being threatened with her life by Duchess Do-Gooder if word got out? Not that anyone would ever think of such a thing ... ...



As much as I'd love for their lies to kick them in the face...those poor children. They will need lots of therapy.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> So amusing to read, but I disagree on one thing: Harry looks nothing like Ed Sheeran.  He looks more like Burger King to me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5187841
> 
> 
> View attachment 5187842
> 
> View attachment 5187845



And that's as close as he will EVER be to being king of _anything _assuming he would even be considered by BK


----------



## Jayne1

breakfastatcartier said:


> I think Meghan wanted a white passing “black” child too …


Archie is all Harry though. It never occurred to me she might want a white passing black child.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> If they didn't do their part (pay the medical bills), maybe that voids the NDA? After all, it is a transaction, not a gag order from the courts. Although I think it would be exceedingly foolish of them if they didn't do their part. Did the cheque bounce? Maybe the surrogate wanted more money?


Because *HAZEL-BERRY* is CHEAP, and of course *MEGHAN-THE-MALEFICIENT* just thinks that she could play the race card and be the #1 VICTIM in the world .. 'ya know!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

purseinsanity said:


> Mulroney reminds me of *the kind of woman who is either born into money, married into money, or both. * The kind that doesn’t have a single intelligent brain cell, but acts superior to those around her simply because of sheer luck.


She is in the ‘both’ category.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Mulroney reminds me of the kind of woman who is either born into money, married into money, or both.  The kind that doesn’t have a single intelligent brain cell, but acts superior to those around her simply because of sheer luck.  She’s sick if she has these plates, and demented if she’s posting that she does.


 
kinda like some royals?


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> Haha





Also, that white outfit was one of the worst MM ever wore during her flash performance as a Duchess.
It was one of the worst hats I've ever seen and the only place it belonged was burning in a fire, destroyed for eternity.




Chanbal said:


> Will & Charles- The apparent villains… And they sill what an audience with QE!?
> View attachment 5185681
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William is villain for 'not speaking on racism' in new TV film
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan: Escaping the Palace, the third made-for-TV movie from US cable channel Lifetime, will dramatise the Sussexes' 'controversial conscious uncoupling from the crown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





This horrible 'film' is actually one thing that would be very worthy of being sued. Yet, _nothing_. Very telling.




Chanbal said:


> BRF, veterans, covid vaccines… all good for photo-ops and $$$$



Every time he/both of them speak about certain issues thinking their words and say-so are God's gift to the world, I always think of Robin in HIMYM saying this:


Also, Princess Hairy, don't ever stand that close to a camera, please. My poor eyes.
And is he wearing fake tan? He looks like a shiny botoxed oompa loompa
There is no spark, no life, nothing behind those eyes of his.




needlv said:


>





When I first heard of them mentioning this in the Oprah sh*tshow I wondered about it being Princess Hairy himself who mentioned it within the family. He sure looked awkward when MM brought it up and he had to speak about it and lie through his teeth.
I also wouldn't be surprised if he was the one to bring it up within the family as a plan to see what type of response he would get from them to possibly use against them in the future.




csshopper said:


> WHY would she post this????????  Article goes on to say she and Methane are still good friends.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney reveals she has 'full place setting' from designer who sells plates featuring the Queen and Prince Philip with the words 'Hail Satan'*
> 
> *Meghan Markle's BFF Jessica Mulroney, 40, from Toronto, shared plate online*
> *The stylist revealed she had the 'full place setting' from designer Wolf Dottir *
> *Other plates from store feature 'Hail Satan' with Queen and Prince Philip's face*
> *Another item shows the monarch's portrait alongside words 'Eat sh** and die' *





WTF!? Someone thought this was a gReAt IdEa for a business?? Wow. So disgusting.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Just look at his face.  The hate is real, very real - I would not want him or her standing behind me.
> View attachment 5187242


W&K- worried/stressed AF
Princess Hairy- jealous/angry
MM- deliriously happy with herself




Chanbal said:


> It's time to start Christmas Wish Lists:
> View attachment 5187697
> 
> After recent calls for the couple to release more content via the platforms, *author and publisher Andrew Lownie believes Harry may respond to royal fans sooner than expected*.
> 
> 
> He told Express.co.uk how *Harry would release his memoir in time for the Christmas market*.
> 
> “My own feeling is that the book will come out sooner [than the Platinum Jubilee], that’s just a faint to put people off the trail and the book will be out by Christmas.
> 
> “It’s already written so why would you wait? They’ll go for the Christmas market, it’s written it’s ready to go.
> 
> “What’s the advantage of waiting? The publishers will want to get their money back too.
> 
> “Why would they wait another year when they’ve put down so much money? They want to get a return. A book will come out this year.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s memoir ‘to be out by Christmas’ as book ‘ready to go'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY'S memoir will be "out by Christmas" as the book is "written and ready to go" a royal historian claimed in an exclusive interview with Express.co.uk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Out in time for the Christmas market?






xincinsin said:


> @Maggie Muggins
> Brilliant nickname for Hazard - found while browsing Twitter: *Carbon Footprince*


----------



## poopsie

Back to the surrogate...........would HIPPA not apply to Migraine as she wasn't the actual patient?
Can someone_ voluntarily_ relinquish  their right to privacy?
Could *the* truth eventually come out?


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> Jess Mulroney, she is really unlikeable. A few months ago, I read an in depth piece on the twitter back and forth between her and that Canadian influencer, the one that got her fired from all her gigs and basically cancelled, and felt a bit of sympathy for her. Now, she turns around and posts something like that.  She's Canadian. Canada is part of the British Commonwealth.  Her former FIL was Prime Minister.  What an idiot she is.


She clapped back on twitter in last few days about criticism of her ghastly plate


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan used a surrogate for Lilibet, how does she explain her mountainous bump during the Oprah interview? Even if the surrogate got sued by H&M for coming out, is it possible she could make even MORE $$$$$$$ by admitting/proving she was the surrogate and write a TELL-ALL book (and selling the movie rights) about the experience? And her treatment by the royal couple? You know, make the story extremely scandalous. Like, maybe not getting paid or paid the full amount of carrying the baby while getting treated like dirt, having to report every bite of food she ate, not being allowed to go outside, inventing a story about giving the baby up for adoption, I dunno, maybe being threatened with her life by Duchess Do-Gooder if word got out? Not that anyone would ever think of such a thing ... ...


I cannot believe how this story has legs ... 
I remember when Suri Cruise was born, her parents declined to feed anything to the media, but after a while, they acquiesced and Suri became a Vanity Fair cover girl at like 6 mos, end of story 
It only takes one IN FOCUS photo to get us all to shut the heck up ... indulge us


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> She clapped back on twitter in last few days about criticism of her ghastly plate



Showing once again that she has as much intelligence as she has style.
ETA:  Her children were in that wedding.  She likely met the Queen and PP.  What a horrible thing to post.


----------



## justwatchin

marietouchet said:


> I cannot believe how this story has legs ...
> I remember when Suri Cruise was born, her parents declined to feed anything to the media, but after a while, they acquiesced and Suri became a Vanity Fair cover girl at like 6 mos, end of story
> It only takes one IN FOCUS photo to get us all to shut the heck up ... indulge us


And not a photo of a finger or foot allegedly belonging to this mysterious Lilibet.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! Michelle O may have been markled, and she is likely relieved.  

_Meghan Markle__'s alleged plans of casting former First Lady Michelle ***** in her new animated series have reportedly gone "through the pan", after the Sussexes were omitted from the guest list of Barack *****'s birthday party. A royal commentator has claimed that the Duchess is keen to include "big voice-over names" for her upcoming project, and has now turned her attention to the couple's friend and neighbour, __Oprah Winfrey._

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...Michelle-*****-birthday-snub-Oprah-Winfrey-vn


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> And not a photo of a finger or foot allegedly belonging to this mysterious Lilibet.



Some have claimed there was a tiny framed photo of Lilibet on the table of her set during the Melissa McCarthy video. It was so small and out of focus it is impossible to say the photo was of a baby however.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Some have claimed there was a tiny framed photo of Lilibet on the table of her set during the Melissa McCarthy video. It was so small and out of focus it is impossible to say the photo was of a baby however.


That one does not count. IN FOCUS photo is required, full face , parents optional, toes and fingers do not count either

i have vague memories but there were lots of rumors swirling around Tom Cruise when Siri was born 
and the cover photo on Vanity Fair, TDF , Suri had like a full head of black hair at 6-9 mos, and incredible blue eyes, so pretty and she looked just like her dad so, the rumors went away …. 
I am also good with the Jolie Pitt approach sell a few snaps to benefit charity


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> And that's as close as he will EVER be to being king of _anything _assuming he would even be considered by BK


Exactly


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Oops! Michelle O may have been markled, and she is likely relieved.
> 
> _Meghan Markle__'s alleged plans of casting former First Lady Michelle ***** in her new animated series have reportedly gone "through the pan", after the Sussexes were omitted from the guest list of Barack *****'s birthday party. A royal commentator has claimed that the Duchess is keen to include "big voice-over names" for her upcoming project, and has now turned her attention to the couple's friend and neighbour, __Oprah Winfrey._
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...Michelle-*****-birthday-snub-Oprah-Winfrey-vn


right!
like she is in a position to snub Michelle....that is hilarious


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> That one does not count. IN FOCUS photo is required, full face , parents optional, toes and fingers do not count either
> 
> i have vague memories but there were lots of rumors swirling around Tom Cruise when Siri was born
> and the cover photo on Vanity Fair, TDF , Suri had like a full head of black hair at 6-9 mos, and incredible blue eyes, so pretty and she looked just like her dad so, the rumors went away ….
> I am also good with the Jolie Pitt approach sell a few snaps to benefit charity


People magazine paid something like six figures for Brangelina and infant Shiloh to be on the cover IIRC.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/g...tt-angelina-jolie-and-new-baby-shiloh-nouvel/


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Back to the surrogate...........would HIPPA not apply to Migraine as she wasn't the actual patient?
> Can someone_ voluntarily_ relinquish  their right to privacy?
> Could *the* truth eventually come out?


One would think that Migraine not being a patient wouldn't be protected under HIPPA , since HIPAA only applies to healthcare-related activities. The surrogate would be entitled to her own records and authorize their release to whoever needs them.

However, I would think the surrogate signed an ironclad NDA, and unless someone with tons of money pays for the surrogate's lawyers to review the agreement, we may never know the truth. Obviously all speculation…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> right!
> like she is in a position to snub Michelle....that is hilarious


Yep, but she seems rather delusional.. She planned to modernize the monarchy single handed…


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh! 


_Recent polling by YouGov shows the Sussexes are the least popular royals after Prince Andrew, who is facing allegations of sexual abuse._









						Prince Harry is now the least popular royal after Prince Andrew
					

His brother William is seen far more positively by the public, according to a new poll.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Great title… 











						Meghan and Harry's Netflix projects shunned
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's Netflix projects were described as "about as exciting as gluten-free bran muffin" by a commentator in a brutal take on the pair's commercial venture.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Back to the surrogate...........would HIPPA not apply to *Migraine* as she wasn't the actual patient?
> Can someone_ voluntarily_ relinquish  their right to privacy?
> Could *the* truth eventually come out?


Thanks @poopsie for the nickname Migraine. The BRF might also agree with you as in, "What a terrible migraine she turned out to be!" I believe it's pronounced 'megrane' in the UK. Congratulations and here's your ribbon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Great title…
> View attachment 5188063
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Netflix projects shunned
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's Netflix projects were described as "about as exciting as gluten-free bran muffin" by a commentator in a brutal take on the pair's commercial venture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




So glad to see Netflix fall.  Such a sham.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Oops! Michelle O may have been markled, and she is likely relieved.
> 
> _Meghan Markle__'s alleged plans of casting former First Lady Michelle ***** in her new animated series have reportedly gone "through the pan", after the Sussexes were omitted from the guest list of Barack *****'s birthday party. A royal commentator has claimed that the Duchess is keen to include "big voice-over names" for her upcoming project, and has now turned her attention to the couple's friend and neighbour, __Oprah Winfrey._
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...Michelle-*****-birthday-snub-Oprah-Winfrey-vn



My guess, after being First Lady for 8 years, being dissed by a Z-lister won't cause M****** to lose any sleep.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> My guess, after being First Lady for 8 years, being dissed by a Z-lister won't cause M****** to lose any sleep.



My guess is Michelle O declined the offer to participate and this is Meghan’s way of saving face.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> My guess is Michelle O declined the offer to participate and this is Meghan’s way of saving face.


Or she is probably happy to be spared from having to decline… She is too smart to be involved with the couple of Montecito imo.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Michelle O: "Hmmm, would I rather be friends with the future king and his classy wife, or his idiotic spare brother and delusional spoiled brat wife who threw the Queen under the bus?"


----------



## Toto too

I can imagine a conversation in about 15 or so years:  Archie and Lillibet go to mom and dad:  "So, let us get this straight.  Our grandfather is King.  Our uncle will be the next King.  Our first cousin after that.  We could have been a part of this, had titles, lived in really nice places, go to parties, wear jewels, been a part of history and perhaps make a difference in the world.  And you took that away from us.  What on earth were you thinking?"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toto too said:


> I can imagine a conversation in about 15 or so years:  Archie and Lillibet go to mom and dad:  "So, let us get this straight.  Our grandfather is King.  Our uncle will be the next King.  Our first cousin after that.  We could have been a part of this, had titles, lived in really nice places, go to parties, wear jewels, been a part of history and perhaps make a difference in the world.  And you took that away from us.  What on earth were you thinking?"



Haaaaa, most kids believe without much evidence that their parents have _limited intelligence, _but these 2 kids have plenty of evidence to confirm it.


----------



## Annawakes

What’s sad to me is that while Archie and Lilibet do have to struggle with having dolts for parents…..chances are they will grow up to be just like them.  And cause the same types of migraines for William and next, George.  Poor George!


----------



## xincinsin

Toto too said:


> I can imagine a conversation in about 15 or so years:  Archie and Lillibet go to mom and dad:  "So, let us get this straight.  Our grandfather is King.  Our uncle will be the next King.  Our first cousin after that.  We could have been a part of this, had titles, lived in really nice places, go to parties, wear jewels, been a part of history and perhaps make a difference in the world.  And you took that away from us.  What on earth were you thinking?"


Unfortunately, they will be brought up to believe that the world is against their parents, the BRF deprived them of everything, they were soooooo lucky to be smuggled out of the castle and their parents fled to freedom, rescuing them from a life of servitude. Their playmates will be carefully selected children from the sycophant squad who will continue the brainwashing.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Jayne1 said:


> Archie is all Harry though. It never occurred to me she might want a white passing black child.


I'm wondering if Lilibet looks more like M.  One wonders since we haven't seen a hand or a foot or anything. M can't hide Lilibet forever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm wondering if Lilibet looks more like M.  One wonders since we haven't seen a hand or a foot or anything. M can't hide Lilibet forever.


I'm waiting for Omid to wax lyrical about how Lil Bit is the spitting image of HMTQ or Diana.


----------



## needlv

I can think of a lot of better things to spend my money on…

edit - is the Sussex squad doing more podcasts than H and M?  Oh how Spotify must be annoyed…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am frugal, but I'd rather burn that money or drop it into the ocean instead of funding those lunatics.


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> Archie is all Harry though. It never occurred to me she might want a white passing black child.



Not that it matters, I believe it doesn’t, but her children with Harry would be (statistically) more than 80% white, so I don’t see how this talk of white passing is even making any sense…

I also don’t get these rumors about the surrogate. Meghan looked completely pregnant to me, not just the bump, the way she was swollen, and her physic altered in both pregnancies. And she doesn’t seem to have lost the baby weight quickly either, as she didn’t with the first… Where does this come from?


----------



## Allisonfaye

I haven't been keeping up with this thread in a while but that diss by not being invited to the *****'s party was huge, IMO.


----------



## xincinsin

doni said:


> I also don’t get these rumors about the surrogate. Meghan looked completely pregnant to me, not just the bump, the way she was swollen, and her physic altered in both pregnancies. And she doesn’t seem to have lost the baby weight quickly either, as she didn’t with the first… Where does this come from?


The 1st pregnancy, the travelling bump with its variable size in photos was really weird. I believe she really was pregnant but didn't have a big bump till her 3rd trimester. So she tried to create drama by augmenting the size of her bump for better clutching poses. She really did look matronly and very like her mother post-partum. Pregnancy aged her.

That attention-seeking behaviour carried on. I don't believe she had a miscarriage. I think she wrote fiction for sympathy points. 

The second pregnancy though, I think there may have been a surrogate. There was just an abnormal amount of secrecy and red herrings involved. Maybe they were keeping it under wraps in their warped version of privacy to protect the kids. Maybe they were holding out for a $$$$ deal to be featured in a magazine. Maybe there was a surrogate. The b/w photos to announce the pregnancy were so staged and her belly so huge that, as someone here said, she appeared to be heavily pregnant for 9 months. And her pudgy face in the birthday video could be from her plastic surgeon and not a pregnancy.

By the way, I found it strange that some of her sugars are supporting her claims of suicidal ideation by claiming that she was fragile due to baby blues. Are they unaware that postpartum depression is defined as the moodiness *after* the baby is born? She could have been unhappy before birthing the child, but that's not *post*partum.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Allisonfaye said:


> I haven't been keeping up with this thread in a while but that diss by not being invited to the *****'s party was huge, IMO.


I was thinking, I can’t ever remember so much talk about a party invite list!


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I can think of a lot of better things to spend my money on…
> 
> edit - is the Sussex squad doing more podcasts than H and M?  Oh how Spotify must be annoyed…





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am frugal, but I'd rather burn that money or drop it into the ocean instead of funding those lunatics.



No need to worry, DM will foot the $5.49/month and will share their pearls of wisdom with us.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> I can think of a lot of better things to spend my money on…
> 
> edit - is the Sussex squad doing more podcasts than H and M?  Oh how Spotify must be annoyed…




Who's the "Sussex Squad"?  Scobie? H&M? Where does the $6 each month go to? And will the "followers" be hundreds of thousands of non-paying bots? Sussex Squad sugars could save themselves 72 bucks a year just by following this thread and become much better informed. Just sayin'.


----------



## Chanbal

Come on Om*d! You know that they will always love you as long as you keep spreading their message, including the one below… 











						Harry and Meghan’s biographer Omid Scobie: ‘I don’t know if they even like me’
					

Journalist and author of Finding Freedom gives new details in magazine interview




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Come on Om*d! You know that they will always love you as long as you keep spreading their message, including the one below…
> 
> View attachment 5188641
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s biographer Omid Scobie: ‘I don’t know if they even like me’
> 
> 
> Journalist and author of Finding Freedom gives new details in magazine interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


Well, Scabies, it's safe to say that most of us here can't stand you.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Come on Om*d! You know that they will always love you as long as you keep spreading their message, including the one below…
> 
> View attachment 5188641
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s biographer Omid Scobie: ‘I don’t know if they even like me’
> 
> 
> Journalist and author of Finding Freedom gives new details in magazine interview
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk



As long as Omid is spreading their lies for their personal benefit, they’ll like him well enough. They don’t respect him, but they’ll like him.


----------



## rose60610

Toto too said:


> I can imagine a conversation in about 15 or so years:  Archie and Lillibet go to mom and dad:  "So, let us get this straight.  Our grandfather is King.  Our uncle will be the next King.  Our first cousin after that.  We could have been a part of this, had titles, lived in really nice places, go to parties, wear jewels, been a part of history and perhaps make a difference in the world.  And you took that away from us.  What on earth were you thinking?"



Answer: "We lived in a time where all you had to do is called anybody a racist and get paid a ton of money. So we decided to slander the entire BRF that gave us everything we had. Since they were a huge famous target we got lots and lots and lots of money. Turns out it wasn't quite as much as the BRF's fortune based on ten centuries worth of growth, victorious conquests and global connections, but how could we know that? We assumed we'd just overthrow the monarchy because, well, all we had to do was call everyone a racist and tell everyone that we suffered so much. All those riches and perks were so suffocating, so we schemed to come to Montecito. The rescue chickens had to go because we had to pay for our security, that racist BRF had the audacity to stop paying for our security after we told them to go to hell right before your Great Grandfather Philip died. Just remember, your parents can do no wrong, our crap doesn't stink, and we are (professional) victims. Anyone who says otherwise is racist."


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> I also don’t get these rumors about the surrogate. Meghan looked completely pregnant to me, not just the bump, the way she was swollen, and her physic altered in both pregnancies. And she doesn’t seem to have lost the baby weight quickly either, as she didn’t with the first… Where does this come from?


She was extremely thin during her TV days and we could see her nervous energy and fidgeting when being interviewed.  So my guess is that she was taking something to stay thin for the cameras.

Pure speculation of course, but she hasn't been thin like that since she got married so I think any weight gain was normal when no pills were involved. Or even smoking, she used to smoke.

My theory is she had surrogates for both pregnancies.  Few geriatric women get pregnant immediately after marriage just because they want to.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So four days to go until Met Gala...any word that the troublesome two have been invited? I don't think so, but also, why haven't they put out a message yet that they declined because they are on maternity leave?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> She was extremely thin during her TV days and we could see her nervous energy and fidgeting when being interviewed.  So my guess is that she was taking something to stay thin for the cameras.
> 
> Pure speculation of course, but she hasn't been thin like that since she got married so I think any weight gain was normal when no pills were involved. Or even smoking, she used to smoke.
> 
> My theory is she had surrogates for both pregnancies.  Few geriatric women get pregnant immediately after marriage just because they want to.



Most women either get pregnant very soon, or take a while. I got pregnant with my first baby at 36 and always got pregnant immediately. It is pretty normal. I have also always been very thin and put an enormous amount of weight during my pregnancies. I looked 9 month pregnant with twins by the end of the 6th month. It happens to some naturally thin women. I actually looked very much like Meghan did, before and after giving birth. Nothing unusual about it... I just don’t see that there is any exceptional circumstance that gives raise to this speculation…


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So four days to go until Met Gala...any word that the troublesome two have been invited? I don't think so, but also, why haven't they put out a message yet that they declined because they are on maternity leave?



Their message will be: "We regret we had to decline the gracious invitation because we were never actually invited. "


----------



## CarryOn2020

doni said:


> Not that it matters, I believe it doesn’t, but her children with Harry would be (statistically) more than 80% white, so I don’t see how this talk of white passing is even making any sense…
> 
> I also don’t get these rumors about the surrogate. Meghan looked completely pregnant to me, not just the bump, the way she was swollen, and her physic altered in both pregnancies. And she doesn’t seem to have lost the baby weight quickly either, as she didn’t with the first… Where does this come from?



IMO it comes from knowing H&M lie, not just once but consistently, about many things. Why wouldn’t they lie about these pregnancies? 

It keeps their names in the news and allows them to scream ‘racist‘.  She may have been pregnant and there may be indeed be 2 kids from those pregnancies, but she also could have worn the fake bump.  All of these things can be true.


----------



## mellibelly

doni said:


> Not that it matters, I believe it doesn’t, but her children with Harry would be (statistically) more than 80% white, so I don’t see how this talk of white passing is even making any sense…


I’d guess the kids are more than 80% white. Doris is clearly mixed race too. That’s why Nutmeg’s claim of Archie not getting a title because he’s black is so preposterous. That kid looks fully ginge and white. I’m half white/white passing and have to laugh at the alleged “racist” skin color convo. Like anyone thought Smirk & Jerk could create a dark skinned baby when she looks like a white woman


doni said:


> I also don’t get these rumors about the surrogate. Meghan looked completely pregnant to me, not just the bump, the way she was swollen, and her physic altered in both pregnancies. And she doesn’t seem to have lost the baby weight quickly either, as she didn’t with the first… *Where does this come from?*



Pandemic weight gain like the rest of us LOL


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So four days to go until Met Gala...any word that the troublesome two have been invited? I don't think so, but also, why haven't they put out a message yet that they declined because they are on maternity leave?


There are a lot of IG pages that update the list (or changes to) for the Met Gala. I have never seen their names.


----------



## poopsie

mellibelly said:


> I’d guess the kids are more than 80% white. Doris is clearly mixed race too. That’s why Nutmeg’s claim of Archie not getting a title because he’s black is so preposterous. That kid looks fully ginge and white. I’m half white/white passing and have to laugh at the alleged “racist” skin color convo. Like anyone thought Smirk & Jerk could create a dark skinned baby when she looks like a white woman
> 
> 
> Pandemic weight gain like the rest of us LOL



I actually lost 20 lbs
Since I couldn't go to work I worked out every day at home. Dragged out my old Step Reebok, dusted off the stationary bike and AbCoaster and got to it.
I also ate better. At work we only got 2 ten minute breaks and with no microwave or refrigerator basically all you could have was a sandwich.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> So amusing to read, but I disagree on one thing: Harry looks nothing like Ed Sheeran.  He looks more like Burger King to me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5187841
> 
> 
> View attachment 5187842
> 
> View attachment 5187845


HA HA HA .. a new nickname "*BURGER KING*"!!!   Good job @purseinsanity !!!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> she lives in LA, right?  a few hours away? not that she couldn't come stay with them


Yes, if I recall .. in the Mid-Wilshire area


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Great title…
> View attachment 5188063
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Netflix projects shunned
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's Netflix projects were described as "about as exciting as gluten-free bran muffin" by a commentator in a brutal take on the pair's commercial venture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



A-HA!!! .. this (somewhat) confirms what a friend (who is in the BIZ) told me!  She told me that Netflix is pretty pissed-off because *HAPLESS* and *MENACE* have brought them sh!t!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> The 1st pregnancy, the travelling bump with its variable size in photos was really weird. I believe she really was pregnant but didn't have a big bump till her 3rd trimester. So she tried to create drama by augmenting the size of her bump for better clutching poses. She really did look matronly and very like her mother post-partum. Pregnancy aged her.
> 
> That attention-seeking behaviour carried on. I don't believe she had a miscarriage. I think she wrote fiction for sympathy points.
> 
> The second pregnancy though, I think there may have been a surrogate. There was just an abnormal amount of secrecy and red herrings involved. Maybe they were keeping it under wraps in their warped version of privacy to protect the kids. Maybe they were holding out for a $$$$ deal to be featured in a magazine. Maybe there was a surrogate. The b/w photos to announce the pregnancy were so staged and her belly so huge that, as someone here said, she appeared to be heavily pregnant for 9 months. And her pudgy face in the birthday video could be from her plastic surgeon and not a pregnancy.
> 
> By the way, I found it strange that some of her sugars are supporting her claims of suicidal ideation by claiming that she was fragile due to baby blues. Are they unaware that postpartum depression is defined as the moodiness *after* the baby is born? She could have been unhappy before birthing the child, but that's not *post*partum.


Everything about them is created to stimulate interest.  It is like a game plan for life.  Be secretive, obfuscate and never tell the real truth and just skirt around it.  This was a decision made before marriage. I think that most of their subsequent choices were basically laid out prior to marriage i.e. leaving the UK and landing eventually in LA.   I am now thinking that one of the reasons why that wedding dress was so ill fitting was because she was having several made, thinking that one of them  might be leaked and not one of them was really every completed or fitted properly.  It looks as if the one that made it to the wedding was the best choice, that doesn't  that say much for the ones we never saw. (Another reason for the yelling and screaming on MM's part and why Waight Keller was fired for taking up so much of the staff time over several disastrous dresses.)   We were never sure about where they were living and it never really looked like they were at Frog Cot for more than photo ops.  The press was fooled and hung out there and totally missed the trip to the hospital because the couple  were staying someplace else.  The bump pads were used because she just wasn't carrying big enough in front.  Some women put the weight on all over and the abdomen never really looks that big.  I think she fit into this category based on her appearance after the birth and especially at the Disney premiere.  Her upper torso was bursting out of that dress and her posterior was large.  Both of my SIL barely had to wear maternity clothing and both said that their posteriors enlarged significantly rather than the tummy and the joke was that they were carrying in the back!  She was foolish to wear a bump pad and should have left nature to nature.


----------



## gracekelly

doni said:


> Most women either get pregnant very soon, or take a while. I got pregnant with my first baby at 36 and always got pregnant immediately. It is pretty normal. I have also always been very thin and put an enormous amount of weight during my pregnancies. I looked 9 month pregnant with twins by the end of the 6th month. It happens to some naturally thin women. I actually looked very much like Meghan did, before and after giving birth. Nothing unusual about it... I just don’t see that there is any exceptional circumstance that gives raise to this speculation…


She wasn't patient enough to find out.  She went straight to IVF and gender selection.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> My guess, after being First Lady for 8 years, being dissed by a Z-lister won't cause M****** to lose any sleep.


She spent the entire presidency and after with people trying to be MO adjacent so they could rub shoulders with her and use her fame and position.  Once she saw the taco lunch nonsense, she gave MM the benefit of no doubts.


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm wondering if Lilibet looks more like M.  One wonders since we haven't seen a hand or a foot or anything. M can't hide Lilibet forever.


Funny how Michael Fassbender and Alicia have been papped out and about with their son and his face has never been seen  or his name mentioned.  I'm sure their fans are curious about the baby.  Hiding Lili is part of their MO as I mentioned in a previous post today.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> I’d guess the kids are more than 80% white. Doris is clearly mixed race too. That’s why Nutmeg’s claim of Archie not getting a title because he’s black is so preposterous. That kid looks fully ginge and white. I’m half white/white passing and have to laugh at the alleged “racist” skin color convo. *Like anyone thought Smirk & Jerk could create a dark skinned baby when she looks like a white woman*
> Pandemic weight gain like the rest of us LOL


Genetics are funny and you never know what your child will look like until they actually exist, which is why a comment about what skin color a future child will have isn't automatically a racist remark to me.
My husband is pretty darn white and I'm brown (but ambiguous looking enough that I can pass for several different backgrounds), but my kids came out looking completely 100% white.  DH and I were in Vegas years ago before we got married, and did a photo booth to "predict what your future child will look like".  It predicted a very unfortunate looking little girl (mostly because it used our adult features on a 4 year old's head!) to the point that DH said to never show that picture to his mother because she may actually tell us to not have children.   
My son decided to join a club at his university that has to do with my background/ethnicity, so that he could learn even more about my culture from other 19 year olds.  The kids in the club actually asked each other, "What is this white kid doing here?!"  He told them he was only half white, and they didn't believe him until he showed them a picture of my wedding, where I wore a traditional dress for our reception.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. a new nickname "*BURGER KING*"!!!   Good job @purseinsanity !!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Michelle O: "Hmmm, would I rather be friends with the future king and his classy wife, or his idiotic spare brother and delusional spoiled brat wife who threw the Queen under the bus?"


Michelle O:


----------



## EverSoElusive

Since we aren't seeing Lil Bit anytime soon, here's pictures of Daisy, the daughter of Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom. This is my first time seeing this cutie pie


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Since we aren't seeing Lil Bit anytime soon, here's pictures of Daisy, the daughter of Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom. This is my first time seeing this cutie pie



Was thinking … they live down the street from Hazmat


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Was thinking … they live down the street from Hazmat



I wonder if Archie and Daisy have playdates  I heard the two dads are friends?


----------



## Chanbal

These videos are usually short and fun.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m guessing I missed this ages ago…? 












						Someone Made Harry and Meghan Swimsuits, So That's a Thing
					

Yup.




					www.teenvogue.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> These videos are usually short and fun.




I was wondering about the Spotify contract recently. There’s not been a peep about it in a long time. I assume that H&M have been making one excuse after another before they are finally forced to admit they are reneging on the deal.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing I missed this ages ago…?
> 
> View attachment 5189462
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone Made Harry and Meghan Swimsuits, So That's a Thing
> 
> 
> Yup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.teenvogue.com



That should come with a warning. Scary stuff!


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> That should come with a warning. Scary stuff!



Unfortunate placement of the beard


----------



## Chanbal

Hector @Maggie Muggins courtesy of Lady C   

_“*I think Harry should change his name to Hector, I really do. He’s always hectoring everybody*.

“Maybe he could also call himself obsession because he’s obsessed with the press and the media and the conspiracy theories.”

She added about the speech: “The paranoia does come out.”_









						Prince Harry ‘paranoid’ and ‘obsessed with press’ claims Lady C
					

PRINCE HARRY's speech at the GQ Awards has been called out by royal commentator Lady Colin Campbell.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> Hector @Maggie Muggins courtesy of Lady C
> 
> _“*I think Harry should change his name to Hector, I really do. He’s always hectoring everybody*.
> 
> “Maybe he could also call himself obsession because he’s obsessed with the press and the media and the conspiracy theories.”
> 
> She added about the speech: “The paranoia does come out.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘paranoid’ and ‘obsessed with press’ claims Lady C
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY's speech at the GQ Awards has been called out by royal commentator Lady Colin Campbell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Aww… I had a dog named Hector… I think that’s an insult… Hector is too good for Harry…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing I missed this ages ago…?
> 
> View attachment 5189462
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone Made Harry and Meghan Swimsuits, So That's a Thing
> 
> 
> Yup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.teenvogue.com



Harry's beard is placed very unfortunately.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Unfortunate placement of the beard



Great minds think alike


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I was wondering about the Spotify contract recently. There’s not been a peep about it in a long time. I assume that H&M have been making one excuse after another before they are finally forced to admit they are reneging on the deal.


Hopefully they'll have to renege on the money as well


----------



## jelliedfeels

Background noise x


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

doni said:


> Most women either get pregnant very soon, or take a while. I got pregnant with my first baby at 36 and always got pregnant immediately. It is pretty normal. I have also always been very thin and put an enormous amount of weight during my pregnancies. I looked 9 month pregnant with twins by the end of the 6th month. It happens to some naturally thin women. I actually looked very much like Meghan did, before and after giving birth. Nothing unusual about it... I just don’t see that there is any exceptional circumstance that gives raise to this speculation…



This is true, bumps can be big or small and apparent at different times depending on the shape of the woman and how the baby is lying. I think the sizes of M's bump going down as well as up and even moving was a bit strange.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Unfortunate placement of the beard


Exactly my first thought!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Hopefully they'll have to renege on the money as well



Well, we know they aren’t going to give back anything they’ve already been paid. I hope their advance wasn’t much otherwise that lame half hour “holiday special” will go down in history as being the world’s most expensive podcast.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Some women put the weight on all over and the abdomen never really looks that big.


So true. One of my colleagues came into the office looking absolutely floored. When we rallied around her, she told us that she was feeling stunned. A heavyset lady who was part of her car pool just announced that morning that she would be giving birth the following week. The 3 other ladies saw this woman every working day and never suspected that she was pregnant. She was large, and merely became a little larger.


----------



## Chanbal

Was this news release in the US done on behalf of the Montecito couple?


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> This is true, bumps can be big or small and apparent at different times depending on the shape of the woman and how the baby is lying. I think the sizes of M's bump going down as well as up and even moving was a bit strange.


The pics of her bump decreasing in size were difficult to accept. I've had two kids and the bump grows. It never shrinks. If it did, my gynaecologist would be urgently checking me for loss of amniotic fluid.

I remember there were pics of her belly folding in on itself which were used as proof of a moonbump. And her defenders were staunchly declaring that a regular pregnant belly would of course fold in. It left me


----------



## Annawakes

That OK magazine cover.  Pure fiction!  “The future Queen tells all??”  That’s SO not the DoC.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Well, we know they aren’t going to give back anything they’ve already been paid. I hope their advance wasn’t much otherwise that lame half hour “holiday special” will go down in history as being the world’s most expensive podcast.


Wow, plenty of money to hire one more person! This  one has podcast experience… 
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle continue hiring spree for Archewell as they recruit Iranian-born talent agent turned political activist as Chief Operating Officer*

*Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 40, have hired a Chief Operating Officer*
*Mandana  Dayani will 'oversee growth strategy and day-to-day operations' *
*Iranian activist is creator of I Am A Voter, which aims to increase voter turnout *
*Previously hosted a podcast alongside Will and Grace star Debra Messing*
*Has interviewed ********ic politicians including Hillary *******, Adam Schiff *









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recruit political activist as COO
					

The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex , 40,  have taken on Mandana Dayani to 'oversee their growth strategy and day-to-day operations', according to Fortune .




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

Why does she keep hiring people who look like herself??????  Narcissistic!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Annawakes

she likes to walk into a conference room and see carbon copies of herself


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments… 










						NTAs 2021: Prince Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview is met with BOOS
					

While the booing did not appear on-screen for the live telecast, attendees report the audience jeered once the duo appeared on-screen in the infamous interview




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Why does she keep hiring people who look like herself??????  Narcissistic!!!!!!!!!!


God created man in his own image, right?  Meghan thinks she is God, so why not?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Wow, plenty of money to hire one more person! This  one has podcast experience…
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle continue hiring spree for Archewell as they recruit Iranian-born talent agent turned political activist as Chief Operating Officer*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 40, have hired a Chief Operating Officer*
> *Mandana  Dayani will 'oversee growth strategy and day-to-day operations' *
> *Iranian activist is creator of I Am A Voter, which aims to increase voter turnout *
> *Previously hosted a podcast alongside Will and Grace star Debra Messing*
> *Has interviewed ********ic politicians including Hillary *******, Adam Schiff *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recruit political activist as COO
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex , 40,  have taken on Mandana Dayani to 'oversee their growth strategy and day-to-day operations', according to Fortune .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



A talent agent turned political activist sounds like the kind of employee they would want, woke and show biz savvy. DM makes a big deal out of her being Iranian-born and then you find out she moved to the US as a very small child and grew up here.

The article says she has been working for them since June. Hasn’t done anything noticeably different in her first three months. Unless she is responsible for them being more quiet lately, in which case I fully endorse her hiring.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> A talent agent turned political activist sounds like the kind of employee they would want, woke and show biz savvy. DM makes a big deal out of her being Iranian-born and then you find out she moved to the US as a very small child and grew up here.
> 
> The article says she has been working for them since June. Hasn’t done anything noticeably different in her first three months. Unless she is responsible for them being more quiet lately, in which case I fully endorse her hiring.


I didn't find the DM comments on her being Iranian-born a big deal. There are plenty of Iranian-born people in the US, particularly in the Los Angeles area, and they often call themselves Iranian Americans. DM also mentioned that she earned BA and JD degrees from the University of Southern California. I think they were just trying to provide whatever info they have on M*ndana, since the announcement of her position was only now made public.

It's obvious that M*ndana with her celebrity and political contacts, podcast experience… will be precious to the Montecito couple for their Pearl and Spotify deals. She will likely be doing the work and the Harkles will be getting the credit and most $$$$…  I wonder what kind of privilege/entitlement would this be called…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

We hear about who they hire. What about who they fire or who choose to leave because they are disgusted?  A payroll this size is unsupportable.


----------



## xincinsin

I don't think they have a choice regarding hiring as big a team as they can. Neither of them are talented. Methane is from a showbiz background but she herself is not Oscar/Emmy material in front or behind the camera. Without a pool of talent to produce content for their paymasters, they will tank. Let's see if the people they hire are paid well enough to endure them. If everything is done according to Methane's wishes, we will get podcasts and programmes of similar calibre as the bench.


----------



## csshopper

I know this power couple are not the subject of this thread, but they are relevant as an example of people who invest their Foundations' funds on doing good work in support of worthy causes as opposed to the subjects of this thread who do nothing more than regurgitate word salad and move on to the next great cause. HUGE divide between the people who DO it, JZ and Beyonce and the people who only PREACH it, Maggot and Hazbeen. There are numerous citations on line about the charity work already done by JZ and Bey, this is the latest:

*Beyonce and Jay-Z pledge $2million to fund college scholarships*
Beyonce and Jay-Z have pledged $2million to fund college scholarships.

The couple - who have daughter Blue Ivy, nine, and twins Rumi and Sir, four, together - have teamed up with Tiffany & Co to fund places at five historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) via their charities BeyGOOD and Shawn Carter Foundation as part of their About Love campaign.

Tiffany & Co. Chief Sustainability Officer Anisa Kamadoli Costa praised Beyoncé and JAY-Z for 'their relentless dedication to lifting underrepresented groups is the inspiration for the About Love Scholarship program.'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> So amusing to read, but I disagree on one thing: Harry looks nothing like Ed Sheeran.  He looks more like *Burger King* to me:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5187841
> 
> 
> View attachment 5187845


 Thanks @purseinsanity for the nickname Burger King.  Wow, you keep me on my toes! Welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> A-HA!!! .. this (somewhat) confirms what a friend (who is in the BIZ) told me!  She told me that Netflix is pretty pissed-off because *HAPLESS* and *MENACE* have brought them sh!t!!!!


 Thanks @CeeJay for the nicknames Hapless and Menace. Welcome to the Gold Medal Club.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Wow, plenty of money to hire one more person! This  one has podcast experience…
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle continue hiring spree for Archewell as they recruit Iranian-born talent agent turned political activist as Chief Operating Officer*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 40, have hired a Chief Operating Officer*
> *Mandana  Dayani will 'oversee growth strategy and day-to-day operations' *
> *Iranian activist is creator of I Am A Voter, which aims to increase voter turnout *
> *Previously hosted a podcast alongside Will and Grace star Debra Messing*
> *Has interviewed ********ic politicians including Hillary *******, Adam Schiff *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recruit political activist as COO
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex , 40,  have taken on Mandana Dayani to 'oversee their growth strategy and day-to-day operations', according to Fortune .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If their goal is entree to the liberal elite this may be helpful. But as far as the public, I can speak for myself.  I am no conservative and I've said before, I don't need them to tell me what to think or how to be "woke"
What are they going to DO?  Never mind what they say.  they doesn't help anyone.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

csshopper said:


> I know this power couple are not the subject of this thread, but they are relevant as an example of people who invest their Foundations' funds on doing good work in support of worthy causes as opposed to the subjects of this thread who do nothing more than regurgitate word salad and move on to the next great cause. HUGE divide between the people who DO it, JZ and Beyonce and the people who only PREACH it, Maggot and Hazbeen. There are numerous citations on line about the charity work already done by JZ and Bey, this is the latest:
> 
> *Beyonce and Jay-Z pledge $2million to fund college scholarships*
> Beyonce and Jay-Z have pledged $2million to fund college scholarships.
> 
> The couple - who have daughter Blue Ivy, nine, and twins Rumi and Sir, four, together - have teamed up with Tiffany & Co to fund places at five historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) via their charities BeyGOOD and Shawn Carter Foundation as part of their About Love campaign.
> 
> Tiffany & Co. Chief Sustainability Officer Anisa Kamadoli Costa praised Beyoncé and JAY-Z for 'their relentless dedication to lifting underrepresented groups is the inspiration for the About Love Scholarship program.'


Beyoncé is trying to save face because she wore a blood diamond and then realized nobody’s buying her “I didn’t know they were blood diamonds!” BS.

Plus bey is a big supporter of Meghan, maybe Meghan’s “friends” can claim that this donation was on her behalf too? Lol.


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> Beyoncé is trying to save face because she wore a blood diamond and then realized nobody’s buying her “I didn’t know they were blood diamonds!” BS.
> 
> Plus bey is a big supporter of Meghan, maybe Meghan’s “friends” can claim that this donation was on her behalf too? Lol.


I'm glad Beyonce is giving money but two million isn't really huge from them


----------



## breakfastatcartier

poopsie said:


> Hopefully they'll have to renege on the money as well


I honestly hope they didn’t. I blame these media companies that are foolish enough to pay these thieves large sums of money to feature them.

Let Harry and the wife run with the money so word can spread that these broke people have nothing to offer.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm wondering if Lilibet looks more like M.  One wonders since we haven't seen a hand or a foot or anything. M can't hide Lilibet forever.


I’m pretty sure “Lilibet not Lilibet just Diana” looks like Meghan. Natural hair, beady eyes, pale skin and all … Meghan was a very ugly baby and her baby girl probably looks like her … or maybe a blonde hair blue eyed surrogate, lol.

I feel sorry for those babies, I wish they could just live with their uncles and aunts and cousins instead.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> I'm glad Beyonce is giving money but two million isn't really huge from them


I’m not one to judge any one for the amount they donate, even filthy rich people … but this shows you that something’s up …


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> If their goal is entree to the liberal elite this may be helpful. But as far as the public, I can speak for myself.  I am no conservative and I've said before, I don't need them to tell me what to think or how to be "woke"
> What are they going to DO?  Never mind what they say.  they doesn't help anyone.


I may be wrong, but their goals seem to be self-serving and not ideological. M*ndana (the new employee) seems to have the right credentials and contacts to help the entitled couple achieve whatever the privileged couple wants.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but my patience with hypocrisy is low today!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’m pretty sure “Lilibet not Lilibet just Diana” looks like Meghan. Natural hair, beady eyes, pale skin and all … Meghan was a very ugly baby and her baby girl probably looks like her … *or maybe a blonde hair blue eyed surrogate*, lol.



A surrogate isn't the same as an egg donor, though.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A surrogate isn't the same as an egg donor, though.


Well , then I must’ve mixed up between the two terms …


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I'm glad Beyonce is giving money but two million isn't really huge from them


This latest is only a fraction of their giving through the years, too many to go into here. JZ's Foundation has been active since  at least 2003. Bey has been giving to a variety of causes for years also. Here's one entry on line as an example:
*Beyoncé Donates $6 million to COVID-19 Relief - Harper's ...*
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32253315/beyonce-beygood-covid-19-relief-donation/ - 227k - Cached - Similar pages 
Apr 23, 2020 *...* *Beyoncé's* BeyGOOD will *donate* $6 million to mental health facilities ... The Grammy Award winner, through BeyGOOD, her *charitable* initiative ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> M*ndana (the new employee) seems to have the right credentials and contacts to help the entitled couple achieve whatever the privileged couple wants.


I’ve googled her and she almost has the same hairstyle as Meghan … also seems to have the same morals as meghan, or lack thereof.


----------



## poopsie

It never ceases to amaze me how the have nots like to tell the have gots how to spend their money. 
I know nothing about Beyonce and her husband, but I am sure that they have hundreds of requests from various charities. Along with other financial obligations that go with that level of wealth. 
Every time I go to PetSmart (and with 10 cats to feed I am a regular) I donate $1 to homeless pets at the register. There are larger amounts to choose from, and I could give more, but i look at it this way: If everyone who went through checkout donated a dollar every time the burden is shared. Also 4 of those 10 cats aren't even "mine". I also work on my own time to help with spay/neuter efforts. I certainly don't owe the clerk at the register an explanation of why I _only _give a dollar, any more than Beyonce or whoever owes anyone an explanation of why they _only _gave what they did


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Hector @Maggie Muggins courtesy of Lady C
> 
> _“*I think Harry should change his name to Hector, I really do. He’s always hectoring everybody*.
> 
> “Maybe he could also call himself obsession because he’s obsessed with the press and the media and the conspiracy theories.”
> 
> She added about the speech: “The paranoia does come out.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘paranoid’ and ‘obsessed with press’ claims Lady C
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY's speech at the GQ Awards has been called out by royal commentator Lady Colin Campbell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Thanks @Chanbal for *Hector *from Lady C. Congratulations, #15 entitles you to join the Hooting Owl Club.


----------



## K.D.

Chanbal said:


>




The essence of this thread LOL


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


>




I loved his Prince Charles impression!

I also respected him for being one of the first few black Americans who saw through Meghan’s “I’m black” facade …


----------



## marietouchet

Mandana Dayani, the new Archewell employee, interesting CV 
I knew I had heard the name before …
CV says she is/was/trained as lawyer (honestly don’t know which verb is correct, no aspersions intended) and she worked 5 years at Rachel Zoe Inc 
I remember her ! R hired MD at the time RZ started her design business, up til then RZ had been stylist to the stars 
The design business is still around , I think, so MD must have contributed 
But before you fall asleep, here is the juicy bit ! Yes, MD was on the RZ reality TV show
OK, I had A perfectly good reason for watching that show , I never do reality TV, but I traveled a lot then and hotel rooms are boring …

who is gonna take one for the team and watch the re-reruns ??? 
honestly, I remember nothing juicy about MD, I just remember RZ always asking for MORE options, ie take more outfits to the celebrity photo shoot, more clothes in the store, a bigger/better design for the RZ niche at the department store


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I don't know where this is from...Crazy Tarot Lady posted it a few hours ago but has a habit of not crediting her sources.


----------



## rose60610

If H&M are on a "hiring spree" for Archewell, then what are they actually doing? Huge foundations like to brag about how much money they have, we've heard nothing about Archewell's amount. And how many expenditures are self-serving? What have they done besides making another company donate diapers or building supplies?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> It never ceases to amaze me how the have nots like to tell the have gots how to spend their money.
> I know nothing about Beyonce and her husband, but I am sure that they have hundreds of requests from various charities. Along with other financial obligations that go with that level of wealth.
> Every time I go to PetSmart (and with 10 cats to feed I am a regular) I donate $1 to homeless pets at the register. There are larger amounts to choose from, and I could give more, but i look at it this way: If everyone who went through checkout donated a dollar every time the burden is shared. Also 4 of those 10 cats aren't even "mine". I also work on my own time to help with spay/neuter efforts. I certainly don't owe the clerk at the register an explanation of why I _only _give a dollar, any more than Beyonce or whoever owes anyone an explanation of why they _only _gave what they did



I agree. I also hate when people post under animal recues' posts to say "Why don't you feed homeless children" or stuff like that. Honestly, if that's a cause close to your heart get off your a*s and start feeding those kids. But don't tell strangers what to do with their time and money.

That said, when it's your self-created job to be charitable but all you hand out is baby beanies or lunch for 10 that's when I absolutely judge


----------



## Chanbal

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’ve googled her and she almost has the same hairstyle as Meghan … also seems to have the same morals as meghan, or lack thereof.


Wow, I didn't know that, but then again, I'm starting to have little respect for whoever associates with this couple…


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> This latest is only a fraction of their giving through the years, too many to go into here. JZ's Foundation has been active since  at least 2003. Bey has been giving to a variety of causes for years also. Here's one entry on line as an example:
> *Beyoncé Donates $6 million to COVID-19 Relief - Harper's ...*
> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a32253315/beyonce-beygood-covid-19-relief-donation/ - 227k - Cached - Similar pages
> Apr 23, 2020 *...* *Beyoncé's* BeyGOOD will *donate* $6 million to mental health facilities ... The Grammy Award winner, through BeyGOOD, her *charitable* initiative ...


that's great
I'm not particularly a fan but Bey and her husband actually earn money by working.  they're not making a "career" out of posing or preaching to the masses like some people we know


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Background noise x



Lady C calls M & H chicken feet and chicken brain, although I  think chickens are more intelligent than either of them.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Lady C calls M & H chicken feet and chicken brain, although I  think chickens are more intelligent than either of them.


certainly more likeable


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree. I also hate when people post under animal recues' posts to say "Why don't you feed homeless children" or stuff like that. Honestly, if that's a cause close to your heart get off your a*s and start feeding those kids. But don't tell strangers what to do with their time and money.
> 
> That said, when it's your self-created job to be charitable but all you hand out is baby beanies or lunch for 10 that's when I absolutely judge


yes, yes, yes


----------



## Chanbal

Today is the day of unbelievable news. I don't know if the are going or not, but they certainly do everything for photo-Ops and press releases… 










						Harry and Meghan are coming to the UK for Lilibet’s christening
					

Piers Morgan is ready to stage a meltdown




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Chanbal for *Hector *from Lady C. Congratulations, #15 entitles you to join the Hooting Owl Club.
> View attachment 5190059


Oh Gosh, did I find all those names? It looks like that each time I need to relax, I browse Twitter and post the findings here. Stress has been high, and I can't wait for the returning to 'normal life' after covid…  So many terrible stories out there. 

Though, thank you for the nice award.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Wow, I didn't know that, but then again, I'm *starting* to have little respect for whoever associates with this couple…



Starting??? 




Chanbal said:


> Harry and Meghan are coming to the UK for Lilibet’s christening
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan is ready to stage a meltdown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk



Team Piers — let’s all meltdown!




sdkitty said:


> that's great
> I'm not particularly a fan but Bey and her husband actually earn money by working.  they're not making a "career" out of posing or preaching to the masses like some people we know



Bey and Jay have real talent. Sadly, she got caught up in the Blood Diamond issue. Surprised her team didn‘t catch that.



marietouchet said:


> who is gonna take one for the team and watch the re-reruns ???
> honestly, I remember nothing juicy about MD, I just remember RZ always asking for MORE options, ie take more outfits to the celebrity photo shoot, more clothes in the store, a bigger/better design for the RZ niche at the department store



I’ll see what I can find. My guess is that most of these H&M hires sign on for the resume boost.  They’ll eventually figure out this job will ruin those resumes.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> that's great
> I'm not particularly a fan but Bey and her husband actually earn money by working.  they're not making a "career" out of posing or preaching to the masses like some people we know


Not particularly a fan either, know they are wealthy, seem to work hard, have a child named Ivy, are friendly with the O's, and, if I remember one bit, their marriage survived a fling he had with someone. Googled their charity work after reading the headline and it is  their level of  ongoing significant support via their Foundations that caused me to comment. So much more than a calligraphy note sent with a lemon olive oil cake to a charity in "support" the sender expected to cause rapture with the public.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Starting???


Ok! Come to think of it, I may have started awhile ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal 
I have had and continue to have very little respect for whoever associates with this couple.
When I saw _that_ VF cover, I knew these two were trouble.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal
> I have had and continue to have very little respect for whoever associates with this couple.
> When I saw _that_ VF cover, I knew these two were trouble.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5190305



Am I the only one who thinks she was made up to kinda look like Elizabeth Taylor of younger days? The poofy (not the usual stupid pony tail wisps) and the intense eyes? And the cheesy "Wild About Harry" was said for Leona Helmsley (AKA "Queen of Mean") who did  the phrase theme party for her billionaire husband, Harry. BTW, Meghan has followed in Leona's footsteps as far as I'm concerned.  Has Meghan ever remotely looked like this mag cover? The photographer must have burned a thousand calories photoshopping this cover.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Wish I was there









						Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview booed by audience at National TV Awards
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan were booed when a clip of their interview with Oprah Winfrey was shown in a montage of the best national TV moments at the NTAs last night. Sir Trevor McDonald introduced th…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal
> I have had and continue to have very little respect for whoever associates with this couple.
> When I saw _that_ VF cover, I knew these two were trouble.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5190305


I remember hearing that Harry had dumped Meghan at that point which is why Meghan did the vanity fair cover to trap him … 

Look at how much her face has changed since …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

rose60610 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she was made up to kinda look like Elizabeth Taylor of younger days? The poofy (not the usual stupid pony tail wisps) and the intense eyes? And the cheesy "Wild About Harry" was said for Leona Helmsley (AKA "Queen of Mean") who did  the phrase theme party for her billionaire husband, Harry. BTW, Meghan has followed in Leona's footsteps as far as I'm concerned.  Has Meghan ever remotely looked like this mag cover? *The photographer must have burned a thousand calories photoshopping this cover.*


And she still looks unattractive… the photographer should’ve just called it a day …


----------



## CarryOn2020

The new hire — definitely a look-alike, runs the I’m a Voter stuff so she could explain the political chatter:



with Rachel Zoe:



	

		
			
		

		
	
\

ETA:  She begins in Season 4 - https://www.bravotv.com/the-rachel-zoe-project/season-4/episode-4/videos/zoeisms-from-episode-4


----------



## needlv

Or maybe they didn’t pay their bills…


----------



## csshopper

Sunshine Sachs represented infamous Harvey Weinstein at one point, so low lifes are nothing new to their "hard ball approach" as it was once described, but the pair in Montecito may have proved to be a liability to their image and maybe SS dumped them, instead of the other way around?

The list of things needing to be "managed" seems to be growing:

*In spite of the hype, the Bench turns out to be a rotting pile of wood.

*The public appetite for word salads is waning. "Speechless" in preachy pronouncements about Afghanistan, Hector making the GQ awards about his misplaced loathing of the press, as they are outed for constantly seeking publicity in spite of call for "privacy".

*The Oprah Interview has made them accountable for the proven lies and the questionable recollections. And the RF has benefitted with increased popularity in the polls.

*Their popularity has tanked in the UK with each new YouGuv poll and they have to care, that's the basis of their livelihood. 

*Dissed by the O's for a major social event they are certain to have assumed they'd be attending.

*So far no invite to MetGala for former VOGUE Cover Girl and Guest Editor.

*40 by 40 was merely a 40 minute staged/with a juggling act bonus, ego trip for Methane, then disintegrated without any follow up.

*Booed and jeered at the Television Awards program in the UK, an apparent "first" for royalty.

*Piers WON big time, Free Speech and calling out Methane  on her lies, lies, and more lies, is open to all.

*The RF at home in England is doing quite nicely without them.

*Unless something happens quickly Spotify will be Spotremover.

*Netflix?

*Harry and Oprah Mental Health Series on Apple?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Sunshine Sachs represented infamous Harvey Weinstein at one point, so low lifes are nothing new to their "hard ball approach" as it was once described, but the pair in Montecito may have proved to be a liability to their image and maybe SS dumped them, instead of the other way around?
> 
> The list of things needing to be "managed" seems to be growing:
> 
> *In spite of the hype, the Bench turns out to be a rotting pile of wood.
> 
> *The public appetite for word salads is waning. "Speechless" in preachy pronouncements about Afghanistan, Hector making the GQ awards about his misplaced loathing of the press, as they are outed for constantly seeking publicity in spite of call for "privacy".
> 
> *The Oprah Interview has made them accountable for the proven lies and the questionable recollections. And the RF has benefitted with increased popularity in the polls.
> 
> *Their popularity has tanked in the UK with each new YouGuv poll and they have to care, that's the basis of their livelihood.
> 
> *Dissed by the O's for a major social event they are certain to have assumed they'd be attending.
> 
> *So far no invite to MetGala for former VOGUE Cover Girl and Guest Editor.
> 
> *40 by 40 was merely a 40 minute staged/with a juggling act bonus, ego trip for Methane, then disintegrated without any follow up.
> 
> *Booed and jeered at the Television Awards program in the UK, an apparent "first" for royalty.
> 
> *Piers WON big time, Free Speech and calling out Methane  on her lies, lies, and more lies, is open to all.
> 
> *The RF at home in England is doing quite nicely without them.
> 
> *Unless something happens quickly Spotify will be Spotremover.
> 
> *Netflix?
> 
> *Harry and Oprah Mental Health Series on Apple?


Here is another version of your overview.


----------



## Chanbal

The book could be too long, is that good?


----------



## V0N1B2

rose60610 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she was made up to kinda look like Elizabeth Taylor of younger days? The poofy (not the usual stupid pony tail wisps) and the intense eyes? And the cheesy "Wild About Harry" was said for Leona Helmsley (AKA "Queen of Mean") who did  the phrase theme party for her billionaire husband, Harry. BTW, Meghan has followed in Leona's footsteps as far as I'm concerned.  Has Meghan ever remotely looked like this mag cover? The photographer must have burned a thousand calories photoshopping this cover.


Wasn’t this very thread originally titled “We’re Wild About Harry” until it was changed a few years ago?
@Swanky @CobaltBlu ?
Do either of you know/remember?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Here is another version of your overview.



Chanbal, you find the best bits! Love all the things you share, thanks.


----------



## Icyjade

Hollywood Ignores Meghan Markle and Prince Harry... trouble in paradise for the controversial royals?  — EXPOSINGSMG
					

Reese Witherspoon does not want to be your friend, Meghan! Hollywood dubs Meghan, and she and Harry sleep in different rooms. Trouble in paradise!




					www.exposingsmg.com
				




All sorts of dirt in the article.


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> I know this power couple are not the subject of this thread, but they are relevant as an example of people who invest their Foundations' funds on doing good work in support of worthy causes as opposed to the subjects of this thread who do nothing more than regurgitate word salad and move on to the next great cause. HUGE divide between the people who DO it, JZ and Beyonce and the people who only PREACH it, Maggot and Hazbeen. There are numerous citations on line about the charity work already done by JZ and Bey, this is the latest:
> 
> *Beyonce and Jay-Z pledge $2million to fund college scholarships*
> Beyonce and Jay-Z have pledged $2million to fund college scholarships.
> 
> The couple - who have daughter Blue Ivy, nine, and twins Rumi and Sir, four, together - have teamed up with Tiffany & Co to fund places at five historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) via their charities BeyGOOD and Shawn Carter Foundation as part of their About Love campaign.
> 
> Tiffany & Co. Chief Sustainability Officer Anisa Kamadoli Costa praised Beyoncé and JAY-Z for 'their relentless dedication to lifting underrepresented groups is the inspiration for the About Love Scholarship program.'


It is interesting they are giving the money ‘in partnership’ with Tiffany makes you wonder who is donating what - but in general I don’t doubt they frequently get out the cheque book.

Open question but I don’t understand this blood diamond controversy at all though. As far as I understand it’s about this yellow diamond Bey wore which was mined in 1878?
My understanding was that blood diamonds are specifically recently mined diamonds which are sold to fund conflict or genocides or which are in some other way associated with a current reigning dictator.

Personally I don’t we’re ever going to have a sustainable jewellery industry if you can no longer wear antique gems because the miners suffered under the conditions of colonial diamond mining 100+ years ago. I would say buy used over buying something from an uncertain source now for sure.

To me seems like they are holding Beyoncé to unreasonable standards for virtue signaling purposes. No one had a problem when ladyGAga wore the same necklace.



Sol Ryan said:


> Aww… I had a dog named Hector… I think that’s an insult… Hector is too good for Harry…


That’s a lovely name! Come to think of it same as Thom Browne’s dachshund & the bag - which I’ve always liked.


V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn’t this very thread originally titled “We’re Wild About Harry” until it was changed a few years ago?
> @Swanky @CobaltBlu ?
> Do either of you know/remember?


I have _never_ been wild about Harry but I do believe this was the case.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she was made up to kinda look like Elizabeth Taylor of younger days? The poofy (not the usual stupid pony tail wisps) and the intense eyes? And the cheesy "Wild About Harry" was said for Leona Helmsley (AKA "Queen of Mean") who did  the phrase theme party for her billionaire husband, Harry. BTW, Meghan has followed in Leona's footsteps as far as I'm concerned.  Has Meghan ever remotely looked like this mag cover? The photographer must have burned a thousand calories photoshopping this cover.







My reaction to this comparison;


Elizabeth Taylor?!?!? Elizabeth, I’m so sorry!

I do get your point but it’s not difficult to tell the difference between a stunning natural beauty and an accomplished lead actress and someone who struggled to get roles like ‘hot girl #6’ and has had more surgery than Amanda Lepore.

That is Interesting on the origin of wild about Harry - I guess she didn’t hide her little gold digging plans that well if even VF caught the vibe.

Off topic but one thing that makes me a little sad about this Beyoncé/Tiffany campaign & controversy is I worry it’ll outstrip the New York meme as the number one result for ‘Tiffany Beyoncé’ and I want to see miss New York get due credit.


----------



## Lodpah

Icyjade said:


> Hollywood Ignores Meghan Markle and Prince Harry... trouble in paradise for the controversial royals?  — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Reese Witherspoon does not want to be your friend, Meghan! Hollywood dubs Meghan, and she and Harry sleep in different rooms. Trouble in paradise!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All sorts of dirt in the article.


That pic of Harry and MM sitting down on their wedding with her looking like her 36 year old ingenue cracks me up, her trying to look so innocent, virginal . . . girl . . . sit the phuck down, you've been pumped enough (I don't care and it's not my business) but at least don't fake looking so virginal. Save that for the virgins who get married, being virgins. Own up to "truth" and not be afraid to express your femininity and own it. That would make you oh so much more credible. Your lives are real, not a "fairy tale."


----------



## Lodpah

jelliedfeels said:


> It is interesting they are giving the money ‘in partnership’ with Tiffany makes you wonder who is donating what - but in general I don’t doubt they frequently get out the cheque book.
> 
> Open question but I don’t understand this blood diamond controversy at all though. As far as I understand it’s about this yellow diamond Bey wore which was mined in 1878?
> My understanding was that blood diamonds are specifically recently mined diamonds which are sold to fund conflict or genocides or which are in some other way associated with a current reigning dictator.
> 
> Personally I don’t we’re ever going to have a sustainable jewellery industry if you can no longer wear antique gems because the miners suffered under the conditions of colonial diamond mining 100+ years ago. I would say buy used over buying something from an uncertain source now for sure.
> 
> To me seems like they are holding Beyoncé to unreasonable standards for virtue signaling purposes. No one had a problem when ladyGAga wore the same necklace.
> 
> 
> That’s a lovely name! Come to think of it same as Thom Browne’s dachshund & the bag - which I’ve always liked.
> 
> I have _never_ been wild about Harry but I do believe this was the case.


I suppose at one time some girls would have been wild about him but since he lost his manliness and is now just an eunuch to his "handler" he has lost all attractiveness. Who wants a PW of a man? I can't even see a gentle man, or a sensitive man in him, he's just a    sad caricature of a stupid boy in a man's body.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> I suppose at one time some girls would have been wild about him but since he lost his manliness and is now just an eunuch to his "handler" he has lost all attractiveness. Who wants a PW of a man? I can't even see a gentle man, or a sensitive man in him, he's just a    sad caricature of a stupid boy in a man's body.


To paraphrase Churchill:
He’s an idiot, wrapped in a chump, inside a fool.

He’s also going to be financially & physically drained by the time she’s through with him so the girls are going to have to be attracted to dried orange peel to get with him.

Still, he will always have some sort of title, so I have no doubt he could find someone even more desperate than Megs


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What do we think about the christening rumours? Sure, let them borrow the chapel and the archbishop, but wouldn't it be awsome if the complete BRF refused to attend (conflict of scheduling? The Queen will be in Balmoral for the reminder of September anyway)?


----------



## rose60610

Weeeeell, I doubt Smirk and Jerk are going to request that Archbishop Justin Welby christen Lilibet, he's the guy who set the record straight when they lied about getting married three days before the royal wedding. And why would Maggot and Hazbeen want to put Lilibet in a carbon oozing jet to be christened by the "racist" BRF when they could have a quiet ceremony at home complete with PRIVACY?  Oh wait. It isn't about taking a christening seriously, is it? It's to make the BRF heel and obey their commands. Good luck with that.


----------



## rose60610

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn’t this very thread originally titled “We’re Wild About Harry” until it was changed a few years ago?
> @Swanky @CobaltBlu ?
> Do either of you know/remember?



I vaguely recall that now, I believe you're right! It was a time before we realized he was as dense as his Z-Lister Loser.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Icyjade said:


> Hollywood Ignores Meghan Markle and Prince Harry... trouble in paradise for the controversial royals?  — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Reese Witherspoon does not want to be your friend, Meghan! Hollywood dubs Meghan, and she and Harry sleep in different rooms. Trouble in paradise!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All sorts of dirt in the article.


It’s all old news, we’ve known Meghan moved out of the UK and closer to Hollywood thinking she’ll get those acting jobs she’s desperately wanted.
Every black celeb or director that has supported her before Megxit seems to have taken hiding in a cave until Meghan stops calling them … 

It’s so hilarious to think that all the drama she’s made just to “escape the palace” was all for nothing.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new hire — definitely a look-alike, runs the I’m a Voter stuff so she could explain the political chatter:
> View attachment 5190401
> 
> 
> with Rachel Zoe:
> 
> View attachment 5190403
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \
> 
> ETA:  She begins in Season 4 - https://www.bravotv.com/the-rachel-zoe-project/season-4/episode-4/videos/zoeisms-from-episode-4
> 
> View attachment 5190424


Yup. I’ve stated this earlier. Beady eyes full of evil, outdated “slut strands”, bulbous nose … Meghan and her took one look at each other and fell in love. True narcissists.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We remember. 









						Harry and Meghan change Archewell website homepage in 9/11 tribute
					

The Duke and Duchess' homepage was blacked out on Saturday with nothing but white text reading 'In Memoriam, September 11, 2001' followed by rows of the names of the victims.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> We remember.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan change Archewell website homepage in 9/11 tribute
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess' homepage was blacked out on Saturday with nothing but white text reading 'In Memoriam, September 11, 2001' followed by rows of the names of the victims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'd really like to know who they think they are?


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Hollywood Ignores Meghan Markle and Prince Harry... trouble in paradise for the controversial royals?  — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> Reese Witherspoon does not want to be your friend, Meghan! Hollywood dubs Meghan, and she and Harry sleep in different rooms. Trouble in paradise!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All sorts of dirt in the article.




Thanks for posting this! Some of us suspected that Melissa worked on the video for a service fee, but this article went a few steps further… Reese was apparently smart in staying away from this toxic couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I'd really like to know who they think they are?



As the story indicated, they are one of many who have commented today. QE sent a heartwarming message, Charles and William posted messages. So, they are simply copying others. Nothing surprising about that, IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> As the story indicated, they are one of many who have commented today. QE sent a heartwarming message, Charles and William posted messages. So, they are simply copying others. Nothing surprising about that, IMO.


not surprising
But they aren't royals and I personally don't care what they say


----------



## Swanky

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn’t this very thread originally titled “We’re Wild About Harry” until it was changed a few years ago?
> @Swanky @CobaltBlu ?
> Do either of you know/remember?


 I think you’re right!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> As the story indicated, they are one of many who have commented today. QE sent a heartwarming message, Charles and William posted messages. So, they are simply copying others. Nothing surprising about that, IMO.


Yes, the others are meaningful, the Suckesses just to have their names in the media. 
If a reporter asked either of them about Sept 11, 2001 I doubt they would be able to discuss it intelligently.


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this! Some of us suspected that Melissa worked on the video for a service fee, but this article went a few steps further… Reese was apparently smart in staying away from this toxic couple.



Yes, the info re Melissa doing the clip for a fee was interesting, as is the separate bedrooms (so that’s why they needed that many bedrooms right). Anyway is gossip site but ultimately time will reveal the truth I think.


----------



## Icyjade

sdkitty said:


> I'd really like to know who they think they are?



Avid attention seekers?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The more I think about it,  Hazz is indeed still a royal. He has not renounced any titles, line of succession.  His kids are royals, too. They may not be working royals, but they are royals.  By copying the working royals, they seem to be doing exactly what Wallis and Edward did - pretend royals.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this! Some of us suspected that Melissa worked on the video for a service fee, but this article went a few steps further… Reese was apparently smart in staying away from this toxic couple.


I'm sure Meghan dreams of being Reese Witherspoon. Emphasis on dreams.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Today is the day of unbelievable news. I don't know if the are going or not, but they certainly do everything for photo-Ops and press releases…
> View attachment 5190188
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are coming to the UK for Lilibet’s christening
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan is ready to stage a meltdown
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


Awesome.  Fireworks and balloons are heavily featured with these two.  Two absolutely wonderful things for a cause *so close* to their hearts:  the environment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> We remember.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan change Archewell website homepage in 9/11 tribute
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess' homepage was blacked out on Saturday with nothing but white text reading 'In Memoriam, September 11, 2001' followed by rows of the names of the victims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Did they vow to donate dog biscuits for the offspring of the search dogs?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Yes, the others are meaningful, the Suckesses just to have their names in the media.
> If a reporter asked either of them about Sept 11, 2001 I doubt they would be able to discuss it intelligently.



Now let's not be unfair. I bet Flower watched the Twin Towers collapse...just forgot to mention that like most of us, it was on TV! I guess at that point she was old enough that her dad didn't whisk her away so she wouldn't be traumatized.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Awesome.  Fireworks and balloons are heavily featured with these two.  Two absolutely wonderful things for a cause *so close* to their hearts: the environment.


Let's see, it could just be PR to keep them on the news. I can't see why QE would accept to meet them, unless there is  a need of a distraction from what's happening to Randy A.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> We remember.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan change Archewell website homepage in 9/11 tribute
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess' homepage was blacked out on Saturday with nothing but white text reading 'In Memoriam, September 11, 2001' followed by rows of the names of the victims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They are up to their usual tricks.  Using something that had nothing to do with them personally just to get clicks on their miserable web site.  They are too awful for words.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I'd really like to know who they think they are?


Did they copy and paste the names? It was announced the president was going to do that yesterday.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now let's not be unfair. I bet Flower watched the Twin Towers collapse...just forgot to mention that like most of us, it was on TV! I guess at that point she was old enough that her dad didn't whisk her away so she wouldn't be traumatized.


You think she saw it?  Doubt it.  It had nothing to do with her personally so she wasn't interested.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Did they copy and paste the names? It was announced the president was going to do that yesterday.



Surely a worker bee found the list someplace and copy/pasted it there.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> As the story indicated, they are one of many who have commented today. QE sent a heartwarming message, Charles and William posted messages. So, they are simply copying others. Nothing surprising about that, IMO.


They think this is keeping them royal by doing this.  Like they are still working royals lolololololol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> You think she saw it?  Doubt it.  It had nothing to do with her personally so she wasn't interested.



You have a point there. But she also claimed to have seen the LA riots as a child when a) she lived nowhere near and b) her father took her on a trip to the countryside just in case so she wouldn't be in harm's way.


----------



## kipp

RE: going to the Met Gala and who was invited (or not!) , I'm currently on a plane to NYC and Tom Daley, the UK Olympic diver is sitting in front of me---said he was going to NY to attend the Gala.


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> RE: going to the Met Gala and who was invited (or not!) , I'm currently on a plane to NYC and Tom Daley, the UK Olympic diver is sitting in front of me---said he was going to NY to attend the Gala.


See, you have to have accomplished something of note to be invited.


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> RE: going to the Met Gala and who was invited (or not!) , I'm currently on a plane to NYC and Tom Daley, the UK Olympic diver is sitting in front of me---said he was going to NY to attend the Gala.


Have a safe trip and enjoy NYC, I miss The City That Never Sleeps. 

If you look back at the very last seats of the economy class, you will find the Montecito couple. They are traveling incognito to attend the Gala…


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The more I think about it,  Hazz is indeed still a royal. He has not renounced any titles, line of succession.  His kids are royals, too. They may not be working royals, but they are royals.  By copying the working royals, they seem to be doing exactly what Wallis and Edward did - pretend royals.



I'm afraid M is also royal. By marriage yes, but she become royal when she married a Prince and then was made a Duchess by QEII


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> I'm afraid M is also royal. By marriage yes, but she become royal when she married a Prince and then was made a Duchess by QEII



Well........couldn't one argue that Vlad the Impaler and Ivan the Terrible were also considered "royal"?   So......


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Well........couldn't one argue that Vlad the Impaler was also considered "royal"?   So......



As was Ivan the Terrible (Ivan IV Vasilyevich of Russia) 1533-47 - I won't even go into some of the things he got up to


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> You think she saw it?  Doubt it.  It had nothing to do with her personally so she wasn't interested.



I'm sure she saw it, if only once. Coverage was wall to wall 24/7 across all the networks for the first several days. It was all _anyone _talked about. Must have been a *very *trying time for her, no doubt
I don't usually defend her-----perish the thought------but if they hadn't acknowledged today they would have been pilloried for that. They have painted themselves into a no win situation. Oh well


----------



## rose60610

I wonder if Meghan sees other members of the BRF as peasants, forgetting that they're the ones who gave HER the title of Duchess. She certainly treats them as beneath her. And then, of course, is angry that they aren't paying for HER security, when, if it wasn't for THEM, she wouldn't NEED security  .


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> We remember.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan change Archewell website homepage in 9/11 tribute
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess' homepage was blacked out on Saturday with nothing but white text reading 'In Memoriam, September 11, 2001' followed by rows of the names of the victims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





gracekelly said:


> They are up to their usual tricks.  Using something that had nothing to do with them personally just to get clicks on their miserable web site.  They are too awful for words.



I think this post describes what goes through the minds of many of us.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I think this post describes what goes through the minds of many of us.
> 
> View attachment 5191070


What did they do? I refuse to click on their website.


----------



## rose60610

M&H are their own worst enemies at this point. Whenever they do make a statement about an impactful event, such as 9/11, they never sound sincere or authentic. It's as though they're checking off a box and saying "There, that's done now. Moving on..." They're such a fake shallow couple that cares only about themselves. Numerous organizations made 9/11 statements that sounded stoic and professional. M&H give you the feeling that every time they can be bothered to do something decent, there's always a cash register in the background.


----------



## TC1

V0N1B2 said:


> Wasn’t this very thread originally titled “We’re Wild About Harry” until it was changed a few years ago?
> @Swanky @CobaltBlu ?
> Do either of you know/remember?


It was indeed called "we're just wild about Harry" and I only came in here to snicker at posts that people thought at one time this dude was A) attractive and B) a catch


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> What did they do? I refuse to click on their website.


This is a nice dedication.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> Lady C calls M & H chicken feet and chicken brain, although I  think chickens are more intelligent than either of them.


Well, along that line .. I'm surprised she didn't call Harry "*HENPECK*" and Meghan "*MALODOROUS*", after all .. it fits both of them to a 'T'!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'd really like to know who they think they are?


I'm surprised that Mega-lo-maniac hasn't said that she was there, you know .. like the LA Riots?!?!?!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I'm surprised that Mega-lo-maniac hasn't said that she was there, you know .. like the LA Riots?!?!?!


I bet she would have loved to be in NY today with the former presidents and FL's


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> The new hire — definitely a look-alike, runs the I’m a Voter stuff so she could explain the political chatter:
> View attachment 5190401
> 
> 
> with Rachel Zoe:
> 
> View attachment 5190403
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \
> 
> ETA:  She begins in Season 4 - https://www.bravotv.com/the-rachel-zoe-project/season-4/episode-4/videos/zoeisms-from-episode-4
> 
> View attachment 5190424


Hope Harry doesn’t mistaken her for M.  Me bad.


----------



## Lounorada

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing I missed this ages ago…?
> 
> View attachment 5189462
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone Made Harry and Meghan Swimsuits, So That's a Thing
> 
> 
> Yup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.teenvogue.com









Chanbal said:


> Wow, plenty of money to hire one more person! This  one has podcast experience…
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle continue hiring spree for Archewell as they recruit Iranian-born talent agent turned political activist as Chief Operating Officer*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 36, and Meghan Markle, 40, have hired a Chief Operating Officer*
> *Mandana  Dayani will 'oversee growth strategy and day-to-day operations' *
> *Iranian activist is creator of I Am A Voter, which aims to increase voter turnout *
> *Previously hosted a podcast alongside Will and Grace star Debra Messing*
> *Has interviewed ********ic politicians including Hillary *******, Adam Schiff *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recruit political activist as COO
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex , 40,  have taken on Mandana Dayani to 'oversee their growth strategy and day-to-day operations', according to Fortune .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





They sure love to hire people. I just want to know do they actually have any work to do once hired because does this Archewell actually do anything except post occasional things on it's website? And whoTF is paying them because I highly doubt Archwell is making any money.




rose60610 said:


> Weeeeell, I doubt Smirk and Jerk are going to request that Archbishop Justin Welby christen Lilibet, he's the guy who set the record straight when they lied about getting married three days before the royal wedding. And why would Maggot and Hazbeen want to put Lilibet in a carbon oozing jet to be christened by the "racist" BRF when they could have a quiet ceremony at home complete with PRIVACY?  Oh wait. It isn't about taking a christening seriously, is it? It's to make the BRF heel and obey their commands. Good luck with that.





Smirk and Jerk never fails to crack me up, suits them so well 




TC1 said:


> It was indeed called "we're just wild about Harry" and I only came in here to snicker at posts that people thought at one time this dude was A) attractive and B) a catch








Girl, I was one of those people. I used to post pics of him in the thread and I thought he was really cute, more so when he grew the beard. Of course back then he _seemed _like a nice guy, enjoyed his work in the RF and had a fun personality. Seems now that was all a successful act crafted by his PR people and everyone who worked hard to maintain his image (besides his flaws and failures).
I even said this in the past about him:


Lounorada said:


> He looks even more handsome when he's in uniform. I'd marry him tomorrow, if he'd have me!





Lounorada said:


> I think I love him  He's just too damn handsome and charismatic.





Thankfully I saw the light and am now a reformed person  It wasn't long before the real Princess Hairy started to show his true ugly self.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lounorada said:


> Girl, I was one of those people. I used to post pics of him in the thread and I thought he was really cute, more so when he grew the beard. Of course back then he _seemed _like a nice guy, enjoyed his work in the RF and had a fun personality. Seems now that was all a successful act crafted by his PR people and everyone who worked hard to maintain his image (besides his flaws and failures).
> I even said this in the past about him:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5191184
> 
> Thankfully I saw the light and am now a reformed person  It wasn't long before the real Princess Hairy started to show his true ugly self.
> View attachment 5191185



Just imagine what the BRF, Chels, Cressie, etc. thought of all those praises.
 Perhaps :If you only knew him, you would *run:*


----------



## CarryOn2020

100 more pages and we will hit 5,000!
Just like the Wikipedia book  











						Wikipedia The Book
					

Wikipedia has, for the most part, rendered all forms of physical encyclopedias obsolete. Despite the difficulty of policing what gets written on the website and the numerous falsehoods that get promoted across its pages, people still use it as a default resource for most any subject on the face...




					www.coolthings.com


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just imagine what the BRF, Chels, Cressie, etc. thought of all those praises.
> Perhaps :If you only knew him, you would *run:*


What I don’t understand is, didn’t both of these women “date” him for quite a long time?  What made them hang around so long if he was so horrible?* One of them (forget which one) broke up with him allegedly because she didn’t want to be part of the royal family.
* is the name Horrible Harry already on the nickname list?
Malevolent Meg?


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Yes, the others are meaningful, the Suckesses just to have their names in the media.
> If a reporter asked either of them about Sept 11, 2001 I doubt they would be able to discuss it intelligently.


Thankfully, this time round, they remained "speechless". Though I'm sure that if the response had been less virulent to their fragile world pronouncement, they would be out there hectoring all terrorists.



rose60610 said:


> I wonder if Meghan sees other members of the BRF as peasants, forgetting that they're the ones who gave HER the title of Duchess. She certainly treats them as beneath her. And then, of course, is angry that they aren't paying for HER security, when, if it wasn't for THEM, she wouldn't NEED security  .


A very good reason for giving up her titles and renouncing her status as a royal by marriage. Imagine the savings on security!


----------



## Chanbal

Let's hope he is right!  @bag-mania


_Mr Farage, who has a prime time show on GB News, told Express.co.uk: "Meghan and Harry had mover's advantage in that they were able to put their side of the argument out before anybody else.

"But bit by bit, I can see even American commentators getting very bored with them, so I think their honeymoon is over."

Mr Farage's comments come after a recent YouGov poll suggested the Sussexes' popularity in the UK is continuing to fall.


Of the survey, the GB News presenter said: "That’s right and as it should be.
_
*"America is a little bit behind but Americans are beginning to see it."*









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 'honeymoon is over' in America
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry's "honeymoon is over" in the US, according to Nigel Farage.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Icyjade

rose60610 said:


> M&H are their own worst enemies at this point. Whenever they do make a statement about an impactful event, such as 9/11, they never sound sincere or authentic. It's as though they're checking off a box and saying "There, that's done now. Moving on..." They're such a fake shallow couple that cares only about themselves. Numerous organizations made 9/11 statements that sounded stoic and professional. M&H give you the feeling that every time they can be bothered to do something decent, there's always a cash register in the background.



So is it them or the people that they employ to help them with such things? If the latter, then so dreadfully incompetent.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Let's hope he is right!  @bag-mania
> View attachment 5191393
> 
> _Mr Farage, who has a prime time show on GB News, told Express.co.uk: "Meghan and Harry had mover's advantage in that they were able to put their side of the argument out before anybody else.
> 
> "But bit by bit, I can see even American commentators getting very bored with them, so I think their honeymoon is over."
> 
> Mr Farage's comments come after a recent YouGov poll suggested the Sussexes' popularity in the UK is continuing to fall.
> 
> 
> Of the survey, the GB News presenter said: "That’s right and as it should be._
> 
> *"America is a little bit behind but Americans are beginning to see it."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 'honeymoon is over' in America
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry's "honeymoon is over" in the US, according to Nigel Farage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I think he’s right but it is sure taking longer than it should. I don’t think most commentators here will ever criticize them but it would be nice if they stop reporting every single dumb thing they say and do.

Although I should be careful what I wish for. I’ll miss the fun in this thread when they finally do fall out of the spotlight and things die down here.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I think he’s right but it is sure taking longer than it should. I don’t think most commentators here will ever criticize them but* it would be nice if they stop reporting every single dumb thing they say and do*.
> 
> Although I should be careful what I wish for. I’ll miss the fun in this thread when they finally do fall out of the spotlight and things die down here.


Yep, you are right. Thanks to their PR machine, they get even bigger headlines then QE and President…


----------



## Chanbal

I think DM is wrong on this one. It's MM, and not KK, arriving in NYC to attend the Met Gala.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> What I don’t understand is, didn’t both of these women “date” him for quite a long time?  What made them hang around so long if he was so horrible?* One of them (forget which one) broke up with him allegedly because she didn’t want to be part of the royal family.
> * is the name Horrible Harry already on the nickname list?
> Malevolent Meg?


I'm of the opinion that everyone has a "good side". Perhaps his previous girlfriends saw the good in him and stuck with him till they gave up. His pre-Methane character seems to have been indolent and easily influenced. All his faux pas were excused as youthful excess. I think Methane, like Darth Vader, turned him to the dark side by cultivating his feelings of inadequacy and injustice, and dangling the lure of a carefree life with prestige and wealth. They feed off each other.


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> I'm of the opinion that everyone has a "good side". Perhaps his previous girlfriends saw the good in him and stuck with him till they gave up. His pre-Methane character seems to have been indolent and easily influenced. All his faux pas were excused as youthful excess. I think Methane, like Darth Vader, turned him to the dark side by cultivating his feelings of inadequacy and injustice, and dangling the lure of a carefree life with prestige and wealth. They feed off each other.



He sounded like a brat even then?





__





						Chelsy Davy’s final straw: Prince Harry's demand that ended their relationship | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
					

CHELSY DAVY and Prince Harry broke up over a decade ago - and the final straw was reportedly Harry's demand that she should withdraw from a charity ball she was going to.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> He sounded like a brat even then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chelsy Davy’s final straw: Prince Harry's demand that ended their relationship | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
> 
> 
> CHELSY DAVY and Prince Harry broke up over a decade ago - and the final straw was reportedly Harry's demand that she should withdraw from a charity ball she was going to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Big time brat.
Supposedly the York girls are _friends_ with Hazz, Chels and Cress. Surely they all have witnessed his rages, his pity parties, his rude behavior. I would like to hear their stories. Based on Chels IG feed, it looks like she has been in the USA a few times. Surely she wouldn’t get involved with Hazz now. Would she?


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> He sounded like a brat even then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chelsy Davy’s final straw: Prince Harry's demand that ended their relationship | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
> 
> 
> CHELSY DAVY and Prince Harry broke up over a decade ago - and the final straw was reportedly Harry's demand that she should withdraw from a charity ball she was going to.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


A Me-first brat.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Big time brat.
> Supposedly the York girls are _friends_ with Hazz, Chels and Cress. Surely they all have witnessed his rages, his pity parties, his rude behavior. I would like to hear their stories. Based on Chels IG feed, it looks like she has been in the USA a few times. Surely she wouldn’t get involved with Hazz now. Would she?


Surely not, after he has now exposed his worst side to the public. The ones who will still go for him would be those women aiming for sainthood who want to "rescue" him.  No doubt that is how Methane portrayed her role too (apart from the cash register angle). Remember how they both trumpeted their rescue of each other during the OW interview? I wouldn't be surprised if Methane starts some form of MLM with cultish aspects. She has the stans to make it work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think DM is wrong on this one. It's MM, and not KK, arriving in NYC to attend the Met Gala.
> 
> View attachment 5191471



I like her, but this is so ridiculous.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like her, but this is so ridiculous.



One of Yeezy’s bizarre creations for sure.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I'm of the opinion that everyone has a "good side". Perhaps his previous girlfriends saw the good in him and stuck with him till they gave up. His pre-Methane character seems to have been indolent and easily influenced. All his faux pas were excused as youthful excess. I think Methane, like Darth Vader, turned him to the dark side by cultivating his feelings of inadequacy and injustice, and dangling the lure of a carefree life with prestige and wealth. They feed off each other.


Maybe the difference is the context ? 
I presume, dont know, that C  & C were integrated into H's London scene and friends whereas H saw a Lot of M in Toronto far away from dad's surveillance and prying eyes 
I have to believe that the security detail - the folks that cover up any kerfuffles - was different overseas


----------



## Chanbal

Valid observations here???


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like her, but this is so ridiculous.


no eye holes?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Valid observations here???



yes, as I said, who cares about what they think or say?  they are private citizens, basically nobodies - their choice


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like her, but this is so ridiculous.


Creepy as h3ll.


----------



## Chanbal

Grab your popcorn…










						Big Brother VIP: Thomas Jr pens letter to Meghan Markle and Harry
					

Thomas Markle Jr. famously wrote a letter to Prince Harry pleading for him to not marry his half-sister Meghan in April 2018.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Well, along that line .. I'm surprised she didn't call Harry "*HENPECK*" and Meghan "*MALODOROUS*", after all .. it fits both of them to a 'T'!


Thanks @CeeJay Your suggested nicknames have been added to the list.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> no eye holes?



I think the zipper was open a tiny bit. But still!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think the zipper was open a tiny bit. But still!


grotesque...what is she going for? dominatrix?
is it Halloween?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Grab your popcorn…
> View attachment 5191840
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big Brother VIP: Thomas Jr pens letter to Meghan Markle and Harry
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr. famously wrote a letter to Prince Harry pleading for him to not marry his half-sister Meghan in April 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




I've said it before, I'll say it again...it would really help the Markles' reputation if they just shut up. Have some dignity and save the paper and ink.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> grotesque...what is she going for? dominatrix?
> is it Halloween?



Isn't it the domineered part that's in those hoods? Not that I have a real clue haha.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, I'll say it again...it would really help the Markles' reputation if they just shut up. Have some dignity and save the paper and ink.



Unless he _knows_ something - then he is required to share with all of us


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, I'll say it again...it would really help the Markles' reputation if they just shut up. Have some dignity and save the paper and ink.



That said...hasn't Samantha been really quiet lately? I wonder if they paid her off because she had real dirt on Flower. In her shoes, middle aged with a disability, I'd take the money too.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it the domineered part that's in those hoods? Not that I have a real clue haha.


ha....I have no experience in that area either


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> grotesque...what is she going for? dominatrix?
> is it Halloween?


 Sub not Dom, she is the one who is masked therefore she is the one being dominated


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is a nice dedication.



The national anthem still gives me goosebumps every time I hear it.  As irritated as I am with woke culture, and general stupidity of a lot of Americans, the US is my adopted homeland and has given my family the opportunities to accomplish everything we have.  I will always be a proud citizen.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5191170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5191177
> 
> They sure love to hire people. I just want to know do they actually have any work to do once hired because does this Archewell actually do anything except post occasional things on it's website? And whoTF is paying them because I highly doubt Archwell is making any money.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5191178
> 
> Smirk and Jerk never fails to crack me up, suits them so well
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Girl, I was one of those people. I used to post pics of him in the thread and I thought he was really cute, more so when he grew the beard. Of course back then he _seemed _like a nice guy, enjoyed his work in the RF and had a fun personality. Seems now that was all a successful act crafted by his PR people and everyone who worked hard to maintain his image (besides his flaws and failures).
> I even said this in the past about him:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5191184
> 
> Thankfully I saw the light and am now a reformed person  It wasn't long before the real Princess Hairy started to show his true ugly self.
> View attachment 5191185


At least you had the personal growth to see the light and reform yourself.  The first step to change is admitting you have a problem.  I am so proud of you!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I think DM is wrong on this one. It's MM, and not KK, arriving in NYC to attend the Met Gala.
> 
> View attachment 5191471


Didn't she already do this look for a Kanye concert??  What's up Kimme?  Hiding more plastic surgery?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Valid observations here???



Sigh, I can't take videos with ridiculous misspellings seriously.  "Proferiting"??  Seriously??


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, I can't take videos with ridiculous misspellings seriously.  "Proferiting"??  Seriously??


Ever since I only recently discovered the 'second' R in what I had been calling 'tumeric' I have been more generous in my benefit of doubt giving


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Ever since I only recently discovered the 'second' R in what I had been calling 'tumeric' I have been more generous in my benefit of doubt giving


My mother has been using turmeric in cooking for years, and we've always pronounced the first "R".  My MIL last year starts telling me about this "wonderful spice" blah blah blah "TOOMERIC", and I kept thinking WTF is she pronouncing it that way?!!?...only to find out almost every white person I've run into says it that way.  I'm so confused!!    
turmeric pronunciation


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> My mother has been using turmeric in cooking for years, and we've always pronounced the first "R".  My MIL last year starts telling me about this "wonderful spice" blah blah blah "TOOMERIC", and I kept thinking WTF is she pronouncing it that way?!!?...only to find out almost every white person I've run into says it that way.  I'm so confused!!
> turmeric pronunciation


I'm completely of the mind that the second r was snuck in there recently when I wasn't looking. A social science experiment to see who's paying attention? They tried it before with library, you know


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I'm completely of the mind that the second r was snuck in there recently when I wasn't looking. A social science experiment to see who's paying attention? They tried it before with library, you know



and they took the R out of “author”


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> At least you had the personal growth to see the light and reform yourself.  The first step to change is admitting you have a problem.  I am so proud of you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> and they took the R out of “author”



And February


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> My mother has been using turmeric in cooking for years, and we've always pronounced the first "R".  My MIL last year starts telling me about this "wonderful spice" blah blah blah "TOOMERIC", and I kept thinking WTF is she pronouncing it that way?!!?...only to find out almost every white person I've run into says it that way.  I'm so confused!!
> turmeric pronunciation


i Do it both ways, am kind of bi or turmeric-fluid


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh, I can't take videos with ridiculous misspellings seriously.  "Proferiting"??  Seriously??


Didn't see the misspelling, sorry about that. 

Oops, I just checked it, and the word is written in big letters.  

By the way, 'tumeric' is a lot easier to pronounce then 'turmeric', so I vote on the 1st.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Valid observations here???



Yes, very valid observations and the kind I wish would make it into the main stream press. 

As she points out, during the Oprah interview Haz talked about being angry and upset so many people were mourning his mother because "they didn't know her" . Keeping their hypocrisy current, he and the Money Ho he's married to posted the names of all 9/11 victims on Archewell. So, why did they do it since it is 99.999% certain they did not "know" a victim personally?

Because, and I had never processed this until listening to Murky Meg. Each click on Archwell nets them information that can be sold to third parties and generates income for them. They will be making money from the Victims of 9/11. Think of the number of potential clicks. I want to vomit.

She also pointed out their lack of social media, with the exception of the Archwell Foundation site, keeps them in a "bubble" that insulates them from the comments/opinions people can post on Twitter etc. They post their crap on Archwell, applaud themselves for their wokeness, and wait for the next opportunity to share their "privacy."


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Yes, very valid observations and the kind I wish would make it into the main stream press.
> 
> As she points out, during the Oprah interview Haz talked about being angry and upset so many people were mourning his mother because "they didn't know her" . Keeping their hypocrisy current, he and the Money Ho he's married to posted the names of all 9/11 victims on Archewell. So, why did they do it since it is 99.999% certain they did not "know" a victim personally?
> 
> Because, and I had never processed this until listening to Murky Meg. *Each click on Archwell nets them information that can be sold to third parties and generates income for them.* They will be making money from the Victims of 9/11. Think of the number of potential clicks. I want to vomit.
> 
> She also pointed out their lack of social media, with the exception of the Archwell Foundation site, keeps them in a "bubble" that insulates them from the comments/opinions people can post on Twitter etc. They post their crap on Archwell, applaud themselves for their wokeness, and wait for the next opportunity to share their "privacy."


The possibility of selling the information to third parties is an eye opener. It was one of the main reasons why I posted the video here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh,   










						Oprah's Harry and Meghan TV interview loses out at Emmys to food show
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive American TV interview with Oprah Winfrey lost out at the Creative Emmy Awards to a show series about Italian cuisine and culture.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Or maybe they didn’t pay their bills…




I wonder if the rumor about dumping Sunsh*ne S*chs is true…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah's Harry and Meghan TV interview loses out at Emmys to food show
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive American TV interview with Oprah Winfrey lost out at the Creative Emmy Awards to a show series about Italian cuisine and culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yay! Congrats to Stanley Tucci (I assume it's his program winning, can't be bothered to click right now)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Yes, very valid observations and the kind I wish would make it into the main stream press.
> 
> As she points out, during the Oprah interview Haz talked about being angry and upset so many people were mourning his mother because "they didn't know her" . Keeping their hypocrisy current, he and the Money Ho he's married to posted the names of all 9/11 victims on Archewell. So, why did they do it since it is 99.999% certain they did not "know" a victim personally?
> 
> Because, and I had never processed this until listening to Murky Meg. Each click on Archwell nets them information that can be sold to third parties and generates income for them. They will be making money from the Victims of 9/11. Think of the number of potential clicks. I want to vomit.
> 
> She also pointed out their lack of social media, with the exception of the Archwell Foundation site, keeps them in a "bubble" that insulates them from the comments/opinions people can post on Twitter etc. They post their crap on Archwell, applaud themselves for their wokeness, and wait for the next opportunity to share their "privacy."



Could they sink any lower. And no, I'm not challenging them.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah's Harry and Meghan TV interview loses out at Emmys to food show
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive American TV interview with Oprah Winfrey lost out at the Creative Emmy Awards to a show series about Italian cuisine and culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The winner post!


----------



## CarryOn2020

In honor of Medvedev’s win, L2 + left


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah's Harry and Meghan TV interview loses out at Emmys to food show
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive American TV interview with Oprah Winfrey lost out at the Creative Emmy Awards to a show series about Italian cuisine and culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Let out a whoop of joy and scared the dog! I love Stanley Tucci, a class act and his Italy series was excellent, really wanted him to win. Such good news.

I hope some of the decision making by those who cast ballots included the scope of deception in the material and the lack of "interview" by Oprah. The timing of this is spectacular since the boos and jeers from the celebrity crowd as clips from it were being shown during the London TV Awards Show were just made public.  

Adding to their misery, an article in the NYTimes today may help explain why they are not at the Met Gala this week:

"Ms. Wintour, the editor of American Vogue and the artistic director of Condé Nast, became chairwoman in 1995 and took over the leadership in 1999. Since then, she has been instrumental in transforming a local philanthropic event into *the ultimate global celebrity/power cocktail. *

Take a jigger of famous names from fashion, add film, tech, politics, sports and business, and mix. (Hence those hosts: *Ms. Wintour is entirely unsentimental about out with the old and in with the influencers.) Indeed, it remains the gold standard of parties and the one by which other benefits are measured."*

The bolding is mine. It's beginning to look more and more, at long last, the Suckesses will have freedom, and can play with the chickens all they want to. Their presence at major events is not sought, their pompous preaching is falling on deafened ears, and if they really did ask the Queen about christening Lilibet at Windsor, so far they are the equivalent of wall flowers standing alone on the sidelines while the rest of the world waltzes on. Definitely not, except in their own narcissistic minds, "global celebrity power" or "influencers."


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> And February


I also hear a lot of people pronounce "mirror" are "meer".  How is this on topic you ask?  I'm sure Meguns looks into a lot of meers .
Kind of like Stuart Smalley:  "I'm DEFINITELY beyond good enough, I'm smart (-er than everyone else), and doggone it, people LOVE me!"


----------



## poopsie

My goodness.
No invite to the burfday party
No invite to the Met Ball
No appearance at the awards 
Good thing they announced that they were taking a parental leave otherwise it might look like they're personae non gratae


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Valid observations here???



Yeah they want to monetize. She could care less about strangers. It's a way for them to have clicks.  They are of no importance, not political figures, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why does she do this? Does she need the support?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why does she do this? Does she need the support?



I kind of like the Sophie appreciation post.


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> As she points out, during the Oprah interview Haz talked about being angry and upset so many people were mourning his mother because "they didn't know her" . Keeping their hypocrisy current, he and the Money Ho he's married to posted the names of all 9/11 victims on Archewell. So, why did they do it since it is 99.999% certain they did not "know" a victim personally?



So...did H&M know the soldiers in the CA cemetery whose graves they used as props for a photo op? Charles and Diana's wedding was broadcast to millions, we got unending pictures of her pregnancies, then children, etc. We were almost forced "to know" them. When any famous personality dies that had millions of huge fans--rock stars, RBG, world leaders, and professional athletes-- for example, is it improper for fans to "mourn"?


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, you would think she would have the sense not to give him a platform for self-promotion but apparently not. What is he going to say? “This is the event I copied and called it the Invictus Games in the UK”?   

*The Prince and the 'Prof': Harry will join Jill ***** on Monday for virtual event to honor Warrior Games athlete*

*Jill ***** and Prince Harry will pair up Monday to celebrate the Warrior Games*
*Two are longtime friends thanks to their work on veterans' issues*
*Jill ***** has attended Harry's Invictus Games in the past*
*This is their first event since she became first lady and he moved to US *
*Defense Department's Warrior Games celebrates wounded veterans*
*The 2021 Warrior Games were slated to begin in-person this week in Orlando, Fla., but were canceled due to the COVID pandemic*
*Jill ***** and Prince Harry were scheduled to go to Games together in person *
Jill ***** is teaming up with Prince Harryon Monday to celebrate the Warrior Games, the first event for the two of them since she entered the White House.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Ken Fisher, Chairman and CEO of Fisher House Foundation, will join the duo for the virtual event, which will honor Warrior Games athletes, their families, and caregivers.


Jill ***** and Prince Harry have a relationship prior to her becoming first lady thanks to their work on veterans' issues and with military families, with Jill and Joe ***** having attended his Invictus Games in the past.

Despite their 33-year age gap, Jill and Harry have formed a bond over their shared interest in veterans' affairs.  

But this is their first event together since she became first lady and since Harry and his wife Meghan moved to the United States. The Duchess of Sussex was not included in the list of participants for Monday's event. 

Jill *****, Prince Harry and Austin had planned to attend the games in person prior to the games being canceled due to the COVID pandemic, the East Wing of the White House said in a statement Sunday night. 

The pairing up of Harry with the American first lady could ruffle feathers in London and once again bring up concerns that Harry and Meghan will get involved in US politics. Traditionally, members of the Royal Family are expected to remain politically neutral at all times.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...html?ns_mchannel=rss&ico=taboola_feed_article


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> grotesque...what is she going for? dominatrix?
> is it Halloween?


Late entry for the Chinese Ghost Month? (Just ended last Monday  )


----------



## VickyB

She must be stewing and fuming regarding all these snubs. I am sure this was not the treatment she expected.


----------



## poopsie

Another _virtual_ event?
Yawn
Get back to us when you are invited to an _actual _event
K?
thnx bye


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, you would think she would have the sense not to give him a platform for self-promotion but apparently not. What is he going to say? “This is the event I copied and called it the Invictus Games in the UK”?
> 
> *The Prince and the 'Prof': Harry will join Jill ***** on Monday for virtual event to honor Warrior Games athlete*
> 
> *Jill ***** and Prince Harry will pair up Monday to celebrate the Warrior Games*
> *Two are longtime friends thanks to their work on veterans' issues*
> *Jill ***** has attended Harry's Invictus Games in the past*
> *This is their first event since she became first lady and he moved to US *
> *Defense Department's Warrior Games celebrates wounded veterans*
> *The 2021 Warrior Games were slated to begin in-person this week in Orlando, Fla., but were canceled due to the COVID pandemic*
> *Jill ***** and Prince Harry were scheduled to go to Games together in person *
> Jill ***** is teaming up with Prince Harryon Monday to celebrate the Warrior Games, the first event for the two of them since she entered the White House.
> 
> Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Ken Fisher, Chairman and CEO of Fisher House Foundation, will join the duo for the virtual event, which will honor Warrior Games athletes, their families, and caregivers.
> 
> 
> Jill ***** and Prince Harry have a relationship prior to her becoming first lady thanks to their work on veterans' issues and with military families, with Jill and Joe ***** having attended his Invictus Games in the past.
> 
> Despite their 33-year age gap, Jill and Harry have formed a bond over their shared interest in veterans' affairs.
> 
> But this is their first event together since she became first lady and since Harry and his wife Meghan moved to the United States. The Duchess of Sussex was not included in the list of participants for Monday's event.
> 
> Jill *****, Prince Harry and Austin had planned to attend the games in person prior to the games being canceled due to the COVID pandemic, the East Wing of the White House said in a statement Sunday night.
> 
> The pairing up of Harry with the American first lady could ruffle feathers in London and once again bring up concerns that Harry and Meghan will get involved in US politics. Traditionally, members of the Royal Family are expected to remain politically neutral at all times.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...html?ns_mchannel=rss&ico=taboola_feed_article



After all that has happened recently, this is in the poorest of tastes.  Unreal what these people do.

ETA: both are such media whores. At least, Oprah has maintained a quiet dignity.


----------



## xincinsin

VickyB said:


> She must be stewing and fuming regarding all these snubs. I am sure this was not the treatment she expected.


Sometimes I wonder what would have been their fate if Covid had not put paid to all their plans to market themselves. More walks through the woods dangling a toy baby and smirking at the paps? Jaunts every week on carbon-neutralized private jets to exclusive resorts? Parades down red carpets in ill-fitting borrowed gowns?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, you would think she would have the sense not to give him a platform for self-promotion but apparently not. What is he going to say? “This is the event I copied and called it the Invictus Games in the UK”?
> 
> *The Prince and the 'Prof': Harry will join Jill ***** on Monday for virtual event to honor Warrior Games athlete*
> 
> *Jill ***** and Prince Harry will pair up Monday to celebrate the Warrior Games*
> *Two are longtime friends thanks to their work on veterans' issues*
> *Jill ***** has attended Harry's Invictus Games in the past*
> *This is their first event since she became first lady and he moved to US *
> *Defense Department's Warrior Games celebrates wounded veterans*
> *The 2021 Warrior Games were slated to begin in-person this week in Orlando, Fla., but were canceled due to the COVID pandemic*
> *Jill ***** and Prince Harry were scheduled to go to Games together in person *
> Jill ***** is teaming up with Prince Harryon Monday to celebrate the Warrior Games, the first event for the two of them since she entered the White House.
> 
> Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Ken Fisher, Chairman and CEO of Fisher House Foundation, will join the duo for the virtual event, which will honor Warrior Games athletes, their families, and caregivers.
> 
> 
> Jill ***** and Prince Harry have a relationship prior to her becoming first lady thanks to their work on veterans' issues and with military families, with Jill and Joe ***** having attended his Invictus Games in the past.
> 
> Despite their 33-year age gap, Jill and Harry have formed a bond over their shared interest in veterans' affairs.
> 
> But this is their first event together since she became first lady and since Harry and his wife Meghan moved to the United States. The Duchess of Sussex was not included in the list of participants for Monday's event.
> 
> Jill *****, Prince Harry and Austin had planned to attend the games in person prior to the games being canceled due to the COVID pandemic, the East Wing of the White House said in a statement Sunday night.
> 
> The pairing up of Harry with the American first lady could ruffle feathers in London and once again bring up concerns that Harry and Meghan will get involved in US politics. Traditionally, members of the Royal Family are expected to remain politically neutral at all times.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...html?ns_mchannel=rss&ico=taboola_feed_article


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I kind of like the Sophie appreciation post.



I had never seen this, it is priceless. Sophie quietly witheringly disdains her and the insult landed given Methane’s reaction.


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> Sometimes I wonder what would have been their fate if Covid had not put paid to all their plans to market themselves. More walks through the woods dangling a toy baby and smirking at the paps? Jaunts every week on carbon-neutralized private jets to exclusive resorts? Parades down red carpets in ill-fitting borrowed gowns?



There is a divinity that shapes our ends, rough hew them as we will


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> There is a divinity that shapes our ends, rough hew them as we will



Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit,
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
I will be brief: your noble son is mad:


----------



## xincinsin

Hip Hip Hooray for Willy!
Always an apt quote!
So far we have used the Scottish play and Hamlet. A couple more tragedies to go!


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> I kind of like the Sophie appreciation post.



I can't get enough of this!!!!!! Thanks!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I kind of like the Sophie appreciation post.



I love that!  Now, if M had behaved and got on with trying to learn how to be a proper Royal, she could've learnt a lot from Sophie.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5192510



When was this interview with Katie Nicholls done?
2 possibilities come to mind:
a) Methane is so forgettable that after Hazard declared her his dream woman, he forgot about her and met her with "new eyes" two years later
b) the interviewee writes for Vanity Fair which I believe is quite pro-Methane, and "tailored" her answer to promote the idea of "A Love That Was Meant To Be"

In any case, if Hazard really had a crush on her in Suits, I think he would have figured out a way to meet her. And if she was really a yacht girl, their paths would have crossed sooner or later.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why does she do this? Does she need the support?




I thought that was very patronizing. She probably thought it looked caring. Why would she need the support, she could have been all over her husband in public like usual.

ETA: I guess she did it to fake closeness. Just like "I called the Queen like you do".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5192510




I've heard that one before but not sure if I buy it. Let's be real, if that is his type for his whole adult life he dated the complete opposite.

Then again, why would one of *his* friends leak that to a journalist. Unless said journalist has an agenda and made it up. Dunno.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've heard that one before but not sure if I buy it. Let's be real, *if that is his type for his whole adult life he dated the complete opposite.*
> 
> Then again, why would one of *his* friends leak that to a journalist. Unless said journalist has an agenda and made it up. Dunno.


That's a very good point. Why did he pick someone totally not his type? It does push the case that their "love" is transactional and provides a good reason for all the overcompensatory drama and overacting: they have to convince the world that their "truth" is real.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought that was very patronizing. She probably thought it looked caring. Why would she need the support, she could have been all over her husband in public like usual.
> 
> ETA: I guess she did it to fake closeness. Just like "I called the Queen like you do".



patronizing and showing that MM is the one in control - even of Catherine.

BTW - I keep hearing rumours - Catherine hasn’t been seen for a long while and the pregnancy rumour keeps being raised.  It would be hilarious if number 6 in line became number 7 - although I doubt she really is pregnant…


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why does she do this? Does she need the support?




Benefit of doubt. It honestly looks like she realized she was going to cross the threshold of the gate before Kate was (and had had many many talks on hierarchy), so her response was to slow down a little, wait for Kate and then to shove Kate through.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> I think DM is wrong on this one. It's MM, and not KK, arriving in NYC to attend the Met Gala.
> 
> View attachment 5191471


She has a better posture than Meghan …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> I kind of like the Sophie appreciation post.



My god, Meghan is almost 50 and she acts like a disgusting kid that thinks the world revolves around her.

The smug smile …


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> patronizing and showing that MM is the one in control - even of Catherine.
> 
> BTW - I keep hearing rumours - Catherine hasn’t been seen for a long while and the pregnancy rumour keeps being raised.  It would be hilarious if number 6 in line became number 7 - although I doubt she really is pregnant…


Yes, it would be fun if Harry was demoted. Though, I wonder if Kate's 'disappearance' has to do with her attending her brother's wedding in France.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> When was this interview with Katie Nicholls done?
> 2 possibilities come to mind:
> a) Methane is so forgettable that after Hazard declared her his dream woman, he forgot about her and met her with "new eyes" two years later
> b) *the interviewee writes for Vanity Fair which I believe is quite pro-Methane, and "tailored" her answer to promote the idea of "A Love That Was Meant To Be"*
> 
> In any case, if Hazard really had a crush on her in Suits, I think he would have figured out a way to meet her. And if she was really a yacht girl, their paths would have crossed sooner or later.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've heard that one before but not sure if I buy it. Let's be real, if that is his type for his whole adult life he dated the complete opposite.
> 
> Then again, why would one of *his* friends leak that to a journalist. *Unless said journalist has an agenda and made it up. Dunno.*


I think the journalist has an agenda an this is a falsehood. I agree with the post below the video, this is likely related to six's wife trying to improve her image and promoting the idea of "A Love That Was Meant To Be".


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Monday! As it has been said before, '_happiness is a book and a cup of coffee',_ here is a nice article for you:








						Kate Middleton’s $22 million exposes Prince Harry’s problem
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> My god, Meghan is almost 50 and she acts like a disgusting kid that thinks the world revolves around her.
> 
> The smug smile …


"Almost 50"?  She just turned 40 
Your post cracked me up, but I'm closer to 50 than our favorite Miserable Meg


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> I love that!  Now, if M had behaved and got on with trying to learn how to be a proper Royal, she could've learnt a lot from Sophie.


excuse me if I'm being dense but not sure what the point is here?  Meghan was smiling broadly at a formal occasion where no one else was and sophie gave her a dirty look?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> excuse me if I'm being dense but not sure what the point is here?  Meghan was smiling broadly at a formal occasion where no one else was and sophie gave her a dirty look?



Actually, she and Ed were laughing themselves silly about something (wish we knew what it was). He stopped laughing, straightened his shoulders and picked something out of his teeth - gross. Sophie tried to look away and ignore them, but she must have felt MM’s stare so she looked directly at MM who smirked and started reading the program. Although the ceremony had not begun, both Ed and MM behaved inappropriately IMO.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Actually, she and Ed were laughing themselves silly about something (wish we knew what it was). He stopped laughing, straightened his shoulders and picked something out of his teeth - gross. Sophie tried to look away and ignore them, but she must have felt MM’s stare so she looked directly at MM who smirked and started reading the program. Although the ceremony had not begun, both Ed and MM behaved inappropriately IMO.


Wonder where was Hazard. Usually they are busy with PDA or Methane is making goo goo eyes at the nearest camera lens.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Yes, it would be fun if Harry was demoted. Though, I wonder if Kate's 'disappearance' has to do with her attending her brother's wedding in France.



The last time she was seen in public was in July, though. I think they are just on an extended break. I bet they could use some peace and quiet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Wonder where was Hazard. Usually they are busy with PDA or Methane is making goo goo eyes at the nearest camera lens.



He was stewing in his angst.  The video is on @Chanbal’s post and below:


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA:  This dress and coat combo looks good on her, but her stance -


----------



## breakfastatcartier

purseinsanity said:


> "Almost 50"?  She just turned 40
> Your post cracked me up, but I'm closer to 50 than our favorite Miserable Meg


My bad, she’s always looked like a badly aging woman in her late 40s to me … there were many rumors that she’s lied about her age.

Maybe that’s why she’s had so many cosmetic procedures once she “escaped the palace”


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> excuse me if I'm being dense but not sure what the point is here?  Meghan was smiling broadly at a formal occasion where no one else was and sophie gave her a dirty look?





CarryOn2020 said:


> Actually, she and Ed were laughing themselves silly about something (wish we knew what it was). He stopped laughing, straightened his shoulders and picked something out of his teeth - gross. Sophie tried to look away and ignore them, but she must have felt MM’s stare so she looked directly at MM who smirked and started reading the program. Although the ceremony had not begun, both Ed and MM behaved inappropriately IMO.



I was assuming Meghan was staring at one of the cameras filming her angle. Sophie must’ve seen it on a reflection or screen or something and put Meghan in her place.


----------



## lanasyogamama

breakfastatcartier said:


> I was assuming Meghan was staring at one of the cameras filming her angle. Sophie must’ve seen it on a reflection or screen or something and put Meghan in her place.


Plus, the two of them had already caused a huge issue by freaking out about not being asked to walk in with the queen or something like that. William and Kate were asked, but didn’t do it to appease them.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Wonder where was Hazard. Usually they are busy with PDA or Methane is making goo goo eyes at the nearest camera lens.


He was sitting to her right


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Plus, the two of them had already caused a huge issue by freaking out about not being asked to walk in with the queen or something like that. William and Kate were asked, but didn’t do it to appease them.


As senior Royals William and Catherine were indeed supposed to walk in with the Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla. H&M would have too had they not announced they were stepping back a few weeks earlier. This was their last official event, I suppose they were told you don't want to be senior Royals so start as you mean to go on and get yourself seated before the senior Royals arrive.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lanasyogamama said:


> Plus, the two of them had already caused a huge issue by freaking out about not being asked to walk in with the queen or something like that. William and Kate were asked, but didn’t do it to appease them.


I remember that … they’re such whiny brats. How will they raise their kids?


----------



## lanasyogamama

why am i worried they’re going to be surprise attendees of the Met Gala tonight? is that even possible?


----------



## lanasyogamama

breakfastatcartier said:


> I remember that … they’re such whiny brats. How will they raise their kids?


poorly, lol


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> I had never seen this, it is priceless. Sophie quietly witheringly disdains her and the insult landed given Methane’s reaction.


To see the M's face change so rapidly is really interesting. But seeing that AWFUL green outfit again--my eyes!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  This dress and coat combo looks good on her, but her stance -



IMO, the person who could have taught M the most was Anne, the Princess Royal and in my mind's eye, I can see Anne succinctly putting M in her place.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

lanasyogamama said:


> why am i worried they’re going to be surprise attendees of the Met Gala tonight? is that even possible?


I highly doubt that. 
1) you must be vaccinated (we are not sure if these two ever followed up with theirs) 
2) Anna wants people who have an eye or have contributed to fashion. LOL at these two. One look at any of their previous outfit choices would get them expelled


----------



## gracekelly

breakfastatcartier said:


> I remember that … they’re such whiny brats. *How will they raise their kids?
> *



With huge chips on their shoulders.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> why am i worried they’re going to be surprise attendees of the Met Gala tonight? is that even possible?



If they do make an appearance we can note this as being the "jump the shark" moment for the Met Gala.


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> I highly doubt that.
> 1) you must be vaccinated (we are not sure if these two ever followed up with theirs)
> 2) Anna wants people who have an eye or have contributed to fashion. LOL at these two. One look at any of their previous outfit choices would get them expelled



I could see M in a full-on Dom-dress and H in a gimp mask  

I said 'could' NOT would want to


----------



## Jayne1

Meg isn't one to do fashion that's outlandish, camp or iconic. She's a duchess, guys.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I could see M in a full-on Dom-dress and H in a gimp mask
> 
> I said 'could' NOT would want to


She could lead Haz in with a rope around his neck and his hands tied together, like the Medieval days, when they led prisoners to their death.  You know, kind of like she's already doing very sloooooowly now.


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> why am i worried they’re going to be surprise attendees of the Met Gala tonight? is that even possible?


You mean like how they would just pop in on Zoom calls?


----------



## mellibelly

sdkitty said:


> excuse me if I'm being dense but not sure what the point is here?  Meghan was smiling broadly at a formal occasion where no one else was and sophie gave her a dirty look?


I could be wrong but weren’t the royals instructed to wear red, white or blue for commonwealth day? And Megadeath shows up in that fugly Kermit outfit grinning like a lunatic with Harriet scowling to her left. This was their last official engagement as working royals. She’s such a f*cking phony and one look from Sophie wiped the smirk off her face


----------



## mellibelly

Has anyone seen the Murders at White House Farm? Cressida Bonas was really good in it. She’s a much better actress than 6’s wife.


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


> She could lead Haz in with a rope around his neck and his hands tied together, like the Medieval days, when they led prisoners to their death.  You know, kind of like she's already doing very sloooooowly now.


Yes, quoting myself LOL!

I imagine Meg pulling a Kimme like getup like this:







And if she keeps up with the plastic surgery, she could wind up looking like this:


----------



## Chanbal

Valid point!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Even IF Meghan and/or Harry are at the Met Gala, their "star power" and media coverage is likely to be eclipsed. I just read that Emma Raducanu ( the British teenager who just won the US Open) has been personally invited by Anna Wintour who is well known as a tennis fan. 
The article I read also claimed Wintour was aiming for young talent, achievers and influencers which would also explain Tom Daley' s invitation mentioned here a few days ago. (He's the Olympic diver) 
Will be interesting to see the photo's later.


----------



## bellecate

breakfastatcartier said:


> I remember that … they’re such whiny brats. How will they raise their kids?


They won't, the nannies/staff will be raising them.


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> Even IF Meghan and/or Harry are at the Met Gala, their "star power" and media coverage is likely to be eclipsed. I just read that Emma Raducanu ( the British teenager who just won the US Open) has been personally invited by Anna Wintour who is well known as a tennis fan.
> The article I read also claimed Wintour was aiming for young talent, achievers and influencers which would also explain Tom Daley' s invitation mentioned here a few days ago. (He's the Olympic diver)
> Will be interesting to see the photo's later.


I'm watching the live stream and have hardly recognized anyone.....maybe partly because they are going really young and also its still early arrivals....Channing Tatum and Billy Elish were about the most recognizable for me


----------



## marietouchet

Murky Meg had a post - Harry and the First Lady are hosting a virtual thing for Invictus … at the same time as the Met Red Carpet, is that correct ?
watching red carpet live stream , love Billie Eilish gown but everything else is too way out there (translate unattractive)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

They keep insisting on a meeting with QE, but Rosarito is a lot closer to Montecito… 

*Prince Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’*

_With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed.

*A royal commentator has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen in order to be commercially successful in the US.*

This comes as speculation has been mounting over when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will bring their daughter Lilibet over from their US base to meet the Queen.

No photos of the couple’s new baby have been released since she was born on June 4.

Harry last attended a public meeting with other Royal Family members when he returned to unveil a statue dedicated to the memory of his late mother Princess Diana, at the start of July.

Now, speaking on the Mail’s Palace Confidential podcast, consultant editor Andrew Pierce claimed maintaining their connections with The Firm will be crucial for the Sussexes’ continued success.

He suggested: “*They know that their only saleability in the United States is their connection to the most famous woman on the planet – the Queen.*

“*That’s why they’re desperate to see her. It’s all about product Harry, product Meghan plc.*”

He suggested: “*It will happen. Harry and Meghan need it*. They do need to keep up that royal connection. They are a family. They do want a christening.

“Meghan does not speak to any members of her family apart from her mother, so it makes sense to have the christening where any family can come, and that would be Harry’s family rather than hers.”
…_









						Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’
					

With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> They keep insisting on a meeting with QE, but Rosarito is a lot closer to Montecito…
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’*
> 
> _With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed.
> 
> *A royal commentator has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen in order to be commercially successful in the US.*
> 
> This comes as speculation has been mounting over when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will bring their daughter Lilibet over from their US base to meet the Queen.
> 
> No photos of the couple’s new baby have been released since she was born on June 4.
> 
> Harry last attended a public meeting with other Royal Family members when he returned to unveil a statue dedicated to the memory of his late mother Princess Diana, at the start of July.
> 
> Now, speaking on the Mail’s Palace Confidential podcast, consultant editor Andrew Pierce claimed maintaining their connections with The Firm will be crucial for the Sussexes’ continued success.
> 
> He suggested: “*They know that their only saleability in the United States is their connection to the most famous woman on the planet – the Queen.*
> 
> “*That’s why they’re desperate to see her. It’s all about product Harry, product Meghan plc.*”
> 
> He suggested: “*It will happen. Harry and Meghan need it*. They do need to keep up that royal connection. They are a family. They do want a christening.
> 
> “Meghan does not speak to any members of her family apart from her mother, so it makes sense to have the christening where any family can come, and that would be Harry’s family rather than hers.”
> …_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’
> 
> 
> With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



No kidding!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> why am i worried they’re going to be surprise attendees of the Met Gala tonight? is that even possible?


Here they are


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> If they do make an appearance we can note this as being the "jump the shark" moment for the Met Gala.


I kinda thought it did when Kim K went dressed like a sofa.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Here they are



so happy to be wrong!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> I could be wrong but weren’t the royals instructed to wear red, white or blue for commonwealth day? And *Megadeath* shows up in that fugly Kermit outfit grinning like a lunatic with *Harriet* scowling to her left. This was their last official engagement as working royals. She’s such a f*cking phony and one look from Sophie wiped the smirk off her face


 Thanks @mellibelly for two new nicknames. Since you now have a total of five, it's a pleasure to address you as Nickname Master.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I could see M in a full-on Dom-dress and H in a gimp mask
> 
> I said 'could' NOT would want to


I would think she would convince Hazard to play the dom - shoring up his manliness as well as laying the ground for evidence of victimhood when the divorce happens.



mellibelly said:


> I could be wrong but weren’t the royals instructed to wear red, white or blue for commonwealth day? And Megadeath shows up in that fugly Kermit outfit grinning like a lunatic with Harriet scowling to her left. This was their last official engagement as working royals. She’s such a f*cking phony and one look from Sophie wiped the smirk off her face


The red/white/blue story was never proven. I'd give Methane a pass on that, although I think there were some family photos where she appears to have deliberately not followed the colour co-ordination instructions. Totally agree on the utterly horrendous green outfit. And I like green! Gigi Hadid wore a pale blue jumpsuit with that same strangling cape detail (same designer), so I think Methane's generally lousy sense of fashion heightened my dislike of that detail.



Chanbal said:


> They keep insisting on a meeting with QE, but Rosarito is a lot closer to Montecito…
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’*
> 
> _With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed.
> 
> *A royal commentator has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen in order to be commercially successful in the US.*
> 
> This comes as speculation has been mounting over when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will bring their daughter Lilibet over from their US base to meet the Queen.
> 
> No photos of the couple’s new baby have been released since she was born on June 4.
> 
> Harry last attended a public meeting with other Royal Family members when he returned to unveil a statue dedicated to the memory of his late mother Princess Diana, at the start of July.
> 
> Now, speaking on the Mail’s Palace Confidential podcast, consultant editor Andrew Pierce claimed maintaining their connections with The Firm will be crucial for the Sussexes’ continued success.
> 
> He suggested: “*They know that their only saleability in the United States is their connection to the most famous woman on the planet – the Queen.*
> 
> “*That’s why they’re desperate to see her. It’s all about product Harry, product Meghan plc.*”
> 
> He suggested: “*It will happen. Harry and Meghan need it*. They do need to keep up that royal connection. They are a family. They do want a christening.
> 
> “Meghan does not speak to any members of her family apart from her mother, so it makes sense to have the christening where any family can come, and that would be Harry’s family rather than hers.”
> …_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’
> 
> 
> With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


They may need HMTQ to improve their marketability, but she doesn't need them.


----------



## mellibelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @mellibelly for two new nicknames. Since you now have a total of five, it's a pleasure to address you as Nickname Master.
> View attachment 5193292


Thank you so much! You made my day! Though I can’t take credit for creating those nicknames, I will accept this award


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Meg isn't one to do fashion that's outlandish, camp or iconic. She's a duchess, guys.



Meg's style is clothes that don't fit. Her fashion motto: "How can I screw this up?"


----------



## tiktok

rose60610 said:


> Meg's style is clothes that don't fit. Her fashion motto: "How can I screw this up?"



To be fair, fit was the least of the problems tonight… even Meg could have gotten on the best dressed list. I’ve seen some things that can’t be unseen.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Meg's style is clothes that don't fit. Her fashion motto: "How can I screw this up?"


I was taking a look at some pics of her before-Harry. She had the same trend of fashion hits and misses. She is definitely not a standard dress size, even though some early stories were calling her a (super)model. If her clothes back then were also sponsored/borrowed/merched, then she could not adjust the fit. But after she struck the jackpot, it seems unbelievable that she is still wearing ill-fitting clothes since the wedding.


----------



## Sharont2305

mellibelly said:


> Has anyone seen the Murders at White House Farm? Cressida Bonas was really good in it. She’s a much better actress than 6’s wife.


That was brilliant, she was really good in it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They keep insisting on a meeting with QE, but Rosarito is a lot closer to Montecito…
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’*
> 
> _With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed.
> 
> *A royal commentator has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen in order to be commercially successful in the US.*
> 
> This comes as speculation has been mounting over when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will bring their daughter Lilibet over from their US base to meet the Queen.
> 
> No photos of the couple’s new baby have been released since she was born on June 4.
> 
> Harry last attended a public meeting with other Royal Family members when he returned to unveil a statue dedicated to the memory of his late mother Princess Diana, at the start of July.
> 
> Now, speaking on the Mail’s Palace Confidential podcast, consultant editor Andrew Pierce claimed maintaining their connections with The Firm will be crucial for the Sussexes’ continued success.
> 
> He suggested: “*They know that their only saleability in the United States is their connection to the most famous woman on the planet – the Queen.*
> 
> “*That’s why they’re desperate to see her. It’s all about product Harry, product Meghan plc.*”
> 
> He suggested: “*It will happen. Harry and Meghan need it*. They do need to keep up that royal connection. They are a family. They do want a christening.
> 
> “Meghan does not speak to any members of her family apart from her mother, so it makes sense to have the christening where any family can come, and that would be Harry’s family rather than hers.”
> …_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’
> 
> 
> With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



I honestly hope her schedule is packed until after her jubilee. Also, which continued success? Wouldn't you have to be successful in the first place to continue anything?


----------



## poopsie

So.
Did anyone watch or listen to Hairbrain's Invictus ,thing?


----------



## EverSoElusive

poopsie said:


> So.
> Did anyone watch or listen to Hairbrain's Invictus ,thing?



I saw screenshot of Jill and Manchild from their video call on IG. Does that count?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> So.
> Did anyone watch or listen to Hairbrain's Invictus ,thing?


No, I was watching my fresh coat of paint dry.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@bisousx After frequently seeing the nickname Manchild on this thread and doing a search, I discovered that you were the first to use it on January 11, 2020. Thank you for a very popular and appropriate nickname for the 'wee wittle' prince H.


----------



## Chanbal

What six's wife wants… 

_Ms Montague claims that when Prince Philip demanded that Fergie was not to receive an invite to the big day: "Harry intervened and said, 'this is what I want.'
"'This is what my bride wants as well. She has bonded with Fergie and she wants her there.''_









						Prince Harry snubbed Prince Philip demands to secure invite for Fergie
					

PRINCE HARRY ignored Prince Phillip's demands to exclude Fergie from his wedding with Meghan Markle, a new documentary has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> What six's wife wants…
> 
> _Ms Montague claims that when Prince Philip demanded that Fergie was not to receive an invite to the big day: "Harry intervened and said, 'this is what I want.'
> "'This is what my bride wants as well. She has bonded with Fergie and she wants her there.''_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry snubbed Prince Philip demands to secure invite for Fergie
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY ignored Prince Phillip's demands to exclude Fergie from his wedding with Meghan Markle, a new documentary has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


i’m not sure she’s still getting what she wants.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! I'm so sorry, I posted this on the wrong thread. 










						Over the moon: Prince William’s Earthshot Prize receives high praise from JFK’s family
					

The Duke of Cambridge’s landmark environmental prize has been hailed as a “great tribute” to the president it was named for, as John F Kennedy’s family gave their stamp of approval.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> So.
> Did anyone watch or listen to Hairbrain's Invictus ,thing?


I din't, but here is a clip for you.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *She could lead Haz in with a rope around his neck *and his hands tied together, like the Medieval days, when they led prisoners to their death.  You know, kind of like she's already doing very sloooooowly now.


It looks like someone else had a similar idea. 


Spoiler: the image might be a bit strong


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> What six's wife wants…
> 
> _Ms Montague claims that when Prince Philip demanded that Fergie was not to receive an invite to the big day: "Harry intervened and said, 'this is what I want.'
> "'This is what my bride wants as well. She has bonded with Fergie and she wants her there.''_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry snubbed Prince Philip demands to secure invite for Fergie
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY ignored Prince Phillip's demands to exclude Fergie from his wedding with Meghan Markle, a new documentary has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Don’t forget Meghan shed a tear, but her bottom lip and looked into Phillips eyes silently begging for her aunt in law to attend her wedding along with all her a-list celeb friends …


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Meg's style is clothes that don't fit. Her fashion motto: "How can I screw this up?"


I think one of MM's fashion issues was not understanding the difference between a red carpet & BRF events. As computer scientists  would say, the use cases are totally different ... 

Red Carpet - standing only, maybe a few steps up a flight of stairs, short time, glam team there to primp you and photogs are nice and make sure the GT is not in the shot, outfit can be over the top and impractical so long as you can be a statue and walk in it for 45 min
Outfit is ALWAYS disposable, worn ONLY once, then tossed
Celebrity (most likely) did not purchase the outfit
Dare to bare

BRF - walk abouts, sit on podium in front of audience with camera staring up your dress (cross legs correctly), bend over for meet and greets, lots of staff to help but not so much with hair & makeup, get in and out of cars with photogs snapping away 
You may be stuck in the dress for hours ... will it wrinkle? work in rain and wind ? does it have a bit of give? 
Re-wearing outfits gets you points, the budget is finite and clothes are purchased, not received in gift bags from designers 

To me, MM always seemed to be dressing for a red carpet, not the BRF.


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> I saw screenshot of Jill and Manchild from their video call on IG. Does that count?



Of course!
You clicked so you must care


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> i’m not sure she’s still getting what she wants.



I believe the old adage of be careful what you wish for is applicable here


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What six's wife wants…
> 
> _Ms Montague claims that when Prince Philip demanded that Fergie was not to receive an invite to the big day: "Harry intervened and said, 'this is what I want.'
> "'This is what my bride wants as well. She has bonded with Fergie and she wants her there.''_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry snubbed Prince Philip demands to secure invite for Fergie
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY ignored Prince Phillip's demands to exclude Fergie from his wedding with Meghan Markle, a new documentary has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Oprah wanted Fergie there. Why?  To ensure there would be drama, to check Hazzie’s commitment to irking his own family, to pitch herself as the BRF’s healer.  Always a hidden agenda with these people.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah wanted Fergie there. Why?  To ensure there would drama, to check Hazzie’s commitment to irking his own family, to pitch herself as the BRF’s healer.  Always a hidden agenda with these people.


 who cares?


----------



## bag-mania

More than three years later and they are still writing about wedding invitations? The press is really scraping the bottom of the barrel to find H&M news this week.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> What six's wife wants…
> 
> _Ms Montague claims that when Prince Philip demanded that Fergie was not to receive an invite to the big day: "Harry intervened and said, 'this is what I want.'
> "'This is what my bride wants as well. She has bonded with Fergie and she wants her there.''_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry snubbed Prince Philip demands to secure invite for Fergie
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY ignored Prince Phillip's demands to exclude Fergie from his wedding with Meghan Markle, a new documentary has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Not buying the bonding story.  I think that he was tweaking William because she was excluded from his wedding and Harry was trying to be kind to Bea and Eugenie by including their mother.  The latter was more likely the reason at the time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> They keep insisting on a meeting with QE, but Rosarito is a lot closer to Montecito…
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’*
> 
> _With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed.
> 
> *A royal commentator has claimed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen in order to be commercially successful in the US.*
> 
> This comes as speculation has been mounting over when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will bring their daughter Lilibet over from their US base to meet the Queen.
> 
> No photos of the couple’s new baby have been released since she was born on June 4.
> 
> Harry last attended a public meeting with other Royal Family members when he returned to unveil a statue dedicated to the memory of his late mother Princess Diana, at the start of July.
> 
> Now, speaking on the Mail’s Palace Confidential podcast, consultant editor Andrew Pierce claimed maintaining their connections with The Firm will be crucial for the Sussexes’ continued success.
> 
> He suggested: “*They know that their only saleability in the United States is their connection to the most famous woman on the planet – the Queen.*
> 
> “*That’s why they’re desperate to see her. It’s all about product Harry, product Meghan plc.*”
> 
> He suggested: “*It will happen. Harry and Meghan need it*. They do need to keep up that royal connection. They are a family. They do want a christening.
> 
> “Meghan does not speak to any members of her family apart from her mother, so it makes sense to have the christening where any family can come, and that would be Harry’s family rather than hers.”
> …_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan ‘desperately need Queen meeting to maintain saleability in US’
> 
> 
> With speculation about daughter Lilibet’s christening, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle need a meeting with the Queen to maintain their royal image and appeal to their US fanbase, a commentator has claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


.. and I *SO* hope that the Queen does *NOT* give them this opportunity!  Knowing that the plan is for them to "merch" off of her, makes me wonder if she's going to do it .. since she's made it pretty clear that they cannot merch off the BRF!  Let them wallow in their stupidity thinking that they could honestly have it both ways ..


----------



## TC1

gracekelly said:


> Not buying the bonding story.  I think that he was tweaking William because she was excluded from his wedding and Harry was trying to be kind to Bea and Eugenie by including their mother.  The latter was more likely the reason at the time.


But, but, but MM and Ewwweegennie had known each other "for years" that's the story she told O!


----------



## lanasyogamama

TC1 said:


> But, but, but MM and Ewwweegennie had known each other "for years" that's the story she told O!


That’s another expression she overuses, like “sweet nod”. I remember one of the first lines in her VF article was how she had been wearing some British designer “for years”, not just because of her relationship with Hazard.


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> .. and I *SO* hope that the Queen does *NOT* give them this opportunity!  Knowing that the plan is for them to "merch" off of her, makes me wonder if she's going to do it .. since she's made it pretty clear that they cannot merch off the BRF!  Let them wallow in their stupidity thinking that they could honestly have it both ways ..


I'm beginning to wonder if this is true or if it was a "planted" item to see what reaction would result. Kind of like a pile of dog **** left in the middle of a sidewalk to see who might come along and scoop it up.

I "get" they need the infusion of a royal photo op, but Harry made a big deal in one of his Mental Health presentations (or was it the OW Interview? all the word salads are tossed salad at this point) about how toxic returning to London is for him, and really, how much tap, tap, tapping therapy during the long flight from LA to Heathrow will it take to ease that anxiety? Do they risk showing up in a place where they are pilloried by a huge percentage of the population via the you guv polls and to such an extent celebrities, who might be deemed to have much to lose by the behavior, booed and jeered the appearance of clips of them on screen at the National TV Awards. How will they respond to potential public BOOING?  What kind of parents will they appear to be if they take an infant into a country still requiring quarantining? Will they risk environmental wrath by flying private jet, or bundle everyone onto British Air, First Class of course, out of LA? Hard to envision Methane trying to deal with a fussy baby in front of an audience. Where will they stay? Do they assume free ride at Frogmore, Eugenie _might _go for it? And in the background the RF is scrambling to deal with the resident Pedophile, adding two more toxic members to the scene will not be good for the Queen's health, nor Charles, dealing with his own brouhaha of an aid selling a Knighthood.

The flip side, of course, is the Suckesses don't really care about anyone but themselves, and by not having their request granted will trot out the racism charges claiming the whole wide world is against 1/2 of Methane, so maybe it is true they asked. If they did, hoping hoping hoping CeeJay you are right and the Queen says a resounding "NO!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ya kno, sometimes some people are simply ”not likeable” on the world stage.  It’s nothing to do with race, ethnicity, etc.  
They are simply _not likeable.      _H&M are in that category.


----------



## needlv

Gossip from Insta (slide to see full story)


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ya kno, sometimes *some people are simply ”not likeable” on the world stage*.  It’s nothing to do with race, ethnicity, etc.
> They are simply _not likeable.      _H&M are in that category.


World stage?  These two wouldn't even be likable in my neighborhood.  And my neighbors are really nice people


----------



## needlv

Well Thomas Markle was interviewed on breakfast tv this morning here in Australia.  I’ll see if I can find a clip for you to watch.

Edit - here it is.



one of the things Thomas confirmed is that yes, MM is controlling and would dominate H. He said Samantha is the same.  He said he raised them that way (then backtracked a bit when pushed).

He criticised H for not calling a doctor when M said she needed mental help… then also said it’s possible M was being “over dramatic”

He wouldn’t comment on bullying claims because he wasn’t there.


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting article from Toronto Sun, but it has a few gaps imo.

_From afar, the May 2018 wedding was like the others: grand and filled with all the pomp and circumstance that comes with an event of that magnitude.

Knowing what we now know of *Meghan, she clearly had her fingers in every pie*…_

Not questioning that. 

_All of it was intentional, according to two royal commentators, who believe her choices were designed to show the world *she would not forget her history as she became a part of the Royal Family*._

However, she completely forgot her family, including her father. 

_“I think there’s every sign that the marriage of Harry and Meghan marked the beginnings of something different, or at least that *Meghan wanted to curate things in her own way*,” said royal historian Anna Whitelock in the documentary, Fergie and Meghan: Inconvenient Royals, according to the Daily Star._

We got that. 

_“For Meghan, being a woman of colour, having a gospel choir that were mostly black, and having a black minister as well… while that might not seem political — and perhaps it shouldn’t be seen as political — it absolutely was a political choice and *I think she was trying to send a very clear message*.”_
Adebayo added: “She wasn’t going to be leaving behind who she was.”

that is better to give her whatever she wants, or… 

_What no one knew was that she was going to leave the U.K. behind – and take Harry with her.
The question now is, will they ever return? More importantly, and based on their plummeting popularity, *do Britons even want them back?*_

My bet is on the *NO *










						Meghan Markle’s ‘political’ wedding choices send ‘very clear message’
					

Two royal commentators believe Meghan's choices were designed to show the world she would not forget her history as she became a royal.




					torontosun.com


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Gossip from Insta (slide to see full story)




Thanks for that. This was posted there as well. Can’t prove it is true but it is easy to imagine her doing it.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> An interesting article from Toronto Sun, but it has a few gaps imo.
> 
> _From afar, the May 2018 wedding was like the others: grand and filled with all the pomp and circumstance that comes with an event of that magnitude.
> 
> Knowing what we now know of *Meghan, she clearly had her fingers in every pie*…_
> 
> Not questioning that.
> 
> _All of it was intentional, according to two royal commentators, who believe her choices were designed to show the world *she would not forget her history as she became a part of the Royal Family*._
> 
> However, she completely forgot her family, including her father.
> 
> _“I think there’s every sign that the marriage of Harry and Meghan marked the beginnings of something different, or at least that *Meghan wanted to curate things in her own way*,” said royal historian Anna Whitelock in the documentary, Fergie and Meghan: Inconvenient Royals, according to the Daily Star._
> 
> We got that.
> 
> _“For Meghan, being a woman of colour, having a gospel choir that were mostly black, and having a black minister as well… while that might not seem political — and perhaps it shouldn’t be seen as political — it absolutely was a political choice and *I think she was trying to send a very clear message*.”_
> Adebayo added: “She wasn’t going to be leaving behind who she was.”
> 
> that is better to give her whatever she wants, or…
> 
> _What no one knew was that she was going to leave the U.K. behind – and take Harry with her.
> The question now is, will they ever return? More importantly, and based on their plummeting popularity, *do Britons even want them back?*_
> 
> My bet is on the *NO *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s ‘political’ wedding choices send ‘very clear message’
> 
> 
> Two royal commentators believe Meghan's choices were designed to show the world she would not forget her history as she became a royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> torontosun.com



But it was CHARLES who selected the choir, not MM.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> An interesting article from Toronto Sun, but it has a few gaps imo.
> 
> _From afar, the May 2018 wedding was like the others: grand and filled with all the pomp and circumstance that comes with an event of that magnitude.
> 
> Knowing what we now know of *Meghan, she clearly had her fingers in every pie*…_
> 
> Not questioning that.
> 
> _All of it was intentional, according to two royal commentators, who believe her choices were designed to show the world *she would not forget her history as she became a part of the Royal Family*._
> 
> However, she completely forgot her family, including her father.
> 
> _“I think there’s every sign that the marriage of Harry and Meghan marked the beginnings of something different, or at least that *Meghan wanted to curate things in her own way*,” said royal historian Anna Whitelock in the documentary, Fergie and Meghan: Inconvenient Royals, according to the Daily Star._
> 
> We got that.
> 
> _“For Meghan, being a woman of colour, having a gospel choir that were mostly black, and having a black minister as well… while that might not seem political — and perhaps it shouldn’t be seen as political — it absolutely was a political choice and *I think she was trying to send a very clear message*.”_
> Adebayo added: “She wasn’t going to be leaving behind who she was.”
> 
> that is better to give her whatever she wants, or…
> 
> _What no one knew was that she was going to leave the U.K. behind – and take Harry with her.
> The question now is, will they ever return? More importantly, and based on their plummeting popularity, *do Britons even want them back?*_
> 
> My bet is on the *NO *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s ‘political’ wedding choices send ‘very clear message’
> 
> 
> Two royal commentators believe Meghan's choices were designed to show the world she would not forget her history as she became a royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> torontosun.com


Chanbal, yes one gap in particular, there are multiple citations and quotes from Choir sources, Prince Charles arranged for the Gospel Choir at the wedding, not the bride and groom.

sorry for the double post, needlv already had it covered!


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> What six's wife wants…
> 
> _Ms Montague claims that when Prince Philip demanded that Fergie was not to receive an invite to the big day: "Harry intervened and said, 'this is what I want.'
> "'This is what my bride wants as well. She has bonded with Fergie and she wants her there.''_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry snubbed Prince Philip demands to secure invite for Fergie
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY ignored Prince Phillip's demands to exclude Fergie from his wedding with Meghan Markle, a new documentary has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



So Meghan "bonded" with Fergie to the point of insisting that she be invited to her but wanted nothing to do with HER OWN family other than Doria. Oh. Yet, it was the BRF paying for the 50 million dollar wedding. Another sign that Miseryghan was going against the royal grain on purpose just to spite them for the hell of it. Anyone surprised? How close to Fergie is she NOW? Why hasn't Fergie visited them? I mean, they BONDED and everything  .


----------



## lulu212121

Reese blew her off again!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Admittedly, I don’t know much , but …. all of this chatter concerning Reese most surely will backfire on H&M at some point.  My impression is Hwood does not care for their A listers being dragged by a never-did-that-well z lister.  Look what has happened to Angie and Brad, both A listers.  It will not end well.  Predicting doom and gloom,


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I think one of MM's fashion issues was not understanding the difference between a red carpet & BRF events.
> ...
> Dare to bare
> ...
> To me, MM always seemed to be dressing for a red carpet, not the BRF.


Considering her desire to modernize the BRF, she probably assumed she could lead by example  and make them celebrities. All those wardrobe malfunctions count towards her Dare to Bare.



csshopper said:


> The flip side, of course, is the Suckesses don't really care about anyone but themselves, and by not having their request granted will trot out the racism charges claiming the whole wide world is against 1/2 of Methane, so maybe it is true they asked. If they did, hoping hoping hoping CeeJay you are right and the Queen says a resounding "NO!"


I'm against her top half - the scheming brain, slut strands, mutable face. Hazard can praise the bottom half. 
0


Chanbal said:


> An interesting article from Toronto Sun, but it has a few gaps imo.
> 
> _From afar, the May 2018 wedding was like the others: grand and filled with all the pomp and circumstance that comes with an event of that magnitude.
> 
> Knowing what we now know of *Meghan, she clearly had her fingers in every pie*…_
> 
> Not questioning that.
> 
> _All of it was intentional, according to two royal commentators, who believe her choices were designed to show the world *she would not forget her history as she became a part of the Royal Family*._
> 
> However, she completely forgot her family, including her father.
> 
> _“I think there’s every sign that the marriage of Harry and Meghan marked the beginnings of something different, or at least that *Meghan wanted to curate things in her own way*,” said royal historian Anna Whitelock in the documentary, Fergie and Meghan: Inconvenient Royals, according to the Daily Star._
> 
> We got that.
> 
> _“For Meghan, being a woman of colour, having a gospel choir that were mostly black, and having a black minister as well… while that might not seem political — and perhaps it shouldn’t be seen as political — it absolutely was a political choice and *I think she was trying to send a very clear message*.”_
> Adebayo added: “She wasn’t going to be leaving behind who she was.”
> 
> that is better to give her whatever she wants, or…
> 
> _What no one knew was that she was going to leave the U.K. behind – and take Harry with her.
> The question now is, will they ever return? More importantly, and based on their plummeting popularity, *do Britons even want them back?*_
> 
> My bet is on the *NO *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s ‘political’ wedding choices send ‘very clear message’
> 
> 
> Two royal commentators believe Meghan's choices were designed to show the world she would not forget her history as she became a royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> torontosun.com


She has history? I thought she rewrote her life. 



needlv said:


> But it was CHARLES who selected the choir, not MM.


Hear, hear! Methane gave that choir a hard time as Bridezilla.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> But it was CHARLES who selected the choir, not MM.





csshopper said:


> Chanbal, yes one gap in particular, there are multiple citations and quotes from Choir sources, Prince Charles arranged for the Gospel Choir at the wedding, not the bride and groom.
> 
> sorry for the double post, needlv already had it covered!


You are both right, I recall to have read that. It's also possible that he went along with her requests… We will never know, but the idea that she was always very demanding is very clear.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> So Meghan "bonded" with Fergie to the point of insisting that she be invited to her but wanted nothing to do with HER OWN family other than Doria. Oh. Yet, it was the BRF paying for the 50 million dollar wedding. Another sign that Miseryghan was going against the royal grain on purpose just to spite them for the hell of it. Anyone surprised? How close to Fergie is she NOW? Why hasn't Fergie visited them? I mean, they BONDED and everything  .



Oprah, Oprah, Oprah.  This woman is a major player in this entire drama.  O hooked Sarah years ago, tried to hook Diana but was rejected.  O realized this new opportunity with H&M, possibly with Mrs.&Mr. O’s assists. Looking back, all the connections fit.  The Yorks befriended Hazzie while O befriended MM and Doria.  Is it possible that Thomas’s 3 emmys got in O’s way? I am just certain there is a connection there. None of this stuff is random. In time, it will all become clear.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah, Oprah, Oprah.  This woman is a major player in this entire drama.  O hooked Sarah years ago, tried to hook Diana but was rejected.  O realized this new opportunity with H&M, possibly with Mrs.&Mr. O’s assists. Looking back, all the connections fit.  The Yorks befriended Hazzie while O befriended MM and Doria.  Is it possible that Thomas’s 3 emmys got in O’s way? I am just certain there is a connection there. None of this stuff is random. In time, it will all become clear.



Yep, OW seems to be a major player in all this. Hopefully Tom Bower's book will shed some light on the subject. 

The post below agrees with the opinion of may of us here.


----------



## gracekelly

From The Times of London


MELANIE PHILLIPS

*The Queen deserves better from her family

A failing sense of duty among the princes is threatening the future of the entire monarchy*



Tuesday September 14 2021, 12.01am BST, The Times


Pity the Queen. Recently bereaved, she is now having to face no fewer than three simultaneous crises involving members of her close family, all of which are damaging the institution to which she has devoted her life.

*Her grandson Prince Harry has become an uncontrollable malcontent, seemingly determined to inflict pain upon his family and harm upon the monarchy. He and his wife have turned themselves into a titled insurgency: media guerrillas regularly exploding grievance bombs under the royal firm.*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> So Meghan "bonded" with Fergie to the point of insisting that she be invited to her but wanted nothing to do with HER OWN family other than Doria. Oh. Yet, it was the BRF paying for the 50 million dollar wedding. Another sign that *Miseryghan* was going against the royal grain on purpose just to spite them for the hell of it. Anyone surprised? How close to Fergie is she NOW? Why hasn't Fergie visited them? I mean, they BONDED and everything  .


 Thanks @rose60610 for the nickname Miseryghan. Yes, M is at least 1/2 part misery; misery that she inflicts on others. Welcome to The List.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @rose60610 for the nickname Miseryghan. Yes, M is at least 1/2 part misery; misery that she inflicts on others. Welcome to The List.
> View attachment 5194302



I'm honored, @Maggie Muggins, thank you!  There's a lot of misery in Hazzameghanistan, a suburb of Chunga Changa. I'll be sure to send a special lemon olive oil cake and a wreath complete with ten pages of word salad symbolic explanations to make the inhabitants feel better. Surely this over generous gift will lift their spirits and inspire them to do great things like donate to Archewell.


----------



## Sharont2305

She is going to be fuming that only one has her picture in it.


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Aimee3

Sharont2305 said:


>



We need a barf emoji!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cousin It’s sister?

They’re creepy and their kooky
Mysterious and spooky
They’re all together ooky
The Harkle   family


----------



## lanasyogamama

They are?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So those two losers made the TIME 100 Influential People thing (no clue if that's the right term, I read the news in German)? Is this like the NYT Bestseller List where you can buy your spot?


----------



## Norm.Core

Sharont2305 said:


>




I can’t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


>




Ha, that answers the question...didn't see it before I posted. Also, what is wrong with her face?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Two things.
1. The size of the hair distracts from the size of the body.  I have nothing against people gaining weight after having children.  It is just so obvious they’re trying to balance out what’s on top versus bottom.  I’m surprised she didn’t wear black or something more slimming.

2. I’m distracted by the guy drinking soda from his bottle that’s right in front of her in that birthday picture.  Haha.  Looks bad.  Like he couldn’t care any less who was behind him.

Oh, and what were the criteria for the most influential?  I disagree.


----------



## Annawakes

And one more thing.  Again she is front and center.  And Harry is just hanging on as an afterthought.  Should’ve been the other way around, those poses.  Of course she never allowed that to happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> 2. I’m distracted by the guy drinking soda from his bottle that’s right in front of her in that birthday picture.  Haha.  Looks bad.  Like he couldn’t care any less who was behind him.



‘Which guy?

I see it.  You’re right. He did not care about the 2 behind him.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


>



And again, Haz is creeping from behind.
And chef Jose states "They run towards the struggle".  WTF is he kidding?  He should stick to cooking, not writing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Commenters are having fun 









						Harry and Markle in Time's 'world's 100 most influential people'
					

The US publication released a glossy and heavily-airbrushed cover on Harry's 37th birthday showing the Duke of Sussex stood behind his wife with his arms on her right shoulder.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Alright. That list has a former president who all but got arrested and a freaking Taliban. I'm not sure I can take them seriously at this point, and I personally would rather not mingle with those two.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> And again, Haz is creeping from behind.



IMO he does not look good in all black. His face still looks angry.  Hers doesn’t sing happiness either.Those white pants don’t flatter her.  But the hair


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> Two things.
> 1. The size of the hair distracts from the size of the body.  I have nothing against people gaining weight after having children.  It is just so obvious they’re trying to balance out what’s on top versus bottom.  I’m surprised she didn’t wear black or something more slimming.



Right? I thought, maybe she did give birth after all because she is...fuller. But also, maybe don't wear pleated trousers to make the hips even wider?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Alright. That list has a former president who all but got jailed and a freaking Taliban. I'm not sure I can take them seriously at this point, and I personally would rather not mingle with those two.


Time Magazine, IMO, has gone the way of most American "news": bunch of BS that's manipulated and bought.
Wonder how many people will use this article as toilet paper or kindling?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he does not look good in all black. Those white pants don’t flatter her.  But the hair
> 
> View attachment 5194652


The proportions are off.  Harry's head looks like it's been photoshopped onto someone else's body.  Same with Megain...
They probably didn't even bother to pose and sent one of their many new hires in their place, and posed for head shots.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Time Magazine, IMO, has gone the way of most American "news": bunch of BS that's manipulated and bought.
> Wonder how many people will use this article as toilet paper or kindling?



Yes, the days of Time being a respected source of information and news is long behind them. Maybe it is too hard for them to come up with 100 influential people each year. They should cut it back to 10 if that’s the case.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Time Insta and Twitter comments are on fire


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, what's with that pose? No, said hips don't look slimmer just because your feet are a yard apart.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Legs akimbo seems her preferred stance while he keeps his hand in his pocket.

ETA: his suit (?) looks waterproof


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> Time Magazine, IMO, has gone the way of most American "news": bunch of BS that's manipulated and bought.
> Wonder how many people will use this article as toilet paper or kindling?


I was going to say, who buys Time magazine?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So those two losers made the TIME 100 Influential People thing (no clue if that's the right term, I read the news in German)? Is this like the NYT Bestseller List where you can buy your spot?


IIRC Time once justified an unpopular choice for person of the year by saying they look for someone who had major impact for good or bad. In this case, the gruesome twosome had major bad influence.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Only if the struggle isn't in their family. They are filled with empathy only for strangers.

ETA: I am astonished that they didn't hop on to gush about how they overcame their "personal struggle".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




  

And their compassion for their family members, especially an ailing father, a disabled sister, a dying grandfather and a very elderly grandmother! How can these people writing that sh*t still take themselves seriously.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, what's with that pose? No, said hips don't look slimmer just because your feet are a yard apart.


Literally made me lol


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Sharont2305 said:


>



This photo is so tacky lol …


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> Commenters are having fun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Markle in Time's 'world's 100 most influential people'
> 
> 
> The US publication released a glossy and heavily-airbrushed cover on Harry's 37th birthday showing the Duke of Sussex stood behind his wife with his arms on her right shoulder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Lol, “Markle” …


----------



## zinacef

Looks like a JLo pose !


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, what's with that pose? No, said hips don't look slimmer just because your feet are a yard apart.



I can’t get past the business with her arms. Did she do that pose to look like she’s thinking?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha, that answers the question...didn't see it before I posted. *Also, what is wrong with her face?*


Every thing …


----------



## Aminamina

This prince looks tiny next to his mother…ahem, wife.


----------



## Yes I did!

Wow clearly not a thread for fans of MM


----------



## justwatchin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, what's with that pose? No, said hips don't look slimmer just because your feet are a yard apart.


They should have sat on the infamous bench from her book…ugh…


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> I can’t get past the business with her arms. Did she do that pose to look like she’s thinking?


She always does that … even back when she was in the BRF when she would interact with certain people, they could be speaking casually to each other but she would do this stupid pose where she would place her thumb or hand under her chin, support one arm over the other while doing so and look deep in thought and nod once in a while … all for the cameras to get a pose of “The Thinking Meghan” … she’s so pathetic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

lanasyogamama said:


> I was going to say, who buys Time magazine?


Meghan


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> She always does that … even back when she was in the BRF when she would interact with certain people, they could be speaking casually to each other but she would do this stupid pose where she would place her thumb or hand under her chin, support one arm over the other while doing so and look deep in thought and nod once in a while … all for the cameras to get a pose of “The Thinking Meghan” … she’s so pathetic.



I’m imagining some silly little tween somewhere looking at the photo and saying “she looks so wise.”

Naw, even kids are more discerning.


----------



## Annawakes

Oh my goodness.  I didn’t realize before those are pants. Pleated pants.   And again in a different color . Chalk this up to another unfortunate fashion mishap


----------



## lanasyogamama

Scroll through, these are all so funny.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this like the NYT Bestseller List where you can buy your spot?


Are People magazine and Time still owned by the same corporation?

Sunshine Sachs earned every penny they billed this year.


----------



## Sol Ryan

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he does not look good in all black. His face still looks angry.  Hers doesn’t sing happiness either.Those white pants don’t flatter her.  But the hair
> 
> View attachment 5194652



What did they do to Harry’s eyes? Wtf?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right? I thought, maybe she did give birth after all *because she is...fuller*. But also, maybe don't wear pleated trousers to make the hips even wider?


Covid pounds?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he does not look good in all black. His face still looks angry.  Hers doesn’t sing happiness either.Those white pants don’t flatter her.  But the hair
> 
> View attachment 5194652


That hair! Made me want to break into a chorus of Rag Mop. I said M O P Rag Mop!
The Muppets with Ragg Mopp


----------



## lanasyogamama

They gave him so much extra hair. Well, both of them got lots of hair actually.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO *he does not look good in all black*. His face still looks angry. Hers doesn’t sing happiness either.Those white pants don’t flatter her. But the hair
> 
> View attachment 5194652





purseinsanity said:


> The proportions are off.  Harry's head looks like it's been photoshopped onto someone else's body.  Same with Megain...
> They probably didn't even bother to pose and sent one of their many new hires in their place, and posed for head shots.



He is the new Steve Jobs, considered by many to be a genius! 

I used to subscribe to Time Magazine…


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664


Here she seems to be copying E. Holmes, who used to copy Steve Jobs… The image of Power!
This was likely organized by S*nshine S… What did they do to deserve to be on this list? 

Just adding this here:


----------



## Sharont2305

And here we have a real (Royal) influencer.... just doing her job.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I used to subscribe to Time Magazine…



Me too 

Sing to the tune of The Addams Family -

_They’re creepy and their kooky
Mysterious and spooky
They’re all together ooky
The Harkle family

What did they do to deserve to be in this list? _
I think but could be wrong, they bought their way on to the list.  The World Kitchen chef wrote their syrupy  piece.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



TIME claims that they have compassion for people they don't know, this is hilarious.
However, Time should have added that they are accused of bullying people they know like their family, palace aids…


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> And here we have a real (Royal) influencer.... just doing her job.


I know that I shouldn’t compare, but she looks so much more natural and confident.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he does not look good in all black. His face still looks angry.  Hers doesn’t sing happiness either.Those white pants don’t flatter her.  But the hair
> 
> View attachment 5194652



The cover is hilarious. They added hair to both of them?? And the pleated pants… whoever styled them really hates them. And the cover is a joke right? We get that she has the balls between the two of them but no need to point out the obvious, legs apart and all. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> And their compassion for their family members, especially an ailing father, a disabled sister, a dying grandfather and a very elderly grandmother! How can these people writing that sh*t still take themselves seriously.



And he was upset at all the people crying over Princess Diana when they didn’t even know her? How dare they now have compassion for total STRANGERS. 

I cannot even take the ranking seriously. It almost feels like Time is trolling them with the pictures and poses and description.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> And here we have a real (Royal) influencer.... just doing her job.



On another site, there was a post about dressing to blend in or to stand out.
Seems to me, Hwood stars dress to stand out, usually sticking out.  Royals try to blend in.
ETA:  QE has said she wears the bright colors so people can see her.


----------



## Chanbal

This post says it all!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow, they had help to look this awful.

_Meanwhile, Serge Normant, who created Meghan's 'messy bun' on her wedding day to Prince Harry in May 2018, was responsible for the Duchess of Sussex's wavy hair style, which hair stylist James Johnson told FEMAIL is the 'main focal point of this piece.'  


'Her middle parted big waves highlights her authority and the leg apart stance gives viewers a glimpse of her powerful new status,' he explained. '*It gives me Beyoncé vibes showing us girl power - backed up by her man*, her Prince leaning on her showcasing the female empowerment, she’s wearing the trousers with her big hair.' _









						Meghan Markle hires A-list glam squad for VERY glamorous appearance
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, put on a very glamorous display after being styled by an A-list team of experts as she posed alongside husband Prince Harry for the cover of The Times magazine.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  are we tired of this pretend-symbolism?  Everything we wear now must symbolize something or someone???  Not for me.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, they had help to look this awful.
> 
> _Meanwhile, Serge Normant, who created Meghan's 'messy bun' on her wedding day to Prince Harry in May 2018, was responsible for the Duchess of Sussex's wavy hair style, which hair stylist James Johnson told FEMAIL is the 'main focal point of this piece.'
> 
> 
> 'Her middle parted big waves highlights her authority and the leg apart stance gives viewers a glimpse of her powerful new status,' he explained. 'It gives me Beyoncé vibes showing us girl power - backed up by her man, her Prince leaning on her showcasing the female empowerment, she’s wearing the trousers with her big hair.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires A-list glam squad for VERY glamorous appearance
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, put on a very glamorous display after being styled by an A-list team of experts as she posed alongside husband Prince Harry for the cover of The Times magazine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So the main focal point of the piece was the hair - which came from someone else's head.  Probably some woman in India? LOL.  What a world.
Wish that Indian woman would get credit


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that talk about compassion… TIME, and whoever nominated them should be ashamed of the disservice they are doing. 









						Thomas Markle: 'It's unfair not to let family see Archie and Lilibet'
					

Young Archie and Lilibet are being 'deprived' of seeing their grandparents by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, her father Thomas Markle said while speaking to Australia's Channel 7 Sunrise.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that talk about compassion… TIME, and whoever nominated them should be ashamed of the disservice they are doing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle: 'It's unfair not to let family see Archie and Lilibet'
> 
> 
> Young Archie and Lilibet are being 'deprived' of seeing their grandparents by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, her father Thomas Markle said while speaking to Australia's Channel 7 Sunrise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


as much as I detest her, I also don't see why her dad has to talk to the press....unless he's being paid.  that I could understand.  If he's living in Mexico he probably doesn't have a lot of money


----------



## youngster

Preening and posturing, they are excellent at this. Putting out statements that call on other people to do stuff to fix problems, they are also excellent at this.  I will give them that much credit.  Still, don't you actually have to do something, create something, invent something, to get on a list like this?  Other than their OW interview, I don't know what they've done in the past year other than produce 1 podcast episode and a children's picture book.  I'd say the scientists at Moderna, Pfizer and the CDC are the most influential now lol.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> as much as I detest her, I also don't see why her dad has to talk to the press....unless he's being paid.  that I could understand.  If he's living in Mexico he probably doesn't have a lot of money


I watched the video posted here about his interview and he spoke well. He was put in a very bad light due to his association with the couple of Montecito, and he has the right to tell his side of the story. It's important that he keeps reminding people that the TIME most influential couple has NO compassion!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I watched the video posted here about his interview and he spoke well. He was put in a very bad light due to his association with the couple of Montecito, and he has the right to tell his side of the story. It's important that he keeps reminding people that the TIME most influential couple has NO compassion!



I, too, watched the video. He did say anyone can live a very good life in Mexico for a reasonable cost.  He said no one should worry about his well-being.  He also had 3 !!! Emmys on the mantel.  Woozeee.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664


There's her stupid tendrils again!


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> That’s another expression she overuses, like “sweet nod”. I remember one of the first lines in her VF article was how she had been wearing some British designer “for years”, not just because of her relationship with Hazard.



I'm allergic to the expression "sweet nod". 

Every time I hear or read it, it's a "trigger". Like nails down a blackboard X watching someone vomit


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> They gave him so much extra hair. Well, both of them got lots of hair actually.


They hired the best of Hollywood's best for styling and hair/makeup. Serge Normant for the hair and Nina Hallworth and crew for the clothes. Not sure who did the photoshop because it's not good. Their hair is huge and the backgrounds look edited in, even if they weren't.

I think she looks very pretty and the clothes are perfect for the image she is trying to project. Kudos to the stylists. I like that she seems to have stopped whatever she was taking to be stick thin.

Still hate her and her lying, manipulative, destructive ways, but she's still pretty...


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I, too, watched the video. He did say anyone can live a very good life in Mexico for a reasonable cost.  He said no one should worry about his well-being.  He also had 3 !!! Emmys on the mantel.  Woozeee.



That's 3 more than his daughter has.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



This picture makes them look like an exhibit at the museum.  Kind of like Dr. Ross Gellar's dinosaur displays.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So those two losers made the TIME 100 Influential People thing (no clue if that's the right term, I read the news in German)? Is this like the NYT Bestseller List where you can buy your spot?



Yes you can


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, they had help to look this awful.
> 
> _Meanwhile, Serge Normant, who created Meghan's 'messy bun' on her wedding day to Prince Harry in May 2018, was responsible for the Duchess of Sussex's wavy hair style, which hair stylist James Johnson told FEMAIL is the 'main focal point of this piece.'
> 
> 
> 'Her middle parted big waves highlights her authority and the leg apart stance gives viewers a glimpse of her powerful new status,' he explained. '*It gives me Beyoncé vibes showing us girl power - backed up by her man*, her Prince leaning on her showcasing the female empowerment, she’s wearing the trousers with her big hair.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires A-list glam squad for VERY glamorous appearance
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, put on a very glamorous display after being styled by an A-list team of experts as she posed alongside husband Prince Harry for the cover of The Times magazine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  are we tired of this pretend-symbolism?  Everything we wear now must symbolize something or someone???  Not for me.


The cover pose , she wears white pants …. there is something so awkward about the posing , she looks short waisted, he is piled on top of her and scrunched down , major fail by photographer


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO he does not look good in all black. His face still looks angry.  Hers doesn’t sing happiness either.Those white pants don’t flatter her.  But the hair
> 
> View attachment 5194652



If you could measure people's influence by PR-output then I agree. 

Never mind photo-shopped, they look painted.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664



If the natural light's coming from the back, why can we can we still see their faces? Spare us.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> They hired the best of Hollywood's best for styling and hair/makeup. Serge Normant for the hair and Nina Hallworth and crew for the clothes. Not sure who did the photoshop because it's not good. Their hair is huge and the backgrounds look edited in, even if they weren't.
> 
> I think she looks very pretty and the clothes are perfect for the image she is trying to project. Kudos to the stylists. I like that she seems to have stopped whatever she was taking to be stick thin.
> 
> Still hate her and her lying, manipulative, destructive ways, but she's still pretty...


It’s like I technically I know she is still very pretty, but I literally can’t even see it anymore because of everything we know.


----------



## Jayne1

Britney Spears was also on the Times list and she's barely functioning (apologies to Brit fans) and just wants to be naked all the time, so take this list with a grain of salt.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I think she looks very pretty and the clothes are perfect for the image she is trying to project. Kudos to the stylists. I like that she seems to have stopped whatever she was taking to be stick thin.



She can be very pretty, but in this photo the hair-raising hair hides it.  The clothes look awkward because of the way she stands.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> Me too
> 
> Sing to the tune of The Addams Family -
> 
> _They’re creepy and their kooky
> Mysterious and spooky
> They’re all together ooky
> The Harkle family
> 
> What did they do to deserve to be in this list? _
> I think but could be wrong, they bought their way on to the list.  The World Kitchen chef wrote their syrupy  piece.


He had to earn his "donation".   OMG! These 2 are such a joke! The Queen really needs to make a clear separation of the rest of the royal family from these 2.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> She can be very pretty, but in this photo the hair-raising hair hides it.  The clothes look awkward because of the way she stands.



Some petites suit flamboyant styles. MM looks best in minimal as well as minimalist, the hair blowout is Washington DC 1990s (yes, I know it's supposed to be back in as a micro-trend, but not if it doesn't suit).


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> This picture makes them look like an exhibit at the museum.  Kind of like Dr. Ross Gellar's dinosaur displays.



New exhibit at Madame Tussaud’s Wax Museum?


----------



## xincinsin

That praise which Time Magazine heaped on them for having compassion for people they don't know - it got me thinking. Aren't most charitable efforts similar? When I donate, it's to help a nebulous unfortunate person or animal or situation. At most, I direct the donation to a niche, say a charity for abandoned bunnies rather than the SPCA. So what makes their compassion for strangers so special?

Oh, that godawful cover photo - they look like they were given the proportions of Hobbits. Long live Tolkien!


----------



## bag-mania

Hey y'all. Archewell updated their page to include the _Time_ photo and introduces their new slogan.
SHARED PURPOSE, GLOBAL ACTION, LEADING THE WAY WITH COMPASSION! 

Obviously they want COMPASSION to be their BRAND. Plus extra points for slipping COMMUNITIES and WORLD in there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

When we find out how much money and time they have actually donated, then we can heap on the compassion praise.
Until then, they are simply two more Hwood z-listers who do very little but lecture the rest of us.

It’s possible Hazzie may use Prince Charles’s formula for donations. Some call it money-laundering _troubling transactions_ for friends. 

_What’s come to light so far certainly gives the sense of powerful people engaged in troubling transactions. The full extent of it isn’t entirely clear yet; there may be more scandals yet to break within this larger one._








						Prince Charles's Charity Embroiled in Political Scandal
					

Worrying news from the Prince's Foundation




					www.insidehook.com


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664


I'm sorry (not sorry) but every time I see the picture of her in these pants..... it looks like she has large bloomers or a baggy diaper on. Is it just me?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh, today’s equivalent of boo-ing:









						Social media explodes with memes mocking Harry and Meghan's Time cover
					

Social media is ablaze with hilarious memes including Oprah Winfrey's infamous 'what?' moment during the Duke and Duchess' bombshell interview in March and a laughing Ryan Gosling.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

bag-mania said:


> Hey y'all. Archewell updated their page to include the _Time_ photo and introduces their new slogan.
> SHARED PURPOSE, GLOBAL ACTION, LEADING THE WAY WITH COMPASSION!
> 
> Obviously they want COMPASSION to be their BRAND. Plus extra points for slipping COMMUNITIES and WORLD in there.
> 
> View attachment 5194844


Oh, go and change yourselves already.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> _“For Meghan, being a woman of colour, having a gospel choir that were mostly black, and having a black minister as well… while that might not seem political — and perhaps it shouldn’t be seen as political — it absolutely was a political choice and *I think she was trying to send a very clear message*.”_
> Adebayo added: “She wasn’t going to be leaving behind who she was.”
> 
> that is better to give her whatever she wants, or…


.. and how many times had *MORPHINE* attended a Black Church here in LA?!? .. I would guess, NEVER (as far as I recall, she and her Doria belonged to some crunchy-granola "church" out here).  How many friends did she have that were friends-of-color? .. not many if I recall .. so, yet again, using that black card when it's convenient and/or to "send a message" a PATHETIC PEARL!


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> Thanks for that. This was posted there as well. Can’t prove it is true but it is easy to imagine her doing it.
> 
> View attachment 5194218
> View attachment 5194219
> View attachment 5194220


.. and this is why I DO believe that rumor about her being a Yacht Girl!!  She would pretty much do anything to move herself up that social ladder, especially if it would result in a move up in the H'wood world!  Disgusting that she would do this, especially given that the gentleman's wife was there but, am I surprised?!!? .. nope, not really. 

Both Landon Clements and Ashley Jacobs (both from Bravo's Southern Charm series) were also rumored to be Yacht Girls out here in SoCal (both in San Diego) and "supposedly" Ashley got onto the show as Thomas' girlfriend because of her stint as a Yacht Girl.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I, too, watched the video. He did say anyone can live a very good life in Mexico for a reasonable cost.  He said no one should worry about his well-being.  He also had 3 !!! Emmys on the mantel.  Woozeee.


Yes, he doesn't want any financial help from the couple of Montecito. He mentioned also that MM and H stopped Jason Knauf from helping him with the unexpected limelight situation. The impression I get is that TM sees H as a puppet that doesn't deserve much respect. 

I read an article not long ago mentioning that Doria raised MM as a 'single mum,' I believe this is the story being sold by the Entitled of Montecito.


----------



## Deleted 698298

bag-mania said:


> Hey y'all. Archewell updated their page to include the _Time_ photo and introduces their new slogan.
> SHARED PURPOSE, GLOBAL ACTION, LEADING THE WAY WITH COMPASSION!
> 
> Obviously they want COMPASSION to be their BRAND. Plus extra points for slipping COMMUNITIES and WORLD in there.
> 
> View attachment 5194844


All talk no trousers
can’t stand those posers


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Britney Spears was also on the Times list and she's barely functioning (apologies to Brit fans) and just wants to be naked all the time, so take this list with a grain of salt.



I happen to have a soft spot for Britney and am rooting for her...but I said earlier, they have a freaking Taliban on that list who had been incarcerated for years, so at that point I wasn't even bothered by the troublesome two anymore because this basically drove home the point how ridiculous that list ist.

Plus, I'm sure theirs was one of the bought spots haha.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sharont2305 said:


>




Is it just me or does it look as though her head was photoshopped onto the body (though I'm sure it wasn't)?  Must be all that fake hair distorting the image.




Yes I did! said:


> Wow clearly not a thread for fans of MM



If you read the earlier posts from their dating and wedding period, a lot of people were welcoming and supported her. After all the shenanigans she pulled and/or were uncovered, most of our opinions changed from positive to negative.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

The Time photos of them are awful.  Those pleated trousers on her are very unflattering.  They look photoshopped into some strange museum exhibit backgrounds.  So weird.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Hey y'all. Archewell updated their page to include the _Time_ photo and introduces their new slogan.
> SHARED PURPOSE, GLOBAL ACTION, LEADING THE WAY WITH COMPASSION!
> 
> Obviously they want COMPASSION to be their BRAND. Plus extra points for slipping COMMUNITIES and WORLD in there.
> 
> View attachment 5194844


Somehow when I saw this rendering of this photo, in this size, I thought she looks like Posh Spice, not VB


----------



## purseinsanity

Consumer2much said:


> All talk* no trousers*
> can’t stand those posers



Except on the Time cover and inside pictures.  All we see are Megalomaniac's trousers.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I will believe it when I see her running to make amends with her father.


----------



## Chanbal

I bet the stocks of medications for Nausea/Vomiting are running low today… 











						Social media explodes with memes mocking Harry and Meghan's Time cover
					

Social media is ablaze with hilarious memes including Oprah Winfrey's infamous 'what?' moment during the Duke and Duchess' bombshell interview in March and a laughing Ryan Gosling.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I happen to have a soft spot for Britney and am rooting for her...but I said earlier, they have a freaking Taliban on that list who had been incarcerated for years, so at that point I wasn't even bothered by the troublesome two anymore because this basically drove home the point how ridiculous that list ist.
> 
> Plus, I'm sure theirs was one of the bought spots haha.



No kidding.  Jason Sudeikis??  Scarlett Johanssen?  Britney Spears?  Billie Eilish??  WTF came up with this list??  The top 100 buyers?  And who is Kane Brown?  "A singer and songwriter who first gained popularity through social media"?  Like TikTok?  Oh my, the world is way worse off than my worst nightmare if these are the schmucks that are most influential.  Influential to who?  My 16 year old and her teen peers?


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Is it just me or does it look as though her head was photoshopped onto the body (though I'm sure it wasn't)?  Must be all that fake hair distorting the image.


No, I said that earlier!  It looks like their heads are photoshopped onto someone else's bodies...both of them.  Harry's almost looks like it's floating frontwards to give the illusion that he's not actually behind MM.  He just needs a dunce cap and his balls to juggle again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I'm going to be generous with the birthday boy today. Poor Hazz! He was was once again overshadowed by his wife on a key milestone day. His birthday tributes were almost forgotten…  









						Queen leads birthday tributes to Prince Harry
					

The Queen has led birthday wishes to Prince Harry on his 37th birthday, sharing a selection of photos highlighting her grandson's charity efforts while he was a working royal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## TimeToShop

purseinsanity said:


> No, I said that earlier!  It looks like their heads are photoshopped onto someone else's bodies...both of them.  Harry's almost looks like it's floating frontwards to give the illusion that he's not actually behind MM.  He just needs a dunce cap and his balls to juggle again.



There really is something off about that photo. His forearm is so short. If you zoom in his eyes are almost going two different ways. Her jaw is not symmetrical but it’s really not there. Yes he’s sitting but it looks like they’ve purposely shrunk him to make her stand out.


----------



## poopsie

"I was going to say, who buys Time magazine? "



justwatchin said:


> Meghan





Well, *that* issue anyway


sorry..........I can't multi-quote


----------



## mellibelly

What have they done the last 2 years besides send some beanies, a lemon olive oil cake and pay for part of a leaky roof repair? A meme account on Instagram, a freaking *MEME ACCOUNT*, raised over $7 million and evacuated hundreds from Afghanistan in less than 2 weeks. But these two clowns “run towards the struggle” LMFAO


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664


I was always a HUGE pleated trousers wearer during my Financial Services days, BUT .. the pleat should lay flat, not be "open" as hers appear to be .. to me, that means she does not have the right size (quelle surprise - wrong size for MORTICIA?) .. and again, with those STUPID wisps of hair next to her face .. uggh!


----------



## TimeToShop

bag-mania said:


> Hey y'all. Archewell updated their page to include the _Time_ photo and introduces their new slogan.
> SHARED PURPOSE, GLOBAL ACTION, LEADING THE WAY WITH COMPASSION!
> 
> Obviously they want COMPASSION to be their BRAND. Plus extra points for slipping COMMUNITIES and WORLD in there.
> 
> View attachment 5194844


Not a very ladylike stance but suppose she thinks it shows power.
Her signature - please. My name starts with M too. There’s no way I’m signing it and then going back and adding a half circle. That’s middle school stuff.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I was always a HUGE pleated trousers wearer during my Financial Services days, BUT .. the pleat should lay flat, not be "open" as hers appear to be .. to me, that means she does not have the right size (quelle surprise - wrong size for MORTICIA?) .. and again, with those STUPID wisps of hair next to her face .. uggh!



I like pleated trousers as well, it's just that she looks bad in them  I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but not the rize size sounds like her usual MO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> Her signature - please. My name starts with M too. There’s no way I’m signing it and then going back and adding a half circle. That’s middle school stuff.



That's simply because you are not a _professional calligrapher_.


----------



## bagshopr

They have influenced us all right- to LOATHE them.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> "I was going to say, who buys Time magazine? "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, *that* issue anyway


I would say only that issue. She needs to alternate her computer stand…


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like pleated trousers as well, it's just that she looks bad in them  I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but not the rize size sounds like her usual MO.


That is true. But I thought the goal was to make it appear seamless, not have it be an obvious addition.  Shoot dang, if I’d have known that’s all you have to do I could have turned pro at 12 when I was dotting my i with a heart.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All the impressionable young ladies need to know that MM‘s stance does *not* reflect power


----------



## mellibelly

“Power posing is a *controversial self-improvement technique* or "life hack" in which people stand in a posture that they mentally associate with being powerful, in the hope of feeling and behaving more assertively”

Everything she does is so phony and cringeworthy. Not an authentic bone in her body. Meanwhile Catherine comes off as natural and likeable.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry was behind her cause he’s wearing the panties abs his balls/testicles are in MM pleated pants.


----------



## Sharont2305

Look at the way the Queen stands. Now, that's power 'posing'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> I'm going to be generous with the birthday boy today. Poor Hazz! He was was once again overshadowed by his wife on a key milestone day. His birthday tributes were almost forgotten…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen leads birthday tributes to Prince Harry
> 
> 
> The Queen has led birthday wishes to Prince Harry on his 37th birthday, sharing a selection of photos highlighting her grandson's charity efforts while he was a working royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Photos from when Mommy's Boy was a working royal? Oh the shades that the BRF is capable of throwing at the Troublesome Duo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Look at his hair - wth?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> All the impressionable young ladies need to know that MM‘s stance does *not* reflect power



Putting these 2 pictures side by side is rather cruel, it is like gracious vs. clumsy!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look at his hair - wth?



I think this post belongs here.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look at his hair - wth?




If I had a dollar for every time they said they were "humbled" by something, I'd be buying a really nice dinner with a glass of wine tonight. There is nothing humble about either of them.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, this is a clever observation!


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — Time’s most insufferable*

Most influential? More like most insufferable.

Proving that magazines are irrelevant and more out of touch than ever, Time has named Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to their Time 100: The Most Influential People of 2021.

Please. Can you name one real-world, practical application deployed by these two phonies that’s served anyone but themselves?

Let’s see. They began 2021 with a bang, sitting down with Oprah to launch verbal ballistic missiles from a lush Santa Barbara garden, claiming that the British royal family didn’t care that a pregnant Meghan was suicidal and that there was a racist among the senior royals.

All this while Prince Philip, the Queen’s husband of nearly 74 years, was on his deathbed.

“Be kind,” they tell us constantly. Compassion is their brand.

HA!

Oh, how we have suffered this year. Our collective hope that lockdown would be over is crushed. We are ravaged by natural disasters and manmade ones — like those endless videos Harry and Meghan stream from their $14 million, nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion, lecturing us on everything from Black Lives Matter to US elections (important, Megs says) to, of course, the environment.

Did you catch Harry flying private a few weeks ago? Polo match in Aspen. Such a great look for these two self-appointed eco-warriors.

Netflix, Spotify, SussexRoyal, commodify: These two are interested in self-promotion and celebrity only. We endured a painful home video Meghan made with Melissa McCarthy, another self-aggrandizement under the guise of some other b.s. initiative no one remembers, Harry outside, juggling through a window.

McCarthy later said Harry worried he would look “weird” doing that.

Rightly so.

“In a world where everyone has an opinion about people they don’t know, the duke and duchess have compassion for the people they don’t know,” chef José Andrés wrote for the magazine. “They don’t just opine. They run towards the struggle.”

If by “run towards the struggle” Andrés means making nearly every great human tragedy about themselves — from staging Remembrance Day photos at a California cemetery to their Afghanistan statement (lecturing us all to “alleviate suffering”) to turning their website back on 9/11 — then yeah, sure.

Let’s just call them what they are: ponderous and platitudinous.

Even Twitter has had it. *The Time 100 cover image of the couple, Harry with suspiciously lush hair and Meghan wrinkle-free and glowing, was read for filth.*

“The cover looks so fake …” said one. “Oh wait, that’s because they are.”

“Wow, has @Time fallen,” said another. “Hard.”

At Britain’s National TV Awards last Friday, the couple was booed as their Oprah clip rolled.

“Everyone joined in,” an unnamed audience member told the Sun. “It was really funny.”

Yet Harry and Meghan are no doubt taking a victory lap, luxuriating in their delusion as global leaders, one reinforced by a silly list.

Reports are, though, that Spotify wants some content by the end of 2021 to justify that $25 million payday. Harry has a memoir due soon, one in which he’s rumored to go after stepmother Camilla and shame the royals some more. After all, he’s not getting $20 million without spilling some dirt.

But remember, everyone: Be kind.

And keep paying attention to the Sussexes, even though what they really want is privacy.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — Time’s most insufferable
					

Proving that magazines are irrelevant and more out of touch than ever, Time has named Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to their Time 100: The Most Influential People of 2021. Please.




					nypost.com


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s ‘airbrushed’ Time 100 cover gets roasted*

All hail Prince Hairy — and Meghan Mark-less.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s new Time 100 cover was roasted by internet users who believe the photo was heavily airbrushed.

The magazine released the cover picture of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Wednesday, in which they appear with eerily glowing smooth skin, creepy bright eyes and, in Harry’s case, suspiciously fuller hair.

Netizens flocked to Twitter to share their thoughts on the alleged retouching.

“The airbrush is doing some heavy lifting there,” one person tweeted on Wednesday.

“The cover looks so fake… oh wait it’s because they are,” someone else wrote.

Some thought the mag did a number on Harry’s infamously receding hairline.

“Is Harry wearing a rug? Or just overdone the air brushing?” wondered one user.

Another thought Harry and Markle looked like royals in an animated Disney flick, writing, “Terrible retouching job. They look CGI.”

“Jesus I thought this was a parody account with a clearly photoshopped creepy cover. Then I noticed the blue tick. Wow has @Time fallen. Hard,” someone else tweeted.

One troll wrote that the couple looked “so plastic” that they could not tell whether the image was “real or photoshopped.”

Others, meanwhile, dragged Time for the way they positioned Meghan in front of Harry for the photo opp.

“Who approved this shot?! Is he standing? Is he sitting? Is he holding on to her shoulder so he doesn’t fall? Why would you make such lovely looking people look like this?” one Twitter user asked.

“Its like he’s cowering behind her,” someone else quipped.

Another compared the pic to the “Step Brothers” movie poster.




Others, however, seemed unbothered by the cover and praised the pair over the photo.

“Amazing cover! Love all the good work they are doing despite the vicious attacks coming at them by The Firm,” wrote a fan. “Keep up the good work #HarryAndMeghan! Your humanitarian work speaks for itself.”

“It’s the glow for me … This is what peace and happiness does,” tweeted another.

The former “Suits” star, 40, and her royal husband, 37, made the Time 100 list for their charity work with their Archewell Foundation.

“They turn compassion into boots on the ground through their Archewell Foundation. They give voice to the voiceless through media production,” chef José Andrés wrote in a short essay about the pair. “Hand in hand with nonprofit partners, they take risks to help communities in need — offering mental-health support to black women and girls in the US and feeding those affected by natural disasters in India and the Caribbean.”

Markle and Harry — who resigned from their royal duties in early 2020 — topped the “Icons” section of the list, which also includes pop star Britney Spears, country superstar Dolly Parton, tennis pro Naomi Osaka and Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s ‘airbrushed’ Time 100 cover gets roasted
					

Time magazine dropped the cover photo of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Wednesday, where they appeared with glowing smooth skin and bright eyes.




					pagesix.com


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look at his hair - wth?




Ch-ch-ch-chia pet


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> Photos from when Mommy's Boy was a working royal? Oh the shades that the BRF is capable of throwing at the Troublesome Duo



Well, they could have thrown in one from his childhood of him on a bike


----------



## Allisonfaye

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it the domineered part that's in those hoods? Not that I have a real clue haha.



That's what I was thinking.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like pleated trousers as well, it's just that she looks bad in them  I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but not the rize size sounds like her usual MO.



It looks like she has on a bulky adult incontinence undergarment (diaper?) on underneath the pleated trousers.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Wow, this is a clever observation!
> View attachment 5195129


Wow - that's exactly it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She is ok, isn’t she?  Could there have been a mishap during the birth?


----------



## bellecate

Now this really is creepy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Putting these 2 pictures side by side is rather cruel, it is like gracious vs. clumsy!


You can’t buy class and you can’t fake class.  Nice try tho’.


----------



## needlv

So it seems you buy your way into the most influential list…


----------



## marietouchet

someone on Twitter found the Beckhams portrait that they copied


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> someone on Twitter found the Beckhams portrait that they copied



Wow they sure lack originality in everything that they do! Plagiarism is their middle name


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> So it seems you buy your way into the most influential list…



I thought that a cover would cost thousands not millions, pardon my ignorance. If they paid $1.5mil to be on the cover of TIME, they must feel despaired.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


>



This man looks seriously depressed in all the recent photos.  He must realize that they are failing no matter what they do.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Quote from chef José Andrés “They turn compassion into boots on the ground through their Archewell Foundation. They give voice to the voiceless through media production. Hand in hand with nonprofit partners, they take risks to help communities in need — offering mental-health support to black women and girls in the US and feeding those affected by natural disasters in India and the Caribbean.”

I hope the chef doesn't burn his fingers while cooking because he must be utterly blind if he is unable to see this unscrupulous couple's true nature.  
1. I bet this little ditty was written by M for the chef. 
2. Who's boots will hit the ground? Not H's nor M's boots as they would be 'sh**ting on the ground in terror if they were to help anyone in the above mentioned areas. However, it would be risky for those involved if only we could believer that H&M would actually spend $$$ for such endeavours.
3. Further to #2, and as seen from their previous charitable gifts, there will be no monetary risks involved because they provide little $$$ (or help) to the needy except for a few baby beanies, one lemon cake, a few lousy flowers in Diana's memory and lots of word salad to apparently comfort everyone. 
4. The only voice we hear is M's complaining of racism and abuse at the hands of the RF, so she has no time left to hear anyone else's voice.
5. It's unbelievable to think that she could help anyone in mental distress when she herself is in dire need of help to correct her super large ego. Besides, she is too busy playing the racist card, while pretending to be Caucasian, to assist black women and girls with mental health.
6. Compassionate isn't a word I would associate with H&M as they showed little compassion for the relatives when they trampled over the graves at the veterans cemetery while pretending to mourn, all for a photo-op.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> “Power posing is a *controversial self-improvement technique* or "life hack" in which people stand in a posture that they mentally associate with being powerful, in the hope of feeling and behaving more assertively”
> 
> Everything she does is so phony and cringeworthy. Not an authentic bone in her body. Meanwhile Catherine comes off as natural and likeable.


Catherine is smiling in many pictures, which makes her seem warm and caring.  When do we ever see Miserable Meg smile?  Only when it looks like she's about to stab someone in the back.  She's either looking melancholy or posing all.the.time.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look at his hair - wth?



His hair looks like it could polish a bunch of shoes at the airport.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> It looks like she has on a bulky adult incontinence undergarment (diaper?) on underneath the pleated trousers.


She's marching to the fullest extent.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is ok, isn’t she?  Could there have been a mishap during the birth?


Like what?  Her uterus prolapsed and diapers are needed to hold it up so she can walk?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Quote from chef José Andrés “They turn compassion into boots on the ground through their Archewell Foundation. They give voice to the voiceless through media production. Hand in hand with nonprofit partners, they take risks to help communities in need — offering mental-health support to black women and girls in the US and feeding those affected by natural disasters in India and the Caribbean.”
> 
> I hope the chef doesn't burn his fingers while cooking because he must be utterly blind if he is unable to see this unscrupulous couple's true nature.
> 1. I bet this little ditty was written by M for the chef.
> 2. Who's boots will hit the ground? Not H's nor M's boots as they would be 'sh**ting on the ground in terror if they were to help anyone in the above mentioned areas. However, it would be risky for those involved if only we could believer that H&M would actually spend $$$ for such endeavours.
> 3. Further to #2, and as seen from their previous charitable gifts, there will be no monetary risks involved because they provide little $$$ (or help) to the needy except for a few baby beanies, one lemon cake, a few lousy flowers in Diana's memory and lots of word salad to apparently comfort everyone.
> 4. The only voice we hear is M's complaining of racism and abuse at the hands of the RF, so she has no time left to hear anyone else's voice.
> 5. It's unbelievable to think that she could help anyone in mental distress when she herself is in dire need of help to correct her super large ego. Besides, she is too busy playing the racist card, while pretending to be Caucasian, to assist black women and girls with mental health.
> 6. Compassionate isn't a word I would associate with H&M as they showed little compassion for the relatives when they trampled over the graves at the veterans cemetery while pretending to mourn, all for a photo-op.


I am trying to feel sorry for the Chef because Migraine  made him look like a fool with the piece that SHE wrote.  She doesn't even know enough to change her buzz words and phrases so it isn't so obvious that she wrote it.  No street smarts.  If she had any, she wouldn't be in the position of being the total fool that she is today.  

If anyone thinks that MM cares about racism, mental health, the poor and/or the downtrodden, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn.  You can include her husband in that list too.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Like what?  Her uterus prolapsed and diapers are needed to hold it up so she can walk?


How about a sling procedure?  She probably needs a pessary too.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> 1. I bet this *little ditty* was written by M for the chef.


I love you @Maggie Muggins, but doggone it, I now have Jack and Diane stuck in my head!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> So it seems you buy your way into the most influential list…



Interesting...if a magazine is featuring you, I always assumed the magazine is paying for the cover?  (I wonder when was the last time Cindy Crawford or Bella Hadid paid to be on a cover?)


----------



## breakfastatcartier

EverSoElusive said:


> Is it just me or does it look as though her head was photoshopped onto the body (though I'm sure it wasn't)?  Must be all that fake hair distorting the image.


I immediately thought of Kate’s hair when I saw the horridness on meghans head …


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Interesting...if a magazine is featuring you, I always assumed the magazine is paying for the cover?  (I wonder when was the last time Cindy Crawford or Bella Hadid paid to be on a cover?)


I think Time is in the toilet.  It ain't the Time that we remember when growing up.  No quality writers and fact checkers.  I think you can buy your way into it fairly easily.  Plus they were sold the bit that as Diana's son it was a guaranteed sell out of the issue.  Whenever things were slow, People used to put Diana on the cover and I bet the Time people were told this.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

needlv said:


> So it seems you buy your way into the most influential list…



Where do they get $1.5 mil???


----------



## CarryOn2020

They’re creepy and their kooky
Mysterious and spooky
They’re all together ooky
The Harkle family

===
Let’s just correct this power pose nonsense - the impressionable tweens need to know 








						This Simple 'Power Pose' Can Change Your Life And Career
					






					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> It looks like she has on a bulky adult incontinence undergarment (diaper?) on underneath the pleated trousers.


That birthday video only showed the work she had done on her upper half while she was supposedly pregnant and giving birth. Perhaps she augmented her lower half a la Kim Kardashian for the Barbie hip look.

Her inspiration for hair and hips (especially the crotch gap).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I love you @Maggie Muggins, but doggone it, I now have Jack and Diane stuck in my head!!!


Damn, I couldn't remember it so I googled it and now all I want to do is forget it.   So sorry for both of us.


----------



## Chanbal

Not alone, so I'll have to watch this one later.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> His hair looks like it could polish a bunch of shoes at the airport.



It makes me appreciate that William chose not to fight his baldness. No rugs, no plugs, no Photoshop magic. He may not look as attractive as he did in his younger days but at least he isn’t trying to hide anything like he’s ashamed or something.


----------



## Annawakes

Is it true that archewell built a building in the Caribbean to give free meals and vaccinations?  And that another is going to be built in Mumbai?  Is this really true??


----------



## Chanbal

I hope this so called expert is wrong! 
This is likely why they paid all that money for the cove of Time. 










						Time magazine cover shows 'political future' for Meghan, says expert
					

MEGHAN MARKLE'S appearance on the front cover of Time Magazine, along with husband Prince Harry, points to a "political future", according to a top royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Norm.Core

lanasyogamama said:


> Scroll through, these are all so funny.




I am ROLF! It’s too hard to pick a favourite.


----------



## bag-mania

Was there nobody on the list of 100 who is actually influential? It is difficult to believe they would be the ones most worthy of being featured on the cover. That’s why I completely believe the rumor that it was bought.


----------



## Chanbal

le_junkie said:


> I am ROLF! It’s too hard to pick a favourite.


Here is one more for you!


----------



## Norm.Core

bellecate said:


> Now this really is creepy.
> View attachment 5195368



This guy is on fire!!! And so is this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664


That's a very awkward stance.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Was there nobody on the list of 100 who is actually influential? It is difficult to believe they would be the ones most worthy of being featured on the cover. That’s why I completely believe the rumor that it was bought.



They included a Taliban guy, Dolly Parton, and others.

H&M are under the *icon* tab 








						The 100 Most Influential People of 2021
					

Find out who made TIME's annual list




					time.com
				












						Abdul Ghani Baradar: The 100 Most Influential People of 2021
					

Find out why Abdul Ghani Baradar is on this year’s list




					time.com


----------



## Norm.Core

I have been lurking this thread since the O interview but it’s their Time cover that finally pushed me over the edge.

Just go away Hollow and Meager!


----------



## charlottawill

So much for the Tiresome Twosome laying low for a while.


----------



## EverSoElusive

breakfastatcartier said:


> Where do they get $1.5 mil???



Probably siphoned off Archewell  

Their funds must be severely low now since they no longer get free money from Charles and not to mention they haven't been doing any serious work to generate income. They haven't even produced sh^t for Spotify and Netflix. And what kind of quality bacon does Harry bring in as Chief Impact Officer?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> They included a Taliban guy, Dolly Parton, and others.
> 
> H&M are under the *icon* tab
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 100 Most Influential People of 2021
> 
> 
> Find out who made TIME's annual list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abdul Ghani Baradar: The 100 Most Influential People of 2021
> 
> 
> Find out why Abdul Ghani Baradar is on this year’s list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com



Well, Dolly donated a million dollars to Covid research which ended up being used in the development of the Moderna vaccine, a fact she didn’t discover until months later when a list of donors was released. So right there she ended up having a more beneficial impact on the world than anything the word salad twins have done or will ever do.

It also goes to prove that a celebrity can make a big donation (or in H&M’s case, a little one) and not get online to toot their own horn.


----------



## Yanca

bag-mania said:


> If I had a dollar for every time they said they were "humbled" by something, I'd be buying a really nice dinner with a glass of wine tonight. There is nothing humble about either of them.




It's all about MEEGain, she really just come across as insincere, even when you watch the old videos of her doing royal engagement, she seemed to be very consious of the attention instead of  putting the attention to the causes of engagement. Their PR is working more thn Overtime.  I guess we will never have peace from all the preaches, compassion and " donating" they are doing.  Too bad they can't activate compassion to their own families, or even just to their eldery relatives if they can't manage to be compassion because the root cause of all of these is the wifes unhappiness to being number 2 to Catherine. Aside from their Squad and spoke person Scoobie who are they really influencing.


----------



## Chanbal

Pass the bucket!   

_'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends. 

'*Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added*.









						Meghan Markle 'planning low-key dinner' for Harry's 37th birthday
					

Harry and Meghan will be shying away from the spotlight for the prince's 37th birthday this year and will mark the occasion with an intimate dinner instead, DailyMail.com can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Pass the bucket!
> 
> _'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends.
> 
> '*Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'planning low-key dinner' for Harry's 37th birthday
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will be shying away from the spotlight for the prince's 37th birthday this year and will mark the occasion with an intimate dinner instead, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I have a beach house on the shores of the Atlantic in Nebraska I can sell the two twats. I don’t think they got invited to the Met or if they did it was not as honored guests so they declined. Yeah that’s most probable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Pass the bucket!
> 
> _'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends.
> 
> '*Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added*._



I need a reminder, pls. Since she did not attend the MET gala, the Emmys, O’s bday party or many other _glitzy events_,  what service did she do with this ‘extra’ time?   Hazzie’s bday cake does not count as service.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Yes I did! said:


> Wow clearly not a thread for fans of MM


We liked her three years ago. But she took every good opinion we had, and set it on fire. Now, people just use their

If you want to make a fan page, or a fashion page, we’ll try to stay out and play nice



Annawakes said:


> Is it true that archewell built a building in the Caribbean to give free meals and vaccinations?  And that another is going to be built in Mumbai?  Is this really true??


I haven’t heard any rumors about that, and no news sources or even blind sources have picked it up. If you have more information from a semi-reputable source, I’d be interested.
Where would they get the money, I wonder?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

le_junkie said:


> I have been lurking this thread since the O interview but it’s their Time cover that finally pushed me over the edge.
> 
> Just go away *Hollow* and *Meager*!


@le_junkie First, I'm glad you've actively joined in the conversation.  Second, since you've been lurking, I'm thinking that perhaps you've heard about our H&M nickname collection called The List to which I've added Hollow and Meager. Yes, H is an empty shell and M is inadequate in so many ways. 
 Thanks for your contribution.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Annawakes

Note - chef José Andrés wrote the blurb for Time 100.  Small Harkle world.
Article first published Dec, 2020








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell Has Accomplished Its First Major Project
					

The Archewell Foundation and World Central Kitchen have teamed up to create community relief centers in regions of the world prone to climate disasters.




					www.popsugar.com
				




_On Dec. 21, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Archewell Foundation announced its first major philanthropic project. The nonprofit, named after Meghan and Harry's son, Archie, partnered with chef José Andrés and World Central Kitchen with plans to feed those in disaster-stricken areas around the world as well as to create community relief centers in regions of the world prone to climate disasters.
….
The Archewell Foundation is supporting the building of four community relief centers for World Central Kitchen, which will serve as community kitchens during national emergencies and have the flexibility to become community centers, schools, and clinics when necessary. On Feb. 23, World Central Kitchen announced that the construction of the first community center had been completed in Dominica, which was hit by two devastating hurricanes in 2017. The second center will be built in Puerto Rico. 

The Dominica center, which is located in a school that was constructed under the country's climate resiliency plan to be a shelter against future hurricanes, includes kitchen equipment that can run on solar power. This year, there are also plans to launch a culinary training program to equip chefs to prepare large quantities of food in case of an emergency._


----------



## Norm.Core

Maggie Muggins said:


> @le_junkie First, I'm glad you've actively joined in the conversation.  Second, since you've been lurking, I'm thinking that perhaps you've heard about our H&M nickname collection called The List to which I've added Hollow and Meager. Yes, H is an empty shell and M is inadequate in so many ways.
> Thanks for your contribution.
> View attachment 5195604



Thank you @Maggie Muggins for my Star.   

I was able to keep my trap shut from commenting through soooo much of their nonsense since that interview but the ridiculousness of this Time cover finally broke my resolve. 

Much respect to all the lively ladies in this thread who’s been at it since the very beginning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

le_junkie said:


> Thank you @Maggie Muggins for my Star.
> 
> I was able to keep my trap shut from commenting through soooo much of their nonsense since that interview but the ridiculousness of this Time cover finally broke my resolve.
> 
> Much respect to all the lively ladies in this thread who’s been at it since the very beginning.


Welcome! Tough ladies in here that call BS out when warranted.


----------



## Sophie-Rose

All I see when I look at her cover is her evil "smize"


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## eunaddict

lanasyogamama said:


> Scroll through, these are all so funny.




Honestly, when I first saw the photos....if it weren't for having a mid-week exam, I would have photoshopped the pics into photos of her only...especially that cover photo. I'm sure that's how she really sees the photo anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

Selling their brand as a power couple, not to us!   


*All the pictures have the rehearsed quality you'd expect from a full on PR campaign presenting them as the 'Power Couple'' Robin explained discussing the cover.*
_
'I can see why Time chose the cover shot with Meghan in front with Harry leaning on the wall behind her, but it was probably one of hundreds of shots and doesn't necessarily represent the actual relationship balance of the couple. 

'There is an almost deliberately wide-eyed look, showing openness, but *the pose feels almost self-consciously so'.

'Meghan's right hand in the pocket feels very staged.* This is not a natural position for a hand, and there is tension in the thumb to maintain this position without ruining the line of the trousers'.

In a third shot Harry is seen standing behind Meghan with her hands on her hips and face. 

*'I would say Meghan looks as if she is enjoying this shoot. Harry looks as if he is trying to '"do the right thing*"' Robin explained.

'Again, Megan's arms are very consciously 'posed' as if deliberately *creating the image she wants. *

'A little tension in Harry's lip corners and chin area suggests he has been asked to stand in a particular way for the shot. 

'This feels like the slightly tired 'end of shoot' look. Megan seems to be still firing on all cylinders. '.

Meanwhile, body language expert Darren Stanton said the photos were reminiscent of those seen of Kim Kardashian and Kanye West.  

'Harry is standing straight to arrive his hands his pockets Megan is adopting a classic power pose noticed at a distance,' he explained.

'*She has placed her feet  widely apart this is a classic power gesture used by major world politicians seen in recent times including *****, Putin, Macron and Trudo*.

'*This gesture is saying "hey look at me I am the most powerful person in the room"* *the idea is the more space we occupy the more important we are opposite of *******s to be.*

'The image of the pair walking woods also is quite revealing although they are looking at each other holding hands we can see from *Meghan's left hand position it is off and off out of her pocket thumb is showing again this is a power gesture to say "I am the more powerful person"*…_









						Meghan Markle is posed to 'look powerful' in her Time cover
					

Speaking to FEMAIL, Robin Kermode, a communication coach said the Duchess of Sussex's 'wide-eyed' look was 'self conscious' while Harry's style feels more natural.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## eunaddict

Still can't believe they were dressed by famous stylists. 

They really did injustice to her body proportions - the stylists choosing to combine a high waist, wide pleated pants with a scrunched up sweater (especially in the Green outfit) just shortens her torso, combine that with the camera angle, that "power stance" and it all adds up to make her look stumpier than she is.

Also, holy smokes bad photoshop everywhere, that's why their faces look stuck on - unnaturally shading to sharpen and smooth jaw lines, removed wrinkles and some seriously messing around with color saturations and sharpening of the photos.


----------



## needlv

eunaddict said:


> Still can't believe they were dressed by famous stylists.
> 
> They really did injustice to her body proportions - the stylists choosing to combine a high waist, wide pleated pants with a scrunched up sweater (especially in the Green outfit) just shortens her torso, combine that with the camera angle, that "power stance" and it all adds up to make her look stumpier than she is.
> 
> Also, holy smokes bad photoshop everywhere, that's why their faces look stuck on - unnaturally shading to sharpen and smooth jaw lines, removed wrinkles and some seriously messing around with color saturations and sharpening of the photos.



maybe she tried to bully the stylist… so ultimate revenge is looking wider and shorter than she is…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Was there nobody on the list of 100 who is actually influential? It is difficult to believe they would be the ones most worthy of being featured on the cover. That’s why I completely believe the rumor that it was bought.



The current president and his VP maybe. The more I think of it, this list is so weirdly random.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Pass the bucket!
> 
> _'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends.
> 
> '*Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'planning low-key dinner' for Harry's 37th birthday
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will be shying away from the spotlight for the prince's 37th birthday this year and will mark the occasion with an intimate dinner instead, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _




Bwahahaha. Didn't I ask a few days ago where the drip-drip-drip was why they didn't WANT to attend the Met gala? 

Also, her focus is being of service...where's my sick bucket now.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> “Power posing is a *controversial self-improvement technique* or "life hack" in which people stand in a posture that they mentally associate with being powerful, in the hope of feeling and behaving more assertively”
> 
> Everything she does is so phony and cringeworthy. Not an authentic bone in her body. Meanwhile Catherine comes off as natural and likeable.





BUT, one is supposed to it _before_ - whatever it is one is supposed to do.

As my mother used to say, "don't stay like that for _too_ long or the wind will change and you'll be stuck like that forever".


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Pass the bucket!
> 
> _'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends.
> 
> '*Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'planning low-key dinner' for Harry's 37th birthday
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will be shying away from the spotlight for the prince's 37th birthday this year and will mark the occasion with an intimate dinner instead, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


----------



## allanrvj

Saw these from my friend's IG story:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German gossip rag BILD titles "Harry and Meghan's cover shot - what are they trying to tell us?"


----------



## lanasyogamama

I too will not be attending glitzy balls for the foreseeable future, my energy is needed here, on this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

eunaddict said:


> Still can't believe they were dressed by famous stylists.
> 
> They really did injustice to her body proportions - the stylists choosing to combine a high waist, wide pleated pants with a scrunched up sweater (especially in the Green outfit) just shortens her torso, combine that with the camera angle, that "power stance" and it all adds up to make her look stumpier than she is.
> 
> Also, holy smokes bad photoshop everywhere, that's why their faces look stuck on - unnaturally shading to sharpen and smooth jaw lines, removed wrinkles and some seriously messing around with color saturations and sharpening of the photos.





needlv said:


> maybe she tried to bully the stylist… so ultimate revenge is looking wider and shorter than she is…



I think she probably insisted on wearing those outfits that don't suit her well and posing the way she did because we all know she's a control freak who thinks she's better and smarter than anyone else in the room   

And of course all the over-airbrushing was probably how Nutmeg wanted it so that she could look like the perfect porcelain doll


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Annawakes
> 
> Note - chef José Andrés wrote the blurb for Time 100.  Small Harkle world.
> Article first published Dec, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell Has Accomplished Its First Major Project
> 
> 
> The Archewell Foundation and World Central Kitchen have teamed up to create community relief centers in regions of the world prone to climate disasters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _On Dec. 21, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Archewell Foundation announced its first major philanthropic project. The nonprofit, named after Meghan and Harry's son, Archie, partnered with chef José Andrés and World Central Kitchen with plans to feed those in disaster-stricken areas around the world as well as to create community relief centers in regions of the world prone to climate disasters.
> ….
> The Archewell Foundation is supporting the building of four community relief centers for World Central Kitchen, which will serve as community kitchens during national emergencies and have the flexibility to become community centers, schools, and clinics when necessary. On Feb. 23, World Central Kitchen announced that the construction of the first community center had been completed in Dominica, which was hit by two devastating hurricanes in 2017. The second center will be built in Puerto Rico.
> 
> The Dominica center, which is located in a school that was constructed under the country's climate resiliency plan to be a shelter against future hurricanes, includes kitchen equipment that can run on solar power. This year, there are also plans to launch a culinary training program to equip chefs to prepare large quantities of food in case of an emergency._


Thank you @CarryOn2020!

@Vintage Leather, please see above for the links to the community center info, courtesy of CarryOn2020!

Now, my thoughts about this. IF this were actually true, I’m surprised and incredulous that they haven’t had a gazillion photo ops at the community center. Or a zoom call?!!!!! I wonder has anyone actually visited this building??? It says “construction was completed” but is it actually operational, is my question. Or, is this just empty words again?
I just think they would milk this as publicity for every drop they could, since this is actually something concrete they’ve done.  IF it were true that is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They probably threw out there that hey wanted to build it, but never followed through.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> Like what?  Her uterus prolapsed and diapers are needed to hold it up so she can walk?



I assumed she meant the baby?



Chanbal said:


> I hope this so called expert is wrong!
> This is likely why they paid all that money for the cove of Time.
> View attachment 5195570
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time magazine cover shows 'political future' for Meghan, says expert
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S appearance on the front cover of Time Magazine, along with husband Prince Harry, points to a "political future", according to a top royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



God help us.


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> They included a Taliban guy, Dolly Parton, and others.
> 
> H&M are under the *icon* tab
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 100 Most Influential People of 2021
> 
> 
> Find out who made TIME's annual list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abdul Ghani Baradar: The 100 Most Influential People of 2021
> 
> 
> Find out why Abdul Ghani Baradar is on this year’s list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> time.com



Ugh at Taliban guy. I refused to look at Time. Was it the new leader of the Taliban who was wanted by the FBI and had a $5 million reward on his head?


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Is it true that archewell built a building in the Caribbean to give free meals and vaccinations?  And that another is going to be built in Mumbai?  Is this really true??


If I recall right, Archewell did the usual provide funds to World Central Kitchen to assist in the construction, and World Central Kitchen did all the actual work in putting up the building and running the charity service. The "partnership" is for 4 buildings, I believe. It netted them a gooey syrupy love note from World Central Kitchen Jose Andres.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> If I recall right, Archewell did the usual provide funds to World Central Kitchen to assist in the construction, and World Central Kitchen did all the actual work in putting up the building and running the charity service. The "partnership" is for 4 buildings, I believe. It netted them a gooey syrupy love note from World Central Kitchen Jose Andres.


Adding, this appears to be their modus operandi: throw out some cash or low value item like beanies, and reap the credit. There was never any mention of how much exactly hard cash they donated. All very shady.


----------



## Annawakes

That sounds about right.  I mean, if they publicized the baking of a cake I just don’t believe they wouldn’t widely publicize the building of a community center.  Probably donated a few hundred dollars and then said World Central Kitchen could use their name to get visibility to that cause.  Always trading on those titles!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

When I was PTO president, we used to provide lunch for the teachers on their professional days. Can one of you call time magazine for me, I’m tied up looking for new pleated pants.


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> I too will not be attending glitzy balls for the foreseeable future, my energy is needed here, on this thread.



Well, the only glitzy balls MM will get are Harry’s… I’m ok not participating in either of those…


----------



## LittleStar88

Savage


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> That sounds about right.  I mean, if they publicized the baking of a cake I just don’t believe they wouldn’t widely publicize the building of a community center.  Probably donated a few hundred dollars and then said World Central Kitchen could use their name to get visibility to that cause.  Always trading on those titles!!


They will probably protest that the amount doesn't matter. It's the level of compassion and service! And they are so humble and private and influential ... sacks of sh*t


----------



## marietouchet

Stories 
Time cover cost $1.5M
40+40 cost $1M
They are blowing through the $20 advance on book


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Well, Dolly donated a million dollars to Covid research which ended up being used in the development of the Moderna vaccine, a fact she didn’t discover until months later when a list of donors was released. So right there she ended up having a more beneficial impact on the world than anything the *word salad twins* have done or will ever do.
> 
> It also goes to prove that a celebrity can make a big donation (or in H&M’s case, a little one) and not get online to toot their own horn.


 Thanks @bag-mania for the nickname '*word salad twins*' that has been added to The List and here's your gold ribbon.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Stories
> Time cover cost $1.5M
> 40+40 cost $1M
> They are blowing through the $20 advance on book



I'm sure it is all being run through as a business expense (tax deduction). I'm guessing 90% of everything is a tax write-off for them. Or use Archwell money to pay for everything. Rich people and their creative tax filings...

I had a boss who ran everything through company money: Rent for expensive luxury house, luxury car lease, groceries, gifts, and who knows what else. Never once claimed any of it as a taxable benefit. His actual "salary" was very low to avoid high tax rate... I imagine H&M are doing some creative accounting, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sophie-Rose said:


> All I see when I look at her cover is her evil "smize"


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @bag-mania for the nickname '*word salad twins*' that has been added to The List and here's your gold ribbon.
> View attachment 5195866



Thank you, Maggie Muggins! It's always an honor to make the list.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Pass the bucket!
> 
> _'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends.
> 
> '*Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'planning low-key dinner' for Harry's 37th birthday
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will be shying away from the spotlight for the prince's 37th birthday this year and will mark the occasion with an intimate dinner instead, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Yes, I too decided NOT to attend the Met Gala, BO's birthday party or the Emmy's because I was being of service to myself and applying a groundswell of the aforementioned fresh paint to my living room wall.  It had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the fact I was not invited.


----------



## jelliedfeels

What in the name of the Golden Girls is she wearing?
She looks like hungover Dorothy Zbornak going supply teaching (though she’s missing a nice statement scarf & some chunky hoops.)
Meanwhile Hazzles is wearing a rug that could pass for livestock in St Olaf. 

It is so weird how M either dresses like 20 year old going clubbing in 2007 or like a 70 year old at the rotary club in 1989. Her hair is absolutely nuts too- the photoshop guy definitely went overboard

 Harry well…. He looks cheap and dodgy, very untrustworthy salesman, shame he can’t flog them  

All this talk about how short & hairy  M looks made me think of this:


I can’t quite tell if the Time blurb is written in arch sarcasm or whether it’s just extremely condescending: who exactly are they to say most people have no compassion for strangers? I think the last couple of years especially have proven the opposite is true. It’s a very dated view of philanthropy that it’s just the great & good tossing a couple of sandwiches at the unwashed serf.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, I too decided NOT to attend the Met Gala, BO's birthday party or the Emmy's because I was being of service to myself and applying a groundswell of the aforementioned fresh paint to my living room wall.  It had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the fact I was not invited.


I do do hope you had a nice cuppa/glass of while emulating Michelangelo , he too did frescoes


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I think she probably insisted on wearing those outfits that don't suit her well and posing the way she did because we all know she's a control freak who thinks she's better and smarter than anyone else in the room
> 
> And of course all the over-airbrushing was probably how Nutmeg wanted it *so that she could look like the perfect porcelain doll*


I always thought porcelain dolls were so creepy!


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Well,* the only glitzy balls MM will get are Harry’s*… I’m ok not participating in either of those…


You really think they're glitzy???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

IMO, it's time that we respectfully ask HMTQ to deal with the two ingrates once and for all. 


PS Sorry the cartoonist misspelt Elizabeth.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, the only glitzy balls MM will get are Harry’s… I’m ok not participating in either of those…


The image of fuzzy balls covered in glitter arose, and now I can't unsee them.


----------



## xincinsin

I have to admit feeling sad. Time Magazine used to have a spine. Being on the cover of it used to mean something. Now it looks like Time is selling its soul to keep afloat. Putting a witch and her black cat familiar on the cover for a price.


----------



## melissatrv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bwahahaha. Didn't I ask a few days ago where the drip-drip-drip was why they didn't WANT to attend the Met gala?
> 
> Also, her focus is being of service...where's my sick bucket now.



I remember, you totally called it!


----------



## melissatrv

bag-mania said:


> Well, Dolly donated a million dollars to Covid research which ended up being used in the development of the Moderna vaccine, a fact she didn’t discover until months later when a list of donors was released. So right there she ended up having a more beneficial impact on the world than anything the word salad twins have done or will ever do.
> 
> It also goes to prove that a celebrity can make a big donation (or in H&M’s case, a little one) and not get online to toot their own horn.



Plus H&M are about "raising money" to donate.  Not donating their own like Dolly


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> When I was PTO president, we used to provide lunch for the teachers on their professional days. Can one of you call time magazine for me, I’m tied up looking for new pleated pants.



Consider it done! Congrats by the way…


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I have to admit feeling sad. Time Magazine used to have a spine. Being on the cover of it used to mean something. Now it looks like Time is selling its soul to keep afloat. Putting a witch and her black cat familiar on the cover for a price.



What was left of Time magazine was sold off a few years ago. It is only a shell of what it once was. This article was written by a former employee back in 2013 and it was in bad shape then.





__





						Running Out of TIME: The Slow, Sad Demise of a Great American Magazine
					

The weekly was among the first to invest heavily in the Internet. So how come Time.com never figured it out?




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## Chanbal

The title sounds about right! They have been sending wrong messages to everyone… 











						Meghan Markle sending wrong message to young women - claim
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has "surprised" fashion journalist Lowri Turner who claimed her Time magazine cover with Prince Harry has been "retouched".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Like everyone is saying, Time magazine is almost dead, and this most influential “issue”, if you can even call it that is basically all they have left, so they need to get as many clicks and retweets as possible.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

*Such A Private Relationship*
SEPTEMBER 15, 2021 BLIND GOSSIP LEAVE A COMMENT

_Let’s talk about a famous boy bander and his new girlfriend!

Our boy bander usually tries to keep his love life fairly quiet.

*It’s the girl who is leaking the info*…_









						Such A Private Relationship - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] Let’s talk about a famous boy bander and his new girlfriend! Our boy bander usually tries to keep his love life fairly quiet. It’s the girl who is leaking the info. This relationship reminds us of the time when Meghan Markle first started dating Prince Harry. She had asked her...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## Chanbal

allanrvj said:


> Saw these from my friend's IG story:
> View attachment 5195711
> 
> View attachment 5195710


Here is the video to go with your post.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! One more mystery…  

_Prince *Harry and Meghan Markle have denied claims that the Duchess wore a $62,000 ring made with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East for their Time cover shoot*. 

Meghan Markle sported a staggering $384,000 worth of jewelry while posing for the cover of Time's most influential people issue alongside her husband Prince Harry - including a pinky ring worth an estimated $62,000.

*According to Page Six, Meghan 'turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.*'

_
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-ring-diamonds-mystery-donor-Middle-East.html


----------



## Hermes Zen

Annawakes said:


> Thank you @CarryOn2020!
> 
> @Vintage Leather, please see above for the links to the community center info, courtesy of CarryOn2020!
> 
> Now, my thoughts about this. IF this were actually true, I’m surprised and incredulous that they haven’t had a gazillion photo ops at the community center. Or a zoom call?!!!!! I wonder has anyone actually visited this building??? It says “construction was completed” but is it actually operational, is my question. Or, is this just empty words again?
> I just think they would milk this as publicity for every drop they could, since this is actually something concrete they’ve done.  IF it were true that is.


This made me curious so I did some searching!  Found these articles. Hmmmm … still didn’t say how much $$$$$’s they contributed to the builds.    Apparently on H&M’s third wedding anniversary they announced their third construction will be in Mumbai India. Per second article below: ‘Mumbai is also home to Myna Mahila, an Indian organization focused on women’s health and employment opportunities that the Duchess of Sussex has long supported.’

A Look at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Latest Dominica Project With José Andrés -
https://www.cntraveler.com/story/a-...-latest-dominica-project-with-jose-andres/amp

Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan Markle to Build Relief Center in Mumbai Amid COVID Crisis -
https://www.indiawest.com/news/glob...cle_507140ba-b9a6-11eb-93e0-e77ff4502265.html


----------



## breakfastatcartier

EverSoElusive said:


> Probably siphoned off Archewell
> 
> Their funds must be severely low now since they no longer get free money from Charles and not to mention they haven't been doing any serious work to generate income. They haven't even produced sh^t for Spotify and Netflix. And what kind of quality bacon does Harry bring in as Chief Impact Officer?


Or possibly Diana’s money … Meghan wouldn’t be above going to a rich person’s grave to dig out anything expensive she could sell off either.

She’s so tacky and horrible. Can’t wait till she crawls back to the unknown cave she came from.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oops! One more mystery…
> 
> _Prince *Harry and Meghan Markle have denied claims that the Duchess wore a $62,000 ring made with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East for their Time cover shoot*.
> 
> Meghan Markle sported a staggering $384,000 worth of jewelry while posing for the cover of Time's most influential people issue alongside her husband Prince Harry - including a pinky ring worth an estimated $62,000.
> 
> *According to Page Six, Meghan 'turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.*'
> View attachment 5196013
> _
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-ring-diamonds-mystery-donor-Middle-East.html


Even if not true,  it is more bad PR. Congrats Harkles for diving deeper into the abyss


----------



## lulu212121

Hermes Zen said:


> This made me curious so I did some searching!  Found these articles. Hmmmm … still didn’t say how much $$$$$’s they contributed to the builds.    Apparently on H&M’s third wedding anniversary they announced their third construction will be in Mumbai India. Per second article below: ‘Mumbai is also home to Myna Mahila, an Indian organization focused on women’s health and employment opportunities that the Duchess of Sussex has long supported.’
> 
> A Look at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Latest Dominica Project With José Andrés -
> https://www.cntraveler.com/story/a-...-latest-dominica-project-with-jose-andres/amp
> 
> Prince Harry, Duchess Meghan Markle to Build Relief Center in Mumbai Amid COVID Crisis -
> https://www.indiawest.com/news/glob...cle_507140ba-b9a6-11eb-93e0-e77ff4502265.html


Neither article gave an amount donated. I think the actual cash donation was very small, but H&M think the donation to use their likeness is gold for any organization.

Like I said, Jose had to earn his "donation" with that ridiculous sappy quote.


----------



## lulu212121

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 5195684


Meg appears to be obsessed with Kate! I know there was the urban dictionary joke earlier, but I think this is the reason she gave that story. She copies Kate frequently or is trying to put her down. I think if she could/would have another child it would be a boy.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Here is the video to go with your post.



I love Simon McCoy, he's very dry. Ironically he was the Sky News Royal Correspondent between 1991-96.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Oops! One more mystery…
> 
> _Prince *Harry and Meghan Markle have denied claims that the Duchess wore a $62,000 ring made with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East for their Time cover shoot*.
> 
> Meghan Markle sported a staggering $384,000 worth of jewelry while posing for the cover of Time's most influential people issue alongside her husband Prince Harry - including a pinky ring worth an estimated $62,000.
> 
> *According to Page Six, Meghan 'turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.*'
> View attachment 5196013
> _
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-ring-diamonds-mystery-donor-Middle-East.html


Did she change engagement ring again, or was the insignificant sentimental bauble Hazard gifted Her Heinous dubbed the Triology?


----------



## Vintage Leather

xincinsin said:


> If I recall right, Archewell did the usual provide funds to World Central Kitchen to assist in the construction, and World Central Kitchen did all the actual work in putting up the building and running the charity service. The "partnership" is for 4 buildings, I believe. It netted them a gooey syrupy love note from World Central Kitchen Jose Andres.


Okay. I was thrown by the word “vaccine site” in the comments of person I reacted to.
I’ve been to enough catering kitchens to say - that’s a $50k investment, less if they buy preowned equipment, and their biggest operating expense will be staff, fuel for the generators and transportation to devastated areas.
Vaccine site a whole different kettle of fish. I used Covax pricing. Average per county is 590k just for a site, education and facilities. And then vaccines and staffing are an additional expense (about $3.80 per person for vaccines) and they’re assuming volunteer staffing. Staffing for a US vaccine center averages $100k to $300k per day.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> View attachment 5195684


How trustworthy is Katie Nicholls as a royal reporter? So many royal experts emerging from the woodwork that I have little faith in any of them now, especially considering Heinous Harry and Merching MememeGain's penchant for re-writing history.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Oops! One more mystery…
> 
> _Prince *Harry and Meghan Markle have denied claims that the Duchess wore a $62,000 ring made with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East for their Time cover shoot*.
> 
> Meghan Markle sported a staggering $384,000 worth of jewelry while posing for the cover of Time's most influential people issue alongside her husband Prince Harry - including a pinky ring worth an estimated $62,000.
> 
> *According to Page Six, Meghan 'turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.*'
> View attachment 5196013
> _
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-ring-diamonds-mystery-donor-Middle-East.html


Trio-logy? Give me strength. 

These prices seem fanciful to me. Of course you can have something insured for whatever price you want - provided they don’t look into the claim too thoroughly 

I think it’s as likely that H spent that much on the wedding set as  A**drew actually going to asprey rather than getting Fergs a cubic zirconia from the market & pocketing the difference.

OT but am I the only one who thinks a lot of Lorraine Schwartz stuff looks cheap for what it is?

on topic again, do we suspect that a certain pair of earrings from the shores of sunny Saudi may have finally got back from being reset in a new form?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Thinking back, it must have absolutely KILLED this service-oriented couple to ditch Harry's veterans to attend the Lion King premiere. Poor things.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Such A Private Relationship*
> SEPTEMBER 15, 2021 BLIND GOSSIP LEAVE A COMMENT
> 
> _Let’s talk about a famous boy bander and his new girlfriend!
> 
> Our boy bander usually tries to keep his love life fairly quiet.
> 
> *It’s the girl who is leaking the info*…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Such A Private Relationship - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] Let’s talk about a famous boy bander and his new girlfriend! Our boy bander usually tries to keep his love life fairly quiet. It’s the girl who is leaking the info. This relationship reminds us of the time when Meghan Markle first started dating Prince Harry. She had asked her...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



Oh, our Raptor definitely left more breadcrumbs for the press than just the necklace.


----------



## EverSoElusive

breakfastatcartier said:


> Or possibly Diana’s money … *Meghan wouldn’t be above going to a rich person’s grave to dig out anything expensive she could sell off either.*
> 
> She’s so tacky and horrible. Can’t wait till she crawls back to the unknown cave she came from.



Agreed 100%. If she needs to, I totally think that she will. She's a lowlife.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## CarryOn2020

Personally, to my eye, IMO, [please don’t kick me out, I *love* this thread], the pinky diamond ring looks gauche, tacky, awful. 
Why not just size up and put it on the right ring finger?  I know the pinky rings are very popular now, but a diamond?  Ick.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> So it seems you buy your way into the most influential list…




Told you so.

Oldest open-secret in the book. 

Most award nominations are bought too.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## poopsie

melissatrv said:


> Plus H&M are about "raising money" to donate.  Not donating their own like Dolly



Dolly is a national treasure

She has more class and compassion in her well manicured pinky than those two will EVER have in their entire lives


----------



## mellibelly

Meredith Corporation owns Time, People, InStyle etc. I fully believe Sunshine NutSacks brokered the Time cover deal$$$$


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> *You really think they're glitzy*???


You really think he has any???


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Meredith Corporation owns Time, People, InStyle etc. I fully believe Sunshine NutSacks brokered the Time cover deal$$$$



IIRC, they were included last year, too.  The only difference now is the cover. I, too, believe SS made that happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Meredith Corporation owns Time, People, InStyle etc. I fully believe Sunshine NutSacks brokered the Time cover deal$$$$



Thanks so much for this info. Wow, indeed this is an interesting connection. They own tv stations, too.
Hidden agendas everywhere.-

_The broadcasting division owns 15 television stations. Most of the company's stations are affiliated with CBS or Fox.





						Meredith Corporation - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I am all for equality too, but she has always steered/signalled and pushed him behind her. It's true, she_ is_ obsessed by going first, front, centre, and twice as tall, bizarre -for someone in love. Not so strange for a selfish narcissist. 

He thinks he looks woke from playing along.  

And the accompanying side dish word-salad  that makes them sound like cartoon superheroes. 

Everybody's laughing at them and they still take themselves sooooo seriously.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Personally, to my eye, IMO, [please don’t kick me out, I *love* this thread], the pinky diamond ring looks gauche, tacky, awful.
> Why not just size up and put it on the right ring finger?  I know the pinky rings are very popular now, but a diamond?  Ick.


The diamond is stunning, but in that pinky ring looks indeed tacky…


----------



## Chanbal

A habitué here:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> Or possibly *Diana’s money* … Meghan wouldn’t be above going to a rich person’s grave to dig out anything expensive she could sell off either.
> 
> She’s so tacky and horrible. Can’t wait till she crawls back to the unknown cave she came from.


Since H wasn't and isn't now very bright or knowledgeable re financial matter, I'm thinking that M conned him into signing a power of attorney or equivalent giving her complete authority over his bank accounts, etc. and that she is bleeding him dry for her own needs.  

ET remove duplicate icon


----------



## melissatrv

I don't understand how they can be Time's Persons of the Year.  In the business world, you only get rewarded for what you have actually achieved, not what you talked about doing.   As far as I can see all they did was bash their family, make accusations where "recollections vary", and a couple of articles.  Lightweight charity work such as handing out food or something one time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

melissatrv said:


> I don't understand how they can be Time's Persons of the Year.  In the business world, you only get rewarded for what you have actually achieved, not what you talked about doing.   As far as I can see all they did was bash their family, make accusations where "recollections vary", and a couple of articles.  Lightweight charity work such as handing out food or something one time.



How? 
Simple, really.


----------



## rose60610

How nauseating to reward these hucksters for throwing the BRF under the bus, making outlandish claims that cannot be proven, and claiming they help "a lot" of people. By whose standards? Besides, their cover looks sooo airbrushed (which of course they always are), but this is so altered they look like wax dummies, Harry has all his hair and then some--even at his own wedding his facial hair wasn't this well groomed, and Misery looks crazed as usual. He's behind her like she's protecting him. As far as I'm concerned, the shape of M's face reminds me of Alfred Neuman of MAD magazine. "They run toward the struggle"??? Well, they ran AWAY from royal duties and expected Granny and Dada to keep forking out the cash. But of course they keep trying to steer royal money their way. So is THAT the struggle they're running toward? Anyone stupid enough to donate to Archewell is a pigeon for every scam out there. Sooo, are M&H behind some additional scams, targeting those who donated to Archewell? Talk about low hanging fruit.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



In other words, "Still waters run deep"!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Dolly is a national treasure
> 
> She has more class and compassion in her well manicured pinky than those two will EVER have in their entire lives


One of my favorite Dolly Parton quotes SOOOOO applies to MM in general, but especially this cover:

"It costs a lot of money to look this cheap!"


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> You really think he has any???


Yes, he was seen juggling them after MM ripped them off, remember?  Although, I think they'd be a lot worse for wear, and definitely not glitzy, because his juggling skills are as impressive as his groundswell of compassion he shows, and I'm sure they've been dropped all over the Montecito chicken coop.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> One of my favorite Dolly Parton quotes SOOOOO applies to MM in general, but especially this cover:
> 
> "It costs a lot of money to look this cheap!"



Or in M's case 'it costs a lot of _other_ people's money to look this cheap'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, the only glitzy balls MM will get are Harry’s… I’m ok not participating in either of those…





purseinsanity said:


> You really think they're glitzy???





1LV said:


> You really think he has any???


Thanks everyone, I enjoy a civilized debate, but I think we shouldn't worry too much about whether H's bollocks are au naturel, glitzy, fuzzy wuzzy, black or blue because IMHO, M's tight claws have already transformed H into a total eunuch.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> Meredith Corporation owns Time, People, InStyle etc. I fully believe *Sunshine NutSacks* brokered the Time cover deal$$$$


 Thanks @mellibelly I've added 'Sunshine NutSacks' to the PR Teams Nicknames. My fellow posters are so creative.


----------



## charlottawill

eunaddict said:


> Still can't believe they were dressed by famous stylists.
> 
> They really did injustice to her body proportions - the stylists choosing to combine a high waist, wide pleated pants with a scrunched up sweater (especially in the Green outfit) just shortens her torso, combine that with the camera angle, that "power stance" and it all adds up to make her look stumpier than she is.
> 
> Also, holy smokes bad photoshop everywhere, that's why their faces look stuck on - unnaturally shading to sharpen and smooth jaw lines, removed wrinkles and some seriously messing around with color saturations and sharpening of the photos.


Could be the work of her BFF, British designer Misha Nonoo. Looks like her signature "husband shirt". 


> https://mishanonoo.com/pages/styling


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks everyone, I enjoy a civilized debate, but I think we shouldn't worry too much about whether H's bollocks are au naturel, glitzy, fuzzy wuzzy, black or blue because IMHO, M's tight claws have already transformed H into a total eunuch.



So, his new title - the Sussex Eunuch.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Could be the work of her BFF, British designer Misha Nonoo. Looks like *her signature "husband shirt"*.


I remember Sharon Stone wearing a simple Gap white men's button down with a couture long skirt at the Oscars or some awards show and she killed it.  She's the gold standard for that look, IMO.
MM just proves that she'll rip her husband's shirt off his back, no matter what.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some more details about her clothes and jewelry.  



Spoiler: What she wore








__





						Mad About Meghan
					

A blog about Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, covering her life, engagements, style, and everything else besides.




					madaboutmeghan.blogspot.com
				



Styling for the shoot saw crisp neutrals and olive green chosen. With thanks to the ID work of What Meghan Wore, Meghan's Mirror, Caroline and Danielle a number of those pieces have been identified. It appears Meghan wore the Demme turtleneck by The Row. It's available at Nordstrom and Saks Fifth Avenue.




It appears Meghan wore a pair of Victoria Beckham trousers (also available at Moda Operandi). For her white trousers, Laura suggests the Giorgio Armani Wide-Leg trousers. 





The Duchess wore a number of striking pieces of jewellery. On her left hand, Meghan sported her gorgeous Lorraine Schwartz ring. Meghan also wore Diana's Cartier Tank watch and her Cartier Love and Jennifer Meyer tennis bracelets. 





Meghan accessorised with Shiffon's Duet Pinky Ring - a *piece loved by Michelle *****, Serena Williams and Nicole Kidman. *





The brand supports women with a portion of profits. More from People:


> *'She sports Shiffon's flagship Duet Pinky Ring, which features a tiny diamond beside a larger one to represent one woman supporting another through a "pinky promise." Shiffon also donates half of their profits to fund female empowerment grants.
> 
> Keeping with the Duchess of Sussex's commitment to sustainable fashion, the company's diamonds "are ethically sourced and follow conflict-free and socially responsible practices."
> 
> Shilpa Yarlagadda started the jewelry company in her Harvard dorm room with the mission to give women equal footing.
> 
> "Our mission at Shiffon is to close that gender gap, particularly in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is about taking action and learning quickly, and we want to give women the opportunity to do that while not being afraid to take risks or fail," Shiffon says on their website. "We are optimistic that we can begin making this change. Through our efforts, we aim to financially empower a million women across the globe by 2025."*


----------



## jennlt

There are actually seven covers for the Time100 most influential people and most of them are very accomplished. When the covers are counted by issues sold,  Six will probably moved down in the rankings to Seven.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Side eye to Winslet and Eilish. Still, no Dolly Parton.
IMO that is just tacky on Time’s part.



jennlt said:


> There are actually seven covers for the Time100 most influential people and most of them are very accomplished. When the covers are counted by issues sold,  Six will probably moved down in the rankings to Seven.
> View attachment 5196229


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and how many times had *MORPHINE* attended a Black Church here in LA?!? .. I would guess, NEVER (as far as I recall, she and her Doria belonged to some crunchy-granola "church" out here).  How many friends did she have that were friends-of-color? .. not many if I recall .. so, yet again, using that black card when it's convenient and/or to "send a message" a PATHETIC PEARL!


yes, she likes to use her WOC card but she does everything to look white - the fake hair, the PS....so she gets to have her cake and eat it


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Personally, to my eye, IMO, [please don’t kick me out, I *love* this thread], the pinky diamond ring looks gauche, tacky, awful.
> Why not just size up and put it on the right ring finger?  I know the pinky rings are very popular now, but a diamond?  Ick.


Correct


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Correct



Thank you. I posted that before I realized she is wearing 2 pinky diamond  rings.  Anyone else doing that?


----------



## Chanbal

melissatrv said:


> I don't understand how they can be Time's Persons of the Year.  In the business world, you only get rewarded for what you have actually achieved, not what you talked about doing.   As far as I can see all they did was bash their family, make accusations where "recollections vary", and a couple of articles.  Lightweight charity work such as handing out food or something one time.


See if this explanation sheds some light.


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> Yes, he was seen juggling them after MM ripped them off, remember?  Although, I think they'd be a lot worse for wear, and definitely not glitzy, because his juggling skills are as impressive as his groundswell of compassion he shows, and I'm sure they've been dropped all over the Montecito chicken coop.


EEWWW!  Lol!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> See if this explanation sheds some light.
> View attachment 5196249



Everyone loves a royal connection!  This [and Andy’s mess] happens because QE and Charles fail to act.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks so much for this info. Wow, indeed this is an interesting connection. *They own tv stations, too.
> Hidden agendas everywhere.-*
> 
> _The broadcasting division owns 15 television stations. Most of the company's stations are affiliated with CBS or Fox.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meredith Corporation - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


All's well with the world as long they don't transmit subliminal messages of "I love M" or try to convince everyone that she is charitable, compassionate, kind, blah, blah, etc.  It's a good thing I don't watch TV anymore. Still I wonder how much she would be willing to pay for such messages as nothing seems too abhorrent to her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Remind me again, where is his left knee?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> All's well with the world as long they don't transmit subliminal messages of "I love M" or try to convince everyone that she is charitable, compassionate, kind, blah, blah, etc.  It's a good thing I don't watch TV anymore. Still I wonder how much she would be willing to pay for such messages as nothing seems too abhorrent to her.



She’ll let Oprah and Gayle do it for her - because, ya know, _she is a duchess_.


----------



## Chanbal

I do need a haircut asap, should I try Hair by Harry?


----------



## bag-mania

Let me fix the chef's quote:
"They don't just opine. They run toward the struggle and exploit it for their own self-interests."


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remind me again, where is his left knee?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, his new title - *the Sussex Eunuch*.


 Thanks @CarryOn2020  Very clever and that brings it to #8 for you.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Great news for the heroin of this thread!   


_Holding up a pint and grinning at the Scarsdale Tavern, in Kensington, West London, Piers said: “*And I need to say a special thank you Meghan.* As we sit drinking now, it was five years ago I met her here.

“And I bet she was sitting there celebrating my departure from Good Morning Britain so this move will be the stuff of nightmares for her. So cheers Meghan!”_









						Piers says his Sun deal will give Meghan nightmares after she got him sacked
					

PIERS Morgan last night took a swipe at the Duchess of Sussex, saying she will be sweating about his new job. Six months after Meghan tried to get him fired from Good Morning Britain, Piers returne…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. I posted that before I realized she is wearing 2 pinky diamond  rings.  Anyone else doing that?
> 
> View attachment 5196247



The only 'pinky' ring I have ever worn is a tiny rg Victorian (antique not style) ring, originally set-in natural seed pearls which popped out, I reset with rubies. It was given to me when  was 10 - and now my little finger is the only one it fits. 

I also think that if you do the 'pinky' statement ring, it should be ideally be only on one finger, one hand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> The only 'pinky' ring I have ever worn is a tiny rg Victorian (antique not style) ring, originally set-in natural seed pearls which popped out, I reset with rubies. It was given to me when  was 10 - and now my little finger is the only one it fits.
> 
> I also think that if you do the 'pinky' statement ring, it should be ideally be only on one finger, one hand.



Exactly, unless the ring has significant, heirloom-level, meaning, it’s a showy display of excess. IMO.
I didn’t realize her left hand, pinky ring is a favorite of Michelle, Nicole, etc.

Okaaaay, I admit it, I am much too old for this stuff - here in the states,  the ring is symbol of empowerment, a pledge of self-love.
I’ll be quiet now.
https://tiphero.com/pinky-rings-meaning
and some very attractive signet rings: https://revereandco.com/


----------



## bag-mania

I am disappointed that some American publications are still doing their best to prop them up. _USAToday_ and even _Time_'s former fierce rival _Newsweek_ (which has fallen even lower than _Time_) both put out positive stories about H&M being on the _Time_ cover.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> The only 'pinky' ring I have ever worn is a tiny rg Victorian (antique not style) ring, originally set-in natural seed pearls which popped out, I reset with rubies. It was given to me when  was 10 - and now my little finger is the only one it fits.
> 
> I also think that if you do the 'pinky' statement ring, it should be ideally be only on one finger, one hand.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, unless the ring has significant, heirloom-level, meaning, it’s a showy display of excess. IMO.
> I didn’t realize her left hand, pinky ring is a favorite of Michelle, Nicole, etc.
> 
> Okaaaay, I admit it, I am much too old for this stuff - here in the states,  the ring is symbol of empowerment, a pledge of self-love.
> I’ll be quiet now.
> https://tiphero.com/pinky-rings-meaning
> and some very attractive signet rings: https://revereandco.com/



I like (ok, I love ) pinky rings, and they have been in and out of fashion since I remember. In the many (many ) years I have been exposed to pinky rings, I do not recall to ever seen two pinky rings used at the same time. And that beautiful big diamond in a pinky ring…


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, unless the ring has significant, heirloom-level, meaning, it’s a showy display of excess. IMO.
> I didn’t realize her left hand, pinky ring is a favorite of Michelle, Nicole, etc.
> 
> Okaaaay, I admit it, I am much too old for this stuff - here in the states,  the ring is symbol of empowerment, a pledge of self-love.
> I’ll be quiet now.
> https://tiphero.com/pinky-rings-meaning
> and some very attractive signet rings: https://revereandco.com/



Don't believe it. 

"Melody Godfred is an author and entrepreneur. She launched Fred and Far in 2016" (my underline). This 'tradition' goes back - wow- 5 years when someone had the brilliant idea of selling empowerment to women rather than women owning in within themselves. 

There was a very good article in Elle magazine a few of years ago about the latest trend of feminism being sold to women through fashion https://www.pressreader.com/uk/elle-uk/20181101/281668255907648

The right hand ring (the ones you buy yourself) how much a man should spend on his intended's E-ring, 'cognac' diamonds (brownish diamonds that were virtually worthless) black diamonds (usually only used for engineering) etc were all started by marketing depts and entrepreneurs to commercialise and invigorate the market. 

Self-love = self-love, can't be bought and doesn't need to be forcibly displayed


----------



## Lodpah

News today PC might step aside to let Prince William take the throne. If this is true Het Majesty the Queen sure knows how to play the long game.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> The right hand ring (the ones you buy yourself) how much a man should spend on his intended's E-ring, *'cognac' diamonds (brownish diamonds that were virtually worthless) *black diamonds (usually only used for engineering) etc were all started by marketing depts and entrepreneurs to commercialise and invigorate the market.



I wish I had been the genius who thought to market the dirty brown stones as “chocolate diamonds” and sell them for a bundle. Never underestimate how a good ad campaign can change long held viewpoints.


----------



## Betty-Lou

TIME really is money.

The *Smarmy Smarmets* on the cover. * "WTF"

*


----------



## CarryOn2020

love love these discussions!  Spot on, brilliant.

I, too, like the _look_ of pinky rings on some hands, but it takes the a certain type of hand for it to look good. Charles’s ring looks so uncomfortable. Plus, as in MM’s case, it looks pretentious, especially with the diamonds. Audrey Hepburn wore one that was perfection.  Of course, she looked good in anything.

@Lodpah  this needs to happen ASAP.  QE’s sons are too messed up.


----------



## Chanbal

_Laughing is the best medicine_, and we have a photo with therapeutic potential… FDA?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _Laughing is the best medicine_, and we have a photo with therapeutic potential… FDA?




“Looks good enough to bring down the monarchy“


----------



## Melocoton

Pinky rings on both fingers!  Hahah.  Gaudy!  The 80s are gone, honey.


----------



## Norm.Core

Omg. There’s so many comedy-gold posts here! 

Thanks to the Royal Crassness latest fail, this thread will hit 5,000 pages in a few days.


----------



## zinacef

meghan can’t make up her mind which ring she wants to show off—- so nouveau riche, has anybody seen major royals wore more than 1 significant ring?  just So cheap looking even though all of them are so so expensive. I’m sure she knows and hate reading all the comments and memes. Another group of new hires gonna be fired again! I wonder which temp agency they use.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

le_junkie said:


> Omg. There’s so many comedy-gold posts here!
> 
> Thanks to the Royal Crassness latest fail, this thread will hit 5,000 pages in a few days.


Maybe hours.  After moments of silence, the Montecitos decided to lounge their media comeback…


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


>




The Ducka$s in this version looks like Khloe Kartrashian before her weight loss


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Maybe hours.  After moments of silence, the Montecitos decided to lounge their media comeback…




Hazzie is returning to the UK at the end of Sept??? Ostensibly to do interviews for Netflix and Invictus Games????  
We will hit 10K pages by then.


----------



## Genie27

Bwahahaha when I saw that cover shot, my first thought was about merching all the jewels* - why else choose such an unflattering pose, if not to have the focus on all the tchotchkes.

*and the extensions.

Hairy the hairdresser indeed!
 Tresemme, tresseme, ooh la la….


----------



## bag-mania

Genie27 said:


> Bwahahaha when I saw that cover shot, my first thought was about merching all the jewels* - why else choose such an unflattering pose, if not to have the focus on all the tchotchkes.
> 
> *and the extensions.
> 
> Hairy the hairdresser indeed!
> Tresemme, tresseme, ooh la la….



Definitely. Within a few days we will see articles popping up telling us about the “special meaning” behind each piece of jewelry in the photo shoot, complete with convenient links so that you too can buy them!


----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> I do need a haircut asap, should I try Hair by Harry?
> View attachment 5196252



Omg. I’m dying here! I need a haircut too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Definitely. Within a few days we will see articles popping up telling us about the “special meaning” behind each piece of jewelry in the photo shoot, complete with convenient links so that you too can buy them!



Already posted - #73,919 - page 4928.
This thread is moving at warp-speed today


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remind me again, where is his left knee?


Up her butt.  That's why her legs are so far apart.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> The only 'pinky' ring I have ever worn is a tiny rg Victorian (antique not style) ring, originally set-in natural seed pearls which popped out, I reset with rubies. It was given to me when  was 10 - and now my little finger is the only one it fits.
> 
> I also think that if you do the 'pinky' statement ring, it should be ideally be only on one finger, one hand.


I feel her pinky rings are like her pretending to be the Mafioso.  "Kiss my ring, peasant."  And I'm so important, you must kiss both hands!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I wish I had been the genius who thought to market the dirty brown stones as “chocolate diamonds” and sell them for a bundle. Never underestimate how a good ad campaign can change long held viewpoints.


Yep, Kate Hudson got a "chocolate" diamond.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Up her butt.  That's why her legs are so far apart.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


>



Why does she look like Amy Schumer with a wig??


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Definitely. Within a few days we will see articles popping up telling us about the “special meaning” behind each piece of jewelry in the photo shoot, complete with convenient links so that you too can buy them!


Don't you mean "sweet nods"??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Don't you mean "sweet nods"??



Only if the pinky rings each represent one of the kids, Archie and the Invisible Girl.


----------



## Chanbal

Poetic!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Poetic!
> View attachment 5196557


Friar Tuck vs Burger King.


----------



## rose60610

About 15 years ago, I bought a man's yellow gold signet ring from Tiffany sized down to my pinky finger with my monogram. I like it but don't wear it too often. They added "shocks", beads on the inside so it'd hug my finger a bit more tightly. Everything Migraine does looks contrived and desperate.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, unless the ring has significant, heirloom-level, meaning, it’s a showy display of excess. IMO.
> I didn’t realize her left hand, pinky ring is a favorite of Michelle, Nicole, etc.
> 
> Okaaaay, I admit it, I am much too old for this stuff - here in the states,  the ring is symbol of empowerment, a pledge of self-love.
> I’ll be quiet now.
> https://tiphero.com/pinky-rings-meaning
> and some very attractive signet rings: https://revereandco.com/


I agree with you, they do look a bit mob boss when they have big stones in them. Apparently Oprah popularised the trend so the godfather connection makes sense- time to kiss the ring H&M   

of course, signet rings have been worn on the pinky and they were and are unique hand-carved pieces of family history and are a mile away from these disposable diamond things the celebs are wearing. Again I’d say, you are preaching sustainability but who is mining your diamonds & how long before it becomes passé & discarded?

As for this new imported symbolism, give me a break, buying myself jewellery is always an expression of self love isn’t it? Especially a right hand ring.


----------



## Chanbal

Another interesting analysis…


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> News today PC might step aside to let Prince William take the throne. If this is true Het Majesty the Queen sure knows how to play the long game.


I just can't see that happening. He's been waiting for more than half a century to ascend the throne, and even if it's only for a decade or so he will not pass it up. Unless there's more to the scandal with his former staffer than we know about.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. I posted that before I realized she is wearing 2 pinky diamond  rings.  Anyone else doing that?
> 
> View attachment 5196247


Diana wore pinky rings.  I remember she wore a Cartier trinity ring on her pinky too.  I remember considering it because I liked her day-to-day jewelry.  lol


----------



## Vintage Leather

Jayne1 said:


> Diana wore pinky rings.  I remember she wore a Cartier trinity ring on her pinky too.  I remember considering it because I liked her day-to-day jewelry.  lol





Diana wore a stack with a trinity band and a family signet ring. But she usually only wore one ring at a time, not one on each hand, and not multiple fingers


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thank you @Jayne1 and @Vintage Leather 
 I had forgotten Diana wore a signet ring, not a diamond one.
_Princess Diana wore a signet ring given to her by Charles before their wedding, and Meghan Markle and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, both have their own symbolic signet rings.









						The Fascinating History Behind the British Royal Family’s Favorite Ring
					

Royals from Prince Charles to Meghan Markle wear this defining jewel.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> I just can't see that happening. He's been waiting for more than half a century to ascend the throne, and even if it's only for a decade or so he will not pass it up. Unless there's more to the scandal with his former staffer than we know about.


I too don’t see him resigning it but I wonder whether it’d be in the best interests of the monarchy for him to do so. He’s never been mr popular especially compared to his mother & son and I do wonder whether the team are trying to force his hand a bit by letting some of these… indiscretions… slip.

The last thing the firm wants is another George the third/Prince regent scenario (of course this is exactly what’s happened to Charles.) Charles could easily live to 90 meaning W would start at retirement age too but given the fact men age much worse than women I doubt either he & W will carry off the elderly monarch look like QE has.


----------



## papertiger

Vintage Leather said:


> View attachment 5196589
> 
> Diana wore a stack with a trinity band and a family signet ring. But she usually only wore one ring at a time, not one on each hand, and not multiple fingers



and _just_ those


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Another interesting analysis…




@Maggie Muggins,  Harry the "handbag"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I've thought it before, but she really has a lot of sun damage. Also on her face and decolleté area.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, now that the pic is in-your-face big, could she have loaded up on even more jewelry? Channelling Lady CC: vulgar. 

And why is her wedding band in front of her e-ring, another hidden message?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And why is her wedding band in front of her e-ring, another hidden message?



 

 

When do they _ever_ do hidden?   

WE WISH!


----------



## xincinsin

melissatrv said:


> I don't understand how they can be Time's Persons of the Year.  In the business world, you only get rewarded for what you have actually achieved, *not what you talked about doing*.   As far as I can see all they did was bash their family, make accusations where "recollections vary", and a couple of articles.  Lightweight charity work such as handing out food or something one time.


Actually, all they talked about is what *others* should be doing. They are our moral signposts, telling the world how everyone else should feel and behave. Do as they say, not as they themselves do. Delusional, utterly delusional.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I hope this so called expert is wrong!
> This is likely why they paid all that money for the cove of Time.
> View attachment 5195570
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time magazine cover shows 'political future' for Meghan, says expert
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S appearance on the front cover of Time Magazine, along with husband Prince Harry, points to a "political future", according to a top royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Political career when she is so thin-skinned? Maybe the plastic surgeons are covering her with extra layers of skin...
Vote for me or I'll cry?
Vote for me or I'll call you racist?


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Actually, all they talked about is what *others* should be doing. They are our moral signposts, telling the world how everyone else should feel and behave. Do as they say, not as they themselves do. Delusional, utterly delusional.


In the spirit of doing as they do,  am gonna fish out all my bling today - currently wearing a rock star tshirt , bling will look awesome with Flying V guitar


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've thought it before, but she really has a lot of sun damage. Also on her face and decolleté area.


so her right hand pinky ring is a larger diamond than what most of her stans could afford for their engagement ring....yet where is the money going as far as charity?  why are they getting credit for being such humanitarians? makes no sense


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> so her right hand pinky ring is a larger diamond than what most of her stans could afford for their engagement ring....yet where is the money going as far as charity?  why are they getting credit for being such humanitarians? makes no sense


They will let slip through Scabies and other friendly media that the diamonds and jewellery were given to them by people who appreciate how much they have done for the world despite their personal struggles with fame and fortune.


----------



## Aimee3

A few words:  *prince puke and his pukess.*
Could you imagine the reaction of that couple if the Queen does bypass Charles?  Better hope the pukess doesn’t have access to nuclear weapons!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Only if the pinky rings each represent one of the kids, Archie and the Invisible Girl.


An interesting post on what is becoming an infamous pinky ring. 

The rumor is that the big diamond used on the pinky ring was part of diamonds allegedly gifted to the couple by a mysterious donor from the Middle East. They denied this and informed that the ring was sourced by a stylist directly from the designer, but later clarified that they were referring to the other pinky ring (the cheap one). In other words, they didn't clarify the provenience of the stunning diamond that should never have been used on a pinky ring.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so her right hand pinky ring is a larger diamond than what most of her stans could afford for their engagement ring....*yet where is the money going as far as charity?  *why are they getting credit for being such humanitarians? makes no sense



They deal in charity in the abstract, theoretical sense, not in the writing a big, fat check way.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> A few words:  *prince puke and his pukess.*
> Could you imagine the reaction of that couple if the Queen does bypass Charles?  Better hope the pukess doesn’t have access to nuclear weapons!


The couple would be furious imo. It would end the issues with the titles for their kids, since they would never be the grandkids of a monarch.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> An interesting post on what is becoming an infamous pinky ring.
> 
> The rumor is that the big diamond used on the pinky ring was part of diamonds allegedly gifted to the couple by a mysterious donor from the Middle East. They denied this and informed that the ring was sourced by a stylist directly from the designer, but later clarified that they were referring to the other pinky ring (the cheap one). In other words, they didn't clarify the provenience of the stunning diamond that should never have been used on a pinky ring.




Is is possible the ring isn't hers, she just borrowed it for the photo shoot?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, now that the pic is in-your-face big, could she have loaded up on even more jewelry? Channelling Lady CC: vulgar.
> 
> And why is her wedding band in front of her e-ring, another hidden message?



Lady C is older and the big stones work well for her. MM was wearing beautiful pieces, but the way she combined them looked tacky. 

However, I don't think there was a hidden message on the wedding band. The diamond on her e-ring is relatively heavy, so the ring might feel a little loose; the wedding band in front gives a little more support.


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> Is is possible the ring isn't hers, she just borrowed it for the photo shoot?
> 
> View attachment 5196793



nope. It was clarified that the borrowed ring is the smaller pinky ring. The other pinky ring has unknown origins


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> An interesting post on what is becoming an infamous pinky ring.
> 
> The rumor is that the big diamond used on the pinky ring was part of diamonds allegedly gifted to the couple by a mysterious donor from the Middle East. They denied this and informed that the ring was sourced by a stylist directly from the designer, but later clarified that they were referring to the other pinky ring (the cheap one). In other words, they didn't clarify the provenience of the stunning diamond that should never have been used on a pinky ring.



Sourced by a stylist. Translate: borrowed for the shoot.
So, not her regular jewelry, a prop.
Interesting - someone thought the bonus bling added gravitas ?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Is is possible the ring isn't hers, she just borrowed it for the photo shoot?
> 
> View attachment 5196793


See the 2nd part of the post. They clarified later that the ring borrowed for the photo shoot was the small pinky ring, not the one with the big stone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Here is one of the articles on the 'infamous' pinky ring @bag-mania

_Questions about Meghan Markle's jewelery look set to overshadow her appearance on the cover of Time magazine, amid a growing mystery surrounding the ring on her right pinky finger.

Yesteday, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle denied claims that the ring, made by celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz and reportedly worth an estimated $62,000, was fashioned with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East. 

They said the ring was sourced by a stylist on the shoot directly from the designer and that there was no link to a mystery donor in the Middle East. 

*But in a spectacular U-turn, they later rolled back the denial, and clarified that they were referring only to a ring on Meghan's  left hand - a $525 pinky ring from Shiffon, which is meant to represent women's empowerment

There was no further mention made of the Lorraine Schwartz ring in question on her right hand, begging the question of whether Meghan has something to hide about the provenance of the diamond, which was first seen on her finger in October 2020.*

If the diamonds did indeed come from the Middle East, it's not clear if Meghan received the gift while she was still a working royal, or after she performed her final official duties in early March 2021. 

Although Buckingham Palace keeps an official list gifts, only those received while on duty in the UK or overseas are made public, and there is no record of Meghan being given any diamonds during her travels as a working royal. She did not visit the Middle East in any official capacity, but it's possible she could have visited privately.  

It comes after Meghan was criticized earlier this year when it emerged she wore a pair of dazzling diamond earrings on her tour of Fiji in October 2018 that were a wedding gift from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who's been accused of ordering the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi…_









						Riddle of Meghan's pinky ring made with 'gifted Middle East diamonds'
					

Yesteday, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle denied claims that the Duchess wore a ring made with diamonds gifted from the MIddle East for her Time cover, but they have since rolled back.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

A valid point!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Here is one of the articles on the 'infamous' pinky ring @bag-mania
> 
> _Questions about Meghan Markle's jewelery look set to overshadow her appearance on the cover of Time magazine, amid a growing mystery surrounding the ring on her right pinky finger.
> 
> Yesteday, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle denied claims that the ring, made by celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz and reportedly worth an estimated $62,000, was fashioned with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East.
> 
> They said the ring was sourced by a stylist on the shoot directly from the designer and that there was no link to a mystery donor in the Middle East.
> 
> *But in a spectacular U-turn, they later rolled back the denial, and clarified that they were referring only to a ring on Meghan's  left hand - a $525 pinky ring from Shiffon, which is meant to represent women's empowerment
> 
> There was no further mention made of the Lorraine Schwartz ring in question on her right hand, begging the question of whether Meghan has something to hide about the provenance of the diamond, which was first seen on her finger in October 2020.*
> 
> If the diamonds did indeed come from the Middle East, it's not clear if Meghan received the gift while she was still a working royal, or after she performed her final official duties in early March 2021.
> 
> Although Buckingham Palace keeps an official list gifts, only those received while on duty in the UK or overseas are made public, and there is no record of Meghan being given any diamonds during her travels as a working royal. She did not visit the Middle East in any official capacity, but it's possible she could have visited privately.
> 
> It comes after Meghan was criticized earlier this year when it emerged she wore a pair of dazzling diamond earrings on her tour of Fiji in October 2018 that were a wedding gift from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who's been accused of ordering the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Riddle of Meghan's pinky ring made with 'gifted Middle East diamonds'
> 
> 
> Yesteday, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle denied claims that the Duchess wore a ring made with diamonds gifted from the MIddle East for her Time cover, but they have since rolled back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Okay, it's hard to keep up with all of this stuff.  There isn't any doubt then that that was the ring made from the gifted diamonds. It was reported openly last year. From the article below: Page Six has now been told that the brunette, in fact, turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.

And how many times did her engagement ring have to be reset before she was happy with it? I know it was reset once within a short time of them getting married but it looks like it was done again last year: The prince also took the opportunity to have Schwartz resize and reset Meghan’s engagement ring — which features two stones that once belonged to Diana — with a new delicate diamond band.









						Meghan Markle’s pinky ring is a custom Lorraine Schwartz design
					

Some royal watchers speculated it could be Princess Diana’s famous aquamarine ring, but the diamond bauble was made just for Meghan.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Betty-Lou said:


> TIME really is money.
> 
> The *Smarmy Smarmets* on the cover. * "WTF"
> 
> *


@Betty-Lou Welcome to the H&M thread and thanks for creating the very appropriate nickname *Smarmy Smarmets* to describe the despicable duo and as such you have joined The (endless) List where the collected nicknames are kept. The List will be posted as soon as our clever members run out of ideas which apparently won't happen in the near future.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

le_junkie said:


> Omg. There’s so many comedy-gold posts here!
> 
> Thanks to the *Royal Crassness* latest fail, this thread will hit 5,000 pages in a few days.


Thanks @le_junkie for your 3rd very apt nickname 'Royal Crassness' that entitles you to a gold ribbon.


----------



## Sina08

Chanbal said:


> Wow, this is a clever observation!
> View attachment 5195129



I‘m countless pages behind, so probably would have read about the Time cover sometime next week if it weren’t for my husband, who made me laugh out loud in the midst of a waiting room full of people with this exact meme! 
Honestly, I thought this was a joke until I came here for your comments.
And I still consider it a joke. They are a joke, no memes needed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> *The Ducka$s* in this version looks like Khloe Kartrashian before her weight loss


Thanks @EverSoElusive for your #5 nickname 'The Ducka$s' aka the money-hungry M. Congratulations Nickname Master.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Genie27 said:


> Bwahahaha when I saw that cover shot, my first thought was about merching all the jewels* - why else choose such an unflattering pose, if not to have the focus on all the tchotchkes.
> 
> *and the extensions.
> 
> *Hairy the hairdresser* indeed!
> Tresemme, tresseme, ooh la la….


 Thanks @Genie27 for your #3 nickname 'Hairy the hairdresser' that entitles you to a gold ribbon.  



PS I should've started earlier today as it seems everyone is wearing their creative beanies (not provided by M) lately.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Friar Tuck vs Burger King.


Friar Tuck was entertaining. H not so much!


----------



## marietouchet

RING GATE  .... 

I doubt the idea was to spend $1.5M on snaps so we can gossip about her $385,000 worth of baubles

EPIC FAIL


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5196797



 Spectacular U-turn  

Perfect way to describe this despicable  duo.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> You really think they're glitzy???



Probably sweaty.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I hope this so called expert is wrong!
> This is likely why they paid all that money for the cove of Time.
> View attachment 5195570
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time magazine cover shows 'political future' for Meghan, says expert
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S appearance on the front cover of Time Magazine, along with husband Prince Harry, points to a "political future", according to a top royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Uggh - this again?!?! .. I don't believe this AT ALL!  Seriously, think about it .. if *MEATHEAD* couldn't even take the "heat" from the British press, how is she going to take the heat from the US press in regards to a campaign?  Does she think that she'll be able to word-salad the media, because we all know that she would *never* allow anyone else to write anything for her!  If her opponent calls her out for something, would she say he/she is racist (that would be a hard thing to do if ****** were to call her out, and ****** certainly has the reputation to do something like that)!!!  If *MEGA-NUTTER* thinks she can dip her toes into the political arena, then she is really THAT stupid!


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Probably sweaty.


LOLOL reminds me of Schweddy Balls.  Enjoy:


----------



## CeeJay

le_junkie said:


> Thank you @Maggie Muggins for my Star.
> 
> I was able to keep my trap shut from commenting through soooo much of their nonsense since that interview but the ridiculousness of this Time cover finally broke my resolve.
> 
> Much respect to all the lively ladies in this thread who’s been at it since the very beginning.


Hi @le_junkie .. good to see you here as well as our beloved Balenciaga threads!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL reminds me of Schweddy Balls.  Enjoy:




I was going to post it but I hate Alec Baldwin so I didn't.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> RING GATE  ....
> 
> I doubt the idea was to spend $1.5M on snaps so we can gossip about her $385,000 worth of baubles
> 
> EPIC FAIL


Well I think we’re supposed to be discussing how wonderful & charitable  our betters truly are but people are buying that even less than the tacky rings and the Tintin trousers.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. I posted that before I realized she is wearing 2 pinky diamond  rings.  Anyone else doing that?
> 
> View attachment 5196247


Well, the large-sized emerald one (Lorraine Schwartz I presume) is just F-UGLY; way too big a diamond to be a "pinky" ring per se (IMO) .. and that had to cost-a-plenty given that it's Lorraine's work (way too expensive for IMO ho-hum jewelry).  

I do wear 2 Diamond Pinkies, but that is also because they are my design and my fabrication: 
1.  Left-hand:  traditional solitaire in 18k Royal Yellow Gold setting 
2.  Right-hand:  Grey kite Diamond in 18k Rose Gold setting


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> @Maggie Muggins,  *Harry the "handbag"*


 Thanks @papertiger for your #2 nickname; Harry the "handbag" has been added to The List.


----------



## tiktok

Interesting to see how the naive US audience sees them (ETA: Look at the comments too):


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Uggh - this again?!?! .. I don't believe this AT ALL!  Seriously, think about it .. if *MEATHEAD* couldn't even take the "heat" from the British press, how is she going to take the heat from the US press in regards to a campaign?  Does she think that she'll be able to word-salad the media, because we all know that she would *never* allow anyone else to write anything for her!  If her opponent calls her out for something, would she say he/she is racist (that would be a hard thing to do if ****** were to call her out, and ****** certainly has the reputation to do something like that)!!!  If *MEGA-NUTTER* thinks she can dip her toes into the political arena, then she is really THAT stupid!


You make very good points, but this is our media:


----------



## Sol Ryan

tiktok said:


> Interesting to see how the naive US audience sees them (ETA: Look at the comments too):




I still can’t get over Harry’s eyes… it’s like they pushed them closer together…. What kind of weird photoshop is this?


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @papertiger for your #2 nickname; Harry the "handbag" has been added to The List.


I've added quite a few as of late, did you not see them (or were they already added)??  Thanks @Maggie Muggins , you're the best!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> You make very good points, but this is our media:
> View attachment 5197039


For now, yes .. but the gloves would be off if she attempted to go into the political arena.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Lady C is older and the big stones work well for her. MM was wearing beautiful pieces, but the way she combined them looked tacky.


Agree - and also Lady C's jewelry looks real, not costume, so there is a mature woman, or old money appeal when she wears it.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Well, the large-sized emerald one (Lorraine Schwartz I presume) is just F-UGLY; way too big a diamond to be a "pinky" ring per se (IMO) .. and that had to cost-a-plenty given that it's Lorraine's work (way too expensive for IMO ho-hum jewelry).
> 
> I do wear 2 Diamond Pinkies, but that is also because they are my design and my fabrication:
> 1.  Left-hand:  traditional solitaire in 18k Royal Yellow Gold setting
> 2.  Right-hand:  Grey kite Diamond in 18k Rose Gold setting
> 
> View attachment 5197022
> View attachment 5197023


All beautiful! 
the bottom one


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> For now, yes .. but the gloves would be off if she attempted to go into the political arena.


I wish I had your optimism.  We still don't know what she wanted from that meeting with a certain governor. So to be safe, I would prefer that she stops attempting… Her ambition is a lot bigger than her capabilities and this is usually a dangerous combination imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> An interesting post on what is becoming an infamous pinky ring.
> 
> The rumor is that the big diamond used on the pinky ring was part of diamonds allegedly gifted to the couple by a mysterious donor from the Middle East. They denied this and informed that the ring was sourced by a stylist directly from the designer, but later clarified that they were referring to the other pinky ring (the cheap one). In other words, they didn't clarify the provenience of the stunning diamond that should never have been used on a pinky ring.




So either another blood diamond (using the term loosely) or they are not supposed to even have it as it was either present of a head of state (so property of the crown) or if running with that wild "donation" story, they are not supposed to accept "donations" in jewelry form.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> I've added quite a few as of late, did you not see them (or were they already added)??  Thanks @Maggie Muggins , you're the best!


@CeeJay as off your above post, you have 9 suggestions for which you have received a Gold Star, Gold Ribbon, Nickname Master and Gold Medal. Your nicknames appear on the alphabetized list as such:
Hap-Hazza [CeeJay]
Hapless [CeeJay]
Henpeck (Harry) [CeeJay]
Malodorous (Meghan) [CeeJay]
Master Manipulator [CeeJay]
Menace [CeeJay]
Meg-a-lo-maniac [CeeJay]
Prince Harzardous [CeeJay] 
Vainglorious [CeeJay]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Well, the large-sized emerald one (Lorraine Schwartz I presume) is just F-UGLY; way too big a diamond to be a "pinky" ring per se (IMO) .. and that had to cost-a-plenty given that it's Lorraine's work (way too expensive for IMO ho-hum jewelry).
> 
> I do wear 2 Diamond Pinkies, but that is also because they are my design and my fabrication:
> 1.  Left-hand:  traditional solitaire in 18k Royal Yellow Gold setting
> 2.  Right-hand:  Grey kite Diamond in 18k Rose Gold setting
> 
> View attachment 5197022
> View attachment 5197023



I didn't know how much I love diamonds and rose gold together until recently. Beautiful!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of jewelry, I urgently need a rich British husband who buys my birthday and Christmas gifts at Hancock's, London. I promise to not try to ruin my in-laws.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I wish I had your optimism.  We still don't know what she wanted from that meeting with a certain governor. So to be safe, I would prefer that she stops attempting… Her ambition is a lot bigger than her capabilities and this is usually a dangerous combination imo.


Well, if she did attempt that, I swear I would get a journalists badge and .. well, just let her answer my questions.  I do have 2 journalist friends and one covers the Government and campaigns; she would have to get past him and I don't think she would be able to as he is a tough nut.  My other friend, while she doesn't normally cover politics, would love to get an assignment covering her and she would also not be "kind" to MORPHINE if she was stupid!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So either another blood diamond (using the term loosely) or they are not supposed to even have it as it was either present of a head of state (so property of the crown) or if running with that wild "donation" story, they are not supposed to accept "donations" in jewelry form.


The jewelry pieces that we saw are possibly only a small sample of what can be found in Montecito. It would be interesting to know where the infamous earrings are. It's possible that the rumors about her refusing to return some pieces are untrue…  



Spoiler: The Missing Jewelry! 



https://www.archyde.com/meghan-mark...ry-from-the-palace-he-refuses-to-return-them/


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't know how much I love diamonds and rose gold together until recently. Beautiful!


You know, it's funny because I used to really dislike Rose Gold, but I've fallen in love with it again .. and especially when using "cool" gemstones because I like the warm/cool combination.  Likewise, while I do not work in White metals (White Gold or Platinum), I once had a commission where I created a Platinum ring that had a gorgeous Ruby with it .. again, love the play of warm & cold together!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Political career when she is so thin-skinned? Maybe the plastic surgeons are covering her with extra layers of skin...
> Vote for me or I'll cry?
> Vote for me or I'll call you racist?


If M tries to use the racist card during an election, she should be reminded that BO was elected to two terms in spite and despite the racists who voted against him and the same criteria should apply to her.

ET correct a typo


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of jewelry, I urgently need a rich British husband who buys my birthday and Christmas gifts at Hancock's, London. I promise to not try to ruin my in-laws.


HEE HEE HEE .. yeah, me too .. except I would go to Harvey Nichols as they used to have a fantastic collection of contemporary jewelry, especially in their London store (although I have to say that their Edinburgh store was pretty fantastic too)!!


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> If M tries to use the racist card during an election, she should be reminded that BO was elected to two terms in spite and despite the racists who vote against him and the same criteria should apply to her.


Ah - excellent point, but I doubt that she would be able to help herself .. you know, she is such a victim of so many things!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> A few words:  *prince puke and his pukess.*
> Could you imagine the reaction of that couple if the Queen does bypass Charles?  Better hope the pukess doesn’t have access to nuclear weapons!


 Thanks @Aimee3 for the nicknames prince puke and his pukess. Welcome to The List.


----------



## TimeToShop

Hope this shows up. From Murky Meg. Yikes.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The jewelry pieces that we saw are possibly only a small sample of what can be found in Montecito. It would be interesting to know where the infamous earrings are. It's possible that the rumors about her refusing to return some pieces are untrue…
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Missing Jewelry!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.archyde.com/meghan-mark...ry-from-the-palace-he-refuses-to-return-them/


I don’t believe that she took off with anything of value. If she had the aquamarine ring, she would wear it. I think that was returned to the vault where everything is nicely locked up.   I think the Spencer’s control Diana‘s jewelry and they fully realize the value of it.   Not just monetary,  but historical.   A gold bracelet, a watch and a few diamonds are nothing. Anything Diana wore as Princess of Wales will go to Kate  Earl Spencer side eyed Meghan from the start. He won’t let things go easily.


----------



## TimeToShop

Meant to include this too


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> Hope this shows up. From Murky Meg. Yikes.



The problem is that she thinks the rest of us are stupid and remember nothing. Wrong.


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> Meant to include this too



Enty is confabulating. More likely the ring was made with stones of murky provenance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Well, the large-sized emerald one (Lorraine Schwartz I presume) is just F-UGLY; way too big a diamond to be a "pinky" ring per se (IMO) .. and that had to cost-a-plenty given that it's Lorraine's work (way too expensive for IMO ho-hum jewelry).
> 
> I do wear 2 Diamond Pinkies, but that is also because they are my design and my fabrication:
> 1.  Left-hand:  traditional solitaire in 18k Royal Yellow Gold setting
> 2.  Right-hand:  Grey kite Diamond in 18k Rose Gold setting
> 
> View attachment 5197022
> View attachment 5197023



Your designs are gorgeous!   
They perfectly show the difference between a ring designed to be worn on the little finger, our dear pinky, and one designed as a ”right-hand ring finger“ ring, but sized down.  Her emerald-cut(?) solitaire looks like it should be worn on the ring finger, but she didn’t want to wait for it to be re-sized so she sticks it on her pinky.  If the ring came from the stylist’s inventory, then MM would not be able to resize it [because she does not own it].  Something about the dastardly duo tells me they pay for very little.  Hazzie is accustomed to the _royal_ way, i. e., expect others to pay.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like she does own it - screenshot of her birthday video


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

TimeToShop said:


> Hope this shows up. From Murky Meg. Yikes.



EXACTLY this, and they start to believe their own lies after a while (this was my Father).  See, that is what would get her if she ever tried to campaign because (well at least they used to) they'll fact-check and ~BOOM~, she'll get caught!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Really???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Earl Spencer side eyed Meghan from the start.



Please share, were there any leaks what he really thought?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> Meant to include this too




I don't believe that, but it sure is entertaining.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really???




I need to know what kind of info.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I need to know what kind of info.



Do Cali DLs ask for race or ethnicity?


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Aimee3 for the nicknames prince puke and his pukess. Welcome to The List.
> View attachment 5197102


Thank you so much Maggie.  I am truly honored to have made your list!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do Cali DLs ask for race or ethnicity?


Not in California.  Race is not on the license.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe we are reading it incorrectly?

An excerpt:
_The Time profile is so dripping in Harry and Meghan cliche it could be mistaken for parody. The uber-privileged couple representing ‘equality’. The private jet loving Prince symbolising ‘nature’. The attention-grabbing, self-obsessed Duke and Duchess espousing self-sacrifice. What’s bizarre is that Time magazine takes this stuff seriously enough to print. 

But maybe Time has it right, after all. The Duke and Duchess are certainly influential and very 2021 indeed. They epitomise today’s woke elite: fantastically wealthy and privileged yet comfortable preaching to the masses about the importance of sacrifice and compassion. Like the Californian celeb-set they have bought into, they co-opt the language of political struggle to direct attention to their own moral superiority over the plebs. 

It’s no coincidence that the issues Harry and Meghan choose to highlight – race, gender, mental health, the environment – can all sit comfortably alongside immense privilege. To the woke elite, social class and wealth inequalities are barely worth considering. If pushed, they shy away from talking about economic or political solutions – Heaven forbid! – but prefer discussing the need for yet more ‘compassion’. They’ll happily be photographed demonstrating equality, or make a speech via Zoom, but actually rescind the titles and inherited wealth, give up the private jet flights and the designer clothes? Not on your life. Charges of hypocrisy never land on this thick-skinned group who seem to think genuine lifestyle change is reserved for the little people. 

So perhaps Time magazine deserves praise for publishing such sycophancy. It offers us yet more hilarious insight into the bizarre world-view of the woke elite. Harry and Meghan’s loyal fans will no doubt lap it up. The rest of us, meanwhile, can enjoy a laugh at the oblivious duo’s expense._


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please share, were there any leaks what he really thought?


He told Harry the same thing that William did, i.e. take it slow and get to know her.  As the veteran of three marriages, Spencer should have learned something.  I recall that his father did not want him to marry his first wife.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Your designs are gorgeous!
> They perfectly show the difference between a ring designed to be worn on the little finger, our dear pinky, and one designed as a ”right-hand ring finger“ ring, but sized down.  Her emerald-cut(?) solitaire looks like it should be worn on the ring finger, but she didn’t want to wait for it to be re-sized so she sticks it on her pinky.  If the ring came from the stylist’s inventory, then MM would not be able to resize it [because she does not own it].  Something about the dastardly duo tells me they pay for very little.  Hazzie is accustomed to the _royal_ way, i. e., expect others to pay.


Regarding resizing.  I think the main reason her engagement was changed was because it had to be resized. Given the weight gain with her pregnancy, the ring was too tight.  Perfect opportunity for her to change the setting.  Standard ring size is a 6.  If she is right handed, it is probably too small for a right hand rind so the default is the pinky.  I do think there was the element of copying Diana by wearing a pinky ring as well.


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> He told Harry the same thing that William did, i.e. take it slow and get to know her.  As the veteran of three marriages, Spencer should have learned something.  I recall that his father did not want him to marry his first wife.



Yet for some reason he got spared the wrath.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


>




Pretty sure he did not say he knowingly sabotaged the wedding but that he was used, so not sure where that POS comes from.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(But also, I'm positive if those pictures had never been taken his daughter would have found another reason to discard of him.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yet for some reason he got spared the wrath.



We don’t know what happened behind closed doors.  Seems to me MM should have worn the Spencer tiara - or is that a privilege granted to Spencer girls, not the sons?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spectacular U-turn
> 
> Perfect way to describe this despicable  duo.


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #9 nickname 'Spectacular U-turn' that describes the many times they've had to backtrack and explain their many lies and deceptions, probably known as Megsplain.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yet for some reason he got spared the wrath.


Because he was older and his uncle.  He viewed him with respect.  Given Spencer's marital track record, he should have listened lolol!  Plus, he will always remember Spencer's rant at Diana's funeral.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> We don’t know what happened behind closed doors.  Seems to me MM should have worn the Spencer tiara - or is that a privilege granted to Spencer girls, not the sons?



I should have said public wrath then. They have not been exactly private with their feelings towards Charles and William.

Regarding the tiara, Spencer women and Spencer brides who don't have their own family tiara, so Raptor wouldn't qualify.

But also, isn't it funny how it's always drama around her...or was it ever discussed Kate should have worn the Spencer tiara instead of having to borrow one of the Queen's?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> We don’t know what happened behind closed doors.  Seems to me MM should have worn the Spencer tiara - or is that a privilege granted to Spencer girls, not the sons?


I suspect it was  more protocol that The Queen should provide for an heir on the list.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I should have said public wrath then. They have not been exactly private with their feelings towards Charles and William.
> 
> Regarding the tiara, Spencer women and Spencer brides who don't have their own family tiara, so Raptor wouldn't qualify.
> 
> But also, isn't it funny how it's always drama around her...or was it ever discussed Kate should have worn the Spencer tiara instead of having to borrow one of the Queen's?



The Spencer Tiara is a *family heirloom*
The century-old diamond-encrusted Spencer Tiara was reportedly made out of several different elements that were put together by Garrard in the 1930s, including the central part which was a wedding gift to Diana's grandmother Lady Cynthia Hamilton



This is  Celia,daughter of  Diana's older sister.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The Spencer Tiara is a *family heirloom*



I'm slightly confused, isn't that exactly what I said? MM didn't marry into the Spencer family.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pretty sure he did not say he knowingly sabotaged the wedding but that he was used, so not sure where that POS comes from.


It was to sabotage Thomas, was it not?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm slightly confused, isn't that exactly what I said? MM didn't marry into the Spencer family.


This is what you wrote:


_Regarding the tiara, Spencer women and Spencer brides *who *don't have their own family tiara, so Raptor wouldn't qualify. _

I  apologize.  I completely did not see the words *who don't!  *I mistakenly read it as the Spencers had no family tiara!  Put me in the corner!

EDIT: the lemonade from my lemon of an error is that I got to post pictures of the Spencer tiara. lol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> It was to sabotage Thomas, was it not?



I thought so too, but that snippet made it sound like some random outsider wanted to give the couple trouble, but then the Stan chose to read it as Thomas admitting to wanting to harm his daughter? Honestly, at this point I feel that whole bunch is slightly crazy.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I should have said public wrath then. They have not been exactly private with their feelings towards Charles and William.
> 
> Regarding the tiara, Spencer women and Spencer brides who don't have their own family tiara, so Raptor wouldn't qualify.
> 
> But also, isn't it funny how it's always drama around her...or was it ever discussed Kate should have worn the Spencer tiara instead of having to borrow one of the Queen's?


It's only Spencer women, or a woman marrying the Earl or Viscount. The next non Spencer woman entitled to wear it will be the woman Louis, Charles Spencer son marries,as Louis is heir. 
I don't think Catherine or Megan had any entitlement to wear it. Same will go for any son of Diana's sisters, their brides wouldn't be entitled either.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don’t believe that she took off with anything of value. If she had the aquamarine ring, she would wear it. I think that was returned to the vault where everything is nicely locked up.   I think the Spencer’s control Diana‘s jewelry and they fully realize the value of it.   Not just monetary,  but historical.   A gold bracelet, a watch and a few diamonds are nothing. Anything Diana wore as Princess of Wales will go to Kate  Earl Spencer side eyed Meghan from the start. He won’t let things go easily.


I certainly believe that she wasn't able to bring all the pieces she wished to have.   However, rumors exist that very costly jewelry has never been returned… The article on the post is not the only one on the subject.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> It's only Spencer women, or a woman marrying the Earl or Viscount. The next non Spencer woman entitled to wear it will be the woman Louis, Charles Spencer son marries,as Louis is heir.
> I don't think Catherine or Megan had any entitlement to wear it. Same will go for any son of Diana's sisters, their brides wouldn't be entitled either.



That's what I said. I just find it funny how there's drama around Raptor even if it's a non-issue


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I certainly believe that she wasn't able to bring all the pieces she wished to have.   However, rumors exist that very costly jewelry has never been returned… The article on the post is not the only one on the subject.



Like the Vladimir?


----------



## Betty-Lou

Maggie Muggins  Thank you I'm honored!

Welcome to the H&M thread and thanks for creating the very appropriate nickname *Smarmy Smarmets* to describe the despicable duo and as such you have joined The (endless) List where the collected nicknames are kept. The List will be posted as soon as our clever members run out of ideas which apparently won't happen in the near future.
View attachment 5196834

[/QUOTE]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't believe that, but it sure is entertaining.


Perhaps a yachting present from a Middle Eastern guest? Then she wouldn't be lying about the stone's origin, just glossing over the facts. She seems quite good at it.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do Cali DLs ask for race or ethnicity?


That seems suspect. I've never heard of such a thing.


----------



## amante

Aww, TIME is struggling more than other media giants in this era but in its defense I sincerely doubt that TIME received money to put the two on the cover, it's just that MM & H's PR reps are running such a well-oiled campaign I imagine it's hard on TIME's part to turn them down (or away!).


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like the Vladimir?


haha, the crown jewels were unfortunately off limits. However, Diana had many pieces in her personal collection that were passed to her sons. If MM was able to get Hazz's pieces, she is fine. 









						As Remainder Of Princess Diana's Estate Passes To Harry, Troubling Questions Remain
					

Yesterday marked Prince Harry's 30th birthday. His mother, the iconic Lady Di, passed away just over 17 years ago, following the tragic crash as Diana and Dodi Fayed sped away from paparazzi in France.  What was so special about Harry's 30th birthday (other than the fact that he's still single...




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> ...a woman marrying the Earl or Viscount.


So 3 women got to wear it. lol


----------



## amante

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (But also, I'm positive if those pictures had never been taken his daughter would have found another reason to discard of him.)


He was already out of her life, remember? He's never met his daughter's husband, ever. Not when his daughter was dating the guy, not after the engagement, and definitely not after the wedding.

The apple does not fall far from the tree, first he says he went along with the photographs for money and now he's flip flopping his story to aggrandize himself. Delusions of grandeur. Like father, like daughter.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Really???




What a sloppy lie! A quick Google search by anyone from anywhere on the planet can easily dispprove what this Shallon Lester said.


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> Aww, TIME is struggling more than other media giants in this era but in its defense I sincerely doubt that TIME received money to put the two on the cover, it's just that MM & H's PR reps are running such a well-oiled campaign I imagine it's hard on TIME's part to turn them down (or away!).



Considering that this one photo and accompanying story have made them a global laughing stock for the last 4 days, IMO this “well-oiled campaign“ has lots of squeaks. Their lies continue to haunt them. Of course, ymmv.


----------



## amante

CarryOn2020 said:


> Considering that this one photo and accompanying story have made them a global laughing stock for the last 4 days, IMO this “well-oiled campaign“ has lots of squeaks. Their lies continue to haunt them. Of course, ymmv.


Well...you know how the saying goes: bad publicity is still publicity. MM and her team know that attention is today's most important currency. They've probably accepted that she is polarizing that some people will laugh at them and others will defend her but at the end of the day, we're still talking about her, are we not?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Considering that this one photo and accompanying story have made them a global laughing stock for the last 4 days, IMO this “well-oiled campaign“ has lots of squeaks. Their lies continue to haunt them. Of course, ymmv.


What do you think about this article? 









						Queen video-called Harry on birthday, said she's proud of his latest feat
					

The monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely




					www.geo.tv


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> Well...you know how the saying goes: bad publicity is still publicity. MM and her team know that attention is today's most important currency. They've probably accepted that she is polarizing that some people will laugh at them and others will defend her but at the end of the day, we're still talking about her, are we not?



And we are still talking about JeffE, Charles Manson, and a whole bunch of other criminals, liars, etc. 
Bad publicity is bad publicity.   Remember, it was P.T. Barnum who said bad publicity is still publicity.  He is the one who said there’s a sucker born every minute - $5 to see the egress.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> What do you think about this article?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen video-called Harry on birthday, said she's proud of his latest feat
> 
> 
> The monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


i remember 1930s - 1950s style etiquette, never raise your voice, always take the high road, now we have social media instead , how many insults can you squeeze into 144 characters ?


----------



## amante

CarryOn2020 said:


> And we are still talking about JeffE, Charles Manson, and a whole bunch of other criminals, liars, etc.
> Bad publicity is bad publicity.   Remember, it was P.T. Barnum who said bad publicity is still publicity.  He is the one who said there’s a sucker born every minute - $5 to see the egress.


With all due respect to Mr. Barnum, but maybe his observations are out of date as we now live in the social media era. As for Epstein, Manson et al they are probably the wrong industry to compare. I'm thinking of Gwyneth Paltrow and her vaginal steaming Goop empire and Kim Kardashian the once D-list "celebrity stylist" with a leaked sex tape who's now the, well, not quite the queen of social media but pretty close.

Look, I'm no fan of Meghan Markle nor the attention economy of  the social media era, but it is what it is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What do you think about this article?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen video-called Harry on birthday, said she's proud of his latest feat
> 
> 
> The monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv



_As revealed by an *insider*, the monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely.

Hmmmm, _who could that be?


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> With all due respect to Mr. Barnum, but maybe his observations are out of date as we now live in the social media era. As for Epstein, Manson et al they are probably the wrong industry to compare. I'm thinking of Gwyneth Paltrow and her vaginal steaming Goop empire and Kim Kardashian the once D-list "celebrity stylist" with a leaked sex tape who's now the, well, not quite the queen of social media but pretty close.
> 
> Look, I'm no fan of Meghan Markle nor the attention economy of  the social media era, but it is what it is.



JeffE and Manson may not be who H&M _want_ themselves compared to, but, as you say, it is what is. Who wants to support liars, cheats, etc.? Seriously, we all want to believe our support is going to honest people who have integrity. To most of us, those qualities still matter.

PT knew human nature and _that_ has not changed in thousands of years. People are who they are. The world has seen H&M up close and laughed at them, not in a good way.

ETA: IMO


----------



## needlv

Apparently neither are happy about being mocked on Twitter for days… 









						I have a little bit of tea! It's just a splash but still made my day!  Times Magazine NEVER wanted Meghan on the list or on the cover! Th...
					

I have a little bit of tea! It's just a splash but still made my day!  Times Magazine NEVER wanted Meghan on the list or on the cover! They only wanted Harry! We all know that Harry isn't allowed to do anything by himself especially not something this BIG! So $1.5 million was paid for his wife to...




					smokemirrorsmontecitosfauxroyals.quora.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Apparently neither are happy about being mocked on Twitter for days…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a little bit of tea! It's just a splash but still made my day!  Times Magazine NEVER wanted Meghan on the list or on the cover! Th...
> 
> 
> I have a little bit of tea! It's just a splash but still made my day!  Times Magazine NEVER wanted Meghan on the list or on the cover! They only wanted Harry! We all know that Harry isn't allowed to do anything by himself especially not something this BIG! So $1.5 million was paid for his wife to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> smokemirrorsmontecitosfauxroyals.quora.com



The comments!!!  
Not a SINGLE word complimenting her.  I think others have finally caught up with us!  Some are using downright nasty language.  For all the trolls that come here to chastise us, at least we don't call her anything vulgar.


----------



## Lodpah

It blows my mind how much money the probably spend on PR a d to be on magazine covers. Like an old proverb:

Oh vanity of all vanities!

She has the two sins. Misguided pride and vanity.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> It blows my mind how much money the probably spend on PR a d to be on magazine covers. Like an old proverb:
> 
> Oh vanity of all vanities!
> 
> She has the two sins. Misguided pride and vanity.


So we could say, "Vanity, thy name is Meghan!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> So we could say, "Vanity, thy name is Meghan!"



‘And Pride, they name is Hazzie.’  
Introducing Pride and Vanity


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> So 3 women got to wear it. lol


Four women: Diana, her two sisters Jane and Sarah and Victoria Lockwood for her wedding to Charles, 9th Earl Spencer in 1989. Of course Diana wore it on several occasions post wedding. The Spencer Tiara


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘And Pride, they name is Hazzie.’
> Introducing *Pride and Vanity*
> 
> View attachment 5197457


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your 10th nickname Pride and Vanity. At first, I mistakenly read 'Pride and Prejudice' and yelled, "Mr. Darcy?" just like they all do in the movie.  Now back to the business at hand: Congratulations and please join the Energizer Bunny Club.


----------



## Katel

Captain Hairball and Toenail
 LOVE will keep them together  




au naturel - Sir Spit Polish and Madam Shine (it on)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> *Captain Hairball and Toenail*
> LOVE will keep them together
> 
> View attachment 5197467
> 
> 
> au naturel - Sir Spit Polish and Madam Shine (it on)
> 
> View attachment 5197468


 Thanks @Katel for your 5th nickname. I'm still  at the ugly hairdo, ill-fitting clothes, H's missing leg or is it his knee up her butt?! 
Congratulations and please join the Nickname Master's Club.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> Four women: Diana, her two sisters Jane and Sarah and Victoria Lockwood for her wedding to Charles, 9th Earl Spencer in 1989. Of course Diana wore it on several occasions post wedding. The Spencer Tiara


I was referencing a poster who said a woman marrying the Earl or Viscount gets to wear the Spencer tiara - but Charles Spencer had 3 wives, so did they all 3 women wear it? lol


----------



## Chanbal

Nefl*x is so invested in promoting MM&H that other shows are advertising them. In the 1st episode of the last season of "Jack W: Travels with my father", Jack and father drive in front of Buckingham Palace and Jack starts to boo. The father asks Jack if he doesn't like the royal family, and he answers that he is team M*gh*n.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry the hairdresser, one more for his collection.


----------



## Chanbal

A well written article by Joanna Williams. 
*Is Harry and Meghan’s Time profile a parody?

*
_Of course the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are named in Time magazine’s 100 most influential people of 2021. And of course their listing, which makes the publication’s front cover, is accompanied by a lavish citation and photos of the pair put together by Hollywood A-list stylists. Did we really expect anything less?

Time truly has it all. First there are the photos. The couple are groomed beyond the imagining of mere mortals, their clothes carefully co-ordinated. They are artistically positioned in order to comprise both a beautiful image and a political statement. Yes, indeed! These are no ordinary celebrity snaps. They are Harry and Meghan’s meaningful portraits.

*The cover shot symbolises equality.* So Harry is kitted out in black, while Meghan dons a white trouser suit. Harry is in the background, Meghan to the fore. Harry perches awkwardly on a ledge so they appear to be the same height, his hand resting supportively on her shoulder. They’re equals, geddit? _*Most married couples take their equality for granted. But for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex this, apparently, counts as making a brave statement. And so they both stare fearlessly into the camera…*










						Is Harry and Meghan's Time profile a parody? | The Spectator
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are named in Time magazine’s 100 most influential people of 2021




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

So the infamous pinky ring has also matching earrings… 

_On her right hand is another, larger diamond pinky ring; as Page Six Style revealed in October, celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz fashioned the piece out of a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.

*Multiple sources have confirmed to us that the gift initially arrived for Harry, but that the Duke of Sussex then gave it to his wife, who turned to Schwartz to rework them.*

Schwartz also turned the same set of diamonds into stunning convertible earrings with the same exquisite emerald cut, which Markle wore to the 2019 Trooping the Colour ceremony as simple studs._









						Everything we know about Meghan Markle’s mysterious diamond pinky ring
					

As Page Six Style revealed in October, celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz fashioned the piece out of a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East, but questions remain.




					pagesix.com


----------



## FreeSpirit71

Bloop!  This interview also named Jason Knauf and is being wiped (or trying to be wiped) from the internet.

Guess the palaces are scrambling.....


----------



## FreeSpirit71




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

^^ so what? He has always been an insufferable blabbermouth and so are his two daughters.


----------



## jelliedfeels

tiktok said:


> Interesting to see how the naive US audience sees them (ETA: Look at the comments too):



I personally think it’d only be a normal pose for a parrot and his pirate.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> So 3 women got to wear it. lol


Entitled to wear it, the first one did obviously, not sure about the second. The current one didn't, probably because she was divorced as well and thought better of it (unlike a bride who shall remain nameless.) I have seen the current Countess wear the Spencer Tiara at some function. 
I can bet my life that knowing what we know now in that she likes to cos play Diana, had she been offered the Spencer tiara, M would not have refused it. Catherine would have been told discreetly that given your position to be, it would be better for you to wear a Royal tiara. And she would have accepted that.


----------



## needlv

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Bloop!  This interview also named Jason Knauf and is being wiped (or trying to be wiped) from the internet.
> 
> Guess the palaces are scrambling.....




please be careful with smaller clips like this.  You should watch the full interview.  Jason Knauff was not mentioned at the same time or with the same question / story - as the other two people.

TM said the photographs were a setup.  He said they were set up by Jeff and Dylan.  He said Samantha was tricked into doing the photo shoot, to clean up TM’s image, and she in turn convinced TM to do it.  TM said he regretted it and still regret it.  This is where he mentions “mess up the wedding” In the interview.

The interview pivoted to talk about Mm’s mental health.  TM blames H for being a useless husband and not taking her to a doctor,but then says his  daughter may have been “over dramatic”
Then pivots again to ask if MM is the controlling one (TM said yes)
Then asks about bullying claims - of which TM doesn’t know.  Then said the only person at the palace he had a relationship with was Jason K, who offered many times to help TM but was refused by MM and H to help TM.

so the linking of the three names (Jeff, Dylan, then Jason K) is deliberately out of context.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> I was referencing a poster who said a woman marrying the Earl or Viscount gets to wear the Spencer tiara - but Charles Spencer had 3 wives, so did they all 3 women wear it? lol


According to the quoted article, neither of his last two wives wore the tiara on their wedding day, but it doesn't elaborate further.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry finally found his call, congrats to him!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Nefl*x is so invested in promoting MM&H that other shows are advertising them. In the 1st episode of the last season of "Jack W: Travels with my father", Jack and father drive in front of Buckingham Palace and Jack starts to boo. The father asks Jack if he doesn't like the royal family, and he answers that he is team M*gh*n.


Hubby received a free Netflix subscription when he bought something a few months back and wanted to add me to the deal, but I said no thanks because I couldn't support H&M. Thanks, that makes me feel really justified.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hubby received a free Netflix subscription when he bought something a few months back and wanted to add me to the deal, but I said no thanks because I couldn't support H&M. Thanks, that makes me feel really justified.


I would like to end our subscription, but didn't succeed to convince family yet.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Uggh - this again?!?! .. I don't believe this AT ALL!  Seriously, think about it .. if *MEATHEAD* couldn't even take the "heat" from the British press, how is she going to take the heat from the US press in regards to a campaign?  Does she think that she'll be able to word-salad the media, because we all know that she would *never* allow anyone else to write anything for her!  If her opponent calls her out for something, would she say he/she is racist (that would be a hard thing to do if ****** were to call her out, and ****** certainly has the reputation to do something like that)!!!  If *MEGA-NUTTER* thinks she can dip her toes into the political arena, then she is really THAT stupid!


if they are implying she will run for office, she'd have to get people to vote for her....on what basis?  she has no experience, hasn't shown a willingness to work.  she would have to win a Dem primary.  If she really wanted this, then she should probably start with something smaller like City Council.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I certainly believe that she wasn't able to bring all the pieces she wished to have.   However, rumors exist that very costly jewelry has never been returned… The article on the post is not the only one on the subject.


Wouldn't put it past her to behave like a fence: break up the jewellery, melt down the precious metals, reset the stones and then make up stories to account for them. 



Chanbal said:


> What do you think about this article?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen video-called Harry on birthday, said she's proud of his latest feat
> 
> 
> The monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


Geo.tv is a lowest of the low tabloid site based in Pakistan which puts out click bait. Nothing they say can be believed.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe we are reading it incorrectly?
> 
> An excerpt:
> _The Time profile is so dripping in Harry and Meghan cliche it could be mistaken for parody. The uber-privileged couple representing ‘equality’. The private jet loving Prince symbolising ‘nature’. The attention-grabbing, self-obsessed Duke and Duchess espousing self-sacrifice. What’s bizarre is that Time magazine takes this stuff seriously enough to print.
> 
> But maybe Time has it right, after all. The Duke and Duchess are certainly influential and very 2021 indeed. They epitomise today’s woke elite: fantastically wealthy and privileged yet comfortable preaching to the masses about the importance of sacrifice and compassion. Like the Californian celeb-set they have bought into, they co-opt the language of political struggle to direct attention to their own moral superiority over the plebs.
> 
> It’s no coincidence that the issues Harry and Meghan choose to highlight – race, gender, mental health, the environment – can all sit comfortably alongside immense privilege. To the woke elite, social class and wealth inequalities are barely worth considering. If pushed, they shy away from talking about economic or political solutions – Heaven forbid! – but prefer discussing the need for yet more ‘compassion’. They’ll happily be photographed demonstrating equality, or make a speech via Zoom, but actually rescind the titles and inherited wealth, give up the private jet flights and the designer clothes? Not on your life. Charges of hypocrisy never land on this thick-skinned group who seem to think genuine lifestyle change is reserved for the little people.
> 
> So perhaps Time magazine deserves praise for publishing such sycophancy. It offers us yet more hilarious insight into the bizarre world-view of the woke elite. Harry and Meghan’s loyal fans will no doubt lap it up. The rest of us, meanwhile, can enjoy a laugh at the oblivious duo’s expense._



but the celebs that are being criticized for being "too woke" or preaching etc. have become celebs by actually working and are still earing money working.  Leo Dicaprio (who is one who some people here have criticized) is rich and famous for being an excellent actor.  He earns his living doing that.  So if some people don't like what he says, that's fine.  but that is not his main thing in life.


----------



## xincinsin

FreeSpirit71 said:


>



I really do think that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree when it comes to the Markles. Let's hope Methane does not raise her invisible kids to be just like her.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> A well written article by Joanna Williams.
> *Is Harry and Meghan’s Time profile a parody?
> View attachment 5197526
> *
> _Of course the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are named in Time magazine’s 100 most influential people of 2021. And of course their listing, which makes the publication’s front cover, is accompanied by a lavish citation and photos of the pair put together by Hollywood A-list stylists. Did we really expect anything less?
> 
> Time truly has it all. First there are the photos. The couple are groomed beyond the imagining of mere mortals, their clothes carefully co-ordinated. They are artistically positioned in order to comprise both a beautiful image and a political statement. Yes, indeed! These are no ordinary celebrity snaps. They are Harry and Meghan’s meaningful portraits.
> 
> *The cover shot symbolises equality.* So Harry is kitted out in black, while Meghan dons a white trouser suit. Harry is in the background, Meghan to the fore. Harry perches awkwardly on a ledge so they appear to be the same height, his hand resting supportively on her shoulder. They’re equals, geddit? _*Most married couples take their equality for granted. But for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex this, apparently, counts as making a brave statement. And so they both stare fearlessly into the camera…*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Harry and Meghan's Time profile a parody? | The Spectator
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are named in Time magazine’s 100 most influential people of 2021
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk



This is so spot on.

*The Time profile is so dripping in Harry and Meghan cliche it could be mistaken for parody. The uber-privileged couple representing ‘equality’. The private jet loving Prince symbolising ‘nature’. The attention-grabbing, self-obsessed Duke and Duchess espousing self-sacrifice. What’s bizarre is that Time magazine takes this stuff seriously enough to print.*
_*
But maybe Time has it right, after all. The Duke and Duchess are certainly influential and very 2021 indeed. They epitomise today’s woke elite: fantastically wealthy and privileged yet comfortable preaching to the masses about the importance of sacrifice and compassion. Like the Californian celeb-set they have bought into, they co-opt the language of political struggle to direct attention to their own moral superiority over the plebs.

It’s no coincidence that the issues Harry and Meghan choose to highlight – race, gender, mental health, the environment – can all sit comfortably alongside immense privilege. To the woke elite, social class and wealth inequalities are barely worth considering. If pushed, they shy away from talking about economic or political solutions – Heaven forbid! – but prefer discussing the need for yet more ‘compassion’. They’ll happily be photographed demonstrating equality, or make a speech via Zoom, but actually rescind the titles and inherited wealth, give up the private jet flights and the designer clothes? Not on your life. Charges of hypocrisy never land on this thick-skinned group who seem to think genuine lifestyle change is reserved for the little people.*_


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to the quoted article, neither of his last two wives wore the tiara on their wedding day, but it doesn't elaborate further.


Maybe 2 and 3 weren't a tiara type wedding especially as Charles was divorced and bride 3 was also. Here are 1 and 3


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe 2 and 3 weren't a tiara type wedding especially as Charles was divorced and bride 3 was also. Here are 1 and 3
> 
> View attachment 5197890
> 
> 
> View attachment 5197891


little boy in pic with first wedding looks like Harry.  a relative?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *Harry the hairdresser*, one more for his collection.
> View attachment 5197519



Thanks @Chanbal for your #16 nickname, Harry the Hairdresser. Congratulations for reaching the top of The List. Please join the Roaring Lion Club.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> little boy in pic with first wedding looks like Harry.  a relative?


It is Harry.


----------



## rose60610

How would somebody who fled the BRF in search of "privacy" explain her desire to run for public office? Is this a joke? Her campaign would be a nonstarter. How can one be transparent when you supposedly CRAVE privacy?


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> little boy in pic with first wedding looks like Harry.  a relative?


so all the speculation about Harry not looking like his dad may be explained away with this...he looks like diana's family


----------



## Chanbal

Let's dance…


----------



## CeeJay

TimeToShop said:


> Meant to include this too



Hmmmmm .. "yachting" present?!?!!?  At some point, if this is true, someone is going to spill the beans (and supposedly, Hazardous' former very good friend - "Skippy" was the one who met/slept with [?] Meghan on said yacht)!  I had read earlier that Harry's friends made it very clear that if he slammed any of them in his "biography", they would strike back .. and given that his friend Skippy and his wife were not invited to the reception, I can totally see them coming back at Harry & Meghan!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Chanbal for your #16 nickname, Harry the Hairdresser. Congratulations for reaching the top of The List. Please join the Roaring Lion Club.
> View attachment 5197966


Haha, it looks like I've been competing with shine S and working extra hours.  My only excuse is that they are better than many sitcoms. 

Much appreciated @Maggie Muggins


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Your designs are gorgeous!
> They perfectly show the difference between a ring designed to be worn on the little finger, our dear pinky, and one designed as a ”right-hand ring finger“ ring, but sized down.  Her emerald-cut(?) solitaire looks like it should be worn on the ring finger, but she didn’t want to wait for it to be re-sized so she sticks it on her pinky.  If the ring came from the stylist’s inventory, then MM would not be able to resize it [because she does not own it].  Something about the dastardly duo tells me they pay for very little.  Hazzie is accustomed to the _royal_ way, i. e., expect others to pay.


Aw, thank you so much @CarryOn2020 !!!  Yes, both were designed specifically as Pinky rings (I kind of have this "thing" for Pinky rings and have had to stop myself from designing/making any more)!  

Totally agree with you re: the Emerald cut Diamond (especially of that size) being a pinky ring .. it looks stupid and frankly, very nouveau-riche looking.  I don't buy that it was the stylist's ring because, honestly, I don't think a stylist would have a ring like that as a pinky .. as a ring-finger ring, yeah - maybe!  However, given that Meghan has been caught in yet another lie, I don't believe a word that comes out of that trash-mouth!


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> Aw, thank you so much @CarryOn2020 !!!  Yes, both were designed specifically as Pinky rings (I kind of have this "thing" for Pinky rings and have had to stop myself from designing/making any more)!
> 
> Totally agree with you re: the Emerald cut Diamond (especially of that size) being a pinky ring .. it looks stupid and frankly, very nouveau-riche looking.  I don't buy that it was the stylist's ring because, honestly, I don't think a stylist would have a ring like that as a pinky .. as a ring-finger ring, yeah - maybe!  However, given that Meghan has been caught in yet another lie, I don't believe a word that comes out of that trash-mouth!


Well, the Pukess is certainly nouveau riche!


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> _As revealed by an *insider*, the monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely.
> 
> Hmmmm, _who could that be?



you mean she wasn't _*gushing*_ over him?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> What a sloppy lie! A quick Google search by anyone from anywhere on the planet can easily dispprove what this Shallon Lester said.



Really disappointing. 

She was probably counting on people like me (who comes from a country that doesn't ask about ethnicity anywhere, it's more common to find forms that ask about religion even) swallowing it without checking first because I've obviously heard here and there the US asks for ethnicity / race e.g. for college applications, but I've never felt the need to google a California driver's license before.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> if they are implying she will run for office, she'd have to get people to vote for her....on what basis?  she has no experience, hasn't shown a willingness to work.  she would have to win a Dem primary.  If she really wanted this, then she should probably start with something smaller like City Council.


*MEGA-MONOTONE* start with something smaller?!?! .. surely you jest!  I'm sure she thinks she should be president!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FreeSpirit71 said:


> Bloop!  This interview also named Jason Knauf and is being wiped (or trying to be wiped) from the internet.
> 
> Guess the palaces are scrambling.....




As if. They had better methods to stop the wedding if they had really wanted to.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Maggie Muggins 
You are shining your light in this thread.  
We all join with Brad to say:


----------



## Lodpah

They’re becoming memes and a joke. It’s sad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> They’re becoming memes and a joke. *It’s sad.*



No, it's not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> They’re becoming memes and a joke. It’s sad.



IMO They brought it all on themselves.
 End of story.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *MEGA-MONOTONE* start with something smaller?!?! .. surely you jest!  I'm sure she thinks she should be president!


what was I thinking?  of course she would have to at least be a senator


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO They brought it all on themselves.
> End of story.


the best thing will be when no one is interested in them....not even to ridicule them


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO They brought it all on themselves.
> End of story.


Yeah I agree with you. It’s just sad how low level their minds are and how arrogant they are. Their thirst for money and fake will be is their down fall.


----------



## csshopper

justwatchin said:


> Meghan


16 copies, one per bathroom, and stacks for her desk to replace the equally useless copies of The Bench.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sunday papers  Hazzie _standing behind his glossy wife like a *fake-tanned Stepford Husband*_

Full article in spoiler -








						'Prince Harry hates being photographed, but posed for a magazine cover shoot'
					

Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners'




					www.mirror.co.uk
				






Spoiler: How will he cope?



*'Prince Harry hates being photographed, but agreed to pose for a magazine cover shoot'*
*Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners'*
Rachael Bletchly
Prince Harry hates being photographed as he says it triggers painful memories of his late mother Diana.

He believes the world’s most photographed woman was killed by the paparazzi, so each lens pointed in his direction is “the worst reminder of her life”.

“Every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I hear a flash, it takes me straight back,” he said in 2019.

He has also accused the press of “commoditising” people he loves “to the point that they are no longer seen as a real person”.

Which is why he moved to California with his wife, to live a life out of the spotlight.

So it must have really p****d Harry off that Time magazine went and made him and Megan “Icons”. Because the shy, retiring couple had to face those bloody cameras again and pose for a cover shoot!

But I reckon H asked the snapper just to knock off a few quick frames and then tart them up with the airbrush.

Because that would explain the bizarre image of Harry standing behind his glossy wife like a *fake-tanned Stepford Husband.*

Or, as one Twitter wag suggested, “like Harry is her hairdresser and he’s looking into the mirror explaining what he did to her layers”.

The magazine, which lists the Sussexes among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their “powerful dynamic as equal partners.” But to those asking “WTF?” on social media, they appeared to have been captured using CGI. And commoditised to the point they no longer seem real.

Meanwhile, over in Blighty, Harry’s dad and Uncle Andrew are struggling with their own images. The Prince of Wales’ charity is being rocked by a sleazy “cash for honours” row and two senior officials have quit. But Charles insists he was never part of the picture.

And the Duke of York knows he can no longer hide from sex assault allegations (which he denies) as the High Court has ensured US court papers are properly served. So he won’t be smiling. Thank God for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge!

They were back to work this week after the school holidays. Kate went to RAF Brize Norton this week to thank folk involved in evacuating Afghan refugees, while William was handing out awards to NHS heroes. They are the REAL icons. The authentic face of modern monarchy, the picture of royal duty.

And as the Queen starts to cut her workload after next year’s Platinum celebrations, the Cambridges will thankfully come into even sharper focus. But Harry won’t be out of the frame for long.

He’s releasing an explosive memoir in 2022 – and it could just steal the spotlight from Granny’s Jubilee. How on earth is he going to cope with all those photographic triggers?


----------



## periogirl28

I say, isn't this Photoshop thing supposed to make people look better?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sunday papers  Hazzie _standing behind his glossy wife like a *fake-tanned Stepford Husband*_
> 
> Full article in spoiler -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Prince Harry hates being photographed, but posed for a magazine cover shoot'
> 
> 
> Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: How will he cope?
> 
> 
> 
> *'Prince Harry hates being photographed, but agreed to pose for a magazine cover shoot'*
> *Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners'*
> Rachael Bletchly
> Prince Harry hates being photographed as he says it triggers painful memories of his late mother Diana.
> 
> He believes the world’s most photographed woman was killed by the paparazzi, so each lens pointed in his direction is “the worst reminder of her life”.
> 
> “Every single time I see a camera, every single time I hear a click, every single time I hear a flash, it takes me straight back,” he said in 2019.
> 
> He has also accused the press of “commoditising” people he loves “to the point that they are no longer seen as a real person”.
> 
> Which is why he moved to California with his wife, to live a life out of the spotlight.
> 
> Because that would explain the bizarre image of Harry standing behind his glossy wife like a fake-tanned Stepford Husband.
> 
> Or, as one Twitter wag suggested, “like Harry is her hairdresser and he’s looking into the mirror explaining what he did to her layers”.
> 
> But I reckon H asked the snapper just to knock off a few quick frames and then tart them up with the airbrush.
> 
> Because that would explain the bizarre image of Harry standing behind his glossy wife like a *fake-tanned Stepford Husband.*
> 
> Or, as one Twitter wag suggested, “like Harry is her hairdresser and he’s looking into the mirror explaining what he did to her layers”.
> 
> The magazine, which lists the Sussexes among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their “powerful dynamic as equal partners.” But to those asking “WTF?” on social media, they appeared to have been captured using CGI. And commoditised to the point they no longer seem real.
> 
> Meanwhile, over in Blighty, Harry’s dad and Uncle Andrew are struggling with their own images. The Prince of Wales’ charity is being rocked by a sleazy “cash for honours” row and two senior officials have quit. But Charles insists he was never part of the picture.
> 
> And the Duke of York knows he can no longer hide from sex assault allegations (which he denies) as the High Court has ensured US court papers are properly served. So he won’t be smiling. Thank God for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge!
> 
> They were back to work this week after the school holidays. Kate went to RAF Brize Norton this week to thank folk involved in evacuating Afghan refugees, while William was handing out awards to NHS heroes. They are the REAL icons. The authentic face of modern monarchy, the picture of royal duty.
> 
> And as the Queen starts to cut her workload after next year’s Platinum celebrations, the Cambridges will thankfully come into even sharper focus. But Harry won’t be out of the frame for long.
> 
> He’s releasing an explosive memoir in 2022 – and it could just steal the spotlight from Granny’s Jubilee. How on earth is he going to cope with all those photographic triggers?


_"Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners"

their powerful dynamic _is shown on this version of the TIME's cover. 
*

*


----------



## lulu212121

Chanbal said:


> _"Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners"
> 
> their powerful dynamic _is shown on this version of the TIME's cover.
> *
> View attachment 5198475
> *


They actually look better!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Lodpah said:


> They’re becoming memes and a joke. It’s sad.


They’ve been this way since they showed up on the scene … Harry may be a little earlier, but his youth and being Diana’s youngest son made people easily forget.


----------



## csshopper

Finally, a US paper puts it out there, going to be hard for them to ignore this, and the Page6 article is a great companion piece!


bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — Time’s most insufferable*
> 
> Most influential? More like most insufferable.
> 
> Proving that magazines are irrelevant and more out of touch than ever, Time has named Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to their Time 100: The Most Influential People of 2021.
> 
> Please. Can you name one real-world, practical application deployed by these two phonies that’s served anyone but themselves?
> 
> Let’s see. They began 2021 with a bang, sitting down with Oprah to launch verbal ballistic missiles from a lush Santa Barbara garden, claiming that the British royal family didn’t care that a pregnant Meghan was suicidal and that there was a racist among the senior royals.
> 
> All this while Prince Philip, the Queen’s husband of nearly 74 years, was on his deathbed.
> 
> “Be kind,” they tell us constantly. Compassion is their brand.
> 
> HA!
> 
> Oh, how we have suffered this year. Our collective hope that lockdown would be over is crushed. We are ravaged by natural disasters and manmade ones — like those endless videos Harry and Meghan stream from their $14 million, nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion, lecturing us on everything from Black Lives Matter to US elections (important, Megs says) to, of course, the environment.
> 
> Did you catch Harry flying private a few weeks ago? Polo match in Aspen. Such a great look for these two self-appointed eco-warriors.
> 
> Netflix, Spotify, SussexRoyal, commodify: These two are interested in self-promotion and celebrity only. We endured a painful home video Meghan made with Melissa McCarthy, another self-aggrandizement under the guise of some other b.s. initiative no one remembers, Harry outside, juggling through a window.
> 
> McCarthy later said Harry worried he would look “weird” doing that.
> 
> Rightly so.
> 
> “In a world where everyone has an opinion about people they don’t know, the duke and duchess have compassion for the people they don’t know,” chef José Andrés wrote for the magazine. “They don’t just opine. They run towards the struggle.”
> 
> If by “run towards the struggle” Andrés means making nearly every great human tragedy about themselves — from staging Remembrance Day photos at a California cemetery to their Afghanistan statement (lecturing us all to “alleviate suffering”) to turning their website back on 9/11 — then yeah, sure.
> 
> Let’s just call them what they are: ponderous and platitudinous.
> 
> Even Twitter has had it. *The Time 100 cover image of the couple, Harry with suspiciously lush hair and Meghan wrinkle-free and glowing, was read for filth.*
> 
> “The cover looks so fake …” said one. “Oh wait, that’s because they are.”
> 
> “Wow, has @Time fallen,” said another. “Hard.”
> 
> At Britain’s National TV Awards last Friday, the couple was booed as their Oprah clip rolled.
> 
> “Everyone joined in,” an unnamed audience member told the Sun. “It was really funny.”
> 
> Yet Harry and Meghan are no doubt taking a victory lap, luxuriating in their delusion as global leaders, one reinforced by a silly list.
> 
> Reports are, though, that Spotify wants some content by the end of 2021 to justify that $25 million payday. Harry has a memoir due soon, one in which he’s rumored to go after stepmother Camilla and shame the royals some more. After all, he’s not getting $20 million without spilling some dirt.
> 
> But remember, everyone: Be kind.
> 
> And keep paying attention to the Sussexes, even though what they really want is privacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — Time’s most insufferable
> 
> 
> Proving that magazines are irrelevant and more out of touch than ever, Time has named Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to their Time 100: The Most Influential People of 2021. Please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> How would somebody who fled the BRF in search of "privacy" explain her desire to run for public office? Is this a joke? Her campaign would be a nonstarter. How can one be transparent when you supposedly CRAVE privacy?


There was an article some time ago claiming that Hazard and Methane never said that they wanted privacy, and people were putting words in their mouths. I think they are just upset that they can't control the media and the social media.

The way some of her stans are getting militant, I would not be surprised if her constant cries of victimhood result in an unbalanced stan doing something violent one day to protect his or her "perfect princess". I would also not be surprised if Methane denies all responsibility then.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More on the diamonds!

*Diamonds used for Meghan's mysterious pinky ring were 'also turned into earrings she wore at Trooping the Colour' after being 'gifted from the Middle East'*

*Meghan sported what looked a large diamond pinky ring on latest cover of Time*
*Reports suggest it was a piece created for her by jeweler Lorraine Schwartz *
*It's also alleged the ring was made with 'gifted diamonds from the Middle East'*
*Same diamonds used to make earrings which Meghan wore publicly, it's claimed *
*








						Diamonds used for Meghan's earrings were 'gifted from the Middle East'
					

Interest in the jewellery continues to overshadow the Duchess of Sussex's appearance on the cover of Time magazine earlier this week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





*


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> There was an article some time ago claiming that Hazard and Methane never said that they wanted privacy, and people were putting words in their mouths. I think they are just upset that *they can't control the media and the social media.*
> 
> The way some of her stans are getting militant, I would not be surprised if her constant cries of victimhood result in an unbalanced stan doing something violent one day to protect his or her "perfect princess". I would also not be surprised if Methane denies all responsibility then.



(Boldfaced) Agreed. I believe some DO control the media and social media, our precious Methane put herself into that category and IMO is about 50% correct (). Our gutless, spineless whoring U.S. media do write her up favorably for the most part, and her stans on social media do what they can to prop her up and denigrate those who can't bring themselves to kneel at her altar of lies and victimhood. So.....if they "never said they wanted privacy" then why did they flee the BRF (but still begging to suck off their $$$)? Since the racism charge didn't materialize until Auntie Oprah came into the picture, one can only surmise they needed cash ASAP. I don't quite see her stans getting militant in the sense that hell is going to break loose if Methane can't get her way. Weirder things have happened, but why waste energy on a woman who was given EVERYTHING and screwed it  up? I believe her stans don't really care about Raptor per se, but are protecting a larger narrative. I agree Methane would deny responsibility, but if there was so much as a bruised strawberry during the last cozy BRF Sandringham holiday, she'd have gone cray cray ballistic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## littlemisskeira

Her looks have changed quite a lot considering she has been in the spotlight for only a few years.
I think she looked her best in Suits and then just b4 her wedding.
Then things seem to do downhill after that.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Does anyone know where in 100 most influential list M&H are?  Are they 100th or since they are on the cover does that make them number 1 or close to the top of the list or ?  Hard for me to believe they are anywhere near the top.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> More on the diamonds!
> 
> *Diamonds used for Meghan's mysterious pinky ring were 'also turned into earrings she wore at Trooping the Colour' after being 'gifted from the Middle East'*
> 
> *Meghan sported what looked a large diamond pinky ring on latest cover of Time*
> *Reports suggest it was a piece created for her by jeweler Lorraine Schwartz *
> *It's also alleged the ring was made with 'gifted diamonds from the Middle East'*
> *Same diamonds used to make earrings which Meghan wore publicly, it's claimed *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diamonds used for Meghan's earrings were 'gifted from the Middle East'
> 
> 
> Interest in the jewellery continues to overshadow the Duchess of Sussex's appearance on the cover of Time magazine earlier this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5198530
> *


So she’s one of those “Dubai Porta Potty” chicks?

I live in the Middle East and nobody likes or cares about her here …


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> So she’s one of those “Dubai Porta Potty” chicks?
> 
> I live in the Middle East and nobody likes or cares about her here …


She seems to think she has global influence  I haven't found any of her fans in my part of Asia. Either they think she is irrelevant or they don't know who she is. We do get her on the news sometimes - in the gossip section.


----------



## creme fraiche

Not sure about the rest of Asia, but I know she is very disliked in Japan.  Confucian societies do not rate highly people who disrespect the elders in their families and are willing to throw relatives under the bus for their own gain.


----------



## jennlt

rose60610 said:


> I agree Methane would deny responsibility, *but if there was so much as a bruised strawberry *during the last cozy BRF Sandringham holiday, she'd have gone cray cray ballistic.


She is triggered by the wrong shade of red...








						Meghan 'flew into rage over colour of blankets' & 'entire staff wanted to quit'
					

MEGHAN Markle reportedly flew into a rage at a PA because blankets were the “wrong shade of red” and her outbursts left her entire staff on the verge of quitting, insiders claimed last …




					www.the-sun.com
				



.


----------



## marietouchet

Musings  ... comparing and contrasting 

The new H&M photos definitely make me think of Posh and Becks, P&B are serious business people (is her business is financially in the red ??), big lifestyle - they earned it, they have been at this for like 25 years , i have not heard of their charitable works (which surely exist), VB has same messy hair tendrils 
Very curious that M&H handlers are recasting them as P&B , I dont get it yet 
I think the H&M PR handlers made a major mistake trying tor rebrand H&M as P&B

Kitty Spencer, wow what a wedding. Conspicuous consumption. The lady earns her living working for D&G. D&G had a major kerfuffle ca 2017 - 2018, their ads were criticized for bias against Asians and big shindig in Shanghai had to be cancelled, so, D&G does not have a long term woke pedigree. KS has a bit of charitable work on her CV.
KS borrowed TDF D&G haute joaillerie necklace(s). One was $500k ??. Barely discussed.  No one cared. 
I think the H&M handlers made a major mistake putting all the BLING on Meghan. The topic of diamond provenance has come up before, why did they let her go there ???  And now they are backpedalling about provenance ... Silly handlers


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I think the H&M handlers made a major mistake putting all the BLING on Meghan. The topic of diamond provenance has come up before, why did they let her go there ???  And now they are backpedalling about provenance ... Silly handlers



I don’t believe for a minute that Meghan listens to the advice of others if it goes against something she wants. Handlers are merely employees after all, their wishes don’t prevail. She has those gorgeous diamonds and she is damn well going to show them off.

We probably won’t see that particular jewelry again for awhile after this latest kerfuffle though.


----------



## rose60610

She's all about product placement. She probably invites criticism so she can play "victim!" over and over and over and over....


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> So she’s one of those “Dubai Porta Potty” chicks?
> 
> I live in the Middle East and nobody likes or cares about her here …


"Dubai Porta Potty" chicks?  Please elaborate....


----------



## Chanbal

This post shows a little of the huge hypocrisy of Ms. M and her quotes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She's so full of it. For starters, if she didn't define herself by her relationship she'd ask people to not call her Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *She's so full of it.* For starters, if she didn't define herself by her relationship she'd ask people to not call her Duchess of Sussex.


Yes!




Spoiler: Next Prize???






	

		
			
		

		
	
 Posted by


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"That picture where she has her legs wide open...and several people have very unkindly commented on the fact that this might actually be a pose that Meghan...is used to? Well, I'm not commenting one way or the other, absolutely not."


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe for a minute that Meghan listens to the advice of others if it goes against something she wants. Handlers are merely employees after all, their wishes don’t prevail. She has those gorgeous diamonds and she is damn well going to show them off.
> 
> We probably won’t see that particular jewelry again for awhile after this latest kerfuffle though.


Or else we will see it as a newly designed piece of jewelry. Can see her thinking she is outsmarting the world by wearing them redesigned.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Whew, catching up took some time, last Tuesday took a vacation from the dispicables in Montecito and focused on the joyfulness of 2 adorable great grandbabies, in person.  What a  catch up read of the all the posts and a "look" at the Douchess and Harry the Handbag. For a man who has supposedly chafed at being "the spare" all of his life, it's revelatory to see how he's been reduced to being not just a spare but looks like an expendable prop. And verified on the cover of a magazine no less: Having already done it psychologically, lowered physically to be on her level. Stand back and let her radioactive white pop off the paper while hanging back in the darker recesses, almost fading into that horrible scrim.  Her hair extensions would have been put to better use if they'd become wigs for cancer recovery patients bald from chemo. The hairy Harry is hilarious. He lost his balls, went on progesterone replacement therapy, and kinky red masses of hair sprouted. A research paper into the phenomenon is being discussed.

Hope someone on the world wide net collects all the versions of the TIME cover to collage them as a single page. 

The awareness of the rotten cores of these two loathsome people, that no amount of staging can mask, by an increasingly large audience, is gratifying.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh those Twitter folks, indulging Meghan's fantasies!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Oh those Twitter folks, indulging Meghan's fantasies!
> 
> View attachment 5199037



I feel a man who's an actual self-made billionaire might not be as gullible as easy target Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel a man who's an actual self-made billionaire might not be as gullible as easy target Harry.



She wouldn’t have a chance. Bezos has so many interests he would never give her the time she wants. Even if he was thinking with something other than his brain, Meghan is getting a little long in the tooth to mesmerize men using her, um, physical assets.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> She wouldn’t have a chance. Bezos has so many interests he would never give her the time she wants. Even if he was thinking with something other than his brain, Meghan is getting a little long in the tooth to mesmerize men using her, um, physical assets.


Bezos' girlfriend Lauren Sanchez is 51, and she is arguably far more accomplished than MM. MM probably wishes she was Lauren Sanchez. 


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Sánchez


----------



## Chanbal

One more of those mysterious messages.  This one is rather


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe for a minute that Meghan listens to the advice of others if it goes against something she wants. Handlers are merely employees after all, their wishes don’t prevail. She has those gorgeous diamonds and she is damn well going to show them off.
> *We probably won’t see that particular jewelry again for awhile after this latest kerfuffle though.*



Not in _*that*_ setting anyway


----------



## breakfastatcartier

charlottawill said:


> Bezos' girlfriend Lauren Sanchez is 51, and she is arguably far more accomplished than MM. MM probably wishes she was Lauren Sanchez.


And she looks good for her age!


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> And she looks good for her age!


Hey, it's not like 51 is ancient!   She's in the entertainment field and in LA, so she has to look good. You can be sure plenty of time and money go into maintaining her appearance.


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> And she looks good for her age!


Jennifer Aniston, Salma Hayek, Halle Berry and a number of their friends would like to have a word with you


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> More on the diamonds!
> 
> *Diamonds used for Meghan's mysterious pinky ring were 'also turned into earrings she wore at Trooping the Colour' after being 'gifted from the Middle East'*
> 
> *Meghan sported what looked a large diamond pinky ring on latest cover of Time*
> *Reports suggest it was a piece created for her by jeweler Lorraine Schwartz *
> *It's also alleged the ring was made with 'gifted diamonds from the Middle East'*
> *Same diamonds used to make earrings which Meghan wore publicly, it's claimed *
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diamonds used for Meghan's earrings were 'gifted from the Middle East'
> 
> 
> Interest in the jewellery continues to overshadow the Duchess of Sussex's appearance on the cover of Time magazine earlier this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5198530
> *


How much do we want to bet that these Diamonds came from that same man who has a suspicious history of killing individuals who opposed Saudi Arabia???


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> There was an article some time ago claiming that Hazard and Methane never said that they wanted privacy, and people were putting words in their mouths. I think they are just upset that they can't control the media and the social media.
> 
> The way some of her stans are getting militant, I would not be surprised if her constant cries of victimhood result in an unbalanced stan doing something violent one day to protect his or her "perfect princess". I would also not be surprised if Methane denies all responsibility then.


----------



## rose60610

Me-gain wants Bezos for his billions plus she thinks she knows how he should build a spaceship.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Me-gain wants Bezos for his billions plus she thinks *she knows how he should build a spaceship*.


Not only that! After seeing the TIME's photos and what happened to Hazz's hair, Bezos might be looking forward to such marriage.


----------



## Lodpah

I read online (can’t remember which site) that Princess Diana actually left only 38 million between PW and MM version of “Corey Campbell hand bag, 2 step behind” husband. If true, then the money was not as much as we all thought.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




All those mean black people being racist towards Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also Murky Meg apparently had a long week, it says the TikTok channel it came from.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also Murky Meg apparently had a long week, it says the TikTok channel it came from.



I feel like we all have had a long week. 
If the disastrous duo had an ounce of compassion for the people of the world, they would stop draining the oxygen out of the universe. 
Andrew and Charles, too.  Haven’t we all had enough of the BRF‘s preachings?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I feel like we all have had a long week.



More like a long 18 months *sigh*


----------



## gelbergirl

I just saw that Time Magazine cover photo.
What's with that mane of hair on her?


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Me-gain wants Bezos for his billions plus she thinks she knows how he should build a spaceship.


.. and wouldn't it be just great if he then put her on it and sent it *BEYOND* our Galaxy?!?!?!


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> I read online (can’t remember which site) that Princess Diana actually left only 38 million between PW and MM version of “Corey Campbell hand bag, 2 step behind” husband. If true, then the money was not as much as we all thought.


Lots of contradictory stuff out there on that … and stories mix up  £ and $ amounts … and stories mix up dates
D died in 1997 with £21m estate (£17m money from divorce and £4 of personal property - jewels), reduced later by bequests to D’s godchildren and death duties of almost £9m, interest accrued over time,  boys each got £10m of stuff ( cash and jewels] when Harry reached age 30, about 7-8 years ago
and contradictory stories about bequest to the boys from the Queen Mum, £7m each maybe 
so each got about £17m in stuff, 10 from D and 7 from QM 

BUT, who paid the death duties on the money from the QM? Or the valuation of the jewels/ personal property 

They might each have gotten only £10m in cash ….  

And either one or both may have had major expenses in recent years, who knows what is left … someone paid for the polo ponies , gifts to girlfriends,  personal - non Firm - travel expenses , I doubt the Duchy of Cornwall paid for these incidentals


----------



## Lodpah

marietouchet said:


> Lots of contradictory stuff out there on that … and stories mix up  £ and $ amounts … and stories mix up dates
> D died in 1997 with £21m estate (£17m money from divorce and £4 of personal property - jewels), reduced later by bequests to D’s godchildren and death duties of almost £9m, interest accrued over time,  boys each got £10m of stuff ( cash and jewels] when Harry reached age 30, about 7-8 years ago
> and contradictory stories about bequest to the boys from the Queen Mum, £7m each maybe
> so each got about £17m in stuff, 10 from D and 7 from QM
> 
> BUT, who paid the death duties on the money from the QM? Or the valuation of the jewels/ personal property
> 
> They might each have gotten only £10m in cash ….
> 
> And either one or both may have had major expenses in recent years, who knows what is left … someone paid for the polo ponies , gifts to girlfriends,  personal - non Firm - travel expenses , I doubt the Duchy of Cornwall paid for these incidentals


True so Harry did not get 30 mil from his mother? I’m sure their monthly expenses are over a mil a month


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> True so Harry did not get 30 mil from his mother? I’m sure their monthly expenses are over a mil a month


I feel pretty confident thinking H did not get $30m or £30m from his mother 
it was more like £10m from D, maybe £8 m cash and £2m in jewels or maybe 9m cash +1m jewels

it was enough for a down payment on the Montecito mortgage , he is not swimming in money


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> One more of those mysterious messages.  This one is rather
> View attachment 5199109


Bears investigating. I noticed the last time I visited Archewell that there was no avenue to donate directly to it. Time to check it again


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> True so Harry did not get 30 mil from his mother? I’m sure their monthly expenses are over a mil a month





marietouchet said:


> I feel pretty confident thinking H did not get $30m or £30m from his mother
> it was more like £10m from D, maybe £8 m cash and £2m in jewels or maybe 9m cash +1m jewels
> 
> it was enough for a down payment on the Montecito mortgage , he is not swimming in money


Lady C, who researches on the subject and has her own sources, mentioned in one of her videos that he had about $40M, which agrees with other sources (see below). This likely doesn't account certain diamonds and other gifts…

Though, if they are spending $1M/month, they could be already low in cash. 

His salary in the British Army was about $50K/year and it is already a lot more than what they deserve imo. 

"_Prior to Harry and Meghan becoming financially independent, the wealth-tracking site celebritynetworth.com estimates that Prince Harry was _*worth $40 million…"*









						Prince Harry "Will No Longer Receive Public Funds"—Here’s How That Impacts His Net Worth
					

Harry will no longer receive funding from the Sovereign Grant, which pays for the royal family's working endeavors.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Chanbal

Another great one…


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I feel pretty confident thinking H did not get $30m or £30m from his mother
> it was more like £10m from D, maybe £8 m cash and £2m in jewels or maybe 9m cash +1m jewels
> 
> it was enough for a down payment on the Montecito mortgage , he is not swimming in money



Yes, the BRF keeps this info sealed. It gives me a bad feeling, makes these royals seem untrustworthy.
The latest is Phillip’s will has been sealed for 90 years - to protect QE.  I agree with those who ask why.  It leads to so much speculation, rumour, innuendo, etc.  Best to be upfront, especially since he lived off the public money.  Same for Diana. From what I have read, her godchildren did not receive what she herself had told them they would receive.  









						Prince Philip's will to be secret for 90 years
					

A judge says he made the ruling, in line with other royal deaths, to protect the Queen's dignity.



					www.bbc.com
				













						The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
					

Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.




					www.rd.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> I read online (can’t remember which site) that Princess Diana actually left only 38 million between PW and MM version of “Corey Campbell hand bag, 2 step behind” husband. If true, then the money was not as much as we all thought.


If invested well, that 38 million would be a lot more 25 years later!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the BRF keeps this info sealed. It gives me a bad feeling, makes these royals seem untrustworthy.
> *The latest is Phillip’s will has been sealed for 90 years* - to protect QE.  I agree with those who ask why.  It leads to so much speculation, rumour, innuendo, etc.  Best to be upfront, especially since he lived off the public money.  *Same for Diana. From what I have read, her godchildren did not receive what she herself had told them they would receive*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip's will to be secret for 90 years
> 
> 
> A judge says he made the ruling, in line with other royal deaths, to protect the Queen's dignity.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
> 
> 
> Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rd.com


So, we will never know if Philip left a memento to his soulmate MM. 

I also read about Diana's family (mother and sisters) ignoring her wishes, which doesn't sound right.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Bears investigating. I noticed the last time I visited Archewell that there was no avenue to donate directly to it. Time to check it again


Archewell does cite some secondary charities , about six of them , and you can click on a link to get to the secondary charity’s site to donate directly to the latter 
Archewell benefits from using the meta data of the donor that it provided to the secondary charity, it is not evident whether Archewell gets a kickback after donation to the secondary charity


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> So, we will never know if Philip left a memento to his soulmate MM.
> 
> I also read about Diana's family (mother and sisters) ignoring her wishes, which doesn't sound right.


Diana’s will was complicated, she made it before her divorce … and before her untimely death when she was put on a pedestal, her assets were not worth much when the will was made 

Godchildren were supposed to share equally in some of her assets , personal property,  that would have meant liquidating the assets to ensure equal shares, a tedious embarrassing sale … instead executors decided to gift each godchild a piece of property, anything that had belonged to D would have had an astronomical value due to the way she died

being an executor requires making difficult decisions, interpreting the intent of the deceased after major changes since the drafting of the will eg the divorce which made her rich , she was not rich when she wrote the will, she owned some jewelry - which went to the sons? - and bibelots


----------



## xincinsin

One of the many many comments I read about the Time cover claimed that the Photoshop work darkened Methane's skin colour. I don't agree. I think Time may in fact have lightened her skin tone a shade or two to give her that radioactive look and avoid a glaring contrast with the blindingly white outfit. In her previous pics when she was wearing black or navy, her skin tone looked darker than in the Time pic.
(Can't get over the masses of fake hair  )


----------



## marietouchet

That Time Cover is like the meme’d thing of the century 
see twitter for all the fun too many to link to, murky Meg has a great collection 
my fav - H and M are singing I’M TOO SEXY FOR MA SHIRT ….


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> One of the many many comments I read about the Time cover claimed that the Photoshop work darkened Methane's skin colour. I don't agree. I think Time may in fact have lightened her skin tone a shade or two to give her that radioactive look and avoid a glaring contrast with the blindingly white outfit. In her previous pics when she was wearing black or navy, her skin tone looked darker than in the Time pic.
> (Can't get over the masses of fake hair  )


I noticed her skin color is all over the place in various photos of her diamond jewelry of dubious provenance, sometimes she looks like her mother’s clone, other time like Catherine Zeta Jones


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Diana’s will was complicated, she made it before her divorce … and before her untimely death when she was put on a pedestal, her assets were not worth much when the will was made
> 
> Godchildren were supposed to share equally in some of her assets , personal property,  that would have meant liquidating the assets to ensure equal shares, a tedious embarrassing sale … instead executors decided to gift each godchild a piece of property, anything that had belonged to D would have had an astronomical value due to the way she died
> 
> being an executor requires making difficult decisions, interpreting the intent of the deceased after major changes since the drafting of the will eg the divorce which made her rich , she was not rich when she wrote the will, she owned some jewelry - which went to the sons? - and bibelots



I have read that godchildren were not pleased with their _Diana tchotchke.  _Such a tangled weave she wove.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t think she wove a tangled web, she was dead. And, just like in life, everyone still wanted something from her.

Wills bring out the worst in people and expectations, nay, entitlement from godchildren no less, is gross. (IMHO)


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Bears investigating. I noticed the last time I visited Archewell that there was no avenue to donate directly to it. Time to check it again


I wouldn’t put it past her. Narcs don’t have an ounce of compassion for anyone.


----------



## xincinsin

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t think she wove a tangled web, she was dead. And, just like in life, everyone still wanted something from her.
> 
> *Wills bring out the worst in people and expectations*, nay, entitlement from godchildren no less, is gross. (IMHO)


So agree with this. I fully expect all-out war when the patriarch of my clan passes on. Not that he has a lot to leave to his descendants but, sometimes, the fighting can be fiercer when there is not much to go around. And he is determined to die intestate because why should he pay a lawyer to do a will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t think she wove a tangled web, she was dead. And, just like in life, everyone still wanted something from her.
> 
> Wills bring out the worst in people and expectations, nay, entitlement from godchildren no less, is gross. (IMHO)



As so often happens irl, she made verbal promises, then did not follow through. IMO that’s a tangled web.  For whatever reason, she chose to hand-write her requests. Knowing she had considerable assets and access to the best attorneys, she chose to do it herself.  That allowed for her mother and sister to make significant changes. So, the godchildren lost their share causing much ill will.  Of course she did not know she would die at that time. Still, why not make the proper preparations?  Seems Hazzie has inherited that gift? of making promises he cannot keep, such as wanting ‘privacy’, reducing global footprints, ad nauseam.

ETA:  based on her own family’s issues with the step-mother, surely she understood how contentious a death can be.




__





						Royal Estate Planning: Princess Diana’s Final Will | Trust & Will
					

Take a look inside princess Diana's last will and testament as we break down a royal estate plan.




					trustandwill.com
				



_The important lesson learned through Princess Diana’s estate planning controversy is this: always address your wishes directly in a verified Trust or Will. In Princess Diana’s case, some of her last wishes were written in a letter. (Quite literally, a “Letter of Wishes.”) Ultimately, the contents of the letter weren’t honored because it wasn’t written by a lawyer and could not be held up in court._


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> As so often happens irl, she made verbal promises, then did not follow through. IMO that’s a tangled web.  For whatever reason, she chose to hand-write her requests. Knowing she had considerable assets and access to the best attorneys, she chose to do it herself.  That allowed for her mother and sister to make significant changes. So, the godchildren lost their share causing much ill will.  Of course she did not know she would die at that time. Still, why not make the proper preparations?  Seems Hazzie has inherited that gift? of making promises he cannot keep, such as wanting ‘privacy’, reducing global footprints, ad nauseam.
> 
> ETA:  based on her own family’s issues with the step-mother, surely she understood how contentious a death can be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Estate Planning: Princess Diana’s Final Will | Trust & Will
> 
> 
> Take a look inside princess Diana's last will and testament as we break down a royal estate plan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> trustandwill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The important lesson learned through Princess Diana’s estate planning controversy is this: always address your wishes directly in a verified Trust or Will. In Princess Diana’s case, some of her last wishes were written in a letter. (Quite literally, a “Letter of Wishes.”) Ultimately, the contents of the letter weren’t honored because it wasn’t written by a lawyer and could not be held up in court._



I give her credit for having as much of a will as she did at her age. Nobody expects to die in their mid-30s. I’m sure she had a fair expectation that she could live another 40 to 50 years, plenty of time to update a will. She also would have assumed her sons would be set for life as the heirs of the future king.

There are famous people much wealthier and much older who didn’t have wills at all. Aretha Franklin had an estate worth over $80 million and she was in her mid-70s and knew she had cancer and she still didn’t make a legal will. A few handwritten notes were found months after she died between her sofa cushions and a couple others mysteriously popped up but I don’t think the estate is settled yet and it’s been three years. Prince also didn’t have a will and his estate was worth more than $100 million. His relatives have been fighting over it ever since.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I give her credit for having as much of a will as she did at her age. Nobody expects to die in their mid-30s. I’m sure she had a fair expectation that she could live another 40 to 50 years, plenty of time to update a will. She also would have assumed her sons would be set for life as the heirs of the future king.
> 
> There are famous people much wealthier and much older who didn’t have wills at all. Aretha Franklin had an estate worth over $80 million and she was in her mid-70s and knew she had cancer and she still didn’t make a legal will. A few handwritten notes were found months after she died between her sofa cushions and a couple others mysteriously popped up but I don’t think the estate is settled yet and it’s been three years. Prince also didn’t have a will and his estate was worth more than $100 million. His relatives have been fighting over it ever since.



Yes, indeed, plenty of examples of ‘what-not-to-do’. Maybe my expectations are too high, I expect the royals to live life at a higher, more organised level than the other wealthy people or the rest of us. I also wonder what is in Phillip’s will that may destroy? _QE’s dignity_. Perhaps it is something to do with the value of the estate?  We all know she is wealthy, so IMO we could handle knowing the actual amount.

_The will of Prince Philip, the late husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, will be sealed and remain private for at least 90 years to *preserve the monarch's dignity*, a judge at London's High Court has ruled.

He also ruled in favor of the request "to *exclude the value of the estate* from the grant of probate."

"The degree of publicity that publication would be likely to attract would be very extensive and wholly contrary to the aim of maintaining the dignity of the Sovereign," McFarlane said in a ruling published published on Thursday.

He said the convention was that following the death of a senior royal, an application to seal the will was made to the Family Division president, with such hearings and judgments kept private.

However, he said "as is plain from this judgment" he considered it was a "necessary and proportionate intrusion into the private affairs of Her Majesty and the Royal Family to make public the fact that an application to seal the will of HRH The Prince Philip ... has been made and granted in private, and to explain the underlying reasons."

The judge said 90 years should pass from the granting of probate before the will should be unsealed in private before possible publication, a period he said was "proportionate and sufficient."

He said the first royal whose will was sealed was Prince Francis of Teck, who was the younger brother of George V's wife Queen Mary. He said he was the custodian of a safe containing more than 30 envelopes with the wills of dead royals. 

The most recent additions were made in 2002 following the deaths of Queen Elizabeth's mother, Elizabeth, and her sister Princess Margaret, he said.








						Prince Philip's will to be kept secret for 90 years, British court rules
					

The will of Prince Philip, the late husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, will be sealed and remain private for at least 90 years to preserve the monarch's dignity, a judge at London's High Court has ruled.




					www.cnn.com
				



_


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> Maybe 2 and 3 weren't a tiara type wedding especially as Charles was divorced and bride 3 was also. Here are 1 and 3
> 
> View attachment 5197890
> 
> 
> View attachment 5197891


That first photo is a classic example of the kids looking really cute in the  outfits but you know they are hating every minute   


Chanbal said:


> _"Time magazine, which lists Prince Harry and Meghan Markle among the world’s 100 most influential people, claims to have captured their 'powerful dynamic as equal partners"
> 
> their powerful dynamic _is shown on this version of the TIME's cover.
> *
> View attachment 5198475
> *


If they were juggalos that’d be hilarious! Though the stans would then be truly next level.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, indeed, plenty of examples of ‘what-not-to-do’. Maybe my expectations are too high, I expect the royals to live life at a higher, more organised level than the other wealthy people or the rest of us. I also wonder what is in Phillip’s will that may destroy? _QE’s dignity_. Perhaps it is something to do with the value of the estate?  We all know she is wealthy, so IMO we could handle knowing the actual amount.
> 
> _The will of Prince Philip, the late husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, will be sealed and remain private for at least 90 years to *preserve the monarch's dignity*, a judge at London's High Court has ruled.
> 
> He also ruled in favor of the request "to *exclude the value of the estate* from the grant of probate."
> 
> "The degree of publicity that publication would be likely to attract would be very extensive and wholly contrary to the aim of maintaining the dignity of the Sovereign," McFarlane said in a ruling published published on Thursday.
> 
> He said the convention was that following the death of a senior royal, an application to seal the will was made to the Family Division president, with such hearings and judgments kept private.
> 
> However, he said "as is plain from this judgment" he considered it was a "necessary and proportionate intrusion into the private affairs of Her Majesty and the Royal Family to make public the fact that an application to seal the will of HRH The Prince Philip ... has been made and granted in private, and to explain the underlying reasons."
> 
> The judge said 90 years should pass from the granting of probate before the will should be unsealed in private before possible publication, a period he said was "proportionate and sufficient."
> 
> He said the first royal whose will was sealed was Prince Francis of Teck, who was the younger brother of George V's wife Queen Mary. He said he was the custodian of a safe containing more than 30 envelopes with the wills of dead royals.
> 
> The most recent additions were made in 2002 following the deaths of Queen Elizabeth's mother, Elizabeth, and her sister Princess Margaret, he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip's will to be kept secret for 90 years, British court rules
> 
> 
> The will of Prince Philip, the late husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, will be sealed and remain private for at least 90 years to preserve the monarch's dignity, a judge at London's High Court has ruled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I, perhaps mean-spiritedly, suspect it says:
‘As my sons are so useless I leave everything to the Milton Keynes dog shelter. I’m sure Anne won’t mind.”
Probably would want to keep that under their hat.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, indeed, plenty of examples of ‘what-not-to-do’. Maybe my expectations are too high, I expect the royals to live life at a higher, more organised level than the other wealthy people or the rest of us. I also wonder what is in Phillip’s will that may destroy? _QE’s dignity_. Perhaps it is something to do with the value of the estate?  We all know she is wealthy, so IMO we could handle knowing the actual amount.
> 
> _The will of Prince Philip, the late husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, will be sealed and remain private for at least 90 years to *preserve the monarch's dignity*, a judge at London's High Court has ruled.
> 
> He also ruled in favor of the request "to *exclude the value of the estate* from the grant of probate."
> 
> "The degree of publicity that publication would be likely to attract would be very extensive and wholly contrary to the aim of maintaining the dignity of the Sovereign," McFarlane said in a ruling published published on Thursday.
> 
> He said the convention was that following the death of a senior royal, an application to seal the will was made to the Family Division president, with such hearings and judgments kept private.
> 
> However, he said "as is plain from this judgment" he considered it was a "necessary and proportionate intrusion into the private affairs of Her Majesty and the Royal Family to make public the fact that an application to seal the will of HRH The Prince Philip ... has been made and granted in private, and to explain the underlying reasons."
> 
> The judge said 90 years should pass from the granting of probate before the will should be unsealed in private before possible publication, a period he said was "proportionate and sufficient."
> 
> He said the first royal whose will was sealed was Prince Francis of Teck, who was the younger brother of George V's wife Queen Mary. He said he was the custodian of a safe containing more than 30 envelopes with the wills of dead royals.
> 
> The most recent additions were made in 2002 following the deaths of Queen Elizabeth's mother, Elizabeth, and her sister Princess Margaret, he said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip's will to be kept secret for 90 years, British court rules
> 
> 
> The will of Prince Philip, the late husband of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, will be sealed and remain private for at least 90 years to preserve the monarch's dignity, a judge at London's High Court has ruled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


There is probably nothing to squabble over in PP's will, but eager beavers will scrutinize every dot and comma for something to gossip about. To say nothing of Madam Moron of Montecito who will compare what her doting hubby gets or doesn't get with what everyone else gets, then raise a hue and cry over how unfairly they are treated (racist of course) when it is so obvious that they do more for the world than every other living soul, and she is PP's most beloved, you know. 

So I think the remark about QE's dignity is more to prevent an undignified squabble which she will have to control, rather than some dark mystery about PP's finances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Aren't at the 2021 Emmys Despite Their Oprah Interview's Nomination
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's big Oprah interview is Emmy-nominated tonight for Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series or Special, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex opted not to attend the award ceremony tonight.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

I was just listening to a podcast where a editor from people magazine was being interviewed, and they asked if she ever got a thank you card from a celebrity. She said she had not but that Mega used to send them to everyone, and nobody had kept them because they didn’t think she was going anywhere.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I was just listening to a podcast where a editor from people magazine was being interviewed, and they asked if she ever got a thank you card from a celebrity. She said she had not but that* Mega used to send them to everyone*, and nobody had kept them because they didn’t think she was going anywhere.



That's not something I'd normally hate on though I'm sure for her it was more about staying on peoples' minds than about being polite, but...was her signature bigger than the addressees' names?

ETA: but is wasn't the same editor who claimed Raptor's driver's license said Caucasian only to be swiftly busted by the clever ladies of this thread?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently Harry participated in the new BBC documentary on Prince Philip (as per my daily newspaper), but the official BRF Insta account makes no mention of him at all in their announcement today while William is mentioned alongside Charles, Anne and Edward (forget about Andrew haha). They are indeed masters of subtle shade.


----------



## Norm.Core

Shade that is well deserved. Considering they did the O interview while Prince Philip was unwell.  I think shade isn’t enough. I’d like to see them iced out completely and let them work out how to survive without the BRF.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So apparently Harry participated in the new BBC documentary on Prince Philip (as per my daily newspaper), but the official BRF Insta account makes no mention of him at all in their announcement today while William is mentioned alongside Charles, Anne and Edward (forget about Andrew haha). They are indeed masters of subtle shade.


It was Andrea Lavinthal. Is that the same one?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> It was Andrea Lavinthal. Is that the same one?



No! I'm bad with names and too lazy to scroll back but it wasn't this one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No! I'm bad with names and too lazy to scroll back but it wasn't this one.


Yeah, honestly it was a throwaway comment on the podcast, she didn’t seem that interested in MM. She did mention that Ryan Reynolds is extremely handsome and charming.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not something I'd normally hate on though I'm sure for her it was more about staying on peoples' minds than about being polite, but...was her signature bigger than the addressees' names?
> 
> ETA: *but is wasn't the same editor who claimed Raptor's driver's license said Caucasian only to be swiftly busted by the clever ladies of this thread?*


This is not the first video with questionable information that has appeared on Twitter. There was also the video of someone claiming that Hazz said that his ideal woman was MM, a couple of years before meeting her or something like that. 

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that these easily to verify falsehoods/videos are provided as bait by people close to the Montecitos, so they end up on social media and discredit real information.


----------



## Chanbal

If true, this thread will continue flourishing!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not something I'd normally hate on though I'm sure for her it was more about staying on peoples' minds than about being polite, but...was her signature bigger than the addressees' names?
> 
> ETA: but is wasn't the same editor who claimed Raptor's driver's license said Caucasian only to be swiftly busted by the clever ladies of this thread?


The editor in the driver's licence story: Shallon Lester



Chanbal said:


> This is not the first video with questionable information that has appeared on Twitter. There was also the video of someone claiming that Hazz said that his ideal woman was MM, a couple of years before meeting her or something like that.
> 
> I wouldn't rule out the possibility that these easily to verify falsehoods/videos are provided as bait by people close to the Montecitos, so they end up on social media and discredit real information.


The Royal correspondent in the "H's idéal woman is MM" story: Katie Nicholl


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> If true, this thread will continue flourishing!
> 
> View attachment 5199695


You know I think H&M are running on fumes .. I get it -  she does not like his family, and he is taking her side, there is no reconciliation in  sight ...   how much more is there to know ???

There are two facets to them - charitable works and BRF relations. 
The BRF side of the coin is overexposed
The other side, sad, they make a laughable mess every time they try, it is a sequence of faux pas


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now *this* is a sweet nod:









						James Middleton's wife Alizee wore mother-in-law Carole's wedding gown
					

Speaking to Hello!, the financial analyst, 32, said she borrowed the gown, which was donned by the Duchess of Cambridge's mother in 1980 during her nuptials to Michael, after falling 'in love with it'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

N*flix: OW the fairy godmother, 3 year contract, about $5M signing bonus… all deals interlinked. Pearl deal, all pre-planned, Invictus/MM the poster child, money not given back to veterans?… Entertainment purposes.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Meghan is writing a memoir ? Any of us here could write it for her. "I had a disadvantaged childhood, never got a break, had to work hard for everything I have, I was forced to open suitcases as Suitcase Girl to make the rent, I became Yacht Girl to promote philanthropy among the rich people who owned the yachts, and fell in love with a cute redhead even though I had no clue who he was. That is my truth, my voice, and sadly I was forced to flee from the BRF to be able to use my voice so the world could be enlightened. All I do is sacrifice everything for the greater good."


----------



## melissatrv

Hugh Hefner called (from beyond the grave)

He wants his silk pajamas back


----------



## melissatrv

sdkitty said:


> so all the speculation about Harry not looking like his dad may be explained away with this...he looks like diana's family


Yes he looks like Earl Spencer when he was younger


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Aren't at the 2021 Emmys Despite Their Oprah Interview's Nomination
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's big Oprah interview is Emmy-nominated tonight for Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series or Special, but the Duke and Duchess of Sussex opted not to attend the award ceremony tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com



so they weren't at the emmys due to parental leave?  interesting.  I would think they'd have had the option if their show was nominated.  and I would have thought she would jump at the chance to show up on a red carpet


----------



## rose60610

??? Parental leave prevented them from going to the Emmy's? Parental Leave didn't prevent them from posing on the cover of Time and other things. I thought they had nannies. Do they never go out to dinner and leave the kids at home? Hmm. Huge excuse fail.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the DM on the Emmy Awards. It looks like Cedric may have not been fooled by Montecito (who knows?), he was certainly having a blast…

*'That's the real tea': Emmy Awards host Cedric the Entertainer mocks Royal family as he pokes fun at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Oprah interview and addresses baby Archie race claims*

_He told the star-studded audience: 'As great as The Crown is, it pales in comparison to the real monarchy…

'Oooo I mean that *Oprah interview with Prince Harry and Megan. That was the real tea right there, wasn't it!?'*
Cedric teased: *'Meghan must put it on that boy because he renounced his throne quicker than Eddie Murphy in Coming to America.'*
…
Moving on to Meghan's claims that members of the Royal family questioned her about how dark Archie's skin would be when she was pregnant with her first child, *Cedric said: 'I can't believe they were talking about that little baby like that, little Archie. How dark that little baby gonna be.'*

He joked: *'They need little Archie! Charles can't dance, who else going to teach them how to TikTok. I can just see it now, baby Archie with the Queen like,* 'Come on Gammy…''_










						Emmy Awards host Cedric the Entertainer mocks Royal family
					

The comedian, 57, had been running through the TV highlights of the past year, brought up the bombshell interview in which Meghan claimed concerns were raised over son Archie's skin colour.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bet she’s psyched she was included.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so they weren't at the emmys due to parental leave?  interesting.  I would think they'd have had the option if their show was nominated.  and I would have thought she would jump at the chance to show up on a red carpet


From what I understood, OW was the person that could have invited them, but she had only a 3 or 4 tickets.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> so they weren't at the emmys due to parental leave?  interesting.  I would think they'd have had the option if their show was nominated.  and I would have thought she would jump at the chance to show up on a red carpet


Translation .. *they weren't invited*!!!!!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> N*flix: OW the fairy godmother, 3 year contract, about $5M signing bonus… all deals interlinked. Pearl deal, all pre-planned, Invictus/MM the poster child, money not given back to veterans?… Entertainment purposes.



Chanbal, thanks for posting this, she is an insightful, straight forward commentator. Interesting. Reaffirms what we have been saying for pages and pages - exaggeration is the currency of Meagain and Harry the Handbag.

She also noted the silence on Spotify and the thud of the initial podcast as it bombed and did not generate the anticipated income stream.

Commented on the recent silence of Oprah re the Snarkles, absence of Maggot in video celebration of Beyonce's 40th birthday (Oprah was there). Anticipation of backlash for Haz over Invictus Games. Made comment, "People just don't like him." The Pearl deal is probably not going to be a program that saves Netflix!


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Same for Diana. From what I have read, her godchildren did not receive what she herself had told them they would receive.


So I don't have to give any more clicks -- which side of the family disobeyed her wishes and were those wishes in writing, or just a casual comment.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now *this* is a sweet nod:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> James Middleton's wife Alizee wore mother-in-law Carole's wedding gown
> 
> 
> Speaking to Hello!, the financial analyst, 32, said she borrowed the gown, which was donned by the Duchess of Cambridge's mother in 1980 during her nuptials to Michael, after falling 'in love with it'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


it is a sweet nod, and is also a great gown! 

1980 fashion was lovely and then Diana the following year, went and ruined it with that huge silk-taffeta wrinkled pouf of a thing which all the young girls copied.... then finally Carolyn Bessette showed them a thing or two.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Chanbal, thanks for posting this, she is an insightful, straight forward commentator. Interesting. Reaffirms what we have been saying for pages and pages - exaggeration is the currency of Meagain and Harry the Handbag.
> 
> She also noted the silence on Spotify and the thud of the initial podcast as it bombed and did not generate the anticipated income stream.
> 
> Commented on the recent silence of Oprah re the Snarkles, absence of Maggot in video celebration of Beyonce's 40th birthday (Oprah was there). Anticipation of backlash for Haz over Invictus Games. Made comment, "People just don't like him." The Pearl deal is probably not going to be a program that saves Netflix!


My pleasure, I also thought that the commentator was insightful, and it's believable that she has a N*flix contact. You made an excellent summary. It's fun that she thinks that only the stans' children will (be forced to) watch Pearl.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> So I don't have to give any more clicks -- which side of the family disobeyed her wishes and were those wishes in writing, or just a casual comment.


Mother and sisters and, as far as I understood, Diana wrote a wish letter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> *1980 fashion was lovely *and then Diana the following year, went and ruined it with that huge silk-taffeta wrinkled pouf of a thing which all the young girls copied.... then finally Carolyn Bessette showed them a thing or two.



Are you...sure? I might be too young to appreciate it, but IMO 80s fashion was pretty awful. Also, Carolyn got married in 1996, you'd hope fashion would have moved on by then.

ETA: I think Carole's dress still has that 70s vibe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> So I don't have to give any more clicks -- which side of the family disobeyed her wishes and were those wishes in writing, or just a casual comment.



This is from the link posted:
*A Princess’s wishes… overridden*
In December of 1997, *Diana’s mother and sister *went to court and obtained a “variation order,” permitting them to distribute the princess’s estate differently from how she’d specified:


The two princes would not receive their shares of Diana’s estate until the age of 30 (although they would begin receiving income distributions at age 25).
Instead of splitting 25 percent of Princess Diana’s jewels and possessions, each of the godchildren would receive a single memento, chosen by the executors. And none of that would happen until the younger prince, Harry, turned 30 in 2014.


and this, from Forbes, 2014: 








						As Remainder Of Princess Diana's Estate Passes To Harry, Troubling Questions Remain
					

Yesterday marked Prince Harry's 30th birthday. His mother, the iconic Lady Di, passed away just over 17 years ago, following the tragic crash as Diana and Dodi Fayed sped away from paparazzi in France.  What was so special about Harry's 30th birthday (other than the fact that he's still single...




					www.forbes.com
				




After Diana passed on August 31, 1997, *her mother, Frances Ruth Shand Kydd, and her sister, Lady Elizabeth Sarah Lavinia McCorquodale*, became executors of her Estate, based on Diana's last will and testament dated June 1, 1993 (amended through a codicil in 1996).  The probate filings revealed that Diana left behind assets valued at around £21 million (or worth about 31.5 million in USD at the time), netting £17 million after estate taxes.  Originally, the will called for these assets to be held in trust for Diana's sons, Princes William and Harry, until they turned 25.

As to her collection of personal property (called "chattels" in the will), Diana's will directed the executors "to give effect as soon as possible but not later than two years following my death to any written memorandum or notes of wishes of mine."  Diana penned a Letter of Wishes, dated the day after she signed the will, and asked that all of her jewelry and three-fourths of her chattels pass to her sons, with one-quarter of the rest earmarked for her 17 godchildren.  Seems clear, right?

Apparently Diana's executors at the time didn't think so.  *Without notifying the parents of any of the godchildren* (who were minors for the most part), the executors petitioned the probate court for a "variance" of the will.  They obtained the variance, which included a delay of the distributions to William and Harry until they each turned 30, instead of 25 (although they were able to start receiving interest from the trust fund at age 25).  The variance also gave the 17 godchildren one item each from Diana's Estate, rather than the one-quarter of the value of all of her personal property (aside from the jewelry), along with other changes.

The change to Princess Diana's Letter of Wishes was kept secret for several years, until it was revealed through unrelated court proceedings. When the parents of the godchildren were told about the Letter of Wishes, they were, by and large, shocked and outraged.  Instead of receiving one-quarter of the personal property (each share of which would have been worth, conservatively, £100,000 or $160,000), each godchild received what was called by some a "tacky memento."

The court allowed the executors to ignore the Letter of Wishes because it did not contain certain language required by British law, and instead used words like "discretion" and "wishes," which meant that ultimately Diana's sister and mother had discretion whether or not to honor her wishes.  But Lady Di presumably wouldn't have written the Letter of Wishes -- and directed her executors to follow such writings in her will -- without good reason.

One on hand, it may appear that Diana's mother and sister simply wanted to protect the interests of William and Harry, insuring they received all of Diana's personal property, instead of only three-fourths.  But, until this week, William and Harry were not given the property.  Because of the court-permitted "variance", when the distribution age was changed to 30 (from 25), it also meant that all of Diana's belongings could be held until Harry's 30th birthday.

What type of personal property is involved?  Diana's famed wedding dress is the centerpiece.  The collection of 150 items also includes 28 other dresses, diamond tiaras, photographs, letters, family paintings, home movies, scores and lyrics from the "Candle in the Wind" tribute song sung by Elton John, and much more.

And here is where it gets even more interesting.  Throughout the last 17 years, the collection was held by Diana's brother, Earl Spencer, who looked after the famed wedding dress and other property until this week.  Spencer displayed the collection at Althorp, the Spencer family estate in England where Diana was raised, for two months each year.  During those two months, visitors paid admission to visit Althorp, view the collection called "Diana: A Celebration," and visit her burial site.

For the other ten months of the year, the collection traveled around the United States and other parts of the world, on loan to different museums and similar display sites.  The Princess Diana Collection website reported that the collection raised over two million dollars (U.S.) for charities as of 2011.  The Spencer family says the proceeds were donated to a charitable fund created in Diana's memory after she passed, called the "Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund."

What will William and Harry do with the collection?  That of course remains to be seen. Most likely, they will not use it for income.  Each reportedly received more than £10 million as of their 30th birthdays (with estimated interest and taxes applied to the reported value of the assets when Diana's estate was opened in probate).

The more troubling questions that may never be answered (at least publicly) are:  What was the true motivation for the Spencer family in disregarding the Letter of Wishes and delaying the distributions to William and Harry?  Did they do it with revenue for Althorp in mind?  And do William and Harry approve of how it was handled?

And, most importantly, is this what Princess Diana would have wanted?

Her Letter of Wishes was addressed in the will, through the provision that directed writings like it to be honored "as soon as possible but not later than two years" after her death. Yet, it was almost completely disregarded.  Instead, her property was put on public display, for money, over the course of 17 years.

While we can only speculate on how Diana may have felt about this, we can point to a clear lesson to be learned.  No one should ever rely on a letter, note, or other informal writing to pass along significant assets (whether monetary or sentimental in value).  If the wishes expressed in the Letter of Wishes had been included directly into Diana's last will and testament, then the lawyer who prepared the will could have made certain that the wishes were followed.

It is a common practice for estate planning attorneys to incorporate written lists directing how personal property is to be distributed into the estate planning documents.  For example, the person who signs the will or trust may include a signed and dated list directing who is to receive specific items.  This practice is usually fine.

But in Diana's case, she tried to pass along one-quarter of her collection of personal property worth millions.  Items that important and valuable should be addressed directly in a will -- or even better, a revocable living trust -- so there is no question or confusion over what the individual wants to happen to them. And, this will help insure there are no variances to their wishes later on. Letters and notes written by non-lawyers can often fail to be honored, just liked Diana's Letter of Wishes.

Many people make this mistake in their own estate planning.  While it is rare that items this valuable would be effected, many times people try to change their will or direct their final wishes through a letter, note, or conversation, rather than using an experienced estate planning attorney to prepare or update the will or trust the right way.  It's a shortcut that often leads to conflict and fighting -- and not just in royal families.


----------



## Lodpah

Jayne1 said:


> it is a sweet nod, and is also a great gown!
> 
> 1980 fashion was lovely and then Diana the following year, went and ruined it with that huge silk-taffeta wrinkled pouf of a thing which all the young girls copied.... then finally Carolyn Bessette showed them a thing or two.


Oh my gosh on Amazon Prime there’s a documentary about Iris Apfel. Stunning dresser and get style is so amazing. I’m  hitting thrift shops for custome jewelry.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> so they weren't at the emmys due to parental leave?  interesting.  I would think they'd have had the option if their show was nominated.  and I would have thought she would jump at the chance to show up on a red carpet


When she saw Anya Taylor-Joy and how thin she was, she was happy she didn't go because until she can look like this, Meghan will be hiding in one of the bathrooms.  So don't expect to see her on the red carpet ever.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you...sure? I might be too young to appreciate it, but IMO 80s fashion was pretty awful. Also, Carolyn got married in 1996, you'd hope fashion would have moved on by then.
> 
> ETA: I think Carole's dress still has that 70s vibe.



1980 fashion------as opposed to 1980's fashion------ was actually pretty tame, IIRC
It bridged the gap between the end of the 70's dreary duds/Studio 54 spandex and the easily caricatured trends that were to come.
I recall jumpsuits and pegged pants and of course the prairie look was yuuuuuge thanks in no small part to Urban Cowboy being released.


----------



## gracekelly

I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't wait to hear the whinging stories previously told in a new iteration.  She needs to shine a brighter light on why no one asked if she was OK and Archie's skin color and how she REALLY didn't WANT that multimillion dollar wedding etc.  Is anyone really interested?  Thought not.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't wait to hear the whinging stories previously told in a new iteration.  She needs to shine a brighter light on why no one asked if she was OK and Archie's skin color and how she REALLY didn't WANT that multimillion dollar weddiong etc.  Is anyone really interested?  Thought not.



Bring on Jason and his chair!!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is from the link posted:
> *A Princess’s wishes… overridden*
> In December of 1997, *Diana’s mother and sister *went to court and obtained a “variation order,” permitting them to distribute the princess’s estate differently from how she’d specified:
> 
> 
> The two princes would not receive their shares of Diana’s estate until the age of 30 (although they would begin receiving income distributions at age 25).
> Instead of splitting 25 percent of Princess Diana’s jewels and possessions, each of the godchildren would receive a single memento, chosen by the executors. And none of that would happen until the younger prince, Harry, turned 30 in 2014.
> 
> 
> and this, from Forbes, 2014:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Remainder Of Princess Diana's Estate Passes To Harry, Troubling Questions Remain
> 
> 
> Yesterday marked Prince Harry's 30th birthday. His mother, the iconic Lady Di, passed away just over 17 years ago, following the tragic crash as Diana and Dodi Fayed sped away from paparazzi in France.  What was so special about Harry's 30th birthday (other than the fact that he's still single...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Diana passed on August 31, 1997, *her mother, Frances Ruth Shand Kydd, and her sister, Lady Elizabeth Sarah Lavinia McCorquodale*, became executors of her Estate, based on Diana's last will and testament dated June 1, 1993 (amended through a codicil in 1996).  The probate filings revealed that Diana left behind assets valued at around £21 million (or worth about 31.5 million in USD at the time), netting £17 million after estate taxes.  Originally, the will called for these assets to be held in trust for Diana's sons, Princes William and Harry, until they turned 25.
> 
> As to her collection of personal property (called "chattels" in the will), Diana's will directed the executors "to give effect as soon as possible but not later than two years following my death to any written memorandum or notes of wishes of mine."  Diana penned a Letter of Wishes, dated the day after she signed the will, and asked that all of her jewelry and three-fourths of her chattels pass to her sons, with one-quarter of the rest earmarked for her 17 godchildren.  Seems clear, right?
> 
> Apparently Diana's executors at the time didn't think so.  *Without notifying the parents of any of the godchildren* (who were minors for the most part), the executors petitioned the probate court for a "variance" of the will.  They obtained the variance, which included a delay of the distributions to William and Harry until they each turned 30, instead of 25 (although they were able to start receiving interest from the trust fund at age 25).  The variance also gave the 17 godchildren one item each from Diana's Estate, rather than the one-quarter of the value of all of her personal property (aside from the jewelry), along with other changes.
> 
> The change to Princess Diana's Letter of Wishes was kept secret for several years, until it was revealed through unrelated court proceedings. When the parents of the godchildren were told about the Letter of Wishes, they were, by and large, shocked and outraged.  Instead of receiving one-quarter of the personal property (each share of which would have been worth, conservatively, £100,000 or $160,000), each godchild received what was called by some a "tacky memento."
> 
> The court allowed the executors to ignore the Letter of Wishes because it did not contain certain language required by British law, and instead used words like "discretion" and "wishes," which meant that ultimately Diana's sister and mother had discretion whether or not to honor her wishes.  But Lady Di presumably wouldn't have written the Letter of Wishes -- and directed her executors to follow such writings in her will -- without good reason.
> 
> One on hand, it may appear that Diana's mother and sister simply wanted to protect the interests of William and Harry, insuring they received all of Diana's personal property, instead of only three-fourths.  But, until this week, William and Harry were not given the property.  Because of the court-permitted "variance", when the distribution age was changed to 30 (from 25), it also meant that all of Diana's belongings could be held until Harry's 30th birthday.
> 
> What type of personal property is involved?  Diana's famed wedding dress is the centerpiece.  The collection of 150 items also includes 28 other dresses, diamond tiaras, photographs, letters, family paintings, home movies, scores and lyrics from the "Candle in the Wind" tribute song sung by Elton John, and much more.
> 
> And here is where it gets even more interesting.  Throughout the last 17 years, the collection was held by Diana's brother, Earl Spencer, who looked after the famed wedding dress and other property until this week.  Spencer displayed the collection at Althorp, the Spencer family estate in England where Diana was raised, for two months each year.  During those two months, visitors paid admission to visit Althorp, view the collection called "Diana: A Celebration," and visit her burial site.
> 
> For the other ten months of the year, the collection traveled around the United States and other parts of the world, on loan to different museums and similar display sites.  The Princess Diana Collection website reported that the collection raised over two million dollars (U.S.) for charities as of 2011.  The Spencer family says the proceeds were donated to a charitable fund created in Diana's memory after she passed, called the "Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund."
> 
> What will William and Harry do with the collection?  That of course remains to be seen. Most likely, they will not use it for income.  Each reportedly received more than £10 million as of their 30th birthdays (with estimated interest and taxes applied to the reported value of the assets when Diana's estate was opened in probate).
> 
> The more troubling questions that may never be answered (at least publicly) are:  What was the true motivation for the Spencer family in disregarding the Letter of Wishes and delaying the distributions to William and Harry?  Did they do it with revenue for Althorp in mind?  And do William and Harry approve of how it was handled?
> 
> And, most importantly, is this what Princess Diana would have wanted?
> 
> Her Letter of Wishes was addressed in the will, through the provision that directed writings like it to be honored "as soon as possible but not later than two years" after her death. Yet, it was almost completely disregarded.  Instead, her property was put on public display, for money, over the course of 17 years.
> 
> While we can only speculate on how Diana may have felt about this, we can point to a clear lesson to be learned.  No one should ever rely on a letter, note, or other informal writing to pass along significant assets (whether monetary or sentimental in value).  If the wishes expressed in the Letter of Wishes had been included directly into Diana's last will and testament, then the lawyer who prepared the will could have made certain that the wishes were followed.
> 
> It is a common practice for estate planning attorneys to incorporate written lists directing how personal property is to be distributed into the estate planning documents.  For example, the person who signs the will or trust may include a signed and dated list directing who is to receive specific items.  This practice is usually fine.
> 
> But in Diana's case, she tried to pass along one-quarter of her collection of personal property worth millions.  Items that important and valuable should be addressed directly in a will -- or even better, a revocable living trust -- so there is no question or confusion over what the individual wants to happen to them. And, this will help insure there are no variances to their wishes later on. Letters and notes written by non-lawyers can often fail to be honored, just liked Diana's Letter of Wishes.
> 
> Many people make this mistake in their own estate planning.  While it is rare that items this valuable would be effected, many times people try to change their will or direct their final wishes through a letter, note, or conversation, rather than using an experienced estate planning attorney to prepare or update the will or trust the right way.  It's a shortcut that often leads to conflict and fighting -- and not just in royal families.


Wonder what the parents of the godchildren did with those "tacky mementos?"  Sell them?  Many times executors have more common sense than the person who composed their wishes in a will and what they do makes more sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO the suddenness of her death weighed heavily on her mother’s  and sister’s minds.  The boys were too young to make decisions about who gets what.  Plus, with 17 (!) godchildren, it is highly unlikely all would agree to anything.  One quarter of $17 million is a significant amount of money, even by today’s standard, approximately 300,000.  Perhaps this is where some of Harry’s anger and angst comes from. He may feel some of the godchildren did not really know her, so they should be excluded.

ETA:  see @marietouchet ‘s post about the corrected amount. Apologies for the error.


----------



## bag-mania

I wouldn't have thought she would have known all 17 godchildren either, but apparently Diana did make an effort to see them since they were mostly the children of her friends. For what it's worth the Queen has 30 godchildren.

From a DM article about Diana's godchildren in 2018:

With characteristic care, she sent each of her 17 godchildren a card and presents on their birthday and every Christmas — followed by a visit laden with hugs and kisses.

For these youngsters, Princess Diana was the best godmother in the world.

But then, on August 31, 1997, the presents stopped. Tragically, too, after Diana’s death there was an unseemly row over her godchildren’s inheritance which saw them end up with little more than trinkets despite her £21 million estate.

Today, those adored youngsters — aged between two and 15 in 1997 — are now mostly in their 30s. The churlish ignoring of Diana’s instructions that were carefully written into a ‘letter of wishes’ accompanying her will is buried in the past.

Their warm memories are more important than the money. The ten girls and seven boys were mainly the offspring of Diana’s oldest friends — classmates and flatmates, with a sprinkling of newer friends or via a dynastic link.










						Look what became of Princess Diana's godchildren
					

With characteristic care, Princess Diana sent each of her 17 godchildren a card and presents on their birthday and every Christmas — followed by a visit laden with hugs and kisses.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you...sure? I might be too young to appreciate it, but IMO 80s fashion was pretty awful. Also, Carolyn got married in 1996, you'd hope fashion would have moved on by then.
> 
> ETA: I think Carole's dress still has that 70s vibe.


It is like Beatrice wearing the queen’s gown for her wedding, I saw that as a sweet thought although it was a very 1950s dress


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> 1980 fashion------as opposed to 1980's fashion------ was actually pretty tame, IIRC
> It bridged the gap between the end of the 70's dreary duds/Studio 54 spandex and the easily caricatured trends that were to come.
> I recall jumpsuits and pegged pants and of course the prairie look was yuuuuuge thanks in no small part to Urban Cowboy being released.



The photos from James’s wedding are beautiful and touching.  The family and friends lined up on each side of the car, wow.  The females wearing floral dresses, the men in suits, the adorable car - this really shows how touching intimate ceremonies can be.  Brides should take note - smaller is far more meaningful than a big extravaganza.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the suddenness of her death weighed heavily on her mother’s  and sister’s minds.  The boys were too young to make decisions about who gets what.  Plus, with 17 (!) godchildren, it is highly unlikely all would agree to anything.  One quarter of $17 million is a significant amount of money, even by today’s standard, approximately 300,000.  Perhaps this is where some of Harry’s anger and angst comes from. He may feel some of the godchildren did not really know her, so they should be excluded.


All you solicitors, please correct me if I am wrong …
The 17 godchildren were to get a fourth of the personal property (chattels) ie bibelots rather than jewelry and cash, so not a fourth of £17M
Let’s say there was £170,000 of stuff - knick knacks, paintings, clothing 
then each child would have gotten £2500 (ignoring death duties), instead each got an item , a painting, a figurine, a piece of clothing 
and the executors petitioned the court , all very above board


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wouldn't have thought she would have known all 17 godchildren either, but apparently Diana did make an effort to see them since they were mostly the children of her friends. For what it's worth the Queen has 30 godchildren.
> 
> From a DM article about Diana's godchildren in 2018:
> 
> With characteristic care, she sent each of her 17 godchildren a card and presents on their birthday and every Christmas — followed by a visit laden with hugs and kisses.
> 
> For these youngsters, Princess Diana was the best godmother in the world.
> 
> But then, on August 31, 1997, the presents stopped. Tragically, too, after Diana’s death there was an unseemly row over her godchildren’s inheritance which saw them end up with little more than trinkets despite her £21 million estate.
> 
> Today, those adored youngsters — aged between two and 15 in 1997 — are now mostly in their 30s. The churlish ignoring of Diana’s instructions that were carefully written into a ‘letter of wishes’ accompanying her will is buried in the past.
> 
> Their warm memories are more important than the money. The ten girls and seven boys were mainly the offspring of Diana’s oldest friends — classmates and flatmates, with a sprinkling of newer friends or via a dynastic link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look what became of Princess Diana's godchildren
> 
> 
> With characteristic care, Princess Diana sent each of her 17 godchildren a card and presents on their birthday and every Christmas — followed by a visit laden with hugs and kisses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Seems like they had no need of the money, so why the fuss about their trinkets?  Again, one more reason to keep this stuff private.  We the public do not need to know these details.  Imagine reporters calling up these godchildren 20 years later!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> All you solicitors, please correct me if I am wrong …
> The 17 godchildren were to get a fourth of the personal property (chattels) ie bibelots rather than jewelry and cash, so not a fourth of £17M
> Let’s say there was £170,000 of stuff - knick knacks, paintings, clothing
> then each child would have gotten £2500 (ignoring death duties), instead each got an item , a painting, a figurine, a piece of clothing
> and the executors petitioned the court , all very above board



Ooooh, good point. I will correct my post. Thank you.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems like they had no need of the money, so why the fuss about their trinkets?  Again, one more reason to keep this stuff private.  We the public do not need to know these details.  Imagine reporters calling up these godchildren 20 years later!



I don't know who made the fuss. Maybe it was a media-created story. None of the godchildren has complained as near as I can tell.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> But then, on August 31, 1997, the presents stopped. Tragically, too, after Diana’s death there was an unseemly row over her godchildren’s inheritance which saw them end up with little more than trinkets despite her £21 million estate.



It's one thing her wishes were ignored, but what is wrong with these - probably wealthy as well - parents to make such a fuss? In my bubble godparents aren't there to make their godchildren rich.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> It is like Beatrice wearing the queen’s gown for her wedding, I saw that as a sweet thought although it was a very 1950s dress



I have no problem with the dress at all, I thought it matched the apparently laid back wedding vibe perfectly, and it fit the bride well. I was just vetoing 80s fashion being gorgeous 

ETA: I'm the only one who can fit my grandmother's wedding dress because everyone else is towering over us...but sadly, it hasn't been preserved as well as these two and has completely yellowed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don't know who made the fuss. Maybe it was a media-created story. None of the godchildren has complained as near as I can tell.



Good point.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2003, article in spoiler :

_WHEN the last will and testament of a loved one is read, it is always a tense family scene. For centuries, writers have used it to explore human emotions, from greed and exhilaration, to disappointment and rage. 

But seldom has a will produced so many undercurrents of bad feeling as that of the Princess of Wales. 

Ever since it emerged at the trial of her former butler Paul Burrell that Princess Diana added a brief 'letter of wishes' in favour of her 17 godchildren - a letter which her executors ignored - *there has been a rising tide of anger*. 

*A muted anger*, it must be said. An anger which dare not speak its name for fear of the outspoken voices being labelled greedy or acquisitive or, in such exquisite company, accused of rank bad taste. 

Even by the standards of inheritance disagreements, this is an *extraordinary drama*. The cast of characters includes a bishop, a former Prime Minister, three Princes, the mother of a Princess and some of the most distinguished families in Britain._





__





						IS THIS THE LAST BETRAYAL?
					

WHEN the last will and testament of a loved one is read, it is always  a tense family scene. For centuries, writers have used it to explore  human emotions, from greed and exhilaration, to disappointment and  rage.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Spoiler: ”Not many paupers”…



WHEN the last will and testament of a loved one is read, it is always a tense family scene. For centuries, writers have used it to explore human emotions, from greed and exhilaration, to disappointment and rage.

But seldom has a will produced so many undercurrents of bad feeling as that of the Princess of Wales.

Ever since it emerged at the trial of her former butler Paul Burrell that Princess Diana added a brief 'letter of wishes' in favour of her 17 godchildren - a letter which her executors ignored - there has been a rising tide of anger.

A muted anger, it must be said. An anger which dare not speak its name for fear of the outspoken voices being labelled greedy or acquisitive or, in such exquisite company, accused of rank bad taste.

Even by the standards of inheritance disagreements, this is an extraordinary drama. The cast of characters includes a bishop, a former Prime Minister, three Princes, the mother of a Princess and some of the most distinguished families in Britain.
The cleric is the Bishop of London, third in the Church of England hierarchy, no less. He is accused of 'cowardice' in failing to ensure that Diana's wishes were carried out; the Princes are William and Harry and their father, the Prince of Wales, all of whom are 'troubled' by the row.

There are also the godchildren themselves and, crucially, their parents, most of whom will only admit their bitterness in whispers.

AND then there are the executors who made the decision to ignore Diana's letter: her sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale, and her mother, Frances Shand Kydd. Indeed, they went as far as the High Court for permission to ignore the document and, on a technicality, were told they could do so if they wished.

But why? It was Lady Sarah who drove round the country visiting the parents of the godchildren in an estate car in order to hand out newspaper-wrapped 'trinkets' instead of the 25 per cent of Diana's 'goods and chattels' as the Princess had expressly wished in her letter. These trinkets included a framed print which, an inscription on the back revealed, had been a gift to the Princess from Argos, the High Street catalogue store.

In recent days, Lady Sarah has begun a second circumnavigation of all the godchildren, this time by telephone.

So far, these calls have offered no explanation for the inexplicable decision to ignore Diana's wishes. She is clearly unsettled by the disparagement, but only enough for her to apologise for not informing the families of the existence of the crucial letter, nothing else.

Little wonder that disquiet has become anger, and anger bitterness, and that bitterness has now given way to words such as 'scandal', 'betrayal' and 'disgrace'. One intimate figure even refers to the executors as 'bastards'.

Indeed, the Mail can reveal that royal advisers have become so concerned that they have been considering ways in which a fourth executor of Diana's estate - perhaps an accountant or lawyer with experience in such matters - could be appointed to find a way out of the predicament.

So what is behind this extraordinary saga that doesn't allow the Princess of Wales to rest in peace? In a major investigation, we have talked to many of the parents of the godchildren and others involved in the issue. What emerges is a fascinating drama of envy, suspicion and intrigue.

It also involves distant echoes of the Princess's troubled friendships and the fervent manner in which, after Diana was killed, her sister and mother sought to reclaim her as a Spencer.

Diana's 17 godchildren span the years of her life as a royal Princess.

Their parents range from King Constantine of Greece and the Duke of Westminster, to the Princess's old schoolfriends and former flatmates.

But first, the letter of wishes. Diana wrote it, with legal help, on June 2, 1993, the day after she had signed her will. At the time, three years away from her divorce settlement, her worth was relatively modest, certainly under Pounds 1 million. She was a month short of her 32nd birthday.

The document was quite specific in what the Princess intended. 'I would like you to divide at your discretion my personal chattels between my sons and my godchildren,' she wrote. 'The division is to be three-quarters in value to my sons, and one quarter between my godchildren.'

Note the phrase 'in value'. She stipulated that her jewellery should be kept separate from the calculation in order that William and Harry could give it to their future wives.

The shattering unexpectedness of her death in 1997 threw her family into turmoil. Decisions had to be taken, and they sought the help of the High Court.

When they went before Lord Justice Scott they had three requests involving Diana's will: to ratify the Bishop of London, Richard Chartres, as a third executor; permission to vary the will to enable them to give Burrell a special bequest of Pounds 50,000, and, curiously, permission to set aside Diana's letter of wishes.

All of these demands were granted. The letter of wishes, it turned out, was not binding because eight vital legal words were missing. The words that were omitted were: 'There be no legal binding trust or obligation'. But legally binding or not, surely it was their duty to carry it out?

BUT what makes the decision to ignore the letter all the more bizarre is the fact that 'personal chattels' is a legal term relating to tangible possessions only, not financial holdings and investments.

Therefore, it could not have threatened Diana's Pounds 18 million cash divorce settlement from Prince Charles which raised the value of her estate to Pounds 21 million.

By the time of her death, Diana had accumulated private possessions of quality - fine furniture, paintings, ornaments - which filled her apartment in Kensington Palace and, as was to famously emerge, some of which found their way to Burrell's home for safekeeping.

The probate value of these 'personal chattels' was never revealed, but just the other week, a major clue emerged from Lady Sarah herself.

She was at a dinner and was complaining about the criticism she and her mother have received over Diana's will since the collapse of the Burrell trial, and she said she couldn't understand 'all this fuss over Pounds 150,000 each'.

This throwaway remark was a suitable postscript to her memorable, some say offensive, observation at the trial, when questioned about Diana's godchildren and the bequests they did not get.

When Burrell's counsel, Lord Carlile QC, suggested: 'You thought they might get too much?' Lady Sarah replied: 'There were not many paupers there.'

For the record, apart from the Argos print, the mementos chosen with such tender care by the executors and distributed in place of what Diana intended, included a decanter inscribed to the Princess from a Women's Institute in Wales, a china cockerel, a coffee set, a carriage clock, a model harp, watercolours, hunting figures, a model of a bird, a shepherdess figurine and an incomplete tea service.

One person, who is both a godfather to one of Diana's godchildren and an eminent lawyer, was privately asked by the child's family to look into the legality of the executors' actions. He reported back that Mrs Shand Kydd and Lady Sarah had done nothing illegal.

But yesterday, brimming over with anger, he said: 'No deceased person who has written a letter of wishes with instructions to their executors to carry out their wishes ever thinks for one moment that the bastards will ignore those wishes. This letter was not written by some silly young girl who didn't know what she was doing.

'It was very clearly a legallydrafted letter of wishes because it refers to "personal chattels" - a technical term no lay person would ever use and which has a very precise meaning. It is a sad, but clear, breach of trust.'

HAVING acted simply as a family friend, he says he sought a meeting to discuss the matter with former Prime Minister John Major, who was appointed to watch over the interests of William and Harry after their mother's death.

'I believed Mr Major could be an influential figure in sorting out the mess,' he says, 'but he declined to see me. If he was acting as guardian of the boys' interests, he should have made sure the wishes of their mother were respected. He lamentably failed to do so.

'As for the parents, none of them can step forward because it is demeaning in the circumstances to complain that they should have got more.' Diana's former accountant, Joseph Saunders, whom Diana consulted when she was making her will, is amazed that her wishes were not followed.

He told the Mail: 'I was aware of her letter of wishes and not adhering to it is scandalous. Why cheat the godchildren of what they were entitled to?'

The father of one of Diana's goddaughters, a successful professional man, heard from a third party about the existence of Diana's letter of wishes and personally delivered a letter to the executors' London solicitors, Lawrence Graham, asking to see a copy of it.

He says: 'Not only did I not see it, but they didn't even have the grace to reply to me.'

He said he was particularly upset that 'the executors not only broke the terms of Diana's wishes, but then tried to make it look with their mementos that they were being spontaneously munificent. This is the most grotesque aspect of the whole business.' Another godchild's father, living in the Home Counties, is equally furious. 'If this was about anyone else but the Princess of Wales, people would be suing,' he rages.

'Morally, what the executors did was a disgrace, but the whole issue would never have arisen if they had written to us to say exactly what they were doing, and why. But there was no communication whatsoever - plain bad manners.

'Even so, just talking about it makes us look like we are grubbing around - I don't want anyone to be able to accuse my child of being money-grubbing over the will of a godmother who was much-loved. This isn't about money, it's about principle and moral duty.

'The other issue, of course, is the question of what happened to the chattels. Where are they? I can tell you, the majority are at bloody Althorp.'

Althorp, the Spencer family seat in Northamptonshire, is where Diana's brother, Earl Spencer, has established a museum - charging Pounds 10.50 a head - incorporating many of her personal things.

Even Patrick Jephson, the Princess's former private secretary who was an executor of her will until they fell out and he resigned, has come out of hiding to join the growing chorus of criticism.

Some people see his move as an attempt to rehabilitate himself after publication of his memoirs two years ago that portrayed Diana as volatile and which led to Prince William accusing him of betrayal.

Jephson insists that had he still been an executor (he was replaced by Lady Sarah), he 'would not have hesitated to carry out her wishes in this matter, and I don't hesitate now to ask why they have not been followed'.

He said he particularly recalled discussing one of Diana's goddaughters (Domenica, daughter of her close friend, Rosa Monckton, and her newspaper editor husband, Dominic Lawson) with the Princess.

Domenica, now seven, has Down's Syndrome and he recalled that Diana was aware that she would need constant and costly care throughout her life.

'Diana definitely wanted to be generous,' says Jephson. The mother of another godchild, a woman who was at school with the Princess, said simply: 'Diana's wishes should have been complied with. I am sure that is what she would have wanted.'

Throughout this bitter dispute, one executor has sought to remain outside the row - the Bishop of London.

RICHARD CHARTRES, a friend since Cambridge of the Prince of Wales, and a contender last year to become Archbishop of Canterbury, was appointed an executor three months after Diana's death.

This was many months before Lady Sarah even began her famous delivery of trinkets.

He told the court during the Burrell trial that according to his 'best recollection', he had never seen the letter of wishes and was unaware of its 'precise terms'.

Since then, he has sought to distance himself from the decision-to ignore Diana's wishes by claiming that it had already been taken by Lady Sarah and her mother before he was appointed, and that he did not consider it his duty to re-examine decisions that had already been made.

This week, his office repeated his assertion that he had never seen the letter. Yet Lawrence Graham, the executors' solicitors, told the Mail that on his appointment, 'the bishop would have been provided with background information, including the letter of wishes.'

Indeed, the Mail has obtained a witness statement made by the bishop in June last year, prior to the Burrell trial.

In it, he praises Lady Sarah and Mrs Shand Kydd for their 'impeccable professionalism and integrity'. He goes on to declare: 'As far as I know, the executors have carefully adhered to all the wishes of the Princess.'

Friends of the bishop say he is 'surprised and frustrated' and claim he has been dragged into the dispute by people with a vested interest in keeping it going.

That is certainly not how the father of one godchild sees it. 'In my view, the bishop is guilty of appalling moral cowardice,' he declares.

'As an independent executor appointed soon after the Princess's death, it was his duty to ensure that her wishes were followed, unless there was a sound legal reason for not doing so.

'Instead, the Princess's letter was allowed to be ignored because of a legal loophole. I am not surprised he is troubled by what is going on. I know that other people in the Church of England are troubled by it, too.'

FACED by this fusillade of condemnation, Lady Sarah and Diana's mother might be pleading for forgiveness. But the Spencers are resilient - some would say stubborn. They are not giving an inch.

Mrs Shand Kydd has told friends that she still believes she and her eldest daughter 'did what Diana would have wanted'.

What on earth can they mean by this?

To begin to understand the motive for their actions, one must look down the list of 17 godchildren. They span 14 years of Diana's life as a Princess during which friendships came and went.

In fact, by the time she died, she had fallen out with many of the parents to whom she was once close enough to be a godmother to their child.

Lady Sarah and Mrs Shand Kydd were conscious of this and especially sensitive, we are told, to the fact that some of the parents had sided with Charles over the bitter marriage break-up.

However, the Spencers seem to have overlooked the fact that - whatever her relationship with the parents - Diana never lost touch with her godchildren and was always generous to them at birthdays and Christmas.

Then there is the 'Spencer' factor. One godparent, who was particularly close to the Princess, believes that the Spencers set out to 'claim her back' after her death.

As the godparent explains: 'They didn't like the fact that we, her friends, perhaps knew her more than they did themselves.

'I am convinced that is why they did all that shredding of her papers and letters and buried her on the island at Althorp where they can have her to themselves. They felt they had to reclaim her, and everything that was hers.'

So how can this distressing dispute be resolved?

'There must be a happy medium between what was given and what was intended by Diana,' one parent says.

Meanwhile, there is William, and of course Harry, to consider, mindful of the fact that everything the Spencers took to Althorp from Kensington Palace is the property of the Princes.

Although 'troubled' by the will issue, William is anxious not to do anything which goes against the wishes of his aunt and grandmother, especially as they are also the trustees of his trust fund, to which he does not have complete access until he is 25.

On the other hand, if he were to ask for a realistic distribution of his late mother's 'personal chattels' among her godchildren, some of whom are his friends, the executors could hardly refuse him.


----------



## Chanbal

One more on the Emmys!











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle humiliated by Emmys host over Oprah interview
					

CEDRIC the Entertainer humiliated Prince Harry and Meghan Markle last night as he roasted the couple over their bombshell chat with Oprah Winfrey. The 2021 Emmy Awards host, 57,…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don't know who made the fuss. Maybe it was a media-created story. None of the godchildren has complained as near as I can tell.



The godchildren and parents only became aware of Diana's letter several years later and didn't like that her wishes were not fulfilled. Though, it was perhaps too late to make a fuss. 

Diana knew that her boys would be well taken care of by the father's side, so I can see her wanting to leave something really nice to her 17 godchildren.   

"_The change to Princess Diana's Letter of Wishes was kept secret for several years, until it was revealed through unrelated court proceedings. *When the parents of the godchildren were told about the Letter of Wishes, they were, by and large, shocked and outraged.  Instead of receiving one-quarter of the personal property (each share of which would have been worth, conservatively, £100,000 or $160,000), each godchild received what was called by some a "tacky memento.*_"









						As Remainder Of Princess Diana's Estate Passes To Harry, Troubling Questions Remain
					

Yesterday marked Prince Harry's 30th birthday. His mother, the iconic Lady Di, passed away just over 17 years ago, following the tragic crash as Diana and Dodi Fayed sped away from paparazzi in France.  What was so special about Harry's 30th birthday (other than the fact that he's still single...




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Chanbal

Another interesting headline. 










						Richard Madeley slams Harry and Meg's climate 'lectures' while taking private jets
					

RICHARD Madeley today hit out at Meghan and Harry for lecturing Brits on climate change. The Good Morning Britain host said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex make a “big deal” about not fl…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Valid points! 

_FOR a couple who have announced their desire to withdraw from the public spotlight and live quietly and privately Prince Harry and his wife - whom my own CO has dubbed Me-Agen - seem to be making an awful lot of noise._
_
For a grandson miles from succession to the throne to claim he has to emigrate to California to get away from it all, then plunge back into it while living in a mortgaged mansion is ludicrous and patience is already running thin to threadbare._









						Our patience with Harry and Meghan is running thin FREDERICK FORSYTH
					

FOR a couple who have announced their desire to withdraw from the public spotlight and live quietly and privately Prince Harry and his wife - whom my own CO has dubbed Me-Agen - seem to be making an awful lot of noise.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Translation .. *they weren't invited*!!!!!


as much as I'd like to think they were not invited, if they were nominated isn't it a given that they could go?  
Maybe they were told they could go but would not get up on the stage as presenters or to give any sort of speech
After all, they couldn't just be there along with the rest of the unwashed masses or lesser known celebs


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Wonder what the parents of the godchildren did with those "tacky mementos?"  Sell them?*  Many times executors have more common sense than the person who composed their wishes in a will and what they do makes more sense.



If those 'tacky mementos' belonged to Diana, I would think that it would be easy to find collectors to buy them. 

I knew a person who had a special little hammer to take care of tacky gifts. I never understood why this person didn't donate them instead, but this person's approach was rather original.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> One more on the Emmys!
> 
> View attachment 5200086
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle humiliated by Emmys host over Oprah interview
> 
> 
> CEDRIC the Entertainer humiliated Prince Harry and Meghan Markle last night as he roasted the couple over their bombshell chat with Oprah Winfrey. The 2021 Emmy Awards host, 57,…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



It’s interesting how everyone sees things differently. I interpreted what he said as he was making fun of the royal family more than Harry and Meghan. They got off kind of easy.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> as much as I'd like to think they were not invited, if they were nominated isn't it a given that they could go?
> Maybe they were told they could go but would not get up on the stage as presenters or to give any sort of speech
> After all, they couldn't just be there along with the rest of the unwashed masses or lesser known celebs


OW was the one nominated, not them. 
"_With only four seats available, Oprah will have to decide whether she would invite the Sussexes to accompany her, her beloved crew, or her family_."








						Meghan, Harry to attend Emmy Awards with Oprah Winfrey?
					

Oprah has a tough decision to make, involving invitation to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at the Emmys




					www.geo.tv


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The godchildren and parents only became aware of Diana's letter several years later and didn't like that her wishes were not fulfilled. Though, it was perhaps too late to make a fuss.
> 
> Diana knew that her boys would be well taken care of by the father's side, so I can see her wanting to leave something really nice to her 17 godchildren.
> 
> "_The change to Princess Diana's Letter of Wishes was kept secret for several years, until it was revealed through unrelated court proceedings. *When the parents of the godchildren were told about the Letter of Wishes, they were, by and large, shocked and outraged.  Instead of receiving one-quarter of the personal property (each share of which would have been worth, conservatively, £100,000 or $160,000), each godchild received what was called by some a "tacky memento.*_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Remainder Of Princess Diana's Estate Passes To Harry, Troubling Questions Remain
> 
> 
> Yesterday marked Prince Harry's 30th birthday. His mother, the iconic Lady Di, passed away just over 17 years ago, following the tragic crash as Diana and Dodi Fayed sped away from paparazzi in France.  What was so special about Harry's 30th birthday (other than the fact that he's still single...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



Most people can handle the news when they are treated with respect.

The DM article above says the sister drove around the countryside and hand delivered the newspaper-wrapped trinkets. Newspaper-wrapped?  Seems a bit casual for such a _touching trinket _IMO. To be a bit repetitive, this is one more example of the tangled web these ‘royals’ weave. With Harry, the apple did not far from the tree. IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It’s interesting how everyone sees things differently. I interpreted what he said as he was making fun of the royal family more than Harry and Meghan. They got off kind of easy.


I've to tell you that I was rather confused, but he didn't sound like a believer of the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Most people can handle the news when they are treated with respect.
> 
> *The DM article above says the sister drove around the countryside and hand delivered the newspaper-wrapped trinkets.* Newspaper-wrapped?  Seems a bit casual for such a _touching trinket _IMO. To be a bit repetitive, this is one more example of the tangled web these ‘royals’ weave. With Harry, the apple ddi not far from the tree. IMO.


It sounds rather cheap imo. From what I understood, they were also making money with the exhibition of Diana's personal belongings …  I would have talked with Diana's kids and respected her wishes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It sounds rather cheap imo. From what I understood, they were also making money with the exhibition of Diana's personal belongings …  I would have talked with Diana's kids and respected her wishes.



Definitely cheap and, as a parent said, just bad manners  I understand wanting to avoid a massive money/trinket grab as well as the need to protect her legacy, but … they goofed, she goofed and now Hazzie the non-influencer has goofed. The Emmys proved how little influence they have. 

ETA: Cedric may know something we don’t.  He said Hazzie “renounced his throne quicker than Eddie Murphy in ‘Coming to America’.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> it is a sweet nod, and is also a great gown!
> 
> 1980 fashion was lovely and then Diana the following year, went and ruined it with that huge silk-taffeta wrinkled pouf of a thing which all the young girls copied.... then finally Carolyn Bessette showed them a thing or two.


I don't know about lovely. I am of that era. We got married shortly after Chuck and Di. Everyone I know who got married around then  had a high necked lacy frilly dress, usually with an empire waist and long sleeves. After Diana more wedding dresses had fitted waists and fuller skirts. But they were all pretty much the same through the 80s. Carolyn Bessette's Calvin Klein silk slip dress was in the 90s.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> as much as I'd like to think they were not invited, if they were nominated isn't it a given that they could go?
> Maybe they were told they could go but would not get up on the stage as presenters or to give any sort of speech
> After all, they couldn't just be there along with the rest of the unwashed masses or lesser known celebs



Tickets were limited to 4, the decision was Oprah's to make. She didn't chose them. 

Tried finding an article with names of who, if anyone, did attend to accept the Award if they had won, and could not. Maybe word leaked it was not going to be Oprah's Inverview and they all stayed away to avoid the embarrassment of not winning? 

From the Net: "However, the talk show host (Oprah)will have to choose whom she will take with her to the award show, as she has received only four tickets due to social-distancing guidelines amid COVID-19. Though Harry and Meghan's shocking revelations had garnered millions of viewers for the interview, it is Winfrey's production team that has been technically nominated for the award.

A source told DailyMail.com that it is Winfrey who "holds the golden tickets and decision in her hands as to who attends." With only three tickets to share between the couple and her production crew, the television presenter has found herself in a quandary.

Emmy chiefs have restricted all the nominees to just four tickets, while leaving the decision to them on who to bring to the indoor-outdoor seating event being held on the Event Deck at L.A. Live, behind the Microsoft Theater in Los Angeles."


----------



## Chanbal

I think this is not here yet.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I don't know who made the fuss. Maybe it was a media-created story. None of the godchildren has complained as near as I can tell.


Media created story or one misreported ? one account says £100k per godchild, another says £150k …. (reporter get confused between $  and £ ?)
So, Diana had £ 6.8 - 10.2 of chattels (assuming 17 kids share a fourth of the chattels ) personal items EXCLUDING jewelry ??? 
Authors say the stuff included antiques and paintings …. No, those were loaned by the Queen, Charles was into antiques not Diana, she liked disco
I don’t for an instant believe that D had £ 7-10 M of stuff. Outside of clothes and jewels, she had no money of her own
i think someone got some numbers wrong in this story, someone supposedly overhead the 150k number from D’s sister , OK, that is rock solid evidence


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's one thing her wishes were ignored, but what is wrong with these - probably wealthy as well - parents to make such a fuss? In my bubble godparents aren't there to make their godchildren rich.


One of my aunts had several godchildren to make up for her childlessness. Some of the parents really pushed their kids to fawn on her, hoping to get the house after she passed on. After 20 years of Parkinson's, the cost of the care draining her savings and assets, I think only one set of parents was still hanging on, hoping their child would get whatever remained of her estate. And no, they weren't poor. They were just greedy.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: Cedric may know something we don’t.  He said Hazzie “renounced his throne quicker than Eddie Murphy in ‘Coming to America’.


I'd call that "for dramatic effect". Methane would throw a soup tureen at Hazard if he really gave up her chance to be Queen.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Carolyn Bessette's Calvin Klein silk slip dress was in the 90s.


I know, that’s how long it took for the 80s style wedding dress to finally go away.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is from the link posted:
> *A Princess’s wishes… overridden*
> In December of 1997, *Diana’s mother and sister *went to court and obtained a “variation order,” permitting them to distribute the princess’s estate differently from how she’d specified:
> 
> 
> The two princes would not receive their shares of Diana’s estate until the age of 30 (although they would begin receiving income distributions at age 25).
> Instead of splitting 25 percent of Princess Diana’s jewels and possessions, each of the godchildren would receive a single memento, chosen by the executors. And none of that would happen until the younger prince, Harry, turned 30 in 2014.
> 
> 
> and this, from Forbes, 2014:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Remainder Of Princess Diana's Estate Passes To Harry, Troubling Questions Remain
> 
> 
> Yesterday marked Prince Harry's 30th birthday. His mother, the iconic Lady Di, passed away just over 17 years ago, following the tragic crash as Diana and Dodi Fayed sped away from paparazzi in France.  What was so special about Harry's 30th birthday (other than the fact that he's still single...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After Diana passed on August 31, 1997, *her mother, Frances Ruth Shand Kydd, and her sister, Lady Elizabeth Sarah Lavinia McCorquodale*, became executors of her Estate, based on Diana's last will and testament dated June 1, 1993 (amended through a codicil in 1996).  The probate filings revealed that Diana left behind assets valued at around £21 million (or worth about 31.5 million in USD at the time), netting £17 million after estate taxes.  Originally, the will called for these assets to be held in trust for Diana's sons, Princes William and Harry, until they turned 25.
> 
> As to her collection of personal property (called "chattels" in the will), Diana's will directed the executors "to give effect as soon as possible but not later than two years following my death to any written memorandum or notes of wishes of mine."  Diana penned a Letter of Wishes, dated the day after she signed the will, and asked that all of her jewelry and three-fourths of her chattels pass to her sons, with one-quarter of the rest earmarked for her 17 godchildren.  Seems clear, right?
> 
> Apparently Diana's executors at the time didn't think so.  *Without notifying the parents of any of the godchildren* (who were minors for the most part), the executors petitioned the probate court for a "variance" of the will.  They obtained the variance, which included a delay of the distributions to William and Harry until they each turned 30, instead of 25 (although they were able to start receiving interest from the trust fund at age 25).  The variance also gave the 17 godchildren one item each from Diana's Estate, rather than the one-quarter of the value of all of her personal property (aside from the jewelry), along with other changes.
> 
> The change to Princess Diana's Letter of Wishes was kept secret for several years, until it was revealed through unrelated court proceedings. When the parents of the godchildren were told about the Letter of Wishes, they were, by and large, shocked and outraged.  Instead of receiving one-quarter of the personal property (each share of which would have been worth, conservatively, £100,000 or $160,000), each godchild received what was called by some a "tacky memento."
> 
> The court allowed the executors to ignore the Letter of Wishes because it did not contain certain language required by British law, and instead used words like "discretion" and "wishes," which meant that ultimately Diana's sister and mother had discretion whether or not to honor her wishes.  But Lady Di presumably wouldn't have written the Letter of Wishes -- and directed her executors to follow such writings in her will -- without good reason.
> 
> One on hand, it may appear that Diana's mother and sister simply wanted to protect the interests of William and Harry, insuring they received all of Diana's personal property, instead of only three-fourths.  But, until this week, William and Harry were not given the property.  Because of the court-permitted "variance", when the distribution age was changed to 30 (from 25), it also meant that all of Diana's belongings could be held until Harry's 30th birthday.
> 
> What type of personal property is involved?  Diana's famed wedding dress is the centerpiece.  The collection of 150 items also includes 28 other dresses, diamond tiaras, photographs, letters, family paintings, home movies, scores and lyrics from the "Candle in the Wind" tribute song sung by Elton John, and much more.
> 
> And here is where it gets even more interesting.  Throughout the last 17 years, the collection was held by Diana's brother, Earl Spencer, who looked after the famed wedding dress and other property until this week.  Spencer displayed the collection at Althorp, the Spencer family estate in England where Diana was raised, for two months each year.  During those two months, visitors paid admission to visit Althorp, view the collection called "Diana: A Celebration," and visit her burial site.
> 
> For the other ten months of the year, the collection traveled around the United States and other parts of the world, on loan to different museums and similar display sites.  The Princess Diana Collection website reported that the collection raised over two million dollars (U.S.) for charities as of 2011.  The Spencer family says the proceeds were donated to a charitable fund created in Diana's memory after she passed, called the "Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund."
> 
> What will William and Harry do with the collection?  That of course remains to be seen. Most likely, they will not use it for income.  Each reportedly received more than £10 million as of their 30th birthdays (with estimated interest and taxes applied to the reported value of the assets when Diana's estate was opened in probate).
> 
> The more troubling questions that may never be answered (at least publicly) are:  What was the true motivation for the Spencer family in disregarding the Letter of Wishes and delaying the distributions to William and Harry?  Did they do it with revenue for Althorp in mind?  And do William and Harry approve of how it was handled?
> 
> And, most importantly, is this what Princess Diana would have wanted?
> 
> Her Letter of Wishes was addressed in the will, through the provision that directed writings like it to be honored "as soon as possible but not later than two years" after her death. Yet, it was almost completely disregarded.  Instead, her property was put on public display, for money, over the course of 17 years.
> 
> While we can only speculate on how Diana may have felt about this, we can point to a clear lesson to be learned.  No one should ever rely on a letter, note, or other informal writing to pass along significant assets (whether monetary or sentimental in value).  If the wishes expressed in the Letter of Wishes had been included directly into Diana's last will and testament, then the lawyer who prepared the will could have made certain that the wishes were followed.
> 
> It is a common practice for estate planning attorneys to incorporate written lists directing how personal property is to be distributed into the estate planning documents.  For example, the person who signs the will or trust may include a signed and dated list directing who is to receive specific items.  This practice is usually fine.
> 
> But in Diana's case, she tried to pass along one-quarter of her collection of personal property worth millions.  Items that important and valuable should be addressed directly in a will -- or even better, a revocable living trust -- so there is no question or confusion over what the individual wants to happen to them. And, this will help insure there are no variances to their wishes later on. Letters and notes written by non-lawyers can often fail to be honored, just liked Diana's Letter of Wishes.
> 
> Many people make this mistake in their own estate planning.  While it is rare that items this valuable would be effected, many times people try to change their will or direct their final wishes through a letter, note, or conversation, rather than using an experienced estate planning attorney to prepare or update the will or trust the right way.  It's a shortcut that often leads to conflict and fighting -- and not just in royal families.


Fascinating, thank you!


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you...sure? I might be too young to appreciate it, but IMO 80s fashion was pretty awful. Also, Carolyn got married in 1996, you'd hope fashion would have moved on by then.
> 
> ETA: I think Carole's dress still has that 70s vibe.


I said 1980 fashion was lovely and that’s because it was still mostly the 70s. Carole Middleton’s wedding dress was not 80s IMO. 

80s fashion happened a few years later and although I liked those shoulder pads and huge belts at the time, I look back and I think it wasn’t as nice looking as I thought. lol


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if Charles has changed his will recently.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if Charles has changed his will recently.



Haaaaaa, that lil piece of paper will be sealed for thousands of years.


ETA: Jackie O’s will was published. As expected, most of it went to her kids.  ”She made no provision for her sister, Lee Radziwill, "for whom I have great affection," because "I have already done so during my lifetime," Onassis said in the will.”  Ouch!



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1994/06/02/onassis-leaves-her-children-bulk-of-estate/1121b63b-fccb-44ce-b4e2-12d79f59a51a/


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you...sure? I might be too young to appreciate it, but IMO 80s fashion was pretty awful. Also, Carolyn got married in 1996, you'd hope fashion would have moved on by then.
> 
> *ETA: I think Carole's dress still has that 70s vibe.*


It looked a little hippie-ish to me, but lovely on the bride.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Tickets were limited to 4, the decision was Oprah's to make. She didn't chose them.
> 
> Tried finding an article with names of who, if anyone, did attend to accept the Award if they had won, and could not. Maybe word leaked it was not going to be Oprah's Inverview and they all stayed away to avoid the embarrassment of not winning?
> 
> From the Net: "However, the talk show host (Oprah)will have to choose whom she will take with her to the award show, as she has *received only four tickets due to social-distancing guidelines amid COVID-19*. Though Harry and Meghan's shocking revelations had garnered millions of viewers for the interview, it is Winfrey's production team that has been technically nominated for the award.
> 
> A source told DailyMail.com that it is Winfrey who "holds the golden tickets and decision in her hands as to who attends." With only three tickets to share between the couple and her production crew, the television presenter has found herself in a quandary.
> 
> Emmy chiefs have restricted all the nominees to just four tickets, while leaving the decision to them on who to bring to the indoor-outdoor seating event being held on the Event Deck at L.A. Live, behind the Microsoft Theater in Los Angeles."


What a load of crock.  All the attendees were mask less and harding social distancing.  
Hollywood hypocrisy at its finest once again.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's one thing her wishes were ignored, but what is wrong with these - probably wealthy as well - parents to make such a fuss? In my bubble godparents aren't there to make their godchildren rich.



Weeeeeellll, Gwyneth Paltrow's godfather is Steven Spielberg  .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Like her or not, M Kelly makes very good points in this video. Though, she seems to be wrong on the number of bathrooms…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Like her or not, M Kelly makes very good points in this video. Though, she seems to be wrong on the number of bathrooms…




“It’s (the hair) fake and so are they.”  M. Kelly

Wow.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> as much as I'd like to think they were not invited, if they were nominated isn't it a given that they could go?
> Maybe they were told they could go but would not get up on the stage as presenters or to give any sort of speech
> After all, they couldn't just be there along with the rest of the unwashed masses or lesser known celebs



As I understood it, they were not nominated, Oprah was.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think this is not here yet.
> View attachment 5200206



I quite like Harry's hair in this haha.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Like her or not, M Kelly makes very good points in this video. Though, she seems to be wrong on the number of bathrooms…


----------



## Aminamina

Meghan Markle ‘needs to start respecting the Queen’: report
					

Experts believe Meghan Markle needs to start respecting the Queen more




					www.geo.tv


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I understood it, they were not nominated, Oprah was.


OK.  but was it for that episode?  was O at the Emmys?


----------



## Chanbal

I'm all for sharing the vaccine with the entire world, but this is disgusting!!! They are using terrible circumstances to promote their public image without giving back anything of substance. 
_
*Prince Harry** and Meghan Markle are set to make their first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park for Global Citizen Live event.*

In May, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, acted as Campaign Chairs of Vax Live, which 'aims to inspire vaccine confidence worldwide and help get the COVID-19 vaccines to everyone, everywhere' - according to Global Citizen. _ 

_*And according to the organisation's website,  the couple will attend the event in New York on Saturday where they will 'continue their urgent work with world leaders in the pursuit of global vaccine equity to end the COVID-19 pandemic for everyone, everywhere*._'









						Prince Harry and Meghan demand world leaders share vaccine in New York
					

According to the Global Citizen Live website, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, will attend the event in New York on Saturday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting, this Marc Benioff is one of the largest donors of Vax Live! Is he a S*nshine client? Well, he seems to be a link in most of the Harkles events…


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I'm all for sharing the vaccine with the entire world, but this is disgusting!!! They are using terrible circumstances to promote their public image without giving back anything of substance.
> 
> _*Prince Harry** and Meghan Markle are set to make their first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park for Global Citizen Live event.*
> 
> In May, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, acted as Campaign Chairs of Vax Live, which 'aims to inspire vaccine confidence worldwide and help get the COVID-19 vaccines to everyone, everywhere' - according to Global Citizen.
> 
> *And according to the organisation's website,  the couple will attend the event in New York on Saturday where they will 'continue their urgent work with world leaders in the pursuit of global vaccine equity to end the COVID-19 pandemic for everyone, everywhere*._'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan demand world leaders share vaccine in New York
> 
> 
> According to the Global Citizen Live website, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, will attend the event in New York on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I wonder if the reason we didn't get photos of H&M getting THEIR jabs is because they got them well before their "window" opened up by pulling some strings. Otherwise, they'd never miss the opportunity to show the world "Looky us getting the jab".  I patiently waited for my window instead of butting in line or claiming I was in a priority category. What was H&M's category? Professional victims?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I'm all for sharing the vaccine with the entire world, but this is disgusting!!! They are using terrible circumstances to promote their public image without giving back anything of substance.
> 
> _*Prince Harry** and Meghan Markle are set to make their first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park for Global Citizen Live event.*
> 
> In May, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, acted as Campaign Chairs of Vax Live, which 'aims to inspire vaccine confidence worldwide and help get the COVID-19 vaccines to everyone, everywhere' - according to Global Citizen.
> 
> *And according to the organisation's website,  the couple will attend the event in New York on Saturday where they will 'continue their urgent work with world leaders in the pursuit of global vaccine equity to end the COVID-19 pandemic for everyone, everywhere*._'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan demand world leaders share vaccine in New York
> 
> 
> According to the Global Citizen Live website, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, will attend the event in New York on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Vaccines ... oh dear ... such a difficult inflamed topic ... they are going to the ends of the world to help OK 
I can think of a million ways in which one could help in the US alone, or Northern Hemisphere - deliberately avoiding mention of any possibly controversial examples - the 6 o clock news is half about vaccines here - and the same sort of issues are in the UK 

Did anyone point out they were listed under the ICON category - what is that ???  an 80 x 80 pixel thumbnail ?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if the reason we didn't get photos of H&M getting THEIR jabs is because they got them well before their "window" opened up by pulling some strings. Otherwise, they'd never miss the opportunity to show the world "Looky us getting the jab".  I patiently waited for my window instead of butting in line or claiming I was in a priority category. What was H&M's category? Professional victims?





marietouchet said:


> Vaccines ... oh dear ... such a difficult inflamed topic ... they are going to the ends of the world to help OK
> I can think of a million ways in which one could help in the US alone, or Northern Hemisphere - deliberately avoiding mention of any possibly controversial examples - the 6 o clock news is half about vaccines here - and the same sort of issues are in the UK
> 
> Did anyone point out they were listed under the ICON category - what is that ???  an 80 x 80 pixel thumbnail ?


All this is so sick. People like the Harkles need to be denounced imo, and I praise the ones that are doing it. Unfortunately, the media in the US is not calling their hypocrisy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I'm all for sharing the vaccine with the entire world, but this is disgusting!!! They are using terrible circumstances to promote their public image without giving back anything of substance.
> 
> _*Prince Harry** and Meghan Markle are set to make their first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park for Global Citizen Live event.*
> 
> In May, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, acted as Campaign Chairs of Vax Live, which 'aims to inspire vaccine confidence worldwide and help get the COVID-19 vaccines to everyone, everywhere' - according to Global Citizen.
> 
> *And according to the organisation's website,  the couple will attend the event in New York on Saturday where they will 'continue their urgent work with world leaders in the pursuit of global vaccine equity to end the COVID-19 pandemic for everyone, everywhere*._'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan demand world leaders share vaccine in New York
> 
> 
> According to the Global Citizen Live website, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, will attend the event in New York on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ah the differences...if William wants something, he asks the world leaders in private and it is probably granted. If the tantrum throwing toddlers want something, they need to have a broadcast from Central Park and still nobody cares.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Yeah I don't know. It's the same colour, not basically the same copied outfit, and not even one I personally recall Diana wearing all the time. It could just be a coincidence instead of an evil masterplan this time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I don't know. It's the same colour, not basically the same copied outfit, and not even one I personally recall Diana wearing all the time. It could just be a coincidence instead of an evil masterplan this time.


Yep, I don't know as well! There is another set of pictures…


----------



## Chanbal

If true, what are the Harkles doing at MK?  Are they going to be featured on the Disney Parade?


----------



## toodensneakers

Chanbal said:


> If true, what are the Harkles doing at MK?  Are they going to be featured on the Disney Parade?
> 
> View attachment 5200525


this is insane.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if the reason we didn't get photos of H&M getting THEIR jabs is because they got them well before their "window" opened up by pulling some strings. Otherwise, they'd never miss the opportunity to show the world "Looky us getting the jab".  I patiently waited for my window instead of butting in line or claiming I was in a priority category. What was H&M's category? Professional victims?


Suicide watch...
My wife says she doesn't want to live any more if you don't give her the vaccine now! What she wants...


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if the reason we didn't get photos of H&M getting THEIR jabs is because they got them well before their "window" opened up by pulling some strings. Otherwise, they'd never miss the opportunity to show the world "Looky us getting the jab".  I patiently waited for my window instead of butting in line or claiming I was in a priority category. What was H&M's category? Professional victims?


Maybe they knew they had no chance of looking as fit as W and K looked!


----------



## Annawakes

I thought they were on parental leave.  Not!!!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Did anyone point out they were listed under the ICON category - what is that ???  an 80 x 80 pixel thumbnail ?


I like that joke in one of the comments I read - it was a typo, not ICONS, but CONS.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I don't know as well! There is another set of pictures…
> View attachment 5200523



It's a coincidence. Hell, I think I had a black and white outfit similar to those in my closet at one time and I'm not doing Diana cosplay.

Now some of those photos of Meghan over the years have been deliberately staged to duplicate photos of Diana. She even duplicated the poses. I assume she did it for the media's sake since there is no way Harry is sharp enough to make any connection himself.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It's a coincidence. Hell, I think I had a black and white outfit similar to those in my closet at one time and I'm not doing Diana cosplay.
> 
> Now some of those photos of Meghan over the years have been deliberately staged to duplicate photos of Diana. She even duplicated the poses. I assume she did it for the media's sake since there is no way Harry is sharp enough to make any connection himself.


Very sure she thought people would gush over how similar she was to Diana, and didn't expect to be mocked for cosplay.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Very sure she thought people would gush over how similar she was to Diana, and didn't expect to be mocked for cosplay.



I bet her stans gave her enough gushing love to make up for any mockery. They are easily impressed.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It's a coincidence. Hell, I think I had a black and white outfit similar to those in my closet at one time and I'm not doing Diana cosplay.
> 
> Now some of those photos of Meghan over the years have been deliberately staged to duplicate photos of Diana. She even duplicated the poses. I assume she did it for the media's sake since there is no way Harry is sharp enough to make any connection himself.


If it wasn't for the previous 'coincidences' between M and Di*na, I would have ignored the post. It's possible that D*ria's choice of outfits were all done by her daughter (unconscious connections?). At this point, I don't assume anything…


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I quite like Harry's hair in this haha.


He looks like Carrot Top.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> If it wasn't for the previous 'coincidences' between M and Di*na, I would have ignored the post. It's possible that D*ria's choice of outfits were all done by her daughter (unconscious connections?). At this point, I don't assume anything…



Do not let Meghan live inside you head!! 

It's unfortunate how she is so well known for her manipulations that we see her scheming everywhere.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I'm all for sharing the vaccine with the entire world, but this is disgusting!!! They are using terrible circumstances to promote their public image without giving back anything of substance.
> 
> _*Prince Harry** and Meghan Markle are set to make their first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park for Global Citizen Live event.*
> 
> In May, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, acted as Campaign Chairs of Vax Live, which 'aims to inspire vaccine confidence worldwide and help get the COVID-19 vaccines to everyone, everywhere' - according to Global Citizen.
> 
> *And according to the organisation's website,  the couple will attend the event in New York on Saturday where they will 'continue their urgent work with world leaders in the pursuit of global vaccine equity to end the COVID-19 pandemic for everyone, everywhere*._'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan demand world leaders share vaccine in New York
> 
> 
> According to the Global Citizen Live website, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, will attend the event in New York on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That seems to be the theme..."demand" things from others, but don't do anything yourselves.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



I think it's a stretch.  I mean, I'm sure I've worn things that look like something someone else has worn.  How can you not?  Unless you're Betsy Johnson.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The video in this article is funny!   








						Meghan and Harry mocked by contestants on popular Aussie quiz show
					

THE Duke and Duchess of Sussex bared the brunt of harsh jokes from comics on the Australian quiz show Have You Been Paying Attention?




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Benioff and Oprah, the media manipulators behind those malodorous people from Montecito. Very fitting, “BO” is slang for bad odor, and these associations stink.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think it's a stretch.  I mean, I'm sure I've worn things that look like something someone else has worn.  How can you not?  Unless you're Betsy Johnson.


Yes, it's possibly a stretch. Though, whoever organized the picture sets did a good job.


bag-mania said:


> Do not let Meghan live inside you head!!
> 
> It's unfortunate how she is so well known for her manipulations that we see her scheming everywhere.


I still have a hard time believing in all those 'coincidences'. Prefer facts to speculation… However, the evidence accumulated since I've joined this thread supports some very weird hypothesis.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Like her or not, M Kelly makes very good points in this video. Though, she seems to be wrong on the number of bathrooms…



Thanks for the link! 

M Kelly is really good talking off the top of her head. She knew what she was going to say, but she wasn’t reading a prepared script, I like that.


----------



## sdkitty

so it seems the award that Oprah was nominated for (and didn't win) was presented at a separate ceremony, not the Emmy award show that was broadcast
Oprah Winfrey's Interview With Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Lost Out At the 2021 Emmys (townandcountrymag.com)


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> so it seems the award that Oprah was nominated for (and didn't win) was presented at a separate ceremony, not the Emmy award show that was broadcast
> Oprah Winfrey's Interview With Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Lost Out At the 2021 Emmys (townandcountrymag.com)


Oh they would never go to the baby emmys.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh they would never go to the baby emmys.


the are much too major for that


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I bet her stans gave her enough gushing love to make up for any mockery. They are easily impressed.


The term "bamboozled" comes to mind.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Yes, it's possibly a stretch. Though, whoever organized the picture sets did a good job.
> 
> I still have a hard time believing in all those 'coincidences'. Prefer facts to speculation… However, the evidence accumulated since I've joined this thread supports some very weird hypothesis.


Maybe Methane's Diana obsession is shared by Doria. They must have bonded over something other than making full use of Thomas Markle.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Most people can handle the news when they are treated with respect.
> 
> The DM article above says the sister drove around the countryside and hand delivered the newspaper-wrapped trinkets. Newspaper-wrapped?  Seems a bit casual for such a _touching trinket _IMO. To be a bit repetitive, *this is one more example of the tangled web these ‘royals’ weave.* With Harry, the apple did not far from the tree. IMO.


They are aristocrats and some have been known to think themselves above royalty and the law. When ordinary folks behaved that way, my mother would say it was because, "Ils peuvent péter plus haut que le trou" literally translated as, "They can fart higher than the hole."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I've to tell you that I was rather confused, but he didn't sound like a believer of the Harkles.


He probably just read the script written by his speech writer so I'm not sure he cared about either the royals or H&M.


----------



## Chanbal

Got this offer from TIME to celebrate Hazz and wife??? Why is Hazz blonde?


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> They must have bonded over something other than making full use of Thomas Markle.


xincinsin, a priceless observation!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Got this offer from TIME to celebrate Hazz and wife??? Why is Hazz blonde?
> View attachment 5200726



Here are all the covers for the this year’s  Time 100 issue - the dim duo was just one of 7:


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> They are aristocrats and some have been known to think themselves above royalty and the law. When ordinary folks behaved that way, my mother would say it was because, "Ils peuvent péter plus haut que le trou" literally translated as, "They can fart higher than the hole."


 And here I am thinking the "Spare the Air" caution (means the pollution levels are unhealthy so follow the suggested limits on activities) we are under in varying regions in California right now are the result of smoke from multiple forrest fires and now I find out it's due to Hazbeen and Methane (most appropriate in this context )spewing into the atmosphere!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here are all the covers for the this year’s  Time 100 issue - the dim duo was just one of 7:
> 
> View attachment 5200746


Oops! Thanks for clarifying, because I thought that MM looked a bit aged on this one:


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> And here I am thinking the "Spare the Air" caution (means the pollution levels are unhealthy so follow the suggested limits on activities) we are under in varying regions in California right now are the result of smoke from multiple forrest fires and now I find out it's due to Hazbeen and Methane (most appropriate in this context )spewing into the atmosphere!


Just one of the many ways in which they "influence" our life and atmosphere.
Influence = flatulence


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> OW was the one nominated, not them.
> "_With only four seats available, Oprah will have to decide whether she would invite the Sussexes to accompany her, her beloved crew, or her family_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, Harry to attend Emmy Awards with Oprah Winfrey?
> 
> 
> Oprah has a tough decision to make, involving invitation to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry at the Emmys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/QUOT



Why  was this even nominated?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Just one of the many ways in which they "influence" our life and atmosphere.
> Influence = flatulence


They could power hot air balloons.


----------



## Aimee3

They are flying to NYC to lecture in Central Park about getting vaccinated.  Who needs them to tell anyone what to do?  I believe NY has the highest per cent of vaccinated people so if they must lecture, why not go someplace with a low percentage of vaccinated people????  And damn, they should ride a bike or walk to wherever.


----------



## csshopper

Aimee3 said:


> They are flying to NYC to lecture in Central Park about getting vaccinated.  Who needs them to tell anyone what to do?  I believe NY has the highest per cent of vaccinated people so if they must lecture, why not go someplace with a low percentage of vaccinated people????  And damn, they should ride a bike or walk to wherever.


If I were still in New jersey I would be on my commuter bus to the City with a large sign reading "Sussexes MONETIZED the Victims of 9/11 as Clickbait on their Archwell site." It would be risky, but worth it, the Stans are probably organizing caravans to attend and worship at the scrawny feet of their pagan goddess. As an aside, I wonder which hair she will wear that day?


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here are all the covers for the this year’s  Time 100 issue - the dim duo was just one of 7:
> 
> View attachment 5200746




Separately from the issue of including the Duke and Duchess of Hazz-ard . . . 
Kate Winslet?
Billie Eilish?  
What a list.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> If I were still in New jersey I would be on my commuter bus to the City with a large sign reading "Sussexes MONETIZED the Victims of 9/11 as Clickbait on their Archwell site." It would be risky, but worth it, the Stans are probably organizing caravans to attend and worship at the scrawny feet of their pagan goddess. As an aside, I wonder which hair she will wear that day?














						What Does Boo Someone Off the Stage Mean? - Writing Explained
					

Booed off definition. What does this expression mean? Learn English idioms with other words and phrases at Writing Explained. When someone is booed…



					writingexplained.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

Come on, NYC.  Do what you do.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Why  was this even nominated?



as a sweet nod, perhaps?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Why  was this even nominated?


----------



## bag-mania

*Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.

Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."

McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.

She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"

When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."

At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"









						Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
					

Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> They are flying to NYC to lecture in Central Park about getting vaccinated.  Who needs them to tell anyone what to do?  I believe NY has the highest per cent of vaccinated people so if they must lecture, why not go someplace with a low percentage of vaccinated people????  And damn, they should ride a bike or walk to wherever.


Why aren't they giving a few of their millions (Hazz's millions) to fund vaccine equity?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
> When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.
> 
> Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
> The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."
> 
> McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.
> 
> She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"
> 
> When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."
> 
> At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


This might address the why of the *'Whole Face Lit Up' *comment.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
> When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.
> 
> Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
> The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."
> 
> McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.
> 
> She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"
> 
> When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."
> 
> At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I have markled Melissa.  She sold out to a couple of nothings.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Page Six has a couple of articles on the upcoming romantic business trip of Saint Meg and the Patron Saint of Hypocrisy. We can't miss any of their miracles. 











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle looking forward to ‘romantic fall’ NYC trip
					

It’s not believed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are bringing their 2-year-old son, Archie, or his 3-month-old sister, Lilibet, for the trip.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bag-mania

PageSix isn't always friendly to them. You can be sure they will be keeping a very close watch on H&M's Manhattan visit, analyzing whatever they do.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> They are flying to NYC to lecture in Central Park about getting vaccinated.  Who needs them to tell anyone what to do?  I believe NY has the highest per cent of vaccinated people so if they must lecture, why not go someplace with a low percentage of vaccinated people????  And damn, they should ride a bike or walk to wherever.


This is beyond ridiculous.  I hope they get a Bronx cheer


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> PageSix isn't always friendly to them. You can be sure they will be keeping a very close watch on H&M's Manhattan visit, analyzing whatever they do.


I hope Cindy Adams has a few word on the subject.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
> When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.
> 
> Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
> The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."
> 
> McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.
> 
> She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"
> 
> When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."
> 
> At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


"weird and funny to boot" and "I tip my hat" did H write this drivel about himself? doesn't sound like Melissa to me *shrug*


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> "weird and funny to boot" and "I tip my hat" did H write this drivel about himself? doesn't sound like Melissa to me *shrug*



Melissa was talking with two guys from the UK in the interview. I think that was her way of "adapting."


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Melissa was talking with two guys from the UK in the interview. I think that was her way of "adapting."


Ahhhhh, thanks for that! sounds disingenuous, but what doesn't when these two are praised


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> "weird and funny to boot" and "I tip my hat" did H write this drivel about himself? doesn't sound like Melissa to me *shrug*


He is just fulfilling his destiny, which is to be a clown.


----------



## Chanbal

A special request.   @CarryOn2020


----------



## Aimee3

Just read this which says Prince Puke and his Pukess will “call for the European Union and G7 to work together to immediately donate at least one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses to those places in the world still struggling most with the pandemic.”  So another example where they call on others to do the actual donating while their money stays theirs, and they take the credit!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Just read this which says Prince Puke and his Pukess will “call for the European Union and G7 to work together to immediately donate at least one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses to those places in the world still struggling most with the pandemic.”  So another example where they call on others to do the actual donating while their money stays theirs, and they take the credit!



Does any of this “calling on blah blah country to do XYZ” - does it ever work? If so, I call on the BRF to take these two back. Hazzie has been *foisted* on the USA (see “Curb your enthusiasm“). We do not want nor need his uninformed opinions.

Bronx cheer or simple boo’s - NYC do what you do best, please.


----------



## Lodpah

Aimee3 said:


> Just read this which says Prince Puke and his Pukess will “call for the European Union and G7 to work together to immediately donate at least one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses to those places in the world still struggling most with the pandemic.”  So another example where they call on others to do the actual donating while their money stays theirs, and they take the credit!


I wish this was a Saturday Night Live skit. Don’t they know PW has met with them quietly without fanfare? Like who in the G7 will even take them seriously? Their PR is coming out with more outrageous things. They are so desperate lol


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does any of this “calling on blah blah country to do XYZ” - does it ever work? If so, I call on the BRF to take these two back. Hazzie has been *foisted* on the USA (see “Curb your enthusiasm“). We do not want nor need his uninformed opinions.
> 
> Bronx cheer or simple boo’s - NYC do what you do best, please.


H has been foisted on the USA by one of its own citizen, M, who once married to H didn't take up British citizenship as she had promised. If I were HMTQ, I would never welcome them back into the fold because I could never trust them again and it's quite possible that M married H with the intent of sabotaging the RF thinking she would reap the spoils (all the jewels and $$$) and be praised by the free world for destroying the 'evil' monarchy.  Well, isn't that what her friends and Netflix and others are trying to peddle?!


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Just read this which says Prince Puke and his Pukess will “call for the European Union and G7 to work together to immediately donate at least one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses to those places in the world still struggling most with the pandemic.”  So another example where they call on others to do the actual donating while their money stays theirs, and they take the credit!


In the DM article, it states that they demanded it!  Hop to it world!  Harry and Meg are demanding that you do this.  Anyone listening???


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> H has been foisted on the USA by one of its own citizen, M, who once married to H didn't take up British citizenship as she had promised. If I were HMTQ, I would never welcome them back into the fold because I could never trust them again and it's quite possible that M married H with the intent of sabotaging the RF thinking she would reap the spoils (all the jewels and $$$) and be praised by the free world for destroying the 'evil' monarchy.  Well, isn't that what her friends and Netflix and others are trying to peddle?!



Ok, time for them to go to ChungaChanga.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> I wish this was a Saturday Night Live skit. Don’t they know PW has met with them quietly without fanfare? Like who in the G7 will even take them seriously? Their PR is coming out with more outrageous things. They are so desperate lol


They are so delusional that they don't see that they have no political standing, and  no royal standing.  They have devolved into Mr and Mrs John Q. Nobody.  They have not actually created any lasting initiative, saved the world or come up with something like the earthshot prize.  

When the Duke of Windsor visited Germany, he was under the delusion that his presence there meant something important to the rest of the world. The Nazis took advantage of him and  were feasting on the thought that he would give their regime legitimacy.  That didn't turn out well for the Duke, did it?  Exiled to the Bahamas to keep his lip buttoned.  Harry is of  similar mindset.  He believes that what he has to say means something.  It means nothing.  This is a world where people ask "what have you done for me lately?"  Harry has done nothing for anyone lately except flap his lips and talk about things without actually doing them. The wife is no better.  One can only hope that the crowd laughs in his face.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, time for them to go to ChungaChanga.
> 
> View attachment 5200998


ITA. It would serve them right!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> In the DM article, *it states that they demanded it*!  Hop to it world!  Harry and Meg are demanding that you do this.  Anyone listening???


Demanding is a word often associated with Hazz's wife. I think she will not risk going to the UK, but…


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Demanding is a word often associated with Hazz's wife. I think she will not risk going to the UK, but…
> View attachment 5200960


That’s . . . but no woman should ever be called the “C” word. That’s where I draw the line for myself.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *They are so delusional that they don't see that they have no political standing, and  no royal standing.  They have devolved into Mr and Mrs John Q. Nobody. * They have not actually created any lasting initiative, saved the world or come up with something like the earthshot prize.
> 
> When the Duke of Windsor visited Germany, he was under the delusion that his presence there meant something important to the rest of the world. The Nazis took advantage of him and  were feasting on the thought that he would give their regime legitimacy.  That didn't turn out well for the Duke, did it?  Exiled to the Bahamas to keep his lip buttoned.  Harry is of  similar mindset.  He believes that what he has to say means something.  It means nothing.  This is a world where people ask "what have you done for me lately?"  Harry has done nothing for anyone lately except flap his lips and talk about things without actually doing them. The wife is no better.  One can only hope that the crowd laughs in his face.


They are 2 delusional hypocrites, but while they are supported, they will keep fooling people. I agree with M. Kelly that it is time for the media to be honest about them.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
> When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.
> 
> Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
> The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."
> 
> McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.
> 
> She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"
> 
> When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."
> 
> At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> That’s . . . but no woman should ever be called the “C” word. That’s where I draw the line for myself.



Yes, my crowd does not use this word. Still, I hear it more and more as our standards in today’s world fall off the cliff.  The thing about H&M is that they do not now, nor have they ever, inspired positive vibes.  They bring out the worst in most people.  It is, though, the exact kind of word I expect Hazzie to use.









						Prince Harry 'trying to impress' by swearing in interview - expert
					

PRINCE HARRY has been slated by a language expert for swearing in a new podcast interview. During the episode, Harry uses curse words when quizzing host Dax Shepard about his path to sobriety.




					www.express.co.uk
				




_Judi said: "*Using swear words and some teenager-style terminology* to paint a verbal portrait of his ‘Wild Child’ days, Harry sounds keen to impress his host and his fans with both his deep understanding of issues like drug-taking and his own wilderness years when he was ‘going wild’."

The expert claimed Harry steps into the of a counsellor during the interview as he coaxes information out of Mr Shepard.

She added: "Harry’s wording as he discusses his host’s experiences make him sound almost like a counsellor.

"Having asked about the causes of the problems he answers for his host, with his answer making it sound as though he might also be talking about his own personal pain as he says: ‘For you, it was all about your upbringing and everything that happened to you – the trauma, pain and suffering.’

ETA:  _is it really fair to blame the teenagers?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They are 2 delusional hypocrites, but while they are supported, they will keep fooling people. I agree with M. Kelly that it is *time for the media to be honest about them.
> *




-and many other topics! 
Much more honesty is what we all crave as we weather this storm from the universe, aka pandemic.


----------



## Chanbal

Has this been confirmed?


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> That’s . . . but no woman should ever be called the “C” word. That’s where I draw the line for myself.


Oops, I didn't realize that. I read only the first part of the post, and was so shocked by her demands… I totally agree with you.


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Just read this which says Prince Puke and his Pukess will “call for the European Union and G7 to work together to immediately donate at least one billion COVID-19 vaccine doses to those places in the world still struggling most with the pandemic.”  So another example where they call on others to do the actual donating while their money stays theirs, and they take the credit!


Hope someone from their latest targets does a Jacinda Ardern on them and point out that whatever they are "demanding" was already done before they jumped on the bandwagon. 



gracekelly said:


> In the DM article, it states that they demanded it!  Hop to it world!  Harry and Meg are demanding that you do this.  Anyone listening???


I sense a disturbance in the Force...


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> Benioff and Oprah, the media manipulators behind those malodorous people from Montecito. Very fitting, “BO” is slang for bad odor, and these associations stink.



haha css  only one switch:
“...the media manipulators behind those malodorous *moochers* of Montecito.” 




csshopper said:


> And here I am thinking the "Spare the Air" caution (means the pollution levels are unhealthy so follow the suggested limits on activities) we are under in varying regions in California right now are the result of smoke from multiple forrest fires and now I find out it's due to Hazbeen and Methane (most appropriate in this context )spewing into the atmosphere!



You’re on fiyah here!


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> H has been foisted on the USA by one of its own citizen, M, who once married to H didn't take up British citizenship as she had promised. If I were HMTQ, I would never welcome them back into the fold because I could never trust them again and it's quite possible that M married H with the intent of sabotaging the RF thinking she would reap the spoils (all the jewels and $$$) and be praised by the free world for destroying the 'evil' monarchy.  Well, isn't that what her friends and Netflix and others are trying to peddle?!


*Taking down* the evil empire is her current plan. Her previous plan was to *take over *the monarchy and milk it for everything it had. She thought her original welcome by the British people would stay rock solid and provide her with the groundswell support to be the most popular royal, allowing her to do it her way (merch and glam). It does make me think that the previous people in her life were all soft touches, who melted every time she wanted something or played the victim with crocodile tears.


----------



## Chanbal

One more picture from Harry's Hair Style Portfolio. What do you think?


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> They are flying to NYC to lecture in Central Park about getting vaccinated.  Who needs them to tell anyone what to do?  I believe NY has the highest per cent of vaccinated people so if they must lecture, why not go someplace with a low percentage of vaccinated people????  And damn, they should ride a bike or walk to wherever.


Low-hanging fruit. They or their PR team figure that by espousing vaccine sainthood in NYC, the people there will voice support. Much safer option than going to a place with low percentage of vaccinated people and encountering either anti-vaccine sentiment or the shortage of vaccine. Addressing those issues would require REAL work - too arduous for a woman still delicate from recent delivery (and still on maternity leave!) Hmm, would this trip be counted as one of those running-towards-struggle journeys?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

Katel said:


> haha css  only one switch:
> “...the media manipulators behind those malodorous *moochers* of Montecito.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re on fiyah here!


Katel , great edit, thanks,  you said it best.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




_Phoney and artificial_ = perfect!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Why  was this even nominated?


Only in America? Only because OW networked enough for any production of hers to be considered for an award?
It was a trashtalk pseudo-interview by a biased host who egged her hypocritical self-pitying guests on so that she could do multiple  dramatic "Whhaaaat?" to reduce moral credibility but increase financial viability.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*



That's quite impressive for someone I am positive is developmentally challenged in the genuine feelings department and whose favourite person in the world is herself. 

(not buying it at all)


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Got this offer from TIME to celebrate Hazz and wife??? Why is Hazz blonde?
> View attachment 5200726


OT but does anyone else think BE’s new hair makes her look like David St Hubbins


I mean at least Billie Eilish is actually releasing content to fulfil her contract - sorry Spotify 



bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
> When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.
> 
> Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
> The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."
> 
> McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.
> 
> She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"
> 
> When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."
> 
> At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I know she’s a big girl but she’s coming across as a bit too hungry isn’t she?

Chris O’Dowd is the real MVP that casual dismissal in dripping irony

I’m sure M’s eyes do light up when she sees him… like a pig with a fresh bucket of swill or a cat with a mouse in between their paws.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sure M’s eyes do light up when she sees him… like a pig with a fresh bucket of swill or a cat with a mouse in between their paws.


If her *whole face* lit up, then she probably picked up some tips and tricks from her dear old dad and used a moving spotlight.


----------



## Norm.Core

jelliedfeels said:


> OT but does anyone else think BE’s new hair makes her look like David St Hubbins
> View attachment 5201359



Umm totally OT but I love Spinal Tap! 

That David St. Hubbins =


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I'm all for sharing the vaccine with the entire world, but this is disgusting!!! They are using terrible circumstances to promote their public image without giving back anything of substance.
> 
> _*Prince Harry** and Meghan Markle are set to make their first public trip since moving to California to broadcast from Central Park for Global Citizen Live event.*
> 
> In May, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, acted as Campaign Chairs of Vax Live, which 'aims to inspire vaccine confidence worldwide and help get the COVID-19 vaccines to everyone, everywhere' - according to Global Citizen.
> 
> *And according to the organisation's website,  the couple will attend the event in New York on Saturday where they will 'continue their urgent work with world leaders in the pursuit of global vaccine equity to end the COVID-19 pandemic for everyone, everywhere*._'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan demand world leaders share vaccine in New York
> 
> 
> According to the Global Citizen Live website, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, will attend the event in New York on Saturday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Go home, H&M. It’s already being done… Get off of the coattails of others.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/17/*****-pfizer-vaccine-global/
“The Biidenn administration is buying hundreds of millions more doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine to donate to the world, according to two people familiar with the deal, as the United States looks to increase efforts to share vaccine with the global population. ….. Pfizer spokeswoman Amy Rose said in a statement: “Pfizer is firmly committed to doing all we can to ensure equitable and affordable access to our COVID-19 vaccines for people around the world. While we don’t have any specific news to share today, we are actively working with governments around the world as well as global health partners towards that goal.”


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*


Maybe H was holding a mirror when he walked in the room? Because I'm pretty sure the only time her face lights up is when she sees herself.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Low-hanging fruit. They or their PR team figure that by espousing vaccine sainthood in NYC, the people there will voice support. Much safer option than going to a place with low percentage of vaccinated people and encountering either anti-vaccine sentiment or the shortage of vaccine. Addressing those issues would require REAL work - too arduous for a woman still delicate from recent delivery (and still on maternity leave!) Hmm, would this trip be counted as one of those running-towards-struggle journeys?


Riot in NY at restaurant I know, a few nights ago, 24 yr old hostess was asking guests for their vac passport and assaulted


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Go home, H&M. It’s already being done… Get off of the coattails of others.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/09/17/*****-pfizer-vaccine-global/
> “The Biidenn administration is buying hundreds of millions more doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine to donate to the world, according to two people familiar with the deal, as the United States looks to increase efforts to share vaccine with the global population. ….. Pfizer spokeswoman Amy Rose said in a statement: “Pfizer is firmly committed to doing all we can to ensure equitable and affordable access to our COVID-19 vaccines for people around the world. While we don’t have any specific news to share today, we are actively working with governments around the world as well as global health partners towards that goal.”


JB at major speaking engagement yesterday in NYC,   title of article was he will give $1B to this good cause and double billions of dollars commitment to another good cause,  way DOWN in the text it was clarified ... he will ask legislators to do so, they are currently having difficulties over budget much less the xtras promised by JB


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> *Melissa McCarthy Says Meghan Markle's 'Whole Face Lit Up' When Prince Harry Entered the Room*
> When Melissa McCarthy was filming Meghan Markle's 40x40 initiative announcement video, the Oscar nominee says she knew Prince Harry had entered the room even before she set eyes on him thanks to the glow on his wife's face.
> 
> Calling the couple's dynamic "so cute," McCarthy said on the British morning show _Lorraine _on Tuesday that she "could tell he walked in because we were talking and then she went, 'Oh hi!' and her whole face lit up, and I was like, _Did Prince Harry just walk in the room?_"
> The _Nine Perfect Strangers_ star added that she "just thought it was so sweet and genuine."
> 
> McCarthy, 51, recounted a tidbit she has previously shared that it was actually Harry's idea to make a surprise juggling cameo in his wife's 40th birthday video.
> 
> She said the off-the-wall suggestion instantly connected her to Harry, 37: "I was like, 'Are you weird and funny to boot?' At that point, I was like, 'That's great!' ... I love anyone that will do something weird just for weird's sake, so I was like, 'I tip my hat!'"
> 
> When asked if she suspected the video would go viral, she said she knew that, "When people see him just creepily standing outside a window juggling, it's so weird that I was like, _Nothing else will matter_."
> 
> At which point McCarthy's _The Starling _costar and co-interviewee Chris O'Dowd, who clearly hasn't seen Meghan's video, hilariously interjected to tell the actress and the host, "Strangely, I have no idea what you're talking about, but that doesn't make it any less exciting!"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy: Meghan Markle's Face Lit Up at Seeing Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Melissa McCarthy shares a moment that was 'so cute' between Meghan Markle and Prince Harry when the trio filmed Meghan's 40th birthday video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Another face she practices in the mirror (along with pouty face). Harry was a very good boy doing his tricks so he deserves a treat!


----------



## Chanbal

Speechless


----------



## Chanbal

Speechless #2


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sure M’s eyes do light up when she sees him… like a pig with a fresh bucket of swill or a cat with a mouse in between their paws.





xincinsin said:


> If her *whole face* lit up, then she probably picked up some tips and tricks from her dear old dad and used a moving spotlight.


----------



## Chanbal

This article makes valid points. Including them on the TIME 100 list was clearly to give them credibility, and support their ventures… 

*But Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants, told Newsweek: "Meghan and Harry landing a cover spot of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People will be seen as a stab in the heart of the Monarchy's reputation because of the greater implicit credibility it affords them and their previous claims against the crown."*
_
The couple's inclusion in the list comes six months after they accused an unnamed member of the Royal Family of racism in their explosive Oprah interview.

Meghan also told Oprah she felt suicidal while working as a royal - but that staff had dismissed her pleas for help.

Schiffer added: *"The strategy Harry's built is to out gun William and to be seen as the authentic prince on a global stage and it's been beautifully executed.*

"They're very disciplined at it.

"The combination of the leaks and the framing of themselves in part as victims of certain behaviour and on top of that connecting in such authentic ways with global Gen Z and Millennial audiences and allowing them to actually feel what it's like to interact with a member of the royal family, that on a human level has been powerful."_









						Meghan and Harry's Time cover is a 'stab in the heart' to Queen's reputation
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s Time Magazine cover is a “stab in the heart” of the Queen’s reputation, an expert has claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were this week…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Schiffer added: *"The strategy Harry's built is to out gun William and to be seen as the authentic prince on a global stage and it's been beautifully executed.*


  The only thing they've executed is their credibility. And by that I mean that they dragged it down a road of falsehoods, hypocrisy and victimhood until it was completely dead.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> _"The combination of the leaks and the framing of themselves in part as victims of certain behaviour and on top of that connecting in such authentic ways with global Gen Z and Millennial audiences and allowing them to actually feel what it's like to interact with a member of the royal family, that on a human level has been powerful."_



What a line of BS this is. I'd like to think no one is buying their act as being remotely "authentic" but there are a lot of people out there who will believe what they want to believe.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> haha css  only one switch:
> “...the media manipulators behind those malodorous *moochers* of Montecito.”


Thanks @Katel for your #6 nickname, malodorous moochers of Montecito.  
I should've known The List would never end as there are too many creative writers on this thread.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> *I sense a disturbance in the Force.*..


ITA. Message to H&M...


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I hope Cindy Adams has a few word on the subject.


well sorry but...so she doesn't have much cred with me.....She's very old and still working though - I guess I'll give her credit for that


----------



## Chagall

Anyone who endeavours to perfect juggling has way too much time on their hands.


----------



## jennlt

The hackers would have released one for H&M's podcast, too, but no one listened so there was no list to reveal   
Oh, and look - Spotify has "users". I thought she was against platforms that have users?





*Please note: This is a satire so don't panic; your Nickleback predilection shall remain a secret *


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Speechless



That's bordering on evil.


----------



## bellecate

Jayne1 said:


> That's bordering on evil.


Bordering? Just plain evil .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Riot in NY at restaurant I know, a few nights ago, 24 yr old hostess was asking guests for their vac passport and assaulted



In Germany, a 20yo student working at a gas station was shot after he asked a customer to please wear a mask inside. The guy went home and returned not with a mask but a gun. WTFFF is wrong with this world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Speechless




OMFG. I have a low opinion of her as is, but if this is true - though we've had suspected it - I don't even have words. 

That said, even if it was all a horrible coincidence, these people have (or should I say, one specific person who threw a fit over the wrong shade of red) markled others for lesser crimes and I do find it very telling they were still willing to work with them.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In Germany, a 20yo student working at a gas station was shot after he asked a customer to please wear a mask inside. The guy went home and returned not with a mask but a gun. *WTFFF is wrong with this world.*



I know this was a rhetorical question, but I truly think there is less value placed on human life than we've seen in decades.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Speechless #2




Not that shocking to me. They have been prostituting themselves for a while.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In Germany, a 20yo student working at a gas station was shot after he asked a customer to please wear a mask inside. The guy went home and returned not with a mask but a gun. WTFFF is wrong with this world.


We had this happen where I live, too. A cashier in a grocery store asked a man to wear a mask and he returned with a gun and killed her. Absolutely horrific. But we all know H&M are the real victims with all they've allegedly endured.


----------



## Lodpah




----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> This article makes valid points. Including them on the TIME 100 list was clearly to give them credibility, and support their ventures…
> 
> *But Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants, told Newsweek: "Meghan and Harry landing a cover spot of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People will be seen as a stab in the heart of the Monarchy's reputation because of the greater implicit credibility it affords them and their previous claims against the crown."*
> 
> _The couple's inclusion in the list comes six months after they accused an unnamed member of the Royal Family of racism in their explosive Oprah interview.
> 
> Meghan also told Oprah she felt suicidal while working as a royal - but that staff had dismissed her pleas for help.
> 
> Schiffer added: *"The strategy Harry's built is to out gun William and to be seen as the authentic prince on a global stage and it's been beautifully executed.*
> 
> "They're very disciplined at it.
> 
> "The combination of the leaks and the framing of themselves in part as victims of certain behaviour and on top of that connecting in such authentic ways with global Gen Z and Millennial audiences and allowing them to actually feel what it's like to interact with a member of the royal family, that on a human level has been powerful."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Time cover is a 'stab in the heart' to Queen's reputation
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s Time Magazine cover is a “stab in the heart” of the Queen’s reputation, an expert has claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were this week…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



Implicit credibility and out-princing William?
This cover has been one of the most universally mocked and memed photos in history. I'm sure that the points made in the article is how they _wanted _to be viewed, but once again they shot themselves in the foot


----------



## CarryOn2020

jennlt said:


> We had this happen where I live, too. A cashier in a grocery store asked a man to wear a mask and he returned with a gun and killed her. Absolutely horrific. But we all know H&M are the real victims with all they've allegedly endured.



IMO the pandemic has changed everything, every single thing.
 Tolerance levels are less than zero. Best to use extra caution, especially when dealing with tone-deaf elitists. Each time H&M, the tabloid royals,  step up to the microphone, they show they have no idea what is actually important to healing this world. They continue to be divisive, provoking arguments and setting a lower and lower bar for civil discussion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This article makes valid points. Including them on the TIME 100 list was clearly to give them credibility, and support their ventures…
> 
> *But Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants, told Newsweek: "Meghan and Harry landing a cover spot of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People will be seen as a stab in the heart of the Monarchy's reputation because of the greater implicit credibility it affords them and their previous claims against the crown."*
> 
> _The couple's inclusion in the list comes six months after they accused an unnamed member of the Royal Family of racism in their explosive Oprah interview.
> 
> Meghan also told Oprah she felt suicidal while working as a royal - but that staff had dismissed her pleas for help.
> 
> Schiffer added: *"The strategy Harry's built is to out gun William and to be seen as the authentic prince on a global stage and it's been beautifully executed.*
> 
> "They're very disciplined at it.
> 
> "The combination of the leaks and the framing of themselves in part as victims of certain behaviour and on top of that connecting in such authentic ways with global Gen Z and Millennial audiences and allowing them to actually feel what it's like to interact with a member of the royal family, that on a human level has been powerful."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Time cover is a 'stab in the heart' to Queen's reputation
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry’s Time Magazine cover is a “stab in the heart” of the Queen’s reputation, an expert has claimed. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were this week…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



Are they seriously worried the Duke and Duchess of Thin Air and Tantrums could outshine a future king who is known to be personable and doing a great job? Right.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Speechless



WOW .. Thomas must wonder what the hell he did (or didn't do) to make his daughter behave this way .. no words for this!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they seriously worried the *Duke and Duchess of Thin Air and Tantrums* could outshine a future king who is known to be personable and doing a great job? Right.


 Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #4 nickname, *Duke and Duchess of Thin Air and Tantrums*. It is indeed a very valid description of the duo.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Implicit credibility and out-princing William?
> This cover has been one of the most universally mocked and memed photos in history. I'm sure that the points made in the article is how they _wanted _to be viewed, but once again they shot themselves in the foot


I have to admit that I was stupefied reading this article.  How much are they paying him to rehab their image?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Just stopped to get gas in montecito. Surrounded by three range rovers. Couldn’t help but think about H&M.


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> The only thing they've executed is their credibility. And by that I mean that they dragged it down a road of falsehoods, hypocrisy and victimhood until it was completely dead.


Agree with you that the above is right for many of us. However, zillions of people, particularly in the US, know very little about their falsehoods and hypocrisy, and they are the perfect targets to be fooled. Media in the US should start reporting honestly about them.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> What a line of BS this is. I'd like to think no one is buying their act as being remotely "authentic" but there are a lot of people out there who will believe what they want to believe.


You are absolutely right!


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah's Harry and Meghan TV interview loses out at Emmys to food show
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's explosive American TV interview with Oprah Winfrey lost out at the Creative Emmy Awards to a show series about Italian cuisine and culture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk










VickyB said:


> She must be stewing and fuming regarding all these snubs. I am sure this was not the treatment she expected.









QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the actual Time list. Different colours, but another pleated trouser. Is that her attempt to look professional and tough? I think she looks really matronly.
> 
> View attachment 5194664





Dreadful styling on her. The pants don't suit her and neither does a turtleneck. Don't even get me started on the colour pairings for both items- a brassy green with a dull dark grey? Oh no. Either she demanded what she wanted to wear because she thinks she knows best about _everything _or the stylist hates her.
I like the colour of the suit Princess Hairy is wearing, it's just a shame he's wearing it.




CarryOn2020 said:


>



Only explanation for this nonsense:







lanasyogamama said:


> Scroll through, these are all so funny.



The last one- accurate!







CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, they had help to look this awful.
> _Meanwhile, Serge Normant, who created Meghan's 'messy bun' on her wedding day to Prince Harry in May 2018, was responsible for the Duchess of Sussex's wavy hair style, which hair stylist James Johnson told FEMAIL is the 'main focal point of this piece.'
> 'Her middle parted big waves highlights her authority and the leg apart stance gives viewers a glimpse of her powerful new status,' he explained. '*It gives me Beyoncé vibes showing us girl power - backed up by her man*, her Prince leaning on her showcasing the female empowerment, she’s wearing the trousers with her big hair.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hires A-list glam squad for VERY glamorous appearance
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, put on a very glamorous display after being styled by an A-list team of experts as she posed alongside husband Prince Harry for the cover of The Times magazine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  are we tired of this pretend-symbolism?  Everything we wear now must symbolize something or someone???  Not for me.





Don't mention Beyoncé. She doesn't deserve to be dragged down to MM's level and the last thing her hair on the Time mag cover gave was 'Beyoncé vibes'.
That's a laughable comparison. Bey & Jay are both super talented and successful individually before either of them comes together to work. Hard work and talent got them to where they are, one didn't need to marry the other to gain fame and attention or climb a social ladder, unlike a certain MM.
The last thing MM gives is 'girl power', but she is extra heavy on the egomaniac, narcissistic Mean Girls vibes.
'Backed up by her man'- that made me laugh out loud 





bag-mania said:


> Hey y'all. Archewell updated their page to include the _Time_ photo and introduces their new slogan.
> SHARED PURPOSE, GLOBAL ACTION, LEADING THE WAY WITH COMPASSION!
> Obviously they want COMPASSION to be their BRAND. Plus extra points for slipping COMMUNITIES and WORLD in there.
> View attachment 5194844










CarryOn2020 said:


> Look at his hair - wth?





He must think no one would notice the drastic difference! They made him look like a hedgehog is living on top of his head.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Implicit credibility and out-princing William?
> *This cover has been one of the most universally mocked and memed photos in history. *I'm sure that the points made in the article is how they _wanted _to be viewed, but once again they shot themselves in the foot





The article was likely written by someone in their PR team… Pure propaganda!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they seriously worried the Duke and Duchess of Thin Air and Tantrums could outshine a future king who is known to be personable and doing a great job? Right.


Not sure if worried, but certainly they are reporting on the apparent intentions of Hazza and wife.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that are already planning Christmas (or other) lists, here is a very affordable option: 



Note, if you buy 3 books, you pay only 2!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

OMG!!  I’m brainwashed by Miserable M!  Everywhere I look I see M!  Got off 405 in L.A. While sitting at a signal light saw this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are already planning Christmas (or other) lists, here is a very affordable option:
> 
> View attachment 5202241
> 
> Note, if you buy 3 books, you pay only 2!




Surely there is a one page version?

Once upon a time a British Royal prince with numerous mental health struggles and ugly sibling rivalry issues, youngest son of most beloved Princess Diana who left him a *multi-million dollar* inheritance,  hooked up with a divorced, sleazy in an odd way, Hwood z-list actress. They insisted on a *multi-million dollar *wedding, just like the older brother’s. Next, they insisted on 2 *multi-million dollar* disastrous royal tours, one while she was pregnant with their first-born child. Once returned from the royal tour, they decided they disliked their negative press and wanted to leave his homeland for hers. _Of course, he did not renounce his succession rights._ First stop, Canada. Then, onward to Montecito - one of the wealthiest enclaves in the USA - where they found a *multi-million dollar* mansion with 19 bathrooms. Along the way, they jetted around the world in order to lecture us about carbon footprints. Then, she told us she had a miscarriage, then became pregenant with 2nd child. They named second child after his grandmother. Second child has never been seen causing many to wonder.

They claim they are *broke* 
End of saga [we hope].


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> OMG!!  I’m brainwashed by Miserable M!  Everywhere I look I see M!  Got off 405 in L.A. While sitting at a signal light saw this.
> 
> View attachment 5202292



Ah now, the blue dress was the giveaway in that photo.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Ah now, the blue dress was the giveaway in that photo.


AND the HAT !


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are already planning Christmas (or other) lists, here is a very affordable option:
> 
> View attachment 5202241
> 
> Note, if you buy 3 books, you pay only 2!


 "Selling well....not!" is a concise way of saying it's 2,738,517 on Amazon. Not a typo, ranked more than 2 1/2 million in the inventory.   Makes me wonder how many books they catalogue.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> OMG!!  I’m brainwashed by Miserable M!  Everywhere I look I see M!  Got off 405 in L.A. While sitting at a signal light saw this.
> 
> View attachment 5202292


 Re your lovely pic. Don't forget to send a bill to Hwarang Korean Restaurant for advertising them on this thread. I mean take a page out of Doria and M's playbook: Don't give anything away for free!

PS: That goes for Metro Rail as well!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely there is a one page version?
> 
> Once upon a time a British Royal prince with numerous mental health struggles and ugly sibling rivalry issues, youngest son of most beloved Princess Diana who left him a *multi-million dollar* inheritance,  hooked up with a divorced, sleazy in an odd way, Hwood z-list actress. They insisted on a *multi-million dollar *wedding, just like the older brother’s. Next, they insisted on 2 *multi-million dollar* disastrous royal tours, one while she was pregnant with their first-born child. Once returned from the royal tour, they decided they disliked their negative press and wanted to leave his homeland for hers. _Of course, he did not renounce his succession rights._ First stop, Canada. Then, onward to Montecito - one of the wealthiest enclaves in the USA - where they found a *multi-million dollar* mansion with 19 bathrooms. Along the way, they jetted around the world in order to lecture us about carbon footprints. Then, she told us she had a miscarriage, then became pregenant with 2nd child. They named second child after his grandmother. Second child has never been seen causing many to wonder.
> 
> They claim they are *broke*
> End of saga [we hope].


Very good! It will be a


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> OMG!!  I’m brainwashed by Miserable M!  Everywhere I look I see M!  Got off 405 in L.A. While sitting at a signal light saw this.
> 
> View attachment 5202292


Wow, this must be Pearl. Impressive!


----------



## Chanbal

One more of those nice videos… *Don't miss this one!*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> One more of those nice videos… Don't miss this one!




Other than Hazzie’s photos, none of the BRF senior members have seen the Diana child????? Whaaaaa??? 
No baptism until they prove there is a legit child. 

He is correct - BRF must remember who they answer to. 
Not what the public wants, indeed !


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Other than Hazzie’s photos, none of the BRF senior members have seen the Diana child????? Whaaaaa???
> No baptism until they prove there is a legit child.
> 
> He is correct - BRF must remember who they answer to.
> Not what the public wants, indeed !


A very intriguing video, and the gentleman seems to know what he is talking about. Good for Will for not conceding to their demands. It's not the time for a baptism at Windsor, plenty of other churches available.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry and Meghan are probably still negotiating with _People_ on the proper price for a cover photo of them with the mystery baby. Either the magazine needs to go way up or the Harkles have to come way down.


----------



## Norm.Core

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan are probably still negotiating with _People_ on the proper price for a cover photo of them with the mystery baby. Either the magazine needs to go way up or the Harkles have to come way down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

le_junkie said:


> View attachment 5202448



I see a private jet in their future


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Re your lovely pic. Don't forget to send a bill to Hwarang Korean Restaurant for advertising them on this thread. I mean take a page out of Doria and M's playbook: Don't give anything away for free!
> 
> PS: That goes for Metro Rail as well!


$$$$$$$$$’s. 

Thanks @Maggie Muggins!  I’ll split it with yah as my manager!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Yanca

I read on twitter that they will be touring something in NYC with the Gov and Mayor, they must be missing Royal Tours and engagements )


----------



## Chanbal

Yanca said:


> I read on twitter that they will be touring something in NYC with the Gov and Mayor, they must be missing Royal Tours and engagements )


This goes well with her political aspirations.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I don’t believe I saw this posted here yet. Although not BRF title I still bet M is fuming over this!   

*Beatrice's baby has a title though H&M’s M’s children don’t* -

‘He (Edoardo) is a count, his wife (Beatrice) will be a countess automatically and any of their children will be counts or nobile donna.’





__





						Beatrice's baby has a title though Harry and Meghan's children don't
					

Princess Beatrice and Edoardo Mapellil Mozzi's new unnamed daughter will be a countess.



					metro.co.uk
				





Sent from my iPhone


----------



## Chanbal

@Yanca You are right, it looks like Hazz is missing the royal engagements.


----------



## Lodpah

IMHO the reason thet don’t show the babies is because a narc does not want any attention deflected from them. It will be all about the babes.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> @Yanca You are right, it looks like Hazz is missing the royal engagements.



Sorry mate. You wanted out so you stay out!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Agree with you that the above is right for many of us. However, zillions of people, particularly in the US, know very little about their falsehoods and hypocrisy, and they are the perfect targets to be fooled. *Media in the US should start reporting honestly* about them.


*Media in the US should start reporting honestly about everything.  *


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are already planning Christmas (or other) lists, here is a very affordable option:
> 
> View attachment 5202241
> 
> Note, if you buy 3 books, you pay only 2!


 Half a pound??


----------



## xincinsin

Yanca said:


> I read on twitter that they will be touring something in NYC with the Gov and Mayor, they must be missing Royal Tours and engagements )


It's difficult to cultivate an image of noble sacrifice when every article about them mentions the price of the mansion and its bedroom/bathroom quantity. By touring a facility, are they trying to show that they are still suffering as they did under the BRF. Ludicrous! Or it's a display of "authenticity" by connecting with the peasants?

Eric Schiffer may be giving this con couple too much credence for executing a PR job to undermine the BRF. I find that Hazard and Methane have no strategy and lurch from one short-term goal to another. Next year, is she going to ask people to give 41 minutes? Will Hazard appear on another magazine cover for his 38th b-day? Better Homes and Gold-Diggers as the Aussie folks said?


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that are already planning Christmas (or other) lists, here is a very affordable option:
> 
> View attachment 5202241
> 
> Note, if you buy 3 books, you pay only 2!




I don't have a person I hate so much to give this as passive-aggressive gift


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once returned from the royal tour, they decided they disliked their negative press and wanted to leave his homeland for hers.



For some reason I thought about Megxit yesterday...at this point I am sure the main reason they left was that Raptor once again misjudged. She was SO CERTAIN that in the US they could have more than the BRF was offering them - more money, more fame, more celebrity status. Yes, she didn't like her bad press and that she was forever to be a step behind Kate, but had she known they'd be on a constant downhill slope from the date of their move you bet she'd have gotten it together enough to not be completely cut off.


----------



## papertiger

I go away for a long weekend 
Do a little work
 - and I'm behind 28 pages of _this_ thread


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I don’t believe I saw this posted here yet. Although not BRF title I still bet M is fuming over this!
> 
> *Beatrice's baby has a title though H&M’s M’s children don’t* -
> 
> ‘He (Edoardo) is a count, his wife (Beatrice) will be a countess automatically and any of their children will be counts or nobile donna.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beatrice's baby has a title though Harry and Meghan's children don't
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice and Edoardo Mapellil Mozzi's new unnamed daughter will be a countess.
> 
> 
> 
> metro.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone



They do, though. But Earl of Dumbarton - and Lady Mountbatten-Windsor - is not good enough for them. Also, that's very simplified as Edo technically can't use his title in the UK, hence Bea's title being Princess Beatrice, Mrs. Mapelli-Mozzi.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I go away for a long weekend
> Do a little work
> - and I'm behind 28 pages of _this_ thread



Sounds like you need to get your priorities straight!


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the pandemic has changed everything, every single thing.
> Tolerance levels are less than zero. Best to use extra caution, especially when dealing with tone-deaf elitists. Each time H&M, the tabloid royals,  step up to the microphone, they show they have no idea what is actually important to healing this world. They continue to be divisive, provoking arguments and setting a lower and lower bar for civil discussion.



 H&M, *the tabloid royals* < love this !
A number of weeks ago  I commented that H&M are reducing a 1,000 year old institution into a soap opera.

Fabulous documentary on TV in the UK last night remembering Prince Philip showing BRF with class, grace, kindness, warmth and love.
Harry even managed to behave and say nice things without throwing shade.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason I thought about Megxit yesterday...at this point I am sure the main reason they left was that Raptor once again misjudged. She was SO CERTAIN that in the US they could have more than the BRF was offering them - more money, more fame, more celebrity status. Yes, she didn't like her bad press and that she was forever to be a step behind Kate, but had she known they'd be on a constant downhill slope from the date of their move you bet she'd have gotten it together enough to not be completely cut off.


She must have had visions that once they hit the ground in LA, everyone would come running to them and they would be feted like the king and queen of high society. Never took into account that they have little to offer except perhaps scandal and clickbait.

ETA Perhaps if that had really happened, the OW interview would be more gloating and self-praise, rather than weeping and self-pity.


----------



## Annawakes

Harry doesn’t miss doing royal engagements.  He misses the crowds cheering and clapping when he shows up, all grandiose and self-important.  They’re both narcs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> H&M, *the tabloid royals* < love this !
> A number of weeks ago  I commented that H&M are reducing a 1,000 year old institution into a soap opera.
> 
> Fabulous documentary on TV in the UK last night remembering Prince Philip showing BRF with class, grace, kindness, warmth and love.
> Harry even managed to behave and say nice things without throwing shade.



I need to look into how I can stream it illegally from the BBC website, as it hasn't shown up on Youtube yet. ETA: she said before checking once more, it's on Youtube now haha.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> This goes well with her political aspirations.



I don’t want to hear a word from Harry about US politics until he gives up his UK citizenship and begins the process to become a US citizen.

No comment about MM… I know no one wants to hear what she has to say.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Watching the documentary now...they say the BRF began filming in early 2021. But Harry is there. So was he in the UK after all? Or did they send a film crew to Montecito?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Watching the documentary now...they say the BRF began filming in early 2021. But Harry is there. So was he in the UK after all? Or did they send a film crew to Montecito?


His bit was filmed in the US, not sure when ... would kill to know who had the final cut on that one


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This goes well with her political aspirations.



I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Meghan does not want to work that hard. Imagine all the meetings held at inconvenient times and the even more inconvenient (shudder!) PRESS QUESTIONS. She is far too thin-skinned to survive in politics.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> His bit was filmed in the US, not sure when ... would kill to know who had the final cut on that one



I must say, he looks good (both healthy and groomed) and so far - only 10 mins in - he's behaving himself too.


----------



## marietouchet

New look for MM, I think she got a deal on KKW's outfit for the Met Ball

The BIG hair is sitting this one out, low bun, no tendrils 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Arrived in New York City
					

The Sussexes made their first major public appearance together since moving stateside last year.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> New look for MM, I think she got a deal on KKW's outfit for the Met Ball
> 
> The BIG hair is sitting this one out, low bun, no tendrils
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Arrived in New York City
> 
> 
> The Sussexes made their first major public appearance together since moving stateside last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Looks like her hair didn’t get to come on the trip. Or his actually.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t want to hear a word from Harry about US politics until he gives up his UK citizenship and begins the process to become a US citizen.
> 
> No comment about MM… I know no one wants to hear what she has to say.


Would he automatically be out of the line of succession if he gives up his UK citizenship?


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> New look for MM, I think she got a deal on KKW's outfit for the Met Ball
> 
> The BIG hair is sitting this one out, low bun, no tendrils
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Arrived in New York City
> 
> 
> The Sussexes made their first major public appearance together since moving stateside last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


I didn't know the Mayor's wife is also called First Lady. Wonder what was the point of showing them the observatory? Sounds like the Mayor considered them VIP guests of the city?


----------



## Annawakes

I see she finally chose to wear black, for its slimming effect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must say, he looks good (both healthy and groomed) and so far - only 10 mins in - he's behaving himself too.


I agree.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Why can't she ever dress for the correct season? It's 75+ degrees in NYC and she's in a turtleneck and coat?


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> New look for MM, I think she got a deal on KKW's outfit for the Met Ball
> 
> The BIG hair is sitting this one out, low bun, no tendrils
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Arrived in New York City
> 
> 
> The Sussexes made their first major public appearance together since moving stateside last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


The DM article on the subject. Tons of photo-Ops as anticipated. JLo style? The all thing is absurd!   










						Harry and Meghan visit One World Trade Center Observatory
					

The Sussexes met with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield at 50 UN Plaza Thursday afternoon for a 'wonderful' and 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Zara and Peter saying Philip was totally into tech, always taking interest in the newest gadgets and fiddling around until they did what he wanted. I have a hard time believing he didn't know how to end a Skype call.


----------



## Chanbal

The Privacy Shy Couple!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> Would he automatically be out of the line of succession if he gives up his UK citizenship?



Oh boo hoo if he does. 

I suspect he isn't giving it up in case things don't work here or with Meghan and he needs to go back to his family.


----------



## Yanca

Chanbal said:


> The DM article on the subject. Tons of photo-Ops as anticipated. JLo style? The all thing is absurd!
> View attachment 5202690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit One World Trade Center Observatory
> 
> 
> The Sussexes met with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield at 50 UN Plaza Thursday afternoon for a 'wonderful' and 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




I wonder who initiated this visit, were they invited by the Mayor and Gov? their PR Reach out?  True it's not the royal engagement that they missed but the adulation from the public,  It seemed that it's the UK media  who are mostly splashing this news.  I don't want to add more clicks to their article. Lol. No hate here,  I just don't really see her doing  all these benevolent acts from the goodness of her heart but it come across as just wanting more attention. The Visit seemed an official engagement, it must really getting to them seeing the BRF with the multiple engagements all over UK.  I wonder what they will do next year for the Queens Jubilee. I am sure Megain will want to be front and center. And what happen to their maternity leave for 5 months? for all their " work" .


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> Why can't she ever dress for the correct season? It's 75+ degrees in NYC and she's in a turtleneck and coat?



1) She’s getting paid or at least given free clothes to wear from the designer. 
or
2) She didn’t bother to check the weather app before packing because Meghan knows best about everything.


----------



## LittleStar88

hollieplus2 said:


> Why can't she ever dress for the correct season? It's 75+ degrees in NYC and she's in a turtleneck and coat?



Kind of looks like she is going with a slimming, more forgiving look. Carrying some baby weight still. Maybe she wants to sweat it off? Maybe we will get another sweaty pits picture?


----------



## Chanbal

hollieplus2 said:


> Why can't she ever dress for the correct season? It's 75+ degrees in NYC and she's in a turtleneck and coat?





LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of looks like she is going with a slimming, more forgiving look. Carrying some baby weight still. Maybe she wants to sweat it off? Maybe we will get another sweaty pits picture?



It looks like a mix of Steve Jobs (black turtleneck, all black) and JLo (hair & shoes) styles… In any event, she must be cooking in that outfit (75+ degrees in NYC).


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of looks like she is going with a slimming, more forgiving look. Carrying some baby weight still. Maybe she wants to sweat it off? Maybe we will get another sweaty pits picture?


I guess this is a post factor 9/11 event, with a sombre look, no brown suede shoes for him , no gray suit for him
Her suit is straight out of the Victoria Beckham playbook, same stylist as for cover photos


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of looks like she is going with a slimming, more forgiving look. Carrying some baby weight still. Maybe she wants to sweat it off? Maybe we will get another sweaty pits picture?



I’m still waiting for proof there is a baby.


----------



## Chanbal

Yanca said:


> *I wonder who initiated this visit, were they invited by the Mayor and Gov? their PR Reach out? * True it's not the royal engagement that they missed but the adulation from the public,  It seemed that it's the UK media  who are mostly splashing this news.  I don't want to add more clicks to their article. Lol. No hate here,  I just don't really see her doing  all these benevolent acts from the goodness of her heart but it come across as just wanting more attention. The Visit seemed an official engagement, it must really getting to them seeing the BRF with the multiple engagements all over UK.  I wonder what they will do next year for the Queens Jubilee. I am sure Megain will want to be front and center. And what happen to their maternity leave for 5 months? for all their " work" .


My bet is on their PR as the initiators of such visit. No hate here, just disgust with so much hypocrisy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m getting an Elizabeth Holmes, “I don’t know what my style is but I want to be taken super seriously” vibe from her recent looks.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m still waiting for proof there is a baby.


Hope you are in a very comfortable place, because it will be a long wait…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the pandemic has changed everything, every single thing.
> Tolerance levels are less than zero. Best to use extra caution, especially when dealing with tone-deaf elitists. Each time H&M, *the tabloid royals*,  step up to the microphone, they show they have no idea what is actually important to healing this world. They continue to be divisive, provoking arguments and setting a lower and lower bar for civil discussion.


 Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #11 nickname that I would've missed had it not been quoted again and I shall punish myself severely for this omission by having only one chocolate bar today instead of two.  BTW, that is an excellent description of the despicable duo. Congratulations and please join the Eager Beaver Club.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I’m still waiting for proof there is a baby.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Would he automatically be out of the line of succession if he gives up his UK citizenship?


Hmmm well a German Hanoverian became king when the (originally Scottish) Stuart line died out ...
Arguably all the Victorian descendants were from the Saxe Coburg line via Prince Albert and Victoria
Lots of precedent for that ... as long as you are willing to live in the UK


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Zara and Peter saying Philip was totally into tech, always taking interest in the newest gadgets and fiddling around until they did what he wanted. I have a hard time believing he didn't know how to end a Skype call.


Things are relative ... if you believe Youtube ... QEII still has an analog phone on her desk - the one with ginormous numbers of buttons


----------



## justwatchin

marietouchet said:


> New look for MM, I think she got a deal on KKW's outfit for the Met Ball
> 
> The BIG hair is sitting this one out, low bun, no tendrils
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Arrived in New York City
> 
> 
> The Sussexes made their first major public appearance together since moving stateside last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Looks like Hazza’s hair deflated a bit from that TIME cover. And she’s wearing a turtleneck already? Surely, it’s not that cold yet.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I go away for a long weekend
> Do a little work
> - and I'm behind 28 pages of _this_ thread


That's what you get for ignoring us and having a life!  How dare you!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They do, though. But Earl of Dumbarton - and Lady Mountbatten-Windsor - is not good enough for them. Also, that's very simplified as Edo technically can't use his title in the UK, hence Bea's title being Princess Beatrice, Mrs. Mapelli-Mozzi.


Interesting how Edo can't label himself a "Count" in the UK, the land of titles, but these Dumbtons are only "Duke and Duchess of Sussex" in the US, a country founded to get away from titles!


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> The DM article on the subject. Tons of photo-Ops as anticipated. JLo style? The all thing is absurd!
> View attachment 5202690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit One World Trade Center Observatory
> 
> 
> The Sussexes met with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield at 50 UN Plaza Thursday afternoon for a 'wonderful' and 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I cannot get over how little hair they both seem to have in these pics


----------



## purseinsanity

justwatchin said:


> Looks like Hazza’s hair deflated a bit from that TIME cover. And she’s wearing a turtleneck already? Surely, it’s not that cold yet.


Doesn't seem to be much of a welcoming crowd 

And what does the title of the article mean?  Did someone forget to proof read?  "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Kick Have Arrived in NYC"??  Did she marry someone named Kick now?


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> New look for MM, I think she got a deal on KKW's outfit for the Met Ball
> 
> The BIG hair is sitting this one out, low bun, no tendrils
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Arrived in New York City
> 
> 
> The Sussexes made their first major public appearance together since moving stateside last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


That self satisfied smirk on her face as her eyes zoom onto the camera lens. Make my skin crawl.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It looks like a mix of Steve Jobs (black turtleneck, all black) and JLo (hair & shoes) styles… In any event, she must be cooking in that outfit (75+ degrees in NYC).


She is 40, but obviously not perimenopausal.  I'm getting hot flashes just looking at her outfit in 75 degree weather!


----------



## CarryOn2020

First - why?  9/11 was 3 weeks ago, so why now?  Why the private tour?
Second - Madam Duchess?  Is that the proper way to address her, a US citizen?  Nothing for Hazzie?  
Third - say hello to Dumb and Dumber attending a faux event = awkward. They look stupid. 
After all they have put us through, I just cannot sugar-coat the obvious - stupid.  Stupid hair, stupid heavy make-up, stupid comments.
Did I say they look stupid?  
Fourth -  pffft, why bother, ffs.




Matthew Ryerson
The visit lasted less than 20 mins apparently.  A PR stunt off the backs of the thousands of people who died on 9/11.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #11 nickname that I would've missed had it not been quoted again and I shall punish myself severely for this omission by having only one chocolate bar today instead of two.  BTW, that is an excellent description of the despicable duo. Congratulations and please join the Eager Beaver Club.
> View attachment 5202717



Thank you so much. This list is such a fun thing that you’ve created. Thank you.


----------



## kipp

purseinsanity said:


> She is 40, but obviously not perimenopausal.  I'm getting hot flashes just looking at her outfit in 75 degree weather!


The weather channel says that right now (12:17pm) it's 79 degrees in NYC and "feels like 83"!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are in a very comfortable place, because it will be a long wait…



Oh, I am here for the duration and open to all conspiracy theories!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

The moment Hazzie realized this was a royal screw-up. He _knows_.




DM video is hilarious to watch.  Hazzie moves like a royal and ignores all of the press commands.  The *thirsty* MM follows every order the press gives her - turn left, right, move to center, etc.  She tries to pause and linger in front of the camera like a red carpet event while Hazz rushes through it. These two are more out of sync with each other than ever before.

ETA:  what a photo - these men _know_ a loser when they see one.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I don't know who Harry's Grey Suit is but it's hard to take her at all seriously when she makes such a silly mistake in a six word tweet. "Seizes" to amaze me. Well, I hope Meghan isn't giving this woman seizures.


----------



## nyshopaholic

The humidity is oppressive here today. I’m sweating just looking at her in those photos. How she is not melting dressed like that is beyond me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I don't know who Harry's Grey Suit is but it's hard to take her at all seriously when she makes such a silly mistake in a six word tweet. "Seizes" to amaze me. Well, I hope Meghan isn't giving this woman seizures.



Perhaps she is just stunned by the audacity and idiocy of MM’s choices at such a somber place.
Indeed colossal errors for both people. Still, it’s a greater error for MM who has spent days planning this outfit for this mockery of a visit.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  *what a photo - these men know a loser when they see one.*
> 
> View attachment 5202759



Poor NYPD cops. They never know what kind of crappy assignment they'll get.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Kind of looks like she is going with a slimming, more forgiving look. Carrying some baby weight still. Maybe she wants to sweat it off? Maybe we will get another sweaty pits picture?



She carried less weight before giving birth, that's a fact ('Raising the Future' T photo)


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> The moment Hazzie realized this was a royal screw-up. He _knows_.
> 
> View attachment 5202756
> 
> 
> DM video is hilarious to watch.  Hazzie moves like a royal and ignores all of the press commands.  The *thirsty* MM follows every order the press gives her - turn left, right, move to center, etc.  She tries to pause and linger in front of the camera like a red carpet event while Hazz rushes through it. These two are more out of sync with each other than ever before.
> 
> ETA:  what a photo - these men _know_ a loser when they see one.
> 
> View attachment 5202759


Her face is saying “This isn’t going well”.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  what a photo - these men _know_ a loser when they see one.
> 
> View attachment 5202759



To me it seems like they are checking out his huge bald spot from behind


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I don't know who Harry's Grey Suit is but it's hard to take her at all seriously when she makes such a silly mistake in a six word tweet. "Seizes" to amaze me. Well, I hope Meghan isn't giving this woman seizures.


Oh give her the benefit of the doubt - spelling checker help , I bet

Writing paper on the hoard of Bactrian gold found in Afghanistan from one of the steppe hordes (probably the Yuezhi / early Kushans) - it took a lot fighting to get that typed right









						Tillya Tepe - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm well a German Hanoverian became king when the (originally Scottish) Stuart line died out ...
> Arguably all the Victorian descendants were from the Saxe Coburg line via Prince Albert and
> Lots of precedent for that ... *as long as you are willing to live in the UK*


And IMO, you'd have to be willing to become a British citizen unlike the dipsy-doo twit, aka M, who didn't go through with it.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> She carried less weight before giving birth, that's a fact ('Raising the Future' T photo)


Or it could be the COVID 15 lbs?


----------



## marietouchet

The DM has summarized it, about the same $ amount of bling as in the Time photos, including the diamond pinky ring we all know and love


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> The DM article on the subject. Tons of photo-Ops as anticipated. JLo style? The all thing is absurd!
> View attachment 5202690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit One World Trade Center Observatory
> 
> 
> The Sussexes met with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield at 50 UN Plaza Thursday afternoon for a 'wonderful' and 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Adding to my post from montecito gas station stop yesterday … if you read it you’d know what I mean.  I KNEW that was them in that black very very dark tinted Range Rover leaving montecito for LAX yesterday!!  Saw two shadows in the back seat as we drove past it. Wanted to tell my DH to slow down so I can take a look.  I’m sure H&M would have loved my face pressed up against my passenger window.  The driver got a little nervous for he started to ride between two lanes. Must have thought we were paparazzi in a bright blue C8.   HAD to have been them to fly out to NYC.  At least that’s what I was thinking at the time.


----------



## Annawakes

Yeah, pretty sure she’s got that big coat on for slimming effect.  And, a warm summery dress under a big coat like that would just look toooooo stupid.  So we get the turtleneck.  Unless she’s hiding something on her neck?


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Adding to my post from montecito gas station stop yesterday … if you read it you’d know what I mean.  I KNEW that was them in that black very very dark tinted Range Rover leaving montecito for LAX yesterday!!  Saw two shadows in the back seat as we drove past it. Wanted to tell my DH to slow down so I can take a look.  I’m sure H&M would have loved my face pressed up against my passenger window.  The driver got a little nervous for he started to ride between two lanes. *Must have thought we were paparazzi in a bright blue C8. *  HAD to have been them to fly out to NYC.  At least that’s what I was thinking at the time.



You probably made their day. They get to believe they are so in demand they had paparazzi chasing them!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> My bet is on their PR as the initiators of such visit. No hate here, just disgust with so much hypocrisy.





Yanca said:


> I wonder who initiated this visit, were they invited by the Mayor and Gov? their PR Reach out?  True it's not the royal engagement that they missed but the adulation from the public,  It seemed that it's the UK media  who are mostly splashing this news.  I don't want to add more clicks to their article. Lol. No hate here,  I just don't really see her doing  all these benevolent acts from the goodness of her heart but it come across as just wanting more attention. The Visit seemed an official engagement, it must really getting to them seeing the BRF with the multiple engagements all over UK.  I wonder what they will do next year for the Queens Jubilee. I am sure Megain will want to be front and center. And what happen to their maternity leave for 5 months? for all their " work" .



My money is on Marc Benioff, owner of TIME magazine, headquartered in Manhattan. TIME used to be an influential, among some sectors, weekly "news" magazine. Lost the lustre and the weekly publication years ago, Benioff will hope this visit ties into his making them part of a group of 100 recently named by the mag and push newsstand sales. Plus he is founder of a huge corporation "Salesforce" which employs Harry so he will do all he can to push forward the Faux Royal and make him more marketable in the US. I'm guessing Benioff has the kind of clout, and probably the donation to political war chests,  that he can make a call to the beleaguered Mayor of NYC to "set something up.'" The Mayor and the Governor will soak up the photo ops and kiss azz of the visitors from Moneticito for their own PR needs.

Benioff also links to the Fairy Godmother, Oprah.

An incestuous group of Narcs Inc. 

edited to add another NYC link: "The pair have signed up with elite New York firm the Harry Walker Agency, whose clients include the Obamas and Meghan’s pal Serena Williams."  Makes truth of the saying, "It's who you know, not what you do."


----------



## Aimee3

Annawakes said:


> Yeah, pretty sure she’s got that big coat on for slimming effect.  And, a warm summery dress under a big coat like that would just look toooooo stupid.  So we get the turtleneck.  Unless she’s hiding something on her neck?


We will probably get more sweat stained photos of her if she takes off the coat.  It’s 78 degrees here now!


----------



## zinacef

So so extra! 70’s is not a turtleneck weather, she’s doing the Kate outfit—— looks nice but belongs to the wrong weather. wonder what weather channel or app she used when she‘s doing her outfit choices.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> My money is on Marc Benioff, owner of TIME magazine, headquartered in Manhattan. TIME used to be an influential, among some sectors, weekly "news" magazine. Lost the lustre and the weekly publication years ago, Benioff will hope this visit ties into his making them part of a group of 100 recently named by the mag and push newsstand sales. Plus he is founder of a huge corporation "Salesforce" which employs Harry so he will do all he can to push forward the Faux Royal and make him more marketable in the US. I'm guessing Benioff has the kind of clout, and probably the donation to political war chests,  that he can make a call to the beleaguered Mayor of NYC to "set something up.'" The Mayor and the Governor will soak up the photo ops and kiss azz of the visitors from Moneticito for their own PR needs.
> 
> Benioff also links to the Fairy Godmother, Oprah.
> 
> An incestuous group of Narcs Inc.


The mayor has his own issues, explaining why he accepted 3 tickets to the Met Ball at $35k each, the museum comp'd the tix, they were a gift, doesnt he still have to pay tax on the $105k donation? 
I understand why the museum sought to ingratiate itself with NYC politicians ..


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> The mayor has his own issues, explaining why he accepted 3 tickets to the Met Ball at $35k each, the museum comp'd the tix, they were a gift, doesnt he still have to pay tax on the $105k donation?
> I understand why the museum sought to ingratiate itself with NYC politicians ..


Actually the current mayor is what is called a lame duck.  He’s not running in november and will be out soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> My money is on Marc Benioff, owner of TIME magazine, headquartered in Manhattan. TIME used to be an influential, among some sectors, weekly "news" magazine. Lost the lustre and the weekly publication years ago, Benioff will hope this visit ties into his making them part of a group of 100 recently named by the mag and push newsstand sales. Plus he is founder of a huge corporation "Salesforce" which employs Harry so he will do all he can to push forward the Faux Royal and make him more marketable in the US. I'm guessing Benioff has the kind of clout, and probably the donation to political war chests,  that he can make a call to the beleaguered Mayor of NYC to "set something up.'" The Mayor and the Governor will soak up the photo ops and kiss azz of the visitors from Moneticito for their own PR needs.
> 
> Benioff also links to the Fairy Godmother, Oprah.
> 
> An incestuous group of Narcs Inc.
> 
> edited to add another NYC link: "The pair have signed up with elite New York firm the Harry Walker Agency, whose clients include the Obamas and Meghan’s pal Serena Williams."  Makes truth of the saying, "It's who you know, not what you do."



Last year or the year before, it was the link to Serena and Alexis that brought them into the ‘time 100’ circle, iirc. 

These rich elitist need to stop trying to make H&M happen. No, they are not the next O’s or any other political family.   Hazzie is a royal, part of that elitist crowd. His contempt for a free press was very clear today as was his need for constant fawning.  When QE goes, the shine will be completely off the BRF royals, not sure Kate and William can get it back. The BRF knows it, our elites and media need to realize it, too.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> Yeah, pretty sure she’s got that big coat on for slimming effect.  And, a warm summery dress under a big coat like that would just look toooooo stupid.  So we get the turtleneck.  *Unless she’s hiding something on her neck?*


Bite marks??? You mean, we thought they were simply getting new veneers when in fact, they were having their canine teeth filed??? Well, since they love titles, maybe we should call them Count & Countess Dracula; they are evil enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Things are relative ... if you believe Youtube ... QEII still has an analog phone on her desk - the one with ginormous numbers of buttons



Yeah, but they are two different people. He also loved spicy food and she doesn't.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ha!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> First - why?  9/11 was 3 weeks ago, so why now?  Why the private tour?
> Second - Madam Duchess?  Is that the proper way to address her, a US citizen?  Nothing for Hazzie?
> Third - say hello to Dumb and Dumber attending a faux event = awkward. They look stupid.
> After all they have put us through, I just cannot sugar-coat the obvious - stupid.  Stupid hair, stupid heavy make-up, stupid comments.
> Did I say they look stupid?
> Fourth -  pffft, why bother, ffs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew Ryerson
> The visit lasted less than 20 mins apparently.  A PR stunt off the backs of the thousands of people who died on 9/11.




What does that even mean...she shouldn't wear Middle Eastern diamonds while visiting Ground Zero? Now you all know my feelings about her, but that's a dumb sentiment in itself, unless the diamond was given by the Bin Ladin family. ETA: I mean the Remoulade Sauce tweet that's in the quoted tweet.

That said, it's in really poor taste to still flaunt it like this.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lanasyogamama said:


> Ha!



That tounge against the teeth thing is so annoying.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> That tounge against the teeth thing is so annoying.


She's trying to look cute and sassy or cute and sexy, a look her stans will appreciate, but us, not so much.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Well, the large-sized emerald one (Lorraine Schwartz I presume) is just F-UGLY; way too big a diamond to be a "pinky" ring per se (IMO) .. and that had to cost-a-plenty given that it's Lorraine's work (way too expensive for IMO ho-hum jewelry).
> 
> I do wear 2 Diamond Pinkies, but that is also because they are my design and my fabrication:
> 1.  Left-hand:  traditional solitaire in 18k Royal Yellow Gold setting
> 2.  Right-hand:  Grey kite Diamond in 18k Rose Gold setting
> 
> View attachment 5197022
> View attachment 5197023


Your rings are lovely! Bezel set stones are my favorite, and your large diamond one totally ROCKS! Thank you for sharing.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> First - why?  9/11 was 3 weeks ago, so why now?  Why the private tour?
> Second - Madam Duchess?  Is that the proper way to address her, a US citizen?  Nothing for Hazzie?
> Third - say hello to Dumb and Dumber attending a faux event = awkward. They look stupid.
> After all they have put us through, I just cannot sugar-coat the obvious - stupid.  Stupid hair, stupid heavy make-up, stupid comments.
> Did I say they look stupid?
> Fourth -  pffft, why bother, ffs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew Ryerson
> The visit lasted less than 20 mins apparently.  A PR stunt off the backs of the thousands of people who died on 9/11.



CarryIn2020, I wanted to love what you had to say but everything about this angers and disgusts me so I need to give it a


----------



## bag-mania

We didn't need to wait long for the Diana tie-in, because of course everything must come back to Diana.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle check into Princess Diana’s favorite NYC hotel*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have checked into the swanky Carlyle hotel, which was Princess Diana’s favorite New York City haunt, Page Six can exclusively reveal.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are in Manhattan ahead of their appearance at Global Citizen Live in Central Park Saturday.

The Sussexes flew in to the Big Apple Wednesday, but it’s not yet known whether they arrived by private jet.

They’re believed to have dined at Bemelmans Bar at the Upper East Side hotel Wednesday night before making an early visit Thursday to the One World Trade Observatory, where they met NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio and Gov. Kathy Hochul. Both somberly dressed in all black, the couple then visited the 9/11 Memorial.

It’s their first big public outing together since quitting the royal family in early 2020, and they left their kids, 2-year-old son Archie and 3-month-old daughter Lilibet, at home in Montecito, Calif.

Harry’s late mom, Diana, frequented the 1,800-square-foot Royal Suite on the 22nd floor of the Carlyle whenever she was in town. It now costs upwards of $8,000 a night.

The Carlyle is also where Harry’s big brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, stayed when they visited NYC in 2014, also staying in the Royal Suite.

The hotel’s former managing director Giovanni Beretta once told Architectural Digest: “The Royal Suite is one of our most sought after at the Carlyle. You truly feel as if you are stepping into a grand residence and wishing the walls could talk.”

Many of the rooms feature Steinway or Baldwin baby grand pianos, plasma HDTVs and large windows to soak up the city sights. Bathroom chambers are kitted out with Kiehl’s toilet fixtures, monogrammed terrycloth bathrobes and slippers as well as Nero Marquina and Thassos marble finishes.

However, multiple sources told us the Sussexes are not staying in the ritzy Royal Suite.

Harry, 37, and Markle, 40, made a private visit Thursday afternoon, rumored to be with the US ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, at her apartment at the 50 UN Plaza Building near the UN global headquarters.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle check into Princess Diana’s favorite NYC hotel
					

We’re told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are not staying in his family’s beloved Royal Suite, which costs upwards of $8,000 a night.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don't know who Harry's Grey Suit is but it's hard to take her at all seriously when she makes such a silly mistake in a six word tweet. "Seizes" to amaze me. Well, I hope Meghan isn't giving this woman seizures.


I've no idea who she is, but she often posts interesting comments. She (or he) was probably tired when wrote that Hazz's wife never ceases to amaze… It's true!


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> To me it seems like they are checking out his huge bald spot from behind
> 
> View attachment 5202763


The TIME photos were released this month. They are likely puzzled and trying to figure out the reason for so much hair loss in such a short period of time.


----------



## poopsie

hollieplus2 said:


> Why can't she ever dress for the correct season? It's 75+ degrees in NYC and she's in a turtleneck and coat?


Well, its been around 100 here for the past week. It would have been a bit cooler in Montecito, but yeah, 75 would feel cool right about now


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> The Privacy Shy Couple!!!




So did security have to evacuate the entire building or just that one floor to accommodate their inflated sense of self importance


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> Yeah, pretty sure she’s got that big coat on for slimming effect.  And, a warm summery dress under a big coat like that would just look toooooo stupid.  So we get the turtleneck.  *Unless she’s hiding something on her neck? *


Could it be QE Coronation Necklace?


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> This is what you wrote:
> 
> 
> _Regarding the tiara, Spencer women and Spencer brides *who *don't have their own family tiara, so Raptor wouldn't qualify. _
> 
> I  apologize.  I completely did not see the words *who don't!  *I mistakenly read it as the Spencers had no family tiara!  Put me in the corner!
> 
> EDIT: the lemonade from my lemon of an error is that I got to post pictures of the Spencer tiara. lol!


I am happy looking at tiara pictures any old time, doesn't matter how they get posted.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> First - why?  9/11 was 3 weeks ago, so why now?  Why the private tour?
> Second - Madam Duchess?  Is that the proper way to address her, a US citizen?  Nothing for Hazzie?
> Third - say hello to Dumb and Dumber attending a faux event = awkward. They look stupid.
> After all they have put us through, I just cannot sugar-coat the obvious - stupid.  Stupid hair, stupid heavy make-up, stupid comments.
> Did I say they look stupid?
> Fourth -  pffft, why bother, ffs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew Ryerson
> The visit lasted less than 20 mins apparently.  A PR stunt off the backs of the thousands of people who died on 9/11.



I see she is wearing "those" diamonds again, so much for her "compassion"!  This 'event' really pisses me off as I lost some dear friends on 9/11!


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> My money is on Marc Benioff, owner of TIME magazine, headquartered in Manhattan. TIME used to be an influential, among some sectors, weekly "news" magazine. Lost the lustre and the weekly publication years ago, Benioff will hope this visit ties into his making them part of a group of 100 recently named by the mag and push newsstand sales. Plus he is founder of a huge corporation "Salesforce" which employs Harry so he will do all he can to push forward the Faux Royal and make him more marketable in the US. I'm guessing Benioff has the kind of clout, and probably the donation to political war chests,  that he can make a call to the beleaguered Mayor of NYC to "set something up.'" The Mayor and the Governor will soak up the photo ops and kiss azz of the visitors from Moneticito for their own PR needs.
> 
> Benioff also links to the Fairy Godmother, Oprah.
> 
> An incestuous group of Narcs Inc.
> 
> edited to add another NYC link: "The pair have signed up with elite New York firm the Harry Walker Agency, whose clients include the Obamas and Meghan’s pal Serena Williams."  Makes truth of the saying, "It's who you know, not what you do."


.. and to think that I interviewed and almost accepted a job at Salesforce, I'm sure glad that I didn't as I didn't know that they "employed" Hazardous!


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Ha!



So, even then .. her 'outfit' didn't fit .. look at the stretch at the boobs area!!!  Same deal today, that Turtleneck is too tight around the boobs!!!


----------



## lallybelle

It's kind of gross & humid here today. Supposed to storm overnight & tomorrow.

UGH. GTFO of my city.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> So, even then .. her 'outfit' didn't fit .. look at the stretch at the boobs area!!!  Same deal today, that Turtleneck is too tight around the boobs!!!



She had to cover up the milk truck with a turtleneck and giant coat.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

I'm just trying to figure out what the point of all this is? Who are they here on behalf of? Not the BRF, not the people of the US they don't represent me. Who are they doing this in support of? 

I don't think they got the welcome they thought they would in CA/Hollywood. NY seems to be pulling out the red carpet for them. I suspect a move in the next 12months to NYC.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> We didn't need to wait long for the Diana tie-in, because of course everything must come back to Diana.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle check into Princess Diana’s favorite NYC hotel*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have checked into the swanky Carlyle hotel, which was Princess Diana’s favorite New York City haunt, Page Six can exclusively reveal.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are in Manhattan ahead of their appearance at Global Citizen Live in Central Park Saturday.
> 
> The Sussexes flew in to the Big Apple Wednesday, but it’s not yet known whether they arrived by private jet.
> 
> They’re believed to have dined at Bemelmans Bar at the Upper East Side hotel Wednesday night before making an early visit Thursday to the One World Trade Observatory, where they met NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio and Gov. Kathy Hochul. Both somberly dressed in all black, the couple then visited the 9/11 Memorial.
> 
> It’s their first big public outing together since quitting the royal family in early 2020, and they left their kids, 2-year-old son Archie and 3-month-old daughter Lilibet, at home in Montecito, Calif.
> 
> Harry’s late mom, Diana, frequented the 1,800-square-foot Royal Suite on the 22nd floor of the Carlyle whenever she was in town. It now costs upwards of $8,000 a night.
> 
> The Carlyle is also where Harry’s big brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, stayed when they visited NYC in 2014, also staying in the Royal Suite.
> 
> The hotel’s former managing director Giovanni Beretta once told Architectural Digest: “The Royal Suite is one of our most sought after at the Carlyle. You truly feel as if you are stepping into a grand residence and wishing the walls could talk.”
> 
> Many of the rooms feature Steinway or Baldwin baby grand pianos, plasma HDTVs and large windows to soak up the city sights. Bathroom chambers are kitted out with Kiehl’s toilet fixtures, monogrammed terrycloth bathrobes and slippers as well as Nero Marquina and Thassos marble finishes.
> 
> However, multiple sources told us the Sussexes are not staying in the ritzy Royal Suite.
> 
> Harry, 37, and Markle, 40, made a private visit Thursday afternoon, rumored to be with the US ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, at her apartment at the 50 UN Plaza Building near the UN global headquarters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle check into Princess Diana’s favorite NYC hotel
> 
> 
> We’re told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are not staying in his family’s beloved Royal Suite, which costs upwards of $8,000 a night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Thanks for posting the article, it avoids clicks. 
My reaction to it:


----------



## LittleStar88

hollieplus2 said:


> I'm just trying to figure out what the point of all this is? Who are they here on behalf of? Not the BRF, not the people of the US they don't represent me. Who are they doing this in support of?
> 
> I don't think they got the welcome they thought they would in CA/Hollywood. NY seems to be pulling out the red carpet for them. I suspect a move in the next 12months to NYC.



The point is a publicity campaign. They are doing it on behalf of themselves. It must feel so weird to be showing up with nothing of substance to contribute. 

Guessing someone behind the Time magazine cover orchestrated this silly publicity and photo tour.


----------



## justwatchin

bellecate said:


> That self satisfied smirk on her face as her eyes zoom onto the camera lens. Make my skin crawl.


Exactly. This is the most relevant she will ever be and Hazza is eating it up as well. No sharing the stage with his brother.
But so many questions:
*who paid for this appearance as I feel confident they aren’t doing it for free?
*how did they make this trip? Private jet or Greyhound bus to reduce their carbon footprint?
*is maternity leave over and who is watching over Archie and the elusive Lilibet?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> I'm just trying to figure out what the point of all this is? Who are they here on behalf of? Not the BRF, not the people of the US they don't represent me. Who are they doing this in support of?
> 
> I don't think they got the welcome they thought they would in CA/Hollywood. NY seems to be pulling out the red carpet for them. I suspect a move in the next 12months to NYC.





LittleStar88 said:


> The point is a publicity campaign. They are doing it on behalf of themselves. It must feel so weird to be showing up with nothing of substance to contribute.
> 
> Guessing someone behind the Time magazine cover orchestrated this silly publicity and photo tour.



Yep, it is purely a publicity event, er, stunt. The PageSix article said they visited with the US Ambassador to the UN this morning, so my guess is it is to get some easy "humanitarian" cred.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> It's difficult to cultivate an image of noble sacrifice when every article about them mentions the price of the mansion and its bedroom/bathroom quantity. By touring a facility, are they trying to show that they are still suffering as they did under the BRF. Ludicrous! Or it's a display of "authenticity" by connecting with the peasants?


I'm not sure it matters. Meg wants people to think she suffers with the peasants - her heart breaks and she runs to the struggle. Never mind her ultra rich lifestyle - she cares, she hurts, she wants others to donate... so she and she alone can help!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> So, even then .. her 'outfit' didn't fit .. look at the stretch at the boobs area!!!  Same deal today, that Turtleneck is too tight around the boobs!!!



Seeing how she is not super busty I never understood how she managed that.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They do, though. But Earl of Dumbarton - and Lady Mountbatten-Windsor - is not good enough for them. Also, that's very simplified as Edo technically can't use his title in the UK, hence Bea's title being Princess Beatrice, Mrs. Mapelli-Mozzi.


I think Bea should name the baby Lily, as was reported she had wanted.

Then there would be a royal Lily and the other Lily.


----------



## Yanca

A lot of people have been wondering what is the purpose, because it's always something with them, nothing straight forward, I don't understant the need to go to the memorial site of 9-11, that is already  a sombre occasion  and site for the US and the whole world and what is the purpose of them visiting it?  They would have been more palatable and likeable if they are more transparent on what it is they are after, sure they want money ,then  why make a foundation and then only donate parts of the proceed to their certain charities?  Why not just be a full blown celebrities that they crave to be- they don't seem to like the responsbilites and the string attached to being a Public Servant,  why hide beneath the veneer of being a Truthful humanatarian and a Public Servant that really wants to put a shine to the causes they hold dear?  They always advertise when they donate but it's always with a partenership of a huge commercial companies , they don't disclose how much they have donate,- even the  Kardashians are more transparent when they  make monetary donations. Why do they need to have the Oprah interviews and non stop attack his family?  I would have been less wary of them, but all their actions screams of hypocrisy.  everything they do is for themselves and they act holy and just want to do good for the people, even the Global Vax live concert? what is the purpose?  President B  already announced  that the US will donate 500 million more  more doses of vaccines  to the less wealthy nations,  even before this concert, the wealthy nations  and leaders are already doing it.   I would have taken their word more seriously if they are  like Dolly Parton who donated for the moderna vaccines studies from her own money and was so quiet and no- nonsesnse about it.


----------



## marietouchet

I still dont get the visit to the 9/11 site, 10 days after the anniversary ...  EXCEPT it is 20 years, so, a big anniversary and everyone has tried to get  a piece of that pr action

JB visited ... hmmm maybe not enuf spotlight if you tag along behind him ??? And JB way down in the polls but more to the point ,when people were planning trips, it may have been JB who did not want HM.  JB was supposed to make BIG SPLASH announcing triumphant exit from Central Asia...

I dont doubt that Cuomo had a shindig planned but he went down the toilet

I bet today's hoohah was de Blasio's attempt at getting 9/11 publicity, and who better at his side than .... the fact that the interim governor was there was just sheer luck, she has not been in office long enough to get on de B's bad list, so, she went to the photo op

Interesting bedfellows ...


----------



## Chanbal

People are replying to Blasio on Twitter, and reminding him about the 1st amendment (bonkers according to Hazz).


----------



## Chanbal

Another heavy coat for hot weather…


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> And IMO, you'd have to be willing to become a British citizen unlike the dipsy-doo twit, aka M, who didn't go through with it.


Maggie Muggins, are you tracking your h/m names too?  You come up with great ones and deserve ribbons!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That Twitter comment from Vonnie...that's EXACTLY what she did as a "royal", reenacting her idea of what a royal would wear and do.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> The point is a publicity campaign. They are doing it on behalf of themselves. It must feel so weird to be showing up with nothing of substance to contribute.
> 
> Guessing *someone behind the Time magazine cover orchestrated this silly publicity and photo tour*.


Good guess!

Blasio on Benioff (2020):

_And I also had another conversation last night, which was also inspirational to me. *One of the, I think the most impressive business leaders in America, Marc Benioff, of Salesforce.* He's someone I've had the opportunity to get to know over the last few years and I think one of the business leaders in this country who has one of the strongest voices in terms of social conscience and what the business community needs to do to help the larger community_.









						Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Holds Media Availability
					

Transcript: Mayor de Blasio Holds Media Availability



					www1.nyc.gov


----------



## Hermes Zen

LittleStar88 said:


> The point is a publicity campaign. They are doing it on behalf of themselves. It must feel so weird to be showing up with nothing of substance to contribute.
> 
> Guessing someone behind the Time magazine cover orchestrated this silly publicity and photo tour.


I agree. Also think since there were little chatter about M going into politics and they were thinking NYC (hope not) this is their way to get some exposure and schmooze with governor to help endorse her in the future.  M is dressed conservatively in pants (again) hair pulled back showing her full face. A KH vp look.


----------



## Handbag1234

I am so confused about this visit. Why? What organisation are they representing? What’s their relevance to 9/11? Who exactly are they ‘supporting’  by doing this and how? If I was a first responder or a survivor or a relative of a victim or a new york resident I would be really annoyed by this show boat PR stunt by Z list ex royals desperate to be relevant and using 9/11 as their own prop. They should just hang round the bins like Kimmy K waiting to be papped by the tipped off media agencies.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I still dont get the visit to the 9/11 site, 10 days after the anniversary ...  EXCEPT it is 20 years, so, a big anniversary and everyone has tried to get  a piece of that pr action
> 
> JB visited ... hmmm maybe not enuf spotlight if you tag along behind him ??? And JB way down in the polls but more to the point ,when people were planning trips, it may have been JB who did not want HM.  JB was supposed to make BIG SPLASH announcing triumphant exit from Central Asia...
> 
> I dont doubt that Cuomo had a shindig planned but he went down the toilet
> 
> I bet today's hoohah was de Blasio's attempt at getting 9/11 publicity, and who better at his side than .... the fact that the interim governor was there was just sheer luck, she has not been in office long enough to get on de B's bad list, so, she went to the photo op
> 
> Interesting bedfellows ...



If they had dared come on the actual anniversary of 9/11 I think they would have been criticized by everyone, possibly even by the normally supportive US press. They absolutely did not belong there. Showing up almost two weeks later is anticlimactic but safer for them. They are trying to fool the world into believing they are relevant and this is how they are going about it. Hopefully no one is naive or stupid enough to believe their little dog and pony show means they actually care.


----------



## marietouchet

Handbag1234 said:


> I am so confused about this visit. Why? What organisation are they representing? What’s their relevance to 9/11? Who exactly are they ‘supporting’  by doing this and how? If I was a first responder or a survivor or a relative of a victim or a new york resident I would be really annoyed by this show boat PR stunt by Z list ex royals desperate to be relevant and using 9/11 as their own prop. They should just hang round the bins like Kimmy K waiting to be papped by the tipped off media agencies.


see post 74542 about first responder comments, about five posts earlier


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Melocoton

Another coat indeed, what are we covering up?!  This is a lame publicity stunt.  These two have little to no connection to NYC.


----------



## bag-mania

I hope New Yorkers give H&M the kind of welcome reserved for very special visitors, like how a group of drunk Yankees fans treats that lone Red Sox fan sitting in the stands at Yankee Stadium.


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, they came to New York to save the world y'all. This is what they did with the UN ambassador today. Here's a nice shot of Harry's bald spot.

*According to Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield, they discussed issues including the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health and racial justice.*

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with US ambassador to the United Nations*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.

“Wonderful meeting with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Important discussion of COVID, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield tweeted.

Thomas-Greenfield, a longtime diplomat nominated by President ***** last year, posted images of the couple chatting with her on a white couch and posing next to an American flag at UN headquarters on East 46th Street near First Avenue.

Markle was later seen leaving the building in a long tan coat and sunglasses — after changing out of the somber outfit she wore earlier in the day — and clutching a black leather binder alongside Prince Harry, who sported a gray suit and tie.

The couple then got into a Land Rover amid a swarm of security outside the building and left.

The UN meeting came after the pair viewed the skyline from the rebuilt World Trade Center and honored the 9/11 memorial on their first business trip to the Big Apple since saying goodbye to royal life.










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with  US ambassador to the United Nations
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US Ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.




					nypost.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her hair looks a lot lighter or reddish. 

I also think part of the motivation for this new look is to look nothing like Kate’s style since the comparison pics weren’t doing her any favors.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Well, the large-sized emerald one (Lorraine Schwartz I presume) is just F-UGLY; way too big a diamond to be a "pinky" ring per se (IMO) .. and that had to cost-a-plenty given that it's Lorraine's work (way too expensive for IMO ho-hum jewelry).
> 
> I do wear 2 Diamond Pinkies, but that is also because they are my design and my fabrication:
> 1.  Left-hand:  traditional solitaire in 18k Royal Yellow Gold setting
> 2.  Right-hand:  Grey kite Diamond in 18k Rose Gold setting
> 
> View attachment 5197022
> View attachment 5197023


Kudos on designs


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Her hair looks a lot lighter or reddish.
> 
> I also think part of the motivation for this new look is to look nothing like Kate’s style since the comparison pics weren’t doing her any favors.


Reddish highlights were obvious on one pic

i noticed the ambassador’s tweet about the meeting, the ambassador seems to tweet for every visitor she meets


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Markle was later seen leaving the building in a long tan coat and sunglasses — after changing out of the somber outfit she wore earlier in the day — and clutching a black leather binder alongside Prince Harry, who sported a gray suit and tie.



She really loves her binders, does she. What was in this one..."How to behave in public"?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Her hair looks a lot lighter or reddish.
> 
> I also think part of the motivation for this new look is to look nothing like Kate’s style since the comparison pics weren’t doing her any favors.



When her hair is pulled back in a bun we know we are dealing with _*serious Meghan thinking important thoughts*_*.*

I have to laugh at her "clutching a black leather binder." Was anything inside the binder? Did she take any notes? Or was it merely a prop so she could pretend like she has big plans to share?


----------



## Jayne1

I’ve noticed the pleated trousers, turtleneck, big camelhair coat, big black sunglasses all have an 80s vibe. It reminds me of Donna Karan from the 80s, which I have to admit I loved at the time.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, they came to New York to save the world y'all. This is what they did with the UN ambassador today. Here's a nice shot of Harry's bald spot.
> 
> *According to Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield, they discussed issues including the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health and racial justice.*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with US ambassador to the United Nations*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> “Wonderful meeting with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Important discussion of COVID, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield tweeted.
> 
> Thomas-Greenfield, a longtime diplomat nominated by President ***** last year, posted images of the couple chatting with her on a white couch and posing next to an American flag at UN headquarters on East 46th Street near First Avenue.
> 
> Markle was later seen leaving the building in a long tan coat and sunglasses — after changing out of the somber outfit she wore earlier in the day — and clutching a black leather binder alongside Prince Harry, who sported a gray suit and tie.
> 
> The couple then got into a Land Rover amid a swarm of security outside the building and left.
> 
> The UN meeting came after the pair viewed the skyline from the rebuilt World Trade Center and honored the 9/11 memorial on their first business trip to the Big Apple since saying goodbye to royal life.
> View attachment 5203020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with  US ambassador to the United Nations
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US Ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


who is paying for these unnecessary "swarms of security" ?????????


----------



## V0N1B2

I don’t understand how in one sentence it’s like this:
“Wonderful meeting with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Important discussion of COVID, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield tweeted.

Then further down the article they write this:
“... on their first business trip to the Big Apple since saying goodbye to royal life.”

So the media acknowledges that they’ve left ‘Royal Life’ yet they’re fêted about town like they’re jetting back to England to inform the Queen with news of their successful diplomatic mission.


----------



## csshopper

Read on line that one of the protection officers trailing in the vapors of the visitors identified himself as being from Homeland Security.

If true,WHY????? . The Red Brillo Pad has no diplomatic standing, no official position, and Maggot even less.

It may make no difference, but I feel minimally better having just completed two blistering calls to the offices of the Senators from CA about misuse of public funds if this is in fact true.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, they came to New York to save the world y'all. This is what they did with the UN ambassador today. Here's a nice shot of Harry's bald spot.
> 
> *According to Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield, they discussed issues including the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health and racial justice.*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with US ambassador to the United Nations*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> “Wonderful meeting with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Important discussion of COVID, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield tweeted.
> 
> Thomas-Greenfield, a longtime diplomat nominated by President ***** last year, posted images of the couple chatting with her on a white couch and posing next to an American flag at UN headquarters on East 46th Street near First Avenue.
> 
> Markle was later seen leaving the building in a long tan coat and sunglasses — after changing out of the somber outfit she wore earlier in the day — and clutching a black leather binder alongside Prince Harry, who sported a gray suit and tie.
> 
> The couple then got into a Land Rover amid a swarm of security outside the building and left.
> 
> The UN meeting came after the pair viewed the skyline from the rebuilt World Trade Center and honored the 9/11 memorial on their first business trip to the Big Apple since saying goodbye to royal life.
> View attachment 5203020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with  US ambassador to the United Nations
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US Ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


There was no reason for them to meet with her except for a photo op.  They have no diplomatic standing, no royal standing and represent no one but themselves and their own agenda.   I actually think someone in her office set this up not realizing they have no official ties to the royals or English gov't.  Big mistake on her part.  

I thought that Meghan's outfits were positively ludicrous given the September weather in NY.  I don't ever recall having to wear such heavy clothing this time of year, much less a camel's hair coat.  Did she think she was going to the Southern Hemisphere where Spring is just beginning?  Another wardrobe failure/faux pas.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I’ve noticed the pleated trousers, turtleneck, big camelhair coat, big black sunglasses all have an 80s vibe. It reminds me of Donna Karan from the 80s, which I have to admit I loved at the time.


And I still love it, but in cold Fall and real Winter!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yep, it is purely a publicity event, er, stunt. The PageSix article said they visited with the US Ambassador to the UN this morning, so my guess is it is to get some easy "humanitarian" cred.


They have been in hibernation in Montecito.  I am dismissing the Zoom calls and appearances because those were not in front of live in your face people.  This is the first public event in the States.  The only problem is that they live here as private citizens, yet were treated as if they had diplomatic status.  Don't people in this country and gov't pay attention?  They have no status.  They do not deserve gov't security any more than I do.  Well, maybe I do since I pay my taxes and we are still not sure about these two since they hide behind tax shelters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> They have been in hibernation in Montecito.  I am dismissing the Zoom calls and appearances because those were not in front of live in your face people.  This is the first public event in the States.  The only problem is that they live here as private citizens, yet were treated as if they had diplomatic status.  Don't people in this country and gov't pay attention?  They have no status.  They do not deserve gov't security any more than I do.  Well, maybe I do since I pay my taxes and we are still not sure about these two since they hide behind tax shelters.



Politicians don't mind kissing up to celebrities when they believe doing so will make them look good. I don't blame the mayor for making sure there is security provided for them. Can't have Prince Harry getting mugged on the street. It would be bad for the city's tourism.


----------



## Lodpah

Shhhh . . . don’t tell them. It’s their “shutter island” reality. Every one is just accommodating them as they are so delusional and believe their hype but like in the movie Leonardo Di Caprio was told he was the crazy one after allowing him to be who he though he was by making investigations. 
	

		
			
		

		
	





The slither and slitherer. See the red headed snake:


----------



## Lodpah

Let’s all write to the IG office and ask for an explanation why these 2 were given public funds for their security, if true. I’m going to ask for an investigation as some have pointed out, they have no capacity in any thing to warrant tax payer funded security.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225

This DM headline is extra shady and I absolutely love it 









						Harry and Meghan visit One World Trade Center Observatory
					

The Sussexes met with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield at 50 UN Plaza Thursday afternoon for a 'wonderful' and 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Politicians don't mind kissing up to celebrities when they believe doing so will make them look good. I don't blame the mayor for making sure there is security provided for them. Can't have Prince Harry getting mugged on the street. It would be bad for the city's tourism.



  They can afford to pay for their own security.  The City of NY has other things for their police force to handle besides these two grifters.


----------



## Annawakes

Who knows, she might have ice packs sewn into the lining of those huge coats.


----------



## youngster

Chloe302225 said:


>




I don't understand why she can never dress properly with good tailoring, ever.  Certainly, the all black is appropriate for a visit to the WTC observatory but in a turtleneck in a heavy coat made with heavy fabrics in September, she was likely sweating buckets.  The pants were not hemmed properly for her shoes and look messy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> The point is a publicity campaign. They are doing it on behalf of themselves. It must feel so weird to be showing up with nothing of substance to contribute.
> 
> Guessing someone behind the Time magazine cover orchestrated this silly publicity and photo tour.



Probably the vaccine folks arranged and paid for it.

Why call her Madam Duchess?  She isn’t there in any official capacity.

Imo it is extremely tacky to wear the blood diamonds when visiting the 9/11 memorial.
Quick story - I saw Prince Albert visit the 9/11 memorial in Dallas. He not only teared up, he sobbed.  No cameras were there, no press, just his own people, those were his genuine feelings.  Worth noting the toxic two had no visible reaction other than where are cameras? Do I look good?  Shameful.  F-ing faux royals need to stay in the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles: unless they become in vogue again, they are a chapter closed in Oprah's life! 
They are not fresh meat anymore…


----------



## LittleStar88

TC1 said:


> who is paying for these unnecessary "swarms of security" ?????????



Paid background actors


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yanca said:


> A lot of people have been wondering what is the purpose, because it's always something with them, nothing straight forward, I don't understant the need to go to the memorial site of 9-11, that is already  a sombre occasion  and site for the US and the whole world and what is the purpose of them visiting it?  They would have been more palatable and likeable if they are more transparent on what it is they are after, sure they want money ,then  why make a foundation and then only donate parts of the proceed to their certain charities?  *Why not just be a full blown celebrities that they crave to be- they don't seem to like the responsbilites and the string attached to being a Public Servant,  why hide beneath the veneer of being a Truthful humanatarian and a Public Servant that really wants to put a shine to the causes they hold dear?  *They always advertise when they donate but it's always with a partenership of a huge commercial companies , they don't disclose how much they have donate,- even the  Kardashians are more transparent when they  make monetary donations. Why do they need to have the Oprah interviews and non stop attack his family?  I would have been less wary of them, but all their actions screams of hypocrisy.  everything they do is for themselves and they act holy and just want to do good for the people, even the Global Vax live concert? what is the purpose?  President B  already announced  that the US will donate 500 million more  more doses of vaccines  to the less wealthy nations,  even before this concert, the wealthy nations  and leaders are already doing it.   I would have taken their word more seriously if they are  like Dolly Parton who donated for the moderna vaccines studies from her own money and was so quiet and no- nonsesnse about it.


Well said!


Maybe it was supposed to be a *private* event. The evil, diabolical media ruined it for them.
Yeah, right.


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Who knows, she might have ice packs sewn into the lining of those huge coats.


I hope she had adult diapers sewn into the armpits of the sweater because she will sweat like a pig in that outfit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Another heavy coat for hot weather…
> View attachment 5202961



Look closely at Hazzie’s face.
That isn’t happiness or love imo.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Probably the vaccine folks arranged and paid for it.
> 
> Why call her Madam Duchess?  She isn’t there in any official capacity.
> 
> Imo it is extremely tacky to wear the blood diamonds when visiting the 9/11 memorial.
> Quick story - I saw Prince Albert visit the 9/11 memorial in Dallas. He not only teared up, he sobbed.  No cameras were there, no press, just his own people, those were his genuine feelings.  Worth noting the toxic two had no visible reaction other than where are cameras? Do I look good?  Shameful.  F-ing faux royals need to stay in the UK.


I think the organizers of the Central Park event paid for it.  The Harkles do nothing they have to spend money on and maybe they are even being paid to show up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — Time’s most insufferable
> Most influential? More like most insufferable.
> Proving that magazines are irrelevant and more out of touch than ever, Time has named Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to their Time 100: The Most Influential People of 2021.
> Please. Can you name one real-world, practical application deployed by these two phonies that’s served anyone but themselves?
> Let’s see. They began 2021 with a bang, sitting down with Oprah to launch verbal ballistic missiles from a lush Santa Barbara garden, claiming that the British royal family didn’t care that a pregnant Meghan was suicidal and that there was a racist among the senior royals.
> All this while Prince Philip, the Queen’s husband of nearly 74 years, was on his deathbed.
> “Be kind,” they tell us constantly. Compassion is their brand.
> HA
> Oh, how we have suffered this year. Our collective hope that lockdown would be over is crushed. We are ravaged by natural disasters and manmade ones — like those endless videos Harry and Meghan stream from their $14 million, nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom mansion, lecturing us on everything from Black Lives Matter to US elections (important, Megs says) to, of course, the environment.
> Did you catch Harry flying private a few weeks ago? Polo match in Aspen. Such a great look for these two self-appointed eco-warriors.
> Netflix, Spotify, SussexRoyal, commodify: These two are interested in self-promotion and celebrity only. We endured a painful home video Meghan made with Melissa McCarthy, another self-aggrandizement under the guise of some other b.s. initiative no one remembers, Harry outside, juggling through a window.
> McCarthy later said Harry worried he would look “weird” doing that.
> Rightly so.
> “In a world where everyone has an opinion about people they don’t know, the duke and duchess have compassion for the people they don’t know,” chef José Andrés wrote for the magazine. “They don’t just opine. They run towards the struggle.”
> If by “run towards the struggle” Andrés means making nearly every great human tragedy about themselves — from staging Remembrance Day photos at a California cemetery to their Afghanistan statement (lecturing us all to “alleviate suffering”) to turning their website back on 9/11 — then yeah, sure.
> Let’s just call them what they are: ponderous and platitudinous.
> Even Twitter has had it. The Time 100 cover image of the couple, Harry with suspiciously lush hair and Meghan wrinkle-free and glowing, was read for filth.
> “The cover looks so fake …” said one. “Oh wait, that’s because they are.”
> “Wow, has @Time fallen,” said another. “Hard.”
> At Britain’s National TV Awards last Friday, the couple was booed as their Oprah clip rolled.
> “Everyone joined in,” an unnamed audience member told the Sun. “It was really funny.”
> Yet Harry and Meghan are no doubt taking a victory lap, luxuriating in their delusion as global leaders, one reinforced by a silly list.
> Reprts are, though, that Spotify wants some content by the end of 2021 to justify that $25 million payday. Harry has a memoir due soon, one in which he’s rumored to go after stepmother Camilla and shame the royals some more. After all, he’s not getting $20 million without spilling some dirt.
> But remember, everyone: Be kind.
> And keep paying attention to the Sussexes, even though what they really want is privacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry — Time’s most insufferable
> 
> 
> Proving that magazines are irrelevant and more out of touch than ever, Time has named Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to their Time 100: The Most Influential People of 2021. Please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com









bellecate said:


> Now this really is creepy.
> View attachment 5195368





Creepy.
Also, it's such an odd pose for a married couple, who are supposed to be _equal _in their partnership. To have one spouse standing behind the other with the dominant one out front while the good little trophy spouse stands hiding behind, firmly in their place.
It's more of a pose that two business partners or friends who helped each other get to a certain point or reach a certain success in their lives would do. I guess it suits the real them- a bossy, controlling wife with her passive docile husband standing behind waiting for her to give out orders.




needlv said:


> So it seems you buy your way into the most influential list…





Some or ALL of that money would have been really helpful donated to a charity or several 




needlv said:


>



And he thought no one would notice







Chanbal said:


> Pass the bucket!
> 'Meghan said they she's making a carrot cake with the help of Archie, and that guests will include Doria and a few close friends.
> 'Meghan said their focus right now is being of service, and that attending glitzy events like the MET Gala is wasted time and energy that could be put to good use towards those suffering and in need,' the source added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'planning low-key dinner' for Harry's 37th birthday
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will be shying away from the spotlight for the prince's 37th birthday this year and will mark the occasion with an intimate dinner instead, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



When in reality she's thinking:









Sophie-Rose said:


> All I see when I look at her cover is her evil "smize"


Yes. She reminds me of the Grinch







Chanbal said:


> Oops! One more mystery…
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have denied claims that the Duchess wore a $62,000 ring made with diamonds gifted to the couple by a mystery donor in the Middle East for their Time cover shoot.
> Meghan Markle sported a staggering $384,000 worth of jewelry while posing for the cover of Time's most influential people issue alongside her husband Prince Harry - including a pinky ring worth an estimated $62,000.
> According to Page Six, Meghan 'turned to celebrity jeweler Lorraine Schwartz to fashion the ring from a gift of diamonds that the couple received from the Middle East.'
> View attachment 5196013
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sported a staggering $384,000 worth of jewelry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has claimed the pinky ring she wore on the cover of Time magazine was obtained by the stylist on the shoot directly from the designer, reported to be Lorraine Schwartz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Why were they receiving diamonds from the Middle East? Nothing suspicious about that at alllll *heavy on the sarcasm 




melissatrv said:


> I don't understand how they can be Time's Persons of the Year.  In the business world, you only get rewarded for what you have actually achieved, not what you talked about doing.   As far as I can see all they did was bash their family, make accusations where "recollections vary", and a couple of articles.  Lightweight charity work such as handing out food or something one time.









Chanbal said:


> What do you think about this article?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen video-called Harry on birthday, said she's proud of his latest feat
> 
> 
> The monarch video-called Harry on Zoom and wished him profusely
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


----------



## AbbytheBT

Actually - I think the Homeland Security people likely there to maintain security for UN Ambassador and other federal staff and sites.  One can look at it as fed enforcement assigned to protect U.S. assets from harm from H & M and whoever they might draw - lol.  No way would federal LEs be assigned as their personal security. That would be complete abuse of their mandate. 

Also - their NY trip feels to me like a “redo” or “reschedule” of what they planned for the Met Gala week - lol. Likely couldn’t get outright refunds for travel and lodging reservations. And how is it that they have NO friends in
NYC willing to put them up? Or loan them their place for a couple days? Could you imagine the head of any philanthropic group in the world staying in the flashy royal suite?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The vaccine concert is Saturday, right.  Let’s check Global Citizen’s records for receipts for this trip.

Now they take a swipe at the BRF:









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Push for Vaccine Equity—Where Are the Remaining Royals?
					

The U.K. is refusing to share its access to the COVID-19 vaccine with some of the very same Commonwealth countries, with no comment from the royal family.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, they came to New York to save the world y'all. This is what they did with the UN ambassador today. Here's a nice shot of Harry's bald spot.
> 
> *According to Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield, they discussed issues including the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health and racial justice.*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with US ambassador to the United Nations*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> “Wonderful meeting with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Important discussion of COVID, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield tweeted.
> 
> Thomas-Greenfield, a longtime diplomat nominated by President ***** last year, posted images of the couple chatting with her on a white couch and posing next to an American flag at UN headquarters on East 46th Street near First Avenue.
> 
> Markle was later seen leaving the building in a long tan coat and sunglasses — after changing out of the somber outfit she wore earlier in the day — and clutching a black leather binder alongside Prince Harry, who sported a gray suit and tie.
> 
> The couple then got into a Land Rover amid a swarm of security outside the building and left.
> 
> The UN meeting came after the pair viewed the skyline from the rebuilt World Trade Center and honored the 9/11 memorial on their first business trip to the Big Apple since saying goodbye to royal life.
> View attachment 5203020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with  US ambassador to the United Nations
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US Ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


She wore what looks like a winter weight long wool coat in 75 degree heat and kept it on during a photo op visit to an ambassador? Any rational person would have taken their outerwear off before sitting on the couch to have a chat. Her outfit only makes sense if she was meeting someone in the dead of winter and the heat was off in the room the meeting was held.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I think the organizers of the Central Park event paid for it.  The Harkles do nothing they have to spend money on and maybe they are even being paid to show up.



Those are the ’vaccine folks’ as I refer to them. It’s all a superficial show to make these elitists *feel* like they’ve done something. 
I remember all those 80s ‘save the world’ concerts. The money seldom reached the people in need. But ya kno, it’s all about raising awareness. Rrrright. The world is aware of what it needs - and what it doesn’t. IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The vaccine concert is Saturday, right.  Let’s check Global Citizen’s records for receipts for this trip.
> 
> Now they take a swipe at the BRF:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Push for Vaccine Equity—Where Are the Remaining Royals?
> 
> 
> The U.K. is refusing to share its access to the COVID-19 vaccine with some of the very same Commonwealth countries, with no comment from the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


They wrote a letter to drug companies.  Gee how original.  This is going to change things?

I think they take swipes whenever and at whatever they can with the BRF.  That is why all this talk about going back is so ludicrous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More photos showing how unkind the weather has been to Hazzie’s hair - bald spot + blind spot, ewwww.





Harry spoke animatedly, gesturing frequently, a *glass of white wine* set before him at what appeared to be a business meeting.

It's unknown at this point who the middle-aged men and woman seen in DailyMail.com's photos were. Two men appeared dressed in black suits and a woman wore a white blazer.

After about 45 minutes, Harry left clutching an iPad and notebook, shaking hands and leaving with his security guard.

*A source told DailyMail.com, 'We get everyone in here. She (Meghan) was in last night. Bill ******* sat here and spoke to people for three hours. He's a people person. This guy [Harry] not so much. I don't blame him.'*










						EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry pictured in swanky NYC bar without Meghan
					

Prince Harry was pictured in New York City's iconic Upper East Side Bemelmans Bar in the lobby of $1,300-a-night Carlyle Hotel for a second night in a row without Meghan Thursday night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Spoiler: Hitting the bar



*Harry hits bar at $1,300-a-night NYC hotel for second night in a row but Meghan nowhere to be seen*





Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were last night spotted out partying in New York with Misha Nonoo and Mikey Hess as they kickstarted their tour of the city, exclusive pictures for MailOnline show

Self proclaimed eco-warriors Prince Harry and Meghan Markle traipsed around New York City for a day packed with celebrity photo ops in a convoy of three gas-guzzling SUVs.

The woke pair first traveled to the One World Trade Center early this morning where they posed for photos with Gov. Kathy Hochul and Mayor Bill de Blasio before heading down to the 9/11 Memorial.

From there, they made a pit stop back to the luxury Carlyle Hotel on Manhattan's Upper East Side where the top-tier suite costs up to a staggering $8,800 a night. The couple are staying there for the duration of their four-day trip and were seen dining in the swanky hotel restaurant Wednesday night, after arriving into the Big Apple from their home in California.

Shortly after midday, they then traveled to the United Nations for a 40-minute meeting where they had an 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield.

They are scheduled to appear at Saturday's Global Citizen concert in Central Park which focuses on vaccine equity.

It is currently unclear how they will spend the remainder of Thursday and Friday.

The luxury convoy carting them around the city, which included at least two Range Rovers and one dark SUV, has CO2 emissions of 235g/km per car. The couple would have traveled a minimum of 20 miles across New York City.

It's not clear whether Harry and Meghan traveled to New York City private plane or commercial airline from their home in Montecito, where they have left Archie and three-month-old Lilibet.

The couple's latest environment gaffe comes just four months after Harry said climate change was one of 'the most pressing issues we are facing'.

Speaking to Oprah Winfrey on Apple TV, Harry said: 'With kids growing up in today's world, pretty depressing, right, depending on where you live, your home country is either on fire, it's either underwater, houses or forests are being flattened.'

But despite his lecture on climate change, in August Harry took a millionaire friend's $45 million private jet home from Aspen, Colorado to Santa Barbara after attending a celebrity polo match.

The two-hour flight, which could have emitted as much as ten tonnes of CO2.

*Royal author Tom Quinn said after Harry's August private jet trip: 'This appears to be enormously hypocritical, given all his talk about climate change.

'Harry seems to see himself as someone who guides the rest of the world and that his own behaviour isn't relevant. It is a huge blind spot.'*

The controversy emerged as Prince Charles issued his robust challenge to big business to join his crusade for action 'before it's finally too late'.

The heir to the throne says that humanity's 'only hope' is for business chiefs to join world leaders in an 'epic battle' to avert 'climate catastrophe'.

Writing exclusively for the Daily Mail, the Prince of Wales said: 'We now have no alternative – we have to do all we possibly can in the short time left to us to avoid the enormous climate catastrophe that has already begun to show its face in the most terrifying ways.'

After flying to London in July, Harry returned to Los Angeles where he made use of an ultra-exclusive and lavish private airport service called The Private Suite.

It sent a luxury gas-guzzling Chevrolet SUV to whisk him away when he landed at LAX from London earlier this month.

The PS service, which has been described as 'the most VIP way through the airport', is one step up from first class and one step down from using a private jet.

Members, who sign up for $4,500 a year and then pay another $3,450 per trip, are invited to exit the plane on their own private stairs before any other passenger, then are loaded into the back of their own SUV and driven to a private terminal where they get to collect their luggage and go through passport control in splendid isolation.

The PS website describes itself as 'a private airport experience' and says: 'PS reimagines the airport experience for the seasoned and discerning traveler.'

Harry previously attracted criticism for taking four private jet flights in 11 days, including to a climate change summit in Sicily.

That summer, Harry and Meghan took Elton John's private plane from Ibiza, where they had been holidaying with Archie, to the singer's home in Nice, France.

The matter raised a storm of controversy, particularly as Harry launched his 'eco' travel initiative Travalyst soon afterwards. Sir Elton loyally raged about 'spurious' criticism and said that he had paid to carbon offset the impact of the trip.

Later that year, Harry claimed that '99 per cent' of his flights were commercial after taking a scheduled flight to Amsterdam to promote Travalyst, a scheme that promotes environmentally-friendly tourism.

Speaking at the event, the prince refused to apologize for private flights to Italy, France and Spain, saying: 'I spend 99 per cent of my life travelling the world by commercial.

'Occasionally there needs to be an opportunity [to fly privately] based on a unique circumstance to ensure that my family are safe – it's as simple as that. For me it's about balance. It's not a decision I would want to take, but if I have to do that, I will ensure that I balance out the impact that I have.'

At the time, Harry dismissed concerns over his carbon footprint by insisting that he 'offsets' his emissions by donating to renewable energy incentives and planting trees.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## AbbytheBT

Also - even though federal enforcement NOT assigned to them personally- as a U.S. federal taxpayer - I too am incensed about using government resources to coddle these two. Having worked in protocol for the federal government, I can assure you that a lot of resources go into these photo op meetings- and very very unlikely the U.N. called them for a meeting. 
Sometimes agencies are stuck with having to think up legit reasons for meeting refusals and am sure they figured agreeing to having them “stop by” for a chat was better than -potentially - being characterized as insensitive to the subjects they wanted to promote - while thinking maybe some “markle sparkle” could highlight the work of the agency.
Lol - probably way TMI about how the feds think - but Yeah! Getting angrier thinking about the waste !!!!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She really loves her binders, does she. What was in this one..."How to behave in public"?


Perhaps recording devices for her future tell alls.


----------



## csshopper

Harry forgot to pack his "rug" or maybe the heat and humidity made the glue useless and he risked it falling off.  Whatever hair treatment they used for the TIME photoshoot seems to have exacerbated his baldness. My grandmother had a raccoon coat in her day, packed away in a trunk in the attic for years. When she died and the trunk was opened the coat was a moth eaten mess, just how Haz's head looks. At any rate he sorely needs the kind of Valet he had as a Royal, because he isn't looking "sharp" like the relatives back home in the UK.

Looking at Methane wrapped in inappropriate layers, and a camelhair coat when it's 80 degrees out, caused me to decide that when a person is a cruel hearted beech with ice in her veins it probably takes that level of camouflage to try to appear human. She failed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t help but giggle at how uncomfortable she must have been in that coat.


----------



## V0N1B2

I don't get why she needed a costume change. She could have worn an appropriate outfit that would've seen her through both functions.
JLo this bish ain't.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> First - why?  9/11 was 3 weeks ago, so why now?  Why the private tour?
> Second - Madam Duchess?  Is that the proper way to address her, a US citizen?  Nothing for Hazzie?
> Third - say hello to Dumb and Dumber attending a faux event = awkward. They look stupid.
> After all they have put us through, I just cannot sugar-coat the obvious - stupid.  Stupid hair, stupid heavy make-up, stupid comments.
> Did I say they look stupid?
> Fourth -  pffft, why bother, ffs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew Ryerson
> The visit lasted less than 20 mins apparently.  A PR stunt off the backs of the thousands of people who died on 9/11.



Well, they literally walked on top of dead soldiers for a photo op, so what's another 3000 innocents dead?  All that matters is a good photo op using the judgement of a toddler.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry spoke animatedly, gesturing frequently, a *glass of white wine* set before him at what appeared to be a business meeting.
> 
> It's unknown at this point who the middle-aged men and woman seen in DailyMail.com's photos were. Two men appeared dressed in black suits and a woman wore a white blazer.
> 
> After about 45 minutes, Harry left clutching an iPad and notebook, shaking hands and leaving with his security guard.
> 
> *A source told DailyMail.com, 'We get everyone in here. She (Meghan) was in last night. Bill ******* sat here and spoke to people for three hours. He's a people person. This guy [Harry] not so much. I don't blame him.'*



He’s allowed to drink without her there to supervise him? She’s slipping!

I wonder what kind of business meeting it was and why she wasn’t invited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

hollieplus2 said:


> I'm just trying to figure out what the point of all this is? Who are they here on behalf of? Not the BRF, not the people of the US they don't represent me. Who are they doing this in support of?
> 
> I don't think they got the welcome they thought they would in CA/Hollywood. *NY seems to be pulling out the red carpet for them. I suspect a move in the next 12months to NYC.*


YESSSS!!!!  PLEASE take them!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> YESSSS!!!!  PLEASE take them!



It is one step closer to the UK.
Plus, she can hide easily in NYC. Jackie O did for years.  Maybe she will hop over to Toronto.


----------



## Chanbal

*Where has Prince Harry's magazine shoot hair gone? *










						Prince Harry's hair is 'thinning on top', expert says
					

Celebrity hairstylist Tom Smith told FEMAIL Prince Harry's image appeared to be 'noticeably different' in New York today in contrast to his photoshoot for the Time 100 magazine cover.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




A mystery for the great…


----------



## Chanbal

Would they?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is one step closer to the UK.
> Plus, she can hide easily in NYC. Jackie O did for years.  Maybe she will hop over to Toronto.


Toronto, love the idea. Should we start a GoFundMe to buy them a one way ticket?


----------



## VickyB

lanasyogamama said:


> Ha!



I didn’t know she used to drive a cab!!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I hope New Yorkers give H&M the kind of welcome reserved for very special visitors, like how a group of drunk Yankees fans treats that lone Red Sox fan sitting in the stands at Yankee Stadium.


Hey!  I'm a Red Sox fan!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Toronto, love the idea. Should we start a GoFundMe to buy them a one way ticket?



Taking a page from their playbook, let’s get Charles to pay for it.



VickyB said:


> I didn’t know she used to drive a cab!!!!



The faces on the people in the background - who is _she_?
=====

Archie’s Papa - lol, they are so desperate for the ‘sweet nod’


----------



## Chanbal

Yep, all this is wrong!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Where has Prince Harry's magazine shoot hair gone? *
> View attachment 5203300
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's hair is 'thinning on top', expert says
> 
> 
> Celebrity hairstylist Tom Smith told FEMAIL Prince Harry's image appeared to be 'noticeably different' in New York today in contrast to his photoshoot for the Time 100 magazine cover.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A mystery for the great…



Velcro doesn't work if it's used too often.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The gray men?
Bet they thought Hazzie would wear his gray suit -  









						Are Harry and Meghan getting security from the Secret Service?
					

The bodyguard, dressed in a smart grey suit and black wingtips that had been resoled with comfortable sneaker soles, was spotted outside the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan on Thursday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: predicting we will hit 5K pages by concert time Saturday


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> Yep, all this is wrong!
> View attachment 5203329
> 
> View attachment 5203328


They are so ridiculous!!!! Case study in total lack of self awareness.  Let’s add delusional to that.
Wonder where and with whom they had dinner tonight.


----------



## Lodpah

I love this picture. See if you can figure out why. Lol


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I’ve noticed the pleated trousers, turtleneck, big camelhair coat, big black sunglasses all have an 80s vibe. It reminds me of Donna Karan from the 80s, which I have to admit I loved at the time.


It's a very classic look. I was thinking Jackie O. But totally inappropriate given the weather. As a native Californian, maybe she just assumed September in NY means cool fall weather. Note that she kept the coat on during the visit with the UN ambassador. She must have been sweating her a** off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I don't understand why she can never dress properly with good tailoring, ever.  Certainly, the all black is appropriate for a visit to the WTC observatory but in a turtleneck in a heavy coat made with heavy fabrics in September, she was likely sweating buckets.  The pants were not hemmed properly for her shoes and look messy.


The long draggy pants are actually in style. Disgusting if you ask me, dragging all over the streets of NY.


----------



## xincinsin

One tweet said: Mayor de Blasio expresses his admiration saying they are wonderful guests and that the work they are doing is so important for our whole country and our whole world. 

Possessive and ego-centric, ain't it?


----------



## VickyB

charlottawill said:


> The long draggy pants are actually in style. Disgusting if you ask me, dragging all over the streets of NY.


I don’t get that”style” at all.  Who came up with that? It looks like people were too lazy to hem properly.


----------



## Chanbal

@Maggie Muggins are you still working tonight?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins are you still working tonight?




No Lili? Lilibet?  Hmmmm,


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins are you still working tonight?



I like the first hashtag under the picture:  #cringe


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## creme fraiche

I am chuckling into my coffee - a pointless trip to highlight a pointless duo. I am so confused to why they are meeting these people in New York - what precisely can they do and why?  Vaccines for the world?  How will they facilitate this in ways that governments can?  Why the multiple weather inappropriate outfits - do they think that the general public is that gullible and stupid to realise that we cannot be manipulated so easily and they are not as PR savvy as they think they are.

If they were truly concerned about vaccines, perhaps they should use their voices to encouraget people in the country they are currently living in to get vaccinated and move the US from being the 30somethingth in the international vaccine table and falling (with countries like Lithuania and Bhutan higher).  Use your stupid voices to actually make a difference and not just to stroke your fragile, thirsty egos!


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



Now we know for sure all those clothes coordination is not by chance. The M spends all her time and I’m sure she has a lot going through photos and matching up with PD.


----------



## Chanbal

Private jet, brought their own photographer, federal protection… I had enough!   Goodnight!










						Are Harry and Meghan getting security from the Secret Service?
					

The bodyguard, dressed in a smart grey suit and black wingtips that had been resoled with comfortable sneaker soles, was spotted outside the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan on Thursday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Melocoton said:


> Another coat indeed, what are we covering up?!  This is a lame publicity stunt.  These two have little to no connection to NYC.



Maybe, somewhere, another surrogate is pregnant again? 

Not enough outside, but coat on inside to meet the US Ambassador for the UN. Cold or not cold, isn't that actually rude? I was taught to take my coat off for proper meetings as a sign of respect - by my mother aged 4.


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> who is paying for these unnecessary "swarms of security" ?????????



It's incase someone tries to steal her coat/tiara and/or his hair


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


>




Fully imitating Diana in this case would have been a lot more appropriate for NY weather in September…


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Politicians don't mind kissing up to celebrities when they believe doing so will make them look good. I don't blame the mayor for making sure there is security provided for them. Can't have Prince Harry getting mugged on the street. It would be bad for the city's tourism.



And without all the security, who would look to see who it was all the security were protecting? 

So what would be the er... point


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: Kate and William stayed at The Carlyle too 
“sweet nod”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Probably the vaccine folks arranged and paid for it.
> Why call her Madam Duchess?  She isn’t there in any official capacity.
> Imo it is extremely tacky to wear the blood diamonds when visiting the 9/11 memorial.
> Quick story - I saw Prince Albert visit the 9/11 memorial in Dallas. He not only teared up, he sobbed.  No cameras were there, no press, just his own people, those were his genuine feelings.  Worth noting the toxic two had no visible reaction other than where are cameras? Do I look good?  Shameful.  *F-ing faux royals need to stay in the UK.*



I agree with everything you say - except the last sentence   we have enough problems atm.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Paid background actors



If H&M are paying they'll be interns and cash-in-hand extras


----------



## papertiger

Suddenly, I've gone off Valextra big time 

Hopefully, Gucci and Hermes will be forever far too vulgar and commonplace for Her-Royal-Minimalist "Madam Duchess"


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t help but giggle at how uncomfortable she must have been in that coat.



This is was happens when you look at the calendar instead of out the window


----------



## K.D.

Chloe302225 said:


>



It's also the emptiest looking bag from some of these angles, so just carried for the look and 'the outfit'.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Toronto, love the idea. Should we start a GoFundMe to buy them a one way ticket?



STOP already  

We already have Charles and Andrew   

Although you seem to want Andrew in the US. Take him too p l e a s e


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> One tweet said: Mayor de Blasio expresses his admiration saying they are wonderful guests and that the work they are doing is so important for our whole country and our whole world.
> 
> Possessive and ego-centric, ain't it?



Why?  

What are they _do_ing?


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> Maybe, somewhere, another surrogate is pregnant again?
> 
> Not enough outside, but coat on inside to meet the US Ambassador for the UN. Cold or not cold, isn't that actually rude? I was taught to take my coat off for proper meetings as a sign of respect - by my mother aged 4.


Unless she&he stormed in, posed for the staged shot and stormed out. Just taking care of business))) A PR blitz.


----------



## jehaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> More photos showing how unkind the weather has been to Hazzie’s hair - bald spot + blind spot, ewwww.
> 
> View attachment 5203195



They look stale and smelly.
The hand “clenching” looks painful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Angela is done being polite.


----------



## eunaddict

charlottawill said:


> The long draggy pants are actually in style. Disgusting if you ask me, dragging all over the streets of NY.



People seemed to really like it when her SIL did this look, and even then I thought it a bit gross, just hemlines picking up dirt and oil and whatever else there is on the ground in NYC and RAF bases; also can we talk about how much of a potential tripping hazard those long, loose fabric combined with heels is?

I really hope this look doesn't take-off, it doesn't look polished IMHO.


----------



## oldbag

K.D. said:


> It's also the emptiest looking bag from some of these angles, so just carried for the look and 'the outfit'.


Will someone please enlighten me as I am just a midwest peasant, but what is it with all these so called celebrities posing with their legs crossed. Everytime I see this it strikes me they are trying not to pee on themselves. I have always found it disconcerting and for someone who wants to be taken seriously, undignified. I have never seen a serious powerful woman stand like that.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> No Lili? Lilibet?  Hmmmm,


Maybe hotstamping the first 15 characters was FOC, and he would have to pay to add in Lili's name


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Maybe, somewhere, another surrogate is pregnant again?
> 
> Not enough outside, but coat on inside to meet the US Ambassador for the UN. Cold or not cold, isn't that actually rude? I was taught to take my coat off for proper meetings as a sign of respect - by my mother aged 4.





papertiger said:


> It's incase someone tries to steal her coat/tiara and/or his hair



Maybe her recording devices are sewn into the coat to record every conversation so that they can throw people under the bus 




K.D. said:


> It's also the emptiest looking bag from some of these angles, so just carried for the look and 'the outfit'.



These pictures made them look like they just came out of court as defendants


----------



## nyshopaholic

He gets it! https://nypost.com/2021/09/23/new-york-pols-fawn-over-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/

*NY pols fawn over ‘tourists’: Stop treating Harry & Meghan like royalty*
By Kyle Smith
September 23, 2021

Why are the governor and mayor of New York taking a meeting at the World Trade Center with the Two Megxiteers? Harry and Meghan threw away their royal obligations as vigorously as John Kerry threw away his Vietnam War service ribbons. I say we treat them like any other tourists. These people are entitled to no more bowing and scraping than the Kansas City Royals. 

Meghan’s brand — California New-Age I’m-Still-on-a-Journey-of-Self-Discovery-in-Middle-Age — and Harry’s palace-born entitlement have intermingled to create the most appalling British-American monster since Madonna’s “Madge” period. At least Madge didn’t mumble about climate change and global poverty, though. 

What has become of what was once the world’s most badass prince? Until just a few years ago Harry was proof that “macho royal” is not an oxymoron. In sharp contrast to his jug-eared, limp-handkerchief of a dad Prince Charles, he used to roar around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban, his red hair blazing like a testosterone torch. Take that, everyone who ever saw a ginger walking down the street and yelled out of his car, “Ronald McDonald,” “Carrot Top” or “Leprechaun,” not that anything like that has ever happened to me. 

Snap out of it, man! Whatever happened to Grandma Liz’s stiff upper lip or Grandpa Phil’s wicked sense of humor? The Queen was literally bombed by Nazis for a year and never even said, “How perfectly beastly!” If anyone had suggested she ever go on a worldwide it’s-so-hard-to-be-me tour, she would have told him to stop being such a wet. Which is British for “wussypants.” 

In 1992, the year a massive fire at Windsor Castle took out 115 rooms and both of her sons’ marriages also went up in flames, Elizabeth said, “1992 is not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure.” Hell, yeah: The British way is mastery of the colossal understatement. There’s a reason people say “Slay, Queen” and not “Preach, Duchess.” The Queen also called that year her “Annus Horribilis.” What a classy way to say, “That sucked!” Meghan Markle, on the other hand, gets duly mocked by Piers Morgan (“I wouldn’t believe her if she filed a weather report”) and she files a formal complaint. And not even in Latin. 

Since he had his tender bits chomped off by the Megalodon, though, Hammerin’ Hank has become Girly Harry, an Instagram influencer (whatever that is) who posts cringey pictures of himself with Jon Bon Jovi alongside the squishy sayings of ’80s motivational speaker Leo “Dr. Love” Buscaglia. British fortitude enabled it to survive the Great War, the Third Reich, and even the European Union, but now one of the UK’s scions has surrendered to Oprahfication. Instead of firing rockets at medieval Islamofascists, Shallow Hal sits there holding his wife’s hand while she emotes about her made-up pain for the cameras. Somehow Thor became Ed Sheeran. 

As if to passive-aggressively troll Her Majesty, instead of giving their daughter a solid English name that suggests equally the ability to wield a scepter or to fix trucks in WWII, H&M gave the baby the monarch’s childhood nickname Lilibet. The thought bubble over Her Majesty’s indomitable hat when she heard this news can only have been, “Er, thanks?” It’s as if a descendant of Winston Spencer Churchill decided to honor the great man by naming his boy Churchy, or Spencebro. 

And not since the Duke of Windsor turned out to be a bit of a Nazi has the royal family suffered an embarrassment on par with H&M’s ghastly Time magazine cover: “This looks like Harry is her hairdresser and he’s looking into the mirror explaining what he did to her layers,” observed Irish comic Gráinne Maguire on Twitter. 

Harry used to be a swashbuckling 6-foot-1; according to the Time photo, he’s now the same height as his wife (5-foot-6). He’s shrinking before our eyes! The next time we see him, he could be the size of a parakeet, and Maleficent Markle will be carrying him around in a cage as though nothing has happened. She’ll continue complaining about how rough it is to be her, and once in a while he’ll let out a little peep or chirp.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Parental leave? never mind. All those coats. In warm weather. Merch merch merch! I hope they're getting the privacy they crave   .


----------



## Annawakes

I feel like those politicians who fell over themselves to welcome them…..they all suffer from delusions of grandeur.  Birds of a feather.  It’s like they don’t even know the rest of us see right through them.  Totally oblivious.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Well, its been around 100 here for the past week. It would have been a bit cooler in Montecito, but yeah, 75 would feel cool right about now


yes, I'm ready for the "Fall" weather we're supposed to have next week


----------



## Icyjade

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5203379
> 
> 
> Suddenly, I've gone off Valextra big time
> 
> Hopefully, Gucci and Hermes will be forever far too vulgar and commonplace for Her-Royal-Minimalist "Madam Duchess"



It’s like she’s blind and is being lead by a guide dog


----------



## Aimee3

nyshopaholic said:


> He gets it! https://nypost.com/2021/09/23/new-york-pols-fawn-over-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/
> 
> *NY pols fawn over ‘tourists’: Stop treating Harry & Meghan like royalty*
> By Kyle Smith
> September 23, 2021
> 
> Why are the governor and mayor of New York taking a meeting at the World Trade Center with the Two Megxiteers? Harry and Meghan threw away their royal obligations as vigorously as John Kerry threw away his Vietnam War service ribbons. I say we treat them like any other tourists. These people are entitled to no more bowing and scraping than the Kansas City Royals.
> 
> Meghan’s brand — California New-Age I’m-Still-on-a-Journey-of-Self-Discovery-in-Middle-Age — and Harry’s palace-born entitlement have intermingled to create the most appalling British-American monster since Madonna’s “Madge” period. At least Madge didn’t mumble about climate change and global poverty, though.
> 
> What has become of what was once the world’s most badass prince? Until just a few years ago Harry was proof that “macho royal” is not an oxymoron. In sharp contrast to his jug-eared, limp-handkerchief of a dad Prince Charles, he used to roar around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban, his red hair blazing like a testosterone torch. Take that, everyone who ever saw a ginger walking down the street and yelled out of his car, “Ronald McDonald,” “Carrot Top” or “Leprechaun,” not that anything like that has ever happened to me.
> 
> Snap out of it, man! Whatever happened to Grandma Liz’s stiff upper lip or Grandpa Phil’s wicked sense of humor? The Queen was literally bombed by Nazis for a year and never even said, “How perfectly beastly!” If anyone had suggested she ever go on a worldwide it’s-so-hard-to-be-me tour, she would have told him to stop being such a wet. Which is British for “wussypants.”
> 
> In 1992, the year a massive fire at Windsor Castle took out 115 rooms and both of her sons’ marriages also went up in flames, Elizabeth said, “1992 is not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure.” Hell, yeah: The British way is mastery of the colossal understatement. There’s a reason people say “Slay, Queen” and not “Preach, Duchess.” The Queen also called that year her “Annus Horribilis.” What a classy way to say, “That sucked!” Meghan Markle, on the other hand, gets duly mocked by Piers Morgan (“I wouldn’t believe her if she filed a weather report”) and she files a formal complaint. And not even in Latin.
> 
> Since he had his tender bits chomped off by the Megalodon, though, Hammerin’ Hank has become Girly Harry, an Instagram influencer (whatever that is) who posts cringey pictures of himself with Jon Bon Jovi alongside the squishy sayings of ’80s motivational speaker Leo “Dr. Love” Buscaglia. British fortitude enabled it to survive the Great War, the Third Reich, and even the European Union, but now one of the UK’s scions has surrendered to Oprahfication. Instead of firing rockets at medieval Islamofascists, Shallow Hal sits there holding his wife’s hand while she emotes about her made-up pain for the cameras. Somehow Thor became Ed Sheeran.
> 
> As if to passive-aggressively troll Her Majesty, instead of giving their daughter a solid English name that suggests equally the ability to wield a scepter or to fix trucks in WWII, H&M gave the baby the monarch’s childhood nickname Lilibet. The thought bubble over Her Majesty’s indomitable hat when she heard this news can only have been, “Er, thanks?” It’s as if a descendant of Winston Spencer Churchill decided to honor the great man by naming his boy Churchy, or Spencebro.
> 
> And not since the Duke of Windsor turned out to be a bit of a Nazi has the royal family suffered an embarrassment on par with H&M’s ghastly Time magazine cover: “This looks like Harry is her hairdresser and he’s looking into the mirror explaining what he did to her layers,” observed Irish comic Gráinne Maguire on Twitter.
> 
> Harry used to be a swashbuckling 6-foot-1; according to the Time photo, he’s now the same height as his wife (5-foot-6). He’s shrinking before our eyes! The next time we see him, he could be the size of a parakeet, and Maleficent Markle will be carrying him around in a cage as though nothing has happened. She’ll continue complaining about how rough it is to be her, and once in a while he’ll let out a little peep or chirp.


I was trying to figure out how to post that article but see that you already did (thank you for doing that). I think Kyle Smith should be an honorary member here.
I love his names for them:  girly Harry and megalodon!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> There was no reason for them to meet with her except for a photo op.  They have no diplomatic standing, no royal standing and represent no one but themselves and their own agenda.   I actually think someone in her office set this up not realizing they have no official ties to the royals or English gov't.  Big mistake on her part.
> 
> I thought that Meghan's outfits were positively ludicrous given the September weather in NY.  I don't ever recall having to wear such heavy clothing this time of year, much less a camel's hair coat.  Did she think she was going to the Southern Hemisphere where Spring is just beginning?  Another wardrobe failure/faux pas.


Agree.  They aren't representing the RF.  They aren't politicians.  What are they?  Oh - humanitarians I guess.  The whole thing with them is just ridiculous IMO.  There are many wealthy people who do more giving than they do and don't go around making public appearances.  Oh, maybe because those people are  busy working to continue making that money they have?  Or they aren't super thirsty for public adulation?

As far as her attire - who doesn't check the weather?  that just seems stupid.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> It’s like she’s blind and is being lead by a guide dog





She's doing an impersonation of a blind person IMO - being led by her Hazardous Red Setter. If anyone knows what guide dogs do and their training, H would make the worst guide dog.

My uncle was actually registered blind and had a guide dog (sadly he passed away 4 years ago a year after his beloved retriever). He went to work every week day and traveled all sorts of places without the need to look like he was going to keel over any minute.

He and his dog also didn't carry a document holders to make 100% sure other people knew he was going to work and not off to play a round of gold or go to the disco. Give them to one of the hundreds of people following you around to take back later - FFS.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, I'm ready for the "Fall" weather we're supposed to have next week



M will be in her bikini


----------



## xincinsin

nyshopaholic said:


> In 1992, the year a massive fire at Windsor Castle took out 115 rooms and both of her sons’ marriages also went up in flames, Elizabeth said, “1992 is not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure.” Hell, yeah: The British way is mastery of the colossal understatement. There’s a reason people say “Slay, Queen” and not “Preach, Duchess.” The Queen also called that year her “Annus Horribilis.” What a classy way to say, “That sucked!” Meghan Markle, on the other hand, gets duly mocked by Piers Morgan (*“I wouldn’t believe her if she filed a weather report”*) and she files a formal complaint. And not even in Latin.


Based on her outfits for this NYC trip, I wouldn't believe her either. Obviously she has little clue about weather and climate except for the unicorns in her head farting rainbow clouds.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> It’s like she’s blind and is being lead by a guide dog


My thoughts exactly, but I didn't want to insult the truly visually impaired and their professional pooches.


----------



## bag-mania

Could wearing the coats be


sdkitty said:


> As far as her attire - who doesn't check the weather?  that just seems stupid.



I think it's clear she had a $$$ deal with the designer/company to be photographed wearing the two coats. Wearing them doesn't make any sense otherwise. Why change the coats after only two hours? Either one would have been fine for the entire morning. It's not like a camel coat would have been in any way inappropriate for their visit to the memorial. Nor would wearing a black coat be wrong to wear to the UN.

But maybe I'm way off-base and she really does have to wear a coat to keep her cold, phony, self-absorbed heart warm.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> Maggie Muggins, are you tracking your h/m names too?  You come up with great ones and deserve ribbons!


Thanks. I usually add (to The List) the nicknames that I find while reading articles and the accompanying comments, but not the ones that come to mind while expressing an opinion on this thread. I think, I have more fun reading fellow posters' remarks, collecting their nicknames and photoshopping rewards than remembering my own creations.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Why?
> 
> What are they _do_ing?


Well, Maggot had 40 minutes open in her Calendar so she decided to go Mentor the Ambassador to the UN. She didn’t know where to park her Eunuch so he got to go too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If she goes out and dresses like that today I will absolutely die laughing.  I’m in Boston and it’s 79 degrees and 87% humidity.  I’ll too warm in my sleeveless tee.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like her hair didn’t get to come on the trip. Or his actually.


Imagine living just outside of LA and not being able to get a decent toupee, 2 cute mixed-race babies from central casting and a hairdresser with some ratty extensions at short notice.
This poor pair never gets a break!


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Zara and Peter saying Philip was totally into tech, always taking interest in the newest gadgets and fiddling around until they did what he wanted. I have a hard time believing he didn't know how to end a Skype call.


also, surely he had someone to do that for him?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Well, Maggot had 40 minutes open in her Calendar so she decided to go Mentor the Ambassador to the UN. She didn’t know where to park her Eunuch so he got to go too.


I'm beginning to think Harry made a deal with the devil when he married her


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Based on her outfits for this NYC trip, I wouldn't believe her either. Obviously she has little clue about weather and climate except for the unicorns in her head farting rainbow clouds.


I suggested she is channeling Victoria Beckham who has a proper English look anymore, always posed, never on a walk about or meet and greet, always an engineered photo op, the weather is irrelevant to her looks, she just gets into the car
It is a power minimalist look not a practical one for MM since the Time cover, it is all about the image
Cant wait for the vaccine shindig outfit ...

The press has got the vaccine event all wrong, titles say she is promoting the vaccine - which is not quite correct - she is not telling people to get vaccinated - a controversial idea, she is telling the world leaders to give away free vaccines to the third world (without addressing the question of whether they will take them... )


----------



## bag-mania

The return of the "sweet little nod." Then NBC's _Today Show_ doubles down on their sicky-sweet sucking up to them with "Harry & Meghan Take Manhattan."


----------



## Icyjade

Hmm


----------



## purseinsanity

nyshopaholic said:


> He gets it! https://nypost.com/2021/09/23/new-york-pols-fawn-over-prince-harry-and-meghan-markle/
> 
> *NY pols fawn over ‘tourists’: Stop treating Harry & Meghan like royalty*
> By Kyle Smith
> September 23, 2021
> 
> Why are the governor and mayor of New York taking a meeting at the World Trade Center with the Two Megxiteers? Harry and Meghan threw away their royal obligations as vigorously as John Kerry threw away his Vietnam War service ribbons. I say we treat them like any other tourists. These people are entitled to no more bowing and scraping than the Kansas City Royals.
> 
> Meghan’s brand — California New-Age I’m-Still-on-a-Journey-of-Self-Discovery-in-Middle-Age — and Harry’s palace-born entitlement have intermingled to create the most appalling British-American monster since Madonna’s “Madge” period. At least Madge didn’t mumble about climate change and global poverty, though.
> 
> What has become of what was once the world’s most badass prince? Until just a few years ago Harry was proof that “macho royal” is not an oxymoron. In sharp contrast to his jug-eared, limp-handkerchief of a dad Prince Charles, he used to roar around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban, his red hair blazing like a testosterone torch. Take that, everyone who ever saw a ginger walking down the street and yelled out of his car, “Ronald McDonald,” “Carrot Top” or “Leprechaun,” not that anything like that has ever happened to me.
> 
> Snap out of it, man! Whatever happened to Grandma Liz’s stiff upper lip or Grandpa Phil’s wicked sense of humor? The Queen was literally bombed by Nazis for a year and never even said, “How perfectly beastly!” If anyone had suggested she ever go on a worldwide it’s-so-hard-to-be-me tour, she would have told him to stop being such a wet. Which is British for “wussypants.”
> 
> In 1992, the year a massive fire at Windsor Castle took out 115 rooms and both of her sons’ marriages also went up in flames, Elizabeth said, “1992 is not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure.” Hell, yeah: The British way is mastery of the colossal understatement. There’s a reason people say “Slay, Queen” and not “Preach, Duchess.” The Queen also called that year her “Annus Horribilis.” What a classy way to say, “That sucked!” Meghan Markle, on the other hand, gets duly mocked by Piers Morgan (“I wouldn’t believe her if she filed a weather report”) and she files a formal complaint. And not even in Latin.
> 
> Since he had his tender bits chomped off by the Megalodon, though, Hammerin’ Hank has become Girly Harry, an Instagram influencer (whatever that is) who posts cringey pictures of himself with Jon Bon Jovi alongside the squishy sayings of ’80s motivational speaker Leo “Dr. Love” Buscaglia. British fortitude enabled it to survive the Great War, the Third Reich, and even the European Union, but now one of the UK’s scions has surrendered to Oprahfication. Instead of firing rockets at medieval Islamofascists, Shallow Hal sits there holding his wife’s hand while she emotes about her made-up pain for the cameras. Somehow Thor became Ed Sheeran.
> 
> As if to passive-aggressively troll Her Majesty, instead of giving their daughter a solid English name that suggests equally the ability to wield a scepter or to fix trucks in WWII, H&M gave the baby the monarch’s childhood nickname Lilibet. The thought bubble over Her Majesty’s indomitable hat when she heard this news can only have been, “Er, thanks?” It’s as if a descendant of Winston Spencer Churchill decided to honor the great man by naming his boy Churchy, or Spencebro.
> 
> And not since the Duke of Windsor turned out to be a bit of a Nazi has the royal family suffered an embarrassment on par with H&M’s ghastly Time magazine cover: “This looks like Harry is her hairdresser and he’s looking into the mirror explaining what he did to her layers,” observed Irish comic Gráinne Maguire on Twitter.
> 
> Harry used to be a swashbuckling 6-foot-1; according to the Time photo, he’s now the same height as his wife (5-foot-6). He’s shrinking before our eyes! The next time we see him, he could be the size of a parakeet, and Maleficent Markle will be carrying him around in a cage as though nothing has happened. She’ll continue complaining about how rough it is to be her, and once in a while he’ll let out a little peep or chirp.


I agree with much of this, but WTF was Harry "roaring around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban"??


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The return of the "sweet little nod." Then NBC's _Today Show_ doubles down on their sicky-sweet sucking up to them with "Harry & Meghan Take Manhattan."
> 
> View attachment 5203670




Sorry @bag-mania, but prefer this title!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Read on line that one of the protection officers trailing in the vapors of the visitors identified himself as being from Homeland Security.
> 
> If true,WHY????? . *The Red Brillo Pad* has no diplomatic standing, no official position, and Maggot even less.
> 
> It may make no difference, but I feel minimally better having just completed two blistering calls to the offices of the Senators from CA about misuse of public funds if this is in fact true.


Thanks @csshopper for your #15 nickname The Red Brillo Pad.  
I owe you two awards for having previously miscalculated your numbers. Congratulations and please join the Golden Retriever Club and Hooting Owl Club.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I agree with much of this, but WTF was Harry "roaring around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban"??



Clearly the royal family's PR game was strong during that time. They sold Harry as actually being in danger while serving in Afghanistan, which I suppose he technically was since it wasn't a safe place, even if he was being protected. It reminds me of when his Uncle Andrew was serving during the Falklands War in the early 80s. It must be the family tradition to put the second son out there to serve his country (or appear to) in times of war.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, they came to New York to save the world y'all. This is what they did with the UN ambassador today. Here's a nice shot of Harry's bald spot.
> 
> *According to Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield, they discussed issues including the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health and racial justice.*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with US ambassador to the United Nations*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> “Wonderful meeting with Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Important discussion of COVID, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness,” Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield tweeted.
> 
> Thomas-Greenfield, a longtime diplomat nominated by President ***** last year, posted images of the couple chatting with her on a white couch and posing next to an American flag at UN headquarters on East 46th Street near First Avenue.
> 
> Markle was later seen leaving the building in a long tan coat and sunglasses — after changing out of the somber outfit she wore earlier in the day — and clutching a black leather binder alongside Prince Harry, who sported a gray suit and tie.
> 
> The couple then got into a Land Rover amid a swarm of security outside the building and left.
> 
> The UN meeting came after the pair viewed the skyline from the rebuilt World Trade Center and honored the 9/11 memorial on their first business trip to the Big Apple since saying goodbye to royal life.
> View attachment 5203020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle meet with  US ambassador to the United Nations
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle met Thursday with the US Ambassador to the United Nations to discuss racial justice and other issues during a work trip to Manhattan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


It’s so depressing these idiots and such truisms as ‘racism=bad, me=good’ are considered worthy of an ambassador’s time, but here we are.
It does make me wonder whether the royals are still helping them in some way,  though, as I can’t see sunshine sacks being able to call in favours with the UN…but maybe I’m wrong. 


Melocoton said:


> Another coat indeed, what are we covering up?!  This is a lame publicity stunt.  These two have little to no connection to NYC.


Maybe they are full of fake Rolex?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @bag-mania, but prefer this title!
> View attachment 5203622



Definitely the more accurate headline. I doubt the average New Yorker is at all fazed by H&M's visit. They are used to seeing celebrities of all sorts.


----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @bag-mania, but prefer this title!
> View attachment 5203622


They’re idiots. Sorry, not sorry.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I agree with much of this, but WTF was Harry "roaring around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban"??


From what I've heard recently there are plenty of Afghanistan vets who will dispute that.


----------



## sdkitty

this is behind a pay wall but looks like an interesting take on H&M visit NY
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are Out to Reinvent Themselves in New York (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Well, Maggot had 40 minutes open in her Calendar so she decided to go Mentor the Ambassador to the UN. She didn’t know where to park her Eunuch so he got to go too.


Wow @csshopper


----------



## bag-mania

Who wants to bet that before they leave NYC they will have bought some multi-million dollar condo? It occurred to me that Harry's "business deal" the other night could have been him signing the papers but I don't think Meghan would have missed that. So it makes me wonder again, WHAT WAS THAT MEETING ABOUT? Which company based in New York is stupid enough to give him a contract after seeing how they have done nothing in a year to fulfill their contracts with Netflix and Spotify?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chloe302225 said:


>





papertiger said:


> View attachment 5203379
> 
> 
> Suddenly, I've gone off Valextra big time
> 
> Hopefully, Gucci and Hermes will be forever far too vulgar and commonplace for Her-Royal-Minimalist "Madam Duchess"



How dowdy does that bag look? Straight out of the rotary club in ’87again. 

Poor Valextra, now they never have a chance of bumping up to their own premium designer thread. Hopefully they won’t get fully buried by the curse though.

as for birks, they are well named if they think she’s good PR.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Could wearing the coats be
> 
> 
> *I think it's clear she had a $$$ deal with the designer/company to be photographed wearing the two coats.* Wearing them doesn't make any sense otherwise. Why change the coats after only two hours? Either one would have been fine for the entire morning. It's not like a camel coat would have been in any way inappropriate for their visit to the memorial. Nor would wearing a black coat be wrong to wear to the UN.
> 
> But maybe I'm way off-base and she really does have to wear a coat to keep her cold, phony, self-absorbed heart warm.


I'm with you on the deal, but the designer/company may not get the best bang for the buck! She looks rather sloppy in that camel coat imo.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Agree.  *They aren't representing the RF. * *They aren't politicians.  What are they? * Oh - humanitarians I guess.  The whole thing with them is just ridiculous IMO.  There are many wealthy people who do more giving than they do and don't go around making public appearances.  Oh, maybe because those people are  busy working to continue making that money they have?  Or they aren't super thirsty for public adulation?
> 
> As far as her attire - who doesn't check the weather?  that just seems stupid.



????


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Based on her outfits for this NYC trip, I wouldn't believe her either. Obviously she has little clue about weather and climate except for the unicorns in her head farting rainbow clouds.


A deranged, sexless and joyless couple living in a fantasy world trying to get rid of their meddling parents… 
Is this the ‘heavenly creatures’ remake no one wanted?


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I agree with much of this, but WTF was Harry "roaring around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban"??


In his video games played in the bunker.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Sorry @bag-mania, but prefer this title!
> View attachment 5203622


Her boobs remind me of the suitcase girl photo. Did she get implants inserted again?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> STOP already
> 
> We already have Charles and Andrew
> 
> Although you seem to want Andrew in the US. Take him too p l e a s e


Very sorry to the people of Toronto , it was an act of desperation!


----------



## TC1

What could Harry possibly have in a folio? LOL he has no business there, or secret royal documents. My guess is...coupons to Subway


----------



## lanasyogamama

Meghan’s really lost that unique profile.  The nose with a little over done before, but I did think it was pretty.


----------



## Norm.Core

The gall of these two. They’ve quit the BRF  and treat the US like it’s their playground. Their attention seeking antics drain me worse than lockdown fatigue. 

I’m not buying whatever you’re selling, Dupe and Deceit of Sussex.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> What could Harry possibly have in a folio? LOL he has no business there, or secret royal documents. My guess is...coupons to Subway



It's all about creating the illusion that Harry is a big boy who can conduct his own business deals and make BIG DECISIONS all by himself. The folio prop was necessary as was the "Archie's dad" stamp on it to serve as a constant reminder of the woman who owns his soul gave it to him, especially when she isn't right there.


----------



## bag-mania

_Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready..._

*Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit*

*Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,

Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.

"I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.

Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.

She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."

The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.

Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.

Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.

Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.



Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


----------



## jenniferlr

My immediate thoughts when seeing the photos:  She's trying to channel Angelina Jolie (in her work with the U.N. and recent visit to D.C. ) and Jennifer Anniston's character on The Morning Show (through the NY style fall/winter looks and Valextra bag).


----------



## bag-mania

So Proctor & Gamble provided the health product donations to the families whose kids go to the school. What did Archewell do besides taking credit? Did they at least buy the washer and dryer or was that P&G as well?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Archie’s Papa* - lol, they are so desperate for the ‘sweet nod’



 Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #12 nickname, Archie's Papa. OMG, we finally have a decent nickname to call this loser, not that he deserves it. Congratulations! Please join the Early Bird Club. 



oops! ETA the image


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Who made that getup? Eileen Fisher?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins are you still working tonight?



I took the night off to watch murder mysteries, mostly Hercule Poirot, on BritBox. I caught the nickname, Archie's Papa, on @CarryOn2020 post on the previous page.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*


To complete the thought:  _because I couldn't find a group who was interested.  But you're stuck here in front of a bunch of cameras with teachers who told you you had to do it. You can't get away and don't even think about asking for a potty break, just sit there and wet your pants if you have to, because I AM going to read this tripe to you and you WILL listen. 

And when we've finished the 3 minutes it takes to read this drivel  I will give each of you your very own copy to take home with you. 

We need to clear space in the garage in anticipation of storing Archie's Papa's book in December.

Now "Smile" _


----------



## TC1

The head to toe red is giving me handmaids tale vibes.


----------



## gracekelly

Someone dumped gallons of  berry jelly on her.  Really ugly outfit. Looks like a berry colored tent.   He is is usual sloppy self. Hungover from a night of drinking while she stayed up late polishing her oral recitation of her book for the kids.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> To complete the thought:  _because I couldn't find a group who was interested.  But you're stuck here in front of a bunch of cameras with teachers who told you you had to do it. You can't get away and don't even think about asking for a potty break, just sit there and wet your pants if you have to, because I AM going to read this tripe to you and you WILL listen.
> 
> And when we've finished the 3 minutes it takes to read this drivel  I will give each of you your very own copy to take home with you.
> 
> We need to clear space in the garage in anticipation of storing Archie's Papa's book in December.
> 
> Now "Smile" _


Lies lies lies.  And the kid were thinking thanks but we’ll pass. It’s boring and we are too old for it.


----------



## gracekelly

Daily Mail says the outfit is Lori Piana and cost $7500. Oy!


----------



## xincinsin

I'm cackling. Just read the comments on Murky Meg's vid about this NYC trip. There are people aghast that American media is billing it as a State Visit. And one comment gave the most glorious moniker for them: the Royal family of MonteShitShow


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5203379
> 
> 
> Suddenly, I've gone off Valextra big time
> 
> Hopefully, Gucci and Hermes will be forever far too vulgar and commonplace for Her-Royal-Minimalist "Madam Duchess"


She does cheapen the brand. I can’t see Valextra in the same away again. It’s like a cheap bag you can pick up at the clearance bin at Ross or TJ Maxx. Off my list forever since I can’t unsee how fugly it looks now.


----------



## papertiger

The Golden Girls are upset, they want their wardrobe's retuned immediately


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> She does cheapen the brand. I can’t see Valextra in the same away again. It’s like a cheap bag you can pick up at the clearance bin at Ross or TJ Maxx. Off my list forever since I can’t unsee how fugly it looks now.



I think someone must have lent her the bag. 

Not Valevtra that's for sure.


----------



## Aminamina

xincinsin said:


> I'm cackling. Just read the comments on Murky Meg's vid about this NYC trip. There are people aghast that American media is billing it as a State Visit. And one comment gave the most glorious moniker for them: the Royal family of MonteShitShow


Monteshitsuxxess


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> It's a very classic look. I was thinking Jackie O. But totally inappropriate given the weather. As a native Californian, maybe she just assumed September in NY means cool fall weather. Note that she kept the coat on during the visit with the UN ambassador. She must have been sweating her a** off.


I agree - very classic and Jackie O too!

The thing is, she lived in Toronto for many years and we have similar weather to NYC.  September isn't fall yet - it is often warm and very humid and although most of us are anxious to get in to our fall weather clothes, it's too uncomfortable to so.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

le_junkie said:


> The gall of these two. They’ve quit the BRF  and treat the US like it’s their playground. Their attention seeking antics drain me worse than lockdown fatigue.
> 
> I’m not buying whatever you’re selling, *Dupe and Deceit of Sussex*.


 Thanks @le_junkie for your #4 nickname, Dupe and Deceit of Sussex, a so à propos nickname for the despicable duo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It's a very classic look. I was thinking Jackie O. But totally inappropriate given the weather. As a native Californian, maybe she just assumed September in NY means cool fall weather. Note that she kept the coat on during the visit with the UN ambassador. She must have been sweating her a** off.



Imo the turtleneck with long pants and high heels screams Victoria Beckham.  Except VB does it sooo much bettter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @csshopper for your #15 nickname The Red Brillo Pad.
> I owe you two awards for having previously miscalculated your numbers. Congratulations and please join the Golden Retriever Club and Hooting Owl Club.
> 
> Aww, Maggie, you're the best, thank you. We are a family of Golden lovers, going to share these pics with the grandkids, they will think they're a "hoot"! Even the glasses are appropriate.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5203691
> View attachment 5203693


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan’s really lost that unique profile.  The nose with a little over done before, but I did think it was pretty.


I was thinking it wasn't different?  But we need a good side by side to know for sure.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Definitely the more accurate headline. I doubt the average New Yorker is at all fazed by H&M's visit. They are used to seeing celebrities of all sorts.



IMO NYers are used to A+ listers who navigate the world stage with aplomb. 
These  z-listers bumble and stumble along, leaving a huge carbon footprint.


----------



## Norm.Core

gracekelly said:


> Daily Mail says the outfit is Lori Piana and cost $7500. Oy!



 She always looks like a wannabe try-hard. Money can’t buy you class, style or credibility.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> _Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready..._
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit*
> 
> *Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
> The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,
> 
> Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.
> 
> "I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.
> 
> Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.
> 
> She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."
> 
> The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.
> 
> Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.
> 
> Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.
> View attachment 5203820
> 
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I'm cackling. Just read the comments on Murky Meg's vid about this NYC trip. There are people aghast that American media is billing it as a State Visit. And one comment gave the most glorious moniker for them: the *Royal family of MonteShitShow*


Thanks @xincinsin for your #12 nickname, Royal family of Montshitshow. WOW, y'all are red hot these last few days proving again that the world can outwit these so-called smarties of Montecito. Congratulations and welcome to the Early Bird Club.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO NYers are used to A+ listers who navigate the world stage with aplomb.
> These  z-listers bumble and stumble along, leaving a huge carbon footprint.



There are many more famous people than these two who live in Manhattan. They go about their lives and are happy when they _are not _noticed by anyone. Or at least people pretend not to notice them in stores and restaurants to give them their privacy, you know that thing H&M say they want but they don't really.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Daily Mail says the outfit is Lori Piana and cost $7500. Oy!



LP executives are in an emergency meeting today.  Other than the price, this outfit does not reflect who they are or, even, who they want to be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to think Harry made a deal with the devil when he married her



I've said it before, I'd only be mildly surprised if some headline came out saying she's only partly human if at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> There are many more famous people than these two who live in Manhattan. They go about their lives and are happy when they _are not _noticed by anyone. Or at least people pretend not to notice them in stores and restaurants to give them their privacy, you know that thing H&M say they want but they don't really.



That’s why Jackie O chose to live there. She said it was easy to move around _in cognito. _Of course, wearing a *really red * suit tends to attract lots of unwanted attention.


----------



## octopus17

DH just said (unprompted) "What on earth is she wearing?? She looks dreadful...!" on seeing the red outfit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meanwhile the real royals are focused on health and happiness:


----------



## Norm.Core

Ron Burgundy called. He wants his suit back.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aminamina said:


> Monteshitsuxxess


 Thanks @Aminamina for your first nickname Monteshitsuxxess and welcome to The List.  


You gotta luv the thread that keeps on giving!


----------



## creme fraiche

Eek!  its worse than I thought possible!  Does she not own a functional mirror?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> That’s why Jackie O chose to live there. She said it was easy to move around _in cognito. _Of course, wearing a *really red * suit tends to attract lots of unwanted attention.



Funny how she suddenly can wear colour when she insisted on drab black, navy blue and very dark olive when pictured with the royal family who doesn't tend to dress like this at all.


----------



## bag-mania

In case anyone wants to watch video of Meghan talking to the kids, see the link below. The press was invited to attend and Meghan's visit to the school was planned days/weeks in advance. The kids even made a big mural of paper flowers for her. It's obvious that the kids who were chosen to participate were the best behaved in the school. They all sat very politely despite the fact they were all older than the intended audience for Meghan's book. Basically this was an orchestrated celebration of Meghan.









						Royal Surprise: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle visit NYC school
					

Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle visited PS 123 in Harlem as part of their continuing their efforts to encourage children to read.




					abc7ny.com


----------



## gracekelly

creme fraiche said:


> View attachment 5204035
> 
> Eek!  its worse than I thought possible!  Does she not own a functional mirror?


OMG  Too tight!


----------



## Yanca

I read that they donated two (2)  boxes of fruit and vegetables and a washing machine to the school in partnership with P&G.  Can anyone confirm? donation is donation but is it not too paltry after all the brouhaha ?  Many people also donate but it's not announced and printed by the media ?  I am sure release by the minute by their PR . Their PR representatives are  getting their salary's worth.  Megain and Hazza  disrupted the kids school routines in guise of promoting literacy? when it's just really to promote her books that's not even for their age ranges?  I read that the kids ages were 11 and up?? I feel bad for those  kids, to be use this way so that she can read and promote her book. 
And then her fans would say , the haters are having a meltdown etc... when it is really their hypocrisy and fakeness that people can not stand. They can do good and charity works without all these hoopla, but they need it for their egos.


----------



## creme fraiche

2 whole boxes of fruit and veg - to a school where 95% are eligible for free school meals?


----------



## poopsie

DoggieBags said:


> She wore what looks like a winter weight long wool coat in 75 degree heat and kept it on during a photo op visit to an ambassador? Any rational person would have taken their outerwear off before sitting on the couch to have a chat. Her outfit only makes sense if she was meeting someone in the dead of winter and the heat was off in the room the meeting was held.



Maybe she botoxed all her sweat glands a la Kimmy
As it was that outfit was quite the homage to Kakes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Elon Musk is single again


----------



## Jayne1

creme fraiche said:


> View attachment 5204035
> 
> Eek!  its worse than I thought possible!  Does she not own a functional mirror?


Those are rather large boobs...


----------



## Tootsie17

creme fraiche said:


> View attachment 5204035
> 
> Eek!  its worse than I thought possible!  Does she not own a functional mirror?


I believe M actually thinks she looks good in this outfit. Look how her thumbs are posed in the photo as she stares at the camera. Best laugh I've had all day. Just hire a stylist already!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> _Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready..._
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit*
> 
> *Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
> The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,
> 
> Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.
> 
> "I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.
> 
> Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.
> 
> She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."
> 
> The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.
> 
> Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.
> 
> Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.
> View attachment 5203820
> 
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


so little tiny girls know who she is?  I have no words.  maybe they dream of being a "princess" like her.  since this was harlem I'm assuming these are little black girls for the most part.  is this who their mother is showing them as an example of an inspiration?


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> One tweet said: Mayor de Blasio expresses his admiration saying they are wonderful guests and that the work they are doing is so important for our whole country and our whole world.
> 
> Possessive and ego-centric, ain't it?



Wouldn't expect anything else from Warren Wilhelm Jr


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> The long draggy pants are actually in style. Disgusting if you ask me, dragging all over the streets of NY.



If my local Wally Worlds are any indication this look never went _out_ of "style"


----------



## Aminamina

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Aminamina for your first nickname Monteshitsuxxess and welcome to The List.
> View attachment 5204021
> 
> You gotta luv the thread that keeps on giving!


I am very pleased to join other exceptional ladies of this thread that feels like home  . Thank you, dear!


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5203379
> 
> 
> Suddenly, I've gone off Valextra big time
> 
> Hopefully, Gucci and Hermes will be forever far too vulgar and commonplace for Her-Royal-Minimalist "Madam Duchess"




Well she certainly has the patented JLo death grip down


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so little tiny girls know who she is?  I have no words.  maybe they dream of being a "princess" like her.  since this was harlem I'm assuming these are little black girls for the most part.  is this who their mother is showing them as an example of an inspiration?



Let's hope it was only because their teachers prepped them for her visit and the kids believe she is important because a big fuss was being made.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Ok, she is chubbier than a year ago, looks good,  does not look bad or unhealthy but is trying to hide it …. turtleneck - twice, PJ jacket 

Own it ! Send a message of body positivity , otherwise, you are part of the culture that is teaching young women to agonize over every pound, thin lip, pimple or wrinkle 

I am ok with her weight 
BUTTTTT the sloppy pants hem should see her banished to the lower levels of hell , where is Dante when you need him to tell you exactly how low she should go … those pants were from THE ROW …. Big buckaroos


----------



## poopsie

le_junkie said:


> Ron Burgundy called. He wants his suit back.
> 
> View attachment 5204015
> View attachment 5204016



OMG
Who Wore It Better or ***** Stole My Look

God I miss Joan. She would have had a field day with these two


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Her boobs remind me of the suitcase girl photo. Did she get implants inserted again?


She may still be breastfeeding, so I wouldn't be too harsh about that. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo the turtleneck with long pants and high heels screams Victoria Beckham.  Except VB does it sooo much bettter.
> 
> View attachment 5203974


She seems to be trying on everyone else's looks instead of finding one of her own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

creme fraiche said:


> View attachment 5204035
> 
> Eek!  its worse than I thought possible!  Does she not own a functional mirror?



Monteshito called.  The kiddies want their mommy, the toilets are leaking, the roof has hole, whatever - Please hurry back.

ETA: NYC is a worldwide style capital, think Anna Wintour, couture, etc.  They cannot allow these Monteshito fashion-don’t’s to ruin their reputation. Blame the kids, blame the weather, blame whatever - they need to exit quickly. Just phone in the concert hoopla.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5203378
> 
> ETA: Kate and William stayed at The Carlyle too
> “sweet nod”


She desperately wants to have the style and grace of Diana and Kate, along with the fans, but her ham-handed efforts fall flat.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> I agree with much of this, but WTF was Harry "roaring around Afghanistan in his helicopter giving hell to the Taliban"??


You know, at night……. in his dreams.


----------



## charlottawill

jehaga said:


> They look stale and smelly.
> The hand “clenching” looks painful.


He really is golng off the cliff rapidly, looks wise. I wonder if she'll stick around in five years when he's bald and they're struggling to pay the mortgage in Montecito.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Monteshito called.  The kiddies want their mommy. Please hurry back.


Dear lord that is dreadful.


----------



## marietouchet

Another rant …. Her mask comes and goes 
it comes out for socially distanced photo ops at UN with Chelsea *******
Goes into storage for hugging kids up close and personal 
Mixed message ???


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Someone dumped gallons of  berry jelly on her.  Really ugly outfit. Looks like a berry colored tent.   He is is usual sloppy self. Hungover from a night of drinking while she stayed up late polishing her oral recitation of her book for the kids.


She could have worn the red jacket with the black turtleneck, pants and heels from yesterday and it would have looked OK. But they were probably all sweated up. Where did she get the idea that her shoes should match the whole hideous ensemble? Dyed to match shoes are so old school mother of the bride.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> _Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready..._
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit*
> 
> *Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
> The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,
> 
> Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.
> 
> "I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.
> 
> Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.
> 
> She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."
> 
> The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.
> 
> Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.
> 
> Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.
> View attachment 5203820
> 
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


We really, really, really need a spewing    for things like this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She may still be breastfeeding, so I wouldn't be too harsh about that.
> 
> She seems to be trying on everyone else's looks instead of finding one of her own.



Do breastfeeding people usually leave behind their infant for a week to prance around NYC, though? The logistics seem complicated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I wonder if she'll stick around in five years when he's bald and they're struggling to pay the mortgage in Montecito.



I'm betting money the answer is no.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Dear lord that is dreadful.



This “tour” is doing nothing to help them. They are not ready for the big stage. The spiralling down needs to stop. Returning home is only sane choice.

Many people who leave the world stage eventually realize that comebacks are very difficult.  The list is long of those who have failed.
===
So far, this is all I can find the is close to the jacket:




			https://www.net-a-porter.com/en-us/shop/product/loro-piana/clothing/long/stefan-reversible-belted-cashmere-coat/11452292645640910
		


ETA:  Is the jacket reversible?  Asking for a friend


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do breastfeeding people usually leave behind their infant for a week to prance around NYC, though? The logistics seem complicated.


I didn't know how long they were there. I thought four days. She could have stockpiled before she left and is pumping and dumping while there. Women often do go to great lengths to keep breastfeeding while "working". In her case I use the term loosely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm betting money the answer is no.


I'm betting you're right.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This “tour” is doing nothing to help them. They are not ready for the big stage. The spiralling down needs to stop. Returning home is only sane choice.
> 
> Many people who leave the world stage eventually realize that comebacks are very difficult.  The list is long of those who have failed.
> ===
> So far, this is all I can find the is close to the jacket:
> View attachment 5204174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.net-a-porter.com/en-us/shop/product/loro-piana/clothing/long/stefan-reversible-belted-cashmere-coat/11452292645640910?cm_mmc=Google-ProductSearch-US--c-_-NAP_EN_TX_PLA-_-NAP+-+AM+-+TX+-+GS+-+SSC+-+Catch-All--AM+-+TX+-+Catch-All_AM&gclid=EAIaIQobChMImZyC28GY8wIVp2pvBB3M9w25EAkYAiABEgKz4vD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds


I think they'll return to Monteshitshow, hunker down and lick their wounded egos for a bit. At least I hope so. Getting tired of hearing about them. And getting little done while keeping up here with their exploits.


----------



## CarryOn2020

First, they hurt our eyes, then they steal our souls.   
This is also available -












						Loro Piana Loreen Reversible Cashmere Coat
					

Get free shipping on Loro Piana Loreen Reversible Cashmere Coat at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.




					www.neimanmarcus.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I think they'll return to Monteshitshow, hunker down and lick their wounded egos for a bit. At least I hope so. Getting tired of hearing about them. And getting little done while keeping up here with their exploits.



Agree, as much as I dislike horror shows, this is the trainwreck I cannot look away from.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Another rant …. Her mask comes and goes
> it comes out for socially distanced photo ops at UN with Chelsea *******
> Goes into storage for hugging kids up close and personal
> Mixed message ???


She is shameless. Diana famously hugged pediatric AIDS patients.
ETA, those kids are not vaccinated and she could potentially be putting them at risk by not wearing a mask.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> To complete the thought:  _because I couldn't find a group who was interested.  But you're stuck here in front of a bunch of cameras with teachers who told you you had to do it. You can't get away and don't even think about asking for a potty break, just sit there and wet your pants if you have to, because I AM going to read this tripe to you and you WILL listen.
> 
> And when we've finished the 3 minutes it takes to read this drivel  I will give each of you your very own copy to take home with you.
> 
> We need to clear space in the garage in anticipation of storing Archie's Papa's book in December.
> 
> Now "Smile" _


You forgot:

*Now "Smile" You little $hits*! 
If that Wimbledon tweet is accurate, there's no way Monstrosity is nice to kids.  She dumped her dog.  People that are cruel to animals certainly don't give two hoots about people, regardless of age.


----------



## purseinsanity

le_junkie said:


> She always looks like a wannabe try-hard. Money can’t buy you class, style or credibility.


Or common sense.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cornflower Blue said:


> DH just said (unprompted) "What on earth is she wearing?? She looks dreadful...!" on seeing the red outfit.


Maybe she's on her period and thought that color would be convenient in case of accidents.


----------



## purseinsanity

creme fraiche said:


> View attachment 5204035
> 
> Eek!  its worse than I thought possible!  Does she not own a functional mirror?


No, she doesn't, but yet again, her eyes are locked onto the camera!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> You forgot:
> 
> *Now "Smile" You little $hits*!
> If that Wimbledon tweet is accurate, there's no way Monstrosity is nice to kids.  She dumped her dog.  People that are cruel to animals certainly don't give two hoots about people, regardless of age.



There's a video out there from when Harry was still somewhat normal. There's a little girl, barely kindergarten aged, trying to get her attention and she's completely and actively ignoring her, just staring in the other direction pretending to not notice her. Until he says something to her and then she turns on the fake megawatt smile and acts like she's actually interested in the kid.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's a video out there from when Harry was still somewhat normal. There's a little girl, barely kindergarten aged, trying to get her attention and she's completely and actively ignoring her, just staring in the other direction pretending to not notice her. Until he says something to her and then she turns on the fake megawatt smile and acts like she's actually interested in the kid.


Yep, I've seen it.  She's probably like Kathy Hilton...as in she ignores her own kids, seems just as disinterested in others and is selfish


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if the people at the school were under the impression they were to receive a bigger donation than a washer/dryer and some P&G products?


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> OMG  Too tight!


Her pose is called the Buffalo Stance.


----------



## Lodpah

Tootsie17 said:


> I believe M actually thinks she looks good in this outfit. Look how her thumbs are posed in the photo as she stares at the camera. Best laugh I've had all day. Just hire a stylist already!


Buffalo Stance. It’s a thing.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> No, she doesn't, but yet again, her eyes are locked onto the camera!


She can find the drone in the outer atmosphere if she knows she’s being photographed. She’s the most fame hungry human in the face on the earth. Guess she’s making those Hollywood people regret that they didn’t pay attention to her in the past.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> Those are rather large boobs...


A recycled moon bump in her bra? Save the planet and reuse the latex, assuming they aren’t planning having more children. 

She is a M E S S. looks like cheap polyester, ill fitting, garish color, half her straggly extensions. I picture the other half hanging in a plastic bag in a closet in Montecito.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> She can find the drone in the outer atmosphere if she knows she’s being photographed. She’s the most fame hungry human in the face on the earth. Guess she’s making those Hollywood people regret that they didn’t pay attention to her in the past.


I predict in five years they'll be divorced, she'll be on RHOBH and she'll hang onto the Duchess title like Countess Luann on RHONY. I'm sure Andy Cohen is salivating at the prospect and counting the days.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5203378
> 
> ETA: Kate and William stayed at The Carlyle too
> “sweet nod”


Every time I read “sweet nod” I think of those bobble headed figures, has anyone made a Maggot one yet?


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM,
Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


More like haunted by the thought of how far they have fallen…


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if the people at the school were under the impression they were to receive a bigger donation than a washer/dryer and some P&G products?


Nah.  They should've been grateful to be in the same air space as Macho Meg and Demasculated Haz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Genie27 said:


> More like haunted by the thought of how far they have fallen…



A slow realization, but it’s sinking in - maybe.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


I think he knows the fakery and due to ego he won’t quite leave yet. He probably knows she’s full of BS.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252



Shhh, he’s trying really hard to follow the story. Oh, that’s right, there isn’t a story, just a lot of convoluted verse.

At least with a mask we only have to see half of his grumpy face.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Shhh, he’s trying really hard to follow the story. Oh, that’s right, there isn’t a story, just a lot of convoluted verse.
> 
> At least with a mask we only have to see half of his grumpy face.


The Bench may be too complex for Haz to understand without a man in a grey suit to explain everything to him?


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> The Bench may be too complex for Haz to understand without a man in a grey suit to explain everything to him?


I honestly think he’s got to be the stupidest man on the face of the earth being led to slaughter by his Jezebel and he can’t see it. What is wrong with him?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I honestly think he’s got to be the stupidest man on the face of the earth being led to slaughter by his Jezebel and he can’t see it. *What is wrong with him?*



Pride. He’s in too deep and there’s no getting out of it. He’ll look like the biggest sucker on the planet if he admitted he made a mistake. Not that I think he’s reached that point yet. He is still enjoying living the high life without having to do what his family expects of him.


----------



## Aimee3

Genie27 said:


> More like haunted by the thought of how far they have fallen…


Again, the Puppeteer is bundled up in a heavy jacket while the puppet and children are down to their short shirt sleeves.
I wonder how many suitcases they brought with them for all these heavy outfits.  They of course flew private so she could’ve packed more options.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


Three children stand out to me. The one in the yellow top looks bored, just waiting for it to end. The little girl on the opposite side of Harry’s wife looking at something more interesting behind herself and then there’s H’. Looking his Mrs thinking I can’t believe you’re making me do this.


----------



## youngster

If they were still full time working members of the BRF, I wouldn't have a problem with a visit like this to an elementary school.  That's what they do: visit schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc., though obviously the visits occur almost always in the UK.  (I guess royals have occasionally visited similar places in the U.S. as well on official visits.)  

But, these two aren't full time working royals.  They aren't on an official visit to the U.S. They are money making for themselves and themselves only.  That book's profits are going into their pockets.  So, while I guess the parents and administrators are happy for whatever donation comes to the school and went along with this, I personally would be pretty ticked off if my kid went to school there.  They swoop in and use these kids as props for their PR event and to generate additional book sales for themselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

youngster said:


> If they were still full time working members of the BRF, I wouldn't have a problem with a visit like this to an elementary school.  That's what they do: visit schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc., though obviously the visits occur almost always in the UK.  (I guess royals have occasionally visited similar places in the U.S. as well on official visits.)
> 
> But, these two aren't full time working royals.  They aren't on an official visit to the U.S. They are money making for themselves and themselves only.  That book's profits are going into their pockets.  So, while I guess the parents and administrators are happy for whatever donation comes to the school and went along with this, I personally would be pretty ticked off if my kid went to school there.  They swoop in and use these kids as props for their PR event and to generate additional book sales for themselves.


^THIS


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Wouldn't expect anything else from Warren Wilhelm Jr


You got me interested enough to go and google ol' Warren.  What a eye opener.  he is an A+ phony!  He and Meg must love each other.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> If they were still full time working members of the BRF, I wouldn't have a problem with a visit like this to an elementary school.  That's what they do: visit schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc., though obviously the visits occur almost always in the UK.  (I guess royals have occasionally visited similar places in the U.S. as well on official visits.)
> 
> But, these two aren't full time working royals.  They aren't on an official visit to the U.S. They are money making for themselves and themselves only.  That book's profits are going into their pockets.  So, while I guess the parents and administrators are happy for whatever donation comes to the school and went along with this, I personally would be pretty ticked off if my kid went to school there.  They swoop in and use these kids as props for their PR event and to generate additional book sales for themselves.


The little girls went home and told their parents that they met a real live princess.  OMG!  Poor deluded children.  Notice I didn't even put Harry into that as he was invisible.  

She hugged the kids!  No mask! Whoa!  Big violation of personal space during the Covid era.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5203379
> 
> 
> Suddenly, I've gone off Valextra big time
> 
> Hopefully, Gucci and Hermes will be forever far too vulgar and commonplace for Her-Royal-Minimalist "Madam Duchess"


I recall back in the early 2000's you couldn't give Valextra away which was actually a shame because it was a very well crafted bag. I bought a leather and toile hobo style and the toile was identical to Hermes toile.  They were never cheap bags.   Someone bought the company and revived it and it has been doing well .  Now it is being Markled!  Shame!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


Harry loves it when mommy.... whoops....I mean Meghan reads to him.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


Not a flattering angle for her, w i d e, looks like a bathrobe with lank hair mostly tucked inside, weird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some say she is copying Michelle‘s inauguration look. Nah, that’s not fair to Michelle.  This is the look she wants - note the wide stride:


----------



## kipp

csshopper said:


> Not a flattering angle for her, w i d e, looks like a bathrobe with lank hair mostly tucked inside, weird.


I saw another UK article that wasn't that flattering either---all about all the expensive jewelry she was wearing.  It was MAJOR shade!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


To me it appears the dummy is looking at the camera and thinking why are they invading our privacy?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Not a flattering angle for her, w i d e, looks like a bathrobe with lank hair mostly tucked inside, weird.


It seems she opted for what she thought is a more casual look for today, but again missed the mark. My hair is unruly in humidity, so I sympathize with her on that count. The oversized outfits suggest to me that she is not comfortable with her postpartum body and is trying to hide it, which is ridiculous. She may have a little extra baby weight but these outfits are only calling attention to it. She really needs a good stylist.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> _*Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready...*_
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit*
> 
> *Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
> The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,
> 
> Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.
> 
> "I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.
> 
> Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.
> 
> She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."
> 
> The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.
> 
> Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.
> 
> Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.
> View attachment 5203820
> 
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


Thanks for the heads up.  The kids were part of a photo-op event without knowing.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funny how she suddenly can wear colour when she insisted on drab black, navy blue and very dark olive when pictured with the royal family who doesn't tend to dress like this at all.


Poor little Duchess has to wear whatever her merching contracts require  



Tootsie17 said:


> I believe M actually thinks she looks good in this outfit. Look how her thumbs are posed in the photo as she stares at the camera. Best laugh I've had all day. Just hire a stylist already!


She did this "thumbs outside trouser pocket" pose for one of the Time photos and someone gushed that it showed how powerful she was. Umm, in this instance, she was powerfully holding her ill-fitting pants up before she adds to her extensive list of wardrobe malfunctions.


----------



## Aimee3

youngster said:


> If they were still full time working members of the BRF, I wouldn't have a problem with a visit like this to an elementary school.  That's what they do: visit schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc., though obviously the visits occur almost always in the UK.  (I guess royals have occasionally visited similar places in the U.S. as well on official visits.)
> 
> But, these two aren't full time working royals.  They aren't on an official visit to the U.S. They are money making for themselves and themselves only.  That book's profits are going into their pockets.  So, while I guess the parents and administrators are happy for whatever donation comes to the school and went along with this, I personally would be pretty ticked off if my kid went to school there.  They swoop in and use these kids as props for their PR event and to generate additional book sales for themselves.


Haha.  If The Bench isn’t selling at the embarrassingly low price of .5£ I doubt anything they do will generate sales.  They have to give the stupid book away for free!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I took the night off to watch murder mysteries, mostly Hercule Poirot, on BritBox. I caught the nickname, Archie's Papa, on @CarryOn2020 post on the previous page.


Oh good, I'm so happy that you took a well deserved night off. It has been a lot of work keeping track of all the nice nicknames attributed to Archie's mom and pop.


----------



## Annawakes

Yikes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Girl, get a good tailor or buy the right size. As Mammy told Scarlett " you ain't never going to be a 22 in waist again after birthing babies!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

So what has happened to our titterverse?
HarrysGraySuit is now priiiivate and RemouladeSauce is unavailable??!!
Are the creepy duo doing creepy things? Again????


----------



## octopus17

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


He looks trapped.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Nah.  They should've been grateful to be in the same air space as *Macho Meg* and *Demasculated Haz*.


 Thanks @purseinsanity for two self-explanatory nicknames: #15 Macho Meg and #16 Demasculated Haz. Congratulations for reaching the pinnacle of The List and please join the Hooting Owl Club and the Roaring Lion Club.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Girl, get a good tailor or buy the right size. As Mammy told Scarlett " you ain't never going to be a 22 in waist again after birthing babies!"
> 
> View attachment 5204370
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204371
> 
> View attachment 5204372



Unless you’re the Great Kate - after 3 kids - photo from 2019!
ETA:  MM needs to be proud of her body, wear clothes that flatter her,  get the proper tailoring. She has and always has had a great body. Dress the body you have, not the one you want.  Many of us do it every day. MM, hire a stylist and tailor who understand who *you* are. You are buying high-end clothing, yet it looks awful.  That is due to tailoring. Get a tailor asap.


----------



## justwatchin

.


----------



## octopus17

gracekelly said:


> Girl, get a good tailor or buy the right size. As Mammy told Scarlett " you ain't never going to be a 22 in waist again after birthing babies!"
> 
> View attachment 5204370
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204371
> 
> View attachment 5204372


I'm embarrassed for her and that's saying something....

(and just to add I've never been a 22" waist ever....not even close unfortunately. That girl really needs a stylist who she actually listens to.)


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


He can’t believe he has to listen to this book again.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Girl, get a good tailor or buy the right size. As Mammy told Scarlett " you ain't never going to be a 22 in waist again after birthing babies!"
> 
> View attachment 5204370
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204371
> 
> View attachment 5204372



Is it me or is Hairless sporting what looks like a camel toe? Or a mangina?
Or is it called a moose knuckle in men.  
I wonder what happened to the epic camel toe thread.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Unless you’re the Great Kate - after 3 kids - photo from 2019!
> 
> View attachment 5204378


I have know only two other women in my life that were as thin a week after delivery as they were before.  Bless your genes if it is you.


----------



## octopus17

poopsie said:


> Is it me or is Hairless sporting what looks like a camel toe? Or a mangina?
> Or is it called a moose knuckle in men.
> I wonder what happened to the epic camel toe thread.


Bring that thread back....it was truely awesome!


----------



## justwatchin

I’m betting she’s planning on moving the “fam” to NY. Let’s face it…she’s not getting the attention she wants in California. Beside People magazine, no one is interested.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some say she is copying Michelle‘s inauguration look. Nah, that’s not fair to Michelle.  This is the look she wants - note the wide stride:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204321



That hair! I'd love to take a pair of scissors to it, cut it really short and part it on one side or have no part. Anything would look better than that mop.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know she wanted the high heels for leg lengthening effect but man, those are not elementary school appropriate.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @purseinsanity for two self-explanatory nicknames: #15 Macho Meg and #16 Demasculated Haz. Congratulations for reaching the pinnacle of The List and please join the Hooting Owl Club and the Roaring Lion Club.
> 
> View attachment 5204374
> View attachment 5204375


Wow!!  I am honored beyond belief!  Thank you!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TimeToShop

CarryOn2020 said:


> So what has happened to our titterverse?
> HarrysGraySuit is now priiiivate and RemouladeSauce is unavailable??!!
> Are the creepy duo doing creepy things? Again????
> 
> View attachment 5204376



Murky Meg’s account is suspended.


----------



## poopsie

Cornflower Blue said:


> Bring that thread back....it was truely awesome!


Weren't there also ones for busted feet and no makeup


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Girl, get a good tailor or buy the right size. As Mammy told Scarlett " you ain't never going to be a 22 in waist again after birthing babies!"
> 
> View attachment 5204370
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204371
> 
> View attachment 5204372


As much as I loathe her, I just can't body shame her, especially considering she (allegedly) just had a baby 4 months ago.  My "baby" is 16 years old, and I'm in worse shape than Meg.  That said, she really needs a stylist.  I am lucky I'm not in the public eye (nor am I actively courting attention, ahem), but a stylist would serve her well.  She's looking very bottom heavy in that ugly red outfit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If I may say to celebs, politicians, etc.  who think they should be praised for a one-off book read or a introducing musicians at a concert or any other one-off’s.  It is the day-to-day effort that brings about real change. The one-off is simply a disruption to someone’s schedule, a glamor shot, an ego boost for the celeb.  The consistent day-to-day effort, that’s what matters. 

Kindly stop these disruptions. These photo-ops are pointless, except providing fodder for us to critique their outfits. 
We all deserve better.



Spoiler: Dragged over the hem



*Meghan Markle Dragged Over Her Choice of Coat During New York City Visit*
- September 24, 2021 05:17 pm EDT
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle might have good intentions for their trip to New York City this week, from encouraging children to read with a stop at a school in Harlem to their planned appearance at the Global Citizen Live event in Central Park. However, Markle's choice of heavy coats drew more attention than any of their initiatives. Markle wore a heavy wool coat when she met New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul at One World Trade Center on Thursday, even though it was 80 degrees in the city that day.
Markle wore a long black Armani wool coat, black turtleneck, and wide-legged trousers during their meeting with de Blasio and Hochul. Later on Thursday, she wore a black turtleneck dress with a camel MaxMara wool coat during a stop at the United Nations with Harry, notes _InTouch Weekly_. While these looks would have been perfect in late fall, outside observers thought Markle's outfits were inappropriate for the weather conditions, although they could also be considered very appropriate for the formal settings the former actress spent her day in.
On Friday morning, Markle and Harry stopped by PS 123 in Harlem, where Markle read a copy of her new book The Bench while Harry joined the schoolchildren. The couple also checked out a mural painted by fourth and fifth graders, reports _ABC7 New York_. They donated garden boxes with vegetables and herbs to also encourage healthy eating. Markle wore a burgundy pantsuit during the stop.
*'Markle realty wants the turtleneck/wool coat look to happen'*

"For me, the idea of 'The Bench' is it doesn't have to be a bench, it could be a chair, it could be any place, just a special place where you feel comfortable," Markle told the students before answering some of their questions. "I was, at the moment, witnessing my husband with our son when he'd just been born, and watching that this could be a place where they could continue to grow and connect and learn, and that could be anywhere. So it's about finding that special place for you that's in your heart, and wherever you find it, to always go and reset and go, ahhhh, this feels good."
*'Ridiculous'*

Markle and Harry will wrap up their New York City tour on Saturday when they attend Global Citizen Live to help promote global access to vaccines. Scroll on for a look at the responses to Markle's outfits during the tour. 
*'Someone should've warned her'*


> Why dress of winter when it’s not cold? https://t.co/kJyg18mweA
> — ℳ ℳ (@Murky__Meg) September 23, 2021


"Lol a fan of Harry and Meghan but someone should've warned her about the September weather in nyc, she's dressed aggressively for fall and it is basically 80 degrees," one fan wrote.
*'She just likes that outfit'*

"It's 25 degrees Celsius in NYC this week—why on earth she is wearing [a] turtleneck and a coat??" one Twitter user wrote.
*'I'm sweating for her'*

"I love love love Meghan Markle so much but it was wayyy tooo hot for her coats in NYC yesterday... love you tho... I'm sweating for her," one fan wrote.
0comments*'Marke is a BOSS'*

"I like that when #MeghanMarkle is working she looks the part... Always very professional," one fan wrote.











						Meghan Markle Dragged Over Her Choice of Coat During New York City Visit
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle might have good intentions for their trip to New York City this [...]




					popculture.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> As much as I loathe her, I just can't body shame her, especially considering she (allegedly) just had a baby 4 months ago.  My "baby" is 16 years old, and I'm in worse shape than Meg.  That said, she really needs a stylist.  I am lucky I'm not in the public eye (nor am I actively courting attention, ahem), but a stylist would serve her well.  She's looking very bottom heavy in that ugly red outfit.



We aren’t out there staging photo ops. They have brought the negative press on themselves. Almost 5,000 pages explain why.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> As much as I loathe her, I just can't body shame her, especially considering she (allegedly) just had a baby 4 months ago.  My "baby" is 16 years old, and I'm in worse shape than Meg.  That said, she really needs a stylist.  I am lucky I'm not in the public eye (nor am I actively courting attention, ahem), but a stylist would serve her well.  She's looking very bottom heavy in that ugly red outfit.



None of us are body shaming her.  The pictures are pointing out the obvious which is that she is not selecting clothing that is for her body type, and she is wearing clothing that is too small.  Wearing clothing that is too small just makes you look bigger. Choosing the wrong style for your body type makes you look larger.   Nothing ever fits her and it is a mystery as she has access to stylists and designers.

ETA:  Re the heavy coats.  I think this is a "thing" to get attention.  I just saw a picture of JLo wearing a heavy jacket walking down the street in NY yesterday.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Girl, get a good tailor or buy the right size. As Mammy told Scarlett " you ain't never going to be a 22 in waist again after birthing babies!"
> 
> View attachment 5204370
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204371
> 
> View attachment 5204372



Oh. My. … Horrifying for someone to look this way in clothing when she has the resources to have proper tailoring. I almost feel sorry for her.


----------



## Chanbal

Time to protest! New Yorkers we are with you!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Opinion: Major problem with Meghan and Harry's 'royal' outing
					

The pair's 'progressive new role' looks like a knock-off copy of the old one.




					www.nzherald.co.nz
				




_• Daniela Elser is a royal expert and a writer with more than 15 years' experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles._



Spoiler: Opinion



OPINION:

In 1989, when Diana, Princess of Wales made her famous trip to New York (and which was recently revived in the public imagination by The Crown) her first daytime engagement was to visit the Henry Street Settlement on the Lower East Side, a non-profit organisation which offered (and still offers) social services, education, and healthcare.

Later, she attended a gala dinner to benefit the Brooklyn Academy of Music before undertaking her iconic visit to an AIDS unit at a Harlem hospital where she hugged a seven-year-old patient.

I'm mentioning this because it's worth keeping in mind what a sanctioned, legitimate royal trip to the Big Apple looks like given that Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have made the first major appearances of their post-palace careers by staging their own quasi-official tour in New York.

Barricades for the public? Check. A press pen for the media? Check. A rolling security cordon involving plain clothes officers, suited security guards and more than 100 New York police officers, some armed with M4 machine guns? Check.

A clearly defined charitable agenda? Umm…

And it is precisely there that Harry and Meghan's DIY royal "tour" veers dramatically off course from the palace blueprint.

Because while appearance-wise their first "official" outing as the Stateside outpost of the house of Windsor might look deceptively like a royal trip, bearing many of the hallmarks of a Whitehall-sanctioned international jaunt, the picture starts to fracture is when we get to the substance of what they are actually doing.

On Thursday they kicked things off by visiting the 9/11 memorial and One World Trade Center, during which they met with New York Governor Kathy Hochul, the city's Mayor Bill de Blasio, National September 11 Memorial & Museum President Alice Greenwald and Bloomberg Philanthropy CEO Patricia Harris.

Then, it was back to the Carlyle Hotel on the Upper East Side, where the Duchess underwent a quick outfit change, before they zipped off to the United Nations for a meeting with US Ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, for what the ambassador termed an "important discussion of Covid-19, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness". (The Sussexes then paid a visit to the World Health Organisation in conjunction with their Archewell Foundation.)


Let's just pause here because the question must be asked: just what was the point of their One World Trade Center visit? What charity, organisation or cause did it help? As the Latin phrase goes, cui bono? That is, who benefits?

The only obvious answer: the Sussexes' image.


Wanting to pay their respects at the site where thousands of people lost their lives is one thing. Planning an event that involved two photocalls is entirely another.

Likewise, no matter the trappings like the security cordons, Harry and Meghan have no diplomatic standing or roles and no longer in any way represent the Crown. So why are they traipsing around UN Plaza and the WHO? (Surely the latter has much bigger pandemic-related fish to fry.)

It is now 18 months since the Duke and Duchess arrived in the US and the Covid pandemic, along with Meghan's second pregnancy, would seem to have delayed their ability to fully launch themselves onto the American market as public figures.

This New York trip, however, can be considered the opening move in their campaign to establish their new, shiny Stateside public identities and to try to carve out a place for themselves in the national firmament.







The Sussexes visit the 9/11 memorial and One World Trade Center. Photo / AP
(The symbolism of Meghan's choice of earrings for the day, her Cartier halo diamond earrings which she has previously worn on her wedding day and at son Archie's christening, has not been lost in the mix.)

So, how did the Sussexes decide to use their US coming out? What did they choose to do with this potent, not-to-be repeated opportunity?

To take part in a visit with no clear or definable philanthropic goal aside from ensuring a volley of images making them look "royal".
If there was one image that underscores this, it was that when Harry and Meghan emerged from their five-star hotel for their UN meeting, the Duchess had changed her outfit.
For her second designer look of the day she kept the $1727 The Row merino turtleneck sweater she had worn to One World Trade Center but replaced her wide-legged black trousers and black coat with what was mooted to be a Max Mara number, a $4555 bag from Italian brand Valextra and black sunglasses.
While the 40-year-old might have looked like the reincarnation of Jackie Kennedy with a black American Express card (which is to say, chic as hell), the very fact she changed clothes is striking.
(It would not appear to be because Meghan had gotten the New York weather wrong with the temperature on Thursday hitting 26 degrees Celsius because both of her outfits featured warm coats. Huh.)


The fact is, her switching up her (truly sublime) ensemble ensured that there were two sets of distinct photos from their day, thus potentially ensuring more press coverage and more sets of images for the media to pore over.
It is hard to get away from the feeling that, so far, the Sussexes' big New York coming out seems driven by image and to sell themselves to the United States as royals.
After only one day, it has felt less like a monarchical outing and more like a marketing opportunity.
All of which is a damn shame.
Contrast what the Sussexes were doing on Thursday with the schedule of Queen Maxima of the Netherlands, who was not only also in the city but also at the UN. She has been attending this week's General Assembly in her capacity as the UN Secretary-General's Special Advocate for Inclusive Finance for Development and who was, on the same day as Harry and Meghan's outings, taking part in discussions focusing on women's digital financial inclusion in Africa.

This is exactly the sort of work Meghan can and should be doing. As a lifelong advocate for gender equality, the former Suits star has one of the most influential platforms in the world to advocate on this front.

Imagine if Meghan had joined Maxima for even a brief session. She would have ensured that the world's attention, even momentarily, was on an issue which affects hundreds of millions of lives.

That is the incredible power that Meghan possesses - a power that she is currently squandering while she and Harry take themselves off on their self-styled 'royal tour'.

After all of this, what is so strange is that when the Sussexes' quit as full-time working members of the royal family, they said they wanted to "carve out a progressive new role" - and yet their new roles look curiously like knock-off copies of their old ones, all shaking hands with officials and posing for photos before it's off to the next meeting.

I'll leave you with this thought: the US is also home to two other siblings of future monarchs, namely Princess Madeleine of Sweden and Princess Martha Louise of Norway. Neither spends their time trying to pass themselves off as something they are not. Instead they are both women with jobs, families and charitable interests, all of which they manage to do without having to alert Good Morning America.
Just saying...
_• Daniela Elser is a royal expert and a writer with more than 15 years' experience working with a number of Australia's leading media titles._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haaaaa, please post the check when it arrives  









						Meghan & Harry enjoy date at Harlem restaurant and make $25K donation
					

The Sussexes headed to local Harlem soul food restaurant Melba's for a bite to eat on Friday afternoon. Prince Harry tried chicken & waffles for the first time declaring the dish to be 'delicious'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





He looks a tad hungover here, no? Or is he having a meltdown?


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, please post the check when it arrives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry enjoy date at Harlem restaurant and make $25K donation
> 
> 
> The Sussexes headed to local Harlem soul food restaurant Melba's for a bite to eat on Friday afternoon. Prince Harry tried chicken & waffles for the first time declaring the dish to be 'delicious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204434
> 
> He looks a tad hungover here, no? Or is he having a meltdown?


And yet again the prince puke and his pukess “promised” a $25,000. donation to the restaurant!  They knew they were going to be there.  Why didn’t they bring the check with them?  Because they probably won’t follow through, and what’s the restaurant going to do if they don’t?  I don’t see the restaurant complaining to the media if they never get that money.


----------



## Icyjade

purseinsanity said:


> As much as I loathe her, I just can't body shame her, especially considering she (allegedly) just had a baby 4 months ago.  My "baby" is 16 years old, and I'm in worse shape than Meg.  That said, she really needs a stylist.  I am lucky I'm not in the public eye (nor am I actively courting attention, ahem), but a stylist would serve her well.  She's looking very bottom heavy in that ugly red outfit.



Normal women don’t have the resources she has so I will cut her less slack. But she does look like she gave birth right? So… no surrogate?




Oh yeah, Hasbeen has that look of a man in love with Merchalot.

Can’t help thinking that she has a deal to merch all the upcoming winter coats hence  the bizarre selection for the trip.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz is such a teacher's pet! 











						Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
					

PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is such a teacher's pet!
> 
> View attachment 5204451
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



Omg such an unflattering shot! The undies and the huge bald spot!!! Why can’t he sit or stand by the side like a normal adult instead of blocking the kids behind him?? Such a big balding baby


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulu212121

I see London, I see France. I see Harry's underpants!!!


----------



## Genie27

Icyjade said:


> Normal women don’t have the resources she has so I will cut her less slack. But she does look like she gave birth right? So… no surrogate?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Hasbeen has that look of a man in love with Merchalot.
> 
> Can’t help thinking that she has a deal to merch all the upcoming winter coats hence  the bizarre selection for the trip.



Gosh I hope whatzhisface isn’t too triggered by all the flashes and cameras….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is such a teacher's pet!
> 
> View attachment 5204451
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



 
Is he exposing his underpants to all those children, mostly little girls????  Whaaaa????
Wait until they tell their moms!  Please, someone file a lawsuit.  That’s a “money shot” imo


----------



## Jayne1

"Prince Harry dined on the beloved soul food dish chicken and waffles for the first time at famed Harlem eaterie Melba’s.

A fellow diner at the restaurant said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were served Southern fried chicken and eggnog waffles, spring rolls, catfish, collard greens and yams.

The onlooker said, “Harry said it was the first time he’d ever tried chicken and waffles and remarked it was delicious.”

Want to make a bet it was Meg's first time too?










						Prince Harry tries chicken and waffles for the first time at Melba’s in Harlem
					

Prince Harry dined on the beloved soul food dish chicken and waffles for the first time at famed Harlem eaterie Melba’s. Melba’s in Harlem. Harry and wife Meghan Markle stopped by Melba…




					pagesix.com


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, please post the check when it arrives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry enjoy date at Harlem restaurant and make $25K donation
> 
> 
> The Sussexes headed to local Harlem soul food restaurant Melba's for a bite to eat on Friday afternoon. Prince Harry tried chicken & waffles for the first time declaring the dish to be 'delicious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204434
> 
> He looks a tad hungover here, no? Or is he having a meltdown?


_The couple were without any other members of their entourage as they enjoyed Southern fried chicken and eggnog waffles, catfish with chipotle mayo, spring rolls with rice, black-eyed peas and collard greens._ 

They only brought the media with them? No security? This is silly. If an assailant wanted to do them any harm, it would be easy peasy since they like to do these "get down with the peasants" photo ops.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is such a teacher's pet!
> 
> View attachment 5204451
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


The article is still saying that she is 39 years old


----------



## xincinsin

A couple of thoughts about her unflattering attire:
a) the merch deals were struck while she was still planning to visit NYC on the 9/11 anniversary or another time when heavy coats would be appropriate? Then no one had time during the actual anniversary to pander to her whirlwind photo ops tour, so the dates got pushed back but she is stuck merching the clothes.
b) she is trying to channel QE with her all red Loro Piana because HMTQ always wears solid brights. All to imply that she is the Queen on this side of the Pond.


----------



## csshopper

OMG, what a vision!!!! within a fraction of Haz's crack . How could he not realize his shirt was not in the vicinity of his pants?????  

And the hair, the bald spot, when they pulled the rug off his head after the TIME magazine shoot it must have taken a lot of hair with it because he has never looked so bald. He can't help that, but at least get a decent trim and shaping. What a pair!

As for his wife, no body shaming, my issue is that given her resources she can afford to have clothes tailored to fit, she can wear appropriate attire to an event, there is advice available from many sources. But, she has always, IMO, and continues to ignore such things and being narcissistic and the supreme know it all, blunders ahead with what SHE wants and ends up looking frumpy, dumpy, and/or inappropriate. As someone posted earlier, be a true feminist and own your body, whatever condition it's in, and make the best of it and be proud. Her approach to apparel does not inspire confidence in her ability to be realistic or a problem solver. 

And, is this a hint of dire financial straits if she was merching the coats, that she could not return them saying, "sorry, this isn't the weather for them" instead of making herself open to derision by looking so out of place, but keeping the $$$.


----------



## VickyB

Cornflower Blue said:


> He looks trapped.


Yes. He has the face of a hostage.


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is such a teacher's pet!
> 
> View attachment 5204451
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


OMG.  what fresh hell is this? I never thought I’d see royal undies on display.


----------



## VickyB

lulu212121 said:


> I see London, I see France. I see Harry's underpants!!!


Genius!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> _Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready..._
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit*
> 
> *Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
> The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,
> 
> Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.
> 
> "I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.
> 
> Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.
> 
> She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."
> 
> The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.
> 
> Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.
> 
> Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.
> View attachment 5203820
> 
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


Rue McClanahan called, she wants her pants suit back as she says M can’t pull it off:


It’s weird since ‘turning 40’ she’s aged her aesthetic up so much considering a couple of months ago she looked like a tarty realtor going clubbing.

Also, isn’t Harlem pricey these days? Either way it’s a little patronising  to assume these kids are too poor for soap just because they are from a black neighbourhood_ and_ if they are really that deprived it’s cruel to draw attention to it just to demonstrate your _incredible_ largesse. They are basically suggesting they are the ‘great unwashed.’


----------



## creme fraiche

And, £25k to a restaurant and only 2 boxes of fruit/veg + gifted washing machine (so they are not paying) to a school.  Optics are not great!


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Daily Mail says the outfit is Lori Piana and cost $7500. Oy!


Oh dear- why on Earth did they think she could carry off the voluminous and elegant look? She looks like a matted spaniel in a collapsed tent.

Is this woman going to be the downfall of Bernard Arnault? Let’s stay tuned!


papertiger said:


> I think someone must have lent her the bag.
> 
> Not Valevtra that's for sure.


Valextra needs to put out a disclaimer   Like when kylie Jenner wore that fake LV


----------



## Sophie-Rose

These two have zero redeeming qualities!! They will never right the wrong they did to the BRF and I wish they would quietly disappear into obscurity!!!

This faux royal tour is disgraceful!!!
They clearly don’t have an F-ing clue!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is such a teacher's pet!
> 
> View attachment 5204451
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


This is what happens when someone who was raised in a system like the BRF leaves the protections afforded by said system. I doubt that such an unflattering rear view shot of the royal butt and undies would have been posted in the UK. The BRF has experienced personnel that advise the family members on appropriate attire for the various events, pose them for the photo ops and ensure that they aren’t photographed from unflattering and unfortunate angles. He’s so used to having all these details handled for him that now that he’s no longer constantly cocooned by experienced handlers when in public, he‘s too dim to realize how much was done for him all his life prior to his “escape” that he never knew or noticed. Since she hadn’t been exposed to such a system before she married into the BRF all she could see in the brief time she was part of that system was the restrictions and what probably seemed like an endless number of people telling her what to do and not to do. I don’t think she ever understood the benefits of having skilled minders with literally centuries of shared institutional experience backing them. And didn’t any of the school staff have the guts to tell just plain Harry that his just plain ass and blue undies were being very inappropriately exposed to young girls???


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> She may still be breastfeeding, so I wouldn't be too harsh about that.
> 
> She seems to be trying on everyone else's looks instead of finding one of her own.


I doubt she’s breastfeeding if she’s left her baby behind for several days. Even if you can express like a dairy that’s going to be uncomfortable & awkward surely?

Mind you I find the idea of both parents leaving an under-6month baby behind to be weird and cold but maybe I’m just a soppy Earth mother.

you hit the nail on the head about her borrowing looks: both clothes & face. For some cursed reason she’s never considered changing up _that hair. _


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> It seems she opted for what she thought is a more casual look for today, but again missed the mark. My hair is unruly in humidity, so I sympathize with her on that count. The oversized outfits suggest to me that she is not comfortable with her postpartum body and is trying to hide it, which is ridiculous. She may have a little extra baby weight but these outfits are only calling attention to it. She really needs a good stylist.


You are very kind, I am less inclined to be generous as it is most definitely not _her_ hair.


Aimee3 said:


> Haha.  If The Bench isn’t selling at the embarrassingly low price of .5£ I doubt anything they do will generate sales.  They have to give the stupid book away for free!


That will be a***wells next charity drive  deprived children at selected locations on the latest tour  will receive five copies of the bench & a segment of a tangerine- to encourage healthy body & mind.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, please post the check when it arrives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry enjoy date at Harlem restaurant and make $25K donation
> 
> 
> The Sussexes headed to local Harlem soul food restaurant Melba's for a bite to eat on Friday afternoon. Prince Harry tried chicken & waffles for the first time declaring the dish to be 'delicious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204434
> 
> He looks a tad hungover here, no? Or is he having a meltdown?


fried food is great for a hangover at least  
Why are they claiming they will give  a business money? Because they are black so they must need a handout? I mean, if I was the owner I wouldn’t turn it down of course but it is so patronising and tone deaf to me.



Chanbal said:


> Hazz is such a teacher's pet!
> 
> View attachment 5204451
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reads her book at school as Harry sits cross-legged with kids
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen sitting front row among schoolchildren as his wife Meghan Markle read to them from her book The Bench. Dressed down in an all-red outfit, the Duchess sat in the playground of …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


Good call wearing the mask for the reading, so the camera can’t catch how truly bored she is.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> _The couple were without any other members of their entourage as they enjoyed Southern fried chicken and eggnog waffles, catfish with chipotle mayo, spring rolls with rice, black-eyed peas and collard greens._
> 
> They only brought the media with them? No security? This is silly. If an assailant wanted to do them any harm, it would be easy peasy since they like to do these "get down with the peasants" photo ops.


They’d have to buy the guards dinner then…not in the budget  
Also bloody hell I’m a)British and b) not black and I’ve had fried chicken & waffles- how the h*ll has he not had it before?

Also quick question for the Americans- when they say spring rolls do they mean Chinese deep-fried pastry rolls with beansprouts & veg in them- because I thought you called them egg rolls? Or is it something else?


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do breastfeeding people usually leave behind their infant for a week to prance around NYC, though? The logistics seem complicated.


…in a desperate NEED to torture other kids by reading/feeding their book crap out loud. Beats me, honestly.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> They’d have to buy the guards dinner then…not in the budget
> Also bloody hell I’m a)British and b) not black and I’ve had fried chicken & waffles- how the h*ll has he not had it before?
> 
> Also quick question for the Americans- when they say spring rolls do they mean Chinese deep-fried pastry rolls with beansprouts & veg in them- because I thought you called them egg rolls? Or is it something else?


I'm not black and nowhere near Harlem, and I've had fried chicken and waffles.

I want to know about the spring rolls too (since I'm of Chinese descent). I'm always interested in how the same dish can be reinterpreted across cultures.


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> 
> View attachment 5204252


Ha! How many Benches has he sit through already and how many more ahead of him, lol. It’s in his eyes.


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, please post the check when it arrives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry enjoy date at Harlem restaurant and make $25K donation
> 
> 
> The Sussexes headed to local Harlem soul food restaurant Melba's for a bite to eat on Friday afternoon. Prince Harry tried chicken & waffles for the first time declaring the dish to be 'delicious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204434
> 
> He looks a tad hungover here, no? Or is he having a meltdown?


Why’s the constant need to hold on to him?? The picture gives an impression as if she’s trying to calm him down from having an argument with the older lady at the cafeteria.


----------



## Icyjade

Aminamina said:


> Why’s the constant need to hold on to him?? The picture gives an impression as if she’s trying to calm him down from having an argument with the older lady at the cafeteria.



Maybe the public PDA is to mask how they aren’t doing so well as a couple now. Typically most couples settle down or are assured enough that they don’t need to engage in PDA. Especially not at that age or for their (former royal) stature.


----------



## Aminamina

Icyjade said:


> Maybe the public PDA is to mask how they aren’t doing so well as a couple now. Typically most couples settle down or are assured enough that they don’t need to engage in PDA. Especially not at that age or for their (former royal) stature.


Absolutely. They are so nauseously in your face it gives me crips thinking of what’s really going on “behind those scenes”.


----------



## Cockleshells

What possible reason could there be politically for the idiot Bill de Blasio and the Ambassador woman to meet with these fools?


----------



## DoggieBags

jelliedfeels said:


> They’d have to buy the guards dinner then…not in the budget
> Also bloody hell I’m a)British and b) not black and I’ve had fried chicken & waffles- how the h*ll has he not had it before?
> 
> Also quick question for the Americans- when they say spring rolls do they mean Chinese deep-fried pastry rolls with beansprouts & veg in them- because I thought you called them egg rolls? Or is it something else?


Spring rolls and egg rolls mean the same thing on most menus here. The fillings change depending on cuisine so it’s only the wrapper and the frying that stays constant. Southern spring rolls would have some kind of meat (pork, chicken, turkey, etc) and veg (cabbage, collard greens, potatoes, yams, etc), filling with cheese, Mayo, mustard, or other sauces and flavorings.


----------



## needlv

She changed her rings again!!


----------



## justwatchin

creme fraiche said:


> And, £25k to a restaurant and only 2 boxes of fruit/veg + gifted washing machine (so they are not paying) to a school.  Optics are not great!


Not to mention the visit to a school in Harlem as well as to a Black owned restaurant, is not fooling anyone. We see you and your thinly disguised motive to identify with your race as needed.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Ok, she is chubbier than a year ago, looks good,  does not look bad or unhealthy but is trying to hide it …. turtleneck - twice, PJ jacket
> 
> Own it ! Send a message of body positivity , otherwise, you are part of the culture that is teaching young women to agonize over every pound, thin lip, pimple or wrinkle
> 
> I am ok with her weight
> BUTTTTT the sloppy pants hem should see her banished to the lower levels of hell , where is Dante when you need him to tell you exactly how low she should go … those pants were from THE ROW …. Big buckaroos


yes, having pants literally drag on the ground is not ok IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Those are rather large boobs...


new implants or due to baby?  my sister never had large boobs but she did have while nursing I think


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> Not to mention the visit to a school in Harlem as well as to a Black owned restaurant, is not fooling anyone. We see you and your thinly disguised motive to identify with your race as needed.


well it's not fooling us here but apparently it does work for some


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> In case anyone wants to watch video of Meghan talking to the kids, see the link below. The press was invited to attend and Meghan's visit to the school was planned days/weeks in advance. The kids even made a big mural of paper flowers for her. It's obvious that the kids who were chosen to participate were the best behaved in the school. They all sat very politely despite the fact they were all older than the intended audience for Meghan's book. Basically this was an orchestrated celebration of Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Surprise: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle visit NYC school
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle visited PS 123 in Harlem as part of their continuing their efforts to encourage children to read.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abc7ny.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some say she is copying Michelle‘s inauguration look. Nah, that’s not fair to Michelle.  This is the look she wants - note the wide stride:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204321




How come she's walking on her own? Weren't the Stans claiming she grabs onto Harry for dear life because the poor thing can't walk very well in heels? (also, did they forget the skyhigh strappy heels she wore as a bunny, I mean, suitcase girl?)


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> Those are rather large boobs...



They are just push-up bras or maybe the remnant of her moon bump  




VickyB said:


> OMG.  what fresh hell is this? I never thought I’d see royal undies on display.



It's blue no less. Could that be a signal for us to save him because he's feeling blue in this miserable marriage?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5204372



Yeah, I refuse to make fun of a woman's natural body, even if it's Raptor. I do however make fun of her freaking inability to buy stuff a) in her size b) flattering to her body type. All that money and she can't get tailoring?


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> Also quick question for the Americans- when they say spring rolls do they mean Chinese deep-fried pastry rolls with beansprouts & veg in them- because I thought you called them egg rolls? Or is it something else?



Not American but live in the US and I dine at Asian restaurants frequently so here's my personal observation:

At Chinese restaurants, spring rolls are filled with vegetables only while egg rolls typically have both vegetables and some minced meat in them. Both are deep fried.

At Vietnamese restaurants, spring rolls are filled with vegetables only OR vegetables plus meat or tofu, rolled up in transparent rice wrappers, never deep fried. Egg rolls are filled with vegetables and some minced meat wrapped in wheat wrappers and then deep fried.


----------



## creme fraiche

I have always thought that Meg gave birth to both of her children (likely with IVF and sex selection), and have never thought she has had much plastic surgery beyond a nose job.  Her puffiness goes hand in hand with pregnancy and weight gain.  I also will never poke fun of her for natural body - in fact, I don't think she looks bad for 3-4 months postpartum.

I do reserve the right to poke fun of her inability to dress properly with all the resources she has, the help available to her, and also because of her arrogance if she is overriding their advice. There are many number of belted shirt-dresses which she could have chosen from which would have been weather appropriate, hidden her flaws and highlighted the good points, and would have cost 1/100th of the price of that red monstrosity and thus more appropriate for the setting.   I also will give a bit of leeway to those who do fat shame her as she thought it appropriate to fat shame a toddler.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> She changed her rings again!!




Oh I thought in the picture from the restaurant her eternity band looked flashy. Those stones are way bigger so it makes sense.


----------



## Icyjade

Ok just had to comment on this…

Ignoring the “crazily wearing warm coat and turtle neck when it’s summer weather” styling faux pas…



Why would anyone not adjust the length of the pants??? And step all over it while tottering around in heels???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> At Vietnamese restaurants, spring rolls are filled with vegetables only OR vegetables plus meat or tofu, rolled up in transparent rice wrappers, never deep fried.



Those (unfried ones) are called summer rolls here (Germany).


----------



## Icyjade

creme fraiche said:


> I do reserve the right to poke fun of her inability to dress properly with all the resources she has, the help available to her, and also because of her arrogance if she is overriding their advice. There are many number of belted shirt-dresses which she could have chosen from which would have been weather appropriate, hidden her flaws and highlighted the good points, and would have cost 1/100th of the price of that red monstrosity and thus more appropriate for the setting. I also will give a bit of leeway to those who do fat shame her as she thought it appropriate to fat shame a toddler.



Spanx. Tailoring the clothes so that they fit. Don’t buy too tight clothes, anything that may crease badly, stop with the loose floppy boho chic styling or whatever she is trying to achieve. It’s basic common sense for someone who will be photographed.

At least I will give some credit to the finally neat bun. But stop with the numerous layering rings already. Is it still trendy?


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> well it's not fooling us here but apparently it does work for some


Did anyone notice? Can’t remember which place - restaurant ? They promised (future tense) to make a $25k DONATION
ok it has not happened yet, and I don’t remember all the caveating word salad in the article, but no wool hats or lunches this time


----------



## marietouchet

Fashion inspiration ?

WARNING , you can’t unsee these pants !


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> They’d have to buy the guards dinner then…not in the budget
> Also bloody hell I’m a)British and b) not black and I’ve had fried chicken & waffles- how the h*ll has he not had it before?
> 
> Also quick question for the Americans- when they say spring rolls do they mean Chinese deep-fried pastry rolls with beansprouts & veg in them- because I thought you called them egg rolls? Or is it something else?




*Melba's Spring Rolls*
Rice, Black Eyed Peas, Collard Greens and Cheddar Cheese in a Spring Roll Wrapper









						Melba's | American Comfort Food in New York, NY
					

Southern classics served in a retro setting that's relaxed & homey by day, bustling in the evening.




					www.melbasrestaurant.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Fashion inspiration ?
> 
> WARNING , you can’t unsee these pants !




Harry can get away with anything as far as I’m concerned


----------



## Sharont2305

VickyB said:


> OMG.  what fresh hell is this? I never thought I’d see royal undies on display.


And in this side of the pond we have the future Queen Consort playing tennis in the shortest of skirts and not one shot of her undercrackers.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Icyjade said:


> Ok just had to comment on this…
> 
> Ignoring the “crazily wearing warm coat and turtle neck when it’s summer weather” styling faux pas…
> View attachment 5204728
> 
> 
> Why would anyone not adjust the length of the pants??? And step all over it while tottering around in heels???
> 
> View attachment 5204727



Didn't at some point we laughed at her for wearing a heavy jacket and beanie coming out of a clinic somewhere in California in the hot summer?   




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those (unfried ones) are called summer rolls here (Germany).



Oh yes, I've heard that before too  When I first moved to the US, I didn't know what egg rolls were because where I came from, fried or not, the rolls share the same name


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How come she's walking on her own? Weren't the Stans claiming she grabs onto Harry for dear life because the poor thing can't walk very well in heels? (also, did they forget the skyhigh strappy heels she wore as a bunny, I mean, suitcase girl?)


so the stans think it's cute that she wears shoes she can't walk in w/o assistance?


----------



## CarryOn2020

What was the point of this “tour”?  They brought their own hair, makeup, photogs, etc.  Why?  Something very suspicious about the entire “tour”. They aren’t stars and they aren’t working royals. So why? The concert is tonight. Fingers crossed, there are no more virtue-signaling ‘events’.  

Whatever the reason, they’ve proven themselves to be worse than Wallis and Ed.  Hazzie, a grown man, showing the young ladies his underpants is disgusting for so many reasons. He may not be a working royal, but he is trading off of his royal status.  The BRF needs to put a stop to this nonsense.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was the point of this “tour”?  They brought their own hair, makeup, photogs, etc.  Why?  Something very suspicious about the entire “tour”. They aren’t stars and they aren’t working royals. So why? The concert is tonight. Fingers crossed, there are no more virtue-signaling ‘events’.
> 
> Whatever the reason, they’ve proven themselves to be worse than Wallis and Ed.  Hazzie, a grown man, showing the young ladies his underpants is disgusting for so many reasons. He may not be a working royal, but he is trading off of his royal status.  The BRF needs to put a stop to this nonsense.



I fear that they are potentially planning to uproot their family to jumpstart Malicious Meg's political career. Given how dirty she is, she will fit right in politics.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe they just wanted to show Anna Wintour that they are “important and Influential people”.  Maybe it’s a Meghan Spite Sh*tshow!


----------



## Aimee3

My view on the egg tolls/spring rolls difference.  The fancier the restaurant, the likelier they will be called spring rolls rather than egg rolls.  That said, usually the outside of a spring roll is very thin whereas an egg roll’s outside is thicker and more “doughy”.  Spring rolls seem lighter and taste better to me as there seems to be more filling and less “outside”


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I fear that they are potentially planning to uproot their family to jumpstart Malicious Meg's political career. Given how dirty she is, she will fit right in politics.



They will be mocked, criticized and mercilessly ridiculed.  They can silence some twitter accounts, but they cannot silence all of us.  
Hope they get booed at this concert.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Maybe they just wanted to show Anna Wintour that they are “important and Influential people”.  Maybe it’s a Meghan Spite Sh*tshow!


I'm being repetitious but really it seems to strange and wrong that they didn't want to perform the royal duties and now they are posing as the american royals?  Oh, I forgot - she was a Victim over there


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They will be mocked, criticized and mercilessly ridiculed.  They can silence some twitter accounts, but they cannot silence all of us.
> Hope they get booed at this concert.


no doubt they will be mocked on Twitter but at the event they will probably be applauded.  the people there will be more interested in the performers though, I think.


----------



## nyshopaholic

Is anyone surprised by this? Anyone?? https://pagesix.com/2021/09/24/megh...39.2005079690.1632578545-397548516.1518207472

*Meghan Markle does ‘most of the talking’ on NYC double date with Prince Harry*
By Oli Coleman
September 24, 2021

Apparently even Prince Harry sometimes has enough of listening to Meghan Markle.

A spy who sat opposite the pair during a double date Wednesday night in New York City exclusively told Page Six that Markle barely stopped speaking to take a breath, while Harry’s attention seemed to drift away from his wife’s musings — to the point where he eventually ended up fiddling with his phone.

The spy told us that they noticed Markle did “most of the talking” at the table at the legendary Bemelmans Bar inside the swanky Carlyle hotel.

While the source tried to turn their attention back to their own drinks and conversation, they occasionally looked across and were surprised to find “she’s still talking.”

In fact, the spy recalled asking their date, “Why is she talking so much?”

Harry, on the other hand, had “very few responses,” per the source’s recollection.

“Harry got bored and started looking at his phone. Then he got back in the conversation, and then he lost it again and went back to his phone.”

Our spy left after an hour but said Markle nearly talked the whole time they were there.

“She was excited about something,” the source said. “She talked with her hands a lot.”

The pair were out with a couple described as a “blonde and a tall guy,” believed to be the “Suits” alum’s BFF Misha Nonoo and the designer’s 6-foot-1 husband, Mikey Hess.

Meanwhile, the source said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s two security guards, who sat at a separate table, were busy keeping an eye out for fellow guests at the Upper East Side haunt who might be so bold as to snap a picture of the former senior royals.

"If people tried to take a picture, they would approach them and say, ‘Please don’t,'” the spy said.

Apparently three separate groups tried their luck at getting photos but were foiled each time.

We’re told Harry ate sliders and had some kind of mixed drink.

As Page Six previously reported, Harry, 37, and Markle, 40, are staying at the Carlyle, which was famously his late mother Princess Diana’s favorite spot in Manhattan.

Sources told us that the couple — who didn’t bring 2-year-old son Archie or 3-month-old daughter Lilibet on the trip — are _not_ staying in the $8,000-a-night Royal Suite.

They’re in town for an appearance at Global Citizen Live in Central Park Saturday.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> no doubt they will be mocked on Twitter but at the event they will probably be applauded.  the people there will be more interested in the performers though, I think.



Best not to mess with JLo - she‘s a NYer.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> They will be mocked, criticized and mercilessly ridiculed.  They can silence some twitter accounts, but they cannot silence all of us.
> Hope they get booed at this concert.



Here's the thing, if she is indeed diving into politics, that means more dirt on her from oppo research would come to light. Yay for our entertainment!  And then we can sit back to see how fast she can plug every leak that's out there or if she could even afford to sue everybody


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> Spring rolls and egg rolls mean the same thing on most menus here. The fillings change depending on cuisine so it’s only the wrapper and the frying that stays constant. Southern spring rolls would have some kind of meat (pork, chicken, turkey, etc) and veg (cabbage, collard greens, potatoes, yams, etc), filling with cheese, Mayo, mustard, or other sauces and flavorings.


Do egg rolls use wrappers made from egg? Or it is a generic name no matter what the wrapper is made from? 

The traditional Chinese wrapper is made from wheat flour. I like Vietnamese wrappers which are made from rice flour.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

You are not too cynical! They have indeed jumped on one more bandwagon…  

_However, *Mr Sacerdoti, a regular commentator on Sky News as well as a contributor to The Spectator, was dubious about how much impact Meghan and Harry’s involvement would have.*

He told Express.co.uk: “There is quite a mainstream movement to try and convince people that it's a good idea, so I'm not surprised that *they've jumped on that bandwagon* to try to convince people, *but I'm also not necessarily clear who would be influenced by Harry and Meghan telling them to get vaccinated.

“I know that scientists who have specialities in this sort of field would have an influence in convincing some people that it's safe and even a good idea to be vaccinated.*

“*But I'm not sure what a one-time actress who married British lapsed royalty has to add to the debate.”*

Mr Sacerdoti said: “*Now I may be too cynical *- perhaps their celebrity status means that there are people who will be influenced by their persuasion to get the vaccine when they wouldn't have been before but I don't know anyone who that would apply to.

“I don’t really think any anti-vaxxers out there will be thinking ‘Well I wasn't going to get vaccinated but now these two millionaires who live in California have told me to and she used to be on Suits and he's part of the Royal Family of Great Britain, so I must go and do it if they've said so’._









						Meghan and Harry's vaccine campaign questioned
					

MEGHAN and Harry's participation in a glitzy New York event aimed at encouraging people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is partly about "making themselves look good", and an example of "virtue-signalling", a Royal watcher has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

creme fraiche said:


> I have always thought that Meg gave birth to both of her children (likely with IVF and sex selection), and have never thought she has had much plastic surgery beyond a nose job.  Her puffiness goes hand in hand with pregnancy and weight gain.  I also will never poke fun of her for natural body - in fact, I don't think she looks bad for 3-4 months postpartum.


Watch Lorry Hill’s video on Meg’s face and you’ll see how she went from an attractive oval face to what I think is an exceptionally beautiful Jennifer Lawrence type face, so it’s not just the nose.  

I agree with you, I also would never poke fun at a natural body. She did pretty well for herself with those slim legs.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Do egg rolls use wrappers made from egg? Or it is a generic name no matter what the wrapper is made from?
> 
> The traditional Chinese wrapper is made from wheat flour. I like Vietnamese wrappers which are made from rice flour.



The roll wrappers that I ever known in my life are those you mentioned - wheat flour and rice flour. I never understood anything about egg rolls when the wrapper is not made from eggs and there's no egg in the rolls   

However, I suspect that at some point, egg rolls were probably rolled up in thin egg crepes or omelettes. But of course things change overtime and different cultures and countries do it differently.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> You are not too cynical! They have indeed jumped on one more bandwagon…
> 
> _However, *Mr Sacerdoti, a regular commentator on Sky News as well as a contributor to The Spectator, was dubious about how much impact Meghan and Harry’s involvement would have.*
> 
> He told Express.co.uk: “There is quite a mainstream movement to try and convince people that it's a good idea, so I'm not surprised that *they've jumped on that bandwagon* to try to convince people, *but I'm also not necessarily clear who would be influenced by Harry and Meghan telling them to get vaccinated.
> 
> “I know that scientists who have specialities in this sort of field would have an influence in convincing some people that it's safe and even a good idea to be vaccinated.*
> 
> “*But I'm not sure what a one-time actress who married British lapsed royalty has to add to the debate.”*
> 
> Mr Sacerdoti said: “*Now I may be too cynical *- perhaps their celebrity status means that there are people who will be influenced by their persuasion to get the vaccine when they wouldn't have been before but I don't know anyone who that would apply to.
> 
> “I don’t really think any anti-vaxxers out there will be thinking ‘Well I wasn't going to get vaccinated but now these two millionaires who live in California have told me to and she used to be on Suits and he's part of the Royal Family of Great Britain, so I must go and do it if they've said so’._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's vaccine campaign questioned
> 
> 
> MEGHAN and Harry's participation in a glitzy New York event aimed at encouraging people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is partly about "making themselves look good", and an example of "virtue-signalling", a Royal watcher has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Confused ... campaign is trying to get vaccines donated ... BUT is it trying to encourage people to take it? ... Read the article and it certainly seems like the focus is on the donation aspect ...  but correct me if I am wrong 
I think encouraging people to take it is too much of a hot topic for philanthropists ??


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Do egg rolls use wrappers made from egg? Or it is a generic name no matter what the wrapper is made from?
> 
> The traditional Chinese wrapper is made from wheat flour. I like Vietnamese wrappers which are made from rice flour.



I believe egg roll wrappers are dipped in egg rather than actually made with them.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy for Will and the UK people!  However, I anticipate a ton of pressure on the way…

*Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William put foot down and 'rejected UK ceremony demand'*

LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after *a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea"*, a royal commentator claimed…

Mr Sean claimed: "One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later is that she wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie.

"But that came to a grinding halt. Both Harry and Meghan were very keen to make that return and make sure that christening happened, particularly in front of Her Majesty The Queen.

*"Some people may say they're just capitalising on their royal connection and why not? It's how they make money now.*

"But moving forward there was one person who basically decided there wasn't an appetite for this and the person that seemingly is, so far, not willing to kiss and make up with his younger brother."

He further claimed: "*According to a very good source, Prince William was the one who basically said 'no, we don't think this is going to work,' it wasn't a particularly good idea.*"

Kensington Palace has declined to comment.









						Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William rejected plan for UK party
					

LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea", a royal commentator claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

If the event in NYC doesn't bring plenty of $$$$, they will need to visit the UK asap…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Happy for Will and the UK people!  However, I anticipate a ton of pressure on the way…
> 
> *Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William put foot down and 'rejected UK ceremony demand'*
> 
> LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after *a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea"*, a royal commentator claimed…
> 
> Mr Sean claimed: "One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later is that she wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie.
> 
> "But that came to a grinding halt. Both Harry and Meghan were very keen to make that return and make sure that christening happened, particularly in front of Her Majesty The Queen.
> 
> *"Some people may say they're just capitalising on their royal connection and why not? It's how they make money now.*
> 
> "But moving forward there was one person who basically decided there wasn't an appetite for this and the person that seemingly is, so far, not willing to kiss and make up with his younger brother."
> 
> He further claimed: "*According to a very good source, Prince William was the one who basically said 'no, we don't think this is going to work,' it wasn't a particularly good idea.*"
> 
> Kensington Palace has declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William rejected plan for UK party
> 
> 
> LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea", a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I don’t know whether this article is true, but if it is, thank goodness someone had enough of a backbone to say no to their shenanigans.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Happy for Will and the UK people!  However, I anticipate a ton of pressure on the way…
> 
> *Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William put foot down and 'rejected UK ceremony demand'*
> 
> LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after *a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea"*, a royal commentator claimed…
> 
> Mr Sean claimed: "One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later is that she wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie.
> 
> "But that came to a grinding halt. Both Harry and Meghan were very keen to make that return and make sure that christening happened, particularly in front of Her Majesty The Queen.
> 
> *"Some people may say they're just capitalising on their royal connection and why not? It's how they make money now.*
> 
> "But moving forward there was one person who basically decided there wasn't an appetite for this and the person that seemingly is, so far, not willing to kiss and make up with his younger brother."
> 
> He further claimed: "*According to a very good source, Prince William was the one who basically said 'no, we don't think this is going to work,' it wasn't a particularly good idea.*"
> 
> Kensington Palace has declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William rejected plan for UK party
> 
> 
> LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea", a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I’m happy to comment

Based on these last 2 days, it is  very bad idea to give them any kind of leeway to swan around your town.  They use people and events to line their own pockets. Best to never let the chaos in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMG, he must really miss his minders!



ETA:  they are getting heckled, yelled at, and flipped off.  Hmmm.


----------



## Icyjade

Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have landed lucrative entertainment deals since leaving England, often drawing on content from their personal lives. The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when they aren’t spilling the tea on the royal family.




					www.wsj.com
				




“

*Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood*
*The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when the couple isn’t spilling the tea on the royal family*

By

Erich Schwartzel
Sept. 25, 2021 12:00 am ET

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and sixth in line to the British throne, had slipped away from his fellow royals to meet with the queen of media.

In a London hotel room in 2018, Oprah Winfrey listened as the prince described his mental-health struggles as a member of the world’s most famous family. Even his trip that day to the hotel—through a back door, to avoid the paparazzi—was a reminder of the restrictions and constant scrutiny that he lived under. 

It was a deeply personal conversation, but the prince and Ms. Winfrey weren’t alone. Also in the room, sitting nearby but keeping quiet, was Jon Kamen, a New York-based film and television producer. To him it looked like something else: a hit. 
“Guys,” he later told his producing partners, “the format of this show—we witnessed it in that hotel room.”


Nearly three years later, Mr. Kamen, the chief executive of RadicalMedia, would be wrapping up the Hollywood project that resulted from that meeting: “The Me You Can’t See,” a six-episode series on mental health released by Apple Inc. in May. A conversation between Prince Harry and Ms. Winfrey—not unlike that hotel room heart-to-heart—anchored every episode. Prince Harry co-produced the series and shared intimate details of the sweat-drenched anxiety attacks and profound sadness that he said gripped his time in the spotlight. 

“I always wanted to be normal, as opposed to Prince Harry,” he says in the documentary. 

If there was a moment when the scion of a tradition-bound dynasty bridged the gulf to his new life as a bare-it-all Hollywood producer, it may have been this: working with Oprah Winfrey on a TV show that mined his personal history for a streaming platform operated by the world’s richest company.



Interesting read on how their hustling worked to get them deals etc.


----------



## Chanbal

Why are they meeting Guterres? They are cashing in the UK titles and TIME 100. This is so wrong!   


_Meghan Markle__ and Prince Harry have arrived at the United Nations to meet with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as they kicked off the last day of their New York City tour, which will culminate in their appearance at Global Citizen Live._









						Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
					

The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aimee3

When is a baby normally christened?  Is there a time when it would be too late to do it?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Why are they meeting Guterres? They are cashing in the UK titles and TIME 100. This is so wrong!
> View attachment 5204843
> 
> _Meghan Markle__ and Prince Harry have arrived at the United Nations to meet with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as they kicked off the last day of their New York City tour, which will culminate in their appearance at Global Citizen Live._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



My guess is Meghan is angling to be named a Goodwill Ambassador or even a Special Envoy for the UN. That would be following the Angelina Jolie humanitarian playbook.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Unless you’re the Great Kate - after 3 kids - photo from 2019!
> ETA:  MM needs to be proud of her body, wear clothes that flatter her,  get the proper tailoring. She has and always has had a great body. Dress the body you have, not the one you want.  Many of us do it every day. MM, hire a stylist and tailor who understand who *you* are. You are buying high-end clothing, yet it looks awful.  That is due to tailoring. Get a tailor asap.
> 
> View attachment 5204378


Let's not body shame our fellow women, even the ones we don't like. MM recently gave birth, and for most women it takes time, if ever, to return to pre-pregnancy shape. I lost 40 pounds and joked that I had finally lost the baby weight, and the baby was 23. Kate is lovely and always chic, but IMO she is too thin. If you look at pre-marriage pictures she was not this thin. I do agree that MM needs the right clothes and a good tailor. It is excellent advice to dress the body you have, not the one you want. Many of us fall into this trap.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> Omg such an unflattering shot! The undies and the huge bald spot!!! Why can’t he sit or stand by the side like a normal adult instead of blocking the kids behind him?? Such a big balding baby


Her prince is more of a frog.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> A couple of thoughts about her unflattering attire:
> a) the merch deals were struck while she was still planning to visit NYC on the 9/11 anniversary or another time when heavy coats would be appropriate? Then no one had time during the actual anniversary to pander to her whirlwind photo ops tour, so the dates got pushed back but she is stuck merching the clothes.
> b) she is trying to channel QE with her all red Loro Piana because HMTQ always wears solid brights. All to imply that she is the Queen on this side of the Pond.


Good point about the Queen and solid brights. It seems MM copies someone else's look on a daily basis.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we go again —











						Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
					

The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Some are saying she wants a UN ambassadorship, like AJ.


----------



## gracekelly

Whose arm was twisted that they met the Secretary General?  Can I call for an appointment too?  I want to speak with him about where that Unicef money went that I collected when I was a kid.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I know she wanted the high heels for leg lengthening effect but man, those are not elementary school appropriate.


Remember, she wore stilettos with her caftan for the backyard O interview. I think they make her feel powerful.


----------



## marietouchet

Who are their peers ? Been thinking...H&M are trying to do the philanthropy thing this weekend (rather than the spill the beans shtick ...) 
They are getting the royal treatment in NY like this were a state visit. OK, but how would their peers do it ? Who are their philanthropic peers? I am tossing this out for discussion 
Yeah H&M are trying to look a lot like W&K ... 
MM is using looking like Victoria Beckham this week week in a fashion sense bu H&M are not trying to emulate the Beckhams in a business sense 
H&M are not like Bill & Melinda (when) they were a couple, the latter never did royal progresses, they wrote boring position papers on malaria control in the third world (or similar topics) and shelled out money 
I saw Chelsea ******* in one of the NY photos, she does philanthropic stuff full-time, writes childrens books, very low key when not pushing a stroller around NYC, lots of cred (education and daughter of...), I guess CC is paid a salary by some foundation', CC is kinda like US royalty ... 
Any other examples someone can think of ???


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go again —
> 
> View attachment 5204860
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some are saying she wants a UN ambassadorship, like AJ.


I'm sure she thinks she's qualified by virtue of the fact that she majored in theater and international relations at Northwestern. She had an internship at the State Department I believe but failed the test to join the foreign service so decided to pursue acting. So now she wants to act the part of a diplomat. Makes perfect sense, to her anyway.


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Omg such an unflattering shot! The undies and the huge bald spot!!! Why can’t he sit or stand by the side like a normal adult instead of blocking the kids behind him?? Such a big balding baby


LOL....I didn't even notice that....what I saw was he looked kinda funny towering over the kids


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure she thinks she's qualified by virtue of the fact that she majored in theater and international relations at Northwestern. She had an internship at the State Department I believe but failed the test to join the foreign service so decided to pursue acting. So now she wants to act the part of a diplomat. Makes perfect sense, to her anyway.


again - so arrogant and full of herself


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Who are their peers ? Been thinking...H&M are trying to do the philanthropy thing this weekend (rather than the spill the beans shtick ...)
> They are getting the royal treatment in NY like this were a state visit. OK, but how would their peers do it ? Who are their philanthropic peers? I am tossing this out for discussion
> Yeah H&M are trying to look a lot like W&K ...
> MM is using looking like Victoria Beckham this week week in a fashion sense bu H&M are not trying to emulate the Beckhams in a business sense
> H&M are not like Bill & Melinda (when) they were a couple, the latter never did royal progresses, they wrote boring position papers on malaria control in the third world (or similar topics) and shelled out money
> I saw Chelsea ******* in one of the NY photos, she does philanthropic stuff full-time, writes childrens books, very low key when not pushing a stroller around NYC, lots of cred (education and daughter of...), I guess CC is paid a salary by some foundation', CC is kinda like US royalty ...
> Any other examples someone can think of ???



Angelina Jolie, Emma Watson, Nicole Kidman, etc. Audrey Hepburn was the OG UN Goodwill Ambassador, imo.
To think that H&M consider themselves Goodwill Ambassadors is beyond the pale.









						United Nations Day: 25 Celebrity U.N. Ambassadors (Photos)
					

Emma Watson, Nicole Kidman, David Beckham and Angelina Jolie are among celebrities who are taking action on issues confronting humanity.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have landed lucrative entertainment deals since leaving England, often drawing on content from their personal lives. The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when they aren’t spilling the tea on the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting read on how their hustling worked to get them deals etc.



Here is the article for the ones that don't have access to the Wall Street Journal. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood*
*The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when the couple isn’t spilling the tea on the royal family*

By

Erich Schwartzel
Sept. 25, 2021 12:00 am ET

_Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and sixth in line to the British throne, had slipped away from his fellow royals to meet with the queen of media.

*In a London hotel room in 2018, Oprah Winfrey listened as the prince described his mental-health struggles as a member of the world’s most famous family.* Even his trip that day to the hotel—through a back door, to avoid the paparazzi—was a reminder of the restrictions and constant scrutiny that he lived under.

It was a deeply personal conversation, but the prince and Ms. Winfrey weren’t alone. *Also in the room, sitting nearby but keeping quiet, was Jon Kamen, a New York-based film and television producer.* To him it looked like something else: a hit.

“Guys,” he later told his producing partners, *“the format of this show—we witnessed it in that hotel room.”*

Nearly three years later, Mr. Kamen, the chief executive of RadicalMedia, would be wrapping up the Hollywood project that resulted from that meeting: “The Me You Can’t See,” a six-episode series on mental health released by Apple Inc. in May. A conversation between Prince Harry and Ms. Winfrey—not unlike that hotel room heart-to-heart—anchored every episode. Prince Harry co-produced the series and shared intimate details of the sweat-drenched anxiety attacks and profound sadness that he said gripped his time in the spotlight.

“I always wanted to be normal, as opposed to Prince Harry,” he says in the documentary.

If there was a moment when the scion of a tradition-bound dynasty bridged the gulf to his new life as a bare-it-all Hollywood producer, it may have been this: working with Oprah Winfrey on a TV show that mined his personal history for a streaming platform operated by the world’s richest company.

*Since leaving behind their royal duties last year and moving to California, Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have netted tens of millions of dollars in deals with media companies like Netflix Inc. and Spotify Technology SA, many of which rely on their proximity to their previous life in England.

Getting there has been no fairy tale. Interviews with associates and colleagues of the couple reveal years of behind-the-scenes hustling that laid the groundwork for a major Hollywood arrival that will blanket the couple across film, TV, podcasts and books.* *They mined personal connections and friendships. They met with potential suitors and evaluated streaming services for their ability to reach a global audience, securing a deal reported to be in the $100 million range from Netflix in the process.* And they have frequently excavated their own personal lives to draw eyeballs, trying to wrest control of the narrative by lambasting critics and telling the story themselves.

*In essence, to escape a life under the microscope, they chose a different microscope.*

Mr. Kamen observed how, for Prince Harry, the Apple series wasn’t just a tour of his emotional past, even touching on the trauma of the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in a car crash when he was 12 years old. It was also an educational primer on the producing duties that may define his future.

Prince Harry joined Zoom meetings with Ms. Winfrey—first from England, then in Canada, and finally in Montecito, Calif. *He shared with the series’ producers his contacts with the global elite to enlist more participants, and suggested the formation of an advisory board that helped the team navigate the sensitive topics they were exploring. He vetted the subjects and pushed to bring in interviewees from beyond the Western world. He watched early edits and turned in notes faster than Ms. Winfrey.*

Streaming companies have spent generously for outsider producers like Barack and Michelle ***** and Pakistani education activist Malala Yousafzai, but skepticism is growing in the industry that big names translate into big profits. The Duke and Duchess’s deal includes shows that have little to do with their personal connections, raising a critical question: *Does anyone care about them when they aren’t spilling the tea on the royal family?

Calling Hollywood
Prince Harry and Meghan, a former actor, started building their Hollywood Rolodex almost immediately after their May 2018 wedding—an event watched by 29 million people in the U.S. and attended by Ms. Winfrey.

They met with power brokers like Jeffrey Katzenberg,* who contacted them to discuss a project that would highlight their philanthropic pursuits through his short-lived Quibi streaming service. Taking a meeting with the couple then often meant signing a nondisclosure agreement, according to those who met with them.

*Meghan began a relationship with Netflix that same year*, *through a connection to her deceased mother-in-law.* David Furnish, a Canadian filmmaker, wanted to produce an animated series with the Duchess. Mr. Furnish’s husband, the singer Elton John, had been close friends with Princess Diana.

In July, Netflix announced it was developing that idea into “Pearl,” a family show about a young girl whose adventures are informed by her interactions with famous women from history.

*The prince also had a yearslong friendship with an industry heavyweight to lean on. He met Walt Disney Co. Executive Chairman Robert Iger* at an overseas conference years ago, a relationship that has evolved into something of a mentor role since he moved to California, people close to the two men say.

One awkward example of how even those with royal lineage have to hustle in Hollywood came up in 2019, when Prince Harry and Mr. Iger had a mini-reunion on the red carpet at “The Lion King” premiere.

“You do know she does voice-overs?” Prince Harry asked Mr. Iger, gesturing to his wife in a video that circulated after the event. To outsiders, it appeared he was advocating for Meghan to get a job.

Ah, I did not know that,” Mr. Iger responded. He turned toward his own wife with a smile while Meghan chatted with Beyoncé and Jay-Z on his other side.

“You seem surprised,” Prince Harry said. “She’s really interested.”

Mr. Iger turned serious. “We’d love to try. That’s a great idea,” he said.

A year later, Meghan did voice-over work that associates say had already been planned for “Elephants,” a Disney documentary that the couple had seen filming during an earlier visit to Botswana. When the movie premiered on Disney’s flagship streaming service, Disney+, her involvement drew greater than usual media coverage for a nature documentary.

*But the Disney team also grew privately concerned that critical tabloid reports about Meghan would depress viewership in the U.K.—a signal of the challenge of working with a producer better known for her personal life.*

Buckingham Palace had no issues with such entertainment projects, which had a philanthropic or advocacy purpose, according to people familiar with the matter. Once the couple left the palace—in part due to personal tensions and constant scrutiny from British tabloids—they were able to pursue more commercial work.

*Touchdown in L.A.*
Soon after their arrival in Los Angeles in March 2020, the couple crashed at the 25,000-square-foot Beverly Hills home of director Tyler Perry before settling in Montecito, not far from Ms. Winfrey’s mansion. 

They hired an attorney who had worked on big-ticket streaming deals. For the Duchess, who had worked as Meghan Markle, it was a return to the Hollywood scene she’d known since nearly birth.

Her father, Thomas Markle, was a lighting designer in Los Angeles, and she would often joke that she grew up on the set of the bawdy 1990s sitcom “Married…With Children,” visiting her father after school.

While attending Northwestern University, she studied abroad in Argentina and interned for the U.S. Embassy. *She thought she would go into politics. **Instead, she went into her hometown industry, booking parts like “hot girl” in the 2005 Ashton Kutcher rom-com “A Lot Like Love” and appearing as Briefcase Model #11, Briefcase Model #12 and Briefcase Model #24 on the game show “Deal or No Deal” from 2006 to 2007. **She called the show her “very lucrative waitressing job,” and made ends meet by doing calligraphy for celebrity wedding invitations.*

Her breakthrough was in the summer of 2011, with USA Network’s “Suits,” a show about an unlicensed attorney who starts working at a law firm. The Duchess was cast as Rachel Zane, a sharp paralegal trying to get into law school. By the show’s second season, more than 3 million viewers were tuning in each week.

“Suits” gave Meghan a platform to explore some of the priorities she’d had outside of show business, traveling to South Carolina to hear the stories of high-school students who overcame bullying and bigotry. By 2014, she was speaking out for gender equality and attending events at the United Nations.

Meghan said she wanted to move behind the scenes after she got married. She has said, in subsequent interviews, including a headline-generating sit-down with Ms. Winfrey that aired on CBS earlier this year, that the tabloids’ prying into her personal life drove her to depression and suicidal thoughts.

The couple’s biggest draws in Hollywood have relied on those personal details—in the interviews with Ms. Winfrey; a podcast about how they and friends spent the pandemic, the sole result so far of a Spotify deal reportedly worth around $20 million; and a book deal with publisher Penguin Random House said to be worth around $20 million that was announced in July and will include the prince’s personal memoir.

The boy who saw his mother die because of the camera’s glare, said “Me You Can’t See” producer Mr. Kamen, “understands the power of media.”

*The talks
In Hollywood, the prince has tried to expand his output beyond the personal, casting himself as a next-generation David Attenborough*, the nature documentarian famous for films like “Planet Earth.” He already has experience in that realm, working on a 2018 documentary about saving rhinos from dehorning practices called “Stroop: Journey into the Rhino Horn War.”

The Duke and Duchess hit the market during a rush that turned into streaming-service FOMO—fear of missing out on the producer who would deliver a breakthrough hit. For streamers competing against one another, getting J.J. Abrams, the Obamas or any other notable name signed was as much about bringing them in-house as it was keeping them out-of-house elsewhere.

Though they had scant producing experience, Prince Harry and Meghan had a few advantages. They are globally recognized names at a time when streaming services are competing for viewers around the world. They are a young family at a time when most megadeal signers are midcareer professionals, making them a potential draw for younger audiences absorbed in TikTok and other services.

The couple’s lawyers set up meetings with companies only after conveying the range of investment they were looking for, hoping to avoid putting the couple through talks that were just about meeting the famous pair. Disney, Netflix, Apple and NBCUniversal were among those who met with the couple or their team.

Netflix won, signing their Archewell Productions, a division of their company formed last year and named for the Greek word “arche,” which means “source of action” and served as inspiration for their son Archie’s name.

“Through its creative partnership with Netflix, Archewell Productions will utilize the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and duty to truth through a compassionate lens,” the company said when the deal was announced.

*Netflix wasn’t the highest bidder, according to a person familiar with the matter, but the couple was drawn to the service’s global footprint,* its focus on children’s programming and the menu of other shows it could carry, from documentaries to scripted series.

The deal came just as skepticism across the industry was growing over such arrangements. Studios fell over themselves to woo creators like Mr. Abrams in deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars, but only a few such arrangements have yielded commensurate hits. And even as Netflix talent deals produce home runs like Shonda Rhimes’s “Bridgerton,” many of the service’s breakout shows have also come from relatively unknown creators, with programming like “The Tiger King” and “The Queen’s Gambit.”

*Archewell is also competing for growing interest in royal-family programming. *Netflix’s fourth season of “The Crown,” about the life of Prince Harry’s grandmother, won outstanding drama series at the Primetime Emmy Awards on Sunday. Actress Kristen Stewart is generating awards buzz for her turn as his mother in the coming movie “Spencer.” Princess Diana is even getting the musical treatment in a show called “Diana,” slated to open on Broadway in November.

Prince Harry and Meghan have spent the past several months hiring executives like podcast veteran Rebecca Sananes as head of audio, joining a handful of employees.

She reports to Ben Browning, Archewell’s head of content, who was hired in March. Mr. Browning earned acclaim most recently for co-producing “Promising Young Woman,” a revenge fantasy about surviving sexual assault that was nominated for best picture this year at the Academy Awards.

Now Mr. Browning is heading a company that will, in its words, “share impactful content that unlocks action.”

So far, that has meant safe, feel-good programming.

Archewell isn’t going to produce the next “Chucky,” as one business associate described it, but the team is trying to avoid programming that seems overly earnest.

Any production will have a hard time outshining the books and interviews that have broken the seal of custom and reserve that define the royals. *In “The Me You Can’t See,” Prince Harry spoke of recalling the sound of horse hooves from his mother’s funeral. He talked of Meghan crying at night because of the cruelty of the London tabloids, and how his son said “Grandma Diana” from an early age. And most notably, in a separate interview with Ms. Winfrey, the couple shared the bombshell that an unidentified member of the royal family openly speculated to Harry on the skin tone of their child.*

It’s undeniably good TV, but it also means the Sussexes bring a unique set of baggage to a working relationship. *While producing “The Me You Can’t See,” Mr. Kamen was approached by the producers of the Broadway musical “Diana.”* It was being filmed for release on Netflix—the kind of adaptation Mr. Kamen’s company had done to great acclaim with the blockbuster musical “Hamilton.” *He passed on the opportunity, worried that Prince Harry would be angry with him if he got involved with a show about his mother.

Mr. Kamen never mentioned to Prince Harry how he had passed on the project, but now he doesn’t know if the prince would have cared. After all, the prince and his wife soon signed their own deal with Netflix.*

—Max Colchester contributed to this article._

*Write to *Erich Schwartzel at erich.schwartzel@wsj.com









						Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have landed lucrative entertainment deals since leaving England, often drawing on content from their personal lives. The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when they aren’t spilling the tea on the royal family.




					www.wsj.com


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> When is a baby normally christened?  Is there a time when it would be too late to do it?


It is never too late - some people do it as adults - but generally for Christians it is in the first year. Catholics do it in the first few months because they believe if anything were to happen to the child before it was baptized its soul would not go to heaven. Or so I've been told.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know whether this article is true, but if it is, thank goodness someone had enough of a backbone to say no to their shenanigans.


I think this is a good one. It is reporting on the comments of a person with apparent very good connections in the Palace.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Meghan said she wanted to move behind the scenes after she got married.



If only she *would  *do that, there would be no need for the clothes critiques, the so-called ‘body shaming’ [which no one here has done], the lawsuits, the twitter suspensions, the heckling, the ridicule, etc.  H&M need to get off their ego train. ASAP.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> My guess is Meghan is angling to be named a Goodwill Ambassador or even a Special Envoy for the UN. That would be following the Angelina Jolie humanitarian playbook.


Oh, yes! She is trying to become a Goodwill Ambassador like Angie. Let's hope Guterres reads UK newspapers…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It is never too late - some people do it as adults - but generally for Christians it is in the first year. Catholics do it in the first few months because they believe if anything were to happen to the child before it was baptized its soul would not go to heaven. Or so I've been told.



Wouldn‘t this important event in a person‘s life be something the parents ask the church about? Almost all churches have a process for this because it is *not* a Hwood photo op! H&M continue to show extreme arrogance in trying to thwart the rules. Glad they are getting told “NO”.


ETA:  perhaps we should clarify the terminology.  

_Christening takes place when a child is named and is also baptized at the same time. Christening is a naming ritual that dates back to English culture. Not properly defined, it is referred to as baptism. In reality, a child is christened and given an official name. They need not be baptized then._








						Difference Between Baptism & Christening
					

Baptism and christening are integral parts of Christianity. But there is a difference between the two, and many are confused about baptism versus christening. What is the difference and what are the intricacies of each ceremony is something that everyone wants to know.




					parenting.firstcry.com


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> If the event in NYC doesn't bring plenty of $$$$, they will need to visit the UK asap…
> View attachment 5204828


It could royally backfire on the Suckesses, they run the very real risk of being booed and jeered in public demonstrations, certainly no love fest and obsequious pandering of the press like way too much of the US coverage. The only thing that might moderate the behavior is if they were in the immediate company of the Queen and then I think, out of respect for her, it might not happen. Maggot's stans would of course be bleating it showed how much HM adores them yada, yada, yada. 

A dose of brutal reality is overdue.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> If only she *would  *do that, there would be no need for the clothes critiques, the so-called ‘body shaming’ [which no one here has done], the lawsuits, the twitter suspensions, the heckling, the ridicule, etc.  H&M need to get off their ego train. ASAP.


they will only get off when they're forced off - not voluntarily, esp The Wife


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> again - so arrogant


During the first impeachment hearings for "the former guy" I was so impressed by the testimony of dedicated career diplomats like Fiona Hill, Bill Taylor, Marie Yovanovitch and Alexander Vindman to name a few. MM would be so out of her depth with these people.


----------



## eunaddict

charlottawill said:


> *Let's not body shame our fellow women, even the ones we don't like. *MM recently gave birth, and for most women it takes time, if ever, to return to pre-pregnancy shape. I lost 40 pounds and joked that I had finally lost the baby weight, and the baby was 23. Kate is lovely and always chic, but* IMO she is too thin. If you look at pre-marriage pictures she was not this thin. *I do agree that MM needs the right clothes and a good tailor. It is excellent advice to dress the body you have, not the one you want. Many of us fall into this trap.




Let's not body shame women spanning the entire spectrum of body types please.

---
That said, MM also needs to stop dressing like her SIL - Kate is ~ 3inches taller with a longer torso and so high waisted bottoms don't shorten and change her proportions in the way it does with MM.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> They’d have to buy the guards dinner then…not in the budget
> Also bloody hell I’m a)British and b) not black and I’ve had fried chicken & waffles- how the h*ll has he not had it before?
> 
> Also quick question for the Americans- when they say spring rolls do they mean Chinese deep-fried pastry rolls with beansprouts & veg in them- because I thought you called them egg rolls? Or is it something else?


From my limited experience, egg rolls often have a thicker "skin" and can have chicken as well as cabbage, etc., and are deep fried.  Spring rolls are usually just veggies and the wrapping is much thinner and made without egg.  They're usually not fried.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cockleshells said:


> What possible reason could there be politically for the idiot Bill de Blasio and the Ambassador woman to meet with these fools?


Fools unite!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Whose arm was twisted that they met the Secretary General?  Can I call for an appointment too?  I want to speak with him about where that Unicef money went that I collected when I was a kid.


TIME 100 more influential…is opening doors. Guterres must read the Wall Street Journal at least… The news releases about this couple in Europe are also not very favorable, so let's have hope that he keeps the meeting short.


----------



## charlottawill

I thought this might be a refreshing palate cleanser. We were discussing her dress here recently, but too many pages to wade through to find it.



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...paign=VF_CH_092521&utm_term=VYF_Cocktail_Hour


----------



## CarryOn2020

eunaddict said:


> Let's not body shame women spanning the entire spectrum of body types please.
> 
> ---
> That said, MM also needs to stop dressing like her SIL - Kate is ~ 3inches taller with a longer torso and so high waisted bottoms don't shorten and change her proportions in the way it does with MM.



As someone on another site said, the Middleton women clearly know how to eat and exercise.  They also know how to live a happy life.
In this spite-filled era, it is truly refreshing to see their positivity. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rty-Pieces-business-built-family-fortune.html


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Fashion inspiration ?
> 
> WARNING , you can’t unsee these pants !



Those pants are uglier than M's.  His posture is awful too!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> It could royally backfire on the Suckesses, they run the very real risk of being booed and jeered in public demonstrations, certainly no love fest and obsequious pandering of the press like way too much of the US coverage. The only thing that might moderate the behavior is if they were in the immediate company of the Queen and then I think, out of respect for her, it might not happen. Maggot's stans would of course be bleating it showed how much HM adores them yada, yada, yada.
> 
> A dose of brutal reality is overdue.


They would bring their own PR people to make sure the news releases in the US would be the continuation of the greatest love story of all time.

It's time to remove their titles imo…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> TIME 100 more influential…is opening doors. Guterres must read the Wall Street Journal at least… The news releases about this couple in Europe are also not very favorable, so let's have hope that he keeps the meeting short.



They are using Hazzie’s royal connections to keep their names in the news. A couple of phone calls here, some ‘donations’ there, they get all the meetings they want. Don’t they look so impressive fluttering from meeting to meeting?  Especially in their 3/4 caravan Range Rovers? Cameras and security following?  With their notebooks?  Their ‘business‘ attire?  Just like the real royals, no?

All made for tv.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> As someone on another site said, the Middleton women clearly know how to eat and exercise.  They also know how to live a happy life.
> In this spite-filled era, it is truly refreshing to see their positivity.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rty-Pieces-business-built-family-fortune.html


The British tabs were not always so kind to her and her family. When Kate and William were first engaged the tabs made her mother out to be a lower class social climber, as did many in William's social circle. The passage of time and Kate's brilliant handling of her role have clearly improved their opinion of the Middletons.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are using Hazzie’s royal connections to keep their names in the news. A couple of phone calls here, some ‘donations’ there, they get all the meetings they want. Don’t they look so impressive fluttering from meeting to meeting?  Especially in their 3/4 caravan Range Rovers? Cameras and security following?  With their notebooks?  Their ‘business‘ attire?  Just like the real royals, no?
> 
> All made for tv.


Disgusting. The people in the UK need to keep asking QE to remove their titles imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> The British tabs were not always so kind to her and her family. When Kate and William were first engaged the tabs made her mother out to be a lower class social climber, as did many in William's social circle. The passage of time and Kate's brilliant handling of her role have clearly improved their opinion of the Middletons.


They were downright nasty.  Markle had it easy!  And the Middletons certainly couldn't cry racism, as Haz and Mamba did.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Egg rolls and spring rolls are both meat and bean sprouts and sometimes other veggies in a rice or wheat wrapper. The difference between them is that the egg roll is then dipped in an egg mixture and then fried, giving it a slightly thicker and crunchier exterior 



DoggieBags said:


> Spring rolls and egg rolls mean the same thing on most menus here. The fillings change depending on cuisine so it’s only the wrapper and the frying that stays constant. Southern spring rolls would have some kind of meat (pork, chicken, turkey, etc) and veg (cabbage, collard greens, potatoes, yams, etc), filling with cheese, Mayo, mustard, or other sauces and flavorings.



Cheese and Mayo?!?  must be a southern thing


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happy couple?
It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.




ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap


----------



## SDinTO

justwatchin said:


> Not to mention the visit to a school in Harlem as well as to a Black owned restaurant, is not fooling anyone. We see you and your thinly disguised motive to identify with your race as needed.



Why did they make a commitment to donate, and not just donate while they were there?  Couldn’t they have just written a cheque and presented it?  Are they really planning on donating?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936
> 
> 
> ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap


She is clearly trying to hide the baby weight and failing.


----------



## Chanbal

"_Why is he shoving that child away so forcefully!_" One explanation could be that he had already collected enough photos of this event…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comments from the WSJ article @Chanbal posted - most are highly critical 

_The problem is that Prince Harry's business model is built on copying the role that Princess Diana played - the white savior, which 20 years ago was tolerated but in today's world is understood to be harmful. I was offended seeing Prince Harry and Meghan using the black students from Harlem as essentially props for their display of "generosity." In the middle of a pandemic, these most likely unvaccinated children (due to their young ages) were encouraged to hug Meghan and Harry for photo opts and publicity. Prince Harry's roles as a white savior was more important than the health of the children that they profess to care so much about. _


> _ Kristal Grant:  "Even though Princess Diana is constantly praised for having donated her money and services to causes which disproportionately affect Black and brown populations, the reality is that we really witnessed a white savior complex. " _



ETA: the more comments I read, the more I realize how many people strongly dislike the grifters -

_I loved the headline  to this article "Prince Harry and Meghan hustle to become Hollywood royalty". I looked up on the Meriam-Webster online dictionary site, the word hustler. The first definition given was one who obtains money by fraud or deceit. The fourth one given was simply prostitute.

I didn't think I would ever take the side of the Royals.  And then Meghan Monster came along. _


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936
> 
> 
> ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap


Her clothes always look so wrinkled like she’s slept in them. I suppose that’s partly because, as many have already pointed out, her clothes rarely fit her. Some people have the knack of always looking fresh and crisp no matter how long they’ve been on the go. I remember years ago seeing a woman board a flight I was on. She wore a white silk shirt with white linen pants and I thought who in their right mind wore that kind of outfit for a 15 hour flight. I saw her debark 15 hours later with hardly a wrinkle looking as fresh as she had when she boarded the plane whereas I, in my practical jeans and T-shirt, felt and looked as rumpled as an unmade bed. Kate seems to have that knack of rarely looking rumpled. You’d think with all the stylists in Hollywood someone would have shared some tips by now with Moaning Meg on how to stay looking cool, calm and wrinkle free over long periods of time but I guess some people are unteachable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Harry's secret mic? Tell-tale wire suggests couple are recording their New York visit as part of multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify deals *
Prince Harry appeared to be sporting a secret mic during his visit with Meghan Markle to an iconic Harlem soul food joint Friday, in a sign the couple may have been recording their New York tour as part of their multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify contracts.
A tell-tale wire was spotted poking out from underneath the prince's shirt and trailing into his chino pocket as he leaned forward to hug Melba restaurant owner Melba Wilson that afternoon.
Other photos taken of the couple's outing Friday - first to a Harlem school and then onto the local food joint - also suggest Harry was wearing a wire.
He wore his long-sleeved polo shirt open, revealing a sneak peak of what appeared to be a dark wire around his neck. 
Meghan, 40, meanwhile has sported unusually heavy, long coats for all of their engagements during their New York City tour, hiding any mic system from view.
The couple has been working to carve out careers in Hollywood since quitting their roles as senior working members of the royal family last January.  







They founded production company Archewell Productions and struck a five-year deal with Netflix in the fall, rumored to be worth around $100 million. 
In December, they announced an exclusive deal - worth an estimated $25 million  -with Spotify for their Archewell Audio podcast, which they said would include podcasts and programming 'that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world.'  

Spotify said a full series would launch in 2021 but, as of September, the couple have only released one holiday special in December which featured their son Archie and Elton John.  
It is not clear if the couple are recording their New York City trip as part of their contract with Netflix or Spotify - or as another commercial venture. The couple has not publicly announced plans to televise their trip to the Big Apple.
However, much of their visit has largely been kept under wraps with the purpose and contents of their closed-door meetings with lawmakers and officials being closely guarded.

from the DM


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Harry's secret mic? Tell-tale wire suggests couple are recording their New York visit as part of multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify deals *
> Prince Harry appeared to be sporting a secret mic during his visit with Meghan Markle to an iconic Harlem soul food joint Friday, in a sign the couple may have been recording their New York tour as part of their multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify contracts.
> A tell-tale wire was spotted poking out from underneath the prince's shirt and trailing into his chino pocket as he leaned forward to hug Melba restaurant owner Melba Wilson that afternoon.
> Other photos taken of the couple's outing Friday - first to a Harlem school and then onto the local food joint - also suggest Harry was wearing a wire.
> He wore his long-sleeved polo shirt open, revealing a sneak peak of what appeared to be a dark wire around his neck.
> Meghan, 40, meanwhile has sported unusually heavy, long coats for all of their engagements during their New York City tour, hiding any mic system from view.
> The couple has been working to carve out careers in Hollywood since quitting their roles as senior working members of the royal family last January.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They founded production company Archewell Productions and struck a five-year deal with Netflix in the fall, rumored to be worth around $100 million.
> In December, they announced an exclusive deal - worth an estimated $25 million  -with Spotify for their Archewell Audio podcast, which they said would include podcasts and programming 'that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world.'
> 
> Spotify said a full series would launch in 2021 but, as of September, the couple have only released one holiday special in December which featured their son Archie and Elton John.
> It is not clear if the couple are recording their New York City trip as part of their contract with Netflix or Spotify - or as another commercial venture. The couple has not publicly announced plans to televise their trip to the Big Apple.
> However, much of their visit has largely been kept under wraps with the purpose and contents of their closed-door meetings with lawmakers and officials being closely guarded.
> 
> from the DM


Ding Ding Ding!


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Ding Ding Ding!


they are super annoying


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936


Interesting. Even her binder is in her right hand which prevents any handholding. I wonder if she’s just trying to be more like Angelina or Diana who never did any clinging.


----------



## Melocoton

And we have a third coat...in this weather?!  Sorry, couldn't help myself.  I love a good wool/cashmere coat or topper, but it's like 75 in NY today.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> "_Why is he shoving that child away so forcefully!_" One explanation could be that he had already collected enough photos of this event…



People with sophisticated equipment can more precisely capture this, but after multiple repeats this is what I understood and (1)it was definitely not playful and (2) Haz on his own without royal handlers is just a rude bloke. 

He's into a group hug, (off camera, a photographer maybe? outside the group is asking some kids "Where were you born and raised?")

One of the children in front of Haz is audibly whimpering, Haz leans down and asks, "So what happened to you? Looks like you got blood on..'" Unintelligible, then "damn it,"  pushes kids away with an assertive "NO."


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> One of the children in front of Haz is audibly whimpering, Haz leans down and asks, "So what happened to you? Looks like you got blood on..'" Unintelligible, then "damn it,"  pushes kids away with an assertive "NO."



Wha? Now I don’t know if there is an official protocol on what to do if a kid comes up and starts bleeding on you, put pushing him off probably isn’t it. Then again, maybe Harry didn’t bring multiple changes of clothes and he needed to make one suit last a whole day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936
> 
> 
> ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap


Same tailor did a bang up job on trouser hems


CarryOn2020 said:


> *Harry's secret mic? Tell-tale wire suggests couple are recording their New York visit as part of multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify deals *
> Prince Harry appeared to be sporting a secret mic during his visit with Meghan Markle to an iconic Harlem soul food joint Friday, in a sign the couple may have been recording their New York tour as part of their multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify contracts.
> A tell-tale wire was spotted poking out from underneath the prince's shirt and trailing into his chino pocket as he leaned forward to hug Melba restaurant owner Melba Wilson that afternoon.
> Other photos taken of the couple's outing Friday - first to a Harlem school and then onto the local food joint - also suggest Harry was wearing a wire.
> He wore his long-sleeved polo shirt open, revealing a sneak peak of what appeared to be a dark wire around his neck.
> Meghan, 40, meanwhile has sported unusually heavy, long coats for all of their engagements during their New York City tour, hiding any mic system from view.
> The couple has been working to carve out careers in Hollywood since quitting their roles as senior working members of the royal family last January.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They founded production company Archewell Productions and struck a five-year deal with Netflix in the fall, rumored to be worth around $100 million.
> In December, they announced an exclusive deal - worth an estimated $25 million  -with Spotify for their Archewell Audio podcast, which they said would include podcasts and programming 'that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world.'
> 
> Spotify said a full series would launch in 2021 but, as of September, the couple have only released one holiday special in December which featured their son Archie and Elton John.
> It is not clear if the couple are recording their New York City trip as part of their contract with Netflix or Spotify - or as another commercial venture. The couple has not publicly announced plans to televise their trip to the Big Apple.
> However, much of their visit has largely been kept under wraps with the purpose and contents of their closed-door meetings with lawmakers and officials being closely guarded.
> 
> from the DM


Secret mics ?  that would explain jackets for her in the sweltering weather
Of course, jackets are also de rigeur if you are concealed carrying


----------



## bag-mania

Is the purpose of the New York trip to give them material to give the biographer since everything else they’ve done went into Finding Freedom?


----------



## purseinsanity

SDinTO said:


> Why did they make a commitment to donate, and not just donate while they were there?  Couldn’t they have just written a cheque and presented it?  Are they really planning on donating?


Publicity.  Yes.  No.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Wha? Now I don’t know if there is an official protocol on what to do if a kid comes up and starts bleeding on you, put pushing him off probably isn’t it. *Then again, maybe Harry didn’t bring multiple changes of clothes and he needed to make one suit last a whole day.*


It's a kid, no excuses for pushing him off. He can always buy new clothes.
Very rude...


----------



## cat1234

I’m so confused about these coats.   Do they make her feel thinner or more powerful?   It’s a beautiful day in NY.


----------



## marietouchet

Suddenly, it came to me, ewwww, it is UN  General Assembly week in NYC, the worst time of year to visit.

I managed 5 years in a row to be in NYC during that week, city is overflowing with everyone's security details, obnoxious people who shove you out of the way. 
Traffic jams .... everyone is walking in the heat ... cabs and limos are hot ... traffic is rerouted around everything 
Have even had my midtown hotel room requisitioned by some grand high mucky muck, my prepaid room was unavailable at check in, the hotel seemed to think it was OK because they found me a room miles away from where I needed to work - Canal St ??

I cant think of a better time fro H&M to be there enjoying the sites, wearing wool

I did notice harry put on his brown suede shoes to go to school


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> People with sophisticated equipment can more precisely capture this, but after multiple repeats this is what I understood and (1)it was definitely not playful and (2) Haz on his own without royal handlers is just a rude bloke.
> 
> He's into a group hug, (off camera, a photographer maybe? outside the group is asking some kids "Where were you born and raised?")
> 
> One of the children in front of Haz is audibly whimpering, Haz leans down and asks, "So what happened to you? Looks like you got blood on..'" Unintelligible, then "damn it,"  pushes kids away with an assertive "NO."


Thanks for doing this. Here is another video of the event.  Someone (a photographer?) is shouting "officer you are blocking the shot…"  Let's make sure we don't miss any of the photo opportunities…


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Wha? Now I don’t know if there is an official protocol on what to do if a kid comes up and starts bleeding on you, put pushing him off probably isn’t it. Then again, maybe Harry didn’t bring multiple changes of clothes and he needed to make one suit last a whole day.


This was the jeans and polo shirt, flash your knickers photo stop at the school.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936
> 
> 
> ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap



What’s with the pants pulled up so high. Bunches of fabric in the crotch… Looks awful.


----------



## charlottawill

cat1234 said:


> I’m so confused about these coats.   Do they make her feel thinner or more powerful?   It’s a beautiful day in NY.


Both. Also, I think she is influenced by powerful women like Hillary *******, *************, etc. who are known for wearing pantsuits. It's not an accident that she is wearing pants on the Time cover.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Wha? Now I don’t know if there is an official protocol on what to do if a kid comes up and starts bleeding on you, put pushing him off probably isn’t it. Then again, maybe Harry didn’t bring multiple changes of clothes and he needed to make one suit last a whole day.


apparently he didn't inherit her mother's empathetic traits
funny since he like to use her memory so much


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> The DM article on the subject. Tons of photo-Ops as anticipated. JLo style? The all thing is absurd!
> View attachment 5202690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit One World Trade Center Observatory
> 
> 
> The Sussexes met with US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield at 50 UN Plaza Thursday afternoon for a 'wonderful' and 'important discussion' on COVID-19, racial justice and mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





1st question- Why are they both dressed like they are going to a funeral in the middle of Winter?
2nd question- Why on earth are they parading around New York pretending to still be working members of the BRF? 
You gave it up, you quit, you walked away. So maybe for once try shutting your mouth and staying at home to live your pRiVaTe LiVeS. 
I get that Americans don't have a RF and might not fully understand the ins and outs of their purpose/how it operates and the fact that these two aren't representing them anymore, but it wouldn't take long for all involved in arranging this to do a quick Google search or make some phone calls to find out why this type of 'privileged pat-me-on-the-back-aren't-I-great tour' is inappropriate. 
In fact, it looks like an insult to the BRF.
It's embarrassing to see all these 'important' people (Mayor, Governor, US Ambassador to UN) entertaining and fawning all over these two opportunistic twits. It's f**king gross.
This is a great example of why they should have their royal titles stripped from them (obv not the Prince title for JCMH as that's stuck to him like glue) or at least ban them from using the titles outside of the UK because seeing as they can still use their titles like this, even though they are PRIVATE CITIZENS, it's creating a huge misperception. They are basically parading around using their titles to make money and rub their overinflated egos and people are still treating them like they are _working _Royals.
Lastly, someone should make her realise that turtlenecks do not suit her-at all. They literally erase all traces of her neck. Not flattering.





Chanbal said:


> Interesting, this Marc Benioff is one of the largest donors of Vax Live! Is he a S*nshine client? Well, he seems to be a link in most of the Harkles events…
> View attachment 5200506


Well, well, well...







Chanbal said:


> The Privacy Shy Couple!!!



*'Madam Duchess' *







LittleStar88 said:


> The point is a publicity campaign. They are doing it on behalf of themselves. It must feel so weird to be showing up with nothing of substance to contribute.
> Guessing someone behind the Time magazine cover orchestrated this silly publicity and photo tour.









Chanbal said:


> Another heavy coat for hot weather…
> View attachment 5202961


The comment from 'Vonnie'- spot on! After all, she is playing the 'roll of her life'.
Her ego is exploding from this picture  _""I'm So ImPoRtAnT, don't take my picture, but do take my picture because I arranged for you to take my picture because i'M sO iMpOrtAnT.""_ 
The only one wearing sunglasses inside a basement parking lot where there is no natural light to be seen 







xincinsin said:


> One tweet said: Mayor de Blasio expresses his admiration saying they are wonderful guests and that *the work they are doing is so important for our whole country and our whole world.*
> Possessive and ego-centric, ain't it?





WTF!!!??? That's laughable. 'Work'- they don't know the meaning of the word. They have done absolutely nothing and continue to do absolutely nothing. Mayor de Blasio, you should probably stop talking in public, you're embarrassing yourself.





Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins are you still working tonight?










creme fraiche said:


> I am chuckling into my coffee - a pointless trip to highlight a pointless duo. I am so confused to why they are meeting these people in New York - what precisely can they do and why?  Vaccines for the world?  How will they facilitate this in ways that governments can?  Why the multiple weather inappropriate outfits - do they think that the general public is that gullible and stupid to realise that we cannot be manipulated so easily and they are not as PR savvy as they think they are.
> 
> If they were truly concerned about vaccines, perhaps they should use their voices to encourage people in the country they are currently living in to get vaccinated and move the US from being the 30somethingth in the international vaccine table and falling (with countries like Lithuania and Bhutan higher).  Use your stupid voices to actually make a difference and not just to stroke your fragile, thirsty egos!


----------



## Aminamina

marietouchet said:


> Suddenly, it came to me, ewwww, it is UN  General Assembly week in NYC, the worst time of year to visit.
> 
> I managed 5 years in a row to be in NYC during that week, city is overflowing with everyone's security details, obnoxious people who shove you out of the way.
> Traffic jams .... everyone is walking in the heat ... cabs and limos are hot ... traffic is rerouted around everything
> Have even had my midtown hotel room requisitioned by some grand high mucky muck, my prepaid room was unavailable at check in, the hotel seemed to think it was OK because they found me a room miles away from where I needed to work - Canal St ??
> 
> I cant think of a better time fro H&M to be there enjoying the sites, wearing wool
> 
> I did notice harry put on his brown suede shoes to go to school


New York, New York! NY is the most “sobering” city in the world, IMO. For anyone. But oh, how I hope it does it’s thing on them.
Harry’s brown shoes…in his craft is the overalls equivalent…
ETA: You reminded me of a short film I love “Hotel Bleu” Adore.


----------



## CeeJay

Chloe302225 said:


>



.. and isn't is JUST amazing that she ALWAYS manages to find that camera lens!!!!  This whole STUNT really has me pissed off, especially related to US (the US Tax Payers) having to pay for their security?!?!?!?!  NFW .. that is not going well with me and I plan to write more than a few letters to inquire about this!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *Where has Prince Harry's magazine shoot hair gone? *
> View attachment 5203300
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's hair is 'thinning on top', expert says
> 
> 
> Celebrity hairstylist Tom Smith told FEMAIL Prince Harry's image appeared to be 'noticeably different' in New York today in contrast to his photoshoot for the Time 100 magazine cover.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A mystery for the great…



In the photoshoot (or other picture editing tool) .. in the delete bucket!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Hey!  I'm a Red Sox fan!


.. and likewise when a lone NY Yankees fan is in Fenway Park, -or-  on the street and stupid enough to be wearing that Yankees cap!!!  I could never get that and if I saw it when someone would come into work, I would kindly warn them that they will likely get some serious sh1t once the season got into full swing.  One guy (a very arrogant NY-er) told me to "F#ck Off", so when I heard that he was in a brawl in one of the local bars?!?! .. well, let me just say that I laughed and told him "told 'ya so" .. what a dumb-a$$ the guy was and thank god that he didn't last long in our group!  You want to work in Boston, an office that is loaded with major-league Red Sox fans and cop your NY-attitude?!?! .. nope, that doesn't work!


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> One tweet said: Mayor de Blasio expresses his admiration saying they are wonderful guests and that the work they are doing is so important for our whole country and our whole world.
> 
> Possessive and ego-centric, ain't it?


He's a FIRST-CLASS BOZO .. he is not running for Mayor because, frankly .. he would NEVER win again!


----------



## CeeJay

VickyB said:


> I don’t get that”style” at all.  Who came up with that? It looks like people were too lazy to hem properly.


Victoria Beckham (I believe) is the one who started this trend; I think it is not only ridiculous but dangerous (tripping over your pants) and disgusting because .. truly, how long are those pants going to last when being dragged all around city streets and the "crap" on the bottom .. UGGH!!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Private jet, brought their own photographer, federal protection… I had enough!   Goodnight!
> View attachment 5203367
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan getting security from the Secret Service?
> 
> 
> The bodyguard, dressed in a smart grey suit and black wingtips that had been resoled with comfortable sneaker soles, was spotted outside the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan on Thursday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Having lived & worked in DC and knowing more than a few Secret Service individuals, I can tell you that they try to dress very inconspicuously in order to not draw attention to what they do.  Now, the ones that do the President's detail .. a little different because they will have the "equipment" (ear bud, chest protector & sling [for their gun], etc.) .. so, their suits are always cut a little bigger to accommodate the equipment.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Both. Also, I think she is influenced by powerful women like Hillary *******, *************, etc. who are known for wearing pantsuits. It's not an accident that she is wearing pants on the Time cover.


 These women (like them or not) put a lot of effort into becoming powerful. Different from marrying someone from a very famous family and hiring a very powerful and costly PR agency…


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> yes, I'm ready for the "Fall" weather we're supposed to have next week


HA!!! .. you know, being from back East, when I see people bundled all up out here in LA, I just crack up.  Or - better?!?! .. a gal with a Tank Top on, leggings and those Ugg boots .. seriously?!!? ... when the weather is still in the 70's??????  Now I get why, when going to the grocery store back in Boston, I could tell in an instant who was from either a Southern State or from a warm Western state .. because the WHINING about how COLD it was .. when it was 40 degrees!!!  Let me tell you, for a native Bostonian, 40 degrees was like a springtime temp!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

She opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.








						Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
					

The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## TC1

Recording devices seem to add up..because a phony diplomatic visit doesn't. You had a chance to do so on behalf of HMTQ and couldn't deal with all the work involved. LOLLLLLL


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> If she goes out and dresses like that today I will absolutely die laughing.  I’m in Boston and it’s 79 degrees and 87% humidity.  I’ll too warm in my sleeveless tee.


Oh god .. you just made me sweat .. HA HA HA!!!  Yeah, that is big-time summah weatha (#bahstontawk) for Bahston!  Although, my favorite month of October is coming up (too quickly IMO), and I literally LIVED for that month when living in Boston because the humidity dropped, but still nice sunny days (sometimes Indian summer) and cool nights and that FOLIAGE!!!  I can't even say how much I miss that Fall Foliage and when still working for a Boston company, I always made sure to book a trip in the Fall so that I could get my "fix"!  Miss the seafood, Irish Bars, my friends & colleagues, the history & architecture .. but just can't live there anymore given my very bad osteoarthritis!  Also miss those accents .. used to crack me up sometimes: 

Water Bubbler = bubbla 
Water = wata 
Car Keys = kahkees 
Harvard = hahvard 
Boston = bahston 
I could go on and some Boston friends and I make sure to use our #bahstontawk when posting things on Instagram .. too funny!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Why are they meeting Guterres? They are cashing in the UK titles and TIME 100. This is so wrong!
> View attachment 5204843
> 
> _Meghan Markle__ and Prince Harry have arrived at the United Nations to meet with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as they kicked off the last day of their New York City tour, which will culminate in their appearance at Global Citizen Live._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She used to wear ill-fitting dresses and now it's sweeper pants everyday     




cat1234 said:


> I’m so confused about these coats.   Do they make her feel thinner or more powerful?   It’s a beautiful day in NY.



Melania wore a lot of coats but even she doesn't wear a wool coat in 70°F+ temperature. Miscreant Megnut must be sick if she needs that much warmth  




CeeJay said:


> In the photoshoot (or other picture editing tool) .. in the delete bucket!!!



Or the toupee is clogging one of their 16 bathrooms


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> She opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205159


I would be dying in that unless it was less than forty degrees. But let's give her some credit, she is carrying a Lady Bag. Which was popularized by his mother in the 90s.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CeeJay said:


> *their suits are always cut a little bigger to accommodate the equipment.*



Somehow I managed to have xxx thoughts 




CarryOn2020 said:


> She opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205159



Uh did she have a neck surgery, tattoo or hickey to hide? And what's with the rolled up coat sleeves? I saw the same in the camel/tan/brown coat pictures too. She really cannot decide if she wants to be formal or casual.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> She opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205159



She looks like a total fool In a winter coat and scarf in this weather.

She couldn’t send someone off to bring a new rack of weather-appropriate clothing to choose from?


----------



## VickyB

csshopper said:


> People with sophisticated equipment can more precisely capture this, but after multiple repeats this is what I understood and (1)it was definitely not playful and (2) Haz on his own without royal handlers is just a rude bloke.
> 
> He's into a group hug, (off camera, a photographer maybe? outside the group is asking some kids "Where were you born and raised?")
> 
> One of the children in front of Haz is audibly whimpering, Haz leans down and asks, "So what happened to you? Looks like you got blood on..'" Unintelligible, then "damn it,"  pushes kids away with an assertive "NO."


That is such an odd clip.  Why is he aggressively pushing away that child?


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> He's a FIRST-CLASS BOZO .. he is not running for Mayor because, frankly .. he would NEVER win again!


Oh, I'm sure we haven't heard the last of Warren Wilhelm,Jr yet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Somehow I managed to have xxx thoughts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh did she have a neck surgery, tattoo or hickey to hide? And what's with the rolled up coat sleeves? I saw the same in the camel/tan/brown coat pictures too. She really cannot decide if she wants to be formal or casual.


I think she is hot and uncomfortable in winter attire .. the big fat coats hide her figure, which she should not be ashamed of, but, I think she is deliberately trying to hide the weight gain so she leaves the coats on
This is all for the cameras not her comfort
I think she took off the read jacket when book reading, when her middle was hidden
First day,  she changed out of the navy pants, put on a turtleneck dress and camel hair coat but was carrying the coat by the end of the day
If we are right about hidden mics, then surely these scenes will be edited with other ones, taken at different times, continuity is all important


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> Victoria Beckham (I believe) is the one who started this trend; I think it is not only ridiculous but dangerous (tripping over your pants) and disgusting because .. truly, how long are those pants going to last when being dragged all around city streets and the "crap" on the bottom .. UGGH!!!!!



…not to mention the dry cleaning impact on the environment in the meantime, which the eco warriors must care so much about.


----------



## VickyB

This will sound nuts but could she be pregnant again?


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was the point of this “tour”?  They brought their own hair, makeup, photogs, etc.  Why?  Something very suspicious about the entire “tour”. They aren’t stars and they aren’t working royals. So why? The concert is tonight. Fingers crossed, there are no more virtue-signaling ‘events’.
> 
> Whatever the reason, they’ve proven themselves to be worse than Wallis and Ed.  Hazzie, a grown man, showing the young ladies his underpants is disgusting for so many reasons. He may not be a working royal, but he is trading off of his royal status.  The BRF needs to put a stop to this nonsense.


Sunshine Sucks begged everyone else and NY City was the only one who didn’t say “NO!!!”

So much horror on the eyes during these last few days ... hasn’t New York already been tortured enough?!?


----------



## CarryOn2020

VickyB said:


> This will sound nuts but could she be pregnant again?



Yep, I’m thinking H&M were mocking all of us who said she still had baby weight. Tonight they will reveal the new pregnancy. 
How disgusting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry take to stage at concert in New York
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have stepped out on stage at a concert to promote Covid vaccine equity.




					www.express.co.uk
				




“Earlier on Saturday, the Sussexes had a meeting with the *UN's Deputy Secretary-General.”*


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> She opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205159


Muffled up to the eyeballs but bare legged!


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5205214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry take to stage at concert in New York
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have stepped out on stage at a concert to promote Covid vaccine equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Earlier on Saturday, the Sussexes had a meeting with the *UN's Deputy Secretary-General.”*


I actually like this dress on her. However, she has extended her streak of NYC fashion faux pas by wearing white after Labor Day. I told a friend earlier today all she needed was to wear white for her concert appearance to round out her nyc run of inappropriate attire


----------



## carmen56

Re ‘Madame Duchess’ - I checked up on the correct mode of address for a Duke and Duchess, including those who are not HRHs, and it is ‘Your Grace.’  

And just as another aside, I fervently hope that when Lady Louise (Sophie and Edward’s daughter) turns 18 in November, she elects to take the title of Princess as she is entitled to do, if only to put Raptor’s nose out of joint!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for doing this. Here is another video of the event.  Someone (a photographer?) is shouting "officer you are blocking the shot…"  Let's make sure we don't miss any of the photo opportunities…



The self importance is off the charts.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> HA!!! .. you know, being from back East, when I see people bundled all up out here in LA, I just crack up.  Or - better?!?! .. a gal with a Tank Top on, leggings and those Ugg boots .. seriously?!!? ... when the weather is still in the 70's??????  Now I get why, when going to the grocery store back in Boston, I could tell in an instant who was from either a Southern State or from a warm Western state .. because the WHINING about how COLD it was .. when it was 40 degrees!!!  Let me tell you, for a native Bostonian, 40 degrees was like a springtime temp!!!


this is a pet peeve of my DH.  seeing people wearing "winter" clothing - like a leather jacket because it's Fall - but it's still quite warm


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> The self importance is off the charts.



Look at this - HarrysGraySuit is now open but not others. The lawyers have been busy.


----------



## purseinsanity

carmen56 said:


> Re ‘Madame Duchess’ - I checked up on the correct mode of address for a Duke and Duchess, including those who are not HRHs, and it is ‘Your Grace.’
> 
> And just as another aside, I fervently hope that when Lady Louise (Sophie and Edward’s daughter) turns 18 in November, she elects to take the title of Princess as she is entitled to do, if only to put Raptor’s nose out of joint!


Something tells me she won't though.


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Victoria Beckham (I believe) is the one who started this trend; I think it is not only ridiculous but dangerous (tripping over your pants) and disgusting because .. truly, how long are those pants going to last when being dragged all around city streets and the "crap" on the bottom .. UGGH!!!!!


What I wouldn't give to see Raptor trip and fall onto her new face on the concrete sidewalks of NYC!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> She opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205159


That coat makes her look like she got butt implants.  And she's carrying a Lady Dior?  "Diana's favorite bag"??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Victoria Beckham (I believe) is the one who started this trend; I think it is not only ridiculous but dangerous (tripping over your pants) and disgusting because .. truly, how long are those pants going to last when being dragged all around city streets and the "crap" on the bottom .. UGGH!!!!!


guess they don't have to last....someone will give her another pair


----------



## purseinsanity

We are on page 5000!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5205214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry take to stage at concert in New York
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have stepped out on stage at a concert to promote Covid vaccine equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Earlier on Saturday, the Sussexes had a meeting with the *UN's Deputy Secretary-General.”*
> 
> View attachment 5205216


The return of the damn tendrils.


----------



## needlv

I’m surprised MM hasn’t asked H to buy her these…






						Queen Marie-Antoinette's Diamonds for Sale in Geneva
					






					www.christies.com


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> _Ladies, get your vomit buckets ready..._
> *Meghan Markle Reads Her Book to Harlem Schoolchildren (and Prince Harry!) as They Continue NYC Visit
> 
> Prince Harry sat with the kids on the ground as Meghan told them, "I haven't read it to any other kids but you"*
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry continued their visit to New York City on Friday with some of the city's young residents.
> The couple joined NYC Schools Chancellor Meisha Porter at P.S. 123 Mahalia Jackson School in Harlem. To promote early literary,
> 
> Meghan read her children's book _The Bench_ to a group of schoolchildren in second grade gathered outside. Prince Harry joined the kids on the ground, sitting among them as Meghan read the story.
> 
> "I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you!" she told them.
> 
> Meghan dedicated her book to "the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump," and she told the children that the phrase came from teaching 2-year-old son Archie how the heart works.
> 
> She also explained, "The idea of representation — 'That looks like me!' — I wanted everyone to be included in this book."
> 
> The children drew Meghan and Prince Harry pink paper hearts with their personal stories and dedications on them, and Meghan went through them and engaged with the students by name.
> 
> Meghan gave out lots of hugs, with some young girls so excited to speak with her that they wiped away tears.
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Prince Harry, 37, were shown around the school by Principal Melitina Hernandez and two student ambassadors, including seeing a mural painted by fourth and fifth grade pupils.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also donated two garden boxes filled with vegetables and herbs to support the school's ongoing community efforts and support the need for fresh food.
> 
> Through Meghan and Harry's Archewell Foundation's partnership with Proctor & Gamble, they are also providing health products for families at the school as well as a washing machine and dryer for students' uniforms.
> View attachment 5203820
> 
> Read more: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-reads-book-harlem-school-children-nyc-visit-prince-harry/


MM's sole reason for this appearance:


Such a sloppy, matronly outfit. That centre parting in her hair is not flattering, neither is the orange makeup.





le_junkie said:


> Ron Burgundy called. He wants his suit back.
> 
> View attachment 5204015
> View attachment 5204016










CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM,
> Not seeing happiness and love in those eyes…
> View attachment 5204252


Going from working Prince of the BRF to being his Z-lister wife's fan-boy. Being forced to sit on the ground with a bunch of schoolkids while his wife takes centerstage and reads her word-salad-for-kids.







youngster said:


> If they were still full time working members of the BRF, I wouldn't have a problem with a visit like this to an elementary school.  That's what they do: visit schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc., though obviously the visits occur almost always in the UK.  (I guess royals have occasionally visited similar places in the U.S. as well on official visits.)
> 
> But, these two aren't full time working royals.  They aren't on an official visit to the U.S. They are money making for themselves and themselves only.  That book's profits are going into their pockets.  So, while I guess the parents and administrators are happy for whatever donation comes to the school and went along with this, I personally would be pretty ticked off if my kid went to school there.  They swoop in and use these kids as props for their PR event and to generate additional book sales for themselves.





Well said. It needs to be repeated.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, please post the check when it arrives
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry enjoy date at Harlem restaurant and make $25K donation
> 
> 
> The Sussexes headed to local Harlem soul food restaurant Melba's for a bite to eat on Friday afternoon. Prince Harry tried chicken & waffles for the first time declaring the dish to be 'delicious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5204434
> 
> He looks a tad hungover here, no? Or is he having a meltdown?





She is just so disingenuous to look at, literally can not hide it from her face. Her _acting _sincere is so fake, shame some people can't see that.




Chanbal said:


> If the event in NYC doesn't bring plenty of $$$$, they will need to visit the UK asap…
> View attachment 5204828


Members of the RF:







Chanbal said:


> Why are they meeting Guterres? They are cashing in the UK titles and TIME 100. This is so wrong!
> View attachment 5204843
> 
> _Meghan Markle__ and Prince Harry have arrived at the United Nations to meet with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as they kicked off the last day of their New York City tour, which will culminate in their appearance at Global Citizen Live._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think every time she makes any type of public appearance, in her head she is imagining herself like this:






CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936
> 
> 
> ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap


What's with the wool coats?   Could she not just wear a nice longline suit jacket/blazer if she wants to cover her behind. Which is what I'm guessing she's doing. Lots of celebs have done that after giving birth. There are less obvious ways to cover up if that's what they want. Wearing wool coats and knitwear in very warm weather isn't it 




CarryOn2020 said:


> *Harry's secret mic? Tell-tale wire suggests couple are recording their New York visit as part of multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify deals *
> Prince Harry appeared to be sporting a secret mic during his visit with Meghan Markle to an iconic Harlem soul food joint Friday, in a sign the couple may have been recording their New York tour as part of their multi-million dollar Netflix and Spotify contracts.
> A tell-tale wire was spotted poking out from underneath the prince's shirt and trailing into his chino pocket as he leaned forward to hug Melba restaurant owner Melba Wilson that afternoon.
> Other photos taken of the couple's outing Friday - first to a Harlem school and then onto the local food joint - also suggest Harry was wearing a wire.
> He wore his long-sleeved polo shirt open, revealing a sneak peak of what appeared to be a dark wire around his neck.
> Meghan, 40, meanwhile has sported unusually heavy, long coats for all of their engagements during their New York City tour, hiding any mic system from view.
> The couple has been working to carve out careers in Hollywood since quitting their roles as senior working members of the royal family last January.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They founded production company Archewell Productions and struck a five-year deal with Netflix in the fall, rumored to be worth around $100 million.
> In December, they announced an exclusive deal - worth an estimated $25 million  -with Spotify for their Archewell Audio podcast, which they said would include podcasts and programming 'that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world.'
> 
> Spotify said a full series would launch in 2021 but, as of September, the couple have only released one holiday special in December which featured their son Archie and Elton John.
> It is not clear if the couple are recording their New York City trip as part of their contract with Netflix or Spotify - or as another commercial venture. The couple has not publicly announced plans to televise their trip to the Big Apple.
> However, much of their visit has largely been kept under wraps with the purpose and contents of their closed-door meetings with lawmakers and officials being closely guarded.
> 
> from the DM





If this is true, I hope they are being upfront about it to the people they are recording because that is a major invasion of privacy if not. Could see them being sued for that.


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> We are on page 5000!!!


----------



## DoggieBags

Lounorada said:


> MM's sole reason for this appearance:
> View attachment 5205108
> 
> Such a sloppy, matronly outfit. That centre parting in her hair is not flattering, neither is the orange makeup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205137
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Going from working Prince of the BRF to being his Z-lister wife's fan-boy. Being forced to sit on the ground with a bunch of schoolkids while his wife takes centerstage and reads her word-salad-for-kids.
> View attachment 5205139
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205140
> 
> Well said. It needs to be repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205230
> 
> She is just so disingenuous to look at, literally can not hide it from her face. Her _acting _sincere is so fake, shame some people can't see that.
> 
> 
> 
> Members of the RF:
> View attachment 5205146
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think every time she makes any type of public appearance, in her head she is imagining herself like this:
> View attachment 5205148
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's with the wool coats?   Could she not just wear a nice longline suit jacket/blazer if she wants to cover her behind. Which is what I'm guessing she's doing. Lots of celebs have done that after giving birth. There are less obvious ways to cover up if that's what they want. Wearing wool coats and knitwear in very warm weather isn't it
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5205151
> 
> If this is true, I hope they are being upfront about it to the people they are recording because that is a major invasion of privacy if not. Could see them being sued for that.


NY is a one party consent state so it’s my understanding that as long as Harry is a party to the conversation he can record the conversation without the other party’s knowledge or consent. The law varies from state to state though.


----------



## Lounorada

DoggieBags said:


> NY is a one party consent state so it’s my understanding that as long as Harry is a party to the conversation he can record the conversation without the other party’s knowledge or consent. The law varies from state to state though.


Ohhh, really? That would be so shady of them if that is what they are doing, knowing that they wouldn't need consent or need to inform the other party that they are recording them (if that's what the wire is for).


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5205214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry take to stage at concert in New York
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have stepped out on stage at a concert to promote Covid vaccine equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Earlier on Saturday, the Sussexes had a meeting with the *UN's Deputy Secretary-General.”*
> 
> View attachment 5205216


So much better than the deep winter clothing, but still so odd - and why is the Duke and Duchess of Sucks meeting with the UN’s Deputy Secretary General (even though it is just the Deputy ha ha)?!?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh, shade, major shade!
Cyndi Lauper - she also mentioned people who “like to rattle their jewelry”












						The Time the Beatles Mocked the Royal Family to Their Faces
					

Brow Beat is following the Beatles in “real time,” 50 years later, from their first chart-topper to their final rooftop concert. Fifty years ago today,...




					slate.com


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, shade, major shade!
> Cyndi Lauper - she also mentioned people who “like to rattle their jewelry”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Time the Beatles Mocked the Royal Family to Their Faces
> 
> 
> Brow Beat is following the Beatles in “real time,” 50 years later, from their first chart-topper to their final rooftop concert. Fifty years ago today,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com



Love Cyndi Lauper - and she can sing live. But where was the shade?  I missed it.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


>



I wish she'd fix the collar and lapel of her coats.  They always look askew.  And those pants don't work on anyone if they're trying to hide a belly.  That closure makes people without a belly look like they have one!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tell it like it is, Angela.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5205214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry take to stage at concert in New York
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have stepped out on stage at a concert to promote Covid vaccine equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Earlier on Saturday, the Sussexes had a meeting with the *UN's Deputy Secretary-General.”*
> 
> View attachment 5205216



I must give it to her, after all the fashion faux pas that she has committed, this is actually a nice outfit. However, it kinda looks like she worn ill-fitting shapewear underneath the cute dress


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Love Cyndi Lauper - and she can sing live. But where was the shade?  I missed it.



Before Cyndi started her set, she said she knew there were people in attendance who liked to rattle their jewelry.  MM in her blood diamonds, perhaps? The link above explains the phrase in detail.

In 1963, at one of the first royal performances of the Beatles, John Lennon said:
“Those of you in the cheap seats, please clap.
The rest, rattle your jewelry.”

Camera landed on the Queen Mother, decked out in diamond tiara, diamond necklace, etc.  Again, the year was 1963. The world was on the brink of disaster.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

VickyB said:


> That is such an odd clip.  Why is he aggressively pushing away that child?



After watching it a few times I thought it looked like he was gently ticking them. If you watch his fingers it looks like he’s tickling them like you do with little toddlers or kids when playing with them. Maybe not?? I just hate to think he’s actually pushing them away


----------



## CarryOn2020

Again, she manages to make expensive clothing look cheap.
- The wrong undergarments, shaking my head.
 - The silly JLo entrance, tsk tsk.  Thing is when JLo takes her coat off, she has a rockin body underneath. MM, not so much.
- this outfit would have looked so much better in the rock studs - stilettos are so yesterday 
- Hazzie looks a bit puffy - alcohol? illness?

IMO


----------



## coldbrewcoffeekate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, I’m thinking H&M were mocking all of us who said she still had baby weight. Tonight they will reveal the new pregnancy.
> How disgusting.


What’s disgusting?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s with the pants pulled up so high. Bunches of fabric in the crotch… Looks awful.



So it's not just me. I thought these pants did not look high-waisted. Or maybe it's just her special talent of making everything look awful. Like...how. Other people with non-supermodel bodies manage to wear clothes well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

coldbrewcoffeekate said:


> What’s disgusting?



Mocking all of us?  Why treat people you want money from so disrespectfully?  Why put on this faux royal show? Why block streets? Why the camera crew?

IMO that is truly disgusting.   Ymmv.
‘Honesty is the best policy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I unfortunately also have a squareish torso like Meg, and the one thing I have learned over the years is that I can never ever ever wear a belted coat or dress. She’s had all the help in the world, and can’t seem to follow this rule


----------



## AbbytheBT

Chloe302225 said:


>




Wow - I hate to say how much this reminds me of how cruel the 70s were to short waisted women. Both my mother and I are short waisted with thicker middles - and even in our prime size 10 years were so disappointed in how pics of us in pleated pants and silky blouses made us look dumpy  - lol 

Made thoses mistake over and over again until we figured out smooth fronts and petite sizing blouses. My mother looked fab in empire shifts/princess lines of the 60s - and did her own tailoring then - but those squished/sloppy looks of pleated pants with tucked in blouses would never look good. Tummy Pleats have been banned from my wardrobe for 30 years now - Lol 

So many many wardrobe mistakes i see her make - Shirtdresses are soooo much more flattering for her torso and would have been perfect for the weather!


----------



## zinacef

None of the favorite strapless bras this week—- baby steps, c’mon y’all!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> The return of the damn tendrils.



My thought as well when I saw the picture. And the da*n handholding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

AbbytheBT said:


> Wow - I hate to say how much this reminds me of how cruel the 70s were to short waisted women. Both my mother and I are short waisted with thicker middles - and even in our prime size 10 years were so disappointed in how pics of us in pleated pants and silky blouses made us look dumpy  - lol
> 
> Made thoses mistake over and over again until we figured out smooth fronts and petite sizing blouses. My mother looked fab in empire shifts/princess lines of the 60s - and did her own tailoring then - but those squished/sloppy looks of pleated pants with tucked in blouses would never look good. Tummy Pleats have been banned from my wardrobe for 30 years now - Lol
> 
> So many many wardrobe mistakes i see her make - Shirtdresses are soooo much more flattering for her torso and would have been perfect for the weather!



100% agree.
‘As others have said, she makes no effort to tidy the shirt or coat’s collar, line the shirt buttons up with pant’s zipper.  Did Max Mara intend for these pieces to be worn together or is my screen acting up? The colors don’t seem to match.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I unfortunately also have a squareish torso like Meg, and the one thing I have learned over the years is that I can never ever ever wear a belted coat or dress. She’s had all the help in the world, and can’t seem to follow this rule



I’m not sure it is a flattering look for most women.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

AbbytheBT said:


> So many many wardrobe mistakes i see her make - Shirtdresses are soooo much more flattering for her torso and would have been perfect for the weather!



But she meant business and had to power-dress!


----------



## CarryOn2020

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> After watching it a few times I thought it looked like he was gently ticking them. If you watch his fingers it looks like he’s tickling them like you do with little toddlers or kids when playing with them. Maybe not?? I just hate to think he’s actually pushing them away



In today’s world, no one should tickle another person’s child.  Way too many issues.
ETA: to my eye, I see a grown man letting small girls tightly hug his lower body. Then, he pushes them away.  I do hope someone had a word with him. His imperialistic ways won’t work on these shores.


----------



## AbbytheBT

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But she meant business and had to power-dress!


A DVF wrap dress and one button fitted (altered to fit - lol) lighter weight blazer then. My goodness - SO many classic elegant business looks out there to choose from for her body shape.


----------



## octopus17

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy couple?
> It is worth noting that space between them has grown. The clinging seems to have stopped, maybe.
> 
> View attachment 5204936
> 
> 
> ETA:  It takes a special talent for someone to make a Max Mara coat look cheap


And again DH had something to say about this after browsing the papers online - "Nothing seems to fit her".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

AbbytheBT said:


> A DVF wrap dress and one button fitted (altered to fit - lol) lighter weight blazer then. My goodness - SO many classic elegant business looks out there to choose from for her body shape.



I'm with you, but that woman has the weirdest ideas about stuff and will go through with it however ridiculous. The few months she tried her hands on being a royal I was always fascinated how she seemed to act out her fantasy of what she thought a royal was like the whole time.


----------



## Yanca

CarryOn2020 said:


> They will be mocked, criticized and mercilessly ridiculed.  They can silence some twitter accounts, but they cannot silence all of us.
> Hope they get booed at this concert.




I read Murky Megs twitter and she does not post bile, threathening or harassament, just facts about the Harkles hypocrisy, I was wondering if it's Megain herself who used her privelege again to  have this account  suspended since it ws recently verified. I wonder what reason she used this time? did she reach out to Twitter as a woman and as a mother like she did in ITV against Piers?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Before Cyndi started her set, she said she knew there were people in attendance who liked to rattle their jewelry.  MM in her blood diamonds, perhaps? The link above explains the phrase in detail.
> 
> In 1963, at one of the first royal performances of the Beatles, John Lennon said:
> “Those of you in the cheap seats, please clap.
> The rest, rattle your jewelry.”
> 
> Camera landed on the Queen Mother, decked out in diamond tiara, diamond necklace, etc.  Again, the year was 1963. The world was on the brink of disaster.


Thanks!


Yanca said:


> I read Murky Megs twitter and she does not post bile, thretening or harassament, just facts about the Harkles hypocrisy, I was wondering if it's Megain herself who used her privelege again to  have this accoutn suspended since it ws recently verified. I wonder what reason she used this time? did she reach out to Twitter as a woman and as a mother like she did in ITV against Piers?


I was also curious as to why she was suspended from Twitter.

The Harkles seem to have lost that star power they held for a minute, especially when in the UK.  I do think they had it once but it appears to be gone. Just two regular folks now.


----------



## Chanbal

They didn't need to travel to NYC (and exacerbate the carbon footprint) to participate in the GC event, this event is happening also in LA today. Though, they needed to pretend they are world leaders with important roles in the United Nations.  Disgusting!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Thanks!
> 
> I was also curious as to why she was suspended from Twitter.
> 
> The Harkles seem to have lost that star power they held for a minute, especially when in the UK.  I do think they had it once but it appears to be gone. Just two regular folks now.



I think I read somewhere that for verified accounts it is against twitter TOS to change an image. She posted the Time 100 doctored images.  I have no idea if true, I do not have a twitter account (no Fbook either).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> Normal women don’t have the resources she has so I will cut her less slack. But she does look like she gave birth right? So… no surrogate?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, Hasbeen has that look of a man in love with* Merchalot*.
> 
> Can’t help thinking that she has a deal to merch all the upcoming winter coats hence  the bizarre selection for the trip.



 Thanks @Icyjade for the nickname Merchalot. Yes, Merchalot is the epitome of M and vice versa. Welcome to The List.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I actually like this dress on her. However, she has extended her streak of NYC fashion faux pas by wearing white after Labor Day. I told a friend earlier today all she needed was to wear white for her concert appearance to round out her nyc run of inappropriate attire


It's no longer a fashion faux pas. But funny that she's wearing a summery dress after winter clothing for several days.


> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/trends/a28691237/white-after-labor-day/


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree.
> ‘As others have said, she makes no effort to tidy the shirt or cost’s collar, line the shirt buttons up with pant’s zipper.  Did Max Mara intend for these pieces to be worn together or is my screen acting up? The colors don’t seem to match.


Who wore it better? Megawatt or these Indian policewomen in their standard issue uniform?


----------



## marietouchet

Chloe302225 said:


>



The Diana bag from Dior


----------



## CarryOn2020

The ruffle blouse!  Now, that’s owning your female power.


----------



## Tootsie17

VickyB said:


> This will sound nuts but could she be pregnant again?


The wicked part of me believes she wants us to see her in the ill- fitting clothes so we will think she was really pregnant and didn't use a surrogate.
Umm...I  wonder.


VickyB said:


> This will sound nuts but could she be pregnant again?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

You guys are SOOOOOOOO on the outfit from two hours ago, who knew GO GO dresses were back?

Pleaseeeeeeeee get on the outfit of the moment

Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City

ps the black satin shoes are dreadful 

https://mol.im/a/10027755


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ruffle blouse!  Now, that’s owning your female power.
> View attachment 5205373


remember when Melania wore a hot pink one and was castigated for wearing a pussy cat blouse , that was only like 2 years ago

ps it takes eons to get my posts right with the help of spelling checkers lol they need to learn the word castigated …


----------



## EverSoElusive

She's not gonna like this! The whole world can see a double chin from this angle


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> She's not gonna like this! The whole world can see a double chin from this angle
> 
> View attachment 5205379


We all get double chins , I can live with that but the 1960s GOGO dress ??? That was optional


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> You guys are SOOOOOOOO on the outfit from two hours ago, who knew GO GO dresses were back?
> 
> Pleaseeeeeeeee get on the outfit of the moment
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> ps the black satin shoes are dreadful
> 
> https://mol.im/a/10027755



is this the one?










						Valentino Embellished Shift Dress
					

Get free shipping and returns on Valentino Embellished Shift Dress at Saks Fifth Avenue. Browse luxury Valentino Cocktail and other new arrivals.




					www.saksfifthavenue.com


----------



## octopus17

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ruffle blouse!  Now, that’s owning your female power.
> View attachment 5205373


I flipping love a ruffle blouse! Unfortunately I couldn't carry it off now but when I was young and thin in the 80's early 90's I would wear ruffle blouses and/or silk blouses over skin tight leggings and ankle boots. I'm a sucker for all that New Romantic/pirate stuff  . However, I have to say I have never given in to a pussycat bow, then or now and advise caution....

I like that camel blouse though...


----------



## Aimee3

Page six (nypost) says prince puke and his pukess are secretly taping their visit for the Netflix documentary.  They brought their own photographer and video person.  You ladies saw those hidden wires first!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> We all get double chins , I can live with that but the 1960s GOGO dress ??? That was optional



I'm sure the double chin doesn't bother us but she's gonna be mad because the photographer didn't take a better picture of her      Hope she's not breaking plates at Carlyle.

Guess I'm in the minority for liking that dress


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cornflower Blue said:


> I flipping love a ruffle blouse! Unfortunately I couldn't carry it off now but when I was young and thin in the 80's early 90's I would wear ruffle blouses and/or silk blouses over skin tight leggings and ankle boots. I'm a sucker for all that New Romantic/pirate stuff  . However, I have to say I have never given in to a pussycat bow, then or now and advise caution....
> 
> I like that camel blouse though...



Me too. _Female power _is not about dressing or acting like a man.
Some American women seem to have misunderstood this important point.

ETA:  Instead of trying to be VB, she should wear shift dresses with short jackets or coat dresses (perhaps Chanel? Catherine Walker?). Those cover a multitude of sins which is why they have lasted for years. When in doubt, go with a classic. 10 years from now, she will look at those long pants and cry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure the double chin doesn't bother us but she's gonna be mad because the photographer didn't take a better picture of her      Hope she's not breaking plates at Carlyle.
> 
> Guess I'm in the minority for liking that dress



The dress is cute. I prefer it with different shoes and better undergarments.  Rock studs say boss chic.  IMO


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> You guys are SOOOOOOOO on the outfit from two hours ago, who knew GO GO dresses were back?
> 
> Pleaseeeeeeeee get on the outfit of the moment
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> ps the black satin shoes are dreadful
> 
> https://mol.im/a/10027755



Whoever chose the title of this DM article has a good sense of humor. 

*Meghan FINALLY sheds her coat on a sweltering day in New York as she and Prince Harry appear on stage at 'Wokestock' in Central Park where they called for COVID-19 'vaccine equity' for the poor countries*











						Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
					

The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> *Rue McClanahan called, she wants her pants suit back as she says M can’t pull it off*:
> View attachment 5204547
> 
> It’s weird since ‘turning 40’ she’s aged her aesthetic up so much considering a couple of months ago she looked like a tarty realtor going clubbing.
> 
> Also, isn’t Harlem pricey these days? Either way it’s a little patronising  to assume these kids are too poor for soap just because they are from a black neighbourhood_ and_ if they are really that deprived it’s cruel to draw attention to it just to demonstrate your _incredible_ largesse. They are basically suggesting they are the ‘great unwashed.’


The Joker agrees with you and he still wants his suit back.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are using Hazzie’s royal connections to keep their names in the news. A couple of phone calls here, some ‘donations’ there, they get all the meetings they want. Don’t they look so impressive fluttering from meeting to meeting?  Especially in their 3/4 caravan Range Rovers? Cameras and security following?  With their notebooks?  Their ‘business‘ attire?  Just like the real royals, no?
> 
> All made for tv.


One of the stans was gushing on Twitter about how professional Methane looks when she is "working". So true. It's all an act. She "looks" professional and that's all there is to her.


----------



## csshopper

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> After watching it a few times I thought it looked like he was gently ticking them. If you watch his fingers it looks like he’s tickling them like you do with little toddlers or kids when playing with them. Maybe not?? I just hate to think he’s actually pushing them away



The whimpering child does not sound happy. From an additional perspective, there is an additional video clip in Post #74980 showing the incident from a slightly different camera angle, Harry can be heard to say after "Stop" (where he pushes a child and then pulls back and thrusts himself to the group again) in an angry tone "...for no fu--ing reason." These are second graders he is interacting with/talking to.

His touching and his language with these children is inappropriate.  He is a man who will not even let his children be photographed, but shamelessly exploits other people's children in international media.  Similarly as with this photo op, the incident planting flowers at the pre school in LA in remembrance of his Mother comes to mind.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> The dress is cute. I prefer it with different shoes and better undergarments.  Rock studs say boss chic.  IMO



Agreed on the undergarments. I must admit I didn't notice her shoes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Well, the crowd cheered for her.  I was surprised.  Thought there might be some jeers.


----------



## AbbytheBT

Chanbal said:


> Whoever chose the title of this DM article has a good sense of humor.
> 
> *Meghan FINALLY sheds her coat on a sweltering day in New York as she and Prince Harry appear on stage at 'Wokestock' in Central Park where they called for COVID-19 'vaccine equity' for the poor countries*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Oooh - I so need to pull the barf emojis  
This is using props for PR gain/marketable footage at the highest levels of greed. 
Honestly no shame - cuz they have not contributed one original idea to help humanity 

Also - anybody in the public eye has someone who is there to make sure (discreetly) that things like messed up coat collars are straightened before walking out to photos. That assistant work is pretty basic. Cannot believe their PR firm let them go out by themselves - lol


----------



## purseinsanity

LOL, (Paid PR) People Magazine used this picture to talk about their appearance.  She looks like she's got 4 chins and a muffin top.  Wonder how long until it's switched out?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t like the white dress.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> You guys are SOOOOOOOO on the outfit from two hours ago, who knew GO GO dresses were back?
> 
> Pleaseeeeeeeee get on the outfit of the moment
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> ps the black satin shoes are dreadful
> 
> https://mol.im/a/10027755



Per Raptor:
*'But if everyone is over it, it's never going to be over with*. There's so much we can do today that can get us closer to ending this pandemic, and that's why we're all here.'

Ummm, say what??


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Whoever chose the title of this DM article has a good sense of humor.
> 
> *Meghan FINALLY sheds her coat on a sweltering day in New York as she and Prince Harry appear on stage at 'Wokestock' in Central Park where they called for COVID-19 'vaccine equity' for the poor countries*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



LOL the article is awesome.  Some of my favorite sentences:


*Meghan appears to have ignored the weather forecast when she packed for their three-day tour of New York City, as the California native has sported a variety of heavy coats throughout the trip *
* Meghan had been wearing a winter clothes for a Saturday afternoon strolled into Central Park for Global Citizen Live. She was wrapped up warm in a heavy coat and scarf despite New York City's 75F heat. *
*Meghan opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the city's summer sun.*
*The couple has already been accused of tone-deaf virtue signaling during their Big Apple tour, where Meghan donned a $7,500 designer pant suit and around $387,000 worth of jewelry to visit children at a Harlem school where 94 percent are eligible for free school meals. *
*The Sussexes left the luxury Carlyle Hotel in their cavalcade of gas-guzzling motor vehicles shortly before 11am Saturday morning and headed to the UN building in Manhattan. *
*They plan to donate a washer and dryer to the school as well so more children can have clean uniforms.  *
*Melba's owner Melba Wilson later thanked the couple on the restaurant's social media pages for a promised $25,000 donation*


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Me too. _Female power _is not about dressing or acting like a man.
> Some American women seem to have misunderstood this important point.
> 
> ETA:  Instead of trying to be VB, she should wear shift dresses with short jackets or coat dresses (perhaps Chanel? Catherine Walker?). Those cover a multitude of sins which is why they have lasted for years. When in doubt, go with a classic. *10 years from now, she will look at those long pants and cry.*


No she won't.  She is all knowing, after all.  She doesn't make mistakes.  You do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How it’s done:


----------



## xincinsin

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> After watching it a few times I thought it looked like he was gently ticking them. If you watch his fingers it looks like he’s tickling them like you do with little toddlers or kids when playing with them. Maybe not?? I just hate to think he’s actually pushing them away


Maybe the kids reciprocated and he panicked - their little fingers might dislodge his hidden wireless mic wire.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tell it like it is, Angela.



_"H and M are setting themselves up to be as important as heads of  state and heads of government."_
The idea that they are important is all that rattles around in their noggins.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Well, the crowd cheered for her.  I was surprised.  Thought there might be some jeers.



Most people aren’t following them and don’t know the truth. The ones that don’t still think they are victims, à la the Oprah special.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Melania wore a lot of coats but even she doesn't wear a wool coat in 70°F+ temperature. *Miscreant Megnut* must be sick if she needs that much warmth


Thanks @EverSoElusive for your #6 nickname Miscreant Megnut, very appropriate M nickname.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

VickyB said:


> This will sound nuts but could she be pregnant again?


Just a thought, could she be going through early menopause because I've seen women in their mid thirties to mid forties undergoing very pronounced menopausal changes.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Well, the crowd cheered for her.  I was surprised.  Thought there might be some jeers.


The crowds were apparently minimal! Could have they used crowd sound effects?


----------



## Chanbal

Insulting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, (Paid PR) People Magazine used this picture to talk about their appearance.  She looks like she's got 4 chins and a muffin top.  Wonder how long until it's switched out?


A post on twitter, which I believe I posted a screenshot here, claimed to have inside information about the Harkles. I recall the post mentioned that MM was out of the public eye because of her weight gain, and several other things about the couple, including that their relationship was a business one. It was posted a while ago and I didn't give it much credit. I wish I could find that post and read it again, because the weight gain is real, and their facial expressions look fake imo.


----------



## bag-mania

Vogue seems to be impressed by Meghan wearing coats in the heat, even if we weren’t.









						Meghan Markle's New York Look Is All About a Great Coat
					

The Duchess of Sussex breezed into Manhattan with a wardrobe of stylish outerwear.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The crowds were apparently minimal! Could have they used crowd sound effects?



I watched the evening video when they were on stage talking about vaccines.  The crowd really cheered for her. More so than for H.


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s the Page Six article. Now everything about the NY trip makes sense.

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle taping NYC trip for Netflix documentary*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been secretly taping their NYC visit for a rumored Netflix documentary about their lives, Page Six has learned. 

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex brought their own videographer with them on their whirlwind trip this week, and he was seen accompanying them around the city. He ran ahead of them as they stepped out before a tour of the 9/11 Memorial Thursday morning.

They also brought their own photographer, Matt Sayles, to document them, we have confirmed.

Harry appeared to be sporting a mic during his visit with his wife to iconic Harlem soul food eatery Melba Friday. He had a wire around his neck, which was then seen tucked into the pocket of his chinos as he hugged restaurant owner Melba Wilson.

Despite the hot Big Apple weather, Markle brought a wardrobe of heavy winter coats and jackets for all of their engagements — thick enough to hide any mic.

Sources who know the Sussexes say they have also been collecting footage for the archives of their Archewell foundation.

However, we’re also told that one of the first things they ever discussed with Netflix chiefs before signing a multi-million dollar deal in September 2020 was making a fly-on-the-wall documentary about their lives.


The couple, in conjunction with their production company Archewell Productions, inked the deal after leaving the royal family earlier this year.

So far, the only projects to be announced are one documentary on Harry’s passion project, the Invictus Games, which gives sick and injured military personnel and veterans the opportunity to compete in sports.


Markle has teamed up with Sir Elton John’s husband, producer David Furnish, on a 12-year-old girl’s adventures in an animated series, with the working title “Pearl.”

In December, they announced another multi-million dollar deal with Spotify for their Archewell Audio podcast, which they said would include podcasts and programming “that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world”.


Spotify said a full series would launch in 2021 but, as of September, the couple have only released one holiday special in December which featured their son Archie and Elton John.

Harry also recently took part in a six-episode series alongside Oprah Winfrey on mental health for Apple TV+ called “The Me You Can’t See.”

As Page Six exclusively revealed, Harry has also signed a mega deal for his memoir – and as part of the deal, he’s teaming up with Markle on a book about ‘leadership’.


The couple stepped out on stage Saturday afternoon at the Global Citizen Live concert in Central Park, were they called for COVID-19 vaccine equality.

A Sussex rep was unavailable for comment.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle taping NYC trip for Netflix documentary
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been secretly taping their NYC visit for a rumored Netflix documentary about their lives, Page Six has learned.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

creme fraiche said:


> I have always thought that Meg gave birth to both of her children (likely with IVF and sex selection), *and have never thought she has had much plastic surgery beyond a nose job. * Her puffiness goes hand in hand with pregnancy and weight gain.  I also will never poke fun of her for natural body - in fact, I don't think she looks bad for 3-4 months postpartum.
> 
> I do reserve the right to poke fun of her inability to dress properly with all the resources she has, the help available to her, and also because of her arrogance if she is overriding their advice. There are many number of belted shirt-dresses which she could have chosen from which would have been weather appropriate, hidden her flaws and highlighted the good points, and would have cost 1/100th of the price of that red monstrosity and thus more appropriate for the setting.   I also will give a bit of leeway to those who do fat shame her as she thought it appropriate to fat shame a toddler.


She used to look very different, but see this clip and draw your own conclusions.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones in need of a few laughs!


----------



## Chanbal

And now I'm going to my news-free zone… Goodnight


----------



## Deleted 698298

Chloe302225 said:


>



I find it so tacky of her to wear all this jewellery when visiting the commoners (in poorer areas). She’s too flashy, a contrast to the real royals Wills and Kate


----------



## muddledmint

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t like the white dress.


The white dress is the most unflattering thing she’s worn the entire trip, despite being the only weather appropriate piece. It makes her shoulders look linebacker wide and her middle look much larger than it is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Happy for Will and the UK people!  However, I anticipate a ton of pressure on the way…
> 
> *Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William put foot down and 'rejected UK ceremony demand'*
> 
> LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after *a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea"*, a royal commentator claimed…
> 
> Mr Sean claimed: "One of the bigger problems that Meghan really encountered of later is that she wanted her daughter, Lilibet Diana, to be christened in the place she was married alongside her husband Prince Harry. And then the christening of her firstborn, Archie.
> 
> "But that came to a grinding halt. Both Harry and Meghan were very keen to make that return and make sure that christening happened, particularly in front of Her Majesty The Queen.
> 
> *"Some people may say they're just capitalising on their royal connection and why not? It's how they make money now.*
> 
> "But moving forward there was one person who basically decided there wasn't an appetite for this and the person that seemingly is, so far, not willing to kiss and make up with his younger brother."
> 
> He further claimed: "*According to a very good source, Prince William was the one who basically said 'no, we don't think this is going to work,' it wasn't a particularly good idea.*"
> 
> Kensington Palace has declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lilibet Diana christening: Prince William rejected plan for UK party
> 
> 
> LILIBET DIANA's christening is unlikely to take place in the United Kingdom after a senior member of the Royal Family allegedly suggested "it wasn't a particularly good idea", a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Was it this article?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Personally I’m not worried about bodyshaming M because I think it’s all about context.
It’d be cruel to laugh at your colleague for getting fat because she’s not trying to sell herself to you.
However this stale tart is parading Herself around trying to sell us both her credentials as both a model & an ambassador AND her outfits & her other ill-gotten gains.  So (to me) there’s nothing wrong with laughing at the fact that emperor has no clothes and he’s got a bit of a paunch too.




CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, he must really miss his minders!
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  they are getting heckled, yelled at, and flipped off.  Hmmm.



It’s awful parents aren’t allowed or come into school or teachers reassure the children with a friendly hug but these complete strangers can manhandle them for a photo op.
Talk about mixed messages! I thought these two were Covid evangelists what’s their message?
“Wear a mask and distance but let me hug you for the cameras & push you away once it’s done”


Chanbal said:


> Why are they meeting Guterres? They are cashing in the UK titles and TIME 100. This is so wrong!
> View attachment 5204843
> 
> _Meghan Markle__ and Prince Harry have arrived at the United Nations to meet with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres as they kicked off the last day of their New York City tour, which will culminate in their appearance at Global Citizen Live._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to appear at Global Citizen Live in New York City
> 
> 
> The duchess, 40, opted for a bizarre outfit choice of a long black coat and grey patterned scarf on a day when many New Yorkers were basking in the last of the  summer sun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’ve finally realised who the too long trousers & coat &  waddling stride  reminds me of…


Not really projecting elegance & efficiency somehow


----------



## littlemisskeira

my 2 cents ... I think they are eager to have whatever connections they can get with the Queen now because once she is gone, Charles and William will take no nonsense from these 2 and they may find heir royal-connection gone. The Queen is still relatively tolerant of their antics and they gotta milk it while it lasts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Vintage Leather said:


> Egg rolls and spring rolls are both meat and bean sprouts and sometimes other veggies in a rice or wheat wrapper. The difference between them is that the egg roll is then dipped in an egg mixture and then fried, giving it a slightly thicker and crunchier exterior
> 
> 
> 
> Cheese and Mayo?!?  must be a southern thing


Thanks to everyone who answered this.
I can’t find the post where carryon2020 posted the menu for the place but their spring rolls have cheese in them.

Like a lot of American food, I can’t decide whether it sounds decadently rich or just a bit much  
I could not bring myself to try sweet potatoes with marshmallows or donut burgers.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Same tailor did a bang up job on trouser hems
> 
> Secret mics ?  that would explain jackets for her in the sweltering weather
> Of course, jackets are also de rigeur if you are concealed carrying


I wish she’d stay away from the good brands because she does make them look like primark. Can she not get a fashion nova deal like everyone else? Or has Instagram realised she makes everything look old and saggy?

The concealed carry…. I agree I think she’s carrying a video recording studio  in there - probably trying to figure out a way to photoshop them both in real life. Honestly it’d be money better spent if they bought a barrel of Vaseline & got an intern to smear it on every pap’s lenses & there might even be some left for Harry’s red nose.


Lounorada said:


> Lastly, someone should make her realise that turtlenecks do not suit her-at all. They literally erase all traces of her neck. Not flattering.


The turtlenecks don’t look great on her and they give me ‘I ran out of fake tan before I did my neck’ vibes. I find it weird she must have a makeup artist but she still looks so blotchy- I don’t think the fillers are settling in well.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

marietouchet said:


> The Diana bag from Dior


Of course the Diana bag


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure the double chin doesn't bother us but she's gonna be mad because the photographer didn't take a better picture of her      Hope she's not breaking plates at Carlyle.
> 
> Guess I'm in the minority for liking that dress



H looks better though. He can keep the shot on his side of the mansion. 

I like the dress on her too. It's better for her figure and gives us a break from thinking she's going to break her neck falling in 6" heels and _pantalon-avec-traine_


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5205214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry take to stage at concert in New York
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry have stepped out on stage at a concert to promote Covid vaccine equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Earlier on Saturday, the Sussexes had a meeting with the *UN's Deputy Secretary-General.”*
> 
> View attachment 5205216


I wish she’d copy Jennifer Lawrence a bit more & set themselves on fire for their big entrance.

I’m sorry anti-body-shamers but those chin fillers are bizarre it makes her look like she’s got fat bulldog jowls.

The dress is very adult baby fetish and the shoes are giving me soho stripper who paints the soles red. The hair and squinty expression is very..




purseinsanity said:


> That coat makes her look like she got butt implants.  And she's carrying a Lady Dior?  "Diana's favorite bag"??


It’s a ‘sweet nod’… a sweet nod that cost more than a washing machine & 2 boxes of veg for sure.    Shame she couldn’t have given it to one of the kids as Madame eco doesn’t wear the same thing twice.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Vogue seems to be impressed by Meghan wearing coats in the heat, even if we weren’t.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's New York Look Is All About a Great Coat
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex breezed into Manhattan with a wardrobe of stylish outerwear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



Vogue obviously means to kick-start our Autumn buying.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> The dress is very adult baby fetish and the shoes are giving me soho stripper who paints the soles red. The hair and squinty expression is very..
> View attachment 5205557



Do you mean the cat or the man?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Genie27 said:


> Who wore it better? Megawatt or these Indian policewomen in their standard issue uniform?
> 
> View attachment 5205371


The policewomen know how to cinch & accessorise   


papertiger said:


> Do you mean the cat or the man?


I mean the man for baby stripper. If I recall the cat is meant to be constantly shedding fur & furiously bad-tempered - so that’ll be Haz.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> Who wore it better? Megawatt or these Indian policewomen in their standard issue uniform?



That said, I even would have liked that outfit if not for a) the wearer and b) the fact that as usual it's all crumpled up and ill-fitting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: her evening outfit, how many more rings and bracelets can she fit on?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  Instead of trying to be VB, she should wear shift dresses with short jackets or coat dresses (perhaps Chanel? Catherine Walker?). Those cover a multitude of sins which is why they have lasted for years. When in doubt, go with a classic. 10 years from now, she will look at those long pants and cry.



Not only that, if she is insecure about her thighs and hips, here's a trick: a skirt will brush over these areas instead of making them look huge.


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> The whimpering child does not sound happy. From an additional perspective, there is an additional video clip in Post #74980 showing the incident from a slightly different camera angle, Harry can be heard to say after "Stop" (where he pushes a child and then pulls back and thrusts himself to the group again) in an angry tone "...for no fu--ing reason." These are second graders he is interacting with/talking to.
> 
> His touching and his language with these children is inappropriate.  He is a man who will not even let his children be photographed, but shamelessly exploits other people's children in international media.  Similarly as with this photo op, the incident planting flowers at the pre school in LA in remembrance of his Mother comes to mind.


Absolutely spot on! Other people, especially poor children, are accessories to be donned & cast off. They paid for all of them with that washing machine after all 
Their own image as a ‘brand’ is so magical it’s only permitted to certain outlets & it’s grotesquely offensive if these images aren’t used in the way they want.


Jayne1 said:


> Well, the crowd cheered for her.  I was surprised.  Thought there might be some jeers.


It’s not hard to cut an applause track into a live broadcast and they may have played one at the event to push the audience a bit.


purseinsanity said:


> Per Raptor:
> *'But if everyone is over it, it's never going to be over with*. There's so much we can do today that can get us closer to ending this pandemic, and that's why we're all here.'
> 
> Ummm, say what??


She’s really trying to sound young isn’t she? Totally garbled double speak…


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: her evening outfit, how many more rings and bracelets can she fit on?



The's def more room if she tries harder 

For M: Tips, hints and inspiration here: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/layering-and-stacking-thread.746322/page-324


----------



## papertiger

Consumer2much said:


> I find it so tacky of her to wear all this jewellery when visiting the commoners (in poorer areas). She’s too flashy, a contrast to the real royals Wills and Kate



Lack of security at the McMontecito mansion means she _has_ to take them all with her wherever she goes. 

Can't leave them in the 5* hotel safe. 

And while the good people of NY are paying for security she doesn't have to worry like those that have to take the Subway.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

csshopper said:


> The whimpering child does not sound happy. From an additional perspective, there is an additional video clip in Post #74980 showing the incident from a slightly different camera angle, Harry can be heard to say after "Stop" (where he pushes a child and then pulls back and thrusts himself to the group again) in an angry tone "...for no fu--ing reason." These are second graders he is interacting with/talking to.
> 
> His touching and his language with these children is inappropriate.  He is a man who will not even let his children be photographed, but shamelessly exploits other people's children in international media.  Similarly as with this photo op, the incident planting flowers at the pre school in LA in remembrance of his Mother comes to mind.


I read/saw that post and listened multiple times and couldn’t hear it. I’m absolutely not saying he didn’t say that, I believe he did, just saying my ears couldn’t pick it up.

What disturbing/bizarre behavior he’s exhibiting  Back before he got tangled up with Methane didn’t he participate in events (charity work, etc) with children and didn’t he do really well with it? I thought I had read articles about how he, like his mother, enjoyed helping children. The more I’m reading about his true behavior with these children the more disturbed I’m becoming


----------



## Icyjade

Couldn’t help looking this up:









						Apple Body Shape: A Comprehensive Guide | the concept wardrobe
					

Learn how to recognise and dress the apple  body shape to achieve a balanced silhouette. Make sure to check out all body shapes that apply to you.




					theconceptwardrobe.com


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, I even would have liked that outfit if not for a) the wearer and b) the fact that as usual it's all crumpled up and ill-fitting.


I think all her outfits were fine in concept but not execution. And if it were November. Also she needs to stop with the colored matching heels.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is she truly apple shaped, though? I thought of her more of a ruler (Sponge Bob-ish).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> What disturbing/bizarre behavior he’s exhibiting  Back before he got tangled up with Methane didn’t he participate in events (charity work, etc) with children and didn’t he do really well with it? I thought I had read articles about how he, like his mother, enjoyed helping children. The more I’m reading about his true behavior with these children the more disturbed I’m becoming



Yeah. Not only did he seem really good with kids, he also seemed to enjoy it. Not sure what's up with him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wow, that Concept Wardrobe website is a treasure. I want to re-sort my wardrobe completely (and get out of the yoga pants haha).


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is she truly apple shaped, though? I thought of her more of a ruler (Sponge Bob-ish).



I thought she was rectangular but supposedly must be tall and lean so I guess not. I did have a quick look at the possible suspects and thought Apple came the closest. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong of course



Based on the website Kate should be a rectangle.









						Rectangle Body Shape: A Comprehensive Guide | the concept wardrobe
					

Learn how to recognise and dress the rectangle body shape to achieve a balanced silhouette. Make sure to check out all body shapes that apply to you.




					theconceptwardrobe.com


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So it's not just me. I thought these pants did not look high-waisted. Or maybe it's just her special talent of making everything look awful. Like...how. *Other people with non-supermodel bodies manage to wear clothes well.*


Meghan's current body shape and height is now similar to Grand Duchesse Therese of Luxembourg who IMHO is one of the best dressed  European royal women. MT always looks really stylish and chic.  I appreciate being short and not skinny (not sure if this is apple or rectangle shape ?) is difficult body shape but Marie Therese NEVER appears short and stumpy !

I suspect Meghan also exaggerates her height and is closer to 5"4/5"5 hence the too long trousers.

I think Meghan's changed body shape confirms it was a gender selected real pregnancy though, so why not publicly thank the maternity/hospital staff to knock that rumour on it head?


----------



## Aminamina

To think about it just two years or so ago when the duo fled the UK ignoring travel ban or something of this matter, they stated COVID is not well familiar subject for them and they need to educate themselves on it. That was when the whole world went full ahead implementing COVID safety measures and making vaccines, leading governments working on distribution, etc. ets. Fast forward two years and now the two posers lecturing world governments on how to not get over it??


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Couldn’t help looking this up:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple Body Shape: A Comprehensive Guide | the concept wardrobe
> 
> 
> Learn how to recognise and dress the apple  body shape to achieve a balanced silhouette. Make sure to check out all body shapes that apply to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theconceptwardrobe.com



A good resource but obviously real body shapes are usually more complex.

I think M is naturally an apple without dieting. She has slim limbs and a fine bones, not overly (naturally) curvaceous and reads as petite (even though she is average height).

The original 'ladies' shapes' were based on proportions of theory of bone/muscle/flesh as well as general silhouette (then these were updated to allow for weight distribution and side-silhouette e.g. hourglass or apple).

Apples are often short-waisted (although not always). Apple-shaped advice would still work well for her. It also shows why a short shift dress works better for her than pleated pants (only wear these is you _want_ to look more curvy). Even if the vertical line is in one colour pleats are always going to throws curved shadows to the tummy area as will a tucked in blouse or shirt. 

The problem with the Valentino dress is it is made from heavy material leaving her looking even more boxy, simultaneously, the light colour emphasises the boxiness that should literally hang off its wearer, at the same time it accentuated any undulations of flesh underneath strong spotlights that could be countered by all-in-one shape-wear.

I'm not arguing that M should have a perfect body or that we (women and men) should constantly have to overthink our formal wardrobes to prevent us looking less than perfect - just that M seems to want to create the illusion of perfection wherever she goes, whatever she does and this coat in hot weather and just okay dress didn't really do that. She looks very ill at ease with her entire wardrobe and style.

One thing you can say for famous women who dress out-of-step with whatever is going on in fashion but rock it like Katherine (conservative from a young age) KK (extreme on the curves) Angie (minimal classics) and others, is that they know what they look good in and what they want to project. There is no consistant projection of image for M, she is everywhere style-wise and so far not owning it. She doesn't look bad, but we just don't believe her.

I am obviously the beachiest here. I think all weight gain has been deliberate to silence surrogate rumours. She's bigger now than she ever was when pregnant. No shade for nursing mothers anywhere, but M is too much a control freak for this to not be a 'sweet nod' to her 'struggle' as a typical 'young' mother. I won't say that's why the ill-fitting clothes too but certainly coats make one look bigger - especially in monotones.


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> To think about it just two years or so ago when the duo fled the UK ignoring travel ban or something of this matter, they stated COVID is not well familiar subject for them and they need to educate themselves on it. That was when the whole world went full ahead implementing COVID safety measures and making vaccines, leading governments working on distribution, etc. ets. Fast forward two years and now the two posers lecturing world governments on how to not get over it??



And we've seen the video where they've had meeting and then only put on their masks for the photo op. Total hypocrites and dangerously so.


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> And we've seen the video where they've had meeting and then only put on their masks for the photo op. Total hypocrites and dangerously so.


Chutzpah is their second happiness. For how long, I wonder?


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> Meghan's current body shape and height is now similar to Grand Duchesse Therese of Luxembourg who IMHO is one of the best dressed  European royal women. MT always looks really stylish and chic.  I appreciate being short and not skinny (not sure if this is apple or rectangle shape ?) is difficult body shape but Marie Therese NEVER appears short and stumpy !
> 
> I suspect Meghan also exaggerates her height and is closer to 5"4/5"5 hence the too long trousers.
> 
> I think Meghan's changed body shape confirms it was a gender selected real pregnancy though, so why not publicly thank the maternity/hospital staff to knock that rumour on it head?



Yes, MM’s height and shape are very similar to MT’s who does look elegant and well-groomed.  It is possible for all women to dress well.

Her weight gain could be from anti-depressants or other medicines, not necessarily baby weight gain IMO.  Could be both, too.  Compared to the past, her arms looked heavy.  The only explanation for the heavy coats is that she was merching or they came from a stylist’s inventory. The clothes may need to be returned, too.  The Valextra (?) purse looked empty.

When they review the clothes for this ‘tour’, they will see what the rest of us see. Changes will be made. The odd thing is that she seemed her usual thin self in that call with Melissa. Her hair was glossy, face glow-y. This was a dramatic change.


----------



## Grande Latte

She did gain a bit of weight, I've noticed in her recent photos. But I assumed it is because of the pandemic, and not being able to be as active as she used to be.

Lots of my friends and work colleagues gained a quite a bit of weight due to the pandemic, every time we get on Zoom, they get bigger.

PS: I've always thought she was pear shaped. Except previously, she was really thin, so it wasn't that obvious.


----------



## muddledmint

Icyjade said:


> I thought she was rectangular but supposedly must be tall and lean so I guess not. I did have a quick look at the possible suspects and thought Apple came the closest. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong of course
> 
> View attachment 5205590
> 
> Based on the website Kate should be a rectangle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rectangle Body Shape: A Comprehensive Guide | the concept wardrobe
> 
> 
> Learn how to recognise and dress the rectangle body shape to achieve a balanced silhouette. Make sure to check out all body shapes that apply to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theconceptwardrobe.com


I think meghan is a skinny Apple. If she gained weight, she would look more like a conventional apple. Kate is rectangle slash inverted triangle. Her hips are sooo narrow and she is all torso with relatively short legs for her height.


----------



## xincinsin

Just throwing an idea out there. Did Methane ever lose the weight from having Archieficial? She was really plump after that baby. So, despite the wandering bump, she probably was pregnant. 

The gruesome twosome skipped town not long after that, and in all subsequent video and photos, it didn't look like she had ever regained her figure. The voluminous dress in the garden photos hides everything: body, legs and arms. Maybe this "baby fat" is from Archie and not new fat from a second pregnancy.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> We all get double chins , I can live with that but the 1960s GOGO dress ??? That was optional


I know we're not supposed to fat shame her but I think this dress makes her look larger (except for the legs of course)


----------



## doni

She is obviously carrying baby weight. That should put an end to surrogacy rumors.

I think Meghan is a rectangle with a hint of apple. Like me. This body shape becomes challenging as you age because of how the lack of waist is accentuated the moment you gain a bit of weight. You also tend to look like a bomb about to explode when pregnant.

Kate to me is an hourglass. She has a tiny waist. I think people think of hourglass as voluptuous but it is about the proportion of the waist in relation to shoulders and hips. A thin hourglass is the easiest to dress.

But in any event


papertiger said:


> A good resource but obviously real body shapes are usually more complex.



I think she looked okay. Very pretty, but a bit try-hard in terms of wardrobe. I don’t understand holding hands when visiting the UN for meetings and the such. Particularly when simultaneously carrying lots of important documents and folders. Seems rather uncomfortable and contrived.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the Page Six article. Now everything about the NY trip makes sense.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle taping NYC trip for Netflix documentary*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been secretly taping their NYC visit for a rumored Netflix documentary about their lives, Page Six has learned.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex brought their own videographer with them on their whirlwind trip this week, and he was seen accompanying them around the city. He ran ahead of them as they stepped out before a tour of the 9/11 Memorial Thursday morning.
> 
> They also brought their own photographer, Matt Sayles, to document them, we have confirmed.
> 
> Harry appeared to be sporting a mic during his visit with his wife to iconic Harlem soul food eatery Melba Friday. He had a wire around his neck, which was then seen tucked into the pocket of his chinos as he hugged restaurant owner Melba Wilson.
> 
> Despite the hot Big Apple weather, Markle brought a wardrobe of heavy winter coats and jackets for all of their engagements — thick enough to hide any mic.
> 
> Sources who know the Sussexes say they have also been collecting footage for the archives of their Archewell foundation.
> 
> However, we’re also told that one of the first things they ever discussed with Netflix chiefs before signing a multi-million dollar deal in September 2020 was making a fly-on-the-wall documentary about their lives.
> 
> 
> The couple, in conjunction with their production company Archewell Productions, inked the deal after leaving the royal family earlier this year.
> 
> So far, the only projects to be announced are one documentary on Harry’s passion project, the Invictus Games, which gives sick and injured military personnel and veterans the opportunity to compete in sports.
> 
> 
> Markle has teamed up with Sir Elton John’s husband, producer David Furnish, on a 12-year-old girl’s adventures in an animated series, with the working title “Pearl.”
> 
> In December, they announced another multi-million dollar deal with Spotify for their Archewell Audio podcast, which they said would include podcasts and programming “that uplifts and entertains audiences around the world”.
> 
> 
> Spotify said a full series would launch in 2021 but, as of September, the couple have only released one holiday special in December which featured their son Archie and Elton John.
> 
> Harry also recently took part in a six-episode series alongside Oprah Winfrey on mental health for Apple TV+ called “The Me You Can’t See.”
> 
> As Page Six exclusively revealed, Harry has also signed a mega deal for his memoir – and as part of the deal, he’s teaming up with Markle on a book about ‘leadership’.
> 
> 
> The couple stepped out on stage Saturday afternoon at the Global Citizen Live concert in Central Park, were they called for COVID-19 vaccine equality.
> 
> A Sussex rep was unavailable for comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle taping NYC trip for Netflix documentary
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been secretly taping their NYC visit for a rumored Netflix documentary about their lives, Page Six has learned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


so the NY trip is supposed to provide entertainment for netflix viewers?  Ha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> The odd thing is that she seemed her usual thin self in that call with Melissa.


The magic of filters and editing software. Versus uncontrolled pap photos.


----------



## csshopper

There may also  be some genetics involved with her evolving body shape as she ages?  Looking at her Dad and half sister Samantha, she seems more like a Markle than a Ragland.


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> A good resource but obviously real body shapes are usually more complex.
> 
> I think M is naturally an apple without dieting. She has slim limbs and a fine bones, not overly (naturally) curvaceous and reads as petite (even though she is average height).
> 
> The original 'ladies' shapes' were based on proportions of theory of bone/muscle/flesh as well as general silhouette (then these were updated to allow for weight distribution and side-silhouette e.g. hourglass or apple).
> 
> Apples are often short-waisted (although not always). Apple-shaped advice would still work well for her. It also shows why a short shift dress works better for her than pleated pants (only wear these is you _want_ to look more curvy). Even if the vertical line is in one colour pleats are always going to throws curved shadows to the tummy area as will a tucked in blouse or shirt.
> 
> The problem with the Valentino dress is it is made from heavy material leaving her looking even more boxy, simultaneously, the light colour emphasises the boxiness that should literally hang off its wearer, at the same time it accentuated any undulations of flesh underneath strong spotlights that could be countered by all-in-one shape-wear.
> 
> I'm not arguing that M should have a perfect body or that we (women and men) should constantly have to overthink our formal wardrobes to prevent us looking less than perfect - just that M seems to want to create the illusion of perfection wherever she goes, whatever she does and this coat in hot weather and just okay dress didn't really do that. She looks very ill at ease with her entire wardrobe and style.
> 
> One thing you can say for famous women who dress out-of-step with whatever is going on in fashion but rock it like Katherine (conservative from a young age) KK (extreme on the curves) Angie (minimal classics) and others, is that they know what they look good in and what they want to project. There is no consistant projection of image for M, she is everywhere style-wise and so far not owning it. She doesn't look bad, but we just don't believe her.
> 
> I am obviously the beachiest here. I think all weight gain has been deliberate to silence surrogate rumours. She's bigger now than she ever was when pregnant. No shade for nursing mothers anywhere, but M is too much a control freak for this to not be a 'sweet nod' to her 'struggle' as a typical 'young' mother. I won't say that's why the ill-fitting clothes too but certainly coats make one look bigger - especially in monotones.


Yes! Amazing post.

I’ve mentioned before that I’d hoped to be inspired by M’s wardrobe as I had similar shape challenges.

However M imagines herself as a 5’10 skinny-tall supermodel and dresses accordingly.

I know what *not to wear,* but damn if I can find things that are flattering for my shape.

and with covid I definitely need to learn what fits all over again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I think Meghan's changed body shape confirms it was a gender selected real pregnancy though, so why not publicly thank the maternity/hospital staff to knock that rumour on it head?



Same reason nobody has seen the miraculous baby: PETTY.

That said, it seems almost that she's heavier now than when pregnant? Weird.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I am obviously the beachiest here. I think all weight gain has been deliberate to silence surrogate rumours. She's bigger now than she ever was when pregnant. No shade for nursing mothers anywhere, but M is too much a control freak for this to not be a 'sweet nod' to her 'struggle' as a typical 'young' mother. I won't say that's why the ill-fitting clothes too but certainly coats make one look bigger - especially in monotones.



Oh wow. That's some dedication right there haha. 

She is definitely not as puffy in the face as with Archie...remember the Trooping the Colours when she barely had eyes (but just enough to shoot darts at Kate)?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Just throwing an idea out there. Did Methane ever lose the weight from having Archieficial? She was really plump after that baby. So, despite the wandering bump, she probably was pregnant.



She did IIRC. When they returned from their extended Christmas break for like two weeks before calling it quits she had noticeably lost weight and boosted her face. Remember that bright blue VB dress?


----------



## Annawakes

I also think she never returned to her pre-Archie body.  Which is fine but wish she wouldn’t try so badly to hide it, as all have said here and I agree with.

although it is also credible that she had those big coats to hide a multitude of recording devices.

eta it is also possible she poured herself into very tight shape wear post-Archie….


----------



## xincinsin

It's crazy to think of recording devices beneath those coats, but it also makes sense. So Methane was all bundled up to hide baby fat, merch the coats, and conceal recording devices. Multi-task Markle


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> A good resource but obviously real body shapes are usually more complex.
> 
> I think M is naturally an apple without dieting. She has slim limbs and a fine bones, not overly (naturally) curvaceous and reads as petite (even though she is average height).
> 
> The original 'ladies' shapes' were based on proportions of theory of bone/muscle/flesh as well as general silhouette (then these were updated to allow for weight distribution and side-silhouette e.g. hourglass or apple).
> 
> Apples are often short-waisted (although not always). Apple-shaped advice would still work well for her. It also shows why a short shift dress works better for her than pleated pants (only wear these is you _want_ to look more curvy). Even if the vertical line is in one colour pleats are always going to throws curved shadows to the tummy area as will a tucked in blouse or shirt.
> 
> The problem with the Valentino dress is it is made from heavy material leaving her looking even more boxy, simultaneously, the light colour emphasises the boxiness that should literally hang off its wearer, at the same time it accentuated any undulations of flesh underneath strong spotlights that could be countered by all-in-one shape-wear.
> 
> I'm not arguing that M should have a perfect body or that we (women and men) should constantly have to overthink our formal wardrobes to prevent us looking less than perfect - just that M seems to want to create the illusion of perfection wherever she goes, whatever she does and this coat in hot weather and just okay dress didn't really do that. She looks very ill at ease with her entire wardrobe and style.
> 
> One thing you can say for famous women who dress out-of-step with whatever is going on in fashion but rock it like Katherine (conservative from a young age) KK (extreme on the curves) Angie (minimal classics) and others, is that they know what they look good in and what they want to project. There is no consistant projection of image for M, she is everywhere style-wise and so far not owning it. She doesn't look bad, but we just don't believe her.
> 
> I am obviously the beachiest here. I think all weight gain has been deliberate to silence surrogate rumours. She's bigger now than she ever was when pregnant. No shade for nursing mothers anywhere, but M is too much a control freak for this to not be a 'sweet nod' to her 'struggle' as a typical 'young' mother. I won't say that's why the ill-fitting clothes too but certainly coats make one look bigger - especially in monotones.


I'm gonna have to disagree with you on the weight gain being deliberate.  I think she is far too vain for that.


----------



## Grande Latte

Hmm....I think Meghan is very uncomfortable/ unfamiliar with her recent weight gain, hence the strange wardrobe choices. 

And I think Harry is a very visual guy without much content. He's not going to be attracted to  this version of Meghan, and with the constant friction with the media and the Royal Family, I suspect this guy will bolt soon. As superficial as it sounds, they never had a genuine bond/ love.


----------



## sdkitty

Grande Latte said:


> Hmm....I think Meghan is very uncomfortable/ unfamiliar with her recent weight gain, hence the strange wardrobe choices.
> 
> And I think Harry is a very visual guy without much content. He's not going to be attracted to  this version of Meghan, and with the constant friction with the media and the Royal Family, I suspect this guy will bolt soon. As superficial as it sounds, they never had a genuine bond/ love.


I don't buy that they are madly in love.  I think the smiling at each other that some media report talked about could def be acting (esp on her part).  But I think she has him under her control.  I don't think he'll bolt any time soon.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It's crazy to think of recording devices beneath those coats, but it also makes sense. So Methane was all bundled up to hide baby fat, merch the coats, and conceal recording devices. Multi-task Markle





sdkitty said:


> I'm gonna have to disagree with you on the weight gain being deliberate.  I think she is far too vain for that.





Annawakes said:


> I also think she never returned to her pre-Archie body.  Which is fine but wish she wouldn’t try so badly to hide it, as all have said here and I agree with.
> although it is also credible that she had those big coats to hide a multitude of recording devices.
> eta it is also possible she poured herself into very tight shape wear post-Archie….



Throwing this image out there

In MCMansion

Image from *18 May* Report:












						Meghan Markle just reminded us of the power of a slogan tee
					

Want to make a style statement? Slogan tees say it best




					www.standard.co.uk
				




Not sure when this was taken, but Oprah int was close to moving in

Lilibet Diana M-W born *4 June*


----------



## eunaddict

Genie27 said:


> The magic of filters and editing software. Versus uncontrolled pap photos.



And studio lighting!

Also, she spent a lot of those videos only showing herself from waist up, OR hidden behind that desk of hers.


----------



## sdkitty

M will love this
Meghan Markle Got a New Nickname During Her NYC Visit (msn.com)


----------



## VickyB

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ruffle blouse!  Now, that’s owning your female power.
> View attachment 5205373


 pants are hemmed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

Genie27 said:


> Who wore it better? Megawatt or these Indian policewomen in their standard issue uniform?
> 
> View attachment 5205371


She can't even come close to those beautiful  Indian cops who rocked the color and look !!!!


----------



## VickyB

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure the double chin doesn't bother us but she's gonna be mad because the photographer didn't take a better picture of her      Hope she's not breaking plates at Carlyle.
> 
> Guess I'm in the minority for liking that dress


I like the dress too.


----------



## Annawakes

papertiger said:


> Throwing this image out there
> 
> In MCMansion
> 
> Image from *18 May* Report:
> 
> View attachment 5205686
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle just reminded us of the power of a slogan tee
> 
> 
> Want to make a style statement? Slogan tees say it best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure when this was taken, but Oprah int was close to moving in
> 
> Lilibet Diana M-W born *4 June*


She doesn’t look pregnant at all!  Not for someone due in a matter of a couple weeks.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Icyjade said:


> Couldn’t help looking this up:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple Body Shape: A Comprehensive Guide | the concept wardrobe
> 
> 
> Learn how to recognise and dress the apple  body shape to achieve a balanced silhouette. Make sure to check out all body shapes that apply to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theconceptwardrobe.com


I couldn’t help reading the sections on style essences to figure out what I am- (I think I’m probably trying for angelic but more suited to romantic) Then I couldn’t help wondering what M is going for- I think they need to add an 8th essence- the chaotic


Aminamina said:


> To think about it just two years or so ago when the duo fled the UK ignoring travel ban or something of this matter, they stated COVID is not well familiar subject for them and they need to educate themselves on it. That was when the whole world went full ahead implementing COVID safety measures and making vaccines, leading governments working on distribution, etc. ets. Fast forward two years and now the two posers lecturing world governments on how to not get over it??


what a point this is- well remembered! 


sdkitty said:


> so the NY trip is supposed to provide entertainment for netflix viewers?  Ha


Maybe it’s meant to be like the Simple Life with Paris Hilton & Nicole Ritchie aka a pair of spoilt brats travel round the country trying out jobs they are rubbish at. Only I suspect the original pair were only playing dumb.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Throwing this image out there
> 
> In MCMansion
> 
> Image from *18 May* Report:
> 
> View attachment 5205686
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle just reminded us of the power of a slogan tee
> 
> 
> Want to make a style statement? Slogan tees say it best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure when this was taken, but Oprah int was close to moving in
> 
> Lilibet Diana M-W born *4 June*



Yeah I really think this was pre-recorded or an old picture or whatever medium they chose that day. There is no belly visible at all. Even she is not stupid enough to forget her fake bump.


----------



## csshopper

Annawakes said:


> She doesn’t look pregnant at all!  Not for someone due in a matter of a couple weeks.


All you said, Plus the tee shirt looks tucked in, looks flat, no apparent sign of Lilibet?

 If she was pregnant and the image had been photo shopped wouldn’t the logo be distorted?  And, it’s not.

?????


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, MM’s height and shape are very similar to MT’s who does look elegant and well-groomed.  It is possible for all women to dress well.
> 
> Her weight gain could be from anti-depressants or other medicines, not necessarily baby weight gain IMO.  Could be both, too.  Compared to the past, her arms looked heavy.  The only explanation for the heavy coats is that she was merching or they came from a stylist’s inventory. The clothes may need to be returned, too.  The Valextra (?) purse looked empty.
> 
> When they review the clothes for this ‘tour’, they will see what the rest of us see. Changes will be made. The odd thing is that she seemed her usual thin self in that call with Melissa. Her hair was glossy, face glow-y. This was a dramatic change.


 I agree, you can look good if you try not if you just throw money at the problem Willy-nilly.
If her weight gain is caused by a chemical imbalance I would bet money on it being coke bloat.

To be honest this NY trip is the first time we get to see her without the filters… so I sort of think the glossy, skinny girl _isn’t_ her usual self. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. That's some dedication right there haha.
> 
> She is definitely not as puffy in the face as with Archie...remember the Trooping the Colours when she barely had eyes (but just enough to shoot darts at Kate)?


I mean….he’s _married_ her, getting fatter would be good cover if she did have surrogacies & it’s not like she can get babe roles anymore… what’s she got to stay thin for?

Besides think what an explosive interview ‘evil, racist BALD prince divorced me because I got fat’ would be.


----------



## doni

csshopper said:


> All you said, Plus the tee shirt looks tucked in, looks flat, no apparent sign of Lilibet?
> 
> If she was pregnant and the image had been photo shopped wouldn’t the logo be distorted?  And, it’s not.
> 
> ?????



So someone who in order to fake she had a surrogate is prepared to go as far as to noticeably put on weight as if she had been pregnant and is having trouble losing the baby weight, would however not bother to fake it when supposedly pregnant?
How does that make any sense?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

doni said:


> So someone who is prepared to go as far as noticeably put on weight _after_ the fact to look as if she had been pregnant and is having trouble losing the baby weight so as to hide that she had a surrogate would however not bother to fake it when supposedly pregnant?
> How does that make any sense?



I'm pretty sure we established it was an old pic back when it was published, but I can't be bothered to go back through pages and pages to find the conversation.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. Not only did he seem really good with kids, he also seemed to enjoy it. Not sure what's up with him.


My 2 cents:
It's pure business for him now. The enjoyment is fake, and let's move on to the next event as soon as photo-ops and the N*flix filming are done.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Personally I’m not worried about bodyshaming M because I think it’s all about context.
> It’d be cruel to laugh at your colleague for getting fat because she’s not trying to sell herself to you.
> However this *stale tart* is parading Herself around trying to sell us both her credentials as both a model & an ambassador AND her outfits & her other ill-gotten gains.  So (to me) there’s nothing wrong with laughing at the fact that emperor has no clothes and he’s got a bit of a paunch too.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s awful parents aren’t allowed or come into school or teachers reassure the children with a friendly hug but these complete strangers can manhandle them for a photo op.
> Talk about mixed messages! I thought these two were Covid evangelists what’s their message?
> “Wear a mask and distance but let me hug you for the cameras & push you away once it’s done”
> 
> I’ve finally realised who the too long trousers & coat &  waddling stride  reminds me of…
> View attachment 5205554
> 
> Not really projecting elegance & efficiency somehow


 Thanks @jelliedfeels for your #2 nickname *Stale Tart* for M. Oooh the shade and the connotation: the moldy pastry you find in the back of your cupboard and quickly toss into the garbage or the old painted hag strutting down the sidewalk pretending to be a young filly. You just made my day!


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> It's crazy to think of recording devices beneath those coats, but it also makes sense. So Methane was all bundled up to hide baby fat, merch the coats, and conceal recording devices. Multi-task Markle



It could be any or all of those reasons. We’ll never know the truth.


----------



## marietouchet

Valentino dress, the black satin 6 in tall pumps are in the shot 

Dress too short ? Two inches longer maybe ??? 









						Meghan Markle Wore a Chic White Valentino Mini Dress to the Global Citizen Live Concert
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex spoke about COVID vaccine equity during the concert.




					www.elle.com


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I am obviously the beachiest here.* I think all weight gain has been deliberate to silence surrogate rumours. She's bigger now than she ever was when pregnant. *No shade for nursing mothers anywhere, but M is too much a control freak for this to not be a 'sweet nod' to her 'struggle' as a typical 'young' mother. I won't say that's why the ill-fitting clothes too but certainly coats make one look bigger - especially in monotones.



I don't like to comment much on physical features, because we often have little control over them. I know, it's not the case of MM and her zillion plastic surgeries. 

However, many of us don't have great genes like Kate, and MM seems to be going through a tough transition from a relatively fit to a much less fit body. So I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she didn't find what works for her new body yet. 

Having said that, and on the surrogate theory, there is also weight gain due to induced lactation (_a practice of helping a woman who has not been pregnant produce milk_).


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just a thought, could she be going through early menopause because I've seen women in their mid thirties to mid forties undergoing very pronounced menopausal changes.


But then you'd think she'd be sweating buckets in those heavy coats!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. Not only did he seem really good with kids, he also seemed to enjoy it. Not sure what's up with him.



All I know is that if some visitor to my kids' school was seemingly hugging and tickling them in some kind of group hug, during a pandemic no less, the school administrators and school board and local media would hear from me loud and clear.  I'm just amazed that he thought that was OK.


----------



## purseinsanity

Consumer2much said:


> I find it so tacky of her to wear all this jewellery when visiting the commoners (in poorer areas). She’s too flashy, a contrast to the real royals Wills and Kate


She's always screaming (either literally or figuratively) "LOOK AT ME!  LOOK AT ME!".  So tacky.


----------



## AbbytheBT

marietouchet said:


> Valentino dress, the black satin 6 in tall pumps are in the shot
> 
> Dress too short ? Two inches longer maybe ???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wore a Chic White Valentino Mini Dress to the Global Citizen Live Concert
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex spoke about COVID vaccine equity during the concert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com


IMO - Too short for such high heels - wrong shoes all around for the dress


----------



## xincinsin

eunaddict said:


> And studio lighting!
> 
> Also, she spent a lot of those videos only showing herself from waist up, OR hidden behind that desk of hers.


Hidden behind the stack of Benches, a shawl, and a huge cup.

We might have to start dating Methane's physical changes by cross-matching them with Hazard's degree of baldness.


----------



## youngster

AbbytheBT said:


> IMO - Too short for such high heels - wrong shoes all around for the dress



I agree with you.  Dress was too short, wrong shoes.  The dress on its own is very pretty, very weather appropriate, lovely color on her but it makes her look big.  I've had a couple kids myself so I sympathize as it's tough to get that pre-pregnancy body back but you'd think a good stylist could help choose more flattering clothes for her.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Her weight gain could be from anti-depressants or other medicines, not necessarily baby weight gain IMO.  Could be both, too.*  Compared to the past, her arms looked heavy.  The only explanation for the heavy coats is that she was merching or they came from a stylist’s inventory. *The clothes may need to be returned, too.  The Valextra *(?) purse looked empty.


Absolutely, anti-depressants and other drugs can have terrible side effects. 

The clothes had to be returned (or donated) when she worked as a royal, but not anymore. She can keep all the freebies now. One could think that her choices of the NYC outfits have to do with what she needs in her closet. She may have endured all that hot weather to get a few winter coats as freebies…  If she is indeed planning to move to NYC or Washington, they will become very handy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> H looks better though. He can keep the shot on his side of the mansion.
> 
> I like the dress on her too. It's better for her figure and gives us a break from thinking she's going to break her neck falling in 6" heels and _pantalon-avec-traine_



Agreed on H  

Now about our beloved (not!) Maleficent of Montecito...

1) When she was a working royal, I understand that she's expected to dress a certain way especially when carrying out her royal duties. She had help for her perusal but she chose not to use them or ignore their advice because she knew better and/or she wanted to rebel. During this time, she ended up with many ill-fitting and some inappropriate outfits, and she tried to incorporate elements from her days of being an actress.

2) Now that she's not representing the BRF, she can forget all about power suits if she can't still get it right. For all these meetings and events in NYC this week, she could have brought back her Hollywood/actress day's best with the right length and also perhaps a blazer over something sleeveless to keep it looking slightly formal. And if she is really clueless as to what she should wear for her meetings, she could easily Google her character Rachel Zane for some style ideas since she (Megnut) is queen of copy anyways. Being as clueless as she is, keeping things simple with clean lines is the least that she should be able to do right. It's not rocket science.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> It's crazy to think of recording devices beneath those coats, but it also makes sense. So Methane was all bundled up to hide baby fat, merch the coats, and conceal recording devices. *Multi-task Markle*


Thanks @xincinsin for your #13 nickname Multi-task Markle, very appropriate although not in a complimentary way.  Please join the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## bag-mania

So are we to believe that the New York City mayor, New York state governor, UN Deputy Secretary-General and US ambassador were all fine with being covertly recorded for a TV show they knew nothing about? Or did they all agree to participate?

What about the restaurant owner and all the people at the school? Wouldn’t the parents have to sign an agreement to allow footage of their children to make it into the show?


----------



## bag-mania

Nothing with them is as it appears. The entire trip was choreographed to happen as it did. All of the visits, even the soul food dinner and it’s “spontaneous” donation, were all organized in advance to culminate in the vaccine event last night. By the time the show airs on Netflix months from now we’ll be led to believe Meghan and Harry were responsible for the world getting vaccinated.


----------



## xincinsin

I like shift dresses. They are very forgiving of tubby figures like mine. I have many dresses with a similar silhouette to Methane's white dress. But I don't like her look, especially those awful tendrils which appear to just get messier as the night wore on. 

She seems to equate particular hairdos with certain impressions she wants to make. 
Low bun, sleek hair = look at how authentically serious and professional I am! 
Tendrils = ooh, I'm so fun and so sexy, see my tongue and underwear peeking out
Big hair = I am powerful because my hairdo is bigger than yours


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> LP executives are in an emergency meeting today.  Other than the price, this outfit does not reflect who they are or, even, who they want to be.


Geez .. even I know where to buy LP's merchandise at significantly less than retail, but .. hey, let's face it, *MEGHAN-MERCHANDISER* just wants to show off her "spoils" now ('cos she has now spoiled YET another brand for me)!!!


----------



## marietouchet

Two more possibilities to add to those already mentioned concerning bumps and faux bumps 
- COVID 15 lbs
- stress eating, has not been a great year ?


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Agreed on H
> 
> Now about our beloved (not!) Maleficent of Montecito...
> 
> 1) When she was a working royal, I understand that she's expected to dress a certain way especially when carrying out her royal duties. She had help for her perusal but she chose not to use them or ignore their advice because she knew better and/or she wanted to rebel. During this time, she ended up with many ill-fitting and some inappropriate outfits, and she tried to incorporate elements from her days of being an actress.
> 
> 2) Now that she's not representing the BRF, she can forget all about power suits if she can't still get it right. For all these meetings and events in NYC this week, she could have brought back her Hollywood/actress day's best with the right length and also perhaps a blazer over something sleeveless to keep it looking slightly formal. And if she is really clueless as to what she should wear for her meetings, she could easily Google her character Rachel Zane for some style ideas since she (Megnut) is queen of copy anyways. Being as clueless as she is, keeping things simple with clean lines is the least that she should be able to do right. It's not rocket science.


Trip wardrobe … it is confirmed trip was recorded for Netflix
Clothes are a business deduction and/or borrowed
Valentino - left to their own devices - would have put her in rock star shoes, so, I don’t think this was entirely left up to the couturier, but yeah, she got a deal on the dress in exchange for PR, SS hard at work


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Nothing with them is as it appears. The entire trip was choreographed to happen as it did. All of the visits, even the soul food dinner and it’s “spontaneous” donation, were all organized in advance to culminate in the vaccine event last night. By the time the show airs on Netflix months from now we’ll be led to believe Meghan and Harry were responsible for the world getting vaccinated.



The donations have been *promised*. 

We'll have to write and ask the various charities and schools if they actually happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> The donations have been *promised*.
> 
> We'll have to write and ask the various charities and schools if they actually happened.


Waiting with bated breath to find out if they follow through on their promises. If this was all pre-planned, they should have turned up with the cheque in hand. Or maybe this too is tied to profit from the 4-book deal.

This particular promise costs less than half of her pinky ring.


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Is it me or is Hairless sporting what looks like a camel toe? Or a mangina?
> Or is it called a moose knuckle in men.
> I wonder what happened to the epic camel toe thread.


OMG .. @poopsie , thanks for the howling morning laugh!!!!!!  MOOSE KNUCKLE .. love that, and wait, what .. there used to be a Camel Toe thread?!?! .. we need to resurrect that tout-suite!!!


----------



## Chanbal

It's all about her ambitions… 
*Palace 'bent over backwards to help Meghan Markle adjust to royalty', insider says*

_Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were handed access to the Queen's own private staff and all the advice needed to help them settle into royal life, Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton claims

Buckingham Palace did everything it could to help Meghan Markle adjust to royal life, a senior source has reportedly claimed.

*Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton has made fresh claims about the background to Meghan and Prince Harry's split from royal life.

The author has updated his sensational biography of the Duchess of Sussex, featuring interviews with royal insiders who defended Buckingham Palace's handling of the couple.

In it, he claims the Sussexes felt that they had been driven out by the ‘bullying’ attitude of Harry's brother Prince William - which royal insiders denied.*

The pair shocked the palace when they laid out their grievances with royalty in a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey last year, as they began their new life in Los Angeles with son Archie.

*In the updated pages added to Morton's book Meghan: A Hollywood Princess, serialised today in the Mail on Sunday, a royal source tells the author they agreed with claims the palace had 'bent over backwards' to help the duchess settle in to royal life.

Last year, it was reported that a palace official had said of Harry and Meghan: "People had bent over backwards for them. They were given the wedding they wanted, the house they wanted, the office they wanted, the money they wanted, the staff they wanted, the tours they wanted and had the backing of their family. What more did they want?"

Speaking to Mr Morton on Saturday evening, the source backed that account and denied any mistreatment of the couple by Prince William.

The insider insisted the royal family had done all it could to support Meghan, despite her interviews alleging the palace had failed to help her when she began suffering from poor mental health.*

Harry told Oprah he reached a dark place as his wife became suicidal, and he struggled with his grief at his mother's Paris car crash death.

But the palace insider backed the official's account in an interview with Mr Morton, who had previously published 1992 with Diana: Her True Story.

Mr Morton claims diplomats were blindsided when the couple launched their public criticism against the media during a tour of South Africa in 2019.

He claims palace officials reject Meghan's allegation in the subsequent Oprah interview that she received little support from the palace as she struggled to settle into royal life.

The author also claims Meghan struggled to form a relationship with sister-in-law Kate Middleton and the pair had "no real rapport" while brothers Harry and William drifted further apart.

The author described support offered to Meghan including the Queen assigning her own experienced assistant private secretary Samantha Cohen to the duchess to explain the workings of the Monarchy and the Commonwealth.

He also highlights an episode at Prince Charles' 70th birthday, when Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, "tenderly" took Meghan's hand.

This was "'a rare royal gesture' which said ‘Meghan is now 'one of us'," according to the author.

The Queen had also given Harry and Meghan ‘a golden ticket’ by appointing them to key Commonwealth roles in the Commonwealth.

"This global role would set the couple free from the endless fashion, lifestyle and personality comparisons with William and Kate," he wrote.
_
*In the updated the new edition of his book, due out in just over a fortnight, the author claims Meghan is much better suited to living life on her "own terms" and fulfilling her ambitions.*









						Palace 'did everything to help Meghan Markle adjust to royalty', insider says
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were handed access to the Queen's own private staff and all the advice needed to help them settle into royal life, Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton claims




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


>



Now, these REALLY PEEVES me off .. indeed, the guy in the front definitely looks Secret Service, and the African-American man behind him .. I'm pretty sure that that is an old friend from my DC days who (at one time) was on the President's detail (which he said was the hardest thing he EVER did in his life .. and he was a former Marine)!


----------



## justwatchin

papertiger said:


> Throwing this image out there
> 
> In MCMansion
> 
> Image from *18 May* Report:
> 
> View attachment 5205686
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle just reminded us of the power of a slogan tee
> 
> 
> Want to make a style statement? Slogan tees say it best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure when this was taken, but Oprah int was close to moving in
> 
> Lilibet Diana M-W born *4 June*


The article was dated May 2021 and she sure wasn’t looking very pregnant  for someone due to give birth very soon


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> So I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she didn't find what works for her new body yet.



I'd be with you if it weren't for the fact she hasn't found what worked for her body ever since she married Harry (probably before too, I just paid zero attention back then)...and that included her wedding dress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *The clothes had to be returned (or donated) when she worked as a royal, but not anymore. She can keep all the freebies now. *One could think that her choices of the NYC outfits have to do with what she needs in her closet. She may have endured all that hot weather to get a few winter coats as freebies…  If she is indeed planning to move to NYC or Washington, they will become very handy.



I think she meant clothes that were only borrowed by her stylist for that very event. They would have to be returned or paid for.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I don't buy that they are madly in love.  I think the smiling at each other that some media report talked about could def be acting (esp on her part).  But I think she has him under her control.  I don't think he'll bolt any time soon.



When it all started and when things were fairly new, up until the end of their working royal time, Harry did seemed genuinely smitten with her. However, this trip to NYC is exposing visible cracks in their relationship and Harry actually looks disinterested. It may be love for Harry at the beginning but now they may just be staying in the marriage solely for optics, money and fame. Harry looks miserable now more so than when he was with the BRF. 




Chanbal said:


> I don't like to comment much on physical features, because we often have little control over them. I know, it's not the case of MM and her zillion plastic surgeries.
> 
> However, many of us don't have great genes like Kate, and MM seems to be going through a tough transition from a relatively fit to a much less fit body. So I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt that she didn't find what works for her new body yet.
> 
> Having said that, and on the surrogate theory, there is also weight gain due to induced lactation (_a practice of helping a woman who has not been pregnant produce milk_).



With the wealth they flaunt and the space available at Palais de Montecito, she can definitely afford a personal trainer to work out in a home gym and stay looking fit like her single days. Alas, she's not one to put in the hard work to reap the benefits. She thinks everything is magic from a fairy godmother. JLo looks amazing for a 50-year-old because she works hard at staying fit. If she didn't, like most of us and Megnut, she would undoubtedly have weight gain and unhidden fat too. The easy way out for Megnut? Just go get lipo and she can wear the kinda clothes that are meant for slimmer frames that she's been trying to pull off but fail miserably.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*"People had bent over backwards for them. They were given the wedding they wanted, the house they wanted, the office they wanted, the money they wanted, the staff they wanted, the tours they wanted and had the backing of their family. What more did they want?"*_



If they can't win at anything they surely do win at ungratefulness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That said, they never asked for Frogmore Cottage, they wanted Frogmore House...must have gotten lost in translation    The courtiers probably thought they had misheard.


----------



## charlottawill

AbbytheBT said:


> IMO - Too short for such high heels - wrong shoes all around for the dress


They may be the same shoes she wore for the O interview. It seems high heels give her confidence. I know years ago when I was young and working in a male dominated field I liked that heels enabled me to look eye to eye or down at men who were giving me a hard time because of my age and sex. I think these would have been cute with the dress. They are super comfortable. 


> https://www.valentino.com/en-US/med...OAZ9xhlSqoFSo9QCDV8aAt0BEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think she meant clothes that were only borrowed by her stylist for that very event. They would have to be returned or paid for.


Yes, I was not referring the $1M wardrobe she got from Charles. I was referring to the items that she was not able to keep as part of the BRF. She can keep all the freebies now.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The donations have been *promised*.
> 
> We'll have to write and ask the various charities and schools if they actually happened.


Yes
The donations may be contingent on a large audience (profits) for the Netflix show - that presumably will include the book reading, UN, restaurant etc
Permission to film was given in exchange for contingent donation


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Now, these REALLY PEEVES me off .. indeed, the guy in the front *definitely looks Secret Service*, and the African-American man behind him .. I'm pretty sure that that is an old friend from my DC days who (at one time) was on the President's detail (which he said was the hardest thing he EVER did in his life .. and he was a former Marine)!



Harry probably asked his good friend Jill for the favor when they did that event together a couple weeks back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember, they just recently hired someone who had been a assistant for  Rachel Zoe.  Surely, she has a warehouse filled with freebies or knows people who do.  Doubtful H&M paid for any of the clothes, hotel, meals, transportation for this ‘tour’.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

And they’re back - those eco-warriors flying coast-to-coast in the private jet  









						Eco-warriors Meghan and Harry return to California in private jet
					

Landing back in California late Saturday Meghan, 40, ditched the block color power dressing that saw some social media users mock her as a Michelle ***** wannabe.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xeyes

Looks as if she may be planning to do something about...well, something. (Comments are fun as always.)





__





						Blind Item #2
					

A very prominent plastic surgeon who is usually booked for at least a year in advance unless your name is Demi Moore has an appointment sche...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## CeeJay

creme fraiche said:


> I have always thought that Meg gave birth to both of her children (likely with IVF and sex selection), and have never thought she has had much plastic surgery beyond a nose job.  Her puffiness goes hand in hand with pregnancy and weight gain.  I also will never poke fun of her for natural body - in fact, I don't think she looks bad for 3-4 months postpartum.
> 
> I do reserve the right to poke fun of her inability to dress properly with all the resources she has, the help available to her, and also because of her arrogance if she is overriding their advice. There are many number of belted shirt-dresses which she could have chosen from which would have been weather appropriate, hidden her flaws and highlighted the good points, and would have cost 1/100th of the price of that red monstrosity and thus more appropriate for the setting.   I also will give a bit of leeway to those who do fat shame her as she thought it appropriate to fat shame a toddler.


Sorry to disappoint, but *METHANOL* has had quite a few "procedures": 

First nose job in the summer before her Senior Year at school 
First set of veneers (teeth) at the same time as above 
Second nose job (to "refine" it more - making it less wide) was done during her college years 
Third nose job after she completed college as she had to start looking for acting jobs 
More 'refinement' to her teeth after she completed college (same time as above) 
Boob job - as can be clearly seen during her time on the game show 
Boob implants taken out - before her time on Suits 
There are plenty of websites that show her "changes" throughout the years and during her time in High School and College, just guess who PAID for all those "refinements" .. yup, her Dad Thomas who she has now "markled"!!


----------



## bag-mania

xeyes said:


> Looks as if she may be planning to do something about...well, something. (Comments are fun as always.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> A very prominent plastic surgeon who is usually booked for at least a year in advance unless your name is Demi Moore has an appointment sche...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



If we don’t see any appearances for her in the next several weeks we will know this one is true.


----------



## Lounorada

I'm not so convinced that crowd gave her a huge cheer last night because my Mom was watching some of the concert on tv in England and she was texting me what she thought: 
-they got a pretty flat response from the crowd when they came out.
-that the crowd was full of teens and young people in their early 20's especially at the front.
-90% of the crowd away from the excitable ones at the front looked bored out of their minds!
-when JCMH said 'my WIFE and I' during their speech, the crowd cheered and instead of continuing with talking he stopped to bask in attention and the crowd cheered more  and MM looked liked she was going to cry  to which my mom said can he not call her by her actual name?!
-The entire concert was boring AF, she switched off when Dumb & Dumber finished their speech because she wasn't going to be preached at by multi-millionaire celebs!

So I found this video to see for myself on youtube by the DM, which shows that the crowd a few meters out from the front and further towards the back could barely hear what they were even saying and very few seemed interested in even watching them, so no wonder the few people at the front were the only ones cheering  I love that the DM added those little clips into this video to show what the sound and atmosphere was really like- dull and boring. To me it sounded like the coverage on tv had enhanced the sound for when crowds were cheering.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Oh my goodness, that’s so cringey, I need a shower.


----------



## charlottawill

She really seems to be carrying weight in an odd fashion around her midsection. But to be fair, she gave birth in what, May? There's a  saying, nine months there and nine months back. And it is even harder when you're 40. I lost the baby weight quickly with my first at 31, but it was much harder five years later with the second one.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> If we don’t see any appearances for her in the next several weeks we will know this one is true.


They'll just say they're laying low with the kids to recover from the exhausting trip.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> And they’re back - those eco-warriors flying coast-to-coast in the private jet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eco-warriors Meghan and Harry return to California in private jet
> 
> 
> Landing back in California late Saturday Meghan, 40, ditched the block color power dressing that saw some social media users mock her as a Michelle ***** wannabe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well quelle surprise .. it wouldn't surprise me if they flew into the airport very close to me, where all the celeb's and power-brokers fly in & out of (and it drives me freakin' nuts because the jets ARE NOT supposed to fly over the neighborhoods, but they do .. and many a time, I'm in my pool and see that damn jet flying right over my house)!!!  AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


>




How does she manage to wear a loose dress in a stiff fabric and still have visible panty line where it cut her below the waist? HOW? The cheapest, easiest trick if you don't want to wear Spanx or have not heard of "invisible" underwear is just buy the freaking panties BIG ENOUGH.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xeyes said:


> Looks as if she may be planning to do something about...well, something. (Comments are fun as always.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> A very prominent plastic surgeon who is usually booked for at least a year in advance unless your name is Demi Moore has an appointment sche...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



They both need some work. Major, imo, but ymmv.


----------



## V0N1B2

Why are those people meeting her dressed like it’s winter? That woman on the right in her heavy looking coat and winter boots? Why? Even way up here in good ol’ Canada people were wearing shorts and T-shirts yesterday. Is it that cold in Santa Barbara that this woman needs to wear boots, a scarf and coat?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How does she manage to wear a loose dress in a stiff fabric and still have visible panty line where it cut her below the waist? HOW? The cheapest, easiest trick if you don't want to wear Spanx or have not heard of "invisible" underwear is just buy the freaking panties BIG ENOUGH.



Just look at where the lines of the dress cut across her body. 
A little longer on the sleeves, a little longer on the dress length = whole new look.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> Why are those people meeting her dressed like it’s winter? That woman on the right in her heavy looking coat and winter boots? Why? Even way up here in good ol’ Canada people were wearing shorts and T-shirts yesterday. Is it that cold in Santa Barbara that this woman needs to wear boots, a scarf and coat?



That’s the former Rachel Zoe assistant. She traveled with H&M.
It is possible she helped with styling. She herself looked good in the photos.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> That’s the former Rachel Zoe assistant. She traveled with H&M.
> It is possible she helped with styling. She herself looked good in the photos.


Well then, she should be fired because she failed miserably .. OH WAIT!!!! .. could it be possible that *MELODRAMATIC* didn't listen????  Hmmm .. my guess is the latter!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

This will kill her for sure. So unflattering from this angle. Or from any angle.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, that's an unflattering pic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lounorada said:


> I'm not so convinced that crowd gave her a huge cheer last night because my Mom was watching some of the concert on tv in England and she was texting me what she thought:
> -they got a pretty flat response from the crowd when they came out.
> -that the crowd was full of teens and young people in their early 20's especially at the front.
> -90% of the crowd away from the excitable ones at the front looked bored out of their minds!
> -when JCMH said 'my WIFE and I' during their speech, the crowd cheered and instead of continuing with talking he stopped to bask in attention and the crowd cheered more  and MM looked liked she was going to cry  to which my mom said can he not call her by her actual name?!
> -The entire concert was boring AF, she switched off when Dumb & Dumber finished their speech because she wasn't going to be preached at by multi-millionaire celebs!
> 
> So I found this video to see for myself on youtube by the DM, which shows that the crowd a few meters out from the front and further towards the back could barely hear what they were even saying and very few seemed interested in even watching them, so no wonder the few people at the front were the only ones cheering  I love that the DM added those little clips into this video to show what the sound and atmosphere was really like- dull and boring. To me it sounded like the coverage on tv had enhanced the sound for when crowds were cheering.




Hazzie does not sound nor look enthusiastic at all. Low energy, speaking in a monotone, another boring lecture. 
MM has an obnoxious flat, nasal voice. The Suits sound guy must have removed it, but this concert guy decided not to.

Neither one has any credibility to speak on vaccines.  Both turn off more people than they convince. Both look and sound unhappy.
imo.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie does not sound nor look enthusiastic at all. Low energy, speaking in a monotone, another boring lecture.
> MM has an obnoxious flat, nasal voice. The Suits sound guy must have removed it, but this concert guy decided not to.
> 
> Neither one has any credibility to speak on vaccines.  Both turn off more people than they convince. Both look and sound unhappy.
> imo.


Yeah, I don't think this trip turned out to be the raging success for their "brand" that they imagined.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Well quelle surprise .. it wouldn't surprise me if they flew into the airport very close to me, where all the celeb's and power-brokers fly in & out of (and it drives me freakin' nuts because the jets ARE NOT supposed to fly over the neighborhoods, but they do .. and many a time, I'm in my pool and see that damn jet flying right over my house)!!!  AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!


She threw a box of food at you from the plane. Did it miss your house?  Good thing it was a washing machine!  
I don’t think I have ever seen such a display of  ill fitting expensive clothing.   There wasn‘t one thing that looked good or appropriate for climate or venue.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Yeah, I don't think this trip turned out to be the raging success for their "brand" that they imagined.


The entire thing was filmed. By the time the editors get finished with it, they will look like they saved the world. Coming to Netflix as soon as they can makes sense of it.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> When it all started and when things were fairly new, up until the end of their working royal time, Harry did seemed genuinely smitten with her. However, this trip to NYC is exposing visible cracks in their relationship and Harry actually looks disinterested. It may be love for Harry at the beginning but now they may just be staying in the marriage solely for optics, money and fame. *Harry looks miserable now more so than when he was with the BRF.*
> 
> With the wealth they flaunt and the space available at Palais de Montecito, she can definitely afford a personal trainer to work out in a home gym and stay looking fit like her single days. *Alas, she's not one to put in the hard work to reap the benefits.* She thinks everything is magic from a fairy godmother. JLo looks amazing for a 50-year-old because she works hard at staying fit. If she didn't, like most of us and Megnut, she would undoubtedly have weight gain and unhidden fat too. The easy way out for Megnut? Just go get lipo and she can wear the kinda clothes that are meant for slimmer frames that she's been trying to pull off but fail miserably.


Bingo!  I think you hit the nails on their heads.  I'm starting to think Harry, in addition to whatever psychiatric issues he has, also has ADD.  Nothing holds his attention long enough, and he's on to the next topic.  In fact, they probably both have ADD.  Mamba is lazy and thinks things just should flow to her.  What was that book Oprah talked about forever?  Something how if you put it into the universe, it'll happen?  Mamba thinks just because she thinks she's gorgeous and is a Queen, she should be.  She has no interest in putting in hard work.  The hardest she's ever worked is probably as a yacht girl and then her hunt for Haz.  Sorry to be crude, but her hardest work has most likely been on her back.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> She threw a box of food at you from the plane. Did it miss your house?  Good thing it was a washing machine!
> I don’t think I have ever seen such a display of  ill fitting expensive clothing.   There wasn‘t one thing that looked good or appropriate for climate or venue.


HA!! .. no, actually .. it was a SEWING MACHINE, you know .. to make all those ALTERATIONS to her HORRIBLE-FITTING wardrobe!!!  After seeing all these pictures being so unflattering, in addition to all the "comments" .. well, she just thought that she could chuck it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> I'm not so convinced that crowd gave her a huge cheer last night because my Mom was watching some of the concert on tv in England and she was texting me what she thought:
> -they got a pretty flat response from the crowd when they came out.
> -that the crowd was full of teens and young people in their early 20's especially at the front.
> -90% of the crowd away from the excitable ones at the front looked bored out of their minds!
> -when JCMH said 'my WIFE and I' during their speech, the crowd cheered and instead of continuing with talking he stopped to bask in attention and the crowd cheered more  and MM looked liked she was going to cry  to which my mom said can he not call her by her actual name?!
> -The entire concert was boring AF, she switched off when Dumb & Dumber finished their speech because she wasn't going to be preached at by multi-millionaire celebs!
> 
> So I found this video to see for myself on youtube by the DM, which shows that the crowd a few meters out from the front and further towards the back could barely hear what they were even saying and very few seemed interested in even watching them, so no wonder the few people at the front were the only ones cheering  I love that the DM added those little clips into this video to show what the sound and atmosphere was really like- dull and boring. To me it sounded like the coverage on tv had enhanced the sound for when crowds were cheering.



A good friend of mine actually went to the concert.  I don't think she knows this thread exists.  I asked her what she thought of MM and Haz.  She replied that's when she took the ear plugs from her purse and put them into her ears, as she has "no interest to hear anything she has to say".


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> They may be the same shoes she wore for the O interview. It seems high heels give her confidence. I know years ago when I was young and working in a male dominated field I liked that heels enabled me to look eye to eye or down at men who were giving me a hard time because of my age and sex. I think these would have been cute with the dress. They are super comfortable.


Your choice is a good one, but she sticks pretty much to closed toe shoes. Early on she wore some sandals and the picture generated lots of comments. She has Morton’s toes, second toe is longer than the first toe, plus if I remember maybe bunion surgery scars. Supposedly her feet were not to be photographed but somebody didn’t get the memo.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh my goodness, that’s so cringey, I need a shower.


Harry sounds like the cheesy emcee no one pays attention to before a two bit circus.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She really seems to be carrying weight in an odd fashion around her midsection. But to be fair, she gave birth in what, May? There's a  saying, nine months there and nine months back. And it is even harder when you're 40. I lost the baby weight quickly with my first at 31, but it was much harder five years later with the second one.


I think like all of her other clothing, she chose the wrong size Spanx.  She probably thinks she's an XS and thus created a lovely muffin top for us all to see.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Constipated?


----------



## doni

Lounorada said:


>




Two comments on this video.

This woman has been pregnant. There is no doubt in my mind about it.
Kudos to her for going around doing things in public without having gone back into shape like an elastic band. I have a feeling she is not into fitness and working out. I relate.

Harry looks like a fish out of water and sort of embarrassed. Which I understand because I cringe watching his performance. She looks more at ease. I am guessing that this is how she imagined being a royal was, the American way, widely smiling from a stage at a cheering crowd instead of shaking hands of polite elderly citizens and unassuming volunteer workers at garden parties.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xeyes

charlottawill said:


> This will kill her for sure. So unflattering from this angle. Or from any angle.




Wow, that’s...just...wow. (Kate looks great, as always.)

I tend to the linebacker-shoulders look (and am thicker through the middle than I would like to be). Wardrobe Rule Number One for me: NO SLEEVED WHITE DRESSES, or I look like the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man. Especially with short sleeves - it all goes horizontal high-albedo wall o’white. Sleeveless black shift dresses hide so many issues. 

Also - and those who speak in public can address this better than I can - isn‘t it a bit, um, risky to stand up on a stage in front of an audience below you in a short, wide skirt?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, they never asked for Frogmore Cottage, they wanted Frogmore House...must have gotten lost in translation    The courtiers probably thought they had misheard.



They actually asked for Windsor Castle

The only problem it was already tenanted - by the Queen - who for some reason didn't want to go live in the granny annex (which in this case would have been either a lodge house or above the stables)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks @CeeJay for your nicknames #10 Methanol and #11 Melodramatic. Both were added to The List.
Welcome to the Energizer Bunny and the Eager Beaver clubs.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Bingo!  I think you hit the nails on their heads.  I'm starting to think Harry, in addition to whatever psychiatric issues he has, also has ADD.  Nothing holds his attention long enough, and he's on to the next topic.  In fact, they probably both have ADD.  Mamba is lazy and thinks things just should flow to her.  What was that book Oprah talked about forever?  Something how if you put it into the universe, it'll happen?  Mamba thinks just because she thinks she's gorgeous and is a Queen, she should be.  She has no interest in putting in hard work.  The hardest she's ever worked is probably as a yacht girl and then her hunt for Haz.  Sorry to be crude, but her hardest work has most likely been on her back.



I believe the book is called The Secret. I kinda feel the book is like a cult i.e. you get fed BS and brainwashed and you blindly believing the "teaching"


----------



## csshopper

Lounorada said:


> I'm not so convinced that crowd gave her a huge cheer last night because my Mom was watching some of the concert on tv in England and she was texting me what she thought:
> -they got a pretty flat response from the crowd when they came out.
> -that the crowd was full of teens and young people in their early 20's especially at the front.
> -90% of the crowd away from the excitable ones at the front looked bored out of their minds!
> -when JCMH said 'my WIFE and I' during their speech, the crowd cheered and instead of continuing with talking he stopped to bask in attention and the crowd cheered more  and MM looked liked she was going to cry  to which my mom said can he not call her by her actual name?!
> -The entire concert was boring AF, she switched off when Dumb & Dumber finished their speech because she wasn't going to be preached at by multi-millionaire celebs!
> 
> So I found this video to see for myself on youtube by the DM, which shows that the crowd a few meters out from the front and further towards the back could barely hear what they were even saying and very few seemed interested in even watching them, so no wonder the few people at the front were the only ones cheering  I love that the DM added those little clips into this video to show what the sound and atmosphere was really like- dull and boring. To me it sounded like the coverage on tv had enhanced the sound for when crowds were cheering.



Lounorada, Great intel, thanks! 

The group in the front are the 2021 version of "claqueurs", an institution as far back as 16th Century France "an organized body of professional applauders." It's more than coincidence the youthful audience, aka, stans were at the forefront.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh! 










						Meghan and Harry faced awkward NYC welcome
					

HARDLY any crowds showed up to greet Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on their three-day trip around New York City, according to one royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Your choice is a good one, but she sticks pretty much to closed toe shoes. Early on she wore some sandals and the picture generated lots of comments. She has Morton’s toes, second toe is longer than the first toe, plus if I remember maybe bunion surgery scars. Supposedly her feet were not to be photographed but somebody didn’t get the memo.


I have ugly feet too, freakishly long second toes, but the Valentino sandals are actually flattering. Doesn't she realize that continued wearing of pointy stilettos is only making her feet worse?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, they just recently hired someone who had been a assistant for  Rachel Zoe.  Surely, she has a warehouse filled with freebies or knows people who do.  Doubtful H&M paid for any of the clothes, hotel, meals, transportation for this ‘tour’.


Mandana worked for RZ like 7 years ago, forever in fashion terms , her wardrobe would be obsolete
she was not a stylist but rather a business manager for the RZ design businesss, not the styling business
i kinda doubt her fashion contacts are worth much anymore and Mandana has distanced herself from that part of her resume, she is now a philanthropic exec
but agree, clothes were loaned in exchange for product placements


----------



## Chanbal

The "tiara tantrum" is back on the news. QE must be relieved to have her far away from the UK. 


_Mr Morton writing in The Times spoke of how Meghan threw a "tiara tantrum" shortly before the wedding._








						Queen 'scolded Meghan' after 'tantrum' - 'she gets tiara she's given'
					

THE QUEEN reportedly put Meghan Markle in her place after she threw a "tiara tantrum" a royal expert has claimed in his new book.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Sorry to disappoint, but *METHANOL* has had quite a few "procedures":
> 
> First nose job in the summer before her Senior Year at school
> First set of veneers (teeth) at the same time as above
> Second nose job (to "refine" it more - making it less wide) was done during her college years
> Third nose job after she completed college as she had to start looking for acting jobs
> More 'refinement' to her teeth after she completed college (same time as above)
> Boob job - as can be clearly seen during her time on the game show
> Boob implants taken out - before her time on Suits
> There are plenty of websites that show her "changes" throughout the years and during her time in High School and College, just guess who PAID for all those "refinements" .. yup, her Dad Thomas who she has now "markled"!!


wow three nose jobs by the time she graduated college...and veneers in high school.  Is it typical in LA to have all that done?


----------



## Chanbal

MM and her eco-conscious husband travel to NYC by private jet to talk about equity, and the US media is muzzled… 










						Meghan Markle wore £66,879 worth of clothes and jewellery in New York
					

With Cartier watches and £3,200 coats, Meghan Markle, 40, donned a very pricy designer wardrobe during her three-day trip to New York, estimated to reach £66,879 in clothes and jewellery.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Mandana worked for RZ like 7 years ago, forever in fashion terms , her wardrobe would be obsolete
> she was not a stylist but rather a business manager for the RZ design businesss, not the styling business
> *i kinda doubt her fashion contacts are worth much anymore *and Mandana has distanced herself from that part of her resume, she is now a philanthropic exec
> but agree, clothes were loaned in exchange for product placements



This explains why MM looked the way she did. The wrong stylists can break a look.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> MM and her eco-conscious husband travel to NYC by private jet to talk about equity, and the US media is muzzled…
> View attachment 5206225
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore £66,879 worth of clothes and jewellery in New York
> 
> 
> With Cartier watches and £3,200 coats, Meghan Markle, 40, donned a very pricy designer wardrobe during her three-day trip to New York, estimated to reach £66,879 in clothes and jewellery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They are acting like she paid for all of it, which I seriously doubt.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> MM and her eco-conscious husband travel to NYC by private jet to talk about equity, and the US media is muzzled…
> View attachment 5206225
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore £66,879 worth of clothes and jewellery in New York
> 
> 
> With Cartier watches and £3,200 coats, Meghan Markle, 40, donned a very pricy designer wardrobe during her three-day trip to New York, estimated to reach £66,879 in clothes and jewellery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Okay. All looks had potential. The jewelry was too much, much too much. Rattling the jewelry is just not cool.
Look 1 - the camel/black dress - not bad except for the purse which appears to be stomped on. Proportions on the clothes look ok.
Look 2 - all navy - the upturned collar on the coat makes this a miss. Dragging the hem does not make MM look like VB.
Look 3 - the LP red -  nope, this is horrible, especially the belt. Same as above with the hem. The color is fugly and the size is extra huge
Look 4 - omg, how many shades of camel can someone wear?  Again, dragging the hem, sloppy sloppy with the shirt and coat
Look 5 -  needs better undergarments, better shoes and posture. The hem of the dress seems to have a curl to it. Why?  The length of the dress cuts her leg at a chunky point - just a little longer would have been better. The sleeves also cut her at a wide point. Elbow length would have looked better.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh!
> View attachment 5206155
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry faced awkward NYC welcome
> 
> 
> HARDLY any crowds showed up to greet Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on their three-day trip around New York City, according to one royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




_Mr Rae responded: "I think their star is waning a little bit, particularly in the UK.

"In the US, I think they are still quite popular. *The Americans have always wanted their own royal family."  *_*  *

No, Nay, Never. 

No, we have not wanted a royal family.  WTH does he think 1776 was about. UK media needs to stop the nonsense. We see what you are doing, UK.     Keep up with this nonsense and we will send these grifters back and put Andy in jail. We see you. 

Stop it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

I got my hands on a copy of the Time magazine (didn't buy it; hope it doesn't sell many copies).  H&& are classified as "icons"
Eww


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I got my hands on a copy of the Time magazine (didn't buy it; hope it doesn't sell many copies).  H&& are classified as "icons"
> Eww



Could be worse - they could have been Leaders 
The choices: Icons, Pioneers, Titans, Artists, Leaders, Innovators

Brittany Spears is called an icon    So is Dolly.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be worse - they could have been Leaders
> The choices: Icons, Pioneers, Titans, Artists, Leaders, Innovators
> 
> Brittany Spears is called an icon    So is Dolly.


well, Dolly deserves it...Britney maybe....H&M - I have no words - just eww


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> well, Dolly deserves it...Britney maybe....H&M - I have no words - just eww


Britney is a champion of people who have been taken advantage of…

Interesting factoid … in the US, it costs so much to do a guardianship that not the rich do it , guardianship is a first world problem


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone post this fawning Vanity Fair article about them meeting Chelsea ******* yet?

www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/09/meghan-harry-chelsea-*******-vaccine-equity/amp


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> I got my hands on a copy of the Time magazine (didn't buy it; hope it doesn't sell many copies).  H&& are classified as "icons"
> Eww


You mean CONS, not icons!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone post this fawning Vanity Fair article about them meeting Chelsea ******* yet?
> 
> www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/09/meghan-harry-chelsea-*******-vaccine-equity/amp


Link will never work , her last time was edited out of URL , no mind
i find it fascinating US royalty meeting BRF, compare and contrast
CC has a cheaper wardrobe


----------



## cat1234

Exactly.  I don’t understand why she didn’t utilize a high/low approach, sprinkling in some “relatable” J Crew or Banana Republic.  Not a good look for a philanthropist.


----------



## octopus17

charlottawill said:


> I have ugly feet too, freakishly long second toes, but the Valentino sandals are actually flattering. Doesn't she realize that continued wearing of pointy stilettos is only making her feet worse?


You're right - my mother wore tight, pointy stilettos in her youth, resulting in bunions which now have to be accommodated in whatever shoe she wears. She manages though, but still....


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Mr Rae responded: "I think their star is waning a little bit, particularly in the UK.
> 
> "In the US, I think they are still quite popular. *The Americans have always wanted their own royal family."  *_*  *
> 
> No, Nay, Never.
> 
> No, we have not wanted a royal family.  WTH does he think 1776 was about. UK media needs to stop the nonsense. We see what you are doing, UK.     Keep up with this nonsense and we will send these grifters back and put Andy in jail. We see you.
> 
> Stop it.


I think the royal family that the Americans "want" is the fantasy version that Disney sells, where the prince & commoner turned princess ride off in a carriage and don't bother the peasants. If Madam Duchess carries on trying to rule the world with her hectoring and simpering, the tarnish on their victimhood halos will get darker very fast.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Mr Rae responded: "I think their star is waning a little bit, particularly in the UK.
> 
> "In the US, I think they are still quite popular. *The Americans have always wanted their own royal family."  *_*  *
> 
> No, Nay, Never.
> 
> *No, we have not wanted a royal family.* WTH does he think 1776 was about. UK media needs to stop the nonsense. We see what you are doing, UK.    Keep up with this nonsense and we will send these grifters back and put Andy in jail. We see you.
> 
> Stop it.


I think QE and Will are great for the UK, but a monarchy in the US is absolutely nonsense. However, instead of blaming the UK media, I blame the US media that is supporting the hypocrisy of this couple. It's more than time for our media to be more honest. This couple preaches about carbon footprints, equity, compassion… and


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Did anyone post this fawning Vanity Fair article about them meeting Chelsea ******* yet?
> 
> www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/09/meghan-harry-chelsea-*******-vaccine-equity/amp


@bag-mania I don't want to give more clicks to their press, what I see here and on twitter is enough…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They are acting like she paid for all of it, which I seriously doubt.


Independently of whoever is paying for her bills now, it's a lot of money in clothes for someone so concerned about equity. It's a long way from the sayonara Zara times…


----------



## Chanbal

Going to watch this one, he is usually very entertaining.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Independently of whoever is paying for her bills now, it's a lot of money in clothes for someone so concerned about equity. It's a long way from the sayonara Zara times…



But we are expected to look the other way when it comes to their hypocrisy. After all, they feel they deserve everything they can get.

From George Orwell's _Animal Farm_, "all are equal, but some are more equal than others."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I think the royal family that the Americans "want" is the fantasy version that Disney sells, where the prince & commoner turned princess ride off in a carriage and don't bother the peasants. If Madam Duchess carries on trying to rule the world with her hectoring and simpering, the tarnish on their victimhood halos will get darker very fast.



Nope, we do not want any ‘royal family’. We resist that on all levels. Even dynasty is a tricky word to use around us. The entitled elites we have now are enough


----------



## rose60610

My guess the white dress was to show off her thin legs since the rest of her isn't as thin as her glory days. Strange contrast from the "dressed for 20 degree weather" outfits. All those pants that dragged on the ground? Ugh. I don't care who wears pants that drag on the ground, it's terrible. Even Victoria Beckham doesn't compensate for the look, regardless of being physically fantastic. So...she's one week off from the Met Gala, does she think she's "one-upping" the Gala by going to the UN, etc? If Maggot is chosen to be some kind of UN Ambassador, IMO it's because they paid for it. Regardless, the loyal royals will always be far more impactful than any U.S. celebrity when it comes to promoting humanitarian causes. Golly, Maggot couldn't handle the diplomacy of the BRF influence to promote humane practices under the radar! Does Mangle Markle think she's replacing the BRF in the U.S.?  Her efforts reek of desperation. Duchess Desperate and Prince Piss Ant won't donate $25 to anything without media coverage and credit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> My guess the white dress was to show off her thin legs since the rest of her isn't as thin as her glory days. Strange contrast from the "dressed for 20 degree weather" outfits. All those pants that dragged on the ground? Ugh. I don't care who wears pants that drag on the ground, it's terrible. Even Victoria Beckham doesn't compensate for the look, regardless of being physically fantastic. So...she's one week off from the Met Gala, does she think she's "one-upping" the Gala by going to the UN, etc? If Maggot is chosen to be some kind of UN Ambassador, IMO it's because they paid for it. Regardless, the loyal royals will always be far more impactful than any U.S. celebrity when it comes to promoting humanitarian causes. Golly, Maggot couldn't handle the diplomacy of the BRF influence to promote humane practices under the radar! Does Mangle Markle think she's replacing the BRF in the U.S.?  Her efforts reek of desperation. Duchess Desperate and Prince Piss Ant won't donate $25 to anything without media coverage and credit.



If the UN wants her, it would only be as one of these nominal positions. Undoubtedly, a _pay and you get to play_ game. A UN Messenger of Peace? The world would know for certain what a farce that would be!





__





						Frequently Asked Questions | United Nations
					






					www.un.org
				



*How are Messengers of Peace selected?*
Due care is exercised when selecting high profile individuals to serve as a Messenger of Peace or Goodwill Ambassador, and established selection criteria ensure that persons of integrity, who demonstrate the commitment and ability to reach a global audience, are designated.

Ultimately, it is the decision of the United Nations Secretary-General to appoint a Messenger of Peace when appropriate.

*What is the difference between a Messenger of Peace and a Goodwill Ambassador?*
The United Nations Secretary-General appoints Messengers of Peace, while Goodwill Ambassadors are designated by the heads of United Nations Funds, Programmes and specialized Agencies, e.g., UNICEF, the World Food Programme (WFP) and UNHCR. Goodwill Ambassadors are subsequently endorsed by the Secretary-General.

*In what type of activity do Messengers of Peace and Goodwill Ambassadors participate? How is Civil Society involved with the Messengers of Peace Programme?*
The role of the Messengers of Peace and Goodwill Ambassadors is to communicate the activities and concerns of the United Nations to help extend its public outreach.

In the past, celebrity advocates have participated in activities and events ranging from concerts to giving keynote addresses at high-level United Nations events, to using social media such as Twitter and Facebook to broaden a particular campaign’s reach. Messengers of Peace also visit United Nations programmes and activities in the field, which help raise visibility around pressing regional and local issues in international media.

Non-governmental organizations, educational institutions and other non-commercial entities regularly invite Messengers of Peace and Goodwill Ambassadors to participate in events and activities that are compatible with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, and help raise awareness and educate about the priority issues of the Organization.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That’s definitely why she wore the dress, but even her legs aren’t what they once were.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *If the UN wants her,* it would only be as one of these nominal positions. Undoubtedly, a _pay and you get to play_ game. A UN Messenger of Peace? The world would know for certain what a farce that would be!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frequently Asked Questions | United Nations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.un.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *How are Messengers of Peace selected?*
> Due care is exercised when selecting high profile individuals to serve as a Messenger of Peace or Goodwill Ambassador, and established selection criteria ensure that persons of integrity, who demonstrate the commitment and ability to reach a global audience, are designated.
> 
> Ultimately, it is the decision of the United Nations Secretary-General to appoint a Messenger of Peace when appropriate.
> 
> *What is the difference between a Messenger of Peace and a Goodwill Ambassador?*
> The United Nations Secretary-General appoints Messengers of Peace, while Goodwill Ambassadors are designated by the heads of United Nations Funds, Programmes and specialized Agencies, e.g., UNICEF, the World Food Programme (WFP) and UNHCR. Goodwill Ambassadors are subsequently endorsed by the Secretary-General.
> 
> *In what type of activity do Messengers of Peace and Goodwill Ambassadors participate? How is Civil Society involved with the Messengers of Peace Programme?*
> The role of the Messengers of Peace and Goodwill Ambassadors is to communicate the activities and concerns of the United Nations to help extend its public outreach.
> 
> In the past, celebrity advocates have participated in activities and events ranging from concerts to giving keynote addresses at high-level United Nations events, to using social media such as Twitter and Facebook to broaden a particular campaign’s reach. Messengers of Peace also visit United Nations programmes and activities in the field, which help raise visibility around pressing regional and local issues in international media.
> 
> Non-governmental organizations, educational institutions and other non-commercial entities regularly invite Messengers of Peace and Goodwill Ambassadors to participate in events and activities that are compatible with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, and help raise awareness and educate about the priority issues of the Organization.


She is the one that wants the UN! Let's hope the UN declines the services of Mrs Hypocrisy.


----------



## V0N1B2

She could have worn something like this (with proper shape wear) if she wanted to disguise problem areas and play up her assets. She could have gone for a slightly shorter knee length version of this dress. Bonus: it’s not white.


----------



## EverSoElusive

V0N1B2 said:


> She could have worn something like this (with proper shape wear) if she wanted to disguise problem areas and play up her assets. She could have gone for a slightly shorter knee length version of this dress. Bonus: it’s not white.
> View attachment 5206442



Do you have a link to this dress?


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> She could have worn something like this (with proper shape wear) if she wanted to disguise problem areas and play up her assets. She could have gone for a slightly shorter knee length version of this dress. Bonus: it’s not white.
> View attachment 5206442



Yes, yes, yes!  
This is exactly what she needed to wear.  After all, it was a _rock concert_. This is feminine and fun with lots of swish and swoosh 
The happy color is an added bonus.  
Thank you for reading the room and bringing the happy


----------



## Chanbal

Compassion in action!  

_Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell website has begun advising its visitors to take a break from their screens. 

*The site - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters. * 

'*We love having you here...' the message reads. 'But we're mindful of screen time.* _


_As we increasingly understand the direct link between technology and its effect on each of us - online and offline - Archewell Foundation will continue to prioritise critical work around the state of our digital world,' the couple say, on their website.

The pair arrived by private jet to Santa Barbara, California on Saturday when they were reunited with their children Archie and Lilibet following a whirlwind tour of New York… 

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also had a photo op with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.*

Pictures from the trip appeared to show a wire poking out of Harry's pocket, suggesting the de-facto royal tour will be part of their multi-million dollar Netflix deal. _









						Harry and Meghan warn readers of their website to take a screen break
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's website - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> That’s definitely why she wore the dress, but even her legs aren’t what they once were.


She has gained all over, even in her legs.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Compassion in action!
> 
> _Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell website has begun advising its visitors to take a break from their screens.
> 
> *The site - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters. *
> 
> '*We love having you here...' the message reads. 'But we're mindful of screen time.* _
> View attachment 5206454
> 
> _As we increasingly understand the direct link between technology and its effect on each of us - online and offline - Archewell Foundation will continue to prioritise critical work around the state of our digital world,' the couple say, on their website.
> 
> The pair arrived by private jet to Santa Barbara, California on Saturday when they were reunited with their children Archie and Lilibet following a whirlwind tour of New York…
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also had a photo op with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.*
> 
> Pictures from the trip appeared to show a wire poking out of Harry's pocket, suggesting the de-facto royal tour will be part of their multi-million dollar Netflix deal. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warn readers of their website to take a screen break
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's website - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My take is that consider themselves to be know it all finger pointers. Only problem is that they have nothing to back it up. They talk, talk, talk, and now will have programs with them showing how they talk,talk,talk, but will they do anything substantive?


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> She could have worn something like this (with proper shape wear) if she wanted to disguise problem areas and play up her assets. She could have gone for a slightly shorter knee length version of this dress. Bonus: it’s not white.
> View attachment 5206442


Love it. Could totally see her wearing that to the concert.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Compassion in action!
> 
> _Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell website has begun advising its visitors to take a break from their screens.
> 
> *The site - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters. *
> 
> '*We love having you here...' the message reads. 'But we're mindful of screen time.* _
> View attachment 5206454
> 
> _As we increasingly understand the direct link between technology and its effect on each of us - online and offline - Archewell Foundation will continue to prioritise critical work around the state of our digital world,' the couple say, on their website.
> 
> The pair arrived by private jet to Santa Barbara, California on Saturday when they were reunited with their children Archie and Lilibet following a whirlwind tour of New York…
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also had a photo op with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.*
> 
> Pictures from the trip appeared to show a wire poking out of Harry's pocket, suggesting the de-facto royal tour will be part of their multi-million dollar Netflix deal. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warn readers of their website to take a screen break
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's website - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk






 The big lie.  They met with the *Deputy* UN Sec-Gen, *Deputy, *a female.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> She could have worn something like this (with proper shape wear) if she wanted to disguise problem areas and play up her assets. She could have gone for a slightly shorter knee length version of this dress. Bonus: it’s not white.
> View attachment 5206442


The red dress would have been a beautiful choice, but I would have preferred the pineapple dress for her. She has already the lemon dress and I would have had a lot more fun if she had repeated the Carmen Miranda look.  Sorry, I'm being bad tonight.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5206473
> 
> 
> The big lie.  They met with the *Deputy* UN Sec-Gen, *Deputy, *a female.


Are you sure about that? It would be nice… Though, the news report a meeting with Guterres.

"_The couple will start their final day of their New York City tour speaking with Mr Guterres before attending climate change concert Global Citizen Live this evening_."









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend meeting at United Nations
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have arrived at the United Nations building in New York for a meeting with Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure about that? It would be nice… Though, the news report a meeting with Guterres.
> 
> "_The couple will start their final day of their New York City tour speaking with Mr Guterres before attending climate change concert Global Citizen Live this evening_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend meeting at United Nations
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have arrived at the United Nations building in New York for a meeting with Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk



Yep, they met with the *Deputy*.

*The royals came to U.N. headquarters to speak with Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed.*



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/harry-and-meghan-visit-un-amid-world-leaders-meeting/2021/09/25/a0f191e0-1e26-11ec-bea8-308ea134594f_story.html


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The red dress would have been a beautiful choice, but I would have preferred the pineapple dress for her. She has already the lemon dress and I would have had a lot more fun if she had repeated the Carmen Miranda look.  Sorry, I'm being bad tonight.
> View attachment 5206470


Really cute but I think the flowy red one would better camouflage her figure flaws.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Both of those would have been an improvement and more suitable to a *rock concert*.
Another option:



or this with a ruffle:




She had options.

ETA:  use a lil jcrew cards to cover arms, if needed


----------



## Jayne1

doni said:


> She is obviously carrying baby weight. That should put an end to surrogacy rumors.


What if she used a surrogate and just gained weight during lockdown? Or gained some weight due to entering her 40s and our metabolism changes.

Gaining weight doesn't mean one gave brith.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Really cute but I think the flowy red one would better camouflage her figure flaws.


I don't think the pineapple dress would look good on her, but would have given us more to talk about.


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> Do you have a link to this dress?











						1960s Taupe Pleated Chiffon Trapeze Dress - S/M
					

Overview Care Shipping DESCRIPTION: 1960s taupe pleated trapeze dress with halter neck. Dress features large open bell sleeves and tiered double layer skirt. CONDITION:Great. Very light wear. Cleaned and ready to wear.  MEASUREMENTS:Bust: up to 35"Waist: Open Hips: Open Length: 42"Fits-Like...




					shopgossamer.com
				



I had originally wanted to post the DVF Fleurette dress from several years ago in one of the bright patterns, but it's just too short - even for Meghan.

I feel for Meghan trying to dress her new body, my middle section is my problem area too, so I know all the tricks to hide it.  Those coats, while lovely, were just too overwhelming on her. Even when you are short waisted AND don't have a well defined waist, you still need to belt your coat. Leaving it open or wearing long open coats/coatigans looks sloppy, and especially when it's an oversized style and you have to roll up the sleeve.  I know she was going for the leg lengthening look in that navy blue ensemble, but a slim (tailored!) cigarette pant to the ankle would've been more chic, IMO. Maybe in a silk dupioni or some kind of fabric with a little bit of depth. She could even hide the muffin top with a flowy tunic length top that floats away from the body.  I'm a big fan of the monochromatic look for slimming purposes, but that Loro Piana outfit was a mess, an absolute mess. With her boxy figure, she needs a really good well-fitting jacket/blazer.  Stacy London was always right about that one.


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, here in the UK the real Royals took their three children for a pub lunch on Saturday.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Gaining weight doesn't mean one gave brith.



Tell me about it


----------



## doni

Jayne1 said:


> What if she used a surrogate and just gained weight during lockdown? Or gained some weight due to entering her 40s and our metabolism changes.
> 
> Gaining weight doesn't mean one gave brith.


To me the weight she is carrying looks and feels completely like post pregnancy weight. 

She is supposed to have been pregnant and is supposed to have given birth around 4 months ago. She looks exactly as someone who has been heavily pregnant and given birth around 4 months ago. So the chances are this is exactly what happened.
But that is just my opinion.


----------



## doni

V0N1B2 said:


> I feel for Meghan trying to dress her new body, my middle section is my problem area too, so I know all the tricks to hide it.  Those coats, while lovely, were just too overwhelming on her. Even when you are short waisted AND don't have a well defined waist, you still need to belt your coat. Leaving it open or wearing long open coats/coatigans looks sloppy, and especially when it's an oversized style and you have to roll up the sleeve.  I know she was going for the leg lengthening look in that navy blue ensemble, but a slim (tailored!) cigarette pant to the ankle would've been more chic, IMO. Maybe in a silk dupioni or some kind of fabric with a little bit of depth. She could even hide the muffin top with a flowy tunic length top that floats away from the body.  I'm a big fan of the monochromatic look for slimming purposes, but that Loro Piana outfit was a mess, an absolute mess. With her boxy figure, she needs a really good well-fitting jacket/blazer.  Stacy London was always right about that one.



I am thin but very short waisted and don’t have any waist to speak of, and belting a coat is an absolute no go. Even when I was younger and thiner or before eating a meal… I agree that a well tailored blazer would have been her friend. Particularly as coats were not necessary at this time of year.


----------



## doni

Sharont2305 said:


> Meanwhile, here in the UK the real Royals took their three children for a pub lunch on Saturday.


No really?! I thought they were locked down in the castle and unable to cross the gates.



Chanbal said:


> Compassion in action!
> 
> _Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell website has begun advising its visitors to take a break from their screens.
> 
> The site - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters.
> 
> 'We love having you here...' the message reads. 'But we're mindful of screen time.
> 
> As we increasingly understand the direct link between technology and its effect on each of us - online and offline - Archewell Foundation will continue to prioritise critical work around the state of our digital world,' the couple say, on their website._



This is the most patronising thing I’ve ever heard in my life.
Also, is this the kind of site where people linge for hours? Do they offer games? Does it include a gossip forum?


----------



## xincinsin

doni said:


> No really?! I thought they were locked down in the castle and unable to cross the gates.


I always found it hysterical - her claim to (sob!) not being able to go for coffee with Doria because she was too famous, so the palace thugs told her to quit going out.


----------



## Lenna.V

bag-mania said:


> But we are expected to look the other way when it comes to their hypocrisy. After all, they feel they deserve everything they can get.
> 
> From George Orwell's _Animal Farm_, "all are equal, but some are more equal than others."



Seriously though, is it just me or are we never seen MM recycle her clothes? Kate did all the time.
Does she have to return clothes after she wore like celebrities do with brands?


----------



## CarryOn2020

doni said:


> To me the weight she is carrying looks and feels completely like post pregnancy weight.
> 
> She is supposed to have been pregnant and is supposed to have given birth around 4 months ago. She looks exactly as someone who has been heavily pregnant and given birth around 4 months ago. So the chances are this is exactly what happened.
> But that is just my opinion.



It could be baby weight, it could be antidepressants, it could be alcohol, it could be several other medical conditions.  We’ll never know.
Why are we certain there is a baby? Because _they_ say so. Noooo, they have zero credibility with most people.

The Melissa call was mid-August.  She looks smaller there, imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> I always found it hysterical - her claim to (sob!) not being able to go for coffee with Doria because she was too famous, so the palace thugs told her to quit going out.



And meanwhile Kate can bring the future heir to the throne to Smiggles to buy stuff. Yeah right.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> It could be baby weight, it could be antidepressants, it could be alcohol, it could be several other medical conditions.  We’ll never know.
> Why are we certain there is a baby? Because _they_ say so. Noooo, they have zero credibility with most people.
> 
> The Melissa call was mid-August.  She looks smaller there, imo.
> 
> View attachment 5206572


Unless her weight is yo-yo-ing crazily, this video may have been made before the weight gain apparent in the NYC appearance. After all, we have no clue when this faux video call was recorded or her 40x40 planned. Then again, that massive table hides most of her body and the shawl hides her upper arms, handily obscuring any extra pounds. I doubt that was by chance, considering how staged that whole video was.


----------



## xincinsin

Lenna.V said:


> Seriously though, is it just me or are we never seen MM recycle her clothes? Kate did all the time.
> Does she have to return clothes after she wore like celebrities do with brands?


So far, in those breakdowns of her outfits, I see a lot of repeats of the expensive jewellery, but I don't see repeats of clothes and (relatively) cheap jewellery, not even the necklaces she wore with the Poppy shirt/dress or the 40x40 video, both of which were supposed to be meaningful. I think her taste is now for ostentatious bling accessories, but she is contractually bound to merch sentimental stuff that her stans can afford.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Both of those would have been an improvement and more suitable to a *rock concert*.
> Another option:
> View attachment 5206487
> 
> 
> or this with a ruffle:
> 
> View attachment 5206488
> 
> 
> She had options.
> 
> ETA:  use a lil jcrew cards to cover arms, if needed



She's worn the bottom version in one of their Zoom calls but we know she's not much of a repeat wearer of her clothes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lenna.V said:


> Seriously though, is it just me or are we never seen MM recycle her clothes? Kate did all the time.
> Does she have to return clothes after she wore like celebrities do with brands?


She never repeat, which is part of the reason I don’t understand why she’s so focused on keeping these clothes


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. That's some dedication right there haha.
> 
> She is definitely not as puffy in the face as with Archie...remember the Trooping the Colours when she barely had eyes (but just enough to shoot darts at Kate)?


Oh my gosh, these descriptions are so funny. Like the the simple things in life  


csshopper said:


> Your choice is a good one, but she sticks pretty much to closed toe shoes. Early on she wore some sandals and the picture generated lots of comments. She has Morton’s toes, second toe is longer than the first toe, plus if I remember maybe bunion surgery scars. Supposedly her feet were not to be photographed but somebody didn’t get the memo.


wow you’ve got a good memory! I think they are lovely shoes but I’m glad she didn’t go for them. TPF doesn’t want rock studs adding to the ‘ruined’ pile when we’ve already taken so many slights. (Farewell valextra, godspeed lady Dior,  nice knowing you CWK Givenchy, you never really had a chance Strathberry )


----------



## Lenna.V

xincinsin said:


> So far, in those breakdowns of her outfits, I see a lot of repeats of the expensive jewellery, but I don't see repeats of clothes and (relatively) cheap jewellery, not even the necklaces she wore with the Poppy shirt/dress or the 40x40 video, both of which were supposed to be meaningful. I think her taste is now for ostentatious bling accessories, but she is contractually bound to merch sentimental stuff that her stans can afford.



Yes and those clothes are expensive! So I came to think, brands lent it to her. Apparently it good for their business.

So conclusion, she loves free cakes come with her titles but not works or rule that the BRY set for senior royals to follow.


----------



## Lenna.V

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh, these descriptions are so funny. Like the the simple things in life
> 
> wow you’ve got a good memory! I think they are lovely shoes but I’m glad she didn’t go for them. TPF doesn’t want rock studs adding to the ‘ruined’ pile when we’ve already taken so many slights. (Farewell valextra, godspeed lady Dior,  nice knowing you CWK Givenchy, you never really had a chance Strathberry )



Oh no not my Valextra


----------



## needlv

Yes the wedding band is bigger.  So she has changed rings again.


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> Yes the wedding band is bigger.  So she has changed rings again.



I saw a super close up that made it look like the ring has not changed, she just added a big honking eternity band to it.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Yes the wedding band is bigger.  So she has changed rings again.




Shame the actress Lilly Collins has the new Cartier contract as the face of Clash Unlimited.

I'm hoping M starts to buy/wear other jewellers (that I don't like)


----------



## sdkitty

I sent an email to Dr Jill basically suggesting it wasn't a good look for her to be "friends" with Harry who is no longer a royal and not a US citizen.  I realize she isn't going to personally read it but maybe if others also tell her this, it could make a difference.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Yes the wedding band is bigger.  So she has changed rings again.



I think Methane's point is that she has defeated poverty and so she piled on the proof. Having set a high bar, she now has the right to tell everyone else that they should go seduce some unintelligent rich person and hook him or her before they hit 40.

If, and that's a big IF, she was pregnant à second time, perhaps the weight gain is due to gestational diabetes. Or she could have a thyroid problem - hence the chins and overall enlargement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> And meanwhile Kate can bring the future heir to the throne to Smiggles to buy stuff. Yeah right.



Kate can also attend soccer games with two future heirs and a spare without clearing out a whole section, or take a cheap flight to Scotland while others are so famous they have to take a private jet three times in ten days for security reasons. Miraculous, really.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I sent an email to Dr Jill basically suggesting it wasn't a good look for her to be "friends" with Harry who is no longer a royal and not a US citizen.  I realize she isn't going to personally read it but maybe if others also tell her this, it could make a difference.



I mean, they can be friends, but please don't give him a platform. I don't bring my bff on projects she is not qualified for (in her case, not because she's talentless, but because we have completely different careers).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Does *Mangle Markle* think she's replacing the BRF in the U.S.?  Her efforts reek of desperation. *Duchess Desperate* and *Prince Piss Ant* won't donate $25 to anything without media coverage and credit.


Many thanks @rose60610 for your nicknames #2Mangle Markle, #3 Desperate Duchess and #4 Prince Piss Ant; all accurate descriptions of the duo and good for a gold ribbon.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they can be friends, but please don't give him a platform. I don't bring my bff on projects she is not qualified for (in her case, not because she's talentless, but because we have completely different careers).


right
I was trying to say she best not give the appearance of "endorsing" these two who are looking out for their own advantage, not really acting as humanitarians


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate can also attend soccer games with two future heirs and a spare without clearing out a whole section, or take a cheap flight to Scotland while others are so famous they have to take a private jet three times in ten days for security reasons. Miraculous, really.


And forget her money when buying a wetsuit from a small surf shop near where I live, call herself Mrs Cambridge to hold the item, then went back to pay and collect it.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate can also attend soccer games with two future heirs and a spare without clearing out a whole section, or take a cheap flight to Scotland while others are so famous they have to take a private jet three times in ten days for security reasons. Miraculous, really.





Sharont2305 said:


> And forget her money when buying a wetsuit from a small surf shop near where I live, call herself Mrs Cambridge to hold the item, then went back to pay and collect it.


Methane was probably horrified that behind the scenes, the royals ate out of tupperware and had holidays in rural areas. She must have imagined a princess would be waited on hand and foot, served exotic delicacies on golden plates, and no one would ever say No to her. Imagine her disgust when she realized that she was expected to work and not just turn up acting cute (= slutty) to wow the crowd. Did Hazard ever bring her along for the less grandiose parts of his life while they were dating? Or did she think she could skive her way out of those parts of his life?


----------



## Chanbal

doni said:


> This is the most patronising thing I’ve ever heard in my life.
> Also, is this the kind of site where people linge for hours? Do they offer games? Does it include a gossip forum?


I don't know if Arch*well offers games or has a gossip forum, but I agree with you 100%, the message is patronizing.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> She never repeat, which is part of the reason I don’t understand why she’s so focused on keeping these clothes


Would she be selling them? The $1M wardrobe offered by Charles would at least add a few hundred thousand dollars to a particular bank account…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Would she be selling them? The $1M wardrobe offered by Charles would at least add a few hundred thousand dollars to a particular bank account…


I do wonder what happened to those clothes. If she sold them, surely a stan somewhere would be crowing about buying clothes worn by her. I think it is more likely that she had a deal to return them to the designer for a kickback.


----------



## doni

xincinsin said:


> Methane was probably horrified that behind the scenes, the royals ate out of tupperware and had holidays in rural areas. She must have imagined a princess would be waited on hand and foot, served exotic delicacies on golden plates, and no one would ever say No to her. Imagine her disgust when she realized that she was expected to work and not just turn up acting cute (= slutty) to wow the crowd. Did Hazard ever bring her along for the less grandiose parts of his life while they were dating? Or did she think she could skive her way out of those parts of his life?


Harry brought her to Africa and they happily used the jungle as their toilet. So that was that. It was evident that he’d found the right woman for the job (as per his own words).
Little did he know that in a couple of years he would be living in California sorrounded by artificial landscaping and have a different bathroom for everyday of the month….


----------



## Chanbal

Worldwide leaders (dictators)? Compassion and Equity? Disgusting!  

“_*My wife and I believe that where you're born should not dictate your ability to survive*_.” What would you be if it wasn't for the place you were born? Your team keeps requesting that you and your wife are addressed by the UK titles. Hypocrisy to the maximum…


----------



## Chanbal

PIERS MORGAN: Sussexes love to preach one thing and do the opposite
					

Harry and Meghan have  just finished a four-day trip to New York, and spoke at Global Citizen concert. Even by their two-faced standards, it set a new low bar for hypocrisy.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I do wonder what happened to those clothes. If she sold them, surely a stan somewhere would be crowing about buying clothes worn by her. I think it is more likely that she had a deal to return them to the designer for a kickback.


I don't think she had to return the clothes paid by Charles. According to online sources, she likes freebies. I wouldn't be surprised if she has someone selling some of those clothes for her…


----------



## Chanbal

"DSSOS"


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5206802
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Sussexes love to preach one thing and do the opposite
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have  just finished a four-day trip to New York, and spoke at Global Citizen concert. Even by their two-faced standards, it set a new low bar for hypocrisy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Indeed.  Harkles, hypocrisy is thy name.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> right
> I was trying to say she best not give the appearance of "endorsing" these two who are looking out for their own advantage, not really acting as humanitarians



Whichever of her minions reads your message will likely assume you must be a racist and a hater and therefore disregard it. Honestly, if public figures cannot be bothered to properly vet the people they associate with there's not much we can do to help them from looking foolish and being used.


----------



## Chanbal

US media, you can do a lot better! Do we need to keep getting our news from international outlets? 



_The maths on this is queasy. The New York Times has previously reported that school meals comes in at a cost of $US1.75 ($A2.40) per day, so the cost of Meghan’s coat, pants, belt and shoes alone, never mind her jewellery, would equate to paying for 5083 meals for kids in New York._









						Big problem with Meghan’s $12k outfit
					

If there was one substantial change that the arrival of Kate Middleton wrought when she breached the walls of Buckingham Palace in 2011 it was to launch the era of The Zara Royal.




					www.news.com.au


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Worldwide leaders (dictators)? Compassion and Equity? Disgusting!
> 
> “_*My wife and I believe that where you're born should not dictate your ability to survive*_.” What would you be if it wasn't for the place you were born? Your team keeps requesting that you and your wife are addressed by the UK titles. Hypocrisy to the maximum…




I mean, I even agree with that statement but hearing it from them infuriates me.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Whichever of her minions reads your message will likely assume you must be a racist and a hater and therefore disregard it. Honestly, if public figures cannot be bothered to properly vet the people they associate with there's not much we can do to help them from looking foolish and being used.


You are right, but we can hope that if many people do what @sdkitty did, they will be 'forced' to pay attention to it.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I even agree with that statement but hearing it from them infuriates me.


The statement is correct, but the hypocrisy of making sure they are addressed by the UK titles is disgusting. She even uses the title on the new Dior bag…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> US media, you can do a lot better! Do we need to keep getting our news from international outlets?
> 
> View attachment 5206811
> 
> _The maths on this is queasy. The New York Times has previously reported that school meals comes in at a cost of $US1.75 ($A2.40) per day, so the cost of Meghan’s coat, pants, belt and shoes alone, never mind her jewellery, would equate to paying for 5083 meals for kids in New York._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big problem with Meghan’s $12k outfit
> 
> 
> If there was one substantial change that the arrival of Kate Middleton wrought when she breached the walls of Buckingham Palace in 2011 it was to launch the era of The Zara Royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



VULGAR. 

I'm not sure Kate has donned an outfit in this price category ever, apart from evening looks.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Whichever of her minions reads your message will likely assume you must be a racist and a hater and therefore disregard it. Honestly, if public figures cannot be bothered to properly vet the people they associate with there's not much we can do to help them from looking foolish and being used.


well to be fair she became friendly with him when he was a member of the RF....different than what he is now.  I don't know how many people will bother to complain but I wanted to try


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> "DSSOS"
> View attachment 5206809


She’s honestly disgusting.


----------



## TC1

I wish I could try to "defeat poverty" from my mansion whilst unemployed and flying private SIGH


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> US media, you can do a lot better! Do we need to keep getting our news from international outlets?
> 
> View attachment 5206811
> 
> _The maths on this is queasy. The New York Times has previously reported that school meals comes in at a cost of $US1.75 ($A2.40) per day, so the cost of Meghan’s coat, pants, belt and shoes alone, never mind her jewellery, would equate to paying for 5083 meals for kids in New York._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big problem with Meghan’s $12k outfit
> 
> 
> If there was one substantial change that the arrival of Kate Middleton wrought when she breached the walls of Buckingham Palace in 2011 it was to launch the era of The Zara Royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



Oh I totally agree with the writer! Tone deaf and very vulgar indeed. It’s like she can’t wait to flash her designer togs. She could have worn some unknown women of color designers knowing the exposure it would have given them, or just dressed down for once for the school visit. But no, she must read her disgusting book and have her baby husband flash his undies at us in that awful ill fitting red clown like ensemble. Ugh.


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Oh I totally agree with the writer! Tone deaf and very vulgar indeed. It’s like she can’t wait to flash her designer togs. She could have worn some unknown women of color designers knowing the exposure it would have given them, or just dressed down for once for the school visit. But no, she must read her disgusting book and have her baby husband flash his undies at us in that awful ill fitting red clown like ensemble. Ugh.


yes, this victim-WOC seems to be clueless but getting away with it


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Unless her weight is yo-yo-ing crazily, this video may have been made before the weight gain apparent in the NYC appearance. After all, we have no clue when this faux video call was recorded or her 40x40 planned. Then again, that massive table hides most of her body and the shawl hides her upper arms, handily obscuring any extra pounds. I doubt that was by chance, considering how staged that whole video was.



Iirc, we were told the call took place on or near her birthday - that is why she is eating the cake. So, did they lie about that? 

My point is from the 40x40 video to last week’s ‘tour’ [about 6 weeks?], she appears to have gained weight. Since the ‘tour’ clothes are extremely oversized, it is difficult to know. It isn’t the weight that causes her to look off balance, it is the clothes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My point is from the 40x40 video to last week’s ‘tour’ [about 6 weeks?], she appears to have gained weight. Since the ‘tour’ clothes are extremely oversized, it is difficult to know. *It isn’t the weight that causes her to look off balance, it is the clothes.*



This. She is heavier, not morbidly obese.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> wow three nose jobs by the time she graduated college...and veneers in high school.  Is it typical in LA to have all that done?


Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon .. especially with people who are in the "business".  Heck, my former neighbor's (and he was the biggest a$$hole I've ever met) daughter had her nose done when she was 13-years-old!!!!!  I was shocked honestly, and yup .. just like METHODONE, the father (a Cinematographer) paid for it .. and apparently, the ex-wife had no idea and gave the a$$wipe quite a bit of sh!t when she picked up her daughter (she had been with her Dad for 2 weeks).  Heck, look at the Kardashians .. they started early!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okay. All looks had potential. The jewelry was too much, much too much. Rattling the jewelry is just not cool.
> Look 1 - the camel/black dress - not bad except for the purse which appears to be stomped on. Proportions on the clothes look ok.
> *Look 2 - all navy - the upturned collar on the coat makes this a miss. *Dragging the hem does not make MM look like VB.
> Look 3 - the LP red -  nope, this is horrible, especially the belt. Same as above with the hem. The color is fugly and the size is extra huge
> Look 4 - omg, how many shades of camel can someone wear?  Again, dragging the hem, sloppy sloppy with the shirt and coat
> Look 5 -  needs better undergarments, better shoes and posture. The hem of the dress seems to have a curl to it. Why?  The length of the dress cuts her leg at a chunky point - just a little longer would have been better. The sleeves also cut her at a wide point. Elbow length would have looked better.


Really?!?! .. I've been doing that for YEARS, but maybe it's a New England/NYC thing?  Remember, when it's cold in the wintertime, in addition to a scarf, you put up the collar to block wind from going on your neck!  I've sadly been stupid sometimes and in a rush, so I didn't put up the scarf .. and guess who would get a bad cold?!?!?!  I also used to do this when I was working in London and Edinburgh because, my GOD .. it's like they never turned the heat on and I froze my a$$ off!!!!


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Chanbal said:


> The statement is correct, but the hypocrisy of making sure they are addressed by the UK titles is disgusting. She even uses the title on the new Dior bag…


Omg - are you serious?? I thought I saw something in the pic like it was personalized but was too blurry to make out - I did see an S and X I think - so she actually had the balls to get the DIANA bag personalized as SUSSEX? if so, then she is on a whole other level of whack.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Really?!?! .. I've been doing that for YEARS, but maybe it's a New England/NYC thing?  Remember, when it's cold in the wintertime, in addition to a scarf, you put up the collar to block wind from going on your neck!  I've sadly been stupid sometimes and in a rush, so I didn't put up the scarf .. and guess who would get a bad cold?!?!?!  I also used to do this when I was working in London and Edinburgh because, my GOD .. it's like they never turned the heat on and I froze my a$$ off!!!!



IMO, the upturn collar only works if the collar is large and wide, as in the MaxMara coats. She is wearing a coat with a small, narrow collar. Plus, she has a turtleneck on.  Popping the collar when it isn’t cold outside really takes the pretentious look to the next level.  Hazzie knows that.  Just my opinion. Ymmv.

ETA: they buy such expensive clothes and look awful in them. 





[/QUOTE]


WillstarveforLV said:


> Omg - are you serious?? I thought I saw something in the pic like it was personalized but was too blurry to make out - I did see an S and X I think - so she actually had the balls to get the DIANA bag personalized as SUSSEX? if so, then she is on a whole other level of whack.



My guess is it was a gift.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> What if she used a surrogate and just gained weight during lockdown? Or gained some weight due to entering her 40s and our metabolism changes.
> 
> Gaining weight doesn't mean one gave brith.


I've seen this happen, well .. heck, it happened to me!  A good friend (from my High School days) could eat WHATEVER she wanted (and it was NOT "healthy" food) .. and NEVER gained a pound.  She got married (mid-30's) and then proceeded to have 2 children (the last one was same as MEGA-BRAT - 39-years-old).  When I took a trip down to CT from Boston, I called her and said "hey - let's go out to dinner at the place we used to", and of course she said "yes".  When she walked in the door, I did not recognize her!  I know my face likely told her "holy cow - have you gained weight", but I didn't say a word.  She later told me that she was diagnosed with a thyroid problem and unlike her youth, it had changed to the one that makes you gain weight .. but she also said that her Doctor had told her that the birth of her children had impacted her thyroid.  The most interesting thing she told me, was that it was SO hard for her to eat the proper foods, because (as she said) "you know me, I've eaten junk food for most of my life .. so it's so hard to give that up".  Yikes .. I honestly felt really sorry for her!


----------



## WillstarveforLV

xincinsin said:


> *I think Methane's point is that she has defeated poverty and so she piled on the proof.* Having set a high bar, she now has the right to tell everyone else that they should go seduce some unintelligent rich person and hook him or her before they hit 40.
> 
> If, and that's a big IF, she was pregnant à second time, perhaps the weight gain is due to gestational diabetes. Or she could have a thyroid problem - hence the chins and overall enlargement.



I think this is why they (she) wanted to leave the Firm - in order for her to do this - she needs to show off her new found wealth in such obscene and tacky thirsty ways and she could not be like this as a Royal Family Member as her behavior is so offensive and disgusting - she rather leave the Royal Family and the Firm in order to have no morals and decency and not have to accept any types of standards being a respectful member of the monarchy. MeGain has really proved what and who she is and it is nothing to be desired.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It could be baby weight, it could be antidepressants, it could be alcohol, it could be several other medical conditions.  We’ll never know.
> Why are we certain there is a baby? Because _they_ say so. Noooo, they have zero credibility with most people.
> 
> The Melissa call was mid-August.  She looks smaller there, imo.
> 
> View attachment 5206572


Who knows when this was filmed.  It was for her 40th, but could've been filmed months before for all we know!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Unless her weight is yo-yo-ing crazily, this video may have been made before the weight gain apparent in the NYC appearance. After all, we have no clue when this faux video call was recorded or her 40x40 planned. Then again, that massive table hides most of her body and the shawl hides her upper arms, handily obscuring any extra pounds. I doubt that was by chance, considering how staged that whole video was.


Just read your post!  Great minds LOL!


----------



## Chanbal

WillstarveforLV said:


> Omg - are you serious?? I thought I saw something in the pic like it was personalized but was too blurry to make out - I did see an S and X I think - so she actually had the balls to get the DIANA bag personalized as SUSSEX? if so, then she is on a whole other level of whack.


See post 75,282
It is disgusting.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> She never repeat, which is part of the reason I don’t understand why she’s so focused on keeping these clothes


Maybe she wears them to all their dinners with Haz's substitute father, David Foster?


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I've seen this happen, well .. heck, it happened to me!  A good friend (from my High School days) could eat WHATEVER she wanted (and it was NOT "healthy" food) .. and NEVER gained a pound.  She got married (mid-30's) and then proceeded to have 2 children (the last one was same as MEGA-BRAT - 39-years-old).  When I took a trip down to CT from Boston, I called her and said "hey - let's go out to dinner at the place we used to", and of course she said "yes".  When she walked in the door, I did not recognize her!  I know my face likely told her "holy cow - have you gained weight", but I didn't say a word.  She later told me that she was diagnosed with a thyroid problem and unlike her youth, it had changed to the one that makes you gain weight .. but she also said that her Doctor had told her that the birth of her children had impacted her thyroid.  The most interesting thing she told me, was that it was SO hard for her to eat the proper foods, because (as she said) "you know me, I've eaten junk food for most of my life .. so it's so hard to give that up".  Yikes .. I honestly felt really sorry for her!



It happens to many of us (ahem). Oprah has said she ruined her thyroid with all of her dieting. Chemicals, medications, etc. - all have an impact on the thyroid. Since MM was so very thin on Suits, she may have an issue. 

As @QueenofWrapDress siad, MM is not obese nor unattractive. Her clothes on this tour do not do her any favors.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, the upturn collar only works if the collar is large and wide, as in the MaxMara coats. She is wearing a coat with a small, narrow collar. Plus, she has a turtleneck on.  Popping the collar when it isn’t cold outside really takes the pretentious look to the next level.  Hazzie knows that.  Just my opinion. Ymmv.
> 
> ETA: they buy such expensive clothes and look awful in them.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5206855




My guess is it was a gift.
[/QUOTE]
 If so, only other person just as vulgar to do that other than MeGain is her bff Jessica Mulroney


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> *I think Methane's point is that she has defeated poverty *and so she piled on the proof. Having set a high bar, she now has the right to tell everyone else that they should go seduce some unintelligent rich person and hook him or her before they hit 40.
> 
> If, and that's a big IF, she was pregnant à second time, perhaps the weight gain is due to gestational diabetes. Or she could have a thyroid problem - hence the chins and overall enlargement.


How though?  WTF was she ever living in poverty?  When she was a spoiled little brat going to private school paid by her father?  Taking pictures in front of Buckingham Palace, which she probably thought was just a building since she claims to know nothing about the BRF?  When she was allegedly in Argentina?  Living with Hubby #1, 2, and Corey?  Working on yachts?  This chick really pi$$es me off!


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Chanbal said:


> See post 75,282
> It is disgusting.


 ugh - I just did - so gross  Girl needs to drink from Niagara Falls because she is so thirsty.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> "DSSOS"
> View attachment 5206809


Ok, I'm dense.  How does DSSOS = Duchess of Sussex?    (I can never decipher license plates either!)


----------



## Lenna.V

bag-mania said:


> Whichever of her minions reads your message will likely assume you must be a racist and a hater and therefore disregard it. Honestly, if public figures cannot be bothered to properly vet the people they associate with there's not much we can do to help them from looking foolish and being used.



Hahaha I got that all the time. I must be jealous and racist to not like MM or what she does now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Ok, I'm dense.  How does DSSOS = Duchess of Sussex?    (I can never decipher license plates either!)



DSS = duchess
O = of
S = Sussex


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> She is the one that wants the UN! Let's hope the UN declines the services of M*rs Hypocrisy*.
> 
> View attachment 5206441


Thanks @Chanbal for your nickname #17 Mrs Hypocrisy. You're so good, I'm running out of rewards and so from now on you will get numbered ribbons for each suggestion. Congratulations!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I even agree with that statement but hearing it from them infuriates me.


I think because like everything else they say, it comes across as disingenuous and condescending.  "Do as I say, not as I do."  They're hypocritical at every turn, and all their words are utterly patronizing and FOS.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon .. especially with people who are in the "business".  Heck, my former neighbor's (and he was the biggest a$$hole I've ever met) daughter had her nose done when she was 13-years-old!!!!!  I was shocked honestly, and yup .. just like METHODONE, the father (a Cinematographer) paid for it .. and apparently, the ex-wife had no idea and gave the a$$wipe quite a bit of sh!t when she picked up her daughter (she had been with her Dad for 2 weeks).  Heck, look at the Kardashians .. they started early!


Having lived in Southern California for half of my life, I can easily say that LA is one of the most superficial places in the world.  Everything is just appearances.  It's not uncommon for girls to have plastic surgery before their 18 birthdays.  I think social medial, with glorifying TikTok stars and people like the Kardashians that are famous for really nothing starting off, is just making things worse, and not just in SoCal any more.


----------



## Lenna.V

Chanbal said:


> US media, you can do a lot better! Do we need to keep getting our news from international outlets?
> 
> View attachment 5206811
> 
> _The maths on this is queasy. The New York Times has previously reported that school meals comes in at a cost of $US1.75 ($A2.40) per day, so the cost of Meghan’s coat, pants, belt and shoes alone, never mind her jewellery, would equate to paying for 5083 meals for kids in New York._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Big problem with Meghan’s $12k outfit
> 
> 
> If there was one substantial change that the arrival of Kate Middleton wrought when she breached the walls of Buckingham Palace in 2011 it was to launch the era of The Zara Royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



MM should learn a thing or two from Marcus Rashford, a 23 years old English football players who feed the kids in the UK during pandemic. He started with his own money before anyone could join and endorse his efforts.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

CarryOn2020 said:


> DSS = duchess
> O = of
> S = Sussex


Maybe it is for *D*elu*S*i*O*nal?? She fits that title much better.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> DSS = duchess
> O = of
> S = Sussex



Maybe it means this instead:

DSS = Duchess Sh!t Show
O = Of
S = Sussex


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> DSS = duchess
> O = of
> S = Sussex


Thank you!  I thought it may have been a gift from Haz as a cry for help from the crowd:  DSSOS:  Duke of Sussex HELP!!!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> well, Dolly deserves it...Britney maybe....H&M - I have no words - just eww


Dolly deserves all the titles--because she IS Dolly!


----------



## littlemisskeira

I was thinking how much her looks have changed.. and i went to google.. it's only been 3 years and 4 months since she married her husband. I considered her attractive back in 2018, but somehow the face has changed and she appeared to have aged quite significantly too. I do not think it's the weight gain that 'distorted' her facial features. For instance, I do not remember Kate's face changing that significantly when she still had post pregnancy weight on her. Ok maybe Kate is blessed with skinny genes but Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie also didn't have that obvious change in facial features when they went through the pregnant-birth-post pregnant weight gain cycle. I think this one is not going to age well.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> well to be fair she became friendly with him when he was a member of the RF....different than what he is now.  I don't know how many people will bother to complain but I wanted to try


sdkitty,

THANK YOU for the nudge, I hadn't thought about contacting JB until I read your post and it's timely since they share a link through Invictus Games. My email has just been sent, thanks to your prompting.


----------



## Yanca

I love Piers Morgan article about them on thispseudo royal -vanity tour for Megain on dailymail today.  I am looking forward to seeing and hearing Piers talk again on TV, I may not agree on eveyrthing he says but he sure calls out everyone, even politicians. Also, The Megxit Twitter-  Murky Meg was IP banned like Pres T on twitter, she made a video of that today so she's thinking it must be from the very top- ( the harkles) maybe she caught Megains attention after her twitter was verified and her reach is growing. This is so wrong, they should not be able to muzzle the smaller accounts and people. They can try to mimic Royals and have their own royals tours but how many of these events they can insert themselves into? who fill foot the bill? and what are their credentials?  they should just call themselves motivational speakers or the influences on IG that are paid for appearances, it's cringy that they pretend to be an official carrying cases and folders for these " meetings and talks" ughh,


----------



## Chanbal

WillstarveforLV said:


> Maybe it is for *D*elu*S*i*O*nal?? She fits that title much better.



To be fair, there are several possibilities

DSS=*D*elusional *S*ymptom*s* 
O=*o*f
S= *S*chizophrenia


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Unfortunately, it's not that uncommon .. especially with people who are in the "business".  Heck, my former neighbor's (and he was the biggest a$$hole I've ever met) daughter had her nose done when she was 13-years-old!!!!!  I was shocked honestly, and yup .. just like METHODONE, the father (a Cinematographer) paid for it .. and apparently, the ex-wife had no idea and gave the a$$wipe quite a bit of sh!t when she picked up her daughter (she had been with her Dad for 2 weeks).  Heck, look at the Kardashians .. they started early!


I'm older and I recall at least a couple of kids having their noses done in HS.  BUT they had large noses - not a case of perfecting or improving something that was basically "normal"


----------



## Chanbal

littlemisskeira said:


> I was thinking how much her looks have changed.. and i went to google.. it's only been 3 years and 4 months since she married her husband. I considered her attractive back in 2018, but somehow the face has changed and she appeared to have aged quite significantly too. I do not think it's the weight gain that 'distorted' her facial features. For instance, I do not remember Kate's face changing that significantly when she still had post pregnancy weight on her. Ok maybe Kate is blessed with skinny genes but Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie also didn't have that obvious change in facial features when they went through the pregnant-birth-post pregnant weight gain cycle. I think this one is not going to age well.


The changes in facial features are likely due to multiple surgeries.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, the upturn collar only works if the collar is large and wide, as in the MaxMara coats. She is wearing a coat with a small, narrow collar. Plus, she has a turtleneck on.  Popping the collar when it isn’t cold outside really takes the pretentious look to the next level.  Hazzie knows that.  Just my opinion. Ymmv.
> 
> ETA: they buy such expensive clothes and look awful in them.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5206855


I don't mind the turned up collar.  I have a Chanel jacket that is supposed to look like that.  If she turned down the collar, she would have the skinniest, silliest lapels that would look weird.

Or, as *CeeJay *wrote, we tend to turn up collars in countries with 4 seasons and colder weather.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> It happens to many of us (ahem). Oprah has said she ruined her thyroid with all of her dieting. Chemicals, medications, etc. - all have an impact on the thyroid. Since MM was so very thin on Suits, she may have an issue.
> 
> As @QueenofWrapDress siad, MM is not obese nor unattractive. Her clothes on this tour do not do her any favors.


Agree, it's just a bit of a change since in her TV days when she was so skinny and jittery and now, she's just not super thin anymore.


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> I don't think she had to return the clothes paid by Charles. According to online sources, she likes freebies. I wouldn't be surprised if she has someone selling some of those clothes for her…



Well I hoped they had them cleaned first to remove the under arm sweat stains!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> "DSSOS"
> View attachment 5206809


HA - damn, too bad that Dior didn't purposely put '*DISSED*' on there, that would be more like it!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

littlemisskeira said:


> I was thinking how much her looks have changed.. and i went to google.. it's only been 3 years and 4 months since she married her husband. I considered her attractive back in 2018, but somehow the face has changed and she appeared to have aged quite significantly too. I do not think it's the weight gain that 'distorted' her facial features. For instance, I do not remember Kate's face changing that significantly when she still had post pregnancy weight on her. Ok maybe Kate is blessed with skinny genes but Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie also didn't have that obvious change in facial features when they went through the pregnant-birth-post pregnant weight gain cycle. I think this one is not going to age well.



True. She does look older and more matronely in a way I can't quite put my finger on. 40 is not old.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yanca said:


> Also, The Megxit Twitter-  Murky Meg was IP banned like Pres T on twitter, she made a video of that today so she's thinking it must be from the very top- ( the harkles) maybe she caught Megains attention after her twitter was verified and her reach is growing.



I can totally believe that they had a hand in this...but my question is, why would anyone still consider them "the very top"? I don't get it.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True. She does look older and more matronely in a way I can't quite put my finger on. 40 is not old.


That's what happens when you carry the weight of the world on your shoulders. 

US presidents all turned grey before their term ended.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Compassion in action!
> 
> _Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell website has begun advising its visitors to take a break from their screens.
> 
> *The site - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters. *
> 
> '*We love having you here...' the message reads. 'But we're mindful of screen time.* _
> View attachment 5206454
> 
> _As we increasingly understand the direct link between technology and its effect on each of us - online and offline - Archewell Foundation will continue to prioritise critical work around the state of our digital world,' the couple say, on their website.
> 
> The pair arrived by private jet to Santa Barbara, California on Saturday when they were reunited with their children Archie and Lilibet following a whirlwind tour of New York…
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex also had a photo op with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.*
> 
> Pictures from the trip appeared to show a wire poking out of Harry's pocket, suggesting the de-facto royal tour will be part of their multi-million dollar Netflix deal. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warn readers of their website to take a screen break
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's website - which offers fans updates on the couple's 'compassion in action' - has introduced an automated message which pops up 20 minutes after a visitor enters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Someone pointed this out ages ago… evidently they don’t want anyone reading too thoroughly 
Best   


Chanbal said:


> MM and her eco-conscious husband travel to NYC by private jet to talk about equity, and the US media is muzzled…
> View attachment 5206225
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore £66,879 worth of clothes and jewellery in New York
> 
> 
> With Cartier watches and £3,200 coats, Meghan Markle, 40, donned a very pricy designer wardrobe during her three-day trip to New York, estimated to reach £66,879 in clothes and jewellery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well gosh, I wonder how many boxes of vegetables that would have bought for the schoolchildren his nibs was shoving around.
It is a bad sign when people on TPF, a forum which encourages luxury purchases, think you are being gauche with your spending  
Who can guess what people who say a £2k bag is madness must think.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Having lived in Southern California for half of my life, I can easily say that LA is one of the most superficial places in the world.  Everything is just appearances.  It's not uncommon for girls to have plastic surgery before their 18 birthdays.  I think social medial, with glorifying TikTok stars and people like the Kardashians that are famous for really nothing starting off, is just making things worse, and not just in SoCal any more.


I've only been in the LA area since 2013, but every Persian gal I have met out here have told me that they had their nose done "for their 16th-birthday present"!!!  I heard this when I was going to my ENT (Ears, Nose & Throat) Doctor to have my deviated septum repaired (and let me tell you, having to wear those things in your nose?? .. NOT FUN)!!!  He also performed Nose Job plastic surgery, hence the reason for seeing these gals in his office.  He had told me that there had been younger patients, but he turns them away until it is required surgery (like my deviated septum).  That is one of the major things that I liked about him, he's actually ethical!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Agree, it's just a bit of a change since in her TV days when she was so skinny and jittery and now, she's just not super thin anymore.


Well, she smoked (cigarettes and likely weed) then, she did Yoga all the time and likely didn't eat much (thanks to appetite suppressors).  That may be way there were some reports that she had a "drug problem".  Alas, many of HW gals seem to go through this because (unfortunately) that camera DOES add 10 pounds (at least)!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Even the hair is similar.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I can't resist anymore; again, the devil made me do it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It is so bizarre, I was certain that once she got back to California it would be all laid-back vibes with yoga outfits and swipe ups on Instagram, I was way off, she wants world domination!


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> Yes the wedding band is bigger.  So she has changed rings again.




Is that a Trinity cord bracelet?!?!? 
With a gold cord????? 
Like mine?!?!?! 
Noooooo......please just noooooo I love mine
would she really wear  something so "inexpensive"
Say it ain't so


----------



## Sharont2305

WillstarveforLV said:


> Omg - are you serious?? I thought I saw something in the pic like it was personalized but was too blurry to make out - I did see an S and X I think - so she actually had the balls to get the DIANA bag personalized as SUSSEX? if so, then she is on a whole other level of whack.


On this map of England, I wonder if she could actually pinpoint where exactly the County of Sussex is?


----------



## CarryOn2020

To my eye, she is not really popping this collar in the true sense of the phrase. 
She is trying  to close the skinny lapels so that she can cover her chest and stomach. The coat is too small to give her coverage.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True. She does look older and more matronely in a way I can't quite put my finger on. 40 is not old.



It was her "you must take me seriously, I have friends at the UN" look. It is likely for the NYC trip only. I'm surprised she didn't wear a Hillaryesque power pantsuit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Is that a Trinity cord bracelet?!?!?
> With a gold cord?????
> Like mine?!?!?!
> Noooooo......please just noooooo I love mine
> would she really wear  something so "inexpensive"
> Say it ain't so



Wait, what???? Where????
No. No. No.  Say it ain’t so.
I’m already giving away my MaxMara coats.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, what???? Where????
> No. No. No.  Say it ain’t so.
> I’m already giving away my MaxMara coats.



click the quoted link in my post
right above the watch
I thought I'd seen it on her before


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> *The statement is correct, but the hypocrisy of making sure they are addressed by the UK titles is disgusting*. She even uses the title on the new Dior bag…



I wholeheartedly agree. As a U.S. citizen, I am hereby informing the Dimwit Duo that while they are in the United States, they are the Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat.


----------



## Lounorada

EverSoElusive said:


> She's not gonna like this! The whole world can see a double chin from this angle
> 
> View attachment 5205379


 Oh dear!
Whoever the photographer was that took this picture will be waking up like this first thing today:






xincinsin said:


> Waiting with bated breath to find out if they follow through on their promises. If this was all pre-planned, they should have turned up with the cheque in hand. Or maybe this too is tied to profit from the 4-book deal.
> This particular promise costs less than half of her pinky ring.


Speaking of that pinky ring, the diamond looks bigger than her engagement ring diamond, which is probably why she insists on wearing it. I wonder how long until she convinces Princess Hairy that it would be a good idea to wear it on her wedding ring finger instead of her E-ring  I imagine her doing a Carrie Bradshaw in SATC when she was engaged to Aidan and didn't want to wear an engagement ring, so put it on a chain said 'this way it's closer to my heart' 
I'm surprised that Lorraine Schwartz is supposed to have made that ring, seems extremely basic to be her work. Looks more like Jennifer Meyer style of work.



MM's daily affirmations:







csshopper said:


> Lounorada, Great intel, thanks!
> 
> *The group in the front are the 2021 version of "claqueurs", *an institution as far back as 16th Century France *"an organized body of professional applauders." It's more than coincidence the youthful audience, aka, stans were at the forefront*.


Sounds about right! 







Chanbal said:


> Oh!
> View attachment 5206155
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry faced awkward NYC welcome
> 
> 
> HARDLY any crowds showed up to greet Meghan Markle and Prince Harry on their three-day trip around New York City, according to one royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk










Chanbal said:


> "DSSOS"
> View attachment 5206809





So tacky. She sure LOVES that royal title, I would guess it means more to her than anything else. It must keep her oversized ego thriving every time someone says it to her, it's like a drug to her.
Which would make it a great time to strip them of the Duke/Duchess titles. I would love to see the meltdown she would have if she lost them all.
I can't imagine any feminist running off to the have her designer handbag embossed with the royal title given to her solely because of the man she married.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5207003



I guess the eternity band is her new push present? Because the delicate one Harry gave her after Archie - as is apparently tradition in the UK, Kate has one too - is gone.

OMG that pinky ring annoys me.


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> I wholeheartedly agree. As a U.S. citizen, I am hereby informing the Dimwit Duo that while they are in the United States, they are the Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat.


No just diddly Squat.  No titles


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Oh dear!
> Whoever the photographer was that took this picture will be waking up like this first thing today:
> View attachment 5206999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of that pinky ring, the diamond looks bigger than her engagement ring diamond, which is probably why she insists on wearing it. I wonder how long until she convinces Princess Hairy that it would be a good idea to wear it on her wedding ring finger instead of her E-ring  I imagine her doing a Carrie Bradshaw in SATC when she was engaged to Aidan and didn't want to wear an engagement ring, so put it on a chain said 'this way it's closer to my heart'
> I'm surprised that Lorraine Schwartz is supposed to have made that ring, seems extremely basic to be her work. Looks more like Jennifer Meyer style of work.
> View attachment 5207003
> 
> 
> MM's daily affirmations:
> View attachment 5207007
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds about right!
> View attachment 5207012
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207016
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207047
> 
> So tacky. She sure LOVES that royal title, I would guess it means more to her than anything else. It must keep her oversized ego thriving every time someone says it to her, it's like a drug to her.
> Which would make it a great time to strip them of the Duke/Duchess titles. I would love to see the meltdown she would have if she lost them all.
> I can't imagine any feminist running off to the have her designer handbag embossed with the royal title given to her solely because of the man she married.


I thought she was an independent woman. Should have RMM No?  hahahahahaha!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It was her "you must take me seriously, I have friends at the UN" look. It is likely for the NYC trip only. I'm surprised she didn't wear a Hillaryesque power pantsuit.


Im sure she thinks she wore a more modern and youthful version of Hillary's look.


----------



## tiktok

charlottawill said:


> Im sure she thinks she wore a more modern and youthful version of Hillary's look.



Well she did but that’s not saying much.


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> No just diddly Squat.  No titles



Exactly!


----------



## scarlet555

I cannot even comment on a post, it's too fast of a thread to find... but LOL at the one where there are more security and cops than fans in NY.... 
Yes girl, that's how is going to be, so get used to it: no relevance self marketing losers!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I guess the eternity band is her new push present? Because the delicate one Harry gave her after Archie - as is apparently tradition in the UK, Kate has one too - is gone.
> 
> OMG that pinky ring annoys me.




_For one of her first outings as Harry's fiancée, in Edinburgh she wore a Birks Diamond Snowflake Ring, worth £3,300._








						Meghan Markle wears a new diamond ring
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was glittering in jewels worth over £300,000 as she stepped out in New York today with Prince Harry to visit the One World Trade Center.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				









						Birks Iconic | Stackable White Gold and Diamond Snowflake Ring
					

A tribute to the dazzling beauty of Canadian winters captured in the Birks Snowflake collection, this stackable snowflake ring is made of 18kt white gold and diamonds.




					www.maisonbirks.com


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I guess the eternity band is her new push present? Because the delicate one Harry gave her after Archie - as is apparently tradition in the UK, Kate has one too - is gone.
> 
> OMG that pinky ring annoys me.


Just out of curiosity I put my engagement ring, a two carat round diamond in a classic Tiffany setting, on my pinky. It looked and felt very odd and out of place. Maybe she thinks she's setting a trend by doing this but I don't see it catching on.


----------



## scarlet555

charlottawill said:


> Just out of curiosity I put my engagement ring, a two carat round diamond in a classic Tiffany setting, on my pinky. It looked and felt very odd and out of place. Maybe she thinks she's setting a trend by doing this but I don't see it catching on.



Methane is not a trend setter, she is more of a copy cat...
the pinky ring was worn by men in Casino, the movie by some of the mobsters, or poker players, status of wealth and prosperity.


----------



## bag-mania

Yet another "nod" article. Will they never end? It's laughable that they refer to it as a "subtle message." Is the press really so stupid they actually believe it was a tribute rather than an attention grab?

*Meghan Markle nods to Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live*
While Markle’s Dior Lady D-Lite bag ($4,900) is a modern edition of the design – even personalized with her title, “DSOS” – the black embroidered style is still strikingly similar to the one her late mother-in-law often carried.

Princess Diana was first gifted the bag in 1995 by French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac’s wife Bernadette, per the Financial Times, and went on to wear it so often that in 1996, the fashion house dubbed the design the Lady Dior in her honor.

She even sported the style during one of her own big moments in the Big Apple, pairing it with a navy dress at the 1996 Met Gala. 

Markle instead teamed the special accessory with a sparkling white Valentino dress for the international music festival, where she and Harry joined the call to increase vaccination efforts worldwide.

The royals are known for sending subtle messages through their clothing and accessories, and it’s hardly the first time the former “Suits” star has paid homage to Diana. 


In addition to sometimes selecting similar styles, Markle has worn several of the late Princess of Wales’ precious pieces of jewelry, including a Cartier bracelet for her Oprah tell-all and an aquamarine ring for her wedding reception.

And the Dior bag isn’t the only way she and Harry nodded to Diana during their September stay in the Big Apple, either, as they even checked into one of the late royal’s favorite NYC spots, the Carlyle hotel.

Beyond appearing at the Global Citizen Festival, the couple’s NYC trip also included meeting with the US ambassador to the United Nations and visiting an elementary school in Harlem. 

It seems we’ll eventually get a closer look at the Sussexes’ time in the city, as Page Six exclusively reported that they taped it for a Netflix documentary.









						Meghan Markle nods to  Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live
					

Markle carried a version of one of Princess Diana’s go-to bags. The late royal brought hers to a different big moment in the Big Apple: the 1996 Met Gala.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is a _subtle nod._



The Dior is a _copyDi_ (kinda like copyKate).

Imagine MM -
sitting in her McMansion, staring at images of Diana and Kate’s clothes then searching for current versions, then ordering, etc.


ETA:  when will we see the Chanel and Tods?





						Designer-Vintage
					






					www.designer-vintage.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Just out of curiosity I put my engagement ring, a two carat round diamond in a classic Tiffany setting, on my pinky. It looked and felt very odd and out of place. Maybe she thinks she's setting a trend by doing this but I don't see it catching on.


I kind of like that diamond on her pinky. It's very plain, but worn in a very nonchalant way, so casual... for a big diamond.

I actually got out one of my old Cartier Trinity rings and wore it on my pinky, the way Diana wore it (I always liked Diana's Cartier jewelry) and I was so happy to see it again. *CeeJay *inspired me too.

(Runs and hides from this unpopular opinion... )


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I kind of like that diamond on her pinky. It's very plain, but worn in a very nonchalant way, so casual... for a big diamond.
> 
> I actually got out one of my old Cartier Trinity rings and wore it on my pinky, the way Diana wore it (I always liked Diana's Cartier jewelry) and I was so happy to see it again. *CeeJay *inspired me too.
> 
> (Runs and hides from this unpopular opinion... )



uh huh, ok, now you can confess to wearing pants dragging the ground -
p.s. I did it, too.


----------



## charlottawill

scarlet555 said:


> Methane is not a trend setter, she is more of a copy cat...
> the pinky ring was worn by men in Casino, the movie by some of the mobsters, or poker players, status of wealth and prosperity.


Pinky rings have long been associated with shady characters, so it rings true for her. No pun intended.


----------



## bubablu

Lounorada said:


> she convinces Princess Hairy


This is savage on so many level. Love it.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Pinky rings have long been associated with shady characters, so it rings true for her. No pun intended.


Wearing a big diamond on the pinky reminds me of shady guys smoking cigars.  BTW, HBO is rerunning The Sopranos. lol!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Yet another "nod" article. Will they never end? It's laughable that they refer to it as a "subtle message." Is the press really so stupid they actually believe it was a tribute rather than an attention grab?
> 
> *Meghan Markle nods to Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live*
> While Markle’s Dior Lady D-Lite bag ($4,900) is a modern edition of the design – even personalized with her title, “DSOS” – the black embroidered style is still strikingly similar to the one her late mother-in-law often carried.
> 
> Princess Diana was first gifted the bag in 1995 by French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac’s wife Bernadette, per the Financial Times, and went on to wear it so often that in 1996, the fashion house dubbed the design the Lady Dior in her honor.
> 
> She even sported the style during one of her own big moments in the Big Apple, pairing it with a navy dress at the 1996 Met Gala.
> 
> Markle instead teamed the special accessory with a sparkling white Valentino dress for the international music festival, where she and Harry joined the call to increase vaccination efforts worldwide.
> 
> The royals are known for sending subtle messages through their clothing and accessories, and it’s hardly the first time the former “Suits” star has paid homage to Diana.
> View attachment 5207079
> 
> In addition to sometimes selecting similar styles, Markle has worn several of the late Princess of Wales’ precious pieces of jewelry, including a Cartier bracelet for her Oprah tell-all and an aquamarine ring for her wedding reception.
> 
> And the Dior bag isn’t the only way she and Harry nodded to Diana during their September stay in the Big Apple, either, as they even checked into one of the late royal’s favorite NYC spots, the Carlyle hotel.
> 
> Beyond appearing at the Global Citizen Festival, the couple’s NYC trip also included meeting with the US ambassador to the United Nations and visiting an elementary school in Harlem.
> 
> It seems we’ll eventually get a closer look at the Sussexes’ time in the city, as Page Six exclusively reported that they taped it for a Netflix documentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle nods to  Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live
> 
> 
> Markle carried a version of one of Princess Diana’s go-to bags. The late royal brought hers to a different big moment in the Big Apple: the 1996 Met Gala.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Uggh, so sick of the "sweet nods". More like evidence of a personality disorder.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> To my eye, she is not really popping this collar in the true sense of the phrase.
> 
> She is trying  to close the skinny lapels so that she can cover her chest and stomach. The coat is too small to give her coverage.
> View attachment 5207008


I think you're right, now that I see it clearly.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Hard to keep up with this thread. Did anyone post the piece from the WSJ here? I couldn't stomach actually reading it.


----------



## muddledmint

littlemisskeira said:


> I was thinking how much her looks have changed.. and i went to google.. it's only been 3 years and 4 months since she married her husband. I considered her attractive back in 2018, but somehow the face has changed and she appeared to have aged quite significantly too. I do not think it's the weight gain that 'distorted' her facial features. For instance, I do not remember Kate's face changing that significantly when she still had post pregnancy weight on her. Ok maybe Kate is blessed with skinny genes but Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie also didn't have that obvious change in facial features when they went through the pregnant-birth-post pregnant weight gain cycle. I think this one is not going to age well.


Ok, I don’t like meghan markle and her clothes were overall pretty bad on this trip, super matronly and unflattering …. but have you SEEN Kate’s face close up? Meghan looks way younger.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a _subtle nod._
> View attachment 5207107
> 
> 
> The Dior is a _copyDi_ (kinda like copyKate).
> 
> Imagine MM -
> sitting in her McMansion, staring at images of Diana and Kate’s clothes then searching for current versions, then ordering, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designer-Vintage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.designer-vintage.com


Instead of "subtle nods", the press could call them what they are:  "Sledgehammers to Your Eyes".


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> Ok, I don’t like meghan markle and her clothes were overall pretty bad on this trip, super matronly and unflattering …. but have you SEEN Kate’s face close up? Meghan looks way younger.


I don't think Kate has nearly the same amount of PS and/or fillers in her face as Mamba.


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think Kate has nearly the same amount of PS and/or fillers in her face as Mamba.


Probably true! But if you put aside all the hate for meghan (and believe me, I can’t stand her), it’s not fair to say that she aging terribly, especially in comparison to Kate. Kate’s face actually looked the best when she was pregnant or post partum because her face was rounder. Now her skin is like that of someone 5-10 years older than her actual age.


----------



## Chloe302225

muddledmint said:


> Ok, I don’t like meghan markle and her clothes were overall pretty bad on this trip, super matronly and unflattering …. but have you SEEN Kate’s face close up? Meghan looks way younger.



But shouldn't Kate actually look older given that she is doing less to her face than Meghan. I thought the whole point of these procedures were for Meghan to look younger than Kate. It defeats the purpose of all plastic surgery if she ends up looking older than Kate imo.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Yet another "nod" article. Will they never end? It's laughable that they refer to it as a "subtle message." Is the press really so stupid they actually believe it was a tribute rather than an attention grab?
> 
> *Meghan Markle nods to Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live*
> View attachment 5207079


Could she be carrying the bag in such an awkward way to purposely show off the embossed title so the paparazzi could get a clear shot just so her PR people could point it out in another '_nod' _article. Surely she couldn't be so damn calculating? 
*heavy on the sarcasm






CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a _subtle nod._
> View attachment 5207107
> 
> 
> The Dior is a _copyDi_ (kinda like copyKate).
> 
> Imagine MM -
> *sitting in her McMansion, staring at images of Diana and Kate’s clothes then searching for current versions, then ordering, etc.*





So creepy, but sounds totally believable


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> Probably true! But if you put aside all the hate for meghan (and believe me, I can’t stand her), it’s not fair to say that she aging terribly, especially in comparison to Kate. Kate’s face actually looked the best when she was pregnant or post partum because her face was rounder. Now her skin is like that of someone 5-10 years older than her actual age.


I don't remember anyone saying she's aging terribly though...more just comments about her attempting (and failing miserably) to hide her weight gain, and the obvious changes to her face.
Remember the old adage: as you age, it's either your a$$ or your face.    
I had a client I hadn't seen in about 7 years.  She came back to see me with her husband in tow.  He commented how great I looked and that I looked even younger than I had when he'd last seen me 7 years prior.  I was feeling pretty good hearing that!  I jokingly said, well, it's probably the extra 20 lbs filling out my wrinkles.  He literally looked me up and down and commented, "Yeah, you're probably right".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I imagine MM going from Z lister to newfound royal fame. She has to wear all her jewelry at once so she's aiming for this.


----------



## Lodpah

I think it's the California sun that ages her. The make up is good whoever puts it on her but women who go in the sun a lot tend to age faster in their skin.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Yet another "nod" article. Will they never end? It's laughable that they refer to it as a "subtle message." Is the press really so stupid they actually believe it was a tribute rather than an attention grab?
> 
> *Meghan Markle nods to Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live*
> While Markle’s Dior Lady D-Lite bag ($4,900) is a modern edition of the design – even personalized with her title, “DSOS” – the black embroidered style is still strikingly similar to the one her late mother-in-law often carried.
> 
> Princess Diana was first gifted the bag in 1995 by French Prime Minister Jacques Chirac’s wife Bernadette, per the Financial Times, and went on to wear it so often that in 1996, the fashion house dubbed the design the Lady Dior in her honor.
> 
> She even sported the style during one of her own big moments in the Big Apple, pairing it with a navy dress at the 1996 Met Gala.
> 
> Markle instead teamed the special accessory with a sparkling white Valentino dress for the international music festival, where she and Harry joined the call to increase vaccination efforts worldwide.
> 
> The royals are known for sending subtle messages through their clothing and accessories, and it’s hardly the first time the former “Suits” star has paid homage to Diana.
> View attachment 5207079
> 
> In addition to sometimes selecting similar styles, Markle has worn several of the late Princess of Wales’ precious pieces of jewelry, including a Cartier bracelet for her Oprah tell-all and an aquamarine ring for her wedding reception.
> 
> And the Dior bag isn’t the only way she and Harry nodded to Diana during their September stay in the Big Apple, either, as they even checked into one of the late royal’s favorite NYC spots, the Carlyle hotel.
> 
> Beyond appearing at the Global Citizen Festival, the couple’s NYC trip also included meeting with the US ambassador to the United Nations and visiting an elementary school in Harlem.
> 
> It seems we’ll eventually get a closer look at the Sussexes’ time in the city, as Page Six exclusively reported that they taped it for a Netflix documentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle nods to  Princess Diana with purse at Global Citizen Live
> 
> 
> Markle carried a version of one of Princess Diana’s go-to bags. The late royal brought hers to a different big moment in the Big Apple: the 1996 Met Gala.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Even you Page Six?


----------



## muddledmint

Chloe302225 said:


> But shouldn't Kate actually look older given that she is doing less to her face than Meghan. I thought the whole point of these procedures were for Meghan to look younger than Kate. It defeats the purpose of all plastic surgery if she ends up looking older than Kate imo.


I’m not convinced that meghan had a lot of work done recently. Her face looks a bit fuller but that is probably just from weight gain. I think meghan looks her age or younger, while Kate looks many years older than she actually is. She looks like she’s in her late 40s despite being very pretty. If meghan does get cosmetic work, how it affects her looks depends on how far she takes it. If she starts getting that stereotypical bad plastic surgery/filler/Botox face, it will definitely make her look older than Kate.


----------



## bellecate

muddledmint said:


> Ok, I don’t like meghan markle and her clothes were overall pretty bad on this trip, super matronly and unflattering …. but have you SEEN Kate’s face close up? Meghan looks way younger.


When I see Kate’s face I see grace, compassion, contentment and a happy person. With H’s wife I see the opposite greed, no peace, a facade. What she thinks she needs to be showing. I’ll take the Duchess of Cambridges looks any day.


----------



## Lodpah

Enjoy! This kid is spot on. He calls them Harry and Scary. Did Harry really cuss at the kids and push them away? He's a fcuking idiot and needs his behind kicked by a real man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Allisonfaye said:


> Hard to keep up with this thread. Did anyone post the piece from the WSJ here? I couldn't stomach actually reading it.



I did not post it, but will confirm that the comments were brutal.  Mostly males who slammed the wsj for writing about the faux royal.
The article is behind a paywall, but here’s the transcript of the podcast.  Much same info and snark   








						Harry and Meghan, Hollywood Royalty? - The Journal. - WSJ Podcasts
					

Since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle quit the royal family, the couple have been building a Hollywood production company and signed deals with Netflix and Spotify. WSJ's Erich Schwartzel explains how this royal career shift has been going.




					www.wsj.com
				






Spoiler: Erich Schwartzel - podcast



Kate Linebaugh: Over the last 18 months, a lot of people all over the world have chosen to switch careers. Two people who've made a career shift that everyone is watching are Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex

Erich Schwartzel: The Royals go to Hollywood.

Kate Linebaugh: That's our colleague, Erich Schwartzel in our L.A. bureau. He says, after leaving their Royal lives behind the Duke and Duchess are making an age-old gamble, trying to make it big in show business.

Erich Schwartzel: They have a lot of connections to lean on. They were not showing up with a suitcase, getting off the bus and saying, "Here I am, I'm going to make it big."

Kate Linebaugh: And Erich says, "Hollywood is interested."

Erich Schwartzel: It is hard for people out here to be starstruck, but this is like another level. I mean running a studio or starring in a movie, that's one thing. But being a freaking Royal, having a title, going by one name, it's another level.

Kate Linebaugh: Since getting to Los Angeles, Harry and Meghan have signed multimillion dollar deals with Netflix and Spotify. And the spotlight on them is as bright as ever.

Erich Schwartzel: This is where you have the marriage of the Royals and the contemporary entertainment ecosystem. They've traded one microscope for another.

Kate Linebaugh: But like with any career change, there's a big question. Will it work?

Erich Schwartzel: But they also land in Hollywood, a place where you have to hire producers and hire writers and read scripts and do a bunch of grunt work to really actually try to make it. So I set out to do this story because I wanted to see how exactly that transition was going.

Kate Linebaugh: Welcome to the Journal, our show about money, business and power. I'm Kate Linebaugh. It's Friday, September 24th. Coming up on the show, Harry and Meghan try to make it in LA LA land.

Erich Schwartzel: I'll say right here at the top that referring to them as Harry and Meghan is not disrespectful. It's actually proper. They are a Duke and Duchess, and they can go by their first names like Madonna and Cher.

Kate Linebaugh: Maybe what is more controversial is you just put Harry and Meghan on the same level as Madonna and Cher.

Erich Schwartzel: Well, Kate we're talking Royals.

Kate Linebaugh: Erich says that while the Royals aren't everyone's cup of tea, he thinks a lot of people follow Harry and Meghan, more than they're willing to admit.

Erich Schwartzel: You can't help but launch into a massive conversation about them.

Kate Linebaugh: But a lot of people don't care about the Royals.

Erich Schwartzel: I think that's a lot of posturing a lot of the time. I think it's quite cool not to care about the Royals right now.

Kate Linebaugh: Ever since the British prince and American actress became a couple, they've received a lot of attention, and they've tried to leverage that fame.

Erich Schwartzel: Soon after Harry and Meghan married in 2018, they started working on various entertainment projects, but they were tied to their philanthropic advocacy work. For example, Meghan narrated a documentary about elephants that was on Disney Plus.

Meghan Markle: This is a side of elephants we rarely see.

Kate Linebaugh: Harry was also working on projects like a documentary series on mental health.

Erich Schwartzel: And this was all fine and good, but they had to be advocacy work. They couldn't be really commercial ventures.

Kate Linebaugh: That's because working Royals can't do any commercial work. The palace is worried about potential conflicts of interest. So Harry and Meghan could do entertainment projects that promoted their advocacy, but they couldn't make a profit. But in January 2020, that changed for the couple when they announced they were quitting their jobs as Royals.

Speaker 4: Britain's Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle will no longer use their Royal titles or receive public funds.

Speaker 5: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will no longer be official working members of the Royal family.

Speaker 6: Leaving many of the trappings of royalty behind.

Kate Linebaugh: So they moved to Hollywood and they already have some seeds planted in the entertainment world when they get there.

Erich Schwartzel: I'd say they have a lot, yes they do. They have a lot of seeds planted. There were connections well established. And then there was a town really eager to see what they were all about. I will say it was not a world that was foreign to them by that point. Obviously Meghan was a former actor, and Harry, just by virtue of being a prince ran in certain circles. He was friends with Bob Iger of Disney. And when they moved to California, they crashed at the mansion of Tyler Perry. I mean, this is not a world that would've been completely foreign or outside the realm of possibility.

Kate Linebaugh: After Harry and Meghan moved to L.A., Erich says a friend recommended that they reach out to streaming services, places like Netflix and HBO and Disney Plus. Some streaming companies had signed big deals with celebrities outside of show business, like the Obamas and Pakistani activist Malala Yousafzai.

Erich Schwartzel: People like known entities, whether that's Iron Man or whether that's watching a movie that you know Barack and Michelle ***** have produced and signed off on. And so we've seen this proliferation of talent deals where these streaming services come in, and they sign these mega deals and they say, "Okay, you're coming in house and you're going to make stuff just for us. And all of your fans are going to subscribe because they know you work for us."

Kate Linebaugh: So how did Harry and Meghan go about establishing themselves in Hollywood? What did they do to set up their operation?

Erich Schwartzel: So soon after their move to California, they announced that they are forming this new company called Archewell, and it is going to house their entertainment operations. It has an audio division. It has entertainment division. It's also their clearing house for a lot of the projects they're doing that are really trying to establish the Harry and Meghan brand post-Buckingham.

Kate Linebaugh: As in Buckingham Palace.

Erich Schwartzel: Right. Right, yeah.

Kate Linebaugh: And to establish that brand, Harry and Meghan used more than just their Royal celebrity.

Erich Schwartzel: People knew who they were. They also had a significant advantage in the fact that they are a young family.

Meghan Markle: No way. Archie look. You didn't scare him away. I didn't scare him away. You scared him away.

Erich Schwartzel: And not a lot of people signing these talent deals fit their demographic. And so you have a possibility here where if you're running a streaming service, you have this young, rather glamorous, two young glamorous parents, frankly.

Kate Linebaugh: And in no time, a lot of streaming services got in line to meet with the young couple.

Erich Schwartzel: Among others, they met with Apple, they met with NBCUniversal. They met with Disney where they had something of a preexisting relationship. And so they met with several folks, and then ultimately decided on Netflix, despite, and I found this interesting, despite the fact that Netflix was not the highest bidder to work with them.

Kate Linebaugh: Harry and Meghan did strike a deal with Netflix for a reported $100 million. The wide range of Netflix programming and its global reach appealed to the couple.

Erich Schwartzel: If you're running a company like this, and you think maybe I want to do a documentary one day, but maybe I want to do a children's show the other day. It offers you pretty much every type of show you can make. And so it was that combination of global footprint and a menu of opportunities that made Netflix the winner here.

Kate Linebaugh: And that Netflix deal was just a start. A few months later at the end of 2020, the couple announced a reported $20 million deal with Spotify to make podcasts. As a quick disclaimer, the Journal is a co-production with Gimlet Media, which is owned by Spotify.

Erich Schwartzel: Their deal with Spotify was also very similar to some of the other talent deals that Spotify was striking. And it was for basically the audio version of what they were doing at Netflix. So far, they've only released one podcast project through this deal. It was a Christmas special.

Prince Harry: Welcome to our 2020 holiday special from ultra audio. I'm Harry.

Meghan Markle: And I'm Meghan.

Erich Schwartzel: It was an inspirational special about spending Christmas in quarantine essentially. So we don't know as much about what the Spotify deal is going to yield.

Kate Linebaugh: Okay, so they've got these big deals from Netflix and Spotify. What kind of content do you expect them to make?

Erich Schwartzel: So Archewell has a pretty clear identity, I think. They want to make programming that they say is going to help the world. I mean, heal the world, make people feel good about themselves, inspire people. It feels like a company that is trying to translate their advocacy work into commercial efforts.

Kate Linebaugh: Sounds like it risks being boring.

Erich Schwartzel: It absolutely does or safe. And I think that if you talk to people in town, that is something that comes up quite frequently. Like it or not, a lot of times what breaks through are things that have a real edge to them and that are provocative. And I think some people, some agents or executives in Hollywood when they hear, "Oh, we're going to make inspirational programming." They think it's like automatic snoozefest.

Kate Linebaugh: According to Erich, that's the central tension. Will enough people actually tune in to a Harry and Meghan production?

Erich Schwartzel: They came to Hollywood as this very unique kind of outsider in that they were massively famous. I mean, almost like stratospherically famous, but they were trying to break into an industry where fame an everyday thing. And so there was this big question about whether or not people cared about what they had to say when they weren't talking about their lives in the palace.

Kate Linebaugh: That's after the break. What catapulted Harry and Meghan onto television this year was not an original Archewell production. It was an interview with Oprah Winfrey. And the sit down focused on their old life at the palace.

Meghan Markle: And then I was silent.

Oprah Winfrey: Were you silent or were you silenced?

Meghan Markle: The latter.

Kate Linebaugh: The Oprah interview had huge ratings, and Harry and Meghan were the talk of Hollywood.

Erich Schwartzel: Honestly, I feel more interest than ever was on reading the body language between Harry and William. And there was so much more attention on what was going to happen with their new daughter and what the queen was thinking. And I think that it really turned the spotlight back on the personal drama that's defined this quite a bit.

Kate Linebaugh: But they have left that institution, and they are trying to make it in Hollywood like so many people before them. And they've had a lot of success with their, we will tell you the dirty secrets of the palace that you're fascinated by, but what is the bar for them to make content that's not about the palace that the public is interest it in?

Erich Schwartzel: I think there's a very high bar, especially because we're in a world where they're competing with a lot. There's not just three broadcast stations anymore. There's a million streamers. We haven't yet seen people say, "I love Meghan, ergo I want to watch movies and TV shows she has endorsed." And I think, Kate, you're getting at the central issue, which is what do you do when you are the commodity, and you're trying to get people to look elsewhere, but people just still want to hear about whether or not Kate Middleton was mean.

Kate Linebaugh: So the challenge Harry and Meghan face is moving on from whether or not Kate Middleton is mean and still keeping that huge audience they got from the Oprah interview. And they have some projects on the horizon that will test if they can do that.

Erich Schwartzel: So, so far Harry has announced he's producing a documentary on the Invictus Games, which is a sporting event for wounded veterans.

Prince Harry: They are now without doubt, the best role models that any parent out there or anybody could wish for.

Erich Schwartzel: And this is an organization that he's been quite involved with in the past. He's just bringing it to this new platform he's got. Meghan has announced the show Pearl, that she is developing about a young girl who leans on figures from history, famous women from history, for inspiration. And I actually think that Pearl is probably the example we have so far of a post-palace show because it's a little more just plain entertainment. You can imagine it's being a Meghan Markle production.

Kate Linebaugh: And with their big multimillion dollar streaming deals, more Harry and Meghan projects will be coming soon.

Erich Schwartzel: We could be entering a moment where it starts to feel like Harry and Meghan are everywhere because they've been hiring. They've been laying the groundwork for there to be more productions, more podcasts, more movies, more TV shows.

Kate Linebaugh: What is the track record of non-Hollywood elite making it in Hollywood?

Erich Schwartzel: So far the track record is not encouraging. I'd say certainly we've seen a lot of deals get signed, but so far the success has been inconclusive. It feels like it's been a little bit more like one off pops. The Obamas, for instance, had quite a bit of success with a documentary they did for Netflix called American Factory that won an Oscar. I mean, that's a great start. I will be totally frank. When you talk to sources in Hollywood off the record, they say, "Yeah, and what else have they done?"

Kate Linebaugh: Erich says that having staying power in Hollywood is a long road for anyone. So even with all their advantages for Harry and Meghan to make this new career work, they'll have to make great content.

Erich Schwartzel: I don't know if I'd be laughed out of town for saying this, but this might be a moment where Hollywood is something of a meritocracy at times because the shows and movies still have to be good. The connections get you incredibly far, and money gets you even farther. But I think that if people aren't watching, if it just flops, it's not only financially unviable, but it's also embarrassing. And so I think that at some point we're going to have to see do viewers care, or do they just say that's all fine and good. Can you please tell us if Harry has talked to his brother in the last month? I mean that's the question.

Kate Linebaugh: That's all for today, Friday, September 24th. The Journal is a co-production of Gimlet and the Wall Street Journal. Your hosts are Ryan Knutson and me, Kate Linebaugh. The show's produced by Priscilla (Alabe), Katherine Brewer, Gerard Cole, Pia Gadkari, Brendan Klinkenberg, Annie Minoff, Laura Morris, (Afif Nosily), Rikki Novetsky, Enrique Pérez de la Rosa, Sarah Platt, Willa Rubin, Matthew Sherman, Matthew Shilts, Kayla Stokes, and Annie-Rose Strasser. Our engineers are Griffin Tanner, Nathan Singhapok, and Sam Behr. Our theme music is by So Wylie. Additional music this week from Catherine Anderson, Peter Leonard, Billy Libby, Bobby Lord, Emma Munger, and Blue Dot Sessions. Fact checking by Nicole Pisulka. Thanks for listening. See you Monday.


----------



## Lodpah

I'm upset seeing that video of him assaulting those kids. Yeah, I call it assaulting. First, he uses them as a prop and once he's done, he shoves them away. I hope some parents sue him for assault. You, Harry, is the racist.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> I wholeheartedly agree. As a U.S. citizen, I am hereby informing the *Dimwit Duo* that while they are in the United States, they are the *Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat*.


 Thanks @jennit for your nicknames #2 Dimwit Duo and #3 Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat. Wow! Two great nicknames in just one sentence seems like quite a feat and justifies being awarded a ribbon. Congratulations!


----------



## CarryOn2020

To my eye, both ladies are gorgeous.  Not sure anyone here has said negative things about the face. Certainly the clothes, certainly the lies, not the face. As my mother famously said, ‘pretty is as pretty does’.  H&M are not known for being kind people.  Actions matter more the words.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @jennit for your nicknames #2 Dimwit Duo and #3 Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat. Wow! Two great nicknames in just one sentence seems like quite a feat and justifies being awarded a ribbon. Congratulations!
> View attachment 5207242


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh really  

*EXCLUSIVE: Look what you made me do! Taylor Swift gave up her personal bodyguards to protect Harry and Meghan during their whistle-stop tour of New York - including ex-NYPD cop*

*Meghan and Harry were protected by Taylor Swift's bodyguards during their whistle stop tour of New York City this weekend, DailyMail.com can reveal *
*The couple was driven around by a former NYPD officer in his 50s - known as Jimmy - who also serves at the singer's head of security *
*A second, shorter and burlier guard who was also seen looking after the Sussexes has also been pictured alongside Swift in 2019 *
*It's unclear if Swift loaned Meghan and Harry her guards during their stay as a favor or if the Sussexes happened to hire them from a company *
*The two guards were seen at the posh Carlyle Hotel on the Upper East Side every day of the couple's stay *
*They were spotted out front coordinating with other security personnel, including one who claimed to be with the Department of Homeland Security*
*








						Harry and Meghan used Taylor Swift's bodyguards for their NYC trip
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were minded by two of Taylor Swift's bodyguards during their whistle stop tour of New York City, DailyMail.com can exclusively reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## csshopper

If what we've had to endure the past few days in news feeds from NYC is the Diddly Squat’s idea of Netflix entertainment I predict a short contract with the vendor. 
Y A W N!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Even you Page Six?



Like all of them, Page Six does whatever it takes to get clicks. Putting Diana’s and Meghan’s names in the same article will get clicks from both sides.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

scarlet555 said:


> I cannot even comment on a post, it's too fast of a thread to find... but LOL at the one where there are more security and cops than fans in NY....
> Yes girl, that's how is going to be, so get used to it: *no relevance self marketing losers*!


 Thanks @scarlet555 for your first very appropriate nickname,* no relevance self marketing losers *and welcome to The List.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Enjoy! This kid is spot on. He calls them Harry and Scary. Did Harry really cuss at the kids and push them away? He's a fcuking idiot and needs his behind kicked by a real man.



Lodpah, It is mind boggling, sixth in line to the throne pushing second graders and lobbing the F bomb in anger into their midst. Except for this thankfully being saved on YouTube it seems to have disappeared from the Net and it's for damn sure it will not show up in the Netflix home movies coming soon to a monitor near you. This clip should be on the Evening News internationally.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Lodpah, It is mind boggling, sixth in line to the throne pushing second graders and lobbing the F bomb in anger into their midst. Except for this thankfully being saved on YouTube it seems to have disappeared from the Net and it's for damn sure it will not show up in the Netflix home movies coming soon to a monitor near you. This clip should be on the Evening News internationally.


It's interesting how that clip has suddenly disappeared.  BUT we have it here!!
Page 4997 Post #74,947


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I don't remember anyone saying she's aging terribly though...more just comments about her attempting (and failing miserably) to hide her weight gain, and the obvious changes to her face.
> Remember the old adage: as you age, it's either your a$$ or your face.
> I had a client I hadn't seen in about 7 years.  She came back to see me with her husband in tow.  He commented how great I looked and that I looked even younger than I had when he'd last seen me 7 years prior.  I was feeling pretty good hearing that!  I jokingly said, well, it's probably the extra 20 lbs filling out my wrinkles.  He literally looked me up and down and commented, "Yeah, you're probably right".


Very true.  Can't have both. Speaking from experience...


----------



## edsbgrl

csshopper said:


> Lodpah, It is mind boggling, sixth in line to the throne pushing second graders and lobbing the F bomb in anger into their midst. Except for this thankfully being saved on YouTube it seems to have disappeared from the Net and it's for damn sure it will not show up in the Netflix home movies coming soon to a monitor near you. This clip should be on the Evening News internationally.



Listening to this and I don't think that's Harry speaking. It sounds like someones done a voice over with the clip. And as far as pushing the children, it looks more like he's playfully interacting with them, not pushing. 

I have no skin in this game but I don't like seeing someone vilified for something they aren't actually saying/doing.


----------



## Lodpah

edsbgrl said:


> Listening to this and I don't think that's Harry speaking. It sounds like someones done a voice over with the clip. And as far as pushing the children, it looks more like he's playfully interacting with them, not pushing.
> 
> I have no skin in this game but I don't like seeing someone vilified for something they aren't actually saying/doing.


You can clearly see how aggressive he’s pushing them snd not smiling.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I did not post it, but will confirm that the comments were brutal.  Mostly males who slammed the wsj for writing about the faux royal.
> The article is behind a paywall, but here’s the transcript of the podcast.  Much same info and snark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, Hollywood Royalty? - The Journal. - WSJ Podcasts
> 
> 
> Since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle quit the royal family, the couple have been building a Hollywood production company and signed deals with Netflix and Spotify. WSJ's Erich Schwartzel explains how this royal career shift has been going.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Erich Schwartzel - podcast
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Over the last 18 months, a lot of people all over the world have chosen to switch careers. Two people who've made a career shift that everyone is watching are Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: The Royals go to Hollywood.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: That's our colleague, Erich Schwartzel in our L.A. bureau. He says, after leaving their Royal lives behind the Duke and Duchess are making an age-old gamble, trying to make it big in show business.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: They have a lot of connections to lean on. They were not showing up with a suitcase, getting off the bus and saying, "Here I am, I'm going to make it big."
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: And Erich says, "Hollywood is interested."
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: It is hard for people out here to be starstruck, but this is like another level. I mean running a studio or starring in a movie, that's one thing. But being a freaking Royal, having a title, going by one name, it's another level.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Since getting to Los Angeles, Harry and Meghan have signed multimillion dollar deals with Netflix and Spotify. And the spotlight on them is as bright as ever.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: This is where you have the marriage of the Royals and the contemporary entertainment ecosystem. They've traded one microscope for another.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: But like with any career change, there's a big question. Will it work?
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: But they also land in Hollywood, a place where you have to hire producers and hire writers and read scripts and do a bunch of grunt work to really actually try to make it. So I set out to do this story because I wanted to see how exactly that transition was going.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Welcome to the Journal, our show about money, business and power. I'm Kate Linebaugh. It's Friday, September 24th. Coming up on the show, Harry and Meghan try to make it in LA LA land.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: I'll say right here at the top that referring to them as Harry and Meghan is not disrespectful. It's actually proper. They are a Duke and Duchess, and they can go by their first names like Madonna and Cher.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Maybe what is more controversial is you just put Harry and Meghan on the same level as Madonna and Cher.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: Well, Kate we're talking Royals.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Erich says that while the Royals aren't everyone's cup of tea, he thinks a lot of people follow Harry and Meghan, more than they're willing to admit.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: You can't help but launch into a massive conversation about them.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: But a lot of people don't care about the Royals.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: I think that's a lot of posturing a lot of the time. I think it's quite cool not to care about the Royals right now.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Ever since the British prince and American actress became a couple, they've received a lot of attention, and they've tried to leverage that fame.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: Soon after Harry and Meghan married in 2018, they started working on various entertainment projects, but they were tied to their philanthropic advocacy work. For example, Meghan narrated a documentary about elephants that was on Disney Plus.
> 
> Meghan Markle: This is a side of elephants we rarely see.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Harry was also working on projects like a documentary series on mental health.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: And this was all fine and good, but they had to be advocacy work. They couldn't be really commercial ventures.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: That's because working Royals can't do any commercial work. The palace is worried about potential conflicts of interest. So Harry and Meghan could do entertainment projects that promoted their advocacy, but they couldn't make a profit. But in January 2020, that changed for the couple when they announced they were quitting their jobs as Royals.
> 
> Speaker 4: Britain's Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle will no longer use their Royal titles or receive public funds.
> 
> Speaker 5: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will no longer be official working members of the Royal family.
> 
> Speaker 6: Leaving many of the trappings of royalty behind.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: So they moved to Hollywood and they already have some seeds planted in the entertainment world when they get there.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: I'd say they have a lot, yes they do. They have a lot of seeds planted. There were connections well established. And then there was a town really eager to see what they were all about. I will say it was not a world that was foreign to them by that point. Obviously Meghan was a former actor, and Harry, just by virtue of being a prince ran in certain circles. He was friends with Bob Iger of Disney. And when they moved to California, they crashed at the mansion of Tyler Perry. I mean, this is not a world that would've been completely foreign or outside the realm of possibility.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: After Harry and Meghan moved to L.A., Erich says a friend recommended that they reach out to streaming services, places like Netflix and HBO and Disney Plus. Some streaming companies had signed big deals with celebrities outside of show business, like the Obamas and Pakistani activist Malala Yousafzai.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: People like known entities, whether that's Iron Man or whether that's watching a movie that you know Barack and Michelle ***** have produced and signed off on. And so we've seen this proliferation of talent deals where these streaming services come in, and they sign these mega deals and they say, "Okay, you're coming in house and you're going to make stuff just for us. And all of your fans are going to subscribe because they know you work for us."
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: So how did Harry and Meghan go about establishing themselves in Hollywood? What did they do to set up their operation?
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: So soon after their move to California, they announced that they are forming this new company called Archewell, and it is going to house their entertainment operations. It has an audio division. It has entertainment division. It's also their clearing house for a lot of the projects they're doing that are really trying to establish the Harry and Meghan brand post-Buckingham.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: As in Buckingham Palace.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: Right. Right, yeah.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: And to establish that brand, Harry and Meghan used more than just their Royal celebrity.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: People knew who they were. They also had a significant advantage in the fact that they are a young family.
> 
> Meghan Markle: No way. Archie look. You didn't scare him away. I didn't scare him away. You scared him away.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: And not a lot of people signing these talent deals fit their demographic. And so you have a possibility here where if you're running a streaming service, you have this young, rather glamorous, two young glamorous parents, frankly.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: And in no time, a lot of streaming services got in line to meet with the young couple.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: Among others, they met with Apple, they met with NBCUniversal. They met with Disney where they had something of a preexisting relationship. And so they met with several folks, and then ultimately decided on Netflix, despite, and I found this interesting, despite the fact that Netflix was not the highest bidder to work with them.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Harry and Meghan did strike a deal with Netflix for a reported $100 million. The wide range of Netflix programming and its global reach appealed to the couple.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: If you're running a company like this, and you think maybe I want to do a documentary one day, but maybe I want to do a children's show the other day. It offers you pretty much every type of show you can make. And so it was that combination of global footprint and a menu of opportunities that made Netflix the winner here.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: And that Netflix deal was just a start. A few months later at the end of 2020, the couple announced a reported $20 million deal with Spotify to make podcasts. As a quick disclaimer, the Journal is a co-production with Gimlet Media, which is owned by Spotify.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: Their deal with Spotify was also very similar to some of the other talent deals that Spotify was striking. And it was for basically the audio version of what they were doing at Netflix. So far, they've only released one podcast project through this deal. It was a Christmas special.
> 
> Prince Harry: Welcome to our 2020 holiday special from ultra audio. I'm Harry.
> 
> Meghan Markle: And I'm Meghan.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: It was an inspirational special about spending Christmas in quarantine essentially. So we don't know as much about what the Spotify deal is going to yield.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Okay, so they've got these big deals from Netflix and Spotify. What kind of content do you expect them to make?
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: So Archewell has a pretty clear identity, I think. They want to make programming that they say is going to help the world. I mean, heal the world, make people feel good about themselves, inspire people. It feels like a company that is trying to translate their advocacy work into commercial efforts.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Sounds like it risks being boring.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: It absolutely does or safe. And I think that if you talk to people in town, that is something that comes up quite frequently. Like it or not, a lot of times what breaks through are things that have a real edge to them and that are provocative. And I think some people, some agents or executives in Hollywood when they hear, "Oh, we're going to make inspirational programming." They think it's like automatic snoozefest.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: According to Erich, that's the central tension. Will enough people actually tune in to a Harry and Meghan production?
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: They came to Hollywood as this very unique kind of outsider in that they were massively famous. I mean, almost like stratospherically famous, but they were trying to break into an industry where fame an everyday thing. And so there was this big question about whether or not people cared about what they had to say when they weren't talking about their lives in the palace.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: That's after the break. What catapulted Harry and Meghan onto television this year was not an original Archewell production. It was an interview with Oprah Winfrey. And the sit down focused on their old life at the palace.
> 
> Meghan Markle: And then I was silent.
> 
> Oprah Winfrey: Were you silent or were you silenced?
> 
> Meghan Markle: The latter.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: The Oprah interview had huge ratings, and Harry and Meghan were the talk of Hollywood.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: Honestly, I feel more interest than ever was on reading the body language between Harry and William. And there was so much more attention on what was going to happen with their new daughter and what the queen was thinking. And I think that it really turned the spotlight back on the personal drama that's defined this quite a bit.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: But they have left that institution, and they are trying to make it in Hollywood like so many people before them. And they've had a lot of success with their, we will tell you the dirty secrets of the palace that you're fascinated by, but what is the bar for them to make content that's not about the palace that the public is interest it in?
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: I think there's a very high bar, especially because we're in a world where they're competing with a lot. There's not just three broadcast stations anymore. There's a million streamers. We haven't yet seen people say, "I love Meghan, ergo I want to watch movies and TV shows she has endorsed." And I think, Kate, you're getting at the central issue, which is what do you do when you are the commodity, and you're trying to get people to look elsewhere, but people just still want to hear about whether or not Kate Middleton was mean.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: So the challenge Harry and Meghan face is moving on from whether or not Kate Middleton is mean and still keeping that huge audience they got from the Oprah interview. And they have some projects on the horizon that will test if they can do that.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: So, so far Harry has announced he's producing a documentary on the Invictus Games, which is a sporting event for wounded veterans.
> 
> Prince Harry: They are now without doubt, the best role models that any parent out there or anybody could wish for.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: And this is an organization that he's been quite involved with in the past. He's just bringing it to this new platform he's got. Meghan has announced the show Pearl, that she is developing about a young girl who leans on figures from history, famous women from history, for inspiration. And I actually think that Pearl is probably the example we have so far of a post-palace show because it's a little more just plain entertainment. You can imagine it's being a Meghan Markle production.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: And with their big multimillion dollar streaming deals, more Harry and Meghan projects will be coming soon.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: We could be entering a moment where it starts to feel like Harry and Meghan are everywhere because they've been hiring. They've been laying the groundwork for there to be more productions, more podcasts, more movies, more TV shows.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: What is the track record of non-Hollywood elite making it in Hollywood?
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: So far the track record is not encouraging. I'd say certainly we've seen a lot of deals get signed, but so far the success has been inconclusive. It feels like it's been a little bit more like one off pops. The Obamas, for instance, had quite a bit of success with a documentary they did for Netflix called American Factory that won an Oscar. I mean, that's a great start. I will be totally frank. When you talk to sources in Hollywood off the record, they say, "Yeah, and what else have they done?"
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: Erich says that having staying power in Hollywood is a long road for anyone. So even with all their advantages for Harry and Meghan to make this new career work, they'll have to make great content.
> 
> Erich Schwartzel: I don't know if I'd be laughed out of town for saying this, but this might be a moment where Hollywood is something of a meritocracy at times because the shows and movies still have to be good. The connections get you incredibly far, and money gets you even farther. But I think that if people aren't watching, if it just flops, it's not only financially unviable, but it's also embarrassing. And so I think that at some point we're going to have to see do viewers care, or do they just say that's all fine and good. Can you please tell us if Harry has talked to his brother in the last month? I mean that's the question.
> 
> Kate Linebaugh: That's all for today, Friday, September 24th. The Journal is a co-production of Gimlet and the Wall Street Journal. Your hosts are Ryan Knutson and me, Kate Linebaugh. The show's produced by Priscilla (Alabe), Katherine Brewer, Gerard Cole, Pia Gadkari, Brendan Klinkenberg, Annie Minoff, Laura Morris, (Afif Nosily), Rikki Novetsky, Enrique Pérez de la Rosa, Sarah Platt, Willa Rubin, Matthew Sherman, Matthew Shilts, Kayla Stokes, and Annie-Rose Strasser. Our engineers are Griffin Tanner, Nathan Singhapok, and Sam Behr. Our theme music is by So Wylie. Additional music this week from Catherine Anderson, Peter Leonard, Billy Libby, Bobby Lord, Emma Munger, and Blue Dot Sessions. Fact checking by Nicole Pisulka. Thanks for listening. See you Monday.



I believe the WSJ article is the one in the quote below. It has almost 800 comments, and the ones I read are from non-fans. Here are a couple for your entertainment:










Chanbal said:


> Here is the article for the ones that don't have access to the Wall Street Journal.
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood*
> *The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when the couple isn’t spilling the tea on the royal family*
> 
> By
> 
> Erich Schwartzel
> Sept. 25, 2021 12:00 am ET
> 
> _Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and sixth in line to the British throne, had slipped away from his fellow royals to meet with the queen of media.
> 
> *In a London hotel room in 2018, Oprah Winfrey listened as the prince described his mental-health struggles as a member of the world’s most famous family.* Even his trip that day to the hotel—through a back door, to avoid the paparazzi—was a reminder of the restrictions and constant scrutiny that he lived under.
> 
> It was a deeply personal conversation, but the prince and Ms. Winfrey weren’t alone. *Also in the room, sitting nearby but keeping quiet, was Jon Kamen, a New York-based film and television producer.* To him it looked like something else: a hit.
> 
> “Guys,” he later told his producing partners, *“the format of this show—we witnessed it in that hotel room.”*
> 
> Nearly three years later, Mr. Kamen, the chief executive of RadicalMedia, would be wrapping up the Hollywood project that resulted from that meeting: “The Me You Can’t See,” a six-episode series on mental health released by Apple Inc. in May. A conversation between Prince Harry and Ms. Winfrey—not unlike that hotel room heart-to-heart—anchored every episode. Prince Harry co-produced the series and shared intimate details of the sweat-drenched anxiety attacks and profound sadness that he said gripped his time in the spotlight.
> 
> “I always wanted to be normal, as opposed to Prince Harry,” he says in the documentary.
> 
> If there was a moment when the scion of a tradition-bound dynasty bridged the gulf to his new life as a bare-it-all Hollywood producer, it may have been this: working with Oprah Winfrey on a TV show that mined his personal history for a streaming platform operated by the world’s richest company.
> 
> *Since leaving behind their royal duties last year and moving to California, Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, have netted tens of millions of dollars in deals with media companies like Netflix Inc. and Spotify Technology SA, many of which rely on their proximity to their previous life in England.
> 
> Getting there has been no fairy tale. Interviews with associates and colleagues of the couple reveal years of behind-the-scenes hustling that laid the groundwork for a major Hollywood arrival that will blanket the couple across film, TV, podcasts and books.* *They mined personal connections and friendships. They met with potential suitors and evaluated streaming services for their ability to reach a global audience, securing a deal reported to be in the $100 million range from Netflix in the process.* And they have frequently excavated their own personal lives to draw eyeballs, trying to wrest control of the narrative by lambasting critics and telling the story themselves.
> 
> *In essence, to escape a life under the microscope, they chose a different microscope.*
> 
> Mr. Kamen observed how, for Prince Harry, the Apple series wasn’t just a tour of his emotional past, even touching on the trauma of the death of his mother, Princess Diana, in a car crash when he was 12 years old. It was also an educational primer on the producing duties that may define his future.
> 
> Prince Harry joined Zoom meetings with Ms. Winfrey—first from England, then in Canada, and finally in Montecito, Calif. *He shared with the series’ producers his contacts with the global elite to enlist more participants, and suggested the formation of an advisory board that helped the team navigate the sensitive topics they were exploring. He vetted the subjects and pushed to bring in interviewees from beyond the Western world. He watched early edits and turned in notes faster than Ms. Winfrey.*
> 
> Streaming companies have spent generously for outsider producers like Barack and Michelle ***** and Pakistani education activist Malala Yousafzai, but skepticism is growing in the industry that big names translate into big profits. The Duke and Duchess’s deal includes shows that have little to do with their personal connections, raising a critical question: *Does anyone care about them when they aren’t spilling the tea on the royal family?
> 
> Calling Hollywood
> Prince Harry and Meghan, a former actor, started building their Hollywood Rolodex almost immediately after their May 2018 wedding—an event watched by 29 million people in the U.S. and attended by Ms. Winfrey.
> 
> They met with power brokers like Jeffrey Katzenberg,* who contacted them to discuss a project that would highlight their philanthropic pursuits through his short-lived Quibi streaming service. Taking a meeting with the couple then often meant signing a nondisclosure agreement, according to those who met with them.
> 
> *Meghan began a relationship with Netflix that same year*, *through a connection to her deceased mother-in-law.* David Furnish, a Canadian filmmaker, wanted to produce an animated series with the Duchess. Mr. Furnish’s husband, the singer Elton John, had been close friends with Princess Diana.
> 
> In July, Netflix announced it was developing that idea into “Pearl,” a family show about a young girl whose adventures are informed by her interactions with famous women from history.
> 
> *The prince also had a yearslong friendship with an industry heavyweight to lean on. He met Walt Disney Co. Executive Chairman Robert Iger* at an overseas conference years ago, a relationship that has evolved into something of a mentor role since he moved to California, people close to the two men say.
> 
> One awkward example of how even those with royal lineage have to hustle in Hollywood came up in 2019, when Prince Harry and Mr. Iger had a mini-reunion on the red carpet at “The Lion King” premiere.
> 
> “You do know she does voice-overs?” Prince Harry asked Mr. Iger, gesturing to his wife in a video that circulated after the event. To outsiders, it appeared he was advocating for Meghan to get a job.
> 
> Ah, I did not know that,” Mr. Iger responded. He turned toward his own wife with a smile while Meghan chatted with Beyoncé and Jay-Z on his other side.
> 
> “You seem surprised,” Prince Harry said. “She’s really interested.”
> 
> Mr. Iger turned serious. “We’d love to try. That’s a great idea,” he said.
> 
> A year later, Meghan did voice-over work that associates say had already been planned for “Elephants,” a Disney documentary that the couple had seen filming during an earlier visit to Botswana. When the movie premiered on Disney’s flagship streaming service, Disney+, her involvement drew greater than usual media coverage for a nature documentary.
> 
> *But the Disney team also grew privately concerned that critical tabloid reports about Meghan would depress viewership in the U.K.—a signal of the challenge of working with a producer better known for her personal life.*
> 
> Buckingham Palace had no issues with such entertainment projects, which had a philanthropic or advocacy purpose, according to people familiar with the matter. Once the couple left the palace—in part due to personal tensions and constant scrutiny from British tabloids—they were able to pursue more commercial work.
> 
> *Touchdown in L.A.*
> Soon after their arrival in Los Angeles in March 2020, the couple crashed at the 25,000-square-foot Beverly Hills home of director Tyler Perry before settling in Montecito, not far from Ms. Winfrey’s mansion.
> 
> They hired an attorney who had worked on big-ticket streaming deals. For the Duchess, who had worked as Meghan Markle, it was a return to the Hollywood scene she’d known since nearly birth.
> 
> Her father, Thomas Markle, was a lighting designer in Los Angeles, and she would often joke that she grew up on the set of the bawdy 1990s sitcom “Married…With Children,” visiting her father after school.
> 
> While attending Northwestern University, she studied abroad in Argentina and interned for the U.S. Embassy. *She thought she would go into politics. **Instead, she went into her hometown industry, booking parts like “hot girl” in the 2005 Ashton Kutcher rom-com “A Lot Like Love” and appearing as Briefcase Model #11, Briefcase Model #12 and Briefcase Model #24 on the game show “Deal or No Deal” from 2006 to 2007. **She called the show her “very lucrative waitressing job,” and made ends meet by doing calligraphy for celebrity wedding invitations.*
> 
> Her breakthrough was in the summer of 2011, with USA Network’s “Suits,” a show about an unlicensed attorney who starts working at a law firm. The Duchess was cast as Rachel Zane, a sharp paralegal trying to get into law school. By the show’s second season, more than 3 million viewers were tuning in each week.
> 
> “Suits” gave Meghan a platform to explore some of the priorities she’d had outside of show business, traveling to South Carolina to hear the stories of high-school students who overcame bullying and bigotry. By 2014, she was speaking out for gender equality and attending events at the United Nations.
> 
> Meghan said she wanted to move behind the scenes after she got married. She has said, in subsequent interviews, including a headline-generating sit-down with Ms. Winfrey that aired on CBS earlier this year, that the tabloids’ prying into her personal life drove her to depression and suicidal thoughts.
> 
> The couple’s biggest draws in Hollywood have relied on those personal details—in the interviews with Ms. Winfrey; a podcast about how they and friends spent the pandemic, the sole result so far of a Spotify deal reportedly worth around $20 million; and a book deal with publisher Penguin Random House said to be worth around $20 million that was announced in July and will include the prince’s personal memoir.
> 
> The boy who saw his mother die because of the camera’s glare, said “Me You Can’t See” producer Mr. Kamen, “understands the power of media.”
> 
> *The talks
> In Hollywood, the prince has tried to expand his output beyond the personal, casting himself as a next-generation David Attenborough*, the nature documentarian famous for films like “Planet Earth.” He already has experience in that realm, working on a 2018 documentary about saving rhinos from dehorning practices called “Stroop: Journey into the Rhino Horn War.”
> 
> The Duke and Duchess hit the market during a rush that turned into streaming-service FOMO—fear of missing out on the producer who would deliver a breakthrough hit. For streamers competing against one another, getting J.J. Abrams, the Obamas or any other notable name signed was as much about bringing them in-house as it was keeping them out-of-house elsewhere.
> 
> Though they had scant producing experience, Prince Harry and Meghan had a few advantages. They are globally recognized names at a time when streaming services are competing for viewers around the world. They are a young family at a time when most megadeal signers are midcareer professionals, making them a potential draw for younger audiences absorbed in TikTok and other services.
> 
> The couple’s lawyers set up meetings with companies only after conveying the range of investment they were looking for, hoping to avoid putting the couple through talks that were just about meeting the famous pair. Disney, Netflix, Apple and NBCUniversal were among those who met with the couple or their team.
> 
> Netflix won, signing their Archewell Productions, a division of their company formed last year and named for the Greek word “arche,” which means “source of action” and served as inspiration for their son Archie’s name.
> 
> “Through its creative partnership with Netflix, Archewell Productions will utilize the power of storytelling to embrace our shared humanity and duty to truth through a compassionate lens,” the company said when the deal was announced.
> 
> *Netflix wasn’t the highest bidder, according to a person familiar with the matter, but the couple was drawn to the service’s global footprint,* its focus on children’s programming and the menu of other shows it could carry, from documentaries to scripted series.
> 
> The deal came just as skepticism across the industry was growing over such arrangements. Studios fell over themselves to woo creators like Mr. Abrams in deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars, but only a few such arrangements have yielded commensurate hits. And even as Netflix talent deals produce home runs like Shonda Rhimes’s “Bridgerton,” many of the service’s breakout shows have also come from relatively unknown creators, with programming like “The Tiger King” and “The Queen’s Gambit.”
> 
> *Archewell is also competing for growing interest in royal-family programming. *Netflix’s fourth season of “The Crown,” about the life of Prince Harry’s grandmother, won outstanding drama series at the Primetime Emmy Awards on Sunday. Actress Kristen Stewart is generating awards buzz for her turn as his mother in the coming movie “Spencer.” Princess Diana is even getting the musical treatment in a show called “Diana,” slated to open on Broadway in November.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan have spent the past several months hiring executives like podcast veteran Rebecca Sananes as head of audio, joining a handful of employees.
> 
> She reports to Ben Browning, Archewell’s head of content, who was hired in March. Mr. Browning earned acclaim most recently for co-producing “Promising Young Woman,” a revenge fantasy about surviving sexual assault that was nominated for best picture this year at the Academy Awards.
> 
> Now Mr. Browning is heading a company that will, in its words, “share impactful content that unlocks action.”
> 
> So far, that has meant safe, feel-good programming.
> 
> Archewell isn’t going to produce the next “Chucky,” as one business associate described it, but the team is trying to avoid programming that seems overly earnest.
> 
> Any production will have a hard time outshining the books and interviews that have broken the seal of custom and reserve that define the royals. *In “The Me You Can’t See,” Prince Harry spoke of recalling the sound of horse hooves from his mother’s funeral. He talked of Meghan crying at night because of the cruelty of the London tabloids, and how his son said “Grandma Diana” from an early age. And most notably, in a separate interview with Ms. Winfrey, the couple shared the bombshell that an unidentified member of the royal family openly speculated to Harry on the skin tone of their child.*
> 
> It’s undeniably good TV, but it also means the Sussexes bring a unique set of baggage to a working relationship. *While producing “The Me You Can’t See,” Mr. Kamen was approached by the producers of the Broadway musical “Diana.”* It was being filmed for release on Netflix—the kind of adaptation Mr. Kamen’s company had done to great acclaim with the blockbuster musical “Hamilton.” *He passed on the opportunity, worried that Prince Harry would be angry with him if he got involved with a show about his mother.
> 
> Mr. Kamen never mentioned to Prince Harry how he had passed on the project, but now he doesn’t know if the prince would have cared. After all, the prince and his wife soon signed their own deal with Netflix.*
> 
> —Max Colchester contributed to this article._
> 
> *Write to *Erich Schwartzel at erich.schwartzel@wsj.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Hustle to Become Royalty—in Hollywood
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have landed lucrative entertainment deals since leaving England, often drawing on content from their personal lives. The big unknown: whether audiences will pay attention when they aren’t spilling the tea on the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wsj.com


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> It's interesting how that clip has suddenly disappeared.  BUT we have it here!!
> Page 4997 Post #74,947


I wonder why they made it disappear.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Instead of "subtle nods", the press could call them what they are:  "*Sledgehammers to Your Eyes*".


 Thanks @purseinsanity for being so creative in coining your #17 nickname, Sledgehammers to Your Eyes. Please collect #17 The List Ribbon.


----------



## bag-mania

edsbgrl said:


> Listening to this and *I don't think that's Harry speaking. It sounds like someones done a voice over with the clip.* And as far as pushing the children, it looks more like he's playfully interacting with them, not pushing.
> 
> I have no skin in this game but I don't like seeing someone vilified for something they aren't actually saying/doing.



I believe you are right. If he had really cursed at little kids and nobody in the press reported it (even in the UK, which is looking for stuff like this) then our society is in even worse shape than I thought. It was manufactured.


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> To my eye, she is not really popping this collar in the true sense of the phrase.
> She is trying  to close the skinny lapels so that she can cover her chest and stomach. The coat is too small to give her coverage.
> 
> View attachment 5207008



I have a coat like this. It’s meant to be up you couldn’t sit it folded and flat if you tried.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> I have a coat like this. It’s meant to be up you couldn’t sit it folded and flat if you tried.



Odd that the coat has deeply embedded creases from the lapels being folded over ?
What am I missing ?

Same coat, same day, lapels down.


----------



## littlemisskeira

muddledmint said:


> Ok, I don’t like meghan markle and her clothes were overall pretty bad on this trip, super matronly and unflattering …. but have you SEEN Kate’s face close up? Meghan looks way younger.



Seem like the 2 ladies are only 1 year apart in age. Meghan was born in 1981 and Kate 1982. I was honestly quite surprised to discover this. Maybe Kate seems much younger to me because of the image she portrays - very athletic and always appears to enjoy a game of sports in photographs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DP


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> Odd that the coat has deeply embedded creases from the lapels being folded over ?
> What am I missing ?



Yup, mine has that as well. And there are seams in those lines in some places. But it’s meant to be worn up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> Yup, mine has that as well. And there are seams in those lines in some places. But it’s meant to be worn up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

The back is still up. I’m just trying to explain its a thing. Not trying to start a battle over a lapel. Stand down soldier lol.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think Kate has nearly the same amount of PS and/or fillers in her face as *Mamba*.


 Thanks @purseinsanity for your #18 nickname, Mamba and here's your reward.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> The back is still up. I’m just trying to explain its a thing. Not trying to start a battle over a lapel. *Stand down soldier lol. ??????*



‘wow, not sure if you are trying to attack my opinion [which seems pointless], but okaaaay.  Agree to disagree, soldier???
  I am well acquainted with collars and lapels like this.  Hint: They are thin for a reason.  Talk to a tailor.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @purseinsanity for your #18 nickname, Mamba and here's your reward.
> View attachment 5207380


----------



## periogirl28

Chanbal said:


> To be fair, there are several possibilities
> 
> DSS=*D*elusional *S*ymptom*s*
> O=*o*f
> S= *S*chizophrenia


I like this one best. I hope it wasn't a gift directly from Dior. Shucks! Can they stop it already.


----------



## CarryOn2020

with this jacket, the notches show the lapel should lay flat. There is no way to stand those lapels up. 
MM’s coat is **not** like that.


----------



## Chanbal

edsbgrl said:


> Listening to this and I don't think that's Harry speaking. It sounds like someones done a voice over with the clip. And as far as pushing the children, it looks more like he's playfully interacting with them, not pushing.
> 
> I have no skin in this game but I don't like seeing someone vilified for something they aren't actually saying/doing.





bag-mania said:


> I believe you are right. If he had really cursed at little kids and nobody in the press reported it (even in the UK, which is looking for stuff like this) then our society is in even worse shape than I thought. It was manufactured.


I watched that part of the video a couple of times, and it's hard to decide one way or the other. However, I don't support when things are manufactured.


----------



## bag-mania

This is pathetic. Both Us and Cosmopolitan magazines wrote articles about some bystander on the street calling to Meghan, “how’s Lilibet?” and Meghan replying “she’s beautiful.”

That’s it. Two words and it is the subject of national stories. Us described Meghan as “gushing” and Cosmo says Meghan was “sharing a Lilibet update.” SMH


----------



## Chanbal

They can't be taken seriously…


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘wow, not sure if you are trying to attack my opinion [which seems pointless], but okaaaay.  Agree to disagree, soldier???
> I am well acquainted with collars and lapels like this.  Hint: They are thin for a reason.  Talk to a tailor.



Not at all, I was actually kidding. Because I felt a bit attacked actually. Still do. Happy to disagree. No need to get nasty about it. We agree, this is pointless. It’s a coat.


----------



## Chanbal

A self-serving trip…  A great summary of the NYC trip, so called a fake royal trip.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> This is pathetic. Both Us and Cosmopolitan magazines wrote articles about some bystander on the street calling to Meghan, “how’s Lilibet?” and Meghan replying “she’s beautiful.”
> 
> That’s it. Two words and it is the subject of national stories. Us described Meghan as “gushing” and Cosmo says Meghan was “sharing a Lilibet update.” SMH


So we will continue getting our information from international outlets. Here are a few more examples to illustrate the work of our media:


----------



## Norm.Core

Helium and Methane sucks the life outta me. Their antics are so pathetic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everyone gets a medal, including Andrew and the Cali royals

_Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen_








						Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen
					

PRINCE Andrew is to be honoured with a Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I guess the eternity band is her new push present? Because the delicate one Harry gave her after Archie - as is apparently tradition in the UK, Kate has one too - is gone.
> 
> OMG that pinky ring annoys me.


I’m very grateful for this thread for telling me of this trend & am keenly awaiting my push present from the jewellers. It’s a right hand ring, though, not an eternity. (The symbolism may be a bit wacky on this but  I’m not that mad about eternity bands. I’ve rationalised it as _I_ gave birth to our children so it is a reward for my efforts.)

I guess M is just such a sentimental person who just loves sweet gestures that get upgraded every 6 months.


charlottawill said:


> Just out of curiosity I put my engagement ring, a two carat round diamond in a classic Tiffany setting, on my pinky. It looked and felt very odd and out of place. Maybe she thinks she's setting a trend by doing this but I don't see it catching on.


Yeah doesn’t a lovely big stone swing round all the time? I feel like a pinky has got to be a thick band, flattish and pretty tight as it is a skinny finger. This is probably why the trend started with men’s big hands back in the Middle Ages


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a _subtle nod._
> View attachment 5207107
> 
> 
> The Dior is a _copyDi_ (kinda like copyKate).
> 
> Imagine MM -
> sitting in her McMansion, staring at images of Diana and Kate’s clothes then searching for current versions, then ordering, etc.
> 
> 
> ETA:  when will we see the Chanel and Tods?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designer-Vintage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.designer-vintage.com


*Vertigo theme plays*




CarryOn2020 said:


> Everyone gets a medal, including Andrew and the Cali royals
> 
> _Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen
> 
> 
> PRINCE Andrew is to be honoured with a Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/



They should call it the nepotism medal- ‘congratulations on being born into the right family & doing precisely nothing good with it’

This is why I can’t get behind the BRF either because they act humble & discreet for a minute but then do something like this which shows they have nothing but contempt for the public and the normal mores of our society because they are so above us all.

I don’t care if Kate looks slamming in a mini skirt (which she does) they are still shady.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I watched that part of the video a couple of times, and it's hard to decide one way or the other. However, I don't support when things are manufactured.



He is definitely interacting with the children however it’s viewed. I think if it had been a positive interaction his video people would have this out for wide distribution. The source is skynews, an independent NY company that sends crews out, sells their content, at least that’s what I got from their website, this was definitely not recorded by Succexes team.

There are 1633 comments about this video. I didn’t read all, but the ones attached are the first published and the analysis by the man who slowed the tape to closely review it is particularly interesting. Consensus of the comments read was he bullied the kids, he’s not the man he used to be, they are using kids to make money etc. I had to stop, after awhile it’s wearying.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> Probably true! But if you put aside all the hate for meghan (and believe me, I can’t stand her), it’s not fair to say that she aging terribly, especially in comparison to Kate. Kate’s face actually looked the best when she was pregnant or post partum because her face was rounder. Now her skin is like that of someone 5-10 years older than her actual age.



I personally am not saying she's aging terribly, I'm saying she's aging very sudden and in a weird way. Like that matronely look, you can get wrinkly and still not be matronely. That said, look at close-ups of her and she has tons of sun damage that is usually concealed by her skintone. 

But objectively, she does not look horrible (on the outside at least haha), just as she is not fat, just heavier than usual.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I imagine MM going from Z lister to newfound royal fame. She has to wear all her jewelry at once so she's aiming for this.
> 
> View attachment 5207172



Sadly she is no Elizabeth Taylor who could pull it off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I think it's the California sun that ages her. The make up is good whoever puts it on her but women who go in the sun a lot tend to age faster in their skin.
> 
> View attachment 5207174



Oh wow. There I was talking about her sun damage and even I am shocked. I have been wearing sunscreen religiously since my teens and not grilled myself at the beach. My sister is still making fun of me for the daily sunscreen habit, but we're getting at the age where I'll have the last laugh.


----------



## Lenna.V

Jayne1 said:


> Agree, it's just a bit of a change since in her TV days when she was so skinny and jittery and now, she's just not super thin anymore.



I always thought she doesn't have much of a waist. Her upper body seems shorter to me.


----------



## Lenna.V

scarlet555 said:


> Methane is not a trend setter, she is more of a copy cat...
> the pinky ring was worn by men in Casino, the movie by some of the mobsters, or poker players, status of wealth and prosperity.



She was chic and herself during her dating Harry days. Now is just pretentious with all that clad with luxury designers.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> They should call it the nepotism medal- ‘congratulations on being born into the right family & doing precisely nothing good with it’
> 
> This is why I can’t get behind the BRF either because they act humble & discreet for a minute but then do something like this which shows they have nothing but contempt for the public and the normal mores of our society because they are so above us all.
> 
> I don’t care if Kate looks slamming in a mini skirt (which she does) they are still shady.


It's not just the BRF. Nepotism rears its head especially when there is lots of $$$$ and prestige at stake. Plus when you have a big family, it is almost inevitable that some will be bad apples. This is the core plot point of many a TV drama. One of my ex-bosses used to religiously watch Korean drama and dab at her eyes as she told me how true to life the plot was with its family intrigue, backstabbing and sabotaging.


----------



## papertiger

Lenna.V said:


> She was chic and herself during her dating Harry days. Now is just pretentious with all that clad with luxury designers.



She hasn't found her personal style for her new 'role'. 

When she figures out what that role is and stops trying to be someone/something else she may figure it out. 
 .


----------



## Grande Latte

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally am not saying she's aging terribly, I'm saying she's aging very sudden and in a weird way. Like that matronely look, you can get wrinkly and still not be matronely. That said, look at close-ups of her and she has tons of sun damage that is usually concealed by her skintone.
> 
> But objectively, she does not look horrible (on the outside at least haha), just as she is not fat, just heavier than usual.



I agree. Her "look" changed suddenly. She was svelte and fashionable, and chic. There was something about her that was undeniably charming and attractive. But now, everything she puts on (despite how expensive these clothes are) just don't work anymore. I can't describe it. It's not just the weight, but her whole demeanor and aura changed.

Maybe deep down, she is really depressed.


----------



## eunaddict

muddledmint said:


> I’m not convinced that meghan had a lot of work done recently. Her face looks a bit fuller but that is probably just from weight gain. I think meghan looks her age or younger, while Kate looks many years older than she actually is. *She looks like she’s in her late 40s despite being very pretty.* *If meghan does get cosmetic work, how it affects her looks depends on how far she takes it. *If she starts getting that stereotypical bad plastic surgery/filler/Botox face, it will definitely make her look older than Kate.



There is no way on earth Kate looks like she's heading into her 50s. Both photos were taken within the last 1-2 years and to my eye (I'm about a decade younger than Kate), she looks her age.





That being said, both women definitely make use of botox and fillers, they both have had wrinkles and lines appear then disappear then reappear. And it's hard to judge how old anyone really looks when just about every single photo available is retouched to some degree.

That MM has DEFINITELY had plastic surgery done is a pretty well-documented fact (that's the other problem with having constant photos taken that document your changing features), she's definitely had breast augmentation and then revision, as well as at least one rhinoplasty - per multiple plastic surgeons who have been asked to comment. Her having had procedures done is no longer an "if", it's a question of what and when and how much, besides such is the Hollywood life. That being said, I really hope she didn't have any of that done in her teens, that's just such a sad way to grow up with that kind of pressure on physical appearance.


----------



## kemilia

As to her rings--the thin plain one is her real Welsh gold wedding ring, right? 
It should be the first ring on her finger, not the new and improved (about every 6 months) eternity-band-bigger-diamonds ring, if one is following tradition. 
Of all her baubles, that Welsh gold band is what got her to where she is now and should be treated as the most valuable piece of her stash. IMO, of course.
Pile on on all the diamonds and gold watches you want, M, but that little thin ring is what counts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> As to her rings--the thin plain one is her real Welsh gold wedding ring, right?
> It should be the first ring on her finger, not the new and improved (about every 6 months) eternity-band-bigger-diamonds ring, if one is following tradition.
> Of all her baubles, that Welsh gold band is what got her to where she is now and should be treated as the most valuable piece of her stash. IMO, of course.
> Pile on on all the diamonds and gold watches you want, M, but that little thin ring is what counts.



Also Welsh gold is super rare as the mines are basically exhausted and the big nugget given to the BRF has been used on several wedding bands so very little is left. It pains me to think about how it was wasted on Raptor who didn't deserve it and didn't do it justice.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Welsh gold is super rare as the mines are basically exhausted and the big nugget given to the BRF has been used on several wedding bands so very little is left. It pains me to think about how it was wasted on Raptor who didn't deserve it and didn't do it justice.



We still have some gold in Scotland (let's keep that quiet though)


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m sure some of you remember that a few years ago the William and Kate thread was full of posts talking about how Kate looked older than her age, mainly due to the heavy eyeliner she used to wear. She’s definitely freshened things up in the last few years


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Let's face it, style and looking good has nothing to do with age.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Let's face it, style and looking good has nothing to do with age.



My godmother works in fashion. She's definitely more fashionable and stylish than I am (and I don't hesitate to ask her before making expensive fashion purchases).


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I've only been in the LA area since 2013, but every Persian gal I have met out here have told me that they had their nose done "for their 16th-birthday present"!!!  I heard this when I was going to my ENT (Ears, Nose & Throat) Doctor to have my deviated septum repaired (and let me tell you, having to wear those things in your nose?? .. NOT FUN)!!!  He also performed Nose Job plastic surgery, hence the reason for seeing these gals in his office.  He had told me that there had been younger patients, but he turns them away until it is required surgery (like my deviated septum).  That is one of the major things that I liked about him, he's actually ethical!


so do Persian girls have large noses?  I guess larger than what they want.  all of them?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Everyone gets a medal, including Andrew and the Cali royals
> 
> _Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen
> 
> 
> PRINCE Andrew is to be honoured with a Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I greatly respect the Queen, and I can even understand her actions as a mother, but sometimes her turning a blind eye towards idiots in her family is really annoying.  And now rewarding them on top of it??


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My godmother works in fashion. *She's definitely more fashionable and stylish than I am* (and I don't hesitate to ask her before making expensive fashion purchases).



Surely not, but I know what you mean.

This is why I get so PO when people use the words 'granny bag' or 'matronly' not attached to actual people but their own fears.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Everyone gets a medal, including Andrew and the Cali royals
> 
> _Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen
> 
> 
> PRINCE Andrew is to be honoured with a Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Will, can you let QE know that there is no public appetite for this?  

"_Harry__ and Meghan, who have been mired in controversy since going to the US and dropping royal duties, will also receive the medals.
Andrew, 61, has been lying low as he faces a US civil court case over claims of sexual assault, which he strenuously denies. He stepped back from royal duties in 2019 because of the scandal surrounding his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein."      

_


----------



## Chanbal

The photo of the day (so far… )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Will, can you let QE know that there is no public appetite for this?
> 
> "_Harry__ and Meghan, who have been mired in controversy since going to the US and dropping royal duties, will also receive the medals.
> Andrew, 61, has been lying low as he faces a US civil court case over claims of sexual assault, which he strenuously denies. He stepped back from royal duties in 2019 because of the scandal surrounding his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein."
> 
> _
> View attachment 5207731



I mean, I'd love to see them excluded (all three of them), but there are more than 400000 pieces awarded. It is really more to celebrate the Queen's achievement of having ruled for so long than theirs. 

I'm still hopingt they won't attend. But if they do...what are we betting they will bring both kids in an effort to divert attention from their sh*ttiness?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I'd love to see them excluded (all three of them), but there are more than 400000 pieces awarded. It is really more to celebrate the Queen's achievement of having ruled for so long than theirs.
> 
> I'm still hopingt they won't attend. But if they do...what are we betting they will bring both kids in an effort *to divert attention from their sh*ttiness*?


More of their sh***


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if this is true, but this post is still interesting because they were filming in NYC and they likely want to do it also in the UK.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I think it's the California sun that ages her. The make up is good whoever puts it on her but women who go in the sun a lot tend to age faster in their skin.
> 
> View attachment 5207174


of course practically no one wants to be photographed this close up but wow, lots of spots...the one on her upper lip must not be removable or I'd think she would have had something done with it


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> Hard to keep up with this thread. Did anyone post the piece from the WSJ here? I couldn't stomach actually reading it.



Right. This thread is moving faster since they've moved beyond the chickens and usual word salad platitudes. I'm surprised they didn't hold up their rescue chickens as proof they're the greatest humanitarians the world has ever seen. I read the WSJ article, and as others noted, the comments were V I C I O U S ! AND DESERVEDLY SO. I can't believe some people are still fooled by these idiots. In terms of looks, Meghan has gone downhill fast, and it isn't simply the added pounds. She doesn't help her own case by wearing her stringy strands. They're still full of nauseating word salad platitudes, and how they got into the U.N. is beyond me. Then again, the U.N. is largely a joke anyway full of self important phonies so they fit right in and uphold its do-nothing image complete with alligator teared righteous indignation speeches. The clothes? Oh please. The average person looks better wearing outfits from TJ Maxx than she does in designer clothes. So...where were Archie and Lilibet during this "parental leave"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> More of their sh***
> View attachment 5207758



Now let's not be harsh, they are so important and famous they have to for security reasons.

They are such a*sholes. What they mean is "We're demanding tough new eco laws for the plebs, we'll just buy our way out of it."

(BTW remember when Elton John - or was it Harry himself - justified their overusage of his jet by "But we paid for trees"...yeah, that's not how it works)


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CeeJay said:


> I've only been in the LA area since 2013, but every Persian gal I have met out here have told me that they had their nose done "for their 16th-birthday present"!!!  I heard this when I was going to my ENT (Ears, Nose & Throat) Doctor to have my deviated septum repaired (and let me tell you, having to wear those things in your nose?? .. NOT FUN)!!!  He also performed Nose Job plastic surgery, hence the reason for seeing these gals in his office.  He had told me that there had been younger patients, but he turns them away until it is required surgery (like my deviated septum).  That is one of the major things that I liked about him, he's actually ethical!


I’m middle eastern and I agree to that. When I was in college, I’ve seen so many Arab girls by citizenship (with Persian roots) have their noses done, lol. It’s part of the culture almost.
Even us as Arabs (and Asians as I’m half SE Asian) have insecurities about our noses mostly.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I'd love to see them excluded (all three of them), but there are more than 400000 pieces awarded. It is really more to celebrate the Queen's achievement of having ruled for so long than theirs.
> 
> I'm still hopingt they won't attend. But if they do...what are we betting they will bring both kids in an effort to divert attention from their sh*ttiness?


Both kids, 3 nannies + Doria, two camera crews, Archewell production team, the security mod squad. They themselves will be in heavy coats again to disguise the wire-tap and spycam gear hooked to his underpants and her bra & corset.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> I’m middle eastern and I agree to that. When I was in college, I’ve seen so many Arab girls by citizenship (with Persian roots) have their noses done, lol. It’s part of the culture almost.
> Even us as Arabs (and Asians as I’m half SE Asian) have insecurities about our noses mostly.



Also Iranian plastic surgeons have a reputation for making great noses.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Right. This thread is moving faster since they've moved beyond the chickens and usual word salad platitudes. I'm surprised they didn't hold up their rescue chickens as proof they're the greatest humanitarians the world has ever seen. I read the WSJ article, and as others noted, the comments were V I C I O U S ! AND DESERVEDLY SO. I can't believe some people are still fooled by these idiots. In terms of looks, Meghan has gone downhill fast, and it isn't simply the added pounds. She doesn't help her own case by wearing her stringy strands.* They're still full of nauseating word salad platitudes, and how they got into the U.N. is beyond me. *Then again, the U.N. is largely a joke anyway full of self important phonies so they fit right in and uphold its do-nothing image complete with alligator teared righteous indignation speeches. The clothes? Oh please. The average person looks better wearing outfits from TJ Maxx than she does in designer clothes. So...where were Archie and Lilibet during this "parental leave"?


According to the news I read, they spoke to the US ambassador to the UN and we have to realize that there are at least 190+ UN ambassadors that represent all the countries of the world. They didn't meet Secretary-General António Guterres, however they supposedly met with Deputy-Secretary-General, Amina Mohammed, but I've yet to see a picture confirming this visit and I won't believe it just on their PR machine's say-so.


----------



## sdkitty

found this WSJ piece...not sure if this has been posted
Harry and Meghan, Hollywood Royalty? - The Journal. - WSJ Podcasts


----------



## Maggie Muggins

le_junkie said:


> *Helium* and Methane sucks the life outta me. Their antics are so pathetic.


 Thanks @le_junkie for your #5 nickname, helium, that makes us wish the toxic pair would just float away somewhere, anywhere, and never return.  Welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.


----------



## Sharont2305

I've only just seen this (I've been trying to avoid footage of them) She's directing him in what to do again


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Iranian plastic surgeons have a reputation for making great noses.


Practice makes perfect!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> of course practically no one wants to be photographed this close up but wow, lots of spots.*..the one on her upper lip *must not be removable or I'd think she would have had something done with it


To me, that looks like a mole or wart that she tries to cover up with makeup.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> To me, that looks like a mole or wart that she tries to cover up with makeup.


and maybe it's smaller than it looks in this photo but in the photo it looks like it would be hard to cover up with makeup to me


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> and maybe it's smaller than it looks in this photo but in the photo it looks like it would be hard to cover up with makeup to me


I have a few moles on my face and yes, makeup does little to cover them. I once asked my doctor about having the bigger one on my forehead removed and he told me that they are reluctant to remove them because they are full of small blood vessels and nerve endings. So I try to cover it with bangs/fringe.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> of course practically no one wants to be photographed this close up but wow, lots of spots...the one on her upper lip must not be removable or I'd think she would have had something done with it


I think that photo was manipulated to make her skin much worse.  Clarity, contrast, whatever... the opposite of Facetune.


----------



## doni

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Welsh gold is super rare as the mines are basically exhausted and the big nugget given to the BRF has been used on several wedding bands so very little is left. It pains me to think about how it was wasted on Raptor who didn't deserve it and didn't do it justice.


I didn’t know about the Welsh gold. So nice. I like when things like this have meaning. I carry my husband’s grandmother wedding ring with pride. I just don’t understand what on earth is wrong with a good old fashioned gold wedding band. It is not as if they are difficult to match with the rest of jewelry or anything...


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I have a few moles on my face and yes, makeup does little to cover them. I once asked my doctor about having the bigger one on my forehead removed and he told me that they are reluctant to remove them because they are full of small blood vessels and nerve endings. So I try to cover it with bangs/fringe.



I have two moles on my cheek and I have thought about having them removed for years. Finally, the last time I was in my dermatologist's office I asked about having it done. He said he'd be happy to take them off but it would leave small indentations which may never fill in and I might have to go to a plastic surgeon to fix it. He said that other people don't focus on our moles like we do. The eye tends to gloss over moles because they are so common but a scar would be noticed by most people. So then I decided it wasn't worth it.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I've only just seen this (I've been trying to avoid footage of them) She's directing him in what to do again



Yep, and he looks annoyed too.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> I think that photo was manipulated to make her skin much worse.  Clarity, contrast, whatever... the opposite of Facetune.


Yeah, it looks almost like her face has smudges of dirt.  And despite the peeing in the woods, I don't see her getting in up to her elbows in the garden.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> I think that photo was manipulated to make her skin much worse.  Clarity, contrast, whatever... the opposite of Facetune.


I agree


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

I think plates and toilets are going to be smashed again because of the world premiere of the Bond film. Lol
And this is how you do a subtle nod


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I think plates and toilets are going to be smashed again because of the world premiere of the Bond film. Lol
> And this is how you do a subtle nod
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207921
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207928


Let's help with the recycling of plates in Montecito.  












						No Time To Die: Daniel Craig looks dapper in a pink suede jacket
					

The Duchess of Cambridge sparkled on Tuesday as she and Prince William joined Daniel Craig for the world premiere of No Time To Die at the Royal Albert Hall on Tuesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Considering how many nose and other procedures she's had, it's ironic she hasn't had some of the moles removed, unless she did have even more and got those removed. She's nothing like her yacht girl days, that's for sure. Kate could pass for a Bond girl in the above post, she looks great and better than some of the real previous Bond girls. Meghan? She couldn't even be one of the villains, as evil as they were, they didn't wallow in self pity.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Iranian plastic surgeons have a reputation for making great noses.


Right! I know many people around me that have gone to Iran or planned to go to Iran for their plastic surgeons… and not just for noses.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Let's help with the recycling of plates in Montecito.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207930
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Time To Die: Daniel Craig looks dapper in a pink suede jacket
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge sparkled on Tuesday as she and Prince William joined Daniel Craig for the world premiere of No Time To Die at the Royal Albert Hall on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Kate looks like a Greek goddess in that gown!
Has she done something to her face though? Or is that just makeup?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> While Markle’s Dior Lady D-Lite bag ($4,900) is a modern edition of the design – even personalized with her title, “DSOS”


So tacky … she couldn’t use her original name’s initials instead? I thought the BRF was racist … why is she carrying a title associated with them?

How shameless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I've only just seen this (I've been trying to avoid footage of them) She's directing him in what to do again




And always so pleased with herself. Good thing she found that idiot who fell for her shtick so he could make her somewhat relevant.


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> So tacky … she couldn’t use her original name’s initials instead? I thought the BRF was racist … why is she carrying a title associated with them?
> 
> How shameless.



That title is arguably the most important part of her brand. She is never, EVER letting that go! Plus, with her big ego, she dearly loves hearing the "ordinary" people call her duchess.

Since she is absolutely incapable of acknowledging her hypocrisy about anything else, don't expect her to start drawing the line with titles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And always so pleased with herself. Good thing she found that idiot who fell for her shtick so he could make her somewhat relevant.


They both have unkind eyes.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And always so pleased with herself. Good thing she found that idiot who fell for her shtick so he could make her somewhat relevant.


I noticed that too.  She's in her element, when she sees the camera focused on her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> They both have unkind eyes.


I feel sad for all the folks that fell for his sob story while I feel lucky to have seen him early on for the conniving and envious little twat that he is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Watching Lady CC's new video, and the very first person writing in coined a new nickname: the spare and the snare


----------



## creme fraiche

My goodness, Kate looks amazing.  My young teenage son (who cares not a bit about the Royals or the Markles, so has no bias) commented “Wow.  She looks like a goddess!  What a dress!”

Message to Meghan - this is what dressing well looks like.  And to think that Kates dress here costs less than that red monstrosity La Markle wore to the school full of underprivileged children.


----------



## CeeJay

jennlt said:


> I wholeheartedly agree. As a U.S. citizen, I am hereby informing the Dimwit Duo that while they are in the United States, they are the Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat.


See, I wouldn't even give them the courtesy of using the Duke & Douche-ass titles as the USA passed a law in 1892 to indicate that we would not use Foreign titles (and before that, as we all know .. we fought a war to rid ourselves of the British monarchy & titles)!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments on Lady CC's video...have we heard about this?



> Not sure how to submit comments to you other than here. As a 21 year retired U.S. Navy Chief, I am so disheartened to hear that the Intrepid Museum in NY is having Harry give out medals to US Veterans. Many veterans have complained on Intrepid's FB, Twitter, and Instagram and instead of standing by their choice and explaining, they have deleted every one of them which means they are silencing the voices of military veterans and family members. But the question is, why is a British Prince, who disparaged his Queen and abandoned his country, who called the First Amendment "bonkers", is giving medals to our veterans? That's Bonkers!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Let's help with the recycling of plates in Montecito.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207930
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Time To Die: Daniel Craig looks dapper in a pink suede jacket
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge sparkled on Tuesday as she and Prince William joined Daniel Craig for the world premiere of No Time To Die at the Royal Albert Hall on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk







*M will be dying - DYING!!!*


----------



## sdkitty

creme fraiche said:


> My goodness, Kate looks amazing.  My young teenage son (who cares not a bit about the Royals or the Markles, so has no bias) commented “Wow.  She looks like a goddess!  What a dress!”
> 
> Message to Meghan - this is what dressing well looks like.  And to think that Kates dress here costs less than that red monstrosity La Markle wore to the school full of underprivileged children.


and her face looks great too....I don't really get all the criticism that she looks her age - or older


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Watching Lady CC's new video, and the very first person writing in coined a new nickname: *the spare and the snare*


 Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #5 nickname *the spare and the snare*.  Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master Club.


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, Meghan hasn't been invited to any movie premieres since _The Lion King_, has she?

Methinks Hollywood has her number.


----------



## lulilu

muddledmint said:


> I’m not convinced that meghan had a lot of work done recently. Her face looks a bit fuller but that is probably just from weight gain. I think meghan looks her age or younger, while Kate looks many years older than she actually is. She looks like she’s in her late 40s despite being very pretty. If meghan does get cosmetic work, how it affects her looks depends on how far she takes it. If she starts getting that stereotypical bad plastic surgery/filler/Botox face, it will definitely make her look older than Kate.


No way does Kate look older than Meghan.  Kate is often see doing athletic things, which make her appear youthful, while Meghan wears massive coats and spends her time posing for photos.



Lodpah said:


> I'm upset seeing that video of him assaulting those kids. Yeah, I call it assaulting. First, he uses them as a prop and once he's done, he shoves them away. I hope some parents sue him for assault. You, Harry, is the racist.


I would love to know what really happened.  I wish a teacher or someone who observed it would come forward.  Pushing a child and swearing -- he should be pilloried if he in fact did it.



CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5207236
> 
> 
> To my eye, both ladies are gorgeous.  Not sure anyone here has said negative things about the face. Certainly the clothes, certainly the lies, not the face. As my mother famously said, ‘pretty is as pretty does’.  H&M are not known for being kind people.  Actions matter more the words.


I always said this same thing to my sons.  Luckily their wives are beautiful inside and out.



Chanbal said:


> Not sure if this is true, but this post is still interesting because they were filming in NYC and they likely want to do it also in the UK.



I must be the only one who is totally outraged by this whole taping thing.  It is classless, vile, underhanded, unprofessional -- I could go on -- to tape UN and local officials without their knowledge and consent.  What are they conducting?  Some 60 Minutes expose??  And I just recently heard M had taping equipment under that horrid green tent she wore when she was last in Britain?  Again, why?  To try to get one of the RF on tape saying something they could use for blackmail?  This behavior alone is grounds for them never to be allowed back for any official events with the RF.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5207236
> 
> 
> To my eye, both ladies are gorgeous.  Not sure anyone here has said negative things about the face. Certainly the clothes, certainly the lies, not the face. As my mother famously said, ‘pretty is as pretty does’.  H&M are not known for being kind people.  Actions matter more the words.


Oh come on.  Doncha know they are great humanitarians from whom we can all learn so much?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, Meghan hasn't been invited to any movie premieres since _The Lion King_, has she?
> 
> Methinks Hollywood has her number.



Who needs an invitation when you can just CRASH with a camera crew in tow? Meghan just shows up where she wants and is about as welcome as a plague of locusts. Somehow they're able to find child care during their parental leave for events where they pretend to be important.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> Oh come on.  Doncha know they are great humanitarians from whom we can all learn so much?



Well, I learned that if you're desperate for applause and can't afford for your sugars to hear boo's, appear in front of audiences where ages range from 3 to 12.  No recess or snacks if you don't applaud the pretty lady and listen attentively to her word salad crap, be sure to say nice things about her book! Older audiences bite tongues, applaud politely, look at their watches and count down the minutes to cocktail hour.


----------



## marietouchet

Supposedly only 1 photographer and a videographer following them, interesting article, the vaccine equality topic is a Controversial topic now

Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Return to L.A. After Mini NYC Tour










						Everything You Need to Know About Harry and Meghan's Trip to New York
					

The whirlwind trip offered a glimpse at what their post-royal life will look like.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments on Lady CC's video...have we heard about this?


This is so wicked on so many levels.

*Prince Harry Moves Past Royal Rift With New York Military Awards*

Prince Harry will present awards to service members past and present in New York in a new U.S. military charm offensive on the eve of Veterans Day.

The Duke of Sussex will be the star guest at Intrepid Museum's inaugural Intrepid Valor Awards on Wednesday, November 10.

The 2021 Salute to Freedom Gala comes a day before Veterans Day in the U.S., known as Armistice Day in the U.K., and four days before the Royal Family will gather in London for Remembrance Sunday.

Harry was last year locked in a trans-Atlantic briefing war with the palace over commemorating the country's war dead.

The duke asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf at The Cenotaph when Britain stopped to remember its fallen last November, but his request was declined on the basis he had quit royal duties.

Harry and Meghan were instead left making a personal visit to Los Angeles National Cemetery with their own photographer in tow.

The duke's star turn at the Salute to Freedom Gala ensures he has a formal and high profile function in service of the military community during the period when Britain and America pay tribute to those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

It is not yet clear whether he will try to also make it to Britain for Remembrance Sunday on November 14, particularly since New York is on the way to London from California.

However, this is not the first sign of a Prince Harry charm offensive with the U.S. military after an appearance for U.S. veterans earlier this month.

The duke joined a video call for competitors in the Warrior Games, whose Olympic-style tournament for wounded service personnel was canceled due to COVID.

He appeared alongside Jill ***** and said: "To see every single one of you here, with the pride on your faces, makes me incredibly happy to know how far you guys have come, the dark places that you have been to but where you are now stronger than ever before, no doubt, and that is partly if not mainly down to sport."

Newsweek Article with Video


----------



## jennlt

CeeJay said:


> See, I wouldn't even give them the courtesy of using the Duke & Douche-ass titles as the USA passed a law in 1892 to indicate that we would not use Foreign titles (and before that, as we all know .. we fought a war to rid ourselves of the British monarchy & titles)!!!



I agree with you completely. In my local vernacular, "diddly squat" translates to "nothing" (e.g. I know diddly squat about quantum physics) so they are the Duke and Duchess of Nothing and therefore not entitled to an honorific. The capital letters were used to emphasize my sarcasm. 

Feel free to call them the Diddly Squats, though. I'm sure Netflix and Spotify do


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Supposedly only 1 photographer and a videographer following them, interesting article, the vaccine equality topic is a Controversial topic now
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Return to L.A. After Mini NYC Tour
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything You Need to Know About Harry and Meghan's Trip to New York
> 
> 
> The whirlwind trip offered a glimpse at what their post-royal life will look like.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



Oops, this is an Om*d article, I clicked on the link without thinking.    So I'll post it here to avoid more distracted people like me… I'll also provide the emojis 

*Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Return to California After “Knockout” New York Tour*
_The hugs with their team at a Santa Barbara airfield after they returned to California said it all: Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s first big trip as independent royals was a success.

Along with their onstage appearance at Saturday’s Global Citizen Live concert, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex conducted a whirlwind mini tour of New York, connecting with senior politicians, world leaders, health officials, and grassroots organizations across the city. For the Duchess of Sussex, it was her first time back in the city since attending the U.S. Open finals in September 2019. “I love New York,” she said during her September 25 visit to the United Nations headquarters. “It’s so great to be back.”

And though much of their visit—which coincided with the U.N. General Assembly and President Joe *****’s COVID Summit—focused on challenging vaccine inequity, their schedule also included amplifying other causes. Their September 24 appearance at an elementary school in Harlem to promote children’s literacy gave Meghan the chance to read her children’s book, The Bench, to a group of enthusiastic second-graders, and offered an opportunity for the couple to make an immediate impact on the community. Despite spending only five hours in the Upper Manhattan neighborhood, the mark they left behind was permanent—in the form of planters and gardening equipment in response to a local need for easier access to healthy food, Procter & Gamble items in the school's pantry to help families take care of their personal health, and reading nooks in Graham Windham nonprofit locations across the city to support families’ access to books._


----------



## Chanbal

Valid observation!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> *Prince Harry Moves Past Royal Rift With New York Military Awards*



Just why. They couldn't find an US veteran or honorary?


----------



## charlottawill

Meanwhile, I just saw this by the checkout in Target. Can't decide if the person who stocks the magazines is clueless about them or has a wicked sense of humor


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was closing open tabs and stumbled upon this picture (trigger warning...GREEN HORNET). It gets me each time how he looks sad and upset and that disgusting woman sports this super proud of herself wide grin.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

I have never found the #6's wife pretty.

There is a saying in Chinese called 相由心生, translated to "looks start from the heart". Meaning that how you are inside is reflected on your looks on the outside. Considering what an ugly person she is inside...well...it shows


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> and her face looks great too....I don't really get all the criticism that she looks her age - or older


I suspect criticism of her makeup made its way back to her and she has softened it a bit. Also, she sometimes looks older in photos taken in harsh daylight than she does at an event like this. We all do.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, the next Bond girl! The topic of this thread will fulfill the villain roles. Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for providing the needed picture. 





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was closing oben tabs and stumbled upon this picture (trigger warning...GREEN HORNET). It gets me each time how he looks sad and upset and that disgusting woman sports this super proud of herself wide grin.
> 
> View attachment 5208032


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> I think plates and toilets are going to be smashed again because of the world premiere of the Bond film. Lol
> And this is how you do a subtle nod
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207921
> 
> 
> View attachment 5207928


Throwing some well-deserved shade at MM perhaps?


----------



## Chanbal

On the vaccines… Opinions may vary! 


*Pharmaceutical companies might think it a bit rich being asked to waive the patents on their COVID vaccines by Harry and Meghan, a couple who have rejected the concept of public service in an attempt to monetize their royal status. But let’s overlook the charge of hypocrisy and ask whether there really is any substance to Harry and Meghan’s charge that ‘ultra-wealthy’ pharmaceutical companies are holding up the vaccination of the developing world by refusing to surrender their intellectual property.*
_
It is certainly not true in the case of AstraZeneca, which has made its vaccine available at cost price. Not only that, it has licensed production to the Serum Institute of India, so that low and middle income countries can access vaccines produced at a lower cost base. While other manufacturers have been less forthcoming, the refusal to surrender patents hasn’t stopped wealthy countries donating 300 million doses of COVID vaccines to 142 countries, with a total of 1.3 billion due to be delivered by the end of this year. It might have been cheaper for taxpayers had the patents been waived in these cases, but as far as the recipients are concerned it makes little odds.

The idea that a few rich countries are hoarding vaccines while the rest of the world goes without doesn’t reflect reality. Overall, 44.5 percent of the world’s population has received at least one dose of a vaccine — a remarkable achievement given that it is less than a year since the first data was published from the phase three trial of any vaccine.

More people have been vaccinated in India alone — 631 million have received at least one dose — than live in the whole of Europe. That said, there is one part of the world where vaccination lags well behind: Africa. Across Africa as a whole, according to the Africa CDC, 6.14 percent of people have had at least one dose and 4.02 percent have had two doses. In bottom-of-the-heap Tanzania only 0.57 percent of the population has received a vaccine.

There is a very good reason why western countries wanted to prioritize vaccinating their own citizens: they have been among the worst-hit by COVID, while Africa has been mercifully lightly affected. It would be extraordinary if vaccination programs in the UK (1,993 deaths per million inhabitants to date) and the US (2,119) had been delayed so that vaccine doses could be diverted to Tanzania (0.8 deaths per million), Nigeria (13) or Kenya (92).
…
_
*Not that any of this will rub off on Harry and Meghan. In their vacuous world of celebrity do-gooding, all that matters is that you pick a popular bogeyman — Big Pharma — and score your virtue points by accusing it of being mean-minded. The facts count for little.*









						Harry and Meghan are wrong about COVID vaccine patents
					

Pharmaceutical companies might think it a bit rich being asked to waive the patents on their COVID vaccines by Harry and Meghan




					spectatorworld.com


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was closing open tabs and stumbled upon this picture (trigger warning...GREEN HORNET). It gets me each time how he looks sad and upset and that disgusting woman sports this super proud of herself wide grin.
> 
> View attachment 5208032


It's ingrained in her. She knows how to work the cameras while he wants to avoid them. 

"Make sure you get my good side."


----------



## EverSoElusive

kemilia said:


> As to her rings--the thin plain one is her real Welsh gold wedding ring, right?
> It should be the first ring on her finger, not the new and improved (about every 6 months) eternity-band-bigger-diamonds ring, if one is following tradition.
> Of all her baubles, that Welsh gold band is what got her to where she is now and should be treated as the most valuable piece of her stash. IMO, of course.
> Pile on on all the diamonds and gold watches you want, M, but that little thin ring is what counts.
> 
> View attachment 5207633



I just noticed, did she have the 2 side stones removed from the original engagement ring?




Sharont2305 said:


> I've only just seen this (I've been trying to avoid footage of them) She's directing him in what to do again




I know you guys said H looked annoyed but I noticed Marklenator looked annoyed too when she had to turn to tell H to get in place for the photograph.


----------



## Deleted 698298

Can we again pause for a moment and note how effortlessly breathtaking Kate looked at the premiere of JB…  (in your face Meegain)


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> It's ingrained in her. She knows how to work the cameras while he wants to avoid them.
> 
> "Make sure you get my good side."




Someone got her double chin and People magazine used the picture as the main picture for their article      Lawsuit might be on the way.


----------



## EverSoElusive

EverSoElusive said:


> Maybe it means this instead:
> 
> DSS = Duchess Sh!t Show
> O = Of
> S = Sussex



@Maggie Muggins does this count as a name entry?


----------



## charlottawill

Consumer2much said:


> Can we again pause for a moment and note how effortlessly breathtaking Kate looked at the premiere of JB…  (in your face Meegain)


That's the trick, to make it look effortless, and she's mastered it. But I'm sure a fair amount of effort does go into it. She radiates a sense of grace and ease that Meghan lacks despite her years in front of cameras.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Throwing some well-deserved shade at MM perhaps?


As someone in her generation, here is a shout out to Camilla! Maggot would be doing herself a favor if she reached out to Camilla (fat chance, it will never happen) to learn the name of the tailor/seamstress Camilla uses to fit her clothing. Camilla is "matronly", thickening in the waist as the years go by, but there have been pictures of her looking quite pulled together in jeans and jumpers and certainly in a formal dress like this one, that skims her lumps. I admire her style.

As for Katherine, WOW, just WOW, more beautiful than the actresses in attendance and just glowing with health and goodness.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Oops, this is an Om*d article, I clicked on the link without thinking.    So I'll post it here to avoid more distracted people like me… I'll also provide the emojis
> 
> *Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Return to California After “Knockout” New York Tour*
> _The hugs with their team at a Santa Barbara airfield after they returned to California said it all: Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s first big trip as independent royals was a success.
> 
> Along with their onstage appearance at Saturday’s Global Citizen Live concert, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex conducted a whirlwind mini tour of New York, connecting with senior politicians, world leaders, health officials, and grassroots organizations across the city. For the Duchess of Sussex, it was her first time back in the city since attending the U.S. Open finals in September 2019. “I love New York,” she said during her September 25 visit to the United Nations headquarters. “It’s so great to be back.”
> 
> And though much of their visit—which coincided with the U.N. General Assembly and President Joe *****’s COVID Summit—focused on challenging vaccine inequity, their schedule also included amplifying other causes. Their September 24 appearance at an elementary school in Harlem to promote children’s literacy gave Meghan the chance to read her children’s book, The Bench, to a group of enthusiastic second-graders, and offered an opportunity for the couple to make an immediate impact on the community. Despite spending only five hours in the Upper Manhattan neighborhood, the mark they left behind was permanent—in the form of planters and gardening equipment in response to a local need for easier access to healthy food, Procter & Gamble items in the school's pantry to help families take care of their personal health, and reading nooks in Graham Windham nonprofit locations across the city to support families’ access to books._



“Independent Royals”????


----------



## Chloe302225

This post has nothing to do with this thread I just thought we should acknowledge this one more time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> @Maggie Muggins does this count as a name entry?


@EverSoElusive Yes, indeed it does and I'm sorry I missed it! 
 Thanks for your #7 nickname, *Duchess Sh!t Show*.  
Congratulations and please collect your Gold Medal.


----------



## Aimee3

If 6 and his wicked wife were still working royals, would they have been invited to the premiere of the movie like the Cambridges and PC/çamilla?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was closing open tabs and stumbled upon this picture (trigger warning...GREEN HORNET). It gets me each time how he looks sad and upset and that disgusting woman sports this super proud of herself wide grin.
> 
> View attachment 5208032


She looked so dreadful in that fugly outfit that, at the time, some people were suggesting that she was wearing body armour because she had received threats while others were suggesting that she was wearing a wire. So, choose your side, but I'd be inclined to say, "Wire, wire, b!tch on fire."


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> If 6 and his wicked wife were still working royals, would they have been invited to the premiere of the movie like the Cambridges and PC/çamilla?


I would think so. She could have had a very nice life if she hadn't insisted on being an attention whore and singlehandedly trying to change overnight an institution that's been around for a thousand years.


----------



## Chloe302225

Aimee3 said:


> If 6 and his wicked wife were still working royals, would they have been invited to the premiere of the movie like the Cambridges and PC/çamilla?



Probably, Charles and William are there because they both have high profile patronages in film/arts but this is also a rare  double date engagement for them. I could see a way for MM + H to be invited but it's really a 50/50 decision.


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> I just noticed, did she have the 2 side stones removed from the original engagement ring?



 It looked like that to me, too, and I was searching for another picture to confirm it. I wonder if she used the 2 side stones and then added 20 more to make the large eternity band?


----------



## Norm.Core

Kate looks stunning! It’s like REAL vs Fake.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> That's the trick, to make it look effortless, and she's mastered it. But I'm sure a fair amount of effort does go into it. She radiates a sense of grace and ease that Meghan lacks despite her years in front of cameras.



Marklenator is not comfortable in her own skin. If she was, she'd have radiated a sense of grace, ease and genuine confidence. Also, she never appreciated the lessons and she claimed no one helped her when she was new to the BRF yet I remember very clearly that she carried a thick binder with her during her commonwealth tour with H. 




jennlt said:


> It looked like that to me, too, and I was searching for another picture to confirm it. I wonder if she used the 2 side stones and then added 20 more to make the large eternity band?



From the blurry picture, I think her eternity band actually consists of multiple small clusters instead of solitaires


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> She looked so dreadful in that fugly outfit that, at the time, some people were suggesting that she was wearing body armour because she had received threats while others were suggesting that she was wearing a wire. So, choose your side, but I'd be inclined to say, "Wire, wire, b!tch on fire."


Maggie Muggins you do have a way with words.  I like it!


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> From the blurry picture, I think her eternity band actually consists of multiple small clusters instead of solitaires


Your eyes are better than mine because I missed that detail


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> As someone in her generation, here is a shout out to Camilla! Maggot would be doing herself a favor if she reached out to Camilla (fat chance, it will never happen) to learn the name of the tailor/seamstress Camilla uses to fit her clothing. Camilla is "matronly", thickening in the waist as the years go by, but there have been pictures of her looking quite pulled together in jeans and jumpers and certainly in a formal dress like this one, that skims her lumps. I admire her style.
> 
> As for Katherine, WOW, just WOW, more beautiful than the actresses in attendance and just glowing with health and goodness.


Yes, I like Camilla along with Princess Anne, and HMTQ; they are my favourite royals. Camilla and Anne learned to perform duties with confidence, friendliness and apparent joy while ignoring bad publicity and ugly rumours. I'm guessing that their sense of humour had a lot to do with their success and both ladies probably adopted PP's motto to get on with it instead of wallowing in self pity. H's wife could've learned so much from them if she hadn't considered herself so much better and smarter.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just why. They couldn't find an US veteran or honorary?


As the wife of a US veteran, this *royally* pi$$es me off.  Pun intended.  
WTF does he have to do with the US military?  He squandered his UK military associations when the pissant escaped with Moaning Markle.  He wants to figuratively step on more dead soldiers??


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> More of their sh***
> View attachment 5207758






Classic case of:


Whatever about him, but she will never step foot on a commercial flight for as long as she can. It's completely beneath her, a DuChEsS does not step foot on a peasants plane. Her ego is so far gone now, on another level, delusions of grandeur on steroids.





Chanbal said:


> Not sure if this is true, but this post is still interesting because they were filming in NYC and they likely want to do it also in the UK.





Well, well! That didn't take long! I really hope this is true.




charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, I just saw this by the checkout in Target. Can't decide if the person who stocks the magazines is clueless about them or has a wicked sense of humor
> 
> View attachment 5208028





I'm guessing the latter- wicked sense of humour! This person deserves a raise or promotion


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> It looked like that to me, too, and I was searching for another picture to confirm it. I wonder if she used the 2 side stones and then added 20 more to make the large eternity band?


I think the ring in the picture is the Birks snowflake ring:









						Birks Birks Iconic 18K White Gold & Diamond Snowflake Ring
					

Get free shipping and returns on Birks Birks Iconic 18K White Gold & Diamond Snowflake Ring at Saks Fifth Avenue. Browse luxury Birks Rings and other new arrivals.




					www.saksfifthavenue.com


----------



## Lounorada

jennlt said:


> It looked like that to me, too, and I was searching for another picture to confirm it. I wonder if she used the 2 side stones and then added 20 more to make the large eternity band?





EverSoElusive said:


> I just noticed, did she have the 2 side stones removed from the original engagement ring?


No it still has the two smaller stones either side. 
Although, ever since she changed the band on her engagement ring the stones look completely different too, it's so odd. 
Even though the original ring wasn't something I would like, it _was _pretty, but the changes she made to it ruined that ring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

creme fraiche said:


> My goodness, Kate looks amazing.  My young teenage son (who cares not a bit about the Royals or the Markles, so has no bias) commented “Wow.  She looks like a goddess!  What a dress!”
> 
> Message to Meghan - this is what dressing well looks like.  And to think that Kates dress here costs less than that red monstrosity La Markle wore to the school full of underprivileged children.



This is what caring about others as well as herself looks like.  Young lads should take note as should young ladies. The choices we make will determine how well we age - not just food choices, not just clothing choices, but the healthy habits matter.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Marklenator is not comfortable in her own skin. If she was, she'd have radiated a sense of grace, ease and genuine confidence. Also, she never appreciated the lessons and she claimed no one helped her when she was new to the BRF yet I remember very clearly that she carried a thick binder with her during her commonwealth tour with H.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the blurry picture, I think her eternity band actually consists of multiple small clusters instead of solitaires


I'm sure they tried to make her feel welcome, but she probably stubbornly and arrogantly resisted their traditions and protocols and ruffled a lot of feathers. They say the best way to master a new job is to watch, listen and learn. I doubt she did that, and then portrayed herself as the victim.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> This post has nothing to do with this thread I just thought we should acknowledge this one more time.




May we call her Queen Kate now?  Because *she rules!*


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, I just saw this by the checkout in Target. Can't decide if the person who stocks the magazines is clueless about them or has a wicked sense of humor
> 
> View attachment 5208028


ETA, I suspect Us Weekly is closer to the truth than Time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lounorada said:


> No it still has the two smaller stones either side.
> Although, ever since she changed the band on her engagement ring the stones look completely different too, it's so odd.
> Even though the original ring wasn't something I would like, it _was _pretty, but the changes she made to it ruined that ring.
> View attachment 5208125



I’m confident someone will correct me if I’m wrong, wasn’t the center stone from Africa and 2 smaller stones from Diana’s jewels?
Maybe the Palace or someone (ahem, Wills) insisted Diana’s stones get sent back - ‘cuz ya know.

imo, that Cartier watch and Love bracelet just look cheap cheap cheap on her. Maybe yellow gold is not a good choice.

original ring:


----------



## EverSoElusive

jennlt said:


> Your eyes are better than mine because I missed that detail



Now that you gave her the idea, she's going to hit the speed dial for her jeweler to make her a new eternity band with solitaires instead 




Lounorada said:


> No it still has the two smaller stones either side.
> Although, ever since she changed the band on her engagement ring the stones look completely different too, it's so odd.
> Even though the original ring wasn't something I would like, it _was _pretty, but the changes she made to it ruined that ring.
> View attachment 5208125



Thank you for that. It looked like a single solitaire from the angle of the other picture


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Now that you gave her the idea, she's going to hit the speed dial for her jeweler to make her a new eternity band with solitaires instead
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for that. It looked like a single solitaire from the angle of the other picture



Supposedly the Birks cluster ring was a gift from Hazzie. Perhaps she is showing the world all of the jewelry she has been given by Hazzie. Kinda like, Look here, After all she has been through, this is all she has gotten. Poor pitiful me.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure they tried to make her feel welcome, but she probably stubbornly and arrogantly resisted their traditions and protocols and ruffled a lot of feathers. They say the best way to master a new job is to watch, listen and learn. I doubt she did that, and then portrayed herself as the victim.



She thinks she knows better than everyone. Someone needs to put her in her place. I know we sound like a broken record by now but their titles should be fully revoked while Harry just retains Prince. Marklenator can remain Ms. Markle


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was closing open tabs and stumbled upon this picture (trigger warning...GREEN HORNET). It gets me each time how he looks sad and upset and that disgusting woman sports this super proud of herself wide grin.
> 
> View attachment 5208032


Uber smug mug.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> May we call her Queen Kate now?  Because *she rules!*



Hell yeah. All hail QUEEN KATE  

But when Marklenator reads what we call Kate, tomorrow we'll see a headline with old photos from her suicidal night out in the blue sequin dress.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly the Birks cluster ring was a gift from Hazzie. Perhaps she is showing the world all of the jewelry she has been given by Hazzie. Kinda like, Look here, After all she has been through, this is all she has gotten. Poor pitiful me.



It's a pretty ring but she doesn't deserve it


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Hell yeah. All hail QUEEN KATE
> 
> But when Marklenator reads what we call Kate, tomorrow we'll see a headline with old photos from her suicidal night out in the blue sequin dress.
> 
> View attachment 5208190



She was so much thinner then.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> She was so much thinner then.



I think she's so busy sitting on her tush these days bossing people around, speed dialing her attorneys, Sunshine Sucks and paps hence the weight gain. She probably doesn't even do yoga anymore     

And btw, is it just me or did they stop using Scoobie Doo as their mouth piece? I don't see much of his contents posted here anymore. In the dog house huh?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooopsie, wrong thread, silly me


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooopsie, wrong thread, silly me




In another life, when I grow up, I wanna be Queen Kate


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooops, did it again


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I think she's so busy sitting on her tush these days bossing people around, speed dialing her attorneys, Sunshine Sucks and paps hence the weight gain. She probably doesn't even do yoga anymore
> 
> And btw, is it just me or did they stop using Scoobie Doo as their mouth piece? I don't see much of his contents posted here anymore. In the dog house huh?


He does seem (refreshingly) quiet compared to before, although he did come out with some stupid statement about their NYC trip as "Independent Royals".  WTF is that??


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m confident someone will correct me if I’m wrong, wasn’t the center stone from Africa and 2 smaller stones from Diana’s jewels?
> Maybe the Palace or someone (ahem, Wills) insisted Diana’s stones get sent back - ‘cuz ya know.
> 
> imo, that Cartier watch and Love bracelet just look cheap cheap cheap on her. Maybe yellow gold is not a good choice.
> 
> original ring:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5208162


Look at that pic! M has such a forceful grip on H's hand that it's turning purple. Is that the same 'death grip' that crushed his bollocks because he seemed to have lost them about the same time he put that engagement ring on her finger.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, did it again



Something tells me Wills didn't mention that Kate does voiceovers either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take your pick — remember, these 2 guys had the same mother, same father:


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take your pick:
> 
> View attachment 5208208
> View attachment 5208210


Now, come on.  Is this really fair?  It's like comparing a real diamond to the kind of bauble you win out of a vending machine or a lollipop ring.  NO CONTEST.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> He does seem (refreshingly) quiet compared to before, although he did come out with some stupid statement about their NYC trip as *"Independent *Royals".  WTF is that??



Co-Dependent would be more accurate


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> He does seem (refreshingly) quiet compared to before, although he did come out with some stupid statement about their NYC trip as "Independent Royals".  WTF is that??



Sorry, if they were taking money from  Charles and had to b^tch about being cut off, no, they aren't independent. If they are 100% independent, then they should cough out all the money that came from Charles, the Sovereign Grant or any other BRF sources.

Money from/through their fakea^s Archewell, again, that's meant for charity but they probably pocket most of it instead of channelling it to the charities.

Unless they are putting in the hard work to make their moolah, I wouldn't consider these moochers independent. They can't even produce good contents for Spotify and Netflix to keep up their end of the business deals.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, did it again



Jolly lovely!!


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is so wicked on so many levels.
> 
> *Prince Harry Moves Past Royal Rift With New York Military Awards*
> 
> Prince Harry will present awards to service members past and present in New York in a new U.S. military charm offensive on the eve of Veterans Day.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will be the star guest at Intrepid Museum's inaugural Intrepid Valor Awards on Wednesday, November 10.
> 
> The 2021 Salute to Freedom Gala comes a day before Veterans Day in the U.S., known as Armistice Day in the U.K., and four days before the Royal Family will gather in London for Remembrance Sunday.
> 
> Harry was last year locked in a trans-Atlantic briefing war with the palace over commemorating the country's war dead.
> 
> The duke asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf at The Cenotaph when Britain stopped to remember its fallen last November, but his request was declined on the basis he had quit royal duties.
> 
> Harry and Meghan were instead left making a personal visit to Los Angeles National Cemetery with their own photographer in tow.
> 
> The duke's star turn at the Salute to Freedom Gala ensures he has a formal and high profile function in service of the military community during the period when Britain and America pay tribute to those who made the ultimate sacrifice.
> 
> It is not yet clear whether he will try to also make it to Britain for Remembrance Sunday on November 14, particularly since New York is on the way to London from California.
> 
> However, this is not the first sign of a Prince Harry charm offensive with the U.S. military after an appearance for U.S. veterans earlier this month.
> 
> The duke joined a video call for competitors in the Warrior Games, whose Olympic-style tournament for wounded service personnel was canceled due to COVID.
> 
> He appeared alongside Jill ***** and said: "To see every single one of you here, with the pride on your faces, makes me incredibly happy to know how far you guys have come, the dark places that you have been to but where you are now stronger than ever before, no doubt, and that is partly if not mainly down to sport."
> 
> Newsweek Article with Video



We know Harry will be wearing his wire and bringing his personal videographer. Putting himself up on a literal pedestal and giving out awards (like he has a right to give them) to worthy vets is Netflix documentary gold.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> We know Harry will be wearing his wire and bringing his personal videographer. Putting himself up on a literal pedestal and giving out awards (like he has a right to give them) to worthy vets is Netflix documentary gold.



The US Military deserves better than this fake-royal. Why did they ok this? Oh, wait, JB just loves Hazzie. Haaa, kinda says it all.
IMO

Hazzie will never be this:


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> As the wife of a US veteran, this *royally* pi$$es me off.  Pun intended.
> WTF does he have to do with the US military?  He squandered his UK military associations when the pissant escaped with Moaning Markle.  He wants to figuratively step on more dead soldiers??


I'll ask hubby, who's also a vet what he thinks when he's free. He's playing his favourite PC game 'Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands' and mumbled something when I asked him a bit ago which means he didn't "hear" me. Besides, when he's playing, I only hear an occasional groan when a helicopter falls on him.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thank you @EverSoElusive for your #8 nickname, Marklenator. Pray tell how did you coin this nickname. Perchance is it Markle + Detonator = Marklenator? In any case, it's now on The List.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you @EverSoElusive for your #8 nickname, Marklenator. Pray tell how did you coin this nickname. Perchance is it Markle + Detonator = Marklenator? In any case, it's now on The List.




More like Markle + Terminator = Marklenator because she markles people     

Thank you so much for letting me participate in nicknaming the insufferable couple! You're the best


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The US Military deserves better than this fake-royal. Why did they ok this? Oh, wait, JB just loves Hazzie. Haaa, kinda says it all.
> IMO
> 
> Hazzie will never be this:
> View attachment 5208241



The awards are being given by the Intrepid Sea, Air, & Space Museum in New York. Museums must be facing hard times getting visitors with Covid having kept them closed for many months. If nothing else having Harry there will get their event a lot of attention and hopefully for the museum, some customers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Terrible news for Mrs. Hypocrisy and Hubby, Will is in charge!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Terrible news for Mrs. Hypocrisy and Hubby, Will is in charge!


----------



## Jayne1

Lounorada said:


> No it still has the two smaller stones either side.
> Although, ever since she changed the band on her engagement ring the stones look completely different too, it's so odd.
> Even though the original ring wasn't something I would like, it _was _pretty, but the changes she made to it ruined that ring.
> View attachment 5208125


What is that extra chain thing beside her Tank and Love bracelet?  Anyone know?


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> That's the trick, to make it look effortless, and she's mastered it. But I'm sure a fair amount of effort does go into it. She radiates a sense of grace and ease that Meghan lacks despite her years in front of cameras.


That's because Methane's acting skills seem to have a narrow range from cute to hot N heavy. She missed the class when they discussed cool screen goddesses. I don't think being the next Grace Kelly was ever her ambition, except for the "marry a royal" part.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5207991
> 
> 
> *M will be dying - DYING!!!*
> 
> View attachment 5207990


The only M I want associated with Bond is Judi Dench! 

Reminds me of that silly rumour that Methane was being considered for a Bond role (as hot babe #101 who gets iced by the villain?)
Can you imagine if they attended a Bond premiere? Hazard would be badgering Barbara Broccoli the same way he badgered Bob Iger.


----------



## periogirl28

xincinsin said:


> The only M I want associated with Bond is Judi Dench!
> 
> Reminds me of that silly rumour that Methane was being considered for a Bond role (as hot babe #101 who gets iced by the villain?)
> Can you imagine if they attended a Bond premiere? Hazard would be badgering Barbara Broccoli the same way he badgered Bob Iger.


“She doesn’t mind being iced in the first pre-credit scene. And she does voiceovers too.” Hazard to Broccoli.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gina Torres  was the real reason people watched Suits. Stylish, elegant, well-spoken, she completely owned each scene she was in. 
 A+ actress.








						Meghan Markle's Former Co-Star Gina Torres Says Motherhood Is a "Dream Come True" for the Duchess
					

"I'm sure she's a great mom," said the former Suits star.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## littlemisskeira

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gina Torres  was the real reason people watched Suits. Stylish, elegant, well-spoken, she completely owned each scene she was in.
> A+ actress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Former Co-Star Gina Torres Says Motherhood Is a "Dream Come True" for the Duchess
> 
> 
> "I'm sure she's a great mom," said the former Suits star.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5208343



Meghan did look good here. But things went downhill after she gave birth. Could it be because she gave birth to her first kid at a relatively older age? All the zooms in on her hand and jewels from the last few pages -  drew my attention to the sun spots (or is it age spots?) on her hands and other parts of her body. Maybe too much sun tanning when she was young.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is so wicked on so many levels.
> 
> *Prince Harry Moves Past Royal Rift With New York Military Awards*
> 
> Prince Harry will present awards to service members past and present in New York in a new U.S. military charm offensive on the eve of Veterans Day.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will be the star guest at Intrepid Museum's inaugural Intrepid Valor Awards on Wednesday, November 10.
> 
> The 2021 Salute to Freedom Gala comes a day before Veterans Day in the U.S., known as Armistice Day in the U.K., and four days before the Royal Family will gather in London for Remembrance Sunday.
> 
> Harry was last year locked in a trans-Atlantic briefing war with the palace over commemorating the country's war dead.
> 
> The duke asked for a wreath to be laid on his behalf at The Cenotaph when Britain stopped to remember its fallen last November, but his request was declined on the basis he had quit royal duties.
> 
> Harry and Meghan were instead left making a personal visit to Los Angeles National Cemetery with their own photographer in tow.
> 
> The duke's star turn at the Salute to Freedom Gala ensures he has a formal and high profile function in service of the military community during the period when Britain and America pay tribute to those who made the ultimate sacrifice.
> 
> It is not yet clear whether he will try to also make it to Britain for Remembrance Sunday on November 14, particularly since New York is on the way to London from California.
> 
> However, this is not the first sign of a Prince Harry charm offensive with the U.S. military after an appearance for U.S. veterans earlier this month.
> 
> The duke joined a video call for competitors in the Warrior Games, whose Olympic-style tournament for wounded service personnel was canceled due to COVID.
> 
> He appeared alongside Jill ***** and said: "To see every single one of you here, with the pride on your faces, makes me incredibly happy to know how far you guys have come, the dark places that you have been to but where you are now stronger than ever before, no doubt, and that is partly if not mainly down to sport."
> 
> Newsweek Article with Video


It’s really hard not to comment on the politics when you see an article like this. Let’s just say that of all the people and the times to launch a new military award this is….. ironic on multiple levels.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, did it again



why is he dressed as the bellhop from grand Budapest hotel?
Kate does indeed look wonderful & it’s remarkable how relatively affordable her look is. It was cheaper than that awful white valentino baby doll which was too small for someone .  A great advert for Jenny Packham.
I think Camilla looks very good too. I’ve always thought the _female_ side of this family are stylish.


bag-mania said:


> The awards are being given by the Intrepid Sea, Air, & Space Museum in New York. Museums must be facing hard times getting visitors with Covid having kept them closed for many months. If nothing else having Harry there will get their event a lot of attention and hopefully for the museum, some customers.


A very valid point but I’d be a bit worried about the opposite effect happening tbh. Lots of people have boycotted H. They could  have got somebody less controversial and cheaper, like an Olympic athlete. We all know H is only interested in talking about his ‘own brand’ too.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> On the vaccines… Opinions may vary!
> View attachment 5208049
> 
> *Pharmaceutical companies might think it a bit rich being asked to waive the patents on their COVID vaccines by Harry and Meghan, a couple who have rejected the concept of public service in an attempt to monetize their royal status. But let’s overlook the charge of hypocrisy and ask whether there really is any substance to Harry and Meghan’s charge that ‘ultra-wealthy’ pharmaceutical companies are holding up the vaccination of the developing world by refusing to surrender their intellectual property.*
> 
> _It is certainly not true in the case of AstraZeneca, which has made its vaccine available at cost price. Not only that, it has licensed production to the Serum Institute of India, so that low and middle income countries can access vaccines produced at a lower cost base. While other manufacturers have been less forthcoming, the refusal to surrender patents hasn’t stopped wealthy countries donating 300 million doses of COVID vaccines to 142 countries, with a total of 1.3 billion due to be delivered by the end of this year. It might have been cheaper for taxpayers had the patents been waived in these cases, but as far as the recipients are concerned it makes little odds.
> 
> The idea that a few rich countries are hoarding vaccines while the rest of the world goes without doesn’t reflect reality. Overall, 44.5 percent of the world’s population has received at least one dose of a vaccine — a remarkable achievement given that it is less than a year since the first data was published from the phase three trial of any vaccine.
> 
> More people have been vaccinated in India alone — 631 million have received at least one dose — than live in the whole of Europe. That said, there is one part of the world where vaccination lags well behind: Africa. Across Africa as a whole, according to the Africa CDC, 6.14 percent of people have had at least one dose and 4.02 percent have had two doses. In bottom-of-the-heap Tanzania only 0.57 percent of the population has received a vaccine.
> 
> There is a very good reason why western countries wanted to prioritize vaccinating their own citizens: they have been among the worst-hit by COVID, while Africa has been mercifully lightly affected. It would be extraordinary if vaccination programs in the UK (1,993 deaths per million inhabitants to date) and the US (2,119) had been delayed so that vaccine doses could be diverted to Tanzania (0.8 deaths per million), Nigeria (13) or Kenya (92).
> …_
> 
> *Not that any of this will rub off on Harry and Meghan. In their vacuous world of celebrity do-gooding, all that matters is that you pick a popular bogeyman — Big Pharma — and score your virtue points by accusing it of being mean-minded. The facts count for little.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are wrong about COVID vaccine patents
> 
> 
> Pharmaceutical companies might think it a bit rich being asked to waive the patents on their COVID vaccines by Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectatorworld.com


Again trying avoid the politics, but it’s so refreshing to see a journalist actually engaging with the details of this issue (or indeed any issue) rather than falling back on tarty and party’s style of bland platitudes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> why is he dressed as the bellhop from grand Budapest hotel?
> Kate does indeed look wonderful & it’s remarkable how relatively affordable her look is. It was cheaper than that awful white valentino baby doll which was too small for someone .  A great advert for Jenny Packham.
> I think Camilla looks very good too. I’ve always thought the _female_ side of this family are stylish.



Haven’t you heard - it’s the new thing 









						How the colourful blazer has become THE trend for celebs this season
					

British celebrity stylist Rochelle White told FEMAIL that a colourful blazer is a must-have for A-listers this season as Daniel Craig steps out in a bright pink version at the Royal Albert Hall.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The US media is unbelievable. Even the French are getting better news about the Montecitos who are described as "_*people who have no discernible talent except that of prostituting themselves to the highest bidders.*_" Amazing! 









						« La version royale des Kardashian » : Harry et Meghan Markle violemment attaqués - Gala
					

Au lendemain de leur visite à New York, Harry et Meghan sont de nouveau sous le feu des critiques. Dans les colonnes du Sun, lundi 27 septembre 2021, le journaliste Piers Morgan, qui voue une haine...




					www.gala.fr


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s really hard not to comment on the politics when you see an article like this. Let’s just say that of all the people and the times to launch a new military award this is….. ironic on multiple levels.
> 
> why is he dressed as the bellhop from grand Budapest hotel?
> Kate does indeed look wonderful & it’s remarkable how relatively affordable her look is. It was cheaper than that awful white valentino baby doll which was too small for someone .  A great advert for Jenny Packham.
> I think Camilla looks very good too. I’ve always thought the _female_ side of this family are stylish.
> 
> A very valid point but I’d be a bit worried about the opposite effect happening tbh. Lots of people have boycotted H. They could  have got somebody less controversial and cheaper, like an Olympic athlete. We all know H is only interested in talking about his ‘own brand’ too.



This is his 2nd time to speak. 2010 was his first.  Tempus fugit.






__





						Britain's Prince Harry Returns to Intrepid Museum
					

Intrepid was proud to host a reception on our Flight Deck for Britain's Prince Harry last week during his visit to New York City.  It was a night to honor both British and American veterans and to see how the two countries can come together to help our wounded warriors




					www.intrepidmuseum.org
				





_*Runaway royal* Prince Harry has already booked a return trip to New York — to honor wounded veterans and see rocker pal Jon Bon Jovi get an award at a military gala.

Just days after leaving the Big Apple for a whirlwind trip filmed for a rumored Netflix doc, the prince has been named as a special guest for the Intrepid Museum’s Salute to Freedom gala on Nov. 10.

Harry — who was stripped of all his honorary military roles after Megxit — will present the inaugural “Intrepid Valor Award” to five “service members and veterans living with the invisible wounds of war,” the museum said.
More —_









						Prince Harry heading back to NYC to help honor veterans and rocker pal Jon Bon Jovi
					

Prince Harry — who was stripped of all his honorary military roles — will present the “Intrepid Valor Award” to five service members and veterans.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The US media is unbelievable. Even the French are getting better news about the Montecitos who are described as "_*people who have no discernible talent except that of prostituting themselves to the highest bidders.*_" Amazing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> « La version royale des Kardashian » : Harry et Meghan Markle violemment attaqués - Gala
> 
> 
> Au lendemain de leur visite à New York, Harry et Meghan sont de nouveau sous le feu des critiques. Dans les colonnes du Sun, lundi 27 septembre 2021, le journaliste Piers Morgan, qui voue une haine...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gala.fr



Piers tells it like is *sweet sweet*

*"The royal version of the Kardashians": Harry and Meghan Markle violently attacked *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I think the ring in the picture is the Birks snowflake ring:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Birks Birks Iconic 18K White Gold & Diamond Snowflake Ring
> 
> 
> Get free shipping and returns on Birks Birks Iconic 18K White Gold & Diamond Snowflake Ring at Saks Fifth Avenue. Browse luxury Birks Rings and other new arrivals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.saksfifthavenue.com



WHY on earth would you pay 5000 bucks for splinters of low quality (SI) diamonds?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Aimee3 said:


> If 6 and his wicked wife were still working royals, would they have been invited to the premiere of the movie like the Cambridges and PC/çamilla?


Highly unlikely , Prince William is President of BAFTA and Prince Charles is a Patron of the British Film Institute so they were there in an official capacity. 
Plus, Prince Charles is the patron of the three intelligence *agencies and charities supporting ex and current members will benefit from this premiere.
*Secret Intelligence Service, the Security Service and GCHQ.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take your pick — remember, these 2 guys had the same mother, same father:
> 
> View attachment 5208208
> View attachment 5208210



Shame they don't have the same tailor


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Angela is at the end of her rope with Raptor.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WHY on earth would you pay 5000 bucks for splinters of low quality (SI) diamonds?


Um, because it’s ‘iconic’ sweetie!!!
That’s Latin for ‘get the credit card out.’
TBH I’d say a gingerbread man is more ‘iconic’ and looks more like what it is named after.
seriously I agree with you. I don’t get these pave clusters in general- they don’t really glitter & the settings are so bulky.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven’t you heard - it’s the new thing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the colourful blazer has become THE trend for celebs this season
> 
> 
> British celebrity stylist Rochelle White told FEMAIL that a colourful blazer is a must-have for A-listers this season as Daniel Craig steps out in a bright pink version at the Royal Albert Hall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Normally I’m pro more colour - I think he’s too stocky for double-breasted that’s the problem- the buttons look too busy.

Tbh I think double breasted is very hard to work with.


CarryOn2020 said:


> This is his 2nd time to speak. 2010 was his first.  Tempus fugit.
> View attachment 5208371
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britain's Prince Harry Returns to Intrepid Museum
> 
> 
> Intrepid was proud to host a reception on our Flight Deck for Britain's Prince Harry last week during his visit to New York City.  It was a night to honor both British and American veterans and to see how the two countries can come together to help our wounded warriors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intrepidmuseum.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Runaway royal* Prince Harry has already booked a return trip to New York — to honor wounded veterans and see rocker pal Jon Bon Jovi get an award at a military gala.
> 
> Just days after leaving the Big Apple for a whirlwind trip filmed for a rumored Netflix doc, the prince has been named as a special guest for the Intrepid Museum’s Salute to Freedom gala on Nov. 10.
> 
> Harry — who was stripped of all his honorary military roles after Megxit — will present the inaugural “Intrepid Valor Award” to five “service members and veterans living with the invisible wounds of war,” the museum said.
> More —_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry heading back to NYC to help honor veterans and rocker pal Jon Bon Jovi
> 
> 
> Prince Harry — who was stripped of all his honorary military roles — will present the “Intrepid Valor Award” to five service members and veterans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


what a difference a day makes
I don’t like it then or now. What has a supposedly non-political National representative got to do with another country’s military? Just weird. He wouldn’t start handing out medals in Germany or Thailand would he?

If they just want a ‘celebrity’ who gets attention they should give the people what they want & feed the memes by getting Keanu Reeves.
Or if they wanted controversy have a kardashian because why not get the best?


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Um, because it’s ‘iconic’ sweetie!!!
> That’s Latin for ‘get the credit card out.’
> TBH I’d say a gingerbread man is more ‘iconic’ and looks more like what it is named after.
> seriously I agree with you. I don’t get these pave clusters in general- they don’t really glitter & the settings are so bulky.
> 
> Normally I’m pro more colour - I think he’s too stocky for double-breasted that’s the problem- the buttons look too busy.
> 
> Tbh I think double breasted is very hard to work with.
> 
> what a difference a day makes
> I don’t like it then or now. What has a supposedly non-political National representative got to do with another country’s military? Just weird. He wouldn’t start handing out medals in Germany or Thailand would he?



This is for US and British wounded soldiers. Invictus, I guess, has given him access to this sort of thing. Jon Bon Jovi builds houses for the wounded vets so he is getting an award.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is for US and British wounded soldiers. Invictus, I guess, has given him access to this sort of thing. Jon Bon Jovi builds houses for the wounded vets so he is getting an award.


I know there’s all this lovely charity stuff involved which is nice but at the core of it, I hate the idea, the U.K. & the USA are allies obviously but I think we need a healthy separation of official bodies especially things like the armed forces.  Especially when the main motivation for the speaker seems to be the spoilt brat wants to fantasise about being Rambo.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> The US media is unbelievable. Even the French are getting better news about the Montecitos who are described as "_*people who have no discernible talent except that of prostituting themselves to the highest bidders.*_" Amazing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> « La version royale des Kardashian » : Harry et Meghan Markle violemment attaqués - Gala
> 
> 
> Au lendemain de leur visite à New York, Harry et Meghan sont de nouveau sous le feu des critiques. Dans les colonnes du Sun, lundi 27 septembre 2021, le journaliste Piers Morgan, qui voue une haine...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gala.fr



I don't think the French people are known to mince their words so I bet whatever they write and publish must hurt like hell for Marklenator


----------



## creme fraiche

jelliedfeels said:


> If they just want a ‘celebrity’ who gets attention they should give the people what they want & feed the memes by getting Keanu Reeves.
> Or if they wanted controversy have a kardashian because why not get the best?



Better yet - Adam Driver, who was in the Marines.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The US media is unbelievable. Even the French are getting better news about the Montecitos who are described as "_*people who have no discernible talent except that of prostituting themselves to the highest bidders.*_" Amazing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> « La version royale des Kardashian » : Harry et Meghan Markle violemment attaqués - Gala
> 
> 
> Au lendemain de leur visite à New York, Harry et Meghan sont de nouveau sous le feu des critiques. Dans les colonnes du Sun, lundi 27 septembre 2021, le journaliste Piers Morgan, qui voue une haine...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gala.fr


Followed your link and found another article about the sweet nods to Princess Di during the NY trip. They mentioned the Green Hornet dress too.








						PHOTOS – Meghan Markle divine en Dior à New York : elle multiplie les hommages à Diana - Gala
					

Cette première apparition à New York du couple Sussex depuis la naissance de leur fille Lilibet Diana n'a pas fini de faire couler de l'encre. À chacune de ses sorties, Meghan Markle, divine, offre...




					www.gala.fr


----------



## needlv

So… another royal baby in 9 months then….? Lol


----------



## Sharont2305

needlv said:


> So… another royal baby in 9 months then….? Lol



I must admit, that thought crossed my mind too, lol


----------



## needlv

So Kate shows up in a turtleneck and fitted suit..?  Is she trolling now…?



and the Trousers were hemmed higher…


----------



## Annawakes

Kate looks great but I wish they’d changed her outfit.  I don’t like it when the crazies latch onto anything that makes Kate look like she’s imitating.  Then again, that would mean Kate pays attention to MoM and we shouldn’t draw that conclusion either .  Was it actually cold enough for that outfit in Ireland?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't think the French people are known to mince their words so I bet whatever they write and publish must hurt like hell for Marklenator



Good thing she doesn't speak French


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> So… another royal baby in 9 months then….? Lol




I like them together. The look genuinely happy, nothing forced, over the top about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> So Kate shows up in a turtleneck and fitted suit..?  Is she trolling now…?
> 
> 
> 
> and the Trousers were hemmed higher…




And it's not only fitted, but also fitting.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good thing she doesn't speak French



She only speaks evil. Her tongue should be removed


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> So Kate shows up in a turtleneck and fitted suit..?  Is she trolling now…?
> 
> 
> 
> and the Trousers were hemmed higher…



That's how it's done.


----------



## Sharont2305

Annawakes said:


> Kate looks great but I wish they’d changed her outfit.  I don’t like it when the crazies latch onto anything that makes Kate look like she’s imitating.  Then again, that would mean Kate pays attention to MoM and we shouldn’t draw that conclusion either .  Was it actually cold enough for that outfit in Ireland?


It's about 12°C in Northern Ireland today so, yes, I'd say so. Plus, the UK is between 50°N and 60°N so on par with parts of Canada.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

From @Chanbal post

"The US media is unbelievable. Even the French are getting better news about the Montecitos who are described as "_*people who have no discernible talent except that of prostituting themselves to the highest bidders.*_" Amazing! "

LOL, the article is full of Piers Morgan quotes from his article in The Sun translated to French. Still a fun read in French. 

ETA above quote


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> LOL, the article is full of Piers Morgan quotes from his article in The Sun translated to French. Still a fun read in French.



Piers is opening up new markets / fan bases for himself


----------



## Icyjade

What did the stans say about Kate’s beautiful golden dress does anyone know? I’m just curious


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> What did the stans say about Kate’s beautiful golden dress does anyone know? I’m just curious



No idea. I don’t think any of us go looking for Meghan stans, they are more something you stumble upon.


----------



## lazeny

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5207236
> 
> 
> To my eye, both ladies are gorgeous.  Not sure anyone here has said negative things about the face. Certainly the clothes, certainly the lies, not the face. As my mother famously said, ‘pretty is as pretty does’.  H&M are not known for being kind people.  Actions matter more the words.



Both women are beautiful imo. The difference is that Kate is aging gracefully. I like the creases in her eyes, the laugh lines. Like a woman confident in her own skin. 

Meghan is naturally beautiful too. But her face... changed. She still pretty but it's sort of plastic-ish?


----------



## creme fraiche

Katherine is a pretty woman who has poise and elegance in spite of being shy which makes her beautiful.

Meghan is a pretty woman who has a hardness of character and lack of poise and grace which prevents her from moving into the beautiful category.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lazeny said:


> Meghan is naturally beautiful too. But her face... changed. She still pretty but it's sort of plastic-ish?



Let's just say, her original face wasn't...all that.


----------



## bag-mania

If we didn't know all the bad things we do about Meghan I'm sure we would be more generous when talking about her beauty. Knowing what is going on inside ruins how we see the outside.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Followed your link and found another article about the sweet nods to Princess Di during the NY trip. They mentioned the Green Hornet dress too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PHOTOS – Meghan Markle divine en Dior à New York : elle multiplie les hommages à Diana - Gala
> 
> 
> Cette première apparition à New York du couple Sussex depuis la naissance de leur fille Lilibet Diana n'a pas fini de faire couler de l'encre. À chacune de ses sorties, Meghan Markle, divine, offre...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gala.fr


They have a few articles on them. There is another one with an interesting title. *Meghan Markle et Harry nuisibles pour la santé ?   *


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> That's how it's done.


Oh, and let's not forget purple is the color of royalty. This was not an accident.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops @CarryOn2020 I did the same mistake as you did. Embarrassing!   











						Prince Charles and Kate Middleton are 'closer than ever'
					

Body language expert Judi James told FEMAIL the Duchess of Cambridge showed a 'growing confidence and sense of status' with her embrace of Prince Charles.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe it's that particular photo, but Charles is looking old. Given his bloodline he's likely got another 25 years in him but still...


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it's that particular photo, but Charles is looking old. Given his bloodline he's likely got another 25 years in him but still...


I’m not sure if he does, have you seen those puffy fingers of his?


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it's that particular photo, but Charles is looking old. Given his bloodline he's likely got another 25 years in him but still...


He most definitely is looking very old.  If I didn’t know better I’d say he’s looking about 85.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> So Kate shows up in a turtleneck and fitted suit..?  Is she trolling now…?
> 
> 
> 
> and the Trousers were hemmed higher…



She's giving a "sweet nod" to her dunce SIL who needs some pointers


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not sure if he does, have you seen those puffy fingers of his?


His fingers have always looked chubby to me, but I do think he looks lots older than he is. And not too healthy either.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it's that particular photo, but Charles is looking old. Given his bloodline he's likely got another 25 years in him but still...


His ruddy complexion and puffy fingers make him look like he's hitting the bottle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> His ruddy complexion and puffy fingers make him look like he's hitting the bottle.



If you watch the videos, you’ll see it isn’t only his looks - he moves slowly and awkwardly. He carries the weight of the world on his shoulders. QE seems to move much better than he does.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> His ruddy complexion and puffy fingers make him look like he's hitting the bottle.



Does he have the reputation of being a heavy drinker? Not that that necessarily means anything. Some people prefer to drink alone behind closed doors.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Pinky rings have long been associated with shady characters, so it rings true for her. No pun intended.


Huh?!?! .. quite the opposite!  Oftentimes (even in Roman times), a ring signified that you were "upper-class", aristocratic or patrician lines.  Where I grew up (New England), people would wear pinkie rings with their family crest and oftentimes, it was one of the things that the family passed down.  I was given one by the Irish side of the family and it was lovely but, of course, I lost it in my teen years.  I have thought about having another one made, but I decided to make my own pinkie rings with high-karat gold and diamonds .. that always works for me .. hee hee!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kemilia said:


> His fingers have always looked chubby to me, but I do think he looks lots older than he is. And not too healthy either.





purseinsanity said:


> His ruddy complexion and puffy fingers make him look like he's hitting the bottle.


Charles has what appears to be Rosacea usually more common in women. It can cause swelling of the face and scalp. In another article, it says that Rosacea may also affect the arms and hands.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Never mind. Someone already identified the ring. Need to read to the end!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I don't remember anyone saying she's aging terribly though...more just comments about her attempting (and failing miserably) to hide her weight gain, and the obvious changes to her face.
> Remember the old adage: as you age, it's either your a$$ or your face.
> I had a client I hadn't seen in about 7 years.  She came back to see me with her husband in tow.  He commented how great I looked and that I looked even younger than I had when he'd last seen me 7 years prior.  I was feeling pretty good hearing that!  I jokingly said, well, it's probably the extra 20 lbs filling out my wrinkles.  He literally looked me up and down and commented, "Yeah, you're probably right".


Sheesh .. that was nice, *NOT*!!!!!  However, I have read many articles that have indicated that as you age, you should try to keep the face more "plump" .. and well, for me .. yup, it's my weight (people always say "you have no wrinkles" .. and mind you, I love the Sun)!  My sister on the other hand, is so damn skinny and constantly complains about her "Turkey Neck", to which I reply, "well - you could stand to gain about 30 lbs and I would be glad to give that to you" - HA!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Huh?!?! .. quite the opposite!  Oftentimes (even in Roman times), a ring signified that you were "upper-class", aristocratic or patrician lines.  Where I grew up (New England), people would wear pinkie rings with their family crest and oftentimes, it was one of the things that the family passed down.  I was given one by the Irish side of the family and it was lovely but, of course, I lost it in my teen years.  I have thought about having another one made, but I decided to make my own pinkie rings with high-karat gold and diamonds .. that always works for me .. hee hee!!!



Signet rings are different from pinky rings.  Signet rings had a distinct purpose while pinky rings were for fashion. Usually worn by males because males usually conducted business and needed a fast, authentic way to sign documents. 





__





						The History Press | A brief history of signet rings
					

Signet rings used to be important cultural items of jewellery and have played a surprisingly significant role in history.




					www.thehistorypress.co.uk
				



_Originally signet rings were emblazoned with a family crest and they would frequently be used to stamp, or sign a document. The metal shapes would leave a permanent mark in any soft wax or even clay and this would be placed onto a variety of legal documents. Some of the most important documents in history have been stamped with a signet ring. In its day the stamp of a ring was seen as more authentic than a signature.

Before the days of the internet and other electronic wizardry it was normal for all the most influential people in the world to have these rings and use them to confirm the authenticity of any document. These rings usually look magnificent but they were designed with a very practical purpose in mind.

Every ring was unique, the markings usually included the family crest but there would always be a significant mark which personally identified the ring holder. Some of the rings were simple monograms or icons which were associated with the most important families. All rings were reverse engineered to ensure that the design came out properly when they were stamped on a document. Of course, this level of detail also ensured the rings were expensive and very difficult to copy.

The signet ring was used as long ago as 3500 BC. Records show the people of Mesopotamia used cylindrical seals as marks of authenticity. This is really the origin of the corporate seal which is still used by some companies today. 

By the time of the ancient Egyptians the seal had become attached to a ring and Pharaohs and other important people of the day would wear them to show their position.

At the beginning of the Minoan period most rings were formed from soft stones or ivory but by the end of this period they were created from harder stones. The bronze age saw a shift to metal rings and they took on their current day appearance. There was even a period when they were considered an art form and many people had collections of them.

By the Middle Ages, any person of influence had a signet ring. This included all the nobility and they were used to sign all letters and legal documents. In fact, in the fourteenth century King Edward II decreed that all official documents must be signed with the King’s signet ring. The majority of rings dating from these periods were destroyed when their owner died. This is because they were unique and it avoided any possibility of forged documents appearing after a nobleman’s death. Having a ring during this period marked you as a member of the highest class and above other, common men._


----------



## CeeJay

muddledmint said:


> I’m not convinced that meghan had a lot of work done recently. Her face looks a bit fuller but that is probably just from weight gain. I think meghan looks her age or younger, while Kate looks many years older than she actually is. She looks like she’s in her late 40s despite being very pretty. If meghan does get cosmetic work, how it affects her looks depends on how far she takes it. If she starts getting that stereotypical bad plastic surgery/filler/Botox face, it will definitely make her look older than Kate.


Sorry to disappoint, but MEANIE-MEG did have some procedures done during her "down times" - such as: tweaking her nose yet again (to make the tip more "Barbie-ish") along with some work on her teeth (less gum, more teeth showing) and some filler for sure.  Pictures of said procedures were posted in this thread, with comments from various Plastic Surgeons .. alas, I can't remember the "pages" that these are on.  Since she started her tweaking in her teen years (while still in High School), some when in University and quite a few after her University graduation (in order to "fit" the Hollywood 'type'), and given that she grew up in the Entertainment world, I do not see her as the type who will "age naturally".  I'm sure, down the road, Kate may have some procedures (given that she will be more in the limelight in future years), I give her a lot of credit for being more natural!


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Charles has what appears to be Rosacea usually more common in women. It can cause swelling of the face and scalp. In another article, it says that Rosacea may also affect the arms and hands.



It could certainly be rosacea. Didn't Harry have a ruddy complexion awhile back as well? Either he found a way to get rid of it or maybe it subsided on its own since he's not outside in the sun as much as he used to be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Everyone gets a medal, including Andrew and the Cali royals
> 
> _Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to be awarded with Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen
> 
> 
> PRINCE Andrew is to be honoured with a Platinum Jubilee medal from the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


WOW .. I'm sorry, but that is just in BAD TASTE for either of them, but especially Andrew the degenerate!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Oh, and let's not forget purple is the color of royalty. This was not an accident.



Sometimes I think we're giving Raptor too much credit. Are the royals really sending messages via their outfits or do they just not think about her unless she caused another scandal and live their best lives?


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not sure if he does, have you seen those puffy fingers of his?


What does that mean?


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WHY on earth would you pay 5000 bucks for splinters of low quality (SI) diamonds?


I think it's pretty and you get a lot of bang for your buck.

Maison Birks is Canadian, founded in the late 1800s... it's our Tiffanys, except you know, there's no one like Tiffanys...  lol. But Birks does have some nice stuff and that ring is very popular.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Canadian? Makes sense that Hazzie(?) or MM would have chosen that. A sweet nod to her acting days.

Plenty of ring close-ups here:
_








						Meghan wears special £3k band & ‘Middle Eastern’ pinky ring in New York
					

MEGHAN Markle may have opted for a more somber wardrobe as she visited Ground Zero in New York today – but her jewellery collection was far from it. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex today took …




					www.the-sun.com
				



As well as her £271,000 engagement ring and her Cleave and Company Welsh gold wedding band, Meghan could be seen wearing a Birks Diamond Snowflake Ring, worth £3,300.

It is clearly a ring that Meg holds dear as the last time she was seen wearing it was on another engagement ‘first’ when she joined Prince Harry in Edinburgh for their first engagement together since becoming his fiance._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle's Favorite 10 Jewelry Looks
					

The Duchess of Sussex has a penchant for delicate gold pieces—unless diamonds are involved.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like she owns a _real_ signet ring 








						Meghan Markle sparks frenzy over £40 gold Catbird ring with over 20k fans already snapping it up
					

THE Duchess of Sussex has proved the “Meghan Markle effect” is still a powerful force after budget-friendly rings she wore have prompted over 20,000 sales. Meghan Markle, 38, was pictured wearing N…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				















						Meghan Markle's stylish signet ring is now 20% off in the Missoma sale – but hurry
					

The Duchess of Sussex's favourite gold signet ring is now 20 per cent off in Missoma's flash sale.




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



_According to the site, "*the open heart on this signet ring is a symbol representing emotions of love, passion and friendship. One to wear close to the heart".*_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> I think it's pretty and *you get a lot of bang for your buck*.
> 
> Maison Birks is Canadian, founded in the late 1800s... it's our Tiffanys, except you know, there's no one like Tiffanys...  lol. But Birks does have some nice stuff and that ring is very popular.



For 5000 you can get an eternity band with 15 pointers which will give as much finger coverage and more sparkle. This is basically garbage sold to the gullible as a treasure...pretty or not, it is completely overpriced.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5208889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Favorite 10 Jewelry Looks
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has a penchant for delicate gold pieces—unless diamonds are involved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Yeah, not fond of her favoured ring placements...neither pinky ring nor middle finger. But I'm pretty convervative with jewelry, I also don't like to load up like a Christmas tree.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For 5000 you can get an eternity band with 15 pointers which will give as much finger coverage and more sparkle. This is basically garbage sold to the gullible as a treasure...pretty or not, it is completely overpriced.


Okay, thanks. I haven't been in the market for diamonds for years... so I guess I'm out of touch.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5208889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Favorite 10 Jewelry Looks
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has a penchant for delicate gold pieces—unless diamonds are involved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Oh dear, I still like her jewelry.  I'm not running out to the store or anything, but I think it suits her.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Okay, thanks. I haven't been in the market for diamonds for years... so I guess I'm out of touch.


Well, taste in jewelry, as in everything else (eg which prince is better) varies.    I used to think the ring was pretty until I saw it on Markle's finger.


----------



## CeeJay

Lenna.V said:


> She was chic and herself during her dating Harry days. Now is just pretentious with all that clad with luxury designers.


To me, she has become the epitome of the "*nouveau riche*" moniker, which makes me truly wonder about all these claims that she made tons of money with her Suits role (_and quasi-"modeling" for some of the Toronto retail stores_).  If she had a lot of money then (_and OBVIOUSLY likes designer/brand-name goods_), then why didn't SHE splurge every once in a while and buy some of these items HERSELF???  While I'm not blasting "liking" the designer/brand goods (_heck - isn't that kinda the reason why we all belong to TPF_?!?!) .. it does appear that she has been on a mega shopping spree .. *OR* .. is she getting these goods free with the intention of MERCHING them?  

For me, personally .. the minute I saw her wearing Pippa Small jewelry, and now seeing some other designer brands means that I liked, well .. let's just say that I WILL NOT be buying them anymore.  I know, I may be weird in this aspect, but I DO associate a product with the carrier and probably the biggest disappointment to me, was when the Kartrashians started carrying every single Birkin bag out there .. no more Birkins for me (_well - not that I can afford them anymore anyhow_)!!  I had to (kind of) laugh the other day when another friend who is not a *MISHMOSH *fan said "you know, she's a PWT" (_as in "Poor White Trash", which I then had to remind her that Meghan is a WOC_) .. ooooops!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> What does that mean?


I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.


----------



## CeeJay

eunaddict said:


> There is no way on earth Kate looks like she's heading into her 50s. Both photos were taken within the last 1-2 years and to my eye (I'm about a decade younger than Kate), she looks her age.
> 
> View attachment 5207613
> View attachment 5207614
> 
> 
> That being said, both women definitely make use of botox and fillers, they both have had wrinkles and lines appear then disappear then reappear. And it's hard to judge how old anyone really looks when just about every single photo available is retouched to some degree.
> 
> That MM has DEFINITELY had plastic surgery done is a pretty well-documented fact (that's the other problem with having constant photos taken that document your changing features), she's definitely had breast augmentation and then revision, as well as at least one rhinoplasty - per multiple plastic surgeons who have been asked to comment. Her having had procedures done is no longer an "if", it's a question of what and when and how much, besides such is the Hollywood life. That being said, I really hope she didn't have any of that done in her teens, that's just such a sad way to grow up with that kind of pressure on physical appearance.


I answered that already (re: when the PS started), and indeed .. it DID start in her teen years!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> As to her rings--the thin plain one is her real Welsh gold wedding ring, right?
> It should be the first ring on her finger, not the new and improved (about every 6 months) eternity-band-bigger-diamonds ring, if one is following tradition.
> Of all her baubles, that Welsh gold band is what got her to where she is now and should be treated as the most valuable piece of her stash. IMO, of course.
> Pile on on all the diamonds and gold watches you want, M, but that little thin ring is what counts.
> 
> View attachment 5207633


UGGH .. I just HATE that big Emerald Diamond with the thin band on her right pinkie finger .. it looks like CRAP IMO! .. and this is "supposed" to be a Lorraine Schwartz?!?! .. not buying that big-time because (_as much as I think Lorraine's work is ridiculously expensive_) that design does not fit her aesthetic!  If she truly wanted to wear that as a pinkie ring, I would have designed a chunky-monkey Rose Gold setting and set the emerald such that the long sides were East-West, not like it is now (_where the shorter sides are set North-South_).  To me, the setting screams "*LOOK AT ME AND MY BIG DIAMOND PINKIE RING*" .. when to me it sings "*F-UGLY*"!!!!!


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.
> View attachment 5208973


Oh I know you weren't being snarky, I still wonder what that means!  Very swollen indeed.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.
> View attachment 5208973



ITA.  It actually looks painful to me.  I remember my mother getting off a 12 hour plane ride when she was 6 months pregnant and being this swollen.  She looked and seemed so uncomfortable.  She could barely put her sandals back on at the end of the flight!  PC is not obese, so his fingers don't gel with the rest of him.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.
> View attachment 5208973



I fell down the rabbit hole that happened by Googling "Prince Charles sausage fingers." Apparently people have been concerned about his health for a few years. There are many theories.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> PC is not obese, so his fingers don't gel with the rest of him.



Maybe he eats a lot of salty food. The fat fingers sure get noticed.


----------



## Lodpah

I frequent a watch forum and guys were trying to figure out PW watch and the comments are hilarious. Calling Kate smoking hot and MM Shackles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  It actually looks painful to me.  I remember my mother getting off a 12 hour plane ride when she was 6 months pregnant and being this swollen.  She looked and seemed so uncomfortable.  She could barely put her sandals back on at the end of the flight!  PC is not obese, so his fingers don't gel with the rest of him.


My mom always has terrible swelling of her legs after flights, but I got her a $10 foot hammock that you slip over the seat in front of you, and she didn’t have any swelling at all!


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> Oh I know you weren't being snarky, I still wonder what that means!  Very swollen indeed.


Could be a number of things, but a relative was just diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis following swelling in the fingers like Charles has, also caused water on the knees, so the disease does more than cause disfigurement in joints.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Hazz is still a heavy drinker and smoker… 

_Katie Couric spares few from criticism in her new memoir, which she uses to settle scores from her four decades in TV, DailyMail.com can reveal…

Among the celebrities that Couric takes potshots at are Prince Harry, who she met at a polo match in Brazil during his 'wild-oats sowing phase.'

She recalled that the smell of cigarettes and alcohol seemed to 'ooze from every pore' in his body…_









						Katie Couric's book sparks outrage as she rips into former colleagues
					

DailyMail.com has read the manuscript for Katie Couric's book ' Going There' , which is out in late October and will be accompanied by an 11-city book tour.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Kaka_bobo said:


> I have never found the #6's wife pretty.
> 
> There is a saying in Chinese called 相由心生, translated to "looks start from the heart". Meaning that how you are inside is reflected on your looks on the outside. Considering what an ugly person she is inside...well...it shows


I could not agree with you more, and the phrase is not only in Chinese but in many other languages!  I have always felt that the personality of an individual makes them beautiful or truly ugly .. regardless of their physical features.  I had a very close friend in my high school years that many thought was unattractive in the physical sense, BUT .. when you got to know her .. her kindness, light-heartedness, sense of humor, being so friendly and especially her thoughtfulness, well .. it made her VERY attractive and she sure had a lot of male admirers!  Meanwhile, I have also met super attractive people (men & women) whose behavior was so abominable that they became UGLY to me!  It's a HUGE thing with me, and while I thought (initially) that Meghan was very attractive, NOW?!?! .. no, she is F-UGLY to me!!!


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Huh?!?! .. quite the opposite!  Oftentimes (even in Roman times), a ring signified that you were "upper-class", aristocratic or patrician lines.  Where I grew up (New England), people would wear pinkie rings with their family crest and oftentimes, it was one of the things that the family passed down.  I was given one by the Irish side of the family and it was lovely but, of course, I lost it in my teen years.  I have thought about having another one made, but I decided to make my own pinkie rings with high-karat gold and diamonds .. that always works for me .. hee hee!!!


You are right. I'm thinking of mobsters wearing diamond pinky rings. Pinky rings can also be WASPy as you describe. I actually bought a 14K gold one  for my husband years ago with the seal of his university when he finished his MBA. I thought it was very tasteful, but he did not want it so I returned it. He preferred a new set of golf clubs.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> As the wife of a US veteran, this *royally* pi$$es me off.  Pun intended.
> WTF does he have to do with the US military?  He squandered his UK military associations when the pissant escaped with Moaning Markle.  He wants to figuratively step on more dead soldiers??


RIGHT?!?! .. I totally agree (although not a wife of a US Veteran - and huge thanks to your husband for his service)!  

The thing that also gets to me, is that the press seems to view HAMMERHEAD's time in Afghanistan as him "really serving his country" when in fact (according to a former UK colleague of mine who was in the same camp as HAMMERHEAD), he had big-time special treatment and when things went "his way" he would be happy, but if crossed?!!? .. watch out (as in "spoiled little boy" - hmmm, what a surprise).  As such, he doesn't deserve to be there .. PERIOD!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sometimes I think we're giving Raptor too much credit. Are the royals really sending messages via their outfits or do they just not think about her unless she caused another scandal and live their best lives?


True, but I believe wearing a well-tailored and flattering pantsuit, in purple of all colors, right after "Raptor's" NY fashion debacle is masterful shade on Kate's part. I envision Carol Middleton reading the DM and cackling over her morning tea at the thought of the C list American actress who thought she was going to outshine her daughter going down in flames.


----------



## lill_canele

lanasyogamama said:


> I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.
> View attachment 5208973



He may have arthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. That chronic inflammation (especially when you use the joints often), can cause swelling and edema.
It looks uncomfortably painful


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Hazz is still a heavy drinker and smoker…
> 
> _Katie Couric spares few from criticism in her new memoir, which she uses to settle scores from her four decades in TV, DailyMail.com can reveal…
> 
> Among the celebrities that Couric takes potshots at are Prince Harry, who she met at a polo match in Brazil during his 'wild-oats sowing phase.'_
> 
> _*She recalled that the smell of cigarettes and alcohol seemed to 'ooze from every pore' in his body…*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katie Couric's book sparks outrage as she rips into former colleagues
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com has read the manuscript for Katie Couric's book ' Going There' , which is out in late October and will be accompanied by an 11-city book tour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I mean, honestly, he still certainly looks disheveled and unclean, so it's not that hard to believe.  Didn't M make him give up smoking?  (One thing I can actually agree with her on!)  I can imagine Haz has also given up deodorant and cologne in favor of the chickens.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

I was diagnosed with RA shortly after the birth of my daughter in 2003 and whilst my disease is under good control with medication, I have experienced joint swelling. Whilst RA is different in severity for everyone, Charles does not look to have RA to me. I think he's on heart meds. I have a brother in law with the same swollen hands and fat fingers and general swollenness all over like Charles, die to a myriad of heart issues and serious meds, plus the rosacea. BIL is over 20 years sober so rosacea is definately not alcohol related. I may be wrong but didn't King George the Queens father die from a heart attack? Just because HMTQ, her mother and Prince Philip have longevity doesn't mean Charles didn't get heart problems from his grandfather.
Harry however has been a drinker since he was 12 , before his mother's untimely death.  ( Margaret was a big drinker too)


----------



## RAINDANCE

Just to add, though, steroids can cause overall swelling esp.in the face but are not used here in the UK as a long term treatment for RA.


----------



## Lodpah

As someone earlier said you can be beautiful outside but if you’re rotten inside it shows. An old proverb: you can   put pearls on a swine but they’re still swine.

MM had the opportunity of a lifetime to do good in the world but her thirst for fame and greed and being such a liar has her coming across, even in pictures, as utterly ugly. She’s far from attractive looking, at least to me.


----------



## RAINDANCE

csshopper said:


> Could be a number of things, but a relative was just diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis following swelling in the fingers like Charles has, also caused water on the knees, so the disease does more than cause disfigurement in joints.


I hope your relative gets swift and effective treatment. RA can be a very painful and debilitating illness but equally in my.own experience can be managed well and put into a state of low activity with medication and a return to almost full normality for extensive periods of time.


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> I was diagnosed with RA shortly after the birth of my daughter in 2003 and whilst my disease is under good control with medication, I have experienced joint swelling. Whilst RA is different in severity for everyone, Charles does not look to have RA to me. I think he's on heart meds. I have a brother in law with the same swollen hands and fat fingers and general swollenness all over like Charles, die to a myriad of heart issues and serious meds, plus the rosacea. BIL is over 20 years sober so rosacea is definately not alcohol related. I may be wrong but didn't King George the Queens father die from a heart attack? Just because HMTQ, her mother and Prince Philip have longevity doesn't mean Charles didn't get heart problems from his grandfather.
> Harry however has been a drinker since he was 12 , before his mother's untimely death.  ( Margaret was a big drinker too)


Wiki says KG5 had respiratory problems all his life and died of coronary thrombosis … hmmm yes but …
I remember his having lung cancer (smoker) , having a lung removed, and never being the same afterwards
He may have died from thrombosis but lung problems were the underlying cause for his early death , not sure where I could look to confirm this since Wiki glosses over his cause of death


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonderful book with lots of natural recipes paired with bits of philosophy. Although I’m not a Buddhist, I agree that beauty begins with the heart.  IMO Kate is the model “for a well-polished heart; a bright-shining heart; a true heart; a straight-aiming heart. “
H&M and many others have hearts filled with angst - it shows on their faces, their words, their actions.

Katie Couric seems to agree 





__





						Book: The Japanese Way of Beauty — Michelle Dominique Anderson
					

Illustrated by the author; pen and ink drawings with wash.  Book published by Birch Lane Press, New York, 1993. Issued in trade paper as INNER PEACE, OUTER BEAUTY, Citadel Press, Carol Publishing, 1995. Published in British, German, Mexican, Brazilian, and Romanian editions.   Commercial




					www.michelledominiqueanderson.com
				





Spoiler: Bright heart


----------



## lill_canele

RAINDANCE said:


> I was diagnosed with RA shortly after the birth of my daughter in 2003 and whilst my disease is under good control with medication, I have experienced joint swelling. Whilst RA is different in severity for everyone, Charles does not look to have RA to me. I think he's on heart meds. I have a brother in law with the same swollen hands and fat fingers and general swollenness all over like Charles, die to a myriad of heart issues and serious meds, plus the rosacea. BIL is over 20 years sober so rosacea is definately not alcohol related. I may be wrong but didn't King George the Queens father die from a heart attack? Just because HMTQ, her mother and Prince Philip have longevity doesn't mean Charles didn't get heart problems from his grandfather.
> Harry however has been a drinker since he was 12 , before his mother's untimely death.  ( Margaret was a big drinker too)




Yes I was also thinking something along the lines of CHF, coronary heart failure, (or meds for cardiac issues/diseases), which could cause edema too but I know nothing about his personal medical history so it's all assumptions.


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> Wiki says KG5 had respiratory problems all his life and died of coronary thrombosis … hmmm yes but …
> I remember his having lung cancer (smoker) , having a lung removed, and never being the same afterwards
> He may have died from thrombosis but lung problems were the underlying cause for his early death , not sure where I could look to confirm this since Wiki glosses over his cause of death


Ah, I was not aware of the lung issues. And I certainly don't know anything about lung disease and odema in the hands 
I did particularly notice the swollen hands in last weks programme about Prince Philip though.
Off to see what Dr Google has to say ...

Back to Harry, I think he may have stopped boozing so much ( Does he have anyone to for a beer with in LA?) but my guess is they are both smoking weed.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Hazz is still a heavy drinker and smoker…
> 
> _Katie Couric spares few from criticism in her new memoir, which she uses to settle scores from her four decades in TV, DailyMail.com can reveal…
> 
> Among the celebrities that Couric takes potshots at are Prince Harry, who she met at a polo match in Brazil during his 'wild-oats sowing phase.'
> 
> She recalled that the smell of cigarettes and alcohol seemed to 'ooze from every pore' in his body…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katie Couric's book sparks outrage as she rips into former colleagues
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com has read the manuscript for Katie Couric's book ' Going There' , which is out in late October and will be accompanied by an 11-city book tour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



From this article they both sound like a lot of fun to hang out with (not).


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Does he have the reputation of being a heavy drinker? Not that that necessarily means anything. Some people prefer to drink alone behind closed doors.


The Queen Mum liked her drink and look how long she lived!


----------



## Chanbal

River thinks that Hazz was unfairly accused of mistreating kids during his visit to Harlem. I see his point, and it's better this way. To be fair to Hazz, here is the video.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> River thinks that Hazz was unfairly accused of mistreating kids during his visit to Harlem. I see his point, and it's better this way. To be fair to Hazz, here is the video.




Here’s my take - certainly I could be wrong.
Yes, as River says, Hazzie pushed the kids away. They simply got too close to his private parts. The arrogant Hazzie couldn’t control a simple photo op. That’s enough for me.

I don’t know Hazzie, only what I’ve read, gleaned from his interviews, and have seen in the photos. I do not ‘see’ a _nice_ guy. By his own admission, he has said he has contempt for people and does not like the hugging. By his own admission, he had drug/alcohol issues.

If he is going to attempt more faux-royal walk-abouts for his videos, then he needs to learn some manners rules. IMO.

ETA: my personal advice, in this day and age, with the troubles his family currently has, I would not recommend hugging strangers‘ children. Ever. For whatever reason.  My guess is he will remove that footage from his faux-documentary.

ETA2:  We are still in a pandemic. Stop with the touching, please. Namaste.


----------



## eunaddict

CeeJay said:


> I answered that already (re: when the PS started), and indeed .. it DID start in her teen years!



Oh, i know you've answered it but (and no offence) a single, unverified source from an internet forum about a timeline that has not been publicly confirmed (even via photos and media that isn't MM friendly) isn't something I factor into my own "reasoning" as it were. That's how we end up with anti-vaxers and anti-maskers, the whole "well, someone on the internet said...."

Like, for me, I know she's had something done because I've seen photos and plastic surgeons have all brought up the same few changes/surgeries over and over again (plus did a rotation with plastics and learned to spot the tell-tale signs), but no one has publicly pinned down exactly when the changes occurred.


----------



## eunaddict

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sometimes I think we're giving Raptor too much credit. Are the royals really sending messages via their outfits or do they just not think about her unless she caused another scandal and live their best lives?



Right! I also assume that in order to have things ordered and tailored etc. outfits are ordered in advance and then planned for events in advance. Like, this suit might have been ordered 2+ weeks ago, way before MM's carbon emissions contributing wannabe-royalitician tour of NYC.


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't see this posted here, AL makes good points.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s my take - certainly I could be wrong.
> Yes, as River says, Hazzie pushed the kids away. They simply got too close to his private parts. The arrogant Hazzie couldn’t control a simple photo op. That’s enough for me.
> 
> I don’t know Hazzie, only what I’ve read, gleaned from his interviews, and have seen in the photos. I do not ‘see’ a _nice_ guy. By his own admission, he has said he has contempt for people and does not like the hugging. By his own admission, he had drug/alcohol issues.
> 
> If he is going to attempt more faux-royal walk-abouts for his videos, then he needs to learn some manners rules. IMO.
> 
> ETA: my personal advice, in this day and age, with the troubles his family currently has, I would not recommend hugging strangers‘ children. Ever. For whatever reason.  My guess is he will remove that footage from his faux-documentary.
> 
> ETA2:  We are still in a pandemic. Stop with the touching, please. Namaste.


Yeah, he doesn't seem to be very kind. The visit to Harlem was clearly to generate photo-ops. Even the choice of the book wasn't age appropriate…


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5208889
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Favorite 10 Jewelry Looks
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex has a penchant for delicate gold pieces—unless diamonds are involved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Considering Maggot's penchant for extravagant clothes (that she can't get tailored), I always thought it ironic that she goes for small jewelry, except for Vladimir tiaras and some diamonds. So it'd make sense that the reason she goes for the delicate stuff is the same reason some celebrities start inexpensive clothing/shoe lines (translation: easy to merch merch merch and make a fortune from the sugars and otherwise wide customer base). Everything she does has a profit motive and she'll sink to any level if it means a buck in her pocket.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## xincinsin

Grande Latte said:


> I agree. Her "look" changed suddenly. She was svelte and fashionable, and chic. There was something about her that was undeniably charming and attractive. But now, everything she puts on (despite how expensive these clothes are) just don't work anymore. I can't describe it. It's not just the weight, but her whole demeanor and aura changed.
> 
> Maybe deep down, she is really depressed.


I don't think she is depressed. Unhappy that her grand plans are not coming to fruition maybe.

My theory: Her look before was more "her style" because the brands associated with her blog offered her items which suited her and the demographic that read her blog. In other words, the items were pre-styled for her. Once she became Harry's SO, suddenly her buffet of choices had a stratospheric upgrade and, without budget constraint or any need to court a sponsor's favour, her natural lack of style showed. She equated royal style with celebrity style, expensive price tag with excellent choice, big is always better. With her stated ambition to modernize the BRF, I can imagine her reluctance to accept any advice as that would be conforming with the status quo. And, as all narcs believe, any error would never be on her part but always someone else to blame. Besides, she had a stylist BFF with equally bad taste, so any advice from the "fuddy duddy" courtiers would definitely be ignored. Her style is going to be iconic too but for the wrong reasons: the Green Hornet dress, bedsheet kaftan, Nurse hat, too tight clothes, wrong season apparel - that's what she will be remembered for.



CeeJay said:


> To me, she has become the epitome of the "*nouveau riche*" moniker, which makes me truly wonder about all these claims that she made tons of money with her Suits role (_and quasi-"modeling" for some of the Toronto retail stores_).  If she had a lot of money then (_and OBVIOUSLY likes designer/brand-name goods_), then why didn't SHE splurge every once in a while and buy some of these items HERSELF???  While I'm not blasting "liking" the designer/brand goods (_heck - isn't that kinda the reason why we all belong to TPF_?!?!) .. it does appear that she has been on a mega shopping spree .. *OR* .. is she getting these goods free with the intention of MERCHING them?
> 
> For me, personally .. the minute I saw her wearing Pippa Small jewelry, and now seeing some other designer brands means that I liked, well .. let's just say that I WILL NOT be buying them anymore.  I know, I may be weird in this aspect, but I DO associate a product with the carrier and probably the biggest disappointment to me, was when the Kartrashians started carrying every single Birkin bag out there .. no more Birkins for me (_well - not that I can afford them anymore anyhow_)!!  I had to (kind of) laugh the other day when another friend who is not a *MISHMOSH *fan said "you know, she's a PWT" (_as in "Poor White Trash", which I then had to remind her that Meghan is a WOC_) .. ooooops!


I associate the product with the carrier too, especially if the brand or designer starts gifting the carrier with items. I remember paying more attention to Lancome when they had Rossellini fronting the brand. Hopefully no one is going to sign Methane on as the face of their brand  Usually brand managers would consider the suitability of a public figure if they need a figurehead. But if Sunshine Sucks has a huge slush fund, they might buy a position for the unroyal one.



lanasyogamama said:


> I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.
> View attachment 5208973


My mum has swollen fingers due to poor circulation. Has had the problem for decades. Eventually, the doctors pinpointed it to very slow developing heart function degeneration. She has a pacemaker now.



Chanbal said:


> River thinks that Hazz was unfairly accused of mistreating kids during his visit to Harlem. I see his point, and it's better this way. To be fair to Hazz, here is the video.



I think they should both just stop using other people's kids as props.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I didn't see this posted here, AL makes good points.




She had to make sure the kids were old enough to pretend to be interested in her boring book out of politeness. By age 11 kids can fake it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


>




5Star article @lanasyogamama !  Thanks so much for posting 
Love   this writer - seems like H&M are headed for Wallis&Ed part deaux


_The British royals, as described to us by British Member of Parliament Chris Price decades ago in a university class he taught, are of “mediocre intelligence.” They’re not terribly bright (think Prince Andrew, known as “Randy Andy” in his own country until it was no longer funny due to his licentious relationship with the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein). They depend on the very bright Buck House bureaucrats (master manipulators, be certain of that) to look after the interests of what they call The Firm._

H&M have lost that level of wisdom and good sense. Plenty of evidence to show they are way below BuckHouseBureaucrats in intelligence, style, choices.  My guess is the Middletons paid close attention to the training Kate went through. They made sure she studied and learned. Smart.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> She had to make sure the kids were old enough to pretend to be interested in her boring book out of politeness. By age 11 kids can fake it.


Now I'm imagining tiny children falling asleep as she reads. They could market her audio version as a soporific aid. A reverse marketing strategy: whereas before you got the audio book free with the print version, now you get the print version free if you buy the sleep-inducing kit (audio + a soft toy version of Archie or Lilibet, stuffed with pleasant-smelling herbs).


----------



## CarryOn2020

MeToo!  I am seriously rethinking my MaxMara coats. Once the celebs and IG’ers poison the look, it is difficult for the brand to recover.

ETA:  Jackie O called it being an _Interchangeable woman, _someone just like everyone else. She worked tirelessly to make sure her style was unique, thus her own.  Her shift dresses seem easily copied but it takes more than the dress to look like JKO, as many actresses have found out.


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> brands associated with her blog offered her items which suited her and the demographic that read her blog.


Mall brands…and not even the ones known to be stylish and trendy.

One ad even bragged about how you would never believe it was that brand. Lol.

The jeans ad was so very awful.  Even worse “acting” than the Tostitos voiceover fiasco.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> MeToo!  I am seriously rethinking my MaxMara coats. Once the celebs and IG’ers poison the look, it is difficult for the brand to recover.
> 
> ETA:  Jackie O called it being an _Interchangeable woman, _someone just like everyone else. She worked tirelessly to make sure her style was unique, thus her own.  Her shift dresses seem easily copied but it takes more than the dress to look like JKO, as many actresses have found out.


I like that term: "Interchangeable woman". I remember there was a journalist whom we were grooming for TV appearances. She had a habit of copying the dressing style of a colleague who was taller and thinner. The stylist who was in charge of her make-over muttered despondently that this car needed a workshop overhaul  (And in the end, she was slowly moved to do behind-the-scenes work. She was an excellent journalist, producer and editor, but not cut out for hosting a programme.)



Genie27 said:


> Mall brands…and not even the ones known to be stylish and trendy.
> 
> One ad even bragged about how you would never believe it was that brand. Lol.
> 
> The jeans ad was so very awful.  Even worse “acting” than the Tostitos voiceover fiasco.


I shall not google any of her ad work...


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> I shall not google any of her ad work...


Best not to. I couldn’t be bothered to look for them to post here either


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


>



Very interesting article.  I knew about Edward's Nazi sympathies, and it makes sense if there was a government plot to dethrone him.  I love this line:  
The British royals, as described to us by British Member of Parliament Chris Price decades ago in a university class he taught, are of “mediocre intelligence.”
That's certainly true (from what I can tell) of Haz.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


>



I almost didn't read this article, but I'm glad I did. It must be embarrassing to have this published in Santa Barbara. I wonder if OW and GK got a copy of it. 

*The real questions are these: Did Prince Harry flee? Or, like his great-great-uncle, was he duped by bigger brains into departing his homeland into exile?*
_
*Meghan has already been vilified in the British press as the consummate golddigger/opportunist who seems bent, one way or another, on becoming the world’s most famous woman. *(A knowledgeable source in London told The Investigator that *perhaps, not understanding the line of succession, Meghan may have thought she could be queen* — or at least a princess — and was further disappointed when she became neither the center of attention nor, in the media’s eyes, the “new Princess Diana.”)  

Although Meghan may be adept at weaving a tight web, she, ultimately, is no match for a royal court and those who run it. *Meghan plays by Hollywood rules, mentored by the likes, at best, of Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King. *

British royalty as an institution, on the other hand, is infinitely more sophisticated and steeped in the tradition of strategy and tactics. They draw inspiration from Machiavelli before breakfast. (We don’t know for certain but suspect that Meghan has not read Niccolo Machiavelli’s treatises and may also not be aware of Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson’s dismal decline into oblivion.)

*Harry, who seems to be (or appears to behave like) a rather inconsequential sidekick to his wife’s oversized ambitions,* has allowed his betrothed, in a very short period, to seriously damage both his royal and military status along with his relationships with nearly everyone within the Royal Family, most notably his father and brother. (If public reports are to be believed, Meghan has done the same with her own family, suggesting this may be a standard cult-like defense mechanism to alienate friends and relatives for the purpose of maintaining maximum control.)
…_
*Meantime, the money they bring into their coffers exploiting the titles they’ve been allowed to retain may, when all is said and done (and upcoming books remaindered), serve only to improve their style of misery.*


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


>



Interesting observations. 
And I agree that Madam Moron would have totally thought she would one day rule the roost as Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I loved the entire article. It‘s refreshing to see this type of _truth_ from H&M’s homeland  
Sarah who had plenty of help from Oprah never understood this. Hazzie is in the same category. 

This caught my eye on the 3rd read :


Chanbal said:


> *British royalty as an institution, on the other hand, is infinitely more sophisticated and steeped in the tradition of strategy and tactics. *They draw inspiration from Machiavelli before breakfast. (We don’t know for certain but suspect that Meghan has not read Niccolo Machiavelli’s treatises and may also not be aware of Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson’s dismal decline into oblivion.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Grande Latte said:


> I agree. Her "look" changed suddenly. She was svelte and fashionable, and chic. There was something about her that was undeniably charming and attractive. But now, everything she puts on (despite how expensive these clothes are) just don't work anymore. I can't describe it. It's not just the weight, but her whole demeanor and aura changed.
> 
> Maybe deep down, she is really depressed.


I've wondered if she is suffering from some degree of postpartum depression, and if they really wanted to do the NY tour right now, before she lost the baby weight. Maybe they were pressured by Netflix into producing something and she had no choice but to go along with it. Just a thought.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I've wondered if she is suffering from some degree of postpartum depression, and if they really wanted to do the NY tour right now, before she lost the baby weight. Maybe they were pressured by Netflix into producing something and she had no choice but to go along with it. Just a thought.


She didn't act like someone pressured to do anything.  She was up front and center the whole time and not holding back, as I suspect someone would if they were being forced to do something.  You'd see some hesitancy sometimes, but with her, she zones in on the camera every time. She's seeking the attention and loving every second.


----------



## creme fraiche

CarryOn2020 said:


> MeToo!  I am seriously rethinking my MaxMara coats. Once the celebs and IG’ers poison the look, it is difficult for the brand to recover.
> 
> ETA:  Jackie O called it being an _Interchangeable woman, _someone just like everyone else. She worked tirelessly to make sure her style was unique, thus her own.  Her shift dresses seem easily copied but it takes more than the dress to look like JKO, as many actresses have found out.


 I am also disappointed the Max Mara is associated with LaMarkle.  Who is going to want to buy a supposedly premium coat when it looks so badly fitted and wrinkled?  

Regarding Jackie O and her comment on style, Audrey Hepburn had a similar thing to say about her style.  Audrey's iconic style was based on items available to everywoman in their closets, thus made her way of dressing seem attainable.  However, she had a certain poise, inner grace, and perfect tailoring which made her simple items much more than the sum of their parts.  Audrey herself has many quotes on sale where she points out that true beauty and style comes from within.  I think Meghan was a happier person when she was moving up in the world ( dating Harry and attaining the goal of marrying him) which is why she looked her best then.  Her dissatisfaction with her position, one attainted, and her incessant hunger for status and position will never allow her to be truely happy and it shows on  the outside.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I've wondered if she is suffering from some degree of postpartum depression, and if they really wanted to do the NY tour right now, before she lost the baby weight. Maybe they were pressured by Netflix into producing something and she had no choice but to go along with it. Just a thought.


I doubt the postpartum depression, but I agree on the pressure. I'm pretty sure they used their buzzwords "hit the ground running" when they sold themselves to Spotify and Netflix, thus clinching those $$$$ deals. When the running became an obvious stumbling and they tiptoed around when they couldn't deliver, there must have been much edging around them at the start, then a more in-your-face approach once the reminders didn't work. Payments would have been structured around deliverables, and very little has been delivered, even if they tried to use the baby as a ploy to extend deadlines by 5 months. They are quite lucky that there are very few invitations to events, otherwise Hazard would go broke buying new outfits for Methane or she would be demanding Sunshine Sachs find her more freebies.


----------



## Aminamina

Good morning, ladies✌I had a great neck exercise nodding in agreement with your many brilliant posts. @xincinsin I always thought of Isabella Rosselini for Lancome was a heavenly choice for the brand. To me she seemed a class above then any royal would be with the sense of natural confidence, class and refinement she projected... Tresor... Lancome))
Here's a bit I found interesting https://www.insider.com/mike-tindall-says-he-once-punched-prince-harry-bodyguards-reaction-2021-9


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I mean, honestly, he still certainly looks disheveled and unclean, so it's not that hard to believe.  Didn't M make him give up smoking?  (One thing I can actually agree with her on!)  I can imagine Haz has also given up deodorant and cologne in favor of the chickens.



OT but I gave up deodorant recently after I stumbled upon a derm saying acne wash prevented body odor (the ones with benzoyl peroxide). It works like a charm and I don't ruin my clothes with white stripes (yes, even the ones that say they won't do that) anymore. I've been using it all summer. I'd probably put a deodorant on top if it was hot and humid and I had to be somewhere just to be safe but so far it holds out about 24 hours, that's longer than any deodorant on me. I got a 5 % (comes in 10 too, but figured I'd try the cheaper version first) and use as per directions for acne treatment (apply on damp skin, let sit 2 to 5 mins - I do 2 -, rinse).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I was diagnosed with RA shortly after the birth of my daughter in 2003 and whilst my disease is under good control with medication, I have experienced joint swelling. Whilst RA is different in severity for everyone, Charles does not look to have RA to me.



Jup, if I should guess I'd say heart or kidneys too.



> I may be wrong but didn't King George the Queens father die from a heart attack? Just because HMTQ, her mother and Prince Philip have longevity doesn't mean Charles didn't get heart problems from his grandfather.



Didn't he die from lung cancer?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA2:  We are still in a pandemic. Stop with the touching, please. Namaste.



Right? Yesterday I spent 20 mins in my dentist's hallway because I opened the door to the waiting room and there were five people already in there and I thought that was a bit, uh, crowded.

In other news, that was my 18th appointment since spring and now I need actual surgery, all due to a sh*tty dentist who didn't do their job a year ago. I am p*****ssed. (new dentist ist awsome but was left to pick up the mess)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I've wondered if she is suffering from some degree of postpartum depression, and if they really wanted to do the NY tour right now, before she lost the baby weight. Maybe they were pressured by Netflix into producing something and she had no choice but to go along with it. Just a thought.



I'd feel bad for her, but don't be a greedy famewh*re who took millions but didn't deliver anything then.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> Good morning, ladies✌I had a great neck exercise nodding in agreement with your many brilliant posts. @xincinsin I always thought of Isabella Rosselini for Lancome was a heavenly choice for the brand. To me she seemed a class above then any royal would be with the sense of natural confidence, class and refinement she projected... Tresor... Lancome))
> Here's a bit I found interesting https://www.insider.com/mike-tindall-says-he-once-punched-prince-harry-bodyguards-reaction-2021-9



No way...Mike did really say that, in public, on Tuesday?



> "At Balmoral, the family are now having the same conversation," Tindall said, seemingly as a joke. "Except the Queen has taken his security away."



The same conversation - what would happen if Harry got punched. 

If he truly did, he just became one of my favourite family members and also...how very telling, hu?


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wonder if he has a medical condition, his fingers are so swollen.
> View attachment 5208973


The rumors started last week that he would be stepping aside to let PW take the throne when Her Majesty passes away. I wonder if he is in good health.


----------



## needlv

I think the entire H and MM tour of New York was to troll William and Catherine.

in 2014, William and Catherine visited NY and did the following:

1.stay in the Carlyle hotel;

2. Catherine visited a school in Harlem with NY’s First Lady Chirlime Mccray

3.  William and Catherine attended an event with Hillary and Chelsea C

4. They visited ground zero

5.  Will spent the afternoon with Bill deblasio then a MOMA fundraiser.









						Prince William and Kate arrive in New York for three-day US visit
					

Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are whisked from JFK to Upper East Side hotel at start of trip including ***** and ******* meetings – and a Nets game




					www.theguardian.com
				




MM and H are trying so hard to be better but they are sad cheap imitations.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Are you serious. Why can't they see how ridiculous they are.


----------



## Lenna.V

They like all of these attendances, events showing up blahblahblah but by their own chosen. They love glamourous and spotlight. They love seeing doing good. Which is really sad. Doing good should be out of our pour of heart because we want to do it without want anything back from that good deed. Maybe that's just me.

Clearly they want to be a new King and Queen. I don't know what level of their delusional is look quite high for me hahaha


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> I think the entire H and MM tour of New York was to troll William and Catherine.
> 
> in 2014, William and Catherine visited NY and did the following:
> 
> 1.stay in the Carlyle hotel;
> 
> 2. Catherine visited a school in Harlem with NY’s First Lady Chirlime Mccray
> 
> 3.  William and Catherine attended an event with Hillary and Chelsea C
> 
> 4. They visited ground zero
> 
> 5.  Will spent the afternoon with Bill deblasio then a MOMA fundraiser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate arrive in New York for three-day US visit
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are whisked from JFK to Upper East Side hotel at start of trip including ***** and ******* meetings – and a Nets game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM and H are trying so hard to be better but they are sad cheap imitations.



Sorely distracted by Rowan Atkinson's nose. All this talk of Methane's nose jobs has sensitized me to noses. I like Rowan's nose


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

I have stopped following this thread because after I came back from a holiday in August, it had moved so fast that I've never been able to catch up

I have seen a few pics of them in NY, she has still to shed quite a bit of weight since Lilibet was born, so I think most of the clothes she wore in NY were wrong.  the first that comes to mind is the short () cream coloured dress which I think looked awful. Also, being a SORT OF royal, and not being a young chicken any more, that dress was definately too short.

I have to say that although I love this thread and find it extremely amusing, often they would make me so angry that I really cannot be bothered with them anymore!


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No way...Mike did really say that, in public, on Tuesday?
> 
> 
> 
> The same conversation - what would happen if Harry got punched.
> 
> If he truly did, he just became one of my favourite family members and also...how very telling, hu?


Well, even Yahoo reposting this "sweet story", so I hope there's some truth to it)


----------



## EverSoElusive

EverSoElusive said:


> Hell yeah. All hail QUEEN KATE
> 
> But when Marklenator reads what we call Kate, tomorrow we'll see a headline with old photos from her suicidal night out in the blue sequin dress.
> 
> View attachment 5208190




Omg! I knew this comparison would happen


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Omg! I knew this comparison would happen



Was this they night MM was supposedly crying her eyes out? Why didn’t she choose one of the appearances where her eyes were actually puffy?


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Interesting observations.
> And I agree that Madam Moron would have totally thought she would one day rule the roost as Queen.


This is the only piece of evidence that she actually didn’t know anything about the RF.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> This is the only piece of evidence that she actually didn’t know anything about the RF.


She knew that Diana would have been Queen (before the divorce), so of course Diana ver.2 would be Queen


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Was this they night MM was supposedly crying her eyes out? Why didn’t she choose one of the appearances where her eyes were actually puffy?



Jup. She cried hysterically while the lights were off, but when they turned back on her m/u was pristine and her eyes neither red nor swollen.

Probably a chicken taco lunch situation.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Omg! I knew this comparison would happen



Camilla and Kate both knocked it out of the ballpark at the Bond premiere. It was an obvious effort on their parts. Well done ladies. One was in silver, the other did gold. TEAM WORK 

Camilla had a subtle elegant new silver spangled dress with a MAJOR diamond brooch - hard to see on the dress, 
and the Van Cleef Alhambra earrings - well we all love those 

Kate - WOW - or in the words of Daniel Craig "jolly lovely", huge effort - major hair updo, bronze makeup, false lashes, contoured makeup, and it all matched the divine dress, yellow gold earrings that were possible fakes (BRF does not own a lot of yellow gold ...)

This reminds me of the state dinner when QEII went all out - during some of the Megxit kerfuffle - QEII wore those EMERALDS to remind all that SHE is Queen

A little bling goes a lkong way when  well done .... MM had $350k in baubles, while K wore possible fakes


----------



## CentralTimeZone

So I read on another blog that in 2014 Will and Kate did a tour of NYC. They stayed at the Carlyle, met with Chelsea *******, toured the WOC memorial, met with children in Harlem and met with the mayor. Did they really just copy the entire tour they did minus the basketball game? I remember that tour now.


----------



## marietouchet

hollieplus2 said:


> So I read on another blog that in 2014 Will and Kate did a tour of NYC. They stayed at the Carlyle, met with Chelsea *******, toured the WOC memorial, met with children in Harlem and met with the mayor. Did they really just copy the entire tour they did minus the basketball game? I remember that tour now.


awesome memory, I had forgotten ... 








						Seen-it-all New York loses its cool over William and Kate
					

Everyone right up to Beyonce and Jay-Z has failed to keep calm and carry on during the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s two-day visit




					www.theguardian.com
				



It is CREEPY how the two tours were so alike ... ewww


----------



## Vintage Leather

marietouchet said:


> Camilla and Kate both knocked it out of the ballpark at the Bond premiere. It was an obvious effort on their parts. Well done ladies. One was in silver, the other did gold. TEAM WORK
> 
> Camilla had a subtle elegant new silver spangled dress with a MAJOR diamond brooch - hard to see on the dress,
> and the Van Cleef Alhambra earrings - well we all love those
> 
> Kate - WOW - or in the words of Daniel Craig "jolly lovely", huge effort - major hair updo, bronze makeup, false lashes, contoured makeup, and it all matched the divine dress, yellow gold earrings that were possible fakes (BRF does not own a lot of yellow gold ...)
> 
> This reminds me of the state dinner when QEII went all out - during some of the Megxit kerfuffle - QEII wore those EMERALDS to remind all that SHE is Queen
> 
> A little bling goes a lkong way when  well done .... MM had $350k in baubles, while K wore possible fakes



Kate’s earrings were made by Onitaa, and featured uncut crystals and gold plating.  She first wore them with a Jenny Packham gown during her and William’stour of Pakistan in 2019. At that time, they were roughly $350

I think it’s because she is a British-born British princess but Kate’s jewelry tends to fall in three categories 1) middle class attainable, 2) wedding gifts, or 3) borrowed from Granny. It’s like she knows how badly she’ll be mocked if she wears a lavish modern piece. (MM of Norway and pre-coronation L of Spain did the same)


----------



## Norm.Core

marietouchet said:


> awesome memory, I had forgotten ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seen-it-all New York loses its cool over William and Kate
> 
> 
> Everyone right up to Beyonce and Jay-Z has failed to keep calm and carry on during the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s two-day visit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is CREEPY how the two tours were so alike ... ewww


They’re copy-cats and unoriginal. They only go maverick when they play victim.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. She cried hysterically while the lights were off, but when they turned back on her m/u was pristine and her eyes neither red nor swollen.
> 
> Probably a chicken taco lunch situation.


And considering how many people were around them, not one person has come forward to clarify it. Strange isn't it?


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Was this they night MM was supposedly crying her eyes out? Why didn’t she choose one of the appearances where her eyes were actually puffy?



Uh huh. The suicidal night where they had a cuddle and had to get ready to attend the event. The lies they tell 




marietouchet said:


> Camilla and Kate both knocked it out of the ballpark at the Bond premiere. It was an obvious effort on their parts. Well done ladies. One was in silver, the other did gold. TEAM WORK
> 
> Camilla had a subtle elegant new silver spangled dress with a MAJOR diamond brooch - hard to see on the dress,
> and the Van Cleef Alhambra earrings - well we all love those
> 
> Kate - WOW - or in the words of Daniel Craig "jolly lovely", huge effort - major hair updo, bronze makeup, false lashes, contoured makeup, and it all matched the divine dress, yellow gold earrings that were possible fakes (BRF does not own a lot of yellow gold ...)
> 
> This reminds me of the state dinner when QEII went all out - during some of the Megxit kerfuffle - QEII wore those EMERALDS to remind all that SHE is Queen
> 
> A little bling goes a lkong way when  well done .... MM had $350k in baubles, while K wore possible fakes



Marklenator wishes she's at the same level as QEII, Camilla, Kate and Sophie but she doesn't even come close


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. She cried hysterically while the lights were off, but when they turned back on her m/u was pristine and her eyes neither red nor swollen.
> 
> Probably a chicken taco lunch situation.


She's missing a great opportunity to either merch that undefeatable brand of cosmetics, or start her own brand promising the same staying power.



hollieplus2 said:


> So I read on another blog that in 2014 Will and Kate did a tour of NYC. They stayed at the Carlyle, met with Chelsea *******, toured the WOC memorial, met with children in Harlem and met with the mayor. Did they really just copy the entire tour they did minus the basketball game? I remember that tour now.


Why bother to think of something new when they both are convinced that, as a whole, the world is easily duped, very forgetful and can't recall their self-contradictions or cosplay or plagiarism? I think those skeletons popping of out the ground near their estate is the universe reminding them that nothing stays hidden forever.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> She's missing a great opportunity to either merch that undefeatable brand of cosmetics, or start her own brand promising the same staying power.
> 
> 
> Why bother to think of something new when they both are convinced that, as a whole, *the world is easily duped, very forgetful and can't recall their self-contradictions or cosplay or plagiarism?* I think those skeletons popping of out the ground near their estate is the universe reminding them that nothing stays hidden forever.



Unfortunately, they may be right about that. They have gotten as far as they have because most people are not paying close attention to them. I'm sure there are plenty of other celebrities doing similar hypocritical things as H&M, but for some reason these two stand out to me in ways I can't explain.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Vintage Leather said:


> Kate’s earrings were made by Onitaa, and featured uncut crystals and gold plating.  She first wore them with a Jenny Packham gown during her and William’stour of Pakistan in 2019. At that time, they were roughly $350
> 
> I think it’s because she is a British-born British princess but Kate’s jewelry tends to fall in three categories 1) middle class attainable, 2) wedding gifts, or 3) borrowed from Granny. It’s like she knows how badly she’ll be mocked if she wears a lavish modern piece. (MM of Norway and pre-coronation L of Spain did the same)


She’s very savvy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> I think the entire H and MM tour of New York was to troll William and Catherine.
> 
> in 2014, William and Catherine visited NY and did the following:
> 
> 1.stay in the Carlyle hotel;
> 
> 2. Catherine visited a school in Harlem with NY’s First Lady Chirlime Mccray
> 
> 3.  William and Catherine attended an event with Hillary and Chelsea C
> 
> 4. They visited ground zero
> 
> 5.  Will spent the afternoon with Bill deblasio then a MOMA fundraiser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate arrive in New York for three-day US visit
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are whisked from JFK to Upper East Side hotel at start of trip including ***** and ******* meetings – and a Nets game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM and H are trying so hard to be better but they are sad cheap imitations.




Definitely they were copying William and Kate, but also Diana. Same hotel, visit an underprivileged school, meet important people, glam it up for a big event. Aren’t we cool?  Charles and Camilla did a similar NYC tour. Of course, both H&M had been there before which makes the whole ordeal more of a scam, full of self-importance.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> *She's missing a great opportunity to either merch that undefeatable brand of cosmetics, or start her own brand promising the same staying power.*
> 
> 
> Why bother to think of something new when they both are convinced that, as a whole, the world is easily duped, very forgetful and can't recall their self-contradictions or cosplay or plagiarism? I think those skeletons popping of out the ground near their estate is the universe reminding them that nothing stays hidden forever.


That made me laugh out loud.


----------



## Chanbal

There is a link on this post for an article about the Saga of the Harkles: New York Adventures. Enjoy!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Camilla and Kate both knocked it out of the ballpark at the Bond premiere. It was an obvious effort on their parts. Well done ladies. One was in silver, the other did gold. TEAM WORK
> 
> Camilla had a subtle elegant new silver spangled dress with a MAJOR diamond brooch - hard to see on the dress,
> and the Van Cleef Alhambra earrings - well we all love those
> 
> Kate - WOW - or in the words of Daniel Craig "jolly lovely", huge effort - major hair updo, bronze makeup, false lashes, contoured makeup, and it all matched the divine dress, yellow gold earrings that were possible fakes (BRF does not own a lot of yellow gold ...)
> 
> This reminds me of the state dinner when QEII went all out - during some of the Megxit kerfuffle - QEII wore those EMERALDS to remind all that SHE is Queen
> 
> A little bling goes a lkong way when  well done .... MM had $350k in baubles, while K wore possible fakes



Camilla’s brooch:
IMO it could use a good cleaning. Those diamonds just aren’t sparkling as much as they should be. 
Note: Camilla has removed the _fringe pendant._ 





__





						Princess Marie Louise Diamond Sunburst Brooch| Royal JeweL History | ROYAL MAGAZIN
					






					royal-magazin.de
				




_Duchess Camilla of Cornwall, wore Princess Marie Louise’s Diamond Sunburst brooch for the first time._

_

_

_This  all diamond fringe brooch features a diamond cluster surrounded by a ray of fringes with a fringe pendant. It was given to Queen Victoria on her Accession, and she lent it to her daughter Princess Christian for the occasion of the tsar’s coronation in 1896.

The Sunburst, was originally shared between the British Princess Helena Victoria and Princess Marie Louise, both granddaughters of Queen Victoria. It was most likely inherited from their mother, Princess Helena of Great Britain, Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein. The Princess Helena Victoria died in 1948 followed by Princess Marie Louise in 1956. The brooch was bequeathed to Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother and was now seen at first time-worn by Camilla the Duchess of Cornwall in 2021._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> There is a link on this post for an article about the Saga of the Harkles: New York Adventures. Enjoy!




*The Fauxmatarians
*


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The Fauxmatarians
> *


This is a wonderful designation @Maggie Muggins 
Congrats @CarryOn2020


----------



## CarryOn2020

The first time Kate wore the earrings:


----------



## jelliedfeels

creme fraiche said:


> Better yet - Adam Driver, who was in the Marines.


Oh yes, he’s hot (a gorgeous Sasquatch) and ex-military, what could have been!


xincinsin said:


> I doubt the postpartum depression, but I agree on the pressure. I'm pretty sure they used their buzzwords "hit the ground running" when they sold themselves to Spotify and Netflix, thus clinching those $$$$ deals. When the running became an obvious stumbling and they tiptoed around when they couldn't deliver, there must have been much edging around them at the start, then a more in-your-face approach once the reminders didn't work. Payments would have been structured around deliverables, and very little has been delivered, even if they tried to use the baby as a ploy to extend deadlines by 5 months. They are quite lucky that there are very few invitations to events, otherwise Hazard would go broke buying new outfits for Methane or she would be demanding Sunshine Sachs find her more freebies.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd feel bad for her, but don't be a greedy famewh*re who took millions but didn't deliver anything then.


I must say, I doubt that she has postpartum depression too as discussing their mental health is so central to their ‘brand’  so I can’t believe she wouldn’t have brought up if it were the case. Well, unless of course, they are only interested in discussing their problems in the context of blaming others for them….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like they didn't fire Sunshine S. The foolish articles keep on coming…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a wonderful designation @Maggie Muggins
> Congrats @CarryOn2020



‘Wait, not me, this is all you @Chanbal.
 It was from your post


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ah, Pakistan. Every single outfit she wore on that tour was stunning. Especially her mosque look...flawless, while someone else went with bare arms, uncombed hair and a sloppily wrapped over said uncombed hair rag. It's what, three years later and I still can't get over the disrespect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they didn't fire Sunshine S. The foolish articles keep on coming…
> View attachment 5209682



Yeah, and they probably had them before them too as they have had their country estate for longer than Harry and Raptor have known each other.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they didn't fire Sunshine S. The foolish articles keep on coming…
> View attachment 5209682


Really absolutely stupid. I had chickens too. My MIL had a rooster that chased me round the yard. As if everyone who had chickens was emulating the fake fowl/foul!


----------



## lanasyogamama

The more I read about that global citizen organization, the more shady they seem.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> There is a link on this post for an article about the Saga of the Harkles: New York Adventures. Enjoy!




Applause to HarryMarkle!  Thank you @Chanbal for posting it.   
 The article spells out some _truths _about the Global Citizen group that I did not know as well as important corrections in H&M’s vaccine pitch.  Perhaps H&M’s support of this group is why they are not being invited to other functions. It also clearly discusses the UN meeting and the confusion that followed that mess. Interesting to note the ANL appeals hearing will be heard on the same day as the Intrepid show - Wednesday, Nov. 10.


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, Pakistan. Every single outfit she wore on that tour was stunning. Especially her mosque look...flawless, while someone else went with bare arms, uncombed hair and a sloppily wrapped over said uncombed hair rag. It's what, three years later and I still can't get over the disrespect.






Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


----------



## lulu212121

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


Yes! Her sloppy look made me gasp when seen next to Kate and Diane.


----------



## lulu212121

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5209671


This wins!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Those Stans are really challenged in the intelligence department, aren't they. I just stumbled upon a posting of Raptor in her red outfit, and the caption said they donated two  of boxes of fruit and vegetables, which in itself is so ridiculous...I was tempted to say "How lovely, spending 100 bucks when your outfit cost 7500" but decided to scroll through comments instead.

So the first comment that catches my eye is this idiot gushing "They are so great. They came to NYC from California via the UK and managed to do more for the community than our officials ever will."

Do these people knock their heads each morning after getting up or what is it. THEY DONATED TWO BOXES OF FRUIT AND VEGGIES.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Really absolutely stupid. I had chickens too. My MIL had a rooster that chased me round the yard. As if everyone who had chickens was emulating the fake fowl/foul!



I don't have chickens but I want to, does that count?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.



How does that happen?  It’s baffling to me. Even those of us not in the public eye try to dress better than that. Sheeesh.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is for US and British wounded soldiers. Invictus, I guess, has given him access to this sort of thing. Jon Bon Jovi builds houses for the wounded vets so he is getting an award.


well bon jovi is Doing Something.  Yay for him


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those Stans are really challenged in the intelligence department, aren't they. I just stumbled upon a posting of Raptor in her red outfit, and the caption said they donated two  of boxes of fruit and vegetables, which in itself is so ridiculous...I was tempted to say "How lovely, spending 100 bucks when your outfit cost 7500" but decided to scroll through comments instead.
> 
> So the first comment that catches my eye is this idiot gushing "They are so great. They came to NYC from California via the UK and managed to do more for the community than our officials ever will."
> 
> Do these people knock their heads each morning after getting up or what is it. THEY DONATED TWO BOXES OF FRUIT AND VEGGIES.



Those fans are impressed by the superficial. They believe H&M talking about helping is the same as if they actually did something to help.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Those fans are impressed by the superficial. They believe H&M talking about helping is the same as if they actually did something to help.


So Ridiculous....I guess people believe what they want to believe


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


Was Pakistan post-Archie? She looks very pudgy in that brown dress.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Camilla’s brooch:
> IMO it could use a good cleaning. Those diamonds just aren’t sparkling as much as they should be.
> Note: Camilla has removed the _fringe pendant._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Marie Louise Diamond Sunburst Brooch| Royal JeweL History | ROYAL MAGAZIN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royal-magazin.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Duchess Camilla of Cornwall, wore Princess Marie Louise’s Diamond Sunburst brooch for the first time._
> 
> _
> View attachment 5209674
> _
> 
> _This  all diamond fringe brooch features a diamond cluster surrounded by a ray of fringes with a fringe pendant. It was given to Queen Victoria on her Accession, and she lent it to her daughter Princess Christian for the occasion of the tsar’s coronation in 1896.
> 
> The Sunburst, was originally shared between the British Princess Helena Victoria and Princess Marie Louise, both granddaughters of Queen Victoria. It was most likely inherited from their mother, Princess Helena of Great Britain, Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein. The Princess Helena Victoria died in 1948 followed by Princess Marie Louise in 1956. The brooch was bequeathed to Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother and was now seen at first time-worn by Camilla the Duchess of Cornwall in 2021._


Even I have a heated ultra sonic jewelry cleaner, so, surely Angela Kelly - the keeper of the bling - has access to one to remove oils and dirt
The brooch is so old that it surely contains old mine cut stones, few facets, not cut per modern standards and also polished by hand  - no mirror finishes 100 years ago
Stones set a 100 years ago wont shine like nouveau bling from Tiffany


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have chickens but I want to, does that count?


I like eggs, does that count?


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


Mamba looks like a bag lady!  "Feed the Birds" is now playing in my head!


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those Stans are really challenged in the intelligence department, aren't they. I just stumbled upon a posting of Raptor in her red outfit, and the caption said they donated two  of boxes of fruit and vegetables, which in itself is so ridiculous...I was tempted to say "How lovely, spending 100 bucks when your outfit cost 7500" but decided to scroll through comments instead.
> 
> So the first comment that catches my eye is this idiot gushing "They are so great. They came to NYC from California via the UK and managed to do more for the community than our officials ever will."
> 
> Do these people knock their heads each morning after getting up or what is it. THEY DONATED TWO BOXES OF FRUIT AND VEGGIES.



You assume these are actual people and not planted bots meant to make it look like they have a bigger fan base than they actually do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Was Pakistan post-Archie? She looks very pudgy in that brown dress.



H&M were visiting the South African mosque.  They didn’t go to Pakistan. William&Kate and Diana did go to Pakistan.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


Dear God, and look at meghans stupid smile … she seems so proud of herself considering she looks like a homeless woman taken off the street and being sent to a home to be fed and washed.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Mamba looks like a bag lady!  "Feed the Birds" is now playing in my head!




Off topic, but when I was a kid I didn't care much about that song because it was sad and I preferred the happy, fun songs. Later as an adult I realized the existence of the Bird Lady was the heart of the story and it became my favorite song in the movie.

A bit of film history, there's a story about how adamant Walt Disney was about who he chose for that very small, but significant, role. He wanted Academy Award-winner Jane Darwell. She was in her 80s by then, had a severe heart condition, and was basically retired. He promised her the scene would be shot in one day and sent out a limo to bring her to and from the studio and made sure she was comfortable and catered to the entire time. I don't know if many fans of old movies of the 30s, 40s, and 50s even recognized it was her sitting on those steps.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those Stans are really challenged in the intelligence department, aren't they. I just stumbled upon a posting of Raptor in her red outfit, and the caption said they donated two  of boxes of fruit and vegetables, which in itself is so ridiculous...I was tempted to say "How lovely, spending 100 bucks when your outfit cost 7500" but decided to scroll through comments instead.
> 
> So the first comment that catches my eye is this idiot gushing "They are so great. They came to NYC from California via the UK and managed to do more for the community than our officials ever will."
> 
> Do these people knock their heads each morning after getting up or what is it. THEY DONATED TWO BOXES OF FRUIT AND VEGGIES.


A few months ago I read a magazine article describing how bots can automatically find a negative review and flood the thread with positives. I assumed Sunshine Sachs had something to do with that, considering how good they are with social media.

When I see some odd positive comment, I just assume it's a bot.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Even I have a heated ultra sonic jewelry cleaner, so, surely Angela Kelly - the keeper of the bling - has access to one to remove oils and dirt
> The brooch is so old that it surely contains old mine cut stones, few facets, not cut per modern standards and also polished by hand  - no mirror finishes 100 years ago
> Stones set a 100 years ago wont shine like nouveau bling from Tiffany


Also, metals were different 100 years ago, the alloys of gold or silver  contained more copper and tarnished more easily
actually a lot of diamonds were set in silver, not white gold , which is more of a modern thing 
nowadays you can buy sterling silver and it never stops shining … 
I was just grimacing at a 30 year old hermes sterling bracelet of mine, it never stops getting grayer, and one has to be resigned to a bit of patina (tarnish) in the cracks, if you don’t like that, get a new one instead 
so, the metal in the older settings tarnishes, it is not dirty, it has patina
that is another reason the diamond brooch seems to have gray fringes


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M were visiting the South African mosque.  They didn’t go to Pakistan. William&Kate and Diana did go to Pakistan.


To the credit of MM, she had a low key recycled wardrobe for the African trip, kudos to her for shopping in her own closet
Whereas Kate’s green outfit was custom for the trip, green being the Pakistani color, and of course it was a shalwar kameez style, selected for modesty, not an outfit she will wear again soon


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> To the credit of MM, she had a low key recycled wardrobe for the African trip, kudos to her for shopping in her own closet
> Whereas Kate’s green outfit was custom for the trip, green being the Pakistani color, and of course it was a shalwar kameez style, selected for modesty, not an outfit she will wear again soon



Is the "recycled wardrobe" the reason Meghan went on her pity binge "Not many people ask me if I'm OK" ?  Poor thing, having to wear  something other than the $120,000 caftan, $75,000 engagement dress, etc, in Africa. She probably had to be talked into dressing down for the trip then figured why not start the ""Poor me" narrative.


----------



## csshopper

Another negative outcome to the faux royal tour of NYC? 

Merching Meegain was criticized for selecting her book to read during the school visit, as opposed to highighting another author's work. But narcissist to the core, she read _The Bench._ 

What lingering interest that might have been present about _The Bench,_ has been obliterated as a large audience had to actually hear the drivel. There are many factors in book sales, nevertheless, safe to say, _The Bench_ is real empty and will not bother to check it again.

In 6 days time, it thudded from #4,175 on the day she read it to #10,423 today.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Merching Meegain was criticized for selecting her book to read during the school visit, as opposed to highighting another author's work. But narcissist to the core, she read _The Bench._
> 
> What lingering interest that might have been present about _The Bench,_ has been obliterated as a large audience had to actually hear the drivel. There are many factors in book sales, nevertheless, safe to say, _The Bench_ is real empty and will not bother to check it again.
> 
> In 6 days time, it thudded from #4,175 on the day she read it to #10,423 today.



I would love to know if the publisher made back what they paid her for that insipid schlock masquerading as a children's book.


----------



## jelliedfeels

With apologies to Neil & Vyv 
	

		
			
		

		
	





EverSoElusive said:


> Omg! I knew this comparison would happen



Talk about troll Instagram - they decided to stir the pot 


xincinsin said:


> Really absolutely stupid. I had chickens too. My MIL had a rooster that chased me round the yard. As if everyone who had chickens was emulating the fake fowl/foul!


Coincidentally so does my MIL. Are roosters easy to train or something?  
I like the idea of chickens but they are so destructive.no


marietouchet said:


> To the credit of MM, she had a low key recycled wardrobe for the African trip, kudos to her for shopping in her own closet
> Whereas Kate’s green outfit was custom for the trip, green being the Pakistani color, and of course it was a shalwar kameez style, selected for modesty, not an outfit she will wear again soon


Normally I’m pro reusing resources however I’m concerned a return of the green hornet or the red LP might cause a outbreak of nausea among the thread.


----------



## CeeJay

lazeny said:


> Both women are beautiful imo. The difference is that Kate is aging gracefully. I like the creases in her eyes, the laugh lines. Like a woman confident in her own skin.
> 
> *Meghan is naturally beautiful too. But her face... changed. She still pretty but it's sort of plastic-ish?*


No, MELODRAMA was not a natural beauty, she got better looking after all the various (and multiple) Plastic Surgery procedures she had in her teens, twenties -AND- thirties .. heck, she's still having "procedures" now.  Hence the reason why you noted "plastic-ish", and if she doesn't stop, she will start looking like that woman in NYC that looked like a Cat!


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


>




Thank you for this! It has some VERY interesting side articles


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Was Pakistan post-Archie? She looks very pudgy in that brown dress.



I think that was South Africa (the Cambridges went to Pakistan), but yes. You know, where they introduced the child that is a private citizen to Desmond Tutu. In front of a gazillion cameras, with his mother digging her nails into his chest when he didn't behave the way she wanted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Even I have a heated ultra sonic jewelry cleaner, so, surely Angela Kelly - the keeper of the bling - has access to one to remove oils and dirt
> The brooch is so old that it surely contains old mine cut stones, few facets, not cut per modern standards and also polished by hand  - no mirror finishes 100 years ago
> Stones set a 100 years ago wont shine like nouveau bling from Tiffany



This, but they glisten beautifully in candlelight. I'm not fond of Old Mine Cut (TOO rustic and, uh, handmade for my taste) but a good Old European or transitional cut? So much soul.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Off topic, but when I was a kid I didn't care much about that song because it was sad and I preferred the happy, fun songs. Later as an adult I realized the existence of the Bird Lady was the heart of the story and it became my favorite song in the movie.
> 
> A bit of film history, there's a story about how adamant Walt Disney was about who he chose for that very small, but significant, role. He wanted Academy Award-winner Jane Darwell. She was in her 80s by then, had a severe heart condition, and was basically retired. He promised her the scene would be shot in one day and sent out a limo to bring her to and from the studio and made sure she was comfortable and catered to the entire time. I don't know if many fans of old movies of the 30s, 40s, and 50s even recognized it was her sitting on those steps.



Oh wow, I didn't know that. Love it. But also, yeah, I find the Bird Lady super sad as well. But I even as an adult also refuse to ever rewatch Dumbo (not even talking about the real life version but the cartoon) because I can't take it. Poor little orphan elephant.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know that. Love it. But also, yeah, I find the Bird Lady super sad as well. But I as an adult refuse to ever rewatch Dumbo (not even talking about the real life version but the cartoon) because I can't take it. Poor little orphan elephant.



Cartoon Dumbo was so cute and I could never understand why everyone was so mean to him. Maybe that's why I don't like clowns to this day.

There are certain Disney movies that traumatize kids. I saw that Tommy Kirk, the actor who played the boy in _Old Yeller_, died this week. I absolutely cannot watch _Old Yeller_ under any circumstances.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know I shouldn’t post this, but…


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Signet rings are different from pinky rings.  Signet rings had a distinct purpose while pinky rings were for fashion. Usually worn by males because males usually conducted business and needed a fast, authentic way to sign documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The History Press | A brief history of signet rings
> 
> 
> Signet rings used to be important cultural items of jewellery and have played a surprisingly significant role in history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thehistorypress.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally signet rings were emblazoned with a family crest and they would frequently be used to stamp, or sign a document. The metal shapes would leave a permanent mark in any soft wax or even clay and this would be placed onto a variety of legal documents. Some of the most important documents in history have been stamped with a signet ring. In its day the stamp of a ring was seen as more authentic than a signature.
> 
> Before the days of the internet and other electronic wizardry it was normal for all the most influential people in the world to have these rings and use them to confirm the authenticity of any document. These rings usually look magnificent but they were designed with a very practical purpose in mind.
> 
> Every ring was unique, the markings usually included the family crest but there would always be a significant mark which personally identified the ring holder. Some of the rings were simple monograms or icons which were associated with the most important families. All rings were reverse engineered to ensure that the design came out properly when they were stamped on a document. Of course, this level of detail also ensured the rings were expensive and very difficult to copy.
> 
> The signet ring was used as long ago as 3500 BC. Records show the people of Mesopotamia used cylindrical seals as marks of authenticity. This is really the origin of the corporate seal which is still used by some companies today.
> 
> By the time of the ancient Egyptians the seal had become attached to a ring and Pharaohs and other important people of the day would wear them to show their position.
> 
> At the beginning of the Minoan period most rings were formed from soft stones or ivory but by the end of this period they were created from harder stones. The bronze age saw a shift to metal rings and they took on their current day appearance. There was even a period when they were considered an art form and many people had collections of them.
> 
> By the Middle Ages, any person of influence had a signet ring. This included all the nobility and they were used to sign all letters and legal documents. In fact, in the fourteenth century King Edward II decreed that all official documents must be signed with the King’s signet ring. The majority of rings dating from these periods were destroyed when their owner died. This is because they were unique and it avoided any possibility of forged documents appearing after a nobleman’s death. Having a ring during this period marked you as a member of the highest class and above other, common men._


Yes, I'm aware of that but, I guess .. because we always worn the Signet Ring on the pinkie finger, we always called it "a Pinkie Ring" .. maybe it's a New England thing?!?!


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> Dear God, and look at meghans stupid smile … she seems so proud of herself considering she looks like a homeless woman taken off the street and being sent to a home to be fed and washed.


that is so mean....but made me LOL


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know that. Love it. But also, yeah, I find the Bird Lady super sad as well. But I even as an adult also refuse to ever rewatch Dumbo (not even talking about the real life version but the cartoon) because I can't take it. Poor little orphan elephant.


I recall crying when I saw dumbo at a child....and Old Yeller...heartbreaking


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Mamba looks like a bag lady!  "Feed the Birds" is now playing in my head!




The inimitable Jane Darwell (aka Ma Joad)


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> With apologies to Neil & Vyv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5209863
> 
> 
> Talk about troll Instagram - they decided to stir the pot
> 
> Coincidentally so does my MIL. Are roosters easy to train or something?
> I like the idea of chickens but they are so destructive.no
> 
> Normally I’m pro reusing resources however I’m concerned a return of the green hornet or the red LP might cause a outbreak of nausea among the thread.



Never EVERRRR... Neil and Vyv are TOO GOOD to be compared to these two. ...   BORING!


----------



## Katel

jelliedfeels said:


> With apologies to Neil & Vyv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5209863
> 
> 
> Talk about troll Instagram - they decided to stir the pot
> 
> Coincidentally so does my MIL. Are roosters easy to train or something?
> I like the idea of chickens but they are so destructive.no
> 
> Normally I’m pro reusing resources however I’m concerned a return of the green hornet or the red LP might cause a outbreak of nausea among the thread.





LittleStar88 said:


> Never EVERRRR... Neil and Vyv are TOO GOOD to be compared to these two. ...   BORING!



 *Neil and Vyv *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I recall crying when I saw dumbo at a child....and Old Yeller...heartbreaking



Never heard of Old Yeller and should not have googled


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Never heard of Old Yeller and should not have googled



It will mess you up.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I recall crying when I saw dumbo at a child....and Old Yeller...heartbreaking


I was shocked! Saw them in the theatre as a kid and couldn't believe they would traumatize us kids like that.

Bambi upset me too and I kept thinking they would surprise us with a happy ending because ... we were children!


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


As a relatively short and somewhat full figured woman I can sympathize with her to some extent, especially when you're constantly compared to your tall and slender SIL and MIL, but there is no excuse for this dreadful look. Where are her stylist/designer friends? Was this post Archie?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> Never EVERRRR... Neil and Vyv are TOO GOOD to be compared to these two. ...   BORING!


Bored, bored, bored, bored, bored.... Whack! 
Rip Rik.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Bambi upset me too and I kept thinking they would surprise us with a happy ending because ... we were children!



Back then they wanted to make sure we learned that life was sometimes unfair and cruel. It's not a lesson anyone wanted.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> Bored, bored, bored, bored, bored.... Whack!
> Rip Rik.



I had this vinyl


----------



## Lodpah

The one with the d





lanasyogamama said:


> I know I shouldn’t post this, but…



The one with the dog face is kind of unnecessary. 

Had a sort of revelation this morning. I pity her. She will never know true happiness. Family time, making memories, albeit in the public eye. The thirst and lust she has for fame and money is actually quite sad.

Now as to her handbag husband he’s still as stupid and dumb as the day he married.  No change there in my opinion. He might be mentally ill, big difference between that mental health issues I think. He’s just dumb and stupid.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I was shocked! Saw them in the theatre as a kid and couldn't believe they would traumatize us kids like that.
> 
> Bambi upset me too and I kept thinking they would surprise us with a happy ending because ... we were children!


oh yes, Bambi was tragic


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> oh yes, Bambi was tragic


My hubby and I were clean out the house abs we came across some kid books. He started humming Rock A Bye Baby and I said: think about the lyrics. Lol he realized it was a horrible song. Just like ring around the roses. About the Black Plague.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> The one with the d
> The one with the dog face is kind of unnecessary.
> 
> Had a sort of revelation this morning. I pity her. She will never know true happiness. Family time, making memories, albeit in the public eye. The thirst and lust she has for fame and money is actually quite sad.
> 
> Now as to her handbag husband he’s still as stupid and dumb as the day he married.  No change there in my opinion. He might be mentally ill, big difference between that mental health issues I think. He’s just dumb and stupid.



Nah, no pity from me.  Agree that H&M’s thir$ty behavior is $ad, and they will not know peace and happiness, but they do not get my pity. Wallis&Ed never had peace or happiness either. Life’s about choices and they’ve made theirs. The best thing we can do is ignore them.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Had a sort of revelation this morning. I pity her. She will never know true happiness. Family time, making memories, albeit in the public eye. The thirst and lust she has for fame and money is actually quite sad.
> 
> Now as to her handbag husband he’s still as stupid and dumb as the day he married.  No change there in my opinion. He might be mentally ill, big difference between that mental health issues I think. He’s just dumb and stupid.



I cannot bring myself to pity her. It’s not like Meghan has never known what it is like to be in a family, she knew her family on both sides and was close to most of them until she wasn’t. And it’s not like she grew up never having anyone who loved her, she had several people who did. She arguably had a better foundation to lead her to happiness than many people do but she rejected that. She decided fame and wealth was what she had to have at all costs. I cannot feel even a little bit sorry for someone so shallow and superficial, especially one who pretends she cares about people and causes solely as a means to her end.

I agree with you about Harry. He is as dumb as a box of rocks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> She's missing a great opportunity to either merch that undefeatable brand of cosmetics, or start her own brand promising the same staying power.
> 
> 
> Why bother to think of something new when they both are convinced that, as a whole, the world is easily duped, very forgetful and can't recall their self-contradictions or cosplay or plagiarism? I think those skeletons popping of out the ground near their estate is the universe reminding them that nothing stays hidden forever.



Nope, a deal could be in the works. Infomercial time 

*EXCLUSIVE: Is Meghan being courted to do an infomercial? She and Harry flew back to LA on a private jet provided by marketing company that made Cindy Crawford the richest supermodel in the world - and repped beauty lines of Jennifer Lopez and Heidi Klum*

*DailyMail.com can reveal Harry and Meghan flew home from NYC on a Dassault Falcon 2000LX luxury jet owned by direct marketing company Guthy-Renker*
*The controversial infomercial company is infamous for its celebrity-endorsed beauty products, including acne treatment Proactiv*
*Cindy Crawford, Jennifer Lopez, and Heidi Klum have all earned millions of dollars with beauty product lines marketed by the firm  *









						Meghan and Harry flew home in private jet owned by Guthy-Renker
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle flew home from NYC on Saturday on a private jet owned by company Guthy-Renker, sparking speculation that Meghan could be planning her own product lines.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I cannot bring myself to pity her. It’s not like Meghan has never known what it is like to be in a family, she knew her family on both sides and was close to most of them until she wasn’t. And it’s not like she grew up never having anyone who loved her, she had several people who did. She arguably had a better foundation to lead her to happiness than many people do but she rejected that. She decided fame and wealth was what she had to have at all costs. I cannot feel even a little bit sorry for someone so shallow and superficial, especially one who pretends she cares about people and causes solely as a means to her end.
> 
> I agree with you about Harry. He is as dumb as a box of rocks.


Oh I agree with you  what I meant by pity is that she’s pitiful and I feel bad that she does not see the big picture. I think narcissistic people like her have no soul thus they are damaged people and can’t feel any compassion or realize the pain they cause other people. Her end will be a lonely and pitiful situation but the fact that she won’t or can’t realize it is pitiful.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nope, a deal could be in the works. Infomercial time
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Is Meghan being courted to do an infomercial? She and Harry flew back to LA on a private jet provided by marketing company that made Cindy Crawford the richest supermodel in the world - and repped beauty lines of Jennifer Lopez and Heidi Klum*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Harry and Meghan flew home from NYC on a Dassault Falcon 2000LX luxury jet owned by direct marketing company Guthy-Renker*
> *The controversial infomercial company is infamous for its celebrity-endorsed beauty products, including acne treatment Proactiv*
> *Cindy Crawford, Jennifer Lopez, and Heidi Klum have all earned millions of dollars with beauty product lines marketed by the firm  *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry flew home in private jet owned by Guthy-Renker
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle flew home from NYC on Saturday on a private jet owned by company Guthy-Renker, sparking speculation that Meghan could be planning her own product lines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So she is going to start merching  stuff via QVC.  What’s next?  Reality tv??

oh how the mighty duke and duchess have fallen.  From royalty to infomercials…


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Off topic, but when I was a kid I didn't care much about that song because it was sad and I preferred the happy, fun songs. Later as an adult I realized the existence of the Bird Lady was the heart of the story and it became my favorite song in the movie.
> 
> A bit of film history, there's a story about how adamant Walt Disney was about who he chose for that very small, but significant, role. He wanted Academy Award-winner Jane Darwell. She was in her 80s by then, had a severe heart condition, and was basically retired. He promised her the scene would be shot in one day and sent out a limo to bring her to and from the studio and made sure she was comfortable and catered to the entire time. I don't know if many fans of old movies of the 30s, 40s, and 50s even recognized it was her sitting on those steps.


I knew that story, which makes the song even more special!  I'd also read that the author of the book didn't want it turned into a movie until she heard this song.  When I was in fourth grade, our music teacher had the grade sing a bunch of Disney songs for our chorus concert (I feel so lucky to have gone to school when they still had music, art and PE!) and remember feeling sad every time we sang this, but not really understanding why.  It's such a hauntingly beautiful song.


----------



## Norm.Core

For me, Hollow and Meager’s reputation is unsalvageable, especially after that horrendous interview with O while Prince Philip is unwell and dying. Ungrateful selfish a-holes. I will never see them as anything but money-chasers and fame whores. I don’t care if they save a thousand puppies from a sinking battleship. They are mal carne... and they totally screwed their kids from being a part of the RBF legacy.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nope, a deal could be in the works. Infomercial time
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Is Meghan being courted to do an infomercial? She and Harry flew back to LA on a private jet provided by marketing company that made Cindy Crawford the richest supermodel in the world - and repped beauty lines of Jennifer Lopez and Heidi Klum*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Harry and Meghan flew home from NYC on a Dassault Falcon 2000LX luxury jet owned by direct marketing company Guthy-Renker*
> *The controversial infomercial company is infamous for its celebrity-endorsed beauty products, including acne treatment Proactiv*
> *Cindy Crawford, Jennifer Lopez, and Heidi Klum have all earned millions of dollars with beauty product lines marketed by the firm  *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry flew home in private jet owned by Guthy-Renker
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle flew home from NYC on Saturday on a private jet owned by company Guthy-Renker, sparking speculation that Meghan could be planning her own product lines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


When she shows up on commercial television peddling products it is definitely time to pull the plug on the royal connection. If she's hired the company is settling for second best, the real Duchess star is not available, she's busy thriving in a loving marriage, mothering 3 adorable children, being an integral and important part of an extended family, and  doing good substantive work (not words) in the areas of early child hood education, health, environment, the arts.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Cartoon Dumbo was so cute and I could never understand why everyone was so mean to him. Maybe that's why I don't like clowns to this day.
> *
> There are certain Disney movies that traumatize kids. *I saw that Tommy Kirk, the actor who played the boy in _Old Yeller_, died this week. I absolutely cannot watch _Old Yeller_ under any circumstances.


I remember thinking as a kid (still do) why so many Disney cartoons had to have a motherless character?  If there was one, it was "the evil stepmother".  Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Pinocchio (this makes this post relevant in this thread, LOL!), Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, Pocahontas, etc., etc.  It's almost as if a child couldn't grow up to shine unless there was something missing.  I always found that odd.  Even Dumbo's mother was locked up!  WTH!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I remember thinking as a kid (still do) why so many Disney cartoons had to have a motherless character?  If there was one, it was "the evil stepmother".  Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Pinocchio (this makes this post relevant in this thread, LOL!), Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, Pocahontas, etc., etc.  It's almost as if a child couldn't grow up to shine unless there was something missing.  I always found that odd.  Even Dumbo's mother was locked up!  WTH!



‘Perhaps it was Disney’s background?









						Why Are All The Disney Moms Either Evil Or Absent?
					

Name your favorite Disney mom. It might be hard since nearly all of them are dead, evil, or completely forgettable.




					www.healthyway.com


----------



## xincinsin

I remember reading about Isaac Asimov's reaction in a PTA meeting when a clueless parent protested about his/her kids being assigned "horrible" sci-fi to read, when they should be reading fairy tales! He shot to his feet and told his fellow parents of the sadism and abuse in pretty fairy tales.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I remember thinking as a kid (still do) why so many Disney cartoons had to have a motherless character?  If there was one, it was "the evil stepmother".  Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Pinocchio (this makes this post relevant in this thread, LOL!), Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, Pocahontas, etc., etc.  It's almost as if a child couldn't grow up to shine unless there was something missing.  I always found that odd.  Even Dumbo's mother was locked up!  WTH!



So true, but I think it is just a device that makes for better storytelling. You are not going to empathize as much with the young protagonists of the stories or worry about the adventures they have if they have mothers around who are lovingly taking care of them.

Even in recent stories like Harry Potter we have an orphan who must face horrible adversity before he hits puberty. The kids in Japanese anime almost never have parents around. The whole premise behind Pokémon is insane. Your kid turns 11 and apparently that’s more than old enough to turn him or her loose in the world to make their own way.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *So true, but I think it is just a device that makes for better storytelling.* *You are not going to empathize as much with the young protagonists of the stories or worry about the adventures they have if they have mothers around who are lovingly taking care of them.*
> 
> Even in recent stories like Harry Potter we have an orphan who must face horrible adversity before he hits puberty. The kids in Japanese anime almost never have parents around. The whole premise behind Pokémon is insane. Your kid turns 11 and apparently that’s more than old enough to turn him or her loose in the world to make their own way.


I guess that's Mamba's line of reasoning too!  Except in her case, it's her evil father.


----------



## bag-mania

Let me bring this back on topic. Which Disney character does Meghan remind you of the most? I still say Vanessa from The Little Mermaid.


----------



## purseinsanity

Queen Narissa from Enchanted.  Evil dagger eyes, obvious nose job, and ambiguous race   :


----------



## xincinsin

I'd say Maleficent, but that villainess had STYLE!
Methane is heading down Cruella's path - already got the dog abuse down pat.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> I cannot bring myself to pity her. It’s not like Meghan has never known what it is like to be in a family, she knew her family on both sides and was close to most of them until she wasn’t. And it’s not like she grew up never having anyone who loved her, she had several people who did. She arguably had a better foundation to lead her to happiness than many people do but she rejected that. She decided fame and wealth was what she had to have at all costs. I cannot feel even a little bit sorry for someone so shallow and superficial, especially one who pretends she cares about people and causes solely as a means to her end.
> 
> I agree with you about Harry. He is as dumb as a box of rocks.


No pity from me for someone who intentionally told lies to inflict pain, humiliation and try to mar the Royal Family’s reputation. Shame on both of them.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I'd say Maleficent, but that villainess had STYLE!
> Methane is heading down Cruella's path - already got the dog abuse down pat.


LOL!  I was going to say Maleficent, but then after the movie, you see deep down she's actually good, and that alone killed it for me.  MM is no Maleficent, since I really think MM is rotten at her core.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Witch hunt in progress in Monte$hito - who is the leaker?   Who??
No one was supposed to know our private jet arrived. Whooooo leaked?










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take private jet after climate change event
					

Harry has been called out in the past and has claimed he “occasionally” flies private to “ensure that my family are safe.”




					pagesix.com
				




ETA: uh, I thought they walked back to Cali, didn’t you?


----------



## Katel

I vote Cruella also.

We should feel compassion for them because they’re mentally/emotionally ill. They’re handicapped in those  departments.


Lodpah said:


> My hubby and I were clean out the house abs we came across some kid books. He started humming Rock A Bye Baby and I said: think about the lyrics. Lol he realized it was a horrible song. Just like ring around the roses. About the Black Plague.





purseinsanity said:


> I remember thinking as a kid (still do) why so many Disney cartoons had to have a motherless character?  If there was one, it was "the evil stepmother".  Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Pinocchio (this makes this post relevant in this thread, LOL!), Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, Pocahontas, etc., etc.  It's almost as if a child couldn't grow up to shine unless there was something missing.  I always found that odd.  Even Dumbo's mother was locked up!  WTH!


There’s always been a narrative being seeded  - and it’s not for happiness, peace and joy.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> LOL!  I was going to say Maleficent, but then after the movie, you see deep down she's actually good, and that alone killed it for me.  MM is no Maleficent, since I really think MM is rotten at her core.



But that was the revisionist Maleficent, created as a vehicle for Angelina Jolie. Meghan may be more like the original, pure evil for its own sake, Maleficent.
Although, like xincinsin said, she had way too much style.


----------



## CarryOn2020

There are so many, tough choice, but I nominate Yzma 
	

		
			
		

		
	












						The 12 Zodiac Signs As Disney Villains
					

The best part of Disney movies are the villains. They usually have the funniest lines, the most complex motivations (sometimes we’re on their side?), the most iconic costumes and the best song in the whole...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are so many, touch choice, but I nominate Yzma
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5210200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 12 Zodiac Signs As Disney Villains
> 
> 
> The best part of Disney movies are the villains. They usually have the funniest lines, the most complex motivations (sometimes we’re on their side?), the most iconic costumes and the best song in the whole...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Ha! That will be Meghan in 20 years and 10 more surgeries.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Wait, not me, this is all you @Chanbal.
> It was from your post


You… You were the one that recognize its potential.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Applause to HarryMarkle!  Thank you @Chanbal for posting it.
> The article spells out some _truths _about the Global Citizen group that I did not know as well as important corrections in H&M’s vaccine pitch.  Perhaps H&M’s support of this group is why they are not being invited to other functions. It also clearly discusses the UN meeting and the confusion that followed that mess. Interesting to note the ANL appeals hearing will be heard on the same day as the Intrepid show - Wednesday, Nov. 10.


It's a great article. An interesting comment on the "clothes that highlighted the bumps and padding" to pass the message of a postpartum stage.


----------



## rose60610

Informercial time?  Why not? Meghan Make-a-Buck is up for ANYTHING! Remember, Sarah Ferguson hawked Weight Watchers.  I can see how Meghan believes her beauty made a world famous prince fall in love with her so why not leverage cosmetics and fragrance? J Lo, Paris Hilton, and so many others made fortunes off their perfumes. I'd be stunned if she didn't go that route. I'd bet a hundred bucks her perfume bottle will have a tiara cap. And purple glass  .  Can luggage and yoga pants be far behind?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> But that was the revisionist Maleficent, created as a vehicle for Angelina Jolie. Meghan may be more like the original, pure evil for its own sake, Maleficent.
> Although, like xincinsin said, she had way too much style.
> 
> View attachment 5210191


This Maleficent is too naturally beautiful.


----------



## rose60610

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.



To me, this sloppy outfit and the red one she wore in NY prove the clothes were "borrowed", never tailored, so she could return them and get her $ back. She'd be better off buying clothes from Target, though she wouldn't want to pay for those, either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's a great article. An interesting comment on the "clothes that highlighted the bumps and padding" to pass the message of a postpartum stage.



When I read that sentence, I was not at all certain what he meant.
Is he saying her NYC clothes were padded?  

_Like the day before, TW left her warm coat  (on a hot and sunny day) open on purpose, and wore clothes that highlighted the bumps and padding. This seemed to be an obvious attempt to send a message to the public that she was postpartum, but what was noticeable was that the clothes look wrinkled and creased. Most sane mothers don’t need to prove anything after giving birth._


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nope, a deal could be in the works. Infomercial time
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Is Meghan being courted to do an infomercial? She and Harry flew back to LA on a private jet provided by marketing company that made Cindy Crawford the richest supermodel in the world - and repped beauty lines of Jennifer Lopez and Heidi Klum*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Harry and Meghan flew home from NYC on a Dassault Falcon 2000LX luxury jet owned by direct marketing company Guthy-Renker*
> *The controversial infomercial company is infamous for its celebrity-endorsed beauty products, including acne treatment Proactiv*
> *Cindy Crawford, Jennifer Lopez, and Heidi Klum have all earned millions of dollars with beauty product lines marketed by the firm  *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry flew home in private jet owned by Guthy-Renker
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle flew home from NYC on Saturday on a private jet owned by company Guthy-Renker, sparking speculation that Meghan could be planning her own product lines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The video below from 9/23 mentions about an astronomical deal related to beauty products that was offered to the Harkles. According to the video it will bring them a lot of money and PR. So be prepared to have them advertising the Harkles secret shampoo or something like that…


----------



## Vintage Leather

Lodpah said:


> The one with the d
> The one with the dog face is kind of unnecessary.
> 
> Had a sort of revelation this morning. I pity her. She will never know true happiness. Family time, making memories, albeit in the public eye. The thirst and lust she has for fame and money is actually quite sad; from a palace to a mortgaged McMansion in a mud plane
> 
> Now as to her handbag husband he’s still as stupid and dumb as the day he married.  No change there in my opinion. He might be mentally ill, big difference between that mental health issues I think. He’s just dumb and stupid.


I will say, I usually come to this thread when my own life is a bit of a $hitshow. There’s something vaguely comforting about the knowledge that no matter how things go, I haven’t fallen as far or as hard as the despicable duo


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> But that was the revisionist Maleficent, created as a vehicle for Angelina Jolie. Meghan may be more like the original, pure evil for its own sake, Maleficent.
> Although, like xincinsin said, she had way too much style.
> 
> View attachment 5210191


I must say, I think all of these villainesses have too much panache and personality to be compared to the gruesome twosome. Especially the wonderful Yzma.

I think if they were villains they are generic henchmen like Ursula’s eels.

Even  better…. Colonist soldiers #7 & #8 from Pocahontas…all they do is snatch & call things their own while insisting they are the voices of the common good.


CarryOn2020 said:


> When I read that sentence, I was not at all certain what he meant.
> Is he saying her NYC clothes were padded?
> 
> _Like the day before, TW left her warm coat  (on a hot and sunny day) open on purpose, and wore clothes that highlighted the bumps and padding. This seemed to be an obvious attempt to send a message to the public that she was postpartum, but what was noticeable was that the clothes look wrinkled and creased. Most sane mothers don’t need to prove anything after giving birth._


I think the idea is she’s wearing stomach and hip pads (rounded bits of foam held in place with tights underneath her clothes like drag queens wear) to give us the illusion she’s gained weight in her pelvis area. They do say your hips widen after having babies and never go back.



Vintage Leather said:


> I will say, I usually come to this thread when my own life is a bit of a $hitshow. There’s something vaguely comforting about the knowledge that no matter how things go, I haven’t fallen as far or as hard as the despicable duo


I’m sorry things aren’t going well as you say at least you haven’t gone full moroncito. 
I like to come here to cheer up after reading the news.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like there is an upcoming article from Montecito claiming that Kate owes her confidence to Mrs. Hypocrisy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Irrevocably? Oh, really?
 








						Royal Family braces for 'powerful revelations' in 'intimate' new book
					

Magazine editor Tina Brown's The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil will be published in April - just months before Prince Harry's tell-all memoir.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*Buckingham Palace braces for 'powerful revelations' about the Royal Family in 'intimate' new book*

*Tina Brown's book promises to 'irrevocably change' perception of Royal Family *
*It will be published just months before Prince Harry's tell all memoir, in April*
*Book entitled The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor – The Truth And The Turmoil, will track the Queen's 'loosening grip' on the monarchy*

ETA:  sending best wishes to @Vintage Leather


----------



## lazeny

jelliedfeels said:


> I think the idea is she’s wearing stomach and hip pads (rounded bits of foam held in place with tights underneath her clothes like drag queens wear) to give us the illusion she’s gained weight in her pelvis area. They do say your hips widen after having babies and never go back.



I initially thought it was Spanx, but the wrong kind? Like  instead of a body suit or a waist cincher, she wore
briefs hence the visible muffin top. Also perhaps she has Diastasis Recti, that pooch will be very difficult to get rid of. Especially she gave birth at an older age.


----------



## Chanbal

This commentator is hilarious. MM reads a book to kids in Harlem, what did they do wrong to deserve it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It's a great article. An interesting comment on the "clothes that highlighted the bumps and padding" to pass the message of a postpartum stage.



Yeah, Lady CC mentioned something similar in her latest video from yesterday. In fact, she said some people believe just like with the fake belly she might have enhanced some fat pads. Dunno. Raptor is super vain but also super insane.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> To me, this sloppy outfit and the red one she wore in NY prove the clothes were "borrowed", never tailored, so she could return them and get her $ back. She'd be better off buying clothes from Target, though she wouldn't want to pay for those, either.



That does not explain the uncombed hair though, or didn't they include a comb in her borrowed package that day?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like there is an upcoming article from Montecito claiming that Kate owes her confidence to Mrs. Hypocrisy.




I'll go with no. But what do I know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Irrevocably? Oh, really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family braces for 'powerful revelations' in 'intimate' new book
> 
> 
> Magazine editor Tina Brown's The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil will be published in April - just months before Prince Harry's tell-all memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Buckingham Palace braces for 'powerful revelations' about the Royal Family in 'intimate' new book*
> 
> *Tina Brown's book promises to 'irrevocably change' perception of Royal Family *
> *It will be published just months before Prince Harry's tell all memoir, in April*
> *Book entitled The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor – The Truth And The Turmoil, will track the Queen's 'loosening grip' on the monarchy*
> 
> ETA:  sending best wishes to @Vintage Leather


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I think the idea is she’s wearing stomach and hip pads (rounded bits of foam held in place with tights underneath her clothes like drag queens wear) to give us the illusion she’s gained weight in her pelvis area. They do say your hips widen after having babies and never go back.



It never occurred to me that her chubbiness was fake.  They are really desperate to do $hit like that.
Complete loss of credibility. The trust was already on a slippery slope. If it was padding, they are off the edge.  What slobs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, she has gained, you saw it in her naked legs. But eh, I also think she carried Archie but enhanced her bump because she's a crazy attention wh*re.


----------



## xincinsin

I don't think she was artificially padded. But I still have doubts if Lil Bit was born of her body. As so many of us have mentioned, there can be a multitude of reasons why she has weight gain.


----------



## Lenna.V

Her upper body much shorter than her down part, so she doesn't have much waist. I don't know how to put it in English. This kind of waist always look awkward when you gained weight.


----------



## Grande Latte

EverSoElusive said:


> Omg! I knew this comparison would happen




But you see even when pregnant, Meghan was very pretty in that photo, her face was beautiful. But now not anymore.

PS: Kate looked stunning in that gold outfit. Like real queen.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Grande Latte said:


> But you see even when pregnant, Meghan was very pretty in that photo, her face was beautiful. But now not anymore.
> 
> PS: Kate looked stunning in that gold outfit. Like real queen.



While my original post that you quoted was about the sequin dress comparison, I do feel that her best face was during her Suits period up until when she was pregnant with Archie. She should have stopped messing with her face but like some people that get their face done, she can't stop and her face is going to just get worse  

She may just end up looking like Jocelyn Wildenstein


----------



## Annawakes

Y'all, it’s so obvious.  She wears fat pads for now and then BOOM!!!!!!  She’s shilling a miracle natural diet consisting of solely lemons and farm fresh eggs.  It’s amazing!!!!  She’s never looked better!!!!!


----------



## xincinsin

Lemon olive oil cakes and organic eggs from rescue chickens!

Every cake made with love and compassion!
The yolks are uplifting!


----------



## Aimee3

The Puppeteer is no stranger to plastic surgery as we have seen in this thread with photos for proof.  I doubt she’ll stop at her neck.  If her body has changed for whatever weight gain, I’m sure she’ll just have it sucked out!
As for Puppeteer shampoo…no one here likes her straggly hair, tendrils, etc and the Puppet is very bald.  Can’t say anyone would want to emulate them.  If they become the face of an already out there shampoo brand, since so many people don’t like them, sales could tank!
Now slightly OT, everyone raves about Kate’s hair.  If any brand could get Kate as spokesperson, they’d make a ton of money.
Funny when I was in high school people would stop me all the time to find out what shampoo I used. (Read thick and glossy look).  The thing is as soon as I’d finish a bottle of shampoo, I’d be bored with it and buy a completely different brand.  I’m of the mind that it really doesn’t matter for most people what shampoo they use; results will be the same!


----------



## EverSoElusive

May I present to you the REAL queen  

I love the slide where QEII was looking at a scrapbook gifted to her by a little girl. She said she shall look at it in the car


----------



## rose60610

Annawakes said:


> Y'all, it’s so obvious.  She wears fat pads for now and then BOOM!!!!!!  She’s shilling a miracle natural diet consisting of solely lemons and farm fresh eggs.  It’s amazing!!!!  She’s never looked better!!!!!



I was thinking the same sort of thing. She will start her own weight loss line and use these photos as "proof" that her plan/diet works. Why not? Do the whole makeover! Cosmetics, perfume, diet, shampoo--KA-CHING!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> I was thinking the same sort of thing. She will start her own weight loss line and use these photos as "proof" that her plan/diet works. Why not? Do the whole makeover! Cosmetics, perfume, diet, shampoo--KA-CHING!


If they weren't keeping the kids under wraps, they would come up with junior lines for the products too.


----------



## rose60610

It would also explain the whole weird trip to NY and the UN. She wasn't invited, she just made a couple of calls, and crashed. Complete with more sloppy outfits.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> If they weren't keeping the kids under wraps, they would come up with junior lines for the products too.



Stay tuned! The sugars would love nothing more than little princess/duchess dresses "designed" by Ms. I-Don't-Wear-Anything-That-Fits. And clothes for Dukes to be. You know, promote clothing that symbolizes a family they claim is racist.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lazeny

Lenna.V said:


> Her upper body much shorter than her down part, so she doesn't have much waist. I don't know how to put it in English. This kind of waist always look awkward when you gained weight.



I know exactly what you mean. I have a similar body type with an unfortunate chicken legs, plus I also have manly shoulders. I've had two kids too, so my waist is just weird. 

Meghan can easily hire an excellent tailor. It's so frustrating looking at her clothes. There are many women with fewer means than her in Hollywood who can wear clothes that are tailored and appropriate for their body type. It's like she's looking at Pinterest fashion boards and will put on what fancies her even if it won't look good on her. And the monochromatic neutral look is so Kim Kardashian.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5210501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It never occurred to me that her chubbiness was fake.  They are really desperate to do $hit like that.
> Complete loss of credibility. The trust was already on a slippery slope. If it was padding, they are off the edge.  What slobs.


Lord have mercy … look at her shamelessly carrying around that empty folder and empty laptop.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

rose60610 said:


> I was thinking the same sort of thing. She will start her own weight loss line and use these photos as "proof" that her plan/diet works. Why not? Do the whole makeover! Cosmetics, perfume, diet, shampoo--KA-CHING!


She’s shameless enough to do that.
Plus, she’s in the US where the PC-ness is to the max … so she’s gonna have a field day when people point out how ugly and ridiculous she looks.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lazeny said:


> I know exactly what you mean. I have a similar body type with an unfortunate chicken legs, plus I also have manly shoulders. I've had two kids too, so my waist is just weird.
> 
> Meghan can easily hire an excellent tailor. It's so frustrating looking at her clothes. There are many women with fewer means than her in Hollywood who can wear clothes that are tailored and appropriate for their body type. It's like she's looking at Pinterest fashion boards and will put on what fancies her even if it won't look good on her. And the monochromatic neutral look is so Kim Kardashian.


She doesn’t want to hire a tailor because it’s been said that these clothes are borrowed to her by designers so she can merch them then return them.


----------



## Chanbal

America has 19 million veterans and chooses Harry to give awards…TC uses some rough words, but unfortunately, he makes a valid point. 
What's going on in the world nowadays? Are we going insane? I feel like packing and move to a news-free place.  



Spoiler: Trevor Coult


----------



## bag-mania

I will never believe Meghan would use padding to make herself look fat. She sees herself as being flawless and she wants to make sure everyone else believes that as well. Marketing a diet and weight loss company? That's admitting you are flawed! Leave that for someone like Aunt Fergie to do, not for a star like Meghan!

She's getting a little old for launching a cosmetic line. Doesn't mean someone won't try it. Seems like lots of big companies can't wait to throw money at them.


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> Y'all, it’s so obvious.  She wears fat pads for now and then BOOM!!!!!!  She’s shilling a miracle natural diet consisting of solely lemons and farm fresh eggs.  It’s amazing!!!!  She’s never looked better!!!!!


The same for Hazz's hair… He can be the next model for hair growth products (after behind the scenes hair implants).


----------



## Grande Latte

Aimee3 said:


> The Puppeteer is no stranger to plastic surgery as we have seen in this thread with photos for proof.  I doubt she’ll stop at her neck.  If her body has changed for whatever weight gain, I’m sure she’ll just have it sucked out!
> As for Puppeteer shampoo…no one here likes her straggly hair, tendrils, etc and the Puppet is very bald.  Can’t say anyone would want to emulate them.  If they become the face of an already out there shampoo brand, since so many people don’t like them, sales could tank!
> Now slightly OT, everyone raves about Kate’s hair.  If any brand could get Kate as spokesperson, they’d make a ton of money.
> Funny when I was in high school people would stop me all the time to find out what shampoo I used. (Read thick and glossy look).  The thing is as soon as I’d finish a bottle of shampoo, I’d be bored with it and buy a completely different brand.  I’m of the mind that it really doesn’t matter for most people what shampoo they use; results will be the same!



Hair is genetics. Shampoo matters very little. You're a very lucky girl.


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I will never believe Meghan would use padding to make herself look fat. She sees herself as being flawless and she wants to make sure everyone else believes that as well. Marketing a diet and weight loss company? That's admitting you are flawed! Leave that for someone like Aunt Fergie to do, not for a star like Meghan!
> 
> She's getting a little old for launching a cosmetic line. Doesn't mean someone won't try it. Seems like lots of big companies can't wait to throw money at them.



Perhaps. On the other hand, she worships $$$$$$$, I think enough to the extent that she'll do anything for a buck. Accuse the living BRF of racism? Check. Bring up the BRF history of colonialism? Check. Then lie about not knowing anything about the Commonwealth (despite a degree in Int'l Relations and Commonwealth flowers embroidered into her wedding veil? ) Check. Lie about getting married three days before the royal wedding? Check. Beeyatch that the BRF isn't paying for their security? Check. Slamming the BRF then trying to take Lilibet back for Chrisening? Check. Doing a ton a Zoom calls and showing up uninvited when she claims she wants privacy? Check. Netflix and Spotify? Check. Oatly? Check. Idiotic 40th birthday requests, the cemetery and other disaster photo ops? Check.

This psycho idiot has burned every bridge there is to burn and cries "victim!". Our country has gotten effed up enough to still have enough sugars who still side with her. Also, I think most people don't care about the royals. They see M as a famous pretty lady and will just buy products. I think she'd make a fortune with makeup and diet plans . Gaining weight ingratiates her to most people, like "Oooooh, if Duchess M gained weight I can soooo relate. And look! She admitted it and did the perfect diet and make up to look stunning again! Sign me up!" ( In reality it's called having a personal trainer, cook, and makeup artist and using every fake prop to make her look successful.)  Look how many people can't stand the Kardashians, yet their various cosmetic lines fly off the shelves. The difference between the K fam and Meghan is that the K's basically invite criticism and laugh all the way to the bank. Meghan will cry "racism" and laugh all the way to the bank.


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> Perhaps. On the other hand, she worships $$$$$$$, I think enough to the extent that she'll do anything for a buck. Accuse the living BRF of racism? Check. Bring up the BRF history of colonialism? Check. Then lie about not knowing anything about the Commonwealth (despite a degree in Int'l Relations and Commonwealth flowers embroidered into her wedding veil? ) Check. Lie about getting married three days before the royal wedding? Check. Beeyatch that the BRF isn't paying for their security? Check. Slamming the BRF then trying to take Lilibet back for Chrisening? Check. Doing a ton a Zoom calls and showing up uninvited when she claims she wants privacy? Check. Netflix and Spotify? Check. Oatly? Check. Idiotic 40th birthday requests, the cemetery and other disaster photo ops? Check.
> 
> This psycho idiot has burned every bridge there is to burn and cries "victim!". Our country has gotten effed up enough to still have enough sugars who still side with her. Also, I think most people don't care about the royals. They see M as a famous pretty lady and will just buy products. I think she'd make a fortune with makeup and diet plans . Gaining weight ingratiates her to most people, like "Oooooh, if Duchess M gained weight I can soooo relate. And look! She admitted it and did the perfect diet and make up to look stunning again! Sign me up!" ( In reality it's called having a personal trainer, cook, and makeup artist and using every fake prop to make her look successful.)  Look how many people can't stand the Kardashians, yet their various cosmetic lines fly off the shelves. The difference between the K fam and Meghan is that the K's basically invite criticism and laugh all the way to the bank. Meghan will cry "racism" and laugh all the way to the bank.


Slow clap!


----------



## CeeJay

eunaddict said:


> Oh, i know you've answered it but (and no offence) a single, unverified source from an internet forum about a timeline that has not been publicly confirmed (even via photos and media that isn't MM friendly) isn't something I factor into my own "reasoning" as it were. That's how we end up with anti-vaxers and anti-maskers, the whole "well, someone on the internet said...."
> 
> Like, for me, I know she's had something done because I've seen photos and plastic surgeons have all brought up the same few changes/surgeries over and over again (plus did a rotation with plastics and learned to spot the tell-tale signs), but no one has publicly pinned down exactly when the changes occurred.


No offense taken, but .. not sure if you remember this, the information that I got/get is from very good friends of mine who knew Meghan and her Father (Thomas) personally .. as their son was her male counterpart in many of their theater productions.  He was the one who put dates to her early procedures in her teen years and then his mother (my good friend) put the dates around her procedures during/after college when she started pursuing her "career" (use that term very lightly -  ) in show-BIZ. Are they exact?!? .. well, no .. and that's why I don't put "dates of truth" [sorry - couldn't resist ]!!!


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sometimes I think we're giving Raptor too much credit. Are the royals really sending messages via their outfits or do they just not think about her unless she caused another scandal and live their best lives?


I dont think the royals send messages to H&M via outfits, I think the BRF just try to do their thing as best as they can, they have to circumnavigate a lot of UK stuff first eg trucking


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Perhaps. On the other hand, she worships $$$$$$$, I think enough to the extent that she'll do anything for a buck. Accuse the living BRF of racism? Check. Bring up the BRF history of colonialism? Check. Then lie about not knowing anything about the Commonwealth (despite a degree in Int'l Relations and Commonwealth flowers embroidered into her wedding veil? ) Check. Lie about getting married three days before the royal wedding? Check. Beeyatch that the BRF isn't paying for their security? Check. Slamming the BRF then trying to take Lilibet back for Chrisening? Check. Doing a ton a Zoom calls and showing up uninvited when she claims she wants privacy? Check. Netflix and Spotify? Check. Oatly? Check. Idiotic 40th birthday requests, the cemetery and other disaster photo ops? Check.
> 
> This psycho idiot has burned every bridge there is to burn and cries "victim!". Our country has gotten effed up enough to still have enough sugars who still side with her. Also, I think most people don't care about the royals. They see M as a famous pretty lady and will just buy products. I think she'd make a fortune with makeup and diet plans . Gaining weight ingratiates her to most people, like "Oooooh, if Duchess M gained weight I can soooo relate. And look! She admitted it and did the perfect diet and make up to look stunning again! Sign me up!" ( In reality it's called having a personal trainer, cook, and makeup artist and using every fake prop to make her look successful.)  Look how many people can't stand the Kardashians, yet their various cosmetic lines fly off the shelves. The difference between the K fam and Meghan is that the K's basically invite criticism and laugh all the way to the bank. Meghan will cry "racism" and laugh all the way to the bank.


Has anyone heard a follow up to the 40+40 campaign ?


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Has anyone heard a follow up to the 40+40 campaign ?


Oh yes, definitely.  I've also heard follow ups on the Buttercup stuff, Haz's "Chief Impact Office" career, as well as those shelters in Texas and India that are thriving, all thanks to these miraculous beings put on earth to save us all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Grande Latte said:


> Hair is genetics. Shampoo matters very little. You're a very lucky girl.


Thank you Grande Latte!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Has anyone heard a follow up to the 40+40 campaign ?



Not looking good…

Article form 9/9, may be too soon to tell? 









						Did Meghan Markle’s 40x40 Project Fail? Here's What This Royal Commentator Claim
					

Meghan Markle's 40x40 program, which aimed to have prominent women help those looking for work, was backed by a number of well-known figures.




					www.latintimes.com
				




_"It's completely bombed. There was a hashtag '#40x40', if you look on Instagram, there's [minimal] movement since Meghan's birthday," YouTuber Murky Meg said on a vlog.
"Meghan thought all these celebrities that she has sent out this merch to – and influencers – would wear the shirts on Instagram, and basically flood it with the hashtags and effectively advertise the merchandise," the commentator mentioned.
"This didn't happen. Instagram was not flooded with all this merchandise at all," Murky Meg added.
An online tabloid said, citing the YouTuber, said there was a flurry of activity surrounding the project's introduction. Many female company owners have put into practice helping women return to work.
The Duchess of Sussex, while announcing the scheme, emphasized the significance of assisting women who have lost their jobs worldwide due to COVID-19.
The said 40x40 project comes after Meghan and Prince Harry was reportedly left out of former US President Barack *****'s 60th birthday celebrations.
Angela Levin, a royal specialist, said that the couple "won't get over" the alleged snub._


----------



## CarryOn2020

World Central Kitchen update as of Aug, 2021:









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle donation helps Haiti earthquake victims
					

The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, who are currently living in their £11million mansion in California, donated to the World Central Kitchen (WCK) via their Archewell Foundation.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Interesting article with a mention of the Haz beens.








						A Princess Is Set to Be Wed. But It’s No Fairy Tale. (Published 2021)
					

Princess Mako of Japan will forgo the trappings of royal nuptials when she marries her college boyfriend, a commoner, after a long and arduous engagement.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I agree 100 %, but isn't it unusual for a respected royal reporter to openly say what we all think?


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Informercial time?  Why not? Meghan Make-a-Buck is up for ANYTHING! Remember, Sarah Ferguson hawked Weight Watchers.  I can see how Meghan believes her beauty made a world famous prince fall in love with her so why not leverage cosmetics and fragrance? J Lo, Paris Hilton, and so many others made fortunes off their perfumes. I'd be stunned if she didn't go that route. I'd bet a hundred bucks her perfume bottle will have a tiara cap. And purple glass  .  Can luggage and yoga pants be far behind?



And it will be called SWEET NODStm  

I haven't had cable tv in years. Are infomercials still a 'thing'?


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> And it will be called SWEET NODStm
> 
> I haven't had cable tv in years. Are infomercials still a 'thing'?



Infomercials seem so 80s. MM’s voice has a tinny quality to it that grates on my nerves, so I won’t be watching.


----------



## jennlt

poopsie said:


> And it will be called SWEET NODStm
> 
> I haven't had cable tv in years. Are infomercials still a 'thing'?



And it will smell _exactly_ like some other brand's bestselling perfume and the bottle will be an almost exact copy of some other brand's perfume bottle.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Infomercials seem so 80s. MM’s voice has a tinny quality to it that grates on my nerves, so I won’t be watching.


 You don't think her voice resonates with a groundswell of compassion?


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if they are also visiting this thread/forum.


----------



## Chanbal

One more of those mysterious messages. One condemns smoking, but…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> One more of those mysterious messages. One condemns smoking, but…
> 
> View attachment 5211217



Chain smoking. Maybe that's how she gets the "baby weight" off.


----------



## eunaddict

CeeJay said:


> No offense taken, but .. not sure if you remember this, the information that I got/get is from very good friends of mine who knew Meghan and her Father (Thomas) personally .. as their son was her male counterpart in many of their theater productions.  He was the one who put dates to her early procedures in her teen years and then his mother (my good friend) put the dates around her procedures during/after college when she started pursuing her "career" (use that term very lightly -  ) in show-BIZ. Are they exact?!? .. well, no .. and that's why I don't put "dates of truth" [sorry - couldn't resist ]!!!



Yes, I remember your source. Like I said it's a personal judgment thing - I don't trust single sources of information, especially when it requires memories from decades ago...science has shown repeatedly that memories are untrustworthy and very easily influenced. That's just how I approach life 

Just explaining why I worded the OG post that way - that she'd had procedures but that no one really knows when and how many.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if they are also visiting this thread/forum.




That choice of clip is rather unfortunate though, because a minute later Saruman gets his a*s whipped by Gandalf.


----------



## eunaddict

Chanbal said:


> It looks like there is an upcoming article from Montecito claiming that *Kate owes her confidence to Mrs. Hypocrisy.*



I can MAAAAAYBE see that at a stretch...in the sense that, as long as I don't mess up to that extent, I'll stay the golden child; surely it's confidence boosting when you and yours are objectively thriving in comparison. Plus, they've just hit the 10th Anniversary milestone this year, surely a great deal of that confidence has built naturally from just being together and working together within the BRF for a decade.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more of those mysterious messages. One condemns smoking, but…
> 
> View attachment 5211217



I mean, I don't care if someone wants to ruin their lungs and skin and upper lip (creasing) with smoking as long as I don't have to live with them / kiss them, but her holier-than-thou-attitude combined with her many flaws and bad habits is super annoying.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I agree 100 %, but isn't it unusual for a respected royal reporter to openly say what we all think?



 I think it is unusual and it reflects how far the Suckesses have fallen. They are not esteemed, they are not respected, Haz is more than "the spare" he's proven to be the "the expendable" and the rapacious wife becomes more and more transparent to more and more people as time goes on. The contrast between their performances in NY and the working Royals in London and Northern Ireland made the Suckesses look really tacky and grasping IMO, no class vs warmly regal personified by William and Kate.


----------



## rose60610

She smokes? Then she's the type to smoke in an airplane bathroom. Maybe that's another reason why she prefers private jets.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> My mum has swollen fingers due to poor circulation. Has had the problem for decades. Eventually, the doctors pinpointed it to very slow developing heart function degeneration. She has a pacemaker now.


My husband did too and he also has a pacemaker now (thank god .. it was so scary to me)!!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Chain smoking. Maybe that's how she gets the "baby weight" off.


Or trying to.


----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> America has 19 million veterans and chooses Harry to give awards…TC uses some rough words, but unfortunately, he makes a valid point.
> What's going on in the world nowadays? Are we going insane? I feel like packing and move to a news-free place.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Trevor Coult



Looks like his Twitter account is now deactivated.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That choice of clip is rather unfortunate though, because a minute later Saruman gets his a*s whipped by Gandalf.


I hate to sound like a complete LOTR geek but that gif is Theoden rather than Saruman. There are so many old, white-haired men in the series that it's easy to get them confused.


----------



## charlottawill

Chic is in the eye of the beholder.....









						13 Pieces Meghan Markle Wore During Her New York City Trip
					

Meghan Markle sported a series of chic head-to-toe monochromatic looks featuring designers such as Max Mara, Emporio Armani, and Maison Valentino.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not looking good…
> _"It's completely bombed. There was a hashtag '#40x40', if you look on Instagram, there's [minimal] movement since Meghan's birthday," YouTuber Murky Meg said on a vlog.
> 
> The said 40x40 project comes after Meghan and Prince Harry was reportedly left out of former US President Barack *****'s 60th birthday celebrations.
> *Angela Levin, a royal specialist, said that the couple "won't get over" the alleged snub.*_


I'm sure the Os are shaking in their boots.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> And it will smell _exactly_ like some other brand's bestselling perfume and the bottle will be an almost exact copy of some other brand's perfume bottle.



*You mean, like this, except, Maison Markle's Montecito?*

SALE



*This could be "Haz's water":*





*Megain 40 (not just in years, but in pounds)*


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more of those mysterious messages. One condemns smoking, but…
> 
> View attachment 5211217


More hypocrisy.


----------



## Chanbal

So, Will has been right all along… For the ones that want the short version: Will tried to slow down the fast accessibility of Miss M*rkle to the BRF. The BRF is now regretting not to have listened to him.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Irrevocably? Oh, really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family braces for 'powerful revelations' in 'intimate' new book
> 
> 
> Magazine editor Tina Brown's The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil will be published in April - just months before Prince Harry's tell-all memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Buckingham Palace braces for 'powerful revelations' about the Royal Family in 'intimate' new book*
> 
> *Tina Brown's book promises to 'irrevocably change' perception of Royal Family *
> *It will be published just months before Prince Harry's tell all memoir, in April*
> *Book entitled The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor – The Truth And The Turmoil, will track the Queen's 'loosening grip' on the monarchy*
> 
> ETA:  sending best wishes to @Vintage Leather


It appears that Tina B is connected to OW… A money grab opportunity.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting contrast!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> More hypocrisy.


Jackie Kennedy managed to keep her chain smoking a secret for decades.  The photographers were told_ no pictures of her with a cigarette allowed._

I am confused.  I thought she made Harry quit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> *You mean, like this, except, Maison Markle's Montecito?*
> 
> SALE
> View attachment 5211382
> 
> 
> *This could be "Haz's water":*
> 
> 
> View attachment 5211389
> 
> 
> *Megain 40 (not just in years, but in pounds)*
> 
> View attachment 5211390


As long as it doesn’t smell like “pee in the woods”!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Jackie Kennedy managed to keep her chain smoking a secret for decades.  The photographers were told_ no pictures of her with a cigarette allowed._
> 
> *I am confused.  I thought she made Harry quit.*


It's likely more of her "Do as I command, not as I do" policy about everything.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> My husband did too and he also has a pacemaker now (thank god .. it was so scary to me)!!



My sister’s husband, a heavy smoker in his younger days, is in the hospital for heart surgery. 
New valve and a pacemaker - so far so good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Jackie Kennedy managed to keep her chain smoking a secret for decades.  The photographers were told_ no pictures of her with a cigarette allowed._
> 
> I am confused.  I thought she made Harry quit.



All sound and fury signifying nothing,


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would be surprised if she was a smoker.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> World Central Kitchen update as of Aug, 2021:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle donation helps Haiti earthquake victims
> 
> 
> The Duke, 36, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, who are currently living in their £11million mansion in California, donated to the World Central Kitchen (WCK) via their Archewell Foundation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I find it shady how the scale and value of the presumably monetary donations are always glossed over. They will inform the world of one lemon olive oil cake and X number of beanies, but for something like this when thousands are fed, lots of cheerleading but no mention of actual value and no boots on the ground running towards the struggle.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I would be surprised if she was a smoker.


I've no idea if she is or not a smoker, it's not a big deal. However, those mysterious messages seem to have been accurate so far.



Spoiler: online evidence


----------



## bag-mania

*Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* may no longer be in the good graces of the Royal Family, but they still give their dog the royal treatment ... even when they're busy.

The couple's dog -- a black Lab rescue named *Pula* -- got to enjoy a lovely stroll near the beach in Santa Barbara Friday ... courtesy of her professional walker.

It's unclear who the heavily tatted, dog-walkin' bro is, but he made sure Harry and Meghan's pup was nice and clean before she hopped back into their Land Rover and headed home to Montecito.


While the dog walker's 15 minutes of fame may have just begun, Pula's pretty popular already. She was featured in some photo spreads earlier this year frolicking with Harry at the beach ... and she also made an appearance during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah earlier that month.

As for Harry and Meghan ... they've been super busy lately with their various charities, and visiting with world leaders last week at the UN conference. So, it makes sense they need someone to walk their dog ... and this guy looks like he gets the job done.











						Harry and Meghan's Dog Walker Takes Their Lab, Pula, for a Stroll
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's dog walker takes their black Lab, Pula, for a stroll.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Chanbal

I thought the book was almost written, but it looks like Hazz is still researching… 


*THE Royal Family is braced for another devastating attack from Prince Harry — as he personally researches his mother’s life for a new book.*

_Harry, 37, has a £15million advance from publishers.

*Royal insiders believe he will now be under extreme pressure to identify the family member he alleges made racist remarks about the colour of baby son Archie’s skin.

Harry is understood to have been contacting Princess Diana’s old friends.

It had been thought he would leave most of the work to a ghostwriter.


Now, Palace sources are “surprised” at how involved he has become.*

Harry has told how he took wife Meghan and Archie to the US to stop “history repeating itself” — and drew comparisons to Di.

There are concerns his delving into Diana’s life and divorce will paint Prince Charles and Camilla as the bad guys in his book.

Royal expert Penny Junor said: “The publishers are going to want a lot for their money, such as naming this so-called racist.

“*He’s researching his mother’s life so he’s going to be talking about his parents’ marriage, the break up, the affairs. That could be incredibly damaging for his father and Camilla. Charles is going to be king and Camilla his queen. The last thing they or the country needs is another upsurge of anger based on what I believe to be false, false accusations.”*

In March, Harry told US talk show queen Oprah Winfrey he would never name the alleged royal racist.

But The Sun understands he and Meghan, 40, are under pressure to release it.

Harry scored a £15million multi-book deal with Penguin Random House — but only one is thought to be a memoir. Buckingham Palace did not want to comment._









						Prince Harry may name royal 'racist' in new £15m book leaving Palace terrified
					

THE Royal Family is braced for another devastating attack from Prince Harry — as he personally researches his mother’s life for a new book. Experts also fear he may use the memoir to name the “roya…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5211536
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* may no longer be in the good graces of the Royal Family, but they still give their dog the royal treatment ... even when they're busy.
> 
> The couple's dog -- a black Lab rescue named *Pula* -- got to enjoy a lovely stroll near the beach in Santa Barbara Friday ... courtesy of her professional walker.
> 
> It's unclear who the heavily tatted, dog-walkin' bro is, but he made sure Harry and Meghan's pup was nice and clean before she hopped back into their Land Rover and headed home to Montecito.
> 
> 
> While the dog walker's 15 minutes of fame may have just begun, Pula's pretty popular already. She was featured in some photo spreads earlier this year frolicking with Harry at the beach ... and she also made an appearance during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah earlier that month.
> 
> As for Harry and Meghan ... they've been super busy lately with their various charities, and visiting with world leaders last week at the UN conference. So, it makes sense they need someone to walk their dog ... and this guy looks like he gets the job done.
> 
> View attachment 5211537
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Dog Walker Takes Their Lab, Pula, for a Stroll
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's dog walker takes their black Lab, Pula, for a stroll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



Gosh, even the dog is used for PR purposes.


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally am not saying she's aging terribly, I'm saying she's aging very sudden and in a weird way. Like that matronely look, you can get wrinkly and still not be matronely. That said, look at close-ups of her and she has tons of sun damage that is usually concealed by her skintone.
> 
> But objectively, she does not look horrible (on the outside at least haha), just as she is not fat, just heavier than usual.


I agree overall. I don’t think it’s her face that’s making her look matronly though - it’s definitely her clothes. And she’s not fat, but that white dress makes her look wide and bulgy around the middle when she’s not. That dress is so unflattering!


----------



## needlv

Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?

Gold digger?
Jealous?



lol… other suggestions welcome!!!


----------



## tiktok

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Poison. Oh actually never mind, that one’s already taken.


----------



## CarryOn2020

muddledmint said:


> I agree overall. I don’t think it’s her face that’s making her look matronly though - it’s definitely her clothes. And she’s not fat, but that white dress makes her look wide and bulgy around the middle when she’s not. That dress is so unflattering!



The kinda sagging chest (ahem) with the wide hips definitely ages one. Proper undergarments would help.
Now where is her mother?


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Traitor?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Norm.Core

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



*DUCHESS of DOSH*
oh 16 Toilette
​


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



”Whiff of a Witch”  with a tag line “Cast a spell”


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5211536
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* may no longer be in the good graces of the Royal Family, but they still give their dog the royal treatment ... even when they're busy.
> 
> The couple's dog -- a black Lab rescue named *Pula* -- got to enjoy a lovely stroll near the beach in Santa Barbara Friday ... courtesy of her professional walker.
> 
> It's unclear who the heavily tatted, dog-walkin' bro is, but he made sure Harry and Meghan's pup was nice and clean before she hopped back into their Land Rover and headed home to Montecito.
> 
> 
> While the dog walker's 15 minutes of fame may have just begun, Pula's pretty popular already. She was featured in some photo spreads earlier this year frolicking with Harry at the beach ... and she also made an appearance during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah earlier that month.
> 
> As for Harry and Meghan ... they've been super busy lately with their various charities, and visiting with world leaders last week at the UN conference. So, it makes sense they need someone to walk their dog ... and this guy looks like he gets the job done.
> 
> View attachment 5211537
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Dog Walker Takes Their Lab, Pula, for a Stroll
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's dog walker takes their black Lab, Pula, for a stroll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


1. The paps had to have been told where and when to be there for a photo.

2 A dog living on a huge 7 acre fenced property where he can run free does not need a dog walker.

3. They are pathetic in their craving for their names in print.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> I hate to sound like a complete LOTR geek but that gif is Theoden rather than Saruman. There are so many old, white-haired men in the series that it's easy to get them confused.



Sorry to outgeek you, but I know it's Théoden   He is possessed by Saruman, though. When Gandalf makes Saruman leave Théoden's body, in the movie you see him being knocked over in his tower by the sheer force.

ETA: and it's definitely Saruman via Théoden's tongue saying "You have no power here", not Gandalf, in which case the meme would make sense again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Nuisance.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



I think those have been done 

Dior's J'adore L'Or and Gucci Envy

Actually Gucci's Envy was gorgeous

What about:

Madam Princess_e_ Duchess Diamonds WAG-No6 -

The stopper in the shape of a $

Classy enough?


----------



## doni

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5211536
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* may no longer be in the good graces of the Royal Family, but they still give their dog the royal treatment ... even when they're busy.
> 
> The couple's dog -- a black Lab rescue named *Pula* -- got to enjoy a lovely stroll near the beach in Santa Barbara Friday ... courtesy of her professional walker.
> 
> It's unclear who the heavily tatted, dog-walkin' bro is, but he made sure Harry and Meghan's pup was nice and clean before she hopped back into their Land Rover and headed home to Montecito.
> 
> 
> While the dog walker's 15 minutes of fame may have just begun, Pula's pretty popular already. She was featured in some photo spreads earlier this year frolicking with Harry at the beach ... and she also made an appearance during the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah earlier that month.
> 
> As for Harry and Meghan ... they've been super busy lately with their various charities, and visiting with world leaders last week at the UN conference. So, it makes sense they need someone to walk their dog ... and this guy looks like he gets the job done.
> 
> View attachment 5211537
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Dog Walker Takes Their Lab, Pula, for a Stroll
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's dog walker takes their black Lab, Pula, for a stroll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Driving a huge state wagon to take ONE dog for a walk! Yes, that makes a lot of sense from the perspective of climate change. Particularly when the dog lives in a house with huge grounds.

I think if we all lived like Harry and Meghan the earth would have already exploded and the human race been extinguished long ago…


----------



## Annawakes

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!


Yacht Girl


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Yacht Girl



'Ahoy' in a boat-shaped falcon 

She can give them to everyone as presents forever if they don't sell, like she promoted her own book to those unsuspecting children in Harlem who had to suffer through the entire story/poem/journey/narrative. 

What about 

'L'eau de Libre' for the light Summer version -   darn, I think that's too good, PR's gonna steal it  .


----------



## 1LV

K.D. said:


> It's also the emptiest looking bag from some of these angles, so just carried for the look and 'the outfit'.


Just a couple of tiny balls rolling around in there.


----------



## Aimee3

I like VENOM for the perfume name, with a sculpture of a snake about to strike as the stopper.


----------



## Annawakes

How about…
True Queen
Royal Illusion
Man Eater?


----------



## Norm.Core

NARCISSA
Klassy Parfum​


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I thought the book was almost written, but it looks like Hazz is still researching…
> View attachment 5211538
> 
> *THE Royal Family is braced for another devastating attack from Prince Harry — as he personally researches his mother’s life for a new book.*
> 
> _Harry, 37, has a £15million advance from publishers.
> 
> *Royal insiders believe he will now be under extreme pressure to identify the family member he alleges made racist remarks about the colour of baby son Archie’s skin.
> 
> Harry is understood to have been contacting Princess Diana’s old friends.
> 
> It had been thought he would leave most of the work to a ghostwriter.
> 
> 
> Now, Palace sources are “surprised” at how involved he has become.*
> 
> Harry has told how he took wife Meghan and Archie to the US to stop “history repeating itself” — and drew comparisons to Di.
> 
> There are concerns his delving into Diana’s life and divorce will paint Prince Charles and Camilla as the bad guys in his book.
> 
> Royal expert Penny Junor said: “The publishers are going to want a lot for their money, such as naming this so-called racist.
> 
> “*He’s researching his mother’s life so he’s going to be talking about his parents’ marriage, the break up, the affairs. That could be incredibly damaging for his father and Camilla. Charles is going to be king and Camilla his queen. The last thing they or the country needs is another upsurge of anger based on what I believe to be false, false accusations.”*
> 
> In March, Harry told US talk show queen Oprah Winfrey he would never name the alleged royal racist.
> 
> But The Sun understands he and Meghan, 40, are under pressure to release it.
> 
> Harry scored a £15million multi-book deal with Penguin Random House — but only one is thought to be a memoir. Buckingham Palace did not want to comment._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may name royal 'racist' in new £15m book leaving Palace terrified
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family is braced for another devastating attack from Prince Harry — as he personally researches his mother’s life for a new book. Experts also fear he may use the memoir to name the “roya…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Well that accounts for the $20,000,000 the publisher is paying Harry.  Let's presume Harry named "XYZ" as the person who is claimed to have asked about Archie's skin color. With no proof whatsoever. It's just based on what he has said. I think Harry kicked a hornet's nest because who's going to take this accusation lying down? But hey, 20 mil? Why not just accuse his brother of something malicious while he's at it? That'd be worth another 20 mil to a publisher, no? Oh wait. William could bury him. Scratch that. Harry has to attack somebody who doesn't have the power to retaliate for a big payday.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I remember thinking as a kid (still do) why so many Disney cartoons had to have a motherless character?  If there was one, it was "the evil stepmother".  Snow White, Cinderella, Bambi, Pinocchio (this makes this post relevant in this thread, LOL!), Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, Pocahontas, etc., etc.  It's almost as if a child couldn't grow up to shine unless there was something missing.  I always found that odd.  Even Dumbo's mother was locked up!  WTH!


I think it wasn't just Disney but fairy tales in general were scary and tragic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Two ladies who know how to wear green.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Destroy
Destruction 
Sympathy Elixir
Exploit
Bloodsucker
Sponge
Bench Sitter
Radioactive
Slash and Burn
Wrecking Ball
Epic Disaster
I Should Be Queen
Feel Sorry For Me
Prince and Plunder
Prince Parasite
Highness Hijacker
Predator
Castle Pirate


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I don't think she was artificially padded. But I still have doubts if Lil Bit was born of her body. As so many of us have mentioned, there can be a multitude of reasons why she has weight gain.


I agree.  I just don't think someone as vain as her would want to look fat.  that tan outfit is very unflattering on her.


----------



## rose60610

To paraphrase a joke: Meghan has gone down hill faster than Lindsey Vonn.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Jackie Kennedy managed to keep her chain smoking a secret for decades.  The photographers were told_ no pictures of her with a cigarette allowed._
> 
> I am confused.  I thought she made Harry quit.


I recall she wanted him to quit drinking beer (or whatever alcohol)....she represents herself as a natural/holistic type I think....daughter of the yoga instructor


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I've no idea if she is or not a smoker, it's not a big deal. However, those mysterious messages seem to have been accurate so far.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: online evidence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5211519


interesting....from her yacht girl days?  a lot (used to be most) of models smoke to keep the weight down


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!


The ultimate name for a narc's perfume:
(Eponymously) 
Meghan: Be the woman of your dreams


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> I fear that they are potentially planning to uproot their family to jumpstart Malicious Meg's political career. Given how dirty she is, she will fit right in politics.


Yep.  Did a stint on tv.  No political experience.  Can’t take direction or criticism.  Ego off the charts.  She‘s good to go.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



A new perfume could be 'Plagiat-Eau de Plusieurs Toilettes'. However, there are plenty on the market that could work.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I thought the book was almost written, but it looks like Hazz is still researching…
> View attachment 5211538
> 
> *THE Royal Family is braced for another devastating attack from Prince Harry — as he personally researches his mother’s life for a new book.*
> 
> _Harry, 37, has a £15million advance from publishers.
> 
> *Royal insiders believe he will now be under extreme pressure to identify the family member he alleges made racist remarks about the colour of baby son Archie’s skin.
> 
> Harry is understood to have been contacting Princess Diana’s old friends.
> 
> It had been thought he would leave most of the work to a ghostwriter.
> 
> 
> Now, Palace sources are “surprised” at how involved he has become.*
> 
> Harry has told how he took wife Meghan and Archie to the US to stop “history repeating itself” — and drew comparisons to Di.
> 
> There are concerns his delving into Diana’s life and divorce will paint Prince Charles and Camilla as the bad guys in his book.
> 
> Royal expert Penny Junor said: “The publishers are going to want a lot for their money, such as naming this so-called racist.
> 
> “*He’s researching his mother’s life so he’s going to be talking about his parents’ marriage, the break up, the affairs. That could be incredibly damaging for his father and Camilla. Charles is going to be king and Camilla his queen. The last thing they or the country needs is another upsurge of anger based on what I believe to be false, false accusations.”*
> 
> In March, Harry told US talk show queen Oprah Winfrey he would never name the alleged royal racist.
> 
> But The Sun understands he and Meghan, 40, are under pressure to release it.
> 
> Harry scored a £15million multi-book deal with Penguin Random House — but only one is thought to be a memoir. Buckingham Palace did not want to comment._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry may name royal 'racist' in new £15m book leaving Palace terrified
> 
> 
> THE Royal Family is braced for another devastating attack from Prince Harry — as he personally researches his mother’s life for a new book. Experts also fear he may use the memoir to name the “roya…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I guess I'm a little confused.  I thought this was an "autobiography"?  Why is researching his mother's life or his father's affairs, most of which were before he was born, really anything more than his back story?  He's so uninteresting, that he can't talk about himself but has to use others' juicy stories?


----------



## Chanbal

'They've had enough oxygen!' Harry and Meghan slammed by Joan Collins
					

JOAN COLLINS is not a fan of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, wanting to focus the world's attention on his brother Prince William and Kate Middleton instead.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Bad Intentions?
Bad Underthings?
Cruel Intentions.


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!


 
Evil eye 
Total control 
The plan


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Destroy
> Destruction
> Sympathy Elixir
> Exploit
> Bloodsucker
> Sponge
> Bench Sitter
> Radioactive
> Slash and Burn
> Wrecking Ball
> Epic Disaster
> I Should Be Queen
> Feel Sorry For Me
> Prince and Plunder
> Prince Parasite
> Highness Hijacker
> Predator
> Castle Pirate


this is a no brainer - FLOWER


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think those have been done
> 
> Dior's J'adore L'Or and Gucci Envy
> 
> Actually Gucci's Envy was gorgeous
> 
> What about:
> 
> Madam Princess_e_ Duchess Diamonds WAG-No6 -
> 
> The stopper in the shape of a $
> 
> Classy enough?


No 6 , yes that is brilliant


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I guess I'm a little confused.  I thought this was an "autobiography"?  Why is researching his mother's life or his father's affairs, most of which were before he was born, really anything more than his back story?  He's so uninteresting, that he can't talk about himself but has to use others' juicy stories?


As far as I understood from other online sources, he may lack material. It looks like the publisher doesn't want him to go strong against the media (need media to promote book), so this leaves him with little to say. His mother died when he was very young (not enough memories), so he may need to go after his father, Camilla… name a few offenders… whatever his wife thinks it's right.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> 'They've had enough oxygen!' Harry and Meghan slammed by Joan Collins
> 
> 
> JOAN COLLINS is not a fan of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, wanting to focus the world's attention on his brother Prince William and Kate Middleton instead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



LOL....she called them the other two


----------



## Hermes Zen

How about …

Death Clutch
White Knuckle (Hand Clutch Eau de Toilette)


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> As far as I understood from other online sources, he may lack material. It looks like the publisher doesn't want him to go strong against the media (need media to promote book), so this leaves him with little to say. His mother died when he was very young (not enough memories), so he may need to go after his father, Camilla… name a few offenders… whatever his wife thinks it's right.


Agree lack of material ... he could talk of his troubled youth ... when Katie Couric saw him and he reeked of fags and alcohol ... but that is OLD news, he kinda did that topic with Oprah 
We know he no longer gets along with his family ho hum yawn ... and granny might be willing to fight back if he goes too far


----------



## jelliedfeels

jennlt said:


> I hate to sound like a complete LOTR geek but that gif is Theoden rather than Saruman. There are so many old, white-haired men in the series that it's easy to get them confused.


I was just wondering that because I know that saruman was the legendary Christopher Lee- but didn’t saruman possess the king to steal Sean Bean’s throne or something? 


charlottawill said:


> Chic is in the eye of the beholder.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 13 Pieces Meghan Markle Wore During Her New York City Trip
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sported a series of chic head-to-toe monochromatic looks featuring designers such as Max Mara, Emporio Armani, and Maison Valentino.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


I mean… monochrome is just so naturally bold and chic it _almost_ always looks good.



Chanbal said:


> Interesting contrast!
> View attachment 5211416


I’m surprised I’ve never used this gif on this thread before…




purseinsanity said:


> *You mean, like this, except, Maison Markle's Montecito?*
> 
> SALE
> View attachment 5211382
> 
> 
> *This could be "Haz's water":*
> 
> 
> View attachment 5211389
> 
> 
> *Megain 40 (not just in years, but in pounds)*
> 
> View attachment 5211390


These are a bit upmarket aren’t they? I was thinking she might be more aiming for the heiress by Paris Hilton demographic. Theirs would naturally be called ‘highness by Haz’ and ‘adventuress by Megan’ 

though I can’t resist adding it should be Le Labet Megain 40 (it has terrible silage & longevity - it immediately disappears. )


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Jackie Kennedy managed to keep her chain smoking a secret for decades.  The photographers were told_ no pictures of her with a cigarette allowed._
> 
> I am confused.  I thought she made Harry quit.


I’m torn between assuming this was made up to make her look good by the evil press or that she did it but only because she knew that the torment of withdrawal would further weaken his mind and allow her to hornswoggle him into the shotgun wedding.


----------



## Chanbal

@bag-mania can we trust this? 

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month*

_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle got a greater percentage of positive coverage in British mainstream media than American in September, according to analysis for Newsweek by a data intelligence agency.

*British mainstream media outlets from print to broadcast delivered 50 percent positive coverage, 16 percent neutral and 33 percent negative over the course of the month, research by Zignal Labs suggests.

Reporting by American mainstream media outlets was 44 percent positive, 28 percent neutral and 28 percent negative.

The mainstream media was more positive than social media in both countries, according to the research.*

It comes after Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March the couple left Britain in part because of racism, adding that "the UK press is very bigoted."

*The company pooled mainstream media mentions from* news, data mining platform LexisNexis and broadcast, as well as digital platforms including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, blogs, videos,* online forums* and more.

Of the total, 12,540 mentions of Harry and Meghan were identifiably from the U.K. and 34,997 mentions were American, although some social media posts are not possible to geo track.

The month was dominated by two main stories about the couple, the first of which was their inclusion in the Time100 most influential people list and a joint cover shoot, when there was a spike of 13,000 on September 15…_









						Harry and Meghan Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were covered more positively in Britain than America in September despite leaving the U.K. to escape negativity, according to research for Newsweek.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> It looks like there is an upcoming article from Montecito claiming that Kate owes her confidence to Mrs. Hypocrisy.



And yet it was the ever so confident “mrs hypocrisy” that has been crying and whining to large media outlets …


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> this is a no brainer - FLOWER



Sweet Nod to FLOWER


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania can we trust this?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month*
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle got a greater percentage of positive coverage in British mainstream media than American in September, according to analysis for Newsweek by a data intelligence agency.
> 
> *British mainstream media outlets from print to broadcast delivered 50 percent positive coverage, 16 percent neutral and 33 percent negative over the course of the month, research by Zignal Labs suggests.
> 
> Reporting by American mainstream media outlets was 44 percent positive, 28 percent neutral and 28 percent negative.
> 
> The mainstream media was more positive than social media in both countries, according to the research.*
> 
> It comes after Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March the couple left Britain in part because of racism, adding that "the UK press is very bigoted."
> 
> *The company pooled mainstream media mentions from* news, data mining platform LexisNexis and broadcast, as well as digital platforms including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, blogs, videos,* online forums* and more.
> 
> Of the total, 12,540 mentions of Harry and Meghan were identifiably from the U.K. and 34,997 mentions were American, although some social media posts are not possible to geo track.
> 
> The month was dominated by two main stories about the couple, the first of which was their inclusion in the Time100 most influential people list and a joint cover shoot, when there was a spike of 13,000 on September 15…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were covered more positively in Britain than America in September despite leaving the U.K. to escape negativity, according to research for Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Not in my house


----------



## lindacris

Longtime lurker here.  Why doesn’t the person who made the comment about the baby’s skin color beat them to the punch and admit to saying it and state what they really meant or apologize profusely if they dont have a good explanation?  It seems like this would hurt the book deal since money is all that matters to those two.


----------



## papertiger

le_junkie said:


> NARCISSA
> Klassy Parfum​



I think you have it! 

Stans would love it too, sounds like an exotic flower for/to self-deceivers


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania can we trust this?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month*
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle got a greater percentage of positive coverage in British mainstream media than American in September, according to analysis for Newsweek by a data intelligence agency.
> 
> *British mainstream media outlets from print to broadcast delivered 50 percent positive coverage, 16 percent neutral and 33 percent negative over the course of the month, research by Zignal Labs suggests.
> 
> Reporting by American mainstream media outlets was 44 percent positive, 28 percent neutral and 28 percent negative.
> 
> The mainstream media was more positive than social media in both countries, according to the research.*
> 
> It comes after Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March the couple left Britain in part because of racism, adding that "the UK press is very bigoted."
> 
> *The company pooled mainstream media mentions from* news, data mining platform LexisNexis and broadcast, as well as digital platforms including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, blogs, videos,* online forums* and more.
> 
> Of the total, 12,540 mentions of Harry and Meghan were identifiably from the U.K. and 34,997 mentions were American, although some social media posts are not possible to geo track.
> 
> The month was dominated by two main stories about the couple, the first of which was their inclusion in the Time100 most influential people list and a joint cover shoot, when there was a spike of 13,000 on September 15…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were covered more positively in Britain than America in September despite leaving the U.K. to escape negativity, according to research for Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


So, not content with thrilling us with the news some unemployed actor walks the dog they haven’t killed off yet, SS seeks to scintillate us further with news about the news about this revered couple?   

I thought they had a beagle? Must not have been available this week. Between this and the lack of cute ginger mixed-race kids it’s just been letdown after letdown from LA central casting.

Also, in honour of her battle tactics, I suggest the perfume name  should be Audacious Snatch.

also on the book, there’s no chance they are naming the alleged racist in the book thats as blatant a selling tactic as when Scabies did it for his weak epilogue. If they print a name, they could get sued & they can’t shade the whole family at once, so it’s not in their interests.


----------



## Katel

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Bollocks Breaker
(Who’s Next?)​


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!


Omnipotence 
Tagline: No one matters more than you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Victim     

Sweet Pea (Pee) in The Woods


----------



## xincinsin

lindacris said:


> Longtime lurker here.  Why doesn’t the person who made the comment about the baby’s skin color beat them to the punch and admit to saying it and state what they really meant or apologize profusely if they dont have a good explanation?  It seems like this would hurt the book deal since money is all that matters to those two.


The person who said it and the entire conversation are probably figments of their greedy imagination, created for shock value for the OW interview, along with Methane's suicidal thoughts which could never have existed because that wacko loves herself more than anything and anyone.

It may have been a cheerful passing comment like "I'm looking forward to seeing your baby. Mixed race babies are always so cute. I wonder if he will be fair like you or darker like your wife?" And they twisted it into a racist comment because they needed "truth bombs" and to magnify their victim image.


----------



## charlottawill

lindacris said:


> Longtime lurker here.  Why doesn’t the person who made the comment about the baby’s skin color beat them to the punch and admit to saying it and state what they really meant or apologize profusely if they dont have a good explanation?  It seems like this would hurt the book deal since money is all that matters to those two.


Because maybe it didn't really happen. Remember, recollections may vary.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> The person who said it and the entire conversation are probably figments of their greedy imagination, created for shock value for the OW interview, along with Methane's suicidal thoughts which could never have existed because that wacko loves herself more than anything and anyone.
> 
> It may have been a cheerful passing comment like "I'm looking forward to seeing your baby. Mixed race babies are always so cute. I wonder if he will be fair like you or darker like your wife?" And they twisted it into a racist comment because they needed "truth bombs" and to magnify their victim image.


I don't disagree with you, but there are many who would view that as a racist comment under any circumstances, coming from someone with "white privilege".


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Omnipotence
> Tagline: No one matters more than you





needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!


Grandeur. As in delusions of...


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> 1. The paps had to have been told where and when to be there for a photo.
> 
> 2 A dog living on a huge 7 acre fenced property where he can run free does not need a dog walker.
> 
> 3. They are pathetic in their craving for their names in print.


But they've been super busy lately!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I recall she wanted him to quit drinking beer (or whatever alcohol)....she represents herself as a natural/holistic type I think....daughter of the yoga instructor


She probably started smoking in college or when she started acting to control her weight. I read an article once about how many female Ivy League students smoke despite knowing the health risks. Tobacco kills your taste buds. I wonder if anyone has ever researched a connection between the decline in US women smoking and the rise in obesity.


----------



## charlottawill

1LV said:


> Yep.  Did a stint on tv.  No political experience.  Can’t take direction or criticism.  Ego off the charts.  She‘s good to go.



Funny thing is, she and "the former guy" hate each other.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I guess I'm a little confused.  I thought this was an "autobiography"?  Why is researching his mother's life or his father's affairs, most of which were before he was born, really anything more than his back story?  He's so uninteresting, that he can't talk about himself but has to use others' juicy stories?


If there is any truth to this then he clearly is not interested in ever reconciling with his family. Oh what a tangled web they've weaved....


----------



## Lodpah

Maybe the name of her perfume will be: “Your Truth” or “Gold Dust Royalty” or “Me, Myself and I”,


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> She probably started smoking in college or when she started acting to control her weight. I read an article once about how many female Ivy League students smoke despite knowing the health risks. Tobacco kills your taste buds. I wonder if anyone has ever researched a connection between the decline in US women smoking and the rise in obesity.



Google JessicaM. Plenty of photos of her smoking. Doesn’t marijuana count as smoking?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The person who said it and the entire conversation are probably figments of their greedy imagination, created for shock value for the OW interview, along with Methane's suicidal thoughts which could never have existed because that wacko loves herself more than anything and anyone.
> 
> It may have been a cheerful passing comment like "I'm looking forward to seeing your baby. Mixed race babies are always so cute. I wonder if he will be fair like you or darker like your wife?" And they twisted it into a racist comment because they needed "truth bombs" and to magnify their victim image.



Notice how this “who said it” is used to threaten people publicly and, probably, privately? It’s so childish.
It also provides distraction from Andrew, no?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Google JessicaM. Plenty of photos of her smoking. Doesn’t marijuana count as smoking?


It does, but it has the opposite effect of tobacco on your tastebuds.


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> Funny thing is, she and "the former guy" hate each other.


No doubt.


----------



## bellecate

lindacris said:


> Longtime lurker here.  Why doesn’t the person who made the comment about the baby’s skin color beat them to the punch and admit to saying it and state what they really meant or apologize profusely if they dont have a good explanation?  It seems like this would hurt the book deal since money is all that matters to those two.


Perhaps because the first person to mention it was H’ #6. Maybe there was no other source to come forward. IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SDinTO

needlv said:


> Ok - if you were part of MM’s team - what would you name her perfume?
> 
> Gold digger?
> Jealous?
> 
> 
> 
> lol… other suggestions welcome!!!



Sweet Nod no.6


----------



## sdkitty

I thought for a second that an american magazine was calling them out but no, Marie Claire is French-British
Seriously, Harry and Meghan Need to Cool It on the Private Jets (msn.com)


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania can we trust this?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month*
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle got a greater percentage of positive coverage in British mainstream media than American in September, according to analysis for Newsweek by a data intelligence agency.
> 
> *British mainstream media outlets from print to broadcast delivered 50 percent positive coverage, 16 percent neutral and 33 percent negative over the course of the month, research by Zignal Labs suggests.
> 
> Reporting by American mainstream media outlets was 44 percent positive, 28 percent neutral and 28 percent negative.
> 
> The mainstream media was more positive than social media in both countries, according to the research.*
> 
> It comes after Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March the couple left Britain in part because of racism, adding that "the UK press is very bigoted."
> 
> *The company pooled mainstream media mentions from* news, data mining platform LexisNexis and broadcast, as well as digital platforms including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, blogs, videos,* online forums* and more.
> 
> Of the total, 12,540 mentions of Harry and Meghan were identifiably from the U.K. and 34,997 mentions were American, although some social media posts are not possible to geo track.
> 
> The month was dominated by two main stories about the couple, the first of which was their inclusion in the Time100 most influential people list and a joint cover shoot, when there was a spike of 13,000 on September 15…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were covered more positively in Britain than America in September despite leaving the U.K. to escape negativity, according to research for Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I wish. Jack Royston has the unenviable position of being the sole Newsweek employee who covers Harry and Meghan. Lately it seems he has grown tired of the subjects of his assignment and he’ll slip in a little negative commentary when possible while still putting out the occasional fluffy piece to please his employers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wish. Jack Royston has the unenviable position of being the sole Newsweek employee who covers Harry and Meghan. Lately it seems he has grown tired of the subjects of his assignment and he’ll slip in a little negative commentary when possible while still putting out the occasional fluffy piece to please his employers.



Hate to say I told ya so, but…

We the people *strongly* dislike royalty and dynasties.


----------



## Chanbal

lindacris said:


> Longtime lurker here.  Why doesn’t the person who made the comment about the baby’s skin color beat them to the punch and admit to saying it and state what they really meant or apologize profusely if they dont have a good explanation?  It seems like this would hurt the book deal since money is all that matters to those two.


You must be informed that this thread competes with Chanel, VCA, and several other forums… it can also be a slippery slope. 

Having said that, the story about the baby's skin color has many holes on it. She said the family was concerned about how dark Arch*e would be. When he joined the interview, and was asked to comment on it, he said it was a conversation at the beginning of their relationship and prior to the wedding, so no Arch*e on the horizon.

It's very possible that the person, they eventually plan to name, is clueless. They could be distorting an innocent comment… They did it with several of their statements, the prince title, wedding date, …


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wish. Jack Royston has the unenviable position of being the sole Newsweek employee who covers Harry and Meghan. Lately it seems he has grown tired of the subjects of his assignment and he’ll slip in a little negative commentary when possible while still putting out the occasional fluffy piece to please his employers.


Let's give him some encouragement.


----------



## HermesHope

My French is terrible, but what about something like…

“Les Eaux des 16 Toilettes”

would that do?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> My sister’s husband, a heavy smoker in his younger days, is in the hospital for heart surgery.
> New valve and a pacemaker - so far so good.


Prayers for him; yes .. my husband was also a heavy-duty smoker in his youth and when I first met him, he was still smoking.  He realized pretty quickly that I loathed smoking as my mother was also a very heavy smoker (3 packs a day), and had had cancer 2 times (it was the 3rd time cancer that FINALLY made her stop - sheesh)!!  As such, he quit cold-Turkey, and to this day .. I'm pretty impressed that he did that and did that for me!  It's funny though, he is now that prior smoker who goes NUTS if he catches anyone smoking near a sign that says "No Smoking", to the point that I have had to intervene to ensure that a fight doesn't ensue!


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> I would be surprised if she was a smoker.


Mega-lo-maniac did indeed smoke during her Suits days (and prior), there are pictures of her (somewhere) where she was with her former (and now Markled) Canadian stylist "friend", where she is smoking.  Rumors are that she pretty much did whatever she could to stay as thin as she could for her Z-list acting jobs .. apparently, that also included using some type of speed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania can we trust this?
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month*
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle got a greater percentage of positive coverage in British mainstream media than American in September, according to analysis for Newsweek by a data intelligence agency.
> 
> *British mainstream media outlets from print to broadcast delivered 50 percent positive coverage, 16 percent neutral and 33 percent negative over the course of the month, research by Zignal Labs suggests.
> 
> Reporting by American mainstream media outlets was 44 percent positive, 28 percent neutral and 28 percent negative.
> 
> The mainstream media was more positive than social media in both countries, according to the research.*
> 
> It comes after Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March the couple left Britain in part because of racism, adding that "the UK press is very bigoted."
> 
> *The company pooled mainstream media mentions from* news, data mining platform LexisNexis and broadcast, as well as digital platforms including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, blogs, videos,* online forums* and more.
> 
> Of the total, 12,540 mentions of Harry and Meghan were identifiably from the U.K. and 34,997 mentions were American, although some social media posts are not possible to geo track.
> 
> The month was dominated by two main stories about the couple, the first of which was their inclusion in the Time100 most influential people list and a joint cover shoot, when there was a spike of 13,000 on September 15…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Covered More Positively in U.K. Media Than U.S. Last Month
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were covered more positively in Britain than America in September despite leaving the U.K. to escape negativity, according to research for Newsweek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


What a thrilling and fulfilling job this must be, to count the number of positive vs negative mentions in the US vs the UK.  
I put that right after checking the fetal matter in waste water at US dormitories to check for a certain virus.  Actually, I guess it's a toss up.


----------



## papertiger

HermesHope said:


> My French is terrible, but what about something like…
> 
> “Les Eaux des 16 Toilettes”
> 
> would that do?



How about just 

*'Eau de Toilette'*

Or

*'EDT No 6'*

That way Stans can just buy it and put it down the toilet


----------



## Annawakes

papertiger said:


> How about just
> 
> *'Eau de Toilette'*
> 
> Or
> 
> *'EDT No 6'*
> 
> That way Stans can just buy it and put it down the toilet


It’s a perfume AND poo-purri!  Ain’t it great?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> She probably started smoking in college or when she started acting to control her weight. I read an article once about how many female Ivy League students smoke despite knowing the health risks. Tobacco kills your taste buds. I wonder if anyone has ever researched a connection between the decline in US women smoking and the rise in obesity.


It also raises the metabolism, and the same with Caffeine (hence the reason why you see many of them CONSTANTLY drinking Starbucks or other coffee chain coffee).  Many also take drugs for ADD and/or amphetamines, just look at Lindsay Lohan and other young actresses .. bone thin and then they overdo it and get caught.


----------



## xeyes

Another one from Enty:





__





						Blind Item #3
					

Don't believe the hype. The alliterate one has no plans to sell makeup or anything else. She doesn't have the influence to sell enough produ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## EverSoElusive

Another perfume name...

Eau de 16 toilette, a sweet nod to their 16 bathrooms


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Forbes calls it like it is.


*The Archewell Scramble: Why Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Need To Be Seen Doing Serious, And Seriously Good, Things*
Late September in New York can be delightful: clear bright days, temps in the 80s but not quite so muggy, Broadway re-opening, everybody back to school. And so it was with open arms that the United Nations and much of New York welcomed California’s do-good It-Couple of the moment, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, with open arms. They quietly breezed into the East Side’s luxe Hotel Carlyle, the site of Archie’s plush baby shower back in the day, saw the mayor of New York City and the new governor of New York state atop 1 World Trade, did the tour of the 9/11 memorial, took some serious meetings at the United Nations, made an appeal from the stage at the fully-vaxxed Global Citizen Live concert in Central Park on September 25, hit a couple of local charities, dropped up to Harlem for a public school visit and a well-deserved feast at soul-food queen Melba’s beautiful restaurant, and boom, were en route out of town before many paparazzi were able to hound them too badly from the pavements in front of the Carlyle. It was termed by those involved a very “successful” visit, and it certainly seemed as if the furlong posts the couple passed were signs marking some sort of progress around the track. It is the kind of tactical, pinpoint-bombing run we’re going to be seeing from this couple. For the record, we’ll call it the Archewell Scramble.

A note for the seasoned travelers among us: The Archewell Scramble is not about taking your time. It’s about packing it all in and getting the hell out. It’s also not cheap. It requires lots of freshly-pressed costume and multiple communications devices manned by a trusted Praetorian Guard so that the principals, in this case, of Archewell, can concentrate fully on executing the perfect, down-to-the-second scramble before wheels up on the (fully paid carbon offset) private jet.

The point of this halcyon trip was, for the couple, multi-layered, and some of those layers were more urgent than not. Context is required: Harry is tanking in the polls in Britain — not that that fact, itself, matters at all to the man or to his current endeavors — but the reason he’s tanking is that the British have stopped believing what he says. It’s not just the fact of his ungainly exit from royal life, although that has been a wounding process and continues to be one.

The spike downwards for Harry is partly a result of the couple’s flailing in all sorts of — admittedly admirable, charitable — directions at once, their engagement in mental health initiatives, pandemic relief, child welfare, among others, across a wide variety of platforms. In a word, there’s a tremendous amount of wheel-spinning required to get all these well-meant initiatives off the ground, as there would naturally be. But: Things are a bit helter-skelter. Yes, they have a fine Hollywood-veteran team in place. Although many of these efforts are long-term, as contract after contract is announced, it doesn’t read as if there’s enough of the necessary laserlike focus to make it all truly happen. At some point you have to grind down to produce the actual work. Time will tell on that score. 


In the meantime, there’s the growing impression in Britain that Harry’s a dilettante, and worse, a bit of a traitor. If it had to be expressed as a thought it would run something like this: _He’s insulted his granny and his pop, and he’s traded encouraging our veterans and inner-city kids for doing it over with the Yanks. _

There can be worse things to be than light and all over the place, but the second element of the considerable downtick in popularity for Harry is that, at the same time as his charitable works are ushered into being — again, from the British perspective — the couple has not held back on issuing an apparently endless stream of rather cutting observations of Harry’s family and Meghan Markle’s experience of it. They do this either in person (to Oprah and/or to CBS correspondent Gayle King), or in the several indirect ways at their disposal, podcast, web harangue, whatever. The point is that the volume of unvarnished opprobrium issued by the Windsors of Montecito on, at or about the Windsors of Windsor is big, and is framed as somehow “therapeutic” or at least “healthy” for the Windsors of Montecito. The British are tired of that rationale. 

Naturally, with the Montecito Windsors’ new onrushing $25-million-plus four-book book deal, with the first volume being Harry’s unexpurgated as-told-to, the UK is girding for more of the same. In Harry’s case, it’s hard to tell what will mean more, what he’s already said, or what the man’s going to say next. In addition to his version of the death of his mother, also remaining to be revealed is the identity of the relative who mused aloud to Harry how Archie’s skin tone would read in the family photographs, to mention just a couple of tropes that will drive sales. That noted, no matter what it entails, Harry’s first book will likely open and deeply explore family wounds. That will be its project. Put another way, with all these sharp gears meshing at high speed, the touted, and occasionally still longed-for, rapprochement with Charles, William and the Queen seems several horizons off.


Unsurprisingly, as negative public opinion on Harry has hardened in Britain with his every public step and misstep, Harry has come to be routinely excoriated and satirized in the take-no-prisoners tabloids of Fleet Street — especially by the _Daily Mail_, with whose parent company, Associated Newspapers, no less a litigant than Meghan Markle is in a long invasion-of-privacy legal tangle for publishing extracts of a letter she wrote at the time of her wedding to her father. The _Mail_and the Windsors of Montecito play a very weaponly game of badminton, in other words, nearly as entertaining but not quite so heavy as the game played between Montecito and Buckingham Palace. 

Satirizing Harry and Meghan Markle is not exclusive to the _Mail. _Pretty much every scribe with a royal mandate does it, to the point that, reading the London papers, one could come away with the impression that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are, actually, ridiculous. Naturally, it’s more than a little difficult for anybody to keep a public face genuine, as we note from our thespians and politicians across the board. This is the third eddy, then, in the stream of public opinion that has caused such a downturn for Harry in the polls. 

So far, so good. The still-young Windsors of Montecito are busy setting roots, running from pillar to post, inking an apparently endless stream of contract offers, and all the chaff stirred up may in fact settle as they start to produce. Suffice it to say that, unlike other startups, they have no trouble with backing. With the book deal putting them at somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 million (on paper, and counting), or perhaps north of that given what we don’t know, they are among the most heavily backed couples in entertainment in the country. The question is, rather, what they will actually produce. It’s a big question getting bigger by the day, for them and for their now several heavily-invested backers. 

In New York, correspondents assigned to the Harry beat were initially baffled that there was a mysteriously civilian, aka, non-news, camera team with the couple at all junctures, lending credibility to the notion that Netflix would be taking its pound of flesh for its massive contract with the couple in the form of a day-in-the-life docu-product “reality” vehicle. Which is not to say, now that the Kardashians have abdicated, that the Harry and Meghan Markle show will become the next version of that benighted empire, although in ratings and in revenue-stream terms it would be easy to imagine that Netflix executives would want exactly that, or something very close to it.


Either way, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle desperately need to provide a meaningful narrative to and for their doings. They’ve made some good business, or at least attracted considerable investment, by explaining themselves, and they will keep doing that, if a Netflix doc is any indication. But they need to become greater than whatever Netflix turns out as The Harry And Meghan Markle Show, however many installments the thing gets. In the largest sense there has to be meat to feed the maw, and it has to nourish to keep the audience coming back. They can’t just sit in Montecito and collect contracts. If the story just absolutely has to be about them as it often appears they think it does, then that story has to _go somewhere_. They have to perform. And: It has to be a certain kind of performance. Worthy, if you will, of royalty. 

On cue, the United Nations, ever in need of celebrity endorsement, has an open door to global names from all over, but especially from Hollywood, and there’s also a VIP charity concert in Central Park that needs a bit of a boost between numbers, and some charities to check in on up in Harlem. All serious, all easy-to-assemble gravitas, all good. Presto: An ideal road-trip for Prince Harry.









						The Archewell Scramble: Why Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Need To Be Seen Doing Serious, And Seriously Good, Things
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have to put some content up, fast, and not just to satisfy their Netflix and Spotify deals. They need to be taken seriously.  What better way to do that than to go to New York.




					www.google.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I recall she wanted him to quit drinking beer (or whatever alcohol)....she represents herself as a natural/holistic type I think....daughter of the yoga instructor



There could be a confusion with the language. We may _think_ we know what the words mean, but there are many variations. California can have different definitions for _alcohol_ and _smoking_, right?  Imo, ymmv.


----------



## octopus17

CeeJay said:


> Prayers for him; yes .. my husband was also a heavy-duty smoker in his youth and when I first met him, he was still smoking.  He realized pretty quickly that I loathed smoking as my mother was also a very heavy smoker (3 packs a day), and had had cancer 2 times (it was the 3rd time cancer that FINALLY made her stop - sheesh)!!  As such, he quit cold-Turkey, and to this day .. I'm pretty impressed that he did that and did that for me!  It's funny though, he is now that prior smoker who goes NUTS if he catches anyone smoking near a sign that says "No Smoking", to the point that I have had to intervene to ensure that a fight doesn't ensue!


Ex-smokers are the worst, in a good way , and I should know because I am one of them  and both you and he are very lucky that he quit. I was such a stubborn and thran moo that I only stopped when I could feel the clag draining from one lung to another depending on which side I lay on at night


----------



## CarryOn2020

From CDAN post -


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems she has a thing for citrus stuff - could be a Cali thing
Remember this from the Tig days?


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I don't disagree with you, but there are many who would view that as a racist comment under any circumstances, coming from someone with "white privilege".


Thanks for the viewpoint. I might not understand the situation in the UK as my home country is multiracial.
ETA: I believe they would yell "racist" even if the person said "will the baby look more like you or like your wife".
If it ever did happen, since they can't even agree on whether this happened before marriage or before birth. Must be the trauma messing up their memories  



charlottawill said:


> Funny thing is, she and "the former guy" hate each other.


Both are narcs and both want to be top dog.


----------



## gracekelly

*Why Diana is the third wheel in Harry and Meghan's marriage: Aged 16 Duchess wept when she saw his funeral flowers to 'Mummy' and Prince says he thinks of her every day, writes the princess' confidante ANDREW MORTON*


I can’t even regarding this. Meghan wept big tears. Sure she did.


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> *Why Diana is the third wheel in Harry and Meghan's marriage: Aged 16 Duchess wept when she saw his funeral flowers to 'Mummy' and Prince says he thinks of her every day, writes the princess' confidante ANDREW MORTON*
> 
> 
> I can’t even regarding this. Meghan wept big tears. Sure she did.


 I thought she knew nothing about the royal family


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> I thought she knew nothing about the royal family


Boom.


----------



## Icyjade

pukasonqo said:


> I thought she knew nothing about the royal family



clearly she can’t keep track of her lies


----------



## littlemisskeira

gracekelly said:


> *Why Diana is the third wheel in Harry and Meghan's marriage: Aged 16 Duchess wept when she saw his funeral flowers to 'Mummy' and Prince says he thinks of her every day, writes the princess' confidante ANDREW MORTON*
> 
> 
> I can’t even regarding this. Meghan wept big tears. Sure she did.


If there is any truth to her weeping at the sight of the funeral and the funeral flowers, then she would probably be weeping for William who was 15 like her back then in 1997. Can't imagine a 15 girl going for a 12 boy ... 

And just let the dead rest in peace. Too lowball to use the dead repeatedly for publicity.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> It also raises the metabolism, and the same with Caffeine (hence the reason why you see many of them CONSTANTLY drinking Starbucks or other coffee chain coffee).  Many also take drugs for ADD and/or amphetamines, just look at Lindsay Lohan and other young actresses .. bone thin and then they overdo it and get caught.


Not so sure about the caffeine Ceejay...I drink lots of coffee and can't seem to drop a pound


----------



## 1LV

From the Santa Barbara News Press, posted a few days ago (I’m trying to catch up!), Exiled in Montecito:  History repeats itself with Prince Harry and Meghan.  “The real questions are these: Did Prince Harry flee? Or, like his great-great-uncle, was he duped by bigger brains into departing his homeland into exile?”

I’m thinking it’s the latter.  We all know you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.  Now we know how far you can lead a jacka$$ without a rope.


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> The one with the d
> The one with the dog face is kind of unnecessary.
> 
> *Had a sort of revelation this morning. I pity her. She will never know true happiness. Family time, making memories, albeit in the public eye. The thirst and lust she has for fame and money is actually quite sad.*
> 
> Now as to her handbag husband he’s still as stupid and dumb as the day he married.  No change there in my opinion. He might be mentally ill, big difference between that mental health issues I think. He’s just dumb and stupid.


I completely agree with you.  Nothing will ever be enough so she will always be left wanting.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> *Why Diana is the third wheel in Harry and Meghan's marriage: Aged 16 Duchess wept when she saw his funeral flowers to 'Mummy' and Prince says he thinks of her every day, writes the princess' confidante ANDREW MORTON*
> 
> 
> I can’t even regarding this. Meghan wept big tears. Sure she did.



It could be true, but I can’t give much credibility to Andrew Morton. He’s made so much money off of writing about Diana and he keeps going back to drink from that well year after year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> America has 19 million veterans and chooses Harry to give awards…TC uses some rough words, but unfortunately, he makes a valid point.
> What's going on in the world nowadays? Are we going insane? I feel like packing and move to a news-free place.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Trevor Coult



A-effing-men.


----------



## Sharont2305

I read today that when Charles is king, he's going to have an apartment in Buckingham Palace and give Windsor Castle to the Cambridges. The plan was to give Harry Clarence House. 
Oh dear, that not going to go down well with you know who.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> I read today that when Charles is king, he's going to have an apartment in Buckingham Palace and give Windsor Castle to the Cambridges. The plan was to give Harry Clarence House.
> Oh dear, that not going to go down well with you know who.


I hope there are now no plans to give Hazard anything. The Miserable Moron of MonteShitshow will never settle for less than Buckingham Palace. I'm sure if she runs to OW wailing again about the injustice, she will win widespread public support to give her an apartment in the Tower of London.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I read today that when Charles is king, he's going to have an apartment in Buckingham Palace and give Windsor Castle to the Cambridges. The plan was to give Harry Clarence House.
> Oh dear, that not going to go down well with you know who.


Oh yes, Clarence House has no comparison to a certain 16 (or 19) - toilet mansion. Though, one could live in Clarence House but not own it. 

I read a post on twitter claiming that the meeting with the UN deputy SG was cut short when it was discovered that a certain couple was secretly wired…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oh yes, Clarence House has no comparison to a certain 16 (or 19) - toilet mansion. Though, one could live in Clarence House but not own it.
> *
> I read a post on twitter claiming that the meeting with the UN deputy SG was cut short when it was discovered that a certain couple was secretly wired…*


This, if true, should be illegal.  In addition, I don't care who you are, everyone should be required to go through security screening.  If they'd been patted down, it would've been discovered if they were "secretly wired".


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> This, if true, should be illegal.  In addition, I don't care who you are, everyone should be required to go through security screening.  If they'd been patted down, it would've been discovered if they were "secretly wired".


Yes, I would think so. I don't know what happened, but hopefully other sources will clarify this. 



Spoiler: source


----------



## rose60610

People should assume that whenever the duplicitous duo show up they're probably wired. Shame that their servants in the U.K. weren't wired.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It could be true, but I can’t give much credibility to Andrew Morton. He’s made so much money off of writing about Diana and he keeps going back to drink from that well year after year.


what?
I thought she said she knew nothing about the family before she met H


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh yes, Clarence House has no comparison to a certain 16 (or 19) - toilet mansion. Though, one could live in Clarence House but not own it.
> 
> I read a post on twitter claiming that the meeting with the UN deputy SG was cut short when it was discovered that a certain couple was secretly wired…


Oops, awkward


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> what?
> I thought she said she knew nothing about the family before she met H


----------



## V0N1B2

I can't just see Meghan's next sit-down with Oprah:
"There were three of us in the marriage..."


----------



## charlottawill

The last line of this is perfect 



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...paign=VF_CH_100321&utm_term=VYF_Cocktail_Hour


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Oh yes, Clarence House has no comparison to a certain 16 (or 19) - toilet mansion. Though, one could live in Clarence House but not own it.
> 
> I read a post on twitter claiming that the meeting with the UN deputy SG was cut short when it was discovered that a certain couple was secretly wired…


when you stop to think about it, if this is true, how far H has fallen...can you imagine in your wildest dreams the queen doing a stunt like that?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> when you stop to think about it, if this is true, how far H has fallen...can you imagine in your wildest dreams the queen doing a stunt like that?


I'm embarrassed for him, but he backed himself into a corner by buying into her plan for world domination. They probably need a lot of cash fast and are getting desperate. William probably shakes his head and says "Told you so little bro".


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm embarrassed for him, but he backed himself into a corner by buying into her plan for world domination. They probably need a lot of cash fast and are getting desperate. William probably shakes his head and says "Told you so little bro".


I wonder if he is embarassed or if he is just buying into the whole scheme and thinks he's getting away with something


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if he is embarassed or if he is just buying into the whole scheme and thinks he's getting away with something


Judging by his expressions in photos I think he's embarrassed, as in "How did I get to this point?". But you may be right.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Judging by his expressions in photos I think he's embarrassed, as in "How did I get to this point?". But you may be right.


who knows what he's thinking or feeling?  I don't think he really enjoys the attention as much as His Wife does


----------



## rose60610

Since Meghan enjoys telling the world "her truth", shouldn't her U.K. servants/bodyguards be able to tell their truth? But they're probably concerned with future employment with anyone if they did   .


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Since Meghan enjoys telling the world "her truth", shouldn't her U.K. servants/bodyguards be able to tell their truth? But they're probably concerned with future employment with anyone if they did   .


They'll bide their time until she's a has been royal in ten years, and then maybe they'll spill some hot tea.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> The last line of this is perfect



He could have had such a nice life. Heck, they both could have if someone wasn't going to choke on their greed and ego.

There's a German fairytale, "The Fisherman and his Wife". They live in a shack, but one day the fisherman catches a magic fish. He promises the fisherman whatever he asks for if he releases him, so he asks for a beautiful house. When he comes home to said beautiful house and tells the story his wife starts b*tching how he should have asked for more, how he could have blackmailed the fish etc. Subsequently, she sends the embarassed husband back with more outrageous requests every day - she wants a castle, become king, emperor, pope - until she sends him back demanding to be made God. That's when the fish has finally had it and puts her back into the shack.

Maybe I shall shift my favouritism from Raptor to Ilsebill (wife's name).


----------



## Sharont2305

Just watched the Earthsot programme presented by and narrated by Prince William. Disney should've got him to do the narrating of that elephant thing Megs did. Perfect voice for it.


----------



## Chanbal

Was the couple expecting crowds?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Just watched the Earthsot programme presented by and narrated by Prince William. Disney should've got him to do the narrating of that elephant thing Megs did. Perfect voice for it.



Isn't it funny in a tragic way that they want to be stars so badly - at least one of them -, but it's William who's hosting a five-part documentary? 

Maybe they should have stayed. Ya know, Wills can't do it all once he has a kingdom to rule and people would have been willing to consider them for stuff like this.


----------



## Chanbal

I thought that Marie Claire was one of their magazines, maybe not! 











						Seriously, Harry and Meghan Need to Cool It on the Private Jets
					

They flew private...from an event that called for climate change action. ‍♀️




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems she has a thing for citrus stuff - could be a Cali thing
> Remember this from the Tig days?
> View attachment 5212527


That picture! Scary. She probably plays the Ouija board to get her “motivation.” That has to be it.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder where this picture belongs. It's an interesting one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder where this picture belongs. It's an interesting one.




Commonwealth Day / Service at Westminster Abbey 2018. Meghan's first official appearance with the Queen (I guess they counted Christmas as private occasion?), once again before the wedding. And she already was wishing the plague on Kate. Ew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## zinacef

About time for a Christmas card?  Or a Christmas sketch? It’s probably been made already!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Commonwealth Day / Service at Westminster Abbey 2018. Meghan's first official appearance with the Queen (I guess they counted Christmas as private occasion?), once again before the wedding. And she already was wishing the plague on Kate. Ew.


Talk about shooting daggers at someone


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

pukasonqo said:


> I thought she knew nothing about the royal family


THANK YOU .. yet again, part of her PACK OF LIES (HER translation = 'TRUTH')!!!  Seriously, someone should keep track of all her BS comments such that someone can retort her on her BS!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Talk about shooting daggers at someone



If I remember correctly there is video footage out there as well, so it's not just an unfortunate picture.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If I remember correctly there is video footage out there as well, so it's not just an unfortunate picture.


Looks like she's contemplating skinning Kate and wearing her. I wouldn't be surprised if William was her original target but decided she'd have to settle for the spare. Wanna bet there were pictures of William, not Harry, in her room when she was a teen?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it funny in a tragic way that they want to be stars so badly - at least one of them -, but it's William who's hosting a five-part documentary?
> 
> Maybe they should have stayed. Ya know, Wills can't do it all once he has a kingdom to rule and people would have been willing to consider them for stuff like this.


the arrogance - she thought she could just take that title and run with it.  and she has but we'll see how far they get


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5213449



Here’s the video:


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Talk about shooting daggers at someone


sorry for repeating myself but as I've said before, I think she probably thought it would be easy for her, the Big Hollywood Star, to outshine Kate.  But she was Wrong.  Kate is beautiful, tall, slender, wears beautiful clothes that fit her perfectly and behaves appropriately all the time.  Who wins?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> It could be true, but I can’t give much credibility to Andrew Morton. He’s made so much money off of writing about Diana and he keeps going back to drink from that well year after year.


And who was in the room to see her weep?  Did he get first hand reports from all present?  This is exactly what irks me about all these books with crap like this.  Scobie was a perfect example.  Only a moron would believe that the first hand things he was writing about were not told to him directly by Meghan and/or Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I read today that when Charles is king, he's going to have an apartment in Buckingham Palace and give Windsor Castle to the Cambridges. The plan was to give Harry Clarence House.
> Oh dear, that not going to go down well with you know who.


I don't believe that will happen.  That is wishful thinking on the part of someone.  If Harry was still a working royal, I could see that, but not now. He doesn't deserve it.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself but as I've said before, I think she probably thought it would be easy for her, the Big Hollywood Star, to outshine Kate.  But she was Wrong.  Kate is beautiful, tall, slender, wears beautiful clothes that fit her perfectly and behaves appropriately all the time.  Who wins?


Big Hollywood Star. That's a good one.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Big Hollywood Star. That's a good one.


I actually heard some TV or radio person saying what a big star she was.  Like Suits was a big show and she was the star of it.  Neither of which is true.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself but as I've said before, I think she probably thought it would be easy for her, the Big Hollywood Star, to outshine Kate.  But she was Wrong.  Kate is beautiful, tall, slender, wears beautiful clothes that fit her perfectly and behaves appropriately all the time.  Who wins?



Right! In the video in post #76,010 Meghan is clearly out of her element and overwhelmed by the church service. You can see her talking idiotic word salads to the people in line. Granted she was new to the hoopla, but isn't she supposed to be such a great actress? And why wear white to this ceremony? Almost everyone else was in dark clothes. She wanted to stand out. Well she DOES stand out. Her stupidity and greed make her stand out and she looks like a fool thinking she could one up the BRF. She thought she could be a huge star in Hollyweird but nobody is beating a path to her door in Montecito either. For whatever money they're making in deals, it's a pittance to what they could have had in store had they stayed with the BRF. When she's with Kate, the cameras fixate on Kate, not her. Spare means SPARE, not King, Dearie. When Meghan realized she was relegated to Spare's arm candy, not international influencer, she thought she'd be treated like a Queen in the U.S. That's not panning out. She and Chump hang with chickens and have to invite themselves to events.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself but as I've said before, I think she probably thought it would be easy for her, the Big Hollywood Star, to outshine Kate.  But she was Wrong.  Kate is beautiful, tall, slender, wears beautiful clothes that fit her perfectly and behaves appropriately all the time.  Who wins?



But the audacity when you've been there for only a hot minute and are not even officially a part of the family! Astonishing.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the video:



I only watched the first few minutes of this, but was reminded of the high hopes I had that she would do us (the U.S.) proud, show us in a good light.  I was really, really rooting for her.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> This, if true, should be illegal.  In addition, I don't care who you are, everyone should be required to go through security screening.  If they'd been patted down, it would've been discovered if they were "secretly wired".


Interesting!!! .. I believe that in California, you MUST make the other party aware that you are recording them (remember the case with Yeezy and Taylor Swift)?!!?  I would imagine the same to exist in NY, and especially when talking to a person in that type of capacity!  I hope that they get nailed for this, and yet again .. who knows the word *HYPOCRISY*???????  They want PRIVACY yet .. they are secretly recording others?????


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> I only watched the first few minutes of this, but was reminded of the high hopes I had that she would do us (the U.S.) proud, show us in a good light.  I was really, really rooting for her.



You were not alone in thinking that. Remember, at this point, H&M were already planning their exit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> You were not alone in thinking that. Remember, at this point, H&M were already planning their exit.


Hard to believe what all has transpired since the time most of us first heard of her (& not from Suits).  I still can’t wrap my mind around the cunning and conniving - from both of them.  Normal people don’t think like that.

Edit - Change “normal” to “decent”


----------



## eunaddict

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the video:




She seems perfectly SKILLED in heels on cobblestone.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I thought that Marie Claire was one of their magazines, maybe not!
> 
> View attachment 5213439
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, Harry and Meghan Need to Cool It on the Private Jets
> 
> 
> They flew private...from an event that called for climate change action. ‍♀️
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Some of the publications have started playing both sides, which only seems fair.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Some of the publications have started playing both sides, which only seems fair.


Some of them may finally be waking up to the fact that more than Markle stans read their publications. There are intelligent people with reasonable minds who recognize the lying cheating narcissistic hypocritical Miserable Morons of MonteShitshow* need to be called out on their behaviors because their words and their Archewell site are hollow.

  *to xincinsin for this insightful description, had to use it,


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> Interesting!!! .. I believe that in California, you MUST make the other party aware that you are recording them (remember the case with Yeezy and Taylor Swift)?!!?  I would imagine the same to exist in NY, and especially when talking to a person in that type of capacity!  I hope that they get nailed for this, and yet again .. who knows the word *HYPOCRISY*???????  They want PRIVACY yet .. they are secretly recording others?????



Actually NY and CA are different - when it comes to recording conversations CA is a two-party consent state while NY is a one-party consent state. So if this were a recording that is presented as evidence in court they would be able to use it according to NY law. What I don’t know is if you can create Netflix shows without letting people know they’re being filmed - that I highly doubt…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe they realize the future is this:


	

		
			
		

		
	
 and 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 and 
	

		
			
		

		
	




Not the _other_:

_

_and 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
 and


----------



## Chanbal

This is how Am*zon advertises the masterpiece. Please feel free to use the provided buckets.  

_"*A truthful well written book* about the lovely couple … and R*chel M*ghan Mo*ntbatten-W*ndsor…
affectionally known as H*rry and M*ghan."_


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> This is how Am*zon advertises the masterpiece. Please feel free to use the provided buckets.
> 
> _"*A truthful well written book* about the lovely couple … and R*chel M*ghan Mo*ntbatten-W*ndsor…
> affectionally known as H*rry and M*ghan."_
> View attachment 5213606





How is Marklenator Mo*ntbatten anything if all she ever did was trashing the BRF??? She has nothing but all the disdain in the world for the institution.


----------



## Chanbal

I came across this "book of False Memories" and whoever is writing this is hilarious. He/she should be hired by N*fl*x instead of… Wife wore the wrong Santa suit…


----------



## pukasonqo

Just saw a video on youtube discussing the rise of the Ks
Meghan’s mistake was not to get PMK on the payroll, if she built an empire out of Kimbo’s a$$ets and a talentless group of girls she could have done wonders for Flower and her minion (a bit of a challenge maybe)


----------



## Stansy

tiktok said:


> Actually NY and CA are different - when it comes to recording conversations CA is a two-party consent state while NY is a one-party consent state. So if this were a recording that is presented as evidence in court they would be able to use it according to NY law. What I don’t know is if you can create Netflix shows without letting people know they’re being filmed - that I highly doubt…


But then the UN is not NY right? I mean it is some land within the city limits of NY, but do NY laws apply? Or a different jurisdiction? Sorry for my word salad, but I don‘t know how to phrase it differently and more understandably 

eta: it just dawned on me that this is a perfect question for MM who not only is a paralegal (after all she was the big star of Suits) but also has a degree in int‘l relations, haha


----------



## mellibelly

Wonder how 6 feels about Netflix now that they’ve brought us Diana the Musical

Just kidding, he’s fine cashing the check and being the world’s biggest hypocrite.


----------



## csshopper

George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "star studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.

Two years have given ample examples of why the Morons might not make "the cut".

Meantime in London this past week, who lit up the red carpet at the "Live or Let Die" premier?  Wow, what a contrast!


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Wonder how 6 feels about Netflix now that they’ve brought us Diana the Musical
> 
> Just kidding, he’s fine cashing the check and being the world’s biggest hypocrite.



Isn’t this the thing David Foster, H’s real dad, put together? Iirc, they discussed it over dinner one night. 
Googled it - Yes, Foster and Kelly Devine, the choreographer, have worked together in the past. My theory is that DF provided the connections with Hazz’s approval.

So, in QE’s Platinum Jubileeeeee year, Diana ‘stuff’ dominates.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "start studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.
> 
> Two years have given ample examples of why the Morons might not make "the cut".
> 
> Meantime in London this past week, who lit up the red carpet at the "Live or Let Die" premier?  Wow, what a contrast!



The Tender Bar is the personal story of the ghostwriter working with Hazzie on his tell-all book (ahem).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Tender Bar is the personal story of the ghostwriter working with Hazzie on his tell-all book (ahem).


I'm starting to consider the possibility that J. R. Moehringer as ghostwriter for Hazz is just being used for PR purposes, and the wife and assistant Om*d are the ones writing his memoirs.  

There is so much misinformation being released like meeting the UN Secretary-General or having OW's personal party planner organizing the wife's birthday party…


----------



## mellibelly

New nickname from the comment section of Lady C’s most recent video: the Harlem Woketrotters


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe that will happen.  That is wishful thinking on the part of someone.  If Harry was still a working royal, I could see that, but not now. He doesn't deserve it.


That's why I said it was the plan (for Harry)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "star studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.



I'm sure they were invited but decided to decline to be with their kids who had to give up their parents for days already because they had to rescue the world.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> They'll bide their time until she's a has been royal in ten years, and then maybe they'll spill some hot tea.


Yeah royal news seems to have a super slow relay time. Wasn’t it only last year that thing about Morton making fake bank statements to show Diana came out? And she’s been deceased for over 20 years. I’m not sure why this is, I think part of it is royal correspondents are not the sharpest of journalists and part of it is the royal PR team are constantly trying to push a new, positive story.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> You were not alone in thinking that. Remember, at this point, H&M were already planning their exit.


She realised how many multiple hour, high Anglican Church services she’d have to attend & nope’d out immediately despite discovering her deeply held Anglican faith right before the marriage.  
Of course if you go to a public school like H did you are used to getting press-ganged into going to church several times a week so he was probably amazed to find church services could be under an hour & he wouldn’t have to attend in Cali

Also , am I the only one who thinks being the spare is the sweet deal?

You get to live in luxury too but nowhere near the same level of scrutiny. They also give you some pet projects to manage (despite any possible lack of qualifications and talent) so you can indulge your leadership fantasies.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "star studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.
> 
> Two years have given ample examples of why the Morons might not make "the cut".
> 
> Meantime in London this past week, who lit up the red carpet at the "Live or Let Die" premier?  Wow, what a contrast!


Good point and Amal practices in GB so I can see her being loyal to the Queen and she’s smart so I don’t think she suffers fools.


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> Just saw a video on youtube discussing the rise of the Ks
> Meghan’s mistake was not to get PMK on the payroll, if she built an empire out of Kimbo’s a$$ets and a talentless group of girls she could have done wonders for Flower and her minion (a bit of a challenge maybe)


I mean, I’m sure Mephistopholes herself could manage it- but I feel like much like the mafia the Ks (1) like to keep it in the family and (2) are very dangerous people to owe a favour to.

I feel like the couple are very much copying the K’s model that anything is good publicity and just constantly forcing news stories but they also want to cultivate this aloof mystery of their family life- which is the exact opposite of how the K clan works.

As the old saying goes, you can’t be Kim kardashian and Michael Jackson at the same time: though you can all have the same plastic surgeon. 



csshopper said:


> George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "star studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.
> 
> Two years have given ample examples of why the Morons might not make "the cut".
> 
> Meantime in London this past week, who lit up the red carpet at the "Live or Let Die" premier?  Wow, what a contrast!


Perhaps they were worried that ‘the tender bar’ would remind H too much of the glory days and he’d turn up naked or in a nazi outfit.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure they were invited but decided to decline to be with their kids who had to give up their parents for days already because they had to rescue the world.


Brilliant, they are on a rescue mission. I came across the link below about their foundation, and instead on commenting on it, I leave it here for you. 



Spoiler: speechless 












						Archewell Foundation
					

After the latest announcement of the *cough “Not for Profit” Archewell Foundation’s latest hire, I decided to take a look at the management and leadership of the Sussex’s, A…




					theduchessofnarsussex.com


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Good point and Amal practices in GB so I can see her being loyal to the Queen and she’s smart so I don’t think she suffers fools.


IMHO the baby shower - where MM hitched a ride with AC on a her private jet - was thanks enough for the invite to the wedding


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "star studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.
> 
> Two years have given ample examples of why the Morons might not make "the cut".
> 
> Meantime in London this past week, who lit up the red carpet at the "Live or Let Die" premier?  Wow, what a contrast!





CarryOn2020 said:


> The Tender Bar is the personal story of the ghostwriter working with Hazzie on his tell-all book (ahem).



No big Hollyweird invite to their “ghostwriters” story? Oh, the irony.


----------



## Chanbal

Looking for a second home in NYC? Who is paying for it?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> There is so much misinformation being released like meeting the UN Secretary-General or having OW's personal party planner organizing the wife's birthday party…



I’m not sure it’s always that misinformation is being released as much as it is sloppy journalism. These writers don’t bother to verify rumors anymore, they put whatever they hear out there in a desperate effort to be the first.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Brilliant, they are on a rescue mission. I came across the link below about their foundation, and instead on commenting on it, I leave it here for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: speechless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell Foundation
> 
> 
> After the latest announcement of the *cough “Not for Profit” Archewell Foundation’s latest hire, I decided to take a look at the management and leadership of the Sussex’s, A…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theduchessofnarsussex.com



Duchess of Narsussex is brilliant


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I actually heard some TV or radio person saying what a big star she was.  Like Suits was a big show and she was the star of it.  Neither of which is true.


I've seen/heard that before as well and what utter BS!  She was in the 2nd tier, not a "star" and quite honestly, I'm surprised that she was on for as long as she was because watching her (_although - I admit, I have NEVER watched the show .. I've only seen her via the videos posted in this thread_) so-called 'acting' was *PAINFUL* at best!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Brilliant, they are on a rescue mission. I came across the link below about their foundation, and instead on commenting on it, I leave it here for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: speechless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell Foundation
> 
> 
> After the latest announcement of the *cough “Not for Profit” Archewell Foundation’s latest hire, I decided to take a look at the management and leadership of the Sussex’s, A…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theduchessofnarsussex.com


Seven people for a Foundation that does nothing?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I've seen/heard that before as well and what utter BS!  She was in the 2nd tier, not a "star" and quite honestly, I'm surprised that she was on for as long as she was because watching her (_although - I admit, I have NEVER watched the show .. I've only seen her via the videos posted in this thread_) so-called 'acting' was *PAINFUL* at best!!


I never saw that show at all.  I did see her in some schlocky movie - like Hallmark or something like that - not that I watched the whole thing but it popped up on the TV.  to be fair I guess anyone acting in that would have come off pretty mediocre


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> Actually NY and CA are different - when it comes to recording conversations CA is a two-party consent state while NY is a one-party consent state. So if this were a recording that is presented as evidence in court they would be able to use it according to NY law. What I don’t know is if you can create Netflix shows without letting people know they’re being filmed - that I highly doubt…


AH .. didn't know that, thank you!!!  Seems kind of stinky though, not letting the 'other party' know that they are being recorded seems really shady to me and if it was me, I would make them stop recording and tell them to delete it!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> AH .. didn't know that, thank you!!!  Seems kind of stinky though, not letting the 'other party' know that they are being recorded seems really shady to me and if it was me, I would make them stop recording and tell them to delete it!


I thought you were supposed to have beeps on the line so you knew it was being recorded.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I thought you were supposed to have beeps on the line so you knew it was being recorded.


I think that was some time ago, and was a recording on a phone line .. not sure about the current technology.


----------



## Norm.Core

CeeJay said:


> I've seen/heard that before as well and what utter BS!  She was in the 2nd tier, not a "star" and quite honestly, I'm surprised that she was on for as long as she was because watching her (_although - I admit, I have NEVER watched the show .. I've only seen her via the videos posted in this thread_) so-called 'acting' was *PAINFUL* at best!!


She was 2nd Tier then and still 2nd Tier now. 

Poor Minor Duchess... Peripheral at best.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> George Clooney and Amal lit up Hollywood tonight at the LA Premier of his new movie "The Tender Bar"  with Ben Afleck. "A list" people attended what was described as a "star studded event" . Conspicuously absent from the Guest List were the Morons of Monteshitshow, who could have easily driven, not flown, down the Coast had they been invited. The Rapacious one must be distraught that her issuing a Wedding Invitation did not turn into a quid pro quo, let alone Amal's involvement in Archie's baby shower in NY two years ago not cementing a longed for BF connection.
> 
> Two years have given ample examples of why the Morons might not make "the cut".
> 
> Meantime in London this past week, who lit up the red carpet at the "Live or Let Die" premier?  Wow, what a contrast!


The Clooneys are very private. I imagine they found the O interview distasteful and H&M a little too loose lipped for their liking. It was a big mistake for them to do that interview. They'll never live it down.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> .... he’d turn up naked or in a nazi outfit.


----------



## charlottawill

le_junkie said:


> She was 2nd Tier then and still 2nd Tier now.
> 
> Poor Minor Duchess... Peripheral at best.


If she had just settled into her role as the wife of the spare, with all its related perks, she'd have achieved a higher status than she's ever going to have now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> The Clooneys are very private. I imagine they found the O interview distasteful and H&M a little too loose lipped for their liking. It was a big mistake for them to do that interview. They'll never live it down.




I feel most people with just a tiny bit of class and decency found that one distasteful (then again...apparently lots of US celebrities felt otherwise), especially with Philip on his deathbed.

But also, Amal is a lawyer. At some point, she HAD to sense the crazy.


----------



## csshopper

le_junkie said:


> She was 2nd Tier then and still 2nd Tier now.
> 
> Poor Minor Duchess... Peripheral at best.


Peripheral married to Expendable.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Looking for a second home in NYC? Who is paying for it?



NYC Old money will welcome PH but Meg? I don't think so. They see her kind come and go all the time and can spot a tiger miles away.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> NYC Old money will welcome PH but Meg? I don't think so. They see her kind come and go all the time and can spot a tiger miles away.


They will reject her the same way they rejected "the former guy". Despite their loathing of each other they actually have a lot in common.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> The Clooneys are very private. I imagine they found the O interview distasteful and H&M a little too loose lipped for their liking. It was a big mistake for them to do that interview. They'll never live it down.



It was noticed when George was interviewed at wedding and asked to detail his connection to the bridal couple, G answered something along the lines of we don’t really know them, and that went viral 
MM invited real intimates to sit on her side of the church


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> It was noticed when George was interviewed at wedding and asked to detail his connection to the bridal couple, G answered something along the lines of we don’t really know them, and that went viral
> MM invited real intimates to sit on her side of the church


And that is why he looked like the cat that ate the canary.  He couldn't believe that he was invited to a Royal Wedding and he wasn't going to pass it up.  His wife wore canary yellow and I have to find meaning in that LOL! Maybe she was the canary that ate the cat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

How can Hazz support this. 
*DAN WOOTTON: Unless Harry resigns from Netflix immediately in protest at the travesty that is Diana: The Musical then he is nothing more than the Prince of Hypocrisy*
_
If Prince Harry isn't writing his resignation letter to Netflix at this very moment after the international release of the revolting Diana musical then he is a man devoid of morals.

For years the Duke of Sussex has waged war against any media organisation which, in his eyes, demeans the memory of his late mother or exploits and misinterprets her life for commercial gain.

Over the weekend his new US paymasters did exactly that in the most outrageous fashion.

*Diana: The Musical is the most offensive and degrading portrayal of the late Princess of Wales in fiction since her death in 1997 – and in terms of accuracy it makes that other historically-derided Netflix series The Crown look like a royal encyclopaedia of truth.

The lies about Di's life are egregious – from suggesting she used HIV patients for publicity to attacking Margaret Thatcher for her politics.*

But at least she isn't around to see such nonsense broadcast to millions around the world.

Unlike Prince Harry's grandmother *the Queen, whom Netflix choose to portray as a heartless and nasty battleaxe who even suggests it would be easier to cut off Diana's head at the height of her messy split from Prince Charles.*

It would be easy to dismiss the musical as a ridiculous romp, as many US commentators have done since its release on Friday.

But Netflix is now streamer-by-appointment to Prince Harry.

*If he fails to speak out against such a horrendous depiction of his mother, then he is tacitly endorsing it.*

In a high-minded statement when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex signed a multi-million pound deal with Netflix last September, its boss *Ted Sarandos announced to the world: 'Harry and Meghan have inspired millions of people all around the world with their authenticity, optimism and leadership. We're incredibly proud they have chosen Netflix as their creative home – and are excited about telling stories with them that can help build resilience and increase understanding for audiences everywhere.'

Harry and his wife Meghan added: 'As new parents, making inspirational family programming is also important to us, as is powerful storytelling through a truthful and relatable lens. We are pleased to work with Ted and the team at Netflix whose unprecedented reach will help us share impactful content that unlocks action.'

There's certainly nothing about Diana: The Musical that informs or increases understanding – or is even truthful – about such an iconic figure.*
_
*Quite the opposite, in fact.*

…









						DAN WOOTTON: Harry should resign from Netflix over Diana: The Musical
					

DAN WOOTTON: If the Duke of Sussex isn't writing his resignation letter to Netflix after the international release of the revolting Diana musical then he is a man devoid of morals.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Annawakes

He has GOT to have something to say about this.


----------



## bag-mania

Don’t hold your breath waiting for Harry to condemn the Diana musical. Netflix owns him now. I bet he spent the advance they gave him months ago. I’m sure Meghan will explain to him (in small words) why he has to ignore that show and pretend it doesn’t exist.


----------



## Chanbal

The rumors about Mr. and Mrs. Hypocrisy going broke seem to be wrong. They get most services free of charge, and the money keeps coming…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Don’t hold your breath waiting for Harry to condemn the Diana musical. Netflix owns him now.* I bet he spent the advance they got months ago. I’m sure Meghan will explain to him (in small words) why he has to ignore that show and pretend it doesn’t exist.


Of course not, while he keeps receiving multi-million dollars from N*fl*x, he will never go against it. On the contrary…


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> *He has GOT to have something to say about this*.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Remember the David Foster connection to this $hit$how. 
From Sept, 2020:










						Calls for Harry to get Netflix to pull controversial musical 'Diana'
					

Netflix will screen the controversial musical, named 'Diana: A New Musical', which features a fictitious scene where the Queen labels her a 'tart'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> They will reject her the same way they rejected "the former guy". Despite their loathing of each other they actually have a lot in common.



Uh, just so ya know, the “former guy” is a born and raised New Yorker. She is a born and raised Cali girl. 
Big difference, huge.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember the David Foster connection to this $hit$how.
> From Sept, 2020:
> View attachment 5214517
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Calls for Harry to get Netflix to pull controversial musical 'Diana'
> 
> 
> Netflix will screen the controversial musical, named 'Diana: A New Musical', which features a fictitious scene where the Queen labels her a 'tart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


David Foster, the one that is like a father to him. As many said before, it looks like he sold his soul to the highest bidder.


----------



## rose60610

MM:  Failure in Europe, failure in Africa, failure in U.S./Canada  So that's THREE out of seven continents she's failed in.  I have faith that Maggot can fail in the other four as well. At least she's consistent.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> MM:  Failure in Europe, failure in Africa, failure in U.S./Canada  So that's THREE out of seven continents she's failed in.  I have faith that Maggot can fail in the other four as well. At least she's consistent.


She certainly didn't succeed in Australia, many of the funny news videos are from there.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Uh, just so ya know, the “former guy” is a born and raised New Yorker. She is a born and raised Cali girl.
> Big difference, huge.


Having been born and raised in the NY area, I am well aware of his background and am familiar with his antics long before he took to the national stage. For years he desperately wanted but failed to be accepted into the upper echelons of Manhattan society, who viewed him as boorish and from relatively new money. He bought Mar-a-Lago partly in the belief he'd have an easier time being welcomed into the right circles there, but the Palm Beach old guard detest him too. I meant that he and MM are alike in that they are social climbing, grifting narcissists.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Having been born and raised in the NY area, I am well aware of his background and am familiar with his antics long before he took to the national stage. For years he desperately wanted but failed to be accepted into the upper echelons of Manhattan society, who viewed him as boorish and from relatively new money. He bought Mar-a-Lago partly in the belief he'd have an easier time being welcomed into the right circles there, but the Palm Beach old guard detest him too. I meant that he and MM are alike in that they are social climbing, grifting narcissists.



Yes, I’m aware.  Thank you 
*Sadly*, there are plenty of those _social climbing, grifting narcissists _ in this world.
IMO  H&M are the more despicable types. I did not expect royalty to be so corrupt, but I have learned and still am learning who these royals really are. Hazzie knew better about grifters [or should have]. The old palace guard saw their chance to get rid  of the bratty boy, so they pushed the MM narrative.  Wallis&Ed,part deux - how low will they go?   Just my opinion.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> And that is why he looked like the cat that ate the canary.  He couldn't believe that he was invited to a Royal Wedding and he wasn't going to pass it up.  His wife wore canary yellow and I have to find meaning in that LOL! Maybe she was the canary that ate the cat.


Amal looked better than the bride: outfit, hairdo, make-up. Methane wanted to remind then hubby-to-be of her hot mess sexy image.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Amal looked better than the bride: outfit, hairdo, make-up. Methane wanted to remind then hubby-to-be of her hot mess sexy image.



Amal looks better than most women, imo. I wonder if she is even human. George seems to have found the perfect female, somehow


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The rumors about Mr. and Mrs. Hypocrisy going broke seem to be wrong. They get most services free of charge, and the money keeps coming…



They might get the security guards free in exchange for the security firm using them for publicity, but I do wonder how far they can coast on this way of skiving a living, and how much their credit will stretch when Methane's appetite for the high life will only grow bigger, larger, wider and deeper.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


>



This looks like a musical from South Park but with far worse music and lyrics   
I agree, this is incredibly incongruous as H has never had much of a sense of humour about anything, least of all his mother.

This is the problem with opening the floodgates, I guess, but maybe he doesn’t care quite as much when wealthy paymasters mock the family.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Brilliant, they are on a rescue mission. I came across the link below about their foundation, and instead on commenting on it, I leave it here for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: speechless
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell Foundation
> 
> 
> After the latest announcement of the *cough “Not for Profit” Archewell Foundation’s latest hire, I decided to take a look at the management and leadership of the Sussex’s, A…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theduchessofnarsussex.com


This is a very insightful point and  it correctly raise a lot of  questions about the competency of this organisation. Inefficient charity, especially international aid, has been known to do almost as much harm as good.

 I can’t say I’m surprised that how they actually help those in need is the least of their concerns considering how cack-handed their approach has been in general.

Edited this as a bit garbled


----------



## Aminamina

Was reading an article called  *Why parents should stop obsessing about having happy children *in the Telegraph and surprise! there’s this lovely comment:

miley Fogg4 Oct 2021 10:33AM

Everywhere now, we are told that anything that fails to make us happy is a threat to our 'mental health', and that we therefore need 'counselling' and phoney drugs. 
Born into and raised in such an environment at home, in school, and especially on the Net, it is not at all surprising that teenagers worry about their 'mental health'. They've just about been told that unless they do so, that in itself means there's something wrong with them. Public figures like Stephen Fry and the *Unmentionables* across the pond, go on and on about it. You must, must, must, the government must, must, must.
No one points to role models like Prince Philip, who had far more reason than most people to be _traumatised_ and suffer adverse effects on his 'mental health' but who to the very end refused to play the game.
And the counsellors and medical companies are laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aminamina said:


> Was reading an article called  *Why parents should stop obsessing about having happy children *in the Telegraph and surprise! there’s this lovely comment:
> 
> miley Fogg4 Oct 2021 10:33AM
> 
> Everywhere now, we are told that anything that fails to make us happy is a threat to our 'mental health', and that we therefore need 'counselling' and phoney drugs.
> Born into and raised in such an environment at home, in school, and especially on the Net, it is not at all surprising that teenagers worry about their 'mental health'. They've just about been told that unless they do so, that in itself means there's something wrong with them. Public figures like Stephen Fry and the *Unmentionables* across the pond, go on and on about it. You must, must, must, the government must, must, must.
> No one points to role models like Prince Philip, who had far more reason than most people to be _traumatised_ and suffer adverse effects on his 'mental health' but who to the very end refused to play the game.
> And the counsellors and medical companies are laughing all the way to the bank.


I think this is a dangerously stupid article to be honest.
Prince Philip is a ridiculous comparison to the average person because of the extreme nature of his lifestyle i.e. he never had any financial concerns for the entirety of his marriage, lived in luxury, he received the best health care possible for any ailment and he had an enormous team of staff to deal with any household and childcare tasks. 

Traumatic childhoods and tragic bereavements can cause mental illness, that is certain, but so can financial instability, disordered lifestyles  and feeling you are failing in your caring responsibilities.

If you have a traumatic childhood and you don’t need to pursue help that’s wonderful but no treatment for a health problem is one size fits all and it is ludicrous to describe it as ‘a game’ you can win by not playing. 
Also, it’s a small point but we don’t know what mental Heath care PP or indeed anyone else receives because it’s confidential unless he chooses to reveal it.

I do think some people overindulge themselves, of course,and there are  charlatan therapists out there (case in point that woman treating H on Apple TV) but the idea this is some manufactured problem is a completely disproportionate response.  

Finally, I find the mention of Stephen Fry in the context of being a whiner especially distasteful as he’s got bipolar disorder - a chronic condition  cwhich _is _expensive to manage and underfunded and is so serious it has cost many sufferers their lives.


----------



## Aminamina

jelliedfeels said:


> I think this is a dangerously stupid article to be honest.
> Prince Philip is a ridiculous comparison to the average person because of the extreme nature of his lifestyle i.e. he never had any financial concerns for the entirety of his marriage, lived in luxury, he received the best health care possible for any ailment and he had an enormous team of staff to deal with any household and childcare tasks.
> 
> Traumatic childhoods and tragic bereavements can cause mental illness, that is certain, but so can financial instability, disordered lifestyles  and feeling you are failing in your caring responsibilities.
> 
> If you have a traumatic childhood and you don’t need to pursue help that’s wonderful but no treatment for a health problem is one size fits all and it is ludicrous to describe it as ‘a game’ you can win by not playing.
> Also, it’s a small point but we don’t know what mental Heath care PP or indeed anyone else receives because it’s confidential unless he chooses to reveal it.
> 
> I do think some people overindulge themselves, of course,and there are  charlatan therapists out there (case in point that woman treating H on Apple TV) but the idea this is some manufactured problem is a completely disproportionate response.
> 
> Finally, I find the mention of Stephen Fry in the context of being a whiner especially distasteful as he’s got bipolar disorder - a chronic condition  cwhich _is _expensive to manage and underfunded and is so serious it has cost many sufferers their lives.


Let’s agree to disagree here. I liked the article. The focus is on obsessing over happiness and literally “making a child happy”’. Children and adults should be reminded it’s naturally OK not to feel happy at all times and in order to move on and make it better - one should learn to suck it up. 
As for Prince Phillip - his childhood was really traumatic indeed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Poor clueless stans. 

There is simply no scenario where a people as restrained and deeply polite as the Japanese would cheer for Harry and Raptor and their tasteless public drama.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also my minor dental surgery with no downtime as advertised by my dentist turned into 10 days of forced sick leave (to be fair, you couldn't see the true damage until it was cut open), and now that the numbing wears off it also hurts so please keep me entertained and distracted


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also my minor dental surgery with no downtime as advertised by my dentist turned into 10 days of forced sick leave (to be fair, you couldn't see the true damage until it was cut open), and now that the numbing wears off it also hurts so please keep me entertained and distracted


Sorry to hear that. It seems like Angela Levin is cornering the Japanese market- we can only hope Scabies responds quickly by doing some truly wacky made for Japan adverts though this might not help the companies involved as no one will know who the celeb is.

Conversely, I can see why giving H&M free security is great press for the companies as it is truly testament to their competence we haven’t seen a photo of either of them coated in rotten tomatoes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aminamina said:


> Let’s agree to disagree here. I liked the article. The focus is on obsessing over happiness and literally “making a child happy”’. Children and adults should be reminded it’s naturally OK not to feel happy at all times and in order to move on and make it better - one should learn to suck it up.
> As for Prince Phillip - his childhood was really traumatic indeed.


Agree to disagree to a point. 
I just feel you can make that statement, and in fact you just did, without disparaging people and misleadingly conflating several complex conditions, which is what the article did.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Uh, just so ya know, the “former guy” is a born and raised New Yorker. She is a born and raised Cali girl.
> Big difference, huge.


well he was from Queens....big difference between that and Manhattan.  I think that was part of the problem


----------



## sdkitty

these two are some pieces of work.  they want to live in the US and have all the freedom from royal duties but they want a Royal Christening with the queen in attendance for their baby?  Please.
Prince William Reportedly Refused This Highly Personal Olive Branch From Prince Harry (yahoo.com)


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Amal looks better than most women, imo. I wonder if she is even human. George seems to have found the perfect female, somehow


Amal was kinf of awkward and gawky in pictures I saw of her a few years before she met George, but somehow she really pulled together her fashion and image.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> these two are some pieces of work.  they want to live in the US and have all the freedom from royal duties but they want a Royal Christening with the queen in attendance for their baby?  Please.
> Prince William Reportedly Refused This Highly Personal Olive Branch From Prince Harry (yahoo.com)



I wish we could write in to Wills saying we appreciate his efforts


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> these two are some pieces of work.  they want to live in the US and have all the freedom from royal duties but they want a Royal Christening with the queen in attendance for their baby?  Please.
> Prince William Reportedly Refused This Highly Personal Olive Branch From Prince Harry (yahoo.com)



Love how the writer interpreted a demanding request as being a "highly personal olive branch." It's always easier when they show their biases right in the headline.


----------



## bag-mania

Wait, did Harry even make a request for a christening? Reading the article it sounds like it is all speculation.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


>



The talent is fabulous though. lol


----------



## Chanbal

In line with the first amendment being "bonkers" (according to Mr. Hypocrisy), a connection between fac*book whistleblower and the incredible foundation has been brought up on twitter. If true, this is crazy to say the least. 



Spoiler: Facebook Whistleblower


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Amal looked better than the bride: outfit, hairdo, make-up. Methane wanted to remind then hubby-to-be of her hot mess sexy image.


Amal may be private... but when she appears in public, she's all about the publicity.  

Saw her on TV a lot when she was representing an Al-Jazeera journalist/Canadian citizen and she was the only lawyer wearing all white and flipping her hair. Boy, did she stand out, as she must have wanted.  Another case she lost.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> In line with the first amendment being "bonkers" (according to Mr. Hypocrisy), a connection between fac*book whistleblower and the incredible foundation has been brought up on twitter. If true, this is crazy to say the least.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Facebook Whistleblower




I just refuse to believe these nobodies have actual influence. I just do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Saw her on TV a lot when she was representing an Al-Jazeera journalist/Canadian citizen and she was the only lawyer wearing all white and flipping her hair. Boy, did she stand out, as she must have wanted.  *Another case she lost.*



You say that as if she's a lousy lawyer?


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> The rumors about Mr. and Mrs. Hypocrisy going broke seem to be wrong. They get most services free of charge, and the money keeps coming…



Except they still have to declare the “free” services on their tax returns and pay taxes on those


----------



## breakfastatcartier

xincinsin said:


> Amal looked better than the bride: outfit, hairdo, make-up. Methane wanted to remind then hubby-to-be of her hot mess sexy image.


Remember how silly Amal looked as she was “strutting” towards the church? lol.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Amal may be private... but when she appears in public, she's all about the publicity.
> 
> Saw her on TV a lot when she was representing an Al-Jazeera journalist/Canadian citizen and she was the only lawyer wearing all white and flipping her hair. Boy, did she stand out, as she must have wanted.  Another case she lost.


I still give her credit for being an attorney.  she actually works and seems to have principles - unlike some people


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> Wait, did Harry even make a request for a christening? Reading the article it sounds like it is all speculation.


I’m pretty sure Meghan wanted a tax payer funded christening that she can wear something silly to.

Hasnt she learned from that last christening that Kate will always outshine her?


----------



## eunaddict

Aminamina said:


> Let’s agree to disagree here. I liked the article. The focus is on obsessing over happiness and literally “making a child happy”’. Children and adults should be reminded it’s naturally OK not to feel happy at all times and in order to move on and make it better - *one should learn to suck it up.*
> As for Prince Phillip - his childhood was really traumatic indeed.



The comment you quoted conflates bouts of unhappiness with actual medical conditions - eg. depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety. No one is happy all the time but no one says being mentally healthy = constant happiness. *No one should just "learn to suck up" having to live with a mental health issue, that's how suicides happen.*

As someone in the medical profession, I honestly find that comment ridiculous and old-fashioned. You cannot be healthy if you ignore mental health entirely (hence the new model of bio*psycho*social healthcare). As for Prince Phillip, let's remember that he personifies a generation that was raised on the motto "Do not complain, grin and bear it". In addition, no one knows if he suffered mental health issues from his war service - no one knows any aspect of his health records (except his family and doctors); to make assumptions that because nothing was made public therefore nothing was ever wrong is such an incredibly flawed view to adopt. I've worked in a veterans' hospital and so many come through with PTSD that was under/undiagnosed for decades because of lack of knowledge on medical practitioners' behalf and refusal to acknowledge that there even was an issue on the patient's behalf.

Mental health being brought to the forefront these days is amazing, incredible progress and still there is so much more progress to be made, so much stigma to overcome with diagnoses. Just because MM has made a mockery out of mental health does not mean it's okay to mock it further or that it's okay to deny its importance. It is NOT okay to tell children, teens, adults struggling that they should just suck it up, grin and bear it. We didn't know about mental health then, but we know better these days therefore we should do better.

ETA: actual article is behind a paywall and I can't be bothered.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> I still give her credit for being an attorney.  she actually works and seems to have principles - unlike some people


Honestly she’s just as dirty as Meghan but is smart about it.
There were reports of her being rude to staff, co workers, people she represented …etc. when she first became famous and was happy to bring along the cameras wherever she went so she would show the world how wonderful of an attorney she was.

Plus I heard she was just some small time, failure of a Hollywood attorney whose PR made her to be a “Human Rights Activist” once she got with Hollywood’s most eligible bachelor.

Meghan lacks discipline and self control. Which is many of her “celeb friends” either ghost her or support her from afar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> Honestly she’s just as dirty as Meghan but is smart about it.
> There were reports of her being rude to staff, co workers, people she represented …etc. when she first became famous and was happy to bring along the cameras wherever she went so she would show the world how wonderful of an attorney she was.
> 
> Plus I heard she was just some small time, failure of a Hollywood attorney whose PR made her to be a “Human Rights Activist” once she got with Hollywood’s most eligible bachelor.
> 
> Meghan lacks discipline and self control. Which is many of her “celeb friends” either ghost her or support her from afar.



Her mother is a well-known journalist iirc, so it follows that they would know how to spin everything and work the media in their favor. Yes, George did well in finding a photogenic female who looks to be aging quite well. On the other hand, was there any serious competition for the _Mrs. Clooney_ title?  I could be missing something, it seems like there are some parallels to Hazzie.


----------



## gracekelly

breakfastatcartier said:


> Remember how silly Amal looked as she was “strutting” towards the church? lol.


I didn't think she looked silly.  To me she looked as if she knew she owned her look and enjoyed the attention.  Not too many can pull off the yellow color and her hat.  She was one of the better dressed people there that day.  Her husband loved the attention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, George did well in finding a photogenic female who looks to be aging quite well. On the other hand, was there any serious competition for the _Mrs. Clooney_ title?  I could be missing something, it seems like there are some parallels to Hazzie.



George had been dating around forever but he was in his 50s and it was time for him to settle down and breed some children because the man wanted a legacy. Amal checked all of the boxes for what was important to him in a broodmare wife.

I imagine it went something like this.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is Leo next?!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Is Leo next?!



Probably not with the current girlfriend. I'd give him another ten years and another 2–3 super young girlfriends before he finally picks THE ONE.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> Plus I heard she was just some small time, failure of a Hollywood attorney whose PR made her to be a “Human Rights Activist” once she got with Hollywood’s most eligible bachelor.



That's interesting seeing how the few years she worked in the US she was based in NYC and not in LA. She also worked in The Hague for both The International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court before returning to the UK to work for a rather prestigious London law firm - and all of this before she'd even met George.


----------



## Aminamina

eunaddict said:


> The comment you quoted conflates bouts of unhappiness with actual medical conditions - eg. depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety. No one is happy all the time but no one says being mentally healthy = constant happiness. *No one should just "learn to suck up" having to live with a mental health issue, that's how suicides happen.*
> 
> As someone in the medical profession, I honestly find that comment ridiculous and old-fashioned. You cannot be healthy if you ignore mental health entirely (hence the new model of bio*psycho*social healthcare). As for Prince Phillip, let's remember that he personifies a generation that was raised on the motto "Do not complain, grin and bear it". In addition, no one knows if he suffered mental health issues from his war service - no one knows any aspect of his health records (except his family and doctors); to make assumptions that because nothing was made public therefore nothing was ever wrong is such an incredibly flawed view to adopt. I've worked in a veterans' hospital and so many come through with PTSD that was under/undiagnosed for decades because of lack of knowledge on medical practitioners' behalf and refusal to acknowledge that there even was an issue on the patient's behalf.
> 
> Mental health being brought to the forefront these days is amazing, incredible progress and still there is so much more progress to be made, so much stigma to overcome with diagnoses. Just because MM has made a mockery out of mental health does not mean it's okay to mock it further or that it's okay to deny its importance. It is NOT okay to tell children, teens, adults struggling that they should just suck it up, grin and bear it. We didn't know about mental health then, but we know better these days therefore we should do better.
> 
> ETA: actual article is behind a paywall and I can't be bothered.


Well, you bothered enough to reply without reading an article. No one said people just have to suck it up and avoid treatment when ill. Sorry, but try actually reading it before replying. The main point was not what you assumed. I quoted a reader’s reply and stated it clearly. Anyways, I liked the article I read and moved on.


----------



## Vintage Leather

See, I know this sounds terrible, but I don’t give a good gosh-darn about George and Amal. They’ve never asked for privacy, then sent out press releases about how they need attention. They didn’t talk to Oprah about how life is hard. They live their life. 

In short, they don’t show up in my daily news unless they are actually doing something interesting.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Vintage Leather said:


> See, I know this sounds terrible, but I don’t give a good gosh-darn about George and Amal. They’ve never asked for privacy, then sent out press releases about how they need attention. They didn’t talk to Oprah about how life is hard. They live their life.
> 
> In short, they don’t show up in my daily news unless they are actually doing something interesting.


I would have liked to have gone to their wedding!! Now that looked FUN!


----------



## Jayne1

breakfastatcartier said:


> Honestly she’s just as dirty as Meghan but is smart about it.
> There were reports of her being rude to staff, co workers, people she represented …etc. when she first became famous and was happy to bring along the cameras wherever she went so she would show the world how wonderful of an attorney she was.
> 
> Plus I heard she was just some small time, failure of a Hollywood attorney whose PR made her to be a “Human Rights Activist” once she got with Hollywood’s most eligible bachelor.
> 
> Meghan lacks discipline and self control. Which is many of her “celeb friends” either ghost her or support her from afar.


Apparently, Amal is not an actual human rights lawyer... she represents corrupt world leaders who have been charged with corruption. Then she spins it as a human rights case.

In court, she wears white or red in a sea of black and her hair is down, blown out and gorgeous. You can't miss her. A bit cunning, really.

Apparently she is beyond charming at dinner parties and she beguiled one of Hollywoods most loved and confirmed bachelors (not considering his first quick marriage before he became really successful) with her beauty, intellect and allure.

Meg has some of that, she was really charming in the beginning and she knew it, but as you wrote, lacks the discipline and self awareness for celebs to want to support her. I don't think Meg is as cunning as Amal.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> George had been dating around forever but he was in his 50s and it was time for him to settle down and breed some children because the man wanted a legacy. Amal checked all of the boxes for what was important to him in a broodmare wife.
> 
> I imagine it went something like this.
> 
> View attachment 5215059


Actually George was married once before.  He was married to Talia Balsam and divorced after 4 years.  At that time he said he didn't care to marry again or have children.  People change.  Obviously. lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently, Amal is not an actual human rights lawyer... she represents corrupt world leaders who have been charged with corruption. Then she spins it as a human rights case.
> 
> In court, she wears white or red in a sea of black and her hair is down, blown out and gorgeous. You can't miss her. A bit cunning, really.
> 
> Apparently she is beyond charming at dinner parties and she beguiled one of Hollywoods most loved and confirmed bachelors (not considering his first quick marriage before he became really successful) with her beauty, intellect and allure.
> 
> Meg has some of that, she was really charming in the beginning and she knew it, but as you wrote, lacks the discipline and self awareness for celebs to want to support her. I don't think Meg is as cunning as Amal.



*A* list vs. *Z* list


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Actually George was married once before.  He was married to Talia Balsam and divorced after 4 years.  At that time he said he didn't care to marry again or have children.  People change.  Obviously. lol!



Yeah, but he married her before he became a big star and booted her not long after.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's interesting seeing how the few years she worked in the US she was based in NYC and not in LA. She also worked in The Hague for both The International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court before returning to the UK to work for a rather prestigious London law firm - and all of this before she'd even met George.


He jokes that he married up.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, but he married her before he became a big star and booted her not long after.


I wouldn't shed too many tears for Talia Balsam. She's happily married to John Slattery, aka Roger Sterling, aka the Silver Fox.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> They will reject her the same way they rejected "the former guy". Despite their loathing of each other they actually have a lot in common.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  The NY snobbery is just like the Boston Brahmin snobbery!  If your family doesn't have the appropriate 'history' or connections, you can pretty much forget getting into those "clubs".  Similar to New Orleans especially around the Mardi Gras time when many of the "old" families put on their own parties and balls .. if you aren't part of the "old" family club, there will be no invite in your mailbox!


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!!  The NY snobbery is just like the Boston Brahmin snobbery!  If your family doesn't have the appropriate 'history' or connections, you can pretty much forget getting into those "clubs".  Similar to New Orleans especially around the Mardi Gras time when many of the "old" families put on their own parties and balls .. if you aren't part of the "old" family club, there will be no invite in your mailbox!


There are "tribes" everywhere you go.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently she is beyond charming at dinner parties and she beguiled one of Hollywoods most loved and confirmed bachelors (not considering his first quick marriage before he became really successful) with her beauty, intellect and allure.


I read in an interview with Clooney's parents that George met Amal when she was a guest at a dinner party at their home. According to them he was quite taken with her, and they knew right away that this one would be different than the rest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently, Amal is not an actual human rights lawyer... she represents corrupt world leaders who have been charged with corruption. Then she spins it as a human rights case.
> 
> In court, she wears white or red in a sea of black and her hair is down, blown out and gorgeous. You can't miss her. A bit cunning, really.
> 
> Apparently she is beyond charming at dinner parties and she beguiled one of Hollywoods most loved and confirmed bachelors (not considering his first quick marriage before he became really successful) with her beauty, intellect and allure.
> 
> Meg has some of that, she was really charming in the beginning and she knew it, but as you wrote, lacks the discipline and self awareness for celebs to want to support her. I don't think Meg is as cunning as Amal.


I don't know where this information is coming from.  I've never heard that she isn't a human rights attorney.  And just now I tried to find any such report and didn't see anything.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently, Amal is not an actual human rights lawyer... she represents corrupt world leaders who have been charged with corruption. Then she spins it as a human rights case.
> 
> In court, she wears white or red in a sea of black and her hair is down, blown out and gorgeous. You can't miss her. A bit cunning, really.
> 
> Apparently she is beyond charming at dinner parties and she beguiled one of Hollywoods most loved and confirmed bachelors (not considering his first quick marriage before he became really successful) with her beauty, intellect and allure.
> 
> Meg has some of that, she was really charming in the beginning and she knew it, but as you wrote, lacks the discipline and self awareness for celebs to want to support her. I don't think Meg is as cunning as Amal.


I see today's theme is Amal C, so here are my 2 cents.

Like Hazz's wife, AC is not a natural beauty. However, compared to Hazz's wife, AC is a lot more refined and intelligent. She dresses very well (knows what looks good on her body) and doesn't have a vulgar presence.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just refuse to believe these nobodies have actual influence. I just do.


They are titled nobodies, but the people behind them have strong connections and an agenda imo.


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Except they still have to declare the “free” services on their tax returns and pay taxes on those


If those free services are being provided on behalf of a certain non-profit foundation…


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't know where this information is coming from.  I've never heard that she isn't a human rights attorney.  And just now I tried to find any such report and didn't see anything.


 Just the facts, ma'am. She is a very accomplished woman in her own right.



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amal_Clooney


----------



## Chanbal

This is the 2nd time I come across this, but I've no idea if this is a rumor or fact…
I can see them wanting to get access to the will, but a legal battle…


----------



## Chanbal

The opinion of Ingrid Seward: I don't know who she is, but she makes valid points.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is the 2nd time I come across this, but I've no idea if this is a rumor or fact…
> I can see them wanting to get access to the will, but a legal battle…
> View attachment 5215280



What share though. With a spouse and children alive I'd be very surprised if Harry had a right to anything, so unless Philip left something to him - in which case I doubt the Queen would just keep it out of pettiness, that woman seems to have the patience of a saint with these two jerks and let's face it, she has enough money to last her several more lifetimes - there is no such a thing as his share.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The opinion of Ingrid Seward: I don't know who she is, but she makes valid points.




I have thought about it some more, and frankly I don't believe it. It's one thing to complain about your hard lot in life as Harry has undoubtedly done publicly before Raptor was even on the horizon, but leave cold turkey? He never wanted that or otherwise we wouldn't have had to listen to his endless whining how he was cut off financially at the tender age of 36, how his evil grandma wouldn't let him lay a wreath at a state occasion ya da ya da.

Plus, didn't know how? He could have put more effort into his military career. He could have started a business, become a professional polo player, or retire to a farm in Africa counting elephants on daddy's dime had he really wanted to.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What share though. With a spouse and children alive I'd be very surprised if Harry had a right to anything, so unless Philip left something to him - in which case I doubt the Queen would just keep it out of pettiness, that woman seems to have the patience of a saint with these two jerks and let's face it, she has enough money to last her several more lifetimes - there is no such a thing as his share.


I also think that if there would be something in the will for them, they would get it immediately. However, can you imagine how much a company like N*tf*x would pay to get a copy of that will?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is the 2nd time I come across this, but I've no idea if this is a rumor or fact…
> I can see them wanting to get access to the will, but a legal battle…
> View attachment 5215280


I don't believe this for a second. He's not the brightest, but he has to know a maneuver like this against his beloved grandmother would earn him the undying wrath of millions. I believe that so much of what we read about them is pure fabrication.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I don't believe this for a second. He's not the brightest, but he has to know a maneuver like this against his beloved grandmother would earn him the undying wrath of millions. *I believe that so much of what we read about them is pure fabrication.*


Yes, it's very possible that this issue about the will is a falsehood. This is why I prefer to relate to OW's interview, plenty of falsehoods in their own words.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Just the facts, ma'am. She is a very accomplished woman in her own right.


Well, anyone can edit/omit a wiki page and most would want to if polishing their bio.  Just look at Meg!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have thought about it some more, and frankly I don't believe it. It's one thing to complain about your hard lot in life as Harry has undoubtedly done publicly before Raptor was even on the horizon, but leave cold turkey? He never wanted that or otherwise we wouldn't have had to listen to his endless whining how he was cut off financially at the tender age of 36, how his evil grandma wouldn't let him lay a wreath at a state occasion ya da ya da.
> 
> Plus, didn't know how? He could have put more effort into his military career. He could have started a business, become a professional polo player, or retire to a farm in Africa counting elephants on daddy's dime had he really wanted to.



IDK, he has been vocal about his strong dislike of the job. IMO, he started Invictus in order to find a role for himself (as well as help the vets, of course). He was also vocal about wanting the half-in/half-out plan. When that was not approved, the palace essentially called his bluff, dared him to leave. Being somewhat dim, he took the dare, never dreaming his dad would allow it.

All of this is part of his rebellious nature and over-indulged upbringing. Is he enjoying his choices?  I doubt it.

The “In Touch” cover — dear me, what happened to her face?  If NYC was a flop ,  imagine how they feel after the Bond premiere.  Guessing the chickens have run for cover.

RE: Prince Phillip’s will:
Hazzie probably wants this 30 million, lol.









						Prince Philip Reportedly Left £30 Million in His Will to “Three Key Staff” Members
					

Prince Harry is also apparently expected to receive an inheritance.




					www.vanityfair.com
				













						Prince Harry said he wanted to quit the royal family in his early 20s because of 'what it did to my mom'
					

"I was thinking, I don't want this job," Prince Harry said on Dax Shepard's podcast. "I don't want to be doing this. Look what it did to my mom."




					www.insider.com
				



The Duke of Sussex got candid this week on Dax Shepard's Armchair Expert podcast, revealing that *he wanted to quit the world of royalty when he was in his early 20s. *

"I was thinking, I don't want this job, I don't want to be here. I don't want to be doing this. Look what it did to my mom," Harry told the actor. "How am I ever going to settle down and have a wife and family when I know it's going to happen again? I've seen behind the curtain, I've seen the business model and seen how this whole thing works and I don't want to be part of this."


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The “In Touch” cover — dear me, what happened to her face?  If NYC was a flop ,*  imagine how they feel after the Bond premiere.  Guessing the chickens have run for cover.*



Well this video promises to address that.   I'm at the "oh, wow" part.


----------



## xincinsin

breakfastatcartier said:


> Remember how silly Amal looked as she was “strutting” towards the church? lol.


It wasn't exactly a wedding to be remembered for me. Everyone was excited in the anticipation because it was a Royal Wedding, but when I actually sat down and watched it, I found it quite boring as a spectacle. I think I started doing housework when the bride turned up in the ill-fitting gown.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have thought about it some more, and frankly I don't believe it. It's one thing to complain about your hard lot in life as Harry has undoubtedly done publicly before Raptor was even on the horizon, but leave cold turkey? He never wanted that or otherwise we wouldn't have had to listen to his endless whining how he was cut off financially at the tender age of 36, how his evil grandma wouldn't let him lay a wreath at a state occasion ya da ya da.
> 
> Plus, didn't know how? *He could have put more effort *into his military career. He could have started a business, become a professional polo player, or retire to a farm in Africa counting elephants on daddy's dime had he really wanted to.


The key phrase is "more effort". Hazard likes to whine, but to actually leave the Firm and fend for himself even it was on Daddy's dime would have been more work than he wanted. I think he wanted to be the equivalent of Mummy's Boy and that means someone else would direct his life for him. Along came Methane with her "way out" that sounded like a cushy option with the "best of both worlds": less work, more fun. That's why he is bitter that his family didn't buy into their grandiose half-in/half-out plan.


----------



## Aimee3

Is anyone going to take one for the team and buy the issue of In Touch magazine?  Is In Touch ever true or is it just fluff stuff?  I have never read that magazine.


----------



## Chanbal

The Aussies…


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> The key phrase is "more effort". Hazard likes to whine, but to actually leave the Firm and fend for himself even it was on Daddy's dime would have been more work that he wanted. I think he wanted to be the equivalent of Mummy's Boy and that means someone else would direct his life for him. Along came Methane with her "way out" that sounded like a cushy option with the "best of both worlds": less work, more fun. That's why he is bitter that his family didn't buy into their grandiose half-in/half-out plan.


Exactly, he didn’t think it through.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They are titled nobodies, but the people behind them have strong connections and an agenda imo.


At the beginning, my thought was that someone had an agenda, but the Harkles changed that when they left because they wanted to or were pushed out or a combo of the two.  I think the original agenda was for the people behind HER to get royal influence via HIM.  Not unlike what went on with Andrew for years.  Harry seems onboard with that concept now and probably always was if it meant money in his pocket.  Soho House and Markus Anderson were always about deal making.  She was the foot in the door to it.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is the 2nd time I come across this, but I've no idea if this is a rumor or fact…
> I can see them wanting to get access to the will, but a legal battle…
> View attachment 5215280


If he was named in it, then he got a copy.  If he wants to contest it, then good luck with that buddy.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Is anyone going to take one for the team and buy the issue of In Touch magazine?  Is In Touch ever true or is it just fluff stuff?  I have never read that magazine.



It’s a fluffy celebrity gossip magazine. Doesn’t mean they’re always wrong but take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> IDK, he has been vocal about his strong dislike of the job. IMO, he started Invictus in order to find a role for himself (as well as help the vets, of course). He was also vocal about wanting the half-in/half-out plan. When that was not approved, the palace essentially called his bluff, dared him to leave. Being somewhat dim, he took the dare, never dreaming his dad would allow it.
> 
> All of this is part of his rebellious nature and over-indulged upbringing. Is he enjoying his choices?  I doubt it.
> 
> The “In Touch” cover — dear me, what happened to her face?  If NYC was a flop ,  imagine how they feel after the Bond premiere.  Guessing the chickens have run for cover.
> 
> RE: Prince Phillip’s will:
> Hazzie probably wants this 30 million, lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip Reportedly Left £30 Million in His Will to “Three Key Staff” Members
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is also apparently expected to receive an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said he wanted to quit the royal family in his early 20s because of 'what it did to my mom'
> 
> 
> "I was thinking, I don't want this job," Prince Harry said on Dax Shepard's podcast. "I don't want to be doing this. Look what it did to my mom."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex got candid this week on Dax Shepard's Armchair Expert podcast, revealing that *he wanted to quit the world of royalty when he was in his early 20s. *
> 
> "I was thinking, I don't want this job, I don't want to be here. I don't want to be doing this. Look what it did to my mom," Harry told the actor. "How am I ever going to settle down and have a wife and family when I know it's going to happen again? I've seen behind the curtain, I've seen the business model and seen how this whole thing works and I don't want to be part of this."



I think a lot of what he has said since being with his now wife are ideas she has placed in his head. I think in his early twenties it was all about fun.


----------



## CarryOn2020

NPR’s evaluates the songs in _the musical — _gotta love the humor 

_*21. "Here Comes James Hewitt" *(Diana meets Hewitt, with whom she will have a serious affair)

If Diana, The Musical had embraced its silliness, its campiness, and its absurdity, it would have been much more successful. There's a "Rocky Horror"/"Little Shop Of Horrors" dark weirdness that's sometimes easy to spot around the edges, but which the earnestness of the rest of all this unfortunately chokes. You can tell what I mean from "Here Comes James Hewitt," which is as preposterous and sweaty as the whole thing should have been. If you haven't seen the staging, where he comes up out of the floor shirtless on a horse, you can't fully appreciate its greatness, but the voices in the background saying "you go girl" while Diana trades single-entendre horse come-ons with Hewitt are the direction I wish this had gone. I don't think it's possible to be ambivalent about this song: You either think this is the best song in the show, or you think it's the worst. I'm going with the best — or at least the least worst.









						'Diana, The Musical' mixes camp with sincerity. Here's where every song ranks
					

The songs in the widely panned Netflix musical that sings and dances its way through Princess Diana's tragic life are not all alike — and we're here to put them all in their proper place.




					www.npr.org
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> At the beginning, my thought was that someone had an agenda, but the Harkles changed that when they left because they wanted to or were pushed out or a combo of the two.  I think the original agenda was for the people behind HER to get royal influence via HIM.  Not unlike what went on with Andrew for years.  Harry seems onboard with that concept now and probably always was if it meant money in his pocket.  Soho House and Markus Anderson were always about deal making.  She was the foot in the door to it.


It's very possible. Let's see until when N*tflix and S*nshine continue supporting them. I wonder what happened to M*rkus A, he seems to have disappeared from the Montecito compound.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> I think a lot of what he has said since being with his now wife are ideas she has placed in his head. I think in his early twenties it was all about fun.



All fun and games — apparently showing up with the “stank of cigarettes and alcohol on him” (great quote from Katie Couric).
Says a lot about the BRF that they tolerated that level of disrespect for_ “the job”. _ Yes, Prince Phillip is included in that.


----------



## tiktok

Aimee3 said:


> Is anyone going to take one for the team and buy the issue of In Touch magazine?  Is In Touch ever true or is it just fluff stuff?  I have never read that magazine.



Save your money and read this instead:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Any notes of condolences from H&M? 

I do offer my heartfelt condolences to the family and friends.  These are very sad times.  








						Boris Johnson pays tribute to Royal Marines general who died aged 54
					

Highly decorated Major General Matthew Holmes CBE served in all the UK's recent conflicts and won one of the country's most prestigious gallantry awards, the Distinguished Service Order, in 2007.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aimee3

tiktok said:


> Save your money and read this instead:



Wow thank you TikTok!!!


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> Save your money and read this instead:




Impressive! This supports several claims posted on twitter about them shouting, her pads, the hidden microphones, including being escorted out of the UN… 

Wow, they kept the $3M from the elephant voice event??? This is new info! 

Who are these people?


----------



## Jayne1

So they're bickering? Wonder if H is starting to regret some things.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> She certainly didn't succeed in Australia, many of the funny news videos are from there.



OK! She's a failure in four out of seven continents. Meghan is batting over 500.


----------



## Lodpah

Jayne1 said:


> So they're bickering? Wonder if H is starting to regret some things.


Nah . . . he’s so stupid. He can’t think for himself. MM will make him see the light over and over again . . . like a very certain song.


----------



## Chanbal

US news, how disappointing!   

Terrible Charles for not giving Clarence House to the non-royals that live in the US.  
Bad, bad William for refusing such a personal olive branch from Friar Harry!!!
How come their PR team wasn't able to publish these articles in the UK…


----------



## Chanbal

One must be fair, I need to borrow one of @Maggie Muggins awards to give to People magazine. Nice title! Though, how are they going to modernize the monarchy without the Montecitos?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> US news, how disappointing!
> 
> Terrible Charles for not giving Clarence House to the non-royals that live in the US.
> Bad, bad William for refusing such a personal olive branch from Friar Harry!!!
> How come their PR team wasn't able to publish these articles in the UK…
> 
> View attachment 5215523


Saw the third headline in the image that says they moved to Santa Barbara to give Archie stability.  Stability is more than a geographical location. Or are they implying that with such unstable parents, the poor tot needs a 16-toilet mansion to ground himself?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The opinion of Ingrid Seward: I don't know who she is, but she makes valid points.



“I don’t understand what’s going on in America any more”.

Welcome to the club Ingrid!


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> OK! She's a failure in four out of seven continents. Meghan is batting over 500.


I’m not sure the whales and penguins in Antarctica will care much about her either, so let’s just call her a failure in 5/7 continents.  That’s 0.714!


----------



## purseinsanity

.


----------



## purseinsanity

Queen doesn’t need permission from ‘petulant prat’ Harry to strip him of titles
					

Prince Harry’s $20 million memoir calls into question his “quest for privacy” after stepping down as a senior member of the British Royal Family and chasing multi-million-dollar deals ever since.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Queen doesn’t need permission from ‘petulant prat’ Harry to strip him of titles
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s $20 million memoir calls into question his “quest for privacy” after stepping down as a senior member of the British Royal Family and chasing multi-million-dollar deals ever since.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au


Petulant Prat! Everyone is joining in on the alliteration.

@Maggie Muggins We should have a year-end special medal for the best alliterative nickname. The contender list is growing by leaps and bounds!

Methane's surname has already gained currency as a verb for casting off friends and family who have outlived their usefulness. I would not be surprised if their first names too will become bywords for something none too complimentary.


----------



## Sharont2305

If he was that desperate for a private life maybe he should have had a word with his brother who seems to have the perfect balance between a public life and a very private life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> If he was that desperate for a private life maybe he should have had a word with his brother who seems to have the perfect balance between a public life and a very private life.


But... but... 
The Cambridges are supposed to be jealous of the Sussexes who are living their "best life", according to their sycophants  
It's so unfair, isn't it?


----------



## pukasonqo

There is a show here in Oz called Hard Quiz (abc Australia) and one of the contestant’s expert subject is…MM


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Amal was kinf of awkward and gawky in pictures I saw of her a few years before she met George, but somehow she really pulled together her fashion and image.


She got a Glam squad and a makeover montage it seems. I guess it is testament to what a good stylist can add *cough* Megs *cough.*

I do think she’s a very beautiful woman not to mention erudite and polished and that shines through regardless of what she wears though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> There is a show here in Oz called Hard Quiz (abc Australia) and one of the contestant’s expert subject is…MM


That’s a terrible choice for a special subject as there’s always multiple versions of every event you could be asked about - poor sucker  




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wish we could write in to Wills saying we appreciate his efforts


You can write to Clarence House and they do send replies to people.








						Contact
					

Information on where to write to The Queen or another member of the Royal Family, and how to contact an office or department in the Royal Household




					www.royal.uk
				



Someone posted a blog where the author collected royal correspondence a while back.
Or of course you could message their Instagram if you have it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Impressive! This supports several claims posted on twitter about them shouting, her pads, the hidden microphones, including being escorted out of the UN…
> 
> Wow, they kept the $3M from the elephant voice event??? This is new info!
> 
> Who are these people?


I think the lack of fans screaming for them can be attributed to the fact that the bots can’t show up in person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has this been posted?









						Meghan Markle and Harry invited to Snoop Dogg's house for Thanksgiving dinner
					

Prince Harry is a fan of the American hip hop star and the feeling is apparently mutual as Snoop Dogg invites he and Meghan Markle over for Thanksgiving dinner




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry invited to Snoop Dogg's house for Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is a fan of the American hip hop star and the feeling is apparently mutual as Snoop Dogg invites he and Meghan Markle over for Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



both represented by sunshine PR?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> You can write to Clarence House and they do send replies to people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Contact
> 
> 
> Information on where to write to The Queen or another member of the Royal Family, and how to contact an office or department in the Royal Household
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone posted a blog where the author collected royal correspondence a while back.
> Or of course you could message their Instagram if you have it.



It just seems to terribly rude and intrusive to even mention the terrible two haha. I am sure the BRF prefers that everyone pretends they missed their very public antics.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Save your money and read this instead:



I doubt the Caryle allows smoking in the rooms but I suppose they might be willing to pay whatever penalty and do what they wanted.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> She got a Glam squad and a makeover montage it seems. I guess it is testament to what a good stylist can add *cough* Megs *cough.*
> 
> I do think she’s a very beautiful woman not to mention erudite and polished and that shines through regardless of what she wears though.


around the time that George and Amal got married when everyone kept calling her "stunning" I was somewhat underwhelmed.  It seemed she was enjoying the attention a lot and I didn't find her that stunning.  She is tall and very slender, has good hair.  But what I think makes her so much more of a catch is she is intelligent and has a career of her own - an impressive one.  And now that the newness has worn off, we don't see lots of pictures of her.  She and George seem to be enjoying their private life.  Whatever anyone wants to say about his motives, it seems like he picked good.  And she's not doing bad either


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry invited to Snoop Dogg's house for Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is a fan of the American hip hop star and the feeling is apparently mutual as Snoop Dogg invites he and Meghan Markle over for Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Snoop mentions Harry’s balls a few times.  What balls?  I only know he’s got some that he juggles.  Literally.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It just seems to terribly rude and intrusive to even mention the terrible two haha. I am sure the BRF prefers that everyone pretends they missed their very public antics.


They remind me of one of my BILs. He swaggers around at every family gathering talking loudly to seek attention. And you can count on him to get drunk if there is hard liquor flowing. We are very expert at pretending we don't see and don't hear him.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> I doubt the Caryle allows smoking in the rooms but I suppose they might be willing to pay whatever penalty and to what they wanted.


This is the hotels policy, from their website:
<<Smoke-Free Policy: The Carlyle maintains a smoke-free environment throughout the hotel. Smoking is not allowed in any of our guestrooms. If this policy is violated, a USD 500 cleaning fee will be charged.>>
What pompous asses if they actually lit up in the public rooms.  Rules don’t apply to the UNroyals? If they were smoking in their rooms, no one would have seen, although I suppose the housekeepers would know from the smell.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Queen doesn’t need permission from ‘petulant prat’ Harry to strip him of titles
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s $20 million memoir calls into question his “quest for privacy” after stepping down as a senior member of the British Royal Family and chasing multi-million-dollar deals ever since.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au


Great article on 'Prince Privacy,' thanks for posting it.


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> There is a show here in Oz called Hard Quiz (abc Australia) and one of the contestant’s expert subject is…MM


So keep us updated!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> This is the hotels policy, from their website:
> <<Smoke-Free Policy: The Carlyle maintains a smoke-free environment throughout the hotel. Smoking is not allowed in any of our guestrooms. If this policy is violated, a USD 500 cleaning fee will be charged.>>
> What pompous asses if they actually lit up in the public rooms.  Rules don’t apply to the UNroyals? If they were smoking in their rooms, no one would have seen, although I suppose the housekeepers would know from the smell.


as much as I dislike Meghan it doubt she's smoking these days.  as far as H, he's probably not allowed to smoke


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry invited to Snoop Dogg's house for Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is a fan of the American hip hop star and the feeling is apparently mutual as Snoop Dogg invites he and Meghan Markle over for Thanksgiving dinner
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Aw, poor Snoop is so burned out from all those years of weed. That said I would LOVE to hear that Meghan and Harry went to his house for Thanksgiving. It will never happen but I can imagine it.


----------



## Chanbal

Many creative people out there…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## kemilia

jelliedfeels said:


> This looks like a musical from South Park but with far worse music and lyrics
> I agree, this is incredibly incongruous as H has never had much of a sense of humour about anything, least of all his mother.
> 
> This is the problem with opening the floodgates, I guess, but maybe he doesn’t care quite as much when wealthy paymasters mock the family.


This musical cannot be real. And you are right--totally South Park.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now this is real gossip. No idea if true. 
You ask about the H&M and Giles connection. Here ya go:


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2018,








						Meghan Markle ‘had a glass of red’ and Prince Harry ‘drank vodka tonic’ as the pair attend 'two boozy parties' during secret three-day party trip to Amsterdam
					

MEGHAN Markle was spotted drinking “a glass of red”, while husband Prince Harry opted for “vodka cocktails”, as the pair attended “two boozy parties” during a ge…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				







Meghan at Soho House in 2013Credit: Getty -


_Newspaper columnist Giles Coren was also in attendance, revealing in The Times this week that he approached the Duchess to say hello.

"'Hi Meghan,' I said when I found myself standing in front of her (I can't remember how that happened)," he revealed.

"'We've actually met before. My wife was a big Suits fan and came over to get a selfie with you.' 'Oh sure, I remember,' she said, politely, because she can't have."_


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> This musical cannot be real. And you are right--totally South Park.



South Park would have much better songs with clever, funny lyrics. Those guys are hilarious. I wonder why they didn't go all the way and make it campy.


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 (I quoted your last 2 posts, but it didn't work.

The Sun's article supports the post, and previous rumors about the original source of the Rose falsehood. While we suspected this, it's always shocking to see potential evidence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Sun's article supports the post, and previous rumors about the original source of the Rose falsehood. It's always shocking see this type of potential evidence.



Soooo, the rumors are true. Yes, it is indeed shocking to realize Hazzie was and is such a jerk. 
 Really bizarre that people defend him now.  Even worse that he got those multi-million $$$$ deals.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now this is real gossip. No idea if true.
> You ask about the H&M and Giles connection. Here ya go:




That podcaster (I'm SO bad with names but I'm sure someone will know whom I'm talking about...the guy who also posts blind items?) had a very long segment on exactly this supposed event. It did make a lot of sense all put together. He blamed Raptor though, not Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That podcaster (I'm SO bad with names but I'm sure someone will know whom I'm talking about...the guy who also posts blind items?) had a very long segment on exactly this supposed event. It did make a lot of sense all put together. *He blamed Raptor though, not Harry.*



For the longest time I would have solely blamed Raptor. Now I really believe they have always been in cahoots as far as bringing down the royal family. Meghan might come up with the plans and do most of the dirty work herself, but Harry isn't a clueless innocent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I also wonder...at that time it was said both the Cambridges and the Cholmondeleys (geez, can we just call them the Hanburys?) were looking into taking legal action. They didn't in the end, and I wonder...did they find out who was to blame and wanted to avoid going near that one with a ten foot pole to keep the peace at that time? Because Wills and Kate have sued before if the offense was bad enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> For the longest time I would have solely blamed Raptor. Now I really believe they have always been in cahoots as far as bringing down the royal family. Meghan might come up with the plans and do most of the dirty work herself, but Harry isn't a clueless innocent.



I feel so bad for William. I'd be broken if one of my siblings tried to destroy me like this.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel so bad for William. I'd be broken if one of my siblings tried to destroy me like this.



Or, you might be enraged to discover your brother is a spiteful, deceitful little prick. I bet that is where William is these days.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

gracekelly said:


> I didn't think she looked silly.  To me she looked as if she knew she owned her look and enjoyed the attention.  Not too many can pull off the yellow color and her hat.  She was one of the better dressed people there that day.  Her husband loved the attention.


Oh I’m not denying how gorgeous she looked in that dress, but the way she was walking… it ruined the whole look for me.

Thank Goodness she looks good in still photos lol.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Or, you might be enraged to discover your brother is a spiteful, deceitful little prick. I bet that is where William is these days.


yes, I'd say that's pretty accurate


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The opinion of Ingrid Seward: I don't know who she is, but she makes valid points.



I agree  she’s lady Macbeth, pushy and malevolent but she was ultimately just the spur needed for his own ambition. H was entering the equivalent of the wilderness years for his type of public figure… he is getting too old to be boyish but he’s too young and too low down the pecking order to be august.


rose60610 said:


> OK! She's a failure in four out of seven continents. Meghan is batting over 500.


she will have to make a fresh start in Antarctica- hopefully she can get some empathy from the penguins on the struggle of being both black and white.


sdkitty said:


> around the time that George and Amal got married when everyone kept calling her "stunning" I was somewhat underwhelmed.  It seemed she was enjoying the attention a lot and I didn't find her that stunning.  She is tall and very slender, has good hair.  But what I think makes her so much more of a catch is she is intelligent and has a career of her own - an impressive one.  And now that the newness has worn off, we don't see lots of pictures of her.  She and George seem to be enjoying their private life.  Whatever anyone wants to say about his motives, it seems like he picked good.  And she's not doing bad either


I’m an ab


bag-mania said:


> Aw, poor Snoop is so burned out from all those years of weed. That said I would LOVE to hear that Meghan and Harry went to his house for Thanksgiving. It will never happen but I can imagine it.


Yeah if they really are insistent on recording people they encounter for tv then I hope they release this occasion. Heck go for broke and release it as a live Holiday Special.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree  she’s lady Macbeth, pushy and malevolent but she was ultimately just the spur needed for his own ambition. H was entering the equivalent of the wilderness years for his type of public figure… he is getting too old to be boyish but he’s too young and too low down the pecking order to be august.
> 
> she will have to make a fresh start in Antarctica- hopefully she can get some empathy from the penguins on the struggle of being both black and white.
> 
> I’m an ab
> 
> Yeah if they really are insistent on recording people they encounter for tv then I hope they release this occasion. Heck go for broke and release it as a live Holiday Special.


what does "I'm an AB" mean


----------



## jelliedfeels

repeat post.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> what does "I'm an AB" mean


Sorry either my phone or the website is being odd today.
It’s meant to say:
I’m an absolute sucker for the Cher look though so I do like her aesthetic a lot.
But I couldn’t think of a snarky thing to say about H or M so I deleted it but it posted part of it


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Sorry either my phone or the website is being odd today.
> It’s meant to say:
> I’m an absolute sucker for the Cher look though so I do like her aesthetic a lot.
> But I couldn’t think of a snarky thing to say about H or M so I deleted it but it posted part of it


I like the way Amal looks in work clothes but some of her non-work outfits aren't so great for me


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> So keep us updated!


She lost and for my partner’s amusement I was able to answer the questions which included a pic of MM as a suitcase girl, thanks TPF!!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I also wonder...at that time it was said both the Cambridges and the Cholmondeleys (geez, can we just call them the Hanburys?) were looking into taking legal action. They didn't in the end, and I wonder...did they find out who was to blame and wanted to avoid going near that one with a ten foot pole to keep the peace at that time? Because Wills and Kate have sued before if the offense was bad enough.


I don't why she's still known as Hanbury, that's her maiden name. It's just as easy to say Cholmondeley, pronounced Chumley.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't why she's still known as Hanbury, that's her maiden name. It's just as easy to say Cholmondeley, pronounced Chumley.



It is easy to say Chumley, but not as easy - especially for a non-native speaker like me - to type out that honker of a name that is Cholmondeley   I'm never sure I got it right.


----------



## rose60610

So the big celebrity invite is Snoop Dogg's for Thanksgiving? Really? Among other things he cooks with Martha Stewart on TV. He's 49 and she's 80. What's up with hanging out with considerably older people? Gloria Steinem is 87, Wallis Annenberg 82, Oprah 67, Snoop 49, Deputy Sec Gen Amina Mohammed at the U.N. 60, Melissa McCarthy 51. Nobody their own age wants to be buddies. Do they really think they're such esteemed wise leaders among some of the global elite? They hinted at going to the White House to visit a 78 year old and assumed they'd be invited to a prestigious 60th birthday party but that never happened.  Word must be out that they're just desperate greedy fools who'll stoop at nothing to sponge off of anybody else's fame for a headline, and wear a wire while they're at it. If all the attention they can get is by inviting themselves to see people 10-50 years older than they are, they'll take it.


----------



## redney

Snoop is turning the big 5-0 this month. Maybe they'll go and partake in a little legal weed.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Ig down? Roll one and be productive </p>&mdash; Snoop Dogg (@SnoopDogg) <a href="">October 4, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

ETA: I don't know how to post tweets, obvs, or get rid of the HTML code. Sorry!


----------



## rose60610

Snoop's net worth is reported at $150 million. Do H&M figure they can hit him up for a loan?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Snoop's net worth is reported at $150 million. Do H&M figure they can hit him up for a loan?



Well they might now. Watch out Snoop!


----------



## bag-mania

And here's the latest that Morton has to say. To simplify it down to one word: jealousy. 

*Prince Harry Was Frustrated Prince William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's projects "did not match Prince Charles' budget" and Prince William took priority, according to a biography.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared the same pot of funding from their father's Duchy of Cornwall estate while working royals.

However, Prince William took priority over his brother, stoking arguments and "jealousy," according to Andrew Morton.

The former royal correspondent wrote the definitive biography of Princess Diana, with her help, exposing Prince Charles' affair in the 1990s.

Now he has released new chapters to his 2018 biography _Meghan: A Hollywood Princess_, which _Newsweek_ has read.

Morton wrote: "They [Harry and Meghan] were coming to appreciate that in the royal hierarchy, no matter how popular, inspiring or relevant they were to the outside world, they were low down on the royal totem pole.

"Both William and Harry were funded by their father and it was often the case
that Harry's ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget. His brother, as the future king, would always take priority.

"It may have been frustrating, it may have led to rows and jealousy, but that was the way it was and that was the way it was always going to be."

Morton described how Princess Margaret, Queen Elizabeth II's sister, and photographer husband Lord Snowdon were in a similar position "as the faces of the Swinging Sixties, the most glamorous, popular and photographed royals of the age."

However, they were "far down the pecking order," below the queen and also had to learn what he described as the first rule of royalty: "Funding does not relate to popularity but position."

Prince Charles' budget for funding his children stood at £5.7 million in 2019 to 2020 and at £4.5 million in 2020 to 21, though a "substantial sum" was given to Harry in the summer of 2020.

Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March that he had to rely on money from his mother following the royal exit, in March 2020.

He said: "My family literally cut me off financially and I had to afford security for us. Yeah, in the first quarter of 2020."

He added: "I brought what my mum left me. And without that, we would not have been able to do this, so touching back on what my mother would think of this, I think she saw it coming. I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process."

He also described how in the early days of the relationship there were discussions within the family about there not being enough money to fund Meghan at all.

The duke described how an unnamed royal racist had asked "what will the kids look like?"

He added: "But that was right at the beginning, when she wasn't going to get security, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting, because there was not enough money to pay for her, and all this sort of stuff. Like, there was some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard."









						Prince Harry Was Frustrated William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book
					

Prince Harry was frustrated that "no matter how popular" he and Meghan Markle were his "ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget," a biography says.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And here's the latest that Morton has to say. To simplify it down to one word: jealousy.
> 
> *Prince Harry Was Frustrated Prince William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's projects "did not match Prince Charles' budget" and Prince William took priority, according to a biography.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared the same pot of funding from their father's Duchy of Cornwall estate while working royals.
> 
> However, Prince William took priority over his brother, stoking arguments and "jealousy," according to Andrew Morton.
> 
> The former royal correspondent wrote the definitive biography of Princess Diana, with her help, exposing Prince Charles' affair in the 1990s.
> 
> Now he has released new chapters to his 2018 biography _Meghan: A Hollywood Princess_, which _Newsweek_ has read.
> 
> Morton wrote: "They [Harry and Meghan] were coming to appreciate that in the royal hierarchy, no matter how popular, inspiring or relevant they were to the outside world, they were low down on the royal totem pole.
> 
> "Both William and Harry were funded by their father and it was often the case
> that Harry's ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget. His brother, as the future king, would always take priority.
> 
> "It may have been frustrating, it may have led to rows and jealousy, but that was the way it was and that was the way it was always going to be."
> 
> Morton described how Princess Margaret, Queen Elizabeth II's sister, and photographer husband Lord Snowdon were in a similar position "as the faces of the Swinging Sixties, the most glamorous, popular and photographed royals of the age."
> 
> However, they were "far down the pecking order," below the queen and also had to learn what he described as the first rule of royalty: "Funding does not relate to popularity but position."
> 
> Prince Charles' budget for funding his children stood at £5.7 million in 2019 to 2020 and at £4.5 million in 2020 to 21, though a "substantial sum" was given to Harry in the summer of 2020.
> 
> Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March that he had to rely on money from his mother following the royal exit, in March 2020.
> 
> He said: "My family literally cut me off financially and I had to afford security for us. Yeah, in the first quarter of 2020."
> 
> He added: "I brought what my mum left me. And without that, we would not have been able to do this, so touching back on what my mother would think of this, I think she saw it coming. I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process."
> 
> He also described how in the early days of the relationship there were discussions within the family about there not being enough money to fund Meghan at all.
> 
> The duke described how an unnamed royal racist had asked "what will the kids look like?"
> 
> He added: "But that was right at the beginning, when she wasn't going to get security, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting, because there was not enough money to pay for her, and all this sort of stuff. Like, there was some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Was Frustrated William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was frustrated that "no matter how popular" he and Meghan Markle were his "ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget," a biography says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I, as a person who have worked all my life to pay my bills, feel So Sorry for them.  What?  has to spend some of the tens of millions his mom left him?  SO SAD.  And Meghan "the American pricess" isn't as high on the priority list as Will & Kate!  what a travesty


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He added: "I brought what my mum left me. And without that, we would not have been able to do this, so touching back on what my mother would think of this, I think she saw it coming. I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process."



Seeing she also left William the other half I wonder when William and Kate will pack up and flee the country.



> He added: "But that was right at the beginning, when she wasn't going to get security, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting, because there was not enough money to pay for her, and all this sort of stuff. Like, there was some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard."



Now I don't believe for a minute this conversation ever took place. But even if...so the 2+ million pounds he was going to receive from Charles each year were not enough to provide for his wife? How do people on a 50000 pounds salary do it?


----------



## sdkitty

I was reading that actor Freddie Highmore recently got married and he said this:

Highmore said that he was still getting used to the "terminology" and the vocabulary of being married, saying that "a 'married man' just sounds very old and 'my wife' sounds very possessive."

I couldn't help but think of Harry who from the moment he got married always said My Wife when talking about Meghan.  almost never refers to her by name.  Big difference.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I, as a person who have worked all my life to pay my bills, feel So Sorry for them.  What?  has to spend some of the tens of millions his mom left him?  SO SAD.  And Meghan "the American pricess" isn't as high on the priority list as Will & Kate!  what a travesty


This is the reason why they can’t  be successful in the US as long as he whines about Charles not funding him. The US has always been the land of opportunity and working for what you have. People will side eye both of them until they can show that they earned their keep.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I, as a person who have worked all my life to pay my bills, feel So Sorry for them.  What?  has to spend some of the tens of millions his mom left him?  SO SAD.  And Meghan "the American pricess" isn't as high on the priority list as Will & Kate!  what a travesty


The  American prices is a brilliant typo - they say everyone has a price but few make it quite as obvious as little miss briefcase.
the thing about this Morton argument is, I have to ask where are all H’s brilliant and expensive ideas now?
So far they’ve handed out some sandwiches and put a wreath on a grave….



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing she also left William the other half I wonder when William and Kate will pack up and flee the country.
> 
> 
> 
> Now I don't believe for a minute this conversation ever took place. But even if...so the 2+ million pounds he was going to receive from Charles each year were not enough to provide for his wife? How do people on a 50000 pounds salary do it?


Well those poor 50k proles would probably wear High street outfits to visit school kids and probably have just the one version of their engagement ring - so are they really living at all?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2018,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘had a glass of red’ and Prince Harry ‘drank vodka tonic’ as the pair attend 'two boozy parties' during secret three-day party trip to Amsterdam
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle was spotted drinking “a glass of red”, while husband Prince Harry opted for “vodka cocktails”, as the pair attended “two boozy parties” during a ge…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan at Soho House in 2013Credit: Getty -
> 
> 
> _Newspaper columnist Giles Coren was also in attendance, revealing in The Times this week that he approached the Duchess to say hello.
> 
> "'Hi Meghan,' I said when I found myself standing in front of her (I can't remember how that happened)," he revealed.
> 
> "'We've actually met before. My wife was a big Suits fan and came over to get a selfie with you.' 'Oh sure, I remember,' she said, politely, because she can't have."_


Eight years ago. This may be the last time she wore a dress that was well fitted and flattering.


----------



## bag-mania

Andrew Morton is a parasite, but so much of what he writes is humorous. I remember the stories about Meghan getting regular acupuncture sessions before the wedding. Apparently Harry was so stressed and distraught over "tiaragate" that he needed to get acupuncture as well.  

"The prince, who needed acupuncture to stay calm in the run-up to the wedding, was overwrought when the chosen tiara could not be made instantly available for Meghan’s hairdresser *Serge Norman*t, who had flown from New York to work on the hair fitting," *Andrew Morton* wrote in the updated version of _Meghan: A Hollywood Princess_. "The *Queen*’s formidable dresser *Angela Kelly*, who is the guardian of the Queen’s jewelry, is said to have informed the irate prince that certain security protocols had to be adhered to in order to access the priceless piece."

"A source revealed that he was told: ‘They’re kept under very tight lock and key. You can’t turn up and demand to have the tiara just because your hairdresser happens to be in town.’ Harry would have none of it, telling anyone who would listen: ‘What Meghan wants, Meghan gets.’ His ringing phrase did her no favors," the author continued.









						Prince Harry 'Needed Acupuncture To Stay Calm' Before His Wedding To Meghan Markle, Book Claims
					

Prince Harry 'needed acupuncture to stay calm' before his wedding to Meghan Markle, a new book calimed.




					www.theroyalobserver.com


----------



## bag-mania

Damn, the cheesy lyrics in the Diana musical have got to be shared if only for their sheer awfulness. 

*Prince Harry Has 100 Million Reasons Not to Comment on Exploitative New Netflix Show ‘Diana: The Musical’*

_BOUGHT AND PAID FOR_
Harry’s silence on the new Diana musical on Netflix, which gratuitously exploits his mother’s life, isn’t so odd when you consider his reported $100m deal with the streaming giant.

Prince Harry is refusing to comment on a new Netflix musical that utterly traduces the life of his mother.

Ignoring shows, books, and newspaper articles that dishonor and distort his mother’s story is an entirely sensible response from Prince Harry under normal circumstances. But having signed a reported $100-million deal with Netflix, which is airing _Diana: The Musical_, his silence on this production is less straightforward.

The prince’s spokesperson did not respond to queries from The Daily Beast asking if he felt there was any tension between his own deal with Netflix and the company’s decision to stream a filmed version of the widely pilloried Broadway musical.

The show is made up of entirely fictional scenes, including an opening sequence in which Diana, played by Jeanna de Waal, is encouraged to come and meet Prince Charles for the first time by his girlfriend Camilla Parker Bowles.

The show ran for just a few days of previews on Broadway last year before having to close down after theaters went dark owing to the coronavirus pandemic. It is scheduled to re-open to a live audience in early November at the Longacre Theater on Broadway. The score is by Tony winners Joe DiPietro and David Bryan.

The show whizzes viewers through Charles and Diana’s engagement when she is chased through the streets of London by a pack of cockney paparazzi photographers who chant, rather bizarrely, “Better than a Guinness, better than a wank / Snap a few pics, it’s money in the bank / Honey, you are money in the bank.”

After they get married, with Diana reminding herself, “Time to get a grip, just hold your head up high and don’t trip,” Diana swiftly declares she is pregnant.

Charles' reaction is to say, “It would be rather helpful if it was a boy.”

Charles later sings to her as he holds William, “Darling, I am holding my son, so let me say jolly well done.”

When Harry arrives he gets a similarly joyful serenade from his proud parents, with Diana, singing to him, “Harry, my ginger-haired son / You’ll always be second to none.”

But Charles’s jealousy soon gets the better of him, and he sings: “You’ve never once obeyed me, Diana, goddamn it, it’s all your fault.”

The royal family then rounds on Diana, with the queen ordering her son, “Don’t blame her, Charles, tame her, Charles, she’s embarrassing the throne.”

A showdown in a London basement between Camilla and Diana ensues, with Camilla telling her rival, “I love Charles for who he is / For his strength and the noble life he lives / You love Charles for who he’s not / Some fantasy prince in a storybook plot.”

James Hewitt arrives in the story and declares, “They’ll call me the randy stable boy.”

The production continues in similarly melodramatic style for almost two hours until it culminates, of course, with the decidedly grim reality of Diana’s death in a Paris tunnel.

Harry has previously tried to avoid the conflict between his Netflix payday and the streaming giant’s profiteering off his family with _The Crown_.

“I’m way more comfortable with _The Crown_ than I am seeing the stories written about my family, or my wife or myself, because it’s the difference between fiction—take it how you will—and being reported on as fact because you’re supposedly news. I have a real issue with that,” he told his friend James Corden.

Whatever you think of _The Crown_’s approach to historical accuracy, it is, overall, an affectionate portrayal of a much misunderstood family. _Diana: The Musical,_ on the other hand, is a crass attempt to cash in on the death of Harry’s mother. It’s hard to believe he really has nothing to say.









						Prince Harry Has 100 Million Reasons Not to Comment on Exploitative New Netflix Show ‘Diana: The Musical’
					

Harry’s silence on the new Diana musical on Netflix, which gratuitously exploits his mother’s life, isn’t so odd when you consider his reported $100m deal with the streaming giant.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Prince Phillip’s will:
> Hazzie probably wants this 30 million, lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip Reportedly Left £30 Million in His Will to “Three Key Staff” Members
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is also apparently expected to receive an inheritance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said he wanted to quit the royal family in his early 20s because of 'what it did to my mom'
> 
> 
> "I was thinking, I don't want this job," Prince Harry said on Dax Shepard's podcast. "I don't want to be doing this. Look what it did to my mom."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com


Unfortunately, if I remember correctly, HAZARDOUS was Prince Philip's favorite grandson (because of his jokes, impish behavior), BUT .. if Philip had lived longer and saw what was going on now, I think he would have gotten a different 'feeling' for his grandson!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This is the reason why they can’t  be successful in the US as long as he whines about Charles not funding him. The US has always been the land of opportunity and working for what you have. People will side eye both of them until they can show that they earned their keep.


Well, they have been called "professional victims" by the Aussies.


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Unfortunately, if I remember correctly, HAZARDOUS was Prince Philip's favorite grandson (because of his jokes, impish behavior), BUT ..* if Philip had lived longer and saw what was going on now, I think he would have gotten a different 'feeling' for his grandson!*



But wouldn't he have seen enough? He had over a year to watch Harry abandon his family and country and then piss all over his royal duty. He was still around when Harry whined to Oprah (if they allowed him to watch it). That travesty alone should have been enough for him to call his legal advisors to his bedside and make some last minute changes.


----------



## Chanbal

One more of the mysterious messages.


----------



## Chanbal

Angela Levin on the UK monarchy for the Japanese:

_Japan is fascinated by our Royal Family. Every few weeks I am asked by one of their TV channels to update them on what is happening in the UK. *Their key interest at the moment is Harry and Meghan and who can blame them. They can’t quite believe their behaviour towards the senior royals is so, well, rude.* No one would behave like that to their royal family they tell me…_





__





						Japan and the UK Royal Family
					

Japan is fascinated by our Royal Family. Every few weeks I am asked by one of their TV channels to update them on what is happening in the UK. Their key interest at the moment is Harry and Meghan and who can blame them. They can’t quite believe their behaviour towards the senior royals is so...




					angelalevin.substack.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Angela Levin on the UK monarchy for the Japanese:
> 
> _Japan is fascinated by our Royal Family. Every few weeks I am asked by one of their TV channels to update them on what is happening in the UK. *Their key interest at the moment is Harry and Meghan and who can blame them. They can’t quite believe their behaviour towards the senior royals is so, well, rude.* No one would behave like that to their royal family they tell me…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Japan and the UK Royal Family
> 
> 
> Japan is fascinated by our Royal Family. Every few weeks I am asked by one of their TV channels to update them on what is happening in the UK. Their key interest at the moment is Harry and Meghan and who can blame them. They can’t quite believe their behaviour towards the senior royals is so...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> angelalevin.substack.com



Told you so!


----------



## Chanbal

Didn't have a chance to watch the entire video, but PDina makes a very interesting point about the Harkles on the first part. They don't show their own child, but have they have no problem in exploiting other kids for their own gain… She is referring to the photo-ops in schools.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Damn, the cheesy lyrics in the Diana musical have got to be shared if only for their sheer awfulness.
> 
> *Prince Harry Has 100 Million Reasons Not to Comment on Exploitative New Netflix Show ‘Diana: The Musical’*
> 
> _BOUGHT AND PAID FOR_
> Harry’s silence on the new Diana musical on Netflix, which gratuitously exploits his mother’s life, isn’t so odd when you consider his reported $100m deal with the streaming giant.
> 
> Prince Harry is refusing to comment on a new Netflix musical that utterly traduces the life of his mother.
> 
> Ignoring shows, books, and newspaper articles that dishonor and distort his mother’s story is an entirely sensible response from Prince Harry under normal circumstances. But having signed a reported $100-million deal with Netflix, which is airing _Diana: The Musical_, his silence on this production is less straightforward.
> 
> The prince’s spokesperson did not respond to queries from The Daily Beast asking if he felt there was any tension between his own deal with Netflix and the company’s decision to stream a filmed version of the widely pilloried Broadway musical.
> 
> The show is made up of entirely fictional scenes, including an opening sequence in which Diana, played by Jeanna de Waal, is encouraged to come and meet Prince Charles for the first time by his girlfriend Camilla Parker Bowles.
> 
> The show ran for just a few days of previews on Broadway last year before having to close down after theaters went dark owing to the coronavirus pandemic. It is scheduled to re-open to a live audience in early November at the Longacre Theater on Broadway. The score is by Tony winners Joe DiPietro and David Bryan.
> 
> The show whizzes viewers through Charles and Diana’s engagement when she is chased through the streets of London by a pack of cockney paparazzi photographers who chant, rather bizarrely, “Better than a Guinness, better than a wank / Snap a few pics, it’s money in the bank / Honey, you are money in the bank.”
> 
> After they get married, with Diana reminding herself, “Time to get a grip, just hold your head up high and don’t trip,” Diana swiftly declares she is pregnant.
> 
> Charles' reaction is to say, “It would be rather helpful if it was a boy.”
> 
> Charles later sings to her as he holds William, “Darling, I am holding my son, so let me say jolly well done.”
> 
> When Harry arrives he gets a similarly joyful serenade from his proud parents, with Diana, singing to him, “Harry, my ginger-haired son / You’ll always be second to none.”
> 
> But Charles’s jealousy soon gets the better of him, and he sings: “You’ve never once obeyed me, Diana, goddamn it, it’s all your fault.”
> 
> The royal family then rounds on Diana, with the queen ordering her son, “Don’t blame her, Charles, tame her, Charles, she’s embarrassing the throne.”
> 
> A showdown in a London basement between Camilla and Diana ensues, with Camilla telling her rival, “I love Charles for who he is / For his strength and the noble life he lives / You love Charles for who he’s not / Some fantasy prince in a storybook plot.”
> 
> James Hewitt arrives in the story and declares, “They’ll call me the randy stable boy.”
> 
> The production continues in similarly melodramatic style for almost two hours until it culminates, of course, with the decidedly grim reality of Diana’s death in a Paris tunnel.
> 
> Harry has previously tried to avoid the conflict between his Netflix payday and the streaming giant’s profiteering off his family with _The Crown_.
> 
> “I’m way more comfortable with _The Crown_ than I am seeing the stories written about my family, or my wife or myself, because it’s the difference between fiction—take it how you will—and being reported on as fact because you’re supposedly news. I have a real issue with that,” he told his friend James Corden.
> 
> Whatever you think of _The Crown_’s approach to historical accuracy, it is, overall, an affectionate portrayal of a much misunderstood family. _Diana: The Musical,_ on the other hand, is a crass attempt to cash in on the death of Harry’s mother. It’s hard to believe he really has nothing to say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Has 100 Million Reasons Not to Comment on Exploitative New Netflix Show ‘Diana: The Musical’
> 
> 
> Harry’s silence on the new Diana musical on Netflix, which gratuitously exploits his mother’s life, isn’t so odd when you consider his reported $100m deal with the streaming giant.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> One more of the mysterious messages.
> 
> View attachment 5216072
> 
> [/QUOTE
> Any one of us, well at least 99.9% of us, could have predicted this.
> 
> Maybe Netflix is p---ed off that giving Haz an "Archie's Papa" folio cover to carry around to his world altering meetings in NYC wasn't enough of an incentive for him to get to work. And his lack of attention to detail in letting his supposedly hidden wire become exposed, let alone his underwear does not inspire confidence.
> 
> Recording the read aloud of the yawn inducing _The Bench_, doesn't exactly suggest compelling entertainment unless you are the narcissistic "stars" and clueless.
> 
> Pile on that evidently they were taping without authorizations if reports of them being cut off at the UN are true.  Might cause the Netflix Legal Department to start wondering whether the Morons of Monteshitshow are worth the bother?


----------



## bag-mania

They spent a ton of money and nothing they shot while in NYC would make for entertaining television. 

Meghan and Harry rubbing elbows with politicians = boring
Meghan reading her book to kids who are too old for it = boring
Meghan and Harry order and eat dinner = boring
Meghan and Harry visit the UN = pretentious and boring
Harry lectures to the world about Covid vaccine = annoyingly boring

Netflix is going to want some return on their huge investment. So far all that is on the plate is a rehash show about the Invictus Games and a preachy cartoon in development. Lame.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> They spent a ton of money and nothing they shot while in NYC would make for entertaining television.
> 
> Meghan and Harry rubbing elbows with politicians = boring
> Meghan reading her book to kids who are too old for it = boring
> Meghan and Harry order and eat dinner = boring
> Meghan and Harry visit the UN = pretentious and boring
> Harry lectures to the world about Covid vaccine = annoyingly boring
> 
> Netflix is going to want some return on their huge investment. So far all that is on the plate is a rehash show about the Invictus Games and a preachy cartoon in development. Lame.


Well you never know…. Remember the spat between Jay Z and Beyoncé in the elevator ?
maybe H and M had their videographer for one of those


----------



## Lodpah

I love how the press didn’t want to buy her photos. 










						Meghan Seen at Dinner, Lunch and Shopping During Royal Imprisonment—Book
					

Meghan Markle was pictured at dinner, lunch and beauty treatments during her royal imprisonment but British newspapers turned down the images, a biography says.




					www.google.com


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Angela Levin on the UK monarchy for the Japanese:
> 
> _Japan is fascinated by our Royal Family. Every few weeks I am asked by one of their TV channels to update them on what is happening in the UK. *Their key interest at the moment is Harry and Meghan and who can blame them. They can’t quite believe their behaviour towards the senior royals is so, well, rude.* No one would behave like that to their royal family they tell me…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Japan and the UK Royal Family
> 
> 
> Japan is fascinated by our Royal Family. Every few weeks I am asked by one of their TV channels to update them on what is happening in the UK. Their key interest at the moment is Harry and Meghan and who can blame them. They can’t quite believe their behaviour towards the senior royals is so...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> angelalevin.substack.com


Honestly, back in the day, Harry would have been told to fall on his sword.  I don't think that the kind of dishonor to his family that he has shown, can even be contemplated by the Japanese.  Her bad manners and pushing in front of him would never be tolerated.  Good manners and being polite, even to your enemies, has always been the norm there.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> she will have to make a fresh start in Antarctica- hopefully she can get some empathy from the penguins on the struggle of being both black and white.
> 
> Yeah if they really are insistent on recording people they encounter for tv then I hope they release this occasion. Heck go for broke and release it as a live Holiday Special.


The penguin remark was rather unkind, but it made me  I guess pandas, tapirs and zebras would empathize with her too  
We've got a newborn baby panda at the Singapore Zoo. She can read The Stench to it.
And if she carries on re-shaping her nose, the tapirs will definitely claim her as kin.

Let's see if they release another Christmas podcast to appease Spotify. 



Sharont2305 said:


> I don't why she's still known as Hanbury, that's her maiden name. It's just as easy to say Cholmondeley, pronounced Chumley.


I've learnt a new word! I recall my English teacher drilling us about how to say Worcester.



bag-mania said:


> And here's the latest that Morton has to say. To simplify it down to one word: jealousy.
> 
> *Prince Harry Was Frustrated Prince William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's projects "did not match Prince Charles' budget" and Prince William took priority, according to a biography.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared the same pot of funding from their father's Duchy of Cornwall estate while working royals.
> 
> However, Prince William took priority over his brother, stoking arguments and "jealousy," according to Andrew Morton.
> 
> The former royal correspondent wrote the definitive biography of Princess Diana, with her help, exposing Prince Charles' affair in the 1990s.
> 
> Now he has released new chapters to his 2018 biography _Meghan: A Hollywood Princess_, which _Newsweek_ has read.
> 
> Morton wrote: "They [Harry and Meghan] were coming to appreciate that in the royal hierarchy, no matter how popular, inspiring or relevant they were to the outside world, they were low down on the royal totem pole.
> 
> "Both William and Harry were funded by their father and it was often the case
> that Harry's ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget. His brother, as the future king, would always take priority.
> 
> "It may have been frustrating, it may have led to rows and jealousy, but that was the way it was and that was the way it was always going to be."
> 
> Morton described how Princess Margaret, Queen Elizabeth II's sister, and photographer husband Lord Snowdon were in a similar position "as the faces of the Swinging Sixties, the most glamorous, popular and photographed royals of the age."
> 
> However, they were "far down the pecking order," below the queen and also had to learn what he described as the first rule of royalty: "Funding does not relate to popularity but position."
> 
> Prince Charles' budget for funding his children stood at £5.7 million in 2019 to 2020 and at £4.5 million in 2020 to 21, though a "substantial sum" was given to Harry in the summer of 2020.
> 
> Harry told Oprah Winfrey in March that he had to rely on money from his mother following the royal exit, in March 2020.
> 
> He said: "My family literally cut me off financially and I had to afford security for us. Yeah, in the first quarter of 2020."
> 
> He added: "I brought what my mum left me. And without that, we would not have been able to do this, so touching back on what my mother would think of this, I think she saw it coming. I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process."
> 
> He also described how in the early days of the relationship there were discussions within the family about there not being enough money to fund Meghan at all.
> 
> The duke described how an unnamed royal racist had asked "what will the kids look like?"
> 
> He added: "But that was right at the beginning, when she wasn't going to get security, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting, because there was not enough money to pay for her, and all this sort of stuff. Like, there was some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Was Frustrated William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was frustrated that "no matter how popular" he and Meghan Markle were his "ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget," a biography says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


If it's true that the family told him that there was not enough money to pay for Methane and she should carry on acting, that leads me to make a few assumptions:
a) The "What M wants, M gets" demands had already started way before Tiaragate.
b) She had no intention to work after marriage and expected all her expenses to be paid by the BRF.
c) The "allowance" that she was proposing for the lifestyle she was expecting to lead was bigger than she was worth (sorry, L'Oreal). Based on her apparel bills just for the short period that she was a so-called working royal, I think Charles had a lucky escape from being drained dry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> c) The "allowance" that she was proposing for the lifestyle she was expecting to lead was bigger than she was worth (sorry, L'Oreal). Based on her apparel bills just for the short period that she was a so-called working royal, I think Charles had a lucky escape from being drained dry.



Do we know who paid for the NYC tour clothes?
Are we certain Charles didn’t kick in a few bucks?  With these two, every detail must be questioned, imo.

ETA:  as I consider all that has happened with the lying duo, wouldn’t it be terrible PR for the BRF if Hazzie fails at providing for his family?  As the son of current Queen, Andrew‘s mess is awful enough. If we add a failed son of the next King, ewwww, those optics are horrible.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do we know who paid for the NYC tour clothes?
> Are we certain Charles didn’t kick in a few bucks?  With these two, every detail must be questioned, imo.
> 
> ETA:  as I consider all that has happened with the lying duo, wouldn’t it be terrible PR for the BRF if Hazzie fails at providing for his family?  As the son of current Queen, Andrew‘s mess is awful enough. If we add a failed son of the next King, ewwww, those optics are horrible.


The stans in one of the comment threads on the Newsweek site are accusing Kate of being a spendthrift. It would be hilariously blinkered if it wasn't so tragic. That said, we should try to be even-keeled on this thread so that we don't give any stan ammo. I already know our tolerance level is amazingly high considering how much sarcastic restraint we evince whenever Mega-FauxPas shows up in bad outfits spewing word salad.

If the BRF are still slipping them a few (lots of) quid, I would be very disappointed because they are enabling a couple of losers. OTOH, I see in my own family that parents/grandparents find it emotionally difficult to cut ties with offspring, not matter how much they are attacked.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The stans in one of the comment threads on the Newsweek site are accusing Kate of being a spendthrift. It would be hilariously blinkered if it wasn't so tragic. That said, we should try to be even-keeled on this thread so that we don't give any stan ammo. I already know our tolerance level is amazingly high considering how much sarcastic restraint we evince whenever Mega-FauxPas shows up in bad outfits spewing word salad.
> 
> If the BRF are still slipping them a few (lots of) quid, I would be very disappointed because they are enabling a couple of losers. OTOH, I see in my own family that parents/grandparents find it emotionally difficult to cut ties with offspring, not matter how much they are attacked.



100% agree. I have convinced myself that Charles is slipping a few Hazzie’s way.
The next King has every reason to see Hazzie succeed, in spite of Hazzie‘s self-sabotaging skills.
QE is clearly funding Andrew, so Charles knows what he needs to do, even if he dislikes it.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> she will have to make a fresh start in Antarctica- hopefully *she can get some empathy from the penguins on the struggle of being both black and white.*


You just literally made me spit out my Diet Coke, yet choke on it at the same time!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> And here's the latest that Morton has to say. To simplify it down to one word: *jealousy.*
> 
> *Prince Harry Was Frustrated Prince William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Was Frustrated William Took Priority for Charles' Money—Book
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was frustrated that "no matter how popular" he and Meghan Markle were his "ambitions did not match Prince Charles's budget," a biography says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


"Frustrated"?  Nah, maybe sexually LOL.  He's jealous, 100,000,000%


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> They spent a ton of money and nothing they shot while in NYC would make for entertaining television.
> 
> Meghan and Harry rubbing elbows with politicians = boring
> Meghan reading her book to kids who are too old for it = boring
> Meghan and Harry order and eat dinner = boring
> Meghan and Harry visit the UN = pretentious and boring
> Harry lectures to the world about Covid vaccine = annoyingly boring
> 
> Netflix is going to want some return on their huge investment. So far all that is on the plate is a rehash show about the Invictus Games and a preachy cartoon in development. Lame.


I hope Netflix sues them for breach of contract.  How awesome would that be!


----------



## mellibelly

The contrast of the cover photos he used LMAO!


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> The penguin remark was rather unkind, but it made me  I guess pandas, tapirs and zebras would empathize with her too
> We've got a newborn baby panda at the Singapore Zoo. She can read The Stench to it.
> And if she carries on re-shaping her nose, the tapirs will definitely claim her as kin.



Unkind? As Meghan would say: "It's not our job to coddle her".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> The penguin remark was rather unkind, but it made me  I guess pandas, tapirs and zebras would empathize with her too
> We've got a newborn baby panda at the Singapore Zoo. She can read The Stench to it.
> And if she carries on re-shaping her nose, the tapirs will definitely claim her as kin.
> 
> Let's see if they release another Christmas podcast to appease Spotify.
> 
> 
> I've learnt a new word! I recall my English teacher drilling us about how to say Worcester.
> 
> 
> If it's true that the family told him that there was not enough money to pay for Methane and she should carry on acting, that leads me to make a few assumptions:
> a) The "What M wants, M gets" demands had already started way before Tiaragate.
> b) She had no intention to work after marriage and expected all her expenses to be paid by the BRF.
> c) The "allowance" that she was proposing for the lifestyle she was expecting to lead was bigger than she was worth (sorry, L'Oreal). Based on her apparel bills just for the short period that she was a so-called working royal, I think Charles had a lucky escape from being drained dry.


Not tapirs!  They are definitely not as cute as penguins & are apparently classed as a living fossil… so that won’t go down well.

I did wonder whether it might be a bit of a risky joke but I felt like the image of M lecturing a seminar of penguins was so silly. Now we can add her lulling pandas to sleep. The new David Attenborough.

I’m sure we’re all on baited breath for the Christmas special… after hearing ‘love always wins’ last time I wonder whose catchphrase they will pinch this year… I think it’s between ‘peg the patriarchy’ and ‘what’s up doc’.

I agree, I think they are still getting money from papa Charles. The upper class attitude is very much that any family member getting into financial trouble reflects badly on the whole family. Add to that the BRF always played defensive on any of the allegations made against them which has put them in H&Ms pocket. Still, it is the path of least resistance & Charles and the Queen are definitely not confrontational people so it might be the best thing for them personally.
Besides what’s money to them after all? What better things could Britain have spent it on?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't think it impossible that Charles folded. But...wouldn't you think they'd be smart enough to let the money come with conditions? So far, the Sussexes still have a very big mouth and are generally embarrassing.


----------



## Lodpah

There was a movie called something like “He’s just not into you.” Someone should tell Megsy “Majority of People Are Not Into You.” 

But if she sees a headline like that I’m afraid the stores will start rationing paper plates cause I’m not sure they have any more plates at that Montecito home anymore. Well maybe wine glasses.


----------



## Jktgal

bag-mania said:


> They spent a ton of money and nothing they shot while in NYC would make for entertaining television.


She shouldn't hanve cancelled on the clandestine visit to the girls working the street. Wearing a banana suit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Swipe to the 2nd slide. WTFFF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Swipe to the 2nd slide. WTFFF.




Looks like this confirms yesterday’s info:
Giles went to the SoHo house party — heard the rumor —  printed it as fact — now admits it was all a lie. 
Did I miss something?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Jktgal said:


> She shouldn't hanve cancelled on the clandestine visit to the girls working the street. Wearing a banana suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5216619


This post appears on my screen above a advert for a banana yellow puffa jacket from Todd's accessories with a banana yellow hobo bag. 
That'll be a pass from me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like this confirms yesterday’s info:
> Giles went to the SoHo house party — heard the rumor —  printed it as fact — now admits it was all a lie.
> Did I miss something?



Basically.

I just don't believe for a second he was "joking", that's his lame attempt at refusing responsibility.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Basically.
> 
> I just don't believe for a second he was "joking", that's his lame attempt at refusing responsibility.



100 % agree. 

I haven’t followed this Giles reporter in the past, and definitely won’t trust anything he prints now that I know his sources are drunken SoHo parties. I certainly don’t trust anything coming from H&M either.


----------



## Sophisticatted

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-harry-sits-next-kate-10786562

Uncomfortable body language.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-harry-sits-next-kate-10786562
> 
> Uncomfortable body language.



Why is he always so sulky. I don't think I've ever seen a picture of Wills pouting at a public function.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-harry-sits-next-kate-10786562
> 
> Uncomfortable body language.



Absolutely uncomfortable. Although this event is about a year before the SoHo party, this is the lady H&M started the rumours about. Now, what did she do to catch Hazzie’s wrath?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why is he always so sulky. I don't think I've ever seen a picture of Wills pouting at a public function.


really....pouty isn't a good look for a middle aged man


----------



## Chanbal

You don't want to miss this one.        



Spoiler: wow, wow, wow


----------



## Chanbal

Someone did a great job here putting their statements together.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I skimmed the comments to that Tweet, where is @Maggie Muggins?

Someone called them #6 and #666


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I skimmed the comments to that Tweet, where is @Maggie Muggins?
> 
> Someone called them #6 and #666


I hope @Maggie Muggins is not suffering from job exhaustion. The Harkles are very popular and keeping track of all their affectionate nicknames is a lot of work.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Someone did a great job here putting their statements together.



"Soaprah"


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I skimmed the comments to that Tweet, where is @Maggie Muggins?
> 
> Someone called them #6 and #666



Knock, knock--this is a wellness check for @Maggie Muggins. Seriously, I hope you're fine and well. "#6 and #666" are great nicknames, side by side along with my favorite "Ginge and Cringe". While I'm envious that our thread didn't generate #6 and #666, it's still deserving of a blue ribbon, or at least a wreath presented with a 6 page long explanation of symbolism meanings to show how much we're alligator teared personally impacted by such wisdom.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I might be extra sensitive because I write and edit for a living, but...is he just using language sloppily or avoiding a clear answer to the very clear question?

Also, I'd love to know what prompted him years after the fact to speak up that it was all a huuuge misunderstanding (as if).


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might be extra sensitive because I write and edit for a living, but...is he just using language sloppily or avoiding a clear answer to the very clear question?
> 
> Also, I'd love to know what prompted him years after the fact to speak up that it was all a huuuge misunderstanding (as if).




Deflection and denial he made the accusation. Like they say, "If you're explaining, you're losing". If he was "*CLEAR* that he was joking", then why is he explaining, years later?


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Eight years ago. This may be the last time she wore a dress that was well fitted and flattering.


Yes, I was going to comment too. 

While I don't like the color or style, it FITS and looks good. What the heck happened? Did she have a stylist that she had to listen too (at the TV show's insistence)?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Meghan Markle - if you haven't figured it out yet - is a troublemaker. Meghan Markle weighs in to cause trouble. She feels entitled like a bull in a china shop to topple over everything that's breakable and let's see where the chips fall, chips being all the broken pieces of china."


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might be extra sensitive because I write and edit for a living, but...is he just using language sloppily or avoiding a clear answer to the very clear question?
> 
> Also, I'd love to know what prompted him years after the fact to speak up that it was all a huuuge misunderstanding (as if).




MY guess - since this comes after the disaster NYC tour and the spectacular 007 appearance, which left no doubt who was the future - perhaps Giles doesn’t want to be left out of the celebrations.  Everyone loves a winner


----------



## rose60610

One would hope that after reading all the flattering comments about Kate's gown at the Bond premiere it would dawn on Meghan to up her tailoring game. But then she wouldn't get to cry "victim!" when she gets criticized. I think she enjoys making waves, trouble and problems. Then she loves to hold herself up as a martyr after getting called on her lies. The BRF plays things close to the vest, I'd like to think they're figuring out a strategy to extricate Ginge from Cringe with the least amount of damage. But he's so clueless that it's taking longer than it should. Maybe he enjoys sinking in Markle quicksand and swimming with Ms Poor Me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Meghan Markle - if you haven't figured it out yet - is a troublemaker. Meghan Markle weighs in to cause trouble. She feels entitled like a bull in a china shop to topple over everything that's breakable and let's see where the chips fall, chips being all the broken pieces of china."




Someone trained her to believe that every single thing is a personal affront to her.  She must respond / strike back  / retaliate.  She must compete with every single female she meets.  Whoever trained her this way - that person did this girl a huge disservice.


----------



## Aimee3

Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone trained her to believe that every single thing is a personal affront to her.  She must respond / strike back  / retaliate.  She must compete with every single female she meets.  Whoever trained her this way - that person did this girl a huge disservice.


I don't know if you can say she was trained. It may just be the way her brain is wired. And doesn't it seem to run in the Markle family?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or *was this another lie from #6?*



Probably.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I don't know if you can say she was trained. It may just be the way her brain is wired. And doesn't it seem to run in the Markle family?



Yes, it does seem to run in the family, so it may be a case of nurture vs. nature . Yes, it is difficult to break those family patterns, especially while working in Hwood where everyone has a hammer and sees the world as a nail. Still, she has been in several loving and kind relationships before Hazzie. Maybe her aspirations caused her to be very hard toward others. _Bull in a china shop _explains her perfectly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> You don't want to miss this one.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow, wow, wow



When a video about being reinforcing by Hitler, you’re not a globalized out to set the world on fire, you’re a joke and a meme. They’ve fallen so fast.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Swipe to the 2nd slide. WTFFF.



Why did he have to bring being Jewish into his meddling?  The last thing we need is for the sugars to join forces with the anti-semites and the conspiracy theorists.

He was spreading rumours, he should just admit that, no one from here to Mars thinks he was joking.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> MY guess - *since this comes after the disaster NYC tour and the spectacular 007 appearance, which left no doubt who was the future -* perhaps Giles doesn’t want to be left out of the celebrations. Everyone loves a winner


I think you nailed it! 

On one side there's Raptor tarnishing couture labels with her messy dressing, inappropriately wearing very expensive clothing to a school in Harlem. Haz flashing his underwear and not keeping his wire tucked in. On the other side the future King and Queen could have stepped right onto the throne after the James Bond movie premier and looked right at home. Both stylishly attired and demonstrating grace, poise, genuine engagement with people. Ignoring, not seeking out, the cameras.

Even more jarring in contrast, Methane with her prop notebooks being toted around to her "important meetings" and Harry the Handbag accomplice with his "Archie's Papa" embossed Folio Cover turned just so their camera man could capture it. Since she carried notebooks around with her when she was supposedly learning how to be Royal, and we know how well that went, there's no reason to suspect anything of substance, except maybe some publicity stills from her days on Suits, was actually in those notebooks. They  barely landed back in CA with self congratulatory hugs all around on the tarmac with their high priced lackeys, when the Internet began to fill with articles, video clips, and photos of Prince William's preparing for awarding the first Earthshot Prizes, his accompanying book robustly hitting the sales lists, and the announcement of the first of the five part series on BBC about climate issues. Years of WORK, with global impact, with accountability, with millions of real dollars funneled into significant projects.

The contrast is staggering and the more the Morons of Monteshitshow whine and posture the more they diminish themselves. Chinks in the wall they have tried to build around themselves are showing, articles from the Wall Street Journal to the celebrity rag, In Touch, are now daring to poke at the hypocrisy and lies etc. And two faced twerps like the odious Giles are surfacing out of the slime around the toxic duo.


----------



## gracekelly

Coren may not have actually made up the Hanbury rumor, but he pushed it out so he is guilty of rumormongering.  He knows that he will lose access to royals if he does not deny this

I don’t recall hearing that she had to work after marriage. Where did this come from?  She was given a choice and chose to retire from acting to perform royal duties. If Harry couldn’t support a wife who didn’t want to work, then he shouldn’t have gotten married.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Why did he have to bring being Jewish into his meddling?  The last thing we need is for the sugars to join forces with the anti-semites and the conspiracy theorists.
> 
> He was spreading rumours, he should just admit that, no one from here to Mars thinks he was joking.


Yes that was unnecessary.   The guy is an a$$hat.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Aimee3 said:


> This is the hotels policy, from their website:
> <<Smoke-Free Policy: The Carlyle maintains a smoke-free environment throughout the hotel. Smoking is not allowed in any of our guestrooms. If this policy is violated, a USD 500 cleaning fee will be charged.>>
> What pompous asses if they actually lit up in the public rooms.  Rules don’t apply to the UNroyals? If they were smoking in their rooms, no one would have seen, although I suppose the housekeepers would know from the smell.


$500 is nothing to those two.


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> $500 is nothing to those two.


That’s what I was thinking and plenty of other people have paid it.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> If the BRF are still slipping them a few (lots of) quid, I would be very disappointed because they are enabling a couple of losers. OTOH, I see in my own family that parents/grandparents find it emotionally difficult to cut ties with offspring, not matter how much they are attacked.





CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree. I have convinced myself that Charles is slipping a few Hazzie’s way.
> The next King has every reason to see Hazzie succeed, in spite of Hazzie‘s self-sabotaging skills.
> QE is clearly funding Andrew, so Charles knows what he needs to do, even if he dislikes it.



I don't believe Charles is still giving them money. Harry and Meghan publicly slammed him for cutting them off in the Oprah interview. They have made him look like a joke, and possibly a racist, as many speculated at the time that Meghan was talking about him with the baby skin color comment. Charles is NOT a magnanimous man.

The reason Andrew is still being paid is he didn't stop working voluntarily, he was removed from his assignments due to scandal. He would still be doing his prince duties if it was up to him. That is very different from Harry running to another country and announcing to the world they don't need his royal linage and they are going to make their own way just fine.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Coren may not have actually made up the Hanbury rumor, but he pushed it out so he is guilty of rumormongering.  He knows that he will lose access to royals if he does not deny this
> 
> I don’t recall hearing that she had to work after marriage. Where did this come from?  She was given a choice and chose to retire from acting to perform royal duties. If Harry couldn’t support a wife who didn’t want to work, then he shouldn’t have gotten married.


the thing about Giles is he’s a pundit not a serious investigative journalist , (I know him as a restaurant critic actually) so I personally don’t take exception to him stirring the pot on social media to try & get a reply  because that’s what they all do (I mean just look at Piers M’s Twitter)but like I said, just admit it and move on. it’s not even an inventive rumour- sleeping with a spouse’s friend is such an obvious story.

Yes, it’s another thing he came out with in the interview which just seemed bizarre. She was pleading before that she loved her career & it was hard to give up (& in fact she was being forced to) then suddenly h was acting like acting is some odious drudgery. Last time I checked most actors love their work and there’s no lack of talent trying to get into showbiz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I don't believe Charles is still giving them money. Harry and Meghan publicly slammed him for cutting them off in the Oprah interview. They have made him look like a joke, and possibly a racist, as many speculated at the time that Meghan was talking about him with the baby skin color comment. Charles is NOT a magnanimous man.
> 
> The reason Andrew is still being paid is he didn't stop working voluntarily, he was removed from his assignments due to scandal. He would still be doing his prince duties if it was up to him. That is very different from Harry running to another country and announcing to the world they don't need his royal linage and they are going to make their own way just fine.



From June, 2021:
_Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html
		

_

I’m thinking that QE and Charles won’t allow them to fall to far off course.  I could be wrong, I’d like to think they have learned some lessons from Andrew’s experience. Remember Wallis and Ed were given an allowance forever [although they wanted more, it was still something].


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> From June, 2021:
> _Prince Charles’s office, Clarence House, published in its annual accounts that Charles paid his sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, and their families, a sum of $6.3 million. The annual report covers the period from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. It’s not broken down by family.
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/harry-charles-finances-royal-palace/2021/06/24/675411b0-d4ca-11eb-b39f-05a2d776b1f4_story.html
> 
> 
> _
> 
> I’m thinking that QE and Charles won’t allow them to fall to far off course.  I could be wrong, I’d like to think they have learned some lessons from Andrew’s experience. Remember Wallis and Ed were given an allowance forever [although they wanted more, it was still something].



That was $6.3 million divided between William and Harry's families over the course of a year and we don't know that it was divided equally. If I am reading it correctly, it looks like Charles cut spending going into 2021, including for the sons. We'll see what the numbers are like next year. I would be shocked if Charles has paid Harry a penny since the Oprah interview. If he has then he is an even bigger wuss than I thought.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might be extra sensitive because I write and edit for a living, but...is he just using language sloppily or avoiding a clear answer to the very clear question?
> 
> Also, I'd love to know what prompted him years after the fact to speak up that it was all a huuuge misunderstanding (as if).



My 2 cents:
If he got the info from #6's wife (or #6), he will not acknowledge that. He has nothing to gain by naming the Montecitos at this time, and will expose himself to a lawsuit.

However, it's interesting that he mentions that an American website had an important role in spreading the news about Rose. I read somewhere that 6's wife kept a PR team in the US during her brief stay in the UK, and new releases were done here on her behalf. Coincidence?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Aimee3 said:


> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?


What came into my mind when he said that is that she was already making exorbitant demands for her clothing and other budgets, and he was told that those would not be met. Just an idea.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?


It's possible this is one more falsehoods. This is what I understood, prior to the wedding the BRF expressed concerns about her bills and encouraged 6's wife to keep her brilliant career.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> $500 is nothing to those two.


Of course not, they probably didn't even saw the bill. I doubt that the costs of the NYC trip came from their pockets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Innocent or guilty, 6's wife has been linked to the Rose rumor. I guess, we will never know how this rumor really started.  

This was published in 2020. If the affair didn't happen, what does she know? 





			https://micky.com.au/meghan-markle-believes-prince-william-had-an-affair-with-rose-hanbury-rumor/
		


This is from Quora: 

_*Is there any truth in the media reports that say Meghan Markle is responsible for starting the rumors about Prince William and Rose Hanbury having an affair? *_










						Is there any truth in the media reports that say Meghan Markle is responsible for starting the rumors about Prince William and Rose Hanbu...
					

Answer (1 of 29): I have proof that it was was one her very very huge fans. The fan posted another tweet saying that she had made it all up. I just changed phones and now have 3 phones worth of information on my new one and haven't organized it yet. I'll start looking for the tweet. We do know th...




					www.quora.com


----------



## youngster

Aimee3 said:


> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?



So interesting, how Harry is trying to spin this. I remember reading that the family had said to Harry and MM that if she wanted to continue to work as an actress, great, do it.  They thought it was one of the positives she brought to the marriage, that she had a career of her own and they wouldn't prevent her from pursuing that.   But, here Harry is trying to spin that they told MM to keep her day job basically, when the family probably thought that the two of them had more than enough money between the allowances and Harry's inheritance.  And, they would have if they both didn't aspire to some globe-trotting, jet-setting, private jet flying lifestyle.


----------



## justwatchin

Aimee3 said:


> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?


I vote for lie. He’s just dense enough to say whatever comes floating from his pampered brain to his mouth. I’m not believing that at all.


----------



## tiktok

youngster said:


> So interesting, how Harry is trying to spin this. I remember reading that the family had said to Harry and MM that if she wanted to continue to work as an actress, great, do it.  They thought it was one of the positives she brought to the marriage, that she had a career of her own and they wouldn't prevent her from pursuing that.   But, here Harry is trying to spin that they told MM to keep her day job basically, when the family probably thought that the two of them had more than enough money between the allowances and Harry's inheritance.  And, they would have if they both didn't aspire to some globe-trotting, jet-setting, private jet flying lifestyle.



Yup, they probably told him that if she wants to continue to spend $1m on her wardrobe alone then she can finance this from her acting jobs, not from their allowance (poor dears, they only got $2-3m total).


----------



## youngster

If the family did tell Harry and MM that she could continue her acting career if she chose, then I think they did because they recognized that being the spare and the spare's spouse is filled with all kinds of potential danger.  All that time, all that money, all that social status, but nothing to do, just leads the spares into trouble, as we've seen.


----------



## csshopper

tiktok said:


> Yup, they probably told him that if she wants to continue to spend $1m on her wardrobe alone then she can finance this from her acting jobs, not from their allowance (poor dears, they only got $2-3m total).


*The Queen reportedly offered to let Meghan keep acting part ...*
https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...e/news-story/dd1d12745bff4b604fe194b1e0cce0cc - Cached - Similar pages 
Apr 6, 2021 *...* “And also, *they did* say to *Meghan*, 'If you don't want to embrace royal duties full-time please *be* our guest and *continue* your acting career.' “ ...

This is one of multiple versions reported on different sites, but with the same information. As the Suckesses were bailing they were given options by the family, the Queen, allowing Meghan to continue her acting career while they served as part time Royals was one. They were also offered an option to live wherever they wanted and to be Youth Ambassadors for the Commonwealth. 

I remember thinking at the time I read this, "Wow, they are really offering Meghan a concession to continue acting after she's married" since it seemed to run counter to some of the other commercial issues the RF had had to deal with in balancing family employment. Even Prince Edward and the Countess of Wessex got embroiled in some controversies as did Peter Phillips, the Princess Royal's son. 

But, these suggested options didn't fit into what Suckesses had already plotted and as I think it was Andrew Morton pointed out, Haz being basically dumb as a post (my words, exaggerating what he said) did not take the time to think things through and the whole Megxit mess went forward on their terms not the RF's. Part of what Haz did not factor in, was the loss of the  militaryPatronages as a result of their actions. So, he had a tantrum, they snarkily told the world "service is universal" as a dig at the Queen, and the bile spilled over into the OW interview many months later.


----------



## Aimee3

Also if #6’s wife was still “acting” I assume it would be far away from London, and they would be separated a lot and eventually go separate ways?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Although I am not a fan of Andrew Morton, I do agree with him on these points:
MM had her freedom
The BRF thought MM _liked_ her acting gigs and did not want to stand in her way

Pre-wedding, Hazzie seems obsessed with security and money. IIRC his mom chose her own personal security which some have said led to her death. Perhaps he misunderstood the difference between senior royals and himself, had an inflated sense of his importance.









						Why Did the Royals Tell Meghan Markle She Should Keep Acting?
					

Princess Diana biographer Andrew Morton recently confirmed that the family encouraged Meghan to keep her career—but his explanation differs from Harry’s in one key way.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_To royal biographer Andrew Morton, whose biography of Princess Diana made headlines in 1992, the comparisons that the couple made to Diana’s time in the palace weren’t completely off the mark. Speaking to the hosts of the PureWow podcast Royally Obsessed last week, Morton said he noticed some similarities but *didn’t actually think that Meghan was stripped of her freedom.* “When I was watching the interview, I was ticking off, ‘yes, sense of isolation, yes, sense of desperation,’” he said. “Exactly what Diana was saying to me. But then again, well, friends of mine have seen Meghan walking from Whole Foods supermarket on Kensington High Street with bags of food back to Kensington Palace.”

In explaining his reasoning, he mentioned another point of contention in the interview—that *Queen Elizabeth and the royal family raised the prospect of Meghan carrying on her career as an actress, though Morton claims their motives were benign*. “In fairness to the royal family, in fairness to the Queen, she did give them that opportunity to go wherever they pleased,” he said. “And also, they did say to Meghan, ‘If you don’t want to embrace royal duties full time, please be our guest and continue your acting career.’ Those opportunities were open to her.”

When Harry mentioned Meghan’s career in the Oprah interview, it came in the context of early comments about the skin color of his and Meghan’s potential children. “That was right at the beginning,” he explained to Oprah, “_*when she wasn’t going to get security*_, when members of my family were suggesting that she carries on acting, because there was _*not enough money to pay for her*_, and all this sort of stuff. __*Like, there were some real obvious signs before we even got married that this was going to be really hard.” *_[duh]
_
To Harry, the idea that she continue acting had little to do with her desire to be free, but with the family’s willingness to accept her as a full, working member. *Besides, there’s some evidence that Meghan was no longer interested in acting.* In the biography Finding Freedom, authors Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durant report that she was interested in making a pivot to lifestyle television or humanitarian projects even before she met Harry. When the couple first announced their deal with Netflix last September, a spokesperson said that Meghan would not be making a return to acting. On Tuesday, Archewell Productions announced their first show—a docu-series about the Invictus Games, the Paralympic-style competition for wounded service members he founded in 2014. Only Harry will be making an on-camera appearance this time around.

Though some royal correspondents have mocked the idea of Meghan and Harry telling “their truth” in public, it’s been helpful to know how they experienced the events, many of which transpired largely in public. After watching the Oprah interview, it’s clear that the couple thinks their disagreement with the royal family comes down to how welcome Meghan really was during their years before their royal family.

To Morton, Harry and Meghan share some blame for the rift. “I think neither of them gave it the thought they should have done,” he said. “I think that famous warning from Prince William of ‘steady on, think about what you’re doing,’ that Harry bridled at, was probably meant more with affection.”_


----------



## Katel

rose60610 said:


> Knock, knock--this is a wellness check for @Maggie Muggins. Seriously, I hope you're fine and well. "#6 and #666" are great nicknames, side by side along with my favorite "Ginge and Cringe". While I'm envious that our thread didn't generate #6 and #666, it's still deserving of a blue ribbon, or at least a wreath presented with a 6 page long explanation of symbolism meanings to show how much we're alligator teared personally impacted by such wisdom.


Merch and Lurch are the perpetual gift that keeps giving. At some point, they will flame out, as will the world’s interest, and they will be consigned to some mansion behind gates like Wallis and Ed, throwing little “exclusive” parties, pretending they’re someone.


----------



## bag-mania

Wow, Elton John’s husband has taken ass kissing to the next level.  



Elton John's husband David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflixseries Pearl has praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.

In July, The Duchess of Sussex, 39, dropped a major hint that the new series will be based - at least in part - on her own childhood, by naming both the show and its title character Pearl, the origin meaning of her name. 

The mother-of-two announced details of her new project for the streaming giant, revealing that she will both 'create and produce' the series, which focuses on a '12-year-old heroine who finds inspiration in influential women from history'.  

'She's a fantastic collaborator, amazing leader,' said filmmaker David Furnish, 58, at the HELLO! Inspiration Awards. 'And we're just very, very excited to be working with, you know, someone is as influential and as supportive as Netflix.'

It comes after suggestions that Meghan is also shouldering another major role within the creation of the series - serving as the inspiration for its title character.

Few other details have been released about the series - including which influential female figures will feature, however the choice of name for its young 'heroine' offers a fair amount of insight into the kind of character that will be portrayed on screen.

The name Meghan originated in Wales, where it is traditionally spelled Megan, however it originally came from the Greek name Margaret, derived from the word margaritēs, which translates to 'pearl' - the moniker given to the leading lady of the Duchess of Sussex's new animated series.


Meghan is the 'American pseudo-Irish spelling' of the Welsh name, according to BabyNames.com, which explains: 'The name Meghan is primarily a female name of Welsh origin that means Pearl.'

This is not the first time that Meghan has chosen to draw on her own life as the inspiration for her professional projects - something that she did most recently with her debut children's book The Bench, which was firmly panned by readers on both sides of the Atlantic.

As well as serving as the basis for the title character for her new Netflix project, Meghan will also serve as 'creator and executive producer' - marking the first time that the former actress and Suits star will work in the position of EP.


It is not known whether any of these women will feature in the series - or if Meghan plans to include her late mother-in-law, Princess Diana.

Speaking about his involvement in Pearl, David hinted that he and Meghan have been working on the series for some time now, saying in a statement: 'I am delighted that we are finally able to announce this exciting animated series.

'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex and I are deeply passionate about bringing the inspirational and positive stories of extraordinary women from around the world to a global audience of all ages. The team collaborating on the series are first class, and Netflix are the perfect partner.'

As well as landing Meghan her first executive producer credit, the animated series also marks the first time that she and David will work together in a professional capacity.

David's husband, famed musician Elton, 74, was good friends with Harry's late mother Princess Diana and maintained a close relationship with the Duke after her death in 1997.

In 2019, Elton paid for Harry and Meghan to fly via private jet to his multi-million-dollar mansion in the South of France - and he vehemently defended the couple against furious backlash over their decision to travel in a private plane, despite actively advocating for environmental issues.

Elton and David were also among the many celebrity guests invited to attend Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018.









						Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
					

David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.




					www.google.com


----------



## needlv

You only need to watch the first two minutes of the clip…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Wow, Elton John’s husband has taken ass kissing to the next level.
> 
> View attachment 5217311
> 
> Elton John's husband David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflixseries Pearl has praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> In July, The Duchess of Sussex, 39, dropped a major hint that the new series will be based - at least in part - on her own childhood, by naming both the show and its title character Pearl, the origin meaning of her name.
> 
> The mother-of-two announced details of her new project for the streaming giant, revealing that she will both 'create and produce' the series, which focuses on a '12-year-old heroine who finds inspiration in influential women from history'.
> 
> 'She's a fantastic collaborator, amazing leader,' said filmmaker David Furnish, 58, at the HELLO! Inspiration Awards. 'And we're just very, very excited to be working with, you know, someone is as influential and as supportive as Netflix.'
> 
> It comes after suggestions that Meghan is also shouldering another major role within the creation of the series - serving as the inspiration for its title character.
> 
> Few other details have been released about the series - including which influential female figures will feature, however the choice of name for its young 'heroine' offers a fair amount of insight into the kind of character that will be portrayed on screen.
> 
> The name Meghan originated in Wales, where it is traditionally spelled Megan, however it originally came from the Greek name Margaret, derived from the word margaritēs, which translates to 'pearl' - the moniker given to the leading lady of the Duchess of Sussex's new animated series.
> 
> 
> Meghan is the 'American pseudo-Irish spelling' of the Welsh name, according to BabyNames.com, which explains: 'The name Meghan is primarily a female name of Welsh origin that means Pearl.'
> 
> This is not the first time that Meghan has chosen to draw on her own life as the inspiration for her professional projects - something that she did most recently with her debut children's book The Bench, which was firmly panned by readers on both sides of the Atlantic.
> 
> As well as serving as the basis for the title character for her new Netflix project, Meghan will also serve as 'creator and executive producer' - marking the first time that the former actress and Suits star will work in the position of EP.
> 
> 
> It is not known whether any of these women will feature in the series - or if Meghan plans to include her late mother-in-law, Princess Diana.
> 
> Speaking about his involvement in Pearl, David hinted that he and Meghan have been working on the series for some time now, saying in a statement: 'I am delighted that we are finally able to announce this exciting animated series.
> 
> 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex and I are deeply passionate about bringing the inspirational and positive stories of extraordinary women from around the world to a global audience of all ages. The team collaborating on the series are first class, and Netflix are the perfect partner.'
> 
> As well as landing Meghan her first executive producer credit, the animated series also marks the first time that she and David will work together in a professional capacity.
> 
> David's husband, famed musician Elton, 74, was good friends with Harry's late mother Princess Diana and maintained a close relationship with the Duke after her death in 1997.
> 
> In 2019, Elton paid for Harry and Meghan to fly via private jet to his multi-million-dollar mansion in the South of France - and he vehemently defended the couple against furious backlash over their decision to travel in a private plane, despite actively advocating for environmental issues.
> 
> Elton and David were also among the many celebrity guests invited to attend Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
> 
> 
> David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I saw this article before, but the title prevented me from clicking on it. I don't know much about Elton's husband apart that he directed Tantrum & Tiaras, is he that thirsty for fame?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I saw this article before, but the title prevented from clicking on it. I don't know much about Elton's husband apart the he directed Tantrum & Tiaras, is he that thirsty for fame?



I know even less about him than you do. But judging from this article I would say yes.


----------



## rose60610

So much for craving for privacy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I saw this article before, but the title prevented from clicking on it. I don't know much about Elton's husband apart the he directed Tantrum & Tiaras, is he that thirsty for fame?



My guess is Nflix is indeed that thirsty for a success. They have goofed with several productions lately - The Crown, The Squid Game, that French show, etc. - so they need a win. Doubt H&M‘s show will be the success they want. AppleTV has scored huge gains with Ted Lasso  and others. 

Also, while Elton may have millions, he does have millions of dollars of expenses. The pandemic has caused many to lose money as well as costs to rise. It has affected everyone, especially the rich. Sure, sure, they’ll say they are fine, but … the tell is championing this Pearl show.  The Intrepid Museum show on Nov. 10 should reveal how well Hazzo is accepted. 

Everything is getting re-defined these days. H&M’s duplicitous nature may have caught up with them finally.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

In case the 6s will not be invited to Jubilee, they will have a plan B: the alternative Jubilee celebrations!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is Nflix is indeed that thirsty for a success. They have goofed with several productions lately - The Crown, The Squid Game, that French show, etc. - so they need a win. Doubt H&M‘s show will be the success they want. AppleTV has scored huge gains with Ted Lasso  and others.
> 
> Also, while Elton may have millions, he does have millions of dollars of expenses. The pandemic has caused many to lose money as well as costs to rise. It has affected everyone, especially the rich. Sure, sure, they’ll say they are fine, but … the tell is championing this Pearl show.  The Intrepid Museum show on Nov. 10 should reveal how well Hazzo is accepted.
> 
> Everything is getting re-defined these days. H&M’s duplicitous nature may have caught up with them finally.


It's all about greed!


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Wow, Elton John’s husband has taken ass kissing to the next level.
> 
> View attachment 5217311
> 
> Elton John's husband David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflixseries Pearl has praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> In July, The Duchess of Sussex, 39, dropped a major hint that the new series will be based - at least in part - on her own childhood, by naming both the show and its title character Pearl, the origin meaning of her name.
> 
> The mother-of-two announced details of her new project for the streaming giant, revealing that she will both 'create and produce' the series, which focuses on a '12-year-old heroine who finds inspiration in influential women from history'.
> 
> 'She's a fantastic collaborator, amazing leader,' said filmmaker David Furnish, 58, at the HELLO! Inspiration Awards. 'And we're just very, very excited to be working with, you know, someone is as influential and as supportive as Netflix.'
> 
> It comes after suggestions that Meghan is also shouldering another major role within the creation of the series - serving as the inspiration for its title character.
> 
> Few other details have been released about the series - including which influential female figures will feature, however the choice of name for its young 'heroine' offers a fair amount of insight into the kind of character that will be portrayed on screen.
> 
> The name Meghan originated in Wales, where it is traditionally spelled Megan, however it originally came from the Greek name Margaret, derived from the word margaritēs, which translates to 'pearl' - the moniker given to the leading lady of the Duchess of Sussex's new animated series.
> 
> 
> Meghan is the 'American pseudo-Irish spelling' of the Welsh name, according to BabyNames.com, which explains: 'The name Meghan is primarily a female name of Welsh origin that means Pearl.'
> 
> This is not the first time that Meghan has chosen to draw on her own life as the inspiration for her professional projects - something that she did most recently with her debut children's book The Bench, which was firmly panned by readers on both sides of the Atlantic.
> 
> As well as serving as the basis for the title character for her new Netflix project, Meghan will also serve as 'creator and executive producer' - marking the first time that the former actress and Suits star will work in the position of EP.
> 
> 
> It is not known whether any of these women will feature in the series - or if Meghan plans to include her late mother-in-law, Princess Diana.
> 
> Speaking about his involvement in Pearl, David hinted that he and Meghan have been working on the series for some time now, saying in a statement: 'I am delighted that we are finally able to announce this exciting animated series.
> 
> 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex and I are deeply passionate about bringing the inspirational and positive stories of extraordinary women from around the world to a global audience of all ages. The team collaborating on the series are first class, and Netflix are the perfect partner.'
> 
> As well as landing Meghan her first executive producer credit, the animated series also marks the first time that she and David will work together in a professional capacity.
> 
> David's husband, famed musician Elton, 74, was good friends with Harry's late mother Princess Diana and maintained a close relationship with the Duke after her death in 1997.
> 
> In 2019, Elton paid for Harry and Meghan to fly via private jet to his multi-million-dollar mansion in the South of France - and he vehemently defended the couple against furious backlash over their decision to travel in a private plane, despite actively advocating for environmental issues.
> 
> Elton and David were also among the many celebrity guests invited to attend Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
> 
> 
> David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


   V-a-n-i-t-y project from a narcissist.


----------



## gracekelly

You know what?  She was still acting but the family didn’t realize it at first. She was pretending  to like them, be happy to be there, wanting to fit in and pretending that she wanted to fulfill Royal duties. In reality she was just biding her time before leaving and taking as much as she could with her  She is still acting IMO. She is pretending to be a nice and concerned person. She’s a lousy actress.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Wow, Elton John’s husband has taken ass kissing to the next level.
> 
> View attachment 5217311
> 
> Elton John's husband David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflixseries Pearl has praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> In July, The Duchess of Sussex, 39, dropped a major hint that the new series will be based - at least in part - on her own childhood, by naming both the show and its title character Pearl, the origin meaning of her name.
> 
> The mother-of-two announced details of her new project for the streaming giant, revealing that she will both 'create and produce' the series, which focuses on a '12-year-old heroine who finds inspiration in influential women from history'.
> 
> 'She's a fantastic collaborator, amazing leader,' said filmmaker David Furnish, 58, at the HELLO! Inspiration Awards. 'And we're just very, very excited to be working with, you know, someone is as influential and as supportive as Netflix.'
> 
> It comes after suggestions that Meghan is also shouldering another major role within the creation of the series - serving as the inspiration for its title character.
> 
> Few other details have been released about the series - including which influential female figures will feature, however the choice of name for its young 'heroine' offers a fair amount of insight into the kind of character that will be portrayed on screen.
> 
> The name Meghan originated in Wales, where it is traditionally spelled Megan, however it originally came from the Greek name Margaret, derived from the word margaritēs, which translates to 'pearl' - the moniker given to the leading lady of the Duchess of Sussex's new animated series.
> 
> 
> Meghan is the 'American pseudo-Irish spelling' of the Welsh name, according to BabyNames.com, which explains: 'The name Meghan is primarily a female name of Welsh origin that means Pearl.'
> 
> This is not the first time that Meghan has chosen to draw on her own life as the inspiration for her professional projects - something that she did most recently with her debut children's book The Bench, which was firmly panned by readers on both sides of the Atlantic.
> 
> As well as serving as the basis for the title character for her new Netflix project, Meghan will also serve as 'creator and executive producer' - marking the first time that the former actress and Suits star will work in the position of EP.
> 
> 
> It is not known whether any of these women will feature in the series - or if Meghan plans to include her late mother-in-law, Princess Diana.
> 
> Speaking about his involvement in Pearl, David hinted that he and Meghan have been working on the series for some time now, saying in a statement: 'I am delighted that we are finally able to announce this exciting animated series.
> 
> 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex and I are deeply passionate about bringing the inspirational and positive stories of extraordinary women from around the world to a global audience of all ages. The team collaborating on the series are first class, and Netflix are the perfect partner.'
> 
> As well as landing Meghan her first executive producer credit, the animated series also marks the first time that she and David will work together in a professional capacity.
> 
> David's husband, famed musician Elton, 74, was good friends with Harry's late mother Princess Diana and maintained a close relationship with the Duke after her death in 1997.
> 
> In 2019, Elton paid for Harry and Meghan to fly via private jet to his multi-million-dollar mansion in the South of France - and he vehemently defended the couple against furious backlash over their decision to travel in a private plane, despite actively advocating for environmental issues.
> 
> Elton and David were also among the many celebrity guests invited to attend Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
> 
> 
> David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I really need a big bucket for all the vxxxx I’m about to spew.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sophisticatted said:


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-harry-sits-next-kate-10786562
> 
> Uncomfortable body language.


Talk about a shotgun wedding!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> You don't want to miss this one.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow, wow, wow



Oh my....Besides the Hitler references, this proves we have some of these posters and journalists amongst us!  "Scabies"?  LOLOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> *Why did he have to bring being Jewish into his meddling? * The last thing we need is for the sugars to join forces with the anti-semites and the conspiracy theorists.
> 
> He was spreading rumours, he should just admit that, no one from here to Mars thinks he was joking.


I was wondering this myself.  Why does he mention that he's a Jew?  What does that have to do with anything?  He should've just said he's a douche bag.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Wow, Elton John’s husband has taken ass kissing to the next level.
> 
> View attachment 5217311
> 
> Elton John's husband David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflixseries Pearl has praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> In July, The Duchess of Sussex, 39, dropped a major hint that the new series will be based - at least in part - on her own childhood, by naming both the show and its title character Pearl, the origin meaning of her name.
> 
> The mother-of-two announced details of her new project for the streaming giant, revealing that she will both 'create and produce' the series, which focuses on a '12-year-old heroine who finds inspiration in influential women from history'.
> 
> 'She's a fantastic collaborator, amazing leader,' said filmmaker David Furnish, 58, at the HELLO! Inspiration Awards. 'And we're just very, very excited to be working with, you know, someone is as influential and as supportive as Netflix.'
> 
> It comes after suggestions that Meghan is also shouldering another major role within the creation of the series - serving as the inspiration for its title character.
> 
> Few other details have been released about the series - including which influential female figures will feature, however the choice of name for its young 'heroine' offers a fair amount of insight into the kind of character that will be portrayed on screen.
> 
> The name Meghan originated in Wales, where it is traditionally spelled Megan, however it originally came from the Greek name Margaret, derived from the word margaritēs, which translates to 'pearl' - the moniker given to the leading lady of the Duchess of Sussex's new animated series.
> 
> 
> Meghan is the 'American pseudo-Irish spelling' of the Welsh name, according to BabyNames.com, which explains: 'The name Meghan is primarily a female name of Welsh origin that means Pearl.'
> 
> This is not the first time that Meghan has chosen to draw on her own life as the inspiration for her professional projects - something that she did most recently with her debut children's book The Bench, which was firmly panned by readers on both sides of the Atlantic.
> 
> As well as serving as the basis for the title character for her new Netflix project, Meghan will also serve as 'creator and executive producer' - marking the first time that the former actress and Suits star will work in the position of EP.
> 
> 
> It is not known whether any of these women will feature in the series - or if Meghan plans to include her late mother-in-law, Princess Diana.
> 
> Speaking about his involvement in Pearl, David hinted that he and Meghan have been working on the series for some time now, saying in a statement: 'I am delighted that we are finally able to announce this exciting animated series.
> 
> 'Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex and I are deeply passionate about bringing the inspirational and positive stories of extraordinary women from around the world to a global audience of all ages. The team collaborating on the series are first class, and Netflix are the perfect partner.'
> 
> As well as landing Meghan her first executive producer credit, the animated series also marks the first time that she and David will work together in a professional capacity.
> 
> David's husband, famed musician Elton, 74, was good friends with Harry's late mother Princess Diana and maintained a close relationship with the Duke after her death in 1997.
> 
> In 2019, Elton paid for Harry and Meghan to fly via private jet to his multi-million-dollar mansion in the South of France - and he vehemently defended the couple against furious backlash over their decision to travel in a private plane, despite actively advocating for environmental issues.
> 
> Elton and David were also among the many celebrity guests invited to attend Harry and Meghan's wedding in May 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
> 
> 
> David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Maybe I'm ignorant, but WTF is David Furnish known for besides being Elton John's husband?  Another clinger on whose claim to fame is marrying someone rich and famous.  Takes one to know one, eh David?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Talk about a shotgun wedding!



Who, the Cholmondeleys? They seem unconventional, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> In July, The Duchess of Sussex, 39, dropped a major hint that the new series will be based - at least in part - on her own childhood, by naming both the show and its title character Pearl, the origin meaning of her name.


I thought the heffer  was 40 ? Is she happy about lying about her age again since the 40x40 nonsense didn’t work?


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> I thought the heffer  was 40 ?


Agriculturally speaking she is no longer a heifer. She's just a cow.


----------



## Jktgal

RAINDANCE said:


> This post appears on my screen above a advert for a banana yellow puffa jacket from Todd's accessories with a banana yellow hobo bag.
> That'll be a pass from me.


We need a 'that's bananas!' emoji....


----------



## bag-mania

breakfastatcartier said:


> I thought the heffer  was 40 ? Is she happy about lying about her age again since the 40x40 nonsense didn’t work?



At the time the info from the article was originally written she was still hanging on to 39 for one more month. It’s up to the journalist to update their facts. Meghan sure won’t be complaining about the error.


----------



## bag-mania

Jack Royston from _Newsweek_ seems to be making it a mission to point out the hypocrisy lately. His articles start out sounding favorable but about halfway through he slips in the facts showing Harry's actions don't match his rhetoric. 

*How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel*
Prince Harry's eco-tourism partner Google is highlighting low carbon flight options—just a month after they teamed up.

Google Flights now lets consumers see which airlines are offering the lowest carbon planes and those that are the most polluting.

The tech giant joined Prince Harry's Travalyst initiative, which seeks to encourage sustainable tourism, in September.

While the prince and Travalyst didn't work on the latest update from Google, yesterday's announcement demonstrates the partnership could see progress in a key area where the royals have been looking to make progress for decades.

Prince Charles and Prince William have also launched their own efforts to pursue positive change for the environment.

In a blog post on October 6, Richard Holden, Google's vice president of travel products, wrote: "It's critical that people can find consistent and accurate carbon emissions estimates no matter where they want to research or book their trip.

"That's why we recently joined the Travalyst coalition, where we'll help develop an open model for calculating carbon emissions from air travel and promote standardization across the travel industry using this framework."

Through Google, air passengers can see which airlines are creating the most carbon and how much less efficient it is to fly first class than economy.

The tech giant has also launched eco certificates to help tourists choose hotels and offers eco-friendly route options on Google maps.

Omid Scobie, who wrote the Harry and Meghan Markle biography _Finding Freedom_, wrote on Twitter: "Google's partnership with Prince Harry's Travalyst is off to a flying start.



"The company announced today they will now report carbon emissions data for all flights. This is alongside the fuel-efficient routing options just added to ⁦⁦@googlemaps."

Prince Harry's support for eco travel has long been controversial due to his use of private jets, which produce significantly more carbon than scheduled flights.

For example, Google Flights shows it's possible to find first class tickets from New York to Los Angeles that produce an estimated footprint of 778kg of CO2.

Prince Harry did the same journey, only to Santa Barbara, on a private Dassault Falcon 2000 after a tour of New York last month. An emissions calculator run by Paramount Business Jets puts his cabron footprint for the journey at 13,185kg, 16 times more than even a first class scheduled ticket.

However, progress through the Google partnership will be a welcome breakthrough for the company after it was caught up in a review of Harry's now defunct Sussex Royal charity.

The Charity Commission earlier this year rejected claims the organization had put the relationship between Harry and brother Prince William above the interests of the charity.

In his blog post, Holden wrote: "Beginning today, you'll see a carbon emissions estimate for nearly every flight in the search results — right next to the price and duration of the flight. So when you're choosing among flights of similar cost or timing, you can also factor carbon emissions into your decision.

"These emissions estimates are flight-specific as well as seat-specific. For instance, newer aircraft are generally less polluting than older aircraft, and emissions increase for premium economy and first-class seats because they take up more space and account for a larger share of total emissions.

"To put these estimates in context, flights with significantly lower emissions will be labeled with a green badge. And if you want to prioritize carbon impact, you can sort all of the results to bring the greenest flights to the top of the list."

Sally Davey, Travalyst's chief executive, last month said: "The Travalyst Coalition strives to leverage its collective reach and help drive mass adoption of sustainability standards. We're excited to continue this endeavour with Google as a member of the Travalyst Coalition, delivering on this unique opportunity to build positive, transformative change in travel.

"The Google travel team has committed globally to helping consumers make more sustainable travel choices, and their approach aligns strongly with Travalyst's collaboration principles."









						How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel
					

Prince Harry's eco-tourism initiative Travalyst partnered with Google last month and already the tech giant is helping consumers choose low carbon options.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who, the Cholmondeleys? They seem unconventional, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing.





David Cholmondeley, 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley
Lord Great Chamberlain of the United Kingdom


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm ignorant, but WTF is David Furnish known for besides being Elton John's husband?  Another clinger on whose claim to fame is marrying someone rich and famous.  Takes one to know one, eh David?


He is often referred as Elton's husband and I believe his most 'famous' work is Tantrums & Tiaras, a documentary about Elton J. Elton has always been very supportive of Hazz, perhaps because of his friendship with Diana. Let's see until when… Diana the Musical seems to put Diana in a bad light and Hazz seems to be OK with it. I wouldn't be happy to have a friend or a family member exploited this manner.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Jack Royston from _Newsweek_ seems to be making it a mission to point out the hypocrisy lately. His articles start out sounding favorable but about halfway through he slips in the facts showing Harry's actions don't match his rhetoric.
> 
> *How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel*
> Prince Harry's eco-tourism partner Google is highlighting low carbon flight options—just a month after they teamed up.
> 
> Google Flights now lets consumers see which airlines are offering the lowest carbon planes and those that are the most polluting.
> 
> The tech giant joined Prince Harry's Travalyst initiative, which seeks to encourage sustainable tourism, in September.
> 
> While the prince and Travalyst didn't work on the latest update from Google, yesterday's announcement demonstrates the partnership could see progress in a key area where the royals have been looking to make progress for decades.
> 
> Prince Charles and Prince William have also launched their own efforts to pursue positive change for the environment.
> 
> In a blog post on October 6, Richard Holden, Google's vice president of travel products, wrote: "It's critical that people can find consistent and accurate carbon emissions estimates no matter where they want to research or book their trip.
> 
> "That's why we recently joined the Travalyst coalition, where we'll help develop an open model for calculating carbon emissions from air travel and promote standardization across the travel industry using this framework."
> 
> Through Google, air passengers can see which airlines are creating the most carbon and how much less efficient it is to fly first class than economy.
> 
> The tech giant has also launched eco certificates to help tourists choose hotels and offers eco-friendly route options on Google maps.
> 
> Omid Scobie, who wrote the Harry and Meghan Markle biography _Finding Freedom_, wrote on Twitter: "Google's partnership with Prince Harry's Travalyst is off to a flying start.
> View attachment 5217652
> 
> 
> "The company announced today they will now report carbon emissions data for all flights. This is alongside the fuel-efficient routing options just added to ⁦⁦@googlemaps."
> 
> Prince Harry's support for eco travel has long been controversial due to his use of private jets, which produce significantly more carbon than scheduled flights.
> 
> For example, Google Flights shows it's possible to find first class tickets from New York to Los Angeles that produce an estimated footprint of 778kg of CO2.
> 
> Prince Harry did the same journey, only to Santa Barbara, on a private Dassault Falcon 2000 after a tour of New York last month. An emissions calculator run by Paramount Business Jets puts his cabron footprint for the journey at 13,185kg, 16 times more than even a first class scheduled ticket.
> 
> However, progress through the Google partnership will be a welcome breakthrough for the company after it was caught up in a review of Harry's now defunct Sussex Royal charity.
> 
> The Charity Commission earlier this year rejected claims the organization had put the relationship between Harry and brother Prince William above the interests of the charity.
> 
> In his blog post, Holden wrote: "Beginning today, you'll see a carbon emissions estimate for nearly every flight in the search results — right next to the price and duration of the flight. So when you're choosing among flights of similar cost or timing, you can also factor carbon emissions into your decision.
> 
> "These emissions estimates are flight-specific as well as seat-specific. For instance, newer aircraft are generally less polluting than older aircraft, and emissions increase for premium economy and first-class seats because they take up more space and account for a larger share of total emissions.
> 
> "To put these estimates in context, flights with significantly lower emissions will be labeled with a green badge. And if you want to prioritize carbon impact, you can sort all of the results to bring the greenest flights to the top of the list."
> 
> Sally Davey, Travalyst's chief executive, last month said: "The Travalyst Coalition strives to leverage its collective reach and help drive mass adoption of sustainability standards. We're excited to continue this endeavour with Google as a member of the Travalyst Coalition, delivering on this unique opportunity to build positive, transformative change in travel.
> 
> "The Google travel team has committed globally to helping consumers make more sustainable travel choices, and their approach aligns strongly with Travalyst's collaboration principles."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's eco-tourism initiative Travalyst partnered with Google last month and already the tech giant is helping consumers choose low carbon options.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


It's possible the editors of Newsweek are giving a little more freedom to their writers about this particular subject. Testing the waters?


----------



## Chanbal

@Maggie Muggins "Carbon Foot Prince", whatever it means! We are swamped with hypocrisy!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

bag-mania said:


> Meghan sure won’t be complaining about the error.


Oh honey, never underestimate the power of Karen Markle’s ability to whine and complain about ANYTHING … lol


----------



## djuna1




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Angela's patience is running low.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also the original tweet...I feel they have lots and lots of things they could (and do!) ask for...and it changes daily.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angela's patience is running low.




lol, and do you have to have a source leaking that everyday just gets happier...  Seriously, it's like those instagrammers who post all these 'living my best life' pictures, and next thing you know they divorce.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also the original tweet...I feel they have lots and lots of things they could (and do!) ask for...and it changes daily.




'they couldn't ask for more', except for money... my goodness these two ....!


----------



## jennlt




----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angela's patience is running low.



He could read baseball batting averages to her or stock market quotes and she would fall asleep.  Babies are lulled by a calm voice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5217820



Is he really such a bad journalist that he can't be bothered to do a simple fact check before opening his pie hole, or is he just liberally bending the truth?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also the original tweet...I feel they have lots and lots of things they could (and do!) ask for...and it changes daily.





< "Harry adores Lili and loves reading her bedtime stories and rocking her to sleep” an insider told Us Weekly The source went on to reveal that “every day just gets happier" - "There’s just so much love and gratitude and *they couldn’t ask for more*” > 

and yet they do, more and more and more


----------



## CarryOn2020

djuna1 said:


>




This rest of this article is behind a paywall. 

_The mental health and employee coaching startup finally became a unicorn in late February, some eight years after its founding. Roughly a month later, it hired Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, as its chief impact officer. Then, in September, the company made its first two acquisitions, snapping up an Amsterdam-based employee performance software business, Impraise, and San Francisco–based analytics company Motive Software.









						BetterUp, the coaching startup that hired Prince Harry, nearly triples its valuation
					

Last valued at $1.7 billion, employee wellness startup BetterUp raises funding at a $4.7 billion valuation as companies try to coach and understand their employees.




					fortune.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

And more info:









						Mental health startup BetterUp raises funds at near $5 bln valuation
					

BetterUp said on Friday it had raised $300 million in a late- stage funding round led by Wellington Management, ICONIQ Growth and Lightspeed Venture Partners, bringing the mental health startup's valuation to nearly $5 billion.




					www.reuters.com
				




Oct 8 (Reuters) - BetterUp said on Friday it had raised $300 million in a late- stage funding round led by Wellington Management, ICONIQ Growth and Lightspeed Venture Partners, bringing the mental health startup's valuation to nearly $5 billion.

The San Francisco-based company, which hired Prince Harry as its chief impact officer in March, provides employee coaching and mental health assistance through its mobile app.

Existing investors including Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund Mubadala Investment Company, Salesforce.com Inc's (CRM.N) investment arm Salesforce Ventures, Sapphire Ventures and others also participated in the Series E round.

"We are in the midst of the great global awakening surrounding hybrid work, mental health and well-being... it's clear that every organization and employee critically need support, growth and transformation," Alexi Robichaux, co-founder and chief executive officer, said in a statement.

The current round follows BetterUp's $125 million Series D round in February, which valued the company at $1.7 billion.

It counts high-profile names including Chevron Corp (CVX.N), Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc (HLT.N), Snap Inc (SNAP.N)and NASA among its enterprise customers.

Founded in 2013, BetterUp has raised $600 million in capital so far and said the new funds would be used for international expansion and to drive new product innovation.

BetterUp has over 3,000 coaches on its platform and also provides analytics and real-time insights to help track employee progress. Its other offerings include one-on-one, sepcialist and on-demand coaching along with group sessions.

Reporting by Sohini Podder in Bengaluru; Editing by Rashmi Aich


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> And more info:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mental health startup BetterUp raises funds at near $5 bln valuation
> 
> 
> BetterUp said on Friday it had raised $300 million in a late- stage funding round led by Wellington Management, ICONIQ Growth and Lightspeed Venture Partners, bringing the mental health startup's valuation to nearly $5 billion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oct 8 (Reuters) - BetterUp said on Friday it had raised $300 million in a late- stage funding round led by Wellington Management, ICONIQ Growth and Lightspeed Venture Partners, bringing the mental health startup's valuation to nearly $5 billion.
> 
> The San Francisco-based company, which hired Prince Harry as its chief impact officer in March, provides employee coaching and mental health assistance through its mobile app.
> 
> Existing investors including Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund Mubadala Investment Company, Salesforce.com Inc's (CRM.N) investment arm Salesforce Ventures, Sapphire Ventures and others also participated in the Series E round.
> 
> "We are in the midst of the great global awakening surrounding hybrid work, mental health and well-being... it's clear that every organization and employee critically need support, growth and transformation," Alexi Robichaux, co-founder and chief executive officer, said in a statement.
> 
> The current round follows BetterUp's $125 million Series D round in February, which valued the company at $1.7 billion.
> 
> It counts high-profile names including Chevron Corp (CVX.N), Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc (HLT.N), Snap Inc (SNAP.N)and NASA among its enterprise customers.
> 
> Founded in 2013, BetterUp has raised $600 million in capital so far and said the new funds would be used for international expansion and to drive new product innovation.
> 
> BetterUp has over 3,000 coaches on its platform and also provides analytics and real-time insights to help track employee progress. Its other offerings include one-on-one, sepcialist and on-demand coaching along with group sessions.
> 
> Reporting by Sohini Podder in Bengaluru; Editing by Rashmi Aich


FCUK ‘em. With Handbag Harry as a spokesperson and who I believe has not been treated for his renegade and out of control mental health issues and dumber than a pumpkin and stupid to add it all in, who would want to be coached by these people? Leave it to the professionals who spent years in medical school and credentialed therapists. Now I don’t know much about their crew but if they’re dense enough to have that stupid human being, pussywhxxxx man child then no. I don’t trust their judgment.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Saw the third headline in the image that says they moved to Santa Barbara to give Archie stability.  Stability is more than a geographical location. Or are they implying that with such unstable parents, the poor tot needs a 16-toilet mansion to ground himself?


Rather condescending of them. A single parent who is loving and nurturing is a stable parent.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.


Happy to hear your pup is much better.  You were really missed and welcome back!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.



Welcome back!  We missed you.  So sorry about your fur-baby and glad to know she is better.
Mrs. Stephens, total respect


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.



Awww, poor baby and poor you. I hope you've both recovered in the meantime.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


>



Thanks @lanasyogamama for posting this article from which comes your #3 nickname *Inconsequential Sidekick *for H. Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Jack Royston from _Newsweek_ seems to be making it a mission to point out the hypocrisy lately. His articles start out sounding favorable but about halfway through he slips in the facts showing Harry's actions don't match his rhetoric.
> 
> *How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel*
> Prince Harry's eco-tourism partner Google is highlighting low carbon flight options—just a month after they teamed up.
> 
> Google Flights now lets consumers see which airlines are offering the lowest carbon planes and those that are the most polluting.
> 
> The tech giant joined Prince Harry's Travalyst initiative, which seeks to encourage sustainable tourism, in September.
> 
> While the prince and Travalyst didn't work on the latest update from Google, yesterday's announcement demonstrates the partnership could see progress in a key area where the royals have been looking to make progress for decades.
> 
> Prince Charles and Prince William have also launched their own efforts to pursue positive change for the environment.
> 
> In a blog post on October 6, Richard Holden, Google's vice president of travel products, wrote: "It's critical that people can find consistent and accurate carbon emissions estimates no matter where they want to research or book their trip.
> 
> "That's why we recently joined the Travalyst coalition, where we'll help develop an open model for calculating carbon emissions from air travel and promote standardization across the travel industry using this framework."
> 
> Through Google, air passengers can see which airlines are creating the most carbon and how much less efficient it is to fly first class than economy.
> 
> The tech giant has also launched eco certificates to help tourists choose hotels and offers eco-friendly route options on Google maps.
> 
> Omid Scobie, who wrote the Harry and Meghan Markle biography _Finding Freedom_, wrote on Twitter: "Google's partnership with Prince Harry's Travalyst is off to a flying start.
> View attachment 5217652
> 
> 
> "The company announced today they will now report carbon emissions data for all flights. This is alongside the fuel-efficient routing options just added to ⁦⁦@googlemaps."
> 
> Prince Harry's support for eco travel has long been controversial due to his use of private jets, which produce significantly more carbon than scheduled flights.
> 
> For example, Google Flights shows it's possible to find first class tickets from New York to Los Angeles that produce an estimated footprint of 778kg of CO2.
> 
> Prince Harry did the same journey, only to Santa Barbara, on a private Dassault Falcon 2000 after a tour of New York last month. An emissions calculator run by Paramount Business Jets puts his cabron footprint for the journey at 13,185kg, 16 times more than even a first class scheduled ticket.
> 
> However, progress through the Google partnership will be a welcome breakthrough for the company after it was caught up in a review of Harry's now defunct Sussex Royal charity.
> 
> The Charity Commission earlier this year rejected claims the organization had put the relationship between Harry and brother Prince William above the interests of the charity.
> 
> In his blog post, Holden wrote: "Beginning today, you'll see a carbon emissions estimate for nearly every flight in the search results — right next to the price and duration of the flight. So when you're choosing among flights of similar cost or timing, you can also factor carbon emissions into your decision.
> 
> "These emissions estimates are flight-specific as well as seat-specific. For instance, newer aircraft are generally less polluting than older aircraft, and emissions increase for premium economy and first-class seats because they take up more space and account for a larger share of total emissions.
> 
> "To put these estimates in context, flights with significantly lower emissions will be labeled with a green badge. And if you want to prioritize carbon impact, you can sort all of the results to bring the greenest flights to the top of the list."
> 
> Sally Davey, Travalyst's chief executive, last month said: "The Travalyst Coalition strives to leverage its collective reach and help drive mass adoption of sustainability standards. We're excited to continue this endeavour with Google as a member of the Travalyst Coalition, delivering on this unique opportunity to build positive, transformative change in travel.
> 
> "The Google travel team has committed globally to helping consumers make more sustainable travel choices, and their approach aligns strongly with Travalyst's collaboration principles."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's eco-tourism initiative Travalyst partnered with Google last month and already the tech giant is helping consumers choose low carbon options.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Are these companies also reporting on the emissions from asshats like Branson and Bezos rocketing into "space" for 20 minutes at a time? Man, I can't stand the preachy crap about carbon emissions from these frauds.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he really such a bad journalist that he can't be bothered to do a simple fact check before opening his pie hole, or is he just liberally bending the truth?



He's already bending over to kiss Raptor's bum so he may as well bend the truth while he's at it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Interesting observations.
> And I agree that *Madam Moron* would have totally thought she would one day rule the roost as Queen.


Thanks @xincinsin for your #14 self-explanatory nickname, Madam Moron. Congratulations and welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Maggie Muggins *our Pet Parent Queen  




*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins *our Pet Parent Queen
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5218006
> *


Thanks, I'm honoured. BTW, I'm glad my pup can't run that fast while on a leash or she'd be draggin' me along.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm afraid 6's wife will not be pleased.  



Spoiler: US, UK, and Australia


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The Fauxmatarians
> *


 Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #13 nickname, The Fauxmatarians. Congratulations and please join the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I'm afraid 6's wife will not be pleased.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: US, UK, and Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5218038


Murdoch is evil but this is hilarious


----------



## CarryOn2020

That is static cling, right?  









						Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
					

David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.


Nice to see you back. You were missed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @lanasyogamama for posting this article from which comes your #3 nickname *Inconsequential Sidekick *for H. Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5217950


I’ll wear my ribbon all weekend!


----------



## xeyes

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry did the same journey, only to Santa Barbara, on a private Dassault Falcon 2000 after a tour of New York last month. An emissions calculator run by Paramount Business Jets puts his *cabron* footprint for the journey at 13,185kg, 16 times more than even a first class scheduled ticket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Harry's Google Partnership Hopes to Change Global Air Travel
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's eco-tourism initiative Travalyst partnered with Google last month and already the tech giant is helping consumers choose low carbon options.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



We’ve known for years that his _cabron _footprint is huge. Media, you heard it on this thread first.

(The typo is in the original article! Either it’s accidentally very apropos, or...that’s some weapons-grade shade being thrown.)


----------



## xeyes

Sorry for the double post, but here’s a bit from Enty.





__





						Blind Item #6
					

This weekly tabloid has a what to expect with your toddler type book and every month they see what should be happening in the life of the el...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Murdoch is evil but this is hilarious


Every person has a good side, Murdoch might be showing his here.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Wait, not me, this is all you @Chanbal.
> It was from your post


We can be as magnanimous as the Nobel Prize Committee and confer two awards for the same nickname. 
 Thank you @Chanbal for your #18 nickname, *The Fauxmatarians*, jointly shared with @CarryOn2020 as her #13 nickname and who has already been awarded a Busy Bee. Congratulations @Chanbal for The List #18 award.


----------



## pukasonqo

xeyes said:


> We’ve known for years that his _cabron _footprint is huge. Media, you heard it on this thread first.
> 
> (The typo is in the original article! Either it’s accidentally very apropos, or...that’s some weapons-grade shade being thrown.)


Interesting freudian slip!


----------



## Chanbal

xeyes said:


> We’ve known for years that his _*cabron* _footprint is huge. Media, you heard it on this thread first.
> 
> (The typo is in the original article! Either it’s accidentally very apropos, or...that’s some weapons-grade shade being thrown.)


This is really hilarious.


----------



## csshopper

Awww, Maggie, welcome back, you were missed!

Hardly seems fair you wanted a brief break from the Suckess' Sheetz Show and ended up in Dog Doo Doo. Happy to read your Puppy is OK!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Every person has a good side, Murdoch might be showing his here.



If he wants Piers to be a constant and unrelenting thorn in their side, I say way to go, Rupert!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> We can be as magnanimous as the Nobel Prize Committee and confer two awards for the same nickname.
> Thank you @Chanbal for your #18 nickname, *The Fauxmatarians*, jointly shared with @CarryOn2020 as her #13 nickname and who has already been awarded a Busy Bee. Congratulations @Chanbal for The List #18 award.
> View attachment 5218100



Thank you @Maggie Muggins 
(This shows that I also need to take a vacation. )

@CarryOn2020 I'm very proud to share this award with you.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.


My first thought was Darrin's MIL! Endora... lol


----------



## Chanbal

The 6s are going to regret the use of private jets…  (expect crocodile tears )

The video below is about Diana the Musical and huge calls for 6 to resign from N*fl*x


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is static cling, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is 'amazing leader' says 'Pearl' director David Furnish
> 
> 
> David Furnish who will serve as an executive producer Meghan Markle's new animated Netflix series Pearl has spoken to Hello and praised the royal for being an 'amazing' leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5218062


As much as I hate to admit it, I think that picture is photoshopped. Maybe?

Her pants were too long and hung badly and she might have been wearing pantyhose which did cling, but I don't think that cling in the photo is accurate. This was how her pants looked... really messy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I am honored to share this distinguished & coveted award with @Chanbal, @Maggie Muggins and all the brilliant minds of TpF PH&MM thread. In true golden Kate style, let’s celebrate


----------



## CarryOn2020

I suggest we select one of these for the awards show - red carpet, of course


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> As much as I hate to admit it, I think that picture is photoshopped. Maybe?
> 
> Her pants were too long and hung badly and she might have been wearing pantyhose which did cling, but I don't think that cling in the photo is accurate. This was how her pants looked... really messy.
> 
> View attachment 5218123
> View attachment 5218124



IDK.  As usual with H&M, there does appear to be a great deal of *cling*.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.


That's what happens when a short and pudgy ninny tries to dress like two tall and slim women.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pic from @lanasyogamama post titled, Relaxing in Montecito 


What a beautiful, elegant and poised female, who certainly outshines M.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.



Welcome back @Maggie Muggins   You've been missed.

Love to your


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the kids will also be wearing wired microphones… They need all the footage and memories they can get.  

*PALACE aides are braced for Harry to make a surprise return to the UK with Meghan by his side — at a postponed party to celebrate Princess Diana.*
_
The Sussexes are weighing up whether to join his brother William and 100 guests, including Sir Elton John, at the rearranged bash later this month…

An insider told The Sun: “*No one knows what Harry’s decision is but there are rumblings that he may come with Meghan and their two children*.”…

Majesty Magazine editor-in-chief Ingrid Seward, at said of the reception: “You would have thought it would definitely be something Harry would really want to be at.

"I can’t imagine anything less important for him because he would want to respect his mother.

“It is an important gathering of his mother’s friends. *He could even get a few quotes for his memo*ir.

“I am sure Meghan would want to be there for Diana and Harry.”_









						Prince Harry and Meghan could make surprise UK return for Diana statue party
					

PALACE aides are braced for Harry to make a surprise return to the UK with Meghan by his side — at a postponed party to celebrate Princess Diana. The Sussexes are weighing up whether to join his br…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

TC1 said:


> Are these companies also reporting on the emissions from asshats like Branson and Bezos rocketing into "space" for 20 minutes at a time? Man, I can't stand the preachy crap about carbon emissions from these frauds.



Agreed. And let's not lose sight of Holier-Than-Thou-Meghan-Who-Will-Stoop-At-Nothing likely flinging herself at any billionaire who potentially would give her the time of day. We all know what her priority is ($$$$$$$$$$$$), because it sure isn't family, integrity or decency. Can you imagine--if Bezos or any other 3 Comma Club Member asked her out, she'd be like "H, Archie and Lilibet WHO?" ?


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.


 
Glad you're back! Your pup has a wonderful mom. Poor little puppy dog and poor Maggie Muggins cleaning up after puppy  .


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> As much as I hate to admit it, I think that picture is photoshopped. Maybe?
> 
> Her pants were too long and hung badly and she might have been wearing pantyhose which did cling, but I don't think that cling in the photo is accurate. This was how her pants looked... really messy.
> 
> View attachment 5218123
> View attachment 5218124


Maybe a botched attemp to conceal a piece of recording equipment? Or, she was miked up to read her book. She might have arrived pre wired?


----------



## csshopper

Was reading today about a particularly offensive movie “Spencer” starring Kristen Stewart. Diana is portrayed head in toilet bowl heaving. self harming, leaning on her children with her issues. 

There would be increased interest due to the anniversary of her death, but I wonder if the exploitive nature of these is influenced by the tone the Suckesses have set. Sensationalism vs factual documentaries


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> The Puppeteer is no stranger to plastic surgery as we have seen in this thread with photos for proof.  I doubt she’ll stop at her neck.  If her body has changed for whatever weight gain, I’m sure she’ll just have it sucked out!
> As for *Puppeteer* shampoo…no one here likes her straggly hair, tendrils, etc and the *Puppet* is very bald.  Can’t say anyone would want to emulate them.  If they become the face of an already out there shampoo brand, since so many people don’t like them, sales could tank!
> Now slightly OT, everyone raves about Kate’s hair.  If any brand could get Kate as spokesperson, they’d make a ton of money.
> Funny when I was in high school people would stop me all the time to find out what shampoo I used. (Read thick and glossy look).  The thing is as soon as I’d finish a bottle of shampoo, I’d be bored with it and buy a completely different brand.  I’m of the mind that it really doesn’t matter for most people what shampoo they use; results will be the same!


 Thanks @Aimee3 for your nicknames #2, Puppeteer and #3, Puppet. Yes, in mind's eye, I can see Puppeteer M pulling the strings and making her Puppet H dance to her tune.  Congratulations and here is your gold ribbon.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> May I present to you* the REAL queen*
> 
> I love the slide where QEII was looking at a scrapbook gifted to her by a little girl. She said she shall look at it in the car



Thank you! You are so right, QEII is the only Queen in the BRF and may she reign/rule a while longer.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Stay tuned! The sugars would love nothing more than little princess/duchess dresses "designed" by *Ms. I-Don't-Wear-Anything-That-Fits*. And clothes for Dukes to be. You know, promote clothing that symbolizes a family they claim is racist.


 Thanks @rose60610 for creating a very accurate and appropriate #5 nickname, *Ms. I-Don't-Wear-Anything-That-Fits*. Congratulations and please join the Nickname Master's Club.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xeyes said:


> Sorry for the double post, but here’s a bit from Enty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> This weekly tabloid has a what to expect with your toddler type book and every month they see what should be happening in the life of the el...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Enty! That's the podcast guy whose name escaped me when I said someone did a very thorough segment of the Wills/Rose rumours and where (Amsterdam) and by whom (Raptor) they were started.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Was reading today about a particularly offensive movie “Spencer” starring Kristen Stewart. Diana is portrayed head in toilet bowl heaving. self harming, leaning on her children with her issues.
> 
> There would be increased interest due to the anniversary of her death, but I wonder if the exploitive nature of these is influenced by the tone the Suckesses have set. Sensationalism vs factual documentaries



I mean, it's well known Diana suffered from bulemia, threw herself off the stairs (while pregnant no less) and Wills had to slip tissues under the bathroom door where she'd barricaded herself to hysterically cry, so this movie doesn't seem that far off.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> IDK.  As usual with H&M, there does appear to be a great deal of *cling*.


Yet not as much this time. (The clinging to H that is.) Wonder what that means.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Yet not as much this time. (The clinging to H that is.) Wonder what that means.



Their shtick starts to even wear themselves down?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Informercial time?  Why not? *Meghan Make-a-Buck* is up for ANYTHING! Remember, Sarah Ferguson hawked Weight Watchers.  I can see how Meghan believes her beauty made a world famous prince fall in love with her so why not leverage cosmetics and fragrance? J Lo, Paris Hilton, and so many others made fortunes off their perfumes. I'd be stunned if she didn't go that route. I'd bet a hundred bucks her perfume bottle will have a tiara cap. And purple glass  .  Can luggage and yoga pants be far behind?


 Thanks @rose60610 for your #6 nickname, *Meghan Make-a-Buck  *another appropriate nickname, that I almost missed, but has now been added to The List.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the kids will also be wearing wired microphones… They need all the footage and memories they can get.
> 
> *PALACE aides are braced for Harry to make a surprise return to the UK with Meghan by his side — at a postponed party to celebrate Princess Diana.*
> 
> _The Sussexes are weighing up whether to join his brother William and 100 guests, including Sir Elton John, at the rearranged bash later this month…
> 
> An insider told The Sun: “*No one knows what Harry’s decision is but there are rumblings that he may come with Meghan and their two children*.”…
> 
> Majesty Magazine editor-in-chief Ingrid Seward, at said of the reception: “You would have thought it would definitely be something Harry would really want to be at.
> 
> "I can’t imagine anything less important for him because he would want to respect his mother.
> 
> “It is an important gathering of his mother’s friends. *He could even get a few quotes for his memo*ir.
> 
> “I am sure Meghan would want to be there for Diana and Harry.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan could make surprise UK return for Diana statue party
> 
> 
> PALACE aides are braced for Harry to make a surprise return to the UK with Meghan by his side — at a postponed party to celebrate Princess Diana. The Sussexes are weighing up whether to join his br…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



If [_big_ if] they go, either she needs to be miraculously thin or she needs to rewear all of those fugly outfits. New fugly outfits for the heffer (thank you, @breakfastatcartier ) will cause a very loud uproar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Words fail me at times like these:

from 2019:








						Plus-size woman recreated Meghan's style but troll says 'looks like she ate her'
					

Katie Sturino received hurtful comments about her weight after nasty trolls started commenting on the body-positive advocate's Instagram account




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




*Plus-size woman recreates Meghan Markle's style - but troll says 'looks like she ate her'*
Katie Sturino received hurtful comments about her weight after nasty trolls started commenting on the body-positive advocate's Instagram account

from 2018:








						Plus-size blogger on why she took on Meghan Markle: 'Anyone can dress like a royal'
					

Katie Sturino, the plus-sized blogger behind The 12ish Style, proves you definitely don’t have to be marrying into the royal family to look like a princess. She speaks to HELLO! about her viral looks.




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




ETA:  the guy imitating Hazzie’s hand inside the suit = haaaaa!  Yes, hazzie looks equally as comical imo.
On a certain level, I understand why the blogger is doing this.  Still, it does seem a bit body-shaming.
ETA2:  checked her IG - she is all about proving that these clothes can look good on any size. Really positive message - finally


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @rose60610 for creating a very accurate and appropriate #5 nickname, *Ms. I-Don't-Wear-Anything-That-Fits*. Congratulations and please join the Nickname Master's Club.
> View attachment 5218261



THANK YOU! THANK YOU! Oh golly! I can't believe this! I'd like to thank The Academy, The Hollywood Foreign Press, my directors Vlad and Megs who haven't banned me yet, my agent Paper Tiger despite the eye rolls, my cast of Purse Forum members who are so stylish, observant, and well read that I'm envious of and, of course, my DH who begrudgingly supports my love of handbags and fashion. And last but certainly not least, I'd like to thank Duchess of Desperation Sussex for being such a font of material, conversation starters, indigestion, nausea, heartburn, and proof that it's wise to STFU when it's obvious you don't know what you're talking about  tailor your clothes and support your in-laws instead of making up lies for money to satisfy your Netflix contract so Netflix doesn't sue you for breach of contract.


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Plus-size woman recreates Meghan Markle's style - but troll says 'looks like she ate her'*



Can't say her stuff fits necessarily better than Raptors (which I was expecting seeing she was advertised as a fashion blogger), but that's just unnecessarily cruel and rude. Those stans sure have not gotten the compassionate message.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> Rather condescending of them. A single parent who is loving and nurturing is a stable parent.


Agree. 
also do they think we are so dumb that we don’t know they previously bailed from 1)their royal home in the English countryside & 2) their mansion in a sheltered enclave of Canada because they were both a little too ‘stable’ for their fame hungry ways?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> He is often referred as Elton's husband and I believe his most 'famous' work is Tantrums & Tiaras, a documentary about Elton J. Elton has always been very supportive of Hazz, perhaps because of his friendship with Diana. Let's see until when… Diana the Musical seems to put Diana in a bad light and Hazz seems to be OK with it. I wouldn't be happy to have a friend or a family member exploited this manner.


Thank you, I had misread it as ‘toddlers and tiaras’ and was like oh so he really is doubling down on the irony making an animation about empowering and uplifting little girls then?
I think ageing trophy spouses gotta stick together, there’s a lot of young rivals to push downstairs.


charlottawill said:


> Murdoch is evil but this is hilarious


again, agree.
We called this on the thread right enough. Another network would pay for piers, because love him or hate him, he’s good for ratings. So in conclusion, the only people losing are those idiots at ITV who keep backing H&M and haemorrhaging money & viewers for their trouble.


Add on - bit late to add this but I don’t believe all that stuff about Netflix buying PP’s will or them backing secret recordings to get good tv because I don’t think they’d want to throw good money after bad after seeing how lacklustre the ratings for the infamous interview were.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Add on - bit late to add this but I don’t believe all that stuff about Netflix buying PP’s will or them backing secret recordings to get good tv because I don’t think they’d want to throw good money after bad after seeing how lacklustre the ratings for the infamous interview were.



Not only that, I see huge legal issues. Netflix is money and viewer hungry, but not that stupid I'd like to believe.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Found this little tidbit on Quora. She should have used self-destroying paper so it wouldn't come back to bite her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> As much as I hate to admit it, I think that picture is photoshopped. Maybe?
> 
> Her pants were too long and hung badly and she might have been wearing pantyhose which did cling, but I don't think that cling in the photo is accurate. This was how her pants looked... really messy.
> 
> View attachment 5218123
> View attachment 5218124


Her posture though… she looks like an invisible man is riding on her back…..


CarryOn2020 said:


> Words fail me at times like these:
> 
> from 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus-size woman recreated Meghan's style but troll says 'looks like she ate her'
> 
> 
> Katie Sturino received hurtful comments about her weight after nasty trolls started commenting on the body-positive advocate's Instagram account
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Plus-size woman recreates Meghan Markle's style - but troll says 'looks like she ate her'*
> Katie Sturino received hurtful comments about her weight after nasty trolls started commenting on the body-positive advocate's Instagram account
> 
> from 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus-size blogger on why she took on Meghan Markle: 'Anyone can dress like a royal'
> 
> 
> Katie Sturino, the plus-sized blogger behind The 12ish Style, proves you definitely don’t have to be marrying into the royal family to look like a princess. She speaks to HELLO! about her viral looks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  the guy imitating Hazzie’s hand inside the suit = haaaaa!  Yes, hazzie looks equally as comical imo.
> On a certain level, I understand why the blogger is doing this.  Still, it does seem a bit body-shaming.
> ETA2:  checked her IG - she is all about proving that these clothes can look good on any size. Really positive message - finally


I dunno for such a thick girl she seems too thin skinned and the tone of the mirror article is vomit-inducing.

 Perhaps I’m a bully but maybe….
1) she shouldn’t set up a modelling account if she can’t handle the occasional mean comment about her body? It really is not that big a deal if she gets something other than fawning praise when the entire modelling and styling  industry is people making subjective judgements about looks & they aren’t always that kind about it. It’s not unique to her being a big girl.
And 2) she definitely shouldn’t try to recreate anything a controversial figure has done if she can’t take a little heat.

tbh I think this is all a work to get more sympathy and publicity, I think most BBW advocate types like being fat after all & think it’s the ‘skinny b*tvhes’ who are missing out. So I think it is patronising to claim her she looks good when she actually looks almost as bad as M did though her face isn’t botched


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> *tbh I think this is all a work to get more sympathy and publicity,* I think most BBW advocate types like being fat after all & think it’s the ‘skinny b*tvhes’ who are missing out. So I think it is patronising to claim her she looks good when she actually looks almost as bad as M did though her face isn’t botched



Right now there is a huge thing involving the NYT about a writer who took an acquaintance's (who also happens to be a writer) life event (she donated a kidney to a stranger) and made it into a short story, even going so far as taking bits of a (very dramatic) letter the other person wrote to the recipient and used them 1:1. While I think that is questionable to say the least (though one could also argue the donor person could have written the story herself had she wanted to), the person who got ripped off is such a freaking annoying professional victim (e.g. way before that story was ever written and published she was busy sending emails to acquaintances including the writer who wrote the story inquiring why they hadn't reached out to talk about how she donated the kidney and fawn over her - that she didn't say, but I strongly got the impression that's what she was after) I can't bring myself to take her side.

ETA: they had access to the private letter because drama queen posted it to a WhatsApp writers' group she wasn't even a regular member of.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I bet y'all thought I was on vacation/holidays. I wanted to take a nice break from H&M, but fate had other plans. We took our two-year-old pup to the vet for her yearly physical and shots in mid Sept when she also received her first canine flu shot to which she reacted... I spent an entire day cleaning after her when all hell broke loose from her every body orifice, but finally subsided after we gave her Imodium. BTW, if you're ever in the similar situation, Imodium 2mg worked wonders on our pup. I babied her over the next few days by which time I had a sick headache, the kind Samantha's MIL (you'll remember her from 'Bewitched' if you're as old as I am) used to get, hence the extended time 'off' from H&M. Then I waited until after she received the flu booster a few days ago, just in case, but all went well. Now, I have 44 pages of catching-up.


wow, sorry for what you and pup went through
Glad she's ok now


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> _fawn over her _



IMO that is exactly what these influencers want after they get the $$ for the clicks.
Intellectually I do understand why people do this, personally I think it contributes to body issues. But then I never liked Joan Rivers‘ criticisms of the stars.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that is exactly what these influencers want after they get the $$ for the clicks.
> Intellectually I do understand why people do this, personally I think it contributes to body issues. But then I never liked Joan Rivers‘ criticisms of the stars.


Joan Rivers began as a well dressed comedian with acid wit ca 1960s
She had great taste in clothes etc. She had a remarkable collection of Faberge stuff, yes, the TDF real ones from Russia
Her thing was to make a witty comment about someone/something - the important word is witty , think Oscar Wilde , it was all about the choice of words originally
The others on her show were not such good word smiths , and yes the show devolved into a gripe-fest
And comedy changed, all comedy makes fun of something but that is no longer Poltically Correct
And yes her addiction to cosmetic procedures … oh dear …she was one of the first celebrities with an obvious fixation on the procedures, but those are the norm now 

so, I would say it depends whether you consider the comedian of the 1960s or the procedure diva/ whiner ca 2010


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Aimee3 for your nicknames #2, Puppeteer and #3, Puppet. Yes, in mind's eye, I can see Puppeteer M pulling the strings and making her Puppet H dance to her tune.  Congratulations and here is your gold ribbon.
> View attachment 5218240


So happy to be a member of the club with the rest of the esteemed members!  Thank you!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Twitter post


csshopper said:


> I think it is unusual and it reflects how far the Suckesses have fallen. They are not esteemed, they are not respected, Haz is more than "the spare" he's proven to be the "*the expendable*" and *the rapacious wife* becomes more and more transparent to more and more people as time goes on. The contrast between their performances in NY and the working Royals in London and Northern Ireland made the Suckesses look really tacky and grasping IMO, no class vs warmly regal personified by William and Kate.


 Thanks @csshopper and congratulations for reaching the top of The List with your #16 nickname *the expendable* (for Harry) and also The List#17 *the rapacious wife*. Please join the Roaring Lion Club and The List #17.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that is exactly what these influencers want after they get the $$ for the clicks.
> Intellectually I do understand why people do this, personally I think it contributes to body issues. But then I never liked Joan Rivers‘ criticisms of the stars.



Too early…lol. I thought you typed ‘$$ for the d icks’


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Words fail me at times like these:
> 
> from 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus-size woman recreated Meghan's style but troll says 'looks like she ate her'
> 
> 
> Katie Sturino received hurtful comments about her weight after nasty trolls started commenting on the body-positive advocate's Instagram account
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Plus-size woman recreates Meghan Markle's style - but troll says 'looks like she ate her'*
> Katie Sturino received hurtful comments about her weight after nasty trolls started commenting on the body-positive advocate's Instagram account
> 
> from 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus-size blogger on why she took on Meghan Markle: 'Anyone can dress like a royal'
> 
> 
> Katie Sturino, the plus-sized blogger behind The 12ish Style, proves you definitely don’t have to be marrying into the royal family to look like a princess. She speaks to HELLO! about her viral looks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  the guy imitating Hazzie’s hand inside the suit = haaaaa!  Yes, hazzie looks equally as comical imo.
> On a certain level, I understand why the blogger is doing this.  Still, it does seem a bit body-shaming.
> ETA2:  checked her IG - she is all about proving that these clothes can look good on any size. Really positive message - finally


I like Katie Sturino.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Found this little tidbit on Quora. She should have used self-destroying paper so it wouldn't come back to bite her.
> 
> View attachment 5218346



Apparently “no end” actually meant until she married someone from a prestigious family and “Daddy” would be too embarrassing to be seen in her new life.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Twitter post
> 
> Thanks @csshopper and congratulations for reaching the top of The List with your #16 nickname *the expendable* (for Harry) and also The List#17 *the rapacious wife*. Please join the Roaring Lion Club and The List #17.
> 
> View attachment 5218475
> View attachment 5218476


MaggieMuggins,

I'm humbled! You are amazing to keep track of us.

Truth is, they are such miserable human beings we all struggle to find words completely adequate to describe them.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Found this little tidbit on Quora. She should have used self-destroying paper so it wouldn't come back to bite her.
> 
> View attachment 5218346



I wonder what the "this" was? A Lemon Olive Oil cake, or maybe something less "woke" in 2015 when the note was written.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Queen of Throwing Shade 

"Actually, there are codes of conduct where attire is concerned for royal women. You must be glamorous - or as glamorous as you can be -, you must be as striking as you can be, you must remain tasteful at all times, you must never stray over the boundaries of tastefulness into tastelessness which is what will happen if you are unkempt, if you are not polished, if you...uhm, trying to find a polite way of putting it...if you look disheveled, if you look as if "I'm so great and grand, I don't care. The message I am giving is I'm just so chic and great and grand that I can  look like a bit of a mess."...very inelegant. It breaks the dress code for royalty, which should be kempt, K-E-M-P-T, at all times, not unkempt. I will not mention a certain woman who joined the royal family and is a study in failure in terms of royal attire. Not right yet at any rate."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> LOL....she called them *the other two*


Thanks @sdkitty for your #1 nickname, *the other two*. This is exactly what we're  discussing in this thread: H&M  will never be known as the first couple, the main couple, the best couple, etc. in too many people's mind and will probably always be known as *the other two* who couldn't hack it. Thank you for joining The List and congratulations for picking up this nickname.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Meghan Markle doesn't know how to walk. That's also one of the reasons why her clothes are always so obviously ill-fitting. Because not only are they too tight normally, either too tight or too loose, but she doesn't understand, she's never because I'm sure she wasn't brought up in a world where there was couture, and she doesn't understand the concept of ease. A garment is supposed to have ease which means you're supposed to be able to move around without getting diagonal, vertical or horizontal pulls, which she does. Also, her posture is all wrong, because she puffs her chest out too much and swaggers, with the result that even if there was ease the fit becomes wrong because the hang of the dress."

I can't even express how much I love Lady CCs snark and shade


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Meghan Markle doesn't know how to walk. That's also one of the reasons why her clothes are always so obviously ill-fitting. Because not only are they too tight normally, either too tight or too loose, but she doesn't understand, she's never because I'm sure she wasn't brought up in a world where there was couture, and she doesn't understand the concept of ease. A garment is supposed to have ease which means you're supposed to be able to move around without getting diagonal, vertical or horizontal pulls, which she does. Also, her posture is all wrong, because she puffs her chest out too much and swaggers, with the result that even if there was ease the fit becomes wrong because the hang of the dress."
> 
> I can't even express how much I love Lady CCs snark and shade


Not to defend MM, but I am a clumsy and ungraceful person and I am always amazed at Kate's grace and ease in all situations, especially when wearing heels. I imagine her practicing walking up and down stairs in one of her residences wearing heels with a book on her head.


----------



## poopsie

She is getting better at channeling Kimmy. Those "business" outfits look like they were lifted straight from one of Kim's old threads. 
Can't be long now until we see some late night pap strolls out to the chicken coop


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen of Throwing Shade
> 
> "Actually, there are codes of conduct where attire is concerned for royal women. You must be glamorous - or as glamorous as you can be -, you must be as striking as you can be, you must remain tasteful at all times, you must never stray over the boundaries of tastefulness into tastelessness which is what will happen if you are unkempt, if you are not polished, if you...uhm, trying to find a polite way of putting it...if you look disheveled, if you look as if "I'm so great and grand, I don't care. The message I am giving is I'm just so chic and great and grand that I can  look like a bit of a mess."...very inelegant. It breaks the dress code for royalty, which should be kempt, K-E-M-P-T, at all times, not unkempt. I will not mention a certain woman who joined the royal family and is a study in failure in terms of royal attire. Not right yet at any rate."



If you are not polished -- that's the one that makes or breaks I think.  Hard to do, sometimes just the weather ruins the look, but they do have staff and tailors so it's manageable.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> How about just
> 
> *'Eau de Toilette'*
> 
> Or
> 
> *'EDT No 6'*
> 
> That way Stans can just buy it and *put it down the toilet*


AKA  Floral Scented Toilet Bowl Cleaner


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> If you are not polished -- that's the one that makes or breaks I think.  Hard to do, sometimes just the weather ruins the look, but they do have staff and tailors so it's manageable.


Even walking around in drizzle at Balmoral the Queen always looks pulled together. It really is a skill that MM hasn't mastered  apparently. I've seen pictures of Kate pre-marriage where she looked like many other twenty-something women in London, not the always polished look she's perfected and projects today. I think if H&M hadn't gone nuclear on the BRF we'd be much more forgiving of her fashion transgressions.


----------



## TC1

Meghan had a pretty good wardrobe on Suits. She seemed to have great posture and carried herself well. I realize that was "acting" but you'd think some would have spilled over.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Apparently “no end” actually meant until she married someone from a prestigious family and “Daddy” would be too embarrassing to be seen in her new life.


I don't get it.  what's wrong with him?  her mom isn't any more impressive than her dad to me.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Meghan had a pretty good wardrobe on Suits. She seemed to have great posture and carried herself well. I realize that was "acting" but you'd think some would have spilled over.


I guess someone else was dressing her and now she's the boss


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> Meghan had a pretty good wardrobe on Suits. She seemed to have great posture and carried herself well. I realize that was "acting" but you'd think some would have spilled over.


I imagine it's easier to do for short periods while the camera is rolling. It''s got to be much harder to maintain for extended periods if you're a very public figure whose every move is watched and recorded. I would not want it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Not to defend MM, but I am a clumsy and ungraceful person and I am always amazed at Kate's grace and ease in all situations, especially when wearing heels. I imagine her practicing walking up and down stairs in one of her residences wearing heels with a book on her head.



I'm for sure not as graceful as Kate, but Raptor seems to have made it a challenge to look as awful as possible. I have seriously entertained the thought if she does it to troll us all. It would have made sense (for her petty little mind, not normal, sensible people) to use it as passive-aggressive move towards the BRF, but she's been gone for over a year and still looks a mess most of the time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it.  what's wrong with him?  her mom isn't any more impressive than her dad to me.



Speaking of Doria, hasn't it been awfully quiet. Remember when we were being smothered by stories how CLOSE they were? Maybe the rumour they fell out isn't so far off.


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> I wonder what the "this" was? A Lemon Olive Oil cake, or maybe something less "woke" in 2015 when the note was written.


I believe I read at one time that it was  money. $2,000? Perhaps for Christmas. Sorry mind like a sieve these days and don't remember where I read that, perhaps someone with a better memory will remember.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it.  what's wrong with him?  her mom isn't any more impressive than her dad to me.



My guess is her mom is on the quiet, introverted side and her dad has a more boisterous, extroverted personality. I could be completely wrong about that. I see her mom as being easier for her to control and anticipate while her dad is more unpredictable in what he’ll say or do.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of Doria, hasn't it been awfully quiet. Remember when we were being smothered by stories how CLOSE they were? Maybe the rumour they fell out isn't so far off.



Maybe Doria is busy these days taking care of her two grandkids. That might be her job now.


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oh honey, never underestimate the power of Karen Markle’s ability to whine and complain about ANYTHING … lol


Calling @Maggie Muggins!!!  "Karen Markle" coutesy of @breakfastatcartier  One of my favorite nicknames yet!  Annoyed I didn't think of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> He could read baseball batting averages to her or stock market quotes and she would fall asleep.  Babies are lulled by a calm voice.


Those would put me to sleep too


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he really such a bad journalist that he can't be bothered to do a simple fact check before opening his pie hole, or is he just liberally bending the truth?


Both


----------



## purseinsanity

I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into her lowness.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye.  Kind of like Medusa??     That's what I'm going to call her now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into *her lowness.* And, OMG, they have! She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her. She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind. The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye. Kind of like Medusa??



I know we all are very proud of our various nicknames, but some are just better than others  

About the different, I try to avoid looking at video footage of her because it's more than I can handle, but the bits and bobs I've seen here and there often made me think how...weird and awkward she acted, e.g. talking to herself after the people she wanted to talk to had already turned their back on her. That was when she wasn't bossing Harry around or shooting daggers at Kate. Or having yet another face malfunction.


----------



## Katel

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into her lowness.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  The other friend said they were *told* not to look her in the eye.  Kind of like Medusa??


Told - by whom? Sheesh - pathetic.

I think that’s why her posture and everything about her is so clenched - she’s just trying so hard and seems so unhappy, she appears to not like herself or be at rest.

And, “her lowness?”    thank you sooo much for your lovely wit!


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> Told - by whom? Sheesh - pathetic.
> 
> I think that’s why her posture and everything about her is so clenched - she’s just trying so hard and seems so unhappy, she appears to not like herself or be at rest.
> 
> And, “her lowness?”    thank you sooo much for your lovely wit!


Told by their boss!  Can you believe it?  Reminds me of her Wimbledon appearance, where she had to have the area cleared around her and no one was allowed pictures.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> New nickname from the comment section of Lady C’s most recent video: *the Harlem Woketrotters*


Thanks @mellibelly for your #7 nickname, *the Harlem Woketrotters*.  Now I'm looking forward to Lady C's last video.
Congratulations and please accept this Gold Medal.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> She realised how many multiple hour, high Anglican Church services she’d have to attend & nope’d out immediately despite discovering her deeply held Anglican faith right before the marriage.
> Of course if you go to a public school like H did you are used to getting press-ganged into going to church several times a week so he was probably amazed to find church services could be under an hour & he wouldn’t have to attend in Cali
> 
> *Also , am I the only one who thinks being the spare is the sweet deal?*
> 
> You get to live in luxury too but nowhere near the same level of scrutiny. They also give you some pet projects to manage (despite any possible lack of qualifications and talent) so you can indulge your leadership fantasies.


It doesn't last forever as H hasn't really been the spare since July 22, 2013 when George was born, but the worry is that he could be appointed regent to George (according to the present law) should anything happened to Charles or William.  I don't believe that anyone at BP is ready to accept him as such, but since, HMTQ changed the regency law to appoint PP as regent to Prince Charles (when he was a child) instead of Princess Margaret, IMO, the law can be changed again to remove H from ever being regent to any of William's children.


----------



## redney

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into her lowness.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye.  Kind of like Medusa??     That's what I'm going to call her now.


Wow, so she was actually in an place where she might be seen by the "little people"? If you can say in general, what type of place did she patronize?


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, Hazz is _not_ going to the party.  

_Last night a spokeswoman reportedly confirmed that the Sussexes would not be coming. It will be seen as a sign of the growing rift between the brothers.









						Harry is not expected to return to Britain for party to honour Diana
					

Prince Harry is not expected to return to Britain next week to join his brother Prince William at a party to honour their mother.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

So the parents taught Arch*ie how to be kind and loving… How can they teach what they don't know?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazz is _not_ going to the party.
> 
> _Last night a spokeswoman reportedly confirmed that the Sussexes would not be coming. It will be seen as a sign of the growing rift between the brothers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry is not expected to return to Britain for party to honour Diana
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is not expected to return to Britain next week to join his brother Prince William at a party to honour their mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


They certainly want to avoid one more negative photo-op event. However, they are known for misleading the press, so let's wait and see what they have prepared for that day.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into her lowness.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  *The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye.*  Kind of like Medusa??     That's what I'm going to call her now.


No eye contact was also part of the set of instructions given to the hotel in NYC. She is ridicule to say the least.


----------



## csshopper

Did anybody think they were going to the Party?

Can't see their party of 4 + cameraman, videographer, and security traipsing into First Class on British Air,  nannies lugging all the baby stuff, although support staff would probably be put in Economy. Risking two screaming Royal babies dealing with ear aches or something and having to be handed off to the Nannies unless Papa came prepared with his soothing books to read them. Then there's the issue of his anxiety "trigger" of heading to London and having to spend most of the flight tapping his chest and deep breathing. Of course, he could blow everyone off, grift one of his prior providers for a lift on a private plane, but, hopefully his handlers have helped him see how people have figured out the hypocrisy.

"The wife" will not have had sufficient time to have arranged for a donated gown, and having seen the competition her sister-in-law most recently laid out in the world press to the point of causing her own husband to issue a "Wow" (if that's an accurate account) she will not want to be in the same room with her, which would be awkward.

The British public may not stay quiet and rounds of lusty "boos" could be hard to edit out of all the news coverage.

There will be no one interested in free copies of The Bench so the impact on the carbon footprint of the extra baggage to cart them across the pond would be wasted.

Will they camp out on the grounds at Windsor Castle? No mention of possible accommodations, unless I missed the mention in an article.

If they did show, the RF will be "ready." Oh, they will be "civilized", but IMO no one does "frosty" like some of the Royals. Further, the Suckesses might have to suffer the indignity of being patted down/scanned for hidden electronic equipment. And somebody should probably check the diaper bag.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how the body language expert would analyze this photo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

_Mr Bolt said on Thursday: *"Prince Harry used to be very noisy in attacking the media for his coverage of his mother Princess Diana.*

"But he has now signed a multi-million dollar deal with Netflix and now says nothing.

"*It is the most trashy musical about his mother but also makes the Queen seem like a real cow*."

Lady Colin also agreed with the presenters' sentiment and addressed the topic in her latest YouTube video.

She said: “As of the time of making this video, he (Prince Harry) has not announced his departure (from Netflix), you know greed and need make strange bedfellows. Let us see if he bows out.

“I don’t think we should hold any breaths because I have a feeling that money might triumph over good taste.”

“*Remember Harry has spent the past 20 something years berating the public about how 'dreadfully' his mother was treated and how he is a guardian of her legacy.*”

Ms Elsworth also addressed Prince Harry’s noticeable silence after many years defending his mother, as the news programme aired the musical's trailer to viewers.

She added: "*Funnily enough I can't see Prince Harry coming out screaming about this*.









						‘Greed and need’ Prince Harry won’t drop Netflix deal despite Diana ridicule, says Lady C
					

PRINCE HARRY will not drop his multi-million pound Netflix deal despite backlash over the streaming network's depiction of his late mother Princess Diana, Lady Colin Campbell has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> No eye contact was also part of the set of instructions given to the hotel in NYC. She is ridicule to say the least.


Who the F;$& does she think she is?  Just cause she married a wayward prince?  Seriously, she thinks she’s a queen?  Hmmph, so she stood next to the Queen, it doesn’t make her one!
Does the real queen even have such rules about not looking her in the eye?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Duchess of Narsussex* is brilliant


Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #6 nickname *Duchess of Narsussex*.  It's now on The List. 
I hope your dental problem is swiftly resolved and with little discomfort to you. Take care.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Who the F;$& does she think she is?  Just cause she married a wayward prince?  Seriously, she thinks she’s a queen?  Hmmph, so she stood next to the Queen, it doesn’t make her one!
> Does the real queen even have such rules about not looking her in the eye?


They are idiots. In NYC, they had the hotel checked for bombs, all staff vetted, no autographs or selfies, no eye contact…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> In line with the first amendment being "bonkers" (according to *Mr. Hypocrisy*), a connection between fac*book whistleblower and the incredible foundation has been brought up on twitter. If true, this is crazy to say the least.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Facebook Whistleblower



 Thanks @Chanbal for Mr. Hypocrisy. Since you already have the nickname Mrs. Hypocrisy, I simply combined the two to Mr./Mrs. Hypocrisy, a revolting couple.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They are idiots. In NYC, they had the hotel checked for bombs, all staff vetted, no autographs or selfies, no eye contact…




What are they hiding?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What are they hiding?


Their lack of talent…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> They certainly want to avoid one more negative photo-op event. However, they are known for misleading the press, so let's wait and see what they have prepared for that day.


I'll bet MM is driving his decision not to attend. Knowing how badly the press will compare her to Kate, she won't go, but if he goes alone it will spur talk of marital trouble, which they don't want.


----------



## Lodpah

I never thought I’d say this but Kim K brought her A game to SNL. She is a 100000000 times better actress than than Her Low Higness (whoever coined this is my hero).


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that is exactly what these influencers want after they get the $$ for the clicks.
> Intellectually I do understand why people do this, personally I think it contributes to body issues. But then I never liked Joan Rivers‘ criticisms of the stars.


For me, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with commenting on celebs and aspiring celebs looks because their image is a big part of what they are trying to sell us. Does it go too far sometimes? yes definitely but moderation is the thing in most things.



Chanbal said:


> So the parents taught Arch*ie how to be kind and loving… How can they teach what they don't know?



You would think they, of all people, would know not to count their chickens before they hatch  
he’s only a little child! That can change… I mean W & H apparently got on quite well until…oh let me see…what was it again?

Mind you I suppose it’s easier to get the kids to behave when you are paying them union rates.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Two thoughts about this I’ve been pondering.

On the Piers thing, I don’t know if it has been mentioned in detail but he was already extremely _controversial _when they hired him.
1. While a newspaper editor, he published falsified evidence that British soldiers  were involved in torture. (He was sacked for this)
2. He was implicated in the phone tapping scandal- where anewspaper was bugging the phones of celebs, royals and worst of all, the family of a murder victim. (He denies involvement with this- but he was the boss)

They knew about all this when they hired him. So it’s quite telling really, that they looked past all that, but calling a certain public figure out was beyond the pale apparently. It gives you a sense of the hypocrisy levels we are dealing with. I don’t like anyone involved but it just shows that ITV are the dumbest of the bunch.

And speaking of weird behaviour….
I’m largely joking about the pair’s unfortunate kids being actors but I do find a lot of their public presentation of their relationship a _little strange._
Like I said before, I found it weird they didn’t bring their kids plus a nanny on holiday with them given that they are so young. I can’t imagine not being with my 3-4month old baby for several days at a time. Perhaps I’m very hippy, but that just doesn’t seem very congruent with their saying they are hands on parents who rock the baby to sleep every night.
Then it got even weirder because I happened to see that pap shot (completely unorganised- they just happened to be there) at the Cali private airfield when they got off their eco-friendly private jet & I saw that a load of random staff or something has turned up for hugs but…not their own kids?
They didn’t want to see their kids as soon as possible? The staff didn’t feel the need to bring them in their eco-friendly convoy of people carriers?

It just seems really odd. I just hope those kids aren’t being neglected while their parents pose with other people’s.

add on- I feel a bit guilty looking away from my baby to go on this thread when I was meant to be on ‘parental leave’ am trying to limit it but I guess the influence of the great pair of (to borrow from Tyson Fury)
DSOSSERS rubs off & this thread is so addictive


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I never thought I’d say this but Kim K brought her A game to SNL. She is a 100000000 times better actress than than Her Low Higness (whoever coined this is my hero).



I agree. I can take the Kartrashians in small doses, so this SNL gig was all I needed.  The surprising thing is that H&M have not started merching  Archie & the unseen one.  At a certain point, Arch will lose the baby cuteness factor, so time may pass them by. IIRC Kris had her grandkids out there very quickly.



jelliedfeels said:


> It gives you a sense of the hypocrisy levels we are dealing with.



Exactly.
I give JoanR credit for exposing that hypocrisy earlier than most.  As we have seen with H&M and Andrew, etc., the Royals are another level of hypocrisy.  IMO it is time to expose them for the liars they are.  QE may be a ‘dear older lady’,  enough is enough. This idea of being anointed by God - is there any Biblical justification for that?  Seems so last century imo.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree. I can take the Kartrashians in small doses, so this SNL gig was all I needed.  The surprising thing is that H&M have not started merching  Archie & the unseen one.  At a certain point, Arch will lose the baby cuteness factor, so time may pass them by. IIRC Kris had her grandkids out there very quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly.
> I give JoanR credit for exposing that hypocrisy earlier than most.  As we have seen with H&M and Andrew, etc., the Royals are another level of hypocrisy.  IMO it is time to expose them for the liars they are.  QE may be a ‘dear older lady’,  enough is enough. This idea of being anointed by God - is there any Biblical justification for that?  Seems so last century imo.




*This idea of being anointed by God - is there any Biblical justification for that? Seems so last century imo. *Don't want to get biblical here but yes, it's in the Bible that God raises Kings and brings Kings down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> *This idea of being anointed by God - is there any Biblical justification for that? Seems so last century imo. *Don't want to get biblical here but yes, it's in the Bible that God raises Kings and brings Kings down.



Yes, God brings them down for a variety of reasons. Are they above the law?  Andrew’s case may bring this topic into the 21st century.









						Divine right of kings - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_In 1553, Mary I, a Roman Catholic, succeeded her Protestant half-brother, Edward VI, to the English throne. Mary set about trying to restore Roman Catholicism by making sure that: Edward's religious laws were abolished in the Statute of Repeal Act (1553); the Protestant religious laws passed in the time of Henry VIII were repealed; and the Revival of the Heresy Acts were passed in 1554. The Marian Persecutions began soon afterwards. In January 1555, the first of nearly 300 Protestants were burnt at the stake under "Bloody Mary". When Thomas Wyatt the Younger instigated what became known as Wyatt's rebellion, John Ponet, the highest-ranking ecclesiastic among the exiles, allegedly participated in the uprising. He escaped to Strasbourg after the Rebellion's defeat and, the following year, he published A Shorte Treatise of Politike Power, in which he put forward a theory of justified opposition to secular rulers.

Ponet's treatise comes first in a new wave of anti-monarchical writings ... It has never been assessed at its true importance, for it antedates by several years those more brilliantly expressed but less radical Huguenot writings which have usually been taken to represent the Tyrannicide-theories of the Reformation.
— A.G. Dickens

Ponet's pamphlet was republished on the eve of King Charles I's execution.

According to U.S. President John Adams, Ponet's work contained "all the essential principles of liberty, which were afterward dilated on by Sidney and Locke", including the idea of a three-branched government.

Over time, opposition to the divine right of kings came from a number of sources, including poet John Milton in his pamphlet The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates, and Thomas Paine in his pamphlet Common Sense. Probably the two most famous declarations of a right to revolution against tyranny in the English language are John Locke's Essay concerning The True Original, Extent, and End of Civil-Government and Thomas Jefferson's formulation in the United States Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal"._


----------



## Icyjade

jelliedfeels said:


> Two thoughts about this I’ve been pondering.
> 
> On the Piers thing, I don’t know if it has been mentioned in detail but he was already extremely _controversial _when they hired him.
> 1. While a newspaper editor, he published falsified evidence that British soldiers  were involved in torture. (He was sacked for this)
> 2. He was implicated in the phone tapping scandal- where anewspaper was bugging the phones of celebs, royals and worst of all, the family of a murder victim. (He denies involvement with this- but he was the boss)
> 
> They knew about all this when they hired him. So it’s quite telling really, that they looked past all that, but calling a certain public figure out was beyond the pale apparently. It gives you a sense of the hypocrisy levels we are dealing with. I don’t like anyone involved but it just shows that ITV are the dumbest of the bunch.
> 
> And speaking of weird behaviour….
> I’m largely joking about the pair’s unfortunate kids being actors but I do find a lot of their public presentation of their relationship a _little strange._
> Like I said before, I found it weird they didn’t bring their kids plus a nanny on holiday with them given that they are so young. I can’t imagine not being with my 3-4month old baby for several days at a time. Perhaps I’m very hippy, but that just doesn’t seem very congruent with their saying they are hands on parents who rock the baby to sleep every night.
> Then it got even weirder because I happened to see that pap shot (completely unorganised- they just happened to be there) at the Cali private airfield when they got off their eco-friendly private jet & I saw that a load of random staff or something has turned up for hugs but…not their own kids?
> They didn’t want to see their kids as soon as possible? The staff didn’t feel the need to bring them in their eco-friendly convoy of people carriers?
> 
> It just seems really odd. I just hope those kids aren’t being neglected while their parents pose with other people’s.
> 
> add on- I feel a bit guilty looking away from my baby to go on this thread when I was meant to be on ‘parental leave’ am trying to limit it but I guess the influence of the great pair of (to borrow from Tyson Fury)
> DSOSSERS rubs off & this thread is so addictive



Narcs are incapable of loving their kids.

https://www.scarymommy.com/narcissistic-parents-incapable-loving-children/?amp=1


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. Withdraw or kicked out?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> On the Piers thing, I don’t know if it has been mentioned in detail but he was already extremely _controversial _when they hired him. They knew about all this when they hired him. So it’s quite telling really, that they looked past all that, but calling a certain public figure out was beyond the pale apparently. It gives you a sense of the hypocrisy levels we are dealing with. I don’t like anyone involved but it just shows that ITV are the dumbest of the bunch.



We had a similar thing happen over the summer with a wellknown producer and TV host (talent shows). He is basically gross and bullies candidates, but that has been his shtick for 20+ years. Suddenly, in the middle of another season of two of his bestselling formats the TV channel announced they'd part ways because his behaviour was mean. Like...what? He's been like this forever, and you knew that, approved of it when you hired him and laughed all the way to the bank for 20 years.



> And speaking of weird behaviour….
> I’m largely joking about the pair’s unfortunate kids being actors but I do find a lot of their public presentation of their relationship a _little strange._



Jup.



> It just seems really odd. I just hope those kids aren’t being neglected while their parents pose with other people’s.



I still think Harry is the better parent, but I am also not sure how good of a parent you can be if you're completely absorbed in your own mental health issues and tending to your narcisstic puppeteer. Her...I'd be extremely surprised if this woman possessed even one maternal bone in her body. And to be honest, I am all for privacy, but they way they are keeping the baby from the world is starting to look a little sick. But fear not, they hopefully hired a loving nanny.


----------



## needlv

I always thought MM was wearing padding if not using a surrogate.  But look at this slowed down and you see the bump reinflate after being squished…


----------



## creme fraiche

I have never commented before on the 2 Sussex sprogs because 1)I have no interest and 2) I do sympathise with the desire to keep them out of the limelight until they are able to give consent to using their images.  Despite me not liking Harry and agreeing that he is under the thumb of his wife, I do think this is one thing where he puts his foot down and gets his way.  The only images where we have seen Archie were blurred out )Harry approved) or cooperatively "Papped", probably arranged by Meghan.

In terms of parenting, I agree that Meghan has not a single maternal bone in her body except to try and use it for her advantage.  Harry is probably an affectionate father at this age, but I doubt that he is very clued up on discipline and limits - both of which are essential to raise very privileged children in an emotionally healthy manner.  I hope I am very wrong, but I am not optimistic about the manner that these 2 will be brought up - on the one hand, a mother who will be hyper critical (probably more of her daughter) and a father who is overly indulgent, living in an environment where they don't have an inbuilt support system which they would have had growing up with their royal cousins, uncles, and aunts.  If they turn out OK, it will be very much due to being lucky as things are not stacked in their favour so far.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I completely agree with all points made.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If they are desperate for $$$$, it’s kinda weird they aren’t merching their kids (as KrisJ does).  For whatever odd reason, they were not afraid to use Arch on the South Africa tour or show him with a full diaper.

I have no zero, zilch interest in seeing celebs’, including H&M’s, kids, so I hope H&M keep them away from the media (and H&M should stay out of it, too).  The kids have no royal role, so they don’t need the _media training_. Unless, of course, H&M are truly desperate for the money 

ETA: after seeing Hazzie’s behaviour at the NYC school, I have serious doubts about his ability to connect with anyone. At least W&K appear to be patient and kind with their children as well as other people’s children.

ETA2:  Remember when this happened? I do. 
It completely changed my opinion of Diana.


----------



## xincinsin

creme fraiche said:


> I have never commented before on the 2 Sussex sprogs because 1)I have no interest and 2) I do sympathise with the desire to keep them out of the limelight until they are able to give consent to using their images.  Despite me not liking Harry and agreeing that he is under the thumb of his wife, I do think this is one thing where he puts his foot down and gets his way.  The only images where we have seen Archie were blurred out )Harry approved) or cooperatively "Papped", probably arranged by Meghan.
> 
> In terms of parenting, I agree that Meghan has not a single maternal bone in her body except to try and use it for her advantage.  Harry is probably an affectionate father at this age, but I doubt that he is very clued up on discipline and limits - both of which are essential to raise very privileged children in an emotionally healthy manner.  I hope I am very wrong, but I am not optimistic about the manner that these 2 will be brought up - on the one hand, a mother who will be hyper critical (probably more of her daughter) and a father who is overly indulgent, living in an environment where they don't have an inbuilt support system which they would have had growing up with their royal cousins, uncles, and aunts.  If they turn out OK, it will be very much due to being lucky as things are not stacked in their favour so far.


And if the "parental unit" who is present most of the time is Doria, as some of us speculate, that may not be any better, considering how "successfully" she and Thomas raised the ultimate narc. Also, that super expensive grandparenting course that Doria attended - is it a mega-rich requisite to prep a person for child-rearing?


----------



## eunaddict

xincinsin said:


> And if the "parental unit" who is present most of the time is Doria, as some of us speculate, that may not be any better, considering how "successfully" she and Thomas raised the ultimate narc. *Also, that super expensive grandparenting course that Doria attended - is it a mega-rich requisite to prep a person for child-rearing?*



Not necessarily. A lot of hospitals (public and private alike) provide "refresher" courses for grandparents, sorta like the parenting courses new parents go for. Partially (I assume) it's because we have very different parenting standards and safety guidelines that what was available to our parents - eg. spanking was super common when my generation was being raised but is much less acceptable now....or carseats which was only invented in 1960s and not necessarily common till much later...things like how to prevent SIDS etc.

I've chucked a pretty good link in the post for those curious about research into these programs and what they tend to cover.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> One must be fair, I need to borrow one of @Maggie Muggins awards to give to *People magazine.* Nice title! Though, how are they going to modernize the monarchy without the Montecitos?
> 
> View attachment 5215535


@Chanbal here is the award you requested. Enjoy!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I’m not sure the whales and penguins in Antarctica will care much about her either, so let’s just call her a failure in 5/7 continents.  That’s 0.714!


I'm not so sure she would get a very warm welcome (real or imaginary) in Chunga-Changa either at this point.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree. I can take the Kartrashians in small doses, so this SNL gig was all I needed.  The surprising thing is that H&M have not started merching  Archie & the unseen one.  At a certain point, Arch will lose the baby cuteness factor, so time may pass them by. IIRC Kris had her grandkids out there very quickly.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly.
> I give JoanR credit for exposing that hypocrisy earlier than most.  As we have seen with H&M and Andrew, etc., the Royals are another level of hypocrisy.  IMO it is time to expose them for the liars they are.  QE may be a ‘dear older lady’,  enough is enough. This idea of being anointed by God - is there any Biblical justification for that?  Seems so last century imo.



There is a vid poster (River) who calls them “Merchie” and “Lilibucks” 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Withdraw or kicked out?



Wondered if it’s the same with the upcoming RF Diana celebration next week that they’ve “decided” to forgo ... no invite forthcoming? 

_








						Harry is not expected to return to Britain for party to honour Diana
					

Prince Harry is not expected to return to Britain next week to join his brother Prince William at a party to honour their mother.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> *Petulant Prat*! Everyone is joining in on the alliteration.
> 
> @Maggie Muggins We should have a year-end special medal for the best alliterative nickname. The contender list is growing by leaps and bounds!
> 
> Methane's surname has already gained currency as a verb for casting off friends and family who have outlived their usefulness. I would not be surprised if their first names too will become bywords for something none too complimentary.


Thanks @xincinsin for your #15 nickname, Petulant Prat. Congratulations and welcome to the Hooting Owl Club.


----------



## xincinsin

Interesting find on the marklenews IG. It posted a debunk of a (H)orrid Scabies claim that implied the Methane effect was the reason why the Dior bag sold out. The debunker helenaaurellia said Dior ran an influencer campaign and gave lots of influencers the bag with their names on it, so Methane's was nothing special. She probably had a choice of initials to monogram on the bag and chose to be known as DSSOS: Department of Sex, Scandal and Overt Suckass.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree. I can take the Kartrashians in small doses, so this SNL gig was all I needed.  *The surprising thing is that H&M have not started merching  Archie & the unseen one. * At a certain point, Arch will lose the baby cuteness factor, so time may pass them by. IIRC Kris had her grandkids out there very quickly.


They are merching their own views on privacy imo, which is to impose their pre-approved zillions of photo-ops and press releases on us. I saw an article praising them for keeping the privacy of Archie & the unseen one, while Will and Kate have their kids' photos available to the world…


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into her lowness.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye.  Kind of like Medusa??     That's what I'm going to call her now.


really?  but who would have told the employee not to look her in the eye?  some employee of hers who was with her?  you actually heard this from the source?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Petulant Prat! Everyone is joining in on the alliteration.
> 
> @Maggie Muggins *We should have a year-end special medal for the best alliterative nickname.* The contender list is growing by leaps and bounds!
> 
> Methane's surname has already gained currency as a verb for casting off friends and family who have outlived their usefulness. I would not be surprised if their first names too will become bywords for something none too complimentary.


I can help with the contest, by providing a list from The List and photoshopping the award(s) depending on how many prizes you wish to have as in First, Second and Third or just one winner and if members vote for only nickname. Also, when you want the contest is to start and end. Thanks.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Withdraw or kicked out?



my 2 cents:
I don't believe in such withdrawal. This is either (1) one more of the misleading press releases (falsehood), (2) they can't deliver what they promised to Netfl*x, or (3) they were able to secure another multi-million dollar deal elsewhere. If it happens, it will be done in solidarity against D*ana the Mus*cal, great excuse.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> They are idiots. In NYC, they had the hotel checked for bombs, all staff vetted, no autographs or selfies, no eye contact…



 the eye contact thing seems ludicrous to me.  If someone is providing a service or communicating with them (which might not happen much as they may have their staff deal with any hotel employees), then it would be unnatural for the service person not to look them in the eye.  If they were just passing by and someone looked them in the eye, then I would have to assume H&M would not return the gaze and therefore would be unaware.


----------



## Aimee3

Maybe another of the many reasons they aren’t going to the UK is that no one has offered to fly them privately.  Madame M won’t fly commercial anymore.  She needs her privacy and security so she can alert her photographers.


----------



## Chanbal

creme fraiche said:


> I have never commented before on the 2 Sussex sprogs because 1)I have no interest and *2) I do sympathise with the desire to keep them out of the limelight until they are able to give consent to using their images.*  Despite me not liking Harry and agreeing that he is under the thumb of his wife, I do think this is one thing where he puts his foot down and gets his way.  The only images where we have seen Archie were blurred out )Harry approved) or cooperatively "Papped", probably arranged by Meghan.


I think there is a reason other than privacy behind such desire. However, assuming that they don't want their kids pictures to be used for privacy reason, why do they keep using other people’s children for photo-ops? Are the rights of these other kids irrelevant?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> They are idiots. In NYC, they had the hotel checked for bombs, all staff vetted, no autographs or selfies, no eye contact…



If only I could have the difference between what they’re worth and what they think they’re worth!


----------



## Miss Liz

Chanbal said:


> I think there is a reason other than privacy behind such desire. However, assuming that they don't want their kids pictures to be used for privacy reason, why do they keep using other people’s children for photo-ops? Are the rights of these other kids irrelevant?


I also think there is a reason other than privacy behind the media blackout on their kids. If the Brangelina twins photos were worth $14M in 2008 as the most expensive celebrity baby photos to date, then shots of Lilibet with Archie should be worth a gazillion dollars today, because their parents are the most important and influential people ever!  And then they could contribute most of the cash to their foundation (so ultimately for personal use) and donate the rest to a worthwhile cause (in their case, about 0.00001% sounds about right) as “humanitarians”.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> If only I could have the difference between what they’re worth and what they think they’re worth!


I think she is heady with the money and fame and he is just clueless - has never had to earn anything for himself...had everything handed to him and is totally ungrateful


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I think she is head with the money and fame and he is just clueless - has never had to earn anything for himself...had everything handed to him and is totally ungrateful


I agree.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> The  American prices is a brilliant typo - they say everyone has a price but few make it quite as obvious as* little miss briefcase*.
> the thing about this Morton argument is, I have to ask where are all H’s brilliant and expensive ideas now?
> So far they’ve handed out some sandwiches and put a wreath on a grave….
> 
> 
> Well those poor 50k proles would probably wear High street outfits to visit school kids and probably have just the one version of their engagement ring - so are they really living at all?


 Thanks @jelliedfeels for your #3 nickname, little miss briefcase.  Congratulations and here is your gold ribbon.


----------



## charlottawill

Miss Liz said:


> I also think there is a reason other than privacy behind the media blackout on their kids. If the Brangelina twins photos were worth $14M in 2008 as the most expensive celebrity baby photos to date, then shots of Lilibet with Archie should be worth a gazillion dollars today, because their parents are the most important and influential people ever!  And then they could contribute most of the cash to their foundation (so ultimately for personal use) and donate the rest to a worthwhile cause (in their case, about 0.00001% sounds about right) as “humanitarians”.


Yeah, I think they'e holding out for a good price from People or similar for a family cover photo.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Yeah, I think they'e holding out for a good price from People or similar for a family cover photo.


does anybody really care?  I guess maybe if one or both of them turns out to be as cute as Will & Kate's kids


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Well, they have been called "*professional victims*" by the Aussies.



Thanks @Chanbal for your #19 nickname, professional victims, which they are indeed. Congratulations and here is your #19 ribbon.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Two thoughts about this I’ve been pondering.
> 
> On the Piers thing, I don’t know if it has been mentioned in detail but he was already extremely _controversial _when they hired him.
> 1. While a newspaper editor, he published falsified evidence that British soldiers  were involved in torture. (He was sacked for this)
> 2. He was implicated in the phone tapping scandal- where anewspaper was bugging the phones of celebs, royals and worst of all, the family of a murder victim. (He denies involvement with this- but he was the boss)
> 
> They knew about all this when they hired him. So it’s quite telling really, that they looked past all that, but calling a certain public figure out was beyond the pale apparently. It gives you a sense of the hypocrisy levels we are dealing with. I don’t like anyone involved but it just shows that ITV are the dumbest of the bunch.
> 
> And speaking of weird behaviour….
> I’m largely joking about the pair’s unfortunate kids being actors but I do find a lot of their public presentation of their relationship a _little strange._
> Like I said before, I found it weird they didn’t bring their kids plus a nanny on holiday with them given that they are so young. I can’t imagine not being with my 3-4month old baby for several days at a time. Perhaps I’m very hippy, but that just doesn’t seem very congruent with their saying they are hands on parents who rock the baby to sleep every night.
> Then it got even weirder because I happened to see that pap shot (completely unorganised- they just happened to be there) at the Cali private airfield when they got off their eco-friendly private jet & I saw that a load of random staff or something has turned up for hugs but…not their own kids?
> They didn’t want to see their kids as soon as possible? The staff didn’t feel the need to bring them in their eco-friendly convoy of people carriers?
> 
> It just seems really odd. I just hope those kids aren’t being neglected while their parents pose with other people’s.
> 
> add on- I feel a bit guilty looking away from my baby to go on this thread when I was meant to be on ‘parental leave’ am trying to limit it but I guess the influence of the great pair of (to borrow from Tyson Fury)
> DSOSSERS rubs off & this thread is so addictive


I'm guessing they were in the care of Grandma Doria with assistance from a nanny. It would seem odd to me to bring them to the airport. It's wonderful to a have a "handy Grandma" nearby when your kids are young. We were very fortunate to have my mother less than an hour away and she was happy to watch our kids for our occasional weekends away.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> does anybody really care?  I guess maybe if one or both of them turns out to be as cute as Will & Kate's kids


Probably not. Three possibilities why we haven't seen them yet:
3. They're holding out for a big payday for the first official family photo (most likely)
2. They're concerned about their kids' privacy/safety (least likely)
1. The kids aren't as cute as their cousins (strong possibility)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Withdraw or kicked out?



It will be announced as a "mutually agreed upon decision".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> But wouldn't he have seen enough? He had over a year to watch Harry abandon his family and country and then piss all over his royal duty. He was still around when Harry whined to Oprah (if they allowed him to watch it). That travesty alone should have been enough for him to call his legal advisors to his bedside and make some last minute changes.


If most of us could see that H was a little sh!t almost from the start, I believe that Prince Philip, who was a very astute person, knew exactly what H was all about, but treated all his grandchildren equally. IMO, he kept informed until the very end and probably left H something in his will anyway and I hope it's a meaningless little trinket to pacify the meaningless little brat.


----------



## charlottawill

creme fraiche said:


> I have never commented before on the 2 Sussex sprogs because 1)I have no interest and 2) I do sympathise with the desire to keep them out of the limelight until they are able to give consent to using their images.  Despite me not liking Harry and agreeing that he is under the thumb of his wife, I do think this is one thing where he puts his foot down and gets his way.  The only images where we have seen Archie were blurred out )Harry approved) or cooperatively "Papped", probably arranged by Meghan.
> 
> In terms of parenting, I agree that Meghan has not a single maternal bone in her body except to try and use it for her advantage.  Harry is probably an affectionate father at this age, but I doubt that he is very clued up on discipline and limits - both of which are essential to raise very privileged children in an emotionally healthy manner.  I hope I am very wrong, but I am not optimistic about the manner that these 2 will be brought up - on the one hand, a mother who will be hyper critical (probably more of her daughter) and a father who is overly indulgent, living in an environment where they don't have an inbuilt support system which they would have had growing up with their royal cousins, uncles, and aunts.  If they turn out OK, it will be very much due to being lucky as things are not stacked in their favour so far.


Re MM not being maternal, that has been my gut feeling. I don't wish ill on them, but I'm not at all optimistic about them celebrating a tenth anniversary. I would not be surprised if Harry gets custody if they split and takes them back to England. Settle in gang, this is going to be a long bumpy ride.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Re MM not being maternal, that has been my gut feeling. I don't wish ill on them, but I'm not at all optimistic about them celebrating a tenth anniversary. I would not be surprised if Harry gets custody if they split and takes them back to England. Settle in gang, this is going to be a long bumpy ride.



I thought at some point he'd wake up and get a divorce, or she'd be tired of him and get a divorce. Now, I'm not so sure. He has burned every bridge he had and has the spine of a shrimp, and she has nowhere to go really because he is the one opening doors for her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't watched but liked the title.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> The stans in one of the comment threads on the Newsweek site are accusing Kate of being a spendthrift. It would be hilariously blinkered if it wasn't so tragic. That said, we should try to be even-keeled on this thread so that we don't give any stan ammo. I already know our tolerance level is amazingly high considering how much sarcastic restraint we evince whenever *Mega-FauxPas* shows up in bad outfits spewing word salad.
> 
> If the BRF are still slipping them a few (lots of) quid, I would be very disappointed because they are enabling a couple of losers. OTOH, I see in my own family that parents/grandparents find it emotionally difficult to cut ties with offspring, not matter how much they are attacked.


Thanks @xincinsin for your #16 very accurate nickname, *Mega-FauxPas*, which means you have reached the top of The List. Congratulations and please join the Roaring Lion Club.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm guessing they were in the care of Grandma Doria with assistance from a nanny. It would seem odd to me to bring them to the airport. It's wonderful to a have a "handy Grandma" nearby when your kids are young. We were very fortunate to have my mother less than an hour away and she was happy to watch our kids for our occasional weekends away.


doesn't doria live in LA?  did she move closer to them?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Re MM not being maternal, that has been my gut feeling. I don't wish ill on them, but I'm not at all optimistic about them celebrating a tenth anniversary. I would not be surprised if Harry gets custody if they split and takes them back to England. Settle in gang, this is going to be a long bumpy ride.


I don't think she'd give up those little meal tickets


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> doesn't doria live in LA?  did she move closer to them?



Nobody knows. She isn’t getting papped walking her dogs in LA anymore so for all we know she might be cloistered away at the mansion with the invisible grandkids.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I skimmed the comments to that Tweet, where is @Maggie Muggins?
> 
> Someone called them #6 and *#666*


Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #7 nickname *#666.  *O ye of little faith, beware of the devil. Not sure how accurate I am, but we're just having some fun. Congratulations and here's your Gold Medal.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nobody knows. She isn’t getting papped walking her dogs in LA anymore so for all we know she might be cloistered away at the mansion with the invisible grandkids.


If she is there, I imagine there could be a granny flat or in any case, it's a very large space so she could have some sort of space of her own.  whatever....I don't really care


----------



## Chanbal

I have no idea who M Smith is, but he makes a valid point. The titles must be returned to the UK (with them preferentially ).



_M Smith said:" *It does look like they are using their royal status to bolster their private careers*".

He added: "I do think they are ultimately public titles, they belong to the country.


"*They were given in order to pursue royal duties in theory for the good of the country and they are not doing that now.*

"They have got a halfway house where they have one foot in the royal household but also pursuing their own private interests._









						They belong to Britain! Meghan & Harry keeping titles 'reflects badly'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry keeping their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles "reflects badly" on the Royal Family according to the CEO of Republic.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into her lowness.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye.  Kind of like Medusa??     That's what I'm going to call her now.


WOW ..  not look her in the eye??? .. that's pretty sick, she obviously feels that she's all that high & mighty!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I hope @Maggie Muggins is not suffering from job exhaustion. The Harkles are very popular and keeping track of all their affectionate nicknames is a lot of work.





rose60610 said:


> Knock, knock--this is a wellness check for @Maggie Muggins. Seriously, I hope you're fine and well. "#6 and #666" are great nicknames, side by side along with my favorite "Ginge and Cringe". While I'm envious that our thread didn't generate #6 and #666, it's still deserving of a blue ribbon, or at least a wreath presented with a 6 page long explanation of symbolism meanings to show how much we're alligator teared personally impacted by such wisdom.


Thanks @Chanbal & @rose60610 for the wellness check. I'm doing well, but  still catching up on our required reading to graduate with honours in  psychology #666 H&M. Still have 15 pages to read unless more have appeared...


----------



## Hermes Zen

Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!



Yeah. I'm super shy and non-confrontational in real life (really!), but if I had been told I could not look at those idiots and were not to adress them you bet I'd have asked them how they liked the weather every time I saw them out and about. WTFFF. 

THE QUEEN talks to American tourists and jokes with them (anecdote: she was walking around Balmoral when the tourists approached her and asked if she lived in the area, Queen said she owned a house nearby. Tourists proceeded to ask if she'd ever met the Queen, Queen answered cheerfully "No, but he has!" pointing to her security guy), but of course a failed actress is to good to breathe the same air as everyone else.


----------



## CeeJay

Hermes Zen said:


> Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!


.. I could have sworn that I read this about Mega-lo-maniac when she was on Suits, still in Toronto .. before she even met Hap-Hazza?  Someone like her who has just 'markled' people out of her life when she no longer has use for them, well .. that says it all .. she has ALWAYS felt that she is the MEGA-LA-POLIS!


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> WOW ..  not look her in the eye??? .. that's pretty sick, she obviously feels that she's all that high & mighty!!!



She's obviously feeling that insecure 

Either way I would never obey such a outrageous demand


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting.  I’m confused!  This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals?  It doesn’t seem possible.  Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?


IMO H&M are outright lying. I remember reading around the time of their wedding that someone suggested that M could keep acting if she felt comfortable with it in order to ease her into her role as a royal, but I can't remember the source.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!



You got there first


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5219315



 

  >>>>>>


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @jelliedfeels for your #3 nickname, little miss briefcase.  Congratulations and here is your gold ribbon.
> View attachment 5219220


Thank you so much Maggie Muggins! 
I’m very pleased to be contributing to the wealth of monikers and really appreciate your efforts in recording them all!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> doesn't doria live in LA?  did she move closer to them?


SB isn't far from LA. I imagine she spends a lot of time in Montecito with her grandkids. The house is certainly big enough.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!





Me if I ever do happen to see them  
Then I’d say ‘wasn’t the brown spot on the beagle’s _right_ side last week?’


----------



## LittleStar88

Hermes Zen said:


> Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jktgal said:


> We need a 'that's bananas!' emoji....


Here you go.


----------



## Sophisticatted

> Harry said the royal family wouldn’t be able to support him and his wife, before they married, and she should continue acting. I’m confused! This was even when #6 and wife would’ve been staying as working royals? It doesn’t seem possible. Am I missing something or was this another lie from #6?



My guess, is that Harry has/had been told that he would be welcomed back into the fold, but that his wife would not because the family *cannot support* her actions. That if she were to come back, she should a job and pay her own expenses (wardrobe, security, lifestyle, lawsuits, etc.).

Then it got muddled and spun by Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5219421
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5219422


EXACTLY!!!  Thanks!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Hermes Zen said:


> Not looking in their eyes were going on before they left UK. Recall an article that people walking near Frogmore were instructed to not look at them. Does that also apply to the people that work for them?!?  Despicable M & H ! If I EVER see them in person I will motion my fingers from my eyes to hers/his (wish I had an emoji to demonstrate this for you all but you know what I mean) … saying I’m looking straight at you!



 I see you, H & M!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins "*Carbon Foot Prince*", whatever it means! We are swamped with hypocrisy!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5217693



 Thanks @Chanbal for your #20 nickname Carbon Foot Prince. Great play on words. Congratulations and claim you #20 ribbon.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> My first thought was Darrin's MIL! Endora... lol
> 
> View attachment 5218113


Yes, dear Endora could give Darrin serious headaches too. Remember the time he was on his honeymoon and Endora kept zapping him out of the hotel room and he'd find himself in the streets wearing his pjs and robe.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. And let's not lose sight of *Holier-Than-Thou-Meghan-Who-Will-Stoop-At-Nothing* likely flinging herself at any billionaire who potentially would give her the time of day. We all know what her priority is ($$$$$$$$$$$$), because it sure isn't family, integrity or decency. Can you imagine--if Bezos or any other 3 Comma Club Member asked her out, she'd be like "H, Archie and Lilibet WHO?" ?


 Thanks @rose60610 for your #7 nickname *Holier-Than-Thou-Meghan-Who-Will-Stoop-At-Nothing* that at 41 letters + 8 hyphens really really takes the proverbial cake.  Congratulations and here's your Gold Medal.  
Did I  say CAKE?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA2:  Remember when this happened? I do.
> It completely changed my opinion of Diana.
> 
> View attachment 5219073


For good or bad?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oh honey, never underestimate the power of *Karen Markle*’s ability to whine and complain about ANYTHING … lol


 Thanks @breakfastatcartier for your #3 nickname, *Karen Markle*.
Congratulations and here's your Ribbon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> For good or bad?



Lowered my opinion. 
Of course parents need to discipline their children, this, though, was a very public spanking. Why embarrass the child? She looked like she was hitting him out of anger. Seemed most inappropriate imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I have some insider info!!  A couple friends live in SB and I couldn't help but ask if they've ever run into *her lowness*.  And, OMG, they have!  She's come to their place of employment and one said that "I didn't care for her.  She's...different," as he struggled to not say something unkind.  The other friend said they were told not to look her in the eye.  Kind of like *Medusa*??   That's what I'm going to call her now.


Thanks @purseinsanity for your nicknames #19 *her lowness* and #20 *Medusa*. Congratulations and here are your #19 and #20 The List Ribbons.


----------



## Chanbal

Well said! 



_In the interview about his book, The Uncomfortable Truth About Racism, *Barnes claimed a lot of black people he knows are not fans of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.*

He added: '*The problem now is that if you don't like her, people will call you a racist, when it’s got nothing to do with that.*

'*That’s why it’s important to separate the idea of racism and her character as a human being.*'

_








						John Barnes: Royal who asked about Archie's skin was 'being realistic'
					

In an interview for his new book on racism, former footballer John Barnes said the question about Archie's skin colour should not have been surprising and that most black people would say 'so what?'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lowered my opinion.
> Of course parents need to discipline their children, this, though, was a very public spanking. Why embarrass the child? She looked like she was hitting him out of anger. Seemed most inappropriate imo.



From the article she gave him one smack on the bottom after he ran off with other kids after she told him it was time to go. Hardly a public embarrassment and barely a spanking. But if Will _was_ embarrassed by it then maybe he learned never to do it again. As near as I can tell he’s been very well-behaved in public for years and he certainly doesn’t seem to feel resentment, if he remembers the incident at all.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @rose60610 for your #7 nickname *Holier-Than-Thou-Meghan-Who-Will-Stoop-At-Nothing* that at 41 letters + 8 hyphens really really takes the proverbial cake.  Congratulations and here's your Gold Medal.
> Did I  say CAKE?
> 
> View attachment 5219516
> View attachment 5219517



WOW! Thank you! Had I'd known there would CAKE involved with nicknames....BRINGS IT TO A NEW LEVEL!!!!!  What a scrumptious award! Since you even count hyphens, that's-another-consideration-for-coming-up-with-even-more-nicknames-not-that-I-want-to-say-anything....about Duchess-Do-Nothing or Duchess-Downer or Duchess-Damsel-In-Disaster. This mouth-watering award calls for a toast! A toast to the fact that when one types "Duchess" in one's Google search, "Duchess of Cambridge" comes up, NOT any other duchess. Not even a hyphenated one...or one that throws the BRF under the bus for a buck. Another toast to Maggie Muggins and her puppy dog who has recovered from his health ordeal. For the heck of it, let's throw in another toast----A TOAST TO TAILORED CLOTHES THAT ACTUALLY FIT THE WEARER! (---------------not-that-I-want-to-say-anything...-------------)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Interesting find on the marklenews IG. It posted a debunk of a (H)orrid Scabies claim that implied the Methane effect was the reason why the Dior bag sold out. The debunker helenaaurellia said Dior ran an influencer campaign and gave lots of influencers the bag with their names on it, so Methane's was nothing special. She probably had a choice of initials to monogram on the bag and chose to be known as DSSOS: *Department of Sex, Scandal and Overt Suckass*.


Thanks @xincinsin  The devil made me do it!


----------



## Chanbal

The reason why 6 is not returning to the UK has nothing to do with camera clicks, because he got over that in NY. 
According to a source close to the 6s, he doesn't want to return alone and the wife does't want to go until whatever issues have been addressed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> From the article she gave him one smack on the bottom after he ran off with other kids after she told him it was time to go. Hardly a public embarrassment and barely a spanking. But if Will _was_ embarrassed by it then maybe he learned never to do it again. As near as I can tell he’s been very well-behaved in public for years and he certainly doesn’t seem to feel resentment, if he remembers the incident at all.



I’m expressing my opinion as are you. We can agree to disagree. It is ok. 
I wasn’t there. I strongly disagree with parents hitting their kids, especially in public. In this case, with this highly entitled family, there were plenty of staff who could bring the child ‘home’ which was probably the daily pattern anyway. Why ruin his special fun day with public humiliation? There are better ways. Since that incident, we have learned how unstable she was and how unhappy ‘home’ was. Best not to hit kids out of anger. (_thinking of Hazzie getting a bit [ahem] rough with strangers’ children_). Just my opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Interesting find on the marklenews IG. It posted a debunk of a (H)orrid Scabies claim that implied the Methane effect was the reason why the Dior bag sold out. The debunker helenaaurellia said Dior ran an influencer campaign and gave lots of influencers the bag with their names on it, so Methane's was nothing special. She probably had a choice of initials to monogram on the bag and chose to be known as DSSOS: Department of Sex, Scandal and Overt Suckass.



Dior only made 1 bag with that monogram. MM bought it. Sold out!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, dear Endora could give Darrin serious headaches too. Remember the time he was on his honeymoon and Endora kept zapping him out of the hotel room and he'd find himself in the streets wearing his pjs and robe.


I loved Bewitched when I was a kid.I had sort of a girl crush on Elizabeth Montgomery. I could never understand what Samantha saw in Derwood, as Endora called him.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO H&M are outright lying. I remember reading around the time of their wedding that someone suggested that M could keep acting if she felt comfortable with it in order to ease her into her role as a royal, but I can't remember the source.


MaggieMuggins, Post # 76,296 I included a link and cited one of the articles that talked about it. Seems as more and more people become aware of the trail of Suckesses' "truths" vs the real truth, these surface. They are so stupid they fail to recognize with a few clicks the material is available on line and we can all line up and_ looking her in the eyes _shout "Liar, Liar, pants (ill fitting btw) on fire."

It's fun to have you back!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I loved Bewitched when I was a kid.I had sort of a girl crush on Elizabeth Montgomery. I could never understand what Samantha saw in Derwood, as Endora called him.


In comedies, there is always one person who is the butt/brunt of the jokes and in Bewitched, his name was Darrin.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> WOW! Thank you! Had I'd known there would CAKE involved with nicknames....BRINGS IT TO A NEW LEVEL!!!!!  What a scrumptious award! Since you even count hyphens, that's-another-consideration-for-coming-up-with-even-more-nicknames-not-that-I-want-to-say-anything....about Duchess-Do-Nothing or Duchess-Downer or Duchess-Damsel-In-Disaster. This mouth-watering award calls for a toast! A toast to the fact that when one types "Duchess" in one's Google search, "Duchess of Cambridge" comes up, NOT any other duchess. Not even a hyphenated one...or one that throws the BRF under the bus for a buck. Another toast to Maggie Muggins and her puppy dog who has recovered from his health ordeal. For the heck of it, let's throw in another toast----A TOAST TO TAILORED CLOTHES THAT ACTUALLY FIT THE WEARER! (---------------not-that-I-want-to-say-anything...-------------)


When the limited # of "Like" emojis at the bottom of the page are simply not enough to applaud a post:
 Here's to you rose606010:


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> The reason why 6 is not returning to the UK has nothing to do with camera clicks, because he got over that in NY.
> According to a source close to the 6s, he doesn't want to return alone and the wife does't want to go until whatever issues have been addressed.



Thanks for sharing!  Poor Pinkie Harry will regret this decision.  Another reason on the list that will eat him away and eventually lead to a divorce IMHO.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The reason why 6 is not returning to the UK has nothing to do with camera clicks, because he got over that in NY.
> According to a source close to the 6s, he doesn't want to return alone and *the wife does't want to go until whatever issues have been addressed.*



Ho Ho Ho!  Hell will freeze over first.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> Ho Ho Ho!  Hell will freeze over first.



yes I would think that feeling is mutual -  the BRF does not want her back in the UK until she makes a public apology…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> yes I would think that feeling is mutual -  the BRF does not want her back in the UK until she makes a public apology…



Even if she apologized...would you ever trust her again?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even if she apologized...would you ever trust her again?



No, I wouldn’t trust Hazzie again either.  
They won’t sincerely apologise because they have no intention of working for the BRF and, most importantly, they are not sorry for what they did or said.  So, game over, onward.  Now, ideally, they would stop speaking ill of their family, I don’t see that happening.  Wallis&Ed fussed and fumed their entire lives. H&M will do the same.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even if she apologized...would you ever trust her again?


No.


----------



## needlv

OT: I do wish they would state why and what led them to this conclusion.  There is enough public interest.









						Met Police DROPS investigation into Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein
					

The Metropolitan Police will be taking 'no further action' into allegations Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein committed sex crimes in the UK, it has been revealed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




back on topic - since H and M aren’t attending the Princess Diana memorial party in the UK, who wants to place bets on a rival PR stunt done “in her memory”?


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> OT: I do wish they would state why and what led them to this conclusion.  There is enough public interest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Met Police DROPS investigation into Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein
> 
> 
> The Metropolitan Police will be taking 'no further action' into allegations Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein committed sex crimes in the UK, it has been revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> back on topic - since H and M aren’t attending the Princess Diana memorial party in the UK, who wants to place bets on a rival PR stunt done “in her memory”?



As a sweet nod, they will offer to plant her favorite flower in the backyard.

Yes, I do wish the Met Police offered a reason. Something, anything would do. Maybe we will hear more soon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Dior only made 1 bag with that monogram. MM bought it. Sold out!


Well you can’t argue with that. I think it was a misprint though as they meant to write:


I am smarting a little at her messing with Dior again. I know the Diana bag was irresistible but I still can’t help thinking
‘Et tu, Maria Grazia Churi?’
When I see the bag. Mind you it is the plainest, ugliest d-lite they make- so maybe they are trolling her like they were with the kaftan.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. I'm super shy and non-confrontational in real life (really!), but if I had been told I could not look at those idiots and were not to adress them you bet I'd have asked them how they liked the weather every time I saw them out and about. WTFFF.
> 
> THE QUEEN talks to American tourists and jokes with them (anecdote: she was walking around Balmoral when the tourists approached her and asked if she lived in the area, Queen said she owned a house nearby. Tourists proceeded to ask if she'd ever met the Queen, Queen answered cheerfully "No, but he has!" pointing to her security guy), but of course a failed actress is to good to breathe the same air as everyone else.


Quora had a whole thread about amusing close encounters with HMTQ. Amazing how some important people can go for a walk incognito like this while others of much lower stature need a posse of security guards to announce to the world how important they are.



Chanbal said:


> The reason why 6 is not returning to the UK has nothing to do with camera clicks, because he got over that in NY.
> According to a source close to the 6s, he doesn't want to return alone and the wife does't want to go until whatever issues have been addressed.



He probably still shudders when he recalls the last couple of times he went back and met with the Frosty Reception (TM).
If Methane expects the BRF to grovel, the popcorn makers are going to have a very long run of good sales.  



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even if she apologized...would you ever trust her again?


As I just read in a fanfic about a narc who reminded me utterly of Methane: _"You are apologizing because you got caught and you are afraid of the consequences. You're not apologizing because you admit you were wrong or you want to make amends._"



needlv said:


> OT: I do wish they would state why and what led them to this conclusion.  There is enough public interest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Met Police DROPS investigation into Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein
> 
> 
> The Metropolitan Police will be taking 'no further action' into allegations Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein committed sex crimes in the UK, it has been revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> back on topic - since H and M aren’t attending the Princess Diana memorial party in the UK, who wants to place bets on a rival PR stunt done “in her memory”?


Maybe they will recreate the sunken garden in MonteShitShow with a statue so that Invisibet can also learn to say "Grandma Diana".


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Quora had a whole thread about amusing close encounters with HMTQ. Amazing how some important people can go for a walk incognito like this while others of much lower stature need a posse of security guards to announce to the world how important they are.
> 
> 
> He probably still shudders when he recalls the last couple of times he went back and met with the Frosty Reception (TM).
> If Methane expects the BRF to grovel, the popcorn makers are going to have a very long run of good sales.
> 
> 
> As I just read in a fanfic about a narc who reminded me utterly of Methane: _"You are apologizing because you got caught and you are afraid of the consequences. You're not apologizing because you admit you were wrong or you want to make amends._"
> 
> 
> Maybe they will recreate the sunken garden in MonteShitShow with a statue so that Invisibet can also learn to say "Grandma Diana".


Do you have a link for the quora ? I know half of them may be made up but it’s still entertaining  

Oh my gosh if they got a replica of _that statue_ of Rupert Everett in drag, sorry I mean Diana, that’d be hilarious. I’ve always thought their mansion was tacky but that would truly be the cherry on the cake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Do you have a link for the quora ? I know half of them may be made up but it’s still entertaining


Unfortunately no. I stopped being on Quora last year when the topics I was interested in got overrun by unpleasant and/or uneducated yahoos. One of them insisted that I was being insulting because I described a neat place as "spick and span". He says the word "spic" is a racial slur in the US, so the word "spick" also is insulting. A great many people quoted chapter and verse to him about the etymology of "spick" but he wasn't convinced.


----------



## justwatchin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought at some point he'd wake up and get a divorce, or she'd be tired of him and get a divorce. Now, I'm not so sure. He has burned every bridge he had and has the spine of a shrimp, and she has nowhere to go really because he is the one opening doors for her.


She’s gotten one kid (maybe 2, since we’ve not seen proof) from this and I imagine she lawyered up with a prenup so is set financially if they get divorced. H can  pack up his 2 suits and head back to the family he dumped. I imagine they’ll give him a room somewhere


----------



## xincinsin

justwatchin said:


> She’s gotten one kid (maybe 2, since we’ve not seen proof) from this and I imagine she lawyered up with a prenup so is set financially if they get divorced. H can  pack up his 2 suits and head back to the family he dumped. I imagine they’ll give him a room somewhere


If a prenup is in play, and we know how rapacious Methane is, Hazard likely has to stay impoverished to avoid giving her 1.5 times of whatever he earns. She has developed an appetite for overpriced ill-fitting garments that would suck any bank account dry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

justwatchin said:


> She’s gotten one kid (maybe 2, since we’ve not seen proof) from this and I imagine she lawyered up with a prenup so is set financially if they get divorced. H can  pack up his 2 suits and head back to the family he dumped. I imagine they’ll give him a room somewhere



Prenups are not legally binding in the UK, though. I'd love to see her go out of this marriage with about as much as Fergie...but they'll probably pay her more just to get rid of her / obtain the children.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately no. I stopped being on Quora last year when the topics I was interested in got overrun by unpleasant and/or uneducated yahoos. One of them insisted that I was being insulting because I described a neat place as "spick and span". He says the word "spic" is a racial slur in the US, so the word "spick" also is insulting. A great many people quoted chapter and verse to him about the etymology of "spick" but he wasn't convinced.


That is funny. It’s that  ‘niggling doubts’ thing all over again, which was really beyond the pale.
I dread to think how he’d react to the upper class Brit expression ‘old bean.’ Spick and span is even crazier as why would any language  use a negative slur to describe something positively?

On a jollier note, @Maggie Muggins if we are going to give a cake as the grand nickname prize- I think we need to draw up a system whereby a poster in another continent from the winner bakes them the oil and lemon monstrosity and posts it to them (whether by courier or private jet is their decision.) 

It seems only fitting in honour of how the most generous and eco-friendly person we know gifts a cake. Lol JK


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m expressing my opinion as are you. We can agree to disagree. It is ok.
> I wasn’t there. I strongly disagree with parents hitting their kids, especially in public. In this case, with this highly entitled family, there were plenty of staff who could bring the child ‘home’ which was probably the daily pattern anyway. Why ruin his special fun day with public humiliation? There are better ways. Since that incident, we have learned how unstable she was and how unhappy ‘home’ was. Best not to hit kids out of anger. (_thinking of Hazzie getting a bit [ahem] rough with strangers’ children_). Just my opinion.



That’s fine, we can disagree. My point was that it was in the late 80s and how she handled the situation was the accepted way to correct a child who was acting out at that time. That is reflected in how the article actually seems approving of what she did. She would’ve been roundly criticized if she had left it for staff to do what was a mother’s job.

Keep in mind that everything changes. In another 30 years there will be people who will judge how parents are raising their kids today and say it was wrong and unenlightened. That’s just the way it goes.


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> Do you have a link for the quora ? I know half of them may be made up but it’s still entertaining
> 
> Oh my gosh if they got a replica of _that statue_ of Rupert Everett in drag, sorry I mean Diana, that’d be hilarious. I’ve always thought their mansion was tacky but that would truly be the cherry on the cake.



This is the one I follow…









						The Markles
					

A humorous, no-holds-barred look at Meghan Markle, Harry, & the supporting cast




					themarkles.quora.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> That’s fine, we can disagree. My point was that it was in the late 80s and how she handled the situation was the accepted way to correct a child who was acting out at that time. That is reflected in how the article actually seems approving of what she did. She would’ve been roundly criticized if she had left it for staff to do what was a mother’s job.
> 
> Keep in mind that everything changes. In another 30 years there will be people who will judge how parents are raising their kids today and say it was wrong and unenlightened. That’s just the way it goes.



Other articles look at it differently than the one I posted, so there’s that. Who knows what really happened? So far we have 0 photos of W&K hitting their children, 0 photos of H&M hitting their children. We do have 1 awful video of Hazz shoving children. We do have a video of QE telling William to “stand up“ . My point is none of us know these people, we don’t know how they behave in private, etc.  They are human, they make mistakes.  Glorifying them is a mistake imo.  Peace to all.









						13 times the royals lost their cool
					

All the times the royal family have lost their temper in public, from the Queen telling Prince William off to Kate Middleton scolding eldest children, Prince George and Princess Charlotte




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prenups are not legally binding in the UK, though. I'd love to see her go out of this marriage with about as much as Fergie...but they'll probably pay her more just to get rid of her / obtain the children.


UK prenups are not binding ... hmmm 
He spent all his money on a house ... but I guess he can get half of her stash in a divorce, I assume she has been squirreling away acorns


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Quora had a whole thread about amusing close encounters with HMTQ. Amazing how some important people can go for a walk incognito like this while others of much lower stature need a posse of security guards to announce to the world how important they are.
> 
> 
> He probably still shudders when he recalls the last couple of times he went back and met with the Frosty Reception (TM).
> If Methane expects the BRF to grovel, the popcorn makers are going to have a very long run of good sales.
> 
> 
> As I just read in a fanfic about a narc who reminded me utterly of Methane: _"You are apologizing because you got caught and you are afraid of the consequences. You're not apologizing because you admit you were wrong or you want to make amends._"
> 
> 
> Maybe they will recreate the sunken garden in MonteShitShow with a statue so that Invisibet can also learn to say "Grandma Diana".


"Invisibet"


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lowered my opinion.
> Of course parents need to discipline their children, this, though, was a very public spanking. Why embarrass the child? She looked like she was hitting him out of anger. Seemed most inappropriate imo.


it's not like she pulled his pants down and put him over her knee
He turned out good so I guess it didn't do him permanent damage


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Do you have a link for the quora ? I know half of them may be made up but it’s still entertaining
> 
> Oh my gosh if they got a replica of _that statue_ of Rupert Everett in drag, sorry I mean Diana, that’d be hilarious. I’ve always thought their mansion was tacky but that would truly be the cherry on the cake.


Found this link for you, dear @jelliedfeels 








						What was Queen Elizabeth II like in person?
					

Answer (1 of 110): I lined up ona a regular basis with lots of other people at the Barbican centre, the arts centre of the City of London (The”city” is financial district square mile, a feudal overhang with its own powers and police force) to see HM glide past. She glides. She is covered in bling...




					www.quora.com


----------



## Chanbal

Wise words!   It's more than time for the UK to retrieve their titles…


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have come under fire for allegedly relying on their *‘self-generated publicity’ to maintain relevancy.*

This claim’s been made by Caroline Aston and in her interview with GB News she claimed, “*The meetings, the greetings, the pomp going on.”*

“This oh-so private couple that stepped away from the glare of publicity… And yet seem to have become extremely public property.”

*Ms Aston also pointed out to the growing desire among many Americans for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to drop their royal titles in a bid for their ‘fresh start’.*

“There is always southing happening with the Sussexes. And lets face it, *self-generated publicity is the name of their game*,” she admitted._









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle bashed for ‘self-generated publicity’
					

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle bashed for counting on ‘self-generated publicity’ to remain relevant




					www.geo.tv


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even if she apologized...would you ever trust her again?


Never.  She has lied about so many things.  He isn't too truthful either.


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> She’s gotten one kid (maybe 2, since we’ve not seen proof) from this and I imagine she lawyered up with a prenup so is set financially if they get divorced. H can  pack up his 2 suits and head back to the family he dumped. I imagine they’ll give him a room somewhere


He can bunk with Uncle Andy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

If H&M divorce, I can't imagine Maggot being able to afford the upkeep on the Montecito house by herself, despite whatever income/assets she'd get from Hazzard. And where are the kids going to go to school? Are H&M insistent that they get a woke education so they grow up hating both the U.S. and the United Kingdom with its colonial past? Both countries, by the way, that have been good to  both of them with riches beyond anyone's dreams. So.......when are they going to demonstrate the guilt about all the privilege they've gotten by winning the ovarian lottery, and give away even a mere fraction of their possessions and the filthy lucre that comes from the BRF, Netflix, Spotify, books and speeches about how they're hapless victims?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Other articles look at it differently than the one I posted, so there’s that. Who knows what really happened? So far we have 0 photos of W&K hitting their children, 0 photos of H&M hitting their children. We do have 1 awful video of Hazz shoving children. We do have a video of QE telling William to “stand up“ . My point is none of us know these people, we don’t know how they behave in private, etc.  They are human, they make mistakes.  Glorifying them is a mistake imo.  Peace to all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 13 times the royals lost their cool
> 
> 
> All the times the royal family have lost their temper in public, from the Queen telling Prince William off to Kate Middleton scolding eldest children, Prince George and Princess Charlotte
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5219861


I agree they are definitely not above criticism.
I love that gif you can see her exasperation from a mile off - she’s clearly thinking
‘and *this* is the well-behaved one’



sdkitty said:


> it's not like she pulled his pants down and put him over her knee
> He turned out good so I guess it didn't do him permanent damage


I thought you were talking about M for a minute then and now I need to go and get some brain bleach


xincinsin said:


> Found this link for you, dear @jelliedfeels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What was Queen Elizabeth II like in person?
> 
> 
> Answer (1 of 110): I lined up ona a regular basis with lots of other people at the Barbican centre, the arts centre of the City of London (The”city” is financial district square mile, a feudal overhang with its own powers and police force) to see HM glide past. She glides. She is covered in bling...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.quora.com


That’s very sweet of you, dear @xincinsin and thank you for your link dear @LittleStar88 - I now have an Arsenal of laughs for early morning feeds.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Found this link for you, dear @jelliedfeels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What was Queen Elizabeth II like in person?
> 
> 
> Answer (1 of 110): I lined up ona a regular basis with lots of other people at the Barbican centre, the arts centre of the City of London (The”city” is financial district square mile, a feudal overhang with its own powers and police force) to see HM glide past. She glides. She is covered in bling...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.quora.com



Thank you for sharing. These stories about QEII warm my heart. I have a feeling that William and Catherine will be as wonderful as HMTQ


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin, Thank you for the great link you posted to jelliedfeels!

Reading the Quora articles about the Queen, several things were relative in comparison to our comments on the Mongoose . 

Many different people made mention of the Queen _looking them in the eye_, most along with a smile. For example, she was being chauffeured and pedestrians unexpectedly made eye contact with her through the car window and she smiled at them. A small gesture to most of us, but not something Mongoose would have done.

Kindness and considerations shown to people who work for her.

An entirely different approach to wardrobe. Mongoose should be locked in The Tower and made to memorize a rather lengthy but fascinating article about the Queen's wardrobe, focusing on the sections describing how her wardrobe is made so that it always fits perfectly, is appropriate for the occasion, and is often worn many times (I think one pink coat it was about 10?).  It was fun to see a strip of photos of her in the same outfit and how it might have been slightly modified as time went on. There is a great deal of information about making her garments. Whether she will be seated for much of the time, or standing, will she need to climb stairs, will the audience be mostly children, in which case more decorative details like feathers, embroidery is used. Sleeve lengths are taken into consideration, "no cuffs to drag in the Royal soup," weights in the hems so skirts don't blow up in the wind (this one I had read about previously), zippers are used in garments worn on days where multiple wardrobe changes are necessary and she can do a quick change so her hair and make  up are not disturbed by removing a dress over her head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"No matter how beautiful a dress is, if you don't know how to wear clothes, and you walk like an exhibitionistic scrubber, you should hardly be surprised if the intention of the designer is perverted by your demand to flaunt your wares."

The woman kills me  And she says the meanest things so matter-of-factly and still makes them sound polite haha.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> On a jollier note, @Maggie Muggins* if we are going to give a cake as the grand nickname prize*- I think we need to draw up a system whereby a poster in another continent from the winner bakes them the oil and lemon monstrosity and posts it to them (whether by courier or private jet is their decision.)
> 
> It seems only fitting in honour of how the most generous and eco-friendly person we know gifts a cake. Lol JK


The cake given to @rose60610 was for creativity, imagination and thinking outside the box so to speak. "The List" grand prize hasn't been awarded yet. The so-called contest isn't over as I will not be the one to choose the winner; everyone will have a vote. Meantime, since everyone here are all so creative, bring me those "different" nicknames and you also can have your cake and eat too. You can even select your favourite cake for me to bake.


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> I loved Bewitched when I was a kid.I had sort of a girl crush on Elizabeth Montgomery. I could never understand what Samantha saw in Derwood, as Endora called him.



Even as a small child I found that show disturbing. I never understood why she couldn't just be herself. I instinctively knew that it was wrong for her to sublimate her abilities in order to appease her man. IMO it sent a very bad message that I saw a lot of in school where girls played dumb to appease "the male ego". We should never have to apologize for who /what we are


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prenups are not legally binding in the UK, though. I'd love to see her go out of this marriage with about as much as Fergie...but they'll probably pay her more just to get rid of her / obtain the children.


I was just about to say to a previous poster that I can't imagine the BRF would willingly get down in the legal dirt with an American actress over a prenup. I'm sure they'd find the whole idea extremely distasteful, and if MM requested one it would only prove her to be the gold digger we know she likely is. And it's not like she had huge assets from her acting career to protect. I see Charles having to cough up millions to rid Harry of her down the road.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Even as a small child I found that show disturbing. I never understood why she couldn't just be herself. I instinctively knew that it was wrong for her to sublimate her abilities in order to appease her man. IMO it sent a very bad message that I saw a lot of in school where girls played dumb to appease "the male ego". We should never have to apologize for who /what we are


seems like you were an unusually mature child


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I was just about to say to a previous poster that I can't imagine the BRF would willingly get down in the legal dirt with an American actress over a prenup. I'm sure they'd find the whole idea extremely distasteful, and if MM requested one it would only prove her to be the gold digger we know she likely is. And it's not like she had huge assets from her acting career to protect. I see Charles having to cough up millions to rid Harry of her down the road.


yes, the prenup would be to protect Harry's assets, not hers.  so I'm sure she wouldn't ask for one and I wonder if she would have agreed to sign one.  after all, they were such a Big Love match.  a prenup might imply they were less than that.  and what Meghan wants Meghan gets


----------



## needlv

Awww… lol


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

Has Doria gone underground? The big question of the day.  It seems that people from Charles's team have tried to contact her, but did not succeed.


----------



## Chanbal

Bring the popcorn because we are not done with this! 


_*The Duke and Duchess of Sussxes’s daughter, Lilibet, will not be christened in the UK, according to royal sources.*
It had been suggested the couple would return to Britain to have the four-month-old baptised at Windsor Castle like their son Archie, two. However, a palace insider said: “There will not be a christening in the UK. It is not happening.”
Another source suggested it was “highly unlikely”.
*It comes after a spokeswoman for Harry and Meghan confirmed on Sunday that they would not be flying into Britain to attend a party to honour Diana, Princess of Wales.*
Friends of the late Princess, including Sir Elton John, are said to be attending the event for 100 guests at Kensington Palace with the Duke of Cambridge. It is intended to thank donors who helped fund the statue of Diana unveiled in the summer on what would have been her 60th birthday._





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the apparent response to the previous article from the Montecito compound:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Bring the popcorn because we are not done with this!
> View attachment 5220559
> 
> _*The Duke and Duchess of Sussxes’s daughter, Lilibet, will not be christened in the UK, according to royal sources.*
> It had been suggested the couple would return to Britain to have the four-month-old baptised at Windsor Castle like their son Archie, two. However, a palace insider said: “There will not be a christening in the UK. It is not happening.”
> Another source suggested it was “highly unlikely”.
> *It comes after a spokeswoman for Harry and Meghan confirmed on Sunday that they would not be flying into Britain to attend a party to honour Diana, Princess of Wales.*
> Friends of the late Princess, including Sir Elton John, are said to be attending the event for 100 guests at Kensington Palace with the Duke of Cambridge. It is intended to thank donors who helped fund the statue of Diana unveiled in the summer on what would have been her 60th birthday._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


They shunned UK? Sure Jan.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Has Doria gone underground? The big question of the day.  It seems that people from Charles's team have tried to contact her, but did not succeed.




That story doesn’t sound factual at all. From what has happened over the past few years, Charles of all people has to know he cannot trust someone else to smooth things over for him. I don’t see him having his people reaching out to Doria to confer “as parents” in a million years. I think Doria is laying low for reasons of her own. For her sake I hope she is getting something out of it besides the “honor” of babysitting the grandkids.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Static cling again?
So glad to know brands are realising they do lose customers when the non-influencers look awful.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That story doesn’t sound factual at all. From what has happened over the past few years, Charles of all people has to know he cannot trust someone else to smooth things over for him. I don’t see him having his people reaching out to Doria to confer “as parents” in a million years. I think Doria is laying low for reasons of her own. For her sake I hope she is getting something out of it besides the “honor” of babysitting the grandkids.



At one point Dor*a was a guest of the BRF, so I can see Charles having someone contacting her as a polite courtesy. Very possible imo.

Dor*a is indeed a mystery. I'm sure she loves her grandkid(s), but she may have had a happier life before Ms. Markle married 6. Money is not everything.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Static cling again?
> So glad to know brands are realising they do lose customers when the non-influencers look awful.
> 
> View attachment 5220587


Yeah, I certainly don't feel tempted to get any of the pieces from the NYC tour.   
It looks like she is in serious negotiations for her own beauty line. A beauty line should be less damaging than a political career…


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Bring the popcorn because we are not done with this!
> View attachment 5220559
> 
> _*The Duke and Duchess of Sussxes’s daughter, Lilibet, will not be christened in the UK, according to royal sources.*
> It had been suggested the couple would return to Britain to have the four-month-old baptised at Windsor Castle like their son Archie, two. However, a palace insider said: “There will not be a christening in the UK. It is not happening.”
> Another source suggested it was “highly unlikely”.
> *It comes after a spokeswoman for Harry and Meghan confirmed on Sunday that they would not be flying into Britain to attend a party to honour Diana, Princess of Wales.*
> Friends of the late Princess, including Sir Elton John, are said to be attending the event for 100 guests at Kensington Palace with the Duke of Cambridge. It is intended to thank donors who helped fund the statue of Diana unveiled in the summer on what would have been her 60th birthday._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Right - reality - the Queen doesn’t want to meet with you…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yeah, I certainly don't feel tempted to get any of the pieces from the NYC tour.
> It looks like she is in serious negotiations for her own beauty line. A beauty line should be less damaging than a political career…



Did you mean _A *failed* beauty line should be less damaging than a *failed* political career _

I would like to think she rented those clothes and did not get freebies from the brands.  The Dior bag indicates otherwise. So, I’m rethinking my choices.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Right - reality - the Queen doesn’t want to meet with you…




But but but, Hazzie is “a beloved member of the family”. 
Yeah, rrright, seems that QE is taking care of business.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did you mean _A *failed* beauty line should be less damaging than a *failed* political career _
> 
> I would like to think she rented those clothes and did not get freebies from the brands.  The Dior bag indicates otherwise. So, I’m rethinking my choices.


The quality of people in politics has virtually decreased worldwide imo, so I prefer not to risk having one more mediocre person contributing to noise pollution. In contrast, a moisturizer or perfume can sit quietly and collect dust on a shelf of Target, or wherever her stans shop.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The quality of people in politics has virtually decreased worldwide imo, so I prefer not to risk having one more mediocre person contributing to noise pollution. In contrast, a moisturizer or perfume can sit quietly and collect dust on a shelf of Target, or wherever her stans shop.



Are bots able to buy stuff online?  

Not to disparage any of these shopping venues (?), her cosmetics line would be most appropriate for an informercial imo. 
It would be less work for her, no one would challenge her claims, probably film it from the McMansion. A brick and mortar shop, a shopping channel, they would expect [demand] personal appearances — eek!


----------



## Chanbal

I enjoyed reading this comment with exception of her views on Americans. The appetite for the pair is limited to media and stans…  Can someone update Moodie? Many of us would be happy to return them to the UK. 



*IT’S not often I feel sorry for Harry and Meghan.*
_But in the case of the Princess Diana memorial party at Kensington Palace, the pair were damned if they did attend — and damned if they didn’t.

*Their decision to shun next week’s bash** has been viewed in some quarters as yet another snub to the Royal Family, another thing to make poor Diana turn in her grave. I disagree.

Had the Duke and Duchess of Sussex jumped on to their favourite private jet to make an appearance at the postponed event, they’d have been, in metaphorical terms, hanged, drawn and quartered.

The reality is that nobody wants them there.* Least of all Prince William, who’s been left to carry the royal burden on his lone, gym-honed shoulders, while Harry coins it in from his nine-bedroom Montecito mansion.

Certainly not Diana’s beloved siblings, Earl Spencer, Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes, who, understandably, just want the day to be about their late sister and nothing else.

Nor the Princess of Wales’s friends and former members of staff who must, surely, see Harry’s petulance and weep.

And, finally — perhaps most importantly — neither do the majority of the Great British Public who have, finally, had their fill of the endlessly hypocritical duo.

*Days after their recent Time magazine front cover, the privacy-loving eco-couple went on a three-day vanity tour of New York, which is precisely where they should be, and what they should be doing.

Poverty campaigner Meghan sported a designer Max Mara coat, Valentino shades and Italian cult label Valextra handbag for a trip to the UN headquarters.*

She later described the tete-a-tete with the Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed as a “lovely meeting”.

As if she were emerging from a Women’s Institute cake bake.

Over the three days, the cost of her wardrobe totalled £67,000. In contrast, last week Kate Middleton wore a £16 dress from Zara.

This was the couple’s first major excursion since quitting the Royal Family, and buggering off to California.

With endless handshakes, royal waves and a procession of dignitaries, wreaths, photocalls, military-grade security and a kowtowing Press pack, this trip, as one commentator observed, had, “all the hallmarks of a royal tour except for one minor detail: They no longer represent Queen and country”.

*‘THEY WON’T LET A PESKY SET OF MORALS STOP THEM’*
*Still, that didn’t stop the shy multi-millionaires, who did generously donate two boxes of vegetables and herbs to a school in Harlem, from giving it their all to a largely captive American audience.*

If the couple aren’t to fade into obscurity (chance would be a fine thing), it’s the royal-obsessed Americans they should be wooing.

With no monarchy of their own to fawn over, they view the Firm’s very existence as a sort of soap opera.

Thirty million Americans watched as Harry married his American bride in May 2018 — 18million more than in this country.

*Staunchly principled Prince Harry, who signed a reported £112million deal with Netflix, has remained eerily quiet about the streaming giant’s latest production, Diana: The Musical.

Described by one reviewer as “so bad it makes Cats look good”, maybe one of the Cats has got his tongue, too.*

Of course, Harry and Meghan aren’t entirely stupid.

*They know they’re on to a good thing with this American gig — and won’t let a pesky set of morals stop them from cracking the States.

Across the pond, there remains an appetite for the pair.*

H&M have made their 1,000-thread-count Egyptian cotton bed in the US.

Now they can, and should, shut up, and lie in it._









						Meghan is right to snub Diana and stay in LA... hopefully for good
					

IT’S not often I feel sorry for Harry and Meghan. But in the case of the Princess Diana memorial party at Kensington Palace, the pair were damned if they did attend — and damned if they didn’t. The…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Are bots able to buy stuff online?*
> 
> Not to disparage any of these shopping venues (?), her cosmetics line would be most appropriate for an informercial imo.
> It would be less work for her, no one would challenge her claims, probably film it from the McMansion. A brick and mortar shop, a shopping channel, they would expect [demand] personal appearances — eek!


haha


----------



## rose60610

Given Mimic-Maggot's propensity for plagiarism, my guess any cosmetic line of hers would attempt to copy Tom Ford or Chanel with the tiniest of differences in colors/packaging so as to not get sued, and do it on the cheap so her sugars and tweens would eat it up. Of course it'd be available on Amazon (Jeffy isn't actually married yet), Ulta, Target, and drugstores. Kinda like how it's a fact that pancake restaurants often make much more profit than high end gourmet restaurants. It's all about the bucks.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Given Mimic-Maggot's propensity for plagiarism, my guess any cosmetic line of hers would attempt to copy Tom Ford or Chanel with the tiniest of differences in colors/packaging so as to not get sued, and do it on the cheap so her sugars and tweens would eat it up. Of course it'd be available on Amazon (Jeffy isn't actually married yet), Ulta, Target, and drugstores. Kinda like how it's a fact that pancake restaurants often make much more money than high end gourmet restaurants. It's all about the bucks.


She probably has visions of being the next Kylie Jenner. The difference is, she does not have a shrewd businessman woman like Kris Jenner behind her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of the best videos


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

This cracked me up. 
Kids looove her lowness


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The quality of people in politics has virtually decreased worldwide imo, so I prefer not to risk having one more mediocre person contributing to noise pollution. *In contrast, a moisturizer or perfume can sit quietly and collect dust on a shelf of Target, or wherever her stans shop*.



And one day, be in the bargain bin at TJ Maxx or the Dollar Tree


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Prenups are not legally binding in the UK, though. I'd love to see her go out of this marriage with about as much as Fergie...but they'll probably pay her more just to get rid of her / obtain the children.


I see her as a scheming b*tch. She might convince him to do some sort of will or post-nup arrangement once they were in the States. He is weakminded enough to believe her if she feeds his paranoia and tells him that he has to sign his wealth, present & future, over to her to safeguard the kids. Note how he thought it was his mum's money that saved them. He would see himself in the same saviour role.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Although this is about Charles and the environment, he does show great insight, especially when he says the protestors aren’t _helping by doing things in a way that alienates people.  _[Hello, H&M  ] Hmmmm, lots of insight there that can be applied to more than environmental issues. The old saying “you get more with honey than vinegar” applies imo. He does, though, seem puzzled by the questioning of his own carbon footprint - ouch.  Again, just my opinion.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Static cling again?
> So glad to know brands are realising they do lose customers when the non-influencers look awful.
> 
> View attachment 5220587


The woman behind them, now, she looks more like a duchess.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> I was just about to say to a previous poster that I can't imagine the BRF would willingly get down in the legal dirt with an American actress over a prenup. I'm sure they'd find the whole idea extremely distasteful, and if MM requested one it would only prove her to be the gold digger we know she likely is. And it's not like she had huge assets from her acting career to protect. I see Charles having to cough up millions to rid Harry of her down the road.


Hey, she’s a ‘successful businesswoman’ with a ‘brilliant career’ before she met Harry 
(The way she’s representing these designers  she’s going to be begging Reitmans to take her back soon enough.)

I completely agree, they are going to have to pay her off if there’s a divorce. We have to remember a couple of mill is still chickenfeed to the royals but it’ll certainly keep  a bad actress in blister pads and banana pens.


sdkitty said:


> yes, the prenup would be to protect Harry's assets, not hers.  so I'm sure she wouldn't ask for one and I wonder if she would have agreed to sign one.  after all, they were such a Big Love match.  a prenup might imply they were less than that.  and what Meghan wants Meghan gets


I believe that’s called the Camille Grammar manoeuvre 


Chanbal said:


> Here is the apparent response to the previous article from the Montecito compound:
> 
> View attachment 5220561



I mean, this might be preaching to the choir, but why bother having your kid christened at all given you are clearly not religious people?

Oh yes, so you can show off. 


poopsie said:


> Even as a small child I found that show disturbing. I never understood why she couldn't just be herself. I instinctively knew that it was wrong for her to sublimate her abilities in order to appease her man. IMO it sent a very bad message that I saw a lot of in school where girls played dumb to appease "the male ego". We should never have to apologize for who /what we are


Completely agree. It is a very bad message. Especially if what you are is a witch, which is awesome.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> "No matter how beautiful a dress is, if you don't know how to wear clothes, and you walk like an exhibitionistic scrubber, you should hardly be surprised if the intention of the designer is perverted by your demand to flaunt your wares."
> 
> The woman kills me  And she says the meanest things so matter-of-factly and still makes them sound polite haha.


I was listening to Lady C’s book on them & I was struck by how restrained she was on them considering what she’s now like on YouTube- maybe that book needs a epilogue like scabies 
That’s not to say she’s not throwing shade of course, though a lot of the real heat is directed at Diana. I also noticed that at that point she was sticking to the party line that Harry wasn’t given special treatment in the military.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Bring the popcorn because we are not done with this!
> View attachment 5220559
> 
> _*The Duke and Duchess of Sussxes’s daughter, Lilibet, will not be christened in the UK, according to royal sources.*
> It had been suggested the couple would return to Britain to have the four-month-old baptised at Windsor Castle like their son Archie, two. However, a palace insider said: “There will not be a christening in the UK. It is not happening.”
> Another source suggested it was “highly unlikely”.
> *It comes after a spokeswoman for Harry and Meghan confirmed on Sunday that they would not be flying into Britain to attend a party to honour Diana, Princess of Wales.*
> Friends of the late Princess, including Sir Elton John, are said to be attending the event for 100 guests at Kensington Palace with the Duke of Cambridge. It is intended to thank donors who helped fund the statue of Diana unveiled in the summer on what would have been her 60th birthday._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Awww. Waiting for them to spin the story again to "We don't want to anyway" after Wills puts his foot down once more.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Yeah, I certainly don't feel tempted to get any of the pieces from the NYC tour.
> It looks like she is in serious negotiations for her own beauty line. A beauty line should be less damaging than a political career…



Really...invisible like her wedding m/u or skincare for the sun damage she obviously has?


----------



## Sharont2305

What are the odds that this christening takes place on the day of the party, and partly to remember Diana by?


----------



## needlv

it’s not just bad PR though… its also their disastrous actions!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> What are the odds that this christening takes place on the day of the party, and partly to remember Diana by?



Mhhh. You have a point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, this might be preaching to the choir, but why bother having your kid christened at all given you are clearly not religious people?
> 
> Oh yes, so you can show off.



So the invisible child doesn't lose her spot in the line of succession.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> it’s not just bad PR though… its also their disastrous actions!





_He claimed: "It's very difficult for Harry and Meghan because being *ex-royals* and people wanting to meet them, they cannot really go undertake as an official royal visit.

"The problem a lot of people felt was in New York, people were confused.

"Was it a royal visit or wasn't it?


_


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



I'm only surprised that the fashion houses took so long to come to their senses. Maybe in the past, they didn't mind how awful she looked or how terrible her taste was so long as PC footed the bill ("Money is no object", Madam Moron announced!). After all, they need to pay their bills and here was a patsy who was troublesome but willing to pay hundreds of thousands. Want to bet that without the Bank of Dad, Methane's team is now asking fashion houses for freebies?



CarryOn2020 said:


> Static cling again?
> So glad to know brands are realising they do lose customers when the non-influencers look awful.
> 
> View attachment 5220587


I had a male colleague who wore pants like those, flopping around with every step. He was a narc too. Maybe this is the preferred style for narcs?



Chanbal said:


> Yeah, I certainly don't feel tempted to get any of the pieces from the NYC tour.
> It looks like she is in serious negotiations for her own beauty line. A beauty line should be less damaging than a political career…


 They can discreetly dispose of expired products, whereas a failed political venture (won't even call it a career) will live forever on the internet.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Are bots able to buy stuff online?
> 
> Not to disparage any of these shopping venues (?), her cosmetics line would be most appropriate for an informercial imo.
> It would be less work for her, no one would challenge her claims, probably film it from the McMansion. A brick and mortar shop, a shopping channel, they would expect [demand] personal appearances — eek!


If she has to do close-ups to show off her beautiful face, they can borrow the heavy-handed airbrush guy from Time.



Sharont2305 said:


> What are the odds that this christening takes place on the day of the party, and partly to remember Diana by?


Think you've nailed it.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> _He claimed: "It's very difficult for Harry and Meghan because being *ex-royals* and people wanting to meet them, they cannot really go undertake as an official royal visit.
> 
> "The problem a lot of people felt was in New York, people were confused.
> 
> "Was it a royal visit or wasn't it?
> 
> View attachment 5220740
> _


Perhaps they can coin a special term just for them: The UnRoyals of Montecito. Then the gruesome twosome can imply that the "Un" refers to their close connection to the UN.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps they can coin a special term just for them: The UnRoyals of Montecito. Then the gruesome twosome can imply that the "Un" refers to their close connection to the UN.



Maybe express.uk would publish @Maggie Muggins list?


----------



## needlv

I do wonder what has been signed with Netflix.  Did those two promise access to the BRF?  If so the Oprah interview and subsequent freeze out by the BRF brought an end to that idea.

… and could Netflix use content about Megxit, behind the scenes discussions and other info being pitched by those two to either Do a critical documentary OR add to a fictional crown series type of thing? 

Either way Netflix is going to want to see action for their investment in H and M.  And if the contract is terminated, Netflix may be able to get their writers to “fictionalise” the drama behind the scenes…


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Yeah, I certainly don't feel tempted to get any of the pieces from the NYC tour.
> It looks like she is in serious negotiations for her own beauty line. A beauty line should be less damaging than a political career…


I thought she didn’t wear make up? (oh and that’s her real hair, and she’s never had plastic surgery.)  
I can just see the ad now:
‘Look moderately attractive and DONATE TO CHARITY SELFISH PEASANTS* with Meghan’s new cosmetics range* Arty Face* including;
*Slapper On foundation*-  full coverage like people magazine. comes with free application shovel
*Fired and Iced lipstick* - lipstick a brighter red  than your assistant’s cheek -guaranteed. 
*Blackfish Bronzer* - write your own narrative with a rich gold-tint finish
*Filler Up blusher *- for remarkably fuller cheeks _naturally. _Caution! May also cause nose to change shape
*Ingenue Eye Tea palette*- plead innocence and inexperience well into your forties with our ‘many more tears’ formula 
*Serpent’s  whitening strips*- zing em and sting them with your dazzling smile
*Superglued eyelashes* - these stay in place even when standing by a private jet or tearing up at an imagined slight.
*Lillibutt body pads - *change your shape like you change your story with our figure-enhancing foam curves. 
Coming soon to an infomercial near you! 
* 0.00001% of proceeds go to the Assewell foundation. 
As you can see, I have tried to stay on brand with some truly horrific puns.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok. So guess who didn't know Megalodon was a monster truck (but isn't it also some prehistoric shark thing?). But also...Devastator is pretty fitting as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. So guess who didn't know Megalodon was a monster truck (but isn't it also some prehistoric shark thing?). But also...Devastator is pretty fitting as well.



Yes, it’s the largest shark, too. Very appropriate name imo


----------



## Annawakes

They must be confused right now.  To them there is no question that it was a Royal visit.  To them there is no question that they are still Royal.  In their mind they are still Royal and will always be, simply for the fact that H is blood related to the real Royals.

They don’t see themselves the way the rest of us see them.

Also, the idea they would boycott the Diana party in the UK is laughable.  They would boycott a party but not that horrendous musical?  Again, hypocrisy.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Has Doria gone underground? The big question of the day.  It seems that people from Charles's team have tried to contact her, but did not succeed.



this makes no sense to me
Doria interfering in her daughter's relationship with her in-laws?  I don't think so


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That story doesn’t sound factual at all. From what has happened over the past few years, Charles of all people has to know he cannot trust someone else to smooth things over for him. I don’t see him having his people reaching out to Doria to confer “as parents” in a million years. I think Doria is laying low for reasons of her own. For her sake I hope she is getting something out of it besides the “honor” of babysitting the grandkids.


well, they bought her a business, didn't they?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmm, wonder what they changed?









						Doria Ragland - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




This page was last edited on 28 September 2021, at 13:06 (UTC).


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I enjoyed reading this comment with exception of her views on Americans. The appetite for the pair is limited to media and stans…  Can someone update Moodie? Many of us would be happy to return them to the UK.
> 
> View attachment 5220662
> 
> *IT’S not often I feel sorry for Harry and Meghan.*
> _But in the case of the Princess Diana memorial party at Kensington Palace, the pair were damned if they did attend — and damned if they didn’t.
> 
> *Their decision to shun next week’s bash** has been viewed in some quarters as yet another snub to the Royal Family, another thing to make poor Diana turn in her grave. I disagree.
> 
> Had the Duke and Duchess of Sussex jumped on to their favourite private jet to make an appearance at the postponed event, they’d have been, in metaphorical terms, hanged, drawn and quartered.
> 
> The reality is that nobody wants them there.* Least of all Prince William, who’s been left to carry the royal burden on his lone, gym-honed shoulders, while Harry coins it in from his nine-bedroom Montecito mansion.
> 
> Certainly not Diana’s beloved siblings, Earl Spencer, Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes, who, understandably, just want the day to be about their late sister and nothing else.
> 
> Nor the Princess of Wales’s friends and former members of staff who must, surely, see Harry’s petulance and weep.
> 
> And, finally — perhaps most importantly — neither do the majority of the Great British Public who have, finally, had their fill of the endlessly hypocritical duo.
> 
> *Days after their recent Time magazine front cover, the privacy-loving eco-couple went on a three-day vanity tour of New York, which is precisely where they should be, and what they should be doing.
> 
> Poverty campaigner Meghan sported a designer Max Mara coat, Valentino shades and Italian cult label Valextra handbag for a trip to the UN headquarters.*
> 
> She later described the tete-a-tete with the Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed as a “lovely meeting”.
> 
> As if she were emerging from a Women’s Institute cake bake.
> 
> Over the three days, the cost of her wardrobe totalled £67,000. In contrast, last week Kate Middleton wore a £16 dress from Zara.
> 
> This was the couple’s first major excursion since quitting the Royal Family, and buggering off to California.
> 
> With endless handshakes, royal waves and a procession of dignitaries, wreaths, photocalls, military-grade security and a kowtowing Press pack, this trip, as one commentator observed, had, “all the hallmarks of a royal tour except for one minor detail: They no longer represent Queen and country”.
> 
> *‘THEY WON’T LET A PESKY SET OF MORALS STOP THEM’*
> *Still, that didn’t stop the shy multi-millionaires, who did generously donate two boxes of vegetables and herbs to a school in Harlem, from giving it their all to a largely captive American audience.*
> 
> If the couple aren’t to fade into obscurity (chance would be a fine thing), it’s the royal-obsessed Americans they should be wooing.
> 
> With no monarchy of their own to fawn over, they view the Firm’s very existence as a sort of soap opera.
> 
> Thirty million Americans watched as Harry married his American bride in May 2018 — 18million more than in this country.
> 
> *Staunchly principled Prince Harry, who signed a reported £112million deal with Netflix, has remained eerily quiet about the streaming giant’s latest production, Diana: The Musical.
> 
> Described by one reviewer as “so bad it makes Cats look good”, maybe one of the Cats has got his tongue, too.*
> 
> Of course, Harry and Meghan aren’t entirely stupid.
> 
> *They know they’re on to a good thing with this American gig — and won’t let a pesky set of morals stop them from cracking the States.
> 
> Across the pond, there remains an appetite for the pair.*
> 
> H&M have made their 1,000-thread-count Egyptian cotton bed in the US.
> 
> Now they can, and should, shut up, and lie in it._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan is right to snub Diana and stay in LA... hopefully for good
> 
> 
> IT’S not often I feel sorry for Harry and Meghan. But in the case of the Princess Diana memorial party at Kensington Palace, the pair were damned if they did attend — and damned if they didn’t. The…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


So many good quotes in this!!!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

The Spotify deal have to be unraveled by this point right? We’re coming up on a year with zero contact. That’s crazy!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> The Spotify deal have to be unraveled by this point right? We’re coming up on a year with zero contact. That’s crazy!


so they use their "royalty" to get deals and then can't produce.....what a pair


----------



## djuna1




----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmm, wonder what they changed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This page was last edited on 28 September 2021, at 13:06 (UTC).


Seems to be one person making changes and another undoing the change. Rival contributors?


----------



## xincinsin

djuna1 said:


>



The word "ethic" seems to be totally unsuitable to be in the vicinity of the words "Meghan Markle".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe express.uk would publish @Maggie Muggins list?


I think that TPF H&M thread should become mandatory reading for all first year university/college students in all disciplines to learn 'what not to do' in real life.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think that TPF H&M thread should become mandatory reading for all first year university/college students in all disciplines to learn 'what not to do' in real life.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>




Johnny!! I'm old enough to know Eugene Levy is the funniest member of that family despite his son's current popularity.


----------



## Chanbal

Does it mean they are getting their own private jet?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Does it mean they are getting their own private jet?
> View attachment 5220980


seems to be they are getting positions they aren't qualified for due to Harry's "Royalness"


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Johnny!! I'm old enough to know Eugene Levy is the funniest member of that family despite his son's current popularity.


Haha, did you watch Schitt's Creek? Eugene Levy was phenomenal there, but all actors were great. I was not expecting much from this sitcom, but I was pleasantly surprised. It is brilliant!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> seems to be they are getting positions they aren't qualified for due to Harry's "Royalness"


It's like they are rubbing that in your face … It's so disgusting!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Haha, did you watch Schitt's Creek? Eugene Levy was phenomenal there, but all actors were great. I was not expecting much from this sitcom, but I was pleasantly surprised. It is brilliant!



Yes, I was happy to see Eugene Levy reunited with Catherine O'Hara. Loved them back in the early 80s on SCTV. They were also great together in all those Christopher Guest movies from the early 2000s. My favorite was _Best in Show_. SCTV launched so many great comic careers, John Candy, Martin Short, Rick Moranis, Dave Thomas, and Harold Ramis were also alumni.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It's like they are rubbing that in your face … It's so disgusting!


I think they actually believe they are "all that"....some sort of role models for political correctness or something....Oh I forgot - she started young with her letter to P&G or whatever company about women doing housework


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Does it mean they are getting their own private jet?
> View attachment 5220980



"all about sustainable investing"??? I see. Bashing the BRF over and over and over and crying "Victim!" is sustainable and puts $$ in their pockets. Apparently when Me-Me-Me-Grow-My-Wallet decided to embark on a mega income stream expedition she yacht-girled her way into the pants of the rich and famous. Then leveraged their fame and fortune to redirect some Pounds Sterling into her own piggy bank, AKA Archewell. Basically the modernized woke version of Rumpelstiltskin! Sterling into gold. All the while crying "Victim!" ka-CHING! See? Sustainable!


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> it’s not just bad PR though… its also their disastrous actions!




In a few short sentences, this article presents the problem.  Ex-royals??? How can that be? Hazzie was born royal, so he must always be royal, yes?  Many have said it many times: QE and Charles need to sort this _royal or not_ issue asap. They have let it drag on far too long.

This financial gig is troubling b/c the BRF has a lousy track record with these financial dealings _excursions_.  It really is opening Pandora’s box.  H&M do not have  a business background. They can easily be duped into ”passing information and connections to their clients/frineds.“  Ask Andrew and Sarah how that happens. 

_According to emails and files reviewed by the Mail on Sunday, Andrew might have abused his role as a trade representative to pass information and connections to his friends.








						Now Prince Andrew’s Business Deals Are Under Scrutiny
					

Though the Jeffrey Epstein scandal hasn’t died away, more questions have been raised about Andrew’s career.




					www.vanityfair.com
				




from the Express article above:
He claimed: "It's very difficult for Harry and Meghan because being *ex-royals and people wanting to meet them*, they cannot really go undertake as an official royal visit.

"The problem a lot of people felt was in New York, *people were confused.*

"*Was it a royal visit or wasn't it*?”_


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think that TPF H&M thread should become mandatory reading for all first year university/college students in all disciplines to learn 'what not to do' in real life.


 I am terribly sad to think they wasted so many of their advantages, opportunities


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie has wanted to do this for years, according to MM.   

_The Sussexes, who *experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand* in the US after quitting the Royal Family for independence and to earn their own money, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager pumping money into companies with what they deem *acceptable environmental and social goals*.  _








						Now Harry and Meghan move into banking
					

The Sussexes, who experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand in the US, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:
_She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: "Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?",' adding the couple were introduced to Ethic by friends. It is not yet known how much they invested 'earlier this year' or if they are both being paid a salary for their 'impact partner' roles.

Ethic, which was set up by Briton Jay Lipman, a red-haired Prince Harry lookalike from London now settled in the US having worked for Deutsche Bank, claims to only invest in businesses that meet its 'social responsibility criteria', including on racial justice, climate change and workplace standards such as gender equality and fair pay. 

His co-founders are Australians Doug Scott and Johny Mair, who worked for banks investing in gas and oil amongst other things before they formed Ethic in 2015. _


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In a few short sentences, this article presents the problem.  Ex-royals??? How can that be? Hazzie was born royal, so he must always be royal, yes?  Many have said it many times: *QE and Charles need to sort this royal or not issue asap. They have let it drag on far too long.*
> 
> This financial gig is troubling b/c the BRF has a lousy track record with these financial dealings _excursions_.  It really is opening Pandora’s box.  H&M do not have  a business background. They can easily be duped into ”passing information and connections to their clients/frineds.“  Ask Andrew and Sarah how that happens.
> 
> _According to emails and files reviewed by the Mail on Sunday, Andrew might have abused his role as a trade representative to pass information and connections to his friends.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Prince Andrew’s Business Deals Are Under Scrutiny
> 
> 
> Though the Jeffrey Epstein scandal hasn’t died away, more questions have been raised about Andrew’s career.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from the Express article above:
> He claimed: "It's very difficult for Harry and Meghan because being *ex-royals and people wanting to meet them*, they cannot really go undertake as an official royal visit.
> 
> "The problem a lot of people felt was in New York, *people were confused.*
> 
> "*Was it a royal visit or wasn't it*?”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Moira owned that show imho.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie has wanted to do this for years, according to MM.
> 
> _The Sussexes, who *experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand* in the US after quitting the Royal Family for independence and to earn their own money, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager pumping money into companies with what they deem *acceptable environmental and social goals*.  _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan move into banking
> 
> 
> The Sussexes, who experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand in the US, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:
> _She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: "Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?",' adding the couple were introduced to Ethic by friends. It is not yet known how much they invested 'earlier this year' or if they are both being paid a salary for their 'impact partner' roles.
> 
> Ethic, which was set up by Briton Jay Lipman, a red-haired Prince Harry lookalike from London now settled in the US having worked for Deutsche Bank, claims to only invest in businesses that meet its 'social responsibility criteria', including on racial justice, climate change and workplace standards such as gender equality and fair pay.
> 
> His co-founders are Australians Doug Scott and Johny Mair, who worked for banks investing in gas and oil amongst other things before they formed Ethic in 2015. _


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Does it mean they are getting their own private jet?
> View attachment 5220980


What a joke! The woman who spends millions on clothes?


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Seems to be one person making changes and another undoing the change. Rival contributors?
> View attachment 5220921


Being clueless I looked this up: From Wikipedia:

"The "_BLP_ problem" is defined as the presence of unsourced, poorly sourced, and contentious content in biographies of living people. While negative content and allegations are probably a bigger problem, any contentious content that is unsourced or poorly sourced in biographies is problematic." 

Vandalism: On Wikipedia, _vandalism_ is editing the project in an intentionally disruptive or malicious manner. Vandalism includes any addition, removal, or modification that is intentionally humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, or degrading in any way.

Googled the User Name involved (and guessing it's a "he") he has pages of Google entries. I did not open any, the Net is a scary place for those of us who do not understand all that is out there. But, didn't see anything in the headers that looked like it might be related to Doria. ???? Did see his name under a header "Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard" but have no idea if it's relevant.


----------



## Hermes Zen

LOVE this thread but reading the on going sh!t that M&H does raise my blood pressure.  I was telling my DH about the NYC trip and latest and it raised my bp ... as he walked by he laughed and said .... 'and it's self inflicted'. Stopped me in my tracks ... he's right.  Reading on ...   Have a great day all !


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "...a red-haired Prince Harry lookalike from London..."


Like this one?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: "Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?"


Yes, I'm totally sure her husband has been saying this for years. They are legends in their own minds.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie has wanted to do this for years, according to MM.
> 
> _The Sussexes, who *experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand* in the US after quitting the Royal Family for independence and to earn their own money, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager pumping money into companies with what they deem *acceptable environmental and social goals*.  _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan move into banking
> 
> 
> The Sussexes, who experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand in the US, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:
> _She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: "Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?",' adding the couple were introduced to Ethic by friends. It is not yet known how much they invested 'earlier this year' or if they are both being paid a salary for their 'impact partner' roles.
> 
> Ethic, which was set up by Briton Jay Lipman, a red-haired Prince Harry lookalike from London now settled in the US having worked for Deutsche Bank, claims to only invest in businesses that meet its 'social responsibility criteria', including on racial justice, climate change and workplace standards such as gender equality and fair pay.
> 
> His co-founders are Australians Doug Scott and Johny Mair, who worked for banks investing in gas and oil amongst other things before they formed Ethic in 2015. _


The company's spiel about the Markles use a lot of their word salad phrases.








						Our Impact Partnership with The Duke and Duchess of Sussex  - Ethic
					

Oct 12, 2021 - Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, share a lot of values with us, and we suspect, with many of you as well. That’s why we’re so excited that they’re joining us as impact partners.




					www.ethic.com
				




I'll  
They can't be that bad. They have a really cute pooch as their Chief Smile Officer


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> seems to be they are getting positions they aren't qualified for due to Harry's "Royalness"


Sadly, more of the old "who you know, not what you know".


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie has wanted to do this for years, according to MM.
> 
> _The Sussexes, who *experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand* in the US after quitting the Royal Family for independence and to earn their own money, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager pumping money into companies with what they deem *acceptable environmental and social goals*.  _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan move into banking
> 
> 
> The Sussexes, who experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand in the US, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:
> _She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: "Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?",' adding the couple were introduced to Ethic by friends. It is not yet known how much they invested 'earlier this year' or if they are both being paid a salary for their 'impact partner' roles.
> 
> Ethic, which was set up by Briton Jay Lipman, a red-haired Prince Harry lookalike from London now settled in the US having worked for Deutsche Bank, claims to only invest in businesses that meet its 'social responsibility criteria', including on racial justice, climate change and workplace standards such as gender equality and fair pay.
> 
> His co-founders are Australians Doug Scott and Johny Mair, who worked for banks investing in gas and oil amongst other things before they formed Ethic in 2015. _


So a company named* Ethic *has hired a couple who are completely devoid of ethics? Maybe they should change their name to *Ironic  *


----------



## Lodpah

What is an Impact? That is stupid. Every foundation or most of the honest ones create something to make an impact. Such pretentiousness. I know where my donations go abs it’s not filled with stupid words. Feed the poor, donate to animal rights, missions, etc.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> Like this one?



He only plays A List shows. I doubt he would want to be involved in such fcukery.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Does it mean they are getting their own private jet?
> View attachment 5220980


Oh crap .. so, they are trying to be an ESG Asset Manager .. vis-a-vis, providing 'insight' to Investors in regards to those "sustainable" and "agreeable" companies to invest in?????  That means that they will have to hire some very expensive IM's that know the market and ESG categories very well .. and there are a TON of ESG categories now, both Domestically, European and Asia/Pacific!  If anyone invests with them then, they are NUTS!!  However, given their 'supposed' friendship with the CEO of Salesforce, he may have a factor in this and talk-up other potential investors to invest in their crap!


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Oh crap .. so, they are trying to be an ESG Asset Manager .. vis-a-vis, providing 'insight' to Investors in regards to those "sustainable" and "agreeable" companies to invest in?????  That means that they will have to hire some very expensive IM's that know the market and ESG categories very well .. and there are a TON of ESG categories now, both Domestically, European and Asia/Pacific!  If anyone invests with them then, they are NUTS!!  However, given their 'supposed' friendship with the CEO of Salesforce, he may have a factor in this and talk-up other potential investors to invest in their crap!


Benioff is friends with these self-important whining grifters? I had not heard that. Once again, it's who you know...


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Johnny!! I'm old enough to know Eugene Levy is the funniest member of that family despite his son's current popularity.


Completely agree.  SCTV anyone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> So a company named* Ethic *has hired a couple who are completely devoid of ethics? Maybe they should change their name to *Ironic  *


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie has wanted to do this for years, according to MM.
> 
> _The Sussexes, who *experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand* in the US after quitting the Royal Family for independence and to earn their own money, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager pumping money into companies with what they deem *acceptable environmental and social goals*.  _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan move into banking
> 
> 
> The Sussexes, who experts believe are well on the way to building a $1billion brand in the US, have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, a New York-based fintech asset manager.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:
> _She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: "Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?",' adding the couple were introduced to Ethic by friends. It is not yet known how much they invested 'earlier this year' or if they are both being paid a salary for their 'impact partner' roles.
> 
> Ethic, which was set up by Briton Jay Lipman, a red-haired Prince Harry lookalike from London now settled in the US having worked for Deutsche Bank, claims to only invest in businesses that meet its 'social responsibility criteria', including on racial justice, climate change and workplace standards such as gender equality and fair pay.
> 
> His co-founders are Australians Doug Scott and Johny Mair, who worked for banks investing in gas and oil amongst other things before they formed Ethic in 2015. _


Hmmmmm .. I will have to look up this FinTech company ETHIC.  Unfortunately, there are tons of new 'fintech' companies nowadays (alas - I'm in a start-up FinTech company myself), who are passing themselves off as "experts" in the ESG investment strategies!  Hell, just trying to get a sense of the NUMEROUS amount of ESG categories .. and worse .. how each ESG Provider ranks them?!?! .. you know how much time I've spent with just one of our Vendors (a very large one) who handles the largest number of ESG categories in the world?!?!! .. I'm still trying to sort out their categorization process and it is NOT EASY! 

.. and HA .. setup by a former Deutsche Bank person who only invests in "socially responsible" companies .. sorry, I have to have a BIG laugh at that given the billions of dollars Deutsche has had to pay in the past few years for fraud!


----------



## Norm.Core

Until their titles are taken away from them, the diabolical duo will continue to get hired by these big-bucks companies. They don’t have anything else to offer except their being a part of the BRF and they’re not even working royals. So frustrating... especially after all the talking-sh*t they’ve done since they’ve left.


----------



## csshopper

Ethics and Sussex do not belong in the same sentence unless the statement read "negative impact partner."


----------



## Chanbal

Is there anyone here with connections to the Palace? QE and Charles need a copy of this survey.


----------



## csshopper

le_junkie said:


> Until their titles are taken away from them, the diabolical duo will continue to get hired by these big-bucks companies. They don’t have anything else to offer except their being a part of the BRF and they’re not even working royals. So frustrating... especially after all the talking-sh*t they’ve done since they’ve left.


The thought of this is depressing, but I think she forever more could use "formerly known as the Duchess of Sussex." Unless there is some way to prevent her from doing so?  She doesn't give a rip about Royal Family protocol.


----------



## bag-mania

I can't believe it took seven people to write that measly six paragraph story for the _New York Times. _How far that organization has fallen. 

Meghan is so f*cking phony. These quotes are hard to read without gagging.

Harry and Meghan can make E.S.G. investing part of pop culture in a way that, say, BlackRock’s Larry Fink can’t. “From the world I come from, you don’t talk about investing, right?” Meghan told DealBook in a joint interview with Harry. “You don’t have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.”

“My husband has been saying for years, ‘Gosh, don’t you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like _this_, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?’” Meghan said. They were introduced to Ethic by friends, she said.









						Harry and Meghan Get into Finance (Published 2021)
					

The royal couple’s latest business partnership is all about sustainable investing.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> What are the odds that this christening takes place on the day of the party, and partly to remember Diana by?



Maybe, but I don't think there will be a christening anywhere. They would have to show that there actually is a Lilibet! Unless they just show photos of Harry and Meghan scooting out of the Escalade while clutching a bundled up blanket.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Maybe, but I don't think there will be a christening anywhere. They would have to show that there actually is a Lilibet! Unless they just show photos of Harry and Meghan scooting out of the Escalade while clutching a bundled up blanket.


I'm sure Lilibet exists, but more and more I believe the real reason we haven't seen her or Archie is that MM knows they will be compared unfavorably to their cousins. She doesn't give a sh*t about their privacy.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure Lilibet exists, but more and more I believe the real reason we haven't seen her or Archie is that MM knows they will be compared unfavorably to their cousins. She doesn't give a sh*t about their privacy.


it would be pretty hard for any child to be cuter than Charlotte.  and I don't think they would be able to use racism as an excuse if her kids aren't as adorable....I imagine they will be fair skinned


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure Lilibet exists, but more and more I believe the real reason we haven't seen her or Archie is that MM knows they will be compared unfavorably to their cousins. She doesn't give a sh*t about their privacy.



Plus any positive press attention going to the cute child would be perceived as stealing attention away from herself by her narcissist mother.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Plus any positive press attention going to the cute child would be perceived as stealing attention away from herself by her narcissist mother.


I don't know...I think if they were really cute she would milk it for all she could. Lilibet is now at what is generally a very cute age for babies. I'm surprised we haven't seen a big reveal on the cover of People. Kind of a red flag in my mind. And keep in mind, the RF has not been above this in the past. Harry was on the cover of People when he was a tiny baby. And check outt this headline - the drama never ends it seems:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan can make E.S.G. investing part of pop culture in a way that, say, BlackRock’s Larry Fink can’t. “From the world I come from, you don’t talk about investing, right?” Meghan told DealBook in a joint interview with Harry. “You don’t have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.”



Poor Jenny from the block.


----------



## gracekelly

Gosh I think this new venture is incredible for the two whiz kids! It makes their going to jail happening a whole lot sooner.  Hooking up with this company, is proving how sleazy they are.  They were brought on board to lure unsuspecting noobs to a company of middlemen that will take a cut for sending your money on for you.  I think if you dig hard enough, you will find some shady characters funding this.  It may take a few years, but these two will be caught up in a scam that will require substantial legal fees to get them extricated.  JSMH over a guy who was moaning that Daddy stopped his allowance.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


>



Aww, thanks @Chanbal I'm honored that my meager ramblings are welcome among the amazing and endless witticisms of the talented contributors to this thread. Cheers to all of you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Gosh I think this new venture is incredible for the two whiz kids! It makes their going to jail happening a whole lot sooner.  Hooking up with this company, is proving how sleazy they are.  They were brought on board to lure unsuspecting noobs to a company of middlemen that will take a cut for sending your money on for you.  I think if you dig hard enough, you will find some shady characters funding this.  It may take a few years, but these two will be caught up in a scam that will require substantial legal fees to get them extricated.  JSMH over a guy who was moaning that Daddy stopped his allowance.


I don't know about jail, but certainly there is a strong possibility of further embarrassment for the RF with these two.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan can make E.S.G. investing part of pop culture in a way that, say, BlackRock’s Larry Fink can’t. “*From the world I come from*, you don’t talk about investing, right?” Meghan told DealBook in a joint interview with Harry. “You don’t have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.”
> 
> “*My husband has been saying for years*, ‘Gosh, don’t you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like _this_, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?’” Meghan said. They were introduced to Ethic by friends, she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Get into Finance (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> The royal couple’s latest business partnership is all about sustainable investing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Which world is she now claiming to come from? The Markle-Ragland world or the Hollywood world or ...
She is trying to make it sound like he has been an investment guru for ages.
All part of rewriting history!


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Harry and Meghan can make E.S.G. investing part of pop culture in a way that, say, BlackRock’s Larry Fink can’t. “From the world I come from, you don’t talk about investing, right?” Meghan told DealBook in a joint interview with Harry. “You don’t have the luxury to invest. *That sounds so fancy.”*



Fancy from Dilbert's perspective...


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> Fancy from Dilbert's perspective...
> 
> View attachment 5221452



That strip couldn’t be more appropriate.


----------



## Lodpah

Let’s all take an intermission and go buy a bag. I’m thinking of a Goyard right now.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Which world is she now claiming to come from? The Markle-Ragland world or the Hollywood world or ...
> She is trying to make it sound like he has been an investment guru for ages.
> All part of rewriting history!



I interpreted it as she was trying to make it sound like she was too busy just trying to pay her rent and get by in life to worry about fancy stuff like investing. She is trying to connect with the common folk.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I don't know...I think if they were really cute she would milk it for all she could. Lilibet is now at what is generally a very cute age for babies. I'm surprised we haven't seen a big reveal on the cover of People. Kind of a red flag in my mind. And keep in mind, the RF has not been above this in the past. Harry was on the cover of People when he was a tiny baby. And check outt this headline - the drama never ends it seems:
> 
> View attachment 5221361



Meghan can’t do a cover like that. In the rare photos of her holding Archie, she always looks totally awkward. To do a good mother/child photo you have to be able to look comfortable with your offspring.


----------



## Chanbal

One more confirmation of what we already know by following this thread…










						Meghan Markle's estranged brother claims she 'walked all over first husband'
					

Big Brother VIP star Thomas Markle Jnr has insisted his sister Meghan Markle's past relationships have ended in disaster and it's only a matter of time before Prince Harry gets the boot




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Let’s all take an intermission and go buy a bag. I’m thinking of a Goyard right now.


Which one? I may be in the market for an Artois tote in a few months.


----------



## marietouchet

Ignore stuff about fillers , look at pants, same bell bottom look as MM ie shoes are covered by voluminous pant legs
VB pants are tighter around thigh than MM’s , less of the PJ effect
BUT the VB pants still look bad when seen in a full length shot, tailors would say they break poorly
i don’t like these pants on either lady

I liked Kate’s slim leg purple pants suit, a few days back

i should repost in the MM fashion thread LOL 


Victoria Beckham leaves fans asking 'what's happened to your face?'








						Victoria Beckham leaves fans asking 'what's happened to your face?'
					

Victoria Beckham, 47, made a typically glamorous appearance on Good Morning America on Tuesday however viewers were taken aback by the former Spice Girl's fuller lips.




					mol.im


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> Which one? I may be in the market for an Artois tote in a few months.


I’m getting the MM Artois Black.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I’m getting the MM Artois Black.


Same one I'm considering. I don't live near a store. I'd like to see one in person before I buy though.


----------



## needlv

Lodpah said:


> Let’s all take an intermission and go buy a bag. I’m thinking of a Goyard right now.



Has Valextra been markled?  I admit I can’t even look at the Lady Dior right now…


----------



## rose60610

As soon as I read "Ethic", I had a belly laugh. M&H's "ethics"?  You mean, throwing the BRF under the bus ethics? Whining about your life as part of the BRF? Lying profusely? If those are the "ethics" of Ethic, I'll take a pass, thanks. I think all this "social responsibility" investing is a crock of BS. Bottom line, you need returns. In a good market almost EVERYTHING goes up, so you can't credit a holier-than-thou supposed "ethical" roster of stocks. And you're going to say with a straight face that every company that Ethic deals with is ethical? Are all the depositors "ethical"??? Guess what, if somebody is a gazzilioniare scumbag, do you really think Ethic is going to turn that person away? Give me an effing break. Sounds like a money laundering scam to me.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> Has Valextra been markled?  I admit I can’t even look at the Lady Dior right now…


Yep!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the 6s made the cover of In Touch.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> As soon as I read "Ethic", I had a belly laugh. M&H's "ethics"?  You mean, throwing the BRF under the bus ethics? Whining about your life as part of the BRF? Lying profusely? If those are the "ethics" of Ethic, I'll take a pass, thanks. I think all this "social responsibility" investing is a crock of BS. Bottom line, you need returns. In a good market almost EVERYTHING goes up, so you can't credit a holier-than-thou supposed "ethical" roster of stocks. And you're going to say with a straight face that every company that Ethic deals with is ethical? Are all the depositors "ethical"??? Guess what, if somebody is a gazzilioniare scumbag, do you really think Ethic is going to turn that person away? Give me an effing break. Sounds like a money laundering scam to me.


One more about ethics to add to your list.


----------



## needlv

Huh… I wonder if Ethic is going to invest in the BetterUp IPO…?

This is so dodgy.


----------



## rose60610

Hmmm. ok.  Let's talk about "investing". With ethics. I live in Chicago. You may have heard we have somewhat of a crime problem. Illinois' most wealthy resident (worth about 25-30 billion) has already donated billions to various causes. 

After he threatened to move his company out of Illinois due to crime, he was criticized by both our Governor (who is a billionaire himself) and Mayor for not donating "enough" money to combat crime and violence. 

My point is, if H&M are into ethical money management, how much are THEY contributing to combat crime and violence? How much are they encouraging others to donate to combat crime? Or homelessness, for that matter, in CA? Are THEY getting criticized? Or is it "more ethical" to ignore crime (easy to do when you have a security detail and live in a 19 bathroom house) so you don't have to talk about it? 

Since WHEN is it up to private citizens to protect everyone else from murder, car jackings, other crimes and violence?  

And just what does make ETHICS ethical, anyway? Asking for a friend...


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok. So guess who didn't know Megalodon was a monster truck (but isn't it also some prehistoric shark thing?). But also...Devastator is pretty fitting as well.


I was like have  you not watched the episode of Dino Dana where they hunt the megalodon- it’s great  
Then I remembered most people don’t watch children’s shows if they have a choice. 


bag-mania said:


> I can't believe it took seven people to write that measly six paragraph story for the _New York Times. _How far that organization has fallen.
> 
> Meghan is so f*cking phony. These quotes are hard to read without gagging.
> 
> Harry and Meghan can make E.S.G. investing part of pop culture in a way that, say, BlackRock’s Larry Fink can’t. “From the world I come from, you don’t talk about investing, right?” Meghan told DealBook in a joint interview with Harry. “You don’t have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.”
> 
> “My husband has been saying for years, ‘Gosh, don’t you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like _this_, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?’” Meghan said. They were introduced to Ethic by friends, she said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Get into Finance (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> The royal couple’s latest business partnership is all about sustainable investing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


‘where she’s from’ - does she mean Santa Barbara, Toronto or LA? Hicksville clearly.
I thought the family (she never had) had quite a lot of experience in investing.
Tom Sr invested in a failed jewellers, Doria (I think) invested in a failed shop, and of course Tom again invested in M’s expensive education….

They are making a ton of money with no experience with a company no one has heard of and YOU can too…. honestly this sounds like a scam & as @CarryOn2020 rightly pointed out, this wouldn’t be the first time for a Windsor.

that’s a good catch on 6 people writing it- I assume to muddy the waters of responsibility when they get sued. 

Also, I’m not a genius investor but don’t most large, pretty reputable firms offer some form of sustainable investment package today? It’s not something you have to go to the fringes to get anymore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Huh… I wonder if Ethic is going to invest in the BetterUp IPO…?
> 
> This is so dodgy.




I agree with you. Imo Eventually we will find out that the BetterUp people (software based company) paired up with the Ethic people and H&M were included in the deal. Let’s hope the SEC is paying attention. We do not need another ponzi scheme or another BRF money scandal [realistically, we should expect several more].

IMO choosing to use the singular form, ethic, will cause their downfall. Was the plural form taken?  Does the company have only 1 ethic?  Usually odd words crater the company, people will mispronounce and misspell it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. I will have to look up this FinTech company ETHIC.  Unfortunately, there are tons of new 'fintech' companies nowadays (alas - I'm in a start-up FinTech company myself), who are passing themselves off as "experts" in the ESG investment strategies!  Hell, just trying to get a sense of the NUMEROUS amount of ESG categories .. and worse .. how each ESG Provider ranks them?!?! .. you know how much time I've spent with just one of our Vendors (a very large one) who handles the largest number of ESG categories in the world?!?!! .. I'm still trying to sort out their categorization process and it is NOT EASY!
> 
> .. and HA .. setup by a former Deutsche Bank person who only invests in "socially responsible" companies .. sorry, I have to have a BIG laugh at that given the billions of dollars Deutsche has had to pay in the past few years for fraud!



To me, this seems to be the path many start-ups follow.  Theranos is a good example of one that went wrong. Unreal that these so-called ‘smart’ people support this nonsense. On the other hand, this is exactly what people with too much money easily get involved with.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I interpreted it as she was trying to make it sound like she was too busy just trying to pay her rent and get by in life to worry about fancy stuff like investing. She is trying to connect with the common folk.


Keyword is "trying". Narcs usually consider themselves above the common folk.


----------



## carmen56

I would think that for any company or business, getting involved with M and H would be the kiss of death.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more confirmation of what we already know by following this thread…
> View attachment 5221523
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's estranged brother claims she 'walked all over first husband'
> 
> 
> Big Brother VIP star Thomas Markle Jnr has insisted his sister Meghan Markle's past relationships have ended in disaster and it's only a matter of time before Prince Harry gets the boot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



I still think the Markles talk too much, but I don't have a single doubt this is true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Victoria Beckham leaves fans asking 'what's happened to your face?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham leaves fans asking 'what's happened to your face?'
> 
> 
> Victoria Beckham, 47, made a typically glamorous appearance on Good Morning America on Tuesday however viewers were taken aback by the former Spice Girl's fuller lips.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im



It's her new lipgloss!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more about ethics to add to your list.




Correction: the union you lied about having joined.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> One more about ethics to add to your list.



Did she say "i was such a fraud"? 
Was? Still are luv!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Does it mean they are getting their own private jet?
> View attachment 5220980


This should be retitled to "Harry and Meghan Want to Get Your Money".  Period.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Like this one?



That's not fair!  Damian Lewis has hair!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie has wanted to do this for years, according to MM.
> ETA:
> _She added: 'My husband has been saying for years: *"Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?",' *adding the couple were introduced to Ethic by friends. It is not yet known how much they invested 'earlier this year' or if they are both being paid a salary for their 'impact partner' roles._


I also always speak to my DH like I'm from the Brady Bunch: "Gosh, dear, don't you wish Haz and Been had thought of this sooner?  Gee whiz!"

And he's been saying it "for years"?  To who?  Raptor?  The 5 years you've known him total??


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> What is an Impact? That is stupid. Every foundation or most of the honest ones create something to make an impact. Such pretentiousness. I know where my donations go abs it’s not filled with stupid words. Feed the poor, donate to animal rights, missions, etc.


I believe that's one of the few words Harry can spell.  He's also "Chief *Impact* Officer" of Buttercup IIRC.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> One more about ethics to add to your list.



Ha ha, we call those people Scabs. Those who cross the picket line or work against the Union. Meghan is a scab in union terms. She wanted union jobs but was not a union member.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Ha ha, we call those people Scabs. Those who cross the picket line or work against the Union. Meghan is a scab in union terms. She wanted union jobs but was not a union member.


That's the video where she says, "I was such a fraud".  I beg to differ on the "was" part as IMO, it should be "am".


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> I also always speak to my DH like I'm from the Brady Bunch: "Gosh, dear, don't you wish Haz and Been had thought of this sooner?  Gee whiz!"
> 
> And he's been saying it "for years"?  To who?  Raptor?  The 5 years you've known him total??



it does sound like the wording you would hear in those dodgy pyramid schemes….


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree with you. Imo Eventually we will find out that the BetterUp people (software based company) paired up with the Ethic people and H&M were included in the deal. Let’s hope the SEC is paying attention. We do not need another ponzi scheme or another BRF money scandal [realistically, we should expect several more].
> 
> IMO choosing to use the singular form, ethic, will cause their downfall. Was the plural form taken?  Does the company have only 1 ethic?  Usually odd words crater the company, people will mispronounce and misspell it.


I was thinking this whole thing sounds like a fraud case waiting to happen.


----------



## drifter

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10086147/Inside-Harry-Meghans-hippy-investment-firm.html
Based on the article, the founder seems to have many failed business ventures.
I must say, she makes her husband and herself sound rather unintelligent: 'From the world I come from, you don't talk about investing, right? You don't have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.'  'My husband has been saying for years: 'Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?' 
I mean, my grandparents were basically illiterate and penniless when they started out but they still managed to invest.  Also, ESG funds have existed for so long, how can these 2 people be so clueless?!


----------



## Annawakes

_From the article posted above, a quote:

“Be it through the investment of time (as with mentoring), investment in community (as with volunteering), or the investment of funds (for those who have the means to), our choices-of how and where we put our energy-define us as a global community.'”_

Mentoring…
Volunteering…
Donating…

That’s all they EVER talk about. Talk talk talk. No actions!!!!! Baking a cake and using other people’s children to promote your own “book” does NOT count.

It is amazing that in today’s world people can make $$$$ by holding themselves out as being “impactful” without actually doing anything.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Again, I can't keep up with this thread but did anyone hear/see Sharon Osborne on Megyn Kelly yesterday? She was talking about her firing and she said that the reason she was fired was because the Oprah interview that was the big coup for CBS that as basically supposed to bring them back from the dead, didn't live up to their expectations so basically, the dust up with her coworker was designed to rev up the interest. She also said Oprah would have been preprepped to know EXACTLy what MM was going to say even regarding the kid's skin color. She pointed out that BOTH Oprah and MM were actresses and the whole interview was simply acting. I didn't hear the whole thing but that's what I did hear.


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> _From the article posted above, a quote:
> 
> “Be it through the investment of time (as with mentoring), investment in community (as with volunteering), or the investment of funds (for those who have the means to), our choices-of how and where we put our energy-define us as a global community.'”_
> 
> Mentoring…
> Volunteering…
> Donating…
> 
> That’s all they EVER talk about. Talk talk talk. No actions!!!!! Baking a cake and using other people’s children to promote your own “book” does NOT count.
> 
> It is amazing that in today’s world people can make $$$$ by holding themselves out as being “impactful” without actually doing anything.


On the subject of making $$$$$$$$$$$ and being woke … aren’t those things sorta contradictory these days ? 
They are making money preaching wokeness for others , and maybe the good causes could better be served using the funds spent on 6 ?
Remember the AOC dress , TAX THE RICH ?


----------



## marietouchet

Allisonfaye said:


> Again, I can't keep up with this thread but did anyone hear/see Sharon Osborne on Megyn Kelly yesterday? She was talking about her firing and she said that the reason she was fired was because the Oprah interview that was the big coup for CBS that as basically supposed to bring them back from the dead, didn't live up to their expectations so basically, the dust up with her coworker was designed to rev up the interest. She also said Oprah would have been preprepped to know EXACTLy what MM was going to say even regarding the kid's skin color. She pointed out that BOTH Oprah and MM were actresses and the whole interview was simply acting. I didn't hear the whole thing but that's what I did hear.


Agree, Oprah is a good interviewer, she is like a lawyer, she knows what your answer is going to be before she asks the question, her staffers do Research


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> _From the article posted above, a quote:
> 
> “Be it through the investment of time (as with mentoring), investment in community (as with volunteering), or the investment of funds (for those who have the means to), our choices-of how and where we put our energy-define us as a global community.'”_
> 
> Mentoring…
> Volunteering…
> Donating…
> 
> That’s all they EVER talk about. Talk talk talk. No actions!!!!! Baking a cake and using other people’s children to promote your own “book” does NOT count.
> 
> It is amazing that in today’s world people can make $$$$ by holding themselves out as being “impactful” without actually doing anything.



IMO the BRF has always been that way. Lots of ‘openings’, premiers, honors, etc. Nothing really substantive. Maybe Anne and Sophie actually do real work, not just a 10 min appearance or zoom call.

@_all-who-are-frustrated-with-the- pace -of -this -thread_ and _H&M’s nonsense_ — something I have learned.  Try beginning with the most recent page [begin with the end]. Skim the entries. You’ll be caught up. Usually, there is not much _action_ from H&M, so most of the entries are many of us fussing about the despicable duo.


@Allisonfaye  great comment. Agree, Sharon was treated horribly.  Thanks for posting.


----------



## rose60610

Allisonfaye said:


> Again, I can't keep up with this thread but did anyone hear/see Sharon Osborne on Megyn Kelly yesterday? She was talking about her firing and she said that the reason she was fired was because the Oprah interview that was the big coup for CBS that as basically supposed to bring them back from the dead, didn't live up to their expectations so basically, the dust up with her coworker was designed to rev up the interest. She also said Oprah would have been preprepped to know EXACTLy what MM was going to say even regarding the kid's skin color. She pointed out that BOTH Oprah and MM were actresses and the whole interview was simply acting. I didn't hear the whole thing but that's what I did hear.



Welcome back! You always have great observations and input! Yes, this thread moves fast. But it's consistent as the main plots are: greed, hypocrisy, ill-fitting clothes and word salad nothings. Oh, and inviting yourself (barging in) to events.


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> She pointed out that BOTH Oprah and MM were actresses and the whole interview was simply acting.



I agree with Sharon that the whole interview was carefully planned in advance. Saying they are both actresses is a bit of a stretch. Only one of them is an Academy award nominee, and it sure isn’t Meghan. She could only wish to have the acting career Oprah had and being in The Color Purple was only a side job for Oprah.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> One more confirmation of what we already know by following this thread…
> View attachment 5221523
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's estranged brother claims she 'walked all over first husband'
> 
> 
> Big Brother VIP star Thomas Markle Jnr has insisted his sister Meghan Markle's past relationships have ended in disaster and it's only a matter of time before Prince Harry gets the boot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


She seems to want to be like Angelina Jolie in some respects so maybe H will end up being slandered as Brad was - called an unfit father, etc.  It would not surprise me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> She seems to want to be like Angelina Jolie in some respects so maybe H will end up being slandered as Brad was - called an unfit father, etc.  It would not surprise me.



She will claim Harry mentally abused her. Narcissists always portray themselves as blameless in all things and accuse others of doing what they themselves do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> She seems to want to be like Angelina Jolie in some respects so maybe H will end up being slandered as Brad was - called an unfit father, etc.  It would not surprise me.



Me neither. I'd just hope the minute she tried to pull that sh*t the BRF would destroy her for good by releasing all her skeletons I'm sure they've helped to bury.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the BRF has always been that way. Lots of ‘openings’, premiers, honors, etc. Nothing really substantive. Maybe Anne and Sophie actually do real work, not just a 10 min appearance or zoom call.
> 
> @_all-who-are-frustrated-with-the- pace -of -this -thread_ and _H&M’s nonsense_ — something I have learned.  Try beginning with the most recent page [begin with the end]. Skim the entries. You’ll be caught up. Usually, there is not much _action_ from H&M, so most of the entries are many of us fussing about the despicable duo.
> 
> 
> @Allisonfaye  great comment. Agree, Sharon was treated horribly.  Thanks for posting.


Oh, we aren't so much  
We are more


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> On the subject of making $$$$$$$$$$$ and being woke … aren’t those things sorta contradictory these days ?
> They are making money preaching wokeness for others , and maybe the good causes could better be served using the funds spent on 6 ?
> Remember the AOC dress , TAX THE RICH ?


Been thinking a lot about this ...

There used to be an American merit based philosophy  - work hard and you will succeed -  it is not illegal/immoral to make money. For ex, do your homework and find out about tax deductions, and use them, within the limits of the law. Buy the piece of work machinery that will permit a better depreciation schedule -allowing you to pay lower taxes, maybe no tax...

Time are changing, tax deductions - that allow you to pay zero tax are evil/criminal ...

I keep thinking of 6 saying - I have to provide for MY family - that is totally in keeping with the merit based philosophy but it is SO not woke

Ex the Valentino white dress. May have been loaned not purchased, lets assume. But there were costs involved with getting the loan - salary for the PA that arranged it, shipping costs.  Trust me, 6 is taking a tax deduction for the expenses, maybe if he finds enough deductions he will pay zero tax ???


----------



## Allisonfaye

marietouchet said:


> Been thinking a lot about this ...
> 
> There used to be an American merit based philosophy  - work hard and you will succeed -  it is not illegal/immoral to make money. For ex, do your homework and find out about tax deductions, and use them, within the limits of the law. Buy the piece of work machinery that will permit a better depreciation schedule -allowing you to pay lower taxes, maybe no tax...
> 
> Time are changing, tax deductions - that allow you to pay zero tax are evil/criminal ...
> 
> I keep thinking of 6 saying - I have to provide for MY family - that is totally in keeping with the merit based philosophy but it is SO not woke
> 
> Ex the Valentino white dress. May have been loaned not purchased, lets assume. But there were costs involved with getting the loan - salary for the PA that arranged it, shipping costs.  Trust me, 6 is taking a tax deduction for the expenses, maybe if he finds enough deductions he will pay zero tax ???



Yet 61% in this country paid zero federal tax last year. In a normal year, it's 45%. Even in the much ballyhooed Europe, they all pay something.


----------



## LittleStar88

I think they copied George (Seinfeld reference for those who don't know) by creating Archwell ...


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I think they copied George (Seinfeld reference for those who don't know) by creating Archwell ...
> 
> View attachment 5221852


I don't get this but love George


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't get this but love George



In one episode George gave a donation to a fake charity as a gift. 









						The Human Fund - Money for People - FestivusWeb.com
					

The Human Fund The Human Fund is a fake charity used used by George Costanza. After getting a similar gift from his friend Tim Whatley, George gives out cards to his co-workers stating that a donation had been made to a charity called The Human Fund, with the slogan, Money For People.



					festivusweb.com


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Bring the popcorn because we are not done with this!
> View attachment 5220559
> 
> _*The Duke and Duchess of Sussxes’s daughter, Lilibet, will not be christened in the UK, according to royal sources.*
> It had been suggested the couple would return to Britain to have the four-month-old baptised at Windsor Castle like their son Archie, two. However, a palace insider said: “There will not be a christening in the UK. It is not happening.”
> Another source suggested it was “highly unlikely”.
> *It comes after a spokeswoman for Harry and Meghan confirmed on Sunday that they would not be flying into Britain to attend a party to honour Diana, Princess of Wales.*
> Friends of the late Princess, including Sir Elton John, are said to be attending the event for 100 guests at Kensington Palace with the Duke of Cambridge. It is intended to thank donors who helped fund the statue of Diana unveiled in the summer on what would have been her 60th birthday._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



OMG, their spin is just


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> OMG, their spin is just


I look forward to the day when no one is interested
I think the attention is just as alluring to her as the $


----------



## Chanbal

drifter said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10086147/Inside-Harry-Meghans-hippy-investment-firm.html
> '*From the world I come from, you don't talk about investing, right? You don't have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.' * '*My husband has been saying for years: 'Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?'*
> I mean, my grandparents were basically illiterate and penniless when they started out but they still managed to invest.  Also, ESG funds have existed for so long, how can these 2 people be so clueless?!


This sounds like they are appealing to the beginner/small investor to park his/her extra money in their "ethical" fund, so that some of their values (private jets?) can be funded. Disgusting! 

According to the DM article, this is the company's Chief Smile Officer:



I wonder if this is a "bring your family to work day" photo for the Chief Impact Officer:


----------



## Chanbal

This is how their new venture is seen in Germany: "_Harry and Meghan - They want to make money with these hippies now_"


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Has Valextra been markled?  I admit I can’t even look at the Lady Dior right now…



My sister got my mother's Lady Dior, I'm not mad


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I was thinking this whole thing sounds like a fraud case waiting to happen.


Yes!!  Seems so shady.  Calling Jen Shah from RHOSLC!


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Again, I can't keep up with this thread but did anyone hear/see Sharon Osborne on Megyn Kelly yesterday? She was talking about her firing and she said that the reason she was fired was because the Oprah interview that was the big coup for CBS that as basically supposed to bring them back from the dead, didn't live up to their expectations so basically, the dust up with her coworker was designed to rev up the interest. She also said Oprah would have been preprepped to know EXACTLy what MM was going to say even regarding the kid's skin color. She pointed out that BOTH Oprah and MM were actresses and the whole interview was simply acting. I didn't hear the whole thing but that's what I did hear.


Love her or hate her, Sharon Osbourne doesn't mince words.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I look forward to the day when no one is interested
> I think the attention is just as alluring to her as the $



I don't think we're helping in that case, it's just they are the biggest comedy of errors


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I don't think we're helping in that case, it's just they are the biggest comedy of errors


I know....It's kinda like people slowing down to look at an accident.....


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> I was thinking this whole thing sounds like a fraud case waiting to happen.





purseinsanity said:


> Yes!!  Seems so shady.  Calling Jen Shah from RHOSLC!




I think in this particular case, ESG investment stands for "Extremely Shady Grift".


----------



## Chanbal

I have the same question.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I have the same question.




Was it a joke to use her $5 briefcase girl video to promote their news? Because it looks like they're trolling her and not promoting whatever it is they are expecting her to do.


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> That's not fair!  Damian Lewis has hair!


And has talent. And is hot (imo). I will still watch Billions  but .

And since I am off-topic, those pics of VB--wtf? She's known for not smiling and now she smiles? With those lips? Sheesh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Was it a joke to use her $5 briefcase girl video to promote their news? Because it looks like they're trolling her and not promoting whatever it is they are expecting her to do.



I think that's what Harry's Grey Suit added, not the investment company.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> And he's been saying it "for years"? To who? Raptor? The 5 years you've known him total??


Exactly. She's so full of it.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> She seems to want to be like Angelina Jolie in some respects so maybe H will end up being slandered as Brad was - called an unfit father, etc.  It would not surprise me.


Actually I could see it going the other way.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think that's what Harry's Grey Suit added, not the investment company.



Ahhh - I did not notice that. Thanks for clarifying! How hilarious if it was the organization who had posted that video


----------



## lanasyogamama

These companies are just paying H and M a few bucks and giving them a fancy title to get some publicity.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> I will still watch Billions but .


The show won't be the same without him.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Exactly. She's so full of it.


I laughed out loud when I read that comment of hers.  How ridiculous! They were married in 2018 and she knew him for 5 minutes before.


----------



## gracekelly

Was the plan for this investment scheme info to knock earthshot off the news pages?  As I recall, one of their hires from last year was someone with connections at the NY Times and must account for the story appearing there.


----------



## bag-mania

Is the average person going to read about their investment partnership? We look for stories about them but I can’t imagine most will find it interesting enough to click on it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Is the average person going to read about their investment partnership? We look for stories about them but I can’t imagine most will find it interesting enough to click on it.


The average person will glance at the story and the take home will not be the reality of the situation.  Most people will think that the Sussex are actually providing advice and have an active part.  They will not read the comments to discover that others have sussed out what is really going on and had no problem saying so.  The average person has not yet comprehended that the Sussex are selling the name and have nothing to offer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Is the average person going to read about their investment partnership? *We look for stories about them *but I can’t imagine most will find it interesting enough to click on it.



Speaking for myself, No, I do not look for any stories about H&M. 
They continuously show up on the sites where I go.  That’s the real problem with them — it is too much, much too much.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking for myself, No, I do not look for any stories about H&M.
> They continuously show up on the sites where I go.  That’s the real problem with them — it is too much, much too much.


Exactly.  They thrust themselves at us continuously.  They are on news feeds everyday and you see it whether you want to or not.   Hoping for the overexposure to Markle them.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking for myself, No, I do not look for any stories about H&M.
> They continuously show up on the sites where I go.  That’s the real problem with them — it is too much, much too much.



Really? I find the articles I post from Googling them, which I do for the sole purpose of participating in this thread. You would think they would pop up in my newsfeed all the time because of that but they don’t. That’s good because I don’t want those two showing up unless I’m actively looking for them.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> The average person will glance at the story and the take home will not be the reality of the situation.  Most people will think that the Sussex are actually providing advice and have an active part.  They will not read the comments to discover that others have sussed out what is really going on and had no problem saying so.  The average person has not yet comprehended that the Sussex are selling the name and have nothing to offer.



That is starting to change. H&M have been oversaturating their market. I hope most people are skimming the headlines, seeing it about them, and then keep going without absorbing the nonsense.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Really? I find the articles I post from Googling them, which I do for the sole purpose of participating in this thread. You would think they would pop up in my newsfeed all the time because of that but they don’t. That’s good because I don’t want those two showing up unless I’m actively looking for them.


They pop up in my newsfeed all the time, but mainly from ".pk" (Pakistan) websites like Geo TV and The News International which are gossip and scandal tabloid sites only good for giggles.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> These companies are just paying H and M a few bucks *and giving them a fancy title to get some publicity.*


And we know  that Friar 6 and wife don't care about titles!!! During OW's interview, Friar 6's wife kept repeating that titles are only important because of security. The only reason they are using the UK titles on the company website is to provide some sort of security to all those funds there. So much generosity…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I have the same question.



The comments aren't very flattering.  Look at this tweet:
@Loren017Mary
Oct 12

Replying to 
@hrrysgreysuit
*At the bottom of their website: Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any specialized level of skill or training.*


----------



## Chanbal

Absolutely!


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This sounds like they are appealing to the beginner/small investor to park his/her extra money in their "ethical" fund, so that some of their values (private jets?) can be funded. Disgusting!
> 
> According to the DM article, this is the company's Chief Smile Officer:
> View attachment 5221861
> 
> 
> I wonder if this is a "bring your family to work day" photo for the Chief Impact Officer:
> View attachment 5221876


She’s such . . . even as a single parent I was investing. She acts like only rich people invest . . no Bish MM regular people are the driving or even behind investing. She’s too much.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

I'm still shocked about that at the bottom of their website it states: 
*
Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any specialized level of skill or training.*

An investment company that says on its page that it doesn't guarantee any level of investment skill or training?  
That's like looking up a doctor and at the bottom of the page, it says "Not a real doctor, but play one on the internet".  
Or a lawyer stating, "Trained by Tom Girardi".  WTAF??????


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still shocked about that at the bottom of their website it states:
> *
> Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any specialized level of skill or training.*
> 
> An investment company that says on its page that it doesn't guarantee any level of investment skill or training?
> That's like looking up a doctor and at the bottom of the page, it says "Not a real doctor, but play one on the internet".
> Or a lawyer stating, "Trained by Tom Girardi".  WTAF??????


Invest with us at your own risk.
If you lose every cent, at least you can take comfort that you went bankrupt ethically.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF? Now I will say I haven't seen it repeated anywhere else and this are the kind of gossip rags that make up obvious lies in a way that I wonder how how they are not being sued daily.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? Now I will say I haven't seen it repeated anywhere else and this are the kind of gossip rags that make up obvious lies in a way that I wonder how how they are not being sued daily.



The first thing wrong with this story is that they live too far away for him to be taken to UCLA after finding him unconscious.  He would have been taken someplace local. You don’t take a person in this state 90 miles when you can go 5.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Invest with us at your own risk.
> If you lose every cent, at least you can take comfort that you went bankrupt ethically.


Love how you put this lol!  And very succinctly!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? Now I will say I haven't seen it repeated anywhere else and this are the kind of gossip rags that make up obvious lies in a way that I wonder how how they are not being sued daily.



You are right, I couldn't find this published in other sites. Though, this type of occurrence is sometimes wiped out from the media…

What is suspicious is that the ambulance brought him to Los Angeles. He should have been taken to the nearest hospital. Unless, after being stabilized, the family requested to have him transferred to Ronald Reagan, which is one of the best hospitals in the US. I don't know, but if it is gossip, it is very bad taste gossip.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones worried by the article published in the German magazine, the 3rd comment from a DM article assures that all is well in the House of Montecito.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> For the ones worried by the article published in the German magazine, the 3rd comment from a DM article assures that all is well in the House of Montecito.
> View attachment 5222442


So funny (and ironical) that this stan is called HoneyPotBrenda. Maybe she is a Pooh fan, but to me, HoneyPot is indeed an apt description for Methane and her tactics. 




__





						Honeypots in espionage fiction - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> So funny (and ironical) that this stan is called HoneyPotBrenda. Maybe she is a Pooh fan, but to me, HoneyPot is indeed an apt description for Methane and her tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honeypots in espionage fiction - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



imo MM is no ‘honeypot’. We have plenty of much more appropriate terms for MM.  If Hazzie did attempt this, I feel quite sure the Brits would swoop in and take him to a ‘safe place’.  Maybe this explains why we never seldom see him out in the community.



Chanbal said:


> For the ones worried by the article published in the German magazine, the 3rd comment from a DM article assures that all is well in the House of Montecito.
> View attachment 5222442



The question remains:  how much longer?


----------



## CarryOn2020

“This guy is brilliant! I will look into this!“


----------



## 1LV

drifter said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10086147/Inside-Harry-Meghans-hippy-investment-firm.html
> Based on the article, the founder seems to have many failed business ventures.
> I must say, she makes her husband and herself sound rather unintelligent: 'From the world I come from, you don't talk about investing, right? You don't have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy.'  'My husband has been saying for years: 'Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?'
> I mean, my grandparents were basically illiterate and penniless when they started out but they still managed to invest.  Also, ESG funds have existed for so long, how can these 2 people be so clueless?!


I’m not so sure they’re clueless as much as they’re banking on everyone else being clueless.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> For the ones worried by the article published in the German magazine, the 3rd comment from a DM article assures that all is well in the House of Montecito.
> View attachment 5222442


HoneyPotBrenda. . . Another member of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade!


----------



## Icyjade

So much for being ethical









						Sussexes-backed 'ethical' investment firm has millions in social media
					

The Duchess of Sussex quit Instagram after describing the 'almost unsurvivable' toll of internet trolling but it appears Ethic, where Harry and Meghan are 'impact partners'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? Now I will say I haven't seen it repeated anywhere else and this are the kind of gossip rags that make up obvious lies in a way that I wonder how how they are not being sued daily.



Well since the media reported that “Markle” (I love how they used her last name instead of the undeserved royal title) was the one that found Harry, I guess this news only came out through meghans veneers and the mole over her mouth… but j honestly hope Harry and his kids will be free of markle forever soon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For the ones worried by the article published in the German magazine, the 3rd comment from a DM article assures that all is well in the House of Montecito.
> View attachment 5222442



I thought it was just a crazy stan, but Hollywood's top studios making an Oscar-worthy film has me convinced she must be one of us trolling. You can't be that stupid, can you?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> Well since the media reported that “Markle” (I love how they used her last name instead of the undeserved royal title) was the one that found Harry, I guess this news only came out through meghans veneers and the mole over her mouth… but j honestly hope Harry and his kids will be free of markle forever soon.



Honestly, my first impulse upon reading that was that I just couldn't see her coming home from a party and actively checking on Harry, but what do I know.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? Now I will say I haven't seen it repeated anywhere else and this are the kind of gossip rags that make up obvious lies in a way that I wonder how how they are not being sued daily.



I'd believe it if it was the National Enquirer. They actually have a pretty good track record. Until then, nah. It's disgusting.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, my first impulse upon reading that was that I just couldn't see her coming home from a party and actively checking on Harry, but what do I know.


I thought the same! Meghan would probably come home fuming about how nobody at the party called her Duchess or curtsied to her while she littered the bedroom floor with her bag and outfit and going straight to bed without even checking on her kids since the stay in nannies are watching them at the pool house.

That sounds mean but we’ve seen meghans narcissism in motion the motion she became slightly relevant. So I wouldn’t be surprised if Archie or Diana grow up and wrote a book about her nasty behavior…


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> I'd believe it if it was the National Enquirer. They actually have a pretty good track record. Until then, nah. It's disgusting.


ETA, if it were true TMZ would have been all over it, as they were with the Kobe Bryant crash. They have moles everywhere.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The average person will glance at the story and the take home will not be the reality of the situation.  Most people will think that the Sussex are actually providing advice and have an active part.  They will not read the comments to discover that others have sussed out what is really going on and had no problem saying so.  The average person has not yet comprehended that the Sussex are selling the name and have nothing to offer.


not sure about that....my DH - who doesn't read this thread or follow what's going on with them - thinks they're pretty much like the Kardashians - just seeking attention.  So while I agree most people won't pay much attention, that doesn't mean most people think they're credible


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> For the ones worried by the article published in the German magazine, the 3rd comment from a DM article assures that all is well in the House of Montecito.
> View attachment 5222442



HoneypotBrenda was trolling those comments. She gave it away by referring to “Harry and Meghan: A Love Story” as being one of the decade’s most critically acclaimed films, which even their most devoted stans couldn’t say.


----------



## kemilia

xincinsin said:


> So funny (and ironical) that this stan is called HoneyPotBrenda. Maybe she is a Pooh fan, but to me, HoneyPot is indeed an apt description for Methane and her tactics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honeypots in espionage fiction - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Exactly!


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, my first impulse upon reading that was that I just couldn't see her coming home from a party and actively checking on Harry, but what do I know.


If she was at a party, there would be pics all over because she would have alerted the paps. So I don't believe this story--M at a party and no one was told?--no way. 

And she probably has all the pills and knives hidden if and when she goes out, can't take a chance on H doing something crazy that would put an end to her gravy train.


----------



## CarryOn2020

fwiw:  big wedding in NY this weekend — Were they invited???









						Melinda spends quality time with her bride-to-be daughter Jennifer
					

Melinda Gates was seen accompanying her bride-to-be daughter Jennifer, 25, in New York City Wednesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> So much for being ethical
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes-backed 'ethical' investment firm has millions in social media
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex quit Instagram after describing the 'almost unsurvivable' toll of internet trolling but it appears Ethic, where Harry and Meghan are 'impact partners'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ethic is just the name of the company, they could have chosen Sanctimony or any other name. 

The company is "_managing $1.3billion of investments for around 1,000 wealthy clients_", so the 6s might be able to bring clients like the ones that offer exquisite diamonds…


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> fwiw:  big wedding in NY this weekend — Were they invited???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Melinda spends quality time with her bride-to-be daughter Jennifer
> 
> 
> Melinda Gates was seen accompanying her bride-to-be daughter Jennifer, 25, in New York City Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


why would they be invited?  you're joking, right?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Ethic is just the name of the company, they could have chosen Sanctimony or any other name.
> 
> The company is "_managing $1.3billion of investments for around 1,000 wealthy clients_", so the 6s might be able to bring clients like the ones that offer exquisite diamonds…
> [/QUOT
> 
> LOL
> I thought they were after the lil investors. Ya kno they handle children, [aka the future], so very well


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just spied in passing: another German magazine, not quite as rag-y, claims the troublesome two had a massive fight because Raptor insisted on the grand Windsor christening for the baby (can't bring myself to type out the Queen's stolen nickname somehow) while Harry wanted to give it a rest and not make more demands.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> why would they be invited?  you're joking, right?



not joking - this is their target crowd, right???

from the article:

_*And with billionaire parents, the most wealthy and high-profile guests are expected to attend. *

'One of Jenn's security guards told me the guest list for the event will include a lot of dignitaries,' the neighbor added. 
The guy insisted he didn't know names but *Bill and Melinda are pals with people like Barack *****.* I understand that a request has been made to the town to close the road that goes past the fields so as to give guests ''privacy'' during the ceremony.'_


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> not joking - this is their target crowd, right???
> 
> from the article:
> 
> _*And with billionaire parents, the most wealthy and high-profile guests are expected to attend. *
> 
> 'One of Jenn's security guards told me the guest list for the event will include a lot of dignitaries,' the neighbor added.
> The guy insisted he didn't know names but *Bill and Melinda are pals with people like Barack *****.* I understand that a request has been made to the town to close the road that goes past the fields so as to give guests ''privacy'' during the ceremony.'_


Only in the Hot Mess of Montecito's dreams.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> LOL
> I thought they were after the lil investors. Ya kno they handle children, [aka the future], so very well


This is one of the few areas they will practice inclusion, and the lil investors are welcome imo. The more the merrier...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is one of the few areas they will practice inclusion, and the lil investors are welcome imo. The more the merrier...



It will be fun when H&M and their international (failed?) finance guys meet Mr. Ponzi.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just spied in passing: another German magazine, not quite as rag-y, claims the troublesome two had a massive fight because Raptor insisted on the grand Windsor christening for the baby (can't bring myself to type out the Queen's stolen nickname somehow) while Harry wanted to give it a rest and not make more demands.


There were other reports of a quarrel. May have a grain of truth in it. I can see Methane not being able to accept a denial of her wishes. Maybe she is under the impression that presenting a baby will shield her from boos when she steps foot in the UK (and pigs will fly).


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It will be fun when H&M and their international (failed?) finance guys meet Mr. Ponzi.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The worse type of greed…


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The worse type of greed…




Haaaa, “bankers” rhymes with _____
Let the jokes begin!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This is how their new venture is seen in Germany: "_Harry and Meghan - They want to make money with these hippies now_"



The pictures were deliberately chosen to mirror the pose, right?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Has Doria gone underground? The big question of the day.  *It seems that people from Charles's team have tried to contact her, but did not succeed.*



Thanks for a good laugh. I'll believe this and other imaginary scenarios the despicable duo are trying to promote when..


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just spied in passing: another German magazine, not quite as rag-y, claims the troublesome two had a massive fight because Raptor insisted on the grand Windsor christening for the baby (can't bring myself to type out the Queen's stolen nickname somehow) while Harry wanted to give it a rest and not make more demands.


I think this is believable. She needs to show off the BRF connection to stay relevant, and a Windsor christening would be very helpful to the House of Montecito. Friar 6 is probably tired to be the middle man…


----------



## rose60610

A cut/paste from Bloomberg (apologies if posted before):

Prince Harry, Meghan Join ESG Boom as "Impact Partners" in Fund

With environmental, social and governance investing now part of mainstream finance, regulators have started paying more attention to how well fund managers’ claims of sustainability match their actions. And with about $35 trillion parked in ESG assets, *according to the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance, there’s growing concern that the label is often misused, a practice known as greenwashing.*

“Sustainable investing is certainly *in vogue right now but likely for the wrong reasons,*” said Lisa Sachs, who heads Columbia University’s Center on Sustainable Investment. “We shouldn’t confuse holding a value-aligned portfolio and mitigating exposure to risk with addressing the major and urgent underlying issues.”

Ethic was started in 2015 and says it creates bespoke investments for its customers based on the social and environmental issues they care about the most. Lipman said investors can address society’s biggest challenges through collectively divesting from polluters and companies that perpetuate racial discrimination such as the private prison system.

So it's a way of investing for people who feel guilty about having money (but not guilty enough to donate it all) and whiny piss-ants who inherited a fortune without working for it (who somehow feel qualified to tell people who actually DO work for their money how to invest). People can do whatever they want with their money, but to bring in two famous grifters who sold out their own families to sell your product is rather bizarre. My favorite quote from this article: "...says it creates bespoke investments for its customers based on the social and environmental issues they care about the most".  In other words, take an existing managed money product and carve out the no-no stocks that the customer doesn't want, like maybe tobacco, alcohol, fast food, oil, gambling companies/industries, whatever. Or present a managed money package without XYZ. Big deal. There, "bespoke"!  AKA, marketing to people who are easily controlled/influenced by emotions and celebrities.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> not joking - this is their target crowd, right???
> 
> from the article:
> 
> _*And with billionaire parents, the most wealthy and high-profile guests are expected to attend. *
> 
> 'One of Jenn's security guards told me the guest list for the event will include a lot of dignitaries,' the neighbor added.
> The guy insisted he didn't know names but *Bill and Melinda are pals with people like Barack *****.* I understand that a request has been made to the town to close the road that goes past the fields so as to give guests ''privacy'' during the ceremony.'_


may be their target but hope they're not invited.  they weren't invited to the birthday party.  and they aren't "friends" with the Gates family unless I'm forgetting something


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> A cut/paste from Bloomberg (apologies if posted before):
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Join ESG Boom as "Impact Partners" in Fund
> 
> With environmental, social and governance investing now part of mainstream finance, regulators have started paying more attention to how well fund managers’ claims of sustainability match their actions. And with about $35 trillion parked in ESG assets, *according to the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance, there’s growing concern that the label is often misused, a practice known as greenwashing.*
> 
> “Sustainable investing is certainly *in vogue right now but likely for the wrong reasons,*” said Lisa Sachs, who heads Columbia University’s Center on Sustainable Investment. “We shouldn’t confuse holding a value-aligned portfolio and mitigating exposure to risk with addressing the major and urgent underlying issues.”
> 
> Ethic was started in 2015 and says it creates bespoke investments for its customers based on the social and environmental issues they care about the most. Lipman said investors can address society’s biggest challenges through collectively divesting from polluters and companies that perpetuate racial discrimination such as the private prison system.
> 
> So it's a way of investing for people who feel guilty about having money (but not guilty enough to donate it all) and whiny piss-ants who inherited a fortune without working for it (who somehow feel qualified to tell people who actually DO work for their money how to invest). People can do whatever they want with their money, but to bring in two famous grifters who sold out their own families to sell your product is rather bizarre. My favorite quote from this article: "...says it creates bespoke investments for its customers based on the social and environmental issues they care about the most".  In other words, take an existing managed money product and carve out the no-no stocks that the customer doesn't want, like maybe tobacco, alcohol, fast food, oil, gambling companies/industries, whatever. Or present a managed money package without XYZ. Big deal. There, "bespoke"!  AKA, marketing to people who are easily controlled/influenced by emotions and celebrities.



Creating a green portfolio is easy, has been for years, cherie. Investments companies have been doing this for years.
Odd how they act like they are the first ones to do anything. They ride high on that “ego express train”.





Here, this article is from 2014 may be useful 








						The Very Quick Guide To A Green Portfolio
					

How the small investor can guild a green or fossil-free portfolio.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Creating a green portfolio is easy, has been for years, cherie. Investments companies have been doing this for years.
> Odd how they act like they are the first ones to do anything. They ride high on that “ego express train”.
> 
> View attachment 5222858
> 
> 
> 
> Here, this article is from 2014 may be useful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Very Quick Guide To A Green Portfolio
> 
> 
> How the small investor can guild a green or fossil-free portfolio.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



Exactly.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Creating a green portfolio is easy, has been for years, cherie. Investments companies have been doing this for years.
> Odd how they act like they are the first ones to do anything. They ride high on that “ego express train”.
> 
> View attachment 5222858
> 
> 
> 
> Here, this article is from 2014 may be useful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Very Quick Guide To A Green Portfolio
> 
> 
> How the small investor can guild a green or fossil-free portfolio.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


Yeah, I remember a friend telling me about this type of investing in the late 90s because her boyfriend inherited a bunch of money but was very eco conscious/ hippie.


----------



## poopsie

"I like my money right where I can see it..........hanging in my closet"
Or tucked away in the oven


----------



## Handbag1234

bag-mania said:


> HoneypotBrenda was trolling those comments. She gave it away by referring to “Harry and Meghan: A Love Story” as being one of the decade’s most critically acclaimed films, which even their most devoted stans couldn’t say.


HoneypotBrenda is giving me Kathy Bates in Misery vibes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> "I like my money right where I can see it..........hanging in my closet"
> Or tucked away in the oven



Same. I'd just buy gold if my bank person would let me haha.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> may be their target but hope they're not invited.  they weren't invited to the birthday party.  and they aren't "friends" with the Gates family unless I'm forgetting something


No way they are invited. Jennifer Gates does not have to resort to inviting A list celebs she doesn't even know to her wedding to make herself feel important the way the Hot Mess of Montecito did with Oprah and the Clooneys.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Handbag1234 said:


> HoneypotBrenda is giving me Kathy Bates in Misery vibes



That's why I think she's messing with the other commenters. Her comment was so far over-the-top I refuse to believe it's genuine.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Friar 6 is probably tired to be the middle man…


Feeling a little (or a lot of) buyer's remorse. Should have listened to his brother. He bought the cow when he could have gotten the milk for free.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> No way they are invited. Jennifer Gates does not have to resort to inviting A list celebs she doesn't even know to her wedding to make herself feel important the way the Hot Mess of Montecito did with Oprah and the Clooneys.


and we here would prefer not to classify them as A-list


----------



## Gourmetgal

So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?


----------



## bag-mania

Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?



Maybe because most people have a strong dislike for phonies and liars.

And it's fun!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?



So generous of you to offer free therapy sessions. 

That said, do you understand the concepts of gossip threads and entertainment?


----------



## gelbergirl

bag-mania said:


> Maybe because most people have a strong dislike for phonies and liars.
> 
> And it's fun!



we all know one or more phonies and liars IRL (and despise them!!) but these two are pretty famous and have such gall in everything they do.
Probably the most famous liars in modern  times.  Well, except one.


----------



## rose60610

Jennifer Gates, a pro equestrian herself, is marrying another pro equestrian (net worth 100 million, which sounds like a lot  , but compared to the Gates' it doesn't compare   ). Georgina Bloomberg (another pro equestrian billionaire's daughter) also has a child by another pro equestrian and is leading her own horsey life. They don't have to curry favor to celebrities or invite themselves to events. Let alone remind the media that they should be recognized and rewarded for making a phone call or donating lemon olive oil cakes. Any word to who IS invited to the Gates-Nassar wedding? Anyone want to speculate that Meghan made an attempt to get invited  ?


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Yeah, I remember a friend telling me about this type of investing in the late 90s because her boyfriend inherited a bunch of money but was very eco conscious/ hippie.



Ethic invests in areas that go against their beliefs, but then again, it doesn't seem to be a problem as long as they get the cash. As Dan Wootton said, the worst greed!!!


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Anyone want to speculate that Meghan made an attempt to get invited  ?


Although I'm sure she yearns to run in these rarefied circles I can't imagine even she'd stoop so low as to try to invite herself to this wedding.


----------



## charlottawill

Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?


Doria, is that you? We were getting a little worried.


----------



## Chanbal

One more bandwagon…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more bandwagon…




I mean, I can totally get behind this cause. It's just that all his efforts lately never seem to have any impact. And then you see the good things William is doing and can't help but think he could have done so much more with the right guidance.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is free advertisement for Friar 6 & Mother Theresa of Montecito:


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I can totally get behind this cause. It's just that all his efforts lately never seem to have any impact. And then you see the good things William is doing and can't help but think he could have done so much more with the right guidance.


As others have said, instead of focusing on one thing at a time, as he did with the Invictus games, it appears they are taking a seemingly scattershot approach and hoping something will stick. But it's more like two children with a very short attention span.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I can totally get behind this cause. It's just that all his efforts lately never seem to have any impact. And then you see the good things William is doing and can't help but think he could have done so much more with the right guidance.


I'm not against the causes, on the contrary… What I don't like is their self-serving approach.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That's why I think she's messing with the other commenters. *Her comment was so far over-the-top I refuse to believe it's genuine.*


You might be in denial.


----------



## gracekelly

Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?


During Covid, the Sussex have been my major source of free entertainment.  You couldn't make them up.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> You might be in denial.



Naw, there was nothing critically acclaimed about the H&M Lifetime movie. She was trolling.


----------



## Lodpah

Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?


Not a big factor but for me it’s because it’s like a book club so you discuss the how horrible it was, dissecting the plot. And why not? Call people out on their hypocrisy, especially when they people what to do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One of the comments hilariously said "Meghan gets high on OPM (Other Peoples' Money)."


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> As others have said, instead of focusing on one thing at a time, as he did with the Invictus games, it appears they are taking a seemingly scattershot approach and hoping something will stick. But it's more like two children with a very short attention span.


Agree , lack of focus, it is as if they are tossing it all out there hoping something sticks


----------



## gracekelly

This is a very good read about the Ethic investment firm.  I don't think that the dumb duo ever researched this firm, not that it would have stopped them from accepting a check from them.









						Harry and Meghan's Ethic investment firm partnership is highly questionable
					

Their bid to promote ethical investing as good for the masses is a shameless diversion.




					www.msnbc.com


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Agree , lack of focus, it is as if they are tossing it all out there hoping something sticks



It is telling that they don’t believe in any one cause enough to stay with it. The social causes of the moment are all they care about because they get free press by pretending to care. Remember last year when they were linking themselves with that group that encouraged girls to become strong young women? What was the name of that group again? It doesn’t matter, because Meghan dropped them a month after the press stopped running articles about how wonderful she was. Those girls are on their own!


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> Jennifer Gates, a pro equestrian herself, is marrying another pro equestrian (net worth 100 million, which sounds like a lot  , but compared to the Gates' it doesn't compare   ). Georgina Bloomberg (another pro equestrian billionaire's daughter) also has a child by another pro equestrian and is leading her own horsey life. They don't have to curry favor to celebrities or invite themselves to events. Let alone remind the media that they should be recognized and rewarded for making a phone call or donating lemon olive oil cakes. Any word to who IS invited to the Gates-Nassar wedding? Anyone want to speculate that Meghan made an attempt to get invited  ?



what would be funny - would be if Princess Anne or Zara and Mike T are invited (they move in equestrian circles of the elite!) and H and MM are not!


----------



## justwatchin

.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One of the comments hilariously said "Meghan gets high on OPM (Other Peoples' Money)."




They did not have to buy a $16M mansion or whatever the ridiculous price was. They could have bought a more modest place, and paid for their own security.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One of the comments hilariously said "Meghan gets high on OPM (Other Peoples' Money)."


----------



## needlv

Has this been posted?  MSNBC is absolutely roasting them…









						Opinion | The questionable, often deceptive enterprise Meghan and Harry picked to get rich
					

Their bid to promote ethical investing as good for the masses is a shameless diversion.




					www.msnbc.com
				




Extract

But perhaps on some level this whole appraisal of ethical investing is taking Harry and Meghan too seriously. We can step back and look at this more simply: These are two intelligent, competent people who are extremely rich and unfathomably socially connected. They’ve spoken over and over again about elevating voices that aren’t being heard and making the world more inclusive. But there’s one clear reason they’d get into finance: to make money, and lots of it.

*Their dressing up this latest gig as something virtuous and socially conscious is a diversion.* Their hope of cloaking their role as marketers for this firm as ********ization — for a population that can barely even afford to save money for a minor emergency, let alone invest — is insulting to our intelligence.* There are a million things this power couple could’ve chosen to do with their money, and they chose to make more money*


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Naw, there was nothing critically acclaimed about the H&M Lifetime movie. She was trolling.


Wasn't it Oscar quality? Love your optimism…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *During Covid, the Sussex have been my major source of free entertainment.*  You couldn't make them up.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?


Eh, big factor? Maybe 15 minutes a week. And why do I give them that much time?

1) I can’t avoid them; they show up in my regular news feeds frequently
2) The humor
But mostly:
3) no matter what I’ve done, no matter what bad decisions I’ve made, I haven’t been so stupid as to have a temper fit  that resulted in going from a palace where my job was just to show up - to selling myself for a mortgaged mansion in a mud plain.


----------



## csshopper

Geor


Gourmetgal said:


> So much energy going into dissing this couple.  Why are they such a big factor in your lives do you think?


A preface to my response: It's sometimes difficult in on line conversations, not seeing facial expressions/body language or hearing tone of voice to interpret what is being said, so I  am clearly stating this is being written without sarcasm or snark, and is a straight forward response to your question, which I interpreted as being a sincere inquiry. In that vein I will refer to them by their given names, not the more descriptive ones we have attributed to them.

Over the course of the almost 77,000 posts dating back to 2006 when the subject started as Harry, a story has evolved, one which has had plot twists, revelations, surprises, shocks etc that have caught many people's attention, some from the beginning, others like myself joining in along the line. 

What the postings reveal over time is a multi generational, international community of mostly women who have several key characteristics in common: a sense of right and wrong based on statements and actions, a sense of compassion, ethics, fairness, empathy and a loathing for hypocrisy, an abhorrence for narcissism that leads to harm of others. A feeling people should be held accountable for their actions and words. And, I'm not sure quite how to express this, but an overall feeling that when someone in a position of celebrity who is a narcissist and is widely described as such and who routinely seeks to destroy others through outright lies, sly misrepresentations, and omissions, that person should be held accountable. 

Thus, there is what would be, if ever systematically catalogued,  pages of columns of material showing Meghan's "truths", Harry's lies and misrepresentations compared against examples of their actions or of previous contradictory statements. If anyone wanted to write a definitive volume on them, this Forum would be a gold mine. The pieces exist elsewhere, but the time line and progression of this thread and the citations are epic. 

Why bother? They are not "such a big factor" in my life, I don't give them that kind of influence, but they are an interest and increasingly hard to avoid for someone with English ancestry who has always enjoyed reading about the Royal Family. Most specifically what I get from this thread is a reassurance that in what sometimes feels like a topsy turvy, screwed up world, there are many many other women across the globe, who share their intelligence and compassion and wit and wisdom, in what they post here and I feel better that I am not alone in valuing moral behaviors and ethics and all of the characteristics I previously mentioned. The bonus is the times I erupt in spontaneous laughter at the humor, gif, emoji's and say to the computer "YES!" And it happens frequently!

I have no idea how widely read we are, if we have any impact, but if even one person reads what is written here in real truth and doesn't blithely follow down the path set by Meghan and Harry then it's a victory for good. I'm one of the old ones here and frankly sick and tired of the Meghan and Harry types and especially as they disrespect, selfishly hurt and maybe even physically harm through the stress they cause their elders. 

As for "dissing", that could come to a complete halt with (1) putting others before themselves, (2) telling the truth, (3) accountability for egregious behavior, (4)embracing family before it's too late. There's more, so will sum up with, stop doing what they are doing.


----------



## Chanbal

A few more laughs, courtesy of the Aussies!


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Geor
> 
> A preface to my response: It's sometimes difficult in on line conversations, not seeing facial expressions/body language or hearing tone of voice to interpret what is being said, so I  am clearly stating this is being written without sarcasm or snark, and is a straight forward response to your question, which I interpreted as being a sincere inquiry. In that vein I will refer to them by their given names, not the more descriptive ones we have attributed to them.
> 
> Over the course of the almost 77,000 posts dating back to 2006 when the subject started as Harry, a story has evolved, one which has had plot twists, revelations, surprises, shocks etc that have caught many people's attention, some from the beginning, others like myself joining in along the line.
> 
> What the postings reveal over time is a multi generational, international community of mostly women who have several key characteristics in common: a sense of right and wrong based on statements and actions, a sense of compassion, ethics, fairness, empathy and a loathing for hypocrisy, an abhorrence for narcissism that leads to harm of others. A feeling people should be held accountable for their actions and words. And, I'm not sure quite how to express this, but an overall feeling that when someone in a position of celebrity who is a narcissist and is widely described as such and who routinely seeks to destroy others through outright lies, sly misrepresentations, and omissions, that person should be held accountable.
> 
> Thus, there is what would be, if ever systematically catalogued,  pages of columns of material showing Meghan's "truths", Harry's lies and misrepresentations compared against examples of their actions or of previous contradictory statements. If anyone wanted to write a definitive volume on them, this Forum would be a gold mine. The pieces exist elsewhere, but the time line and progression of this thread and the citations are epic.
> 
> Why bother? They are not "such a big factor" in my life, I don't give them that kind of influence, but they are an interest and increasingly hard to avoid for someone with English ancestry who has always enjoyed reading about the Royal Family. Most specifically what I get from this thread is a reassurance that in what sometimes feels like a topsy turvy, screwed up world, there are many many other women across the globe, who share their intelligence and compassion and wit and wisdom, in what they post here and I feel better that I am not alone in valuing moral behaviors and ethics and all of the characteristics I previously mentioned. The bonus is the times I erupt in spontaneous laughter at the humor, gif, emoji's and say to the computer "YES!" And it happens frequently!
> 
> I have no idea how widely read we are, if we have any impact, but if even one person reads what is written here in real truth and doesn't blithely follow down the path set by Meghan and Harry then it's a victory for good. I'm one of the old ones here and frankly sick and tired of the Meghan and Harry types and especially as they disrespect, selfishly hurt and maybe even physically harm through the stress they cause their elders.
> 
> As for "dissing", that could come to a complete halt with (1) putting others before themselves, (2) telling the truth, (3) accountability for egregious behavior, (4)embracing family before it's too late. There's more, so will sum up with, stop doing what they are doing.



Excellent post! Thank you for giving the proper perspective to this question of why we spend time here. Sheesh, why not spend time here? The hypocrisy that the world’s entitled people are showing and have shown needs to stop. They need to own their behaviors, not lecture us. Change the ’rules for thee, not for me’ nonsense. Look at what Katie Couric is admitting finally — gasp. The gig is up.

We have pulled back the curtain - We see the charlatans for the deceivers they are.

Note the green


----------



## Chanbal

The new venture is a money making scheme for the ex-royals. The titles don't mean anything for the 6s, but continue using them and monetizing the monarchy. They are more than happy to appear on ads…
They are an embarrassment for the BRF and making QE's life difficult…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The new venture is a money making scheme for the ex-royals. The titles don't mean anything for the 6s, but continue using them and monetizing the monarchy. They are more than happy to appear on ads…
> They are an embarrassment for the BRF and making QE's life difficult…




The BRF can stop this embarrassment whenever they want. Same as with Andrew. Send out specific statements that address each issue. Take action. Say “no”. This inaction weakens them. Step up sooner rather than later.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The BRF can stop this embarrassment whenever they want. Same as with Andrew. Send out specific statements that address each issue. Take action. Say “no”. This inaction weakens them. Step up sooner rather than later.


The BRF doesn't seem to have the courage to strip their titles, which is the right thing to do. This is a circus.


----------



## purseinsanity

breakfastatcartier said:


> *So I wouldn’t be surprised if Archie or Diana grow up and wrote a book about her nasty behavior…*


I vote they call it "Markle Un-Dearest"


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> As others have said, instead of focusing on one thing at a time, as he did with the Invictus games, it appears they are taking a seemingly scattershot approach and hoping something will stick. But it's more like two children with a very short attention span.


They are "Jack of all trades, master of none" personified.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent post! Thank you for giving the proper perspective to this question of why we spend time here. Sheesh, why not spend time here? The hypocrisy that the world’s entitled people are showing and have shown needs to stop. They need to own their behaviors, not lecture us. Change the ’rules for thee, not for me’ nonsense. Look at what Katie Couric is admitting finally — gasp. The gig is up.
> 
> We have pulled back the curtain - We see the charlatans for the deceivers they are.
> 
> Note the green
> View attachment 5223259


Seems to be the fabric from which the famous green dress was made!!  Excellent job in finding it dear @CarryOn2020


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> This is a very good read about the Ethic investment firm.  I don't think that the dumb duo ever researched this firm, not that it would have stopped them from accepting a check from them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Ethic investment firm partnership is highly questionable
> 
> 
> Their bid to promote ethical investing as good for the masses is a shameless diversion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msnbc.com



Coming from MSNBC, this is shocking! Thank you for the article 

Perhaps QE needs to chat with these two, since she suddenly seems to be interested in people taking action 
Some highlights:

_OK! Well, let’s speak plainly now: Harry and Meghan are trying to characterize their agenda to get rich in the world of high finance as something intended for the public good — *and it’s mostly nonsense.*

ESG investing — investing in assets in an environmentally friendly, socially responsible way — is *a highly questionable and sometimes outright deceptiveenterprise.* As experts and operatives in the finance world have pointed out, *the ESG label is **unregulated and opaque*. Funds can charge clients higher fees for assets that are, in fact, not doing the ethical things they’re supposed to be doing. For example, fossil fuel-free funds can fund fossil fuels, in part because most people don’t actually know what investments they’re holding in their baskets of funds. And because ESG portfolios are guided by such a broad and inconsistent set of criteria (ranging from employee development to health and safety to supply chains), even ExxonMobil, a major oil company, can be rated as a green investment by premier ESG raters._

*There’s one clear reason they’d get into finance: to make money, and lots of it.*

_“There’s a lot of green-washing, of woke-washing, a lot of washing within this category of ESG,” Marilyn Waite, a program officer in environment at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the author of "Sustainability at Work," told Vox’s Emily Stewart recently.

In other words, *investment funds can exploit the ESG label to charge higher fees *but benefit from the fact that *they’re largely held unaccountable *for where investors’ money is actually going.

And while Harry may think these investments involve "voting" with one’s dollars about company behavior, some experts say that’s not actually what's happening. Lisa Sachs, who heads Columbia University’s Center on Sustainable Investment, told me that an ESG fund does “not change the problematic practices in our economy; it just allows an investor to build a portfolio that they’re more comfortable with.”

“That’s fine ... [but] what is concerning is leading millennials or any retail investors or anyone in the economy to believe that we can solve societal problems through ESG portfolios,” she continued. “These are problems that need policy solutions.”

The issue, she pointed out, is that when an ESG portfolio divests from any given company, another investor will simply snap up those assets.

“Excluding certain stocks from a portfolio doesn’t have any impact on the cost of doing business for that company,” she explained. ESG portfolios don't offer the scale or typically the engagement strategy required to get troubling companies to change their management style or practices.

Sachs told me she wasn't previously familiar with Ethic, but based on a brief look at their website and publicly available materials she said it did not appear that they offered a drastically different strategy in their approach to ESG funds than other investment firms.

But perhaps on some level this whole appraisal of ethical investing is taking Harry and Meghan too seriously. We can step back and look at this more simply: These are two intelligent, competent people who are extremely rich and unfathomably socially connected. They’ve spoken over and over again about elevating voices that aren’t being heard and making the world more inclusive. But there’s *one clear reason they’d get into finance: to make money, and lots of it.

Their dressing up this latest gig as something virtuous and socially conscious is a diversion. Their hope of cloaking their role as marketers for this firm as ********ization — for a population that can barely even afford to save money for a minor emergency, let alone invest — is insulting to our intelligence. There are a million things this power couple could’ve chosen to do with their money, and they chose to make more money.*_


----------



## xincinsin

Vintage Leather said:


> 3) no matter what I’ve done, no matter what bad decisions I’ve made, I haven’t been so stupid as to have a temper fit  that resulted in going from a palace where my job was just to show up - to selling myself *for a mortgaged mansion in a mud plain*.


Love the alliteration!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The BRF doesn't seem to have the courage to strip their titles, which is the right thing to do. This is a circus.



Exactly, QE can lecture world leaders because they choose to not attend her ‘green’ summit????? She claims they ‘talk but don’t do’. Helloooo?  Seems to me she needs to look at her own family.  









						Queen slams world leaders not committing to climate summit
					

The Queen was speaking to the Duchess of Cornwall and the Welsh Parliament's presiding officer when she was overheard saying she was 'irritated' by world leaders who 'talk but don't do'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: A quick look at the comments show people have had enough with QE&Charles&Will&Hazzie’s faux eco politics.  The gall of these people


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, QE can lecture world leaders because they choose to not attend her ‘green’ summit????? She claims they ‘talk but don’t do’. Helloooo?  Seems to me she needs to look at her own family.



Yeah, I don't know. Harry is a nobody, while world leaders (I assume heads of state?) actually have the tools to move things along.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know. Harry is a nobody, while world leaders (I assume heads of state?) actually have the tools to move things along.



Doesn’t she have some tools in her shed to get things done? Doesn’t Chuck? William? When did Hazzie start thinking of himself as a nobody? He swans around like he is a master of the universe. Actually, they all do. 

IMO It sounds so disingenuous coming from someone of her lifestyle, her position and her recent request to be exempt from Scottish laws.  To me, it seems she is mad that people are not flying in for her party — oh, the irony.  Way too many lectures from these people.

ETA -  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...doctors-family-friend-claims-Vanity-Fair.html
*No more martinis for Her Majesty! The Queen, 95, is 'ordered to quit drinking by royal doctors' to 'make sure she's as fit and healthy as possible' ahead of her busy Autumn schedule, claims Vanity Fair*

*Queen, 95, has reportedly been 'ordered to quit drinking by royal doctors'*
*Comes ahead of busy Autumn schedule and Platinum Jubilee celebrations*
*According to palace sources quoted in magazine, monarch's go-to alcoholic drink is a dry martini*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t she have some tools in her shed to get things done? Doesn’t Chuck? William? When did Hazzie start thinking of himself as a nobody? He swans around like he is a master of the universe. Actually, they all do.



Philip co-founded the WMF, Charles was a pioneer of sustainable/organic farmic and William's Earthshot initiative is coming along nicely. But still they are no lawmakers who can install laws to protect the environment on a broader basis. E.g. we just voted, we still don't have a new government formed but there's already a big fuss because one party demands a tempo limit of 130 on highways. It would cost literally pennies to make conditions for farm animals better, but the farming industry refuses (ironically even though part of these changes would be heavily funded so would even mean a financial advantage) and will probably continue to do so until lawmakers show them the middle finger.

But also, I don't think it's realistic to expect people to completely give up their lifestyle. We wouldn't even expect that of the troublesome two had they just continued to be quietly obscenely rich, it's just they overdo it completely.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Philip co-founded the WMF, Charles was a pioneer of sustainable/organic farmic and William's Earthshot initiative is coming along nicely. But still they are no lawmakers who can install laws to protect the environment on a broader basis. E.g. we just voted, we still don't have a new government formed but there's already a big fuss because one party demands a tempo limit of 130 on highways. It would cost literally pennies to make conditions for farm animals better, but the farming industry refuses (ironically even though part of these changes would be heavily funded so would even mean a financial advantage) and will probably continue to do so until lawmakers show them the middle finger.
> 
> But also, I don't think it's realistic to expect people to completely give up their lifestyle. We wouldn't even expect that of the troublesome two had they just continued to be quietly obscenely rich, it's just they overdo it completely.


On the farming industry, I did not think I would like it BUT DS told me I would
I loved Jeremy Clarkson's Farm show - a TOTTALY different tone from his auto shows, no hubris, very humble, NOT boys doing idiotic things - complete surprise
I learned a lot about how hard farming is, very educational show, now, I know how to birth a lamb


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Philip co-founded the WMF, Charles was a pioneer of sustainable/organic farmic and William's Earthshot initiative is coming along nicely. But still they are no lawmakers who can install laws to protect the environment on a broader basis. E.g. we just voted, we still don't have a new government formed but there's already a big fuss because one party demands a tempo limit of 130 on highways. It would cost literally pennies to make conditions for farm animals better, but the farming industry refuses (ironically even though part of these changes would be heavily funded so would even mean a financial advantage) and will probably continue to do so until lawmakers show them the middle finger.
> 
> But also, I don't think it's realistic to expect people to completely give up their lifestyle. We wouldn't even expect that of the troublesome two had they just continued to be quietly obscenely rich, it's just they overdo it completely.



IMO without being political, etc. if all the things they did, if all of it did not help much, if all of it did not change the outcome (the earth is more polluted now than ever), then maybe maybe we aren’t the real issue. The countries that are the biggest polluters won’t be told how to live by the West. As we’ve learned from the pandemic, real change happens when the whole world joins together. So far, the BRF has struggled to make that happen. Due to their troubled past, they have lost some credibility. Still, *they could lead by example.* Maybe they could stop asking for exceptions to be made for their palaces.

Just my 2 cents, worth less due to inflation


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know. Harry is a nobody, while world leaders (I assume heads of state?) actually have the tools to move things along.


Yeah, he might be a nobody, but is contributing heavily to the greed in this world, a different type of green, but still a very harmful one. One should lead by example. It's more than time to strip their titles imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just my 2 cents, worth less due to inflation



I went shopping for my Christmas baking the other day (for that I go to the gastro supplier to buy the bigger packages) and man, everything has gone up in price. 5 pounds of Belgian chocolate chips went up in price by 20 % from last year.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO without being political, etc. if all the things they did, if all of it did not help much, if all of it did not change the outcome (the earth is more polluted now than ever), then maybe maybe we aren’t the real issue. The countries that are the biggest polluters won’t be told how to live by the West. As we’ve learned from the pandemic, real change happens when the whole world joins together. So far, the BRF has struggled to make that happen. Due to their troubled past, they have lost some credibility. Still, *they could lead by example.* Maybe they could stop asking for exceptions to be made for their palaces.
> 
> Just my 2 cents, worth less due to inflation


haha, I just replied to @QueenofWrapDress before reading your post. I agree, one should lead by example. I believe QE tried to do her part for most of her life, and Will seems to also understand the job. It's time for them to do one more push and get rid of the weeds in their grass imo.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went shopping for my Christmas baking the other day (for that I go to the gastro supplier to buy the bigger packages) and man, everything has gone up in price. 5 pounds of Belgian chocolate chips went up in price by 20 % from last year.


Same here. Supermarket bills increased a lot in the last year. Interestingly, many of the luxurious items like VCA, Rolex… are sold out. Permanent long lines of people waiting to get in Chanel, LV, Dior… It's crazy!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This is a very good read about the Ethic investment firm.  I don't think that the dumb duo ever researched this firm, not that it would have stopped them from accepting a check from them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Ethic investment firm partnership is highly questionable
> 
> 
> Their bid to promote ethical investing as good for the masses is a shameless diversion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msnbc.com


Finally a critical report from a US media source that isn't conservative.  The quotes from Meghan are so ridiculous.  Like she came from a poor family that had no money to even think about investing.  But wait - she went to an expensive private high school and an expensive college.
  Maybe their house of cards will fold eventually.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> haha, I just replied to @QueenofWrapDress before reading your post. I agree, one should lead by example. I believe QE tried to do her part for most of her life, and Will seems to also understand the job. It's time for them to do one more push and get rid of the weeds in their grass imo.



Exactly, QE’s shenanigans in Scotland bother me. She should change the palaces without being told to do it. *That is leadership*. 
Sure, her lawyers say the concept is so very complex. Baloney. They need to change those pipes asap. All my opinion.

ETA:  Have H&M gone solar?  Do it or stop lecturing us.









						Queen's lawyers secured amendment to Scottish green energy law
					

The legislation was changed so the monarch's private estates could not be subject to compulsory purchase orders.



					www.bbc.com
				



_The Heat Networks Bill encouraged the use of underground pipes to heat homes and buildings rather than boilers powered by fossil fuels._


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went shopping for my Christmas baking the other day (for that I go to the gastro supplier to buy the bigger packages) and man, everything has gone up in price. 5 pounds of Belgian chocolate chips went up in price by 20 % from last year.



Yes, but good chocolate chips are worth any price.


----------



## csshopper

Error


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t she have some tools in her shed to get things done? Doesn’t Chuck? William? When did Hazzie start thinking of himself as a nobody? He swans around like he is a master of the universe. Actually, they all do.
> 
> IMO It sounds so disingenuous coming from someone of her lifestyle, her position and her recent request to be exempt from Scottish laws.  To me, it seems she is mad that people are not flying in for her party — oh, the irony.  Way too many lectures from these people.
> 
> ETA -  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...doctors-family-friend-claims-Vanity-Fair.html
> *No more martinis for Her Majesty! The Queen, 95, is 'ordered to quit drinking by royal doctors' to 'make sure she's as fit and healthy as possible' ahead of her busy Autumn schedule, claims Vanity Fair*
> 
> *Queen, 95, has reportedly been 'ordered to quit drinking by royal doctors'*
> *Comes ahead of busy Autumn schedule and Platinum Jubilee celebrations*
> *According to palace sources quoted in magazine, monarch's go-to alcoholic drink is a dry martini*


Maybe those cocktails have helped her get this far.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Maybe those cocktails have helped her get this far.



Her relatives alone are enough to drive her to drink.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. I mean, don't we all love some tea, but also...does she never want to work again, and how is she getting around that NDA?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Have you folks seen the latest about this "supposed" ESG Provider?!?!? .. they have quite a few investments in companies that WOULD NOT be considered "ethical" AT ALL!!!  Again, again .. the HYPOCRISY of these two is just appalling!


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Hmmm. ok.  Let's talk about "investing". With ethics. I live in Chicago. You may have heard we have somewhat of a crime problem. Illinois' most wealthy resident (worth about 25-30 billion) has already donated billions to various causes.
> 
> After he threatened to move his company out of Illinois due to crime, he was criticized by both our Governor (who is a billionaire himself) and Mayor for not donating "enough" money to combat crime and violence.
> 
> My point is, if H&M are into ethical money management, how much are THEY contributing to combat crime and violence? How much are they encouraging others to donate to combat crime? Or homelessness, for that matter, in CA? Are THEY getting criticized? Or is it "more ethical" to ignore crime (easy to do when you have a security detail and live in a 19 bathroom house) so you don't have to talk about it?
> 
> Since WHEN is it up to private citizens to protect everyone else from murder, car jackings, other crimes and violence?
> 
> And just what does make ETHICS ethical, anyway? Asking for a friend...


All excellent points .. so, let me expand on what ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) investing is SUPPOSED to be about!  You are right about the issue with Crime (we have it BIG-TIME here in CA and it's getting worse everyday) .. but you see, the ESG Provider "creates" their own categories .. and hence the problem!  In our FinTech Start-Up, we have many vendors who are ESG Providers .. but you see, there is no 'governance' on the types of categories and the rating 'factors'.  So, depending on what you want?!?! .. well, then you pretty much have to do a fair amount of research on your own.  Some vendors operate strictly in a particular region - e.g., Europe or the Middle East, so if you want to invest in ethical companies in the US, then you need to find the appropriate providers.  Then, you need to find the categories that mean the most to you .. but more importantly, you need to understand HOW the provider has done its rankings for that category.  This is the BS that I'm going through right now in my job (yes - I've had to become the ESG SME), and it's kind of surprising how the providers rank sometimes .. and in some cases, wow .. the algorithm to do so is beyond complex.  I just know that these two will likely provide ZERO value to this company, but .. I truly think they were brought in to bring in more of the SUPER-RICH investors through Harry's "contacts" (his Polo playing friends, etc.) .. Meghan?!?! .. really? .. she provides ZERO!


----------



## CarryOn2020

They insist they are *not* hypocrites 
:stomps feet:


*Meghan and Harry's 'sustainable' investment firm Ethic has shares in Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, a manufacturer of laser-guided bombs and scores of oil companies - but it insists that DOESN'T make them hypocrites*

*The Sussexes have been appointed 'impact partners' at Ethic, based in New York, and put in their own cash*
*Ethic claims it will only invest investors' cash in businesses it believes passes its 'social responsibility criteria' *
*Documents in US show Ethic has invested millions in social media giants, tech giants and big pharma firms *
*Ethic's customers also hold stock in oil and gas sector and automotive industry including GM and Toyota  *
*Business was founded in New York by Briton Jay Lipman and Australian bankers Doug Scott and Johny Mair   *









						Meghan and Harry's investment firm has shares in Fox News
					

SEC filings from August reveal that Ethic has ploughed millions into oil, gas, mining companies, airlines, as well as firms that so-called ethical investment guides rate poorly including Amazon.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: a comment 

Niellegend, Quadrant Four Star Command , United Kingdom, 3 minutes ago

*No surprise that the moral high ground seems to be a bit unstable.*


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> A few more laughs, courtesy of the Aussies!



I love these Aussies - why are we in Canada (another Commonwealth county) so politically correct about them...


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still shocked about that at the bottom of their website it states:
> 
> *Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any specialized level of skill or training.*
> 
> An investment company that says on its page that it doesn't guarantee any level of investment skill or training?
> That's like looking up a doctor and at the bottom of the page, it says "Not a real doctor, but play one on the internet".
> Or a lawyer stating, "Trained by Tom Girardi".  WTAF??????


Are you effin' kidding me??? .. they actually say that?  WOW .. *RED FLAG*, *RED FLAG*, *RED FLAG*!!!  NO, NO, NO .. in most cases, the ESG Investment Advisor has to have AT LEAST the ESG certificate (_and oftentimes the full-on CFA_).  I'm getting the pressure from work to get the ESG (CFA) cert, but I'm not paying for it myself and these are not easy courses!  It's bad enough I have to get yearly certs for AML (and the equivalent European & Asia/Pac ones) certs!  Sheesh ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Are you effin' kidding me??? .. they actually say that?  WOW .. *RED FLAG*, *RED FLAG*, *RED FLAG*!!!  NO, NO, NO .. in most cases, the ESG Investment Advisor has to have AT LEAST the ESG certificate (_and oftentimes the full-on CFA_).  I'm getting the pressure from work to get the ESG (CFA) cert, but I'm not paying for it myself and these are not easy courses!  It's bad enough I have to get yearly certs for AML (and the equivalent European & Asia/Pac ones) certs!  Sheesh ..



Many suspect the SEC will bust them for a ponzi scheme, especially now that the ‘hippies’ have attracted mega-attention.


----------



## csshopper

*Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any specialized level of skill or training.*

Is this their attempt to pre empt any lawsuit that might result from someone, or some charity, who was swayed by Maggot and the Handbag's recommendations for investment and ended up broke, or implicated in some illegality? 

There can only be NEGATIVE impacts from taking advice from two numpties who've spent the majority of their lives making only withdrawals from the "Markle-Windsor International Bank of Dads." 

Anyone burned by this scheme has only themselves to blame.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> *Registration of an investment adviser does not imply any specialized level of skill or training.*
> 
> Is this their attempt to pre empt any lawsuit that might result from someone, or some charity, who was swayed by Maggot and the Handbag's recommendations for investment and ended up broke, or implicated in some illegality?
> 
> There can only be NEGATIVE impacts from taking advice from two numpties who've spent the majority of their lives making only withdrawals from the "Markle-Windsor International Bank of Dads."
> 
> Anyone burned by this scheme has only themselves to blame.


Again .. I am just utterly gobsmacked by this comment!  Any person beyond High School would think, seriously .. oh, can I be one of those and or me, that just means that NO ONE in their right mind should believe and especially invest in ANY of the crap-oh-la that these folks are purporting to be as "ethical" categories.  Then again .. *AMEOBA* (Harry - single-cell) and *PARAMECIAN* (Meghan - another single-cell) .. well, they know better .. right???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




Shhhhhh. Here’s the big secret: that algorithm has been around for _years_.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shhhhhh. Here’s the big secret: that algorithm has been around for _years_.
> 
> View attachment 5224660



I'm not super investment savvy, but doesn't this at least mean H&M can't mess it up too much?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not super investment savvy, but doesn't this at least mean H&M can't mess it up too much?



Never underestimate H&M’s ability to mess things up. The ‘royal’ gig should have been an easy one [dress up, show up, smile, shake hands, be pleasant, leave]  but look what they did there.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not super investment savvy, but doesn't this at least mean H&M can't mess it up too much?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



In that case, what exactly did the gruesome twosome put their money (or Archewell's money?) in? And what are they trying to influence others to do?

IOW, I'm not translating the word salad well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> In that case, what exactly did the gruesome twosome put their money (or Archewell's money?) in? And what are they trying to influence others to do?
> 
> IOW, I'm not translating the word salad well.



This is just my opinion. Someone else may have more details. H&M bring in the clients, get a commission.

If the  Forbes article is true, someone walks in with a load of money, says he wants to invest so many dollars in ethical businesses with a focus on the environment, the Ethic genius types in the required info [name, address, amount, etc.], the computer spits out a list of the Ethic-approved businesses [who possibly have paid to participate], hands it to the client to choose which businesses and how much to invest, and presto, bingo. It is possible that all of this can be handled via Zoom or, simply, the telephone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Is he on his way to London?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Is he on his way to London?




Maybe he is training to be a TSA agent ???


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



This looks like paid advertisement.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Is he on his way to London?



This would be in the VIP terminal ??? and travelers , no security folks with him…

could be a line to get into a museum


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, sorry for posting this on the wrong thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oops, sorry for posting this on the wrong thread.




Complete confidence in Bezos to fix whatever needs fixing, the BRF not so much.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> This would be in the VIP terminal ??? and travelers , no security folks with him…
> 
> could be a line to get into a museum


I think it's a line to get into his bank. 









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry could become billion dollar brand, expert claims
					

Frank PR founder Andrew Bloch has predicted Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's new "Brand Sussex" could one day become "the world's richest personal brand"




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting post!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> An interesting post!




Not sure what he's trying to say? She was not told to not use the sacred name, but to not use it when she was with the Queen in an official capacity. So I'm not sure what the big thing is he wants to make it and how exactly it relates to what the troublesome two did - and I'm one of the people who think it was very disrespectful and passive aggressive and not at all a sweet nod. But the Montecito equivalent would be to please not call her granny while on an official appointment together.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure what he's trying to say? She was not told to not use the sacred name, but to not use it when she was with the Queen in an official capacity. So I'm not sure what the big thing is he wants to make it and how exactly it relates to what the troublesome two did - and I'm one of the people who think it was very disrespectful and passive aggressive and not at all a sweet nod. But the Montecito equivalent would be to please not call her granny while on an official appointment together.



All I know is I want to be in the *“fierce old ladies” *club


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



the bit about david foster is interesting


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Complete confidence in Bezos to fix whatever needs fixing, the BRF not so much.


now if Bezos would start paying his taxes he could do lot of good


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure what he's trying to say? She was not told to not use the sacred name, but to not use it when she was with the Queen in an official capacity. So I'm not sure what the big thing is he wants to make it and how exactly it relates to what the troublesome two did - and I'm one of the people who think it was very disrespectful and passive aggressive and not at all a sweet nod. But the Montecito equivalent would be to please not call her granny while on an official appointment together.


As far as I understood, they didn't ask (and didn't need to ask) permission or approval to use the name. There wasn't much the BRF could have done to prevent the 6s from using L*libeth in the US.

I believe what RE is trying to say is that QE and the BRF are not pleased with such choice.


----------



## marietouchet

The article about the ethical investing gig … the article I read was in Harpers Bazaar

I always go to HB for investing news


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> As far as I understood, they didn't ask (and didn't need to ask) permission or approval to use the name. There wasn't much the BRF could have done to prevent the 6s from using L*libeth in the US.
> 
> I believe what RE is trying to say is that QE and the BRF are not pleased with such choice.


Whatever H&M's intentions were, be it a tribute or a slight, it was a questionable choice. Why not Elizabeth Diana and call her Lili? That would have been more appropriate imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

So there is an alternative option: 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' 

*EXCLUSIVE: Laid back hippies? Not so much! Founders of Harry and Meghan-backed 'Ethic' sued rival company claiming it hijacked their woke brand as it's learned 'sustainable' firm owns shares of makers of world's most deadly laser-guided missiles*

*The founders of the 'Ethic' investment firm backed by Harry and Meghan sued  Boston-based Admirals Bancorp last January over its sister organization's name *
*Jay Lipman, Doug Scott and Johny Mair filed a complaint against the company after it named itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and trademarked the word 'ethic' *
*Court filings obtained by DailyMail.com reveal the trio had registered the word in 2017 to protect their 'top notch' brand of investment and advisory services*
*Ethic boasts that it creates 'sustainability solutions to help investors transition money toward companies that treat people and the planet with respect'*
*The firm sought an injunction saying Bancorp's website also 'emphasizes its commitment to socially conscious investing, a clear overlap' with their business*
*It's not clear how they overcame their differences as lawyers however the website for 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and its slogan remains online*









						Harry and Meghan-backed investment firm Ethic sued a company over name
					

The founding trio behind $1.3billion 'socially aware' investment firm Ethic Inc. launched a legal battle early last year when another business decided to name itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> So there is an alternative option: 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Laid back hippies? Not so much! Founders of Harry and Meghan-backed 'Ethic' sued rival company claiming it hijacked their woke brand as it's learned 'sustainable' firm owns shares of makers of world's most deadly laser-guided missiles*
> 
> *The founders of the 'Ethic' investment firm backed by Harry and Meghan sued  Boston-based Admirals Bancorp last January over its sister organization's name *
> *Jay Lipman, Doug Scott and Johny Mair filed a complaint against the company after it named itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and trademarked the word 'ethic' *
> *Court filings obtained by DailyMail.com reveal the trio had registered the word in 2017 to protect their 'top notch' brand of investment and advisory services*
> *Ethic boasts that it creates 'sustainability solutions to help investors transition money toward companies that treat people and the planet with respect'*
> *The firm sought an injunction saying Bancorp's website also 'emphasizes its commitment to socially conscious investing, a clear overlap' with their business*
> *It's not clear how they overcame their differences as lawyers however the website for 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and its slogan remains online*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan-backed investment firm Ethic sued a company over name
> 
> 
> The founding trio behind $1.3billion 'socially aware' investment firm Ethic Inc. launched a legal battle early last year when another business decided to name itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So will H&M say they didn't know....didn't do their homework?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait, what hockey player? (it says the name in the caption, but has anyone ever heard of this?)

That said, the part of leaking to the press sounds just like her, wasn't that how the world found out about Harry?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait, didn't I read this on here a few days ago?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what hockey player? (it says the name in the caption, but has anyone ever heard of this?)
> 
> That said, the part of leaking to the press sounds just like her, wasn't that how the world found out about Harry?



Michael Del Zotto thanks to DM








						So, what is the truth about Meghan and the ice hockey hunk?
					

David Jones reveals the truth behind the rumours surrounding Meghan Markle's relationships after her marriage to former husband Trevor Engelson. He shares how she met Michael Del Zotto.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what hockey player? (it says the name in the caption, but has anyone ever heard of this?)
> 
> That said, the part of leaking to the press sounds just like her, wasn't that how the world found out about Harry?



This is intriguing but you have to take it with big a grain of salt, like so much internet gossip. There are also rumors that she was a "beard" for him and a number of others. Who knows what is really true?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Whatever H&M's intentions were, be it a tribute or a slight, it was a questionable choice. Why not Elizabeth Diana and call her Lili? That would have been more appropriate imo.


I agree, Elizabeth Diana would have been a much nicer choice. I believe the intention behind the Lilib* choice was to show off a special connection with the queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what hockey player? (it says the name in the caption, but has anyone ever heard of this?)
> 
> That said, the part of leaking to the press sounds just like her, wasn't that how the world found out about Harry?




 



charlottawill said:


> This is intriguing but you have to take it with big a grain of salt, like so much internet gossip. There are also rumors that she was a "beard" for him and a number of others. Who knows what is really true?




IMO this is certainly believable.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, didn't I read this on here a few days ago?



Yes. From an MSNBC article @needlv posted. https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...-markle-thread.679793/page-5122#post-34806960









						Opinion | The questionable, often deceptive enterprise Meghan and Harry picked to get rich
					

Their bid to promote ethical investing as good for the masses is a shameless diversion.




					www.msnbc.com


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> This is intriguing but you have to take it with big a grain of salt, like so much internet gossip. There are also rumors that she was a "beard" for him and a number of others. Who knows what is really true?




If it was 20 years ago I might believe it, but today? Being gay isn’t that big a deal anymore, particularly in the modeling and entertainment industries, like a couple of those men are in.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> If it was 20 years ago I might believe it, but today? Being gay isn’t that big a deal anymore, particularly in the modeling and entertainment industries, like a couple of those men are in.


Like I said, a big grain of salt.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not super investment savvy, but doesn't this at least mean H&M can't mess it up too much?


Financial Services - Investing is my area of expertise (_and yes, I started out on the Tech side and still 'somewhat' work in it_).  IMO, the reason why they brought the *Amoeba* and *Paramecium *onboard is that the company believes that given all of the palaver BS (_e.g., compassion, service, love is love, etc. _-- BARF ) that they have spouted, that they would be good "advisors" to those investors who want to invest in ESG funds. Again, IMO .. Ethic likely believe that given "their royal titles" (_BARF again_ ) that they would be able to bring in the $$$$$ investors who would be interested in this sh!t! Look, some of the stuff?!!? .. I totally get it, vis-a-vis, I would never invest my money in certain products, but in general .. I think this is just yet another marketing ploy by the Financial Services industry to get people to invest a lot of money in things that may tank .. the Investment companies get the *$$$$$*, the investor?!?! .. *-$$$$$*!  You need to get an Investment Advisor who *REALLY* knows this part of the business and more importantly, how the ESG Vendor/Provider rates the various categories!!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Whatever H&M's intentions were, be it a tribute or a slight, it was a questionable choice. Why not Elizabeth Diana and call her Lili? That would have been more appropriate imo.



Too simple, too inoffensive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *EXCLUSIVE: Laid back hippies? Not so much! Founders of Harry and Meghan-backed 'Ethic' sued rival company claiming it hijacked their woke brand as it's learned 'sustainable' firm owns shares of makers of world's most deadly laser-guided missiles*



Can't make that sh*t up. Not only are they siblings in spirit with a shared hobby of lawsuits...wasn't Raptor's weird hipster coffee company anything but ethical as well?


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> So there is an alternative option: 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Laid back hippies? Not so much! Founders of Harry and Meghan-backed 'Ethic' sued rival company claiming it hijacked their woke brand as it's learned 'sustainable' firm owns shares of makers of world's most deadly laser-guided missiles*
> 
> *The founders of the 'Ethic' investment firm backed by Harry and Meghan sued  Boston-based Admirals Bancorp last January over its sister organization's name *
> *Jay Lipman, Doug Scott and Johny Mair filed a complaint against the company after it named itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and trademarked the word 'ethic' *
> *Court filings obtained by DailyMail.com reveal the trio had registered the word in 2017 to protect their 'top notch' brand of investment and advisory services*
> *Ethic boasts that it creates 'sustainability solutions to help investors transition money toward companies that treat people and the planet with respect'*
> *The firm sought an injunction saying Bancorp's website also 'emphasizes its commitment to socially conscious investing, a clear overlap' with their business*
> *It's not clear how they overcame their differences as lawyers however the website for 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and its slogan remains online*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan-backed investment firm Ethic sued a company over name
> 
> 
> The founding trio behind $1.3billion 'socially aware' investment firm Ethic Inc. launched a legal battle early last year when another business decided to name itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


HA HA HA HA .. good luck with that ETHIC, Bancorp is no chump-change organization (they've been around for ~20 years)!  They are the 213th largest bank in the US and have MANY subsidiaries and in addition to investment advising, they are also A BANK!!!  Those types of companies can drag your a$$ through tons of hours to make the Plaintiff lose a LOT of $$$!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can't make that sh*t up. Not only are they siblings in spirit with a shared hobby of lawsuits...wasn't Raptor's weird hipster coffee company anything but ethical as well?


Well .. and remember, her step-brother (can't remember the name) .. is a cannabis grower.  Nowadays, most wouldn't be that concerned about that, but there are also some that are very against drugs.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If it was 20 years ago I might believe it, but today? Being gay isn’t that big a deal anymore, particularly in the modeling and entertainment industries, like a couple of those men are in.


IDK about these men but I do think there are still some closeted gay men in the entertainment industry.  Thinking of John T for one.  And there has always been speculation abut Cruise (which may or may not be true).  Granted these two are older.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> IDK about these men but I do think there are still some closeted gay men in the entertainment industry.  Thinking of John T for one.  And there has always been speculation abut Cruise (which may or may not be true).  Granted these two are older.



They are both poster boys for Scientology. I don't think that organization is very supportive of open homosexuality


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> IDK about these men but I do think there are still some closeted gay men in the entertainment industry.  Thinking of John T for one.  And there has always been speculation abut Cruise (which may or may not be true).  Granted these two are older.



Cruise stars mostly in action movies that appeal to heterosexual men so I can believe he would hide it IF he was. And then there is Scientology as poopsie mentioned.

Meghan’s ex Trevor dated her for 7 years before marrying her. That’s a long time for an ambitious and impatient woman like Meghan to play beard, so I’m thinking no for him. I don’t know anything about the other men.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Is he on his way to London?



He is very lucky he didn't run into me while he was here! I would have unloaded baggage unlike the kind on the conveyor belt!


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> He is very lucky he didn't run into me while he was here! I would have unloaded baggage unlike the kind on the conveyor belt!


HA HA HA .. you're like me and I do hope someday to run into these TROLLS in order to give them a piece of my mind!  I've met many a Celebrity and major Politicians (both Repub & Dem Presidents, Vice Presidents & Governors) at the airports (and the Presidents weren't even in Washington DC where I worked at the time)!!  So, you never know ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Meghan’s ex Trevor dated her for 7 years before marrying her. That’s a long time for an ambitious and impatient woman like Meghan to play beard, so I’m thinking no for him. I don’t know anything about the other men.



Plus he's remarried with a baby when he could just stay single...it's not like he's the president of the United States and needs a first lady.


----------



## Chanbal

They finally got it right in Spanish: "In this bank"


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Those 2 first pics


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> *Whatever H&M's intentions were, *be it a tribute or a slight, it was a questionable choice. Why not Elizabeth Diana and call her Lili? That would have been more appropriate imo.


Their intentions!


----------



## Chanbal

The new poster kids for Ethic


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Cruise stars mostly in action movies that appeal to heterosexual men so I can believe he would hide it IF he was. And then there is Scientology as poopsie mentioned.
> 
> Meghan’s ex Trevor dated her for 7 years before marrying her. That’s a long time for an ambitious and impatient woman like Meghan to play beard, so I’m thinking no for him. I don’t know anything about the other men.



For Meghan to date somebody for 7 years and then marry them sounds like she "gave up" trying to find somebody even more rich and famous. Then what? Her job began earning her decent money so she figures she's more marketable? She's a user. The eyes she had for William are recalculating for a billionaire, but Harry will do as long as she can pimp his notoriety into more paydays. She'll line her pockets more and more as the kids get older. and more independent. As Harry becomes even more of an embarrassment/dope and the deals slow down, poof! Off Meghan goes! To greener pastures. We've seen this movie before.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Cruise stars mostly in action movies that appeal to heterosexual men so I can believe he would hide it IF he was. And then there is Scientology as poopsie mentioned.
> 
> Meghan’s ex Trevor dated her for 7 years before marrying her. That’s a long time for an ambitious and impatient woman like Meghan to play beard, so I’m thinking no for him. I don’t know anything about the other men.


Travolta was photographed kissing a man on an airplane tarmac.....so I guess he didn't do a very good job hiding his gayness


----------



## Chanbal

They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.



this is not of great interest to me but at least it sounds somewhat entertaining - rather than them moaning about their victimhood or preaching about social causes


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Chanbal said:


> They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.




Totally not interested, like who cares, their wedding was like 3 years ago.... unless we are getting footages of Tiaragate and full centre of Haz's "WhaT M wAntS M gEtS IT" tantrum


----------



## Jktgal

CeeJay said:


> .. but you see, the ESG Provider "creates" their own categories .. and hence the problem!



Yeah, the Murky Magpies like these murky deals - "clean", "ethical", "eco-anything. They have become the go-to for greenwashing of some sorts.


----------



## bag-mania

Kaka_bobo said:


> Totally not interested, like who cares, their wedding was like 3 years ago.... unless we are getting footages of Tiaragate and full centre of Haz's "WhaT M wAntS M gEtS IT" tantrum



How sad that they have to keep going back to the wedding day to remind us how special it was and how in love they are. Any good feelings from that day have long been overshadowed by the last three years of their nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> How sad that they have to keep going back to the wedding day to remind us how special it was and how in love they are. Any good feelings from that day have long been overshadowed by the last three years of their nonsense.


I wonder what else they would share with the public if they weren't so private.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Those 2 first pics
> View attachment 5225264



Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words. And remember the one of her shooting daggers at Kate. She wanted the heir but settled for the spare.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> So there is an alternative option: 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Laid back hippies? Not so much! Founders of Harry and Meghan-backed 'Ethic' sued rival company claiming it hijacked their woke brand as it's learned 'sustainable' firm owns shares of makers of world's most deadly laser-guided missiles*
> 
> *The founders of the 'Ethic' investment firm backed by Harry and Meghan sued  Boston-based Admirals Bancorp last January over its sister organization's name *
> *Jay Lipman, Doug Scott and Johny Mair filed a complaint against the company after it named itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and trademarked the word 'ethic' *
> *Court filings obtained by DailyMail.com reveal the trio had registered the word in 2017 to protect their 'top notch' brand of investment and advisory services*
> *Ethic boasts that it creates 'sustainability solutions to help investors transition money toward companies that treat people and the planet with respect'*
> *The firm sought an injunction saying Bancorp's website also 'emphasizes its commitment to socially conscious investing, a clear overlap' with their business*
> *It's not clear how they overcame their differences as lawyers however the website for 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank' and its slogan remains online*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan-backed investment firm Ethic sued a company over name
> 
> 
> The founding trio behind $1.3billion 'socially aware' investment firm Ethic Inc. launched a legal battle early last year when another business decided to name itself 'Ethic: A Wealth Bank'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Birds of a feather. Reminds me of the Morons of Montecito and their travails over using the word "royal".

BTW I thought it wasn't possible to register common words as a trademark?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.



Pathetic and reeks of desperation.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.




OF COURSE there're UNSEEN pictures and footage from they wedding!!!  They were calculating from the get-go!  "YO, H! Gotta keep aside some great pictures from the nuptials for the big bucks! Let's do some good poses! Pretend this is the greatest day of your life! We're cashing in, Baby! Give'em your best side, H! Come on, some alligator tears of joy! Ka-CHING! Let the green roll in when the time is right!" 

Oh boy. What? Some pictures of Meghan getting dressed? Her fawning over all her relatives? Oh wait, only her mother was there. The Queen looking so happy? hmmm, maybe not. William congratulating H? Not unless they're using footage from a totally different occasion. The whole thing was recorded. Except people in the bathroom (let's hope), maybe while getting dressed (while Meghan berated everyone), Prince Philip's jokes (you know they had to be great), ok, maybe more utterances of word salad. Wait, wait, wait! There must be some footage of some REAL A-listers, like the Clooneys, Beckham's, etc pretending to be so gracious when in reality it was just a cool invitation to respond to. 

Will there be a sequel? "Unseen pictures" from the christenings?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> How sad that they have to keep going back to the wedding day to remind us how special it was and how in love they are. Any good feelings from that day have long been overshadowed by the last three years of their nonsense.



Right! And at the time most of us were probably on board with Meghan on that day. I was glued to the TV watching the wedding and all the pomp. All the grandeur, outfits, horses, pageantry, etc was exciting to see. I had nothing against Meghan that day and was happy for her. Over time it became apparent that her 50 million dollar wedding (not one penny of which came out of Her pocket) became the her path to riches and the first nail into Harry's figurative coffin. For the time being they are both money whores and completely satisfied with trashing the BRF for more and more bucks. Do they really think that going back to their wedding when more people thought they were nice people is going to press the Reset Button into making us think they're nice people again? Fat chance. Where are all the "unseen pictures" of Will and Kate's wedding? You won't see any because there isn't any damage control to be done.


----------



## csshopper

Like much of what they do it could backfire. It will be such a huge contrast between seeming happiness  and  morphing into whiny discontent,  and will spotlight their extravagant display of hypocrisy since we know now that from very early on they were plotting to exit.


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


> They finally got it right in Spanish: "In this bank"




In german we use the same word for „bench“ and „bank“ as well, I personally appreciate it when people are clear about their motives and interests


----------



## Sharont2305

Ouch! This isn't going to go down well in chez Harkle


----------



## needlv

I see the body language guy is catching up to all the “mask slipping” videos…. We should invite him here!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.




Aw, that must hurt those private people to the core. The things you do to feed your children.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I see the body language guy is catching up to all the “mask slipping” videos…. We should invite him here!




I've said it before in slightly different wording, but I would only be mildy surprised if at one of those occasions you'd briefly see little horns grow out of her forehead or her eyes changing colour to something very unnatural before she got it together and smoothed over her face again.


----------



## Aminamina

Sharont2305 said:


> Ouch! This isn't going to go down well in chez Harkle



I read  “Sustainable Markels Initiative”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aminamina said:


> I read  “Sustainable Markels Initiative”



Oh yes, he rolled this out last year at Davos.  Wild guess where H&M get their money?




__





						Home
					

The Sustainable Markets Initiative aims to lead and accelerate the world's transition to a sustainable future by putting nature, people and planet at the heart of global value creation.




					www.sustainable-markets.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Like much of what they do it could backfire. It will be such a huge contrast between seeming happiness  and  morphing into whiny discontent,  and will spotlight their extravagant display of hypocrisy since we know now that from very early on they were plotting to exit.



Aka: rebranding. 
Overheard at Monteshito: _Remember when you loved us?  We are still the same and still here for you. We are still beloved family of the BRF. Just forget what we said in that interview. _


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Ouch! This isn't going to go down well in chez Harkle




I'm sure you posted this here by mistake.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I'm sure you posted this here by mistake.



Obviously, oops! #notreally


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw, that must hurt those private people to the core. *The things you do to feed your children*.


They would have my respect if the purpose of their activities was to feed their children, but it's not. It's pure greed. As Don Wonton said, 'the worst greed'.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I see the body language guy is catching up to all the “mask slipping” videos…. We should invite him here!




I think this one is also very good.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> I think this one is also very good.



Jesús Enrrriques RRRosas is El Hombrrre! The way he's so often on point and accentuates his R:s gets me every time 

Chanbal, you're on a roll


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Please mods, delete this and the two below.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Duplicate. Mods, delete if you wish,


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Duplicate.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Ouch! This isn't going to go down well in chez Harkle



Nice pic, but I think posting it could backfire on them, with more people calling for PC to step aside in favor of William when the Queen dies. PC looks like a feeble little old man next to his strapping young son. Not sure if that's an image they want to project...or do they? Hmm....


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Nice pic, but I think posting it could backfire on them, with more people calling for PC to step aside in favor of William when the Queen dies. PC looks like a feeble little old man next to his strapping young son. Not sure if that's an image they want to project...or do they? Hmm....


I was thinking that too.....he's not really that old but in that pic compared to Will he does look kinda weak


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> For Meghan to date somebody for 7 years and then marry them sounds like she "gave up" trying to find somebody even more rich and famous. Then what? Her job began earning her decent money so she figures she's more marketable? She's a user. The eyes she had for William are recalculating for a billionaire, but Harry will do as long as she can pimp his notoriety into more paydays. She'll line her pockets more and more as the kids get older. and more independent. As Harry becomes even more of an embarrassment/dope and the deals slow down, poof! Off Meghan goes! To greener pastures. We've seen this movie before.


According to some folks who know that past history, the whole spiel with Trevor was ALL about HIM getting her parts, after all .. he's a Producer, so she figured that he would put HER into some A-list films.  Well, that didn't happen .. and then Suits came along and she didn't need HIM anymore .. 'MARKLED'!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I was thinking that too.....he's not really that old but in that pic compared to Will he does look kinda weak


He isn't that old but IMO he is not aging well. His mother looks better at 95 than he does at 73.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> He isn't that old but IMO he is not aging well. His mother looks better at 95 than he does at 73.


Maybe when they polish him up nicely for outings, like they do the Queen (that's a wig she always wears, her hairline was never that low)... he'll look more kingly.

He does wear great suits, though.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Maybe when they polish him up nicely for outings, like they do the Queen (that's a wig she always wears, her hairline was never that low)... he'll look more kingly.
> 
> He does wear great suits, though.


Did not know about the wigs, but makes sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> that's a wig she always wears



Whaaaa?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Maybe when they polish him up nicely for outings, like they do the Queen (that's a wig she always wears, her hairline was never that low)... he'll look more kingly.
> 
> He does wear great suits, though.


Charles isn't in good health. It's pretty plain to see. He didn't seem to inherit his parents' hardy constitution, sadly for him.


----------



## Jayne1

Buzzwords


----------



## Jayne1

There's more!


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Maybe when they polish him up nicely for outings, like they do the Queen (that's a wig she always wears, her hairline was never that low)... he'll look more kingly.
> 
> He does wear great suits, though.


he looked nice when he walked meghan down the aisle


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> He isn't that old but IMO he is not aging well. His mother looks better at 95 than he does at 73.


I think Charles DOES want to be King at some point; I can see him on the throne for (maybe) a few years and then relinquish to William.  He's been waiting a long time (thank God - love QEII), so I think he would like that position for a bit.  My opinion of course!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Buzzwords




Spot on!


----------



## rose60610

Nah, Charles will be king (if he doesn't die first, he doesn't look that healthy IMO). If anything, I don't believe Camilla would let him bow out of the King gig  .  If M&H actually stay married that long, it'll kill M to watch all the pageantry and news surrounding Kate, she'd be green  with envy.


----------



## poopsie

Sharont2305 said:


> Ouch! This isn't going to go down well in chez Harkle




That is a wonderful picture


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

poopsie said:


> That is a wonderful picture


It is! I'm probably reading too much into it, but I do think it shows that Charles is in a vulnerable position health wise, which William knows and therefore the protective embrace. It must be a relief to Charles to have at least one reliable grownup child acting like an adult, to lean on as he himself is growing old.

I think this picture tells a lot.


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It is! I'm probably reading too much into it, but I do think it shows that Charles is in a vulnerable position health wise, which William knows and therefore the protective embrace. It must be a relief to Charles to have at least one reliable grownup child acting like an adult, to lean on as he himself is growing old.
> 
> I think this picture tells a lot.


what is wrong with his health?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It is! I'm probably reading too much into it, but I do think it shows that Charles is in a vulnerable position health wise, which William knows and therefore the protective embrace. It must be a relief to Charles to have at least one reliable grownup child acting like an adult, to lean on as he himself is growing old.
> 
> I think this picture tells a lot.


At the same time I need to add that I'm commenting on Charles et royal al as a family, with which I can easily emphatise. But I do not consent to Charles dabbling in self-proclaimed elitist world ruling over us plebs with his pals Schwab, Rothschilds, Gates and other hubris laden and God complexed 0.1%:ers.

I hope William will choose another path.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> what is wrong with his health?


From what I've read: He has serious back problems. He often has very swollen fingers which have been very noticeable on numerous public outings. There could be many reasons for this. But just by looking at recent pics, he's starting to look frail. Losing his father who must have been a heck of an imposing patriarch and then being betrayed publicly by his own son has probably taken much toll on him and no wonder.

It's just my armchair Dr. Google opinion, but he doesn't look in good health right now.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, wow the 6s do look gorgeous here:


----------



## breakfastatcartier

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> It is! I'm probably reading too much into it, but I do think it shows that Charles is in a vulnerable position health wise, which William knows and therefore the protective embrace. It must be a relief to Charles to have at least one reliable grownup child acting like an adult, to lean on as he himself is growing old.
> 
> I think this picture tells a lot.


I could’ve sworn this was an old picture Kate had taken and posted it recently in celebration of Father’s Day or Charles birthday?

TBH Charles has been through a lot since Diana. As much as I admire her and excused some of her erratic behavior, she was a very young woman who was given huge responsibilities too soon, which she carried out most of her royal duties wonderfully, but she became a wife, mother, princess too soon… and Charles reputation has taken a very hard hit since their separation.

Thank Goodness for William taking most of his mother’s good characteristics and his father’s too…Charles seems to have done his best for his sons despite Philip being cold towards him when he was just a child.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Oh, wow the 6s do look gorgeous here:
> View attachment 5225989


Not a fan of Wills looking like daddy warbucks, lol. But he doesn’t look bad.

And Kate, well you know, she always slays.


----------



## Sharont2305

breakfastatcartier said:


> I could’ve sworn this was an old picture Kate had taken and posted it recently in celebration of Father’s Day or Charles birthday?
> 
> TBH Charles has been through a lot since Diana. As much as I admire her and excused some of her erratic behavior, she was a very young woman who was given huge responsibilities too soon, which she carried out most of her royal duties wonderfully, but she became a wife, mother, princess too soon… and Charles reputation has taken a very hard hit since their separation.
> 
> Thank Goodness for William taking most of his mother’s good characteristics and his father’s too…Charles seems to have done his best for his sons despite Philip being cold towards him when he was just a child.


Yeah, that picture is a couple of years old.


----------



## charlottawill

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> At the same time I need to add that I'm commenting on Charles et royal al as a family, with which I can easily emphatise. But I do not consent to Charles dabbling in self-proclaimed elitist world ruling over us plebs with his pals Schwab, Rothschilds, Gates and other hubris laden and God complexed 0.1%:ers.
> 
> I hope William will choose another path.


Well he did slap Bezos on the hand the other day, so it's a start I guess.


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> Not a fan of Wills looking like daddy warbucks, lol. But he doesn’t look bad.
> 
> And Kate, well you know, she always slays.


I think he's rocking that green velvet jacket  Nice change from the standard tux.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> I could’ve sworn this was an old picture Kate had taken and posted it recently in celebration of Father’s Day or Charles birthday?



It is.



> Thank Goodness for William taking most of his mother’s good characteristics and his father’s too…Charles seems to have done his best for his sons despite Philip being cold towards him when he was just a child.



I don't think he was cold as much as very strict and no-nonsense which super sensitive little Charles didn't handle well. I guess Philip, who probably only survived his own childhood by not indulding himself at all, completely lacked the ability to see that.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Sharont2305 said:


> Yeah, that picture is a couple of years old.


I wonder if the photo is pre or post the invasion of the Soho House second-tier prince snatcher?


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I wonder if the photo is pre or post the invasion of the Soho House second-tier prince snatcher?




Photo was taken at Sandringham in 2019. What a jewel Kate is! She knows how to capture genuine affection 






*Charles 'cuddle' with William after Harry's UK departure shows 'revelation' for prince*
The British Royal Family is not renowned for hugs. However, Prince William and Charles wowed fans with a sweet personal picture of the two hugging, taken at Sandringham last year.



www.express.co.uk
_The Duchess of Cambridge took the photograph, which shows William pulling his father in for hug, him arm wrapped tight around his shoulders, while Charles laughs looking delighted.

It was a rare insight into a more relaxed relationship between the pair, who are often seen together at more formal events.

Fans cooed over the image, singing its praises._


----------



## marietouchet

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> From what I've read: He has serious back problems. He often has very swollen fingers which have been very noticeable on numerous public outings. There could be many reasons for this. But just by looking at recent pics, he's starting to look frail. Losing his father who must have been a heck of an imposing patriarch and then being betrayed publicly by his own son has probably taken much toll on him and no wonder.
> 
> It's just my armchair Dr. Google opinion, but he doesn't look in good health right now.


Gee whiz, the last two years have been hard on the whole family …. Walking on eggs is tough going
Having daily negative energy about such close relatives, I don’t wish that on anyone …
it has been tough no matter whose side you take 

I can just imagine the plethora of medical issues


----------



## EverSoElusive

breakfastatcartier said:


> Not a fan of Wills looking like daddy warbucks, lol. But he doesn’t look bad.
> 
> And Kate, well you know, she always slays.



Will must have taken fashion cue from Daniel Craig... Think the recent 007 red carpet event


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I think Charles DOES want to be King at some point; I can see him on the throne for (maybe) a few years and then relinquish to William.  He's been waiting a long time (thank God - love QEII), so I think he would like that position for a bit.  My opinion of course!


but it seems I've heard they can't just step down unless maybe their health prevents them from performing their duties?


----------



## Chloe302225

sdkitty said:


> but it seems I've heard they can't just step down unless maybe their health prevents them from performing their duties?



They can step down if they want to but abdication is not a part of the BRF unlike other monarchies in Europe. Edward made abdication a curse word which is why the Queen swore to never do it unless she couldn't go on or died. Charles can choose to step down if he wants but if he wants is the question. In some if the other European monarchies the use abdication like retirement but the BRF do not have a history of this, it more if an in case of emergency situation.


----------



## Sophisticatted

IMO, Charles will be king, but will give William a lot of leadership opportunities, exposure, and major decision-making powers.  It seems the Queen has groomed Will to be her true successor (his reign will probably be longer than Charles).  Charles seems to be on board.  Rumor states it was William’s decision to ban the lilies christening in England. That said, I don’t think Charles will step down; because he wants to have the title and also he wants to buy William, Kate, and the kids more time before their life changes with even more responsibilities and a higher press profile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Perfect!


----------



## Chanbal

breakfastatcartier said:


> Not a fan of Wills looking like daddy warbucks, lol. But he doesn’t look bad.
> 
> And Kate, well you know, she always slays.





EverSoElusive said:


> Will must have taken fashion cue from Daniel Craig... Think the recent 007 red carpet event


Love his green jacket, shoes, the entire outfit... Prefer Will's jacket to Craig's pink one. Kate's dress was also perfect for the event.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> They can step down if they want to but abdication is not a part of the BRF unlike other monarchies in Europe. Edward made abdication a curse word which is why the Queen swore to never do it unless she couldn't go on or died. Charles can choose to step down if he wants but if he wants is the question. In some if the other European monarchies the use abdication like retirement but the BRF do not have a history of this, it more if an in case of emergency situation.



Admittedly, I do not quite understand the BRF and I do not know where to research this topic. It may not be appropriate here, please delete if necessary.   I’ve read that QE feels ordained by God.  The line of succession tells us who is next, but is it telling us who has been ordained by God? Or is she ordained by God because she went through the coronation ceremony which is religious?   Seems to me [and I could be wrong here], that if someone abdicates, then the line is broken, unless the ordination is from the ceremony. 
#confused


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Love his green jacket, shoes, the entire outfit... Prefer Will's jacket to Craig's pink one. Kate's dress was also perfect for the event.



They both looked great.
[still, I was hoping for a sparkly gown. Kate has several that would have paired well with Will’s jacket.]
Just my wishful thinking


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> They both looked great.
> [still, I was hoping for a sparkly gown. Kate has several that would have paired well with Will’s jacket.]
> Just my wishful thinking



Maybe because this is PW’s achievement not hers, she wore a more subtle dress (recycled of course!)

I think the bigger news is that next years awards will be in the USA.  So… do you think H and M will angle for a presenter role and/or invite?


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> They both looked great.
> [still, I was hoping for a sparkly gown. Kate has several that would have paired well with Will’s jacket.]
> Just my wishful thinking



While there's nothing wrong with Kate's gown and thank goodness it's not ill fitting, I too felt that she's got other options that would complement Will's outfit better  

This would be a bit matchy-matchy but no doubt it would look amazing!





How about this red number?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> Ouch! This isn't going to go down well in chez Harkle



Love this photo of PC & W.  See Copy-Cat-Megs again getting inspiration from another BRF photo.


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Maybe because this is PW’s achievement not hers, she wore a more subtle dress (recycled of course!)
> 
> I think the bigger news is that next years awards will be in the USA.  *So… do you think H and M will angle for a presenter role and/or invite?*



Please, no. I don't want them to taint W&K's efforts. You know Marklenator will ruin everything without having to try too hard


----------



## Chanbal

The markle claw.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hello ladies, you’ve been very circumspect this weekend- only six pages!


needlv said:


> I see the body language guy is catching up to all the “mask slipping” videos…. We should invite him here!



The face crack of the century! That’s brilliant. Not one of world’s great actresses! 





sdkitty said:


> this is not of great interest to me but at least it sounds somewhat entertaining - rather than them moaning about their victimhood or preaching about social causes


I’d be more interested in revisiting their wedding for purely aesthetic reasons if it hadn’t been so ugly to begin with 
Even the guests’ outfits were pretty cursed as I recall. James corden looked like an shrill navy sausage with cardboard shoes. Idris Elba’s wife is clearly psychic given she wore black for the wedding. 


EverSoElusive said:


> While there's nothing wrong with Kate's gown and thank goodness it's not ill fitting, I too felt that she's got other options that would complement Will's outfit better
> 
> This would be a bit matchy-matchy but no doubt it would look amazing!
> 
> View attachment 5226328
> 
> 
> 
> How about this red number?
> 
> View attachment 5226332


maybe she sold them on Meggie’s mirror   


EverSoElusive said:


> Please, no. I don't want them to taint W&K's efforts. You know Marklenator will ruin everything without having to try too hard


I think to really troll them they should get the actors from that crappy lifetime movie to present it and make them wear very ill-fitting outfits.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can't make that sh*t up. Not only are they siblings in spirit with a shared hobby of lawsuits...wasn't Raptor's weird hipster coffee company anything but ethical as well?


What happened to that coffee anyway?!!?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Perfect!




I'm laughing, but also...isn't this just sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Admittedly, I do not quite understand the BRF and I do not know where to research this topic. It may not be appropriate here, please delete if necessary.   I’ve read that QE feels ordained by God.  The line of succession tells us who is next, but is it telling us who has been ordained by God? Or is she ordained by God because she went through the coronation ceremony which is religious?   Seems to me [and I could be wrong here], that if someone abdicates, then the line is broken, unless the ordination is from the ceremony.
> #confused



Yeah, the coronation is the ordination ceremony. Besides being Queen, she is also the head of the Church of England.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to that coffee anyway?!!?



Fizzled out like all of her projects is my bet, but I honestly don't know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> They both looked great.
> [still, I was hoping for a sparkly gown. Kate has several that would have paired well with Will’s jacket.]
> Just my wishful thinking



I'm with you on the sparkle!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Hello ladies, you’ve been very circumspect this weekend- only six pages!



I'm just tired all the time (and the irony of telling this to a new mom is not lost on me!). I literally spent my past few weekends having extended naps. Though I did can a batch of dip/bread spread/pasta sauce made from 10 pounds of eggplant and bell pepper this Saturday.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photo was taken at Sandringham in 2019. What a jewel Kate is! She knows how to capture genuine affection
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Charles 'cuddle' with William after Harry's UK departure shows 'revelation' for prince*
> The British Royal Family is not renowned for hugs. However, Prince William and Charles wowed fans with a sweet personal picture of the two hugging, taken at Sandringham last year.
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> _The Duchess of Cambridge took the photograph, which shows William pulling his father in for hug, him arm wrapped tight around his shoulders, while Charles laughs looking delighted.
> 
> It was a rare insight into a more relaxed relationship between the pair, who are often seen together at more formal events.
> 
> Fans cooed over the image, singing its praises._


If I have the correct timeline, this was right smack in the middle of Meghan gate and by this time all of her and Harry boy's evil greedy plotting was already in full speed ahead mode. Charles is showing vulnerability, trust and lots of emotion towards both William and Kate in this pic. To further cement my prior armchair analysis, William is Charles's rock and has been for some time.

*This message has not been fact checked by Jesús Enrrriques RRRosas


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels, are congratulations in order?!


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> I read  “Sustainable Markels Initiative”



Those 3 words will never be true if used together


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to that coffee anyway?!!?



If we can believe the internet, Clevr brand is thriving. With Oprah and MM involved, who knows the truth?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm just tired all the time (and the irony of telling this to a new mom is not lost on me!). I literally spent my past few weekends having extended naps. Though I did can a batch of dip/bread spread/pasta sauce made from 10 pounds of eggplant and bell pepper this Saturday.



You are awesome, Queen 

As long as the tiresome two stay quiet, I‘m good.  When they stick themselves into every news feed, especially with the lies, that’s the stuff that must be addressed. Imo. For whatever reason, the BRF has decided to be so much more active lately, so they require comments, too. I know I know they are back from summer vacation and are supposed to be working, still it will take some getting used to.  QE walking around in those beautiful brooches, that requires a comment or two  

The holidays are on their way, so my attention will be divided [probably while we are distracted,  H&M will announce that they have taken over the West Coast — haaa].  I’ll keep my guard up, just in case.



papertiger said:


> Those 3 words will never be true if used together



Agree in spirit, in practice I am a bit concerned Charles is still funding them, propping them up. He’s a dad, he won’t let them sink into oblivion. So, we will have plenty to visit about.  Stay strong, all.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to that coffee anyway?!!?



Everything she touches is dead   




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm just tired all the time (and the irony of telling this to a new mom is not lost on me!). I literally spent my past few weekends having extended naps. Though I did can a batch of dip/bread spread/pasta sauce made from 10 pounds of eggplant and bell pepper this Saturday.



What about the good ole olive oil lemon cake?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The holidays are on their way, so my attention will be divided [probably while we are distracted,  H&M will announce that they have taken over the West Coast — haaa].  I’ll keep my guard up, just in case.



Ah yes...Christmas is usually the highlight of my year. I did buy baking supplies and even treated myself to a new cookie mold that came all the way from Russia, so at least I'm prepared! Luckily in my line of business Christmas season is now, so my Decembers are usually pretty mellow.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah yes...Christmas is usually the highlight of my year. I did buy baking supplies and even treated myself to a new cookie mold that came all the way from Russia, so at least I'm prepared! Luckily in my line of business Christmas season is now, so my Decembers are usually pretty mellow.



Your dip sounds delicious! Please, if you wish, post a photo of the Christmas cookies. Maybe we should exchange recipes, in honour of H&M of course. Always ready for happy topics


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Admittedly, I do not quite understand the BRF and I do not know where to research this topic. It may not be appropriate here, please delete if necessary.   I’ve read that QE feels ordained by God.  The line of succession tells us who is next, but is it telling us who has been ordained by God? Or is she ordained by God because she went through the coronation ceremony which is religious?   Seems to me [and I could be wrong here], that if someone abdicates, then the line is broken, unless the ordination is from the ceremony.
> #confused



Someone has probably already answered this.

QEII was only in the line of succession because of her uncle's abdication (although 'we' all thank Gd for that). Her mother (Queen Mother) believed wearing the Crown shortened her husband's life (George VI) so actually the role was thought of as huge burden for his character, although I don't think she thought the same for her daughter.

Elizabeth, pre-Ed's abdication, grew-up wanting to work with horses full-time, when she got married (already heir apparent) she thought she would have more time to enjoy being a military wife.

Since Edward VIII and Wallis never had children, she probably would have been Queen anyway, so she may personally believe in her (divine) right to rule but it would have come 20 years later.

She became Queen the second her father died. But, it was once she took her 3 part Oath at the Coronation that she took her vows and was crowed.  To govern (including Commonwealth) to be just/merciful and to be the Head of the true gospel i.e. protestant high-church / CofE).

Edward VIII was never crowned. He became King when his father died but had no coronation and therefore took no vows (and so never broke them).

The role of the monarch is NOT a job. They don't work and then go off duty after 5pm, and they don't retire. The Oath is for life. The concept of monarchy can_ only_ be retained if explained by a life-role. It's the Head of the embodiment of an established hierarchy, and can only be by divine right (otherwise it would be a presidency). Heads of nations that rule for life who are not monarchs are normally called 'dictators'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Someone has probably already answered this.
> 
> QEII was only in the line of succession because of her uncle's abdication (although 'we' all thank Gd for that). Her mother (Queen Mother) believed wearing the Crown shortened her husband's life (George VI) so actually the role was thought of as huge burden for his character, although I don't think she thought the same for her daughter.
> 
> Elizabeth, pre-Ed's abdication, grew-up wanting to work with horses full-time, when she got married (already heir apparent) she thought she would have more time to enjoy being a military wife.
> 
> Since Edward VIII and Wallis never had children, she probably would have been Queen anyway, so she may personally believe in her (divine) right to rule but it would have come 20 years later.
> 
> She became Queen the second her father died. But, it was once she took her 3 part Oath at the Coronation that she took her vows and was crowed.  To govern (including Commonwealth) to be just/merciful and to be the Head of the true gospel i.e. protestant high-church / CofE).
> 
> Edward VIII was never crowned. He became King when his father died but had no coronation and therefore took no vows (and so never broke them).
> 
> The role of the monarch is NOT a job. They don't work and then go off duty after 5pm, and they don't retire. The Oath is for life. The concept of monarchy can_ only_ be retained if explained by a life-role. It's the Head of the embodiment of an established hierarchy, and can only be by divine right (otherwise it would be a presidency). Heads of nations that rule for life who are not monarchs are normally called 'dictators'.



Thank you for the very clear and helpful explanation. I was under the incorrect impression that the _divine right_ came from the _line of succession_.  It will be interesting to watch what Charles does. I am guessing he will opt for a coronation, but how involved with the C of E is he?  How involved is William? Is regular Sunday attendance recommended?  Seems like we only see photos on the holidays. Of course, I could be wrong.
====

Comparisons were inevitable, probably will happen all week. Sigh.









						William and Kate's body languages is 'masterclass of regal behaviour'
					

Speaking exclusively to FEMAIL, body language expert Judi James revealed how the couple showed they are approachable, while they also seemed 'in awe' of David Attenborough.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Your dip sounds delicious! Please, if you wish, post a photo of the Christmas cookies. Maybe we should exchange recipes, in honour of H&M of course. Always ready for happy topics



I'm happy to share, but maybe we should do a holiday thread or something as to not test the mod's saintly patience with us?


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the very clear and helpful explanation. I was under the incorrect impression that the _divine right_ came from the _line of succession_.  It will be interesting to watch what Charles does. I am guessing he will opt for a coronation, but how involved with the C of E is he?  How involved is William? Is regular Sunday attendance recommended?  Seems like we only see photos on the holidays. Of course, I could be wrong.
> ====
> 
> Comparisons were inevitable, probably will happen all week. Sigh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate's body languages is 'masterclass of regal behaviour'
> 
> 
> Speaking exclusively to FEMAIL, body language expert Judi James revealed how the couple showed they are approachable, while they also seemed 'in awe' of David Attenborough.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


When they lived here William and Catherine went to church every Sunday. This one


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the very clear and helpful explanation. I was under the incorrect impression that the _divine right_ came from the _line of succession_.  It will be interesting to watch what Charles does. I am guessing he will opt for a coronation, but how involved with the C of E is he?  How involved is William? Is regular Sunday attendance recommended?  Seems like we only see photos on the holidays. Of course, I could be wrong.
> ====
> 
> Comparisons were inevitable, probably will happen all week. Sigh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate's body languages is 'masterclass of regal behaviour'
> 
> 
> Speaking exclusively to FEMAIL, body language expert Judi James revealed how the couple showed they are approachable, while they also seemed 'in awe' of David Attenborough.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Divine Right does come from the line of succession but 'all in Gd's time'. To abdicate when alive or choose not become King is to abdicate one's responsibility (as Edward was thought to have done). Charles will become King but whether or not he decides to take the Oath and be crownedyis another matter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Divine Right does come from the line of succession but 'all in Gd's time'. To abdicate when alive or choose not become King is to abdicate one's responsibility (as Edward was thought to have done). Charles will become King but whether or not he decides to take the Oath and be crownedyis another matter.



Yes, Charles is one to watch.
Is it correct to say the line of succession gives a person the ability to take the oath, whether or not the person does is up to him/her?
In other words, the right to join the LoS is based on birth, but the taking the oath is voluntary (sorta)?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm happy to share, but maybe we should do a holiday thread or something as to not test the mod's saintly patience with us?



Excellent idea!  I’m in. Thank you :chef’s kiss to you:






Sharont2305 said:


> When they lived here William and Catherine went to church every Sunday.



Thanks so much for this


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent idea!  I’m in. Thank you :chef’s kiss to you:



Here you go:

The Holiday Thread


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here you go:
> 
> The Holiday Thread


Wonderful, I'm following.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> While there's nothing wrong with Kate's gown and thank goodness it's not ill fitting, I too felt that she's got other options that would complement Will's outfit better
> 
> This would be a bit matchy-matchy but no doubt it would look amazing!
> 
> View attachment 5226328
> 
> 
> 
> How about this red number?
> 
> View attachment 5226332


I was thinking the same about the green one, I believe another Jenny Packham. The red is gorgeous but too Christmasy with his green jacket.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, Charles is one to watch.
> Is it correct to say the line of succession gives a person the ability to take the oath, whether or not the person does is up to him/her?
> In other words, the right to join the LoS is based on birth, but the taking the oath is voluntary (sorta)?
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent idea!  I’m in. Thank you :chef’s kiss to you:
> 
> View attachment 5226521
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks so much for this



It comes from a time when less things voluntary were actually voluntary, i.e. a young man may have 'volunteered' for the army at the announcement of war but he would have known in a months times there would have been conscription and 'volunteering' would look better. In other words unless he can commit wholly to the 3-part oath (and PC, like his mother takes these things very seriously) he presumably would not do so not out of choice but conviction.


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> If I have the correct timeline, this was right smack in the middle of Meghan gate and by this time all of her and Harry boy's evil greedy plotting was already in full speed ahead mode. Charles is showing vulnerability, trust and lots of emotion towards both William and Kate in this pic. To further cement my prior armchair analysis, William is Charles's rock and has been for some time.
> 
> *This message has not been fact checked by Jesús Enrrriques RRRosas


William was Diana's rock, he is now Charles's rock… At some point, he was also Harry's rock. It's a lot on the shoulders of a relatively young man. I wish him well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Several sparkly gowns in the W&K thread. All look great -


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> William was Diana's rock, he is now Charles's rock… At some point, he was also Harry's rock. It's a lot on the shoulders of a relatively young man. I wish him well.



True. At least he married a woman who isn't all about herself.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the Canc*l Cultur* people will be using some type of software to find accounts on Tw*tter that are unfavorable to the duchS. A group of so called private citizens ( shine S or ???) will likely be indoctrinating us on how wonderful 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Friar 6's wife is.



Spoiler: Where is Piers?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I was thinking the same about the green one, I believe another Jenny Packham. The red is gorgeous but too Christmasy with his green jacket.


The lilac gown looked gray on my screen, but it is of impeccable taste, not too short, too sheer, too glitzy 
imho she was letting W shine yesterday and it worked 
she got to be a Bond girl for a day not it is his turn, respectful to her husband


----------



## Chanbal

Being unfair to Scooobie??? He is likely still waiting for the approval of his master.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the Canc*l Cultur* people will be using some type of software to find accounts on Tw*tter that are unfavorable to the duchS. A group of so called private citizens ( shine S or ???) will likely be indoctrinating us on how wonderful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friar 6's wife is.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Where is Piers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5226574
> 
> View attachment 5226575



[Yes, of course, absolutely, it is *our* fault people don’t like her.  Because ya kno, she is sooooo perfect - just like Hazzie. ]  

See, it is this stuff that makes both H&M detestable imo.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> [Yes, of course, absolutely, it is *our* fault people don’t like her. Because ya kno, she is sooooo perfect - just like Hazzie. ]
> 
> See, it is this stuff that makes both H&M detestable imo.


Absolutely! We should continue denouncing parasites and weeds…


----------



## Chanbal

Like QE, Friar 6 and wife are allegedly planing to produce their own Christmas message to share with the world…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We no care.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, are these ridiculous two also renting a George to make fruitcake or is that too oldfashioned for their wokeness?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Like QE, Friar 6 and wife are allegedly planing to produce their own Christmas message to share with the world…




They have fans? All around the world?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Like QE, Friar 6 and wife are allegedly planing to produce their own Christmas message to share with the world…


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Nah, Charles will be king (if he doesn't die first, he doesn't look that healthy IMO). If anything, I don't believe Camilla would let him bow out of the King gig  .  If M&H actually stay married that long, it'll kill M to watch all the pageantry and news surrounding Kate, she'd be green  with envy.


*YES *.. and that IS something that *I would want TO SEE*!!!!!


----------



## KJaneN

CeeJay said:


> *YES *.. and that IS something that *I would want TO SEE*!!!!!


Yes me too


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> Gee whiz, the last two years have been hard on the whole family …. Walking on eggs is tough going
> Having daily negative energy about such close relatives, I don’t wish that on anyone …
> it has been tough no matter whose side you take
> 
> I can just imagine the plethora of medical issues


ABSOLUTELY .. stress can take a huge presence related to one's health!  I had a former Financial Services colleague who developed very High Blood Pressure, Cholesterol, etc. - such that she had (thank god - a mild) stroke!!!  She has since left the business and I can't even say how much better she is!!!  I'm back in the game (FinTech Start-Up), and I know that it's likely going to be some tough times coming up .. but I'm such a Type A++++++ person, that I (somewhat) enjoy that pressure!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tee hee!


----------



## jelliedfeels

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> jelliedfeels, are congratulations in order?!


Yes indeed, thank you, I had our lovely little girl Jelly in late August. You can be certain she is not called Lilibet or indeed any other nickname as a name names.  

I actually said I was going to go on maternity break from the thread but much like them I can’t resist sticking my oar in  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm just tired all the time (and the irony of telling this to a new mom is not lost on me!). I literally spent my past few weekends having extended naps. Though I did can a batch of dip/bread spread/pasta sauce made from 10 pounds of eggplant and bell pepper this Saturday.


thank you for your kind words & it’s going really well as she’s a very calm baby  (fingers crossed)
I agree there is a lot to be said for extended naps especially on a crisp autumn day!


----------



## TC1

charlottawill said:


> This is intriguing but you have to take it with big a grain of salt, like so much internet gossip. There are also rumors that she was a "beard" for him and a number of others. Who knows what is really true?



As a Canadian..the term "Ice Hockeyist" has me LOL'ing


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes indeed, thank you, I had our lovely little girl Jelly in late August. You can be certain she is not called Lilibet or indeed any other nickname as a name names.
> 
> I actually said I was going to go on maternity break from the thread but much like them I can’t resist sticking my oar in
> 
> thank you for your kind words & it’s going really well as she’s a very calm baby  (fingers crossed)
> I agree there is a lot to be said for extended naps especially on a crisp autumn day!


Congratulations!  This is very happy news! 

When I was pregnant the first time was about the same time I found tPF. I had problems nursing the first 2-3 months so was literally tethered to my breast pump and kept it up even after we got the hang of nursing. All those lonely night time hours with just me, medela, tPF and those celebrity gossip rabbit holes I was lured into- absolutely against my will  I'll never be free from the memory of that medela sound. Nor what I learned on various gossip and blind item sites either  

I hope you are all getting lots of sleep in between all the cuddles and adoring baby Jelly. (And please don't forget to check your ferritin levels as they can go super low despite your other iron levels looking fine. Don't trust any doctor saying anything below 50 is normal. I had around 5-10 for years and it wreaked havoc with my energy levels which is not a good thing when you have little ones. I think more and more doctors are aware of this now.)


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Nah, Charles will be king (if he doesn't die first, he doesn't look that healthy IMO). If anything, I don't believe Camilla would let him bow out of the King gig


I've always read that Camilla wasn't overly anxious to be a duchess.  She liked her behind the scenes bucolic country life.


----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> As a Canadian..the term "Ice Hockeyist" has me LOL'ing


As a Canadian, born and raised, I didn't realize hockey players were considered rock stars here.  (Someone above mentioned that.). lol


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> Nah, Charles will be king (if he doesn't die first, he doesn't look that healthy IMO). If anything, I don't believe Camilla would let him bow out of the King gig  . If M&H actually stay married that long, it'll kill M to watch all the pageantry and news surrounding Kate, she'd be green  with envy.
> [/Q
> The best picture ever will come, maybe some day, of Maggot having to CURTSY to Catherine!


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> "She liked her behind the scenes bucolic country life."


As does Charles, which has been a common bond for them. Unfortunately he had the "misfortune" to be heir to the throne.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The lilac gown looked gray on my screen, but it is of impeccable taste, not too short, too sheer, too glitzy
> imho she was letting W shine yesterday and it worked
> she got to be a Bond girl for a day not it is his turn, respectful to her husband


Exactly. It is elegant, understated, and she has worn it before. Totally appropriate for the occasion.


----------



## Chanbal

Financial podcast(s) from the 6's squad is/are apparently being sponsored by the 6's PR company (see spoiler), would this be possible?  The video is on youtube and is promoting 'investing in each other.' So I took one for the team and watched parts of it, and they sound like loyal servants of their queen… 

They seem to be preaching about sustainable investing and appealing to their not so rich followers. The ones that are receptive to comments like '_From the world I come from, you don't talk about investing, right? You don't have the luxury to invest. That sounds so fancy._' '_My husband has been saying for years: 'Gosh, don't you wish there was a place where if your values were aligned like this, you could put your money to that same sort of thing?_'

A wonderful coincidence with the announcement of the 6s' new jobs at a certain edge fund. Fist they buy the book, then donate to a foundation, and now … 



Spoiler: Paid by SS?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Like QE, Friar 6 and wife are allegedly planing to produce their own Christmas message to share with the world…



I suspected they would hold off the big reveal of the kids until Christmas and then do something like this. They're so predictable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> As a Canadian, born and raised, I didn't realize hockey players were considered rock stars here.  (Someone above mentioned that.). lol


Meet Steve Yzerman. Canada had some of the absolute finest of hockey players ever to skate across a blue line. As did Russia. And Scandinavia. I discovered hockey players long long before I ever discovered young men in bands. "The ice hockeyists"  were absolute rock stars. And many behaved like it too from what I've heard.






Meanwhile in the US


----------



## charlottawill

Uh oh....more plates will be breaking.....



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...paign=VF_CH_101821&utm_term=VYF_Cocktail_Hour


----------



## Jayne1

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meet Steve Yzerman. Canada had some of the absolute finest of hockey players ever to skate across a blue line. As did Russia. And Scandinavia. I discovered hockey players long long before I ever discovered young men in bands. "The ice hockeyists"  were absolute rock stars. And many behaved like it too from what I've heard.
> 
> View attachment 5226925
> 
> View attachment 5226929
> 
> 
> Meanwhile in the US



Okay, point taken!

It's just usually the ones I see have missing front teeth, although they do put in new ones...


----------



## A1aGypsy

Lol, Stevie Y was no different.  Those were some youthful pics.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Meet Steve Yzerman. Canada had some of the absolute finest of hockey players ever to skate across a blue line. As did Russia. And Scandinavia. I discovered hockey players long long before I ever discovered young men in bands. "The ice hockeyists"  were absolute rock stars. And many behaved like it too from what I've heard.
> 
> View attachment 5226925
> 
> View attachment 5226929
> 
> 
> Meanwhile in the US



I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

A1aGypsy said:


> Lol, Stevie Y was no different.  Those were some youthful pics.


That dental trajectory is to be expected with a multi season three times Stanley Cup champion NHL ice hockeyist. Besides, you deliberately chose a bad angle


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


This post is sad and funny at the same time! I'm scared to even comment    I'm very sorry about your FIL but if your hubby is an ice hockeyist, I'm guessing his father was too so he'd probably understand and consent to you guys going to the game.

It was a Russian player taking of his helmet in the penalty box that started my hockey obsession. After a few years I started paying attention to the actual game too


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


I'm very sorry for your loss.  It doesn't seem wrong to me, people cope with feelings of grief in different ways.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I'm very sorry for your loss.  It doesn't seem wrong to me, people cope with feelings of grief in different ways.


Thank you!  My FIL was a huge hockey fan too, so DH thought it'd be nice.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This post is sad and funny at the same time! I'm scared to even comment    I'm very sorry about your FIL but if your hubby is an ice hockeyist, I'm guessing his father was too so he'd probably understand and consent to you guys going to the game.
> 
> It was a Russian player taking of his helmet in the penalty box that started my hockey obsession. After a few years I started paying attention to the actual game too


----------



## Katel

condolences @purseinsanity 


jelliedfeels said:


> ...revisiting their wedding for purely aesthetic reasons if it hadn’t been so ugly to begin with    Even the guests’ outfits were pretty cursed as I recall. *James corden looked like an shrill navy sausage with cardboard shoes.* Idris Elba’s wife is clearly psychic given she wore black for the wedding.
> 
> maybe she sold them on Meggie’s mirror
> 
> I think to really troll them they should get the actors from that crappy lifetime movie to present it and make them wear very ill-fitting outfits.


Oh hahahaha  TU - you do have such a way with words.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


I’m sorry for your loss.  I think it’s a lovely idea holding a game in memoriam.

Ive never really watched ice hockey myself, we tend to play field hockey at school only and I think I may prefer something less violent, like boxing.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


purseinsanity,  The Friday night game your husband has planned is a lovely tribute to his Dad.  

Can relate to the intense love for the game. My adult grandson has skated since he was 5, once a week drives 4 hours round trip after a full day of work, to practice with his team. Because of COVID mask requirements, they couldn't keep a regular season going as some of the other teams in the league balked at the requirements for playing them. His team/destination happens to be in my city. Anxious to play, they split the group and had an Inter Squad game Saturday night. Besides getting to watch him skate again there was the joy of watching my toddler great grandson at the rink watching live action for the first time. "go skate" are part of his early vocabulary. Saturday the  bonus for him was the Zamboni. Then he came home and had to hear "Good Night Hockey" before he went to bed. And on it goes.

Back on topic: my reaction to the Morons of Monteshitshow's "Christmas Message" is


----------



## chowlover2

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


I'm going to guess your DH and his Dad shared many a hockey game together. I think it's his way of sharing some of his Dad with you and the kids. I think it's lovely. From a long suffering Phila Flyers fan Here's to your FIL!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!



I'm so sorry for your loss.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


I’m sorry for your loss @purseinsanity.  Sounds like the game is a lovely tribute to your FIL.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!



Oh, dear @purseinsanity, I am sorry to hear about your FIL.  Enjoy the game in his honor.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Uh oh....more plates will be breaking.....



 I think I hear a lecture. 
What is it about the UK royals that they think we Americans want them here?  The sheer audacity of that, the ego, my my.  Notice the other royals don’t do that - Willem, Felipe, they stay in their lane and are adored. Oh wait, I get it - they are real kings.  W is just an heir to an heir.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, TM is spilling the beans - again 

Some highlights:
-Mr Markle claimed Meghan 'changed' when she met Prince Harry and said it was 'ridiculous' that he had been estranged from his daughter for nearly four years. [we agree - they are brats]

-The 77-year-old retired lighting director, who lives in Rosarito, Mexico, added that he and Meghan both needed to 'grow up, talk, make up' and mend their relationship. [doubt that will happen any time soon, unless there is some $$$ in it]

-He told ITV's Good Morning Britain today: 'I don't know what changed her. She's never been that way before and once she hooked up with Harry, she changed. [now, what do you mean by _hooked up_?  ]

-'I understand that she hooked up with Soho Club and a different group of people, but she's pretty much disowned both sides of her family, and I don't understand the reason.' [_hooked up???_ Please, please, be more specific.  ]

-And asked by Reid if Meghan and Harry were happy, Mr Markle said: 'Well, money isn't everything, but the book he's writing should be not Finding Freedom - it should be Finding Money, that's all they seem to care about right now.'  [yep, we’ve been right all along]









						Thomas Markle claims Meghan has 'disowned both sides of her family'
					

Thomas Markle claimed Meghan 'changed' when she met Prince Harry and said it was 'ridiculous' that he had been estranged from his daughter for nearly four years.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes indeed, thank you, I had our lovely little girl Jelly in late August. You can be certain she is not called Lilibet or indeed any other nickname as a name names.
> 
> I actually said I was going to go on maternity break from the thread but much like them I can’t resist sticking my oar in
> 
> thank you for your kind words & it’s going really well as she’s a very calm baby  (fingers crossed)
> I agree there is a lot to be said for extended naps especially on a crisp autumn day!


Congratulations @jelliedfeels on your new baby!!  What a blessing.


----------



## carmen56

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to that coffee anyway?!!?



Like everything else Raptor gets involved with, it was a 5 minute wonder.


----------



## CarryOn2020

carmen56 said:


> Like everything else Raptor gets involved with, it was a 5 minute wonder.



It lives.
Sign up for the emails so you can have _sunshine in your inbox _
Isn’t Oprah is an investor, too. Personally, I prefer the non-functional latte.









						Web Shop
					

Shop oat milk lattes, packed with adaptogens and made with mushrooms. Clevr Blends' Matcha, Chai, and Golden oat milk SuperLattes are the perfect substitutes to your daily coffee.




					clevrblends.com


----------



## breakfastatcartier

charlottawill said:


> Uh oh....more plates will be breaking.....


Ya, all those fillers and Botox in meghans face are melting by now …


----------



## Lenna.V

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think I hear a lecture.
> What is it about the UK royals that they think we Americans want them here?  The sheer audacity of that, the ego, my my.  Notice the other royals don’t do that - Willem, Felipe, they stay in their lane and are adored. Oh wait, I get it - they are real kings.  W is just an heir to an heir.



As I am living in European country where there is King, the other relatives (brothers and sisters...) seems to distance themselves from spot light. Press here are around only the King, Queen and their children. Seems like no one care enough about the fringes (Charles in The Crown called Andrew hahaha) to give lime light, and likewise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lenna.V said:


> As I am living in European country where there is King, the other relatives (brothers and sisters...) seems to distance themselves from spot light. Press here are around only the King, Queen and their children. Seems like no one care enough about the fringes (Charles in The Crown called Andrew hahaha) to give lime light, and likewise.



Perhaps W is having a mid-life crisis, much like his dad did.  Ya kno, here is Charles at 70, still in training for his job.  I know I know QE has given him more duties, but still he has waited his entire life for what??? W probably realizes that maybe he is kinda “trapped” as Hazzie boldly claimed.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


I'm so sorry for your loss. It sounds like your husband has a great plan to celebrate his father's life!


----------



## piperdog

purseinsanity said:


> I was obsessed with hockey since childhood and still am.  I married a hockey player/enthusiast and now my children are absolutely obsessed as well.  As a matter of fact, we are traveling to my FIL's funeral this weekend, and are squeezing in a hockey game Friday night.  It somehow seems wrong, but it's hubby's idea, so who am I to argue!??!


So sorry for your loss. The evening of my father's funeral, my niece and I went to see a basketball game of the team he loved and bought season tickets to see for decades. It was a fitting way to honor him, and it was nice to share that time with all of my parents' friends in their section.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also the comment section is gold, these are just the first three ones:



> Since Harry and Meghan started dating in 2016, "The Body Language Guy" is the only  BL analyst who manages to capture those psychotically frightening microexpressions that Meghan displays as the inner monster/monstrosity rises up and threatens to burst forth. It is beyond creepy. It always looks like Freddy Kruger just before the fatal attack.





> I could feel sorry for that guy if he wasn’t such a jerk to his family himself!





> There was one incident where, at an official event, she grabbed his shoulder and you can see her fingers digging in.  He stopped walking and she slips in front of him, which is against protocol, as he should ALWAYS take precedence.  You never see Catherine do it to William.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.


----------



## GirlAndBag

Chanbal said:


> I think this one is also very good.



For some reason , this reminds me of stamford wives.. but probably with role reversed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

GirlAndBag said:


> For some reason , this reminds me of stamford wives.. but probably with role reversed



Didn't one of them have a Stepford husband? The mayor's wife or something?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.


At her first ever engagement with William which was here on Anglesey, Catherine sung our National Anthem. So, not just another anthem, a different language too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> At her first ever engagement with William which was here on Anglesey, Catherine sung our National Anthem. So, not just another anthem, a different language too.



Oh wow. And not only a different language, an extremely difficult language as well.


----------



## GirlAndBag

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't one of them have a Stepford husband? The mayor's wife or something?


Truly apt indeed ! Thanks for the reminder


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, TM is spilling the beans - again
> 
> Some highlights:
> -Mr Markle claimed Meghan 'changed' when she met Prince Harry and said it was 'ridiculous' that he had been estranged from his daughter for nearly four years. [we agree - they are brats]
> 
> -The 77-year-old retired lighting director, who lives in Rosarito, Mexico, added that he and Meghan both needed to 'grow up, talk, make up' and mend their relationship. [doubt that will happen any time soon, unless there is some $$$ in it]
> 
> -He told ITV's Good Morning Britain today: 'I don't know what changed her. She's never been that way before and once she hooked up with Harry, she changed. [now, what do you mean by _hooked up_?  ]
> 
> -'I understand that she hooked up with Soho Club and a different group of people, but she's pretty much disowned both sides of her family, and I don't understand the reason.' [_hooked up???_ Please, please, be more specific.  ]
> 
> -*And asked by Reid if Meghan and Harry were happy, Mr Markle said: 'Well, money isn't everything, but the book he's writing should be not Finding Freedom - it should be Finding Money, that's all they seem to care about right now.'*  [yep, we’ve been right all along]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle claims Meghan has 'disowned both sides of her family'
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle claimed Meghan 'changed' when she met Prince Harry and said it was 'ridiculous' that he had been estranged from his daughter for nearly four years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Agree with TM on 'Finding Money' for the title of 6's book, but he is still a little in denial about his daughter. She has been in 'that way' for a long time, but 6 provided the money and connections needed to act according to what she really is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the recent Thomas Markle DM article's comment section. At this point, I wonder if someone has made a counter army of bots that are so ridiculous in their praise that they will get the point much better across than the ones critisizing Raptor.



> it sounds as though Kate has gotten to Thomas Markle and poisoned his opinions of his daughter, the Empress of Sussex.  Like the overwhelming majority of English people, I am mortified by the continued heinous attacks on HRH Princess Meghan and Husband Harry.  Thomas Markle displays a profound lack of gratitude to his daughter who will likely one day be Queen.  The truth is that the House of Sussex is beloved around the globe and continues to execute vast philanthropic projects for the neediest among us.  From toiling in her kitchen baking lemon cakes for the poor to buying massive quantities of diapers for unwed mothers, HRH Princess Meghan sets highest bar for charitable endeavors.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_to his daughter who will likely one day be Queen_

Looks like they bought the _dumb bots_. They should have paid the extra dollars and bought the _smart bots_.


----------



## piperdog

piperdog said:


> So sorry for your loss. The evening of my father's funeral, my niece and I went to see a basketball game of the team he loved and bought season tickets to see for decades. It was a fitting way to honor him, and it was nice to share that time with all of my parents' friends in their section.


Oh, @purseinsanity  to keep in on topic, don't forget to: 1) have an entire section of premium seats cleared; 2) issue a statement how you plan to present a (merched!) wreath to honor your FIL at a key moment during the game with all sorts of details about how the wreath is a sweet nod to your FIL, who really loved you best of all; and 3) stage an alternative wreath-laying event outside the arena complete with photo and video crew to shine a light on how cruelly you were treated when your reasonable requests to make the hockey game all about you were rebuffed. Sadly, I had to suffer my loss before I had Meghan to set her wonderful examples of how to properly attend sporting events and honor the deceased.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, TM is spilling the beans - again
> 
> -He told ITV's Good Morning Britain today: 'I don't know what changed her. She's never been that way before and once she hooked up with Harry, she changed. [now, what do you mean by _hooked up_?  ]


I remember a staff member saying when Diana got married, she literally woke up a changed person. Meaning she changed overnight into someone who knew she was _ROYAL (_not just a Lady anymore.)

I never forgot that statement which was made early on.

I think it just happens when you marry a member of the Royal Family.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the recent Thomas Markle DM article's comment section. At this point, I wonder if someone has made a counter army of bots that are so ridiculous in their praise that they will get the point much better across than the ones critisizing Raptor.


A few pages ago, there is a very similar DM post from a 'HoneypotBrenda', this is the work of MM's squad imo. I'm still in shock with their video/podcast I heard yesterday; _MM is very rich, she could choose not to care about us, but she wants us to sit at the same table (_something along this line_)_… It sounded like pure indoctrination. Though, @bag-mania may think differently.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Icyjade

Kate showing Megain how to wear red


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> It lives.
> Sign up for the emails so you can have _sunshine in your inbox _
> Isn’t Oprah is an investor, too. Personally, I prefer the non-functional latte.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Web Shop
> 
> 
> Shop oat milk lattes, packed with adaptogens and made with mushrooms. Clevr Blends' Matcha, Chai, and Golden oat milk SuperLattes are the perfect substitutes to your daily coffee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> clevrblends.com


“Functional lattes” Is it a laxative?


----------



## Chanbal

This thread may not be the right fit for this post, but the message is so nice and many of us come here for updates and to say hi…  So, to all my young TPF colleagues:


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.


You'd think as an *actor* she'd be able to, you know, memorize a few lines or something....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Icyjade said:


> Kate showing Megain how to wear red
> 
> View attachment 5227350


Someone had to say it.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, TM is spilling the beans - again
> 
> Some highlights:
> -Mr Markle claimed Meghan 'changed' when she met Prince Harry and said it was 'ridiculous' that he had been estranged from his daughter for nearly four years. [we agree - they are brats]
> 
> -The 77-year-old retired lighting director, who lives in Rosarito, Mexico, added that he and Meghan both needed to 'grow up, talk, make up' and mend their relationship. [doubt that will happen any time soon, unless there is some $$$ in it]
> 
> -He told ITV's Good Morning Britain today: 'I don't know what changed her. She's never been that way before and once she hooked up with Harry, she changed. [now, what do you mean by _hooked up_?  ]
> 
> -'I understand that she hooked up with Soho Club and a different group of people, but she's pretty much disowned both sides of her family, and I don't understand the reason.' [_hooked up???_ Please, please, be more specific.  ]
> 
> -And asked by Reid if Meghan and Harry were happy, Mr Markle said: 'Well, money isn't everything, but the book he's writing should be not Finding Freedom - it should be Finding Money, that's all they seem to care about right now.'  [yep, we’ve been right all along]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle claims Meghan has 'disowned both sides of her family'
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle claimed Meghan 'changed' when she met Prince Harry and said it was 'ridiculous' that he had been estranged from his daughter for nearly four years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Throwing shade? Implying that someone is or was a hooker? Maybe he knows about the yachts?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Throwing shade? Implying that someone is or was a hooker? Maybe he knows about the yachts?



Doubt it. That man still wears hot pink glasses when his little angel is concerned or else he wouldn't blame Harry for her obvious character flaws.

I can't get over that video where that little 11yo sh*t talked down to him and rolled her eyes. I am not 11, and I don't talk to my parents like that.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sorry for your loss.  I think it’s a lovely idea holding a game in memoriam.
> 
> Ive never really watched ice hockey myself, we tend to play field hockey at school only and I think I may prefer something less violent, like boxing.





Katel said:


> condolences @purseinsanity
> Oh hahahaha  TU - you do have such a way with words.





csshopper said:


> purseinsanity,  The Friday night game your husband has planned is a lovely tribute to his Dad.
> 
> Can relate to the intense love for the game. My adult grandson has skated since he was 5, once a week drives 4 hours round trip after a full day of work, to practice with his team. Because of COVID mask requirements, they couldn't keep a regular season going as some of the other teams in the league balked at the requirements for playing them. His team/destination happens to be in my city. Anxious to play, they split the group and had an Inter Squad game Saturday night. Besides getting to watch him skate again there was the joy of watching my toddler great grandson at the rink watching live action for the first time. "go skate" are part of his early vocabulary. Saturday the  bonus for him was the Zamboni. Then he came home and had to hear "Good Night Hockey" before he went to bed. And on it goes.
> 
> Back on topic: my reaction to the Morons of Monteshitshow's "Christmas Message" is





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so sorry for your loss.





chowlover2 said:


> I'm going to guess your DH and his Dad shared many a hockey game together. I think it's his way of sharing some of his Dad with you and the kids. I think it's lovely. From a long suffering Phila Flyers fan Here's to your FIL!



Thank you all so much!


----------



## TC1

Thomas Markle   yah, we get it..you're estranged. He can't even drum up anything new for these interviews because they haven't communicated. He doesn't need to beat that horse for fame anymore..just go away already. Geez


----------



## purseinsanity

chowlover2 said:


> I'm going to guess your DH and his Dad shared many a hockey game together. I think it's his way of sharing some of his Dad with you and the kids. I think it's lovely. From a long suffering Phila Flyers fan Here's to your FIL!


FIL used to build a hockey rink in their CT back yard every winter for DH, his brother & sister, and all their friends.  There are many old videos of them skating in that little rink starting as soon as tyhe could toddle around.  From a long suffering Buffalo Sabres fan (by marriage only, I'm a Penguins fan ), thank you my dear!  

To try to bring on topic, think Haz and Archie have a hockey rink in their Monteshitshow palace?  (I feel mean saying that.  Montecito is actually a lovely place!)


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I’m sorry for your loss @purseinsanity.  Sounds like the game is a lovely tribute to your FIL.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, dear @purseinsanity, I am sorry to hear about your FIL.  Enjoy the game in his honor.





jennlt said:


> I'm so sorry for your loss. It sounds like your husband has a great plan to celebrate his father's life!





piperdog said:


> So sorry for your loss. The evening of my father's funeral, my niece and I went to see a basketball game of the team he loved and bought season tickets to see for decades. It was a fitting way to honor him, and it was nice to share that time with all of my parents' friends in their section.


Thank you all for your support!  For all the trolls that question why we spend so much time in this thread, this is exactly why.  I enjoy everyone's thoughts, insights, recipes, good news, and SUPPORT above all else.  The friendships and camaraderie are what I personally come for.  Spotlighting these two wannabes is just the sprinkles on top!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.


What's even more stupid is that as an American, I'm sure before woke times, she learned "My Country Tis of Thee" which is the EXACT melody except different words.  She should have easily known the tune and would've just had to learn the words.  Being uneducated in many things British, when I first heard "God Save the Queen", I did a double take!  Supposedly, there's a German song with the same melody as well.


----------



## jelliedfeels

T


CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps W is having a mid-life crisis, much like his dad did.  Ya kno, here is Charles at 70, still in training for his job.  I know I know QE has given him more duties, but still he has waited his entire life for what??? W probably realizes that maybe he is kinda “trapped” as Hazzie boldly claimed.


The phenomenon you are describing is commonly attributed to the heirs of long-living George the 3rd and Queen Victoria. I can see why an heir might think like this but on the other hand they are in the pretty unusual position of being in a job that you can’t get fired from or even really get any feedback or evaluation for.
this is often treated like a burden of fate but it’s also a massive bonus in my mind as you never have to compromise anything and because you are destined by blood you simply cannot be wrong for the job. I feel like this takes away a lot of the pressure most people have to suffer in the workplace. I personally would enjoy


QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.


Yes it’s all part of her ‘disingenuous/ingenious ingenue’ act as I call it. Somehow this woman is meant to be so naturally gifted she can turn her hand to diplomacy/podcasting/writing etc with absolutely no training or real experience.
Yer at the same time, she is apparently such a naive ‘fish out of water’ that fairly basic tasks like learning song lyrics, booking a doctor’s appointment or indeed knowing her dress size elude her.

it is almost like it doesn’t make sense…..

Incidentally , lady c called M stylish in her biography- another detail which makes me think we need a second edition.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*to his daughter who will likely one day be Queen*_
> 
> Looks like they bought the _dumb bots_. They should have paid the extra dollars and bought the _smart bots_.


That almost sounds like a threat!  A LOT of people would have to die for TM's daughter to "likely one day be Queen".  WTF.

Also hysterical how they say "HRH Princess Meghan and Husband Harry".  Um...she is not "Princess Meghan" without her "Husband Harry".  She's Princess Harry at best, and she's the afterthought.


----------



## purseinsanity

piperdog said:


> Oh, @purseinsanity  to keep in on topic, don't forget to: 1) have an entire section of premium seats cleared; 2) issue a statement how you plan to present a (merched!) wreath to honor your FIL at a key moment during the game with all sorts of details about how the wreath is a sweet nod to your FIL, who really loved you best of all; and 3) stage an alternative wreath-laying event outside the arena complete with photo and video crew to shine a light on how cruelly you were treated when your reasonable requests to make the hockey game all about you were rebuffed. Sadly, I had to suffer my loss before I had Meghan to set her wonderful examples of how to properly attend sporting events and honor the deceased.


I'm so sorry for your loss!

I love your suggestions!  And since FIL was a veteran, I can end it all by trampling on his fresh grave for a photo op.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Aren't they her half brother and sister?  They're not steps!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> Thomas Markle   yah, we get it..you're estranged. He can't even drum up anything new for these interviews because they haven't communicated. He doesn't need to beat that horse for fame anymore..just go away already. Geez



Yeah. I feel for him, I really do, but just stop talking. At this point, it's helping out Raptor because it makes him look bad going on and on about the same grievance.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Supposedly, there's a German song with the same melody as well.



There is...it was the inofficial anthem of Prussia IIRC.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes it’s all part of her ‘disingenuous/ingenious ingenue’ act as I call it. Somehow this woman is meant to be so naturally gifted she can turn her hand to diplomacy/podcasting/writing etc with absolutely no training or real experience.
> Yer at the same time, she is apparently such a naive ‘fish out of water’ that fairly basic tasks like learning song lyrics, booking a doctor’s appointment or indeed knowing her dress size elude her.
> 
> it is almost like it doesn’t make sense…..



So annoying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Aren't they her half brother and sister?  They're not steps!


Yes, they are half-siblings; the commentator is likely not very informed on the family. He/she needs to read this forum. 

In any event, how could Ms. Markle expect a father to discard his other kids just to please her?!


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> Thomas Markle   yah, we get it..you're estranged. He can't even drum up anything new for these interviews because they haven't communicated. He doesn't need to beat that horse for fame anymore..just go away already. Geez





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. I feel for him, I really do, but just stop talking. At this point, it's helping out Raptor because it makes him look bad going on and on about the same grievance.



I believe he has promised to do this type of interview until she allows him to see his grandkids.

He risks burning his image, but he keeps also reminding people that something is very wrong with the Harkles.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Yes, they are half-siblings; the commentator is likely not very informed on the family. He/she needs to read this forum.
> *
> In any event, how could Ms. Markle expect a father to discard his other kids just to please her?!*


I guess that's in line with the rest of her mentality!


----------



## creme fraiche

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.



Seriously?  An actress can't quickly learn:

God save our gracious Queen, 
Long live our noble Queen,
God save the Queen!
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us,
God save the Queen!

All to a tune known to all Americans with different words?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Okay I just stopped breathing for a sec when I saw an email from a friend who sent me a link to M's 40's birthday video with a question.  She asked if I recognize the large tray on Meghan’s table.   I don't talk about M outside this forum, well ... except with my DH   I thought I was being tracked seeing the email !  LOL  But than figured my friend thought I know everything about fashion (which I don't) since I co-chair a fashion group.  So I won't hold anything against my friend.  

The only thing I recognize is the H blanket from the video.  Nothing else.  Does anyone know who makes the tray?  Maybe it's a wedding present?  If anyone knows, appreciate the intel.  Thanks!!


----------



## poopsie

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> That dental trajectory is to be expected with a multi season three times Stanley Cup champion NHL ice hockeyist. Besides, you deliberately chose a bad angle




"Old time hockey"


----------



## poopsie

chowlover2 said:


> I'm going to guess your DH and his Dad shared many a hockey game together. I think it's his way of sharing some of his Dad with you and the kids. I think it's lovely. From a long suffering Phila Flyers fan Here's to your FIL!



Yup
Bobby Clarke and Bernie Parent got me hooked.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Okay I just stopped breathing for a sec when I saw an email from a friend who sent me a link to M's 40's birthday video with a question.  She asked if I recognize the large tray on Meghan’s table.   I don't talk about M outside this forum, well ... except with my DH   I thought I was being tracked seeing the email !  LOL  But than figured my friend thought I know everything about fashion (which I don't) since I co-chair a fashion group.  So I won't hold anything against my friend.
> 
> The only thing I recognize is the H blanket from the video.  Nothing else.  Does anyone know who makes the tray?  Maybe it's a wedding present?  If anyone knows, appreciate the intel.  Thanks!!



I love a good search.
Still searching for the exact one, try this for now:









						Shop the Look of Meghan Markle’s Clean and Cozy Workspace
					

Here’s how to channel the Duchess of Sussex in your own home




					www.architecturaldigest.com
				




This looks to be the definitive answer - no one really knows:





__





						Meghan Launches New 40×40 Initiative to Mark Her 40th Birthday – UPDATED 8/8
					






					whatmeghanwore.net
				




ETA:  from the comments


Pretty sure the tray is from Anthropologie and is no longer available 
Found a very similar one on a design website and it was from Anthropologie.
Reply








WhatMeghanWore says
August 8, 2021 at 10:43 pm
Hi Bean – I saw that one as well from Anthro (which I can’t find a photo of now!). I also found some from Pottery Barn but the handles and trim are copper (also no longer available). It’s a round tray with a lip around the edge – gold trim and brass handles. Thanks, Susan


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> I love a good search.
> Still searching for the exact one, try this for now:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shop the Look of Meghan Markle’s Clean and Cozy Workspace
> 
> 
> Here’s how to channel the Duchess of Sussex in your own home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.architecturaldigest.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more, still looking:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Launches New 40×40 Initiative to Mark Her 40th Birthday – UPDATED 8/8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whatmeghanwore.net


Thank you @CarryOn2020 !  Appreciate this!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did he go?


_Although Tuesday afternoon's Kensington Palace event was held behind doors out of public view, the Duchess of Cambridge had made a splash with her impassioned speech on the effects of addiction as a patron of the Forward Trust.








						Kate and William honour Diana at poignant ceremony as Harry's absence sorely felt
					

KATE, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William paid tribute to the late Princess Diana on Tuesday but having helped unveil a statue of his late mother in July, Prince Harry was conspicuously absent from the event.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Amazing!  HGS makes a great point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Some of the others, I think it's just that they all wear latest fashion. But the Di cosplay (and to some extend the Angelina impersonation) is super creepy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, it always gets me how grossly happy she looked both in the brown outfit pics a hot minute before they dropped Megxit and the Green Hornet costume while you can clearly see Harry is distressed. She enjoys the destruction.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> I love a good search.
> Still searching for the exact one, try this for now:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shop the Look of Meghan Markle’s Clean and Cozy Workspace
> 
> 
> Here’s how to channel the Duchess of Sussex in your own home
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.architecturaldigest.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This looks to be the definitive answer - no one really knows:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Launches New 40×40 Initiative to Mark Her 40th Birthday – UPDATED 8/8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> whatmeghanwore.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  from the comments
> 
> 
> Pretty sure the tray is from Anthropologie and is no longer available
> Found a very similar one on a design website and it was from Anthropologie.
> Reply
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WhatMeghanWore says
> August 8, 2021 at 10:43 pm
> Hi Bean – I saw that one as well from Anthro (which I can’t find a photo of now!). I also found some from Pottery Barn but the handles and trim are copper (also no longer available). It’s a round tray with a lip around the edge – gold trim and brass handles. Thanks, Susan


Thank you for the extra information!!  I will let my friend know.  Cheers to you @CarryOn2020 !


----------



## Chloe302225

Oops, wrong thread!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Thank you for the extra information!!  I will let my friend know.  Cheers to you @CarryOn2020 !



Ahhh, my pleasure. Was fun to look back.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, it always gets me how grossly happy she looked both in the brown outfit pics a hot minute before they dropped Megxit and the Green Hornet costume while you can clearly see Harry is distressed. She enjoys the destruction.



Or they know exactly what they are doing and behave this way on purpose. Just to see if anyone criticizes them, so they can then scream and sue.


----------



## xeyes

Another from Enty. Gee, wonder who the athlete could POSSIBLY be... (Even more fun stuff in the comments.)





__





						Blind Item #8
					

This permanent A+ list athlete was out to dinner this week and someone asked her about the alliterate one. The only thing the athlete said w...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the recent Thomas Markle DM article's comment section. At this point, I wonder if someone has made a counter army of bots that are so ridiculous in their praise that they will get the point much better across than the ones critisizing Raptor.



that comment is classic English humour. The writer is trolling… but hilariously pointing out the differences Between true royalty and the farce of the Sussexes.

And the writer probably enjoys the outrage at those other commentators who don’t understand the humour…

I did have a giggle at the comment.  Very clever.  I read it this way because Australians have a similar mocking / sarcastic humour.  Obviously it doesn’t translate into all other cultures!


----------



## needlv

xeyes said:


> Another from Enty. Gee, wonder who the athlete could POSSIBLY be... (Even more fun stuff in the comments.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #8
> 
> 
> This permanent A+ list athlete was out to dinner this week and someone asked her about the alliterate one. The only thing the athlete said w...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Oooh, Serena markled MM?


----------



## needlv

Ok - watch this 3 minute video and get a good laugh…at MM’s expense.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xeyes said:


> Another from Enty. Gee, wonder who the athlete could POSSIBLY be... (Even more fun stuff in the comments.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #8
> 
> 
> This permanent A+ list athlete was out to dinner this week and someone asked her about the alliterate one. The only thing the athlete said w...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


No wonder. This was a pitiful and unsisterly display.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> that comment is classic English humour. The writer is trolling… but hilariously pointing out the differences Between true royalty and the farce of the Sussexes.
> 
> And the writer probably enjoys the outrage at those other commentators who don’t understand the humour…
> 
> I did have a giggle at the comment.  Very clever.  I read it this way because Australians have a similar mocking / sarcastic humour.  Obviously it doesn’t translate into all other cultures!


The funny thing is that I have a very similar type of humor, but I have been on the fence about this one. I had a chance to observe squad members in action (podcast) and Ms. Harkle is their beloved guru. Though, you are likely right because Empress of Sussex would be a little too much even for squad cult members.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that like a good mystery, follow the link…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that like a good mystery, follow the link…




Fascinating reading! So many rumors, so many possible links, so many _coincidences_. We look like lil kids compared to this writer 
Still, the PA stuff _is _plausible and does explain lots about his mess. The Hazzie saga is plausible, too. There is almost no evidence that he sought her. Plenty of evidence to show she chased him. Imo for many reasons the BRF saw him as a liability. PA, too, but Hazz more so. They were relieved he left. They wouldn’t have set him up with her, would they? iDK but I do know someday these ‘secrets’ will be revealed. So much of the H&M situation is just odd, weird. Somebody knows something, time for them to start talking.

Thanks @Chanbal - that is an eye-opening, eyebrow-raising, surprising and shocking read. 
_that house story - omg!  _


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of the others, I think it's just that they all wear latest fashion. But the Di cosplay (and to some extend the Angelina impersonation) is super creepy.


She seems to favor Angelina, Sophia, and KIM?!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that like a good mystery, follow the link…



I've heard this before.  Interesting coincidence.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that like a good mystery, follow the link…



Well, everyone in Canada, (Ontario especially) knew that Andrew went to school in Peterborough, Ontario. 

But those Windsor (or maybe Herbert) genes are strong and Marcus Anderson is tall and gorgeous. So, even though I love a good conspiracy theory, this is a hard no for me.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fascinating reading! So many rumors, so many possible links, so many _coincidences_. We look like lil kids compared to this writer
> Still, the PA stuff _is _plausible and does explain lots about his mess. The Hazzie saga is plausible, too. There is almost no evidence that he sought her. *Plenty of evidence to show she chased him.* Imo for many reasons the BRF saw him as a liability. PA, too, but Hazz more so. They were relieved he left. They wouldn’t have set him up with her, would they? iDK but I do know someday these ‘secrets’ will be revealed. So much of the H&M situation is just odd, weird. Somebody knows something, time for them to start talking.
> 
> Thanks @Chanbal - that is an eye-opening, eyebrow-raising, surprising and shocking read.
> _that house story - omg!  _


Oh, yes! I believe he was chased. Here is a youtube video comparing before and after being told that he was trapped … There are people that bring the worst out in others.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes! I believe he was chased. Here is a youtube video comparing before and after being told that he was trapped … There are people that bring the worst out in others.



That video is so sad.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Well, everyone in Canada, (Ontario especially) knew that Andrew went to school in Peterborough, Ontario.
> 
> But those Windsor (or maybe Herbert) genes are strong and Marcus Anderson is tall and gorgeous. So, even though I love a good conspiracy theory, this is a hard no for me.


It's hard to believe for many of us, but the coincidences are interesting (and amusing), "_Anderson is a surname …meaning Son of Ander/Andrew._" Randy Andy is also tall and when younger, he was not too bad. So we will have to wait for the next chapters…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She seems to favor Angelina, Sophia, and KIM?!


Angie for sure. In a more recent phase, she seems to favor Victoria B, but could be only a coincidence.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes! I believe he was chased. Here is a youtube video comparing before and after being told that he was trapped … There are people that bring the worst out in others.



What a stark contrast!  When he is with her, he looks soul less, dejected, and horribly depressed.  It's almost a look like he's given up hope.  IMO, she is a classic abuser.  She's isolated him from everyone and everything he knows and loves.  She probably was "suicidal" because he threatened to leave her.


----------



## lulu212121

bellecate said:


> That video is so sad.


I don't feel sorry for him. Maybe if he'd been a better boyfriend to his prior girlfriends he wouldn't be in this marriage.


----------



## bellecate

lulu212121 said:


> I don't feel sorry for him. Maybe if he'd been a better boyfriend to his prior girlfriends he wouldn't be in this marriage.


I don’t feel sorry for him I find it sad because of what he could have been. What he has thrown away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What a stark contrast!  When he is with her, he looks soul less, dejected, and horribly depressed.  It's almost a look like he's given up hope.  IMO, she is a classic abuser.  She's isolated him from everyone and everything he knows and loves.  She probably was "suicidal" because he threatened to leave her.



I don't think he threatened to leave her at that point, but I'm absolutely sure she threatened suicide to get something out of him. And yes to the abuser. I've said it before, if the roles were reversed everyone would be concerned for Raptor and make Harry out to be the bad guy. A little bit like how male victims of domestic violence are not taken seriously.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes! I believe he was chased. Here is a youtube video comparing before and after being told that he was trapped … There are people that bring the worst out in others.



That was so hard to watch. I cannot believe that he supposedly hated being a Royal and all that it entails. If all that pre meghan footage was fake then he deserves an Oscar. Wow, that's the Harry we loved, a perfect brother for someone who will be king. That ***** has drained the life out of him. So sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> That was so hard to watch. I cannot believe that he supposedly hated being a Royal and all that it entails. If all that pre meghan footage was fake then he deserves an Oscar. Wow, that's the Harry we loved, a perfect brother for someone who will be king. That ***** has drained the life out of him. So sad.



I agree. Yes, he struggled with his role at times, but to be honest, my sympathy is kind of low. He would not have been the spare forever, but other than millions of people he would have never had to worry about money or actually losing a job, so cry me a river. I do think with a better pick of wife he'd have thrived within the BRF. I also think with a better pick of wife he could have thrived outside the BRF if that is what he really wanted, but alas, he picked that demon spawn.


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> Well, everyone in Canada, (Ontario especially) knew that Andrew went to school in Peterborough, Ontario.
> 
> But those Windsor (or maybe Herbert) genes are strong and Marcus Anderson is tall and gorgeous. So, even though I love a good conspiracy theory, this is a hard no for me.



i agree- this is a step too far for me to believe too.  Plus the photo of Prince Andrew on a yacht (supposedly with Markus) was debunked.  It wasn’t Markus but another friend of PA.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I'm watching the video in a desperate attempt to avoid doing any real work and it truly makes me sad. Can you imagine if he had married someone who'd cared to fit in? Someone who got along with Kate and wasn't a compulsive sh*t stirrer? Now if at least she was good for him and made him happy, but he's all but a shadow of his old self.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I'm watching the video in a desperate attempt to avoid doing any real work and it truly makes me sad. Can you imagine if he had married someone who'd cared to fit in? Someone who got along with Kate and wasn't a compulsive sh*t stirrer? Now if at least she was good for him and made him happy, but he's all but a shadow of his old self.



Let’s  be real.  Any smart women (including the Catherine’s of this world) didn’t want H.  He was and still is a mess.  Racist past incidents, drug and alcohol abuse, mental health issues, short temper, not that bright, seething with jealousy over what  his brother has and completely expected his family and the taxpayer to fund him for life whilst he complained about ”shaking hands and handing out prizes”.  

Also put some fault on PC for giving in to H’s demands.

H was complicit in the lies M said on Oprah.  Then threw his own family under the bus, because of a tantrum about his military patronage’s being removed.  Plus whilst PP was on his deathbed.

All Megxit did was point out how good the BRF PR machine was in covering for H all these years with that “cheeky chap” persona they cleverly crafted. 

I think H is just as bad as M.  A huge spoilt man-child.  She is a controlling narc.  They are both at fault.

But just wait.  If divorce proceedings start, he can claim she was abusive and controlling, BRF can drop some stuff about MM they are sitting on.  M will do the rounds claiming H’s drug and alcohol abuse and the “I tried to fix him” And she will try claiming the victim narrative… yet again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not saying Harry was a catch or even the most pleasant person to be around. I am saying Raptor is a predator who smelled the blood from miles away and went in for the kill and he would have done way better in life with someone mellow and nurturing. You are stupid if you park your car with the doors unlocked and the keys and your wallet still inside (and if you're my cousin, you add the expensive equipment you use professionally and roll down the window as well  ), but the person who steals the car and rides into the sunset is still both an a*shole and a criminal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow. Green Hornet told him to smile when entering the church (it's in the video and subtitled, but you can see her mouth it off to him). 

Also the event where suicidal Megs cried her head off but miraculously her make-up was pristine and her eyes not the slightest bit puffy? You can see in the video the one crying is actually him. Say what you will about Harry being a jerk (I don't disagree!), this woman is a monster. Maybe I feel so strongly about it because I'm familiar with the narcisstic mind games and power plays.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not saying Harry was a catch or even the most pleasant person to be around. I am saying Raptor is a predator who smelled the blood from miles away and went in for the kill and he would have done way better in life with someone mellow and nurturing. You are stupid if you park your car with the doors unlocked and the keys and your wallet still inside (and if you're my cousin, you add the expensive equipment you use professionally and roll down the window as well  ), but the person who steals the car and rides into the sunset is still both an a*shole and a criminal.


Yep - she clearly had an agenda!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree. Yes, he struggled with his role at times, but to be honest, my sympathy is kind of low. He would not have been the spare forever, but other than millions of people he would have never had to worry about money or actually losing a job, so cry me a river. I do think with a better pick of wife he'd have thrived within the BRF. I also think with a better pick of wife he could have thrived outside the BRF if that is what he really wanted, but alas, he picked that demon spawn.



Imo this video is an example of  media manipulation.  It would be helpful to have footage of Hazz leaving those ‘before’ events.  He was not known to be kind to the press before marriage, so this video must be an attempt to gain sympathy for Hazzie. Wonder why?


----------



## Chagall

I am about two months behind on this thread so am not even going to try to catch up lol. One thing that does strike me from the bits I’ve read is how Camilla and Kate have been ‘laundered’. I can remember how both of them were criticized on these threads. Have they changed, or only our opinion of them? Condemning MM for her baby weight is ridiculous. And yes she did carry the baby herself! Forget her appearance and clothing choices. Who GAD! It is her behaviour and insincerity that we can dislike her for. That’s all we need.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chagall said:


> I am about two months behind on this thread so am not even going to try to catch up lol. One thing that does strike me from the bits I’ve read is how Camilla and Kate have been ‘laundered’. I can remember how both of them were criticized on these threads. Have they changed, or only our opinion of them? Condemning MM for her baby weight is ridiculous. And yes she did carry the baby herself! Forget her appearance and clothing choices. Who GAD! It is her behaviour and insincerity that we can dislike her for. That’s all we need.



Speaking for myself, I have been a Kate fan from day 1. Yes, often she looks tired and too thin, but other times she nails it!  The entire Middleton family puts the UK in a very positive light. Kudos to her.

Camilla, still deciding. Since the marriage, she has conducted herself with aplomb, but she has not aged well. Neither has Charles.

MM’s clothes, the jewelry imo are indeed fair game. Here’s why:  they underscore the lie. The lie H&M use that says ‘we have no money’.    The clothes were a living metaphor for _that_ trip - ill-fitting and inappropriate. This is the USA - we don’t do royalty here, we don’t want royalty here, we don’t want to be part of Hazzie’s Nflix show.  Either they did not do the preliminary work of setting up meetings and appointments or they offended most of the dignitaries. Secretly filming encounters will do that. So yes, the clothes prove the lie.  If she didn’t want the weight comments, she could have stayed home or worn clothes that fit properly.

ETA: whoever is pushing the narrative that W&K should do a US tour - is it H&M? Oprah? US Pres?
Whoever, they are setting W&K up for a huge failure.  We have had enough of BRF drama.  Enough.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I'm watching the video in a desperate attempt to avoid doing any real work and it truly makes me sad. *Can you imagine if he had married someone who'd cared to fit in? *Someone who got along with Kate and wasn't a compulsive sh*t stirrer? Now if at least she was good for him and made him happy, but he's all but a shadow of his old self.





needlv said:


> Let’s  be real.  *Any smart women (including the Catherine’s of this world) didn’t want H.  He was and still is a mess. * Racist past incidents, drug and alcohol abuse, mental health issues, short temper, not that bright, seething with jealousy over what  his brother has and completely expected his family and the taxpayer to fund him for life whilst he complained about ”shaking hands and handing out prizes”.
> 
> Also put some fault on PC for giving in to H’s demands.
> 
> H was complicit in the lies M said on Oprah.  Then threw his own family under the bus, because of a tantrum about his military patronage’s being removed.  Plus whilst PP was on his deathbed.
> 
> All Megxit did was point out how good the BRF PR machine was in covering for H all these years with that “cheeky chap” persona they cleverly crafted.
> 
> I think H is just as bad as M.  A huge spoilt man-child.  She is a controlling narc.  They are both at fault.
> 
> But just wait.  If divorce proceedings start, he can claim she was abusive and controlling, BRF can drop some stuff about MM they are sitting on.  M will do the rounds claiming H’s drug and alcohol abuse and the “I tried to fix him” And she will try claiming the victim narrative… yet again.



Let's agree that it would be difficult for any smart woman to meet his criteria.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chagall said:


> I am about two months behind on this thread so am not even going to try to catch up lol. One thing that does strike me from the bits I’ve read is how Camilla and Kate have been ‘laundered’. I can remember how both of them were criticized on these threads. Have they changed, or only our opinion of them? Condemning MM for her baby weight is ridiculous. And yes she did carry the baby herself! Forget her appearance and clothing choices. Who GAD! It is her behaviour and insincerity that we can dislike her for. That’s all we need.



My opinion of Kate has totally changed...I didn't think much of her (but then again, I didn't use to discuss the BRF at all and I didn't actively dislike her) when she got married, but she has absolutely grown on me and I think she's grown into her role perfectly. That said, if she did something despicable I'd not be shy to call that out either.

Camilla, I'm not old enough to have harboured any ill feelings towards her and I've always happened to somewhat like her.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking for myself, I have been a Kate fan from day 1. Yes, often she looks tired and too thin, but other times she nails it!  The entire Middleton family puts the UK in a very positive light. Kudos to her.
> 
> Camilla, still deciding. Since the marriage, she has conducted herself with aplomb, but she has not aged well. Neither has Charles.
> 
> MM’s clothes, the jewelry imo are indeed fair game. Here’s why:  they underscore the lie. The lie H&M use that says ‘we have no money’.    The clothes were a living metaphor for _that_ trip - ill-fitting and inappropriate. This is the USA - we don’t do royalty here, we don’t want royalty here, we don’t want to be part of Hazzie’s Nflix show.  Either they did not do the preliminary work of setting up meetings and appointments or they offended most of the dignitaries. Secretly filming encounters will do that. So yes, the clothes prove the lie.  If she didn’t want the weight comments, she could have stayed home or worn clothes that fit properly.
> 
> ETA: whoever is pushing the narrative that W&K should do a US tour - is it H&M? Oprah? US Pres?
> Whoever, they are setting W&K up for a huge failure.  We have had enough of BRF drama.  Enough.



The difference between W&K and H&M when it comes to tours, outings, etc...

Will & Kate don't make it about them - they successfully make it about the cause/event (they are the accessory, not the focus). I can envision them coming to the US and being able to do this successfully if they were to come next year.

Charles & Camilla seem to do this fairly well, too - and I admire Camilla for overcoming all of the hate and criticism she had to endure in the beginning. Even I didn't like her at all but my opinion of her has softened tremendously as she has turned up gracefully despite it all.

Meghan and Harry make it about them - _always_ - and not about the cause/event (they make themselves the focus and not the accessory). Very off-putting. Everything has to be a big show for them and it looks sad and desperate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> The difference between W&K and H&M when it comes to tours, outings, etc...
> 
> Will & Kate don't make it about them - they successfully make it about the cause/event (they are the accessory, not the focus). I can envision them coming to the US and being able to do this successfully if they were to come next year.
> 
> Charles & Camilla seem to do this fairly well, too - and I admire Camilla for overcoming all of the hate and criticism she had to endure in the beginning. Even I didn't like her at all but my opinion of her has softened tremendously as she has turned up gracefully despite it all.
> 
> Meghan and Harry make it about them - _always_ - and not about the cause/event (they make themselves the focus and not the accessory). Very off-putting. Everything has to be a big show for them and it looks sad and desperate.



100% agree with all your points.
Where I exit the WK _tour train _is at the USA border. We are not a commonwealth country and we do not want to become one. We do not want the UK to become our burden either. H&M have made sure we understand what that would be like = ugh  Sure, they have some top-notch thespians, but we have learned to live without Doc Martin, even during a pandemic. In an act of good will, the UK could take back H&M  Then, maybe, we would reconsider the tour, possibly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> The difference between W&K and H&M when it comes to tours, outings, etc...
> 
> Will & Kate don't make it about them - they successfully make it about the cause/event (they are the accessory, not the focus). I can envision them coming to the US and being able to do this successfully if they were to come next year.
> 
> Charles & Camilla seem to do this fairly well, too - and I admire Camilla for overcoming all of the hate and criticism she had to endure in the beginning. Even I didn't like her at all but my opinion of her has softened tremendously as she has turned up gracefully despite it all.
> 
> Meghan and Harry make it about them - _always_ - and not about the cause/event (they make themselves the focus and not the accessory). Very off-putting. Everything has to be a big show for them and it looks sad and desperate.



You put it perfectly. That's my feelings exactly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree with all your points.
> Where I exit the WK _tour train _is at the USA border. We are not a commonwealth country and we do not want to become one. We do not want the UK to become our burden either. H&M have made sure we understand what that would be like = ugh  Sure, they have some top-notch thespians, but we have learned to live without Doc Martin, even during a pandemic. In an act of good will, the UK could take back H&M  Then, maybe, we would reconsider the tour, possibly.



I'm totally for everyone recycling their own trash...that said, seeing that half of the troublesome two is American they are your business now as well. I don't envy you.


----------



## Chanbal

Chagall said:


> I am about two months behind on this thread …



I will attempt to address your comments: 

_I am about two months behind on this thread so am not even going to try to catch up lol. _
No worries, they are still living in Montecito, using (and abusing) the UK titles, and are believed to be working on their 2nd podcast, Netfl*ix and other deals…

_One thing that does strike me from the bits I’ve read is how Camilla and Kate have been ‘laundered’. 
I can remember how both of them were criticized on these threads. Have they changed, or only our opinion of them? _
I never had an opinion of Kate as I didn't of MM. They were just 2 girls that married into the BRF. It was MM's actions in the US and covid that brought them to my attention. And compared to MM, Kate does shine… She is a beautiful woman that is making the people in the UK very proud imo.
My impression of Camilla was not very good because of Diana, but she seems to carry herself well. So, my opinion of her has been improving.

_Condemning MM for her baby weight is ridiculous. _
Would never condemn anyone for weight gain as this can be a very serious matter.

_And yes she did carry the baby herself_! 
It's possible, but I've no idea if she did it or not.

_Forget her appearance and clothing choices._
Some of her clothing choices, particularly that green dress with a cape…  I believe @sdkitty would love to forget that dress. 

_Who GAD! It is her behaviour and insincerity that we can dislike her for. That’s all we need_
It was her annoying behavior with those multiple press releases that brought many of us to this thread, the rest is history.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm totally for everyone recycling their own trash...that said, seeing that half of the troublesome two is American they are your business now as well. I don't envy you.



Luckily for us, we have so many celebrities here, with new ones coming up all the time. H&M have already peaked as far as having fame here and they didn't make much of an impact. Now, maybe if they come up with a hit TV show for Netflix that might get them some notice. But one year after signing the contract and no project in sight, what are the chances of that happening?


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree with all your points.
> Where I exit the WK _tour train _is at the USA border. We are not a commonwealth country and we do not want to become one. We do not want the UK to become our burden either. H&M have made sure we understand what that would be like = ugh  Sure, they have some top-notch thespians, but we have learned to live without Doc Martin, even during a pandemic. In an act of good will, the UK could take back H&M  Then, maybe, we would reconsider the tour, possibly.



I honestly couldn't care less. It's no different from Adele coming to the US to sing in my mind. If Will and Kate have something of substance to contribute then come on over - I don't see them as trying to push royalty or their royal status on the US but rather to promote something with substance and benefit and using their status as a springboard for that concept/event/cause 

Conversely, Harry and Meghan seem to want to push _themselves_ on the US using the royal platform. They have nothing of substance to offer outside of their connection to BRF.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There is...it was the inofficial anthem of Prussia IIRC.



My German BIL always asks me "how is our Queen?" whenever we meet and sings the National Anthem segueing into German


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I'm watching the video in a desperate attempt to avoid doing any real work and it truly makes me sad. Can you imagine if he had married someone who'd cared to fit in? Someone who got along with Kate and wasn't a compulsive sh*t stirrer?


Didn't we initially think that about Meg? An actress who can be charming and smile, even when she's not feeling well, someone who is comfortable around crowds and loves London. (When she was secretly dating H, but letting out little hints, she initially wrote on Instagram how much she loves and misses London when not there.)

I'm avoiding real work too...


----------



## Genie27

We had all hoped, but this ish is so much more entertaining over the past 18 months.


----------



## bag-mania

Genie27 said:


> We had all hoped, but this ish is so much more entertaining over the past 18 months.



True, if she had stayed close to doing what she originally claimed she would, the royals never would have taken over our celebrity gossip subforum. Almost all of them have their own thread.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes! I believe he was chased. Here is a youtube video comparing before and after being told that he was trapped … There are people that bring the worst out in others.



WOW, WOW, WOW oh WOW .. talk about big-time body language here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I honestly couldn't care less. It's no different from Adele coming to the US to sing in my mind. If Will and Kate have something of substance to contribute then come on over - I don't see them as trying to push royalty or their royal status on the US but rather to promote something with substance and benefit and using their status as a springboard for that concept/event/cause
> 
> Conversely, Harry and Meghan seem to want to push _themselves_ on the US using the royal platform. They have nothing of substance to offer outside of their connection to BRF.



As long as they don’t push their anti-space exploration nonsense on us. Imo he may as well send us to the Middle Ages where only royalty and elites had access to the knowledge - [their clever way of keeping the lil people down]. So, any criticism of anyone’s scientific achievement is not welcomed imo.

 If he really understood  climate change, he would know 2 things can happen : we can correct the pollution mess *and* explore space at the same time - a win/win for all! Actually, we can do much more than those 2 things.  We have so much unused potential!


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> Will & Kate don't make it about them - they successfully make it about the cause/event (they are the accessory, not the focus). I can envision them coming to the US and being able to do this successfully if they were to come next year.
> 
> Charles & Camilla seem to do this fairly well, too - and I admire Camilla for overcoming all of the hate and criticism she had to endure in the beginning. Even I didn't like her at all but my opinion of her has softened tremendously as she has turned up gracefully despite it all.
> 
> Meghan and Harry make it about them - _always_ - and not about the cause/event (they make themselves the focus and not the accessory). Very off-putting. Everything has to be a big show for them and it looks sad and desperate.


Prince Philip criticized Diana and Fergie because they too made it about themselves.

I agree, Kate and Will are following protocol and making their appearances about the cause.  Which is tricky to do when Kate looks so elegant!


----------



## bag-mania

You don't expect to see these two in the same story.



*Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa*
*
Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou have joined the Duke of Sussex and the Oscar winner in calling for an end to drilling "destruction" in the Okavango River Basin*









						Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa
					

Prince Harry, Leonardo DiCaprio, Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou are calling for an immediate moratorium on corporate oil drilling in Africa's Okavango River Basin




					people.com


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm totally for everyone recycling their own trash...that said, seeing that half of the troublesome two is American they are your business now as well. I don't envy you.


I’ve got the perfect solution. Since neither country wants them, let’s put the Pompous Puppet and Puppeteer in a rocket and blast them off to space out of our solar system. Should they land anywhere (outside our solar system) let them lord it over wherever that may be and let the rest of earth live happily without them!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> You don't expect to see these two in the same story.
> 
> View attachment 5228406
> 
> *Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa*
> 
> *Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou have joined the Duke of Sussex and the Oscar winner in calling for an end to drilling "destruction" in the Okavango River Basin*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Leonardo DiCaprio, Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou are calling for an immediate moratorium on corporate oil drilling in Africa's Okavango River Basin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Meanwhile, the Duchess's cause of the week:


> https://paidleaveforall.org/theduchessofsussex/


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, the Duchess's cause of the week:


SPEECHLESS about the letter to Nancy and Chuck about $5 sizzler salads ….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, the Duchess's cause of the week:



Gag!


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> SPEECHLESS about the letter to Nancy and Chuck about $5 sizzler salads ….



Sizzler garlic toast is BOMB! Spaghetti Factory was a staple when I was a kid - they had video games and we were thrilled to dine in the cable car. Because we kids were fussy as heck and those were two places with menus and distractions that made everyone happy.

For me that just seemed to be the normal, average American restaurant experience in the late 70's/early 80's...


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, the Duchess's cause of the week:


She should refrain herself from speaking on behalf of all families. It's obvious that she wants to be in the limelight, and is using all possible causes for self-service.

Why isn't her foundation working and donating to solve the homeless crisis in California? So many families without a house, so many people with mental issues that need therapy and a roof… Those are not solved with letters. 

Why is she signing as 'duchess'? She is in the US, and titles don't mean anything to her, they are only important for security.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> She should refrain herself from speaking on behalf of all families. It's obvious that she wants to be in the limelight, and is using all possible causes for self-service.
> 
> Why isn't her foundation working and donating to solve the homeless crisis in California? So many families without a house, so many people with mental issues that need therapy and a roof… Those are not solved with letters.
> 
> Why is she signing as 'duchess'? She is in the US, and titles don't mean anything to her, they are only important for security.



The letter once again was written in a way that was all about her.  The stories, then rubbing it in that she is rich enough to go home and not work.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And ….
And ……..
I I I I - how many times.

Gobsmacked.






Spoiler: The letter









The Honorable Charles Schumer
Majority Leader
U.S. Senate
Washington, D.C.
The Honorable Nancy ******
Speaker
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
October 20, 2021
Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,
I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.
Over the past 20 months, the pandemic has exposed long-existing fault lines in our communities. At an alarming rate, millions of women dropped out of the workforce, staying home with their kids as schools and daycares were closed, and looking after loved ones full-time. The working mom or parent is facing the conflict of being present or being paid. The sacrifice of either comes at a great cost.
For many, this sacrifice goes back further than the past 20 months; it’s 20 or 30 years, even longer—decades of giving time, body, and endless energy not just in the pursuit of the American dream, but simply the dream of stability.
I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler—it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can’t remember)—but what I do remember was the feeling: I knew how hard my parents worked to afford this because even at five bucks, eating out was something special, and I felt lucky. And as a Girl Scout, when my troop would go to dinner for a big celebration, it was back to that same salad bar or The Old Spaghetti Factory—because that’s what those families could afford to do too.
I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends. I worked all my life and saved when and where I could—but even that was a luxury—because usually it was about making ends meet and having enough to pay my rent and put gas in my car.
I expect many of your constituents have their own version of that story. Perhaps you do too. People in our country work incredibly hard, and yet the ask is soft: for a level playing field to achieve their version of a common dream—what is fair, and equal, and right. Many of our economic systems are past their expiration date, and as you well know, too many Americans are forced to shortchange themselves when it comes to what matters to them.
In June, my husband and I welcomed our second child. Like _any_ parents, we were overjoyed. Like _many_ parents, we were overwhelmed. Like _fewer_ parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family.  We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.
No family should be faced with these decisions. No family should have to choose between earning a living and having the freedom to take care of their child (or a loved one, or themselves, as we would see with a comprehensive paid leave plan).
In taking care of your child, you take care of your community, and you take care of your country—because when paid leave is a right, we’re creating a foundation that helps address mental health outcomes, health care costs, and economic strength at the starting line. Instead, as it stands now, we spend a fortune as a country paying into symptoms rather than causes.  I understand that with everything going on these days, people might find it easy to be apathetic about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. And then equally, when it feels like your voice doesn’t matter, you tend to use it less often, but with stakes this high none of us can afford to let apathy win.
I’m writing to you on behalf of millions of American families who _are_ using their voices to say that comprehensive paid leave should not be a place to compromise or negotiate. In fact, most nations already have paid leave policies in place. Estonia, for example, offers over a year and a half of leave to be shared by new parents. Many other countries have robust programs that give months of time for both parents (birth or adoptive) to be home with their child. The United States, in stark contrast, does not federally guarantee any person a single day of paid leave. And fewer than one in four workers has dedicated paid family leave through their employer. I’m sure you agree that if we are to continue to be exceptional, then we can’t be the exception.
The families you represent need your strong leadership. With paid leave on the cusp of becoming a national reality, I trust you will meet this moment. I know you must hear from your constituents about the choices they are facing every day to make ends meet and care for their families.
Paid leave should be a national right, rather than a patchwork option limited to those whose employers have policies in place, or those who live in one of the few states where a leave program exists. If we’re going to create a new era of family first policies, let’s make sure that includes a strong paid leave program for every American that’s guaranteed, accessible, and encouraged without stigma or penalty.
I know how politically charged things can—and have—become. But this isn’t about Right or Left, it’s about right or wrong. This is about putting families above politics. And for a refreshing change, it’s something we all seem to agree on. At a point when everything feels so divisive, let this be a shared goal that unites us.
So, on behalf of my family, Archie and Lili and Harry, I thank you for considering this letter, and on behalf of all families, I ask you to ensure this consequential moment is not lost.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> The letter once again was written in a way that was all about her.  The stories, then rubbing it in that she is rich enough to go home and not work.


This X 1000.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Sizzler garlic toast is BOMB! Spaghetti Factory was a staple when I was a kid - they had video games and we were thrilled to dine in the cable car. Because we kids were fussy as heck and those were two places with menus and distractions that made everyone happy.
> 
> For me that just seemed to be the normal, average American restaurant experience in the late 70's/early 80's...


Well I can go her one better. My family was so poor that when my mother got paid she'd take us to McD's, where she could feed us all for $5 in the late 60s. I didn't go to a Sizzler until I was in college in the late 70s and went there on a date. Oooh fancy! So there Duchess Downtrodden!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> And ….
> And ……..
> I I I I - how many times.
> 
> Gobsmacked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The letter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Honorable Charles Schumer
> Majority Leader
> U.S. Senate
> Washington, D.C.
> The Honorable Nancy ******
> Speaker
> U.S. House of Representatives
> Washington, D.C.
> October 20, 2021
> Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,
> I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.
> Over the past 20 months, the pandemic has exposed long-existing fault lines in our communities. At an alarming rate, millions of women dropped out of the workforce, staying home with their kids as schools and daycares were closed, and looking after loved ones full-time. The working mom or parent is facing the conflict of being present or being paid. The sacrifice of either comes at a great cost.
> For many, this sacrifice goes back further than the past 20 months; it’s 20 or 30 years, even longer—decades of giving time, body, and endless energy not just in the pursuit of the American dream, but simply the dream of stability.
> I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler—it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can’t remember)—but what I do remember was the feeling: I knew how hard my parents worked to afford this because even at five bucks, eating out was something special, and I felt lucky. And as a Girl Scout, when my troop would go to dinner for a big celebration, it was back to that same salad bar or The Old Spaghetti Factory—because that’s what those families could afford to do too.
> I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends. I worked all my life and saved when and where I could—but even that was a luxury—because usually it was about making ends meet and having enough to pay my rent and put gas in my car.
> I expect many of your constituents have their own version of that story. Perhaps you do too. People in our country work incredibly hard, and yet the ask is soft: for a level playing field to achieve their version of a common dream—what is fair, and equal, and right. Many of our economic systems are past their expiration date, and as you well know, too many Americans are forced to shortchange themselves when it comes to what matters to them.
> In June, my husband and I welcomed our second child. Like _any_ parents, we were overjoyed. Like _many_ parents, we were overwhelmed. Like _fewer_ parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family.  We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.
> No family should be faced with these decisions. No family should have to choose between earning a living and having the freedom to take care of their child (or a loved one, or themselves, as we would see with a comprehensive paid leave plan).
> In taking care of your child, you take care of your community, and you take care of your country—because when paid leave is a right, we’re creating a foundation that helps address mental health outcomes, health care costs, and economic strength at the starting line. Instead, as it stands now, we spend a fortune as a country paying into symptoms rather than causes.  I understand that with everything going on these days, people might find it easy to be apathetic about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. And then equally, when it feels like your voice doesn’t matter, you tend to use it less often, but with stakes this high none of us can afford to let apathy win.
> I’m writing to you on behalf of millions of American families who _are_ using their voices to say that comprehensive paid leave should not be a place to compromise or negotiate. In fact, most nations already have paid leave policies in place. Estonia, for example, offers over a year and a half of leave to be shared by new parents. Many other countries have robust programs that give months of time for both parents (birth or adoptive) to be home with their child. The United States, in stark contrast, does not federally guarantee any person a single day of paid leave. And fewer than one in four workers has dedicated paid family leave through their employer. I’m sure you agree that if we are to continue to be exceptional, then we can’t be the exception.
> The families you represent need your strong leadership. With paid leave on the cusp of becoming a national reality, I trust you will meet this moment. I know you must hear from your constituents about the choices they are facing every day to make ends meet and care for their families.
> Paid leave should be a national right, rather than a patchwork option limited to those whose employers have policies in place, or those who live in one of the few states where a leave program exists. If we’re going to create a new era of family first policies, let’s make sure that includes a strong paid leave program for every American that’s guaranteed, accessible, and encouraged without stigma or penalty.
> I know how politically charged things can—and have—become. But this isn’t about Right or Left, it’s about right or wrong. This is about putting families above politics. And for a refreshing change, it’s something we all seem to agree on. At a point when everything feels so divisive, let this be a shared goal that unites us.
> So, on behalf of my family, Archie and Lili and Harry, I thank you for considering this letter, and on behalf of all families, I ask you to ensure this consequential moment is not lost.



I wanted to avoid reading that because I knew it would annoy me, and well...it did.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> The letter once again was written in a way that was all about her.  The stories, then rubbing it in that she is rich enough to go home and not work.


I was about to give this thread a break, but she can't stop to impose herself to us. 

Bringing up the Sizzler's salads, piecemealed jobs to cover odds and ends… when her father used all his money to give her a very comfortable life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wanted to avoid reading that because I knew it would annoy me, and well...it did.


She really is insufferable and I'm sure plenty of people are wising up to the fact.


----------



## csshopper

I don't know if any of you have ever experienced one of the greeting cards rigged to start playing some music when you open it up.

Reading this I thought, I wonder if trumpets blared as they slit the envelopes open to announce the contents came from on high in the hills of Monteshitshow as the Matronly Moron of the Manor spewed forth her prescription for how all of us peons down the hills should be cared for.

O M G  Please give her laryngitis or something so she will just shut up for awhile.

Real Royal Family - this goes way beyond what you should be tolerating, She USED HER TITLE in this blatantly, in your face, political act. Yes, she is an American citizen, but write as a Duchess, be treated as a Duchess and be IGNORED when it come to US politics.

Edit to add: "As ever, Meg"


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wanted to avoid reading that because I knew it would annoy me, and well...it did.


Yes, it happened to me. I can't stand people that use others the way she does. 

Why doesn't she open a free child care service center with the money that she is obscenely being paid? This would be a wonderful contribution to the many women that need to work and don't have a safe place to leave their kids. There is not a lack of causes to be tackled, but idiotic letters or lemon cakes do nothing.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Sizzler garlic toast is BOMB! Spaghetti Factory was a staple when I was a kid - they had video games and we were thrilled to dine in the cable car. Because we kids were fussy as heck and those were two places with menus and distractions that made everyone happy.
> 
> For me that just seemed to be the normal, average American restaurant experience in the late 70's/early 80's...


Agree the food was fine for the times … I did not in any way mean to put down the restaurants …. 
McDonalds was the norm for children’s birthday parties in my son’s day


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> And ….
> And ……..
> I I I I - how many times.
> 
> Gobsmacked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The letter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Honorable Charles Schumer
> Majority Leader
> U.S. Senate
> Washington, D.C.
> The Honorable Nancy ******
> Speaker
> U.S. House of Representatives
> Washington, D.C.
> October 20, 2021
> Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,
> I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.
> Over the past 20 months, the pandemic has exposed long-existing fault lines in our communities. At an alarming rate, millions of women dropped out of the workforce, staying home with their kids as schools and daycares were closed, and looking after loved ones full-time. The working mom or parent is facing the conflict of being present or being paid. The sacrifice of either comes at a great cost.
> For many, this sacrifice goes back further than the past 20 months; it’s 20 or 30 years, even longer—decades of giving time, body, and endless energy not just in the pursuit of the American dream, but simply the dream of stability.
> I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler—it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can’t remember)—but what I do remember was the feeling: I knew how hard my parents worked to afford this because even at five bucks, eating out was something special, and I felt lucky. And as a Girl Scout, when my troop would go to dinner for a big celebration, it was back to that same salad bar or The Old Spaghetti Factory—because that’s what those families could afford to do too.
> I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends. I worked all my life and saved when and where I could—but even that was a luxury—because usually it was about making ends meet and having enough to pay my rent and put gas in my car.
> I expect many of your constituents have their own version of that story. Perhaps you do too. People in our country work incredibly hard, and yet the ask is soft: for a level playing field to achieve their version of a common dream—what is fair, and equal, and right. Many of our economic systems are past their expiration date, and as you well know, too many Americans are forced to shortchange themselves when it comes to what matters to them.
> In June, my husband and I welcomed our second child. Like _any_ parents, we were overjoyed. Like _many_ parents, we were overwhelmed. Like _fewer_ parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family.  We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.
> No family should be faced with these decisions. No family should have to choose between earning a living and having the freedom to take care of their child (or a loved one, or themselves, as we would see with a comprehensive paid leave plan).
> In taking care of your child, you take care of your community, and you take care of your country—because when paid leave is a right, we’re creating a foundation that helps address mental health outcomes, health care costs, and economic strength at the starting line. Instead, as it stands now, we spend a fortune as a country paying into symptoms rather than causes.  I understand that with everything going on these days, people might find it easy to be apathetic about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. And then equally, when it feels like your voice doesn’t matter, you tend to use it less often, but with stakes this high none of us can afford to let apathy win.
> I’m writing to you on behalf of millions of American families who _are_ using their voices to say that comprehensive paid leave should not be a place to compromise or negotiate. In fact, most nations already have paid leave policies in place. Estonia, for example, offers over a year and a half of leave to be shared by new parents. Many other countries have robust programs that give months of time for both parents (birth or adoptive) to be home with their child. The United States, in stark contrast, does not federally guarantee any person a single day of paid leave. And fewer than one in four workers has dedicated paid family leave through their employer. I’m sure you agree that if we are to continue to be exceptional, then we can’t be the exception.
> The families you represent need your strong leadership. With paid leave on the cusp of becoming a national reality, I trust you will meet this moment. I know you must hear from your constituents about the choices they are facing every day to make ends meet and care for their families.
> Paid leave should be a national right, rather than a patchwork option limited to those whose employers have policies in place, or those who live in one of the few states where a leave program exists. If we’re going to create a new era of family first policies, let’s make sure that includes a strong paid leave program for every American that’s guaranteed, accessible, and encouraged without stigma or penalty.
> I know how politically charged things can—and have—become. But this isn’t about Right or Left, it’s about right or wrong. This is about putting families above politics. And for a refreshing change, it’s something we all seem to agree on. At a point when everything feels so divisive, let this be a shared goal that unites us.
> So, on behalf of my family, Archie and Lili and Harry, I thank you for considering this letter, and on behalf of all families, I ask you to ensure this consequential moment is not lost.


Yes I is her favorite vowel


----------



## Chanbal

If the BRF doesn't strip their titles, it's a valid argument that "_Royals are involving themselves in politics_" imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> If the BRF doesn't strip their titles, it's a valid argument that "_Royals are involving themselves in politics_" imo.




This is what *gets* me!  They are clearly milking the royal titles in a very political way.
Before WK come over here, they must clean up this mess! Otherwise, expect Boos.
And no, Leo cannot help your image. Grifters galore.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m trying to figure out what’s she’s yapping about. Every one I know has great benefits going on now. The BRF should be mortified. Some thing is wrong with MM. Lol her title means crap. to people and it comes off as Cobden or Queen like to poor people. Now if she had signed off as MM then maybe she wouldn’t offend anyone.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As always, insightful comments 


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...aying-paid-leave-national-right.html#comments
Test1888, South Florida, United States, less than a minute ago
_Shut up privileged of *privileged panhandlers.*_

Happyme123, Earth, United States, less than a minute ago
_Poor little private school girl only ate at Sizzler. Boohoo_

MsChief, Out of this world, United Kingdom, less than a minute ago
_She went to a private school didn't she? Paid for by her father who was a successful cameraman. Who she lived with as opposed to her Mother, which I still find weird that as her mothers only child, and a daughter at that, she chose to be with her father. Princess Pinocchio seems to be at it again_


----------



## charlottawill

Waiting for her to play this card:


----------



## CarryOn2020

The tough life


----------



## Lodpah

I wonder if her PR is trolling her. So since Kate is out abs about MM has to do something spectacularly stupid like pen that letter lol.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I’m trying to figure out what’s she’s yapping about. Every one I know has great benefits going on now. The BRF should be mortified. Some thing is wrong with MM. Lol her title means crap. to people and it comes off as Cobden or Queen like to poor people. Now if she had signed off as MM then maybe she wouldn’t offend anyone.



Lack of affordable child care is a real and ongoing problem in the US, contributing to the labor shortage. But her letter is nothing but another "Look at me, I really care" ploy to keep herself in the news.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More and more gold! The grifter that keeps on giving 



Brita

_she stressed she was writing as an engaged citizen still she signed as the Duchess of a foreign country._


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The tough life



She was just another starstruck young woman in LA. Not rich but not poor either, she clearly yearned for all that she saw around her. And it is interesting that near the end she says  she and her dad are not on the best of terms.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> Lack of affordable child care is a real and ongoing problem in the US, contributing to the labor shortage. But her letter is nothing but another "Look at me, I really care" ploy to keep herself in the news.


Yes I know. I raised children as a single parent and my monthly child care was around 800 a month, working as a lowly secretary. I had to pay after school care too. It’s a hard thing and I did it for years. I did get TDI when I gave birth this a reduction in pay but it was my responsibility. I have birth not the government. Of course there are circumstances that warrant someone getting additional monies like people I know. They got free child care, free housing or rent subsidies, food stamps, car insurance paid for. There are resources out there that is already generous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is what she said in 2018:

_But now, Meghan Markle and her father Thomas's relationship appears to be a toxic stew of insults and outbursts from his side - aggravated by her half-sister Samantha .

However just four years ago, the now Duchess of Sussex described Thomas with love and affection as she spoke of the sacrifices he made so she could chase her dream to be a performer.

Revealing their special - and private - quote as she paid tribute to him one Father's Day, she said: “If I had all the water in the world, I'd give all the water to you…(You won’t get that quote, but he will...and that’s all that matters.)"

Meghan, who turned 37 on Saturday , has openly admitted in the past how he poured blood, sweat and tears into her future so she could have what he didn't.

Thomas, 74, grew up in a small town in Pennsylvania where Christmas stockings were stuffed with oranges, and dinners consisted of tins of Spam and potatoes.

*As Meghan grew up she revealed he taught her the importance of kindness, and along with her mother, Doria Ragland , they would buy turkeys for homeless shelters at Thanksgiving.*_

_*They would deliver meals to patients in hospice care, donate spare change in their pocket to those asking for it, as well as offering a simple hug, smile or pat on the back to those who needed it.*

Thomas was determined for Meghan to lead a life of happiness and kindness where she could fulfil her aspirations.
When aged 12 she told him she wanted to be a photographer, he dug out his tools and got to work transforming her bathroom into a darkroom where she could develop her snaps.

He shaded the windows, as well as filling the cabinets with the chemicals she would need to produce the pictures.

He also took her to tap and ballet classes every Saturday morning despite him working "75+ hours a week".

It was while accompanying her father, that a young Meghan got a taste of what life was like to be an actress.

She was surrounded by famous actors, their 'glam teams', multi-million dollar budgets, and "crew lunches that always included filet mignon and enough sweets to make you think you were at Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory."_

*As she went from audition to audition trying to make it as an actress, it was Thomas who put gas in her car so she could get to them.









						Meghan Markle's relationship with dad Thomas - in her own brutally honest words
					

EXCLUSIVE Just four years ago, the Duchess of Sussex called Thomas Markle "the most hardworking father you can imagine" - but now he's been left pleading for her to make contact




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



*


----------



## charlottawill

More plates breaking...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another letter from someone far wiser and far more gifted:


----------



## Chanbal

Are the royal courtiers conceding and expecting that we are OK with having the House of Montecito reigning in the US?  

*There is room for both *(Kate&Will and the Montecitos), … _moving forward the royal courtiers would like to know the exact plans of Harry and MM so that both of them get the same amount of focus._


----------



## V0N1B2

I refuse to believe our wordsmith from Montecito penned that letter. It had to be written by some PR underling. It was a tad much on the Sizzler Salad, and a titch too light on the Word Salad.


----------



## gracekelly

Well golly gee...Let's send a letter to US government officials with our official Duke and Duchess letterhead and tell them what life was like for poor Meg when she was growing up and reduced to eating fresh salad/vegetables at a salad bar because Daddy was working and Mommy was off with her friends at an artist colony in Northern California.  Don't forget to sign the letter with your title.  

Once again, the delicious duo has stepped on toes.  It is not appropriate to use titles, even if you are a citizen of said country, when addressing public officials about government policy.  I am including Harry in this major faux pas because he is the owner of the title, his name is on the letterhead and even if he didn't write the letter, he is included because of it.  It's like the wife who signed the tax return with fraudulent numbers.  She signed her name and the IRS is going to hold her as accountable as the husband even if he was the one committing the fraud and didn't know what he was doing.

It is obvious that these two do what they like and certainly in this instance, what she likes.  It is a direct violation of the Royal Family directive to stay out of politics, especially the politics of country that is not your own.  If Meghan Markle has delusions of entering the US political area, signing a letter as the Duchess of Sussex is not how to do it.


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> I refuse to believe our wordsmith from Montecito penned that letter. It had to be written by some PR underling. It was a tad much on the Sizzler Salad, and a titch too light on the Word Salad.


If you are correct,, then the author of the letter had not clue that using that letterhead was inappropriate and they should be fired.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> And ….
> And ……..
> I I I I - how many times.
> 
> Gobsmacked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The letter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Honorable Charles Schumer
> Majority Leader
> U.S. Senate
> Washington, D.C.
> The Honorable Nancy ******
> Speaker
> U.S. House of Representatives
> Washington, D.C.
> October 20, 2021
> Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,
> I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.
> Over the past 20 months, the pandemic has exposed long-existing fault lines in our communities. At an alarming rate, millions of women dropped out of the workforce, staying home with their kids as schools and daycares were closed, and looking after loved ones full-time. The working mom or parent is facing the conflict of being present or being paid. The sacrifice of either comes at a great cost.
> For many, this sacrifice goes back further than the past 20 months; it’s 20 or 30 years, even longer—decades of giving time, body, and endless energy not just in the pursuit of the American dream, but simply the dream of stability.
> I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler—it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can’t remember)—but what I do remember was the feeling: I knew how hard my parents worked to afford this because even at five bucks, eating out was something special, and I felt lucky. And as a Girl Scout, when my troop would go to dinner for a big celebration, it was back to that same salad bar or The Old Spaghetti Factory—because that’s what those families could afford to do too.
> I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends. I worked all my life and saved when and where I could—but even that was a luxury—because usually it was about making ends meet and having enough to pay my rent and put gas in my car.
> I expect many of your constituents have their own version of that story. Perhaps you do too. People in our country work incredibly hard, and yet the ask is soft: for a level playing field to achieve their version of a common dream—what is fair, and equal, and right. Many of our economic systems are past their expiration date, and as you well know, too many Americans are forced to shortchange themselves when it comes to what matters to them.
> In June, my husband and I welcomed our second child. Like _any_ parents, we were overjoyed. Like _many_ parents, we were overwhelmed. Like _fewer_ parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family.  We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.
> No family should be faced with these decisions. No family should have to choose between earning a living and having the freedom to take care of their child (or a loved one, or themselves, as we would see with a comprehensive paid leave plan).
> In taking care of your child, you take care of your community, and you take care of your country—because when paid leave is a right, we’re creating a foundation that helps address mental health outcomes, health care costs, and economic strength at the starting line. Instead, as it stands now, we spend a fortune as a country paying into symptoms rather than causes.  I understand that with everything going on these days, people might find it easy to be apathetic about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. And then equally, when it feels like your voice doesn’t matter, you tend to use it less often, but with stakes this high none of us can afford to let apathy win.
> I’m writing to you on behalf of millions of American families who _are_ using their voices to say that comprehensive paid leave should not be a place to compromise or negotiate. In fact, most nations already have paid leave policies in place. Estonia, for example, offers over a year and a half of leave to be shared by new parents. Many other countries have robust programs that give months of time for both parents (birth or adoptive) to be home with their child. The United States, in stark contrast, does not federally guarantee any person a single day of paid leave. And fewer than one in four workers has dedicated paid family leave through their employer. I’m sure you agree that if we are to continue to be exceptional, then we can’t be the exception.
> The families you represent need your strong leadership. With paid leave on the cusp of becoming a national reality, I trust you will meet this moment. I know you must hear from your constituents about the choices they are facing every day to make ends meet and care for their families.
> Paid leave should be a national right, rather than a patchwork option limited to those whose employers have policies in place, or those who live in one of the few states where a leave program exists. If we’re going to create a new era of family first policies, let’s make sure that includes a strong paid leave program for every American that’s guaranteed, accessible, and encouraged without stigma or penalty.
> I know how politically charged things can—and have—become. But this isn’t about Right or Left, it’s about right or wrong. This is about putting families above politics. And for a refreshing change, it’s something we all seem to agree on. At a point when everything feels so divisive, let this be a shared goal that unites us.
> So, on behalf of my family, Archie and Lili and Harry, I thank you for considering this letter, and on behalf of all families, I ask you to ensure this consequential moment is not lost.


Her writing is really unenthralling. I lost interest after the 2nd para when she started talking about how lucky she is to enjoy months off after supposedly giving birth. If she is the deciding voice for the script for Pearl, it's going to be a preachy programme.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> You don't expect to see these two in the same story.
> 
> View attachment 5228406
> 
> *Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa*
> 
> *Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou have joined the Duke of Sussex and the Oscar winner in calling for an end to drilling "destruction" in the Okavango River Basin*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Leonardo DiCaprio, Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou are calling for an immediate moratorium on corporate oil drilling in Africa's Okavango River Basin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Leo and the rest of them better check daily for wires if they are anywhere near the boy blunder.


----------



## bag-mania

Here she is lecturing everyone again as if she actually has any insight or understanding about what she’s going on about. She’s all whiny about the need but she doesn’t offer a single idea how to make it happen. Where is all the money going to come from for a year of paid parental leave for everyone? Who is going to pay? It’s not coming from Meghan’s bank account, that’s for sure. She’s once again demanding others do the work and make the sacrifices while she does nothing but speak a bunch of empty words to make herself feel important. Imbecile!!


----------



## marietouchet

I just looked it up , the daughter of 45 promoted day care and family leave measures when her father was in office… this was around the time of Megxit 
hmmm I don’t remember MM backing the need for child care then


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> Her writing is really unenthralling. I lost interest after the 2nd para when she started talking about how lucky she is to enjoy months off after supposedly giving birth. If she is the deciding voice for the script for Pearl, it's going to be a preachy programme.


Right?!?! .. same here, ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!  

What really irks me is this whole notion of her growing up poor; really *MegaNut* .. puhleeze, if you want to see truly poor people?!? .. go to some other parts of LA (like Compton, etc.)!!!  A 'private' school (and the one she went to is pretty well-known and NOT cheap), and you're saying "Oh BOO HOO, WOE is ME having to go to Sizzler to the Salad Bar"! .. hey A$$WIPE, even going out to dinner is not an indication of being poor .. try working back in the kitchens at an early age to help out the family (I have friends who had to do that .. go to school and then at the age of 9, head-on into the kitchens with their parents .. for ZERO pay)!!

The two of them are so out of touch, and what REALLY WRANKLES my CHAINS (as most of you have heard me say before) .. *QUIT USING THAT EFFIN' TITLE HERE IN THE US .. it is NOT RECOGNIZED*!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> I just looked it up , the daughter of 45 promoted day care and family leave measures when her father was in office… this was around the time of Megxit
> hmmm I don’t remember MM backing the need for child care then


You are absolutely right!!! .. and while I wasn't a fan of 'them', I do agree with what IVT was trying to do!


----------



## marietouchet

Hmmm see Meghan McCain story today where she says her great regret was not having more children
she wrestled with a miscarriage and wrote a NY Times op Ed on it, about a year before someone else got the idea 
I read the Wall Street Journal instead and miss all these op Eds about personal issues, the ones I read are all about government issues


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?! .. same here, ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
> 
> What really irks me is this whole notion of her growing up poor; really *MegaNut* .. puhleeze, if you want to see truly poor people?!? .. go to some other parts of LA (like Compton, etc.)!!!  A 'private' school (and the one she went to is pretty well-known and NOT cheap), and you're saying "Oh BOO HOO, WOE is ME having to go to Sizzler to the Salad Bar"! .. hey A$$WIPE, even going out to dinner is not an indication of being poor .. try working back in the kitchens at an early age to help out the family (I have friends who had to do that .. go to school and then at the age of 9, head-on into the kitchens with their parents .. for ZERO pay)!!
> 
> The two of them are so out of touch, and what REALLY WRANKLES my CHAINS (as most of you have heard me say before) .. *QUIT USING THAT EFFIN' TITLE HERE IN THE US .. it is NOT RECOGNIZED*!!!!


Your friend who went to HS with her can attest that she did not grow up poor!  This is so insulting!  I bet Tom will have a reaction to that.  Can't wait lol!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, the Duchess's cause of the week:


My first and only thought after reading the first few paragraphs (I couldn't stomach the rest):
*
STFU!!!*


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> SPEECHLESS about the letter to Nancy and Chuck about $5 sizzler salads ….


Our rare, big dinner out when we first came to this country was Long John Silver's.  After that, we graduated to the Ponderosa buffet.  Many of us have sob stories.  Why are hers more important and have to be mentioned every.single.opportunity?  You hardly grew up poor, so STFU Megain, you self serving POS.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> More and more gold! The grifter that keeps on giving
> 
> 
> 
> Brita
> 
> _she stressed she was writing as an engaged citizen still she signed as the Duchess of a foreign country._



But, but, I thought her 40 x 40 initiative was to help to all these women get back to work?!!?  What happened Megsypoo??  Did that fail miserably, just like everything else you leech off?


----------



## Chanbal

I couldn't agree more with these posts:


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> Her writing is really unenthralling. I lost interest after the 2nd para when she started talking about how lucky she is to enjoy months off after supposedly giving birth. If she is the deciding voice for the script for Pearl, it's going to be a preachy programme.



I agree, I started reading and it just couldn't hold my interest. I skimmed for the $4.99 Sizzler part as I remember the Sizzler and used to go there on dates occasionally lol.


----------



## Chanbal

People on Twitter are making great posts in response to Ms. Harkle's salad/letter. I hope the recipients of the already infamous letter get them!


----------



## bag-mania

If she actually cared about the topic she could have sent the message privately. But no, she had to have an open letter through some group’s website to make sure she got maximum media coverage. Getting that positive press is crucial to her.

The good thing is her current bid for attention isn’t getting any TV coverage that I know of and only the usual online publications took the bait.


----------



## rose60610

Why is Meghan going so far back in time to (failingly) trying to convince us that she grew up so poor???  If anything, it was her own father (that she Markled) who sacrificed a $hitload to send her to private schools and take her to lessons. They weren't "poor" and for M to claim she "had it so hard", why NOW??? I'm sorry if Thomas couldn't afford a 10,000 square foot house, but he DID send her to private schools and Northwestern University which is VERY $$$.

M did get some acting gigs that made her a lot of money, relatively speaking. And then landed a world famous prince.

In TRUE Meghan style, she wants us to FEEL SORRY FOR HER???????

What is this? A reset of her Africa trip where "not many people have asked me if I'm ok".???

Apparently when she feels a number of people are disgusted with her, she whips out the ol' "Woe is me" card.

If the Guinness Book of World Records has a category for "Most Pathetic Chump", it's got to be Harry.

I hope the BRF has some kind of "deprogramming system" for Harry when he publicly realizes that he can't take it anymore. For now he's complicit in all of Meghan's BS.

Are they waiting for the Queen to die before begging to become "working royals" again? Or are they trying to lay it on in terms of pressuring the Queen to say flattering things about them? For crissakes the Queen is 95, recently widowed, and has an empire to cover.  She owes the NOTHING. They owe HER.

Live venomous snakes have more charm than H&M.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


>



Musso & Frank is my favorite restaurant in LA and it is NOT cheap. This bish claims her dad took her there after every ballet and tap class. What is that, at least twice a week? But moan about the $5 Sizzler salad bar your parents sacrificed for. Give me a goddamn break!!

Like a true narcissist, she lies, contradicts herself and inserts Me-Me-Me-again into any issue for the spotlight she never got as a third rate actress. The letterhead and signature are vomit inducing. Take the titles away already!


----------



## Sophie-Rose

That is their TOUR GUIDE?? Why is she clinging/snuggling to him like that??? Is it  just me or is that inappropriate...


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sophie-Rose said:


> View attachment 5228802
> 
> That is their TOUR GUIDE?? Why is she clinging/snuggling to him like that??? Is it  just me or is that inappropriate...


I was thinking the same thing!  M's got her grip on his arm, face on his shoulder with that wicked smile.  She apparently always been this way.  Uses men, gives them what they want and she gets what she wants.  Ooops sorry for my openness.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> As long as they don’t push their anti-space exploration nonsense on us. Imo he may as well send us to the Middle Ages where only royalty and elites had access to the knowledge - [their clever way of keeping the lil people down]. So, any criticism of anyone’s scientific achievement is not welcomed imo.
> 
> If he really understood  climate change, he would know 2 things can happen : we can correct the pollution mess *and* explore space at the same time - a win/win for all! Actually, we can do much more than those 2 things.  We have so much unused potential!


Yes I agree girl. Yet another ‘we’re not a political family at all but let me stick my oar in on a international or national policy issue- but it’s not politics honestly! We’re just figureheads!’



bag-mania said:


> You don't expect to see these two in the same story.
> 
> View attachment 5228406
> 
> *Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa*
> 
> *Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou have joined the Duke of Sussex and the Oscar winner in calling for an end to drilling "destruction" in the Okavango River Basin*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio Team Up to Fight 'Imminent Threat' to a Beloved Region of Africa
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Leonardo DiCaprio, Forest Whitaker and Dijmon Hounsou are calling for an immediate moratorium on corporate oil drilling in Africa's Okavango River Basin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


 It’s just so tedious they think they can dictate how other countries manage their land and resources. I hate the Karen meme but this is very entitled behaviour IMO

The drilling is just trying to make money and these last two years have shown that safaris and tourism is not the golden goose for Africa conservationists made out it was. (Ironically given the air miles involved). Ultimately one man’s beauty spot is another man’s white elephant.

side note, has anyone, ever, been concerned about how many snakes and rodents oil drilling in the gulf must have killed off? Probably entire species of evil-looking venemous snakes rendered extinct without us even realising


----------



## needlv

I wonder how Sizzler’s PR department feel about MM associating their restaurant with what the “poor” people can afford?  Surely their branding people would be upset…?


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile, the Duchess's cause of the week:


I mean… if you’ve ever actually been poor you would know a $5 meal is not a cheap feed.  More like $5 for the week’s dinners. This is poverty porn at its most transparent.


charlottawill said:


> Waiting for her to play this card:
> 
> View attachment 5228558


I think that’s what she was doing for Harry given the ‘family she never had’ line he came out with.  I mean arguably _everyone_ is poor compared to the BRF right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Language warning… but still funny


----------



## needlv

Oooh just saw A great nickname to add to our list…

Duchess of Sizzler


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what gets me!  They are clearly milking the royal titles in a very political way.
> Before WK come over here, they must clean up this mess! Otherwise, expect Boos.
> And no, Leo cannot help your image. Grifters galore.


I feel like Leo himself doesn’t have a very good image- don’t people think he’s a little sleazy?

Tbh, I think there’s a comparison to be made between the two men. Both were considered cute back in the day but stories of horrible behaviour suggest they are not a catch . Thing is, Leo’s at least paid his dues with his acting - still waiting to see what H does successfully.

the thing I always find with these high PR philanthropy endeavours is they seem to have quite negligible outcomes given their money and influence. I mean when you compare it to someone like Akon, who released a couple of hits fifteen years ago but has managed to use his resources to bring solar power to 1 million households.




marietouchet said:


> Hmmm see Meghan McCain story today where she says her great regret was not having more children
> she wrestled with a miscarriage and wrote a NY Times op Ed on it, about a year before someone else got the idea
> I read the Wall Street Journal instead and miss all these op Eds about personal issues, the ones I read are all about government issues


She shouldn’t write it off as according to some 40-something is a ‘young mother’ 



gracekelly said:


> If you are correct,, then the author of the letter had not clue that using that letterhead was inappropriate and they should be fired.


Oh god no!
Please show mercy!
They only just paid off their fillers to match dear mistress!

Though given the embarrassment they have incurred for the great one…. Perhaps seppuku might be more appropriate?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




Their titles should be revoked


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are making great posts in response to Ms. Harkle's salad/letter. I hope the recipients of the already infamous letter get them!




Two observations:

1. I'm so happy the internet never forgets and there are people who invest their time to point out Raptor's lies.

2. Why is she always, always inappropriate. Everyone else in that tourguide picture is acting normal while she is all over him, a grown man. Ew.


----------



## Annawakes

Agree, that tour guide picture is gross.  She’s all over him.  

And, AS EVER, she calls on others to open up their wallets.  Paid leave is a right?  Because she says so?  When she blows $100k plus on clothes that don’t fit?


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Oooh just saw A great nickname to add to our list…
> 
> Duchess of Sizzler




Sizzler sizzle - the jokes write themselves 




ETA:  what is that sound? A sizzle?  The BRF falling?  No, it is creepy H&M upstaging W&K


----------



## CarryOn2020

Musso & Frank








						Column: Did coronavirus — or the state — close Musso & Frank? Big money hangs in the balance
					

Hollywood's iconic Musso & Frank Grill fights with its insurer over virus coverage.




					www.latimes.com
				



_Over time the restaurant has become identified with both its neighborhood and Hollywood itself; last year its dark wood bar and dining rooms played a part re-creating the movie community of the 1960s as a setting for the film “Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood.”_




Yep, Leo is there!  Small world


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are making great posts in response to Ms. Harkle's salad/letter. I hope the recipients of the already infamous letter get them!



Omg, she’s so touchy with a stranger! Yuck.


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> Language warning… but still funny



The fact that he was the iconic Diana sweater in every video cracks me up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> I wonder how Sizzler’s PR department feel about MM associating their restaurant with what the “poor” people can afford?  Surely their branding people would be upset…?



Quite the opposite! This is a golden opportunity.
They now have the American version the BRF royal seal of approval. 



ETA:  No, I do not feel sorry for the BRF.  Many have been warning QE et al for months about this very thing. Hazzie will do anything to ruin his family - that much is clear.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> But, but, I thought her 40 x 40 initiative was to help to all these women get back to work?!!?  What happened Megsypoo??  Did that fail miserably, just like everything else you leech off?


Raptor hasn’t stopped grifting since the baby was born so I don’t know why she’s suddenly claiming they are on leave lol.

I think she missed out
‘Like _fewer_ parents we are so blessed to give them back to the help (get here nanny no # 64 now!!!!) at the end of the hour.’


lanasyogamama said:


> The fact that he was the iconic Diana sweater in every video cracks me up.


Oh my days I just looked this up. The fact she was rocking a black sheep jumper in the first place is very funny too.  
Available for just £270…. luckily that price point means lady murky muck probably won’t try out this particular Diana cosplay.








						Warm & Wonderful Women's Sheep Sweater (Fitted)
					

The authentic black sheep jumper worn by Princess Diana, from the designers who made the original. Warm & Wonderful created the original sheep jumper in 1979, and shot to fame when a young Lady Diana Spencer, later Princess of Wales, began wearing it. Joanna Osborne and Sally Muir, who founded...




					rowingblazers.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Somehow this ‘save the Kavango’ seems to have a huge hidden agenda.  And (see what i did there) this is why royals and Hwood’ers should stay out of political issues. Imo

Take some time to consider the views of the Namibians:








						No need to Lament about the Oil Discovery in Namibia's Kavango Basin. What About the Huge Benefits It Represents for Namibians? (By NJ Ayuk) | Africanews
					

Six months ago, Canadian oil and gas company Reconnaissance Energy Africa Ltd. (“ReconAfrica”) began exploratory drilling in the deep Kavango Basin of northeast Namibia and




					www.africanews.com
				




_Don’t get me wrong: I believe in the science of climate change. I believe that we all must take it seriously. But I don’t believe that Western influencers know the best path forward for Africa. Intruding on our efforts to improve our economies and our infrastructures because somehow “they know best” when it comes to fossil fuels is archaic and insulting.

If anything, these efforts feel like just one more example that African voices don’t matter._


----------



## Goodfrtune

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes! I believe he was chased. Here is a youtube video comparing before and after being told that he was trapped … There are people that bring the worst out in others.



I am a long time lurker and faithful reader of this blog. I do have to say that this video broke my heart in  that there is such a huge difference in his demeanor preMeghan and postMeghan. I hope he comes to his senses and divorces her!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Goodfrtune said:


> I am a long time lurker and faithful reader of this blog. I do have to say that this video broke my heart in  that there is such a huge difference in his demeanor preMeghan and postMeghan. I hope he comes to his senses and divorces her!



Imo The video perpetuates the falsehood that Hazzie was happy pre-M. He says he was not. There are plenty of videos to show how badly he behaves at public events pre-M.









						Stop blaming Meghan Markle — Prince Harry planned his exit from the royal family long before they even met
					

A look at Prince Harry's past proves that his decision to leave the royal family was actually in the making for 23 years.




					www.insider.com


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo The video perpetuates the falsehood that Hazzie was happy pre-M. He says he was not. There are plenty of videos to show how badly he behaves at public events pre-M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop blaming Meghan Markle — Prince Harry planned his exit from the royal family long before they even met
> 
> 
> A look at Prince Harry's past proves that his decision to leave the royal family was actually in the making for 23 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com


Honestly Harry was perpetually unhappy since childhood. His parents divorce, his mom’s mental health worsening, the ugly rumors about him not being Charles child, viewing his big brother as competition … he’s been through it from a very young age, and maybe there was a little moment of happiness he’d felt when Kate was introduced to the family, but the man was already rotten by then.

He’s met his equally rotten and shameless wife and the rest is history.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Omg, she’s so touchy with a stranger! Yuck.


And appears to be wearing the least amount of clothing.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sophie-Rose said:


> View attachment 5228802
> 
> That is their TOUR GUIDE?? Why is she clinging/snuggling to him like that??? Is it  just me or is that inappropriate...


She probably did him "favors" so she could be first in line for everything.  Pre Yacht Girl, she was apparently Tour Girl.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Language warning… but still funny



Thank you for starting off my morning laughing!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Two observations:
> 
> 1. I'm so happy the internet never forgets and there are people who invest their time to point out Raptor's lies.
> 
> *2. Why is she always, always inappropriate. Everyone else in that tourguide picture is acting normal while she is all over him, a grown man. Ew.*


Who wants to bet he was probably married too?


----------



## Chanbal

The letter is being published almost everywhere, including in the Washington Post. What group (or person) calls itself progressive and associates with this type of statements?  

_*Meghan’s letter was shared online by the progressive group Paid Leave for All. The organization’s president, Dawn Huckelbridge, said it “means the world” to have the duchess support paid leave.*

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ocial&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter_


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Who wants to bet he was probably married too?



If he was/is married, the wife is most likely on the phone to her divorce attorney.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Oooh just saw A great nickname to add to our list…
> 
> Duchess of Sizzler



Duchess of Sizzler is a great title!  People on Twitter are already taking care of the royal advertisements and endorsements!


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Raptor hasn’t stopped grifting since the baby was born so I don’t know why she’s suddenly claiming they are on leave lol.
> 
> I think she missed out
> ‘Like _fewer_ parents we are so blessed to give them back to the help (get here nanny no # 64 now!!!!) at the end of the hour.’
> 
> Oh my days I just looked this up. The fact she was rocking a black sheep jumper in the first place is very funny too.
> Available for just £270…. luckily that price point means lady murky muck probably won’t try out this particular Diana cosplay.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Warm & Wonderful Women's Sheep Sweater (Fitted)
> 
> 
> The authentic black sheep jumper worn by Princess Diana, from the designers who made the original. Warm & Wonderful created the original sheep jumper in 1979, and shot to fame when a young Lady Diana Spencer, later Princess of Wales, began wearing it. Joanna Osborne and Sally Muir, who founded...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rowingblazers.com


I’ve totally considered buying it!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The letter is being published almost everywhere, including in the Washington Post. What group (or person) calls itself progressive and associates with this type of statements?
> 
> _*Meghan’s letter was shared online by the progressive group Paid Leave for All. The organization’s president, Dawn Huckelbridge, said it “means the world” to have the duchess support paid leave.*
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ocial&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter_


----------



## Chanbal

I feel sorry for QE, but her aids need to act on this. The Sizzler lady is contributing to a very unhealthy society imo. We need people that contribute with good ideas, work, funds, lead by example… Finding a rich husband and making money by merching royal titles is not admirable or inspiring. 











						Meghan slammed for 'highly inappropriate' use of royal title in political letter
					

Royal fans are fuming after Meghan used her Duchess of Sussex title in a letter addressed to US politicians on Wednesday, considering that royals aren't meant to get involved in politics




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The US franchise of British Royalty…


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> I wonder how Sizzler’s PR department feel about MM associating their restaurant with what the “poor” people can afford?  Surely their branding people would be upset…?


I used to take my kids to the Sizzler franchise in Singapore (it has since folded). Will they mention how poverty stricken we were when they were young?  My mum took me to the Ponderosa franchise - feel so sad for myself now


----------



## V0N1B2

lanasyogamama said:


> I’ve totally considered buying it!


My nana (who was an amazing knitter) made that sweater for me and I wore it for my grade 12 yearbook photo (1984/1985).  I loved that sweater - I was the only one in my school that had one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It's not Trinny Woodall but Triny Foyle which kind of puts me off, but the interesting bit for me is that allegedly Rose was there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’ve totally considered buying it!



Honestly, if it came in better colours (say, a nice grey) I'd consider it too, but I don't look great in bright red and the other colours are fugly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, what was the drama with the Matthews guys?


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I used to take my kids to the Sizzler franchise in Singapore (it has since folded). Will they mention how poverty stricken we were when they were young?  My mum took me to the Ponderosa franchise - feel so sad for myself now


I took kids, including mine, out for lunch at McDonalds when they were young. I didn't take them to Sizzler because salads were not their forte, they preferred Happy meals. Poor kids having burgers during playdates, shame on me.  

It was so ridiculous mentioning Sizzler's salads on the even more ridiculous pompous letter from the Office of the Duke and… They are indeed forcing a royal franchise in the US. The all situation is ridiculous and the BRF must try to fix this mess imo.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Your friend who went to HS with her can attest that she did not grow up poor!  This is so insulting!  I bet Tom will have a reaction to that.  Can't wait lol!


For sure .. as a matter of fact, my friends were in a lot more dire straights than the Markle family during that time since the father had gotten fired from one of the major Music companies (they were pissed that he had part-time music gigs without them getting a share)!  Their son was able to go to the boy's private school, ONLY because he got a scholarship to attend!


----------



## Hermes Zen

My parents never took me to a Sizzler when I was a kid.  Maybe they didn't know about them.  We ate at home or on base.  I discovered Sizzler when I as a young bride and my hubby and I frequented Sizzler.  We commuted to our jobs and we went to eat there more than once a week.  Loved it!  Never once did I feel poor eating there.  I think fondly back now AND I STILL DON"T feel like it made me feel poor.  I had to go search to see if Sizzler still exists.  Looks like it is!  May just go back to one!    I bet Sizzler is loving the free PR thanks to Sizzler M.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Meghan Markle VS. Pippa Middleton: 'It's war!'
					

For months rumours have circulated about the apparent tension between the Sussexes and Cambridges. Now a reported feud between the young royals has spread to peripheral members of their families.A source tells New Idea that Kate’s sister Pippa Middleton is at the centre of the latest drama. She...




					www.newidea.com.au
				




Found this  - although not about the Mathews brothers per se - rather Meghan stirring things up for Kate and her sisters' in-laws to be, with regard to Spencer's then girlfriend Vogue


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Meghan Markle VS. Pippa Middleton: 'It's war!'
> 
> 
> For months rumours have circulated about the apparent tension between the Sussexes and Cambridges. Now a reported feud between the young royals has spread to peripheral members of their families.A source tells New Idea that Kate’s sister Pippa Middleton is at the centre of the latest drama. She...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Found this  - although not about the Mathews brothers per se - rather Meghan stirring things up for Kate and her sisters' in-laws to be, with regard to Spencer's then girlfriend Vogue



Thanks! Now I find this quote very telling...this was shortly after the troublesome two made their own Insta account, way before they set out to conquer the US.



> “They’re trying to be their own royal family. New-age, celebrity royals like a totally new era and palace of their own,” says the source, who adds that they are planning an offshoot of sorts to the official royal family and the breaking of the normal traditions.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> She probably did him "favors" so she could be first in line for everything.  Pre Yacht Girl, she was apparently Tour Girl.


Ay, ay, ay! The sizzle!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Musso & Frank
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Column: Did coronavirus — or the state — close Musso & Frank? Big money hangs in the balance
> 
> 
> Hollywood's iconic Musso & Frank Grill fights with its insurer over virus coverage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Over time the restaurant has become identified with both its neighborhood and Hollywood itself; last year its dark wood bar and dining rooms played a part re-creating the movie community of the 1960s as a setting for the film “Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood.”_
> 
> View attachment 5228922
> 
> 
> Yep, Leo is there!  Small world


I would not be surprised if she was the one who requested her father take her there after her dance classes. Probably hoped she'd run into a famous producer or agent who'd give her her "big break".


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> She probably did him "favors" so she could be first in line for everything.  Pre Yacht Girl, she was apparently Tour Girl.


It is for sure a skeevy photo, but that's a pretty serious accusation to make with no evidence, especially if she was underage.


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> My parents never took me to a Sizzler when I was a kid.  Maybe they didn't know about them.  We ate at home or on base.  I discovered Sizzler when I as a young bride and my hubby and I frequented Sizzler.  We commuted to our jobs and we went to eat there more than once a week.  Loved it!  Never once did I feel poor eating there.  I think fondly back now AND I STILL DON"T feel like it made me feel poor.  I had to go search to see if Sizzler still exists.  Looks like it is!  May just go back to one!    I bet Sizzler is loving the free PR thanks to Sizzler M.


Yes! I remember in the military I was working at a military hospital abs my co workers an I loved Sizzlers. Soup and sand all the way. It was fun and the food was good, at least to us it was.


----------



## Katel

Sophie-Rose said:


> View attachment 5228802
> 
> That is their TOUR GUIDE?? Why is she clinging/snuggling to him like that??? Is it  just me or is that inappropriate...



the Markle claw! 




Chanbal said:


> The markle claw.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is becoming more and more ridiculous by the minute. 


https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...*-child-care-policy-plea-Duchess-of-Sussex-vn


----------



## rose60610

I read the letter M sent to Chuck and Nancy. The gall. Like it's an original idea? Is this her way of fishing for a White House invitation? So.......why did she leave the country that already HAS parental leave? The letter went on and on and on, typical word salad. It includes this "The working mom or parent..."  Um, what's wrong with the word 'DAD'? You know, like HER dad? If she "grew up with the salad bar at Sizzler" it means they went out to eat all the time. If they were THAT poor why weren't they going to a soup kitchen? She was soooo poor that she ended up at one of the most expensive universities in the country. Because her father paid for it. And still didn't get invited to her wedding. What a total bish.


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> I read the letter M sent to Chuck and Nancy. The gall. Like it's an original idea? Is this her way to fishing for a White House invitation? So.......why did she leave the country that already HAS parental leave? The letter went on and on and on, typical word salad. It includes this "The working mom or parent..."  Um, what's wrong with the word 'DAD'? You know, like HER dad? If she "grew up with the salad bar at Sizzler" it means they went out to eat all the time. If they were THAT poor why weren't they going to a soup kitchen? She was soooo poor that she ended up at one of the most expensive universities in the country. Because her father paid for it. And still didn't get invited to her wedding. What a total bish.


And honestly, what does eating at a chain restaurant does a kid have anything to do with parental leave? She can’t talk about being a mother that needs to go back to a 9-to-5 job when her baby is six weeks old because she’s absolutely never lived that life.


----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> This is becoming more and more ridiculous by the minute.
> View attachment 5229412
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...*-child-care-policy-plea-Duchess-of-Sussex-vn


Duchess Dunce! 
Always a day late and a dollar short. Stop trying so hard.


----------



## csshopper

Taking the stage at a moment of achievement and celebration during his Earth Shot program last Sunday. In charge, determined, with a fabulous partner at his side.

To the faux royals in Montecito, take note: here is the real deal, the man who will be King, the man you will bow to, the man who will ultimately control your destiny. 

When he loses all patience with you, and I think it will happen, you will be has been harry  and ms. markled markle (the small case not capital letters is deliberate.)


----------



## needlv

Duchess Sizzler would not survive in politics if she couldn’t handle the British tabloids.  AND she would have to give up her title… and you know, work.  Shake hands with the great unwashed…. Maybe this is a desperate backup plan because her marriage isn’t working out and She needs something to jump into.






__





						Blind Item #7
					

The alliterate one and the A++ lister for CA had a one on one conversation this week about her political aspirations.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is becoming more and more ridiculous by the minute.
> View attachment 5229412
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...*-child-care-policy-plea-Duchess-of-Sussex-vn


MODERN DAY INACCURATE REPORTING ... UGHHH 
There may be a deal - agreed to behind the scenes - that will do this
But the legislation has not been passed

It aint over til the fat lady sings ... to use a Wagnerian metaphor that is probably no longer PC ... oh well


----------



## charlottawill

Norm.Core said:


> Duchess Dunce!
> Always a day late and a dollar short. Stop trying so hard.


It's all she knows. I'm sure Chuck and Nancy didn't even see the letter, but I'm sure their staffers had quite a laugh over it.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking about the $5 sizzler salad bar ... that was when a Big Mac cost a $1 ... and if you wanted to pinch pennies you would go to McD


----------



## lulu212121

I have to wonder how the Queen's health really is. Remember what transpired when Price Phillip was in the hospital?


----------



## Roxanna

I am not sure she'll ever give up title.  I imagine  She's taking it as some sort of budge of honour like she is fond of collecting jewellery.  She probably think it will help her to advance her political ambition more as mark of recognition of the efforts she is capable of.  Anyway it remains to be seen how things would unfold. It becoming really fascinating .


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> And honestly, what does eating at a chain restaurant does a kid have anything to do with parental leave? She can’t talk about being a mother that needs to go back to a 9-to-5 job when her baby is six weeks old because she’s absolutely never lived that life.



That is what was so ridiculous. Parents having paid leave after having a baby isn't going to mean the family won't ever have to eat a budget meal at a restaurant when the kid is ten. She's a moron.


----------



## needlv




----------



## LittleStar88

Without the title, she is just _Meghan Who?_

The title is the only shred of "credibility" she has. Without it, she is really nothing.

And why send the letter to Chuck and Nancy? They're on board, don't need convincing. She should figure out who doesn't support it and send the letter to them.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Without the title, she is just _Meghan Who?_
> 
> The title is the only shred of "credibility" she has. Without it, she is really nothing.
> 
> And why send the letter to Chuck and Nancy? They're on board, don't need convincing. She should figure out who doesn't support it and send the letter to them.


It would be too much effort for her without any recognition to reach out to every member of Congress who is against it. She's all about the recognition.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Nancy receives letter from the Montepsycho Duchess and is like:





Then upon hearing of her political aspirations pulls a Jack Palance from City Slickers and says:


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Without the title, she is just _Meghan Who?_
> 
> The title is the only shred of "credibility" she has. Without it, she is really nothing.
> 
> And why send the letter to Chuck and Nancy? They're on board, don't need convincing. She should figure out who doesn't support it and send the letter to them.



_Oddly, with the title, she is still Meghan who?  
She will forever be known as Prince Harry’s wife or Diana’s youngest son’s wife. Nothing on her own merits. When Princess Grace realized she was recognized only as a wife, rather than an top notch actress, she became depressed.
[In the world of royalty, the “mother part“ is expected, there is no or very little praise for that.]_




marietouchet said:


> about the $5 sizzler salad bar ... that was when a Big Mac cost a $1 ... and if you wanted to pinch pennies you would go to McD



_Or we stayed home. Long before MM’s day, eating out was such a treat for most families. By the time the 80s/90s rolled around, everyone ate out regularly or heated up pre-cooked food. Home-cooking from scratch fell out of favor with the double income crowd. 

Not to criticize a whole school, but these NW people seem to have a most inflated view of themselves and their accomplishments, aka: snobs._


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> Nancy receives letter from the Montepsycho Duchess and is like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then upon hearing of her political aspirations pulls a Jack Palance from City Slickers and says:



*Post of the day! 
  *


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I know she's tough, but I can't help but feel that the stress of Megxit on top of Philip's death and the Andrew mess is taking a toll on her physical health. It's a lot for anyone, let alone someone who is 95.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Funny, I was thinking Duchess-Constitution-Is-For-Plebs and Nancy Antoinette would be a perfect fit. They can invite each other over and compare their carefully curated artisan ice-cream stashes


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Better news here, hopefully!


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> Without the title, she is just _Meghan Who?_
> 
> The title is the only shred of "credibility" she has. Without it, she is really nothing.
> 
> And why send the letter to Chuck and Nancy? They're on board, don't need convincing. She should figure out who doesn't support it and send the letter to them.


The Narcissist only communicates with "the leadership",  after all SHE is a Douchass, ordinary Congress people are not worth her staff's time at the moment. Nancy ****** is Speaker of the House of Representatives (the phony royal may have mistakenly thought this is equivalent to the House of Lords in the country where the real royals live) and Chuck Schumer is the Senate Majority Leader, (he's from New York but guess he was too busy trying to take care of business in Washington to fly to NYC to hear The Bench reading.)


----------



## Chanbal

Many people on twitter can't cope with the hardship suffered by the Sizzler lady.

Edit: I forgot to add that the picture below shows little Sizzler riding a donkey to school as the family was too poor to pay for the bus fare.


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Plus he's remarried with a baby when he could just stay single...it's not like he's the president of the United States and needs a first lady.



He and his wife are expecting again.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is becoming more and more ridiculous by the minute.
> View attachment 5229412
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...*-child-care-policy-plea-Duchess-of-Sussex-vn


She got what she wanted out of it so she doesn't care.  There was lots of PR out there with people spreading the letter around, mentioning her and she had people like Melinda Gates supporting her.  As far as Sparkles is concerned, this was a huge win.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Megalomanic is probably screaming at the Eunuch that his Grandmother has stolen her place in headline news. How dare she throw shade on the Great Epistle of Parental Leave?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> SPEECHLESS about the letter to Nancy and Chuck about $5 sizzler salads ….


 I know....any American can write to congress but why is she getting any more attention than any of us for expressing our opinion?  who TF cares what she thinks?  and yes, the $5 sizzler salads.....didn't mention growing up on a TV sound stage with celebs, going to private school, et.

So they are "prominent people" and therefore we have to hear about all their opinions

Not that I have a problem with her opinion
 AGAIN - I just don't need her to tell me (or Congress)


----------



## Aimee3

Oh MM ate her fill at the salad bar all right…the WORD salad bar!!!


----------



## Yanca

Megain latest PR stunt must be because she can't take the fact that The Royals are thriving and doing all these works and projects , Earthshot, meeting ***** and leaders at G26, while she and Hazbeen has to nothing to show for apart from the endless Pro articles about them and endless pro twitter announcement from their mouthpiece Scoobie do.  it is her right to draft a letter to any elected official, as a US citizen, but why use the Royal letterhead?  why sign of as a Duchess, instead of just  her name,  The Speaker and the Senate Majority leader are already  both working to pass this on their bill that is still being debated. Megain's letter was all about herself, her background, etc..  The letter was  unncessarily wrong and is it appropriate to sign of " as Ever" , this letter was supposed to be a professional letter to a elected Goverment official is it not? Her squad really think people are just hating on her but they are being called out on their lies, their many  hypocrisy and endless preaching while really nothing tangible and major results to show for.. aside from their woke word salads.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If she actually cared about the topic she could have sent the message privately. But no, she had to have an open letter through some group’s website to make sure she got maximum media coverage. Getting that positive press is crucial to her.
> 
> The good thing is her current bid for attention isn’t getting any TV coverage that I know of and only the usual online publications took the bait.


Sorry - I first heard it on TV....they said something to the effect that she was a "prominent person" getting involved with the paid family leave issue


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> She got what she wanted out of it so she doesn't care.  There was lots of PR out there with people spreading the letter around, mentioning her and she had people like Melinda Gates supporting her.  As far as Sparkles is concerned, this was a huge win.


Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. This will look good to many less informed people, and will justify her political ambitions. From what I understood, she is engaging again with an established political figure (G N*wsom?) in the state of California.


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW another comment brought up how she cried to Oprah that she wasn't even taught the national anthem of the UK. Is this stupid cow serious. I learned "I vow to thee my country" (not the national anthem but a song I'd never heard before) during the mourning period for Philip when it was everywhere just by watching a few random Youtube videos. You bet if I was getting married to NUMBER SIX as she likes to point out I'd teach myself that anthem within a few hours. I have the internet.



Here in America the medley of "God Save the Queen" is used in one of our very famous patriotic songs: "My Country 'Tis of Thee. We would sing it everyday in school after we recited the Pledge of Allegiance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a guess - this was an early warning stunt.  Wait until COP Scotland begins. They may have something planned for each day 










						UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) at the SEC – Glasgow 2021
					

The 26th UN Climate Change Conference will take place in November 2021, at the Scottish Event Campus (SEC) in Glasgow.




					ukcop26.org
				






			https://twitter.com/COP26


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like their titles need to be stripped by the UK government, so people of the UK do your job. PLEASE! Many of us here in the US with be very grateful. I feel the pain of this poster.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> Yes! I remember in the military I was working at a military hospital abs my co workers an I loved Sizzlers. Soup and sand all the way. It was fun and the food was good, at least to us it was.


Fond memories. 

I miss the mess halls for Thanksgiving and Christmas.  It was always done up wonderfully.  Sadly my parents have both passed on so I can't do that any more.  BUT those were very fond memories for me.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Ay, ay, ay! The sizzle!


Some sizzle for the sizzler


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It is for sure a skeevy photo, but that's a pretty serious accusation to make with no evidence, especially if she was underage.


I’m not accusing her of anything, as it was meant to be a joke; however, given her adult behavior, I wouldn’t be surprised if she started behaving inappropriately at a younger age.  Taking a picture with a low cut dress cozying up to an adult man is pretty inappropriate IMO.  She doesn’t look like she’s being forced to assume that pose, and actually looks pretty pleased with herself.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a circus. The Palace may not be shocked, but we are.   

*R*p*blic*ns*_* are telling Meghan Markle to 'stick to acting' and daring the royal family to strip her of her title *after she wrote a letter to ******** House Speaker Nancy ****** and Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer advocating for paid family leave on Thursday.

*The letter sparked rumors that Markle was using the 'tactics of an aspiring politician' to lobby two senior Washington figures *on Joe *****'s proposed parental and sick leave legislation in a 1000-word letter sent on the Sussexes' own headed paper…

Royal commentator and former editor of International Who's Who, Richard Fitzwilliams, told MailOnline: '*Using the example of the $5 salad bar and how she had to struggle in the past is an attempt to link with the way so many families struggle to pay their bills. *

'*Aspiring politicians use these sort of examples* and it remains to be seen, since she was privately educated and her father was one of Hollywood's top lighting directors, whether the audience she seeks are impressed by her account of how she had to struggle. She and her father are estranged as she is at the moment from the royal family…

*A source close to the Palace has said Meghan's intervention is unlikely to cause waves in the UK, as she is unlikely to return to royal duties. 'She's an American citizen, highly political and it's not the first time she's lobbied using her title. The Palace won't be shocked at all', the expert said. *
….
Royals experts have also questioned whether Americans will be impressed 'by her account of how she had to struggle' on $4.99 salads from Sizzler when her estranged father Thomas put her through private school from kindergarten and she now lives in a $14million LA mansion while sitting on a $100million fortune._

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...le-royal-title-interfering-politics.html?s=09


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is a circus. The Palace may not be shocked, but we are.
> 
> *R*p*blic*ns*_* are telling Meghan Markle to 'stick to acting' and daring the royal family to strip her of her title *after she wrote a letter to ******** House Speaker Nancy ****** and Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer advocating for paid family leave on Thursday.
> 
> *The letter sparked rumors that Markle was using the 'tactics of an aspiring politician' to lobby two senior Washington figures *on Joe *****'s proposed parental and sick leave legislation in a 1000-word letter sent on the Sussexes' own headed paper…
> 
> Royal commentator and former editor of International Who's Who, Richard Fitzwilliams, told MailOnline: '*Using the example of the $5 salad bar and how she had to struggle in the past is an attempt to link with the way so many families struggle to pay their bills. *
> 
> '*Aspiring politicians use these sort of examples* and it remains to be seen, since she was privately educated and her father was one of Hollywood's top lighting directors, whether the audience she seeks are impressed by her account of how she had to struggle. She and her father are estranged as she is at the moment from the royal family…
> 
> *A source close to the Palace has said Meghan's intervention is unlikely to cause waves in the UK, as she is unlikely to return to royal duties. 'She's an American citizen, highly political and it's not the first time she's lobbied using her title. The Palace won't be shocked at all', the expert said. *
> ….
> Royals experts have also questioned whether Americans will be impressed 'by her account of how she had to struggle' on $4.99 salads from Sizzler when her estranged father Thomas put her through private school from kindergarten and she now lives in a $14million LA mansion while sitting on a $100million fortune._
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...le-royal-title-interfering-politics.html?s=09


The $100 million fortune is questionable.


----------



## Chanbal

I hope Nancy gets a copy of this article. 










						What Meghan's $4.99 Sizzler salad letter didn't say
					

Her extraordinary 1,030-word letter asks Nancy ****** and Chuck Schumer, both ********s, to consider her plea for paid leave for parents 'on behalf of my family, Archie and Lili and Harry'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## floatinglili

Chanbal said:


> I was about to give this thread a break, but she can't stop to impose herself to us.
> 
> Bringing up the Sizzler's salads, piecemealed jobs to cover odds and ends… when her father used all his money to give her a very comfortable life.


It’s as if MM binge-watched ‘Maid’ and was feeling inspired.


----------



## Lodpah

floatinglili said:


> It’s as if MM binge-watched ‘Maid’ and was feeling inspired.


That lady in the Maid had more character, substance and credibility than MM will ever have in her lifetime.  The backlash thus far on her latest "venture to achieve world domination" is getting desperate. She's grasping at straws and anything to be relevant. The day she runs for public office and wins is the day Pee Wee Herman wins the presidency.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal

Their last unspeakable events brought Jan Moir back to this thread: 




_Dear Leader Charles Schumer and Speaker Nancy ****** — I’m not an elected official, not yet anyway. I’m not a politician either, but watch this space.

I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a plugged-in parent. I am also a Duchess, did I mention that? Check out the letterhead; Duke and D-U-C-H-E-S-S of Sussex. Duchess. Rhymes with success. Don’t ever forget that.

I’m writing to you at this deeply important time — as a mom and an everyday global icon — to advocate for paid leave for parents. No family should have to choose between earning a living and having the freedom to take care of their child.

That is why everyone should try to marry into a Royal Family if possible, complete with a father-in-law who can be tapped for millions, in addition to the magnificent sums he has already bequeathed upon his son. Prince Charles can rest assured that Harry and I are putting the monies to good use.

Together we have rescued chickens and given fresh purpose to private jet pilots hanging around LAX with nothing to do. It means so much to the little people that we don’t have to fly commercial.
And I am personally keeping the Cashmere Weavers of Montecito in business. Throw another goat on the loom, dudes! I need another five-ply poncho to visit and inspire marginalised children in an inner-city ghetto with my saviour complex and luxury woollens.

Let’s speak more of my truth. I started working (at the local frozen yoghurt shop) at the age of 13. It was there that I first discovered my deep love of culture. In addition, all those fro-yo flavours taught me about the beauty of diversity and how each flavour is unique and wonderful in its own way, just like human beings.

There’s Ginger Totally Nuts, the Flaky Waity Katy, the Royal Sour Lemons Bombe and my favourite, Just Say It Belongs To The Stylist. The more flavours on offer in a yoghurt bar the stronger that bar is — like society, right?

Dining out? Thought you’d never ask. I grew up living on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler, a popular restaurant chain in California. Times were tough. Once they ran out of the broccoli and tomato mix with soy-lime dressing, and I cried for days.

That was back when I lived in Les Miserables, in the leaky wooden shack on the wrong side of the tracks that my father laughingly called a ‘home’. I used to sleep in flour sacks and I cleaned my dresses — some might call them ‘rags’ — on a washboard in the coldwater kitchen.

It is no secret that I was born in the wagon of a travelling show, Mama used to dance for the money they’d throw, Papa would do whatever he could . . . no sorry, that’s Cher. I’m getting mixed up. I remember there was a church house, gin house. A school house, outhouse. On Highway Number Nineteen, where the people keep the city clean — no, wait! (Harry, have you been in my Cinderella File again? Idiot.)

All you have to know is that there’s a world outside your window and it’s a world of dread and fear, where the only water flowing is the . . . no hang on, where am I? I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends. I worked all my life to make ends meet and to put gas in my car.

What has all this got to do with paid parental leave? Absolutely nothing, but I’m not missing this opportunity to lend support to a popular cause while burnishing my victim credentials on an international stage.

To depict myself as a plucky ragamuffin, an Orphan Annie who fought her way up from the crumbs on the breadline to the cherry on the cake. Even though I went to private school and my father was an award-winning Hollywood lighting designer who provided for me generously.

But let’s move on.

Many of our economic systems are past their expiration date, but luckily not hereditary privilege nor inherited titles. Being a Duchess and having this access to you comes courtesy of an ancient European monarchy which I purport to despise, but continue to use to my advantage; to live off and exploit in the most ethical way possible. Like I said, I used to dine at an all-you-can-eat salad bar, so that makes it OK, right?

Even those of us who live in mansions crammed with staff, gourmet kitchens and multiple nannies, can feel overwhelmed at the birth of a child and expansion of a family. That is why I am begging you to consider the paternity leave deals on offer in the land of Narnia, where birth-givers and their partners are given five years off on full pay until their children start school or marry a prince.

Listen. This isn’t about Right or Left, it’s about right or wrong. It’s about putting families above politics, although I obviously don’t mean my own blood family, who don’t understand compassion in action like me.

So, on behalf of Archie and Lili and Harry, I thank you for considering this letter and daring to dream a dream in time gone by, when hope was high and life worth living.

Vote for me. Thank you._









						JAN MOIR: Move over Cinderella, here's Meghan's fairy tale
					

JAN MOIR: Dear Leader Charles Schumer and Speaker Nancy ****** - I'm not an elected official, not yet anyway. I'm not a politician either, but watch this space.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## catlover46

I wonder what stunt they are going to play the day the Queen dies .

The sugars on Celebitchy are rooting for her death.


----------



## sdkitty

catlover46 said:


> I wonder what stunt they are going to play the day the Queen dies .
> 
> The sugars on Celebitchy are rooting for her death.


eww
why?


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> eww
> why?


Because they hate her,Charles,and most of William and Kate.  They think Meghan is a “victim”.


----------



## sdkitty

catlover46 said:


> Because they hate her,Charles,and most of William and Kate.  They think Meghan is a “victim”.


ok
smart group


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> ok
> smart group


They were awful when Phillip’s death was announced as well.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Too good to be true, but I really hope it is.   Someone posted this on Twitter! Not sure what the UK government is waiting for to proceed with doing the right thing. If they are understaffed, I bet there are many people out there ready to volunteer.


----------



## rose60610

catlover46 said:


> I wonder what stunt they are going to play the day the Queen dies .
> 
> The sugars on Celebitchy are rooting for her death.



Are these people the same a$$holes who probably have the "Hate has no home here" signs in front of their houses?


----------



## Chanbal

catlover46 said:


> I wonder what stunt they are going to play the day the Queen dies .
> 
> The sugars on Celebitchy are rooting for her death.


Yes, I saw this as well. You can find one of those bad taste posts on spoiler. 






Spoiler: shocking


----------



## rose60610

So when can we expect Meghan, I'm sorry, DUCHESS OF SUSSEX, write Chuck and Nancy saying something else profound, like,  "sunshine and clean water" are good things? You know, Melinda Gates would agree with such a clever thought, and it would prove that M is best buds with the billionaires of the world. 

And what have M&H said about the Queen's stay in the hospital? Can they at least be bothered to acknowledge the woman who has given them virtually effing everything and has devoted many decades of service without staring into cameras, never once calling herself a victim? And has worn tens of thousands of appropriate outfits that actually fit very nicely? 

When the Queen dies, what excuse will Meghan dredge up to not attend the funeral so she won't have to face the boos? Or will she bring her alligator tears, wearing another ill-fitting outfit, wailing and throwing herself on the coffin for international front page photos? She'll be a victim you know, when another member of "the family she never had" passes away.


----------



## kemilia

needlv said:


> The letter once again was written in a way that was all about her.  The stories, then rubbing it in that she is rich enough to go home and not work.


She waited on tables? She has BRAGGED before that she never did this. Keeping the lies straight continues to be a problem for her.

And we didn't have a Sizzler's, we had a Ponderosa and we loved it!


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> So when can we expect Meghan, I'm sorry, DUCHESS OF SUSSEX, write Chuck and Nancy saying something else profound, like,  "sunshine and clean water" are good things? You know, Melinda Gates would agree with such a clever thought, and it would prove that M is best buds with the billionaires of the world.
> 
> And what have M&H said about the Queen's stay in the hospital? Can they at least be bothered to acknowledge the woman who has given them virtually effing everything and has devoted many decades of service without staring into cameras, never once calling herself a victim? And has worn tens of thousands of appropriate outfits that actually fit very nicely?
> 
> When the Queen dies, what excuse will Meghan dredge up to not attend the funeral so she won't have to face the boos? Or will she bring her alligator tears, wearing another ill-fitting outfit, wailing and throwing herself on the coffin for international front page photos? She'll be a victim you know, when another member of "the family she never had" passes away.



Oh, MM will tell us about all the sweet moments she and QE shared. Remember QE had a blanket for her on that cold day they went somewhere for something. We will hear all about the zoom chats filled with clever Queen-isms about MM’s decor, clothes and kids.
 And (!) we will hear of all the sweet plans they discussed - plans for Chas and W to share the throne with Hazzie.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Too good to be true, but I really hope it is.   Someone posted this on Twitter! Not sure what the UK government is waiting for to proceed with doing the right thing. If they are understaffed, I bet there are many people out there ready to volunteer.
> View attachment 5230009



Complaint filed by who?  I hope it’s true, but these two seem to get away with everything.


----------



## Chanbal

I hesitated to post this video here, but here it is together with one of its comments (see spoiler). I'm under the impression that YW twitter account has also been suspended. I think the person that commented on this video is likely right and the squ*d members are not being paid by SS the way it's shown on the video/posts. However, they seem to be a well organized group perhaps led by their kueen. If you have some free time, watch the video and draw your own conclusion from it. 




Spoiler: For your eyes only


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Complaint filed by who?  I hope it’s true, but *these two seem to get away with everything*.


Great question, I would also like to get an answer.
You are right! They seem to get away with everything, until when?
Seeing the games this duo plays is making me lose faith in humanity.


----------



## lulu212121

Chanbal said:


> Great question, I would also like to get an answer.
> You are right! They seem to get away with everything, until when?
> *Seeing the games this duo plays makes me losing faith in humanity*.


Makes me lose faith in the Royal Family. I don't understand why they let these 2, Andrew, and even Fergie get away with the smears. If they are waiting for something like the UN debacle to take them down, that still reflects poorly on the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

lulu212121 said:


> Makes me lose faith in the Royal Family. I don't understand why they let these 2, Andrew, and even Fergie get away with the smears. If they are waiting for something like the UN debacle to take them down, that still reflects poorly on the BRF.



It looks like a situation of _damned if they do, damned if they don't_. They can't win either way, but I think at this point something needs to be done.


----------



## Chanbal

lulu212121 said:


> Makes me lose faith in the Royal Family. I don't understand why they let these 2, Andrew, and even Fergie get away with the smears. If they are waiting for something like the UN debacle to take them down, that still reflects poorly on the BRF.


Yes, you are right. If they don't act now on the UN debacle, letter to NP, and … (it's a long list), something is very wrong. I feel sorry for QE, she is 95 and has gone through a lot. However, I believe other members of the BRF together with courtiers could work with the UK government and fix this.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Too good to be true, but I really hope it is.   Someone posted this on Twitter! Not sure what the UK government is waiting for to proceed with doing the right thing. If they are understaffed, I bet there are many people out there ready to volunteer.
> View attachment 5230009



They probably requested permission for the recording equipment and were given permission ...
But it is not as if they made it public knowledge

AND correct me if I am wrong,  the candid shot of 6 with the mic cable - that was without a jacket
I seem to remember him in a jacket a the UN, so I give them the benefit of the doubt that they did not have mics for UN, just for other places
There was the photo - Harlem ? - of the wawkwardly hug of a child - that  was from his backside and showed the cable
As to MM, we were all wondering about the winter jackets for the UN - why ?  I seem to remember she FINALLY took coat off at the UN and carried it, but we had no view of her backside then


----------



## rose60610

Perhaps in light of the biiiiiiig picture, one-offs like Meghan and Andrew are but insignificant blips in the 1,000 year old history of the BRF. In our era of social media where some of the most minor things getting waaaaay overblown and then some important issues get completely ignored, where narratives control the news cycles, it's not only easy to latch onto any given topic but also easy to insert one's feelings or comments in the cyber world. Where they're going to exist forever and become fodder for whoever wants to use them against you even many years down the road. We're on the cusp of losing the very last people who served in/lived through WWII, for example, who have gone through *R E A L *hardship and sacrifice. They've been replaced by whiny entitled bishes who tweet their every complaint in life and can never seem to STFU. I can't think of anyone who's been given everything on a silver platter, then turning around and attempting to destroy that very same family like Meghan. And to think she has fans? Even though Diana divorced and said being a royal could be difficult, she didn't set about trying to destroy them. Diana was chosen by the BRF, Meghan BEGGED and CLAWED her way into the BRF,  then tried to destroy it. Like the Trojan Horse. The accusations, the statements of feeling suicidal, the complaining of not getting their security paid for after SHE threw the BRF under the bus, etc. What a piece of garbage she is.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Perhaps in light of the biiiiiiig picture, one-offs like Meghan and Andrew are but insignificant blips in the 1,000 year old history of the BRF. In our era of social media where some of the most minor things getting waaaaay overblown and then some important issues get completely ignored, where narratives control the news cycles, it's not only easy to latch onto any given topic but also easy to insert one's feelings or comments in the cyber world. Where they're going to exist forever and become fodder for whoever wants to use them against you even many years down the road. We're on the cusp of losing the very last people who served in/lived through WWII, for example, who have gone through *R E A L *hardship and sacrifice. They've been replaced by whiny entitled bishes who tweet their every complaint in life and can never seem to STFU. I can't think of anyone who's been given everything on a silver platter, then turning around and attempting to destroy that very same family like Meghan. And to think she has fans? Even though Diana divorced and said being a royal could be difficult, she didn't set about trying to destroy them. Diana was chosen by the BRF, Meghan BEGGED and CLAWED her way into the BRF,  then tried to destroy it. Like the Trojan Horse. The accusations, the statements of feeling suicidal, the complaining of not getting their security paid for after SHE threw the BRF under the bus, etc. What a piece of garbage she is.


piece of garbage it putting it too nicely


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, the BRF needs to act. They _look_ weak because they _are_ weak. If QE is too old to make the tough calls, then she is the one damaging the brand Imo.  It was on shaky ground anyway [with Andrew], so the longer this mess drags on, the less important the BRF is.  The Spanish RF had unresolved issues for a long time. They have been definitely weaken by it. Imo.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pose with deputy UN leader
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry visited the United Nations ahead of their appearance at a vaccine event in New York later today.




					www.express.co.uk
				




We knew at the time something was amiss - this does not look like success imo.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the BRF needs to act. They _look_ weak because they _are_ weak. If QE is too old to make the tough calls, then she is the one damaging the brand Imo.  It was on shaky ground anyway [with Andrew], so the longer this mess drags on, the less important the BRF is.  The Spanish RF had unresolved issues for a long time. They have been definitely weaken by it. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pose with deputy UN leader
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry visited the United Nations ahead of their appearance at a vaccine event in New York later today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We knew at the time something was amiss - this does not look like success imo.
> View attachment 5230208
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230209


I wonder if the  Queen was made aware of this. Maybe all the shenanigans are raising her BP and making her ill. I'm sure PC and William are furious. What an embarrassment to his family and country.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the BRF needs to act. They _look_ weak because they _are_ weak. If QE is too old to make the tough calls, then she is the one damaging the brand Imo.  It was on shaky ground anyway [with Andrew], so the longer this mess drags on, the less important the BRF is.  The Spanish RF had unresolved issues for a long time. They have been definitely weaken by it. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pose with deputy UN leader
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry visited the United Nations ahead of their appearance at a vaccine event in New York later today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We knew at the time something was amiss - this does not look like success imo.
> View attachment 5230208
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230209


I wonder if that was the night they had the big fight at the hotel, and he was spotted out alone with Misha Nonoo and her husband Mike Hess. Trouble in paradise methinks.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The letter is being published almost everywhere, including in the Washington Post. What group (or person) calls itself progressive and associates with this type of statements?
> 
> _*Meghan’s letter was shared online by the progressive group Paid Leave for All. The organization’s president, Dawn Huckelbridge, said it “means the world” to have the duchess support paid leave.*
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ocial&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_source=twitter_


What does that mean - she supports paid leave.

Don't we all?  What did Meg do other than write a letter (probably thought up by Sunshine Sachs) and gain some PR for herself?


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> ...gain some PR for herself?



Answered your own question.


----------



## csshopper

As much as we would like to see it happen, the Queen cannot just wave her scepter and make them go away, nor can the Royals convene a family meeting and take a vote to ban them. 

There are more people than the Queen who have to be involved with removing titles from the odious ones, although with public opinion in Britain being so strongly against them, it would seem there could be a consensus to strip titles? I read, or heard, not sure which, there is speculation the Country is still so occupied with COVID issues, these two warts on the world are not the highest priority.

*From an article on line:*

"Professor Thomas Poole, who specialises in UK constitutional and administrative law at London School of Economics, says that even if the Queen wanted to remove the couple’s titles, it would be difficult. “The monarch is not the guardian of the constitution,” he says “and all major decisions are routed through Parliament. This is true even of the many of the key elements relating to royalty. The Queen cannot remove titles of peerage; that can only be done by statute, passed by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and receiving royal assent, which means the agreement of the Queen. As you can probably guess, this is an extremely uncommon event.” Professor Poole says that it would be an “interesting scenario” if, say, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex could be persuaded to renounce their titles. However, he says it would be unlikely and that even that decision would be subject to parliament.






*Read More*
There is no historical precedent for a situation exactly like the current one, but the closest is the abdication of Edward VIII in 1936. “That’s a good illustration of the power dynamics at play,” Professor Poole says. “At all points, government and parliament were in control of the situation. It was the politicians who decided that Edward could have either the crown or Mrs Simpson, but not both.” The decision to abdicate was given legal effect by statute: His Majesty’s Declaration of Abdication Act 1936. The statue also adjusted the line of succession to exclude any offspring Edward and Mrs Simpson might have had.

The situation is different when it comes to divorce; Diana lost the style HRH and instead was styled Diana, Princess of Wales. Following her divorce from the Duke of York, Sarah Ferguson was allowed to keep her Duchess of York title as was the custom but she also continued to use the style Her Royal Highness. Within a few months a letters patent regulating post-divorce royal titles was issued, which meant that if a woman divorced any of Queen Elizabeth II’s sons, or grandsons, they may not continue to hold the title of Royal Highness. Fergie could not use HRH any more since she was no longer married to Andrew, but was able to continue as Duchess.

“To get political and parliamentary buy-in to take action on Harry and Meghan’s titles, the Queen would need something close to unanimity among the politicians and the public,” Professor Poole says. He doubts that would happen, and so it is “very unlikely that decision-makers, including the Queen and her advisers, would consider going down this route”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh Adele, you cannot be serious 

_She said: 'I'm after Prince Harry. I know I said I wouldn't go out with a ginger, but it's Prince Harry! I'd be a real Duchess then.'

'I'd love a night out with him, he seems like a right laugh,' the singer revealed. 
_








						Adele cheekily chooses between Prince William and Prince Harry
					

Adele answered a round of British-themed quickfire questions as she took part in Vogue's 73 Questions series on Thursday, where she was forced to choose between Prince William and Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

Mendocino said:


> Here in America the medley of "God Save the Queen" is used in one of our very famous patriotic songs: "My Country 'Tis of Thee. We would sing it everyday in school after we recited the Pledge of Allegiance.


In Canada, we sang God Save the Queen every morning before class began.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I would not be surprised if she was the one who requested her father take her there after her dance classes. Probably hoped she'd run into a famous producer or agent who'd give her her "big break".


I totally agree with you; heck, she had NO ISSUE asking my Music Industry friends to "introduce" her to their "*most FAMOUS Musicians*" (her words)!!!  Thankfully, my friends (while very well known in the BIZ) don't do that .. ever!  Many times, they have to sign an NDA with the artist that they are working with and they respect their privacy!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh Adele, you cannot be serious
> 
> _She said: 'I'm after Prince Harry. I know I said I wouldn't go out with a ginger, but it's Prince Harry! I'd be a real Duchess then.'
> 
> 'I'd love a night out with him, he seems like a right laugh,' the singer revealed.
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adele cheekily chooses between Prince William and Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Adele answered a round of British-themed quickfire questions as she took part in Vogue's 73 Questions series on Thursday, where she was forced to choose between Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Maybe she’s thinking back to the Harry from her childhood.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> What does that mean - she supports paid leave.
> 
> Don't we all?  What did Meg do other than write a letter (probably thought up by Sunshine Sachs) and gain some PR for herself?


Many people support paid leave. What is hard to visualize for me is the association of a so called group of progressives and the use a duchess title.


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> She waited on tables? She has BRAGGED before that she never did this. Keeping the lies straight continues to be a problem for her.
> 
> And we didn't have a Sizzler's, we had a Ponderosa and we loved it!


HA-HAH .. yes, indeed .. she made a very BRAGGADOCIO statement about that back 'in-the-day' before Hap-Hazza!!!  The lies just keep 'a-comin'!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh Adele, you cannot be serious
> 
> _She said: 'I'm after Prince Harry. I know I said I wouldn't go out with a ginger, but it's Prince Harry! I'd be a real Duchess then.'
> 
> 'I'd love a night out with him, he seems like a right laugh,' the singer revealed. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adele cheekily chooses between Prince William and Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Adele answered a round of British-themed quickfire questions as she took part in Vogue's 73 Questions series on Thursday, where she was forced to choose between Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Look, even if Harry was a catch...would any woman in their right mind would ever want to deal with that nutjob of an ex that won't go away ever because they share at least one child?

I was having lunch with my bff yesterday and I said I wouldn't want to date a man with children not because the children bother me but the ex-wife who'd continue to have a hold on him (over him?) forever does. And that goes even for a sane ex-wife, which Raptor very obviously wouldn't be.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh Adele, you cannot be serious
> 
> _She said: 'I'm after Prince Harry. I know I said I wouldn't go out with a ginger, but it's Prince Harry! I'd be a real Duchess then.'
> 
> 'I'd love a night out with him, he seems like a right laugh,' the singer revealed. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adele cheekily chooses between Prince William and Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Adele answered a round of British-themed quickfire questions as she took part in Vogue's 73 Questions series on Thursday, where she was forced to choose between Prince William and Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well, to be honest .. I haven't really been a huge fan of her music (I know many are), but now?!?! .. you're DONE in my book Adele!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Interesting views!


----------



## needlv




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Interesting views!




Wonder if the platinum jubilee adds pressure for her to stay on?  Maybe Charles needs to step up and deal with the errant son?


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the BRF needs to act. They _look_ weak because they _are_ weak. If QE is too old to make the tough calls, then she is the one damaging the brand Imo.  It was on shaky ground anyway [with Andrew], so the longer this mess drags on, the less important the BRF is.  The Spanish RF had unresolved issues for a long time. They have been definitely weaken by it. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pose with deputy UN leader
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry visited the United Nations ahead of their appearance at a vaccine event in New York later today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We knew at the time something was amiss - this does not look like success imo.
> View attachment 5230208
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230209


Why does her neck look so red?


----------



## charlottawill

catlover46 said:


> I wonder what stunt they are going to play the day the Queen dies .
> 
> The sugars on Celebitchy are rooting for her death.


A bunch of useless couch and basement dwelling internet groupies wishing death upon a woman who is a symbol of her nation's strength in the face of the Nazi threat during WWII. Very classy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> A bunch of useless couch and basement dwelling internet groupies wishing death upon a woman who is a symbol of her nation's strength in the face of the Nazi threat during WWII. Very classy.



These stans remind me of incels. They might not be as socially awkward in general, but they are clueless and hateful.


----------



## needlv

The letter had dual purpose, PR stunt and provoke a reaction from the BRF.  If the BRF did respond, the narc in her would lash out, calling them racists and not supportive of paid leave… and once again she could claim victim.  And get more content for Netflix.

The BRF needs to keep ignoring Duchess Sizzler.  That way they don’t feed the narc.

besides the Queen has seen far worse behaviour and scandals.  Margaret had her own moments, PP’s sisters were actual nazis, Wallis Simpson, Princess Michael of Kent and Sarah F and her desperate grasping, money making and other scandals.  The Queen has had to deal with all of that.

Just keep ignoring.  Make sure no $ is going to them.  Carry on…


----------



## charlottawill

lulu212121 said:


> Why does her neck look so red?


Some people get red and blotchy when they are hot, stressed, embarrassed, among other reasons. Makes sense here.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> The letter had dual purpose, PR stunt and provoke a reaction from the BRF.  If the BRF did respond, the narc in her would lash out, calling them racists and not supportive of paid leave… and once again she could claim victim.  And get more content for Netflix.
> 
> The BRF needs to keep ignoring Duchess Sizzler.  That way they don’t feed the narc.
> 
> besides the Queen has seen far worse behaviour and scandals.  Margaret had her own moments, PP’s sisters were actual nazis, Wallis Simpson, Princess Michael of Kent and Sarah F and her desperate grasping, money making and other scandals.  The Queen has had to deal with all of that.
> 
> Just keep ignoring.  Make sure no $ is going to them.  Carry on…



I hope PC and William are taking the lead more and more on daily issues for the Queen. She deserves some peace in her later years and not having to deal with her grandson's marital mess.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if the platinum jubilee adds pressure for her to stay on?  Maybe Charles needs to step up and deal with the errant son?


My 2 cents:

I hope she will be able to enjoy the jubilee celebrations. It must be difficult for Charles to deal with Hazz's mess, but if he wants to act as a (future) king, he needs to do it.

He can have Hazz's titles in abeyance indefinitely as their use in the US compromises the role of the monarchy. People in the UK are entitled to benefit from having a monarchy, not private citizens in the US.  As someone else said, the titles belong to the UK and must be returned to the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> The letter had dual purpose, PR stunt and provoke a reaction from the BRF.  If the BRF did respond, the narc in her would lash out, calling them racists and not supportive of paid leave… and once again she could claim victim.  And get more content for Netflix.
> 
> The BRF needs to keep ignoring Duchess Sizzler.  That way they don’t feed the narc.
> 
> _*besides the Queen has seen far worse behaviour and scandals.  Margaret had her own moments, PP’s sisters were actual nazis, Wallis Simpson, Princess Michael of Kent and Sarah F and her desperate grasping, money making and other scandals.  The Queen has had to deal with all of that.*_
> 
> Just keep ignoring.  Make sure no $ is going to them.  Carry on…




Yes, she has seen awful scandals. What makes H&M‘s mess different is that we have social media and the internet. So, we are far more informed than ever, far more informed in a much faster way than ever. In the past, the BRF had lots of time to get a story together and calmly respond.  Now, they seem to be caught off guard. No response simply keeps the story alive.

We continuously hear of all the zillion dollar deals they’ve made using these blasted titles. So, they are getting money and continue to use the titles & LoS to do that.  Imo, they must stop abusing and using the titles or go back to the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> A bunch of useless couch and basement dwelling internet groupies wishing death upon a woman who is a symbol of her nation's strength in the face of the Nazi threat during WWII. Very classy.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> These stans remind me of incels. They might not be as socially awkward in general, but they are clueless and hateful.



It looks like the Montecitos don't use their voices against them. The Sun article is very disturbing.


----------



## Chanbal

According to this video, OW has been replaced by NP as bff.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Was reading an article about King George III: Article

it ends with this paragraph:


> It was right for the colonies to break away from the British Empire in 1776 because they were ready by then to found their own nation-state, but despite the rhetoric of their founding document, they were not escaping tyranny, so much as bravely grasping their sovereign independence from a good-natured, cultured, enlightened and benevolent monarch



in some ways, it echoes the difference between the dumb duo’s version of events (Finding Freedom!) vs. the reality (the BRF was/is nice, grifters gonna grift).


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> According to this video, OW has been replaced by NP as bff.



Oprah was never her BFF. They used each other. By her own admission Oprah has few close friends, among them Gayle King and Maria Shriver.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

lulu212121 said:


> Why does her neck look so red?


She’s probably holding in anger from not being curtsied to or being called duchess … that or it’s sunburn in her constant attempt to remind the world that she’s “of color”


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Oprah was never her BFF. They used each other. By her own admission Oprah has few close friends, among them Gayle King and Maria Shriver.



BFF of convenience (sarcasm).


----------



## Chanbal

Good question!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently it's old news, but I haven't seen it mentioned here. Charles signed a deal with Amazon Prime for a series on the environment about a month ago. Wouldn't it be ironic if he signed his deal more than a year later, but delivered swiftly?


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently it's old news, but I haven't seen it mentioned here. Charles signed a deal with Amazon Prime for a series on the environment about a month ago. Wouldn't it be ironic if he signed his deal more than a year later, but delivered swiftly?



So… why would anyone sign on the duo going forward when they can potentially get REAL royals…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Yes, I saw this as well. You can find one of those bad taste posts on spoiler.
> 
> View attachment 5230013
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: shocking



Maybe we should send HMTQ a tiny good fortune coffin. They use those in Hongkong to change bad luck to good. She certainly could use more good luck. Perhaps the reversal of fortune will let the nasties rebound on the sugars and stans who deserve a dose of karma.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Some people get red and blotchy when they are hot, stressed, embarrassed, among other reasons. Makes sense here.


True, but we (well, me) haven't noticed that before with her. So maybe something really REALLY happened that didn't go to her plan. Like being told to leave?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> Was reading an article about King George III: Article
> 
> it ends with this paragraph:
> 
> 
> in some ways, it echoes the difference between the dumb duo’s version of events (Finding Freedom!) vs. the reality (the BRF was/is nice, grifters gonna grift).



I will need to look at this writer’s sources. The trend to revise history is worrisome. If this _good_ king who had bipolar according to the article did not support the war, then he could have told his soldiers to stop fighting, no?  Instead he allowed many lost lives on both sides. Leaders must be held accountable for their decisions, especially ones involving wars.  Just my opinion.

ETA:  checked the writer’s Wiki page. He has received criticism in the past for revising history, so I take everything he says with a grain of salt. Still, I appreciate the Smithsonian link - interesting article of the Roman garum.









						Culinary Detectives Try to Recover the Formula for a Deliciously Fishy Roman Condiment
					

From Pompeii to modern laboratories, scholars are working to recreate garum, a sauce made from decaying fish that delighted ancient Rome




					www.smithsonianmag.com


----------



## Nutashha

I'm speechless!


*Meghan Advises Women to Stay Out of Drama*



What do you think about this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is this a joke?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Nutashha said:


> I'm speechless!
> 
> 
> *Meghan Advises Women to Stay Out of Drama*
> View attachment 5230730
> 
> 
> What do you think about this?


Says the woman who instigates aaaaallllll the drama!


----------



## Lounorada

Catching up on replying to saved posts!! Too many to get through 



bag-mania said:


> If we didn't know all the bad things we do about Meghan I'm sure we would be more generous when talking about her beauty. Knowing what is going on inside ruins how we see the outside.


Nah. I have never thought of her to be pretty/beautiful/attractive.
Then it only got worse when she opened her mouth to talk lies and showed her true vindictive self






Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5209699
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my. She always looks so sloppy.










Chanbal said:


> I wonder if they are also visiting this thread/forum.



If they are visiting here, here's a little message from me...








Chanbal said:


> Interesting contrast!
> View attachment 5211416





I still can't believe that draped bed sheet labelled a 'custom couture Dior dress', cost £100k. I really believe Dior trolled her with that and laughed all the way to the bank with the £100k they made from it.
If it was actually half decent looking and had exquisite bead-work or hours worth of hand-embroidery on it you'd still think that is a ridiculous amount of money to spend on one dress that will only be worn once, but you'd understand the price a little. _Except_, it's one of ugliest, most unflattering, bland things I've ever seen and I can only imagine the difference that £100k could have made to one or a few charities they were acting patron for.
She wore it *ONCE *for***F*Sake and I bet she never wears it again.
It makes me sick to think of the money wasted on clothes by this greedy fool.





Chanbal said:


> I wonder where this picture belongs. It's an interesting one.










QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Duchess of Narsussex* is brilliant





Perfect. That's brilliant!




Chanbal said:


>





OMG. What in the actual f**k is this???!!! And _no one_ has bothered to file some kind (any kind) of a lawsuit against this sh*tshow to have it stopped? If Diana was my mother and someone made this crap and was profiting off of her life and tragic death, then I would be doing everything in my power to stop this from having even been made. What a sick joke.
Were the lawyers knocked off speed dial around the time this came out? I can't believe someone thought this was a good idea.





Chanbal said:


> Someone did a great job here putting their statements together.





She's such a manipulative liar.


----------



## Chanbal

She meant $50 steaks, everyone makes mistakes.


----------



## Chanbal

Nutashha said:


> I'm speechless!
> 
> 
> *Meghan Advises Women to Stay Out of Drama*
> View attachment 5230730
> 
> 
> What do you think about this?


She is only protecting her turf!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> In Canada, we sang God Save the Queen every morning before class began.


That’s intense! We don’t do that here & she could turn up to hand out medals at any moment   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently it's old news, but I haven't seen it mentioned here. Charles signed a deal with Amazon Prime for a series on the environment about a month ago. Wouldn't it be ironic if he signed his deal more than a year later, but delivered swiftly?


He probably will given his employees tend to last longer than two months. 

I don’t want to be a Debbie downer but…… Whatever happened to royalty being above merching themselves to big companies?

I feel like we really don’t need Charles personally to get yet another lecture on the environment, it’s dangerous waters if you ask me. 


xincinsin said:


> Maybe we should send HMTQ a tiny good fortune coffin. They use those in Hongkong to change bad luck to good. She certainly could use more good luck. Perhaps the reversal of fortune will let the nasties rebound on the sugars and stans who deserve a dose of karma.


So it’s sort of like a more goth reverse uno card for luck?
That’s cool.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, wait! Twitter is getting me confused! Was it steak or sushi?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh, wait! Twitter is getting me confused! Was it steak or sushi?




I clicked the link. 
Ooooh no, this is a contradiction or is it a lie or was she confused? Steak? Sushi? Sizzler? Nomo, ya kno the one in Santa Monica (omg).





__





						The Tig Archives  - The Art of Sushi - Wattpad
					

Read The Art of Sushi from the story The Tig Archives  by Rizcat98 (Zoe Blarewood) with 2,770 reads. blog, duchessofsussex, fashion. The Tig - 19th September 2...




					www.wattpad.com


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm ignorant, but WTF is David Furnish known for besides being Elton John's husband?  Another clinger on whose claim to fame is marrying someone rich and famous.  Takes one to know one, eh David?


Like attracts like 







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Found this little tidbit on Quora. She should have used self-destroying paper so it wouldn't come back to bite her.
> 
> View attachment 5218346





Even her Christmas messages are insufferable word salad





Chanbal said:


> So the parents taught Arch*ie how to be kind and loving… How can they teach what they don't know?





Teaching a small child to be kind, loving and not be jealous when these two adults are callous, extremely selfish, inconsiderate and FULL of jealousy? I don't believe it. That will hopefully be the job of the kind nannies who are taking care of these kids because H&M don't know the meaning of the words 'loving, kind and jealousy'.





Chanbal said:


> I wonder how the body language expert would analyze this photo.
> 
> View attachment 5218900


Lady Muck sitting in the centre at the top of the table, while Princess Hairy looks like his seat position was an afterthought, stuck in on the edge of a corner 
Meanwhile everyone else there was probably thinking:







Chanbal said:


> I have no idea who M Smith is, but he makes a valid point. The titles must be returned to the UK (with them preferentially ).
> 
> View attachment 5219304
> 
> _M Smith said:" *It does look like they are using their royal status to bolster their private careers*".
> 
> He added: "I do think they are ultimately public titles, they belong to the country.
> 
> 
> "*They were given in order to pursue royal duties in theory for the good of the country and they are not doing that now.*
> 
> "They have got a halfway house where they have one foot in the royal household but also pursuing their own private interests._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They belong to Britain! Meghan & Harry keeping titles 'reflects badly'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry keeping their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles "reflects badly" on the Royal Family according to the CEO of Republic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk










papertiger said:


> She's obviously feeling that insecure
> *Either way I would never obey such a outrageous demand*
> View attachment 5219329


Me neither. I'd more inclined to act like this in her company:







Chanbal said:


> One more about ethics to add to your list.










CarryOn2020 said:


> The Honorable Charles Schumer
> Majority Leader
> U.S. Senate
> Washington, D.C.
> The Honorable Nancy ******
> Speaker
> U.S. House of Representatives
> Washington, D.C.
> October 20, 2021
> Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,
> I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.
> Over the past 20 months, the pandemic has exposed long-existing fault lines in our communities. At an alarming rate, millions of women dropped out of the workforce, staying home with their kids as schools and daycares were closed, and looking after loved ones full-time. The working mom or parent is facing the conflict of being present or being paid. The sacrifice of either comes at a great cost.
> For many, this sacrifice goes back further than the past 20 months; it’s 20 or 30 years, even longer—decades of giving time, body, and endless energy not just in the pursuit of the American dream, but simply the dream of stability.
> I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler—it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can’t remember)—but what I do remember was the feeling: I knew how hard my parents worked to afford this because even at five bucks, eating out was something special, and I felt lucky. And as a Girl Scout, when my troop would go to dinner for a big celebration, it was back to that same salad bar or The Old Spaghetti Factory—because that’s what those families could afford to do too.
> I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends. I worked all my life and saved when and where I could—but even that was a luxury—because usually it was about making ends meet and having enough to pay my rent and put gas in my car.
> I expect many of your constituents have their own version of that story. Perhaps you do too. People in our country work incredibly hard, and yet the ask is soft: for a level playing field to achieve their version of a common dream—what is fair, and equal, and right. Many of our economic systems are past their expiration date, and as you well know, too many Americans are forced to shortchange themselves when it comes to what matters to them.
> In June, my husband and I welcomed our second child. Like _any_ parents, we were overjoyed. Like _many_ parents, we were overwhelmed. Like _fewer_ parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family.  We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.
> No family should be faced with these decisions. No family should have to choose between earning a living and having the freedom to take care of their child (or a loved one, or themselves, as we would see with a comprehensive paid leave plan).
> In taking care of your child, you take care of your community, and you take care of your country—because when paid leave is a right, we’re creating a foundation that helps address mental health outcomes, health care costs, and economic strength at the starting line. Instead, as it stands now, we spend a fortune as a country paying into symptoms rather than causes.  I understand that with everything going on these days, people might find it easy to be apathetic about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. And then equally, when it feels like your voice doesn’t matter, you tend to use it less often, but with stakes this high none of us can afford to let apathy win.
> I’m writing to you on behalf of millions of American families who _are_ using their voices to say that comprehensive paid leave should not be a place to compromise or negotiate. In fact, most nations already have paid leave policies in place. Estonia, for example, offers over a year and a half of leave to be shared by new parents. Many other countries have robust programs that give months of time for both parents (birth or adoptive) to be home with their child. The United States, in stark contrast, does not federally guarantee any person a single day of paid leave. And fewer than one in four workers has dedicated paid family leave through their employer. I’m sure you agree that if we are to continue to be exceptional, then we can’t be the exception.
> The families you represent need your strong leadership. With paid leave on the cusp of becoming a national reality, I trust you will meet this moment. I know you must hear from your constituents about the choices they are facing every day to make ends meet and care for their families.
> Paid leave should be a national right, rather than a patchwork option limited to those whose employers have policies in place, or those who live in one of the few states where a leave program exists. If we’re going to create a new era of family first policies, let’s make sure that includes a strong paid leave program for every American that’s guaranteed, accessible, and encouraged without stigma or penalty.
> I know how politically charged things can—and have—become. But this isn’t about Right or Left, it’s about right or wrong. This is about putting families above politics. And for a refreshing change, it’s something we all seem to agree on. At a point when everything feels so divisive, let this be a shared goal that unites us.
> So, on behalf of my family, Archie and Lili and Harry, I thank you for considering this letter, and on behalf of all families, I ask you to ensure this consequential moment is not lost.
> 
> [/SPOILER]












CarryOn2020 said:


> We knew at the time something was amiss - this does not look like success imo.
> View attachment 5230208
> 
> View attachment 5230209


Oh dear, trouble in paradise?







Nutashha said:


> I'm speechless!
> *Meghan Advises Women to Stay Out of Drama*
> View attachment 5230730
> 
> 
> What do you think about this?





Girl, you can't be telling other women to stay out of drama when you yourself _are _drama. The delusions of this woman!
Also, someone get her a dictionary for Christmas because there are so many basic words she doesn't seem to understand the meaning of.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, to be honest .. I haven't really been a huge fan of her music (I know many are), but now?!?! .. you're DONE in my book Adele!


uugh
between the Harry thing, the preference for the spice girls over the beatles and the whole magazine cover/kardashian thing, I'm not happy with her right now.
I loved the plain Adele with the magnificent voice
Now she seems to have been seduced by the fame.  makes me sad


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> So… why would anyone sign on the duo going forward when they can potentially get REAL royals…


but they are so much more glamorous than the real royals doncha know?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I clicked the link.
> Ooooh no, this is a contradiction or is it a lie or was she confused? Steak? Sushi? Sizzler? Nomo, ya kno the one in Santa Monica (omg).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tig Archives  - The Art of Sushi - Wattpad
> 
> 
> Read The Art of Sushi from the story The Tig Archives  by Rizcat98 (Zoe Blarewood) with 2,770 reads. blog, duchessofsussex, fashion. The Tig - 19th September 2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wattpad.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230787
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230788


From what I understood, her father had a well-paid job at the time of his 2nd marriage. I can believe that he would take her and her mother to more costly restaurants than Sizzler. She mentions having a usual booth at Noma when growing up, not bad! I don't think she was a habitué at Sizzler. Though, even if she was, the way she wrote about it on the letter is highly misleading and obviously out of place. As someone else wrote, it's the typical rhetoric of an aspiring (unscrupulous) politician.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I clicked the link.
> Ooooh no, this is a contradiction or is it a lie or was she confused? Steak? Sushi? Sizzler? Nomo, ya kno the one in Santa Monica (omg).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tig Archives  - The Art of Sushi - Wattpad
> 
> 
> Read The Art of Sushi from the story The Tig Archives  by Rizcat98 (Zoe Blarewood) with 2,770 reads. blog, duchessofsussex, fashion. The Tig - 19th September 2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wattpad.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230787
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230788



She has never been an especially gifted writer, but I feel it's getting worse by the minute. This drivel is pretentious as usual but I could somehow make it through. Now...not so much.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has never been an especially gifted writer, but I feel it's getting worse by the minute. This drivel is pretentious as usual but I could somehow make it through. Now...not so much.


gotta be hard vaccilating between bragging about being a Duchess and playing the role of the poor/middle class black child


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder if Harry feel like he's gone through the looking glass.  He basically grew up with a pretty strong dislike of the paps/media.  now his life is one of seeking attention all the time.  I find it kinda hard to believe he is happy.  but what do I know?


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


>



Someone *PLEASE *tell *Sha Mai* .. that the *MEGA-MANIPULATOR* is not even a 3rd-rate actress .. she's the *GROUND ZERO* level!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> A bunch of useless couch and basement dwelling internet groupies wishing death upon a woman who is a symbol of her nation's strength in the face of the Nazi threat during WWII. Very classy.


I will not go on that site given these HORRIBLE people!  The constant "Queen" comments clearly point out that they are BEYOND delusional and obviously demented!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I clicked the link.
> Ooooh no, this is a contradiction or is it a lie or was she confused? Steak? Sushi? Sizzler? Nomo, ya kno the one in Santa Monica (omg).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tig Archives  - The Art of Sushi - Wattpad
> 
> 
> Read The Art of Sushi from the story The Tig Archives  by Rizcat98 (Zoe Blarewood) with 2,770 reads. blog, duchessofsussex, fashion. The Tig - 19th September 2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wattpad.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230787
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230788


I've never been there, I've heard it is quite good .. but $$$$$$$$!!!!!  My Norwegian friend and her family went there when they visited LA (a few years back), and she told me that her husband (a frugal Scotsman) .. almost had a heart attack when he got the bill.  Yet again, Meghan's LIES, LIES and more LIES!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Someone *PLEASE *tell *Sha Mai* .. that the *MEGA-MANIPULATOR* is not even a 3rd-rate actress .. she's the *GROUND ZERO* level!



Yes, Mandana is the PR person who used to work for Rachel Zoe *and* went to NYC with H&M. She is the one with the tan tote.










						Meghan and Harry's Archewell hires Mandana Dayani as first COO
					

The voter turnout activist and former fashion exec will report directly to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					fortune.com
				




_Archewell, the organization founded by Meghan and Harry, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, has hired tech and media exec Mandana Dayani as its first chief operating officer, the organization tells Fortune exclusively._


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> uugh
> between the Harry thing, the preference for the spice girls over the beatles and the whole magazine cover/kardashian thing, I'm not happy with her right now.
> I loved the plain Adele with the magnificent voice
> Now she seems to have been seduced by the fame.  makes me sad


SOOOOOOOOOOOOO true, and one would think that with all the money she has, she would get a stylist .. she's another one who is dressed horribly!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, Mandana is the PR person who used to work for Rachel Zoe *and* went to NYC with H&M. She is the one with the tan tote.
> View attachment 5230986
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's Archewell hires Mandana Dayani as first COO
> 
> 
> The voter turnout activist and former fashion exec will report directly to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fortune.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Archewell, the organization founded by Meghan and Harry, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, has hired tech and media exec Mandana Dayani as its first chief operating officer, the organization tells Fortune exclusively._


Harry is actually unloading luggage himself? I figured they had "people" for all that menial stuff


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> Harry is actually unloading luggage himself? I figured they had "people" for all that menial stuff


probably all quit!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sdkitty said:


> Harry is actually unloading luggage himself? I figured they had "people" for all that menial stuff


They're all too busy kissing up to Drama Mama Meghan. Or there'd be drama hell to pay for all involved if they don't make her look popular and the unchallenged center of their undivided attention. That's probably what they are paid for.


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> I clicked the link.
> Ooooh no, this is a contradiction or is it a lie or was she confused? Steak? Sushi? Sizzler? Nomo, ya kno the one in Santa Monica (omg).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tig Archives  - The Art of Sushi - Wattpad
> 
> 
> Read The Art of Sushi from the story The Tig Archives  by Rizcat98 (Zoe Blarewood) with 2,770 reads. blog, duchessofsussex, fashion. The Tig - 19th September 2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wattpad.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230787
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230788



How did she put out such drivel?  Nauseating.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> How did she put out such drivel?  Nauseating.


pretentious much? I couldn't get through the whole thing


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> "all about sustainable investing"??? I see. Bashing the BRF over and over and over and crying "Victim!" is sustainable and puts $$ in their pockets. Apparently when *Me-Me-Me-Grow-My-Wallet* decided to embark on a mega income stream expedition she yacht-girled her way into the pants of the rich and famous. Then leveraged their fame and fortune to redirect some Pounds Sterling into her own piggy bank, AKA Archewell. Basically the modernized woke version of Rumpelstiltskin! Sterling into gold. All the while crying "Victim!" ka-CHING! See? Sustainable!


I'm playing catching-up again with 50-some pages. Please tell me if I've missed any nicknames before October 12th. Thanks.

 Thanks @rose60610 for #8 nickname, *Me-Me-Me-Grow-My-Wallet* that has been added to The List.


----------



## poopsie

Lies lies lies yeah........they're gonna get you


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> LOVE this thread but reading the on going sh!t that M&H does raise my blood pressure.  I was telling my DH about the NYC trip and latest and it raised my bp ... as he walked by he laughed and said .... 'and it's self inflicted'. Stopped me in my tracks ... he's right.  Reading on ...   Have a great day all !


Wow, is that why my BP returned to normal during the last 50 or so pages that I just missed (from Oct 12 to present)  Better make an appointment with you instead of my doctor.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Wow, is that why my BP returned to normal during the last 50 or so pages that I just missed (from Oct 12 to present)  Better make an appointment with you instead of my doctor.


We missed you!  Hope you had a great time away.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> Harry is actually unloading luggage himself? I figured they had "people" for all that menial stuff


He's become the "menial stuff"


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Norm.Core said:


> Until their titles are taken away from them, *the diabolical duo* will continue to get hired by these big-bucks companies. They don’t have anything else to offer except their being a part of the BRF and they’re not even working royals. So frustrating... especially after all the talking-sh*t they’ve done since they’ve left.


Thanks @Norm.Core for your first nickname, the diabolical duo and welcome to The List.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> True, but we (well, me) haven't noticed that before with her. So maybe something really REALLY happened that didn't go to her plan. Like being told to leave?


Yes, that''s the rumor, that they were escorted out of the UN when security became aware that they were wired up.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Yes, that''s the rumor, that they were escorted out of the UN when security became aware that they were wired up.


what?  The Duke and his Wife, The Duchess?
I'd love this to be true


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently it's old news, but I haven't seen it mentioned here. Charles signed a deal with Amazon Prime for a series on the environment about a month ago. Wouldn't it be ironic if he signed his deal more than a year later, but delivered swiftly?


And that any proceeds go to a legitimate philanthropy, not the "Archewell Foundation".


----------



## Aimee3

IF the titles get taken away, she’ll just refer to herself unfortunately as MM “formerly known as the duchess of Sussex.”  I don’t think they could prevent her from using that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> And that any proceeds go to a legitimate philanthropy, not the "Archewell Foundation".



Are we certain? Maybe indirectly?  Seems like this Sustainable Markets has been mentioned before with H&M. The name is familiar, but I’ll need to check. 


_All of the programmes from RE:TV are curated by Prince Charles, who acts as the editor-in-chief for the service. The channel operates within the Sustainable Markets Initiative, which is a ten-point plan of action created by Prince Charles to encourage a sustainable revolution in the business world to change the current course.

Within this framework, Prince Charles has also developed the Terra Carta, a charter created by himself that places sustainability at the centre of the private sector.

Amazon Prime users will be able to find the RE:TV network by searching that keyword in the search engine.
https://royalcentral.co.uk/uk/wales/prince-charles-signs-amazon-prime-deal-166300/_


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> what?  The Duke and his Wife, The Duchess?
> I'd love this to be true


That's the account I've read in several places. And it could explain why she sat with her coat on in the meeting with the UN rep.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh, wait! Twitter is getting me confused! Was it steak or sushi?



A compulsive liar. God help us, she just might have a future in politics.


----------



## lulilu

At first, I thought the huge coats were to hide her fat azz.  Then I thought she was hiding recording equipment (still do).  But did anyone notice the coat flipping she was doing, like she used to do to show of her "baby bump?"  I read somewhere that she wanted people to think she got fat, including adding fat pads, and that is why she was flipping the coat  -- because she was highlighting bulging tummy and thighs to prove she really had a baby.

I would never criticize a woman for post-baby weight, but to think she was faking that too?  For some bizarre reason only she would understand?  smdh


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am so confused why people choose to ignore her obvious character flaws. It's no rumours and no slander, she's been caught lying over and over again, not only while talking but per her own writing. If you don't mind she treats her husband like a naughty puppy and has an insufferable personality and no manners, if you think she's just misunderstood because poor strong black woman, why wouldn't at least this give you pause when there is simply not an iota of doubt?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am so confused why people choose to ignore her obvious character flaws. It's no rumours and no slander, she's been caught lying over and over again, not only while talking but per her own writing. If you don't mind she treats her husband like a naughty puppy and has an insufferable personality and no manners, if you think she's just misunderstood because poor strong black woman, why wouldn't at least this give you pause when there is simply not an iota of doubt?


people see what they want to see.....apparently some people are still enamoured by the fairy tale of the brown american princess


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Jesus brings up another of her contradictions. She’s quoted in several publications claiming her parents didn’t take her to Disneyland like most kids, they vacationed to Hawaii and Mexico instead. My goodness, the grinding poverty she experienced is off the charts


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> Jesus brings up another of her contradictions. She’s quoted in several publications claiming her parents didn’t take her to Disneyland like most kids, they vacationed to Hawaii and Mexico instead. My goodness, the grinding poverty she experienced is off the charts


again, she can't seem to decide whether she wants to be viewed as poor or as privileged......certainly going to Hawaii isn't something poor families do - so was she bragging in that instance?  and what family? her parents were divorced


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just spied in passing: another German magazine, not quite as rag-y, claims the troublesome two had a massive fight because* Raptor insisted on the grand Windsor christening for the baby (can't bring myself to type out the Queen's stolen nickname somehow) *while Harry wanted to give it a rest and not make more demands.


Good for you; I can't say it either so I call her "the daughter" and "the wife" for M while I call H, "the big zero" among other things.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good for you; I can't say it either so I call her "the daughter" and "the wife" for M while I call H, "the big zero" among other things.


I noted on her letter she called the baby Lili? or Lilli?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> Harry is actually unloading luggage himself? I figured they had "people" for all that menial stuff


I think H’s wife considers him one of her “people”.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> A compulsive liar. God help us, she just might have a future in politics.


Reminds me of a comment on the political news recently, a politician said A and the news show trotted out a video/blog post/web page of the politician’s that said B
the news anchor said “they don’t ever seem to remember we have it all in our digital archives “


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Only in the *Hot Mess of Montecito*'s dreams.


Thanks @charlottawill for your #3 nickname, Hot Mess of Montecito, that indeed describes M's usual appearance and worth the #3 Gold Ribbon.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am so confused why people choose to ignore her obvious character flaws. It's no rumours and no slander, she's been caught lying over and over again, not only while talking but per her own writing. If you don't mind she treats her husband like a naughty puppy and has an insufferable personality and no manners, if you think she's just misunderstood because poor strong black woman, why wouldn't at least this give you pause when there is simply not an iota of doubt?


When someone tells you who they really are, believe them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> It will be fun when H&M and their international (failed?) finance guys meet* Mr. Ponzi*.


And hopefully they will receive a similar reward, a small office in a federal building (aka a cell).


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




Disney World was to far to travel?!?  I bet she went to *Disneyland* an hour away! But let's not mention that!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Here is free advertisement for *Friar 6* & Mother Theresa of Montecito:



 Thanks @Chanbal for your #21 nickname *Friar 6*, that refers to his bald pate because as we know he doesn't possess the necessary qualities or qualifications to become a friar. Congratulations and here's your The List #21 Ribbon.


----------



## catlover46

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently it's old news, but I haven't seen it mentioned here. Charles signed a deal with Amazon Prime for a series on the environment about a month ago. Wouldn't it be ironic if he signed his deal more than a year later, but delivered swiftly?


Can Charles still do the series if he becomes King in the next few months?


----------



## needlv

The Royal Foundation made more money after Duke and Duchess Sizzler left… 









						Meghan Markle move that bagged Kate Middleton $10m
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> A few more laughs, courtesy of the Aussies!



Has this been mentioned before: According to one reporter in the vid, H's new title is The Commissioner of the Commission on Information Disorder at the Aspen Institute.


----------



## pukasonqo

Maggie Muggins said:


> Has this been mentioned before: According to one reporter in the vid, H's new title is The Commissioner of the Commission on Information Disorder at the Aspen Institute.



Sounds like a Monty Python sketch, like the Ministry of Silly Walks


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> They are "*Jack of all trades, master of none*" personified.


Thanks @purseinsanity for your #21 nickname that I added to The List as *Jack(s) of All Trades, Master(s) of None *in case we need to refer to both at the same time.  Congratulations on your The List #21 Ribbon.


----------



## Chanbal

A Christmas in the UK, how convenient!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Again .. I am just utterly gobsmacked by this comment!  Any person beyond High School would think, seriously .. oh, can I be one of those and or me, that just means that NO ONE in their right mind should believe and especially invest in ANY of the crap-oh-la that these folks are purporting to be as "ethical" categories.  Then again .. *AMEOBA* (Harry - single-cell) and *PARAMECIAN* (Meghan - another single-cell) .. well, they know better .. right???


 @CeeJay for your #12 nickname Ameoba (H)  and Paramecium (M) that are respectively a single-celled organism and a single-celled freshwater animal.
Could it be the reason H&M appear to have few constructive suggestions? 
Congratulations and welcome to the Early Bird Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Info deleted as already posted by @Chanbal


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> They finally got it right in Spanish: "In this bank"



According to Google Translate, Este Banco means This Bench.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> They are going to share unseen pictures and footage from their wedding on Netfl*x and share their inner thoughts about each image with us.



IMO it would be hilarious if BP published all the unseen photos first. IOW, I would love for the RF to give H&M a very royal tit for tat for misbehaving so badly.


----------



## rose60610

Duchess Diner of Sizzler Sussex's "unseen" photos should include her melt-downs since she loves telling the rest of us that she basically has everything under control. Except, of course, her mother, Doria, who doesn't say much. So if even your own grandmother can't seem to decide on how much publicity M gets, we can say M&H can slither off into the sunset together.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to Google Translate, Este Banco means This Bench.


Translations may vary, and in their case, I believe 'bank' is the right version


----------



## pukasonqo

Maggie Muggins said:


> According to Google Translate, Este Banco means This Bench.



yup, but “banco” also means bank like Banco de Credito
In my country (Peru) a bench is a banca and a stool a banco


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> A Christmas in the UK, how convenient!



The atmosphere at the dinner table….


Forgot to say -
Congrats to @poopsie for getting that invitation! Hope the vegan option is delicious.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Has this been mentioned before: According to one reporter in the vid, H's new title is The Commissioner of the Commission on Information Disorder at the Aspen Institute.


whoever came up with that mouthful should join your nickname club  


needlv said:


> The Royal Foundation made more money after Duke and Duchess Sizzler left…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle move that bagged Kate Middleton $10m
> 
> 
> COMMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


I mean… they must be saving a fortune on Dior bedsheets and bunion plasters.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> A Christmas in the UK, how convenient!




Wouldn't that require an invitation? I mean, postal services are so unreliable these days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Double post!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wouldn't that require an invitation? I mean, postal services are so unreliable these days.


They invite themselves via Press releases imo.


----------



## Chanbal

This question is of concern for many of us. Is the media in the US "blind" or easily manipulated?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This question is of concern for many of us. Is the media "blind" or easily manipulated?




And besides the justified question...she didn't get in hot water for taking a stand for paid leave. She got into hot water for using her royal title in a country where it isn't recognized to intervene in politics which she isn't supposed to do. But what do I know.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> A Christmas in the UK, how convenient!



Ha ha! 
Reminds me of my #2 sis-in-law who only started visiting her parents when their health declined. The old folks muttered that she must be hoping for a share of the inheritance.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And besides the justified question...she didn't get in hot water for taking a stand for paid leave. She got into hot water for using her royal title in a country where it isn't recognized to intervene in politics which she isn't supposed to do. But what do I know.


If the media in the US is following the media in the UK about the Lady of Montecito, they must be able to read about the evidence provided on those articles. She was the one that wrote about being a regular at expensive restaurants, trips to Hawaii…. when growing up. It looks like the media here only reports whatever SS or other agendas want.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> If the media in the US is following the media in the UK about the Lady of Montecito, they must be able to read about the evidence provided on those articles. She was the one that wrote about being a regular at expensive restaurants, trips to Hawaii…. when growing up. It looks like the media here only reports whatever SS or other agendas want.


Remember when she accused the palace courtiers of cozying up with the tabloids by throwing them parties? Maybe Sunshine Sucks is giving goodie bags and freebies to the US trash media to make sure The Duchess of Trash is mentioned in glowing terms.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

At least the US gossip rags don't worship at her altar anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least the US gossip rags don't worship at her altar anymore.
> 
> View attachment 5231468


$88 billion royal fortune? That's a joke. Makes it sound like the entire BRF's wealth is going to him.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> $88 billion royal fortune? That's a joke. Makes it sound like the entire BRF's wealth is going to him.


Well, isn't it? They are the successors ya know?


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Someone re-posted an older video from 2019 praising the Lady of Montecito, but accidentally or not, she mentioned about a past event. Shown in spoiler as it can be pure gossip, but I wonder if anyone here knows who this lady is or heard about this…
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Who is this lady?



first I've heard of her having had a kid.....I take with a huge grain of salt


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jktgal said:


> Yeah, the *Murky Magpies* like these murky deals - "clean", "ethical", "eco-anything. They have become the go-to for greenwashing of some sorts.


 Thanks @Jktgal for your first very appropriate nickname, Murky Magpies for the despicable duo. Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> $88 billion royal fortune? That's a joke. Makes it sound like the entire BRF's wealth is going to him.


If he'd stayed within the royal fold he'd live a very cushy life thanks to that fortune, even if it isn't actually his.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> first I've heard of her having had a kid.....I take with a huge grain of salt


That would be awfully hard to hide today.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> first I've heard of her having had a kid.....I take with a huge grain of salt


Her being a loose woman, I can believe. Having a kid, I doubt it. I think children are a tool for her to snare a rich meal ticket.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Her being a loose woman, I can believe. Having a kid, I doubt it. I think children are a tool for her to snare a rich meal ticket.


I'm certainly not a fan of her but calling someone a "loose woman" today is akin to slut shaming. Call her a social climbing narcissist, compulsive liar, manipulative, delusions of grandeur if you will - sure, all fair game as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Rvus


Chanbal said:


> This question is of concern for many of us. Is the media in the US "blind" or easily manipulated?



I’m sorry if this is too close to politics and mods please delete as appropriate but…

This is so ill-informed for a professional news outlet especially because if they knew anything about British law they would know we have much larger statutory provision for maternity leave than the US- so it would be very strange for our press to be scandalised by the idea  

I wouldn’t say shocked would be the way to describe the press reaction. 

Ironic mockery would be a better description and that’s about her playing the Oliver Twist at the chain restaurant card not the policy itself.

I suspect the average Brit doesn’t have strong feelings about how the US organises parental leave.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I'm certainly not a fan of her but calling someone a "loose woman" today is akin to slut shaming. Call her a social climbing narcissist, compulsive liar, manipulative, delusions of grandeur if you will - sure, all fair game as far as I'm concerned.


Let's agree to disagree on this then.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Rvus
> 
> I’m sorry if this is too close to politics and mods please delete as appropriate but…
> 
> This is so ill-informed for a professional news outlet especially because if they knew anything about British law they would know we have much larger statutory provision for maternity leave than the US- so it would be very strange for our press to be scandalised by the idea
> I wouldn’t say shocked would be the way to describe the press reaction. Ironic mockery would be a better description and that’s about her playing the Oliver Twist at the chain restaurant card not the policy itself.
> 
> I strongly suspect the average Brit doesn’t have strong feelings about how the US organises parental leave.


It does say it is an opinion piece, but NBC, especially on the Today show in the morning, is very fond of the royals and breathlessly reports on every little detail out of the palace.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It does say it is an opinion piece, but NBC, especially on the Today show in the morning, is very fond of the royals and breathlessly reports on every little detail out of the palace.


there are definitely TV shows/people who think these two are glamourous


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> first I've heard of her having had a kid.....I take with a huge grain of salt



Now that's one of the rumours I don't believe either for various reasons, but where were you when we were discussing this in detail? 

Two of the main rumours were that the baby was a product of her alleged annulled marriage and living with the mysterious ex, one was that one of her goddaughters (?) is hers. And I think another online source claimed she was pregnant in highschool.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that's one of the rumours I don't believe either, but where were you when we were discussing this in details?
> 
> Two of the main rumours were that the baby was a product of her alleged annulled marriage and living with the mysterious ex, one was that one of her goddaughters (?) is hers.


I doubt having a baby would have been convenient for her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that's one of the rumours I don't believe either, but where were you when we were discussing this in details?
> 
> Two of the main rumours were that the baby was a product of her alleged annulled marriage and living with the mysterious ex, one was that one of her goddaughters (?) is hers.


Again, no way you could pull this off today. All it would take is some cash from the National Enquirer to get people with knowledge of the truth to spill the tea.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least the US gossip rags don't worship at her altar anymore.
> 
> View attachment 5231468


His hair…. I swear this guy switches wigs more than Cher




charlottawill said:


> It does say it is an opinion piece, but NBC, especially on the Today show in the morning, is very fond of the royals and breathlessly reports on every little detail out of the palace.


Oh gosh, so you get both of the insufferable ends of the spectrum


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> first I've heard of her having had a kid.....I take with a huge grain of salt


I wonder who that lady is and why she would bring up such thing. Awkward imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wonder who that lady is and why she would bring up such thing. Awkward imo.


and how would she know?  just an attention seeker?


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> *His hair…. I swear this guy switches wigs more than Cher*


Here is the answer to Hazz's hair.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh gosh, so you get both of the insufferable ends of the spectrum


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Here is the answer to Hazz's hair.



Yikes that is some terrible Photoshopping.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Here is the answer to Hazz's hair.



Is this the Filipino guy that they tried to sue for using Archewell as his company name?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophisticatted said:


> IMO, Charles will be king, but will give William a lot of leadership opportunities, exposure, and major decision-making powers.  It seems the Queen has groomed Will to be her true successor (his reign will probably be longer than Charles).  Charles seems to be on board.  Rumor states it was William’s decision to ban the lilies christening in England. *That said, I don’t think Charles will step down; because he wants to have the title and also he wants to buy William, Kate, and the kids more time before their life changes with even more responsibilities and a higher press profile.*


This is precisely why abdication is frowned upon. Each monarch is responsible for ensuring that every member of RF is fully prepared when s/he in turn becomes the monarch. In this case, when Charles is King, he will do his utmost to ensure that William as Prince of Wales has enough time to groom young Prince George to succeed Will as Prince of Wales when Will becomes King.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least the US gossip rags don't worship at her altar anymore.
> 
> View attachment 5231468


On another note, aside from meghans ugly mug on the cover … all these real celebs on the cover make it feel like it’s the early 2000s again, lol.

Renee Zelwegger, Jen and Ben, Britney … and another mess up Harry got himself into… only this time, his family is not there to cover his backside for him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I'm certainly not a fan of her but calling someone a "loose woman" today is akin to slut shaming. Call her a social climbing narcissist, compulsive liar, manipulative, delusions of grandeur if you will - sure, all fair game as far as I'm concerned.



IMO, ‘social climbing’ implies a fair amount of _slutty-like _behavior. In some circles, that could be considered ‘loose’.  Ymmv




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Two of the main rumours were that the baby was a product of her alleged annulled marriage and living with the mysterious ex, one was that one of her goddaughters (?) is hers. And I think another online source claimed she was pregnant in highschool.



IIRC there is a rumor  that her missing year from college was due to a possible baby or an abortion.  Who knows the truth?  Imo, these rumors show how much some people dislike her - they are willing to spread unkind rumors, question her choices, etc.  Seems clear that she was no paragon of virtue. Even Trev [who knew her for years] has not defended her against these rumors, but maybe silence is the best choice.



jelliedfeels said:


> Oh gosh, so you get both of the insufferable ends of the spectrum



Shocked to know anyone is still watching these stations! All of them have been _caught_ in so many lies/false statements, they really cannot be trusted. IMO.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> first I've heard of her having had a kid.....I take with a huge grain of salt


I personally don’t find that hard to believe, excuse me but she seems like the type who “gets around” wherever she sniffs a few dollars … that child probably doesn’t know that Meghan is it’s mom.

Didn’t she lie to one of her ex husbands about not being able to conceive? There’s nothing too low or too dirty for her.


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> I personally don’t find that hard to believe, excuse me but she seems like the type who “gets around” wherever she sniffs a few dollars … that child probably doesn’t know that Meghan is it’s mom.
> 
> Didn’t she lie to one of her ex husbands about not being able to conceive? There’s nothing too low or too dirty for her.


I'm not a fan of hers but there was freedom of choice and I doubt she would have chosen to have a child when it wasn't the right time for her
Just because you "get around" doesn't mean you have babies


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO, ‘social climbing’ implies a fair amount of _slutty-like _behavior. In some circles, that could be considered ‘loose’. Ymmv


Not that I've ever heard, but like you said, YMMV. Carole Middleton has been called a social climber in the past. 
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/social-climbing


----------



## breakfastatcartier

sdkitty said:


> I'm not a fan of hers but there was freedom of choice and I doubt she would have chosen to have a child when it wasn't the right time for her
> Just because you "get around" doesn't mean you have babies


Birth control isn’t always 100% effective… hence why I said there’s a chance she had gotten pregnant, planned or not.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she’d  gotten an abortion…. But maybe she kept the baby to trap a rich man, he proved to be smarter and powerful and her plan backfired, prompting her to get rid of the child possibly through adoption.

This sounds like crazy conspiracy theory and I don’t like that I thought it out loud, but Meghan isn’t a clean person and her antics make my mind go places I don’t want it to…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> Birth control isn’t always 100% effective… hence why I said there’s a chance she had gotten pregnant, planned or not.
> 
> I wouldn’t be surprised if she’d  gotten an abortion…. But maybe she kept the baby to trap a rich man, he proved to be smarter and powerful and her plan backfired, prompting her to get rid of the child possibly through adoption.
> 
> This sounds like crazy conspiracy theory and I don’t like that I thought it out loud, but Meghan isn’t a clean person and her antics make my mind go places I don’t want it to…


anything is possible but I doubt it


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> Birth control isn’t always 100% effective… hence why I said there’s a chance she had gotten pregnant, planned or not.
> 
> I wouldn’t be surprised if she’d  gotten an abortion…. But maybe she kept the baby to trap a rich man, he proved to be smarter and powerful and her plan backfired, prompting her to get rid of the child possibly through adoption.
> 
> This sounds like crazy conspiracy theory and I don’t like that I thought it out loud, but Meghan isn’t a clean person and her antics make my mind go places I don’t want it to…



Completely agree.
Hazzie has his own questionable behavior, too. So much of this H&M drama is simply Ewwww.  They are not the sort of people I would ever want to meet irl. Undoubtedly, they feel the same about me, not a drinker, not a smoker, not a yacht girl


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo, these rumors show how much some people dislike her - they are willing to spread unkind rumors, question her choices, etc.


I think she has been very lucky. The Ragland side of the family, which she seems to have markled because they are now beneath her, have not said anything against her, and her ex-husband and ex-lover are too gentlemanly to spill the tea. It is, however, only a matter of time before she tramples someone so bad that they throw caution to the winds and sell a story to the media. Let's hope she trips over her own tongue before that happens.

If she could stop showboating and crying victim, she could make a real difference. As it is, I can't trust a word she says and I ascribe an ulterior motive ($$$$) to everything she does.


----------



## Lodpah

My .2 cents. She’s far too ambitious to have a child.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> My .2 cents. She’s far too ambitious to have a child.



Unless it's to forever insert herself into the world's most famous family.


----------



## bellecate

Just saw this on Instagram. Sure hope it’s just SS at work.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Is this the Filipino guy that they tried to sue for using Archewell as his company name?


Yes, he is the one. I believe he was able to prove that his choice of Archewell occurred before the Most Reverend Eminences of Montecito chimed in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Just saw this on Instagram. Sure hope it’s just SS at work.



So do I. I will lose all hope when Nancy, who wasn't shy to stand up to a former inhabitant of a famous Washington D.C. building, falls for Raptor's shtick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Yes, he is the one. I believe he was able to prove that his choice of Archewell occurred before the Most Reverend Eminences of Montecito chimed in.



OMG. That makes the trolling all the better. That was such a bold move, can you imagine if they'd won? What would have been next, sue their next-door neighbour because they wanted to move into his house?


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> The atmosphere at the dinner table….
> View attachment 5231349
> 
> Forgot to say -
> Congrats to @poopsie for getting that invitation! Hope the vegan option is delicious.
> 
> whoever came up with that mouthful should join your nickname club
> 
> I mean… they must be saving a fortune on Dior bedsheets and bunion plasters.



"That's a rather tender subject"


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> A Christmas in the UK, how convenient!



Meghan and her slut-strands are trying to kill the woman so she can get those veiny claws on the inheritance.


----------



## poopsie

breakfastatcartier said:


> Meghan and her slut-strands are trying to kill the woman so she can get those veiny claws on the inheritance.



Yup. That was my first thought as well. Push HM over the edge with those vile stans egging her on


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Completely agree.
> Hazzie has his own questionable behavior, too. So much of this H&M drama is simply Ewwww.  They are not the sort of people I would ever want to meet irl. Undoubtedly, they feel the same about me, not a drinker, not a smoker, not a yacht girl


I had a flash thought on H !  Wouldn't it be something if someone came out and announced they had H's baby years ago?!?  Mind blowing what M would think!!!  H's first born ... not Archie.       Me bad ...


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> people see what they want to see.....apparently some people are still enamoured by the fairy tale of the brown american princess


You mean *QUEEN*!!! .. can't even say how many times I've seen that written by these *RIDICULOUS* stans of hers!  These folks are, IMO .. truly SICK in the head and should get help!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that's one of the rumours I don't believe either for various reasons, but where were you when we were discussing this in detail?
> 
> Two of the main rumours were that the baby was a product of her alleged annulled marriage and living with the mysterious ex, one was that one of her goddaughters (?) is hers. And I think another online source claimed she was pregnant in highschool.


Nah .. if she had been, my friend would have told me about it since her son was Meghan's "best Friend" when they were doing high school plays together!


----------



## Chanbal

Dear Nancy,
I grew up having $.99 facials – it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can't remember) – but what I do remember was that I recycled thousands of popsicle-sticks to pay for them, and I felt lucky. If you get a copy of the Hello magazine article, have in mind all the miles I walked to collect all those popsicle-sticks.  










						Meghan Markle's future bonding sessions with her daughter sound so fun
					

The Duchess of Sussex may take inspiration from her own upbringing with mum Doria Ragland when it comes to planning mother-daughter days out with her unborn child




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> You mean *QUEEN*!!! .. can't even say how many times I've seen that written by these *RIDICULOUS* stans of hers!  These folks are, IMO .. truly SICK in the head and should get help!


since the one who was here left, I haven't been to any sites where her stans go.....sounds like they are delusional


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> I don't know if any of you have ever experienced one of the greeting cards rigged to start playing some music when you open it up.
> 
> Reading this I thought, I wonder if trumpets blared as they slit the envelopes open to announce the contents came from on high in the hills of Monteshitshow as the *Matronly Moron of the Manor* spewed forth her prescription for how all of us peons down the hills should be cared for.
> 
> O M G  Please give her laryngitis or something so she will just shut up for awhile.
> 
> Real Royal Family - this goes way beyond what you should be tolerating, She USED HER TITLE in this blatantly, in your face, political act. Yes, she is an American citizen, but write as a Duchess, be treated as a Duchess and be IGNORED when it come to US politics.
> 
> Edit to add: "As ever, Meg"


 Thanks @csshopper for your #18 nickname, *Matronly Moron of the Manor*.
Congratulations and please accept The List #18 Ribbon.


----------



## Chanbal

Will will have a lot of work ahead of him to clean up so much mess.


----------



## Chanbal

When is an article like this going to be published by the US media? 

*The Telegraph* - Zoe Strimpel
*Meghan isn’t Michelle ***** – she should butt out of politics*
The Duchess of Sussex has tried to use her influence-by-marriage to sway policy. She should leave it to those in office

It’s not hard to understand why Marie Antoinette annoyed people in poverty-riven Revolutionary France. Her head should have stayed firmly on – chopping it off was an act of savagery a sane person should never condone – but there is something uniquely irksome, even insulting, about Royals – people in the lap of luxury through no hard work of their own – pronouncing on what the plebs ought to do, either directly or by interfering in politics.

The main sin of the French Queen was flaunting her indolence. Her involvement in politics did become increasingly intense, and some say shrewd, towards the end, but this was an inevitable result of being a monarch in that time and place. *Compared with the Duchess of Sussex, Marie Antoinette was positively sympathetic, for at least she never tried to pretend to be a commoner, or to understand and meddle in the plight of commoners.* Politically, she kept things top-level; war campaigns, plots and escapes.

*The Duchess, however, has become an insufferable meddler in politics* – just without the amazing dresses and headpieces. *For years the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have spoken passionately about climate change and the need for urgent action, while using private jets and apparantly gas-guzzling SUVs, including one they were photographed in as they zoomed around New York last month while in town, entirely superfluously, for the UN General Assembly. **The Royal couple topped their political play-acting off with cocktails at Bemelmans at the Carlyle**, where rooms go for around $1,000 (£726), and martinis for $30.

The Duchess seems particularly keen on forging a sort of First Lady role for herself – the problem being that she lacks the genuinely impressive, relevant background of, say Michelle *****, who, born into a poor family in Chicago, worked her way up to being a top lawyer, has years of policy experience, and is generally far more self-aware and sensitive in how she presents her campaigns.* All this is obviously news to Meghan, whose commitment to wholly unqualified meddling in policy reached a new peak last week with a letter to Nancy ******, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Senator Chuck Schumer, whom she is lobbying for “parental leave for all”.

Paid parental leave for all is a humane and sensible idea, but is the Duchess the right person to be lobbying politicians on behalf of hard-scrabble working parents – or indeed anything else policy-related? I’d argue not. As she herself put it in the letter, “I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician”. She is, however, “a mom”. Yes, except the vast majority of mothers have about as much in common with Megs as they do with Marie Antoinette or a robot dog: nothing.

She writes: “Like fewer parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family. We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.”

She can say that again, and maybe add in that she and her husband will never have to work for their living, will have an endless array of servants and childcare on tap, and can take for granted the kind of luxury and riches that most Americans could never even dream about.

*Indeed the best thing Meghan could do at this point is to stop trying to inflict her influence-by-marriage on the corridors of elected power, and have the decency to accept that she is not Michelle *****. She married a Prince, she got a title, she took him back to California, and she has a fondness for making her feelings – from her desperation at being repressed by the Royals to her love of motherhood to her fury at Piers Morgan – known to all, preferably on globally-franchised TV.

Meghan has a habit of humble-bragging*, intended to give her the political street-cred Harry could never claim. I found it quite charming at the start of their marriage. But it has now become tiresome, as if she expects a Nobel Prize for having not been born rich and for having worked normal jobs like most other American teenagers. “I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler – it may have cost less back then,” she writes in her letter, adding, with a “let them eat cake” flourish, “(to be honest, I can’t remember)”. Then the rags to riches story: “I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends.”

But Meghan: you were stupendously beautiful, stupendously lucky, landed a high-profile TV job, caught the eye of a prince, and the rest is a fairytale.

Someone needs to tell Meghan, and Harry too while they’re at it, that policy is not some easy-breezy confluence of confused celebrity whim. It’s a hard-graft affair that sits at the interstices of ********ic politics and laboriously-gained knowledge.

Meghan has already made her mark, and it’s been confirming all the worst stereotypes of our age, from the apparent reluctance fully embrace the mundanity of royal duties, to the totally unfounded ultra-wokeness, to the “do as I say, not as I do” habits that define the woke-green brigade. She has fame and fortune: it’s time she left politics, and policy, to those with some actual right to conduct them.



			https://archive.vn/HeaXc#selection-1415.1-1419.120


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pic from @Chanbal post

1996 tour
A 15-year-old girl cuddling up to a middle-aged tour guide!??!


----------



## rose60610

Rumors of M having had a baby before Archie? No way. Whether she had one or more abortions? I don't want to know whether she had none, one or several. Those should be kept private for anybody. It's detestable that some celebrities encourage women to brag about their abortions, for example, Martha Plimpton, who said she "had her best abortion in Seattle" and if she "could Yelp review it" she "totally would".  Meghan took social climbing very seriously, discarding a husband (or two?) and boyfriends en route to Harry, who, at present, is at the top of her pyramid. If a billionaire comes along, well, Harry gets demoted. 

J.Lo married thrice and was engaged how many times? The difference between M and J.Lo is Meghan trolls for more and more fame and fortune whether it's on a yacht or Buckingham Palace. J.Lo already had a ton of fame and fortune without the men in her life.  J.Lo has ambition and even though I'm not a big fan of hers, I believe she worked her butt off for it. But Meghan tries to market herself as some kind of naive hapless victim who just happened to fall in love with this guy who she discovered was a prince! Her whole persona is so fake it's sick. She's actually proud of creating all the family fractures she's caused and no lie is off limits no matter who she wants to destroy. I can't wait for the repulsive idiot to try to impress us all with another symbolic wreath.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Duchess of Sussex has tried to use *her influence-by-marriage* to sway policy.



LOVE. We should have a clapping emoji.

*



			The Duchess, however, has become an insufferable meddler in politics
		
Click to expand...

*


*



			The Duchess seems particularly keen on forging a sort of First Lady role for herself – the problem being that she lacks the genuinely impressive, relevant background of, say Michelle *****, who, born into a poor family in Chicago, worked her way up to being a top lawyer, has years of policy experience, and is generally far more self-aware and sensitive in how she presents her campaigns.
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Will will have a lot of work ahead of him to clean up so much mess.



I love when Angela says Harry follows Meghan like a pet dog
Seems like it would be a good idea for them to scale down the number of royals


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> When is an article like this going to be published by the US media?
> 
> *The Telegraph* - Zoe Strimpel
> *Meghan isn’t Michelle ***** – she should butt out of politics*
> The Duchess of Sussex has tried to use her influence-by-marriage to sway policy. She should leave it to those in office
> 
> It’s not hard to understand why Marie Antoinette annoyed people in poverty-riven Revolutionary France. Her head should have stayed firmly on – chopping it off was an act of savagery a sane person should never condone – but there is something uniquely irksome, even insulting, about Royals – people in the lap of luxury through no hard work of their own – pronouncing on what the plebs ought to do, either directly or by interfering in politics.
> 
> The main sin of the French Queen was flaunting her indolence. Her involvement in politics did become increasingly intense, and some say shrewd, towards the end, but this was an inevitable result of being a monarch in that time and place. *Compared with the Duchess of Sussex, Marie Antoinette was positively sympathetic, for at least she never tried to pretend to be a commoner, or to understand and meddle in the plight of commoners.* Politically, she kept things top-level; war campaigns, plots and escapes.
> 
> *The Duchess, however, has become an insufferable meddler in politics* – just without the amazing dresses and headpieces. *For years the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have spoken passionately about climate change and the need for urgent action, while using private jets and apparantly gas-guzzling SUVs, including one they were photographed in as they zoomed around New York last month while in town, entirely superfluously, for the UN General Assembly. **The Royal couple topped their political play-acting off with cocktails at Bemelmans at the Carlyle**, where rooms go for around $1,000 (£726), and martinis for $30.
> 
> The Duchess seems particularly keen on forging a sort of First Lady role for herself – the problem being that she lacks the genuinely impressive, relevant background of, say Michelle *****, who, born into a poor family in Chicago, worked her way up to being a top lawyer, has years of policy experience, and is generally far more self-aware and sensitive in how she presents her campaigns.* All this is obviously news to Meghan, whose commitment to wholly unqualified meddling in policy reached a new peak last week with a letter to Nancy ******, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Senator Chuck Schumer, whom she is lobbying for “parental leave for all”.
> 
> Paid parental leave for all is a humane and sensible idea, but is the Duchess the right person to be lobbying politicians on behalf of hard-scrabble working parents – or indeed anything else policy-related? I’d argue not. As she herself put it in the letter, “I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician”. She is, however, “a mom”. Yes, except the vast majority of mothers have about as much in common with Megs as they do with Marie Antoinette or a robot dog: nothing.
> 
> She writes: “Like fewer parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family. We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.”
> 
> She can say that again, and maybe add in that she and her husband will never have to work for their living, will have an endless array of servants and childcare on tap, and can take for granted the kind of luxury and riches that most Americans could never even dream about.
> 
> *Indeed the best thing Meghan could do at this point is to stop trying to inflict her influence-by-marriage on the corridors of elected power, and have the decency to accept that she is not Michelle *****. She married a Prince, she got a title, she took him back to California, and she has a fondness for making her feelings – from her desperation at being repressed by the Royals to her love of motherhood to her fury at Piers Morgan – known to all, preferably on globally-franchised TV.
> 
> Meghan has a habit of humble-bragging*, intended to give her the political street-cred Harry could never claim. I found it quite charming at the start of their marriage. But it has now become tiresome, as if she expects a Nobel Prize for having not been born rich and for having worked normal jobs like most other American teenagers. “I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler – it may have cost less back then,” she writes in her letter, adding, with a “let them eat cake” flourish, “(to be honest, I can’t remember)”. Then the rags to riches story: “I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends.”
> 
> But Meghan: you were stupendously beautiful, stupendously lucky, landed a high-profile TV job, caught the eye of a prince, and the rest is a fairytale.
> 
> Someone needs to tell Meghan, and Harry too while they’re at it, that policy is not some easy-breezy confluence of confused celebrity whim. It’s a hard-graft affair that sits at the interstices of ********ic politics and laboriously-gained knowledge.
> 
> Meghan has already made her mark, and it’s been confirming all the worst stereotypes of our age, from the apparent reluctance fully embrace the mundanity of royal duties, to the totally unfounded ultra-wokeness, to the “do as I say, not as I do” habits that define the woke-green brigade. She has fame and fortune: it’s time she left politics, and policy, to those with some actual right to conduct them.
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/HeaXc#selection-1415.1-1419.120


pretty accurate except for the part about her being stupendiously beautiful


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I love when Angela says Harry follow Meghan like a pet dog
> Seems like it would be a good idea for them to scale down the number of royals



They will scale down naturally. The Queen has a bunch of cousins who helped share her load. When they are gone, their children won't be as close to the throne and not as involved, and the dukedoms of Gloucester and Kent won't be royal dukedoms anymore once the current title holders perish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Dear Nancy,
> I grew up having $.99 facials – it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can't remember) – but what I do remember was that I recycled thousands of popsicle-sticks to pay for them, and I felt lucky. If you get a copy of the Hello magazine article, have in mind all the miles I walked to collect all those popsicle-sticks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's future bonding sessions with her daughter sound so fun
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex may take inspiration from her own upbringing with mum Doria Ragland when it comes to planning mother-daughter days out with her unborn child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com




Not really unusual considering the times (90s) and that her mother was a makeup artist — in LA, seems like this would be standard practice. Was she ever in beauty pageants?  Some moms push their daughters into that. 

_Doria Loyce Ragland is an American social worker, and former makeup artist and yoga instructor.Wikipedia_



sdkitty said:


> pretty accurate except for the part about her being stupendiously beautiful



Once more, H&M are involved in American politics. Take the titles! Now!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not really unusual considering the times (90s) and that her mother was a makeup artist — in LA, seems like this would be standard practice. Was she ever in beauty pageants?  Some moms push their daughters into that.
> 
> _Doria Loyce Ragland is an American social worker, and former makeup artist and yoga instructor.Wikipedia_
> 
> 
> 
> Once more, H&M are involved in American politics. Take the titles! Now!


only reason I can see for a 13-year-old having facials would be acne


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> When is an article like this going to be published by the US media?
> 
> *The Telegraph* - Zoe Strimpel
> *Meghan isn’t Michelle ***** – she should butt out of politics*
> The Duchess of Sussex has tried to use her influence-by-marriage to sway policy. She should leave it to those in office
> 
> It’s not hard to understand why Marie Antoinette annoyed people in poverty-riven Revolutionary France. Her head should have stayed firmly on – chopping it off was an act of savagery a sane person should never condone – but there is something uniquely irksome, even insulting, about Royals – people in the lap of luxury through no hard work of their own – pronouncing on what the plebs ought to do, either directly or by interfering in politics.
> 
> The main sin of the French Queen was flaunting her indolence. Her involvement in politics did become increasingly intense, and some say shrewd, towards the end, but this was an inevitable result of being a monarch in that time and place. *Compared with the Duchess of Sussex, Marie Antoinette was positively sympathetic, for at least she never tried to pretend to be a commoner, or to understand and meddle in the plight of commoners.* Politically, she kept things top-level; war campaigns, plots and escapes.
> 
> *The Duchess, however, has become an insufferable meddler in politics* – just without the amazing dresses and headpieces. *For years the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have spoken passionately about climate change and the need for urgent action, while using private jets and apparantly gas-guzzling SUVs, including one they were photographed in as they zoomed around New York last month while in town, entirely superfluously, for the UN General Assembly. **The Royal couple topped their political play-acting off with cocktails at Bemelmans at the Carlyle**, where rooms go for around $1,000 (£726), and martinis for $30.
> 
> The Duchess seems particularly keen on forging a sort of First Lady role for herself – the problem being that she lacks the genuinely impressive, relevant background of, say Michelle *****, who, born into a poor family in Chicago, worked her way up to being a top lawyer, has years of policy experience, and is generally far more self-aware and sensitive in how she presents her campaigns.* All this is obviously news to Meghan, whose commitment to wholly unqualified meddling in policy reached a new peak last week with a letter to Nancy ******, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and Senator Chuck Schumer, whom she is lobbying for “parental leave for all”.
> 
> Paid parental leave for all is a humane and sensible idea, but is the Duchess the right person to be lobbying politicians on behalf of hard-scrabble working parents – or indeed anything else policy-related? I’d argue not. As she herself put it in the letter, “I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician”. She is, however, “a mom”. Yes, except the vast majority of mothers have about as much in common with Megs as they do with Marie Antoinette or a robot dog: nothing.
> 
> She writes: “Like fewer parents, we weren’t confronted with the harsh reality of either spending those first few critical months with our baby or going back to work. We knew we could take her home, and in that vital (and sacred) stage, devote any and everything to our kids and to our family. We knew that by doing so we wouldn’t have to make impossible choices about childcare, work, and medical care that so many have to make every single day.”
> 
> She can say that again, and maybe add in that she and her husband will never have to work for their living, will have an endless array of servants and childcare on tap, and can take for granted the kind of luxury and riches that most Americans could never even dream about.
> 
> *Indeed the best thing Meghan could do at this point is to stop trying to inflict her influence-by-marriage on the corridors of elected power, and have the decency to accept that she is not Michelle *****. She married a Prince, she got a title, she took him back to California, and she has a fondness for making her feelings – from her desperation at being repressed by the Royals to her love of motherhood to her fury at Piers Morgan – known to all, preferably on globally-franchised TV.
> 
> Meghan has a habit of humble-bragging*, intended to give her the political street-cred Harry could never claim. I found it quite charming at the start of their marriage. But it has now become tiresome, as if she expects a Nobel Prize for having not been born rich and for having worked normal jobs like most other American teenagers. “I grew up on the $4.99 salad bar at Sizzler – it may have cost less back then,” she writes in her letter, adding, with a “let them eat cake” flourish, “(to be honest, I can’t remember)”. Then the rags to riches story: “I started working (at the local frozen yogurt shop) at the age of 13. I waited tables, babysat, and piecemealed jobs together to cover odds and ends.”
> 
> But Meghan: you were stupendously beautiful, stupendously lucky, landed a high-profile TV job, caught the eye of a prince, and the rest is a fairytale.
> 
> Someone needs to tell Meghan, and Harry too while they’re at it, that policy is not some easy-breezy confluence of confused celebrity whim. It’s a hard-graft affair that sits at the interstices of ********ic politics and laboriously-gained knowledge.
> 
> Meghan has already made her mark, and it’s been confirming all the worst stereotypes of our age, from the apparent reluctance fully embrace the mundanity of royal duties, to the totally unfounded ultra-wokeness, to the “do as I say, not as I do” habits that define the woke-green brigade. She has fame and fortune: it’s time she left politics, and policy, to those with some actual right to conduct them.
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/HeaXc#selection-1415.1-1419.120


seems like the US media is either dazzled with their glamour (alleged) or afraid of being accused of racism


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> only reason I can see for a 13-year-old having facials would be acne



Correct me if needed, I believe the French mothers begin teaching their daughters proper skin care at an early age, too. 

_Many professionals suggest that the time to start taking care of skin with facials is around age 14. That is the time when skin begins to change and when blackheads, bumps, and acne start to appear. While it may be sooner or later for some teens, the beginning of puberty is a good guideline. In general, a facial is beneficial at all ages because it cleans out the pores. But when young teenagers start good habits of skin care, he or she will begin good habits that can last throughout their lives. Children of all ages should also always use sunscreen and especially outdoors between the peak sun hours of 11:00 am to 2:00 pm.

There really is no fixed minimum age for a girl to get facials. Due to hormonal changes and the release of excess oil, having a cleanup or facial can help. Deep cleansing of the face improves and rejuvenates the skin’s health and appearance.

Even if the teenager doesn’t receive all of the chemically-infused creams or scrubs, he or she can benefit from a basic cleaning session. A thorough cleansing is the recommended course at the beginner’s level facials. For a facial in Norfolk, VA, at Medical Aesthetics of Virginia, the procedure includes cleaning of the skin by reducing dehydration and removing blackheads._





__





						The Age to Start Getting Facials | Medical Aesthetics of Virginia
					






					www.medaestheticsva.com
				





_It is a fact that if you start early, the less likely you are to worry about wrinkles at a young age. Prevention is indeed better than cure; therefore starting young will help put off the effects of the advancing years for much longer.
_
*Start Young*
_
Talk to the experts and they will tell you it is never too early to start following a routine that will ensure you have healthy skin well into your adult – and senior – years. Never think you are too young during your teens to start caring for your skin! Starting early lays the foundation for the years to come. Of course nobody is advocating the use of products with AHA and retinoids by young girls – there are other ways for young girls to get used to a proper regimen.

Skin care specialists such as dermatologists and beauticians all agree that the younger one starts, the better the chances are that you will stick to a routine to support great skin for life. Some say girls should start a basic routine even from age 12, while others feel a year or 2 later is fine. 
_
*Teens*
_
It is, however, important to start in your teens: in your mid-20’s signs of aging will creep up on you as skin starts developing the first fine lines way before you’re 30 – if you do not take steps early on. This is even truer for the active young lady that spends quite a bit of time outdoors – in the sun, on the beach, playing sports. And while it is true that the teenager may not follow her mother’s routine, fact remains that being introduced to skin care at a young age will pay dividends into your 20’s, your 30’s, 40’s and later on.






						THE BEST AGE TO START A REGULAR SKIN CARE ROUTINE
					

Prevention is indeed better than cure; therefore starting young will help put off the effects of the advancing years for much longer.




					www.skinstation.co.uk
				



_


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Correct me if needed, I believe the French mothers begin teaching their daughters proper skin care at an early age, too.
> 
> _Many professionals suggest that the time to start taking care of skin with facials is around age 14. That is the time when skin begins to change and when blackheads, bumps, and acne start to appear. While it may be sooner or later for some teens, the beginning of puberty is a good guideline. In general, a facial is beneficial at all ages because it cleans out the pores. But when young teenagers start good habits of skin care, he or she will begin good habits that can last throughout their lives. Children of all ages should also always use sunscreen and especially outdoors between the peak sun hours of 11:00 am to 2:00 pm.
> 
> There really is no fixed minimum age for a girl to get facials. Due to hormonal changes and the release of excess oil, having a cleanup or facial can help. Deep cleansing of the face improves and rejuvenates the skin’s health and appearance.
> 
> Even if the teenager doesn’t receive all of the chemically-infused creams or scrubs, he or she can benefit from a basic cleaning session. A thorough cleansing is the recommended course at the beginner’s level facials. For a facial in Norfolk, VA, at Medical Aesthetics of Virginia, the procedure includes cleaning of the skin by reducing dehydration and removing blackheads._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Age to Start Getting Facials | Medical Aesthetics of Virginia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.medaestheticsva.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _It is a fact that if you start early, the less likely you are to worry about wrinkles at a young age. Prevention is indeed better than cure; therefore starting young will help put off the effects of the advancing years for much longer._
> 
> *Start Young*
> 
> _Talk to the experts and they will tell you it is never too early to start following a routine that will ensure you have healthy skin well into your adult – and senior – years. Never think you are too young during your teens to start caring for your skin! Starting early lays the foundation for the years to come. Of course nobody is advocating the use of products with AHA and retinoids by young girls – there are other ways for young girls to get used to a proper regimen.
> 
> Skin care specialists such as dermatologists and beauticians all agree that the younger one starts, the better the chances are that you will stick to a routine to support great skin for life. Some say girls should start a basic routine even from age 12, while others feel a year or 2 later is fine. _
> 
> *Teens*
> 
> _It is, however, important to start in your teens: in your mid-20’s signs of aging will creep up on you as skin starts developing the first fine lines way before you’re 30 – if you do not take steps early on. This is even truer for the active young lady that spends quite a bit of time outdoors – in the sun, on the beach, playing sports. And while it is true that the teenager may not follow her mother’s routine, fact remains that being introduced to skin care at a young age will pay dividends into your 20’s, your 30’s, 40’s and later on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE BEST AGE TO START A REGULAR SKIN CARE ROUTINE
> 
> 
> Prevention is indeed better than cure; therefore starting young will help put off the effects of the advancing years for much longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skinstation.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


maybe so but facials for someone that age is for the privileged.....the average family isn't going to be spending money on that


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> maybe so but facials for someone that age is for the privileged.....the average family isn't going to be spending money on that
> 
> also, I don't really agree with the part about aging.....a very young girl having facials may have better skin in terms of things like pimples but I don't think you have to start worrying about wrinkles at 13.  and if you have darker skin you are generally going to show age less than fair skinned women - so genetics


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Here is the answer to Hazz's hair.



Is that you Omid?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> maybe so but facials for someone that age is for the privileged.....the average family isn't going to be spending money on that



Does the average parent take his kid ‘religiously’ to tap and ballet classes?  Imo she did not have the average kid’s upbringing. The poverty claims are just entitled bs.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


>



Cry me a river, there are people surviving on less than that no just in the world but in the USA
Very tone deaf statement, would have been better if she spoke about those experiencing hardship instead of making it about…her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Many professionals suggest that the time to start taking care of skin with facials is around age 14. _



Oh I bet they do...especially when they are estheticians who sell them, hu?

I got into skin care big time when the pandemic hit, and there are enough dermatologists out there who never get facials or once in a blue moon for relaxation purposes (I prefer massages  ). It is most certainly not a pillar of a good skincare routine. In fact, if you want to teach your kids one good thing early on it is to use plenty of sunscreen. I've been wearing daily sunscreen since my teens, I've taken a lot of ridicule because I apply even if it's in the depth of winter or I don't plan to leave the house, but let's just say I'm at an age where "Who laughs last laughs best" is starting to surface.

(I was picking out a new sunscreen today because my summer favourite doesn't do so well over my fall moisturizer, and I shuddered reading all the comments claiming "I've been using this very same 3 fl. oz bottle for 6 months, a little goes a long way!" [it does not, you don't apply enough] or "I went on a beach vacation and never had to reapply, good stuff!" [only because you didn't burn to a lobster doesn't mean you didn't get yourself skin damage that will come back to bite you once you hit a certain age])


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Cry me a river, there are people surviving on less than that no just in the world but in the USA
> Very tone deaf statement, would have been better if she spoke about those experiencing hardship instead of making it about…her



Does she ever make anything not about her, though?


----------



## purseinsanity

Nutashha said:


> I'm speechless!
> 
> 
> *Meghan Advises Women to Stay Out of Drama*
> View attachment 5230730
> 
> 
> What do you think about this?


LOLOL her advice should be, “Women start drama, step back, and play victim”.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Dear Nancy,
> I grew up having $.99 facials – it may have cost less back then (to be honest, I can't remember) – but what I do remember was that I recycled thousands of popsicle-sticks to pay for them, and I felt lucky. If you get a copy of the Hello magazine article, have in mind all the miles I walked to collect all those popsicle-sticks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's future bonding sessions with her daughter sound so fun
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex may take inspiration from her own upbringing with mum Doria Ragland when it comes to planning mother-daughter days out with her unborn child
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com



Well, it's a different face now, so she probably thinks all those facials that TM paid for are no longer relevant.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Oooh just saw A great nickname to add to our list…
> 
> *Duchess of Sizzler*



Thanks @needlv for your first nickname, Duchess of Sizzler. Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Pic from @Chanbal post
> 
> 1996 tour
> A 15-year-old girl cuddling up to a middle-aged tour guide!??!


I'm not a body language expert, but everyone seemed to have an appropriate posture on that picture with exception of a single person, and it wasn't the middle-aged tour guide imo.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> LOVE. We should have a clapping emoji.


The article is full of accurate statements. "*Meghan has a habit of humble-bragging*"


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I love when Angela says Harry follows Meghan like a pet dog
> *Seems like it would be a good idea for them to scale down the number of royals*


Andrew, Fergie, Kent, and of course, their Eminences of Montecito, have shamelessly profited from their privileged positions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I would not be surprised if she was the one who requested her father take her there after her dance classes. *Probably hoped she'd run into a famous producer or agent who'd give her her "big break".*


So she could imitate real life by playing a little bi!ch like herself in a movie.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> pretty accurate except for the part about her *being stupendiously beautifu*l


It's probably a misspelling, the author may have meant 'surgically' beautiful.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It's probably a misspelling, the author may have meant 'surgically' beautiful.


The horrors of auto-correct.
Maybe it was supposed to be "stupefyingly beautiful" because Hazard was indeed stupefied by her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Norm.Core said:


> *Duchess Dunce*!
> Always a day late and a dollar short. Stop trying so hard.


Thanks @Norm.Core for your #2 nickname Duchess Dunce. The BRF may eventually take away M's Duchess title, but in their magnanimity, they will let her forever keep the 'Dunce' part of that title.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

V0N1B2 said:


> Nancy receives letter from the *Montepsycho Duchess* and is like:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then upon hearing of her political aspirations pulls a Jack Palance from City Slickers and says:


 Thanks @V0N1B2 for your #2 nickname, *Montepsycho Duchess*, that needs no further definition, but requires a round of  and  for coining this so à propos nickname.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



TM's dedication to his daughter in MM's own words. How cruel can a daughter be to treat a father like him the way she does? This brought tears to my eyes, and I can understand the indignation of her sister and brother. She is so …


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @V0N1B2 for your #2 nickname, *Montepsycho Duchess*, that needs no further definition, but requires a round of  and  for coining this so à propos nickname.



"Montepsycho Duchess" is the best nickname I've heard. Kudos to VON1B2 for coming up with a name that sums up A LOT!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, MM will tell us about all the sweet moments she and QE shared. Remember QE had a blanket for her on that cold day they went somewhere for something. We will hear all about the zoom chats filled with clever Queen-isms about MM’s decor, clothes and kids.
> *And (!) we will hear of all the sweet plans they discussed - plans for Chas and W to share the throne with Hazzie.*


Are you sure you're not secretly writing comedy sketches for the networks or maybe Spotify or maybe Netflix because you really have a knack for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are you sure you're not secretly writing comedy sketches for the networks or maybe Spotify or maybe Netflix because you really have a knack for it.



  Aw, thank you. The thing with H&M is the stuff writes itself. They make it so easy to poke fun


----------



## Chanbal

Please don't come back for Christmas, the queen is fine!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is most certainly not a pillar of a good skincare routine.


This. I read years ago that Aerin Lauder, granddaughter of Estee, does not believe in them. I've only had a few in my life and don't care for them. Finding a good skin care regimen that works for you and adapting it as your needs change over the years is key. Most important of all, never leave the house without sunscreen on your face (and other parts that are exposed). In fact, I recently read that you need sunscreen inside too because the light emitted from electronic devices such as PCs, laptops and smartphones ages your skin. Lifestyle factors are also important too - proper diet, exercise, sleep (or lack of ) and stress all affect your skin.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good for you; I can't say it either so I call her "the daughter" and "the wife" for M while I call H, "the big zero" among other things.


I think of Lili as “The Spawn”.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This question is of concern for many of us. Is the media in the US "blind" or easily manipulated?



Both.  They choose what they want to see or believe then promote it as nauseum to manipulate the American sheep.  There are more herds here than I would’ve ever imagined!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Just saw this on Instagram. Sure hope it’s just SS at work.


Oh good.  More useless speeches and waste of taxpayer money!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Correct me if needed, I believe the French mothers begin teaching their daughters proper skin care at an early age, too.
> 
> _Many professionals suggest that the time to start taking care of skin with facials is around age 14. That is the time when skin begins to change and when blackheads, bumps, and acne start to appear. While it may be sooner or later for some teens, the beginning of puberty is a good guideline. In general, a facial is beneficial at all ages because it cleans out the pores. But when young teenagers start good habits of skin care, he or she will begin good habits that can last throughout their lives. Children of all ages should also always use sunscreen and especially outdoors between the peak sun hours of 11:00 am to 2:00 pm.
> 
> There really is no fixed minimum age for a girl to get facials. Due to hormonal changes and the release of excess oil, having a cleanup or facial can help. Deep cleansing of the face improves and rejuvenates the skin’s health and appearance.
> 
> Even if the teenager doesn’t receive all of the chemically-infused creams or scrubs, he or she can benefit from a basic cleaning session. A thorough cleansing is the recommended course at the beginner’s level facials. For a facial in Norfolk, VA, at Medical Aesthetics of Virginia, the procedure includes cleaning of the skin by reducing dehydration and removing blackheads._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Age to Start Getting Facials | Medical Aesthetics of Virginia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.medaestheticsva.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _It is a fact that if you start early, the less likely you are to worry about wrinkles at a young age. Prevention is indeed better than cure; therefore starting young will help put off the effects of the advancing years for much longer._
> 
> *Start Young*
> 
> _Talk to the experts and they will tell you it is never too early to start following a routine that will ensure you have healthy skin well into your adult – and senior – years. Never think you are too young during your teens to start caring for your skin! Starting early lays the foundation for the years to come. Of course nobody is advocating the use of products with AHA and retinoids by young girls – there are other ways for young girls to get used to a proper regimen.
> 
> Skin care specialists such as dermatologists and beauticians all agree that the younger one starts, the better the chances are that you will stick to a routine to support great skin for life. Some say girls should start a basic routine even from age 12, while others feel a year or 2 later is fine. _
> 
> *Teens*
> 
> _It is, however, important to start in your teens: in your mid-20’s signs of aging will creep up on you as skin starts developing the first fine lines way before you’re 30 – if you do not take steps early on. This is even truer for the active young lady that spends quite a bit of time outdoors – in the sun, on the beach, playing sports. And while it is true that the teenager may not follow her mother’s routine, fact remains that being introduced to skin care at a young age will pay dividends into your 20’s, your 30’s, 40’s and later on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE BEST AGE TO START A REGULAR SKIN CARE ROUTINE
> 
> 
> Prevention is indeed better than cure; therefore starting young will help put off the effects of the advancing years for much longer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skinstation.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Taking care of your skin is so important.  It doesn’t even have to be expensive products.  I’ve mentioned on a thread before (maybe this one?) that my mother uses Cetaphil cleanser and Ponds cream religiously for as long as I can remember.  She is now in her early 70s but barely has any wrinkles and often is thought to be in her 50s.  I taught my daughter to take care of her skin at age 12, and she’s much more disciplined about it than I am (I’m too lazy!).  She’s now 16 and has never had a facial (to Megain:  the horror!).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does she ever make anything not about her, though?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> It's probably a misspelling, the author may have meant 'surgically' beautiful.


I know that some other posters think it is unfair to attack people’s looks and normally I would agree with that but when one sees these sycophantic references to M’s appearance even in critical articles I, personally, can’t help but want to call a spade a spade and point out she looks like a ten-a-penny Insta thot even with a frequent dose of plastic surgery.

I would also say if what a celeb primarily markets is their looks (and even in her ‘acting’ days she was ‘babe #6’ material) then there’s nothing wrong with commenting on it. I feel no guilt in saying that Heidi K is pretty but she dresses like if the white stripes became strippers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Taking care of your skin is so important.  It doesn’t even have to be expensive products.  I’ve mentioned on a thread before (maybe this one?) that my mother uses Cetaphil cleanser and Ponds cream religiously for as long as I can remember.  She is now in her early 70s but barely has any wrinkles and often is thought to be in her 50s.  I taught my daughter to take care of her skin at age 12, and she’s much more disciplined about it than I am (I’m too lazy!).  She’s now 16 and has never had a facial (to Megain:  the horror!).



My grandma has used the original Nivea all her life and barely has a wrinkle in her 90s. My secret weapon is a cheapo tub of store-brand Vaseline.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## needlv

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Don't Sell When On Magazine Covers, Royal Expert Says
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry don't sell magazines anymore, Ingrid Seward said. The editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine shared that she has stopped featuring the royal couple on covers "a while ago."




					www.ibtimes.com


----------



## catlover46

These comments are really awful 




__





						Cele|bitchy | Buckingham Palace accused of ‘misleading the nation’ on the Queen’s health
					

Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.




					www.celebitchy.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine title:

"Duchess Meghan: did she lie again?"

The article goes on to explain how apparently her memory regarding her priviliged childhood is a bit, uh, fuzzy. Not very flattering.


----------



## xincinsin

catlover46 said:


> These comments are really awful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cele|bitchy | Buckingham Palace accused of ‘misleading the nation’ on the Queen’s health
> 
> 
> Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.celebitchy.com


Quite a lot of Stan support in the comments


----------



## CarryOn2020

catlover46 said:


> These comments are really awful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cele|bitchy | Buckingham Palace accused of ‘misleading the nation’ on the Queen’s health
> 
> 
> Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.celebitchy.com



who _are_ those people?  A new level of *sick*.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I hope PC and William are taking the lead more and more on daily issues for the Queen. She deserves some peace in her later years and not having to deal with her grandson's marital mess.


Princes Charles and William and even Princess Anne have been doing most if not all the investitures for some time now even some award ceremonies. IIRC, HMTQ has been receiving ambassadors through Zoom only. Most of her patronages have been reassigned to RF members. However, HM insists on participating in certain events like the opening of Parliament something she would consider as the monarch's absolute duty.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Taking care of your skin is so important.  It doesn’t even have to be expensive products.  I’ve mentioned on a thread before (maybe this one?) that my mother uses Cetaphil cleanser and Ponds cream religiously for as long as I can remember.  She is now in her early 70s but barely has any wrinkles and often is thought to be in her 50s.  I taught my daughter to take care of her skin at age 12, and she’s much more disciplined about it than I am (I’m too lazy!).  She’s now 16 and has never had a facial (to Megain:  the horror!).


a dermatologist told me years ago to use Cetaphil cleanser to soothe some irritation.  I've been using it as a cleanser for years.  I know some people here don't like it but I do and it's inexpensive.  I get it at Costco.  I tried Philosophy cleanser and at first thought it did a better job of removing makeup but then realized it wasn't any better.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> *I know that some other posters think it is unfair to attack people’s looks* and normally I would agree with that but when one sees these sycophantic references to M’s appearance even in critical articles I, personally, can’t help but want to call a spade a spade and point out she looks like a ten-a-penny Insta thot even with a frequent dose of plastic surgery.
> 
> I would also say if what a celeb primarily markets is their looks (and even in her ‘acting’ days she was ‘babe #6’ material) then there’s nothing wrong with commenting on it. I feel no guilt in saying that Heidi K is pretty but she dresses like if the white stripes became strippers.


I don't like to 'attack' a person's physical appearance. It's not our choice if we are short, tall, have blue or green eyes… The 'surgically' was just meant to be 'a nod to' the allegedly multiple plastic surgeries, cosmetic dentistry, etc. 

Though, I think it's Ok to comment on the choices of outfits, bling, handbags, shoes… I bet that some of us here still have a certain green dress on the list of fashion mistakes.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Allegedly, one donates books that don't sell, likely gets tax deductions on funds paid by a publisher, and receives donations in return.  Wow, I wonder if this is the case here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't like to 'attack' a person's physical appearance. It's not our choice if we are short, tall, have blue or green eyes… The 'surgically' was just meant to be 'a nod to' the allegedly multiple plastic surgeries, cosmetic dentistry, etc.
> 
> Though, I think it's Ok to comment on the choices of outfits, bling, handbags, shoes… I bet that some of us here still have a certain green dress on the list of fashion mistakes.



When someone courts(!) the public’s attention the way H&M do, they expose themselves to all levels of criticism.  They do not get to choose. Imo no one here has ‘attacked’  H&M for anything but their clothes, their hypocrisy, their awful behaviour.  If they cannot take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.  Joan Rivers said it pretty well:

_Joan Rivers had a joke for everything. The comedian, who died unexpectedly in September 2014, cracked wise about even the most respected actors—no one was safe from her wit. A new book titled Joan Rivers Confidential, written by  *Melissa Rivers*(Joan’s daughter) with *Scott Currie,* includes letters Rivers wrote and received from some of Hollywood’s biggest names. Among them is a letter from Rivers to Oscar-winner *Kathy Bates* on the fallout of a joke Rivers had made at Bates’s expense.

Per Page Six, Bates was reportedly upset after Rivers joked that the Titanicwouldn’t have sunk if Bates, who played Molly Brown in the 1997 James Cameron movie, hadn’t been on it. Rivers replied with the following complimentary note to Bates:
_


> _“The fact that people even know our names is a gift from God, so relax, enjoy your fame, and SMILE,” Rivers wrote. “Please know that I am a loyal, devoted, longtime fan of yours. (P.S. I also took your side in Misery.) Love and Kisses, Joan XOXO._











						Read the Letter Joan Rivers Wrote to Kathy Bates After Joking About Her Weight
					

Not an apology, exactly . . .




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> When someone courts(!) the public’s attention the way H&M do, they expose themselves to all levels of criticism. They do not get to choose.



When Meghan said "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK", I think a lot of people were astounded. After everything she'd been given, to expect others to feel sorry for her? Sure, many some of the appearances and expectations of being a royal weren't to her liking, but she clawed her way into that world and wallowed in all the perks of that world also. And then to seek pity? IMO, the gloves were off at that moment (if not before) and all the criticism that's come after is well deserved. She finds out that criticizing the BRF doesn't make her endearing so what does she do? She packs her bags, moves to Montecito, and doubles and triples down on the accusations of racism etc. Oh, and cranks out another child, meal ticket, tests the waters for a London christening, pulls out, trots to the United Nations in disaster outfits, writes Chuck and Nancy, and attempts to run the world. She makes the Kardashians look like Nobel Peace Prize winners. News Flash for H&M: you'd be NOTHING without the BRF who you claim "traps" people.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## piperdog

rose60610 said:


> News Flash for H&M: you'd be NOTHING without the BRF who you claim "traps" people.



I'd argue that they're NOTHING even with the BRF.


----------



## V0N1B2

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @V0N1B2 for your #2 nickname, *Montepsycho Duchess*, that needs no further definition, but requires a round of  and  for coining this so à propos nickname.





rose60610 said:


> "Montepsycho Duchess" is the best nickname I've heard. Kudos to VON1B2 for coming up with a name that sums up A LOT!


Thanks dolls, but I can't really take credit for it. I'm pretty sure I saw the moniker written somewhere here on this thread - maybe in a linked article or something. It certainly is fitting tho, isn't it? 
Both of them seem to be so desperate for the spotlight, believing in their own self-importance. It's only Monday, so it will be interesting how they will insert themselves into this week's news cycle. I'm guessing Meghan, as the former star of an award winning TV show, will start to promote firearm safety on sets. I'm sure she'll remind us of all the movie sets she worked on while honing her craft.
This maternity leave thing will be long forgotten by Thursday morning I'm sure.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> Thanks dolls, but I can't really take credit for it. I'm pretty sure I saw the moniker written somewhere here on this thread - maybe in a linked article or something. It certainly is fitting tho, isn't it?
> Both of them seem to be so desperate for the spotlight, believing in their own self-importance. It's only Monday, so it will be interesting how they will insert themselves into this week's news cycle. I'm guessing Meghan, as the former star of an award winning TV show, will start to promote firearm safety on sets. I'm sure she'll remind us of all the movie sets she worked on while honing her craft.
> This maternity leave thing will be long forgotten by Thursday morning I'm sure.



I wonder if she will hold AB accountable. AB can be a powerful enemy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Quote from @Lounorada  "*Lady Muck* sitting in the centre at the top of the table, while Princess Hairy looks like his seat position was an afterthought, stuck in on the edge of a corner "

 Thanks for your #3 nickname, Lady Muck. LOL muck always reminds me of hogs rolling in the swill, but hogs are great however muck, M and swill, not so much! Congratulations and please accept this Gold Ribbon. 


EDT fix quote


----------



## grietje

I enjoy reading this thread, but folks you’ve gone too far.

Sizzler is my guilty pleasure and I don’t want ‘her’ associated with the delicious cheese toast and salad bar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder what's going on with their PR machinery. Like, she has been getting flak after flak - completely justified - and they still don't change gears. And to be honest, if it's all her ignoring her advisors as usual...don't these people have just a little bit of professional honour? You couldn't pay me enough to go down as the world's worst PR person who gets out one embarrassment after another.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Disgusting and so totally them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> Harry is actually unloading luggage himself? *I figured they had "people" for all that menial stuff*


I believe that's Harry the handyman, who caters to Madame's every wish as in "What Meghan wants Meghan gets."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> They're all too busy kissing up to* Drama Mama* Meghan. Or there'd be drama hell to pay for all involved if they don't make her look popular and the unchallenged center of their undivided attention. That's probably what they are paid for.


 Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your first nickname *Drama Mama*, a perfect description for H's wife. Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> When someone courts(!) the public’s attention the way H&M do, they expose themselves to all levels of criticism.  They do not get to choose. Imo no one here has ‘attacked’  H&M for anything but their clothes, their hypocrisy, their awful behaviour.  If they cannot take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.  Joan Rivers said it pretty well:
> 
> _Joan Rivers had a joke for everything. The comedian, who died unexpectedly in September 2014, cracked wise about even the most respected actors—no one was safe from her wit. A new book titled Joan Rivers Confidential, written by  *Melissa Rivers*(Joan’s daughter) with *Scott Currie,* includes letters Rivers wrote and received from some of Hollywood’s biggest names. Among them is a letter from Rivers to Oscar-winner *Kathy Bates* on the fallout of a joke Rivers had made at Bates’s expense.
> 
> Per Page Six, Bates was reportedly upset after Rivers joked that the Titanicwouldn’t have sunk if Bates, who played Molly Brown in the 1997 James Cameron movie, hadn’t been on it. Rivers replied with the following complimentary note to Bates:
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the Letter Joan Rivers Wrote to Kathy Bates After Joking About Her Weight
> 
> 
> Not an apology, exactly . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


That reminds me so much of the letter that Frank Sinatra wrote to George Michael


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Remember when she accused the palace courtiers of cozying up with the tabloids by throwing them parties? Maybe Sunshine Sucks is giving goodie bags and freebies to the US trash media to make sure *The Duchess of Trash* is mentioned in glowing terms.


 Thanks @xincinsin for your #17 nickname, *The Duchess of Trash.  * Congratulations and here is The List #17 Ribbon.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your first nickname *Drama Mama*, a perfect description for H's wife. Congratulations and welcome to The List.
> View attachment 5232291


Thank you, dear Maggie! That's lovely! I'm honoured to have my own star on the tPF "Prince H & MM" thread of shame fame


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> I had a flash thought on H !  Wouldn't it be something if someone came out and *announced they had H's baby years ago*?!? Mind blowing what M would think!!! H's first born ... not Archie.   Me bad ...


Maybe it's true...


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> When someone courts(!) the public’s attention the way H&M do, they expose themselves to all levels of criticism.  They do not get to choose. Imo no one here has ‘attacked’  H&M for anything but their clothes, their hypocrisy, their awful behaviour.  If they cannot take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.  Joan Rivers said it pretty well:
> 
> _Joan Rivers had a joke for everything. The comedian, who died unexpectedly in September 2014, cracked wise about even the most respected actors—no one was safe from her wit. A new book titled Joan Rivers Confidential, written by  *Melissa Rivers*(Joan’s daughter) with *Scott Currie,* includes letters Rivers wrote and received from some of Hollywood’s biggest names. Among them is a letter from Rivers to Oscar-winner *Kathy Bates* on the fallout of a joke Rivers had made at Bates’s expense.
> 
> Per Page Six, Bates was reportedly upset after Rivers joked that the Titanicwouldn’t have sunk if Bates, who played Molly Brown in the 1997 James Cameron movie, hadn’t been on it. Rivers replied with the following complimentary note to Bates:_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the Letter Joan Rivers Wrote to Kathy Bates After Joking About Her Weight
> 
> 
> Not an apology, exactly . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Of course Joan was rooting for Annie Wilkes that’s how her mother got her her a nice man  


sdkitty said:


> a dermatologist told me years ago to use Cetaphil cleanser to soothe some irritation.  I've been using it as a cleanser for years.  I know some people here don't like it but I do and it's inexpensive.  I get it at Costco.  I tried Philosophy cleanser and at first thought it did a better job of removing makeup but then realized it wasn't any better.


all the dermatologists on YouTube seem to love cetaphil cleanser and cerave moisturer. Some of the range is still quite hard to find in stores here in U.K. I liked cerave but I must confess my favourite so far is the Lidl q10 moisturiser- it probably helps I don’t have to frown when I see the price


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I'm not a body language expert, but everyone seemed to have an appropriate posture on that picture with exception of a single person, and it wasn't the middle-aged tour guide imo.


I wasn't implying that the tour guide was at fault, but that a fifteen-year-old girl was overstepping her boundaries in cuddling an older man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, one donates books that don't sell, likely gets tax deductions on funds paid by a publisher, and receives donations in return.  Wow, I wonder if this is the case here!



And the splintering of The Bench continues:
Today on Amazon: 


Best Sellers Rank: #18,727 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#98 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
#417 in Children's Emotions Books
#1,203 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wasn't implying that the tour guide was at fault, but that a fifteen-year-old girl was overstepping her boundaries in cuddling an older man.


I assumed she was late teens.  That’s so crazy that she is 15 there. My 15 year old daughter would neeeeeever.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> who _are_ those people?  A new level of *sick*.


Sunshine Sachs bought bots for this kind of thing.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does the average parent take his kid ‘religiously’ to tap and ballet classes?  Imo she did not have the average kid’s upbringing. The poverty claims are just entitled bs.



Hmmmmm .. according to CA law, you had to be at least 16 to get a job.  According to what I have read, this "supposed" Yogurt job was when she was 13 .. which would mean that she was there *ILLEGALLY*!!!!!!!! .. and remember, she said very boasting that she "_Never waited tables_"!  I'm just waiting for the time that she LIES on a sensitive topic and then *FINALLY *gets called out for it .. it will come, these types of folks start to believe their lies .. and forget about the REAL TRUTH!


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL her advice should be, “Women start drama, step back, and play victim”.


More like "LOOK AT ME .. THE DRAMA QUEEN"!!!  She so desperately wants to be Queen, well *MALADDROIT *.. you are the Queen of this for sure!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



If true that's disgusting. How much could they possibly raise that way? A couple thousand dollars? They just get more and more embarrassing.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmm .. according to CA law, you had to be at least 16 to get a job.  According to what I have read, this "supposed" Yogurt job was when she was 13 .. which would mean that she was there *ILLEGALLY*!!!!!!!! .. and remember, she said very boasting that she "_Never waited tables_"!  I'm just waiting for the time that she LIES on a sensitive topic and then *FINALLY *gets called out for it .. it will come, these types of folks start to believe their lies .. and forget about the REAL TRUTH!



Not only was our delightful Meghan digging her way out of poverty at age 13 (she must have lied-can you imagine- and said she was 16 in order to put Sizzler food on the table), but she also became an feminist activist at age 11 when she brought Proctor & Gamble to its knees about the dish soap commercial. You know, no wonder I felt myself healing 29 years ago when Meghan single-handedly took down a Fortune 500 company. Such a prodigy she was. So it's only natural she feels capable of bringing down the BRF as well! In the next three weeks she'll have found the cure for the common cold and world hunger. Given enough time, she may even discover clothes that fit.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, one donates books that don't sell, likely gets tax deductions on funds paid by a publisher, and receives donations in return.  Wow, I wonder if this is the case here!


I figured there must be a tax angle to it. $5 donations from a couple hundred low income families? Tiny potatoes. Not like it's some pricey UES school where parents can write five or six figure checks without blinking. But then again they would be wise to H&M's scams.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My grandma has used the original Nivea all her life and barely has a wrinkle in her 90s. My secret weapon is a cheapo tub of store-brand Vaseline.


I have a rare skin condition (lucky me) .. which would become crazy aggravated when I didn't get any sun (related to a Vitamin D deficiency).  Like you, Nivea was the only product that seemed to calm it down, but for the longest time, I could only get it in Europe!  When the HB and I would holiday in Italy (or Europe for that matter), I would STOCK UP on it .. and then send a box of it back to the US such that it would last me until the next time I was in Europe.  When I was working in Europe, I was in heaven .. because I could get it so easily.  Thank god that it finally came to the states (although I kind of miss our European trips and running around trying to source it)!!  HA!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I assumed she was late teens.  That’s so crazy that she is 15 there. My 15 year old daughter would neeeeeever.


Neither would my 16 year old.  She'd be locked up in chastity belts and an ivory tower if she was


----------



## purseinsanity

Messy Meg must have never heard the saying "Still Waters Run Deep".  She gurgles and sloshes constantly, "LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME!  WHY ISN'T EVERYONE LOOKING AT ME!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Messy Meg must have never heard the saying "Still Waters Run Deep".  She gurgles and sloshes constantly, "LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME!  WHY ISN'T EVERYONE LOOKING AT ME!"



She is so...unrefined to find a kinder word for Lady CC's favourite.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Not only was our delightful Meghan digging her way out of poverty at age 13 (she must have lied-can you imagine- and said she was 16 in order to put Sizzler food on the table),* but she also became an feminist activist at age 11 when she brought Proctor & Gamble to its knees about the dish soap commercial. You know, no wonder I felt myself healing 29 years ago when Meghan single-handedly took down a Fortune 500 company. *Such a prodigy she was. So it's only natural she feels capable of bringing down the BRF as well! In the next three weeks she'll have found the cure for the common cold and world hunger. Given enough time, she may even discover clothes that fit.


What gives! I read that it was a class project, for which she was chosen to write the letter and then she took credit for the whole project.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here ya go:











						A young Meghan Markle got soap maker to change sexist commercial
					

Video emerged Thursday showing the star of the hit TV show Suits as a young girl in grade school lobbying a dishwasher soap manufacturer to change its sexist commercial.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> I clicked the link.
> Ooooh no, this is a contradiction or is it a lie or was she confused? Steak? Sushi? Sizzler? Nomo, ya kno the one in Santa Monica (omg).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tig Archives  - The Art of Sushi - Wattpad
> 
> 
> Read The Art of Sushi from the story The Tig Archives  by Rizcat98 (Zoe Blarewood) with 2,770 reads. blog, duchessofsussex, fashion. The Tig - 19th September 2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wattpad.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230787
> 
> 
> View attachment 5230788


Me when I'm attempting to read anything she writes:


Seriously though, the way she writes is insufferable. Why does everything have to sound so profound and over-explained?
If you have to try that hard to sound really fancy and clever, then it's pretty obvious you are neither fancy or clever.
You're just f**king annoying.





Chanbal said:


> A Christmas in the UK, how convenient!



The RF when they hear about this:






bellecate said:


> Just saw this on Instagram. Sure hope it’s just SS at work.


Now, Nancy...







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does she ever make anything not about her, though?










QueenofWrapDress said:


>



So now they're supposedly swindling money out of parents by getting them to 'donate' money to their ChArItY fOuNdAtIoN from the kids through their school? It's so pathetic and disgusting that it has to be true, especially for them.


If I was one of the parents, I'd be asking for _my _money back and instead donate that money _myself _to a legit charity where I know it would be used for good.






Maggie Muggins said:


> Quote from @Lounorada  "*Lady Muck* sitting in the centre at the top of the table, while Princess Hairy looks like his seat position was an afterthought, stuck in on the edge of a corner "
> 
> Thanks for your #3 nickname, Lady Muck. LOL muck always reminds me of hogs rolling in the swill, but hogs are great however muck, M and swill, not so much! Congratulations and please accept this Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5232261
> 
> EDT fix quote


 @Maggie Muggins


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

purseinsanity said:


> Neither would my 16 year old.  She'd be locked up in chastity belts and an ivory tower if she was


I like your parental style!   It's like I tell my kids, you'll date only when you are at least 35 and have finished all your homework and chores  

One of my best friend's sons now drives a motorbike and has a steady girlfriend who stays over night and my friend is having some serious problems adjusting. Usually she hides somewhere in the other side of the house pretending she's not there  I still can't believe it. For me he'll always be a sweet little tiny tot who I used to be baby sit and watch all my favourite animated movies with.


----------



## xeyes

We know, Enty. We know.





__





						Blind Item #3
					

Don't believe the hype. The offspring of the alliterate one, were not eligible to receive the titles recently given. There was no turning an...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				




Comments are fun as usual. (Have we seen the “Fredo and Willis” nicknames yet over here? “Willis” may be a typo, but I like it.  )


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here ya go:
> 
> View attachment 5232527
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A young Meghan Markle got soap maker to change sexist commercial
> 
> 
> Video emerged Thursday showing the star of the hit TV show Suits as a young girl in grade school lobbying a dishwasher soap manufacturer to change its sexist commercial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So the pattern of taking credit for others' work started very early on!


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I like your parental style!   It's like I tell my kids, you'll date only when you are at least 35 and have finished all your homework and chores
> 
> One of my best friend's sons now drives a motorbike and has a steady girlfriend who stays over night and my friend is having some serious problems adjusting. Usually she hides somewhere in the other side of the house pretending she's not there  I still can't believe it. For me he'll always be a sweet little tiny tot who I used to be baby sit and watch all my favourite animated movies with.


LOLOL, thanks!  
Both of my children are late to mature, or insecure or whatever, I suppose, but I'm so happy that they are!  My son didn't have his first real girlfriend until 18, and is was not for lack of girls trying.  Some of these girls were drop dead gorgeous.  I finally asked him what was up and he said he avoids girls that are into smoking and drinking and all of the girls asking him out were into that.    I did tell him (much to his embarrassment) now that he's dating that I was happy to buy him jumbo boxes of condoms for him and his roommates as often as needed.

For my daughter's 16th birthday, we did a mother daughter trip to Hawaii with one of her BFFs.  My daughter dresses very modestly and although both girls have similar figures, her 15 year old friend was in the skimpiest and inappropriate (IMO) outfits I've ever seen.  I didn't dare say anything, because her mother was with us and obviously was okay with it.  Even my daughter couldn't get over the fact that her friend was wearing basically nipple covers and thongs on the beach.  She commented that her friend was getting a lot of attention from older men, which my daughter found disturbing.  Maybe I did something right after all!  I am personally thrilled I don't have a Megain-Lolita or some womanizer in my family.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL, thanks!
> Both of my children are late to mature, or insecure or whatever, I suppose, but I'm so happy that they are!  My son didn't have his first real girlfriend until 18, and is was not for lack of girls trying.  Some of these girls were drop dead gorgeous.  I finally asked him what was up and he said he avoids girls that are into smoking and drinking and all of the girls asking him out were into that.    I did tell him (much to his embarrassment) now that he's dating that I was happy to buy him jumbo boxes of condoms for him and his roommates as often as needed.
> 
> For my daughter's 16th birthday, we did a mother daughter trip to Hawaii with one of her BFFs.  My daughter dresses very modestly and although both girls have similar figures, her 15 year old friend was in the skimpiest and inappropriate (IMO) outfits I've ever seen.  I didn't dare say anything, because her mother was with us and obviously was okay with it.  Even my daughter couldn't get over the fact that her friend was wearing basically nipple covers and thongs on the beach.  She commented that her friend was getting a lot of attention from older men, which my daughter found disturbing.  Maybe I did something right after all!  I am personally thrilled I don't have a Megain-Lolita or some womanizer in my family.


My daughters are grown, thankfully. I could not imagine raising them today what with all the garbage thrown at them from all directions.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> My daughters are grown, thankfully. I could not imagine raising them today what with all the garbage thrown at them from all directions.


I'm so grateful I grew up before social media and all the unnecessary pressures it brings on to children!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wasn't implying that the tour guide was at fault, but that a fifteen-year-old girl was overstepping her boundaries in cuddling an older man.


haha, I never thought that you did. The person that was overstepping boundaries was obvious in the photo. The behavior was amazing at such a relatively young age.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> And the splintering of The Bench continues:
> Today on Amazon:
> 
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #18,727 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #98 in Children's Black & African American Story Books
> #417 in Children's Emotions Books
> #1,203 in Children's Family Life Books (Books)


It's shocking that those books are being 'donated' to economically disadvantaged children, and their families are allegedly encouraged to donate $5 to her foundation. In other words, it looks like someone found a way to force people to buy that silly book.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I figured there must be a tax angle to it. $5 donations from a couple hundred low income families? Tiny potatoes. Not like it's some pricey UES school where parents can write five or six figure checks without blinking. But then again they would be wise to H&M's scams.



My 2 cents:
I believe the values of her donations to schools are calculated based on the full price of the book. If she donated for example 400 books to school A, the value of the tax deductible donation from that particular school would be $18.99 X 400.

The $5 that she receives from each student may or may not result in a major donation for her foundation, but will certainly increase the numbers of donors.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> haha, I never thought that you did. The person that was overstepping boundaries was obvious in the photo. The behavior was amazing at such a relatively young age.


After reading your original post I checked the photo again and read the comments; none of them were too kind to M. One poster suggested that M had always been "forward" with man. Another pointed to the fact that M was pressing the man's arm against her breasts, so I took a second look and it appears to be true. Also, M turned 15 on August 4th that year so, depending on when the photo was taken in 1996, she could have been 14 going on 15. Here's the pic so everyone can judge for themselves.
	

		
			
		

		
	



Edited to correct typo


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here ya go:
> 
> View attachment 5232527
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A young Meghan Markle got soap maker to change sexist commercial
> 
> 
> Video emerged Thursday showing the star of the hit TV show Suits as a young girl in grade school lobbying a dishwasher soap manufacturer to change its sexist commercial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I read somewhere that her father was the one that suggested to write that letter. It was cute what she did it with her father's support at that time. According to a twitter post, she got into the habit of writing to companies and getting treats in return.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that her father was the one that suggested to write that letter. It was cute what she did with her father's support at that time. According to a twitter post, she got in the habit of writing to companies and getting treats in return.



Is there anything wrong with writing to companies now and pretending to be 10 yrs old? 
She said in the video that at least 1/3 of the commercials contain offensive statements about women.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is there anything wrong with writing to companies now and pretending to be 10 yrs old?
> She said in the video that at least 1/3 of the commercials contain offensive statements about women.



Maybe they were offensive to Meghan because she wasn't the actress hired to be in them. We want to see girls with self confidence  don't get me wrong, but our dear M is a huge narcissist, getting worse and worse, and that's a big difference.


----------



## needlv

grietje said:


> I enjoy reading this thread, but folks you’ve gone too far.
> 
> Sizzler is my guilty pleasure and I don’t want ‘her’ associated with the delicious cheese toast and salad bar.



i apologise for calling her Duchess Sizzler and associating her with that great cheese toast. From now on I shall refer to her as Duchess Golddigger. Is that less offensive?


----------



## creme fraiche

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder what's going on with their PR machinery. Like, she has been getting flak after flak - completely justified - and they still don't change gears. And to be honest, if it's all her ignoring her advisors as usual...don't these people have just a little bit of professional honour? You couldn't pay me enough to go down as the world's worst PR person who gets out one embarrassment after another.



I think they are doing exactly as planned. MM and her PR strategy is all about clickbait and remaining in the news.  If the response is positive, well that is great but it is perfectly acceptable to also be negative as long as it produces more columns inches and more internet traffic.  The last thing they want is for people to stop talking about her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

If you want a good laugh, read this blogger who breaks down the Duke and Duchess’ royal tour of NY with biting sarcasm…









						Royal round-up: 25th October
					

Well hello, hello all and happy Monday– if ever there was one. Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I can’t believe how much has happened in the last few weeks so of course, I had…




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## Lodpah

Creepy. Now I know where she got the "inspiration" for the green matador cape.


----------



## Lodpah

needlv said:


> If you want a good laugh, read this blogger who breaks down the Duke and Duchess’ royal tour of NY with biting sarcasm…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round-up: 25th October
> 
> 
> Well hello, hello all and happy Monday– if ever there was one. Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I can’t believe how much has happened in the last few weeks so of course, I had…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com


Thanks. Great read.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> After reading your original post I checked the photo again and read the comments; none of them were too kind to M. One poster suggested that M had always been "forward" with man. Another pointed to the fact that M was pressing the man's arm against her breasts, so I took a second look and it appears to be true. Also, M turned 15 on August 4th that year so, depending on when the photo was taken in 1996, she could have been 14 going on 15. Here's the pic so everyone can judge for themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5232729
> 
> Edited to correct typo


In the 60's at my high school she would have been known as "Skanky Meghan Markle" and it would not have been a compliment.

The other noteworthy part of this picture is the girl on his other side, Nikki Priddy, who later as an adult described her relationship with the inappropriate one as "We'd been like sisters since we were two years old." Maybe saying more than she intended, talking about her supposed BFF being on Suits, she said, "She'd _hustled _for years to get there, so that was huge." Their "extraordinary bond spanned 31 years..." Then Nikki dared to talk to Trevor post divorce and she ended up Markled. Edited to add: Nikki was gone before Haz was captured.

The article, source of the quotes, is from December 2017. I didn't pay attention to it then, but now knowing all we know, it's a long, but fascinating read from Nikki's perspective and candid insights into her former friend. 

*Meghan Markle revelations by the friend who knew her best*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5137785/Meghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html - 800k - Cached - Similar pages
Dec 1, 2017 *...* *Meghan's maid* of *honour* at *her first wedding blames* the *future Royal* for the *mysterious end* to the *marriage*: Friend since the age of two ...


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

csshopper said:


> In the 60's at my high school she would have been known as "Skanky Meghan Markle" and it would not have been a compliment.
> 
> The other noteworthy part of this picture is the girl on his other side, Nikki Priddy, who later as an adult described her relationship with the inappropriate one as "We'd been like sisters since we were two years old." Maybe saying more than she intended, talking about her supposed BFF being on Suits, she said, "She'd _hustled _for years to get there, so that was huge." Their "extraordinary bond spanned 31 years..." Then Nikki dared to talk to Trevor post divorce and she ended up Markled. Edited to add: Nikki was gone before Haz was captured.
> 
> The article, source of the quotes, is from December 2017. I didn't pay attention to it then, but now knowing all we know, it's a long, but fascinating read from Nikki's perspective and candid insights into her former friend.
> 
> *Meghan Markle revelations by the friend who knew her best*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5137785/Meghan-Markle-revelations-friend-knew-best.html - 800k - Cached - Similar pages
> Dec 1, 2017 *...* *Meghan's maid* of *honour* at *her first wedding blames* the *future Royal* for the *mysterious end* to the *marriage*: Friend since the age of two ...


 
Did anyone else happen to notice this girl, Nikki, on his other side also has her arm linked through his?? That just seems a little too “cozy” for me at that age


----------



## needlv

What happened to holidays with Snoop dog?  Was he markled?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, I may or may not go to Oprah's as well. What a non-statement.


----------



## jelliedfeels

grietje said:


> I enjoy reading this thread, but folks you’ve gone too far.
> 
> Sizzler is my guilty pleasure and I don’t want ‘her’ associated with the delicious cheese toast and salad bar.


On the topic of sizzler, we don’t have them but I was wondering whether anyone on the thread knows if they are like the Harvester chain here?

I must completely agree with you that cheese toast is delicious. 


charlottawill said:


> If true that's disgusting. How much could they possibly raise that way? A couple thousand dollars? They just get more and more embarrassing.


i mean that’s just basically getting everyone to pay for the books you ‘donated’ isn’t it?
Weird that the school was ok with asking for financial donations from parents so poor they need to get subsidised vegetables. I mean… they could buy a box of veg _each_ not two between them.

A bit late to ask I guess, but how does having a shared washing machine at school even work? Does one of the teachers wash everyone’s clothes at the end of the day & hand them out the next morning? Or do the parents come into school with their laundry? What about their jobs? 
Just seems like a total faff to me. Of course I already know the answer, but why not just offer to give the school a nice cheque like they did that famous, popular, probably wealthy already restaurant?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I may or may not go to Oprah's as well. What a non-statement.


Oh yeah I was going to get a lift with Mariah Carey to Snoop’s too then I was going to go sign my billion-million-gazillion clothing deal with target before zooming the Queen for just under an hour (because it’s a special holiday for us Brits too since we got an American princess of hearts after all ) with my pets for hire.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I like your parental style!   It's like I tell my kids, you'll date only when you are at least 35 and have finished all your homework and chores
> 
> One of my best friend's sons now drives a motorbike and has a steady girlfriend who stays over night and my friend is having some serious problems adjusting. Usually she hides somewhere in the other side of the house pretending she's not there  I still can't believe it. For me he'll always be a sweet little tiny tot who I used to be baby sit and watch all my favourite animated movies with.


Can I just ask, Hermes Zen and CarryOn2020, what in particular about my post blew your minds?  I hope I wasn't being inappropriate. Of course, I'm not going to demand to tag along and chaperone my adult children when they go on future dates. Of course not  ()


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> On the topic of sizzler, we don’t have them but I was wondering whether anyone on the thread knows if they are like the Harvester chain here?
> 
> I must completely agree with you that cheese toast is delicious.



Here’s a good write-up of Sizzler.









						Remembering the halcyon days of Sizzler
					

You have to see the incredible 1991 Sizzler promotional video.




					www.sfgate.com


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that her father was the one that suggested to write that letter. It was cute what she did it with her father's support at that time. According to a twitter post, she got into the habit of writing to companies and getting treats in return.


So the grifting started at a very early age then.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I may or may not go to Oprah's as well. What a non-statement.


Who goes trick or treating with a 2 yr old and a six month old? If they do, it's strictly for the parents' egos. Ahem.


----------



## Nutashha

*Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*


----------



## LittleStar88

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*
> View attachment 5232997



All that b!tching and moaning about a title, then this trick pulls this stunt. Of course.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I may or may not go to Oprah's as well. What a non-statement.


If you go and take some of your delicious baked goods, I'll be very jealous of Oprah!


----------



## purseinsanity

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*
> View attachment 5232997


She's declined use of a title he doesn't have?  That's the same style as the Oprah bit.  I've decided not to fly on my nonexistent private plane this weekend in order to help the world's problem with emissions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Here’s a good write-up of Sizzler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remembering the halcyon days of Sizzler
> 
> 
> You have to see the incredible 1991 Sizzler promotional video.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sfgate.com



Wow, that took me back, back to the days when all of us were striving and aspiring with very bad hair 



charlottawill said:


> Who goes trick or treating with a 2 yr old and a six month old? If they do, it's strictly for the parents' egos. Ahem.



Somewhere in the early 2000’s Halloween became the ‘adult’ holiday, for the parents who refuse to grow up 




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I may or may not go to Oprah's as well. What a non-statement.



Jeff B called and sparked my interest in COP Scotland, so I am heading over there, on the private jet of course. He mentioned something about the south of France, so I’ll prolly go there. May end up at Elon’s Swiss retreat for the holidays.  Stay tuned. O is a no, for sure.




SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Can I just ask, Hermes Zen and CarryOn2020, what in particular about my post blew your minds?  I hope I wasn't being inappropriate. Of course, I'm not going to demand to tag along and chaperone my adult children when they go on future dates. Of course not  ()



For me, nothing really blew my mind, my initial reaction was to raise an eyebrow. To me,  it seemed odd the teen‘s gf would not live in her own house and then it seemed really odd the mom would hide from her son and his gf.  Of course, with all that has happened, nothing should seem odd any more. Maybe I didn’t read your post correctly ??


----------



## scarlet555

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*
> View attachment 5232997


Another non-news BS from Nutty.  Poor Ginge, someday I come on here just to see if he woke up!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Who goes trick or treating with a 2 yr old and a six month old? If they do, it's strictly for the parents' egos. Ahem.



That baby hasn't left the house since they brought her home, I doubt they'd take her out for such a mundane activity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> All that b!tching and moaning about a title, then this trick pulls this stunt. Of course.



Isn't this old news about the Earldom of Dumbarton? Where they made a big fuss Archie, possibly grandson of a monarch by then, would be mocked (not only ridiculous, they told on themselves with Oprah and basically admitted what I said the minute they put that nonsense out...that they were salty little Archie wasn't made a prince. Did they expect he would be declared Heir Apparent too?). That poor child will be bullied for his ridiculous parents and Raptor's steamy movie scenes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> i apologise for calling her Duchess Sizzler and associating her with that great cheese toast. From now on I shall refer to her as *Duchess Golddigger*. Is that less offensive?


 Thanks @needlv for your #2 nickname, *Duchess Golddigger*, that has been added to The List.  
I wonder if the RF will have to sanitize the title of 'Duke & Duchess' with a very strong disinfectant before they confer it on anyone again. They might even have to let all existing "Dukedoms" or "Duchies" expire and then send them into oblivion or change the name to something else. Any suggestions?


----------



## lulilu

When I am feeling down, I get really depressed by these two.  They get away with everything -- lies abound.  And if Nancy P really invites MM to Washington, it will be an outrage.  Of course, Nancy is one who loves publicity, so maybe it is possible.  But I can't believe a seasoned politician would encourage this embarrassing nonsense.  
It seems as if every day we are bombarded with news of more things they are getting involved with.  It makes me sick.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> When I am feeling down, I get really depressed by these two.  They get away with everything -- lies abound.  And if Nancy P really invites MM to Washington, it will be an outrage.  Of course, Nancy is one who loves publicity, so maybe it is possible.  But I can't believe a seasoned politician would encourage this embarrassing nonsense.
> It seems as if every day we are bombarded with news of more things they are getting involved with.  It makes me sick.



They love Hwood people, and she brings that royal cachet, like a Rolex (see below)  Angelina just recently testified.
They really are comic relief from all the other stuff — all full of sound and fury, signifying nothing [Faulkner].


_“Cache” comes from the French verb cacher, meaning “to hide,” and in English is pronounced exactly like the word “cash.” But reporters speaking of a cache (hidden hoard) of weapons or drugs often mispronounce it to sound like cachet—“ca-SHAY” —a word with a very different meaning: originally a seal affixed to a document, now a quality attributed to anything with authority or prestige. 
Rolex watches have cachet.





						cache / cachet | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University
					






					brians.wsu.edu
				



_


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't this old news about the Earldom of Dumbarton? Where they made a big fuss Archie, possibly grandson of a monarch by then, would be mocked (not only ridiculous, they told on themselves with Oprah and basically admitted what I said the minute they put that nonsense out...that they were salty little Archie wasn't made a prince. Did they expect he would be declared Heir Apparent too?). That poor child will be bullied for his ridiculous parents and Raptor's steamy movie scenes.



Yes, I was confused, thought this happened recently, goggled it. Articles were from June, 2021.  Iirc, some claimed this title mess was the reason she didn’t go to the statue reveal.  I think most of us know the real reason.


----------



## littlemisskeira

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That baby hasn't left the house since they brought her home, I doubt they'd take her out for such a mundane activity.



Probably still negotiating for a multi-million dollars reveal!


----------



## littlemisskeira

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*
> View attachment 5232997



She actually still looked good then post Archie. Now she looks like an elder relative who bears some resemblance to herself...if i make sense lol. Just curious, why can't aesthetic procedures help her regain or at least improve her looks? I'm sure she turns to these.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*
> View attachment 5232997


Yes, this was news shortly after Archie's birth/christening that H's wife didn't want him to be known as Earl of Dumbarton. If had nothing to do with Archie being an earl, but all to do with the name, *Dumb*arton. Poor Countess of Dumbarton, really fits the first syllable very well and I sympathize with the citizens of the Earldom of Dumbarton for having an idiot as their countess.


----------



## Hermes Zen

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Can I just ask, Hermes Zen and CarryOn2020, what in particular about my post blew your minds?  I hope I wasn't being inappropriate. Of course, I'm not going to demand to tag along and chaperone my adult children when they go on future dates. Of course not  ()
> 
> View attachment 5232954


Hi SomethingGoodCanWork! I came from a very strict military family. Any boy that came to visit asked if my father would be standing at the door with a shotgun.  They thought this because Father looked big and tough (which he was). When I read your friend’s son now drives a motorcycle (I may have been wrong but in my mind he was young? Still in high school? If he was an adult, my mistake for assuming he was not) and had his gf sleep over. That surprised me. The best emoji for me to reply to was the mind blowing emoji. Selecting the mean/mad face was to extreme and a like/thumbs up and others didn’t quite apply for me. Hope this explains my actions and thoughts. I hope I didn’t offend you. That wasn’t my intent.


----------



## jelliedfeels

LittleStar88 said:


> Here’s a good write-up of Sizzler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remembering the halcyon days of Sizzler
> 
> 
> You have to see the incredible 1991 Sizzler promotional video.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sfgate.com


Thank you! It sounds like a couple of chains here like harvester and beefeater but I think the food must be much better at sizzler as I don’t think anyone would get nostalgic for our chains’ food  

The USA does have wonderful food in general IMHO  though occasionally too sweet.


charlottawill said:


> Who goes trick or treating with a 2 yr old and a six month old? If they do, it's strictly for the parents' egos. Ahem.


how are any of the neighbours meant to put the sweets in the kids’ baskets if they aren’t allowed to look up in case they make eye contact?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, that took me back, back to the days when all of us were striving and aspiring with very bad hair
> 
> 
> 
> Somewhere in the early 2000’s Halloween became the ‘adult’ holiday, for the parents who refuse to grow up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeff B called and sparked my interest in COP Scotland, so I am heading over there, on the private jet of course. He mentioned something about the south of France, so I’ll prolly go there. May end up at Elon’s Swiss retreat for the holidays.  Stay tuned. O is a no, for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For me, nothing really blew my mind, my initial reaction was to raise an eyebrow. To me,  it seemed odd the teen‘s gf would not live in her own house and then it seemed really odd the mom would hide from her son and his gf.  Of course, with all that has happened, nothing should seem odd any more. Maybe I didn’t read your post correctly ??


Oh I would definitely definitely go stay with Elon musk if I had the chance- can you imagine the stories you could tell  - the all plain pasta and weed thanksgiving meal might be a bit bland though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Nutashha said:


> *Meghan Has Declined to Use Royal Title for Son Archie!*
> View attachment 5232997



It is still all about her as she declined it and not Harry.  What ego!  She should be declining to use her married in title as well. As if that would happen. That is where she has a lot in common with Lady Colin Campbell who was married to her husband for a nanosecond, had a bad divorce and still uses his title. The fact that she used it cheesed him off to no end.


----------



## csshopper

1. Jeez, so "Meghan" declined. Last I knew it took two, or maybe three if there's a surrogate, to parent a child. She would not be dealing with this issue were it not for the sperm donor with a real Title who shares this child with her. He gets more expendable with the passing of time. One article recently pointed out in pictures she is see striding ahead of him and is always at the forefront. And this is the man supposedly being paid mega bucks to coach others to excel, achieve, be happy???????

2. This horse gotten beaten to death months ago, why roll the carcas down the hill again?

3. I have visions of a stack of note cards on the desk of some Sunshine Sucks lackey with possible topics to feed the Media about the Malignant one, each morning the stack gets shuffled and whatever turns up is the topic of the day, a notation is made of the date and it goes back in the pile to be reshuffled, but if pulled too soon, the next card gets drawn and on and on it goes.


----------



## lulu212121

Lodpah said:


> Creepy. Now I know where she got the "inspiration" for the green matador cape.



OMG! She's such a creep!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> I believe the values of her donations to schools are calculated based on the full price of the book. If she donated for example 400 books to school A, the value of the tax deductible donation from that particular school would be $18.99 X 400.
> 
> The $5 that she receives from each student may or may not result in a major donation for her foundation, but will certainly increase the numbers of donors.



They could have just bought the damn book at Ross or Marshall's for less than $5


----------



## poopsie

creme fraiche said:


> I think they are doing exactly as planned. MM and her PR strategy is all about clickbait and remaining in the news.  If the response is positive, well that is great but it is perfectly acceptable to also be negative as long as it produces more columns inches and more internet traffic.  The last thing they want is for people to stop talking about her.



Which is why I refuse to click on the links provided here. I really appreciate the posters who copy/paste the contents so i can follow along.  I REFUSE to add even one measly click to their coffers.


----------



## charlottawill

lulilu said:


> When I am feeling down, I get really depressed by these two.  They get away with everything -- lies abound.  And if Nancy P really invites MM to Washington, it will be an outrage.  Of course, Nancy is one who loves publicity, so maybe it is possible.  But I can't believe a seasoned politician would encourage this embarrassing nonsense.
> It seems as if every day we are bombarded with news of more things they are getting involved with.  It makes me sick.


Don't let them live "rent free" in your head. I come here strictly for the entertainment value because the real news is so depressing. I am comfident that the Hot Mess of Montecito will get their comeuppance in due time.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Hermes Zen said:


> Hi SomethingGoodCanWork! I came from a very strict military family. Any boy that came to visit asked if my father would be standing at the door with a shotgun.  They thought this because Father looked big and tough (which he was). When I read your friend’s son now drives a motorcycle (I may have been wrong but in my mind he was young? Still in high school? If he was an adult, my mistake for assuming he was not) and had his gf sleep over. That surprised me. The best emoji for me to reply to was the mind blowing emoji. Selecting the mean/mad face was to extreme and a like/thumbs up and others didn’t quite apply for me. Hope this explains my actions and thoughts. I hope I didn’t offend you. That wasn’t my intent.


No, of course you didn't offend me! And it's OK to disagree! I was honestly just really curious because we are all from such varied backgrounds and it shows sometimes in how we react to certain subjects. My friend's son is 17 going on 18, old enough to vote and drive a car very soon. Age of consent is 15/16 in many parts of Europe so pretty normal all things considered. And many parents in Europe reason that it's better that the kids see each other at home in a safe place rather than roam around who knows where. At least all parents involved know where the kids are and who they are with.

I didn't mean to give you the third emoji degree but thank you for explaining I think we need lots more and even more varied emojis considering this thread touches on every OT subject imaginable


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> 1. Jeez, so "Meghan" declined. Last I knew it took two, or maybe three if there's a surrogate, to parent a child. She would not be dealing with this issue were it not for the sperm donor with a real Title who shares this child with her. He gets more expendable with the passing of time. One article recently pointed out in pictures she is see striding ahead of him and is always at the forefront. And this is the man supposedly being paid mega bucks to coach others to excel, achieve, be happy???????
> 
> 2. This horse gotten beaten to death months ago, why roll the carcas down the hill again?
> 
> 3. I have visions of a stack of note cards on the desk of some Sunshine Sucks lackey with possible topics to feed the Media about the Malignant one, each morning the stack gets shuffled and whatever turns up is the topic of the day, a notation is made of the date and it goes back in the pile to be reshuffled, but if pulled too soon, the next card gets drawn and on and on it goes.


Does anyone remember the game MadLibs?  You filled in the word to make the funny story?  Somehow I see this with your #3 comment.









						Diva Girl Mad Libs – Mad Libs
					






					www.madlibs.com


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> Did anyone else happen to notice this girl, Nikki, on his other side also has her arm linked through his?? That just seems a little too “cozy” for me at that age


Yes, I'm side eyeing Megs, her friend and the tour guide grinning like a fool.


----------



## bag-mania

Check this out. They are blaming bots as being a coordinated campaign of hate against Meghan. Because they cannot think of any reason why anyone wouldn't like her.

“There’s no motive,” he said, comparing the anti-Meghan campaign to other disinformation and harassment campaigns on Twitter such as the #StopTheSteal movement to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election or the campaign to remove actor Amber Heard from the upcoming _Aquaman_ sequel as a result of abuse allegations made against her by ex-husband Johnny Depp. “Are these people who hate her? Is it racism? Are they trying to hurt [Harry and Meghan’s] credibility? Your guess is as good as ours.”

In the report, Bot Sentinel includes examples of tweets from this group of 83 users that violate Twitter’s terms of service against targeted harassment. BuzzFeed News received an advance copy of the Bot Sentinel report and the list of users identified within it and found hundreds of additional tweets that violate Twitter’s rules.









						Twitter Data Has Revealed A Coordinated Campaign Of Hate Against Meghan Markle
					

A concentrated set of users drive 70% of the hate content targeting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a new analysis found.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## Chanbal

Need to catch up on many posts. In the meantime, here is an interesting comment on Ginger Prince of Netfl*x:


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> ...
> For me, nothing really blew my mind, my initial reaction was to raise an eyebrow. To me,  it seemed odd the teen‘s gf would not live in her own house and then it seemed really odd the mom would hide from her son and his gf.  Of course, with all that has happened, nothing should seem odd any more. Maybe I didn’t read your post correctly ??


I see you saw my reply to Hermès Zen, I forgot to add you to the reply but it was for you as well. My friend hiding out was a bit of joke, but that's how she felt because as it's the son's first gf they were all feeling a bit awkward during the gf's first visits. And as parents easily embarrass their teenagers (according to teenagers), she was just trying to give her son some space.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wrong thread!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Does anyone remember the game MadLibs?  You filled in the word to make the funny story?  Somehow I see this with your #3 comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diva Girl Mad Libs – Mad Libs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.madlibs.com


gracekelly,

Yes, hadn’t thought of it in years, but you’re right! Maybe my subconscious?

Her whole media operation seems like a game.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Titles not given to her, so:

_








						Meghan title row explodes but 'there's nothing to strip from her'
					

MEGHAN Markle's title is once again at the centre of a row following her recent involvement in US politics - but a constitutional expert has claimed there is "nothing to strip from her".




					www.express.co.uk
				



Drawing on her status as a mother-of-two, Meghan penned a campaign piece calling to ensure that millions of American families can access guaranteed paid leave. Last week, the 40-year-old issued a letter to US congressional leaders to advocate for paid leave for all parents, on Sussex headed paper and signed with Meghan’s Duchess title.
The letter resulted in demands from many including ********** Congressman Jason Smith for Meghan to be stripped of her title for involving herself with US politics, as traditionally there is an expectation that Royal Family members are politically neutral.

However, the former US actress obtained her Duchess title through her 2018 marriage to Prince Harry, 37, and he would have to lose his status too in order for the couple to both be stripped of the peerages, unless in the event of divorce or an Act of Parliament. 

Constitutional expert Iain MacMarthanne previously told Express.co.uk: "By convention, royals are expected to be politically neutral, thus respecting their constitutional positions.

"Like all conventions, there is much flexibility as to what is, and what is not, acceptable territory to become involved in, and the further away any royal is from succeeding to the crown the greater the latitude given."

He added: "There has become a fashion of late that anyone who oversteps a subjective mark, and who holds a title, should be stripped of it. Easier said than done.

"In the instance of the Duchess of Sussex no laws have been broken, conventions are there to be tested, but above all else, suggestions that the *Duchess could be stripped of her title is to assume it was given to her.*

"This is not the case. The Duchess holds her styles and titles as a *courtesy, derived from her husband*. In effect, there is nothing to strip from her, she is at liberty not to use these titles and could, should she prefer, be known by her pre-marital name."_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Check this out. They are blaming bots as being a coordinated campaign of hate against Meghan. Because they cannot think of any reason why anyone wouldn't like her.
> 
> “There’s no motive,” he said, comparing the anti-Meghan campaign to other disinformation and harassment campaigns on Twitter such as the #StopTheSteal movement to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election or the campaign to remove actor Amber Heard from the upcoming _Aquaman_ sequel as a result of abuse allegations made against her by ex-husband Johnny Depp. “Are these people who hate her? Is it racism? Are they trying to hurt [Harry and Meghan’s] credibility? Your guess is as good as ours.”
> 
> In the report, Bot Sentinel includes examples of tweets from this group of 83 users that violate Twitter’s terms of service against targeted harassment. BuzzFeed News received an advance copy of the Bot Sentinel report and the list of users identified within it and found hundreds of additional tweets that violate Twitter’s rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter Data Has Revealed A Coordinated Campaign Of Hate Against Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> A concentrated set of users drive 70% of the hate content targeting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a new analysis found.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


The CEO of Bot Sentinel claims that he posted in support of Methane, and then received hate messages which alerted him to the hate campaign against her. It's quite funny that a CEO of a data analysis company is so clueless about the extreme like/dislike which has been around for a long time. 

“This campaign comes from people who know how to manipulate the algorithms, manipulate Twitter, stay under the wire to avoid detection and suspension,” he said. “*This level of complexity comes from people who know how to do this stuff, who are paid to do this stuff.*”

Which means, it comes from people not unlike those experts hired by his company. Besides, wasn't there a report earlier that there was an army of bots which amplify positive messages about Duchess Sucky? So it's a Bot vs Bot situation? He really should do a balanced report about how both armies of bots are engaging each other.

I'd venture to guess that Sunshine Sucks is playing both ends of the spectrum. There was a report that they specialize in online reputation rehab, so they definitely have the skills. If there is good publicity, it reflects well on her. If there is bad publicity, Methane gets to cry victim. Win-win.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So that is Andrew sorted.  Now, what to do about the dastardly duo?


_Prince Andrew will be pulled from all next year's Platinum Jubilee events, according to reports _
_The Duke of York 'will not appear with the Queen on the Buckingham Palace balcony for an RAF flypast'_
_It comes after a US court scheduled his bombshell sex abuse case to clash with the celebrations_
_The Platinum Jubilee celebrations will mark what will be his mother the Queen's 70th year on the throne_
_Organisers are also reportedly  trying to establish what to do with Harry and Meghan during the Platinum Jubilee events, which will include street parties, a live televised gig and lighting of beacons across the UK.









						Andrew 'will be PULLED from all next year's Platinum Jubilee events'
					

The Duke of York, who has stepped down from royal duties, will not even appear with the sovereign and senior royals on the Buckingham Palace balcony for an RAF flypast during next year's events.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So that is Andrew sorted.  Now, what to do about the dastardly duo?
> 
> 
> _Prince Andrew will be pulled from all next year's Platinum Jubilee events, according to reports _
> _The Duke of York 'will not appear with the Queen on the Buckingham Palace balcony for an RAF flypast'_
> _It comes after a US court scheduled his bombshell sex abuse case to clash with the celebrations_
> _The Platinum Jubilee celebrations will mark what will be his mother the Queen's 70th year on the throne_
> _Organisers are also reportedly  trying to establish what to do with Harry and Meghan during the Platinum Jubilee events, which will include street parties, a live televised gig and lighting of beacons across the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew 'will be PULLED from all next year's Platinum Jubilee events'
> 
> 
> The Duke of York, who has stepped down from royal duties, will not even appear with the sovereign and senior royals on the Buckingham Palace balcony for an RAF flypast during next year's events.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I feel sorry for QE, she looks a little frail. Randy Andy and Friar 6 should graciously excuse themselves from the Jubilee celebrations.


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Yes, I'm side eyeing Megs, her friend and the tour guide grinning like a fool.


To be fair, the friend looks rather uncomfortable. She was likely following a suggestion from someone else to link arms for the photo. The body language of both girls is very different imo.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *I feel sorry for QE, she looks a little frail*. Randy Andy and Friar 6 should graciously excuse themselves from the Jubilee celebrations.



Losing her husband, all the family drama, and just being in her 90s is going to take its toll. In a way I’m surprised she looks as well as she does with all she’s had to deal with.


----------



## Chanbal

Came across this intriguing blog that claims Friar 6 and wife need some change. 


What’s interesting about my favorite controversial ex-royals, Meghan Markle & Prince Harry, is that they seem to have 90 different job titles and yet *no one knows exactly what they do besides show up in heavy coats in 80 degree New York weather and take photos at events that you wouldn’t associate them wit*h. 

The hot gossip as of late that has been going around nowadays is that *Meghan & Harry are not doing so well with money.* My source alleges that *they don’t pay their staff and that they’re “drowning in debt.” *

*IN DEBT AFTER THE BIRTHDAY CAMPAIGN?*
Let’s go back in time and talk about Meghan’s uneventful 40x40 birthday campaign. 
Her team sent out a bunch of birthday merch to celebrities, but many of the celebrities supposedly did not cooperate. My source tells me that her team sent the birthday merch to the likes of Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Katy Perry, Nicole Kidman, Lady Gaga, Stella McCartney, Jennifer Lopez, Jennifer Aniston, and Jennifer Garner. Other high-profile women included Hoda Kotb and Savannah Guthrie. 
*And yet… nobody supported her campaign or posted about it the way celebrities sometimes post about PR packages that they receive*.

Turns out that supposedly, *she had so much merchandise made from that campaign, it didn’t actually sell and the company that created the merch wants an ROI — a return of investment. *

This is information that was popularized on the royal.archeholes Instagram account, but my source elaborated on it for me.

“*She sent it to everyone in Hollywood hoping that they would wear it and compliment her for a pathetic initiative that doesn’t even make any sense*. My friend says that *they’re running through money like water. Half of the things are Meghan’s ideas and she always convinced Harry that her scheme ‘plans’ will pay off.*” 









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Struggle With.... Finances? The Illusion of Connection — EXPOSINGSMG
					

When it comes to talking about money in regards to big names or public figures, everyone always assumes that these public figures have an unlimited amount because they compare these public figures to… THEMSELVES!




					www.exposingsmg.com


----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> Came across this intriguing blog that claims Friar 6 and wife need some change.
> View attachment 5233518
> 
> What’s interesting about my favorite controversial ex-royals, Meghan Markle & Prince Harry, is that they seem to have 90 different job titles and yet *no one knows exactly what they do besides show up in heavy coats in 80 degree New York weather and take photos at events that you wouldn’t associate them wit*h.
> 
> The hot gossip as of late that has been going around nowadays is that *Meghan & Harry are not doing so well with money.* My source alleges that *they don’t pay their staff and that they’re “drowning in debt.” *
> 
> *IN DEBT AFTER THE BIRTHDAY CAMPAIGN?*
> Let’s go back in time and talk about Meghan’s uneventful 40x40 birthday campaign.
> Her team sent out a bunch of birthday merch to celebrities, but many of the celebrities supposedly did not cooperate. My source tells me that her team sent the birthday merch to the likes of Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Katy Perry, Nicole Kidman, Lady Gaga, Stella McCartney, Jennifer Lopez, Jennifer Aniston, and Jennifer Garner. Other high-profile women included Hoda Kotb and Savannah Guthrie.
> *And yet… nobody supported her campaign or posted about it the way celebrities sometimes post about PR packages that they receive*.
> 
> Turns out that supposedly, *she had so much merchandise made from that campaign, it didn’t actually sell and the company that created the merch wants an ROI — a return of investment. *
> 
> This is information that was popularized on the royal.archeholes Instagram account, but my source elaborated on it for me.
> 
> “*She sent it to everyone in Hollywood hoping that they would wear it and compliment her for a pathetic initiative that doesn’t even make any sense*. My friend says that *they’re running through money like water. Half of the things are Meghan’s ideas and she always convinced Harry that her scheme ‘plans’ will pay off.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Struggle With.... Finances? The Illusion of Connection — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> When it comes to talking about money in regards to big names or public figures, everyone always assumes that these public figures have an unlimited amount because they compare these public figures to… THEMSELVES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com



Mordor and Handbag have a LOT of expenses, priority is to their PR people though to keep them current. Even with “lucrative” deals with Netflix and Spotify, if they don’t deliver the goods, their sign up bonuses won’t be enough for their mansion and lifestyle. Doesn’t matter with their Chimpo job titles either. They need a REAL racket and they’re not equipped for that.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> The CEO of Bot Sentinel claims that he posted in support of Methane, and then received hate messages which alerted him to the hate campaign against her. It's quite funny that a CEO of a data analysis company is so clueless about the extreme like/dislike which has been around for a long time.
> 
> “This campaign comes from people who know how to manipulate the algorithms, manipulate Twitter, stay under the wire to avoid detection and suspension,” he said. “*This level of complexity comes from people who know how to do this stuff, who are paid to do this stuff.*”
> 
> Which means, it comes from people not unlike those experts hired by his company. Besides, wasn't there a report earlier that there was an army of bots which amplify positive messages about Duchess Sucky? So it's a Bot vs Bot situation? He really should do a balanced report about how both armies of bots are engaging each other.
> 
> I'd venture to guess that Sunshine Sucks is playing both ends of the spectrum. There was a report that they specialize in online reputation rehab, so they definitely have the skills. If there is good publicity, it reflects well on her. If there is bad publicity, Methane gets to cry victim. Win-win.



I posted this article before, but I thinks it's worth reviewing considering the above accusations that could be in retaliation to *Maclean's* 2019 article regarding Meghan's bot army. 

*Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane'*
A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals 

Josh Feldberg’s dive into the divisive world of royal social media began after he read a story detailing “how royal correspondents were under attack,” he recounts from London. In particular, the journalists who write about the royals for major British outlets such as the _Telegraph_ and the _Express_ were finding themselves under assault on social media for virtually anything they wrote about Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex.

Accusations of racism, nativism and bullying were being flung with abandon on Twitter. “At least one of my colleagues has called in the police after threats were made to relatives; another was told she deserved to have acid thrown in her face,” Richard Palmer of the _Daily Express_ wrote last July. “We have all faced unpleasant and unfounded accusations of racism towards Meghan.”

Feldberg was curious. He’d never thought about royals as a hotbed for online trolling. But as the the head of digital at 89up, a European consulting firm that has done social media research for a ground-breaking British parliamentary committee investigation into disinformation and fake news, he was the right person to see if there really was anything suspicious in the Meghan Markle Twitter community. His findings were first reported in the _Telegraph_ by Camilla Tominey and Hannah Furness, the paper’s royal correspondent. Tominey, a veteran royal reporter, has been the focus of what 89up called an “orchestrated attack by this network” he discovered.

“The whole thing is a bit insane, really,” Feldberg tells _Maclean’s_. Using data tools and software to track keywords such as “Duchess of Sussex” and hashtags including #Markle, he and his colleagues were able to extract relevant tweets, then analyze them for interconnections. With 89up CEO Mike Harris, Feldberg detailed their analysis in a report, “Is there a Duchess of Sussex bot network?”


89up found “1,103 highly-connected Twitter accounts in a network who share content about the Duchess of Sussex obsessively.” While very few of those accounts appear to be entirely automated—classic bot accounts—Feldberg’s report found that “many have unusual features, suggesting there could be collusion or automation behind some of the accounts.” Many appear to be cyborgs—part-automated, part-human accounts that automatically retweet like-minded messages and also respond to keywords and phrases. One person could run multiple cyborg accounts, making it hard for a casual user to separate real from fake accounts.

Anonymity is a common feature of accounts in the Meghan hive. While royal correspondents and most major royal watchers have verified Twitter accounts, these fake accounts don’t have real profile photos or names. They often don’t have a large number of followers, but they do have lots and lots of interconnections with each other. “They are very heavily connected,” Feldberg explains. “They very much follow each other. It’s a dense network. They retweet each other a lot; the vast majority of tweets are retweets.”

Feldberg usually sees such suspicious networks in political social media. “It’s just the first time I’ve seen it with the royals,” he says. 89up’s analysis appears to confirm what many full-time royal watchers have suspected, and have been quietly talking to each other about, in recent months—that there is co-ordination behind the “pro-Meghan” attacks. Write about fashion—get attacked. Write about the staff turnover among Harry and Meghan’s staff—batten down the hatches. It’s a disturbing trend that has been growing in intensity and vitriol recently.

In November, _Maclean’s_ wrote about the wars between stans (a combo of stalker and fan) of Meghan and her sister-in-law, Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, that had turned social media into a cesspool of hatred. Even then, the coordination among Meghan fans was noticeable.

“I have witnessed what amounts to be roving Twitter gangs that find a tweet/blog post about Meghan and kind of rally the troops and stoke up the fires and suddenly you have a hail storm of abuse flowing at you,” explains Jane Barr, who runs the From Berkshire to Buckingham fashion site, which focuses on Kate. “For me, it is very frustrating to write a nuanced analysis and have people just take a black-and-white interpretation and run wild with it.”

Sometimes a story or tweet would be ignored for a few days, then, without warning, an avalanche of negative attacks would begin. One royal watcher went through 89up’s list of the top interconnected Meghan hive accounts and realized she’d blocked almost every one of them for abusive language.

The nastiness isn’t isolated to royal watchers. Even the royal family’s own feeds have been infected. The royal household took action, releasing social media community guidelines and reserving the right to block users whose comments are abusive, offensive or promote discrimination, among other rules.

In the 89up report, a sample of 3,000 tweets from that Meghan hive of 1,103 accounts revealed that most were from the United States, with Britain and Canada a very distant second and third. But Feldberg points out that anyone can put fake location information on their profile, noting that Curaçao is fourth on the list, followed by Zimbabwe, which are hardly two hot spots of royal Twitter action: “If you’re going to hide, you would put Zimbabwe” on your profile.

Feldberg isn’t discounting the possibility that some super fans might be caught up in the Meghan hive. As he wrote in the report, “It is not impossible that there is just a fanatical community of people online who are tweeting all day content about the duchess, but the scale of the community and the amount of content they are sharing should make us suspicious.”

The big question is why. Feldberg isn’t sure, though the suspicious nature of the linked accounts suggests a more nefarious reason. As he wrote in the report, “The prevalence of strange Twitter user names and the overlap between accounts that tweet primarily about politics but also tweet extensively about the duchess could point to an orchestrated campaign to manipulate public opinion by an organization or state.”

He wonders if they could be building up followings over time, engaging with real people across the political divide, then, when they want to focus on a particular campaign (political or social), they change the subject to the one they really want to focus on. It’s a classic bot/troll disinformation and destabilization strategy that has been seen before, particular from Russians, who are attacking institutions across the West.

A “well-coordinated network of Russian troll accounts” that two professors at Clemson University monitored in the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. election were “much subtler, often more palatable and always seemingly more organic” than most thought, they wrote in the _Washington Post_. “They are remarkably astute in exploiting questions of culture and identity and are frequently among the first to push new divisive conversations.” And they can be quite successful in tailoring messages to different target audiences. In June 2017, a tweet by a troll account participating in Black Lives Matter gained more than two million likes and retweets for a subtle dig at Melania *****: “Daily reminder that the most educated First Lady in American history is a black woman with two Ivy League degrees from Harvard and Princeton.”

While it’s too early to know the ultimate aims, discrediting the media and national institutions, such as the monarchy, would be a logical outcome of such campaigns. And there is a tantalizing hint in the 89up report: “The fourth most shared account, Lewisno1fan, is a left-wing fan of Lewis Hamilton who has posted no fewer than 1,596 tweets about the duchess in the last year. This account in recent weeks has been downplaying the anti-Semitism crisis in the Labour party, yesterday was defending controversial Labour MP Chris Williamson, frequently shares tweets from _Russia Today_ the state broadcaster and has shared Skripal conspiracy theories” regarding the poisoning by Russian agents of dissident Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Britain.

Time is needed to figure out more characteristics of the network Feldberg found. He is curious how that network of 1,103 Meghan accounts will evolve and change, especially as Britain may be heading towards an election or another referendum. “In difficult times, it could be an interesting test case.”


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Came across this intriguing blog that claims Friar 6 and wife need some change.
> View attachment 5233518
> 
> What’s interesting about my favorite controversial ex-royals, Meghan Markle & Prince Harry, is that they seem to have 90 different job titles and yet *no one knows exactly what they do besides show up in heavy coats in 80 degree New York weather and take photos at events that you wouldn’t associate them wit*h.
> 
> The hot gossip as of late that has been going around nowadays is that *Meghan & Harry are not doing so well with money.* My source alleges that *they don’t pay their staff and that they’re “drowning in debt.” *
> 
> *IN DEBT AFTER THE BIRTHDAY CAMPAIGN?*
> Let’s go back in time and talk about Meghan’s uneventful 40x40 birthday campaign.
> Her team sent out a bunch of birthday merch to celebrities, but many of the celebrities supposedly did not cooperate. My source tells me that her team sent the birthday merch to the likes of Taylor Swift, Beyonce, Katy Perry, Nicole Kidman, Lady Gaga, Stella McCartney, Jennifer Lopez, Jennifer Aniston, and Jennifer Garner. Other high-profile women included Hoda Kotb and Savannah Guthrie.
> *And yet… nobody supported her campaign or posted about it the way celebrities sometimes post about PR packages that they receive*.
> 
> Turns out that supposedly, *she had so much merchandise made from that campaign, it didn’t actually sell and the company that created the merch wants an ROI — a return of investment. *
> 
> This is information that was popularized on the royal.archeholes Instagram account, but my source elaborated on it for me.
> 
> “*She sent it to everyone in Hollywood hoping that they would wear it and compliment her for a pathetic initiative that doesn’t even make any sense*. My friend says that *they’re running through money like water. Half of the things are Meghan’s ideas and she always convinced Harry that her scheme ‘plans’ will pay off.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Struggle With.... Finances? The Illusion of Connection — EXPOSINGSMG
> 
> 
> When it comes to talking about money in regards to big names or public figures, everyone always assumes that these public figures have an unlimited amount because they compare these public figures to… THEMSELVES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.exposingsmg.com



If even a single word of this is true, then M&H should have cranked out a Netflix production by now in order to salvage the contract. As for the 40x40 debacle, it's credible they sent it out to various A-listers, but only McCarthy took the bait, and insulted the Queen by doing a parody to boot. It's highly doubtful they sent it to only McCarthy, everybody else ignored them. They'll glom onto anything and give it a go for five minutes, hence "90 different job titles".  I guess it's time for another olive oil lemon cake and another wreath. With an autumn twist. See how it sells.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> If even a single word of this is true, then M&H should have cranked out a Netflix production by now in order to salvage the contract. As for the 40x40 debacle, it's credible they sent it out to various A-listers, but only McCarthy took the bait, and insulted the Queen by doing a parody to boot. It's highly doubtful they sent it to only McCarthy, everybody else ignored them. They'll glom onto anything and give it a go for five minutes, hence "90 different job titles".  I guess it's time for another olive oil lemon cake and another wreath. With an autumn twist. See how it sells.


I think McCarthy was paid and she looked upon this as just another gig.


----------



## xincinsin

For the 40x40, did anyone get mentored in the end? I don't recall any buzz about excited and grateful people talking about A-listers who mentored them for 40 minutes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Check this out. They are blaming bots as being a coordinated campaign of hate against Meghan. Because they cannot think of any reason why anyone wouldn't like her.
> 
> “There’s no motive,” he said, comparing the anti-Meghan campaign to other disinformation and harassment campaigns on Twitter such as the #StopTheSteal movement to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election or the campaign to remove actor Amber Heard from the upcoming _Aquaman_ sequel as a result of abuse allegations made against her by ex-husband Johnny Depp. “Are these people who hate her? Is it racism? Are they trying to hurt [Harry and Meghan’s] credibility? Your guess is as good as ours.”
> 
> In the report, Bot Sentinel includes examples of tweets from this group of 83 users that violate Twitter’s terms of service against targeted harassment. BuzzFeed News received an advance copy of the Bot Sentinel report and the list of users identified within it and found hundreds of additional tweets that violate Twitter’s rules.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter Data Has Revealed A Coordinated Campaign Of Hate Against Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> A concentrated set of users drive 70% of the hate content targeting the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a new analysis found.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com



I saw that on FB and wondered why they won't look into Raptor's bot army and her violent stans.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _"This is not the case. The Duchess holds her styles and titles as a *courtesy, derived from her husband*. In effect, there is nothing to strip from her, she is at liberty not to use these titles and could, should she prefer, be known by her pre-marital name."_



  

She would have the titles tattooed on her foreheard if she could.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So that is Andrew sorted.  Now, what to do about the dastardly duo?
> 
> 
> _Prince Andrew will be pulled from all next year's Platinum Jubilee events, according to reports _
> _The Duke of York 'will not appear with the Queen on the Buckingham Palace balcony for an RAF flypast'_
> _It comes after a US court scheduled his bombshell sex abuse case to clash with the celebrations_
> _The Platinum Jubilee celebrations will mark what will be his mother the Queen's 70th year on the throne_
> _Organisers are also reportedly  trying to establish what to do with Harry and Meghan during the Platinum Jubilee events, which will include street parties, a live televised gig and lighting of beacons across the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew 'will be PULLED from all next year's Platinum Jubilee events'
> 
> 
> The Duke of York, who has stepped down from royal duties, will not even appear with the sovereign and senior royals on the Buckingham Palace balcony for an RAF flypast during next year's events.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Why would they need to be there. I don't get invited to my former employers' bashes.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they need to be there. I don't get invited to my former employers' bashes.


This x1000.
As I recall they left, in a fit of pique and unpleasant backhanded comments despite expressions of sorrow and good wishes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I posted this article before, but I thinks it's worth reviewing considering the above accusations that could be in retaliation to *Maclean's* 2019 article regarding Meghan's bot army.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane'*
> A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals
> 
> Josh Feldberg’s dive into the divisive world of royal social media began after he read a story detailing “how royal correspondents were under attack,” he recounts from London. In particular, the journalists who write about the royals for major British outlets such as the _Telegraph_ and the _Express_ were finding themselves under assault on social media for virtually anything they wrote about Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Accusations of racism, nativism and bullying were being flung with abandon on Twitter. “At least one of my colleagues has called in the police after threats were made to relatives; another was told she deserved to have acid thrown in her face,” Richard Palmer of the _Daily Express_ wrote last July. “We have all faced unpleasant and unfounded accusations of racism towards Meghan.”
> 
> Feldberg was curious. He’d never thought about royals as a hotbed for online trolling. But as the the head of digital at 89up, a European consulting firm that has done social media research for a ground-breaking British parliamentary committee investigation into disinformation and fake news, he was the right person to see if there really was anything suspicious in the Meghan Markle Twitter community. His findings were first reported in the _Telegraph_ by Camilla Tominey and Hannah Furness, the paper’s royal correspondent. Tominey, a veteran royal reporter, has been the focus of what 89up called an “orchestrated attack by this network” he discovered.
> 
> “The whole thing is a bit insane, really,” Feldberg tells _Maclean’s_. Using data tools and software to track keywords such as “Duchess of Sussex” and hashtags including #Markle, he and his colleagues were able to extract relevant tweets, then analyze them for interconnections. With 89up CEO Mike Harris, Feldberg detailed their analysis in a report, “Is there a Duchess of Sussex bot network?”
> 
> 
> 89up found “1,103 highly-connected Twitter accounts in a network who share content about the Duchess of Sussex obsessively.” While very few of those accounts appear to be entirely automated—classic bot accounts—Feldberg’s report found that “many have unusual features, suggesting there could be collusion or automation behind some of the accounts.” Many appear to be cyborgs—part-automated, part-human accounts that automatically retweet like-minded messages and also respond to keywords and phrases. One person could run multiple cyborg accounts, making it hard for a casual user to separate real from fake accounts.
> 
> Anonymity is a common feature of accounts in the Meghan hive. While royal correspondents and most major royal watchers have verified Twitter accounts, these fake accounts don’t have real profile photos or names. They often don’t have a large number of followers, but they do have lots and lots of interconnections with each other. “They are very heavily connected,” Feldberg explains. “They very much follow each other. It’s a dense network. They retweet each other a lot; the vast majority of tweets are retweets.”
> 
> Feldberg usually sees such suspicious networks in political social media. “It’s just the first time I’ve seen it with the royals,” he says. 89up’s analysis appears to confirm what many full-time royal watchers have suspected, and have been quietly talking to each other about, in recent months—that there is co-ordination behind the “pro-Meghan” attacks. Write about fashion—get attacked. Write about the staff turnover among Harry and Meghan’s staff—batten down the hatches. It’s a disturbing trend that has been growing in intensity and vitriol recently.
> 
> In November, _Maclean’s_ wrote about the wars between stans (a combo of stalker and fan) of Meghan and her sister-in-law, Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, that had turned social media into a cesspool of hatred. Even then, the coordination among Meghan fans was noticeable.
> 
> “I have witnessed what amounts to be roving Twitter gangs that find a tweet/blog post about Meghan and kind of rally the troops and stoke up the fires and suddenly you have a hail storm of abuse flowing at you,” explains Jane Barr, who runs the From Berkshire to Buckingham fashion site, which focuses on Kate. “For me, it is very frustrating to write a nuanced analysis and have people just take a black-and-white interpretation and run wild with it.”
> 
> Sometimes a story or tweet would be ignored for a few days, then, without warning, an avalanche of negative attacks would begin. One royal watcher went through 89up’s list of the top interconnected Meghan hive accounts and realized she’d blocked almost every one of them for abusive language.
> 
> The nastiness isn’t isolated to royal watchers. Even the royal family’s own feeds have been infected. The royal household took action, releasing social media community guidelines and reserving the right to block users whose comments are abusive, offensive or promote discrimination, among other rules.
> 
> In the 89up report, a sample of 3,000 tweets from that Meghan hive of 1,103 accounts revealed that most were from the United States, with Britain and Canada a very distant second and third. But Feldberg points out that anyone can put fake location information on their profile, noting that Curaçao is fourth on the list, followed by Zimbabwe, which are hardly two hot spots of royal Twitter action: “If you’re going to hide, you would put Zimbabwe” on your profile.
> 
> Feldberg isn’t discounting the possibility that some super fans might be caught up in the Meghan hive. As he wrote in the report, “It is not impossible that there is just a fanatical community of people online who are tweeting all day content about the duchess, but the scale of the community and the amount of content they are sharing should make us suspicious.”
> 
> The big question is why. Feldberg isn’t sure, though the suspicious nature of the linked accounts suggests a more nefarious reason. As he wrote in the report, “The prevalence of strange Twitter user names and the overlap between accounts that tweet primarily about politics but also tweet extensively about the duchess could point to an orchestrated campaign to manipulate public opinion by an organization or state.”
> 
> He wonders if they could be building up followings over time, engaging with real people across the political divide, then, when they want to focus on a particular campaign (political or social), they change the subject to the one they really want to focus on. It’s a classic bot/troll disinformation and destabilization strategy that has been seen before, particular from Russians, who are attacking institutions across the West.
> 
> A “well-coordinated network of Russian troll accounts” that two professors at Clemson University monitored in the lead-up to the 2018 U.S. election were “much subtler, often more palatable and always seemingly more organic” than most thought, they wrote in the _Washington Post_. “They are remarkably astute in exploiting questions of culture and identity and are frequently among the first to push new divisive conversations.” And they can be quite successful in tailoring messages to different target audiences. In June 2017, a tweet by a troll account participating in Black Lives Matter gained more than two million likes and retweets for a subtle dig at Melania *****: “Daily reminder that the most educated First Lady in American history is a black woman with two Ivy League degrees from Harvard and Princeton.”
> 
> While it’s too early to know the ultimate aims, discrediting the media and national institutions, such as the monarchy, would be a logical outcome of such campaigns. And there is a tantalizing hint in the 89up report: “The fourth most shared account, Lewisno1fan, is a left-wing fan of Lewis Hamilton who has posted no fewer than 1,596 tweets about the duchess in the last year. This account in recent weeks has been downplaying the anti-Semitism crisis in the Labour party, yesterday was defending controversial Labour MP Chris Williamson, frequently shares tweets from _Russia Today_ the state broadcaster and has shared Skripal conspiracy theories” regarding the poisoning by Russian agents of dissident Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Britain.
> 
> Time is needed to figure out more characteristics of the network Feldberg found. He is curious how that network of 1,103 Meghan accounts will evolve and change, especially as Britain may be heading towards an election or another referendum. “In difficult times, it could be an interesting test case.”


I did not read the whole article but it is  plausible - I am in denial 
But wait a moment, wasnt bad behaviour on the internet a specific cause for  6 & M?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> To be fair, the friend looks rather uncomfortable. She was likely following a suggestion from someone else to link arms for the photo. The body language of both girls is very different imo.


I think we need the expert opinion of El Jesús Enrrrique RRRosa!

I just have a sense that they were two of a feather, even if one was more feathery (? ). It's something about the look in their eyes, a sort of knowing look that comes with too much adult experience and feeling the power you can exude as a woman over men too soon. I can see how a narc would thoroughly enjoy this "power" from early on. Just compare to the adorable goofs on the ends in the pic, that's a lot more appropriate for a 14/15 year old imo.

 Some kids are just a bad influence on otherwise good kids. I can imagine Megs was.


----------



## charlottawill

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think we need the expert opinion of El Jesús Enrrrique RRRosa!
> 
> I just have a sense that they were two of a feather, even if one was more feathery (? ). It's something about the look in their eyes, a sort of knowing look that comes with too much adult experience and feeling the power you can exude as a woman over men too soon. I can see how a narc would thoroughly enjoy this "power" from early on. Just compare to the adorable goofs on the ends in the pic, that's a lot more appropriate for a 14/15 year old imo.
> 
> Some kids are just a bad influence on otherwise good kids. I can imagine Megs was.


I got the same impression, that MM and her friend on the opposite side of the guide looked much more mature than the girls on the ends.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they need to be there. I don't get invited to my former employers' bashes.



Apparently, the *balcony* appearance is a huge _thang_ in the royal world. Being seen front and center, next to the queen, supposedly boosts one’s reputation and standing in the world.

*Jubilees*
_Major anniversary of the monarch's coronation always ensure a little balcony action, but with a far smaller group. For the Queen's Silver Jubilee in 1977, which marked 25 years on the throne, there were just nine people present: the Queen, her husband, their four children, and her mother, sister, and cousin. For her Golden Jubilee (50 years) in 2002, it was a larger crowd, made up of her children plus their spouses and offspring.

The Diamond Jubilee (60 years) marked a stark contrast with the previous celebration; just five figures stood beside the monarch. With Prince Philip in the hospital, it was Prince Charles, Camilla Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince Harry taking center stage. The message was clear—here was the stripped-down future of the royal family. 






The Queen on the balcony alongside Charles and Camilla, William, Kate, and Harry at her Diamond Jubilee in 2012._








						Who Gets to Stand on the Buckingham Palace Balcony?
					

In honor of the upcoming Platinum Jubilee, we are taking a closer look at the iconic royal tradition.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				





Spoiler: Balcony: who stands where



*Who Gets to Stand on the Buckingham Palace Balcony?*
*In honor of the annual Trooping the Colour, we taking a closer look at the iconic royal tradition.*
By Marcia Moody
Jun 8, 2019




Getty Images
Later today, as part of this year's Trooping the Colour parade ceremony, various members of the Queen's family will join her up on the balcony at Buckingham Palace. This isn't just a casual family jaunt into the open air—there's a strict protocol about who gets an invite. And of course there's drama about who stands where.

*Who stands on the balcony?*
There's no fixed list of attendees, since the group is tailored to each occasion. It will however always include the monarch and his or her spouse (though Prince Philip did not attend last year), plus the first and second in line to the throne, along with their spouses. One steadfast rule is the familiar "no ring, no bring," so no boyfriends or girlfriends allowed. 

See who was up on the balcony last year below:

*More from Town & Country*
Darren Walker and Ava DuVernay
Watch: Darren Walker and Ava DuVernay
*Who started the tradition?*
As with many recent royal practices, this one was started by Queen Victoria. During the opening celebrations of the Great Exhibition in 1851, she was the first monarch to utilize the balcony as a way to greet her subjects. Seven years later she also instigated the family going out onto the balcony to acknowledge the crowds who had gathered for the wedding of her daughter Princess Victoria, and an iconic royal wedding tradition was born.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below




The royal family following George VI’s coronation. In the front on the left is a young Princess Elizabeth next to her sister, Margaret.
Getty Images
*Who stands where?*
The Queen usually stands in the centre of the balcony, unless it's a royal wedding, in which case the bride and groom take center stage. There are no designated spots for the different members of the family—so it's not a case of Prince Charles always being on the left, or Prince William always on the right—but on most occasions the first and second in line to the throne—Charles and William—plus their wives and children will always be grouped around the Queen.

*On which occasions do the family appear?*
The most regular—and the one with the largest group—is Trooping the Colour, the annual celebration of the sovereign's birthday, which is always held on a Saturday in June. After the Queen inspects her troops, she and her family process in carriages back to Buckingham Palace where they make their traditional balcony appearance. Invitees include descendants of the Queen, her sister and her cousins, plus their spouses. The group often tips the 30+ mark, and for the Queen's 90th birthday in 2016, there were over 40 family members gathered. 

*Weddings*
Ever since the wedding of Princess Victoria in 1858, it has been customary for royal brides and grooms to acknowledge the crowds below. The image of kissing newlyweds on the balcony has become so iconic, it is perhaps surprising to note that it has only happened on three occasions. 

Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer were the first to kiss for the crowds, followed by Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson—who joked around pretending they didn't hear the request, before obliging. On William and Kate's wedding day, they kissed twice as the crowds cheered wildly. 

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below




Will and Kate on their wedding day.
Getty Images
Not all royal couples end up on the balcony on their wedding day though, as some marry outside London. Prince Edward, Peter Phillips, and most recently Prince Harry chose to get married in St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, and Zara Phillips' wedding took place in Holyrood Abbey, Edinburgh. 

*Jubilees*
Major anniversary of the monarch's coronation always ensure a little balcony action, but with a far smaller group. For the Queen's Silver Jubilee in 1977, which marked 25 years on the throne, there were just nine people present: the Queen, her husband, their four children, and her mother, sister, and cousin. For her Golden Jubilee (50 years) in 2002, it was a larger crowd, made up of her children plus their spouses and offspring.

The Diamond Jubilee (60 years) marked a stark contrast with the previous celebration; just five figures stood beside the monarch. With Prince Philip in the hospital, it was Prince Charles, Camilla Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince Harry taking center stage. The message was clear—here was the stripped-down future of the royal family. 





The Queen on the balcony alongside Charles and Camilla, William, Kate, and Harry at her Diamond Jubilee in 2012.
Getty Images
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
*Coronations and Major State Occasions*
There have been less than a handful of balcony appearances following a coronation— and the most recent was of course that of the Queen's in 1953. She appeared on a jam-packed balcony with her attendants and her family, including a young Prince Charles. She was also present for her father King George VI's coronation appearance when she was 11. 

In times of war, a balcony appearance is sometimes deemed appropriate. It's a reminder that the monarch is not merely a ceremonial figurehead—the kings and queens are a potent national symbol for their people, and their appearance cements that relationship.

On August 4, 1914, when the UK officially went to war with Germany, King George V was called out onto the balcony three times by the crowds below, who were looking for reassurance from their head of state. 





Prime Minister Churchill with the royal family on the balcony.
Getty Images
To commemorate the end of World War II, Prime Minister Winston Churchill appeared alongside the King and Queen and their daughters, Princess Elizabeth and Princess Margaret. The family made eight appearances throughout the day, and during the final one, Elizabeth and Margaret slipped into the crowd to experience the celebrations with everyone else.

Marcia Moody Marcia Moody has been reporting on the Royal Family for six years, and is the author of Kate: A Biography and Harry: A Biography.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I did not read the whole article but it is  plausible - I am in denial
> But wait a moment, wasnt bad behaviour on the internet a specific cause for  6 & M?


It falls under the "do as I preach, not as I do" category. The Mistress of Misinformation and the Commissioner Against Online Misinformation - something is wrong with this picture.


----------



## sdkitty

Ooh...they re now in a thrive chapter according to Meghan
How Harry And Meghan Are Preparing For Their Next Chapter Of 'Visibility' (yahoo.com)


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Ooh...they re not in a thrive chapter according to Meghan
> How Harry And Meghan Are Preparing For Their Next Chapter Of 'Visibility' (yahoo.com)



Noooooo, nooooo, say it isn’t so. They have been _visible, _please, trust us, they have been visible. Our eyes do not need to see any more of them   and now, Scobie is baaaack. Ew.



_Bianca Betancourt
Tue, October 26, 2021,_

_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
_Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
_Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.

"They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
*"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooooo, nooooo, say it isn’t so. They have been _visible, _please, trust us, they have been visible. Our eyes do not need to see any more of them   and now, Scobie is baaaack. Ew.
> 
> 
> 
> _Bianca Betancourt
> Tue, October 26, 2021,_
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
> _Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
> _Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
> Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
> Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> "They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground," Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


they are annoying AF


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Norm.Core said:


> *Mordor* and Handbag have a LOT of expenses, priority is to their PR people though to keep them current. Even with “lucrative” deals with Netflix and Spotify, if they don’t deliver the goods, their sign up bonuses won’t be enough for their mansion and lifestyle. Doesn’t matter with their Chimpo job titles either. They need a REAL racket and they’re not equipped for that.


Thanks @Norm.Core for your #3 nickname, *Mordor*, from The Lord of the Rings which means Black Land or Land of Shadow that should then then translate into a person of darkness and shadow. So sad but probably true.
Congratulations and here is your #3 Gold Ribbon.


----------



## purseinsanity

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think we need the expert opinion of El Jesús Enrrrique RRRosa!
> 
> I just have a sense that they were two of a feather, even if one was more feathery (? ). It's something about the look in their eyes, a sort of knowing look that comes with too much adult experience and feeling the power you can exude as a woman over men too soon. I can see how a narc would thoroughly enjoy this "power" from early on. Just compare to the adorable goofs on the ends in the pic, that's a lot more appropriate for a 14/15 year old imo.
> 
> Some kids are just a bad influence on otherwise good kids. I can imagine Megs was.


It's the kind of maturity you don't really want to see in a child!


----------



## purseinsanity

oops


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I think we need the expert opinion of El Jesús Enrrrique RRRosa!
> 
> I just have a sense that they were two of a feather, even if one was more feathery (? ). It's something about the look in their eyes, a sort of knowing look that comes with too much adult experience and feeling the power you can exude as a woman over men too soon. I can see how a narc would thoroughly enjoy this "power" from early on. Just compare to the adorable goofs on the ends in the pic, that's a lot more appropriate for a 14/15 year old imo.
> 
> Some kids are just a bad influence on otherwise good kids. I can imagine Megs was.


Agree , we need Jesus Enrique Rosas to analyze this picture.   In the meantime, here are my 2 cents:
The friend (on the left, not 666) is the only one with the body slightly leaning away from the tour guide (like instinctively she wants to avoid the situation). She is putting her weight on the girl next to her, with whom she feels safe. She seems to be forcing a smile and pretending that she is fine with the situation, which is not an unusual reaction for a 15yo under peer pressure. I wonder if a certain 'bossy' girl said something like 'let's link arms for the picture'…


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apparently, the *balcony* appearance is a huge _thang_ in the royal world. Being seen front and center, next to the queen, supposedly boosts one’s reputation and standing in the world.
> 
> _The Diamond Jubilee (60 years) marked a stark contrast with the previous celebration; just five figures stood beside the monarch. With Prince Philip in the hospital, it was Prince Charles, Camilla Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince Harry taking center stage. _*The message was clear—here was the stripped-down future of the royal family. *
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> *The message was clear—here was the stripped-down future of the royal family.*


Hopefully the newest message shows a stripped down family without #6 and #666 on the balcony as well. 
Reminds me of her appearance on the balcony where she looked like she was tearing up because Haz told her to turn around.  Why was he in the back and she's towards the front again?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Agree , we need Jesus Enrique Rosas to analyze this picture. In the meantime, here are my 2 cents:
> The friend (on the left) is the only one with the body slightly leaning away from the tour guide (like instinctively she wants to avoid the situation). She is putting her weight on the girl next to her, with whom she feels safe. She seems to be forcing a smile and pretending that she is fine with the situation, which is not an unusual reaction for a 15yo under peer pressure.
> 
> View attachment 5233900


ITA.  These four girls don't look remotely the same age.  The one on the left looks like she's 12, the one on the far right looks about 13.  The one with her arm through his is leaning away and looks 15, while 666 looks the oldest and is literally snuggling into a grown, middle aged man, practically clawing his arm into her breast.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  These four girls don't look remotely the same age.  The one on the left looks like she's 12, the one on the far right looks about 13.  The one with her arm through his is leaning away and looks 15, while 666 looks the oldest and is literally snuggling into a grown, middle aged man, practically clawing his arm into her breast.


wonder where this over-confidence came from


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Ooh...they re now in a thrive chapter according to Meghan
> How Harry And Meghan Are Preparing For Their Next Chapter Of 'Visibility' (yahoo.com)


I don't what to click on this link. Here is the illustration for their propaganda articles:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't what to click on this link. Here is the illustration for their propaganda articles:
> View attachment 5233915



Reposting this:

_Bianca Betancourt
Tue, October 26, 2021,_

_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
_Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
_Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.

"They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
*"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wonder where this over-confidence came from



I think she came by it naturally. Some people are born believing they are God's gift to the world. She's a narc so she's probably been playing to the camera from early childhood.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  These four girls don't look remotely the same age.  The one on the left looks like she's 12, the one on the far right looks about 13.  The one with her arm through his is leaning away and looks 15, while 666 looks the oldest and is literally snuggling into a grown, middle aged man, practically clawing his arm into her breast.


It's very possible there is an age difference between the girls. Though, 666 is the only girl who seems to be having an improper posture and very happy with it imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> wonder where this over-confidence came from


Maybe from an overly proud and 'blind' father, who keeps telling his little princess that she is so much better than her brother, sister, friends, classmates, you name it. Does anyone remember the interview when he confesses that taking care of M as a baby and during her early years was the happiest time of his life?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I think she came by it naturally. Some people are born believing they are God's gift to the world. She's a narc so she's probably been playing to the camera from early childhood.


It could also have been fueled by her parents, making her believe that she was special. Of course you want to encourage and be supportive of your children, but they may have treated her as their "snowflake". It does sound like her father may have spoiled her and/or been manipulated by her - had him wrapped around her finger as they say.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooooo, nooooo, say it isn’t so. They have been _visible, _please, trust us, they have been visible. Our eyes do not need to see any more of them   and now, Scobie is baaaack. Ew.
> 
> 
> 
> _Bianca Betancourt
> Tue, October 26, 2021,_
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
> _Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
> _Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
> Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
> Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> *"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


Didn’t they try this “new era of visibility” crap a month or two ago?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It could also have been fueled by her parents, making her believe that she was special. Of course you want to encourage and be supportive of your children, but they may have treated her as their "snowflake". It does sound like her father may have spoiled her and/or been manipulated by her - had him wrapped around her finger as they say.



True, she was certainly spoiled. Some kids know how to manipulate people to get their way at a very young age. I think Meghan was one of those.

ETA: And some children of divorced parents learn to play the parents off of each other to get what they want out of them as well. Wouldn't surprise me if poor 'lil Meghan played the "I'm so deprived" guilt card with daddy many times.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> It falls under the "do as I preach, not as I do" category. The *Mistress of Misinformation* and the *Commissioner Against Online Misinformation* - something is wrong with this picture.


 Thanks @xincinsin for your #18 Mistress of Misinformation and #19 Commissioner Against Online Misinformation. Congratulations and please accept your The List#18 and The List#19 Ribbons.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Hopefully the newest message shows a stripped down family without #6 and #666 on the balcony as well.
> Reminds me of her appearance on the balcony where she looked like she was tearing up because Haz told her to turn around.  *Why was he in the back and she's towards the front again*?


She was probably standing next to him, but has a habit of sneaking to the front. Oh I forgot, she probably tapped him on the back and he let her get in front of him.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> For the 40x40, did anyone get mentored in the end? I don't recall any buzz about excited and grateful people talking about A-listers who mentored them for 40 minutes.



Right. If anyone was ever mentored it would have been spun as that woman's life changing event all thanks to Meghan.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She would have the titles tattooed on her foreheard if she could.



Give her time  .


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute. "Next chapter of visibility"??????  Bbbbbbbbbbut I thought they came to the United States for PRIVACY.  So it's gotta kill them they threw away the Working Royals gig only to come to America, and have to force their way into the cameras. In Merrie Olde England that just came with the territory. And why are they in "visibility" mode when they're supposed to be working their butts off to fulfill a 150 million $ Netflix deal? Or was Netflix stupid enough to write them a check with no contract guarantee of product in return? Netflix could afford to do that, or is it afraid of being called "Racist" for knocking on the door to collect?


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."


The only *proof* we've seen is that H&M are a couple of *Puddin' Heads* (aka soft in the head).


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> The only *proof* we've seen is that H&M are a couple of *Puddin' Heads* (aka soft in the head).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5234016



That guy would be a much better children’s book than The Bench.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Betty-Lou

Chanbal said:


> It's shocking that those books are being 'donated' to economically disadvantaged children, and their families are allegedly encouraged to donate $5 to her foundation. In other words, it looks like someone found a way to force people to buy that silly book.


The  Montecito Marauders at it again.


----------



## Betty-Lou

jennlt said:


> The only *proof* we've seen is that H&M are a couple of *Puddin' Heads* (aka soft in the head).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5234016


Impact Idiots!


----------



## CarryOn2020

She is at it again.  

From the DM:

*Storytime with Meghan! Duchess dons casual blue shirt and jeans to read her children's book The Bench from the garden of her $14 million mansion for YouTube story channel for kids*

*Meghan Markle, 40, read her children's book The Bench for YouTube channel*
*Duchess of Sussex swept her hair back into slick bun and donned blue shirt *
*Could be seen reclining on a seat in the clip which is thought to have been filmed in her $14 million mansion in California*
*Video shared on Brightly Storytime, which is owned by Penguin Random House *
*The Bench was number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books  *
*










						Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and donned a relaxed blue shirt with a pair of jeans in the video, which was shared on the YouTube channel Brightly Storytime.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




*


Spoiler: The story



*Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench*
Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today.

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and heaped on the jewellery for the the video, in which she could be seen reclining on a seat in the garden of her $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara.

The video was shared on the Brightly Storytime channel, which is run by Penguin Random House, the publishing house which published The Bench and with which Prince Harry also has a book deal. 

Before she began reading, Meghan explained: 'Today I'm going to be read to you my book called The Bench with illustrator Christian Robinson...I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolours, which isn't the normal medium he works in but he did it to make it extra special.

'I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son Archie, and then turned it into a book so you could enjoy it too.'

The £12.99 debut book by the Duchess was released in June and was inspired by a poem she wrote for Prince Harry's first Father's Day the month after Archie was born, exloring the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.

It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity. Industry experts have suggested she could have commanded a £500,000 advance alone.









Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today

Sitting on a comfy-looking chair in her garden at her $14.65million Montecito mansion she shares with Prince Harry and their two children Archie, two, and Lilibet, the duchess completed her look with a smattering of glamorous makeup.

Wanting to stick to her low-key vibe, the mother-of-two kept her locks tied back away from her face when reading from her £12.99 ($18.99) book, which is inspired by Prince Harry and her son Archie.

However Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, and today was no different.

On her left wrist, the former actress wore three of her favorite accessories - including the stunning gold Cartier Tank Française watch that belonged to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana.





Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'





The Duchess of Sussex explained how she wrote the book as a poem for her husband Harry and their son  Archie

The classic timepiece was thought to have been worth $23,000 when it was owned by Diana, however it is likely worth much more now, particularly given its history.

Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, while members of the royal family typically prefer to keep their accessories to a bare minimum.

Alongside the Cartier watch, the mother-of-two stacked a $6,900 Cartier Love bracelet - a design that she has worn many times in the past, and which is also thought to have been a gift from Prince Harry in the early days of their romance.

*The Archewell statement in full: Meghan says The Bench is 'modelling a new world' by showing 'another side of masculinity' *
Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, The Bench, is #1 on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books after being released just last week. Congratulations to everyone involved in the project.
The Bench started as a Father’s Day poem for her husband, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, and expanded into a children’s book with imagery that captures moments of love and shared experiences between a diverse group of fathers and sons. Alongside the Duchess’s words are watercolor illustrations by Christian Robinson that bring the gentleness and joy to life.
'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.
'Equally, to depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike. Thank you for supporting me in this special project.'
She then added a more dainty $3,000 mini gold tennis bracelet designed by Jennifer Meyer, estranged wife of actor Tobey Maguire.

While Meghan's left hand and wrist bore the brunt of the weighty bling, she also added a single dazzling piece to her right pinky finger in the form of a custom-made ring that was reportedly designed for her using a diamond that she and Harry received from the Middle East, according to Page Six.

At the end of the clip, the Duchess can be seen closing the book, explaining: 'I hope you enjoyed The Bench, I loved being able to share it with you.

'And now I hope you're able to go and find your own special bench, or chair, or little quiet nook.

'Just a place that means something to you that you can share with someone you love. Have a great day and come back to Brightly Storytime soon. Bye!'

It marks the second occasion at which Meghan has read a children's book on a YouTube channel.

Last year, the Duke and Duchess shared a video of Meghan reading 'Duck! Rabbit!' to their son Archie to mark his first birthday.

On that occasion, the video was posted on Save the Children UK's Instagram page in support of the charity's #SavewithStories campaign, which aims to raise funds for children and families struggling due to the coronavirus crisis in the UK and around the world.

And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students.

'I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you,' she told the children.

After reading the book, she then took questions from some of the students and asked them what special place they share with the important people in their lives.

'It doesn't have to be a bench. It can be anywhere where you feel comfortable,' she told them.

Meghan has claimed her children's book The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity' in a message to thank readers after it became a New York Times bestseller.

In a statement on the Archewell website in June, the Duchess said: 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.

'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.'

Storytime! Meghan recently read to school in Harlem (and Harry)






And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students

Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike.' 

The Bench was inspired by a poem the Duchess of Sussex wrote for Prince Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born, and explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.

And while the £12.99 title was the UK's best-selling picture book last week after being released on June 8, it did not perform so well on the wider chart – but experts said it could still make a fortune by being sold worldwide.

Literary expert Tom Tivan told how the book's German-owned publishers Penguin Random House Children's have the rights to sell the English language version globally and could also sell translation rights to other publishers.  

Mr Tivan, managing editor of The Bookseller magazine, told the Daily Mirror: 'At a little over 3,000 copies (3,212 to be exact) sold The Bench is obviously not a huge bestseller in week one, it didn't even make the top 50.

'But I don't think that's a disappointment for Penguin Random House Children's as picture books generally don't sell huge amounts starting out - even if the writer is the Duchess of Sussex.





A bookshop employee places Meghan Markle's children's book The Bench on a shelf in London after its release on June 8

'The aim is the long game as picture books tend to have a longer shelf life than adult titles. The idea is to keep them selling week in and week out and is not about a quick hit.'

Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'.

Another described it as 'soothing, loving, although a little schmaltzy in places', while a third said it read 'as if it has been penned as a self-help manual for need parents rather than as a story to entertain small kids'.

A further review said: 'One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it.

'But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.'

Little Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor - Harry and Meghan's second child, who was only born on June 4 in Santa Barbara - also features in the book, which was illustrated even before she was born.

An illustration shows the entire Sussex family in the garden of their Californian mansion.





One of the illustrations in 'The Bench' which was written by Meghan and illustrated by Californian artist Christian Robinson





One illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to Harry - cradling a baby on a bench under a tree

Harry can be seen feeding their rescued battery hen chickens - who also featured in the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey earlier this year - with son Archie, two, with their two dogs, beagle Guy and black Labrador Pula, running around in the grounds.

And Meghan can been seen amidst her vegetable patch with a baby in a sling around her chest.

Another illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to the duke - cradling a smiling baby on a bench under a tree.

The text reads: 'This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin.' In another illustration, a father and son duo each wear pink tutus while performing ballet poses.

The accompanying words read: 'You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter.'





Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'





A touching inscription in the book by the Duchess reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump'





It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity

Alongside a picture of a father and son playing with toy dinosaurs, Meghan wrote: 'When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order.' A father using a wheelchair also features in The Bench.

He is drawn fixing his son's shoes alongside the text: 'This is your bench, for papa and son.' It continues on the next page alongside a father and son wearing turbans: 'To celebrate joys and victories won.'

A touching inscription in the book, reproduced from a hand-written note in the Duchess of Sussex's distinctive calligraphy script, reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump.'

The Bench is illustrated by bestselling Californian artist Christian Robinson and published by Penguin Random House.





Prince Harry has also clinched a lucrative four-book deal with Penguin Random House – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died

Meanwhile Prince Harry clinched a lucrative four-book deal with the same publishing house – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died.

Industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled by Harry in July would be the 'tip of the iceberg'.

Sources said the Duke of Sussex oversaw the bidding and told publishing houses to begin at £18million, with the final figure possibly reaching £29million.

The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen's platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.

Harry's wife Meghan is to pen a 'wellness' guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.

The Mail has been told the prince, 36, 'led' negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.

Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the 'auction' by video call, sources say.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She would have the titles tattooed on her foreheard if she could.



Love it!
I've been binge watching Ink Master on Youtube for the past several days. 
Dave Navarro


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> Ooh...they re now in a thrive chapter according to Meghan
> How Harry And Meghan Are Preparing For Their Next Chapter Of 'Visibility' (yahoo.com)





CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooooo, nooooo, say it isn’t so. They have been _visible, _please, trust us, they have been visible. Our eyes do not need to see any more of them   and now, Scobie is baaaack. Ew.
> 
> 
> 
> _Bianca Betancourt
> Tue, October 26, 2021,_
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
> _Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
> _Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
> Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
> Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> *"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_



I am assuming that this is the text of the link?
if so, thank you for the copy/paste


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What is wrong with her face? It is not just the weight. She went from looking young for her age to looking middle aged beyond her years within months.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is at it again.
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> *Storytime with Meghan! Duchess dons casual blue shirt and jeans to read her children's book The Bench from the garden of her $14 million mansion for YouTube story channel for kids*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, read her children's book The Bench for YouTube channel*
> *Duchess of Sussex swept her hair back into slick bun and donned blue shirt *
> *Could be seen reclining on a seat in the clip which is thought to have been filmed in her $14 million mansion in California*
> *Video shared on Brightly Storytime, which is owned by Penguin Random House *
> *The Bench was number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books  *
> *
> View attachment 5234061
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and donned a relaxed blue shirt with a pair of jeans in the video, which was shared on the YouTube channel Brightly Storytime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The story
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench*
> Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and heaped on the jewellery for the the video, in which she could be seen reclining on a seat in the garden of her $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The video was shared on the Brightly Storytime channel, which is run by Penguin Random House, the publishing house which published The Bench and with which Prince Harry also has a book deal.
> 
> Before she began reading, Meghan explained: 'Today I'm going to be read to you my book called The Bench with illustrator Christian Robinson...I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolours, which isn't the normal medium he works in but he did it to make it extra special.
> 
> 'I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son Archie, and then turned it into a book so you could enjoy it too.'
> 
> The £12.99 debut book by the Duchess was released in June and was inspired by a poem she wrote for Prince Harry's first Father's Day the month after Archie was born, exloring the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.
> 
> It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity. Industry experts have suggested she could have commanded a £500,000 advance alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today
> 
> Sitting on a comfy-looking chair in her garden at her $14.65million Montecito mansion she shares with Prince Harry and their two children Archie, two, and Lilibet, the duchess completed her look with a smattering of glamorous makeup.
> 
> Wanting to stick to her low-key vibe, the mother-of-two kept her locks tied back away from her face when reading from her £12.99 ($18.99) book, which is inspired by Prince Harry and her son Archie.
> 
> However Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, and today was no different.
> 
> On her left wrist, the former actress wore three of her favorite accessories - including the stunning gold Cartier Tank Française watch that belonged to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex explained how she wrote the book as a poem for her husband Harry and their son  Archie
> 
> The classic timepiece was thought to have been worth $23,000 when it was owned by Diana, however it is likely worth much more now, particularly given its history.
> 
> Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, while members of the royal family typically prefer to keep their accessories to a bare minimum.
> 
> Alongside the Cartier watch, the mother-of-two stacked a $6,900 Cartier Love bracelet - a design that she has worn many times in the past, and which is also thought to have been a gift from Prince Harry in the early days of their romance.
> 
> *The Archewell statement in full: Meghan says The Bench is 'modelling a new world' by showing 'another side of masculinity' *
> Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, The Bench, is #1 on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books after being released just last week. Congratulations to everyone involved in the project.
> The Bench started as a Father’s Day poem for her husband, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, and expanded into a children’s book with imagery that captures moments of love and shared experiences between a diverse group of fathers and sons. Alongside the Duchess’s words are watercolor illustrations by Christian Robinson that bring the gentleness and joy to life.
> 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.
> 'Equally, to depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike. Thank you for supporting me in this special project.'
> She then added a more dainty $3,000 mini gold tennis bracelet designed by Jennifer Meyer, estranged wife of actor Tobey Maguire.
> 
> While Meghan's left hand and wrist bore the brunt of the weighty bling, she also added a single dazzling piece to her right pinky finger in the form of a custom-made ring that was reportedly designed for her using a diamond that she and Harry received from the Middle East, according to Page Six.
> 
> At the end of the clip, the Duchess can be seen closing the book, explaining: 'I hope you enjoyed The Bench, I loved being able to share it with you.
> 
> 'And now I hope you're able to go and find your own special bench, or chair, or little quiet nook.
> 
> 'Just a place that means something to you that you can share with someone you love. Have a great day and come back to Brightly Storytime soon. Bye!'
> 
> It marks the second occasion at which Meghan has read a children's book on a YouTube channel.
> 
> Last year, the Duke and Duchess shared a video of Meghan reading 'Duck! Rabbit!' to their son Archie to mark his first birthday.
> 
> On that occasion, the video was posted on Save the Children UK's Instagram page in support of the charity's #SavewithStories campaign, which aims to raise funds for children and families struggling due to the coronavirus crisis in the UK and around the world.
> 
> And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students.
> 
> 'I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you,' she told the children.
> 
> After reading the book, she then took questions from some of the students and asked them what special place they share with the important people in their lives.
> 
> 'It doesn't have to be a bench. It can be anywhere where you feel comfortable,' she told them.
> 
> Meghan has claimed her children's book The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity' in a message to thank readers after it became a New York Times bestseller.
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website in June, the Duchess said: 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> 'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.'
> 
> Storytime! Meghan recently read to school in Harlem (and Harry)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students
> 
> Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike.'
> 
> The Bench was inspired by a poem the Duchess of Sussex wrote for Prince Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born, and explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.
> 
> And while the £12.99 title was the UK's best-selling picture book last week after being released on June 8, it did not perform so well on the wider chart – but experts said it could still make a fortune by being sold worldwide.
> 
> Literary expert Tom Tivan told how the book's German-owned publishers Penguin Random House Children's have the rights to sell the English language version globally and could also sell translation rights to other publishers.
> 
> Mr Tivan, managing editor of The Bookseller magazine, told the Daily Mirror: 'At a little over 3,000 copies (3,212 to be exact) sold The Bench is obviously not a huge bestseller in week one, it didn't even make the top 50.
> 
> 'But I don't think that's a disappointment for Penguin Random House Children's as picture books generally don't sell huge amounts starting out - even if the writer is the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A bookshop employee places Meghan Markle's children's book The Bench on a shelf in London after its release on June 8
> 
> 'The aim is the long game as picture books tend to have a longer shelf life than adult titles. The idea is to keep them selling week in and week out and is not about a quick hit.'
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'.
> 
> Another described it as 'soothing, loving, although a little schmaltzy in places', while a third said it read 'as if it has been penned as a self-help manual for need parents rather than as a story to entertain small kids'.
> 
> A further review said: 'One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it.
> 
> 'But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.'
> 
> Little Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor - Harry and Meghan's second child, who was only born on June 4 in Santa Barbara - also features in the book, which was illustrated even before she was born.
> 
> An illustration shows the entire Sussex family in the garden of their Californian mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the illustrations in 'The Bench' which was written by Meghan and illustrated by Californian artist Christian Robinson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to Harry - cradling a baby on a bench under a tree
> 
> Harry can be seen feeding their rescued battery hen chickens - who also featured in the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey earlier this year - with son Archie, two, with their two dogs, beagle Guy and black Labrador Pula, running around in the grounds.
> 
> And Meghan can been seen amidst her vegetable patch with a baby in a sling around her chest.
> 
> Another illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to the duke - cradling a smiling baby on a bench under a tree.
> 
> The text reads: 'This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin.' In another illustration, a father and son duo each wear pink tutus while performing ballet poses.
> 
> The accompanying words read: 'You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A touching inscription in the book by the Duchess reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity
> 
> Alongside a picture of a father and son playing with toy dinosaurs, Meghan wrote: 'When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order.' A father using a wheelchair also features in The Bench.
> 
> He is drawn fixing his son's shoes alongside the text: 'This is your bench, for papa and son.' It continues on the next page alongside a father and son wearing turbans: 'To celebrate joys and victories won.'
> 
> A touching inscription in the book, reproduced from a hand-written note in the Duchess of Sussex's distinctive calligraphy script, reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump.'
> 
> The Bench is illustrated by bestselling Californian artist Christian Robinson and published by Penguin Random House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has also clinched a lucrative four-book deal with Penguin Random House – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died
> 
> Meanwhile Prince Harry clinched a lucrative four-book deal with the same publishing house – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died.
> 
> Industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled by Harry in July would be the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> Sources said the Duke of Sussex oversaw the bidding and told publishing houses to begin at £18million, with the final figure possibly reaching £29million.
> 
> The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen's platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.
> 
> Harry's wife Meghan is to pen a 'wellness' guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.
> 
> The Mail has been told the prince, 36, 'led' negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the 'auction' by video call, sources say.



Ish. Does she make money from YouTube based on the number of people who watch it? I can see stans watching it a hundred times and haters watching it once to make fun of it.  If nothing else it is a blatant advertisement, maybe she is trying to get naive people to buy it to give to kids for Christmas.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her face? It is not just the weight. She went from looking young for her age to looking middle aged beyond her years within months.




All I can see is that she's faking a smile. Maybe even she is tired of pretending her book is any good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her face? It is not just the weight. She went from looking young for her age to looking middle aged beyond her years within months.




I’m getting a Lucy Liu vibe.

The YouTube Brightly channel is not allowing comments, but there are more up votes than down.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't watched it because video footage of her where she actually speaks is more than I can take most days 



And a quick graze through the comments:



> Alternate title: the extreme differences between an authentic couple and a manipulative narcissist and her victim


 


> The ring, that Meghan states is "perfect", after saying "It's beautiful and he designed it; it's incredible!" she later changed.  The wide gold band, that nicely balanced the three diamonds, was replaced by a more expensive band of diamonds. So obviously Meghan did not think it was perfect.  So much for honouring Harry with a ring that he designed.   This was a clear indication that for Meghan nothing is ever good enough. It also showed that her vanity was more important than her husband's feelings.





> The fact that Meghan wouldn't even let Harry finish proposing is disturbing. And the whole contrived Botswana thing - Harry has been there with four different women (including Meghan) and a total of 7 times (fact checked - and Chelsea is from South Africa).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooooo, nooooo, say it isn’t so. They have been _visible, _please, trust us, they have been visible. Our eyes do not need to see any more of them   and now, Scobie is baaaack. Ew.
> 
> 
> 
> _Bianca Betancourt
> Tue, October 26, 2021,_
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
> _Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
> _Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
> Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
> Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> *"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


Yoohoo.. (waving desperately at everyone)  can anyone tell me where I can find embossed cards to send to y'all when I enter my next thrive chapter?!?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> The only *proof* we've seen is that H&M are a couple of *Puddin' Heads* (aka soft in the head).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5234016


 Thanks @jennit for your #4 nickname, Puddin' Heads.  Just too true and too funny! Congratulations!  It's now on The List.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Betty-Lou said:


> The  *Montecito Marauders* at it again.


 @Betty-Lou for your #2 nickname, *Montecito Marauders*, that has been added to The List. 

Thanks also for your #3 nickname, *Impact Idiots*.  Congratulations and please accept your #3 Gold Ribbon.  



ETA second award


----------



## lanasyogamama

Honestly, she looks like she’s on steroids.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reposting this:
> 
> _Bianca Betancourt
> Tue, October 26, 2021,_
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
> _Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
> _Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
> Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
> Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> *"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


I just realized that I wrote "I don't what" instead of "I don't want", it's hard to post here when you have a chatty kid nearby trying to figure out what you are doing. 

Thanks for posting this crap here, it minimizes the number of clicks for those parasites… Should we expect to see them replacing lemon cakes with pudding? Does Scooobie know which flavor?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is at it again.
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> *Storytime with Meghan! Duchess dons casual blue shirt and jeans to read her children's book The Bench from the garden of her $14 million mansion for YouTube story channel for kids*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, read her children's book The Bench for YouTube channel*
> *Duchess of Sussex swept her hair back into slick bun and donned blue shirt *
> *Could be seen reclining on a seat in the clip which is thought to have been filmed in her $14 million mansion in California*
> *Video shared on Brightly Storytime, which is owned by Penguin Random House *
> *The Bench was number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books  *
> *
> View attachment 5234061
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and donned a relaxed blue shirt with a pair of jeans in the video, which was shared on the YouTube channel Brightly Storytime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The story
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench*
> Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and heaped on the jewellery for the the video, in which she could be seen reclining on a seat in the garden of her $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The video was shared on the Brightly Storytime channel, which is run by Penguin Random House, the publishing house which published The Bench and with which Prince Harry also has a book deal.
> 
> Before she began reading, Meghan explained: 'Today I'm going to be read to you my book called The Bench with illustrator Christian Robinson...I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolours, which isn't the normal medium he works in but he did it to make it extra special.
> 
> 'I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son Archie, and then turned it into a book so you could enjoy it too.'
> 
> The £12.99 debut book by the Duchess was released in June and was inspired by a poem she wrote for Prince Harry's first Father's Day the month after Archie was born, exloring the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.
> 
> It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity. Industry experts have suggested she could have commanded a £500,000 advance alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today
> 
> Sitting on a comfy-looking chair in her garden at her $14.65million Montecito mansion she shares with Prince Harry and their two children Archie, two, and Lilibet, the duchess completed her look with a smattering of glamorous makeup.
> 
> Wanting to stick to her low-key vibe, the mother-of-two kept her locks tied back away from her face when reading from her £12.99 ($18.99) book, which is inspired by Prince Harry and her son Archie.
> 
> However Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, and today was no different.
> 
> On her left wrist, the former actress wore three of her favorite accessories - including the stunning gold Cartier Tank Française watch that belonged to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex explained how she wrote the book as a poem for her husband Harry and their son  Archie
> 
> The classic timepiece was thought to have been worth $23,000 when it was owned by Diana, however it is likely worth much more now, particularly given its history.
> 
> Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, while members of the royal family typically prefer to keep their accessories to a bare minimum.
> 
> Alongside the Cartier watch, the mother-of-two stacked a $6,900 Cartier Love bracelet - a design that she has worn many times in the past, and which is also thought to have been a gift from Prince Harry in the early days of their romance.
> 
> *The Archewell statement in full: Meghan says The Bench is 'modelling a new world' by showing 'another side of masculinity' *
> Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, The Bench, is #1 on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books after being released just last week. Congratulations to everyone involved in the project.
> The Bench started as a Father’s Day poem for her husband, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, and expanded into a children’s book with imagery that captures moments of love and shared experiences between a diverse group of fathers and sons. Alongside the Duchess’s words are watercolor illustrations by Christian Robinson that bring the gentleness and joy to life.
> 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.
> 'Equally, to depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike. Thank you for supporting me in this special project.'
> She then added a more dainty $3,000 mini gold tennis bracelet designed by Jennifer Meyer, estranged wife of actor Tobey Maguire.
> 
> While Meghan's left hand and wrist bore the brunt of the weighty bling, she also added a single dazzling piece to her right pinky finger in the form of a custom-made ring that was reportedly designed for her using a diamond that she and Harry received from the Middle East, according to Page Six.
> 
> At the end of the clip, the Duchess can be seen closing the book, explaining: 'I hope you enjoyed The Bench, I loved being able to share it with you.
> 
> 'And now I hope you're able to go and find your own special bench, or chair, or little quiet nook.
> 
> 'Just a place that means something to you that you can share with someone you love. Have a great day and come back to Brightly Storytime soon. Bye!'
> 
> It marks the second occasion at which Meghan has read a children's book on a YouTube channel.
> 
> Last year, the Duke and Duchess shared a video of Meghan reading 'Duck! Rabbit!' to their son Archie to mark his first birthday.
> 
> On that occasion, the video was posted on Save the Children UK's Instagram page in support of the charity's #SavewithStories campaign, which aims to raise funds for children and families struggling due to the coronavirus crisis in the UK and around the world.
> 
> And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students.
> 
> 'I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you,' she told the children.
> 
> After reading the book, she then took questions from some of the students and asked them what special place they share with the important people in their lives.
> 
> 'It doesn't have to be a bench. It can be anywhere where you feel comfortable,' she told them.
> 
> Meghan has claimed her children's book The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity' in a message to thank readers after it became a New York Times bestseller.
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website in June, the Duchess said: 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> 'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.'
> 
> Storytime! Meghan recently read to school in Harlem (and Harry)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students
> 
> Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike.'
> 
> The Bench was inspired by a poem the Duchess of Sussex wrote for Prince Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born, and explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.
> 
> And while the £12.99 title was the UK's best-selling picture book last week after being released on June 8, it did not perform so well on the wider chart – but experts said it could still make a fortune by being sold worldwide.
> 
> Literary expert Tom Tivan told how the book's German-owned publishers Penguin Random House Children's have the rights to sell the English language version globally and could also sell translation rights to other publishers.
> 
> Mr Tivan, managing editor of The Bookseller magazine, told the Daily Mirror: 'At a little over 3,000 copies (3,212 to be exact) sold The Bench is obviously not a huge bestseller in week one, it didn't even make the top 50.
> 
> 'But I don't think that's a disappointment for Penguin Random House Children's as picture books generally don't sell huge amounts starting out - even if the writer is the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A bookshop employee places Meghan Markle's children's book The Bench on a shelf in London after its release on June 8
> 
> 'The aim is the long game as picture books tend to have a longer shelf life than adult titles. The idea is to keep them selling week in and week out and is not about a quick hit.'
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'.
> 
> Another described it as 'soothing, loving, although a little schmaltzy in places', while a third said it read 'as if it has been penned as a self-help manual for need parents rather than as a story to entertain small kids'.
> 
> A further review said: 'One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it.
> 
> 'But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.'
> 
> Little Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor - Harry and Meghan's second child, who was only born on June 4 in Santa Barbara - also features in the book, which was illustrated even before she was born.
> 
> An illustration shows the entire Sussex family in the garden of their Californian mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the illustrations in 'The Bench' which was written by Meghan and illustrated by Californian artist Christian Robinson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to Harry - cradling a baby on a bench under a tree
> 
> Harry can be seen feeding their rescued battery hen chickens - who also featured in the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey earlier this year - with son Archie, two, with their two dogs, beagle Guy and black Labrador Pula, running around in the grounds.
> 
> And Meghan can been seen amidst her vegetable patch with a baby in a sling around her chest.
> 
> Another illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to the duke - cradling a smiling baby on a bench under a tree.
> 
> The text reads: 'This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin.' In another illustration, a father and son duo each wear pink tutus while performing ballet poses.
> 
> The accompanying words read: 'You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A touching inscription in the book by the Duchess reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity
> 
> Alongside a picture of a father and son playing with toy dinosaurs, Meghan wrote: 'When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order.' A father using a wheelchair also features in The Bench.
> 
> He is drawn fixing his son's shoes alongside the text: 'This is your bench, for papa and son.' It continues on the next page alongside a father and son wearing turbans: 'To celebrate joys and victories won.'
> 
> A touching inscription in the book, reproduced from a hand-written note in the Duchess of Sussex's distinctive calligraphy script, reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump.'
> 
> The Bench is illustrated by bestselling Californian artist Christian Robinson and published by Penguin Random House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has also clinched a lucrative four-book deal with Penguin Random House – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died
> 
> Meanwhile Prince Harry clinched a lucrative four-book deal with the same publishing house – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died.
> 
> Industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled by Harry in July would be the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> Sources said the Duke of Sussex oversaw the bidding and told publishing houses to begin at £18million, with the final figure possibly reaching £29million.
> 
> The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen's platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.
> 
> Harry's wife Meghan is to pen a 'wellness' guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.
> 
> The Mail has been told the prince, 36, 'led' negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the 'auction' by video call, sources say.


All parents will now wonder why their little tots are puking in front of the TV.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe from an overly proud and 'blind' father, who keeps telling his little princess that she is so much better than her brother, sister, friends, classmates, you name it. Does anyone remember the interview when he confesses that taking care of M as a baby and during her early years was the happiest time of his life?


Or following a certain advice: 'Don't give the milk away for free.'
Would the guide be able to get free tickets to visit the Buckingham Palace?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I think she came by it naturally. Some people are born believing they are God's gift to the world. She's a narc so she's probably been playing to the camera from early childhood.


Agree -- looking at her early videos from childhood, she's alway had this odd self assured, self important behaviour.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She would have the titles tattooed on her foreheard if she could.


She should find a hair artist who can curl her tendrils into her title  


poopsie said:


> Love it!
> I've been binge watching Ink Master on Youtube for the past several days.
> Dave Navarro


oh gosh yes he’s completely gorgeous and he keeps  getting better with age, seems like he might have made a deal with the Devil  
I remember when I got into the red hot chilli peppers by buying the ‘by the way’ album, then seeing a poster of RHCP from when he was in it at the same music shop and then being very disappointed when I learnt he’d already left them. It is still their best album though so it’s not all bad.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Didn’t they try this “new era of visibility” crap a month or two ago?


Classic PR crap, just trying to keep their names in the media because they really have nothing of value to offer.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Honestly, she looks like she’s on steroids.



I thought the same. She may actually have a health issue we don't know about.


----------



## Chanbal

Alert: This post has sound. 
She introduces herself as the duchS and hopes you love the pictures as much as you love the words…


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I thought the same. She may actually have a health issue we don't know about.


I think it's the picture, she looks OK to me in the little clip posted above.


----------



## csshopper

Enlarge the picture and maybe it is just the lighting, but her left eye is slightly closed and on my screen, more noticable when enhanced, it looks like a bluish bruise underneath, not completely concealed by make up?  As much as I loathe her, I would be happy to be wrong, curious if any of you see it also?

As to the book, it seems counterproductive, hearing her read it makes the lack of story more pronounced, why spend $ on buying one? Penguin must have lost a bundle on this tripe.


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> Love it!
> I've been binge watching Ink Master on Youtube for the past several days.
> Dave Navarro


Loved Ink Master.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Enlarge the picture and maybe it is just the lighting, but her left eye is slightly closed and on my screen, more noticable when enhanced, it looks like *a bluish bruise underneath, not completely concealed* by make up?  As much as I loathe her, I would be happy to be wrong, curious if any of you see it also?
> 
> As to the book, it seems counterproductive, hearing her read it makes the lack of story more pronounced, why spend $ on buying one? Penguin must have lost a bundle on this tripe.


The bruise could be from plastic surgery, I wouldn't worry about 666. I don't feel sorry for Penguin if they are losing money. Why would they invest in this couple? There are plenty of talented people out there that need and deserve their support.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Classic PR crap, just trying to keep their names in the media because they really have nothing of value to offer.


Plus this could have been made a while ago.  I can't get over the plastic look of her puffed up face.  Perhaps this was the fresh tweaking done prior to the trip to NYC?  By the time they got there, it had died down a bit?


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Jayne1 said:


> Agree -- looking at her early videos from childhood, she's alway had this odd self assured, self important behaviour.


Yes, I think we discussed earlier on here how she took over another girl's birthday party as a kid and designated herself Queen of that party. I'm just astounded how everyone went along with it. I don't think I would if that had happened at one of my children's birthday parties.


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Yes, I think we discussed earlier on here how she took over another girl's birthday party as a kid and designated herself Queen of that party. I'm just astounded how everyone went along with it. I don't think I would if that had happened at one of my children's birthday parties.


She was a bully even then.  She probably surrounded herself with other girls who allowed her to act like this.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Agree -- looking at her early videos from childhood, she's alway had this odd self assured, self important behaviour.


I heard or read something about narcissists basically said that parents who over-praise their kids - telling them how they are better than anyone else - can create a narcissist


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Plus this could have been made a while ago.  I can't get over the plastic look of her puffed up face.  Perhaps this was the fresh tweaking done prior to the trip to NYC?  By the time they got there, it had died down a bit?


Could be as simple as baby weight she hasn't lost yet. Some women do gain and lose weight in their faces. The MM we first met was an aging (by Hollywood standards) mildly successful actress who may have been living on lettuce for years to maintain an unrealistic weight and now is at a more "normal' weight. I recall a season of the show "The Biggest Loser" where the woman who "won" had lost so much weight her face was gaunt and she looked unhealthily thin. I'm not a fan of MM but I'm not going to pick apart her appearance, but her words and actions are fair game.


----------



## Lodpah

Prince Harry Went Into ‘Panic Mode’ After Learning of Queen’s Hospital Stay
					

Prince Harry felt ‘helpless’ after hearing that Queen Elizabeth II was hospitalized in October — exclusive details about when he plans to see his grandmother next




					www.google.com


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't watched it because video footage of her where she actually speaks is more than I can take most days
> 
> 
> 
> And a quick graze through the comments:



This was interesting to watch. How lovely and natural is Kate?! And William, a perfect gentleman. I haven't seen a lot of their engagement interview before but they seem to have been made for each other.

The other two though... I remember seeing just a few minutes of their interview when someone posted it here way back then and I knew right away she was very very off. How can a grown woman- and an actual actress at that- let herself be interviewed on national TV like this and not control herself better?! Her micro and macro expressions are like a what's what of narcissistic and bipolar disorder. Harry looks like he's being held hostage.


----------



## Chanbal

It appears that some accounts not pro-666 are being suspended on twitter, so before they suspend this very creative artist, here are a few pieces of his/her artwork illustrating the life of the duchS from poverty to office:


----------



## charlottawill

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This was interesting to watch. How lovely and natural is Kate?! And William, a perfect gentleman. I haven't seen a lot of their engagement interview before but they seem to have been made for each other.
> 
> The other two though... I remember seeing just a few minutes of their interview when someone posted it here way back then and I knew right away she was very very off. How can a grown woman- and an actual actress at that- let herself be interviewed on national TV like this and not control herself better?! Her micro and macro expressions are like a what's what of narcissistic and bipolar disorder. Harry looks like he's being held hostage.


It looks interesting but I could only watch five minutes - that guy is only slightly creepy.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

charlottawill said:


> It looks interesting but I could only watch five minutes - that guy is only slightly creepy.


You mean the male interviewer? Yes, agree.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her face? It is not just the weight. She went from looking young for her age to looking middle aged beyond her years within months.




i think her nose is no longer symmetrical.  You can see it clearly on forward facing shots.  The distance from her left nostril to her lips is different from the right side.  Too much plastic surgery and fillers?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is at it again.
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> *Storytime with Meghan! Duchess dons casual blue shirt and jeans to read her children's book The Bench from the garden of her $14 million mansion for YouTube story channel for kids*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, read her children's book The Bench for YouTube channel*
> *Duchess of Sussex swept her hair back into slick bun and donned blue shirt *
> *Could be seen reclining on a seat in the clip which is thought to have been filmed in her $14 million mansion in California*
> *Video shared on Brightly Storytime, which is owned by Penguin Random House *
> *The Bench was number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books  *
> *
> View attachment 5234061
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and donned a relaxed blue shirt with a pair of jeans in the video, which was shared on the YouTube channel Brightly Storytime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The story
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench*
> Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and heaped on the jewellery for the the video, in which she could be seen reclining on a seat in the garden of her $14 million mansion in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The video was shared on the Brightly Storytime channel, which is run by Penguin Random House, the publishing house which published The Bench and with which Prince Harry also has a book deal.
> 
> Before she began reading, Meghan explained: 'Today I'm going to be read to you my book called The Bench with illustrator Christian Robinson...I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolours, which isn't the normal medium he works in but he did it to make it extra special.
> 
> 'I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son Archie, and then turned it into a book so you could enjoy it too.'
> 
> The £12.99 debut book by the Duchess was released in June and was inspired by a poem she wrote for Prince Harry's first Father's Day the month after Archie was born, exloring the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.
> 
> It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity. Industry experts have suggested she could have commanded a £500,000 advance alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle cut a chic figure in a blue shirt and jeans as she appeared on a children's YouTube channel to read her book The Bench today
> 
> Sitting on a comfy-looking chair in her garden at her $14.65million Montecito mansion she shares with Prince Harry and their two children Archie, two, and Lilibet, the duchess completed her look with a smattering of glamorous makeup.
> 
> Wanting to stick to her low-key vibe, the mother-of-two kept her locks tied back away from her face when reading from her £12.99 ($18.99) book, which is inspired by Prince Harry and her son Archie.
> 
> However Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, and today was no different.
> 
> On her left wrist, the former actress wore three of her favorite accessories - including the stunning gold Cartier Tank Française watch that belonged to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex explained how she wrote the book as a poem for her husband Harry and their son  Archie
> 
> The classic timepiece was thought to have been worth $23,000 when it was owned by Diana, however it is likely worth much more now, particularly given its history.
> 
> Meghan has always been known to favor more conspicuous jewelry stacks, while members of the royal family typically prefer to keep their accessories to a bare minimum.
> 
> Alongside the Cartier watch, the mother-of-two stacked a $6,900 Cartier Love bracelet - a design that she has worn many times in the past, and which is also thought to have been a gift from Prince Harry in the early days of their romance.
> 
> *The Archewell statement in full: Meghan says The Bench is 'modelling a new world' by showing 'another side of masculinity' *
> Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex’s debut children’s book, The Bench, is #1 on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books after being released just last week. Congratulations to everyone involved in the project.
> The Bench started as a Father’s Day poem for her husband, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, and expanded into a children’s book with imagery that captures moments of love and shared experiences between a diverse group of fathers and sons. Alongside the Duchess’s words are watercolor illustrations by Christian Robinson that bring the gentleness and joy to life.
> 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.
> 'Equally, to depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike. Thank you for supporting me in this special project.'
> She then added a more dainty $3,000 mini gold tennis bracelet designed by Jennifer Meyer, estranged wife of actor Tobey Maguire.
> 
> While Meghan's left hand and wrist bore the brunt of the weighty bling, she also added a single dazzling piece to her right pinky finger in the form of a custom-made ring that was reportedly designed for her using a diamond that she and Harry received from the Middle East, according to Page Six.
> 
> At the end of the clip, the Duchess can be seen closing the book, explaining: 'I hope you enjoyed The Bench, I loved being able to share it with you.
> 
> 'And now I hope you're able to go and find your own special bench, or chair, or little quiet nook.
> 
> 'Just a place that means something to you that you can share with someone you love. Have a great day and come back to Brightly Storytime soon. Bye!'
> 
> It marks the second occasion at which Meghan has read a children's book on a YouTube channel.
> 
> Last year, the Duke and Duchess shared a video of Meghan reading 'Duck! Rabbit!' to their son Archie to mark his first birthday.
> 
> On that occasion, the video was posted on Save the Children UK's Instagram page in support of the charity's #SavewithStories campaign, which aims to raise funds for children and families struggling due to the coronavirus crisis in the UK and around the world.
> 
> And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students.
> 
> 'I wrote this when we just had our little boy, and I haven't read it to any other kids but you,' she told the children.
> 
> After reading the book, she then took questions from some of the students and asked them what special place they share with the important people in their lives.
> 
> 'It doesn't have to be a bench. It can be anywhere where you feel comfortable,' she told them.
> 
> Meghan has claimed her children's book The Bench shows 'another side of masculinity' in a message to thank readers after it became a New York Times bestseller.
> 
> In a statement on the Archewell website in June, the Duchess said: 'While this poem began as a love letter to my husband and son, I’m encouraged to see that its universal themes of love, representation and inclusivity are resonating with communities everywhere.
> 
> 'In many ways, pursuing a more compassionate and equitable world begins with these core values.'
> 
> Storytime! Meghan recently read to school in Harlem (and Harry)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And in September, Meghan took to the stage at an outdoor reading event in New York to read her children's book The Bench to a group of second-grade students
> 
> Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike.'
> 
> The Bench was inspired by a poem the Duchess of Sussex wrote for Prince Harry on Father's Day, the month after Archie was born, and explores the 'special bond between father and son' as 'seen through a mother's eyes'.
> 
> And while the £12.99 title was the UK's best-selling picture book last week after being released on June 8, it did not perform so well on the wider chart – but experts said it could still make a fortune by being sold worldwide.
> 
> Literary expert Tom Tivan told how the book's German-owned publishers Penguin Random House Children's have the rights to sell the English language version globally and could also sell translation rights to other publishers.
> 
> Mr Tivan, managing editor of The Bookseller magazine, told the Daily Mirror: 'At a little over 3,000 copies (3,212 to be exact) sold The Bench is obviously not a huge bestseller in week one, it didn't even make the top 50.
> 
> 'But I don't think that's a disappointment for Penguin Random House Children's as picture books generally don't sell huge amounts starting out - even if the writer is the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A bookshop employee places Meghan Markle's children's book The Bench on a shelf in London after its release on June 8
> 
> 'The aim is the long game as picture books tend to have a longer shelf life than adult titles. The idea is to keep them selling week in and week out and is not about a quick hit.'
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'.
> 
> Another described it as 'soothing, loving, although a little schmaltzy in places', while a third said it read 'as if it has been penned as a self-help manual for need parents rather than as a story to entertain small kids'.
> 
> A further review said: 'One wonders how any publisher could have thought fit to publish this grammar-defying set of badly rhyming cod homilies, let alone think any child anywhere would want to read it.
> 
> 'But that's planet Sussex for you, where even the business of raising a family is all about the brand.'
> 
> Little Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor - Harry and Meghan's second child, who was only born on June 4 in Santa Barbara - also features in the book, which was illustrated even before she was born.
> 
> An illustration shows the entire Sussex family in the garden of their Californian mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the illustrations in 'The Bench' which was written by Meghan and illustrated by Californian artist Christian Robinson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to Harry - cradling a baby on a bench under a tree
> 
> Harry can be seen feeding their rescued battery hen chickens - who also featured in the couple's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey earlier this year - with son Archie, two, with their two dogs, beagle Guy and black Labrador Pula, running around in the grounds.
> 
> And Meghan can been seen amidst her vegetable patch with a baby in a sling around her chest.
> 
> Another illustration features a bearded ginger father - who bears a resemblance to the duke - cradling a smiling baby on a bench under a tree.
> 
> The text reads: 'This is your bench, where life will begin, for you and our son, our baby, our kin.' In another illustration, a father and son duo each wear pink tutus while performing ballet poses.
> 
> The accompanying words read: 'You'll love him. You'll listen. You'll be his supporter.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Early reviews for Meghan's first foray into writing were not universally positive, although one cooed that 'the book's storytelling and illustration give us snapshots of shared moments that evoke a deep sense of warmth'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A touching inscription in the book by the Duchess reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not known if Meghan has received an advance for the book and whether any of the proceeds will be donated to charity
> 
> Alongside a picture of a father and son playing with toy dinosaurs, Meghan wrote: 'When life feels in shambles, you'll help him find order.' A father using a wheelchair also features in The Bench.
> 
> He is drawn fixing his son's shoes alongside the text: 'This is your bench, for papa and son.' It continues on the next page alongside a father and son wearing turbans: 'To celebrate joys and victories won.'
> 
> A touching inscription in the book, reproduced from a hand-written note in the Duchess of Sussex's distinctive calligraphy script, reads: 'For the man and the boy who make my heart go pump-pump.'
> 
> The Bench is illustrated by bestselling Californian artist Christian Robinson and published by Penguin Random House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has also clinched a lucrative four-book deal with Penguin Random House – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died
> 
> Meanwhile Prince Harry clinched a lucrative four-book deal with the same publishing house – with the Mail revealing earlier this summer the second would be due out only after the Queen has died.
> 
> Industry insiders said the 'tell-all' tome unveiled by Harry in July would be the 'tip of the iceberg'.
> 
> Sources said the Duke of Sussex oversaw the bidding and told publishing houses to begin at £18million, with the final figure possibly reaching £29million.
> 
> The deal will see a memoir released next year – when it is the Queen's platinum jubilee – with the second book to be held back until after her death.
> 
> Harry's wife Meghan is to pen a 'wellness' guide as part of the contract with Penguin Random House. The subject and author of the fourth title is unknown.
> 
> The Mail has been told the prince, 36, 'led' negotiations from Montecito in California, where he and Meghan have bought an £11million mansion on the back of lucrative tie-ups, including with streaming services Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> Two publishers flew out from London to see him and others took part in the 'auction' by video call, sources say.


It's that "low bun = I'm serious" look again. Somewhere in her past, a stylist gave her a list of stereotypes and their meanings, and she has been following it ever since. It accounts for the caricatures she sports. She isn't original and can only copy and cosplay.


----------



## gracekelly

CVS seen delivering a case of adult diapers to customer "John Smith" at Casa Monstercito.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> CVS seen delivering a case of adult diapers to customer "John Smith" at Casa Monstercito.


Did 666 write a letter to CVS?


----------



## needlv

Online Instagram story on royalinstablog says MM got rejected by as brand ambassador for a big brand for being too polarised (liked or disliked strongly).  So SS PR is running a campaign saying there is  organised bots which are running a hate campaign.  Trying to prove she really is likeable…

Its an interesting thought.  And possible…


----------



## xincinsin

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This was interesting to watch. How lovely and natural is Kate?! And William, a perfect gentleman. I haven't seen a lot of their engagement interview before but they seem to have been made for each other.
> 
> The other two though... I remember seeing just a few minutes of their interview when someone posted it here way back then and I knew right away she was very very off. How can a grown woman- and an actual actress at that- let herself be interviewed on national TV like this and not control herself better?! Her micro and macro expressions are like a what's what of narcissistic and bipolar disorder. Harry looks like he's being held hostage.


Someone posted a clip here earlier of the H&M engagement interview when she positioned herself further in front of him (amazing move considering they were seated side by side) and appeared in one smooth move to elbow him in the balls.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Alert: This post has sound.
> She introduces herself as the duchS and hopes you love the pictures as much as you love the words…




The book is meant for really young kids and I'm almost certain that they don't understand nor care about the DoS title. So really, why can't she just introduce herself as Meghan? This Conceited Psycho probably walks around introducing herself as Megnut, DoS all the god damn time instead of Meghan. She sure can't part ways with the title gifted to her by the head of a racist institution.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Online Instagram story on royalinstablog says MM got rejected by as brand ambassador for a big brand for being too polarised (liked or disliked strongly).  So SS PR is running a campaign saying there is  organised bots which are running a hate campaign.  Trying to prove she really is likeable…
> 
> Its an interesting thought.  And possible…


I'm going to assume that either SS is approaching big brands to try to market her as a brand ambassador or that Hazard met someone important and went: "Did you know she can be the face of a brand? Yeah, yeah, she totally can."

I would totally not buy a brand she fronts unless it's for toilet cleaners - I'm sure with 19 toilets, she knows which is the best brand. And she has relevant experience after being the face of the poo fragrance!


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Prince Harry Went Into ‘Panic Mode’ After Learning of Queen’s Hospital Stay
> 
> 
> Prince Harry felt ‘helpless’ after hearing that Queen Elizabeth II was hospitalized in October — exclusive details about when he plans to see his grandmother next
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


He was probably panicking in case he was not included in her will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> *It's that "low bun* = I'm serious" look again. Somewhere in her past, a stylist gave her a list of stereotypes and their meanings, and she has been following it ever since. It accounts for the caricatures she sports. She isn't original and can only copy and cosplay.


Low bun and centre part makes me wonder if M watched Laugh-In reruns during her teen years and is now channeling Gladys Ormphby and maybe trying to reenact that role for Netflix.  Oops, my bad, I just realized that Gladys has so much more inner and outer beauty than M.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> The book is meant for really young kids and I'm almost certain that they don't understand nor care about the DoS title. So really, why can't she just introduce herself as Meghan? This Conceited Psycho probably walks around introducing herself as Megnut, DoS all the god damn time instead of Meghan. She sure can't part ways with the title gifted to her by the head of a racist institution.


The titles were created for Harry the day before his wedding and so by law, M became Duchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness of Kilkeel upon her marriage to Harry. I'm not excusing M's behaviour, however, I wonder if perhaps she felt entitled to criticize the RF because it wasn't a gift per se even though HMTQ created the titles specifically with them in mind. In any case, IMO, both are too selfish to recognize the privileges afforded them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> The book is meant for really young kids and I'm almost certain that they don't understand nor care about the DoS title. So really, why can't she just introduce herself as Meghan? This *Conceited Psycho* probably walks around introducing herself as Megnut, DoS all the god damn time instead of Meghan. She sure can't part ways with the title gifted to her by the head of a racist institution.



 @EverSoElusive for your #9 nickname *Conceited Psycho*, describing one of M's undeniable character flaws and is now on The List.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> The titles were created for Harry the day before his wedding and so by law, M became Duchess of Sussex, Countess of Dumbarton and Baroness of Kilkeel upon her marriage to Harry. I'm not excusing M's behaviour, however, I wonder if perhaps she felt entitled to criticize the RF because it wasn't a gift per se even though HMTQ created the titles specifically with them in mind. In any case, IMO, both are too selfish to recognize the privileges afforded them.



@Maggie Muggins  

You're so absolutely right that they are too selfish to recognize their privileges. At the end of the day, the main reason Megnut criticizes others especially the BRF is just so she can play the victim and garner sympathy from the general public. She's so thirsty for attention that she doesn't know what to do with herself when she's not getting any.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Someone posted a clip here earlier of the H&M engagement interview when she positioned herself further in front of him (amazing move considering they were seated side by side) and appeared in one smooth move to elbow him in the balls.


The only thing I ever remember of that engagement interview is her looking art her ring and saying how much she loved it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> @Maggie Muggins
> 
> You're so absolutely right that they are too selfish to recognize their privileges. At the end of the day, the main reason Megnut criticizes others especially the BRF is just so she can play the victim and garner sympathy from the general public. She's so thirsty for attention that she doesn't know what to do with herself when she's not getting any.


ITA and back to you


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is at it again.
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> *Storytime with Meghan! Duchess dons casual blue shirt and jeans to read her children's book The Bench from the garden of her $14 million mansion for YouTube story channel for kids*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, read her children's book The Bench for YouTube channel*
> *Duchess of Sussex swept her hair back into slick bun and donned blue shirt *
> *Could be seen reclining on a seat in the clip which is thought to have been filmed in her $14 million mansion in California*
> *Video shared on Brightly Storytime, which is owned by Penguin Random House *
> *The Bench was number one on The New York Times Bestseller list for children’s picture books  *
> *
> View attachment 5234061
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appears on YouTube channel to read The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, swept her hair into a slick bun and donned a relaxed blue shirt with a pair of jeans in the video, which was shared on the YouTube channel Brightly Storytime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Oh, for the love of Pete.  The headlines include her hair being "swept into a slick bun" and wearing a blue shirt?  This is how pathetic it's gotten now?  What is next?  "One can see a hint of a La Perla bra underneath her slightly open unstained armpit shirt"?


----------



## Norm.Core

Jayne1 said:


> The only thing I ever remember of that engagement interview is her looking art her ring and saying how much she loved it.


More lies. She changed it up at the first opportunity. Too much money, not enough brains.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I'm going to assume that either SS is approaching big brands to try to market her as a brand ambassador or that Hazard met someone important and went: "Did you know she can be the face of a brand? Yeah, yeah, she totally can."
> 
> I would totally not buy a brand she fronts unless it's for toilet cleaners - I'm sure with 19 toilets, she knows which is the best brand. And she has relevant experience after being *the face of the poo fragrance*!


Thanks @xincinsin for your #20 nickname, *the face of the poo fragrance*.
I can't stop  but congratulations and The List#20 Ribbon are in order.
So what kind of cake would you like for creating this chef-d'oeuvre and since my culinary skills are at an all-time low, I can only bake paper cakes.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, for the love of Pete.  The headlines include her hair being "swept into a slick bun" and wearing a blue shirt?  This is how pathetic it's gotten now?  What is next?  "One can see a hint of a La Perla bra underneath her slightly open unstained armpit shirt"?


Your comment made me click on the article, and I became puzzled by the statement below. What is she talking about?

"_Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike._'


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *Your comment made me click on the article*, and I became puzzled by the statement below. What is she talking about?
> 
> "_Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike._'


OMG, my sincere apologies!!


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Your comment made me click on the article, and I became puzzled by the statement below. What is she talking about?
> 
> "_Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike._'


Sorry MM there are many men like that out there. I like mine rugged, manly, tender, smart but definitely manly.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh


Chanbal said:


> Your comment made me click on the article, and I became puzzled by the statement below. What is she talking about?
> 
> "_Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike._'


Oh the sort of soft and nurturing  father that works and raises his child as a single parent, takes his little girl to tap and ballet lessons every week and helps his son open a florist? That kind?

Where does she get off? She acts like she’s a time traveller from the Victorian age (which might explain that crunchy hair) and she thinks fathers are still beating their kids every evening before retiring for a port and cigar in the smoking room.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Your comment made me click on the article, and I became puzzled by the statement below. What is she talking about?
> 
> "_Meghan even went so far as to suggest that her book could be part of a blueprint for a new world, saying: 'To depict another side of masculinity — one grounded in connection, emotion, and softness — is to model a world that so many would like to see for their sons and daughters alike._'


She also probably thinks she’s penultimate woman. I’m just amazed at how big her ego is. Reminds me of the Queen of Heaven (Semiramis) as in Nimrod’s wife and is also his mother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Norm.Core said:


> More lies. She changed it up at the first opportunity. Too much money, not enough brains.


And lack of memory.  Or at least, she's hoping her audience has no memory!


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> Alert: This post has sound.
> She introduces herself as the duchS and hopes you love the pictures as much as you love the words…



After all that brouhaha with Oprah and how BRF is racist, I cannot understand how she can pronounce DOS with a straight face like that!


----------



## mellibelly

This nickname from a YouTube comment made me snort laugh…Haznoballs
Also Markdown LOL


----------



## Sharont2305

She got her own title wrong, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. But then again, inserting the word the makes her sound more important in her head.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> She got her own title wrong, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex. But then again, inserting the word the makes her sound more important in her head.


I didn't watch it, but it would sound even more impressive in her mind if she pronounced "the" as "Thee".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German mag title:

"Harry & Meghan:Why They Will Regret Their Fall-out With the Royals"

Maybe, maybe the media landscape is finally catching on.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> I didn't watch it, but it would sound even more impressive in her mind if she pronounced "the" as "Thee".


Yes, I think she actually did, lol


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lanasyogamama said:


> Honestly, she looks like she’s on steroids.





charlottawill said:


> I thought the same. She may actually have a health issue we don't know about.



Or anti anxiety or depression meds…I have a friend who is naturally quite thin and only seemed to gain weight (that showed anyway) in her face until she found the right Rx for her


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I thought the same. She may actually have a health issue we don't know about.


If she is anything like my office narc, she is dissatisfied with life, always believing that she deserves something better, and convinced that the world is against her. That is fertile breeding ground for depression.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German mag title:
> 
> "Harry & Meghan:Why They Will Regret Their Fall-out With the Royals"
> 
> Maybe, maybe the media landscape is finally catching on.


I believe the media in Europe in general has been calling a spade a spade, the problem has been the media in the US imo. The US media has been helping them to behave like they are a royal franchise in this country. The visit to NYC is still fresh in my mind…


----------



## Sophisticatted

xincinsin said:


> He was probably panicking in case he was not included in her will.



Also, Charles cannot stand to be in the same vicinity as him (hasn’t he left the county every time Harry has returned?) and his brother currently feels nothing but anger, disgust and distrust for him.

I doubt there will be room on the balcony for the Dumbarton’s at the Jubilee, and after that there will be nothing ever again for a long, long time.

of course, part of me likes to think that the earth shot prize awards being in the US next year is part of a plan to kidnap Harry and the kids and leave Thee Duchess in the dust!  As soon as they are on the plane it is diplomatic immunity time!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Has the Body Language Guy been invited to this thread? He needs an award @Maggie Muggins


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Has the Body Language Guy been invited to this thread? He needs an award @Maggie Muggins



We are all “Body Language Badddies!”


----------



## Nutashha

I Knew It!

*https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/data-reveals-active-hate-campaigning-against-meghan*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Has the Body Language Guy been invited to this thread? He needs an award @Maggie Muggins



@Chanbal  Here is his award and please be so kind as to invite him to this thread to receive it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Piers never joined after CeeJay invited him. How rude.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> This nickname from a YouTube comment made me snort laugh…*Haznoballs*
> Also *Markdown* LOL


Thanks @mellibelly for your nicknames #8 *Haznoballs* and #9 *Markdown*.
Both nicknames being fine epithets of the despicable duo have been added to The List.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nutashha said:


> I Knew It!
> 
> *https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/data-reveals-active-hate-campaigning-against-meghan*



And why would we believe Christopher Bouzy? 
Because he says it’s true? Because his company has analyzed the data? 
Rrrrright. It is 2021, data can be manipulated to say whatever we want.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Piers never joined after CeeJay invited him. How rude.


Maybe he is not into bags


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Chanbal  Here is his award and please be so kind as to invite him to this thread to receive it.
> View attachment 5235008


I believe @Lodpah was the one that introduced him to us, but I'll be happy to invite him if she doesn't want to do it herself.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> And why would we believe Christopher Bouzy?
> Because he says it’s true? Because his company has analyzed the data?
> Rrrrright. It is 2021, data can be manipulated to say whatever we want.


This ^^^


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



From another poster


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> The only thing I ever remember of that engagement interview is her looking art her ring and saying how much she loved it.


she loved it for a few months?


----------



## Handbag1234

I watched 10 seconds of the You Tube video before I started to gag. She wrote the book so we can all share her poem. Awww Megs- you really shouldn't have bothered  her face looks really puffy and off too 

I don't know any adult that would say 'you make my heart go pump pump'


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> And why would we believe Christopher Bouzy?
> Because he says it’s true? Because his company has analyzed the data?
> Rrrrright. It is 2021, data can be manipulated to say whatever we want.


His last name says it all. He was inebriated when working the data.


----------



## Chanbal

Handbag1234 said:


> I watched 10 seconds of the You Tube video before I started to gag. She wrote the book so we can all share her poem. Awww Megs- you really shouldn't have bothered  her face looks really puffy and off too
> 
> I don't know any adult that would say 'you make my heart go pump pump'


I don't want to give her views/clicks, so I'll refrain from watching such video. 
Though, I thought that we had agreed that she meant to say 'you make my heart go cash cash'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handbag1234 said:


> I don't know any adult that would say 'you make my heart go pump pump'



Months later and I still don't know what that is supposed to mean.


----------



## mellibelly

Funny, all of the comments on this Access Hollywood post are against 6 & 666. No bots here, just real people sick of the grifters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Handbag1234 said:


> I watched 10 seconds of the You Tube video before I started to gag. She wrote the book so we can all share her poem. Awww Megs- you really shouldn't have bothered  her face looks really puffy and off too
> 
> I don't know any adult that would say 'you make my heart go* pump pump*'


She appropriated it from Snoop Dogg's song Pump Pump feat. Listen at your own risk:  Song  Sorry, I can't listen to it, too much swearing, etc.. 
Also, Urban Dictionary's meaning is a v!g!na


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Funny, all of the comments on this Access Hollywood post are against 6 & 666. No bots here, just real people sick of the grifters.



Mako refused also $1.3M from her family. This is a beautiful story, and I wish them well.


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> Funny, all of the comments on this Access Hollywood post are against 6 & 666. No bots here, just real people sick of the grifters.



her husband has an actual job as an attorney.


----------



## mellibelly

Exactly. Princess Mako has class. She gave up her title to marry her college sweetheart. This is the exact opposite of the whiny gruesome twosome.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> And why would we believe Christopher Bouzy?
> Because he says it’s true? Because his company has analyzed the data?
> Rrrrright. It is 2021, data can be manipulated to say whatever we want.



If she led a quiet PRIVATE life it would be a non-issue. But Markdown defines "private" as trying to have iron clad control on her "narrative" about things and Haznoballs is such a non entity he doesn't even figure into this. Every time she puts herself out in the media she opens herself to scrutiny and being a narcissist she never figured out there are millions of people smarter than her who see through her hypocrisy and are calling her out on it. It is not a color issue, it is a credibility issue. 

Interesting combo, her latest groveling for attention hanger on is Boozy, who follows the wouldn't-recognize-a-fact-if-it-smacked-him-in-his-rebuilt-face, Scoobie, which gives her a BS Team.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> If she led a quiet PRIVATE life it would be a non-issue. But Markdown defines "private" as trying to have iron clad control on her "narrative" about things and Haznoballs is such a non entity he doesn't even figure into this. Every time she puts herself out in the media she opens herself to scrutiny and being a narcissist she never figured out there are millions of people smarter than her who see through her hypocrisy and are calling her out on it. It is not a color issue, it is a credibility issue.
> 
> Interesting combo, her latest groveling for attention hanger on is Boozy, who follows the wouldn't-recognize-a-fact-if-it-smacked-him-in-his-rebuilt-face, Scoobie, which gives her a BS Team.



These days of high spin, every single word must be fact-checked 3or 4 times. 
She was caught using bots on the royal reporters.
From 2019:

_Josh Feldberg’s dive into the divisive world of royal social media began after he read a story detailing “how royal correspondents were under attack,” he recounts from London. In particular, the journalists who write about the royals for major British outlets such as the Telegraph and the Express were finding themselves under assault on social media for virtually anything they wrote about Meghan Markle, now the Duchess of Sussex.

Accusations of racism, nativism and bullying were being flung with abandon on Twitter. “At least one of my colleagues has called in the police after threats were made to relatives; another was told she deserved to have acid thrown in her face,” Richard Palmer of the Daily Express wrote last July. “We have all faced unpleasant and unfounded accusations of racism towards Meghan.”

Feldberg was curious. He’d never thought about royals as a hotbed for online trolling. But as the the head of digital at 89up, a European consulting firm that has done social media research for a ground-breaking British parliamentary committee investigation into disinformation and fake news, he was the right person to see if there really was anything suspicious in the Meghan Markle Twitter community. His findings were first reported in the Telegraph by Camilla Tominey and Hannah Furness, the paper’s royal correspondent. Tominey, a veteran royal reporter, has been the focus of what 89up called an “orchestrated attack by this network” he discovered.









						Meghan Markle's Twitter bot network: 'The whole thing is a bit insane' - Macleans.ca
					

A European consulting firm has discovered a 'highly-connected' Twitter hive that is attacking journalists who cover the royals




					www.macleans.ca
				



_


----------



## LittleStar88

mellibelly said:


> Funny, all of the comments on this Access Hollywood post are against 6 & 666. No bots here, just real people sick of the grifters.




I have so much respect for Princess Mako's decision. She handled the whole thing with so much grace and class. She deserved better than what she and her now husband have been put through and would have every reason to be angry or bitter.

The dastardly duo could learn a lot from Princess Mako.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> she loved it for a few months?


Didn’t love it like she loves the title.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> her husband has an actual job as an attorney.


Even though he had a *gasp* ponytail?!


----------



## csshopper

Not posting for politics, only to demonstrate Markdown is not the influencer she thinks she is, her missive on the Royally titled letterhead is crumpled in the trash somewhere in a Congressional waste basket in Washington. (edited for spelling)

*Pushed out of the bill is a paid family leave provision*


----------



## purseinsanity

Nutashha said:


> I Knew It!
> 
> *https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/data-reveals-active-hate-campaigning-against-meghan*
> View attachment 5235007


Ugh I clicked on it, only hoping to see an honorable mention for our thread here, LOL!  The only worthwhile thing I learned was someone's screen name: @*duchofnarsussex* **


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> Even though he had a *gasp* *ponytail*?!


That's okay, so do samurai warriors and it looks like Kei Komuro had to fight for his Princess Mako.


----------



## purseinsanity

I am starting to see why Haznoballs and Markdown (LOVE these nicknames, thank you!) don't actually do any real "work":  it must be utterly exhausting to be them.  Constantly bit**ing, whining, complaining, comparing themselves to Will and Kate, coming up with stupid PR and even more stupid "charity work", and on and on...poor Haz's brain must be utterly fried.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Ugh I clicked on it, only hoping to see an honorable mention for our thread here, LOL!  The only worthwhile thing I learned was someone's screen name: @*duchofnarsussex* **


I could add it to The List, but @QueenofWrapDress already has Duchess of Narsussex.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Not posting for politics, only to demonstrate Markdown is not the influencer she thinks she is, her missive on the Royally titled letterhead is crumpled in the trash somewhere in a Congressional waste basket in Washington. (edited for spelling)
> 
> *Pushed out of the bill is a paid family leave provision*


She is a fool and will never learn when to STFU.  She probably raised some hackles by using her titles in a house where such titles should never be used and as a result she helped to push it out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> She is a fool and will never learn when to STFU.  She probably raised some hackles by using her titles in a house where such titles should never be used and as a result she helped to push it out.


I doubt her letter made any difference 
But yes, probabably some found her letter and the use of the title annoying


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I doubt her letter made any difference
> But yes, *probabably some found her letter and the use of the title annoying*



The whole thing came off as super pretentious and out of touch. She knows nothing about the subject. Penned from her man$$$$$ion while reflecting on her privileged upbringing. Insufferable.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Not posting for politics, only to demonstrate Markdown is not the influencer she thinks she is, her missive on the Royally titled letterhead is crumpled in the trash somewhere in a Congressional waste basket in Washington. (edited for spelling)
> 
> *Pushed out of the bill is a paid family leave provision*


This is a plan that had a great chance of passing, and she was counting on getting credit for it.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they need to be there. I don't get invited to my former employers' bashes.


Totally agree, but .. alas, the Queen is rather 'old-school' and I bet she would want to play nice and invite them (_because I think we all know that if she didn't, she would get pounded by the Meghan sugars - e.g., so racist_!).  However, if they did get invited, I think it would be pretty darn funny if they would have to stand on a totally different balcony .. e.g., NOT the same as where the Queen, Prince Charles, and Prince William (_and families_) would be!


----------



## Chanbal

As we always say pump pump


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> As we always say pump pump




Hahahaaaaa! That was hilarious! I would watch their show - they're GREAT!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> wonder where this over-confidence came from


See, I don't view this as "confidence" at all .. I view it from the point of what a narcissist would view it, as in "what can I get this guy to do FOR ME if I snuggle up to him?" .. hmmmm, perhaps I can get a 'discount' on the food?, perhaps I can get introduced to higher-level people at the museum/restaurant, etc.?  IMO .. everything *MOMOSHIKI* did/does is self-serving and intended to USE to get something (and then, of course, she markles them after she's gotten what she wants)!  Having lived with a narcissist in my family, I think it's a trait that is not learned, but inherent.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reposting this:
> 
> _Bianca Betancourt
> Tue, October 26, 2021,_
> 
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter._
> _Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California. _
> _Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell._
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are ready for their next chapter.
> Following what began a slightly tumultuous start to the year 2020 with their shocking decision to step away from their roles as senior working members of the royal family, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are finding their footing in their new independent lives in Montecito, California.
> Since their very public exit from royal life, the couple has managed to secure a number of lucrative business deals—including multiyear production contracts with Netflix and Spotify, and individual book deals—as well as manage their nonprofit foundation, Archewell. Harper's BAZAAR's royal editor, Omid Scobie, credited the *Sussexes' new chapter as a result of keeping "toxicity" at bay.
> 
> "They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> *"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


Yeah, but .. if this is from Scabies, then .. well, of course, it's going to be glowing!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, but .. alas, the Queen is rather 'old-school' and I bet she would want to play nice and invite them (_because I think we all know that if she didn't, she would get pounded by the Meghan sugars - e.g., so racist_!).  However, if they did get invited, I think it would be pretty darn funny if they would have to stand on a totally different balcony .. e.g., NOT the same as where the Queen, Prince Charles, and Prince William (_and families_) would be!


The kids table!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> As we always say pump pump



They are hilarious. One commenter called her Princess Pumps, but I can't think of her as a princess, because she isn't.  However I wouldn't mind: Duchess or Countess or Baroness of Pump Pump.


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> They are hilarious. One commenter called her Princess Pumps, but I can't think of her as a princess, because she isn't.  However I wouldn't mind: Duchess or Countess or Baroness of Pump Pump.


Let’s bring her down to her real level which is NOT royalty as Cee Jay is fond of reminding us.  How about citizen pump pump or comrade pump pump?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> Funny, all of the comments on this Access Hollywood post are against 6 & 666. No bots here, just real people sick of the grifters.




These two couples have NOTHING in common.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, but .. alas, the Queen is rather 'old-school' and I bet she would want to play nice and invite them (_because I think we all know that if she didn't, she would get pounded by the Meghan sugars - e.g., so racist_!).  However, if they did get invited, I think it would be pretty darn funny if they would have to stand on a totally different balcony .. e.g., NOT the same as where the Queen, Prince Charles, and Prince William (_and families_) would be!



Maybe the have one on the other side of BP? Like, the backside.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> As we always say pump pump




Those Aussies have been savage more than once


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> she loved it for a few months?


Probably not even that long.  Probably hated it from the beginning but she wasn't married yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

If M&H returned to London and appeared on the balcony, wouldn't they have to stand BEHIND Will and Kate's kids and everyone else? Pecking order determines front row, no? 

But, we've already seen Meghan trying to go ahead of the Queen on at least one occasion, remember that one? She'd do it again out of spite.


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> If M&H returned to London and appeared on the balcony, wouldn't they have to stand BEHIND Will and Kate's kids and everyone else? Pecking order determines front row, no?
> 
> *But, we've already seen Meghan trying to go ahead of the Queen on at least one occasion, remember that one? She'd do it again out of spite.*



OMG LOL how did I miss this? When did it happen?


----------



## rose60610

They were celebrating the 50th anniversary of Charles receiving the title "Prince of Wales", going through Buckingham Palace en route to a reception in Charles' honor. TQ, Charles, Camilla, then Will and Kate were looking at some displays along the way. H&M started to bypass the whole line. TQ cast them "a look", Harry stopped dead in his tracks and forced M to stop too. Wenches.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> If M&H returned to London and appeared on the balcony, wouldn't they have to stand BEHIND Will and Kate's kids and everyone else? Pecking order determines front row, no?
> 
> But, we've already seen Meghan trying to go ahead of the Queen on at least one occasion, remember that one? She'd do it again out of spite.



And(!) we saw how Hazzie could not follow instructions at Prince Phillip’s funeral. H&M did not follow the UN’s rules. this isn’t hate - it is fact. And(!) yes, if they dare to call me up to inquire about my comments, they would get the same reaction as on here.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Probably not even that long.  Probably hated it from the beginning but she wasn't married yet.


yes, that's what I was thinking....she said she liked it but she didn't wait long at all to change it


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> See, I don't view this as "confidence" at all .. I view it from the point of what a narcissist would view it, as in "what can I get this guy to do FOR ME if I snuggle up to him?" .. hmmmm, perhaps I can get a 'discount' on the food?, perhaps I can get introduced to higher-level people at the museum/restaurant, etc.?  IMO .. everything *MOMOSHIKI* did/does is self-serving and intended to USE to get something (and then, of course, she markles them after she's gotten what she wants)!  Having lived with a narcissist in my family, I think it's a trait that is not learned, but inherent.


call it confidence or nerve or whatever but what 15-year-old girl feel comfortable coming on to a grown-ass man?  I guess I can't identify as I was a shy kid


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> As we always say pump pump



LOLOL I love the Aussies!
When they busted out with Pump Up the Jam, I almost peed my pants.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL I love the Aussies!
> When they busted out with Pump Up the Jam, I almost peed my pants.


The morning show hosts in the US would never be so cheeky.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> call it confidence or nerve or whatever but what 15-year-old girl feel comfortable coming on to a grown-ass man?  I guess I can't identify as I was a shy kid



‘If I may offer an opinion, it is the same 11 yr old who changed an Ivory Soap commercial! Imagine the ride on _that _ego-train.  Undoubtedly, in her head she can do absolutely no wrong.


----------



## Anokhi

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These two couples have NOTHING in common.



Just my 2 cents as someone who has lived in asia for a decade


For those who don't know, Mako had no choice but to give up her royal title. In Japanese royalty, only the men keep their titles when they marry a commoner. Girls have to marry a royal, but there's no royal families left because it was all abolished when Japan modernized to slowly kill out the japanese royalty. Mako's only choices would be her brother, grandpa, uncle, or just never marry. Since the girls lose their title/benefits, they get a pay out of 1.3m as starting money. People were accusing her husband of marrying her for the payout because his mother had financial trouble. So they waited a few years to sort it out first. Poor girl had it rough and hopefully her sister will be ok when she's next.
Asia is pretty unforgiving to public figures. It's the reason why many Korean/Japanese public figures commit suicide after getting caught in a scandal; whereas in the West a president can say "you can just grab them by the p**sy" and still be loved and forgiven. So Mako and her husband had to take slow baby steps to save their public image and reputation.


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> They were celebrating the 50th anniversary of Charles receiving the title "Prince of Wales", going through Buckingham Palace en route to a reception in Charles' honor. TQ, Charles, Camilla, then Will and Kate were looking at some displays along the way. H&M started to bypass the whole line. TQ cast them "a look", Harry stopped dead in his tracks and forced M to stop too. Wenches.



AND when she stepped in front of the Queen to get into the car FIRST!  She had to be minded by people not to get In front of the Queen at that outing.  You can see the aides trying to steer her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, kids change, especially from 11 to 15. 
To my eye, it looks like she had some work done.

the commercial interview



the Euro trip



ETA: the link for the Euro trip - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5130411/Meghan-Markle-shows-diamond-ring-aged-15.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who raised that woman.

Seriously, I can see everyone - including the Queen who at the end let her go first - giving her the benefit of the doubt (be it nerves or just being overwhelmed with her new role) at the beginning, but we've seen enough footage of her insisting to go first to know she really thinks it's her place to.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who raised that woman.
> 
> Seriously, I can see everyone -including the Queen who at the end let her go first - giving her the benefit of the doubt (be it nerves or just being overwhelmed with her new role) at the beginning, but we've seen enough footage of her insisting to go first to know she really thinks it's her place to.



How many times before this outing do you think she was told/observed/overheard/redirected that the Queen is first? I am guessing enough times that it would not be forgotten.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who raised that woman.
> 
> Seriously, I can see everyone - including the Queen who at the end let her go first - giving her the benefit of the doubt (be it nerves or just being overwhelmed with her new role) at the beginning, but we've seen enough footage of her insisting to go first to know she really thinks it's her place to.



And there was that other footage where she turned her back on the Queen at ascot.  I’m trying to find the youtube of that….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> And there was that other footage where she turned her back on the Queen at ascot.  I’m trying to find the youtube of that….



The one where she did that weird hip thrust towards Charles?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> How many times before this outing do you think she was told/observed/overheard/redirected that the Queen is first? I am guessing enough times that it would not be forgotten.



Maybe it went like the, uh, SUGGESTION to wear a hat - "I'd prefer not to."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Here's a video that discusses some of the above mentioned incidents.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

Is Scooobie the duchS look-alike?


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


>



There is already a more updated count available on twitter.


----------



## needlv

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's a video that discusses some of the above mentioned incidents.




Ah I found it. She spins around, right in front of the Queen. You can see the Queen *does* notice, and another male steps in front of the Queen so it’s not as obvious what mistake Harrys first wife just made.

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/moment-...yal-protocol-right-front-queen-231750342.html

This was hard to find.  I swear someone is scrubbing stuff off the internet….


----------



## Katel

Norm.Core said:


> *Mordor and Handbag* have a LOT of expenses, priority is to their PR people though to keep them current. Even with “lucrative” deals with Netflix and Spotify, if they don’t deliver the goods, their sign up bonuses won’t be enough for their mansion and lifestyle. Doesn’t matter with their Chimpo job titles either. They need a REAL racket and they’re not equipped for that.



hahaha TU!   



lanasyogamama said:


> Honestly, she looks like she’s on steroids.



Inching dangerously close to Jocelyn Wildenstein territory.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


>



I wanted to read the comments on YouTube but they've been turned off.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> I wanted to read the comments on YouTube but they've been turned off.



I think YouTube doesn’t allow any comments on children’s channels…


----------



## purseinsanity

I appreciate everyone posting videos of her stupidity and faux pas, but I must admit, I've more than had my fill of her.  I don't think I can stomach many more of her smug expressions and rude behavior.

I'm going back to this to recover:


----------



## needlv

If you want a bit of fun.  Family feud with the “Name something you would be surprised Prince Harry does himself”


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> If you want a bit of fun.  Family feud with the “Name something you would be surprised Prince Harry does himself”



My answer would be "Think for himself" 
And where's Steve Harvey?  This host is so dull.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> She is a fool and will never learn when to STFU.  She probably raised some hackles by using her titles in a house where such titles should never be used and as a result she helped to push it out.


Never thought of that. So her high-faluting and self-catering missive might have influenced those in charge to turn against the bill


----------



## xincinsin

Handbag1234 said:


> I don't know any adult that would say 'you make my heart go pump pump'





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Months later and I still don't know what that is supposed to mean.


Either she thought she was being cute (like the tongue action she used to love displaying) or she thought that she had to talk in childish terms to write a dedication for a child's book. It does go very well with her ungrammatical nonsense verse. Same substandard writing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

Jesus Enrique Rosas!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Honestly, she looks like she’s on steroids.



That’s a lot of Botox   Her forehead can’t move at all even when she’s talking and smiling. If you stuck a beard on her you’d think she was David Gest.



mellibelly said:


> Funny, all of the comments on this Access Hollywood post are against 6 & 666. No bots here, just real people sick of the grifters.



the photoshop is so wonky on 6&666   It’s lucky ginger is so distinctive or we wouldn’t be able to tell who she is as she looks different in every photo.

The princess Mako story is sweet. From what @Anokhi says she *is* in a situation where she’s treated differently because she’s a woman. 



Anokhi said:


> Just my 2 cents as someone who has lived in asia for a decade
> 
> 
> For those who don't know, Mako had no choice but to give up her royal title. In Japanese royalty, only the men keep their titles when they marry a commoner. Girls have to marry a royal, but there's no royal families left because it was all abolished when Japan modernized to slowly kill out the japanese royalty. Mako's only choices would be her brother, grandpa, uncle, or just never marry. Since the girls lose their title/benefits, they get a pay out of 1.3m as starting money. People were accusing her husband of marrying her for the payout because his mother had financial trouble. So they waited a few years to sort it out first. Poor girl had it rough and hopefully her sister will be ok when she's next.
> Asia is pretty unforgiving to public figures. It's the reason why many Korean/Japanese public figures commit suicide after getting caught in a scandal; whereas in the West a president can say "you can just grab them by the p**sy" and still be loved and forgiven. So Mako and her husband had to take slow baby steps to save their public image and reputation.


This is what I find interesting  when I compare the BRF to other royal families as others seem to have got on with minimising their expenses and cutting down the line of hereditary privileges in a big way, yet for all the talk of their doing so the BRF seem to still be floundering on this despite the fact several individuals have given them grounds for dismissal and they would (most likely) raise their public opinion by doing so. 


needlv said:


> AND when she stepped in front of the Queen to get into the car FIRST!  She had to be minded by people not to get In front of the Queen at that outing.  You can see the aides trying to steer her.



Oh dear this is awkward, that old lady taking too long is driving her nuts isn’t it? This must be the kind, gentle soul Omid told us about.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The one where she did that weird hip thrust towards Charles?



There was a period when she thought being attractive meant walking pelvis first, sort of like in her B&W photo in the garden when her pelvis was projected further forward than her whole head.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Is Scooobie the duchS look-alike?



maybe it's the photo but she looks odd...the left eye is off  and everything looks puffy or airbrushed?


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> maybe it's the photo but she looks odd...the left eye is off  and everything looks puffy or airbrushed?



I think this may be the issue she has with her eye area:








						If Your Eyelid Droops After Botox, Dysport, Jeuveau, or Xeomin
					

One common side effect of Botox is eyelid droop. See what causes it and how can you prevent it and why you should research your doctor first.




					www.webmd.com


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> maybe it's the photo but she looks odd...the left eye is off  and everything looks puffy or airbrushed?



Maybe too much fillers and other stuff?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe too much fillers and other stuff?


I don't really know much about that but I'm sure others here do


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I don't really know much about that but I'm sure others here do



It's called "pillow face"


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I think this may be the issue she has with her eye area:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Your Eyelid Droops After Botox, Dysport, Jeuveau, or Xeomin
> 
> 
> One common side effect of Botox is eyelid droop. See what causes it and how can you prevent it and why you should research your doctor first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.webmd.com


I can't see her using any doctor or provider who wasn't very well qualified....but I guess things can go wrong anyway


----------



## xincinsin

I'm sure her failed attempt at hijacking credit for paid parental leave will now result in her sobbing in bed, softly but just loud enough to wake Hazard up...


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'm sure her failed attempt at hijacking credit for paid parental leave will now result in her sobbing in bed, softly but just loud enough to wake Hazard up...


well, now that they are free, he can call a shrink for her....won't have to go to HR for permission


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> well, now that they are free, he can call a shrink for her....won't have to go to HR for permission


Or Archewell's HR can pander to her. After all, Archewell leads the pack in staff benefits by offering many months of parental leave. And they can deduct it from their taxes as a business expense


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I can't see her using any doctor or provider who wasn't very well qualified....but I guess things can go wrong anyway


Yes, look at Linda Evangelista.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, look at Linda Evangelista.


what? did linda have botched PS?


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, look at Linda Evangelista.


I found the story about Linda.....didn't see any pics....she says she is unrecognizeable but this procedure is usually on the body, not the face?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> I can't see her using any doctor or provider who wasn't very well qualified...



Right, because she has such a long history of making smart decisions


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I found the story about Linda.....didn't see any pics....she says she is unrecognizeable but this procedure is usually on the body, not the face?


I agree! But from what I read she had the fat removal removal face and body, and she had this crazy rare side effect of the fat cells growing larger instead of shrinking.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree! But from what I read she had the fat removal removal face and body, and she had this crazy rare side effect of the fat cells growing larger instead of shrinking.


if she filed a lawsuit there have to be pictures....I'm being morbidly curious


----------



## sdkitty

I was just listening to NPR radio and they were talking to a British woman about the Twitter campaign against Meghan....guess she's a victim again....talking about bots, etc.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> if she filed a lawsuit there have to be pictures....I'm being morbidly curious


It’s not that terrible, but I suppose for her, it’s a huge change.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I found the story about Linda.....didn't see any pics....she says she is unrecognizeable but this procedure is usually on the body, not the face?


I side eye her entire story.  

Regarding that report that Harry was told to dump her and Andrew blew up at her, I need a first hand report from the person who actually witnessed this before I will really believe it.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s not that terrible, but I suppose for her, it’s a huge change.



She put on weight.  Aging and menopause.  She is totally recognizable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I side eye her entire story.



Yeah, I feel for her if something went wrong, but not only do I fail to see how there's grounds for a lawsuit when this is a wellknown risk with this procedure and she'd have to sign a waiver for it...when she complained how her career was ruined my first thought was "Woman, the 90s were a long time ago". Modelling is generally not a job you expect to do until you're 70.



> Regarding that report that Harry was told to dump her and Andrew blew up at her, I need a first hand report from the person who actually witnessed this before I will really believe it.



My main take-away was...did she really say that? How rude and impertinent do you have to be.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s not that terrible, but I suppose for her, it’s a huge change.


oh yeah, not good


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I was just listening to NPR radio and they were talking to a British woman about the Twitter campaign against Meghan....guess she's a victim again....talking about bots, etc.



Is that the NPR narrative? Since obviously there is nothing Ms. Perfect Meghan has ever done that could make people dislike her, any negative comments must be the work of a few deranged racist haters who started a bot campaign to bring a strong, respected woman down.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I feel for her if something went wrong, but not only do I fail to see how there's grounds for a lawsuit when this is a wellknown risk with this procedure and she'd have to sign a waiver for it...when she complained how her career was ruined my first thought was "Woman, the 90s were a long time ago". Modelling is generally not a job you expect to do until you're 70.
> 
> 
> 
> My main take-away was...did she really say that? How rude and impertinent do you have to be.


true modelling doesn't ususally last into your 50's but Naomi Campbell is still working


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Is that the NPR narrative? Since obviously there is nothing Ms. Perfect Meghan has ever done that could make people dislike her, any negative comments must be the work of a few deranged racist haters who started a bot campaign to bring a strong, respected woman down.


well, that's the narrative of the woman they were interviewing.....as usual I wasn't paying full attention but they made it sound pretty extreme


----------



## csshopper

Ooops, reposted something.


----------



## sdkitty

well apparently she is very "trolled"
but maybe if she didn't go around bringing attention to herself, calling herself Duchess, saying things like the trolling was "almost unsurvivable" she wouldn't be dislked as much
Meghan Markle Online Hate Campaign Fueled by Twitter's Own Algorithm—Report (newsweek.com)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> well apparently she is very "trolled"



Oh really? What about us? I feel trolled by the loudmouthed Harkles.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> My answer would be "Think for himself"
> And where's Steve Harvey?  This host is so dull.



Steve Harvey? I haven't seen it since Richard Dawson


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> well apparently she is very "trolled"
> but maybe if she didn't go around bringing attention to herself, calling herself Duchess, saying things like the trolling was "almost unsurvivable" she wouldn't be dislked as much
> Meghan Markle Online Hate Campaign Fueled by Twitter's Own Algorithm—Report (newsweek.com)







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh really? What about us? I feel trolled by the loudmouthed Harkles.



IKR
That headline could be interpreted either way. 
I didn't click on it but Raptor has a pretty good offensive hate campaign thanks to her Squad. But the article was probably about her being on the receiving end.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Is that the NPR narrative? Since obviously there is nothing Ms. Perfect Meghan has ever done that could make people dislike her, any negative comments must be the work of a few deranged racist haters who started a bot campaign to bring a strong, respected woman down.



H&M know Twitter is not a real place, right? Exactly how dim are the Dumbartons?
[yeah, I know, it’s a bit snarky.]


----------



## Aminamina

I hate getting second hand embarrassment over her. This is ridiculous. Did she really said that??:
“Meghan spoke about how Harry and their son Archie inspired the book in the video. _“_I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son, Archie, and then turned it into a book *so* *you can enjoy it too*,” she said.
Before she began reading, she also touched on why the illustrations in the book—by Christian Robinson—are so special. “I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolors, which isn’t the usual medium he works in[_blah blah blah I am so special, kids do you get it, Duchess os Sussex!!!_], but he did it to make this extra special,” she said. “I hope you love the pictures *as much as you love the words.”*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hate to break it to you Ms. Egomaniac...nobody loves the words.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aminamina said:


> I hate getting second hand embarrassment over her. This is ridiculous. Did she really said that??:
> “Meghan spoke about how Harry and their son Archie inspired the book in the video. _“_I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son, Archie, and then turned it into a book *so* *you can enjoy it too*,” she said.
> Before she began reading, she also touched on why the illustrations in the book—by Christian Robinson—are so special. “I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolors, which isn’t the usual medium he works in[_blah blah blah I am so special, kids do you get it, Duchess os Sussex!!!_], but he did it to make this extra special,” she said. “I hope you love the pictures *as much as you love the words.”*



This is exactly what she has been doing since 11 yrs. old. She takes someone else’s idea, makes 1 change and presto bravo, she is a genius! She cannot allow someone else to win. Somebody taught her to be like that. _That_ is some horrible parenting imo.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her face? It is not just the weight. She went from looking young for her age to looking middle aged beyond her years within months.



I think what's missing is the droopy clumps of hair. When her hair is pulled back her face changes. Her forehead is just like her mother's and it is not a "young" look. Kudos to her because she has learned how to use her hair to her advantage. I know that when I pull back my hair (I am a bangs person) I look older and very different. And on top of it all, I don't think she is aging well--some just people don't. 

And she HAS to know (even though she doesn't read the comments on the internet) that she isn't well-liked like she was around the time of her marriage--that can't make her happy.  

And to those that were commenting on her working at a yogurt shop when she was 13, I think she really WAS 15 or 16. Like we have said earlier--keeping all the lies straight is hard work.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan brings most criticism on herself. Typical brat that purposely spews garbage, then when called on it, is like "Who? Me? I didn't mean it that way! No, you misunderstood! You don't know what I go through! I'm the victim here!" She does this crap on purpose, it's obvious to me she loves to stir the pot then wallow in victimhood.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

xincinsin said:


> There was a period when she thought being attractive meant walking pelvis first, sort of like in her B&W photo in the garden when her pelvis was projected further forward than her whole head.


Cryin'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hate to break it to you *Ms. Egomaniac*...nobody loves the words.


Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #8 nickname, *Ms. Egomaniac* and whenever M opens her mouth, she inevitably attests to its veracity. It's now on The List.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aminamina said:


> I hate getting second hand embarrassment over her. This is ridiculous. Did she really said that??:
> “Meghan spoke about how Harry and their son Archie inspired the book in the video. _“_I wrote this as a poem for my husband and our son, Archie, and then turned it into a book *so* *you can enjoy it too*,” she said.
> Before she began reading, she also touched on why the illustrations in the book—by Christian Robinson—are so special. “I asked him to do something special for me and use watercolors, which isn’t the usual medium he works in[_blah blah blah I am so special, kids do you get it, Duchess os Sussex!!!_], but he did it to make this extra special,” she said. “I hope you love the pictures *as much as you love the words.”*


She really really said that!??? Then...


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Sorry MM there are many men like that out there. I like mine rugged, manly, tender, *smart* but definitely manly.


Smart is a HUGE need for me; certainly, the others are important as well .. but there is no way I could live (heck - even be with) a big-time dumba$$ like *Handcuffed Harry*!


----------



## lanasyogamama

the montebozos have put out another oPeN LeTtEr.  I don’t even have the energy to post it.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> the montebozos have put out another oPeN LeTtEr.  I don’t even have the energy to post it.



Got it. They are making demands from the G20. They are so far out of their league. It’s amazing there is anyone left who isn’t laughing at their pretentiousness. They have an uncontrollable need to wedge themselves into everything. 









						Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.




					www.google.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Got it. They are making demands from the G20. They are so far out of their league. It’s amazing there is anyone left who isn’t laughing at their pretentiousness. They have an uncontrollable need to wedge themselves into everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


The Monte-know-nothings both had the benefit of very expensive private school educations. Their respective alma maters should be embarrassed to have allowed these dim bulbs to graduate with apparently zero ability for critical thinking. Their parents should demand a refund of all tuition money


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Got it. They are making demands from the G20. They are so far out of their league. It’s amazing there is anyone left who isn’t laughing at their pretentiousness. They have an uncontrollable need to wedge themselves into everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


I have a “secret” for her. Most poor countries, especially island nations, got vaccinated first due to the fact that one COVId case could wipe out the entire islands and people. They got it before we did. They’re so dumb!!!


----------



## lulu212121

Did they mention Chunga Changa in their letter?


----------



## xincinsin

I have a premonition that they will be penning open letters to every darn big event from now on, calling on important people to do things. Maybe Time will call them Couple of the Year and find some loco friend to praise them for surviving great adversity and becoming champions for the undertrodden of the world.

If only they did more and spewed less...

I'm very curious about how much actual cash Archewell donates. Every cake,  beanie and box of veg is trumpeted to the world, but every time it's a donation that is presumably cash-based, there is no mention of numbers. In fact, I get the feeling that a large portion of the donation is in the form of lending branding influence. If the Twats of Montecito are associated with your charity, you will look good and more people will donate to it.


----------



## bag-mania

It is disheartening how many publications are putting the open letter on their web sites as if they actually have credibility. I guess anything for the clicks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Heck, if all it takes to end this scourge on humankind is for 2 royal-pretenders to stomp their feet and demand that it ends, my goodness, why didn’t they do it sooner??? What took them so long?   [no worries,  i do know the answer].


----------



## Chanbal

About Harry, this time…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> About Harry, this time…




Whaaaaa??? Hold up. The O interview has been removed from the internet.
Wow.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



Might be the ONLY time I've liked Andrew.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> About Harry, this time…



"Ain't"??  Wow, I'm shocked he uses that with the Queen's English!


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Steve Harvey? I haven't seen it since Richard Dawson


Gross, I remember him, always insisting on kissing every female contestant on the mouth!  He'd be slapped with some lawsuits now...


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> I side eye her entire story.
> 
> Regarding that report that Harry was told to dump her and Andrew blew up at her, I need a first hand report from the person who actually witnessed this before I will really believe it.



I agree with you on the story aboutPrince Andrew telling her off being fake.  Her lips do not move after Harry grumpily told her to turn around - and she is blinking rapidly… (anger or tears).  Her lips do not move.


----------



## Chanbal

Some


needlv said:


> *I agree with you on the story aboutPrince Andrew telling her off being fake.*  Her lips do not move after Harry grumpily told her to turn around - and she is blinking rapidly… (anger or tears).  Her lips do not move.



Poor Andrew, he just lost the little credit he had on this thread.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't understand why they don't use some of their millions in causes so close to their hearts. 

_*Meghan and Harry went on to demand that everyone must do 'everything' in their power to get vaccine doses to as many people across the globe 'in the right order'.

*_








						Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I don't understand why they don't use some of their millions in causes so close to their hearts.
> 
> _*Meghan and Harry went on to demand that everyone must do 'everything' in their power to get vaccine doses to as many people across the globe 'in the right order'.
> View attachment 5236826
> *_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Golly, we all know that the leaders of countries await proclamations from the Harkles with bated  breath.   How do world leaders occupy their time whilst awaiting being told what to do by these two?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa??? Hold up. The O interview has been removed from the internet.
> Wow.
> 
> View attachment 5236707



Mh...I wonder why that is? As in, did the troublesome two demand it because their cash flow is running low and they thought that 
would help, or did Oprah have it removed because it finally dawned on her they are full of it?

But also I'm sure someone will have made copies. Nothing ever really vanishes from the internet.


----------



## Annawakes

That latest open letter is just……unbelievable.  Truly a slow moving train wreck.  Wow.  They are so many levels of delusional it renders me speechless.


----------



## xincinsin

Considering Methane's dislike of doing actual work, love of being seen as influential, and habit of trying to charm powerful men, could it be that she is aiming to become a lobbyist rather than run for political office? She would definitely wallow in the backroom mud of dirty politics and it would stroke her ego to have links to multiple powerful people.


----------



## Chanbal

Aussies do it again!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"None of it makes any sense"...we know!


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> That latest open letter is just……unbelievable.  Truly a slow moving train wreck.  Wow.  They are so many levels of delusional it renders me speechless.


I think these letters follow a similar principle to the ones she used to write to companies as a child.

I read somewhere that she got in the habit of writing to companies and getting candy and other free stuff back from them in return. An 'activist' is born, and the rest is history! 

I googled this practice and it works.   








						How I Got 14 Companies Like Chipotle and Trader Joe's to Send Me Free Stuff
					

Even I couldn't believe Trader Joe's sent me a gift card.




					www.thrillist.com


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> IKR
> That headline could be interpreted either way.
> I didn't click on it but Raptor has a pretty good offensive hate campaign thanks to her Squad. But the article was probably about her being on the receiving end.


yes, I found a few different articles about how she is the victim of trolls and bots


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Got it. They are making demands from the G20. They are so far out of their league. It’s amazing there is anyone left who isn’t laughing at their pretentiousness. They have an uncontrollable need to wedge themselves into everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


They need to fire their PR group, this is getting too embarrassing--hopping from one bandwagon to another.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Smart is a HUGE need for me; certainly, the others are important as well .. but there is no way I could live (heck - even be with) a big-time dumba$$ like *Handcuffed Harry*!


 Thanks @CeeJay for your #13 nickname, Handcuffed Harry, that has been added to The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> I agree with you on the story aboutPrince Andrew telling her off being fake.  Her lips do not move after Harry grumpily told her to turn around - and she is blinking rapidly… (anger or tears).  Her lips do not move.



she doesn't like being told what to do.....that's fixed now....she's the boss


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> the *montebozos* have put out another oPeN LeTtEr.  I don’t even have the energy to post it.


 Thanks @lanasyogamama for your aptly described #4 nickname, Montebozos, that has been added to The List. Congratulations and I hope you feel better and more energetic very soon.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't like being told what to do.....that's fixed now....she's the boss


Yep, she wasn't in total control at that point. Getting him away from his family & homeland was key in becoming the puppeteer (classic abuser move, I believe). 

Oh Harry--will you ever wake up to what has happened?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> *The Monte-know-nothings* both had the benefit of very expensive private school educations. Their respective alma maters should be embarrassed to have allowed these dim bulbs to graduate with apparently zero ability for critical thinking. Their parents should demand a refund of all tuition money


Thanks @DoggieBags for your first nickname, The Monte-know-nothings, a good assessment of this duo. Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## rose60610

With all the letters and forced appearances these dunces have done, I gotta wonder if any anyone has penned a letter to THEM saying they're full of crap. If they pen a letter, notice how the world has to know about it. As if their contributions to anything make any difference. Maybe all these stupid letters are M's sneaky way of reminding the world's billionaires that there's a duchess out there with a track record of climbing social ladders and that she'd gladly give H and the kids the boot in exchange for any billionaire's thick wallet. Run, Elon, run!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I have a premonition that they will be penning open letters to every darn big event from now on, calling on important people to do things. Maybe Time will call them Couple of the Year and find some loco friend to praise them for surviving great adversity and becoming champions for the undertrodden of the world.
> 
> If only they did more and spewed less...
> 
> I'm very curious about how much actual cash Archewell donates. Every cake,  beanie and box of veg is trumpeted to the world, but every time it's a donation that is presumably cash-based, there is no mention of numbers. In fact, I get the feeling that a large portion of the donation is in the form of lending branding influence. If the *Twats of Montecito* are associated with your charity, you will look good and more people will donate to it.


Thanks @xincinsin for your #21 nickname, Twats of Montecito. Congratulations and here is your The List #21 Ribbon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> yes, I found a few different articles about how she is the victim of trolls and bots


Because real people love her, right? 
Didn't she or he claim that they never looked at social media for the sake of their mental health? How in that case is Hazard going to be a contributing member of the Aspen Commission? It'll be like those paid book reviewers who publish an opinion despite never having read the book.


----------



## Nico61

To whomever was asking about how much money they keep from arsewipe charity: a massive 95%
Its registered in Delaware. They only have to give 5%
Allegedly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Didn't she or he claim that they never looked at social media for the sake of their mental health?



She did, but for some weird reason - must have been a glitch in the matrix? - she knew about even the most mundane things said about her.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did, but for some weird reason - must have been a glitch in the matrix? - she knew about even the most mundane things said about her.


if your biggest desire is to have attention, then is any attention better than none?
I honestly can't understand a person like her.  Or maybe I can understand but can't relate.  I see her as this person who wants to be the most famous, the most revered woman in the world.  so it makes sense that she would try to emulate Diana, who, especially in death, was an icon.  
Obviously some people don't see her this way.  The stans see her as a good and beautiful person.  If H&M had just done their jobs - or if they had come to the US and led a quiet life - I think I would have been pretty neutral about her.  It's her attention - and adulation - seeking that burns me up.
I don't need you to tell me what to think about climate change, covid vaccinations, who to vote for, or anything else.


----------



## Chanbal

Why are they signing a letter together with Tedros? This makes no sense!


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s not that terrible, but I suppose for her, it’s a huge change.


When you've been called one of the most beautiful women in the world for much of your adult life and suddenly you no longer are, it has to take a heavy psychological toll.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> She put on weight.  Aging and menopause.  She is totally recognizable.


Her face kind of looks like Chrissy Teigen there.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Got it. They are making demands from the G20. They are so far out of their league. It’s amazing there is anyone left who isn’t laughing at their pretentiousness. They have an uncontrollable need to wedge themselves into everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


We should be thankful that they're not actually at the G20 making fools of themselves like little Vanky ***** did. Although if they were it would provide enough fodder to take us into 2022.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> *When you've been called one of the most beautiful women* in the world for much of your adult life and suddenly you no longer are, it has to take a heavy psychological toll.





charlottawill said:


> Her face kind of looks like Chrissy Teigen there.


For a moment I thought that you were talking about 666 and something was wrong with your statement. Then I realized that is about Linda Envagelista. I googled her, and wow  I wonder if 666 is also following in her footsteps with surgical procedures.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I have a premonition that they will be penning open letters to every darn big event from now on, calling on important people to do things.


"Well it worked for me with Proctor and Gamble when I was 11".


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Her face kind of looks like Chrissy Teigen there.


her face looks very full, like the face of a heavy set woman....ironic since the procedure she got was some sort of fat removal.....I guess it goes to show that even if you're wealthy and choose a reputable provider things can go wrong with cosmetic procedures


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't like being told what to do.....that's fixed now....she's the boss


He's been paying for that moment ever since.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> her face looks very full, like the face of a heavy set woman....ironic since the procedure she got was some sort of fat removal.....I guess it goes to show that even if you're wealthy and choose a reputable provider things can go wrong with cosmetic procedures


Apparently an uncommon side effect of CoolSculpting is that you actually grow more fat than lose it. That is what she is arguing, claiming she was not informed of this risk before the procedure. Interestingly, I used to see their commercials and those of competitor Sonobello a lot on my local stations. I only see Sonobello these days, and I'm sure that is not without risk.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I don't understand why they don't use some of their millions in causes so close to their hearts.
> 
> _*Meghan and Harry went on to demand that everyone must do 'everything' in their power to get vaccine doses to as many people across the globe 'in the right order'.
> View attachment 5236826
> *_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan write open letter demanding G20 leaders end Covid
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have penned an open letter asking the leaders of the 'wealthiest' nations at the G20 summit in Rome to send more vaccines to low-income countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I still wonder who they think they are to make any "Demands" of others??


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Apparently an uncommon side effect of CoolSculpting is that you actually grow more fat than lose it. That is what she is arguing, claiming she was not informed of this risk before the procedure. Interestingly, I used to see their commercials and those of competitor Sonobello a lot on my local stations. I only see Sonobello these days, and I'm sure that is not without risk.


Even if risks were disclosed I can understand a person like her who has had a huge career based on her looks would be Very upset at this result and would be inclined to seek damages


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Betty-Lou

sdkitty said:


> yes, I found a few different articles about how she is the victim of trolls and bots


I think this was the only way her PR team could get *The Montecito Messenger* to shut up about her low approval ratings.
A nice PR move by the PR team to stop The *Montecito Moaner. 

Maggie Muggins - *Your name game is loads of fun. You could add a timer for the most names in 1 min.

Then sell the idea and donate all funds to your favorite charity Archwell -- Sarcasm at its best! LOL


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I still wonder who they think they are to make any "Demands" of others??


Making unrealistic demands like a toddler seems to be their forte.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Even if risks were disclosed I can understand a person like her who has had a huge career based on her looks would be Very upset at this result and would be inclined to seek damages


This is the woman who famously proclaimed back in the 90s that she didn't get out of bed for less than ten grand. Those days are long gone. She also sued her billionaire ex bf Francois Pinault (who is now married to Salma Hayek) for child support after he denied paternity. She won after he took a test and was awarded big time child support for their son. She is no stranger to the courts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Making unrealistic demands like a toddler seems to be their forte.



She’s been doing it since 11.  Guessing she was a constant whiner in class - the kid who goes why this, why that with every lesson.
Hazz supposedly was the one who misbehaved constantly, so they must have loads of fun at their McMansion. Npt.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Nico61 said:


> To whomever was asking about how much money they keep from *arsewipe charity*: a massive 95%
> Its registered in Delaware. They only have to give 5%
> Allegedly


Thanks @Nico61 for your first nickname Arsewipe Charity.   Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s been doing it since 11.  Guessing she was a constant whiner in class - the kid who goes why this, why that with every lesson.
> Hazz supposedly was the one who misbehaved constantly, so they must have loads of fun at their McMansion. Npt.



I think you hit on something. She is a constant whiner ("Not many people have asked me if I'm OK"). Maybe that's what turned Harry on. She immediately turned on the pity spigot at the same time she basked in his fame when they met. Harry was thinking "Wow, I never met anyone who suffered so much and has done well for herself." He's so naive it's pathetic (Chunga Changa anyone?) Did Harry think he was this wonderful knight in shining armor who could rescue the damsel in distress? When Meghan found the gig working for her she went into overdrive, to this day demanding pity from everyone else and attention for her idiotic word salad letters.


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


> Why are they signing a letter together with Tedros? This makes no sense!



Her signature looks like she started with her very own, ahem, caligraphy, and when it took too long, somebody started pulling away the letter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This is the woman who famously proclaimed back in the 90s that she didn't get out of bed for less than ten grand. Those days are long gone. She also sued her billionaire ex bf Francois Pinault (who is now married to Salma Hayek) for child support after he denied paternity. She won after he took a test and was awarded big time child support for their son. She is no stranger to the courts.



I think this tells us a lot why she's now looking to sue again. She might have a cash flow problem, because why on earth would you argue with your a*shole ex if you didn't need the f*cking money....and that was 15 years ago. Not that I didn't applaud the fact the jerk didn't get away with his sh*tty move.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I had to google Salma's kid because I always thought it was unfortunate to have basically a goddess as a mom and look like a spitting image of your dad, but she has totally grown into her looks.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Betty-Lou said:


> I think this was the only way her PR team could get *The Montecito Messenger* to shut up about her low approval ratings.
> A nice PR move by the PR team to stop The *Montecito Moaner.
> 
> Maggie Muggins - *Your name game is loads of fun. You could add a timer for the most names in 1 min.
> 
> Then sell the idea and donate all funds to your favorite charity Archwell -- Sarcasm at its best! LOL


 Thanks @Betty-Lou for your #3 nickname The Montecito Messenger and your #4 Montecito Moaner. Congratulations and here's a Gold Ribbon for #3.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> This is the woman who famously proclaimed back in the 90s that she didn't get out of bed for less than ten grand. Those days are long gone. She also sued her billionaire ex bf Francois Pinault (who is now married to Salma Hayek) for child support after he denied paternity. She won after he took a test and was awarded big time child support for their son. She is no stranger to the courts.


I knew he had a baby with someone else at the same time as Salma, I forgot it was Linda’s.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK"


Funny, I've never seen that on one of those cutesy signs in Home Goods - "Live, Laugh, Love" and such.

I have, however, seen plenty that say "Keep Calm and Carry On".


----------



## DoggieBags

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @DoggieBags for your first nickname, The Monte-know-nothings, a good assessment of this duo. Congratulations and welcome to The List.
> View attachment 5237071


Thank you! I’m honored to make The List


----------



## mellibelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Nico61 for your first nickname Arsewipe Charity.   Congratulations and welcome to The List.
> 
> View attachment 5237304


Arsewipe is a genius nickname for Archewell!


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


>



gawd


----------



## CeeJay

mellibelly said:


> This nickname from a YouTube comment made me snort laugh…*Haznoballs*
> Also Markdown LOL


HA HA HA .. the best evah!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Piers never joined after CeeJay invited him. How rude.


Yeah, but I don't give up easily .. I have also written in his comments to join us; next time he posts something about these 2 MEANINGLESS FOOLS, I will be sure to DM him as well as write a comment!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Yeah, but I don't give up easily .. I have also written in his comments to join us; next time he posts something about these 2 MEANINGLESS FOOLS, I will be sure to DM him as well as write a comment!



That is the spirit! Never give up


----------



## Jktgal

Maybe we can pen an open letter and send it to Piers. My heart goes pump pump pump pump about this idea....


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


>



In one of the comments, a Stan defended Methane by saying Catherine was wearing a see-through outfit when Wills first saw her, while Methane was fully clothed when she first met Hazard. Her conclusion: Methane therefore has more class


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> In one of the comments, a Stan defended Methane by saying Catherine was wearing a see-through outfit when Wills first saw her, while Methane was fully clothed when she first met Hazard. Her conclusion: Methane therefore has more class


The Stan is incorrect. They had known each other for some time as friends at university, but he saw her in different light, shall we say, when she wore a sheer black lingerie ensemble at a school fashion show. That's old news.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like she wrote another letter.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like she wrote another letter.



Good lord how many trees is the woman killing?


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> It looks like she wrote another letter.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Good lord how many trees is the woman killing?




The fulfilling days of Pump Pump, Duchess of Bandwagon!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Duchess of Bandwagon!


Perfection!


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting comment!


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Perfection!


haha, this one is perfection imo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> The Stan is incorrect. They had known each other for some time as friends at university, but he saw her in different light, shall we say, when she wore a sheer black lingerie ensemble at a school fashion show. That's old news.


IIRC that see-through outfit was sold at auction for a princely sum, proceeds going to charity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


>




For some reason Kate's face also doesn't look as if it's about to fall off.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> Interesting comment!



I love Lady C. She seems like a hoot! Imagine what a drag being friends with the Monteshitshows would be

I learned something else from Twitter today. Christopher Guest is a baron! He can be styled Lord and his wife Lady Jamie Lee Curtis. But she doesn’t because she’s cool and not a pretentious ahole like Markdown.


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason Kate's face also doesn't look as if it's about to fall off.


There’s also an insane filter on her video. It looks like vintage soap opera with Vaseline on the camera lens effect. Funny, no other Brightly Storytime videos are so filtered and blurry. She’s clearly insecure about her looks. Nothing natural or ‘authentic’ about anything she does.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The fulfilling days of Pump Pump, *Duchess of Bandwagon*!



Thanks @Chanbal for your #22 nickname, Duchess of Bandwagon, that has been added to The List. Congratulations and here's the #22 Ribbon.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The Stan is incorrect. They had known each other for some time as friends at university, but he saw her in different light, shall we say, when she wore a sheer black lingerie ensemble at a school fashion show. That's old news.


I thought (from memory, may not be correct) that they had been dating and maybe were on a break or something when she wore that sheer outfit


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> I love Lady C. She seems like a hoot! Imagine what a drag being friends with the Monteshitshows would be
> 
> I learned something else from Twitter today. Christopher Guest is a baron! He can be styled Lord and his wife Lady Jamie Lee Curtis. But she doesn’t because she’s cool and not a pretentious ahole like Markdown.


Whenever JLC is on the Today show they tease her about being Lady Guest. She is a good sport about it, doesn't take herself too seriously and is far more accomplished than the Duchess of Bandwagon.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I needed a little diversion today so I played with my crayons, figuratively speaking.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I thought (from memory, may not be correct) that they had been dating and maybe were on a break or something when she wore that sheer outfit


As I recall they were friends at university, she wore it at a charity fashion show and apparently it prompted Wills to want to take things to the next level.  The "break" was post university, during which time the tabloids nicknamed her "Waity Katy".


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> As I recall they were friends at university, she wore it at a charity fashion show and apparently it prompted Wills to want to take things to the next level.  The "break" was post university, during which time the tabloids nicknamed her "Waity Katy".


well, whatever the sequence of events, it turned out great for Will


----------



## tiktok

charlottawill said:


> The Stan is incorrect. They had known each other for some time as friends at university, but he saw her in different light, shall we say, when she wore a sheer black lingerie ensemble at a school fashion show. That's old news.



Whatever it was, they’re comparing the behavior of college kids to the behavior of a 35 year old woman (or whatever age she was). That’s smart, because if they were comparing the younger W&K to the younger H&M we may need to decide if a sheer outfit is more or less classy than a Nazi uniform…


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Whatever it was, they’re comparing the behavior of college kids to the behavior of a 35 year old woman (or whatever age she was). That’s smart, because if they were comparing the younger W&K to the younger H&M we may need to decide if a sheer outfit is more or less classy than a Nazi uniform…


or being a "yacht girl" which could be code for "call girl"


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Whatever it was, they’re comparing the behavior of college kids to the behavior of a 35 year old woman (or whatever age she was). That’s smart, because if they were comparing the younger W&K to the younger H&M we may need to decide if a sheer outfit is more or less classy than a Nazi uniform…



So true!  Thank you for saying this

Facts on the dress:








						Kate Middleton See Through Dress Auctioned Off
					

The lingerie-style dress that caught Prince William's eye sells for a bundle at auction




					people.com


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh...I wonder why that is? As in, did the troublesome two demand it because their cash flow is running low and they thought that
> would help, or did Oprah have it removed because it finally dawned on her they are full of it?
> 
> But also I'm sure someone will have made copies. Nothing ever really vanishes from the internet.


Oprah is just as rotten as Meghan, so it takes one to know one.

Interest in her hasn’t been all that for over ten years now. So Meghan latched on to her and Oprah thought: hey, someone new to keep in the spotlight for a while… but Meghan has her maxed out since she’s half Oprah’s age and still has the energy to be more demanding and shameless about it.

I guess Oprah has seen the backlash, realized it’s not getting any better and decided to quietly take it down after contemplating for a while.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Betty-Lou for your *#3* nickname The Montecito Messenger and your *#4* Montecito Moaner. Congratulations and here's a Gold Ribbon for #3.
> View attachment 5237335


My sincere apologies @Betty-Lou because that should've been nicknames #4 & #5 and as a result you should've received the Nickname Master Award.
Belated congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oprah is just as rotten as Meghan, so it takes one to know one.
> 
> Interest in her hasn’t been all that for over ten years now. So Meghan latched on to her and Oprah thought: hey, someone new to keep in the spotlight for a while… but Meghan has her maxed out since she’s half Oprah’s age and still has the energy to be more demanding and shameless about it.
> 
> I guess Oprah has seen the backlash, realized it’s not getting any better and decided to quietly take it down after contemplating for a while.



Especially since it lost at the Emmy’s.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason Kate's face also doesn't look as if it's about to fall off.


Meghan uses a lot of filters for her video appearances, or as some people suspected. Put Vaseline on the camera lens, lol.

Nobody knows who “Rachel Meghan Markle” is … nobody will know Meghan when she’s without Harry … so she has to use that “racist” title … the thing is, Catherine is a commoner and she knows these things … she knows that regular people don’t care what duchess you are because they don’t know what that stands for anyway … Meghan has faded into oblivion and will still try to clutch onto fame with those cellar spider legs but to no avail.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> Especially since it lost at the Emmy’s.


Why was that BS even nominated at the first place? Like who in these economic times wants to see rich people whine about not getting money from their parents?


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> cellar spider legs


----------



## poopsie

mellibelly said:


> I love Lady C. She seems like a hoot! Imagine what a drag being friends with the Monteshitshows would be
> 
> I learned something else from Twitter today. Christopher Guest is a baron! He can be styled Lord and his wife Lady Jamie Lee Curtis. But she doesn’t because she’s cool and not a pretentious ahole like *Markdown*.



Markdown! 
She certainly is cheap. LOL


----------



## poopsie

tiktok said:


> Whatever it was, they’re comparing the behavior of college kids to the behavior of a 35 year old woman (or whatever age she was). That’s smart, because if they were comparing the younger W&K to the younger H&M *we may need to decide if a sheer outfit is more or less classy than a Nazi uniform…*




Or a birthday suit


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> In one of the comments, a Stan defended Methane by saying Catherine was wearing a see-through outfit when Wills first saw her, while Methane was fully clothed when she first met Hazard. Her conclusion: Methane therefore has more class


How does she know they were clothed?


----------



## muddledmint

Have we discussed her VERY generous gift of a $25 Starbucks gift card for the campaigners fighting for paid leave???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> I guess Oprah has seen the backlash, realized it’s not getting any better and decided to quietly take it down after contemplating for a while.



Yeah, that's way more plausible than "Someone saw the light".


----------



## csshopper

muddledmint said:


> Have we discussed her VERY generous gift of a $25 Starbucks gift card for the campaigners fighting for paid leave???


IF she had any class she would embarrassed to have this puny action publicized. $25 per person might have been worth a very minor sentence somewhere, but even that is a stretch.  Depending on the size of the group it would be a small cup per person and don't bother with any of the special drinks, they would blow the budget. It's a wonder she didn't include a free copy of _The Bench _for them to read on their coffee breaks.

A week ago today during a historic storm, 7.5" one day rain total in the gauge on the deck, wind gusts and Flood Evacuation Warning as the adjacent Creek surged along filled with debris washing downstream from the past year's forest fires, I had a delivery to my door. The young girl had to walk a bit from the parking area in to my location. I saw her coming and she was struggling to manage it all in the wind and sheeting rain and was getting soaked in the process. I received my groceries carefully packed and secured in tightly closed heavy duty plastic bags. Extra effort had been taken to protect everything being delivered. Given the conditions I would not have been surprised if the delivery had been delayed, residents were being encouraged to stay in. I really appreciated receiving mine and in perfect condition and tipped her more than Methane would have ever thought to do.

Didn't call the local paper to tell them about it. It was a gesture repeated uncounted times around the world by other ordinary citizens, unlike the NARCISISSTIC, PUBLICITY CRAVING HO, who for $25 bucks got her high paid lackeys to grab her a headline. 

Thinking about it, it is the ultimate statement of how skewed her opinion of herself  is in relationship to others. She's a dried up emotional husk, and reading the headline I laughed at her pitiful attempt to be important.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

breakfastatcartier said:


> Why was that BS even nominated at the first place? Like who in these economic times wants to see rich people whine about not getting money from their parents?



I thought that was especially ridiculous seeing it doesn't seem unusual in US culture to make your kids move our or pay rent once they turn 18. And there are people pushing 40 with millions in their bank account whining their allowance from daddy was cut after they had publicly announced they wanted to be financially independent?


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought that was especially ridiculous seeing it doesn't seem unusual in US culture to make your kids move our or pay rent once they turn 18. And there are people pushing 40 with millions in their bank account whining their allowance from daddy was cut after they had publicly announced they wanted to be financially independent?


Oh yes I’m familiar with American parents pushing their kids to be independent at 18.
I could see Harry whining about it, that man was raised to believe that the world was at his command … but not miss sizzlers honey, miss independent Meghan … and the funny part about it was how she put black makeup all over those beady eyes of hers and she knew she was gonna shed so many fake tears in that interview.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, ok, let’s dig deeper into this pumpkin latte:

The PL group partners with corporations. Mr. A.  Ohanian is one of those partners along with several other corporations.
Mr. Neil Sroka, the PL spokesperson, is a well known lobbyist. https://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=77917

So, this is the new normal. Get some money, find a lobbyist, find a San Fran person to invest with, make a splash with a donation, get that smug, holier-than-thou face on!

ETA: forgot the founder  
_Founder Katie Bethell; along with employees, employers, consumers, and investors; has gained paid family leave for "nearly 8 million" employees at companies in the U.S. including Walmart, Starbucks, and CVS. _

Read More: https://www.thelist.com/647896/what...port-for-paid-family-leave/?utm_campaign=clip


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> IF she had any class she would embarrassed to have this puny action publicized. $25 per person might have been worth a very minor sentence somewhere, but even that is a stretch.  Depending on the size of the group it would be a small cup per person and don't bother with any of the special drinks, they would blow the budget. It's a wonder she didn't include a free copy of _The Bench _for them to read on their coffee breaks.
> 
> A week ago today during a historic storm, 7.5" one day rain total in the gauge on the deck, wind gusts and Flood Evacuation Warning as the adjacent Creek surged along filled with debris washing downstream from the past year's forest fires, I had a delivery to my door. The young girl had to walk a bit from the parking area in to my location. I saw her coming and she was struggling to manage it all in the wind and sheeting rain and was getting soaked in the process. I received my groceries carefully packed and secured in tightly closed heavy duty plastic bags. Extra effort had been taken to protect everything being delivered. Given the conditions I would not have been surprised if the delivery had been delayed, residents were being encouraged to stay in. I really appreciated receiving mine and in perfect condition and tipped her more than Methane would have ever thought to do.
> 
> Didn't call the local paper to tell them about it. It was a gesture repeated uncounted times around the world by other ordinary citizens, unlike the NARCISISSTIC, PUBLICITY CRAVING HO, who for $25 bucks got her high paid lackeys to grab her a headline.
> 
> Thinking about it, it is the ultimate statement of how skewed her opinion of herself  is in relationship to others. She's a dried up emotional husk, and reading the headline I laughed at her pitiful attempt to be important.



Ya kno, do what MM does. Go the Starb, tell them what you did, who you have helped, then ask for a freebie.  It could happen. If not, pull a KarenMarkle and throw a freaking fit!


----------



## purseinsanity

muddledmint said:


> Have we discussed her VERY generous gift of a $25 Starbucks gift card for the campaigners fighting for paid leave???


Of course, paid through her foundation, Arseholes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, kids change, especially from 11 to 15.
> To my eye, it looks like she had some work done.
> 
> the commercial interview
> View attachment 5235515
> 
> 
> the Euro trip
> View attachment 5235519
> 
> 
> ETA: the link for the Euro trip - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5130411/Meghan-Markle-shows-diamond-ring-aged-15.html


From what my friends told me, Meghan had her first nose job when she was going from Junior High School to High School (always done in the Summer so that others didn't see her Black Eyes or other tell-tale signs).  Of course, when asked, she denied it up the ying-yang!


----------



## charlottawill

breakfastatcartier said:


> miss sizzlers


Good name for a stripper


----------



## sdkitty

breakfastatcartier said:


> Oprah is just as rotten as Meghan, so it takes one to know one.
> 
> Interest in her hasn’t been all that for over ten years now. So Meghan latched on to her and Oprah thought: hey, someone new to keep in the spotlight for a while… but Meghan has her maxed out since she’s half Oprah’s age and still has the energy to be more demanding and shameless about it.
> 
> I guess Oprah has seen the backlash, realized it’s not getting any better and decided to quietly take it down after contemplating for a while.


I don't think you can compare O to Meghan.  Oprah is self-made.  Started from the bottom and became hugely successful.  Meghan was a spoiled child and is now reaping the benefits of her husband's birth.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> From what my friends told me, Meghan had her first nose job when she was going from Junior High School to High School (always done in the Summer so that others didn't see her Black Eyes or other tell-tale signs).  Of course, when asked, she denied it up the ying-yang!


that seems to me is very young for a nose job.  It's not like she had a huge nose.  and I think you said she had veneers or some such thing on her teeth at a young age too?


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Is Scooobie the duchS look-alike?



Looking at these pictures, is he trying to "mirror" her face???  Others have done this in the past (you know - those "super fans") .. look at Michael Jackson and his 'thing' with Diana Ross?!!? .. it was rumored for MANY years that he had all that plastic surgery (talk about going way overboard) .. to look like her because he was such a "super fan" of Diana!  Personally, I find this SICK .. they need mental health help if they are SO attempting to look like the person who they have a 'thing' for!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Looking at these pictures, is he trying to "mirror" her face???  Others have done this in the past (you know - those "super fans") .. look at Michael Jackson and his 'thing' with Diana Ross?!!? .. it was rumored for MANY years that he had all that plastic surgery (talk about going way overboard) .. to look like her because he was such a "super fan" of Diana!  Personally, I find this SICK .. they need mental health help if they are SO attempting to look like the person who they have a 'thing' for!


yes, Michael Jackson had so much work done on his nose that he basically had almost no nose at the end.  hard to believe surgeons will agree to do these procedures


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Didn't call the local paper to tell them about it. It was a gesture repeated uncounted times around the world by other ordinary citizens, unlike the *NARCISISSTIC, PUBLICITY CRAVING HO*, who for $25 bucks got her high paid lackeys to grab her a headline.
> 
> Thinking about it, it is the ultimate statement of how skewed her opinion of herself  is in relationship to others. She's a *dried up emotional husk*, and reading the headline I laughed at her pitiful attempt to be important.


Thanks @csshopper for your #19 nickname, Narcissistic Publicity-Craving Ho and #20 Dried-up emotional husk.  Would or could those nicknames sound better written in calligraphy?  Nope, they would have the same devastating meaning. Congratulations and here's your #19 & #20 Ribbons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't think you can compare O to Meghan.  Oprah is self-made.  Started from the bottom and became hugely successful.  Meghan was a spoiled child and is now reaping the benefits of her husband's birth.



That's true, but her behaviour surrounding the interview was so shady. She's either the world's worst journalist to not have fact checked anything (another option: she had a really bad researcher, but we never heard heads rolled) or she didn't have a problem with deliberately spreading lies and libel to further their agenda, all while Philip was on his death bed. She was confronted with her production team photoshopping headlines to "prove" the poor troublesome two were harrassed and refused to acknowledge it, let alone issue an apology. That's extremely unethical, and she should have earned a warning from whatever US institution deals with media ethics instead of an Emmy nomination.


----------



## charlottawill

muddledmint said:


> Have we discussed her VERY generous gift of a $25 Starbucks gift card for the campaigners fighting for paid leave???


Gotta give her PR team credit. They get her the biggest media bangs for the smallest amount of bucks. A couple of boxes of fruits and veggies and some books for the school in Harlem? Maybe $2500 worth of Starbucks cards? Important sounding letters for free to people who actually are important and really don't care what she thinks?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Gotta give her PR team credit. They get her the biggest media bangs for the smallest amount of bucks. A couple of boxes of fruits and veggies and some books for the school in Harlem? Maybe $2500 worth of Starbucks cards? Important sounding letters for free to people who actually are important and really don't care what she thinks?



Starb _already_ partners with the PL+ group. So, was it a full $25 or a cleverrrrr discount?  Wonder how the Clevr company feels about her Starb connection - probably don’t care bc these folks are all in it together.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @csshopper for your #19 nickname, Narcissistic Publicity-Craving Ho and #20 Dried-up emotional husk.  Would or could those nicknames sound better written in calligraphy?  Nope, they would have the same devastating meaning. Congratulations and here's your #19 & #20 Ribbons.
> View attachment 5238277
> View attachment 5238293


Maggie, you are a marvel! 

Thank you, and in a quote I found on line attributed to your avatar and it sure applies to the Dried up emotional husk: 

_" like she always said at the end of every episode; "I don't know what'll happen tomorrow!"_

But we know something will because Markdown (one of my faves) cannot miss a day on the Internet.

Pump  Pump Pump


----------



## jenayb

My BIL lives relatively near to these two & mentioned to me yesterday that their youngest has been booted from their preschool in SB/Montecito because apparently Archie is now attending. Further the entire building is nothing but security now; no parents are allowed in, and you have to drop your child off a block away.


----------



## needlv

muddledmint said:


> Have we discussed her VERY generous gift of a $25 Starbucks gift card for the campaigners fighting for paid leave???



No because I bought my friends drinks on the weekend and didn’t put that all over Twitter asking for credit.  So now it’s on the purseforum, do I get a participation trophy?

Duchess Lookatme must be desperate if you have to publicise $25 gift card for coffee…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jenaywins said:


> My BIL lives relatively near to these two & mentioned to me yesterday that their youngest has been booted from their preschool in SB/Montecito because apparently Archie is now attending. Further the entire building is nothing but security now; no parents are allowed in, and you have to drop your child off a block away.



Why would the other parents accept this sh*t? They are probably wealty and influential people as well, why does everyone bow to the crazies?

Can you imagine Will and Kate basically shutting down a school and making it hell for everyone else just so their kids can attend, one of whom is a future king of the UK?


----------



## jenayb

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would the other parents accept this sh*t? They are probably wealty and influential people as well, why does everyone bow to the crazies?
> 
> Can you imagine Will and Kate basically shutting down a school and making it hell for everyone else just so their kids can attend, one of whom is a future king of the UK?



Exactly, exactly! I wondered this, too... I can't stand these two and didn't want to get into the weeds with BIL but it is absolutely insane. They are not well-received within the community, however, is my understanding. "Not well-received" being very diplomatic from what I've been told by several.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would the other parents accept this sh*t? They are probably wealty and influential people as well, why does everyone bow to the crazies?
> 
> Can you imagine Will and Kate basically shutting down a school and making it hell for everyone else just so their kids can attend, one of whom is a future king of the UK?


Hands off or long distance pick up and drop off at daycare has been the norm since COVID started
School doors are locked during the day and you have to be buzzed in ALWAYS
Not to mention the awkwardness of the do you / don’t you mask up and vaccinate strum and drang
COVID changed a lot


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Maggie, you are a marvel!
> 
> Thank you, and in a quote I found on line attributed to your avatar and it sure applies to the Dried up emotional husk:
> 
> _" like she always said at the end of every episode; "I don't know what'll happen tomorrow!"_
> 
> But we know something will because Markdown (one of my faves) cannot miss a day on the Internet.
> 
> Pump  Pump Pump


My user name comes from this little girl that I would hurry home from school to hear on the radio and by the time I turned 15, it started airing on CBC TV. Most of the kids my age watched it on TV, because she was totally Canadian. BTW, I looked nothing like her, no red hair, no pigtails and no freckles. And yes, she would end each episode with, "I wonder what will happen tomorrow."  
Maggie Muggins from Wiki
Thank you for bringing back fun memories. 

Maggie Muggins on TV show.


----------



## muddledmint

charlottawill said:


> Gotta give her PR team credit. They get her the biggest media bangs for the smallest amount of bucks. A couple of boxes of fruits and veggies and some books for the school in Harlem? Maybe $2500 worth of Starbucks cards? Important sounding letters for free to people who actually are important and really don't care what she thinks?


The daily mail makes it sound like she gave ONE $25 gift card for the whole group of staffers. Knowing how cheap they are when it comes to charity, I can believe it. Their idea of service is pushing themselves in the spotlight and begging everyone else to do good while they themselves make tiny token gestures of charity like giving out a free copy of bench or a banana that St Meghan blessed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> No because I bought my friends drinks on the weekend and didn’t put that all over Twitter asking for credit.  So now it’s on the purseforum, do I get a participation trophy?
> 
> *Duchess Lookatme* must be desperate if you have to publicise $25 gift card for coffee…


Thanks @needlv for your #3 nickname, Duchess Lookatme, indeed a true description of M. Congratulations and please accept this Gold Ribbon.


----------



## needlv

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @needlv for your #3 nickname, Duchess Lookatme, indeed a true description of M. Congratulations and please accept this Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5238370


Why thank you!  This can also count as my participation trophy for buying a friend drinks!

And FYI, their PR clarified it was $25 gift card per staffer, paid by Archewell.  So why didn’t she give them Oat Lattes?


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> Why thank you!  This can also count as my participation trophy for buying a friend drinks!
> 
> And FYI, their PR clarified it was $25 gift card per staffer, paid by Archewell.  So why didn’t she give them Oat Lattes?



??  Their PR had to CLARIFY that it was a $25 card per staffer? Paid for by a foundation composed of other people's money. Oooh! PER staffer!! What a life changing event. Well......I donated some clothes and housewares to a thrift store. QUICK! ALERT THE NYT AND ALL MAJOR MEDIA! THE WORLD MUST KNOW!


----------



## muddledmint

rose60610 said:


> ??  Their PR had to CLARIFY that it was a $25 card per staffer? Paid for by a foundation composed of other people's money. Oooh! PER staffer!! What a life changing event. Well......I donated some clothes and housewares to a thrift store. QUICK! ALERT THE NYT AND ALL MAJOR MEDIA! THE WORLD MUST KNOW!


I mean, it is a lot of money! That money could have paid for an entire other fugly outfit for meghan to wear.


----------



## bag-mania

muddledmint said:


> The daily mail makes it sound like she gave ONE $25 gift card for the whole group of staffers. Knowing how cheap they are when it comes to charity, I can believe it. Their idea of service is pushing themselves in the spotlight and begging everyone else to do good while they themselves make tiny token gestures of charity like giving out a free copy of bench or a banana that St Meghan blessed.



People magazine went overboard the other way and made it out like donating the gift cards was the most noble act anyone could make. Why am I certain that Starbucks or someone else donated the gift cards to Archewell and they are just using what they already had on hand because they couldn’t figure out a way to convert them to cash? She probably isn’t quite that cheap, but still.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Halloween! Here is a treat for you all: an article about Pump Pump's latest activities!  









						TW Reads A Scary Tale In Time For Halloween
					

Giving away the book for free didn’t work, so TW resorted to reading the book out for free – just in time for Halloween. Why not throw in some much needed PR, courtesy of Brightly Storytime, …




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## csshopper

csshopper said:


> IF she had any class she would embarrassed to have this puny action publicized. $25 per person might have been worth a very minor sentence somewhere, but even that is a stretch.  Depending on the size of the group it would be a small cup per person and don't bother with any of the special drinks, they would blow the budget. It's a wonder she didn't include a free copy of _The Bench _for them to read on their coffee breaks.
> 
> A week ago today during a historic storm, 7.5" one day rain total in the gauge on the deck, wind gusts and Flood Evacuation Warning as the adjacent Creek surged along filled with debris washing downstream from the past year's forest fires, I had a delivery to my door. The young girl had to walk a bit from the parking area in to my location. I saw her coming and she was struggling to manage it all in the wind and sheeting rain and was getting soaked in the process. I received my groceries carefully packed and secured in tightly closed heavy duty plastic bags. Extra effort had been taken to protect everything being delivered. Given the conditions I would not have been surprised if the delivery had been delayed, residents were being encouraged to stay in. I really appreciated receiving mine and in perfect condition and tipped her more than Methane would have ever thought to do.
> 
> Didn't call the local paper to tell them about it. It was a gesture repeated uncounted times around the world by other ordinary citizens, unlike the NARCISISSTIC, PUBLICITY CRAVING HO, who for $25 bucks got her high paid lackeys to grab her a headline.
> 
> Thinking about it, it is the ultimate statement of how skewed her opinion of herself  is in relationship to others. She's a dried up emotional husk, and reading the headline I laughed at her pitiful attempt to be important.


My bad, I didn’t realize it would actually be a whopping $525. if all 21 staff pictured on line as Company staff got their own card. But like others have stated, it probably was a donation from their client,  Starbucks, and Markdown is gabbing at any glory.


----------



## rose60610

I just had a real sick thought. Does this mean M&H might get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize? Come on, they barely escaped England with the clothes on their backs, M met with 90 year old Gloria Steinem, H met with 81 year old Annenberg, they threw the BRF under the bus with elderly Oprah, they forced their way into the United Nations to meet with the sub sub sub secretary of whatever, and now they DONATED $25 STARBUCKS CARDS!!!  OMG!!  No one has ever undertaken such humanitarian efforts for the betterment of all humankind. I shudder to think what would happen to the globe if these two losers didn't care sooo much. And to think they wish all their activities would have been quiet unnoticed events. Oh wait. They didn't. 

If these two so much as get NOMINATED for a Nobel, then I demand that the trophy be redesigned as a bunch of brass toilets stacked 19 deep to symbolize all the profound SUFFERING M&H have undergone to improve our lives. Nothing less will do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> ??  Their PR had to CLARIFY that it was a $25 card per staffer? Paid for by a foundation composed of other people's money. Oooh! PER staffer!! What a life changing event. Well......I donated some clothes and housewares to a thrift store. QUICK! ALERT THE NYT AND ALL MAJOR MEDIA! THE WORLD MUST KNOW!



How many staffers? 2?  3? 4? My guess is Starb gave them a *huge* discount for all of this publicity.  One more reason I stopped going to StarB. Haven’t been since March, 2020.

ETA:  the tone deafness continues.  This lobbyist/Communications Director and his commenters/bots actually believe _all_ the hate comes from the British media. No, we in the USA can think for ourselves.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> People magazine went overboard the other way and made it out like donating the gift cards was the most noble act anyone could make. Why am I certain that Starbucks or someone else donated the gift cards to Archewell and they are just using what they already had on hand because they couldn’t figure out a way to convert them to cash? She probably isn’t quite that cheap, but still.
> 
> View attachment 5238436


If she bought everyone dinner, dessert and coffee, that would have been a whole lot better.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> How many staffers? 2?  3? 4? My guess is Starb gave them a *huge* discount for all of this publicity.  One more reason I stopped going to StarB. Haven’t been since March, 2020.
> 
> ETA:  the tone deafness continues.  This lobbyist/Communications Director and his commenters/bots actually believe _all_ the hate comes from the British media. No, we in the USA can think for ourselves.



Haha, here is a better post!


----------



## Chanbal

This is also a very good one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent article on the “Latest Celebrity Grift” by the liberal Nation mag! Article in spoiler.
I think I hear the tide turning 




Spoiler: Craven!



*Championing Mental Health Is the Latest Celebrity Grift*
*The Sussexes are cashing in on the wellness explosion, and it couldn’t be more craven.
By Alexis Grenell*
*October 20, 2021*



Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, speak onstage. (Theo Wargo / Getty)
Over a century before Princess Diana died at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris, the physician Jean-Martin Charcot attracted _toute la ville_ to his live demonstrations of neurological disorders on its premises. Charcot’s particular interest was hysteria, that mysterious, uniquely female complex—literally, “of the womb”—that seemed to afflict so many women of his day. His Tuesday lectures, featuring patients of the hospital on full display, were high spectacle, attended, according to one account, by “a multi-colored audience, drawn from all of Paris: authors, doctors, leading actors and actresses, fashionable demimondaines, all full of morbid curiosity.” Among them was Sigmund Freud, whose own deranged analysis of “the great neurosis” also made him famous.
There are certain symmetries in history that lend the impression that all has been foretold, when in fact it’s just a matter of human foolishness doomed to repeat itself. But it seems fitting that the Salpêtrière was the final destination of the most famously unhappy woman of her time—and that her son should turn his grief into a mental health grift.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, styled the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, fled to US shores at the beginning of the pandemic, when the whinings of the well-to-do were being eclipsed by the worries of the unwashed. There wasn’t time to care about an unemployed adult man whose falling-out with his family had forced him to quarantine in a $15 million home. But not for long. The Sussexes reinvented themselves as warriors for the oppressed, cashing in on their privilege by disavowing it loudly to anyone who would listen: Oprah, Dax Shepard, etc. Pitching themselves as refugees from the (inarguably oppressive) British monarchy and the (inarguably racist) tabloid press, they’ve made mental health projects into a kind of radical chic. Their search for well-being may not include fighting for universal health care, but an adoring public gets to see them thrive through gauzy photo shoots, expensive clothes, and multimillion-dollar Netflix deals. Harry has even become an influencer—pardon, the “chief impact officer”—for an app-based “coaching” company. Far from seeking a life less public, they’ve capitalized on the US media’s willingness to amplify their struggle without scrutiny and to frame their “advocacy” as somehow raw and brave.
That myth-making is antithetical to the actual work of psychotherapy, which is an intensely private experience. The Sussexes’ performance, meanwhile, is calculated to drive eyeballs, clicks, and consumption. They’re in good company, now that social media’s hegemony has made the appearance of living well into a spectator sport, arguably resulting in the recent massive and quantifiable uptick in generalized depression.
A July study published in _Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences_analyzed a century’s worth of Google Books data for instances of language reflecting negative ways of thinking called “cognitive distortions,” which are commonly associated with psychiatric disorders like depression and anxiety. It found a spike in the early aughts, then an increase to unprecedented levels between 2007 and the present day. That timeline just happens to coincide with the rise of Facebook (2004), Twitter (2006), and Instagram (2010), leading researchers to theorize that “the widespread adoption of communication technologies such as the internet, the World Wide Web, and social media may have driven greater societal and political polarization at a global level.” They connect the polarization to cognitive distortions such as “us-vs.-them thinking (labeling and mislabeling) [i.e., a reliance on simplistic good/bad categories], dichotomous reasoning, mindreading [assuming one knows what others are thinking], overgeneralizing, emotional reasoning, and catastrophizing.” All of this helps explain the increasing prevalence of depression—and in turn the explosion of the wellness industry.
Instagram in particular—that aspirational portal—is linked directly to increasing rates of depression among teenage girls. A September _Wall Street Journal_exposé revealed that Instagram’s own research found that over 40 percent of teenagers who said they felt “unattractive,” and roughly 25 percent who felt “not good enough,” reported that those feelings began while using the app. (For more on the recent Facebook revelations, see Jeet Heer’s column.) Teens with existing mental health issues were unequivocal that using Instagram made things worse, but they struggled in their efforts to log off, for fear of missing out. Gazing incessantly at other people’s carefully curated lives does not, in fact, help emerging adults cultivate a healthy sense of self. It’s a huge market, though: 40 percent of Instagram’s users are under 22 years old. The other 60 percent include all manner of snake oil salesmen, as well as scheming royals who’ve been banished from Buckingham Palace for attempting to monetize their titles to 10 million followers.
Nevertheless, Meghan is writing a guaranteed best seller about “wellness” with Prince Harry as part of a $20 million four-book deal. This does not surprise Natalia Petrzela, a history professor at the New School who’s written about the hijacking of the wellness movement, which originated in the counterculture of the 1960s as a response to a medical establishment that failed women and Black patients (as it still does); their physical and mental well-being was and is routinely disregarded and their afflictions attributed to individual dysfunction rather than systemic failure. (Think Charcot’s and Freud’s pathologizing of women as “hysterics.”) “Mental health today is such an inchoate, capacious concept that it’s ripe for manipulation and exploitation by people who use that term to perhaps sell dubious products, services, or experiences to vulnerable people,” Petrzela explains. “It’s very hard to verify whether an app or a retreat, or a crystal or a self-help book, is really supporting mental health, but there’s really no barrier to billing it as such.”
Clearly not. There’s just something particularly nefarious about hawking mental health as part of the broader spectacle that’s destroying it on a grand scale.




*Championing Mental Health Is the Latest Celebrity Grift*
*The Sussexes are cashing in on the wellness explosion, and it couldn’t be more craven.*
_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, styled the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, fled to US shores at the beginning of the pandemic, when the whinings of the well-to-do were being eclipsed by the worries of the unwashed. There wasn’t time to care about an unemployed adult man whose falling-out with his family had forced him to quarantine in a $15 million home. But not for long. The Sussexes reinvented themselves as warriors for the oppressed, cashing in on their privilege by disavowing it loudly to anyone who would listen: Oprah, Dax Shepard, etc. Pitching themselves as refugees from the (inarguably oppressive) British monarchy and the (inarguably racist) tabloid press, they’ve made mental health projects into a kind of radical chic. Their search for well-being may not include fighting for universal health care, but an adoring public gets to see them thrive through gauzy photo shoots, expensive clothes, and multimillion-dollar Netflix deals. Harry has even become an influencer—pardon, the “chief impact officer”—for an app-based “coaching” company. Far from seeking a life less public, they’ve capitalized on the US media’s willingness to amplify their struggle without scrutiny and to frame their “advocacy” as somehow raw and brave.
….
“Mental health today is such an inchoate, capacious concept that *it’s ripe for manipulation and exploitation by people who use that term to perhaps sell dubious products, services, or experiences to vulnerable people,”* Petrzela explains. “*It’s very hard to verify whether an app or a retreat, or a crystal or a self-help book, is really supporting mental health, but there’s really no barrier to billing it as such.”*

Clearly not. There’s just something *particularly nefarious about hawking mental health as part of the broader spectacle that’s destroying it on a grand scale.*_


----------



## Chanbal

I hope you are all OK. Goodnight!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> I just had a real sick thought. Does this mean M&H might get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize?



Do not summon the Kraken.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> Good name for a stripper


Her bikini top could be shaped like t bone steaks with a mini skirt of salad leaves bejewelled with glittering croutons, then she erotically pours thousand island over herself as her finale.

Well, that’s if the money ever runs out and H tells her he’s never worked a day in his life & has no intention of starting 


jenaywins said:


> My BIL lives relatively near to these two & mentioned to me yesterday that their youngest has been booted from their preschool in SB/Montecito because apparently Archie is now attending. Further the entire building is nothing but security now; no parents are allowed in, and you have to drop your child off a block away.


doesn’t that arguably put every other child in danger because you can’t see them to the school gates? The parents should pull em out & let them ask the ‘royals’ for loss of earnings. 


marietouchet said:


> Hands off or long distance pick up and drop off at daycare has been the norm since COVID started
> School doors are locked during the day and you have to be buzzed in ALWAYS
> Not to mention the awkwardness of the do you / don’t you mask up and vaccinate strum and drang
> COVID changed a lot


That’s not what it’s like at all the daycares in my area. Covid paranoia only changes things if people let it.

Also, we’ve said it a thousand times,  these two had no problem putting their hands on other people’s  kids but don’t want classmates getting to close to their precious doll face.


muddledmint said:


> I mean, it is a lot of money! That money could have paid for an entire other fugly outfit for meghan to wear.


$525 is nowhere near enough to buy a klaaaasssy outfit!

In the unlikely event starb didn’t donate those cards themselves then as a donor I would be annoyed that the money was being given to some heartless multinational rather than, you know, a charity


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> Her bikini top could be shaped like t bone steaks with a mini skirt of salad leaves bejewelled with glittering croutons, then she erotically pours thousand island over herself as her finale.
> 
> Well, that’s if the money ever runs out and H tells her he’s never worked a day in his life & has no intention of starting
> 
> doesn’t that arguably put every other child in danger because you can’t see them to the school gates? The parents should pull em out & let them ask the ‘royals’ for loss of earnings.
> 
> That’s not what it’s like at all the daycares in my area. Covid paranoia only changes things if people let it.
> 
> Also, we’ve said it a thousand times,  these two had no problem putting their hands on other people’s  kids but don’t want classmates getting to close to their precious doll face.
> 
> $525 is nowhere near enough to buy a klaaaasssy outfit!
> 
> In the unlikely event starb didn’t donate those cards themselves then as a donor I would be annoyed that the money was being given to some heartless multinational rather than, you know, a charity


It was only $525???! Sheesh, these “donations” are more like a slap in the face when you consider that is what she spends on a fugly pair of pants that she’ll wear once.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> I just had a real sick thought. Does this mean M&H might get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize?


If only they would leave us in peace, but if anyone nominated them, I'm sure we would hear no end of their raucous cawing.


----------



## carmen56

charlottawill said:


> Gotta give her PR team credit. They get her the biggest media bangs for the smallest amount of bucks. A couple of boxes of fruits and veggies and some books for the school in Harlem? Maybe $2500 worth of Starbucks cards? Important sounding letters for free to people who actually are important and really don't care what she thinks?



Has the washing machine they promised to that school in Harlem been delivered yet?


----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> Has the washing machine they promised to that school in Harlem been delivered yet?


Has the cheque been cut for the big bucks they promised the restaurant?
Any timeline for the mucho $$$$ that Hazard promised at the polo event? Is it pegged to the sale of the last copy of his memoirs?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Haha, here is a better post!
> View attachment 5238506


I always read her signature as “Mef”, and my mind automatically converts it to Me-F’er.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> The fulfilling days of Pump Pump, Duchess of Bandwagon!






Chanbal said:


> Happy Halloween! Here is a treat for you all: an article about Pump Pump's latest activities!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TW Reads A Scary Tale In Time For Halloween
> 
> 
> Giving away the book for free didn’t work, so TW resorted to reading the book out for free – just in time for Halloween. Why not throw in some much needed PR, courtesy of Brightly Storytime, …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com


Can there be any other name but Duchess Pump Pump?!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This is also a very good one.



Duke Huffalot from one commenter.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is also a very good one.



SERIOUSLY when did she last go to Starbucks ?
Even a plain coffee of the day costs a fortune AND NO ONE drinks those, almond milk, paleolithic coffee beans,  low cal flavored syrup, unicorn colored froth - it all adds up
$25 buys two 800 cal froufrou drinks at Starbucks


----------



## charlottawill

carmen56 said:


> Has the washing machine they promised to that school in Harlem been delivered yet?


Unfortunately it has been delayed indefinitely due to chip shortage with manufacturer.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The Dumbarton title was extinct since 1749 and recreated for Harry in 2018 when he married *pump-pump*, I wonder is there was a hidden message there...
> 
> _Lord Dumbarton was also created Lord Douglas of Ettrick. He was married to Anne Douglas, the first Countess of Dumbarton, who was the sister of Catherine Fitzroy, Duchess of Northumberland.
> Following the death of their only son, the unmarried second Earl, both titles became extinct in January 1749.
> The title was recreated in the UK Peerage by the Queen as one of the two subsidiary titles for her grandson Harry, when he married Meghan in May 2018._
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/PCOJq#selection-3291.0-3299.151


Since 'pump pump' has resurfaced to amuse us again, I 'searched' to learn that @Chanbal called M, pump-pump, back on June 24th and so she will be credited for that nickname and everyone else will be credited for their add-ons. 
So thanks @Chanbal for your #23 nickname pump-pump. Congratulations and here is The List #23 Ribbon.


----------



## Chanbal

Am I missing something here? Pump Pump's interview with OW has been nominated for People's Choice Award (for the best pop special).  

Though, what I found even more interesting is that the Office of the Duchess and Duke of Bandwagon contacted Kensington Palace to kindly offer their precious help to the Cambridges to bring the Earthshot Prize to America in 2022.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Though, what I found even more interesting is that the Office of the Duchess and Duke of Bandwagon contacted Kensington Palace to kindly offer their precious help to the Cambridges to bring the Earthshot Prize to America in 2022.



They have not   I hope KP lost the message.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Since 'pump pump' has resurfaced to amuse us again, I 'searched' to learn that @Chanbal called M, pump-pump, back on June 24th and so she will be credited for that nickname and everyone else will be credited for their add-ons.
> So thanks @Chanbal for your #23 nickname pump-pump. Congratulations and here is The List #23 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5238674


I'm very humble accepting your award, and I promise I'll try to refrain from noticing/finding more nicknames for this very special couple.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Can there be any other name but *Duchess Pump Pump*?!


Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your #2 nickname, Duchess Pump Pump, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> SERIOUSLY when did she last go to Starbucks ?
> Even a plain coffee of the day costs a fortune AND NO ONE drinks those, almond milk, paleolithic coffee beans,  low cal flavored syrup, unicorn colored froth - it all adds up
> $25 buys two 800 cal froufrou drinks at Starbucks



Starb decided to get into the _political causes _world, so it needs the cash. Also, it didn’t handle the shutdown well, imo. 
MM’s thing is supposed to Clevr, the oat latte folks.  Until I see receipts, I doubt H&M bought anything. All talk in that world.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They have not   I hope KP lost the message.


The Kensington Palace didn't publicize the response, but we can assume the Cambridges were not pleased by such 'kind' offer.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Chanbal said:


> The Kensington Palace didn't publicize the response, but we can assume the Cambridges were not pleased by such 'kind' offer.


Oh they will do ANYTHING to get an invite to that party! ANYTHING!!!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope the Nobel peace prize people aren’t stupid enough to ruin their reputation giving these bozos a medal.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Am I missing something here? Pump Pump's interview with OW has been nominated for People's Choice Award (for the best pop special).
> 
> Though, what I found even more interesting is that the Office of the Duchess and Duke of Bandwagon contacted Kensington Palace to kindly offer their precious help to the Cambridges to bring the Earthshot Prize to America in 2022.




I don't understand "bringing the Earthshot Prize to America in 2022." You mean, M&H would actually do something worthwhile so they get 100% credit (even though a team of volunteers would be doing 100% of the work?) Will can probably say "go to hell" in a myriad of diplomatic ways.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I don't understand "bringing the Earthshot Prize to America in 2022." You mean, M&H would actually do something worthwhile so they get 100% credit (even though a team of volunteers would be doing 100% of the work?) Will can probably say "go to hell" in a myriad of diplomatic ways.



I agree.  Gates and Bezos have been exposed on the super yacht.  Phony, bogus, fake, rules for thee/not meeeee.  No need for one of these vanity climate projects to come here.









						Billionaire Jeff Bezos discussed climate change with Prince Charles
					

The group were seen in a photograph shared on Bezos's social media pages at Dumfries House, two days after the Amazon founder was seen in Turkey celebrating Bill Gates' 66th birthday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope the Nobel peace prize people aren’t stupid enough to ruin their reputation giving these bozos a medal.


What sort of peace are these two loons promoting?  They've caused nothing but discord in their own families!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Duke Huffalot from one commenter.


Not to nitpick, kylieer on Twitter, but she donated $25, not 25 pounds!  Why are they always trying to make it appear like she did more than she did?


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> People magazine went overboard the other way and made it out like donating the gift cards was the most noble act anyone could make. Why am I certain that Starbucks or someone else donated the gift cards to Archewell and they are just using what they already had on hand because they couldn’t figure out a way to convert them to cash? She probably isn’t quite that cheap, but still.
> 
> View attachment 5238436



All I can say is they better watch their six

no pun intended


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Haha, here is a better post!
> View attachment 5238506


Here is a scary thought.  What if she sees this and gets them to do it? lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

If they can get Meg to stop talking and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, they might be able to push her for an eco-warrior prize.  No worries, it will never happen lolol!


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your #2 nickname, Duchess Pump Pump, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


I owe it all to Chanbal but thank you Maggie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up. 
Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.  

*Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*

*Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
*Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
*Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
*Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
*Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is also a very good one.



Gee .. I wonder if the *DOUCHESS DULLNESS* (having lived in the Valley ~ Woodland Hills ~ after all) .. remembers this one:  *GAG ME WITH A SPOON*!!!!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> If they can get Meg to stop talking and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, they might be able to push her for an eco-warrior prize.  No worries, it will never happen lolol!


Give them credit, when credit is due - they expended no carbon gas going to Glasgow and Rome 
A motorcade of 85 cars ??? seriously????  and 2 million units of carbon emissions for that world leader I am dying to emulate ...


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


*WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?!?! .. oh now, this 100% PISSES ME OFF!  HOW DARE THEY have this MONUMENTAL-MORON talk about reaching parity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  What the 'F' does she know about reaching economic and professional parity .. what?!?! .. getting that by peeing in the woods and putting some spell on the HEX-AGON-HAZARD????  *

They should be inviting women like myself, who: 

had to BUST THEIR A$$ working long hours, weekends, nights, holidays .. what social life?!?! 
had to prove (over & over again) that I not only did we know the business COLD, but consistently came up with creative approaches to solve hard business problems 
identified areas for improvement, reduction of manual processes, areas for cost savings and actually IMPLEMENT those improvements/processes, etc. - saving the corporation millions of dollars year after year 
provide mentorship to younger female employees, define/develop training programs to engage/re-engage enthusiasm for new techniques/processes to bring in more business 
all this .. while consistently seeing less knowledgeable, more expensive, golf-playing male colleagues get promoted .. because they had a "family" to support 
Do I sound bitter?!?! .. yeah, kind of .. I knew that I wasn't getting paid as much, stock options were less "glamourous", bonuses were less than what my male colleagues got .. but I was one of 5 Female Executives in the Corporation and I was pretty damn proud to be so.  

I know *EXACTLY* who Mellody Hobson is, the President & CEO of Ariel Investments.  She is a woman of color who is married to .. George Lucas (yes, that George Lucas).  So .. what is the 'REAL' Agenda here??? .. >> does *Z-LIST* think that she might get an acting gig for an A-List actress???  You better believe that I will be writing a letter here; this is a HUGE slap in the face to many women in the Financial Services sector who had to kick ass to get where they are/were!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> *WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?!?! .. oh now, this 100% PISSES ME OFF!  HOW DARE THEY have this MONUMENTAL-MORON talk about reaching parity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  What the 'F' does she know about reaching economic and professional parity .. what?!?! .. getting that by peeing in the woods and putting some spell on the HEX-AGON-HAZARD????  *
> 
> They should be inviting women like myself, who:
> 
> had to BUST THEIR A$$ working long hours, weekends, nights, holidays .. what social life?!?!
> had to prove (over & over again) that I not only did we know the business COLD, but consistently came up with creative approaches to solve hard business problems
> identified areas for improvement, reduction of manual processes, areas for cost savings and actually IMPLEMENT those improvements/processes, etc. - saving the corporation millions of dollars year after year
> provide mentorship to younger female employees, define/develop training programs to engage/re-engage enthusiasm for new techniques/processes to bring in more business
> all this .. while consistently seeing less knowledgeable, more expensive, golf-playing male colleagues get promoted .. because they had a "family" to support
> Do I sound bitter?!?! .. yeah, kind of .. I knew that I wasn't getting paid as much, stock options were less "glamourous", bonuses were less than what my male colleagues got .. but I was one of 5 Female Executives in the Corporation and I was pretty damn proud to be so.
> 
> I know *EXACTLY* who Mellody Hobson is, the President & CEO of Ariel Investments.  She is a woman of color who is married to .. George Lucas (yes, that George Lucas).  So .. what is the 'REAL' Agenda here??? .. >> does *Z-LIST* think that she might get an acting gig for an A-List actress???  You better believe that I will be writing a letter here; this is a HUGE slap in the face to many women in the Financial Services sector who had to kick ass to get where they are/were!!!



I hear you. I, too, gave up much for my career. Now, we have these _married-ins_ claim that they are successful???  Yeah, we all know what they are good at.  What bs is this!  Not interested one iota in anything they say. Shame on all of them, especially NYT.


----------



## charlottawill

hollieplus2 said:


> Oh they will do ANYTHING to get an invite to that party! ANYTHING!!!!!


I sincerely hope KP shuts them down with a polite "Thanks, but all is under control". 

But I think the Cambridges will have to invite them or risk being cast as the villains.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*



How would she know anything about this? She's lived off both the money and clout of men since her teens...first her daddy, then boyfriends and husbands.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> this is a HUGE slap in the face to many women in the Financial Services sector who had to kick ass to get where they are/were!!!


Here's my theory: Hobson as a fellow woman of color feels sorry for MM after the NY disaster and is taking her under her wing. She suggested the letters and donated the gift cards. She or her staffers will write the speech but let MM deliver it to give her a veneer of credibility. We'll know if it's not the usual rambling word salad.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CeeJay said:


> *WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?!?! .. oh now, this 100% PISSES ME OFF!  HOW DARE THEY have this MONUMENTAL-MORON talk about reaching parity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  What the 'F' does she know about reaching economic and professional parity .. what?!?! .. getting that by peeing in the woods and putting some spell on the HEX-AGON-HAZARD????  *
> 
> They should be inviting women like myself, who:
> 
> had to BUST THEIR A$$ working long hours, weekends, nights, holidays .. what social life?!?!
> had to prove (over & over again) that I not only did we know the business COLD, but consistently came up with creative approaches to solve hard business problems
> identified areas for improvement, reduction of manual processes, areas for cost savings and actually IMPLEMENT those improvements/processes, etc. - saving the corporation millions of dollars year after year
> provide mentorship to younger female employees, define/develop training programs to engage/re-engage enthusiasm for new techniques/processes to bring in more business
> all this .. while consistently seeing less knowledgeable, more expensive, golf-playing male colleagues get promoted .. because they had a "family" to support
> Do I sound bitter?!?! .. yeah, kind of .. I knew that I wasn't getting paid as much, stock options were less "glamourous", bonuses were less than what my male colleagues got .. but I was one of 5 Female Executives in the Corporation and I was pretty damn proud to be so.
> 
> I know *EXACTLY* who Mellody Hobson is, the President & CEO of Ariel Investments.  She is a woman of color who is married to .. George Lucas (yes, that George Lucas).  So .. what is the 'REAL' Agenda here??? .. >> does *Z-LIST* think that she might get an acting gig for an A-List actress???  You better believe that I will be writing a letter here; this is a HUGE slap in the face to many women in the Financial Services sector who had to kick ass to get where they are/were!!!


They should be inviting you just for the mere fact that you have the most fantabulous Bal City collection in the history of City bags, but I tPF digress I guess, your other reasons will suffice to  Write that letter, Bal queen!


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Here's my theory: Hobson as a fellow woman of color feels sorry for MM after the NY disaster and is taking her under her wing. She suggested the letters and donated the gift cards. She or her staffers will write the speech but let MM deliver it to give her a veneer of credibility. We'll know if it's not the usual rambling word salad.



Why are so many random people determined to help her become successful? At least Oprah and Gayle appear to have backed off for the moment.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

bag-mania said:


> Why are so many random people determined to help her become successful? At least Oprah and Gayle appear to have backed off for the moment.


I'm pretty convinced that if it hadn't been for someone having an evil master plan behind all of this there is no chance in a hot place that Pump Pump would have ever reflected back to Dumbarton's princely radar. 

_______________________

It's a case of who cahoots with whom. It's not random to me but it's not possible to discuss without getting into politics. Follow the money they say. I'd add follow the societal chaos. Cui bono.

On the other hand it could just as well be a clever bread and circuses attention diversion. Just look how "attentionally" invested we are- on both sides of this drama. Pump Pump is an actress after all. And I know many here like their BRF but what do we really know about them? Some of those closest to the queen are members of secret societies with rather alarmingly selfish and "elite" agendas. Things are rarely as they look to us plebs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I'm pretty convinced that if it hadn't been for someone having an evil master plan behind all of this there is no chance in a hot place that Pump Pump would have ever reflected back to Dumbarton's princely radar.
> 
> _______________________
> 
> It's a case of who cahoots with whom. It's not random to me but it's not possible to discuss without getting into politics. Follow the money they say. I'd add follow the societal chaos. Cui bono.
> 
> On the other hand it could just as well be a clever bread and circuses attention diversion. Just look how "attentionally" invested we are- on both sides of this drama. Pump Pump is an actress after all. And I know many here like their BRF but what do we really know about them? Some of those closest to the queen are members of secret societies with rather alarmingly selfish and "elite" agendas. Things are rarely as they look to us plebs.



You are so right. Follow the money.  It leads right back to the monarchy.  


On a side note, this COP party may not be all people intended it to be. Greta herself criticised it as pointless, useless, and added her own f-bombs. Wow.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hear you. I, too, gave up much for my career. Now, we have these _married-ins_ claim that they are successful???  Yeah, we all know what they are good at.  What bs is this!  Not interested one iota in anything they say. Shame on all of them, especially NYT.


Yes! .. I used to read the NYT religiously, now?!? .. may just let the subscription lapse .. very disappointing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Yes! .. I used to read the NYT religiously, now?!? .. may just let the subscription lapse .. very disappointing.



I gave up my beloved NYT Food subscription after super poorly handled drama with a very b*tchy, slightly racist food columnist. I think at some point NYT cut them off and they haven't revocered from it, but I'm still waiting for that statement and apology I felt then and still feel they should have made.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hear you. I, too, gave up much for my career. Now, we have these _married-ins_ claim that they are successful???  Yeah, we all know what they are good at.  What bs is this!  Not interested one iota in anything they say. Shame on all of them, especially NYT.



100% agree.  Unless she is giving tips on how to bag a rich husband, she should pipe down.  There are a LOT of women who I would like to hear from women who “made it” without a British prince or rich connections.  When anyone promotes women who “married up” as the top speakers, it makes the discussion less valuable.


----------



## needlv

Piers…


----------



## jennlt

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*



 This summit must be more of a parody than about parity because they can't be serious if she's a speaker.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are so right. Follow the money.  It leads right back to the monarchy.
> View attachment 5239105
> 
> On a side note, this COP party may not be all people intended it to be. Greta herself criticised it as pointless, useless, and added her own f-bombs. Wow.


Does anyone even know how wealthy the BRF really are?

I can't write how I truly feel about little Greta, or more specifically her dear parents, or my post might get deleted. But shame on them too, the "parents" that is


----------



## gracekelly

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Does anyone even know how wealthy the BRF really are?
> 
> I can't write how I truly feel about little Greta, or more specifically her dear parents, or my post might get deleted. But shame on them too, the "parents" that is


Lots more than the public knows about and that is still a lot.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


Now that I read that she will be in an online summit with Hobson, I KNOW that she did NOT pay for those Starbuck gift cards.  I want to hear her offer solutions (about anything at all)  because that would be a first.  The Sussex are good at pointing fingers and telling others to be woke, but have yet to actually find a solution for anything.  As far as her marrying up, I even question that because Harry hasn't shown himself a real personal success with anything as far as I am concerned.  He is just riding on his family name.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


That explains the Starbucks cards.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Piers…



Welcome back Piers!!!


----------



## needlv




----------



## rose60610

Edited: oops. you guys beat me to it. So this is old news. 

NYT has a "DealBook Online Summit" coming up. Numerous famous speakers are lined up. Unfortunately, Meghan is chosen as one of them. cut/paste:

"Join us for two extraordinary days, celebrating the 20th anniversary of DealBook. We’re bringing together some of the most influential minds in business, policy and culture to take stock of a world in the midst of rapid reinvention, grappling with the ripples of Covid and rewriting the rules in real time.

What happens next, happens here first.
Join us."

2–2:30 p.m.
*Minding the Gap*

Conversation with Mellody Hobson, Co-C.E.O. and President, Ariel Investments and Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex, Co-Founder, Archewell
How can women reach economic and professional parity? Two groundbreaking figures join us to discuss top-down solutions, and reflect on how their shared experiences influenced their thinking about creating opportunities for others.

 Mellody Hobson is married to George Lucas. Hobson had a brain and was accomplished before she married Lucas. The only thing these two women have in common is that they married famous men. Surely Meghan feels she is on par with Hobson. Nope. But this speaking gig does put her in touch with billionaires. Harry's days could be numbered...if Meghan can score a date with a member in the three comma club...


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


I don't get it. The wench on the bench doesn't even have a job. She certainly never reached any economic or professional parity. 

And this is pure word salad, though I will admit that she certainly had many people creating opportunities for her to meet a rich (stupid) British man.

*Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*


----------



## Chanbal

Thanks Forbes, I also have the same question. 



The letter written by Meghan Markle to lobby Senator Chuck Schumer and Speaker of the House Nancy ****** on paid leave for parenting, published on October 20 on the newly non-royal “Sussex” letterhead by the Paid Leave For All organization, is a remarkable personal document in many respects, not least of all because it represents yet another decent cause piled on to the quite large number of good causes in support of which Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have claimed agency, or, at a minimum, advocacy.
People of prominence in Hollywood should in fact lobby and/or lend their names to causes to their hearts’ content. It’s a right.


But this letter is remarkable for a few other reasons. First, at just over a thousand words, it’s extremely long. Second, it argues an obvious point— and does so quite defensively, as the paid-leave legislation seems likely to pass, plus or minus Meghan Markle’s observations to these two politicians. We can fairly say that Meghan Markle’s spoken work and her writing voice do seem to have a presence, occasionally a mite preachy, possibly overbearing and almost always scattered, but that can also be read as forceful, and it seems that, as far as the causes go, her engagement (with whatever cause) is honestly meant. If we add to that she is beloved by large segments of the population and by very nearly every tabloid editor on earth — not just in London but chiefly in London, who have made an industry of tracking the couple’s every jot and tittle — there’s no reason why Meghan Markle shouldn’t wield that cudgel of popularity to lobby Congress as a spokesperson for paid parental leave. It could even get the issue some votes when it counts, if arguably only on that side of the aisle with which she has aligned herself, namely, the ********s. Her salability among **********s may not exactly imitate but certainly would approximate what the British polls are telling us, namely, that Harry’s and Meghan Markle’s numbers are in a raging race to the bottom among conservatives.

In the abstract, parental leave is a good fit as a cause for this couple: They’ve just had their second, Lilibet Diana, so that, although it’s safe to assume that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have sufficient at-home child care, enabling paid parental care across the socioeconomic spectrum at whatever stage of a child’s life is an issue that respects no political or economic divide. Among lower-income families in which both parents work, it would only boost.
That noted, specifically this couple have a thousand good causes that are a good fit, and to which they devote their time, and they may well be keeping it in perspective. Which is to say: The thousand-word letter could have been just a solid afternoon’s work, a lobbying effort to which they could offer a shoulder because it seemed like it might help, at least to the interest group under whose banner they published it. But this specific letter bears a rather more sweeping grand, personal, anecdotal, long-term tone than that, and it’s wholly Meghan Markle’s.

To the letter, then:

Of the addressees, Senator Chuck Schumer’s name and address are flush left; Speaker ******’s name is flush right, in what we can call the secondary position, as we do read from left to right. While the Senate is, in some ways, the senior body of the two on the Hill, here it seems that Meghan Markle’s protocol team has forgotten the order of succession to the presidency in the United States, which is to say, the Speaker of the House, Nancy ******, is the third most-powerful elected official in the U.S. government. She, and only she, is designated to assume the reins of the country should President ***** and Vice-president Harris be simultaneously incapacitated. Bluntly put, Speaker ****** outranks Senator Schumer by a long shot. The addressees should be reversed, with Ms. ****** flush left.
The lapse is buttressed and emphasized in the actual address: “Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,” Ms. Markle writes.

This is minor, and forgivable, but here again, she’s put him first twice and she’s not even out of the starting gate, which is never a good thing if you’re writing the Senate majority leader and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. It’s an open letter, intended to be read by thousands if not millions given its publication online, and it’s being sent to two of the most prominent elected office-holders in America at the moment. Compounding this is Senator Schumer’s awkwardly truncated title. What Ms. Markle is trying to do is to engineer a faux parallel by cutting Schumer’s title to one word along with Ms. ******’s, but there is no parallelism to be attained with Speaker ******’s title anyway. First and foremost, Chuck Schumer is a U.S. senator. Thus: “Senator Schumer,” or “Majority Leader Schumer.”

Next, instead of delving immediately into the issue at hand, Meghan Markle has chosen to fashion the first paragraph about herself. It’s a subject with which she’s familiar, and as a rhetorical flourish it’s a play that she, Prince Harry and other speakers often engage in order to “come down” to a plain-speaking level.

Here’s the paragraph:

_“I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.”_

The turn she makes in the third sentence, from “universalizing” herself with the use of the first person into the second person — describing Speaker ******’s and Senator Schumer’s jobs and responsibilities to the two veteran lawmakers with the personal pronoun “you” — is at the very least mislaid and presumptive. We may think what we like of ******’s and Schumer’s politics, but they carry a combined 66 years of experience in the House and the Senate, which is to say, they’ve been making and debating the laws of the land for a good quarter-century longer than Meghan Markle has been alive. It’s safe to assume they’ve been lobbied before. Why address them with their responsibilities, then, as if they’re freshman congressmen just in off the farm? Clearly, she felt she needed to take a breath somehow, but the introductory paragraph of a letter like this is not the place for it.

We could well argue that this paragraph and others like it are simply blithe warm-up — because they are that, too — but their coyness and fluffy presence has a way of working against the writer from the get-go. It undermines her point, especially in a public “open” letter composed and published to be read by their constituents and presumably, thousands of others. If the goal is to publicly motivate the most senior lawmakers in the most august lawmaking body in the land to act on a cause, then the meat of the matter is what needs to be delivered, as in, stats, income levels, research. None of which is present here.

She continues with this cocktail of the first and second-person for the rest of the letter, for the following thirteen paragraphs. Five of the following thirteen paragraphs are wholly biographical. The intent is to instruct Speaker ****** and Senator Schumer, first, how normal her childhood was, how hardworking her parents were, and how she worked from the age of 13. It was special to eat out at a restaurant. She spent a lot of time at the Sizzler salad bar. The picture is that of a modest, middle-class American family, very aware of how to make ends meet.

But it’s a coy, cherry-picked, highly curated picture, to say the very least. Meghan Markle grew up in an affluent Los Angeles neighborhood, Windsor Hills, attended a private Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, and a private university, Northwestern, in Illinois. Her estranged father, Thomas Markle, now retired, was a well paid Hollywood (television) lighting director.

It’s most fair and correct that Meghan Markle writes the members of Congress as “a mom,” and a working one at that — the demands on her time as a mother and a professional are, apparently, extraordinary. But to spend more than a third of the letter on herself is, first, not the point, and second, within that, to elide literally all personal detail that (she thinks) might belie her belonging to the common people for whom she’s lobbying leaves her open to criticism that she’s pretending to be something other than what she is. The pretense blunts the effect of the letter she’s trying to deliver.

Taken as a whole, it seems that she’s also forgotten in a different way to whom she’s writing: Senator Schumer attended Harvard and Harvard Law. Speaker ****** attended Trinity Washington. Which is to say: These two addressees have been there and done that. In this instance, there’s less than zero need need to be coy about any biographical detail that could be construed as “elite.” Whatever else she is, Meghan Markle is not the daughter of a fireman and a cop, or a construction worker and a nurse. She’s a prominent television actress who married into the British Royal family. Millions know this.

Salted in between the highly select paragraphs on herself are observations on how hard American families have had it for the last three decades — not just because of the pandemic, but also because of that. This, then, is finally the meat of the matter. Some of it is effective polemic, but again, the use of the second person plural in the letter — the pronoun “you,” meaning, the addressees — gets in the way and has the effect of separating the writer from the addressees when what she wants here is the opposite. The first person plural — “we”— would have been an obvious, bridge-building alternative in the political paragraphs. But that was not a choice that this writer could or did make.

Bottom line, it’s axiomatic that Meghan Markle and her husband Prince Harry are at no loss for things to do, but they’re also engaged with the notion of “engagement” itself, so there’s a breezy undertone to this letter, as if Meghan Markle is relieved to have found yet another stage for her brand of meta-think on social and political issues. Unfortunately, with the amount of biography in the thing, that becomes the letter’s overriding vapor trail. Put another way, Ms. Markle needs to broadcast something, and she’s quite adroitly and swiftly built a number of those stages from which she can do that. Paid parental leave is yet another one of those.









						Why Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Must Weigh In On Absolutely Everything, Including Parental Leave
					

It was only a matter of time:  Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have found another cause, parental leave.  In her letter to House Speaker Nancy ****** and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Meghan Markle waxes loquacious. Here's what the letter reveals.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Piers…



Whether you like him or not, he is often right.


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> I know *EXACTLY* who Mellody Hobson is, the President & CEO of Ariel Investments. She is a woman of color who is married to .. George Lucas (yes, that George Lucas). So .. what is the 'REAL' Agenda here??? .



Real agenda? 

Meghan: "Gee, Mellody, do you have some billionaire guy friends you could introduce me to? Preferably single, but I have no problem breaking up families. In fact, that's my forte, breaking up families. If the prize is big enough, I'll send Hazza packing with Archie and Lilibet. And I'll owe you one! Wink-wink"

Mellody: "I have to refill my drink. Excuse me." 

Meghan: "I have to refill my drink too. I'm coming along because stalking my prey works for me. I hunted down Hazza to his buddy's wedding, and look, I got a wedding that was far more luxurious than even yours. So these billionaire friends of yours...."

Mellody: (gives signal to her personal security and they whisk her away)

Meghan, shouting: "I'll call you in the morning!"


----------



## Chanbal

Nice!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Nice!




Did you hear that?  Sounded like several large windows broke into a million pieces in Monteshito land 
Plates are just too expensive right now.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did you hear that?  Sounded like several large windows broke into a million pieces in Monteshito land
> Plates are just too expensive right now.



I think this is an expectation problem.  H and MM left - they are no longer senior royals.  So they should not expect the Queen to even acknowledge or mention them.


----------



## tiktok

needlv said:


> I think this is an expectation problem.  H and MM left - they are no longer senior royals.  So they should not expect the Queen to even acknowledge or mention them.




I’m sure she wanted to mention them but due to time constraints had to cut off the sentence “I’m also proud of our beloved Harry and Meghan for faithfully doing everything they possibly can to maximize their own carbon footprint”.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Thanks Forbes, I also have the same question.
> 
> View attachment 5239280
> 
> The letter written by Meghan Markle to lobby Senator Chuck Schumer and Speaker of the House Nancy ****** on paid leave for parenting, published on October 20 on the newly non-royal “Sussex” letterhead by the Paid Leave For All organization, is a remarkable personal document in many respects, not least of all because it represents yet another decent cause piled on to the quite large number of good causes in support of which Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have claimed agency, or, at a minimum, advocacy.
> People of prominence in Hollywood should in fact lobby and/or lend their names to causes to their hearts’ content. It’s a right.
> 
> 
> But this letter is remarkable for a few other reasons. First, at just over a thousand words, it’s extremely long. Second, it argues an obvious point— and does so quite defensively, as the paid-leave legislation seems likely to pass, plus or minus Meghan Markle’s observations to these two politicians. We can fairly say that Meghan Markle’s spoken work and her writing voice do seem to have a presence, occasionally a mite preachy, possibly overbearing and almost always scattered, but that can also be read as forceful, and it seems that, as far as the causes go, her engagement (with whatever cause) is honestly meant. If we add to that she is beloved by large segments of the population and by very nearly every tabloid editor on earth — not just in London but chiefly in London, who have made an industry of tracking the couple’s every jot and tittle — there’s no reason why Meghan Markle shouldn’t wield that cudgel of popularity to lobby Congress as a spokesperson for paid parental leave. It could even get the issue some votes when it counts, if arguably only on that side of the aisle with which she has aligned herself, namely, the ********s. Her salability among **********s may not exactly imitate but certainly would approximate what the British polls are telling us, namely, that Harry’s and Meghan Markle’s numbers are in a raging race to the bottom among conservatives.
> 
> In the abstract, parental leave is a good fit as a cause for this couple: They’ve just had their second, Lilibet Diana, so that, although it’s safe to assume that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have sufficient at-home child care, enabling paid parental care across the socioeconomic spectrum at whatever stage of a child’s life is an issue that respects no political or economic divide. Among lower-income families in which both parents work, it would only boost.
> That noted, specifically this couple have a thousand good causes that are a good fit, and to which they devote their time, and they may well be keeping it in perspective. Which is to say: The thousand-word letter could have been just a solid afternoon’s work, a lobbying effort to which they could offer a shoulder because it seemed like it might help, at least to the interest group under whose banner they published it. But this specific letter bears a rather more sweeping grand, personal, anecdotal, long-term tone than that, and it’s wholly Meghan Markle’s.
> 
> To the letter, then:
> 
> Of the addressees, Senator Chuck Schumer’s name and address are flush left; Speaker ******’s name is flush right, in what we can call the secondary position, as we do read from left to right. While the Senate is, in some ways, the senior body of the two on the Hill, here it seems that Meghan Markle’s protocol team has forgotten the order of succession to the presidency in the United States, which is to say, the Speaker of the House, Nancy ******, is the third most-powerful elected official in the U.S. government. She, and only she, is designated to assume the reins of the country should President ***** and Vice-president Harris be simultaneously incapacitated. Bluntly put, Speaker ****** outranks Senator Schumer by a long shot. The addressees should be reversed, with Ms. ****** flush left.
> The lapse is buttressed and emphasized in the actual address: “Dear Leader Schumer and Speaker ******,” Ms. Markle writes.
> 
> This is minor, and forgivable, but here again, she’s put him first twice and she’s not even out of the starting gate, which is never a good thing if you’re writing the Senate majority leader and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. It’s an open letter, intended to be read by thousands if not millions given its publication online, and it’s being sent to two of the most prominent elected office-holders in America at the moment. Compounding this is Senator Schumer’s awkwardly truncated title. What Ms. Markle is trying to do is to engineer a faux parallel by cutting Schumer’s title to one word along with Ms. ******’s, but there is no parallelism to be attained with Speaker ******’s title anyway. First and foremost, Chuck Schumer is a U.S. senator. Thus: “Senator Schumer,” or “Majority Leader Schumer.”
> 
> Next, instead of delving immediately into the issue at hand, Meghan Markle has chosen to fashion the first paragraph about herself. It’s a subject with which she’s familiar, and as a rhetorical flourish it’s a play that she, Prince Harry and other speakers often engage in order to “come down” to a plain-speaking level.
> 
> Here’s the paragraph:
> 
> _“I’m not an elected official, and I’m not a politician. I am, like many, an engaged citizen and a parent. And because you and your congressional colleagues have a role in shaping family outcomes for generations to come, that’s why I’m writing to you at this deeply important time—as a mom—to advocate for paid leave.”_
> 
> The turn she makes in the third sentence, from “universalizing” herself with the use of the first person into the second person — describing Speaker ******’s and Senator Schumer’s jobs and responsibilities to the two veteran lawmakers with the personal pronoun “you” — is at the very least mislaid and presumptive. We may think what we like of ******’s and Schumer’s politics, but they carry a combined 66 years of experience in the House and the Senate, which is to say, they’ve been making and debating the laws of the land for a good quarter-century longer than Meghan Markle has been alive. It’s safe to assume they’ve been lobbied before. Why address them with their responsibilities, then, as if they’re freshman congressmen just in off the farm? Clearly, she felt she needed to take a breath somehow, but the introductory paragraph of a letter like this is not the place for it.
> 
> We could well argue that this paragraph and others like it are simply blithe warm-up — because they are that, too — but their coyness and fluffy presence has a way of working against the writer from the get-go. It undermines her point, especially in a public “open” letter composed and published to be read by their constituents and presumably, thousands of others. If the goal is to publicly motivate the most senior lawmakers in the most august lawmaking body in the land to act on a cause, then the meat of the matter is what needs to be delivered, as in, stats, income levels, research. None of which is present here.
> 
> She continues with this cocktail of the first and second-person for the rest of the letter, for the following thirteen paragraphs. Five of the following thirteen paragraphs are wholly biographical. The intent is to instruct Speaker ****** and Senator Schumer, first, how normal her childhood was, how hardworking her parents were, and how she worked from the age of 13. It was special to eat out at a restaurant. She spent a lot of time at the Sizzler salad bar. The picture is that of a modest, middle-class American family, very aware of how to make ends meet.
> 
> But it’s a coy, cherry-picked, highly curated picture, to say the very least. Meghan Markle grew up in an affluent Los Angeles neighborhood, Windsor Hills, attended a private Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, and a private university, Northwestern, in Illinois. Her estranged father, Thomas Markle, now retired, was a well paid Hollywood (television) lighting director.
> 
> It’s most fair and correct that Meghan Markle writes the members of Congress as “a mom,” and a working one at that — the demands on her time as a mother and a professional are, apparently, extraordinary. But to spend more than a third of the letter on herself is, first, not the point, and second, within that, to elide literally all personal detail that (she thinks) might belie her belonging to the common people for whom she’s lobbying leaves her open to criticism that she’s pretending to be something other than what she is. The pretense blunts the effect of the letter she’s trying to deliver.
> 
> Taken as a whole, it seems that she’s also forgotten in a different way to whom she’s writing: Senator Schumer attended Harvard and Harvard Law. Speaker ****** attended Trinity Washington. Which is to say: These two addressees have been there and done that. In this instance, there’s less than zero need need to be coy about any biographical detail that could be construed as “elite.” Whatever else she is, Meghan Markle is not the daughter of a fireman and a cop, or a construction worker and a nurse. She’s a prominent television actress who married into the British Royal family. Millions know this.
> 
> Salted in between the highly select paragraphs on herself are observations on how hard American families have had it for the last three decades — not just because of the pandemic, but also because of that. This, then, is finally the meat of the matter. Some of it is effective polemic, but again, the use of the second person plural in the letter — the pronoun “you,” meaning, the addressees — gets in the way and has the effect of separating the writer from the addressees when what she wants here is the opposite. The first person plural — “we”— would have been an obvious, bridge-building alternative in the political paragraphs. But that was not a choice that this writer could or did make.
> 
> Bottom line, it’s axiomatic that Meghan Markle and her husband Prince Harry are at no loss for things to do, but they’re also engaged with the notion of “engagement” itself, so there’s a breezy undertone to this letter, as if Meghan Markle is relieved to have found yet another stage for her brand of meta-think on social and political issues. Unfortunately, with the amount of biography in the thing, that becomes the letter’s overriding vapor trail. Put another way, Ms. Markle needs to broadcast something, and she’s quite adroitly and swiftly built a number of those stages from which she can do that. Paid parental leave is yet another one of those.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Must Weigh In On Absolutely Everything, Including Parental Leave
> 
> 
> It was only a matter of time:  Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have found another cause, parental leave.  In her letter to House Speaker Nancy ****** and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Meghan Markle waxes loquacious. Here's what the letter reveals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


In brief, she has nothing better to do, and her ego gets in the way of her pleas and demands to those who actually wield the power.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Nice!



No hands flapping around, no dabbing of eyes in fake grief, no talking about herself and how no one asks if she is Okay!!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope the Nobel peace prize people aren’t stupid enough to ruin their reputation giving these bozos a medal.


Realistically, it wouldn’t be their first hilariously bad choice by the committee (naming no names.)
It would definitely be a wasted nomination  given so much has happened this last year there is plenty of worthy people.


gracekelly said:


> Here is a scary thought.  What if she sees this and gets them to do it? lololol!


hopefully she would then have to pay damages when someone scalds themselves after dropping their coffee in horror.


csshopper said:


> Another bowl of word salad coming next week, accompanied by a cup of Starbucks, since their leader arranged this hook-up.
> Have not linked the entire article, I'm dealing with a nauseous side effect to a new prescription medication and feared reading it would "hurl" me over the edge.
> 
> *Meghan Markle will speak on 'women reaching economic and professional parity' at New York Times online summit - after sending controversial lobbyist letter pleading for paid family leave*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, will speak at the New York Times Dealbook online summit *
> *Duchess will discuss solutions to reaching economic and professional parity *
> *Royal will be joined by Mellody Hobson, chairwoman of Starbucks Corporation*
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*
> *Comes after Meghan bought Starbucks coffee for employees working overtime to campaign for paid family and medical leave in the US*


I’m sure if there’s anyone who can connect to the struggles of the normal working woman it is a fake duchess and the CEO of a multinational married to the richest man in showbiz.

Wonder what the maternity leave is like at their firms and do you get paid extra if you let H&M use your kid in a photo shoot? (Maybe that’s why she likes to hire people who look like her  )


needlv said:


> 100% agree.  Unless she is giving tips on how to bag a rich husband, she should pipe down.  There are a LOT of women who I would like to hear from women who “made it” without a British prince or rich connections.  When anyone promotes women who “married up” as the top speakers, it makes the discussion less valuable.



I mean there’s a lot of money to be made as a sexpert….
Ultimately they are doing it for the controversy we could learn from a lady who built her way up but unfortunately a lot of people in PR still equate shock value with good sales.


xincinsin said:


> I don't get it. The wench on the bench doesn't even have a job. She certainly never reached any economic or professional parity.
> 
> And this is pure word salad, though I will admit that she certainly had many people creating opportunities for her to meet a rich (stupid) British man.
> 
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*


Yes indeed, they were complaining about his evil family putting the real Queen out to work in that vanished interview of theirs, then she was saying in that letter how lucky they are to get leave, now apparently girl is working 9 to 5?
The only work she needs to do is keeping better track of her lies


----------



## Lenna.V

xincinsin said:


> In brief, she has nothing better to do, and her ego gets in the way of her pleas and demands to those who actually wield the power.



If she didn't involve herself with these hot topics how else we are going to hear about her? hahaha


----------



## carmen56

charlottawill said:


> I sincerely hope KP shuts them down with a polite "Thanks, but all is under control".
> 
> But I think the Cambridges will have to invite them or risk being cast as the villains.



I hope the Cs don't invite them, the next thing you know is Raptor will be telling the world that Earthshot was her idea and William stole it!  Don't let them anywhere near it!


----------



## Debbie65

bag-princess said:


> i don't think he minds that at all.


Yes I agree.  They are much more then just mere titles.


----------



## Nutashha

He misses home!


*Prince Harry Is Eager to Return to the UK to Spend Christmas with Queen*


----------



## creme fraiche

Regarding the net worth of the British Royal Family, it is a number which is difficult to quantify.  Should the monarch be dissolved, there is a question of what specifically would happen to the Crown Estate whose proceeds every monarch signs over to the government at the start of their reign since George III (the one the USA kicked out).  Technically, it should revert back to the monarch, but realistically ti would probably be split.  The worth of just the Crown Estate is over $14 billion.  The rest is just petty change in comparison (less than $1 billion, but more than $500 million).


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "wench on the bench"


----------



## marietouchet

More plates will be smashed 
Article in Times about councilors of state to the Queen, Andrew and 6 are on the list now, and rumors they will be removed in favor of Edward and Anne
but the name of Beatrice has been floated as well !


----------



## justwatchin

Nutashha said:


> He misses home!
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Eager to Return to the UK to Spend Christmas with Queen*
> View attachment 5239551


Nope! Not believing this either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> More plates will be smashed
> Article in Times about councilors of state to the Queen, Andrew and 6 are on the list now, and rumors they will be removed in favor of Edward and Anne
> but the name of Beatrice has been floated as well !



I mean, what do they expect? They fled the country and want nothing do to with the BRF unless it's to reap in undeserved benefits, especially of the monetary kind. It's not being petty to replace Harry, but sensible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbie65

justwatchin said:


> Nope! Not believing this either.


Right. If he misses home THAT MUCH, he knows how to get there. Lol


----------



## Chanbal

Many people have a hard time 100% buying whatever Pump Pump says…  


Thomas Markle Jr said he didn't believed that his half-sister Meghan Markle was refused help by the palace when she confessed to mental health struggles.

Prince Harry's wife claimed during her explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey that she had felt suicidal while she was pregnant with son Archie, but that she'd been refused help by palace staff.

There was huge fallout for Good Morning Britain star Piers Morgan, who ended up stepping down from his role after he said on air that he didn't believe Meghan.

Now, her half-brother has made similar remarks while being interviewed in the Big Brother VIP Australia house.
He said of the Oprah interview: *"She kind of knew what she was getting into when she went into it [marrying into the royal family] *if you got a job and you got paid $4million salary a year to bow and curtsy and shake hands and take pictures and do some charity work here and some charity work, it’s about the highest pedestal you can get to in life. *So do your job and don’t gripe about it.*"

When asked about Meghan's mental health issues and why she needed to get away from the royal life, Thomas said: "*I don’t 100% buy that and I don’t agree with some of the things on the Oprah interview like not having those [mental health] services available. *I can’t imagine being that sheltered."

Thomas has spoken openly about his life with Meghan before she became famous, saying: "*I was 15 when she was born so I fed her and baby sat, normal family stuff,* but I grew up in a divided home, my parents split up when I was real young as well.

"*My dad, he makes sure the family gets together for the holidays and family occasions and they are all of the great things.*"

The letter was published in a magazine.

*But when asked if he's spoken to Harry since then, he said: "No, not me. My father did. My dad doesn’t approve of them. My father said he couldn’t even protect those chickens in the backyard if he needed to.*

"He wants Harry to do things proper, like call him on the phone, go see him in person, and ask 'Can I take your daughter’s hand in marriage?'

"*He cherishes Meghan, he worships her, I feel sorry for him because she won’t even pick up the phone and call my father ever, and then he is in the dark as much as everybody else is.*"

As his housemates listened in, Caitlyn Jenner whispered to others: "Is this going viral?"

"It’s a pretty divided family," she said with a smile.

Thomas Jr was then asked about his decision to write the open letter in 2018.
He said: "*The reason I wrote that letter is because my private life went from private to in the paper. I read a few lies that were told about us so I got a hold of the palace and said 'Please can you do something about those paparazzi?*'

"*The correspondence I got back was 'Distant family and I don’t know those people' and that was from Meghan. So that kind of p****d me off. She knows damn well we had a good time growing up together so I wrote that letter*."

He added that despite everything they've been through, he'd be there to support Meghan if she needed him.

"Yes I’ll answer the phone if she picks up the phone," he said. "*Everybody has always loved Meghan, everybody has always supported Meghan. I mean I may say bad things about her, I may write horrible letters about her but the end result is that I do love my sister.*"

It was also pointed out to Thomas Jr that he didn't know for sure it was Meghan who had referred to him as a "distant relative".
He said: "I hope so. I seriously hope so. It’s a big question mark. It’s a mystery still this whole thing has been a roller coaster and for everybody who always asks me I always give honest answers.

"Gosh if I had that opportunity to speak to my sister, and get to know her again, after this I would sort everybody’s answers out overnight.

"Coming on BB is part of that step. I want to show a different side of me, maybe spark a little interest in me, maybe she will call."









						Meghan Markle's brother says he doesn't '100% buy' her mental health struggles
					

Meghan Markle's half-brother Thomas Markle Jr made a series of scathing remarks about her and her husband Prince Harry while being interviewed on Big Brother VIP Australia




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

creme fraiche said:


> Regarding the net worth of the British Royal Family, it is a number which is difficult to quantify.  Should the monarch be dissolved, there is a question of what specifically would happen to the Crown Estate whose proceeds every monarch signs over to the government at the start of their reign since George III (the one the USA kicked out).  Technically, it should revert back to the monarch, but realistically ti would probably be split.  The worth of just the Crown Estate is over $14 billion.  The rest is just petty change in comparison (less than $1 billion, but more than $500 million).



The Crown passes down through Monarchs, it's never owned by one. The Crown actually belongs to the people of the UK since we are 'subjects' of Her Majesty, She is only the custodian - it's riches and land/property are passed through the line of succession, it's not the property of one person or the family - IF they were to dissolve the Monarchy it should dissolve into x the figure of population of the United Kingdom, as should all nobility held seats that are dependent on the 'right to rule' system (Land Estates) since there would by default be no right to rule (over) anyone.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Many people have a hard time 100% buying whatever Pump Pump says…
> View attachment 5239680
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr said he didn't believed that his half-sister Meghan Markle was refused help by the palace when she confessed to mental health struggles.
> 
> Prince Harry's wife claimed during her explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey that she had felt suicidal while she was pregnant with son Archie, but that she'd been refused help by palace staff.
> 
> There was huge fallout for Good Morning Britain star Piers Morgan, who ended up stepping down from his role after he said on air that he didn't believe Meghan.
> 
> Now, her half-brother has made similar remarks while being interviewed in the Big Brother VIP Australia house.
> He said of the Oprah interview: *"She kind of knew what she was getting into when she went into it [marrying into the royal family] *if you got a job and you got paid $4million salary a year to bow and curtsy and shake hands and take pictures and do some charity work here and some charity work, it’s about the highest pedestal you can get to in life. *So do your job and don’t gripe about it.*"
> 
> When asked about Meghan's mental health issues and why she needed to get away from the royal life, Thomas said: "*I don’t 100% buy that and I don’t agree with some of the things on the Oprah interview like not having those [mental health] services available. *I can’t imagine being that sheltered."
> 
> Thomas has spoken openly about his life with Meghan before she became famous, saying: "*I was 15 when she was born so I fed her and baby sat, normal family stuff,* but I grew up in a divided home, my parents split up when I was real young as well.
> 
> "*My dad, he makes sure the family gets together for the holidays and family occasions and they are all of the great things.*"
> 
> The letter was published in a magazine.
> 
> *But when asked if he's spoken to Harry since then, he said: "No, not me. My father did. My dad doesn’t approve of them. My father said he couldn’t even protect those chickens in the backyard if he needed to.*
> 
> "He wants Harry to do things proper, like call him on the phone, go see him in person, and ask 'Can I take your daughter’s hand in marriage?'
> 
> "*He cherishes Meghan, he worships her, I feel sorry for him because she won’t even pick up the phone and call my father ever, and then he is in the dark as much as everybody else is.*"
> 
> As his housemates listened in, Caitlyn Jenner whispered to others: "Is this going viral?"
> 
> "It’s a pretty divided family," she said with a smile.
> 
> Thomas Jr was then asked about his decision to write the open letter in 2018.
> He said: "*The reason I wrote that letter is because my private life went from private to in the paper. I read a few lies that were told about us so I got a hold of the palace and said 'Please can you do something about those paparazzi?*'
> 
> "*The correspondence I got back was 'Distant family and I don’t know those people' and that was from Meghan. So that kind of p****d me off. She knows damn well we had a good time growing up together so I wrote that letter*."
> 
> He added that despite everything they've been through, he'd be there to support Meghan if she needed him.
> 
> "Yes I’ll answer the phone if she picks up the phone," he said. "*Everybody has always loved Meghan, everybody has always supported Meghan. I mean I may say bad things about her, I may write horrible letters about her but the end result is that I do love my sister.*"
> 
> It was also pointed out to Thomas Jr that he didn't know for sure it was Meghan who had referred to him as a "distant relative".
> He said: "I hope so. I seriously hope so. It’s a big question mark. It’s a mystery still this whole thing has been a roller coaster and for everybody who always asks me I always give honest answers.
> 
> "Gosh if I had that opportunity to speak to my sister, and get to know her again, after this I would sort everybody’s answers out overnight.
> 
> "Coming on BB is part of that step. I want to show a different side of me, maybe spark a little interest in me, maybe she will call."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's brother says he doesn't '100% buy' her mental health struggles
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's half-brother Thomas Markle Jr made a series of scathing remarks about her and her husband Prince Harry while being interviewed on Big Brother VIP Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Frankly, I think if Methane could rewrite her life to edit out inconvenient relatives, she definitely would. She wants to spin this fairy tale of a deprived neglected childhood eating rabbit food (and yoghurt), followed by a difficult unloved adolescence and, as a young adult, she  struggled to pay the bills with faux waitressing (her calligraphy). As she pursues her career of penning open letters to chastise the world, she will likely drag out her unsuccessful internship at the South American embassy and recast it as her triumphant entry into diplomacy, sabotaged only by her competing love for acting. Hollywood vs the path to the White House!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wouldn’t be surprised if he wanted to go home before HMTQ dies.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Nice!



She's in her mid 90s and doesn't even need glasses to read a teleprompter.  I'm in my 40s and can't see a thing.  QEII is remarkable in many ways LOL!

Edited to correct her age from mid 40s to mid 90s.  I told you I can't see!


----------



## purseinsanity

Nutashha said:


> He misses home!
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Eager to Return to the UK to Spend Christmas with Queen*
> View attachment 5239551


ie, hoping to grease her up as much as possible to be included prominently in the will.  Her recent hospitalization shocked him to the core, I'm sure, for greedy reasons, nothing else.


----------



## purseinsanity

I loved watching this every year at Christmas ever since I was a child, but now all I hear instead of "Thumpetty Thump Thump", is "Pumpitty Pump Pump"



Beeyotch has forever ruined Christmas for me.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> The Crown passes down through Monarchs, it's never owned by one. The Crown actually belongs to the people of the UK since we are 'subjects' of Her Majesty, She is only the custodian - it's riches and land/property are passed through the line of succession, it's not the property of one person or the family - IF they were to dissolve the Monarchy it should dissolve into x the figure of population of the United Kingdom, as should all nobility held seats that are dependent on the 'right to rule' system (Land Estates) since there would by default be no right to rule (over) anyone.


LOL, kind of like a Patek Philippe:

"*You never actually own a Patek Philippe.* *You merely look after it for the next generation.*"


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *She's in her mid 40s and doesn't even need glasses *to read a teleprompter.  I'm in my 40s and can't see a thing.  QEII is remarkable in many ways LOL!


I'm sure QE will be thrilled by your comment, but mid 40s?  
You are right, she looks great.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, kind of like a Patek Philippe:
> 
> "*You never actually own a Patek Philippe.* *You merely look after it for the next generation.*"



Luxury's origins are mostly from royal courts, traditions as well as products. Obviously works for PP's marketing (that's Patek Phillippe and not Prince Philip  )


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Chanbal said:


> Many people have a hard time 100% buying whatever Pump Pump says…
> View attachment 5239680
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr said he didn't believed that his half-sister Meghan Markle was refused help by the palace when she confessed to mental health struggles.
> 
> Prince Harry's wife claimed during her explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey that she had felt suicidal while she was pregnant with son Archie, but that she'd been refused help by palace staff.
> 
> There was huge fallout for Good Morning Britain star Piers Morgan, who ended up stepping down from his role after he said on air that he didn't believe Meghan.
> 
> Now, her half-brother has made similar remarks while being interviewed in the Big Brother VIP Australia house.
> He said of the Oprah interview: *"She kind of knew what she was getting into when she went into it [marrying into the royal family] *if you got a job and you got paid $4million salary a year to bow and curtsy and shake hands and take pictures and do some charity work here and some charity work, it’s about the highest pedestal you can get to in life. *So do your job and don’t gripe about it.*"
> 
> When asked about Meghan's mental health issues and why she needed to get away from the royal life, Thomas said: "*I don’t 100% buy that and I don’t agree with some of the things on the Oprah interview like not having those [mental health] services available. *I can’t imagine being that sheltered."
> 
> Thomas has spoken openly about his life with Meghan before she became famous, saying: "*I was 15 when she was born so I fed her and baby sat, normal family stuff,* but I grew up in a divided home, my parents split up when I was real young as well.
> 
> "*My dad, he makes sure the family gets together for the holidays and family occasions and they are all of the great things.*"
> 
> The letter was published in a magazine.
> 
> *But when asked if he's spoken to Harry since then, he said: "No, not me. My father did. My dad doesn’t approve of them. My father said he couldn’t even protect those chickens in the backyard if he needed to.*
> 
> "He wants Harry to do things proper, like call him on the phone, go see him in person, and ask 'Can I take your daughter’s hand in marriage?'
> 
> "*He cherishes Meghan, he worships her, I feel sorry for him because she won’t even pick up the phone and call my father ever, and then he is in the dark as much as everybody else is.*"
> 
> As his housemates listened in, Caitlyn Jenner whispered to others: "Is this going viral?"
> 
> "It’s a pretty divided family," she said with a smile.
> 
> Thomas Jr was then asked about his decision to write the open letter in 2018.
> He said: "*The reason I wrote that letter is because my private life went from private to in the paper. I read a few lies that were told about us so I got a hold of the palace and said 'Please can you do something about those paparazzi?*'
> 
> "*The correspondence I got back was 'Distant family and I don’t know those people' and that was from Meghan. So that kind of p****d me off. She knows damn well we had a good time growing up together so I wrote that letter*."
> 
> He added that despite everything they've been through, he'd be there to support Meghan if she needed him.
> 
> "Yes I’ll answer the phone if she picks up the phone," he said. "*Everybody has always loved Meghan, everybody has always supported Meghan. I mean I may say bad things about her, I may write horrible letters about her but the end result is that I do love my sister.*"
> 
> It was also pointed out to Thomas Jr that he didn't know for sure it was Meghan who had referred to him as a "distant relative".
> He said: "I hope so. I seriously hope so. It’s a big question mark. It’s a mystery still this whole thing has been a roller coaster and for everybody who always asks me I always give honest answers.
> 
> "Gosh if I had that opportunity to speak to my sister, and get to know her again, after this I would sort everybody’s answers out overnight.
> 
> "Coming on BB is part of that step. I want to show a different side of me, maybe spark a little interest in me, maybe she will call."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's brother says he doesn't '100% buy' her mental health struggles
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's half-brother Thomas Markle Jr made a series of scathing remarks about her and her husband Prince Harry while being interviewed on Big Brother VIP Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


This is too much. I felt for him, the father and the sister at the time and I understand him writing the letter but for the adult brother to still go on like this- and mainly about himself, not the father- is just a bit much. Going on BB so Pump Pump will call him?! Sure you did. And sure she will.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Gee .. I wonder if the *DOUCHESS DULLNESS* (having lived in the Valley ~ Woodland Hills ~ after all) .. remembers this one:  *GAG ME WITH A SPOON*!!!!


Thanks @CeeJay for your #14 nickname, Douchess Dullness, that's now on The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> *WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?! .. WHAT?!?!?! .. oh now, this 100% PISSES ME OFF!  HOW DARE THEY have this MONUMENTAL-MORON talk about reaching parity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  What the 'F' does she know about reaching economic and professional parity .. what?!?! .. getting that by peeing in the woods and putting some spell on the HEX-AGON-HAZARD????  *
> 
> They should be inviting women like myself, who:
> 
> had to BUST THEIR A$$ working long hours, weekends, nights, holidays .. what social life?!?!
> had to prove (over & over again) that I not only did we know the business COLD, but consistently came up with creative approaches to solve hard business problems
> identified areas for improvement, reduction of manual processes, areas for cost savings and actually IMPLEMENT those improvements/processes, etc. - saving the corporation millions of dollars year after year
> provide mentorship to younger female employees, define/develop training programs to engage/re-engage enthusiasm for new techniques/processes to bring in more business
> all this .. while consistently seeing less knowledgeable, more expensive, golf-playing male colleagues get promoted .. because they had a "family" to support
> Do I sound bitter?!?! .. yeah, kind of .. I knew that I wasn't getting paid as much, stock options were less "glamourous", bonuses were less than what my male colleagues got .. but I was one of 5 Female Executives in the Corporation and I was pretty damn proud to be so.
> 
> I know *EXACTLY* who Mellody Hobson is, the President & CEO of Ariel Investments.  She is a woman of color who is married to .. George Lucas (yes, that George Lucas).  So .. what is the 'REAL' Agenda here??? .. >> does *Z-LIST* think that she might get an acting gig for an A-List actress???  You better believe that I will be writing a letter here; this is a HUGE slap in the face to many women in the Financial Services sector who had to kick ass to get where they are/were!!!


 Thanks @CeeJay for your nicknames #15 Monumental-Moron and #16 Hex-Agon-Hazard, both added to The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Hooting Owl & Roaring Lion Clubs.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, what do they expect? They fled the country and want nothing do to with the BRF unless it's to reap in undeserved benefits, especially of the monetary kind. It's not being petty to replace Harry, but sensible.


Anne and Edward have earned places at table ... Beatrice no, she is greener than 6 so, it is her name that smarts


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I don't get it. *The wench on the bench* doesn't even have a job. She certainly never reached any economic or professional parity.
> 
> And this is pure word salad, though I will admit that she certainly had many people creating opportunities for her to meet a rich (stupid) British man.
> 
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*


Thanks @xincinsin for your #22, The wench on the bench, and it rhymes and rolls off the tongue so nicely.  Congratulations and here's The List #22 Ribbon.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I'm sure QE will be thrilled by your comment, but mid 40s?
> You are right, she looks great.


Oops!  Yikes!  I went back and edited it.  I told you I can't see!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This is too much. I felt for him, the father and the sister at the time and I understand him writing the letter but for the adult brother to still go on like this- and mainly about himself, not the father- is just a bit much. Going on BB so Pump Pump will call him?! Sure you did. And sure she will.



Yeah. As much as I dislike her and think she is an a*shole towards her father...can this family please shut up? Sure, Thomas Jr. is not wrong in what he is saying, but a) we have heard it several times before b) who really cares that much c) at what point can you get over it and move on? Your much younger sister doesn't talk to you, boohoo. You'll live to tell the story. Though we'd rather not hear it rehashed again.

ETA: speaking of shutting up, Samantha has been very quiet for a long while.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

tiktok said:


> I’m sure she wanted to mention them but due to time constraints had to cut off the sentence “*I’m also proud of our beloved Harry and Meghan* for faithfully doing everything they possibly can to maximize their own carbon footprint”.


I hope HM would be very tempted to speak the truth instead, "However, I'm not so very proud of our beloved Harry and Meghan...footprint"


----------



## gracekelly

lololol! The wench on the bench!  To my way of thinking, the wench on the bench has a stench.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Many people have a hard time 100% buying whatever Pump Pump says…
> View attachment 5239680
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr said he didn't believed that his half-sister Meghan Markle was refused help by the palace when she confessed to mental health struggles.
> 
> Prince Harry's wife claimed during her explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey that she had felt suicidal while she was pregnant with son Archie, but that she'd been refused help by palace staff.
> 
> There was huge fallout for Good Morning Britain star Piers Morgan, who ended up stepping down from his role after he said on air that he didn't believe Meghan.
> 
> Now, her half-brother has made similar remarks while being interviewed in the Big Brother VIP Australia house.
> He said of the Oprah interview: *"She kind of knew what she was getting into when she went into it [marrying into the royal family] *if you got a job and you got paid $4million salary a year to bow and curtsy and shake hands and take pictures and do some charity work here and some charity work, it’s about the highest pedestal you can get to in life. *So do your job and don’t gripe about it.*"
> 
> When asked about Meghan's mental health issues and why she needed to get away from the royal life, Thomas said: "*I don’t 100% buy that and I don’t agree with some of the things on the Oprah interview like not having those [mental health] services available. *I can’t imagine being that sheltered."
> 
> Thomas has spoken openly about his life with Meghan before she became famous, saying: "*I was 15 when she was born so I fed her and baby sat, normal family stuff,* but I grew up in a divided home, my parents split up when I was real young as well.
> 
> "*My dad, he makes sure the family gets together for the holidays and family occasions and they are all of the great things.*"
> 
> The letter was published in a magazine.
> 
> *But when asked if he's spoken to Harry since then, he said: "No, not me. My father did. My dad doesn’t approve of them. My father said he couldn’t even protect those chickens in the backyard if he needed to.*
> 
> "He wants Harry to do things proper, like call him on the phone, go see him in person, and ask 'Can I take your daughter’s hand in marriage?'
> 
> "*He cherishes Meghan, he worships her, I feel sorry for him because she won’t even pick up the phone and call my father ever, and then he is in the dark as much as everybody else is.*"
> 
> As his housemates listened in, Caitlyn Jenner whispered to others: "Is this going viral?"
> 
> "It’s a pretty divided family," she said with a smile.
> 
> Thomas Jr was then asked about his decision to write the open letter in 2018.
> He said: "*The reason I wrote that letter is because my private life went from private to in the paper. I read a few lies that were told about us so I got a hold of the palace and said 'Please can you do something about those paparazzi?*'
> 
> "*The correspondence I got back was 'Distant family and I don’t know those people' and that was from Meghan. So that kind of p****d me off. She knows damn well we had a good time growing up together so I wrote that letter*."
> 
> He added that despite everything they've been through, he'd be there to support Meghan if she needed him.
> 
> "Yes I’ll answer the phone if she picks up the phone," he said. "*Everybody has always loved Meghan, everybody has always supported Meghan. I mean I may say bad things about her, I may write horrible letters about her but the end result is that I do love my sister.*"
> 
> It was also pointed out to Thomas Jr that he didn't know for sure it was Meghan who had referred to him as a "distant relative".
> He said: "I hope so. I seriously hope so. It’s a big question mark. It’s a mystery still this whole thing has been a roller coaster and for everybody who always asks me I always give honest answers.
> 
> "Gosh if I had that opportunity to speak to my sister, and get to know her again, after this I would sort everybody’s answers out overnight.
> 
> "Coming on BB is part of that step. I want to show a different side of me, maybe spark a little interest in me, maybe she will call."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's brother says he doesn't '100% buy' her mental health struggles
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's half-brother Thomas Markle Jr made a series of scathing remarks about her and her husband Prince Harry while being interviewed on Big Brother VIP Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Ooh is anyone watching this? You know celebrity big brother has had its fair share of juicy gossip over the years. I wouldn’t count this as a shocking revelation. We want to know about the surgery dammit!

I like how Caitlin Jenner, of all people, is judging how divided the family is…


purseinsanity said:


> LOL, kind of like a Patek Philippe:
> 
> "*You never actually own a Patek Philippe.* *You merely look after it for the next generation.*"


We were discussing how Tiffany’s basically nicked & inverted this slogan the other day. It’s easily the most memorable thing about that brand to me.


Debbie65 said:


> Right. If he misses home THAT MUCH, he knows how to get there. Lol


quite right, I mean he flies for such vital reasons as playing polo and delivering vegetables… you would think he might go see his poorly granny. But then he didn’t give two figs about grandpa. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. As much as I dislike her and think she is an a*shole towards her father...can this family please shut up? Sure, Thomas Jr. is not wrong in what he is saying, but a) we have heard it several times before b) who really cares that much c) at what point can you get over it and move on? Your much younger sister doesn't talk to you, boohoo. You'll live to tell the story. Though we'd rather not hear it rehashed again.
> 
> ETA: speaking of shutting up, Samantha has been very quiet for a long while.


I think if they can still make money flogging this dead horse called Meg then I think they should; as lord knows the grifters themselves have set out their stall of old news. 

Speaking of Samantha, has anyone read her book?


----------



## Chanbal

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> This is too much. I felt for him, the father and the sister at the time and I understand him writing the letter but for the adult brother to still go on like this- and mainly about himself, not the father- is just a bit much. Going on BB so Pump Pump will call him?! Sure you did. And sure she will.


The part that the sister would call him is awkward and contrasts with some of his previous comments, which were a lot less polite.

He is expected to spill the beans on BB, but he sounds rather cautious. I wonder if his new attitude is the result of a potential love letter from his sister via lawyers.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @CeeJay for your #14 nickname, Douchess Dullness, that's now on The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.
> View attachment 5239775


Isn't an Hermes blanket missing on this picture? @CeeJay the books should be under the computer.


----------



## Chanbal

According to Twitter, the pledge came 24h after QE's comments about how proud she was of Charles and Will.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Nutashha said:


> He misses home!
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Eager to Return to the UK to Spend Christmas with Queen*
> View attachment 5239551


Money Hungry A-Hole Harry!    HM, PC and W&K doesn't need your stress!!


----------



## lallybelle

UGH. Leave my Senator alone. You don't even live in my state. Go bother Feinstein.


----------



## Chanbal

Hypocrisy, jealousy, arrogance, feel free to add more…  


The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Archewell Foundation has pledged to be net zero by 2030.
Inspired by Harry and Meghan’s “long-standing commitment to the planet, both together and prior to their union”, the company has committed to cut its carbon emissions over the next few years.
In a statement on its website, the foundation said: “Achieving net zero carbon emissions means making a series of choices over time to make that footprint as small as possible, while compensating for any remaining emissions through high-quality carbon removal projects.

“As an organisation, we will work with an independent consultant to track all Archewell-related activities from our inception (internet use, commutes, and electricity in home offices, for example) to understand our collective footprint.

“Using 2022 as our baseline year, they will develop a plan for Archewell that aligns with the latest guidance from leading organisations, like the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol and Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), while offsetting remaining emissions until we achieve net zero in 2030 and beyond.”

The statement added that Harry’s sustainable tourism initiative Travalyst and the investing firm Ethic, which the pair have invested in, will advise the foundation on “focusing” its investments “in support of a low-carbon economy”.
A spokesperson for Archewell said: “Carbon emissions are a part of nearly every activity in daily life—the food we eat, the electricity we use, and the internet we are connected to, for example. The totality of these actions comprises our ‘carbon footprint’.
“Today’s commitment is that Archewell, including Prince Harry and Meghan the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be working with experts to assess the sum total of our emissions, and develop a plan of action to reach net zero.
“Achieving net zero carbon emissions means making a series of choices over time to make our footprint as small as possible, while compensating for any remaining emissions through investments in carbon removal projects like reforestation.”
Harry and Meghan set up their not-for-profit Archewell Foundation organisation after leaving their royal roles.
The foundation has partnerships with a range of academic, tech and charitable organisations.









						Harry and Meghan’s foundation pledges to be net zero by 2030
					

The announcement was made on the foundation’s website during the COP26 summit in Glasgow




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

Why not start now, why wait until 2022? Have some private jet trip plans for the remainder of the year?


----------



## creme fraiche

Back to the Crown Estate - it is actually a very murky legal question, and it is not owned by the people of the UK and they are not entitled to it.  Should the monarchy go, there would be mighty fight on divvying out the assets:









						The mysterious property empire behind the Queen – DW – 06/09/2021
					

One of the largest property groups in Europe is directly tied to Queen Elizabeth II. Strictly speaking, the 95-year-old monarch doesn't own it. But neither does the government, making it complex legally.




					www.dw.com
				




"The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning monarch 'in right of the Crown,' that is, it is owned by the monarch for the duration of their reign, by virtue of their accession to the throne," the company explains on its website. "But it is not the private property of the monarch —  it cannot be sold by the monarch, nor do revenues from it belong to the monarch."

It also makes clear that the British government also does not "own" The Crown Estate, which is registered as a corporation sole and managed by an independent organization. The royal family is not involved in its governance.

However, should Britain ever move towards **********ism, the question of who actually owns The Crown Estate may become a very thorny legal issue.

"There are no set rules on how to dismantle it," says Clancy. "I think the legal definitions make it quite complicated. As The Crown is set up as a legal entity, what that all would mean in terms of it becoming public property is unclear."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulu212121

Their foundation is already zero! They do NOTHING!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> *Money Hungry A-Hole Harry*!   HM, PC and W&K doesn't need your stress!!


 Thanks @Hermes Zen for your #2 nickname, Money Hungry A-Hole Harry, that's now on The List. Congratulations.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Hermes Zen for your #2 nickname, Money Hungry A-Hole Harry, that's now on The List. Congratulations.


Thank you Maggie Muggins!!  I'm not as creative as the others but thank you so very much!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> quite right, I mean he flies for such vital reasons as playing polo and delivering vegetables… you would think he might go see his poorly granny. *But then he didn’t give two figs about grandpa.*



I think I haven't mentioned in a while how angry this still makes me months after the fact.



> Speaking of Samantha, has anyone read her book?



Lady C!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lallybelle said:


> UGH. Leave my Senator alone. You don't even live in my state. Go bother Feinstein.



Right? I am not super firm in US politics, let alone being able to tell one politician from another, but I was like "Wait...isn't Gillibrand a senator for NY?" 

I googled to confirm and I must say her kids' names are way more distinguished than Archie and the other nickname that was stolen. (not dissing the poor kid, I just can't stand when parents are too stingy for a full name)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Archewell Foundation has pledged to be net zero by 2030.



Not that I understand what would take so long for basically an office to do so...but by 2030, they'll be divorced and that foundation a thing of the past haha.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if he wanted to go home before HMTQ dies.


He and the Queen were reportedly close before MM showed up. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he wants to see her out of love and not concern about his inheritance. I'm sure one or more trusts have been set up for him since the day he was born.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> He and the Queen were reportedly close before MM showed up. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he wants to see her out of love and not concern about his inheritance. I'm sure one or more trusts have been set up for him since the day he was born.



Supposedly he was close to his brother and father too, but that sure isn't the case now. Harry has learned the art of severing family ties from the missus. Has he shown any genuine sign of affection towards his relatives in a few years?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not that I understand what would take so long for basically an office to do so...but by 2030, they'll be divorced and that foundation a thing of the past haha.


You took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## bag-mania

Oops, Wrong thread


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

jelliedfeels said:


> Ooh is anyone watching this? You know celebrity big brother has had its fair share of juicy gossip over the years. I wouldn’t count this as a shocking revelation. We want to know about the surgery dammit!
> 
> I like how Caitlin Jenner, of all people, is judging how divided the family is…
> 
> We were discussing how Tiffany’s basically nicked & inverted this slogan the other day. It’s easily the most memorable thing about that brand to me.
> 
> quite right, I mean he flies for such vital reasons as playing polo and delivering vegetables… you would think he might go see his poorly granny. But then he didn’t give two figs about grandpa.
> 
> I think if they can still make money flogging this dead horse called Meg then I think they should; as lord knows the grifters themselves have set out their stall of old news.
> 
> Speaking of Samantha, has anyone read her book?


I actually like Samantha, from the interviews I've seen. Well spoken and generally speaks more about her father than about herself. She seems genuinely perturbed mainly for him and not herself. I also find her admirable as she still speaks fondly of her memories of Pump Pump as a child, considering their father clearly spoiled Pump Pump rotten as compared to the rest of his brood.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Is this the “plant tress” plan or will they pay for excessive carbon emissions?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> He and the Queen were reportedly close before MM showed up. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he wants to see her out of love and not concern about his inheritance. I'm sure one or more trusts have been set up for him since the day he was born.



So, reportedly Hazzie get a chunk of Phillip’s estate. Maybe that’s why he has been kinda quiet lately.



Spoiler: The article



Prince Harry, 36, was not punished by Prince Philip for giving making accusations against the Royal Family while his grandfather was in the hospital. A source has revealed that the Duke of Edinburgh "never held a grudge". Us Weekly correspondent Christina Garibaldi said: "There are reports Prince Philip left nearly $42 million to his staff following his death.
*How to watch Harry's documentary on Apple TV+*
ou can watch the new documentary series, produced by Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey, by signing up to Apple TV+ streaming service *HERE*
You can subscribe to Apple TV+ instantly for £4.99 a month or try the free 7-day trial, but remember to cancel before the trial ends to avoid getting charged the full subscription fee. *To find out more visit tv.apple.com*
_This article contains affiliate links, we may receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more_
"Clearly very generous to his staff. I think there were three people in his staff he left a majority of his estate to."
Royal commentator Molly Mulshine added: "I think that was incredible. It was his private secretary, his page and his valet.
"This source also said that he probably wouldn't have detracted from Prince Harry's inheritance which I guess is good to hear even though I think Prince Harry is doing fine."
*READ MORE: Princess Diana's accurate prediction about Harry*






Prince Harry received a handout from Prince Philip in his Will (Image: GETTY)





Prince Harry returned to the UK after the Oprah interview aired for Prince Philip's funeral (Image: GETTY)
The source had told The Sun: "Philip was not the sort of character to punish a grandson [Harry] for misbehaving.
"He was a very fair, even-handed and lovely man. Never held a grudge."
A Buckingham Palace spokesperson told the newspaper: "This is a personal matter for the family and as such arrangements are private."
The Duke of Sussex has since accused the royal family of "total neglect" in his mental health documentary series with Oprah.





Prince Philip died 'peacefully' in his sleep at the age of 99 (Image: GETTY)
*King's College slammed by student for Philip apology*



During the first three episodes of Apple TV's The Me You Can't See, Harry addressed traumatic memories from his childhood, including the death of his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, and harassment on social media of he and his wife Meghan.
"Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect," he told Winfrey, referring to his attempts to get assistance from his family with the attacks levelled at the Sussexes online.
"We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job."
The duke also told Winfrey his family did not speak about Diana's death and expected him to just deal with the resulting press attention and mental distress.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...will-duke-of-edinburgh-royal-family-latest-vn


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Here's my theory: Hobson as a fellow woman of color feels sorry for MM after the NY disaster and is taking her under her wing. She suggested the letters and donated the gift cards. She or her staffers will write the speech but let MM deliver it to give her a veneer of credibility. We'll know if it's not the usual rambling word salad.


I definitely think the WOC is playing a part here, but I’m VERY DISAPPOINTED in Mellody .. think about what SHE likely went through building her career!  It’s hard enough being a white woman in the Financial Services sector, but being a WOC is a whole different challenge. Having mentored many women, the stories I would hear from the WOC were sad and some (frankly) outrageous!  I insisted that the Corporation include both WOC, Asian, Latina and other cultures which could pose issues to the women’s advancement.  In addition to Quarterly


SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> They should be inviting you just for the mere fact that you have the most fantabulous Bal City collection in the history of City bags, but I tPF digress I guess, your other reasons will suffice to  Write that letter, Bal queen!


HA!!! .. you are too sweet!!  

When I talked to a few friends & former colleagues of mine about this, they all pretty much said the same thing .. "WTF does she know about 'parity"!!!!  I may just "call-in" to this and give the two of them a piece of my mind, this just really frosts my cookies!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I definitely think the WOC is playing a part here, but I’m VERY DISAPPOINTED in Mellody .. think about what SHE likely went through building her career!  It’s hard enough being a white woman in the Financial Services sector, but being a WOC is a whole different challenge. Having mentored many women, the stories I would hear from the WOC were sad and some (frankly) outrageous!  I insisted that the Corporation include both WOC, Asian, Latina and other cultures which could pose issues to the women’s advancement.  In addition to Quarterly
> 
> HA!!! .. you are too sweet!!
> 
> When I talked to a few friends & former colleagues of mine about this, they all pretty much said the same thing .. "WTF does she know about 'parity"!!!!  I may just "call-in" to this and give the two of them a piece of my mind, this just really frosts my cookies!



According to Mellody’s Wikipedia page, she and George used a surrogate. They prove that  some people can and do own their choices and behaviour. Total respect for that.  Still puzzled why anyone is working so hard to make MM happen.  The harder they push, the less likely it will happen. Still, this pushing MM at us is bizarre.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this the “plant tress” plan or will they pay for excessive carbon emissions?


Be assured, the foundation may sponsor the trips of its founders by their transportation of choice, but the foundation is very serious about its pledge. The foundation will not be flying by private jets.


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> 100% agree.  Unless she is giving tips on how to bag a rich husband, she should pipe down.  There are a LOT of women who I would like to hear from women who “made it” without a British prince or rich connections.  When anyone promotes women who “married up” as the top speakers, it makes the discussion less valuable.



IMO .. it makes the discussion a JOKE!  I don't believe for 1 second that Mellody had it easy getting to the point where she is now; SHE should tell her story!  I'm wondering if Mega-lo-maniac asked to be part of the discussion?!!? .. certainly wouldn't surprise me.  I wonder how many other folks will voice their opinions on her (Meghan's) participation.  When I spoke to friends of mine who are WOC and, like me, had to fight to move up the ladder .. well, let's just say that they were just as happy [SIC] as I was when I heard this news!


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> I don't get it. The *wench on the bench* doesn't even have a job. She certainly never reached any economic or professional parity.
> 
> And this is pure word salad, though I will admit that she certainly had many people creating opportunities for her to meet a rich (stupid) British man.
> 
> *Described as 'groundbreaking figure' who will 'reflect on how shared experiences have influenced thinking about creating opportunities for others'*


@xincinsin .. this is *GENIUS*!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> Piers…



Replied to Piers and (yet again), invited him to join us here ..


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, reportedly Hazzie get a chunk of Phillip’s estate. Maybe that’s why he has been kinda quiet lately.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The article
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 36, was not punished by Prince Philip for giving making accusations against the Royal Family while his grandfather was in the hospital. A source has revealed that the Duke of Edinburgh "never held a grudge". Us Weekly correspondent Christina Garibaldi said: "There are reports Prince Philip left nearly $42 million to his staff following his death.
> *How to watch Harry's documentary on Apple TV+*
> ou can watch the new documentary series, produced by Prince Harry and Oprah Winfrey, by signing up to Apple TV+ streaming service *HERE*
> You can subscribe to Apple TV+ instantly for £4.99 a month or try the free 7-day trial, but remember to cancel before the trial ends to avoid getting charged the full subscription fee. *To find out more visit tv.apple.com*
> _This article contains affiliate links, we may receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more_
> "Clearly very generous to his staff. I think there were three people in his staff he left a majority of his estate to."
> Royal commentator Molly Mulshine added: "I think that was incredible. It was his private secretary, his page and his valet.
> "This source also said that he probably wouldn't have detracted from Prince Harry's inheritance which I guess is good to hear even though I think Prince Harry is doing fine."
> *READ MORE: Princess Diana's accurate prediction about Harry*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry received a handout from Prince Philip in his Will (Image: GETTY)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry returned to the UK after the Oprah interview aired for Prince Philip's funeral (Image: GETTY)
> The source had told The Sun: "Philip was not the sort of character to punish a grandson [Harry] for misbehaving.
> "He was a very fair, even-handed and lovely man. Never held a grudge."
> A Buckingham Palace spokesperson told the newspaper: "This is a personal matter for the family and as such arrangements are private."
> The Duke of Sussex has since accused the royal family of "total neglect" in his mental health documentary series with Oprah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Philip died 'peacefully' in his sleep at the age of 99 (Image: GETTY)
> *King's College slammed by student for Philip apology*
> 
> 
> 
> During the first three episodes of Apple TV's The Me You Can't See, Harry addressed traumatic memories from his childhood, including the death of his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, and harassment on social media of he and his wife Meghan.
> "Every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, to stop just got met with total silence or total neglect," he told Winfrey, referring to his attempts to get assistance from his family with the attacks levelled at the Sussexes online.
> "We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything that we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job."
> The duke also told Winfrey his family did not speak about Diana's death and expected him to just deal with the resulting press attention and mental distress.
> 
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...will-duke-of-edinburgh-royal-family-latest-vn


Unbelievable!


----------



## Chanbal

There are so many people out there shocked with the Duke and Duchess of Bandwagon. This gentleman analyzes the Forbes article. I never saw him before, but I'm amazed by the number of people talking about Pump Pump and Hubby. I never saw this before.


----------



## gracekelly

lulu212121 said:


> Unbelievable!


Don't believe that.  Also don't believe that he received anything from his great grandmother.

Pump Pump isn't a bad nickname, but for me she is more like Lump Lump.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> There are so many people out there shocked with the Duke and Duchess of Bandwagon. This gentleman analyzes the Forbes article. I never saw him before, but I'm amazed by the number of people talking about Pump Pump and Hubby. I never saw this before.




Someone with an agenda is pushing these two on us. I would like to know who. Could it be Charles?  Some unknown billionaire? Now that we have seen Andrew attack his accuser as a ‘money-grabber’ [sheesh, the irony] and even Greta ridicule the COP confab, these royals need to go on holiday.  Enough already. Like Andrew,  H&M continue to damage the brand.


----------



## Chanbal

The highlights of the day (allegedly): 1) the Bandwagons are upset by not being named on the climate change video by QE, and 2) the Cambridges are copying them.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone with an agenda is pushing these two on us. I would like to know who. Could it be Charles?  Some unknown billionaire? Now that we have seen Andrew attack his accuser as a ‘money-grabber’ [sheesh, the irony] and even Greta ridicule the COP confab, these royals need to go on holiday.  Enough already. Like Andrew,  H&M continue to damage the brand.


I agree with you, someone with an agenda is helping them. I have no idea who is behind them, but I don't think it's Charles. In any event, whoever is helping them is up to no good imo. As someone else posted, they personify inequality, injustice and greed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The highlights of the day (allegedly): 1) the Bandwagons are upset by not being named on the climate change video by QE, and 2) the Cambridges are copying them.



H & M, you don't like being ignored and I really feel bad for you, but not really.  

Quote from Neil Sean: This is what freedom tastes like. Harry and Meghan you're cut off and you're on your own. Now, some might say, "Deal with it."


----------



## Chanbal

Pump Pump will not be happy!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Pump Pump will not be happy!




Well, Bezos is trying to get a few favours. He promised to plant trees in Africa.
The $500 million dollar super yacht must be worth something, right?  Imo, he’s ok, going in the right direction - forward, with smart ideas. Granted, I know nothing about working for Amazon or Bezos, so I could be wrong. Time will tell. 

https://www.geekwire.com/2021/see-w...eported-500m-superyacht-netherlands-shipyard/


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone with an agenda is pushing these two on us. I would like to know who. Could it be Charles?  Some unknown billionaire? Now that we have seen Andrew attack his accuser as a ‘money-grabber’ [sheesh, the irony] and even Greta ridicule the COP confab, these royals need to go on holiday.  Enough already. Like Andrew,  H&M continue to damage the brand.


People at Soho House who thought they could turn Harry into another Andrew with Migraine acting as the person convincing Harry to sell access to rich and influential people. Markus Anderson as one of the architects of this.   For example, the recent polo match that he went to had many uber wealthy people in attendance.  Great place to make connections.  For a fee, Harry can make introductions.


----------



## Chanbal

Planning to get a copy!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Be assured, the foundation may sponsor the trips of its founders by their transportation of choice, but the foundation is very serious about its pledge. The foundation will not be flying by private jets.



This really annoys Me.  Rich elites take private jets to any destinations, also using huge SUVs (for security, of course!) decide that if they pay an offset for the carbon emission - then make grandiose statements  - they are carbon neutral.  

But they expect everyone else to change their behaviour. Not go on their holidays because… carbon.  Be mindful about your vehicle choices etc   Make sure your small house is using only the energy you need.

Then they lecture everyone about it from their enormous mansions…

If only they would just be quiet.  Seriously if they cannot see the hypocrisy - then they need to have everything removed from them and try living on a low or middle income for a while.

 Now that would be a worthy Netflix reality show.  Let’s watch H and M work 8am to 7pm for a low or middle wage and survive.  No nannies, chef or mansion….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> According to Twitter, the pledge came 24h after QE's comments about how proud she was of Charles and Will.



"Archewell joins our co-founders"? I thought H&M and Archewell were practically synonymous. 

Anyway, their idea of becoming carbon neutral is to throw money (preferably someone else's money) to buy carbon neutrality.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not that I understand what would take so long for basically an office to do so...but by 2030, they'll be divorced and that foundation a thing of the past haha.


They do make it sound like Archewell is a huge conglomerate.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to Mellody’s Wikipedia page, she and George used a surrogate. They prove that  some people can and do own their choices and behaviour. Total respect for that.  Still puzzled why anyone is working so hard to make MM happen.  The harder they push, the less likely it will happen. Still, this pushing MM at us is bizarre.


My office narc was a master at 1st impressions. Everyone from the CEO down was sooooo impressed by him. It took about 3 months of close contact for us to see through his veneer (by which time he was unfortunately past probation and confirmed in his job). Even then, people were still giving him 2nd, 3rd, 4th.... chances for years because "surely such a nice guy can't be all that bad". 

I believe this is the same case as for Methane. She seems so utterly charming and sincere, and do people like Mellody have time to get to know the wench well? If she gets to network with them via the recommendations of others "charmed" by her, they might be fooled by her "poor me, everyone is out to get me" act.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> My office narc was a master at 1st impressions. Everyone from the CEO down was sooooo impressed by him. It took about 3 months of close contact for us to see through his veneer (by which time he was unfortunately past probation and confirmed in his job). Even then, people were still giving him 2nd, 3rd, 4th.... chances for years because "surely such a nice guy can't be all that bad".
> 
> I believe this is the same case as for Methane. She seems so utterly charming and sincere, and do people like Mellody have time to get to know the wench well? If she gets to network with them via the recommendations of others "charmed" by her, they might be fooled by her "poor me, everyone is out to get me" act.


BTW, just to come clean, my office narc told everyone who would listen that I was out to get him. Because I actually dared to expect him to meet his work goals. His constant failures were not his fault - it was the system, or because no one would help him do his work. My eyes had a lot of exercise rolling for 5 years. I fully expect Methane to use similar excuses if anyone can ever squeeze an answer out of her regarding her limp projects.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> BTW, just to come clean, my office narc told everyone who would listen that I was out to get him. Because I actually dared to expect him to meet his work goals. His constant failures were not his fault - it was the system, or because no one would help him do his work. My eyes had a lot of exercise rolling for 5 years. I fully expect Methane to use similar excuses if anyone can ever squeeze an answer out of her regarding her limp projects.



Yes, if their negative press continues or gets worse, it will be the USA’s  fault. Never theirs. That is how these people operate.  It is my hope more and more people see through their bs. I do believe people will see through it, especially if she shows up on a ballot.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> "Archewell joins our co-founders"? I thought H&M and Archewell were practically synonymous.
> 
> Anyway, their idea of becoming carbon neutral is to throw money (preferably someone else's money) to buy carbon neutrality.



They are being pompous.  Meghan problem refers to herself in the third person, as in "we are not amused!"


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> BTW, just to come clean, my office narc told everyone who would listen that I was out to get him. Because I actually dared to expect him to meet his work goals. His constant failures were not his fault - it was the system, or because no one would help him do his work. My eyes had a lot of exercise rolling for 5 years. I fully expect Methane to use similar excuses if anyone can ever squeeze an answer out of her regarding her limp projects.


She is already doing it.  It is all part of the victim's playbook.  Blame someone else as it NEVER is your fault.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, someone with an agenda is helping them. I have no idea who is behind them, but I don't think it's Charles. In any event, whoever is helping them is up to no good imo. As someone else posted, they personify inequality, injustice and greed.



M&H's message: Since they are victims, then YOU are a victim. If you do not think you are a victim of something, you're either wrong or in denial. You need saving. Only the people who brainwash you into thinking you are a victim can save you. The more people who are programmed to believe that they are victims, the bigger the audience of suckers who'll gravitate toward the leaders who can "save them".  Leaders have power. Leaders need followers. Leaders have a vested interest into making you believe you are a victim. Nothing is ever YOUR fault. Have you made terrible choices in your life? Put all your money into Beanie Babies? Wake up late all the time and get fired from every job as a result? Get bad grades because you screw off and go to parties instead? It's not your fault! You're a victim!  You need word salad from entitled idiots who can show you that even victims can have mansions and the good life. Don't think. Just whine and follow. Never stop complaining and don't you dare improve your life. Your leader can only have power if you believe you're a victim and continue living your crappy life just the way it is.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Hypocrisy, jealousy, arrogance, feel free to add more…
> View attachment 5239963
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Archewell Foundation has pledged to be net zero by 2030.
> Inspired by Harry and Meghan’s “long-standing commitment to the planet, both together and prior to their union”, the company has committed to cut its carbon emissions over the next few years.
> In a statement on its website, the foundation said: “Achieving net zero carbon emissions means making a series of choices over time to make that footprint as small as possible, while compensating for any remaining emissions through high-quality carbon removal projects.
> 
> “As an organisation, we will work with an independent consultant to track all Archewell-related activities from our inception (internet use, commutes, and electricity in home offices, for example) to understand our collective footprint.
> 
> “Using 2022 as our baseline year, they will develop a plan for Archewell that aligns with the latest guidance from leading organisations, like the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol and Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), while offsetting remaining emissions until we achieve net zero in 2030 and beyond.”
> 
> The statement added that Harry’s sustainable tourism initiative Travalyst and the investing firm Ethic, which the pair have invested in, will advise the foundation on “focusing” its investments “in support of a low-carbon economy”.
> A spokesperson for Archewell said: “Carbon emissions are a part of nearly every activity in daily life—the food we eat, the electricity we use, and the internet we are connected to, for example. The totality of these actions comprises our ‘carbon footprint’.
> “Today’s commitment is that Archewell, including Prince Harry and Meghan the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be working with experts to assess the sum total of our emissions, and develop a plan of action to reach net zero.
> “Achieving net zero carbon emissions means making a series of choices over time to make our footprint as small as possible, while compensating for any remaining emissions through investments in carbon removal projects like reforestation.”
> Harry and Meghan set up their not-for-profit Archewell Foundation organisation after leaving their royal roles.
> The foundation has partnerships with a range of academic, tech and charitable organisations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s foundation pledges to be net zero by 2030
> 
> 
> The announcement was made on the foundation’s website during the COP26 summit in Glasgow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


Yet another pledge, to be honored sometime vaguely in the future.


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> This really annoys Me.  Rich elites take private jets to any destinations, also using huge SUVs (for security, of course!) decide that if they pay an offset for the carbon emission - then make grandiose statements  - they are carbon neutral.
> 
> But they expect everyone else to change their behaviour. Not go on their holidays because… carbon.  Be mindful about your vehicle choices etc   Make sure your small house is using only the energy you need.
> 
> Then they lecture everyone about it from their enormous mansions…
> 
> If only they would just be quiet.  Seriously if they cannot see the hypocrisy - then they need to have everything removed from them and try living on a low or middle income for a while.
> 
> *Now that would be a worthy Netflix reality show.  Let’s watch H and M work 8am to 7pm for a low or middle wage and survive.  No nannies, chef or mansion….*


Great idea for the Netflix show, Methane as a Barrista at Starbucks and wouldn't it be fun to have Hazmat be the guy in the window handing you your Big Mac, Chocolate Shake, and Fries as you drive through McDonalds in your hybrid car. To make it real the Nannies would be furloughed while they work so child care challenges would be made real and someone would have to be hired to feed the chickens, cutting into their earnings. They would leave work to stand in line like everyone else to buy rationed bathroom tissue, a huge expense 16 rolls at a time.


----------



## Chanbal

This time on QE


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, for the jewelry fans amongst us...the butterfly brooch, set with rubies and diamonds, was given to the Queen as a wedding present by the sister of the very Baron Poltimore who sold the Poltimore tiara that became Margaret's wedding tiara.

I walk into the basement and have forgotten what I wanted to do down there, but stuff like this I remember in detail


----------



## marietouchet

OK I can be slowwwwww at times ... 

Why didnt she send one of the paleolithic vegan latte kits instead of the Starbucks coupon ? 

Answer: business connection between 6 and MM

In other words a Starbucks buck kickback somewhere ...


----------



## pomeline

I'm terribly sorry to barge in like this, being new here and all but... I could not help myself. I dislike the pair so much.

Their pompous statement can be read in so many ways.

_"Nearly every activity in daily life results in the release of carbon into the atmosphere"_ - Harry and I suffer from flatulence every day

_"what we eat and how often we eat it"_ - We really must tighten our belts and limit our intake of canned beans

_"our transport and the frequency of it"_ - We'll mostly be holed up in our mansion to save money and because we have nowhere to go

_"our use of electricity/heating"_ - We can now only afford to heat one room + bathroom

_"our reliance on big industries that contribute to the problem"_ - Like we said, Heinz beans will have to go

In reality, they would not be able to reduce their emissions to zero even if they dropped dead - whether they'd be buried or cremated they'd still be releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

On ARCHEWELL carbon neutrality ... Is there a diff between ARCHEWELL CARBON NEUTARLITY and 6 /MM CARBON NEUTRALITY ??? Hmm
I am coming to the conclusion that climate control is best achieved via SELF ONTROL eg DONT BUY more clothes, shop from your closet, whatever you do - dont buy small disposable stuff - you dont need it ...  do one trip for all shopping not six of them
Those are my goals, not sure SELF CONTROL is big on the list for 6 and MM


----------



## Lenna.V

MM remind me of a vegan I know, who told me how much toxic I put on this planet by my non vegan diet while I ride bike to work and she drives car


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> On ARCHEWELL carbon neutrality ... Is there a diff between ARCHEWELL CARBON NEUTARLITY and 6 /MM CARBON NEUTRALITY ??? Hmm


I think they are creating a false divide so that they can squirm out of trouble if ever any auditor questions Archewell's activities. I remember when Sussex Royal or its later incarnation was being checked for some reason, Hazard claimed that it was run by the board and he had nothing to do with it.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> This really annoys Me.  Rich elites take private jets to any destinations, also using huge SUVs (for security, of course!) decide that if they pay an offset for the carbon emission - then make grandiose statements  - they are carbon neutral.
> 
> But they expect everyone else to change their behaviour. Not go on their holidays because… carbon.  Be mindful about your vehicle choices etc   Make sure your small house is using only the energy you need.
> 
> Then they lecture everyone about it from their enormous mansions…
> 
> If only they would just be quiet.  Seriously if they cannot see the hypocrisy - then they need to have everything removed from them and try living on a low or middle income for a while.
> 
> Now that would be a worthy Netflix reality show.  Let’s watch H and M work 8am to 7pm for a low or middle wage and survive.  No nannies, chef or mansion….



True. As I've said before we did project after project at school on saving forests, CO2 emissions, holes on the ozone and disappearing wildlife - and I'm surely not Gen Z. I haven't been on holiday for 2 years, or any plane since 2017.

We should all do whatever we can - it's these annoying hypocrites that make it all sound ludicrous and useless. As well as all the greenwashing bumph-blah-blah-blah from their empires monopolies international companies asset-stripping investment portfolios, and trust fund charity home pages we have to put up with them barking on about how evil/mindless _we_ all are  .


----------



## Chanbal

pomeline said:


> I'm terribly sorry to barge in like this, being new here and all but... I could not help myself. I dislike the pair so much.
> 
> Their pompous statement can be read in so many ways.
> 
> _"Nearly every activity in daily life results in the release of carbon into the atmosphere"_ - Harry and I suffer from flatulence every day
> 
> _"what we eat and how often we eat it"_ - We really must tighten our belts and limit our intake of canned beans
> 
> _"our transport and the frequency of it"_ - We'll mostly be holed up in our mansion to save money and because we have nowhere to go
> 
> _"our use of electricity/heating"_ - We can now only afford to heat one room + bathroom
> 
> _"our reliance on big industries that contribute to the problem"_ - Like we said, Heinz beans will have to go
> 
> In reality, they would not be able to reduce their emissions to zero even if they dropped dead - whether they'd be buried or cremated they'd still be releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.


Welcome to this forum. We understand the dislike of the pair, it seems to be global. I don't recall to care or to be particularly shocked by the actions of celebrities before these two appeared in California. However, the way they continuously impose themselves on us, the way they personify inequality, injustice, greed, hypocrisy… is absurd. So this is a great thread to exchange a few laughs as a compensation for the 'pain and suffering' we endure from them.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Now that I read that she will be in an online summit with Hobson, I KNOW that she did NOT pay for those Starbuck gift cards.  I want to hear her offer solutions (about anything at all)  because that would be a first.  The Sussex are good at pointing fingers and telling others to be woke, but have yet to actually find a solution for anything.  As far as her marrying up, I even question that because Harry hasn't shown himself a real personal success with anything as far as I am concerned.  He is just riding on his family name.


I've seen Hobson on TV (as a financial advisor) and knew about her marriage but didn't know she was chair of starbucks.  I still don't understand why all these black women are so sympathetic to a woman who basically passed all her life.  I'm sorry if this offends anyone here but why did she get her nose done at age 13?  not because it was large.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I've seen Hobson on TV (as a financial advisor) and knew about her marriage but didn't know she was chair of starbucks.  I still don't understand why all these black women are so sympathetic to a woman who basically passed all her life.  I'm sorry if this offends anyone here but why did she get her nose done at age 13?  not because it was large.



I don't think the people helping her know about any of that. They took the accusation of racism as truth and Meghan has been reaping the benefit of others wanting to make things "right" for her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't think the people helping her know about any of that. They took the accusation of racism as truth and Meghan has been reaping the benefit of others wanting to make things "right" for her.


will be interesting to see path forward....they are getting legit-appearing "jobs" but without the sensational stories, will interest in them wane?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> will be interesting to see path forward....they are getting legit-appearing "jobs" but without the sensational stories, *will interest in them wane?*



Yes, but not nearly fast enough. For two people who don't actually do anything, they have dominated the celebrity news for longer than we could ever have anticipated. I expect to see a big decline in coverage of them over the next year but I could be wrong.


----------



## tiktok

Another “job” - I guess all of these appearances add up…? I don’t know how much magazines can pay these days, my guess is not a lot:


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Another “job” - I guess all of these appearances add up…? I don’t know how much magazines can pay these days, my guess is not a lot:




They are polluting the atmosphere with _*their* hypocrisy and lies_. It is my belief someone is pushing them on us. Perhaps to distract from Andrew‘s mess or some other mess we aren’t aware of. Perhaps it is an effort to make royals relevant, especially before we are bombarded with the jubilee stuff.  Let them learn the hard way the nobody cares what they say.


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are polluting the atmosphere with their hypocrisy and lies. It is my belief someone is pushing them on us. Perhaps to distract from Andrew‘s mess or some other mess we aren’t aware of. Perhaps it is an effort to make royals relevant, especially before we are bombarded with the jubilee stuff.  Let them learn the hard way the nobody cares what they say.



All their crap events are in the US though, I don't think the average US citizen cares about Andrew or even knows anything about the Jubilee. To me these are all part of the grift. They need $$$ and they want a Kardashian level monetization scheme. So far the only way they can do that is by selling royal family dirt... but in their grandiose view of themselves, they can get paid the big bucks to preach to people about every topic under the sun. So far they manage to book those events but I doubt they get paid a ton.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

tiktok said:


> Another “job” - I guess all of these appearances add up…? I don’t know how much magazines can pay these days, my guess is not a lot:



"...for an exclusive panel on misinformation..."

Wow. Well Duke Dumbdumberbarton would be the expert on this, wouldn't he.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Hypocrisy, jealousy, arrogance, feel free to add more…
> View attachment 5239963
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Archewell Foundation has pledged to be net zero by 2030.
> Inspired by Harry and Meghan’s “long-standing commitment to the planet, both together and prior to their union”, the company has committed to cut its carbon emissions over the next few years.
> In a statement on its website, the foundation said: “Achieving net zero carbon emissions means making a series of choices over time to make that footprint as small as possible, while compensating for any remaining emissions through high-quality carbon removal projects.
> 
> “As an organisation, we will work with an independent consultant to track all Archewell-related activities from our inception (internet use, commutes, and electricity in home offices, for example) to understand our collective footprint.
> 
> “Using 2022 as our baseline year, they will develop a plan for Archewell that aligns with the latest guidance from leading organisations, like the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol and Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi), while offsetting remaining emissions until we achieve net zero in 2030 and beyond.”
> 
> The statement added that Harry’s sustainable tourism initiative Travalyst and the investing firm Ethic, which the pair have invested in, will advise the foundation on “focusing” its investments “in support of a low-carbon economy”.
> A spokesperson for Archewell said: “Carbon emissions are a part of nearly every activity in daily life—the food we eat, the electricity we use, and the internet we are connected to, for example. The totality of these actions comprises our ‘carbon footprint’.
> “Today’s commitment is that Archewell, including Prince Harry and Meghan the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be working with experts to assess the sum total of our emissions, and develop a plan of action to reach net zero.
> “Achieving net zero carbon emissions means making a series of choices over time to make our footprint as small as possible, while compensating for any remaining emissions through investments in carbon removal projects like reforestation.”
> Harry and Meghan set up their not-for-profit Archewell Foundation organisation after leaving their royal roles.
> The foundation has partnerships with a range of academic, tech and charitable organisations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s foundation pledges to be net zero by 2030
> 
> 
> The announcement was made on the foundation’s website during the COP26 summit in Glasgow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


SURE, SURE, SURE .. not holding my breath    on this one, after all .. how are they going to go anywhere without their Private Jet, their Gas-guzzling Cars and all the Security that has to wait on them hand & foot?!?!?!?! .. that's not going to cost any $$$???  At this point, ANYONE who supports these hypocrites is just plain-ass DUMB, STUPID, DERANGED, etc.!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are polluting the atmosphere with _*their* hypocrisy and lies_. It is my belief someone is pushing them on us. Perhaps to distract from Andrew‘s mess or some other mess we aren’t aware of. Perhaps it is an effort to make royals relevant, especially before we are bombarded with the jubilee stuff.  Let them learn the hard way the nobody cares what they say.


I don't think the RF is behind this.  I think it's their huge greed for money and fame that fuels everything they do


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> All their crap events are in the US though, I don't think the average US citizen cares about Andrew or even knows anything about the Jubilee. To me these are all part of the grift. They need $$$ and they want a Kardashian level monetization scheme. So far the only way they can do that is by selling royal family dirt... but in their grandiose view of themselves, they can get paid the big bucks to preach to people about every topic under the sun. So far they manage to book those events but I doubt they get paid a ton.



Agree, doubtful they are getting paid much. While the O interview made Americans aware of their BRF hate, they really aren’t that influential. These repetitive talks reinforce their own hypocrisy.  So, talk away.



sdkitty said:


> I don't think the RF is behind this.  I think it's their huge greed for money and fame that fuels everything they do



True, that explains their motivation. What explains these companies that support them?  Is it the Netflix guy? Starb? Someone is pushing them on us.

ETA: just my 2 cents, adjusted for inflation


----------



## rose60610

Whoever is pushing H&M onto everything forgets that they came to the U.S. in search of privacy and to escape publicity in the UK. I mean, that's what they said. So M&H must be going to all these events against their will   .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are polluting the atmosphere with _*their* hypocrisy and lies_. It is my belief someone is pushing them on us. *Perhaps to distract from Andrew‘s mess* or some other mess we aren’t aware of. Perhaps it is an effort to make royals relevant, especially before we are bombarded with the jubilee stuff.  Let them learn the hard way the nobody cares what they say.



I really don't think so for one reason only: expat or not, idiot wife or not, Harry still ranks higher than Andrew. 

I do think there's someone in the background pulling the strings, but I don't think it's the BRF, and I do think it goes way back because really, what were the odds of Raptor snagging Harry, one of the most eligible bachelors in the world?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so for one reason only: expat or not, idiot wife or not, Harry still ranks higher than Andrew.
> 
> I do think there's someone in the background pulling the strings, but I don't think it's the BRF, and I do think it goes way back because really, what were the odds of Raptor snagging Harry, one of the most eligible bachelors in the world?


who do you think is pulling the strings?  do you think this is some big scheme involving the CIA or something?  just curious.  I actually think that Meghan was probably very happy at the idea of being royal until she found out what it was all about, then decided to bail.  I'm not of the school of thought that she planned this from the time she met him or got engaged.  the whole thing is just disgusting to me.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so for one reason only: expat or not, idiot wife or not, Harry still ranks higher than Andrew.
> 
> I do think there's someone in the background pulling the strings, but I don't think it's the BRF, and I do think it goes way back because really, what were the odds of Raptor snagging Harry, one of the most eligible bachelors in the world?


Yes it goes back to day one when she was introduced to him at the Soho House bar. It was a honeytrap and he fell for it.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Don't believe that.  Also don't believe that he received anything from his great grandmother.
> 
> Pump Pump isn't a bad nickname, but for me she is more like Lump Lump.


.. and to me, more like *DUMP*-*DUMP*!!!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yes it goes back to day one when she was introduced to him at the Soho House bar. It was a honeytrap and he fell for it.


right but the people who helped her were friends, right? not some mysterious group looking to bring down the RF?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> who do you think is pulling the strings?  do you think this is some big scheme involving the CIA or something?  just curious.  I actually think that Meghan was probably very happy at the idea of being royal until she found out what it was all about, then decided to bail.  I'm not of the school of thought that she planned this from the time she met him or got engaged.  the whole thing is just disgusting to me.


She was looking for money and the title was the sugar on top. In a way both of them were manipulated and played by a bunch of businessmen.   The ringer was that they didn’t know what a raging narcissist she was and continues to be. I think she left the game plan a while ago though he is stuck giving access if requested. Not sure if Markus if still their wrangler.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> right but the people who helped her were friends, right? not some mysterious group looking to bring down the RF?


 Not  bring them down. They want to use them and their connections to make money.  Andrew is no longer of use.  Peter Phillips wasn’t a big enough draw, but Harry is.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Not  bring them down. They want to use them and their connections to make money.  Andrew is no longer of use.  Peter Phillips wasn’t a big enough draw, but Harry is.


you think the RF is actually trying to make them successful in order to help the royals in some way?  and in doing so it's ok that they call the RF racists?  I'm confused


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She was looking for money and the title was the sugar on top. In a way both of them were manipulated and played by a bunch of businessmen.   The ringer was that they didn’t know what a raging narcissist she was and continues to be. I think she left the game plan a while ago though he is stuck giving access if requested. Not sure if Markus if still their wrangler.


what bunch of businessmen?  this theory is diabolical


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> who do you think is pulling the strings?  do you think this is some big scheme involving the CIA or something?  just curious.  I actually think that Meghan was probably very happy at the idea of being royal until she found out what it was all about, then decided to bail.  I'm not of the school of thought that she planned this from the time she met him or got engaged.  the whole thing is just disgusting to me.



I don't know, but no, I don't think the CIA, FBI, government of the US or any other state or whatever is involved. I'm not even saying there was this super huge conspiracy to kidnap Harry but I do believe Raptor had help to get into Harry's...sphere. Yes, she was very eager to become Mrs. Windsor (the money, the fame, the adulation, the staff waiting on her hand and foot), but again, what were the odds? She was neither super beautiful nor super successful nor from old money or a part of the right circles.

But now someone has a a particular interest to make those two idots happen. They have no talent, no work ethic, not unique ideas, they are illoyal and indiscret, and they get very unfavourable press coverage, yet people still bother to work with them and invite them to attend stuff when any other celeb would have been cancelled months ago.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> right but the people who helped her were friends, right? not some mysterious group looking to bring down the RF?



She doesn't have friends. Even her friendships are business transactions.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are polluting the atmosphere with _*their* hypocrisy and lies_. It is my belief someone is pushing them on us. Perhaps to distract from Andrew‘s mess or some other mess we aren’t aware of. Perhaps it is an effort to make royals relevant, especially before we are bombarded with the jubilee stuff.  Let them learn the hard way the nobody cares what they say.


Interesting. Reasonable sounding. Isn't next year, the year of the Queen's jubilee, also when Will and Kate are planning a big USA visit?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, but no, I don't think the CIA, FBI, government of the US or any other state or whatever is involved. I'm not even saying there was this super huge conspiracy to kidnap Harry but I do believe Raptor had help to get into Harry's...sphere. Yes, she was very eager to become Mrs. Windsor (the money, the fame, the adulation, the staff waiting on her hand and foot), but again, what were the odds? She was neither super beautiful nor super successful nor from old money or a part of the right circles.
> 
> But now someone has a a particular interest to make those two idots happen. They have no talent, no work ethic, not unique ideas, they are illoyal and indiscret, and they get very unfavourable press coverage, yet people still bother to work with them and invite them to attend stuff when any other celeb would have been cancelled months ago.


I agree she wasn't super beautiful and not that successful as an actress.  but an A-list actress wouldn't have wanted him.  she would have had her own money and success.
they get invited to things based on his royalty and her being that rare American WOC "princess" IMO.  How long will that last?  we don't know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, I don't know. Maybe the stars really did align, but sadly not in the right way haha.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Planning to get a copy!
> View attachment 5240186
> 
> View attachment 5240181


Hmmmm .. like her "Yacht Girl" days? .. like her 1st marriage that was annulled? .. her Casting Couch interviews? .. her Soho House days? .. her use & dump of various people? .. oh, the list can go on quite a bit!  The BRF's "security"(?) team must have been pretty busy cleaning up after her!


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so for one reason only: expat or not, idiot wife or not, Harry still ranks higher than Andrew.
> 
> I do think there's someone in the background pulling the strings, but I don't think it's the BRF, and I do think it goes way back because really, what were the odds of Raptor snagging Harry, one of the most eligible bachelors in the world?



But who was he eligible to other than a woman after fame and fortune? We’ve seen he’s not smart, has no achievements that aren’t tied to the BRF and all the handlers that do the work he slaps his name on, and is not even a particularly good person given how quickly he was willing to throw his entire family under the bus. So eligible to whom other than a gold digger / fame wh*re? I’m sure all the truly eligible women who met him found that out pretty quickly and stayed away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> But who was he eligible to other than a woman after fame and fortune? We’ve seen he’s not smart, has no achievements that aren’t tied to the BRF and all the handlers that do the work he slaps his name on, and is not even a particularly good person given how quickly he was willing to throw his entire family under the bus. So eligible to whom other than a gold digger / fame wh*re? I’m sure all the truly eligible women who met him found that out pretty quickly and stayed away.



Agree, after Chels and Cressida didn’t work out, it was going to be a gold digger/fame wh*re for Hazzie.  Someone with money and connections. Hello, SoHo house.

Agree, their ?partnership? has always been about bringing in cash, either for themselves or some other entrepreneur or even the BRF.   Since they want to be in the billionaire club so badly, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn a billionaire is involved. Not one of the big guys, but a lower tier one - there are hundreds of those.  

No, I do not believe it is a conspiracy to bring down the BRF or anyone else. No, I don’t believe a spy agency was involved. H&M have always been about the $$$$ - Hazzie said in the interview that the BRF told him they did not have money for MM. 

 I do believe a successful businessperson figured out how to monetize titles, connections [as old as time], etc. and Hazzie was willing. Andrew and plenty of other BRF have done it.  Why not Hazzie?  My question is who is pushing H&M on us. My first guess is the BRF. They must stay relevant, probably why they’ve chosen to join the green movement. Of course, they will enjoy the royal exception from any green legislation. Those palaces are expensive to maintain and reconfigure. This story isn’t over yet. We’ve learned so much just in the short time they’ve been married. Looking forward to learning more


----------



## needlv

Yes they have quite a while before they become net zero…


----------



## needlv

And it’s clear they are merching  themselves as speakers to get some $.  I Am Sure Spotify is impressed….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be aware - green is for thee, not meeeee.









						Queen's lawyers secured amendment to Scottish green energy law
					

The legislation was changed so the monarch's private estates could not be subject to compulsory purchase orders.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## needlv




----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so for one reason only: expat or not, idiot wife or not, Harry still ranks higher than Andrew.
> 
> I do think there's someone in the background pulling the strings, but I don't think it's the BRF, and I do think it goes way back because really, what were the odds of Raptor snagging Harry, one of the most eligible bachelors in the world?


I agree, but I definitely think someone put Duchess Pump Pump in Duke Dumbdumberbarton's way after putting some serious thought into the possibility and the use they could make of the transaction, sorry, union .

I think I've found my nickname happy place with Pump Pump and Dumdumberbarton


----------



## Melocoton

Imagine the senator who does not know of her getting that call on their cell:  
Uh, Meghan-who?  THE Duchess of what?  Is this a joke?  BYE.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> URGENT: Can a link of this thread be sent to senators, particularly women senators, in both parties?
> View attachment 5240930
> 
> View attachment 5240928
> 
> …
> 
> *Who sent Meghan? *Sen. Kirsten Gilibrand (D-N.Y.), who's pushed her party to include paid leave in its social spending bill, said Wednesday that she gave senators' numbers to Markle. "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lauren Boebert, Bob Good and Dan Bishop are joining the leadership ranks of the House Freedom Caucus.
> 
> 
> News and analysis from Capitol Hill for when you only have a few minutes, from POLITICO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


wait...she is calling US government officials and calling herself the Duchess?  eww... she is Really Full of Herself


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know. Maybe the stars really did align, but sadly not in the right way haha.



I think they crashed into each other like a couple of out of control meteorites down a sink hole    and he lost what was left of his royal-marbles and she, her common sense of any decency, in the process.


----------



## sdkitty

I guess some people think the public cares what she says?
Meghan Markle Phones Sen. Gillibrand to Get Involved in Paid Family Leave Battle (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Be aware - green is for thee, not meeeee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's lawyers secured amendment to Scottish green energy law
> 
> 
> The legislation was changed so the monarch's private estates could not be subject to compulsory purchase orders.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



I have a house in Scotland. I don't want wasteful and hideous wind farms that never reach carbon neutral before they need to be replaced, pour tons concrete into hillsides and tarmac fields to build them, then kill migrating and native birds anywhere near my home either. The collective hum alone will drive me insane. It's not like local people will get free electricity and they will no longer have right of way across land due to health and safety concerns. 

I may have to move to the Balmoral Estate


----------



## TC1

xincinsin said:


> They do make it sound like Archewell is a huge conglomerate.


They DID just buy $500 worth of gift cards...you know, for the tax write off


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> They DID just buy $500 worth of gift cards...you know, for the tax write off


can you imagine getting credit for spending a few hundred dollars when you're living in a 19-bath mansion?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I have a house in Scotland. I don't want wasteful and hideous wind farms that never reach carbon neutral before they need to be replaced, pour tons concrete into hillsides and tarmac fields to build them, then kill migrating and native birds anywhere near my home either. The collective hum alone will drive me insane. It's not like local people will get free electricity and they will no longer have right of way across land due to health and safety concerns.
> 
> I may have to move to the Balmoral Estate



Exactly, I do not want wind farms or sun roofs or any of the other more expensive, frequently broken stuff near me either.  
The green movement is so hypocritical to me, always has been.  At least Leo took the train.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, I do not want wind farms or sun roofs or any of the other more expensive, frequently broken stuff near me either.
> The green movement is so hypocritical to me, always has been.  At least Leo took the train.



We grow willow, dry it and burn it in my stove (with a back boiler). Same system but more efficient apparatus that has been in my house since it was built in 1790. Most of my neighbours have the same. The only electricity we need is mostly for light and a washing machine.

Prince H can run his helicopter for 2 on all the hot air he spouts, he and all his woke fiends know nothing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> We grow willow, dry it and burn it in my stove (with a back boiler). Same system but more efficient since my house was built in 1790. Most of my neighbours have the same. The only electricity we need is mostly for light and a washing machine.
> 
> Prince H can run his helicopter for 2 on all the hot air he spouts, he and all his woke fiends know nothing.



Gotta ask - what have H&M done to make their mansion green??
Have they sold their cars/suv yet?  Walking would help both of them — Hazz with his mental health, her with that ‘baby’ weight
Seems like they would publicize their own efforts, right?


----------



## rose60610

We all know Harry isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. I think he was easy prey for anyone who could break through whatever gatekeepers he had. I think Meghan used her acting skills big time on him and the public at large. When they were dating they seemed nice and she appeared sweet at the appearances, graciously accepting posies from the kiddies. The numerous red flags were ignored. We learn she's a mega beaytch behind closed doors, then her conniving comes public at the "Not many people have asked if I'm OK". She initially thrived on the publicity then claimed it was too much. Oh, and the thoughts of suicide and not being able to get help. Oh please. As long as she has a critical mass behind her she'll get away with her garbage and there's plenty of slime bags out there that need her to spread her lies of victimhood to further indoctrinate the chronically offended and victimized. Not unlike how gangs recruit new members--gangs prey on the weak, give them a sense of belonging and protection, as long as they participate and contribute to the gang's objectives. All is fine as long as they do what the gang wants, none of it good.

Markle is a gift to those who need to indoctrinate more people into believing they're victims. Notice how if you don't like her, you're immediately "A Racist!". Yawn, yawn, yawn. And she's famous because she bagged a Prince. Harry is like a new gang recruit. He must go along or face consequences. I don't think he gets it. Too many people suck up to him so he hasn't noticed his balls have been cut off and that he's a loser. He's enjoying naive, goo-goo-eyed Americans and the money being thrown at him. When he wakes up he'll see 90% of the world takes him for a fool. 

If Meghan enters politics as a candidate, her opponents will have a heyday cutting her down. I'll help!


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> We all know Harry isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. I think he was easy prey for anyone who could break through whatever gatekeepers he had. I think Meghan used her acting skills big time on him and the public at large. When they were dating they seemed nice and she appeared sweet at the appearances, graciously accepting posies from the kiddies. The numerous red flags were ignored. We learn she's a mega beaytch behind closed doors, then her conniving comes public at the "Not many people have asked if I'm OK". She initially thrived on the publicity then claimed it was too much. Oh, and the thoughts of suicide and not being able to get help. Oh please. As long as she has a critical mass behind her she'll get away with her garbage and there's plenty of slime bags out there that need her to spread her lies of victimhood to further indoctrinate the chronically offended and victimized. Not unlike how gangs recruit new members--gangs prey on the weak, give them a sense of belonging and protection, as long as they participate and contribute to the gang's objectives. All is fine as long as they do what the gang wants, none of it good.
> 
> Markle is a gift to those who need to indoctrinate more people into believing they're victims. Notice how if you don't like her, you're immediately "A Racist!". Yawn, yawn, yawn. And she's famous because she bagged a Prince. Harry is like a new gang recruit. He must go along or face consequences. I don't think he gets it. Too many people suck up to him so he hasn't noticed his balls have been cut off and that he's a loser. He's enjoying naive, goo-goo-eyed Americans and the money being thrown at him. When he wakes up he'll see 90% of the world takes him for a fool.
> 
> If Meghan enters politics as a candidate, her opponents will have a heyday cutting her down. I'll help!


I'm beginning to think these two are a symptom of the media culture we're living with


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> wait...she is calling US government officials and calling herself the Duchess?  eww... she is Really Full of Herself


No worries, your eyes are fine. You read it well!


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to think these two are a symptom of the media culture we're living with



They are two seriously flawed individuals who bring out the worst in each other.

She thought she was going to be super rich and famous, live in a castle and wear the tiaras.  And that she could continue her “merching” on the side, be the next Diana 2.0 …

He was  a damaged, self-indulged @hole that any clever woman steered clear from.  He was also known to be trouble - with the BRF sweeping up after his numerous incidents, and running the “cheeky” persona (which works in your teens and twenties but not when you are 35).  He also wanted to rebel against his family, so chose a gold digging actress - knowing his family initially wouldn’t approve.

And now they are stuck with each other.  I have no doubt she didn’t know H’s wealth is in family trusts, and H was not as wealthy as she thought (in terms of readily available cash).  She also didn’t realise the hundreds of protocol rules that royals need to follow. (At the start), nor that the Royal family are glorified public civil servants, so flashing wealth is NOT ok - and spending huge sums of $ on clothes did not go down well.

But even when she was told about the rules and received backlash as to her spending… she did not stop.  And that is the issue.  Everyone can forgive a few protocol breaches when you start out, but to continue shows you aren’t listening or learning.

I honestly think the RF was relieved when they announced they were leaving.  H was a huge drag on resources (covering up his numerous issues), she was spending tax payer and PC’s money without any signs of stopping.  

The Queen said no to their half in / half out idea but gave them a 12 month review period to decide whether to come back.  They said no and did an Oprah interview.

From then on the BRF has iced them out.  No response, not answering calls, not acknowledging their stunts.  And only corrected where they lied about zoom calls with the Queen (notice they haven’t claimed this since?)

And now we have the Duchess using her title everywhere… because without that title, what is she?  And that is why she is stuck.  Until she grows her own brand or has another billionaire to grasp onto or a political career… she is stuck with H.

It will be interesting to see if H gets bored and cheats first, or whether she finds someone better and leaves as fast as she can….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to think these two are a symptom of the media culture we're living with



Or - a symptom of what happens to hypocritical Royals. Absolutely they need to be exposed. Finally. 
[behaving in a way that suggests one has higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case]


----------



## Chanbal

They lie, spread misinformation, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are behind the Twitter accounts that have been permanently suspended (murky meg, duchofnarsussex, etc). These cancel culture people are dangerous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Who sent Meghan? *Sen. Kirsten Gilibrand (D-N.Y.), who's pushed her party to include paid leave in its social spending bill, said Wednesday that she gave senators' numbers to Markle. "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."



Has everyone lost their f*cking mind?

Also, how rude to call with your number blocked out when you got the number of the other person over shady connections to begin with. Same MO as "Our kids can't be seen, but let's grab yours for a photo op."

And when will she stop using that title?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




Which court case? I'm losing overview.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I have a house in Scotland. I don't want wasteful and hideous wind farms that never reach carbon neutral before they need to be replaced, pour tons concrete into hillsides and tarmac fields to build them, then *kill migrating and native birds* anywhere near my home either. The collective hum alone will drive me insane. It's not like local people will get free electricity and they will no longer have right of way across land due to health and safety concerns.
> 
> I may have to move to the Balmoral Estate



TRIGGER WARNING animal cruelty.

Right? I don't know why it is not more of a scandal how many birds are killed and injured by wind farms (when in fact it would be easy to design them so they don't). Recently a big bird of prey was found after he'd been seen sitting under a wind turbine for days. When rescuers arrived they found his eyes were gone and his wings were broken but he was still alive and in horrible pain. All they could do for him is have him euthanized after days of suffering. And he is just the one story that made it big because it was extra cruel.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Whoch court case? I'm losing overview.



Associated news limited has an appeal against Justice Warby (?) summary judgement in favour of the Duchess.  Remember her claims of copyright over the letter and breach of privacy for Daily Mail and others publishing it?  The appeal was supposed to be heard November 11 or 12.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> We all know Harry isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. I think he was easy prey for anyone who could break through whatever gatekeepers he had



You're probably so right. Still, how did she make it? Let's replaced most eligible bachelor with most sheltered, if only to try to shield the BRF from more embarrassment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You're probably so right. Still, how did she make it? Let's replaced most eligible bachelor with most sheltered, if only to try to shield the BRF from more embarrassment.



IMO the BRF needed this soap opera in order to stay relevant and distract from Andy’s mess. The dueling brothers, dueling royal houses on separate continents, the Diana glorification nonsense, all of it worked to keep the BRF in the media. In other words, we’ve all been duped. For all the green talk, they took a Royal exception to the laws.  Remember that.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or - a symptom of what happens to hypocritical Royals. Absolutely they need to be exposed. Finally.
> [behaving in a way that suggests one has higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case]


I don't have a problem with Royals if the people in their own countries want to have them. Monarchies never made sense to me, but they may provide a useful role in some countries. In the UK, for example, I think  Charles is right about reducing the monarchy, and I believe Will will represent the UK very well. People like Randy Andy or 6 should get real jobs and stop being parasites.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the BRF needed this soap opera in order to stay relevant and distract from Andy’s mess. The dueling brothers, dueling royal houses on separate continents, the Diana glorification nonsense, all of it worked to keep the BRF in the media. In other words, we’ve all been duped. For all the green talk, they took a Royal exception to the laws.  Remember that.



because the BRF are ignoring them (and their suggestions, eg christening for Lili, Christmas at Sandringham) the stunts they pull will get more and more ridiculous to provoke a reaction.  The narc in her cannot understand why the BRF is ignoring them!

So the latest stunt, using her title in calling US politicians about family leave has two edges to it, yes a noble cause and gets her good PR; but also intended to rile the BRF as she is using her (foreign) title to influence US politics….  She is waiting for the BRF to comment so she can claim “victim status” and make the BRF look like bullies… 

The BRF should ignore.  And the Queens message where she praised PC and PW specifically - is a message that Hazbeen and the first wife are OUT.  

If there is a jubilee celebration, I hope the Queen doesn’t allow them on the balcony or any carriage rides.  If they want to celebrate they are invited to join the private family gatherings but that is it….

 After all, they chose to leave, and H gets triggered by London and all those clicks of the camera…. And no one wants them back because whatever is said in those family gatherings will be twisted and released by her PR.


----------



## bag-mania

So we know she was calling senators and pestering them. I think the senator who gave Meghan their private cell numbers is going to hear about it. That was overstepping. She didn’t impress everyone and I’m no expert but I suspect this isn’t the best way to enter politics.

Markle then called another, more moderate, ********** -- Susan Collins of Maine -- who was in the gym at the time and also thought it was Manchin on the phone, according to a source familiar with the matter.

The duchess once again pitched paid family leave, Collins said.

"*Much* *to my surprise, she called me on my private line and she introduced herself as the duchess of Sussex, which is kind of ironic*," Collins added.

"I was happy to talk with her, but I’m more interested in what the people of Maine are telling me about it," she said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnew...es-**********-senators-paid/story?id=80953944


----------



## gracekelly

After reading all of the posts on this wonderful thread and posts in other places, i have come to the conclusion that there is just one plan here and it is pretty simple.  They will double down on anything inappropriate simply because it keeps people talking.  They don't care that the talk about them is negative as long as people are talking about them and they are in the public eye.  It is a newer approach to there is no such thing as bad publicity.  Meghan is being very deliberate in the usage of her title to influence US policy makers and she is doing it not because she cares that much for the issue, she does it because she knows she is not supposed to.  She knew she was not supposed to name her daughter Lilibet, but she did it anyway.  She knew she wasn't supposed to walk in front of TQ, or her husband at royal events or run her hands all over him in public, but she did it all anyway because no one tells her what to do and these actions got her noticed.  She wore a muddy colored dress in the christening picture in total contradiction to the dress code for the day because she wanted you to focus on her when you subsequently viewed the picture.   See her, talk about her.  This  is her plan and she isn't changing it for anyone.  She is so thirsty for attention, she makes Chrissy Teigen look like a rank amateur.

Ignoring her is a form of slow death for people like this and I hope the Windsors continue to ignore anything that comes from Harry and/or Meghan.


----------



## needlv

Well, this guy certainly knows how to use every business opportunity…









						Philippines businessman plans Archewell launch in US, vows to block Duke and Duchess of Sussex
					

A small business owner who last year became embroiled in a trademark dispute with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle has told WTR he plans to launch his Archewell Cosmetics brand in the US.




					www.worldtrademarkreview.com


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> After reading all of the posts on this wonderful thread and posts in other places, i have come to the conclusion that there is just one plan here and it is pretty simple.  They will double down on anything inappropriate simply because it keeps people talking.  They don't care that the talk about them is negative as long as people are talking about them and they are in the public eye.  It is a newer approach to there is no such thing as bad publicity.  Meghan is being very deliberate in the usage of her title to influence US policy makers and she is doing it not because she cares that much for the issue, she does it because she knows she is not supposed to.  She knew she was not supposed to name her daughter Lilibet, but she did it anyway.  She knew she wasn't supposed to walk in front of TQ, or her husband at royal events or run her hands all over him in public, but she did it all anyway because no one tells her what to do and these actions got her noticed.  She wore a muddy colored dress in the christening picture in total contradiction to the dress code for the day because she wanted you to focus on her when you subsequently viewed the picture.   See her, talk about her.  This  is her plan and she isn't changing it for anyone.  She is so thirsty for attention, she makes Chrissy Teigen look like a rank amateur.
> 
> Ignoring her is a form of slow death for people like this and I hope the Windsors continue to ignore anything that comes from Harry and/or Meghan.


I agree, the BRF needs to continue ignoring them. She should be embarrassed for using that title in the US, but she isn't. It's all done in name of money and power. She is a dangerous person imo. I wouldn't be surprised if the leaders of her squad are on Arch* or SS payroll.    



Spoiler: Cancer culture


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is so full of it. She doesn't use the Duchess title so people know who she is....everyone has heard of Meghan Markle, the greedy, lying famewhore with no manners. She uses it because she enjoys feeling important. If she had just an iota of decency and even self-worth she'd stop using a title given by a racist family that nearly killed her by her own account. I wish someone - anyone - important wouldn't be a sycophant and say "Look, we don't recognize titles in the US, what can I call you instead?"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

For some reason I can't find the original post right now, so I have to repost:



One of the comments, instead of staying on topping, aggressively asked why we don't know where the Cambridges went on vacation. Why are the stans never willing to focus on their pet royals, and how is the one vacation a year the Cambridges take a) unreasonable and b) anyone's business?

Even the sugars know they have no leg to stand on defending the troublesome two


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> Great idea for the Netflix show, Methane as a Barrista at Starbucks and wouldn't it be fun to have Hazmat be the guy in the window handing you your Big Mac, Chocolate Shake, and Fries as you drive through McDonalds in your hybrid car. To make it real the Nannies would be furloughed while they work so child care challenges would be made real and someone would have to be hired to feed the chickens, cutting into their earnings. They would leave work to stand in line like everyone else to buy rationed bathroom tissue, a huge expense 16 rolls at a time.


Oh my just like New York goes to work. Bring Tiffany Pollard in to host and they will finally have a show worth selling. 


tiktok said:


> Another “job” - I guess all of these appearances add up…? I don’t know how much magazines can pay these days, my guess is not a lot:



I guess M can’t make it as she’s too busy trying to remember whether or not she knew anything about the BRF before or after she met him.  


gracekelly said:


> Yes it goes back to day one when she was introduced to him at the Soho House bar. It was a honeytrap and he fell for it.


more like a marmalade trap, extra bitter or a peanut butter trap, extra crunchy.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> URGENT: Can a link of this thread be sent to senators, particularly women senators, in both parties?
> View attachment 5240930
> 
> View attachment 5240928
> 
> …
> 
> *Who sent Meghan? *Sen. Kirsten Gilibrand (D-N.Y.), who's pushed her party to include paid leave in its social spending bill, said Wednesday that she gave senators' numbers to Markle. "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lauren Boebert, Bob Good and Dan Bishop are joining the leadership ranks of the House Freedom Caucus.
> 
> 
> News and analysis from Capitol Hill for when you only have a few minutes, from POLITICO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


Yes, but which* major celebrity* is pitching to the senators? 
David Spade? Britney Spears? Peppa pig?
The article doesn’t say…


papertiger said:


> I have a house in Scotland. I don't want wasteful and hideous wind farms that never reach carbon neutral before they need to be replaced, pour tons concrete into hillsides and tarmac fields to build them, then kill migrating and native birds anywhere near my home either. The collective hum alone will drive me insane. It's not like local people will get free electricity and they will no longer have right of way across land due to health and safety concerns.
> 
> I may have to move to the Balmoral Estate


couldn’t agree more. If you are going to build on the green belt at least build something useful 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Gotta ask - what have H&M done to make their mansion green??
> Have they sold their cars/suv yet? Walking would help both of them — Hazz with his mental health, her with that ‘baby’ weight
> Seems like they would publicize their own efforts, right?


gosh think of the poor residents of montecito though, forced to face the floor whenever they hear the dreaded clack of ill-fitting stilettos against bunions waddling through the town.


CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the BRF needed this soap opera in order to stay relevant and distract from Andy’s mess. The dueling brothers, dueling royal houses on separate continents, the Diana glorification nonsense, all of it worked to keep the BRF in the media. In other words, we’ve all been duped. For all the green talk, they took a Royal exception to the laws.  Remember that.


I agree with you. I think that the presentation of the Queen as an elderly victim of her ungrateful grandchild has gained her a lot of sympathy. However, like King Lear, many audiences don’t notice that the senior relative’s own behaviour is pretty reprehensible.

I do wonder whether it’s just a long game to increase media attention and as you say, to throw a smoke screen of H&M’s bad behaviour to create a simple, engaging narrative of heroic brother Will and degenerate brother H to get people to root for W, a bit like professional wrestling really. W is the hulk hogan: the one man unafraid  to face the big baddie and here to dispense solecisms about eating vegetables and caring for the environment.
However, he’s always struck me as lacking in the necessary charisma, I think he’s more a Roman Reigns. He looks right but matter how much they push him he’s not getting wild cheers.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> wait...she is calling US government officials and calling herself the Duchess?  eww... she is Really Full of Herself


oh wait....if she said Meghan Markle no one would know who she is?  this is so annoying.  any of us can call our representative but we will get a staff member at best.  she gets their cell phone number....why?  because she is married to a fallen prince


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. The troublesome two found their match. Ursula von der Leyen just got outed for having used a private jet for a distance of 47 km (not even 30 miles). WTFFF.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. The troublesome two found their match. Ursula von der Leyen just got outed for having used a private jet for a distance of 47 km (not even 30 miles). WTFFF.


who is that?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. The troublesome two found their match. Ursula von der Leyen just got outed for having used a private jet for a distance of 47 km (not even 30 miles). WTFFF.


Just 2 days ago, she tweeted: 
_I'm very glad to launch the Global Methane Pledge with @*****. 83 countries are now joining us in this worldwide initiative to reduce methane emissions. This will slow down global warming and keep the goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees within reach. _

Perhaps she practises the Archewell model of pledging: I'll do it sometime really far in the future when you've forgotten what I've pledged.


----------



## piperdog

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to think these two are a symptom of the media culture we're living with


Even worse, I think they're either a creation of that media culture, or at least of the same ideas that have resulted in our current media culture. It makes my head spin.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> who is that?



Germany's former Minister of Defence who's now President of the European Commission.

ETA: one comment read "Did the jet fly the distance or drive?"


----------



## sdkitty

piperdog said:


> Even worse, I think they're either a creation of that media culture, or at least of the same ideas that have resulted in our current media culture. It makes my head spin.


oh, don't get me started on kylie jenner, who totally transformed her face as a teen and is now a billionaire.....I see young women locally (not teens in my limited experience) who are following her example.....injecting their lips, their butts, enlarging their breasts, changing their noses


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I do wonder whether it’s just a long game to increase media attention and as you say, to throw a smoke screen of H&M’s bad behaviour to create a simple, engaging narrative of heroic brother Will and degenerate brother H to get people to root for W, a bit like professional wrestling really. W is the hulk hogan: the one man unafraid  to face the big baddie and here to dispense solecisms about eating vegetables and caring for the environment.
> However, he’s always struck me as lacking in the necessary charisma, I think he’s more a Roman Reigns. He looks right but matter how much they push him he’s not getting wild cheers.


I doubt that anyone would have the family dunce marry a deceitful family wrecker just to produce a smoke screen. The inevitable problems would make it a disastrous move.

I'm of the opinion that people like Marcus Anderson, Jessica Mulroney and Oprah Winfrey played kingmaker and boosted Methane into circles and events which would allow her to ensnare Hazard. They wanted an "in" to the influence that a tame royal could give them. Their game plan may have been derailed as I doubt they anticipated Methane to make everything about her instead.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> who is that?



Another hypocrite who is preachy about global warming and carbon footprints but she'll burn jet fuel like crazy if it is for her own convenience.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm running out of words to comment on the activities of the Duke and Duchess of Bandwagon. People like them are harmful to our planet in more ways than their carbon footprint.


----------



## Chanbal

I've no appreciation for people that help or promote this overly ambitious couple. However, I'm very thankful to courageous people that keep denouncing personifications of hypocrisy, injustice, and greed in this world.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> "...for an exclusive panel on misinformation..."
> 
> Wow. Well *Duke Dumbdumberbarton* would be the expert on this, wouldn't he.


Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your #3 nickname, Duke Dumbdumberbarton that has been added to The List. Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Yes, but not nearly fast enough. For two people who don't actually do anything, they have dominated the celebrity news for longer than we could ever have anticipated. *I expect to see a big decline in coverage of them over the next year but I could be wrong.*



We'll see. Midterms are next year so there will be plenty of bandwagon opportunities  and no shortage of "issues" for her to yawp about


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I doubt that anyone would have the family dunce marry a deceitful family wrecker just to produce a smoke screen. The inevitable problems would make it a disastrous move.



This is where I stand as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I've no appreciation for people that help or promote this overly ambitious couple. However, I'm very thankful to courageous people that keep denouncing personifications of hypocrisy, injustice, and greed in this world.




This might be just a very unflattering shot, but I am getting major Donatella vibes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> If there is a jubilee celebration, I hope the Queen doesn’t allow them on the balcony or any carriage rides.  If they want to celebrate they are invited to join the private family gatherings but that is it….


I don't believe HM will allow either of them anywhere near her family knowing they were wired in NYC and that they could try the same stunt at BP. If H&M complain about the lack of invitation, HM could send them an email, "Harry, sorry, your invitation must be lost in the post and unfortunately that was our last one. Be thankful that we're sparing you reliving all the painful memories about your mother that resurface when you arrive London. Don't call us, we'll call you. Maybe!"


----------



## poopsie

tiktok said:


> Another “job” - I guess all of these appearances add up…? I don’t know how much magazines can pay these days, my guess is not a lot:




I am so frikken sick and tired of this "misinformation" ish. And WTF is misinformantion DISORDER?
Interesting. How does "speaking MY truth" stack up against the concept of one monolithic truth?


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> What explains these companies that support them?  Is it the Netflix guy? Starb? *Someone is pushing them on us.*
> 
> ETA: just my 2 cents, adjusted for inflation



Soros?
Lots of fingers in lots of pies


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so for one reason only: expat or not, idiot wife or not, Harry still ranks higher than Andrew.
> 
> I do think there's someone in the background pulling the strings, but I don't think it's the BRF, and I do think it goes way back because really, *what were the odds of Raptor snagging Harry, one of the most eligible bachelors in the world?*



On paper only
All his previous gf's bailed whether because of him or the obligations they would be saddled with who can say.


----------



## poopsie

Melocoton said:


> Imagine the senator who does not know of her getting that call on their cell:
> Uh, Meghan-who?  THE Duchess of what?  Is this a joke?  BYE.



Prince Albert in a can?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> “I couldn’t figure out how she got my number,” she said.



As someone who doesn't even answer most of the time when I don't recognize the number (did you read about the hiker that got lost and never answered the rescue team's calls because he didn't know the number? That would be me.) that infuriates me.



> As part of their Megxit, Markle and Harry agreed to give up their titles as His Royal Highness and Her Royal Highness, but were allowed to keep Duke and Duchess of Sussex.



Dear Page 6, HRH is not a title but a style. You're welcome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said, according to Politico. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."



Oh did she...how is it that at least one of them couldn't figure out where Raptor got her private number from?


----------



## purseinsanity

Rep. Jason Smith Rips Meghan Markle for Using Royal Title to Lobby Congress
					

Rep. Jason Smith says Meghan Markle should drop her royal title the next time she lobbies Congress.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> And who is Gillibrand to decide for everyone that Meghan is going to be part of a working group on this subject? She's forcing Meghan on her fellow senators when clearly she doesn't know Meghan will have moved on to another hot topic next month.
> 
> Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) had apparently given Meghan the numbers to the U.S senators.
> 
> "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said, according to Politico. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."
> 
> "*She wants to be part of a working group to work on paid leave long term and she's going to be*. Whether this comes to fruition now or later, she'll be part of a group of women that hopefully will work on paid leave together," Gillibrand said of the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle personally called GOP senators to push paid leave: report
> 
> 
> Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, personally called Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) to advocate for paid family leave, according to Politico.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com


I'm not a Senator, but I would be pi$$ed for any colleague to hand out my PRIVATE number to some numbskull.  I get it that Megain doesn't comprehend what "Privacy" actually means, but this Senator is way out of line.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not a Senator, but I would be pi$$ed for any colleague to hand out my PRIVATE number to some numbskull.  I get it that Megain doesn't comprehend what "Privacy" actually means, but this Senator is way out of line.



Could you imagine if those other ladies had giver HER (the Sen or MM) number out? The outraged backlash would be off the charts


----------



## Aimee3

The only White House *prince pump pump & duchess dump dump *should live in should be their current montecito place painted white.  Won’t she have to give up her duchess title to run for any office?


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Could you imagine if those other ladies had giver HER (the Sen or MM) number out? The outraged backlash would be off the charts



If I were one of them I'd write Gillbrand's private phone number on the mens' room wall at the seediest bar or truck stop I could find.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the phone numbers. Yes, I would be furious and would make sure KG knows about it.  There are many Karen’s among those congresspeople, so MM gets hoisted by her own petard. KG will regret this sycophantic move. See, this is why H&M should not seek publicity. They mess up each time. At least, more people are boo-ing their antics.  Apparently it has not sunk in that we do not want royals in our business. Nope, not here. Keep that pomp and nonsense on the UK shores.

RE: the jubilee balcony - of course, they will get an invite. QE will want her family there and they are family.  After these green lectures, though, the hypocritical BRF may lose public support.  While we politely applaud her longevity, it does not indicate that she has always gotten it right. They should be careful about conflating _applause_ with _agreeing and supporting_.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent analysis of this major privacy violation.  Thank you.
> Interesting to note that MM concealed her number so caller ID would not display it.  What a rat.



What a scary thought. If my caller ID ever has "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" appear on it, I'd have to draw all the blinds and huddle quietly in the dark in a fetal position!


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> I am so frikken sick and tired of this "misinformation" ish. And WTF is misinformantion DISORDER?
> Interesting. How does "speaking MY truth" stack up against the concept of one monolithic truth?


“Misinformation Disorder” is a chronic, evidently incurable, rotten, moral decaying of the soul, aka “Sussexism” . 

Before it became woke, it was known for eons as “Pathological Lying”. 

It leads to “Pants on Fire” which ultimately reeks havoc on hemorrhoids due to the constant irritation. Finally it results  to being a constant pain in the a** as the more they jabber the worse it gets.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> “Misinformation Disorder” is a chronic, evidently incurable, rotten, moral decaying of the soul, aka “Sussexism” .
> 
> Before it became woke, it was known for eons as “Pathological Lying”.
> 
> It leads to “Pants on Fire” which ultimately reeks havoc on hemorrhoids due to the constant irritation. Finally it results  to being a constant pain in the a** as the more they jabber the worse it gets.



 Love love this!  You’ve made my day  

Kinda like this?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> I am so frikken sick and tired of this "misinformation" ish. And WTF is *misinformantion DISORDER*?
> Interesting. How does "speaking MY truth" stack up against the concept of one monolithic truth?


Its just a newly minted slogan created by someone similar to M and constantly using it until they have fooled enough people into joining their vapid little group and giving them lots of $$$ for accomplishing absolutely nothing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent analysis of this major privacy violation.  Thank you.
> Interesting to note that *MM concealed her number so caller ID would not display it*.  What a rat.



Isn't this what serial killers and robo-callers for extended car warranties do? And wow, Meghan gets senators' phone #s but doesn't want THEM to know HERS? How will they ever get hold of her to invite her to the White House or State of the Union speeches?   
I thought she wanted to be best buds with influential people. How quickly did Meghan sell those #'s for monetary gain  ?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> What a scary thought. If my caller ID ever has "Meghan, Duchess of Sussex" appear on it, I'd have to draw all the blinds and huddle quietly in the dark in a fetal position!


I bet she literally did change her cell phone plan to include the title.


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> I bet she literally did change her cell phone plan to include the title.



one day burner phone?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> If I were one of them I'd write Gillbrand's private phone number on the mens' room wall at the seediest bar or truck stop I could find.


Don't forget to draw a huge heart around the number and write, "Honey, I'm always in the mood!"


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love this!  You’ve made my day
> 
> Kinda like this?
> 
> View attachment 5241702


Love it, Pinocchio is endearing and reforms himself, unlike “those people”.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The Boston Globe, a VERY liberal paper tweeted about Megalomaniac’s calls and I was surprised that all the comments were negative.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yeppers, he married up!  Congrats, Trevor.

*'I'm the luckiest guy I know!' Meghan Markle's ex-husband Trevor Engelson celebrates the birth of his second child - a daughter named Sienna Lee - as he and wife Tracey are pictured with the newborn for the first time*

*The Hollywood producer, 44, and his wife Tracey Kurkland announced on Instagram that they've welcomed a daughter named Sienna Lee*
*'I don't know what I did right, but I'm the luckiest guy I know,' Trevor said*
*He and his wife also share 15-month-old daughter Ford Grace Engelson*
*Trevor dated the Duchess of Sussex six years before getting engaged in 2010 and marrying in 2011, but they split in 2013*
*He proposed to Tracey, a multi-millionaire banker's daughter, in June 2018, and they married in May 2019*
*








						Meghan Markle's ex-husband Trevor Engelson welcomes baby #2
					

Trevor, 44, and his wife Tracey Kurkland announced that they've welcomed a daughter named Sienna Lee. 'I don't know what I did right, but I'm the luckiest guy I know,' Trevor said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> And who is Gillibrand to decide for everyone that Meghan is going to be part of a working group on this subject? She's forcing Meghan on her fellow senators when clearly she doesn't know Meghan will have moved on to another hot topic next month.
> 
> Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) had apparently given Meghan the numbers to the U.S senators.
> 
> "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said, according to Politico. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."
> 
> "*She wants to be part of a working group to work on paid leave long term and she's going to be*. Whether this comes to fruition now or later, she'll be part of a group of women that hopefully will work on paid leave together," Gillibrand said of the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle personally called GOP senators to push paid leave: report
> 
> 
> Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, personally called Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) to advocate for paid family leave, according to Politico.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com




Thank you!  That working group BS made my head explode!  Not sure what this group is - is it just for the Senate, just for Congress?  MM has exact zero qualifications to be part of any such group - unless it is about how to maximize ways to use your husband’s name, family, title and money to extract the most publicity and $$.  Each of those senators have staff who have been looking at this and other major issues - no one needs the addition of word salad and paps.  

I thought/hoped that this would be the last straw on the issue of them keeping titles.  Surely her using a title to lobby US politicians should be a bridge too far!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Luvbolide said:


> Thank you!  That working group BS made my head explode!  Not sure what this group is - is it just for the Senate, just for Congress?  MM has exact zero qualifications to be part of any such group - unless it is about how to maximize ways to use your husband’s name, family, title and money to extract the most publicity and $$.  Each of those senators have staff who have been looking at this and other major issues - no one needs the addition of word salad and paps.
> 
> I thought/hoped that this would be the last straw on the issue of them keeping titles.  Surely her using a title to lobby US politicians should be a bridge too far!



A bridge too far? Possibly, it seems the BRF via Charles intends to set up shop over here. Actually, Hazzie already has. The York girls _working_ in NYC looks suspicious now, too. Sarah, not sure she made lots of money, but she did travel all over.  Perhaps Andrew was laying the groundwork for this transition?  Nothing from that crowd would surprise me now.

From day 1, the entire H&M story has been shady and sketchy.  As the nightmare progressed, QE, Charles and Wills have shown very little leadership. Now we know why — they completely approve. Sadly, our own leaders just bow down, probably no one considered the BRF to be a serious threat yet.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not a Senator, but I would be pi$$ed for any colleague to hand out my PRIVATE number to some numbskull.  I get it that Megain doesn't comprehend what "Privacy" actually means, but this Senator is way out of line.


Don't know Gillibrand and not implying anything traitorous, but if she is so eager and willing to give out private numbers. then I have a few questions:
a) What is she getting out of it? Is she a stan too? Or is this a business transaction?
b) If she gives out private info like this, what else is she willing to give out to the "right person"?
c) If Methane has been working with a NY Senator, might that be one of the reasons for that NY trip? Is she trying to get into politics via NY? Could Gillibrand be promoting/sponsoring the wench? 








						Meghan Markle and Sen. Gillibrand conferred over paid leave advocacy
					

Meghan Markle has been calling senators about passing a national paid leave program,...




					www.timesunion.com
				







csshopper said:


> “Misinformation Disorder” is a chronic, evidently incurable, rotten, moral decaying of the soul, aka “Sussexism” .
> 
> Before it became woke, it was known for eons as “Pathological Lying”.
> 
> It leads to “Pants on Fire” which ultimately reeks havoc on hemorrhoids due to the constant irritation. Finally it results  to being a constant pain in the a** as the more they jabber the worse it gets.


I'd love to know if the Urban Dictionary has assigned more terms to describe the gruesome twosome.



Luvbolide said:


> I thought/hoped that this would be the last straw on the issue of them keeping titles.  Surely her using a title to lobby US politicians should be a bridge too far!


If the BRF moves to take back the titles, Methane will launch a self pity fest the likes of which the world has never seen. The accusations of racism and the smudged eyeliner will reappear. And add to that, she gets to call herself Princess Henry, which her stans will promptly change to Princess Meghan   She will go down in history as the mirror image of Princess Michael of Kent.

I'm wondering if they are taking the same strategy as my ex-boss did. That is, to give her all the rope she needs to hang herself. I can tell them that it may work or it may backfire. Right up till the day that my office narc left the company, he still had blinkered fans who thought the world of him.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your #3 nickname, Duke Dumbdumberbarton that has been added to The List. Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5241591


Thank you!  To paraphrase the Misinformationous Twosome, they do make it easy


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Thank you!  To paraphrase the *Misinformationous Twosome*, they do make it easy


 Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your #4 nickname Misinformationous Twosome. Gees, I didn't know we could form an adjective with the noun, misinformation, but if the despicable duo can break all the rules they like, a little spelling misbehaving shouldn't hurt us either.  Congratulations.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Don't know Gillibrand and not implying anything traitorous, but if she is so eager and willing to give out private numbers. then I have a few questions:
> a) What is she getting out of it? Is she a stan too? Or is this a business transaction?
> b) *If she gives out private info like this, what else is she willing to give out to the "right person"?*
> c) If Methane has been working with a NY Senator, might that be one of the reasons for that NY trip? Is she trying to get into politics via NY? Could Gillibrand be promoting/sponsoring the wench?



Gillibrand ran for President. She probably had a price in mind for the nuclear codes. The "right person", AKA, the highest bidder.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't see this video here yet. It's


----------



## Chanbal

Agree with Piers, QE and/or Charles need to stop this circus.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> I didn't see this video here yet. It's






I like it!  Well, except for the part where he says that the senators picked up the call with a blocked number because they thought it was from “her boss” - excuse me?!?!  The only “boss” that a senator has is her voters.  In this case, both Collins and Capito thought the call was from their fellow senator Joe Manchin, with whom they have been working on the spending plan issues.  Seriously, dude…

But as for what he said about Ginge and Cringe - excellent points, couldn’t agree more.  Sadly, though, in spite of all of the voices condemning her outrageous behavior, I am sure all that she heard were people saying her name and President in the same sentence…


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Agree with Piers, QE and/or Charles need to stop this circus.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5241964





SO agree!!


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Pump Pump is planning to donate/auction some of her previous outfits for charity. Don't worry, this is just PR, she is keeping the diamonds. 

They are also planning more 'royal' tours for 2022 like the one they did in NYC.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I didn't see this video here yet. It's




Oh my! Colin - well done! You captured everything wrong with the _sanctimonious Marketeers who never listen, just talk. _Wow, powerful chat. I realize he does not want them back, but we don’t want them here either. So, until Hazzie removes himself from the LoS, he needs to be on your shores, luv. 




Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Pump Pump is planning to donate/auction some of her previous outfits for charity. Don't worry, this is just PR, she is keeping the diamonds.
> 
> They are also planning more 'royal' tours for 2022 like the one they did in NYC.




We all know why she, aka The Heffer, must donate the clothes, don’t we? 
A tour???? Wth????  Who will pay for that sh*tsh*w?
This _tour_ is scheduled to happen during QE’s jubilee celebrations?  Wow.



Chanbal said:


> Agree with Piers, QE and/or Charles need to stop this circus.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5241964




Wake up, Piers, that ship has sailed.  QE and Chas  are not going to do a thing, much to our dismay.  Still, we can dream.


----------



## Chanbal

Ruthless and no conscience … It looks like part 2 of the previous one.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Don't forget to draw a huge heart around the number and write, "Honey, I'm always in the mood!"


In calligraphy.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Pump Pump is planning to donate/auction some of her previous outfits for charity. Don't worry, this is just PR, she is keeping the diamonds.
> 
> They are also planning more 'royal' tours for 2022 like the one they did in NYC.




Tour Australia?  The Australian media will not be kind.  Our morning shows already put their stunts In the entertainment segment, and no one takes them seriously or believes their BS.  And I can guarantee you that Australian taxpayers will not want to pay for their security.  Please stay away…


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> Tour Australia?  The Australian media will not be kind.  Our morning shows already put their stunts In the entertainment segment, and no one takes them seriously or believes their BS.  And I can guarantee you that Australian taxpayers will not want to pay for their security.  Please stay away…




I’ve seen a couple of clips of Australian media where the presenters don’t hold back.  I got a big kick out of one where they were trying to talk about her latest attempt to read that stupid book and they were laughing so much they couldn’t get through it.  Hilarious!!

Wouldn’t it be grand if all/most/some media stopped feeding into their crap by just ignoring them.  Being ignored to poor MM would be the cruelest cut of all.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I doubt that anyone would have the family dunce marry a deceitful family wrecker just to produce a smoke screen. The inevitable problems would make it a disastrous move.
> 
> I'm of the opinion that people like Marcus Anderson, Jessica Mulroney and Oprah Winfrey played kingmaker and boosted Methane into circles and events which would allow her to ensnare Hazard. They wanted an "in" to the influence that a tame royal could give them. Their game plan may have been derailed as I doubt they anticipated Methane to make everything about her instead.


To be clear, I think them meeting & hooking up was largely chance.
I’m sure the likes of Markus have been feeding H ‘actresses’ for many moons. They couldn’t have predicted he would get so obsessed with her & rush for a shotgun wedding.
The other thing they couldn’t predict is that the royals would let it happen - ‘we step out with actresses etc’.
It’s easy to imagine a version of now where M is his mistress and H was forced to marry a very nice, bland, noble girl who would play by the rules because they didn’t want a repeat of Diana.
As it happens, they were clearly seduced by the promise of the ‘biracial royal’ storyline and  bought M wholesale when they should have been a bit more cautious about intentions.

what I do also believe though, is that the BRF have a massive and skilled PR team behind them & a lot of connections to the U.K. and international press. They have had quite some time to assess the situation with H&M and come up with a strategy that best helps their employers. I can easily believe that pushing will to the front as a good/bad brother dichotomy and portraying the Queen as a victim W needs to protect (when she’s previously been portrayed as a strong stoic type) seemed like the best strategy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Ruthless and no conscience … It looks like part 2 of the previous one.




OT, I'm always shocked when I see Angela Levin on screen because at this point I'm convinced her Twitter pic must be at least 10 years old. Also, that makes me realize I really should replace my ancient Twitter pic (I just have little good photos of myself and was too stingy to shell out for that set of professional pics haha).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Well, she’s always struck me as shifty  so this doesn’t surprise me.



She's on my list of politicians I am not especially fond of, but I still had to pick up my jaw from the floor. You can bike that distance if you're inclined so (well, maybe not me  ).



> To be clear, I think them meeting & hooking up was largely chance.



Maybe you're right. Maybe she was just part of a toy collection but a way bigger opportunist than the others. BUT: what did we do to the universe it allowed this to be the outcome?



> what I do also believe though, is that the BRF have a massive and skilled PR team behind them & a lot of connections to the U.K. and international press. They have had quite some time to assess the situation with H&M and come up with a strategy that best helps their employers. I can easily believe that pushing will to the front as a good/bad brother dichotomy and portraying the Queen as a victim W needs to protect (when she’s previously been portrayed as a strong stoic type) seemed like the best strategy.



I can totally believe that, after all that's what these people are paid for. I do not believe the BRF personally arranged for Harry to marry the worst possible choice just so they can look good in comparison. This woman has caused them a lot of stress and grief.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> And who is Gillibrand to decide for everyone that Meghan is going to be part of a working group on this subject? She's forcing Meghan on her fellow senators when clearly she doesn't know Meghan will have moved on to another hot topic next month.
> 
> Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) had apparently given Meghan the numbers to the U.S senators.
> 
> "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said, according to Politico. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."
> 
> "*She wants to be part of a working group to work on paid leave long term and she's going to be*. Whether this comes to fruition now or later, she'll be part of a group of women that hopefully will work on paid leave together," Gillibrand said of the duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle personally called GOP senators to push paid leave: report
> 
> 
> Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, personally called Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) to advocate for paid family leave, according to Politico.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com



MM is paid - what doesn't_ she_ leave!?!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Pump Pump is planning to donate/auction some of her previous outfits for charity. Don't worry, this is just PR, she is keeping the diamonds.
> 
> They are also planning more 'royal' tours for 2022 like the one they did in NYC.




Well, they don't fit anymore and weren't paid for by her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Pump Pump is planning to donate/auction some of her previous outfits for charity. Don't worry, this is just PR, she is keeping the diamonds.
> 
> They are also planning more 'royal' tours for 2022 like the one they did in NYC.



She might as well, they don’t fit her anymore.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Well, they don't fit anymore and weren't paid for by her


Ah! You beat me to it!!


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Ah! You beat me to it!!



Great minds... 

I also think she's wanting some doll maker or museum to buy the clothes. She thinks she's creating history


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Eliza has a point there.



BTW I had a doctor's appointment today I managed to book myself without going to HR. Please celebrate my achievement.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @SomethingGoodCanWork for your #4 nickname Misinformationous Twosome. Gees, I didn't know we could form an adjective with the noun, misinformation, but if the despicable duo can break all the rules they like, a little spelling misbehaving shouldn't hurt us either.  Congratulations.


I think we can allow for ourselves to be as creative with their nicknames as they are with the truth and their nonexistent morals. In other words, the creative possibilities for us are endless


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eliza has a point there.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW I had a doctor's appointment today I managed to book myself without going to HR. Please celebrate my achievement.



You are woman, we hear you roar!


----------



## Aimee3

Excuse me but my mind is in the gutter today.  All this talk about *Duchess dump dump* calling politicians made me imagine a scenario with spotty cell phone reception so her call would sound like “this is M, (static) *Ass *of (static) *Sex….”*  They’d probably all hang up on her!
_Slinking back to the corner now as I climb out of the gutter.
_


----------



## marietouchet

calls to senators ... NONE OF WHOM ARE FROM HER HOME STATE ...
There are political reasons for selecting those 3 but please annoy YOUR OWN representatives, not everyone else's


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eliza has a point there.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW I had a doctor's appointment today I managed to book myself without going to HR. Please celebrate my achievement.



Maybe Methane will claim that Hazard is an autistic savant, trapped by the oppressive structure of royal life. She has set him free and enabled him to blossom into a financial genius and all-round expert in many fields!


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eliza has a point there.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW I had a doctor's appointment today I managed to book myself without going to HR. Please celebrate my achievement.



Sorry sweetheart we can’t celebrate you, any little achievement celebration that goes to another person in the world other than Meghan kills her a little bit inside … we gotta save all the praise for miss: nobody asked if I was ok.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Pump Pump is planning to donate/auction some of her previous outfits for charity. Don't worry, this is just PR, she is keeping the diamonds.
> 
> They are also planning more 'royal' tours for 2022 like the one they did in NYC.



Probably outfits that were given to her for free since she stained them or hid them away and feigned ignorance on their whereabouts…


----------



## breakfastatcartier

G


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yeppers, he married up!  Congrats, Trevor.
> 
> *'I'm the luckiest guy I know!' Meghan Markle's ex-husband Trevor Engelson celebrates the birth of his second child - a daughter named Sienna Lee - as he and wife Tracey are pictured with the newborn for the first time*
> 
> *The Hollywood producer, 44, and his wife Tracey Kurkland announced on Instagram that they've welcomed a daughter named Sienna Lee*
> *'I don't know what I did right, but I'm the luckiest guy I know,' Trevor said*
> *He and his wife also share 15-month-old daughter Ford Grace Engelson*
> *Trevor dated the Duchess of Sussex six years before getting engaged in 2010 and marrying in 2011, but they split in 2013*
> *He proposed to Tracey, a multi-millionaire banker's daughter, in June 2018, and they married in May 2019*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's ex-husband Trevor Engelson welcomes baby #2
> 
> 
> Trevor, 44, and his wife Tracey Kurkland announced that they've welcomed a daughter named Sienna Lee. 'I don't know what I did right, but I'm the luckiest guy I know,' Trevor said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I think Meghan’s bunions regrew after reading this …


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I am so frikken sick and tired of this "misinformation" ish. And WTF is misinformantion DISORDER?
> Interesting. How does "speaking MY truth" stack up against the concept of one monolithic truth?


he's making a fool of himself IMO


----------



## breakfastatcartier

M


rose60610 said:


> How low can you get? And how many senators/reps did Meghan go through before she ensnared someone as stupid, conniving and dishonest as Gillibrand? I'd like to know the senators who had the couth to deny Meghan others' phone #s, I'd have some respect for them. Or did Meghan get a hole in one with Gillibrand? And a quid pro quo? What's Gillibrand getting in return from Meghan for this betrayal?
> 
> Sounds like a huge CYA from Gillibrand--“I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she’s going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls,”--how did Gillibrand know Meghan "only completed two of the calls"??? Notice Gillibrand said she "talked to each of the women senators" only AFTER Meghan "only completed two of the calls". Why didn't she tell Meghan that not only would she give her the phone #s but also call the senators to let them know she'd be calling? That's standard practice in business. Another CYA. Gillibrand didn't tell the senators beforehand because she knew they'd be pissed that their #s got out. As short as this story is, it's full of holes.
> 
> And why only call the women? Don't the men vote also? For somebody who wants to get into politics, she isn't too savvy. Meghan likely imagined that the women senators would be so honored and flattered that the Duchess of Sussex would call them. And maybe that the male senators wouldn't fall all over themselves to get a call from her. Gillibrand probably figured she'd get hammered by the men if she gave out THEIR #s.


meghan probably threatened she’ll claim racism against Kirsten if she didn’t give her the numbers…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I especially liked the 2nd slide.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

To me, M & H seem to have an awfully short memory. The wanted to leave the BRF to have a "private life" and not be "working royals"  Now all they do is use titles they no longer should have, to further some woke agenda. Please just go away..like you said you were going to in the first place.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Tour Australia?  The Australian media will not be kind.  Our morning shows already put their stunts In the entertainment segment, and no one takes them seriously or believes their BS.  And I can guarantee you that Australian taxpayers will not want to pay for their security.  Please stay away…


Yep! Allegedly, they are planning to tour Australia and Japan in 2022. We know how the Aussies love them.  Japan will also be fine. Japanese are very reserved, they will do whatever it takes to avoid being discussed on an OW's interview (like the BRF) imo. So, if Pump Pump wants to become a Maiko, they will likely take her despite being too old to enroll in the classes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

breakfastatcartier said:


> Sorry sweetheart we can’t celebrate you, *any little achievement celebration that goes to another person in the world other than Meghan kills her a little bit inside* … we gotta save all the praise for miss: nobody asked if I was ok.



If only more people understood *this.*
The MarkleMarketeers are so far above us hoi polloi. Perhaps we should bow?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yep! Allegedly, they are planning to tour Australia and Japan in 2022. We know how the Aussies love them.  Japan will also be fine. Japanese are very reserved, they will do whatever it takes to avoid being discussed on an OW's interview (like the BRF) imo. So, if Pump Pump wants to become a Maiko, they will likely take her despite being too old to enroll in the classes.



As long as it is on their own dime, who cares?  More photos and gaffes for the world to laugh at


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> I like it!  Well, except for the part where he says that the senators picked up the call with a blocked number because they thought it was from “her boss” - excuse me?!?!  The only “boss” that a senator has is her voters.  In this case, both Collins and Capito thought the call was from their fellow senator Joe Manchin, with whom they have been working on the spending plan issues.  Seriously, dude…
> 
> But as for what he said about Ginge and Cringe - excellent points, couldn’t agree more.  Sadly, though, in spite of all of the voices condemning her outrageous behavior, I am sure all that she heard were people saying her name and President in the same sentence…


Don't most people ignore a call from an unknown number?  you'd think a person in that type of position would be even more likely to not answer.......did she really get through to anyone?  it's not anything really significant anyway IMO. she's lobbying for something pretty harmless that most women would agree with.....another publicity stunt.  So what?  Who cares what she thinks?


----------



## sdkitty

another sweet article about Meghan
‘Suits’ Creator Gets Candid About Working with Meghan Markle (yahoo.com)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> Sorry sweetheart we can’t celebrate you, any little achievement celebration that goes to another person in the world other than Meghan kills her a little bit inside … we gotta save all the praise for *miss: nobody asked if I was ok*.


 Thanks @breakfastatcartier for your #4 nickname, miss: nobody asked if I was ok. Congratulations.  Please help yourself to a piece of cake, any cake and I hope your favourite is among the lot. Cheers!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> another sweet article about Meghan
> ‘Suits’ Creator Gets Candid About Working with Meghan Markle (yahoo.com)


Wow, another St Meghan story that I have trouble believing in view of the many complaints heard from others, who have worked with her on Suits.  

ET correct a typo


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> If only more people understood *this.
> The MarkleMarketeers* are so far above us hoi polloi. Perhaps we should bow?


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #14 nickname, The MarkleMarketeers, that has been added to The List. Congratulations and please join the Golden Retriever Club.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #14 nickname, The MarkleMarketeers, that has been added to The List. Congratulations and please join the Golden Retriever Club.
> View attachment 5242396



Ahhh, thanks so much. I must confess I pulled it off the tweet posted yesterday, so credit should go to @Chanbal who is a *5 star genius* at finding these ‘names’.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, thanks so much. I must confess I pulled it off the tweet posted yesterday, so credit should go to @Chanbal who is a *5 star genius* at finding these ‘names’.


As this is the second time, I swear you and Chanbal must be in cahoots.  
 Thanks @Chanbal for your #24 nickname, The MarkleMarketeers, that you and @CarryOn2020 jointly share forever and a day. (Makes me feel like I'm officiating at a wedding.) Congratulations and here is the The List#24 Ribbon.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> To me, M & H seem to have an awfully short memory. The wanted to leave the BRF to have a "private life" and not be "working royals"  Now all they do is use titles they no longer should have, to further some woke agenda. Please just go away..like you said you were going to in the first place.


I know
I'm repeating myself but really Harry who seemed to hate public attention is now spending his life seeking same.  what irony


----------



## Lodpah

Wow! I go on a trip to Las Vegas and this thread moves fast. Still here at wonderful Bellagio. Will have a good read on the plane.

Anyway, observational from my POV Just looking at the 1000s of people, eating dinner, walking, people don’t cate about those two but at least they’re contributing to the economy by paying their PR millions, I presume. to put out stupid drivel. A waste of money lol.

Never seen so many Chanel’s being carried in the hotel, go see the Jets of you come! Remember them? Curiosity, You Got It All and Crush on You. Lots of good memories. 

Ok back to enjoying myself. Toodle do.


----------



## CeeJay

bag-mania said:


> I don't think the people helping her know about any of that. They took the accusation of racism as truth and Meghan has been reaping the benefit of others wanting to make things "right" for her.


Totally agree, but .. what surprises me, is that people who have been doing things for her are not dummies .. and the fact that they have not done their "due diligence" just confounds me!  Why??? .. because THEY are afraid that they will be accused of racism?  To me, that's what really drives this BS "allegiance"!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> URGENT: Can a link of this thread be sent to senators, particularly women senators, in both parties?
> View attachment 5240930
> 
> View attachment 5240928
> 
> …
> 
> *Who sent Meghan? *Sen. Kirsten Gilibrand (D-N.Y.), who's pushed her party to include paid leave in its social spending bill, said Wednesday that she gave senators' numbers to Markle. "I talked to each of the women senators and let them know that she's going to reach out, because she only completed two of the calls," Gillibrand said. "She's going to call some others, so I let them know in advance."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lauren Boebert, Bob Good and Dan Bishop are joining the leadership ranks of the House Freedom Caucus.
> 
> 
> News and analysis from Capitol Hill for when you only have a few minutes, from POLITICO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


.. and YET AGAIN, she USES her FREAKIN' TITLE?? .. to a US Senator????  Not that I should really be surprised but .. UFB!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, but .. what surprises me, is that people who have been doing things for her are not dummies .. and the fact that they have not done their "due diligence" just confounds me!  Why??? .. because THEY are afraid that they will be accused of racism?  To me, that's what really drives this BS "allegiance"!!!



Is is because people are eager to believe what they are told if they are sympathetic to the narrative? I looked at the comments in The Hill article and they blew my mind. Those readers eat, sleep, and breath, American politics. Most of them were heartily supportive of Meghan calling the senators. One of them insisted Meghan grew up with her single mother and she knew what it meant to grow up in hardship. Others tried to argue that Meghan's childhood wasn't that way at all, but that commenter wouldn't hear it. He/she had decided that's the way it was. Mind closed.


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> Don't most people ignore a call from an unknown number?  you'd think a person in that type of position would be even more likely to not answer.......did she really get through to anyone?  it's not anything really significant anyway IMO. she's lobbying for something pretty harmless that most women would agree with.....another publicity stunt.  So what?  Who cares what she thinks?



I think she got through to both of them.  Trying to sway GOP votes.  I also thought it was funny when they both said that they answered because they thought it was Joe Manchin.  Neither of them sounded too impressed about their chance to talk to a Duchess though!  Ugh - MM is so pretentious!

And I totally agree - who cares what she thinks.  Little opportunist that she is, she managed to get Gillibrand to invite her to a monthly dinner of women senators.  Disgusting!  Try inviting women who have fought for this and are knowledgeable about it.  Gillibrand is apparently unaware that Meggie’s idea of advocating is writing a letter or making phone calls.  Now she will flit off to another topic, happy in the view that she is creating change or whatever stupid phrases she bandies about.


----------



## needlv

Who is this guy?  We need to give him an award for the phrase “royal reject”


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, but .. what surprises me, is that people who have been doing things for her are not dummies .. and the fact that they have not done their "due diligence" just confounds me!  Why??? .. because THEY are afraid that they will be accused of racism?  To me, that's what really drives this BS "allegiance"!!!



Absolutely agree. My guess is they may _seem_ to agree, but they are just waiting for an opportunity to run for the hills!
These days no one supports this bullying behavior, patience is running low with that game.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> MM is paid - what doesn't_ she_ leave!?!



I actually meant 'WHY doesn't she leave'? But it works the other way too - autocorrect AI-Freudian slip

The more technologically 'advanced' autocorrect gets with updates the more I can't understand what I've written


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Don't most people ignore a call from an unknown number?  you'd think a person in that type of position would be even more likely to not answer.......did she really get through to anyone?  it's not anything really significant anyway IMO. she's lobbying for something pretty harmless that most women would agree with.....another publicity stunt.  So what?  Who cares what she thinks?


 
Unknown numbers just usually mean 'someone wants to sell me something or phish me' - in MM's case - the receiver's assumption would be correct. 

I don't even answer the doorbell at home if I'm busy, didn't arrange for anyone to come over or no-one made an appointment.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Yep! Allegedly, they are planning to tour Australia and Japan in 2022. We know how the Aussies love them.  Japan will also be fine. Japanese are very reserved, they will do whatever it takes to avoid being discussed on an OW's interview (like the BRF) imo. So, if Pump Pump wants to become a Maiko, they will likely take her despite being too old to enroll in the classes.



Being a Maiko takes natural grace, dedicated patience, hours of practice to acquire actual skills, and recognising authority in hierarchy and experience. MM would have trouble with any of those attributes whatever age.


----------



## papertiger

breakfastatcartier said:


> I think Meghan’s bunions regrew after reading this …



OOPs, plates slipped again


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ahhh, thanks so much. I must confess I pulled it off the tweet posted yesterday, so credit should go to @Chanbal who is a *5 star genius* at finding these ‘names’.





Maggie Muggins said:


> As this is the second time, I swear you and Chanbal must be in cahoots.
> Thanks @Chanbal for your #24 nickname, The MarkleMarketeers, that you and @CarryOn2020 jointly share forever and a day. (Makes me feel like I'm officiating at a wedding.) Congratulations and here is the The List#24 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5242425


I'm very honored, thank you @Maggie Muggins! However, the credit belongs 100% to @CarryOn2020. I was so shocked by the Senator phone call events that I couldn't notice anything else. I'm also restricting myself to the use of Pump Pump for the time being.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I'm very honored, thank you @Maggie Muggins! However, the credit belongs 100% to @CarryOn2020. I *was so shocked by the Senator phone call events that I couldn't notice anything else.* I'm also restricting myself to the use of Pump Pump for the time being.



Thank you, all. As wonderful as this list is, I don’t need credit. I’m just happy TpF lets us chat 

Yes, the phone call is indeed the shocker for this week. Would have been helpful to have a heads-up [kinda like Hazzie’s thing next week], but she seems to keep the crazy going strong.

Surely, this has been mentioned before:  








						Prince Charles’ 'secret nickname' for Meghan Markle is revealed - and it's quite rare
					

Prince Charles has a 'secret nickname' for daughter-in-law Meghan Markle after royal commentators let slip the detail - and its meaning is unusual.




					www.goodto.com
				



_Prince Charles has a ‘secret nickname’ for Meghan Markle – and it’s not what you’d expect to be called by your father-in-law.

The Duke of Cornwall is said to have a good relationship with Meghan – even though there appear to be tensions between Prince Charles and her husband Prince Harry following their bombshell Oprah interview. At the time Harry claimed his father has stopped taking his calls and now its been revealed that Prince Charles has a secret nickname for the Duchess of Sussex.

Marie Liwag Dixon said despite the royal family not approving of Meghan and Harry quitting the royal family, Prince Charles’ nickname for the Duchess could well be considered a compliment. “This was evident in the secret nickname he reportedly had for her: ‘*Tungsten*'”, she said.

And added, “As royal correspondent Russell Myers revealed on Lorraine in 2019, Charles nicknamed her after the metal as ‘she is tough and unbending’. Tungsten is the strongest naturally occurring metal on the planet. That makes this a pretty neat compliment all things considered.”_


----------



## Chanbal

It seems the pressure to remove titles is increasing at Buckingham… People of the UK keep up with the good work, and keep asking for what's right.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Tour Australia?  The Australian media will not be kind.  Our morning shows already put their stunts In the entertainment segment, and no one takes them seriously or believes their BS.  And I can guarantee you that Australian taxpayers will not want to pay for their security.  Please stay away…


Additional information for our Aussie and Japanese TPF members. Mr and Mrs Pump Pump are allegedly leaving their calendar open to attend the Jubilee celebrations in June. So don't expect their visit during that month.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


>





I wonder if she knows that she does that type of thing EVERY SINGLE TIME!  Surprised she didn’t throw an elbow also - just to remind him who really counts!


----------



## Luvbolide

I soooo hope that someone over there makes a decision - and sticks to it - that Andrew, Ginge and Cringe can join all of the private family events, but cannot be on the balcony or participate in public events.

By June we may know more about Andrew’s case - and hopefully even know how badly he does in his depo!  And surely there will be more “moments”
From Gringe and Cringe.  Poor Queen!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eliza has a point there.
> 
> 
> 
> BTW I had a doctor's appointment today I managed to book myself without going to HR. Please celebrate my achievement.




I was able to donate $40 (in cash, not a check-to-be-mailed) to a homeless man today without being accompanied by security and a camera crew. Alert the world press to my selflessness and life-changing generosity!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It seems the pressure to remove titles is increasing at Buckingham… People of the UK keep up with the good work, and keep asking for what's right.




Micro-celebrities   Good nickname.
=====

Okaaaay, Hazzie must have been told something:

*Prince Harry will not wear an army uniform when he gives out medals to armed forces heroes after being stripped of his honorary military titles*

*Duke of Sussex will be attending Salute to Freedom gala on warship in New York*
*Despite serving two tours in Afghanistan, he was stripped of his honorary titles*
*He will instead wear black tie at the gala, but can pin his four medals on the suit*









						Prince Harry won't wear army uniform when he gives out medals
					

The Duke of Sussex will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala in New York on November 10. Despite serving two tours in Afghanistan, he was stripped of his honorary titles.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: No comment?



*Prince Harry will not wear an army uniform when he gives out medals to armed forces*
22:15 EDT, 5 November 2021
By 

Published: 20:52 EDT, 5 November 2021 | 

Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear military uniform when he hands out awards to war heroes next week.
The , 37, will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala on a warship in New York on November 10 where he will present five medals.
Despite serving two tours in with the Army, the veteran will not be able to wear his uniform at the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum as he was stripped of his honorary titles. 





Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear military uniform when he hands out awards to war heroes next week

Harry was stripped of his role as Captain-General of the Royal Marines - handed down to him by his grandfather Prince Philip, as part of the final deal for him and Meghan Markle, 40, to step back as front line royals. 
He will have to instead wear black tie at the gala, but Harry will be able to pin his four medals on the suit. 
It was reported prior to the announcement of the final 'Megxit' deal in February that Prince Harry had hoped to keep the titles.
And he is said to have asked the Queen about the possibility, in what was described as a half-in-half-out role.
But such a plan was vetoed and the title was taken back, along with his role as Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Suffolk and Commodore-in-Chief Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.




The Duke of Sussex, 37, will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala on a warship in New York on November 10 where he will present five medals

Harry spent ten years in the Army, first with the Household Cavalry (Blues and Royals), and later in the Army Air Corps where he rose to the rank of Captain. He served in Afghanistan.
He wore his Blues and Royals uniform when he married Meghan at Windsor in 2018.

The museum said: 'The Intrepid Museum's Salute to Freedom gala recognizes extraordinary leadership and honors the brave men and women who serve in defense of our nation.'

*A spokesman for the duke did not want to comment. *


----------



## Chanbal

You can do it Piers!   










						Piers demands Meg is stripped of title for cold-calling politicians as duchess
					

PIERS Morgan has demanded that Meghan Markle is stripped of her royal title – after she cold-called politicians as the Duchess of Sussex. The TV firebrand, a long-standing critic of Meghan an…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, all. As wonderful as this list is, I don’t need credit. I’m just happy TpF lets us chat
> 
> Yes, the phone call is indeed the shocker for this week. Would have been helpful to have a heads-up [kinda like Hazzie’s thing next week], but she seems to keep the crazy going strong.
> 
> Surely, this has been mentioned before:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles’ 'secret nickname' for Meghan Markle is revealed - and it's quite rare
> 
> 
> Prince Charles has a 'secret nickname' for daughter-in-law Meghan Markle after royal commentators let slip the detail - and its meaning is unusual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodto.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Charles has a ‘secret nickname’ for Meghan Markle – and it’s not what you’d expect to be called by your father-in-law.
> 
> The Duke of Cornwall is said to have a good relationship with Meghan – even though there appear to be tensions between Prince Charles and her husband Prince Harry following their bombshell Oprah interview. At the time Harry claimed his father has stopped taking his calls and now its been revealed that Prince Charles has a secret nickname for the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Marie Liwag Dixon said despite the royal family not approving of Meghan and Harry quitting the royal family, Prince Charles’ nickname for the Duchess could well be considered a compliment. “This was evident in the secret nickname he reportedly had for her: ‘*Tungsten*'”, she said.
> 
> And added, “As royal correspondent Russell Myers revealed on Lorraine in 2019, Charles nicknamed her after the metal as ‘*she is tough and unbending*’. Tungsten is the strongest naturally occurring metal on the planet. That makes this a pretty neat compliment all things considered.”_


Tungsten nails are very hard and tough. So is it fair to say, "She is hard as nails which means very tough, or not sentimental or easily influenced?"


----------



## missfiggy

Apparently her half brother is appearing on the Australian version of Big Brother, and apparently he is dishing some serious dirt.  All grist to the mill as far as I care - it's not a tv program that I would ever watch for any reason, but the advertising is positively SALACIOUS!!


----------



## Chanbal

Next week, the author of the '_*First Amendment is Bonkers*_' is giving awards in an event that will pay tribute to "_*those who have served in the US forces, defending America,* with the awards honouring those who have "demonstrated courage and perseverance in the face of great danger or personal struggle_". Am I missing something here? 

He will be able to display his bling, but has been "_blocked from wearing military uniform_".









						Prince Harry blocked from wearing military uniform when he hands out war medals
					

Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear his military uniform as he presents five war heroes with medals at a gala in New York next week because of him being stripped of his titles after quitting royal life




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

missfiggy said:


> Apparently her half brother is appearing on the Australian version of Big Brother, and apparently he is dishing some serious dirt.  All grist to the mill as far as I care - it's not a tv program that I would ever watch for any reason, but the advertising is positively SALACIOUS!!


Don't get your hopes too high. From what I understood, he has changed his tune. He was more like 'peace and love' on his last interview.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if this gentleman will be part of the welcome committee for Pump Pump in Australia.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a very interesting one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a very interesting one.




Finally!  He recognizes Hazzie’s role. Well-planned attacks on the BRF with one motivation - their own profits.  Someone is helping them imo.  All about the $$$$$.  Wonder how long this _Us against the world_ narrative can last?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, all. As wonderful as this list is, I don’t need credit. I’m just happy TpF lets us chat
> 
> Yes, the phone call is indeed the shocker for this week. Would have been helpful to have a heads-up [kinda like Hazzie’s thing next week], but she seems to keep the crazy going strong.
> 
> Surely, this has been mentioned before:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles’ 'secret nickname' for Meghan Markle is revealed - and it's quite rare
> 
> 
> Prince Charles has a 'secret nickname' for daughter-in-law Meghan Markle after royal commentators let slip the detail - and its meaning is unusual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodto.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Charles has a ‘secret nickname’ for Meghan Markle – and it’s not what you’d expect to be called by your father-in-law.
> 
> The Duke of Cornwall is said to have a good relationship with Meghan – even though there appear to be tensions between Prince Charles and her husband Prince Harry following their bombshell Oprah interview. At the time Harry claimed his father has stopped taking his calls and now its been revealed that Prince Charles has a secret nickname for the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> Marie Liwag Dixon said despite the royal family not approving of Meghan and Harry quitting the royal family, Prince Charles’ nickname for the Duchess could well be considered a compliment. “This was evident in the secret nickname he reportedly had for her: ‘*Tungsten*'”, she said.
> 
> And added, “As royal correspondent Russell Myers revealed on Lorraine in 2019, Charles nicknamed her after the metal as ‘she is tough and unbending’. Tungsten is the strongest naturally occurring metal on the planet. That makes this a pretty neat compliment all things considered.”_


I'm going to take the liberty of changing "Tungsten" to "Dungstunk"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is a very interesting one.



Is this subconsciously done on her part?  If not, that's a lot of heavy research in what lies to say, how and where to say it, and what gestures to do.  I'm exhausted just listening to all of it!


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Micro-celebrities   Good nickname.
> =====
> 
> Okaaaay, Hazzie must have been told something:
> 
> *Prince Harry will not wear an army uniform when he gives out medals to armed forces heroes after being stripped of his honorary military titles*
> 
> *Duke of Sussex will be attending Salute to Freedom gala on warship in New York*
> *Despite serving two tours in Afghanistan, he was stripped of his honorary titles*
> *He will instead wear black tie at the gala, but can pin his four medals on the suit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry won't wear army uniform when he gives out medals
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala in New York on November 10. Despite serving two tours in Afghanistan, he was stripped of his honorary titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: No comment?
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry will not wear an army uniform when he gives out medals to armed forces*
> 22:15 EDT, 5 November 2021
> By
> 
> Published: 20:52 EDT, 5 November 2021 |
> 
> Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear military uniform when he hands out awards to war heroes next week.
> The , 37, will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala on a warship in New York on November 10 where he will present five medals.
> Despite serving two tours in with the Army, the veteran will not be able to wear his uniform at the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum as he was stripped of his honorary titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear military uniform when he hands out awards to war heroes next week
> 
> Harry was stripped of his role as Captain-General of the Royal Marines - handed down to him by his grandfather Prince Philip, as part of the final deal for him and Meghan Markle, 40, to step back as front line royals.
> He will have to instead wear black tie at the gala, but Harry will be able to pin his four medals on the suit.
> It was reported prior to the announcement of the final 'Megxit' deal in February that Prince Harry had hoped to keep the titles.
> And he is said to have asked the Queen about the possibility, in what was described as a half-in-half-out role.
> But such a plan was vetoed and the title was taken back, along with his role as Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Suffolk and Commodore-in-Chief Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala on a warship in New York on November 10 where he will present five medals
> 
> Harry spent ten years in the Army, first with the Household Cavalry (Blues and Royals), and later in the Army Air Corps where he rose to the rank of Captain. He served in Afghanistan.
> He wore his Blues and Royals uniform when he married Meghan at Windsor in 2018.
> 
> The museum said: 'The Intrepid Museum's Salute to Freedom gala recognizes extraordinary leadership and honors the brave men and women who serve in defense of our nation.'
> 
> *A spokesman for the duke did not want to comment. *




Maybe I am missing the obvious, but why is H handing out medals to US soldiers?  Surely there is some American who can handle this.  I’m confused…


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Is this subconsciously done on her part?  If not, that's a lot of heavy research in what lies to say, how and where to say it, and what gestures to do.  I'm exhausted just listening to all of it!



IMO H&M choreographed their comments and movements. Maybe O helped, maybe not.  They all are camera-savvy people. They know exactly what they are doing , all of it calculated to get them money.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Luvbolide said:


> Maybe I am missing the obvious, but why is H handing out medals to US soldiers?  Surely there is some American who can handle this.  I’m confused…



I thought Hazz was invited to present the award to JonBJovi, they did work together on a project in the UK. I could be wrong.





__





						Salute to Freedom Gala 2021
					






					support.intrepidmuseum.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Is this a f*cking joke. Someone hands something to HIM, yet she puts out her grabby paw to take it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Duke of Cornwall is said to have a good relationship with Meghan – even though there appear to be tensions between Prince Charles and her husband Prince Harry following their bombshell Oprah interview. _



Sure, his relationship with his own son is strained, but he still adores the gold-digging devastator. Give me a break.


----------



## Jktgal

https://www.ft.com/content/4788beae-9035-4449-b5cd-200dc7b6ea9d


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

missfiggy said:


> Apparently her half brother is appearing on the Australian version of Big Brother, and apparently he is dishing some serious dirt.  All grist to the mill as far as I care - it's not a tv program that I would ever watch for any reason, but the advertising is positively SALACIOUS!!


I hope someone puts together a BB Best of dishing dirt on Pump Pump


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

CarryOn2020 said:


> Micro-celebrities   Good nickname.
> =====
> 
> Okaaaay, Hazzie must have been told something:
> 
> *Prince Harry will not wear an army uniform when he gives out medals to armed forces heroes after being stripped of his honorary military titles*
> 
> *Duke of Sussex will be attending Salute to Freedom gala on warship in New York*
> *Despite serving two tours in Afghanistan, he was stripped of his honorary titles*
> *He will instead wear black tie at the gala, but can pin his four medals on the suit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry won't wear army uniform when he gives out medals
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala in New York on November 10. Despite serving two tours in Afghanistan, he was stripped of his honorary titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: No comment?
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry will not wear an army uniform when he gives out medals to armed forces*
> 22:15 EDT, 5 November 2021
> By
> 
> Published: 20:52 EDT, 5 November 2021 |
> 
> Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear military uniform when he hands out awards to war heroes next week.
> The , 37, will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala on a warship in New York on November 10 where he will present five medals.
> Despite serving two tours in with the Army, the veteran will not be able to wear his uniform at the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum as he was stripped of his honorary titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will not be allowed to wear military uniform when he hands out awards to war heroes next week
> 
> Harry was stripped of his role as Captain-General of the Royal Marines - handed down to him by his grandfather Prince Philip, as part of the final deal for him and Meghan Markle, 40, to step back as front line royals.
> He will have to instead wear black tie at the gala, but Harry will be able to pin his four medals on the suit.
> It was reported prior to the announcement of the final 'Megxit' deal in February that Prince Harry had hoped to keep the titles.
> And he is said to have asked the Queen about the possibility, in what was described as a half-in-half-out role.
> But such a plan was vetoed and the title was taken back, along with his role as Honorary Air Commandant of RAF Honington in Suffolk and Commodore-in-Chief Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, will be attending the Salute to Freedom gala on a warship in New York on November 10 where he will present five medals
> 
> Harry spent ten years in the Army, first with the Household Cavalry (Blues and Royals), and later in the Army Air Corps where he rose to the rank of Captain. He served in Afghanistan.
> He wore his Blues and Royals uniform when he married Meghan at Windsor in 2018.
> 
> The museum said: 'The Intrepid Museum's Salute to Freedom gala recognizes extraordinary leadership and honors the brave men and women who serve in defense of our nation.'
> 
> *A spokesman for the duke did not want to comment. *


Why is he giving out medals at all?! He's not a working royal.


----------



## Annawakes

So so agree, it doesn’t make sense to have him handing out medals to US veterans.  I think  this “engagement” was probably bought and paid for by SS for good PR.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> We all know Harry isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. I think he was easy prey for anyone who could break through whatever gatekeepers he had. I think Meghan used her acting skills big time on him and the public at large. When they were dating they seemed nice and she appeared sweet at the appearances, graciously accepting posies from the kiddies. The numerous red flags were ignored. We learn she's a mega beaytch behind closed doors, then her conniving comes public at the "Not many people have asked if I'm OK". She initially thrived on the publicity then claimed it was too much. Oh, and the thoughts of suicide and not being able to get help. Oh please. As long as she has a critical mass behind her she'll get away with her garbage and there's plenty of slime bags out there that need her to spread her lies of victimhood to further indoctrinate the chronically offended and victimized. Not unlike how gangs recruit new members--gangs prey on the weak, give them a sense of belonging and protection, as long as they participate and contribute to the gang's objectives. All is fine as long as they do what the gang wants, none of it good.
> 
> Markle is a gift to those who need to indoctrinate more people into believing they're victims. Notice how if you don't like her, you're immediately "A Racist!". Yawn, yawn, yawn. And she's famous because she bagged a Prince. Harry is like a new gang recruit. He must go along or face consequences. I don't think he gets it. Too many people suck up to him so he hasn't noticed his balls have been cut off and that he's a loser. He's enjoying naive, goo-goo-eyed Americans and the money being thrown at him. When he wakes up he'll see 90% of the world takes him for a fool.
> 
> If Meghan enters politics as a candidate, her opponents will have a heyday cutting her down. I'll help!


yes, and don't forget the voodoo


----------



## Nutashha

It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?

*Meghan May relaunch Her Old Blog 'The Tig'*


----------



## sdkitty

Nutashha said:


> It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?
> 
> *Meghan May relaunch Her Old Blog 'The Tig'*
> View attachment 5243072


yes, when hell freezes over


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nutashha said:


> It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?



I don't think so.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Micro-celebrities*   Good nickname.
> =====


Yes I know! It's a nickname from the article posted by @Chanbal 
  Thanks @Chanbal for your #25 nickname and @CarryOn2020 for your #15 nickname, Micro-Celebrities, that you jointly share into posterity. Congratulations and here are your individual rewards.


----------



## Chanbal

Nutashha said:


> It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?
> 
> *Meghan May relaunch Her Old Blog 'The Tig'*
> View attachment 5243072


I saw somewhere that Paltrow is making more money with her blog than what she made in Hollywood.  'Cha-Ching' it's great music to Pump Pump's ears.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes I know! It's a nickname from the article posted by @Chanbal
> Thanks @Chanbal for your #25 nickname and @CarryOn2020 for your #15 nickname, Micro-Celebrities, that you jointly share into posterity. Congratulations and here are your individual rewards.
> View attachment 5243132
> 
> View attachment 5243133


Sorry, I was late replying to you! @Maggie Muggins thank you very much, but I was not the one that noticed it.  Congratulations @CarryOn2020!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Totally agree, but .. what surprises me, is that people who have been doing things for her are not dummies .. and the fact that they have not done their "due diligence" just confounds me!  Why??? .. because THEY are afraid that they will be accused of racism?  To me, that's what really drives this BS "allegiance"!!!


black people fearing being called racist?  IDK.  wonder if we have any WOC on this thread who can weigh in on this.  seems to me it's more like misplaced empathy


----------



## breakfastatcartier

CarryOn2020 said:


> As long as it is on their own dime, who cares?  More photos and gaffes for the world to laugh at


Do you really believe that cheap prince and his greedy hag will pay for this trip?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @breakfastatcartier for your #4 nickname, miss: nobody asked if I was ok. Congratulations.  Please help yourself to a piece of cake, any cake and I hope your favourite is among the lot. Cheers!
> 
> View attachment 5242366


I just wanna thank you for not putting a deflated banana cake amongst the choices provided.


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this a f*cking joke. Someone hands something to HIM, yet she puts out her grabby paw to take it?


IKR? I'm fascinated by Harry's face in that tweet/GIF/clip. I must have watched it 6 or 7 times, just staring at Harry's change in demeanour.  He reaches out to receive the book, his face has the expression of "thank you, how kind of you, look at this, adorbs" and as his wife reaches past him to get her grubby mitts on it - and he's forced to hand it over, his facial expression immediately changes and he puts his head down, furrows his brow, and has this very serious look on his face. Almost like "uh-oh I hope she likes it because if there's something wrong with it, it's going to be my fault - again! and I'll never hear the end of it."  Meanwhile the wife looks so pleased with herself and just can't believe these people are here to honour her and gift her a book. Fake fvcking smile plastered all over her face, as usual.


----------



## Aminamina

Another telling bit regarding the fake royals - from Mr Elba))! 








						Idris Elba says Meghan and Harry wedding was 'a lot of pressure'
					

Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, took control of Idris Elba' entertainment at the wedding in May 2018, Luther and The Wire has claimed




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## breakfastatcartier

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this a f*cking joke. Someone hands something to HIM, yet she puts out her grabby paw to take it?


Look at those veneers … even if Harry got to it first she’d probably chomp on that book to grab it from his hands … she’s so unbearable.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Nutashha said:


> It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?
> 
> *Meghan May relaunch Her Old Blog 'The Tig'*
> View attachment 5243072


What’s the new name? Thee Duchess’s royal Tigeth?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I'm going to take the liberty of changing "Tungsten" to "*Dungstunk*"


Thanks @purseinsanity for your #22 nickname, Dungstunk.  Wow, I'm glad I'm not in M's shoes or should I say, Dungstunk's shoes. Congratulations and here is your well-earned The List #22 Ribbon.  And for the sheer beauty of the nickname, help yourself to a well-deserved piece of cake of your choice.


----------



## Chanbal

It starts on Tuesday!


----------



## Chanbal

Why would they do such bizarre thing? 










						Harry 'would love it' if Charles and William 'begged' Duke to return
					

PRINCE HARRY "would love it" if a "desperate" Royal Family "begged" him to come back to the UK, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> Why is he giving out medals at all?! He's not a working royal.


As I understand it, the Intrepid Museum isn't a US Government enterprise and not a US Government sponsored event and therefore the Intrepid Museum can ask whoever they please to participate in their ceremonies. By the same token, since it's not being a BP sanctioned event, H is free to attend as a private citizen, but cannot wear his uniform.


----------



## bellecate

I’m offline a handful of days with a wicked head cold and come back to 28 pages to read. A Diet Pepsi and a box of Kleenex at hand and I’m ready to delve in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Why would they do such bizarre thing?
> View attachment 5243176
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'would love it' if Charles and William 'begged' Duke to return
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY "would love it" if a "desperate" Royal Family "begged" him to come back to the UK, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



He sure would, I just can't find any reason for either of them to do so. Maybe if Charles was on his deathbed, but we know that doesn't impress Harry much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It starts on Tuesday!




Uh oh.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> Do you really believe that *cheap prince and his greedy hag* will pay for this trip?


Thanks @breakfastatcartier for your #5 nickname cheap prince and his greedy hag that has been added to The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

breakfastatcartier said:


> What’s the new name? *Thee Duchess’s royal Tigeth*?


Thanks @breakfastatcartier for the blog nickname (under the blog category), Thee Duchess's royal Tigeth that I tweaked a little to give you your #6 M nickname, Thee Duchess of the Royal Tigeth. Congratulations.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Great minds...
> 
> I also think she's wanting some doll maker or museum to buy the clothes. She thinks she's creating history


Oh yes fingers crossed Mattel will buy them & make a barbie line based on her.  
They could even recreate the family dolls TM with two empty cable ties beside the loving husband & wife  (children & varying numbers of dogs sold separately).


Nutashha said:


> It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?
> 
> *Meghan May relaunch Her Old Blog 'The Tig'*
> View attachment 5243072


I’m not surprised that she wants to release a heavily edited second edition given people keep pulling up articles to prove when she’s lying  
I hope you are all looking forward to ‘the definitive guide to eating salads at Chain restaurants while being very working class and nice and likeable’


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Why would they do such bizarre thing?
> View attachment 5243176
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'would love it' if Charles and William 'begged' Duke to return
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY "would love it" if a "desperate" Royal Family "begged" him to come back to the UK, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


JCMH, if you want Charles and William to ask you (they'll never beg) back to the UK, you had better find yourself a pig farm and start giving them pilot lessons because it will happen only when...


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He sure would, I just can't find any reason for either of them to do so. Maybe if Charles was on his deathbed, but we know that doesn't impress Harry much.


There are two BRF issues - 6 and Andrew, I don’t think the family will go out of its way until the Andrew mess wraps up, sometime next year


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Who is this guy?  We need to give him an award for the phrase “*royal reject*”



Thanks @needlv Although "this guy" gets the credit for coining the nickname, you get the credit for bringing it to our attention. Congratulations for your #4 nickname, Royal Reject, that has been added to The List.


----------



## caramelize126

Chanbal said:


> I saw somewhere that Paltrow is making more money with her blog than what she made in Hollywood.  'Cha-Ching' it's great music to Pump Pump's ears.



I totally believe that but what would the Tig bring that sites like Goop and Poosh dont already have? Sure Me-gain is a duchess... but shes a duchess who has cut off all aristocratic connections, doesnt get invited anywhere, and no one wants to work with her. What on earth would she blog about??




sdkitty said:


> black people fearing being called racist?  IDK.  wonder if we have any WOC on this thread who can weigh in on this.  seems to me it's more like misplaced empathy



So I'm not black ( I'm asian) but I have been called a racist by other WOC for saying i wasnt a fan of Meghan. I dont bring up the topic of meghan and harry with certain friend groups anymore and when it comes up i just smile, nod, and keep quiet. I never realized how polarizing this was until then. It does almost seem like its just not PC to say anything against her.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

V0N1B2 said:


> IKR? I'm fascinated by Harry's face in that tweet/GIF/clip. I must have watched it 6 or 7 times, just staring at Harry's change in demeanour.  He reaches out to receive the book, his face has the expression of "thank you, how kind of you, look at this, adorbs" and as his wife reaches past him to get her grubby mitts on it - and he's forced to hand it over, his facial expression immediately changes and he puts his head down, furrows his brow, and has this very serious look on his face. Almost like "uh-oh I hope she likes it because if there's something wrong with it, it's going to be my fault - again! and I'll never hear the end of it."  Meanwhile the wife looks so pleased with herself and just can't believe these people are here to honour her and gift her a book. Fake fvcking smile plastered all over her face, as usual.


I had to look at it a couple of times too. She is scary. Children can do this because they don't know better but grown women... There's some serious arrested development and precious snowflake syndrome going on with Pump Pump. I wonder if she can even stand herself.

Harry seems to vacillate between being an emotional hostage and being Larry David hiding behind Vivica Fox.

Warning: Women cursing


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> I totally believe that but what would the Tig bring that sites like Goop and Poosh dont already have? Sure Me-gain is a duchess... but shes a duchess who has cut off all aristocratic connections, doesnt get invited anywhere, and no one wants to work with her. What on earth would she blog about??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I'm not black ( I'm asian) but I have been called a racist by other WOC for saying i wasnt a fan of Meghan. I dont bring up the topic of meghan and harry with certain friend groups anymore and when it comes up i just smile, nod, and keep quiet. I never realized how polarizing this was until then. It does almost seem like its just not PC to say anything against her.


sorry you've had that experience.....it's my impression that sometimes POC who you would think would be empathatic to each other aren't that way - so an Asian may be prejudiced against Hispanics for example

I can empathize with you about the keeping quiet.  I have to do that a lot because my politics are different from many of the people I know


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I had to look at it a couple of times too. She is scary. Children can do this because they don't know better but grown women... There's some serious arrested development and precious snowflake syndrome going on with Pump Pump. I wonder if she can even stand herself.
> 
> Harry seems to vacillate between being an emotional hostage and being Larry David hiding behind Vivica Fox.
> 
> Warning: Women cursing



LOL
love Larry


----------



## purseinsanity

Nutashha said:


> It's said it's quite a good blog, at par with Gwyneth Paltrow's Goop. Will you guys follow this blog?
> 
> *Meghan May relaunch Her Old Blog 'The Tig'*
> View attachment 5243072


Hell, no.  I can't stand Gwyneth either TBH.  I won't read it, but I'd rather see Megain do this than all the other crap she pulls.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @purseinsanity for your #22 nickname, Dungstunk.  Wow, I'm glad I'm not in M's shoes or should I say, Dungstunk's shoes. Congratulations and here is your well-earned The List #22 Ribbon.  And for the sheer beauty of the nickname,* help yourself to a well-deserved piece of cake of your choice.*
> View attachment 5243162
> 
> View attachment 5243175


Thank you my dearest @Maggie Muggins!  Which one is the olive lemon one?!!?

I'd eat any of those except that.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you my dearest @Maggie Muggins!  Which one is the olive lemon one?!!?
> 
> I'd eat any of those except that.


None as far as I know. They are too gorgeous to have travelled across the country from Montecito. Besides, I think we know what she can do with her lemon tree after greasing the passage with the olive oil.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Hell, no.  I can't stand Gwyneth either TBH.  I won't read it, but I'd rather see Megain do this than all the other crap she pulls.



Just imagine the snarky comments! People are so much more aware now and will not hesitate to mock, expose the lies/half-truths/the monetizing, etc. It could be fun, so go ahead, bring back all the 90s junk and see what happens    We don’t need the H&M noise. Quite honestly, we do not need to hear from any royals over here.  Sure, they want to be relevant, maybe the dollars are slipping away, but this is not the place for them. Not at all.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Is this subconsciously done on her part?  If not, that's a lot of heavy research in what lies to say, how and where to say it, and what gestures to do.  I'm exhausted just listening to all of it!


I watched the video.  My take home is that she knew she was lying.  She planned to lie about the three day prior wedding and it was not spontaneous and she looking like she was going to burst out laughing.  In fact all of her lies were planned as we know there was nothing spontaneous in that video at all.  She may not have told Oprah that she was going to say it so there would be an element of surprise on Oprah's part.  Everything she does and says is for shock value and nothing else.


----------



## kipp

Re: resurrecting her blog and similarities to GP---GP's blog does a lot of selling as I recall (it's been a long time since I've looked at it). One can imagine that MM hopes to do exactly the same thing---maybe with that beauty line that others have suggested she is starting.


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Re: resurrecting her blog and similarities to GP---GP's blog does a lot of selling as I recall (it's been a long time since I've looked at it). One can imagine that MM hopes to do exactly the same thing---maybe with that beauty line that others have suggested she is starting.


Oh but wouldn't her proceeds all go to charity?


----------



## needlv

Language warning but I did laugh….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

caramelize126 said:


> So I'm not black ( I'm asian) but I have been called a racist by other WOC for saying i wasnt a fan of Meghan. I dont bring up the topic of meghan and harry with certain friend groups anymore and when it comes up i just smile, nod, and keep quiet. I never realized how polarizing this was until then. It does almost seem like its just not PC to say anything against her.


Asian too, and in Asia, so luckily for me, I have friends who think she is ghastly and family who think she is irrelevant. My country is very PC, so if she turns up here, no one will laugh in her face but the media will be fastidiously polite and distant. The social media will probably have a field day if she comes togged out in winter coats in a tropical country. In fact, I suspect the only people who would be fawning on her are probably the members of the American Club.



purseinsanity said:


> Hell, no.  I can't stand Gwyneth either TBH.  I won't read it, but I'd rather see Megain do this than all the other crap she pulls.


If only she would do only the blog. But she will likely use it as a platform for airing her views on the "American situation" from her "unique viewpoint" as an oppressed WOC princess.



sdkitty said:


> Oh but wouldn't her proceeds all go to charity?


The charity called Archewell?


----------



## xeyes

Enty has this for us today - with some interesting things in the comments as usual.





__





						Blind Item #3
					

From someone who speaks to the alliterate one on a near daily basis, there is a lot of tension in the couple right now because he would like...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

Pump Pump case will be live streamed! 




__





						The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) - Live streaming of court hearings - Courts and Tribunals Judiciary
					

Working to improve public access to, and understanding of, the work of the courts




					www.judiciary.uk


----------



## Chanbal

We didn't elect her… ghastly… smiling and dialing


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

… and another one…. The jokes write themselves at this point…


----------



## K.D.

While planning their 'tours' of Japan and ??? the Invictus Games are apparently still going ahead April 2022. As I was previously selected as a volunteer I received some e-mails last week to reapply. Would have happily been your eyes and ears behind the scenes but it's planned during Easter week and as they are asking for at least five shifts availability and I have a regular job, it's too much. Also, still feel awkward as they don't seem to do anything. I guess the grabby grifters of Montecito can pick up my 5 shifts themselves to keep the event running


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Asian too, and in Asia, so luckily for me, I have friends who think she is ghastly and family who think she is irrelevant. My country is very PC, so if she turns up here, no one will laugh in her face but the media will be fastidiously polite and distant. The social media will probably have a field day if she comes togged out in winter coats in a tropical country. In fact, I suspect the only people who would be fawning on her are probably the members of the American Club.
> 
> 
> If only she would do only the blog. But she will likely use it as a platform for airing her views on the "American situation" from her "unique viewpoint" as an oppressed WOC princess.
> 
> 
> The charity called Archewell?


well, she can't just spend Archewell money on herself - unless she's taking a salary, right?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, she can't just spend Archewell money on herself - unless she's taking a salary, right?


Agree, she can't just spend the Arch* on herself. 

It seems that 5% of that money would need to be given to charity. The $25 dollars Starbucks cards may qualify!?!?

The remaining 95% could potentially pay for founders and staff salaries (assistants, nannies...), business trips (private jets, hotels…), and several other perks.


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> well, she can't just spend Archewell money on herself - unless she's taking a salary, right?


There are strict rules regarding what charitable foundations can and cannot spend on and the reporting requirements regarding the uses of funds. The NY AG in 2019 forced the dissolution of the ***** Foundation for misusing charitable funds to benefit various ***** entities and political causes in a series of cases dating as far back as 2011 and continuing on after he became President.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Agree, she can't just spend the Arch* on herself.
> 
> It seems that 5% of that money would need to be given to charity. The $25 dollars Starbucks cards may qualify!?!?
> 
> The remaining 95% could potentially pay for founders and staff salaries (assistants, nannies...), business trips (private jets, hotels…), and several other perks.


I'd love to know what salaries they take


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I'd love to know what salaries they take


from Charity Navighator
I guess none of the money they are earning from Netflix or spotify is going to Archewell (or not much of it) 



*quote: This organization cannot be evaluated by our Encompass Rating methodology because it files Form 990-EZ, as allowed by the IRS for charities with less than $200,000 annual revenue. unquote*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Couldn’t agree more - all about the Nflix show *$*


----------



## needlv

Scoobie has apparently removed “Royal reporter” from his bio on twitter… then this pops up…


----------



## tiktok

needlv said:


> Scoobie has apparently removed “Royal reporter” from his bio on twitter… then this pops up…




“What William wants William gets”…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Mr and Mrs Bandwagon offered to send a video welcoming the COP26 participants. The video idea was apparently well received by the organizers, but it went wrong when QE decided to record her own message for the event.


----------



## bag-mania

Omid is still Royal Editor at Large for Harpers Bazaar and a contributor to Good Morning America on ABC. I have a feeling we won’t be getting rid of him any time soon.


----------



## Chanbal

Make a stand and lose all those dollars? Yeah right! 
*'What's more important, money or defending his mum?' Royal experts demand Prince Harry axes his £112million Netflix deal over The Crown's portrayal of Diana - saying 'it's astonishing he can't find his voice on this' after Jemima Khan walked away*

*Royal experts have said Prince Harry should 'tear up' Netflix deal and 'make a stand' for his mother*
*Jemima Khan, 47, a close friend of Princess Diana's, has pulled out of The Crown *
*Khan has said the script was not as 'compassionate' as she hoped it would be  *









						Prince Harry urged to axe Netflix deal over Crown's portrayal of Diana
					

Prince Harry is being urged to tear up his £112million Netflix deal and make a stand over The Crown's portrayal of his mother Princess Diana.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Omid is still Royal Editor at Large for Harpers Bazaar and a contributor to Good Morning America on ABC. I have a feeling we won’t be getting rid of him any time soon.


Omid is like 6's wife, they have no plans to give us a break.


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> Omid is still Royal Editor at Large for Harpers Bazaar and a contributor to Good Morning America on ABC. I have a feeling we won’t be getting rid of him any time soon.



I think the gossip is he dropped “Royal” from his bio… so “editor at large” but no longer a royal one…


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Make a stand and lose all those dollars? Yeah right!
> *'What's more important, money or defending his mum?' Royal experts demand Prince Harry axes his £112million Netflix deal over The Crown's portrayal of Diana - saying 'it's astonishing he can't find his voice on this' after Jemima Khan walked away*
> 
> *Royal experts have said Prince Harry should 'tear up' Netflix deal and 'make a stand' for his mother*
> *Jemima Khan, 47, a close friend of Princess Diana's, has pulled out of The Crown *
> *Khan has said the script was not as 'compassionate' as she hoped it would be  *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry urged to axe Netflix deal over Crown's portrayal of Diana
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is being urged to tear up his £112million Netflix deal and make a stand over The Crown's portrayal of his mother Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Maybe Harry the Dim is having trouble remembering doing a Netflix deal since they have produced zero content to date, in spite of droning on about the same 2 ideas…blah, blah, blah, a little girl meets famous people, Invictis, blah, blah, blah…


----------



## Nutashha

Some spicy tea!

*What Meghan Wrote about Kate in Her Blog before Becoming a Royal*


View attachment 5244367


----------



## purseinsanity

tiktok said:


> “What William wants William gets”…


Maybe not.  He probably would like to "off with their heads" to a certain couple, but it's not encouraged any more.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> I think the gossip is he dropped “Royal” from his bio… so “editor at large” but no longer a royal one…



Could it be??  Has he been Markled?!!?    Can Markle be Markled next?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Scoobie has apparently removed “Royal reporter” from his bio on twitter… then this pops up…




What was that ITV comment again?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I think the gossip is he dropped “Royal” from his bio… so “editor at large” but no longer a royal one…




Why does a journalist need an agent? 

Also, not editor-at-large sure sounds nice, but it's just a fancier name for freelancer with little influence haha.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why does a journalist need an agent?
> 
> Also, not editor-at-large sure sounds nice, but it's just a fancier name for freelancer with little influence haha.



OMG, I never realized that it was code for freelancer.  I can’t believe any real journalist would take him seriously.  I guess the good news is that once H&M fade away, Scabies will too!  That day can’t come soon enough for me!!


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> Could it be??  Has he been Markled?!!?    Can Markle be Markled next?!



apparently he didn’t like the speculation and put the word “Royal” back on his bio….

It would be hilarious if the Duchess markled him though…. At the moment he is still useful for her, so I can’t see her cutting him off unless it helps her for the ANL court case…


----------



## piperdog

Luvbolide said:


> I think she got through to both of them.  Trying to sway GOP votes.  I also thought it was funny when they both said that they answered because they thought it was Joe Manchin.  Neither of them sounded too impressed about their chance to talk to a Duchess though!  Ugh - MM is so pretentious!
> 
> And I totally agree - who cares what she thinks.  Little opportunist that she is, she managed to get Gillibrand to invite her to a monthly dinner of women senators.  Disgusting!  Try inviting women who have fought for this and are knowledgeable about it.  Gillibrand is apparently unaware that Meggie’s idea of advocating is writing a letter or making phone calls.  Now she will flit off to another topic, happy in the view that she is creating change or whatever stupid phrases she bandies about.


This whole stunt makes me have more respect for Senators Capito and Collins, and a lot less for Gillibrand.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh gosh, is this real? I didn't even vote. 




_"TMZ also did a poll. They polled over 19,000 people, and 62 percent said they thought it was inappropriate for the Duchess to use her title if she was going to participate in politics.

"Some called in foreign interference- which I thought was mightily aggressive!"_









						Meghan Markle: New US poll shows majority want Duchess to drop titles
					

THE US backlash against Meghan Markle has exploded, according to a US-based showbiz reporter, who remarked that a new poll showed Americans turning against the Duchess of Sussex's interventions in politics.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What was that ITV comment again?


Here you go:
Not sure why this resurfaced online now, it dates back many months. It's  Scabies making one of his assertions in a Documentary about something he would not have been privy to, and William (Kensington Palace) contacted ITV about it.  ITV reviewed the request, gave it merit, and removed the statement. Kudos to William.
*Prince William Had ITV Cut Out Footage From Harry And Meghan Doc*
By Corey Atad.  5 Jul 2021 1:20 PM 






Prince William and Prince Harry — Photo: Yui Mok/Pool Photo via AP/CP Images
Prince William keeps a tight watch on rumours about his family.

In a new report from the Daily Mail, it has been revealed that William’s staff stepped in to have footage removed from the ITV documentary “Harry and William: What Went Wrong?”, which aired in the U.K. on Sunday night.

RELATED: Prince Harry Returns To Family In California After U.K. Reunion With Prince William

In the documentary, Omid Scobie, the biographer of Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, had originally said, “I would say that it was no coincidence that it was shortly after that aired, even the next day, there were source quotes that came from a senior aide at Kensington Palace saying that William was worried about his brother’s mental health.”

But after staff at Kensington Palace raised concerns, the network removed the words “about his brother’s mental health” from the statement in the film.

The Mail reported that Willliam’s staff “contacted the producers in relation to… Scobie’s suggestion that William had expressed a ‘concern’ about his brother’s mental health, which the author had no evidence to support.”

RELATED: Prince William And Prince George Adorably Match While Cheering On England’s Soccer Team

After “carefully considering” the request, ITV “chose to remove any reference to mental health from the sequence, although they chose to keep in Mr Scobie’s comment about an alleged briefing from Kensington Palace relating to Harry.”

The Mail also suggested in the report that Kensington Palace had hinted at possible legal action if the line was not removed, telling the network “that such a suggestion, if it formed part of the ITV program, would be defamatory in that it was substantially untrue.”


----------



## Chanbal

Why do these two keep imposing their presence everywhere? 










						Meghan and Harry dropped for COP26 video after Queen's message
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry reportedly offered a recorded speech to COP26 organisers but were dropped after it was arranged that the Queen would speak virtually.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

piperdog said:


> This whole stunt makes me have more respect for Senators Capito and Collins, and a lot less for Gillibrand.




Agree!  I definitely have my issues with Sen. Collins, but I thought her comments were perfect - after all, the people of Maine should be a lot more important to her.  I wonder if MM takes in any of the criticism she is receiving.  Sure doesn’t seem like it!  Or maybe we are all racists…


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> Here you go:
> Not sure why this resurfaced online now, it dates back many months. It's  Scabies making one of his assertions in a Documentary about something he would not have been privy to, and William (Kensington Palace) contacted ITV about it.  ITV reviewed the request, gave it merit, and removed the statement. Kudos to William.
> *Prince William Had ITV Cut Out Footage From Harry And Meghan Doc*
> By Corey Atad.  5 Jul 2021 1:20 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Prince Harry — Photo: Yui Mok/Pool Photo via AP/CP Images
> Prince William keeps a tight watch on rumours about his family.
> 
> In a new report from the Daily Mail, it has been revealed that William’s staff stepped in to have footage removed from the ITV documentary “Harry and William: What Went Wrong?”, which aired in the U.K. on Sunday night.
> 
> RELATED: Prince Harry Returns To Family In California After U.K. Reunion With Prince William
> 
> In the documentary, Omid Scobie, the biographer of Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, had originally said, “I would say that it was no coincidence that it was shortly after that aired, even the next day, there were source quotes that came from a senior aide at Kensington Palace saying that William was worried about his brother’s mental health.”
> 
> But after staff at Kensington Palace raised concerns, the network removed the words “about his brother’s mental health” from the statement in the film.
> 
> The Mail reported that Willliam’s staff “contacted the producers in relation to… Scobie’s suggestion that William had expressed a ‘concern’ about his brother’s mental health, which the author had no evidence to support.”
> 
> RELATED: Prince William And Prince George Adorably Match While Cheering On England’s Soccer Team
> 
> After “carefully considering” the request, ITV “chose to remove any reference to mental health from the sequence, although they chose to keep in Mr Scobie’s comment about an alleged briefing from Kensington Palace relating to Harry.”
> 
> The Mail also suggested in the report that Kensington Palace had hinted at possible legal action if the line was not removed, telling the network “that such a suggestion, if it formed part of the ITV program, would be defamatory in that it was substantially untrue.”



Thanks for digging this up and posting it.  It definitely went right by me when it happened.  Good for William!


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Why do these two keep imposing their presence everywhere?
> View attachment 5244559
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry dropped for COP26 video after Queen's message
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry reportedly offered a recorded speech to COP26 organisers but were dropped after it was arranged that the Queen would speak virtually.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I thought they quit royal life so they wouldn't have to do things like this anymore? There were plenty of hypocrites spewing CO2 into the atmosphere already so no need to add two more.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Why do these two keep imposing their presence everywhere?
> View attachment 5244559
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry dropped for COP26 video after Queen's message
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry reportedly offered a recorded speech to COP26 organisers but were dropped after it was arranged that the Queen would speak virtually.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


It's an absurd, extreme comparison but these two are like gnats in a room full of elephants. 
 Agree with Jennit and others, they have NOTHING to contribute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!

Reminder that there cannot be any political discussion at all on tPF.  Please take care that your posts aren't commenting or linking to anything political.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Chanbal said:


> Why do these two keep imposing their presence everywhere?
> View attachment 5244559
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry dropped for COP26 video after Queen's message
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry reportedly offered a recorded speech to COP26 organisers but were dropped after it was arranged that the Queen would speak virtually.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


So they were going to be involved? Who on earth thought that was going to be a good idea?


----------



## Chanbal

The brother  changed his tune drastically… Would this sudden love be the work of lawyers, Sunshine, or … ?  

_“Dear Meghan and Harry, the first thing I want to say to both of you is that I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart for the awful, mean letter that I wrote to you prior to your wedding,” he said as he read his new apology letter aloud on the show.

“I want both of you to know it did not come from the real person that I am, but came from a very dark and hurt part of my heart … I am not a mean person at all, and I have more love inside me to give than anything.”

Thomas added that he was offended at the time after Markle described him as “distant family.”

“I was very hurt and confused because of the amazing bond and relationship we shared growing up together and all I could do was put up a defense wall to protect my heart,” he said, adding, “I know that it was very immature and wrong and I truly regret it.”..

“*Meg, if I could really turn the clock back, I would truly tell you that I am so, so proud of you and truly I am so happy for you and Harry. And I love you,” he said. “You are my little sister, my family and you always will be. Now you have found the love of your life and started a family of your own … couldn’t be more proud of you*.”









						Meghan Markle’s brother apologizes for urging Prince Harry to call off wedding
					

Thomas Markle Jr. was given the task of penning a letter of apology to the royal couple on Monday’s episode of Australia’s “Big Brother VIP.”




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The brother  changed his tune drastically… Would this sudden love be the work of lawyers, Sunshine, or … ?
> 
> _“Dear Meghan and Harry, the first thing I want to say to both of you is that I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart for the awful, mean letter that I wrote to you prior to your wedding,” he said as he read his new apology letter aloud on the show.
> 
> “I want both of you to know it did not come from the real person that I am, but came from a very dark and hurt part of my heart … I am not a mean person at all, and I have more love inside me to give than anything.”
> 
> Thomas added that he was offended at the time after Markle described him as “distant family.”
> 
> “I was very hurt and confused because of the amazing bond and relationship we shared growing up together and all I could do was put up a defense wall to protect my heart,” he said, adding, “I know that it was very immature and wrong and I truly regret it.”..
> 
> “*Meg, if I could really turn the clock back, I would truly tell you that I am so, so proud of you and truly I am so happy for you and Harry. And I love you,” he said. “You are my little sister, my family and you always will be. Now you have found the love of your life and started a family of your own … couldn’t be more proud of you*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s brother apologizes for urging Prince Harry to call off wedding
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr. was given the task of penning a letter of apology to the royal couple on Monday’s episode of Australia’s “Big Brother VIP.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Some people seem desperate to rehabilitate their reputations.  Perhaps the roar of negative reviews finally has caused a shift in their thinking? perhaps in QE’s?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The brother  changed his tune drastically… Would this sudden love be the work of lawyers, Sunshine, or … ?
> 
> _“Dear Meghan and Harry, the first thing I want to say to both of you is that I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart for the awful, mean letter that I wrote to you prior to your wedding,” he said as he read his new apology letter aloud on the show.
> 
> “I want both of you to know it did not come from the real person that I am, but came from a very dark and hurt part of my heart … I am not a mean person at all, and I have more love inside me to give than anything.”
> 
> Thomas added that he was offended at the time after Markle described him as “distant family.”
> 
> “I was very hurt and confused because of the amazing bond and relationship we shared growing up together and all I could do was put up a defense wall to protect my heart,” he said, adding, “I know that it was very immature and wrong and I truly regret it.”..
> 
> “*Meg, if I could really turn the clock back, I would truly tell you that I am so, so proud of you and truly I am so happy for you and Harry. And I love you,” he said. “You are my little sister, my family and you always will be. Now you have found the love of your life and started a family of your own … couldn’t be more proud of you*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s brother apologizes for urging Prince Harry to call off wedding
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr. was given the task of penning a letter of apology to the royal couple on Monday’s episode of Australia’s “Big Brother VIP.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Meh, he is currently in the Big Brother house in Australia, right? It’s obvious the show’s producers asked/paid him to say that to make for “drama” on the show. I don’t believe it any more than I’d believe it if Meghan apologized to him. He’s doing what he has to to make quick cash.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The brother  changed his tune drastically… Would this sudden love be the work of lawyers, Sunshine, or … ?
> 
> _“Dear Meghan and Harry, the first thing I want to say to both of you is that I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart for the awful, mean letter that I wrote to you prior to your wedding,” he said as he read his new apology letter aloud on the show.
> 
> “I want both of you to know it did not come from the real person that I am, but came from a very dark and hurt part of my heart … I am not a mean person at all, and I have more love inside me to give than anything.”
> 
> Thomas added that he was offended at the time after Markle described him as “distant family.”
> 
> “I was very hurt and confused because of the amazing bond and relationship we shared growing up together and all I could do was put up a defense wall to protect my heart,” he said, adding, “I know that it was very immature and wrong and I truly regret it.”..
> 
> “*Meg, if I could really turn the clock back, I would truly tell you that I am so, so proud of you and truly I am so happy for you and Harry. And I love you,” he said. “You are my little sister, my family and you always will be. Now you have found the love of your life and started a family of your own … couldn’t be more proud of you*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s brother apologizes for urging Prince Harry to call off wedding
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr. was given the task of penning a letter of apology to the royal couple on Monday’s episode of Australia’s “Big Brother VIP.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


The worm turns when the worm has an infusion to the worm's bank account and an introduction to Sunshine Sachs to do the worm's PR after the show.  In other word, make nice and play ball or you will find yourself one of the few reality show contestants who never made a dime from making a fool of yourself on television.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some people seem desperate to rehabilitate their reputations.  Perhaps the roar of negative reviews finally has caused a shift in their thinking? perhaps in QE’s?


Money, lawyers… I don't know. The change from what he said about 3 months ago is drastic…


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> The worm turns when the worm has an infusion to the worm's bank account and an introduction to Sunshine Sachs to do the worm's PR after the show.  In other word, make nice and play ball or you will find yourself one of the few reality show contestants who never made a dime from making a fool of yourself on television.


The timing of the letter is perfect, just before the Court Appeal in the UK. Sunshine lives up to his reputation.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Meh, he is currently in the Big Brother house in Australia, right? It’s obvious the show’s producers asked/paid him to say that to make for “drama” on the show. I don’t believe it any more than I’d believe it if Meghan apologized to him. He’s doing what he has to to make quick cash.


Pathetic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Pathetic




Truly pathetic!  I did a bit of Googling- there are 3 Americans on this "reality" show - Thomas Markle, Jr., Omarosa whatever-her-name-is and Caitlyn Jenner.  OMG, I can't imagine what the Aussies will think of us after that display!  And Caitlyn got paid the most on the show - $500,000; Omarosa got paid $450,000 (I think) - what on earth?!?!?!


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Truly pathetic!  I did a bit of Googling- there are 3 Americans on this "reality" show - Thomas Markle, Jr., Omarosa whatever-her-name-is and Caitlyn Jenner.  OMG, I can't imagine what the Aussies will think of us after that display!  And Caitlyn got paid the most on the show - $500,000; Omarosa got paid $450,000 (I think) - what on earth?!?!?!


Wow!  2 out of three are the biggest famewh*res imaginable!  I think Omarosa is a much bigger joke than Caitlyn  At least Caitlyn was an Olympian with gold medals.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  2 out of three are the biggest famewh*res imaginable!  I think Omarosa is a much bigger joke than Caitlyn  At least Caitlyn was an Olympian with gold medals.




I agree, I think Omarosa is the bottom of the barrel!  On some place I was online - can't recall where now - she styles herself as a "Professional reality show competitor".    Maybe I am just getting old, but sometimes I wonder what the world is coming to!!


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Money, lawyers… I don't know. The change from what he said about 3 months ago is drastic…



He sounds like a hostage video.


----------



## needlv




----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  2 out of three are the biggest famewh*res imaginable!  I think Omarosa is a much bigger joke than Caitlyn  At least Caitlyn was an Olympian with gold medals.



Aren’t there fame ho and has-been celebs in Australia who they could have used for Big Brother? They didn’t need to bring in the dregs from the US.


----------



## Annawakes

Wait. SS is a man?  I always thought SS is a woman.  What kind of guy is named Sunshine?


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Wait. SS is a man?  I always thought SS is a woman.  What kind of guy is named Sunshine?



No, he’s a guy. Ken Sunshine founded Sunshine Sachs. He had a political career before he entered public relations, his political leanings kind of show up now and then in the agency’s work. Shawn Sachs was one of his main employees who became a partner later and his name was added to the company.


----------



## Chanbal

This video is being shared on twitter again. I wonder if one of the skeletons that Bower mentioned just slipped out… 



_Bower has claimed that he believes Meghan, 40, has "secrets" that are set to come out in the future and revealed that he thinks Meghan's father Thomas Markle, 77, is holding back "embarrassing" details about her._








						Meghan Markle has ‘skeletons in closet’ dad is holding back, Royal author claims
					

MEGHAN Markle has “skeletons in her closet” that could be unearthed, a Royal author has claimed. Writer Tom Bower, who is known for writing unauthorised biographies on a number of publi…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Luvbolide

The gods must be crazy!  (Great movie!). Tomorrow Harry the Dim is speaking at a tech conference put together by Wired.  He is going to talk about social media algorithms-how did we get here and how do we get out, or something like that.  Seriously?  I can’t imagine knows much more about computers than how to send/receive email.  Wonder if he will start talking about being tormented by flash bulbs again.  But I really wonder how much he is getting paid!  And why would a bunch of techies think he knows anything about the topic?!?!  

H&M must be in heaven these days - they volunteer to give remarks at as many international events that they are aware of, they go on fake royal tours, they sign endless deals that they don’t follow through on - and they get paid big bucks for it!  And no senior royals to cut in front of them and grab up the fun jobs and the attention!!  Sort of like being royal but you get to pick what you want to do and you get paid for it!  Unbelievable!!


----------



## Chanbal

Dan Wootton


----------



## periogirl28

needlv said:


> View attachment 5245097


Of course it did. It kinda shows the Queen is the victim here? Who as a grandma, wouldn’t be affected.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The brother  changed his tune drastically… Would this sudden love be the work of lawyers, Sunshine, or … ?
> 
> _“Dear Meghan and Harry, the first thing I want to say to both of you is that I’m sorry from the bottom of my heart for the awful, mean letter that I wrote to you prior to your wedding,” he said as he read his new apology letter aloud on the show.
> 
> “I want both of you to know it did not come from the real person that I am, but came from a very dark and hurt part of my heart … I am not a mean person at all, and I have more love inside me to give than anything.”
> 
> Thomas added that he was offended at the time after Markle described him as “distant family.”
> 
> “I was very hurt and confused because of the amazing bond and relationship we shared growing up together and all I could do was put up a defense wall to protect my heart,” he said, adding, “I know that it was very immature and wrong and I truly regret it.”..
> 
> “*Meg, if I could really turn the clock back, I would truly tell you that I am so, so proud of you and truly I am so happy for you and Harry. And I love you,” he said. “You are my little sister, my family and you always will be. Now you have found the love of your life and started a family of your own … couldn’t be more proud of you*.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s brother apologizes for urging Prince Harry to call off wedding
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Jr. was given the task of penning a letter of apology to the royal couple on Monday’s episode of Australia’s “Big Brother VIP.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



He must have found the cheque


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> He must have found the cheque



I think he was required to do it as one of the tasks in the celebrity BB house.  But maybe she did pay him To keep quiet.

edit to add a link summarising (with sarcasm) the stunt pulled by TM Junior On BB









						James Weir recaps | ‘Complete a**’: Shameless Meghan stunt aired
					

Meghan Markle continues to unwittingly be the biggest star on Big Brother VIP when her weird half-brother takes part in a shameless stunt during Monday night’s episode and writes a Part II to the insult-laden letter he famously sent Prince Harry before the royal wedding.




					www.news.com.au


----------



## needlv

Just a reminder that the ANL appeal is starting today…









						Meghan Markle faces crunch High Court privacy showdown TODAY after three-year battle
					

MEGHAN Markle faces a crunch High Court privacy showdown today following a three-year legal wrangle. The duchess is bracing for battle amid the next stages of her court fight over a letter she sent…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well. Is anyone watching?


----------



## needlv

For those who want to watch live - click here



so far the barrister for ANL has been asked by one of the judges to point out where Justice Warby ”erred at law”.  

He is now bouncing around between examples of a “right to privacy” vs justifications for interference.  He is submitting that  Justice Warby - when granting the judgement relied on criminal cases (or cases against the state) rather than civil actions.

it is quite slow….


----------



## needlv

The ANL barrister is now arguing that there is a “right of reply” when attacked / or feels they have been defamed…. when necessary for vindication.

The arguments so far from ANL are:

1. Thomas had the right of reply to the People magazine article with a proportionate reply Or if he believes the attack is false.  Barrister mentioned that some items in the letter are objectively false…(ie, not just Thomas’ belief it’s false…)

2. And whether MM has no reasonable expectation of privacy with the letter because parts of it were disclosed in People magazine.

ANL are arguing that MM and the five people she showed the letter to - *knew* that Mr Markle would get upset and want to reply.  But then claim a right of privacy over the letter - knowing it was already disclosed to at least five people who talked to People magazine means MM could not have had  a reasonable expectation that the letter was private.

mentioned that people magazine said the letter was an olive branch, the barrister then stated it clearly was not!



The arguments are quite nuanced…. And I’m not going to listen for the next ten hours!  Hopefully someone (or the daily mail) is able to do a summary and post it here.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm with that barrister. I just hope someone exposes the lying liar some more.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Oof so Jason K. gave a witness statement that MM used him to pass the letter to Scobie and her lawyers admitted again that she did contribute to Finding Freedom.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

K.D. said:


> While planning their 'tours' of Japan and ??? the Invictus Games are apparently still going ahead April 2022. As I was previously selected as a volunteer I received some e-mails last week to reapply. Would have happily been your eyes and ears behind the scenes but it's planned during Easter week and as they are asking for at least five shifts availability and I have a regular job, it's too much. Also, still feel awkward as they don't seem to do anything. I guess the *grabby grifters of Montecito* can pick up my 5 shifts themselves to keep the event running


 Thanks @K.D. for your first nickname, grabby grifters of Montecito, that indeed personifies the selfish duo. Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## Chanbal

Perfect comment from Piers!


----------



## Chanbal

This post summarizes the annoyance of many of us!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, *Mr and Mrs Bandwagon* offered to send a video welcoming the COP26 participants. The video idea was apparently well received by the organizers, but it went wrong when QE decided to record her own message for the event.


Thanks @Chanbal for your #26 nickname, Mr and Mr Bandwagon.  Love it, no duke or duchess, just plain Mr and Mrs, just as it should be. Congratulations and please accept The List #26 Ribbon.


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> The gods must be crazy!  (Great movie!). Tomorrow Harry the Dim is speaking at a tech conference put together by Wired.  He is going to talk about social media algorithms-how did we get here and how do we get out, or something like that.  Seriously?  I can’t imagine knows much more about computers than how to send/receive email.  Wonder if he will start talking about being tormented by flash bulbs again.  But I really wonder how much he is getting paid!  And why would a bunch of techies think he knows anything about the topic?!?!
> 
> H&M must be in heaven these days - they volunteer to give remarks at as many international events that they are aware of, they go on fake royal tours, they sign endless deals that they don’t follow through on - and they get paid big bucks for it!  And no senior royals to cut in front of them and grab up the fun jobs and the attention!!  Sort of like being royal but you get to pick what you want to do and you get paid for it!  Unbelievable!!


I agree H wouldn't know much about computers and I don't think techies would be interested in him.  I hope this thing backfires on the people who "hired" him.......really, as you say, do these people want to hear how diana was stalked by the paps?  or how Meghan has been "bullied" on the Internet?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Luvbolide said:


> Maybe *Harry the Dim* is having trouble remembering doing a Netflix deal since they have produced zero content to date, in spite of droning on about the same 2 ideas…blah, blah, blah, a little girl meets famous people, Invictis, blah, blah, blah…


Thanks @Luvbolide for your first nickname, Harry the Dim. Yes indeed, he's a very low wattage bulb.  Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## carmen56

What on Earth is a ‘compassion scholar?’


----------



## Chanbal

One more…


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> The Boston Globe, a VERY liberal paper tweeted about Megalomaniac’s calls and I was surprised that all the comments were negative.


Probably because no matter who you are NOBODY likes having their number given out without their permission


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Probably because no matter who you are NOBODY likes having their number given out without their permission



I'd like to think Gillibrand would face some backlash for that ill-advised publicity stunt, but alas, since most of the news media supports her they are ignoring it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

OMG  This bracelet would look great with the infamous earrings that have disappeared from circulation for the time being.


----------



## Chanbal

Of course, she knew…


----------



## jennlt

carmen56 said:


> What on Earth is a ‘compassion scholar?’



A person who works in conjunction with Chief Impact Officers and other people with inflated titles (and egos) to confabulate bombastic word salad that makes them all feel self-important.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Of course, she knew…




Sooooo, hold up,  she wrote this letter with the intention that it would be released to the public.
 Let that sink in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems gloves are off and the claw is out!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5245789



Maybe he should have tweeted at him instead.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please report back, I'm caught up in binging Call the Midwife


----------



## jennlt

This was posted below the tweet about Harry. I'm sure Guy the beagle has one of these at the MonteSh!tShow mansion to make his life easier after his two broken legs because Compassion in Action is their specialty.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> One more…



"....playing with his balls"......


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comments are gold!


----------



## CarryOn2020

[rather than click each article, I am posting some tweets - maybe the full articles will get posted, then I’ll have a look. Right now, he comes off as  so much dimmer than most people thought]


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh no! Shocking!









						Meghan Markle’s 'credibility' questioned in court over new evidence
					

MEGHAN Markle’s “credibility” was sensationally questioned at the Court of Appeal yesterday after bombshell new evidence was submitted by one of her closest former aides. The Duchess of Sussex’s ex…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Comments are gold!



He has aged ten years since they married.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Of course, she knew…



Totally OT, but when I look at this video of OhHorrid, he reminds me of The Penguin (as in Batman's Penguin). Must be the way his surgeon shaped the nose...
His bleached white pallor though... yeah, he could audition for The Joker and save them some make-up money.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> OMG  This bracelet would look great with the infamous earrings that have disappeared from circulation for the time being.



The earrings are probably being reset, to obscure the origins.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> [rather than click each article, I am posting some tweets - maybe the full articles will get posted, then I’ll have a look. Right now, he comes off as  so much dimmer than most people thought]



Chief Prophecy Officer is his newest job title? Maybe he hopes the social media giants will employ him to give them insight into trends


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> [rather than click each article, I am posting some tweets - maybe the full articles will get posted, then I’ll have a look. Right now, he comes off as  so much dimmer than most people thought]



Of course, he predicted January 6. He is Harry, the wizard!
The author of the "First Amendment is Bonkers" wants to close more twitter accounts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Of course, he predicted January 6. He is Harry, the wizard!
> The author of the "First Amendment is Bonkers" wants to close more twitter accounts.




‘Because he and his entitled family are the only ones with _the knowledge, the secret of the universe, the wizard of wizards!_
We ignorant peons must bow to his superior knowledge. MarkleSnarkle, indeed!

Seriously, as a commenter said, if ever someone is asking to be trolled, he is.  At least Dorsey had the good sense not to respond to the entitled icky person’s request.  He seems to have zero understanding of free speech, free thinking. Yes, it’s dangerous. What is more dangerous is going back to the Middle Ages, unless, of course, you are a royal.     

ETA: another commenter pointed out {paraphrasing} with the lies, the half-truths, all the bad stuff comes the accountability, the intelligent questioning of decisions, the ability to form new ideas without a bunch of noise. No wonder the PretendPrince is against it.


----------



## Chanbal

Why is she wearing a poppy brooch? She lost a lot of weight or several pads since her "royal" trip to NYC.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why is she wearing a poppy brooch? She lost a lot of weight or several pads since her "royal" trip to NYC.




Haaaaa, we saw this one coming. Now, we’ll get her diet plan, rrrright Oprah?  
There’s a screenshot of her giving _the stare -_ actually quite scary.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaa, we saw this one coming. Now, we’ll get her diet plan, rrrright Oprah?
> There’s a screenshot of her giving _the stare -_ actually quite scary.


The rumor about pads during the NY trip is making more and more sense. In one of her last videos, Lady C compares her personality to the personality of a historical figure that should not be named (and it's not Voldemort).


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The rumor about pads during the NY trip is making a lot of sense. In one of her last videos, Lady C compares her personality to the personality of a historical figure that shouldn't be named. Very dangerous.


But her face was chubby too. It’s so confusing.


----------



## xeyes

Enty gives us one about Hazard for a change.





__





						Blind Item #8
					

The ginger one loves invoking his mother's name for clicks or book purchases, but when it comes down to principles over cash, he will take t...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> But her face was chubby too. It’s so confusing.



Plumped up with injectables? Do they do that?
Camera angles matter, too, maybe?









						This GIF shows the camera really does add 10 pounds — here’s why
					

It turns out that the camera really does add 10 pounds.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *Why is she wearing a poppy brooch?* She lost a lot of weight or several pads since her "royal" trip to NYC.




The brooch is for Veterans Day this week (Remembrance Day in the UK). The red poppy has been a symbol for fallen soldiers since World War I. Of course Meghan would jump on that bandwagon.


----------



## bag-mania

Which reminds me, isn’t Harry supposed to be in New York City this week to give out some awards to veterans?


----------



## KellyObsessed

We wear a poppy (Remembrance Day) here in Canada too, and Meghan likely would have worn one when she lived here during her filming of Suits.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The brooch is for Veterans Day this week (Remembrance Day in the UK). The red poppy has been a symbol for fallen soldiers since World War I. Of course Meghan would jump on that bandwagon.



I've seen Poppies being mostly used in the UK, particularly on November 11. It's not November 11 yet, she is not British (or Canadian)… It's just one more thing to attract attention to herself.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Chanbal said:


> I've seen Poppies being mostly used in the UK, particularly on November 11. It's not November 11 yet, she is not British (or Canadian)… It's just one more thing to attract attention to herself.



She spent a significant time in Canada and we start wearing poppies the last week of October. I’ll give her this one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Nefl*x is not happy with the negative publicity brought by Mr. and Mrs. Bandwagon.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Totally OT, but when I look at this video of OhHorrid, he reminds me of The Penguin (as in Batman's Penguin). Must be the way his surgeon shaped the nose...
> His bleached white pallor though... yeah, he could audition for The Joker and save them some make-up money.


He kind of reminds me of Dracula.  They're both blood suckers too.



lanasyogamama said:


> But her face was chubby too. It’s so confusing.


Fillers?



bag-mania said:


> The brooch is for Veterans Day this week (Remembrance Day in the UK). The red poppy has been a symbol for fallen soldiers since World War I. Of course Meghan would jump on that bandwagon.


Of course.  She walked over their dead bodies last year.  She can't miss this year's opportunity!


----------



## needlv

Urgh.  I hate to say this but the Duke and Duchess of Montecito‘s PR strategy today *worked.  *We are all talking about what H or MM said in their interviews today and *not* what was disclosed in the appeal hearing.

so they wanted to flood the airways with their word salad… and it worked.

*In case you missed it, this is what happened in the  appeal:*

1.  Jason Knauf has a private statement (not disclosed to the public yet) which indicates MM wanted the letter to be public.  Some commentators are taking this as the RF are no longer protecting Duchess privacy…

2.  Jason was allegedly told by MM to disclose parts of it to Scoobie for his book

3. People magazine indicated that Thomas Markle was “cruelly cold shouldering” MM, whereas his text messages at the time were the opposite.  Offering love and support, telling them about being in hospital with heart problems etc. but still offering to come and walk her down the aisle.  Thomas had not cut off contact.

4.  It was Harry who sent a strong text (not read aloud in court) whilst Thomas was in hospital, recovering.  It was this text that upset Thomas Markle.

5.  proof about M having cooperated with Scoobie for his book Finding Freedom, while claiming not to have done so, should call into question M's character / truthfulness…

Because of point 3 and people magazine publishing such lies (text messages indicate the opposite to what People magazine said), the newspaper argues Thomas had a right of reply (and by implication could publish the letter)

To be honest as much as I would love newspapers to win, unless they prove that Justice Warby was mistaken (by incorrect application of the law, not on the facts), the newspapers  are going to lose this…

The hearing continues today…


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> But her face was chubby too. It’s so confusing.


Cheek pads? (I must be loosing my mind  )


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Of course.  She walked over their dead bodies last year.  She can't miss this year's opportunity!


Quite surprised that they haven't done the graveyard visit yet, but there's still time for that to happen.



needlv said:


> Urgh.  I hate to say this but the Duke and Duchess of Montecito‘s PR strategy today *worked.  *We are all talking about what H or MM said in their interviews today and *not* what was disclosed in the appeal hearing.
> 
> so they wanted to flood the airways with their word salad… and it worked.
> 
> *In case you missed it, this is what happened in the  appeal:*
> 
> 1.  Jason Knauf has a private statement (not disclosed to the public yet) which indicates MM wanted the letter to be public.  Some commentators are taking this as the RF are no longer protecting Duchess privacy…
> 
> 2.  Jason was allegedly told by MM to disclose parts of it to Scoobie for his book
> 
> 3. People magazine indicated that Thomas Markle was “cruelly cold shouldering” MM, whereas his text messages at the time were the opposite.  Offering love and support, telling them about being in hospital with heart problems etc. but still offering to come and walk her down the aisle.  Thomas had not cut off contact.
> 
> 4.  It was Harry who sent a strong text (not read aloud in court) whilst Thomas was in hospital, recovering.  It was this text that upset Thomas Markle.
> 
> 5.  proof about M having cooperated with Scoobie for his book Finding Freedom, while claiming not to have done so, should call into question M's character / truthfulness…
> 
> Because of point 3 and people magazine publishing such lies (text messages indicate the opposite to what People magazine said), the newspaper argues Thomas had a right of reply (and by implication could publish the letter)
> 
> To be honest as much as I would love newspapers to win, unless they prove that Justice Warby was mistaken (by incorrect application of the law, not on the facts), the newspapers  are going to lose this…
> 
> The hearing continues today…


Is all this new info that is coming out? In that case, they could argue that Justice Warby wasn't in possession of these facts?


----------



## K.D.

I guess BBC doesn't count as giving clicks, right? Removed parts of the article that can be considered political. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59229044
*The Duke of Sussex has said he warned Twitter boss Jack Dorsey about political unrest in the US - just a day before the deadly 6 January riots.*
"I warned him his platform was allowing a coup to be staged," Prince Harry said at the RE:WIRED tech forum in the US.
"That email was sent the day before. And then it happened and I haven't heard from him since," the duke said.
He was speaking at a session discussing whether social media was contributing to misinformation and online hatred.

Harry promises to share 'highs and lows' in memoir
Harry: Heavy drinking masked pain of mum’s death
Mr Dorsey, who is Twitter's chief executive officer, has so far made no public comments on the issue.
*Internet 'being defined by hate, division and lies'*
Prince Harry, who now lives with his wife the Duchess of Sussex in California, appeared at Tuesday's session via video chat as a guest speaker. He was introduced as the co-founder of the Archewell organisation. 

The duke used his personal experience with online hatred and the press to reflect that social media companies were not doing enough to stop the spread of misinformation. 
He said the internet was "being defined by hate, division and lies", adding: "That can't be right."
ADVERTISEMENT


His appearance via video chat comes two weeks after a data analytics company alleged that 70% of the hate directed towards the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Twitter was generated by just 55 accounts.


----------



## xincinsin

K.D. said:


> His appearance via video chat comes two weeks after a data analytics company alleged that *70% of the hate *directed towards the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Twitter was generated by just 55 accounts.


I wonder if anyone will calculate how much ridicule is generated, because hate, in my opinion, is like her sugars telling people to die, and I doubt many people hate Mr & Mrs "I'm so Perfect" to this degree. They just can't stand anyone who pokes holes in their fabricated history.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Quite surprised that they haven't done the graveyard visit yet, but there's still time for that to happen.
> 
> _Hazzie is handing out awards later this week - count on it being in the headlines. They are in NYC for the week, apparently. _
> 
> Is all this new info that is coming out? In that case, they could argue that Justice Warby wasn't in possession of these facts?
> 
> _Yes, new info. That is exactly what ANL  is arguing. Warby was deceived, so appeal should be accepted. Hmmmm._





Spoiler: T&C’s account of the case



*Meghan Markle Faces Fresh Challenge Over Letter to Her Father*
*Lawyers for Associated Newspapers Limited appeared before the Court of Appeal today saying they want to present new evidence to challenge the Duchess of Sussex's case.*
By Victoria Murphy
Nov 9, 2021





In February of this year, the Duchess of Sussex won a high-profile privacy and copyright case against the publishers of the _Mail on Sunday_ after they published parts of a letter she wrote to her father. However, the newspaper group has now launched an appeal, and a hearing was held today in which the publisher’s lawyers said they wanted to use “new evidence” to challenge Meghan’s case.

Associated Newspapers Limited’s lawyer Andrew Caldecott QC told the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal in London this morning that their position was that Meghan’s letter was “crafted specifically with the possibility of public consumption” because she “appreciated” her father “might disclose it to the media.” The lawyer also claimed that there was new evidence they wanted to rely on from Meghan’s former Communications Secretary Jason Knauf on the issue of her co-operation with the authors of the biography _Finding Freedom_.

However, in a written submission to the court, lawyers for the Duchess of Sussex requested that the appeal be dismissed. Describing the case as a “very straightforward case of mass media dissemination, for commercial gain, of a private and deeply personal letter from a daughter to her estranged father,” Meghan’s legal team accused the newspaper group of seeking to “muddy the waters, and to generate a proliferation of factual issues which it relies upon as justifying a trial.”

*More from Town & Country*
Darren Walker and Ava DuVernay
Standing before the court today, in a hearing which was streamed live online, Associated Newspaper’s lawyer Mr. Caldecott said, “We read the judgment as implicitly accepting that the letter was crafted as an intimate communication for her father’s eyes only. That is how the Claimant’s case was put before the judge, both in writing and aurally.”

He added, “That fundamental point turns out to be false on the new evidence. The letter was crafted specifically with the possibility of public consumption in mind because the Claimant appreciated Mr. Markle might disclose it to the media. That nuanced position was not before the judge.”

On the question of co-operation with the _Finding Freedom_ authors, Mr. Caldecott claimed that Meghan had co-operated with the writers via Jason Knauf in Autumn and Winter 2018. "The Claimant expressly denied any such co-operation in her pleaded case with one minor exception," he said. "That is now, we say, contradicted by the evidence of Mr. Knauf.”

The newspaper group is seeking permission from the court to introduce a recent witness statement from Mr. Knauf as evidence. Its lawyers are challenging the legal reasons for High Court Judge Lord Justice Warby's initial summary judgement as well as the judge’s factual analysis. They argued today that the judge’s approach to “correction,” Mr. Markle’s “right of reply” following an article mentioning his letter in _People_ magazine, and “the wider public interest” was “much too narrow and contrary to authority.”

In written submissions to the court, Associated Newspapers Ltd also outlined how it had “amended its case on appeal,” withdrawing the allegation that the letter was written “as part of a media strategy or that she then intended it to be made public.” “There is nothing opaque or grudging about the concession,” the written submission reads.

The court also heard reference to what appeared to be previously undisclosed text message exchanges between Meghan, Harry, and Thomas Markle ahead of the wedding, including one which Mr. Caldecott declined to read out from Prince Harry but he said was “obvious” would have “upset” Mr Markle.

When it was announced in February that Lord Justice Warby had found in Meghan’s favor in a summary judgement, she issued a statement saying how she was “grateful to the courts for holding Associated Newspapers and _The Mail on Sunday_ to account for their illegal and dehumanizing practices.” She concluded: “I share this victory with each of you—because we all deserve justice and truth, and we all deserve better.” Justice Warby found that, on privacy, the “disclosures were manifestly excessive and hence unlawful.” On copyright he concluded that "There is no room for doubt that the defendant’s conduct involved an infringement of copyright in the Electronic Draft of which the claimant was the owner or, at worst, a co-owner."

The appeal hearing will run until Thursday.


----------



## xincinsin

Rashad Robinson, identified as the Co-chair of the Aspen Commission on Info Disorder, is also involved in Re:Wired. Maybe Hazard pulled that string and didn't have to pay Sunshine Sucks money to get into a techie forum.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Rashad Robinson, identified as the Co-chair of the Aspen Commission on Info Disorder, is also involved in Re:Wired. Maybe Hazard pulled that string and didn't have to pay Sunshine Sucks money to get into a techie forum.



Yes, right now, they are running with the ‘wealthy, popular kids’ who get 99% of the headlines. After today’s debacle with both of them [one claiming he knew in advance something would happen and the other misleading a Judge], they may well get dropped. 

IMO, of course.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I've seen Poppies being mostly used in the UK, particularly on November 11. It's not November 11 yet, she is not British (or Canadian)… It's just one more thing to attract attention to herself.


We, UK, start wearing them a week or so prior to Remembrance Day.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Luvbolide said:


> Truly pathetic!  I did a bit of Googling- there are 3 Americans on this "reality" show - Thomas Markle, Jr., Omarosa whatever-her-name-is and Caitlyn Jenner.  OMG, I can't imagine what the Aussies will think of us after that display!  And Caitlyn got paid the most on the show - $500,000; Omarosa got paid $450,000 (I think) - what on earth?!?!?!


Let this be a lesson… never get on the wrong side of Kris ‘behemoth’ Jenner.

From the cover of vanity fair to big brother - what a fall!


Chanbal said:


> Why is she wearing a poppy brooch? She lost a lot of weight or several pads since her "royal" trip to NYC.



you are right about the pads, wow, she’s a bit mad isn’t she? Rather her than me - she must have been sweating like a hooker in church. 

As bagmania mentioned, the red paper poppies are sold to commemorate people who died in WW1 &WW2. Recently there’s been a trend of people making their own poppies to sell for charity and also selling different coloured poppies to commemorate different  such as purple ones for animals that died in the world wars (which is belittling to the people who died IMHO). As to the poppy itself it doesn’t look quite like the normal charity ones so it might be a custom job. 

It is a very touchy subject and she would have been absolutely roasted if she hadn’t worn a poppy this week. Some newsreader didn’t wear one once & the press went wild.

As to her legal case, we all know she didn’t have a leg to stand on first time round & she still won (e.g. how can you claim your privacy has been violated when the letter has already been discussed in the US press.) to me the result will be an indication of whether the BRF are still protecting the couple.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I go to Twitter before I come here most mornings (I know, I know, but Twitter is my newspaper substitute for the marginalized areas of the world), so this has probably been discussed to death, but W-T-F. This POS.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, when will Scobie's shady reputation finally catch up with him?



Chanbal said:


> Of course, she knew…




Oh sure she did, just not via her father.



CarryOn2020 said:


>




Ok, I've watched this 6 times in a row. Is he seriously suggesting he warned the Twitter CEO of the riots?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, I've watched this 6 times in a row. Is he seriously suggesting he warned the Twitter CEO of the riots?



Apparently he did. Please get the man the help he clearly needs.



CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Because he and his entitled family are the only ones with _the knowledge, the secret of the universe, the wizard of wizards!_
> We ignorant peons must bow to his superior knowledge. MarkleSnarkle, indeed!



I mean, I'd be surprised if no intelligence agency knew of what was about to go down. I just can't think of a single scenario where - if the UK ones did know - they'd share this information with Harry and be cool with him sending emails about classified information.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, I've watched this 6 times in a row. Is he seriously suggesting he warned the Twitter CEO of the riots?


This implies that he spends a lot of time on Twitter. Must be for the sake of his mental health.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophie-Rose

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, I've watched this 6 times in a row. Is he seriously suggesting he warned the Twitter CEO of the riots?



Someone in the DailyMail comments section called them: Psychic Harry and Mystic Meg  hahaha


----------



## needlv

And it’s back on…



evidence suggests she was happy for the public to read it if it were published.  Wanted people to review it (including  asking RF staff to check if there is any potential liability against her).


----------



## needlv

Newspapers barrister just called PH, MM and Scobie out on their lies.  They all denied collaborating on finding freedom book.  The barrister is just reading out emails where they admit co-operating / collaborating with Scoobie.  Multiple conversations, text messages and emails.  Said MM disclosed personal information of Samantha to authors of the book… and noted the hypocrisy in disclosing another persons personal information to the authors.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> This implies that he spends a lot of time on Twitter. Must be for the sake of his mental health.


Oh gosh maybe he’s on here… 
Look out for @Chimposteaparty or @spoiltforvoice 

on the Jason knauf passing the letter thing… this doesn’t surprise me. It follows that the royals would have commissioned scooby and friend to write a very nice hagiography of Meghan the new royal when they were still in the firm (as they do it for all the family especially the big sellers)  & that information was eventually stuck together with a very different perspective into the Frankenstein’s monster known as FF. (when you read it you do notice it seems VERY disjointed almost like it was meant to have a very different ending than the garbled mess it does)

what this information does do is make me feel a LOT more sympathy for dad Markle  as it would suggest the royal PR team were looking to cast him as the bad guy from very early days. I do wonder whether that  family were always meant to be set up to be the villains and that’s why they weren’t invited to tackyfest at St. George’s.


----------



## xincinsin

Hazard is such a hoot. He said on RE:Wired: "People now more than ever want and need trust, transparency, and truth." says Prince Harry. "We need to have a shared reality."  

What he really means is that he and SHE want us to share their "reality" and believe that they are trustworthy, transparent and truthful. It's feeling like a mishmash of The Matrix and Handmaid's Tale if a liar can spout this trash.


----------



## Sophie-Rose

I hope jack releases the email.... i bet it says something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! 

These two LOVE playing loose with the truth!


----------



## Chanbal

DM win or lose, the material is hot!


----------



## Chanbal

I read somewhere that Mr. and Mrs. Bandwagon are professional victim…  

*Meghan Markle Reveals Pressure Royals Placed on Prince Harry Over Her Father's Attacks*
BY JACK ROYSTON ON 11/10/21 AT 9:52 AM EST
_*Meghan Markle says senior royals were putting pressure on Prince Harry and expressed a desire for her father's attacks to be stopped.*

The Duchess of Sussex told a London court she got a phone call from a mystery royal about an interview Thomas Markle gave to The Mail on Sunday.

*In a bombshell 20-page witness statement Meghan suggested the family only became concerned when he turned his guns from her to the wider Monarchy.*

The extraordinary claims have echoes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Oprah Winfrey interview, when they started a public guessing game about the identity of a mystery racist royal.

Meghan told the Court of Appeal: *"I had privately endured the media onslaught surrounding my father with the support of my husband and [Jason Knauf], in his capacity of our Communications Secretary.*_

_*"But it was only when my father began criticizing the Royal Family (including in a long interview published by [The Mail on Sunday] on 28 July 2018) that senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks, and expressed their desire to have them stopped.*

"*I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them.*

"It is correct that (as I said in my texts to Mr Knauf) the situation was putting significant pressure on my husband (both externally and by his family), and I felt strongly that I needed to do something about it.

"I felt that, even if my attempt to stop my father talking to the media failed, at least my husband would be able to say to his family that I had done everything I could to stop it."

Meghan described how she and Prince Harry went to stay with an unnamed senior royal in the first week of August, 2018, when she got a phone call from another family member.

The duchess said in her statement, seen by Newsweek: "While my husband and I were sitting with Senior Member B, I was told that Senior Member A was on the telephone and wished to speak to me.

"The telephone was passed to me and we had a discussion about the situation in the presence of Senior Member B and my husband.

"*Once the call ended, we continued discussions with Senior Member B, and it was only after these discussions, and in accordance with the advice that I received from the two senior family members, I decided, that I would write a letter to my father.*"

*The witness statement describes how royals and palace aides wanted Meghan to sit down face-to-face with her father to talk things through but she feared the paparazzi were camped outside his home.*

Phone calls and emails were also ruled out because she said they suspected he was no longer in control of his accounts and devices.

Meghan said: *"It had been suggested by the Duke of Cambridge's Private Secretary (at the time), and senior members of the family that I personally arrange to fly out to see my father and speak with him in person.*


"It seemed to me, however, that, even had I wanted to, it was completely unrealistic to think that I could fly discreetly to Mexico, arrive unannounced on his doorstep (as I had no secure means of communication with my father), to a location and residence I had never visited or known, in a small border town that had been descended upon by the press, and somehow hope to speak privately to my father without causing a frenzy of media attention and intrusion that could bring yet more embarrassment to the Royal Family."

Meghan then wrote her father a now famous letter in which she begged him to stop talking to the media in August 2018, a few months after her wedding to Prince Harry.

A month earlier, Thomas Markle said he believed his daughter would soon have a baby who he would be denied a chance to meet in the critical Mail on Sunday interview that Meghan referenced.

On July 28, 2018, he said: "How tragic is that, to deprive a child of its grandfather because I said a few things critical of the Royal Family?

"They're just like a Monty Python sketch. Say a few critical words about the Royal Family and they put their fingers in their ears, cover their eyes and pull the blinds down. They don't want to know about it."

He added: "I tell you, I've just about reached my limit with Meghan and the Royal Family. They want me to be silent, they want me to just go away. But I won't be silenced."

Meghan then sent her letter the following month after her discussions with senior royals, she said.

Meghan's lengthy account to the court case came in response to Knauf revealing private messages Meghan and Harry sent him.

*They showed Meghan was aware her five page handwritten note might be leaked to the media and felt the truth would have come out if it was.*

In August 2018, *Meghan messaged Knauf: "Obviously everything I've drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked so I have been meticulous in my word choice but please do let me know if anything stands out to you as a liability."*

She added: *"Honestly Jason, I feel fantastic, cathartic and real and honest and factual.
"If he leaks it then that's on his conscience but at least the world will know the truth, words I could never voice publicly*."

*Her father initially kept the letter, written in expert calligraphy, private but in February 2019 five of her friends gave anonymous interviews to People in which they criticised him and mentioned the note.*

Meghan sued at the High Court in London for breach of privacy and copyright and won a resounding victory in February, which the newspaper is attempting to overturn.

The duchess said in her statement: "To be clear, I did not want any of it [the letter] to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimized, were it to be exploited."

Knauf said in a statement seen by Newsweek: "As part of a series of messages on 24 August 2018 she explained that she had given careful thought to how to prevent the letter being leaked in part or in a misleading way.

Markle Sr then passed it to The Mail on Sunday who published extensive extracts alongside quotes from a handwriting expert who described the duchess as a showman and narcissist.

"*She explained to me by text that she had numbered the pages at the top to indicate the length of the letter.

"She also deliberately ended each page part way through a sentence so that no page could be falsely presented as the end of the letter.

"In the event that it was leaked she wanted the full narrative as set out in the letter to be understood and shared."*_









						Meghan Reveals Pressure Royals Placed on Harry Over Her Father's Attacks
					

Meghan Markle says senior royals became concerned about father Thomas Markle's attacks and "expressed their desire to have them stopped."




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophie-Rose said:


> Someone in the DailyMail comments section called them: *Psychic Harry and Mystic Meg*  hahaha


Thanks @Sophie-Rose for your first nickname Psychic Harry and Mystic Meg.  It must be because they are so predictable. Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> We, UK, start wearing them a week or so prior to Remembrance Day.


It's a nice tradition. I found additional details on this post about the leaf detail and its symbolism.


----------



## Chanbal

Dan Wootton makes a valid point. This is the person who is going to meet with senators (without being a donor or elected for anything) and allegedly wants to pursue a political career…


----------



## Chanbal

The contradictions are showing up…


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> As bagmania mentioned, the red paper poppies are sold to commemorate people who died in WW1 &WW2. Recently there’s been a trend of people making their own poppies to sell for charity and also selling different coloured poppies to commemorate different  such as purple ones for animals that died in the world wars (which is belittling to the people who died IMHO). As to the poppy itself it doesn’t look quite like the normal charity ones so it might be a custom job.
> 
> *It is a very touchy subject and she would have been absolutely roasted if she hadn’t worn a poppy this week. *Some newsreader didn’t wear one once & the press went wild.



In the US the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) sells poppies which are hand assembled by disabled and needy veterans. I should have clarified in my earlier post that the poppy is not typically worn here for Veterans Day the way it is in the UK and Canada for Remembrance Day. It is more likely to be worn here on Memorial Day in the spring. So while I recognized it immediately, I have to agree that Meghan was wearing it to avoid criticism. 

Although now I see that she has apparently worn it incorrectly so that didn't work for her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Dan Wootton makes a valid point. This is the person who is going to meet with senators (without being a donor or elected for anything) and allegedly wants to pursue a political career…



Appropriate nickname for the despicable duo by Dan Wootten:
 "I’ll have a special Digest on @GBNEWS at 9pm on how the past 24 hours will be seen as a seminal moment in the exposure of the Duke and Duchess of Woke as *deluded fantasists* prepared to use their friends in the media to try and distort the truth."


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> In August 2018, *Meghan messaged Knauf: "Obviously everything I've drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked so I have been meticulous in my word choice but please do let me know if anything stands out to you as a liability."*


Wowwwwww


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

I read in an extract that one of the talking points she wanted Jason to tell Omid was her version of what happened during tiaragate. Of all the things she could of chosen to clarify, that One was deemed important. Jason Knauf is digging up all the dirt.


----------



## Chloe302225

Those with Twitter please post Roya Nikkah's tweets. She is giving a very good play by play of Meghan having to apologize to the court for her convenient lapse in memory about her collaboration with Omid for his book.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Chloe302225 said:


> Those with Twitter please post Roya Nikkah's tweets. She is giving a very good play by play of Meghan having to apologize to the court for her convenient lapse in memory about her collaboration with Omid for his book.


----------



## bellecate

Kaka_bobo said:


>



And again her pants are on fire. Hot pants Meggie.


----------



## charlottawill

Somewhat off topic, this just came to my attention. Oprah and Gayle King visited a baby store in Santa Barbara to pick out gifts for Gayle's soon to be grandchild. A "good friend" of Oprah's who is a new mom and fellow Montecito resident joined them. Hint: it wasn't MM   


> https://people.com/parents/oprah-winfrey-katy-perry-help-gayle-king-shop-for-baby-grandson/





>


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Somewhat off topic, this just came to my attention. Oprah and Gayle King visited a baby store in Santa Barbara to pick out gifts for Gayle's soon to be grandchild. A "good friend" of Oprah's who is a new mom and fellow Montecito resident joined them. Hint: it wasn't MM



I think Oprah and Gayle feel they've done all they can for Meghan.


----------



## jelliedfeels

O


Chanbal said:


> DM win or lose, the material is hot!




I love how even one of the most famously emotional reticent families ever were urging her to go see dad. she really is tungsten

It says a lot either way that she’d ice out her own dad over talking to the press even though she’s lied about him more than once AND she wants the news to correct every little detail about what diamond tiara she wore once (as if not wanting the emerald tiara would change anyone’s opinion of her) - what a hypocrite!


lanasyogamama said:


> Wowwwwww


What a deeply personal letter from a loving daughter it must have been for the threat of litigation to be foremost in her mind 

If this is true- they should just grant the appeal now or she should throw the case.
I mean she’s apparently not short of money and this is only going to get more embarrassing.


Chloe302225 said:


> I read in an extract that one of the talking points she wanted Jason to tell Omid was her version of what happened during tiaragate. Of all the things she could of chosen to clarify, that One was deemed important. Jason Knauf is digging up all the dirt.


Yes god forbid we ever think of M as being demanding or covetous!  

The spiteful part of me wants to add that no one ever would have the bandeau as their first choice - so on that alone  story is completely unbelievable


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> And again her pants are on fire. *Hot pants Meggie*.


 Thanks @bellecate for your first nickname, Hot pants Meggie. Congratulations and welcome to The List. Please know that ITA with post.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Whoever brought this guy to my attention, thanks. He's apparently a UK based lawyer?


----------



## V0N1B2

jelliedfeels said:


> O
> 
> 
> I love how even one of the most famously emotional reticent families ever were urging her to go see dad. she really is tungsten
> 
> It says a lot either way that she’d ice out her own dad over talking to the press even though she’s lied about him more than once AND she wants the news to correct every little detail about what diamond tiara she wore once (as if not wanting the emerald tiara would change anyone’s opinion of her) - what a hypocrite!
> 
> What a deeply personal letter from a loving daughter it must have been for the threat of litigation to be foremost in her mind
> 
> If this is true- they should just grant the appeal now or she should throw the case.
> I mean she’s apparently not short of money and this is only going to get more embarrassing.
> 
> Yes god forbid we ever think of M as being demanding or covetous!
> 
> The spiteful part of me wants to add that no one ever would have the bandeau as their first choice - so on that alone  story is completely unbelievable


Not to mention she was just “too famous” to make the trip to see her father. The logistics, oh my!
I thought Harry was able to fly back and forth to Toronto unbothered when they were dating. Not to mention the trip(s) to stargaze in Africa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _"*I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them.*_



Now, she admits it.  She is willing to lie, twist, manipulate, anything just to please the BRF?  Yep, that’s certainly a women’s rights supporter — not!


----------



## Chanbal

This commentator goes straight to the point.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Briefing points???  Did O get these, too? 

What a jerk.









						Meghan Markle's Private Messages Exposed by Aide Behind Bullying Accusation
					

Meghan Markle knew a letter she sent her father might leak and told an aide "at least the world will know the truth," a court has heard.




					www.newsweek.com
				






Spoiler: MM’s briefing points 



*Meghan Markle's Briefing Points for Aide's Meeting With Finding Freedom Authors*
Jason Knauf's witness statement reads: "In the email The Duchess copied the list of questions and topic areas and added the briefing points she wanted me to share with the authors in my meeting with them."

He said these included:

• Information on how she had very minimal contact with her half-siblings throughout her childhood
• That she had been "close [for] most of her life" with her father and she had supported him "...in spite of his reclusiveness." She added that "media pressure crumbled him and he began doing press deals brokered by his daughter Samantha" and that "despite countless efforts to support him through the past two years, they now no longer have a relationship."
• Her perspective on the thinking behind a statement in November 2016 issued by me
about the way she was being treated by the media
• Her happiness about moving to Windsor
• Detail on how the tiara for her wedding had been selected and that it had been misrepresented by media."


----------



## purseinsanity

K.D. said:


> I guess BBC doesn't count as giving clicks, right? Removed parts of the article that can be considered political. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59229044
> *The Duke of Sussex has said he warned Twitter boss Jack Dorsey about political unrest in the US - just a day before the deadly 6 January riots.*
> "I warned him his platform was allowing a coup to be staged," Prince Harry said at the RE:WIRED tech forum in the US.
> "That email was sent the day before. And then it happened and I haven't heard from him since," the duke said.
> He was speaking at a session discussing whether social media was contributing to misinformation and online hatred.
> 
> Harry promises to share 'highs and lows' in memoir
> Harry: Heavy drinking masked pain of mum’s death
> Mr Dorsey, who is Twitter's chief executive officer, has so far made no public comments on the issue.
> *Internet 'being defined by hate, division and lies'*
> Prince Harry, who now lives with his wife the Duchess of Sussex in California, appeared at Tuesday's session via video chat as a guest speaker. He was introduced as the co-founder of the Archewell organisation.
> 
> The duke used his personal experience with online hatred and the press to reflect that social media companies were not doing enough to stop the spread of misinformation.
> He said the internet was "being defined by hate, division and lies", adding: "That can't be right."
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> His appearance via video chat comes two weeks after a data analytics company alleged that 70% of the hate directed towards the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Twitter was generated by just 55 accounts.


Are we soon going to see Haz promoting 1-800-PsychicFriends?  
As a psychic?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, their little charade might not have worked quite as well this time:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, their little charade might not have worked quite as well this time:




  

Regardless of what the decision is,  the fact is H&M lied, bold-faced.  They deliberately lied in order to manipulate people.
Why would anyone listen to anything they say?  Shame to their supporters, including Charles.




ETA: I do hope the Intrepid Museum is aware of all of this.  How embarrassing for them.








						Special reason why Prince Harry will travel to New York this week
					

The Duke of Sussex is set to attend the Intrepid Museum's 2021 Salute to Freedom gala on Thursday 10 November.




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

[the article is behind a paywall, so I removed the link]. Humble apologies.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, she admits it.  She is willing to lie, twist, manipulate, anything just to please the BRF?  Yep, that’s certainly a women’s rights supporter — not!


What she didn't want to do... Shake hands, hand out prizes and NOT be asked if she was ok?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tonight Hazzie hands out awards for bravery, courage, etc. All qualities he lacks.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Now, she admits it.  She is willing to lie, twist, manipulate, anything just to please the BRF?*  Yep, that’s certainly a women’s rights supporter — not!


I suppose that's what she was also doing during the OW interview, lying to protect the BRF? No, M lies to protect M and sometimes H, but in the end, she would throw H under the bus to protect herself. I knew someone, who's a compulsive liar and she could lie about anything and everything for absolutely no reason. Her stories varied from one day to the next, (same story but different version) and rather than trying to unravel her lies, I have completely ignored her for years now.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> I think Oprah and Gayle feel they've done all they can for Meghan.


They’re right!


----------



## Chanbal

Cancel culture?


----------



## Chanbal

How Hazz inspired Spider-Man! 
*Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
By Lee Brown
November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
_Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.

“You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.

The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”

While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._









						Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
					

Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chloe302225

Kaka_bobo said:


>





Thank You!!


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> The contradictions are showing up…
> View attachment 5246497




This tweet is gold.  If you click on the letter attachments you can read MM’s briefing notes / spin on her background.

Plus, Piers weighs in….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Briefing points???  Did O get these, too?
> 
> What a jerk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Private Messages Exposed by Aide Behind Bullying Accusation
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle knew a letter she sent her father might leak and told an aide "at least the world will know the truth," a court has heard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: MM’s briefing points
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Briefing Points for Aide's Meeting With Finding Freedom Authors*
> Jason Knauf's witness statement reads: "In the email The Duchess copied the list of questions and topic areas and added the briefing points she wanted me to share with the authors in my meeting with them."
> 
> He said these included:
> 
> • Information on how she had very minimal contact with her half-siblings throughout her childhood
> • That she had been "close [for] most of her life" with her father and she had supported him "...in spite of his reclusiveness." She added that "media pressure crumbled him and he began doing press deals brokered by his daughter Samantha" and that "despite countless efforts to support him through the past two years, they now no longer have a relationship."
> • Her perspective on the thinking behind a statement in November 2016 issued by me
> about the way she was being treated by the media
> • Her happiness about moving to Windsor
> • Detail on how the tiara for her wedding had been selected and that it had been misrepresented by media."


Basically proves they are both lying sacks of $hit.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


More plagiarism!  Nothing new to see here.


----------



## mikimoto007

You know what stood out to me in the legal stuff? In an email/text to Jason, Harry refers to Meghan as the Duchess....I realise that's her title, but I wouldn't expect a husband to use it when referring to a wife. It seems so pompous and old-fashioned. 
Like back in the day, people did it in front of staff to remind others of their social position....are they that desperate?


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Are we soon going to see Haz promoting 1-800-PsychicFriends?
> As a psychic?


This reeks, like the smell of foot deep chicken **** baking in the 100+degree California sunshine. 

Sunshine, as in Sunshine Sachs is probably where it came from. That's a little circuitous, but this level of media manipulation is what SS is known for. I mean if SS can represent Harvey Weinstein and portray him as just a friendly old man, then making 6 into a Clairvoyant is an easy task.

       Step 1 - Identify the person/persons Hazza the Clown (good one from Tourre Bakahai) would most like to smear for daring to continually expose he and the toxic wife's hypocrisy and lies, lies, and more lies.

      Step 2- Have the lackey mouthpieces from Sunshine Sachs identify a major incident like January 6 that will grab public notice and is a story with "legs" as it continues to be in the news 11 months after it happened and is not over yet.

      Step 3- Manufacture a link between Steps 1 and 2, refine and hold until perceived optimum Media Release date to maximize diffusion from some negative publicity about the Morons of Monteshitshow.

      Step 4 - Ready, aim, fire, and see how it lands.

#1 is Twitter, so Jack is the target; #2 is hoping to erase the memory of dumb-as-a-brick Hazza spouting his infamous line about the First Amendment and to, instead, package him as really caring about the USA as more than just a place to make millions and hide out from any royal responsibilities so in January he tried to "save it"; # 3 is the result of the first two and a set up to disparage Jack, who not only didn't act on the information but, slam of slams, dissed Hazza by ignoring him.

Which brings us to #4, as it seems the Douchess of Suckess, is unraveling in Court, apologizing for her lapses in memory, and flailing in front of a public who is increasingly unwilling to accept "her truth" as "the truth" because there are so many varied and contradictory "truths" to choose from.

Meantime, the Aspen Institute and Wired magazine and the New York Times are tarnishing before our eyes as they support the hypocrisy of one of the least authentic couples on the planet and give them venues to spew their lies and distortions.


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Or sometimes attributed to the French Enlightenment writer, Voltaire.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mikimoto007 said:


> You know what stood out to me in the legal stuff? In an email/text to Jason, *Harry refers to Meghan as the Duchess*....I realise that's her title, but I wouldn't expect a husband to use it when referring to a wife. It seems so pompous and old-fashioned.
> Like back in the day, people did it in front of staff to remind others of their social position....are they that desperate?


I wonder if maybe M, being such a control freak, would write most if not all of H's emails and of course, we know that she'd call herself, "thee Duchess."


----------



## mikimoto007

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wonder if maybe M, being such a control freak, would write most if not all of H's emails and of course, we know that she'd call herself, "thee Duchess."



I don't think so. I think he writes his own emails.

Although she obviously doesn't  Object to the duchess thing, at her book reading she refers to herself as the duchess of Sussex.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Stan Lee must be turning over in his grave.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



A clarification: _Noblesse Oblige _is the motto of many organizations, such as National honor Society which was formed long ago. Edith Wharton writes about it as does Nancy Mitford. Of course, it is Biblical, Luke 12:48. The fact that H&M choose to emphasize the movie connection, again, makes my head spin. They are so much dimmer than I originally thought.





__





						Noblesse oblige - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @bellecate for your first nickname, Hot pants Meggie. Congratulations and welcome to The List. Please know that ITA with post.
> View attachment 5246702
> View attachment 5246703


We all know it’s unlikely to be H’s first time with a burning crotch- what happens in Vegas….  


needlv said:


> This tweet is gold.  If you click on the letter attachments you can read MM’s briefing notes / spin on her background.
> 
> Plus, Piers weighs in….



Oh yes if these aspen people have any sense they will drop H like a hot brick. It’s just laughable.

Another thing that strikes me about that email is M claims to have been the main caregiver for her grandma. I’m pretty sure this isn’t in FF as clearly even OS thought this was not credible 



redney said:


> Or sometimes attributed to the French Enlightenment writer, Voltaire.


I think he was Spider-Man in one of the alternate worlds


CarryOn2020 said:


> A clarification: _Noblesse Oblige _is the motto of many organizations, such as National honor Society which was formed long ago. Edith Wharton writes about it as does Nancy Mitford. Of course, it is Biblical, Luke 12:48. The fact that H&M choose to emphasize the movie connection, again, makes my head spin. They are so much dimmer than I originally thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noblesse oblige - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


of course, noblesse oblige can also be interpreted as  ‘don’t treat your servants like dirt just because you can’ but I don’t think these two would go for that version


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


You can thank Voltaire for that quote:   _*With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'”   _Not that I believe for one minute that either of them ever read Voltaire or any of the the other greats who said a variation on it.  


I think the Daily Mail is sitting back very happy.  They have exposed Meghan Markle as a prevaricator. Not even sure if they care if there is a trial considering the damage that has been done to the duo.  It is irreparable.   In addition, Harry has outed himself as being just as bad and part of the game plan IMO.  We used to give him the benefit of the doubt, but now i see him as being as bad as she is if only for allowing her to use his family and her father so badly and perhaps coming up with ideas as to how to do it.  They are both despicable at this point.  The DM may lose on a point of law, i.e. copyright of the letter, but otherwise they have won.  No one in their right mind would think that she meant for this letter to be private.  Who goes to the trouble of writing in that tortured script unless they want their chef d'oeuvre to be viewed.


----------



## needlv

And this blogger is back with plenty of snark…









						Royal round-up: 10th November
					

Hello hello all, and happy hump day! Whew, well a lot has happened in the last couple of weeks (including two COVID scares on my side) but all is fine. I like my COVID tests how I like my pregnancy…




					thecrownsofbritain.com
				




Some quotes -

_Back to the social media whining, and not able to resist a chance to open her mouth, Meghan popped up to, to talk about how toxic social media is (again) and how she avoids it (again) because she doesn’t want to ‘listen to the noise’ (again).

Well honey, for someone who doesn’t read anything about herself, do you mind telling us just how you’ve come to be sitting in an interview whining about.. things that have been said about you? I’m not sure I understand how this has happened then.

Meghan, donning her best Mother Theresa expression, tells everyone that there should be a ‘dislike’ button on social media to ‘encourage kindness’.

Yes, and I’m sure the conflict in Afghanistan will be resolved if we just hand the Talibans a teddy bear and world peace would be restored if all the world leaders hit the local pub together. Girl, get a grip_.


----------



## needlv

And MM trading favours with the press (omid) by inviting him to an engagement if coverage is positive?









						Revealed: How Duchess of Sussex authorised aide to brief biographers
					

Meghan's relationship with family members and private discussions with the Queen included in briefing sent to her then-press secretary




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				




The text messages / emails are very telling…


_November 19, 2018 _
*Meghan to Jason*
"Has omid gotten back to you with his outline of what he foresees covering in the book. *If so, can please let me know in separate email and then I can make the decision [about whether to invite him to report on a royal engagement] accordingly*?"


Jason to Meghan
"Please see attached the areas Omid and Carolyn have asked to discuss with me. My advice is that we do not ask your friends to directly engage with them. I think it is important that we can say hand on heart they had no access, just in case it goes into any difficult territory.
"If you’re happy I will see them later this week to set out the factual background and to provide more recent context. Of course if you still think you would like to have one or two people speak to them on your behalf we will arrange it." 

Harry to Jason
“...I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it. Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there. The truth is v much needed and would be appreciated, especially around the Markle/wedding stuff but at the same time we can’t put them directly in touch with her friends.”

*Meghan* to Jason
After receiving the list of questions to The Duchess
“Thank you very much for the info below - for when you sit down with them it may be helpful to have some background reminders so I’ve included them below just in case. I know you are better versed at this than most but assisting where I can. I appreciate your support - please let me know if you need me to fill in any other blanks.”

*Harry to Jason*
“Also, are u planning on giving them a rough idea of what she’s been through over the last 2yrs? Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc. Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. *So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I ?!” *


----------



## CarryOn2020

Find the poppy — egad:


----------



## needlv

Oops someone is a little forgetful with their timeline…


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Who goes to the trouble of writing in that *tortured script* unless they want their chef d'oeuvre to be viewed.


I guess, no one, not even someone who is photoshopping it unto gold stars, ribbons, medals, etc..


----------



## c18027

Chanbal said:


> Cancel culture?





*They can remove the “dislike” button, but we’ll always have the screenshot!*


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977


And she still can’t figure out how to get something that fits.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> You can thank Voltaire for that quote:   _*With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'”   _Not that I believe for one minute that either of them ever read Voltaire or any of the the other greats who said a variation on it.



Voltaire? I am skeptical Harry has ever read Spider-Man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear, that pesky back fat:


----------



## Annawakes

An awful awful dress.  Not appropriate for the occasion whatsoever.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, that pesky back fat:
> 
> View attachment 5247000



Its too tight on the back and the  front bust area does not look flattering…

Edit - obviously using the dress to distract from her perjury…


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Voltaire? I am skeptical Harry has ever read Spider-Man.


That comic is too advanced.  He is strictly Dick and Jane.


----------



## gracekelly

You are supposed to imagine that she is sylph like underneath the balloon of the dress.  It's really fug.


----------



## needlv

Also, another question… If MM did her own styling and didn’t have a stylist (written by her in one of the emails disclosed in court), then she is at fault for her clothes choices … and …

Did she get a kickback from that “Meghans mirror” site…???


----------



## gracekelly

Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Since all they have done in the past 18 months is spin a web of lies, I think the Spider-Man attribution fits them perfectly  

The Discount and Discountess of Disinformation are too cut-rate to understand the elevated concept of _noblesse oblige._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Which one for best dress?


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Which one for best dress?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247010
> View attachment 5247012



Where is that vomit emoji,….?


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009



Her shoulders look wider than his. She looks like a linebacker in that dress.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009



Hazzie‘s shirt looks dirty on his right side.


----------



## LittleStar88

She really put this dress on, looked in the mirror, and said “this is the best one!”?


----------



## needlv

LittleStar88 said:


> She really put this dress on, looked in the mirror, and said “this is the best one!”?



The narc does what she needs to - to distract from all her lies she told the court….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009



Holy Senior Prom! Was their mode of transportation a party bus with a stripper pole?


----------



## Chanbal

mikimoto007 said:


> You know what stood out to me in the legal stuff? In an email/text to Jason, Harry refers to Meghan as the Duchess....I realise that's her title, but I wouldn't expect a husband to use it when referring to a wife. It *seems so pompous *and old-fashioned.
> Like back in the day, people did it in front of staff to remind others of their social position....are they that desperate?


They preach in public that titles mean nothing and just call me Harry. Piers  calls him prince Hypocrite, but to me, he is Mr. Mediocre. However, mediocre people due to their lack of intelligence can be dangerous and shouldn't be overlooked.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> How Hazz inspired Spider-Man!
> *Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man*
> By Lee Brown
> November 10, 2021 | 2:08pm
> _Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchphrase.
> 
> “You mentioned privilege — *my husband always says, ‘With great privilege comes great responsibility*,'” she replied.
> 
> The duchess made no mention of her hubby’s saying being close to a famous quote from Spider-Man, one that is often called “the Peter Parker principle.”
> 
> While the original saying, “With great power comes great responsibility,” is thought to have been around since the French Revolution in the 1700s, it was used wildly in the cartoon webslinger’s movies and comics since the 1960s._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle praises Prince Harry for quote best known from Spider-Man
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has praised husband Prince Harry for encouraging her political activism — and said he inspires her with motivational words that are almost the same as Spider-Man’s catchph…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Didn't they find all that responsibility too onerous for her delicate constitution? She is being motivated by the privileges ($$$$$). No sense of responsibility whatsoever, unless you count her wailing over her lot in life while poking her Pinocchio into everyone else's business.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Regardless of what the decision is,  the fact is H&M lied, bold-faced.  They deliberately lied in order to manipulate people.
> Why would anyone listen to anything they say?  Shame to their supporters, including Charles.
> 
> View attachment 5246765
> 
> 
> ETA: I do hope the Intrepid Museum is aware of all of this.  How embarrassing for them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Special reason why Prince Harry will travel to New York this week
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is set to attend the Intrepid Museum's 2021 Salute to Freedom gala on Thursday 10 November.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com



Did you know that the bell ringer is Rebecca from Ted Lasso?




CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977



Did she think it was a pastie?




CarryOn2020 said:


>



Tee hee!!


----------



## xincinsin

redney said:


> Or sometimes attributed to the French Enlightenment writer, Voltaire.


They wouldn't know enlightenment even if the Bodhi tree dropped on their heads.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977


Well, at least I know she is NOT breastfeeding. New mums who breastfeed do not deflate like this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Did you know that the bell ringer is Rebecca from Ted Lasso?



Oh yes, Hannah W. is amazing! 


Spoiler: Skin care












						Hannah Waddingham Shares the Nighttime Ritual Responsible for Her Stunning, Youthful Glow
					

The English actress shares her best tips and techniques for skin preservation.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## gracekelly

The red dress was a raging success actually.  People were so focused on how awful it was, and badly fitting that they completely forgot for 10 seconds that the court proceedings demonstrated how much she has lied her head off and showed how she can't be trusted to tell the truth.

So I have to say this.  She didn't get like this completely on her own.  Her parents did not do a good job parenting.  I don't care how sorry we feel for Thomas, or how lovely we might suppose Doris is.  The fact is that they have to bear some responsibility for this lack of a moral center.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Which one for best dress?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247010
> View attachment 5247012


My vote goes to the jealousy green one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The red dress was a raging success actually.  People were so focused on how awful it was, and badly fitting that they completely forgot for 10 seconds that the court proceedings demonstrated how much she has lied her head off and showed how she can't be trusted to tell the truth.
> 
> So I have to say this.  She didn't get like this completely on her own.  Her parents did not do a good job parenting.  I don't care how sorry we feel for Thomas, or how lovely we might suppose Doris is.  The fact is that they have to bear some responsibility for this lack of a moral center.



Well said. A parenting fail for both of them. Charles has lots to answer for imo. So do Thomas and Doria [wherever she may be]. Additionally, OW, Nflix, Spotify, etc. - all of these companies/people are at fault too. These 2 are a colossal failure. The red dress may fade, but these lies and their manipulative tactics will live forever.  Bad moves 

Has the designer of this red mess been named?  The cost?   Carolina Herrera  

_








						Meghan stuns in plunging red gown
					

Meghan Markle has made a stunning return to the red carpet, donning a striking gown with a plunging neckline and dramatic train.




					www.news.com.au
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> The red dress was a raging success actually.  People were so focused on how awful it was, and badly fitting that they completely forgot for 10 seconds that the court proceedings demonstrated how much she has lied her head off and showed how she can't be trusted to tell the truth.
> 
> So I have to say this.  She didn't get like this completely on her own.  Her parents did not do a good job parenting.  I don't care how sorry we feel for Thomas, or how lovely we might suppose Doris is.  The fact is that they have to bear some responsibility for this lack of a moral center.


Reminds me of my uni philosophy course when we debated if some people are born bad, or if it really is Nature vs Nurture. I'm afraid I'm being converted to Nature by Madame Conniver and her "Igor".


----------



## Chanbal

This explains why the red dress looked familiar. She really wants people to talk about the dress instead of her instructions to Jason Knauf.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009


A terrible misuse of a poppy as it looks ridiculous there. Maybe she wants it handy to use as a nipple pasty in case she pops out of that ill-fitting dress.


----------



## Chanbal

By the way, Jason deserves a special recognition here. @Maggie Muggins can we get him one of the awards?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> By the way, Jason deserves a special recognition here. @Maggie Muggins can we get him one of the awards?




Jason, BRF Savior

btw, why doesn’t Charles get those medals back and stop this farce?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said. A parenting fail for both of them. Charles has lots to answer for imo. So do Thomas and Doria [wherever she may be]. Additionally, OW, Nflix, Spotify, etc. - all of these companies/people are at fault too. These 2 are a colossal failure. The red dress may fade, but these lies and their manipulative tactics will live forever.  Bad moves
> 
> Has the designer of this red mess been named?  The cost?   Carolina Herrera
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stuns in plunging red gown
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has made a stunning return to the red carpet, donning a striking gown with a plunging neckline and dramatic train.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


When we say someone looks stunning, we usually mean "jawdropping beautiful", not stun with a cattle prod.

I want to know if she paid for the dress, or it was a loaner. Amazed that she was wearing less jewelry than for the Time cover.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jason, BRF Savior
> 
> btw, why doesn’t Charles get those medals back and stop this farce?


I would like an opinion as to whether it was appropriate for him to wear them.  This was not a military sponsored event.


----------



## Chanbal

Nice headline…


----------



## bag-mania

The US media is ignoring the court case, aren’t they? They are too busy gushing about the dress to report her lies.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> Since all they have done in the past 18 months is spin a web of lies, I think the Spider-Man attribution fits them perfectly
> 
> *The Discount and Discountess of Disinformation* are too cut-rate to understand the elevated concept of _noblesse oblige._


Thanks @jennit for your #5 nickname, The Discount and Discountess of Disinformation. Congratulations and please join the Master's Club.  
For the sweet alliteration and wordplay, please help yourself to a piece of your favourite cake. Cheers!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> By the way, Jason deserves a special recognition here. @Maggie Muggins can we get him one of the awards?



@Chanbal please be so kind as to invite him to collect his award.


----------



## Chanbal

We can't miss the Aussies…


----------



## tiktok

jennlt said:


> Holy Senior Prom! Was their mode of transportation a party bus with a stripper pole?



Pretty sure it was a private jet to NYC for the planet saviors…


----------



## bag-mania

Gag! Not only is the press here deliberately pretending the court case isn’t happening, they are going way overboard to prop them up. Why are they fawning over these morons? Is it because they promote the issues they support so they get a free pass on everything else? Check out these headlines.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Gag! Not only is the press here deliberately pretending the court case isn’t happening, they are going way overboard to prop them up. Why are they fawning over these morons? Is it because they promote the issues they support so they get a free pass on everything else? Check out these headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5247105
> View attachment 5247106
> View attachment 5247107
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247114



All things considered, it isn’t too surprising. 


According to Google,
_Chanel is an assistant editor at POPSUGAR in San Francisco. She graduated from the Medill School of Journalism at *Northwestern University.*_

Alyssa Bailey: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/author/1382/alyssa-bailey/
_Alyssa Bailey is the news and strategy editor at ELLE.com, where she oversees coverage of celebrities and royals (particularly Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton). She previously held positions at InStyleand Cosmopolitan. When she's not working, she loves running around Central Park, making people take #ootd pics of her, and exploring New York City._

She could be in Omid’s network.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Gag! Not only is the press here deliberately pretending the court case isn’t happening, they are going way overboard to prop them up. Why are they fawning over these morons? Is it because they promote the issues they support so they get a free pass on everything else? Check out these headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5247105
> View attachment 5247106
> View attachment 5247107
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247114


It's a disservice that the US media is doing to this country. It's so disappointing!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's a disservice that the US media is doing to this country. It's so disappointing!



IMO it does not reflect well on Northwestern’s Journalism School.  Don’t most people ignore these ‘journo-people’ who appear to have very little sense?  We can all look at the photo and see the dress does not fit…at all.  Wonder if Hazzie told her it looked good


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Gag! Not only is the press here deliberately pretending the court case isn’t happening, they are going way overboard to prop them up. Why are they fawning over these morons? Is it because they promote the issues they support so they get a free pass on everything else? Check out these headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5247105
> View attachment 5247106
> View attachment 5247107
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247114


  It's nauseating! "There are none so blind as those who will not see."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> Wait. SS is a man?  I always thought SS is a woman.  What kind of guy is named Sunshine?


I went to school with various kids with a last name of Sunshine so it sounds normal to me.


----------



## needlv

A round of applause fo Jason Knauf though… he handed over emails and text messages that proved both H and M were lying!

Edit - and Scoobie - lied in his witness statement too…


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> We, UK, start wearing them a week or so prior to Remembrance Day.


Yes, it's observed in Canada (and other Commonwealth nations) on the eleventh day of the eleventh month. Lest we forget.

But Meg wearing a big poppy -- suddenly she's a Brit again. Or a Canadian.


----------



## Jayne1

I'm going to need some cliff notes on this court case.


----------



## Chanbal

Thank you, Maureen Callahan! 



_As the woke media yet again entertains Harry and Meghan, with journalists and editors allowing themselves to be scolded and told how to do their jobs, a nice little scandal is unfolding back in London.

“*Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis,” Harry said at a Wired panel on Tuesday.

It’s not, but Harry and Meghan, two histrionic personalities given to hyperbole, always go big — along with their hypocrisy, which continues to mushroom like a nuclear cloud.*

When, oh when, will it swallow them whole?

Harry went on to say that the British media “creates” news, that the UK media has a vested interest in provoking Meghan’s untimely death, and that he has known from a very young age that “the incentives of publishing are not necessarily aligned with the incentives of truth.”

*Truth, he says? So we are to believe, as Harry incredibly claims, that it was he alone who foresaw the January 6 insurrection fomenting on Twitter, that he warned Jack Dorsey the very day before — even though Harry also said he’s not on social media, so how would he know? — and that he hasn’t heard from Dorsey since*.

Seriously, where’s Harry’s thank you? Board seat? Stock options? Won’t someone think of this poor little prince?

Meanwhile, back in London, the Court of Appeal just released a detailed statement from H&M’s former press secretary Jason Knauf, and it’s a doozy.

*Not only, Knauf says, did Harry and Meghan actively participate in their hagiographic book “Finding Freedom” — despite their repeated denials, even in court, that they had anything at all to do with it — they have schemed, strategized and lied to the media when it suits them, playing the victim card all the way.*

Harry and Meghan, Knauf said, “authorized specific cooperation [with the book] in writing in December 2018” — even though Knauf warned Harry not to put the authors in touch with Meghan’s friends and that “being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important.”

*Yet Knauf emailed Meghan questions directly submitted by the authors, and she replied with “briefing points” for them to address in the book.*

“The claimant [Meghan] and her husband did not collaborate with the authors on the book, nor were they interviewed for it,” her lawyer told a UK court in September 2020. Meghan, today: “I apologize to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.”
*Who forgets cooperating on a book that’s all about score-settling and agenda-setting?

Yet the New York Times hosts Meghan — who still insufferably goes by “the Duchess of Sussex” despite fleeing the mean, racist British royal family — allowing her to prattle on about federalizing paid family leave as, you guessed it, “a humanitarian issue.”*

These two, such great humanitarians.

“*Given I’ve only ever called him Daddy, it may make sense to open as such despite him being less than paternal. And in the unfortunate event that it leaked, it would pull at the heartstrings*.”

This is Meghan in a message to Knauf, talking about the letter she was writing to her estranged father Thomas, one in which she would beg him to quit talking to the media — even though, as Meghan told Knauf, she was sure her father would leak the letter to the media.

Which was exactly what she wanted.
“She explained to me by text that she had numbered the pages at the top to indicate the length of the letter (1/5, 2/5, etc.),” Knauf said. “She also deliberately ended each page part way through a sentence so that no page could be falsely presented as the end of the letter . . . She said she had ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated.’”

Here, in part, is that simpering, doe-eyed letter:

“Daddy, it is with a heavy heart that I write this . . . Your actions have broken my heart into a million little pieces — not simply because you have manufactured such unnecessary and unwarranted pain, but by making the choice to not tell the truth as you are puppeteered in this.”

Puppeteered! Meghan writes this with a straight face.
“I have only ever loved, protected and defended you, offering whatever financial support I could” — way to emasculate your father on the world stage — “. . . and instead of speaking to me to accept this or any help, you stopped answering your phone and chose to only speak to tabloids.”
*Talk about gaslighting: Meghan writes her father a letter begging him to stop talking to the media, hoping he will talk to the media!*

Then, when all goes according to plan — her father leaking that carefully crafted letter to the Daily Mail — Meghan turns around and sues the paper for invasion of privacy.

Incredibly, Meghan won that case.

*But now the Mail is appealing, Knauf is squealing, and things aren’t looking so good for the Duke and Duchess of Victimhood.*

Megxit, Harry said this week, is a misogynistic portmanteau. Just kidding — he doesn’t know the word “portmanteau.” But “Megxit,” he said, “was created by a troll, amplified by royal correspondents, and it grew and grew and grew into mainstream media.”

I’m pretty sure it was created by a synergistic brain spasm on comment threads and in tabloid newsrooms, but whatever. _*Meghan herself has loftier goals, cold-calling U.S. senators who have openly expressed confusion and disdain that a C-list actress-turned-royal-defector has the temerity — the megalomania — to inject herself into national politics.

Get ready, America: Meghan Markle has her eye on 2024. And you thought Kanye was nuts.*









						Meghan and Harry’s egos keep getting bigger — but it’s all about to pop
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s hypocrisy keeps dwarfing into a gigantic cloud as the liberal media keeps feeding into their dubious lies, Maureen Callahan writes.




					nypost.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009


WHERE's her engagement ring?  At the jewelers being redone again?


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> I'm going to need some cliff notes on this court case.


I know, it's a lot of info. Here is the Tiara version provided to 'Funding Freebies':

_"Yesterday an *email written by Meghan to Mr Knauf was exhibited at the Court of Appeal.* *Mr Knauf said the Duchess of Sussex had wanted him to share the details with the authors of Finding Freedom.*

Under one of the headings suggested by the authors – 'Tabloid stories that need correcting/batting down: tiara, etc' – *Meghan wrote about herself in the third person:* 'Meghan shared the very special story about choosing the tiara in their wedding exhibition now ongoing at Windsor.

'The Queen, Harry and Meghan were all present – she tried on five tiaras and the Queen asked her which she preferred. Meghan asked the Queen her preference.

'The Queen said they all suited her and Meghan chose the diamond one, which the Queen agreed was perfect.

'Shame to see such a beautiful sweet moment skewed in media. There was no conversation about any other tiara as a preference.

'Meghan loved the one she wore and it remains a very special memory."_









						Aide 'got Duchess's version of wedding across to book writers'
					

British palace press chief Jason Knauf said Meghan provided him with 'detail on how the tiara for her wedding had been selected and that it had been misrepresented by media'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Bet you that she will wail that she was under such pressure at that time that she suffered from selective amnesia (still does...)


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> A round of applause fo Jason Knauf though… he handed over emails and text messages that proved both H and M were lying!
> 
> Edit - and Scoobie - lied in his witness statement too…



Isn’t Jason part of the bullying investigation? Trying to remember, I think he was one who alerted William to trouble.

If he is, and has done as thoroughly documented material in support of bullying charges against Methane, it will be really interesting .


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Thank you, Maureen Callahan!
> View attachment 5247164
> 
> 
> _As the woke media yet again entertains Harry and Meghan, with journalists and editors allowing themselves to be scolded and told how to do their jobs, a nice little scandal is unfolding back in London.
> 
> “*Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis,” Harry said at a Wired panel on Tuesday.
> 
> It’s not, but Harry and Meghan, two histrionic personalities given to hyperbole, always go big — along with their hypocrisy, which continues to mushroom like a nuclear cloud.*
> 
> When, oh when, will it swallow them whole?
> 
> Harry went on to say that the British media “creates” news, that the UK media has a vested interest in provoking Meghan’s untimely death, and that he has known from a very young age that “the incentives of publishing are not necessarily aligned with the incentives of truth.”
> 
> *Truth, he says? So we are to believe, as Harry incredibly claims, that it was he alone who foresaw the January 6 insurrection fomenting on Twitter, that he warned Jack Dorsey the very day before — even though Harry also said he’s not on social media, so how would he know? — and that he hasn’t heard from Dorsey since*.
> 
> Seriously, where’s Harry’s thank you? Board seat? Stock options? Won’t someone think of this poor little prince?
> 
> Meanwhile, back in London, the Court of Appeal just released a detailed statement from H&M’s former press secretary Jason Knauf, and it’s a doozy.
> 
> *Not only, Knauf says, did Harry and Meghan actively participate in their hagiographic book “Finding Freedom” — despite their repeated denials, even in court, that they had anything at all to do with it — they have schemed, strategized and lied to the media when it suits them, playing the victim card all the way.*
> 
> Harry and Meghan, Knauf said, “authorized specific cooperation [with the book] in writing in December 2018” — even though Knauf warned Harry not to put the authors in touch with Meghan’s friends and that “being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important.”
> 
> *Yet Knauf emailed Meghan questions directly submitted by the authors, and she replied with “briefing points” for them to address in the book.*
> 
> “The claimant [Meghan] and her husband did not collaborate with the authors on the book, nor were they interviewed for it,” her lawyer told a UK court in September 2020. Meghan, today: “I apologize to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.”
> *Who forgets cooperating on a book that’s all about score-settling and agenda-setting?
> 
> Yet the New York Times hosts Meghan — who still insufferably goes by “the Duchess of Sussex” despite fleeing the mean, racist British royal family — allowing her to prattle on about federalizing paid family leave as, you guessed it, “a humanitarian issue.”*
> 
> These two, such great humanitarians.
> 
> “*Given I’ve only ever called him Daddy, it may make sense to open as such despite him being less than paternal. And in the unfortunate event that it leaked, it would pull at the heartstrings*.”
> 
> This is Meghan in a message to Knauf, talking about the letter she was writing to her estranged father Thomas, one in which she would beg him to quit talking to the media — even though, as Meghan told Knauf, she was sure her father would leak the letter to the media.
> 
> Which was exactly what she wanted.
> “She explained to me by text that she had numbered the pages at the top to indicate the length of the letter (1/5, 2/5, etc.),” Knauf said. “She also deliberately ended each page part way through a sentence so that no page could be falsely presented as the end of the letter . . . She said she had ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated.’”
> 
> Here, in part, is that simpering, doe-eyed letter:
> 
> “Daddy, it is with a heavy heart that I write this . . . Your actions have broken my heart into a million little pieces — not simply because you have manufactured such unnecessary and unwarranted pain, but by making the choice to not tell the truth as you are puppeteered in this.”
> 
> Puppeteered! Meghan writes this with a straight face.
> “I have only ever loved, protected and defended you, offering whatever financial support I could” — way to emasculate your father on the world stage — “. . . and instead of speaking to me to accept this or any help, you stopped answering your phone and chose to only speak to tabloids.”
> *Talk about gaslighting: Meghan writes her father a letter begging him to stop talking to the media, hoping he will talk to the media!*
> 
> Then, when all goes according to plan — her father leaking that carefully crafted letter to the Daily Mail — Meghan turns around and sues the paper for invasion of privacy.
> 
> Incredibly, Meghan won that case.
> 
> *But now the Mail is appealing, Knauf is squealing, and things aren’t looking so good for the Duke and Duchess of Victimhood.*
> 
> Megxit, Harry said this week, is a misogynistic portmanteau. Just kidding — he doesn’t know the word “portmanteau.” But “Megxit,” he said, “was created by a troll, amplified by royal correspondents, and it grew and grew and grew into mainstream media.”
> 
> I’m pretty sure it was created by a synergistic brain spasm on comment threads and in tabloid newsrooms, but whatever. _*Meghan herself has loftier goals, cold-calling U.S. senators who have openly expressed confusion and disdain that a C-list actress-turned-royal-defector has the temerity — the megalomania — to inject herself into national politics.
> 
> Get ready, America: Meghan Markle has her eye on 2024. And you thought Kanye was nuts.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s egos keep getting bigger — but it’s all about to pop
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s hypocrisy keeps dwarfing into a gigantic cloud as the liberal media keeps feeding into their dubious lies, Maureen Callahan writes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


IIRC, the media was dubbing a lot of stuff something-Xit at that time because Brexit was such a hot topic. But of course Methane would make it all about her. Ego bigger than the EU.

Kanye walked on water. Methane will ... turn water into oatmeal latte?


----------



## purseinsanity

redney said:


> Or sometimes attributed to the French Enlightenment writer, Voltaire.


Just technicalities.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977


Poppy?  What poppy?  All I can focus on is what appears to be Methane's inverted nipple!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Comments are gold!



Haz looks like a kissing cousin of a fatter, bloated version of Gerard Butler.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, that pesky back fat:
> 
> View attachment 5247000


What are they on the red carpet for?  Begging for more work?


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> Since all they have done in the past 18 months is spin a web of lies, I think the Spider-Man attribution fits them perfectly
> 
> The Discount and Discountess of Disinformation are too cut-rate to understand the elevated concept of _noblesse oblige._


Maybe we should name them Venom and CatWoman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe we should name them Venom and CatWoman.


Catwoman is much more likable than Methane.  
And she isn't the weepy victim sort. 
She left Bruce Wayne at the altar, so not a money-grubber fame whore either.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Catwoman is much more likable than Methane.
> And she isn't the weepy victim sort.
> She left Bruce Wayne at the altar, so not a money-grubber fame whore either.


True that...Venom and Poison Ivy?  I'm sure she grows it near the chicken coop.  Plus, the Cat Woman suit would be a very ill fitting version on Megain and we already know she loves wearing green....


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> You are supposed to imagine that she is sylph like underneath the balloon of the dress.  It's really fug.


She really is the JC Penney to any Halston.
Is it Valentino again? They must be crying into their tulle. 


LittleStar88 said:


> Her shoulders look wider than his. She looks like a linebacker in that dress.


All the better to keep him in line with.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Which one for best dress?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247010
> View attachment 5247012


I love green normally…. I love red normally….

I’m going to have to say whatever her maid just off right of camera is wearing.

In all honesty, I’m going to have to say the dreaded green because she’s more covered up and thus she looks slightly less of the dumpy,
snotty tart she is than the red.



gracekelly said:


> That comic is too advanced.  He is strictly Dick and Jane.


he didn’t even finish that because he was hoping it was a porno.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> True that...Venom and Poison Ivy?  I'm sure she grows it near the chicken coop.  Plus, the Cat Woman suit would be a very ill fitting version on Megain and we already know she loves wearing green....


No the DC villain M resembles is Jesse Eisenberg’s  Lex Luther as she’s bald, irrational and utterly unconvincing in her role.


----------



## csshopper

I’m on my iPad and tired, so having trouble inserting this, but if one of you talented ladies search for a picture of Meghan as suitcase girl you will find her, bigger boobed, in a red dress that looks like a shorter version of tonight’s. She is not aging well.

Raging narcissist that she is, the dress was fully intended to make her the center of attention, not the veterans being recognized. SHAME ON HER AND  HER HANDBAG CLUTCHED IN HER CLAW, aka Hazz.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Oh can you imagine if she got Jeffrey Archered and locked up for lying, 
They really should tbh to set an example as otherwise rich people are just going to try lying in court and hoping for the best.


----------



## jelliedfeels

C


Chanbal said:


> Thank you, Maureen Callahan!
> View attachment 5247164
> 
> 
> _As the woke media yet again entertains Harry and Meghan, with journalists and editors allowing themselves to be scolded and told how to do their jobs, a nice little scandal is unfolding back in London.
> 
> “*Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis,” Harry said at a Wired panel on Tuesday.
> 
> It’s not, but Harry and Meghan, two histrionic personalities given to hyperbole, always go big — along with their hypocrisy, which continues to mushroom like a nuclear cloud.*
> 
> When, oh when, will it swallow them whole?
> 
> Harry went on to say that the British media “creates” news, that the UK media has a vested interest in provoking Meghan’s untimely death, and that he has known from a very young age that “the incentives of publishing are not necessarily aligned with the incentives of truth.”
> 
> *Truth, he says? So we are to believe, as Harry incredibly claims, that it was he alone who foresaw the January 6 insurrection fomenting on Twitter, that he warned Jack Dorsey the very day before — even though Harry also said he’s not on social media, so how would he know? — and that he hasn’t heard from Dorsey since*.
> 
> Seriously, where’s Harry’s thank you? Board seat? Stock options? Won’t someone think of this poor little prince?
> 
> Meanwhile, back in London, the Court of Appeal just released a detailed statement from H&M’s former press secretary Jason Knauf, and it’s a doozy.
> 
> *Not only, Knauf says, did Harry and Meghan actively participate in their hagiographic book “Finding Freedom” — despite their repeated denials, even in court, that they had anything at all to do with it — they have schemed, strategized and lied to the media when it suits them, playing the victim card all the way.*
> 
> Harry and Meghan, Knauf said, “authorized specific cooperation [with the book] in writing in December 2018” — even though Knauf warned Harry not to put the authors in touch with Meghan’s friends and that “being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important.”
> 
> *Yet Knauf emailed Meghan questions directly submitted by the authors, and she replied with “briefing points” for them to address in the book.*
> 
> “The claimant [Meghan] and her husband did not collaborate with the authors on the book, nor were they interviewed for it,” her lawyer told a UK court in September 2020. Meghan, today: “I apologize to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.”
> *Who forgets cooperating on a book that’s all about score-settling and agenda-setting?
> 
> Yet the New York Times hosts Meghan — who still insufferably goes by “the Duchess of Sussex” despite fleeing the mean, racist British royal family — allowing her to prattle on about federalizing paid family leave as, you guessed it, “a humanitarian issue.”*
> 
> These two, such great humanitarians.
> 
> “*Given I’ve only ever called him Daddy, it may make sense to open as such despite him being less than paternal. And in the unfortunate event that it leaked, it would pull at the heartstrings*.”
> 
> This is Meghan in a message to Knauf, talking about the letter she was writing to her estranged father Thomas, one in which she would beg him to quit talking to the media — even though, as Meghan told Knauf, she was sure her father would leak the letter to the media.
> 
> Which was exactly what she wanted.
> “She explained to me by text that she had numbered the pages at the top to indicate the length of the letter (1/5, 2/5, etc.),” Knauf said. “She also deliberately ended each page part way through a sentence so that no page could be falsely presented as the end of the letter . . . She said she had ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated.’”
> 
> Here, in part, is that simpering, doe-eyed letter:
> 
> “Daddy, it is with a heavy heart that I write this . . . Your actions have broken my heart into a million little pieces — not simply because you have manufactured such unnecessary and unwarranted pain, but by making the choice to not tell the truth as you are puppeteered in this.”
> 
> Puppeteered! Meghan writes this with a straight face.
> “I have only ever loved, protected and defended you, offering whatever financial support I could” — way to emasculate your father on the world stage — “. . . and instead of speaking to me to accept this or any help, you stopped answering your phone and chose to only speak to tabloids.”
> *Talk about gaslighting: Meghan writes her father a letter begging him to stop talking to the media, hoping he will talk to the media!*
> 
> Then, when all goes according to plan — her father leaking that carefully crafted letter to the Daily Mail — Meghan turns around and sues the paper for invasion of privacy.
> 
> Incredibly, Meghan won that case.
> 
> *But now the Mail is appealing, Knauf is squealing, and things aren’t looking so good for the Duke and Duchess of Victimhood.*
> 
> Megxit, Harry said this week, is a misogynistic portmanteau. Just kidding — he doesn’t know the word “portmanteau.” But “Megxit,” he said, “was created by a troll, amplified by royal correspondents, and it grew and grew and grew into mainstream media.”
> 
> I’m pretty sure it was created by a synergistic brain spasm on comment threads and in tabloid newsrooms, but whatever. _*Meghan herself has loftier goals, cold-calling U.S. senators who have openly expressed confusion and disdain that a C-list actress-turned-royal-defector has the temerity — the megalomania — to inject herself into national politics.
> 
> Get ready, America: Meghan Markle has her eye on 2024. And you thought Kanye was nuts.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s egos keep getting bigger — but it’s all about to pop
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s hypocrisy keeps dwarfing into a gigantic cloud as the liberal media keeps feeding into their dubious lies, Maureen Callahan writes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I don’t know about you all, but I think  a grown woman calling a grown man ‘daddy’ to ‘pull at the heartstrings’ and manipulate him sounds like the sort of thing a cringe-inducing and greedy whore would do.

I used to think it was misogynistic to label M as like a prostitute just because I don’t like her but as I notice her behaviour more and more  I think if the boot fits….

edit- actually no, I think that’s an insult to ladies of the night as at least they earn their money


purseinsanity said:


> Haz looks like a kissing cousin of a fatter, bloated version of Gerard Butler.


What did poor Gerard butler ever do to you… oh yeah _the Ugly Truth… _fire at will!


Chanbal said:


> I know, it's a lot of info. Here is the Tiara version provided to 'Funding Freebies':
> 
> _"Yesterday an *email written by Meghan to Mr Knauf was exhibited at the Court of Appeal.* *Mr Knauf said the Duchess of Sussex had wanted him to share the details with the authors of Finding Freedom.*
> 
> Under one of the headings suggested by the authors – 'Tabloid stories that need correcting/batting down: tiara, etc' – *Meghan wrote about herself in the third person:* 'Meghan shared the very special story about choosing the tiara in their wedding exhibition now ongoing at Windsor.
> 
> 'The Queen, Harry and Meghan were all present – she tried on five tiaras and the Queen asked her which she preferred. Meghan asked the Queen her preference.
> 
> 'The Queen said they all suited her and Meghan chose the diamond one, which the Queen agreed was perfect.
> 
> 'Shame to see such a beautiful sweet moment skewed in media. There was no conversation about any other tiara as a preference.
> 
> 'Meghan loved the one she wore and it remains a very special memory."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aide 'got Duchess's version of wedding across to book writers'
> 
> 
> British palace press chief Jason Knauf said Meghan provided him with 'detail on how the tiara for her wedding had been selected and that it had been misrepresented by media'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Of course the Queen said they all look good on her, we can NEVER forget what a stunning beauty she is for even a second  

Lets be honest, the bandeau was the only one that fit on her swollen head.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> No the DC villain M resembles is Jesse Eisenberg’s  Lex Luther as she’s bald, irrational and utterly unconvincing in her role.


I think DC has dear Lexi as a woman in some AUs.

Maybe a Bond villainess since Methane once hankered to be in a Bond movie? Someone who gets offed early in the plot?


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> Poppy?  What poppy?  All I can focus on is what appears to be Methane's inverted nipple!


Omg this outfit! Saggy, puckered cone boobs, back fat overhang, linebacker shoulder profile, dyed to match satin bridesmaid shoes. What is she thinking? Does she have NO ONE to help her?


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> I'm going to need some cliff notes on this court case.



ok, I will  recap for you…

1 Duchess sued newspapers claiming publication of the letter to her father was a breach of her privacy and a breach of copyright (ie, she wrote it so she owned it and did not consent to publication)

2. associated news defended the action suggesting the Duchess intended for it to be published and that she wasn’t the only author of the letter (asked other staff to contribute etc)

3. Justice Warby decided on a summary judgement (ie, judgement in MM’s favour with no need for a trial) because he believed MM.  He ordered an apology to be published and a certain amount of $ to be paid for her legal fees.  But this was “stayed” (ie on hold) if Associated News appealed…

4.   Associated news did appeal because they want to go to trial. and now they are presenting their appeal before three different judges - if successful on appeal it goes back to a lower court for a full trial (including cross examination of the  Duchess!).  

Technically ANL aren’t supposed to go over facts in an appeal, but point to where Justice Warby was wrong in his judgement.  But clearly ANL has decided to use the opportunity to point out MM’s lies with a witness statement from Jason K (former comms secretary for H and MM) which attached copies of text messages and emails refuting H, MM and even Scoobie’s claims.

5. The appeal has so far pointed out that MM expected the letter to be public, changed the language knowing it would be published, to put herself in a good light.  Ie, *she had no expectation of privacy. * I think ANL did very well on this point as they disclosed texts and emails with her own words.  They also pointed out Thomas has a right of reply because he was defamed by people magazine.

6.  Where ANL fails is on the copyright claim.  Jason K denied co-writing it.  So unless someone else helped write it, or it was written on royal family assets (eg like a computer your employer provides), copyright belongs to MM.  so ANL tried to argue an exception to copyright (fair use, public interest and even tried human rights of free speech).  This is where potentially they have a weak argument.  

The appeals court will review and decide whether or not to uphold the original judgement of Justice Warby or send it back to a lower court for retrial (With a new judge for the trial).

Either way, ANL managed to get some juicy info released, showed MM as a liar, and MM had to apologise to the court for *forgetting* she did collaborate with Scoobie for Finding freedom book.  

Even if ANL loses the appeal, they still pointed out that the Duchess is a HUGE LIAR, so her credibility took a large hit today.


----------



## needlv

csshopper said:


> Isn’t Jason part of the bullying investigation? Trying to remember, I think he was one who alerted William to trouble.
> 
> If he is, and has done as thoroughly documented material in support of bullying charges against Methane, it will be really interesting .



Yes, Jason raised bullying investigations in writing and was concerned that nothing would be done (because they are members of the RF).  It was his email which leaked where he described MM’s bullying behaviour.

The bullying investigation won’t be flattering.  Firstly because of both H and MM’s behaviour, but secondly because the BRF tries to cover this up when it’s their own family members.  And I would venture to say, no doubt other members of the RF have behaved appallingly (PC and PA are known for their arrogance) - so the law firm doing the investigation would most likely suggest a bullying policy apply to all, even the BRF members…


----------



## needlv




----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> _Which was exactly what she wanted.
> “She explained to me by text that she had numbered the pages at the top to indicate the length of the letter (1/5, 2/5, etc.),” Knauf said. “She also deliberately ended each page part way through a sentence so that no page could be falsely presented as the end of the letter . . . She said she had ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated.’”_



I can just see her spending weeks working on this letter like a psycho … and it still turned out like something an overwrought melodramatic preteen girl would write. I get secondhand embarrassment just reading it.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


>





OMG - did she break all of the mirrors in Montecito Palace?!?!  The top of the dress is so Ill fitting that it looks like she sewed it herself on a kiddie sewing machine.  And because it doesn’t fit, she is holding herself like she is in rigor mortis.  Good rule of thumb - if you are too uncomfortable in a dress, don’t wear it!  And that skirt - Meggie , what the hell is that skirt?!?!  Why would anyone think that a short woman should walk around in a skirt made of about 100 yards of bright red silk satin?  I love Carolina Herrera - she must be so embarrassed.

I am confident that MM thinks she stole the spotlight back from Kate and that fabulous Jenny Peckham.  Yeah, sure, when pigs fly!  Photos of those two dresses perfectly demonstrate the difference between wearing your dress and your dress wearing you.

Meghan - please go away now - and take Harry the Dim with you.  Enough already.


----------



## muddledmint

Luvbolide said:


> OMG - did she break all of the mirrors in Montecito Palace?!?!  The top of the dress is so Ill fitting that it looks like she sewed it herself on a kiddie sewing machine.  And because it doesn’t fit, she is holding herself like she is in rigor mortis.  Good rule of thumb - if you are too uncomfortable in a dress, don’t wear it!  And that skirt - Meggie , what the hell is that skirt?!?!  Why would anyone think that a short woman should walk around in a skirt made of about 100 yards of bright red silk satin?  I love Carolina Herrera - she must be so embarrassed.
> 
> I am confident that MM thinks she stole the spotlight back from Kate and that fabulous Jenny Peckham.  Yeah, sure, when pigs fly!  Photos of those two dresses perfectly demonstrate the difference between wearing your dress and your dress wearing you.
> 
> Meghan - please go away now - and take Harry the Dim with you.  Enough already.


She’s not even short and this dress makes her look short and wide. Even with her usual 8” heels on


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jason, BRF Savior
> 
> btw, why doesn’t Charles get those medals back and stop this farce?




Makes me wonder what kind of ridiculous stunt they are planning for Sunday…


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> Gag! Not only is the press here deliberately pretending the court case isn’t happening, they are going way overboard to prop them up. Why are they fawning over these morons? Is it because they promote the issues they support so they get a free pass on everything else? Check out these headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5247105
> View attachment 5247106
> View attachment 5247107
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247114


----------



## Lenna.V

Unmatched elegance?   I normally find her beautiful and stylish, on this occasion however she looks like half roasted turkey.


----------



## xincinsin

Lenna.V said:


> Unmatched elegance?   I normally find her beautiful and stylish, on this occasion however she looks like half roasted turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247218


I'd like to say it's just the lighting, but she really does look roasted. Can see the tan lines clearly in this shot.

Is that a new nose? Thought it looked different in her birthday vid which already sported a new nose. This is newer nose?


----------



## needlv




----------



## EverSoElusive

Lenna.V said:


> Unmatched elegance?   I normally find her beautiful and stylish, on this occasion however she looks like half roasted turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247218



I can see the tip is starting to grow from all the lies      Pinocchio would be jealous because you know, she's THE Duchess of Sussex, and she does everything better than others.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977



Marklenator looked very masculine from this angle


----------



## Genie27

muddledmint said:


> Omg this outfit! Saggy, puckered cone boobs, back fat overhang, linebacker shoulder profile, dyed to match satin bridesmaid shoes. What is she thinking? Does she have NO ONE to help her?


Her only aide is her magic mirror which tells her she has the proportions of Heidi Klum.


----------



## Cheddar Cheese

This popped the other day & it crossed my minds this thread would be a place where the comments might be appreciated. 
Cheers!









						Royal round-up: 25th October
					

Well hello, hello all and happy Monday– if ever there was one. Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I can’t believe how much has happened in the last few weeks so of course, I had…




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is it me it is the lighting at this event absolutely awful?! The pics look like they were taken in a garage.


----------



## sdkitty

Well, I finally saw it.  Watching some TV show after dinner last night - ET or something in that genre.  They reported "bombshell" news that Meghan and Harry lied when they said they didn't participate in Omid's book, Finding Freedom.  This came out in the court case I guess.  Could their house of cards tumble some day?


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> By the way, Jason deserves a special recognition here. @Maggie Muggins can we get him one of the awards?



Oh, that’s him?  He’s cute .
I like the geeky, studious look. Meatheads are not for me


----------



## Maggie Muggins

tiktok said:


> Pretty sure it was a private jet to NYC for *the planet saviors*…


Thanks @tiktok for your first nickname, the planet saviors, an excellent tongue-in-cheek compliment for the dastardly duo.  Congratulations and welcome to The List.


----------



## Chanbal

The dress is Carolina Herrera, and they arrived to the event with their own film crew. Whoever is sponsoring them is as ghastly as they are. 




www.jerseydeanne.tumblr.com/post/667562552165826560/meghan-and-harry-arrived-last-night-with-a-film








						Meghan stuns as she and Harry attend Veterans' Day gala in NYC
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in New York City last night, on the eve of Veterans' Day in the US and Armistice Day in the UK, to attend a gala for military personnel and their families and supporters.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Her boobs look like the parting of the Red Sea.


----------



## Luvbolide

Lenna.V said:


> Unmatched elegance?   I normally find her beautiful and stylish, on this occasion however she looks like half roasted turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247218




And do, Megsie, please, top the whole mess off with tan lines!  She needs a friend who will tell her honestly…that mountain of silk needs to go.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

I can't resist popping in here from time to time and I was shocked to see this red carpet appearance (what is it anyway??) WHAT ON EARTH is she wearing?? That red dress, her "roasted" colour(as someone rightly said), her figure still overweight, H wearing his medals.....I just have no words.....


----------



## Luvbolide

Oh, and one more thing - since you like to meticulously select the words you use, Meggie - “I forgot” is not the same as “I perjured myself”!  On your toes, girl!


----------



## Chanbal

Parts of Mrs. Bandwagon's statement have already been shown in several posts, but this masterpiece belongs here imo. It shows her lawyers' attempts to use Knauf's letter to support their case. So many lies…  

*'I did not want any of it to be published': Meghan Markle denies writing a letter to Thomas Markle with the intention of it being made public - but admits it was a possibility her words would be shared*

*Meghan Markle denied thinking Thomas Markle would leak her letter but said she prepared for the possibility*
*She said she sent the letter because she wanted 'public attacks' that 'put pressure' on the Royal family to stop*
*Meghan apologised to Court of Appeal for failing to disclose emails with communications aide Jason Knauf*
*The Duchess of Sussex insisted she couldn't remember the emails - or find them during her own searches*

Meghan Markle has denied wanting a letter she wrote for her father to be leaked - but admitted it was a possibility her words would be shared.  

In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, published today, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility. She said: 'To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published'. 

*She said she sent the letter because she wanted 'public attacks' to stop because they were 'putting pressure' on her husband and the Royal family. *

In her statement she wrote: *'Senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks, and expressed their desire to have them stopped. I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them.*

'It is correct that (as I said in my texts to Mr Knauf) the situation was putting significant pressure on my husband (both externally and by his family), and I felt strongly that I needed to do something about it.

'I felt that, even if my attempt to stop my father talking to the media failed, at least my husband would be able to say to his family that I had done everything I could to stop it'.

During the privacy trial with the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to disclose discussions helping Jason Knauf to brief the authors of Finding Freedom.

*In her latest witness statement, published today, the Duchess of Sussex insisted she couldn't remember the emails - or find them during her own searches.

The signed document also claims Mr Knauf's emails actually help her case.

She wrote: 'I did not have the benefit of seeing these emails and I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.

'I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court. In fact, had I been aware of these exchanges at the time of serving the Re-Amended Reply, I would have been more than happy to refer to them as I feel they strongly support my case.' *

She added: 'Not only do I refer to the background information shared with Mr Knauf as “reminders”, as much of it was information that he had already requested of me dating back to 2016 when he had asked me for a timeline relating to my family to enable him to engage with the media on enquiries, it is also a far cry from the very detailed personal information that the Defendant alleges that I wanted or permitted to put into the public domain.'

In her written statement the Duchess of Sussex also insisted she did not think her estranged father would leak a handwritten letter from her 'because it would not put him in a good light'.

In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility.

She said: 'While we had to recognize that anything was possible in the extraordinary circumstances in which we were living and therefore the need to mitigate against the risks of disclosure of the letter's contents, I did not think that my father would sell or leak the letter, primarily because it would not put him in a good light.'

She later added: 'I had not heard from him since the week leading up to our wedding, but it seemed incredibly unlikely that he would disclose the contents because they contained unpalatable truths and would thereby negate the falsehoods the media had attributed to him.

'The main purpose of the letter was to encourage my father to stop talking to the press.

'To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimised, were it to be exploited.'

In her written statement the Duchess of Sussex also insisted she did not think her estranged father would leak a handwritten letter from her 'because it would not put him in a good light'.

In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility.

She said: 'While we had to recognize that anything was possible in the extraordinary circumstances in which we were living and therefore the need to mitigate against the risks of disclosure of the letter's contents, I did not think that my father would sell or leak the letter, primarily because it would not put him in a good light.'

She later added: 'I had not heard from him since the week leading up to our wedding, but it seemed incredibly unlikely that he would disclose the contents because they contained unpalatable truths and would thereby negate the falsehoods the media had attributed to him.

'The main purpose of the letter was to encourage my father to stop talking to the press.

'To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimised, were it to be exploited.'









						Meghan Markle denies she knew letter to  her father would be published
					

In her written evidence to the British Court of Appeal, published today, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> What did poor Gerard butler ever do to you… oh yeah _the Ugly Truth… _fire at will!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> In all honesty, I’m going to have to say the dreaded green because she’s more covered up and thus she looks slightly less of the *dumpy,
> snotty tart* she is than the red.


Thanks @jelliedfeels for your #4 nickname, dumpy, snotty tart, that needs no further explanation.  Congratulations.


----------



## bag-mania

It's no surprise TMZ is promoting them. Of course they put Meghan first. They even found a way to spin Harry wearing the medals to make it sound sympathetic and sad. It was his happiest time while in the Royal Family! 

*MEGHAN AND HARRY ALL DRESSED UP FOR NYC GALA*
*Meghan* and *Harry* got all gussied up Wednesday night to attend a splashy NYC event.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex put on their best duds for the "Salute to Freedom" gala that went down at the Intrepid Museum.

It's a duel event ... honoring the military the day before Veterans Day and Britain's Armistice Day.

Meghan definitely made a statement with her red *Carolina Herrera* dress and some pretty bold stilettos. They were definitely head-turners.

It's interesting ... Harry wore his military star -- it's called KCVO ... Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order. Harry has disavowed his royal status, but his military service is a whole different thing. He was happiest during his time in the Royal Family when he served in Afghanistan.

Meghan *drew fire recently* for lobbying members of the United States Senate on the Paid Family Leave provision of the Build Back Better legislation using her title, Duchess of Sussex, as a calling card.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Dress Up for NYC Gala
					

Meghan and Harry got all gussied up Wednesday night to attend a splashy NYC event.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Raging narcissist that she is, the dress was fully intended to make her the center of attention, not the veterans being recognized.


This. It is not a movie premiere, although I'm sure she wishes it was. Meghan, Duchess of Noclass strikes again. And remember, Kate wore  a simple but elegant 10 year old gown to her husband's function.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Her boobs look like the parting of the Red Sea.


Here is a twitter post on the subject. It seems to have first hand information retrieved from a certain diary.









						Meghan Markle's 'secret diary' laid bare - Prince Harry's wife-to-be talks 'magical boobs', Hollywood hustle and being REJECTED
					

MEGHAN Markle has been revealed as the author of a racy secret diary detailing the struggles of a hustling Hollywood actress – revealing she has “magical boobs” and talking a LOT …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I'd like to say it's just the lighting, but she really does look roasted. Can see the tan lines clearly in this shot.
> 
> Is that a new nose? Thought it looked different in her birthday vid which already sported a new nose. This is newer nose?


It looks like her old nose. Maybe she has a collection and selects one for special occasions? Like selecting the appropriate tiara. 

Or, like Pinocchio it’s growing out of control with all her lies being confirmed.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009


Carolina Herrera must really hate her.


----------



## Aimee3

xincinsin said:


> I'd like to say it's just the lighting, but she really does look roasted. Can see the tan lines clearly in this shot.
> 
> Is that a new nose? Thought it looked different in her birthday vid which already sported a new nose. This is newer nose?


Well, when her Pinocchio nose keeps on growing since she keeps lying, she has to continually “fix and shorten” it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That woman is priceless. She really thinks we're all idiots, does she.



Also, German headlines are less than flattering.


----------



## Icyjade

charlottawill said:


> Carolina Herrera must really hate her.



Yeah, while magazines are gushing over how “amazing” she looks, I don’t think normal people are buying that story at all. She looks awful. It’s such an unflattering dress and hair combination.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did seriously a mod come here and pieced together several postings of mine into one big one? I'm not sure if I admire that kind of dedication or think it's a bit OTT


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Newspapers barrister just called PH, MM and Scobie out on their lies.  They all denied collaborating on finding freedom book.  The barrister is just reading out emails where they admit co-operating / collaborating with Scoobie.  Multiple conversations, text messages and emails.  Said *MM disclosed personal information of Samantha to authors of the book*… and noted the hypocrisy in disclosing another persons personal information to the authors.




Just when you think she couldn't be a sh*ttier of a person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> what this information does do is make me feel a LOT more sympathy for dad Markle  as it would suggest the royal PR team were looking to cast him as the bad guy from very early days. I do wonder whether that  family were always meant to be set up to be the villains and that’s why they weren’t invited to tackyfest at St. George’s.



Why would the BRF want any scandal adhered to themselves though, even just unruly in-laws? That's where I struggle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> DM win or lose, the material is hot!




Sure, they wanted the attacks of a nobody to be stopped because it damaged them oh so much but can't be bothered to shut up Markle and her spineless puppet which do damage them if only because simply nobody understands why they let them run havoc.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> This. It is not a movie premiere, although I'm sure she wishes it was. Meghan, Duchess of Noclass strikes again. And remember, Kate wore  a simple but elegant 10 year old gown to her husband's function.



Duchess of Noclass.  Love it  Describes her to a ‘T’.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that Mr. and Mrs. Bandwagon are professional victim…
> 
> *Meghan Markle Reveals Pressure Royals Placed on Prince Harry Over Her Father's Attacks*
> BY JACK ROYSTON ON 11/10/21 AT 9:52 AM EST
> _*Meghan Markle says senior royals were putting pressure on Prince Harry and expressed a desire for her father's attacks to be stopped.*
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex told a London court she got a phone call from a mystery royal about an interview Thomas Markle gave to The Mail on Sunday.
> 
> *In a bombshell 20-page witness statement Meghan suggested the family only became concerned when he turned his guns from her to the wider Monarchy.*
> 
> The extraordinary claims have echoes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Oprah Winfrey interview, when they started a public guessing game about the identity of a mystery racist royal.
> 
> Meghan told the Court of Appeal: *"I had privately endured the media onslaught surrounding my father with the support of my husband and [Jason Knauf], in his capacity of our Communications Secretary.
> 
> "But it was only when my father began criticizing the Royal Family (including in a long interview published by [The Mail on Sunday] on 28 July 2018) that senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks, and expressed their desire to have them stopped.*
> 
> "*I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them.*
> 
> "It is correct that (as I said in my texts to Mr Knauf) the situation was putting significant pressure on my husband (both externally and by his family), and I felt strongly that I needed to do something about it.
> 
> "I felt that, even if my attempt to stop my father talking to the media failed, at least my husband would be able to say to his family that I had done everything I could to stop it."
> 
> Meghan described how she and Prince Harry went to stay with an unnamed senior royal in the first week of August, 2018, when she got a phone call from another family member.
> 
> The duchess said in her statement, seen by Newsweek: "While my husband and I were sitting with Senior Member B, I was told that Senior Member A was on the telephone and wished to speak to me.
> 
> "The telephone was passed to me and we had a discussion about the situation in the presence of Senior Member B and my husband.
> 
> "*Once the call ended, we continued discussions with Senior Member B, and it was only after these discussions, and in accordance with the advice that I received from the two senior family members, I decided, that I would write a letter to my father.*"
> 
> *The witness statement describes how royals and palace aides wanted Meghan to sit down face-to-face with her father to talk things through but she feared the paparazzi were camped outside his home.*
> 
> Phone calls and emails were also ruled out because she said they suspected he was no longer in control of his accounts and devices.
> 
> Meghan said: *"It had been suggested by the Duke of Cambridge's Private Secretary (at the time), and senior members of the family that I personally arrange to fly out to see my father and speak with him in person.*
> 
> 
> "It seemed to me, however, that, even had I wanted to, it was completely unrealistic to think that I could fly discreetly to Mexico, arrive unannounced on his doorstep (as I had no secure means of communication with my father), to a location and residence I had never visited or known, in a small border town that had been descended upon by the press, and somehow hope to speak privately to my father without causing a frenzy of media attention and intrusion that could bring yet more embarrassment to the Royal Family."
> 
> Meghan then wrote her father a now famous letter in which she begged him to stop talking to the media in August 2018, a few months after her wedding to Prince Harry.
> 
> A month earlier, Thomas Markle said he believed his daughter would soon have a baby who he would be denied a chance to meet in the critical Mail on Sunday interview that Meghan referenced.
> 
> On July 28, 2018, he said: "How tragic is that, to deprive a child of its grandfather because I said a few things critical of the Royal Family?
> 
> "They're just like a Monty Python sketch. Say a few critical words about the Royal Family and they put their fingers in their ears, cover their eyes and pull the blinds down. They don't want to know about it."
> 
> He added: "I tell you, I've just about reached my limit with Meghan and the Royal Family. They want me to be silent, they want me to just go away. But I won't be silenced."
> 
> Meghan then sent her letter the following month after her discussions with senior royals, she said.
> 
> Meghan's lengthy account to the court case came in response to Knauf revealing private messages Meghan and Harry sent him.
> 
> *They showed Meghan was aware her five page handwritten note might be leaked to the media and felt the truth would have come out if it was.*
> 
> In August 2018, *Meghan messaged Knauf: "Obviously everything I've drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked so I have been meticulous in my word choice but please do let me know if anything stands out to you as a liability."*
> 
> She added: *"Honestly Jason, I feel fantastic, cathartic and real and honest and factual.
> "If he leaks it then that's on his conscience but at least the world will know the truth, words I could never voice publicly*."
> 
> *Her father initially kept the letter, written in expert calligraphy, private but in February 2019 five of her friends gave anonymous interviews to People in which they criticised him and mentioned the note.*
> 
> Meghan sued at the High Court in London for breach of privacy and copyright and won a resounding victory in February, which the newspaper is attempting to overturn.
> 
> The duchess said in her statement: "To be clear, I did not want any of it [the letter] to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimized, were it to be exploited."
> 
> Knauf said in a statement seen by Newsweek: "As part of a series of messages on 24 August 2018 she explained that she had given careful thought to how to prevent the letter being leaked in part or in a misleading way.
> 
> Markle Sr then passed it to The Mail on Sunday who published extensive extracts alongside quotes from a handwriting expert who described the duchess as a showman and narcissist.
> 
> "*She explained to me by text that she had numbered the pages at the top to indicate the length of the letter.
> 
> "She also deliberately ended each page part way through a sentence so that no page could be falsely presented as the end of the letter.
> 
> "In the event that it was leaked she wanted the full narrative as set out in the letter to be understood and shared."*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Reveals Pressure Royals Placed on Harry Over Her Father's Attacks
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says senior royals became concerned about father Thomas Markle's attacks and "expressed their desire to have them stopped."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


she's really good at the blame game


----------



## bag-mania

I feel bad for the Intrepid Museum. They spent months of time and who knows how much money to put on a red carpet affair. Was there any news reported about the event that wasn't about Meghan and Harry?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




She looks tragic. 

Also, I've caught up enough to say that these two lowlives make me physically ill. I shall return to another season of Call the Midwife for now. OMG.


----------



## Suncatcher

That red dress looks horrific on her (so ill fitting and too voluminous on her body, gapes in the chest area at the same time parted too widely, and the bottom half is just a hot mess) and not an appropriate look for a veterans ball. Frankly I’m not even sure where one might wear that dress. It over the top meets hideous, with a bit of real housewives of Beverly Hills. I’m surprised she can even feel comfortable in that dress. There is a look that works for every body type and this is not it. Either her stylist is trying to sabotage her or she doesn’t have one to work with.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> This. It is not a movie premiere, although I'm sure she wishes it was. Meghan, *Duchess of Noclass* strikes again. And remember, Kate wore  a simple but elegant 10 year old gown to her husband's function.


Thanks @charlottawill for your #4 nickname, Duchess of Noclass, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I feel bad for the Intrepid Museum. They spent months of time and who knows how much money to put on a red carpet affair. Was there any news reported about the event that wasn't about Meghan and Harry?



From the day they announced Hazz as their choice, the museum received enormous criticism and plenty of calls to change it.  They plunged ahead. They boasted they are a private organization, can do what they want, blah blah.   So they allowed H&M to bring their own film crew?????  No, the museum brought this on themselves. My sympathy to the soldiers who were overshadowed by 2 jerks, definitely not to this museum.  The more we learn about H&M‘s tactics, whoever supports them is banned from my support.


----------



## muddledmint

Suncatcher said:


> That red dress looks horrific on her (so ill fitting and too voluminous on her body, gapes in the chest area at the same time parted too widely, and the bottom half is just a hot mess) and not an appropriate look for a veterans ball. Frankly I’m not even sure where one might wear that dress. It over the top meets hideous, with a bit of real housewives of Beverly Hills. I’m surprised she can even feel comfortable in that dress. There is a look that works for every body type and this is not it. Either her stylist is trying to sabotage her or she doesn’t have one to work with.


Yes! It does gape and sag and do no favors for her chest. But at the same time, it is so tight that her upper back fat is bulging over the top of the bodice! It’s amazingly unflattering. I can just imagine her entourage tittering behind her back. All her people must be frenemies. Or she picked this out all on her own and is completely delusional.


----------



## Aimee3

That dress looked like an ill fitting bathing suit with a big voluminous skirt over it.  The hairstyle looked like something from the early 1960’s…horrific.  Too stiff etc.  But what got me the most was that big self satisfied stupid grin plastered on her face.  She’s her own biggest fan.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the day they announced Hazz as their choice, the museum received enormous criticism and plenty of calls to change it.  They plunged ahead. They boasted they are a private organization, can do what they want, blah blah.   So they allowed H&M to bring their own film crew?????  No, the museum brought this on themselves. My sympathy to the soldiers who were overshadowed by 2 jerks, definitely not to this museum.  The more we learn about H&M‘s tactics, whoever supports them is banned from my support.



As usual for me, I blame the press.  They are the ones who determine what is important enough to them to report.

Jon Bon Jovi and iHeartMedia's chairman Bob Pittman were actually RECEIVING awards for what they have done for veterans and service members over the years. I had to really search to find the story below about them, but it is from yesterday morning before the event. Harry was only there to present an award and we have no idea who the service member was who received it.  Seriously, is Bon Jovi so old hat these days that he isn't worthy of even a mention by the media?









						Intrepid Museum Gala Honors Jon Bon Jovi, iHeartMedia Chief Bob Pittman for Service to Veterans
					

Military veterans are often honored for their service and remembered on traditional holidays: Memorial Day, Pearl Harbor Day and Veterans Day. But throughout the year, the Intrepid Sea, Air & S…




					variety.com


----------



## LittleStar88

Only a certain body type can pull off that dress, and she doesn’t have it. Seems she has no clue as to what styles to avoid or how to dress her maturing and changed body (her briefcase girl figure is long gone).

These two are a steamy hot mess. How can she turn up all smiles after being outed as a big fat liar? I’d be so embarrassed. She must be some kind of sociopath.

While part of me wishes these two would just go away, it’s also great to watch them behave like the two fools they’re proving themselves to be.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Only a certain body type can pull off that dress, and she doesn’t have it. Seems she has no clue as to what styles to avoid or how to dress her maturing and changed body (her briefcase girl figure is long gone).
> 
> These two are a steamy hot mess. How can she turn up all smiles after being outed as a big fat liar? I’d be so embarrassed. *She must be some kind of sociopath.*
> 
> While part of me wishes these two would just go away, it’s also great to watch them behave like the two fools they’re proving themselves to be.



I think she happily dresses in whatever a designer is willing to give her. Hell, maybe the designers PAY her to wear their clothes. Nothing would surprise me.

She is a narcissist. Anything bad that happens is always blamed on others. Nothing will ever be her fault and she will never do any soul-searching.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977


I finally remembered what she reminds me of: a football player, but mostly a sumo wrestler with his oops her agent/manager, however she isn't heavy enough in the chest area to pull it off, but the hair is absolutely perfect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @charlottawill for your #4 nickname, Duchess of Noclass, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


I am honored


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Find the poppy — egad:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5246977


Where did her boobs go? She looked much fuller in the bust when they were last in NY. Maybe she really was still breastfeeding then?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "I bet she thinks this is her  “Revenge Dress “


Maybe Carolina Herrera's revenge on her. Inquiring mind that I am, I looked at CH's current offerings on Neiman Marcus, Saks, Bergdorf and her website. There is nothing like this on any of them. Could it be a past season bargain that Megs picked up a few seasons back? If so, it's obvious why it was on sale. Or maybe it's a freebie that her pseudo-stylist begged from someone.


----------



## V0N1B2

Aimee3 said:


> But what got me the most was that big self satisfied stupid grin plastered on her face.  She’s her own biggest fan.


Preach.
It's like all the other big events she attends. Grinning like a loon, thinking all these people are really there to honour _her_. Delusional.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Maybe Carolina Herrera's revenge on her. Inquiring mind that I am, I looked at CH's current offerings on Neiman Marcus, Saks, Bergdorf and her website. There is nothing like this on any of them. Could it be a past season bargain that Megs picked up a few seasons back? If so, it's obvious why it was on sale. Or maybe it's a freebie that her pseudo-stylist begged from someone.



*Look radiant in red like Meghan in a dress by Carolina Herrera*



Carolina Herrera Pre-Fall 2022 gown
Shop the current collection at Farfetch
Buy now
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had a red carpet moment when they attended a Veterans' Day gala in New York on Wednesday.
It's been a while since we've seen Meghan so glammed up, and she certainly did not disappoint. She wore a gown designed by Carolina Herrera Creative Director Wes Gordon, which is from the forthcoming *Pre-Fall 2022 Collection*. One step ahead, as ever!
We love the plunging halter neckline, structured bodice and dramatic layered skirt on this gown, which Meghan teamed with Giuseppe Zanotti slingbacks in matching red, her favorite Birks earrings and a bracelet by Cartier.

The Pre-Fall collection should debut in December, but in the meantime, click through to add some Carolina Herrera to your wardrobe.
Or be a lady in red with the help of our carefully curated carousel. From Asos to vintage Carolina Herrera, you're bound to find a Meghan-inspired option to suit.











						Meghan stuns as she and Harry attend Veterans' Day gala in NYC
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in New York City last night, on the eve of Veterans' Day in the US and Armistice Day in the UK, to attend a gala for military personnel and their families and supporters.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Where did her boobs go? She looked much fuller in the bust when they were last in NY. Maybe she really was still breastfeeding then?


did she breast feed?  that seems like too much trouble and discomfort for a narcissist


----------



## elvisfan4life

Wholly inappropriate dress for the day no respect


----------



## CarryOn2020

The way he looks at her, hahahaha


----------



## bellecate

Such a nice slab of beef on that vegetarian/vegan’s plate.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> It's no surprise TMZ is promoting them. Of course they put Meghan first. They even found a way to spin Harry wearing the medals to make it sound sympathetic and sad. It was his happiest time while in the Royal Family!
> 
> *MEGHAN AND HARRY ALL DRESSED UP FOR NYC GALA*
> *Meghan* and *Harry* got all gussied up Wednesday night to attend a splashy NYC event.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex put on their best duds for the "Salute to Freedom" gala that went down at the Intrepid Museum.
> 
> It's a duel event ... honoring the military the day before Veterans Day and Britain's Armistice Day.
> 
> Meghan definitely made a statement with her red *Carolina Herrera* dress and some pretty bold stilettos. They were definitely head-turners.
> 
> It's interesting ... Harry wore his military star -- it's called KCVO ... Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order. Harry has disavowed his royal status, but his military service is a whole different thing. He was happiest during his time in the Royal Family when he served in Afghanistan.
> 
> Meghan *drew fire recently* for lobbying members of the United States Senate on the Paid Family Leave provision of the Build Back Better legislation using her title, Duchess of Sussex, as a calling card.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Dress Up for NYC Gala
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry got all gussied up Wednesday night to attend a splashy NYC event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Is it just me or does the idea that he was apparently happier gunning down afghanis than, say, going to film premiers or interacting with cute kids on school visits makes him sound like a total psycho? 

Also what’s with her plastering on the streaky fake tan?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> The way he looks at her, hahahaha



It doesn’t count because that’s probably just the heart of a disobedient journalist


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> Carolina Herrera must really hate her.



Exactly what I thought: CH must have said to herself "I'll make her the most hideous dress I have ever made!!!"


----------



## TC1

So tacky to bring a film crew to a Veteran's event. 
If there are so many emails from M & H to palace aides, why haven't either of these grifters leaked the ones where they beg for mental health assistance for Meghan and get denied repeatedly????


----------



## K.D.

Chanbal said:


> We can't miss the Aussies…



 The reporter they interviewed says tomorrow is the third and final day of the hearings and has excellent advice: get your popcorn ready everyone


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Is it just me or does the idea that *he was apparently happier gunning down afghanis than, say, going to film premiers or interacting with cute kids* on school visits makes him sound like a total psycho?
> 
> Also what’s with her plastering on the streaky fake tan?



TMZ has committed to supporting them as much as they can. Sometimes it’s hard to find the right shade of lipstick to put on that pig.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> did she breast feed?  that seems like too much trouble and discomfort for a narcissist


I'm betting she had implants in her suitcase days, her "cup runneth over" in some photos. At some point had them removed. Aged and like many women doesn't have what she used to, and what she does have, has slipped. None of this bodes well for selecting a dress that has enough open acreage in the middle of the bodice to accommodate a third boob.

Edited to add: IF she had any sense she would look to The Duchess of Cornwall, Sophie Wessex, let alone Princess Anne and, of course, most of all her sister-in-law for guidance in how to wear appropriate clothing. Of course that will never happen so we will continue to be entertained by her train wreck appearances.  And since they arrived with complete film crew, it will be available for future viewing. Can hardly wait to see an entire film of sequenced disasters. Actually I will probably never watch it, once is enough.


----------



## duna

For the first time ever I have checked the MM style thread, since I was too curious to see what people had to say about this latest "debacle": sure enough someone said she looks "absolutely gorgeous"  .....I guess it's true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder!!


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'd like to say it's just the lighting, but she really does look roasted. Can see the tan lines clearly in this shot.
> 
> Is that a new nose? Thought it looked different in her birthday vid which already sported a new nose. This is newer nose?


she still has the ski slope - like harry


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> For the first time ever I have checked the MM style thread, since I was too curious to see what people had to say about this latest "debacle": sure enough someone said she looks "absolutely gorgeous"  .....I guess it's true that beauty is in the eye of the beholder!!



In this case it would also be appropriate to say Love Fandom is Blind. She could wear a burlap sack and fans would gush over it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she still has the ski slope - like harry



Maybe they are starting to look like each other, like so many married couples.


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> enough open acreage in the middle of the bodice to accommodate a third boob.


(.)(.) boob math


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> (.)(.) boob math


and the dress puckers over her nipples


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would the BRF want any scandal adhered to themselves though, even just unruly in-laws? That's where I struggle.


Well, I think it was more reactive than proactive on the royals’ part. So it would have gone something like this I think;
1. H is in a whirlwind romance with  this z-lister he meets at his usual haunt for slightly dodgy characters.
2. the firm tries to dissuade him from the union and he kicks off big style. (They are also aware of the fact he’s not considered a  desirable match by aristos.)
3. _Possibly_ The firm gets intel on her and her  family being slightly shifty but they are locked in at this point and are determined to push the positives of ‘royal diversity’
3b. They launch a massive positive PR campaign pushing this wonderful new modern POC bride, I think it’s hard to underestimate how much they started to buy their own hype about this. 
4. Whether they get intel or not M drops the revelation her family ain’t invited to tackyfest but clooney is
5. This is obviously going raise questions at the character of M. It also makes the royals look bad t because it just makes them seem snooty.
6. Meghan bangs on about how ‘not paternal’ her father is and how wicked her siblings are. Whether the firm believed this I don’t know. I think then, at least, H probably bought it. This offers the BRF a convenient answer to their embarrassing wedding conundrum i.e. ‘saint meg, the great humanitarian and actress, is from a broken home so having a load of family at her wedding would be too painful for her’ and they go along with it.
7. the press get the memo the markles need to be tarred & feathered and they go along with it because let’s be honest jokes about Americans being stupid hicks write themselves for the average hack writer.
8. Everything is going swimmingly as most people then believed the saintly M over her greedy & envious seeming family. This finally changes when H&M decide they don’t like playing the game.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> and the dress puckers over her nipples



She's just being true to herself. Her signature style is ill-fitting.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm with that barrister. I just hope someone exposes the *lying liar* some more.



Queen calling Duchess out for what she is, and a Queen always trumps a (lying liar) Duchess 
@Maggie Muggins


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> she's really good at the blame game


You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> She is a narcissist. Anything bad that happens is always blamed on others. *Nothing will ever be her fault and she will never do any soul-searching.*



Because that would require a soul...


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> I'm betting she had implants in her suitcase days, her "cup runneth over" in some photos. At some point had them removed. Aged and like many women doesn't have what she used to, and what she does have, has slipped. None of this bodes well for selecting a dress that has enough *open acreage* in the middle of the bodice to accommodate a third boob.
> 
> Edited to add: IF she had any sense she would look to The Duchess of Cornwall, Sophie Wessex, let alone Princess Anne and, of course, most of all her sister-in-law for guidance in how to wear appropriate clothing. Of course that will never happen so we will continue to be entertained by her train wreck appearances.  And since they arrived with complete film crew, it will be available for future viewing. Can hardly wait to see an entire firm of sequenced disasters. Actually I will probably never watch it, once is enough.



Open acreage  

Enough room to screen a movie in between.

I’m secretly grateful for her continuous wardrobe faux pas. 

She claims to be vegan?


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I'm going to need some cliff notes on this court case.



Me too! 

And a map.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I feel bad for the Intrepid Museum. *They spent months of time and who knows how much money to put on a red carpet affair. Was there any news reported about the event that wasn't about Meghan and Harry?


I don't! Why would they invite the author of the "First Amendment is Bonkers"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

muddledmint said:


> Yes! It does gape and sag and do no favors for her chest. But at the same time, it is so tight that her upper back fat is bulging over the top of the bodice! It’s amazingly unflattering. I can just imagine her entourage tittering behind her back. All her people must be frenemies. Or she picked this out all on her own and is completely delusional.


Well as much as I suspect the staff might indulge in the odd bit of revenge I think this might be a case of ‘a pig in lipstick is still a pig’


bag-mania said:


> As usual for me, I blame the press.  They are the ones who determine what is important enough to them to report.
> 
> Jon Bon Jovi and iHeartMedia's chairman Bob Pittman were actually RECEIVING awards for what they have done for veterans and service members over the years. I had to really search to find the story below about them, but it is from yesterday morning before the event. Harry was only there to present an award and we have no idea who the service member was who received it.  Seriously, is Bon Jovi so old hat these days that he isn't worthy of even a mention by the media?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intrepid Museum Gala Honors Jon Bon Jovi, iHeartMedia Chief Bob Pittman for Service to Veterans
> 
> 
> Military veterans are often honored for their service and remembered on traditional holidays: Memorial Day, Pearl Harbor Day and Veterans Day. But throughout the year, the Intrepid Sea, Air & S…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com


He mustn’t be paying enough  

either that or he is happy enough in himself (and his talent and his enormous wealth and success and his contented life) to not need every thing he does to be sang from the hilltops.

But as @CarryOn2020 rightly said, this is why the couple are actually bad for PR because they attract a lot of attention to themselves & do not successfully convey any information about the event or cause itself.


CarryOn2020 said:


> *Look radiant in red like Meghan in a dress by Carolina Herrera*
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera Pre-Fall 2022 gown
> Shop the current collection at Farfetch
> Buy now
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had a red carpet moment when they attended a Veterans' Day gala in New York on Wednesday.
> It's been a while since we've seen Meghan so glammed up, and she certainly did not disappoint. She wore a gown designed by Carolina Herrera Creative Director Wes Gordon, which is from the forthcoming *Pre-Fall 2022 Collection*. One step ahead, as ever!
> We love the plunging halter neckline, structured bodice and dramatic layered skirt on this gown, which Meghan teamed with Giuseppe Zanotti slingbacks in matching red, her favorite Birks earrings and a bracelet by Cartier.
> 
> The Pre-Fall collection should debut in December, but in the meantime, click through to add some Carolina Herrera to your wardrobe.
> Or be a lady in red with the help of our carefully curated carousel. From Asos to vintage Carolina Herrera, you're bound to find a Meghan-inspired option to suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stuns as she and Harry attend Veterans' Day gala in NYC
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in New York City last night, on the eve of Veterans' Day in the US and Armistice Day in the UK, to attend a gala for military personnel and their families and supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


shouldn’t that be ‘look rabid in red?’


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> *She really is the JC Penney to any Halston.
> Is it Valentino again? They must be crying into their tulle.*



Immortal words


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m not sure she ever claimed to be vegan.  Wasn’t she “cooking a chicken” when H proposed?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Maybe Carolina Herrera's revenge on her. Inquiring mind that I am, I looked at CH's current offerings on Neiman Marcus, Saks, Bergdorf and her website. There is nothing like this on any of them. *Could it be a past season bargain that Megs picked up a few seasons back?* If so, it's obvious why it was on sale. Or maybe it's a freebie that her pseudo-stylist begged from someone.





CarryOn2020 said:


> *Carolina Herrera Pre-Fall 2022 gown*
> Shop the current collection at Farfetch
> Buy now
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had a red carpet moment when they attended a Veterans' Day gala in New York on Wednesday.
> It's been a while since we've seen Meghan so glammed up, and she certainly did not disappoint. She wore a gown designed by Carolina Herrera Creative Director Wes Gordon, which is from the forthcoming *Pre-Fall 2022 Collection*. One step ahead, as ever!
> We love the plunging halter neckline, structured bodice and dramatic layered skirt on this gown, which Meghan teamed with Giuseppe Zanotti slingbacks in matching red, her favorite Birks earrings and a bracelet by Cartier.
> 
> The Pre-Fall collection should debut in December, but in the meantime, click through to add some Carolina Herrera to your wardrobe.
> Or be a lady in red with the help of our carefully curated carousel. From Asos to vintage Carolina Herrera, you're bound to find a Meghan-inspired option to suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stuns as she and Harry attend Veterans' Day gala in NYC
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in New York City last night, on the eve of Veterans' Day in the US and Armistice Day in the UK, to attend a gala for military personnel and their families and supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Past season? For the duchess?


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


>





That's very crewel  - to Cruella


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> (.)(.) boob math


I narrowly avoided splattering the computer screen, did manage to dribble on the track pad, but grabbed some Kleenex in time. 

I REALLY must remember to not have a mouth full of beverages when reading/seeing clever, hilarious posts like yours. 

I am still LMAO! You made my day and I fear that image is now an imprint on my brain.


----------



## Yanca

Annawakes said:


> An awful awful dress.  Not appropriate for the occasion whatsoever.




She is thirsty for attention, treating the awards ceremony for the vereran as her own red carpet moment, taking the attention away from those who are receiving the awards, her dress is Over the top for the occasion, it was not the OScars, the Emmys or the MET gala, so different from Jon Bovi and and his wife, who were there and dressed classy and understated.


----------



## Yanca

bag-mania said:


> Gag! Not only is the press here deliberately pretending the court case isn’t happening, they are going way overboard to prop them up. Why are they fawning over these morons? Is it because they promote the issues they support so they get a free pass on everything else? Check out these headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5247105
> View attachment 5247106
> View attachment 5247107
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247114




THE Media here in the US is so Pro Meghain, probably because she is considered woke, that's fine if they want to feauture her but they should also be fair and report on the case where she apologized to the court for forgetting to disclose her involvement in the FF book.


----------



## bag-mania

That first line was Harry's attempt at humor. I think we can all be grateful we didn't have to sit through his speech. I hope he eventually got around to talking about the person(s) being honored.

*Harry jokes about his American Dream in speech to Salute to Freedom gala*
He told the audience at the Intrepid Museum: “*It’s wonderful to be back on USS Intrepid a decade after my last visit – and a lot has changed since then. Just last week, I went for a ride on the Oscar Mayer Wienermobile – how’s that for living the American dream.*

“I’ve lived in the US for close to two years now. I have to say, witnessing your support for all those that put themselves in harm’s way in defence of our freedoms and liberties – it’s remarkable and hugely respected.

“It reminds me of the deep reverence us Brits have for our military as well. The armed forces communities in both our countries share a special bond, and I’m grateful to have served in support of our joint allyship for many years.”

Harry served in the military for a decade and had two tours of Afghanistan, and has organised the Invictus Games for wounded and injured service members and veterans since 2014.

He added: “As we honour and reflect on Remembrance Day in the UK, which shares a date tomorrow with Veterans Day here in the US, my hope is for all of us to continue to support the wellbeing, and recognise the value of, our troops, veterans, and the entire military and service family. We and they are better for it.

“I served 10 years in the military, including two tours of duty in Afghanistan – one as an FAC (Forward Air Controller) on the ground and in the dust with some of you, another as an Apache helicopter pilot in the air supporting and talking with you.

“Nothing was more valuable than the time I got to spend with my soldiers in a shell scrape, eating an MRE (Meal, Ready-to-Eat) in the back of a tank, thanks for the swaps, flying a mission overhead knowing those below were safer, or making each other laugh when it was needed the most.

“My experience in the military made me who I am today, and I will always be grateful for the people I got to serve with – wherever in the world we were.”









						Harry jokes about his American Dream in speech to Salute to Freedom gala
					

The duke presented Intrepid Valor Awards to five service members, veterans and military families.




					www.grampianonline.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Yanca said:


> THE Media here in the US is so Pro Meghain, probably because she is considered woke, that's fine if they want to feauture her *but they should also be fair *and report on the case where she apologized to the court for forgetting to disclose her involvement in the FF book.



Unfortunately for us, there is nothing fair about the media.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Parts of Mrs. Bandwagon's statement have already been shown in several posts, but this masterpiece belongs here imo. It shows her lawyers' attempts to use Knauf's letter to support their case. So many lies…
> 
> *'I did not want any of it to be published': Meghan Markle denies writing a letter to Thomas Markle with the intention of it being made public - but admits it was a possibility her words would be shared*
> 
> *Meghan Markle denied thinking Thomas Markle would leak her letter but said she prepared for the possibility*
> *She said she sent the letter because she wanted 'public attacks' that 'put pressure' on the Royal family to stop*
> *Meghan apologised to Court of Appeal for failing to disclose emails with communications aide Jason Knauf*
> *The Duchess of Sussex insisted she couldn't remember the emails - or find them during her own searches*
> 
> Meghan Markle has denied wanting a letter she wrote for her father to be leaked - but admitted it was a possibility her words would be shared.
> 
> In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, published today, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility. She said: 'To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published'.
> 
> *She said she sent the letter because she wanted 'public attacks' to stop because they were 'putting pressure' on her husband and the Royal family. *
> 
> In her statement she wrote: *'Senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks, and expressed their desire to have them stopped. I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them.*
> 
> 'It is correct that (as I said in my texts to Mr Knauf) the situation was putting significant pressure on my husband (both externally and by his family), and I felt strongly that I needed to do something about it.
> 
> 'I felt that, even if my attempt to stop my father talking to the media failed, at least my husband would be able to say to his family that I had done everything I could to stop it'.
> 
> During the privacy trial with the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline, Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to disclose discussions helping Jason Knauf to brief the authors of Finding Freedom.
> 
> *In her latest witness statement, published today, the Duchess of Sussex insisted she couldn't remember the emails - or find them during her own searches.
> 
> The signed document also claims Mr Knauf's emails actually help her case.
> 
> She wrote: 'I did not have the benefit of seeing these emails and I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.
> 
> 'I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court. In fact, had I been aware of these exchanges at the time of serving the Re-Amended Reply, I would have been more than happy to refer to them as I feel they strongly support my case.' *
> 
> She added: 'Not only do I refer to the background information shared with Mr Knauf as “reminders”, as much of it was information that he had already requested of me dating back to 2016 when he had asked me for a timeline relating to my family to enable him to engage with the media on enquiries, it is also a far cry from the very detailed personal information that the Defendant alleges that I wanted or permitted to put into the public domain.'
> 
> In her written statement the Duchess of Sussex also insisted she did not think her estranged father would leak a handwritten letter from her 'because it would not put him in a good light'.
> 
> In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility.
> 
> She said: 'While we had to recognize that anything was possible in the extraordinary circumstances in which we were living and therefore the need to mitigate against the risks of disclosure of the letter's contents, I did not think that my father would sell or leak the letter, primarily because it would not put him in a good light.'
> 
> She later added: 'I had not heard from him since the week leading up to our wedding, but it seemed incredibly unlikely that he would disclose the contents because they contained unpalatable truths and would thereby negate the falsehoods the media had attributed to him.
> 
> 'The main purpose of the letter was to encourage my father to stop talking to the press.
> 
> 'To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimised, were it to be exploited.'
> 
> In her written statement the Duchess of Sussex also insisted she did not think her estranged father would leak a handwritten letter from her 'because it would not put him in a good light'.
> 
> In her written evidence to the Court of Appeal, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility.
> 
> She said: 'While we had to recognize that anything was possible in the extraordinary circumstances in which we were living and therefore the need to mitigate against the risks of disclosure of the letter's contents, I did not think that my father would sell or leak the letter, primarily because it would not put him in a good light.'
> 
> She later added: 'I had not heard from him since the week leading up to our wedding, but it seemed incredibly unlikely that he would disclose the contents because they contained unpalatable truths and would thereby negate the falsehoods the media had attributed to him.
> 
> 'The main purpose of the letter was to encourage my father to stop talking to the press.
> 
> 'To be clear, I did not want any of it to be published, and wanted to ensure that the risk of it being manipulated or misleadingly edited was minimised, were it to be exploited.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle denies she knew letter to  her father would be published
> 
> 
> In her written evidence to the British Court of Appeal, published today, Meghan denied she thought it likely that Thomas Markle would leak the document, but had prepared for the possibility.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She could of called - like any other person in the entire world. 

Her whole_ schtick_ is that she needs to create history - her life by PR

Unfortunately, history can't keep up with her - she's told so many lies by design, by default and by herself, no one even takes any notice of what she says/said anymore. Not even Harry.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Look radiant in red like Meghan in a dress by Carolina Herrera*
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera Pre-Fall 2022 gown
> Shop the current collection at Farfetch
> Buy now
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had a red carpet moment when they attended a Veterans' Day gala in New York on Wednesday.
> It's been a while since we've seen Meghan so glammed up, and she certainly did not disappoint. She wore a gown designed by Carolina Herrera Creative Director Wes Gordon, which is from the forthcoming *Pre-Fall 2022 Collection*. One step ahead, as ever!
> We love the plunging halter neckline, structured bodice and dramatic layered skirt on this gown, which Meghan teamed with Giuseppe Zanotti slingbacks in matching red, her favorite Birks earrings and a bracelet by Cartier.
> 
> The Pre-Fall collection should debut in December, but in the meantime, click through to add some Carolina Herrera to your wardrobe.
> Or be a lady in red with the help of our carefully curated carousel. From Asos to vintage Carolina Herrera, you're bound to find a Meghan-inspired option to suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stuns as she and Harry attend Veterans' Day gala in NYC
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in New York City last night, on the eve of Veterans' Day in the US and Armistice Day in the UK, to attend a gala for military personnel and their families and supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Pass


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is one of the answers Angela Levin got for pointing out Raptor lied in court.

She could murder her baby to use her blood as a fountain of youth and they'd find a way to deflect and minimize the offense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Queen calling Duchess out for what she is, and a Queen always trumps a (lying liar) Duchess
> @Maggie Muggins



Has the Queen said anything?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.




Someone please shut her up. It is starting to get truly offensive.

ETA: there is no scientific proof whatsoever that stress causes miscarriages. If that miscarriage ever took place (and I'll believe it when hell freezes over or someone produces the medical records) it was probably her geriatric eggs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> That first line was Harry's attempt at humor. I think we can all be grateful we didn't have to sit through his speech. I hope he eventually got around to talking about the person(s) being honored.
> 
> *Harry jokes about his American Dream in speech to Salute to Freedom gala*
> He told the audience at the Intrepid Museum: “*It’s wonderful to be back on USS Intrepid a decade after my last visit – and a lot has changed since then. Just last week, I went for a ride on the Oscar Mayer Wienermobile – how’s that for living the American dream.*
> 
> “I’ve lived in the US for close to two years now. I have to say, witnessing your support for all those that put themselves in harm’s way in defence of our freedoms and liberties – it’s remarkable and hugely respected.
> 
> “It reminds me of the deep reverence us Brits have for our military as well. The armed forces communities in both our countries share a special bond, and I’m grateful to have served in support of our joint allyship for many years.”
> 
> Harry served in the military for a decade and had two tours of Afghanistan, and has organised the Invictus Games for wounded and injured service members and veterans since 2014.
> 
> He added: “As we honour and reflect on Remembrance Day in the UK, which shares a date tomorrow with Veterans Day here in the US, my hope is for all of us to continue to support the wellbeing, and recognise the value of, our troops, veterans, and the entire military and service family. We and they are better for it.
> 
> “I served 10 years in the military, including two tours of duty in Afghanistan – one as an FAC (Forward Air Controller) on the ground and in the dust with some of you, another as an Apache helicopter pilot in the air supporting and talking with you.
> 
> “Nothing was more valuable than the time I got to spend with my soldiers in a shell scrape, eating an MRE (Meal, Ready-to-Eat) in the back of a tank, thanks for the swaps, flying a mission overhead knowing those below were safer, or making each other laugh when it was needed the most.
> 
> “My experience in the military made me who I am today, and I will always be grateful for the people I got to serve with – wherever in the world we were.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry jokes about his American Dream in speech to Salute to Freedom gala
> 
> 
> The duke presented Intrepid Valor Awards to five service members, veterans and military families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.grampianonline.co.uk


Hmph. Doesn't sound like Harry to me. Nothing about his dead mother?


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.




Right, and Harry had pregnant brain by proxy and couldn’t be like “babe, remember when we went over every word we wrote to Jason for Omid, and when you strategized every word you wrote to dear daddy? Right, right, you don’t call him daddy, that’s only for the gullible public’s heartstrings. But remember that time?”


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.




I am now blowing into a paper bag - she can't act to save her life, but she's the biggest darn drama-queen Duchess that never entered RuPaul's Drag Race


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I am now blowing into a paper bag - she can't act to save her life, but she's the biggest darn drama-queen Duchess that never entered RuPaul's Drag Race



It is almost a year since she wrote her miscarriage story for the NYT (which I still believe was an IVF that didn't take). I wonder what she's working on to release for Thanksgiving this year.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Has the Queen said anything?



 You are the queen - @QueenofWrapDress


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I am now blowing into a paper bag - she can't act to save her life, but she's the biggest darn drama-queen Duchess that never entered RuPaul's Drag Race



See, I actually do think she's one of the worst actresses there is (having ended up zapping into one of her early Disney channel movies and sarificing 15 mins of my life I won't get back), but maybe we are all wronging her. She acted well enough long enough to get that freaking ring on her finger.


----------



## csshopper

Did Hazz just throw shade on his wife?

*"My experience in the military made me who I am today,"*

I thought, as expressed in the infamous O interview, it was Methane. Neither of them can keep their stories sorted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It is almost a year since she wrote her miscarriage story for the NYT (which I still believe was an IVF that didn't take). I wonder what she's working on to release for Thanksgiving this year.



I am slightly scared.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.



Jesus Christ,  that’s so sick, lying about her own baby’s life. Is nothing sacred? 

Oh wait, she’s the one who sued the daily Mail so didn’t she bring this problem onto herself in the first place?

also I’m no doctor, but I don’t think being somewhat inconvenienced causes miscarriages or else anyone who has a remotely difficult or stressful job, (e.g. doctors, police, social workers, teachers etc etc) would be unable to have Children.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Such a nice slab of beef on that vegetarian/vegan’s plate.


This has been clarified.


----------



## Lenna.V

Luvbolide said:


> And do, Megsie, please, top the whole mess off with tan lines!  She needs a friend who will tell her honestly…that mountain of silk needs to go.



I'm afraid honesty is not her type of friends hahaha


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> Did Hazz just throw shade on his wife?
> 
> *"My experience in the military made me who I am today,"*
> 
> I thought, as expressed in the infamous O interview, it was Methane. Neither of them can keep their stories sorted.


Another bulletproof argument in the pacifist’s Arsenal right there  


bag-mania said:


> That first line was Harry's attempt at humor. I think we can all be grateful we didn't have to sit through his speech. I hope he eventually got around to talking about the person(s) being honored.
> 
> *Harry jokes about his American Dream in speech to Salute to Freedom gala*
> He told the audience at the Intrepid Museum: “*It’s wonderful to be back on USS Intrepid a decade after my last visit – and a lot has changed since then. Just last week, I went for a ride on the Oscar Mayer Wienermobile – how’s that for living the American dream.*
> 
> “I’ve lived in the US for close to two years now. I have to say, witnessing your support for all those that put themselves in harm’s way in defence of our freedoms and liberties – it’s remarkable and hugely respected.
> 
> “It reminds me of the deep reverence us Brits have for our military as well. The armed forces communities in both our countries share a special bond, and I’m grateful to have served in support of our joint allyship for many years.”
> 
> Harry served in the military for a decade and had two tours of Afghanistan, and has organised the Invictus Games for wounded and injured service members and veterans since 2014.
> 
> He added: “As we honour and reflect on Remembrance Day in the UK, which shares a date tomorrow with Veterans Day here in the US, my hope is for all of us to continue to support the wellbeing, and recognise the value of, our troops, veterans, and the entire military and service family. We and they are better for it.
> 
> “I served 10 years in the military, including two tours of duty in Afghanistan – one as an FAC (Forward Air Controller) on the ground and in the dust with some of you, another as an Apache helicopter pilot in the air supporting and talking with you.
> 
> “Nothing was more valuable than the time I got to spend with my soldiers in a shell scrape, eating an MRE (Meal, Ready-to-Eat) in the back of a tank, thanks for the swaps, flying a mission overhead knowing those below were safer, or making each other laugh when it was needed the most.
> 
> “My experience in the military made me who I am today, and I will always be grateful for the people I got to serve with – wherever in the world we were.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry jokes about his American Dream in speech to Salute to Freedom gala
> 
> 
> The duke presented Intrepid Valor Awards to five service members, veterans and military families.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.grampianonline.co.uk


isn’t he always riding in a wienermobile?

The fact that this man has an incredibly large PR team behind him is staggering….


QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is one of the answers Angela Levin got for pointing out Raptor lied in court.
> 
> She could murder her baby to use her blood as a fountain of youth and they'd find a way to deflect and minimize the offense.



I wanna know more about these intrepid undercover crocheters creating headlines on YouTube in between making bonnets. Is Lady C in this secret crafting and espionage society? Or River?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Look radiant in red like Meghan in a dress by Carolina Herrera*
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera Pre-Fall 2022 gown
> Shop the current collection at Farfetch
> Buy now
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had a red carpet moment when they attended a Veterans' Day gala in New York on Wednesday.
> It's been a while since we've seen Meghan so glammed up, and she certainly did not disappoint. She wore a gown designed by Carolina Herrera Creative Director Wes Gordon, which is from the forthcoming *Pre-Fall 2022 Collection*. One step ahead, as ever!
> We love the plunging halter neckline, structured bodice and dramatic layered skirt on this gown, which Meghan teamed with Giuseppe Zanotti slingbacks in matching red, her favorite Birks earrings and a bracelet by Cartier.
> 
> The Pre-Fall collection should debut in December, but in the meantime, click through to add some Carolina Herrera to your wardrobe.
> Or be a lady in red with the help of our carefully curated carousel. From Asos to vintage Carolina Herrera, you're bound to find a Meghan-inspired option to suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan stuns as she and Harry attend Veterans' Day gala in NYC
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in New York City last night, on the eve of Veterans' Day in the US and Armistice Day in the UK, to attend a gala for military personnel and their families and supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's funny, I thought afterward to check FarFetch. The model in that sketch resembles Herrera model Karlie Kloss, who is 6'2". I'm sure it would look much better on her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am slightly confused how she looked considerably slimmed down in that TV interview, but is about the same size as during the earlier NY trip in that red abomination.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This might be interesting.


----------



## charlottawill

I'm here for the entertainment



Sorry for double posting


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. (fixed link)


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Only a certain body type can pull off that dress, and she doesn’t have it. Seems she has no clue as to what styles to avoid or how to dress her maturing and changed body (her briefcase girl figure is long gone).
> 
> These two are a steamy hot mess. How can she turn up all smiles after being outed as a big fat liar? I’d be so embarrassed. She must be some kind of sociopath.
> 
> While part of me wishes these two would just go away, it’s also great to watch them behave like the two fools they’re proving themselves to be.


I'm here for the entertainment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This might be interesting.




To be honest, I could die happy if I never had to hear from any of them again. Not Thomas, not Samantha, not Raptor.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> I narrowly avoided splattering the computer screen, did manage to dribble on the track pad, but grabbed some Kleenex in time.
> 
> I REALLY must remember to not have a mouth full of beverages when reading/seeing clever, hilarious posts like yours.
> 
> I am still LMAO! You made my day and I fear that image is now an imprint on my brain.


You made my day!!! We keep each other going.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I'm here for the entertainment
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for double posting



Aren't we all?


----------



## Debbini

xincinsin said:


> I'd like to say it's just the lighting, but she really does look roasted. Can see the tan lines clearly in this shot.
> 
> Is that a new nose? Thought it looked different in her birthday vid which already sported a new nose. This is newer nose?


If that's a new nose I'd demand a refund!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> did she breast feed?  that seems like too much trouble and discomfort for a narcissist


Agreed, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that she was.


----------



## papertiger

*Meghan’s half-sister accuses Duchess of false briefings*

Victoria Ward
Thu, 11 November 2021, 7:11 pm






Samantha Markle, the Duchess of Sussex's half-sister - Fox
On Thursday, the Duchess of Sussex’s half-sister accused her of falsely briefing that she had lost custody of her three children.
Samantha Markle, from whom the Duchess has been estranged for several years, hit back at the “PR smears” and attacked the “grandiose” image she had created of herself.
It emerged on Wednesday that the Duchess had authorised a senior aide to speak to the authors of a biography about her family.
She apologised to the Court of Appeal after a series of emails were disclosed which appeared to contradict her previous claim that she had not collaborated with Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, co-authors of Finding Freedom.

Amid the notes she sent to Jason Knauf, her former communications secretary, were several details about Miss Markle and her half-brother Thomas Markle Jr, as the Duchess sought to distance herself from her biological family.
She urged Mr Knauf to disclose that her siblings had “dropped out of high school” and that she had “never had a relationship with either of them,” or even known their birthdays or middle names.
Of Samantha, she said: “She had lost custody of all three of her three children from different fathers.”
Miss Markle said the use of Finding Freedom to “take pot shots” was “hurtful and revealing”.
She told The Telegraph: “To see Jason Knauf’s evidence was shocking. I never lost custody of my kids... no court record on the planet would confirm that.
“To take personal matters and then spin them in an ugly way to discredit me is pretty tacky.
“Everyone, even Trevor (Engelson, the Duchess’s first husband), who has been good to her – she has a disgusting way of disposing, stepping on and then silencing.
“The public will form an appropriate opinion of her based on her own actions. People do not like to be lied to and manipulated.
“She’s going to have to live with that. She’s so grandiose, she self sabotaged.”
Miss Markle claimed that the Duchess had constructed an image of herself in order to fit in with the Royal family and that she had distanced herself from her father and siblings in order to maintain the facade.
She said that she and her father, Thomas Markle, who has also been shut out by the Duchess, had wanted to give the Duchess “the benefit of the doubt” but were now having to come to terms with the fact that she had actively briefed against them.
In her emails to Mr Knauf, the Duchess said she had supported her father “in spite of his reclusiveness” but that media pressure had “crumbled him”.
She added: “Despite countless efforts to support him through the past two years, they now no longer have a relationship.”




The Duchess, as a baby, is held by her half brother, Tom Markle, in a family photo taken in Los Angeles in 1982 - Coleman-Rayner
Miss Markle, who has written a book about her frosty relationship with her sister called The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part I, said a part of her could not believe that the Duchess had been “the driving force” behind the biography all along.
“To see her nonchalantly say that she wants to see this added and that added, like items on a lunch menu was astonishing,” she said.
“She’s got an appetite for her own sense of empowerment by doing damage to others.
“My father didn’t want to believe that this smear campaign was all against him, designed to take away his credibility.
“We are victims of a narcissist and narcissists are manipulators who are into domination and control. We are both coming to terms that the denial is over, we have reached acceptance,” she said.
In a series of tweets about the court revelations, Miss Markle suggested that their father should sue the Duchess for “entrapment, elder abuse, defamation” and added that “she doesn’t deserve to have a father”.
She claimed that her sister was “just devoid of a soul,” adding: “Spiders don’t foresee getting caught in their own webs.”
The Duchess’s contact with the authors of Finding Freedom became pertinent when she sued The Mail on Sunday, which had published a letter she wrote in 2018 to her estranged father.
The High Court ruled in February that her privacy had been breached but the newspaper is appealing the decision.
Should the appeal prove successful, the case will go to trial, potentially pitting father against daughter in the witness stand.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.


----------



## bag-mania

As much as I hate to hear from her family, I can fully understand their frustration at the way she portrayed them. Nobody is going to want to stay silent while being publicly disparaged, even if it would be in their best interest if they did.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not sure she ever claimed to be vegan.  Wasn’t she “cooking a chicken” when H proposed?


I thought he proposed while they were vacationing in Africa? Is she now using the "proposal chicken" story? I can't keep up with her stories.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Did Hazz just throw shade on his wife?
> 
> *"My experience in the military made me who I am today,"*
> 
> I thought, as expressed in the infamous O interview, it was Methane. Neither of them can keep their stories sorted.


He's not that smart. I think he meant to say it helped make him who he is today.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am really, really looking forward to Lady CC's next video.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> I thought he proposed while they were vacationing in Africa? Is she now using the "proposal chicken" story? I can't keep up with her stories.


Yes, I believe like most other things, there are multiple murky stories attached to the engagement


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, I believe like most other things, there are multiple murky stories attached to the engagement



In fairness (haaaa), she does have memory problems


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. (fixed link)



Good on her, quiet and deadly.


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Good on her, quiet and deadly.



Deadly   Quiet


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am slightly confused how she looked considerably slimmed down in that TV interview, but is about the same size as during the earlier NY trip in that red abomination.


It just shows what a difference the right clothing can make.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, I believe like most other things, there are multiple murky stories attached to the engagement


Also, how they met.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> As much as I hate to hear from her family, I can fully understand their frustration at the way she portrayed them. Nobody is going to want to stay silent while being publicly disparaged, even if it would be in their best interest if they did.


I also think they have the right to tell their versions. TM was enjoying his retirement, and didn't ask to be on the limelight. From what I understood, he was a good father to MM and was very proud of her achievements. She used to praise him until it served her. When Samantha wrote her book, her comments about MM were very mild imo. I bet she knows a lot more, and we may see a part 2 of her book…


----------



## lulu212121

I wonder if she did that nasty spray tan to hide all her sun damage.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am really, really looking forward to Lady CC's next video.


Your wish is my command.  I didn't watch it yet.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm going to watch this one.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I also think they have the right to tell their versions. TM was enjoying his retirement, and didn't ask to be on the limelight. From what I understood, he was a good father to MM and was very proud of her achievements. She used to praise him until it served her. When Samantha wrote her book, her comments about MM were very mild imo. I bet she knows a lot more, and we may see a part 2 of her book…



There was supposed to be a part 2 but maybe she didn't make much money from part 1. Since Amazon allows people who didn't buy the book to post reviews on the site, stans bombarded it with bad reviews. I doubt it was very good, but I imagine it was still a better read than The Bench or Finding Freedom.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Queen calling Duchess out for what she is, and a Queen always trumps a (*lying liar*) Duchess
> @Maggie Muggins


 Thanks @papertiger for the heads-up and thanks  @QueenofWrapDress for your #9 nickname, lying liar duchess. This enquiring mind would like to know if that makes 'thee duchess' a double liar, which I tend to believe considering the rate at which her lies are being revealed. In any case, the nickname has been added to The List. Congratulations.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that she was.


hmm
maybe she said she was but did she actually do it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. (fixed link)




This is FALSE.  When there are court proceedings you (not as a party to the proceedings) can be subpoenaed and required to produce documents, texts and emails and sometimes required to submit a statement.  No NDA can override the power of a court subpoena.  the most you can do in an NDA is require the person who received the court order to give you notice of when/if a court serves you with a subpoena to produce documents.

Sorry but this statement that he violated an NDA or had BRF permission to do so is false. 

Jason would have been served with a court document to produce the info.  No doubt he checked with BRF lawyers as well as his own before handing over anything, but you cannot ignore a court ordered subpoena to produce docs….


----------



## Annawakes

I too wandered over to the style thread and saw…..that hideous red gown had a train?!!?!?!!  Ugh!!!!  Just sashaying around in a dress with a train (_*look at me!  I’m a pwin-cess!!!*_) when the event isn’t about you!!!


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> I too wandered over to the style thread and saw…..that hideous red gown had a train?!!?!?!!  Ugh!!!!  Just sashaying around in a dress with a train (_*look at me!  I’m a pwin-cess!!!*_) when the event isn’t about you!!!



I agree, totally the wrong event for that dress (if ever)


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.





This chick is crazy!  She is going on and on about her ethics and integrity...um, moron Meg, you just got called out for repeatedly lying under oath in a court of law.  Not to mention having lied to Oprah in an interview for international screening.  That shows your ethics and moral fiber...you know the old saying...actions speak louder than words!


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> I agree, totally the wrong event for that dress (if ever)



Yes it’s like a reality tv star dress.  Like real housewives or something like that.  But she needed something to distract from the ANL case where she was caught “forgetting” she had collaborated with Omid on that Finding Freedom book.

The PR strategy didn’t work where I am though.  Our news only mentioned her lying to court and then Her apology, not the red dress.


----------



## gracekelly

I just realized that the train on the red dress was the train for her appearance at a state dinner.    I guess she couldn't borrow a tiara for the evening.


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> This chick is crazy!  She is going on and on about her ethics and integrity...um, moron Meg, you just got called out for repeatedly lying under oath in a court of law.  Not to mention having lied to Oprah in an interview for international screening.  That shows your ethics and moral fiber...you know the old saying...actions speak louder than words!


She needs a lie detector test, but I think she would pass it lololol!


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> I just realized that the train on the red dress was the train for her appearance at a state dinner.    I guess she couldn't borrow a tiara for the evening.



Well one thing that came out in MM’s email to Jason was that she didn’t have a stylist.

We know, Meg… we know….


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> There was supposed to be a part 2 but maybe she didn't make much money from part 1. Since Amazon allows people who didn't buy the book to post reviews on the site, stans bombarded it with bad reviews. I doubt it was very good, but I imagine it was still a better read than The Bench or Finding Freedom.


Watch the video on post #78,792, I replaced the previous one with the full version. It's a very good one imo.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. (fixed link)





Don't most NDAs have an exclusion for court testimony?  It isn't as if Jason called up Piers Morgan or anything.  He produced documents and gave written testimony under oath in a matter in court (that she brought!).


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Who do they think they are? Of course, they brought their own photographers…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## needlv




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Did Hazz just throw shade on his wife?
> 
> *"My experience in the military made me who I am today,"*
> 
> I thought, as expressed in the infamous O interview, it was Methane. Neither of them can keep their stories sorted.


Let's look at this rationally from the military's point of view. I'm sure it was a huge challenge for them to teach H who wasn't the brightest bulb in the pack and that H managed to turn into a first class jackass all on his own.


----------



## needlv

MM sure is stupid.  She sued the newspapers thinking she could get a payday… but ANL decided to fight so the disclosure of emails, texts etc has to happen.  

Her lies are being exposed and it’s all… her own fault.  

If she had let it go, none of us would be talking about her letter to Mr Markle and her lies about co-operating with the authors of Finding Freedom wouldn’t have been exposed.

This is why the BRF has the “never complain, never explain” policy and are very careful of when the sue (eg, Catherine’s topless photos being published is one of the few times they did sue).


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> I just realized that the train on the red dress was the train for her appearance at a state dinner.    I guess she couldn't borrow a tiara for the evening.




That’s our Meg - big old bright red dress with a huge train…for dinner aboard an aircraft carrier!  So appropriate!


----------



## Luvbolide

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's look at this rationally from the military's point of view. I'm sure it was a huge challenge for them to teach H who wasn't the brightest bulb in the pack and that H managed to turn into a first class jackass all on his own.




I must admit that I never paid much attention to H when he was in the military, though I have more recently often wondered- did they actually let this guy pilot helicopters?  I’ve seen pics of William in the pilot’s seat, but H has always struck me as a clown, I guess.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> hmm
> maybe she said she was but did she actually do it?


We'll never know....


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> I must admit that I never paid much attention to H when he was in the military, though I have more recently often wondered- did they actually let this guy pilot helicopters?  I’ve seen pics of William in the pilot’s seat, but H has always struck me as a clown, I guess.


He qualified as a co-pilot.  That's as far as he got.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> He qualified as a co-pilot.  That's as far as he got.



Thank you - that makes me feel relieved.


----------



## xeyes

A fun little question...





__





						Blind Item #5 - Reader Blind
					

Giving knives as a gift is bad luck. To which royal did the alliterate one give a knife as a Christmas present?




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## needlv

xeyes said:


> A fun little question...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #5 - Reader Blind
> 
> 
> Giving knives as a gift is bad luck. To which royal did the alliterate one give a knife as a Christmas present?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



It was Catherine that received knives from MM.

I think that was gossiped about in tabloids, so I don’t know if it was actually true…


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> TMZ has committed to supporting them as much as they can. Sometimes it’s hard to find the right shade of lipstick to put on that pig.


TMZ...the same site that keeps giving excuses for Travis Scott and also promotes the Kardashians and Hilarious from Boston.  They're not a gossip site any more, but paid spokesmen.  I have more respect for the National Enquirer.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> (.)(.) boob math


55378008.  Upside down on a calculator = exactly what Megaladum looks like in her hideous red dress.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's just being true to herself. Her signature style is ill-fitting.



“To thine own self be true,” says *Polonius in Hamlet*.


----------



## purseinsanity

This was truly the first thing I thought of when I saw Megaladum's dress:  (only difference is Madonna had less material and the body to carry it off):


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> TMZ...the same site that keeps giving excuses for Travis Scott and also promotes the Kardashians and Hilarious from Boston.  They're not a gossip site any more, but paid spokesmen.  I have more respect for the National Enquirer.



TMZ leans heavily pro-celeb in almost all situations. They can find a way to excuse or rationalize any bad behavior, even when someone dies.


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> That’s our Meg - big old bright red dress with a huge train…for dinner aboard an aircraft carrier!  So appropriate!



That huge train served it's purpose: others were kept at a distance so she and her handbag could be more easily centered in the pictures without distractions from nobodies who might have wanted to get close to faux royalty.

One other photo observation: a picture of Hazz dining, smiling, actually seeming relaxed and enjoying himself. Stared at it for a moment and then realized. He is out of reach of THE CLAW and is seated between 2 strangers well out of reach of his keeper.
Gives new meaning to "Finding Freedom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

She has sunk so low, the butt of so many jokes.


----------



## Chanbal

Something is very wrong here. Who is opening doors to people that lie in court and call the first amendment bonkers?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Something is very wrong here. Who is opening doors to people that lie in court and call the first amendment bonkers?




They are volunteering themselves everywhere as do-gooders who only want to help mental health issues get proper representation. Most people aren’t following what they are doing like we are and take what they are told at face value.


----------



## bag-mania

*Meghan Markle wears Princess Diana’s bracelet to Salute to Freedom Gala*






Meghan Markle wore Princess Diana's Cartier diamond tennis bracelet to the Salute to Freedom Gala on Wednesday.Getty Images

Meghan Markle brought some special bling to the red carpet.
While attending the Salute to Freedom Gala on Wednesday, the 40-year-old Duchess of Sussex sported Princess Diana’s Cartier diamond tennis bracelet.
She paired the special sparkle with her all-red outfit – a Carolina Herrera dress and matching Giuseppe Zanotti heels – for the event at the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum in NYC, further accessorizing with a gold Cartier bracelet and Birks earrings.
Markle walked the red carpet with Prince Harry, who presented the 2021 Intrepid Valor Awards to five US service members at the gala.

It’s hardly the first time Markle has picked Princess Diana’s bracelet for a public appearance, as she memorably wore the same precious piece during her tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.

“They wanted to wear the bracelet to have [Harry’s] mother there with them during the interview,” a spokesperson for the Duchess explained to the “Today” show at the time.

The meaningful bling has been a part of Markle’s collection for much longer, however, as she first donned the Cartier design for a state dinner in Fiji and a reception in Tonga in October 2018.









						Meghan Markle wears Princess Diana’s bracelet to Salute to Freedom Gala
					

Markle paired a red dress and heels with the special sparkle, which she previously wore during her tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.




					www.google.com


----------



## bag-mania

There had to be a Diana tie in for the event. She is nothing if not consistent.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Something is very wrong here. Who is opening doors to people that lie in court and call the first amendment bonkers?




Notice how small the group is.  Looks like Melody was in the group, maybe? Guessing these people were hand-picked to be part of the show? 

I really wish, after the show is over, someone would interview those who chatted with H&M. Tell us what they said, what they promised to do.  Easy to stand and smile, there is indeed a learning curve to greeting the public -  I remember, when Kate started, she was heavily criticized  for asking how tea was made.  Story in spoiler.



Spoiler: Tea and chocolate 








__





						Cele|bitchy | Duchess Kate: “I love chocolate. I think all girls like chocolate.”
					

Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.




					www.celebitchy.com
				





Thursday morning brought a very rare tea party to London’s swankiest food store. In attendance, a royal trifecta: The Queen, Camilla and the Duchess of Cambridge (who wore a blue M Missoni coat with a daffodil for St. David’s Day) – with all three receiving special Jubilee picnic hampers that included dog treats.

“One thing in common with all the ladies is their love of a hound,” says Kate Hobhouse, chairman of the Fortnum & Mason food store, on why the baskets included the venison-flavored dog biscuits, called Hearty Treats for Happy Hounds. “It was a little bit of fun.”

The gifts were very well received by the Queen and two future queens. “There was lots of joy, especially over the biscuits,” says a royal source, adding, “The [Queen's] Corgis are going to be lucky tonight. They’ll be in doggie heaven.”

Kate’s cocker spaniel puppy Lupo was bound to be happy, too.

The three royals were at the Piccadilly store to mark the regeneration of the central London business district, and while they were at Fortnum’s they were shown many of the store’s posh products.

Taking a whiff of some tea (the store’s specialty), Kate said, “It is quite acidic, isn’t it?” before asking Fortnum’s staff, “So how do you go about choosing which tea to sell when there are so many out there?

*Perfect Cup of Tea*
As for her personal tastes, she said, “‘I like a cup of tea but it is my brother who really likes his tea as well. I will definitely tell my brother to come down here. He really does love his tea. This is so interesting.”

She apparently likes it, too. “I would really like to learn to make the perfect cup of tea, as when I last made a pot of tea with dried tea leaves I got it very wrong,” Kate admitted.

The focus for Kate and Camilla was the sweet section. They were talked through a huge array of chocolates and sweets by chocolatier Itesh Patel.

Camilla asked if she could have a jelly bean. Kate remarked it was “definitely the naughty counter”.

At the confectionery stand piled high with chocolates, Kate chose a small, crystallized rose petal, which retails for about $10 per 3.5 oz.

Mr Patel told Sky News: “The Duchess of Cambridge had a rose petal which she tasted and said was really delightful.”

“Gosh, it is very sweet,” she said as a staffer suggested placing it in a glass of champagne. “I will definitely try that.”

She added, “I love chocolate. I think all girls like chocolate.”


----------



## Luvbolide

bellecate said:


> She has sunk so low, the butt of so many jokes.
> View attachment 5247975


Oooooohhh, that’s bad!!  Unless you see both together, it is hard to imagine the full ghastliness of the red one!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Notice how small the group is. * Looks like Melody was in the group, maybe? Guessing these people were hand-picked to be part of the show?
> 
> I really wish, after the show is over, someone would interview those who chatted with H&M. Tell us what they said, what they promised to do.  Easy to stand and smile, there is indeed a learning curve to greeting the public -  I remember, when Kate started, she was heavily criticized  for asking how tea was made.  Story in spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Tea and chocolate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cele|bitchy | Duchess Kate: “I love chocolate. I think all girls like chocolate.”
> 
> 
> Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.celebitchy.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thursday morning brought a very rare tea party to London’s swankiest food store. In attendance, a royal trifecta: The Queen, Camilla and the Duchess of Cambridge (who wore a blue M Missoni coat with a daffodil for St. David’s Day) – with all three receiving special Jubilee picnic hampers that included dog treats.
> 
> “One thing in common with all the ladies is their love of a hound,” says Kate Hobhouse, chairman of the Fortnum & Mason food store, on why the baskets included the venison-flavored dog biscuits, called Hearty Treats for Happy Hounds. “It was a little bit of fun.”
> 
> The gifts were very well received by the Queen and two future queens. “There was lots of joy, especially over the biscuits,” says a royal source, adding, “The [Queen's] Corgis are going to be lucky tonight. They’ll be in doggie heaven.”
> 
> Kate’s cocker spaniel puppy Lupo was bound to be happy, too.
> 
> The three royals were at the Piccadilly store to mark the regeneration of the central London business district, and while they were at Fortnum’s they were shown many of the store’s posh products.
> 
> Taking a whiff of some tea (the store’s specialty), Kate said, “It is quite acidic, isn’t it?” before asking Fortnum’s staff, “So how do you go about choosing which tea to sell when there are so many out there?
> 
> *Perfect Cup of Tea*
> As for her personal tastes, she said, “‘I like a cup of tea but it is my brother who really likes his tea as well. I will definitely tell my brother to come down here. He really does love his tea. This is so interesting.”
> 
> She apparently likes it, too. “I would really like to learn to make the perfect cup of tea, as when I last made a pot of tea with dried tea leaves I got it very wrong,” Kate admitted.
> 
> The focus for Kate and Camilla was the sweet section. They were talked through a huge array of chocolates and sweets by chocolatier Itesh Patel.
> 
> Camilla asked if she could have a jelly bean. Kate remarked it was “definitely the naughty counter”.
> 
> At the confectionery stand piled high with chocolates, Kate chose a small, crystallized rose petal, which retails for about $10 per 3.5 oz.
> 
> Mr Patel told Sky News: “The Duchess of Cambridge had a rose petal which she tasted and said was really delightful.”
> 
> “Gosh, it is very sweet,” she said as a staffer suggested placing it in a glass of champagne. “I will definitely try that.”
> 
> She added, “I love chocolate. I think all girls like chocolate.”


 Mr. and Mrs. Bandwagon were the ones officially hosting the luncheon. If they (Arch*) had to pay for it, they probably ordered only a small number of sandwiches.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She looks great in sheaths. Why not wear that?  Wait, I know, I know. smh.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle wears Princess Diana’s bracelet to Salute to Freedom Gala*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore Princess Diana's Cartier diamond tennis bracelet to the Salute to Freedom Gala on Wednesday.Getty Images
> 
> Meghan Markle brought some special bling to the red carpet.
> While attending the Salute to Freedom Gala on Wednesday, the 40-year-old Duchess of Sussex sported Princess Diana’s Cartier diamond tennis bracelet.
> She paired the special sparkle with her all-red outfit – a Carolina Herrera dress and matching Giuseppe Zanotti heels – for the event at the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum in NYC, further accessorizing with a gold Cartier bracelet and Birks earrings.
> Markle walked the red carpet with Prince Harry, who presented the 2021 Intrepid Valor Awards to five US service members at the gala.
> 
> It’s hardly the first time Markle has picked Princess Diana’s bracelet for a public appearance, as she memorably wore the same precious piece during her tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.
> 
> “They wanted to wear the bracelet to have [Harry’s] mother there with them during the interview,” a spokesperson for the Duchess explained to the “Today” show at the time.
> 
> The meaningful bling has been a part of Markle’s collection for much longer, however, as she first donned the Cartier design for a state dinner in Fiji and a reception in Tonga in October 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wears Princess Diana’s bracelet to Salute to Freedom Gala
> 
> 
> Markle paired a red dress and heels with the special sparkle, which she previously wore during her tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


Diana always wore it solo. I know a lot of people like to stack bracelets, but I think you shouldn't wear two competing pieces. It lessens their impact. And as Coco Chanel said, _“Before you leave the house, look in the mirror and take at least one thing off.”_


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> She has sunk so low, the butt of so many jokes.
> View attachment 5247975


The dress is at least a size too small. I'm sure she thinks she's the same size she was pre-pregnancy, and that is clearly not the case.  I am surprised the designer allowed her to wear it that way. It doesn't reflect well on them.


----------



## Chanbal

Murky Meg got her twitter account permanently suspended, but she is still making videos.


----------



## Chanbal

More from the Aussies…


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I agree, totally the wrong event for that dress (if ever)


Well, it might have been the ideal thing to wear if she ever became the slutty salsa teacher on a saga cruise ship. She could use H’s balls as maracas.
 Or perhaps for a campy drag number to _Roxanne _


Chanbal said:


> Who do they think they are? Of course, they brought their own photographers…



This just sounds like an episode of the sopranos.
I can just hear Paulie saying;
‘Hey Tony, I got the carrot top in the trunk, he ain’t too smart is he? I told him we was from people magazine and he jumped right in.’
‘But did you get the girl as well?’
‘I was supposed to pinch the goomah? I thought she was some two  dolla haawww. Christopher was telling her he was a big wheel in the film biz and she was all ova him.’

also, a joke we’ve made a thousand times, but like most couples who love their privacy they bring a film crew with them to document their lives…


CarryOn2020 said:


> She looks great in sheaths. Why not wear that?  Wait, I know, I know. smh.
> 
> View attachment 5248036


 Thin people look good in simple shapes but we all know she’s not like that since she got the ring(version 1.1) on the finger.  
It’s not entirely her fault tbf but she’s got a short, dumpy body that gets fat quickly  (and then she doesn’t even have good arms or legs.)
As we’ve all said, problem is she tries to copy Beyonce and she’s got a gorgeous hourglass figure. I mean life ain’t fair, but you gotta work with what you’ve got   

I’d also like to add I don’t think her weight gain has anything to do with pregnancy or even with eating. I think she’s got classic coke bloat.
Ive seen it so many times, people (especially narcissistic types) get into coke because they think it keeps them on point and skinny and then  one day, boom, they just balloon up and there is nothing they can do about it but it’s all their own fault for taking that terrible stuff.


charlottawill said:


> Diana always wore it solo. I know a lot of people like to stack bracelets, but I think you shouldn't wear two competing pieces. It lessens their impact. And as Coco Chanel said, _“Before you leave the house, look in the mirror and take at least one thing off.”_


I did that once and got arrested for streaking 
But seriously I agree with you. I like a bit of minimalism especially if you are already wearing yards of big, bulging silk taffeta.

It’s so creepy she’s wearing the same shade of red as mother but sluttier. Whoever put together that photo comparison must have had the vertigo music playing in their head.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is one of the answers Angela Levin got for pointing out Raptor lied in court.
> 
> She could murder her baby to use her blood as a fountain of youth and they'd find a way to deflect and minimize the offense.



Are the Sussex Squad rebranding as Archewell Army? I don't know about you, but they are starting to resemble the Nazis to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> You bet! She may find a way to blame the tabloid for the miscarriage that likely only happened on paper.





bag-mania said:


> It is almost a year since she wrote her miscarriage story for the NYT (which I still believe was an IVF that didn't take). I wonder what she's working on to release for Thanksgiving this year.


Me too. I highly doubt the miscarriage happened. Her account of it was so OTT. Just part of Madame Pump Pump's histrionics.



LittleStar88 said:


> She claims to be vegan?


I think I read that she sidestepped the question by saying she preferred a plant-based diet but is electively vegetarian (meaning she will eat meat whenever she wants to  )



csshopper said:


> Did Hazz just throw shade on his wife?
> 
> *"My experience in the military made me who I am today,"*
> 
> I thought, as expressed in the infamous O interview, it was Methane. Neither of them can keep their stories sorted.


He has so many personas. I'm sure in future we will get many more variations of this because the wimp he is will mutate according to whose a** he wishes to kiss. 



Annawakes said:


> I too wandered over to the style thread and saw…..that hideous red gown had a train?!!?!?!!  Ugh!!!!  Just sashaying around in a dress with a train (_*look at me!  I’m a pwin-cess!!!*_) when the event isn’t about you!!!


If you told her that, she would probably look disbelieving. I mean, of course every event is about her  



gracekelly said:


> She needs a lie detector test, but I think she would pass it lololol!


She would. She thoroughly believes in all her lies.



Luvbolide said:


> I must admit that I never paid much attention to H when he was in the military, though I have more recently often wondered- did they actually let this guy pilot helicopters?  I’ve seen pics of William in the pilot’s seat, but H has always struck me as a clown, I guess.


Pretty sure he failed the helicopter pilot test, amongst other challenges in life.



charlottawill said:


> The dress is at least a size too small. I'm sure she thinks she's the same size she was pre-pregnancy, and that is clearly not the case.  I am surprised the designer allowed her to wear it that way. It doesn't reflect well on them.


Someone on this forum once remarked that Methane dresses for the body she _*thinks*_ she has.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> She looks great in sheaths. Why not wear that?  Wait, I know, I know. smh.
> 
> View attachment 5248036



That was at least 30 pounds ago, though.


----------



## Jktgal

Looks like Archie' ration served on his play set....
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Swiss and Austrian press apparently feels "Knauf stabbed Duchess in the back". How revealing the truth while under oath is backstabbing is beyond me, but what do I know.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Swiss and Austrian press apparently feels "Knauf stabbed Duchess in the back". How revealing the truth while under oath is backstabbing is beyond me, but what do I know.


Are they pro-Methane on the whole?


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> This was truly the first thing I thought of when I saw Megaladum's dress:  (only difference is Madonna had less material and the body to carry it off):



Thant's crewel to Madonna _and_ JPG


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> That huge train served it's purpose: others were kept at a distance so she and her handbag could be more easily centered in the pictures without distractions from nobodies who might have wanted to get close to faux royalty.
> 
> One other photo observation: a picture of Hazz dining, smiling, actually seeming relaxed and enjoying himself. Stared at it for a moment and then realized. He is out of reach of THE CLAW and is seated between 2 strangers well out of reach of his keeper.
> Gives new meaning to "Finding Freedom.
> 
> 
> edit: I have no idea why all this blank space is here and can't seem to find a way to delete it.
> Apologies for the wasted space.



The blank space is to allow for M's ballgown (although you'll never get her head in too how ever much space you leave)


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan Markle wears Princess Diana’s bracelet to Salute to Freedom Gala*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore Princess Diana's Cartier diamond tennis bracelet to the Salute to Freedom Gala on Wednesday.Getty Images
> 
> Meghan Markle brought some special bling to the red carpet.
> While attending the Salute to Freedom Gala on Wednesday, the 40-year-old Duchess of Sussex sported Princess Diana’s Cartier diamond tennis bracelet.
> She paired the special sparkle with her all-red outfit – a Carolina Herrera dress and matching Giuseppe Zanotti heels – for the event at the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum in NYC, further accessorizing with a gold Cartier bracelet and Birks earrings.
> Markle walked the red carpet with Prince Harry, who presented the 2021 Intrepid Valor Awards to five US service members at the gala.
> 
> It’s hardly the first time Markle has picked Princess Diana’s bracelet for a public appearance, as she memorably wore the same precious piece during her tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.
> 
> “They wanted to wear the bracelet to have [Harry’s] mother there with them during the interview,” a spokesperson for the Duchess explained to the “Today” show at the time.
> 
> The meaningful bling has been a part of Markle’s collection for much longer, however, as she first donned the Cartier design for a state dinner in Fiji and a reception in Tonga in October 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wears Princess Diana’s bracelet to Salute to Freedom Gala
> 
> 
> Markle paired a red dress and heels with the special sparkle, which she previously wore during her tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



She's entitled to, but whatever. Just another PR op to pair M's name with D's and have another rehash of the same story to knock back the courtroom DRAMA. Same with the eye catching red dress, so loud it's deafening and is supposed to take our minds off she's not only a liar but committed perjury in court whist under oath.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was at least 30 pounds ago, though.



That's no excuse though.

I'm not saying it's not easier to dress at a certain size but a) our shapes don't change drastically if we gain weight as we have the same skeleton and b) plenty of amazing women a lot bigger than M is presently, killing it on the red carpet, events and parties all over the world. She would still look better in a simple sheath dress and at least it would have been more appropriate for the the event. There was not a single good thing about that dress apart from the colour, and given the seriousness of the event, even the colour was very questionable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Are they pro-Methane on the whole?



I don't know, that's actually the first headlines re: the troublesome two I ever saw.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

Cheddar Cheese said:


> This popped the other day & it crossed my minds this thread would be a place where the comments might be appreciated.
> Cheers!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round-up: 25th October
> 
> 
> Well hello, hello all and happy Monday– if ever there was one. Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I can’t believe how much has happened in the last few weeks so of course, I had…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com


 
Omgosh, this is the best thing EVER! I’m dyyyying over these picture captions:
“So what do you think, yah? It took her a full two hours to write the book.” 
“This is some whack a$$ sh’!”


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> That's no excuse though.
> 
> I'm not saying it's not easier to dress at a certain size but a) our shapes don't change drastically if we gain weight as we have the same skeleton and b) plenty of amazing women a lot bigger than M is presently, killing it on the red carpet, events and parties all over the world. She would still look better in a simple sheath dress and at least it would have been more appropriate for the the event.



I agree, I was just saying who knows how a fitted sheet would look on her now...no discussion that it would look better than this abomination, though. Most things would.

Oh, there are tons of women who are a) heavier and b) don't have her endless wardrobe budget and manage to look fabulous. She's rather unfortunate.



> There was not a single good thing about that dress apart from the colour, and given the seriousness of the event, even the colour was very questionable.



I mean, she wore red to a military function where red was reserved for those in uniform (and her a*shole puppet let her). What made us think she'd be for once appropriate.


----------



## papertiger

Shade being thrown by Thomas LOL:






BANG Showbiz
*Thomas Markle: Maybe Prince Harry was dropped on his head as a baby?*


Fri, 12 November 2021, 11:00 am






Prince Harry credit:Bang Showbiz
Thomas Markle has claimed Prince Harry could've been "dropped on his head as a baby".
The 77-year-old father of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has slammed his daughter's husband, claiming "everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid", when asked whether he thinks the word "Megxit" - which was used to described Harry and Meghan's decision to quit their royal duties and move to the US - is "sexist", after Harry recently claimed it "was or is a misogynistic term".
Thomas said: "I refer to Harry’s ignorance. I don’t know what happened to him, maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby or something?
"But the bottom line is that everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid.

"It gets me in trouble with them, of course, but it's true.
"He rides a bicycle around where he lives, every day, and I understand they're going to take the training wheels off soon."
Thomas also admitted he was "disappointed" that Harry and Meghan didn't visit him in Mexico before they got engaged, claiming he invited them "several times".
He said: "I invited them down several times.
"I’m very disappointed that Harry, wanting to marry my daughter, wouldn’t have had the good sense to come down here and ask for her hand."
Thomas said he would like to take his daughter's former press secretary, Jason Knauf, out for a steak meal, after an email exchange revealed the duchess had briefed Jason before sending Thomas a letter involved in her High Court privacy case.
He added to GB News: "Finally the truth is coming out.
"Thank God for Jason Knauf, I’d be happy to invite him over here and take him to Sizzler - we’ll enjoy a steak and a nice little dinner together.
"He’s certainly putting things in the right perspective."
It comes after Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to remember she told Jason to brief the authors of her biography.
The former actress and Harry had previously insisted they "did not collaborate...nor were they interviewed" for Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand's 'Finding Freedom', but emails between Meghan, 40, and her then-press secretary Jason about a meeting with the authors have now emerged.
In a witness statement to the Court of Appeal, Mr. Knauf said Meghan and Harry, 37, "authorised specific cooperation in writing" in December 2018.
Emails showed he felt putting the authors in touch with the former 'Suits' star's friends was "not a good idea".
He added: "Being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important."
Harry responded: "I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it.
"Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there."
And in a witness statement to the court, Mr. Knauf confirmed Meghan had sent him briefing notes on topics she suggested be discussed with the authors, including her father, and her half-siblings, as well as an infamous row over the tiara she would wear when she married Prince Harry in May 2018.
Harry had written: "Also, are u planning on giving them a rough idea of what she’s been through over the last 2yrs?
"Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.
"Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!"
Meghan has apologised and confirmed her former press secretary had briefed the authors with her knowledge, and insisted she "had not remembered" their exchanges or set out to mislead the court.
She said: "I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.
"I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Thomas said: "I refer to Harry’s ignorance. I don’t know what happened to him, maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby or something?
> "But the bottom line is that everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid.



I mean, he is not wrong. But did he really have to go there.



> "It gets me in trouble with them, of course, but it's true.



Naw, that ship has sailed.



> Thomas also admitted he was "disappointed" that Harry and Meghan didn't visit him in Mexico before they got engaged, claiming he invited them "several times".



Oh, the very thought probably made raptor sweat like we've not even seen her sweat when she visibly stained her sweater.



> "Thank God for Jason Knauf, I’d be happy to invite him over here and take him to *Sizzler* - we’ll enjoy a steak and a nice little dinner together.



Hear hear, Thomas is funny 



> It comes after Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to remember she told Jason to brief the authors of her biography.



Is nobody going to charge her? If I commit a crime then say I forgot I did it and didn't mean to offend, will that get me off?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Murky Meg got her twitter account permanently suspended, but she is still making videos.



Murky Meg provides a very good summary. Some of the comments are very interesting and this one in particular sounds like something M would pull.

From Debi Tate:  "Ok. I’m from Toronto. My daughter was dating a Toronto cop at the time of Meghan’s calls to the Toronto Police about paparazzi and being followed and harassed. The police did respond. They only ever found one lonely photographer outside her Toronto house. They stopped acting on Meghan’s relentless calls because they were determined to be bogus. Also my current stylist worked on the set of Suits. He personally witnessed Meghan’s horrid behaviour toward staff. She shouted and threw things around the set. Many of these allegations now coming out I knew about at the time they were occurring. There is no reason why the Toronto cop and my stylist would make up these stories because Meghan was not yet famous or rather infamous. Just putting this out there for what it’s worth. Hope she gets jail time. What a rotter"


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Shade being thrown by Thomas LOL:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BANG Showbiz
> *Thomas Markle: Maybe Prince Harry was dropped on his head as a baby?*
> 
> 
> Fri, 12 November 2021, 11:00 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry credit:Bang Showbiz
> Thomas Markle has claimed Prince Harry could've been "dropped on his head as a baby".
> The 77-year-old father of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has slammed his daughter's husband, claiming "everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid", when asked whether he thinks the word "Megxit" - which was used to described Harry and Meghan's decision to quit their royal duties and move to the US - is "sexist", after Harry recently claimed it "was or is a misogynistic term".
> Thomas said: "I refer to Harry’s ignorance. I don’t know what happened to him, maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby or something?
> "But the bottom line is that everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid.
> 
> "It gets me in trouble with them, of course, but it's true.
> "He rides a bicycle around where he lives, every day, and I understand they're going to take the training wheels off soon."
> Thomas also admitted he was "disappointed" that Harry and Meghan didn't visit him in Mexico before they got engaged, claiming he invited them "several times".
> He said: "I invited them down several times.
> "I’m very disappointed that Harry, wanting to marry my daughter, wouldn’t have had the good sense to come down here and ask for her hand."
> Thomas said he would like to take his daughter's former press secretary, Jason Knauf, out for a steak meal, after an email exchange revealed the duchess had briefed Jason before sending Thomas a letter involved in her High Court privacy case.
> He added to GB News: "Finally the truth is coming out.
> "Thank God for Jason Knauf, I’d be happy to invite him over here and take him to Sizzler - we’ll enjoy a steak and a nice little dinner together.
> "He’s certainly putting things in the right perspective."
> It comes after Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to remember she told Jason to brief the authors of her biography.
> The former actress and Harry had previously insisted they "did not collaborate...nor were they interviewed" for Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand's 'Finding Freedom', but emails between Meghan, 40, and her then-press secretary Jason about a meeting with the authors have now emerged.
> In a witness statement to the Court of Appeal, Mr. Knauf said Meghan and Harry, 37, "authorised specific cooperation in writing" in December 2018.
> Emails showed he felt putting the authors in touch with the former 'Suits' star's friends was "not a good idea".
> He added: "Being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important."
> Harry responded: "I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it.
> "Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there."
> And in a witness statement to the court, Mr. Knauf confirmed Meghan had sent him briefing notes on topics she suggested be discussed with the authors, including her father, and her half-siblings, as well as an infamous row over the tiara she would wear when she married Prince Harry in May 2018.
> Harry had written: "Also, are u planning on giving them a rough idea of what she’s been through over the last 2yrs?
> "Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.
> "Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!"
> Meghan has apologised and confirmed her former press secretary had briefed the authors with her knowledge, and insisted she "had not remembered" their exchanges or set out to mislead the court.
> She said: "I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.
> "I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court."





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, he is not wrong. But did he really have to go there.
> 
> 
> 
> Naw, that ship has sailed.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, the very thought probably made raptor sweat like we've not even seen her sweat when she visibly stained her sweater.
> 
> 
> 
> Hear hear, Thomas is funny
> 
> 
> 
> Is nobody going to charge her? If I commit a crime then say I forgot I did it and didn't mean to offend, will that get me off?



My 2 cents about some of the last events (1 cent each ):

1) A Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) is the equivalent to a 'Licence to Lie' for MM&Hazz. So, they didn't anticipate that Jason Knauf would be able to submit evidence of their lies to the court. 

2) The infamous letter was written for public consumption. Since TM kept the letter private, she (or one of her loyal servants) organized the People's event and five of her 'close friends' shared very unfavorable (to TM) parts of the letter. The People's event then forced TM to release the letter. It sounds like a machiavellian plan.


----------



## Chanbal

Who is this nice friend? 


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle skipped the Carlyle hotel during their most recent New York City visit, instead staying in a luxury apartment at 860 United Nations Plaza on Manhattan’s East Side, Page Six has exclusively learned.

A source told us that while the pair stayed at the exclusive building, “They had eight bodyguards and a surveillance van on site — and they’d go in and out through the basement.”

The insider added, “They were staying in a friend’s four-bedroom apartment with river views.”_









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stayed at luxury UN building on NYC trip
					

While in town for the Salute to Freedom Gala, the couple stayed “in a friend’s four-bedroom apartment with river views,” according to a source.




					pagesix.com


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents about some of the last events (1 cent each ):
> 
> 1) A Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) is the equivalent to a 'Licence to Lie' for MM&Hazz. So, they didn't anticipate that Jason Knauf would be able to submit evidence of their lies to the court.
> 
> 2) The infamous letter was written for public consumption. Since TM kept the letter private, she (or one of her loyal servants) organized the People's event and five of her 'close friends' shared very unfavorable (to TM) parts of the letter. The People's event then forced TM to release the letter. It sounds like a machiavellian plan.



1. NDAs here are trumped by court orders. Therefore, when JKn was told to submit all/any emails pertaining to the letter he would have to do and any NDA would not stop it unless it was breaking another court order. Therefore, M should have known.

We also have an Official Secret's Act which he would also have been asked to sign, this would have trumped all had the BRF insisted, and in that case we'd hear 'in the interests of national security'. We didn't nd therefore these 2 are no longer being protected by The Firm. 

2. Agreed.
Although Machiavelli was a genius manipulator and these guys just think they are.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> 55378008.  Upside down on a calculator = exactly what *Megaladum* looks like in her hideous red dress.


Thanks @purseinsanity for your #23 nickname, Megaladum that has been added to The List. Congratulations and here is The List #23 Ribbon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Shade being thrown by Thomas LOL:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BANG Showbiz
> *Thomas Markle: Maybe Prince Harry was dropped on his head as a baby?*
> 
> 
> Fri, 12 November 2021, 11:00 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry credit:Bang Showbiz
> Thomas Markle has claimed Prince Harry could've been "dropped on his head as a baby".
> The 77-year-old father of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has slammed his daughter's husband, claiming "everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid", when asked whether he thinks the word "Megxit" - which was used to described Harry and Meghan's decision to quit their royal duties and move to the US - is "sexist", after Harry recently claimed it "was or is a misogynistic term".
> Thomas said: "I refer to Harry’s ignorance. I don’t know what happened to him, maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby or something?
> "But the bottom line is that everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid.
> 
> "It gets me in trouble with them, of course, but it's true.
> "He rides a bicycle around where he lives, every day, and I understand they're going to take the training wheels off soon."
> Thomas also admitted he was "disappointed" that Harry and Meghan didn't visit him in Mexico before they got engaged, claiming he invited them "several times".
> He said: "I invited them down several times.
> "I’m very disappointed that Harry, wanting to marry my daughter, wouldn’t have had the good sense to come down here and ask for her hand."
> Thomas said he would like to take his daughter's former press secretary, Jason Knauf, out for a steak meal, after an email exchange revealed the duchess had briefed Jason before sending Thomas a letter involved in her High Court privacy case.
> He added to GB News: "Finally the truth is coming out.
> "Thank God for Jason Knauf, I’d be happy to invite him over here and take him to Sizzler - we’ll enjoy a steak and a nice little dinner together.
> "He’s certainly putting things in the right perspective."
> It comes after Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to remember she told Jason to brief the authors of her biography.
> The former actress and Harry had previously insisted they "did not collaborate...nor were they interviewed" for Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand's 'Finding Freedom', but emails between Meghan, 40, and her then-press secretary Jason about a meeting with the authors have now emerged.
> In a witness statement to the Court of Appeal, Mr. Knauf said Meghan and Harry, 37, "authorised specific cooperation in writing" in December 2018.
> Emails showed he felt putting the authors in touch with the former 'Suits' star's friends was "not a good idea".
> He added: "Being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important."
> Harry responded: "I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it.
> "Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there."
> And in a witness statement to the court, Mr. Knauf confirmed Meghan had sent him briefing notes on topics she suggested be discussed with the authors, including her father, and her half-siblings, as well as an infamous row over the tiara she would wear when she married Prince Harry in May 2018.
> Harry had written: "Also, are u planning on giving them a rough idea of what she’s been through over the last 2yrs?
> "Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.
> "Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!"
> Meghan has apologised and confirmed her former press secretary had briefed the authors with her knowledge, and insisted she "had not remembered" their exchanges or set out to mislead the court.
> She said: "I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.
> "I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court."


Has TM been on this thread? He’s king of the quips all of a sudden!
The bike gag came out of nowhere and following it up with an invite to sizzler?  Chef’s kiss!

I like this new angle for him and I’m glad he can see the humour in the situation.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Murky Meg provides a very good summary. Some of the comments are very interesting and this one in particular sounds like something M would pull.
> 
> From Debi Tate:  "Ok. I’m from Toronto. My daughter was dating a Toronto cop at the time of Meghan’s calls to the Toronto Police about paparazzi and being followed and harassed. The police did respond. They only ever found one lonely photographer outside her Toronto house. They stopped acting on Meghan’s relentless calls because they were determined to be bogus. Also my current stylist worked on the set of Suits. He personally witnessed Meghan’s horrid behaviour toward staff. She shouted and threw things around the set. Many of these allegations now coming out I knew about at the time they were occurring. There is no reason why the Toronto cop and my stylist would make up these stories because Meghan was not yet famous or rather infamous. Just putting this out there for what it’s worth. Hope she gets jail time. What a rotter"


_ Maintiens le dread of the phone ringing. _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> 1. NDAs here are trumped by court orders. Therefore, when JKn was told to submit all/any emails pertaining to the letter he would have to do and any NDA would not stop it unless it was breaking another court order. Therefore, M should have known.
> 
> *We also have an Official Secret's Act which he would also have been asked to sign, this would have trumped all had the BRF insisted, and in that case we'd hear 'in the interests of national security'. We didn't nd therefore these 2 are no longer being protected by The Firm.*



So the Insta people I posted yesterday were right after all, they just didn't word it correctly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _A source told us that while the pair stayed at the exclusive building, “They had *eight bodyguards and a surveillance van *on site — and they’d go in and out through the basement.”_



Who TF is paying for this? (not mentioning how utterly ridiculous those people are needing more security than the Queen herself)


----------



## bag-mania

Even in the UK there are journalists who are fighting tooth and nail to defend Meghan. According to this woman, lying to the court was just a mistake.









						Opinion: Meghan Markle made a mistake – that’s all
					

The Duchess of Sussex was right to apologise to the court for denying collaborating with the authors of ‘Finding Freedom’ – but this not the ‘gotcha’ moment some would wish




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

This one is a must!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> 1. *NDAs here are trumped by court orders. *Therefore, when JKn was told to submit all/any emails pertaining to the letter he would have to do and any NDA would not stop it unless it was breaking another court order. Therefore, M should have known.
> 
> We also have an Official Secret's Act which he would also have been asked to sign, this would have trumped all had the BRF insisted, and in that case we'd hear 'in the interests of national security'. We didn't nd therefore these 2 are no longer being protected by The Firm.
> 
> 2. Agreed.
> Although Machiavelli was a genius manipulator and these guys just think they are.


MM might have hoped that Jason Knauf wouldn't be able to break his NDA (under the Official Secret's Act???). According to NS, breaking that particular NDA may lead to bigger headaches for the couple…


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Even in the UK there are journalists who are fighting tooth and nail to defend Meghan. According to this woman, lying to the court was just a mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: Meghan Markle made a mistake – that’s all
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was right to apologise to the court for denying collaborating with the authors of ‘Finding Freedom’ – but this not the ‘gotcha’ moment some would wish
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


Not premediated?  
Sorry but it's hard to keep a straight face when I read this. Stupidity is contagious after all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Even in the UK there are journalists who are fighting tooth and nail to defend Meghan. According to this woman, lying to the court was just a mistake.



Not reading the article because my blood pressure, but seriously?

Putting your cashmere sweater in the washing machine is a mistake. Saying something in passing and forgetting it happened is...not even a mistake, but completely believable.

Denying a PR campaign executed meticulously over months is not a mistake, but a big, fat lie, and it comes from a person who has been proven to lie over and over again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This one is a must!




The Duchess of California and The Artist Formerly Known as Harry 

Speaking of Omid, I nearly felt bad reading how coldly she spoke of him in those emails. Poor little pup must be heartbroken.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not reading the article because my blood pressure, but seriously?
> 
> Putting your cashmere sweater in the washing machine is a mistake. Saying something in passing and forgetting it happened is...not even a mistake, but completely believable.
> 
> Denying a PR campaign executed meticulously over months is not a mistake, but a big, fat lie, and it comes from a person who has been proven to lie over and over again.



It confirms what I already know about society. People see things the way they want them to be, not necessarily the way they really are. Whatever Meghan happens to represent to her supporters, they are going to hold on to that image and disregard anything that doesn't fit that viewpoint. You can see this way of thinking span across all facets of culture, it comes down to "I believe what I want to believe."


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not reading the article because my blood pressure, but seriously?
> 
> Putting your cashmere sweater in the washing machine is a mistake. Saying something in passing and forgetting it happened is...not even a mistake, but completely believable.
> 
> Denying a PR campaign executed meticulously over months is not a mistake, but a big, fat lie, and it comes from a person who has been proven to lie over and over again.


I'm waiting for her to claim that she is so busy saving the world that she cannot be expected to remember some minor family-backstabbing project that she had already instructed her underlings to handle.

Ventured into Reddit. They are having a field day over her lies and reaching much the same conclusions we have, albeit in much stronger language.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> MM might have hoped that Jason Knauf wouldn't be able to break his NDA (under the Official Secret's Act???). According to NS, breaking that particular NDA may lead to bigger headaches for the couple…




Disclaimer. Not a lawyer but did study some law, unfortunately not employment law: 

From what I understand, if he's signed a NDA, unless he's regurgitating the same information/instances the court case demanded, he won't be able to say anything else. He may be able to go into greater detail surrounding and/or as background but nothing additionally. 

The only other way he could play it with a tell-all, is that if some of the other things he was asked to do were against the law or his moral codes/society ethical norms were breached (e.g. asking him to lie or conceal theirs on other matters too). 

In addition to an NDA when a job starts, they've probably asked him to sign something when he left so that he can't come back and sue anyone later or declare anything that should have already been addressed. There may still an issue with the BRF if this is the case. 

If an NDAs and/or condition of severance is found to be unfair to an employee it/they can be rescinded, If this was the case he prob could write that tell-all. Obviously he'd never work again.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not reading the article because my blood pressure, but seriously?
> 
> Putting your cashmere sweater in the washing machine is a mistake. Saying something in passing and forgetting it happened is...not even a mistake, but completely believable.
> 
> Denying a PR campaign executed meticulously over months is not a mistake, but a big, fat lie, and it comes from a person who has been proven to lie over and over again.



"I can't remember" and "no comment" are both code for "you do the work coz I'm not going to tell you/own up".  

Providing written statements is another good way to make sure 'your truth' is fully edited and gone through with a fine tooth (legal) comb and you're not in any danger of being cross-examined (which could also endanger any past/present/future babies physical/mental health too).


----------



## bellecate

I really need to stay off Twitter.


----------



## lanasyogamama

And while she is saying she “didn’t remember” now, at the time she was flat out denying providing the information


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> And while she is saying she “didn’t remember” now, at the time she was flat out denying providing the information



And she’s blaming it all on having been in her first trimester of pregnancy after having had a tragic miscarriage. She is waving the pity-poor-me flag as wildly as she can.


----------



## Aimee3

I could see maybe forgetting you had a 2 minute conversation with somebody, but not forgetting a conversation with someone that went on over a few months (?) and with many emails as well about the same subject. I don’t see how she doesn’t get slapped with perjury.


----------



## Hermes Zen

M should go to jail even for a short stay. Maybe it would rattle her enough to not lie again and improve her personality! Naaahh that wouldn’t even change her.


----------



## joyeaux

Some intel from the last day of hearing... I’m attaching the texts so you don’t have to worry about links. She was “Tilly” in Jason Knauf’s phone.

Of all this new info, the fact that her iPhone signature is ”_Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite.” _is what I can’t get out of my head  Wonder if Charles’ “fundamental” lack of understanding is why Harry threw him under the bus to Oprah?



*Meghan’s texts revealed: Royal family are ‘constantly berating’ Prince Harry over row with my father*
*Duchess of Sussex said, in newly-released messages, that senior royals 'fundamentally don't understand' the situation with Thomas Markle*
By Hannah Furness, Royal Correspondent12 November 2021 • 3:38pm
The Duchess of Sussex, writing in a text message to Jason Knauf, her then press secretary, said she and her husband had been 'endlessly explaining' the situation to the Prince of Wales Credit: Caitlin Ochs/Reuters
The Duchess of Sussex accused the Royal family of "constantly berating" Prince Harry over the behaviour of her estranged father, saying that they "fundamentally" did not understand why she did not fly to his home in Mexico to "make this stop".
The Duchess said she and her husband had been "endlessly explaining" the situation with Thomas Markle to the Prince of Wales while they were staying with him.
At the time, in August 2018, Mr Markle had been giving a series of media interviews about his daughter after he pulled out of attending her wedding, causing distress to the Duke and Duchess and concern in the Royal household.
According to newly released text messages, written to Jason Knauf, her then-press secretary as she crafted a letter to her estranged father, the Duchess said she wanted to protect her husband from the "pain" the situation had caused.
"Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'" she wrote on Aug 22, 2018.
"They fundamentally don't understand, so at least by writing H [Harry] will be able to say to his family 'she wrote him a letter and he's still doing it'. By taking this form of action, I protect my husband from this constant berating, and while unlikely perhaps it will give my father a moment to pause."

The Sussexes are reported to have stayed with the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey in Scotland in the week beginning July 28 2018. There, they are believed to have discussed what to do about Mr Markle and his public declarations.
In August 2018, the Duchess said, she spoke with two senior members of the Royal family – one in person and one by phone – who agreed she would write a letter.
In her witness statement to court, the Duchess explained she did not feel able to fly to see her father in person because she believed it would be impossible to reach him privately without risking bringing "yet more embarrassment" on her in-laws.
Saying "senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks" on the Royal family from Mr Markle, wanting them "stopped", the Duchess added: "I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them."
In October, at the time of the text messages, she was in the process of "meticulously" drafting a letter to Mr Markle, in which she told him of her heartbreak over his behaviour surrounding the wedding.
The letter was mentioned by one of her friends, speaking anonymously to People magazine, with extracts later published by the Mail on Sunday. 
The Duchess successfully sued the newspaper's publisher for breach of privacy, copyright and data protection, but Associated Newspapers Limited is seeking to have that summary judgment overturned in favour of a trial.
Earlier this week, the court heard select details of messages between the Duchess and Mr Knauf, in which said she had "obviously" written the letter to her father "with the understanding that it could be leaked".
Saying she would address him as "Daddy" in a handwritten letter, believing it would "pull at the heartstrings" in the event that it was leaked, she added that if he shared it then "at least the world will know the truth".
At the close of the three-day hearing, the media applied for the full schedule of text messages after the Duchess herself said in her witness statement that she was "puzzled" to see them quoted in extract. 
She has told the court that she had previously been unable to find the texts "because an automatic deletion system had been implemented on my phone by a cyber security specialist brought to Kensington Palace for my devices in 2016".
The texts are shown to be sent from "Tilly", a pseudonym used by Mr Knauf for the Duchess.
The messages also include emails between the Duchess, Prince Harry and Mr Knauf in which they discuss a briefing meeting with the authors of Finding Freedom.
They show the Duchess's email signature: "Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite." 
The Duchess has already won a High Court privacy battle with the Mail on Sunday after a judge found the publication of extracts of her letter to her father was unlawful.
The Mail on Sunday is seeking to overturn that summary decision, arguing that the matter should go to trial.
After a three-day hearing this week, the Court of Appeal judges will return their findings within the next few weeks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Shade being thrown by Thomas LOL:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BANG Showbiz
> *Thomas Markle: Maybe Prince Harry was dropped on his head as a baby?*
> 
> 
> Fri, 12 November 2021, 11:00 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry credit:Bang Showbiz
> Thomas Markle has claimed Prince Harry could've been "dropped on his head as a baby".
> The 77-year-old father of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, has slammed his daughter's husband, claiming "everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid", when asked whether he thinks the word "Megxit" - which was used to described Harry and Meghan's decision to quit their royal duties and move to the US - is "sexist", after Harry recently claimed it "was or is a misogynistic term".
> Thomas said: "I refer to Harry’s ignorance. I don’t know what happened to him, maybe he was dropped on his head as a baby or something?
> "But the bottom line is that everything that comes out of his mouth is always kind of stupid.
> 
> "It gets me in trouble with them, of course, but it's true.
> "He rides a bicycle around where he lives, every day, and I understand they're going to take the training wheels off soon."
> Thomas also admitted he was "disappointed" that Harry and Meghan didn't visit him in Mexico before they got engaged, claiming he invited them "several times".
> He said: "I invited them down several times.
> "I’m very disappointed that Harry, wanting to marry my daughter, wouldn’t have had the good sense to come down here and ask for her hand."
> Thomas said he would like to take his daughter's former press secretary, Jason Knauf, out for a steak meal, after an email exchange revealed the duchess had briefed Jason before sending Thomas a letter involved in her High Court privacy case.
> He added to GB News: "Finally the truth is coming out.
> "Thank God for Jason Knauf, I’d be happy to invite him over here and take him to Sizzler - we’ll enjoy a steak and a nice little dinner together.
> "He’s certainly putting things in the right perspective."
> It comes after Meghan apologised to the Court of Appeal for failing to remember she told Jason to brief the authors of her biography.
> The former actress and Harry had previously insisted they "did not collaborate...nor were they interviewed" for Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand's 'Finding Freedom', but emails between Meghan, 40, and her then-press secretary Jason about a meeting with the authors have now emerged.
> In a witness statement to the Court of Appeal, Mr. Knauf said Meghan and Harry, 37, "authorised specific cooperation in writing" in December 2018.
> Emails showed he felt putting the authors in touch with the former 'Suits' star's friends was "not a good idea".
> He added: "Being able to say hand on heart that we did not facilitate access will be important."
> Harry responded: "I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it.
> "Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there."
> And in a witness statement to the court, Mr. Knauf confirmed Meghan had sent him briefing notes on topics she suggested be discussed with the authors, including her father, and her half-siblings, as well as an infamous row over the tiara she would wear when she married Prince Harry in May 2018.
> Harry had written: "Also, are u planning on giving them a rough idea of what she’s been through over the last 2yrs?
> "Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.
> "Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!"
> Meghan has apologised and confirmed her former press secretary had briefed the authors with her knowledge, and insisted she "had not remembered" their exchanges or set out to mislead the court.
> She said: "I apologise to the Court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time.
> "I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the Defendant or the Court."



IMO after watching TM’s interviews, he sounds just like MM.  Always a victim, whines about MM’s poor attitude and Harry‘s poor upbringing, compliments himself with his humblebragging - it sounds exactly like her.  These charlatans have taken up too much of the headlines.  Even though we enjoy the jokes, time is up for them, they need to stop talking and start doing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Duchess of California and The Artist Formerly Known as Harry
> 
> Speaking of Omid, I nearly felt bad reading how coldly she spoke of him in those emails. Poor little pup must be heartbroken.



H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Disclaimer. Not a lawyer but did study some law, unfortunately not employment law:
> 
> From what I understand, if he's signed a NDA, unless he's regurgitating the same information/instances the court case demanded, he won't be able to say anything else. He may be able to go into greater detail surrounding and/or as background but nothing additionally.
> 
> The only other way he could play it with a tell-all, is that if some of the other things he was asked to do were against the law or his moral codes/society ethical norms were breached (e.g. asking him to lie or conceal theirs on other matters too).
> 
> In addition to an NDA when a job starts, they've probably asked him to sign something when he left so that he can't come back and sue anyone later or declare anything that should have already been addressed. There may still an issue with the BRF if this is the case.
> 
> If an NDAs and/or condition of severance is found to be unfair to an employee it/they can be rescinded, If this was the case he prob could write that tell-all. Obviously he'd never work again.


I remember the timing of the suit about the letter .... it was over, and several courtiers came out saying they would have liked to add something - too little too late ... hmmm ... This was vaguely at the same time as (the same?) courtiers made bullying claims ... more hmmm 
Knauf is under an NDA ... and Knauf is still employed by the Cambridges 

My guess: the employer that required the NDA was the BRF, not H &M personally, so, it is the BRF that can rescind the NDA
My guess: his participation is being carefully orchestrated by the BRF in the hopes of getting MM to drop the suit
My guess; the BRF is handling the bullying issues in tandem with the letter suit, they want it all to die down


----------



## bellecate

My first ever disclaimer this is not really my fault. We’re traveling/driving ( I’m not driving) going slow through snow and Twitter keeps enticing me to open it up.


----------



## joyeaux

This is a little more intel into Jason Knauf’s speaking out now vs. initially, from the Telegraph today:

*Duchess of Sussex aide came forward in privacy case after ‘regretting’ not speaking out sooner*
Jason Knauf's decision to provide written statement to the court detailing text and emails followed year-long campaign to persuade him




> The Duchess of Sussex’s most trusted aide came forward to give evidence in a Court of Appeal case after a one-year campaign to persuade him having “regretted” failing to speak out sooner, the court heard on Thursday.
> Jason Knauf, the Sussexes’ former communications secretary, provided a written statement to the court detailing emails and text message exchanges which showed the Duchess had authorised collaboration with the authors of her biography.
> They revealed the Duchess telling him that “obviously everything I've drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked”, and sharing her view that if Thomas Markle took the decision to share it, “at least the world will know the truth”.
> The emails provided by Mr Knauf led the Duchess to apologise to the Court of Appeal for failing to remember the exchange, in which she gave written authorisation for him to brief the authors of Finding Freedom.
> They have been the key part of the Mail on Sunday’s campaign to overturn a summary judgment that it unlawfully breached the Duchess’s privacy, copyright and data protection by publishing extracts from the letter to her father.
> 
> The Court of Appeal is currently hearing arguments that the case should instead be heard at trial. The Mail on Sunday argues that Mr Knauf’s new evidence should be admitted.
> 
> A witness statement from Keith Mathieson, the Mail on Sunday’s lawyer, has now revealed how Mr Knauf resisted having any part in the legal proceedings for a year before “regretting” his decision.
> Saying he first approached Mr Knauf in September last year, and tried again without success on numerous occasions, it was not until July 2021 that he eventually provided a written statement, insisting it was from a “position of neutrality” and covering only the relevant facts.
> Mr Mathieson said he had approached Mr Knauf again in July, having “received information from a confidential source to the effect that Mr Knauf now regretted not providing a witness statement to us”.
> “It did indeed turn out that, since the summary judgment had deprived Mr Knauf of the opportunity to provide evidence at a trial, he now wished to provide a witness statement to the parties so that his evidence could be considered as part of the appeal,” he said.
> He went on to explain that it had been impossible to convince Mr Knauf, through his lawyers, to provide testimony before then.
> At the time, it was considered likely that Mr Knauf and his former colleagues, including other press secretaries and a private secretary who had worked for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex at the relevant time, would eventually be called to give evidence at trial.
> Instead, the Duchess successfully applied for a summary judgment and, in Feb 2021, Lord Justice Warby ruled that the Mail on Sunday was unlawful in its actions.
> The decision meant that no arguments were heard at full trial, and no witnesses were heard in the High Court.
> A month later, a bullying complaint made against the Duchess, filed by Mr Knauf during his time at Kensington Palace and concerning two different members of staff, came to light in a newspaper.
> In March, the Duchess took part in a bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which she made revelations about her own suicidal thoughts, and serious claims about racism from a member of the Royal family.
> In July, Prince Harry - who on Thursday night joined members of the Armed Forces to mark Remembrance Day (below) - announced he would be writing his own version of the events of his life in an autobiography.
> 
> *In a statement dated Sep 21 2021, Mr Knauf said: “I consider it the right thing to do to set out information that I am advised may be relevant to the court’s considerations.
> “I have adopted a position of neutrality throughout, offering to provide information that I am advised is relevant to both parties. This has been a difficult and time-consuming process that I have not sought a role in.”*
> The Duchess of Sussex described Mr Knauf as a trusted adviser, and used elements from their email and text exchanges in her own witness statement.
> The Court of Appeal on Thursday heard closing arguments, as the Duchess’s legal team reiterated her right to privacy and copyright over the handwritten letter.
> Andrew Caldecott QC, representing ANL, argued there was a public interest in correcting “nasty and untrue” allegations about Mr Markle in a People Magazine article, which it claims put a “wholly misleading gloss” on the contents of the letter.
> “Either we believe in freedom of expression or we don't,” he told judges. “Thomas Markle has been royally attacked in the People magazine... and this is his reply.”
> Justin Rushbrooke QC, on behalf of the Duchess, argued the new texts and emails did not change the case, showing that his client considered the letter confidential and did not provide any details on it to the authors of Finding Freedom.
> The Court of Appeal judges on Thursday night said they will give their decision in writing at a later date.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> From Debi Tate:  "Ok. I’m from Toronto. My daughter was dating a Toronto cop at the time of Meghan’s calls to the Toronto Police about paparazzi and being followed and harassed. The police did respond. They only ever found one lonely photographer outside her Toronto house. They stopped acting on Meghan’s relentless calls because they were determined to be bogus. Also my current stylist worked on the set of Suits. He personally witnessed Meghan’s horrid behaviour toward staff. She shouted and threw things around the set. Many of these allegations now coming out I knew about at the time they were occurring. There is no reason why the Toronto cop and my stylist would make up these stories because Meghan was not yet famous or rather infamous. Just putting this out there for what it’s worth. Hope she gets jail time. What a rotter"



Seems she has been a mentally unstable liar and inventor of stories to make herself seem more important than she is for long time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Duchess of California and The Artist Formerly Known as Harry
> 
> Speaking of Omid, I nearly felt bad reading how coldly she spoke of him in those emails. Poor little pup must be heartbroken.



Speaking of the emails...she saw him tweet and felt uncomfortable, yet she never reads anything about herself (which Oprah admires oh so much) because she's better than that and has only room for stuff that nourishes the soul or whatever nonsense she spew? Oh Meg


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> I really need to stay off Twitter.
> View attachment 5248427


My money's on the Babybel.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

joyeaux said:


> "Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'" she wrote on Aug 22, 2018.
> "They fundamentally don't understand, so at least by writing H [Harry] will be able to say to his family 'she wrote him a letter and he's still doing it'.



I fundamentally don't understand either, but it might just be your stupid word salad.

No really, did she ever give a valid reason why she couldn't?

Also, I find it interesting she was so insistent Samantha Cohen didn't learn of the letter before it was sent out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe.




It did sound a bit...meager. 

But also, that stupid grin and that stupid handholding is starting to give me herpes (in Cologne dialect we literally say "I'm getting herpes" when something offends or disgusts us  ).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *The Duchess of California *and *The Artist Formerly Known as Harry*
> 
> Speaking of Omid, I nearly felt bad reading how coldly she spoke of him in those emails. Poor little pup must be heartbroken.


Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for you nicknames #10, The Duchess of California and #11, The Artist Formerly Known as Harry. Congratulations and please join the Energizer Bunny and the Eager Beaver Clubs.


----------



## Chanbal

joyeaux said:


> Of all this new info, the fact that her iPhone signature is ”_Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite.” _is what I can’t get out of my head  *Wonder if Charles’ “fundamental” lack of understanding is why Harry threw him under the bus to Oprah?*
> 
> 
> *Meghan’s texts revealed: Royal family are ‘constantly berating’ Prince Harry over row with my father*
> *Duchess of Sussex said, in newly-released messages, that senior royals 'fundamentally don't understand' the situation with Thomas Markle*
> By Hannah Furness, Royal Correspondent12 November 2021 • 3:38pm
> The Duchess of Sussex, writing in a text message to Jason Knauf, her then press secretary, said she and her husband had been 'endlessly explaining' the situation to the Prince of Wales Credit: Caitlin Ochs/Reuters
> The Duchess of Sussex accused the Royal family of "constantly berating" Prince Harry over the behaviour of her estranged father, saying that they "fundamentally" did not understand why she did not fly to his home in Mexico to "make this stop".
> The Duchess said she and her husband had been "endlessly explaining" the situation with Thomas Markle to the Prince of Wales while they were staying with him.
> At the time, in August 2018, Mr Markle had been giving a series of media interviews about his daughter after he pulled out of attending her wedding, causing distress to the Duke and Duchess and concern in the Royal household.
> According to newly released text messages, written to Jason Knauf, her then-press secretary as she crafted a letter to her estranged father, the Duchess said she wanted to protect her husband from the "pain" the situation had caused.
> "Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'" she wrote on Aug 22, 2018.
> "They fundamentally don't understand, so at least by writing H [Harry] will be able to say to his family 'she wrote him a letter and he's still doing it'. By taking this form of action, I protect my husband from this constant berating, and while unlikely perhaps it will give my father a moment to pause."
> 
> The Sussexes are reported to have stayed with the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey in Scotland in the week beginning July 28 2018. There, they are believed to have discussed what to do about Mr Markle and his public declarations.
> In August 2018, the Duchess said, she spoke with two senior members of the Royal family – one in person and one by phone – who agreed she would write a letter.
> In her witness statement to court, the Duchess explained she did not feel able to fly to see her father in person because she believed it would be impossible to reach him privately without risking bringing "yet more embarrassment" on her in-laws.
> Saying "senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks" on the Royal family from Mr Markle, wanting them "stopped", the Duchess added: "I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them."
> In October, at the time of the text messages, she was in the process of "meticulously" drafting a letter to Mr Markle, in which she told him of her heartbreak over his behaviour surrounding the wedding.
> The letter was mentioned by one of her friends, speaking anonymously to People magazine, with extracts later published by the Mail on Sunday.
> The Duchess successfully sued the newspaper's publisher for breach of privacy, copyright and data protection, but Associated Newspapers Limited is seeking to have that summary judgment overturned in favour of a trial.
> Earlier this week, the court heard select details of messages between the Duchess and Mr Knauf, in which said she had "obviously" written the letter to her father "with the understanding that it could be leaked".
> Saying she would address him as "Daddy" in a handwritten letter, believing it would "pull at the heartstrings" in the event that it was leaked, she added that if he shared it then "at least the world will know the truth".
> At the close of the three-day hearing, the media applied for the full schedule of text messages after the Duchess herself said in her witness statement that she was "puzzled" to see them quoted in extract.
> She has told the court that she had previously been unable to find the texts "because an automatic deletion system had been implemented on my phone by a cyber security specialist brought to Kensington Palace for my devices in 2016".
> The texts are shown to be sent from "Tilly", a pseudonym used by Mr Knauf for the Duchess.
> The messages also include emails between the Duchess, Prince Harry and Mr Knauf in which they discuss a briefing meeting with the authors of Finding Freedom.
> They show the Duchess's email signature: "Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite."
> The Duchess has already won a High Court privacy battle with the Mail on Sunday after a judge found the publication of extracts of her letter to her father was unlawful.
> The Mail on Sunday is seeking to overturn that summary decision, arguing that the matter should go to trial.
> After a three-day hearing this week, the Court of Appeal judges will return their findings within the next few weeks.


Poor Charles, how could he understand the situation? The duchess may have sold Charles a certain image of TM being supported by the daughter. Charles probably thought that if the duchess visits her father and assures him of her continuous support, everything will be fine. Also, Charles was likely happy to host TM at Clarence House, and that was the last thing the duchess wanted.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe.



WOW! The clip showing the long perp walk with no acknowledgment beyond very cursory applause is very telling! Helps to put things in honest perspective, too bad it does not get real news coverage. They are so self absorbed they will never internalize that even after being prompted in a flashing, full screen prompt the best they could get was a few minor acknowledgements with no enthusiasm, certainly not the standing ovation I bet she assumed would greet them.

Edited to add: It will be interesting to see how their camera crew edits this, in comparison to the reality, if they try to include it in a documentary.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s pretty funny that the BRF was saying the exact same thing that everyone else was saying, why doesn’t she just go talk to him in person?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> WOW! The clip showing the long perp walk with no acknowledgment beyond very cursory applause is very telling! Helps to put things in honest perspective, too bad it does not get real news coverage. They are so self absorbed they will never internalize that even after being prompted in a flashing, full screen prompt the best they could get was a few minor acknowledgements with no enthusiasm, certainly not the standing ovation I bet she assumed would greet them.
> 
> Edited to add: It will be interesting to see how their camera crew edits this, in comparison to the reality, if they try to include it in a documentary.



The ‘meager’ applause was with instructions to clap being posted on the screen!  While people are dining and enjoying themselves - no, the servers did not wait for them  Note who gets top billing


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wednesday, he lectures us on truth. Thursday, his emails are revealed.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Even in the UK there are journalists who are fighting tooth and nail to defend Meghan. According to this woman, lying to the court was just a mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: Meghan Markle made a mistake – that’s all
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was right to apologise to the court for denying collaborating with the authors of ‘Finding Freedom’ – but this not the ‘gotcha’ moment some would wish
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


Last I checked, "mistake" doesn't apply to things that are intentionally done, unless it's in hindsight.  Their "mistake" was misjudging the outcome.


----------



## Annawakes

So…..

Senior members of the royal family and senior aides were asking her to fly to Mexico to talk to her Dad in person.  These people have decades of experience handling media and they thought it was a good idea.

She disagreed and all by her herself declared that flying to Mexico would be too intrusive and cause too much embarrassment. The RF didn’t think so, but she did and of course she knows best!  And that is how this disastrous letter came about.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ‘meager’ applause was with instructions to clap being posted on the screen!  While people are dining and enjoying themselves - no, the servers did not wait for them  Note who gets top billing
> 
> View attachment 5248568


Utterly pathetic.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe.



The meager applause died down FAST.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> WOW! The clip showing the long perp walk with no acknowledgment beyond very cursory applause is very telling! Helps to put things in honest perspective, too bad it does not get real news coverage. They are so self absorbed they will never internalize that even after being prompted in a flashing, full screen prompt the best they could get was a few minor acknowledgements with no enthusiasm, certainly not the standing ovation I bet she assumed would greet them.
> 
> Edited to add: *It will be interesting to see how their camera crew edits this, in comparison to the reality, if they try to include it in a documentary.*


They will probably add canned cheering and clapping to enhance their sagging popularity, but we will know that it is as fake are they are.

ET correct a to as


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "...some minor family-backstabbing project..."


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe."


You hit the nail on the head. Quite the opposite of the Cambridges IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Edited to add: It will be interesting to see how their camera crew edits this, in comparison to the reality, if they try to include it in a documentary.



It will be edited the same way The Masked Singer was during Covid. Live audiences were not permitted but they took preexisting audience footage of screaming people jumping up and down and strung it throughout each episode. No one was the wiser when watching the show.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> They will probably add canned cheering and clapping to enhance their sagging popularity, but we will know that it is as fake are they are.
> 
> ET correct a to as



Ha! You beat me to it.


----------



## Chanbal

This must read article is still hot!    


Two days before Jason Knauf sat down with Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand to provide a two-hour background briefing for Finding Freedom – their biography of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex – he had an extraordinary email exchange with Prince Harry.
*Desperate for the authors to “get some truths out there,” the Prince begged the communications secretary he shared with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to make sure Meghan was cast in a positive light.*
“Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.
“Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it. So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!”
*An incredulous Knauf replied**: “Of course – I’ve never stopped!” It was a sharp insight into just how many fires he and others had fought on Harry and Meghan’s behalf in the two years since she had come on to the Royal scene.*
Understandably, much has been made of the evidence showing that the Duchess did co-operate with the authors of what turned out to be a highly flattering account of the Sussexes’ lives in the Royal family.
Indeed, this week Meghan was forced to apologise for previously unintentionally misleading the High Court, in her privacy case against the Mail on Sunday that is now at the Court of Appeal.
But this week’s revelations also lay bare another uncomfortable “truth” for the couple. *Far from being unsupported by the “institution”, as they described the monarchy to interviewer Oprah Winfrey, the evidence appears to tell a different story.*
Rather than being abandoned, it is a damning indictment of the gospel according to Harry and Meghan.
*‘Duchess Difficult’*
*Moreover, it exposes just how much was done behind the scenes to placate the pair nicknamed “Duchess Difficult” and “The Hostage” below stairs. Plus it is a vindication of staff who have always claimed they “bent over backwards” for the couple.*
Most of all, it is impossible now not to recall Meghan’s emotional interview with Oprah last March, as she exclaimed: “I’ve advocated for so long for women to use their voice and I was silent.”
When asked: “Were you silent or were you silenced?’ Meghan famously replied: “The latter. Not only was I not being protected but they were willing to lie to protect other members of the family but they weren’t willing to tell the truth to protect me and my husband.”
*Yet what Knauf’s witness statement – and the Duchess’s response to it – reveals is that no one was silent**. * *And it wasn’t just the palace PR machine that was going into overdrive for the couple but the Royals themselves.*
Indeed, further contradicting her earlier prime-time narrative, Meghan this week went into great detail about the lengths her in-laws had gone to to help. Especially in regards to her father, Thomas Markle Snr, who pulled out of his daughter’s May 2018 wedding at Windsor Castle at the last minute, following a heart attack.
She admitted two senior members of the Royal Family – whose names have not been made public – held a meeting with her and Harry “in regards to how to deal with the concern surrounding my father and his dealings with the media”. Meghan went on: “In accordance with the advice that I received from the two senior family members… I decided that I would write a letter to my father."
Yet while the Duchess claims “it was only when my father began criticising the Royal Family that senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern … and their desire to have them stopped,” palace insiders tell a different story.
*In fact, they insist that “concerns were raised” on multiple occasions about how to help the couple – as well as “manage the Thomas Markle situation”, long before he started talking to the media. 
The revelations this week certainly seem to contradict Harry’s claim to Oprah that they left the Royal Family due to a “lack of support and lack of understanding.”*
According to one well-placed source: “High level discussions were taking place about the Duchess’s father for months and months before the wedding.”
But matters really came to a head when Markle, a former Hollywood lighting director, gave his first ever interview to the Daily Mirror in December 2017. Headlined: “Royal Wedding Exclusive: I’d Love To Walk Meghan Down The Aisle”, the front page story boasted of how a reporter had tracked Meghan’s “reclusive” father down to Rosarito Beach “to discuss the upcoming union between his daughter and Prince Harry.”
*Crisis talks*
Asked if he would be in attendance at St George's Chapel to walk his daughter down the aisle, Markle answered: "Yes. I’d love to”. Then, he added, cautiously: “I’m very pleased. I’m delighted. I’m sorry. You know I can’t talk."
The Telegraph understands that the article sparked “crisis talks” at the palace, an institution well-versed in managing situations that protect its own reputation and privacy.  Another source says: “The whole institution was involved, not just the press office but palace lawyers, senior aides and family members.”
*As Meghan revealed in her witness statement this week, around the time she was drafting her letter to her father in August 2018, Simon Case, then Prince William’s press secretary and now the Cabinet Secretary, even suggested that the couple “fly out to see my father and speak with him in person.”*
Explaining why they decided against it, she added: “It seemed to me, however, that, even had I wanted to, it was completely unrealistic to think that I could fly discreetly to Mexico, arrive unannounced on his doorstep (as I had no secure means of communication with my father), to a location and residence I had never visited or known, in a small border town that had been descended upon by the press, and somehow hope to speak privately to my father without causing a frenzy of media attention and intrusion that could bring yet more embarrassment to the Royal Family.” *In texts released on Friday, Meghan accused the Royal Family of “constantly berating” Harry over the behaviour of her estranged father, saying they “fundamentally don’t understand” why she couldn’t fly out there.
The Telegraph understands that such concerns were taken seriously and a royal aide, who would not have attracted any media attention, offered to visit Markle on the couple’s behalf instead; the offer was declined.*
Insiders say the couple were backed from the beginning – and it is not just Mr Knauf’s witness statement that supports that premise, but Meghan’s too. As she wrote to the judge this week: “I had privately endured the media onslaught surrounding my father with the support of my husband and Mr Knauf.”
*Knauf's position of neutrality*
Having been born in America and educated in New Zealand, with a formidable career in public relations under his belt having spun for the Royal Bank of Scotland in the wake of the global financial crisis, cool-headed and approachable Mr Knauf appeared perfect for the job.
*Indeed the mild mannered and progressive-thinking Texan moved heaven and earth for Meghan, seemingly responding to Harry’s desperate pleas that he would “lose her” if she wasn’t well protected. *
On Thursday, the court heard how 39-year-old Knauf came forward to give evidence after a one-year campaign to persuade him, after he “regretted” failing to speak out about what he knew about the drafting of Meghan’s letter to her father and the couple’s involvement with Finding Freedom earlier. Having first been approached by the Mail on Sunday’s lawyer, Keith Mathieson, in September 2020, it was not until July 2021 that he eventually provided a written statement, insisting it was from a “position of neutrality” and covering only the relevant facts.
He said: “This has been a difficult and time-consuming process that I have not sought a role in,” an understatement, perhaps, when you consider his bosses are the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Although he ended up working solely for William and Kate, Knauf was originally far closer to Harry when he first joined the Kensington Palace press office in 2015. In one email Harry, 37, to whom Knauf refers as “Sir” throughout, appears on such familiar terms with his comms chief that he willingly confides, when referring to collaborating with the Finding Freedom authors: “I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it.
“Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there. The truth is v much needed and would be appreciated, especially around the Markle/wedding stuff but at the same time we can’t put them directly in touch with her friends.”
Their close relationship had been forged two years earlier in October 2016. Completely surprised by my scoop revealing *Harry’s relationship with Meghan Markle – then a virtually unknown US actress – it was Knauf, only a year into the job, who managed the media in the immediate aftermath and beyond. *Since I had not given Kensington Palace prior warning, Knauf soon found himself inundated with requests from outlets around the world. In addition, he had to manage the couple’s reaction to their relationship being made public after having secretly dated for about six months.
*Yet what the PR professional, who took a masters degree in politics and communication at the London School of Economics, could not have foreseen is how he would be compromised from the start. This was when Harry and Meghan persuaded him to put out an unprecedented statement, in his own name, condemning the press for how it had reacted to the news that the Suits star was the prince’s “girlfriend”.*
The statement “by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry”, published on November 8, 2016, read: “The past week has seen a line crossed. His girlfriend, Meghan Markle, has been subject to a wave of abuse and harassment.”
Detailing how she had been “smeared” and calling out the “racial undertones” of comment pieces, the strongly worded warning put Knauf in a difficult position. Suddenly the palace was being pitted against the press whom it was his job to liaise with.
By referencing how Meghan’s mother, Doria Ragland, had “had to struggle past photographers in order to get to her front door” and “the attempts of reporters and photographers to gain illegal entry to her home and the calls to police that followed”, the salvo also set the tone for a narrative that would continue throughout the Sussexes’ tenure at “The Firm”, all the way to Oprah’s sofa. Namely, that like Diana, the late Princess of Wales, Meghan was a victim.
As the statement continued: “Prince Harry is worried about Ms. Markle’s safety and is deeply disappointed that he has not been able to protect her. It is not right that a few months into a relationship with him that Ms. Markle should be subjected to such a storm. He knows commentators will say this is ‘the price she has to pay’ and that ‘this is all part of the game’. He strongly disagrees. This is not a game - it is her life and his.”
*Friends of Knauf say he had no choice but to sign off the statement, even though it put him in an awkward position with the journalists he had to deal with on a daily basis.* Not least when a rather “desperate” Harry appeared to intimate not putting it out might cost him his fledgling relationship with “The One”.
*The 403-word statement, which the Telegraph understands was drafted with both Harry and Meghan’s input, not only set a new precedent far removed from the Queen’s tried and tested “never complain, never explain” mantra. It also marked the Duchess’s first hands-on foray into royal media management, which would continue throughout her time in the Royal Family.*
Rather than picking their battles, the couple made it clear that they would be paying much closer attention to what had been written about them. Which left Knauf and the rest of the palace’s “Team Sussex” with their work cut out.  “*It wasn’t just a problem that they read everything,” explained one former employee, “It was that they were both really thin-skinned.”*
*A round-the-clock job*
*Following their engagement in November 2017 – exactly a year after Knauf had fired off his bombshell missive – the couple were given their own team of staff who learned quickly that it would be a 24/7 job.*
“*The last thing we’d do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we’d do in the morning is reply to their messages,” said one former aide. “Weekends, holidays - there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time.” Rather than being abandoned by the palace machine, staff were actually working overtime to super-serve the couple.*
As arguably evidenced by Meghan’s 23-page response to Knauf’s witness statement, the Duchess was intent on being across the detail. She told Knauf when drafting the handwritten letter to her father: “Obviously everything I drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked so I have been meticulous in my word choice but please do let me know if anything stands out for you as a liability...(I) toiled over every detail which could be manipulated…”
In the end “The Duchess accepted one small drafting suggestion I made to mention her father’s health in the letter”, according to Knauf. Similarly, as his witness statement also explains, it was Meghan who wrote up “some background reminders” for his meeting with Scobie and Durand, as well as offering to “fill in any other blanks.”
Topic areas included information on how she had very minimal contact with her half-siblings throughout her childhood, that she had been “close [for] most of her life” with her father and she had supported him “...in spite of his reclusiveness” and the fact her half-sister Samantha had had three children with three different fathers. She even wanted to give her “perspective on the thinking behind a statement in November 2016 issued by Mr Knauf" as well as detailing how the tiara for her wedding had been selected.
*As one insider put it: “That’s vintage Meghan. She was a control freak throughout.”
To counter briefings suggesting the couple were demanding and difficult, a number of Meghan’s anonymous friends popped up in the press suggesting that palace employees “who preferred a more genteel pace” simply could not keep up with the Duchess’s “American work ethic”.*
Naturally the tempo picked up even more with the wedding fast approaching in the new year of 2018. “The wedding was hugely stressful for everyone involved in it,” said one former aide.
When Markle pulled out of the wedding three days before the big day, the Royals rallied, with Prince Charles offering to walk Meghan down the aisle instead. The Most Rev Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who officiated the ceremony, is also understood to have been drafted in to provide “psychological as well as spiritual” support.
Yet it is the timetable of events that have been laid bare in court this week that give the strongest indication of just how much help the couple received. In the autumn of 2018, after Meghan’s PA, Melissa Toubati, sensationally quit, the first of nine staff members to leave in the subsequent 18 months.  The couple were apparently “furious” about reports of their high staff turnover - piling more pressure on their PR people to “try to turn negative headlines into positives”.
We now know that Knauf continued to work tirelessly and intimately with Harry and Meghan even after he had submitted a bullying claim against them in October 2018.
Knauf sent an email to Case warning that he feared “nothing would be done” about alleged attacks on staff, which was then passed on to Samantha Carruthers, the head of HR based at Clarence House. Despite this, he continued working for the couple for a further six months.
*After the Sussexes found out about the bullying complaint, their relationship with Knauf irretrievably broke down and in March 2019, he became an adviser to the Cambridges, before becoming chief executive of their Royal Foundation.* He will leave the charity next month to join his husband in India, where he has been working for the British Embassy in Delhi for the past six months.
*Harry and Meghan replaced Knauf with another American PR supremo in the form of Sara Latham, a former adviser to the *******s.*  The modus operandi, however, remained unchanged with the couple returning from a tour to Africa in October 2019 with a statement by Harry accusing “some newspapers” of “vilifying” his wife “almost daily for the past nine months”. Referencing his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, who died in a Paris car crash while being pursued by the paparazzi, the Duke said: “Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one.
“Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”
In January 2020, they announced that they would be “stepping back as senior Royals” to become “financially independent”, making it clear they wanted to be free of any restraints.
*Of course, what we have really learnt from this week’s court proceedings is how much control the Sussexes actually had all along – and how much those around them desperately tried to save them from themselves.*



			https://archive.vn/PpcdE#selection-2525.0-2560.0


----------



## bag-mania

“The last thing we’d do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we’d do in the morning is reply to their messages,” said one former aide. “Weekends, holidays - there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time.” Rather than being abandoned by the palace machine, staff were actually working overtime to super-serve the couple.

What kind of hell was it to be their employee?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It will be edited the same way The Masked Singer was during Covid. Live audiences were not permitted but they took preexisting audience footage of screaming people jumping up and down and strung it throughout each episode. No one was the wiser when watching the show.


The magic of television.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> “The last thing we’d do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we’d do in the morning is reply to their messages,” said one former aide. “Weekends, holidays - there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time.” Rather than being abandoned by the palace machine, staff were actually working overtime to super-serve the couple.
> 
> What kind of hell was it to be their employee?


Reminds me of this excellent new law in Portugal.


>


----------



## papertiger

joyeaux said:


> Some intel from the last day of hearing... I’m attaching the texts so you don’t have to worry about links. She was “Tilly” in Jason Knauf’s phone.
> 
> Of all this new info, the fact that her iPhone signature is ”_Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite.” _is what I can’t get out of my head  Wonder if Charles’ “fundamental” lack of understanding is why Harry threw him under the bus to Oprah?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan’s texts revealed: Royal family are ‘constantly berating’ Prince Harry over row with my father*
> *Duchess of Sussex said, in newly-released messages, that senior royals 'fundamentally don't understand' the situation with Thomas Markle*
> By Hannah Furness, Royal Correspondent12 November 2021 • 3:38pm
> The Duchess of Sussex, writing in a text message to Jason Knauf, her then press secretary, said she and her husband had been 'endlessly explaining' the situation to the Prince of Wales Credit: Caitlin Ochs/Reuters
> The Duchess of Sussex accused the Royal family of "constantly berating" Prince Harry over the behaviour of her estranged father, saying that they "fundamentally" did not understand why she did not fly to his home in Mexico to "make this stop".
> The Duchess said she and her husband had been "endlessly explaining" the situation with Thomas Markle to the Prince of Wales while they were staying with him.
> At the time, in August 2018, Mr Markle had been giving a series of media interviews about his daughter after he pulled out of attending her wedding, causing distress to the Duke and Duchess and concern in the Royal household.
> According to newly released text messages, written to Jason Knauf, her then-press secretary as she crafted a letter to her estranged father, the Duchess said she wanted to protect her husband from the "pain" the situation had caused.
> "Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'" she wrote on Aug 22, 2018.
> "They fundamentally don't understand, so at least by writing H [Harry] will be able to say to his family 'she wrote him a letter and he's still doing it'. By taking this form of action, I protect my husband from this constant berating, and while unlikely perhaps it will give my father a moment to pause."
> 
> The Sussexes are reported to have stayed with the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey in Scotland in the week beginning July 28 2018. There, they are believed to have discussed what to do about Mr Markle and his public declarations.
> In August 2018, the Duchess said, she spoke with two senior members of the Royal family – one in person and one by phone – who agreed she would write a letter.
> In her witness statement to court, the Duchess explained she did not feel able to fly to see her father in person because she believed it would be impossible to reach him privately without risking bringing "yet more embarrassment" on her in-laws.
> Saying "senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks" on the Royal family from Mr Markle, wanting them "stopped", the Duchess added: "I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them."
> In October, at the time of the text messages, she was in the process of "meticulously" drafting a letter to Mr Markle, in which she told him of her heartbreak over his behaviour surrounding the wedding.
> The letter was mentioned by one of her friends, speaking anonymously to People magazine, with extracts later published by the Mail on Sunday.
> The Duchess successfully sued the newspaper's publisher for breach of privacy, copyright and data protection, but Associated Newspapers Limited is seeking to have that summary judgment overturned in favour of a trial.
> Earlier this week, the court heard select details of messages between the Duchess and Mr Knauf, in which said she had "obviously" written the letter to her father "with the understanding that it could be leaked".
> Saying she would address him as "Daddy" in a handwritten letter, believing it would "pull at the heartstrings" in the event that it was leaked, she added that if he shared it then "at least the world will know the truth".
> At the close of the three-day hearing, the media applied for the full schedule of text messages after the Duchess herself said in her witness statement that she was "puzzled" to see them quoted in extract.
> She has told the court that she had previously been unable to find the texts "because an automatic deletion system had been implemented on my phone by a cyber security specialist brought to Kensington Palace for my devices in 2016".
> The texts are shown to be sent from "Tilly", a pseudonym used by Mr Knauf for the Duchess.
> The messages also include emails between the Duchess, Prince Harry and Mr Knauf in which they discuss a briefing meeting with the authors of Finding Freedom.
> They show the Duchess's email signature: "Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite."
> The Duchess has already won a High Court privacy battle with the Mail on Sunday after a judge found the publication of extracts of her letter to her father was unlawful.
> The Mail on Sunday is seeking to overturn that summary decision, arguing that the matter should go to trial.
> After a three-day hearing this week, the Court of Appeal judges will return their findings within the next few weeks.



It's not what you say, it's what you leave out. 

"She has told the court that she had previously been unable to find the texts 'because an automatic deletion system had been implemented on my phone by a cyber security specialist brought to Kensington Palace for my devices in 2016'.

Isn't it funny no-one else's messages were automatically deleted against their will  . She doesn't actually say if and when those emails have been deleted automatically. My work emails and texts will be deleted after 7 years, which means that even though I too have an 'automatic deletion system' on all my devices - but emails and texts from 2016, '17 '18 etc are still there.

Aides didn't advise her to write the letter to TM with invisible ink though


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *the pair nicknamed “Duchess Difficult” and “The Hostage”*



Great article!  The palace was wrong about one thing. Hazzie is no “hostage”. 
He craves this attention [so does she], always has, always will. The guy is one of the thirstiest celebs Hwood has seen.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article!  The palace was wrong about one thing. Hazzie is no “hostage”.
> He craves this attention [so does she], always has, always will. The guy is one of the thirstiest celebs Hwood has seen.
> 
> View attachment 5248620


It's an amazing article. It's the icing on the cake in response to Oprah's interview. I would give it 10 out of 5 starts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If only …


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Reminds me of this excellent new law in Portugal.


Haha, that new law came immediately to my mind when I read Tominey's article. Of course, it was reported on DM. 








						Portugal BANS employers contacting workers outside of office hours
					

Portugal is set to introduce a new labour law that will ban employers from contacting workers outside of their contracted office hours, in new rules approved in parliament on Friday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> When Markle pulled out of the wedding three days before the big day, the Royals rallied, with Prince Charles offering to walk Meghan down the aisle instead. *The Most Rev Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who officiated the ceremony, is also understood to have been drafted in to provide “psychological as well as spiritual” support.*
> Yet it is the timetable of events that have been laid bare in court this week that give the strongest indication of just how much help the couple received. In the autumn of 2018, after Meghan’s PA, Melissa Toubati, sensationally quit, the first of nine staff members to leave in the subsequent 18 months. The couple were apparently “furious” about reports of their high staff turnover - piling more pressure on their PR people to *“try to turn negative headlines into positives”*.



More truths:
- they were offered spiritual and psychological support. Gee, Oprah, couldn’t you have gotten that part correct? Gayle?

- *try to turn negative headlines into positives *- yep, just manipulate the truth.

Calling Karma - it’s time, baby, it is indeed time.

ETA:  worth a listen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> WOW! The clip showing the long perp walk with no acknowledgment beyond very cursory applause is very telling! Helps to put things in honest perspective, too bad it does not get real news coverage. They are so self absorbed they will never internalize that even after being prompted in a flashing, full screen prompt the best they could get was a few minor acknowledgements with no enthusiasm, certainly not the standing ovation I bet she assumed would greet them.
> 
> Edited to add: It will be interesting to see how their camera crew edits this, in comparison to the reality, if they try to include it in a documentary.



I was just thinking...was everyone else in a full-on ball gown, or was it just Miss If-I'm-not-invited-I'll-stage-my-own-Oscars?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> More truths:
> - they were offered spiritual and psychological support. Gee, Oprah, couldn’t you have gotten that part correct? Gayle?
> 
> - *try to turn negative headlines into positives *- yep, just manipulate the truth.
> 
> Calling Karma - it’s time, baby, it is indeed time.
> 
> ETA:  worth a listen



MM, Hazz, OW, GK... should all apologize for misleading the public!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Yanca

US Media still failing to report all about the case, People magazine which is very Pro Sussex, tweeted about Meghan only wrote  the letter because Prince Charles is berating Harry about her father, but People magazine did not report about Meghan having to apologized to the courts. It's so bias.

I guess in that sense the duo is winning  in the US because they are after the US media and market based on their emails exchanges,   seem the rest of the world can see their duplicity but the The US media ( mostly at least). It just irritating that any critisism against them, Hazza would say that is is mininformation or racism, but really it just people seeing through their actions. They seemed to have a hand in closing down accounts in twitter who are critical of them. They can call US senators on their private numbers, H admitted he was emailing with the twitter founder but nobody asked them why did you not call your doctors when M was feeling sucidal? it just does not make any sense.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan will go down in the history books as The Lying Duchess and Harry as the Cowardly Prince. That’s their legacy I think.


----------



## csshopper

Yanca said:


> US Media still failing to report al about the case, People magazine which is very Pro Sussex, tweeted about Meghan only wrote  the letter because Prince Charles is berating Harry about her father, but People magazine did not report about Meghan having to apologized to the courts. It's so bias.
> 
> I guess in that sense the duo is winning  in the US because they are after the US media and market based on their emails exchanges,   seem the rest of the world can see their duplicity but the The US media ( mostly at least). It just irritating that any critisism against them, Hazza would say that is is mininformation or racism, but really it just people seeing through their actions. They seemed to have a hand in clsoing down accounts in twitter who are critical of them. They can call US senators on their private numbers, H admitted he was emailing with the twitter founder but nobody asked them why did you not call your doctors when M was feeling sucidal? it just does not make any sense.


Yes, Saint Meghan trying to save the Monarchy from embarrassment. A futile effort if ever there was one, SHE is the embarrassment.


----------



## Suncatcher

Meghan and Harry come across as vile and despicable individuals with seemingly no redeeming qualities. 

The footage of them walking in was interesting. Tepid polite clapping that ended quickly even with prompting from the screen, no standing ovation and no interest from the people at the tables to watch them come in. They are insignificant  and yet they don’t realize this. You have to wonder who they think their fandom is. Can’t think of a generation they speak to. Maybe it is the fact they are in America, a republic. Very few people in America could tell you what is Sussex (a city, a province, a state, a region, a town, the name of a castle?). I don’t know what is Sussex. Which makes that title kind of irrelevant if you don’t understand its significance.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Miss If-I'm-not-invited-I'll-stage-my-own-Oscars"


 Add it to the list


----------



## bellecate

I have a question Ms Winfrey. If the palace took little miss whiney’s  phone how was she able to send all those texts. Someone needs to study up on Journalism 101 maybe.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> “The last thing we’d do before going to sleep is reply to their messages and the first thing we’d do in the morning is reply to their messages,” said one former aide. “Weekends, holidays - there were no boundaries. They live on their phones all the time.” Rather than being abandoned by the palace machine, staff were actually working overtime to super-serve the couple.
> 
> What kind of hell was it to be their employee?


Too bad they don't live in Portugal, where it's now illegal for bosses to contact employees outside of work hours!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking...was everyone else in a full-on ball gown, or was it just *Miss If-I'm-not-invited-I'll-stage-my-own-Oscars*?


@QueenofWrapDress for your #12 nickname, Miss If-I'm-not-invited-I'll-stage-my-own-Oscars. I can see M tapping her foot and saying it in grandiose Veruca Salt style. Congratulations and please join the Early Bird Club.  
And for this masterpiece, please help yourself to a cake of your choice and I realize that you're a great cook and your cakes will never taste like mine.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Meghan will go down in the history books as The Lying Duchess and Harry as the Cowardly Prince. That’s their legacy I think.


They may get a prime spot in history books like "The Book of Charlatans."


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *Too bad they don't live in Portugal*, where it's now illegal for bosses to contact employees outside of work hours!


Don't wish that to the Portuguese.


----------



## Chanbal

If this is true…


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking...was everyone else in a full-on ball gown, or was it just Miss If-I'm-not-invited-I'll-stage-my-own-Oscars?


Jon Bon Jovi received an award that night, he wore a wonderful dark suit, dark shirt, black long tie - no bow tie ,  no tux 
His wife wore a dark colored pant suit, olive silk shirt if I remember , no ball gown, self styled and did her own makeup, she wore glasses


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

An important throwback!


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Jon Bon Jovi received an award that night, he wore a wonderful dark suit, dark shirt, black long tie - no bow tie ,  no tux
> His wife wore a dark colored pant suit, olive silk shirt if I remember , no ball gown, self styled and did her own makeup, she wore glasses


Dorothea Bongiovi is a very down to earth Jersey girl. The two of them, high school sweethearts, started a restaurant in NJ that offers free meals to anyone who needs one, no questions asked. They actually accomplish things.


> https://jbjsoulkitchen.org/


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Jon Bon Jovi received an award that night, he wore a wonderful dark suit, dark shirt, black long tie - no bow tie ,  no tux
> His wife wore a dark colored pant suit, olive silk shirt if I remember , no ball gown, self styled and did her own makeup, she wore glasses


how did she miscalculate the appropriate dress so badly?  does she care?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> If this is true…




Looks like punches are about to be thrown. If true, good on our USA soldiers. 
Takes courage, dignity and guts to speak truth to power.  Glad to know some still stand up.
‘Waiting for more info…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Trying to avoid controversy here, but this story seems to be spinning up fast. 
still waiting on confirmation




Spoiler: Is this too much?





https://twitter.com/TOMMY94560065
Comments:
TOMMY

@TOMMY94560065
·
6m

Replying to
@Alexes47070206
@BaronessBruck
Have you heard this?




Baroness Bruck
·
Only rumours so far


----------



## Chanbal

Great title! I wonder if the author was inspired on a certain post about "my Alec".


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> how did she miscalculate the appropriate dress so badly?  does she care?


She probably overdressed intentionally. Most people would be embarrassed if they showed up way overdressed, but not a narcissist. She revels in the attention, even if much of it is negative.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://twitter.com/TOMMY94560065



Oh Gosh, I clicked on the link, and . I moved the pictures to the Spoiler and I didn't copy and paste the legend. 


Spoiler: Wow, wow, wow… noooo


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trying to avoid controversy here, but this story seems to be spinning up fast.
> still waiting on confirmation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Is this too much?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/TOMMY94560065
> Comments:
> TOMMY
> 
> @TOMMY94560065
> ·
> 6m
> 
> Replying to
> @Alexes47070206
> @BaronessBruck
> Have you heard this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baroness Bruck
> ·
> Only rumours so far



I praise the veterans that allegedly asked him to go home. 
I'm still in shock with the TOMMY link. The pictures say a lot, but did you read the legend? 
I wonder if they are part of the info that was cleaned from the net, and it's showing up again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nm


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I praise the veterans that allegedly asked him to go home.
> I'm still in shock with the TOMMY link. The pictures say a lot, but did you read the legend?
> I wonder if they are part of the info that was cleaned from the net, and it's showing up again.



Yes, yes, I saw that.  Eeek, could be a bumpy night.  Getting popcorn and champers ready.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

One more…


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Bob Woodruff nearly died in an IED explosion in Iraq in 2006 while reporting for ABC News. Harry was surrounded by a security bubble during his time in Afghanistan.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, yes, I saw that.  Eeek, could be a bumpy night.  Getting popcorn and champers ready.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Suncatcher said:


> Meghan and Harry come across as vile and despicable individuals with seemingly no redeeming qualities.
> 
> The footage of them walking in was interesting. Tepid polite clapping that ended quickly even with prompting from the screen, no standing ovation and no interest from the people at the tables to watch them come in. They are insignificant  and yet they don’t realize this. You have to wonder who they think their fandom is. Can’t think of a generation they speak to. Maybe it is the fact they are in America, a republic. Very few people in America could tell you what is Sussex (a city, a province, a state, a region, a town, the name of a castle?). I don’t know what is Sussex. Which makes that title kind of irrelevant if you don’t understand its significance.


There is actually a Sussex County in northern New Jersey. It is a relatively affluent area. But I doubt the residents want anything to do with them


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> She probably overdressed intentionally. Most people would be embarrassed if they showed up way overdressed, but not a narcissist. She revels in the attention, even if much of it is negative.


The over the top red dress was a direct salvo leveled at Kate’s golden Bond girl dress , the gold dress everyone loved


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Meghan will go down in the history books as The Lying Duchess and Harry as the Cowardly Prince. That’s their legacy I think.


Well, the US is now in the mode of rewriting history, whether good or bad, so she'll probably be written up as the first biracial royal who saved the planet for us all.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Dorothea Bongiovi is a very down to earth Jersey girl. The two of them, high school sweethearts, started a restaurant in NJ that offers free meals to anyone who needs one, no questions asked. They actually accomplish things.


I had no idea.  Sounds like sincere charity without any fanfare to me!


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> The over the top red dress was a direct salvo leveled at Kate’s golden Bond girl dress , the gold dress everyone loved


I cracked up at the tweet that said Megain probably thought the red atrocity was her "revenge dress", and would take attention away from Kate.


----------



## needlv

this and a huge disrespect to the Queen who asked for it to not be used…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, yes, I saw that.  Eeek, could be a bumpy night.  Getting popcorn and champers ready.


According to the author of the post, the photos were taken at the Soho (or associated with the Soho). I'm all in favor that each person should be free to live her/his own life. If she would stop preaching people and live a private life, I would have ignored the photos.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Meghan will go down in the history books as *The Lying Duchess* and Harry as the *Cowardly Prince*. That’s their legacy I think.


#5
Thanks @Lodpah for your nicknames #5, The Lying Duchess and #6 Cowardly Prince. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club (for#5).


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> If this is true…



Someone in the audience spoke "the truth."


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh, I clicked on the link, and . I moved the pictures to the Spoiler and I didn't copy and paste the legend.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Wow, wow, wow… noooo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5248760
> 
> View attachment 5248764



The poses aside, her face was pretty then and makeup was on point too. Wish she didn't have the aspirations to turn into Joyce Wildenstein


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> Someone in the audience spoke "the truth."


Honestly when I was in the service these visiting dignitaries were more of a nuisance than anything. We wanted to be out of uniform and enjoying our time off. Most military people I served with WERE not fazed at all by them. We wanted to chill with each other. I understand their lackluster approval of these two fakes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> According to the author of the post, the photos were taken at the Soho (or associated with the Soho). I'm all in favor that each person should be free to live her/his own life. If she would stop preaching people and live a private life, I would have ignored the photos.



100% agree.  It’s the preaching, the hypocrisy of them and people who support them.  I am now looking at the BRF with a different view. They need to dial down the ‘holier-than-thou’ chats - sadly, these have a way of turning into ‘we are better than thee’ chats. Ick.


ETA: if the BRF steps up and stops the H&M nonsense [as they did with Andy], then ok, I will reconsider.  As it stands now, they look like an epic fail. Imo, of course.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> how did she miscalculate the appropriate dress so badly?  does she care?



She knows the press here will shower her with glowing praise and compliments no matter what she wears. There were dozens of headlines gushing over that ill-fitting red dress. Not one of them reported that the other people there weren’t dressed up as much. The only surprise is that she didn’t wear a tiara.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> The poses aside, her face was pretty then and makeup was on point too. Wish she didn't have the aspirations to turn into Joyce Wildenstein


Reminds me of the picture of her hanging onto her teacher on the European trip when she was 15 and fast forward to hanging onto her handbag husband. Sunshine Sucks can try as hard as they want to recast her into a woman of class and style, not going to happen. Her most "real" self was carrying a suitcase while flashing fake boobs and sailing as baggage on yachts. 

Don't recognize the man in this picture but am certain he was either rich or someone with a connection to something she wanted.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The over the top red dress was a direct salvo leveled at Kate’s golden Bond girl dress , the gold dress everyone loved


She failed, spectacularly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I had no idea.  Sounds like sincere charity without any fanfare to me!


Yup, total opposite of the Harkles.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh, I clicked on the link, and . I moved the pictures to the Spoiler and I didn't copy and paste the legend.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Wow, wow, wow… noooo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5248760
> 
> View attachment 5248764


I have to wonder, did "The Firm" not have have MI6 or similar do a deep dive into her background before the engagement? Or if they did, did Harry just forge ahead out of stubbornness?


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Reminds me of the picture of her hanging onto her teacher on the European trip when she was 15 and fast forward to hanging onto her handbag husband. Sunshine Sucks can try as hard as they want to recast her into a woman of class and style, not going to happen. Her most "real" self was carrying a suitcase while flashing fake boobs and sailing as baggage on yachts.
> 
> Don't recognize the man in this picture but am certain he was either rich or someone with a connection to something she wanted.



If I didn't know who she was, I'd have assumed she's a sugar baby or an escort and the older man was her benefactor


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I have to wonder, did "The Firm" not have have MI6 or similar do a deep dive into her background before the engagement? Or if they did, did Harry just forge ahead out of stubbornness?



Wasn't it reported or speculated that William told Cuckold Prince to take his time to get to know Evil Hollywood but he still chose to rush things with her?  

ETA: It's the BRF. I'm sure they vetted her and that's why they had to get things scrubbed off the internet. They probably didn't think she's the right fit but Harry already made up his mind anyways.


----------



## CarryOn2020

New nickname from Radar Online: TRFKATS [the royals formerly known as the sussexes] 

*Finding Freedom Through Lies: The One About The Royals Formerly Known As The Sussexes*









						Finding Freedom Through Lies: The One About The Royals Formerly Known As The Sussexes
					

Everyone loves a good bit of gossip, and none more so than those of us who work in the industry.




					radaronline.com
				






Spoiler: Luddite



_Unreliable Sources _has reliably written about Omid Scobie before, exposing — at the very least — his big whammy of a lie about his age.

A quick recap: According to Scobie, a former reporter for the weekly British tabloid Heat, he once told The Times of London he’d "just turned 33" when official records revealed he was actually six years older. 

Now, in the High Court of Britain, Scobie has been exposed yet again — as effectively being a mouthpiece for Meghan and Harry, The Royals Formerly Known As The Sussexes. 

Meghan was forced to apologize to the court — perjury, anyone? — after, all of a sudden, she remembered an email exchange with Jason Knauf, her former communications secretary. 

In an email exchange presented to the court, mischievous Meghan suggests Knauf be a source to Scobie and Carolyn Durand, the authors of the book _Finding Freedom_ which was billed as a tell-all tome — without cooperation from the TRFKATS — about their escape from Buckingham Palace. 

According to The Sun, Knauf said in his witness statement how the couple authorized “specific cooperation” for certain topics for the bombshell book.

Knauf also told how he met with Scobie to discuss the "briefing points" Meghan wanted him to share with the authors.

This all emerged as a trio of judges are considering an appeal by the Mail on Sunday against a judgment in favor of the TRFKATS, after Meghan sued the publisher when the contents of a letter she sent to her father, the loose-lipped Thomas Markle, was published.

Until now, TRFKATS have always denied having anything to do with the book, with Scobie also lambasting any suggestion of that as "false."

Now it’s proven that Scobie is a liar, can he maintain his roles as Royal Editor At Large for Harper's Bazaar and as a paid contributor for ABC News and Good Morning America?
_*Leakage*_
Here’s what TRFKATS wanted Knauf to leak to Scobie and Durand, according to the High Court.
Details about:

Her "happiness about moving to Windsor" and details surrounding her wedding tiara. 
“Information on how she had very minimal contact with her half-siblings throughout her childhood.”
How she had been “close (for) most of her life” with her dad “in spite of his reclusiveness.” 
Drip, drip, drip. So he did.

_*Loose-Lipped*_
It has also now emerged Harry wanted to talk to Scobie and Durand, too!
Talk about a royal turncoat. 
Knauf, who has systematically dismantled what little credibility TRFKATS had remaining, told the court how Harry messaged him to ask if he would give the _Finding Freedom _duo a “rough idea” of what Meghan had gone through over the past two years.
"Media onslaught, cyber bullying on a different scale, puppeteering Thomas Markle etc etc etc.,” he wrote in an email. 
“Even if they choose not to use it, they should hear what it was like from someone who was in the thick of it.
“So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I ?!”
So much for Harry following the Windsor’s long-held tradition of "never complain, never explain.”

_*Luddite*_
Also revealed in court, was Meghan’s email signature.
"Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite." 
Well, Luddite (which, by the way, is the definition of a person opposed to new technology or ways of working) was allowed to at least keep her iPhone when she joined the House of Windsor. 
As you might recall, Luddite told Oprah: "I mean, you have to understand, as well, when I joined that family, that was the last time, until we came here, that I saw my passport, my driver's license, my keys. All that gets turned over. I didn't see any of that anymore."
Or maybe this was art imitating life because, after all, Meghan insisted on her own “ways of working” as a member of the royal family.


----------



## tiktok

New York Magazine is about as woke as it gets, and yet the comments on this (ridiculously positive "woe Meghan") article are vicious. I think she has a brilliant PR team worth its weight in gold and effectively used the Black card early on to silence any overt criticism, but real people (read: not bots) are starting to see her for what she is...



			https://www.thecut.com/2021/11/the-fight-of-meghan-markle-life.html


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> This was truly the first thing I thought of when I saw Megaladum's dress:  (only difference is Madonna had less material and the body to carry it off):



I never thought that I would see the day when that outfit of Madonna’s was considered to be by far the better of two choices!


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> I never thought that I would see the day when that outfit of Madonna’s was considered to be by far the better of two choices!



We are living in strange times.


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> Lol




Yes, savage - but hilarious!!  Loved it!


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> New York Magazine is about as woke as it gets, and yet the comments on this (ridiculously positive "woe Meghan") article are vicious. I think she has a brilliant PR team worth its weight in gold and effectively used the Black card early on to silence any overt criticism, but real people (read: not bots) are starting to see her for what she is...
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thecut.com/2021/11/the-fight-of-meghan-markle-life.html



The UCLA professor who wrote that piece is an example of what I mentioned earlier. She only sees Meghan as being what she wants her to be, not who she is. I wonder if the accusation in the comments was true about that woman’s department being funded by Archewell. (I find it hard to believe Archewell has funded anyone.)


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> If I didn't know who she was, I'd have assumed she's a sugar baby or an escort and the older man was her benefactor


Now that we know who she is, I'm still assuming she's the sugar baby or an escort in these pictures.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> The UCLA professor who wrote that piece is an example of what I mentioned earlier. She only sees Meghan as being what she wants her to be, not who she is. I wonder if the accusation in the comments was true about that woman’s department being funded by Archewell. (I find it hard to believe Archewell has funded anyone.)


They probably got our glorious governor to fund it with taxpayer money and got the glory for "funding it".


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The UCLA professor who wrote that piece is an example of what I mentioned earlier. She only sees Meghan as being what she wants her to be, not who she is. I wonder if the accusation in the comments was true about that woman’s department being funded by Archewell. (I find it hard to believe Archewell has funded anyone.)


My 2 cents:
Archew*ll might have not funded this poor quality article directly, but might have secured a donor for the author's program. Archew*ll often acts as "middleman"…
Moreover, the fact that the author's center "_is a partner to the Archewell Foundation on internet policy reform_", the impartiality of this article is highly compromised. I wonder if it could even be considered to have been sponsored by Arch*.


----------



## Lodpah

Luvbolide said:


> I never thought that I would see the day when that outfit of Madonna’s was considered to be by far the better of two choices!


Someone forgot to tell them it was not a Halloween Ball.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not reading the article because my blood pressure, but seriously?
> 
> Putting your cashmere sweater in the washing machine is a mistake. Saying something in passing and forgetting it happened is...not even a mistake, but completely believable.
> 
> Denying a PR campaign executed meticulously over months is not a mistake, but a big, fat lie, and it comes from a person who has been proven to lie over and over again.


Oh god I’m having horror flashbacks of two jumpers I did that to  and now would be a better fit for a toddler.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Duchess of California and The Artist Formerly Known as Harry
> 
> Speaking of Omid, I nearly felt bad reading how coldly she spoke of him in those emails. Poor little pup must be heartbroken.


We all know what a great honour it is for the real queen of hearts to even speak to him


joyeaux said:


> Some intel from the last day of hearing... I’m attaching the texts so you don’t have to worry about links. She was “Tilly” in Jason Knauf’s phone.
> 
> Of all this new info, the fact that her iPhone signature is ”_Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite.” _is what I can’t get out of my head  Wonder if Charles’ “fundamental” lack of understanding is why Harry threw him under the bus to Oprah?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan’s texts revealed: Royal family are ‘constantly berating’ Prince Harry over row with my father*
> *Duchess of Sussex said, in newly-released messages, that senior royals 'fundamentally don't understand' the situation with Thomas Markle*
> By Hannah Furness, Royal Correspondent12 November 2021 • 3:38pm
> The Duchess of Sussex, writing in a text message to Jason Knauf, her then press secretary, said she and her husband had been 'endlessly explaining' the situation to the Prince of Wales Credit: Caitlin Ochs/Reuters
> The Duchess of Sussex accused the Royal family of "constantly berating" Prince Harry over the behaviour of her estranged father, saying that they "fundamentally" did not understand why she did not fly to his home in Mexico to "make this stop".
> The Duchess said she and her husband had been "endlessly explaining" the situation with Thomas Markle to the Prince of Wales while they were staying with him.
> At the time, in August 2018, Mr Markle had been giving a series of media interviews about his daughter after he pulled out of attending her wedding, causing distress to the Duke and Duchess and concern in the Royal household.
> According to newly released text messages, written to Jason Knauf, her then-press secretary as she crafted a letter to her estranged father, the Duchess said she wanted to protect her husband from the "pain" the situation had caused.
> "Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'" she wrote on Aug 22, 2018.
> "They fundamentally don't understand, so at least by writing H [Harry] will be able to say to his family 'she wrote him a letter and he's still doing it'. By taking this form of action, I protect my husband from this constant berating, and while unlikely perhaps it will give my father a moment to pause."
> 
> The Sussexes are reported to have stayed with the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall at the Castle of Mey in Scotland in the week beginning July 28 2018. There, they are believed to have discussed what to do about Mr Markle and his public declarations.
> In August 2018, the Duchess said, she spoke with two senior members of the Royal family – one in person and one by phone – who agreed she would write a letter.
> In her witness statement to court, the Duchess explained she did not feel able to fly to see her father in person because she believed it would be impossible to reach him privately without risking bringing "yet more embarrassment" on her in-laws.
> Saying "senior members of the family and their advisers expressed their concern over the public attacks" on the Royal family from Mr Markle, wanting them "stopped", the Duchess added: "I was especially sensitive to this as I had very recently married into the family and was eager to please them."
> In October, at the time of the text messages, she was in the process of "meticulously" drafting a letter to Mr Markle, in which she told him of her heartbreak over his behaviour surrounding the wedding.
> The letter was mentioned by one of her friends, speaking anonymously to People magazine, with extracts later published by the Mail on Sunday.
> The Duchess successfully sued the newspaper's publisher for breach of privacy, copyright and data protection, but Associated Newspapers Limited is seeking to have that summary judgment overturned in favour of a trial.
> Earlier this week, the court heard select details of messages between the Duchess and Mr Knauf, in which said she had "obviously" written the letter to her father "with the understanding that it could be leaked".
> Saying she would address him as "Daddy" in a handwritten letter, believing it would "pull at the heartstrings" in the event that it was leaked, she added that if he shared it then "at least the world will know the truth".
> At the close of the three-day hearing, the media applied for the full schedule of text messages after the Duchess herself said in her witness statement that she was "puzzled" to see them quoted in extract.
> She has told the court that she had previously been unable to find the texts "because an automatic deletion system had been implemented on my phone by a cyber security specialist brought to Kensington Palace for my devices in 2016".
> The texts are shown to be sent from "Tilly", a pseudonym used by Mr Knauf for the Duchess.
> The messages also include emails between the Duchess, Prince Harry and Mr Knauf in which they discuss a briefing meeting with the authors of Finding Freedom.
> They show the Duchess's email signature: "Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any technological mishaps. I'm a Luddite."
> The Duchess has already won a High Court privacy battle with the Mail on Sunday after a judge found the publication of extracts of her letter to her father was unlawful.
> The Mail on Sunday is seeking to overturn that summary decision, arguing that the matter should go to trial.
> After a three-day hearing this week, the Court of Appeal judges will return their findings within the next few weeks.


Thanks for this. Dear little sugarplum doesn’t make sense does she? 
evidently the royals, as is their MO wanted it all smoothed out and him invited to wedding so there would be no awkward questions. M was absolutely adamant no big fat truth-tellers would be at her wedding. 
Then M started playing the violin & claiming her dad was abusive and she had to stay apart for her mental health. A cynical insult to parental abuse victims everywhere I might add. Not wanting the bad PR because at this point they thought they could avoid it with accepting Meggles demands and a big positive PR campaign about what a little angel she is  the BRF decided to do the wrong thing. They just didn’t realise they were with the kind of attention seeker who would burn down a house just so she could stand next to it in the photos.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan and Harry accused of ‘making it about themselves’ on Remembrance Day

&

Her political ambitions 

_*The seat, which could apparently be an "attractive" option for the Duchess of Sussex, is currently held by ******** Dianne Feinstein who is nearly 88 years old, meaning she is unlikely to run again at the next elections. Speaking to Express.co.uk, Richard Johnson, US politics professor at Queen Mary University, said that the Duchess of Sussex would be eligible for "the key powerful seat".*









						Meghan Markle could target 'key powerful seat' to 'leapfrog' into political office
					

MEGHAN MARKLE could "leapfrog" into top political office through a key California senate seat which may soon become vacant, says US political expert.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> how did she miscalculate the appropriate dress so badly?  *does she care?*



I'll go with no.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I


Hermes Zen said:


> M should go to jail even for a short stay. Maybe it would rattle her enough to not lie again and improve her personality! Naaahh that wouldn’t even change her.


yes I felt she should be served the sentence for her perjury too but now I feel like that’d be manipulated as well.

She would come out claiming she was an even more innocent John Coffey narrowly avoiding the green mile in between bringing mice back to life and rustling up lemon cake in the prison kitchen.

This is a touchy subject but I’m just going to say it, I can’t help wondering if her suddenly slathering on the fake tan has a more manipulative application.
she has always looked pretty pale before, but now she is going into court and she’s very keen to perpetuate the idea she’s a victim of prejudiced witnesses and jury alike, she is presenting herself to the public as much darker colour than usual… coincidence? I think not!

I really hope some people will start to see that she is not a champion of the marginalised but a manipulator who will play and possibly discredit any cause of our society to her advantage.

If she were 100% white and blonde she would be banging on about how they hated her because she is an American like Wallis, she just twists any hand she is given completely without sincerity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh, I clicked on the link, and . I moved the pictures to the Spoiler and I didn't copy and paste the legend.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Wow, wow, wow… noooo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5248760
> 
> View attachment 5248764



Was that when she was sitting on a married man's lap while his wife was there?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The over the top red dress was a direct salvo leveled at Kate’s golden Bond girl dress , the gold dress everyone loved



Didn't that work out great for her. Then again, the US press doesn't only seem challenged in the critical thinking department, but also visually impaired.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She knows the press here will shower her with glowing praise and compliments no matter what she wears. There were dozens of headlines gushing over that ill-fitting red dress. Not one of them reported that the other people there weren’t dressed up as much. The only surprise is that she didn’t wear a tiara.



She would have had she been able to smuggle one out of London.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking...was everyone else in a full-on ball gown, or was it just Miss If-I'm-not-invited-I'll-stage-my-own-Oscars?


Looks like a black tie event, so anyone who went to Eton should know that means cocktail dress or a simple suit for ladies absolutely nothing with a train or showing too much boob and fake tan.

it looks like he’s messy and shambolic as usual but he’s actually in black tie at least.

This is quite a good article on it.








						Suits you! The complete guide to black and white tie dress codes
					

The dos and do nots of formal fashion explained




					www.standard.co.uk
				




I have my own theory that white tie has largely fallen out of fashion because it makes shorter men look like Burgess Meredith’s Penguin.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> how did she miscalculate the appropriate dress so badly?  does she care?


I think she did it on purpose because she likes to cause uproar. She has to do it at serious events like medal ceremonies because: 
A) she can’t get invited to the oscars or the met
B) absolutely anything goes at those events and she’s not imaginative enough to outdo the likes of Janelle Monae or Lady Gaga.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Murky Meg provides a very good summary. Some of the comments are very interesting and this one in particular sounds like something M would pull.
> 
> From Debi Tate:  "Ok. I’m from Toronto. My daughter was dating a Toronto cop at the time of Meghan’s calls to the Toronto Police about paparazzi and being followed and harassed. The police did respond. They only ever found one lonely photographer outside her Toronto house. They stopped acting on Meghan’s relentless calls because they were determined to be bogus. Also my current stylist worked on the set of Suits. He personally witnessed Meghan’s horrid behaviour toward staff. She shouted and threw things around the set. Many of these allegations now coming out I knew about at the time they were occurring. There is no reason why the Toronto cop and my stylist would make up these stories because Meghan was not yet famous or rather infamous. Just putting this out there for what it’s worth. Hope she gets jail time. What a rotter"


Reminds me of all those calls to the police when they first settled in Toilettes 19. So much crying wolf going on. I suppose she is still waking Hazard up at night crying that she can hear heavy breathing outside the window of their 3rd floor bedroom.



bag-mania said:


> And she’s blaming it all on having been in her first trimester of pregnancy after having had a tragic miscarriage. She is waving the pity-poor-me flag as wildly as she can.


How does this make her a good candidate for ownership of the nuclear codes?



CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe.



They were under the impression that once they scored the invite, the whole event would be about them.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I fundamentally don't understand either, but it might just be your stupid word salad.
> 
> No really, did she ever give a valid reason why she couldn't?


From what I'm reading, she seems to think there is no secure way for her to contact her father  and she doesn't know the way to his house. Makes me wonder: how long has she been icing him out of her life that she has never once visited him despite being perfectly capable of conducting a long-range fishing expedition across countries to trap her a prince? And I guess she really is a Luddite as well as an idiot if she doesn't know how to use GPS or Google Maps, and thought she would have to drive or take a bus to his house.

I bet she was regretting not spinning them a tale that he was dead, then she wouldn't have to figure out a way to NOT have him walk her down the aisle. After all, she already sold them the story that she didn't really have any family despite, you know, taking care of her granny longterm and such.



Chanbal said:


> Poor Charles, how could he understand the situation? The duchess may have sold Charles a certain image of TM being supported by the daughter. Charles probably thought that if the duchess visits her father and assures him of her continuous support, everything will be fine. Also, Charles was likely happy to host TM at Clarence House, and that was the last thing the duchess wanted.


Nail on head.



csshopper said:


> WOW! The clip showing the long perp walk with no acknowledgment beyond very cursory applause is very telling! Helps to put things in honest perspective, too bad it does not get real news coverage. They are so self absorbed they will never internalize that even after being prompted in a flashing, full screen prompt the best they could get was a few minor acknowledgements with no enthusiasm, certainly not the standing ovation I bet she assumed would greet them.
> 
> Edited to add: It will be interesting to see how their camera crew edits this, in comparison to the reality, if they try to include it in a documentary.


I'm sure it will be shown for all of 3 seconds with canned applause spliced in, then jump cut to Hazard meaningfully bonding with the audience.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article!  The palace was wrong about one thing. Hazzie is no “hostage”.
> He craves this attention [so does she], always has, always will. The guy is one of the thirstiest celebs Hwood has seen.
> 
> View attachment 5248620


Maybe was the hostage once. There were a couple of incidents like the balcony "Turn Around" when he appeared to still possess vestigial backbone. After that, Stockholm Syndrome took over.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Trying to avoid controversy here, but this story seems to be spinning up fast.
> still waiting on confirmation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Is this too much?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/TOMMY94560065
> Comments:
> TOMMY
> 
> @TOMMY94560065
> ·
> 6m
> 
> Replying to
> @Alexes47070206
> @BaronessBruck
> Have you heard this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baroness Bruck
> ·
> Only rumours so far



OMG, the Tommy link is flaming good. Someone called her Princess Perjury 
There was one comment about Methane's remark that she started the court case before becoming a mother and now has 2 kids. The commenter pointed out that Archie was born 5 months before the court case, so does she mean Archie doesn't exist?



Chanbal said:


> According to the author of the post, the photos were taken at the Soho (or associated with the Soho). I'm all in favor that each person should be free to live her/his own life. If she would stop preaching people and live a private life, I would have ignored the photos.


If she doesn't cause controversy, everyone would be ignoring her. Don't think she could live that way.



charlottawill said:


> I have to wonder, did "The Firm" not have have MI6 or similar do a deep dive into her background before the engagement? Or if they did, did Harry just forge ahead out of stubbornness?


Did Knauf really say "The One" in his statement? If Hazard was convinced she was "The One", I can imagine him throwing tantrums to get his way. Should have shipped him off to Chunga Changa.



EverSoElusive said:


> If I didn't know who she was, I'd have assumed she's a sugar baby or an escort and the older man was her benefactor


I know who she is and I'm think you are right.



tiktok said:


> New York Magazine is about as woke as it gets, and yet the comments on this (ridiculously positive "woe Meghan") article are vicious. I think she has a brilliant PR team worth its weight in gold and effectively used the Black card early on to silence any overt criticism, but real people (read: not bots) are starting to see her for what she is...
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thecut.com/2021/11/the-fight-of-meghan-markle-life.html


There was a stan in there giving her support and claiming those who didn't rally around Methane lacked discernible reasoning skills. This PHD wrote a book about algorithms reinforcing racism, so of course she has narrowed her viewpoint to just one cause for all ills. No wonder she worships Saint Meghan, patroness of liars and truth twisters.


----------



## Luvbolide

bellecate said:


> I really need to stay off Twitter.
> View attachment 5248427



OMG, I am laughing so hard that I am crying.  Now I can never look at those little cheeses again!  Or … I can bring a bag of them to Thanksgiving and see how many people start shrieking with laughter!!


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M try to come across as warm and caring but they give off an ice cold, easily irritated vibe.




woah - gives new meaning to the term “scattered applause”.  I guess the crowd had the same reaction we did as to why on earth Harry was selected to do this.


----------



## Luvbolide

Annawakes said:


> So…..
> 
> Senior members of the royal family and senior aides were asking her to fly to Mexico to talk to her Dad in person.  These people have decades of experience handling media and they thought it was a good idea.
> 
> She disagreed and all by her herself declared that flying to Mexico would be too intrusive and cause too much embarrassment. The RF didn’t think so, but she did and of course she knows best!  And that is how this disastrous letter came about.



And by filing her stupid lawsuit, she has touched off this entire firestorm whichconfirms what deceitful liars and opportunists H&M are and discloses publicly a whole bunch of unsavory things best left private.

imagine what will happen if she loses the appeal and the case is sent back to the trial court for a trial.  How I’d love to see her subjected to a withering cross-examination!


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> woah - gives new meaning to the term “scattered applause”.  I guess the crowd had the same reaction we did as to why on earth Harry was selected to do this.



That's HUGE @CarryOn2020 

Wow, and the overhead even instructed them to ("cheers and applause") - not many veterans normally disobey orders written or otherwise


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> how did she miscalculate the appropriate dress so badly?  does she care?



My suspicion is that she was hoping to get - or top - the reaction that Catherine got to her gold dress.  M wouldn’t care about being the only one in a gown with a huge train so long as people looked at her.  Doubt she realizes that the many dropped jaws in reaction to K were in awe.  OTOH, the dropped jaws in reaction to M were shock and horror!  She is so good at reading the room - said no one ever!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> That's HUGE @CarryOn2020
> 
> Wow, and the overhead even instructed them to ("cheers and applause") - not many veterans normally disobey orders written or otherwise


They were pretty self controlled. No one booed.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5248972
> 
> Meghan and Harry accused of ‘making it about themselves’ on Remembrance Day
> 
> &
> 
> Her political ambitions
> 
> _*The seat, which could apparently be an "attractive" option for the Duchess of Sussex, is currently held by ******** Dianne Feinstein who is nearly 88 years old, meaning she is unlikely to run again at the next elections. Speaking to Express.co.uk, Richard Johnson, US politics professor at Queen Mary University, said that the Duchess of Sussex would be eligible for "the key powerful seat".*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle could target 'key powerful seat' to 'leapfrog' into political office
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could "leapfrog" into top political office through a key California senate seat which may soon become vacant, says US political expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Oh hell no!!  I will drive over to DiFi’s house right now to beg her to stay!


----------



## papertiger

Cliffnotes from The Independent 






*Meghan Markle news: Final arguments heard in Mail on Sunday appeal over letter publication*
Chiara Giordano
Thu, 11 November 2021, 5:54 pm


Final arguments are being heard in a three-day legal battle by the _Mail on Sunday _to overturn a High Court ruling on its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.
Lawyers for the newspaper have said that the Duchess of Sussex crafted the letter to her father so that it would “pull at the heartstrings” if it was ever revealed to the public. They are trying to over turn the previous High Court ruling that the publication was unlawful by basing their case on this new evidence.
The Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have said that, although Meghan Markle knew it might be leaked to the press, she did not want the letter to be seen publicly.
They argued in the court of appeal this morning that Meghan Markle would have had ample opportunity to disclose the letter to authors of an unauthorised biography but was “simply not prepared to go there”.
The Duchess of Sussex, 40, sued the newspaper’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), over five articles that reproduced parts of a “personal and private” letter sent to her father Thomas Markle, 77, in August 2018.
Read More
Meghan Markle apologises for misleading court over aide’s exchanges with biography authors
Meghan Markle ‘wrote her father a letter to pull heartstrings if leaked,’ says ex-aide
Mail on Sunday’s legal battle against ruling over Meghan Markle letter enters final day
*Key Points*

Mail on Sunday’s legal battle against letter ruling enters final day
Letter ‘drafted with understanding it could be leaked’, newspaper’s lawyers suggest
Meghan Markle had opportunity to disclose letter to biography authors but chose not to, says lawyer
Key disclosures in aide’s correspondence with Meghan and Harry over unauthorised biography
Judges will ‘take time’ to consider judgments ‘with great care’
_10:57_ , _Chiara Giordano_
Good morning and welcome to _The Independent_’s live coverage of the _Mail on Sunday_’s legal bid to overturn a High Court ruling its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.
The three-day hearing at the Court of Appeal will end today, with a judgment expected at a later date.
*Mail on Sunday’s legal battle against letter ruling enters final day*
_11:00_ , _Chiara Giordano_
The _Mail on Sunday_ is continuing its legal battle to overturn a High Court ruling on its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.
The Duchess of Sussex, 40, sued the newspaper’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), over five articles that reproduced parts of a “personal and private” letter sent to her father Thomas Markle, 77, in August 2018.
The High Court ruled earlier this year that ANL’s publication of the letter was unlawful, entering summary judgment for Meghan and avoiding the need for a trial.
ANL is challenging that ruling at the Court of Appeal in a three-day hearing that will come to an end today.
Mail on Sunday’s appeal against ruling over Meghan Markle letter enters final day
*Court pauses to observe two-minute silence*
_11:03_ , _Chiara Giordano_
The hearing at the Court of Appeal in London has paused as those present stand to observe a two-minute silence to mark the anniversary of Armistice Day.
*Letter ‘drafted with understanding it could be leaked’, newspaper’s lawyers suggest*
_11:12_ , _Chiara Giordano_
Lawyers for Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) told senior judges on Tuesday that they wanted to rely on a recent witness statement made by Jason Knauf - the Duchess of Sussex’s former aide - in their legal bid to overturn the ruling.
The court yesterday heard the Duchess of Sussex told Mr Knauf a handwritten letter to her estranged father was “drafted with the understanding that it could be leaked”.
Mr Knauf, who was communications secretary to Meghan and Harry until March 2019, said the duchess had indicated to him in August of the previous year that she recognised it was possible her father, Thomas Markle, would make the letter public.
More on that story here:
Mail on Sunday suggests Meghan’s letter to father not intended to be ‘private’
*Meghan Markle had ample opportunity to disclose letter to authors but chose not to, says lawyer*
_12:45_ , _Chiara Giordano_
Meghan Markle’s lawyer has argued she had ample opportunity to disclose the letter to the authors of an unauthorised biography about her and her husband but was “simply not prepared to go there”.
The Duchess of Sussex’s former aide Jason Knauf has claimed her handwritten letter to her estranged father Thomas Markle was “drafted with the understanding that it could be leaked”.
In a witness statement, Mr Knauf said the book - _Finding Freedom_ - was “discussed on a routine basis”, which was “discussed directly with the duchess multiple times in person and over email”.
Mr Knauf also discussed planning a meeting with the authors to provide background information and said Meghan had given him several briefing points to share with them, including information on how she had “very minimal contact” with her half-siblings during her childhood.
Meghan on Wednesday apologised for “misleading” the court over her recollection of the information given by her aides to the authors.
Her lawyer today argued she only regarded the “possibility” that the letter could be leaked into the public domain. He also told the court she gave little information about her father to Mr Knauf for the authors and made absolutely no reference to the letter.
“There is no real prospect that the evidence the defendant now relies on could show anything higher than a case that she regarded as a possibility,” he told the Court of Appeal.
“What is striking is how little information about her father she was prepared to contemplate Mr Knauf giving to the authors and made absolutely no reference to the letter. She is simply not prepared to go there.”
*Court adjourns over lunch*
_13:16_ , _Holly Bancroft_
The appeal hearing for Meghan Markle’s case against Associated Newspapers Limited, the publishers of the Mail on Sunday, has been paused over lunch.
The hearing will start again at 2:10 pm.
*Key disclosures in Palace aide’s correspondence with Meghan and Harry over unauthorised biography*
_14:10_ , _Holly Bancroft_
While the court of appeal breaks for lunch, here are some of the key moments from Palace communications chief, Jason Knauf’s, correspondence with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - as revealed to the court yesterday.
The Duke of Sussex asked Jason Knauf in December 2018 if he would give the writers of an unauthorised biography about the couple a “rough idea of what [Meghan’s] been through over the last two years?”.
He described the “media onslaught” and “cyber bullying on a different scale”. He then asked: “So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!”
Neither the Duke or Duchess of Sussex ever had any direct contact with the book authors.
The Duke of Sussex acknowledged to Jason Knauf in December 2018 that “we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it” and said that the couple would be unable to put the book’s authors in touch with any of Meghan Markle’s friends.
Mr Knauf, who did meet with the authors, told Meghan Markle in December 2018 that he “took them through everything.”
He said: “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a celebration of you that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”
Meghan Markle told Mr Knauf in August 2018 that she had written the letter to her father “with the understanding that it could be leaked”.
*Letter was best evidence to refute magazine article’s ‘royal attack’ on Thomas Markle, says publisher’s lawyer*
_15:20_ , _Chiara Giordano_
Andrew Caldecott QC, representing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), has argued the _Mail on Sunday_ published the letter sent from Meghan Markle to her father to refute “nasty and untrue” allegations made about him in a _People_ magazine article.
The barrister argued there was a public interest in correcting the claims made during an interview with five friends of the Duchess of Sussex.
Mr Caldecott said the letter to Mr Markle from Meghan was “not a loving letter, not a generous letter”, contrary to how it was presented in the _People _article.
He added: “What evidence is there to refuse that than the time and text of the letter? We pleaded it was necessary not because that is a legal test but because it was necessary to put the public right about these matters.
“Mr Markle has been royally attacked in the _People _article.”
*Judges will ‘take time’ to consider judgments ‘with great care’*
_16:24_ , _Chiara Giordano_
The three-day hearing at the Court of Appeal has been heard by Sir Geoffrey Vos, master of the rolls, Dame Victoria Sharp, president of the Queen’s Bench Division, and Lord Justice Bean.
The judges have now retired to consider their judgment, which will be handed down at a later date.
Sir Geoffrey Vos, master of the rolls, said they would “take time” to consider their judgments and the lawyers’ submissions “with great care”.
_17:54_ , _Chiara Giordano_
That’s the end of our live coverage for today


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if Charles wanted her to go see her dad as a way of getting her away from Harry for a while in order to try to get Harry to “see the light” before the wedding.  No wonder she refused to go. 

Also, a Charles probably,couldn’t understand her excuses/reasons for not going to see her dad because they probably made no sense.


----------



## csshopper

Lady C eviserates “that EVIL EVIL woman” in her latest video. Almost sputtering, she’s so angry I think maybe she might have scared her dog. It’s an hour of brutal assessment. 

One of many statements: Meaghan “is so full of the brown stuff if someone gave her an enema she would disappear.”


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> this and a huge disrespect to the Queen who asked for it to not be used…



Miscarriage also “pull at the heartstrings” just saying.


----------



## kipp

Megalomaniac is such a manipulating narcissist it's almost unbelievable.  If she even spent a tenth of the time really doing good works as opposed to staging photo ops and "sweet nods,"  writing word salads to "pull at the heartstrings" the world would be better off.


----------



## Yanca

They are in news again, another bandwagon, visiting the afghan refugees in one of the US base, they really wanto to play royals again- I hope the intentions are pure and  not just for photo- ops and column inches- one can't help but think they really want something to top  the remembrance  day event the Royals have on Sunday.  What really is the intention of going to see the refugees?- they are already in the process of being resetlled, Were the duo officially  invited to visit the base?- under which capacity?  what good will their  visit do?- is it to just for their netflix content to " pull the heart strings" of people of how good people they are.  Did their foundation donated something tangible to the refugees?  Whenever they donate- like the starbucks coffee, the sandwichesthe diapers- ( which were always in behalf of ( archewell, Proctor & Gamvle) - and not really directly from them)  it's all over the news.  I did not read it on the news except them singing head-knees-shoulder and toes with the kids, I won't be surprised next time they will insert themselves  and go to the US southern border to visit the migrants being held at the facility.  They are self serving and the media keep giving them platform.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> The UCLA professor who wrote that piece is an example of what I mentioned earlier. She only sees Meghan as being what she wants her to be, not who she is. I wonder if the accusation in the comments was true about that woman’s department being funded by Archewell. (I find it hard to believe Archewell has funded anyone.)


I think a lot of people, especially the PR and Twitter minded, will do a favour for a celebrity just in the hopes they will say something nice about them. Being publicly recognised can do a lot for a jobbing academic’s career. Or maybe she bought her baby a hat. Who knows!


papertiger said:


> e Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have said that, although Meghan Markle knew it might be leaked to the press, she did not want the letter to be seen publicly.
> They argued in the court of appeal this morning that Meghan Markle would have had ample opportunity to disclose the letter to authors of an unauthorised biography but was “simply not prepared to go there”.


This is such a dumb argument from them:
1. Just because I don’t want a to leak something doesn’t mean I won’t allow b to leak something.
2. Most importantly, of course, she didn’t give it to Omid as she’d have to wait several months for the book to be published. If she sent the letter to him then, I don’t know, say got in contact with people magazine? Then she could have her version of events reported by ‘friends’ within the week.  She obviously wanted to drop her dad in the **** as quickly as possible to utterly discredit him as a witness of her earlier life and character.
3. continuing this, she wanted his fall to be seen by as large an audience as possible, so something fairly niche like a royal biography by a pair of nobodies wouldn’t be a good convoy for this information.(of course we all know they were disappointed by the sales of FF.) people magazine on the other hand, bigger audience in the country that matters. Daily mail was just the icing on the cake: though of course she pretends she hates them talking about her to be like Di.

Jeez, they must think we are idiots.


----------



## jelliedfeels

kipp said:


> Megalomaniac is such a manipulating narcissist it's almost unbelievable.  If she even spent a tenth of the time really doing good works as opposed to staging photo ops and "sweet nods,"  writing word salads to "pull at the heartstrings" the world would be better off.


Succinctly put and that is a lovely dog  in your pic.


----------



## xincinsin

Yanca said:


> They are in news again, another bandwagon, visiting the afghan refugees in one of the US base, they really wanto to play royals again- I hope the intentions are pure and  not just for photo- ops and column inches- one can't help but think they really want something to top  the remembrance  day event the Royals have on Sunday.  What really is the intention of going to see the refugees?- they are already in the process of being resetlled, Were the duo officially  invited to visit the base?- under which capacity?  what good will their  visit do?- is it to just for their netflix content to " pull the heart strings" of people of how good people they are.  Did their foundation donated something tangible to the refugees?  Whenever they donate- like the starbucks coffee, the sandwichesthe diapers- ( which were always in behalf of ( archewell, Proctor & Gamvle) - and not really directly from them)  it's all over the news.  I did not read it on the news except them singing head-knees-shoulder and toes with the kids, I won't be surprised next time they will insert themselves  and go to the US southern border to visit the migrants being held at the facility.  They are self serving and the media keep giving them platform.


No bananas with beautiful calligraphy?
Couple of fraudsters


----------



## kipp

jelliedfeels said:


> Succinctly put and that is a lovely dog  in your pic.


Thank you @jelliedfeels---he's Kipp my beloved Irish Terrier who passed away in 2012 at 16 1/2 years.  (sorry for being off topic). 
ETA:  I had some "friends" for a number of years who exhibited many of the same traits as Megalomaniac.  Always victims and manipulators to the core.  They actually had some redeeming characteristics so I put up with the other stuff until they became so crazy and toxic that I had to de-friend them.   I'm not sure if Megalomaniac has any redeeming characteristics though.


----------



## DoggieBags

Yanca said:


> They are in news again, another bandwagon, visiting the afghan refugees in one of the US base, they really wanto to play royals again- I hope the intentions are pure and  not just for photo- ops and column inches- one can't help but think they really want something to top  the remembrance  day event the Royals have on Sunday.  What really is the intention of going to see the refugees?- they are already in the process of being resetlled, Were the duo officially  invited to visit the base?- under which capacity?  what good will their  visit do?- is it to just for their netflix content to " pull the heart strings" of people of how good people they are.  Did their foundation donated something tangible to the refugees?  Whenever they donate- like the starbucks coffee, the sandwichesthe diapers- ( which were always in behalf of ( archewell, Proctor & Gamvle) - and not really directly from them)  it's all over the news.  I did not read it on the news except them singing head-knees-shoulder and toes with the kids, I won't be surprised next time they will insert themselves  and go to the US southern border to visit the migrants being held at the facility.  They are self serving and the media keep giving them platform.


I’m surprised the Puerile Princess didn’t stage another reading of the stench (aka The Bench) to some of the children at the refugee base.


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if Charles wanted her to go see her dad as a way of getting her away from Harry for a while in order to try to get Harry to “see the light” before the wedding.  No wonder she refused to go.
> 
> Also, a Charles probably,couldn’t understand her excuses/reasons for not going to see her dad because they probably made no sense.



Your guess could be right but it’s impossible to know what is going on in Charles’ head. He may as well be the invisible man for how little we know about his views on the matter. He comes off as weak and detached by never saying anything.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Wasn't it reported or speculated that William told *Cuckold Prince* to take his time to get to know *Evil Hollywood* but he still chose to rush things with her?


Thanks @EverSoElusive for your nicknames #10, Cuckold Prince (Mother would've said, "tsk, tsk, girl" but I ) and #11, Evil Hollywood. Congratulations and welcome to the Energizer Bunny and Eager Beaver Clubs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Wasn't it reported or speculated that William told Cuckold Prince to take his time to get to know Evil Hollywood but he still chose to rush things with her?
> 
> ETA: It's the BRF. I'm sure they vetted her and that's why they had to get things scrubbed off the internet. They probably didn't think she's the right fit but Harry already made up his mind anyways.


William's advice to take the relationship slowly was reportedly the beginning of the divide between them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> New nickname from Radar Online: *TRFKATS [the royals formerly known as the sussexes]*


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #16 nickname, TRFKATS [the royals formerly known as the sussexes]. BTW, does it belong to @Chanbal as well?
Congratulations and welcome to the Roaring Lion Club.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## scarlet555

I don’t understand how she looks ‘bigger’ than when she was ‘pregnant’really supports the fake bump and surrogate storyline.  I dont remember her being this bloated with her pregnancy pictures.


----------



## Chanbal

no words!










						Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
					

Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> no words!
> View attachment 5249174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Please, someone make them stop already!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #16 nickname, TRFKATS [the royals formerly known as the sussexes]. BTW, does it belong to @Chanbal as well?
> Congratulations and welcome to the Roaring Lion Club.
> View attachment 5249159



Yes, indeed   It could have been another poster. I saw the Radar Online link and followed it. Apologies for not recalling the poster.  This thread was smokin yesterday


----------



## scarlet555

was this discussed? And what’s the juice?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Please, someone make them stop already!



Actually, this could be good. To show their full commitment, they needs to take 200-500 refugees to their McMansion and any other residences they have.


----------



## Lounorada

xincinsin said:


> For the 40x40, *did anyone get mentored in the end*? I don't recall any buzz about excited and grateful people talking about A-listers who mentored them for 40 minutes.










Chanbal said:


> Though, what I found even more interesting is that the Office of the Duchess and Duke of Bandwagon contacted Kensington Palace to kindly offer their precious help to the Cambridges to bring the Earthshot Prize to America in 2022.


The Cambridges:









needlv said:


> Piers…










pomeline said:


> I'm terribly sorry to barge in like this, being new here and all but... I could not help myself. I dislike the pair so much.
> 
> Their pompous statement can be read in so many ways.
> 
> _"Nearly every activity in daily life results in the release of carbon into the atmosphere"_ - Harry and I suffer from flatulence every day
> 
> _"what we eat and how often we eat it"_ - We really must tighten our belts and limit our intake of canned beans
> 
> _"our transport and the frequency of it"_ - We'll mostly be holed up in our mansion to save money and because we have nowhere to go
> 
> _"our use of electricity/heating"_ - We can now only afford to heat one room + bathroom
> 
> _"our reliance on big industries that contribute to the problem"_ - Like we said, Heinz beans will have to go
> 
> In reality, they would not be able to reduce their emissions to zero even if they dropped dead - whether they'd be buried or cremated they'd still be releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.










tiktok said:


> Another “job” - I guess all of these appearances add up…? I don’t know how much magazines can pay these days, my guess is not a lot:





Well, he's definitely an expert on 'misinformation'- _spreading _misinformation that is.
How on earth do you ask a perpetual liar to speak on a panel about misinformation? The world has gone mad.





bag-mania said:


> So we know she was calling senators and pestering them. I think the senator who gave Meghan their private cell numbers is going to hear about it. That was overstepping. She didn’t impress everyone and I’m no expert but I suspect this isn’t the best way to enter politics.
> 
> Markle then called another, more moderate, ********** -- Susan Collins of Maine -- who was in the gym at the time and also thought it was Manchin on the phone, according to a source familiar with the matter.
> 
> The duchess once again pitched paid family leave, Collins said.
> 
> "*Much* *to my surprise, she called me on my private line and she introduced herself as the duchess of Sussex, which is kind of ironic*," Collins added.
> 
> "I was happy to talk with her, but I’m more interested in what the people of Maine are telling me about it," she said.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnew...es-**********-senators-paid/story?id=80953944


Wow. This is so inappropriate on so many levels.
For people who claim they left the RF for PrIvAcY and that the media are always invading their pRiVaCy, they sure love to invade other people's privacy without hesitation.
I hope afterwards those senators were like:







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eliza has a point there.










needlv said:


> … and another one…. The jokes write themselves at this point…



The way her mind works:







CarryOn2020 said:


>



WTF?!!
Jack Dorsey be like:


----------



## Chanbal

On puppeteering TM. 

From the Mrs- the infamous letter to daddy:



From the Mr. -information to be leaked to the authors of FF:










						Read: Meghan’s correspondence with aide over Markle letter and biography
					

The Duchess of Sussex apologised to the Court of Appeal yesterday after a series of explosive revelations in her privacy battle with the Mail on Sunday.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

How is it possible for her ears to move so much?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> no words!
> View attachment 5249174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I have a few words for them 

Shouldn’t these photos [cough cough] be saved for the Nflix docudrama?  I feel like I have seen the show already


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> How is it possible for her ears to move so much?




Different events, different noses.

Just goes to show you nature nose best


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> no words!
> View attachment 5249174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Again - who TF do they think they are?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Again - who TF do they think they are?



I think they are - the people who didn't get cheered when they walked into the veteran's event and so now need claim 'this' as their territory.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> Again - who TF do they think they are?



The ever so self-absorbed DumbErtons


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> Again - who TF do they think they are?


And WHO in the H E L L authorized this????? They are not diplomats, she has no more standing than any other US citizen and he isn't one. As a tax payer I am flamed at their intrusions. Respecting our Mods and tpf guidelines will not vent further.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> Again - who TF do they think they are?



it’s *heinous Harry and duchess denial!*


----------



## eunaddict

I need to catch up on the thread but... I can't unsee the pics below. Also judging by instagram posts, she's quite overdressed...they said "gala", someone heard "Red Carpet" or "State Dinner".

AND they apparently sang both the "Star Spangled Banner" AND "God Save the Queen" at the start.

These two are about to undo a lot of American history if y'all will let them.







ETA: Many edits for many grammar mistakes, it's very very early morning where I am.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s just call them what they are - the lying liars.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> no words!
> View attachment 5249174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I hope someone asked her if she’s ok (since we know that’s usually the type of situation where she feels the most vulnerable and victimized).


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> I hope someone asked her if she’s ok (since we know that’s usually the type of situation where she feels the most vulnerable and victimized).


From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> There was a stan in there giving her support and claiming those who didn't rally around Methane lacked discernible reasoning skills. This PHD wrote a book about algorithms reinforcing racism, so of course she has narrowed her viewpoint to just one cause for all ills. No wonder she worships *Saint Meghan, patroness of liars and truth twisters*.


 Thanks @xincinsin for your #23 nickname, Saint Meghan, patroness of liars and truth twisters. Congratulations and here's The List #23 Ribbon.  And for the sweet juxtaposition, help yourself to a cake of your choice. Cheers!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> How is it possible for her ears to move so much?



She might  have had them pinned back (pinnaplasty) or the shape changed (Otoplasty) but having fillers or face lifts might have changed the shape of the face so the ears sit differently.  Honestly, it is probably all of them as she’s rarely off the operating table.


papertiger said:


> Different events, different noses.
> 
> Just goes to show you nature nose best


Oh girl that’s nowhere near her natural nose!  

Ironically, her original face with its broad nose, close set beady eyes and prominent teeth and jaw made her look a lot like young QE2.




If you put this Queen in a crunchy brown wig you would struggle to tell them apart


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> no words!
> View attachment 5249174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It’s amazing that she can manage to look contrived and insincere even with a mask covering half her face.  No one is buying the overly arched eyebrows, phony concern look any more!


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is
> View attachment 5249255
> 
> View attachment 5249256


Good thing these little refugee children are learning the importance of recycling. *side-eye*
But then again, who better to teach them than America's very own beloved planet warriors.


----------



## Chanbal

The dramatic twist in the Duchess of Sussex’s battle against a newspaper, forcing her to apologise for “misleading” a court, is just the tip of iceberg, according to royal sources.

Meghan made a U-turn in court last week in her privacy case against Associated Newspapers, admitting that she had authorised an aide to brief authors on a flattering biography about the Sussexes. Harry and Meghan previously denied any collaboration with the authors of Finding Freedom but a source said “a lot more” could emerge on “what was briefed for the book” if the case proceeds.

Details of the Sussexes’ disputed involvement with the book came out in documents submitted to the Court of Appeal, where Associated Newspapers is challenging a ruling in February that The Mail on Sunday had breached Meghan’s privacy and copyright by publishing extracts of a letter she wrote to her father, Thomas Markle, in 2018.

Lawyers for the publisher argued that the letter was intended for public consumption, and that further evidence should be heard at trial. A judgment will be handed down at a later date.
Highly sensitive details in the court documents included texts and emails exchanged between Meghan, Harry and Jason Knauf, their former communications secretary, about the letter to her father and Finding Freedom.

The biography by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, published last year, included intimate personal details, including the exact “perfect warrior [yoga] pose” Meghan, 40, performed after she and Harry first discussed marriage on holiday in Africa and the expression on their son Archie’s face when he was born. The Sussexes’ lawyers denied that Meghan authorised any details for the book when The Sunday Times approached them with information suggesting otherwise in November last year.

The royal family is frustrated by the fallout from the case and Meghan’s decision, backed by Harry, to take legal action. A royal source said: “There is frustration all the way to the top, because a lot of people told them that it was unwise to proceed with the case. Now you have been found out. They [the royal family] will think they should never have taken it to court.”

One of the royal family’s most trusted lawyers, Gerrard Tyrrell, and several senior Sussex aides attempted to dissuade them. A royal source said: “Before Harry and Meghan pulled the trigger, we wanted to walk them through what it would look like if it went all the way and face up to that.” The advice fell on deaf ears and the couple turned to Schillings, a firm known for its aggressive tactics on behalf of celebrity clients.
The court documents also revealed discussions between the Sussexes and senior members of the royal family over strained relations with Meghan’s father. One text that Meghan sent Knauf in August 2018, after staying with the Prince of Wales in Scotland, suggests family relations were breaking down within months of their wedding in May.

She accused the royal family of “constantly berating” Harry, 37, by suggesting she could visit her father in Mexico, where he lives, to encourage him to stop speaking to the media, and suggested Charles was behind her decision to write the letter. “The catalyst for my doing this is seeing how much pain this is causing H. Even after a week with his dad and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context — and revert to ‘can’t she just go and see him and make him stop?’ They fundamentally don’t understand so at least by writing H will be able to say to his family ... ‘she wrote him a letter and he’s still doing it’. By taking this form of action I protect my husband from this constant berating ...”

But sources close to Charles, who turns 73 tomorrow, said he was unlikely to give family members specific advice on handling the media, suggesting he would be “sympathetic to the issue, but not didactic about the solution”. Meghan has not spoken to her 77-year-old father since the wedding. Harry has never met him.

Knauf’s witness statement detailed how the Sussexes “authorised specific co-operation in writing” to the authors of Finding Freedom, forcing Meghan to concede in a statement that they were briefed “with my knowledge”, adding: “I apologise to the court for the fact I had not remembered these exchanges ... I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the defendant or the court.” Meghan’s lawyers had described claims she collaborated on the book as “false”, “fantastical” and “a conspiracy theory”.

A palace aide said: “Perhaps this gives them the understanding of why the royals don’t like to get into court cases. It’s not like this wasn’t going to happen. There is no gleeful dancing about it, nobody is wearing the “told you so” T-shirt, they are family members, but in the long run this is probably why you don’t want to get involved.”

Another royal source said: “If you can’t trust the witness evidence of a member of the royal family, if that unravels, then you’re b*****ed. To anyone who follows their story closely, it’s obvious that if she didn’t tell the whole story in court, and got caught out, of course it casts doubt on anything she has said. A lot of us who follow it closely know a lot of what she said to Oprah [Winfrey] wasn’t true.”

In their bombshell television interview with Winfrey in March, Harry and Meghan claimed a member of the royal family raised “concerns” about how dark their son Archie’s skin might be, and said the “institution” ignored Meghan’s suicidal pleas for help as she struggled to cope with royal life.
The fallout comes as Buckingham Palace confirmed that its investigation into claims that Meghan bullied royal staff is still going on after eight months. Last night a spokesman said: “The review and the consideration of the issues raised is still being actively worked on.”
The original complaint was made in October 2018 by Knauf.

Lawyers for Meghan have said reports of the claims were “a wholly false narrative” and a spokesman for the Sussexes said the allegations were a “calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation”._
@RoyaNikkhah_



			https://archive.vn/sBXyQ#selection-1053.0-1097.12


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is
> View attachment 5249255
> 
> View attachment 5249256


Can she not get the mask over her fillers?
Or is it to convince us she’s smiling as benevolently as Buddha the whole time?

Another inappropriate outfit for the occasion. Why is she dressed like Veronica Lake at the chump’s funeral? 
maybe some colour? A little less overt ‘sexy’ décolletage in front of a usually religious people who are also  kids?   


kipp said:


> Thank you @jelliedfeels---he's Kipp my beloved Irish Terrier who passed away in 2012 at 16 1/2 years.  (sorry for being off topic).
> ETA:  I had some "friends" for a number of years who exhibited many of the same traits as Megalomaniac.  Always victims and manipulators to the core.  They actually had some redeeming characteristics so I put up with the other stuff until they became so crazy and toxic that I had to de-friend them.   I'm not sure if Megalomaniac has any redeeming characteristics though.


A lovely dog and a very good age! I love wire-haired dogs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> I’m surprised the *Puerile Princess* didn’t stage another reading of the stench (aka The Bench) to some of the children at the refugee base.


Thanks @DoggieBags for your so very apt #2 nickname, Puerile Princess, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is
> View attachment 5249255
> 
> View attachment 5249256


this is all ludicrous....they could have been genuine royals.  what?  she would have to wear natural colored nail polish?  Oh, she would have had to stand behind Kate - the future queen


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> *The ever so self-absorbed DumbErtons*


 Thanks @EverSoElusive for your #12 nickname, The ever so self-absorbed DumbErtons. You're on a roll today!  Congratulations and welcome to the Early Bird Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> it’s *heinous Harry and duchess denial!*


 Thanks @Aimee3 for your nicknames #4 Heinous Harry and #5 Duchess denial that have been added to The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club (for #5).


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Here is a twitter post on the subject. It seems to have first hand information retrieved from a certain diary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'secret diary' laid bare - Prince Harry's wife-to-be talks 'magical boobs', Hollywood hustle and being REJECTED
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has been revealed as the author of a racy secret diary detailing the struggles of a hustling Hollywood actress – revealing she has “magical boobs” and talking a LOT …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



*Hmmmmm* .. and how did the *LASCIVIOUS LIAR* come up with all this sexy information???? .. possibly from her *YACHT-GIRL *days???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

V0N1B2 said:


> Good thing these little refugee children are learning the importance of recycling. *side-eye*
> But then again, who better to teach them than *America's very own beloved planet warriors*.


@VON1B2 for your #3, America's very own beloved planet warriors. I love the tongue-in-cheek compliments you all give the despicable duo. Congratulations and here's the #3 Gold Ribbon.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is
> View attachment 5249255
> 
> View attachment 5249256


In the second picture, the little girl is yawning and playing with her fingers probably bored to death and thinking, "Where's the reward they promised us for listening to this idiot?"


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is
> View attachment 5249255
> 
> View attachment 5249256


Look at the children ... yawning and bored to death listening to M.  Harry's truly a court jester.  He's the only one listening intensely.  Her biggest fan. 

This is the second photo from this visit that I've seen M wearing her mask under the nose. Guess her nose was so long it wouldn't fit inside the mask.  Probably spewing more lies.


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly I am livid at seeing these two worm their way into a refugee camp solely for the clicks and PR.  The folks there have no idea who these two are and if they were told that they were royals, then it really was under false pretenses.  Who allowed this?









						Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
					

Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Let's have a little bit of humour. Is Momma bear channeling Thomas Markle?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> From the same article: the teacher and the applied student.   The body language is
> View attachment 5249255
> 
> View attachment 5249256


The little girl’s yawn speaks for us all.


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> Look at the children ... yawning and bored to death listening to M.  Harry's truly a court jester.  He's the only one listening intensely.  Her biggest fan.
> 
> This is the second photo from this visit that I've seen M wearing her mask under the nose. Guess her nose was so long it wouldn't fit inside the mask.  Probably spewing more lies.


And hilariously in the second picture he is the poster boy-man-child-wimp as he is literally "limp wristed"  (definition on line that fits: "weak, ineffectual, not acting as a man would be expected to act") as he sits obsequiously* pretending to worship her every utterance. 

*A friend used it to describe Hazz in a conversation we had this morning and since "obsequious" is a word one rarely gets to use, thought it would be fun to play it forward. It is spot on to describe the Eunuch aka JCMH: "_Obedient or attentive to an excessive or servile degree, compliant with someone else's orders, fawning." _


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan and Harry’s egos keep getting bigger — but it’s all about to pop
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s hypocrisy keeps dwarfing into a gigantic cloud as the liberal media keeps feeding into their dubious lies, Maureen Callahan writes.




					nypost.com
				




The Post is going after both of them.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> And hilariously in the second picture he is the poster boy-man-child-wimp as he is literally "limp wristed"  (definition on line that fits: "weak, ineffectual, not acting as a man would be expected to act") as he sits obsequiously* pretending to worship her every utterance.
> 
> *A friend used it to describe Hazz in a conversation we had this morning and since "obsequious" is a word one rarely gets to use, thought it would be fun to play it forward. It is spot on to describe the Eunuch aka JCMH: "_Obedient or attentive to an excessive or servile degree, compliant with someone else's orders, fawning." _


Obsequious is one of my husband’s favorite words.  He’d randomly quiz our children on its definition when they were growing up.  And as many times as I’ve heard it, I still have to look up WTH it means!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Meghan and Harry’s egos keep getting bigger — but it’s all about to pop
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s hypocrisy keeps dwarfing into a gigantic cloud as the liberal media keeps feeding into their dubious lies, Maureen Callahan writes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Post is going after both of them.


Haha what a great article.  I think the author is a member here as well.  And it ends with, “And you thought Kanye was nuts”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

@artemisgoog
TW dazzled? She stunned? She looked incredible? Gorgeous? I need my eyes checked?  Making sure all eyes were on her and not the recipients of the American Intrepid Valour awards presented by her British Royal pet, this song played in my head. Apologies to L. Bernstein. Soz.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Mr Knauf, who did meet with the authors, told Meghan Markle in December 2018 that he “took them through everything.”
> He said: “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a celebration of you that *corrects the record on a number of fronts*. I will stay in close contact with them.”



This made me pause for a moment. Was Knauf at this point not aware what nutjobs he was working for? I do understand his job profile, but seeing he's a master wordsmith this still strucks me as slightly odd.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Lady C eviserates “that EVIL EVIL woman” in her latest video. Almost sputtering, she’s so angry I think maybe she might have scared her dog. It’s an hour of brutal assessment.
> 
> One of many statements: Meaghan “is so full of the brown stuff if someone gave her an enema she would disappear.”



I understand her reaction completely (I haven't watched yet, still binging Call the Midwife). I don't usually get worked up over "celebrities", but this woman is such an extraordinary level of evil she makes my skin crawl. She really has no soul and a brain that's entirely not wired correctly, and the worst, there are still people unable to see the obvious.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This made me pause for a moment. Was Knauf at this point not aware what nutjobs he was working for? I do understand his job profile, but seeing he's a master wordsmith this still strucks me as slightly odd.


Lots of people work for nut jobs who are successful at what they do.  Elon Musk?? He knew she was very difficult, but he probably went through that before.  Perhaps he didn't count on how bad she would become.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Miscarriage also “pull at the heartstrings” just saying.



I have always felt it was made up, but at this point the one thing I want to know is: was Harry in on it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Where does this dumb pic come from? I've seen it several times but don't remember the original occasion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> no words!
> View attachment 5249174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan visit Afghan refugee families at US military base
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan met Afghan refugees during a trip to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, including a classroom full of children learning English and a group of women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Aw, did she have to pull down her mask again to make sure she was recognized?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This made me pause for a moment. Was Knauf at this point not aware what nutjobs he was working for? I do understand his job profile, but seeing he's a master wordsmith this still strucks me as slightly odd.



Maybe it's literal World-word-salad. I have an experienced journalist friend who says when someone very professional writes something seemingly incomprehensible - it is meant to be incomprehensible

It just kills me that the red-headed husband of Miss Information wants to  "corrects the record"


I also don't get

“They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a* celebration of you *that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”

"celebration of you" - who me? - I wouldn't care enough to correct or redirect, I just come here for the laughs


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5249363
> 
> @artemisgoog
> TW dazzled? She stunned? She looked incredible? Gorgeous? I need my eyes checked?  Making sure all eyes were on her and not the recipients of the American Intrepid Valour awards presented by her British Royal pet, this song played in my head. Apologies to L. Bernstein. Soz.


The crabs surrounding her had me puzzled at first. A visit to the Urban Dictionary may explain them? 

Crab
1. A person who does not want another person to succeed by showing the following actions: Disloyalty, Jealousy, Slander, Two-faced behavior.

2. A person who uses another for personal gain or self gratification.

Synonyms: Hater, Back Stabber Leach Free-Loader


----------



## needlv

Well Duchess tabloidfodder should not read this article… all about her fashion fails…









						Meghan Markle’s biggest fashion faux pas - from terrible tailoring to tags
					

MEGHAN Markle stepped out in New York this week in a red Carolina Herrera gown for a Veterans Day gala in New York. She may have looked stunning in the red dress, however on closer inspection it se…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh that mean British tabloids again!


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @Aimee3 for your nicknames #4 Heinous Harry and #5 Duchess denial that have been added to The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club (for #5).
> View attachment 5249285


You made my day!  Thank you so much.  I’m honored!


----------



## needlv

Good question to ask…


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Well Duchess tabloidfodder should not read this article… all about her fashion fails…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s biggest fashion faux pas - from terrible tailoring to tags
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle stepped out in New York this week in a red Carolina Herrera gown for a Veterans Day gala in New York. She may have looked stunning in the red dress, however on closer inspection it se…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



The tag on the dress says it all. I'll bet that wasn't an accident.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Good question to ask…



The difference is, the WH didn't want the public to see the deplorable conditions at the border, whereas someone thought it would be good publicity for the public to see the Afghan refugees being well care for, even if it meant allowing the Sussexes to visit outside of normal protocols.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> She might  have had them pinned back (pinnaplasty) or the shape changed (Otoplasty) but having fillers or face lifts might have changed the shape of the face so the ears sit differently.  Honestly, it is probably all of them as she’s rarely off the operating table.
> 
> Oh girl that’s nowhere near her natural nose!
> 
> Ironically, her original face with its broad nose, close set beady eyes and prominent teeth and jaw made her look a lot like young QE2.
> View attachment 5249262
> 
> View attachment 5249264
> 
> If you put this Queen in a crunchy brown wig you would struggle to tell them apart


Each time I come across this picture, I remember @CeeJay's comments about TM paying for a lot of cosmetic surgery.


----------



## kipp

charlottawill said:


> The tag on the dress says it all. I'll bet that wasn't an accident.


Neither was the coat vent that was still sewn down


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does this dumb pic come from? I've seen it several times but don't remember the original occasion.


Wasn't this from when she invited herself to address the graduating class at her old high school? 
Another instance of pushing herself on a group of people that really don't GAF about her word salad stammerings.


----------



## Chanbal

This is getting very complicated! 


Confidential electronic correspondence from within the Royal household could be laid bare in court for the first time, as Court of Appeal judges consider whether to overturn a ruling in the Duchess of Sussex’s privacy case.

Emails and text messages sent within Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace, between members of staff and the Royal family, could be searched and included in documents at a future trial.
This week, messages between the Duchess of Sussex and her former press secretary were heard at the Court of Appeal, in an unprecedented development in the case over a handwritten letter to Thomas Markle, the Duchess’s father.

The Mail on Sunday’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited, has been seeking evidence from numerous other members of palace staff, none of whom have yet complied.

If the matter is sent for trial, experts say, the emails of senior staff and former staff will be searched for mentions of relevant terms such as the Finding Freedom biography the Sussexes are said to have cooperated with, and a People magazine article first exposing the existence of the letter.

The Telegraph understands staff who worked for the Sussexes have been instructed not to delete any correspondence and the palace email system has been left open should searches need to take place.
Attempts to involve palace staff in the case have caused deep disquiet within the institution, with any hopes of an elegant end to the Duchess vs Mail on Sunday case dashed.

Earlier hearings at the High Court made reference to the so-called Palace Four: the Duchess’s former private secretary Samantha Cohen, and former press secretaries Jason Knauf, Christian Jones and Sara Latham.

Documents released in the Court of Appeal this week also mention Simon Case, the Duke of Cambridge’s former private secretary who is now Cabinet Secretary and head of the civil service.

The obligation to provide information to the court or later appear as witnesses would override the customary discretion of members of the Royal household. They are thought to have signed non-disclosure agreements about their work at the palace, which could now be rendered useless.

Keith Mathieson, ANL’s solicitor, told the court he had contacted the solicitor representing the “Palace Four” on numerous occasions, eventually being told in December 2020 that they "had relevant evidence” about the letter and "whether or not the claimant [Meghan] anticipated that the letter might come into the public domain".

“However, the letter did not elaborate any further as to what that evidence might be,” he added.

Mr Knauf, who went on to take legal advice from a different firm, has now submitted written evidence including emails and text messages to and from the Duchess of Sussex.

They show her telling him she had “obviously” written the letter to Mr Markle "with the understanding that it could be leaked", and included emails with both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in which they authorised him to brief the authors of Finding Freedom.

The messages cover just a few key moments in the Sussexes' time at Kensington Palace and later Buckingham Palace.

Mr Knauf left his role in March 2019, moving to be chief executive of the Cambridge’s Royal Foundation, and he has said he cannot shed light on events relating to the Sussexes after his departure.

Finding Freedom was published in August 2020, after the Duke and Duchess moved through two more press secretaries and left for a new life in California.

*‘Masses of material is going to be searched’*
Mark Stephens, a media law expert and partner at Howard Kennedy, said it was likely that internal emails and text messages between palace staff would be produced in court if the case moved to a full trial.

“It’s almost certain that masses of that material is going to have to be searched to look for relevant material,” he said.

But he added: “I think it’s almost a racing certainty that whilst it will be handed over the Mail on Sunday’s lawyers, the judge might put in place reporting restrictions to prevent it being used in news reporting.”

Mr Stephens said that because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were essentially estranged from the Royal family, they may well no longer have access to royal systems including emails, meaning a judge would have to make a third party disclosure order directly against the palace.

The Duchess’s own witness statement claimed she was bracing to search her own email and text archives for 177 terms at the insistence of ANL, although conceding that these were later narrowed down.

Paperwork dating from September 2020 from the Duchess’s team said ANL was seeking “all disclosures and communications about her relationship with her father over a period of 18 months” with 40 search terms.

In the event, the searches were not provided to the court after the Duchess won her case - of breach of privacy, copyright and data protection - in a High Court summary judgment which found the publication of extracts of her letter to Mr Markle to be unlawful.

The Mail on Sunday is seeking to overturn that summary decision, arguing the matter should go to trial.

After a three-day hearing this week, the Court of Appeal judges will return their findings within the next few weeks.

Given the involvement of a member of the Royal family, the Duchess of Sussex’s case is unprecedented in the modern British courts.

In its closest equivalent, in 2006, the Mail on Sunday lost an appeal over the publication of extracts from the Prince of Wales's private diaries describing the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, with a summary judgment ruling the newspaper had breached his copyright and privacy.

Mr Stephens said the current case was the first major legal dispute involving the Royal family in which electronic communications could play a vital role.

“The Charles case predates Whatsapp, Messenger and that kind of thing, so it isn’t an area that has been gone into before,” he said.

Buckingham Palace did not comment.








						Royal family secrets could be spilled in court as confidential emails and text laid bare
					

Messages sent within Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace could be revealed at a future trial in the Duchess of Sussex’s privacy case




					web.archive.org


----------



## Chanbal

I can see his point!


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> Well Duchess tabloidfodder should not read this article… all about her fashion fails…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s biggest fashion faux pas - from terrible tailoring to tags
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle stepped out in New York this week in a red Carolina Herrera gown for a Veterans Day gala in New York. She may have looked stunning in the red dress, however on closer inspection it se…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



is this the kind of thing that was "unsurvivable"?


----------



## Chanbal

We will have a lot to discuss for many weeks, months… 












						Royal family told they can sue Netflix over The Crown after friends get legal advice on libel
					

THE Royal Family have been told they can sue Netflix over The Crown. Friends shown in the new series consulted the Queen’s lawyers who said they and the royals had grounds for legal action. Close f…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Chanbal

I feel her pain! Can't wait for COVID and MM to go away…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Look at the children ... yawning and bored to death listening to M.  Harry's truly a court jester.  He's the only one listening intensely.  Her biggest fan.
> 
> This is the second photo from this visit that I've seen M wearing her mask under the nose. Guess her nose was so long it wouldn't fit inside the mask.  Probably spewing more lies.



My take - it is all for the Nflix doc - these photos will be patched in with the Harlem photos, add upbeat music by one of their ‘friends’.  I’ll say it again, I feel like I have seen this show already. It was boring the first time, will not watch again. I will also say again, I blame the BRF for this disruption on our shores. They knew these 2 were liars, they knew what these liars planned do and *they let them do it*.  QE and Charles, epic failures. H&M, epic failures.  W&K should stay over there, no need for a USA tour.  The RadarOnline article said it best - the BRF always comes over here when they want to make money.  Disgusting misuse of us.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Maybe it's literal World-word-salad. I have an experienced journalist friend who says when someone very professional writes something seemingly incomprehensible - it is meant to be incomprehensible
> 
> It just kills me that the red-headed husband of Miss Information wants to  "corrects the record"
> 
> 
> I also don't get
> 
> “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a* celebration of you *that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”
> 
> "celebration of you" - who me? - I wouldn't care enough to correct or redirect, I just come here for the laughs


Miss Information , bravo for nickname


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Miss Information , bravo for nickname


Do you mean Miss Disinformation?
Don't we love her selective memory?


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> Good question to ask…



acting silly with kids does not always garner more fans, just makes you look silly
Did no one and learn from the VP’s Recent silly kids video on outer space ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> _*They are prioritising the US market*_



Let *that* sink in, USA.  We are being used and misused by this BRF.  Stand up and say *Hell NO.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is getting very complicated!
> View attachment 5249445
> 
> Confidential electronic correspondence from within the Royal household could be laid bare in court for the first time, as Court of Appeal judges consider whether to overturn a ruling in the Duchess of Sussex’s privacy case.
> 
> Emails and text messages sent within Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace, between members of staff and the Royal family, could be searched and included in documents at a future trial.
> This week, messages between the Duchess of Sussex and her former press secretary were heard at the Court of Appeal, in an unprecedented development in the case over a handwritten letter to Thomas Markle, the Duchess’s father.
> 
> The Mail on Sunday’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited, has been seeking evidence from numerous other members of palace staff, none of whom have yet complied.
> 
> If the matter is sent for trial, experts say, the emails of senior staff and former staff will be searched for mentions of relevant terms such as the Finding Freedom biography the Sussexes are said to have cooperated with, and a People magazine article first exposing the existence of the letter.
> 
> The Telegraph understands staff who worked for the Sussexes have been instructed not to delete any correspondence and the palace email system has been left open should searches need to take place.
> Attempts to involve palace staff in the case have caused deep disquiet within the institution, with any hopes of an elegant end to the Duchess vs Mail on Sunday case dashed.
> 
> Earlier hearings at the High Court made reference to the so-called Palace Four: the Duchess’s former private secretary Samantha Cohen, and former press secretaries Jason Knauf, Christian Jones and Sara Latham.
> 
> Documents released in the Court of Appeal this week also mention Simon Case, the Duke of Cambridge’s former private secretary who is now Cabinet Secretary and head of the civil service.
> 
> The obligation to provide information to the court or later appear as witnesses would override the customary discretion of members of the Royal household. They are thought to have signed non-disclosure agreements about their work at the palace, which could now be rendered useless.
> 
> Keith Mathieson, ANL’s solicitor, told the court he had contacted the solicitor representing the “Palace Four” on numerous occasions, eventually being told in December 2020 that they "had relevant evidence” about the letter and "whether or not the claimant [Meghan] anticipated that the letter might come into the public domain".
> 
> “However, the letter did not elaborate any further as to what that evidence might be,” he added.
> 
> Mr Knauf, who went on to take legal advice from a different firm, has now submitted written evidence including emails and text messages to and from the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> They show her telling him she had “obviously” written the letter to Mr Markle "with the understanding that it could be leaked", and included emails with both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in which they authorised him to brief the authors of Finding Freedom.
> 
> The messages cover just a few key moments in the Sussexes' time at Kensington Palace and later Buckingham Palace.
> 
> Mr Knauf left his role in March 2019, moving to be chief executive of the Cambridge’s Royal Foundation, and he has said he cannot shed light on events relating to the Sussexes after his departure.
> 
> Finding Freedom was published in August 2020, after the Duke and Duchess moved through two more press secretaries and left for a new life in California.
> 
> *‘Masses of material is going to be searched’*
> Mark Stephens, a media law expert and partner at Howard Kennedy, said it was likely that internal emails and text messages between palace staff would be produced in court if the case moved to a full trial.
> 
> “It’s almost certain that masses of that material is going to have to be searched to look for relevant material,” he said.
> 
> But he added: “I think it’s almost a racing certainty that whilst it will be handed over the Mail on Sunday’s lawyers, the judge might put in place reporting restrictions to prevent it being used in news reporting.”
> 
> Mr Stephens said that because the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were essentially estranged from the Royal family, they may well no longer have access to royal systems including emails, meaning a judge would have to make a third party disclosure order directly against the palace.
> 
> The Duchess’s own witness statement claimed she was bracing to search her own email and text archives for 177 terms at the insistence of ANL, although conceding that these were later narrowed down.
> 
> Paperwork dating from September 2020 from the Duchess’s team said ANL was seeking “all disclosures and communications about her relationship with her father over a period of 18 months” with 40 search terms.
> 
> In the event, the searches were not provided to the court after the Duchess won her case - of breach of privacy, copyright and data protection - in a High Court summary judgment which found the publication of extracts of her letter to Mr Markle to be unlawful.
> 
> The Mail on Sunday is seeking to overturn that summary decision, arguing the matter should go to trial.
> 
> After a three-day hearing this week, the Court of Appeal judges will return their findings within the next few weeks.
> 
> Given the involvement of a member of the Royal family, the Duchess of Sussex’s case is unprecedented in the modern British courts.
> 
> In its closest equivalent, in 2006, the Mail on Sunday lost an appeal over the publication of extracts from the Prince of Wales's private diaries describing the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, with a summary judgment ruling the newspaper had breached his copyright and privacy.
> 
> Mr Stephens said the current case was the first major legal dispute involving the Royal family in which electronic communications could play a vital role.
> 
> “The Charles case predates Whatsapp, Messenger and that kind of thing, so it isn’t an area that has been gone into before,” he said.
> 
> Buckingham Palace did not comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal family secrets could be spilled in court as confidential emails and text laid bare
> 
> 
> Messages sent within Kensington Palace and Buckingham Palace could be revealed at a future trial in the Duchess of Sussex’s privacy case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org



This is why the case won’t go to trial. H&M know the BRF fears being exposed. I say expose this lying family, all of them.
*Do it. *


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Maybe it's literal World-word-salad. I have an experienced journalist friend who says when someone very professional writes something seemingly incomprehensible - it is meant to be incomprehensible
> 
> It just kills me that the red-headed husband of Miss Information wants to  "corrects the record"
> 
> 
> I also don't get
> 
> “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. *They are prioritising the US market *and will position it as a* celebration of you *that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”
> 
> "celebration of you" - who me? - I wouldn't care enough to correct or redirect, I just come here for the laughs



*They are prioritising the US market*
*They are prioritising the US market
They are prioritising the US market*
*They are prioritising the US market*

Pay attention here, friends. 
Do you think of yourself as a “market” for H&M? The BRF?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

In addition to Jason Knauf, there are 4 more people ready to come forward…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> In addition to Jason Knauf, there are 4 more people ready to come forward…




*Do it. *
Now is the time to step up.


----------



## needlv

Lol


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *This is why the case won’t go to trial.* H&M know the BRF fears being exposed. I say expose this lying family, all of them.
> *Do it. *


Very possible, but it would be outrageous! They bluntly lied in court.


----------



## Jktgal

"Simon Case...Duke of Cambridge’s former private secretary who is now Cabinet Secretary and head of the civil service."

I have to chuckle at this - the chaos that Bonehead Markle was able to create under the guy who is now head of the WHOLE f'ing civil service. Now that she's free to thrive, we'll have entertainment material for a few generations


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> this is all ludicrous....they could have been genuine royals.  what?  she would have to wear natural colored nail polish?  Oh, she would have had to stand behind Kate - the future queen


M couldn't hack being a royal when she learnt that the focus of attention had to be on the patronages and causes that she supported instead of herself and we know that M requires 24/7 adulation.


----------



## Aimee3

Refresh my memory please. *Duchess dunce *couldn’t call her father because why?  The phone call would’ve been private and thus not able to be leaked?  I remember years (?) ago we all discussed how ridiculous in the age of emails and cell phones she wrote a calligraphied letter that took a few days to be delivered!
I get annoyed when something happens that’s avoidable and the person says to me “but I texted you/emailed you” and I reply “you couldn’t pick up the GD phone and call since it was so important/time sensitive?!?”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Refresh my memory please. *Duchess dunce *couldn’t call her father because why?  The phone call would’ve been private and thus not able to be leaked?  I remember years (?) ago we all discussed how ridiculous in the age of emails and cell phones she wrote a calligraphied letter that took a few days to be delivered!
> I get annoyed when something happens that’s avoidable and the person says to me “but I texted you/emailed you” and I reply “you couldn’t pick up the GD phone and call since it was so important/time sensitive?!?”



She wanted to tug on our “heartstrings” so it had to be a written letter.
  

All part of their plan to “*prioritze the US market.*”
Ya know what it time for?  Time for us to send the Kardashians and Paris over there.  Any other suggestions?


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Oprah is considering whether she needs a 2nd interview with Mr. and Mrs. Bandwagon…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> And hilariously in the second picture he is the *poster boy-man-child-wimp* as he is literally "limp wristed"  (definition on line that fits: "weak, ineffectual, not acting as a man would be expected to act") as he sits obsequiously* pretending to worship her every utterance.
> 
> *A friend used it to describe Hazz in a conversation we had this morning and since "obsequious" is a word one rarely gets to use, thought it would be fun to play it forward. It is spot on to describe the Eunuch aka JCMH: "_Obedient or attentive to an excessive or servile degree, compliant with someone else's orders, fawning." _


 Thanks @csshopper for your #21 nickname, poster boy-man-child-wimp. Wow, it sounds as if H is in limbo and unsure as to what stage of life he fits in, but needs to grow a pair very quickly. And no, I don't feel sorry for him. Congratulations and here is your The List #21 Ribbon.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

NYT continues very sympathetic to MM (and/or to her PR). So these mild sentences about a (naive) duchess must have been very difficult for them to write.



_The trouble is, Meghan admitted she erred in telling the court that she had not cooperated with the authors of a flattering book about the couple. Her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, turned over emails showing she supplied him with bullet points to give to the authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, including details about her ruptured relationship with her father, Thomas Markle.

“*I apologize to the court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time,” Meghan said in a witness statement. “I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the defendant or the court.”
A spokeswoman for the duchess declined to comment further*.

All of this is somewhat peripheral in a case that turns on whether The Mail on Sunday invaded her privacy by publishing the private letter to her father. The Mail, which obtained the letter, argues that Meghan, as a public figure, should not have expected it would remain confidential.

*Still, the disclosures paint a portrait of a duchess who seemed anything but naïve about her public image in the turbulent months after her marriage to Harry in May 2018.*_









						For Meghan, an Image Rendered in a U.K.-U.S. Split Screen (Published 2021)
					

She has re-emerged in America as a formidable A-list celebrity and social activist. In Britain, however, Meghan remains a polarizing figure.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Maybe it's literal World-word-salad. I have an experienced journalist friend who says when someone very professional writes something seemingly incomprehensible - it is meant to be incomprehensible
> 
> It just kills me that *the red-headed husband of Miss Information* wants to  "corrects the record"
> 
> 
> I also don't get
> 
> “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a* celebration of you *that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”
> 
> "celebration of you" - who me? - I wouldn't care enough to correct or redirect, I just come here for the laughs


 Thanks @papertiger for your #3 nickname, the red-headed husband of Miss Information. I love double entendre.  Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon.


----------



## needlv

Meanwhile, Royals demonstrate how to properly dress for the occasion… and yes, wear some of Diana’s jewels…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Well *Duchess tabloidfodder* should not read this article… all about her fashion fails…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s biggest fashion faux pas - from terrible tailoring to tags
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle stepped out in New York this week in a red Carolina Herrera gown for a Veterans Day gala in New York. She may have looked stunning in the red dress, however on closer inspection it se…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Thanks @needlv for your very apt #4 nickname, Duchess tabloidfodder, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Another PR guru… Who is funding this? So, get ready to be fed more propaganda…


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Another PR guru… Who is funding this? So, get ready to be fed more propaganda…



Agree more propaganda on the way.  
However, the good news is that they maybe realize they are in a crisis! They have seemed oblivious to this previously.


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> Agree more propaganda on the way.
> However, the good news is that they maybe realize they are in a crisis! *They have seemed oblivious to this previously.*


My 2 cents:
They will continue oblivious to everything as long as the media in the US continues favorable and supportive towards their multi-million deals, political career… I wonder if the guru has different media connections than SS, so all is covered.


----------



## Chanbal

This is an important question?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Cliffnotes from The Independent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle news: Final arguments heard in Mail on Sunday appeal over letter publication*
> Chiara Giordano
> Thu, 11 November 2021, 5:54 pm
> 
> 
> Final arguments are being heard in a three-day legal battle by the _Mail on Sunday _to overturn a High Court ruling on its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.
> Lawyers for the newspaper have said that the Duchess of Sussex crafted the letter to her father so that it would “pull at the heartstrings” if it was ever revealed to the public. They are trying to over turn the previous High Court ruling that the publication was unlawful by basing their case on this new evidence.
> The Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have said that, although Meghan Markle knew it might be leaked to the press, she did not want the letter to be seen publicly.
> They argued in the court of appeal this morning that Meghan Markle would have had ample opportunity to disclose the letter to authors of an unauthorised biography but was “simply not prepared to go there”.
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, sued the newspaper’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), over five articles that reproduced parts of a “personal and private” letter sent to her father Thomas Markle, 77, in August 2018.
> Read More
> Meghan Markle apologises for misleading court over aide’s exchanges with biography authors
> Meghan Markle ‘wrote her father a letter to pull heartstrings if leaked,’ says ex-aide
> Mail on Sunday’s legal battle against ruling over Meghan Markle letter enters final day
> *Key Points*
> 
> Mail on Sunday’s legal battle against letter ruling enters final day
> Letter ‘drafted with understanding it could be leaked’, newspaper’s lawyers suggest
> Meghan Markle had opportunity to disclose letter to biography authors but chose not to, says lawyer
> Key disclosures in aide’s correspondence with Meghan and Harry over unauthorised biography
> Judges will ‘take time’ to consider judgments ‘with great care’
> _10:57_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> Good morning and welcome to _The Independent_’s live coverage of the _Mail on Sunday_’s legal bid to overturn a High Court ruling its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.
> The three-day hearing at the Court of Appeal will end today, with a judgment expected at a later date.
> *Mail on Sunday’s legal battle against letter ruling enters final day*
> _11:00_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> The _Mail on Sunday_ is continuing its legal battle to overturn a High Court ruling on its publication of a letter written by Meghan Markle to her estranged father.
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, sued the newspaper’s publisher, Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), over five articles that reproduced parts of a “personal and private” letter sent to her father Thomas Markle, 77, in August 2018.
> The High Court ruled earlier this year that ANL’s publication of the letter was unlawful, entering summary judgment for Meghan and avoiding the need for a trial.
> ANL is challenging that ruling at the Court of Appeal in a three-day hearing that will come to an end today.
> Mail on Sunday’s appeal against ruling over Meghan Markle letter enters final day
> *Court pauses to observe two-minute silence*
> _11:03_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> The hearing at the Court of Appeal in London has paused as those present stand to observe a two-minute silence to mark the anniversary of Armistice Day.
> *Letter ‘drafted with understanding it could be leaked’, newspaper’s lawyers suggest*
> _11:12_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> Lawyers for Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) told senior judges on Tuesday that they wanted to rely on a recent witness statement made by Jason Knauf - the Duchess of Sussex’s former aide - in their legal bid to overturn the ruling.
> The court yesterday heard the Duchess of Sussex told Mr Knauf a handwritten letter to her estranged father was “drafted with the understanding that it could be leaked”.
> Mr Knauf, who was communications secretary to Meghan and Harry until March 2019, said the duchess had indicated to him in August of the previous year that she recognised it was possible her father, Thomas Markle, would make the letter public.
> More on that story here:
> Mail on Sunday suggests Meghan’s letter to father not intended to be ‘private’
> *Meghan Markle had ample opportunity to disclose letter to authors but chose not to, says lawyer*
> _12:45_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> Meghan Markle’s lawyer has argued she had ample opportunity to disclose the letter to the authors of an unauthorised biography about her and her husband but was “simply not prepared to go there”.
> The Duchess of Sussex’s former aide Jason Knauf has claimed her handwritten letter to her estranged father Thomas Markle was “drafted with the understanding that it could be leaked”.
> In a witness statement, Mr Knauf said the book - _Finding Freedom_ - was “discussed on a routine basis”, which was “discussed directly with the duchess multiple times in person and over email”.
> Mr Knauf also discussed planning a meeting with the authors to provide background information and said Meghan had given him several briefing points to share with them, including information on how she had “very minimal contact” with her half-siblings during her childhood.
> Meghan on Wednesday apologised for “misleading” the court over her recollection of the information given by her aides to the authors.
> Her lawyer today argued she only regarded the “possibility” that the letter could be leaked into the public domain. He also told the court she gave little information about her father to Mr Knauf for the authors and made absolutely no reference to the letter.
> “There is no real prospect that the evidence the defendant now relies on could show anything higher than a case that she regarded as a possibility,” he told the Court of Appeal.
> “What is striking is how little information about her father she was prepared to contemplate Mr Knauf giving to the authors and made absolutely no reference to the letter. She is simply not prepared to go there.”
> *Court adjourns over lunch*
> _13:16_ , _Holly Bancroft_
> The appeal hearing for Meghan Markle’s case against Associated Newspapers Limited, the publishers of the Mail on Sunday, has been paused over lunch.
> The hearing will start again at 2:10 pm.
> *Key disclosures in Palace aide’s correspondence with Meghan and Harry over unauthorised biography*
> _14:10_ , _Holly Bancroft_
> While the court of appeal breaks for lunch, here are some of the key moments from Palace communications chief, Jason Knauf’s, correspondence with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex - as revealed to the court yesterday.
> The Duke of Sussex asked Jason Knauf in December 2018 if he would give the writers of an unauthorised biography about the couple a “rough idea of what [Meghan’s] been through over the last two years?”.
> He described the “media onslaught” and “cyber bullying on a different scale”. He then asked: “So if you aren’t planning on telling them, can I?!”
> Neither the Duke or Duchess of Sussex ever had any direct contact with the book authors.
> The Duke of Sussex acknowledged to Jason Knauf in December 2018 that “we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it” and said that the couple would be unable to put the book’s authors in touch with any of Meghan Markle’s friends.
> Mr Knauf, who did meet with the authors, told Meghan Markle in December 2018 that he “took them through everything.”
> He said: “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a celebration of you that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”
> Meghan Markle told Mr Knauf in August 2018 that she had written the letter to her father “with the understanding that it could be leaked”.
> *Letter was best evidence to refute magazine article’s ‘royal attack’ on Thomas Markle, says publisher’s lawyer*
> _15:20_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> Andrew Caldecott QC, representing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), has argued the _Mail on Sunday_ published the letter sent from Meghan Markle to her father to refute “nasty and untrue” allegations made about him in a _People_ magazine article.
> The barrister argued there was a public interest in correcting the claims made during an interview with five friends of the Duchess of Sussex.
> Mr Caldecott said the letter to Mr Markle from Meghan was “not a loving letter, not a generous letter”, contrary to how it was presented in the _People _article.
> He added: “What evidence is there to refuse that than the time and text of the letter? We pleaded it was necessary not because that is a legal test but because it was necessary to put the public right about these matters.
> “Mr Markle has been royally attacked in the _People _article.”
> *Judges will ‘take time’ to consider judgments ‘with great care’*
> _16:24_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> The three-day hearing at the Court of Appeal has been heard by Sir Geoffrey Vos, master of the rolls, Dame Victoria Sharp, president of the Queen’s Bench Division, and Lord Justice Bean.
> The judges have now retired to consider their judgment, which will be handed down at a later date.
> Sir Geoffrey Vos, master of the rolls, said they would “take time” to consider their judgments and the lawyers’ submissions “with great care”.
> _17:54_ , _Chiara Giordano_
> That’s the end of our live coverage for today


M chose not to disclose letter to Omid for book … 
Makes total sense given timing … book came out at about the same time as People mag that started the ruckus about the existence of the letter , but did not quote it 
M would not have given Omid letter without reason and book went to press before ruckus … Omid did not need to see the letter … 
I don’t remember if the book even mentioned the existence of the letter … anyone know ???


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is an important question?
> View attachment 5249566


Do senators know M’s background ?    yup .. they have research staffs and they also know of the kerfuffle with Gillibrand and two other senators about child care …
Saying no to lunch may not be worth the effort for some .. senators go to lots of useless lunches …
BIG question , will it be a vegan lunch ???


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> She wanted to tug on our “heartstrings” so it had to be a written letter.
> 
> 
> All part of their plan to “*prioritze the US market.*”
> Ya know what it time for?  Time for us to send the Kardashians and Paris over there.  Any other suggestions?


Tug on our heartstrings … wow ! that is it ! BRILLIANT POINT 

A conversation or meeting would have been reasonably private.  But a calligraphied letter cannot be refuted , she INTENDED  for it to be revealed with all the heartstring tugging daddys in it 

She KNOWS her father , she knew he would publish it 

the letter was a bunch of disinformation from the get go


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> The crabs surrounding her had me puzzled at first. A visit to the Urban Dictionary may explain them?
> 
> Crab
> 1. A person who does not want another person to succeed by showing the following actions: Disloyalty, Jealousy, Slander, Two-faced behavior.
> 
> 2. A person who uses another for personal gain or self gratification.
> 
> Synonyms: Hater, Back Stabber Leach Free-Loader


Thank you for explaining!  I still haven't figured out that if something doesn't make sense with these two (much doesn't), consult Urban Dictionary!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> NYT continues very sympathetic to MM (and/or to her PR). So these mild sentences about a (naive) duchess must have been very difficult for them to write.
> 
> View attachment 5249543
> 
> _The trouble is, Meghan admitted she erred in telling the court that she had not cooperated with the authors of a flattering book about the couple. Her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, turned over emails showing she supplied him with bullet points to give to the authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, including details about her ruptured relationship with her father, Thomas Markle.
> 
> “*I apologize to the court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time,” Meghan said in a witness statement. “I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the defendant or the court.”
> A spokeswoman for the duchess declined to comment further*.
> 
> All of this is somewhat peripheral in a case that turns on whether The Mail on Sunday invaded her privacy by publishing the private letter to her father. The Mail, which obtained the letter, argues that Meghan, as a public figure, should not have expected it would remain confidential.
> 
> *Still, the disclosures paint a portrait of a duchess who seemed anything but naïve about her public image in the turbulent months after her marriage to Harry in May 2018.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For Meghan, an Image Rendered in a U.K.-U.S. Split Screen (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> She has re-emerged in America as a formidable A-list celebrity and social activist. In Britain, however, Meghan remains a polarizing figure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Bravo NYT!  Yet another example of how low you've sunk.  Groveling BS about a low rate, low class ("formidable A list celebrity and social activist" my a$$!), lying, two faced, disgusting and pathetic excuse for a woman...go crawl back under a rock and take her with you!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is an important question?
> View attachment 5249566


Do they really care?  They're politicians after all.  How many honest ones even exist??


----------



## eunaddict

marietouchet said:


> Do senators know M’s background ?    yup .. they have research staffs and they also know of the kerfuffle with Gillibrand and two other senators about child care …
> *Saying no to lunch may not be worth the effort for some .. senators go to lots of useless lunches …*
> BIG question , will it be a vegan lunch ???



Exactly. If someone invites me for lunch, it's their treat...and I can feign being interested in a lot of things if the food is both good and free.


----------



## Chanbal

SARAH VINE for todays's DM (very little on the subject of this thread)

The dress was a poor choice for an event in honor of the fallen.


----------



## Yanca

I watched a clip of GB news interviewing US based Royal/ showbiz  correspondence  Kinsey Schofield and she said, there are two reasons why the US media is not  covering/ touching  her UK court case, number one is  their PR team have relationships with certain huge outlets like People magazine and New York times, Forbes, and second reason is  they have established themselves as liberals, they position themselves as left leaning so the mainstream media has decided that they are on their side. The clip is still on the GB news twitter account. 
It make sense now because on the day that the news broke that she apologized for misleading the court- these outlets were active nonstop in twitter with their syrupy articles about her gown on the Intrepid awards. As long as this is the arrangement, Megain will continue to be smug andd feel untouchable.


----------



## needlv

Yanca said:


> I watched a clip of GB news interviewing US based Royal/ showbiz  correspondence  Kinsey Schofield and she said, there are two reasons why the US media is not  covering/ touching  her UK court case, number one is  their PR team have relationships with certain huge outlets like People magazine and New York times, Forbes, and second reason is  they have established themselves as liberals, they position themselves as left leaning so the mainstream media has decided that they are on their side. The clip is still on the GB news twitter account.
> It make sense now because on the day that the news broke that she apologized for misleading the court- these outlets were active nonstop in twitter with their syrupy articles about her gown on the Intrepid awards. As long as this is the arrangement, Megain will continue to be smug andd feel untouchable.



Until bullying allegations / investigation is done.  Think of Ellen etc.  If there is any video I would think it would have surfaced by now… but if enough people come forward and give their accounts it will be impossible to ignore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yanca said:


> I watched a clip of GB news interviewing US based Royal/ showbiz  correspondence  Kinsey Schofield and she said, there are two reasons why the US media is not  covering/ touching  her UK court case, number one is  their PR team have relationships with certain huge outlets like People magazine and New York times, Forbes, and second reason is  they have established themselves as liberals, they position themselves as left leaning so the mainstream media has decided that they are on their side. The clip is still on the GB news twitter account.
> It make sense now because on the day that the news broke that she apologized for misleading the court- these outlets were active nonstop in twitter with their syrupy articles about her gown on the Intrepid awards. *As long as this is the arrangement, Megain will continue to be smug andd feel untouchable.*



Yes, some of the east coast journalists are looking dim and dimmer, but just wait — karma‘s a coming. While H&M may believe they are untouchable and behave accordingly, Ghislane‘s trial begins this week. There could be some sordid stuff about the BRF. Hazzie may have been chatting with attorneys about this. Could be why he sought the Intrepid gig? The timing is too coincidental imo.

RE: the dress - as we all know, any designer who lets a client walk out looking that awful, he really doesn’t like her.  Let’s see if she wears another CH.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I think this is relevant. TM kept the infamous letter private for 6 months. This supports that he had no intention of making the letter public. I can see why some people think that the purpose of having friends talking to People magazine was to release parts of the letter to the public (since TM haven't done it). 











						Meghan's father kept letter secret for six months - until published
					

The Duchess of Sussex's father kept her explosive letter 'totally private' for six months, only releasing extracts after an 'attack' from his daughter's friends in a US magazine, a court heard last week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Do senators know M’s background ?    yup .. they have research staffs and they also know of the kerfuffle with Gillibrand and two other senators about child care …
> Saying no to lunch may not be worth the effort for some .. senators go to lots of useless lunches …
> *BIG question , will it be a vegan lunch ???*


Bigger question, who will pay for the lunch?


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Tug on our heartstrings … wow ! that is it ! BRILLIANT POINT
> A conversation or meeting would have been reasonably private.  But a calligraphied letter cannot be refuted , she INTENDED  for it to be revealed with all the heartstring tugging daddys in it
> *She KNOWS her father , she knew he would publish it*
> the letter was a bunch of disinformation from the get go


He kept the letter private for six months, I don't think he had intentions of publishing it. He had to be further provoked by the People article. The father seems to be surprising her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s the A-listers’ look, proving MM is no A-lister:




ETA:  no back fat, we all need to find ourselves a stylist who tells the truth


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lulilu

csshopper said:


> I'm betting she had implants in her suitcase days, her "cup runneth over" in some photos. At some point had them removed. Aged and like many women doesn't have what she used to, and what she does have, has slipped. None of this bodes well for selecting a dress that has enough open acreage in the middle of the bodice to accommodate a third boob.





lanasyogamama said:


> (.)(.) boob math





sdkitty said:


> and the dress puckers over her nipples





needlv said:


> Well one thing that came out in MM’s email to Jason was that she didn’t have a stylist.
> We know, Meg… we know….


Clearly she did not have a stylist.  Even the lowest most inexperienced stylist would use chicken cutlets to fill in the empty spaces her breasts don't fill.  Styling 101.



eunaddict said:


> View attachment 5249225
> 
> 
> ETA: Many edits for many grammar mistakes, it's very very early morning where I am.


What is that flat thing sticking out over her butt?  Is that where the recorder is situated?[/QUOTE]


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Bigger question, who will pay for the lunch?



My guess? Not Desperate Ducka$s for sure    If she did, it would probably be a piece of finger sandwich for each person. She's cheap.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Lots of people work for nut jobs who are successful at what they do.  Elon Musk?? He knew she was very difficult, but he probably went through that before.  Perhaps he didn't count on how bad she would become.


I've worked for nut jobs and even admired a couple of them for their ability to think out of the box. One of the non-nut-job bosses married a narc who reminds me of Methane. She served a jail term for assaulting someone who worked for her, and IIRC pleaded for a lighter sentence by claiming she was under stress when she attacked the victim multiple times.


----------



## Luvbolide

jelliedfeels said:


> Can she not get the mask over her fillers?
> Or is it to convince us she’s smiling as benevolently as Buddha the whole time?
> 
> Another inappropriate outfit for the occasion. Why is she dressed like Veronica Lake at the chump’s funeral?
> maybe some colour? A little less overt ‘sexy’ décolletage in front of a usually religious people who are also  kids?



Excellent point about the dress.  I pretty much live in black, so that seems ok to me, but the neckline is too low for a military base and a bunch kids.  I wonder what the kids of these two wackos parachuting in on them to sing songs!

I see she has Diana’s watch on again.  Looks like her Cartier love bracelet stacked with it.  Better the watch be used than left in a drawer in Montecito, I guess.  Especially with the inadequate security there!  LOL!!  Somewhere I read that Megsie has repeatedly gone to their HOA complaining about inadequate securityand demanding that more security be hired at the HOA’s expense.  Honestly - who does this woman think she is?  A briefcase girl with delusions of grandeur!


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Wells makes a good point about her anger towards H's family, but there is another shocking statement on the texts imo.

She says on mailing a letter, "_*It also does not open the door for a conversation*._" She didn't want to give any chance to her father. A father that paid for her expensive schools, surgeries, and whom she praised until she started making more money.  Isn't compassion the Arch*'s motto? Disgusting!


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Tom Wells makes a good point about her anger towards H's family, but there is another shocking statement on the texts imo.
> 
> She says about mailing a letter, "_*It also does not open the door for a conversation*._" She didn't want to give any chance to her father. A father that paid for her expensive schools, surgeries, and whom she praised until she started making more money.  Isn't compassion the Arch*'s motto? Disgusting!




I can see PC getting frustrated and asking her to call him or visit.  To me her excuses don’t make sense.


----------



## GirlAndBag

To date , I am still wondering how anyone can manage to make a CH dress look this way


----------



## CarryOn2020

_“They fundamentally don’t understand.”_

Melodramatic or bullying?  When phrased this way, she is saying _they_ are too stupid to understand her situation.  She is saying this about people who have met and understood zillions of people over many years.  Her situation is sooooo very complicated that they cannot understand it.  Puhleeze.  That is some kind of bs right there.


----------



## Icyjade

GirlAndBag said:


> To date , I am still wondering how anyone can manage to make a CH dress look this way



Because she is vulgar


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I can see PC getting frustrated and asking her to call him or visit.  To me her excuses don’t make sense.





CarryOn2020 said:


> _“*They fundamentally don’t understand*.”_
> 
> Melodramatic or bullying?  When phrased this way, she is saying _they_ are too stupid to understand her situation.  She is saying this about people who have met and understood zillions of people over many years.  Her situation is sooooo very complicated that they cannot understand it.  Puhleeze.  That is some kind of bs right there.
> 
> View attachment 5249670


Let me try to complete the thought, allegedly of course.

_“They fundamentally don’t understand.” _that I don't want any contact with my father. I don't want him to tell his truth, because it's so different than mine. Charles would be shocked if that would happen. 



GirlAndBag said:


> To date , I am still wondering how anyone can manage to make a CH dress look this way



It's her talent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let *that* sink in, USA.  We are being used and misused by this BRF.  Stand up and say *Hell NO.*



That quote referred to Scobie and Durand and their ghastly book


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *They are prioritising the US market*
> *They are prioritising the US market
> They are prioritising the US market*
> *They are prioritising the US market*
> 
> Pay attention here, friends.
> Do you think of yourself as a “market” for H&M? The BRF?



Again...he was referring to the target market for the book. Hardly "the BRF".


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That quote referred to Scobie and Durand and their ghastly book



IMO they are all connected.  Jason knew H&M were helping the book’s authors.  I doubt he kept that info to himself.  The BRF may be a bit of tangled web, but they are all connected and news travels fast. Just my opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_We know that these events occurred back in 2018, as the emails are dated August 2018, and December 2018, therefore, the entire KP Communications Team would have had knowledge of the issues, and no doubt they would have (or should have) reported this to their bosses at BP and that also meant Charles and William should have been informed. That means that a lot of people knew that TW was committing perjury during the hearings, so what does that say about the state of the Monarchy? That they enabled the perjury?_








						Public Appearances, Photos, and PR, While Knauf Talks
					

Who can forget the dreadful stunt the duo pulled last year on Remembrance Sunday, but they seemed to have done it again at the Salute To Freedom Gala at the Intrepid Museum held on 10 November 2021…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We know that these events occurred back in 2018, as the emails are dated August 2018, and December 2018, therefore, the entire KP Communications Team would have had knowledge of the issues, and no doubt they would have (or should have) reported this to their bosses at BP and that also meant Charles and William should have been informed. That means that a lot of people knew that TW was committing perjury during the hearings, so what does that say about the state of the Monarchy? That they enabled the perjury?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Public Appearances, Photos, and PR, While Knauf Talks
> 
> 
> Who can forget the dreadful stunt the duo pulled last year on Remembrance Sunday, but they seemed to have done it again at the Salute To Freedom Gala at the Intrepid Museum held on 10 November 2021…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com



And the spin begins.  This should start with… it’s not Mm’s fault she lied to the court.  Give me a break.  She lied.  They must have realised AFTER she submitted statements.

from her own text messages she was keeping BRF PR/ comms team out of what she was doing.

LYING is her fault only.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Tom Wells makes a good point about her anger towards H's family, but there is another shocking statement on the texts imo.
> 
> She says on mailing a letter, "_*It also does not open the door for a conversation*._" She didn't want to give any chance to her father. A father that paid for her expensive schools, surgeries, and whom she praised until she started making more money.  Isn't compassion the Arch*'s motto? Disgusting!



I guess this means she didn't include a return address on the envelope or any email or phone number in the letter. Sneaky. Like those trolls who send you nasty messages, then immediately block you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO they are all connected.  Jason knew H&M were helping the book’s authors.  I doubt he kept that info to himself.  The BRF may be a bit of tangled web, but they are all connected and news travels fast. Just my opinion.



Yeah, but I find it a bit...alu-hatish to assume the Queen (or Charles) want to re-conquer the US via a badly written hagiography featuring #6 and his wife - or should I say the wife and #6.

I also don't think one family member's press person keeps the other ones informed about every minute detail of their work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We know that these events occurred back in 2018, as the emails are dated August 2018, and December 2018, therefore, the entire KP Communications Team would have had knowledge of the issues, and no doubt they would have (or should have) reported this to their bosses at BP and that also meant Charles and William should have been informed. That means that a lot of people knew that TW was committing perjury during the hearings, so what does that say about the state of the Monarchy? That they enabled the perjury?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Public Appearances, Photos, and PR, While Knauf Talks
> 
> 
> Who can forget the dreadful stunt the duo pulled last year on Remembrance Sunday, but they seemed to have done it again at the Salute To Freedom Gala at the Intrepid Museum held on 10 November 2021…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harrymarkle.wordpress.com




It's these peoples' job to keep things from their bosses and get stuff cleaned up so they don't have to...if they had to deal with everything themselves, what's the point in paying staff? They are there to keep their backs free.

ETA: just an example on a much smaller scale. When one of my test kitchen peeps messes up *I* deal with it, not the client, not the program director. And that's not some big conspiracy, it's practical.


----------



## Luvbolide

GirlAndBag said:


> To date , I am still wondering how anyone can manage to make a CH dress look this way




No kidding!  I can't imagine that CH saw the dress on her - at least as it looked the other day.  CH is such a lovely woman and she is always dressed impeccably.   My take is that it is a typical MM situation - the briefcase girl knows it all - she thinks her taste (and everything else about her) is so fabulous that she doesn't need anyone else to help select her clothes (heck,even suggest clothes!) or help her get dreessed so she doesn't go out of the house like that.  She did have the same hair and makeup guy that she used for her wedding.  She is spending buckets of money and still can't quite get it right.  She needs someone to come in and help her figure out a few shapes that work for her and some colors that work for her - and get her some lingerie that doesn't show through everything she wears.  If the clothes are simple, well all the better - at lease she would look tasteful and well dressed instead of looking like a case of ketchup exploded on her.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Tom Wells makes a good point about her anger towards H's family, but there is another shocking statement on the texts imo.
> 
> She says on mailing a letter, "_*It also does not open the door for a conversation*._" She didn't want to give any chance to her father. A father that paid for her expensive schools, surgeries, and whom she praised until she started making more money.  Isn't compassion the Arch*'s motto? Disgusting!





This snarkiness about H's family is another nutty thing she did - WTF?  Here she is, newly married (or soon to be) into the family and she shoots snarky messages - in writing - to Knauf.  She doesn't even know the guy - how can she be sure that he won't go directly to Charles with those texts?  And she stirred up enough of a hornet's nest that now they are public for all to read.  Nice way to talk about your new in-laws!!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5249689




How I would love to hear what that was all about!!!


----------



## mellibelly

Apparently Hazbeen requested they play God Save the Queen at the Intrepid awards. WTF!! He does not represent the Queen and this was an award ceremony for AMERICAN military. Here’s the video, it starts at the 5:07 mark.


----------



## mellibelly

And I’ve got to share some new nicknames I came across. The *Louse and* *Spouse *and our old favorite HazBeen with his wife *NeverWas*.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> Apparently Hazbeen requested they play God Save the Queen at the Intrepid awards. WTF!! He does not represent the Queen and this was an award ceremony for AMERICAN military. Here’s the video, it starts at the 5:07 mark.



Did he hope the audience were ignorant and blind, and could be conned into thinking the dumpster fire camo'd by the the red carpet was HMTQ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> It just kills me that the red-headed husband of Miss Information wants to  "*corrects the record*"
> “They are going to time the book for run-up to the baby being born and it is going to be very positive. *They are prioritising the US market and will position it as a celebration of you *that corrects the record on a number of fronts. I will stay in close contact with them.”
> "celebration of you" - who me? - I wouldn't care enough to correct or redirect, I just come here for the laughs


I also come here for the laughs, but this couple shouldn't be overlooked. They want to "correct records", close accounts, question the first amendment, get people fired, lie in court… and hire very costly PR teams to saturate the media with propaganda, very dangerous imo.

It looks like one of the intents of the book was for us to celebrate our very first and beloved American princess. How nice! It also supports opinions that they had in mind the American market ($$$$) very early in their relationship.


----------



## Sophisticatted

IMO, they should have denied the request for “God Save the Queen”.  It wasn’t HIS party, for starters….

Considering the event, it was just so wrong, on so many levels, to play that song….

With all this talk of “heartstrings” I also wonder if it was a “message” or manipulative ploy for his family members, in particular THE Queen.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I also come here for the laughs, but this couple shouldn't be overlooked. They want to "correct records", close accounts, question the first amendment, get people fired, lie in court… and hire very costly PR teams to saturate the media with propaganda, very dangerous imo.
> 
> It looks like one of the intents of the book was for us to celebrate our very first and beloved American princess. How nice! It also supports opinions that they had in mind the American market ($$$$) very early in their relationship.


Unfortunately, I agree. The Americans are normally very against revisionist history, but they are being hoodwinked by her "poor me" act.  

This is one time when this saying really applies: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Am I saying Methane is evil? No, but she is entitled and immoral, and thinks nothing of pushing someone into the deep end for her own benefit. Am I racist? I couldn't care less if she were white, black or purple.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a great article that should be shared with the NYT, which I used to respect. However, I wish the author would be wrong on some of her comments. @CarryOn2020 Long seems to agree with you.


_*My instinct is she will be saved a trial.* The appeal judges will conveniently ignore the fact she had to apologise, preferring to focus on the holes in what Knauf said. No one really wants a trial: not the royals nor the judges — they won’t want to rat on their colleague in such a high-profile case. So Meghan will probably swerve this one yet again, just because she’s a member of a family she is meant to hate._



			https://archive.vn/3YvNl#selection-925.0-925.413


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Unfortunately, I agree. The Americans are normally very against revisionist history, but they are being hoodwinked by her "poor me" act.
> 
> This is one time when this saying really applies: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Am I saying Methane is evil? No, but she is entitled and immoral, and thinks nothing of pushing someone into the deep end for her own benefit. Am I racist? I couldn't care less if she were white, black or purple.



Agree with both of you. The revisions are happening in real time right in front of our eyes.
- it wasn’t only MM who lied.
- yes, QE and Charles and William knew about the lying. They went along with it. Still are.
- H&M can operate with no consequences, so why not be bold? Demand the US veterans sing the UK song? Why not? H&M got what they wanted, got the Nflix footage, got to stay at the UN, etc. So what if it is insulting to the US veterans? So what if some people don’t like it? _*Because what H&M know is people are buying whatever they sell.  *_
- the HarryMarkle blog raises the correct questions. Time for the BRF to answer them.

Just my opinion. YMMV.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did H&M miss this ?  









						Kate Hudson and Danny Fujikawa at the Baby2Baby gala in LA
					

The 42-year-old Almost Famous actress slipped her fit frame into a bold pink gown covered in vibrant red roses.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

I was woken up by the sound of plates breaking this morning and when I went to investigate, this is what I found  

Poor Jilted Ducka$s


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder who's grave they'll be stepping on today?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Another PR guru… Who is funding this? So, get ready to be fed more propaganda…



they in crisis?  good...they created the mess


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I think this is relevant. TM kept the infamous letter private for 6 months. This supports that he had no intention of making the letter public. I can see why some people think that the purpose of having friends talking to People magazine was to release parts of the letter to the public (since TM haven't done it).
> 
> View attachment 5249608
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's father kept letter secret for six months - until published
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's father kept her explosive letter 'totally private' for six months, only releasing extracts after an 'attack' from his daughter's friends in a US magazine, a court heard last week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


she should be ashamed of herself....treating her father so poorly after he gave her everything growing up.  I suspect she was way more spoiled than the rest of his kids


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> Apparently Hazbeen requested they play God Save the Queen at the Intrepid awards. WTF!! He does not represent the Queen and this was an award ceremony for AMERICAN military. Here’s the video, it starts at the 5:07 mark.



what?
they want to be everything


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> No kidding!  I can't imagine that CH saw the dress on her - at least as it looked the other day.  CH is such a lovely woman and she is always dressed impeccably.   My take is that it is a typical MM situation - the briefcase girl knows it all - she thinks her taste (and everything else about her) is so fabulous that she doesn't need anyone else to help select her clothes (heck,even suggest clothes!) or help her get dreessed so she doesn't go out of the house like that.  She did have the same hair and makeup guy that she used for her wedding.  She is spending buckets of money and still can't quite get it right.  She needs someone to come in and help her figure out a few shapes that work for her and some colors that work for her - and get her some lingerie that doesn't show through everything she wears.  If the clothes are simple, well all the better - at lease she would look tasteful and well dressed instead of looking like a case of ketchup exploded on her.


I imagine MM's "stylist", to use the term loosely, reached out to an underling of CH's and asked to borrow something from the new collection in a size 2 and it was messengered over to her. I doubt there was anything like an in person fitting. I also imagine that underling now getting ripped by CH for it. But CH is too classy to ever say anything publicly about it.


----------



## Jayne1

GirlAndBag said:


> To date , I am still wondering how anyone can manage to make a CH dress look this way


I read somewhere that she borrowed the CH sample which can explain the small size.


----------



## Aminamina

The Sussexes are naked! In what capacity did they visit those refugee kids?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I imagine MM's "stylist", to use the term loosely, reached out to an underling of CH's and asked to borrow something from the new collection in a size 2 and it was messengered over to her. I doubt there was anything like an in person fitting. I also imagine that underling now getting ripped by CH for it. But CH is too classy to ever say anything publicly about it.


you think she'd fit into a size 2?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> you think she'd fit into a size 2?


Of course not, but that's the problem. They sent a sample size 2 and it fit her like a sausage bursting out of its casing.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Of course, he predicted January 6. He is Harry, the wizard!
> The author of the "First Amendment is Bonkers" wants to close more twitter accounts.




_"Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis" _



_"I lost my mother to this self-manufactured rabidness."_
No, your mother lost her life as the result of a tragic car accident which had many factors, the main one being an intoxicated dangerous driver who shouldn't have been left anywhere near a car let alone given keys to drive one.





K.D. said:


> I guess BBC doesn't count as giving clicks, right? Removed parts of the article that can be considered political. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59229044
> *The Duke of Sussex has said he warned Twitter boss Jack Dorsey about political unrest in the US - just a day before the deadly 6 January riots.*
> "I warned him his platform was allowing a coup to be staged," Prince Harry said at the RE:WIRED tech forum in the US.
> "That email was sent the day before. And then it happened and I haven't heard from him since," the duke said.
> He was speaking at a session discussing whether social media was contributing to misinformation and online hatred.
> 
> Harry promises to share 'highs and lows' in memoir
> Harry: Heavy drinking masked pain of mum’s death
> Mr Dorsey, who is Twitter's chief executive officer, has so far made no public comments on the issue.
> *Internet 'being defined by hate, division and lies'*
> Prince Harry, who now lives with his wife the Duchess of Sussex in California, appeared at Tuesday's session via video chat as a guest speaker. He was introduced as the co-founder of the Archewell organisation.
> 
> The duke used his personal experience with online hatred and the press to reflect that social media companies were not doing enough to stop the spread of misinformation.
> He said the internet was "being defined by hate, division and lies", adding: "That can't be right."
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> His appearance via video chat comes two weeks after a data analytics company alleged that 70% of the hate directed towards the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on Twitter was generated by just 55 accounts.


This honestly sounds like the ramblings of a mentally ill person who needs urgent help.
On what planet does Jack Dorsey need an entitled, protected BRITISH prince to be emailing him telling him about possible political unrest in America around an election that he has no right to vote in?!







needlv said:


> Newspapers barrister just called PH, MM and Scobie out on their lies.  They all denied collaborating on finding freedom book.  The barrister is just reading out emails where they admit co-operating / collaborating with Scoobie.  Multiple conversations, text messages and emails.  *Said MM disclosed personal information of Samantha to authors of the book… and noted the hypocrisy in disclosing another persons personal information to the authors.*










Kaka_bobo said:


>



Girl, you had every intention to mislead the Defendant and/or the Court.








CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, that pesky back fat:
> View attachment 5247000


Still hanging off each other like they're sewn together 





gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009





Words can not describe how ugly, ill-fitting, inappropriate for the event, unsuitable for her body shape and again- ugly that dress is.
Carolina Herrera must be wondering how tf her name is attached to that dress.




Icyjade said:


> Yeah, while magazines are gushing over how “amazing” she looks, I don’t think normal people are buying that story at all. She looks awful. It’s such an unflattering dress and hair combination.


I totally agree.





CarryOn2020 said:


>



The way the crowd went flat as they walked in despite instructions to cheer for them- absolutely HILARIOUS  









charlottawill said:


> She probably overdressed intentionally. Most people would be embarrassed if they showed up way overdressed, but not a narcissist. *She revels in the attention, even if much of it is negative.*


_Especially _negative attention. That's the conclusion I have come to from the narcissists I have encountered in the past. It's what they get their energy from.


----------



## lulilu

charlottawill said:


> Of course not, but that's the problem. They sent a sample size 2 and it fit her like a sausage bursting out of its casing.


Bursting everywhere except the boobs, thank were sunk in to the point of embarrassing.  How could she not see that?

I can't believe US publications gushed over her.  The massive train and bustle made her bum look enormous.


----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


> Apparently Hazbeen requested they play God Save the Queen at the Intrepid awards. WTF!! He does not represent the Queen and this was an award ceremony for AMERICAN military. Here’s the video, it starts at the 5:07 mark.




This event was to honor American vets and Harry requested for God Save the Queen to be played?? For someone who was once a working royal, he must know this was extremely inappropriate  Furthermore, he's not representing the Queen nor the British government therefore this shouldn't have been considered and granted in the first place.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> This event was to honor American vets and Harry requested for God Save the Queen to be played?? For someone who was once a working royal, he must know this was extremely inappropriate  Furthermore, he's not representing the Queen nor the British government therefore this shouldn't have been considered and granted in the first place.



It was a _private_ event, so they can do what they want, sing what they want. 
Ken Fisher, Intrepid Co- Chairman of the Board, helped Hazzie with Invictus.  Powerful people pushing the disastrous duo.


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


> The massive train and bustle made her bum look enormous.


Can't remember where, but someone commented this might have been where the recording equipment was stashed, and you know thinking about it, if so, it was well placed.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> It was a _private_ event, so they can do what they want, sing what they want.
> Ken Fisher, Intrepid Co- Chairman of the Board, helped Hazzie with Invictus.  Powerful people pushing the disastrous duo.



Though a private event, I'd have thought people have more decorum      Sad that some powerful people want to be associated with these Scheming Duo.


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> Apparently Hazbeen requested they play God Save the Queen at the Intrepid awards. WTF!! He does not represent the Queen and this was an award ceremony for AMERICAN military. Here’s the video, it starts at the 5:07 mark.



Did Meghan know the words this time?  This was really inappropriate.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Some here have written of the RF’s support of M&H.  I will give William credit.  He was never in support of Meghan, or the marriage, and he hasn’t hidden his lack of support from the public eye.  (He “scarfed” Meg instead of responded to her.). He puts physical distance between himself and Harry whenever possible.  (Spencer family members at Diana statue unveiling.)


----------



## mellibelly

Since I posted the video of the British national anthem performance they turned off all comments. Every single comment was negative. At least you can see the almost 400 dislikes to 31 likes, but I guess YouTube will be censoring that soon


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It was a _private_ event, so they can do what they want, sing what they want.
> Ken Fisher, Intrepid Co- Chairman of the Board, helped Hazzie with Invictus.  Powerful people pushing the disastrous duo.


Now I really don't regret throwing all those mailings from Fisher Investments in the trash for years.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Bravo NYT!  Yet another example of how low you've sunk.  Groveling BS about *a low rate, low class ("formidable A list celebrity and social activist" my a$$!), lying, two faced, disgusting and pathetic excuse for a woman*...go crawl back under a rock and take her with you!


 Thanks @purseinsanity for your #24 nickname, "a low rate, low class ("formidable A list celebrity and social activist" my a$$!), lying, two faced, disgusting and pathetic excuse for a woman." Well, that certainly needs no explanation, but I still want to know if that means you don't like her.  Congratulations and here is The List #24 Ribbon.  
And for that extraordinary nickname, have a bit of caffeine on me and they're all yours to devour at your leisure. Cheers!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Of course not, but that's the problem. They sent a sample size 2 and it fit her like a sausage bursting out of its casing.


not trying to fat shame her but I'd say she is average height - maybe 5'5" with skinny legs and a healthy sized butt....so, considering photographs can be cruel, I'd think she might be 130 lbs.  Not fat but not size 2


----------



## Lodpah

Lounorada said:


> _"Misinformation is a global humanitarian crisis" _
> View attachment 5249827
> 
> 
> _"I lost my mother to this self-manufactured rabidness."_
> No, your mother lost her life as the result of a tragic car accident which had many factors, the main one being an intoxicated dangerous driver who shouldn't have been left anywhere near a car let alone given keys to drive one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This honestly sounds like the ramblings of a mentally ill person who needs urgent help.
> On what planet does Jack Dorsey need an entitled, protected BRITISH prince to be emailing him telling him about possible political unrest in America around an election that he has no right to vote in?!
> View attachment 5249836
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5249837
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Girl, you had every intention to mislead the Defendant and/or the Court.
> View attachment 5249838
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still hanging off each other like they're sewn together
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5249851
> 
> Words can not describe how ugly, ill-fitting, inappropriate for the event, unsuitable for her body shape and again- ugly that dress is.
> Carolina Herrera must be wondering how tf her name is attached to that dress.
> 
> 
> 
> I totally agree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The way the crowd went flat as they walked in despite instructions to cheer for them- absolutely HILARIOUS
> 
> View attachment 5249875
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Especially _negative attention. That's the conclusion I have come to from the narcissists I have encountered in the past. It's what they get their energy from.


In the real world at least in the US the lawyers representing her would have withdrawn I think due to credibility issues and whoever drafted her declaration or included it in his/her declare should be charged with fraud and misrepresentation to the court. Does not the UK court do this?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> not trying to fat shame her but I'd say she is average height - maybe 5'5" with skinny legs and a healthy sized butt....so, considering photographs can be cruel, I'd think she might be 130 lbs.  Not fat but not size 2


Pre-pandemic I was similarly sized and size 4 fit well. She may have been size 2 pre-kids but like so many people thinks anything larger is plus size, especially in Hollywood.  One of the biggest fashion mistakes you can make is to squeeze yourself into a size that is too small. It won't go unnoticed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal    Camilla does have a way with words. In her honor, H&M are the Turducken Two:

_That Turducken Letter:

*It is weird to feel that royalty is dragging you down to its level.* This is before we even get to the letter: the most preposterous *turducken* of a literary endeavour ever created. I feel ashamed of the way we are being induced to accept this manipulative document as remotely “private”. It is private in the sense that the Trojan horse was a convenient mode of transport. It looked like a letter and felt like a letter, but in fact it was something else entirely: *her way of getting her “truth” out.* “Words”, as she put it to Knauf, “I could never voice publicly”.

We know from Knauf, who helped Meghan draft the letter, that she had been “*meticulous in her word choice”* because she believed it would be leaked. 
-She *numbered the pages specifically* so that people other than Thomas Markle would know how long the letter was. 
-She *ended pages halfway through a sentence *so no one could reproduce it partly. 
-Most despicably, she *addressed her father as “Daddy”*, according to Knauf, because “in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heart-strings”._

*


			https://archive.vn/3YvNl
		

*


----------



## Lodpah

mellibelly said:


> Since I posted the video of the British national anthem performance they turned off all comments. Every single comment was negative. At least you can see the almost 400 dislikes to 31 likes, but I guess YouTube will be censoring that soon


That is so offensive. They make it about them. There’s no joint exercises going on there, there’s no tragedy each Allie is supporting each other, this was simply a way to reflect the event on them. Man, they can’t go lower but then the sewer is way beyond them. They’ve passed sewer stage, now they’re digging their way to hell.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> He kept the letter private for six months, I don't think he had intentions of publishing it. He had to be further provoked by the People article. The father seems to be surprising her.


Yes, M didn't really know her own father and just expected him to behave as badly as herself. Look at who she married, another egocentric, loose-lipped, fame-seeking who*e like herself.  She didn't want TM at the wedding for fear that he would divulge all her dirty little secrets and so she badmouthed him to the RF who then tried to "protect" her when in fact it was TM who needed protection from his evil-spawn of a daughter. He didn't react when his text messages and emails were being ignored, but only after the People article was published.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> That is so offensive. They make it about them. There’s no joint exercises going on there, there’s no tragedy each Allie is supporting each other, this was simply a way to reflect the event on them. Man, they can’t go lower but then the sewer is way beyond them. They’ve passed sewer stage, now they’re digging their way to hell.



It’s a private event at a private museum.  This kind of thing happens all the time in the private world of museums. The tragedy is that our veterans were shamelessly used by the Turducken Two and the museum owners.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Poor lamb, deprived from the very beginning.



Also that description of Omid


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> My guess? Not *Desperate Ducka$s* for sure   If she did, it would probably be a piece of finger sandwich for each person. She's cheap.


 Thanks @EverSoElusive for your #13 nickname, Desperate Ducka$s, that has been added to The List. Congratulations and welcome to the Busy Bee Club.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor lamb, deprived from the very beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> Also that description of Omid



Every time I read that she "raged" and "demanded" jewelry etc., I wonder WTF Harry thought?  And why did she feel entitled to do so when they weren't even married?  Why didn't he run away?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Luvbolide said:


> Excellent point about the dress.  I pretty much live in black, so that seems ok to me, but the neckline is too low for a military base and a bunch kids.  I wonder what the kids of these two wackos parachuting in on them to sing songs!
> 
> I see she has Diana’s watch on again.  Looks like her Cartier love bracelet stacked with it.  Better the watch be used than left in a drawer in Montecito, I guess.  Especially with the inadequate security there!  LOL!!  Somewhere I read that Megsie has repeatedly gone to their HOA complaining about inadequate securityand demanding that more security be hired at the HOA’s expense.  Honestly - who does this woman think she is?  A *briefcase girl with delusions of grandeur*!


Thanks @Luvbolide for your #2 nickname, briefcase girl with delusions of grandeur. Yep, M all excited, mouth wide opened at opening a $5 briefcase. Congratulations.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s a private event at a private museum.  This kind of thing happens all the time in the private world of museums. The tragedy is that our veterans were shamelessly used by the Turducken Two and the museum owners.


Even though it’s a private event the optics they displayed should have adhered to protocols for especially since he is a royal figure and the event was sure to be publicized.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> This is one time when this saying really applies: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." *Am I saying Methane is evil? No*, but she is entitled and immoral, and thinks nothing of pushing someone into the deep end for her own benefit. Am I racist? I couldn't care less if she were white, black or purple.



After careful consumption of video footage showing her infamous face malfunctions I believe she indeed is. If not evil in a demonic way at least in a complete psychopath way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I imagine MM's "stylist", to use the term loosely, reached out to an underling of CH's and asked to borrow something from the new collection in a size 2 and it was messengered over to her. I doubt there was anything like an in person fitting. I also imagine that underling now getting ripped by CH for it. But CH is too classy to ever say anything publicly about it.



I really don't think Raptor in her current shape and form could zip up a couture 2. They don't do vanity sizing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> Every time I read that she "raged" and "demanded" jewelry etc., I wonder WTF Harry thought?  And why did she feel entitled to do so when they weren't even married?  Why didn't he run away?



I think I can answer that! "What Meghan wants Meghan gets!" Too bad someone else held the key to Diana's jewelry box.

As to why he didn't run...I'm still not fully convinced the people claiming voodoo was involved are completely off haha.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> And I’ve got to share some new nicknames I came across. The *Louse and* *Spouse *and our old favorite HazBeen with his wife *NeverWas*.


Thanks @mellibelly for your nicknames #10, Louse and Spouse and #11, NeverWas. Congratulations and welcome to the Energizer Bunny and Eager Beaver Clubs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Even though it’s a private event the optics they displayed should have adhered to protocols for especially since he is a royal figure and the event was sure to be publicized.



I agree that this show was wrong on so many levels. The Turduckens did it because they can.  The organizers bear the responsibility for allowing it.  Robert Kraft when asked who invited the Turduckens said it was the organizers. They are the ones who allowed this.  Turduckens simply did what they were allowed to do.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Did he hope the audience were ignorant and blind, and could be conned into thinking *the dumpster fire camo'd by the the red carpet* was HMTQ?


 Thanks @xincinsin for your #24, the dumpster fire camo'd bye the red carpet.    Congratulations and here's The List #24 Ribbon.  
For that magnificent concoction, please accept this sweet little gift. Cheers!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Our friend is back…


----------



## Chanbal

Thanks for the


----------



## Sophisticatted

If the emerald choker Diana wore as a headband is the piece in question, it wasn’t even Diana’s.  It belongs to the Queen or the Crown.  Ugh!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal    Camilla does have a way with words. In her honor, H&M are the *Turducken Two*:
> 
> _That Turducken Letter:
> 
> *It is weird to feel that royalty is dragging you down to its level.* This is before we even get to the letter: the most preposterous *turducken* of a literary endeavour ever created. I feel ashamed of the way we are being induced to accept this manipulative document as remotely “private”. It is private in the sense that the Trojan horse was a convenient mode of transport. It looked like a letter and felt like a letter, but in fact it was something else entirely: *her way of getting her “truth” out.* “Words”, as she put it to Knauf, “I could never voice publicly”.
> 
> We know from Knauf, who helped Meghan draft the letter, that she had been “*meticulous in her word choice”* because she believed it would be leaked.
> -She *numbered the pages specifically* so that people other than Thomas Markle would know how long the letter was.
> -She *ended pages halfway through a sentence *so no one could reproduce it partly.
> -Most despicably, she *addressed her father as “Daddy”*, according to Knauf, because “in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heart-strings”._
> 
> *
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/3YvNl
> 
> 
> *


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #17 nickname, Turducken Two.  At first, I thought you were talking about a couple of turds then I realized they are chicken, duck and turkey or triple personality.   Congratulations and here is The List #17 Ribbon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #17 nickname, Turducken Two.  At first, I thought you were talking about a couple of turds then I realized they are chicken, duck and turkey or triple personality.   Congratulations and here is The List #17 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5250329



Thanks so much, once again, the credit goes to @Chanbal 
It was in the link she graciously gave us. 

ETA: imo it fits H&M because they are  (1) half in (2) half out (3) still with titles and in the LoS









						What is a Turducken? - New Orleans Local News and Events
					

If you have never had a Turducken, you are truly in for a treat. So what is it exactly? A Turducken




					neworleanslocal.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks so much, once again, the credit goes to @Chanbal
> It was in the link she graciously gave us.
> 
> ETA: imo it fits H&M because they are  (1) half in (2) half out (3) still with titles and in the LoS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is a Turducken? - New Orleans Local News and Events
> 
> 
> If you have never had a Turducken, you are truly in for a treat. So what is it exactly? A Turducken
> 
> 
> 
> 
> neworleanslocal.com


Not guilty, I didn't even noticed the name.  The credit is all yours @CarryOn2020

This thread is precious, I'm gratefully to all of you for the great discussions and laughs.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was that when she was sitting on a married man's lap while his wife was there?


Not the first time I've heard this and/or seen this!  She's truly despicable ..


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> NYT continues very sympathetic to MM (and/or to her PR). So these mild sentences about a (naive) duchess must have been very difficult for them to write.
> 
> View attachment 5249543
> 
> _The trouble is, Meghan admitted she erred in telling the court that she had not cooperated with the authors of a flattering book about the couple. Her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, turned over emails showing she supplied him with bullet points to give to the authors, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, including details about her ruptured relationship with her father, Thomas Markle.
> 
> “*I apologize to the court for the fact that I had not remembered these exchanges at the time,” Meghan said in a witness statement. “I had absolutely no wish or intention to mislead the defendant or the court.”
> A spokeswoman for the duchess declined to comment further*.
> 
> All of this is somewhat peripheral in a case that turns on whether The Mail on Sunday invaded her privacy by publishing the private letter to her father. The Mail, which obtained the letter, argues that Meghan, as a public figure, should not have expected it would remain confidential.
> 
> *Still, the disclosures paint a portrait of a duchess who seemed anything but naïve about her public image in the turbulent months after her marriage to Harry in May 2018.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For Meghan, an Image Rendered in a U.K.-U.S. Split Screen (Published 2021)
> 
> 
> She has re-emerged in America as a formidable A-list celebrity and social activist. In Britain, however, Meghan remains a polarizing figure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Can't even say HOW DISAPPOINTED I am in the NY Times for NOT be honest about these two!!!!  C'mon NYT'ers .. WAKE-THE-F-UP!!!


----------



## CeeJay

WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..


----------



## EverSoElusive

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..



Hope Angus pull through


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..



Oh no, prayers to Angus! Hope kitty will be okay.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..



Prayers for your sweet Angus


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## carmen56

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..



My Angus wishes your Angus well.


----------



## Hermes Zen

lulilu said:


> Every time I read that she "raged" and "demanded" jewelry etc., I wonder WTF Harry thought?  And why did she feel entitled to do so when they weren't even married?  Why didn't he run away?


It was the sex. Harry was hooked.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lulilu said:


> Every time I read that she "raged" and "demanded" jewelry etc., I wonder WTF Harry thought?  And why did she feel entitled to do so when they weren't even married?  Why didn't he run away?


He wasn't thinking. Or at least not thinking with the right head.
Maybe he enjoyed dating a "strong" woman who knew what she wanted. Such a turn-on to have a dominatrix want him, just little ole wimpy Harry!
She must have whacked him on that head many times to get the engagement ring re-set and re-set. She should just get re-engaged and re-married to do it the way she wants


----------



## kipp

@CeeJay prayers for Angus!  ❤️


----------



## Chanbal

Cheers to Cindy Adams! @Maggie Muggins Cindy deserves an award for her courage, what do you think? 

*Meghan Markle is all for the photo ops*

*Markle: All for the op*
*The former Miss Markle — who gave the back of her hand to her father, her once-best friend, her prince of a husband’s relatives and gave the finger to Her Majesty the Queen — now springs only for publicity. And lawsuits.*
_
In NYC — to make a film about themselves — *she and her princelet sponged at 860 UN Plaza*. No neighbors witnessed sparkle Markle hauling out the garbage. Or lumbering in and out. *The freebee place belonged to lawyer Barry Bloom who once worked for Loews and the Tisches.* So commoners couldn’t actually see this body she knew how to work she schlepped up and down on a freight elevator.

Me-Me-Markle’s become a specialist in that department. Nobody in England wants to see her either.









						Meghan Markle is all for the photo ops
					

The former Miss Markle — who gave the back of her hand to her father, her once-best friend, her prince of a husband’s relatives and gave the finger to Her Majesty the Queen — now springs …




					nypost.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

lulilu said:


> Every time I read that she "raged" and "demanded" jewelry etc., I wonder WTF Harry thought?  And why did she feel entitled to do so when they weren't even married?  Why didn't he run away?



True love? 

imo he wanted someone who would disrupt his family.  She prides herself on being a disrupter, in a negative way. Hazzie is exactly like that. His behavior issues as a child are well known.

@CeeJay  sending you and Angus get well vibes. Hoping he is purrrfect soon


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As to why he didn't run...I'm still not fully convinced the people claiming voodoo was involved are completely off haha.



Considering how she has completely enchanted Harry and managed to convince about 95% of American journalists that she is a sweet, innocent victim of racism, I’d say finding out Meghan was a student of The Craft would explain so much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..



Oh no  I'm sending every bit of good vibes I have.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Cheers to Cindy Adams! @Maggie Muggins Cindy deserves an award for her courage, what do you think?



Is the NY Post the only US magazine that employs people with critical thinking abilities?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Considering how she has completely enchanted Harry and managed to convince about 95% of American journalists that she is a sweet, innocent victim of racism, I’d say finding out Meghan was a student of The Craft would explain so much.



I don't think she has the patience, but eh, it's a service you can buy if you know where to go I guess. 

OT, I will never forget the story a few years back that caught an Haitian lady with a human head (not skull) in her luggage trying to enter the US, and when questioned about it she matter-of-factly said it was an accessoire to a ritual, like one of us would say "Oh that cinnamon is going into my Christmas cookies". Iirc she was charged for not declaring the head properly and transporting hazardous materials. I personally would have wondered where exactly a human head came from, so maybe it already worked.


----------



## purseinsanity

Luvbolide said:


> This snarkiness about H's family is another nutty thing she did - WTF?  Here she is, newly married (or soon to be) into the family and she shoots snarky messages - in writing - to Knauf.  She doesn't even know the guy - how can she be sure that he won't go directly to Charles with those texts?  And she stirred up enough of a hornet's nest that now they are public for all to read.  Nice way to talk about your new in-laws!!


ITA!!!  And my rule number 1, if you truly don’t want something “leaked”, DON’T EVER PUT IT IN WRITING!  Not in a text, a DM, post, or LETTER, Megass!


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Can't remember where, but someone commented this might have been where the recording equipment was stashed, and you know thinking about it, if so, it was well placed.


Well, hopefully she wasn’t flatulent, because having the recording devices that close would pick up everything


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @purseinsanity for your #24 nickname, "a low rate, low class ("formidable A list celebrity and social activist" my a$$!), lying, two faced, disgusting and pathetic excuse for a woman." Well, that certainly needs no explanation, but I still want to know if that means you don't like her.  Congratulations and here is The List #24 Ribbon.
> And for that extraordinary nickname, have a bit of caffeine on me and they're all yours to devour at your leisure. Cheers!
> View attachment 5250070
> View attachment 5250076


LOLOLOL!  I never thought my ranting like a lunatic would garner me a medal!!  Now I’m starting to see why Megain constantly does it


----------



## needlv

Ouch…


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is the NY Post the only US magazine that employs people with critical thinking abilities?


It’s a tabloid that is majority owned by the same family that has majority ownership in Fox News. It has been known to be critical of “woke” individuals and celebrities who express liberal sentiments. The duchess of woke should probably expect more articles critical of her in the future from this tabloid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> It’s a tabloid that is majority owned by the same family that has majority ownership in Fox News. It has been known to be critical of “woke” individuals and celebrities who express liberal sentiments. The duchess of woke should probably expect more articles critical of her in the future from this tabloid.



Ugh. That is takes a Fox News relative to report factually is kind of sad.


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> ITA!!!  And my rule number 1, if you truly don’t want something “leaked”, DON’T EVER PUT IT IN WRITING!  Not in a text, a DM, post, or LETTER, Megass!



I totally agree.  Somehow, however, this totally escaped MM.  I can’t believe some of those ems.  Well, at least we have gone from he said/she said to she said/he documented!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I've had to skip through so many posts, alas .. my sweet & dear baby (kitty) boy Angus is in the VET ER Hospital and alas, the outcome is not the best.  Please say prayers for him ..



Sending you and Angus positive thoughts.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. That is takes a Fox News relative to report factually is kind of sad.


Unfortunately, as with so many individuals, organizations, and institutions in the US these days, the media has become very polarized. So given the source of this article, her supporters can just shrug it off as misinformation from a biased media outlet and Megalodon could actually see it as an indication that she has raised her profile high enough in the circle she aspires to that she merited an “attack” from conservative media.


----------



## marietouchet

Deep thoughts on 6MM… after RED DRESS , and visiting refugees , not that the latter is a bad thing but 6MM has such a touch for turning an Angelina Jolie moment into sawdust 

anyway back to my thought concerning revelations from TRIAL …. Poor boy , his 2022 book was supposedly written and now he is going to rewrite half to share His insights on Coaching Omid, and the further elaborate on HER new truth and sincere apology about forgetfulness


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did the BRF write in to PostSecrets?


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> ITA!!!  And my rule number 1, if you truly don’t want something “leaked”, DON’T EVER PUT IT IN WRITING!  Not in a text, a DM, post, or LETTER, Megass!


This is like the inverse of that role, if you DO want something leaked, PUT IT IN CALLIGRAPHY WRITING!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Considering how she has completely enchanted Harry and *managed to convince about 95% of American journalists that she is a sweet*, innocent victim of racism, I’d say finding out Meghan was a student of The Craft would explain so much.


@bag-mania we are very optimist today, aren't we? I think the number is about 99%. All this shows the power of money and PR agencies. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is the NY Post the only US magazine that employs people with critical thinking abilities?



It looks like you are right. I can't believe that the US media is buying into this for-profit woke wave. A wave that comes from people that live in oversized mansions, use private jets, don't favor freedom of speech… and feel entitled to dictate to others how they should live their lives. This is not cool, and certainly, it's not liberal!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Deep thoughts on 6MM… after RED DRESS , and visiting refugees , not that the latter is a bad thing but 6MM has such a touch for turning an Angelina Jolie moment into sawdust
> 
> anyway back to my thought concerning revelations from TRIAL …. Poor boy , his 2022 book was supposedly written and now he is going to rewrite half to share His insights on Coaching Omid, and the further elaborate on HER new truth and sincere apology about forgetfulness


I think they will ignore the court case and rewrite history in her favour. Why change what they view as a winning formula?


----------



## Jayne1

Lounorada said:


> _"I lost my mother to this self-manufactured rabidness."_
> No, your mother lost her life as the result of a tragic car accident which had many factors, the main one being an intoxicated dangerous driver who shouldn't have been left anywhere near a car let alone given keys to drive one.


And don’t forget, she called the paps to let them know she would be in Paris because she wanted to make the ex-boyfriend jealous.

Then add in an intoxicated driver and not wearing a seatbelt, plus Dodie’s poor security.


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> Every time I read that she "raged" and "demanded" jewelry etc., I wonder WTF Harry thought?  And why did she feel entitled to do so when they weren't even married?  Why didn't he run away?


I doubt she showed that side before the wedding.  more likely IMO she would have gone teary-eyed or pouted and Harry would jump around to make her happy


----------



## marietouchet

SPOILER ALERT - TOTAL WORD SALAD - may not even be in an Indo European language








						Prince Harry issues his fake news action plan
					

The Duke of Sussex is one of 15 commissioners and three co-chairmen who carried out a study into the digital 'avalanche of misinformation' on behalf of the Aspen Institute based in Washington DC.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Just to pick one point - there are so many to chat about .....  Does this mean protect the whistle blowers ??? Please help me - I am at a linguistic impasse

"Implement protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.""
While we are talking whistleblowers ... does Knauf (who deserves a medal...) qualify ??


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Hope Angus pull through





Hermes Zen said:


> It was the sex. Harry was hooked.


They said that about Wallis & Edward ... she had lived in China (true) and supposedly was trained in the arts of the Far East (amusing gossip)


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> SPOILER ALERT - TOTAL WORD SALAD - may not even be in an Indo European language
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry issues his fake news action plan
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is one of 15 commissioners and three co-chairmen who carried out a study into the digital 'avalanche of misinformation' on behalf of the Aspen Institute based in Washington DC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to pick one point - there are so many to chat about .....  Does this mean protect the whistle blowers ??? Please help me - I am at a linguistic impasse
> 
> "Implement protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.""
> While we are talking whistleblowers ... does Knauf (who deserves a medal...) qualify ??


LOL....H has a plan?  Please!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> SPOILER ALERT - TOTAL WORD SALAD - may not even be in an Indo European language
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry issues his fake news action plan
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is one of 15 commissioners and three co-chairmen who carried out a study into the digital 'avalanche of misinformation' on behalf of the Aspen Institute based in Washington DC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to pick one point - there are so many to chat about .....  Does this mean protect the whistle blowers ??? Please help me - I am at a linguistic impasse
> 
> "Implement protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.""
> While we are talking whistleblowers ... does Knauf (who deserves a medal...) qualify ??



I am so confused. Does this mean the “platform terms of service” _discourages _responsibly conducted research?????
Also, now that we have heard Katie Couric’s “truth”, is she the best person to lecture on ‘truth in media’? Of course, Hazzie brings his own set of lies, so maybe he should hold off on his lectures??? Or has the definition of ‘truth’ changed???  


Seems  “Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes” is the song of choice for Afghan Refugee Centers.  In case anyone wants a refresher:


Looks like Jennifer Garner started the trend:








						Jennifer Garner visits Afghan refugee center
					

Save the Children board member Jennifer Garner recently spent a day playing with Afghan refugee children just outside of Washington, D.C.




					pagesix.com


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> LOL....H has a plan?  Please!


OK last week KH got into trouble in PARIS for discussing ZEE PLAN - cue French accent


----------



## CeeJay

Hermes Zen said:


> It was the sex. Harry was hooked.


This is what I've thought all along .. she must have learned a lot in her "yachting" days!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> Unfortunately, as with so many individuals, organizations, and institutions in the US these days, the media has become very polarized. So given the source of this article, her supporters can just shrug it off as misinformation from a biased media outlet and Megalodon could actually see it as an indication that she has raised her profile high enough in the circle she aspires to that she merited an “attack” from conservative media.


Does anybody remember the stories of William Randolph Hearst - Rosebud and San Simeon fame - the owner of many newspapers ca 1920s-1930s 
He was famous as someone not to cross since he would lambast you in his newspapers
Or the Pulitzers ?
Journalism fairness and balance ... hmmm discuss


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am so confused. Does this mean the “platform terms of service” _*discourages *_*responsibly conducted research*?????
> Also, now that we have heard Katie Couric’s “truth”, is she the best person to lecture on ‘truth in media’? Of course, Hazzie brings his own set of lies, so maybe he should hold off on his lectures??? Or has the definition of ‘truth’ changed???
> 
> 
> Seems  “Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes” is the song of choice for Afghan Refugee Centers.  In case anyone wants a refresher:
> 
> 
> Looks like Jennifer Garner started the trend:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Garner visits Afghan refugee center
> 
> 
> Save the Children board member Jennifer Garner recently spent a day playing with Afghan refugee children just outside of Washington, D.C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> SPOILER ALERT - TOTAL WORD SALAD - may not even be in an Indo European language
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry issues his fake news action plan
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is one of 15 commissioners and three co-chairmen who carried out a study into the digital 'avalanche of misinformation' on behalf of the Aspen Institute based in Washington DC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to pick one point - there are so many to chat about .....  Does this mean protect the whistle blowers ??? Please help me - I am at a linguistic impasse
> 
> "Implement protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.""
> While we are talking whistleblowers ... does Knauf (who deserves a medal...) qualify ??


Would this qualify as misinformation?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Would this qualify as misinformation?
> View attachment 5250749



Yes, dots are connecting. Agendas are revealed. Donors are exposed.
And Charles, William and QE leave the titles and LoS as is. Wow.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear, the timing of Hazzie’s “mind-reader” interview paired with the Intrepid disaster(!) paired with the ’lie heard round the world’ —
It may be time for a re-think on those titles, LoS, Nflix deal, and every other thing they’ve done.  Maybe?


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> SPOILER ALERT - TOTAL WORD SALAD - may not even be in an Indo European language
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry issues his fake news action plan
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is one of 15 commissioners and three co-chairmen who carried out a study into the digital 'avalanche of misinformation' on behalf of the Aspen Institute based in Washington DC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to pick one point - there are so many to chat about .....  Does this mean protect the whistle blowers ??? Please help me - I am at a linguistic impasse
> 
> *"Implement protections for researchers and journalists who violate platform terms of service by responsibly conducting research on public data of civic interest.""*
> While we are talking whistleblowers ... does Knauf (who deserves a medal...) qualify ??


Read the bold part to DH and his response was "huh".


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, the timing of Hazzie’s “mind-reader” interview paired with the Intrepid disaster(!) paired with the ’lie heard round the world’ —
> It may be time for a re-think on those titles, LoS, Nflix deal, and every other thing they’ve done.  Maybe?



Isn’ it interesting that it is written as if he was in control of the news release.  He really wants to portray himself as a master of the universe. He is master of the chicken coop.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Read the bold part to DH and his response was "huh".


That headline is shade. At first glance one might think he is releasing his fake news plan lol!


----------



## CeeJay

All I can think of (especially since the US Thanksgiving is upcoming) is .. Duke of Turducken and Douchess Turkeybreath!


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> Well Duchess tabloidfodder should not read this article… all about her fashion fails…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s biggest fashion faux pas - from terrible tailoring to tags
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle stepped out in New York this week in a red Carolina Herrera gown for a Veterans Day gala in New York. She may have looked stunning in the red dress, however on closer inspection it se…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk




"miss the Mark-le"


----------



## jelliedfeels

@CeeJay I’m sorry to hear that Angus is unwell. Fingers crossed.


sdkitty said:


> not trying to fat shame her but I'd say she is average height - maybe 5'5" with skinny legs and a healthy sized butt....so, considering photographs can be cruel, I'd think she might be 130 lbs.  Not fat but not size 2


You are generous! I want you to provide my weight & dress size in future 


CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal    Camilla does have a way with words. In her honor, H&M are the Turducken Two:
> 
> _That Turducken Letter:
> 
> *It is weird to feel that royalty is dragging you down to its level.* This is before we even get to the letter: the most preposterous *turducken* of a literary endeavour ever created. I feel ashamed of the way we are being induced to accept this manipulative document as remotely “private”. It is private in the sense that the Trojan horse was a convenient mode of transport. It looked like a letter and felt like a letter, but in fact it was something else entirely: *her way of getting her “truth” out.* “Words”, as she put it to Knauf, “I could never voice publicly”.
> 
> We know from Knauf, who helped Meghan draft the letter, that she had been “*meticulous in her word choice”* because she believed it would be leaked.
> -She *numbered the pages specifically* so that people other than Thomas Markle would know how long the letter was.
> -She *ended pages halfway through a sentence *so no one could reproduce it partly.
> -Most despicably, she *addressed her father as “Daddy”*, according to Knauf, because “in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heart-strings”._
> 
> *
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/3YvNl
> 
> 
> *


I also love the name turducken for them. They are often used in eating competitions,  I believe, a place where people make a spectacle of themselves by trying to force things down the throat until they become horribly over-stuffed & nauseous… 
A true symbol  of greed in short. 



sdkitty said:


> I doubt she showed that side before the wedding.  more likely IMO she would have gone teary-eyed or pouted and Harry would jump around to make her happy


oh yes I totally agree. I think she is more of the cry and whine style of manipulator still.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I am so confused. Does this mean the “platform terms of service” _discourages _responsibly conducted research?????
> Also, now that we have heard Katie Couric’s “truth”, is she the best person to lecture on ‘truth in media’? Of course, Hazzie brings his own set of lies, so maybe he should hold off on his lectures??? Or has the definition of ‘truth’ changed???
> 
> 
> Seems  “Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes” is the song of choice for Afghan Refugee Centers.  In case anyone wants a refresher:
> 
> 
> Looks like Jennifer Garner started the trend:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Garner visits Afghan refugee center
> 
> 
> Save the Children board member Jennifer Garner recently spent a day playing with Afghan refugee children just outside of Washington, D.C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



These poor children are going to have a totally warped view of what’s happening in American culture if the only celebs they get to see are total has-Beens. I wouldn’t be surprised if they became luddites and swore off tech forever (to use the term correctly)


CarryOn2020 said:


>



their motto being ‘democracy dies in darkness’ is particularly funny here isn’t it


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let *that* sink in, USA.  We are being used and misused by this BRF.  Stand up and say *Hell NO.*



IDK what your beef is with the RF as they are inconsequential in my everyday life. 
I am far more concerned about being used and abused by the biased agenda driven media and their controllers. 
YMMV


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Isn’ it interesting that it is written as if he was in control of the news release.  He really wants to portray himself as a master of the universe. *He is master of the chicken coop.*



He wishes!!!!  

The hens would run rings around him


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> Until bullying allegations / investigation is done.  Think of Ellen etc.  If there is any video I would think it would have surfaced by now… but if enough people come forward and give their accounts it will be impossible to ignore.



I would like to think that the Teigen Treatment would apply, but apparently these two are more highly connected than either Chrissy or Ellen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think she has the patience, but eh, it's a service you can buy if you know where to go I guess.
> 
> OT, I will never forget the story a few years back that *caught an Haitian lady with a human head (not skull) in her luggage trying to enter the US, and when questioned about it she matter-of-factly said it was an accessoire to a ritual*, like one of us would say "Oh that cinnamon is going into my Christmas cookies". Iirc she was charged for not declaring the head properly and transporting hazardous materials. I personally would have wondered where exactly a human head came from, so maybe it already worked.



That is a ritual you don't want to be any part of, literally. 

I think Meghan needs to re-up her spell. It's still working on the press but the one she has on the court is wearing off.


----------



## mellibelly

Saw this quote today and it really sums up the SuckAzzes


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Saw this quote today and it really sums up the* SuckAzzes*
> View attachment 5250940



If this name isn't already on Maggie Muggins' list, then it should be added.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> "miss the Mark-le"


This is precisely why called her a fashion influencer is so wrong. No, it is right for one thing.  She influences people to check their clothing for tags, to make sure it fits, be careful of see through pieces and open those coat vents! (Unless you are planning on returning the coat in which case you better leave them closed.)


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am so confused. Does this mean the “platform terms of service” _discourages _responsibly conducted research?????
> Also, now that we have heard Katie Couric’s “truth”, is she the best person to lecture on ‘truth in media’? Of course, Hazzie brings his own set of lies, so maybe he should hold off on his lectures??? Or has the definition of ‘truth’ changed???
> 
> 
> Seems  “Head, Shoulders, Knees and Toes” is the song of choice for Afghan Refugee Centers.  In case anyone wants a refresher:
> 
> 
> Looks like Jennifer Garner started the trend:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jennifer Garner visits Afghan refugee center
> 
> 
> Save the Children board member Jennifer Garner recently spent a day playing with Afghan refugee children just outside of Washington, D.C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Step 1 Translate article into English - a daunting task -  pls tell me "platform terms of service" means - I WANT to learn... 

Reminds me of the word GLAMOUR - there is no equivalent in French !!!??!!, we may never know what PTOS are/is, is it binary or plural ???  

Is 6 trying to talk to the common woman/man/person/being ?? or extraterrestrials ???


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Step 1 Translate article into English - a daunting task -  pls tell me "platform terms of service" means - I WANT to learn...
> 
> Reminds me of the word GLAMOUR - there is no equivalent in French !!!??!!, we may never know what PTOS are/is, is it binary or plural ???
> 
> Is 6 trying to talk to the common woman/man/person/being ?? or extraterrestrials ???



He’s unavailable for comment.  Seems he’s having a fitting — evil laugh, haaaaa.


----------



## needlv




----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


>



There is hope for me ... Piers will read the manifesto and translate it ... I shall wait patiently


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> IDK what your beef is with the RF as they are inconsequential in my everyday life.
> I am far more concerned about being used and abused by the biased agenda driven media and their controllers.
> YMMV



Not trying to cause offense, something has shifted here in the USA with Hazzie’s arrival. He is weighing in our 1st amendment freedoms, showing up at our veterans’ events, wagging his privilege all over our land. Nope, not going to be silent about that, enough. Knowing Hazzie-o is still very connected to Charles and always will be, the “planting of Hazzie-o in the USA“ goes back to the top. HarryMarkle gave the details. I am tired of the BRF’s inaction on the H&M matter because as someone famous [cough] said, silence is complicity.

Most of their nonsense would not happen without those titles and LoS.  IMO, ymmv.

ETA: Wallis and Ed did not get too far over here because Ed abdicated, gave up his LoS and his title. Of course, Hazzie-o  is not king, so it is not called ’abdicating’, but ‘renouncing’.  It needs to happen so that everyone understands how meaningless their _influence/fame_(?) is.  Again, imo.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Most of their nonsense would not happen without those titles and LoS. IMO, ymmv.


True, but I don't think they're part of some grand plan to retake the colonies. I believe most people here don't take them seriously or even pay attention to them. The BRF was all too happy to dump them on our doorstep because they knew the drama she would bring.


----------



## charlottawill

Meghan's song. Although she's not deserving of such an 80s classic, it could not be more appropriate.


----------



## Chanbal

How the duchess of bandwagons is seen in Spanish speaking countries (partial translation is provided in bold):
*Meghan Markle admite su mentira y se doblega ante la justicia británica*
Meghan Markle es puesta en evidencia y aunque juró y perjuró que ella decía la verdad, ahora la exhiben ante las autoridades y se le cae el teatrito.

_*Meghan Markle admits her lie and bows to British justice
Meghan Markle is put in evidence and although she swore and perjured that she was telling the truth, now she is exhibited before the authorities and her theater falls off.*_









						Meghan Markle admite su mentira y se doblega ante la justicia británica
					

Meghan Markle es puesta en evidencia y aunque juró y perjuró que ella decía la verdad, ahora la exhiben ante las autoridades y se le cae el teatrito.




					www.telemundo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> True, but I don't think they're part of some grand plan to retake the colonies. I believe most people here don't take them seriously or even pay attention to them. The BRF was all too happy to dump them on our doorstep because they knew the drama she would bring.



IMO They are here for $$$$$ and influence. [just like Andy and all the others].
The BRF knew the drama HE would bring. Early on, QE justified Hazzie’s behavior by saying “he is not a working royal“. What a silly thing to say. They have gained more influence here than they had in the UK simply because of his titles and LoS. 

_I believe most people here don't take them seriously or even pay attention to them._
MM is cold-calling our senators.  They took her call. Imo that is indeed taking them seriously. Now that she has admitted to ‘forgetting’ , some call it _lying_, to a UK court, so yes, the BRF needs to pull the damn titles and LoS. Also, they can tell us Hazz’s immigration status. Many suspect he is here as a “Prince of the UK”. Did he give up his UK passport? Is he tax-exempt? 
So many unanswered questions.









						Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship
					

Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by sp




					www.natlawreview.com
				




_A new report to The Times noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told The Times that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”_


----------



## needlv

Prince Harry declares war on disinformation
					

Democracy is in crisis, faith in institutions is at an all-time low. The public’s trust in our leaders has collapsed; cynicism is all around. Which pillar of integrity can save us from the morass and rescue our crumbling polity? Step forward erstwhile aristo Prince Harry, the hereditary hedonist...




					www.spectator.co.uk
				




Democracy is in crisis, faith in institutions is at an all-time low. The public's trust in our leaders has collapsed; cynicism is all around. Which pillar of integrity can save us from the morass and rescue our crumbling polity? Step forward erstwhile aristo Prince Harry, the hereditary hedonist reborn as a fearless fighter of fake news. Since joining the beautiful people in LA eighteen months ago, the exiled royal has gone round collecting pseudo-jobs like a less employable George Osborne.




Eco-warrior, occasional podcaster, ethical banker and interminable speech-giver: there are many hats now worn by the dilettante Duke. And today it was the turn of Commissar Harry to adopt his Ushanka in his role as a member of the Aspen Institute's Orwell-esque 'Commission on Information Disorder.' The Institute has concluded a six-month study into an 'avalanche of misinformation' online, with the 37-year-old prince setting out 15 demands on his foundation website, Archewell, for how to deal with this problem.

The report calls for 'increasing social media transparency and disclosure', with suggested 'solutions' including 'community-led methods for improving civic dialogue and resisting imbalances of information power'. Harry is quoted as labelling 'the mis-and disinformation crisis' as 'a global humanitarian issue' which 'affects not some of us, but all of us.' The millionaire monarch's grandchild expresses his desire for such 'recommendations' to to become law, writing: 'I hope to see the substantive and practical recommendations of our Commission taken up by the tech industry, the media industry, by policymakers, and leaders.'

But Steerpike was most taken with the section of the report summary labelled 'superspreader accountability.' It demands that leaders:



> “Hold superspreaders of mis- and disinformation to account with clear, transparent, and consistently applied policies that enable quicker, more decisive actions and penalties, commensurate with their impacts — regardless of location, or political views, or role in society.


With delicious timing, the report comes just five days after Prince Harry's wife Meghan was forced to admit to a British court that she had made a misleading statement in her privacy case against the publishers of the Mail on Sundaynewspaper. The Appeal Court heard on Thursday that the Duchess of Sussex had asked an aide to pass on information to the authors of a biography – despite having earlier said she 'did not contribute'.  

*If superspreaders of misinformation are to be held to account – regardless of their 'role in society' – perhaps Harry could start with addressing the claims of his wife. Speaking her truth or spreading fake news? Steerpike will leave it to his readers to decide who is 'perpetuating falsehoods' – to borrow a phrase from Meghan's Oprah interview*.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Meghan's song. Although she's not deserving of such an 80s classic, it could not be more appropriate.




IMO “Maneater”  gives her way too much credit. Look closely at the top on the Herrera dress.   She is more of a whiner and complainer, just like her dad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Prince Harry declares war on disinformation
> 
> 
> Democracy is in crisis, faith in institutions is at an all-time low. The public’s trust in our leaders has collapsed; cynicism is all around. Which pillar of integrity can save us from the morass and rescue our crumbling polity? Step forward erstwhile aristo Prince Harry, the hereditary hedonist...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Democracy is in crisis, faith in institutions is at an all-time low. The public's trust in our leaders has collapsed; cynicism is all around. Which pillar of integrity can save us from the morass and rescue our crumbling polity? Step forward erstwhile aristo Prince Harry, the hereditary hedonist reborn as a fearless fighter of fake news. Since joining the beautiful people in LA eighteen months ago, the exiled royal has gone round collecting pseudo-jobs like a less employable George Osborne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Eco-warrior, occasional podcaster, ethical banker and interminable speech-giver: there are many hats now worn by the dilettante Duke. *And today it was the turn of *Commissar Harry to adopt his Ushanka* in his role as a member of the Aspen Institute's Orwell-esque 'Commission on Information Disorder.' The Institute has concluded a *six-month study* into an 'avalanche of misinformation' online, with the 37-year-old prince setting out *15 demands* on his foundation website, Archewell, for how to deal with this problem.
> 
> The report calls for 'increasing social media transparency and disclosure', with suggested 'solutions' including 'community-led methods for improving civic dialogue and resisting imbalances of information power'. Harry is quoted as labelling 'the mis-and disinformation crisis' as 'a global humanitarian issue' which 'affects not some of us, but all of us.' The *millionaire monarch's grandchild *expresses *his desire for such 'recommendations' to to become law, writing: 'I hope to see the substantive and practical recommendations of our Commission taken up by the tech industry, the media industry, by policymakers, and leaders.'*
> 
> But Steerpike was most taken with the section of the report summary labelled *'superspreader accountability.'* It demands that leaders:
> 
> 
> With delicious timing, the report comes just five days after Prince Harry's wife Meghan was forced to admit to a British court that she had made a misleading statement in her privacy case against the publishers of the Mail on Sundaynewspaper. The Appeal Court heard on Thursday that the Duchess of Sussex had asked an aide to pass on information to the authors of a biography – despite having earlier said she 'did not contribute'.
> 
> *If superspreaders of misinformation are to be held to account – regardless of their 'role in society' – perhaps Harry could start with addressing the claims of his wife. Speaking her truth or spreading fake news? Steerpike will leave it to his readers to decide who is 'perpetuating falsehoods' – to borrow a phrase from Meghan's Oprah interview*.



*Yep, it needs to be said.  
[don’t be tricked by the Aspen name which is headed by Katie Couric, who by her own admission trashed talked Ashleigh Banfield  ] *

*Eco-warrior, occasional podcaster, ethical banker and interminable speech-giver: there are many hats now worn by the dilettante Duke.  *And today it was the turn of *Commissar Harry to adopt his Ushanka* in his role as a member of the Aspen Institute's Orwell-esque 'Commission on Information Disorder.' The Institute has concluded a *six-month study* into an 'avalanche of misinformation' online, with the 37-year-old prince setting out *15 demands* on his foundation website, Archewell, for how to deal with this problem.

The report calls for 'increasing social media transparency and disclosure', with suggested 'solutions' including 'community-led methods for improving civic dialogue and resisting imbalances of information power'. Harry is quoted as labelling 'the mis-and disinformation crisis' as 'a global humanitarian issue' which 'affects not some of us, but all of us.' The *millionaire monarch's grandchild *expresses *his desire for such 'recommendations' to to become law, writing: 'I hope to see the substantive and practical recommendations of our Commission taken up by the tech industry, the media industry, by policymakers, and leaders.'*

But Steerpike was most taken with the section of the report summary labelled *'superspreader accountability.'* It demands that leaders:


With delicious timing, the report comes just five days after Prince Harry's wife Meghan was forced to admit to a British court that she had made a misleading statement in her privacy case against the publishers of the Mail on Sundaynewspaper. The Appeal Court heard on Thursday that the Duchess of Sussex had asked an aide to pass on information to the authors of a biography – despite having earlier said she 'did not contribute'. 

*If superspreaders of misinformation are to be held to account – regardless of their 'role in society' – perhaps Harry could start with addressing the claims of his wife. Speaking her truth or spreading fake news? Steerpike will leave it to his readers to decide who is 'perpetuating falsehoods' – to borrow a phrase from Meghan's Oprah interview*.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO They are here for $$$$$ and influence. [just like Andy and all the others].
> The BRF knew the drama HE would bring. Early on, QE justified Hazzie’s behavior by saying “he is not a working royal“. What a silly thing to say. They have gained more influence here than they had in the UK simply because of his titles and LoS.
> 
> _I believe most people here don't take them seriously or even pay attention to them._
> MM is cold-calling our senators.  They took her call. Imo that is indeed taking them seriously. Now that she has admitted to ‘forgetting’ , some call it _lying_, to a UK court, so yes, the BRF needs to pull the damn titles and LoS. Also, they can tell us Hazz’s immigration status. Many suspect he is here as a “Prince of the UK”. Did he give up his UK passport? Is he tax-exempt?
> So many unanswered questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by sp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.natlawreview.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _A new report to The Times noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told The Times that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”_


I think the senators took her call simply as a courtesy. And if they didn't take her call they ran the risk of her calling them out to their constituents as being "unwoke". They may have given Gillebrand an earful afterward for giving their numbers out.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I have no idea if the titles will actually be taken away, but I suspect that if “they” are inclined to do so, it won’t be until after the jubilee.  Partly so that the focus remains on the “celebration of reign” and partly because things are already very awkward with that family and they don’t want anything else to add to tue awkwardness if they can avoid it.  After the jubilee, the gloves might come off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I think the senators took her call simply as a courtesy. And if they didn't take her call they ran the risk of her calling them out to their constituents as being "unwoke". They may have given Gillebrand an earful afterward for giving their numbers out.



IMO just by asking for these numbers, she shows her privilege and arrogance. She smugly stepped on the American voters who do not have that sort of access and publicly rubbed our noses in it. IMO that is a dangerous, out-of-control ego. 

Equally awful is using Afghan refugees and children in Harlem for their Nflix docudrama.  Here’s hoping they get sued by every parent of those children


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That headline is shade. At first glance one might think he is releasing his fake news plan lol!



That's how I read it until you pointed it out!


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> Ouch…



Dense as a brick Hazz should have listened to his Grandfather who gave him the advice "One should only step out with actresses, not marry them."  

Catherine looked every bit the future Queen poised center balcony. vs  The other one who looked like a smirking hooker scoring a big trick on a street corner, quickly dragging her hapless client away. Silly girl, all she had to do was pee and he would have followed her anywhere.


----------



## cremel

gracekelly said:


> Once again a dress that does not fit.  It's awful  He is wearing all his medals!  How dare he!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5247009


exactly!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing they dislike this ‘truth’:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

If just Philip had been younger and in better health. He was a fierce defender of the Queen and what she stands for. He would not have stood by idle while they trampled all over her. The Queen doesn't own the word royal! Service is universal! Let's steal her childhood nickname to pull at heartstrings! Oh and of course the heartbreaking story of Raptor's imprisonment on British soil.

That was in reply to @csshopper but I wasn't quick enough.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's how I read it until you pointed it out!


hahahaha!  I read it that way initially too!  I had to read it two more times!  That is when I realized that it was really clever shade!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If just Philip had been younger and in better health. He was a fierce defender of the Queen and what she stands for. He would not have stood by idle while they trampled all over her. The Queen doesn't own the word royal! Service is universal! Let's steal her childhood nickname to pull at heartstrings! Oh and of course the heartbreaking story of Raptor's imprisonment on British soil.
> 
> That was in reply to @csshopper but I wasn't quick enough.



I think that PP felt great disappointment in Harry as a grandson and as a soldier.  What Harry did was unthinkable to a professional soldier.  Everything about PP's funeral told you that this is how he always thought of himself.  The fact that all that the officers and soldiers involved in  the ceremony were so letter perfect told the world that they thought that of him as well.  A real soldier does not abandon his post, insult his sovereign/commander in chief or his country.  Harry did all of the above.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If just Philip had been younger and in better health. He was a fierce defender of the Queen and what she stands for. He would not have stood by idle while they trampled all over her. The Queen doesn't own the word royal! Service is universal! Let's steal her childhood nickname to pull at heartstrings! Oh and of course the heartbreaking story of Raptor's imprisonment on British soil.
> 
> That was in reply to @csshopper but I wasn't quick enough.



IMO the real problem is that Charles owns and will own a huge chunk of the UK.
Sure, sure, William will inherit most of that, but — exactly what will Hazzie inherit?

ETA:  to underscore my point, MM will be entitled to some of Hazzie‘s inheritance, yes?  So, could she be a huge UK landowner?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Dense as a brick Hazz should have listened to his Grandfather who gave him the advice "One should only step out with actresses, not marry them."
> 
> Catherine looked every bit the future Queen poised center balcony. vs  The other one who looked like a smirking hooker scoring a big trick on a street corner, quickly dragging her hapless client away. Silly girl, all she had to do was pee and he would have followed her anywhere.


I believe the Queen and Philip trolled them masterfully when she bestowed the titles "Earl of *Dumb*arton" and "Duchess of Sus*sex*".

And she really does look trashy. Despite all the resources at her disposal, she never seems to get it right.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the real problem is that Charles owns and will own a huge chunk of the UK.
> Sure, sure, William will inherit most of that, but — exactly what will Hazzie inherit?
> 
> ETA:  to underscore my point, MM will be entitled to some of Hazzie‘s inheritance, yes?  So, could she be a huge UK landowner?


 I doubt she'll get much in a divorce. Diana didn't. Cash, no property.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The red dress was a raging success actually.  People were so focused on how awful it was, and badly fitting that they completely forgot for 10 seconds that the court proceedings demonstrated how much she has lied her head off and showed how she can't be trusted to tell the truth.
> 
> So I have to say this.  She didn't get like this completely on her own.  Her parents did not do a good job parenting.  I don't care how sorry we feel for Thomas, or how lovely we might suppose Doris is.  The fact is that they have to bear some responsibility for this lack of a moral center.


I think the parents literally "spoiled" her - taught her that she was more special than her siblings or anyone else - creating a narcissist


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> How the duchess of bandwagons is seen in Spanish speaking countries (partial translation is provided in bold):
> *Meghan Markle admite su mentira y se doblega ante la justicia británica*
> Meghan Markle es puesta en evidencia y aunque juró y perjuró que ella decía la verdad, ahora la exhiben ante las autoridades y se le cae el teatrito.
> 
> _*Meghan Markle admits her lie and bows to British justice
> Meghan Markle is put in evidence and although she swore and perjured that she was telling the truth, now she is exhibited before the authorities and her theater falls off.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle admite su mentira y se doblega ante la justicia británica
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle es puesta en evidencia y aunque juró y perjuró que ella decía la verdad, ahora la exhiben ante las autoridades y se le cae el teatrito.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telemundo.com


Love to see how different countries tell the same story ..
the key word here is MENTIRA, lie in English


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I doubt she'll get much in a divorce. Diana didn't. Cash, no property.



Diana bailed before Charles became king. This Cali girrrl isn’t going to bail.
She is in it for her inheritance as well as her kids [if they exist].

Lots of maybe’s - perhaps they’ll get a payout:
No titles for H&M’s kids, maybe : https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/charles-wont-allow-archie-prince-133700027.html
No Clarence House, maybe: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/3...uld-inherit-charles-clarence-house-not-harry/


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana bailed before Charles became king. This Cali girrrl isn’t going to bail.
> She is in it for her inheritance as well as her kids [if they exist].
> 
> Lots of maybe’s - perhaps they’ll get a payout:
> No titles for H&M’s kids, maybe : https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/charles-wont-allow-archie-prince-133700027.html
> No Clarence House, maybe: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/3...uld-inherit-charles-clarence-house-not-harry/



PC could only leave private wealth to Harry.  None of the Crown properties etc.

Think about it this way, if the Queen passes, do you expect she will give Andrew, Anne and Edward something?  

She already gave/loaned them a property (Andrew sold his - so the lesson learned out of that is not to “give” property outright but offer long term leases where the occupants may stay rent free/ reduced rent…).  I imagine the Queen will leave her children something but certainly not as much as people think.  And it will all be tied up in family trusts so divorcees cannot get their hands on it.

If she leaves anything to H I hope it’s in a family trust that doesn’t vest until he is 60… or upon his divorce… lol


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> @CeeJay I’m sorry to hear that Angus is unwell. Fingers crossed.
> 
> You are generous! I want you to provide my weight & dress size in future
> 
> I also love the name turducken for them. They are often used in eating competitions,  I believe, a place where people make a spectacle of themselves by trying to force things down the throat until they become horribly over-stuffed & nauseous…
> A true symbol  of greed in short.
> 
> 
> oh yes I totally agree. I think she is more of the cry and whine style of manipulator still.
> 
> These poor children are going to have a totally warped view of what’s happening in American culture if the only celebs they get to see are total has-Beens. I wouldn’t be surprised if they became luddites and swore off tech forever (to use the term correctly)
> 
> their motto being ‘democracy dies in darkness’ is particularly funny here isn’t it


I googled her height and weight.....consensus is she is 5'6.....weight varied from 103 lbs to 130.....of course these people are speculating but I'd say 130 is probably close.....sure - I'll speculate on your weight too


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Considering how she has completely enchanted Harry and managed to convince about 95% of American journalists that she is a sweet, innocent victim of racism, *I’d say finding out Meghan was a student of The Craft would explain so much.*


You bring back so many memories! Thanks.

Eric Clapton & Steve Winwood and Voodoo Chile.



Eric Clapton Black Magic Woman


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana bailed before Charles became king. This Cali girrrl isn’t going to bail.
> She is in it for her inheritance as well as her kids [if they exist].
> 
> Lots of maybe’s - perhaps they’ll get a payout:
> No titles for H&M’s kids, maybe : https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/charles-wont-allow-archie-prince-133700027.html
> No Clarence House, maybe: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/3...uld-inherit-charles-clarence-house-not-harry/



The difference is, Diana was married to the heir and produced another. The Maneater has done neither. I'll bet there is an ironclad prenup (or similar if those are not a thing in the UK) that limits what she'll get in the divorce. I'm sticking with my initial prediction of five years, two kids and they're done. The prodigal son will return to the royal fold with his tail between his legs amid murmurs of "We told you so". Her political aspirations are a joke as more and more people realize that the Duke and Duchess of Windbag are just a bunch of hot air. Next stop for her will be a Real Housewives franchise. She will of course insist on top billing because she's a "Royal". I cannot wait for that sh*tshow.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The difference is, Diana was married to the heir and produced another. The Maneater has done neither. I'll bet there is an ironclad prenup (or similar if those are not a thing in the UK) that limits what she'll get in the divorce. I'm sticking with my initial prediction of five years, two kids and they're done. The prodigal son will return to the royal fold with his tail between his legs amid murmurs of "We told you so". Her political aspirations are a joke as more and more people realize that the Duke and Duchess of Windbag are just a bunch of hot air. Next stop for her will be a Real Housewives franchise. She will of course insist on top billing because she's a "Royal". I cannot wait for that sh*tshow.


I don't know.....He's doing a pretty good job of burning bridges but I guess blood is thicker than water.  I don't think she's gonna let go of him.  but I guess she could live as a wealthy divorcee with all the child support and alimony she would get and still call herself "duchess".....we'll see


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Cheers to *Cindy Adams*! @Maggie Muggins Cindy deserves an award for her courage, what do you think?
> 
> *Meghan Markle is all for the photo ops*
> 
> *Markle: All for the op*
> *The former Miss Markle — who gave the back of her hand to her father, her once-best friend, her prince of a husband’s relatives and gave the finger to Her Majesty the Queen — now springs only for publicity. And lawsuits.*
> 
> _In NYC — to make a film about themselves — *she and her princelet sponged at 860 UN Plaza*. No neighbors witnessed sparkle Markle hauling out the garbage. Or lumbering in and out. *The freebee place belonged to lawyer Barry Bloom who once worked for Loews and the Tisches.* So commoners couldn’t actually see this body she knew how to work she schlepped up and down on a freight elevator.
> 
> Me-Me-Markle’s become a specialist in that department. Nobody in England wants to see her either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is all for the photo ops
> 
> 
> The former Miss Markle — who gave the back of her hand to her father, her once-best friend, her prince of a husband’s relatives and gave the finger to Her Majesty the Queen — now springs …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Good idea @Chanbal  As a valuable emissary for this blog, would you be so kind as to invite Cindy Adams to collect her award. Thanks.


----------



## Chanbal

A fraud in her own words.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> Saw this quote today and it really sums up the *SuckAzzes*



[/QUOTE]
 Thanks @mellibelly for your #12 nickname, SuckAzzes, that was added to The List. Not a moniker that I'd want conferred on me. Congratulations and welcome to the Early Bird Club.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> "*miss the Mark-le*"


 Thanks @poopsie for your great #4 nickname, miss the Mark-le.  Congratulations.


----------



## Lodpah

The Queen injured her back apparently abs won’t attend Jubilee. I hope she’s ok. I’m sure the Despicable Duo will make it about them. I can see MM joyful with glee holding her greedy hands out and with her Chucky the Bride grin. Harry is too dumb to figure things out without his “handler.” I’m serious. x.


----------



## xeyes

A bit more detail on Hazard vs Veterans.





__





						Blind Item #2
					

As a follow up to the ginger haired one being told to go home by veterans. The reason for it was because they didn't want to be part of the...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eco-warrior, occasional podcaster, ethical banker and interminable speech-giver: there are many hats now worn by the *dilettante Duke. *





csshopper said:


> Catherine looked every bit the future Queen poised center balcony. vs  The other one who looked like a *smirking hooker*


These two nicknames!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> The Queen injured her back apparently abs won’t attend Jubilee. I hope she’s ok. I’m sure the Despicable Duo will make it about them. I can see MM joyful with glee holding her greedy hands out and with her Chucky the Bride grin. Harry is too dumb to figure things out without his “handler.” I’m serious. I think Harry is retarded and it’s covered up well.



Speculation is that she is quite unwell and the palace is covering it up. Oh my!  









						The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee Plans Just Got Thrown Into Confusion
					

Will the Queen be well enough to celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next year, and if she is, will Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, and Meghan Markle be included in the festivities?




					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

xeyes said:


> A bit more detail on Hazard vs Veterans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> As a follow up to the ginger haired one being told to go home by veterans. The reason for it was because they didn't want to be part of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Comments are a bit _unfavorable  
‘_One of the nicknames : _ *Prince Pity Pot*_


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> The Queen injured her back apparently abs won’t attend Jubilee. I hope she’s ok. I’m sure the Despicable Duo will make it about them. I can see MM joyful with glee holding her greedy hands out and with her Chucky the Bride grin. Harry is too dumb to figure things out without his “handler.” I’m serious. I think Harry is retarded and it’s covered up well.


ha.....not ok to use "retarded" these days...guess you mean Harry has an intellectual disability.....but he's going around Our Country preaching to us on how to behave.....so arrogant....to think he was viewed as the fun brother.  now he's a pompous ass


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Isn’ it interesting that it is written as if he was in control of the news release.  He really wants to portray himself as a master of the universe. He is *master of the chicken coop*.


 Thanks @gracekelly for your #8 nickname, master of the chicken coop. Good, he gets to clean up all the Harry-faced droppings. Congratulations.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Comments are a bit _unfavorable
> ‘_One of the nicknames : _ *Prince Pity Pot*_


I feel very sorry for QE. This post makes a valid point.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to cause offense, something has shifted here in the USA with Hazzie’s arrival. He is weighing in our 1st amendment freedoms, showing up at our veterans’ events, wagging his privilege all over our land. Nope, not going to be silent about that, enough. Knowing Hazzie-o is still very connected to Charles and always will be, the “planting of Hazzie-o in the USA“ goes back to the top. HarryMarkle gave the details. I am tired of the BRF’s inaction on the H&M matter because as someone famous [cough] said, silence is complicity.
> 
> Most of their nonsense would not happen without those titles and LoS.  IMO, ymmv.
> 
> ETA: Wallis and Ed did not get too far over here because Ed abdicated, gave up his LoS and his title. Of course, Hazzie-o  is not king, so it is not called ’abdicating’, but ‘renouncing’.  It needs to happen so that everyone understands how meaningless their _influence/fame_(?) is.  Again, imo.
> 
> View attachment 5250974


I'm still of the opinion that the BRF is not responsible for the embarrassments that are H&M. They are a pair of loose cannons which the BRF doesn't know how to deal with decisively, so they have opted to (a) do like an ostrich and (b) let them scuttle their own ship.

The American "friends" though seem to be supporting them, bewitched by the "glamor" of association with royalty and deluded by the seemingly woke word salad. I'm hoping their support will be eroded by their own disreputable behaviour.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I feel very sorry for QE. This post makes a valid point.




The headline intrigued me. The author is quite unhappy with the trimmer Adele and ‘her truth’. 
Oprah continues to bring people down, it seems.


_*Sadly, the more Adele says, the greater the realisation for the world that she's deeply shallow.*
Bob Dylan has remained one of the most enigmatic and charismatic performers of the last 100 years because he reveals so little about himself. 
In his new book The Lyrics, Paul McCartney offers new versions of how his greatest songs were written, so an element of mystery remains.
But Adele is a millennial, which means that everything is part of her journey. Tweeting after the Oprah show aired, she gushed: 'The most beautiful venue I've ever played. 
'Thank you to everyone who made it possible. To Oprah for allowing me to tell my truth lovingly in a safe space. 
'The whole thing was pretty overwhelming, I've seen it twice and cried my eyes out both times.'
Classic Adele; gushing and crying yet again. But what is 'my truth' and why does it have to be told 'in a safe space'.
*Can you any longer tell the difference between Meghan Markle and Adele Adkins? *Both had difficult relationships with their fathers and worship their mothers. 
Both felt that Oprah was the best person to share their 'truths' with.
In other words to offer the world a shiny version of what they want us to believe, slickly edited and unchallenged._









						JANET STREET-PORTER: I can't stand the new Adele
					

I love Adele's voice. Her live performances are electrifying. But please, please, please spare me any more of her talking, writes JANET STREET-PORTER.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## daisychainz

Lodpah said:


> The Queen injured her back apparently abs won’t attend Jubilee. I hope she’s ok. I’m sure the Despicable Duo will make it about them. I can see MM joyful with glee holding her greedy hands out and with her Chucky the Bride grin. Harry is too dumb to figure things out without his “handler.” I’m serious. I think Harry is retarded and it’s covered up well.


PC term these days is intellectually disabled, but I agree, he's mentally off.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> The other one who looked like *a smirking hooker scoring a big trick on a street corner, quickly dragging her hapless client away*


 Thanks @csshopper for your #22 nickname, a smirking hooker scoring a big trick on a street corner, quickly dragging her hapless client away. Pretty please, would you reproduce this scene in a Netflix movie? Congratulations and here is The List #22 Ribbon.  And, for this masterpiece, please enjoy a cake of your choice. Cheers! 






charlottawill said:


> The difference is, Diana was married to the heir and produced another. The Maneater has done neither. I'll bet there is an ironclad prenup (or similar if those are not a thing in the UK) that limits what she'll get in the divorce. I'm sticking with my initial prediction of five years, two kids and they're done. The prodigal son will return to the royal fold with his tail between his legs amid murmurs of "We told you so". Her political aspirations are a joke as more and more people realize that the* Duke and Duchess of Windbag* are just a bunch of hot air. Next stop for her will be a Real Housewives franchise. She will of course insist on top billing because she's a "Royal". I cannot wait for that sh*tshow.


Thanks @charlottawill for your very accurate #5 nickname, Duke and Duchess of Windbag. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club. 





CarryOn2020 said:


> Eco-warrior, occasional podcaster, ethical banker and interminable speech-giver: there are many hats now worn by the *dilettante Duke*


Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #18 nickname, dilettante Duke. Yes, H is possibly, "a Jack of all trades, master of none" but in reality, his resume is most likely overstated. Congratulations and here is The List #18 Ribbon.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Meghan's song. Although she's not deserving of such an 80s classic, it could not be more appropriate.



I used to love this song 



Maggie Muggins said:


> You bring back so many memories! Thanks.
> 
> Eric Clapton & Steve Winwood and Voodoo Chile.
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Clapton Black Magic Woman



Et tu @Maggie Muggins?!!?  I liked this song too!  Now I can’t unhear it 

Lots and lots of smashing plates to the point their minions are running to the Dollar stores for more to break!

Kate commanded more attention simply standing on a balcony than the harlot did in a “F**k me” red dress:









						Why experts claim Kate Middleton became a high ranking royal this weekend — Marie Claire UK
					

The Cambridges are undoubtedly the most talked-about family in the world, with Prince William and Kate Middleton making news following their role elevation over the coronavirus pandemic. In fact, the Duchess of Cambridge has been credited by many for getting the royal family through the past few...




					apple.news


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Lots and lots of smashing plates to the point their minions are running to the Dollar stores for more to break!
> 
> Kate commanded more attention simply standing on a balcony than the harlot did in a “F**k me” red dress:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why experts claim Kate Middleton became a high ranking royal this weekend — Marie Claire UK
> 
> 
> The Cambridges are undoubtedly the most talked-about family in the world, with Prince William and Kate Middleton making news following their role elevation over the coronavirus pandemic. In fact, the Duchess of Cambridge has been credited by many for getting the royal family through the past few...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


I can’t imagine the rage and epithets being hurled for the next couple of days at that mansion. I hope no one gets hurt.


----------



## Lodpah

daisychainz said:


> PC term these days is intellectually disabled, but I agree, he's mentally off.


I apologize. There’s intellectually disabled and there’s retard which Harry is the. Only one who fits into that category.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speculation is that she is quite unwell and the palace is covering it up. Oh my!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee Plans Just Got Thrown Into Confusion
> 
> 
> Will the Queen be well enough to celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next year, and if she is, will Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, and Meghan Markle be included in the festivities?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


For some time I have been thinking that she might not make it to next June. It is unfortunate that what are likely her final days will be clouded by her son's and grandson's antics. It's not hard to understand why she got a puppy during the pandemic. They provide unconditional love, and you don't have to worry about them embarrassing you in front of the world. I wish her well.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> I'm still of the opinion that the BRF is not responsible for the embarrassments that are H&M. They are a pair of loose cannons which the BRF doesn't know how to deal with decisively, so they have opted to (a) do like an ostrich and (b) let them scuttle their own ship.
> 
> The American "friends" though seem to be supporting them, bewitched by the "glamor" of association with royalty and deluded by the seemingly woke word salad. I'm hoping their support will be eroded by their own disreputable behaviour.


Forgot to add: if the BRF take action of any sort, Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury will be crying VICTIM to the high heavens.
Because Her Heinous needs to stand up for what is "right"  
I don't know about you, but discretion (and ostrichness) may be the better part of valour in this case.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Forgot to add: if the BRF take action of any sort, Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury will be crying VICTIM to the high heavens.
> Because Her Heinous needs to stand up for what is "right"
> I don't know about you, but discretion (and ostrichness) may be the better part of valour in this case.



Yes, they most likely will cry victim. So, let them. After admitting to ‘forgetting’ important details’ [aka, lying] even the most enlightened folks are backing off this couple. Their behavior is especially egregious and shady.  The palace will always win.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Is the tide turning in the USA?

Are more journalists going to question their motivations????









						Meghan’s credibility in Oprah interview faces new scrutiny following court revelations
					

Concerns that Meghan Markle was ‘misleading’ in her U.K. court case is leading to new questions about things she told Winfrey in March.




					www.mercurynews.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> Meghan's song. Although she's not deserving of such an 80s classic, it could not be more appropriate.



Or perhaps in honour of her


CarryOn2020 said:


> The headline intrigued me. The author is quite unhappy with the trimmer Adele and ‘her truth’.
> Oprah continues to bring people down, it seems.
> 
> 
> _*Sadly, the more Adele says, the greater the realisation for the world that she's deeply shallow.*
> Bob Dylan has remained one of the most enigmatic and charismatic performers of the last 100 years because he reveals so little about himself.
> In his new book The Lyrics, Paul McCartney offers new versions of how his greatest songs were written, so an element of mystery remains.
> But Adele is a millennial, which means that everything is part of her journey. Tweeting after the Oprah show aired, she gushed: 'The most beautiful venue I've ever played.
> 'Thank you to everyone who made it possible. To Oprah for allowing me to tell my truth lovingly in a safe space.
> 'The whole thing was pretty overwhelming, I've seen it twice and cried my eyes out both times.'
> Classic Adele; gushing and crying yet again. But what is 'my truth' and why does it have to be told 'in a safe space'.
> *Can you any longer tell the difference between Meghan Markle and Adele Adkins? *Both had difficult relationships with their fathers and worship their mothers.
> Both felt that Oprah was the best person to share their 'truths' with.
> In other words to offer the world a shiny version of what they want us to believe, slickly edited and unchallenged._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JANET STREET-PORTER: I can't stand the new Adele
> 
> 
> I love Adele's voice. Her live performances are electrifying. But please, please, please spare me any more of her talking, writes JANET STREET-PORTER.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


this is a dumb argument though. Songwriters writing about their own lives and relationships and having a personal relationship with their songs is hardly limited to 30-somethings. Joni Mitchell is an absolute legend and her songs are full of personal insights, that’s why so many fans feel a connection with her. Not everyone can write political art and to be honest I’d rather listen to well-written  break-up songs than crude politics songs.

Also I’m not particularly into Bob or solo Paul and I know loads about both of their lives. They aren’t exactly obscure figures. 

isn’t _blood on the tracks_ about Bob’s first marriage crumbling? How is that different from_ 30_ being about Adele’s divorce?


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> ha.....not ok to use "retarded" these days...guess you mean Harry has an intellectual disability.....but he's going around Our Country preaching to us on how to behave.....so arrogant....to think he was viewed as the fun brother.  now he's a pompous ass


Please add to the list SDKitty’s name for #6
Prince Pompous Ass.  Suits him to a T.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Regarding Kate being front and center, she really is the next queen.  Charles’ health has been speculated about before.  Camilla seems like more of a “support person” vs. a “limelight person”.  

I am glad that Kate had two very supportive women on either side of her that day.  I still remember the “stare down of Sophie” causing Meg to look down and away.  LOL.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sophisticatted said:


> Regarding Kate being front and center, she really is the next queen.  Charles’ health has been speculated about before.  Camilla seems like more of a “support person” vs. a “limelight person”.
> 
> I am glad that Kate had two very supportive women on either side of her that day.  I still remember the “stare down of Sophie” causing Meg to look down and away.  LOL.


That was awesome


----------



## Chanbal

Not invited!


----------



## Chanbal

It's bonkers!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> Not invited!




“Busy schedule” on Christmas.  Haha!

it reminds me of the time my aunt didn’t want to hang out with us (extended family) one Christmas.  She claimed she “had to work”.  However, she worked for very close relatives who (a) weren’t the type of people to overwork someone or make them work on a holiday and (b) always closed the office down for a significant period of time around the holidays.

it was the lamest excuse ever, but I suppose it’s nicer than saying, “I really don’t want to hang out with any of you.”


----------



## Chanbal

The sooner they cut all ties with the Bandwagons, the earlier they all heal imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Comments are a bit _unfavorable
> ‘_One of the nicknames : _ *Prince Pity Pot*_


 Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #19 nickname, Prince Pity Pot. Congratulations and here's The List #19 Ribbon.  






sdkitty said:


> ha.....not ok to use "retarded" these days...guess you mean Harry has an intellectual disability.....but he's going around Our Country preaching to us on how to behave.....so arrogant....to think he was viewed as the fun brother.  now he's a *pompous ass*


Thanks @sdkitty for your accurate #2 nickname, pompous ass, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I feel very sorry for QE. This post makes a valid point.



ITA. OW wants to be queen of Hollywood, TV, and what have you, but feels she has to destroy a real Monarch in the process. It is the anti-monarchist's hypocrisy that I detest the most. They can't accept a legitimate monarch, but they start at an early age being called my little prince/princess, then go on to become king/queen of the proms, parades, fairs, countries, world, etc.. Then they have their Hollywood, basketball, baseball, etc. royalty. I don't begrudge them their right to use whatever title they want, I just wish they would stop belittling a real Monarch, who has proved her mettle from a very early age. End of rant.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I'm still of the opinion that the BRF is not responsible for the embarrassments that are H&M. They are a pair of loose cannons which the BRF doesn't know how to deal with decisively, so they have opted to (a) do like an ostrich and (b) let them scuttle their own ship.
> 
> The American "friends" though seem to be supporting them, bewitched by the "glamor" of association with royalty and deluded by the seemingly woke word salad. I'm hoping their support will be eroded by their own disreputable behaviour.


I've seen parents with truculent children where they did their best to raise them, but in the end they simply had to ignore them until they self-destructed so to speak. Luckily, most of them learnt their lesson albeit the hard way. Perhaps HMTQ is trying the same strategy with the despicable duo.


----------



## AbbytheBT

Chanbal said:


> Not invited!



That is crazy! How in the world would you deny your children, grandfather and great granny the opportunity to meet and spend a holiday together? Given their time and resources to travel - this is just plain cruel.


----------



## Luvbolide

AbbytheBT said:


> That is crazy! How in the world would you deny your children, grandfather and great granny the opportunity to meet and spend a holiday together? Given their time and resources to travel - this is just plain cruel.



i so agree!  Harry claims to be so upset that he did not have the chance to say goodbye to his grandfather, but he is now potentially doing the same with his grandmother.  IMO, he should go to see her - and bring the kids (which sadly means bringing MM, too) in a quiet, private gathering.  No announcement or fanfare before and spending a couple of days with her.  And absolutely none of their stupid camera crews.  He and MM have made being around them so tense and unpleasant that nobody really wants them around.  There’s been talk that others in the family were encouraging them to come before Christmas so as not to ruin the holiday for everyone else.  Truly pathetic but richly deserved.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Forgot to add: if the BRF take action of any sort, Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury will be crying VICTIM to the high heavens.
> Because Her Heinous needs to stand up for what is "right"
> I don't know about you, but discretion (and ostrichness) may be the better part of valour in this case.


 Thanks @xincinsin for your #25 nickname, Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury. Congratulations and here's The List #25 Ribbon.


----------



## Aimee3

I believe #6’s wife will never return to the UK unless she’s forced by the courts.  #6 could return without her and take the kids and nannies which we know they have.  Her excuse could be another fabricated pregnancy/miscarriage.  She’d go have more plastic surgery while the family was off.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I googled her height and weight.....consensus is she is 5'6.....weight varied from 103 lbs to 130.....of course these people are speculating but I'd say 130 is probably close.....sure - I'll speculate on your weight too


I previously heard that after her Deal or No Deal stint, she dieted like crazy, smoked cigarettes constantly, exercised constantly down to that skinny weight that is required when on screen.  So, she was probably around that ~100 mark when she was on Suits.


----------



## xeyes

Either way, our Terrible Twosome would come out looking rather bad from this. Either they'll have been rejected by his family and told to pound sand for the holidays, which is humiliating, or they look selfish and callous (nothing new there) for deciding to stay home with the rumors about the Queen's health flying around. 

All their own fault, of course. And their choice of explanation would be rather telling about which option they'd rather people believe.


----------



## Chanbal

AbbytheBT said:


> That is crazy! How in the world would you deny your children, grandfather and great granny the opportunity to meet and spend a holiday together? Given their time and resources to travel - this is just plain cruel.





Luvbolide said:


> i so agree!  Harry claims to be so upset that he did not have the chance to say goodbye to his grandfather, but he is now potentially doing the same with his grandmother.  IMO, he should go to see her - and bring the kids (which sadly means bringing MM, too) in a quiet, private gathering.  No announcement or fanfare before and spending a couple of days with her.  And absolutely none of their stupid camera crews.  He and MM have made being around them so tense and unpleasant that nobody really wants them around.  There’s been talk that others in the family were encouraging them to come before Christmas so as not to ruin the holiday for everyone else.  Truly pathetic but richly deserved.


At this point, I believe the BRF doesn't want to have them in the UK. I can't blame the family, they need to protect the queen. The OW's interview with Prince Philip in the hospital was disgraceful.


----------



## bellecate

Lodpah said:


> I apologize. There’s intellectually disabled and there’s retard which Harry is the. Only one who fits into that category.


Not wanting to start anything but my sister has Down's Syndrome and when you write the word "retard" in that connotation it is a slap in the face to so many wonderful people who are special and different.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> ha.....not ok to use "retarded" these days...guess you mean Harry has an intellectual disability.....but he's going around Our Country preaching to us on how to behave.....so arrogant....to think he was viewed as the fun brother.  now he's a pompous ass


Yes, the *PRINCE-OF-POMPOSITY* and his *MOPPET-MEGALOMANIAC* side-piece!


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> Not wanting to start anything but my sister has Down's Syndrome and when you write the word "retard" in that connotation it is a slap in the face to so many wonderful people who are special and different.


I apologize. I’m a big supporter of Down’s Syndrome people. I’ll remove the offending word.


----------



## CeeJay

Luvbolide said:


> i so agree!  Harry claims to be so upset that he did not have the chance to say goodbye to his grandfather, but he is now potentially doing the same with his grandmother.  IMO, he should go to see her - and bring the kids (which sadly means bringing MM, too) in a quiet, private gathering.  No announcement or fanfare before and spending a couple of days with her.  And absolutely none of their stupid camera crews.  He and MM have made being around them so tense and unpleasant that nobody really wants them around.  There’s been talk that others in the family were encouraging them to come before Christmas so as not to ruin the holiday for everyone else.  Truly pathetic but richly deserved.


.. but you see, IF (big IF) .. Harry and "family" did go back to the UK for the holidays or whatever, I just don't see him having the balls to tell the Megalomaniac that they simply CANNOT film anything!  She's not going to go over there and not be filmed, after all .. if (in fact) they do get boo'd, you bet they would want that footage to (yet again - barf) show how RACIST the BRF and British people are TO THEM!  It would be the coup de grâce to "destroy" the BRF (in their opinion).


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Not wanting to start anything but my sister has Down's Syndrome and when you write the word "retard" in that connotation it is a slap in the face to so many wonderful people who are special and different.


My brothers threw it at each other with abandon when we were kids many years ago, but it really isn't acceptable anymore. Just stick with "You moron!". It rolls nicely off the tongue.


----------



## Chanbal

After the Spanish, we welcome now the French speaking countries… Pleading amnesia.  (Partial translation provided)

*Meghan Markle et Harry : nouvelles révélations sur l'enfer vécu par leurs collaborateurs…*
_Meghan Markle et Harry, champions de l'empathie ? Cité comme témoin dans le bras de fer qui oppose les Sussex au Daily Mail, l'ex-responsable de leur communication, Jason Knauf, a ouvert la boîte de Pandore. Servir le couple n'avait rien d'une sinécure..._
_L'épouse du prince Harry a déjà contre-attaqué, en rejetant la faute sur la famille royale, peu solidaire de son couple. Rappel des faits qui s'impose : l'épouse du prince Harry a décidé d'attaquer l'éditeur du tabloïd anglais pour atteinte à la vie privée et violation du droit d'auteur suite à la publication, en février 2019, d'une lettre qu'elle avait écrite à son père, Thomas Markle. Un premier jugement, sans procès, lui a donné raison. *Le Daily Mail a décidé de faire appel et s'appuie désormais sur le témoignage de Jason Knauf.* Décidé à sortir du silence, après les contre-vérités de Meghan et Harry face à Oprah Winfrey en début d'année, celui-ci vient d'apporter *des preuves - SMS, e-mails... - *que son ancienne patronne se doutait bien que sa lettre serait rendue publique et que lui-même avait été incité à collaborer avec Omid Scobie et Carolyn Durand, auteurs de Finding Freedom, biographie hagiographique des Sussex. *Face à l'évidence, Meghan a fait acte de contrition, *_*en plaidant l'amnésie.*

_*Meghan Markle and Harry: new revelations about the hell experienced by their collaborators ...*__ 
Meghan Markle and Harry, champions of empathy? Cited as a witness in the standoff between the Sussexes and the Daily Mail, the ex-head of their communications, Jason Knauf, opened Pandora's box. Serving the couple was not easy ...

Prince Harry's wife has already counter-attacked, blaming the royal family for their lack of solidarity with their couple. A reminder of the facts that is necessary: the wife of Prince Harry has decided to attack the publisher of the English tabloid for invasion of privacy and violation of copyright following the publication, in February 2019, of a letter she had written to her father, Thomas Markle. A first judgment, without trial, proved him right. The Daily Mail has decided to appeal and is now relying on Jason Knauf's testimony. Decided to come out of the silence, after the untruths of Meghan and Harry in the face of Oprah Winfrey at the beginning of the year, he has just brought evidence - SMS, e-mails ... - that his former boss suspected although his letter would be made public and he himself had been prompted to collaborate with Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, authors of Finding Freedom, a hagiographic biography of the Sussexes. *Faced with the evidence, Meghan made an act of contrition, pleading amnesia.*









						Meghan Markle et Harry : nouvelles révélations sur l'enfer vécu par leurs collaborateurs… - Gala
					

Meghan Markle et Harry, champions de l'empathie ? Cité comme témoin dans le bras de fer qui oppose les Sussex au Daily Mail, l'ex-responsable de leur communication, Jason Knauf, a ouvert la boîte d...




					www.gala.fr
				



_


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


>



Ok, I like Adele but that’s hilarious.

But it goes to show ALL celebrities get a mixture of negative and positive comments  and it’s not ‘hate’ or ‘bullying’ or any kind of reason to try and censor public opinion or not allow it at all.


Luvbolide said:


> i so agree!  Harry claims to be so upset that he did not have the chance to say goodbye to his grandfather, but he is now potentially doing the same with his grandmother.  IMO, he should go to see her - and bring the kids (which sadly means bringing MM, too) in a quiet, private gathering.  No announcement or fanfare before and spending a couple of days with her.  And absolutely none of their stupid camera crews.  He and MM have made being around them so tense and unpleasant that nobody really wants them around.  There’s been talk that others in the family were encouraging them to come before Christmas so as not to ruin the holiday for everyone else.  Truly pathetic but richly deserved.


they could just send the kids (if they really exist) after all they are independent little mites. They were apparently fine without their parents for a couple of days while they swanned around NY carrying empty ring binders and wearing ill fitting pant suits.

In all seriousness, though, I do agree with you. It rings totally hollow to not go and see a nonagenarian grandparent who is obviously ill  and then complain about not seeing him & then to risk doing the same thing again. It just seems very cold.

If he has a sliver of heart left he will live to regret it.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Aimee3 said:


> I believe #6’s wife will never return to the UK unless she’s forced by the courts.  #6 could return without her and take the kids and nannies which we know they have.  Her excuse could be another fabricated pregnancy/miscarriage.  She’d go have more plastic surgery while the family was off.


Oh I absoluetly think she'll go back for the funeral and the coronation. She'll want that photo Kate got at PP's funeral and she's not turning down a robe and tiara at a coronation. Never


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I googled her height and weight.....consensus is she is 5'6.....weight varied from 103 lbs to 130.....of course these people are speculating but I'd say 130 is probably close.....sure - I'll speculate on your weight too


Don’t worry I think it’d be hard to do cross-continentally, over the internet without a picture. I’m the same height at 5’5 on a good day & I will very happily take anything in the ballpark suggested for Madame (too long) pants on fire  

(Though this may be about as accurate as A***well’s tax return)


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Her Heinous


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

hollieplus2 said:


> Oh I absoluetly think she'll go back for the funeral and the coronation. She'll want that photo Kate got at PP's funeral and she's not turning down a robe and tiara at a coronation. Never


There is no universe in which she will ever look like this


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> Oh I absoluetly think she'll go back for the funeral and the coronation. She'll want that photo Kate got at PP's funeral and she's not turning down a robe and tiara at a coronation. Never



Oh, hell. I don't think so. She doesn't dare go where she is so universally disliked and put herself in the crosshairs of the UK press who she has spent the last three years complaining about and suing. Then the prospect of having to privately come face to face with the family members she bashed and lied about in the Oprah interview and in Finding Freedom. Horrors!

Meghan is not a brave woman. She is not a strong woman. She will send her regrets and send Harry in to the lion's den alone to face the music. She will tell him to not let his family boss him around while she is home, safe from any uncomfortable moments, thousands of miles away.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Meghan is not a brave woman. She is not a strong woman.* She will send her regrets and send Harry in to the lion's den alone to face the music. She will tell him to not let his family boss him around while she is home, safe from any uncomfortable moments, thousands of miles away.


She is a coward imo.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> She is a coward imo.



She also has a strong sense of self-preservation to go along with her incredible ambition. 

I watched a couple Harry Potter movies over the weekend. If Meghan lived in that world she would have been sorted into Slytherin House for sure.


----------



## xeyes

charlottawill said:


> There is no universe in which she will ever look like this
> View attachment 5251829


 
No universe at all. And I'm not talking about the beautiful outfit or the lovely jewelry or even the hair - that genuine, barely-controlled grief in Kate's eyes is likely well beyond any acting Megalomaniac could ever manage, never mind actual feeling.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Meghan is not a brave woman. She is not a strong woman. *She will send her regrets and send Harry in to the lion's den alone to face the music. *She will tell him to not let his family boss him around while she is home, safe from any uncomfortable moments, thousands of miles away.



Complete with various recording devices


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've seen parents with truculent children where they did their best to raise them, but in the end they simply had to ignore them until they self-destructed so to speak. Luckily, most of them learnt their lesson albeit the hard way. Perhaps HMTQ is trying the same strategy with the despicable duo.



I'm as impatient as everyone else with their lenient ways, but I'll add another perspective. If Harry's mental health is really as fragile as some of us have suspected for a long while, they might be deadly afraid of what might happen if they push too hard. They could always have him discretely sent to a sanatorium or something while under their care but he's out of their reach both geographically and legally...if he has a mental breakdown it will be Raptor who calls the shots.

I bet they couldn't care less what happens to the tramp, but their hands are tied as long as Harry insists she's...whatever to him. I'd really like to see how they wipe her out once a divorce is forthcoming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> I believe #6’s wife will never return to the UK unless she’s forced by the courts.  #6 could return without her and take the kids and nannies which we know they have.  Her excuse could be another fabricated pregnancy/miscarriage.  She’d go have more plastic surgery while the family was off.



I doubt she'd let go of Harry AND the kids at the same time. Keeping the kids somewhat secures his return.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> There is no universe in which she will ever look like this
> View attachment 5251829



This is seriously one of the iconic portraits of the decade.


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> ha.....not ok to use "retarded" these days...guess you mean Harry has an intellectual disability.....but he's going around Our Country preaching to us on how to behave.....so arrogant....to think he was viewed as the fun brother.  now he's a pompous ass


*That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She also has a strong sense of self-preservation to go along with her incredible ambition.
> 
> I watched a couple Harry Potter movies over the weekend. If Meghan lived in that world she would have been sorted into Slytherin House for sure.



I read all the books and still watch the movies whenever they are on TV even though I know them by heart and Rowling has turned out to be not that likeable  

I also love the Fantastic Beasts spin-off.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read all the books and still watch the movies whenever they are on TV even though I know them by heart *and Rowling has turned out to be not that likeable *
> 
> I also love the Fantastic Beasts spin-off.



Rowling got a raw deal. Our culture has reached the point where if you are not in lockstep agreement with whatever the prevailing views are of the moment, you get cancelled. She may not be the most likable person in the world, but she created an iconic story loved by millions. Yet apparently she was deliberately excluded from the 20th anniversary HP movie special celebrating HER creation. All because of a social media post.

I like Fantastic Beasts but I am so glad they got rid of Johnny Depp. He was awful. Grindelwald is supposed to be a charismatic character and Johnny played him super creepy and gross.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Rowling got a raw deal. Our culture has reached the point where if you are not in lockstep agreement with whatever the prevailing views are of the moment, you get cancelled. She may not be the most likable person in the world, but she created an iconic story loved by millions. Yet apparently she was deliberately excluded from the 20th anniversary HP movie special celebrating HER creation. All because of a social media post.
> 
> I like Fantastic Beasts but I am so glad they got rid of Johnny Depp. He was awful. Grindelwald is supposed to be a charismatic character and Johnny played him super creepy and gross.


What did she do or say?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> What did she do or say?



She made a Twitter post last year that was perceived by some groups, as well as the press, as being anti-trans. She made subsequent posts explaining what she meant but that only seemed to make things worse. Here is her explanation:









						J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues - J.K. Rowling
					

Warning: The below content is not appropriate for children. Please check with an adult before you read this page. To go back to the children’s page, please click here. This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an...



					www.jkrowling.com


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. but you see, IF (big IF) .. Harry and "family" did go back to the UK for the holidays or whatever, I just don't see him having the balls to tell the Megalomaniac that they simply CANNOT film anything!  She's not going to go over there and not be filmed, after all .. if (in fact) they do get boo'd, you bet they would want that footage to (yet again - barf) show how RACIST the BRF and British people are TO THEM!  It would be the coup de grâce to "destroy" the BRF (in their opinion).


I doubt he's told her what to do since that time he told her to turn around on the balcony


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Rowling got a raw deal. Our culture has reached the point where if you are not in lockstep agreement with whatever the prevailing views are of the moment, you get cancelled. She may not be the most likable person in the world, but she created an iconic story loved by millions.* Yet apparently she was deliberately excluded from the 20th anniversary HP movie special celebrating HER creation.* All because of a social media post.



Oh wow, I didn't know that. That's harsh.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know that. That's harsh.



It was announced today and I happened to see it. It seems like everyone in the cast was invited for the reunion but they didn't include her.

I need to keep this post on topic. "I like Meghan better than Professor Umbridge." There, that should do it. 









						‘Harry Potter’ Retrospective to Feature Cast — But No J.K. Rowling
					

The 20th anniversary special will stream Jan. 1 on HBO Max.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> She made a Twitter post last year that was perceived by some groups, as well as the press, as being anti-trans. She made subsequent posts explaining what she meant but that only seemed to make things worse. Here is her explanation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues - J.K. Rowling
> 
> 
> Warning: The below content is not appropriate for children. Please check with an adult before you read this page. To go back to the children’s page, please click here. This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an...
> 
> 
> 
> www.jkrowling.com


Thanks. I can’t understand people anymore.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> She made a Twitter post last year that was perceived by some groups, as well as the press, as being anti-trans. She made subsequent posts explaining what she meant but that only seemed to make things worse. Here is her explanation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues - J.K. Rowling
> 
> 
> Warning: The below content is not appropriate for children. Please check with an adult before you read this page. To go back to the children’s page, please click here. This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an...
> 
> 
> 
> www.jkrowling.com


Extremely detailed and lengthy explanation. If people still don't understand her intentions, then I don't know what will.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Extremely detailed and lengthy explanation. If people still don't understand her intentions, then I don't know what will.


I guess there is no room for grey area on certain subjects


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Extremely detailed and lengthy explanation. If people still don't understand her intentions, then I don't know what will.



Unfortunately the people accusing her will never read her explanation. They already decided what they believe about her and that is that. There is no place for intelligent discourse anymore. It's all "if you say something I don't like then you must be silenced."


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Extremely detailed and lengthy explanation. If people still don't understand her intentions, then I don't know what will.





bag-mania said:


> Unfortunately the people accusing her will never read her explanation. They already decided what they believe about her and that is that. There is no place for intelligent discourse anymore. It's all "if you say something I don't like then you must be silenced."


I'm going OT here but those of us who are of a different generation (and probably some young people too) may have a bit of trouble understanding some things that are happening now.  Just saw this story about Demi Lovato.  She is now "they"
I have to admit I don't really get it.  Why can't one just be a woman who is gay? or a woman who has a masculine side?  clearly Demi is feminine appearing.  I'm sure she is sincere but I don't really get it.
Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm going OT here but those of us who are of a different generation (and probably some young people too) may have a bit of trouble understanding some things that are happening now.  Just saw this story about Demi Lovato.  She is now "they"
> I have to admit I don't really get it.  Why can't one just be a woman who is gay? or a woman who has a masculine side?  clearly Demi is feminine appearing.  I'm sure she is sincere but I don't really get it.
> Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle



It is fashionable/trendy to proclaim what you identify as these days. Why anyone cares is beyond me.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I'm going OT here but those of us who are of a different generation (and probably some young people too) may have a bit of trouble understanding some things that are happening now.  Just saw this story about Demi Lovato.  She is now "they"
> I have to admit I don't really get it.  Why can't one just be a woman who is gay? or a woman who has a masculine side?  clearly Demi is feminine appearing.  I'm sure she is sincere but I don't really get it.
> Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle



Grammatically speaking, it gets really confusing when I hear/read someone being referenced to as "they/them". For instance, this headline: Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle - I wonder who "they" are that Demi is referring to.

As Gen X, I'm all for folks calling themselves whatever they like - really don't care (whatever!!). But when you mess with grammar and my ageing brain, that's where I get annoyed (and sometimes confused)


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Grammatically speaking, it gets really confusing when I hear/read someone being referenced to as "they/them". For instance, this headline: Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle - I wonder who "they" are that Demi is referring to.
> 
> As Gen X, I'm all for folks calling themselves whatever they like - really don't care (whatever!!). But when you mess with grammar and my ageing brain, that's where I get annoyed (and sometimes confused)


well, apparently "they" means neither him nor her....it's kinda strange


----------



## charlottawill

xeyes said:


> No universe at all. And I'm not talking about the beautiful outfit or the lovely jewelry or even the hair - that genuine, barely-controlled grief in Kate's eyes is likely well beyond any acting Megalomaniac could ever manage, never mind actual feeling.


The epitome of grace and dignity. I feel like I am intruding on a very private moment, but it is such a poignant photo.


----------



## sdkitty

xeyes said:


> No universe at all. And I'm not talking about the beautiful outfit or the lovely jewelry or even the hair - that genuine, barely-controlled grief in Kate's eyes is likely well beyond any acting Megalomaniac could ever manage, never mind actual feeling.


and the whole look with the hat/veil, pearls, everything - so elegant


----------



## Jktgal

Yes, I don't understand why they can't just create a new word for the "they" that is singular. Say, "khey" or something. It's wreaking havoc on teaching English as 2nd language.
Same as vegan leather and vegan anything, really. Maybe just call it leavher?
And hypocrite preachers? Hypochers.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> There is no universe in which she will ever look like this
> View attachment 5251829


She would be eyeing the camera and fluttering her eyelashes to look sultry, with her mask strategically positioned to drop-off-chin so that they can capture her whole face. Plus an ill-fitting inappropriate outfit and half a million bucks in jewellery of course.



bag-mania said:


> She also has a strong sense of self-preservation to go along with her incredible ambition.
> 
> I watched a couple Harry Potter movies over the weekend. If Meghan lived in that world she would have been sorted into Slytherin House for sure.


She would have been fawning on Draco Malfoy and sitting on his dad's lap.



sdkitty said:


> I doubt he's told her what to do since that time he told her to turn around on the balcony


Probably had to suffer a lot of tears and tantrums plus reminders at every turn of how she gave up "everything" for him and how she is suffering and suicidal.

I don't think Hazard is blameless in his fiasco of a life, but I do think Methane did a lot of mental conditioning to make him a willing partner in her crimes and follies.


----------



## Chanbal

_How the Queen STOPPED Meghan's AGGRESSIVE plans by _The Body Language expert


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CentralTimeZone

bag-mania said:


> She also has a strong sense of self-preservation to go along with her incredible ambition.
> 
> I watched a couple Harry Potter movies over the weekend. If Meghan lived in that world she would have been sorted into Slytherin House for sure.


The only way MM doesn’t go is if the Queen issues the letters patent before her death barring the kids from titles. Otherwise she has to go. It’s her brand and her kids “birthright” according to her. She needs those photos.


----------



## bisbee

sdkitty said:


> I'm going OT here but those of us who are of a different generation (and probably some young people too) may have a bit of trouble understanding some things that are happening now.


I too am of a different generation.  I don’t pretend to understand trans-gender or “they/them” pronouns, but I don’t have to understand.  I just have to accept.  And…I did read JK Rowling’s very long explanation of her feelings about 
trans-gendered people…if the subject was changed to homosexuality, it sounds suspiciously like writings published years ago (actually, not that long ago) explaining how gay and lesbian people could be ”converted” to heterosexuality.  So…I am not surprised that negative reactions to her views would be widespread.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Megalo
> She made a Twitter post last year that was perceived by some groups, as well as the press, as being anti-trans. She made subsequent posts explaining what she meant but that only seemed to make things worse. Here is her explanation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues - J.K. Rowling
> 
> 
> Warning: The below content is not appropriate for children. Please check with an adult before you read this page. To go back to the children’s page, please click here. This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an...
> 
> 
> 
> www.jkrowling.com


bag-mania, Thank you so much for posting this, I had not seen it before and reading it was very helpful in understanding the issues.

Once again tpf membership benefits include learning about the wider world through the willingness to share among our posters. Thanks too for our Mods for letting us include these occasional "side trips" knowing we do respect our venue and return to the topic of  Megalomanic. and her Eunuch.


----------



## lallybelle

Hmmm...and she tweeted/posted a link to an online shop that is selling shirts and items with anti-trans sayings etc. on them. I only clicked because the shirt she posted with the link had a cute saying (can't remember what it said right now) and I wanted to see what else they had. I was shocked at some of the things I saw. So i don't care about some explanation she tried to give. As far as I am concerned, she showed herself.


----------



## Chanbal

It's such an unbelievable situation.


*PRINCE Harry has helped release a report into the digital “avalanche of misinformation” that calls for “accountability for ‘super-spreaders’ of online lies”.

Stop laughing at the back.*

Begging the question: What about those who super-spread several proven mistruths during an interview with Oprah Winfrey and “forget” to give important evidence to a court of law?

*Just when you think the breathtaking hypocrisy of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (a title they’re milking for all its commercial worth) has hit its apex, they elevate it to even dizzier heights.*

And aside from the misinformation emanating from both himself and his wife, will Harry also address Netflix show The Crown’s tenuous link with the “truth” of his mother Diana’s life?

I doubt it, because he and Meghan are trousering a reported £110million fortune from the streaming giant to “make documentaries”.

*No, yet again, the Montecito millionaires are seemingly showing an arrogance that suggests they think their status protects them from the rules/laws the rest of us “ordinary” folk are expected to abide by.*

Associated Newspapers is appealing against a High Court ruling made against it for publishing extracts from Meghan’s supposedly “private” letter to her father Thomas.

As part of the appeal, the Sussexes’ former press officer Jason Knauf has released texts and emails he exchanged with the couple that provide an alternative narrative to the one they are peddling.

But to be honest, the content came as little surprise to me.

*Back when Meghan’s letter to her father first came to light, I commented on this very page that the carefully calligraphed handwriting and choice of words suggested it was a letter that the author expected might be made public.

Narcissists ploughed on, taking us all for fools*

Indeed, snippets of it were put in the public domain by five of Meghan’s “close friends” and, at the time, I suggested that no one within her inner circle would dare to speak to the Press without her permission, for fear of excommunication.

Then came the “unauthorised” biography Finding Freedom and I cast doubt on Harry and Meghan’s claim that they had nothing to do with it, despite it containing their innermost thoughts about scenarios only they had been involved in.

Mr Knauf’s emails reveal that Meghan “authorised specific co-operation” for him to meet the authors and gave him a list of things to discuss.

*I’m not pretending to be Mystic Moore here. It was blindingly obvious that something was not right at the heart of Den Markle.*

Pretty much everyone knew, or at least suspected it.

Yet on these two narcissists ploughed, trying to control the narrative around their public image while clearly thinking they are taking us all for fools.

So what happens now? Well, Meghan has apologised for “misleading the court” and we await the consequence of that.

*I sincerely hope that the royal status she’s clinging on to does not protect her from her privacy claim now being properly tested in court.

It’s clear that Harry and Meghan think it’s one rule for them and quite another for everyone else.*

But the “justice” system should show this couple exactly what it thinks.









						Harry and Meghan mislead court, then declare war on lies... you couldn't Meg it up
					

PRINCE Harry has helped release a report into the digital “avalanche of misinformation” that calls for “accountability for ‘super-spreaders’ of online lies”. Stop laughing at the back. Begging the …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Duke and Duchess of Woke


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> well, apparently "they" means neither him nor her....it's kinda strange


"They" will always mean plural to me.  Very confusing.


----------



## Chanbal

The brand of the Bandwagons is still intact in the US. Their PR has very good contacts, and the mainstream media in the US only wants to believe in one narrative. So, Mrs Bandwagon can keep her political aspirations. It's crazy!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Not wanting to start anything but my sister has Down's Syndrome and when you write the word "retard" in that connotation it is a slap in the face to so many wonderful people who are special and different.





Lodpah said:


> I apologize. I’m a big supporter of Down’s Syndrome people. I’ll remove the offending word.


Just off topic, I want to thank you both for showing how mature people here interact.  @bellecate politely stated why she didn't like how something was said and @Lodpah apologized.  That's it.  No tit for tat.  Thank you both!  
Now back to regular scheduled programming with two highly immature people...


----------



## purseinsanity

hollieplus2 said:


> Oh I absoluetly think she'll go back for the funeral and the coronation. She'll want that photo Kate got at PP's funeral and she's not turning down a robe and tiara at a coronation. Never


I shudder at the thought of what ill-fitting, highly inappropriate monstrosity she'll don to try to upstage the Queen's moments.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is seriously one of the iconic portraits of the decade.


It reminds me of the famous National Geographic cover with the young Afghani girl, with the piercing green eyes that IMO showed sadness and strength all at once.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I shudder at the thought of what ill-fitting, highly inappropriate monstrosity she'll don to try to upstage the Queen's moments.


Maybe it will be see-through or with acres of exposure. Her modus operandi for attracting attention appears to verge on tart dressing.

If we are lucky, it will be a pantsuit to reinforce the message of who wears the trousers in their dysfunctional marriage. Hazard may even cart along a portable piece of garden wall so that he can go down to her height to show his support, his legs demurely placed out of sight behind her rump.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> *Maybe it will be see-through or with acres of exposure. Her modus operandi for attracting attention appears to verge on tart dressing.*
> 
> If we are lucky, it will be a pantsuit to reinforce the message of who wears the trousers in their dysfunctional marriage. Hazard may even cart along a portable piece of garden wall so that he can go down to her height to show his support, his legs demurely placed out of sight behind her rump.


I wonder if she thinks that because Kate caught William's eye by wearing a sheer dress, that she can steal Wills away by exposure?


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I wonder if she thinks that because Kate caught William's eye by wearing a sheer dress, that she can steal Wills away by exposure?


Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> It reminds me of the famous National Geographic cover with the young Afghani girl, with the piercing green eyes that IMO showed sadness and strength all at once.



Don't be mistaken, that girl was both afraid and ashamed (and has said so many years later). I like McCurry's work a lot, but the way this picture was obtained was extremely unethical and may I say colonialist.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167



Oh my, that's exceptionally bad. That said, she isn't good at picking bras that fit even when her boobs are small, so I don't know.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> It was announced today and I happened to see it. It seems like everyone in the cast was invited for the reunion but they didn't include her.
> 
> I need to keep this post on topic. "I like Meghan better than Professor Umbridge." There, that should do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Harry Potter’ Retrospective to Feature Cast — But No J.K. Rowling
> 
> 
> The 20th anniversary special will stream Jan. 1 on HBO Max.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


Thgh, pound for pound, Umbridge has better outfits.

Snape also has a better version of the same hairstyle.

OT JK has been treated too harshly IMO and it’s partly because there is no easily accessible consensus on what trans opinion is on this issue so the media tends to follow the most knee-jerk  reaction. It’s also because she’s talking about a taboo subject.
It does feel like some of these debates miss a modicum of common sense. There’s an episode of king of the Hill where Hank, the definition of the uptight common man, has to buy tampons. I’m pretty sure the idea behind that episode is it’s normal for all kinds of people to buy tampons and it’s nothing to get hung up on not that the people of Arlen are now speculating on his gender. 


LittleStar88 said:


> Grammatically speaking, it gets really confusing when I hear/read someone being referenced to as "they/them". For instance, this headline: Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle - I wonder who "they" are that Demi is referring to.
> 
> As Gen X, I'm all for folks calling themselves whatever they like - really don't care (whatever!!). But when you mess with grammar and my ageing brain, that's where I get annoyed (and sometimes confused)


I agree this is why I wish ‘zer’ had caught on. To me it makes more sense to add an additional pronoun rather than give an existing one a confusing secondary meaning.
When you think about it, this must get even harder to express in gendered languages like French or Spanish.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree this is why I wish ‘zer’ had caught on. To me it makes more sense to add an additional pronoun rather than give an existing one a confusing secondary meaning.
> When you think about it, this must get even harder to express in gendered languages like French or Spanish.



In German it doesn't even work as they is the same word as she. They did invent new pronouns, but as usual, nobody could agree on anything, so it's not one, but a handful. Which makes it really hard for the bystander because let's be real, a person I rarely see can tell me their preference all they want, but I'll have forgotten by the next time I see them.

Also, I find it extremely telling OB/GYNs were very quick to replace women and mothers with birthing people or lactating people to include a very minority of trans people who get pregnant, but were completely deaf to countless women who felt their identity was being erased and who didn't want to be addressed as people. If you can go the extra mile to include a pregnant man, I do think you can be bothered to say "women and birthing people" or "mothers and birthing people".


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167



OMG, this is ghastly - somehow I have never seen this pic before.  Someone really needs to explain fabrics to her.  Clingy jersey when your figure is like this? Or acres of shiny bright red silk satin -which emphasized her weight.  Matte fabric - and a toned down color would have been soooo much better.  Someone ought to sue her for fashion malpractice!  She spends sooooo much money on designer clothes ( that she wears once) and she almost always has various major fails going on.  Hard to believe that she dressed herself until she was nearly 40 and still is totally clueless.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167


This has to be photoshopped.  She’s way too vain to be caught dead like this.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think they messed with the lighting.







1LV said:


> This has to be photoshopped.  She’s way too vain to be caught dead like this.





I think they messed with the lighting.


----------



## xincinsin

1LV said:


> This has to be photoshopped.  She’s way too vain to be caught dead like this.


I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress. 

When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction? 

I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.








						Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
					

The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> "They" will always mean plural to me.  Very confusing.


I guess "they" could have gone with "it".....the whole thing is strange to me


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In German it doesn't even work as they is the same word as she. They did invent new pronouns, but as usual, nobody could agree on anything, so it's not one, but a handful. Which makes it really hard for the bystander because let's be real, a person I rarely see can tell me their preference all they want, but I'll have forgotten by the next time I see them.
> 
> Also, I find it extremely telling OB/GYNs were very quick to replace women and mothers with birthing people or lactating people to include a very minority of trans people who get pregnant, but were completely deaf to countless women who felt their identity was being erased and who didn't want to be addressed as people. If you can go the extra mile to include a pregnant man, I do think you can be bothered to say "women and birthing people" or "mothers and birthing people".


How about the use of "sis"......it's not even in the urban dictionary but seems it now means somone who was born female (as opposed to a trans woman)


----------



## A1aGypsy

It is ‘cis’. It is in the UD. And I believe now, other dictionaries as well.
It has been long used to refer to someone who’s gender identity matches their anatomy at birth.

ETA: Oxford and Webster both have included it in their dictionaries.


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> It is ‘cis’. It is in the UD. And I believe now, other dictionaries as well.
> It has been long used to refer to someone who’s gender identity matches their anatomy at birth.
> 
> ETA: Oxford and Webster both have included it in their dictionaries.


ok, thanks.  now that you've corrected the spelling I found this:
Urban Dictionary: cisgendered


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> How about the use of "sis"......it's not even in the urban dictionary but seems it now means somone who was born female (as opposed to a trans woman)



Yes, cisgender means you identify with the gender you were born with. Gender-fluid means you may change from day to day which gender you identify with. Pangender is for those who identify as all genders. Can you tell I work with academic publications? They are all over this stuff.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress.
> 
> When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction?
> 
> I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252269


That is...unfortunate.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, cisgender means you identify with the gender you were born with. Gender-fluid means you may change from day to day which gender you identify with. Pangender is for those who identify as all genders. Can you tell I work with academic publications? They are all over this stuff.


If I recall correctly Miley Cyrus said (at one time) she identified as Pangender


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In German it doesn't even work as they is the same word as she. They did invent new pronouns, but as usual, nobody could agree on anything, so it's not one, but a handful. Which makes it really hard for the bystander because let's be real, a person I rarely see can tell me their preference all they want, but I'll have forgotten by the next time I see them.
> 
> Also, I find it extremely telling OB/GYNs were very quick to replace women and mothers with birthing people or lactating people to include a very minority of trans people who get pregnant, but were completely deaf to countless women who felt their identity was being erased and who didn't want to be addressed as people. If you can go the extra mile to include a pregnant man, I do think you can be bothered to say "women and birthing people" or "mothers and birthing people".


Yes it’s also very interesting there’s virtually none of the same push to accommodate trans men in male spaces and products. When you think about it, the public bathroom question is more pressing for trans men but you never see the practicalities of this discussed.
And as for trans men in sports…. Forget it!

To me, it’s not conducive to acceptance to insist that a group of people can only be discussed with academic language that common people risk offending by misusing and no room for growth and learning . To me normalisation is  the key if we want to create a world where all people feel safe and welcome. 

To bring it back to topic, I was originally a lot more lenient on H&M than I am now. It has been the months & months of continuing audacious misdeeds that has convinced me they are beyond intolerable  


xincinsin said:


> I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress.
> 
> When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction?
> 
> I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252269


This reminds me of Michael Kors on project runway:-
“You’ve achieved the impossible! She has camel toe in baggy shorts!”

This makes me hope she has the sense never to try the sheer look. For me, it’s always made me worry I would look like a turkey in shrink-wrap and I think a similar image would be applicable here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress.
> 
> When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction?
> 
> I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252269


Yikes!!


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167



Not speculating but perhaps a very purposefully awkward looking cushion 

Nothing is real with these two. Not a thing. Everything is calculated and on purpose and to tug at us pleb's (plebeians') "heartstrings". I don't believe a single word or image that these 2 proven liars have produced, are behind, in front of or anywhere near.


----------



## charlottawill

1LV said:


> This has to be photoshopped.  She’s way too vain to be caught dead like this.


Unforgiving fabric plus uneven lighting equals unflattering photos.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress.
> 
> When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction?
> 
> I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252269


that bottom photo looks like she isn't even wearing a bra


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh she’s going on Ellen.


----------



## Aimee3

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167
> 
> [/QUOTE
> That doesn’t look like a pregnant belly to me.  Pregnant bellies are taut and that looks lumpy.


----------



## Aimee3

Sorry re above post. My comment somehow got attached in Xincinsin’s quote and I can’t figure out how to fix it.  Apologies in advance.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh she’s going on Ellen.


the Duchess?  isn't she too important for daytime TV?


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> I think they messed with the lighting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they messed with the lighting.


I’ve never seen a more unflattering picture of her, and there have been some doozies.  That has to hurt.


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Sorry re above post. My comment somehow got attached in Xincinsin’s quote and I can’t figure out how to fix it.  Apologies in advance.


If you accidentally write before the "[/QUOTE]" at the end of my post, your comment will insert into my post.


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> Unforgiving fabric plus uneven lighting equals unflattering photos.


I’m convinced!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Yes, cisgender means you identify with the gender you were born with. Gender-fluid means you may change from day to day which gender you identify with. Pangender is for those who identify as all genders. Can you tell I work with academic publications? They are all over this stuff.



I identity as someone who refuses to identify. 

As for Harry, supposedly an expert with misinformation, he can't even tell truth from a lie when he's sitting next to one. He is the  unappointed, know-all, head of the ministry of propaganda. 

As for a Royal Prince even being on a Left-wing/leaning think tank shows us surely that this entire story-line should be in Gilbert and Sullivan operetta and has nothing to do with reality or common sense.


----------



## xincinsin

1LV said:


> I’ve never seen a more unflattering picture of her, and there have been some doozies.  That has to hurt.


She equates beauty with bucks, and that dress cost a lot of bucks. She would never admit that it looked bad on her or she looked bad in it.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> She equates beauty with bucks, and that dress cost a lot of bucks. She would never admit that it looked bad on her or she looked bad in it.


I think you’re right.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> How about the use of "sis"......it's not even in the urban dictionary but seems it now means somone who was born female (as opposed to a trans woman)


Cisgender or cis for short,  just means that you feel you are the gender you were given at birth. I.E. I was born a girl and I have grown up to be a woman and I feel I am a woman.
So it is essentially just the opposite of trans. 
I think it is important to have terms which have 1 clear meaning personally  so people can explain things. People used to say ‘biological’ but obviously that already has a meaning so it was a bit confusing.

back on JK, I think some of her opinions on some trans issues are wrong and reactionary but from what I read I don’t think she has any hate towards trans people in her heart and that calling well-intentioned but wrong people bigots just scares them off from learning more and stops them from challenging their own assumptions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> How about the use of "sis"......it's not even in the urban dictionary but seems it now means somone who was born female (as opposed to a trans woman)



For whom, women and mothers? Why though, there are already words for it.

ETA: I answered before reading the whole discussion. I don't mind cis in an academic context or when people want to call themselves that, but it's not necessarily a term that endears itself to me to use for myself. But also, I rarely ever feel the need to discuss my gender identity or sexual orientation. I do understand it might be different for people who don't fit into the "easy" categories.


----------



## lanasyogamama

New Archie homepage


----------



## lanasyogamama

This whole statement it so bizarre to me. First of all, she’s trying to push the whole blame on JK. Second of all, what’s with all the quotation marks? Literally the least sincere apology ever.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> This whole statement it so bizarre to me. First of all, she’s trying to push the whole blame on JK. Second of all, what’s with all the quotation marks? Literally the least sincere apology ever.


the highlighted part was added as a joke, right?


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress.
> 
> When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction?
> 
> I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252269



Looks very lumpy and dumpy. She looks like a baked potato that busted open.

I agree that she has no clue (or doesn't care?) about fabrics, clothing cuts, and how they will look on her body.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I identity as someone who refuses to identify.
> 
> As for Harry, supposedly an expert with misinformation, he can't even tell truth from a lie when he's sitting next to one. He is the  unappointed, know-all, head of the ministry of propaganda.
> 
> As for a Royal Prince even being on a Left-wing/leaning think tank shows us surely that this entire story-line should be in Gilbert and Sullivan operetta and has nothing to do with reality or common sense.


His apparent "_Left-wing/leaning_" is all for power and profit imo.
In the meantime, their falsehoods are hurting QE big time.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Looks very lumpy and dumpy. She looks like a baked potato that busted open.
> 
> I agree that she has no clue (or doesn't care?) about fabrics, clothing cuts, and how they will look on her body.


maybe she has the opposite of body dysmorphia.....she sees herself better than reality


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> maybe she has the opposite of body dysmorphia.....she sees herself better tan reality



I think you are right! She definitely dresses for some other body (not the one she has at the time).


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> New Archie homepage




If "An Apology" had been written in calligraphy with sad face emojis in the O's, it really would have pulled at my heartstrings.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> the highlighted part was added as a joke, right?


I am so confused about whether any of it is real. I don’t want to give their website and click, but I feel like they would be more buzz about that statement if she put it on the website


----------



## Chanbal

More Sizzler days… 
*

*

*Meghan Markle, 40, is set to appear on the Ellen Degeneres show *
*In a trailer of interview, set to air tomorrow, Duchess reminisces about acting*
*Can be seen laughing as she discusses arriving on the lot for auditions *
*Marks the second high profile interview Meghan has given since stepping back from royal duty *
*Ellen and the Duchess are close friends having met  years ago at a dog shelter*









						Meghan Markle  on the Ellen show
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen joining the chat show host on her Hollywood set and discussing how she used to audition for acting roles on the lot.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I am so confused about whether any of it is real. I don’t want to give their website and click, but I feel like they would be more buzz about that statement if she put it on the website


I went there.....I didn't see it on their site


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I am so confused about whether any of it is real. I don’t want to give their website and click, but I feel like they would be more buzz about that statement if she put it on the website


Wait for DM. If real, it will be shown there imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> More Sizzler days…
> *
> View attachment 5252346
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, is set to appear on the Ellen Degeneres show *
> *In a trailer of interview, set to air tomorrow, Duchess reminisces about acting*
> *Can be seen laughing as she discusses arriving on the lot for auditions *
> *Marks the second high profile interview Meghan has given since stepping back from royal duty *
> *Ellen and the Duchess are close friends having met  years ago at a dog shelter*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle  on the Ellen show
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen joining the chat show host on her Hollywood set and discussing how she used to audition for acting roles on the lot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


so she's apparently going for likeable/relatable now?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I think you are right! She definitely dresses for some other body (not the one she has at the time).


maybe she thinks she has Kate's figure?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> His apparent "_Left-wing/leaning_" is all for power and profit imo.
> In the meantime, their falsehoods are hurting QE big time.




I really want to read this just to see how far gone he is...but I'm not lining his pockets with money at all and hope Daily Mail will keep us posted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> maybe she has the opposite of body dysmorphia.....she sees herself better than reality



It's not just *body* dysmorphia then, is it.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> New Archie homepage



This is a joke, right? No way Methane would apologize. She already got out her humongous broom to sweep the whole incident under the carpet of selective amnesia. We should do our duty to keep her lies in the public eye. 

I read some articles which mentioned her perjury and her stans are already out there in the comments, twisting the incident, claiming that the judges already dismissed the matter and that anyone who disagrees is a [insult of your choice].


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think I got fooled. I’m really sorry everyone!


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> maybe she thinks she has Kate's figure?


I wish I had Kate’s figure as well!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so she's apparently going for likeable/relatable now?


I'm so disappointed with the mainstream media in the US. Liars leading the cancel culture movement, and nothing is reported here. This is making me sick.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I think I got fooled. I’m really sorry everyone!



Not to worry, you got fooled once. 

H&M would like to think they fooled us all, all the time


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> More Sizzler days…
> *
> View attachment 5252346
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, is set to appear on the Ellen Degeneres show *
> *In a trailer of interview, set to air tomorrow, Duchess reminisces about acting*
> *Can be seen laughing as she discusses arriving on the lot for auditions *
> *Marks the second high profile interview Meghan has given since stepping back from royal duty *
> *Ellen and the Duchess are close friends having met  years ago at a dog shelter*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle  on the Ellen show
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen joining the chat show host on her Hollywood set and discussing how she used to audition for acting roles on the lot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


just watched video of the clip (from a People email I got)....she is so darn cute and funny...and what a nice wig


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> just watched video of the clip (from a People email I got)....she is so darn cute and funny...and what a nice wig



 

And that's just from your description, I refuse to watch video footage of her speaking.


----------



## LittleStar88

I wonder if she will be interviewed by Nice Ellen or Mean Ellen. I'm hoping for some snarky question in there somewhere...


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I wonder if she will be interviewed by Nice Ellen or Mean Ellen. I'm hoping for some snarky question in there somewhere...


oh no....very nice ellen...no snark


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And that's just from your description, I refuse to watch video footage of her speaking.


you can read what she said if you want....laughing about when she was a poor actress


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh she’s going on Ellen.


Two narcissists in search of attention?

Perhaps they can discuss that dog Ellen encouraged her to get…how she loves it so much….walks it everyday….. 

She’ll be on the phone to central casting now trying to find a convincing elderly lab mix


----------



## Luvbolide

lanasyogamama said:


> New Archie homepage




I sincerely hope that the Court of Appeal hands down some sort of sanction for her behavior.  She continues to walk a very thin line with her fake apologies.  

IIRC, before the book came out, there was all sorts of chatter about readers seeing the “real MM” as there had recently been considerable publicity about the claims that she bullied her staff and treated them terribly.  She was clearly heavily involved in providing info to Scoobie, albeit indirectly.  The info that she provided is also quite detailed - she obviously gave thought to what she asked Knauf to convey.  I don’t believe for a moment that she “forgot” about all of the info she provided to Knauf to pass along.


----------



## Luvbolide

LittleStar88 said:


> Looks very lumpy and dumpy. She looks like a baked potato that busted open.
> 
> I agree that she has no clue (or doesn't care?) about fabrics, clothing cuts, and how they will look on her body.



She would have been a disaster on Project Runway!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> His apparent "_Left-wing/leaning_" is all for power and profit imo.
> In the meantime, their falsehoods are hurting QE big time.




If this little s**t’s stupid book comes out before the Jubilee celebration, someone ought to kick him off of the top of Big Ben!  The Jubilee may be the last big celebration that his grandmother will see - to do something so disrespectful is disgusting.


----------



## LittleStar88

Luvbolide said:


> She would have been a disaster on Project Runway!!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> More Sizzler days…
> *
> View attachment 5252346
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, is set to appear on the Ellen Degeneres show *
> *In a trailer of interview, set to air tomorrow, Duchess reminisces about acting*
> *Can be seen laughing as she discusses arriving on the lot for auditions *
> *Marks the second high profile interview Meghan has given since stepping back from royal duty *
> *Ellen and the Duchess are close friends having met  years ago at a dog shelter*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle  on the Ellen show
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen joining the chat show host on her Hollywood set and discussing how she used to audition for acting roles on the lot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I have lost it ... I thought Ellen was canceled ... for bullying ???


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> More Sizzler days…
> *
> View attachment 5252346
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, is set to appear on the Ellen Degeneres show *
> *In a trailer of interview, set to air tomorrow, Duchess reminisces about acting*
> *Can be seen laughing as she discusses arriving on the lot for auditions *
> *Marks the second high profile interview Meghan has given since stepping back from royal duty *
> *Ellen and the Duchess are close friends having met  years ago at a dog shelter*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle  on the Ellen show
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen joining the chat show host on her Hollywood set and discussing how she used to audition for acting roles on the lot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Isn’t this focus on the actress days tacitly admitting the last time she was likeable or ‘relatable’ was 20 years ago?  

As per usual she looks like a dog’s breakfast in the expensive clothes which is a close as she will come to something nice for our canine friends.

I’m not that bothered about what she’s going to say on Ellen tbh but I would love to see them both on Jerry Springer




QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really want to read this just to see how far gone he is...but I'm not lining his pockets with money at all and hope Daily Mail will keep us posted.


Maybe my library will get it and I’ll give you summaries with reaction gifs,
There’s also a good chance lady C will do a dramatic reading


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> If I recall correctly Miley Cyrus said (at one time) she identified as Pangender



Miley has described herself a number of ways over the years. I found an interview where she says she is “a gender-neutral, sexually fluid person."


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> More Sizzler days…
> *
> View attachment 5252346
> *
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, is set to appear on the Ellen Degeneres show *
> *In a trailer of interview, set to air tomorrow, Duchess reminisces about acting*
> *Can be seen laughing as she discusses arriving on the lot for auditions *
> *Marks the second high profile interview Meghan has given since stepping back from royal duty *
> *Ellen and the Duchess are close friends having met  years ago at a dog shelter*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle  on the Ellen show
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen joining the chat show host on her Hollywood set and discussing how she used to audition for acting roles on the lot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I thought Ellen was gone form the airwaves... everyone who didn't know, found out the truth about her nastiness and she was cancelled.


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> so she's apparently going for likeable/relatable now?


She tried that already.





She's so much more refined now darling, so I'm sure her demeanour will be even more contrived on Hellen.


----------



## 1LV

After all reports of Ellen’s nastiness I don’t think she’s a hot ticket anymore.  What’s next for MM - the Chrissy Teigen Apology Tour?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I doubt he's told her what to do since that time he told her to turn around on the balcony


HA!!! .. yes, how true is this!!!  Thanks for the good laugh ..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder who they're referring to


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> If this little s**t’s stupid book comes out before the Jubilee celebration, someone ought to kick him off of the top of Big Ben!  The Jubilee may be the last big celebration that his grandmother will see - to do something so disrespectful is disgusting.


Agree there is disrespect in the scheduled publication date BUT that was deliberate , the publisher did not want to wait until after the jubilee or her death - 6 signed up for the untimely publication - this was deliberate 
We will have forgotten 6 in another year...


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167


Well .. two things here: 

Remember, she had breast implants during her Deal or No Deal days; she subsequently had them removed .. but unless you have that skin "uplifted" somehow (sorry - don't know the correct word to use), couldn't that contribute to some sagginess. 
She seems to have a 'thing' about wearing bras that don't have shoulder straps .. can't remember the name of the contration since .. well, HECK .. I would never have been able to wear something like that in my entire life (my HB refers to my bras as the shoulder over the boulders contraptions)!!!  
Beyond that .. WTF with the rest of that look???  Having never been pregnant, is the stomach area that movable such that it looks like .. well, a moon bump?!?!?!?!


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> How about the use of "sis"......it's not even in the urban dictionary but seems it now means somone who was born female (as opposed to a trans woman)



Back in the early 80's when I was frequenting gay bars I was referred to as an RG (Real Girl)


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I thought Ellen was gone form the airwaves... everyone who didn't know, found out the truth about her nastiness and she was cancelled.



Her show ends next year. Her popularity isn’t what it once was but a contract is a contract.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh she’s going on Ellen.


I JUST saw that this morning and thought the same .. UGGH and GROSS!  Not that I have watched Ellen for years anyhow, but the more 'exposure' the Megalomanic gets, the worst!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> back on JK, I think some of her opinions on some trans issues are wrong and reactionary but from what I read I don’t think she has any hate towards trans people in her heart and that calling well-intentioned but wrong people bigots just scares them off from learning more and stops them from challenging their own assumptions.



so, are opinions now falling under the dread "disinformation" ?
I was raised that there are no right or wrong opinions.........just ones that differ from mine. And that they----the opinions and their owners-------- were entitled to the same respect I expected for mine. 
I am sick of the "universal truth" sledgehammer. Just because someone isn't in lockstep with The Agenda doesn't make them wrong.


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> She equates beauty with bucks, and that dress cost a lot of bucks. She would never admit that it looked bad on her or she looked bad in it.



I had a former friend that had (or still has) behaviours very similar to Meghan and also the same talent for wearing expen$ive clothing and making it look either cheap or horrid
Luckily for the world she has not married a prince


----------



## bellecate

lanasyogamama said:


> New Archie homepage



She "accepts that Mr Knauf"  she is placing the blame on someone else, yet again. I have no words to describe how despicable I find them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks @xincinsin for your #26 nickname, Her Heinous. Congratulations and here's The List #26 Ribbon.  



Thanks @CeeJay for your #17 nickname, Prince-Of-Pomposity and his Moppet-Megalomaniac side-piece. Congratulations and here's The List #17 Ribbon.  



Thanks @jelliedfeels for your #5 nickname, Madame (too long) pants on fire. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master Club.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> so, are opinions now falling under the dread "disinformation" ?
> I was raised that there are no right or wrong opinions.........just ones that differ from mine. And that they----the opinions and their owners-------- were entitled to the same respect I expected for mine.
> I am sick of the "universal truth" sledgehammer. Just because someone isn't in lockstep with The Agenda doesn't make them wrong.



That is true. Every human alive assumes that their beliefs are right and anything that contradicts those beliefs must be wrong. Yet they are all only opinions. It is hubris for any of us to think we have all the correct answers. 

Humans are herd creatures. They want to fit in and be accepted so they tend to go along with whatever the prevailing and most talked about beliefs are at the time.

If we went back in time 100 years, most of us would believe what was prevalent at that moment. It is arrogance to think that any of us would be any different. Why would we be? In another 100 years what is called "right" today will have been replaced by something else and those people will probably pity our naivety and backwardness.


----------



## csshopper

The Ellen Hook Up was just a matter of time: They are Montecito neighbors so the Suckesses can claim to have "friends" in town since Katy Perry/Orlando Bloom, Katherine McPhee/ David Foster don't seem to have worked out. Oprah has moved on to Adele and Rob Lowe fled.

Both women are narcissistic bullies playing the victim card (Ellen claims ignorance and no responsibility for the toxic environment she maintained and Maggot's list is too long to reprint in this post).

Methane will not have to be concerned about Ellen making any moves on Hazz so they can buddy up.

Both women like "grand gestures" for giving although Ellen's are often in the 6 figures and probably actually do do good, while Methane's olive oil lemon cake only gave calories and her free books bombed.

Am willing to bet this attempt to play to the "stans" to help Ellen's sagging exit will generate a BIG check to Archwell Foundation, of the headline making variety. The audience will have been very very carefully vetted so that an outlier like me would not disrupt the sound track with raucous boos as Her Heinous swans onto the stage. This appearance will give The Body Language Guy on You Tube fresh material, stay tuned! 

Ellen will be the Douchess's  new BF until she's off the air and then it will vaporize.


----------



## Sophisticatted

There was a blind item when Ellen trouble began, than Meghan was hoping to get Ellen’s job.  Iondr if she is still thinking about being a replacement talk show hostess.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I think they messed with the lighting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they messed with the lighting.


In that pic it appears she has muffin top over whatever underwear she has on. Again, poor choice of undergarments. Does she not do test runs with her outfits with her stylist or some one? Maybe Kim K can send her some Skims. I'm not a fan of her or her fashion choices, but I've never seen her look lumpy and bumpy like this.


----------



## papertiger

poopsie said:


> so, are opinions now falling under the dread "disinformation" ?
> I was raised that there are no right or wrong opinions.........just ones that differ from mine. And that they----the opinions and their owners-------- were entitled to the same respect I expected for mine.
> I am sick of the "universal truth" sledgehammer. Just because someone isn't in lockstep with The Agenda doesn't make them wrong.



Yes, but it's the law these people are going after changing the law(s) with my/their/his/her truth. 

It's the the same way Prince Harry of Dumbarton will be recommending through his Ministry of Misinformation through his "action plan" for all media to "adopt guidelines" `(as in legally and/or morally bound) to make is illegal/repugnant to refute, rebut, critique or criticise, or even analyse the PR "heartstring"-pulling truth that comes from him and/or his wife Miss Information. That would include this thread.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> The Ellen Hook Up was just a matter of time: They are Montecito neighbors so the Suckesses can claim to have "friends" in town since Katy Perry/Orlando Bloom, Katherine McPhee/ David Foster don't seem to have worked out. Oprah has moved on to Adele and Rob Lowe fled.
> 
> Both women are narcissistic bullies playing the victim card (Ellen claims ignorance and no responsibility for the toxic environment she maintained and Maggot's list is too long to reprint in this post).
> 
> Methane will not have to be concerned about Ellen making any moves on Hazz so they can buddy up.
> 
> Both women like "grand gestures" for giving although Ellen's are often in the 6 figures and probably actually do do good, while Methane's olive oil lemon cake only gave calories and her free books bombed.
> 
> Am willing to bet this attempt to play to the "stans" to help Ellen's sagging exit will generate a BIG check to Archwell Foundation, of the headline making variety. The audience will have been very very carefully vetted so that an outlier like me would not disrupt the sound track with raucous boos as Her Heinous swans onto the stage. This appearance will give The Body Language Guy on You Tube fresh material, stay tuned!
> 
> Ellen will be the Douchess's  new BF until she's off the air and then it will vaporize.



At this point it looks like Ellen needs HRH Duchess of S as much as M needs Ellen. Actually, M makes Ellen look stable, reliable and truthful in comparison.

And think of all the things they have in common they can chat about in the green room. They both are (alleged) bullies (alleged) manipulators and love the limelight. Perhaps they can give each other tips on NLP body language control signalling and controlling annoying staff that retain their pesky emails.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> There was a blind item when Ellen trouble began, than Meghan was hoping to get Ellen’s job.  Iondr if she is still thinking about being a replacement talk show hostess.


That's more believable than her political aspirations. I'm sure she sees herself as the next Oprah, and it could never have happened if they had stayed within the royal fold. This may have been part of her long game from the start. Marrying Harry has clearly opened a lot of doors for her. What a wonderful stroke of luck that they met and fell in love! /s


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read all the books and still watch the movies whenever they are on TV even though I know them by heart and *Rowling has turned out to be not that likeable *
> 
> I also love the Fantastic Beasts spin-off.


She's simply not afraid to speak her mind and frankly and it's refreshing in this world where you can lose everything you have in a second if your opinion on any issue deviates the slightest from the PC Police Doctrine. You don't have to like her opinion but you have to give it to her -  unlike Princess Pinocchio she's a brave woman.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> I have lost it ... I thought Ellen was canceled ... for bullying ???


I think she said she was quitting...not sure when


----------



## gracekelly

Ellen has already been tainted once with the dreaded markling.  If she thought that this would give her some rating, then she was mistaken and her first markling was just given a refresher booster shot.  The only live beings who saw this were dogs whose owners left the TV on to amuse them, shut ins and folks in hospital beds who are unable to change the channel and of course the sugar brigade who thought that turning on every TV set in the house would improve Ellen's ratings.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan and Ellen are both bullies who enjoy pushing around employees. That common bond ties them together.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Ellen has already been tainted once with the dreaded markling.  If she thought that this would give her some rating, then she was mistaken and her first markling was just given a refresher booster shot.  The only live beings who saw this were dogs whose owners left the TV on to amuse them, shut ins and folks in hospital beds who are unable to change the channel and of course the sugar brigade who thought that turning on every TV set in the house would improve Ellen's ratings.


I wonder if Ellen introduced her as Duchess


----------



## lulilu

@Vlad please please please give us a barf emoji?   
	

		
			
		

		
	




It's impossible to quote all the posts that deserve it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There is one! I used it today


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There is one! I used it today



I think we're referring to having one added to the "like" button options


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> I'm going OT here but those of us who are of a different generation (and probably some young people too) may have a bit of trouble understanding some things that are happening now.  Just saw this story about Demi Lovato.  She is now "they"
> *I have to admit I don't really get it.  Why can't one just be a woman who is gay? or a woman who has a masculine side?  clearly Demi is feminine appearing.  I'm sure she is sincere but I don't really get it.*
> Demi Lovato Opened Up About How They Realized That They're Non-Binary | InStyle


I've been pondering these questions for a while. I think the current climate is against being genuinely unique. People are being boxed just as it was done before, only the boxes are different this time and you can be just as ostracised nowadays if you don't fit in one.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


>




Unless she can show financial loss because of what MM, Omid and the publisher did , I can’t see her being successful….

Back to the Duchess Desperateforrelevance, she is clearly on the offensive trying to rehab her image.  The Oprah interview showed how much whining and entitlement she had, plus showcased her telling huge lies.    she and H were mocked for it and wealthy celebs and others don’t want to do business with people who are indiscreet.  The NY tour was a fail (no one cared), using veterans wasn’t well received, so now she goes on a talk show to try to be relatable.  Except it’s Ellen, whose known for her own bullying behaviour.  A bully interviewing another bully…


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> She "accepts that Mr Knauf"  she is placing the blame on someone else, yet again. I have no words to describe how despicable I find them.



Due to the poor wording, this seems to be a contradictory statement as well as a half-a$$ed apology. She only apologized when JK presented the info in court. She and her cohorts trash-talked those who said she cooperated when the book was published. Imo this attitude of _blame the accuser _is exactly what the BRF has always done.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> I've been pondering these questions for a while. I think the current climate is against being genuinely unique. People are being boxed just as it was done before, only the boxes are different this time and you can be just as ostracised nowadays if you don't fit in one.



Not so long ago there was pride in saying you didn’t believe in labels, that an individual is so much more than a mere word or words could convey. Now people are finding pride in putting a label on themselves. They put themselves in a box based on a single facet of their whole being.


----------



## Lounorada

lulilu said:


> @Vlad please please please give us a barf emoji?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252867
> View attachment 5252869
> 
> It's impossible to quote all the posts that deserve it.


Also, a 'roll your eyes' emoji reaction is needed too. Please


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I JUST saw that this morning and thought the same .. UGGH and GROSS!  Not that I have watched Ellen for years anyhow, but the more 'exposure' the Megalomanic gets, the worst!



Do we call this thirsty or desperate or attention-w$ore or a cheap trick?  All of those?

ETA: hungry?  needy?  pompous? desperate? pampered? indulged?  f.a.k.e.?  liar?

ETA2: grandiose? over-indulged? How about ‘ego-centric regressed’?  Brat?








						Spoiled Brat synonyms - 81 Words and Phrases for Spoiled Brat
					

Another way to say Spoiled Brat? Synonyms for Spoiled Brat (other words and phrases for Spoiled Brat).




					www.powerthesaurus.org


----------



## Chanbal

I still think they were not invited, but multiple sources (aka PR, SS, MM…) informed they were invited. 



_An invitation has been extended to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to join the rest of the royal family at Sandringham for Christmas, but they will not be attending, Page Six is told by multiple royal sources.

“There’s a lot that goes into the logistics and the planning of the family Christmas, so of course, staff know that Harry and Meghan are not coming,” one royal source told Page Six. “If they were, they would have communicated it to their family by now.

“But this is Her Majesty’s first Christmas without her husband, so one would have hoped they would want to be with her.”_


----------



## kipp

I'm not sure what looks worse---H & M not being invited vs. being invited and refusing to come.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As you listened to E’s show tomorrow, remember the Explorer was a brand new vehicle, according to Sam [who seems to be so much wiser than MM].


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think maybe there was an invite but not a very attractive one? Like they wouldn’t be doing the church walk in and other photo ops?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> I still think they were not invited, but multiple sources (aka PR, SS, MM…) informed they were invited.
> 
> 
> 
> _An invitation has been extended to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to join the rest of the royal family at Sandringham for Christmas, but they will not be attending, Page Six is told by multiple royal sources.
> 
> “There’s a lot that goes into the logistics and the planning of the family Christmas, so of course, staff know that Harry and Meghan are not coming,” one royal source told Page Six. “If they were, they would have communicated it to their family by now.
> 
> “But this is Her Majesty’s first Christmas without her husband, so one would have hoped they would want to be with her.”_



I wonder if it's true. I'm sure that their behaviour in the last two years caused her only headaches and sorrow. If they were really invited, it's no surprise that they refused the invitation. It  would be a very awkward meeting and the public is against them. Of course, they could be brave and face the music to visit his ailing grandmother in order to support her in these difficult times, but this is what sympathetic and kind people would do.  As they have proven, such positive traits  as sympathy and kindness are not really their strongest suits.


----------



## Chanbal

Spencer was apparently offered a big check (he could name the figure) to allow Nefl*x use his home in the Crown, but he refused. Uncle seems to have more integrity than nephew…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh my, connections connections, life is about connections.


----------



## Chanbal

DeMonica said:


> I wonder if it's true. I'm sure that their behaviour in the last two years caused her only headaches and sorrow. If they were really invited, it's no surprise that they refused the invitation. It  would be a very awkward meeting and the public is against them. Of course, they could be brave and face the music to visit his ailing grandmother in order to support her in these difficult times, but this is what sympathetic and kind people would do.  As they have proven, such positive traits  as sympathy and kindness are not really their strongest suits.


From what I understood, they have been asked to stay away. The article on Page Six about the invitation is likely coming from Montecito.


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> I'm not sure what looks worse---H & M not being invited vs. being invited and refusing to come.


Lots of families face logistical challenges at the holidays. If he really wanted to Harry could go to England and Meghan could spend Christmas with her mother and the kids. They are too young to miss his presence for a few days and this could be the Queen's last Christmas. Or he could spend Christmas Eve and morning with Meghan and the kids and get an afternoon flight to London in time to spend Boxing Day with his family. But that's probably too logical for them. Anything for the drama. And what Meghan wants, Meghan gets.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In German it doesn't even work as they is the same word as she. They did invent new pronouns, but as usual, nobody could agree on anything, so it's not one, but a handful. Which makes it really hard for the bystander because let's be real, a person I rarely see can tell me their preference all they want, but I'll have forgotten by the next time I see them.
> 
> Also, I find it extremely telling OB/GYNs were very quick to replace women and mothers with birthing people or lactating people to include a very minority of trans people who get pregnant, but were completely deaf to countless women who felt their identity was being erased and who didn't want to be addressed as people. If you can go the extra mile to include a pregnant man, I do think you can be bothered to say "women and birthing people" or "mothers and birthing people".


TBH, I don’t know a single OBGYN that has called their patients “birthing people” or “lactating people”, but there has been a trend to try to use whatever pronouns one prefers.  That’s often confusing as it is to try to be respectful of everyone and try to re program your brain to a new form of English.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I don't think so. After you commented on the photo, I googled a lot of photos of her in this dress.
> 
> When she was wearing it during the day, and I suppose she was still fresh and standing straight, the dress fell over the chest quite smoothly. But there are shots which show the outline of her bra and shots where she was bending over and the underwear puckered quite strangely. The shots of her indoors appear to be later in the day and, in some of them, there is a horizontal line appearing across her chest. Bra malfunction?
> 
> I found the original photo in this article: it is lighter-toned but the strange bulges at the breasts and tummy can be seen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan dazzles in a Moroccan-inspired dress by Dior
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex dazzled in a sweeping kaftan-inspired Dior gown as she joined husband Prince Harry for a reception at the British ambassador's residence in Morocco on Sunday night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5252269


This literally made me think of the beloved Hindu God Ganesha.  Now she’s insulted Madonna and now all Hindus:



			https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0066/2802/products/sivana-ganesh-prosperity-statue-7424210437.jpg?v=1571322086


----------



## Chanbal

She gets her dress in a garment bag with a royal monogram, and he rents his outfit…


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I'm not sure what looks worse---H & M not being invited vs. being invited and refusing to come.


I have trouble believing that they were invited.  I only say that because their usual MO is saying that they can't go when in fact, they weren't  invited.  It is all to save face.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Spencer was apparently offered a big check (he could name the figure) to allow Nefl*x use his home in the Crown, but he refused. Uncle seems to have more integrity than nephew…



I think he knew that it would turn Althorp into more of a three ring circus.  They have had their share of people trying to get to the little island where Diana is resting and after a Netflix episode showing the estate, it would be worse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> I'm not sure what looks worse---H & M not being invited vs. being invited and refusing to come.



The latter. Them not being invited is just a natural consequence of their behaviour, and they have to thank themselves for that. But if a betrayed grandmother who is in her 90s offers an olive branch you're a jerk for refusing to come. Especially when said grandmother is also your sovereign and you pride yourself in being a military man.

I'm noticing I don't even talk about the wife anymore because she difficulties adhering to social standards and basic manners anyway.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Lots of families face logistical challenges at the holidays. If he really wanted to Harry could go to England and Meghan could spend Christmas with her mother and the kids. They are too young to miss his presence for a few days and this could be the Queen's last Christmas. Or he could spend Christmas Eve and morning with Meghan and the kids and get an afternoon flight to London in time to spend Boxing Day with his family. But that's probably too logical for them. Anything for the drama. And what Meghan wants, Meghan gets.



I understand not wanting to miss Christmas with your kids, but even Archie is young enough they could shift their celebration to the 23rd or the 27th and he wouldn't be any wiser.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> She gets her dress in a garment bag with a royal monogram, and he rents his outfit…




Are we sure that was his? Maybe it was for the five security guys they needed to shield their table. I have no problem believing that stupid cow had a monogramed garment bag (that said, the red monstrosity wouldn't have fit in there, would it), but I find it unlikely someone who grew up with tailored clothes would rent a tuxedo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> TBH, I don’t know a single OBGYN that has called their patients “birthing people” or “lactating people”, but there has been a trend to try to use whatever pronouns one prefers.  That’s often confusing as it is to try to be respectful of everyone and try to re program your brain to a new form of English.



I don't know them personally either, but they are all over Twitter and Instagram using their platform.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know them personally either, but they are all over Twitter and Instagram using their platform.


Ah, the few woke members who don’t get silenced I suppose!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Not so long ago there was pride in saying you didn’t believe in labels, that an individual is so much more than a mere word or words could convey. Now people are finding pride in putting a label on themselves. They put themselves in a box based on a single facet of their whole being.


I had a subordinate try that "didn't believe in labels" tactic on me about 20 years ago. He was a skiver who tried to get away with only doing work he liked, and then palm off everything else to other colleagues. 

So, it was staff review time, and I told him that his performance was below par. His other colleagues who were in the same job role with similar job scope were producing more in terms of quality and quantity. He sagely informed me that he was an individual, not just a clerk, and should be judged on his own merits, not compared with the other clerks. I had to bite my tongue not to snark at him that he was also failing as an individual who was hired to do the job of a clerk


----------



## Chanbal

Dan Wootton Tonight poll: British public want Harry and Meghan's Royal titles stripped
					

Dan Wootton Tonight conducted an exclusive scientific survey with One Poll




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *As you listened to E’s show tomorrow, remember the Explorer was a brand new vehicle, according to Sam* [who seems to be so much wiser than MM].


More lies… Fraud was the word she used to describe herself.


----------



## xeyes

A twofer from Enty today. (Discussion topics, not news.)





__





						Blind Item #1
					

This cable show could never get any of its stars on the one named host's talk show. I guess that changed with the alliterate one. I wonder i...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				








__





						Blind Item #2
					

Speaking of the alliterate one. When she and the ginger one do finally get divorced, do you think he will resent her for not getting to see ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## bag-mania

xeyes said:


> A twofer from Enty today. (Discussion topics, not news.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> This cable show could never get any of its stars on the one named host's talk show. I guess that changed with the alliterate one. I wonder i...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> Speaking of the alliterate one. When she and the ginger one do finally get divorced, do you think he will resent her for not getting to see ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. Maybe he never did.


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. Maybe he never did.



So the only way H can salvage himself is to go (like, now), see the Queen in private, then jump on the plane back to California.  And I would hope he would apologise for his poor behaviour - but maybe that’s too much to wish for.

Then when he is back in California, leak that he went to visit the Queen privately to spend some time with her.

If something happens to the Queen, he would get in trouble for not going to see her, just as though he would get in trouble for all the publicity if he did go see her…

But then again, maybe he has been told he is not welcome because of all the stress he causes her…


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> So the only way H can salvage himself is to go (like, now), see the Queen in private, then jump on the plane back to California.  And I would hope he would apologise for his poor behaviour - but maybe that’s too much to wish for.
> 
> Then when he is back in California, leak that he went to visit the Queen privately to spend some time with her.
> 
> If something happens to the Queen, he would get in trouble for not going to see her, just as though he would get in trouble for all the publicity if he did go see her…
> 
> But then again, maybe he has been told he is not welcome because of all the stress he causes her…


The Queen is a strong woman. It will undoubtedly be difficult to not have Philip there, but she will be surrounded by many loving and supportive family members. At this point I'm sure Harry's absence will hardly be noticed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? *The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. Maybe he never did.*



 


Thank you for taking the time to state this so clearly.  Imo the guy always has been,  is, and always will be a jerk and so is TW.


----------



## gracekelly

Thinking that Meghan keeps Harry away from his granny as a form of punishment and control. Punishing because of how she was wronged and controlling to keep Harry from straying too far afield.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The Queen is a strong woman. It will undoubtedly be difficult to not have Philip there, but she will be surrounded by many loving and supportive family members. At this point I'm sure Harry's absence will hardly be noticed.


She would appreciate seeing him like any grandchild, but with all the emotional baggage attached to him, it is easier for her to take a pass.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for taking the time to state this so clearly.  Imo the guy always has been,  is, and always will be a jerk and so is TW.


bag-mania and CarryOn2020’

Agree with both of you and it was cemented with me in the clip from the last minutes of the O interview when they thought the taping had ended. After posturing as beaten down victims about every issue, they get caught immediately going into huge old smirky faced smiles and laughing. Harry seems to be engaging with Oprah, colluding in what they thought was pulling a fast one.

There had been other offensive behaviors from him, but from the point of that smirk on he’s just been one big turd to me. I’m not so sure he feels trapped. I think it’s more he’s scared she’ll leave him. I think he’s probably always had the tendency to be a nasty little wanker, she‘s the first to openly encourage and support it. Could be wrong but i think it will take a complete character reboot and massive contrition for him to ever regain any respect or acceptance, if he wants to return to the RF.

And that may never happen. He’s not sharp enough to think ahead, most of his life going forward will be impacted by King William, who may not be amenable to any recognition of him or reconciliation given the toxic two’s attacks on Catherine, the treatment of the Queen, Prince Phillip, their father. And most of all, Haz ignoring the Netflix desecration of their Mum for money. William may be fed up with his brother’s perceived ownership of their Mum’s life and death for monetization. Plus William will be very protective of his children, he will not want the Suckesses mucking about, and Maggot has already demonstrated her bullying behavior toward Charlotte.


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> so, are opinions now falling under the dread "disinformation" ?
> I was raised that there are no right or wrong opinions.........just ones that differ from mine. And that they----the opinions and their owners-------- were entitled to the same respect I expected for mine.
> I am sick of the "universal truth" sledgehammer. Just because someone isn't in lockstep with The Agenda doesn't make them wrong.


Yes I agree with you but I would say that the human race, collectively, does try and improve how we interact. I do believe  people don’t set out to be cruel to others & a lot of hurt happens through misunderstandings.

what I would say is there’s a difference between prejudice and opinion because an unfounded and unfair view can cause harm to others, all be it unintentionally at times. To me, some of the things JK said seemed a bit more prejudiced aka the thing about men claiming to be women to assault women in changing rooms. I can totally understand why she thinks this from what she’s explained of her own background but my point really was if people can have a healthy and polite debate people do change their minds all the time- I don’t believe either prejudices or opinions are always set in stone for life. )If someone doesn’t want to change their mind even if an idea is harmful then tbh I don’t think there’s much you can do about it and you should just leave the issue at that point, I don’t condone spamming people.) my point was really that because she’s been subjected to a volley of abuse she’s unlikely to want to talk about this issue when she seems like a good person who has much to contribute. 

you see this all the time. 
If you don’t immediately spout certain buzzwords or phrases or just agree because you ‘don’t know as much’ and you can’t talk. Whereas I think a far healthier atmosphere on the likes of Twitter would be a forum for discussion and growth not a point scoring tribalistic exercise where concessions are seen as weakness.it just feels like the sound bite bully bots are winning. But hey, that’s myight be a bit of a Pipe dream.

to bring it back to H&M these two are a symbol of the meaningless sound bite in action coupled with implausibly denying involvement in their tribalistic bullying and censoring campaign,


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> That is true. Every human alive assumes that their beliefs are right and anything that contradicts those beliefs must be wrong. Yet they are all only opinions. It is hubris for any of us to think we have all the correct answers.
> 
> Humans are herd creatures. They want to fit in and be accepted so they tend to go along with whatever the prevailing and most talked about beliefs are at the time.
> 
> If we went back in time 100 years, most of us would believe what was prevalent at that moment. It is arrogance to think that any of us would be any different. Why would we be? In another 100 years what is called "right" today will have been replaced by something else and those people will probably pity our naivety and backwardness.


I was imagining only the other day if she took out another censoring suit against the internet how funny it would be to hear her valley girl whine or some stereotypical stuffy solicitor reading out some of the choice nicknames from @Maggie Muggins  Muggins  wonderful and comprehensive list or getting out a PowerPoint of some of the best GIFs.

I mean, it’s just so ridiculous it might happen with them.


----------



## Chanbal

I will not be watching the show (no clicks), but anticipate some fun with the BLG and DM.


----------



## jelliedfeels

DeMonica said:


> I've been pondering these questions for a while. I think the current climate is against being genuinely unique. People are being boxed just as it was done before, only the boxes are different this time and you can be just as ostracised nowadays if you don't fit in one.





bag-mania said:


> Not so long ago there was pride in saying you didn’t believe in labels, that an individual is so much more than a mere word or words could convey. Now people are finding pride in putting a label on themselves. They put themselves in a box based on a single facet of their whole being.


I think the urge to be part of a group is very strong and a very old instinct rather than something new. 
if you look at us, a lot of us have mentioned our nationalities because we think it conveys something about ourselves, even a subtle difference like how some people refer to themselves as Welsh or Scottish whereas others go for British. However, the thing we all have in common, of course, is that a certain couple  cheeses us off and we find their fawning coverage to be irritating. Also, we all love the jokes.

I can see how if you grow up a bisexual trans man who loves trainspotting and abstract art in rural Romania, say, you are unlikely to meet anyone like you in person. However, the internet allows you to get this specific and talk to people who share your identity and interests from all over the world. I think this is a really good thing that helps people learn and feel like they belong.  The problem is  ‘when two tribes go to war a point is all that you can score.’


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. Maybe he never did.


This ^
I feel like if he lived in the olden days he’d have been another ginger Henry and his six wives.
Poor aristocratic girls would be pressured by their family into marrying the knob until he got sick of them and sent them packing one way or another.

Luckily, we live in more enlightened times & all ladies of rank said No! Loud and clear. So he was left with the kind of clapped-out ‘celebrities’ who hang out in sketchy  ‘gentlemen’s clubs’ hoping to find a free ride and boy, did he find one!

I mean, he could have actually done something with his life and met normal people of integrity and maybe even married a middle or working class woman with morals but let’s face it, where’s the drama or ‘class’ in that?

add on- saw this on Twitter, shady but true? 


Add add on do you think we would be called ‘enemies of compassion and universal service’ by the sugars?


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. Maybe he never did.



And this is precisely the one thing that tipped me over. I sat with my dying grandfather for three days and helped get him ready for burial. Harry can suck it. I still think this relationship is abusive and he's getting the short end of the stick, but that's unforgiveable to me. Philip bent over backwards for these boys when their mother died. In fact they both did. It was the one time in her life the Queen let family come before duty and she took a lot of flak for it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Two comments from blind item #2 I think make valid points.



> I  think Harry has inherited/assumed some of his mothers attention seeking behaviours. It feels to me like he has used threats of suicide to get his own way in the past. For me, that would explain why the family allowed Harry's wife privileges waaay before they did with Catherine. I also feel that, if he ever followed through on his threats, his wife would be the merriest widow the world has ever seen... and we would never be rid of her.





> She's already started laying down the foundations [for divorce]. The minute he volunteered about the drinking and other stuff it was clear who actually told him to admit it. Fast foward to when the inevitable happens she will blame that and go on a 'I tried the best I could but he has too many demons he couldn't exorcise like the rest of his family' tirade or some BS like that.


----------



## Aminamina

This is looking darn juicy! And oh, take a look at the Meegain serving tweet inserted in the article.








						Former Rep. Bachmann compares Harris to Meghan Markle as ‘very entitled people’
					

Michele Bachmann, the first ********** woman elected to the House of Representatives from the state of Minnesota and one of […] The post Former Rep. Bachmann compares Harris to Meghan Markle as ‘very entitled people’ appeared first on TheGrio.




					news-yahoo-com.cdn.ampproject.org


----------



## Chanbal

This seems to be an old post that is circulating again. However, I could see the reduced (no) interest in visiting grandma without photo-ops…


----------



## Chanbal

It sounds forced…


----------



## lulilu

Chanbal said:


> It sounds forced…



She really must have nerves of steel to go on this show with stupid stories after being proven a liar to the court.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> She really must have nerves of steel to go on this show with stupid stories after being proven a liar to the court.



She doesn't care! The majority of the US media isn't reporting her lies. Celebrities lie all the time and are almost never called out. Meghan has been telling lies and getting away with it forever. She isn't going to stop doing what works for her.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if MM was at that particular animal shelter just waiting to meet Auntie Ellen. Well, she had to wait a long time, and get a duchess title, to be invited to the _DeGeneres's_ show. 

_DeGeneres, a friend of the couple who lives near them in the celebrity enclave of Montecito, asked what Harry loves about California.

The duchess replied: “*We’re just happy*.”

DeGeneres said of the Sussexes’ five-month-old daughter: “Lili’s now teething.”

Meghan put her hands to her mouth, saying “Anything to relieve that.”

The talk show host quipped “Tequila, anything”, People magazine reported.

Meghan replied: “*That’s Auntie Ellen for you,*” with DeGeneres saying “That’s why I don’t have kids.”

The show’s Ellentube.com website said: “*The activist and co-founder of Archewell will chat with Ellen about growing up and returning to California, as well as her New York Times bestselling children’s book The Bench*.”

DeGeneres first met Meghan by chance at an animal shelter some years ago and encouraged her to adopt her first dog, Bogart.

She has previously described the Sussexes as “the cutest couple, so down to earth” and defended them when they faced criticism after taking a series of flights on private jet.

After meeting the Sussexes’ son in 2019, DeGeneres said: “I mean I can’t tell you how sweet they are. But the most important thing is I got to hold Archie. I fed Archie. I held Archie.”_









						Meghan tells 'Auntie Ellen' she and Harry are happy in US and Lili is teething
					

Meghan is appearing on The Ellen Show on Thursday – eight months after the former Suits star’s controversial sit-down with Oprah Winfrey which left the royal family in crisis




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if MM was at that particular animal shelter just waiting to meet Auntie Ellen. Well, she had to wait a long time, and get a duchess title, to be invited to the _DeGeneres's_ show.
> 
> _DeGeneres, a friend of the couple who lives near them in the celebrity enclave of Montecito, asked what Harry loves about California.
> 
> The duchess replied: “*We’re just happy*.”
> 
> DeGeneres said of the Sussexes’ five-month-old daughter: “Lili’s now teething.”
> 
> Meghan put her hands to her mouth, saying “Anything to relieve that.”
> 
> The talk show host quipped “Tequila, anything”, People magazine reported.
> 
> Meghan replied: “*That’s Auntie Ellen for you,*” with DeGeneres saying “That’s why I don’t have kids.”
> 
> The show’s Ellentube.com website said: “*The activist and co-founder of Archewell will chat with Ellen about growing up and returning to California, as well as her New York Times bestselling children’s book The Bench*.”
> 
> DeGeneres first met Meghan by chance at an animal shelter some years ago and encouraged her to adopt her first dog, Bogart.
> 
> She has previously described the Sussexes as “the cutest couple, so down to earth” and defended them when they faced criticism after taking a series of flights on private jet.
> 
> After meeting the Sussexes’ son in 2019, DeGeneres said: “I mean I can’t tell you how sweet they are. But the most important thing is I got to hold Archie. I fed Archie. I held Archie.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan tells 'Auntie Ellen' she and Harry are happy in US and Lili is teething
> 
> 
> Meghan is appearing on The Ellen Show on Thursday – eight months after the former Suits star’s controversial sit-down with Oprah Winfrey which left the royal family in crisis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk



As I recall it was a celebrity pet adoption event. Ellen would have been the major celebrity and ensemble-cast Meghan would have been one of the minor celebrities participating.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> This seems to be an old post that is circulating again. However, I could see the reduced (no) interest in visiting grandma without photo-ops…
> View attachment 5253272


I called it!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if MM was at that particular animal shelter just waiting to meet Auntie Ellen. Well, she had to wait a long time, and get a duchess title, to be invited to the _DeGeneres's_ show.
> 
> _DeGeneres, a friend of the couple who lives near them in the celebrity enclave of Montecito, asked what Harry loves about California.
> 
> The duchess replied: “*We’re just happy*.”
> 
> DeGeneres said of the Sussexes’ five-month-old daughter: “Lili’s now teething.”
> 
> Meghan put her hands to her mouth, saying “Anything to relieve that.”
> 
> The talk show host quipped “Tequila, anything”, People magazine reported.
> 
> Meghan replied: “*That’s Auntie Ellen for you,*” with DeGeneres saying “That’s why I don’t have kids.”
> 
> The show’s Ellentube.com website said: “*The activist and co-founder of Archewell will chat with Ellen about growing up and returning to California, as well as her New York Times bestselling children’s book The Bench*.”
> 
> DeGeneres first met Meghan by chance at an animal shelter some years ago and encouraged her to adopt her first dog, Bogart.
> 
> She has previously described the Sussexes as “the cutest couple, so down to earth” and defended them when they faced criticism after taking a series of flights on private jet.
> 
> After meeting the Sussexes’ son in 2019, DeGeneres said: “I mean I can’t tell you how sweet they are. But the most important thing is I got to hold Archie. I fed Archie. I held Archie.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan tells 'Auntie Ellen' she and Harry are happy in US and Lili is teething
> 
> 
> Meghan is appearing on The Ellen Show on Thursday – eight months after the former Suits star’s controversial sit-down with Oprah Winfrey which left the royal family in crisis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


Sounds riveting 
Surely even by mindless daytime tv standards this is inane. It makes  this morning seem like a Homeric battle of wits.

5 months seems early for teething but I guess vampires cut sooner.




bag-mania said:


> As I recall it was a celebrity pet adoption event. Ellen would have been the major celebrity and ensemble-cast Meghan would have been one of the minor celebrities participating.


Evidently she was hoping Ellen would adopt her sugarbaby self too.
“I can be the daughter you never had Ellen! Please put me in your will!”
“Aren’t you five years younger than me tops?”


----------



## TC1

HMTQ has not been in great health.. I'm surprised they would pretend to turn down a Christmas invitation..I mean, a chance for Lili to meet her namesake IN PERSON! 
So, they didn't turn it down. They weren't invited in the first place.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Evidently she was hoping Ellen would adopt her sugarbaby self too.
> “I can be the daughter you never had Ellen! Please put me in your will!”
> “Aren’t you five years younger than me tops?”


I think Megain is the kind to have a new sexual orientation just to get richer and further herself.  Maybe she was hoping to pick up Ellen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. *Maybe he never did*.


IMO, H was an entitled little brat from the beginning. The public spanking Diana gave William should've been reserved for H who learnt at an early age it was okay and funny to disrespect others. It's a well-known fact that Diana called reporters to inform them of her whereabouts and when she brought H along, he'd stick his tongue out at them while Diana giggled like a school girl reinforcing this bad behaviour. There are many pictures of him doing this, even some on the balcony during TRF public events. I truly believe HM tried to instill in him a sense of propriety and decorum during her sessions with him, but to no avail. He liked his bad-boy-prince image too much to change as it gave him the freedom to behave as he pleased just like he's still doing today.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> This seems to be an old post that is circulating again. However, I could see the reduced (no) interest in visiting grandma without photo-ops…
> View attachment 5253272



I hope this is true - they can hang out with Andrew!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh my, connections connections, life is about connections.



where's that vomit emoji?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



so now the Duchess wants to be seen as a fun girl


----------



## Chanbal

Oops 










						Ellen brutally mocked Meghan Markle and doesn't remember story of meeting her
					

Ellen DeGeneres and Meghan Markle are close pals, but the talk show host has made savage jokes about the Duchess of Sussex in the past and has no memory of their first meeting




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

One more interesting piece of the long list of falsehoods.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if MM was at that particular animal shelter just waiting to meet Auntie Ellen. Well, she had to wait a long time, and get a duchess title, to be invited to the _DeGeneres's_ show.
> 
> _DeGeneres, a friend of the couple who lives near them in the celebrity enclave of Montecito, asked what Harry loves about California.
> 
> The duchess replied: “*We’re just happy*.”
> 
> DeGeneres said of the Sussexes’ five-month-old daughter: “Lili’s now teething.”
> 
> Meghan put her hands to her mouth, saying “Anything to relieve that.”
> 
> The talk show host quipped “Tequila, anything”, People magazine reported.
> 
> Meghan replied: “*That’s Auntie Ellen for you,*” with DeGeneres saying “That’s why I don’t have kids.”
> 
> The show’s Ellentube.com website said: “*The activist and co-founder of Archewell will chat with Ellen about growing up and returning to California, as well as her New York Times bestselling children’s book The Bench*.”
> 
> DeGeneres first met Meghan by chance at an animal shelter some years ago and encouraged her to adopt her first dog, Bogart.
> 
> She has previously described the Sussexes as “the cutest couple, so down to earth” and defended them when they faced criticism after taking a series of flights on private jet.
> 
> After meeting the Sussexes’ son in 2019, DeGeneres said: “I mean I can’t tell you how sweet they are. But the most important thing is I got to hold Archie. I fed Archie. I held Archie.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan tells 'Auntie Ellen' she and Harry are happy in US and Lili is teething
> 
> 
> Meghan is appearing on The Ellen Show on Thursday – eight months after the former Suits star’s controversial sit-down with Oprah Winfrey which left the royal family in crisis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


----------



## CeeJay

Sophisticatted said:


> There was a blind item when Ellen trouble began, than Meghan was hoping to get Ellen’s job.  Iondr if she is still thinking about being a replacement talk show hostess.


How could she be? .. she would never shut the 'F' up, it would always be HER talking (you know - having to get her TRUTH out there), even if she asked A question, do you honestly think she could listen and not interrupt and/or talk over the person?????


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Her stans are in full force on the comments.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oops
> View attachment 5253482
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ellen brutally mocked Meghan Markle and doesn't remember story of meeting her
> 
> 
> Ellen DeGeneres and Meghan Markle are close pals, but the talk show host has made savage jokes about the Duchess of Sussex in the past and has no memory of their first meeting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


She probably (truly, unless Megain's memory lapses) doesn't remember, because it's likely yet another concocted story MM made up!


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> How could she be? .. she would never shut the 'F' up, it would always be HER talking (you know - having to get her TRUTH out there), *even if she asked A question, do you honestly think she could listen and not interrupt and/or talk over the person?????*


Hmmmm...sounds an awful lot like her other BFF, Oprah!  O never let anyone speak without constantly injecting her own wisdom either.


----------



## kemilia

xincinsin said:


> Not body shaming, but when I saw this photo, I wondered if the saggy breasts were because of lousy underwear or her "shapely" figure pre-marriage was the result of a lot of shapewear. This was during 1st pregnancy in the staggeringly expensive Dior bedsheet dress.
> View attachment 5252167


Wow, never saw this pic before. I'm sure her "staff" was laughing their butts off sending her out like this.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Her stans are in full force on the comments.


the clown duchess… Hazz juggles balls. It's a circus!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She probably (truly, unless Megain's memory lapses) doesn't remember, because it's likely yet another concocted story MM made up!


It's possible the story is one more falsehood a la Markle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is a good one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more interesting piece of the long list of falsehoods.




As if. It was Raptor herself to create facts.


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> Wow, never saw this pic before. I'm sure her "staff" was laughing their butts off sending her out like this.


Someone on her staff should have resurrected this photo to alert her to the fact the top of her Herrara gown was going to appear "unfilled."


----------



## csshopper

NO COINCIDENCE: The Ellen Show airing the same day as William and Kate attending the Royal Variety Show in London. Even the usual sources of Maggotry, People Magazine and Harpers Bazaar posted with "Kate sparkled... "William cut a dashing figure in his blue velvet tux", "The Duchess of Cambridge went full glam..show stopping red carpet look..." Harpers says William was in a black tux. Either way, classy, handsome, kingly. And the recycled Jenny Packham green beaded dress is queenly.

Meantime, bouncing around on the Ellen stage, spewing more lies, and trying to look pure in white is the strumpet who will NEVER be royal. Expect some side by side pictures to appear on line.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> NO COINCIDENCE: The Ellen Show airing the same day as William and Kate attending the Royal Variety Show in London. Even the usual sources of Maggotry, People Magazine and Harpers Bazaar posted with "Kate sparkled... "*William cut a dashing figure in his blue velvet tux", "The Duchess of Cambridge went full glam..show stopping red carpet look..*." Harpers says William was in a black tux. Either way, classy, handsome, kingly. And the recycled Jenny Packham green beaded dress is queenly.
> 
> Meantime, bouncing around on the Ellen stage, spewing more lies, and trying to look pure in white is the strumpet who will NEVER be royal. Expect some side by side pictures to appear on line.


Some people seem to prefer a lousy circus to a gala evening. Do you mean glam like this?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



could be and out of focus pic but she sure looks boxy there


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



Meanwhile,


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Meanwhile,



this is what class looks like


----------



## Chanbal

Ellen must be having fun at the expense of the duchess. It looks like Ellen wanted to recreate the moment when Hazz fell in love with the duchess of squat…


----------



## Chanbal

Yep! This is what I thought from the video clips, Ellen was having a blast at MM's expense… 










						Meghan unafraid of 'greater dignity loss than Harry' in Ellen show, expert says
					

EXCLUSIVE: Body language expert Judi James told Daily Star that Meghan Markle appeared full of enthusiasm even when Ellen Degeneres made her perform "undignified" pranks




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> "...the strumpet who will NEVER be royal."


At this point I think she doesn't even care and is just using her disgraced royal status for whatever she can get. They've got a big mortgage and expenses to pay. She can't be choosy. This appearance on Ellen suggests to me that she's looking for a spot on daytime TV. We all know how lucrative that can be - Oprah, Ellen, Wendy Williams haha, to name a few. It could solve all their financial problems.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Ellen must be having fun at the expense of the duchess. It looks like Ellen wanted to recreate the moment when Hazz fell in love with the duchess of squat…




Oh dear....


----------



## needlv




----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Some people seem to prefer a lousy circus to a gala evening. Do you mean glam like this?
> View attachment 5253666


Chanbal, yes, Thank you!!! (Appreciation for the good stuff you always post deserves more than an emoji.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Yep! This is what I thought from the video clips, Ellen was having a blast at MM's expense…
> View attachment 5253693
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan unafraid of 'greater dignity loss than Harry' in Ellen show, expert says
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Body language expert Judi James told Daily Star that Meghan Markle appeared full of enthusiasm even when Ellen Degeneres made her perform "undignified" pranks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


Based on the preview teaser yesterday The Body Language Guy posted a frozen screen shot of Ellen looking b-o-r-e-d during the long tee hee hee story about the key in the car. He promised to post more once the full show aired, should be more entertaining than the show itself, which I refuse to watch.


----------



## Mendocino

I just saw photos of Meghan from the Ellen show.They evidently were from a skit where Meghan was in public and had to do what Ellen told her to do. My jaw dropped. If I didn't know better my first reaction would be this must be someone using photoshop to make a meme.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...by-bottle-dances-toe-curling-Ellen-prank.html


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

Dang, she couldn’t wait for the divorce ala Fergie. Not Very royal and not a future political good move.


----------



## Helventara

This latest stunt prompted me to write. I truly don’t get MM's. Here’s someone, who managed to get into the BRF, not just any royal family, and behaves like this. She would rather throw the privileges of BRF (think diplomatic status, titles, lifetime income, etc) than follow their tradition and duties. She had an incredibly rare opportunity to do good with her privileges but no….

it's almost abnormal. There are countless examples of commoners marrying into rich or royal families and none is like MM.

Now she is desperate and, while her in-laws look appropriately grand and royal at an event, she was pranked by Ellen

We can argue on how she gets access but whatever it is, getting into BRF is like winning a lottery. Lesser royal or rich families impose stricter 'checks' before allowing just anyone to get close to them. Let alone marry.

Sorry if I ramble. I just can’t wrap my head around it


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yep! This is what I thought from the video clips, Ellen was having a blast at MM's expense…
> View attachment 5253693
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan unafraid of 'greater dignity loss than Harry' in Ellen show, expert says
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Body language expert Judi James told Daily Star that Meghan Markle appeared full of enthusiasm even when Ellen Degeneres made her perform "undignified" pranks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


I don't watch ellen often at all but from what I've seen she does this type of thing all the time.  I don't think she intentionally made Meghan look foolish.  This behavior may not be "royal" but I think Meghan deliberately made the decision to go on there and appear to be fun and relatable.  It is somewhat out of character for the one who wants to call herself Duchess and who wants to preach to all of us about the environment and all sorts of other stuff though.  Did her advisors suggest to her that it would be a good idea to go there an act like a "regular girl"?  or is she just compelled to seek attention at every level?


----------



## bag-mania

Her insatiable desire for attention overshadows what tiny bit of sense she may possess. However, it was her turn to play the fool, after having Harry juggle and do the James Corden show.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't watch ellen often at all but from what I've seen she does this type of thing all the time.  I don't think she intentionally made Meghan look foolish.  This behavior may not be "royal" but I think Meghan deliberately made the decision to go on there and appear to be fun and relatable.  It is somewhat out of character for the one who wants to call herself Duchess and who wants to preach to all of us about the environment and all sorts of other stuff though.  Did her advisors suggest to her that it would be a good idea to go there an act like a "regular girl"?  or is she just compelled to seek attention at every level?



The goofy footage will hopefully kill any chance of a political career. Her opponents could have commercials showing her like that over and over.


----------



## Chanbal

From the Aussies…


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The goofy footage will hopefully kill any chance of a political career. Her opponents could have commercials showing her like that over and over.


we can hope


----------



## charlottawill

BVBookshop said:


> This latest stunt prompted me to write. I truly don’t get MM's. Here’s someone, who managed to get into the BRF, not just any royal family, and behaves like this. She would rather throw the privileges of BRF (think diplomatic status, titles, lifetime income, etc) than follow their tradition and duties. She had an incredibly rare opportunity to do good with her privileges but no….
> 
> it's almost abnormal. There are countless examples of commoners marrying into rich or royal families and none is like MM.
> 
> Now she is desperate and, while her in-laws look appropriately grand and royal at an event, she was pranked by Ellen
> 
> We can argue on how she gets access but whatever it is, getting into BRF is like winning a lottery. Lesser royal or rich families impose stricter 'checks' before allowing just anyone to get close to them. Let alone marry.
> 
> Sorry if I ramble. I just can’t wrap my head around it


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> The goofy footage will hopefully kill any chance of a political career. Her opponents could have commercials showing her like that over and over.


It seems that she's given up any pretense of that after all the recent negative press and is abandoning any sense of dignity in favor of landing a lucrative daytime talk show. Maybe she'll have the last laugh after all.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It seems that she's given up any pretense of that after all the recent negative press and is *abandoning any sense of dignity in favor of landing a lucrative daytime talk show*. Maybe she'll have the last laugh after all.



Nothing would surprise me. She would be a terrible interviewer on a talk show since she would only want to talk about herself.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Yep! This is what I thought from the video clips, Ellen was having a blast at MM's expense…
> View attachment 5253693
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan unafraid of 'greater dignity loss than Harry' in Ellen show, expert says
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Body language expert Judi James told Daily Star that Meghan Markle appeared full of enthusiasm even when Ellen Degeneres made her perform "undignified" pranks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


Dignity loss?! That ship has sailed a long, long, long time ago.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, yes! 
*JAN MOIR: After this superchummy banquet of chick chat, how the Windsors must sigh with relief that the Sussexes are so very far away*
By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 17:43 EST, 18 November 2021 | UPDATED: 18:01 EST, 18 November 2021









						JAN MOIR: Windsors must sigh with relief that Sussexes are far away
					

JAN MOIR: Yesterday the Duchess of Sussex appeared on The Ellen Show and spoke about returning to California, her new life in her £10million mansion and of course her children's book.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nothing would surprise me. She would be a terrible interviewer on a talk show since she would only want to talk about herself.


how many stans does she have?  I don't think anyone else would watch
And honestly I think she probably has higher aspirations


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't watch ellen often at all but from what I've seen she does this type of thing all the time.  I don't think she intentionally made Meghan look foolish.  This behavior may not be "royal" but I think Meghan deliberately made the decision to go on there and appear to be fun and relatable.  It is somewhat out of character for the one who wants to call herself Duchess and who wants to preach to all of us about the environment and all sorts of other stuff though.  Did her advisors suggest to her that it would be a good idea to go there an act like a "regular girl"?  or is she just compelled to seek attention at every level?


I think she's decided "F*ck it, no matter what I do I will always be compared negatively to Princess Perfect, so I'm just gonna go for the big bucks in daytime talk TV". It could work for her. We don't like her around here, but we know that there are plenty of others who do.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I think she's decided "F*ck it, no matter what I do I will always be compared negatively to Princess Perfect, so I'm just gonna go for the big bucks in daytime talk TV". It could work for her. We don't like her around here, but we know that there are plenty of others who do.


eww
your probably right
But again - how many stans does she have?
I think most people don't care about her one way or the other


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh, yes!
> *JAN MOIR: After this superchummy banquet of chick chat, how the Windsors must sigh with relief that the Sussexes are so very far away*
> By JAN MOIR FOR THE DAILY MAIL
> 
> PUBLISHED: 17:43 EST, 18 November 2021 | UPDATED: 18:01 EST, 18 November 2021
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Windsors must sigh with relief that Sussexes are far away
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Yesterday the Duchess of Sussex appeared on The Ellen Show and spoke about returning to California, her new life in her £10million mansion and of course her children's book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Love how Jan closed that article 



> In the meantime, Mommy might want some heat, but a little more decorum and cool judgment might not go amiss.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> eww
> your probably right
> But again - how many stans does she have?
> I think most people don't care about her one way or the other


From what I've read in other places, there are a lot of people who do like her. They think she's refreshing and not stuffy like her in laws and rose from humble beginnings to have a successful career before landing her prince. Of course YMMV.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Dang, she couldn’t wait for the divorce ala Fergie. Not Very royal and not a future political good move.


That ship has sailed. They're scrambling for a lot of cash fast and she probably sees her delusional self as Ellen's successor.  

And as I type this, NBC Nightly News is doing a favorable piece on Diana, the musical. There are more Harkle stans than we think.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> From what I've read in other places, there are a lot of people who do like her. They think she's refreshing and not stuffy like her in laws and rose from humble beginnings to have a successful career before landing her prince. Of course YMMV.


humble beginnings?  she was pretty spoiled and went to expensive private schools....not RF level but not that humble


----------



## octopus17

bag-mania said:


> Miley has described herself a number of ways over the years. I found an interview where she says she is “a gender-neutral, sexually fluid person."


And there was me thinking she was a singer....


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> Her insatiable desire for attention overshadows what tiny bit of sense she may possess. However, it was her turn to play the fool, after having Harry juggle and do the James Corden show.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> humble beginnings?  she was pretty spoiled and went to expensive private schools....not RF level but not that humble


We know that, but that's not the narrative she's put forth.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> We know that, but that's not the narrative she's put forth.


Maybe when she has rewritten her life sufficiently, she will find another sheep like Omid to put forth her one and only truth in a fluff biography that will laud her as not the princess/duchess she was forced to suffer as, but the woman she has thrived to become. Companion piece to the pack of lies that Hazard is currently concocting.


----------



## Luvbolide

poopsie said:


>





Thank you, I needed that!  For a minute I thought we had entered some kind of parallel universe.  What the hell were those two doing?!?!


----------



## redney

Here's the picture of Archie that the grifter shared on Ellen. What? You can't tell it's him?  
From: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-shares-touching-snap-25493908


----------



## redney

Pfft, even if she somehow finagles a daytime talk show, she's proven over and over she never finishes what she starts. Remember that huge podcast deal with Spotify? One podcast. Remember that huge deal with Netflix? Have they released one show yet?

Whatever "show" she might manager to get will be over pretty fast.


----------



## purseinsanity

Mendocino said:


> I just saw photos of Meghan from the Ellen show.They evidently were from a skit where Meghan was in public and had to do what Ellen told her to do. My jaw dropped. If I didn't know better my first reaction would be this must be someone using photoshop to make a meme.
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...by-bottle-dances-toe-curling-Ellen-prank.html


I've watched the Ellen skits with Kris Jenner and Adele and I admit, I laughed out loud, but I refuse to watch anything with MM.  MM and Haz have the uncanny ability of not actually looking funny or cute when doing these silly pranks, but rather quite pathetic.  Haz asking the Fresh Prince house owner to use her toilet was the epitome of embarrassing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

redney said:


> Here's the picture of Archie the grifter shared on Ellen. From: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-shares-touching-snap-25493908
> 
> View attachment 5253813


Her child’s privacy must be protected at all costs. Other people’s children are merely publicity fodder.
They are thoroughly disgusting.

And that clip with the LA vendors was soooooo embarrassing.


----------



## Mendocino

purseinsanity said:


> I've watched the Ellen skits with Kris Jenner and Adele and I admit, I laughed out loud, but I refuse to watch anything with MM.  MM and Haz have the uncanny ability of not actually looking funny or cute when doing these silly pranks, but rather quite pathetic.  Haz asking the Fresh Prince house owner to use her toilet was the epitome of embarrassing.



Ah! I see!  I don't watch Ellen so I wasn't familiar with this skit.  I just felt an overwhelming sense of embarrassment when I saw the pictures.


----------



## xeyes

And now, your moment of Enty.





__





						Blind Item #15
					

The alliterate one told the exact same story almost a decade ago about a different boyfriend she was dating at the time. She is becoming ver...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I think she's decided "F*ck it, no matter what I do I will always be compared negatively to *Princess Perfect*, so I'm just gonna go for the big bucks in daytime talk TV". It could work for her. We don't like her around here, but we know that there are plenty of others who do.


M would never use that sobriquet for Catherine because she will always see  herself as thee totally perfect princess whom everyone else disparage out of sheer jealousy, envy, misunderstanding, etc..


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't watch ellen often at all but from what I've seen she does this type of thing all the time.  I don't think she intentionally made Meghan look foolish.  This behavior may not be "royal" but I think Meghan deliberately made the decision to go on there and appear to be fun and relatable.  It is somewhat out of character for the one who wants to call herself Duchess and who wants to preach to all of us about the environment and all sorts of other stuff though.  Did her advisors suggest to her that it would be a good idea to go there an act like a "regular girl"?  or is she just compelled to seek attention at every level?



Imo I have not and will not watched the show. I parted ways years ago with Ellen’s same ole, same ole (ewww) show. _Looking foolish_ was not funny back then and it is not funny now. It is not relatable because no one knows anyone who does this stuff, do they? This is clearly Fergie territory — it is uncomfortable, if not painful, to watch people humiliate themselves.  Another time-waster. 

Surely, this is H&M hitting rock bottom, right?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo I have not and will not watched the show. I parted ways years ago with Ellen’s same ole, same ole (ewww) show. _Looking foolish_ was not funny back then and it is not funny now. It is not relatable because no one knows anyone who does this stuff, do they? This is clearly Fergie territory — it is uncomfortable, if not painful, to watch people humiliate themselves.  Another time-waster.
> 
> Surely, this is H&M hitting rock bottom, right?


Just bouncing on the way down I suspect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> Here's the picture of Archie that the grifter shared on Ellen. What? You can't tell it's him?
> From: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/meghan-markle-shares-touching-snap-25493908
> 
> View attachment 5253813



Why does this kid never seem to grow?  Feels like he has been 1.5/2 years old for the last 6 years. Imo


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> Pfft, even if she somehow finagles a daytime talk show, she's proven over and over she never finishes what she starts. Remember that huge podcast deal with Spotify? One podcast. Remember that huge deal with Netflix? Have they released one show yet?
> 
> Whatever "show" she might manager to get will be over pretty fast.


I don't know, a daytime talk show with an audience full of people who like her might actually work. She'd need coaching to be able to conduct a decent interview without making it all about her, good writers and a good booker to attract desirable guests. Finding material to do interesting podcasts on a regular basis or, even worse, coming up with material for Netflix is a much harder task imo. I believe she went on Ellen in the hope that network execs would see her and find her charming enough to consider giving her a show. Think about how many other people have been given daytime talk shows. Some flop, some are very successful. I can't imagine why else she would have gone on Ellen and made a complete fool of herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ChickChat - MM will always be lower tier [just like Fergie]


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I don't know, a daytime talk show with an audience full of people who like her might actually work. She'd need coaching to be able to conduct a decent interview without making it all about her, good writers and a good booker to attract desirable guests. Finding material to do interesting podcasts on a regular basis or, even worse, coming up with material for Netflix is a much harder task imo. I believe she went on Ellen in the hope that network execs would see her and find her charming enough to consider giving her a show. Think about how many other people have been given daytime talk shows. Some flop, some are very successful. I can't imagine why else she would have gone on Ellen and made a complete fool of herself.



The problem with the chat show is she will be expected to _read the books, see the films and converse with the guests. _ She never works _that_ hard. Remember she is “such a fraud”.   But go ahead, try it. More mockery, more horrible clothes with awful hair.


----------



## Annawakes

An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:

_“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_

I resent that!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:
> 
> _“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_
> 
> I resent that!!!



No photo evidence they have 2.


----------



## Lodpah

I leave the tv on for my doggies and when I came home the Ellen Show was on. I caught a bit. MM does not have the personality to host a talk, she’s awkward, her stupid grin gets in the way so yeah, watching paint dry will be more interesting. She does not have the “It” factor.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Someone should learn


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Annawakes said:


> An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:
> 
> _“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_
> 
> I resent that!!!
> 
> Is scares me, because what it alludes to is a first child being raised in a very poor environment who only gets parental attention when they feel like they need the amusement of a "hobby." Also makes one wonder how she defines "parenting."
> 
> Hope there are terrific nannies to offset the emotional abuse being doled out by two narcissistic parents.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The problem with the chat show is she will be expected to _read the books, see the films and converse with the guests. _ She never works _that_ hard. Remember she is “such a fraud”.   But go ahead, try it. More mockery, more horrible clothes with awful hair.


You'd be surprised. Talk show people often have staffers who read the books, see the films etc. and give them the "Cliff Note" versions to discuss on air. She could replace Wendy Williams, whose personal situation over the past few years has gotten precarious. Now that would be rock bottom for Megs.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why does this kid never seem to grow?  Feels like he has been 1.5/2 years old for the last 6 years. Imo


Covid has made many of us lose all sense of time. They married in 2018, he was born in 2019. It does seem like an eternity at times.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> You'd be surprised. Talk show people often have staffers who read the books, see the films etc. and give them the "Cliff Note" versions to discuss on air. She could replace Wendy Williams, whose personal situation over the past few years has gotten precarious. Now that would be rock bottom for Megs.



Meghan couldn’t handle the grind of doing a daily show. Too much work. Maybe she can be one of the fill-ins for Wendy for a few days. I can almost hear her “how you doin’?” now.


----------



## needlv

Or the new photo is from a while ago…


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Or the new photo is from a while ago…




Did they need to recast the role of Archie? They must still be looking for just the right baby girl to play Lilibet.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks @needlv for your #5 nickname, Duchess Desperateforrelevance, that is indeed a very apt nickname. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.  




Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #13 nickname, Stupid Cow, that needs no explanation. Congratulations and welcome to the Busy Bee Club.  




 Thank @csshopper for your nickname #23, Maggotry and #24,  Strumpet.  Congratulations and here are The List #23 and #24 Ribbons.   




Thanks @Chanbal for your #27 nickname, The Clown Duchess.  Congratulations and here is The List #27 Ribbon.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Or the new photo is from a while ago…



My guess is that they have a lucrative deal with People magazine, which treats them favorably, for a "Home for the Holidays" cover reveal of the kids next month, which she thinks will upstage any photos of the Cambridge kids' Christmas with Great Gran.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> How many stans, are they in the US and will they vote her in?
> If Marjorie Taylor Greene, a conspiracy theorist, can get a seat in the House of Reps, Methane, who births conspiracy theories galore, stands a good chance of weeping and snivelling her way in.


Please don't say that


----------



## Chanbal

Oh gosh!


----------



## muddledmint

Meghan quit the royal family to have control over her PR and image and privacy so that she can go and act like a fool on a show that almost no one watches anymore. I thought the Ellen show was canceled already. The prank scene wasn’t even a tiny bit funny. Just full on cringe. What is wrong with her. The poster who said she is abnormal is absolutely correct.


----------



## muddledmint

Also, wtf was she wearing on the show. Her studio outfit with those dowdy pants hiked up practically to her bra line and hideous poofy blouse was so unflattering (as usual). And why couldn’t she wear something normal for the street market scene. Like jeans and sneakers or something. She looked so dumb and overdressed wearing stilettos and that dress and baggy coat combo.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> could be and out of focus pic but she sure looks boxy there


She’s wearing the Simon cowell trousers  
does she think her legs are just soooo long she suits high waisted? Because no.


Chanbal said:


> Ellen must be having fun at the expense of the duchess. It looks like Ellen wanted to recreate the moment when Hazz fell in love with the duchess of squat…



If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times, that hair of hers is entirely the wrong thickness and style for her head and she just looks like a wet spaniel. She should get down to the wig shop and change it up  because we all know that’s not coming out of her scalp anyway.

Why is she wearing black leather bag and stiletto heels (also stilettos to a market? Please) with that Rose Nyland on a cruise jacket and a matronly fuschia gown?
She looks insane. Those poor stall holders must have been in fear of being killed by a vengeful lunatic before she even started acting ‘funny’.


Cornflower Blue said:


> And there was me thinking she was a singer....


Hey, she gets the best of both worlds.


Annawakes said:


> An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:
> 
> _“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_
> 
> I resent that!!!


and don’t forget ‘three is the most evil and environmentally irresponsible thing you can do…now excuse me I have to go catch my private jet to go look at oats in China’


----------



## periogirl28

muddledmint said:


> Also, wtf was she wearing on the show. Her studio outfit with those dowdy pants hiked up practically to her bra line and hideous poofy blouse was so unflattering (as usual). And why couldn’t she wear something normal for the street market scene. Like jeans and sneakers or something. She looked so dumb and overdressed wearing stilettos and that dress and baggy coat combo.


You know I was thinking this exactly.


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times, that hair of hers is entirely the wrong thickness and style for her head and she just looks like a wet spaniel. She should get down to the wig shop and change it up  because we all know that’s not coming out of her scalp anyway.



Yes! So much yes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

muddledmint said:


> Also, wtf was she wearing on the show. Her studio outfit with those dowdy pants hiked up practically to her bra line and hideous poofy blouse was so unflattering (as usual). And why couldn’t she wear something normal for the street market scene. Like jeans and sneakers or something. She looked so dumb and overdressed wearing stilettos and that dress and baggy coat combo.


The “assistant” wore a better tailored outfit. Which probably cost a tenth of whatever Pwincess Mew Mew was wearing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xeyes said:


> And now, your moment of Enty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #15
> 
> 
> The alliterate one told the exact same story almost a decade ago about a different boyfriend she was dating at the time. She is becoming ver...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



As I refuse to go near that Ellen segment: which story?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:
> 
> _“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_
> 
> I resent that!!!



What an idiotic statement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks @QueenofWrapDress for your #13 nickname, Stupid Cow, that needs no explanation. Congratulations and welcome to the Busy Bee Club.



That's not a nickname, that's an insult  (probably for the cow)


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I refuse to go near that Ellen segment: which story?



Apparently it’s the Halloween party story where they dress up and no one knew it was them…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She really is completely mental.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:
> 
> _“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_
> 
> I resent that!!!


“A hobby”???  Well considering how uncomfortable she looks holding Archie, I’d say she needs to put a lot more time into her hobby with both her spawn.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> My guess is that they have a lucrative deal with People magazine, which treats them favorably, for a "Home for the Holidays" cover reveal of the kids next month, which she thinks will upstage any photos of the Cambridge kids' Christmas with Great Gran.


Maybe this year’s picture will be like a Monet except less pixelated.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Or the new photo is from a while ago…




He certainly looks younger, so maybe it's an old photo (trying to be nice here ) .


----------



## lazeny

Chanbal said:


>




OMG what is going on with her pants?!

I feel so strongly about this. MM and I have the same body type and I know enough not to wear something like THAT. Christ.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watching the clip of MM with this IFB thing in her ear, I get a creepy feeling she was wearing one from day 1.  The engagement interview looks and sounds like it was staged. Perhaps this is why she does her hair like this. Something to think about.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She never stops, does she.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Apparently it’s the Halloween party story where they dress up and no one knew it was them…


I mean tbf, no one would know who she was about a decade ago,
I can’t imagine anyone running over to her at a party and saying:-
“OMG! Are you the girl who was tossing that greasy meat  in that advert? Please can I have your autograph? I’m such a fan!”

And now of course, no one at the party would be asking for her autograph, disguise or no disguise.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> She never stops, does she.



Ethnic hair?

She really is the more incompetent version of Rachel Dolezal isn’t she?

It is so sad the only way she portrays black and mixed identity is being a bullied outcast. 
She’s actually terrible representation for mixed race people.


----------



## kemilia

BVBookshop said:


> This latest stunt prompted me to write. I truly don’t get MM's. Here’s someone, who managed to get into the BRF, not just any royal family, and behaves like this. She would rather throw the privileges of BRF (think diplomatic status, titles, lifetime income, etc) than follow their tradition and duties. She had an incredibly rare opportunity to do good with her privileges but no….
> 
> it's almost abnormal. There are countless examples of commoners marrying into rich or royal families and none is like MM.
> 
> Now she is desperate and, while her in-laws look appropriately grand and royal at an event, *she* *was pranked by Ellen*
> 
> We can argue on how she gets access but whatever it is, getting into BRF is like winning a lottery. Lesser royal or rich families impose stricter 'checks' before allowing just anyone to get close to them. Let alone marry.
> 
> Sorry if I ramble. I just can’t wrap my head around it


Exactly!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She never stops, does she.



Ethnic hair...  
This is going to pop up in my mind at inopportune times (like zooming with the boss) and I'll be making constipated expressions to stop myself from giggling.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lazeny said:


> OMG what is going on with her pants?!
> 
> I feel so strongly about this. MM and I have the same body type and I know enough not to wear something like THAT. Christ.



I bet you also know your size.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Ethnic hair?
> 
> She really is the more incompetent version of Rachel Dolezal isn’t she?
> 
> It is so sad the only way she portrays black and mixed identity is being a bullied outcast.
> She’s actually terrible representation for mixed race people.



I was completely distracted by yet again another lie, but your observation is so much worse really.


----------



## marietouchet

I finally watched some of the interview, could not stand to do all

1. the CRUSTY the clown hair issues ... oh dear ... trying to appeal to a certain demographic ON PURPOSE , I will leave it at that ...
2. The stuff outside - baby bottle - there are no words, embarrassing for HER personally 
3. The comment about family leave .... OK even the VIEW discusses family leave so it has to be expected on fluffy afternoon TV

A disjointed cornucopia of word salad nonsense, but overall, she stayed away from dissing the in-laws , good for that


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I finally watched some of the interview, could not stand to do all
> 
> 1. the CRUSTY the clown hair issues ... oh dear ... trying to appeal to a certain demographic ON PURPOSE , I will leave it at that ...
> 2. The stuff outside - baby bottle - there are no words, embarrassing for HER personally
> 3. The comment about family leave .... OK even the VIEW discusses family leave so it has to be expected on fluffy afternoon TV
> 
> A disjointed cornucopia of word salad nonsense, but overall, she stayed away from dissing the in-laws , good for that


 It looks like Ellen's questions were reviewed and approved by Ms. Markle's PR team ahead of time, so no surprises…


----------



## Chanbal

Renommée universelle!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> My guess is that they have a lucrative deal with People magazine, which treats them favorably, for a "Home for the Holidays" cover reveal of the kids next month, which she thinks will upstage any photos of the Cambridge kids' Christmas with Great Gran.


they may get attention from that if it happens but in terms of upstaging the Cambridge kids, maybe in the US if they get more coverage but those Cambridge kids are adorable, esp Charlotte.  No way an infant is going to out-do them and from what I've seen, Archie isn't all that special looking
Sounds awful comparing little kids


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> Apparently it’s the Halloween party story where they dress up and no one knew it was them…



They should try that every day - they wouldn’t be nearly as annoying if no one knew who they were.    Or at least I think not!!


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> they may get attention from that if it happens but in terms of upstaging the Cambridge kids, maybe in the US if they get more coverage but those Cambridge kids are adorable, esp Charlotte.  No way an infant is going to out-do them and from what I've seen, Archie isn't all that special looking
> Sounds awful comparing little kids


The tag line on the cover could read, “A PEOPLE Exclusive: Megan and Harry Share Their Hobbies, Archie and Lily”


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Ethnic hair?
> 
> She really is the more incompetent version of Rachel Dolezal isn’t she?
> 
> It is so sad the only way she portrays black and mixed identity is being a bullied outcast.
> *She’s actually terrible representation for mixed race people.*


My children are mixed race and are proud to be BOTH.  They don't flip flop between their races to whatever is convenient at that moment.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It looks like Ellen's questions were reviewed and approved by Ms. Markle's PR team ahead of time, so no surprises…



Of course!  She needs time to come up with some "funny, cute" anecdotes that really didn't happen!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> My children are mixed race and are proud to be BOTH.  They don't flip flop between their races to whatever is convenient at that moment.


and Meghan hasn't worn her natural hair since that traumatic inicident in junior HS....but she is so proud to be a WOC


----------



## Chanbal

The title says it all. 
*PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like such a gormless desperate reality TV star on her vomit-making Ellen cheese-fest that even a Kardashian would have deemed this humiliating fiasco too brand-damaging*









						PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like a desperate reality TV star on Ellen
					

PIERS MORGAN: The Ellen debacle exposed Markle's desire to be a jobbing C-list reality TV celebrity, not a jobbing A-list royal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

How a good friend make you look so ridiculous?!!  Unless you have grievances…
 lowest type of humor… awful for the BRF… so gross
Do I like her? She has been so rude…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One more entertaining video…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## V0N1B2

I'm unable to see/open a single linked tweet. I assume there is some unfavourable news or photos of her somewhere?


----------



## bellecate

Annawakes said:


> An excerpt from the daily Mail article linked in post 79,562:
> 
> _“The Duchess said: 'Someone told H (Harry) and I that when you have one kid it's a hobby, and two children is parenting.”_
> 
> I resent that!!!


And how many Nannies do they employ? How much time does she actually spend parenting? And no #6's wife, pap walks don't count as parenting time.


----------



## TC1

I have never understood those "bits" that Ellen does where she tells you what to do and say via ear piece. Would SHE do whatever she was told if someone was in HER ear? doubtful, I can't stand Ellen.


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> I'm unable to see/open a single linked tweet. I assume there is some unfavourable news or photos of her somewhere?


----------



## andrashik

I am shocked that she stooped so low . She looks ridiculous


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> they may get attention from that if it happens but in terms of upstaging the Cambridge kids, maybe in the US if they get more coverage but those Cambridge kids are adorable, esp Charlotte.  No way an infant is going to out-do them and from what I've seen, Archie isn't all that special looking
> Sounds awful comparing little kids


But people inevitably will.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The title says it all.
> *PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like such a gormless desperate reality TV star on her vomit-making Ellen cheese-fest that even a Kardashian would have deemed this humiliating fiasco too brand-damaging*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like a desperate reality TV star on Ellen
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: The Ellen debacle exposed Markle's desire to be a jobbing C-list reality TV celebrity, not a jobbing A-list royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He's not wrong.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I finally watched some of the interview, could not stand to do all
> 
> 1. the CRUSTY the clown hair issues ... oh dear ... trying to appeal to a certain demographic ON PURPOSE , I will leave it at that ...
> 2. The stuff outside - baby bottle - there are no words, embarrassing for HER personally
> 3. The comment about family leave .... OK even the VIEW discusses family leave so it has to be expected on fluffy afternoon TV
> 
> A disjointed cornucopia of word salad nonsense, but overall, she stayed away from dissing the in-laws , good for that



Wasn’t [isn’t] her mother a make-up artist? Wouldn’t she know hair stylists too? 
Feels like the bizarro world









						Doria Ragland - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



an American social worker, and former makeup artist and yoga instructor.


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> I have never understood those "bits" that Ellen does where she tells you what to do and say via ear piece. Would SHE do whatever she was told if someone was in HER ear? doubtful, I can't stand Ellen.


Her talk show was entertaining for a while, but then it got mean spirited, just like her prime time game show where couples often humiliate each other while chasing points. Is that the next step for the Hapless Harkles? 

David Letterman did the ear thing first, but it was funny. This was just sad and humiliating.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Old Hollywood believe there was no bad press. Even if the press was negative, at least people were talking about the actor so he/she stayed in people’s minds.  Well, times have changed. *There is bad press.* Fergie helped us all to realize the entitled, privileged royals really ought not complain e.v.e.r.

Ellen has always loved the gross, low level humor. This was just more of that. But, but, now she showed us how this IFB works.  H&M (and many others  ) have been using these all along. Imo.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wasn’t [isn’t] her mother a make-up artist? Wouldn’t she know hair stylists too?
> Feels like the bizarro world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> an American social worker, and former makeup artist and yoga instructor.


The entire point of the hair discussion was to gain sympathy from a certain demographic by painting herself as a victim of  the " I AM JUST LIKE YOU - WITH DIFFICULT HAIR" problem- a Me Too thing 

It is like the her suicidal moments of despair in the UK - help was all around her - but help did not materialize  - and she was a victim of the evil HR department of the BRF - they turned her down


----------



## csshopper

Here's a reality check for the woman who claims she wants to influence world leaders, be a savy businesswoman with a multi million dollar Foundation, and be esteemed by the world.  Just for starters and feel free to add additional references: Would Michelle or Angelina or Reese or Ahmal have listened to the voice of a bully in their ear and made themselves a rollicking world wide laughing stock in an effort to be "relatable". Relatable to who? I don't know any adult who squats in the street, or greedily sucks a baby bottle while spouting inanities. We could go on. 

And, the women I cited above, in addition to all of their professional accomplishments, have another trait in common, parenting that does not appear to be a "hobby." Having one child is a "hobby"????? Poor Archie may feel more love from the chickens. God help him if he hadn't had a sibling so his mother and father could figure out parenting (by their definition, whatever that is) takes more time.

A life long friend, from our college days in the '60's, a WOC, is incandescent with rage over this debacle. Her take on it: "That Phony Beige Beech let some blond bully debase her in front of the world. It feels like the days of being made to do what we were told to do by the Master and as a WOC it does NOT feel good."


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The entire point of the hair discussion was to gain sympathy from a certain demographic by painting herself as a victim of  the " I AM JUST LIKE YOU - WITH DIFFICULT HAIR" problem- a Me Too thing
> 
> It is like the her suicidal moments of despair in the UK - help was all around her - but help did not materialize  - and she was a victim of the evil HR department of the BRF - they turned her down



Yes, from a pre-teen, it’s one thing to tell these stories - girls love to experiment. To emphasize it as a 40+ year old twice-divorced woman is indicative of some serious issues within herself. My impression is that she tells these unflattering stories because she is desperate to fit in. She _thinks_ we, the hoi poloi, have her on a high pedestal, so she needs to make the extra effort to seem common.  Such a juvenile move, no one is putting her on that pedestal except herself, plus it never works to make oneself seem less than what she is. It is arrogance, it is entitlement, it is gross.  Fergie tried to connect in this same manner.  Epic fail. Epic disconnect.  IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

As a commenter said, I doubt many of us think of MM as royal, as untouchable, as superior to us.  I do not think of any royal in that way - that ship sailed ages ago. Maybe the royals think of themselves like that. If so, they need a reality check.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> I have never understood those "bits" that Ellen does where she tells you what to do and say via ear piece. Would SHE do whatever she was told if someone was in HER ear? doubtful, I can't stand Ellen.


I came across an episode while channel surfing where she had Adam Levine doing this.  have to admit I found it pretty hilarious.  I haven't watched Meghan's episode (nor will I) but maybe she figures if movie stars have done these things for ellen, it's good enough for her.  I don't know who else besides Adam has done this but I assume others have.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Here's a reality check for the woman who claims she wants to influence world leaders, be a savy businesswoman with a multi million dollar Foundation, and be esteemed by the world.  Just for starters and feel free to add additional references: Would Michelle or Angelina or Reese or Ahmal have listened to the voice of a bully in their ear and made themselves a rollicking world wide laughing stock in an effort to be "relatable". Relatable to who? I don't know any adult who squats in the street, or greedily sucks a baby bottle while spouting inanities. We could go on.
> 
> And, the women I cited above, in addition to all of their professional accomplishments, have another trait in common, parenting that does not appear to be a "hobby." Having one child is a "hobby"????? Poor Archie may feel more love from the chickens. God help him if he hadn't had a sibling so his mother and father could figure out parenting (by their definition, whatever that is) takes more time.
> 
> A life long friend, from our college days in the '60's, a WOC, is incandescent with rage over this debacle. Her take on it: "That Phony Beige Beech let some blond bully debase her in front of the world. It feels like the days of being made to do what we were told to do by the Master and as a WOC it does NOT feel good."


It would appear she has decided that since the world doesn't want to take her seriously, why should she even try to be serious anymore? In the US making a fool of yourself on TV is very lucrative, and that's what she seems to be after at this point. Somebody's gotta pay that big mortgage and the staff salaries.


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> My children are mixed race and are proud to be BOTH.  They don't flip flop between their races to whatever is convenient at that moment.


I'm mixed race.  Thank you for posting this!


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> they may get attention from that if it happens but in terms of upstaging the Cambridge kids, maybe in the US if they get more coverage but those Cambridge kids are adorable, esp Charlotte.  No way an infant is going to out-do them and from what I've seen, Archie isn't all that special looking
> Sounds awful comparing little kids


It does depend who is playing him though.


TC1 said:


> I have never understood those "bits" that Ellen does where she tells you what to do and say via ear piece. Would SHE do whatever she was told if someone was in HER ear? doubtful, I can't stand Ellen.


First time I’ve ever seen this and I can’t stand it, all she’s doing is making some extras (hopefully rather than actual bystanders) uncomfortable for their own amusement. They all know that because the people are celebrities and it’s being recorded the stall holders will have to endure it through gritted teeth. I mean you might as well put the peasants in jester costumes and pelt them with tomatoes at least then they’d know when the ordeal is over.

Does this segment predate Sachs Baron Cohen’s bit because if she’s stolen it off him she’s completely missed how this concept works


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It would appear she has decided that since the world doesn't want to take her seriously, why should she even try to be serious anymore? In the US making a fool of yourself on TV is very lucrative, and that's what she seems to be after at this point. Somebody's gotta pay that big mortgage and the staff salaries.



Again, she is following Fergie.  Big mistake.


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> I came across an episode while channel surfing where she had Adam Levine doing this.  have to admit I found it pretty hilarious.  I haven't watched Meghan's episode (nor will I) but maybe she figures if movie stars have done these things for ellen, it's good enough for her.  I don't know who else besides Adam has done this but I assume others have.


I've seen the one with David Beckham and Dennis Quaid. Both cringe worthy.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, from a pre-teen, it’s one thing to tell these stories - girls love to experiment. To emphasize it as a 40+ year old twice-divorced woman is indicative of some serious issues within herself. My impression is that she tells these unflattering stories because she is desperate to fit in. She _thinks_ we, the hoi poloi, have her on a high pedestal, so she needs to make the extra effort to seem common.  Such a juvenile move, no one is putting her on that pedestal except herself, plus it never works to make oneself seem less than what she is. It is arrogance, it is entitlement, it is gross.  Fergie tried to connect in this same manner.  Epic fail. Epic disconnect.  IMO


yes, her reminiscing about the days when she had to audition and apparently (even with dad's help) couldn't afford to fix her car door, only seems to me to be a way to say "look how far I've come.  I used to have to work like the rest of you"


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I came across an episode while channel surfing where she had Adam Levine doing this.  have to admit I found it pretty hilarious.  I haven't watched Meghan's episode (nor will I) but maybe she figures if movie stars have done these things for ellen, it's good enough for her.  I don't know who else besides Adam has done this but I assume others have.


If she had done this as Meghan Markle, TV star, people would have laughed it off. But the fact is, as long as she is married to Harry she still represents the BRF and should conduct herself with a little more decorum. After this though that could be coming to an end soon too.


----------



## muddledmint

sdkitty said:


> and Meghan hasn't worn her natural hair since that traumatic inicident in junior HS....but she is so proud to be a WOC


You know, I hesitate to say this because it’s a sensitive issue, would she have _any_ fans or supporters if she weren’t half black? Would anyone like a lying phony social climber with no style and a meh personality and a mediocre career as a d list actress if it weren’t for the fact that she is a POC? Especially since that is an aspect of her identity that she mostly seemed to hide until it became beneficial to her. It’s really the only thing she has going for her right now. That and the fact that she’s jumped on the woke bandwagon.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> If she had done this as Meghan Markle, TV star, people would have laughed it off. But the fact is, as long as she is married to Harry she still represents the BRF and should conduct herself with a little more decorum. After this though that could be coming to an end soon too.


and even if she isn't royal (which to me she is not) she is using the title


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I think she's decided "F*ck it, no matter what I do I will always be compared negatively to Princess Perfect, so I'm just gonna go for the big bucks in daytime talk TV". It could work for her. We don't like her around here, but we know that there are plenty of others who do.





sdkitty said:


> eww
> your probably right
> But again - how many stans does she have?
> I think most people don't care about her one way or the other



.. yeah, I'm sure she would like something like that .. a "Talk Show", you know .. kind of like Oprah and/or Ellen (IMO .. she would likely try the Oprah theme).  BUT, BUT, BUT .. let me say this .. 

I had a friend in this type of BIZ in NYC .. she was (in essence) the booker of Talent .. which meant that she had to FIRST get that Talent, talk to them, set up how much $$$$$ and 'perks' they needed (yes, this is a big thing .. some like certain foods or booze), find the right 'slot' for said Talent (in other words, some would say "you cannot put me on a Monday Night") .. and so on.  So, it's not necessarily easy to get the Talent in the first place  -AND-  the Talent has to believe that being on the show would boost them (whatever project, movie, whatever) they are in!  Just based on what we've seen in regards to the H'Wood 'A' list folks and their resistance to associate with these 2 .. who would come on her "Talk Show"????? 
More importantly (and said this before) .. she would likely never let the Talent speak because .. you know, SHE is the SMARTEST person in the world and would HAVE TO speak her 'TRUTH' .. blah blah blah.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> My children are mixed race and are proud to be BOTH.  They don't flip flop between their races to whatever is convenient at that moment.


And so they should be! Everyone’s background is interesting and it is always a part of who we are.

With Mewtwo, I feel like she only brings it up to lie about her past to try and gain sympathy. This latest lie about her hair is bizarre but relatively benign by her standards but it is still telling.  

I guess if she’s willing to manipulate and fabricate everything about her life for attention why should her ethnicity be any different?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> If she had done this as Meghan Markle, TV star, people would have laughed it off. But the fact is, as long as she is married to Harry she still represents the BRF and should conduct herself with a little more decorum. After this though that could be coming to an end soon too.



Looking at the catastrophe happening in Monaco, this could become even more painful to watch. Wallis and Ed’s story was before my time. Diana‘s story was awful enough, Fergie‘s was disturbing, Charlene‘s is creepy.  This one could be very ugly.  Ewwww.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> *With Mewtwo*, I feel like she only brings it up to lie about her past to try and gain sympathy. This latest lie about her hair is bizarre but relatively benign by her standards but it is still telling.
> 
> I guess if she’s willing to manipulate and fabricate everything about her life for attention why should her ethnicity be any different?



Meghan wishes she had the power of MewTwo! She is as destructive but she lacks the style.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

There isn't enough money in the world to get me to do what MM did on Ellen.  No amount of money, no promise of fame, would be worth the public embarrassment and ridicule.  I'd have told Ellen no way, no how, find someone else to amuse yourself with.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> There isn't enough money in the world to get me to do what MM did on Ellen.  No amount of money, no promise of fame, would be worth the public embarrassment and ridicule.  I'd have told Ellen no way, no how, find someone else to amuse yourself with.


Exactly!

One of the more disturbing aspects of this show is the report that MM had been given the script and list of questions ahead of time. She had every opportunity to say "no" and did not.

There are calls for her to finally be stripped of her title as an embarrassment to the RF, but I think it was The Body Language Guy on You Tube in one of his segments about narcissistic behaviors of hers who made an interesting observation. Although warranted, if they did, she would spin it as another example of victimization, "I was just trying to relate to the common people and those mean old people punished me for it." The RF's other choice is to try and ignore her and move on. No win for the RF. The BLG has an explanatory phrase for this kind of narcissistic behavior, which I can't remember at the moment.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The title says it all.
> *PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like such a gormless desperate reality TV star on her vomit-making Ellen cheese-fest that even a Kardashian would have deemed this humiliating fiasco too brand-damaging*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like a desperate reality TV star on Ellen
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: The Ellen debacle exposed Markle's desire to be a jobbing C-list reality TV celebrity, not a jobbing A-list royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's beyond my control and too difficult to resist. I must to this. 
 Thanks Piers Morgan and @Chanbal for your #28 nickname, A gormless desperate reality TV star on her vomit-making Ellen cheese-fest.  Congratulations and here is The List #28. 
And for your close cooperation with Piers Morgan in obtaining this magnificent description of MM, HMTQ offers you the use of her precious Cullinan Brooch. And from us to you, here's three rounds of .




ET post correct pic


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> There isn't enough money in the world to get me to do what MM did on Ellen.  No amount of money, no promise of fame, would be worth the public embarrassment and ridicule.  I'd have told Ellen no way, no how, find someone else to amuse yourself with.



Ellen convinced her to adopt a dog she didn't want when she was younger and unknown, maybe she is still intimidated by her to some degree.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Ellen convinced her to adopt a dog she didn't want when she was younger and unknown, maybe she is still intimidated by her to some degree.



I think it could have been a life goal of MM, to appear on Ellen, when Ellen wouldn't have anything to do with her at one point, so maybe she went along for that reason.  Still, you'd think that her PR people, her husband, somebody would have said, no, wait, this is going to be humiliating.  Ellen is using you for cheap laughs at your expense.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I think it could have been a life goal of MM, to appear on Ellen, when Ellen wouldn't have anything to do with her at one point, so maybe she went along for that reason.  Still, you'd think that her PR people, her husband, somebody would have said, no, wait, this is going to be humiliating.  Ellen is using you for cheap laughs at your expense.



It's not like other talk show hosts are knocking down her door for an interview. Fallon? Kimmel? Not even Colbert! Nope, they know she has limited appeal, and almost solely to women. Daytime is the best she can hope to get.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> Exactly!
> 
> One of the more disturbing aspects of this show is the report that MM had been given the script and list of questions ahead of time. She had every opportunity to say "no" and did not.
> 
> There are calls for her to finally be stripped of her title as an embarrassment to the RF, but I think it was The Body Language Guy on You Tube in one of his segments about narcissistic behaviors of hers who made an interesting observation. Although warranted, if they did, she would spin it as another example of victimization, "I was just trying to relate to the common people and those mean old people punished me for it." The RF's other choice is to try and ignore her and move on. No win for the RF. The BLG has an explanatory phrase for this kind of narcissistic behavior, which I can't remember at the moment.


So now common people behave like that? Common people value their dignity and call out hypocrisy. If she said that then common people should be humiliated as she’s mocking us.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking at the catastrophe happening in Monaco, this could become even more painful to watch. Wallis and Ed’s story was before my time. Diana‘s story was awful enough, Fergie‘s was disturbing, Charlene‘s is creepy.  This one could be very ugly.  Ewwww.


Haven't heard the latest out of Monaco but Charlene does not look like a happy person in photos.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Ellen convinced her to adopt a dog she didn't want when she was younger and unknown, maybe she is still intimidated by her to some degree.


I wouldn't say intimidated. More like wanting to be liked and accepted by a cool older girl as a freshman in high school. Also, I'm sure she sees how wealthy Ellen has become from her show and the mansion flipping that the show funded and she wants in on that action. Probably much more to her liking than having to come up with content for Netflix and Spotify.


----------



## Lodpah

Two things:

Her PR people dislike her intensely and Ellen was being trolling her in a mean way to humiliate MM.

I see a lawsuit against Ellen in the future from her.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "Looking at the catastrophe happening in Monaco..."


Sounds like she's finally had enough of the charade that their marriage has been from day one.


> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...0b095f1a_personalized-popularity-mab-strategy


----------



## muddledmint

Lodpah said:


> Two things:
> 
> Her PR people dislike her intensely and Ellen was being trolling her in a mean way to humiliate MM.
> 
> I see a lawsuit against Ellen in the future from her.


As enjoyable as that would be, I don’t think meghan would ever sue or complain. Doing so would be admitting that she was humiliated by Ellen and ended up looked like a fool. She has to save face. I love how all the headlines in the us say that meghan and Ellen pranked the street vendors. No. The vendors don’t give a f and were obviously thinking “what’s wrong with this crazy chick and who is she again.”  Ellen pranked meghan if anything.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's beyond my control and too difficult to resist. I must to this.
> Thanks Piers Morgan and @Chanbal for your #28 nickname, A gormless desperate reality TV star on her vomit-making Ellen cheese-fest.  Congratulations and here is The List #28.
> And for your close cooperation with Piers Morgan in obtaining this magnificent description of MM, HMTQ offers you the use of her precious Cullinan Brooch. And from us to you, here's three rounds of .
> View attachment 5254489
> View attachment 5254490
> 
> 
> ET post correct pic


Wow, the brooch is so beautiful. Thank you so much @Maggie Muggins


----------



## LittleStar88

I didn't watch the Ellen prank - did any of the people she came across know who she was? Or did she eventually have to tell them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Haven't heard the latest out of Monaco but Charlene does not look like a happy person in photos.



She's currently abroad (they didn't say where, could just be France) for treatment for "physical and mental exhaustion". She spent mere days with family before apparently Albert called in her siblings because she was so unwell.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Sounds like she's finally had enough of the charade that their marriage has been from day one.



Yeah I don't know what to make of it. For the longest time, when she looked at the verge of tears for years, I gave the benefit of the doubt...it took her years to get pregnant, so I credited fertility treatments and losses for her sadness. I do think a mental breakdown was a long time coming, what with her wildly inappropriate (for her position) shaved head? But I can't quite figure out if she just has mental health problems with no one to blame, Albert drove her mad (then again, his antics were an open secret long before they got married) or what else.

I do have a hard time believing she was forced to marry him or that they took her passport in the days leading to the wedding. This is a tiny principality in the middle of Europe, not some mysterious exotic country far, far away with a ruler who holds all the power.

That said, if she is completely sane and just has had enough as you say...there are two small children involved and I'm kind of tired of parents who have a hard time acting responsible.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> There isn't enough money in the world to get me to do what MM did on Ellen.  No amount of money, no promise of fame, would be worth the public embarrassment and ridicule.  I'd have told Ellen no way, no how, find someone else to amuse yourself with.



I am a commoner. I know of no one who does that $hit. No one. Imo it is a stupid Hwood stunt.  
That said, the titles and LoS should have been removed *long ago. *Let them cry and complain as loudly as they want. We have seen the truth. Charles and Diana did a lousy job of instilling respect in their youngest. He should apologize to all of us. Imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(to go back on topic, this includes parents who describe their child as a hobby and do everything they can to make sure they will be mocked mercilessly in school should they ever be allowed to leave the house)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am a commoner. I know of no one who does that $hit. No one. Imo it is a stupid Hwood stunt.
> That said, the titles and LoS should have been removed *long ago. *Let them cry and complain as loudly as they want. We have seen the truth. Charles and Diana did a lousy job of instilling respect in their youngest. He should apologize to all of us. Imo.



I've meant to ask for some time, what's LoS? I may be extremely slow to catch on, but I just can't figure it out.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's currently abroad (they didn't say where, could just be France) for treatment for "physical and mental exhaustion". She spent mere days with family before apparently Albert called in her siblings because she was so unwell.


I just read up on it in VF and DM. Sounds like she's finally had enough of the charade that the marriage has been since day one and/or she is severely depressed. None of it is terribly surprising.


----------



## Chanbal

Fama universale!


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've meant to ask for some time, what's LoS? I may be extremely slow to catch on, but I just can't figure it out.


Line of Succession


----------



## Chanbal

US continues refusing to report the obvious. Sunshine S is indeed powerful here. 

_*Meghan Markle*__* was widely praised in the US on Thursday evening following her light-hearted sitdown with comedian and veteran chatshow host Ellen DeGeneres. *While Sussex fans cooed over the video with many observing how "at peace" Meghan looked, the Duchess of Sussex and her husband Prince Harry have also been subject to heavy criticism following their recent outings.









						Harry and Meghan hit by 'devastating' backlash as France turns on Sussexes
					

PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle have faced "devastating" backlash in recent weeks with France's media lambasting the couple, a British journalist claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've meant to ask for some time, what's LoS? I may be extremely slow to catch on, but I just can't figure it out.



I use it for ‘line of succession’. I’m too lazy to type it out each time.


ETA:  yes, I know Hazzie will need to renounce his LoS which is a complicated procedure because the LoS was not given to him, so it cannot be removed. It is just easier for me to say _remove it. 
ETA2: _privately, I will admit I thought it made me sound like a cool insider  Now, I realize it just makes me sound like a tosser.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Sounds like she's finally had enough of the charade that their marriage has been from day one.


I just read a short bit about it.....didn't realize (or recall) that she was 20 years younger than Albert


----------



## Chanbal

MM lied because she was convinced that her messages would be kept private imo. Surprise, surprise… 










						Meghan’s private messages handed over with William’s approval
					

THE QUEEN'S former spokesperson has claimed he would "put my money on" Prince William and Kate having approval over the submission of private messages from Meghan Markle.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Jessica M must be saying . . . Karma!


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> US continues refusing to report the obvious. Sunshine S is indeed powerful here.
> 
> _*Meghan Markle*__* was widely praised in the US on Thursday evening following her light-hearted sitdown with comedian and veteran chatshow host Ellen DeGeneres. *While Sussex fans cooed over the video with many observing how "at peace" Meghan looked, the Duchess of Sussex and her husband Prince Harry have also been subject to heavy criticism following their recent outings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan hit by 'devastating' backlash as France turns on Sussexes
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle have faced "devastating" backlash in recent weeks with France's media lambasting the couple, a British journalist claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



That’s one writer’s opinion . . . Trying to make us commoners “like” her.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> That’s one writer’s opinion . . . Trying to make us commoners “like” her.


trouble is she doesn't think she's "common".....I think she is worse than common


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I don't know what to make of it. For the longest time, when she looked at the verge of tears for years, I gave the benefit of the doubt...it took her years to get pregnant, so I credited fertility treatments and losses for her sadness. I do think a mental breakdown was a long time coming, what with her wildly inappropriate (for her position) shaved head? But I can't quite figure out if she just has mental health problems with no one to blame, Albert drove her mad (then again, his antics were an open secret long before they got married) or what else.
> 
> I do have a hard time believing she was forced to marry him or that they took her passport in the days leading to the wedding. This is a tiny principality in the middle of Europe, not some mysterious exotic country far, far away with a ruler who holds all the power.
> 
> That said, if she is completely sane and just has had enough as you say...there are two small children involved and I'm kind of tired of parents who have a hard time acting responsible.


I too don't think she was forced or had her passport taken away as reported. I think she believed he'd be more discreet in his wandering though and now a third "love child" has popped up. It seems she has put up with a similar situation as her late MIL did, but today it's blasted around the world instead of whispered about in their circles. And she may have come into the marriage with depression. It's funny, I saw a picture in the DM of an apartment in Monaco above a chocolate shop to which she supposedly moved a few years ago, and I recognized the shop from when we stopped in Monte Carlo on a cruise two years ago. Who knows, while I was buying chocolate Charlene could have been upstairs pining away for a different life and plotting her escape.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I too don't think she was forced or had her passport taken away as reported. I think she believed he'd be more discreet in his wandering though and now a third "love child" has popped up. It seems she has put up with a similar situation as her late MIL did, but today it's blasted around the world instead of whispered about in their circles. And she may have come into the marriage with depression. It's funny, I saw a picture in the DM of an apartment in Monaco above a chocolate shop to which she supposedly moved a few years ago, and I recognized the shop from when we stopped in Monte Carlo on a cruise two years ago. Who knows, while I was buying chocolate Charlene could have been upstairs pining away for a different life and plotting her escape.


I didn't know that about a "love child" (or love children)


----------



## muddledmint

LittleStar88 said:


> I didn't watch the Ellen prank - did any of the people she came across know who she was? Or did she eventually have to tell them?


I couldn’t stand to watch the whole thing, but it started with her “assistant” going first to tell the street vendors that meghan was coming to shop and wanted to be treated like a normal person, not a celebrity, so everyone should act cool.


----------



## bag-mania

The Washington Post is defending the Ellen interview and even calling it a good idea. The author actually says it was “low-key.” To think this is one of the most respected newspapers in the country. The comments make up for it but there are a handful of rabid stans who refute each criticism as if her depends on it.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/11/19/meghan-markle-ellen-degeneres-interview/


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I didn't know that about a "love child" (or love children)


There are two that have been publicly acknowledged for years but now another one has come to light, born after they started dating but before they became engaged. I hate to link to the DM but usually they've got the dirt.



> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...Monaco-fight-paternity-claims-love-child.html


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> The Washington Post is defending the Ellen interview and even calling it a good idea. The author actually says it was “low-key.” To think this is one of the most respected newspapers in the country. The comments make up for it but there are a handful of rabid stans who refute each criticism as if her depends on it.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2021/11/19/meghan-markle-ellen-degeneres-interview/


Entertainment Tonight also presented it in a favorable light. Maybe we're the crazy ones. Or are we all just British at heart?


----------



## DeMonica

jelliedfeels said:


> I think the urge to be part of a group is very strong and a very old instinct rather than something new.
> if you look at us, a lot of us have mentioned our nationalities because we think it conveys something about ourselves, even a subtle difference like how some people refer to themselves as Welsh or Scottish whereas others go for British. However, the thing we all have in common, of course, is that a certain couple  cheeses us off and we find their fawning coverage to be irritating. Also, we all love the jokes.
> 
> I can see how if you grow up a bisexual trans man who loves trainspotting and abstract art in rural Romania, say, you are unlikely to meet anyone like you in person. However, the internet allows you to get this specific and talk to people who share your identity and interests from all over the world. I think this is a really good thing that helps people learn and feel like they belong.  The problem is  ‘when two tribes go to war a point is all that you can score.’


Humans are social animals, no-one denies it. Yet, peer pressure might push you to do things you wouldn't consider otherwise and might regret later, and it's a huge problem, especially when you are young and vulnerable. It's not a new thing, either, but the length you have to go to fit in groups has changed compared to how it was for example thirty years ago. It's much more radical and tribal now, and there's much less room for independent thinking or time for perusal before making a decision about life changing issues.
We are also back to 50's, 40s' or even the middle ages - because this is really medieval to be after someone's blood if the person raises absolutely legitimate questions the ruling ideologists don't like or disagrees with some of their principles. If you don't get on one bandwagon then you must be the part of the opposition, an enemy, and the idea that you might be just a sympathetic bystander is absolutely inconceivable according to the cancel culture rules. IMO that's also what happened Piers Morgan whom I'm not an avid follower of. Calling him a racist just because he questioned the allegations made by Hazzie and Horrid - and we all know how many of those allegations have been refuted since then - was all wrong.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Entertainment Tonight also presented it in a favorable light. *Maybe we're the crazy ones*. Or are we all just British at heart?



If we saw the way most Americans see her, only as a celebrity, no different than actors, singers, etc., we’d be fine. We wouldn’t know about all her phoniness and lies because we wouldn’t care enough to find out.


----------



## bubablu

charlottawill said:


> It seems she has put up with a similar situation as her late MIL did


Really? I didn't know that, tell me more.
If you like we have a new born thread https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/her-serene-highness-charlene-of-monaco.1047795/


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> There isn't enough money in the world to get me to do what MM did on Ellen.  No amount of money, no promise of fame, would be worth the public embarrassment and ridicule.  I'd have told Ellen no way, no how, find someone else to amuse yourself with.


Ellen is such a mean person. Why would anyone want to go on her show.  Most aren't desperate and we know she'll be happy to make you look stupid.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Ellen is such a mean person. Why would anyone want to go on her show.  Most aren't desperate and we know she'll be happy to make you look stupid.



In a way she is like Meghan. Ellen continues to benefit from all the years of popularity she had before news of her true nature was known. She likely has many fans who still don’t know what a mean woman she can be.

Meghan still has many fans who decided they liked her at the time of the wedding and are sticking with it.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

The Aussies again…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooh, is this how it’s done?

*Taylor Swift: White Mini Dress, Gold Pumps*
Posted by *Nazaret *on November 11, 2021
Leave a Comment





Taylor Swift on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon – photo: NBC
Taylor Swift appeared on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon wearing Zuhair Murad Resort 2022 Dress (Not available online), Nickho Rey Small Casey Hoop ($290.00) and Christian Louboutin So Kate Heels ($695.00 – wrong heel).


----------



## charlottawill

Really? I didn't know that, tell me more.
If you like we have a new born thread https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/her-serene-highness-charlene-of-monaco.1047795/
[/QUOTE]
Prince Rainier adored his wife but was not a faithful husband.


----------



## muddledmint

charlottawill said:


> Entertainment Tonight also presented it in a favorable light. Maybe we're the crazy ones. Or are we all just British at heart?


Nah, I think more and more Americans are starting to see meghan and Harry for what they really are. Washpo and nyt are notoriously woke, and it will take a lot for them to start producing critical coverage of meghan because she is liberal and POC. However, today I heard my favorite local morning radio show hosts making fun of her Ellen appearance and they are really liberal. So people here are starting to wake up and smell the coffee too. I think all the journalists fawning over her now are going to feel stupid in future.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> US continues refusing to report the obvious. Sunshine S is indeed powerful here.
> 
> _*Meghan Markle*__* was widely praised in the US on Thursday evening following her light-hearted sitdown with comedian and veteran chatshow host Ellen DeGeneres. *While Sussex fans cooed over the video with many observing how "at peace" Meghan looked, the Duchess of Sussex and her husband Prince Harry have also been subject to heavy criticism following their recent outings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan hit by 'devastating' backlash as France turns on Sussexes
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY and Meghan Markle have faced "devastating" backlash in recent weeks with France's media lambasting the couple, a British journalist claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


‘At peace’ aka dead 

well I’d be mortified too after that show.

I’m just so glad This happy couple  are able to enjoy a private life. Away from all the embarrassing demands and compromises the Royals asked of them and of course, far away from the villainous media. 



Chanbal said:


> MM lied because she was convinced that her messages would be kept private imo. Surprise, surprise…
> View attachment 5254593
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s private messages handed over with William’s approval
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN'S former spokesperson has claimed he would "put my money on" Prince William and Kate having approval over the submission of private messages from Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Unleash the kraken! Spill that tea!


----------



## jehaga

Chanbal said:


> The Aussies again…



Love Karl!


----------



## V0N1B2

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5254306


Thanks doll


----------



## carmen56

andrashik said:


> I am shocked that she stooped so low . She looks ridiculous



This must rate as the lowest point so far in the saga of Raptor and Hazbeen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

carmen56 said:


> This must rate as the lowest point so far in the saga of Raptor and Hazbeen.



They think it makes them cool and hip. Odd, when older people do this stuff, they call it dementia.


----------



## Allisonfaye

As usual, I can't keep up with this thread. Saw an article that MM is thinking of a political run and maybe eyeing Diane Feinstein's seat. I would lol but in the current climate, I could see her winning. Ugh.

*Meghan Markle could target 'key powerful seat' to 'leapfrog' into political office









						Meghan Markle could target 'key powerful seat' to 'leapfrog' into political office
					

MEGHAN MARKLE could "leapfrog" into top political office through a key California senate seat which may soon become vacant, says US political expert.




					www.express.co.uk
				



*


----------



## Chanbal

Great article… I still think Ellen has no respect for the achievements of "_the holder of case 24 on Deal or No Deal". _What she made Pump Pump do was very embarrassing… 


*I wonder what Kim Kardashian would have said if Ellen DeGeneres had invited her onto her daytime chat show to eat tortilla chips “like a chipmunk” and “drink milk” from a baby bottle before a live studio audience?* My guess is that it would have started with an *‘N’ and an ‘O*’ – a*nd ended with a click and a dial tone.*
But the Duchess of Sussex is, perhaps, less discerning. Certainly she’s more craven. And *with Meghan's carefully choreographed brand now damaged by the revelations heard by the Court of Appeal* earlier this month – where it emerged she had ‘misremembered’ various key points at the heart of her legal battle against Associated Newspapers – *it was time for a concerted repositioning.* Not in British minds, you understand (we no longer matter, if we ever did), but in the eyes of America, where her future lies.  
Because *that last sit down with Oprah didn’t go down quite as well as Meghan* had hoped with many of her countrymen and women, who, she seemed to have forgotten, have always been enormously fond of the Queen. And *after the Queen’s recent health problems, now seemed a good moment to position herself in a softer, warmer light.*
 To a*So the Duchess said yes.ll of it. Yes to “Aunty Ellen”.* Yes, to recasting herself as the game and affable “girl next door” in front of 1.5 million viewers and a studio full of middle-Americans in matching medical grade masks. Yes, to eating multiple tortilla chips like a chipmunk. Yes, to slugging from the baby bottle in her “prop purse”. Yes, to mewling like a cat whilst wearing cat ears, telling punchline-less elephant jokes, chanting “hot, hot, hot”, and squealing: “My boo loves hot sauce!”
It reached the stage where, like the royal commentator, Angela Levin, who Tweeted “I wonder whether Ellen DeGeneres has a grudge against Meghan and wanted her to look so foolish her career would crumble,” *I began to ask myself whether this might in fact be a prank within a prank. Whether it was part of a sophisticated, cruel game the 63-year-old TV host had decided to play to see how far the actress-turned-duchess she has previously mocked on the show* (*as “the holder of case 24 on *_*Deal or No Deal*_) *would go for the sake of celebrity?*
Because although much was made of the deep personal friendship these two are supposed to enjoy off screen, I was not convinced. It wasn’t just the inorganic anecdotes that were teed up like golf balls throughout the hour-long show (*not something a genuine friendship would necessitate*, one would think) or the gaping audience-aimed smiles held a fraction too long. No, *it was the slight glaze of Ellen’s eyes as Meghan recounted in enthusiastic detail how the two of them had first met a decade ago at an LA animal shelter* and bonded over a dog she was thinking of saving.
“*When Ellen tells you to take a dog, you take the dog!” Meghan chirruped excitedly. But of course Ellen didn’t remember any of this.* Because whereas back in 2012 the pretty young actress holding a dog was already dreaming of sitting opposite Ellen in a doily-sleeved £1,366 designer blouse and bringing the house down with her “cute” anecdotes, Meghan was of zero use to the TV host then. And *in Hollywood a friendship can only exist if you are mutually beneficial to one another: brand enhancing.* Why bother wasting your time with anything else?
For that reason and a few of her own, Meghan’s yeses just kept on coming. Yes, to the sharing of illustrations penned when she was younger and photographs from her childhood. Yes, to photographs of little Archie too, along with anecdotes about the dinosaur costume he hated so much he took it off. Then there was more in that same vein about five-month-old Lilibet: the teething, the sleep issues – all that 24-karat motherliness that screams: “I am normal! I am just like all of you!”
*Of course once you’ve been told that this woman deliberately chose to address her father as “daddy” in a letter, since “it would pull at the heartstrings” more efficiently if leaked, it’s quite hard not to be cynical about anything in the warm and fuzzy department. *But bar a couple of awkward moments where a giddy-eyed Meghan failed to be recompensed with the “ooh”, “ahh”, “aww” or burst of applause she’d expected when handing over a particularly juicy intimacy, Ellen’s audience lapped it up.
If there was any confusion in these peoples’ minds as to precisely how the commodification of these private nuggets squared with the duchess’s desire for privacy, you couldn’t tell. And given Americans’ unapologetic consumerism, maybe there was nothing uncomfortable about Meghan portraying the children’s book she was there to flog, _The Bench_, as a private “poem for my husband on Father’s Day… about my observation of him being a dad, which was the most beautiful thing to watch.”
*Maybe the message that Meghan’s “intention” had never been to “share” that book with anyone but “a couple of friends”, and that it had basically been published and ruthlessly promoted quite by accident, didn’t hit a bum note over there. But over here in the UK? As Ellen robotically recited the plug for The Bench just seconds later, it was viewing-through-parted-fingers time. * 
One thing about this curdled mess of an interview was a relief. And that was the dialling down of the victim narrative the Duchess of Sussex has bought into so vigorously in the past. I mean, I’d take “cheeky, cheerful Meghan” over her doleful Oprah alter ego anytime. Indeed, as a former _Suits_ fan, I remember thinking that the actress playing Rachel Zane had natural comic timing and ability. That said, there were a couple of early instances in Meghan’s Ellen interview where one felt she had to catch herself and stop it there, before the ‘woe is me’ sucked her under.
Remembering how Harry came to visit her in Toronto one October early on in their relationship, Meghan recounted how – along with his cousin Eugenie and her now husband Jack Brooksbank – the four of them “snuck out in Halloween costumes to just have one fun night on the town before it was out in the world that we were a couple.” Unable to hold back a telling repetition, the Duchess of Sussex went on: “It was a post-apocalypse theme. So we had all this very bizarre costuming on and we were able to just sort of have one, final, fun night out.” Because it’s been drudgery from that moment on. But isn’t Meghan holding up well?


----------



## Chanbal

Sunshine's propaganda on CNN. I used to respect CNN (a lot!)…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The title says it all.
> *PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like such a gormless desperate reality TV star on her vomit-making Ellen cheese-fest that even a Kardashian would have deemed this humiliating fiasco too brand-damaging*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Meghan behaved like a desperate reality TV star on Ellen
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: The Ellen debacle exposed Markle's desire to be a jobbing C-list reality TV celebrity, not a jobbing A-list royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"*Gormless*". I just learned a new word!  This forum is educational in so many ways!


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> *I am shocked that she stooped so low .* She looks ridiculous


Quite literally.  In heels.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wasn’t [isn’t] her mother a make-up artist? Wouldn’t she know hair stylists too?
> Feels like the bizarro world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> an American social worker, and former makeup artist and yoga instructor.


Doria's resume, just like Meg's, seems to grow by the minute.  Is there anything this woman can't do?


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I think it could have been a life goal of MM, to appear on Ellen, when Ellen wouldn't have anything to do with her at one point, so maybe she went along for that reason.  *Still, you'd think that her PR people, her husband, somebody would have said, no, wait, this is going to be humiliating*.  Ellen is using you for cheap laughs at your expense.


Even if they did, MM probably wouldn't have listened to their advice anyway, since she always knows best.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooh, is this how it’s done?
> 
> *Taylor Swift: White Mini Dress, Gold Pumps*
> Posted by *Nazaret *on November 11, 2021
> Leave a Comment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taylor Swift on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon – photo: NBC
> Taylor Swift appeared on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon wearing Zuhair Murad Resort 2022 Dress (Not available online), Nickho Rey Small Casey Hoop ($290.00) and Christian Louboutin So Kate Heels ($695.00 – wrong heel).
> 
> 
> View attachment 5254669


well, taylor is built like a model...super tall and slender...Meghan isn't that


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The Aussies again…



He starts laughing at the first sentence  
I love the Aussies!

And, WTF?  She's the first to think about how your first child adjusts?  Mmmmkay.  What a freaking dumba$$.  WTF is worried about how a new baby "adjusts" to having an older sibling?  They know nothing else!  It's the older child(red) you worry about!


----------



## TC1

I'm a parent of an only child. Whew, it sure hasn't felt like a hobby for the last 18 years!  
Perhaps If I lived in a mansion and were unemployed, it would feel like that. Oh, and with a brigade of hired help *shrug*
FFS this woman is just down right stupid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I don't know what to make of it. For the longest time, when she looked at the verge of tears for years, I gave the benefit of the doubt...it took her years to get pregnant, so I credited fertility treatments and losses for her sadness. I do think a mental breakdown was a long time coming, what with her wildly inappropriate (for her position) shaved head? But I can't quite figure out if she just has mental health problems with no one to blame, Albert drove her mad (then again, his antics were an open secret long before they got married) or what else.
> 
> I do have a hard time believing she was forced to marry him or that they took her passport in the days leading to the wedding.* This is a tiny principality in the middle of Europe, not some mysterious exotic country far, far away with a ruler who holds all the power.*
> 
> That said, if she is completely sane and just has had enough as you say...there are two small children involved and I'm kind of tired of parents who have a hard time acting responsible.


OT
It's small in territory but much bigger financially. Unfortunately, rulers of even much less wealthy countries can abuse their power in ways you wouldn't think it's possible. I hope she's just unwell and receiving a treatment, and not a Princess Latifa scenario.


----------



## Handbag1234

I was cringing through the short clip I could bear to watch. She must be really desperate. Bet the royal family had a snigger behind closed doors


----------



## xincinsin

A Sussex insider spinning a tall tale... just boggles the mind what they can churn out to make Methane look good.








						Kate and William will 'be playing by' Meghan's rules when visiting US
					

KATE MIDDLETON and Prince William may travel to the US next year and they are expected to visit Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But what will their stay at Meghan's £11million Los Angeles home be like?




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## muddledmint

TC1 said:


> I'm a parent of an only child. Whew, it sure hasn't felt like a hobby for the last 18 years!
> Perhaps If I lived in a mansion and were unemployed, it would feel like that. Oh, and with a brigade of hired help *shrug*
> FFS this woman is just down right stupid.


Right? That comment was so insulting to parents who have one child.


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> Doria's resume, just like Meg's, seems to grow by the minute.  Is there anything this woman can't do?


Well. For starters they can’t tell the truth!


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> A Sussex insider spinning a tall tale... just boggles the mind what they can churn out to make Methane look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate and William will 'be playing by' Meghan's rules when visiting US
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON and Prince William may travel to the US next year and they are expected to visit Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But what will their stay at Meghan's £11million Los Angeles home be like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Are they out of their mind? This is unbelievable! I hope at least they fly in different planes... 

"_Reports claim the US trip early next year will be part of a royal tour and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will stop in California along the way.

When they visit California they will likely stay at Meghan's £11million Montecito home with their three children, Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis.

“Meghan would like some show of commitment from William and Kate._"


----------



## Sophisticatted

That article seems to be “ from the Mind of Meg”.  I noted that it was “HER house” in the article, as if Harry doesn’t share ownership.

There’s no way W&K will stay with them.  DREAM ON, Sussexes.


----------



## DeMonica

xincinsin said:


> A Sussex insider spinning a tall tale... just boggles the mind what they can churn out to make Methane look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate and William will 'be playing by' Meghan's rules when visiting US
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON and Prince William may travel to the US next year and they are expected to visit Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But what will their stay at Meghan's £11million Los Angeles home be like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


We can so picture Meagain dusting the guest room, changing the linen, cooking a welcome dinner, baking an olive lemon cake, right?  I might be wrong or just lacking imagination, but I  can't see much chance for this fairy tale story playing out in reality.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> OT
> It's small in territory but much bigger financially. Unfortunately, rulers of even much less wealthy countries can abuse their power in ways you wouldn't think it's possible. I hope she's just unwell and receiving a treatment, and not a Princess Latifa scenario.



Yeah. Monaco isn't Dubai.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> A Sussex insider spinning a tall tale... just boggles the mind what they can churn out to make Methane look good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate and William will 'be playing by' Meghan's rules when visiting US
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON and Prince William may travel to the US next year and they are expected to visit Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. But what will their stay at Meghan's £11million Los Angeles home be like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Won't that be after publishing date?  I doubt any of the Windsors will want to visit after that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“Meghan would like some show of commitment from William and Kate._"



Oh would she. Now I would like for her to shut up and go away, if she could see to this first? 

Seriously, who are these people putting out stuff like that that makes her look even more rude and delusional? They can't think they are doing her a favour?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I remember Lady C's commentary on that plane crash comment. To make it even worse, while I assume everyone else was staring at her in horror because WTFFF, she LAUGHED.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I too don't think she was forced or had her passport taken away as reported. I think she believed he'd be more discreet in his wandering though and now a third "love child" has popped up. It seems she has put up with a similar situation as her late MIL did, but today it's blasted around the world instead of whispered about in their circles. And she may have come into the marriage with depression. It's funny, I saw a picture in the DM of an apartment in Monaco above a chocolate shop to which she supposedly moved a few years ago, and I recognized the shop from when we stopped in Monte Carlo on a cruise two years ago. Who knows, while I was buying chocolate Charlene could have been upstairs pining away for a different life and plotting her escape.


Ooooooooh - do you have a link for that picture @charlottawill ?!?!?!  We spent a fair amount of time in Monaco when we holidayed in the South of France, and I recall going into a Chocolate store there .. would love to see the pic!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooooh - do you have a link for that picture @charlottawill ?!?!?!  We spent a fair amount of time in Monaco when we holidayed in the South of France, and I recall going into a Chocolate store there .. would love to see the pic!











						Princess Charlene may NOT move back to the palace
					

EXCLUSIVE: Chantell Wittstock, Charlene's sister-in-law and PR for her charitable Foundation in South Africa, told MailOnline the royal has still not decided where she will 'settle' in Monaco.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Oooh juicy…





__





						Blind Item #8
					

With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the famil...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				




*Blind Item #8*

With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the family will be aired, including of course that background report prepared about the alliterate one by the security services in advance of her marriage. That would mean of course other affairs involving the second in line would also be leaked. A truce might be the better way to go for them. For us, the public, the all out war would be best.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *I wonder what Kim Kardashian would have said if Ellen DeGeneres had invited her onto her daytime chat show to eat tortilla chips “like a chipmunk” and “drink milk” from a baby bottle before a live studio audience?* My guess is that it would have started with an *‘N’ and an ‘O*’ – a*nd ended with a click and a dial tone.*
> But the Duchess of Sussex is, perhaps, less discerning. Certainly she’s more craven. And *with Meghan's carefully choreographed brand now damaged by the revelations heard by the Court of Appeal* earlier this month – where it emerged she had ‘misremembered’ various key points at the heart of her legal battle against Associated Newspapers – *it was time for a concerted repositioning.* Not in British minds, you understand (we no longer matter, if we ever did), but in the eyes of America, where her future lies.
> Because *that last sit down with Oprah didn’t go down quite as well as Meghan* had hoped with many of her countrymen and women, who, she seemed to have forgotten, have always been enormously fond of the Queen. And *after the Queen’s recent health problems, now seemed a good moment to position herself in a softer, warmer light.*
> To a*So the Duchess said yes.ll of it. Yes to “Aunty Ellen”.* Yes, to recasting herself as the game and affable “girl next door” in front of 1.5 million viewers and a studio full of middle-Americans in matching medical grade masks. Yes, to eating multiple tortilla chips like a chipmunk. Yes, to slugging from the baby bottle in her “prop purse”. Yes, to mewling like a cat whilst wearing cat ears, telling punchline-less elephant jokes, chanting “hot, hot, hot”, and squealing: “My boo loves hot sauce!”
> It reached the stage where, like the royal commentator, Angela Levin, who Tweeted “I wonder whether Ellen DeGeneres has a grudge against Meghan and wanted her to look so foolish her career would crumble,” *I began to ask myself whether this might in fact be a prank within a prank. Whether it was part of a sophisticated, cruel game the 63-year-old TV host had decided to play to see how far the actress-turned-duchess she has previously mocked on the show* (*as “the holder of case 24 on *_*Deal or No Deal*_) *would go for the sake of celebrity?*
> Because although much was made of the deep personal friendship these two are supposed to enjoy off screen, I was not convinced. It wasn’t just the inorganic anecdotes that were teed up like golf balls throughout the hour-long show (*not something a genuine friendship would necessitate*, one would think) or the gaping audience-aimed smiles held a fraction too long. No, *it was the slight glaze of Ellen’s eyes as Meghan recounted in enthusiastic detail how the two of them had first met a decade ago at an LA animal shelter* and bonded over a dog she was thinking of saving.
> “*When Ellen tells you to take a dog, you take the dog!” Meghan chirruped excitedly. But of course Ellen didn’t remember any of this.* Because whereas back in 2012 the pretty young actress holding a dog was already dreaming of sitting opposite Ellen in a doily-sleeved £1,366 designer blouse and bringing the house down with her “cute” anecdotes, Meghan was of zero use to the TV host then. And *in Hollywood a friendship can only exist if you are mutually beneficial to one another: brand enhancing.* Why bother wasting your time with anything else?
> For that reason and a few of her own, Meghan’s yeses just kept on coming. Yes, to the sharing of illustrations penned when she was younger and photographs from her childhood. Yes, to photographs of little Archie too, along with anecdotes about the dinosaur costume he hated so much he took it off. Then there was more in that same vein about five-month-old Lilibet: the teething, the sleep issues – all that 24-karat motherliness that screams: “I am normal! I am just like all of you!”
> *Of course once you’ve been told that this woman deliberately chose to address her father as “daddy” in a letter, since “it would pull at the heartstrings” more efficiently if leaked, it’s quite hard not to be cynical about anything in the warm and fuzzy department. *But bar a couple of awkward moments where a giddy-eyed Meghan failed to be recompensed with the “ooh”, “ahh”, “aww” or burst of applause she’d expected when handing over a particularly juicy intimacy, Ellen’s audience lapped it up.
> If there was any confusion in these peoples’ minds as to precisely how the commodification of these private nuggets squared with the duchess’s desire for privacy, you couldn’t tell. And given Americans’ unapologetic consumerism, maybe there was nothing uncomfortable about Meghan portraying the children’s book she was there to flog, _The Bench_, as a private “poem for my husband on Father’s Day… about my observation of him being a dad, which was the most beautiful thing to watch.”
> *Maybe the message that Meghan’s “intention” had never been to “share” that book with anyone but “a couple of friends”, and that it had basically been published and ruthlessly promoted quite by accident, didn’t hit a bum note over there. But over here in the UK? As Ellen robotically recited the plug for The Bench just seconds later, it was viewing-through-parted-fingers time. *
> One thing about this curdled mess of an interview was a relief. And that was the dialling down of the victim narrative the Duchess of Sussex has bought into so vigorously in the past. I mean, I’d take “cheeky, cheerful Meghan” over her doleful Oprah alter ego anytime. Indeed, as a former _Suits_ fan, I remember thinking that the actress playing Rachel Zane had natural comic timing and ability. That said, there were a couple of early instances in Meghan’s Ellen interview where one felt she had to catch herself and stop it there, before the ‘woe is me’ sucked her under.
> Remembering how Harry came to visit her in Toronto one October early on in their relationship, Meghan recounted how – along with his cousin Eugenie and her now husband Jack Brooksbank – the four of them “snuck out in Halloween costumes to just have one fun night on the town before it was out in the world that we were a couple.” Unable to hold back a telling repetition, the Duchess of Sussex went on: “It was a post-apocalypse theme. So we had all this very bizarre costuming on and we were able to just sort of have one, final, fun night out.” Because it’s been drudgery from that moment on. But isn’t Meghan holding up well?



Let’s see, Kim Kardashian got to host Saturday Night Live and she was watched by millions. Meghan got to be the Thursday afternoon guest on the almost defunct Ellen show and was watched by a few. So no, even though we all hope Kim K’s popularity will eventually be over, she still has way more celebrity clout than Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I honestly don't mind Kim.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I just want to steal our favorite Desperate Ducka$s' thunder  

Did you guys know about this alleged joint christening? Kinda cool


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly don't mind Kim.



IMO I don’t mind KimK because she is [more or less] forthright about who she is, kinda like Paris.
H&M and other royals try to put themselves on a very high pedestal. It never works. Authentic, down-to-earth wins the day.



needlv said:


> Oooh juicy…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #8
> 
> 
> With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the famil...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Blind Item #8*
> 
> With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the family will be aired, including of course that background report prepared about the alliterate one by the security services in advance of her marriage. That would mean of course other affairs involving the second in line would also be leaked. A truce might be the better way to go for them. For us, the public, the all out war would be best.



_All-out war, it is time!  _


----------



## RAINDANCE

Reports of the joint christening popped up today. It's a very clever move IMO. Doing two babies at once will deflect criticism about expense but allow a fairly big core family gathering and show of solidarity. Expect plenty of good natured snaps from everyone on their way in and out of church and none of the pretentious  secrecy for Archie's.

Incidentally didn't Harry make a comment about only having one child (interpreted as a snide remarks to W&C at the time.) As the parent of an only child I too found Megan's  comment out of order.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly don't mind Kim.



She used to bother me more a few years ago but I have to admit much of that annoyance has waned. Maybe she is outlasting the criticism.


----------



## Sophisticatted

RAINDANCE said:


> Reports of the joint christening popped up today. It's a very clever move IMO. Doing two babies at once will deflect criticism about expense but allow a fairly big core family gathering and show of solidarity. Expect plenty of good natured snaps from everyone on their way in and out of church and none of the pretentious  secrecy for Archie's.



I agree with all of this.  I also think it’s a way to help the Queen through her first without Philip wedding anniversary.  It focuses on a joyful occasion, instead of on what’s missing.

I wonder if H&M were offered to have Lilibet included in this Christening.  Basically, “if you want to do it here, with and surrounded by family, you’re welcome; but NO special treatment.”


----------



## charlottawill

Allisonfaye said:


> As usual, I can't keep up with this thread. Saw an article that MM is thinking of a political run and maybe eyeing Diane Feinstein's seat. I would lol but in the current climate, I could see her winning. Ugh.
> 
> *Meghan Markle could target 'key powerful seat' to 'leapfrog' into political office
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle could target 'key powerful seat' to 'leapfrog' into political office
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE could "leapfrog" into top political office through a key California senate seat which may soon become vacant, says US political expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Nah, I don't buy it.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooooh - do you have a link for that picture @charlottawill ?!?!?!  We spent a fair amount of time in Monaco when we holidayed in the South of France, and I recall going into a Chocolate store there .. would love to see the pic!


I think it was in the DM. I'll see if I can find it. It had yellow awnings.


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly don't mind Kim.


Yeah, Kim earned her celebrity by putting in the work. Unlike Meghan, who married into it, quit her freaking easy job (of wearing nice clothes, shaking hands, and sharing a little bit of your life via the occasional photo, ummm kind of like what she does anyway now that she is free of the royal family), yet still demands the respect and title of her former job.


----------



## xincinsin

muddledmint said:


> Right? That comment was so insulting to parents who have one child.


Insulting to all parents, since all mums and dads start off with one child, apart from those fortunate enough to be blessed with twins or more. And what about those who adopt or foster, or the blended families? It's a pity so much crap spews forth from _thee_ mouth. Maybe she will found a (charity tax haven) support group for those who parent as a hobby and fawn on her as a career


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Well, why would she?  I'm sure her uncle was no use to her now, so markling makes perfect sense!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Interesting!



Not surprised at all at what he has highlighted. The Malignant one has no boundaries or filters, which makes her scarier than ever. She will knowingly debase herself just to get attention, no matter how repugnant the acts, no matter how atrocious the lies, no matter who she wounds, being in the news is more important to her than anything else.  

The other nasty part of her, affirmed once again, is the ability to "turn on" the charm and to slobber over people she thinks can help her get noticed and be important. The facial features revealed her anger at Ellen, yet the giggles and smiles and Auntie Ellen schtick and the hints at Happy Thanksgiving together are just yuck.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is getting really ugly… 
*Royals at war with BBC over 'tittle tattle' documentary: The Queen, Charles and Cambridges unite in threat to boycott corporation over show alleging 'briefing wars between William and Harry'*

*The Palace is furious that the BBC has refused to let it see The Princes and the Press before it airs on BBC2*
*It has said they will refuse to cooperate on future projects unless given a right to respond*
*Senior royal source condemned the documentary airing tomorrow as 'tittle tattle' and left the Monarch 'upset'*
*In an unusual move, the three most senior Royals have joined together to complain to the corporation*
*The Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William have joined forces in a 'tri-household' boycott if it goes ahead*

_The Queen has united with Prince Charles and Prince William in a threat to boycott the BBC over a documentary alleging vicious briefing wars between members of the Royal Family.

The Palace is furious that the Corporation has refused to let it see The Princes And The Press before it airs on BBC2 tomorrow, and says it will refuse to co-operate on future projects unless it is given a right to respond.

Last night, a senior royal source condemned the documentary as ‘tittle-tattle’ and said the row over the programme had left the 95-year-old Monarch ‘upset’…

A Palace source said: ‘There is upset about it. The households are all united in thinking this is not fair. No one at the Palace has seen it.’

The BBC says the two-part programme will provide ‘context’ for William and Harry’s relationship with the media.

But while Palace insiders say ‘we’ll judge it when we’ve seen it’, sources believe the film will suggest that the brothers – or advisers working for them – ‘briefed against each other’ to the media and want a fair right to reply…_









						Royals unite in threat to boycott BBC over 'tittle tattle' documentary
					

The Queen has united with Prince Charles and Prince William in a threat to boycott the BBC over a documentary alleging vicious briefing wars between members of the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Are they out of their mind? This is unbelievable! I hope at least they fly in different planes...
> 
> "_Reports claim the US trip early next year will be part of a royal tour and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will stop in California along the way.
> 
> When they visit California they will likely stay at Meghan's £11million Montecito home with their three children, Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis.
> 
> “Meghan would like some show of commitment from William and Kate._"



Why does this ‘accommodate’ bit sound like they want to do a wife swap?

I actually think it would be good for all of them, especially Will, he needs to learn never to cede to the demands of tyrants.



needlv said:


> Oooh juicy…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #8
> 
> 
> With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the famil...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Blind Item #8*
> 
> With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the family will be aired, including of course that background report prepared about the alliterate one by the security services in advance of her marriage. That would mean of course other affairs involving the second in line would also be leaked. A truce might be the better way to go for them. For us, the public, the all out war would be best.


It’s going to have to be something really juicy as they already did the affair story with Will and no one cared. The financial scandals with his dad and uncle also died in the dust. So you’ve got to wonder what it is….
Again I say


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow. 











						Social media explodes with memes mocking Meghan Markle on Ellen Show
					

Social media is ablaze with hilarious memes after the Duchess of Sussex, 40, appeared on The Ellen  DeGeneres Show yesterday and took part in a prank segment.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

bubablu said:


> Really? I didn't know that, tell me more.
> If you like we have a new born thread https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/her-serene-highness-charlene-of-monaco.1047795/


FYI:








						Princess Charlene may NOT move back to the palace
					

EXCLUSIVE: Chantell Wittstock, Charlene's sister-in-law and PR for her charitable Foundation in South Africa, told MailOnline the royal has still not decided where she will 'settle' in Monaco.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



That shows her true character. People like her once the beauty fades, success and everything end up lonely, bitter and angry. She will be begging for one drop of water for her soul.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Royals at war with BBC over 'tittle tattle' documentary: The Queen, Charles and Cambridges unite in threat to boycott corporation over show alleging 'briefing wars between William and Harry'*



I often find the comments more telling than the article...a vast majority of these comments are angry with the BBC and unanimously supportive of the Queen. They don't even mention the brothers, they just feel the BBC is being disrespectful to the monarch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comment from the other article:



> There was a narcissist called Markle, who feared she was losing her sparkle. So she danced a strange jig, just like Pippa Pig, and passers by started to startle. ...For a prince she determined to marry, and hooked a poor chump known as Harry. Now she has cash, that she just loves to splash on diamonds too heavy to carry.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> Interesting!



I agree it's uncomfortable to watch. I just don't understand why she agreed to do that sketch. Using an good opportunity to plug her tanking book - I get this, but agreeing to make yourself ridiculous in a sketch which was painful to watch is beyond me. I think if she had done it in her Suits days I would understand it, but now ? She became a "duchess" and not even of an operetta principality, but of the United Kingdom, became the champion of WOC (at least to some of them), trying to sell herself as political activist, made very profitable deals with media companies - she got practically everything she could whish for. It's obvious that she has an insatiable need for fame and money it might make she blind but someone from her army should have warned her and or she should have simply say no. 
On a side note: doesn't her skin tone look slightly darker than in her Windsor days? I know the weather is different in California than in Britain (not that she spent much time there) but it seems to me that she's trying to strengthen the her WOC image.


----------



## needlv

Ouch…


----------



## creme fraiche

xincinsin said:


> Insulting to all parents, since all mums and dads start off with one child, apart from those fortunate enough to be blessed with twins or more. And what about those who adopt or foster, or the blended families? It's a pity so much crap spews forth from _thee_ mouth. Maybe she will found a (charity tax haven) support group for those who parent as a hobby and fawn on her as a career


Agreed.  What is worse, according to her she's an only child and thus, according to her analogy, she's been just a hobby for Thomas and Doria.


----------



## creme fraiche

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow.
> 
> View attachment 5255598
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Social media explodes with memes mocking Meghan Markle on Ellen Show
> 
> 
> Social media is ablaze with hilarious memes after the Duchess of Sussex, 40, appeared on The Ellen  DeGeneres Show yesterday and took part in a prank segment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yikes.  The stench of desperation from the Markle camp has me feeling that German word for secondhand embarrassment for Megs.

Ellen must really dislike Meghan or is a sadist - could be both.


----------



## creme fraiche

On another train of thought, it is pretty obvious that Meghan does not have a sense of humour and definitely not about herself.  If she, and she never will, by some miraculous jump into a meta verse, becomes P O T U S - can you imagine her reaction at the White House Correspondent's Dinner?  An event where the press roast the current President?  I have a feeling she'll do exactly like the previous President and boycott it.  Too bad; it would have been interesting to see what a top comic would have come up with.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Ouch…



Didn't the Sussex PR release some story about Hazard having to dash back home from wherever he went to support the wifey who was griefstricken by the passing of her uncle? Must be very very private grief


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Didn't the Sussex PR release some story about Hazard having to dash back home from wherever he went to support the wifey who was griefstricken by the passing of her uncle? Must be very very private grief



Yes, you are correct — this was in July









						Prince Harry Reportedly Flew Back to California Friday Following News of Meghan Markle's Uncle's Death
					

A car that was part of Harry's "convoy" when he arrived in the U.K. was spotted driving to the airport Friday.




					www.marieclaire.com
				





_Harry's quick trip home could be due in part to some sad news for his wife, Meghan Markle. On Thursday, news broke that Meghan's 82-year-old uncle, Michael Markle, had died following a battle with Parkinson's disease._

_Prince Harry's most recent trip home to the United Kingdom has already come to an end, it seems.

The Duke of Sussex headed to the airport Friday to catch a flight back to California, according to a report from the Daily Mail. Apparently, a black, 2019 Volkswagen Caravelle that had been part of the "convoy" that picked Harry up at the airport when he landed in London a week ago was spotted leaving Harry's U.K. residence, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. The Daily Mail reported that the vehicle was led by a police escort and was driven straight onto the tarmac of Terminal 5 at London's Heathrow Airport—two signs that its passenger was a VIP with major security concerns (like a member of the royal family, for instance).

If Harry was indeed in the 2019 Volkswagon Caravelle that headed to Heathrow Friday, it means that the royal's trip home only included two days outside of his mandatory quarantine period. One reason for Harry's quick return trip could be the recent death in Meghan Markle's family.

On Thursday, just a few hours before Harry and his brother, Prince William, unveiled a statue in honor of their late mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, news broke that Meghan's 82-year-old uncle, Michael Markle, had died following a battle with Parkinson's disease.
"Mike was a lovely, gentle, softly spoken old man," a source told The Sun of Meghan's uncle, who reportedly went by Mike. "He was always happy to be asked about Meghan, but whenever he spoke to anyone he mainly wanted to talk about his late wife—he loved her so much."

According to another report from the Daily Mail, Mike Markle (the older brother of her father, Thomas Markle) had never met Prince Harry, but was "very proud" of Meghan and happy to have a royal in-law.

"He was quite well known in his community for being Meghan's uncle, and he would always stop for a chat to say how proud he was of her even though he didn't often agree with how she went about things," a source said, according to the Daily Mail. "He would usually just chuckle and say, 'It's not every day you have a prince in the family, though, I suppose!'"

ETA: _Since I am not too familiar with the Ellen show, I watched her interview with Victoria Beckham.  Victoria promoted her beauty line, told lovely [and humorous]  stories about her children and husband. The interview was not degrading in any way.  Imo perhaps opinions have shifted over here.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, you are correct — this was in July
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reportedly Flew Back to California Friday Following News of Meghan Markle's Uncle's Death
> 
> 
> A car that was part of Harry's "convoy" when he arrived in the U.K. was spotted driving to the airport Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Harry's quick trip home could be due in part to some sad news for his wife, Meghan Markle. On Thursday, news broke that Meghan's 82-year-old uncle, Michael Markle, had died following a battle with Parkinson's disease._
> 
> _Prince Harry's most recent trip home to the United Kingdom has already come to an end, it seems.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex headed to the airport Friday to catch a flight back to California, according to a report from the Daily Mail. Apparently, a black, 2019 Volkswagen Caravelle that had been part of the "convoy" that picked Harry up at the airport when he landed in London a week ago was spotted leaving Harry's U.K. residence, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. The Daily Mail reported that the vehicle was led by a police escort and was driven straight onto the tarmac of Terminal 5 at London's Heathrow Airport—two signs that its passenger was a VIP with major security concerns (like a member of the royal family, for instance).
> 
> If Harry was indeed in the 2019 Volkswagon Caravelle that headed to Heathrow Friday, it means that the royal's trip home only included two days outside of his mandatory quarantine period. One reason for Harry's quick return trip could be the recent death in Meghan Markle's family.
> 
> On Thursday, just a few hours before Harry and his brother, Prince William, unveiled a statue in honor of their late mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, news broke that Meghan's 82-year-old uncle, Michael Markle, had died following a battle with Parkinson's disease.
> "Mike was a lovely, gentle, softly spoken old man," a source told The Sun of Meghan's uncle, who reportedly went by Mike. "He was always happy to be asked about Meghan, but whenever he spoke to anyone he mainly wanted to talk about his late wife—he loved her so much."
> 
> According to another report from the Daily Mail, Mike Markle (the older brother of her father, Thomas Markle) had never met Prince Harry, but was "very proud" of Meghan and happy to have a royal in-law.
> 
> "He was quite well known in his community for being Meghan's uncle, and he would always stop for a chat to say how proud he was of her even though he didn't often agree with how she went about things," a source said, according to the Daily Mail. "He would usually just chuckle and say, 'It's not every day you have a prince in the family, though, I suppose!'"_


So she had two uncles pass away recently? Joseph Johnson from the Ragland side of the family, and Michael Markle from her father's side of the family. I'm sure she sent no wreath with bountiful floral meanings.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> So she had two uncles pass away recently? Joseph Johnson from the Ragland side of the family, and Michael Markle from her father's side of the family. I'm sure she sent no wreath with bountiful floral meanings.



Correct, 2 uncles, no contact with either.

Very sad article:








						"My niece Meghan Markle still hasn't called me - 3 months after uncle's death"
					

Meghan Markle's uncle Joseph ‘JJ’ Johnson died at the age of 72 following a long battle with congestive heart failure on August 27. Widow Pam said she received no 'no words of condolence' from Meghan




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is random, but I can’t understand why she went into such a deep open leg squad on Ellen. If someone asked if me to do a squat so they knew I was  hearing them I feel like I would bend my knees a little bit, not try to get a$$ to grass as they say in my Peleton workout.


----------



## Tyler_JP

I will no longer be defending Meghan after that Ellen Show appearance... I can't defend the indefensible.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> This is random, but I can’t understand why she went into such a deep open leg squad on Ellen. If someone asked if me to do a squat so they knew I was  hearing them I feel like I would bend my knees a little bit, not try to get a$$ to grass as they say in my Peleton workout.


With Her Heinous, overdoing it is par for the course.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Correct, 2 uncles, no contact with either.
> 
> Very sad article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "My niece Meghan Markle still hasn't called me - 3 months after uncle's death"
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's uncle Joseph ‘JJ’ Johnson died at the age of 72 following a long battle with congestive heart failure on August 27. Widow Pam said she received no 'no words of condolence' from Meghan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I feel sorry for both uncles, they seem to have loved and helped her at some point. The father, who helped her career a lot, was not impressed by the duchess's last ventures on Ellen's show. He cares about her and knows that she would be better off rejoining the BRF. 

_“She’s putting herself out there as a duchess but I’ve never seen a duchess behave this way, doing stupid stunts._” According to Mirror, he also said: "_Meghan was wrong to claim she struggled by using a dodgy car while finding acting work*" *and "Believes the couple should join the Royal Family over Christmas."_









						Meghan's dad brands Ellen chat 'stupid stunt' and slams his daughter's book
					

Thomas Markle Sr said he watched his daughter's chat with talk show host Ellen DeGeneres and found it 'embarrassing'. He also said he is 'hurt' to get updates on his grandchildren through interviews




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Sophisticatted

Another thought about the recent christening, while sharing the stage and not getting any special treatment would be horrible enough for the Dumbartons, it would be an even lower blow if they were not invited to participate at all.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> This is random, but I can’t understand why she went into such a deep open leg squad on Ellen. If someone asked if me to do a squat so they knew I was  hearing them I feel like I would bend my knees a little bit, not try to get a$$ to grass as they say in my Peleton workout.



Did we forget that she loves peeing in the woods? This must be her pee squat


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, you are correct — this was in July
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Reportedly Flew Back to California Friday Following News of Meghan Markle's Uncle's Death
> 
> 
> A car that was part of Harry's "convoy" when he arrived in the U.K. was spotted driving to the airport Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Harry's quick trip home could be due in part to some sad news for his wife, Meghan Markle. On Thursday, news broke that Meghan's 82-year-old uncle, Michael Markle, had died following a battle with Parkinson's disease._
> 
> _Prince Harry's most recent trip home to the United Kingdom has already come to an end, it seems.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex headed to the airport Friday to catch a flight back to California, according to a report from the Daily Mail. Apparently, a black, 2019 Volkswagen Caravelle that had been part of the "convoy" that picked Harry up at the airport when he landed in London a week ago was spotted leaving Harry's U.K. residence, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. The Daily Mail reported that the vehicle was led by a police escort and was driven straight onto the tarmac of Terminal 5 at London's Heathrow Airport—two signs that its passenger was a VIP with major security concerns (like a member of the royal family, for instance).
> 
> If Harry was indeed in the 2019 Volkswagon Caravelle that headed to Heathrow Friday, it means that the royal's trip home only included two days outside of his mandatory quarantine period. One reason for Harry's quick return trip could be the recent death in Meghan Markle's family.
> 
> On Thursday, just a few hours before Harry and his brother, Prince William, unveiled a statue in honor of their late mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, news broke that Meghan's 82-year-old uncle, Michael Markle, had died following a battle with Parkinson's disease.
> "Mike was a lovely, gentle, softly spoken old man," a source told The Sun of Meghan's uncle, who reportedly went by Mike. "He was always happy to be asked about Meghan, but whenever he spoke to anyone he mainly wanted to talk about his late wife—he loved her so much."
> 
> According to another report from the Daily Mail, Mike Markle (the older brother of her father, Thomas Markle) had never met Prince Harry, but was "very proud" of Meghan and happy to have a royal in-law.
> 
> "He was quite well known in his community for being Meghan's uncle, and he would always stop for a chat to say how proud he was of her even though he didn't often agree with how she went about things," a source said, according to the Daily Mail. "He would usually just chuckle and say, 'It's not every day you have a prince in the family, though, I suppose!'"
> 
> ETA: _Since I am not too familiar with the Ellen show, I watched her interview with Victoria Beckham.  Victoria promoted her beauty line, told lovely [and humorous]  stories about her children and husband. The interview was not degrading in any way.  Imo perhaps opinions have shifted over here.


I think this is TM’s brother.  Apparently this other one is Doria’s half brother.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> So she had two uncles pass away recently? Joseph Johnson from the Ragland side of the family, and Michael Markle from her father's side of the family. I'm sure she sent no wreath with bountiful floral meanings.


Sorry just saw your post!


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting view (including from the US)!


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Insulting to all parents, since all mums and dads start off with one child, apart from those fortunate enough to be blessed with twins or more. And what about those who adopt or foster, or the blended families? It's a pity so much crap spews forth from _thee_ mouth. Maybe she will found a (charity tax haven) support group for those who parent as a hobby and fawn on her as a career


This is the quote, apparently…


----------



## Chanbal

This person is very talented


----------



## Chanbal

This is hilarious!


----------



## Sharont2305

So it is true about the joint christenings. Oh dear, is that more plates being smashed?


----------



## CeeJay

needlv said:


> Oooh juicy…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #8
> 
> 
> With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the famil...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Blind Item #8*
> 
> With the second in line now leaking to the media, there will either be a truce or an all out war where all of the dirty laundry of the family will be aired, including of course that background report prepared about the alliterate one by the security services in advance of her marriage. That would mean of course other affairs involving the second in line would also be leaked. A truce might be the better way to go for them. For us, the public, the all out war would be best.


Woo-hee .. yeah, let's SPILL all her 'truth' .. that would be my preference for sure!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Did we forget that she loves peeing in the woods? This must be her pee squat


Maybe the tight leg pregnancy squat kept the moon bump in place, last week that was not a concern so she could spread them wide?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Maybe the tight leg pregnancy squat kept the moon bump in place, last week that was not a concern so she could spread them wide?


----------



## muddledmint

lanasyogamama said:


> This is random, but I can’t understand why she went into such a deep open leg squad on Ellen. If someone asked if me to do a squat so they knew I was  hearing them I feel like I would bend my knees a little bit, not try to get a$$ to grass as they say in my Peleton workout.


It looked very weird. Of course her fans were like, “omg she is a queen for squatting in heels!”


----------



## charlottawill

muddledmint said:


> Of course her fans were like, “omg she is a queen for squatting in heels!”


Seriously? Please. 
Why is there no eye roll emoji here?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Interesting view (including from the US)!




*Meghan De-Markle!*

@Chanbal  you find the best articles!  Thank you for sharing


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Seriously? Please.
> Why is there no eye roll emoji here?


There is ..


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> There is ..


Thanks!


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I agree with all of this.  I also think it’s a way to help the Queen through her first without Philip wedding anniversary.  It focuses on a joyful occasion, instead of on what’s missing.
> 
> I wonder if H&M were offered to have Lilibet included in this Christening.  Basically, “if you want to do it here, with and surrounded by family, you’re welcome; but NO special treatment.”


I suspect they weren't invited because they know the Duchess of Noclass would try to do something to upstage everyone else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s a theory - Maybe I am imagining that we have been told in the past how important Thanksgiving is to MM?  She loves cooking [haaaa], so maybe she did not want to travel during this holiday?  

OR is it because _she and he _were there?















						Princess Eugenie and Zara Tindall christen their babies at Windsor
					

The Queen celebrated the double christening of her two great-grandsons with Princess Eugenie, Zara Tindall and their families in Windsor this afternoon in a celebration thought to be the first of its kind.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Tyler_JP

@CarryOn2020 - Forgive my ignorance, but why would Cressida Bonas have been at this event?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German headline: 

"US talk show: How Meghan Markle made a fool of herself".


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tyler_JP said:


> @CarryOn2020 - Forgive my ignorance, but why would Cressida Bonas have been at this event?



Supposedly, she and Eugenia are besties. She _*may*_ be a god-parent, too.


----------



## Sharont2305

Tyler_JP said:


> @CarryOn2020 - Forgive my ignorance, but why would Cressida Bonas have been at this event?


She's friends with Eugenie.

ETA Oops @CarryOn2020 you got there first


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Maybe the tight leg pregnancy squat kept the moon bump in place, last week that was not a concern so she could spread them wide?



Based on precedence, Desperate Ducka$s is generally very willing to spread wide if it gives her 5 minutes of fame or publicity


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Comment from the other article:


Read this to the Mr, his response describes him pretty well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> I suspect they weren't invited because they know the Duchess of Noclass would try to do something to upstage everyone else.



Remember Scabies trumpeting this headline news in August: *"Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Entering 'New Era of Visibility'"*

Her recent antics take visibility to a new low, even for her. Some of the pictures and comments will probably haunt her on line until her obituary is published some day. With more world wide articles emerging (Just saw QueenofWrapDress' post sharing the German headline) her reputation as a "fool" is spreading like a toxic oil spill in the ocean.  

Re: upstaging everyone: Following the "do as I say" segment on Ellen Degenerate's show last week, there might be a quandary when/if the Duchess of Noclass next needs to be included in a RF group photo: does she prefer to sit or squat? A squat gives her the opportunity to elbow her way to be front row center with the children. Given her rabid pursuit of publicity at any cost, including complete lack of dignity, anything is possible. 

 Haven't seen any published comments from the Juggling Jester about his wife's performance in the carnival sideshow?


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Based on precedence, Desperate Ducka$s is generally very willing to spread wide if it gives her 5 minutes of fame or publicity


 Yep!

Edit: 10 minutes later and I am still laughing EverSoElusive. And we must acknowledge a "super squat with pee included" was a major factor in scoring a Prince (in title only) for a husband.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> *Based on precedence, Desperate Ducka$s is generally very willing to spread wide if it gives her 5 minutes of fame or publicity*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Ouch…




Is that the uncle that got her the internship?

Either way, there is NO excuse. She has staff. Someone could have sent a card if she wasn't the a*shole with no manners she is.

ETA: Saw this is Doria's brother, so no.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a theory - Maybe I am imagining that we have been told in the past how important Thanksgiving is to MM?  She loves cooking [haaaa], so maybe she did not want to travel during this holiday?
> 
> OR is it because _she and he _were there?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5255942
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie and Zara Tindall christen their babies at Windsor
> 
> 
> The Queen celebrated the double christening of her two great-grandsons with Princess Eugenie, Zara Tindall and their families in Windsor this afternoon in a celebration thought to be the first of its kind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



To be honest, I wouldn't like that I was running into exes wherever I went just because these people are all friends


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Are they out of their mind? This is unbelievable! I hope at least they fly in different planes...
> 
> "_Reports claim the US trip early next year will be part of a royal tour and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will stop in California along the way.
> 
> When they visit California they will likely stay at Meghan's £11million Montecito home with their three children, Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and Prince Louis.
> 
> “Meghan would like some show of commitment from William and Kate._"



Some time ago when I listened to the vid where MM says, "We're only a plane crash from the throne" we could also hear someone responding either, "Fingers crossed" or "Keep your fingers crossed" followed by laughter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Re: upstaging everyone: Following the "do as I say" segment on Ellen Degenerate's show last week, there might be a quandary when/if the Duchess of Noclass next needs to be included in a RF group photo: does she prefer to sit or squat? A squat gives her the opportunity to elbow her way to be front row center with the children. Given her rabid pursuit of publicity at any cost, including complete lack of dignity, anything is possible.



Isn't it funny that "Please don't walk before the Queen, dress appropriately, don't bully your staff and stop chatting while on the balcony" is too much asked for, but "Act like an idiot in public" is perfectly fine?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Some time ago when I listened to the vid where MM says, "We're only a plane crash from the throne" we could also hear someone responding either, "Fingers crossed" or "Keep your fingers crossed" followed by laughter.



I think Raptor was credited with that as well (as in, the whole sentence was "We are one plane crash away from the throne...fingers crossed"), but I didn't know there was an actual video. I knew about it from Lady C.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that the uncle that got her the internship?
> 
> Either way, there is NO excuse. She has staff. Someone could have sent a card if she wasn't the a*shole with no manners she is.
> 
> ETA: Saw this is Doria's brother, so no.



In July, the uncle who _gave_ her the internship passed away. He was Thomas’s brother. 
In August, Doria’s step-brother(?) passed away. He was the one who gave some of the childhood photos to the media.
MM didn’t contact anyone


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think Raptor was credited with that as well (as in, the whole sentence was "We are one plane crash away from the throne...fingers crossed"), but I didn't know there was an actual video. I knew about it from Lady C.


Every time I hear this, it just amazes me that she would say it .. because it's just so crass!!!  Then again, Ms. Crass-Ass ?? .. well, yeah, I can believe it!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest, I wouldn't like that I was running into exes wherever I went just because these people are all friends



In theory and for most of us, I agree. This crowd, though,  maintains a very small circle, so it is inevitable they see each other frequently. As far as Eug is concerned, I wonder. She seems to be oh-so-friendly with everyone and anyone. Maybe she is genuine, maybe she loves the drama. Time will tell.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> So she had two uncles pass away recently? Joseph Johnson from the Ragland side of the family, and Michael Markle from her father's side of the family. I'm sure she sent no wreath with bountiful floral meanings.


Well, no film crews were there to promote the merch-tie-in at their funerals and she can’t sell her deep connection in the hopes of some dollars so it’s diddly squat for them.

Thinking about it, the media and pumper herself have discussed ad nauseum the sins of her dad’s family but what did the Raglands ever do to deserve wiping from her family history?


lanasyogamama said:


> This is random, but I can’t understand why she went into such a deep open leg squad on Ellen. If someone asked if me to do a squat so they knew I was  hearing them I feel like I would bend my knees a little bit, not try to get a$$ to grass as they say in my Peleton workout.


She’s got to show off her yogi training somehow  



Chanbal said:


> This is the quote, apparently…



That quote is actually funny so I can see why she couldn’t compute it correctly.


----------



## marietouchet

I think today’s joint baptism of Lucas and August was a master stroke by BRF … Maybe Lili was invited to this one … but she will be invited to be baptized at the same time as Sienna

i like this , treat all the great grand kids alike … classy


----------



## pukasonqo

Prince Harry’s former girlfriend ‘feels lucky’ their relationship was short
					

The model briefly dated the Duke of Sussex in 2011




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is the quote, apparently…



Now, _*that*_, I am on board with!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> So it is true about the joint christenings. Oh dear, is that more plates being smashed?



Did the Queen attend?  Was it officiated by the Archbishop?  Even more plates.  Add saucers and tea cups too!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Some time ago when I listened to the vid where MM says, "We're only a plane crash from the throne" we could also hear someone responding either, "Fingers crossed" or "Keep your fingers crossed" followed by laughter.


I didn't realize there's an actual video of that!


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Yep!
> 
> Edit: 10 minutes later and I am still laughing EverSoElusive. And we must acknowledge a "super squat with pee included" was a major factor in scoring a Prince (in title only) for a husband.



With everything that's going on in the world today, we all deserve some laughter 




Maggie Muggins said:


> View attachment 5255972



You know it


----------



## CarryOn2020

@RoyallyBlunt

Cheers to all


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


> Did the Queen attend?  Was it officiated by the Archbishop?  Even more plates.  Add saucers and tea cups too!


OOOOHHHH, the Queen DID attend!!!!  

Do some more squats Monstrous Meg!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> OOOOHHHH, the Queen DID attend!!!!
> 
> Do some more squats Monstrous Meg!



That makes me relieved that the Queen’s health is a little better than we thought earlier in the week.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest, I wouldn't like that I was running into exes wherever I went just because these people are all friends



I know I am a bad person for saying this , but I can’t help chuckling at the thought of MM’s head exploding at the thought of two of TQ’s great-grandsons being christened in TQ’s presence while the Harkles mope around in Montecito.  Now we will probably hear that it must be the work of the racist, sexist royals and henchmen to deliberately leave MM & H out….


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that the uncle that got her the internship?
> 
> Either way, there is NO excuse. She has staff. Someone could have sent a card if she wasn't the a*shole with no manners she is.
> 
> ETA: Saw this is Doria's brother, so no.



I guess given the extent to which she excluded her family from her wedding, it should come as no surprise, but it is still hard for me to believe that she could be so cruel, selfish and devoid of even basic manners.  If she wants to swan around doing her I’m-better-than-you-common-people thing, she should at least have rudimentary manners.  She is such a trash heap…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Luvbolide said:


> I guess given the extent to which she excluded her family from her wedding, it should come as no surprise, but it is still hard for me to believe that she could be so cruel, selfish and devoid of even basic manners.  If she wants to swan around doing her I’m-better-than-you-common-people thing, she should at least have rudimentary manners.  She is such a *trash heap*…


There is only one Trash Heap. Her name is Marjory and she's a lady.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that the uncle that got her the internship?
> 
> Either way, there is NO excuse. She has staff. Someone could have sent a card if she wasn't the a*shole with no manners she is.
> 
> ETA: Saw this is Doria's brother, so no.


It takes five minutes to order flowers on line, or make a memorial contribution if the family prefers.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Well, no film crews were there to promote the merch-tie-in at their funerals and she can’t sell her deep connection in the hopes of some dollars so it’s diddly squat for them.
> 
> Thinking about it, the media and pumper herself have discussed ad nauseum the sins of her dad’s family but *what did the Raglands ever do to deserve wiping from her family history?*


I believe one of the Raglands mentioned that they were now viewed by her as a different class of people, i.e., not rich enough, inferior - so she is looking down on them. And there was a family photo which had Doria looking disgruntled in the middle of her beaming folks, so maybe her mother isn't as thick with her family as presumed.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It takes five minutes to order flowers on line, or make a memorial contribution if the family prefers.


and she has employees to do it....so it would take a minute for her to tell them order flowers....the only possible challenge would be giving them the address


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Seriously? Please.
> Why is there no eye roll emoji here?


Type "rolleyes" between colons and this little guy appears!


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> "...her I’m-better-than-you-common-people thing..."


That ship sailed after she popped a squat for Ellen on national television.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I believe one of the Raglands mentioned that they were now viewed by her as a different class of people, i.e., not rich enough, inferior - so she is looking down on them. And there was a family photo which had Doria looking disgruntled in the middle of her beaming folks, so maybe her mother isn't as thick with her family as presumed.


she wants to reap the benefits of being a WOC but she looks down on her black relatives?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> and she has employees to do it....so it would take a minute for her to tell them order flowers....the only possible challenge would be giving them the address


We know how geographically challenged she is. She was horrified when the BRF told her to go visit her father. The poor woman might get lost in Mexico! It is larger than Montecito, you know  (But smaller than Africa - snark snark)



sdkitty said:


> she wants to reap the benefits of being a WOC but she looks down on her black relatives?


She will spin it as another "Finding Freedom" tale. Those stories about her helping grandma with the cooking or taking care of grandma in her last days? Pseudo-slavery is how she will craft it, rescued from her life of drudgery by a prince (ponce) like Cinderella. Let's see how Hazard words it in his ghostwritten bio - his valiant swoop in to uplift her and help her "thrive". I wonder how they will work Suits and her being a self-made millionaire into her tale of woe.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I believe one of the Raglands mentioned that they were now viewed by her as a different class of people, i.e., not rich enough, inferior - so she is looking down on them. And there was a family photo which had Doria looking disgruntled in the middle of her beaming folks, so maybe her mother isn't as thick with her family as presumed.



His_ offense_ was releasing happy family photos of Pump-Pump-Squat’s childhood.  Can you imagine the audacity?  Think of the exposure? The change in narrative?  Gosh, so awful - not!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks @DeMonica for your #1 nickname, Hazzie and Horrid. Congratulations and welcome to The List. 



Thanks @Luvbolide for your #3 nickname, I’m-better-than-you-common-people, and yes that is exactly how egotistical M sees herself. Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon. 



Thanks @Genie27 for your #4 nickname, Princess Mew Mew. Congratulations and here is your Gold Ribbon. 



Thanks @CeeJay for your #18 nickname, Ms. Crass-Ass. Congratulations and here's The List #18 Ribbon. 



Thanks @csshopper for your #25 nickname, Juggling Jester. Yes, we know that JCMH is left juggling just some of his balls. Congratulations and here's The List #25 Ribbon. 



Thanks @xincinsin for your #27 nickname, thee mouth.  Congratulations and here's The List #27 Ribbon. 



ETA
Thanks @CarryOn2020 for your #20 nickname, Pump-Pump-Squat. 
Congratulations and here's The List #20 Ribbon.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> That ship sailed after she popped a squat for Ellen on national television.


Meghan now has people in non-English speaking countries making fun of her.  Quite an accomplishment.  She wanted to be famous for her accomplishments , but infamous as a fool would be more accurate.


----------



## Chanbal

Another fun video with the BLG


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Meghan De-Markle!*
> 
> @Chanbal  you find the best articles!  Thank you for sharing
> 
> View attachment 5255935


Thank you! The people on Twitter deserve a lot of credit, they are doing a wonderful job reminding all of us about the hypocrisy of the Montecito couple.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Another fun video with the BLG




What the body language expert didn’t know, but we do, is the reason Meghan was having so much anxiety during that dog rescue conversation. She was absolutely terrified Ellen was going to ask her what happened to the dog she adopted. We know she got rid of Bogart and no one knows if the poor pup is still alive. Showing Duchess Do-gooder as the pet dumper she is isn’t good for her PR.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> What the body language expert didn’t know, but we do, is the reason Meghan was having so much anxiety during that dog rescue conversation. She was absolutely terrified Ellen was going to ask her what happened to the dog she adopted. We know she got rid of Bogart and no one knows if the poor pup is still alive. Showing Duchess Do-gooder as the pet dumper she is isn’t good for her PR.



That said, if Ellen has been at her house, wouldn't she know the dog isn't there? Apparently she doesn't care.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Another fun video with the BLG




I wonder if there is more to MM’s history with Ellen than the dog story.  Maybe other stuff happened. Seems like Ellen is paying MM back for many slights with this latest chat.  Certainly, one reason for not inviting Ellen to the wedding is that it would take away from O and Gayle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress: Kiss of Death for Designer"

German press is not loving Raptor today.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I don't know if Anne Hathaway actually said this but this is a great message for Spready Chicken Legs


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress: Kiss of Death for Designer"
> 
> German press is not loving Raptor today.


Wow!  I am impressed that they are bring that back up to discuss.  That is really old news.  The gloves are well off everywhere.  Hunting season is open!  Grouse season in Scotland starts August 12th and it is called The Glorious 12th!  It came a little late for Meg, but she will soon have difficulty sitting with all that birdshot in her posterior.  She thought that by forcing Harry to sell the Purdey rifles that she would be OK.  Guess what? lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't know if Anne Hathaway actually said this but this is a great message for Spready Chicken Legs



Ha!  Said she who had a swindler for a long term boyfriend.  Wonder if he was interested in HER money.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So Hazzie said ’no’ to a TikTok, was he ok with the Ellen IFB nonsense?  Odd. 








						Meghan Markle says Harry banned her from recreating viral pregnancy dance
					

Meghan Markle admitted to TikTok sensation Stephen "tWitch" Boss on The Ellen Show that she was keen to recreate his popular videos, but Prince Harry wasn't up for the challenge




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> What the body language expert didn’t know, but we do, is the reason Meghan was having so much anxiety during that dog rescue conversation. *She was absolutely terrified Ellen was going to ask her what happened to the dog she adopted. We know she got rid of Bogart and no one knows if the poor pup is still alive.* Showing Duchess Do-gooder as the pet dumper she is isn’t good for her PR.


Ellen may not believe in the Bogart story.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Ellen may not believe in the Bogart story.




Grrr, and that post proves how she lied about Bogart. Remember, she said she couldn’t bring him to the UK because he was “too old” to make the trip. Yet there he is as a puppy in 2013 which shows he was only 5 when she got married. Barely middle-aged for a dog.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I wonder if there is more to MM’s history with Ellen than the dog story.  Maybe other stuff happened. Seems like Ellen is paying MM back for many slights with this latest chat.  Certainly, one reason for not inviting Ellen to the wedding is that it would take away from O and Gayle.


I'm starting to believe that Ellen had nothing to do with MM adopting Bogart. It's possible that Ellen thinks that MM was just using her name. She doesn't seem to have any appreciation for MM.
And of course, not been invited didn't help.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to believe that Ellen had nothing to do with MM adopting Bogart. It's possible that Ellen thinks that MM was just using her name. She doesn't seem to have any appreciation for MM.
> And of course, not been invited didn't help.




That would be a plot twist.

I think it seemed more like Meghan was actually taken aback that their meeting at the dog rescue was so memorable for her yet so obviously insignificant to Ellen. Meghan thinks everyone should remember her.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, if Ellen has been at her house, wouldn't she know the dog isn't there? Apparently she doesn't care.


I doubt Ellen has been at her house.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> His_ offense_ was releasing happy family photos of Pump-Pump-Squat’s childhood.  Can you imagine the audacity?  Think of the exposure? The change in narrative?  Gosh, so awful - not!


It's been a while, but I think her late Uncle might have released the photos (which were lovely family scenes) around the time totally stupidly dumber than cement Haz was flapping his jaws about Megan "gaining the family she never had" as if he was rescuing her from an orphanage.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> "gaining the family she never had"


 
Boy she really conned him didn't she?


----------



## Luvbolide

Maggie Muggins said:


> There is only one Trash Heap. Her name is Marjory and she's a lady.




OMG - I haven’t met her before!  Hilarious!!


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> That ship sailed after she popped a squat for Ellen on national television.



I am still trying to pretend that I didn’t see that…honestly - WTF is she thinking?!?!


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Did the Queen attend?  Was it officiated by the Archbishop?  Even more plates.  Add saucers and tea cups too!


The Queen did attend.


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Boy she really conned him didn't she?



That very sentence was the moment I knew what kind of person she is and what she'd been feeding him. Only the poor idiot couldn't see.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That very sentence was the moment I knew what kind of person she is and what she'd been feeding him. Only the poor idiot couldn't see.


It was definitely a jaw-dropping moment in many parts of the US and that little border town in Mexico. I can understand her father and siblings lashing out after her dismissal of their existence. I wonder how big a tale she concocted to make herself look attractive to the white knight.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly, she and Eugenia are besties. She _*may*_ be a *god-parent*, too.



I firstly read '*good-parent*' and I was  Really? What are you saying? How do you (we)know? "One is a hobby..." Wha?

But, I re-read. All is good, carry on @CarryOn2020


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sharont2305 said:


> The Queen did attend.


 But very sadly it has been reported today that Jack Brooksbank's father passed away at the end of last week.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> But very sadly it has been reported today that Jack Brooksbank's father passed away at the end of last week.



Oh no  It's extra sad when someone missed a milestone by days.


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> But very sadly it has been reported today that Jack Brooksbank's father passed away at the end of last week.


Aw bless, no wonder he looked sad in that photo.


----------



## Chanbal

SM is right about questioning a possible agenda. In addition to lawyer, agent, she kept also a very strong PR agency here… 


_The mum-of-three explained that she believes *there were "clear indicators" that Meghan wanted to "keep an oar in the water in the United States".*

Speaking from her home in Florida, she said: "*It seems as though now you have to wonder was it just in case things don't work out or was there a clear agenda from the beginning to return.*"

She continued: "Whatever the case is, it was very deceitful to the Royals not to let them know that she had that in mind and that she wasn't really present and sincere in the moment.

"In terms of ongoing duty with the Royal Family, *especially in a marriage, I can see going into a marriage and thinking 'Well if the marriage doesn't work out, yeah, I've still got family and you know, I was trained in my career, I've still got my career' but to actually go into a marriage and say, 'You know what, I'm married now, that's the end of it, I'm giving up my career everything because this is now my commitment.*

"'I've made a commitment to my husband and to you know, the British royal family and the people of Great Britain'."

Samantha added: "*I don't think you know, being there under a year in terms of royal duty is really executing a commitment.*

"*It's not any due diligence, it's not a demonstration of loyalty or commitment, and to keep an attorney and manager in LA is really deceitful.*

"I had heard through the grapevine across the pond that the Queen wasn't made aware of that, you know, that and I would imagine that they were shocked when they found out because it shows an agenda perhaps."_









						Meghan Markle may have had 'agenda' ahead of marrying Harry, claims sister
					

EXCLUSIVE: Samantha Markle has addressed Meghan Markle's return to California, claiming that the Duchess may have pre-planned her return to Los Angeles despite 'axing' her acting career




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

This article shows some of the palaces of the saviors of the world, the ones that keep expressing concerns with things like carbon footprint… Here is for your entertainment:

_It seems like everyone either lives in Montecito, California, or wants to move there. From royalty to Hollywood's most elite, the exclusive (and expensive) Santa Barbara enclave is home to the likes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Oprah Winfrey, Gwyneth Paltrow, Ellen DeGeneres and more. Although we don't have photos of all of the exquisite mansions in the area, we rounded up pictures of some of its most famous residential homes to illustrate what it's really like to live behind the community's private gates. Click through to see them all... _









						Inside the most stunning celebrity homes in Montecito, California
					

From royalty to Hollywood's most elite, the exclusive Santa Barbara enclave is home to the likes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Gwyneth Paltrow and more.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't know if Anne Hathaway actually said this but this is a great message for Spready Chicken Legs




God bless the child that got it's own


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> You know, I hesitate to say this because it’s a sensitive issue, would she have _any_ fans or supporters if she weren’t half black? Would anyone like a lying phony social climber with no style and a meh personality and a mediocre career as a d list actress if it weren’t for the fact that she is a POC? Especially since that is an aspect of her identity that she mostly seemed to hide until it became beneficial to her. It’s really the only thing she has going for her right now. That and the fact that she’s jumped on the woke bandwagon.


agree
she is cashing in on the identify that she downplayed most of her life


----------



## bellecate

Wow, has she ever told a story that was true?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

muddledmint said:


> You know, I hesitate to say this because it’s a sensitive issue, would she have _any_ fans or supporters if she weren’t half black? Would anyone like a* lying phony social climber with no style and a meh personality and a mediocre career as a d list actress* if it weren’t for the fact that she is a POC? Especially since that is an aspect of her identity that she mostly seemed to hide until it became beneficial to her. It’s really the only thing she has going for her right now. That and the fact that she’s jumped on the woke bandwagon.


 Thanks @muddledmint for your #1 nickname, lying phony social climber with no style and a meh personality and a mediocre career as a d list actress. Congratulations and welcome to The List.  
And for this all-encompassing M personification, please help yourself to a cake of your choice. Cheer!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This article shows some of the palaces of the saviors of the world, the ones that keep expressing concerns with things like carbon footprint… Here is for your entertainment:
> 
> _It seems like everyone either lives in Montecito, California, or wants to move there. From royalty to Hollywood's most elite, the exclusive (and expensive) Santa Barbara enclave is home to the likes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Oprah Winfrey, Gwyneth Paltrow, Ellen DeGeneres and more. Although we don't have photos of all of the exquisite mansions in the area, we rounded up pictures of some of its most famous residential homes to illustrate what it's really like to live behind the community's private gates. Click through to see them all... _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the most stunning celebrity homes in Montecito, California
> 
> 
> From royalty to Hollywood's most elite, the exclusive Santa Barbara enclave is home to the likes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Gwyneth Paltrow and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


These places are amazing, but I guess it's just me .. who really wants to live in a "house" that is so large, and/or have multiple houses on the property??? .. I just don't get it!  I would much rather have something smaller, but yeah .. some architectural reference (favorites are Mid-Century Modern, Tuscan style, Ancient Roman and Paris Atelier).  I consider myself pretty darn lucky to have found a nice 1400 sqft Mid-Century Modern in the Valley .. whose Architect (and original owner) studied with the famous Architects of the Case Study program in the 60's and 70's.  I'll take that any day over these monstrosities!


----------



## tiktok

CeeJay said:


> These places are amazing, but I guess it's just me .. who really wants to live in a "house" that is so large, and/or have multiple houses on the property??? .. I just don't get it!  I would much rather have something smaller, but yeah .. some architectural reference (favorites are Mid-Century Modern, Tuscan style, Ancient Roman and Paris Atelier).  I consider myself pretty darn lucky to have found a nice 1400 sqft Mid-Century Modern in the Valley .. whose Architect (and original owner) studied with the famous Architects of the Case Study program in the 60's and 70's.  I'll take that any day over these monstrosities!



Totally agree, I was flipping through Architectural Digest yesterday and thinking all of these are generic beautifully decorated houses, but none of them looks like an actual home.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> These places are amazing, but I guess it's just me .. who really wants to live in a "house" that is so large, and/or have multiple houses on the property??? .. I just don't get it!  I would much rather have something smaller, but yeah .. some architectural reference (favorites are Mid-Century Modern, Tuscan style, Ancient Roman and Paris Atelier).  I consider myself pretty darn lucky to have found a nice 1400 sqft Mid-Century Modern in the Valley .. whose Architect (and original owner) studied with the famous Architects of the Case Study program in the 60's and 70's.  I'll take that any day over these monstrosities!


I agree
Even if I were very wealthy I wouldn't want a huge home.


----------



## purseinsanity

tiktok said:


> Totally agree, I was flipping through Architectural Digest yesterday and thinking all of these are generic beautifully decorated houses, but *none of them looks like an actual home*.


I tend to be a little (ok, a lot) OCD when it comes to cleanliness and having order in my home.  When I met my now DH, he came with a rather large Alaskan Malamute puppy, who didn't give two hoots if my carpet had nice straight vacuum lines or if my couch was pristine.  Every time my then BF would come over, my apartment would be left with paw prints all over the carpet, dog hair on the cushions and just general chaos.  I quickly came to realize I'd have to learn to deal with it or find another BF.  It was a good learning experience for having children.  You can either have a "home" or a showpiece house, but it's very hard to have both, unless you have full time staff picking up every little lego and crumb.  It's not a lot of fun living in a museum.  MM probably begs to differ, as I'm sure her dogs are probably banished to certain rooms or outside with the chickens and the children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Totally agree, I was flipping through Architectural Digest yesterday and thinking all of these are generic beautifully decorated houses, but none of them looks like an actual home.



Remember some, if not most, are used as movie/tv sets and as temporary housing for the stars. Just watch Episodes, the columns in the house are made of cardboard or foam board - sure, heavy cardboard, but cardboard.


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> These places are amazing, but I guess it's just me .. who really wants to live in a "house" that is so large, and/or have multiple houses on the property??? .. I just don't get it!  I would much rather have something smaller, but yeah .. some architectural reference (favorites are Mid-Century Modern, Tuscan style, Ancient Roman and Paris Atelier).  I consider myself pretty darn lucky to have found a nice 1400 sqft Mid-Century Modern in the Valley .. whose Architect (and original owner) studied with the famous Architects of the Case Study program in the 60's and 70's.  I'll take that any day over these monstrosities!


I couldn't agree more with you. I'm the one that finds Nott Cott a lot more interesting than the Montecito compound.


----------



## CeeJay

tiktok said:


> Totally agree, I was flipping through Architectural Digest yesterday and thinking all of these are generic beautifully decorated houses, but none of them looks like an actual home.


BINGO!!! .. it's like they are all so antiseptic, almost like a Hotel lobby, room .. where there is no 'sign of life'!  Personally, I'm not a "minimalistic" type of house style .. show me some life!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that received QE's invitation, here is part of the suggested program for Christmas Day  



_This is a woman who is determined to remain a Duchess, who thinks she is entitled to, even worthy of, the title, yet she performs cheap stunts on a TV chat show so that America will say: “Oh look, she’s lovely. She’s fun. She’s just like us…”

*The Windsors should keep this Ellen Show and watch it all together after lunch on Christmas Day. They’ll have a right old laugh. 

They’ll also be thanking their lucky stars that the “Suits” girl has hightailed it back to L.A.* and is doing what she always wanted to do - making herself a star!_









						Meghan's cheap TV stunt reveals exactly who she REALLY is, says MALONE
					

IT FELT more than a bit ironic to see Meghan, who stands accused of bullying by Royal staff (a charge she has vehemently denied) being interviewed in the US by chat show host Ellen DeGeneres, who also faces allegations of bullying and creating a toxic work environment on her own TV show.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that received QE's invitation, here is part of the suggested program for Christmas Day
> View attachment 5256849
> 
> 
> _This is a woman who is determined to remain a Duchess, who thinks she is entitled to, even worthy of, the title, yet she performs cheap stunts on a TV chat show so that America will say: “Oh look, she’s lovely. She’s fun. She’s just like us…”
> 
> *The Windsors should keep this Ellen Show and watch it all together after lunch on Christmas Day. They’ll have a right old laugh.
> 
> They’ll also be thanking their lucky stars that the “Suits” girl has hightailed it back to L.A.* and is doing what she always wanted to do - making herself a star!_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's cheap TV stunt reveals exactly who she REALLY is, says MALONE
> 
> 
> IT FELT more than a bit ironic to see Meghan, who stands accused of bullying by Royal staff (a charge she has vehemently denied) being interviewed in the US by chat show host Ellen DeGeneres, who also faces allegations of bullying and creating a toxic work environment on her own TV show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



_TV chat show_
Somehow the British papers have the perfect phrase - it sounds so _*cheap and tawdry*_, no?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Another fun video with the BLG



I've watched other body language videos but the BLG is one of the few who will replay the sequence in slow motion with little strobing lines around what he wants us to see.

I think I would miss it if he didn't show me like that!


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to believe that Ellen had nothing to do with MM adopting Bogart. It's possible that Ellen thinks that MM was just using her name.


That makes a lot of sense!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> SM is right about questioning a possible agenda. In addition to lawyer, agent, she kept also a very strong PR agency here…
> View attachment 5256584
> 
> _The mum-of-three explained that she believes *there were "clear indicators" that Meghan wanted to "keep an oar in the water in the United States".*
> 
> Speaking from her home in Florida, she said: "*It seems as though now you have to wonder was it just in case things don't work out or was there a clear agenda from the beginning to return.*"
> 
> She continued: "Whatever the case is, it was very deceitful to the Royals not to let them know that she had that in mind and that she wasn't really present and sincere in the moment.
> 
> "In terms of ongoing duty with the Royal Family, *especially in a marriage, I can see going into a marriage and thinking 'Well if the marriage doesn't work out, yeah, I've still got family and you know, I was trained in my career, I've still got my career' but to actually go into a marriage and say, 'You know what, I'm married now, that's the end of it, I'm giving up my career everything because this is now my commitment.*
> 
> "'I've made a commitment to my husband and to you know, the British royal family and the people of Great Britain'."
> 
> Samantha added: "*I don't think you know, being there under a year in terms of royal duty is really executing a commitment.*
> 
> "*It's not any due diligence, it's not a demonstration of loyalty or commitment, and to keep an attorney and manager in LA is really deceitful.*
> 
> "I had heard through the grapevine across the pond that the Queen wasn't made aware of that, you know, that and I would imagine that they were shocked when they found out because it shows an agenda perhaps."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle may have had 'agenda' ahead of marrying Harry, claims sister
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Samantha Markle has addressed Meghan Markle's return to California, claiming that the Duchess may have pre-planned her return to Los Angeles despite 'axing' her acting career
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


That's been pretty clear to me from the start, unlike Grace Kelly, who left Hollywood completely behind when she married Rainier.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This article shows some of the palaces of the saviors of the world, the ones that keep expressing concerns with things like carbon footprint… Here is for your entertainment:
> 
> _It seems like everyone either lives in Montecito, California, or wants to move there. From royalty to Hollywood's most elite, the exclusive (and expensive) Santa Barbara enclave is home to the likes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Oprah Winfrey, Gwyneth Paltrow, Ellen DeGeneres and more. Although we don't have photos of all of the exquisite mansions in the area, we rounded up pictures of some of its most famous residential homes to illustrate what it's really like to live behind the community's private gates. Click through to see them all... _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the most stunning celebrity homes in Montecito, California
> 
> 
> From royalty to Hollywood's most elite, the exclusive Santa Barbara enclave is home to the likes of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Gwyneth Paltrow and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I guess on the positive side these mansions keep armies of people employed. I think the Harkles are in way over their head financially, but I'm sure Raptor insisted on moving here so she could rub elbows with the elite of the entertainment world. Much more important to her long term plan than staying in England and having to socialize with British aristocrats who were of no use to her.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that received QE's invitation, here is part of the suggested program for Christmas Day
> View attachment 5256849
> 
> 
> _This is a woman who is determined to remain a Duchess, who thinks she is entitled to, even worthy of, the title, yet she performs cheap stunts on a TV chat show so that America will say: “Oh look, she’s lovely. She’s fun. She’s just like us…”
> 
> *The Windsors should keep this Ellen Show and watch it all together after lunch on Christmas Day. They’ll have a right old laugh.
> 
> They’ll also be thanking their lucky stars that the “Suits” girl has hightailed it back to L.A.* and is doing what she always wanted to do - making herself a star!_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's cheap TV stunt reveals exactly who she REALLY is, says MALONE
> 
> 
> IT FELT more than a bit ironic to see Meghan, who stands accused of bullying by Royal staff (a charge she has vehemently denied) being interviewed in the US by chat show host Ellen DeGeneres, who also faces allegations of bullying and creating a toxic work environment on her own TV show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I've wondered if this disaster has made its way back to the Queen or they are keeping it from her. I think she would be very disappointed. The Queen welcomed MM to the family and this is how she shows respect?


----------



## Lounorada

mellibelly said:


> *Apparently Hazbeen requested they play God Save the Queen at the Intrepid awards*.
> 
> WTF!! He does not represent the Queen and this was an award ceremony for AMERICAN military. Here’s the video, it starts at the 5:07 mark.










Chanbal said:


> I also come here for the laughs, but this couple shouldn't be overlooked. They want to "correct records", close accounts, question the first amendment, get people fired, lie in court… and hire very costly PR teams to saturate the media with propaganda, very dangerous imo.
> It looks like one of the intents of the book was for us to celebrate our very first and beloved American princess. How nice! It also supports opinions that they had in mind the American market ($$$$) very early in their relationship.









xincinsin said:


> Forgot to add: if the BRF take action of any sort, Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury will be crying VICTIM to the high heavens.
> Because *Her Heinous* needs to stand up for what is "right"
> I don't know about you, but discretion (and ostrichness) may be the better part of valour in this case.










Chanbal said:


> I still think they were not invited, but multiple sources (aka PR, SS, MM…) informed they were invited.
> 
> _An invitation has been extended to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to join the rest of the royal family at Sandringham for Christmas, but they will not be attending, Page Six is told by multiple royal sources.
> “There’s a lot that goes into the logistics and the planning of the family Christmas, so of course, staff know that Harry and Meghan are not coming,” one royal source told Page Six. “If they were, they would have communicated it to their family by now.
> “But this is Her Majesty’s first Christmas without her husband, so one would have hoped they would want to be with her.”_



The RF:









Chanbal said:


> She gets her dress in a garment bag with a royal monogram, and he rents his outfit…



Not surprised by this because this is what she looks like in her head:






bag-mania said:


> For #2: Harry didn’t appear to have any regrets about not seeing his grandfather before he died. Why would anyone think he wants to see his grandmother? *The Harry you think you knew doesn’t exist anymore. Maybe he never did.*









bag-mania said:


> In a way she is like Meghan. Ellen continues to benefit from all the years of popularity she had before news of her true nature was known. She likely has many fans who still don’t know what a mean woman she can be.
> Meghan still has many fans who decided they liked her at the time of the wedding and are sticking with it.










bellecate said:


> *Wow, has she ever told a story that was true?*
> View attachment 5256679










Chanbal said:


> Another fun video with the BLG




Oh wow! @ the Michelle Oba.ma cosplay!
It's so creepy.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> That's been pretty clear to me from the start, unlike Grace Kelly, who left Hollywood completely behind when she married Rainier.


Not defending Methane, but if she built herself a house of cards, then she would definitely be keeping her "Hollywood career" alive in anticipation of the day that that flimsy house comes tumbling down.



charlottawill said:


> I've wondered if this disaster has made its way back to the Queen or they are keeping it from her. I think she would be very disappointed. The Queen welcomed MM to the family and this is how she shows respect?


Gives dramatic meaning to biting the hands that feed you. Rapacious Raptor.


----------



## Chanbal

The controversial BBC documentary: The Princes and the Press (I didn't have a chance to watch it yet)


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> BINGO!!! .. it's like they are all so antiseptic, almost like a Hotel lobby, room .. where there is no 'sign of life'!  Personally, I'm not a "minimalistic" type of house style .. show me some life!


I've seen some celebs homes I liked.....I like old Spanish.  Carrie Fisher's house comes to mind.


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> BINGO!!! .. it's like they are all so antiseptic, almost like a Hotel lobby, room .. where there is no 'sign of life'!  Personally, I'm not a "minimalistic" type of house style .. show me some life!


DH usually asks: are they into designer stuff? And we do spot the Hermes/Fendi/LV. 

I like looking at magazine spreads of houses with innovative or unique features, like those with library shelves that remind me of Henry Higgin's library in My Fair Lady.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Not defending Methane, but if she built herself a house of cards, then she would definitely be keeping her "Hollywood career" alive in anticipation of the day that that flimsy house comes tumbling down.
> 
> 
> Gives dramatic meaning to biting the hands that feed you. Rapacious Raptor.
> 
> View attachment 5256992



If the above photo is unretouched,  she is not aging well at all.


----------



## Annawakes

Thank you for posting the BBC documentary @Chanbal.  I just watched it.  They took great care to present both sides of M’s coverage.  They didn’t mince words though, when it came to stating the competitiveness and fracture between the brothers.  

I thought it was funny that one reporter (?) referred to M as “the hand”. He wouldn’t even speak her name. Just “when ‘the hand’ came….” .  He was talking about M right?  I didn’t misinterpret that?


----------



## V0N1B2

Annawakes said:


> Thank you for posting the BBC documentary @Chanbal.  I just watched it.  They took great care to present both sides of M’s coverage.  They didn’t mince words though, when it came to stating the competitiveness and fracture between the brothers.
> 
> I thought it was funny that one reporter (?) referred to M as “the hand”. He wouldn’t even speak her name. Just “when ‘the hand’ came….” .  He was talking about M right?  I didn’t misinterpret that?


The Hand. OMG how fitting, really.
No Harry, wrong way! not like that, like this!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

More of The Hand in action.
No no Harry, me first. I'm next in line after Camilla. Me. Not you. Me.
Me me me me me me me me me me me me me


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> More of The Hand in action.
> No no Harry, me first. I'm next in line after Camilla. Me. Not you. Me.
> Me me me me me me me me me me me me me


And it has happened so many times that she can't claim people are picking on her for one misjudgement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The controversial BBC documentary: The Princes and the Press (I didn't have a chance to watch it yet)




Fascinating interviews by the BBC.  Gloves are decidedly off.  Not sure this needs to be said, the BRF will never receive the fawning, obsequious coverage it once did. The scrutiny will only increase.

Thanks so much, @Chanbal, for posting this. I’m looking forward to the next episode.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> Thank you for posting the BBC documentary @Chanbal.  I just watched it.  They took great care to present both sides of M’s coverage.  They didn’t mince words though, when it came to stating the competitiveness and fracture between the brothers.
> 
> _I thought it was funny that one reporter (?) referred to M as “the hand”. He wouldn’t even speak her name. Just “when ‘the hand’ came_….” .  He was talking about M right?  I didn’t misinterpret that?



I thought the reporter was referring to a palace aide?


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> The Hand. OMG how fitting, really.
> No Harry, wrong way! not like that, like this!



When I first saw her doing this clinging [all those years ago], I thought she was using him for balance. She does have huge bunions so walking in heels must be painful and treacherous.  Now, after being ‘educated’, I realize I was wrong. Either she knows he is stoned/drunk/whatever and needs to be guided or she is controlling him. In the video where she wants to walk in after Camilla, Hazzie makes such a strange face, kinda like a person who is bored with all of it. Or Camilla said something to him and he smarted off a retort?  Not sure which?


----------



## tiktok

Harry actually comes off as way worse than Meghan in this documentary so far - very immature with little self-control.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Harry actually comes off as way worse than Meghan in this documentary so far - very immature with little self-control.



100% agree. William, too, comes off badly. Charles pouting about not being the cover story = jerk, kinda like his sons.
  Clearly, these royals take their entitlement way too seriously.  Based on Hazzie’s own comments, there is indeed a ‘deal’ between the BRF and press. So, why didn’t Charles get his sons in line? 









						Royal Family blasts BBC over The Princes and the Press series
					

Lawyers for the Royal Family were on standby over the two-part BBC2 series, which included claims that insiders from other royal households had briefed against the Sussexes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_The hour-longer episode one of the divisive two-part series, which was aired on Monday night, featured: 
_

_Claims by Omid Scobie - the journalist who co-authored the controversial Finding Freedom biography about the Sussexes - that negative stories about the Sussexes had been briefed by other royal households_
_Counter-claims by journalist and MailOnline columnist Dan Wootton that people 'behind the scenes' had come forward to the press after 'getting annoyed' at the behaviour of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry _
_An on-camera interview by Meghan Markle's lawyer in which she denied claims that the Duchess of Sussex had 'bullied' royal staff_
_An apology by a private detective who admitted he had targeted Prince Harry's then girlfriend Chelsy Davy in 2004 _
_Claims that Prince Charles had been 'overshadowed' by a decision by Harry's press secretary to release a statement criticising the press's coverage of his relationship with Meghan Markle while he was on a royal trip to Oman_


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree. William, too, comes off badly. Charles pouting about not being the cover story = jerk, kinda like his sons.
> Clearly, these royals take their entitlement way too seriously.  Based on Hazzie’s own comments, there is indeed a ‘deal’ between the BRF and press. So, why didn’t Charles get his sons in line?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Family blasts BBC over The Princes and the Press series
> 
> 
> Lawyers for the Royal Family were on standby over the two-part BBC2 series, which included claims that insiders from other royal households had briefed against the Sussexes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The hour-longer episode one of the divisive two-part series, which was aired on Monday night, featured: _
> 
> 
> _Claims by Omid Scobie - the journalist who co-authored the controversial Finding Freedom biography about the Sussexes - that negative stories about the Sussexes had been briefed by other royal households_
> _Counter-claims by journalist and MailOnline columnist Dan Wootton that people 'behind the scenes' had come forward to the press after 'getting annoyed' at the behaviour of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry _
> _An on-camera interview by Meghan Markle's lawyer in which she denied claims that the Duchess of Sussex had 'bullied' royal staff_
> _An apology by a private detective who admitted he had targeted Prince Harry's then girlfriend Chelsy Davy in 2004 _
> _Claims that Prince Charles had been 'overshadowed' by a decision by Harry's press secretary to release a statement criticising the press's coverage of his relationship with Meghan Markle while he was on a royal trip to Oman_



The person in charge of this documentary is in favour of a republic and abolishing the BRF.  Please keep in mind the huge bias- and that MM had Omid and her lawyer defending her but the Royals weren’t allowed to comment or given an advanced copy.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> The person in charge of this documentary is in favour of a republic and abolishing the BRF.  Please keep in mind the huge bias- and that MM had Omid and her lawyer defending her but the Royals weren’t allowed to comment or given an advanced copy.


Methane had an "in" with the person in charge of this docu? Mutual appreciation society against the BRF?


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> The person in charge of this documentary is in favour of a republic and abolishing the BRF.  Please keep in mind the huge bias- and that MM had Omid and her lawyer defending her but the Royals weren’t allowed to comment or given an advanced copy.



Yes, I did read that in the article. The bias does come through in the video. MM’s lawyer and Omid speak freely while no one defends the palace [as the palace’s note indicates]. Imo that’s why this is a fascinating piece - kind of like the Bashir/Diana interview. It is so unusual to hear this criticism. Are the reporters simply complaining because they were snubbed?  Or did they really have sources telling them stuff that they did not print?  What else has been said? Was this documentary filmed before MM admitted her lies? Lots of intrigue, lots of questions.

ETA: apparently, Scooby says this was filmed a year ago.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> More of The Hand in action.
> No no Harry, me first. I'm next in line after Camilla. Me. Not you. Me.
> Me me me me me me me me me me me me me



The audacity, three days after the wedding. He should have gotten it annulled right there and then.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I did read that in the article. The bias does come through in the video. MM’s lawyer and Omid speak freely while no one defends the palace [as the palace’s note indicates]. Imo that’s why this is a fascinating piece - kind of like the Bashir/Diana interview. It is so unusual to hear this criticism. Are the reporters simply complaining because they were snubbed?  Or did they really have sources telling them stuff that they did not print?  What else has been said? Was this documentary filmed before MM admitted her lies? Lots of intrigue, lots of questions.
> 
> ETA: apparently, Scooby says this was filmed a year ago.




I wonder how much editing they had to do since MM admitted she was collaborating with Omid and his witness statement may also contain factual errors….  It was recorded before the court case.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a theory - Maybe I am imagining that we have been told in the past how important Thanksgiving is to MM?  She loves cooking [haaaa], so maybe she did not want to travel during this holiday?
> 
> OR is it because _she and he _were there?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5255942
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie and Zara Tindall christen their babies at Windsor
> 
> 
> The Queen celebrated the double christening of her two great-grandsons with Princess Eugenie, Zara Tindall and their families in Windsor this afternoon in a celebration thought to be the first of its kind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My god. I know this is shallow but  cressida plus man are so much better looking than H&M    M was pretty in a very fake way at the beginning but she’s letting it all hang out now and H has been scowling for so long you could rent him to Norte dame as a gargoyle.


CarryOn2020 said:


> In theory and for most of us, I agree. This crowd, though,  maintains a very small circle, so it is inevitable they see each other frequently. As far as Eug is concerned, I wonder. She seems to be oh-so-friendly with everyone and anyone. Maybe she is genuine, maybe she loves the drama. Time will tell.


You think she’s a ****-stirrer like her mum? Could be. She is definitely trying to play cute and innocent with those headbands of hers.
I do suspect she loves attention  and wants to be the   Popular ‘Head girl’ of her friendship group.


Chanbal said:


> The controversial BBC documentary: The Princes and the Press (I didn't have a chance to watch it yet)



It’s just going to be the same old bunkum about how hard growing up in the press and losing Diana was because that’s the only narrative they have even though these brothers are now 40-something.
Then add in a subplot about how revolutionary M was  and how she was unfairly hounded by the gutter press for daring to be different. (Candle in the wind plays)

If they are feeling particularly candid they might mention that monkey comment was from the Twitter of a bbc radio DJ but probably not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> I wonder how much editing they had to do since MM admitted she was collaborating with Omid and his witness statement may also contain factual errors….  It was recorded before the court case.



Was it recorded before the latest case where she admitted she had lied in the first case?  I’m confused.
Was this the “info” that Hazzie planned to tell?


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> I wonder how much editing they had to do since MM admitted she was collaborating with Omid and his witness statement may also contain factual errors….  It was recorded before the court case.


If I was editing it I would have that flashing whenever either of them was talking.  
I would also have a cut of Haz in his nazi costume to headlines of reports of him using racist terms in the army to him talking about how insensitive his family were to sweet little Pumper.

To be honest, even if I wasn’t obviously partisan on this, I’d say it was a bad idea to release this before the trial came out as there’s still stuff up in the air.

Also, it’s sad to see even the great Ian Hislop and the private eye fell for her lies for a while.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Was this documentary filmed before MM admitted her lies?* Lots of intrigue, lots of questions.
> 
> ETA: apparently, Scooby says this was filmed a year ago.



We can probably track the timeline from the progress of Omid's facial changes/upgrades.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ah, Neil explains the issue:
W&K plan to use social media to broadcast their ‘jubilee’ interviews, rather than use the BBC. Ouch.


----------



## Sharont2305

V0N1B2 said:


> More of The Hand in action.
> No no Harry, me first. I'm next in line after Camilla. Me. Not you. Me.
> Me me me me me me me me me me me me me


And this was only about 5 days after the wedding.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was it recorded before the latest case where she admitted she had lied in the first case?  I’m confused.
> Was this the “info” that Hazzie planned to tell?



I read on another thread that they did have to edit to cut out statements because of MM court admissions… she “forgot” she collaborated with Omid on his book… lol…”forgot”…


----------



## needlv

Lol… (referring to the documentary)


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> When I first saw her doing this clinging [all those years ago], I thought she was using him for balance. She does have huge bunions so walking in heels must be painful and treacherous.  Now, after being ‘educated’, I realize I was wrong. Either she knows he is stoned/drunk/whatever and needs to be guided or she is controlling him. *In the video where she wants to walk in after Camilla, Hazzie makes such a strange face, kinda like a person who is bored with all of it. Or Camilla said something to him and he smarted off a retort?  Not sure which?*


This still makes me so very cross !

_EDIT - I mudled up two events. The video referred to above was the BP garden party just after the wedding.

However there is a another video with similar puppetry and manoeuverings_
There was a reception to mark 50 years since the investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales So *Charles was guest of honour.* It was held at Buckingham Palance. I don't know the number of guests but it was an important and substantial enough do. Welby gave a speech, Theresa May PM at the time etc. were present and representatives of Charles' Welsh charities . Harry and Meghan were supposed to have been seated in the hall so if you view the longer clips, PC is surprised to see H&M in the anteroom. It gets really messy then. An aide is summonded and H&M are waived aside to allow HMTQ to lead a viewing of some memorabilia. H&M then try to scoot acros the room, presumably to get into the reception room. At the same time as M is marching ahead, it then seems to register that, a. M is ahead of HMTQ and b. H&M will enter the room in front of HMTQ, whom all the guests are expecting to see first and protocol dictates. I know some people think this stuff is anachronistic but its about respect for the office. Not exactly rocket science.

But the one that left me openmouthed - several month ago there was compliation vides of Meghan's shoving etc. posted here and in the middle is one part when Meghan snatches a pen out of Harry's hand, and I mean snatches, really snatches it, not a tap or a press. My guess it was on the Australia/Pacific tour.


----------



## papertiger

V0N1B2 said:


> More of The Hand in action.
> No no Harry, me first. I'm next in line after Camilla. Me. Not you. Me.
> Me me me me me me me me me me me me me



OMG, I would have a really hard time not smacking that hand away from me, it literally makes me feel ill just watching


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> This still makes me so very cross !
> The event was a reception to mark 50 years since the investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales So *Charles was guest of honour.* It was held at Buckingham Palance. I don't know the number of guests but it was an important and substantial enough do. Welby gave a speech, Theresa May PM at the time etc. were present and representatives of Charles' Welsh charities . Harry and Meghan were supposed to have been seated in the hall so if you view the longer clips, PC is surprised to see H&M in the anteroom. It gets really messy then. An aide is summonded and H&M are waived aside to allow HMTQ to lead a viewing of some memorabilia. H&M then try to scoot acros the room, presumably to get into the reception room. At the same time as M is marching ahead, it then seems to register that, a. M is ahead of HMTQ and b. H&M will enter the room in front of HMTQ, whom all the guests are expecting to see first and protocol dictates. H&M then jump in the line behind Camilla but before W&K. so no wonder Camilla shoots him a hard stare. I know some people think this stuff is anachronistic but its about respect for the office. Not exactly rocket science.
> 
> But the one that left me openmouthed - several month ago there was compliation vides of Meghan's shoving etc. posted here and in the middle is one part when Meghan snatches a pen out of Harry's hand, and I mean snatches, really snatches it, not a tap or a press. My guess it was on the Australia/Pacific tour.


An anachronistic system ? Maybe, but it is the UK system, gotta respect the UK choice , it is the UK "truth"


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> This still makes me so very cross !
> The event was a reception to mark 50 years since the investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales So *Charles was guest of honour.* It was held at Buckingham Palance. I don't know the number of guests but it was an important and substantial enough do. Welby gave a speech, Theresa May PM at the time etc. were present and representatives of Charles' Welsh charities . Harry and Meghan were supposed to have been seated in the hall so if you view the longer clips, PC is surprised to see H&M in the anteroom. It gets really messy then. An aide is summonded and H&M are waived aside to allow HMTQ to lead a viewing of some memorabilia. H&M then try to scoot acros the room, presumably to get into the reception room. At the same time as M is marching ahead, it then seems to register that, a. M is ahead of HMTQ and b. H&M will enter the room in front of HMTQ, whom all the guests are expecting to see first and protocol dictates. H&M then jump in the line behind Camilla but before W&K. so no wonder Camilla shoots him a hard stare. I know some people think this stuff is anachronistic but its about respect for the office. Not exactly rocket science.
> 
> But the one that left me openmouthed - several month ago there was compliation vides of Meghan's shoving etc. posted here and in the middle is one part when Meghan snatches a pen out of Harry's hand, and I mean snatches, really snatches it, not a tap or a press. My guess it was on the Australia/Pacific tour.


Was it poor upbringing which is to blame? If her mother was busy instilling in her a very transactional way to view relationships and her father was granting her every wish, then her becoming a self-centred creature is inevitable. She does have rotten manners and I think no one ever pointed it out to her. Maybe all her friends are like this. The Mean Girls Sorority.


----------



## Annawakes

Yeah, I agree, this BBC documentary showed all the royals unfavorably.  The whole lot.  I noticed the pointed remark, “in exchange for living in palaces and for being partially financed by taxpayer money….”  The royals are supposed to provide details about themselves.  
That statement makes it sound like the royals are basically puppets, doing nothing more than trying to earn their keep.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Was it poor upbringing which is to blame? If her mother was busy instilling in her a very transactional way to view relationships and her father was granting her every wish, then her becoming a self-centred creature is inevitable. She does have rotten manners and I think no one ever pointed it out to her. Maybe all her friends are like this. The Mean Girls Sorority.
> [/QUO
> whatever the reason, she is clearly pushy.....I wonder if H is OK with this.....she actually calls him that - H instead of harry


----------



## Chanbal

This!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This guy admits he had a drug habit to fund. Who _are_ these people? 
_Listening between the lines _made this an interesting show. Agendas are clear - it’s about the $$$$

_Mr Burrows apologised, saying he was "very sorry" and that he acted this way "because I was greedy, I was into my cocaine, and I was living in a fake state of grandeur"._








						Prince Harry: Private investigator apologises for targeting prince's ex-girlfriend
					

A private investigator makes new claims of press intrusion on royals and others in a BBC documentary.



					www.bbc.com
				




ETA: admittedly, scooby, the liar, weakens H&M’s sympathy factor


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> This still makes me so very cross !
> The event was a reception to mark 50 years since the investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales So *Charles was guest of honour.*



Naw, that was the garden party he threw for his birthday only days after the wedding. 

I do however remember very well the embarrassing situation when they basically invited themselves to the investiture event and aides had to reign them in when they wanted to walk past the Queen. 



> But the one that left me openmouthed - several month ago there was compliation vides of Meghan's shoving etc. posted here and in the middle is one part when Meghan snatches a pen out of Harry's hand, and I mean snatches, really snatches it, not a tap or a press. My guess it was on the Australia/Pacific tour.



I have not seen that one, but one where she rips a book from his hands. Seems to be a pattern for her? I've said it before, who raised that chick.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The back-and-forth is everywhere


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> An anachronistic system ? Maybe, but it is the UK system, gotta respect the UK choice , it is the UK "truth"


Yesterday interview of darling Joanna Lumley, she was with Pss Anne, ladies were offered biscuits and JL took one first - a faux pas ...

Does it matter that the faux pas is because Anne is an HRH and JL is not ??? No, in many houses we teach our kids to wait until Granny has had a biscuit first, it is just manners, what if we were all digging for biscuits at the same time? There would be a lot of crumbs ????

I dog walk in a large dog group, we offer them treats - mine are slow about accepting, meanwhile their dog buddies covet the treats offered to mine, the buddies wait 3 secs then go after the treat, and mine sometimes snap "BUT IT WAS MY TREAT !!!!"  The Best solution is to ask that no more treats be offered to my slowpokes ... I am not going to chew out other dogs for being speedy

Sometimes rules and protocol  are the best ....


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> Harry actually comes off as way worse than Meghan in this documentary so far - *very immature with little self-control.*



And that's how we got where we are today.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw, that was the garden party he threw for his birthday only days after the wedding.
> 
> I do however remember very well the embarrassing situation when they basically invited themselves to the investiture event and aides had to reign them in when they wanted to walk past the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> I have not seen that one, but one where she rips a book from his hands. Seems to be a pattern for her? I've said it before, who raised that chick.



Ha Ha, I have obviously not been paying proper attention - I will look for aforemntioned video complilation as penance!
You  are correct @queen; I muddled the two events up. Which means I didn't even register the two different outfits - my bad


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Gives dramatic meaning to biting the hands that feed you. *Rapacious Raptor*.
> View attachment 5256992


 Thanks for your #28 nickname, Rapacious Raptor. One only needs to compare the eyes in the pictures to see that both sets look like predator eyes. Congratulations and here's The List #28 Ribbon.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> And this was only about 5 days after the wedding.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This!



It's nice to see this tweet is from a man of color, so Me Me can't claim racism.  Although, I suppose he is a meanie man, right MeMe??


----------



## papertiger

INSIDER
*Meghan Markle's estranged father Thomas Markle says her interview on 'The Ellen DeGeneres Show' was embarrassing for the royal family*
Mikhaila Friel
Tue, 23 November 2021, 3:12 pm






The Duchess of Sussex during her appearance on "Ellen" (left) and Thomas Markle (right).The Ellen Show/YouTube, 60 Minutes Australia/YouTube

Thomas Markle says Meghan's appearance on "The Ellen Show" was embarrassing for the royals.
During her appearance, Meghan took part in a number of prerecorded pranks.
"I've never seen a duchess behave this way, doing stupid stunts," Thomas told The Sunday Mirror.
The Duchess of Sussex's estranged father Thomas Markle criticized her appearance on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show."
During Meghan Markle's appearance on the daytime talk show on Thursday, she discussed her new life in California with Prince Harry and her children's book, "The Bench."
She also took part in a number of pranks in a prerecorded segment of the show. DeGeneres gave Meghan orders via an earpiece, including to eat "like a chipmunk"and to say she had healing powers.

*"It's no way to behave. The whole thing was kind of embarrassing.* *It was certainly embarrassing for the royal family,"* Thomas told The Sunday Mirror.* "It's embarrassing for her as well. I suspect it embarrassed everyone in the UK, too."
"She's putting herself out there as a duchess but I've never seen a duchess behave this way, doing stupid stunts," *he added.
During the interview, Meghan recalled the car she used to get to her acting auditions, a Ford Explorer, and said she had to climb in through the trunk because the key had stopped working on the driver's car door.
*"The Ford Explorer she had in her early 20s that she mentioned was a good running vehicle. I don't remember any time she had to crawl out of the back of it to get out, like she said,"* Thomas told The Sunday Mirror.
*"The doors worked fine on that vehicle until the day she got rid of it," he added.
Representatives for the Duchess of Sussex did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.*


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> INSIDER
> *Meghan Markle's estranged father Thomas Markle says her interview on 'The Ellen DeGeneres Show' was embarrassing for the royal family*
> Mikhaila Friel
> Tue, 23 November 2021, 3:12 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex during her appearance on "Ellen" (left) and Thomas Markle (right).The Ellen Show/YouTube, 60 Minutes Australia/YouTube
> 
> Thomas Markle says Meghan's appearance on "The Ellen Show" was embarrassing for the royals.
> During her appearance, Meghan took part in a number of prerecorded pranks.
> "I've never seen a duchess behave this way, doing stupid stunts," Thomas told The Sunday Mirror.
> The Duchess of Sussex's estranged father Thomas Markle criticized her appearance on "The Ellen DeGeneres Show."
> During Meghan Markle's appearance on the daytime talk show on Thursday, she discussed her new life in California with Prince Harry and her children's book, "The Bench."
> She also took part in a number of pranks in a prerecorded segment of the show. DeGeneres gave Meghan orders via an earpiece, including to eat "like a chipmunk"and to say she had healing powers.
> 
> *"It's no way to behave. The whole thing was kind of embarrassing.* *It was certainly embarrassing for the royal family,"* Thomas told The Sunday Mirror.* "It's embarrassing for her as well. I suspect it embarrassed everyone in the UK, too."
> "She's putting herself out there as a duchess but I've never seen a duchess behave this way, doing stupid stunts," *he added.
> During the interview, Meghan recalled the car she used to get to her acting auditions, a Ford Explorer, and said she had to climb in through the trunk because the key had stopped working on the driver's car door.
> *"The Ford Explorer she had in her early 20s that she mentioned was a good running vehicle. I don't remember any time she had to crawl out of the back of it to get out, like she said,"* Thomas told The Sunday Mirror.
> *"The doors worked fine on that vehicle until the day she got rid of it," he added.
> Representatives for the Duchess of Sussex did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.*



She must hate that the tabloids call Thomas Markle every time she makes up a story of her youth.


----------



## Chanbal

I finally watched the BBC video. I've been fighting an excruciating back pain and I apologize if I don't sound very coherent.

The BBC documentary was relatively favorable to MM. Having one of MM's highly paid lawyers to deny the bulling accusations to the BBC large audience, that was a low blow. Interviewing MM mouthpiece Omid, who has apparently mislead the court about the sources of information for his book, doesn't show much respect for the BRF imo. I understand why the Palace is not happy.

To refresh one's mind:


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting views!


----------



## Chanbal

The BRF had enough…


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Was it poor upbringing which is to blame? If her mother was busy instilling in her a very transactional way to view relationships and her father was granting her every wish, then her becoming a self-centred creature is inevitable. She does have rotten manners and I think no one ever pointed it out to her. Maybe all her friends are like this. The Mean Girls Sorority.


I dunno ive met extremely doted on and indulged people who are really nice and loads of people grow up with mainly one parent. lots of children of a listers are less dramatic about their showbiz background than her (when she’s not playing poor) I think she’s bad at her core. 



marietouchet said:


> Yesterday interview of darling Joanna Lumley, she was with Pss Anne, ladies were offered biscuits and JL took one first - a faux pas ...
> 
> Does it matter that the faux pas is because Anne is an HRH and JL is not ??? No, in many houses we teach our kids to wait until Granny has had a biscuit first, it is just manners, what if we were all digging for biscuits at the same time? There would be a lot of crumbs ????
> 
> I dog walk in a large dog group, we offer them treats - mine are slow about accepting, meanwhile their dog buddies covet the treats offered to mine, the buddies wait 3 secs then go after the treat, and mine sometimes snap "BUT IT WAS MY TREAT !!!!"  The Best solution is to ask that no more treats be offered to my slowpokes ... I am not going to chew out other dogs for being speedy
> 
> Sometimes rules and protocol  are the best ....


OT but I’ve really gone off Joanna Lumley she seems so full of herself. Someone who makes travel shows for a living telling the proles not to go abroad was what did it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Interesting views!



This makes a lot of sense actually. We all know fame is not an easy game. Not only has she had an in from birth she got ahead with each of her marriages. 
She’s also an appalling actress and that must grate on the people who have honed their craft despite the fact they could’ve coasted on looks and sexual favours like she did.

Also you know Jennifer Lawrence must be extremely p*ssed she stole her face.


----------



## queennadine

I have been away for WAY too long! Catching up (at least a little ) now!


----------



## Chanbal

This was also my impression.  
*BBC is accused of 'anti-William and pro-Meghan and Harry' bias in documentary about warring Princes that featured interview with Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer but 'didn't let Palace have their say'*

Buckingham Palace accused BBC of giving credibility to 'overblown and unfounded claims' about the Royals
Comment was made in a joint statement by Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace and Clarence House
It comes after the BBC tonight aired part one of a two-part BBC2 series called The Princes and The Press
The episode included claims that insiders from other royal households had briefed against the Sussexes 









						BBC is accused of 'anti-William and pro-Meghan and Harry' bias
					

Angela Levin said it was telling that the corporation's final interview of last night's show was with the Duchess of Sussex's British lawyer, Jenny Afia (pictured).




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I finally watched the BBC video. I've been fighting an excruciating back pain and I apologize if I don't sound very coherent.
> 
> The BBC documentary was relatively favorable to MM. Having one of MM's highly paid lawyers to deny the bulling accusations to the BBC large audience, that was a low blow. Interviewing MM mouthpiece Omid, who has apparently mislead the court about the sources of information for his book, doesn't show much respect for the BRF imo. I understand why the Palace is not happy.
> 
> To refresh one's mind:



Get well soon!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Interesting views!



Since when is she considered an "A list celebrity"??


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This was also my impression.
> *BBC is accused of 'anti-William and pro-Meghan and Harry' bias in documentary about warring Princes that featured interview with Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer but 'didn't let Palace have their say'*
> 
> Buckingham Palace accused BBC of giving credibility to 'overblown and unfounded claims' about the Royals
> Comment was made in a joint statement by Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace and Clarence House
> It comes after the BBC tonight aired part one of a two-part BBC2 series called The Princes and The Press
> The episode included claims that insiders from other royal households had briefed against the Sussexes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BBC is accused of 'anti-William and pro-Meghan and Harry' bias
> 
> 
> Angela Levin said it was telling that the corporation's final interview of last night's show was with the Duchess of Sussex's British lawyer, Jenny Afia (pictured).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Same old story with this lot blah blah being famous is so hard blah blah. The press are against us blah blah.

You know it has just occurred to me that Justin Bieber has been famous since he was about 12 and probably receives more hate on any given Tuesday than these royals and Rumpy-Pumpy have got in their whole lives and what does he do? He enjoys the money and the power fame gives him. He’s dabbled in drugs but as far as I know he’s not saying that’s everyone’s fault but his own.

I’m not a Bieber Stan or anything but I do think this lot could learn a thing or two about resilience from any celebrity who actually had to pull themselves up.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Same old story with this lot blah blah being famous is so hard blah blah. The press are against us blah blah.
> 
> You know it has just occurred to me that Justin Bieber has been famous since he was about 12 and probably receives more hate on any given Tuesday than these royals and Rumpy-Pumpy have got in their whole lives and what does he do? He enjoys the money and the power fame gives him. He’s dabbled in drugs but as far as I know he’s not saying that’s everyone’s fault but his own.
> 
> I’m not a Bieber Stan or anything but I do think this lot could learn a thing or two about resilience from any celebrity who actually had to pull themselves up.


I'm not a Belieber (is that what they're called?) but it's nice when any celebrity takes accountability for their actions.  He got famous when he was really young, and we all know how that often turns out (not well).  There's no one taking responsibility any more, and it's more just "poor me, it wasn't my fault" attitude.


----------



## tiktok

jelliedfeels said:


> Same old story with this lot blah blah being famous is so hard blah blah. The press are against us blah blah.
> 
> You know it has just occurred to me that Justin Bieber has been famous since he was about 12 and probably receives more hate on any given Tuesday than these royals and Rumpy-Pumpy have got in their whole lives and what does he do? He enjoys the money and the power fame gives him. He’s dabbled in drugs but as far as I know he’s not saying that’s everyone’s fault but his own.
> 
> I’m not a Bieber Stan or anything but I do think this lot could learn a thing or two about resilience from any celebrity who actually had to pull themselves up.



The one important difference is that Beiber chose it and the royals by birth didn’t. So I have some empathy for them on that score (although they definitely enjoy a lot of privilege, and I wish some of them used their limitless resources to grow more as people - ahem ahem).

The ones who married into it and keep complaining while enjoying the benefits I have below zero empathy for.


----------



## Lodpah

I read a new name attached to The Lying Duchess. Markle Claw. Very apropos.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> This makes a lot of sense actually. We all know fame is not an easy game. Not only has she had an in from birth she got ahead with each of her marriages.
> She’s also an appalling actress and that must grate on the people who have honed their craft despite the fact they could’ve coasted on looks and sexual favours like she did.
> 
> Also you know Jennifer Lawrence must be extremely p*ssed she stole her face.


respectfully, if she tried to steal her face she didn't succeed IMO
I think she looks more like her mom every day


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really do think blackmailing Charles would be taking it entirely too far for those two. He might be so quiet because a) his mother told him to be regal (wasn't there rumours he wanted to do a press released debunking all the lies after Oprah?) or b) he's just so deeply hurt he doesn't even want to touch the subject.
> 
> Re: money, who knows? I'd have thought it wasn't entirely impossible he still quietly funded them partially from his private funds, but now after them hurling insults for months? I really doubt it.


yes, I think the Royals take the high road....if they respond it's via staff or other "sources"
as far as financing, I wish Charles would cut them off


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> It's nice to see this tweet is from a man of color, so Me Me can't claim racism.  Although, I suppose he is a meanie man, right MeMe??


They have covered all bases. Hazard will vilify this guy as a misogynist. I am not white, but also not black, so I would be accused of racism. And if a woman who is black or biracial like Methane voiced disapproval, well, that would be jealousy. Narcs are never in the wrong. The world is unjustly against them.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Obviously, have purposely taken a break from all things tech - ie still 4K unread emails - just not be influenced continually by commercial statements that may or not be true made by people that are positively financially influenced based on any statement true or false - truth is a thing of the past it seems unless it can be blended to the narrative du jour.

 So I thought about this Meghan “Con Artist” Markle once in a whie and asked my own family members w/ diff social, age & eco lifestyles and there was a def shift after the big O interview bc every single female from 20’s- 90’s age groups started watching hating MM but said that by the end they liked her ver much.

All convos were private without pressure or influence and no-one knew my thoughts except my oldest DD, who also liked MM by the end of the interview.

Interesting, and wondering where this will go during the next few years

My thoughts about MM are still the same - it was a con, still is and the BRF are not handling this well imo - personally I put the blame on PC, whom should be passed over immediately in favor of Wills & Kate if the BRF wish to survive in this century or in to the next.

Your comments, ladies & gents still make me lol - so thankful to have all of you here @tpf ♥️


----------



## xincinsin

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Obviously, have purposely taken a break from all things tech - ie still 4K unread emails - just not be influenced continually by commercial statements that may or not be true made by people that are positively financially influenced based on any statement true or false - truth is a thing of the past it seems unless it can be blended to the narrative du jour.
> 
> So I thought about this Meghan “Con Artist” Markle once in a whie and asked my own family members w/ diff social, age & eco lifestyles and there was a def shift after the big O interview bc every single female from 20’s- 90’s age groups started watching hating MM but said that by the end they liked her ver much.
> 
> All convos were private without pressure or influence and no-one knew my thoughts except my oldest DD, who also liked MM by the end of the interview.
> 
> Interesting, and wondering where this will go during the next few years
> 
> My thoughts about MM are still the same - it was a con, still is and the BRF are not handling this well imo - personally I put the blame on PC, whom should be passed over immediately in favor of Wills & Kate if the BRF wish to survive in this century or in to the next.
> 
> Your comments, ladies & gents still make me lol - so thankful to have all of you here @tpf ♥


Their views were changed positively by the O interview? I had the opposite experience, went from indifference to disgust. To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to her before then. I stumbled upon this thread around that time. I was totally cheesed off by her scam act and Oprah's enabling (and overacting). Perhaps the difference is that I've met and been aggravated by narcs before, so I identified her as similar.

ETA: Was Oprah a deciding factor? Did Methane's association with her give her an aura of trustworthiness or credibility?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Their views were changed positively by the O interview? I had the opposite experience, went from indifference to disgust. To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to her before then. I stumbled upon this thread around that time. I was totally cheesed off by her scam act and Oprah's enabling (and overacting). Perhaps the difference is that I've met and been aggravated by narcs before, so I identified her as similar.
> 
> ETA: Was Oprah a deciding factor? Did Methane's association with her give her an aura of trustworthiness or credibility?


IDK about credibility but when their engagement was announced she got a huge response for being American and biracial (and an actress).  Then she got a lot of sympathy for the way she was treated by the British tabloids.   I think that's all a lot of people need to make them sympathetic to her.  So she can apparently do no wrong in the eyes of a lot of people (many of them young girls or POC)


----------



## Chanbal

@kylieer has a great sense of humor!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Get well soon!


Thanks, I'm trying. Stress doesn't help with pain, I may need to stop reading about these 2 for a couple of days.


----------



## CarryOn2020

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Obviously, have purposely taken a break from all things tech - ie still 4K unread emails - just not be influenced continually by commercial statements that may or not be true made by people that are positively financially influenced based on any statement true or false - _*truth is a thing of the past it seems unless it can be blended to the narrative du jour*_.
> 
> ♥



 back  So glad to see you hear. There is much wisdom in your post. Thank you 

RE: MM  no real haters here, just lots of people who dislike H&M’s  actions and their public comments/lies. IMO BRF royals should stay across the pond. They are not useful to us because there is so much to dislike about them - mainly, they use us for cash. Secondly, they are not _that _interesting - 99% of what they do is fuss and complain. Monaco’s royals - now _they _have some secrets!

I’m glad the BBC exposed ‘this deal’ that Hazzie fumed about [as if we hadn’t figured that one out].  Years ago, Diana told us about all those deals, so this show was kind of a _nothing-burger_. Fascinating in that the BBC would own up, that the lawyer would lie, that Omid would lie again. The new generation needs to hear it, understand it, not get fooled again.  Just my opinion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Thanks, I'm trying. Stress doesn't help with pain, I may need to stop reading about these 2 for a couple of days.



Noooo, we need you here  Your posts are some of the best ones we have.  I know, I know, these royals are a royal pain, so we must stay strong, be brave, vent as much as needed, and rest.  I’m hoping Ellen is their bottom, at least for the holidays. How much gritching can they do? [rhetorical question].  Take good care, be well.  We will get through this.


----------



## DeMonica

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ah, Neil explains the issue:
> W&K plan to use social media to broadcast their ‘jubilee’ interviews, rather than use the BBC. Ouch.




Leaving BBC would make perfect sense especially after this programme. I'm sure the media teams of the BRF are perfectly capable to put decent content out through their own channels. I think W+K's Ig is presenting them right; relatable, reasonably humble, of course not at state functions or movie premieres, but definitely as a new, revamped face of the monarchy.


----------



## DeMonica

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Obviously, have purposely taken a break from all things tech - ie still 4K unread emails - just not be influenced continually by commercial statements that may or not be true made by people that are positively financially influenced based on any statement true or false - truth is a thing of the past it seems unless it can be blended to the narrative du jour.
> 
> So I thought about this Meghan “Con Artist” Markle once in a whie and asked my own family members w/ diff social, age & eco lifestyles and there was a def shift after the big O interview bc every single female from 20’s- 90’s age groups started watching hating MM but said that by the end they liked her ver much.
> 
> All convos were private without pressure or influence and no-one knew my thoughts except my oldest DD, who also liked MM by the end of the interview.
> 
> Interesting, and wondering where this will go during the next few years
> 
> *My thoughts about MM are still the same - it was a con, still is and the BRF are not handling this well imo - personally I put the blame on PC, whom should be passed over immediately in favor of Wills & Kate if the BRF wish to survive in this century or in to the next.*
> 
> Your comments, ladies & gents still make me lol - so thankful to have all of you here @tpf ♥


ITA. I think when the BRF should have intervened in the very start of the ****storm, when they left for Canada. I know that the " never complain, never explain" method worked in the past but the press was different then and the people, too. I'm sure David and Wallis had a huge chip on their shoulders for the rest of their life but they had been easily sidelined. I'm sure they had felt unfairly treated but after all: Wallis got the blings and David got Wallis - and they eventually  sank into insignificance. Now our Disastrous Duo has much bigger appetite and ambition: they want to be global superstars, and unfortunately, they might be a tiny bit smarter, too. Not Hazzie, he's dumb as stick, but Meagain obviously can play this game better and she's not afraid to squat low enough.
I think PC is far cry from his parents: a sensitive but egoistic and - as his marriage shows - irresponsible man. Unfortunately, the Queen is old and I'm sure quite shaken by the happenings of the recent times to be able to helm this ship as she used to and the PC won't be a great help in this. I think it would serve the interest of the monarchy if he stepped back and passed the throne to Wills who has shown more leadership qualities than PC ever did.


----------



## charlottawill

DeMonica said:


> ITA. I think when the BRF should have intervened in the very start of the ****storm, when they left for Canada. I know that the " never complain, never explain" method worked in the past but the press was different then and the people, too. I'm sure David and Wallis had a huge chip on their shoulders for the rest of their life but they had been easily sidelined. I'm sure they had felt unfairly treated but after all: Wallis got the blings and David got Wallis - and they eventually  sank into insignificance. Now our Disastrous Duo has much bigger appetite and ambition: they want to be global superstars, and unfortunately, they might be a tiny bit smarter, too. Not Hazzie, he's dumb as stick, but Meagain obviously can play this game better and she's not afraid to squat low enough.
> I think PC is far cry from his parents: a sensitive but egoistic and - as his marriage shows - irresponsible man. Unfortunately, the Queen is old and I'm sure quite shaken by the happenings of the recent times to be able to helm this ship as she used to and the PC won't be a great help in this. I think it would serve the interest of the monarchy if he stepped back and passed the throne to Wills who has shown more leadership qualities than PC ever did.


PC will never step aside in favor of W. Being king is his birthright and he's not about to give that up. He obviously won't be around as long as his mother, but even if it's only a decade or so he's not going to pass that up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DeMonica said:


> ITA. I think when the BRF should have intervened in the very start of the ****storm, when they left for Canada. I know that the " never complain, never explain" method worked in the past but the press was different then and the people, too. I'm sure David and Wallis had a huge chip on their shoulders for the rest of their life but they had been easily sidelined. I'm sure they had felt unfairly treated but after all: Wallis got the blings and David got Wallis - and they eventually  sank into insignificance. _*Now our Disastrous Duo has much bigger appetite and ambition: they want to be global superstars*_, and unfortunately, they might be a tiny bit smarter, too. Not Hazzie, he's dumb as stick, but Meagain obviously can play this game better and she's not afraid to squat low enough.
> I think PC is far cry from his parents: a sensitive but egoistic and - as his marriage shows - irresponsible man. Unfortunately, the Queen is old and I'm sure quite shaken by the happenings of the recent times to be able to helm this ship as she used to and the PC won't be a great help in this. I think it would serve the interest of the monarchy if he stepped back and passed the throne to Wills who has shown more leadership qualities than PC ever did.



Global superstars, indeed. They have plenty of powerful people to make that happen, too. Since Wallis&Ed lost their royal status, they eventually lost their connections and people lost interest. H&M seem to be thriving on the royal connection train, so they have not been cut off imo. Sure, sure lots of loud-mouthed press about being cut off, reality tells a much different story. H&M remain very connected to the BRF imo. 

  You are so correct - the world is different now. The press cannot continue to keep too many royal secrets because they lose credibility and risk being yesterday’s news.  As we know, somebody always talks. Lies and half-truths will be found out. So, go ahead, close those palace gates and send IG‘s to the world. That’s a successful strategy for our Tik-Tok world for now. They should use it while they can.


----------



## megs0927

Who has watched King Richard (the movie about Venus and Serena’s dad and their rise to greatness)? In the outtakes there is a picture of Serena curtseying to the Queen.  I can’t help but think this is a little jab to her prior BFF “never just call me Meghan”


----------



## xincinsin

megs0927 said:


> Who has watched King Richard (the movie about Venus and Serena’s dad and their rise to greatness)? In the outtakes there is a picture of Serena curtseying to the Queen.  I can’t help but think this is a little jab to her prior BFF “never just call me Meghan”


I think it's quite telling that Methane was astounded that she would have to curtsey to the Queen. That story I do believe because it involved Fergie having to give her a quick lesson. Methane's whoppers tend to involve unnamed nebulous people, or incidents which are unverifiable "he said-she said" allegations. I think curtseying was covered in palace etiquette lessons but Methane believed it would not apply to her. As recounted, she protested to Hazard: "she's your grandmother" and he retorted "she's the Queen". Methane obviously thought everyone is as shallow as she is and everyone puts on an act in public.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I think it's quite telling that Methane was astounded that she would have to curtsey to the Queen. That story I do believe because it involved Fergie having to give her a quick lesson. Methane's whoppers tend to involve unnamed nebulous people, or incidents which are unverifiable "he said-she said" allegations. I think curtseying was covered in palace etiquette lessons but Methane believed it would not apply to her. As recounted, she protested to Hazard: "she's your grandmother" and he retorted "she's the Queen". Methane obviously thought everyone is as shallow as she is and everyone puts on an act in public.



Agree, as a married-in, she should curtsy.  When she met the Queen, they were not married. Still, they were engaged, right? So, yes, curtsy. As an American, though, I  would not curtsy. I could be wrong, but I do not believe it is expected that foreigners bow/curtsy to foreign royals.  They do nothing for us over here


----------



## xincinsin

DeMonica said:


> ITA. *I think when the BRF should have intervened in the very start of the ****storm, when they left for Canada.* I know that the " never complain, never explain" method worked in the past but the press was different then and the people, too. I'm sure David and Wallis had a huge chip on their shoulders for the rest of their life but they had been easily sidelined. I'm sure they had felt unfairly treated but after all: Wallis got the blings and David got Wallis - and they eventually  sank into insignificance. Now our Disastrous Duo has much bigger appetite and ambition: they want to be global superstars, and unfortunately, they might be a tiny bit smarter, too. Not Hazzie, he's dumb as stick, but Meagain obviously can play this game better and she's not afraid to squat low enough.
> I think PC is far cry from his parents: a sensitive but egoistic and - as his marriage shows - irresponsible man. Unfortunately, the Queen is old and I'm sure quite shaken by the happenings of the recent times to be able to helm this ship as she used to and the PC won't be a great help in this. I think it would serve the interest of the monarchy if he stepped back and passed the throne to Wills who has shown more leadership qualities than PC ever did.


Agreed. But I also think no one would have expected Methane to be such a snake (apologies to reptiles!). Where it all went wrong was when the BRF refused their half-in/half-out proposal. If they had gotten their way, I'm very sure the Disgusting Duo would now be swanning around their pick of red carpet events and criss-crossing the globe on private jets, not a word of complaint except maybe to angle for more perks.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, as a married-in, she should curtsy.  When she met the Queen, they were not married. Still, they were engaged, right? So, yes, curtsy. As an American, though, I  would not curtsy. I could be wrong, but* I do not believe it is expected that foreigners bow/curtsy to foreign royals. * They do nothing for us over here


Interesting question. I too would like to know the protocol. It might differ if she was on home ground or in the foreign royal's country. If an American curtseyed to TQ in the UK, would it be a mark of respect? Would the American be obliged to curtsey or is he/she free to stick out a hand and expect TQ to shake it?

Also to note, Methane was not against curtseying. She merely assumed that curtseying was a show for the public and she would not be expected to do it out of public eye.


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, as a married-in, she should curtsy.  When she met the Queen, they were not married. Still, they were engaged, right? So, yes, curtsy. As an American, though, I  would not curtsy. I could be wrong, but I do not believe it is expected that foreigners bow/curtsy to foreign royals.  They do nothing for us over here



I think when you’re a guest at someone’s house you respect their customs even when you don’t like them / disagree with them / are not expected to follow said customs. It’s a show of respect - just like you take your shoes off at someone’s house even if you allow shoes in your own home, or don’t show up in a tank top and a miniskirt to the home of ultra Orthodox Jews or Muslims. Now if it’s the family of my fiancé - then there’s absolutely no doubt I’ll be extra careful to learn exactly what’s expected and follow that to a T.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Interesting question. I too would like to know the protocol. It might differ if she was on home ground or in the foreign royal's country. If an American curtseyed to TQ in the UK, would it be a mark of respect? Would the American be obliged to curtey or is he/she free to stick out a hand and expect TQ to shake it?
> 
> Also to note, Methane was not against curtseying. She merely assumed that curtseying was a show for the public and she would not be expected to do it out of public eye.



An American is not obliged to curtsy to the Queen but many  may choose to do it as an expression of respect. In Meghan’s case she was marrying into the family and adhering to the customs of her husband’s culture were expected. She apparently didn’t want to do that any more than she wanted to do the other duties expected for the role.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Royal Etiquette: Talking to the Queen
					






					abcnews.go.com
				




_Do not bow or curtsy.

"As an American when you're actually meeting the queen you don't have to do a curtsy or a bow because she's not the head of state of America," Gauger said. "What might be a nice sign of respect if you're a gentleman, you can just do a slight nod… and some women, if they really want to they can do a little bob."

Do not attempt to touch the queen. Wait for the queen to extend her hand. 

"You shouldn't touch a member of the royal family. You should always wait for them to extend their hand to you and with that handshake, just be nice and gentle," he said. "If she doesn't extend her hand it's not a sign of disrespect and that's where you might enter into conversation."
_


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, as a married-in, she should curtsy.  When she met the Queen, they were not married. Still, they were engaged, right? So, yes, curtsy. As an American, though, I  would not curtsy. I could be wrong, but I do not believe it is expected that foreigners bow/curtsy to foreign royals.  They do nothing for us over here


In Japanese culture we slightly bow down our heads, business people who do work with Japanese do it, in the US and elsewhere. It’s just good protocol. Also giving gifts, you make sure you don’t use certain colors that is offensive when wrapping gifts. I can’t imagine any company, American or European who do business with them would not study up on cultures. I don’t have to bow down but I will show respect, mutually.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From that conversation with Hazzie, MM thought she was meeting family, possibly she was checking if Hazzie’s intentions were certain.  Hazzie, on the other hand, demanded respect for his monarch. He was more or less showing off how powerful his family was.  Certainly sounds like a bad Lifetime rom/com.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> In Japanese culture we slightly bow down our heads, business people who do work with Japanese do it, in the US and elsewhere. It’s just good protocol. Also giving gifts, you make sure you don’t use certain colors that is offensive when wrapping gifts. I can’t imagine any company, American or European who do business with them would not study up on cultures. *I don’t have to bow down but I will show respect, mutually.*


Ah well, we all know that showing respect in any form is not Methane's forte.


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Ah well, we all know that showing respect in any form is not Methane's forte.


Yep. You’re so right.


----------



## periogirl28

If I am not wrong, as long as you are not a U.K. citizen you need not curtesy or bow. My DH has met the Queen and Prince Phillip and they just shook his hand at a State banquet. If I had been introduced to the Queen I would have “bobbed”. I would just take it as a sign of respect, not a personal slight on me, plus my family did teach me manners.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, as a married-in, she should curtsy.  When she met the Queen, they were not married. Still, they were engaged, right? So, yes, curtsy. As an American, though, I  would not curtsy. I could be wrong, but I do not believe it is expected that foreigners bow/curtsy to foreign royals.  They do nothing for us over here


You are correct, as an American you are not expected to curtsy.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do not attempt to touch the queen. Wait for the queen to extend her hand.


Remember the uproar when Michelle O. gently put a guiding hand on the Queen's back? It was just a warm gesture by a warm person, but oh the outrage that she touched the Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> You are correct, as an American you are not expected to curtsy.



My family taught me manners, too - what is important about manners is making sure everyone feels welcome and comfortable.


----------



## jelliedfeels

tiktok said:


> The one important difference is that Beiber chose it and the royals by birth didn’t. So I have some empathy for them on that score (although they definitely enjoy a lot of privilege, and I wish some of them used their limitless resources to grow more as people - ahem ahem).
> 
> The ones who married into it and keep complaining while enjoying the benefits I have below zero empathy for.


I do agree with you for some extent but I feel like _everyone_ is born into something and being a royal is a cakewalk compared to say being born on a council estate.

They talk about being judged but every child is judged at school with these targets and stuff now whereas Eton never dared tell Harry he was too thick to get in. Everyone is also evaluated at work apart from them. There is no recourse for those who do their job badly as their mother is their boss. The press might release a tame slap hand story about their financial embezzlement.
I feel the press and the people at large have absolutely no say in what they do but I do think I at least don’t have to feel sorry for them and they could at least have the decorum to be stoical about some of the minor slights they face.




xincinsin said:


> Their views were changed positively by the O interview? I had the opposite experience, went from indifference to disgust. To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to her before then. I stumbled upon this thread around that time. I was totally cheesed off by her scam act and Oprah's enabling (and overacting). Perhaps the difference is that I've met and been aggravated by narcs before, so I identified her as similar.
> 
> ETA: Was Oprah a deciding factor? Did Methane's association with her give her an aura of trustworthiness or credibility?


Well I think Oprah helped them both a lot at the time and the  BRF’s ‘recollections may vary’ rebuttal was seen as a admission of guilt by many. I think it’s easy to forget how long it took for the details of what was a lie to come out through the press and by that point I think a lot of people had made up their minds.

I personally have found it so strange they were apparently so terrified of being called racist that they let the rush wedding go ahead, at least according to lady C, but then when they actually got called that anyway they barely seemed to react. It makes me wonder why they didn’t just get Harry to drop her in the early days and roll with the punches, especially given she had far less credibility as a golddigger  then she does now as H’s wife.

In the U.K. and amongst international royal enthusiasts the PR campaign had started long before the Oprah interview. (In part to rehabilitate her image of being a d-lister who hangs around clubs looking for wealthy men) obviously the palace took the fact she’s biracial to put to bed the stories about him shouting slurs in the army because a racist wouldn’t marry the whitest woman of colour in history would he ?  Then they held tackyfest and tried to push her as a glamorous humanitarian.

I will say her being American probably helped them get into the US news far more than if he’d married a Brit. However, I do think they really locked into the media spotlight when they ironically announced they were leaving to have a more private life.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Thanks, I'm trying. Stress doesn't help with pain, I may need to stop reading about these 2 for a couple of days.


Get well soon Chanbal


----------



## papertiger

periogirl28 said:


> If I am not wrong, as long as you are not a U.K. citizen you need not curtesy or bow. My DH has met the Queen and Prince Phillip and they just shook his hand at a State banquet. If I had been introduced to the Queen I would have “bobbed”. I would just take it as a sign of respect, not a personal slight on me, plus my family did teach me manners.



British Commonwealth countries citizens are expected bow/curtsey   

Some UK citizens don't on principle, I know one Scott that didn't as he's very strong for independence. Like all things, if someone doesn't, it's treated as though they just forgot and no more is said. I expect that person may not be in a New Year's Honour List award though ha.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> From that conversation with Hazzie, MM thought she was meeting family, possibly she was checking if Hazzie’s intentions were certain.  *Hazzie, on the other hand, demanded respect for his monarch. *He was more or less showing off how powerful his family was.  Certainly sounds like a bad Lifetime rom/com.



That was before Meghan taught him who his monarch really is.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Was it poor upbringing which is to blame? If her mother was busy instilling in her a very transactional way to view relationships and her father was granting her every wish, then her becoming a self-centred creature is inevitable. She does have rotten manners and I think no one ever pointed it out to her. Maybe all her friends are like this. The Mean Girls Sorority.


Yes, it's a sign of poor upbringing. We were taught at an early age how to behave away from home like the saying goes, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." In other words, if one accepts someone's invitation, one follows their rules. M should have read the protocols and procedures binders she was given instead of just lugging them around for show. Smarty pants felt so far superior to the royals that she tried from the onset to change them to her "woke" way instead of taking notes and then politely offering suggestions later on like normal people do, but that would have been too taxing for this egotistical maniac, who liked to crash parties, push her way to the front, turn her back on HM, refuse to wear a hat, grab articles from others, etc..


----------



## redney

I'm American and would still curtsy to the Queen. It's a demonstration of respect, not as 'my' sovereign, but for her position in her country, the world, world history, etc. And she's 95 years old, for pete's sake! Respect your elders.


----------



## 1LV

redney said:


> I'm American and would still curtsy to the Queen. It's a demonstration of respect, not as 'my' sovereign, but for her position in her country, the world, world history, etc. And she's 95 years old, for pete's sake! Respect your elders.


Absolutely.


----------



## V0N1B2

Me first. Me.


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Me first. Me.


Princess Pushy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Me first. Me.


Every time she pulls these stunts I think _country come to town_.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Every time she pulls these stunts I think _country come to town_.


she is just plain rude to her husband


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> she is just plain rude to her husband



No doubt.


----------



## scarlet555

V0N1B2 said:


> Me first. Me.



HARRY, you watching this?!!??  F@ckng embarrassed for you, prince or not, dump this looser!!!  Your wife is a selfish self promoting crazy person, NO normal person, decent or not, does this to anyone!  WTF


----------



## Lodpah

scarlet555 said:


> HARRY, you watching this?!!??  F@ckng embarrassed for you, prince or not, dump this looser!!!  Your wife is a selfish self promoting crazy person, NO normal person, decent or not, does this to anyone!  WTF


He can’t do anything. He’s an empty suit. He’s been stripped of anything manly or what makes him human. He speaks what he’s fed, he looks soulless and so emasculated by his wife I don’t think he has his genitals.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ah, Neil explains the issue:
> W&K plan to use social media to broadcast their ‘jubilee’ interviews, rather than use the BBC. Ouch.




Interesting how anti-monarchists are using Royals (even if they're H&M) in order to diss the BRF. 

More interesting, that H&M are happy to be used (we haven't heard a peep!)


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> He can’t do anything. He’s an empty suit. He’s been stripped of anything manly or what makes him human. He speaks what he’s fed, he looks soulless and so emasculated by his wife I don’t think he has his genitals.



It's not his genitals that should denote assurance, it's his brain - like _all_ self-respecting humans, whichever gender/sex.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

xincinsin said:


> Their views were changed positively by the O interview? I had the opposite experience, went from indifference to disgust. To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to her before then. I stumbled upon this thread around that time. I was totally cheesed off by her scam act and Oprah's enabling (and overacting). Perhaps the difference is that I've met and been aggravated by narcs before, so I identified her as similar.
> 
> ETA: Was Oprah a deciding factor? Did Methane's association with her give her an aura of trustworthiness or credibility?



xincinsin, all great questions and was personally blind-sided by my FEMALE relatives positive response post O’s Grifters-R-Us interview

Cld only watch 15-seconds of it and that was 20-seconds too much.

To answer your questions:
- all relatives (29-years - 90-years) thought MM sounded v sincere 
- they felt COMPASSION after hearing the echo of her victim statements, “no-one asked if i was okay” 
Fact: she’s out pissi@g in the wild while on a safari with hairy :smirk: 
Think she’s okay, guys 
But I held back!

- they LOVED O - she “made” the interview, her visuals and tone on camera cemented a positive spin, this was mentioned even by none-O fans

- the INTERVIEW SETTING was mentioned, how lovely, peaceful blah blah blah bucolic 

All I can add is bravo to O & her team.

As a student of history and strategies of war, this interview exemplifies quite lot of POWER -> O, to pull off an interview of that magnitude so successfully, bc my family IS NEVER in agreement about anything or anyone and we are spread out all over the world: US, AU, IT,  etc. lol


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

V0N1B2 said:


> Me first. Me.



Hmmm, a little S&M@ home, maybe too?
Just rougher, keeping’ things spicy
Imo, you two just keep on running

Also the first tip-off that the BRF was  boarding the Titanic of all bad marriages with H&M was that only ONE (1) relative from the bride’s family showed-up, interestingly the one parent with whom she did not live with for a prolonged period of time or supported her financially.

Meghan Markle is not an orphan, unless it’s suits her con, she’s just a user & abuser and there are a million out there these days just like her unfortunately. 

Maybe that’s her fan base? Trying not to be judgemental but really my blame is with PC all the way and I once adored him lol


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> @kylieer has a great sense of humor!
> View attachment 5257984



The fake kid with H - I die!!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Interesting how anti-monarchists are using Royals (even if they're H&M) in order to diss the BRF.
> 
> More interesting, that H&M are happy to be used (we haven't heard a peep!)



papertiger,
All you said!

Handbag Harry, in particular, should be so ashamed of himself, but, of course, is not because he's a selfish, brainless twit.

First he and the wife sell out to Netflix even ignoring the ghastly portrayals of his Mum, to whom a symbolic umbilical cord seems to still be attached. Now it's the BBC with whom he is complicit in attacks on his family.

A BBC reporter, like Oprah in the US with a definite anti RF slant, would never have had Scabies or Malignant's Attorney included in the production without the total support of the Suckesses. In spite of this being the BBC, network of the infamous Martin Bashir interview, which is widely regarded as the source of some of Diana's mental health issues. The slimy little wuss left it to his Brother and Uncle to sort that out. He appears willing to use any outlet available to take shots at his family.

On some level he has to know, and evidently not care a whit, that all of this is hurtful to his family and his Grandmother in particular. He is so completely disrespectful to her not only as his Grandmother, but as his Monarch, and his Royal Commander of the Armed Services, which he recently proclaimed "made him the man he is today." ( He's too dense to understand that was ultimately horribly insulting to them because he's become a man widely treated with derision, a dried up husk, dominated  by a rabid sociopath, definitely not capable of being a leader of men in the battlefield.)


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she is just plain rude to her husband


Many times it is Harry that is the person who has been invited or the known person.  In cases like that, the invited person should be going first and then introduce the significant other.  So even putting royal  protocol aside, she shouldn't be thrusting herself in front of him.  This need to be seen first and as the more important person is really pathologic with her.  I think it is time that Princess Michael cede her title as Princess Pushy and hand it over to Migraine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> That was before Meghan taught him who his monarch really is.



COMMENT OF THE DAY.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she is just plain rude to her husband



Oh not only her husband. Remember the face she pulled when she took Doria to some UK event and the woman dared to actually speak?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Many times it is Harry that is the person who has been invited or the known person.  In cases like that, the invited person should be going first and then introduce the significant other.  So even putting royal  protocol aside, she shouldn't be thrusting herself in front of him.  This need to be seen first and as the more important person is really pathologic with her.  I think it is time that Princess Michael cede her title as Princess Pushy and hand it over to Migraine.


I knew someone had the princess pushy name but I forgot who it was


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I knew someone had the princess pushy name but I forgot who it was


Samantha Markle's book is "The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1"


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BBC interview simply confirmed what Hazzie mentioned in the O interview [which itv aired]:

_Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey that the press is 'bigoted' and that there is an '*invisible contract' *between the royal family and the tabloids to guarantee positive media coverage.

Meghan said their relationship with the media was like the 'wild wild West' and said the palace holds 'holiday parties' for journalists to try and get better press.

But their claims were today rubbished by royal correspondents, and the Society of Editors said it was 'not acceptable' for the couple to make such allegations without evidence._









						Royal experts rubbish Harry and Meghan's fears of media conspiracy
					

The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah Winfrey, during the bombshell interview aired last night in the U.S, that Buckingham Palace holds 'holiday parties' for the media in return for good press.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> Me first. Me.


Hmmm....where have I seen this before? 
They really are birds of a feather.


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> Hmmm....where have I seen this before?
> They really are birds of a feather.



One of more than a few similarities!


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh not only her husband. Remember the face she pulled when she took Doria to some UK event and the woman dared to actually speak?


The only time I've ever seen The Hand (lol) and her mum within 10ft of each other was at her wedding and the baby shower. When were they ever seen in public together? 
*I'm not saying you're wrong, I just honestly can't recall.


----------



## bellecate

Meghan Markle's mom joins the royal couple at luncheon - Bing video
See if this link works. If you don't wanted to be nauseated jump to the 1:54 mark to see #6's wife's face.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> The only time I've ever seen The Hand (lol) and her mum within 10ft of each other was at her wedding and the baby shower. When were they ever seen in public together?
> *I'm not saying you're wrong, I just honestly can't recall.


I remember it because Methane had unkempt hair and gesticulated wildly, and Doria was said to have had a wardrobe malfunction and her nipples were perky. And I did catch the glare Methane threw at her mother when Doria dared to open her mouth to say something. It was like the mask slipped and we caught a glimpse of the demon within.


----------



## muddledmint

sdkitty said:


> respectfully, if she tried to steal her face she didn't succeed IMO
> I think she looks more like her mom every day


I thought she looked a lot like doria at archie’s christening. That was the first time I really could notice a resemblance.


----------



## muddledmint

xincinsin said:


> Their views were changed positively by the O interview? I had the opposite experience, went from indifference to disgust. To be honest, I didn't pay much attention to her before then. I stumbled upon this thread around that time. I was totally cheesed off by her scam act and Oprah's enabling (and overacting). Perhaps the difference is that I've met and been aggravated by narcs before, so I identified her as similar.
> 
> ETA: Was Oprah a deciding factor? Did Methane's association with her give her an aura of trustworthiness or credibility?


Same. I thought she was ok, and I kind of liked her casual style before marriage. I was already thinking something must be really off with her due to all the negative stories in the press (tiara, bullying, Kate crying, cutting off her family members etc) but the Oprah interview clinched it for me. So. Many. Lies.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Many times it is Harry that is the person who has been invited or the known person.  In cases like that, the invited person should be going first and then introduce the significant other.  So even putting royal  protocol aside, she shouldn't be thrusting herself in front of him.  This need to be seen first and as the more important person is really pathologic with her.  I think it is time that Princess Michael cede her title as Princess Pushy and hand it over to Migraine.


Do most people know who princess Michael is? I think she ceded the notoriety to Pumper a long time ago.

I only know who princess Michael is because I found her book on the £1 shelf of a book shop a few years ago & it looked like cheese fest 101.


CarryOn2020 said:


> The BBC interview simply confirmed what Hazzie mentioned in the O interview [which itv aired]:
> 
> _Prince Harry told Oprah Winfrey that the press is 'bigoted' and that there is an '*invisible contract' *between the royal family and the tabloids to guarantee positive media coverage.
> 
> Meghan said their relationship with the media was like the 'wild wild West' and said the palace holds 'holiday parties' for journalists to try and get better press.
> 
> But their claims were today rubbished by royal correspondents, and the Society of Editors said it was 'not acceptable' for the couple to make such allegations without evidence._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal experts rubbish Harry and Meghan's fears of media conspiracy
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex told Oprah Winfrey, during the bombshell interview aired last night in the U.S, that Buckingham Palace holds 'holiday parties' for the media in return for good press.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


not like them then, who get SS to pay journalists for positive coverage  

I thought everyone knew the royals had a deal with the press? I mean duh!
There’s no way they can say the press as a whole is bigoted- that’s a ridiculous smear-and quite honestly an irresponsible one. 


muddledmint said:


> I thought she looked a lot like doria at archie’s christening. That was the first time I really could notice a resemblance.


I think she looks the most like her mum while her fillers are still fresh but who even knows what D the Grendel’s mother looks like these days? She seems to no longer be useful.


----------



## muddledmint

charlottawill said:


> Hmmm....where have I seen this before?
> They really are birds of a feather.



I always thought that clip plays like a parody skit of you know who. Like something you would see Alec Baldwin do on snl. But it’s the real deal.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> respectfully, if she tried to steal her face she didn't succeed IMO
> I think she looks more like her mom every day


I was just reading an interview with JL in Vanity Fair with a bunch of photos, and I see no resemblance between the two. MM is delusional as always.


----------



## xincinsin

Sometimes I wonder if I'm being unfair to Methane. Maybe she has a very scowly resting b*tch face, and what we see as her glare or evil eyes is actually her natural expression. It's like this unlikable colleague I currently have who is quite free with the definition of "truth" and only simpers at you when she needs something from you. Her boss commiserated with me and described her as having a "coffin" face 

And then I come to my senses and remind myself that no matter how foul a resting b*tch face you may be born with, you do not need to live up to it by being a harpy inside.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> I was just reading an interview with JL in Vanity Fair with a bunch of photos, and I see no resemblance between the two. MM is delusional as always.


I was thinking of teen JL in the hunger games but maybe it was just that awful  wig that made me think of M 




Speaking of which I keep seeing ads for wheel of time and I don’t understand why you’d spend so much on CGI and SFX and then put Rosamund Pike in the cheapest witch wig ever


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muddledmint

xincinsin said:


> Sometimes I wonder if I'm being unfair to Methane. Maybe she has a very scowly resting b*tch face, and what we see as her glare or evil eyes is actually her natural expression. It's like this unlikable colleague I currently have who is quite free with the definition of "truth" and only simpers at you when she needs something from you. Her boss commiserated with me and described her as having a "coffin" face
> 
> And then I come to my senses and remind myself that no matter how foul a resting b*tch face you may be born with, you do not need to live up to it by being a harpy inside.


Ha, to be honest, I don’t see what you guys are seeing most of the time when you point out these moments of her evil face showing.


----------



## muddledmint

charlottawill said:


> I was just reading an interview with JL in Vanity Fair with a bunch of photos, and I see no resemblance between the two. MM is delusional as always.


I thought meghan at the red dress event looked like Paula Patton in mission impossible. Something about the eye makeup probably. Although Paula patton is more attractive


----------



## csshopper

muddledmint said:


> Ha, to be honest, I don’t see what you guys are seeing most of the time when you point out these moments of her evil face showing.


_The Body Language Guy_ on YouTube analyzes videos with very slow speed that capture much of what we are referring to. It's not always obvious at first, but it's there. He has an extensive library of programs. The slips when her real self is revealed happen in so many situations that it's hard to ignore, he even picked up on her being momentarily angry with H when she reached for his hand during their wedding ceremony and he did not take it. 

There have been instances where her look is so hateful and evil that it's kind of scary because if it slips through, even momentarily, in a public setting then one wonders what goes on when she's away from a camera. Looking at some of this I have never doubted the stories of her bullying and I have concern about her as a mother.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just google _Meghan Markle evil stare_. Here are a few that popped up:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have always said the abuse Kate (and her family!) got was way worse than anything Raptor experienced, but even I was surprised to learn this (video, so not embeddable):

How many times the Royals' phones were hacked


----------



## V0N1B2

It's like she read a couple of books on neurolinguistic programming. Put your hand on Harry's back and *poof* he steps aside and lets her walk in front. Every.Single.Time.


----------



## bisousx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just google _Meghan Markle evil stare_. Here are a few that popped up:
> 
> View attachment 5258825
> View attachment 5258826
> View attachment 5258827
> View attachment 5258828



I honestly used to think most of the Meghan photos were photoshopped to make her look evil. At some point I realized that’s just how she looks when she drops her mask  Gotta add a few more stares to the bunch:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> The only time I've ever seen The Hand (lol) and her mum within 10ft of each other was at her wedding and the baby shower. When were they ever seen in public together?
> *I'm not saying you're wrong, I just honestly can't recall.



For a short while she brought her to some functions and occasions where she hadn't really any business to be (e.g. introducing Archie to the Queen and Philip - I don't think the Middletons came with three Cambridge kids, but if so, the Cambridges didn't invite the press also). That was when the narrative how oh so close they were was heavily pushed on us.

Speaking of Doria, has she been seen in months? No sappy "The Harkles are spending Thanksgiving with Doria whom Harry is oh so close to"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> Ha, to be honest, I don’t see what you guys are seeing most of the time when you point out these moments of her evil face showing.



I like to call them face malfunctions. She's all smiles and acting oh so cute, then someone does or says something and her face will completely slip until she catches herself. It is quite unsettling to watch. But you really need to see video footage, not just photographs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> It's like she read a couple of books on neurolinguistic programming. Put your hand on Harry's back and *poof* he steps aside and lets her walk in front. Every.Single.Time.



My favourite situation from this event: when he stepped over to greet someone and she neither let go of his hand nor made the move with him. She just stood there clinging onto his hand for dear life while their arms got longer and longer. Just...why is she completely not right in the head.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> It's like she read a couple of books on neurolinguistic programming. Put your hand on Harry's back and *poof* he steps aside and lets her walk in front. Every.Single.Time.


Like kung fu or judo. In Asian martial arts, there is a concept - kind of difficult to translate but it's like using using minimal force to divert heavy impact. She has trained him to give way the moment she touches him, so a slight pull on his shoulder translates into his entire body shifting aside. She doesn't even need to elbow him or shove him hard any more.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazin titles

"Harry and Meghan: Hellish Escalation - Escape from the Marriage?"

Not that I see him going anywhere anytime soon, but the fact that even is a headline.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For a short while she brought her to some functions and occasions where she hadn't really any business to be (e.g. introducing Archie to the Queen and Philip - I don't think the Middletons came with three Cambridge kids, but if so, the Cambridges didn't invite the press also). That was when the narrative how oh so close they were was heavily pushed on us.
> 
> Speaking of Doria, has she been seen in months? No sappy "The Harkles are spending Thanksgiving with Doria whom Harry is oh so close to"?


Either Doria has chosen not to be part of this dog and pony show, or she has served her purpose and has been Markled.


----------



## jelliedfeels

muddledmint said:


> I thought meghan at the red dress event looked like Paula Patton in mission impossible. Something about the eye makeup probably. Although Paula patton is more attractive


I think the thing with M is she’s always getting fillers or doing makeup or getting photoshopped to change her face (never changes that hair alas) so she does end up looking like a bootleg version of another prettier celeb. One day it’s Paula, next day J-Law, day after that it’s Medusa.

Didn’t Paula Patton also marry a total prat? That’s something they’ve got in common I guess.


1LV said:


> Either Doria has chosen not to be part of this dog and pony show, or she has served her purpose and has been Markled.


Yes it is quite interesting. She did seem to disappear when they left the BRF to my mind. Was she in the US media at all? 

I think she probably got markled as she served her purpose as proof of M’s black heritage.

She probably also served as a horrible reminder of M’s mere humanity and it is much more goddess-like to be born from the sky and raise yourself without parents. 

The more I think about it, the more I think it serves D right as she didn’t fight for the reputation of her family or for the ex who did a lot to help bring up their daughter when M was clearly telling H and family she was from a broken home and none of them cared about her.

I know some people think she lives with them but I can’t see them having anyone they can’t simply fire and NDA so close to the nucleus of operations.


----------



## 1LV

jelliedfeels said:


> I think the thing with M is she’s always getting fillers or doing makeup or getting photoshopped to change her face (never changes that hair alas) so she does end up looking like a bootleg version of another prettier celeb. One day it’s Paula, next day J-Law, day after that it’s Medusa.
> 
> Didn’t Paula Patton also marry a total prat? That’s something they’ve got in common I guess.
> 
> Yes it is quite interesting. She did seem to disappear when they left the BRF to my mind. Was she in the US media at all?
> 
> I think she probably got markled as she served her purpose as proof of M’s black heritage.
> 
> She probably also served as a horrible reminder of M’s mere humanity and it is much more goddess-like to be born from the sky and raise yourself without parents.
> 
> The more I think about it, the more I think it serves D right as she didn’t fight for the reputation of her family or for the ex who did a lot to help bring up their daughter when M was clearly telling H and family she was from a broken home and none of them cared about her.
> 
> I know some people think she lives with them but I can’t see them having anyone they can’t simply fire and NDA so close to the nucleus of operations.


“*One day it’s Paula, next day J-Law, day after that it’s Medusa*”
*“it is much more goddess-like to be born from the sky and raise yourself without parents*”

Omg.  Hilarious!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Has this been posted yet?


----------



## V0N1B2

She just can't let go of his hand. EVER. Like, just let the guy move through the line and shake hands with people. He doesn't need you stuck on his backside while he's trying to act like a Royal.


----------



## muddledmint

n


csshopper said:


> _The Body Language Guy_ on YouTube analyzes videos with very slow speed that capture much of what we are referring to. It's not always obvious at first, but it's there. He has an extensive library of programs. The slips when her real self is revealed happen in so many situations that it's hard to ignore, he even picked up on her being momentarily angry with H when she reached for his hand during their wedding ceremony and he did not take it.
> 
> There have been instances where her look is so hateful and evil that it's kind of scary because if it slips through, even momentarily, in a public setting then one wonders what goes on when she's away from a camera. Looking at some of this I have never doubted the stories of her bullying and I have concern about her as a mother.


i believe you and I’ve seen a few of those videos, but I don’t personally see it. To me it’s just her face all the time. She’s always had sort of a beady eyed sort of look - that’s the first thing I noticed about her when the news broke that Harry was seeing her. I think i am just not fluent in the language of the body


----------



## CarryOn2020

*“What if today, we were just grateful for everything?”  - Charlie Brown*


----------



## jelliedfeels

1LV said:


> “*One day it’s Paula, next day J-Law, day after that it’s Medusa*”
> *“it is much more goddess-like to be born from the sky and raise yourself without parents*”
> 
> Omg.  Hilarious!


Thank you! I try.


V0N1B2 said:


> She just can't let go of his hand. EVER. Like, just let the guy move through the line and shake hands with people. He doesn't need you stuck on his backside while he's trying to act like a Royal.


Well he might get away otherwise….


muddledmint said:


> n
> 
> i believe you and I’ve seen a few of those videos, but I don’t personally see it. To me it’s just her face all the time. She’s always had sort of a beady eyed sort of look - that’s the first thing I noticed about her when the news broke that Harry was seeing her. I think i am just not fluent in the language of the body


She does have beady eyes that make her look angry. It’s a bit incestuous really as a lot of the Windsors, especially Harry himself, have that look.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> *“What if today, we were just grateful for everything?”  - Charlie Brown*
> 
> View attachment 5259012
> 
> 
> View attachment 5259011


Is…is…. Woodstock about to eat another bird?
so many questions  


poopsie said:


> Why do you consider someone "crazy" if they don't think like you?
> As for being dumb and gullible, I could ask you the same thing.
> Not very nice is it?
> There is a thread for that in another forum (which I avoid like the plague as it is vicious and hateful beyond belief)
> This forum is my escape  from "all the crazy stuff going on" elsewhere


I agree, the purpose of this thread is to be respectful of others beliefs and disrespectful of H&M.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

OT @V0N1B2  On your avatar, you're shoulder-deep in water with an umbrella.  I hope you're safely away from the BC flooding.


----------



## purseinsanity

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!!!  With so much craziness going on in the world, I am thankful for this thread and for all of you!  Wishing everyone a safe and healthy Thanksgiving for all.  Hope you have an enjoyable day doing whatever it is you love!


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> *“What if today, we were just grateful for everything?”  - Charlie Brown*
> 
> View attachment 5259012
> 
> 
> View attachment 5259011


 Love this. Happy Thanksgiving to you all.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Hmmm....where have I seen this before?
> They really are birds of a feather.




Oh, I am so glad that you posted this, my immediate thoughts went right to the same place!


----------



## Luvbolide

V0N1B2 said:


> It's like she read a couple of books on neurolinguistic programming. Put your hand on Harry's back and *poof* he steps aside and lets her walk in front. Every.Single.Time.



it is worse than I thought, as it isn’t always as easy to spot among all of the footage of them. But when these scenes are isolated and lined up, it is astounding how she does it - every time! Harry the Dim should have called her out on it the first few times because she will never stop on her own. After all, he did successfully make his royal protocol position on curtsying/bowing to his grandmother!   But it is too late now - she is unbelievable sometimes!


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For a short while she brought her to some functions and occasions where she hadn't really any business to be (e.g. introducing Archie to the Queen and Philip - I don't think the Middletons came with three Cambridge kids, but if so, the Cambridges didn't invite the press also). That was when the narrative how oh so close they were was heavily pushed on us.
> 
> Speaking of Doria, has she been seen in months? No sappy "The Harkles are spending Thanksgiving with Doria whom Harry is oh so close to"?



Maybe Doria  is having Thanksgiving with Harry’s second father David Foster somewhere on the heap of markled people that H & MM are so close to!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Happy thanksgiving to you all. Enjoy your pumpkin pie!


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> She does have beady eyes that make her look angry. It’s a bit incestuous really as a lot of the Windsors, especially Harry himself, have that look.



yes, meghan and Harry look very alike! Similar beady, close set eyes, large noses, broad shoulders


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree, the purpose of this thread is to be respectful of others beliefs and disrespectful of H&M.



Nah, I don’t want to keep harping on this topic, but I don’t feel any responsibility to be respectful of dangerous and indefensibly wrong beliefs. Beliefs don’t take precedence over facts.


----------



## Chagall

xincinsin said:


> She equates beauty with bucks, and that dress cost a lot of bucks. She would never admit that it looked bad on her or she looked bad in it.


That is an absolutely beautiful dress. With the correct underwear it could have looked very elegant. Her bra is a terrible fit but even worse was shapewear that cut right across her stomach. A Shame.


----------



## bellecate

muddledmint said:


> Nah, I don’t want to keep harping on this topic, but I don’t feel any responsibility to be respectful of dangerous and indefensibly wrong beliefs. Beliefs don’t take precedence over facts.


'Opinions may vary' and that's okay.  #6 and his plus 1 have been quiet for a few days. That's never good. Wonder what they are cooking up? A chicken for Thanksgiving?


----------



## Swanky

You may not feel responsibility to be respectful, but we require it. 



muddledmint said:


> Nah, I don’t want to keep harping on this topic, but I don’t feel any responsibility to be respectful of dangerous and indefensibly wrong beliefs. Beliefs don’t take precedence over facts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh did I miss all the fun?


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> She just can't let go of his hand. EVER. Like, just let the guy move through the line and shake hands with people. He doesn't need you stuck on his backside while he's trying to act like a Royal.


Very insecure and unsure of herself IMO.


----------



## V0N1B2

Maggie Muggins said:


> OT @V0N1B2  On your avatar, you're shoulder-deep in water with an umbrella.  I hope you're safely away from the BC flooding.


Thanks doll, no flooding near me, so far.
Also giving thanks today to The Hand and her Purse for not flooding the interwebz with pictures of their entwined hands on a fancy knife carving into their tofurkey.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## breakfastatcartier

lanasyogamama said:


> I think they messed with the lighting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they messed with the lighting.


No, she’s one of those people that mess a perfectly good outfit. I was even shocked that this gown was Dior!
She reminds me of my colleague who’s always at the mall shopping for the most expensive things and yet, comes out looking a mess.


----------



## breakfastatcartier

Chanbal said:


> His apparent "_Left-wing/leaning_" is all for power and profit imo.
> In the meantime, their falsehoods are hurting QE big time.



I highly doubt that anything Harry and that z-lister wife of his put out now will harm the Royal Family in any way. Nobody cares for them in the Real World that much to take their lies seriously.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks @bellecate for your #2 nickname, #6 and his plus 1, that has been added to The List. Congratulations.  

Thanks @bag-mania for your nicknames #4, Duchess Do-gooder (I really love tongue-in-cheek compliments) and #5, pet dumper, sad but unfortunately true. Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master Club.  



Thanks @Annawakes for your #5 nickname The Hand.  Congratulations and welcome to the Nickname Master Club.  



Thanks @Lodpah for your #7 nickname, Markle Claw. Yes, she grasps his hand and never lets go.  Congratulations and here's your Gold Medal.  



Thanks @EverSoElusive for your #14 nickname, Spready Chicken Legs. Congratulations and welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.  



Thanks @xincinsin for your #29 nickname, Disgusting Duo. Congratulations and here's The List #29 Ribbon.


----------



## Mendocino

muddledmint said:


> I thought meghan at the red dress event looked like Paula Patton in mission impossible. Something about the eye makeup probably. Although Paula patton is more attractive



Factoid about Paula Patton: Meaghan allegedly worked on Paula's invitations when she married Robin Thicke. M. did the calligraphy for the envelopes, supposedly. I believed this when I first heard it, but now I'm not so sure.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> 'Opinions may vary' and that's okay.  #6 and his plus 1 have been quiet for a few days. That's never good. *Wonder what they are cooking up?* A chicken for Thanksgiving?


Dan Wootton explains…


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Dan Wootton explains…



Chanbal,

Hope your back pain has eased, or even better, ceased. Another great post.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, QE doesn’t take Hazzie’s calls  









						Queen's only two phone contacts she 'always' answered
					

The late monarch had an "anti-hacker encrypted" mobile phone to speak to her most frequent callers, a royal expert claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

muddledmint said:


> Nah, I don’t want to keep harping on this topic, but I don’t feel any responsibility to be respectful of dangerous and indefensibly wrong beliefs. Beliefs don’t take precedence over facts.


I guess I just disagree with you and we will leave it at that. I think if you are right about a serious issue  you still need to be eloquent and polite in explaining why others are wrong because the goal is to try and get people to see the facts not to vilify them. 

I do not feel so responsible in expressing what I think are clearly subjective like H is a whiny, balding Gargoyle or I have a theory that x did this because y because obviously I’m just expressing an opinion.

Anyway, if you celebrate it, Happy thanksgiving.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chagall said:


> That is an absolutely beautiful dress. With the correct underwear it could have looked very elegant. Her bra is a terrible fit but even worse was shapewear that cut right across her stomach. A Shame.


I think it has the makings of a understated dress (and I think it’s actually an abayah really)  but I do not understand how something clearly cut to be flowing can be so tight on her and she still went with that size. Underwear is not meant to be visible under modest clothing…that’s kind of the point


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Chanbal,
> 
> Hope your back pain has eased, or even better, ceased. Another great post.


Thanks you so much @csshopper, I'm feeling better today.  As they say, it's good to start the day with laughter. Here is a relatively old post, but it still does the job.


----------



## Chanbal

Curious fact!? In 'Travels with My Father' (Netfl*x, Season 5-episode 1, released September 2021), Jack Whitehall drives in front of Buckingham and claims to be "team Meghan". Well, it looks like he may have changed his mind…


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Thanks you so much @csshopper, I'm feeling better today.  As they say, it's good to start the day with laughter. Here is a relatively old post, but it still does the job.
> 
> View attachment 5259413


What's she carrying under her arm? A seat cushion?
I've never understood all these celebs who carry everything but the kitchen sink with them at the airport, walking down the street.... Phones and sugar free non fat caramel frappalattes and car keys...
She's got a big bag slung over her shoulder, can't she hang the neck pillow off of it, and whatever else is in her right hand? I mean, what if she needed to cling onto Harry with the other hand?


----------



## csshopper

Brief item in the DM about the Queen feeling better and looking forward to Family Christmas at Sandringham. The list of invitees mentioned did not include the Dumbartons.

Wouldn’t it be fun if she stripped them of the Sussex title, but left the Dumbarton in place to be forevermore used to refer/address them?

And sincere apologies to the wonderful people of Scotland, no disrespect intended to them. I understand your pain through association, the Dumbartons are only about 400 miles from me here in CA and I swear the air pollution increased when they moved in!


----------



## Chanbal

Weltweiter Ruhm! Germans and how they see the Montecito couple (partial translation provided). Hazz is disappearing, but the wife is not.  

*Sie übernimmt immer mehr die Kontrolle! Expertin: "Er verschwindet"*
Man hört und liest in den Medien fast nur noch von Herzogin Meghan. Dabei scheint Prinz Harry immer weiter in den Hintergrund zu rücken. Das zumindest behauptet eine Expertin.
Bei medialer Berichterstattung über die Sussexes stehe meistens sie im Fokus: Herzogin Meghan (40, geborene Meghan Markle). Von Prinz Harry (37) höre man jedoch immer weniger, während Meghan die Protagonistin aller Titelstorys sei… 









						Prinz Harry & Herzogin Meghan: Sie übernimmt immer mehr die Kontrolle! Expertin: "Er verschwindet"
					

Man hört und liest in den Medien fast nur noch von Herzogin Meghan. Dabei scheint Prinz Harry immer weiter in den Hintergrund zu rücken. Das zumindest behauptet eine Expertin.




					www.bunte.de
				




*She takes control more and more! Expert: "He's disappearing"*
You hear and read in the media almost exclusively from Duchess Meghan. Prince Harry seems to move further and further into the background. At least that's what an expert says.
In media coverage of the Sussexes, she is usually the focus: Duchess Meghan (40, née Meghan Markle). However, one hears less and less from Prince Harry (37), while Meghan is the protagonist of all cover stories…


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> "sugar free non fat caramel frappalattes"


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Wouldn’t it be fun if she stripped them of the Sussex title, but left the Dumbarton in place to be forevermore used to refer/address them?


I have a feeling PC will strip their titles as soon as he gets the chance, if not of his own volition, at the urging of William and Camilla. Despite her role in the Diana triangle, Camilla has kept her head down and followed the royal rule "Never complain, never explain", and in doing so has gained the respect of many who formerly disliked her. I'm sure her opinions carry a lot of weight with Charles, and I doubt she's a fan of the Dumbartons at this point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> What's she carrying under her arm? A seat cushion?



At that time it was reported it was a piece of art Harry gave her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I have a feeling PC will strip their titles as soon as he gets the chance, if not of his own volition, at the urging of William and Camilla. Despite her role in the Diana triangle, Camilla has kept her head down and followed the royal rule "Never complain, never explain", and in doing so has gained the respect of many who formerly disliked her. I'm sure her opinions carry a lot of weight with Charles, and I doubt she's a fan of the Dumbartons at this point.



Say about Camilla what you will (and no, I'm not especially fond of cheating either), she's not a fame wh*re. In fact it seems Charles' position was a con in her book.


----------



## bellecate

Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. I can somewhat tolerate hunting and eating game. But trophy hunting is just disgusting.


----------



## Sophisticatted

csshopper said:


> Brief item in the DM about the Queen feeling better and looking forward to Family Christmas at Sandringham. The list of invitees mentioned did not include the Dumbartons.
> 
> Wouldn’t it be fun if she stripped them of the Sussex title, but left the Dumbarton in place to be forevermore used to refer/address them?
> 
> And sincere apologies to the wonderful people of Scotland, no disrespect intended to them. I understand your pain through association, the Dumbartons are only about 400 miles from me here in CA and I swear the air pollution increased when they moved in!



Scotland can just pass them off as being titled after a bridge in the Bay Area (that I’m sure they’ll try to sell us at some point) and wash their hands of them completely.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Completely random and I couldn't disagree more, but I just read Carolina Herrera (maker of the red monstrosity) believes women over 40 with long hair are classless. Pretty sure that includes extensions, doesn't it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Completely random and I couldn't disagree more, but I just read *Carolina Herrera* (maker of the red monstrosity) *believes women over 40 with long hair are classless.* Pretty sure that includes extensions, doesn't it


Is Carolina Herrera's belief from before or after COVID? I thought that ponytails were a big hit during COVID?


----------



## Kevinaxx

charlottawill said:


> I have a feeling PC will strip their titles as soon as he gets the chance,


I hope so but I can see her still using it. What would happen if she still does?

finally caught up after reading pages here/there.

i said it before and it’s still true now, I feel really bad for their son/daughter. I can’t imagine growing up under scrutiny of famous parents much less “famous” parents who consistently thrust themselves in the spotlight all the while playing victim.

the values their kids are learning now (my nephew at barely 2 and 5 has picked up a LOT), I just…

and Meghan’s behavior, isn’t that a bit like a psychopath?

“Psychopathy is characterized by diagnostic features such as *superficial charm, high intelligence, poor judgment and failure to learn from experience*, pathological egocentricity and incapacity for love, lack of remorse or shame, impulsivity, grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, manipulative…”


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5259739



IMO the hypocrisy charges will haunt him until he renounces. His family plus he himself are responsible for huge carbon footprints, plenty of indecent behavior and other things we don’t know about. Renounce and he can go his own way. Same for her, too.


----------



## Chanbal

@QueenofWrapDress I found this one for you and Carolina


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Completely random and I couldn't disagree more, but I just read Carolina Herrera (maker of the red monstrosity) believes women over 40 with long hair are classless. Pretty sure that includes extensions, doesn't it


She does??  Well, I'm over 40 and have "long" hair, and not to toot my own horn, but I think I have much more class than some women she's dressing in her clothing!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> She does??  Well, I'm over 40 and have "long" hair, and not to toot my own horn, but I think I have much more class than some women she's dressing in her clothing!


I think that is a ridiculous statement on her part if she actually said it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO the hypocrisy charges will haunt him until he renounces. His family plus he himself are responsible for huge carbon footprints, plenty of indecent behavior and other things we don’t know about. Renounce and he can go his own way. Same for her, too.



This article was published in 2017, preMM [?]. Still, H’s hypocrisy seems to have quadrupled, no?


_German newspaper Bild had earlier claimed that Harry, 33, was with a security detail which arrived at Berlin’s Schoenefeld Airport and drove to sleepy Görlsdorf in the north-eastern state of Brandenburg.

The destination was the hunting grounds of German blueblood Albrecht Fürst zu Oettingen-Oettingen und Oettingen-Spielberg, a family friend who attended the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's wedding








						Prince Harry and a group of friends 'kill 15 wild boar on hunting trip'
					

The royal reportedly joined a group of 60 for a hunt in sleepy Görlsdorf




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At that time it was reported it was a piece of art Harry gave her.


What, did he give her a self-portrait?


----------



## Chanbal

_As Meghan Markle moves full speed ahead with her post-royal career, an insider says she's hyper-focused on her public image — so much so that *she Googles her name several times a day!*

“It’s the first thing she does every morning,” the insider dishes. “Then she’ll check websites right until bedtime, even though *she’s got alerts set up to keep track of everything people say about her*.”_









						Meghan Markle Keeping 'Track' Of Media Coverage Surrounding Her & It's 'Driving' Husband Prince Harry 'Up The Wall,' Says Source
					

An insider spilled the 'Suits' alum will 'check websites right until bedtime' for news about her.




					okmagazine.com


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> _As Meghan Markle moves full speed ahead with her post-royal career, an insider says she's hyper-focused on her public image — so much so that *she Googles her name several times a day!*
> 
> “It’s the first thing she does every morning,” the insider dishes. “Then she’ll check websites right until bedtime, even though *she’s got alerts set up to keep track of everything people say about her*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Keeping 'Track' Of Media Coverage Surrounding Her & It's 'Driving' Husband Prince Harry 'Up The Wall,' Says Source
> 
> 
> An insider spilled the 'Suits' alum will 'check websites right until bedtime' for news about her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com


I would not suggest her reading this site before bedtime.  It could keep her awake.


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> What, did he give her a self-portrait?
> View attachment 5259955


I can’t stop laughing!  This is priceless.


----------



## gracekelly

I thought that MM said previously that she NEVER read anything about herself or Harry.  Not that I believed it for a second.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> She does??  Well, I'm over 40 and have "long" hair, and not to toot my own horn, but I think I have much more class than some women she's dressing in her clothing!


Me too. Also, some of my favourite mature women have long hair.

I certainly look younger than my grey, short haired contemporaries.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting video!


----------



## Chanbal

Get your popcorn ready! 
_According to court lists published on Friday, the Court of Appeal’s decision on the challenge will be delivered on December 2._








						Judges to rule on Mail On Sunday publisher’s appeal over Meghan letter next week
					

The Court of Appeal heard a three-day challenge by Associated Newspapers Limited over the handwritten letter earlier this month.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Get your popcorn ready!
> _According to court lists published on Friday, the Court of Appeal’s decision on the challenge will be delivered on December 2._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judges to rule on Mail On Sunday publisher’s appeal over Meghan letter next week
> 
> 
> The Court of Appeal heard a three-day challenge by Associated Newspapers Limited over the handwritten letter earlier this month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


Hmmmm, If they rule against her mother, will we be introduced to Lily on December 2 as a diversion?


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> What's she carrying under her arm? A seat cushion?
> I've never understood all these celebs who carry everything but the kitchen sink with them at the airport, walking down the street.... Phones and sugar free non fat caramel frappalattes and car keys...
> She's got a big bag slung over her shoulder, can't she hang the neck pillow off of it, and whatever else is in her right hand? I mean, what if she needed to cling onto Harry with the other hand?


To prove they are 100% too humble and normal and wonderful to have their help carry it. As this is before their wedding M was also in ‘nice, chill girl’ mode so she hadn’t stuck the talons in him yet.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Completely random and I couldn't disagree more, but I just read Carolina Herrera (maker of the red monstrosity) believes women over 40 with long hair are classless. Pretty sure that includes extensions, doesn't it


Talk about cognitive dissonance  if I was letting M model my work I would no longer consider myself an authority on decorum. 

Maybe M takes the tendrils off for the atelier? It would certainly make sure no one would recognise her. 

OT but Carolina herself is so beautiful - m dreams of looking that good at 40  never mind 80.


bellecate said:


> Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5259739





Yeah he’s got no room to talk. He’s been manhandling elephants, spiking horses and killing birds since he was a wee lad.

If he really cares he should put the money down for a wildlife reserve that generates employment and money for the economy or all these elephants are just white elephants for the local people.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. I can somewhat tolerate hunting and eating game. But trophy hunting is just disgusting.


He would definitely claim they or someone else ate the buffalo (apparently it does taste good.)
I  think there is something to be said for eating game as they have a better life than some farm animals and here in the U.K. we have an invasive pheasant problem. On the other hand, a lot of people hate the taste and all the bones so I think it may never catch on. 
. 


Chanbal said:


> _As Meghan Markle moves full speed ahead with her post-royal career, an insider says she's hyper-focused on her public image — so much so that *she Googles her name several times a day!*
> 
> “It’s the first thing she does every morning,” the insider dishes. “Then she’ll check websites right until bedtime, even though *she’s got alerts set up to keep track of everything people say about her*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Keeping 'Track' Of Media Coverage Surrounding Her & It's 'Driving' Husband Prince Harry 'Up The Wall,' Says Source
> 
> 
> An insider spilled the 'Suits' alum will 'check websites right until bedtime' for news about her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com


Again you’ve gotta wonder if she’s on here. This  thread must pop up when she’s googling for things to get mad about.
@truequeenangel wrote ‘hi longtime lurker, first time poster. Will you all shut the hell up!!!!!!! Especially you Jelliedfeels, this hair is growing right out of my, sorry, her head! ’


Jayne1 said:


> Me too. Also, some of my favourite mature women have long hair.
> 
> I certainly look younger than my grey, short haired contemporaries.


I love having long hair too. It really depends on your face and style.

My mum is into this makeover guy on YouTube who looks like Snapchat Santa and he is very much of the school of thought that every woman over 40 needs to have their long hair snipped off and remodelled in the classic ‘can I speak to the manager’ cut then put into stilettos, white jeans and a duster waistcoat. Truly cursed stuff.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> My mum is into this makeover guy on YouTube who looks like Snapchat Santa and he is very much of the school of thought that every woman over 40 needs to have their long hair snipped off and remodelled in the *classic ‘can I speak to the manager’ cut then put into stilettos, white jeans and a duster waistcoat*. Truly cursed stuff.



Ut oh, someone stole my look! Haaaaaaaa, just kidding, no way I could live with *that* look.  Since her 5th grade days, I feel MM has spoken to many managers.



Spoiler: That look


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _As Meghan Markle moves full speed ahead with her post-royal career, an insider says she's hyper-focused on her public image — so much so that *she Googles her name several times a day!*
> 
> “It’s the first thing she does every morning,” the insider dishes. “Then she’ll check websites right until bedtime, even though *she’s got alerts set up to keep track of everything people say about her*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Keeping 'Track' Of Media Coverage Surrounding Her & It's 'Driving' Husband Prince Harry 'Up The Wall,' Says Source
> 
> 
> An insider spilled the 'Suits' alum will 'check websites right until bedtime' for news about her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okmagazine.com



Shocking...not.

If you read this, Meghan: GET A GRIP.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I thought that MM said previously that she NEVER read anything about herself or Harry.  Not that I believed it for a second.



She did. And Oprah repeated it admiringly.


----------



## Chanbal

@SBLady


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Shocking...not.
> 
> If you read this, Meghan: GET A GRIP.


I found a few articles when I searched the above. I also came across intriguing posts/documents about a certain company linked to the mother (see spoiler). The all thing is a little confusing, so maybe someone here familiar with this type of documents would like to explain it in simple words. 





Spoiler: CEO


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut oh, someone stole my look! Haaaaaaaa, just kidding, no way I could live with *that* look.  Since her 5th grade days, I feel MM has spoken to many managers.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: That look
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5260103


That is such a horrible haircut on anyone. I had a friend in the 90s who wore her hair like that. She was a lovely person but I always wondered why she did that to herself. My husband made me promise I'd never cut my hair like that.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did. And Oprah repeated it admiringly.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did. And Oprah repeated it admiringly.


Oprah's behaviour during the whole interview was appalling by my standards, although I guess it may be typical for American talk show hosts. I found her questions and responses so fake. She was acting serious, emphasis on "acting".


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Oprah's behaviour during the whole interview was appalling by my standards, although I guess it may be typical for American talk show hosts. I found her questions and responses so fake. She was acting serious, emphasis on "acting".



They shot that interview over the course of two or three days and did some reshoots later after Prince Philip’s deteriorating health was announced. They were given the questions in advance and it was as scripted as any other TV show.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> They shot that interview over the course of two or three days and did some reshoots later after Prince Philip’s deteriorating health was announced. They were given the questions in advance and it was as scripted as any other TV show.


That disclaimer at the start to ensure the viewers knew that Methane wasn't being paid for the interview just made me wonder if it was the other way around: Oprah was being paid in kind to do a sympathetic sycophantic interview (which was true since Harpo raked in the cash).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @SBLady
> 
> I found a few articles when I searched the above. I also came across intriguing posts/documents about a certain company linked to the mother (see spoiler). The all thing is a little confusing, so maybe someone here familiar with this type of documents would like to explain it in simple words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: CEO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5260233




From the DM, Sept., 2020









						Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
					

The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM, Sept., 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
> 
> 
> The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The way I read it, just another person getting a job for which they're not really qualified simply due to having the right connections. Like daughter, like mother. But I suppose it was inevitable that she would benefit financially from the marriage.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, wow… I've confirmed this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM, Sept., 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
> 
> 
> The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What is with this current campaign to make the words kind and kindness sound a bit menacing?
I’m not sure if this is an international trend but I cannot stand those ‘be kind’ t shirts - bizarre use of the imperative that one.
I wonder whether “Loving kindness” might be the kind of Beverley hills company that knows how to put the boot on a rich old lady to change her will?
They have probably dispatched a couple of their best performers to BP  


Chanbal said:


> Oh, wow… I've confirmed this.



Well clocked by the baroness.
imagine there being a billion charities in the world and choosing Asswell


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Oh, wow… I've confirmed this.



My purchases go to a non-profit on Amazonsmile.  Checked for Archewell and it came back not found.  Maybe it was removed because it got embarrassing low donation $'s?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> My purchases go to a non-profit on Amazonsmile.  Checked for Archewell and it came back not found.  Maybe it was removed because it got embarrassing low donation $'s?


Are you in the USA?
It might only be limited to certain countries. I don’t think I can donate to the American Red Cross, for example, only the British equivalent.


----------



## Hermes Zen

jelliedfeels said:


> Are you in the USA?
> It might only be limited to certain countries. I don’t think I can donate to the American Red Cross, for example, only the British equivalent.


That makes total sense.  I'm in the USA.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh, wow… I've confirmed this.



Anyone believing that anything they do is not for profit is very naïve.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> My purchases go to a non-profit on Amazonsmile.  Checked for Archewell and it came back not found.  Maybe it was removed because it got embarrassing low donation $'s?


Still there. Go to your account, click 'Change Your Charity' and type…


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Still there. Go to your account, click 'Change Your Charity' and type…
> 
> View attachment 5260498


Thanks @Chanbal! Oh wow, your way did come up with Archewell. I took pics of the way I searched that didn’t find it.  Would think it would come up that way as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ok, y’all made me look 
Interesting it says BevHills?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Yippeeee!  Agree with the commenters who say the Palace insisted she stop, possibly has begun efforts to remove the titles.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> ok, y’all made me look
> Interesting it says BevHills?
> 
> View attachment 5260552


They probably use a BH post office box as their address.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Well clocked by the baroness.
> imagine there being a billion charities in the world and choosing Asswell



Yeah, my Smile contribution goes to hungry kittens, not greedy ex- and wannabe-royals.


----------



## Lodpah

I liken The Lying Duchess to Rachel Hollis.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Does anyone know if one could request how much Amazonsmile donations has generated for Archewell?  So curious!!  I can see how much I generate from my purchases and how much overall is generated for my charity.  Should I take the bullet for everyone here by temporarily changing my charity to Archewell, do a tiny tiny (if there is one) purchase, go to see how much Archewell donations is being raised for 2021? Only thing, I hate even generating a penny for them BUT willing to do it for the sake of this thread.  What do you all think?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Does anyone know if one could request how much Amazonsmile donations has generated for Archewell?  So curious!!  I can see how much I generate from my purchases and how much overall is generated for my charity.  Should I take the bullet for everyone here by temporarily changing my charity to Archewell, do a tiny tiny (if there is one) purchase, go to see how much Archewell donations is being raised for 2021? Only thing, I hate even generating a penny for them BUT willing to do it for the sake of this thread.  What do you all think?



I think (from when I picked my charity) you can see how much the charity has gotten right away when you choose them, without making a purchase.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think (from when I picked my charity) you can see how much the charity has gotten right away when you choose them, without making a purchase.



Thanks, excellent thought!  I went and changed to Archewell and got this message on the page  ...

'Once you generate a donation for this charity, you'll see the amount they've received here.'

Maybe they changed the process or again don't know how to do it?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> To prove they are 100% too humble and normal and wonderful to have their help carry it. As this is before their wedding M was also in *‘nice, chill girl’* *mode* so she hadn’t stuck the talons in him yet.


This inquiring mind wants to know if 'nice call girl mode' could also apply here?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippeeee!  Agree with the commenters who say the Palace insisted she stop, possibly has begun efforts to remove the titles.



From the Express link, "It feels like she is rebranding herself to be more about Meghan, the person she was before Harry".
Divorce in 3...2...1....


----------



## Hermes Zen

Hermes Zen said:


> Thanks, excellent thought!  I went and changed to Archewell and got this message on the page  ...
> 
> 'Once you generate a donation for this charity, you'll see the amount they've received here.'
> 
> Maybe they changed the process or again don't know how to do it?


Placed an order.  Will report back what I discover after item shipped and all is processed.  Be interesting to see how much Archewell has received so far this year.


----------



## redney

The grifters and their fake nonprofit won't make a lot from Amazon Smile donations. The donation amount is 0.5%. If you spend $20, that’s 10 cents. Spend $200 and that's $1. Spend $2,000 and that's $10. And so on.

Even for small nonprofits, like schools, etc., a few hundred dollars over time isn't a significant part of their fundraising strategies. But I still use Amazon Smile for my selected charities, because a few dollars here and there don't hurt.

But, these tiny donations won't make a dent in what the Grifters want.

Plus, all monies donated via Amazon Smile are donated by the Amazon Smile Foundation, which presumably has to file Form 990s that record its giving.


----------



## redney

Hermes Zen said:


> Placed an order.  Will report back what I discover after item shipped and all is processed.  Be interesting to see how much Archewell has received so far this year.


Last year or the year before, my kid's school sent a report on fundraising to parents. Even with a couple of hundred families, the Amazon Smile donations totalled less than $100 or so IIRC.


----------



## Hermes Zen

redney said:


> The grifters and their fake nonprofit won't make a lot from Amazon Smile donations. The donation amount is 0.5%. If you spend $20, that’s 10 cents. Spend $200 and that's $1. Spend $2,000 and that's $10. And so on.
> 
> Even for small nonprofits, like schools, etc., a few hundred dollars over time isn't a significant part of their fundraising strategies. But I still use Amazon Smile for my selected charities, because a few dollars here and there don't hurt.
> 
> But, these tiny donations won't make a dent in what the Grifters want.
> 
> Plus, all monies donated via Amazon Smile are donated by the Amazon Smile Foundation, which presumably has to file Form 990s that record its giving.


True.  All you've mentioned is spot on.  Still want to see how much over all Archewell (from all those stans) would get from Amazonsmile.  My normal charity so far this year will get around $20,000.  Nice.  My portion is a drop in that bucket.


----------



## needlv

The Crowns of Britain blogger is back with some hugely funny GIFs reacting to the latest Harkle stunts…

worth a read and a good laugh.









						Royal round up: 26th November
					

Hello all and happy Friday! Hope you all had a good week: just had a quick 4-day break to beautiful Switzerland and feeling well rested. If you live here, give yourself a pat on the back – su…




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> ok, y’all made me look
> Interesting it says BevHills?
> 
> View attachment 5260552


Googling the Archewell address: "9665 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills"

"9665 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills" is also the address used for registering the "Loving Kindness Senior Care Facility" group owned by Doria Ragland. 
Visiting their web site there is NO information about locations, ownership, staff, qualifications etc. Just slick advertising that includes a form where a potential client must email them to be contacted about more information. 

Keeping it all in the family with Methane's attorney? Remember someone pointed out the LKSCF business was originally identified as Entertainment and then was amended. 

The link is:
*Top Rated Entertainment & Sports Attorney in Beverly Hills, CA*
https://profiles.superlawyers.com/c...now/c00c18b2-114d-4e19-82d1-bc73a850770b.html - 74k - Cached - Similar pages
Oct 22, 2021 *...* *Richard Genow* is one of the top rated Entertainment & Sports attorneys in ... *9665 Wilshire Blvd*, Fifth Floor *Beverly Hills*, CA 90212.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Googling the Archewell address: "9665 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills"
> 
> "9665 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills" is also the address used for registering the "Loving Kindness Senior Care Facility" group owned by Doria Ragland.
> Visiting their web site there is NO information about locations, ownership, staff, qualifications etc. Just slick advertising that includes a form where a potential client must email them to be contacted about more information.
> 
> Keeping it all in the family with Methane's attorney? Remember someone pointed out the LKSCF business was originally identified as Entertainment and then was amended.
> 
> The link is:
> *Top Rated Entertainment & Sports Attorney in Beverly Hills, CA*
> https://profiles.superlawyers.com/c...now/c00c18b2-114d-4e19-82d1-bc73a850770b.html - 74k - Cached - Similar pages
> Oct 22, 2021 *...* *Richard Genow* is one of the top rated Entertainment & Sports attorneys in ... *9665 Wilshire Blvd*, Fifth Floor *Beverly Hills*, CA 90212.


Sounding shady AF.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> The Crowns of Britain blogger is back with some hugely funny GIFs reacting to the latest Harkle stunts…
> 
> worth a read and a good laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round up: 26th November
> 
> 
> Hello all and happy Friday! Hope you all had a good week: just had a quick 4-day break to beautiful Switzerland and feeling well rested. If you live here, give yourself a pat on the back – su…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com


Savage


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> From the Express link, "It feels like she is rebranding herself to be more about Meghan, the person she was before Harry".
> Divorce in 3...2...1....


He is still useful for now. But, as can be seen from to the Time cover, he is relegated to a support role, rather than equal partner.

We can track his descent from the way she is being given top billing: M and H, Duchess of Sussex & Prince Harry (like at the Intrepid event). Soon, this thread may be one of the last hold-outs where his name is placed ahead of hers.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Googling the Archewell address: "9665 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills"
> 
> "9665 Wilshire Blvd, Beverly Hills" is also the address used for registering the "Loving Kindness Senior Care Facility" group owned by Doria Ragland.
> Visiting their web site there is NO information about locations, ownership, staff, qualifications etc. Just slick advertising that includes a form where a potential client must email them to be contacted about more information.
> 
> Keeping it all in the family with Methane's attorney? Remember someone pointed out the LKSCF business was originally identified as Entertainment and then was amended.
> 
> The link is:
> *Top Rated Entertainment & Sports Attorney in Beverly Hills, CA*
> https://profiles.superlawyers.com/c...now/c00c18b2-114d-4e19-82d1-bc73a850770b.html - 74k - Cached - Similar pages
> Oct 22, 2021 *...* *Richard Genow* is one of the top rated Entertainment & Sports attorneys in ... *9665 Wilshire Blvd*, Fifth Floor *Beverly Hills*, CA 90212.





charlottawill said:


> *Sounding shady* AF.


They are surrounded by very powerful lawyers, I wonder how they are being paid. I came across an interesting video about the Arch*** operation from someone who claims to be using her voice "_per the advice given by M*gh*n M*rkl*_" … 



Spoiler: Shady?


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz is embarrassed, allegedly


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is embarrassed, allegedly




Excellent video!
Their ‘brand’ has always been based on deception, mis-statements, half-truths and lies. Imo


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is embarrassed, allegedly


About time, dumbass.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder what was the Montecitos' contributions to this new book… 









						Book: Prince Charles is the one who asked about baby Archie’s skin tone
					

A new book claims that Prince Charles speculated about the skin tone of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future children — and unwittingly triggered the rift between the couple and the B…




					pagesix.com


----------



## K.D.

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yippeeee!  Agree with the commenters who say the Palace insisted she stop, possibly has begun efforts to remove the titles.




What did the tweet say? It's unavailable now. Thanks


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what was the Montecitos' contributions to this new book…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book: Prince Charles is the one who asked about baby Archie’s skin tone
> 
> 
> A new book claims that Prince Charles speculated about the skin tone of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future children — and unwittingly triggered the rift between the couple and the B…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


And will they quite "innocently" forget about their contributions?


----------



## CarryOn2020

K.D. said:


> What did the tweet say? It's unavailable now. Thanks



Didn’t know tweet was removed…hmmm. It was on BaronnessBruck’s page to this story (circled in red) on the Express site. The story is about MM’s rebranding [again], but it is not loading for me.   The link still does take you to the BaronessBruck’s twitter page, so the comments are still available.








__





						Latest UK and World News, Sport and Comment - Express.co.uk
					

Latest news, showbiz, sport, comment, lifestyle, city, video and pictures from the Daily Express and Sunday Express newspapers and Express.co.uk




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

redney said:


> Last year or the year before, my kid's school sent a report on fundraising to parents. Even with a couple of hundred families, the Amazon Smile donations totalled less than $100 or so IIRC.


I don’t know how much they are getting but it may be more about appearing legitimate and demonstrating they have widespread support. After all, I can think of several foundations that rely on getting people to tweet their names to successfully parlay their popularity to large corporate sponsors (regardless of whether they spent ant significant percentage of their money on the cause they represent.)
Asswell has not had much success on the hashtag front so they may be hoping for better engagement with the broader audience of Bezos.

Also it’s just publicity isn’t it? It’s just a shame they are taking yet more money from smaller legitimate charities.


needlv said:


> The Crowns of Britain blogger is back with some hugely funny GIFs reacting to the latest Harkle stunts…
> 
> worth a read and a good laugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round up: 26th November
> 
> 
> Hello all and happy Friday! Hope you all had a good week: just had a quick 4-day break to beautiful Switzerland and feeling well rested. If you live here, give yourself a pat on the back – su…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com


The letter is interesting because she  admits she expects to be in contact with staff at the weekend. Also D being in danger from the paps? Please    The only thing her and her mother are in danger of is an unflattering photo and someone digging out their scams.



CarryOn2020 said:


>





Chanbal said:


> Hazz is embarrassed, allegedly



It takes a while because:
A) it is a phenomenal intellectual effort for dumb H to realise people are laughing at him not adoringly supporting him.
B) it takes another giant period of concentration for him to decide that he, nazi suit himself, does not think all attention is good attention.

Tbh, I think he’s still short-circuiting on point A. 


Chanbal said:


> I wonder what was the Montecitos' contributions to this new book…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book: Prince Charles is the one who asked about baby Archie’s skin tone
> 
> 
> A new book claims that Prince Charles speculated about the skin tone of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future children — and unwittingly triggered the rift between the couple and the B…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Yeah right, hippy dippy yoga boy Chaz who travels the world on mummy’s money found M too incomprehensibly different. If anything he _wants_ to be a POC. 

let’s end this now and work it out:
1. It can’t be the Queen because she’s good for the brand so they’d never mention it.
2. It can’t be chaz see above 
3. It can’t be the late Philip because everyone has M’s skintone in Greece. 
 4. It can’t be Will or Kate because they are only 40 and likely wouldn’t express it that way.
5. It can’t be Anne because lady c already guessed this to no reaction.
6. It can’t be Epstein’s buddy because they’d have named him. 
7. it can’t be Edward because he’s not allowed to say anything after it’s a royal knock out.

You know, I’m beginning to wonder if the compulsive liar was lying….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Oh I forgot to diss this guy. Imagine wearing a broken watch as a defining personality trait… What is he? A C grade Batman villain?


----------



## Chanbal

Page Six continues reporting on the adventures of the Montecitos in the new upcoming masterpiece. I have the same question Hazz, "_Who the hell do you think you are?”_ 

_According to a new book, *Prince Harry* was so incensed when his older brother, Prince William, questioned his fast-moving romance with Meghan Markle that he *blurted out*, “*Who the hell do you think you are?*”

The alleged outburst in September 2017 happened when Harry indicated that he was about to propose to his American girlfriend, prompting William to ask, “Why rush things?”…

Harry soon become “angry” with anyone he perceived to be “against Meghan.”

Harry extolled his girlfriend’s virtues to his brother before she and William were introduced. But he had previously worried what William — who, Andersen writes, can be “very stiff” — would make of Meghan, fearing he’d think she was “an opportunist.”

William was, the book claims, initially charmed, but soon harbored doubts…

“I don’t know what to believe,” the book claims William told a confidant.

He allegedly expressed his misgivings with Prince Charles, informing his father that Harry’s obsession with Meghan was “like something I’d never seen.” William went on to say that “it feels like I have lost my best friend.” _









						Prince Harry lashed out at William for doubting Meghan romance, book says
					

According to a new book, Prince Harry was so incensed when his older brother, Prince William, questioned his fast-moving romance with Meghan Markle that he blurted out, “Who the hell do you think y…




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> And will they quite "innocently" forget about their contributions?


Poor people, they have such a poor memory. I already came to terms with the possibly that we may never know what their contributions were…


----------



## Chanbal

According to online sources, typical podcasters make about "_$500 – $900 per episode_," I wonder how they feel about their co-workers from Montecito.


----------



## Chanbal

On the Hazexit! 

 Yahoo: 


The original article:


_The Duke of Sussex will be able to celebrate a triumph in his mission to end the use of the term “Megxit”, with the BBC choosing to instead call its second episode “Sussexit”.



			https://archive.vn/KcXla#selection-1201.0-1208.0
		

_


----------



## xincinsin

Megxit - when Harry lost his marbles, his backbone, his wits and his balls


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> On the Hazexit!
> 
> Yahoo:
> View attachment 5260981
> 
> The original article:
> View attachment 5260982
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex will be able to celebrate a triumph in his mission to end the use of the term “Megxit”, with the BBC choosing to instead call its second episode “Sussexit”.
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/KcXla#selection-1201.0-1208.0
> 
> 
> _



So heartwarming to see an unbiased documentary where Meghan’s lawyers have a starring role. /s


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah right, hippy dippy yoga boy Chaz who travels the world on mummy’s money found M too incomprehensibly different. If anything he _wants_ to be a POC.
> 
> let’s end this now and work it out:
> 1. It can’t be the Queen because she’s good for the brand so they’d never mention it.
> 2. It can’t be chaz see above
> 3. It can’t be the late Philip because everyone has M’s skintone in Greece.
> 4. It can’t be Will or Kate because they are only 40 and likely wouldn’t express it that way.
> 5. It can’t be Anne because lady c already guessed this to no reaction.
> 6. It can’t be Epstein’s buddy because they’d have named him.
> 7. it can’t be Edward because he’s not allowed to say anything after it’s a royal knock out.
> 
> You know, I’m beginning to wonder if the compulsive liar was lying….



I came here after I saw German headlines about Charles being the culprit and my first thought was actually that's their retaliation for something he has or hasn't done (like, cut off the money stream?).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT, but I stumbled upon the future Countess of Sandwich's Youtube (as my brain's a sieve I already forgot her husband's current title, I only remember that he's a Viscount). She's an American as well who met Luke Montagu at a Jimmy Choo launch and besides her claiming she didn't know about his title for months (don't people google or talk to their mutual friends?) she seems totally normal, grounded and well adapted to British aristocratic life. She managed to build a career without embarrassing scandals, and her Youtube channel is completely inoffensive and even interesting to watch.

It's just the chancer who was too stupid to fit in it seems.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Harry extolled his girlfriend’s virtues to his brother before she and William were introduced. But he had previously worried what William — who, Andersen writes, can be “very stiff” — would make of Meghan, fearing he’d think she was “an opportunist.”_



Well, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Anyone else getting tired of the same stories being re-cycled multiple times? 
Is this a PR strategy to make H&M the most irritating people of 2021? 

- Megxit?  Seriously, he quibbles over his _exit_ terminology? Does he not get the joke, the wit? Brexit/Megzit?  ” A rose by any other name is still a rose.”  

- Hazzi told William to “go to hell”?  Was this the first time Hazzio said this to Will? Doubt it. Not too surprising from an immature, entitled jerk, is it?

- who said what?  The hypocrites H&M have said plenty that is offensive to many of us.  Now that they have admitted lying to a UK court and have proven to be hypocrites on many topics , maybe *they* should stop talking? Give us all a break, please.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The things you learn...apparently Harry played the tambourine in the album version of this which Barlow wrote for the Queen's diamond jubilee.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Page Six continues reporting on the adventures of the Montecitos in the new upcoming masterpiece. I have the same question Hazz, "_Who the hell do you think you are?”_
> 
> _According to a new book, *Prince Harry* was so incensed when his older brother, Prince William, questioned his fast-moving romance with Meghan Markle that he *blurted out*, “*Who the hell do you think you are?*”
> 
> The alleged outburst in September 2017 happened when Harry indicated that he was about to propose to his American girlfriend, prompting William to ask, “Why rush things?”…
> 
> Harry soon become “angry” with anyone he perceived to be “against Meghan.”
> 
> Harry extolled his girlfriend’s virtues to his brother before she and William were introduced. But he had previously worried what William — who, Andersen writes, can be “very stiff” — would make of Meghan, fearing he’d think she was “an opportunist.”
> 
> William was, the book claims, initially charmed, but soon harbored doubts…
> 
> “I don’t know what to believe,” the book claims William told a confidant.
> 
> He allegedly expressed his misgivings with Prince Charles, informing his father that Harry’s obsession with Meghan was “like something I’d never seen.” William went on to say that “it feels like I have lost my best friend.” _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lashed out at William for doubting Meghan romance, book says
> 
> 
> According to a new book, Prince Harry was so incensed when his older brother, Prince William, questioned his fast-moving romance with Meghan Markle that he blurted out, “Who the hell do you think y…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Harry most likely was upset because he knew William was right. But he wasn't thinking with his head at the time. I believe William will ultimately get to say "Told you so little bro", and sooner rather than later.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, but I stumbled upon the future Countess of Sandwich's Youtube (as my brain's a sieve I already forgot her husband's current title, I only remember that he's a Viscount). She's an American as well who met Luke Montagu at a Jimmy Choo launch and besides her claiming she didn't know about his title for months (don't people google or talk to their mutual friends?) she seems totally normal, grounded and well adapted to British aristocratic life. She managed to build a career without embarrassing scandals, and her Youtube channel is completely inoffensive and even interesting to watch.
> 
> It's just the chancer who was too stupid to fit in it seems.


I remember watching her on one of the housewives shows. The Ladies of London.
Ladies of London | Bravo TV Official Site


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, but I stumbled upon the future Countess of Sandwich's Youtube (as my brain's a sieve I already forgot her husband's current title, I only remember that he's a Viscount). She's an American as well who met Luke Montagu at a Jimmy Choo launch and besides her claiming she didn't know about his title for months (don't people google or talk to their mutual friends?) she seems totally normal, grounded and well adapted to British aristocratic life. She managed to build a career without embarrassing scandals, and her Youtube channel is completely inoffensive and even interesting to watch.
> 
> It's just the chancer who was too stupid to fit in it seems.


I don't think it was that she was too stupid to fit in, more likely she didn't want to fit in. She arrogantly envisioned herself single-handedly modernizing a centuries old institution, like she was the star of some Hollywood rom com. As dumb as H is, he understood early on "what M wants, M gets". I believe it was in her game plan all along to leave England as soon as possible and settle in as the Queen of Montecito, with all of Hollywood clamoring for her attention. Things are clearly not going according to plan.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what was the Montecitos' contributions to this new book…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book: Prince Charles is the one who asked about baby Archie’s skin tone
> 
> 
> A new book claims that Prince Charles speculated about the skin tone of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future children — and unwittingly triggered the rift between the couple and the B…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



He was my guess at the time. Charles has been as quiet as a mouse since the Oprah interview. Too quiet. He’s worried about what they’ll say.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Harry most likely was upset because he knew William was right. But he wasn't thinking with his head at the time. I believe William will ultimately get to say "Told you so little bro", and sooner rather than later.


Hazz & Will one month prior to the wedding. It looks like Will was (rightly) apprehensive, but very supportive & protective of Hazz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He was very involved on the last Jubilee - guessing he will not have a role or a place on this one  









						Harry Plays Tambourine
					





					www.thedailybeast.com
				



_When Prince Harry was in Jamaica, he was much admired for his musical moves, getting down to Bob Marley and dancing in his blue suede shoes.

British pop musician Gary Barlow was also traveling around the Commonwealth, recording 210 separate artist contributions for his Jubilee single, and, when he was in Jamaica he managed to get Harry on the tambourine, as shown in this clip (scroll to 1:35).






The track was broadcast this morning on a BBC radio breakfast show.
Barlow used his laptop to record Harry's musical contribution after visiting him while he was in Jamaica.

He said of the experience: “He's fun and relaxed and he's a really nice kid. We caught him on his last day in Jamaica. We turned up and I asked him would he play on the record and he said 'I don't sing'. But I said, 'No, no - I don't want you to sing, I want you to play the tambourine’. Then we met him later on that night and he did the tambourine hit and we spun it into the track. He probably hasn't got a clue what he's part of just yet.”

Barlow travelled around various Commonwealth countries to record 210 musicians for the new single including the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force Band, the Sydney Symphony Orchestra, young drummers from Kenya's Kibera slum and the Australian musician Gurrumul.

The song was co-written by Barlow and the composer Andrew Lloyd Webber after an approach from Buckingham Palace, and will form part of a commemorative Jubilee album by Gary Barlow & The Commonwealth Band, to be released by Decca Records on Monday May 28th. The proceeds from “Sing” will raise funds for The Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust._


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I don't think it was that she was too stupid to fit in, more likely she didn't want to fit in. She arrogantly envisioned herself single-handedly modernizing a centuries old institution, like she was the star of some Hollywood rom com. As dumb as H is, he understood early on "what M wants, M gets". I believe it was in her game plan all along to leave England as soon as possible and settle in as the Queen of Montecito, with all of Hollywood clamoring for her attention. Things are clearly not going according to plan.



Diana wanted to modernise the monarchy, too.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> He was my guess at the time. Charles has been as quiet as a mouse since the Oprah interview. Too quiet. He’s worried about what they’ll say.


I don't believe in malicious comments or concerns on how dark the son might be. Why would Charles be concerned with that? 
However, I wouldn't discard a comment from an intrigued Charles about the potential complexion of a baby from a very pale skinned, ginger father and a mixed race mother. There is nothing wrong about it imo, and the alleged Camilla's response makes all sense “_Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain._”


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, but I stumbled upon the future Countess of Sandwich's Youtube (as my brain's a sieve I already forgot her husband's current title, I only remember that he's a Viscount). She's an American as well who met Luke Montagu at a Jimmy Choo launch and besides her claiming she didn't know about his title for months (don't people google or talk to their mutual friends?) she seems totally normal, grounded and well adapted to British aristocratic life. She managed to build a career without embarrassing scandals, and her Youtube channel is completely inoffensive and even interesting to watch.
> 
> It's just the chancer who was too stupid to fit in it seems.


Julia Montagu was on the short lived but highly scandalous Ladies of London reality series. She seemed like a level-headed person who was very motivated by her children and by maintaining the family’s stately home. She did keep insisting she wasn’t rich and was always working which is an annoying trait in rich people    But we can forgive her that.

she is a yoga fanatic as well isn’t she?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He was my guess at the time. Charles has been as quiet as a mouse since the Oprah interview. Too quiet. He’s worried about what they’ll say.



Once again, we see Hazzio’s immaturity by creating an idiotic guessing game.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana wanted to modernise the monarchy, too.


To be fair to Diana, they have started using a fair few of her ideas and I feel like she would’ve taken to a family Instagram like a duck to water.

Also on Harry making a guessing game, I feel like it’s on purpose better to let the cloud of suspicion hang irrefutably over them all then spend your hand and give them a chance to counter your version. It’s so clearly an exaggerated version of whatever was said they may have the added bonus of each person wondering whether they might have inadvertently said something offensive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> He was my guess at the time. Charles has been as quiet as a mouse since the Oprah interview. Too quiet. He’s worried about what they’ll say.


Honestly, he was probably thinking out loud and it was a question that is asked in many families regarding hair color, eye color or how fair a dark a child might be depending on the two parents.  If the color of a future child bothered Charles that much, he would have said something to Harry when they were engaged.  That is provided I believe any of this.  They might be pinning this on Charles simply because he has the broadest shoulders metaphorically.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I don't believe in malicious comments or concerns on how dark the son might be. Why would Charles be concerned with that?
> However, I wouldn't discard a comment from an intrigued Charles about the potential complexion of a baby from a very pale skinned, ginger father and a mixed race mother. There is nothing wrong about it imo, and the alleged Camilla's response makes all sense “_Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain._”



Context is everything. I don’t believe Charles said anything offensive. I absolutely believe he may have said _something_ that Meghan decided could be skewed to look bad and garner sympathy. It would have been something Harry told her because I remember Harry looking painfully uncomfortable during that part of the interview.


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> Context is everything. I don’t believe Charles said anything offensive. I absolutely believe he may have said _something_ that Meghan decided could be skewed to look bad and garner sympathy. It would have been something Harry told her because I remember Harry looking painfully uncomfortable during that part of the interview.


I think 6’s wife even said at the interview that she wasn’t there when “the comment” was made.  If it was said, I don’t see it as any different from wondering if a child will be short/tall, thin/fat, small/big nose, eye and hair color, etc.  How to make a mountain out of a mole hill!


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, my mother, who  had brown eyes and disliked them, told my two sister in laws when they were pregnant that she hoped their babies didn't have brown eyes! She was very vocal about it and it was embarrassing because one of the SIL had brown eyes! It was as if she could will this into happening!   Out of 5, mom only had one that had brown eyes and she considered that a victory.  People discuss future physical traits of children in utero all the time.  It also used to be guessing gender, but science has taken that away, so all that is left is what they will look like.   Weaponizing that in the Oprah interview really was mean especially considering that IF Charles really had said something, he had been more than generous to Meghan and she obviously didn't care or appreciate it.  It is all what have you done for me lately with this woman.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Aimee3 said:


> I think 6’s wife even said at the interview that she wasn’t there when “the comment” was made.  If it was said, I don’t see it as any different from wondering if a child will be short/tall, thin/fat, small/big nose, eye and hair color, etc.  How to make a mountain out of a mole hill!


Agree.  I think out of curiosity the Ragland's may have asked how light the baby would be. This discussion can work both ways.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> To be fair to Diana, they have started using a fair few of her ideas and I feel like she would’ve taken to a family Instagram like a duck to water.
> 
> Also on Harry making a guessing game, I feel like it’s on purpose better to let the cloud of suspicion hang irrefutably over them all then spend your hand and give them a chance to counter your version. It’s so clearly an exaggerated version of whatever was said they may have the added bonus of each person wondering whether they might have inadvertently said something offensive.



Yes, they have used Diana’s ideas and notice the monarchy has not fallen apart, yet.

RE: Guessing game - it’s the ultimate power trip, right?  It continues to be a cloud over the monarchy and keeps everyone on edge.


----------



## xeyes

Enty on that party photo from upthread:





__





						Blind Item #1
					

Back in 2015, before he was publicly disgraced, this producer hosted a party. At the party were two people germane to the story. One is the ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> On the Hazexit!
> 
> Yahoo:
> View attachment 5260981
> 
> The original article:
> View attachment 5260982
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex will be able to celebrate a triumph in his mission to end the use of the term “Megxit”, with the BBC choosing to instead call its second episode “Sussexit”.
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/KcXla#selection-1201.0-1208.0
> 
> 
> _



Oh Harry - good to see you concentrating with laser-like focus on the least important things.  What a clown!


----------



## needlv

xeyes said:


> Enty on that party photo from upthread:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> Back in 2015, before he was publicly disgraced, this producer hosted a party. At the party were two people germane to the story. One is the ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I had to read that blind a few times to get it….Its about Misha Nonoo being  a source for the BBC documentary guy, Amol…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hello, lawyers, so nice to see you


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I don't believe in malicious comments or concerns on how dark the son might be. Why would Charles be concerned with that?
> However, I wouldn't discard a comment from an intrigued Charles about the potential complexion of a baby from a very pale skinned, ginger father and a mixed race mother. There is nothing wrong about it imo, and the alleged Camilla's response makes all sense “_Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain._”


This is the equivalent of the terrorist who lobs a bomb into the street and then flees: According to Page 6, "Andersen stops short of claiming that Charles is the unnamed “senior royal” whom Harry and Meghan — whose mother is black and father is white  — sensationally accused during their shocking interview with Oprah Winfrey."

The author, Andersen, has published a stack of celebrity themed books including ones on the Royals, so he would have links to the Suckesses or their associates who hang out with them in a majority of Dante's Inferno "Nine Circles of Hell : Limbo, _Lust,_ _Gluttony,_ _Greed_, _Anger_, _Heresy,_ Violence, _Fraud _and _Treachery_" because this is really low, slimy behavior. Supposedly, Prince Charles and Camilla were having a conversation in the privacy of their home, and we're expected to believe this is a transcription of it??? Not unless the room's been bugged.

Among many of the lies continuously being told, Hasbeen said in the Oprah Interview he would never reveal the source.  We know from the Finding Freedom book he and the wife are skilled at deception and convoluted behavior, so which scummy little minion did the dirty work in planting this?  

This phrase from one blurb accompanying the pre publication hype of Andersen's book probably sums it all up: "perfect for fans of Netflix’s The Crown."


----------



## Allisonfaye

Hermes Zen said:


> Agree.  I think out of curiosity the Ragland's may have asked how light the baby would be. This discussion can work both ways.



I think it's about as likely that this conversation even occurred as it is that they were married three days before the wedding. I think she lies and she likes attention. What better way to get it than making a comment like the in the current environment?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Page Six continues reporting on the adventures of the Montecitos in the new upcoming masterpiece. I have the same question Hazz, "_Who the hell do you think you are?”_
> 
> _According to a new book, *Prince Harry* was so incensed when his older brother, Prince William, questioned his fast-moving romance with Meghan Markle that he *blurted out*, “*Who the hell do you think you are?*”
> 
> The alleged outburst in September 2017 happened when Harry indicated that he was about to propose to his American girlfriend, prompting William to ask, “Why rush things?”…
> 
> Harry soon become “angry” with anyone he perceived to be “against Meghan.”
> 
> Harry extolled his girlfriend’s virtues to his brother before she and William were introduced. But he had previously worried what William — who, Andersen writes, can be “very stiff” — would make of Meghan, fearing he’d think she was “an opportunist.”
> 
> William was, the book claims, initially charmed, but soon harbored doubts…
> 
> “I don’t know what to believe,” the book claims William told a confidant.
> 
> He allegedly expressed his misgivings with Prince Charles, informing his father that Harry’s obsession with Meghan was “like something I’d never seen.” William went on to say that “it feels like I have lost my best friend.” _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry lashed out at William for doubting Meghan romance, book says
> 
> 
> According to a new book, Prince Harry was so incensed when his older brother, Prince William, questioned his fast-moving romance with Meghan Markle that he blurted out, “Who the hell do you think y…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



According to Wiki, this guy has made a living off of various couple - Bill&Hill, John&Jackie, Charles&Diana, etc.  His daughter, also, an author worked for Bloomberg News. The other daughter is an artist.  Here’s a review of another book:

_In a lengthy 1999 Salon review, Jake Tapper wrote of Bill and Hillary: The Marriage: "Andersen *dishes like a catty high school girl holding forth in the lunchroom*." But Tapper also stated that the book's "depiction of the *******s' lopsided quid-pro-quo relationship meshes perfectly with the glimmers of insight the *******s themselves have offered us", concluding that Bill and Hillary is *"a guilty pleasure"* and that in the end "the *******s are getting the book they deserve."[7] Similarly, in its review of Andersen's bestselling Streisand biography, Barbra: The Way She Is, the New York Times noted that Andersen "has a knack for ferreting memorable anecdotes of the 'no wire hangers' variety" while USA Today claimed the book "hits all the high notes" in Streisand's life story. Terry Hartle of the Christian Science Monitor wrote that Andersen's These Few Precious Days: The Last Year of Jack with Jackie was "fascinating and insightful" and Kirkus Reviews determined that The Good Sonwas "sensitive and astute, intimate" with "the power to mesmerize". Vanity Fair called Andersen's 2016 book Game of Crowns “ *catnip for royal watchers*"._




__





						Christopher Andersen - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## gracekelly

Allisonfaye said:


> I think it's about as likely that this conversation even occurred as it is that they were married three days before the wedding. I think she lies and she likes attention. What better way to get it than making a comment like the in the current environment?


Agree.  She would say anything to get attention and have sympathy thrown her way.  

This whole thing about calling the exit Sussexit really smells of SS.  The fact that the BBC bowed to this pressure is more amazing to me.  They are Markling themselves rapidly.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I don't believe in malicious comments or concerns on how dark the son might be. Why would Charles be concerned with that?
> However, I wouldn't discard a comment from an intrigued Charles about the potential complexion of a baby from a very pale skinned, ginger father and a mixed race mother. There is nothing wrong about it imo, and the alleged Camilla's response makes all sense “_Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain._”


True. I always ask my relatives what color do you think his/her eyes will be/skin tone, etc. especially if mixed couple. Heck some even say I hope she/he has green/blue/purple eyes/hair/whatever. It’s just curiosity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Shame on BBC….. shame on the ungrateful whiner #6 and his despicable wife.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, he was probably thinking out loud and it was a question that is asked in many families regarding hair color, eye color or how fair a dark a child might be depending on the two parents.  If the color of a future child bothered Charles that much, he would have said something to Harry when they were engaged.  That is provided I believe any of this.  They might be pinning this on Charles simply because he has the broadest shoulders metaphorically.


My father has brown eyes, mother has green… everybody asks about my blue eyes until they see my great grandparents portraits with the blue eyes on both


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to Wiki, this guy has made a living off of various couple - Bill&Hill, John&Jackie, Charles&Diana, etc.  His daughter, also, an author worked for Bloomberg News. The other daughter is an artist.  Here’s a review of another book:
> 
> _In a lengthy 1999 Salon review, Jake Tapper wrote of Bill and Hillary: The Marriage: "Andersen *dishes like a catty high school girl holding forth in the lunchroom*." But Tapper also stated that the book's "depiction of the *******s' lopsided quid-pro-quo relationship meshes perfectly with the glimmers of insight the *******s themselves have offered us", concluding that Bill and Hillary is *"a guilty pleasure"* and that in the end "the *******s are getting the book they deserve."[7] Similarly, in its review of Andersen's bestselling Streisand biography, Barbra: The Way She Is, the New York Times noted that Andersen "has a knack for ferreting memorable anecdotes of the 'no wire hangers' variety" while USA Today claimed the book "hits all the high notes" in Streisand's life story. Terry Hartle of the Christian Science Monitor wrote that Andersen's These Few Precious Days: The Last Year of Jack with Jackie was "fascinating and insightful" and Kirkus Reviews determined that The Good Sonwas "sensitive and astute, intimate" with "the power to mesmerize". Vanity Fair called Andersen's 2016 book Game of Crowns “ *catnip for royal watchers*"._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christopher Andersen - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


I sincerely hope that Charles doesn't feel intimidated by the accusations of racism and keeps his plans for a slimmed-down monarchy. As I said, I don't believe Charles would make racist comments about a  grandchild (or any other child). Charles should cut all ties with the Montecitos, their deplorable comments during OW's interview were pure poison (and it's not the Dior perfume).


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hello, lawyers, so nice to see you



Here is The Sun's cover, very strong!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely hope that Charles doesn't feel intimidated by the accusations of racism and keeps his plans for a slimmed-down monarchy. As I said, I don't believe Charles would make racist comments about a  grandchild (or any other child). Charles should cut all ties with the Montecitos, their deplorable comments during OW's interview were pure poison (and it's not the Dior perfume).



OT but I once got a hefty reaction after someone sprayed Poison (the Dior) on my wrist. It was covered in tiny red blisters within minutes. Also, it stinks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but I once got a hefty reaction after someone sprayed Poison (the Dior) on my wrist. It was covered in tiny red blisters within minutes. Also, it stinks.



When walking by dept store cosmetic counters, I start sneezing. Those ‘smells’ aggravate my sinuses. Back in the day, I used to tell the perfume sprayers at the doors to stop it.  Sometimes I had to say it very emphatically, some sprayers would act pouty, as if I was the spoil sport - well, humph, nowadays, workplaces ban perfumes for males and females.


----------



## Chanbal

Very interesting comments on BBC


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Here is The Sun's cover, very strong!
> View attachment 5261280



What exactly are the toxic duo playing at? Do they really think the monarchy is _not_ powerful???? How immature.
I learned today Scoobie’s dad runs a digital pr firm. He could be advising the toxic two, too.


_British marketing director father










						Omid Scobie - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




ETA:  _Charles needs to go ahead and tell us Hazzie is not his kid. Then, some of this nonsense would make a bit of sense. We are mature enough that we could handle this info just fine. Heck, we’ve been through a vicious pandemic.


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> I had to read that blind a few times to get it….Its about Misha Nonoo being  a source for the BBC documentary guy, Amol…


I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who found it confusing!


----------



## xeyes

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely hope that Charles doesn't feel intimidated by the accusations of racism and keeps his plans for a slimmed-down monarchy. As I said, I don't believe Charles would make racist comments about a  grandchild (or any other child). Charles should cut all ties with the Montecitos, their deplorable comments during OW's interview were pure poison (and it's not the Dior perfume).



Theme song of the Royal solicitors (after “God Save The Queen”, of course!):



If only Hazza knew to never trust a big butt and a smile...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



From his bio, Amol Rajan, who was born in Calcutta India, moved at age 3 to the UK with his family and grew up to become a r-e-p-u-b-l-i-c-a-n. In other words, he came to a new country and availed himself of its resources to get a proper education and most likely a decent life and then he turns around hell bent on destroying the very country (Monarchy) that accepted him. So from now on, I will call him Amol Megan Markle Rajan as they are two birds of a feather.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> So from now on, I will call him *Amol Megan Markle Rajan* as they are two birds of a feather.


Amol 'Megan Markle' Rajan**Asbestos?  Interesting correlation.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what was the Montecitos' contributions to this new book…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book: Prince Charles is the one who asked about baby Archie’s skin tone
> 
> 
> A new book claims that Prince Charles speculated about the skin tone of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future children — and unwittingly triggered the rift between the couple and the B…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Honestly, WTF is so wrong with grandparents wondering what their grandchildren will look like?  Whether or not their in law is of a different race?  Maybe Charles was wondering if the child would have red hair like Harry, which according to Diana, he didn't care for.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> On the Hazexit!
> 
> Yahoo:
> View attachment 5260981
> 
> The original article:
> View attachment 5260982
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex will be able to celebrate a triumph in his mission to end the use of the term “Megxit”, with the BBC choosing to instead call its second episode “Sussexit”.
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/KcXla#selection-1201.0-1208.0
> 
> 
> _


Why is the BBC suddenly the Broadcasters for the Blithering Cuckhold??


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, but I stumbled upon the future Countess of Sandwich's Youtube (as my brain's a sieve I already forgot her husband's current title, I only remember that he's a Viscount). She's an American as well who met Luke Montagu at a Jimmy Choo launch and besides her claiming she didn't know about his title for months (don't people google or talk to their mutual friends?) she seems totally normal, grounded and well adapted to British aristocratic life. She managed to build a career without embarrassing scandals, and her Youtube channel is completely inoffensive and even interesting to watch.
> 
> It's just the chancer who was too stupid to fit in it seems.


She was on Ladies of London and knows reality TV quite well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Amol 'Megan Markle' Rajan*Asbestos*?  Interesting correlation.
> View attachment 5261368


This guy is as hazardous to the RF as the real Asbestos is to our lungs. He must be a H&M admirer.

From wiki: *Asbestos* (pronounced: /æsˈbɛstɒs/ or /æsˈbɛstəs/) is a naturally occurring fibrous silicate mineral. There are six types, all of which are composed of long and thin fibrous crystals, each fibre being composed of many microscopic "fibrils" that can be released into the atmosphere by abrasion and other processes. Inhalation of asbestos fibres can lead to various serious lung conditions, including mesothelioma, asbestosis, and lung cancer, so it is now notorious as a health and safety hazard*.*[1]


----------



## rose60610

Oh wait. Charles is so racist that he accepted Harry marrying Meghan AND walked her down the aisle? When he could have prevented Harry from marrying her or at the very least insist that they elope to Vegas and get married by Elvis instead? Once again, as usual, Meghan's reputation for lying has made her credibility null and void. Nothing new here. Yawn.


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> This is the equivalent of the terrorist who lobs a bomb into the street and then flees: According to Page 6, "Andersen stops short of claiming that Charles is the unnamed “senior royal” whom Harry and Meghan — whose mother is black and father is white  — sensationally accused during their shocking interview with Oprah Winfrey."
> 
> The author, Andersen, has published a stack of celebrity themed books including ones on the Royals, so he would have links to the Suckesses or their associates who hang out with them in a majority of Dante's Inferno "Nine Circles of Hell : Limbo, _Lust,_ _Gluttony,_ _Greed_, _Anger_, _Heresy,_ Violence, _Fraud _and _Treachery_" because this is really low, slimy behavior. Supposedly, Prince Charles and Camilla were having a conversation in the privacy of their home, and we're expected to believe this is a transcription of it??? Not unless the room's been bugged.
> 
> Among many of the lies continuously being told, Hasbeen said in the Oprah Interview he would never reveal the source.  We know from the Finding Freedom book he and the wife are skilled at deception and convoluted behavior, so which scummy little minion did the dirty work in planting this?
> 
> This phrase from one blurb accompanying the pre publication hype of Andersen's book probably sums it all up: "perfect for fans of Netflix’s The Crown."


He’s probably not got direct links to anyone and he’s just churning out the kind of books you find on the pound shelf. This also explains why C is briefing lawyers against him but didn’t against Oprah and others because a small fish like Anderson will fold like laundry whereas Oprah….

When you think about it, though, once they eliminated the Queen & Phillip, Charles is the only newsworthy choice. Loads of people have an aunt or uncle they don’t speak to anymore. The only thing dramatic enough to be big news is that H’s dad himself and the future king said something incredibly racist and evil and exclusionary so they just had to pack their bags and leave for LA, where racism doesn’t exist.

Also I know I seem a bit anti-Charles but I can’t help feeling he’s such a pushover/eager to please sort of guy that he could easily be convinced he was in the wrong and he said something he didn’t say especially where his sons are concerned.  Whereas someone like Anne would say ‘When? What? Oh no dear, I just said you were an obnoxious little schemer nothing about the baby.’


gracekelly said:


> Agree.  She would say anything to get attention and have sympathy thrown her way.
> 
> This whole thing about calling the exit Sussexit really smells of SS.  The fact that the BBC bowed to this pressure is more amazing to me.  They are Markling themselves rapidly.


Sussexit is a great pun written down but it’s pretty difficult to say. The BBC will always jump 20 feet in the air when a celebrity accuses them of misogyny or prejudice of any kind but of course, these are the same people who make Harry’s life a living hell, persecuted M to the point of suicide and wanted to murder Doria apparently


----------



## Chanbal

This doesn't sound right. Why would the couple's lawyer participate in such program? 






__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.md


----------



## CarryOn2020

Odd the BBC would broadcast this monsense when they *know* H&M lied to a court of law.  I won’t watch part 2, but I wonder if they begin with a statement  about the lie.  If not, the BBC have sunk to the lowest of lows.  Credibility is everything in today’s world. Actually, it always has been. The score so far:  H&M = 0. BBC = .5.  Charles = +100.
ETA: couple’s lawyer = 0


----------



## jelliedfeels

xeyes said:


> Theme song of the Royal solicitors (after “God Save The Queen”, of course!):
> 
> 
> 
> If only Hazza knew to never trust a big butt and a smile...



Big butt? She’s never even had that
The smile is only part time as well.


purseinsanity said:


> Honestly, WTF is so wrong with grandparents wondering what their grandchildren will look like?  Whether or not their in law is of a different race?  Maybe Charles was wondering if the child would have red hair like Harry, which according to Diana, he didn't care for.


The only way us mere mortals are allowed to comment on the glorious M is to say how ‘stunning and brave’ she is and this extends to her progeny (real, imagined or rental)

how can anyone be against red hair? It is the only thing h has going for him and then even it is trying to get away from his poisonous little mind.


Maggie Muggins said:


> This guy is as hazardous to the RF as the real Asbestos is to our lungs. He must be a H&M admirer.
> 
> From wiki: *Asbestos* (pronounced: /æsˈbɛstɒs/ or /æsˈbɛstəs/) is a naturally occurring fibrous silicate mineral. There are six types, all of which are composed of long and thin fibrous crystals, each fibre being composed of many microscopic "fibrils" that can be released into the atmosphere by abrasion and other processes. Inhalation of asbestos fibres can lead to various serious lung conditions, including mesothelioma, asbestosis, and lung cancer, so it is now notorious as a health and safety hazard*.*[1]


between asbestos and tungsten I’m starting to feel like I’m back in a chemistry lesson.


Chanbal said:


> This doesn't sound right. Why would the couple's lawyer participate in such program?
> View attachment 5261419
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.md


To be completely honest, even if it’s true,  I would fully support them not ‘fully supporting’ the couple.
These people are grown adults, nearly 40 (allegedly) and are meant to represent our nation and get receive incredible luxuries and experiences as a result. H and hand, in particular, were meant to be top faces.
Given all that, what is wrong with asking for a bit of self-reliance?

If anything there’s been too much infantilising of the Windsors leading to several of them being whiny selfish mama’s boys.

Add on - here’s the latest couple photo of H & M


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Context is everything. I don’t believe Charles said anything offensive. I absolutely believe he may have said _*something*_* that Meghan decided could be skewed to look bad and garner sympathy.* It would have been something Harry told her because I remember Harry looking painfully uncomfortable during that part of the interview.


She does that a lot. One of those conversationalists to whom you are better off not saying a word.


----------



## needlv




----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> How can he age well? Keeping up with what it seems a demanding 37yo wife, 6 very young kids, Emilio…
> 
> He is likely 68. His ex wife Kim Basinger is 67, and they look about the same age in pictures.





bellecate said:


> Shame on BBC….. shame on the ungrateful whiner #6 and his despicable wife.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5261237



I would think the BBC and their lawyers would know not to air it without #2 request..
But WHY does #6 and his current +1 want it on air?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Completely random and I couldn't disagree more, but I just read Carolina Herrera (maker of the red monstrosity) believes women over 40 with long hair are classless. Pretty sure that includes extensions, doesn't it



I don't believe that women of any age in this day 'n age should pass comment on how other people do their hair, at any age. 

CH should have sent an atelier along with that 'dress' so it fit M or not agree to the lend. CG is a business woman and that dress (her dress) looked terrible.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is Carolina Herrera's belief from before or after COVID? I thought that ponytails were a big hit during COVID?



I think it must be from pre-Second-wave feminism times  .


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Interesting video!




Well caught!


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I don't believe that women of any age in this day 'n age should pass comment on how other people do their hair, at any age.
> 
> CH should have sent an atelier along with that 'dress' so it fit M or not agree to the lend. CG is a business woman and that dress (her dress) looked terrible.


If the Bridezilla tales are true, CH may have decided to save her people from the Gorgon. Better that Methane look her usual shipwrecked self than get embroiled in her fashion disaster.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I don't believe that women of any age in this day 'n age should pass comment on how other people do their hair, at any age.
> 
> CH should have sent an atelier along with that 'dress' so it fit M or not agree to the lend. CG is a business woman and that dress (her dress) looked terrible.


Interesting quotes from CH, ca 2018 - when she was 80 years old, the article dates to 2020, CH sold her label in 2018. All in all the quotes are a bit out of context, and the title - AGAINST WOMEN OVER 40 HAVING LONG HAIR - is a bit strong









						Caroline Herrera is against women over 40 having long hair. She thinks it “looks bad”
					

“A woman must age graciously, and not try to be an age she’s not or she will look ridiculous” the Venezuelan designer commented in 2018, while sharing her tips on how to stay stylish with age.



					www.upsocl.com
				












						Carolina Herrera reveals her rules for ageless style
					

Venezuelan fashion designer Carolina Herrera, 79, has said that nothing ages a woman more than pretending she is still young.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Interesting quotes from CH, ca 2018 - when she was 80 years old, the article dates to 2020, CH sold her label in 2018. All in all the quotes are a bit out of context, and the title - AGAINST WOMEN OVER 40 HAVING LONG HAIR - is a bit strong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caroline Herrera is against women over 40 having long hair. She thinks it “looks bad”
> 
> 
> “A woman must age graciously, and not try to be an age she’s not or she will look ridiculous” the Venezuelan designer commented in 2018, while sharing her tips on how to stay stylish with age.
> 
> 
> 
> www.upsocl.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera reveals her rules for ageless style
> 
> 
> Venezuelan fashion designer Carolina Herrera, 79, has said that nothing ages a woman more than pretending she is still young.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


You are very right to seek out the truth of what CH actually said and where she stands rather than jumping to conclusions.

I do think the joke still stands that it’s ironic the plastic princess seeks our CH designs given she says a woman should age gracefully given that is something M is completely incapable of.

On whether she was getting fitted at the atelier or what not, I do think even if it were well fitted she’d have still looked gaudy given the event but I guess that was the point.

Better to make a big scene wearing a paper bag to the oscars than wearing a nice black dress like 5 other girls and being judged on charisma, personality and talent alone.


----------



## Annawakes

Actually I wouldn’t be surprised if they came out and said it was Philip who made those comments.  After all, he is now not able to defend himself.  Lowest of the low, is what I expect from them.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Interesting quotes from CH, ca 2018 - when she was 80 years old, the article dates to 2020, CH sold her label in 2018. All in all the quotes are a bit out of context, and the title - AGAINST WOMEN OVER 40 HAVING LONG HAIR - is a bit strong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caroline Herrera is against women over 40 having long hair. She thinks it “looks bad”
> 
> 
> “A woman must age graciously, and not try to be an age she’s not or she will look ridiculous” the Venezuelan designer commented in 2018, while sharing her tips on how to stay stylish with age.
> 
> 
> 
> www.upsocl.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera reveals her rules for ageless style
> 
> 
> Venezuelan fashion designer Carolina Herrera, 79, has said that nothing ages a woman more than pretending she is still young.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



No jeans and no black - that would be half the wardrobes of most women over 40


----------



## Chanbal

Isn't Jack the one that stopped replying to Hazz's messages? The one that Hazz informed about his predictions… destruction wherever they go…  Another Piers M? Coincidence?


----------



## Chanbal

I have to admire the people on twitter that keep fighting against misinformation!


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, my Smile contribution goes to hungry kittens, not greedy ex- and wannabe-royals.


Mine go to the elephants at the Tenn Elephant Sanctuary--definitely not the Harkles scam.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Actually I wouldn’t be surprised if they came out and said it was Philip who made those comments.  After all, he is now not able to defend himself.  Lowest of the low, is what I expect from them.



I don’t think they could at this point. They made a huge deal out of insisting that it wasn’t Philip at the time of the interview. That was specifically stressed  due to his declining health.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Interesting quotes from CH, ca 2018 - when she was 80 years old, the article dates to 2020, CH sold her label in 2018. All in all the quotes are a bit out of context, and the title - AGAINST WOMEN OVER 40 HAVING LONG HAIR - is a bit strong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caroline Herrera is against women over 40 having long hair. She thinks it “looks bad”
> 
> 
> “A woman must age graciously, and not try to be an age she’s not or she will look ridiculous” the Venezuelan designer commented in 2018, while sharing her tips on how to stay stylish with age.
> 
> 
> 
> www.upsocl.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carolina Herrera reveals her rules for ageless style
> 
> 
> Venezuelan fashion designer Carolina Herrera, 79, has said that nothing ages a woman more than pretending she is still young.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


As with most things in life, sweeping statements about everyone usually don't ring true.  The only true statement for us all (as far as I know!) is that the only sure thing is death.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


>



 Thanks @needlv for your post, which contains your #6 nickname, Little Miss Forgetful and #7 nickname, Omits-A-Lot (Omid Scobie), indeed accurate descriptions of both fakes. Congratulations and here's your Gold Medal.


----------



## Chanbal

They virtually ignore or damage family members from all sides. I don't understand why people can be so divisive. This is all very sad imo.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> No jeans and no black - that would be half the wardrobes of most women over 40


I would have nothing to wear


----------



## Chanbal

Great timing, after a memory lapse… keeps them on the headlines, keeps them on making money.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> No jeans and no black - that would be half the wardrobes of most women over 40


Is CH moonlighting as The Queen’s stylist? QE is the only person I know who dresses like that.


Chanbal said:


> I have to admire the people on twitter that keep fighting against misinformation!
> View attachment 5261562


now the real question is how much of what BP denied was actually true…..


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> now the real question is how much of what BP denied was actually true…..


That is a great question…To me, all the 'denials' from the Palace should have been 'no comments' instead. One should avoid getting involved with very controversial people like the Harkles. 

Here is an interesting video on the subject.


----------



## bag-mania

Serious question, why is the media so obsessed with them? I know they are paying publicists for placement but it is obvious that these news media outlets are not being paid. They are disparaging the royal family and propping up H&M because its part of their agenda, business and perhaps personal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Completely random and I couldn't disagree more, but I just read Carolina Herrera (maker of the red monstrosity) believes women over 40 with long hair are classless. Pretty sure that includes extensions, doesn't it


as a woman over 40 with long hair, I resent that.....but as far as extensions go, I'm seeing way too many and some of them extremely long and therefore, obviously fake


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what was the Montecitos' contributions to this new book…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book: Prince Charles is the one who asked about baby Archie’s skin tone
> 
> 
> A new book claims that Prince Charles speculated about the skin tone of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s future children — and unwittingly triggered the rift between the couple and the B…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


IF this was true I (which I doubt) then I would think they would give Charles the benefit of the doubt that it was not intended in a mean spirited way.  After all, if he was a racist, would he have walked that biatch down the aisle?  That family (for whatever reason) gave them a wedding with a black choir and a black minister.  now they are racists?

just want to add - a lot of people are prejudiced against red haired boys....maybe charles was thinking it would be good to have a grandson who wasn't a "ginger"


----------



## TC1

IIRC Meghan brought it up before Harry joined her in the O interview and said that's what she was "told", but nothing ever said to her directly. Soo...just simple to throw H and his entire family under the bus


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He was my guess at the time. Charles has been as quiet as a mouse since the Oprah interview. Too quiet. He’s worried about what they’ll say.


so what if he did say it?  I heard a black woman (Whoopi I think) say black people speculate about what color babies skin will be all the time.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so what if he did say it?  I heard a black woman (Whoopi I think) say black people speculate about what color babies skin will be all the time.



You know it would be perceived differently if a white person, particularly a man, and most particularly the future king of England, speculated about it.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> You know it would be perceived differently if a white person, particularly a man, and most particularly the future king of England, speculated about it.


well, she wanted to make it sound that way but I still say it could have been innocent (if he said it)


----------



## DeMonica

charlottawill said:


> I don't think it was that she was too stupid to fit in, more likely she didn't want to fit in. She arrogantly envisioned herself single-handedly modernizing a centuries old institution, like she was the star of some Hollywood rom com. As dumb as H is, he understood early on "what M wants, M gets". I believe it was in her game plan all along to leave England as soon as possible and settle in as the Queen of Montecito, with all of Hollywood clamoring for her attention. Things are clearly not going according to plan.


ITA. She never wanted to put an effort to fit in. The Palace tried to help her out but she didn't want to listen. You'd think that she as an actress, especially an actress who studies international relations or something like that, would take instructions easily but taking instructions from the BRF must have been beneath her.  I'm just shocked that CDAN got it so right when the got married. They predicted the whole scenario except the ugliness of how they would put their plans in action.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, she wanted to make it sound that way but I still say it could have been innocent (if he said it)



This is one of those situations where the rumors and conjecture is more damaging than whatever was actually said could be.


----------



## pmburk

What gets me the most about the whole skin color speculation fiasco is that while Meghan is biracial, she is very fair/light, and with pale redhead Harry as the dad... I just don't honestly see how ANYONE could have had concerns about the baby's skin tone. If anything the kid was at risk of being an albino.


----------



## bag-mania

pmburk said:


> What gets me the most about the whole skin color speculation fiasco is that while Meghan is biracial, she is very fair/light, and with pale redhead Harry as the dad... I just don't honestly see how ANYONE could have had concerns about the baby's skin tone. If anything the kid was at risk of being an albino.



So true. 

Meghan was deliberately trying to be provoking in the interview and she had no worries about being called a liar. Why isn't she worried? Because even if what she said was an outright lie, she has Harry willing to back her up and say that it happened. They are in this together. I don't believe we'll ever know exactly what was said because H&M lie and Charles won't talk.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Agree.  She would say anything to get attention and have sympathy thrown her way.
> 
> This whole thing about calling the exit Sussexit really smells of SS. * The fact that the BBC bowed to this pressure is more amazing to me.*  They are Markling themselves rapidly.


Not only to you. I just can't understand what kind of benefit they would get out of this other than alienating the BRF for the favours of these clowns.


----------



## Sophisticatted

When this is all over, as we all imagine that it will be.  Harry (and hopefully his children) will return to the UK.  I believe there was hope, once, that he would become a working Royal again.  Now, I think that hope has been extinguished, never to be revived.  He will end up hidden away on an estate in the country.  He and his children will be given all the privacy in the world!

Here’s my take on the skin color debate, it’s much better to idly speculate what it might be, before the birth, than what I experienced. I’m causcasion. According to DNA analysis well over 90% of my DNA comes from England, Ireland, Scotland and another large percentage from Scandinavia, with a smidgeon from France & Germany. So, I am fair with brown hair and blue green eyes. DH is 1st generation Chinese-American. (Black hair, brown eyes.). Our kids have my coloring. DS has my eyes. MIL once asked me in a nasty, accusatory manner, “*WHEN *are his eyes going to turn brown?!?”.  My reply was, “Maybe they’re NOT going to turn brown!”

And they HAVEN’T!!!  Muahahaha


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> When this is all over, as we all imagine that it will be.  Harry (and hopefully his children) will return to the UK.  I believe there was hope, once, that he would become a working Royal again.  Now, I think that hope has been extinguished, never to be revived.  He will end up hidden away on an estate in the country.  He and his children will be given all the privacy in the world!
> 
> Here’s my take on the skin color debate, it’s much better to idly speculate what it might be, before the birth, than what I experienced. I’m causcasion. According to DNA analysis well over 90% of my DNA comes from England, Ireland, Scotland and another large percentage from Scandinavia, with a smidgeon from France & Germany. So, I am fair with brown hair and blue green eyes. DH is 1st generation Chinese-American. (Black hair, brown eyes.). Our kids have my coloring. DS has my eyes. MIL once asked me in a nasty, accusatory manner, “*WHEN *are his eyes going to turn brown?!?”.  My reply was, “Maybe they’re NOT going to turn brown!”
> 
> And they HAVEN’T!!!  Muahahaha


I don't think she will let go of those kids....they are her little meal tickets


----------



## Chanbal

pmburk said:


> What gets me the most about the whole skin color speculation fiasco is that while Meghan is biracial, she is very fair/light, and with pale redhead Harry as the dad... I just don't honestly see how ANYONE could have had concerns about the baby's skin tone. If anything the kid was at risk of being an albino.


'Concern' was MM's version. Curiosity was likely the reality, particularly having a redhead father.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> No jeans and no black - that would be half the wardrobes of most women over 40


I generally like her designs, but my lifestyle does not lend itself to her vision of fashion. On any given day I'm either wearing jeans or black leggings. I do like bright colors and patterns, but I have a very stylish friend who is also past 60 and wears black most of the time. I envy her look of effortless elegance that I never seem to achieve. And I have longish hair, mostly because I look awful with short hair. You have to wear what works for you, not what some designer who has been wealthy for her entire life thinks you should wear. A lot of her designs are geared toward the "ladies who lunch".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

In case you missed it....



> https://www.today.com/video/author-...02053784?playlist=mmlsnnd_todayarchivesmonday


----------



## poopsie

I am beginning to doubt that a divorce is inevitable
Any split would be initiated by her. I believe that she is savvy enough to realize that the RF provides endless victim scenarios for her to capitalize on. More so than any other potential partner would. Also, what other man (or woman, for that matter) of the necessary caliber is going to let her shove them around like a secondhand prop
As long as good ol' JCMH is on board she isn't going anywhere. 
IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> I am beginning to doubt that a divorce is inevitable
> Any split would be initiated by her. I believe that she is savvy enough to realize that the RF provides endless victim scenarios for her to capitalize on. More so than any other potential partner would. Also, what other man (or woman, for that matter) of the necessary caliber is going to let her shove them around like a secondhand prop
> As long as good ol' JCMH is on board she isn't going anywhere.
> IMO



I think you might be right, as sad as it is.


----------



## needlv

PC commenting on skin tone is their revenge for not giving Archie and Lilibucks the prince / princess title.  That way when he initiates plans to slim the monarchy down they can claim racism.  That is why MM linked those topics with security too.

You can bet that when the Queen passes, they will have a press statement ready to go announcing that Archie and Lilibucks are now prince and princess because of the (older) letters patent.

Thats why PC should act now.  Announce formally that Archie and Lilibucks aren’t getting those titles when he is king, and that a change in letters patent will occur when PC is king.  Let them have their tantrums now.


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


> PC commenting on skin tone is their revenge for not giving Archie and Lilibucks the prince / princess title.  That way when he initiates plans to slim the monarchy down they can claim racism.  That is why MM linked those topics with security too.
> 
> You can bet that when the Queen passes, they will have a press statement ready to go announcing that Archie and Lilibucks are now prince and princess because of the (older) letters patent.
> 
> Thats why PC should act now.  Announce formally that Archie and Lilibucks aren’t getting those titles when he is king, and that a change in letters patent will occur when PC is king.  Let them have their tantrums now.



Unless William forces his hand, I don't see Charles doing a thing


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think you might be right, as sad as it is.



IF she does somehow manage a political venture, good ol Hasbeen will be the perfect prop. She would have to renounce _her _title, but wouldn't he be allowed to keep his------thus retaining a link to royalty
I can see it now..........Madame Markle, formally known as Duckass of Somesuch


----------



## needlv

Oh and btw the ANL decision is supposed to come out 2 December.  Hence frantically trying to distract using the “PC is racist” distraction.


----------



## papertiger

pmburk said:


> What gets me the most about the whole skin color speculation fiasco is that while Meghan is biracial, she is very fair/light, and with pale redhead Harry as the dad... I just don't honestly see how ANYONE could have had concerns about the baby's skin tone. If anything the kid was at risk of being an albino.



It may never have happened. 

This is the dangerous thing about putting things out there. Especially by 2 such unaccomplished liars. Nothing she's said have been true and he has no idea. Even us talking about it gives it credence. 

Fact: M never heard because she wasn't in the room. 
Fact: H says the first thing that comes out of his mouth to make him sound like a knight in shining armour when he's an ineffectual half-wit. 
Fact: Almost everything either has said has been proven fabricated or exaggerated beyond recognition.


----------



## Chanbal

Absolutely, MM was the one that started this during OW's interview. Haz may or may not have been aware of it ahead of time. Toxic is a good word to describe this couple. 


*This was never going to be the ideal week for Prince Charles to learn from a new book that he was being accused of questioning the future skin colour of Prince Harry and Meghan’s children.*

He was, after all, arriving in Barbados representing the Queen at a momentous ceremony to mark the transition of the Caribbean island to a republic and where issues of race and identity politics are key.

Whether the claim by American author Christopher Andersen – made with his usual audacious assertions of impeccable sources – is true, is quite another matter.

It earned the immediate scorn of royal officials, with one describing it as ‘fiction’.

*And it is certainly convenient that the book, Brothers And Wives: Inside The Private Lives Of William, Kate, Harry And Meghan, is being published in the US safely out of reach of the prince’s lawyers.*

Andersen has a track record of writing books about the royals that rely on the most astonishingly intimate – some would say contentious – information.

In a 2001 book called Diana’s Boys, he claimed that William and Harry had insisted on walking behind their mother’s coffin when in fact they agreed to do so only the night before the funeral when their grandfather Prince Philip offered to walk with them.

For Charles the timing of this latest volume, however improbable the content, is unfortunate on two counts.

To have such a grotesque accusation hanging over him as he engages in one of the most diplomatically sensitive of missions – Barbados is the first country to remove the Queen as its head of state since 1992 – is bad enough, but against the backdrop of last night’s controversial BBC documentary probing Harry and Meghan’s relations with the media, it is a mischievous distraction.

*But the way the story has raced round the world on social media hints at the potential damage such charges can have, even against the one figure who has done more than any other member of the Royal Family to promote racial tolerance.*

The tragedy for Charles is that however scurrilous the allegations, the blame for it all lies much closer to home.

*It was Harry and Meghan who triggered the ‘who was the royal racist’ mystery in their Oprah Winfrey interview last March, when it became open season for any writer to line their pockets with spurious speculation at the expense of the Royal Family.*

According to Andersen, the catalyst for Charles’s alleged remarks was his son and former actress Meghan’s engagement almost exactly four years ago on November 27, 2017.

He claims that a few hours after the announcement the prince asked the Duchess of Cornwall over breakfast: ‘I wonder what the children will look like?’ Camilla was said to be ‘somewhat taken aback’ and allegedly replied: ‘Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain.’

The prince, so the book claims, lowered his voice and added: ‘I mean, what do you think their children’s complexion might be?’

How very tantalising it sounds, but can it possibly be true? It is hard to think of a more crass conversation than the kind imagined here – even though Andersen claims the prince’s words were made innocently – not least because it requires a considerable leap of faith.

Who on earth overheard this confidential breakfast-time discussion, complete with voice-lowering inflection, before, as Andersen has it, ‘scheming courtiers’ gave Charles’s words ‘a racist spin’?

*Can we even be sure such exchanges took place over the breakfast table at all? The fact is the couple tend to take breakfast separately – the prince prefers tea and toast, while Camilla often has hers ‘on the go’ or skips it.*

No wonder Clarence House aides are poring over the couple’s diary for November 28, 2017, which suggests they would have had little time for such a languid discussion over toast and marmalade.

Charles and Camilla travelled to Stoke-on-Trent for a day of engagements across the Potteries during which the duchess gave an interview in which she spoke of their joy at Harry and Meghan’s engagement.

*If there is any consolation for Charles, it is the view of those close to him that the quotes attributed to him are so unlikely and so out of character.

No one has worked harder to improve cross-community relations;* he is founder of the British Asian Trust, which aims to tackle poverty inequality and injustice in South Asia, and for years he has forged the strongest of links with the Muslim world.

*He was the first senior royal to appoint a black press secretary, the hugely capable Colleen Harris, he currently has an Asian police bodyguard and he has had and continues to have other BAME (black, Asian and minority ethnic) staff.

The issue for Charles is that the fallout from the royal racist row long predates Andersen’s pot-boiler. It all began with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Oprah broadcast.*

It was by some distance the most explosive and egregious of their so-called ‘truth bombs’ and contributed to the Palace’s wry observation that ‘recollections’ of what occurred ‘may vary’.

Like a good many of the couple’s claims, it was allowed to go largely unchallenged. They told Oprah that at least one member of the Royal Family expressed concern about ‘how dark’ their children’s skin might be.
But they were unwilling to identify the individual involved. *A point not lost on the duchess, who added: ‘That would be very damaging to them.’

Meghan was insistent that questions about Archie’s complexion were motivated by racism (as opposed to, say, curiosity) too.*

At one point, Oprah put it to her that ‘they were concerned that if he were too brown that would be a problem’.

She responded: ‘If that’s the assumption you are making, I think that feels a pretty safe one.’

*But remember that two very different versions of events were presented to Oprah – by Harry and Meghan – during their interview.

The duchess claimed ‘several conversations’ about Archie’s skin colour took place ‘in those months when I was pregnant’.

Harry, meanwhile, said there was just one conversation ‘right at the beginning’ of their relationship, ‘before we even got married’.*

A more forensic interviewer than Oprah might have queried this obvious inconsistency. For while Harry and Meghan were just ‘speaking their truth’, they can’t both have been right.

All the same, it was damning enough and played to that gallery of Meghan devotees who believe she was the victim of prejudice from within the Royal Family.

And, of course, it set off a guessing game that Harry’s intervention, saying neither his grandmother nor grandfather were responsible, failed to prevent.

According to Andersen, Charles’s ‘innocent’ question was being echoed ‘in a less innocent way throughout the halls of Buckingham Palace’ and was ‘weaponised’ by courtiers.

He further claims that Harry angrily confronted his father, with Charles allegedly telling him he was being ‘overly sensitive’.

Prince William, who denounced the claims with his ‘we are very much not a racist family’ intervention, is said in the book to have described his father’s comments as ‘tactless but not a sign of racism’.

Palace insiders are doubtful of US-based Andersen’s knowledge of such intimate family exchanges. And William, who guards his privacy ferociously, has yet to comment.

Andersen, predictably, was standing by his claims yesterday.

*For Charles in Barbados, there was the hope that diplomacy would, for one night at least, replace ‘fiction’.
But nine months on, the fallout from that toxic Oprah interview shows no sign of diminishing.*









						RICHARD KAY: Sussexes are to blame for race slur witchhunt
					

RICHARD KAY: The issue for Charles is that the fallout from the royal racist row predates the book by Christopher Andersen but began with Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't think she will let go of those kids....they are her little meal tickets


I think it might depend on the price she's offered for them?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They virtually ignore or damage family members from all sides. I don't understand why people can be so divisive. This is all very sad imo.




IMO I’m guessing the Yorks couldn’t be happier about these divisions; the others get along with Charles just fine. It takes away from Andy’s mess. Since Maxwell’s trial began today, maybe they will put out a new story daily.

Is it possible that Hazzie himself said this, but presented it to his wife as someone else?  We know he enjoys(!!) his pranks.  Perhaps he was just trying to provoke MM.  Wouldn’t surprise me at all.

ETA:  After all the recent “reveals”, what is left for Hazzie’s book?

ETA2:  Does the  BRF make _Succession’s_ Roy family look _normal_???


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think they could at this point. They made a huge deal out of insisting that it wasn’t Philip at the time of the interview. That was specifically stressed  due to his declining health.


If they did accuse PP, it wouldn't be the first time they flipflop. They rewrite history all the time. And their stans have short term memory glitches like their plastic idol.



Chanbal said:


> They virtually ignore or damage family members from all sides. I don't understand why people can be so divisive. This is all very sad imo.



We know who went to their wedding (not her family  )
It will be interesting to see which new BFFs (Best Friends For now) attend her next birthday.



DeMonica said:


> Not only to you. I just can't understand what kind of benefit they would get out of this other than alienating the BRF for the favours of these clowns.


Should we look at the people managing the BBC now? Are they women swayed by her garbage about the travails of being a mom, POCs swayed by her victim spiel, wokesters charmed by her "causes" or people with a price tag that Sunshine Sucks can buy?



Sophisticatted said:


> When this is all over, as we all imagine that it will be.  Harry (and hopefully his children) will return to the UK.  I believe there was hope, once, that he would become a working Royal again.  Now, I think that hope has been extinguished, never to be revived.  He will end up hidden away on an estate in the country.  He and his children will be given all the privacy in the world!
> 
> Here’s my take on the skin color debate, it’s much better to idly speculate what it might be, before the birth, than what I experienced. I’m causcasion. According to DNA analysis well over 90% of my DNA comes from England, Ireland, Scotland and another large percentage from Scandinavia, with a smidgeon from France & Germany. So, I am fair with brown hair and blue green eyes. DH is 1st generation Chinese-American. (Black hair, brown eyes.). Our kids have my coloring. DS has my eyes. MIL once asked me in a nasty, accusatory manner, “*WHEN *are his eyes going to turn brown?!?”.  My reply was, “Maybe they’re NOT going to turn brown!”
> 
> And they HAVEN’T!!!  Muahahaha


That is bizarre! (I have many inter-racial marriages in my extended family and we tend to take all the cross-cultural compromises in our stride).



sdkitty said:


> I don't think she will let go of those kids....they are her little meal tickets


Unless a bigger meal ticket comes along...
And she can always cry victim and say the meal tickets were ripped from her inflating/deflating bosom.



needlv said:


> PC commenting on skin tone is their revenge for not giving Archie and Lilibucks the prince / princess title.  That way when he initiates plans to slim the monarchy down they can claim racism.  That is why MM linked those topics with security too.
> 
> You can bet that when the Queen passes, they will have a press statement ready to go announcing that Archie and Lilibucks are now prince and princess because of the (older) letters patent.
> 
> Thats why PC should act now.  Announce formally that Archie and Lilibucks aren’t getting those titles when he is king, and that a change in letters patent will occur when PC is king.  Let them have their tantrums now.


Hear, hear!


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I generally like her designs, but my lifestyle does not lend itself to her vision of fashion. On any given day I'm either wearing jeans or black leggings. I do like bright colors and patterns, but I have a very stylish friend who is also past 60 and wears black most of the time. I envy her look of effortless elegance that I never seem to achieve. And I have longish hair, mostly because I look awful with short hair. You have to wear what works for you, not what some designer who has been wealthy for her entire life thinks you should wear. A lot of her designs are geared toward the "ladies who lunch".



Google CH’s daughters - they must be 40ish. Guessing they have long hair and wear jeans


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I think it might depend on the price she's offered for them?


I could see that there could be a possibility of her accepting a huge settlement to give up the little meal tickets....but that would hurt her image.  or maybe she could claim they were stolen from her.


----------



## xincinsin

I'm concerned with how dark Meghan Markle is. Yes, I've said it! I'm referring of course to how dark her soul is for her to be so despicable. 

I think karma and the universe are sabotaging her right now, with how Covid has scuttled MM's plans to be the toast of the town and queen of the red carpet. She will always have her supporters who buy her crocodile tears, humble brag and victim claims. May she always have to pay big bucks to Sunshine Sucks and other crisis management outfits to buy her way into events! (Because she certainly doesn't have the talent or status to get anywhere on her own.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Absolutely, MM was the one that started this during OW's interview. Haz may or may not have been aware of it ahead of time. Toxic is a good word to describe this couple.
> View attachment 5262009
> 
> *This was never going to be the ideal week for Prince Charles to learn from a new book that he was being accused of questioning the future skin colour of Prince Harry and Meghan’s children.*
> 
> He was, after all, arriving in Barbados representing the Queen at a momentous ceremony to mark the transition of the Caribbean island to a republic and where issues of race and identity politics are key.
> 
> Whether the claim by American author Christopher Andersen – made with his usual audacious assertions of impeccable sources – is true, is quite another matter.
> 
> It earned the immediate scorn of royal officials, with one describing it as ‘fiction’.
> 
> *And it is certainly convenient that the book, Brothers And Wives: Inside The Private Lives Of William, Kate, Harry And Meghan, is being published in the US safely out of reach of the prince’s lawyers.*
> 
> Andersen has a track record of writing books about the royals that rely on the most astonishingly intimate – some would say contentious – information.
> 
> In a 2001 book called Diana’s Boys, he claimed that William and Harry had insisted on walking behind their mother’s coffin when in fact they agreed to do so only the night before the funeral when their grandfather Prince Philip offered to walk with them.
> 
> For Charles the timing of this latest volume, however improbable the content, is unfortunate on two counts.
> 
> To have such a grotesque accusation hanging over him as he engages in one of the most diplomatically sensitive of missions – Barbados is the first country to remove the Queen as its head of state since 1992 – is bad enough, but against the backdrop of last night’s controversial BBC documentary probing Harry and Meghan’s relations with the media, it is a mischievous distraction.
> 
> *But the way the story has raced round the world on social media hints at the potential damage such charges can have, even against the one figure who has done more than any other member of the Royal Family to promote racial tolerance.*
> 
> The tragedy for Charles is that however scurrilous the allegations, the blame for it all lies much closer to home.
> 
> *It was Harry and Meghan who triggered the ‘who was the royal racist’ mystery in their Oprah Winfrey interview last March, when it became open season for any writer to line their pockets with spurious speculation at the expense of the Royal Family.*
> 
> According to Andersen, the catalyst for Charles’s alleged remarks was his son and former actress Meghan’s engagement almost exactly four years ago on November 27, 2017.
> 
> He claims that a few hours after the announcement the prince asked the Duchess of Cornwall over breakfast: ‘I wonder what the children will look like?’ Camilla was said to be ‘somewhat taken aback’ and allegedly replied: ‘Well, absolutely gorgeous, I’m certain.’
> 
> The prince, so the book claims, lowered his voice and added: ‘I mean, what do you think their children’s complexion might be?’
> 
> How very tantalising it sounds, but can it possibly be true? It is hard to think of a more crass conversation than the kind imagined here – even though Andersen claims the prince’s words were made innocently – not least because it requires a considerable leap of faith.
> 
> Who on earth overheard this confidential breakfast-time discussion, complete with voice-lowering inflection, before, as Andersen has it, ‘scheming courtiers’ gave Charles’s words ‘a racist spin’?
> 
> *Can we even be sure such exchanges took place over the breakfast table at all? The fact is the couple tend to take breakfast separately – the prince prefers tea and toast, while Camilla often has hers ‘on the go’ or skips it.*
> 
> No wonder Clarence House aides are poring over the couple’s diary for November 28, 2017, which suggests they would have had little time for such a languid discussion over toast and marmalade.
> 
> Charles and Camilla travelled to Stoke-on-Trent for a day of engagements across the Potteries during which the duchess gave an interview in which she spoke of their joy at Harry and Meghan’s engagement.
> 
> *If there is any consolation for Charles, it is the view of those close to him that the quotes attributed to him are so unlikely and so out of character.
> 
> No one has worked harder to improve cross-community relations;* he is founder of the British Asian Trust, which aims to tackle poverty inequality and injustice in South Asia, and for years he has forged the strongest of links with the Muslim world.
> 
> *He was the first senior royal to appoint a black press secretary, the hugely capable Colleen Harris, he currently has an Asian police bodyguard and he has had and continues to have other BAME (black, Asian and minority ethnic) staff.
> 
> The issue for Charles is that the fallout from the royal racist row long predates Andersen’s pot-boiler. It all began with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s Oprah broadcast.*
> 
> It was by some distance the most explosive and egregious of their so-called ‘truth bombs’ and contributed to the Palace’s wry observation that ‘recollections’ of what occurred ‘may vary’.
> 
> Like a good many of the couple’s claims, it was allowed to go largely unchallenged. They told Oprah that at least one member of the Royal Family expressed concern about ‘how dark’ their children’s skin might be.
> But they were unwilling to identify the individual involved. *A point not lost on the duchess, who added: ‘That would be very damaging to them.’
> 
> Meghan was insistent that questions about Archie’s complexion were motivated by racism (as opposed to, say, curiosity) too.*
> 
> At one point, Oprah put it to her that ‘they were concerned that if he were too brown that would be a problem’.
> 
> She responded: ‘If that’s the assumption you are making, I think that feels a pretty safe one.’
> 
> *But remember that two very different versions of events were presented to Oprah – by Harry and Meghan – during their interview.
> 
> The duchess claimed ‘several conversations’ about Archie’s skin colour took place ‘in those months when I was pregnant’.
> 
> Harry, meanwhile, said there was just one conversation ‘right at the beginning’ of their relationship, ‘before we even got married’.*
> 
> A more forensic interviewer than Oprah might have queried this obvious inconsistency. For while Harry and Meghan were just ‘speaking their truth’, they can’t both have been right.
> 
> All the same, it was damning enough and played to that gallery of Meghan devotees who believe she was the victim of prejudice from within the Royal Family.
> 
> And, of course, it set off a guessing game that Harry’s intervention, saying neither his grandmother nor grandfather were responsible, failed to prevent.
> 
> According to Andersen, Charles’s ‘innocent’ question was being echoed ‘in a less innocent way throughout the halls of Buckingham Palace’ and was ‘weaponised’ by courtiers.
> 
> He further claims that Harry angrily confronted his father, with Charles allegedly telling him he was being ‘overly sensitive’.
> 
> Prince William, who denounced the claims with his ‘we are very much not a racist family’ intervention, is said in the book to have described his father’s comments as ‘tactless but not a sign of racism’.
> 
> Palace insiders are doubtful of US-based Andersen’s knowledge of such intimate family exchanges. And William, who guards his privacy ferociously, has yet to comment.
> 
> Andersen, predictably, was standing by his claims yesterday.
> 
> *For Charles in Barbados, there was the hope that diplomacy would, for one night at least, replace ‘fiction’.
> But nine months on, the fallout from that toxic Oprah interview shows no sign of diminishing.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Sussexes are to blame for race slur witchhunt
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: The issue for Charles is that the fallout from the royal racist row predates the book by Christopher Andersen but began with Harry and Meghan's interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think I would be looking into who was serving in the dining room that day and that is provided they even breakfasted together at all.  This is just like the nonsense that went on in the Scoobiedo book.  Since when does a fly on the wall record all conversations and know the intimate thoughts of people. This is all absurd.  I am sure that  the staff who work for Prince Charles have been vetted and know not to speak to strange authors.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'm concerned with how dark Meghan Markle is. Yes, I've said it! I'm referring of course to how dark her soul is for her to be so despicable.
> 
> I think karma and the universe are sabotaging her right now, with how Covid has scuttled MM's plans to be the toast of the town and queen of the red carpet. She will always have her supporters who buy her crocodile tears, humble brag and victim claims. May she always have to pay big bucks to Sunshine Sucks and other crisis management outfits to buy her way into events! (Because she certainly doesn't have the talent or status to get anywhere on her own.)


what she has is H.  the guy she fell in love with who just happened to be a prince


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I'm concerned with how dark Meghan Markle is. Yes, I've said it! I'm referring of course to how dark her soul is for her to be so despicable.
> 
> I think karma and the universe are sabotaging her right now, with how Covid has scuttled MM's plans to be the toast of the town and queen of the red carpet. She will always have her supporters who buy her crocodile tears, humble brag and victim claims. May she always have to pay big bucks to Sunshine Sucks and other crisis management outfits to buy her way into events! (Because she certainly doesn't have the talent or status to get anywhere on her own.)


If Megladon had a portrait like Doran Gray, it would be a sheet of all black.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> It may never have happened.
> 
> This is the dangerous thing about putting things out there. Especially by 2 such unaccomplished liars. Nothing she's said have been true and he has no idea. Even us talking about it gives it credence.
> 
> Fact: M never heard because she wasn't in the room.
> Fact: H says the first thing that comes out of his mouth to make him sound like a knight in shining armour when he's an ineffectual half-wit.
> Fact: Almost everything either has said has been proven fabricated or exaggerated beyond recognition.


but her knight in shining armour supposedly couldn't get her to a doctor for her depression?  she laid in bed and just sobbed into his arms.  so tragic that these two middle aged people couldn't get help for her and the evil HR people were against her


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> what she has is H.  the guy she fell in love with who just happened to be a prince


How far do you think his princely status will go at the rate that his star is descending? An honest question. 

For now, he can hobnob with like-minded people as in that Aspen committee which doesn't see the irony of a major misinformation source speaking out against misinformation, and headline programmes with his mental ailments. But he is already rehashing his stories. He needs new fodder to feed the media maw (and his wife's maw). And with Methane pushing him into the background, will he become a prince-for-hire soon? Buy an hour of his time to turn up at your birthday party? Pay extra for juggling?


----------



## CarryOn2020

DeMonica said:


> ITA. She never wanted to put an effort to fit in. The Palace tried to help her out but she didn't want to listen. You'd think that she as an actress, especially an actress who studies international relations or something like that, would take instructions easily but taking instructions from the BRF must have been beneath her.  I'm just shocked that CDAN got it so right when the got married. They predicted the whole scenario except the ugliness of how they would put their plans in action.



H&M said from the beginning they had this MegaSussexit plan.  I’ve rewatched their engagement interview - it’s all there [just like in Charles&Diana’s,interview]. Since Opera was at the wedding, it is easy to believe she coached MM the entire way. She really disliked not getting to interview Diana so she gave us plenty of cringe-y Fergie moments.  Plus, William himself called MM a disruptor, so he knew something was off.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> How far do you think his princely status will go at the rate that his star is descending? An honest question.
> 
> For now, he can hobnob with like-minded people as in that Aspen committee which doesn't see the irony of a major misinformation source speaking out against misinformation, and headline programmes with his mental ailments. But he is already rehashing his stories. He needs new fodder to feed the media maw (and his wife's maw). And with Methane pushing him into the background, will he become a prince-for-hire soon? Buy an hour of his time to turn up at your birthday party? Pay extra for juggling?


we'll see
truth is stranger than fiction and we just don't know how this will end


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> How far do you think his princely status will go at the rate that his star is descending? An honest question.
> 
> For now, he can hobnob with like-minded people as in that Aspen committee which doesn't see the irony of a major misinformation source speaking out against misinformation, and headline programmes with his mental ailments. But he is already rehashing his stories. He needs new fodder to feed the media maw (and his wife's maw). And with Methane pushing him into the background, will he become a prince-for-hire soon? Buy an hour of his time to turn up at your birthday party? Pay extra for juggling?



Katie Couric is on that committee, too. She has admitted some unpleasant things that she did during her reign


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  After all the recent “reveals”, what is left for Hazzie’s book?
> 
> ETA2:  Does the  BRF make _Succession’s_ Roy family look _normal_???


It's a great question. Lady C named Anne, not as a racist, but as someone who brought up cultural differences between MM&Haz. Andersen named Charles as being interested in the complexion of his grandkids. So, I wouldn't be surprised if Hazz decides to name Will… He needs to reveal something new in his book. 

I believe MM wouldn't do to Logan Roy what she has been doing to Charles. Logan wouldn't give her the time of day.


----------



## Chanbal

This!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This!




Imo it tells us what a lousy, sleezy press the world has. While we want to believe in a fair and free press, life tells us everyone has an agenda and answers to someone else.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Google CH’s daughters - they must be 40ish. Guessing they have long hair and wear jeans


----------



## Chanbal

On the Hazexit…


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG again…


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it tells us what a lousy, sleezy press the world has. *While we want to believe in a fair and free press, life tells us everyone has an agenda and answers to someone else.*


They are anything but "free", but rather fairly easily bought.  USWeekly and People were obviously being paid by the Kardashians, and it's pretty apparent someone is paying for all the ridiculous favorable press these buffoons get as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> In case you missed it....


I lost interest immediately after this quip, “Blah blah toxic… men in grey blah blah blah.” IMO, Christopher Andersen sounds like a braggart, boasting of attending HMTQ’s Silver Jubilee as if he were an invited guest, whereas he was just a reporter, probably standing outside amongst the thousands of well wishers, but lets forgive him this obvious ego boost.

The palace informants he professes to know would never impart to anyone such intimate details as C&C discussing grandkid’s skin colour, which leads one to believe that his book is a collection of false tattletales or he’s now into writing fanfiction in order to sell more books or maybe he is being compensated for corroborating the compulsive liar’s fabrications and as such, hopefully his sources will eventually be revealed to be none other than the traitorous fake and her ventriloquist dummy, aka JCMH.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Plenty of lessons on Dressing for the toxic two:

_Herrera is not a prude. She is more than willing to give her customers a plunging neckline, but doing so requires care and a precise placement of the breasts underneath the fabric. “*If it’s open so much, they look like fried eggs,” Herrera says. “Fashion is about proportion.”*
The Carolina Herrera brand debuted in 1981. A socialite, Herrera was urged into fashion by the legendary editor Diana Vreeland. In 1995, the company was purchased by the Barcelona-based luxury conglomerate, Puig, which also owns Nina Ricci and Paco Rabanne, as well as a controlling interest in Jean Paul Gaultier. Of these fashion houses, Herrera’s is probably the least attentive to shifts in trends. To stay true to one’s aesthetic sometimes means shunning fads, which can leave a designer outside the fashion conversation. “For me, fashion is about originality, sophistication and beauty,” Herrera says. “I’m not in the fashion business; I’m in the beauty business.”
*“You can’t always please the press,” Herrera says. “That’s for your ego.”*



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2015/06/08/how-can-you-be-a-fashion-icon-says-carolina-herrera-if-youre-not-wearing-clothes/
		

_


----------



## rose60610

Herrera can say whatever she wants. So can anybody else, and think whatever they want as well. I remember she was Renee Zellweger's go-to for award shows and they were often nice creations. I disagree with her supposed statements on older women shouldn't wear their hair long, etc. I have a few pieces of her clothing, they're beautiful and will last a long time. That said, I can't keep up with most celebrity statements on anything. When, however, a certain gold digging duchess is pretty much a disaster every time she opens her stupid lying mouth, she grates on your nerves. Add in her expensive ill-fitting outfits and you got a Midas touch in reverse. Everything she touches turns to trash. Somebody should have staged an intervention on her a long time ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Herrera can say whatever she wants. So can anybody else, and think whatever they want as well. I remember she was Renee Zellweger's go-to for award shows and they were often nice creations. I disagree with her supposed statements on older women shouldn't wear their hair long, etc. I have a few pieces of her clothing, they're beautiful and will last a long time. That said, I can't keep up with most celebrity statements on anything. When, however, a certain gold digging duchess is pretty much a disaster every time she opens her stupid lying mouth, she grates on your nerves. Add in her expensive ill-fitting outfits and you got a Midas touch in reverse. Everything she touches turns to trash. Somebody should have staged an intervention on her a long time ago.



_Fried eggs_ says it all


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> but her knight in shining armour supposedly couldn't get her to a doctor for her depression?  she laid in bed and just sobbed into his arms.  so tragic that these two middle aged people couldn't get help for her and the evil HR people were against her


So true. She’s so conniving I can’t see her being so held back she wouldn’t demand treatment. I was watching an interview with an evil girl by a psychiatrist and MM fits all the criteria. No soul, no empathy, no feelings, etc. Scary.


----------



## needlv

Ok… tin foil hat time…

is it possible PC is ok with the Sun story that “he is the racist” in order to take the sting out of PH’s book?  No one will care by the time PH’s Book is out.

PC issues the usual “we have instructed lawyers” threat… but when it dies down, nothing really happens… and we have all moved on to the next scandal/ shenanigans by the 666’s…?


----------



## Lodpah

Prince Harry felt he was ‘being erased from the family’ after Queen Elizabeth’s photo snub, book claims
					

Bestselling author Christopher Andersen has a new book being released on Tuesday titled “Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan.”




					www.yahoo.com
				




Another attack. What do these two want? Annihilate all their families? For what? Fame and fortune?

There’s an old ancient story where the devil took Jesus up the mountain and told Him he would give Him all the fame and fortune in the world if Jesus would worship him the devil. Guess these two sold their souls.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Prince Harry felt he was ‘being erased from the family’ after Queen Elizabeth’s photo snub, book claims
> 
> 
> Bestselling author Christopher Andersen has a new book being released on Tuesday titled “Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another attack. What do these two want? Annihilate all their families? For what? Fame and fortune?
> 
> There’s an old ancient story where the devil took Jesus up the mountain and told Him he would give Him all the fame and fortune in the world if Jesus would worship him the devil. Guess these two sold their souls.



This incident happened in 2019???  There must be a statue of limitations on family drama, right?

_In it, Andersen quoted a source who claimed the reigning British monarch had a palace aide move a portrait of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son Archie, who was eight months at the time, off-camera before she recorded her 2019 holiday broadcast, Page Six reported on Monday.









						Prince Harry felt he was ‘being erased from the family’ after Queen Elizabeth’s photo snub, book claims
					

Bestselling author Christopher Andersen has a new book being released on Tuesday titled “Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan.”




					www.yahoo.com
				



_


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> This incident happened in 2019???  There must be a statue of limitations on family drama, right?
> 
> _In it, Andersen quoted a source who claimed the reigning British monarch had a palace aide move a portrait of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son Archie, who was eight months at the time, off-camera before she recorded her 2019 holiday broadcast, Page Six reported on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry felt he was ‘being erased from the family’ after Queen Elizabeth’s photo snub, book claims
> 
> 
> Bestselling author Christopher Andersen has a new book being released on Tuesday titled “Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



it’s like Anderson wrote his book as a compilation of tabloid stories from the last four years.  This is nothing new to all of us TPFers!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> That is a great question…To me, all the 'denials' from the Palace should have been 'no comments' instead. One should avoid getting involved with very controversial people like the Harkles.
> 
> Here is an interesting video on the subject.



Well we now definitely know they were lying about hand not consulting with an LA PR firm and I strongly suspect M hating K is true too. 


bag-mania said:


> Serious question, why is the media so obsessed with them? I know they are paying publicists for placement but it is obvious that these news media outlets are not being paid. They are disparaging the royal family and propping up H&M because its part of their agenda, business and perhaps personal.


Negative engagement is still engagement I guess. This is why I think it’s good we use nicknames and abbreviations as we don’t want to be bumping up their SEO. 


DeMonica said:


> Not only to you. I just can't understand what kind of benefit they would get out of this other than alienating the BRF for the favours of these clowns.


It’s an ideological statement ultimately, who cares if it loses them money and ratings, they aren’t a commercial organisation so you all just need to be educated. *dramatic hand wave*
Aside from the politics I don’t think its that surprising when you think that ITV, which is a commercial company, threw away one of their big ratings earners because they didn’t want to be beholden to him.
The bbc clearly thinks they don’t want  to be beholden to the royals for ratings anymore especially if the royals are moving to the internet.

I feel they have played the game wrongly here TBH because they should’ve learned from ITV buying the Oprah interview that H&M do not pull in good ratings.


gracekelly said:


> If Megladon had a portrait like Doran Gray, it would be a sheet of all black.


If this is true, she should get back on to the devil as the eternal youth and beauty ain’t quite working out….


----------



## needlv

Did anyone notice MM’s lawyer deliberate choice of wording in denying the bullying claims?

_she didn't '*repeatedly* and *deliberately* hurt someone' but adds she 'wouldn't want to negate anyone's personal experiences'_

You can clearly see what the legal/ PR defences will be from this statement:


It was *one* incident, not bullying but someone may have suffered because - .'I dont want to negate your experience'
  it wasnt *deliberate*.
NOT an outright denial.

I am hoping some ex employee has a recording and leaks it.  Either way, you can defend bullying claims when it’s one or two people by saying it’s disgruntled employees etc.  But ten complaints from ten different former staff = major issues….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> This incident happened in 2019???  There must be a statue of limitations on family drama, right?
> 
> _In it, Andersen quoted a source who claimed the reigning British monarch had a palace aide move a portrait of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their son Archie, who was eight months at the time, off-camera before she recorded her 2019 holiday broadcast, Page Six reported on Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry felt he was ‘being erased from the family’ after Queen Elizabeth’s photo snub, book claims
> 
> 
> Bestselling author Christopher Andersen has a new book being released on Tuesday titled “Brothers and Wives: Inside the Private Lives of William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If only it were so easy to remove troublesome people...


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Did anyone notice MM’s lawyer deliberate choice of wording in denying the bullying claims?
> 
> _she didn't '*repeatedly* and *deliberately* hurt someone' but adds she 'wouldn't want to negate anyone's personal experiences'_
> 
> You can clearly see what the legal/ PR defences will be from this statement:
> 
> 
> It was *one* incident, not bullying but someone may have suffered because - .'I dont want to negate your experience'
> it wasnt *deliberate*.
> NOT an outright denial.
> 
> I am hoping some ex employee has a recording and leaks it.  Either way, you can defend bullying claims when it’s one or two people by saying it’s disgruntled employees etc.  But ten complaints from ten different former staff = major issues….


IOW, casual cruelty does not equate to malicious bullying. And her staff are just sensitive wimps who cannot take her forceful Californian work ethic (an excuse she already used, I believe).


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> So true.
> 
> Meghan was deliberately trying to be provoking in the interview and she had no worries about being called a liar. Why isn't she worried? Because even if what she said was an outright lie, she has Harry willing to back her up and say that it happened. They are in this together. I don't believe we'll ever know exactly what was said because H&M lie and Charles won't talk.


One thing I'm wondering, and really it is the first time I've thought about it, is wouldn't she have had a similar conversation with Harry? Don't all parents to be talk about what their baby would look like, whose colouring they will have? Pale like one parent or dark like the other. 
I remember in my last job I knew a girl who's parents were Chinese (she was born here in Wales) She and her partner (white Welsh, kinda looked Italian, a lot of Italians migrated here after the war) were having a baby and I think we all as colleagues had conversations with her about what her baby would look like, as in how Chinese or Welsh it would look. 
Were we racist, even though those conversations were with her and she was very active in them too?


----------



## littlemisskeira

Sharont2305 said:


> One thing I'm wondering, and really it is the first time I've thought about it, is wouldn't she have had a similar conversation with Harry? Don't all parents to be talk about what their baby would look like, whose colouring they will have? Pale like one parent or dark like the other.
> I remember in my last job I knew a girl who's parents were Chinese (she was born here in Wales) She and her partner (white Welsh, kinda looked Italian, a lot of Italians migrated here after the war) were having a baby and I think we all as colleagues had conversations with her about what her baby would look like, as in how Chinese or Welsh it would look.
> Were we racist, even though those conversations were with her and she was very active in them too?



My thoughts exactly. 
Even if said person had said that, it might not be from the same 'racist' stem that MM assumed and then perpetuated

My friend has a baby girl with Chinese-Indian origins and our group of friends including my friend and her husband, are absolutely okay with discussing how 'Indian' the baby looked in her first few months and yet after a year, she seems to appear more 'Chinese'. We are discussing physical attributes associated with the race with absolutely no racist or condescending undertones.

The BRF aside, any family with such an unreasonably sensitive member with the ability to blow anything and everything said into augmented proportions and then slyly twist them to advance her agenda, has my sympathy. Well, no peace at all in the family I would say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think they could at this point. They made a huge deal out of insisting that it wasn’t Philip at the time of the interview. That was specifically stressed  due to his declining health.


That’s true.  Though we know they have no problem with lying.  They could easily say they said that at the time out of respect for his declining health.  I just think, if they were really pressured to cough up a name, (assuming it actually happened, which I doubt)….it would be too easy to point at Philip.


----------



## papertiger

littlemisskeira said:


> My thoughts exactly.
> Even if said person had said that, it might not be from the same 'racist' stem that MM assumed and then perpetuated
> 
> My friend has a baby girl with Chinese-Indian origins and our group of friends including my friend and her husband, are absolutely okay with discussing how 'Indian' the baby looked in her first few months and yet after a year, she seems to appear more 'Chinese'. We are discussing physical attributes associated with the race with absolutely no racist or condescending undertones.
> 
> The BRF aside, any family with such an unreasonably sensitive member with the ability to blow anything and everything said into augmented proportions and then slyly twist them to advance her agenda, has my sympathy. Well, no peace at all in the family I would say.



Again,* if* anything was said. 

The allegation is now being fixed on PC with Anderson's book. 

As far as I know PC/Cam don't usually have breakfast with H. PC and Cam don't often have breakfast together either so PC would have been talking to himself or the dogs. So who did H hear it from? 

Since only H&M know who, they must have told Anderson (the way they 'didn't' cooperate with Scooby-doo)

Not a conspiracy theorist fan but I know how it works. If you ask me, this whole debacle was made-up to fix into our heads Archie is her baby as well as H's. And we have no evidence for that either, since unlike all other Royal babies there was no offical to verify the baby came from the body of the mother let alone her egg.


----------



## Genie27

It’s like a game of Clue - 
Now it’s PC in the breakfast room with Camilla. Earlier it was “unknown individual to H” but ruled out PP and TQ. And before that, it was *everybody/anybody*


----------



## Chanbal

If anyone has a link for the BBC 2 video, could it be shared here?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wasn't able to find the BBC part 2 video, but found this photo instead. The girl is all dressed up, but she doesn't look happy holding the cute baby. I wonder what the little baby may have done to her. It should have been something unforgettable, he was even excluded from a certain wedding years later.
> 
> View attachment 5262329



Perhaps it’s the glasses?  Or she’s contemplating which misogynistic company she can attack?


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Ok… tin foil hat time…
> 
> is it possible PC is ok with the Sun story that “he is the racist” in order to take the sting out of PH’s book?  No one will care by the time PH’s Book is out.
> 
> PC issues the usual “we have instructed lawyers” threat… but when it dies down, nothing really happens… and we have all moved on to the next scandal/ shenanigans by the 666’s…?



It’s a good theory but the moment race gets mentioned the press will be all over the story again. Even if the fuss has died down by next year, it will be quickly resurrected.

Unless I am missing something there is no good reason for Charles to fall on the sword and take responsibility for something he didn’t do.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All good questions:


----------



## Chanbal

Angela Levin has always nice words…


----------



## marietouchet

Genie27 said:


> It’s like a game of Clue -
> Now it’s PC in the breakfast room with Camilla. Earlier it was “unknown individual to H” but ruled out PP and TQ. And before that, it was *everybody/anybody*


Doesn't anyone remember ??? Lady Colin Campbell said it was Pss Anne, undoubtedly to a groom while mucking out the stables LOL

But also remember the TV Oprah version:  X made offensive comment to H - no third party was mentioned
H repeated comment to MM, MM told O the comment which she (MM) did NOT witness first hand but she worded her account in such a way as to make it seem like she was there - lying?

And how would H know what Charles told Camilla at breakfast?

These stories tiaragate, brides maid dress, crying .... so MANY CONFLICTING versions ... they cant all be true


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Again,* if* anything was said.
> 
> The allegation is now being fixed on PC with Anderson's book.
> 
> As far as I know PC/Cam don't usually have breakfast with H. PC and Cam don't often have breakfast together either so PC would have been talking to himself or the dogs. So who did H hear it from?
> 
> Since only H&M know who, they must have told Anderson (the way they 'didn't' cooperate with Scooby-doo)
> 
> Not a conspiracy theorist fan but I know how it works. If you ask me, this whole debacle was made-up to fix into our heads Archie is her baby as well as H's. And we have no evidence for that either, since unlike all other Royal babies there was no offical to verify the baby came from the body of the mother let alone her egg.


100% agree with you. This thing has got more versions than a Greek myth and is probably less true.

I think the idea they spread it against surrogacy rumours makes a lot of sense.

I also think IF they did have any negative feelings towards M and her future motherhood it would be more likely to be ‘is she too old to give H an heir?’
As sad but true, a lot of royal marriages are about baby-bearing  first and foremost. I would feel a lot more sympathy with her if she was openly contending with the unfair focus on progeny as the be-all of marriage and the pressure that causes but I feel like she’s too arrogant and greedy to actually want to argue  with something which might harm her inheritance and *gasp* suggest she is anything other than a supreme specimen of humanity who does everything perfectly.


----------



## Chanbal

Yeah Piers, she will do that in a million years


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> 100% agree with you. This thing has got more versions than a Greek myth and is probably less true.
> 
> I think the idea they spread it against surrogacy rumours makes a lot of sense.
> 
> I also think IF they did have any negative feelings towards M and her future motherhood it would be more likely to be ‘is she too old to give H an heir?’
> As sad but true, *a lot of royal marriages are about baby-bearing*  first and foremost. I would feel a lot more sympathy with her if she was openly contending with the unfair focus on progeny as the be-all of marriage and the pressure that causes but I feel like she’s too arrogant and greedy to actually want to argue  with something which might harm her inheritance and *gasp* suggest she is anything other than a supreme specimen of humanity who does everything perfectly.



Agree, the entire institution is based on heirs and lineage. Still with each variant (!!), I firmly believe Hazzie made it up. Perhaps a tabloid had speculated on the topic and Hazzie in his delusions of grandeur thought it must be true.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> 100% agree with you. This thing has got more versions than a Greek myth and is probably less true.
> 
> I think the idea they spread it against surrogacy rumours makes a lot of sense.
> 
> I also think IF they did have any negative feelings towards M and her future motherhood it would be more likely to be ‘is she too old to give H an heir?’
> As sad but true, a lot of royal marriages are about baby-bearing  first and foremost. I would feel a lot more sympathy with her if she was openly contending with the unfair focus on progeny as the be-all of marriage and the pressure that causes but I feel like she’s too arrogant and greedy to actually want to argue  with something which might harm her inheritance and *gasp* suggest she is anything other than a supreme specimen of humanity who does everything perfectly.


but do they care as much about baby bearing when H is sixth in line?


----------



## Aimee3

This all brings to mind the moral of the boy who cried wolf story.  “No one believes a liar even when they’re telling the truth.”  So I don’t believe anything these two say.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Chanbal said:


> Yeah Piers, she will do that in a million years



Meghan believes in Meghan having a voice, not anyone else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Maybe they discussed it with their IVF doctor and decided it was a good topic to use to stick a knife in someone's back.

Methane: So can we select the traits we want? The gender? The color of his skin and his eyes?
(lightbulb moment!)
Methane and Hazard grin at each other
Methane: We'll say they made rude speculations about the baby's complexion...
Hazard: They won't see that coming!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT but Charles' goddaughter and kind of cousin (her mother is a first cousin of Philip) India Hicks got married after 25 years and five kids, and her bridal style was impeccable if you want to google.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Maybe they discussed it with their IVF doctor and decided it was a good topic to use to stick a knife in someone's back.
> 
> Methane: So can we select the traits we want? The gender? The color of his skin and his eyes?
> (lightbulb moment!)
> Methane and Hazard grin at each other
> Methane: We'll say they made rude speculations about the baby's complexion...
> Hazard: They won't see that coming!



How sad is it that I wouldn't put it past them at this point?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> IOW, casual cruelty does not equate to malicious bullying. And her staff are just sensitive wimps who cannot take her forceful *Californian work ethic *(an excuse she already used, I believe).


LOLOL.  I find that term hysterical.  Not trying to offend anyone, but here I go.  I realize I'm making sweeping generalizations (which I just scolded Carolina Herrera for), but this is my personal experience.  I grew up in the Northeast US.  Pretty damn good work ethic.  You show up on time (if not a little early), you work hard and actually try.  My parents moved to California just as I was about to start college.  Total culture shock.  While I initially found the laid back attitude refreshing, now having lived in CA for the majority of my life, there is no such thing as a "California work ethic".  Getting out of work is more like it.  People work harder at trying to not work than actually work.  I'd take time off work to have something fixed at home, and workers with whom I had appointments wouldn't show up, or even bother to keep me updated.  I had babysitters who despite MULTIPLE confirmations, wouldn't show up on time or at all, and actually ask me, "Oh you still needed me today?"  Cleaning ladies who would cut corners if I didn't watch them like a hawk.  Office staff caught on camera during "catch up on their work time" doing anything but working.  The list goes on and on.  I think the country in general is getting lazier, and California has led the charge.  Megain with her "CA work ethic"...get millions of dollars for a 37 minute podcast, mostly featuring other actual talented people, and pretending to start a dozen projects but not actually doing anything or following through.  She truly is the perfect example of the Calfornia no work ethic.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It's a great question. Lady C named Anne, not as a racist, but as someone who brought up cultural differences between MM&Haz. Andersen named Charles as being interested in the complexion of his grandkids. So, I wouldn't be surprised if Hazz decides to name Will… He needs to reveal something new in his book.
> 
> I believe MM wouldn't do to Logan Roy what she has been doing to Charles. Logan wouldn't give her the time of day.


Logan Roy would have told her that if she didn’t shape up, she would be lucky to find a job working as a hostess on one of his cruise ships


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL.  I find that term hysterical.  Not trying to offend anyone, but here I go.  I realize I'm making sweeping generalizations (which I just scolded Carolina Herrera for), but this is my personal experience.  I grew up in the Northeast US.  Pretty damn good work ethic.  You show up on time (if not a little early), you work hard and actually try.  My parents moved to California just as I was about to start college.  Total culture shock.  While I initially found the laid back attitude refreshing, now having lived in CA for the majority of my life, there is no such thing as a "California work ethic".  Getting out of work is more like it.  People work harder at trying to not work than actually work.  I'd take time off work to have something fixed at home, and workers with whom I had appointments wouldn't show up, or even bother to keep me updated.  I had babysitters who despite MULTIPLE confirmations, wouldn't show up on time or at all, and actually ask me, "Oh you still needed me today?"  Cleaning ladies who would cut corners if I didn't watch them like a hawk.  Office staff caught on camera during "catch up on their work time" doing anything but working.  The list goes on and on.  I think the country in general is getting lazier, and California has led the charge.  Megain with her "CA work ethic"...get millions of dollars for a 37 minute podcast, mostly featuring other actual talented people, and pretending to start a dozen projects but not actually doing anything or following through.  She truly is the perfect example of the Calfornia no work ethic.


This. People looking for an easy out to get on disability and collect a check. I think this could be a generational issue as well as a geographic one. I recall my father, who worked through college and law school, saying that he was proud of the fact  that he always had a job and this was during the Depression.  When my father served during WWll, my mother (who had a child at home) invented a business,related to the wartime  shortage of leather, that  created ladies handbags made of a woven material. As far as I can tell, that is a claim regarding work ethic that neither of the delightful duo can lay a claim to. They have not worked hard at anything and created nothing.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I lost interest immediately after this quip, “Blah blah toxic… men in grey blah blah blah.” IMO, Christopher Andersen sounds like a braggart, boasting of attending HMTQ’s Silver Jubilee as if he were an invited guest, whereas he was just a reporter, probably standing outside amongst the thousands of well wishers, but lets forgive him this obvious ego boost.
> 
> The palace informants he professes to know would never impart to anyone such intimate details as C&C discussing grandkid’s skin colour, which leads one to believe that his book is a collection of false tattletales or he’s now into writing fanfiction in order to sell more books or maybe he is being compensated for corroborating the compulsive liar’s fabrications and as such, hopefully his sources will eventually be revealed to be none other than the traitorous fake and her ventriloquist dummy, aka JCMH.


It’s like the lies that tabloids got away with 40 years ago until they started losing lawsuits.   Once the courts began slapping big payouts on them for the plaintiffs, they stopped and did better fact checking before they stuck their necks out with outlandish stories. Unless this author can show proof that he received this info from a person in the same room, he is toast


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Again,* if* anything was said.
> 
> The allegation is now being fixed on PC with Anderson's book.
> 
> As far as I know PC/Cam don't usually have breakfast with H. PC and Cam don't often have breakfast together either so PC would have been talking to himself or the dogs. So who did H hear it from?
> 
> Since only H&M know who, they must have told Anderson (the way they 'didn't' cooperate with Scooby-doo)
> 
> Not a conspiracy theorist fan but I know how it works. If you ask me, this whole debacle was made-up to fix into our heads Archie is her baby as well as H's. And we have no evidence for that either, since unlike all other Royal babies there was no offical to verify the baby came from the body of the mother let alone her egg.


You bring up something that has nagged at me. I believe that she took, a quick trip to Toronto shortly after the wedding to have IVF. Harvesting eggs takes preparation on the part of the donor. When did she do this?  She spent months in England prior to the marriage   Why run back to Toronto for the IVF if she harvested the eggs in the UK?  Maybe it wasn’t her egg. Since we really don’t know what the children look like, it is hard to know who they resemble. As far as a father is concerned, you can pick out eye color and hair color out of the sperm donor catalogue.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Again,* if* anything was said.
> 
> The allegation is now being fixed on PC with Anderson's book.
> 
> As far as I know PC/Cam don't usually have breakfast with H. PC and Cam don't often have breakfast together either so PC would have been talking to himself or the dogs. So who did H hear it from?
> 
> Since only H&M know who, they must have told Anderson (the way they 'didn't' cooperate with Scooby-doo)
> 
> Not a conspiracy theorist fan but I know how it works. If you ask me, this whole debacle was made-up to fix into our heads Archie is her baby as well as H's. And we have no evidence for that either, since unlike all other Royal babies there was no offical to verify the baby came from the body of the mother let alone her egg.


What jumps at me is that the BRF schedules are so tight and these two regurgitate stories all the time. I doubt MM spent as much time with them.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL.  I find that term hysterical.  Not trying to offend anyone, but here I go.  I realize I'm making sweeping generalizations (which I just scolded Carolina Herrera for), but this is my personal experience.  I grew up in the Northeast US.  Pretty damn good work ethic.  You show up on time (if not a little early), you work hard and actually try.  My parents moved to California just as I was about to start college.  Total culture shock.  While I initially found the laid back attitude refreshing, now having lived in CA for the majority of my life, there is no such thing as a "California work ethic".  Getting out of work is more like it.  People work harder at trying to not work than actually work.  I'd take time off work to have something fixed at home, and workers with whom I had appointments wouldn't show up, or even bother to keep me updated.  I had babysitters who despite MULTIPLE confirmations, wouldn't show up on time or at all, and actually ask me, "Oh you still needed me today?"  Cleaning ladies who would cut corners if I didn't watch them like a hawk.  Office staff caught on camera during "catch up on their work time" doing anything but working.  The list goes on and on.  I think the country in general is getting lazier, and California has led the charge.  Megain with her "CA work ethic"...get millions of dollars for a 37 minute podcast, mostly featuring other actual talented people, and pretending to start a dozen projects but not actually doing anything or following through.  She truly is the perfect example of the Calfornia no work ethic.


there certainly seem to be plenty of people taking advatage of government handouts here in So Cal lately but IDK if it's that different from the rest of the country.  My DH is about the hardest working person I know - much more than me.  He is a So Cal native and I'm from the east coast.  So you can't really generalize


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> but do they care as much about baby bearing when H is sixth in line?


I would say so, I mean of course a lot of people want to have children on their own accord but I would say there is a definite idea that a wedding should be followed by a christening. Bea and Eug, for example, are low on the line but they had babies pretty quick.
Let’s not forget an important thing is these people all have their own titles and the name dies out if they have no legitimate, biological children and Aristo families tend to be quite afraid of this happening.


xincinsin said:


> Maybe they discussed it with their IVF doctor and decided it was a good topic to use to stick a knife in someone's back.
> 
> Methane: So can we select the traits we want? The gender? The color of his skin and his eyes?
> (lightbulb moment!)
> Methane and Hazard grin at each other
> Methane: We'll say they made rude speculations about the baby's complexion...
> Hazard: They won't see that coming!


I don’t believe this for a second…..imagine H coming up with an idea!

I think there’s probably truth in this though.


----------



## papertiger

hollieplus2 said:


> Meghan believes in Meghan having a voice, not anyone else.



TRUTH.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Logan Roy would have told her that if she didn’t shape up, she would be lucky to find a job working as a hostess on one of his cruise ships


 
Logan would be in one of his most generous days to offer her a job in a cruise ships. And now that Mo is gone…


----------



## Deleted 698298

gracekelly said:


> This. People looking for an easy out to get on disability and collect a check. I think this could be a generational issue as well as a geographic one. I recall my father, who worked through college and law school, saying that he was proud of the fact  that he always had a job and this was during the Depression.  When my father served during WWll, my mother (who had a child at home) invented a business,related to the wartime  shortage of leather, that  created ladies handbags made of a woven material. As far as I can tell, that is a claim regarding work ethic that neither of the delightful duo can lay a claim to. They have not worked hard at anything and created nothing.


Then you should come and see what’s happening in the UK…benefit culture is real, mother collects benefits, then children do the same, no work ethic, new generations of NEETS…it’s terrifying. I’m not surprised at all Megain and Harred escaped the country


----------



## needlv

Lol - Catherine rolls her eyes when kids ask about H and M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noooo, we need you here  Your posts are some of the best ones we have.  I know, I know, these royals are a royal pain, so we must stay strong, be brave, vent as much as needed, and rest.  I’m hoping Ellen is their bottom, at least for the holidays. How much gritching can they do? [rhetorical question].  Take good care, be well.  We will get through this.


Sadly, I can *SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO* relate to your back pain, having Spinal Stenosis, and Scoliosis (_in addition to very bad osteoarthritis_).  Your health is always the most important, so sending healing vibes your way .. but, laughter (_and goodness knows that our TPF posters provide some hilarious comments_) is also very helpful to the healing process!!  So, hopefully .. "skimming" (_as I often find myself doing nowadays_) this thread should provide some moments of hilarity .. to help you feel better!  Sending big hugs     to you!!!


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Doesn't anyone remember ??? Lady Colin Campbell said it was Pss Anne, undoubtedly to a groom while mucking out the stables LOL
> 
> But also remember the TV Oprah version:  X made offensive comment to H - no third party was mentioned
> H repeated comment to MM, MM told O the comment which she (MM) did NOT witness first hand but she worded her account in such a way as to make it seem like she was there - lying?
> 
> And how would H know what Charles told Camilla at breakfast?
> 
> These stories tiaragate, brides maid dress, crying .... so MANY CONFLICTING versions ... they cant all be true


I don't believe she was ever suicidal or that Kate made her cry - she certainly may have pretended to cry, given that she is an actress. From everything I've seen or read, she is opportunistic and manipulative, and I don't doubt that she is a bully. At first I was happy for them and wished them well, but with every passing day her true colors are revealed. I'm sorry the final chapter of the Queen's life is being clouded by this drama queen.


----------



## Lodpah

Consumer2much said:


> Then you should come and see what’s happening in the UK…benefit culture is real, mother collects benefits, then children do the same, no work ethic, new generations of NEETS…it’s terrifying. I’m not surprised at all Megain and Harred escaped the country


I liked your post because these two can’t tell the difference between real life and royal life. Being sarcastic here lol


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Lol - Catherine rolls her eyes when kids ask about H and M.



No worries, the kids might have a chance to see Pump and her prince in an upcoming mini-series. Did I hear right?


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that didn't have a chance to watch the BBC2 video, here it is:


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that didn't have a chance to watch the BBC2 video, here it is:




Thanks so much for posting this. So glad your back is better 

RE: part 2 — these whine-fiestas need to stop. Enough rehashing each and every injustice.  It all should have stayed private and not become trash-talk fodder.  Each time I see one of these ‘docu-dramas’, including Diana’s, I lose more and more respect for these ppl. None of these interviews are impressive, it takes no courage to disparage other people publicly, even one’s family.

Essentially this part of the BRF ‘tree’ are people who do very little, live off the public, and complain the loudest.   
No balconies, no coronations, no photo ops for this part of the BRF, ever!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that didn't have a chance to watch the BBC2 video, here it is:



Would a very brave person post a synopsis of the drivel spouted in this video?


&


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Would a very brave person post a synopsis of the drivel spouted in this video?
> 
> View attachment 5262922
> &
> View attachment 5262923




I couldn’t finish it. It was too much whining, pouting, double-speak, ill fitting clothing, bad make-up, etc.  Who wants to see _that_ during the holidays? This lawyer, though :smh:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kate’s WHAT. ELSE. moment 



			https://www.laineygossip.com/impatient-exasperated-princess-kate-rolls-her-eyes-at-mention-of-harry-meghan-during-visit-nower-hill-high-school/69890/amp
		


H&M must be really terrified of the ruling.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I couldn’t finish it. It was too much whining, pouting, double-speak, ill fitting clothing, bad make-up, etc.  Who wants to see _that_ during the holidays? This lawyer, though :smh:



This was posted on Twitter in response to M's crazy lawyer's spiel.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that didn't have a chance to watch the BBC2 video, here it is:




The so-called-documentary mentioning the Africa “documentary” without mentioning “no one asked me if I’m ok” tells you everything you need to know about the quality of this piece of @#$%. I seems like Sunshine Sachs edited it or something. The BBC should be ashamed.


----------



## Lodpah

Saw this on Quora


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> Would a very brave person post a synopsis of the drivel spouted in this video?
> 
> View attachment 5262922
> &
> View attachment 5262923


I tried, I really tried. I just couldn’t. 
I couldn’t even get past the first few minutes.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> I tried, I really tried. I just couldn’t.
> I couldn’t even get past the first few minutes.


At least you tried.  I couldn't even get myself to do that!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> I tried, I really tried. I just couldn’t.
> I couldn’t even get past the first few minutes.


I’m with you! A nano second listening to the Lying Duchess and her handbag is a nano second I can’t get back. Listening to them is like listening to a fingernail scratching against a wooden spoon.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m being serious here does anyone think maybe Harry has a low IQ? I mean he has the body of a man but maybe he’s just utterly stupid and the BRF has been protecting him and now that he’s out in the wild he can’t make decisions, he just went from one controlling environment to a more controlling one and he has a Stockholm Syndrome via his manipulative and narcissistic wife?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL.  I find that term hysterical.  Not trying to offend anyone, but here I go.  I realize I'm making sweeping generalizations (which I just scolded Carolina Herrera for), but this is my personal experience.  I grew up in the Northeast US.  Pretty damn good work ethic.  You show up on time (if not a little early), you work hard and actually try.  My parents moved to California just as I was about to start college.  Total culture shock.  While I initially found the laid back attitude refreshing, now having lived in CA for the majority of my life, there is no such thing as a "California work ethic".  Getting out of work is more like it.  People work harder at trying to not work than actually work.  I'd take time off work to have something fixed at home, and workers with whom I had appointments wouldn't show up, or even bother to keep me updated.  I had babysitters who despite MULTIPLE confirmations, wouldn't show up on time or at all, and actually ask me, "Oh you still needed me today?"  Cleaning ladies who would cut corners if I didn't watch them like a hawk.  Office staff caught on camera during "catch up on their work time" doing anything but working.  The list goes on and on.  I think the country in general is getting lazier, and California has led the charge.  Megain with her "CA work ethic"...get millions of dollars for a 37 minute podcast, mostly featuring other actual talented people, and pretending to start a dozen projects but not actually doing anything or following through.  She truly is the perfect example of the Calfornia no work ethic.


I think there was an interview that said she would get upset if some grandiose plan she concocted over dinner had not been greenhoused into fruition by breakfast the next morning. Maybe her idea of California work ethic, as learnt from the TV studios, was to demand the team supporting her does all the work so that she looks hardworking. 



Chanbal said:


>



Jenny Afia describing herself below. Sounds like Methane's kind of gal. Although I'd say Methane achieved marital success rather than professional success.
_I help people in the public eye protect their privacy and reputations against arbitrary interference. I believe that privacy is precious and people don't give up their rights just because they've achieved professional success. 

I've worked at Schillings since 2006, having previously trained in the City. I've been a Schillings Partner since 2012; *a fact I try to slip into most conversations as nothing makes me prouder.*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Royal obsessed America????? Nonsense! Sheesh, UK, kindly understand we do not like your royals. While the gossip may be somewhat intriguing, they aren’t worth the agony and lawsuits to get it. We have our own dramas here.  Understand?  

The way TM writes, it seems he thinks that it was indeed Charles who asked.  _Does TM know something?_


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> One thing I'm wondering, and really it is the first time I've thought about it, is wouldn't she have had a similar conversation with Harry? Don't all parents to be talk about what their baby would look like, whose colouring they will have? Pale like one parent or dark like the other.
> I remember in my last job I knew a girl who's parents were Chinese (she was born here in Wales) She and her partner (white Welsh, kinda looked Italian, a lot of Italians migrated here after the war) were having a baby and I think we all as colleagues had conversations with her about what her baby would look like, as in how Chinese or Welsh it would look.
> Were we racist, even though those conversations were with her and she was very active in them too?



I still don't understand what's racist about talking about a future baby and who it will look like, families do it all the time. My sister's sons are mixed race since her husband was Jamaican. They are both parents now and we talked about who their kids would look like and nobody even remotely thought it was racism. As it happened my eldest nephew, who is quite dark and married a tipical English rose, blond with blue eyes, their daughter is blond with blue eyes. My other nephew, who is less dark than his brother and who also married a white English girl, their son is white and their daughter is darker. There are all kinds of possibilities when mixed race people have a child, so I find wondering who the child will look like totally normal. Of course duchess Disney would make it a racist thing, she always plays the racist card when it suits her!


----------



## amante

Just throwing this out here:


> "The catalyst for my doing this is seeing how much pain this is causing H," Meghan said via text in August 2018, using her pet name for Prince Harry. "Even after a week with his dad [Prince Charles] and endlessly explaining the situation, his family seem to forget the context — and revert to 'can't she just go and see him and make this stop?'"











						Meghan Markle's Texts Released in Court: Prince Harry 'Berated' by His Family over Strain with Her Dad
					

Meghan Markle's texts and emails, which were released by a London court on Friday, concern her thought process when writing a letter to her father, Thomas Markle, as well as the relationship between her husband, Prince Harry, and her royal in-laws




					people.com
				




This shows how unqualified MM was for the job of being a royal. You have to do things that you really don't want to do. MM seemed to think that being royal meant privilege (or in this case freedom to do as she thinks is proper) when in fact it's a life of sacrifice, and not the glamorous big gesture type, rather the boring humiliating quotidian little personal sacrifices.

Example #1 When Diana died, HM eventually had to address her death and say good things about her, even though HM highly likely would have preferred to ignore her death on account of her strong antipathy against Diana. 
Example #2 ex-US president's state visit (I don't actually have much proof that the BRF hate Big Orange Little Hands, but to have to entertain and be personable and gracious to people you may not really like, to put aside your personal preferences, opinions, values, etc is part of the job at the BRF.

She really didn't understand the basics and then got burned.


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> Just throwing this out here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Texts Released in Court: Prince Harry 'Berated' by His Family over Strain with Her Dad
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's texts and emails, which were released by a London court on Friday, concern her thought process when writing a letter to her father, Thomas Markle, as well as the relationship between her husband, Prince Harry, and her royal in-laws
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This shows how unqualified MM was for the job of being a royal. You have to do things that you really don't want to do. MM seemed to think that being royal meant privilege (or in this case freedom to do as she thinks is proper) when in fact it's a life of sacrifice, and not the glamorous big gesture type, rather the boring humiliating quotidian little personal sacrifices.
> 
> Example #1 When Diana died, HM eventually had to address her death and say good things about her, even though HM highly likely would have preferred to ignore her death on account of her strong antipathy against Diana.
> Example #2 ex-US president's state visit (I don't actually have much proof that the BRF hate Big Orange Little Hands, but to have to entertain and be personable and gracious to people you may not really like, to put aside your personal preferences, opinions, values, etc is part of the job at the BRF.
> 
> She really didn't understand the basics and then got burned.


I think the BRF really didn't understand the context. Neither would I. This supposedly lovely young woman is going to be walked down the aisle by her proud dad, although H says she is practically an orphan. She won't visit proud dad and neither will she let H or any courtier do it. She wrings her hands helplessly because he is talking to the press. She says she doesn't have any reliable way to communicate with him and doesn't know how to get to his house. I keep wondering how Thomas Markle even knew that he was supposed to walk her down the aisle. Did he learn about it from the papparazzi? They sent him snail mail?

Methane should have done a better job if she was rebooting her life with long range lies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I don't believe she was ever suicidal or that Kate made her cry - she certainly may have pretended to cry, given that she is an actress. From everything I've seen or read, she is opportunistic and manipulative, and I don't doubt that she is a bully. At first I was happy for them and wished them well, but with every passing day her true colors are revealed. I'm sorry the final chapter of the Queen's life is being clouded by this drama queen.



Me neither. I do however fully believe she told Harry she was to manipulate and control him further.

Remember that Royal Albert Hall visit where she had told him before he couldn't leave her alone or she'd harm herself (and told us she was hysterically crying whenever the lights went off, but her eyes were not red, her face not puffy and her make-up pristine)? She looked like the Cheshire Cat while he looked like he'd burst into tears at any moment.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Me neither. I do however fully believe she told Harry she was to manipulate and control him further.
> 
> Remember that Royal Albert Hall visit where she had told him before he couldn't leave her alone or she'd harm herself (and told us she was hysterically crying whenever the lights went off, but her eyes were not red, her face not puffy and her make-up pristine)? She looked like the Cheshire Cat while he looked like he'd burst into tears at any moment.


I remember thinking how stupid that story was. Did she think no one in the world knew how make up can run if you cry (especially mascara which she slathers on with a rake)? It struck me again during the Oprah interview when she overdid that smokey eye job that made her look like someone had punched her in both eyes: she would do that dab dab motion to signal tears and emotion, and all I could think was: fake, fake, FAKE!


----------



## Chanbal

The Montecitos may not approve this.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Royal obsessed America????? Nonsense! Sheesh, UK, kindly understand we do not like your royals. While the gossip may be somewhat intriguing, they aren’t worth the agony and lawsuits to get it. We have our own dramas here.  Understand?
> 
> The way TM writes, it seems he thinks that it was indeed Charles who asked.  _Does TM know something?_


Yep, I've seen this around.   If you forgive the author for a couple of comments about America & Royals, you may enjoy the article in Spoiler. 



Spoiler: circus












						The contemptible Oprah /Sussex circus
					

It told us nothing about the Royal Family and much more about Meghan, Harry and America




					melaniephillips.substack.com


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Me neither. I do however fully believe she told Harry she was to manipulate and control him further.
> 
> Remember that Royal Albert Hall visit where she had told him before he couldn't leave her alone or she'd harm herself (and told us she was hysterically crying whenever the lights went off, but her eyes were not red, her face not puffy and her make-up pristine)? She looked like the Cheshire Cat while he looked like he'd burst into tears at any moment.


Funny how no one sitting in the box with them or the boxes either side have come forward to support her "truths" in these claims!


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Funny how no one sitting in the box with them or the boxes either side have come forward to support her "truths" in these claims!


In my neck of woods, when someone is acting insane, the people nearby either go deaf and blind, or they slip sliding away. No one wants to get involved with the claims of mad people. It's sort of like the bystander effect. Methane is counting on the ostrich effect to keep her lies ballooning.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I've seen this around.   If you forgive the author for a couple of comments about America & Royals, you may enjoy the article in Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: circus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The contemptible Oprah /Sussex circus
> 
> 
> It told us nothing about the Royal Family and much more about Meghan, Harry and America
> 
> 
> 
> 
> melaniephillips.substack.com



Thanks much. Ms. Phillips does make some interesting points. Guessing if we took a poll today, most Americans would down vote the toxic two. None of us like being lied to. The same was true for Diana.  After that interview, the facts were publicized and she lost much support. Just because we watch the weddings and the interviews does not make us ‘obsessed’.  Looking forward to the day when the media stops the hype.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I think there was an interview that said she would get upset if some grandiose plan she concocted over dinner had not been greenhoused into fruition by breakfast the next morning. Maybe her idea of California work ethic, as learnt from the TV studios, was to demand the team supporting her does all the work so that she looks hardworking.
> 
> 
> Jenny Afia describing herself below. Sounds like Methane's kind of gal. Although I'd say Methane achieved marital success rather than professional success.
> _I help people in the public eye protect their privacy and reputations against arbitrary interference. I believe that privacy is precious and people don't give up their rights just because they've achieved professional success.
> 
> I've worked at Schillings since 2006, having previously trained in the City. I've been a Schillings Partner since 2012; *a fact I try to slip into most conversations as nothing makes me prouder.*_


OK Jenny is a braggart


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Me neither. I do however fully believe she told Harry she was to manipulate and control him further.
> 
> Remember that Royal Albert Hall visit where she had told him before he couldn't leave her alone or she'd harm herself (and told us she was hysterically crying whenever the lights went off, but her eyes were not red, her face not puffy and her make-up pristine)? She looked like the Cheshire Cat while he looked like he'd burst into tears at any moment.


Her face was actually pretty thin and not a pregnancy face at all.  I thought she looked as if she felt supremely in control.


----------



## gracekelly

I think that someone shoukd start a petition to demand a DNA test of the Sussex children.  The results might be very interesting


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think that someone shoukd start a petition to demand a DNA test of the Sussex children.  The results might be very interesting



I just don't see any good coming out of this, and I am of the opinion that it is really none of the public's business. I would love for all of her lies to be exposed, but not at the cost of two innocent children who will have a hard time as is with the parents the universe gave them - a crazy, malicious narcissist mother and a boneless, mentally unwell father.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> (especially mascara which she slathers on with a rake)


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Her face was actually pretty thin and not a pregnancy face at all.  I thought she looked as if she felt supremely in control.


I noticed that also, her face was very non-puffy. 

In the O interview it was way different--VERY puffy. I don't know anything about pregnancies but I guess that can happen--the body reacts differently. And then I think how "full" she looked months later (NYC) and I think "can't trust that anything is real with her."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> I noticed that also, her face was very non-puffy.
> 
> In the O interview it was way different--VERY puffy. I don't know anything about pregnancies but I guess that can happen--the body reacts differently. And then I think how "full" she looked months later (NYC) and I think "can't trust that anything is real with her."



She also blew up after Archie. She looked slim in the face up until her due date, but when she came to Trooping the Colours several weeks later her face was so puffy her eyes all but vanished.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't see any good coming out of this, and I am of the opinion that it is really none of the public's business. I would love for all of her lies to be exposed, but not at the cost of two innocent children who will have a hard time as is with the parents the universe gave them - a crazy, malicious narcissist mother and a boneless, mentally unwell father.


I appreciate what you say, but if it turns out that these children have no AA blood or Windsor blood, they and their family should know.  When they are older, and have possible health issues, it is important to know family background.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She also blew up after Archie. She looked slim in the face up until her due date, but when she came to Trooping the Colours several weeks later her face was so puffy her eyes all but vanished.


She could have been taking hormones to produce breast milk.


----------



## Sophisticatted

gracekelly said:


> I appreciate what you say, but if it turns out that these children have no AA blood or Windsor blood, they and their family should know.  When they are older, and have possible health issues, it is important to know family background.



A DNA test won’t tell you all of that.  You would have to have contact with genetic family with info to provide (some people are ignorant of their own family health issues) AND a willingness to provide it.  Source: me, I have first-hand personal knowledge and experience.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I appreciate what you say, but if it turns out that these children have no AA blood or Windsor blood, they and their family should know.  When they are older, and have possible health issues, it is important to know family background.



Their family as in their parents are probably in on it. The Windsors, if they have to know re: succession etc., sure, but I don't see how it's the public's business that anyone would have to petition for it. Even the Harkles have basic human rights.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Rihanna would never, but imagine! He ACTUALLY looked happy.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Their family as in their parents are probably in on it. The Windsors, if they have to know re: succession etc., sure, but I don't see how it's the public's business that anyone would have to petition for it. *Even the Harkles have basic human rights.*



In a perfect world this is true. We don't live in a perfect world and for some, the world is a lot less perfect for some than for others.  i am going to forward your thoughts to the employees who were terrorized by the La Migraine.  *kidding* or not.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


>



Thank you for posting the facts.  Apologies for my post from Lainey’s site. It disturbs me that I let myself be used. Kate deserves better, everyone here deserves better. I’ll do better in the future.  Cheers, everyone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Rihanna would never, but imagine! He ACTUALLY looked happy.



she has her own success....doesn't need to hitch her wagon to a man-boy


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> Rihanna would never, but imagine! He ACTUALLY looked happy.




He looks like a boob. A happy, infatuated man-boy boob.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> He looks like a boob. A happy, infatuated man-boy boob.



That is as accurate a description of Harry as there is!


----------



## MooMooVT

sdkitty said:


> she has her own success....doesn't need to hitch her wagon to a man-boy


Harry's always been a starf-er, man-boy


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> He looks like a boob. A happy, infatuated man-boy boob.


Actually, if one looks at all the pics, H's smile looks pasted on and never quite reaching his eyes that appear glazed over from maybe too much booze. Imo, in some of the pics, he looks like a robot just going through the motions of smiling and interacting with others without real interest.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Actually, if one looks at all the pics, H's smile looks pasted on and never quite reaching his eyes that appear glazed over from maybe too much booze. Imo, in some of the pics, *he looks like a robot just going through the motions of smiling and interacting with others without real interest.*


Giving him the credit that he at least went through the motions for many years. Methane didn't have the fortitude to even match a fraction of his record, even though she took multiple breaks for holidays and mum duties. Just imagine if she becomes a Rep/Senator/PTUS: however will she be able to endure the job? Hazard will have to comfort her with diamonds.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I think there was an interview that said she would get upset if some grandiose plan she concocted over dinner had not been greenhoused into fruition by breakfast the next morning. Maybe her idea of California work ethic, as learnt from the TV studios, was to demand the team supporting her does all the work so that she looks hardworking.
> 
> 
> Jenny Afia describing herself below. Sounds like Methane's kind of gal. Although I'd say Methane achieved marital success rather than professional success.
> _I help people in the public eye protect their privacy and reputations against arbitrary interference. I believe that privacy is precious and people don't give up their rights just because they've achieved professional success.
> 
> I've worked at Schillings since 2006, having previously trained in the City. I've been a Schillings Partner since 2012; *a fact I try to slip into most conversations as nothing makes me prouder.*_


Fascinating to hear how people justify things to themselves isn’t it?


Lodpah said:


> I’m being serious here does anyone think maybe Harry has a low IQ? I mean he has the body of a man but maybe he’s just utterly stupid and the BRF has been protecting him and now that he’s out in the wild he can’t make decisions, he just went from one controlling environment to a more controlling one and he has a Stockholm Syndrome via his manipulative and narcissistic wife?


I think it’s absolutely certain he’s academically lacking or he wouldn’t have had to cheat his way into Eton and on his A Levels. (Tests 18 year olds take). I don’t think it’s any secret the royal family pressures desirable institutions to take their children regardless of whether they meet the requirements others must. (See also Edward at Cambridge.)

Harry is also lacking in creative intelligence because he cheated on his art A level  too.

He’s also lacking in common sense because even if he loved M there was no reason to rush into marriage with a woman he barely knew and he couldn’t untangle the obvious fact that her back story doesn’t make sense.

Finally, he’s also lacking in personal convictions because he can only repeat whatever hackneyed, mollifying catchphrases are currently in vogue or complain about his life without a moment of self-awareness.

So in brief, yeah, he’s pretty thick.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I think the BRF really didn't understand the context. Neither would I. This supposedly lovely young woman is going to be walked down the aisle by her proud dad, although H says she is practically an orphan. She won't visit proud dad and neither will she let H or any courtier do it. She wrings her hands helplessly because he is talking to the press. She says she doesn't have any reliable way to communicate with him and doesn't know how to get to his house. I keep wondering how Thomas Markle even knew that he was supposed to walk her down the aisle. Did he learn about it from the papparazzi? They sent him snail mail?
> 
> Methane should have done a better job if she was rebooting her life with long range lies.


Yes when you think about it, they must have been confused as much as anything.
W- If your father is alive and attending the wedding - surely you can get into contact with him?
M- Yes he’s attending the wedding but I can’t contact him.
Everyone thinks that doesn’t make sense.
(later on)
Q- I’ve just seen the papers, can you talk to your father? I’m sure this is a misunderstanding,
M- I already told you he’s no father to me and I can’t contact him. Now excuse me I’m going to write a letter to him and call him Daddy.
Q- Are you sure that’s a good idea, what if it leaks?
M- stop asking questions! Can’t you see how you are upsetting Harry!!!! 


kemilia said:


> I noticed that also, her face was very non-puffy.
> 
> In the O interview it was way different--VERY puffy. I don't know anything about pregnancies but I guess that can happen--the body reacts differently. And then I think how "full" she looked months later (NYC) and I think "can't trust that anything is real with her."


I still think she has frequent fillers but because she’s a lying fake she can’t admit to it.
When you first get them your face is very puffy then after a few weeks they recede into lower layers of skin.

People who get addicted to fillers start to love the new fillers-puffy look and keep having it plugged into their face until they have that Jocelyn wildestein level of ‘filled up’.


lanasyogamama said:


> Rihanna would never, but imagine! He ACTUALLY looked happy.



Rihanna turned down billionaire king of the F-boys Drake!
(I love  but I don’t think he’d make a good husband  )

A c-grade f-boy like Haz never had a chance.

I feel like H is the kind of guy who’d be horribly jealous of a more successful wife. He’s got no danger of that with M who has only ever _failed upwards_ and needs his name to be a success.


----------



## K.D.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59502787 
*The Duchess of Sussex has won the latest stage in her legal fight against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday.*
The Court of Appeal rejected Associated Newspapers' attempt to have a trial over its publication of extracts from Meghan's letter to her father. 
A High Court judge earlier this year ruled in favour of the duchess in the privacy and copyright case.
He said the issues were so clear cut there was no need for a full hearing.
That decision has now been upheld.
In a statement issued after the ruling, the duchess said: "This is a victory not just for me, but for anyone who has ever felt scared to stand up for what's right."

Meghan's lawyers had said her letter to Thomas Markle in August 2018 was "deeply personal" and "self-evidently was intended to be kept private".
Announcing the decision, the three judges hearing the appeal said the letter's contents were "personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest".
They added: "It was hard to see what evidence could have been adduced at trial that would have altered the situation...
ADVERTISEMENT


"The judge had correctly decided that, whilst it might have been proportionate to publish a very small part of the letter for that purpose, it was not necessary to publish half the contents of the letter."
The judges were told during the hearing that 585 out of the letter's 1,250 words had been republished in the five articles in question.









Meghan has won a significant victory in this courtroom battle to protect her privacy.

She's drawn a line in the sand. Even if her life is of public interest, she's shown that it doesn't make her public property.
It was a high-risk strategy, which could have put her in court facing awkward questions, but the appeal court ruling has seen her winning without that.
But it's already come with some bruising headlines - such as having to apologise for having forgotten how information was given to authors writing a book about her and Prince Harry.
This might have been an "unfortunate lapse of memory", said the appeal court ruling, but it didn't bear on the fundamental issues of whether such a private letter to her father should have been published.
Meghan divides public opinion - with vocal supporters and critics both seeing bias and prejudice on the other side - and this court case is unlikely to change that.
But she has succeeded in a legal battle that previous generations of royals would probably have avoided.


----------



## needlv

Not surprise she won(on a point of law) … but from a gossip point of view a full trial would have been entertaining…


----------



## xincinsin

Such a pity! I would have looked forward to watching Her Heinous twisting her forked tongue on a stand after swearing to tell the truth.


----------



## needlv




----------



## CentralTimeZone

Now that the case is over and I doubt ANL will appeal to the Supreme Court can they release all the evidence they have on her?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



Interesting how contagious her lapse of memory was. It spread to her husband as well as the authors of Finding Freebies, and affected their legal counsel as well. Omegcron. Hazard will accuse me of misogyny.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Rihanna would never, but imagine! He ACTUALLY looked happy.




He could have married up!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

I hated to say it, but I’m not surprised she won, it is not in the BRF’s interest to have their dirty laundry aired at the trial. In their opinion, the admission of omission is enough to sully M’s reputation but they are not going to go to trial and have the inbox bust open for the sake of the Mail. They can always pay them back some other way.

Lady C called it. They are still sheltering them because they don’t want to set a precedent. Same deal with the titles. I think it’s pretty spineless personally and they should trust the people to be just.


----------



## sdkitty

her remarks are so self-important.....uugh
UK Court Backs Meghan Markle In Dispute Over Privacy With Newspaper Publisher | HuffPost Latest News


----------



## Jayne1

Speaking of Lady C -- still love listening of course, but I wish she'd do a lot less of that melodramatic whingeing thing she does in imitation of Meg. It's a bit beneath her.

I much prefer hearing her talk and answer questions in her real voice giving us real information.


----------



## purseinsanity

K.D. said:


> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59502787
> *The Duchess of Sussex has won the latest stage in her legal fight against the publisher of the Mail on Sunday.*
> The Court of Appeal rejected Associated Newspapers' attempt to have a trial over its publication of extracts from Meghan's letter to her father.
> A High Court judge earlier this year ruled in favour of the duchess in the privacy and copyright case.
> He said the issues were so clear cut there was no need for a full hearing.
> That decision has now been upheld.
> In a statement issued after the ruling, the duchess said: "This is a victory not just for me, but for anyone who has ever felt scared to stand up for what's right."
> 
> Meghan's lawyers had said her letter to Thomas Markle in August 2018 was "deeply personal" and "self-evidently was intended to be kept private".
> Announcing the decision, the three judges hearing the appeal said the letter's contents were "personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest".
> They added: "It was hard to see what evidence could have been adduced at trial that would have altered the situation...
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> "The judge had correctly decided that, whilst it might have been proportionate to publish a very small part of the letter for that purpose, it was not necessary to publish half the contents of the letter."
> The judges were told during the hearing that 585 out of the letter's 1,250 words had been republished in the five articles in question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan has won a significant victory in this courtroom battle to protect her privacy.
> 
> She's drawn a line in the sand. Even if her life is of public interest, she's shown that it doesn't make her public property.
> It was a high-risk strategy, which could have put her in court facing awkward questions, but the appeal court ruling has seen her winning without that.
> But it's already come with some bruising headlines - such as having to apologise for having forgotten how information was given to authors writing a book about her and Prince Harry.
> This might have been an "unfortunate lapse of memory", said the appeal court ruling, but it didn't bear on the fundamental issues of whether such a private letter to her father should have been published.
> Meghan divides public opinion - with vocal supporters and critics both seeing bias and prejudice on the other side - and this court case is unlikely to change that.
> But she has succeeded in a legal battle that previous generations of royals would probably have avoided.


So basically, you can commit perjury and instead of getting in trouble for that, win?


----------



## RAINDANCE

*Analysis: ‘Victory’ is not vindication of Harry and Meghan’s repeated attacks on the entire press*
What we have actually learned from this court case is that the Duchess of Sussex had a voice - and knew how to use it

ByCamilla Tominey, ASSOCIATE EDITOR2 December 2021 • 1:26pm



The Duchess of Sussex did not miss a beat in rejoicing in the decision to dismiss the Mail on Sunday’s attempt to have her testify in court.
Within seconds of the Court of Appeal ruling her privacy and copyright had been breached, upholding a previous decision, Meghan issued a jubilant statement suggesting it was a triumph over the entire tabloid press.
“This is a victory not just for me, but for anyone who has ever felt scared to stand up for what’s right," she crowed.
"While this win is precedent setting, what matters most is that we are now collectively brave enough to reshape a tabloid industry that conditions people to be cruel, and profits from the lies and pain that they create.”
Note the use of the word “they”. Yet this, as the Court of Appeal specifically reiterated, was a judgment on a narrow issue involving just one newspaper.
The former American actress had started out on this legal journey in October 2019 trying to make it a case of Meghan versus the media. She claimed to be the victim of a “vendetta” and her lawyers tried to include a caché of negative articles in evidence but the original judge, Mr Justice, now Lord Justice Warby, swiftly struck them out.

Instead, the case boiled down to one simple premise - whether it was “proportionate” to have countered a People magazine article from February 2019 featuring Meghan’s friends “speaking the truth” about her relationship with her father by publishing 585 out of 1,250 words she had subsequently written to Thomas Markle. The Court of Appeal decided it wasn’t, but supported Lord Justice Warby’s view that had Associated Newspapers Limited published a much smaller part of the letter, it would probably have won.
So let’s just keep this decision in perspective, rather than elevating it, as Meghan has, to "an important measure of right versus wrong".
Not so subtly referring to the “daily fail”, the nickname of the Daily Mail in some quarters, the 40-year-old mother of two claimed in her statement that “tomorrow it could be you.”
She added: “These harmful practices don’t happen once in a blue moon - they are a daily fail that divide us, and we all deserve better.”
But in reality, bar this individual instance, royal privacy has never been more respected than it is today.

Royals are no longer pursued going about their private lives and unlike in California, where the Sussexes now reside, there is no market in the UK for long lens paparazzi photographs.
Yes, acres of news print are written about the couple, but in Harry and Meghan’s case they have actively courted publicity since they left the Royal family, predominantly by giving a 90-minute primetime TV interview to Oprah Winfrey accusing the Royal family of racism.
As with that cosy sofa chat, in being forced to apologise to the court for failing to remember she had collaborated with the authors of Finding Freedom, having previously stated otherwise via her lawyers, we learned that “recollections may vary” when it comes to the gospel according to Meghan.
“This was at best an unfortunate lapse of memory on her part,” said Sir Geoffrey Vos, one of the three judges presiding, refusing to elaborate on what a worst case scenario might be.
There is no doubt that this is a coup not only for the Duchess but the Royal Family - who had been dreading the prospect of the case going to trial, when yet more correspondence between the Sussexes and their staff would inevitably have been laid bare for the media to lap up.
*But it is definitely not a vindication of Harry and Meghan’s repeated attacks on the entire media nor does it add up to the vilification of the "evil" press that the royal victim is making it out to be.
On the contrary, what Meghan has proven is that when newspapers get it wrong - there is a legal recourse (provided you have got Netflix levels of cash to pay for a 25 month legal wrangle). If only the same could be said of social media, which continues to publish with impunity.*
In exposing the lengths the Duchess went to not only to write a letter to her father - but also to brief Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand so they could write their flattering account of "Megxit", *this case actually revealed just how much control Meghan had all along.
She told Oprah she had been “silenced” during her time in the monarchy. But what we have actually learned from this contentious cash cow of a case is that Meghan had a voice - and wasn't afraid to use it.*


----------



## gracekelly

She was branded a liar and that is not going away. This victory is pyrrhic at best, but this will feed her ego. Let’s hope that it results in more missteps because she now thinks she is invincible. This is when people get sloppy. Getting some popcorn ready.


----------



## rose60610

My disgust with this couple exceeds the patience I have to follow every detail. This "letter" --I'll assume it was a private correspondence to her father? If so, who made it public? Somebody had to. Either Meghan or her father. If the recipient of any given letter makes it public, is it illegal? Third parties, however.....But how did any third party get hold of it?
Considering how Meghan can never shut her stupid mouth and she prides herself on "sharing" her feelings with the world on any given day, including wild accusations, I can't see how anyone can take her seriously. Did she plant this letter to add another pity bone to her pity party? She's such a lying snake.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## lulu212121

jelliedfeels said:


> I hated to say it, but I’m not surprised she won, it is not in the BRF’s interest to have their dirty laundry aired at the trial. In their opinion, the admission of omission is enough to sully M’s reputation but they are not going to go to trial and have the inbox bust open for the sake of the Mail. They can always pay them back some other way.
> 
> Lady C called it. They are still sheltering them because they don’t want to set a precedent. Same deal with the titles. I think it’s pretty spineless personally and they should trust the people to be just.


I think her admission of omission means nothing now that she has won. No one is going to think she's a liar. She won! I have a hard time finding any support for the BRF if the reason she won is so they don't have to have so called "dirty laundry" exposed. I'm sure there is something on everyone. They have let her and Harry go on way too long.


----------



## bag-mania

lulu212121 said:


> I think her admission of omission means nothing now that she has won. No one is going to think she's a liar. She won! I have a hard time finding any support for the BRF if the reason she won is so they don't have to have so called "dirty laundry" exposed. I'm sure there is something on everyone. They have let her and Harry go on way too long.



I think you are right. The US media has bent over backwards to make excuses for her. Calling Meghan's untruths to the court "a mistake." They will continue to defend her. Judging from the BBC, it appears some in the UK press are starting to swing the same way.

Could Meghan and Harry be the key to bringing down the BRF? I would never have thought it possible, but now I can't say that it couldn't happen with 100% conviction.


----------



## MiniMabel

bag-mania said:


> I think you are right. The US media has bent over backwards to make excuses for her. Calling Meghan's untruths to the court "a mistake." They will continue to defend her. Judging from the BBC, it appears some in the UK press are starting to swing the same way.
> 
> Could Meghan and Harry be the key to bringing down the BRF? I would never have thought it possible, but now I can't say that it couldn't happen with 100% conviction.



Queen Elizabeth has been 70 years at the helm; the Harkles are small fry and irrelevant in comparison.


----------



## lulu212121

She admitted she made a mistake to the court. Small fry and irrelevant, I think not. Who else in the BRF has done that?


----------



## bag-mania

MiniMabel said:


> Queen Elizabeth has been 70 years at the helm; the Harkles are small fry and irrelevant in comparison.



Queen Elizabeth's reputation is secure. She is much loved and respected. But after her...?

Nothing stays the same. Do you think Charles and William will receive the same level of support and admiration?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Queen Elizabeth's reputation is secure. She is much loved and respected. But after her...?
> 
> Nothing stays the same. Do you think Charles and William will receive the same level of support and admiration?



No.  Just no.
Whatever support and admiration they do receive will cost them in real dollars. The number will be high, very high.


----------



## Lodpah

I’ve done extensive research on Prince Charles. His agenda is in line with those two. Prince William is the outlier who can fix this but he’s got to be King first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

Chloe302225 said:


>




I’m sorry but how is this person even employed in this day and age? That’s vile.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This explains the court’s decision.  Hazzie called daddy, daddy’s lawyers called the court, etc.  imo.









						Prince Charles and Prince Harry are talking again, but it’s not ‘all roses’
					

A source tells Page Six that “channels of communication are open,” but they are not “sitting down for a heart-to-heart on the phone once a week.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> This explains the court’s decision.  Hazzie called daddy, daddy’s lawyers called the court, etc.  imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Prince Harry are talking again, but it’s not ‘all roses’
> 
> 
> A source tells Page Six that “channels of communication are open,” but they are not “sitting down for a heart-to-heart on the phone once a week.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Would Charles do that sort of favour after bring called a racist?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> She was branded a liar and that is not going away. This victory is pyrrhic at best, but this will feed her ego. Let’s hope that it results in more missteps because she now thinks she is invincible. This is when people get sloppy. Getting some popcorn ready.


My SIMPLE view on the matter -  unfortunately the MAJOR LIE about having contributed to the book is irrelevant to the matter of invading her privacy and publishing the letter 

I did find it interesting that the current verdict pointed out TOO MUCH of the letter was published, suggesting that fewer snippets would be OK to publish.  It was not a BINARY thing - the letter cannot be published AT ALL ... interesting 

But, it aint over yet, the newspaper may do another appeal ...  and until then the kerfuffle is costing her ... money and credibility - her brief about the lie was 22 pages long , all vetted by expensive lawyers .... 

And the credibility issue due to the LIE is huge .... who would want to employ her now ???

She needs to settle now, get paid some damages and stop the legal outlays and repair her reputation - no one care about the letter any more


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Would Charles do that sort of favour after bring called a racist?



I cannot imagine why Charles would go out of his way to help them after they made him look bad. _UNLESS_ they are blackmailing him for unknown reasons that he is determined to keep quiet. This is purely speculation of course but a lot of what is going on isn't making sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Lodpah

Yeah rem





QueenofWrapDress said:


>



 Yeah remember Handbag said the First Amendment is bonkers. I now think there is an Agenda going on behind closed doors. 1984 vibes.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This explains the court’s decision.  Hazzie called daddy, daddy’s lawyers called the court, etc.  imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Prince Harry are talking again, but it’s not ‘all roses’
> 
> 
> A source tells Page Six that “channels of communication are open,” but they are not “sitting down for a heart-to-heart on the phone once a week.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Page Six is a tabloid...I don't necessarily believe anything they say


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> My SIMPLE view on the matter -  unfortunately the MAJOR LIE about having contributed to the book is irrelevant to the matter of invading her privacy and publishing the letter
> 
> I did find it interesting that the current verdict pointed out TOO MUCH of the letter was published, suggesting that fewer snippets would be OK to publish.  It was not a BINARY thing - the letter cannot be published AT ALL ... interesting
> 
> But, it aint over yet, the newspaper may do another appeal ...  and until then the kerfuffle is costing her ... money and credibility - her brief about the lie was 22 pages long , all vetted by expensive lawyers ....
> 
> And the credibility issue due to the LIE is huge .... who would want to employ her now ???
> 
> She needs to settle now, get paid some damages and stop the legal outlays and repair her reputation - no one care about the letter any more


first of all, the letter belonged to her father, didn't it?
and she admitted that she edited it in the expectation it would be seen by others?
how could the court decide in her favor?


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> Interesting question. I too would like to know the protocol. It might differ if she was on home ground or in the foreign royal's country. If an American curtseyed to TQ in the UK, would it be a mark of respect? Would the American be obliged to curtsey or is he/she free to stick out a hand and expect TQ to shake it?
> 
> Also to note, Methane was not against curtseying. She merely assumed that curtseying was a show for the public and she would not be expected to do it out of public eye.


Americans are not expected to curtsey to the Queen, the American Revolution saw to that.  However, many do (as seen in Wimbledon) as a courtesy (and being nice), but it is not really expected.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> My SIMPLE view on the matter -  unfortunately the MAJOR LIE about having contributed to the book is irrelevant to the matter of invading her privacy and publishing the letter
> 
> I did find it interesting that the current verdict pointed out TOO MUCH of the letter was published, suggesting that fewer snippets would be OK to publish.  It was not a BINARY thing - the letter cannot be published AT ALL ... interesting
> 
> But, it aint over yet, the newspaper may do another appeal ...  and until then the kerfuffle is costing her ... money and credibility - her brief about the lie was 22 pages long , all vetted by expensive lawyers ....
> 
> And the credibility issue due to the LIE is huge .... who would want to employ her now ???
> 
> She needs to settle now, get paid some damages and stop the legal outlays and repair her reputation - no one care about the letter any more.


marietouchet,

Re your "no one cares about the letter" statement: a small glimmer of hope that it's becoming true. 

 Earlier today while stuck on the the phone on hold with a vendor's customer service dept, I clicked on USA Today's web site to scan headlines/major articles. There was no mention of Methane and her court case in the news section. I looked in a several places, finally clicked on the "Entertainment" tab, but then had to go to the "Celebrity" tab and there down the the page, 6th in the listing of articles was the item about her getting a settlement. Interestingly the #1 article at the top of the "Celebrity" section was a retrospective of The Duchess of Cambridge's impeccable taste in clothing.

I don't know if it was intentional but it felt like major shade had been thrown


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> My SIMPLE view on the matter -  unfortunately the MAJOR LIE about having contributed to the book is irrelevant to the matter of invading her privacy and publishing the letter
> 
> I did find it interesting that the current verdict pointed out TOO MUCH of the letter was published, suggesting that fewer snippets would be OK to publish.  It was not a BINARY thing - the letter cannot be published AT ALL ... interesting
> 
> But, it aint over yet, the newspaper may do another appeal ...  and until then the kerfuffle is costing her ... money and credibility - her brief about the lie was 22 pages long , all vetted by expensive lawyers ....
> 
> And the credibility issue due to the LIE is huge .... who would want to employ her now ???
> 
> She needs to settle now, get paid some damages and stop the legal outlays and repair her reputation - no one care about the letter any more


I think you are right and that is why she won.  She owned  the copyright for the letter even though it was sent to her father. Even if she expected that it would be seen, she still held the copyright.   All the other things that recently were revealed to be lies had nothing to do with the copyright issue.  ANL would appeal only to get more lies out there.  They would do that to sell more newspapers.  People love reading juicy gossip.  Jason K must be writing his book very quickly because I have the feeling that it will be serialized in the Daily Mail.


----------



## poopsie

tiktok said:


> I’m sorry but how is this person even employed in this day and age? That’s vile.



Actually the real question is how long before they're promoted? 
In this day and age they are merely pushing the chosen agenda. If you are on the "correct" side, nothing is too vile or outrageous. God help you if you aren't though.
Imagine if those things had been said about Her Wokeness? 
The hypocrisy is staggering.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> first of all, the letter belonged to her father, didn't it?
> and she admitted that she edited it in the expectation it would be seen by others?
> how could the court decide in her favor?


According to the law, the letter belonged to her.


----------



## gracekelly

These rumblings about Will and Harry speaking...I could see that if Will is telling him to move his butt over the pond to see his granny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> According to the law, the letter belonged to her.


I don't understand that....she gave it to her father so if she gave him an object, it would still be hers?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand that....she gave it to her father so if she gave him an object, it would still be hers?


She wrote the letter, therefore she owns the copyright to what is written (the thoughts)  just like any author owns the copyright to their work whether it appears in a bound book, a comic book or online. If you want to  copy it, you have to ask their permission and money may also change hands.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand that....she gave it to her father so if she gave him an object, it would still be hers?



Copyright:
If I wrote you a poem and sent it to you. 
That copy of the poem would be yours, but it's still my poem.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand that....she gave it to her father so if she gave him an object, it would still be hers?


The confusion is that he has the actual pieces of paper, but she owns what she has written on them.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> The confusion is that he has the actual pieces of paper, but she owns what she has written on them.


She owns her lies. What a staggering inventory!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The confusion is that he has the actual pieces of paper, but she owns what she has written on them.


not saying you're not correct but I don't agree it should be that way


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Page Six is a tabloid...I don't necessarily believe anything they say



Me either, except this has a loud ring of truth, imo

ETA: a word from Charles‘s lawyers to the court can be very powerful! 

ETA2:  imo this case did much damage to H&M’s reputations. JasonK’s texts revealed their manipulative ways.  That’s a win imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Giving him the credit that he at least went through the motions for many years. Methane didn't have the fortitude to even match a fraction of his record, even though she took multiple breaks for holidays and mum duties. Just imagine if she becomes a Rep/Senator/PTUS: however will she be able to endure the job? Hazard will have to comfort her with diamonds.


ITA, I wasn't dissing H for doing his duties, just explaining that he wasn't interested in doing some if not most of them, but complied anyway and yes, M probably saw right through him and used it to lure him away from the BRF because she couldn't be numero uno in the BRF hierarchy and she didn't want to participate in what she saw as profitless and tedious engagements.


----------



## needlv

I wish that ANL will do the type of apology that MM’s lawyer was offering about bullying victims…

“ANL is sorry that the Duchess feels aggrieved by how much of the letter ANL published”

ie, sorry not sorry….  Or sorry YOU feel that way…


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> I wish that ANL will do the type of apology that MM’s lawyer was offering about bullying victims…
> 
> “ANL is sorry that the Duchess feels aggrieved by how much of the letter ANL published”
> 
> ie, sorry not sorry….  Or sorry YOU feel that way…


And of course they don't want to negate her personal experience


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA, I wasn't dissing H for doing his duties, just explaining that he wasn't interested in doing some if not most of them, but complied anyway and yes, M probably saw right through him and used it to lure him away from the BRF because she couldn't be numero uno in the BRF hierarchy and she didn't want to participate in what she saw as profitless and tedious engagements.


I think Methane set her hopes on immediately becoming HMTQ's favourite as well as the people's favourite. She might have held off on her "Hollywood, Here I Come" plan if it had worked that way. When she didn't top the popularity charts and reap power + lots of monetary rewards (freebies especially), the duo came up with the 50% plan. It was only when that was rejected that Megxit and the victim tragedy scheme was initiated. 

It's important for us to remember that the "we left UK because my wife was breaking down" story is *total hogwash*. 

I feel insulted by the way they rewrite history and expect us to have memory glitches, but I also feel vindicated. This constant respinning was done by all my office narcs (four and counting over 20 years) so it's justified for me to call Methane a narc.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Such a pity! I would have looked forward to watching Her Heinous twisting her forked tongue on a stand after swearing to tell the truth.


I'd love to see someone hypnotize her into scratching her butt (or choose your favourite spot) when she lies.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I think Methane set her hopes on immediately becoming HMTQ's favourite as well as the people's favourite. She might have held off on her "Hollywood, Here I Come" plan if it had worked that way. When she didn't top the popularity charts and reap power + lots of monetary rewards (freebies especially), the duo came up with the 50% plan. It was only when that was rejected that Megxit and the victim tragedy scheme was initiated.
> 
> It's important for us to remember that the "we left UK because my wife was breaking down" story is *total hogwash*.
> 
> I feel insulted by the way they rewrite history and expect us to have memory glitches, but I also feel vindicated. This constant respinning was done by all my office narcs (four and counting over 20 years) so it's justified for me to call Methane a narc.


Yes, I've also seen my share of MM's during my working days. They lied and cajoled you into doing their bidding and then it was bye bye when you ask them for anything. After a couple incidents, I avoided the narcs, but saw them manipulate others, who refused to believe the narc's true nature until they were burned. I'm sorry to say that some coworkers never understood or believed they were being used.


----------



## Lodpah

Ancient wisdom: don’t fret when the wicked prosper, they’ll have their day.

Light eventually will shine on the darkness and that’s when you see their ugliness.


----------



## Chloe302225

Madonna had a similar copyright issue come up a few years ago when letters she wrote to a now deceased friend came up for auction by the person who held physical possession. She sued and won because the court said she still held the copyright to her letters even though she hadn't seen them for years. Publishing or auctioning without her permission or making a payment to her was seen as a breech.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chloe302225 said:


> Madonna had a similar copyright issue come up a few years ago when letters she wrote to a now deceased friend came up for auction by the person who held physical possession. She sued and won because the court said she still held the copyright to her letters even though she hadn't seen them for years. Publishing or auctioning without her permission or making a payment to her was seen as a breech.


Does this only apply to physical letters? I would imagine it cannot be applied to emails or other electronic communication since those systems all allow receivers to amend and/or forward ad infinitum. I'm wondering especially about verbal communication. What if Methane left voicemails? 

Oprah or HARPO would own the copyright to the infamous interview. I don't think Methane can stop them from airing it again, or reversioning it with edits or adding more footage, or if someone paid HARPO to license footage from it to use in a future programme entitled "Sussexes: Truth or Lies".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I cannot imagine why Charles would go out of his way to help them after they made him look bad. _UNLESS_ they are blackmailing him for unknown reasons that he is determined to keep quiet. This is purely speculation of course but a lot of what is going on isn't making sense.


Prince Charles owes those two leeches and especially the Unfortunate-lapse-of-memory(my-ar$e)LyingWitch absolutely nothing, but some people still want him to pay for Diana's untimely death as if he were responsible for the drunk driver and the paparazzi chasing her. Also, Charles is way ahead of others as far as renewable resources and conservation go, but cute little Will gets all the attention as if he had invented it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Me either, except this has a loud ring of truth, imo
> 
> *ETA: a word from Charles‘s lawyers to the court can be very powerful! *
> 
> ETA2:  imo this case did much damage to H&M’s reputations. JasonK’s texts revealed their manipulative ways.  That’s a win imo.


I'm traveling and with little time for the duchess's drama. I just came here to say hi. 

I understand that she had a big victory after her forgetful memory (being a liar), disgusting! I read somewhere that she allegedly begged Charles to 'make it stop'… Unfortunately, I can't remember if I read this for the first court appearance or for the appeal. I didn't have a chance to read previous posts or Page Six yet. 

I'm not sure if this has been posted here, but it's never too many times for this title:










						PIERS MORGAN: Put your gloating champagne away, Princess Pinocchio
					

'If you tell the truth,' Mark Twain once observed, 'you don't have to remember anything.' I thought of this today when news broke that Meghan Markle 'won' her privacy court battle with the Mail on Sunday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I'm traveling and with little time for the duchess's drama. I just came here to say hi.
> 
> I understand that she had a big victory after her forgetful memory (being a liar), disgusting! I read somewhere that she allegedly begged Charles to 'make it stop'… Unfortunately, I can't remember if I read this for the first court appearance or for the appeal. I didn't have a chance to read previous posts or Page Six yet.
> 
> I'm not sure if this has been posted here, but it's never too many times for this title:
> View attachment 5264717
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PIERS MORGAN: Put your gloating champagne away, Princess Pinocchio
> 
> 
> 'If you tell the truth,' Mark Twain once observed, 'you don't have to remember anything.' I thought of this today when news broke that Meghan Markle 'won' her privacy court battle with the Mail on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thanks Piers Morgan and @Chanbal for your #29 nickname, A fork-tongued devious manipulative piece of work who only wants to protect your privacy so you can sell it. I wonder if PM stays up all night creating these little marvels. Congratulations and here's The List #29 Ribbon.  Safe travels as well.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv




----------



## Hermes Zen

Hi !  Last week I posted that I would change my amazonsmile charity to Archewell because I was curious to see what donations they have received this year so far. I now received my tiny purchase and the webpage was updated.  Here's the before photo message when I first changed to Archewell (sorry blurry) and the second photo is the updated message.      NO SURPRISE they have either $0's donated or less than $5 or haven't completed registering. For those not familiar, usually see a running total of donations for the year.  Like everything M does ... no follow through! Like 40x40, their promise to donate to good causes ... WHAT LOSERS!!! I've changed my charity back to a 'REAL' non-profit!! Enjoy the laugh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TNT aired The Meg tonight - coinky dink?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of Lady C -- still love listening of course, but I wish she'd do a lot less of that melodramatic whingeing thing she does in imitation of Meg. It's a bit beneath her.
> 
> I much prefer hearing her talk and answer questions in her real voice giving us real information.


Oh yeah I definitely don’t like everything about her.

The bit when she said she believed Andrew over Virginia Guiffre because he’s never been proven to be a liar almost made me laugh at how off it was. (Aside from lying on TV about his alibi, and pretending he didn’t know Epstein and claiming he didn’t know he was committing fraud and insider trading….Yeah sure, he’s never lied  )

What. I do find interesting about her, apart from her great cadence and eloquence of speech, is that she
definitely represents the ‘establishment’ view.


Chloe302225 said:


>



This tweet is ridiculous though as if Piers has never thrown out insults just like Amol has  neither of them should be penalised for having opinions.

If saying a certain woman is being praised for nothing or looks bad is all it takes to be branded a misogynist…. Then this  thread must be the biggest group of self-hating ladies on the internet.

Add on- I will agree that the documentary is an obvious vanity project though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Hi !  Last week I posted that I would change my amazonsmile charity to Archewell because I was curious to see what donations they have received this year so far. I now received my tiny purchase and the webpage was updated.  Here's the before photo message when I first changed to Archewell (sorry blurry) and the second photo is the updated message.      NO SURPRISE they have either $0's donated or less than $5 or haven't completed registering. For those not familiar, usually see a running total of donations for the year.  Like everything M does ... no follow through! Like 40x40, their promise to donate to good causes ... WHAT LOSERS!!! I've changed my charity back to a 'REAL' non-profit!! Enjoy the laugh.
> 
> View attachment 5264807
> View attachment 5264808


That is interesting…. It does suggest it’s there to add legitimacy and publicise their name then.

it’s fascinating they’ve hired so many people but no one seems to be able to do their paperwork to legitimise them


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'd love to see someone hypnotize her into scratching her butt (or choose your favourite spot) when she lies.



No hypnosis necessary. Just ask Ellen to tell her to


----------



## duna

Chloe302225 said:


>




Who is this idiot????


----------



## needlv

She is still copying Catherine.  How sad….


----------



## Jktgal

The world needs that court appeal...




(Wow my first successfull gif attachment ever, well done to me!)


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand that....she gave it to her father so if she gave him an object, it would still be hers?


I believe the crux of the matter is the difference between UK and US copyright laws, in the UK, the letter contents (words) reside with the writer - it may not be so in the US

Also, I thought of the innumerable DIANA letters that go to auction, mostly unseen, but unpublished and who cares about her thank you letters? The BRF will not pursue that ...

I dont buy the story that Charles stepped in - if he had done so, court matter would have been dropped, apologies written and maybe a quiet money exchange

Finally, there is the curious bit  now that it would have been OK to publish A BIT of the letter but the MAIL ON SUNDAY published too much of it - that totally surprised me, I though the copyright thing was binary - you can publish the whole thing or not at all , this ruling STUPEFIES ME

And interesting how MM is not denying/suing about her email snippets that Knauf circulated ....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

needlv said:


> She is still copying Catherine.  How sad….



Is Methane allowed to use that monogram (crown and a M under it)???  Isn’t that using her title?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> I believe the crux of the matter is the difference between UK and US copyright laws, in the UK, the letter contents (words) reside with the writer - it may not be so in the US
> 
> Also, I thought of the innumerable DIANA letters that go to auction, mostly unseen, but unpublished and who cares about her thank you letters? The BRF will not pursue that ...
> 
> I dont buy the story that Charles stepped in - if he had done so, court matter would have been dropped, apologies written and maybe a quiet money exchange
> 
> Finally, there is the curious bit  now that it would have been OK to publish A BIT of the letter but the MAIL ON SUNDAY published too much of it - that totally surprised me, I though the copyright thing was binary - you can publish the whole thing or not at all , this ruling STUPEFIES ME
> 
> *And interesting how MM is not denying/suing about her email snippets that Knauf circulated ....*


i believe Jason Knauf complied with a court order to testify and produce the emails, which in this case supersedes the copyright law.


----------



## sdkitty

can't read the full story due to paywall but sounds interesting
Meghan Markle vs. the Mail Is a Grudge Match That’s Far From Over (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> Is Methane allowed to use that monogram (crown and a M under it)???  Isn’t that using her title?



You mean Meghan might do something she isn't supposed to do? Shocked! Shocked!  Isn't it curious how she clings to a title bestowed to her by a family she accuses of being racist? So, by extension, if she uses that title, isn't that saying she's also a racist or at least complicit with the BRF's supposed racism? Oh wait. In her psycho mind she's sacrificing herself to use the title so her kids' get their titles upon QEII's death. In her early days of positive publicity when most people, me included, were happy for her, I thought she was very beautiful. Now? She's going downhill very fast. As though the more her internal ugliness is displayed, the more unattractive she looks on the outside. You'd think a 150 million dollar Netflix plus other contracts could make physical attractiveness more attainable. Guess not! But they can buy plenty of sloppy stringy hair extensions and excess syringes of facial filler. Pretty soon her face will look like a helium balloon. A far cry from her looks on her wedding day. And it hasn't been THAT long.


----------



## lulu212121

I think if you really look back, you will find she was never as attractive as you thought.


----------



## jennlt

Jesus is always funny but he is on fire in this video


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> Jesus is always funny but he is on fire in this video



Would anyone have believed in their wildest dreams that Ex-Pres T**** could defend HMTQ against M.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> Jesus is always funny but he is on fire in this video



This was his best video so far!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Finally, there is the curious bit  now that it would have been OK to publish A BIT of the letter but the MAIL ON SUNDAY published too much of it - that totally surprised me, *I though the copyright thing was binary - you can publish the whole thing or not at all ,* this ruling STUPEFIES ME


This falls under fair usage which allows a portion of a copyrighted work to be used for purposes such as research or news reporting.








						Fair Use Exception To Copyright
					

Much has been written about the fair use exception to copyright. It is simply not possible to discuss it in great detail here. What we provide is an overview of the fair use exception to




					copyrightalliance.org


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> Is Methane allowed to use that monogram (crown and a M under it)???  Isn’t that using her title?


If you blow up the crown, it seems to be a generic ducal coronet - with strawberry leaves - not a BRF-related crown 








						Coronet - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> This falls under fair usage which allows a portion of a copyrighted work to be used for purposes such as research or news reporting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fair Use Exception To Copyright
> 
> 
> Much has been written about the fair use exception to copyright. It is simply not possible to discuss it in great detail here. What we provide is an overview of the fair use exception to
> 
> 
> 
> 
> copyrightalliance.org


YES YES YES - by George that is it ! You can quote a portion ...


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I believe the crux of the matter is the difference between UK and US copyright laws, in the UK, the letter contents (words) reside with the writer - it may not be so in the US
> 
> Also, I thought of the innumerable DIANA letters that go to auction, mostly unseen, but unpublished and who cares about her thank you letters? The BRF will not pursue that ...
> 
> I dont buy the story that Charles stepped in - if he had done so, court matter would have been dropped, apologies written and maybe a quiet money exchange
> 
> Finally, there is the curious bit  now that it would have been OK to publish A BIT of the letter but the MAIL ON SUNDAY published too much of it - that totally surprised me, I though the copyright thing was binary - you can publish the whole thing or not at all , this ruling STUPEFIES ME
> 
> And interesting how MM is not denying/suing about her email snippets that Knauf circulated ....



I wonder if emails are like conversations. The recipient merely quoting as evidence, like a recorded conversation. Not just, hearsay, but this is what s/he said, here's the evidence.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I wonder if emails are like conversations. The recipient merely quoting as evidence, like a recorded conversation. Not just, hearsay, but this is what s/he said, here's the evidence.


I do know in the US, you must tell the other party that you are recording a conversation - otherwise the recording is illegal. If you sit on the phone with a contractor there is always an interminable bit about "ÿou are being recorded for quality control purposes"
An email is different, since there is a presumption that the other party has a copy. 

Was thinking of the bit about the FAIR USE EXCEPTION TO COPYRIGHT ... I guess that really makes a lot of PRACTICAL sense, have seen everyone quoting books (for ex) on the internet , and wondered did they get permission? How tedious ... every book has a preface ït cannot be "used or copied" (even for academic purposes).  The FUEC is how you can quote a snippet and not get into trouble ... 

Funny how the FAIR USE EXCLUSION TO COPYRIGHT topic never came up when the lawsuit was first discussed in the press. I woul have liked to learn this two years ago... out of simple curiosity


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> I do know in the US, you must tell the other party that you are recording a conversation - otherwise the recording is illegal. If you sit on the phone with a contractor there is always an interminable bit about "ÿou are being recorded for quality control purposes"
> An email is different, since there is a presumption that the other party has a copy.
> 
> Was thinking of the bit about the FAIR USE EXCEPTION TO COPYRIGHT ... I guess that really makes a lot of PRACTICAL sense, have seen everyone quoting books (for ex) on the internet , and wondered did they get permission? How tedious ... every book has a preface ït cannot be "used or copied" (even for academic purposes).  The FUEC is how you can quote a snippet and not get into trouble ...
> 
> Funny how the FAIR USE EXCLUSION TO COPYRIGHT topic never came up when the lawsuit was first discussed in the press. I woul have liked to learn this two years ago... out of simple curiosity


it actually varies by state...11 states require both parties to consent to recording


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> She is still copying Catherine.  How sad….



She loves to talk sh*t about the RF, yet she also loves to use that royal letterhead. What an unrelenting hypocrite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> Jesus is always funny but he is on fire in this video



He was A++++ in this one,  Really witty.  He really does have  way with words lol!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She loves to talk sh*t about the RF, yet she also loves to use that royal letterhead. What an unrelenting hypocrite.


It is part of her deep seeded inferiority complex.


----------



## xeyes

sdkitty said:


> it actually varies by state...11 states require both parties to consent to recording



I’m a U.S. resident in one of the other states (a state that only requires one-party consent for recording conversations). Don’t know off the top of my head how many others there are, but here there’s no need to inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded, AFAIK.

Today’s bit from Enty isn’t explicitly about our dynamic duo (well, no blind item is _explicitly _about anybody by definition), but it’s pretty obvious who its subject is.





__





						Blind Item #3
					

The one still in charge issued a very rare edict. She wanted no trails of the century while still alive and ordered the result that was issu...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## xincinsin

Methane and Hazard remind me of a YA author Cassandra Clare. Before going professional, Clare wrote very popular Harry Potter fanfic which contained whole paragraphs and sections plagiarized from other authors dead or alive. Fanfic itself is in that grey area where you can argue if it infringes copyright. Clare was well-read and she would tweak a word here or rearrange a sentence there, replace character names with her own. Her stans praised her for her excellent writing, often praising the plagiarized portions. Anyone who brought up the plagiarism was viciously attacked online. It created a schism in the HP fan community.

Clare deleted all her fanfic before going professional. There was speculation that it was to bury her plagiarism, but, as we know, nothing on the internet is buried for good. She is now a successful YA fantasy author. Several years ago, she was asked to take part in a forum at a fan convention. IIRC it was to do with the problems of plagiarism. Those with long memories raised a hue and cry, and she had to withdraw from the forum. 

When I read about Hazard being on the Aspen committee, it reminded me of this. He is however too "exalted" and has cronies on the committee, and can therefore ignore the derision.


----------



## Chloe302225

Duchess of Cambridge 'left in tears after confronting Meghan Markle'
					

Kate Middleton, 39, was said to have been left in tears after she 'lost control' during a row with her future sister-in-law, which stemmed over claims Meghan  had been rude to Palace staff.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chloe302225

*








						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Will Prince William ban the BBC from Baftas?
					

RICHARD EDEN: With Hollywood stars flown in by the dozen, and footage screened around the world, the Bafta awards are the highlight of the British film industry's calendar.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## Hermes Zen

LOVE HMTQ !  Whether this is a gossip mag or there's some truth to this, I loved the article.   Enjoy.

"There's a point at which — just before she gives a speech to the director on set — [she is] asked which photographs she wants in the shot next to her." Looking at a framed photo of the Sussexes, she reportedly said, "We won't be needing that one."



> https://www.instyle.com/celebrity/p...-queen-elizabeth-christmas-photo-display-2019
> 
> *The Queen's Christmas Photo Display Reportedly Upset Prince Harry*


----------



## RAINDANCE

*Meghan, Harry and the privacy paradox*
In insisting that she wants to be left alone, the Duchess of Sussex has ensured all the global press she could ever wish for

ByAngela Levin3 December 2021 • 2:44pm


Five years ago, Meghan Markle could only have dreamt of occupying the front pages around the world as she attempted to move on from amiable Suits cast member to becoming a real live movie star.
Now she’s achieved her wildest fantasy – and that of every jobbing actress like her: she is known by her first name, both globally and financially. 
And all it took was marrying Prince Harry, a man who wanted the opposite – anonymity – due to  an understandable hatred of the paparazzi because of what happened to his mother, Princess Diana.   
When I was writing Harry’s biography, I remember touching on this delicate subject with hesitation. Harry told me that one of his most upsetting memories was seeing his mother cry when he and William got in her car to go out, only to be surrounded by photographers using flashlights. The poor boy felt upset and angry as he didn’t know how to protect her.  (He was also too young to know that Princess Diana had refused to have protection officers, which Prince Charles himself had offered to pay for.)   

The Duchess of Sussex revealed her profound unhappiness about life in the media spotlight during an ITV documentary CREDIT: ITV
Those feelings of guilt and frustration lessened somewhat once he was older. In 2017, he told me, as we talked one to one in Kensington Palace, that he now didn’t think journalists and photographers “were all bad. There are some exceptions.”  

I remembered this comment two years later at the end of what had been a hugely successful tour in South Africa, for them both, when a sad and bitter-looking Harry took part in an ITV documentary detailing his Royal visit: “Everything I do reminds me of [my mother],” he said. “Every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash it takes me straight back, so in that respect it’s the worst reminder of her life.” In other words, he still hated being in the spotlight.  
Yet, the fact is that now he and Meghan could choose to live a completely private life away from all forms of media. We see, instead, the pair opting for global visibility, even inviting chosen media into their LA home. In particular, they are photographed – almost constantly – even when that could easily be avoided.  
Take, for example, the Sussexes’ “private visit” to a Los Angeles cemetery in November 2020 to honour fallen soldiers and mark Remembrance Sunday in the UK. They could have gone alone and paid their respects quietly. Instead, the pair enlisted celebrity fashion photographer Lee Morgan, and their office released the resulting pictures to the UK.  
Ditto their four-day faux-Royal tour in New York City a year later, when the couple had their own photographer following them around – some thought for a future Netflix documentary – as well as the regular press photographers.   
Looking back to the start of the relationship, when Meghan met Harry, she must have been delighted at first that here was guaranteed glamorous PR for free as the Prince’s girlfriend. But the closer they got, the more frustrating it must have been to realise that her meat-and-drink need for publicity had to be curtailed because of his need for privacy. Harry’s need was so deep, he projected it on to her when he issued an unprecedented appeal to the world’s media for his then girlfriend to be left alone, claiming she had been subjected to a wave of “abuse and harassment”.

The Duke and Duchess pay a ‘private visit’ to the Los Angeles National Cemetery CREDIT: Lee Morgan
Harry wasn’t pleading for Meghan here as much as himself. He has blamed the press for scaring off two previous serious girlfriends, Chelsea Davey and Cressida Bonas, who both loved Harry but couldn’t cope with being in the spotlight. He was desperate, I was told at the time, not to lose Meghan in the same way although he also hoped that being accustomed to the flashing lights of showbusiness would enable her to cope.  
However, he knew, too, there would also be a conflict for her, telling me that while he hated the “goldfish bowl” and sometimes hid behind the meat counter at his local supermarket to avoid being seen, Meghan had grown up with the understanding that actresses can pick and choose when to be in the spotlight. Unlike Royals, who are “in the public eye 24-7” merely because of the family they are born into, and whether they like it or not.
It’s difficult not to think that Meghan – having thrived on publicity as an actress – must have wondered why she had to give that up? Especially as Harry now insisted she was in control and could cherry pick her choice of journalist and photographer when she wanted to hit the headlines. Those chosen journalists would then have to follow “her truth” rather than ask questions or evaluate what was going on. 
Yet as an extremely helpful bonus, Meghan seems to have seen a chance to please Harry at the same time. The more she complained about feeling under threat from the press, the more powerfully Harry reacted.  
So can we assume that Meghan set herself and Harry against the world – and particularly against the Royal family – before they were even official? It would certainly have given them a special bond when they both had to endure unwanted and relentless chronicalisation of their rather unglamorous lives as working junior Royals. 

In the now infamous interview, Oprah asked Meghan what she thought about the Palace ‘hearing you speak your truth’ CREDIT: Reuters
There is a further twist to the couple’s campaign against uninvited press coverage: a now familiar deep-seated need to examine it all, regardless of where it came from, rather than letting it lie. Over time, it’s been apparent that the pair have worked to be equally outraged by any new material in the media (however tame), with the result that anyone around them – including family and staff – who doesn’t agree, has to go.
Harry in particular seems to search for and build up countless petty grievances that outrage him but prove Meghan is always right.  A recent example is the word Megxit, used to describe their stepping back as members of the British Royal family, which most people take as a play on ‘Brexit’. Harry angrily decided it was sexist and it’s believed to have been  removed from the recent BBC TV documentary Prince and the Press. 
On the other hand, many have assumed Meghan’s experience as an actor would have enabled her to manage the press with ease, shrugging off difficult stories and boosting positive ones. Yet, instead, she seems addicted to “bad” press, reading it, cogitating over it and fanning it for more. There is a rumour that she spends huge amounts of time, day and night, checking on her round-the-world image.   
Perhaps she is also creating scenarios to ensure privacy on her terms as an ongoing issue? Refusing to share names of godparents, hiding their babies’ faces and withdrawing information to keep everyone on their toes and create demand?   
Meanwhile Harry, who looks more lost than ever, issues grandiose and pompous statements that are about as far from the Harry I met as you could get. The Harry I knew was someone who genuinely cared about “making a positive difference” and told me he longed to live in Africa and help with endangered species. He also had a terrific sense of humour. This new Harry and Meghan show of positioning themselves against the world, private when it suits them, going public when they need the spotlight, doesn’t suit him. 
He seems to have taken several steps back behind Meghan, both literally and figuratively. I feel sorry for him even if he doesn’t feel sorry for himself. Meanwhile Meghan is getting what she wanted all along – to be the star of her own show on her own terms.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> _Meanwhile Meghan is getting what she wanted all along – to be the star of her own show on her own terms._



Therein lies the problem. Most people are fine with women _starring in their own shows on their own terms. _With MM, it is the *way *she has done this [although she is still really dependent on Hazzie and the BRF, so it isn’t her own show and it isn’t on her terms].  Simply said, she uses people.  Networking is one thing, relentlessly using people in vicious ways is another matter altogether.  Plus playing the Diana card is a cheap shot.  MM would not be where she is now without the BRF, Hazzie and her connections.  Nothing liberated or admirable about that. Imo.


----------



## RAINDANCE

My apologies - I should have credited this article to todays Telegraph


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> My apologies - I should have credited this article to todays Telegraph


Well shame on you ! you copied the WHOLE text for us , violating the Fair Use of Copyright principle LOL 
THANK YOU for all the work !


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is from the CDAN comments - the last paragraph [below the line] intrigues me. Are the copyrights to letters inherited?





__





						Blind Item #3
					

The one still in charge issued a very rare edict. She wanted no trails of the century while still alive and ordered the result that was issu...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## bagshopr

Hermes Zen said:


> LOVE HMTQ !  Whether this is a gossip mag or there's some truth to this, I loved the article.   Enjoy.
> 
> "There's a point at which — just before she gives a speech to the director on set — [she is] asked which photographs she wants in the shot next to her." Looking at a framed photo of the Sussexes, she reportedly said, "We won't be needing that one."


Good for Her Majesty!! Why in the world would she want to look at those backstabbers?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is from the CDAN comments - the last paragraph [below the line] intrigues me. Are the copyrights to letters inherited?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> The one still in charge issued a very rare edict. She wanted no trails of the century while still alive and ordered the result that was issu...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5265759



I have no answer to your question, but ewww to James Hewitt trying to sell them. What a lowlife.


----------



## Lodpah

I saw the House of Gucci last night and Patrizia Regianni’s actions are similar to MM. She meets M. Gucci, she stalks him, she created drama within the families, pitting families against each other. Till M. Gucci wises up. 

Women like MM have been around forever. They don’t last. Their husbands either divorce them, have affairs or mistresses and then get tossed aside. Sad but true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Methane and Hazard remind me of a YA author Cassandra Clare. Before going professional, Clare wrote very popular Harry Potter fanfic which contained whole paragraphs and sections plagiarized from other authors dead or alive. Fanfic itself is in that grey area where you can argue if it infringes copyright. Clare was well-read and she would tweak a word here or rearrange a sentence there, replace character names with her own. Her stans praised her for her excellent writing, often praising the plagiarized portions. Anyone who brought up the plagiarism was viciously attacked online. It created a schism in the HP fan community.
> 
> Clare deleted all her fanfic before going professional. There was speculation that it was to bury her plagiarism, but, as we know, nothing on the internet is buried for good. She is now a successful YA fantasy author. Several years ago, she was asked to take part in a forum at a fan convention. IIRC it was to do with the problems of plagiarism. Those with long memories raised a hue and cry, and she had to withdraw from the forum.
> 
> When I read about Hazard being on the Aspen committee, it reminded me of this. He is however too "exalted" and has cronies on the committee, and can therefore ignore the derision.



Many students fool anti-plagiarism software by 'spinning'. Using a different word every 5 or so words. A word can be 'the' instead of 'a', or 'while' instead of 'whilst', which is why, although it may not read well, it fools computer programmes designed to only see exact matches.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I saw the House of Gucci last night and Patrizia Regianni’s actions are similar to MM. She meets M. Gucci, she stalks him, she created drama within the families, pitting families against each other. Till M. Gucci wises up.
> 
> Women like MM have been around forever. They don’t last. Their husbands either divorce them, have affairs or mistresses and then get tossed aside. Sad but true.



Although Patrizia killed her husband which is what she's most remembered for  .

Harry wanted Riri  and anded-up with MeMe!!! 

MeMe!! went all out for a handsome prince palace and all she got was 16 toilets


----------



## needlv

Lol.  Daily Mail and the other newspapers are going to keep writing scathing stories and using unflattering photos of MM


----------



## oldbag

[/QUOTE]


Lodpah said:


> I saw the House of Gucci last night and Patrizia Regianni’s actions are similar to MM. She meets M. Gucci, she stalks him, she created drama within the families, pitting families against each other. Till M. Gucci wises up.
> 
> Women like MM have been around forever. They don’t last. Their husbands either divorce them, have affairs or mistresses and then get tossed aside. Sad but true.


M Gucci wised up too late. Machinations, jealousy, and hate are leathel. I wonder if the former Madame Gucci ever thinks about her actions? There is no longer any Gucci family member involved in that company.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just found this pic browsing Pinterest (I was just looking for recipe inspiration...I can't get a break apparently)...if I'm not totally mistaken this is from her outing with the Queen. Maybe she should have taken the hint and put on that hat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just found this pic browsing Pinterest (I was just looking for recipe inspiration...I can't get a break apparently)...if I'm not totally mistaken this is from her outing with the Queen. Maybe she should have taken the hint and had put on that hat.
> 
> View attachment 5266054



I could be wrong, I think that is a photoshopped photo. Ooooops, apologies, not a photoshop,  nope.  There is a huge problem with her hair.








						Meghan Markle Joins the Queen for Her First Royal Outing Without Harry
					

She wore her hair down and carried a clutch, which might be proof of Kate Middleton’s fashion advice at work.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## mellibelly

Markdown is downright psycho in this old Larry King interview.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong, I think that is a photoshopped photo. Ooooops, apologies, not a photoshop,  nope.  There is a huge problem with her hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Joins the Queen for Her First Royal Outing Without Harry
> 
> 
> She wore her hair down and carried a clutch, which might be proof of Kate Middleton’s fashion advice at work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Her hair looks greasy or too much product applied in this photo. Clearly she AND her handlers knew this event was on the docket and the cameras would be zeroing in. So why the disaster hair? She followed the nail and dress protocol so why the crappy hair? Is this the outing where the Queen was rubbing her eyes after a while and wanting Meghan to shut up? Notice TQ isn't looking at M in this particular shot. But M was sucky uppy to TQ. Somebody forced this appropriate dress onto Meghan, because if she had her druthers, she'd have been wearing an off the shoulder dress and baring much more skin just to spite protocol. This photo was taken in Meghan's beauty days, though her hair was terrible. TQ was playing the good sport, she knew Meghan was an idiot from the second she saw her.


----------



## Kevinaxx

rose60610 said:


> Her hair looks greasy or too much product applied in this photo. Clearly she AND her handlers knew this event was on the docket and the cameras would be zeroing in. So why the disaster hair? She followed the nail and dress protocol so why the crappy hair? Is this the outing where the Queen was rubbing her eyes after a while and wanting Meghan to shut up? Notice TQ isn't looking at M in this particular shot. But M was sucky uppy to TQ. Somebody forced this appropriate dress onto Meghan, because if she had her druthers, she'd have been wearing an off the shoulder dress and baring much more skin just to spite protocol. This photo was taken in Meghan's beauty days, though her hair was terrible. TQ was playing the good sport, she knew Meghan was an idiot from the second she saw her.


When you’re an arrogant and mean-spirited person, people tend not to go out of their way to tell you when you’re looking like a fool or something is wrong with you which is why she’s been photographed so many times with tags out, hair all greasy, dress ill-fitting etc.


mellibelly said:


> Markdown is downright psycho in this old Larry King interview.



She must be so tired being so fake all the time, that then when she’s in the privacy of her own home or with her own staff that she just unleashes all that pent up she does because Adam probably has no idea how much she hates him, he’s only said good things about working with her.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong, I think that is a photoshopped photo. Ooooops, apologies, not a photoshop,  nope.  There is a huge problem with her hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Joins the Queen for Her First Royal Outing Without Harry
> 
> 
> She wore her hair down and carried a clutch, which might be proof of Kate Middleton’s fashion advice at work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



yipes!  I never noticed the hair before.  I was probably too focused on the pic of MM’s dress, which is one of the few that I actually liked of hers.  And, of course, always love seeing pics where TQ is laughing!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just found this pic browsing Pinterest (I was just looking for recipe inspiration...I can't get a break apparently)...if I'm not totally mistaken this is from her outing with the Queen. Maybe she should have taken the hint and had put on that hat.
> 
> View attachment 5266054


I just googled more photos from that outing, and yes, several photos from that outing do show her scalp peeping through. So that Rapunzel look on the Time cover was (a) airbrush, (b) a wig or (c) the Spotify money was spent on hair plugs for her. Not a good sign because this was pre-preg, and many women experience hair thinning when they are preggers (the lucky ones get the opposite - luxuriant hair!)

Wasn't this also the outing when she did the "me first, you first" dance in front of the car?


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I just googled more photos from that outing, and yes, several photos from that outing do show her scalp peeping through. So that Rapunzel look on the Time cover was (a) airbrush, (b) a wig or (c) the Spotify money was spent on hair plugs for her. Not a good sign because this was pre-preg, and many women experience hair thinning when they are preggers (the lucky ones get the opposite - luxuriant hair!)
> 
> *Wasn't this also the outing when she did the "me first, you first" dance in front of the car?*



You'd think someone with common sense would let an elder go first what more the said elder is HMTQ!  

It's been speculated that Marklenator was told to wear a hat for this event but she refused. How dumb!


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no answer to your question, but ewww to James Hewitt trying to sell them. What a lowlife.


It was with Diana's blessing though.  She wanted it all out there.


----------



## Hermes Zen

After viewing M’s photo again , I had to go wash my hair and mine didn’t look so bad! I feel better now.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is from the CDAN comments - the last paragraph [below the line] intrigues me. Are the copyrights to letters inherited?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> The one still in charge issued a very rare edict. She wanted no trails of the century while still alive and ordered the result that was issu...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5265759


I believe that you can inherit copyright if you are the heir of the estate of the person.

So say, when Sylvia Plath died, Faber decide to publish her collected letters, they needed the consent of her heir aka her husband Ted Hughes to publish her letters, even those held by someone else and indeed he did a lot to control what was published and his own image.

copyright is also finite in most legal systems:-





						How copyright protects your work
					

Who gets copyright, types of work it covers, permitted use of copyright material, how to license and sell copyright and help resolving disputes




					www.gov.uk
				





Hermes Zen said:


> After viewing M’s photo again , I had to go wash my hair and mine didn’t look so bad! I feel better now.








						How copyright protects your work
					

Who gets copyright, types of work it covers, permitted use of copyright material, how to license and sell copyright and help resolving disputes




					www.gov.uk
				



It gives me horror flashbacks of when I used to wear really thick and curly extensions that damaged my hair. Fortunately I met a great hair stylist who explained it all. 

The first rule of extensions is the weave you put in should match the thickness of the hair on your head and if in doubt, less is more. You can’t just shortcut to thick hair by putting a couple of chunky pieces in. 
This is definitely the case with M - those thick waves she wears are far too heavy for her hair. She’s had her naturally fine 2c(?) hair straightened out, which isn’t good for your hair anyway and then she’s putting a lot of pressure on her scalp by hanging that super thick hair off her head. 
 She used to wear finer extensions which actually looked far better on her but she clearly wants to have bigger hair than Kate as well.

If she’s that in love with the tendrils she’d be better off switching to a full wig.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I just googled more photos from that outing, and yes, several photos from that outing do show her scalp peeping through. So that Rapunzel look on the Time cover was (a) airbrush, (b) a wig or (c) the Spotify money was spent on hair plugs for her. Not a good sign because this was pre-preg, and many women experience hair thinning when they are preggers (the lucky ones get the opposite - luxuriant hair!)
> 
> Wasn't this also the outing when she did the "me first, you first" dance in front of the car?


It was definitely air brushed to hell and back   Harry magically grew hair as well. Not to mention no eye bags, fat, beady eyes etc.

I don’t think hair plugs would work because her natural hair has never looked like that, unless she got plugs from someone else? Tbh, it’s easier for a woman just to get a weave or a wig 

(for some weird reason women seem to look much better wearing wigs whereas with men it’s usually incongruous..)

hate to brag, but pregnancy really improved my own poor hair  


RAINDANCE said:


> *Meghan, Harry and the privacy paradox*
> In insisting that she wants to be left alone, the Duchess of Sussex has ensured all the global press she could ever wish for
> 
> ByAngela Levin3 December 2021 • 2:44pm
> 
> 
> Five years ago, Meghan Markle could only have dreamt of occupying the front pages around the world as she attempted to move on from amiable Suits cast member to becoming a real live movie star.
> Now she’s achieved her wildest fantasy – and that of every jobbing actress like her: she is known by her first name, both globally and financially.
> And all it took was marrying Prince Harry, a man who wanted the opposite – anonymity – due to  an understandable hatred of the paparazzi because of what happened to his mother, Princess Diana.
> When I was writing Harry’s biography, I remember touching on this delicate subject with hesitation. Harry told me that one of his most upsetting memories was seeing his mother cry when he and William got in her car to go out, only to be surrounded by photographers using flashlights. The poor boy felt upset and angry as he didn’t know how to protect her.  (He was also too young to know that Princess Diana had refused to have protection officers, which Prince Charles himself had offered to pay for.)
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex revealed her profound unhappiness about life in the media spotlight during an ITV documentary CREDIT: ITV
> Those feelings of guilt and frustration lessened somewhat once he was older. In 2017, he told me, as we talked one to one in Kensington Palace, that he now didn’t think journalists and photographers “were all bad. There are some exceptions.”
> 
> I remembered this comment two years later at the end of what had been a hugely successful tour in South Africa, for them both, when a sad and bitter-looking Harry took part in an ITV documentary detailing his Royal visit: “Everything I do reminds me of [my mother],” he said. “Every single time I hear a click, every single time I see a flash it takes me straight back, so in that respect it’s the worst reminder of her life.” In other words, he still hated being in the spotlight.
> Yet, the fact is that now he and Meghan could choose to live a completely private life away from all forms of media. We see, instead, the pair opting for global visibility, even inviting chosen media into their LA home. In particular, they are photographed – almost constantly – even when that could easily be avoided.
> Take, for example, the Sussexes’ “private visit” to a Los Angeles cemetery in November 2020 to honour fallen soldiers and mark Remembrance Sunday in the UK. They could have gone alone and paid their respects quietly. Instead, the pair enlisted celebrity fashion photographer Lee Morgan, and their office released the resulting pictures to the UK.
> Ditto their four-day faux-Royal tour in New York City a year later, when the couple had their own photographer following them around – some thought for a future Netflix documentary – as well as the regular press photographers.
> Looking back to the start of the relationship, when Meghan met Harry, she must have been delighted at first that here was guaranteed glamorous PR for free as the Prince’s girlfriend. But the closer they got, the more frustrating it must have been to realise that her meat-and-drink need for publicity had to be curtailed because of his need for privacy. Harry’s need was so deep, he projected it on to her when he issued an unprecedented appeal to the world’s media for his then girlfriend to be left alone, claiming she had been subjected to a wave of “abuse and harassment”.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess pay a ‘private visit’ to the Los Angeles National Cemetery CREDIT: Lee Morgan
> Harry wasn’t pleading for Meghan here as much as himself. He has blamed the press for scaring off two previous serious girlfriends, Chelsea Davey and Cressida Bonas, who both loved Harry but couldn’t cope with being in the spotlight. He was desperate, I was told at the time, not to lose Meghan in the same way although he also hoped that being accustomed to the flashing lights of showbusiness would enable her to cope.
> However, he knew, too, there would also be a conflict for her, telling me that while he hated the “goldfish bowl” and sometimes hid behind the meat counter at his local supermarket to avoid being seen, Meghan had grown up with the understanding that actresses can pick and choose when to be in the spotlight. Unlike Royals, who are “in the public eye 24-7” merely because of the family they are born into, and whether they like it or not.
> It’s difficult not to think that Meghan – having thrived on publicity as an actress – must have wondered why she had to give that up? Especially as Harry now insisted she was in control and could cherry pick her choice of journalist and photographer when she wanted to hit the headlines. Those chosen journalists would then have to follow “her truth” rather than ask questions or evaluate what was going on.
> Yet as an extremely helpful bonus, Meghan seems to have seen a chance to please Harry at the same time. The more she complained about feeling under threat from the press, the more powerfully Harry reacted.
> So can we assume that Meghan set herself and Harry against the world – and particularly against the Royal family – before they were even official? It would certainly have given them a special bond when they both had to endure unwanted and relentless chronicalisation of their rather unglamorous lives as working junior Royals.
> 
> In the now infamous interview, Oprah asked Meghan what she thought about the Palace ‘hearing you speak your truth’ CREDIT: Reuters
> There is a further twist to the couple’s campaign against uninvited press coverage: a now familiar deep-seated need to examine it all, regardless of where it came from, rather than letting it lie. Over time, it’s been apparent that the pair have worked to be equally outraged by any new material in the media (however tame), with the result that anyone around them – including family and staff – who doesn’t agree, has to go.
> Harry in particular seems to search for and build up countless petty grievances that outrage him but prove Meghan is always right.  A recent example is the word Megxit, used to describe their stepping back as members of the British Royal family, which most people take as a play on ‘Brexit’. Harry angrily decided it was sexist and it’s believed to have been  removed from the recent BBC TV documentary Prince and the Press.
> On the other hand, many have assumed Meghan’s experience as an actor would have enabled her to manage the press with ease, shrugging off difficult stories and boosting positive ones. Yet, instead, she seems addicted to “bad” press, reading it, cogitating over it and fanning it for more. There is a rumour that she spends huge amounts of time, day and night, checking on her round-the-world image.
> Perhaps she is also creating scenarios to ensure privacy on her terms as an ongoing issue? Refusing to share names of godparents, hiding their babies’ faces and withdrawing information to keep everyone on their toes and create demand?
> Meanwhile Harry, who looks more lost than ever, issues grandiose and pompous statements that are about as far from the Harry I met as you could get. The Harry I knew was someone who genuinely cared about “making a positive difference” and told me he longed to live in Africa and help with endangered species. He also had a terrific sense of humour. This new Harry and Meghan show of positioning themselves against the world, private when it suits them, going public when they need the spotlight, doesn’t suit him.
> He seems to have taken several steps back behind Meghan, both literally and figuratively. I feel sorry for him even if he doesn’t feel sorry for himself. Meanwhile Meghan is getting what she wanted all along – to be the star of her own show on her own terms.


slightly OT, but what’s wrong with turning down security? Maybe she didn’t want to owe her ex or thought Charles’ detail would report to Charles?

Personally I don’t think all this newly found criticism of Diana from the press is doing anyone any good. The press created the myth of Diana the beautiful saint because it sold papers and at the time, it was mutually beneficial for Diana, the royals and the press. I don’t think anyone, even her fans, believe she was absolutely perfect but to suddenly start bringing up her flaws and poor decisions now she is long dead just seems a bit duplicitous and spiteful to me.


----------



## Luvbolide

jelliedfeels said:


> I believe that you can inherit copyright if you are the heir of the estate of the person.
> 
> So say, when Sylvia Plath died, Faber decide to publish her collected letters, they needed the consent of her heir aka her husband Ted Hughes to publish her letters, even those held by someone else and indeed he did a lot to control what was published and his own image.
> 
> copyright is also finite in most legal systems:-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How copyright protects your work
> 
> 
> Who gets copyright, types of work it covers, permitted use of copyright material, how to license and sell copyright and help resolving disputes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gov.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How copyright protects your work
> 
> 
> Who gets copyright, types of work it covers, permitted use of copyright material, how to license and sell copyright and help resolving disputes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gov.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It gives me horror flashbacks of when I used to wear really thick and curly extensions that damaged my hair. Fortunately I met a great hair stylist who explained it all.
> 
> The first rule of extensions is the weave you put in should match the thickness of the hair on your head and if in doubt, less is more. You can’t just shortcut to thick hair by putting a couple of chunky pieces in.
> This is definitely the case with M - those thick waves she wears are far too heavy for her hair. She’s had her naturally fine 2c(?) hair straightened out, which isn’t good for your hair anyway and then she’s putting a lot of pressure on her scalp by hanging that super thick hair off her head.
> She used to wear finer extensions which actually looked far better on her but she clearly wants to have bigger hair than Kate as well.
> 
> If she’s that in love with the tendrils she’d be better off switching to a full wig.



MM is so freaking immature - she is never going to have hair as nice as Kate’s.  Nor is she ever going to look as good in clothes as Kate - Kate is taller and has a great body for clothes.  So why keep trying to reach the unattainable?  I always thought MM’s hair was fine (not great, mind you, but fine) until she started messing with those stupid extentions.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Luvbolide said:


> MM is so freaking immature - she is never going to have hair as nice as Kate’s.  Nor is she ever going to look as good in clothes as Kate - Kate is taller and has a great body for clothes.  So why keep trying to reach the unattainable?  I always thought MM’s hair was fine (not great, mind you, but fine) until she started messing with those stupid extentions.


I think she looked best with her natural curly hair. It just needed a good conditioner and a nice cut. 
But I do remember that heavily processed and ironed hair was all the rage in the 90s-00s when she joined the D list but she’s got no excuse for it now


----------



## Luvbolide

“When she joined the D list” - hilarious!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> The press created the myth of Diana the beautiful saint because it sold papers and at the time, it was mutually beneficial for Diana, the royals and the press. I don’t think anyone, even her fans, believe she was absolutely perfect but to suddenly start bringing up her flaws and poor decisions now she is long dead just seems a bit duplicitous and spiteful to me.



Agree. IMO the flaws are being discussed to add a huge dose of reality to the “Saint Diana” articles [which tend to be very over-the-top, imo].  Like all of us, she had feet of clay, as do all members of the BRF.  The press prefers the either/or stories.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> It was with Diana's blessing though.  She wanted it all out there.



She was dead at that point and it was years after the relationship, how would we know?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was dead at that point and it was years after the relationship, how would we know?



This article from 2015 may shed some light on the issue.  Full article in spoiler








						Princess Diana's Former Lover Caught Trying to Sell Her Letters
					

It's not the first time he's betrayed the woman he loved.




					www.goodhousekeeping.com
				






Spoiler: Betrayal



*Princess Diana's Former Lover Caught Trying to Sell Her Letters*
His collection even includes a note from 6-year-old Prince William.





BY ASHER FOGLE
Nov 9, 2015





GETTY IMAGES
Princess Diana's private letters to her former lover James Hewitt have been secretly offered for sale, The Mail on Sunday reports.
His betrayals have long haunted the royal family. Hewitt, a former Army major, first offered to sell the intimate notes on a 2003 Larry King Live broadcast but quickly recanted. The 64 letters in his collection were primarily sent to him during his Gulf War deployment — and included two handwritten notes from 6-year-old Prince William.
Princess Diana first met the cavalry officer when she hired him to teach her — and the two young princes — to ride horses in 1986. (At the time, Prince Charles had resumed his affair with Camila Parker-Bowles and their marriage was fracturing.) They started a five-year affair, which Diana admitted to in a 1995 BBC interview, saying of Hewitt, "Yes, I adored him. Yes, I was in love with him. But I was very let down."


Most of the letters are relatively innocent, though occasionally flirtatious. On March 4, 1988, she wrote, "Dearest James, you have left and it all feels very empty here to me and that includes one bottle of champagne, too!"
Then on December 19, 1987, she wrote: "If by any chance you want to get in touch for whatever, the B. P. switchboard will know exactly where I am even if I don't ... it has been known!"
In her letters, she thanks Hewitt for being such a supportive friend and making such a difference in her life. She joked in one note about her own lack of grammar skills, saying she had to look the word "inflicting" up in the dictionary. Though the early letters were signed as "yours sincerely, Diana," later ones were "Kissy Kissy!" and "with much love." One letter, from April 1988, she thanks Hewitt for organizing a trip to his regiment for Prince William and Prince Harry, adding the boys now dreamed of a soldier's life.
The cache, which has never before been made public, was also offered for sale to Prince William and Prince Harry via their lawyer last November.
Now, the British newspaper claims that an American memorabilia dealer, Gary Zimet, has been trying to secretly buy eight letters and 26 cards. Zimet contacted Hewitt at his mother's Devon home and they conducted clandestine negotiations through one of Hewitt's friends, Zimet told the Daily Mail. "From the start I was told secrecy and privacy was paramount. That no one must know James was behind the sale of these letters ... because Hewitt was worried about the fall-out if it became public. He needs money, pure and simple."
But perhaps he needed even more: Zimet had a buyer willing to pay $150,000 but recently, Hewitt backed out. "He changed his mind," Zimet said. "Perhaps the offer wasn't enough."
Zimet added, "He appears to have carefully chosen these letters because they are from the start of the relationship and are less salacious than the letters written at the height of their affair."
It's not the first time Hewitt has tried to cash in on the affair. He was interviewed for a book about their romance, Princess In Love, and then he later wrote one of his own, Love and War, in 1999.
Princess Diana eventually spoke about Hewitt's "utter betrayal" — she believed he had burned her letters — and was horrified when he went on television offering to sell them.



eta - another article from 2020, it details the cooperation the author had fro Hewitt and Diana









						Diana, Hewitt and Me
					

Anna Pasternak on Diana and the secret letters which informed her explosive 1994 biography




					www.tatler.com
				




eta2 - from 2006, James was tricked








						Princess Di's Letters to Former Lover Read
					






					abcnews.go.com


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was dead at that point and it was years after the relationship, how would we know?


She wanted the world to know and told Hewitt to write about it.

The letters being sold at a later date... well, I guess he needs the money. But Diana was writing them to be published, or at least interpreted. Remind you of anyone?  Meg uses Diana a lot as her inspiration.


----------



## jennlt

"Comparing apples to...slightly rotten apples"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I could be wrong, I think that is a photoshopped photo. Ooooops, apologies, not a photoshop,  nope.  There is a huge problem with her hair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Joins the Queen for Her First Royal Outing Without Harry
> 
> 
> She wore her hair down and carried a clutch, which might be proof of Kate Middleton’s fashion advice at work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


It looks like someone lost a hair extension on one of the sides, would that be possible?


----------



## Chanbal

A very nice article by Sarah Vine!










						SARAH VINE: A rare insight into Prince William's charming character
					

SARAH VINE: In just 38 minutes strolling gently through the Norfolk countryside, we learn what so many Royal-watchers have lately come to sense is true of Prince William.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Her hair looks greasy or too much product applied in this photo. Clearly she AND her handlers knew this event was on the docket and the cameras would be zeroing in. So why the disaster hair? She followed the nail and dress protocol so why the crappy hair? Is this the outing where the Queen was rubbing her eyes after a while and wanting Meghan to shut up? Notice TQ isn't looking at M in this particular shot. But M was sucky uppy to TQ. Somebody forced this appropriate dress onto Meghan, because if she had her druthers, she'd have been wearing an off the shoulder dress and baring much more skin just to spite protocol. This photo was taken in Meghan's beauty days, though her hair was terrible. TQ was playing the good sport, she knew Meghan was an idiot from the second she saw her.


looks like she should have bought some of that stuff on qvc that colors your scalp


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I think she looked best with her natural curly hair. It just needed a good conditioner and a nice cut.
> But I do remember that heavily processed and ironed hair was all the rage in the 90s-00s when she joined the D list but she’s got no excuse for it now


now it's extensions.....at least hers aren't super long like some women I see....so fake


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> It looks like someone lost a hair extension on one of the sides, would that be possible?


Oh definitely. I would assume she has a sewn-in weave (It’s a bit like anchoring a piece of hemming tape to your hairs in the middle and base of your head along the natural hairline and then using the upper layers of real hair to cover the joins.) but after a while the thread gets loose and the hair drops out of place or can come undone together so you have to have it redone or get a new extension put in.  If this happens when out and about the best thing to do is just pin the loose weave back in place though it will be more patchy and visible) but maybe a goddess doesn’t want a lady in waiting getting in her way.

If she had clip in then they fall out all the time and the aforementioned lady in waiting might have had a handbag full of trampled hair.

(She might also have micro/nano ring extensions but I’ve found they are pretty similar to sew-ins really.)


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh definitely. I would assume she has a sewn-in weave (It’s a bit like anchoring a piece of hemming tape to your hairs in the middle and base of your head along the natural hairline and then using the upper layers of real hair to cover the joins.) but after a while the thread gets loose and the hair drops out of place or can come undone together so you have to have it redone or get a new extension put in.  If this happens when out and about the best thing to do is just pin the loose weave back in place though it will be more patchy and visible) but maybe a goddess doesn’t want a lady in waiting getting in her way.
> 
> If she had clip in then they fall out all the time and the aforementioned lady in waiting might have had a handbag full of trampled hair.
> 
> (She might also have micro/nano ring extensions but I’ve found they are pretty similar to sew-ins really.)


you'd think someone in her position would have professional help and this would not happen esp in public at an event with the queen of England


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just found this pic browsing Pinterest (I was just looking for recipe inspiration...I can't get a break apparently)...if I'm not totally mistaken this is from her outing with the Queen. Maybe she should have taken the hint and put on that hat.
> 
> View attachment 5266054


Looks to me like *Duchess Dummy *should’ve listened to her advisors and worn a hat!


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> Markdown is downright psycho in this old Larry King interview.



   I love this guy!
What this video shows, yet again, is that this narcissist cannot STAND anyone else getting any attention, even if it's to answer a simple question.  She acts utterly frustrated when he answers anything at all.  Attention whore to the max.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> "Comparing apples to...slightly rotten apples"



"Slightly rotten"???  I beg to differ.  I'd say they're so rotted, the worms are crawling out.


----------



## Hermes Zen

M has done it again! Lengthy article mostly about the history so including link if one wants more.  BUT that BEEECH M !  



> *Nightmare Week for London’s Last Press Lord: Name-Shamed by Meghan Markle and His Digital Genius Quits*





> Clive Irving
> Published Dec. 05, 2021 4:57AM ET



"As other British newspaper dynasties disappeared, the oldest kept on. But now, with print on life support, the fourth Lord Rothermere is losing the man who saved his empire.

It’s been an uncomfortably rocky week for London’s last surviving Press Lord, who normally keeps a very low profile. 
First, he was shame-named by Meghan Markle in her statement following her triumph in court against his London tabloid: “Today, the courts ruled in my favor—again—cementing that the _Mail on Sunday_, owned by Lord Jonathan Rothermere, has broken the law.” Then, on Friday, he lost the man who, in little more than a decade, built MailOnline, a digital business now valued at more than twice as much as his 125-year-old newspaper empire."


> https://www.thedailybeast.com/night...by-meghan-markle-and-his-digital-genius-quits


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> you'd think someone in her position would have professional help and this would not happen esp in public at an event with the queen of England



We've thought that often about her fashion mishaps, haven't we.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> M has done it again! Lengthy article mostly about the history so including link if one wants more.  BUT that BEEECH M !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "As other British newspaper dynasties disappeared, the oldest kept on. But now, with print on life support, the fourth Lord Rothermere is losing the man who saved his empire.
> 
> It’s been an uncomfortably rocky week for London’s last surviving Press Lord, who normally keeps a very low profile.
> First, he was shame-named by Meghan Markle in her statement following her triumph in court against his London tabloid: “Today, the courts ruled in my favor—again—cementing that the _Mail on Sunday_, owned by Lord Jonathan Rothermere, has broken the law.” Then, on Friday, he lost the man who, in little more than a decade, built MailOnline, a digital business now valued at more than twice as much as his 125-year-old newspaper empire."




Thanks for posting this. Haven’t finished the article, yet.  This part points to the real agenda -  all of this is about power.  H&M do not give a dammm about their reputation, this is all about *power*. Something royals understand very well.  Control the media and they control the world, right?

_For at least half of the last century most of Britain’s national newspapers were owned or run by families headed by Lords. To be more precise, their Lordships Astor, Beaverbrook, Camrose, Kemsley, Rothermere and Thomson. *Now Rothermere is the only one left standing. His dynasty is the oldest, based on the Daily Mail, founded in 1896.*

According to the conventional wisdom about the merciless newspaper game, particularly as practiced in London, Rothermere’s business should have been roadkill long ago.

So why didn’t that happen?_


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Prince Harry's swipe at Charles' Saudi donor: Duke of Sussex risks new family rift after claiming he 'expressed concerns' over controversial billionaire and severed ties with him BEFORE his father presented him with a CBE*

*Prince Harry 'severed ties' with billionaire at centre of 'cash for honours' scandal *
*The Duke of Sussex 'expressed concern' over Saudi billionaire's motives in 2015*
*Saudi was allegedly promised knighthood for donations to Prince Foundation*
*Michael Fawcett also resigned as the foundation's chief executive last month *
*It is alleged he helped organise honours for Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz*
*








						Prince Harry 'severed ties' with controversial billionaire before CBE
					

The Duke of Sussex said last night he had 'severed ties' with Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz a year before Prince Charles presented the controversial Saudi billionaire with a CBE.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## pukasonqo

But not enough concern to suggest that MM should not wear the diamond earrings gifted by a Saudi royal probably involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> But not enough concern to suggest that MM should not wear the diamond earrings gifted by a Saudi royal probably involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi


IIRC Hazard was given a pile of diamonds, some of which were set into those diamond earrings. I'm wondering WHY he was given a pile of diamonds.

Also, we are talking about Mr Prophecy here, who foretold the storming on Jan 6th, so I'm going to stick my neck out and predict many more instances of "I told you so" coming from him.

It's a good pairing: Prophet Hazard and Saint Methane.


----------



## rose60610

Typically, if one associates or is closely related to someone of high stature, shouldn't a little bit rub off?  Haz's brother is a future king who presents himself very well and IMO already has more personality, intelligence, ease with the public and relatability than his father, the next King. I'm not saying Charles is a clod, but William outshines him IMO. Kate is also a huge asset. Bottom line: for somebody whose brother and father are future kings, Haz appears to be a total loser. If Haz had no ties to anyone of importance, he'd probably do OK in the private sector taking orders from someone else, but would never be promoted to a leadership role. No wonder he fell for a vile gold digging idiot who made him feel important. I'll give Meghan credit for this: for being a D-Lister, she put on a great acting job to nail a prominent member of the BRF. If Haz had any brains he'd have seen through her charade. 

Were it not for the BRF who they enjoy berating, neither would be given the time of day. I guess they deserve each other. For the time being, Haz is stuck with her. I'd hope by now he realizes he'd been played for a fool. Which he is. Maybe Meghan is craftier than we thought. Haz can't go back to the BRF now, she's severed that tie pretty good. He's forced to pimp his name and royal lineage to score whatever deal he can. Meghan is enjoying the good life courtesy of the pinhead who can land lucrative contracts simply based on who he's related to, not who he is. Haz can afford to throw his own family under the bus since his DNA is BRF for the money whore hounds of the world who are only too glad to leverage his name to dollar sign profit. 

By the time the money whore hounds realize Haz is toxic, M&H will still have a stellar balance sheet. If they don't pi$$ it away. So that's questionable. I predict they'll divorce at some point. Meghan will be a rich divorcee, and marry a man who has a fortune by having invested in Amazon, Apple and Tesla from the proceeds of his small business and has been tapped to run for Governor or Senator of whatever state. During that political campaign, we can count on Meghan to say something soooo stupid she'll sink his chances of winning. Sooo, divorce #2 for Meghan. No worries!!! She'll get half of that man's fortune too! I think our favorite snake has her flow chart future planned out. I wonder how many pounds of facial filler she'll have gone through by then.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Typically, if one associates or is closely related to someone of high stature, shouldn't a little bit rub off?  Haz's brother is a future king who presents himself very well and IMO already has more personality, intelligence, ease with the public and relatability than his father, the next King. I'm not saying Charles is a clod, but William outshines him IMO. Kate is also a huge asset. Bottom line: for somebody whose brother and father are future kings, Haz appears to be a total loser. If Haz had no ties to anyone of importance, he'd probably do OK in the private sector taking orders from someone else, but would never be promoted to a leadership role. No wonder he fell for a vile gold digging idiot who made him feel important. I'll give Meghan credit for this: for being a D-Lister, she put on a great acting job to nail a prominent member of the BRF. If Haz had any brains he'd have seen through her charade.
> 
> Were it not for the BRF who they enjoy berating, neither would be given the time of day. I guess they deserve each other. For the time being, Haz is stuck with her. I'd hope by now he realizes he'd been played for a fool. Which he is. Maybe Meghan is craftier than we thought. Haz can't go back to the BRF now, she's severed that tie pretty good. He's forced to pimp his name and royal lineage to score whatever deal he can. Meghan is enjoying the good life courtesy of the pinhead who can land lucrative contracts simply based on who he's related to, not who he is. Haz can afford to throw his own family under the bus since his DNA is BRF for the money whore hounds of the world who are only too glad to leverage his name to dollar sign profit.
> 
> By the time the money whore hounds realize Haz is toxic, M&H will still have a stellar balance sheet. If they don't pi$$ it away. So that's questionable. I predict they'll divorce at some point. Meghan will be a rich divorcee, and marry a man who has a fortune by having invested in Amazon, Apple and Tesla from the proceeds of his small business and has been tapped to run for Governor or Senator of whatever state. During that political campaign, we can count on Meghan to say something soooo stupid she'll sink his chances of winning. Sooo, divorce #2 for Meghan. No worries!!! She'll get half of that man's fortune too! I think our favorite snake has her flow chart future planned out. I wonder how many pounds of facial filler she'll have gone through by then.


I'm really hoping your prediction won't come true. She isn't a catch and, in some photos, looks on her way to becoming a sugar granny. Are there that many rich gullible men out there who will fall for her wiles?


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think the BRF will always take H back.  I doubt they’ll restore his role as it was before.  No more balconies.  No more Clarence House lying in wait for him, etc.  

Part of me thinks that William did his take a walk recording in a rider to try to reach his brother.  Bringing up his history and shared family moments.  Talking about mental health, ending with the comment about “his best friend, or his wife”.


----------



## Sophisticatted

xincinsin said:


> I'm really hoping your prediction won't come true. She isn't a catch and, in some photos, looks on her way to becoming a sugar granny. Are there that many rich gullible men out there who will fall for her wiles?



She’s a narcissist. She thinks she cute.

I know someone who is the same way.  Nothing is worse than a senior citizen putting on mannerisms that might have been enticing in another, much younger, era of life.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> looks like she should have bought some of that stuff on qvc that colors your scalp


Oh my gosh do you mean like those little grey paint brushes?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sophisticatted said:


> She’s a narcissist. She thinks she cute.
> 
> I know someone who is the same way.  Nothing is worse than a senior citizen putting on mannerisms that might have been enticing in another, much younger, era of life.


You mean you think she’s going full Baby Jane?

well…she is infamous for ‘writing a letter to daddy’


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry's swipe at Charles' Saudi donor: Duke of Sussex risks new family rift after claiming he 'expressed concerns' over controversial billionaire and severed ties with him BEFORE his father presented him with a CBE*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'severed ties' with billionaire at centre of 'cash for honours' scandal *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'expressed concern' over Saudi billionaire's motives in 2015*
> *Saudi was allegedly promised knighthood for donations to Prince Foundation*
> *Michael Fawcett also resigned as the foundation's chief executive last month *
> *It is alleged he helped organise honours for Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'severed ties' with controversial billionaire before CBE
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said last night he had 'severed ties' with Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz a year before Prince Charles presented the controversial Saudi billionaire with a CBE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Does that mean he also returned Raptor's blood diamonds?


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry's swipe at Charles' Saudi donor: Duke of Sussex risks new family rift after claiming he 'expressed concerns' over controversial billionaire and severed ties with him BEFORE his father presented him with a CBE*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'severed ties' with billionaire at centre of 'cash for honours' scandal *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'expressed concern' over Saudi billionaire's motives in 2015*
> *Saudi was allegedly promised knighthood for donations to Prince Foundation*
> *Michael Fawcett also resigned as the foundation's chief executive last month *
> *It is alleged he helped organise honours for Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'severed ties' with controversial billionaire before CBE
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said last night he had 'severed ties' with Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz a year before Prince Charles presented the controversial Saudi billionaire with a CBE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Is he just randomly bringing up instances of when he claims to have done or seen things before others did?  Like his claim that he warned Jack Dorsey that there was going to be a riot on Jan. 6?!?!  Maybe he is hoping to get on Psychic Network or something.  He is really getting more and more annoying by the day.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does that mean he also returned Raptor's blood diamonds?



Alas, no.  They have a special exemption to do just as they please - it is only the little people (i.e. everyone else) who have to abide the rules according to the Harkles.  After all, if they didn’t tell everyone else how to live their lives, who would?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, not sure what's so hard to grasp here, Peter.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry's swipe at Charles' Saudi donor: Duke of Sussex risks new family rift after claiming he 'expressed concerns' over controversial billionaire and severed ties with him BEFORE his father presented him with a CBE*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'severed ties' with billionaire at centre of 'cash for honours' scandal *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'expressed concern' over Saudi billionaire's motives in 2015*
> *Saudi was allegedly promised knighthood for donations to Prince Foundation*
> *Michael Fawcett also resigned as the foundation's chief executive last month *
> *It is alleged he helped organise honours for Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'severed ties' with controversial billionaire before CBE
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said last night he had 'severed ties' with Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz a year before Prince Charles presented the controversial Saudi billionaire with a CBE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


This is such an UNFORCED error on the part of H, he cant blame the disclosure on

TABLOID PRESS - H&M leaked (tiaragate and bridesmaids dress crying) to Omid to fight the tabloids
MENTAL DISTRESS - talked to Oprah of IGNORED mental issues, likely as a justification for rude (bullying) behaviour to courtiers
LEGAL ISSUES - he is/was not required by law to disclose this, compare MM's disclosure of her faulty memory - she had to do that disclosure
FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES - he did not do this due to lack of funds
RACE

This disclosure is unique - NO OBVIOUS CAUSE, and a DIRECT PERSONAL attack on DADDY. (I now wonder if baby's skin color came up with DADDY, so now DADDY is in the crosshairs). WHY DO THIS DISCLOSURE  (NOW) ?????
H can never come back after this ... So much for the BRF long game of leaving the door open ... 
WHY DID H SLAM the door shut ? 

OK, I can think of all sorts of bad reasons for doing this (vengeance, stupidity). I want to name a mental disorder (where the patient does things to make the situation worse) ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The original tweets are both gone, but...hu?


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if she was role playing Princess Leia at the end of the first star wars film.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my gosh do you mean like those little grey paint brushes?
> View attachment 5266538


ha....I was thinking of this one


			https://www.qvc.com/Joan-Rivers-Great-Hair-Day-Fill-In-Powder-and-Root-Touch-Up-Stick.product.A396533.html


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if she was role playing Princess Leia at the end of the first star wars film.


oh my gosh , your comment ROTFL - now I cant unsee that graphic 

You made my day with this huge chuckle , thank you


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry is encouraging people to quit jobs that don’t bring them joy. How can he not see that this is not gonna go over well?!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry is encouraging people to quit jobs that don’t bring them joy. How can he not see that this is not gonna go over well?!


if only we all could afford to stop working if our work didn't bring joy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He truly doesn't realize how stupid he sounds, does he. Not all of us are sitting on 30 millions. Or is that a concealed offer to pay my bills because I really could use a break?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He truly doesn't realize how stupid he sounds, does he. Not all of us are sitting on 30 millions. Or is that a concealed offer to pay my bills because I really could use a break?



right
tell that to the garbage man and the housekeeper....


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if she was role playing Princess Leia at the end of the first star wars film.


I can hear her say it: "Omid Scoobie, you are my only hope..."


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> right
> tell that to the garbage man and the housekeeper....



Honestly might be the stupidest thing he’s said yet, and that’s saying something!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry is encouraging people to quit jobs that don’t bring them joy. How can he not see that this is not gonna go over well?!


I just saw this, he may need to be institutionalized. How does he expect people to pay their bills?


----------



## Chanbal

Why would a company hire a person without any credentials apart of being an arrogant, out of touch nincompoop? It's beyond my understanding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I just saw this, he may need to be institutionalized. How does he expect people to pay their bills?




OMG that shade in the second to last sentence. Angela is savage!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Why would a company hire a person without any credentials apart of being an arrogant, out of touch nincompoop? It's beyond my understanding.



Harry thinks that people that quit their jobs will have a daddy to pay their bills like he did. He is so out of touch with reality.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Why would a company hire a person without any credentials apart of being an arrogant, out of touch nincompoop? It's beyond my understanding.




I’m assuming they did it to get publicity, which they did, but at what cost? Hey betterup, you hired an idiot who was born into a historically important family.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry thinks that people that quit their jobs will have a daddy to pay their bills like he did. He is so out of touch with reality.


he's an idiot and I think this one will come back to bite him


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry thinks that people that quit their jobs will have a daddy to pay their bills like he did. He is so out of touch with reality.


I've often thought that people who are artists or others who love their work will work into old age while the rest of us want to retire.  It would be nice if everyone loved their work but most people work to support themselves and their families.  Of course H wouldn't understand that since he has been handed everything all his life.  This kind of crap makes me understand why some want the monarchy abolished.  Ungrateful angry stupid little man.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> ha....I was thinking of this one
> 
> 
> https://www.qvc.com/Joan-Rivers-Great-Hair-Day-Fill-In-Powder-and-Root-Touch-Up-Stick.product.A396533.html


Poor Joan, she wouldn’t be seen dead with that hair, you can’t cover up those patches with a statement necklace.


lanasyogamama said:


> Harry is encouraging people to quit jobs that don’t bring them joy. How can he not see that this is not gonna go over well?!


Marie Kondo needs to sue him for stealing her schtick!

Soon her nibs is going to be looking at him and wondering if _he_ sparks joy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You know, these two are not sparking joy AT ALL. Can we dispose of them?


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> he's an idiot and I think this one will come back to bite him


We can only hope. Unfortunately they seem to have fallen into that woke niche that can say and do anything and still be idolized by the other wokers. IMO


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I'm really hoping your prediction won't come true. She isn't a catch and, in some photos, looks on her way to becoming a sugar granny. *Are there that many rich gullible men out there who will fall for her wiles?*


Unfortunately, yes.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if she was role playing Princess Leia at the end of the first star wars film.


OMG I was just about to say the same thing!


----------



## kipp

Re: the quitting work issue---Aside from being clueless, it's also easier for Hapless Harry to say this because in the UK there is National Health Insurance, so quitting a job doesn't impact this. 
Since in the US health insurance is linked to one's employment (if one is lucky!) a lot of people stay at their job because of this benefit.


----------



## csshopper

Staggering this is coming from the mouth of a supposedly authentic espouser of Mental Health and a Career Counselor.  

"Quit your job" and exchange it for a lifestyle in not being able to pay your rent, put food on your table, buy diapers and formula for the baby, find health insurance in an age of pandemic, fill your car gas tank with all time high (in some areas) gas, plus pay the insurance and registration fees on the vehicle, keep the house warm and on it goes month after month.  

If a person had depression before, it will be nothing compared to Hazardous Handbag's version of "joy." 

I'm at a loss to understand how this totally uselessly preposterously loathsome  thumb sucking whining little turd is being paid to spew this crap. He should be confined to squat in a corner with the missus and ponder his navel in silence. Worthless, absolutely worthless!


----------



## bag-mania

Geez, he is simple. Just go do what you want and be free and everything will magically turn out wonderful for you somehow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## catlover46

Celebitchy is doubling down on the Kate hate today.





						Cele|bitchy | It sounds like Duchess Kate went berserk on Meghan before the wedding
					

Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.




					www.celebitchy.com


----------



## bag-mania

catlover46 said:


> Celebitchy is doubling down on the Kate hate today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cele|bitchy | It sounds like Duchess Kate went berserk on Meghan before the wedding
> 
> 
> Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.celebitchy.com



 I guess we know where all of the Meghan stans are clustering these days.


----------



## catlover46

bag-mania said:


> I guess we know where all of the Meghan stans are clustering these days.


Pretty sure they are being paid by her PR firm or they are paid bots.


----------



## bag-mania

catlover46 said:


> Pretty sure they are being paid by her PR firm or they are paid bots.



I don't know, those sounded real to me. There are plenty of delusional women out there.


----------



## K.D.

Don't think the poor bloke even has a job to quit as I don't think he is in any formal employment? There's a big legal difference where I'm from. ETA: between employment and 'odd jobs'


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry's swipe at Charles' Saudi donor: Duke of Sussex risks new family rift after claiming he 'expressed concerns' over controversial billionaire and severed ties with him BEFORE his father presented him with a CBE*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'severed ties' with billionaire at centre of 'cash for honours' scandal *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'expressed concern' over Saudi billionaire's motives in 2015*
> *Saudi was allegedly promised knighthood for donations to Prince Foundation*
> *Michael Fawcett also resigned as the foundation's chief executive last month *
> *It is alleged he helped organise honours for Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'severed ties' with controversial billionaire before CBE
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said last night he had 'severed ties' with Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz a year before Prince Charles presented the controversial Saudi billionaire with a CBE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *




See below:



pukasonqo said:


> But not enough concern to suggest that MM should not wear the diamond earrings gifted by a Saudi royal probably involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi


----------



## Chanbal

This is a funny one.


----------



## LittleStar88

Harry has always been in a position of privilege where he could literally quit anything he wanted to at any time with no financial repercussions.

He is completely out of touch. What a joke.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Prince Harry's swipe at Charles' Saudi donor: Duke of Sussex risks new family rift after claiming he 'expressed concerns' over controversial billionaire and severed ties with him BEFORE his father presented him with a CBE*
> 
> *Prince Harry 'severed ties' with billionaire at centre of 'cash for honours' scandal *
> *The Duke of Sussex 'expressed concern' over Saudi billionaire's motives in 2015*
> *Saudi was allegedly promised knighthood for donations to Prince Foundation*
> *Michael Fawcett also resigned as the foundation's chief executive last month *
> *It is alleged he helped organise honours for Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'severed ties' with controversial billionaire before CBE
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex said last night he had 'severed ties' with Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz a year before Prince Charles presented the controversial Saudi billionaire with a CBE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *





pukasonqo said:


> But not enough concern to suggest that MM should not wear the diamond earrings gifted by a Saudi royal probably involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi





papertiger said:


> See below:


I wonder where those stunning earrings are…


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> Staggering this is coming from the mouth of a supposedly authentic espouser of Mental Health and a Career Counselor.
> 
> "Quit your job" and exchange it for a lifestyle in not being able to pay your rent, put food on your table, buy diapers and formula for the baby, find health insurance in an age of pandemic, fill your car gas tank with all time high (in some areas) gas, plus pay the insurance and registration fees on the vehicle, keep the house warm and on it goes month after month.
> 
> If a person had depression before, it will be nothing compared to Hazardous Handbag's version of "joy."
> 
> *I'm at a loss to understand how this totally uselessly preposterously loathsome  thumb sucking whining little turd is being paid to spew this crap. He should be confined to squat in a corner with the missus and ponder his navel in silence. Worthless, absolutely worthless!*


   No really..... tell us how you really feel! Absolutely love this.


----------



## Chanbal

K.D. said:


> *Don't think the poor bloke even has a job to quit* as I don't think he is in any formal employment? There's a big legal difference where I'm from. ETA: between employment and 'odd jobs'


As someone else asked, _*how would he know*_*? *












						People stuck in jobs that don't bring them joy should QUIT, says Harry
					

The Duke of Sussex told US business magazine Fast Company that 'with self-awareness comes the need for change' and that the many job resignations during the pandemic 'aren't all bad'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I'm really hoping your prediction won't come true. She isn't a catch and, in some photos, looks on her way to becoming a sugar granny. *Are there that many rich gullible men out there who will fall for her wiles?*




Good point. I don't think she'll give-up on the most gullible rich man she could find until she finds a replacement.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> As someone else asked, _*how would he know*_*? *
> 
> View attachment 5267208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People stuck in jobs that don't bring them joy should QUIT, says Harry
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told US business magazine Fast Company that 'with self-awareness comes the need for change' and that the many job resignations during the pandemic 'aren't all bad'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Harry should stfu and sit down.  He wouldn't know, because he doesn't know, that's why he is stupid enough to be blabbering about random sh!t all over the place.  He is delusional and ill, I mean it!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> As someone else asked, _*how would he know*_*? *
> 
> View attachment 5267208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People stuck in jobs that don't bring them joy should QUIT, says Harry
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told US business magazine Fast Company that 'with self-awareness comes the need for change' and that the many job resignations during the pandemic 'aren't all bad'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Well, it worked for him. Being a pampered prince was too much work and it didn't make him happy so he quit. Now he sits around a luxurious mansion and every few weeks he tells everyone in the world how they should be living. Apparently he gets paid for it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Think H said quitting is good for your mental health to prove/cover up leaving the BRF was the right thing to do. Look at me!!!  M and I did this for our mental health and made out with all these multi-million dollar contracts/jobs! If you quit, you may be better off too (may not be by the millions but).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This is a funny one.




This guy is a treasure.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is a funny one.




This one's brilliant!


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Think H said quitting is good for your mental health to prove/cover up leaving the BRF was the right thing to do. Look at me!!!  M and I did this for our mental health and made out with all these multi-million dollar contracts/jobs! If you quit, you may be better off too (may not be by the millions but).



That's right. He's the most ungrateful quitter ever. 

Not everyone gets their entire over-privileged upbringing paid-for loan free, gets guaranteed work at their grandmother's firm, and then get's paid millions to diss/piss off all the people that helped him. 

Actually, I think too many people quit. What happened to fighting for your rights or a better life, or standing firm with others in the same predicament?


----------



## csshopper

Tomorrow night the USA's E!/NBC network's show, "The People's Choice" will air and the winners in 44 different categories will be revealed. Voting by the "People" is long over so we can't have any input, but sure can hope the compilation of lies, inferences and character assassinations perpetrated by Oprah and the Dumbartons does not emerge the winner in this category. Their smirky faces bleating about being loved would taint the holiday season.

Part of me wonders if putting them in the same category as Rihanna's Savage vs Feinty video was meant to be a sly joke. Sixth in line to the throne and his straggly extensioned wife in competition with RiRi's lingerie.  Seems totally bizarre but it does give Haz an opportunity to ogle RiRi (for research into the competition of course, wink/wink). The Body Language Guy has one video with Haz and RiRi where Haz is happy, smiling, slightly besotted, and in one picture with eyes firmly planted on her cleavage while she is attempting to make eye contact with him.

One characteristic I noticed, the other the nominees are hard working people who produce more than woke pronouncements as their "job,"  a fact that would be lost on the Dumbartons.

THE POP SPECIAL OF 2021

Billie Eilish: _The World's a Little Blurry _

Demi Lovato: _Dancing with the Devil 

Friends: The Reunion -_ _The One Where They Get Back Together _

Justin Bieber: _Our World 

Olympic Highlights with Kevin Hart & Snoop Dogg

Oprah with Meghan and Harry _

P!nk:_ All I Know So Far 

Savage x Fenty Show Vol. 3_


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> As someone else asked, _*how would he know*_*? *
> 
> View attachment 5267208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People stuck in jobs that don't bring them joy should QUIT, says Harry
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told US business magazine Fast Company that 'with self-awareness comes the need for change' and that the many job resignations during the pandemic 'aren't all bad'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hmm I guess all of those bullied employees did the right thing by quitting under SkidMarkle and her Handbag. Working for those hypocrites didn’t bring them joy! It’s too bad they couldn’t go on the BBC to tell the truth about their toxic employers. But the Suckazzes lawyer gets to!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Well, it worked for him. Being a pampered prince was too much work and it didn't make him happy so he quit. Now he sits around a luxurious mansion and *every few weeks *he tells everyone in the world how they should be living. Apparently he gets paid for it.


Did you mean 'every few days'? If he was mildly intelligent, he would refrain from talking about what he doesn't know.


----------



## sdkitty

Seen at check stand


----------



## mellibelly

I knew HazNoBalls was a moron, but now I think he’s low IQ. This is village idiot level.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG on Hazz's pearls of wisdom about quitting one's job.


----------



## Roxanna

So, Harry had his own Marie Antuanette moment. About the cake that is. It's just sad, how  he and his wife  are appearing  so self centered.   All that while lately press reports about Will make him very relatable.   It's just very much sad.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry branded ‘Mr Nonsense’ after telling people unhappy at work to quit
					

PRINCE Harry was mocked for talking nonsense last night after telling anyone unhappy at work to quit. The duke, who gave up royal duties to live in an £11million mansion, said walking out can be a …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

So - remember the old adage about it being better to stay silent and have people think you are stupid rather than speaking up and removing all doubt?!?!  I give you Exhibit A.  Or maybe Exhibit H!!  Gahhhhhh…


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## csshopper

[QUOTE="sdkitty, post: 34890360, member: 1486"
Seen at check stand
[/QUOTE]
sdkitty,
Thanks for posting this. 

1. The National Enquirer is evidently beyond any influence from Sunshine Sucks on what gets published.
2. Probably no year end performance bonuses for Sunshine Sucks from the Dumbartons this year because SS let this land in every major newsstand in America, supermarkets, convenience stores, drug stores, airports etc. Oh, my!


----------



## mellibelly

On another site their house was referred to as the Olive Garden Mansion and I’m now deceased


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> [QUOTE="sdkitty, post: 34890360, member: 1486"
> Seen at check stand


sdkitty,
Thanks for posting this. 

1. The National Enquirer is evidently beyond any influence from Sunshine Sucks on what gets published.
2. Probably no year end performance bonuses for Sunshine Sucks from the Dumbartons this year because SS let this land in every major newsstand in America, supermarkets, convenience stores, drug stores, airports etc. Oh, my!
[/QUOTE]
wish I could send it to H&M


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a funny one.




This So Africa tour was in Sept., 2019. They began their half-in/half-out life in Jan., 2020. So, within 3 months, she was gone. She is smiling and smirking here because she knew exactly what was going to happen. They really are a most unkind couple.   
Imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The BLG on Hazz's pearls of wisdom about quitting one's job.




One of those important life lessons that Hazzie has never learned [because he never had a job]: 
_“Your self worth comes from the constant exercise of your own values and principles, not from your professional output. Your professional output measures your market value, something external and doesn't have anything to do with your self worth, something internal."_


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> Seen at check stand


Didn't 6's wife say there were no tabloids in the US. Then does this make it true?


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Staggering this is coming from the mouth of a supposedly authentic espouser of Mental Health and a Career Counselor.
> 
> "Quit your job" and exchange it for a lifestyle in not being able to pay your rent, put food on your table, buy diapers and formula for the baby, find health insurance in an age of pandemic, fill your car gas tank with all time high (in some areas) gas, plus pay the insurance and registration fees on the vehicle, keep the house warm and on it goes month after month.
> 
> If a person had depression before, it will be nothing compared to Hazardous Handbag's version of "joy."
> 
> I'm at a loss to understand how this totally uselessly preposterously loathsome  thumb sucking whining little turd is being paid to spew this crap. He should be confined to squat in a corner with the missus and ponder his navel in silence. Worthless, absolutely worthless!


He is so out of touch with reality, that he has NO RIGHT to be dispensing useless, almost dangerous, advice to anyone, especially those in a country where he did not grow up, has barely lived in for a year, and in which he knows NOTHING.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tell it like it is, Angela. Celebrating everyone who won't let the public forget.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The BLG on Hazz's pearls of wisdom about quitting one's job.



Was anyone sitting at the table and suggesting quitting ones job was not so easy for the average person, or like Oprah, did they let him ramble on with no discussion and explanation.


----------



## purseinsanity

They are spinning their wheels trying to make it look like they have lofty ideals and goals, but nothing comes to fruition, primarily because these two truly live lives with no purpose whatsoever.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> They are spinning their wheels trying to make it look like they have lofty ideals and goals, but nothing comes to fruition, primarily because these two truly live lives with no purpose whatsoever.



This must be Hazzie’s answer to William’s walk and a punch at Charles. The thing he is too dim to understand - this just makes him look weaker. Undoubtedly H&M _think_ these ‘deep thoughts’ make them look smarter, but, no, nope, never gonna happen.


----------



## rose60610

So are all the servants-house-keepers, nannies, cook, chauffeur, security personnel, sparked with joy working for Meghan and Harry?  Can they all quit at the same time if they don't feel sparked with joy? 

Sure, there are jobs that make employees miserable, of course. Millions work under bad circumstances and slog it out day after day. If there were positive opportunities with equal or better pay available of course they'd take it. But because they have responsibilities and obligations to meet, they're often forced to return to their "spark no joy job". In other words, they have honor and put the families they must support first. They don't have the luxury of falling back on the many millions given to them by family members who they throw under the bus or pimping their fame out to the highest bidder. 

I suppose next we'll hear Clueless Prince suggesting to surgeons that if they're half way through a challenging iffy operation and are not sparked with joy, then dump the patient and pursue those tap dancing lessons or exotic trips. Meghan stalked Harry to the 50 million dollar wedding altar then supposedly turned suicidal. Are they really in any position to tell people what to do?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This So Africa tour was in Sept., 2019. They began their half-in/half-out life in Jan., 2020. So, within 3 months, she was gone. She is smiling and smirking here because she knew exactly what was going to happen. They really are a most unkind couple.
> Imo.


She is very aware of the damage she does. According to Neil Sean, she is now feeling invincible… Both of them are unkind and dangerous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> She is very aware of the damage she does. According to Neil Sean, she is now feeling invincible… Both of them are unkind and dangerous.
> View attachment 5267461



‘Ruling the world’ is not a job for the weak. H&M are weak lawsuit-happy complainers.  Surely, their reign of terror will end soon.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Ruling the world’ is not a job for the weak. H&M are weak lawsuit-happy complainers.  Surely, *their reign of terror will end soon.*


Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
					

Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...




					www.newidea.com.au


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> She is very aware of the damage she does. According to Neil Sean, she is now feeling invincible… Both of them are unkind and dangerous.


She should feel invincible... she's winning everything and nothing sticks. No one questions her, no one challenges her so she says what she wants... and is winning lawsuits to boot.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


The Crown is totally cool with him (Netflix$$$) but not Spencer. GTFO with the hypocrisy LOLOL! And they would NEVER be invited to the Oscars. I absolutely believe they’ve been blacklisted in Hollywood. She threw Jennifer Meyer under the bus with that merching scam and Jennifer is majorly connected here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I just hope he leaves this country.


----------



## Sophisticatted

In order to boycott the Oscars, you’d have to be invited first.  I guess this is their face-saving excuse for their lack of presence there.


----------



## Chanbal

Courtesy of The Sun: the couple of the year, Mr. Nonsense and Little Miss Forgetful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> She should feel invincible... she's winning everything and nothing sticks. No one questions her, no one challenges her so she says what she wants... and is winning lawsuits to boot.



It _appears_ that nothing is sticking, yet she is mocked whenever she parades around town in her ill- fitting clothes.  Imo stuff is sticking, doors are closing, invites are not arriving, etc.   Besides they have 2 kiddies under 3


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


LOLOL boycotting something they weren't invited to.  I also am continuing my boycotts of all formerly important events, such as the Grammys, Emmys, Tonys, Oscars, The Met Gala, BO's birthday party...just FYI.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


Let’s see if I got this right. They didn’t boycott Netflix for that horrendous Diana show but they have something to say about the Oscars? Maybe they are preempting in the event thru don’t get invited. These two are sick as fcuk in the head.


----------



## Lodpah

mellibelly said:


> The Crown is totally cool with him (Netflix$$$) but not Spencer. GTFO with the hypocrisy LOLOL! And they would NEVER be invited to the Oscars. I absolutely believe they’ve been blacklisted in Hollywood. She threw Jennifer Meyer under the bus with that merching scam and Jennifer is majorly connected here.


What did she do to her?


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> She is very aware of the damage she does. According to Neil Sean, she is now feeling invincible… Both of them are unkind and dangerous.
> View attachment 5267461


Ancient wisdom: pride comes before a fall.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I don't know, those sounded real to me. There are plenty of delusional women out there.


Why would anyone be jealous of a beautiful woman with cute kids and a designer wardrobe who is married to a Prince and lives in several palaces?

I’m more envious of H because he gets to be high priest of the true goddess.  


Chanbal said:


> As someone else asked, _*how would he know*_*? *
> 
> View attachment 5267208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People stuck in jobs that don't bring them joy should QUIT, says Harry
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told US business magazine Fast Company that 'with self-awareness comes the need for change' and that the many job resignations during the pandemic 'aren't all bad'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well to be fair, he speaks from some authority as far more of his staff have resigned than average and I’m sure they told him how much they hated the job on the way out.


----------



## mellibelly

Lodpah said:


> What did she do to her?



She had a merching deal with Meyer (one of many) and the palace shut it down. 









						Side Deal Silence - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] A private side deal recently led to a public embarrassment. This actress is looking for every opportunity possible to ingratiate herself with other prominent people… and to make money! One of those people who could help make that happen is this well-connected designer and business...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au



Oh you mean BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T INVITED? Seems to be a theme, no Windsor christening, no Christmas invitation.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au



And how does one if they are boycotting or if they weren’t even invited.  Can’t imagine anyone wanting them there in the first place - they have nothing to do with the motion picture industry.  And a purported bazillion dollar deal with Netflix doesn’t really count since it appears that they haven’t done a thing about producing content other than talking about it.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> And how does one if they are boycotting or if they weren’t even invited.  Can’t imagine anyone wanting them there in the first place - *they have nothing to do with the motion picture industry*.  And a purported bazillion dollar deal with Netflix doesn’t really count since it appears that they haven’t done a thing about producing content other than talking about it.


She does voice-overs, you know  
And she did try to seduce Hollywood to her side by inviting A-listers to her wedding. She likely thinks those invites guarantee her entry into the inner circles.


----------



## pukasonqo

Amalia: Heir to the Dutch throne keeps it normal at 18
					

Princess Amalia had an ordinary childhood and wants her life to continue that way.



					www.bbc.com
				




She has a right to 1.6 million pounds in income


----------



## needlv

Lol…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BK is on fire, in Germany they launched (together with tons of other chains) a vaccination campaign and the anti-vaxxers are losing it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BK is on fire, in Germany they launched (together with tons of other chains) a vaccination campaign and the anti-vaxxers are losing it.


Tbh, I agree with the anti-vaxxers here, BK’s specialty is making fast food not advising on healthcare.

I like my state and private industries as separate as possible in general. One of the things I don’t like about Harry is how he is still flogging his British-given title to the highest bidder in sunny CA.



pukasonqo said:


> Amalia: Heir to the Dutch throne keeps it normal at 18
> 
> 
> Princess Amalia had an ordinary childhood and wants her life to continue that way.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She has a right to 1.6 million pounds in income


This is interesting. What a sensible seeming girl with sensible parents too. 

I do think H has a point that maybe his parents put the spotlight on him and W a little young but at some point a person’s got to come to terms with a difficult childhood for their own sanity and it seems to me H loves salting his own wounds.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This is interesting. What a sensible seeming girl with sensible parents too.



I'm always stunned that one heir to a throne can ride her bicycle to school and another one can sit with his parents amongst the unwashed masses at a football game, yet some #6th's son can't attend a playgroup because his mother is too famous


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting article on Hazz's relationship with Charles. This picture from the article is precious and it should be analyzed by the Body Language Guy.   










						Prince Harry and his father Charles have 'barely spoken' in MONTHS
					

Prince Charles has been left 'deeply shocked and hurt' following Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview and repeated statements after their departure from public duties.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> An interesting article on Hazz's relationship with Charles. This picture from the article is precious and it should be analyzed by the Body Language Guy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and his father Charles have 'barely spoken' in MONTHS
> 
> 
> Prince Charles has been left 'deeply shocked and hurt' following Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview and repeated statements after their departure from public duties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



And I don't blame Charles one bit. I have never spoken to Harry as is, and at this point I feel I only want to talk to him after he gets a divorce, publicly apologizes, makes amends and never talks to the press (ETA: make that "in public") again


----------



## Chanbal

Source: @MaggieMobrules



https://twitter.com/MaggieMobrules


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


that is hilarious!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL boycotting something they weren't invited to.  I also am continuing my boycotts of all formerly important events, such as the Grammys, Emmys, Tonys, Oscars, The Met Gala, BO's birthday party...just FYI.


this thread is getting to be so entertaining


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Tbh, I agree with the anti-vaxxers here, BK’s specialty is making fast food not advising on healthcare.
> 
> I like my state and private industries as separate as possible in general. One of the things I don’t like about Harry is how he is still flogging his British-given title to the highest bidder in sunny CA.
> 
> 
> This is interesting. What a sensible seeming girl with sensible parents too.
> 
> I do think H has a point that maybe his parents put the spotlight on him and W a little young but at some point a person’s got to come to terms with a difficult childhood for their own sanity and it seems to me H loves salting his own wounds.


yes, he had a difficult childhood in that he lost his mom.  but nothing compared to poor, starving children, abused children, etc.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Hope you are right. They are now planning to boycott the Oscars.  Wow, it's amazing how important they think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to boycott the Oscars
> 
> 
> Kristen Stewart is tipped to score an Oscar nomination for her role as the late Princess Diana in the upcoming biopic, Spencer.  But, sources tell New Idea that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aren’t pleased with her rave reviews because it’s ruined their plans to attend the awards ceremony next...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au



from "New Idea":
"A source told New Idea that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are unhappy about it and are even considering not attending next year’s Oscars. 

“Some of the scenes in the film are pretty self-explanatory and Harry wouldn’t be happy with his portrayal of his mother. The couple are even considering lobbying the academy to abandon the film, which they certainly will never do,” the source said.

“It would definitely destroy their hopes of attending the Academy Awards next year if they had to see Kristen as Diana,” the source added. 

Spencer’s film premiered in theaters on November 5 last. The film’s story focuses on a brief period in Princess Diana’s life. Especially the three days spent Christmas at Sandringham in 1991 – a time when she considered divorcing Prince Charles after 10 years of marriage. 

British Royal biographer Penny Junor criticized Spencer’s film for portraying Princess Diana in a haphazard way. “Unfortunate for William, that’s all I can say. Diana should have been portrayed with some respect and dignity. I know William was there when Diana wasn’t happy, but I don’t think the film is factually true,” Junor said."



In other words, Meghan and Harry are angry someone beat them to the punch. Why should they care if someone else slams members of the BRF? Do they think they should have a monopoly on slamming and slandering their own family? M&H already accused the BRF of being racist and making her suicidal. And we're supposed to feel sorry for them because somebody didn't portray Diana in a good light? In M&H's future portrayal of Diana, are they going to give her a halo and angel wings while they portray the rest of the BRF as evil and racist? If M&H are boycotting the Oscars, will Oprah too? Meghan insists on cramming "HER TRUTH" down everyone's throat, is there no room for anyone else's "truth"?


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


>



I bet BetterUp is ecstatic having their very important Chief Impact Officer putting their essence of work like this, LOL. A bubble bursting another bubble.


----------



## bag-mania

The Oscars shouldn't be an issue. Why would they be invited to take away two seats from people who actually work in the film industry at their biggest event of the year? It wouldn't make any sense.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The Oscars shouldn't be an issue. Why would they be invited to take away two seats from people who actually work in the film industry at their biggest event of the year? It wouldn't make any sense.


you know that if they were given an opportunity to take the stage they would use it to preach


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> you know that if they were given an opportunity to take the stage they would use it to preach



Of course, but they would be competing with Hollywood royalty who also believe their views must be heard by the masses. They don't want to share time with those two, particularly since they already are getting more attention than almost anyone.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Of course, but they would be competing with Hollywood royalty who also believe their views must be heard by the masses. They don't want to share time with those two, particularly since they already are getting more attention than almost anyone.


well, I don't really mind if actors or other artists who have earned their place give their opinions....but I don't want to hear from these two


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, *I don't really mind if actors or other artists who have earned their place give their opinions.*...but I don't want to hear from these two



I do! One of the things I hated the most about award shows is when they would go off topic and start spouting their views. Show biz folks are not any more insightful than anyone else. All I want is for them to thank the academy and their family and their agent, and then move off of the stage so that the show doesn't run so long. I haven't watched one of those boring love fests in several years.


----------



## mellibelly

I loved Joaquin Phoenix’s oscar speech.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I do! One of the things I hated the most about award shows is when they would go off topic and start spouting their views. Show biz folks are not any more insightful than anyone else. All I want is for them to thank the academy and their family and their agent, and then move off of the stage so that the show doesn't run so long. I haven't watched one of those boring love fests in several years.


100%  They can even thank God while they're at it, but I don't need people, the majority of who are way less educated than I am, preaching to me about how I should think and behave.  Then watch these same hypocrites go do the opposite of whatever they've preached the rest of us to do or not do.  STFU and spout out the lines that someone wrote for you.


----------



## K.D.

Can confirm you hardly even noticed it was her unless you realise you're near her school and the person on the bicycle seems familiar to you. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm always stunned that one heir to a throne can ride her bicycle to school and another one can sit with his parents amongst the unwashed masses at a football game, yet some #6th's son can't attend a playgroup because his mother is too famous


----------



## Sophisticatted

One thing about Willem-Alexander and Maxima is that she really DIDN’T know he was a prince, initially.


----------



## Chanbal

The Aussies again…


----------



## Luvbolide

pukasonqo said:


> Amalia: Heir to the Dutch throne keeps it normal at 18
> 
> 
> Princess Amalia had an ordinary childhood and wants her life to continue that way.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She has a right to 1.6 million pounds in income



What a wonderfully normal family - well, except for that royalty thing!  Would love to be filing off a plane being greeted by the pilot only to find out he is the King!


----------



## Chanbal

Sophisticatted said:


> One thing about Willem-Alexander and Maxima is that she really DIDN’T know he was a prince, initially.


My 2 cents: Finding a prince or a rich husband was not on Maxima's priority list. She is an educated, independent, and beautiful woman with a genuine smile. Maxima & Willem-Alexander make a beautiful couple, and the Dutch are lucky to have her as queen.


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> She does voice-overs, you know
> And she did try to seduce Hollywood to her side by inviting A-listers to her wedding. She likely thinks those invites guarantee her entry into the inner circles.



You know, an odd red-headed man mentioned the voice-overs.  But I only heard about the one - have there been others?  Maybe we will hear more now that it is time for their annual boring podcast on Spotify.  Or has this year’s been cancelled?!?!


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Meghan stalked Harry to the 50 million dollar wedding altar


This is the most succinct description of their courtship I've ever heard.


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> You know, an odd red-headed man mentioned the voice-overs.  But I only heard about the one - have there been others?  Maybe we will hear more now that it is time for their annual boring podcast on Spotify.  Or has this year’s been cancelled?!?!



She has only had one voiceover gig. Bob Iger threw her a bone and gave her a Disney nature documentary narration job after Harry's embarrassing pitch at the UK _Lion King_ premiere.

They have successfully ignored Spotify for a year. That company will never get their money's worth out of them.


----------



## Luvbolide

Aminamina said:


> I bet BetterUp is ecstatic having their very important Chief Impact Officer putting their essence of work like this, LOL. A bubble bursting another bubble.



So far, the only reactions to H’s pronouncement about quitting jobs has been ridicule (duh!).  And yet so perfect for a ludicrous title as Chief Impact Officer.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> She has only had one voiceover gig. Bob Iger threw her a bone and gave her a Disney nature documentary narration job after Harry's embarrassing pitch at the UK _Lion King_ premiere.
> 
> They have successfully ignored Spotify for a year. That company will never get their money's worth out of them.



Yep, that is the voice-over that I heard about.  Meanwhile, Harry the Dim seems to be signing up for ridiculous jobs and things like working with the Aspen Group while apparently doing nothing about their Netflix and Spotify deals except bragging about them.  Now since he has never had a real job, maybe he hasn’t connected the fact that he and Raptor need to produce content -presumably accepted by Netflix and Spotify - in order to get paid by them.  So far, nothing from Netflix and their one poorly reviewed podcast from Spotify - a year ago.  MM & H seem totally unclear on the concept of working for pay.  No wonder he thinks quitting one’s job is no big deal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> Yep, that is the voice-over that I heard about.  Meanwhile, Harry the Dim seems to be signing up for ridiculous jobs and things like working with the Aspen Group while apparently doing nothing about their Netflix and Spotify deals except bragging about them.  Now since he has never had a real job, maybe he hasn’t connected the fact that he and Raptor need to produce content -presumably accepted by Netflix and Spotify - in order to get paid by them.  So far, nothing from Netflix and their one poorly reviewed podcast from Spotify - a year ago.  MM & H seem totally unclear on the concept of working for pay.  No wonder he thinks quitting one’s job is no big deal.



Your earlier post made me check their nonprofit's web site. It hasn't had a major update since Meghan's birthday 40X40 fiasco. Even their "news" blurbs have not had any new material added for a few weeks. They must have stopped paying their webmaster.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Your earlier post made me check their nonprofit's web site. It hasn't had a major update since Meghan's birthday 40X40 fiasco. Even their "news" blurbs have not had any new material added for a few weeks. They must have stopped paying their webmaster.



Oooh - great idea!  MM and H have definitely won the right to use the title of King and Queen of Zero Follow Through!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: Finding a prince or a rich husband was not on Maxima's priority list. She is an educated, independent, and beautiful woman with a genuine smile. Maxima & Willem-Alexander make a beautiful couple, and the Dutch are lucky to have her as queen.



I have to sheepishly admit that I didn’t know anything about the Dutch royal family, but wish we could hear more about them and less about people whose only accomplishments are being born into the BRF or marrying into the BRF.


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> This one's brilliant!


Her face has really changed a lot! And not for the better. To those who say she is such a natural beauty--gimme a break.


----------



## xeyes

Enty, pointing out that dumping the job you hate doesn’t mean the money stops flowing (it just flows to Hazbeen, not you):






						Blind Item #3
					

There is nothing like an out of touch foreign born permanent A list celebrity who says if your job isn't making you happy, then you should q...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> So far, the only reactions to H’s pronouncement about quitting jobs has been ridicule (duh!).  And yet so perfect for a ludicrous title as Chief Impact Officer.



Chief of Negative Impact, and he’s really skillful at it.


----------



## marietouchet

H‘s nonsense about how quitting your job is good … IMHO
This speech is a metaphor for himself, he is trying to convince himself that he is better off having left his job with the BRF 

I do note that H quit his job without having another one already lined up…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> An interesting article on Hazz's relationship with Charles. This picture from the article is precious and it should be analyzed by the Body Language Guy.
> View attachment 5267774
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and his father Charles have 'barely spoken' in MONTHS
> 
> 
> Prince Charles has been left 'deeply shocked and hurt' following Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview and repeated statements after their departure from public duties.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Oooooh, is Page 6 wrong?









						Prince Charles and Prince Harry are talking again, but it’s not ‘all roses’
					

A source tells Page Six that “channels of communication are open,” but they are not “sitting down for a heart-to-heart on the phone once a week.”




					pagesix.com
				




_Prince Charles has not seen his younger son, Prince Harry, in almost eight months — but they are back on speaking terms again, multiple sources tell Page Six.

The pair last saw each other in person at Prince Philip’s funeral in April, and Charles — who has spent several days this week in Barbados as it becomes a republic — has yet to meet his granddaughter Lilibet, born in July.

“Charles was hugely hurt when Harry and Meghan just dumped it on the family they were giving up their roles and moving abroad,” a royal insider told Page Six, referring to Harry and wife Meghan Markle’s decision to “quit” the family. “I don’t think [Harry and Charles] talked for a good while, but now the channels of communication are open.”

Still, the insider admitted, “I don’t think it’s all roses. It’s not like they are sitting down for a heart-to-heart on the phone once a week.”_


----------



## marietouchet

On H’s disavowal of The Saudi Businessperson (TSB), whose name I do not remember … my deep thoughts …
H threw dad under the bus, why , why why ???
This could be an knee jerk reaction eg vengeance or stupidity but could there be some other deeper reason ?
this disclosure had me thinking of Andrew’s interview that was supposed to nip the Epstein problem in the bud, but did the opposite by making A look like a fool

I advance the idea that maybe H is trying to nip a brewing problem in the bud - one we don’t exactly know about YET, something to do with TSB


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> I loved Joaquin Phoenix’s oscar speech.


Who was it who accepted an award by reading from the phone directory? 



Luvbolide said:


> You know, an odd red-headed man mentioned the voice-overs.  But I only heard about the one - have there been others?  Maybe we will hear more now that it is time for their annual boring podcast on Spotify.  Or has this year’s been cancelled?!?!


I suppose her audio book of the piece of garden furniture counts as audio work in her resume. There was that strange researcher who declared Methane's voice was the best of the best, but I don't see anyone beating a path to her door. 

Really wondering how the Netflix and Spotify contracts were worded. No deliverables? No timelines? Were there clauses saying that the toxic two could take 5 months parental leave and ignore obligations? Wasn't it a multi-year contract? Hopefully the companies didn't shell out too much in the upfront commitment.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> On H’s disavowal of The Saudi Businessperson (TSB), whose name I do not remember … my deep thoughts …
> H threw dad under the bus, why , why why ???
> This could be an knee jerk reaction eg vengeance or stupidity but could there be some other deeper reason ?
> this disclosure had me thinking of Andrew’s interview that was supposed to nip the Epstein problem in the bud, but did the opposite by making A look like a fool
> 
> I advance the idea that maybe H is trying to nip a brewing problem in the bud - one we don’t exactly know about YET, something to do with TSB


Perhaps Hazard and Methane have their own TSB whom they held hands with for diamonds. So they are quickly disavowing PC's TSB and calling attention to the situation to divert attention and minimize any scrutiny of their own dealings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA:  all my opinion, of course 



marietouchet said:


> H threw dad under the bus, why , why why ???



To destabilize the BRF. Imo H&M are *only *about power.  I used to think it was money. Nah, they have a ready supply - Charles never really cut them off, neither will William.  They know the money will come to them because they can always write a book, do a streaming show, call the BRF, etc. Money is not the issue - he has money, that is why he willingly walked away. He wants power - power to control the media, power to control what we little people think and do.



xincinsin said:


> Really wondering how the Netflix and Spotify contracts were worded. No deliverables? No timelines? Were there clauses saying that the toxic two could take 5 months parental leave and ignore obligations? Wasn't it a multi-year contract? Hopefully the companies didn't shell out too much in the upfront commitment.



They are besties with the CEO so there are no timelines, no rules, probably not much in the way of cash either.  All promises written on rainbows and delivered with unicorns.  We need to understand that these kind of people operate in a different world than the rest of us.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> They are besties with the CEO so there are no timelines, no rules, probably not much in the way of cash either.  All promises written on rainbows and delivered with unicorns.  We need to understand that these kind of people operate in a different world than the rest of us.


True, that could work if these are not publicly listed companies (I have no idea). Then they could avoid auditing and shareholder queries.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> True, that could work if these are not publicly listed companies (I have no idea). Then they could avoid auditing and shareholder queries.



I don’t know either.  Based on all I have read, people at this level do not sign documents like the rest of us do.  They don’t deal with pesky details like contracts. They have privileges that are beyond the commoners.  Look at Andrew, etc.


----------



## purseinsanity

Luvbolide said:


> So far, the only reactions to H’s pronouncement about quitting jobs has been ridicule (duh!).  And yet so perfect for a ludicrous title as Chief Impact Officer.


I guess Haz wasn't happy with the Spotify situation and so took his own advice and quit?  Maybe return the money you were fronted, if that's the case HazBeen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Chief of Negative Impact, and he’s really skillful at it.


I think *Chief of No Impact* is appropriate as well.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, is Page 6 wrong?
> _Prince Charles has not seen his younger son, Prince Harry, in almost eight months — but they are back on speaking terms again,* multiple sources tell Page Six*.
> 
> The pair last saw each other in person at Prince Philip’s funeral in April, and Charles — who has spent several days this week in Barbados as it becomes a republic — has yet to meet his granddaughter Lilibet, born in July.
> 
> “Charles was hugely hurt when Harry and Meghan just dumped it on the family they were giving up their roles and moving abroad,” a royal insider told Page Six, referring to Harry and wife Meghan Markle’s decision to “quit” the family. “I don’t think [Harry and Charles] talked for a good while, but now the channels of communication are open.”
> 
> Still, the insider admitted, “I don’t think it’s all roses. It’s not like they are sitting down for a heart-to-heart on the phone once a week.”_


Page Six must be right, since its information comes from multiple sources (MM, Pump Pump, Miss Little Forgetful, Hazz, Mr. Nonsense, Ginger Guru… )


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I guess Haz wasn't happy with the Spotify situation and so took his own advice and *quit*?  Maybe return the money you were fronted, if that's the case HazBeen.



Quit??? Methinks you jest.
Nooooo, not this genius, he _*stepped back*_*,* never quit, never walk away, never step down.
  The guy is just brilliant, brilliant with his use of language









						Prince Harry explains why he stepped back from royal family
					

Prince Harry spoke with James Corden about why he and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, decided to break with the British royal family. "It was never walking away," Harry said.




					www.today.com
				



_"It was never walking away," Harry said. "*It was stepping back rather than stepping down.* It was a really difficult environment, as I think a lot of people saw. We all know what the British press can be like, and it was destroying my mental health.

ETA:  _and AB did not pull the trigger, right?


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  all my opinion, of course
> 
> 
> 
> To destabilize the BRF. Imo H&M are *only *about power.  I used to think it was money. Nah, they have a ready supply - Charles never really cut them off, neither will William.  They know the money will come to them because they can always write a book, do a streaming show, call the BRF, etc. Money is not the issue - he has money, that is why he willingly walked away. He wants power - power to control the media, power to control what we little people think and do.
> 
> 
> 
> They are besties with the CEO so there are no timelines, no rules, probably not much in the way of cash either.  All promises written on rainbows and delivered with unicorns.  We need to understand that these kind of people operate in a different world than the rest of us.



I think you’re right that they want power, but I wouldn’t discount the money angle at all - I think they want a lot more money than they have. They have many millions, but it’s a pittance compared to some of the people they would like to hang out with - Serena Williams, Oprah etc., who have hundreds of millions or even billions. Once you buy $14M mansions, pay a full staff of people to run around for you, the security they pretend to required, private jets everywhere, wardrobe where every items costs no less than $3K, constant beauty treatments in the top clinics etc. you run through money very quickly, especially in a place like CA where cost of living is very high. A couple of millions a year from Charles, which would be an astoundingly high amount for normal people, would not last them very long. Their property tax alone is in the range of $150K and you don’t even get a tax credit for that…


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> I think you’re right that they want power, but I wouldn’t discount the money angle at all - I think they want a lot more money than they have. They have many millions, but it’s a pittance compared to some of the people they would like to hang out with - Serena Williams, Oprah etc., who have hundreds of millions or even billions. Once you buy $14M mansions, pay a full staff of people to run around for you, the security they pretend to required, private jets everywhere, wardrobe where every items costs no less than $3K, constant beauty treatments in the top clinics etc. you run through money very quickly, especially in a place like CA where cost of living is very high. A couple of millions a year from Charles, which would be an astoundingly high amount for normal people, would not last them very long. Their property tax alone is in the range of $150K and you don’t even get a tax credit for that…



You could be right. Imo they didn’t buy the house, probably aren’t paying much for it. They have access to many millions of dollars and services. The last thing Charles would want is for Hazzie to be on the streets (figuratively). It would bring up all the Camilla drama which C&C wish to avoid. Hazz holds most of the cards here, Charles knows it.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## bellecate

Things that make you go hmmmmm.


----------



## Traveladdie

Chanbal said:


>



Samantha Markle? Sorry I went so far back, I am just catching up on this thread. Suffice to say, my feelings on the Prince and Duchess are not reflected in most of the posts. It's OK, I am not pressed about that. It's still a fun thread. But Samantha Markle? She makes bank by speaking to the UK media. I read "Finding Freedom" and it was so clear they collaborated on that book. The amount of detail was extraordinary.   I don't believe they did anything different than many other famous people regarding tell-all books, however, they looked ridiculous when it came out that they had tried to circumvent officially being a part of it. I loved the book though, mostly because I like them so much. I hope Harry is planning a time to head home if the Queen is as ill as she appears to be. Awesome that Charles is finally on speaking terms with his youngest son. It is my dear wish that the entire family reconcile to a manageable degree soon.


----------



## xincinsin

tiktok said:


> I think you’re right that they want power, but I wouldn’t discount the money angle at all - I think they want a lot more money than they have. They have many millions, but it’s a pittance compared to some of the people they would like to hang out with - Serena Williams, Oprah etc., who have hundreds of millions or even billions. Once you buy $14M mansions, pay a full staff of people to run around for you, the security they pretend to required, private jets everywhere, wardrobe where every items costs no less than $3K, constant beauty treatments in the top clinics etc. you run through money very quickly, especially in a place like CA where cost of living is very high. A couple of millions a year from Charles, which would be an astoundingly high amount for normal people, would not last them very long. Their property tax alone is in the range of $150K and you don’t even get a tax credit for that…


They likely churn most income through Archewell to avoid taxes. Archewell would provide its founders with a dwelling, staff and transport as befit their station in life, plus a meagre non-taxable salary of course. The jewellery & apparel are business expenses. 

One of the megachurch pastors in Singapore enjoyed a lavish million dollar lifestyle that way. And till today, after a prison term for fraud, he still has supporters who explain away his life of crime as a test from God.

I wouldn't be surprised if Methane and Hazard quietly arrange dual citizenship somewhere so that they can take a quick trip if ever they come under investigation.


----------



## Traveladdie

charlottawill said:


> Lots of families face logistical challenges at the holidays. If he really wanted to Harry could go to England and Meghan could spend Christmas with her mother and the kids. They are too young to miss his presence for a few days and this could be the Queen's last Christmas. Or he could spend Christmas Eve and morning with Meghan and the kids and get an afternoon flight to London in time to spend Boxing Day with his family. But that's probably too logical for them. Anything for the drama. And what Meghan wants, Meghan gets.


I am disappointed they are not spending any part of Christmas in England. How do we know that Meghan wanted to skip the festivities?


----------



## Traveladdie

gracekelly said:


> Thinking that Meghan keeps Harry away from his granny as a form of punishment and control. Punishing because of how she was wronged and controlling to keep Harry from straying too far afield.


Goodness! Again, how do we know this to be true? It seems accepted as fact. Would love to read any article with sourcing on this topic. Thanks!


----------



## Kevinaxx

purseinsanity said:


> He is so out of touch with reality, that he has NO RIGHT to be dispensing useless, almost dangerous, advice to anyone, especially those in a country where he did not grow up, has barely lived in for a year, and in which he knows NOTHING.


Honestly if he was SMART about it he would have said this is now the time to look for work that isn’t so taxing on your mental health.

that one should make mental health a priority same as benefits of 401k match, etc.

and the silver lining now in covid is that it’s become an employees’ market (rare) thanks to the government stimulus and QE (trust me they weren’t intending for this to happen)

and so if you feel tired, exhausted, don’t give up. Look for work that will not only pay the bills (and then some) but look for work where you make your mental health a priority.

but in order for him to actually articulate this he would need to use more than a few brain cells and normally I wouldn’t make these types of assumptions (that he doesn’t have any to spare) but how else does one explain his place under Meghan’s thumb?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Traveladdie said:


> Goodness! Again, how do we know this to be true? It seems accepted as fact. Would love to read any article with sourcing on this topic. Thanks!



I have always found Google to be a tremendous help. Give it a try


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Many thanks and congratulations to members, who posted nicknames for The List during the last few days.         

@bellecate 
Your #2, Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy.  

@Luvbolide
Your #4, King and Queen of Zero Follow Through.  

@Aimee3
Your #6, Duchess Dummy.  

@jelliedfeels
Your #6, A whiny, balding Gargoyle. 
Your #7, A c-grade f-boy. Good for a Gold Medal.
Your #8, High priest of the true goddess.  



@rose60610
Your #9, Clueless Prince.  

@purseinsanity
Your #25, Chief of No Impact.  



@csshopper
Your #26, This totally uselessly preposterously loathsome thumb sucking whining little turd. 
Your #27, Chief Negative Impact Officer.
Your #28, Chief of Negative Impact.   





@Chanbal
Your #30, Mr. Nonsense.
Your #31, Ginger Guru.  




@xincinsin
Your #30, Omegcron. Yes, our dear M is like a deadly and tenacious virus.
Your #31, Mr Prophecy.
Your #32, Prophet Hazard and Saint Methane.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Quit??? Methinks you jest.*
> Nooooo, not this genius, he _*stepped back*_*,* never quit, never walk away, never step down.
> The guy is just brilliant, brilliant with his use of language
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry explains why he stepped back from royal family
> 
> 
> Prince Harry spoke with James Corden about why he and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, decided to break with the British royal family. "It was never walking away," Harry said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _"It was never walking away," Harry said. "*It was stepping back rather than stepping down.* It was a really difficult environment, as I think a lot of people saw. We all know what the British press can be like, and it was destroying my mental health.
> 
> ETA:  _and AB did not pull the trigger, right?


You're right.  Forgive me.


----------



## Traveladdie

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have always found Google to be a tremendous help. Give it a try


I just did and found nothing but would be very interested in reading something. I did find this quote from Andrew Morton:


*Despite common beliefs that Meghan was the one who pulled Harry away from royal life, author Andrew Morton says Harry wanted to be in Hollywood more so than people think.

“Meghan Markle is blamed for Harry coming to Hollywood,” Morton told Good Morning America. “When ironically, it was Harry who was very keen to do an interview with Oprah.”

He added, “Sadly for Meghan, there’s a narrative that’s built up that’s wholly negative towards her.”*

_*Morton also claimed that Harry made many decisions about their lives while they were still senior royals, and Meghan reportedly even “deferred to him.” However, the public would often blame her when things went awry.*_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Many thanks and congratulations to members, who posted nicknames for The List during the last few days.
> 
> @bellecate
> Your #2, Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy.
> 
> @Luvbolide
> Your #4, King and Queen of Zero Follow Through.
> 
> @Aimee3
> Your #6, Duchess Dummy.
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> Your #6, A whiny, balding Gargoyle.
> Your #7, A c-grade f-boy. Good for a Gold Medal.
> Your #8, High priest of the true goddess.
> View attachment 5268219
> 
> 
> @rose60610
> Your #9, Clueless Prince.
> 
> @purseinsanity
> Your #25, Chief of No Impact.
> View attachment 5268224
> 
> 
> @csshopper
> Your #26, This totally uselessly preposterously loathsome thumb sucking whining little turd.
> Your #27, Chief Negative Impact Officer.
> Your #28, Chief of Negative Impact.
> View attachment 5268232
> View attachment 5268238
> View attachment 5268241
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> Your #30, Mr. Nonsense.
> Your #31, Ginger Guru.
> View attachment 5268256
> View attachment 5268257
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> Your #30, Omegcron. Yes, our dear M is like a deadly and tenacious virus.
> Your #31, Mr Prophecy.
> Your #32, Prophet Hazard and Saint Methane.
> View attachment 5268260
> View attachment 5268261
> View attachment 5268262


Thank you @Maggie Muggins
Ginger Guru came from this nice post.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Thank you @Maggie Muggins
> Ginger Guru came from this nice post.



Yes, I've read it, but is this just a hint that you want him to become an Honorary TPF Member?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> You're right.  Forgive me.



Eeeeeek, please forgive me.  My post was inappropriate. I loved your post and meant no disrespect.  Humble apologies.
ETA:  I’m awful with my online sarcasm.  I should avoid it.  Please ignore my post. Thank you.


----------



## csshopper

People’s Choice award for “The Pop Special of 2021” has been announced and Oprah and her playmates did not win. In awards competitions where it was nominated, the Interview is 0 out of 2, having previously been a loser at the Golden Globes.


----------



## Lodpah

He's just a shadow of a man who is shrinking, while her phoenix is rising (not in a good way).


----------



## Lodpah

Saw online Sunshine Sachs being called "Reputation Management Consultants." How appropriate lol. Even they are being mocked.


----------



## Lodpah

Saw this from a poster on Quora:

Why do you dislike Meghan Markle so much? None of you know her. 
I didn't know Hitler either but he was still a bastard. Don't know Markle but she's still a *****. Not worth my time.

That sounds about right. Quite appropriate too since her handbag dressed up as a Nazi.


----------



## Jktgal

Traveladdie said:


> Goodness! Again, how do we know this to be true? It seems accepted as fact. Would love to read any article with sourcing on this topic. Thanks!


Ummm, physics? He can get on a jet and fly for a polo game but can not fly to UK? No other explanation but someone took his wings and shoved them in the bunker.


----------



## xincinsin

Traveladdie said:


> I am disappointed they are not spending any part of Christmas in England. How do we know that Meghan wanted to skip the festivities?


I don't see any reason for them to return. They have given plenty of reasons why they wanted to leave (conveniently forgetting their original half-in/half-out proposal) and Hazard said he was triggered by the very sight of London. While it would be nice if feuding families could make up, I doubt the BRF would open their doors if Hazard turned up with a film crew.

After all their bashing of the UK relatives and the Markles, I'd rather see Methane celebrate Christmas with her mother and the Ragland side of the family. I know you like her and I know you know I don't, but it would go a long way to show her as less mercenary if she actually reached out to family whom she does not seem to actively dislike.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> She has only had one voiceover gig. Bob Iger threw her a bone and gave her a Disney nature documentary narration job after Harry's embarrassing pitch at the UK _Lion King_ premiere.
> 
> They have successfully ignored Spotify for a year. That company will never get their money's worth out of them.


Yes and what’s really strange is I assumed they would do the easy thing and just lend their names to a load of fledgling podcasts to give them brand recognition aka the ‘celeb x presents’ model but they haven’t even done that  

Everyone at that ‘charity’ must be clocking in, munching on homemade lemon cake , maybe get someone banned on Twitter for no reason.


xincinsin said:


> They likely churn most income through Archewell to avoid taxes. Archewell would provide its founders with a dwelling, staff and transport as befit their station in life, plus a meagre non-taxable salary of course. The jewellery & apparel are business expenses.
> 
> One of the megachurch pastors in Singapore enjoyed a lavish million dollar lifestyle that way. And till today, after a prison term for fraud, he still has supporters who explain away his life of crime as a test from God.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if Methane and Hazard quietly arrange dual citizenship somewhere so that they can take a quick trip if ever they come under investigation.


you make a very good point here….  Religion is an Avenue they have yet to explore.

I remember M discovered her deeply held Anglican faith straight after she discovered what not being Anglican meant for your titles and inheritance.




Traveladdie said:


> Goodness! Again, how do we know this to be true? It seems accepted as fact. Would love to read any article with sourcing on this topic. Thanks!


I would say for myself I don’t know any of these things to be absolutely true. We are all just giving our reading of the situation. 

 I could send you some articles that offer different reads on the scenarios but as far as I can see these people are just commenting their POV as well as neither the royals nor H&M themselves have offered any explanations (as is their wont).

In brief, I think I am right but you are welcome not to agree with me and to post your own thoughts. All gossip threads are speculative.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> He's just a shadow of a man who is shrinking, while her phoenix is rising (not in a good way).
> View attachment 5268324



She is like one of these vampires that suck you dry to thrive. I have a few of these people and I'll be exhausted after a few hours with them...can't imagine being married to one.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

Does anyone else find it suspicious that H released PR saying he had cut ties with the Saudi billionaire and warned PC?  Is that to get ahead of a bigger story?

because Clarence House denied H had done any such warning….

For those that want to get behind the paywall, you can click this link.



			archive.ph


----------



## needlv

… no surprise with this poll either…


----------



## needlv

… and ouch… at least people are seeing through the charade…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Does anyone else find it suspicious that H released PR saying he had cut ties with the Saudi billionaire and warned PC?  Is that to get ahead of a bigger story?
> 
> because Clarence House denied H had done any such warning….
> 
> For those that want to get behind the paywall, you can click this link.
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Knowing H&M lie, it is so easy to believe the Palace. 
Does anyone believe MM has returned _those_ earrings or any other jewelry?

ETA:  Ellen won  








						Ellen DeGeneres, Portia de Rossi, Kris Jenner, and Corey Gamble MATCH
					

Ellen DeGeneres and her wife Portia de Rossi matched outfits with pals Kris Jenner and boyfriend Corey Gamble as they hung out at the People's Choice Awards on Tuesday night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

csshopper said:


> People’s Choice award for “The Pop Special of 2021” has been announced and Oprah and her playmates did not win. In awards competitions where it was nominated, the Interview is 0 out of 2, having previously been a loser at the Emmys.


correction made: previous loss was at the Emmy Awards, not the Golden Globe awards.


----------



## Chanbal

I believe this.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps Hazard and Methane have their own TSB whom they held hands with for diamonds. So they are quickly disavowing PC's TSB and calling attention to the situation to divert attention and minimize any scrutiny of their own dealings.


That is my suspicion EXACTLY
Arguably, they accepted favors from lots eg Tyler Perry, David Foster, the owner of the Vancouver house - all while using Metropolitan Police security - it is not clear that any of that is above board, they may also have a TSB

AMUSING FACTOID in 2021, in the US, you can give up to  $15k to a friend without that friend having to report the gift as income thus paying federal gift tax, the value of a seat on a private plane is well above $15k

How many friends sent planes to pick the Harkles?


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> … and ouch… at least people are seeing through the charade…




Ha! I'm going to think of him as Harry Antoinette for the rest of the day.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ha! I'm going to think of him as *Harry Antoinette* for the rest of the day.


haha, and you will get one more award from @Maggie Muggins


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> haha, and you will get one more award from @Maggie Muggins



Well, we have to give credit to Chita from ChitaCartoons. The illustration of Harry in a gown makes it perfect.


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> … no surprise with this poll either…



I know the history and as former mistress, wife #2, she will always be a pariah to some, but it saddens me to see Camilla so low in ranking. I have come to admire much about her, she never preaches, never demands, never pushes herself into the news, works hard for her patronages, provides desperately needed loving support for Prince Charles, is always impeccably and appropriately groomed, and the Royal Family does not need to worry she will embarrass them. She  understands her aging thickening body needs to be dressed tastefully and has obviously had the good sense to listen to professional advice from experts in selecting and probably tailoring her garments, unlike her, IMO, increasingly frumpy mess of a daughter-in-law who at age 44 (that was a revelation, but not surprising since she lies about everything else) is a blight on fashion in her ill fitting, ill chosen clothing.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I believe this.



Eh? I don’t understand this. He’s got a diplomatic passport and I assume she has too; not to mention an existing connection to the commonwealth. He could start investing in Africa whenever he wanted. I also think that’s way too much planning and collateral for him to be interested in. He’s more ‘pay me to shake hands at your gala.’


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> … and ouch… at least people are seeing through the charade…



Thanks @needlv for this image of JCMH that unfortunately I'll never be able to forget and so to protect my eyes and my sanity, I've shrunk it to half its original size. However, many thanks for your #8 nickname, Harry Antoinette. Congratulations.  Also, help yourself to cake of your choice for this gorgeous picture. Cheers!


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Eh? I don’t understand this. He’s got a diplomatic passport and I assume she has too; not to mention an existing connection to the commonwealth. He could start investing in Africa whenever he wanted. I also think that’s way too much planning and collateral for him to be interested in. He’s more ‘pay me to shake hands at your gala.’


Africa has been attracting a lot of interest from several powers in the last several years. The country has enormous wealth and I do believe the Montecitos are after big money. I agree with you, he’s more ‘pay me to shake hands at your gala,’ but she seems more ambitious than that.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> I know the history and as former mistress, wife #2, she will always be a pariah to some, but it saddens me to see Camilla so low in ranking. I have come to admire much about her, she never preaches, never demands, never pushes herself into the news, works hard for her patronages, provides desperately needed loving support for Prince Charles, is always impeccably and appropriately groomed, and the Royal Family does not need to worry she will embarrass them. She  understands her aging thickening body needs to be dressed tastefully and has obviously had the good sense to listen to professional advice from experts in selecting and probably tailoring her garments, unlike her, IMO, increasingly frumpy mess of a daughter-in-law who at age 44 (that was a revelation, but not surprising since she lies about everything else) is a blight on fashion in her ill fitting, ill chosen clothing.



Camilla would be my choice to lift a few with. I think she would be a hoot


----------



## sdkitty

Traveladdie said:


> I just did and found nothing but would be very interested in reading something. I did find this quote from Andrew Morton:
> 
> 
> *Despite common beliefs that Meghan was the one who pulled Harry away from royal life, author Andrew Morton says Harry wanted to be in Hollywood more so than people think.
> 
> “Meghan Markle is blamed for Harry coming to Hollywood,” Morton told Good Morning America. “When ironically, it was Harry who was very keen to do an interview with Oprah.”
> 
> He added, “Sadly for Meghan, there’s a narrative that’s built up that’s wholly negative towards her.”*
> 
> _*Morton also claimed that Harry made many decisions about their lives while they were still senior royals, and Meghan reportedly even “deferred to him.” However, the public would often blame her when things went awry.*_


so if this is true (and I have no idea if this guy is credible) then H is more of an AH than we thought


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> … no surprise with this poll either…





csshopper said:


> I know the history and as former mistress, wife #2, she will always be a pariah to some, but it saddens me to see Camilla so low in ranking. I have come to admire much about her, she never preaches, never demands, never pushes herself into the news, works hard for her patronages, provides desperately needed loving support for Prince Charles, is always impeccably and appropriately groomed, and the Royal Family does not need to worry she will embarrass them. She  understands her aging thickening body needs to be dressed tastefully and has obviously had the good sense to listen to professional advice from experts in selecting and probably tailoring her garments, unlike her, IMO, increasingly frumpy mess of a daughter-in-law who at age 44 (that was a revelation, but not surprising since she lies about everything else) is a blight on fashion in her ill fitting, ill chosen clothing.


Poor Charles, he doesn't look very popular either. The Montecito couple has not been helping with his image. How rude and deceiving this couple has been. 

*Charles had been impressed by the American actress's apparent willingness to learn the royal ropes and, as a gesture of encouragement, he asked her to attend a Palace exhibition marking 50 years since his investiture as Prince of Wales. But, having accepted the invitation, she then pulled out, reportedly unhappy that television cameras would be recording the occasion.*









						Prince Charles's friends fear his rift with Harry may be damaging
					

RICHARD KAY: Unlike his awkward and tense relationship with Prince William, Charles enjoyed a closeness with Harry that he treasured.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Nothing new here, just make sure you don't sign up for the apparently useless $680 app…   







						Blind Item #3
					

There is nothing like an out of touch foreign born permanent A list celebrity who says if your job isn't making you happy, then you should q...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Africa has been attracting a lot of interest from several powers in the last several years. The country has enormous wealth and I do believe the Montecitos are after big money. I agree with you, he’s more ‘pay me to shake hands at your gala,’ but she seems more ambitious than that.



The BRF owns a considerable amount of land throughout Africa.  Without getting into the politics, it is not too surprising Charles, William and Hazzie are making the environment their issue — they have an agenda that is not about _being green._ There is much more to the story, but that’s all I will say here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Poor Charles, he doesn't look very popular either. The Montecito couple has not been helping with his image. How rude and deceiving this couple has been.
> 
> *Charles had been impressed by the American actress's apparent willingness to learn the royal ropes and, as a gesture of encouragement, he asked her to attend a Palace exhibition marking 50 years since his investiture as Prince of Wales. But, having accepted the invitation, she then pulled out, reportedly unhappy that television cameras would be recording the occasion.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles's friends fear his rift with Harry may be damaging
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Unlike his awkward and tense relationship with Prince William, Charles enjoyed a closeness with Harry that he treasured.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



_Criticising his father — and by implication the Queen — for the way he was raised is one thing. But the broadside he launched questioning the 'motives' of Dr Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz and highlighting his own 'concerns' about the Saudi businessman, is an implicit challenge to Charles's judgment.

Such a rebuke — especially if it continues — could have an impact on the Prince as monarch as we edge closer to his reign. And it is why this week those close to Charles are viewing the unravelling of the relationship between father and son as potentially as damaging as that between the Prince and Princess Diana._

This is HBO’s Succession in real time.  Entitled, privileged offspring never age well — they fuss and complain until they get their way.  
ETA:  I know I will get criticized for saying this, I just do not buy into the _Saint William_ stories.  Sure, some must be true, but really it is Catherine [with her own family] that has demonstrated tremendous leadership skills while QE’s side unravels daily.  I will take the Middletons and Camilla over any of Diana or Charles’s family.  IMO


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Criticising his father — and by implication the Queen — for the way he was raised is one thing. But the broadside he launched questioning the 'motives' of Dr Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz and highlighting his own 'concerns' about the Saudi businessman, is an implicit challenge to Charles's judgment.
> 
> Such a rebuke — especially if it continues — could have an impact on the Prince as monarch as we edge closer to his reign. And it is why this week those close to Charles are viewing the unravelling of the relationship between father and son as potentially as damaging as that between the Prince and Princess Diana._
> 
> This is HBO’s Succession in real time.  Entitled, privileged offspring never age well — they fuss and complain until they get their way.


and, as someone pointed out, his WIFE is wearing blood diamonds from a Saudi


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> Camilla would be my choice to lift a few with. I think she would be a hoot



Me too! And she's the kind of lady who could do a great G & T or a nice cup of tea, depending on the occasion and the time of day.

 Among other things, she loves animals, has rescue dogs, is a fanatical reader on a broad range of subjects, has a wicked sense of humor according to friends who have been quoted over the years, is a doting grandmother and a loved mother, and I'm sure has some great stories to be shared with the closest confidants. 

It's a tribute to her that Prince Phillip recognized her worth and appreciated her contributions to the family and the Monarchy. It's Camilla who was tagged to assume his Book Club and the Commander of the Royal Rifles, supposedly two of his favorite Patronages. He made the effort in his last months of mobility to manage appearances at two engagements of great importance to him: Princess Beatrice's wedding and the passing on of the Royal Rifles to his daughter-in-law, The Duchess of Cornwall.  

Neil Sean in one of his You Tube broadcasts recently pointed out a lovely bit about The Duchesses of Cornwall and Cambridge. At the Remembrance Day appearance of Camilla, Catherine, and Sophie on the Balcony, Catherine was in the middle where the Queen would normally have stood. Some might have thought Camilla, as next in line to fill that space when she stands with Charles in the future, would be in the middle but she stood obviously at ease where she was off to Catherine's side. They could be seen amicably sharing come comments prior to the start of the ceremony. Once it ended and they turned to exit and go back inside, subtly Catherine motioned Camilla to take the lead and she and Sophie followed behind her. It seems a small thing but his point was it speaks volumes about having class and manners, Catherine's grace to acknowledge Camilla as the elder and more senior Royal, and what it demonstrated about Catherine's feelings for her. 

The contrast among the two Duchesses and Sophie's behaviors vs the classless rudeness of the woman in Montecito who pushes and elbows her way through life is really staggering. She's like a bunion on a big toe, out of place, always irritating, and needing to be permanently removed!


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Me too! And she's the kind of lady who could do a great G & T or a nice cup of tea, depending on the occasion and the time of day.
> 
> Among other things, she loves animals, has rescue dogs, is a fanatical reader on a broad range of subjects, has a wicked sense of humor according to friends who have been quoted over the years, is a doting grandmother and a loved mother, and I'm sure has some great stories to be shared with the closest confidants.
> 
> It's a tribute to her that Prince Phillip recognized her worth and appreciated her contributions to the family and the Monarchy. It's Camilla who was tagged to assume his Book Club and the Commander of the Royal Rifles, supposedly two of his favorite Patronages. He made the effort in his last months of mobility to manage appearances at two engagements of great importance to him: Princess Beatrice's wedding and the passing on of the Royal Rifles to his daughter-in-law, The Duchess of Cornwall.
> 
> Neil Sean in one of his You Tube broadcasts recently pointed out a lovely bit about The Duchesses of Cornwall and Cambridge. At the Remembrance Day appearance of Camilla, Catherine, and Sophie on the Balcony, Catherine was in the middle where the Queen would normally have stood. Some might have thought Camilla, as next in line to fill that space when she stands with Charles in the future, would be in the middle but she stood obviously at ease where she was off to Catherine's side. They could be seen amicably sharing come comments prior to the start of the ceremony. Once it ended and they turned to exit and go back inside, subtly Catherine motioned Camilla to take the lead and she and Sophie followed behind her. It seems a small thing but his point was it speaks volumes about having class and manners, Catherine's grace to acknowledge Camilla as the elder and more senior Royal, and what it demonstrated about Catherine's feelings for her.
> 
> The contrast among the two Duchesses and Sophie's behaviors vs the classless rudeness of the woman in Montecito who pushes and elbows her way through life is really staggering. She's like a bunion on a big toe, out of place, always irritating, and needing to be permanently removed!


I can hardly wait for the day when no one cares what H&M are doing


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The BRF owns a considerable amount of land throughout Africa.  Without getting into the politics, it is not too surprising Charles, William and Hazzie are making the environment their issue — *they have an agenda that is not about *_*being green*._ There is much more to the story, but that’s all I will say here.


Unfortunately, many agendas are all about a particular shade of green.


----------



## Chanbal

One more entertaining video…


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> I know the history and as former mistress, wife #2, she will always be a pariah to some, but it saddens me to see Camilla so low in ranking. I have come to admire much about her, she never preaches, never demands, never pushes herself into the news, works hard for her patronages, provides desperately needed loving support for Prince Charles, is always impeccably and appropriately groomed, and the Royal Family does not need to worry she will embarrass them. She  understands her aging thickening body needs to be dressed tastefully and has obviously had the good sense to listen to professional advice from experts in selecting and probably tailoring her garments, unlike her, IMO, increasingly frumpy mess of a daughter-in-law who at age 44 (that was a revelation, but not surprising since she lies about everything else) is a blight on fashion in her ill fitting, ill chosen clothing.


I think the YouGov survey results shows the change in ranking. So Camilla +3 would mean her popularity improved 3 per cent. She usually hovers mid-range with near equal numbers liking and disliking her, so a slight improvement is good. Andrew and the toxic two dropped in popularity.

If you sort by age group, the younger you go, the more support Methane gets. 
https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all 

I wonder if there is any equivalent survey gauge in the US - for influential people. Discounting the useless Time Magazine list. I'm sure there must be something to which advertisers and PR agencies refer, otherwise we would not be getting the story that Methane is not being considered for brand ambassador positions because she is too polarizing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I think the YouGov survey results shows the change in ranking. So Camilla +3 would mean her popularity improved 3 per cent. She usually hovers mid-range with near equal numbers liking and disliking her, so a slight improvement is good. Andrew and the toxic two dropped in popularity.
> 
> If you sort by age group, the younger you go, the more support Methane gets.
> https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all
> 
> I wonder if there is any equivalent survey gauge in the US - for influential people. Discounting the useless Time Magazine list. I'm sure there must be something to which advertisers and PR agencies refer, otherwise we would not be getting the story that Methane is not being considered for brand ambassador positions because she is too polarizing.



This is the USA site.  








						YouGov | What the world thinks
					

YouGov is a global public opinion and data company. Explore what the world thinks, discover our solutions, and join our community to share your opinion.




					today.yougov.com


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the USA site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YouGov | What the world thinks
> 
> 
> YouGov is a global public opinion and data company. Explore what the world thinks, discover our solutions, and join our community to share your opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> today.yougov.com


Thanks for this explanation. I was misreading the data. Feel better and hope her contributions and demeanor lead to even more acceptance and appreciation.

i fear it’s going to be a rough road next year if that nasty little whiner who is one of her step sons scapegoats her.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I think the YouGov survey results shows the change in ranking. So Camilla +3 would mean her popularity improved 3 per cent. She usually hovers mid-range with near equal numbers liking and disliking her, so a slight improvement is good. Andrew and the toxic two dropped in popularity.
> 
> If you sort by age group, the younger you go, the more support Methane gets.
> https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all
> 
> I wonder if there is any equivalent survey gauge in the US - for influential people. Discounting the useless Time Magazine list. I'm sure there must be something to which advertisers and PR agencies refer, otherwise we would not be getting the story that Methane is not being considered for brand ambassador positions because she is too polarizing.


 xincinsin,
Meant to credit you with the initial thanks for posting this, then CarryOn2020.
I think I was absent the day directions for multi quotes were explained.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Thank you @Maggie Muggins
> Ginger Guru came from this nice post.





Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I've read it, but is this just a hint that you want him to become an Honorary TPF Member?


Dear @Chanbal please accept this badge as TPF Ambassador and be so kind as to ask Tourre Bakahai to join us as a TPF Honorary Member.  Many many thanks in advance.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Criticising his father — and by implication the Queen — for the way he was raised is one thing. But the broadside he launched questioning the 'motives' of Dr Mahfouz Marei Mubarak bin Mahfouz and highlighting his own 'concerns' about the Saudi businessman, is an implicit challenge to Charles's judgment.
> 
> Such a rebuke — especially if it continues — could have an impact on the Prince as monarch as we edge closer to his reign. And it is why this week those close to Charles are viewing the unravelling of the relationship between father and son as potentially as damaging as that between the Prince and Princess Diana._
> 
> This is HBO’s Succession in real time.  Entitled, privileged offspring never age well — they fuss and complain until they get their way.
> ETA:  I know I will get criticized for saying this, I just do not buy into the _Saint William_ stories.  Sure, some must be true, but really it is Catherine [with her own family] that has demonstrated tremendous leadership skills while QE’s side unravels daily.  I will take the Middletons and Camilla over any of Diana or Charles’s family.  IMO


I don’t think you’re the only one who thinks W is a humble man with much to be humble about. 

Hasn’t that always been the way though? The parents know the future lord of the manor is a bit of a dim bulb so they get him a wife with a bit of charisma and brains and just hope it doesn’t go lady Macbeth. Will may have met Catherine on his own but you can bet she was screened for suitability. After  all this is what they clearly did this with  Diana, Sophie and Fergie (with varying degrees of success) and it’s what they’ve been doing since at least Eleanor of Aquitaine, 

I’m sure they were polishing up Cressida for such a role but then she decided she ‘didn’t like the spotlight’ aka didn’t want to have to put up with Harry for the next decade or so.

The problem always has been that they bought what Megsy was selling wholesale and didn’t put her through the filter. When they really, really should have done.

Also, I’m not usually in support of the Claw but she isn’t the one who accepted the Saudi blood diamonds the BRF did. They would claim they are politically neutral on international leaders….. unless it’s Charles objecting about Tibet  or Megs refusing to meet DT….. but sure, Idi Amin can come to dinner.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Also, I’m not usually in support of the Claw but she isn’t the one who accepted the Saudi blood diamonds the BRF did. They would claim they are politically neutral on international leaders….. unless it’s Charles objecting about Tibet  or Megs refusing to meet DT….. but sure, Idi Amin can come to dinner.



True, but the storyline goes like this: wedding gifts are accepted, the scandal breaks afterwards, handlers tell the troublesome two to NOT wear those earrings out because of said scandal, she does it anyway with Harry's support because they know best.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Africa has been attracting a lot of interest from several powers in the last several years. The country has enormous wealth and I do believe the Montecitos are after big money. I agree with you, he’s more ‘pay me to shake hands at your gala,’ but she seems more ambitious than that.


Yes but I don’t see how giving Africans free visas would make it easier for him to invest in Africa. If anything, it would escalate ‘brain drain’ with professionals leaving for better money in the U.K. rather than making progress at home.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but the storyline goes like this: wedding gifts are accepted, the scandal breaks afterwards, handlers tell the troublesome two to NOT wear those earrings out because of said scandal, she does it anyway with Harry's support because they know best.


Yes but my point is the morally wrong thing is taking them in the first place not whether anyone wears them or not.

They could have mailed them back if they were that distasteful to them but this is my point, the BRF chooses whose to play politics when they feel like it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes but my point is the morally wrong thing is taking them in the first place not whether anyone wears them or not.



But the issue arose only after they accepted them, how could they have known?



> They could have mailed them back if they were that distasteful to them but this is my point, the BRF chooses whose to play politics when they feel like it.



Not argueing your second point at all, but returning an already accepted gift is rude in the most private of settings so not sure how that would work on a royal scale.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agreeing with all, my guess is the BRF has many jewels and artwork from questionable sources.  Doubt the BRF has ever mailed anything back, just stores it away until all is forgotten. It is always the long game with them.  H&M flaunting those jewels like they did,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agreeing with all, my guess is the BRF has many jewels and artwork from questionable sources.  Doubt the BRF has ever mailed anything back, just stores it away until all is forgotten. It is always the long game with them.  H&M flaunting those jewels like they did,



The Queen's own grandmother, Queen Mary, had a reputation of bullying people into selling their jewels to her for peanuts or giving them for free altogether. It is also said she took massive advantage of the Russian relatives fleeing the revolution when they had to sell what little they had brought for maintenance.

And the priceless artifacts stored away in the British Museum? (that said, some of it was actually bought, so in these cases maybe have a good hard look at your own greed instead of pointing fingers)

But then there's diplomatic complications which makes it the safer option to just store the stuff away and pretend you've all forgotten about it. E.g. some demand the Koh-i Noor be returned. Whom do you return it to, though? Iran, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan have all claimed it as their own.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen's own grandmother, Queen Mary, had a reputation of bullying people into selling their jewels to her for peanuts or giving them for free altogether. It is also said she took massive advantage of the Russian relatives fleeing the revolution when they had to sell what little they had brought for maintenance.
> 
> And the priceless artifacts stored away in the British Museum? (that said, some of it was actually bought, so in these cases maybe have a good hard look at your own greed instead of pointing fingers)
> 
> But then there's diplomatic complications which makes it the safer option to just store the stuff away and pretend you've all forgotten about it. E.g. some demand the Koh-i Noor be returned. Whom do you return it to, though? Iran, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan have all claimed it as their own.


Agree the royal approach to blood diamonds or equivalent is say thank you privately, then stick 'em in a vault and sit on them 

Times have changed. QEII used to wear a whole parure (tiara, bracelets, necklace, earrings) to James Bond movie premiers, neither Camilla nor Kate did so recently

MM keeps repeating the collection of 250,000 pounds of diamond jewelry despite the criticism. And that is with everyday outfits, not state dinner regalia.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Agree the royal approach to blood diamonds or equivalent is say thank you privately, then stick 'em in a vault and sit on them
> 
> Times have changed. QEII used to wear a whole parure (tiara, bracelets, necklace, earrings) to James Bond movie premiers, neither Camilla nor Kate did so recently
> 
> MM keeps repeating the collection of 250,000 pounds of diamond jewelry despite the criticism. And that is with everyday outfits, not state dinner regalia.


I think it’s only a matter of time before the jewels come back out, it’s just they are toning it down presently for political reasons. The royals have the advantage of us all knowing they have riches even when they are playing normal in a high street outfit. whereas H&M is now trying to run in the celeb culture which is a lot more ‘if you’ve got it, flaunt it’.

I can see the logic of sticking the dodgy jewels in the secret safe but I don’t think the press can then throw approbation on M for wearing them. She’s done many, many tacky things but I feel like you might as well use your ill-gotten gains if you are going to keep them in the first place.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen's own grandmother, Queen Mary, had a reputation of bullying people into selling their jewels to her for peanuts or giving them for free altogether. It is also said she took massive advantage of the Russian relatives fleeing the revolution when they had to sell what little they had brought for maintenance.
> 
> And the priceless artifacts stored away in the British Museum? (that said, some of it was actually bought, so in these cases maybe have a good hard look at your own greed instead of pointing fingers)
> 
> But then there's diplomatic complications which makes it the safer option to just store the stuff away and pretend you've all forgotten about it. E.g. some demand the Koh-i Noor be returned. Whom do you return it to, though? Iran, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan have all claimed it as their own.


don’t get me started on the Elgin marbles   
I think the case for repatriation needs to be judged on a case by case basis and the fact that conservation is such a great continual expense needs to be take into account not only when considering whether the artefact will be preserved at a similar standard in a new location but also in consideration of how much the taxpayer has contributed towards the ‘health’ of the object, (some of these things have been heavily restored at enormous expense).
It’s also a bit dicey because you basically need to make value judgements on the future safety of the region. Events like the destruction of Palmyra are such an enormous loss to art. 
Then as you said, there’s the issue of which modern state collects the ancient legacy.
It’s sad I’m not surprised Mary was ripping off the Russians given what they did to their own Russian cousins.


----------



## Chanbal

Is anyone here looking for a financial advisor? Well, you may be lucky and get 2 in 2022!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Dear @Chanbal please accept this badge as TPF Ambassador and be so kind as to ask Tourre Bakahai to join us as a TPF Honorary Member.  Many many thanks in advance.
> View attachment 5269111
> View attachment 5269112


Thank you so much @Maggie Muggins  I feel very honored.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but the storyline goes like this: wedding gifts are accepted, the scandal breaks afterwards, handlers tell the troublesome two to NOT wear those earrings out because of said scandal, she does it anyway with Harry's support because they know best.


ITA. From what I've read, the gift was left at the palace when a Saudi Royal visited England because H&M were away at the time. After their return, the palace informed them re the earrings and offered to place them in safe storage because of their provenance. Can you imagine the glint in M's eye at the sight of those diamonds?! Yep, she took immediate possession as there was no reasoning with the devil incarnate.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Also, I’m not usually in support of the Claw but she isn’t the one who accepted the Saudi blood diamonds the BRF did. They would claim they are politically neutral on international leaders….. unless it’s Charles objecting about Tibet  or Megs refusing to meet DT….. but sure, Idi Amin can come to dinner.



She may not have accepted them but she seems to adore wearing them.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen's own grandmother, Queen Mary, had a reputation of bullying people into selling their jewels to her for peanuts or giving them for free altogether.



People used to hide anything way of value or sentiment before inviting Queen Mary over.


----------



## Nutashha

A very funny incident!!!

*Prince Harry Is Mistaken for a Salesman while Shopping for Christmas*


----------



## bag-mania

^ Wow, you know the press is desperate for Harry and Meghan news when they bring back a story from a year ago. I guess anything about those two gets millions of clicks. It explains why we are still seeing stories about the wedding 3 1/2 years later.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Nothing new here, just make sure you don't sign up for the apparently useless $680 app…
> View attachment 5268846
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> There is nothing like an out of touch foreign born permanent A list celebrity who says if your job isn't making you happy, then you should q...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Merchin Meg and El Chimpo  

The comments are gold.  As usual


----------



## lanasyogamama

Nutashha said:


> A very funny incident!!!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Mistaken for a Salesman while Shopping for Christmas*
> 
> View attachment 5269529


Was that from last year or am I having deja vu vibes for no reason?


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> Dear @Chanbal please accept this badge as TPF Ambassador and *be so kind as to ask Tourre Bakahai to join us as a TPF Honorary Member.* Many many thanks in advance.



Yes. Please do
Damn fine looking man


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Nutashha said:


> A very funny incident!!!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Mistaken for a Salesman while Shopping for Christmas*
> View attachment 5269529


Oh 'cause he is such a regular guy!


----------



## mellibelly

Looking at you Duke and Duchess of Sucks


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> People used to hide anything way of value or sentiment before inviting Queen Mary over.




I read this in my book about the Faberge Imperial eggs - Queen Mary would compliment something and drop hints until the host/hostess felt sufficiently guiltified that they gave the item to her.  This and buying things after driving the price down as far as she could from the royal collection of Russia after 1917 always seemed very distasteful to me, particularly after she and her husband (who looked so much like Nicholas II that many could not tell them apart) refused to help Nicholas and his family during the months leading up to their execution.  Apparently George V was so horrified and what happened to Nicholas, Alexandra and their 5 children that he did send a British war ship to collect Nicholas' mother from the Crimea in 1919.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> Looking at you Duke and Duchess of Sucks
> View attachment 5269745


Maybe Hazard will use the same excuse that one of my office narcs used for skiving. He took half hour off every morning and afternoon for smoke breaks, plus his one-hour lunch break always extended to 2 hours. So he was skiving minimum 2 hours every working day. His excuse: he didn't smoke alone or have lunch alone, so his guilt and unauthorised time off should be divided by the number of participants in the activity. Yep! If he had lunch with 3 other people, then I should divide that extra hour by 4 and he only skived 15 minutes. Why was I penalizing him for such a negligible amount of time? Such a face palm moment.

Reporter: JCMH! What do you have to say about the carbon emissions for your private jet flights?
Hazard: You've got it all wrong. I travel with my family, 16 staff and 8 security officers. You should divide the number by 28 to get the correct figure.


----------



## Traveladdie

sdkitty said:


> so if this is true (and I have no idea if this guy is credible) then H is more of an AH than we thought



I don't know what AH means but Andrew Morton is very well known and respected royal biographer. He also writes about the British monarchy for several of the UK newspapers.


----------



## Traveladdie

sdkitty said:


> I can hardly wait for the day when no one cares what H&M are doing


Same, and I really like them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Traveladdie said:


> I don't know what AH means but Andrew Morton is very well known and respected royal biographer. He also writes about the British monarchy for several of the UK newspapers.



A$$hole. @sdkitty is being polite. Me, not so much 

I get the impression Hazzie believes, really believes, anything he says _must_ be true.  His way is the only way so all of the world _must_ follow his way.  Clearly, this is learned behavior, so who taught him to think like this?  Does this level of arrogance come from his being in the royal bloodline?  Does the entire BRF believe this about themselves?  Mercy, they are begging  for a comeuppance. Imo.


----------



## Luvbolide

Luvbolide said:


> I read this in my book about the Faberge Imperial eggs - Queen Mary would compliment something and drop hints until the host/hostess felt sufficiently guiltified that they gave the item to her.  This and buying things after driving the price down as far as she could from the royal collection of Russia after 1917 always seemed very distasteful to me, particularly after she and her husband (who looked so much like Nicholas II that many could not tell them apart) refused to help Nicholas and his family during the months leading up to their execution.  Apparently George V was so horrified and what happened to Nicholas, Alexandra and their 5 children that he did send a British war ship to collect Nicholas' mother from the Crimea in 1919.




Oh yeah, forgot to say that Queen Mary's mother (Queen Alexandra) was Nicholas' mother's sister.  So it was family that George V refused to help.  Aside from any politics of the thing, I find it hard to believe that the Brits would be so heartless as to refuse to respond when family asked them for help.  I don't think there was any saving Nicholas or Alexi, but because women could not take the throne in Russia, there is a decent argument to be made that Alexandra and her 4 daughters could maybe have been saved.  Lenin was well aware that killing women and children was likely to be treated as inexcusable.  Okay,rant over!


----------



## Traveladdie

bag-mania said:


> ^ Wow, you know the press is desperate for Harry and Meghan news when they bring back a story from a year ago. I guess anything about those two gets millions of clicks. It explains why we are still seeing stories about the wedding 3 1/2 years later.



I agree. It's the same reason all of the big UK papers keep paying Meghan's family to make up stories about her. People want to read about them, it sells papers, so whatever story will do. This one is on a random website but was sourced from the Mirror UK.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> Oh 'cause he is such a regular guy!




Surprised H didn't harangue the kid to get a living tree - better for the environment!!


----------



## Luvbolide

Traveladdie said:


> Same, and I really like them.



I initially agreed that I would love to see the end of H&M stories (and I really don't like either of them!), but I would definitely miss this thread, if only for the comic relief!!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> so if this is true (and I have no idea if this guy is credible) then H is more of an AH than we thought


Andrew Morton is a journalist who started off in the tabloids. He specializes in unauthorized biographies of royals and celebrities. His first biography of Diana was written with the collaboration of her friends. After Diana's death, he published another book about her based on taped interviews she had done with him. He has been sued before for including unverified scandalous accounts in his books. Reviewers have noted his lack of impartiality, iow if he likes the subject, it will be a rosy picture; if he doesn't, he digs for dirt. 

In my view, he is generally more trustworthy than Omid, but equally prone to sensationalisation and fictionalisation. He doesn't make my skin crawl like Omid, but I'd take his words with a large pinch of salt. The title of his first unauthorised biography of Methane called her a Hollywood Princess


----------



## Traveladdie

Luvbolide said:


> Oh yeah, forgot to say that Queen Mary's mother (Queen Alexandra) was Nicholas' mother's sister.  So it was family that George V refused to help.  Aside from any politics of the thing, I find it hard to believe that the Brits would be so heartless as to refuse to respond when family asked them for help.  I don't think there was any saving Nicholas or Alexi, but because women could not take the throne in Russia, there is a decent argument to be made that Alexandra and her 4 daughters could maybe have been saved.  Lenin was well aware that killing women and children was likely to be treated as inexcusable.  Okay,rant over!


It's really disheartening since George and Nicolaus were extremely close. But I tend to find that the family will do whatever they feel is right for the UK. This is from a Town and Country article from last year on the topic:

*"King George V was deeply distressed when he heard that the Russian Revolution led Nicholas to abdicate in 1917 and the family to be placed under house arrest. Proposals were floated for the Russian royals to go into exile and settle in England. However, the invitation was later withdrawn. The Romanovs were forced to go to Siberia, and there they died. Even had the invitation not been withdrawn, historians agree that it’s doubtful the Bolsheviks would ever have allowed Nicholas to leave Russia.

It was long assumed that the British government had overruled George V, who was a constitutional monarch. But papers released in the 1980s showed that it was George himself—fearing that the British monarchy was losing support—who felt he could not take the risk of welcoming to England a man whom the public decried as a blood-stained tyrant. His friendship gave way to the needs of the Windsors. It is highly unlikely he thought a firing squad awaited his cousin. Nonetheless, it is a sensitive subject in the royal family to this day."
*


----------



## pukasonqo

Traveladdie said:


> It's really disheartening since George and Nicolaus were extremely close. But I tend to find that the family will do whatever they feel is right for the UK. This is from a Town and Country article from last year on the topic:
> 
> *"King George V was deeply distressed when he heard that the Russian Revolution led Nicholas to abdicate in 1917 and the family to be placed under house arrest. Proposals were floated for the Russian royals to go into exile and settle in England. However, the invitation was later withdrawn. The Romanovs were forced to go to Siberia, and there they died. Even had the invitation not been withdrawn, historians agree that it’s doubtful the Bolsheviks would ever have allowed Nicholas to leave Russia.
> 
> It was long assumed that the British government had overruled George V, who was a constitutional monarch. But papers released in the 1980s showed that it was George himself—fearing that the British monarchy was losing support—who felt he could not take the risk of welcoming to England a man whom the public decried as a blood-stained tyrant. His friendship gave way to the needs of the Windsors. It is highly unlikely he thought a firing squad awaited his cousin. Nonetheless, it is a sensitive subject in the royal family to this day."*


In “Nicholas and Alexandra” there is an anecdote that George V and Nicholas looked so much alike that some attendants that escaped to England burst into tears when seeing him thinking that, somehow, Nicholas had survived
They could have tried harder to save the kids at least…


----------



## Luvbolide

Traveladdie said:


> It's really disheartening since George and Nicolaus were extremely close. But I tend to find that the family will do whatever they feel is right for the UK. This is from a Town and Country article from last year on the topic:
> 
> *"King George V was deeply distressed when he heard that the Russian Revolution led Nicholas to abdicate in 1917 and the family to be placed under house arrest. Proposals were floated for the Russian royals to go into exile and settle in England. However, the invitation was later withdrawn. The Romanovs were forced to go to Siberia, and there they died. Even had the invitation not been withdrawn, historians agree that it’s doubtful the Bolsheviks would ever have allowed Nicholas to leave Russia.
> 
> It was long assumed that the British government had overruled George V, who was a constitutional monarch. But papers released in the 1980s showed that it was George himself—fearing that the British monarchy was losing support—who felt he could not take the risk of welcoming to England a man whom the public decried as a blood-stained tyrant. His friendship gave way to the needs of the Windsors. It is highly unlikely he thought a firing squad awaited his cousin. Nonetheless, it is a sensitive subject in the royal family to this day."*




Well, I would quibble with the quoted section - they didn't so much die in Siberia as they were brutally murdered in Siberia.  I believe that it is true that George was worried about the fact that that royals in Germany, Austria and Russia were all given the boot at around the same time and that George V didn't want to have revolutionary fervor take over Britain also.  I get that, but he was able to send a war ship for his aunt and assorted others, including Romanovs, I find it hard to believe that he refused to lift a finger while one entire branch of a family (and the best known branch of that family) were brutally murdered.  That said, it is true that Nicholas was a terrible czar, in many ways.  And he earned his nickname "Bloody Nicholas".  (You can probably tell that I learned these stories from the Russian perspective!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

pukasonqo said:


> In “Nicholas and Alexandra” there is an anecdote that George V and Nicholas looked so much alike that some attendants that escaped to England burst into tears when seeing him thinking that, somehow, Nicholas had survived
> They could have tried harder to save the kids at least…




Totally agree - there was no saving Nicholas and Alexi. Both of them had to die so that the Bolsheviks could end the Romanov dynasty.  But killing a woman and her 4 daughters, none of whom could have taken over the throne, is what caused the most uproar.  Just like the Dowager Empress, they could have been taken into exile somewhere.  No way anyone would look at Alexandra as someone to rally around in hopes of preserving the dynasty.  She was actually much more disliked than her husband!


----------



## Traveladdie

Luvbolide said:


> Well, I would quibble with the quoted section - they didn't so much die in Siberia as they were brutally murdered in Siberia.  I believe that it is true that George was worried about the fact that that royals in Germany, Austria and Russia were all given the boot at around the same time and that George V didn't want to have revolutionary fervor take over Britain also.  I get that, but he was able to send a war ship for his aunt and assorted others, including Romanovs, I find it hard to believe that he refused to lift a finger while one entire branch of a family (and the best known branch of that family) were brutally murdered.  That said, it is true that Nicholas was a terrible czar, in many ways.  And he earned his nickname "Bloody Nicholas".  (You can probably tell that I learned these stories from the Russian perspective!)


I prefer if they would not have let them die (agree with the article that they didn't think the family would be murdered) but I have yet to read a historical account or book that does not state that George ,in the end, did exactly that. I agree, Nicholas was not a good leader at all. I do feel like this story is not as black and white as history teaches us. It is probably why the subject is still so sensitive within the family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

While fascinating, perhaps the Romanovs need their own thread?  We should stay on topic here.  Thank you.

Someone mentioned UK papers make up H&M stories.    There really is no need to make up anything because H&M’s  own words and actions are enough to make them the least-liked people on the planet, although some others seem to be competing for that title.  Ahem, Alec?


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Andrew Morton is a journalist who started off in the tabloids. He specializes in unauthorized biographies of royals and celebrities. His first biography of Diana was written with the collaboration of her friends. After Diana's death, he published another book about her based on taped interviews she had done with him. He has been sued before for including unverified scandalous accounts in his books. Reviewers have noted his lack of impartiality, iow if he likes the subject, it will be a rosy picture; if he doesn't, he digs for dirt.
> 
> *In my view, he is generally more trustworthy than Omid,* but equally prone to sensationalisation and fictionalisation. He doesn't make my skin crawl like Omid, but I'd take his words with a large pinch of salt. The title of his first unauthorised biography of Methane called her a Hollywood Princess



Agree! Andrew Morton shines compared to Om*d, particularly after he updated his book with a slightly more accurate description of Little Miss Forgetful.  

*Royal author ANDREW MORTON explores how she preaches compassion, yet cast her own father into outer darkness and claims she’s the victim of uncaring Royals, yet in truth was welcomed with open arms*









						The Meghan Paradox: Royal author ANDREW MORTON
					

ANDREW MORTON: Harry was desperate for Meghan and his sister-in-law to bond - a tall order given their contrasting careers and social backgrounds.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Traveladdie

Chanbal said:


> Agree! Andrew Morton shines compared to Om*d, particularly after he updated his book with a slightly more accurate description of Little Miss Forgetful.
> 
> *Royal author ANDREW MORTON explores how she preaches compassion, yet cast her own father into outer darkness and claims she’s the victim of uncaring Royals, yet in truth was welcomed with open arms*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan Paradox: Royal author ANDREW MORTON
> 
> 
> ANDREW MORTON: Harry was desperate for Meghan and his sister-in-law to bond - a tall order given their contrasting careers and social backgrounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I actually really liked this article. It gives some grey to the story that some see as black and white. Naturally, the headline is not quite what the article was about at all. It does not say that she cast them into the darkness but instead questions what is to become of them in the dark. Salacious headlines sell. As much as I like her, I do find Meghan to be far from an innocent. I am sure there were missteps and coming in to this family as an independent, American woman in her late 30's, there was bound to be issues. What do they say? Oh yes, there are three sides to every story; his, hers and the truth.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> While fascinating, perhaps the Romanovs need their own thread?  We should stay on topic here.  Thank you.
> 
> Someone mentioned UK papers make up H&M stories.    There really is no need to make up anything because H&M’s  own words and actions are enough to make them the least-liked people on the planet, although some others seem to be competing for that title.  Ahem, Alec?




You're right, I apologize!!  And I agree that H&MM don't need much help making stories up.  Wonder what new whoppers H's memoir will bring.  Honestly, I don't think he has lived long enough, or had enough memoir-worthy things happen for him to do a memoir, at least at this point in his life.  I expect a lot of boring navel gazing and pages and pages of expressing his bitterness at his father (mostly) and maybe others, too.  Hard pass for me!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Luvbolide said:


> You're right, I apologize!!  And I agree that H&MM don't need much help making stories up.  Wonder what new whoppers H's memoir will bring.  Honestly, I don't think he has lived long enough, or had enough memoir-worthy things happen for him to do a memoir, at least at this point in his life.  I expect a lot of boring navel gazing and pages and pages of expressing his bitterness at his father (mostly) and maybe others, too.  Hard pass for me!



No apology necessary. I, too, enjoy reading about the Romanovs.  Seriously consider starting a thread.

As for desperate Hazzie and thirsty MM, Morton sticks his knife in, doesn’t he?  

_Harry was *desperate* for Meghan and his sister-in-law to bond – a tall order given their *contrasting careers and social backgrounds*.

But like the Queen, Kate offered friendliness but not friendship. Her cool and somewhat reserved nature would have profound consequences. [_he does remind us that Kate was in the middle of a difficult pregnancy _]_. 

IMO friendship must be earned from both parties. It cannot be forced or pushed. Was MM a friend to Kate? We’ll never know because Kate thankfully will always maintain her dignified silence.  Imo this speaks to MM‘s thirstiness, as the kids say, as well as Hazzie’s desperate need for attention. The world does not revolve around them. The world does not owe them anything.  At that time, they were mid to late 30s.  Someone should tell them to grow up, learn how to be an adult and move on. Enough already.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> Oh yeah, forgot to say that Queen Mary's mother (Queen Alexandra) was Nicholas' mother's sister.



Queen Mary's mother was the Duchess of Cambridge. Queen Alexandra was her MIL.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> You're right, I apologize!!  And I agree that H&MM don't need much help making stories up.  Wonder what new whoppers H's memoir will bring.  Honestly, I don't think he has lived long enough, or had enough memoir-worthy things happen for him to do a memoir, at least at this point in his life.  I expect a lot of boring navel gazing and pages and pages of expressing his bitterness at his father (mostly) and maybe others, too.  Hard pass for me!


It's going to be ghostwritten by an award-winning writer. It might turn out to be entertaining, but utterly fictional. Hazard has rewritten his life to be an archetypal victim, so it will proceed from early years as adoring son doted on by adoring mother but deprived of bicycle rides by distant father, The Lost Years when he felt aimless without his mother, then The Enlightenment when the worldly wise yacht girl came into his life offering him freebies. I don't think the ghostwriter is going to write a truthful memoir of the dolt Hazard has become, considering that the source material will veer from self-pity to self-grandeur, and back. GIGO!


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> It's going to be ghostwritten by an award-winning writer. It might turn out to be entertaining, but utterly fictional. Hazard has rewritten his life to be an archetypal victim, so it will proceed from early years as adoring son doted on by adoring mother but deprived of bicycle rides by distant father, The Lost Years when he felt aimless without his mother, then The Enlightenment when the worldly wise yacht girl came into his life offering him freebies. I don't think the ghostwriter is going to write a truthful memoir of the dolt Hazard has become, considering that the source material will veer from self-pity to self-grandeur, and back. GIGO!



Dont forget that H will offer his pearls of wisdom like,
“just quit your job!” And “ what if we are raindrops” or whatever else his Wordsalad Master orders him to say…


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Dont forget that H will offer his pearls of wisdom like,
> “just quit your job!” And “ what if we are raindrops” or whatever else his Wordsalad Master orders him to say…


Ghostwriter will probably use the pearls as chapter headings


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> It's going to be ghostwritten by an award-winning writer. It might turn out to be entertaining, but utterly fictional. Hazard has rewritten his life to be an archetypal victim, so it will proceed from early years as adoring son doted on by adoring mother but deprived of bicycle rides by distant father, The Lost Years when he felt aimless without his mother, then The Enlightenment when the worldly wise yacht girl came into his life offering him freebies. I don't think the ghostwriter is going to write a truthful memoir of the dolt Hazard has become, considering that the source material will veer from self-pity to self-grandeur, and back. GIGO!



Remember this writer is same one who wrote Affleck’s movie,The Tender Bar, which appears to be struggling - 6.4/10








						The Tender Bar (2021) - IMDb
					

The Tender Bar: Directed by George Clooney. With Ben Affleck, Tye Sheridan, Daniel Ranieri, Lily Rabe. A boy growing up on Long Island seeks out father figures among the patrons at his uncle's bar.




					www.imdb.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Nutashha said:


> A very funny incident!!!
> 
> *Prince Harry Is Mistaken for a Salesman while Shopping for Christmas*
> View attachment 5269529


Well I guess we can’t blame the customer for not recognising the perpetually frowning baldie when he is always pictured smiling with lustrous ginger locks.  


Traveladdie said:


> Same, and I really like them.


That’ll only happen when they stop paying sunshine sacks. 


Luvbolide said:


> Well, I would quibble with the quoted section - they didn't so much die in Siberia as they were brutally murdered in Siberia.  I believe that it is true that George was worried about the fact that that royals in Germany, Austria and Russia were all given the boot at around the same time and that George V didn't want to have revolutionary fervor take over Britain also.  I get that, but he was able to send a war ship for his aunt and assorted others, including Romanovs, I find it hard to believe that he refused to lift a finger while one entire branch of a family (and the best known branch of that family) were brutally murdered.  That said, it is true that Nicholas was a terrible czar, in many ways.  And he earned his nickname "Bloody Nicholas".  (You can probably tell that I learned these stories from the Russian perspective!)


Yes that’s what I heard, Nicholas asked his cousin King George for protection but George was worried his family would get overthrown too. I  think this was a bit unreasonable on his part. I would’ve taken his family in but told him a captain has to be ready to go down with his ship which is pretty much what happened last time the English executed their king.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Agree! Andrew Morton shines compared to Om*d, particularly after he updated his book with a slightly more accurate description of Little Miss Forgetful.
> 
> *Royal author ANDREW MORTON explores how she preaches compassion, yet cast her own father into outer darkness and claims she’s the victim of uncaring Royals, yet in truth was welcomed with open arms*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan Paradox: Royal author ANDREW MORTON
> 
> 
> ANDREW MORTON: Harry was desperate for Meghan and his sister-in-law to bond - a tall order given their contrasting careers and social backgrounds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Somewhere I got the impression that Andrew Morton was a hack - I suspect  that is not so correct.  I enjoyed this article very much - found it informative and I like the way he organized it so that the progression is laid out nicely, one of the benefits of hindsight.  Sounds like there might more to come in Mail on Sunday or whatever they call it.  Sure makes Omid Scooby-do look even more like a hack.  Wonder who Omid thinks he is going to work for once H&MM slide more into oblivion.  Surely no one else in the BRF will want anything to do with him since he is just a mouthpiece and puppet of H&MM.  Time will tell, I guess.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Queen Mary's mother was the Duchess of Cambridge. Queen Alexandra was her MIL.




Oops - sorry about that!  Truth be told, I get them all quite mixed up in the BRF.  Didn't know there was another Duchess of Cambridge!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> It's going to be ghostwritten by an award-winning writer. It might turn out to be entertaining, but utterly fictional. Hazard has rewritten his life to be an archetypal victim, so it will proceed from early years as adoring son doted on by adoring mother but deprived of bicycle rides by distant father, The Lost Years when he felt aimless without his mother, then The Enlightenment when the worldly wise yacht girl came into his life offering him freebies. I don't think the ghostwriter is going to write a truthful memoir of the dolt Hazard has become, considering that the source material will veer from self-pity to self-grandeur, and back. GIGO!




You make it sound so appealing - LOL!!  Didn't realize that a good writer had signed on - I was expecting about a third grade reading level, as if Omid wrote it!  Still not enough for me to read it - I can't stand victims,particularly when they are among the most privileged people on earth!


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> It's going to be ghostwritten by an award-winning writer. It might turn out to be entertaining, but utterly fictional. Hazard has rewritten his life to be an archetypal victim, so it will proceed from early years as adoring son doted on by adoring mother but deprived of bicycle rides by distant father, The Lost Years when he felt aimless without his mother, then The Enlightenment when the worldly wise yacht girl came into his life offering him freebies. I don't think the ghostwriter is going to write a truthful memoir of the dolt Hazard has become, considering that the source material will veer from self-pity to self-grandeur, and back. GIGO!





CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember this writer is same one who wrote Affleck’s movie,The Tender Bar, which appears to be struggling - 6.4/10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tender Bar (2021) - IMDb
> 
> 
> The Tender Bar: Directed by George Clooney. With Ben Affleck, Tye Sheridan, Daniel Ranieri, Lily Rabe. A boy growing up on Long Island seeks out father figures among the patrons at his uncle's bar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


i feel kind of sorry for this guy who has to polish this turd into a Pearl,  but it sounds like he can just copy and paste pages of slightly self-indulgent rumination about seeking a father figure and getting wasted to numb the pain from his last book. Just remember to change ‘it’s all my absentee dad’s fault I threw up on the steps’ to ‘it’s all my absentee dad Prince Charles’ fault I wore that nazi outfit and then threw up on the steps.’

Lady C was talking about the charity thing this morning on Youtube and I think she raised a valid point that the charities themselves are definitely not saying they think there is anything suspicious about Mr Mahfouz’s Donation. I feel he’s been done dirty as by the sound of it he was just doing a bit of common or garden wheel greasing and now ten years down the line suddenly his name is being singled out in the news for doing exactly what H&M do aka publicise their ‘philanthropy’  to receive favours from powerful people. But still, at least this guy was giving thousands rather than a stale cake!


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> i feel kind of sorry for this guy who has to polish this turd into a Pearl,  but it sounds like he can just copy and paste pages of slightly self-indulgent rumination about seeking a father figure and getting wasted to numb the pain from his last book. Just remember to change ‘it’s all my absentee dad’s fault I threw up on the steps’ to ‘it’s all my absentee dad Prince Charles’ fault I wore that nazi outfit and then threw up on the steps.’


I had this insane idea of the central metaphor of his memoir being chickens! Hazard will liken his early upbringing to battery hens forced to produce eggs, the turning point in his life being the woman of indeterminate age who wooed him with roast chicken, his "freedom & privacy" in California symbolized by the rescue chickens residing in a coop on a vast luxury estate with their own dedicated toilets, and his future dependence on his son who runs a Chick Inn.


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> I read this in my book about the Faberge Imperial eggs - Queen Mary would compliment something and drop hints until the host/hostess felt sufficiently guiltified that they gave the item to her.  This and buying things after driving the price down as far as she could from the royal collection of Russia after 1917 always seemed very distasteful to me, particularly after she and her husband (who looked so much like Nicholas II that many could not tell them apart) refused to help Nicholas and his family during the months leading up to their execution.  Apparently George V was so horrified and what happened to Nicholas, Alexandra and their 5 children that he did send a British war ship to collect Nicholas' mother from the Crimea in 1919.



The Vladimir tiara was bought that way at that time. 

In regards to Nicolas, Alexandra, I don't think it was that simple: 

Alexandra was granddaughter of Queen Victoria and was _also_ first cousin to George V, making _both_ Tsar and Tsarina first cousins to the King. (This interbreeding was thought most likely why N&A's son, Tsarevich Alexei had haemophilia). 

George granted the RRF asylum in Britain but then withdrew (trying to find them safe passage and a place elsewhere) due to fear of the Monarch's own position. Nicolas was called 'Bloody Nicolas' here and Alexandra was German born (Britain had been at war with Germany for three years already (Great War) and almost whole generation of British Men were lost or mutilated). It would have been quite a precarious situation to give them a home here. This was when George changed his name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor. The Romanovs were related to other royal families (Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Norway) but none of these countries wanted to take the RRF either as the new Russian Government were now allies against Germany. 

The issue (as I see it) was a lack of coordinated organisation, communication and will on the part of all European royal families who were very worried about the anti-monarchist feeling in their own countries, they had a lot to lose. There was a underlying belief that Nicolas and Alexandra had in many ways contributed to their own downfall and they weren't sure if they wanted him plotting revenge/return from their own shores.

In 1919 The British sent a ship that evacuated many 'White  Russians' including children of Nicolas' sisters. Many of these have British descendants today.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I had this insane idea of the central metaphor of his memoir being chickens! Hazard will liken his early upbringing to battery hens forced to produce eggs, the turning point in his life being the woman of indeterminate age who wooed him with roast chicken, his "freedom & privacy" in California symbolized by the rescue chickens residing in a coop on a vast luxury estate with their own dedicated toilets, and his future dependence on his son who runs a Chick Inn.





xincinsin said:


> the turning point in his life being the woman of indeterminate age who wooed him with roast chicken


This has very strong _Misery and Animal Farm_ vibes. Hilarious!  

I congratulate you on the aptitude of the imagery. I can just see H the brainless chicken pecking happily around pleased with his new lodgings and unable to make the connection that M will one day roast him too  (perhaps this story is a little of _To Serve Man _also.)

You know this chicken metaphor is actually maybe a little too clever for the client. 
Nevertheless,  if you are reading this thread Megs, (which you may well be for all we know you could be) please consider Xincinsin as your new ghostwriter for your husband Schmuckles the clown. It would be the first project of yours to actually be award-worthy!


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> Well, I would quibble with the quoted section - they didn't so much die in Siberia as they were brutally murdered in Siberia.  I believe that it is true that George was worried about the fact that that royals in Germany, Austria and Russia were all given the boot at around the same time and that George V didn't want to have revolutionary fervor take over Britain also.  I get that, but he was able to send a war ship for his aunt and assorted others, including Romanovs, I find it hard to believe that he refused to lift a finger while one entire branch of a family (and the best known branch of that family) were brutally murdered.  That said, it is true that Nicholas was a terrible czar, in many ways.  And he earned his nickname "Bloody Nicholas".  (You can probably tell that I learned these stories from the Russian perspective!)



He was called Bloody Nicolas over many parts of Europe including Britain. At a time of war, he was thought to be a lousy leader and soldier.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> While fascinating, perhaps the Romanovs need their own thread?  We should stay on topic here.  Thank you.
> 
> Someone mentioned UK papers make up H&M stories.    There really is no need to make up anything because H&M’s  own words and actions are enough to make them the least-liked people on the planet, although some others seem to be competing for that title.  Ahem, Alec?



IMO it's very pertinent to this thread. 

M&H are very short-sighted and have shown spite against their own families without a moment's thought that they could actually strengthen the anti-monarchist's cause. I am not pro-monarchy but I don't particularly want the alternative either. 

I think all of this is much more serious than the tittle tattle the gossip colonists make of it. IMO H&M should be stripped of all their titles using a Parliament ruling since their words and actions are treacherous. The US should not allow H&M to use titles anyway but I leave that to you guys 'over there'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> IMO it's very pertinent to this thread.
> 
> M&H are very short-sighted and have shown spite against their own families without a moment's thought that they could actually strengthen the anti-monarchist's cause. I am not pro-monarchy but I don't particularly want the alternative either.
> 
> I think all of this is much more serious than the tittle tattle the gossip colonists make of it. IMO H&M should be stripped of all their titles using a Parliament ruling since their words and actions are treacherous. The US should not allow H&M to use titles anyway but I leave that to you guys 'over there'.



Excellent, thank you. Good to know it’s ok to post about the Romanovs. I was worried we might get a warning if we continued on that trail. Faberge is a huge part of the Romanov story, so who is the BRF’s Faberge?

43 of 50 eggs have been accounted for - this June,2021 article tells us where they are:








						Secrets of the Fabergé Eggs
					

In the waning decades of their rule, Russia's Romanov imperial family maintained a standing order with Peter Carl Fabergé to create jeweled Easter eggs. Here is the story of nine of the most important works of art that resulted from this remarkable commission.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




_Fabergé oversaw production, but the eggs were crafted by teams of metalsmiths, jewelers, designers, and other specialists who in turn were given wide artistic latitude. Although the eggs were made from precious materials, their value lay not in the cost of the particular jewels or metals used (some eggs were comparatively modest in that regard) but in the inventiveness and skill the artists brought to each one. 

When the Bolsheviks took St. Petersburg, they seized the eggs, selling some of them and holding on to others. From that moment, each piece has gone on its own journey: In the early years the eggs weren’t particularly sought after—the market was flooded with Romanov art and objets—but gradually collectors became more keen, most famously the media magnate Malcolm Forbes, whose art collection at one point included nine eggs. Today they sell for tens of millions of dollars._






Tsar Alexander II and Empress Maria Feodorovna with their family (the future tsar, Nicholas II, is standing in back).
HULTON DEUTSCHGETTY IMAGES


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> The Vladimir tiara was bought that way at that time.
> 
> In regards to Nicolas, Alexandra, I don't think it was that simple:
> 
> Alexandra was granddaughter of Queen Victoria and was _also_ first cousin to George V, making _both_ Tsar and Tsarina first cousins to the King. (This interbreeding was thought most likely why N&A's son, Tsarevich Alexei had haemophilia).
> 
> George granted the RRF asylum in Britain but then withdrew (trying to find them safe passage and a place elsewhere) due to fear of the Monarch's own position. Nicolas was called 'Bloody Nicolas' here and Alexandra was German born (Britain had been at war with Germany for three years already (Great War) and almost whole generation of British Men were lost or mutilated). It would have been quite a precarious situation to give them a home here. This was when George changed his name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor. The Romanovs were related to other royal families (Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Norway) but none of these countries wanted to take the RRF either as the new Russian Government were now allies against Germany.
> 
> The issue (as I see it) was a lack of coordinated organisation, communication and will on the part of all European royal families who were very worried about the anti-monarchist feeling in their own countries, they had a lot to lose. There was a underlying belief that Nicolas and Alexandra had in many ways contributed to their own downfall and they weren't sure if they wanted him plotting revenge/return from their own shores.
> 
> In 1919 The British sent a ship that evacuated many 'White  Russians' including children of Nicolas' sisters. Many of these have British descendants today.


You are right, the situation was complicated.

On the tiara, Queen Mary might have been cruel and manipulative but boy was fitting those emeralds to the tiara a good idea. Takes it from an 8 to an 800. It’s definitely the best one and I  think someone who knew so little about the royals she didn’t know who Harry was or about the British empire may agree   


papertiger said:


> IMO it's very pertinent to this thread.
> 
> M&H are very short-sighted and have shown spite against their own families without a moment's thought that they could actually strengthen the anti-monarchist's cause. I am not pro-monarchy but I don't particularly want the alternative either.
> 
> I think all of this is much more serious than the tittle tattle the gossip colonists make of it. IMO H&M should be stripped of all their titles using a Parliament ruling since their words and actions are treacherous. The US should not allow H&M to use titles anyway but I leave that to you guys 'over there'.


I agree they should lose their titles and I think the general royal opinion that they have to think collectively and are in fear of all losing their titles if one loses his is just a licence for ignominious behaviour.

I am not pro-royal because I don’t think it’s a good idea for our head of state to also be the head of a particular church. Jews and Catholics suffered for centuries because of this and while religious discrimination has died down a lot I still think it’s a bad precedent.


----------



## CarryOn2020

wow









						The fascinating history behind one of the Queen’s favourite tiaras – now on display at Buckingham Palace
					

The Vladimir Tiara was smuggled out of Russia by a British antiques dealer after the assassination of the Tsar and was later bought by Elizabeth II’s grandmother, Queen Mary




					www.tatler.com
				







THE VLADIMIR TIARA WORN THREE WAYSMark Cuthbert / Toby Melville / Getty Images


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember this writer is same one who wrote Affleck’s movie,The Tender Bar, which appears to be struggling - 6.4/10
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Tender Bar (2021) - IMDb
> 
> 
> The Tender Bar: Directed by George Clooney. With Ben Affleck, Tye Sheridan, Daniel Ranieri, Lily Rabe. A boy growing up on Long Island seeks out father figures among the patrons at his uncle's bar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com



To be fair to the author, the movie was based on a book he wrote about his youth. I didn’t read the book or see the movie, but films rarely live up to the quality of the books.


----------



## Sharont2305

Over to you Harkles.


----------



## marietouchet

Large article this morning (Friday) in WALL STREET JOURNAL real estate section , I saw it in hardcopy and cant find it online yet, would probably be behind a paywall

They are ALL owned by the Crown Trust - not by the BRF directly - EXCEPT
Charles personally owns HIGHGROVE and a house in Romania - sic
A residence/castle in No. Ireland by the British government - cannot remember name, sounds like an official residence for the head of the UK government in No. Ireland , ie he/she lives there, it does not stand empty til the BRF comes to town - the discussion of that residence was rather superficial 
SANDRINGHAM an BALMORAL are owned personally by the Queen, they have been passed down to the next sovereign 

Good article with sizes, valuations and succession - who inherits each , the BIGGIES - Cornwall, Buck House, Clarence House, Windsor , Holyroodhouse (Scotland) are all in trust


----------



## octopus17

marietouchet said:


> Large article this morning (Friday) in WALL STREET JOURNAL real estate section , I saw it in hardcopy and cant find it online yet, would probably be behind a paywall
> 
> They are ALL owned by the Crown Trust - not by the BRF directly - EXCEPT
> Charles personally owns HIGHGROVE and a house in Romania - sic
> A residence/castle in No. Ireland by the British government - cannot remember name, sounds like an official residence for the head of the UK government in No. Ireland , ie he/she lives there, it does not stand empty til the BRF comes to town - the discussion of that residence was rather superficial
> SANDRINGHAM an BALMORAL are owned personally by the Queen, they have been passed down to the next sovereign
> 
> Good article with sizes, valuations and succession - who inherits each , the BIGGIES - Cornwall, Buck House, Clarence House, Windsor , Holyroodhouse (Scotland) are all in trust


Hillsborough Castle is the one in Northern Ireland


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Large article this morning (Friday) in WALL STREET JOURNAL real estate section , I saw it in hardcopy and cant find it online yet, would probably be behind a paywall
> 
> They are ALL owned by the Crown Trust - not by the BRF directly - EXCEPT
> Charles personally owns HIGHGROVE and a house in Romania - sic
> A residence/castle in No. Ireland by the British government - cannot remember name, sounds like an official residence for the head of the UK government in No. Ireland , ie he/she lives there, it does not stand empty til the BRF comes to town - the discussion of that residence was rather superficial
> SANDRINGHAM an BALMORAL are owned personally by the Queen, they have been passed down to the next sovereign
> 
> Good article with sizes, valuations and succession - who inherits each , the BIGGIES - Cornwall, Buck House, Clarence House, Windsor , Holyroodhouse (Scotland) are all in trust




Missing is Dumfries House, Ayrshire in Scotland. PC bought the house leading a consortium to take over the house and contents and now is part of The Great Steward of Scotland's Dumfries House Trust.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Luvbolide said:


> Oh yeah, *forgot to say that Queen Mary's mother (Queen Alexandra)* was Nicholas' mother's sister.  So it was family that George V refused to help.  Aside from any politics of the thing, I find it hard to believe that the Brits would be so heartless as to refuse to respond when family asked them for help.  I don't think there was any saving Nicholas or Alexi, but because women could not take the throne in Russia, there is a decent argument to be made that Alexandra and her 4 daughters could maybe have been saved.  Lenin was well aware that killing women and children was likely to be treated as inexcusable.  Okay,rant over!



Queen Alexandra was George V's mother, therefore Mary's mother in law.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Queen Mary's mother was the Duchess of Cambridge. Queen Alexandra was her MIL.



Oops sorry, I hadn't seen your post!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Missing is Dumfries House, Ayrshire in Scotland. PC bought the house leading a consortium to take over the house and contents and now is part of The Great Steward of Scotland's Dumfries House Trust.


Yes you are correct the WSJ has some missing ... the Castle of Mey perhaps shopuld be on the list, it was the residence of the Queen Mum , it is definitely (link) now in a trust (which one?)

My computer is fighting me and preventing further research but if I remember, Charles inherited it and created the trust, and was there not some recent kerfuffle about a donation from a questionable source ??? 









						Castle of Mey
					

Welcome to The Castle of Mey - The Queen Mother's Home in Caithness. Previously a Royal residence, The Castle of Mey is home to the beautiful surrounding gardens, visitor centre, animal centre and is available for luxury wedding venue hire.




					www.castleofmey.org.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Traveladdie said:


> I don't know what AH means but Andrew Morton is very well known and respected royal biographer. He also writes about the British monarchy for several of the UK newspapers.


the second word is hole if you get my meaning
thanks


----------



## sdkitty

Traveladdie said:


> I don't know what AH means but Andrew Morton is very well known and respected royal biographer. He also writes about the British monarchy for several of the UK newspapers.


He may be well known and credible but I don't know how he would know these things.....in any case, I guess it's fair to say both H&M are nasty pieces of work


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Large article this morning (Friday) in WALL STREET JOURNAL real estate section , I saw it in hardcopy and cant find it online yet, would probably be behind a paywall
> 
> They are ALL owned by the Crown Trust - not by the BRF directly - EXCEPT
> Charles personally owns HIGHGROVE and a house in Romania - sic
> A residence/castle in No. Ireland by the British government - cannot remember name, sounds like an official residence for the head of the UK government in No. Ireland , ie he/she lives there, it does not stand empty til the BRF comes to town - the discussion of that residence was rather superficial
> SANDRINGHAM an BALMORAL are owned personally by the Queen, they have been passed down to the next sovereign
> 
> Good article with sizes, valuations and succession - who inherits each , the BIGGIES - Cornwall, Buck House, Clarence House, Windsor , Holyroodhouse (Scotland) are all in trust


Here you go. Thanks so much for calling attention to it!

*The Billion-Dollar Property Portfolios of Queen Elizabeth and ...*
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-bi...ueen-elizabeth-and-prince-charles-11639069372 - Cached - Similar pages 
24 hours ago *...* And Sandringham is only the tip of the royal *property*-portfolio iceberg, which includes *castles*, palaces, country *houses*, townhouses, ...


----------



## caramelize126

papertiger said:


> The Vladimir tiara was bought that way at that time.
> 
> In regards to Nicolas, Alexandra, I don't think it was that simple:
> 
> Alexandra was granddaughter of Queen Victoria and was _also_ first cousin to George V, making _both_ Tsar and Tsarina first cousins to the King. (This interbreeding was thought most likely why N&A's son, Tsarevich Alexei had haemophilia).
> 
> George granted the RRF asylum in Britain but then withdrew (trying to find them safe passage and a place elsewhere) due to fear of the Monarch's own position. Nicolas was called 'Bloody Nicolas' here and Alexandra was German born (Britain had been at war with Germany for three years already (Great War) and almost whole generation of British Men were lost or mutilated). It would have been quite a precarious situation to give them a home here. This was when George changed his name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to Windsor. The Romanovs were related to other royal families (Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Norway) but none of these countries wanted to take the RRF either as the new Russian Government were now allies against Germany.
> 
> The issue (as I see it) was a lack of coordinated organisation, communication and will on the part of all European royal families who were very worried about the anti-monarchist feeling in their own countries, they had a lot to lose. There was a underlying belief that Nicolas and Alexandra had in many ways contributed to their own downfall and they weren't sure if they wanted him plotting revenge/return from their own shores.
> 
> In 1919 The British sent a ship that evacuated many 'White  Russians' including children of Nicolas' sisters. Many of these have British descendants today.



Came here to say this, but you have explained it much more articulately than i could have! 

There was a documentary on netflix that also discussed how George refused to give his cousin refuge in Britain because he was worried about the anti-monarchist sentiments and losing his crown. The documentary was basically saying that the BRF will always prioritize the crown over anything else and thats why they have lasted as long as they have.
But this makes me wonder why they havent done anything to shut H&M up. I would think that their antics are damaging and potentially threatening to the monarchy...


----------



## sdkitty

caramelize126 said:


> Came here to say this, but you have explained it much more articulately than i could have!
> 
> There was a documentary on netflix that also discussed how George refused to give his cousin refuge in Britain because he was worried about the anti-monarchist sentiments and losing his crown. The documentary was basically saying that the BRF will always prioritize the crown over anything else and thats why they have lasted as long as they have.
> But this makes me wonder why they havent done anything to shut H&M up. I would think that their antics are damaging and potentially threatening to the monarchy...


I wonder what can be done to shut them up.  If they don't give them their security money or whatever it is they think they are owed, they whine about it and call them racists.  If they do pay them there is no end to the bribe.  My idea would be cut them off and take away any right to use their titles.  Then at least it would be clear they are truly "free" and not a part of the RF


----------



## CarryOn2020

Beautiful article. Thanks so much for sharing.  Do they pay property taxes on their own holdings?  Looks like Charles will eventually get QE’s property and William gets Charles’s. So it would seem there is plenty for Hazzie.  This is why I doubt he purchased the Cali property. Of course, I could be wrong, I know nothing about owning land in the UK. 
Cheers, all.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Beautiful article. Thanks so much for sharing.  Do they pay property taxes on their own holdings?  Looks like Charles will eventually get QE’s property and William gets Charles’s. So it would seem there is plenty for Hazzie.  This is why I doubt he purchased the Cali property. Of course, I could be wrong, I know nothing about owning land in the UK.
> Cheers, all.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5270302



The Crown is tax-exempt 
QEII and PC are not subject to capital gains or inheritance tax


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Beautiful article. Thanks so much for sharing.  Do they pay property taxes on their own holdings?  Looks like Charles will eventually get QE’s property and William gets Charles’s. So it would seem there is plenty for Hazzie.  This is why I doubt he purchased the Cali property. Of course, I could be wrong, I know nothing about owning land in the UK.
> Cheers, all.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5270302



Harry won't get anything. Eldest son(s) gets all.
The above map doesn't distinguish between Crown Estate (not QEII's) and her own.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent, thank you. Good to know it’s ok to post about the Romanovs. I was worried we might get a warning if we continued on that trail. Faberge is a huge part of the Romanov story, so who is the BRF’s Faberge?
> 
> 43 of 50 eggs have been accounted for - this June,2021 article tells us where they are:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Secrets of the Fabergé Eggs
> 
> 
> In the waning decades of their rule, Russia's Romanov imperial family maintained a standing order with Peter Carl Fabergé to create jeweled Easter eggs. Here is the story of nine of the most important works of art that resulted from this remarkable commission.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Fabergé oversaw production, but the eggs were crafted by teams of metalsmiths, jewelers, designers, and other specialists who in turn were given wide artistic latitude. Although the eggs were made from precious materials, their value lay not in the cost of the particular jewels or metals used (some eggs were comparatively modest in that regard) but in the inventiveness and skill the artists brought to each one.
> 
> When the Bolsheviks took St. Petersburg, they seized the eggs, selling some of them and holding on to others. From that moment, each piece has gone on its own journey: In the early years the eggs weren’t particularly sought after—the market was flooded with Romanov art and objets—but gradually collectors became more keen, most famously the media magnate Malcolm Forbes, whose art collection at one point included nine eggs. Today they sell for tens of millions of dollars._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tsar Alexander II and Empress Maria Feodorovna with their family (the future tsar, Nicholas II, is standing in back).
> HULTON DEUTSCHGETTY IMAGES


I’m amazed how thoughtful some of the ideas behind these eggs are (like the rosebud one) seems like these guys may have been among the minority of royals who actually liked their spouses  

That winter egg is STUNNING,

I don’t know who the BRF’s faberge is, they do have several jewellers who make enamel work among their royal appointment list but I’ve never heard of them commissioning anything as detailed as a faberge egg, which is a shame. I couldn’t help wishing as I was reading about the plutocrats who bought eggs commissioned a jeweller to make a new unique egg of their own.


Sharont2305 said:


> Over to you Harkles.



I know it’s bad to give them attention but it’s going to be interesting to see what this year’s photoshop slop is.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Beautiful article. Thanks so much for sharing.  Do they pay property taxes on their own holdings?  Looks like Charles will eventually get QE’s property and William gets Charles’s. So it would seem there is plenty for Hazzie.  This is why I doubt he purchased the Cali property. Of course, I could be wrong, I know nothing about owning land in the UK.
> Cheers, all.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5270302


This is just scratching the surface. The crown estate owns an enormous amount of commercial and agricultural land as wellhttps://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/the-crown-estate-the-mysterious-property-empire-behind-queen-elizabeth-ii/a-57821897

There are some fascinating land deals in the U.K. The university of Cambridge basically owns the entire town of Cambridge and a lot of its surrounding farm land and rents it out to people. British Independent schools are also buying prime real estate in the likes of Singapore and China to build new branches of their school

Are you tempted to elaborate on what you know about the royals plans to expand Green business in Africa? I, for one, would be very interested 

Also does anyone know why they have estates in Romania?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I wonder what can be done to shut them up.  If they don't give them their security money or whatever it is they think they are owed, they whine about it and call them racists.  If they do pay them there is no end to the bribe.  My idea would be cut them off and take away any right to use their titles.  Then at least it would be clear they are truly "free" and not a part of the RF


They are doing a good job of hoisting themselves by their petards. Let them keep up the good work.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m amazed how thoughtful some of the ideas behind these eggs are (like the rosebud one) seems like these guys may have been among the minority of royals who actually liked their spouses
> 
> That winter egg is STUNNING,
> 
> I don’t know who the BRF’s faberge is, they do have several jewellers who make enamel work among their royal appointment list but I’ve never heard of them commissioning anything as detailed as a faberge egg, which is a shame. I couldn’t help wishing as I was reading about the plutocrats who bought eggs commissioned a jeweller to make a new unique egg of their own.
> 
> I know it’s bad to give them attention but it’s going to be interesting to see what this year’s photoshop slop is.
> 
> This is just scratching the surface. The crown estate owns an enormous amount of commercial and agricultural land as wellhttps://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/the-crown-estate-the-mysterious-property-empire-behind-queen-elizabeth-ii/a-57821897
> 
> There are some fascinating land deals in the U.K. The university of Cambridge basically owns the entire town of Cambridge and a lot of its surrounding farm land and rents it out to people. British Independent schools are also buying prime real estate in the likes of Singapore and China to build new branches of their school
> 
> Are you tempted to elaborate on what you know about the royals plans to expand Green business in Africa? I, for one, would be very interested
> 
> Also does anyone know why they have estates in Romania?




This article was published in October.








						Prince Harry Wrote an Op-Ed About Corporate Oil Drilling In Africa
					

He calls the drilling an "imminent threat" to the Okavango River Basin.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_Prince Harry did not mince his words when speaking out against corporate oil drilling in *Africa's Okavango River Basin* this week. The Duke of Sussex just released an op-ed in the Washington Post, co-written with Namibian environmental activist, conservationist, and poet, Reinhold Mangundu. The pair advocate against ReconAfrica, "a Canadian oil and gas company that has been granted licenses for exploratory drilling in an area of Namibia and Botswanalarger than some European countries."_


Another article on the BRF property - article from 2018:








						Inside the British Monarchy's £13 billion property empire
					

The list includes some of Britain's best-known buildings: Iconic race courses, grand hotels, and historic castles.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> This article was published in October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Wrote an Op-Ed About Corporate Oil Drilling In Africa
> 
> 
> He calls the drilling an "imminent threat" to the Okavango River Basin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry did not mince his words when speaking out against corporate oil drilling in *Africa's Okavango River Basin* this week. The Duke of Sussex just released an op-ed in the Washington Post, co-written with Namibian environmental activist, conservationist, and poet, Reinhold Mangundu. The pair advocate against ReconAfrica, "a Canadian oil and gas company that has been granted licenses for exploratory drilling in an area of Namibia and Botswanalarger than some European countries."_
> 
> 
> Another article on the BRF property - article from 2018:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside the British Monarchy's £13 billion property empire
> 
> 
> The list includes some of Britain's best-known buildings: Iconic race courses, grand hotels, and historic castles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com


I know he wants to save the wildlife so he can shoot it himself but this strikes me as the (sadly) normal sanctimonious hand-wringing the haves like to do at the have-nots.
(As I’ve said before the desert is as much a natural habitat as the fertile plains but for some reason no one seems to care about the gulf bumping off rats and venomous snakes   

 Do you think there is more of a focused reason behind this particular area?

On the topic of conservation, I hated that rubbish book ‘where the crawdads sing’ but I was fascinated to learn more about the author’s dodgy past at her wildlife sanctuary with her criminal ex-husband. The politics of conservation are certainly very interesting generally. 

My own conservation wish is that H next turns his interest to the proposed drilling of Antarctica and decides that him and his wife need to move there in person to protect it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> IMO it's very pertinent to this thread.
> 
> M&H are very short-sighted and have shown spite against their own families without a moment's thought that they could actually strengthen the anti-monarchist's cause. I am not pro-monarchy but I don't particularly want the alternative either.
> 
> I think all of this is much more serious than the tittle tattle the gossip colonists make of it. IMO H&M should be stripped of all their titles using a Parliament ruling since their words and actions are treacherous. The US should not allow H&M to use titles anyway but I leave that to you guys 'over there'.


The US does not 'recognize' the titles, but unfortunately .. many of the bonehead publications can't stop themselves from using the titles which REALLY pisses me off!!!  However, there were some publications that noted the displeasure of Megalomaniac using her Duchess title when addressing the Congress and Senate DEM leathers .. re: "Paid Leave for All".  I truly wish that QEII and/or Charles will take those titles away, but I think we all know that that would provide H&M more ammunition re: "victims"!


----------



## octopus17

jelliedfeels said:


> I know he wants to save the wildlife so he can shoot it himself but this strikes me as the (sadly) normal sanctimonious hand-wringing the haves like to do at the have-nots.
> (As I’ve said before the desert is as much a natural habitat as the fertile plains but for some reason no one seems to care about the gulf bumping off rats and venomous snakes
> 
> Do you think there is more of a focused reason behind this particular area?
> 
> On the topic of conservation, I hated that rubbish book ‘where the crawdads sing’ but I was fascinated to learn more about the author’s dodgy past at her wildlife sanctuary with her criminal ex-husband. The politics of conservation are certainly very interesting generally.
> 
> My own conservation wish is that *H next turns his interest to the proposed drilling of Antarctica and decides that him and his wife need to move there in person to protect it.*


With the amount of hot air they spout, they'd probably melt it....


----------



## papertiger

Cornflower Blue said:


> With the amount of hot air they spout, they'd probably melt it....






*Danger: Methane Hazard warning *


----------



## wisconsin

Deleted


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> The US does not 'recognize' the titles, but unfortunately .. many of the bonehead publications can't stop themselves from using the titles which REALLY pisses me off!!!  However, there were some publications that noted the displeasure of Megalomaniac using her Duchess title when addressing the Congress and Senate DEM leathers .. re: "Paid Leave for All".  I truly wish that QEII and/or Charles will take those titles away, but I think we all know that that would provide H&M more ammunition re: "victims"!


Here's one way to have the titles removed. To all USA posters here, please petition your Prez/Congress Members to demand that your Ambassador to the UK ask Boris Johnson to initiate the title removal in Parliament. HMTQ would have to give it royal assent to become law and HM doesn't usually interfere with Parliamentary decisions. 
PS: Please feel free to suggest a suitable replacement title for H&M like Shmuck and Shmuckess of Montecito or The Shmucks of Montecito etc..


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent, thank you. Good to know it’s ok to post about the Romanovs. I was worried we might get a warning if we continued on that trail. Faberge is a huge part of the Romanov story, so who is the BRF’s Faberge?
> 
> 43 of 50 eggs have been accounted for - this June,2021 article tells us where they are:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Secrets of the Fabergé Eggs
> 
> 
> In the waning decades of their rule, Russia's Romanov imperial family maintained a standing order with Peter Carl Fabergé to create jeweled Easter eggs. Here is the story of nine of the most important works of art that resulted from this remarkable commission.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Fabergé oversaw production, but the eggs were crafted by teams of metalsmiths, jewelers, designers, and other specialists who in turn were given wide artistic latitude. Although the eggs were made from precious materials, their value lay not in the cost of the particular jewels or metals used (some eggs were comparatively modest in that regard) but in the inventiveness and skill the artists brought to each one.
> 
> When the Bolsheviks took St. Petersburg, they seized the eggs, selling some of them and holding on to others. From that moment, each piece has gone on its own journey: In the early years the eggs weren’t particularly sought after—the market was flooded with Romanov art and objets—but gradually collectors became more keen, most famously the media magnate Malcolm Forbes, whose art collection at one point included nine eggs. Today they sell for tens of millions of dollars._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tsar Alexander II and Empress Maria Feodorovna with their family (the future tsar, Nicholas II, is standing in back).
> HULTON DEUTSCHGETTY IMAGES



When Malcolm Forbes was still alive, he kept his Faberge goodies, including his Imperial Eggs in a little museum off of the lobby of the Forbes building.  Admission was free, but the hours were odd and the building seemed to me to be off the beaten path.  It was never very crowded and contained his collection of US presidential papers and his other collections.  The only other collection that I can recall were boatloads of tiny soldiers set up in formation of various historic battles.  I went many times to check out the eggs and various other Faberge goodies.  I was sad to see that Forbes’ sons sold the Faberge to a Russian oligarch who has now sent them to the Faberge Museum in St. Petersburg, though admittedly they really should be there IMO.  I was afraid that they would disappear into a private collection, but was happy to see that they are now in a museum.


----------



## Chanbal

I believe this!
SALAD DRESSING DOWN *Thomas Markle blasts Meghan and ‘candyass’ Harry over her claim she grew up on $4.99 salads at budget restaurant*

_But Thomas, speaking from his home in Rosarito, Mexico, told The Sun: “*She’s never, ever, ever had to worry about anything like that in her life.*

“*We’d do the best restaurants in town and we’d do Sizzler because it was convenient. We never had to rub our pennies together and just have the salad bar.

“She had the salad bar — but she had a meal as well*.”

He added of Meghan’s note: “She sends letters to senators and congressmen where she calls herself the Duchess. That’s totally wrong. You really shouldn’t do that.”_









						Thomas Markle blasts Meghan & 'candyass' Harry over $4.99 salad claim
					

MEGHAN’S father has scotched her claims she grew up on salads at a budget restaurant. Thomas Markle, 77, also called Harry a candyass, a timid or cowardly person, for quitting the UK. Meghan tried …




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I believe this!
> SALAD DRESSING DOWN *Thomas Markle blasts Meghan and ‘candyass’ Harry over her claim she grew up on $4.99 salads at budget restaurant*
> 
> _But Thomas, speaking from his home in Rosarito, Mexico, told The Sun: “*She’s never, ever, ever had to worry about anything like that in her life.*
> 
> “*We’d do the best restaurants in town and we’d do Sizzler because it was convenient. We never had to rub our pennies together and just have the salad bar.
> 
> “She had the salad bar — but she had a meal as well*.”
> 
> He added of Meghan’s note: “She sends letters to senators and congressmen where she calls herself the Duchess. That’s totally wrong. You really shouldn’t do that.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle blasts Meghan & 'candyass' Harry over $4.99 salad claim
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S father has scotched her claims she grew up on salads at a budget restaurant. Thomas Markle, 77, also called Harry a candyass, a timid or cowardly person, for quitting the UK. Meghan tried …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



I'm so glad he said something


----------



## bag-mania

Candyass! A perfect description of Harry. I’m sure he has a couple of names in his head for his daughter but he’s not about to share them publicly.


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> When Malcolm Forbes was still alive, he kept his Faberge goodies, including his Imperial Eggs in a little museum off of the lobby of the Forbes building.  Admission was free, but the hours were odd and the building seemed to me to be off the beaten path.  It was never very crowded and contained his collection of US presidential papers and his other collections.  The only other collection that I can recall were boatloads of tiny soldiers set up in formation of various historic battles.  I went many times to check out the eggs and various other Faberge goodies.  I was sad to see that Forbes’ sons sold the Faberge to a Russian oligarch who has now sent them to the Faberge Museum in St. Petersburg, though admittedly they really should be there IMO.  I was afraid that they would disappear into a private collection, but was happy to see that they are now in a museum.



I'm happy they're in a museum too. Great for St Petersburg domestic and international tourism industry too. 

There is a Faberge exhibition going on at the V&A in London at the moment. Since many are owned by the Queen, I bet there are some of Queen Mary's 'bargains' on display too  .  









						V&A · Fabergé in London: Romance to Revolution - Exhibition at South Kensington
					

Legendary Russian goldsmith, Carl Fabergé, fostered an Anglo-Russian relationship which saw the opening of a London branch in 1903, the only one outside Russia.




					www.vam.ac.uk
				





Faberge in London: Romance to Revolution https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/inside-the-fabergé-in-london-romance-to-revolution-exhibition

To think Harry grew up around many of these objects and takes them all for granted preferring the tat that M peddles.


----------



## Sophisticatted

jelliedfeels said:


> Also does anyone know why they have estates in Romania?



Here is some info.  It looks like a personal passion, plus real estate hobby.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sorry to read that BBC didn't receive more complaints for the traitorous Amol Rajan's documentary.

*RINCES AND THE PRESS GETS 925 COMPLAINTS*




THE BBC had 925 complaints over its documentary about Princes William and Harry’s relationship with the media.
The first episode of the two-part Princes and the Press — which aired last month — received 776 complaints alone.
Objections related to alleged bias against the royal family.
Following the documentary by journalist Amol Rajan, 38, a carol service led by the Duchess of Cambridge was moved from the BBC to ITV.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I believe this!
> SALAD DRESSING DOWN *Thomas Markle blasts Meghan and ‘candyass’ Harry over her claim she grew up on $4.99 salads at budget restaurant*
> 
> _But Thomas, speaking from his home in Rosarito, Mexico, told The Sun: “*She’s never, ever, ever had to worry about anything like that in her life.*
> 
> “*We’d do the best restaurants in town and we’d do Sizzler because it was convenient. We never had to rub our pennies together and just have the salad bar.
> 
> “She had the salad bar — but she had a meal as well*.”
> 
> He added of Meghan’s note: “She sends letters to senators and congressmen where she calls herself the Duchess. That’s totally wrong. You really shouldn’t do that.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle blasts Meghan & 'candyass' Harry over $4.99 salad claim
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S father has scotched her claims she grew up on salads at a budget restaurant. Thomas Markle, 77, also called Harry a candyass, a timid or cowardly person, for quitting the UK. Meghan tried …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


excuse me if I'm outing myself as some sort of plebian but I used to like to go to Sizzler for lunch with my office mates....so she's trying to imply that going there is something for poor people?  oh, I know - it's not something for royalty


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> excuse me if I'm outing myself as some sort of plebian but I used to like to go to Sizzler for lunch with my office mates....so she's trying to imply that going there is something for poor people?  oh, I know - it's not something for royalty


The all Sizzler thing was ridiculous, one more of many lies from Little Miss Forgetful.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry to read that BBC didn't receive more complaints for the traitorous Amol Rajan's documentary.
> 
> *RINCES AND THE PRESS GETS 925 COMPLAINTS*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE BBC had 925 complaints over its documentary about Princes William and Harry’s relationship with the media.
> The first episode of the two-part Princes and the Press — which aired last month — received 776 complaints alone.
> Objections related to alleged bias against the royal family.
> Following the documentary by journalist Amol Rajan, 38, a carol service led by the Duchess of Cambridge was moved from the BBC to ITV.



Not many people go out of their way to complain anymore because they know it doesn’t do any good. TV networks will air what they want. Did the show get millions of viewers? If most people knew it was going to be a biased hit job they may not have bothered to watch it at all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if we will ever see the results of such investigation. 

*Is Meghan 'bullying' probe being kicked into long grass? Buckingham Palace inquiry into allegations the Duchess of Sussex bullied staff only interviews 'a tiny handful' of people who worked for her*

*Revelation prompted fears the investigation is being 'kicked into the long grass'*
*Palace aides announced in March that they were launching an internal inquiry *
*Staff were said to have been left in tears and feeling 'traumatised' *
*A Buckingham Palace inquiry into allegations the Duchess of Sussex bullied staff has so far only interviewed 'a tiny handful' of people who worked for her.*

_The revelation has prompted fears that the investigation, set up nine months ago, is being 'kicked into the long grass'.

Palace aides announced in March that they were launching an internal inquiry into claims Meghan's behaviour drove two personal assistants out of the household and 'undermined the confidence' of a third.

Staff were said to have been left in tears and feeling 'traumatised'…

*The Sussexes would, on average, have had around 15 employees working for them at any one time* – *with up to 25 over the course of Meghan's brief time in the Royal Family between 2017 and 2020.* 

But there is such a wall of silence around the entire probe, on the orders of the Queen's ultra-cautious private secretary Sir Edward Young, that no one within the household has been told whether it is even still ongoing.

Part of the problem is that the Palace has never before had to deal with an official bullying complaint against a member of the royal family – effectively an employer – and so has no precedent on which to act. _









						Fears over Palace inquiry into claims Meghan Markle bullied staff
					

The revelation has prompted fears that the investigation, set up nine months ago, is being 'kicked into the long grass'. Pictured: Meghan and Harry at Windsor in 2018.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Many thanks and congratulations for the nicknames added to The List.


@sdkitty
For your #3, Nasty pieces of work, here's the Gold Ribbon. 



@poopsie
For your #5, Merchin Meg, welcome to the Nickname Master's Club. 
For your #6, El Chimpo.  



@jelliedfeels
For your #9, Perpetually frowning baldie.  
For your #10, Your husband Schmuckles the clown, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club. 



@Chanbal
For your #32, Candyass, a timid or cowardly person (H), here's The List #32 Ribbon. And to please you dear Chanbal, let’s also give credit to Thomas Markle (FIL) & James Beal (Author) for this nickname.


----------



## Sophisticatted

So, according to rumors, the Queen doesn’t want to deal with it (would rather it be dealt with after she’s gone).  According to observation, Charles doesn’t want to deal with it, and doesn’t seem to be the type to take up the mantle of dealing with it once he is king.  William has somewhat dealt with it; she wouldn’t even be in this family, if it were up to him. 

So, they let a snake in to the party, but didn’t book the snake handlers???


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> So, according to rumors, the Queen doesn’t want to deal with it (would rather it be dealt with after she’s gone).  According to observation, Charles doesn’t want to deal with it, and doesn’t seem to be the type to take up the mantle of dealing with it once he is king.  William has somewhat dealt with it; she wouldn’t even be in this family, if it were up to him.
> 
> So, they let a snake in to the party, but didn’t book the snake handlers???


Family feuds are always ugly. And someone like Methane will definitely make it even uglier to turn it to her advantage. If she can craft a letter to her own father with all the scheming required to "tug at heartstrings", just imagine what conniving she will do to turn others against the BRF. Hazard will be coming up with unveriable incidents ... oh wait, they did that already with Oprah.

If she wants to swan around and be feted as the Douchebag of Sucks, I think she is stuck in the US where people like the ninnies who received her in NY are still starstruck by bad fashion choices. She could travel to private estates and yachts round the world belonging to her cronies, but she will never get international faux-royal treatment except from the spineless like Tedros.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if we will ever see the results of such investigation.
> 
> *Is Meghan 'bullying' probe being kicked into long grass? Buckingham Palace inquiry into allegations the Duchess of Sussex bullied staff only interviews 'a tiny handful' of people who worked for her*
> 
> *Revelation prompted fears the investigation is being 'kicked into the long grass'*
> *Palace aides announced in March that they were launching an internal inquiry *
> *Staff were said to have been left in tears and feeling 'traumatised' *
> *A Buckingham Palace inquiry into allegations the Duchess of Sussex bullied staff has so far only interviewed 'a tiny handful' of people who worked for her.*
> 
> _The revelation has prompted fears that the investigation, set up nine months ago, is being 'kicked into the long grass'.
> 
> Palace aides announced in March that they were launching an internal inquiry into claims Meghan's behaviour drove two personal assistants out of the household and 'undermined the confidence' of a third.
> 
> Staff were said to have been left in tears and feeling 'traumatised'…
> 
> *The Sussexes would, on average, have had around 15 employees working for them at any one time* – *with up to 25 over the course of Meghan's brief time in the Royal Family between 2017 and 2020.*
> 
> But there is such a wall of silence around the entire probe, on the orders of the Queen's ultra-cautious private secretary Sir Edward Young, that no one within the household has been told whether it is even still ongoing.
> 
> Part of the problem is that the Palace has never before had to deal with an official bullying complaint against a member of the royal family – effectively an employer – and so has no precedent on which to act. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fears over Palace inquiry into claims Meghan Markle bullied staff
> 
> 
> The revelation has prompted fears that the investigation, set up nine months ago, is being 'kicked into the long grass'. Pictured: Meghan and Harry at Windsor in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If I remember correctly BP announced at the time that there would be an independent investigation and also according to this March 13, 2021 The Sun article.

BUCKINGHAM PALACE are bringing in a team of independent investigators to launch the probe into claims Meghan Markle bullied royal staff, it has been reported.

Palace officials have opted to employ a third-party law firm to conduct the investigation into the allegations from former and current aides, according to royal insiders.

The inquiry will no doubt ramp up tensions between the Sussexes and the Royal Family - as one source warned "the actual worst incidences haven't come out", the Times reports.

The dramatic U-turn from the originally announced in-house inquiry comes after Meghan and Harry's explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey.

The couple has found themselves at the centre of a historic race row with the British monarchy, after Meghan claimed members of the Royals had concerns about "how dark" her son Archie's skin might be, when she was pregnant.

However, it has emerged that Prince Harry and William have finally "been in contact" amid the Oprah fall out after it was reported they had not spoken for months.

*'HYPOCRITE HARRY'*
During the bombshell interview with Winfrey, Harry also claimed that his family had "cut him off" financially after he and Meghan left the Firm.

But pals of the Prince of Wales have slammed the Duke's account and accused him of "hypocrisy".

One fiery friend of Charles told the Time: "What f*****g hypocrisy. When Harry and Meghan left last year, they wanted to become ‘financially independent".

Another reportedly added: "It was a surprise to hear he’d been cut off, given the bank statements.

"The prince continued to provide Harry and Meghan with financial support after their move to America, while they found their feet."

Several current and former royal aides are set to submit evidence for the inquiry, after they were unable to provide testimony in court during Meghan's recent legal battle against the Mail on Sunday.

Jason Knauf, the Sussexes then Communications Secretary, kicked off the bullying saga in October 2018 after he sent an email to a senior courtier.

He expressed his concern that "the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year."

Despite Knauf's claim that "The duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights," the complaint was not pursued by the HR department.

Two senior members of staff came forward in February this year, alleging that they had been bullied by Meghan.

One former employee claimed they were personally "humiliated" by the 39-year-old ex-Suits star, and that two other employees were bullied by her.

*'HARROWING' STORIES*
Meghan has denied the claims, with the Sussexes spokesperson branding it: "a calculated smear campaign based on misleading and harmful misinformation."

But one Royal insider suggested, "The actual worst incidences haven’t
come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell."

Another warned some scandals, "could come out in the wash that hasn't been told."

Meghan and Harry are not expected to be invited to participate in the Palace inquiry - despite having written to "The Firm" specifically regarding the matter.

However, it is reported that the Palace is keen for the examination to "not be played out in public" to guarantee those involved can "feel comfortable".

A Palace spokesman said: "Our commitment to look into the circumstances around the allegations from former staff of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is being taken forward but we will not be providing a public commentary on it."

The bullying probe has been launched with the intention to "learn lessons" by conducting a thorough investigation involving a broad-spectrum of Palace staff.

Royal sources also slammed the couple's claims that the Palace offered her no assistance when she felt suicidal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whatever her problem is, it began at a very early age and was never dealt with.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whatever her problem is, it began at a very early age and was never dealt with.



THIS is the video that opened my eyes!  Daddy’s little girl turned BEEEECH !!


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> I'm happy they're in a museum too. Great for St Petersburg domestic and international tourism industry too.
> 
> There is a Faberge exhibition going on at the V&A in London at the moment. Since many are owned by the Queen, I bet there are some of Queen Mary's 'bargains' on display too  .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> V&A · Fabergé in London: Romance to Revolution - Exhibition at South Kensington
> 
> 
> Legendary Russian goldsmith, Carl Fabergé, fostered an Anglo-Russian relationship which saw the opening of a London branch in 1903, the only one outside Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vam.ac.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faberge in London: Romance to Revolution https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/inside-the-fabergé-in-london-romance-to-revolution-exhibition
> 
> To think Harry grew up around many of these objects and takes them all for granted preferring the tat that M peddles.



I saw the write up about the V&A - I would love to see it.   I may be in Paris in early January, but I am reluctant to add another set of borders and rules this year.  The Queen has that beautiful Mosaic Egg - I would love to see that one particularly.  Maybe the Queen’s eggs will lure me across the Channel!!

I would really love to go to Moscow and St. Petersburg as well, but the situation there seems a bit fraught right now…rats!!

An interesting point that you made about Hapless Harry - wonder if he takes many of the treasures around him for granted.  It does seem to think that TQ’s fabulous tiaras should be available to him, MM and her hairdresser at a moments notice!  So obnoxious!!


----------



## needlv




----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


>




and I absolutely have no idea who Jussie Smollett is  

and f she's anything like M I don't want to know


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> and I absolutely have no idea who Jussie Smollett is
> 
> and f she's anything like M I don't want to know



its a male actor who was convicted after he was caught faking a hate crime in the USA.  That wasn’t the crime, I think it was lying to police (multiple occasions), and a huge waste of police time and resources Investigating his lies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> its a male actor who was convicted after he was caught faking a hate crime in the USA.  That wasn’t the crime, I think it was lying to police (multiple occasions), and a huge waste of police time and resources Investigating his lies.



In other words, he is a fraud, just like dearie dreary MM. 

Old story:








						Meghan confesses to lying so she could land a role in resurfaced clip
					

Meghan Markle confessed to lying to casting directors so she could land a role in a resurfaced clip from her Suits run. The Duchess of Sussex, 38, opened up about her dishonesty and admitted she wa…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Roxanna

Hermes Zen said:


> THIS is the video that opened my eyes!  Daddy’s little girl turned BEEEECH !!


Exactly.  It's like the final piece of puzzle.   I wonder what Harry found in her and what on earth he meant  when he said in his pre-wedding interview that Diana and her would be thick as thieves. Its certainly make one to pause and think.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whatever her problem is, it began at a very early age and was never dealt with.



New nickname: Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic


----------



## xincinsin

Roxanna said:


> Exactly.  It's like the final piece of puzzle.   I wonder what Harry found in her and what on earth he meant  when he said in his pre-wedding interview that Diana and her would be thick as thieves. Its certainly make one to pause and think.


Narcs are good at putting up a false front to worm their way in. I have no doubt that despite her professed naivete, Methane studied Diana and made sure to model herself after the late princess to suck Hazard in. Once she had him hook, line, sinker and ring on finger, she started the media victim ploy and feeding him persuasive tales of how they could make it big on their own. Not excusing his later complicity, but he did show some backbone at the start.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> When Malcolm Forbes was still alive, he kept his Faberge goodies, including his Imperial Eggs in a little museum off of the lobby of the Forbes building.  Admission was free, but the hours were odd and the building seemed to me to be off the beaten path.  It was never very crowded and contained his collection of US presidential papers and his other collections.  The only other collection that I can recall were boatloads of tiny soldiers set up in formation of various historic battles.  I went many times to check out the eggs and various other Faberge goodies.  I was sad to see that Forbes’ sons sold the Faberge to a Russian oligarch who has now sent them to the Faberge Museum in St. Petersburg, though admittedly they really should be there IMO.  I was afraid that they would disappear into a private collection, but was happy to see that they are now in a museum.


I remember the museum and visited, not a crowded breathing-on-the-installment-plan  kind of challenge like the Met, but cosy and the collection was breathtaking


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> Oh yeah, forgot to say that Queen Mary's mother (Queen Alexandra) was Nicholas' mother's sister.  So it was family that George V refused to help.  Aside from any politics of the thing, I find it hard to believe that the Brits would be so heartless as to refuse to respond when family asked them for help.  I don't think there was any saving Nicholas or Alexi, but because women could not take the throne in Russia, there is a decent argument to be made that Alexandra and her 4 daughters could maybe have been saved.  Lenin was well aware that killing women and children was likely to be treated as inexcusable.  Okay,rant over!


On the Brits accepting the Romanovs, it was VERY complicated … all the royal houses were related … 
Ex, King George’s cousin Kaiser Wilhelm started the war … the German cousin declared war on the English one … 
AND a the UK needed support from the Bolsheviks/Mensheviks to win WWI - not clear who was in charge ca 1917 / 1918, Russia would have a civil war til 1923. The Bolsheviks got out of WWI, settled with Germany, to end Germany’s war on 2 fronts , so why did Wilhelm not take care of his first cousin Tsar Nicolas in treaty ?? Well the Bolsheviks were not solidly in control in Russia …


----------



## Roxanna

xincinsin said:


> Narcs are good at putting up a false front to worm their way in. I have no doubt that despite her professed naivete, Methane studied Diana and made sure to model herself after the late princess to suck Hazard in. Once she had him hook, line, sinker and ring on finger, she started the media victim ploy and feeding him persuasive tales of how they could make it big on their own. Not excusing his later complicity, but he did show some backbone at the start.


Agreed.  However, I guess despite her efforts  she is nowhere near being ppls princess or even being likeable.   It's well possible  that all what has in her supporters is affects by projection  at the best.


----------



## marietouchet

Roxanna said:


> Agreed.  However, I guess despite her efforts  she is nowhere near being ppls princess or even being likeable.   It's well possible  that all what has in her supporters is affects by projection  at the best.


People’s Princess … Di sold magazine covers and her presence at a charitable red carpet event was priceless, she (mostly) did not present herself as a humanitarian in a refugee camp or saving elephants , her principle avatar/brand was the impeccably dressed princess
Times are different … MM wrote a book, owns the charity - hmmm, and has followers - on IG , twitter , sugars -  so far that has not coalesced in a coherent brand
if anything, H&M seems to be using a shotgun approach, trying everything out to see what fits


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> In other words, he is a fraud, just like dearie dreary MM.
> 
> Old story:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan confesses to lying so she could land a role in resurfaced clip
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle confessed to lying to casting directors so she could land a role in a resurfaced clip from her Suits run. The Duchess of Sussex, 38, opened up about her dishonesty and admitted she wa…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


And if I remember correctly her lie was also a lie. Her father at one point said she was in that union because he was the one that paid her dues.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Luvbolide said:


> When Malcolm Forbes was still alive, he kept his Faberge goodies, including his Imperial Eggs in a little museum off of the lobby of the Forbes building.  Admission was free, but the hours were odd and the building seemed to me to be off the beaten path.  It was never very crowded and contained his collection of US presidential papers and his other collections.  The only other collection that I can recall were boatloads of tiny soldiers set up in formation of various historic battles.  I went many times to check out the eggs and various other Faberge goodies.  I was sad to see that Forbes’ sons sold the Faberge to a Russian oligarch who has now sent them to the Faberge Museum in St. Petersburg, though admittedly they really should be there IMO.  I was afraid that they would disappear into a private collection, but was happy to see that they are now in a museum.


I love small passion project and personal collection museums! They have so much personality. 


papertiger said:


> I'm happy they're in a museum too. Great for St Petersburg domestic and international tourism industry too.
> 
> There is a Faberge exhibition going on at the V&A in London at the moment. Since many are owned by the Queen, I bet there are some of Queen Mary's 'bargains' on display too  .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> V&A · Fabergé in London: Romance to Revolution - Exhibition at South Kensington
> 
> 
> Legendary Russian goldsmith, Carl Fabergé, fostered an Anglo-Russian relationship which saw the opening of a London branch in 1903, the only one outside Russia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vam.ac.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faberge in London: Romance to Revolution https://www.vam.ac.uk/articles/inside-the-fabergé-in-london-romance-to-revolution-exhibition
> 
> To think Harry grew up around many of these objects and takes them all for granted preferring the tat that M peddles.


You raise an interesting point about the Pearls before Harry the swine. I do  wonder how often any of them look at say the paintings on the wall.

Speaking of H’s taste, I’m surprised he didn’t do a ‘sweet gesture’ and get a replica emerald tiara made in gold vermeil. 


Sophisticatted said:


> Here is some info.  It looks like a personal passion, plus real estate hobby.


Thank you. That’s really interesting. Maybe I’ll make a trip to Transylvania- I’m certainly witchy enough   


Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry to read that BBC didn't receive more complaints for the traitorous Amol Rajan's documentary.
> 
> *RINCES AND THE PRESS GETS 925 COMPLAINTS*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE BBC had 925 complaints over its documentary about Princes William and Harry’s relationship with the media.
> The first episode of the two-part Princes and the Press — which aired last month — received 776 complaints alone.
> Objections related to alleged bias against the royal family.
> Following the documentary by journalist Amol Rajan, 38, a carol service led by the Duchess of Cambridge was moved from the BBC to ITV.


That’s actually quite a good amount of complaints. Ultimately the problem is no matter how many people complain the production team can brush it off as ‘controversy is good’ and ‘low ratings don’t matter if it’s thought provoking’ which are concepts I don’t disagree with though I think it might be missing out the simpler explanation that people didn’t like it because it was a load of ****.


needlv said:


> its a male actor who was convicted after he was caught faking a hate crime in the USA.  That wasn’t the crime, I think it was lying to police (multiple occasions), and a huge waste of police time and resources Investigating his lies.


The absolute funniest thing about this case was this d-list actor Smollett is such a raging narcissist (remind you of anyone?) that he claimed his two attackers racist, homophobic white men  recognised him from the black, gay tv show he had a bit part in! 

extremely believable that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Prince’s passion project - it looks like a private home, quite charming and fun.  

Prices seem reasonable :








						The Prince Of Wales's Guesthouses Valea Zălanului - Official reservation system - Instant confirmation
					

His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales's private nature retreat lies nestled amongst the meadows and hills of Zalán Valley (Zalánpatak,...




					the-prince-of-waless-guesthouses.pynbooking.direct
				




My question — who called _shabby chic_? 
_Our philosophy of restoring heritage architecture is characterised by utmost respect for the textures and atmospheres of ancient buildings. All the rooms have been lovingly restored and furnished with authentic antiques and textiles from Transylvania. The way we restore derelict houses is barely noticeable, rather would it seem that the buildings have aged gently and gradually without recent intervention. *The property is not to be seen as a 'shabby chic' styled holiday resort*, it is genuine in its harmony and guests feel like staying in a centuries-old private home.





						Transylvania's Authentic Charm - H.R.H. Prince Charles of Wales's Transylvanian Retreat
					

Holidays in Transylvania, Romania. Nature holidays in the wild flower meadows of Prince Charles. Accommodation in heritage guesthouses of The Prince of Wales.




					zalan.transylvaniancastle.com
				



_


----------



## Kevinaxx

I just had a bit of thought and I thought you ladies might appreciate this especially…

realizing you’re getting older (whether it’s physically older or just experience wise older) is when you see someone five, ten years younger (same type as “older” definition) come along and say something you would probably have said or done years ago.

acting older/more mature/wise is knowing not to get caught up in that drama by feeling the need to tell them what’s “right”.

I have a feeling Meghan is a 40 year old body stuck with a high school mentality.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kevinaxx said:


> I just had a bit of thought and I thought you ladies might appreciate this especially…
> 
> realizing you’re getting older (whether it’s physically older or just experience wise older) is when you see someone five, ten years younger (same type as “older” definition) come along and say something you would probably have said or done years ago.
> 
> acting older/more mature/wise is knowing not to get caught up in that drama by feeling the need to tell them what’s “right”.
> 
> I have a feeling Meghan is a 40 year old body stuck with a high school mentality.



100% agree about her immature mentality.
Imo Not high school, this goes all the way back to the 5th grade dishwashing project.  My armchair analysis is she never learned how to handle the attention from that project. She watched actors and actresses on the Married with Children show and became quite the diva herself.  Her parents let her behave in an obnoxious manner [common for her age group], probably thinking they were teaching her to be oh-so-strong. I agree she is definitely a 40+ yr old trapped in a juvenile mind — just like Hazzie.  Neither one behave as adults.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if we will ever see the results of such investigation.
> 
> *Is Meghan 'bullying' probe being kicked into long grass? Buckingham Palace inquiry into allegations the Duchess of Sussex bullied staff only interviews 'a tiny handful' of people who worked for her*
> 
> *Revelation prompted fears the investigation is being 'kicked into the long grass'*
> *Palace aides announced in March that they were launching an internal inquiry *
> *Staff were said to have been left in tears and feeling 'traumatised' *
> *A Buckingham Palace inquiry into allegations the Duchess of Sussex bullied staff has so far only interviewed 'a tiny handful' of people who worked for her.*
> 
> _The revelation has prompted fears that the investigation, set up nine months ago, is being 'kicked into the long grass'.
> 
> Palace aides announced in March that they were launching an internal inquiry into claims Meghan's behaviour drove two personal assistants out of the household and 'undermined the confidence' of a third.
> 
> Staff were said to have been left in tears and feeling 'traumatised'…
> 
> *The Sussexes would, on average, have had around 15 employees working for them at any one time* – *with up to 25 over the course of Meghan's brief time in the Royal Family between 2017 and 2020.*
> 
> But there is such a wall of silence around the entire probe, on the orders of the Queen's ultra-cautious private secretary Sir Edward Young, that no one within the household has been told whether it is even still ongoing.
> 
> Part of the problem is that the Palace has never before had to deal with an official bullying complaint against a member of the royal family – effectively an employer – and so has no precedent on which to act. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fears over Palace inquiry into claims Meghan Markle bullied staff
> 
> 
> The revelation has prompted fears that the investigation, set up nine months ago, is being 'kicked into the long grass'. Pictured: Meghan and Harry at Windsor in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I am a pragmatist, some people misbehave, there should be consequences, but what and how ? If you cannot answer the question, then let go of agonizing over the lack of punishment 

What should the BRF do ? The bullying problem no longer exists. I dont doubt the BRF personnel manual has been updated to curb future issues.  Ok, the inquiry findings could be published, does it really matter when ??? 

H&M are gone and no longer get funds or live in the palace. They have been GHOSTED. Just like Andrew. 

Yes, title removal is a possibility BUT 
1. Will that get H&M to shut up ??? I dont think so, it could make matters worse. 
2. The duchies of Sussex and York wont be touched until there is some resolution of the Andrew matter - stay tuned ... 
3. It is a bad time to do anything. Cant we wait until after the Jubilee please? HMTQ is not well. Charles has not been looking well either.  Boris (who might be needed) is in the doghouse, COVID. 

What else could the BRF do?


----------



## sdkitty

Roxanna said:


> Exactly.  It's like the final piece of puzzle.   I wonder what Harry found in her and what on earth he meant  when he said in his pre-wedding interview that Diana and her would be thick as thieves. Its certainly make one to pause and think.


witchcraft


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> I love small passion project and personal collection museums! They have so much personality.
> 
> You raise an interesting point about the Pearls before Harry the swine. I do  wonder how often any of them look at say the paintings on the wall.
> 
> Speaking of H’s taste, I’m surprised he didn’t do a ‘sweet gesture’ and get a replica emerald tiara made in gold vermeil.
> 
> Thank you. That’s really interesting. Maybe I’ll make a trip to Transylvania- I’m certainly witchy enough
> 
> That’s actually quite a good amount of complaints. Ultimately the problem is no matter how many people complain the production team can brush it off as ‘controversy is good’ and ‘low ratings don’t matter if it’s thought provoking’ which are concepts I don’t disagree with though I think it might be missing out the simpler explanation that people didn’t like it because it was a load of ****.
> 
> The absolute funniest thing about this case was this d-list actor Smollett is such a raging narcissist (remind you of anyone?) that he claimed his two attackers racist, homophobic white men  recognised him from the black, gay tv show he had a bit part in!
> 
> extremely believable that.


*"...Smollett is such a raging narcissist (remind you of anyone?)... *

 YES! Jesse Smollett is another California born Narcissist, Santa Rosa, 1982,  joining the infamous Merchin' Madam of Montecito, who, even though "recollections may vary" is reported  (depending on the source) to have been born in LA in 1981.

In his case, Smollett claimed he had received a death threat type letter but the producers of the TV show he appeared in were not taking it seriously so he staged being attacked to get attention. His attackers were two black brothers, friends, and one had done stand in work for Smollett on the show. They were supposed to lightly beat him, dump bleach on him and put a noose loosely around his neck. Money exchanged hands, they purchased the props and the case garnered major headlines. It unraveled under closer scrutiny, the brothers were captured on store security video purchasing some items used in the attack, security video showing them "casing the site" the night before the attack, a $3500. check from Smollett in payment, and their detailed testimony.  Smollett was tried and convicted this week on 6 felony counts of disorderly conduct for lying to the Chicago Police Dept and lying under oath to the Jury. 

He was sued in 2019 in Civil Court by the City of Chicago to recoup $130,106.15 in costs including the 1836 hours of police overtime dedicated to investigating the case. He refused to pay and counter sued the City for "malicious prosecution." An understatement in one article this week said the City considered the Guilty verdict in Smollett's trial as vindication for having filed their Civil Suit in 2019 and they will pursue payment.

Meanwhile, the show "Empire" has ended so Smollett would have no show to return to. Production had to shut down in 2020 due to the Pandemic and there was a "corporate realignment as Fox TV was reorganized under Disney."

Lots of wasted effort, just like so many of her stunts and lies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I am a pragmatist, some people misbehave, there should be consequences, but what and how ? If you cannot answer the question, then let go of agonizing over the lack of punishment
> 
> What should the BRF do ? The bullying problem no longer exists. I dont doubt the BRF personnel manual has been updated to curb future issues.  Ok, the inquiry findings could be published, does it really matter when ???
> 
> H&M are gone and no longer get funds or live in the palace. They have been GHOSTED. Just like Andrew.
> 
> Yes, title removal is a possibility BUT
> 1. Will that get H&M to shut up ??? I dont think so, it could make matters worse.
> 2. The duchies of Sussex and York wont be touched until there is some resolution of the Andrew matter - stay tuned ...
> 3. It is a bad time to do anything. Cant we wait until after the Jubilee please? HMTQ is not well. Charles has not been looking well either.  Boris (who might be needed) is in the doghouse, COVID.
> 
> What else could the BRF do?



Personnel manual updated  ✓
Bullies removed ✓
Inquiry findings published ??? Not recommended, imo.  A simple statement indicating the matter is resolved. Now, if H&M blab the details, they need to be held accountable. Personnel records are private.  
Title removal ?? Hazzie needs to man up and willingly renounce his title and LoS. No more half-in/half-out. He has caused enough trouble, said unkind things about his father and brother, his wife has lied, he is a proven hypocrite. Give it up. Game over. Renounce and the world will leave ya alone.

The BRF could persuade Hazzie - perhaps with cash, perhaps some sweet nods to the kids, perhaps a house on someone’s land. Undoubtedly, they know what works with him. Use it so we can all move on.  Best advice is to get it done asap. Otherwise, H&M will show up at the celebrations and expect to be on the main balcony. They will make it _awkward_.  
The world does not want _awkward_ right now.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Personnel manual updated  ✓
> Bullies removed ✓
> Inquiry findings published ??? Not recommended, imo.  A simple statement indicating the matter is resolved. Now, if H&M blab the details, they need to be held accountable. Personnel records are private.
> Title removal ?? Hazzie needs to man up and willingly renounce his title and LoS. No more half-in/half-out. He has caused enough trouble, said unkind things about his father and brother, his wife has lied, he is a proven hypocrite. Give it up. Game over. Renounce and the world will leave ya alone.
> 
> The BRF could persuade Hazzie - perhaps with cash, perhaps some sweet nods to the kids, perhaps a house on someone’s land. Undoubtedly, they know what works with him. Use it so we can all move on.  Best advice is to get it done asap. Otherwise, H&M will show up at the celebrations and expect to be on the main balcony. They will make it _awkward_.
> The world does not want _awkward_ right now.


but will what works with H work with H, husband of M?
BTW, does anyone else think Meghan calling him H is just ridiculous?  who does that?
maybe that's part of her domination....like when Theon in Game of Thrones was changed to Reek


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Charles personally owns HIGHGROVE and a house in Romania - sic



A house in Romania? How random.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Kevinaxx said:


> I just had a bit of thought and I thought you ladies might appreciate this especially…
> 
> realizing you’re getting older (whether it’s physically older or just experience wise older) is when you see someone five, ten years younger (same type as “older” definition) come along and say something you would probably have said or done years ago.
> 
> acting older/more mature/wise is knowing not to get caught up in that drama by feeling the need to tell them what’s “right”.
> 
> I have a feeling Meghan is a 40 year old body stuck with a high school mentality.


High School??? .. *NO*, *NO*, *NO* .. she's Junior High for sure (I would put her age at 13 .. at most)!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> There is a Faberge exhibition going on at the V&A in London at the moment. Since many are owned by the Queen, I bet there are some of Queen Mary's 'bargains' on display too  .



All I want to see is the Alice in Wonderland exhibition, but I honestly don't think travelling for frivolous reasons is the thing to do right now 

(also, the lady who wrote the Cartier book - a granddaughter - said on her Insta there's an exbition of Persian jewels in Paris at the moment. Oh the jealousy because again, not travelling right now to not spread or catch the annoying plague )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Old story:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan confesses to lying so she could land a role in resurfaced clip
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle confessed to lying to casting directors so she could land a role in a resurfaced clip from her Suits run. The Duchess of Sussex, 38, opened up about her dishonesty and admitted she wa…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



But then her dad came out saying she indeed had a union card which he paid for.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Roxanna said:


> Exactly.  It's like the final piece of puzzle.   I wonder what Harry found in her and what on earth he meant  when he said in his pre-wedding interview that Diana and her would be thick as thieves. Its certainly make one to pause and think.



I still maintain he'd never married her had Diana lived - and I doubt she'd have loved her manipulative a*s.


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A house in Romania? How random.



Information on Romania’s “Queen” I THOUGHT I remembered an article where Prince Charles showed the property to her son, his cousin. That the family had been forced out. Charles bought and restored the property, and then gave the “heir” a tour. Then, I thought I misremembered it.

IT seems that, like Philip, they were royalty without a homeland and grew up abroad.  It seems like a family connection kind of thing.  Plus, Charles really likes developing estates and renting them out.  Something to do while he waits to become king and a “side business” of sorts, in addition to being a hobby.


----------



## Sophisticatted

As far as dealing with the troublesome twosome, I think the family should just keep siccing Sophie on them!  They can’t handle her stares!


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> but will what works with H work with H, husband of M?



witchcraft 

Seriously I really do believe the BRF knows what motivates these 2.  
In fact, it seems very quiet , things could be happening now. Stay tuned.


----------



## zinacef

They’re having their Christmas card pictures done—- or painted! Only the best for sure!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Personnel manual updated  ✓
> Bullies removed ✓
> Inquiry findings published ??? Not recommended, imo.  A simple statement indicating the matter is resolved. Now, if H&M blab the details, they need to be held accountable. Personnel records are private.
> Title removal ?? Hazzie needs to man up and willingly renounce his title and LoS. No more half-in/half-out. He has caused enough trouble, said unkind things about his father and brother, his wife has lied, he is a proven hypocrite. Give it up. Game over. Renounce and the world will leave ya alone.
> 
> The BRF could persuade Hazzie - perhaps with cash, perhaps some sweet nods to the kids, perhaps a house on someone’s land. Undoubtedly, they know what works with him. Use it so we can all move on.  Best advice is to get it done asap. Otherwise, H&M will show up at the celebrations and expect to be on the main balcony. They will make it _awkward_.
> The world does not want _awkward_ right now.


Agree, H should just rejoice the stuff but he wont
I bet he thinks his book may vindicate him … dream on … 
I just don’t think that gifts - that are given and cannot be taken back - will curb future outbursts from MonteVito
Gifts to kids is a good idea , but what ? there has to be a continuing incentive for Monrecito to behave 

ps Montecito keeps gets spelling corrected to Montevideo , ok, that might be a great idea, that is in Uruguay ? that might be just the spot for the duo


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> ps Montecito keeps gets spelling corrected to Montevideo , ok, that might be a great idea, that is in Uruguay ? that might be just the spot for the duo



Excellent idea, maybe Uruguay doesn’t have tabloids just like the US doesn’t!


----------



## xeyes

Another gig where she can claim to be doing something and then only do actual work “a few days per month”...is this how our Megs gets her “revenge”? Or something else?





__





						Blind Item #3
					

Don't believe the hype about how the alliterate one wants some high brow talk show. The truth is she wants to replace the one named talk sho...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## octopus17

jelliedfeels said:


> I love small passion project and personal collection museums! They have so much personality.


One of the best museums I ever visited was the Pitts River Museum in Oxford - talk about a 'passion project and personal collection'...
Blows my mind every time I've visited. Would not want to spend the night there though, lol...


----------



## Genie27

zinacef said:


> They’re having their Christmas card pictures done—- or painted! Only the best for sure!


Yeah some first year community college Photoshop 101 project. Hey ma, look at these cool filters. Which one should we use this time?


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> All I want to see is the Alice in Wonderland exhibition, but I honestly don't think travelling for frivolous reasons is the thing to do right now
> 
> (also, the lady who wrote the Cartier book - a granddaughter - said on her Insta there's an exbition of Persian jewels in Paris at the moment. Oh the jealousy because again, not travelling right now to not spread or catch the annoying plague )



Oooh - just finished the Cartier book - honestly, I was a bit surprised how much I enjoyed it.  Didn’t know about the exhibition in Paris - would love to see that!  One year when we were in Paris, my friends and I saw a wonderful Cartier exhibition.  I do so love jewels!!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But then her dad came out saying she indeed had a union card which he paid for.


If she lied, then what was the point? To show how clever she is to outsmart the system? Seems so idiotic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The BRF could persuade Hazzie - *perhaps with cash, perhaps some sweet nods to the kids, perhaps a house on someone’s land.* Undoubtedly, they know what works with him. Use it so we can all move on.  Best advice is to get it done asap. Otherwise, H&M will show up at the celebrations and expect to be on the main balcony. They will make it _awkward_.
> The world does not want _awkward_ right now.


No, no, MegaMaw is an abyss which you can never hope to fill. Narcs are very entitled. And the more you give them, the more they think they deserve to have. Remember how they wanted entire manors and palaces? Freeze them out. Let them whine. The BRF has the resources to play the waiting game. Treat them like Diana's butler who turns up at events with husband in tow, demanding to party crash because "Diana would want me to be there".


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> I am a pragmatist, some people misbehave, there should be consequences, but what and how ? If you cannot answer the question, then let go of agonizing over the lack of punishment
> 
> What should the BRF do ? The bullying problem no longer exists. I dont doubt the BRF personnel manual has been updated to curb future issues.  Ok, the inquiry findings could be published, does it really matter when ???
> 
> H&M are gone and no longer get funds or live in the palace. They have been GHOSTED. Just like Andrew.
> 
> Yes, title removal is a possibility BUT
> 1. Will that get H&M to shut up ??? I dont think so, it could make matters worse.
> 2. The duchies of Sussex and York wont be touched until there is some resolution of the Andrew matter - stay tuned ...
> 3. It is a bad time to do anything. Cant we wait until after the Jubilee please? HMTQ is not well. Charles has not been looking well either.  Boris (who might be needed) is in the doghouse, COVID.
> 
> What else could the BRF do?



I think the BRF are using the results of an investigation (if it has indeed finished which I doubt) as a way to keep the Wayward Duo in check, at least as a warning.  They may drop info from it around the time H releases snippets of his book.  And maybe allow one or two ex employees to release a (vetted) statement about both of their bullying behaviours.

Then the RF also needs to follow up with - and we have changed our processes and procedures to ensure this doesn’t happen again… etc 

But the BRF has been icing them out.  You can tell by the stories that H and M are desperately trying to make contact through the media/PR stories (christening of Lily, we can come at Christmas stories, PC and H are now talking stories… but the reality -   deafening silence from the family, then the inevitable “Lily is getting christened in California, and we are too busy to go to the UK” released by her PR).  They have now cycled back to dropping nasty stories in the media (H warned PC story).  And repeat.

None of the senior royals in the family is talking to those two.  And do note that after the Palace said that the Queen would start correcting stories, neither H nor M have mentioned “calling” or “zooming” with the Queen since.  Because we all knew that was a lie.

But the result from the BRF is silence.  Good.  Don’t acknowledge them.  They aren’t half in- half out, they are OUT.


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> I think the BRF are using the results of an investigation (if it has indeed finished which I doubt) as a way to keep the Wayward Duo in check, at least as a warning.  They may drop info from it around the time H releases snippets of his book.  And maybe allow one or two ex employees to release a (vetted) statement about both of their bullying behaviours.
> 
> Then the RF also needs to follow up with - and we have changed our processes and procedures to ensure this doesn’t happen again… etc
> 
> But the BRF has been icing them out.  You can tell by the stories that H and M are desperately trying to make contact through the media/PR stories (christening of Lily, we can come at Christmas stories, PC and H are now talking stories… but the reality -   deafening silence from the family, then the inevitable “Lily is getting christened in California, and we are too busy to go to the UK” released by her PR).  They have now cycled back to dropping nasty stories in the media (H warned PC story).  And repeat.
> 
> None of the senior royals in the family is talking to those two.  And do note that after the Palace said that the Queen would start correcting stories, neither H nor M have mentioned “calling” or “zooming” with the Queen since.  Because we all knew that was a lie.
> 
> But the result from the BRF is silence.  Good.  Don’t acknowledge them.  They aren’t half in- half out, they are OUT.



I like to picture in my mind TQ slamming the palace front door with all her might and saying “and stay out”!  Followed by resounding applause from the rest of the family…except Andrew who is already outside and greeting MM & H…sigh - a girl can dream!!


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> They aren’t half in- half out, *they are OUT*.


----------



## bag-mania

Nobody has mentioned how the press was going on and on earlier this week about Lily being six months old. It’s hard to get excited about an invisible baby but they want us to care.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Nobody has mentioned how the press was going on and on earlier this week about Lily being six months old. It’s hard to get excited about an invisible baby but they want us to care.



Someday she will be faced with volumes of embarrassing hysterical/historical material about her parents (Mom, did you really squat on a public sidewalk in front of television cameras because some voice in your ear told you to?  Dad why did you let Mom push you aside, elbow you, hang onto you to direct where to go, and always have such an angry face?  Who am I named after? I have cousins?????? Where?????  King William and Queen Catherine are like mega people in the World, if we're related, how come I never got to be around them????).

When she Goggles her name for at least the first 6 months, NADA unless it's a reference to her controversial name.

A narcissistic mother, an emasculated father, future Mental Health professionals will be kept busy helping this young woman come to grips with her reality.


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> *"...Smollett is such a raging narcissist (remind you of anyone?)... *
> 
> YES! Jesse Smollett is another California born Narcissist, Santa Rosa, 1982,  joining the infamous Merchin' Madam of Montecito, who, even though "recollections may vary" is reported  (depending on the source) to have been born in LA in 1981.
> 
> In his case, Smollett claimed he had received a death threat type letter but the producers of the TV show he appeared in were not taking it seriously so he staged being attacked to get attention. His attackers were two black brothers, friends, and one had done stand in work for Smollett on the show. They were supposed to lightly beat him, dump bleach on him and put a noose loosely around his neck. Money exchanged hands, they purchased the props and the case garnered major headlines. It unraveled under closer scrutiny, the brothers were captured on store security video purchasing some items used in the attack, security video showing them "casing the site" the night before the attack, a $3500. check from Smollett in payment, and their detailed testimony.  Smollett was tried and convicted this week on 6 felony counts of disorderly conduct for lying to the Chicago Police Dept and lying under oath to the Jury.
> 
> He was sued in 2019 in Civil Court by the City of Chicago to recoup $130,106.15 in costs including the 1836 hours of police overtime dedicated to investigating the case. He refused to pay and counter sued the City for "malicious prosecution." An understatement in one article this week said the City considered the Guilty verdict in Smollett's trial as vindication for having filed their Civil Suit in 2019 and they will pursue payment.
> 
> Meanwhile, the show "Empire" has ended so Smollett would have no show to return to. Production had to shut down in 2020 due to the Pandemic and there was a "corporate realignment as Fox TV was reorganized under Disney."
> 
> Lots of wasted effort, just like so many of her stunts and lies.



There’s a rumor that he’s K Harris’s nephew ... she was trying to pass a civil rights bill (about lynching?) when Smelly pulled his stunt ... it seemed so odd at the time ... seemed perhaps he’d been put up to it.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fl...sie-smollett-an-attempted-modern-day-lynching


----------



## Sophisticatted

I do think that privacy for the kids is where Harry puts his foot down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> There’s a rumor that he’s K Harris’s nephew ... she was trying to pass a civil rights bill (about lynching?) when Smelly pulled his stunt ... it seemed so odd at the time ... seemed perhaps he’d been put up to it.
> 
> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fl...sie-smollett-an-attempted-modern-day-lynching



Not trying to defend anyone, that rumor is false. 
IMO Definitely the JS case is very odd.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to defend anyone, that rumor is false.
> IMO Definitely the JS case is very odd.


Was his star fading fast, so he wanted to create a publicity stir to bring attention to himself? A lot of people don't think of the consequences for wasting resources like the police or the fire department.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Was his star fading fast, so he wanted to create a publicity stir to bring attention to himself? *A lot of people don't think of the consequences for wasting resources like the police or the fire department.*



My guess is he definitely was thirsty for attention [as we have seen with H&M]. A lot of people simply don’t think at all. As much as I would like to believe he will be off our screens, my concern is that he and his case will continue to dominate for a bit more.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> Oooh - just finished the Cartier book - honestly, I was a bit surprised how much I enjoyed it.  Didn’t know about the exhibition in Paris - would love to see that!  One year when we were in Paris, my friends and I saw a wonderful Cartier exhibition.  I do so love jewels!!



I just ordered my copy to read over Christmas! You might enjoy the author's Insta, she does all kinds of cool stuff, e.g. a series on the treasures of Indian maharajas.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If she lied, then what was the point? To show how clever she is to outsmart the system? Seems so idiotic.



I have a hard time understanding her thinking pattern, but I guess it fits with the narrative of her growing up oh so poor? Which is a really weird fetish to have if you are so full of yourself and love to mingle with the 1%ers.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just ordered my copy to read over Christmas! You might enjoy the author's Insta, she does all kinds of cool stuff, e.g. a series on the treasures of Indian maharajas.



Thank you, I will check that out!  Enjoy the book!


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> If she lied, then what was the point? To show how clever she is to outsmart the system? Seems so idiotic.


I mean when the boot fits….
tbh I think she just loves lying. 


xincinsin said:


> Was his star fading fast, so he wanted to create a publicity stir to bring attention to himself? A lot of people don't think of the consequences for wasting resources like the police or the fire department.


I think he felt his star was not quite big enough so he was hoping that becoming a cause celebre would boost his fame.


CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is he definitely was thirsty for attention [as we have seen with H&M]. A lot of people simply don’t think at all. As much as I would like to believe he will be off our screens, my concern is that he and his case will continue to dominate for a bit more.


Yes, I mean it only takes one influential person to believe his argument that this is all an extremely elaborate frame-up or maybe he will be able to parlay the controversy to his advantage but I don’t know - he seems _a little_ foolish. 

 I am glad he is though, his case only really fell apart when the identity of his ‘attackers’ became known. I can easily imagine if he’d have found a pair of, say, Russians who barely spoke English to be his fall guys he’d have  got a lot more people behind him and the patsies would have got the book thrown at them.

I wouldn’t blame people for believing him though, horrible things happen all the time and I think you need to take people at face value until they prove otherwise. 
I mean, I myself once believed H really did want to leave the BRF for a private life and that M really had serious perinatal depression before they proved otherwise.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> I think the BRF are using the results of an investigation (if it has indeed finished which I doubt) as a way to keep the Wayward Duo in check, at least as a warning.  They may drop info from it around the time H releases snippets of his book.  And maybe allow one or two ex employees to release a (vetted) statement about both of their bullying behaviours.
> 
> Then the RF also needs to follow up with - and we have changed our processes and procedures to ensure this doesn’t happen again… etc
> 
> But the BRF has been icing them out.  You can tell by the stories that H and M are desperately trying to make contact through the media/PR stories (christening of Lily, we can come at Christmas stories, PC and H are now talking stories… but the reality -   deafening silence from the family, then the inevitable “Lily is getting christened in California, and we are too busy to go to the UK” released by her PR).  They have now cycled back to dropping nasty stories in the media (H warned PC story).  And repeat.
> 
> None of the senior royals in the family is talking to those two.  And do note that after the Palace said that the Queen would start correcting stories, neither H nor M have mentioned “calling” or “zooming” with the Queen since.  Because we all knew that was a lie.
> 
> But the result from the BRF is silence.  Good.  Don’t acknowledge them.  They aren’t half in- half out, they are OUT.



I agree

Like the swans she owns, the queen is all serene to the (media) eye with all the work going on under the water.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> I do think that privacy for the kids is where Harry puts his foot down.



There are kids? _Real _kid_s_?


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> *"...Smollett is such a raging narcissist (remind you of anyone?)... *
> 
> YES! Jesse Smollett is another California born Narcissist, Santa Rosa, 1982,  joining the infamous Merchin' Madam of Montecito, who, even though "recollections may vary" is reported  (depending on the source) to have been born in LA in 1981.
> 
> In his case, Smollett claimed he had received a death threat type letter but the producers of the TV show he appeared in were not taking it seriously so he staged being attacked to get attention. His attackers were two black brothers, friends, and one had done stand in work for Smollett on the show. They were supposed to lightly beat him, dump bleach on him and put a noose loosely around his neck. Money exchanged hands, they purchased the props and the case garnered major headlines. It unraveled under closer scrutiny, the brothers were captured on store security video purchasing some items used in the attack, security video showing them "casing the site" the night before the attack, a $3500. check from Smollett in payment, and their detailed testimony.  Smollett was tried and convicted this week on 6 felony counts of disorderly conduct for lying to the Chicago Police Dept and lying under oath to the Jury.
> 
> He was sued in 2019 in Civil Court by the City of Chicago to recoup $130,106.15 in costs including the 1836 hours of police overtime dedicated to investigating the case. He refused to pay and counter sued the City for "malicious prosecution." An understatement in one article this week said the City considered the Guilty verdict in Smollett's trial as vindication for having filed their Civil Suit in 2019 and they will pursue payment.
> 
> Meanwhile, the show "Empire" has ended so Smollett would have no show to return to. Production had to shut down in 2020 due to the Pandemic and there was a "corporate realignment as Fox TV was reorganized under Disney."
> 
> Lots of wasted effort, just like so many of her stunts and lies.


Thank you for this, it is a very exhaustive view of the case. I did not know he’d tried sending himself death threats for attention- the DRAMA of it all.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a hard time understanding her thinking pattern, but I guess it fits with the narrative of her growing up oh so poor? Which is a really weird fetish to have if you are so full of yourself and love to mingle with the 1%ers.


I think it’s indicative of her world view. When she’s playing a born lady and duchess she’s charitable, informed and a member of every club that matters. When she’s playing the cash-strapped actress she says she’s shifty and dishonest because in her head that’s what poor people are like.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I wouldn’t blame people for believing him though, horrible things happen all the time and I think you need to take people at face value until they prove otherwise.
> I mean, I myself once believed H really did want to leave the BRF for a private life and that M really had serious perinatal depression before they proved otherwise.



The issue with JS was that from the beginning there were gaps in his story. Actually, _chasms_ is more accurate.
A clip from Dave Chappell’s show is in the spoiler. Language is harsh, but his point is valid.



Spoiler: Dave


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> The issue with JS was that from the beginning there were gaps in his story. Actually, _chasms_ is more accurate.
> A clip from Dave Chappell’s show is in the spoiler. Language is harsh, but his point is valid.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Dave



True his story didn’t make a lot of sense but he wouldn’t have been the first celebrity to lie in court and get away with it. 

I really wish Dave Chapelle would host the Oscars or another award ceremony it would be the biggest roast in history.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> The issue with JS was that from the beginning there were gaps in his story. Actually, _chasms_ is more accurate.
> A clip from Dave Chappell’s show is in the spoiler. Language is harsh, but his point is valid.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Dave




OMG, this made me LOL!!  DC is hilarious!   I had never heard of JS before this incident, or maybe lack of an incident.  I saw bits of film of him walking through the courthouse after the verdict with so many people walking with him.  I was surprised that so many rallied to his side in light of the verdict.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Boyer is warning that "_*the Windsor firm is adrift*_" without Prince Philip and the Buckingham Palace is apparently mismanaging the situation. While not optimistic, it's a very good article. One that the BRF should consider imo 

*Sir Edward Young, the Queen’s private secretary, appears haplessly caught in the crossfire. If Buckingham Palace’s mismanagement continues, there is a serious risk that the public’s respect for the embodiment of British stability will be undermined…*

_Harry’s damning allegations during the Oprah Winfrey interview in March distastefully reinforced the Duchess of Sussex’s many unpalatable assertions, not least that the royal family had denied her unborn son Archie a title and protection because of the colour of his skin. Harry further upset his family by describing his mental torture on Apple TV. To many people’s scorn, the 37-year-old prince, utterly spoilt by obsequiousness, has exploited his unwillingness to be reconciled with his mother’s death. Worse, he comes across as intensely envious of William’s happiness and popularity.

*Last week Harry cannot have failed to notice William’s podcast about mental health, his own favoured theme. At the same time another poisonous missile arrived from Montecito.* In an unexpected statement Harry claimed that, unlike Charles, he had spotted the danger of a relationship with Mahfouz and had broken off relations in 2015. By implication he accused Charles of recklessness.

*That denunciation was not only a warning shot to his father about the arrangements for his future coronation but also a victory roll after Meghan defeated The Mail on Sunday in the Court of Appeal.* The duchess’s successful assertion of her right to privacy over a letter to her father surprised many lawyers.
Meghan’s victory and her defiant attack on the defeated media prompted the TV presenter Kirstie Allsopp, a friend of the Duchess of Cornwall, to resurrect allegations that, just before her wedding in May 2018, Meghan made the Duchess of Cambridge cry.

The revelation that members of Meghan’s former staff had accused her of bullying was released to The Times in March. A Palace investigation is continuing. Allsopp’s reports of tearful scenes confirmed an escalating battle between the princes…

Queen’s adviser has been caught on the back foot. His latest stumble was last month, when he failed to guide the BBC away from broadcasting The Princes and the Press, a flawed report purporting to describe a briefing war between William and Harry. As the Palace seems incapable of controlling them, their mutually vitriolic retaliation will ratchet up next year.

Young will then be faced with a bigger challenge: Harry’s memoirs.* If Harry is uncharacteristically considerate, publication will follow, not precede, the Platinum Jubilee celebrations. But few doubt that in return for an estimated $20 million advance the selfishly indiscreet Harry will be expected to divulge juicy private conversations and discomfiting revelations about Charles and William.

The sadness is that Harry and Meghan prosper financially by playing their royal cards*. So far, Britain’s judges and the BBC have aided their operation, regardless of their disloyalty. The Queen’s misfortune is that many young people sympathise with the Sussexes and disapprove of Charles, Camilla and Andrew. _*The new year threatens to be the Queen’s second annus horribilis. The 95-year-old monarch, selfless and discreet, deserves better.*



			https://archive.vn/xP18P#selection-849.73-849.322


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still maintain he'd never married her had Diana lived - and I doubt she'd have loved her manipulative a*s.


ITA because two narcissists could never co-exist and D like M craved attention and the media fawning over her despite claiming otherwise. She posed and waited for the cameras to snap the pics like in this one below.


She was always trying to outshine C, like the WH dance with Travolta and her on-stage dance routine for C's birthday. Yes, I believe Lady C was right when she said that D wanted the marriage more than C and that she was the domineering spouse in the marriage.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> witchcraft
> *Seriously I really do believe the BRF knows what motivates these 2. *
> In fact, it seems very quiet , things could be happening now. Stay tuned.


I also believe that they really know what motivates Ginger Guru and his wife Little Miss Forgetful, but I'm starting to question if they are dealing with this the best way possible. I would have removed the titles and let them accuse the BRF of whatever they want, they will do it anyway…


----------



## Chanbal

Kevinaxx said:


> *I have a feeling Meghan is a 40 year old body stuck with a high school mentality.*


According to recent developments, she might be 44. According to Lady C's last video, the court documents stated that MM is 13 years younger than SM (information provided to court by MM), and SM is 57.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Many thanks and congratulations for the nicknames added to The List.
> 
> 
> @sdkitty
> For your #3, Nasty pieces of work, here's the Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5270769
> 
> 
> @poopsie
> For your #5, Merchin Meg, welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.
> For your #6, El Chimpo.
> View attachment 5270770
> 
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> For your #9, Perpetually frowning baldie.
> For your #10, Your husband Schmuckles the clown, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club.
> View attachment 5270778
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> For your #32, Candyass, a timid or cowardly person (H), here's The List #32 Ribbon. And to please you dear Chanbal, let’s also give credit to Thomas Markle (FIL) & James Beal (Author) for this nickname.
> View attachment 5270780


Haha, thanks for the award @Maggie Muggins
I hesitated to post the article because I didn't like the sound of "_Candyass_" , but its meaning "_cowardly, or despicable_" seems to fit the son-in-law like a glove.


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> According to recent developments, she might be 44. According to Lady C's last video, the court documents stated that MM is 13 years younger than SM (information provided to court by MM), and SM is 57.




Cee Jay knows people who knew her back in high school so maybe we can ask CEE Jay to dig deeper.  It would’ve meant she was”left back” a few years in school if this is true.  I know I call her Duchess Dummy but I’m finding this a bit hard to believe.


----------



## Chanbal

I hope the members here are doing well and not affected by the Kentucky tornado. Very sad what's happening in that region.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Cee Jay knows people who knew her back in high school so maybe we can ask CEE Jay to dig deeper.  It would’ve meant she was”left back” a few years in school if this is true.  I know I call her Duchess Dummy but I’m finding this a bit hard to believe.


I also think it is hard to believe, but why to provide the wrong information to the court about the age difference? There is also the childhood boyfriend who was apparently born in 1977 (44yo). There are so many falsehoods linked to the Montecitos… Let's see if @CeeJay can shed some light here.



Spoiler: Boyfriend 












						Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
					

Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle




					biographydaily.com
				











						Joshua Silverstein Wikipedia Age Wife And Net Worth: Meghan Markle First Boyfriend
					

After his TV interview persons are looking for Joshua Silverstein on Wikipedia. He’s already a longtime Hollywood determine.  All people was shocked to seek out out Joshua was Meghan Markle’s first boyfriend. He’s an activist, actor, and TV persona. Moreover, Joshua just lately gave an...




					thewikibiography.com


----------



## csshopper

oops


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

xeyes said:


> Another gig where she can claim to be doing something and then only do actual work “a few days per month”...is this how our Megs gets her “revenge”? Or something else?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> Don't believe the hype about how the alliterate one wants some high brow talk show. The truth is she wants to replace the one named talk sho...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Is there a new Oprah show?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> According to recent developments, she might be 44. According to Lady C's last video, the court documents stated that MM is 13 years younger than SM (information provided to court by MM), and SM is 57.




We always said MM wanted to live at Windsor, Frogmore House at the very least.

More on the Russian and French Royal Family too.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> According to recent developments, she might be 44. According to Lady C's last video, the court documents stated that MM is 13 years younger than SM (information provided to court by MM), and SM is 57.



44 x 44 doesn't sound as good as 40 x 40   
OTOH, if she really is 44, then it gives more life to the tales of IVF. Fertility and the health of the baby are adversely affected after a woman passes 35.


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> There’s a rumor that he’s K Harris’s nephew ... she was trying to pass a civil rights bill (about lynching?) when Smelly pulled his stunt ... it seemed so odd at the time ... seemed perhaps he’d been put up to it.
> 
> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fl...sie-smollett-an-attempted-modern-day-lynching


I'm calling BS on that "rumor"


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I also think it is hard to believe, but why to provide the wrong information to the court about the age difference? There is also the childhood boyfriend who was apparently born in 1977 (44yo). There are so many falsehoods linked to the Montecitos… Let's see if @CeeJay can shed some light here.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Boyfriend
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife
> 
> 
> Who is Joshua Silverstein? Wiki, Biography, Net Worth, Age, Height, Wife. Joshua Silverstein is an Award-winning Actor, Writer, Education activist, and well known as a childhood boyfriend of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> biographydaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joshua Silverstein Wikipedia Age Wife And Net Worth: Meghan Markle First Boyfriend
> 
> 
> After his TV interview persons are looking for Joshua Silverstein on Wikipedia. He’s already a longtime Hollywood determine.  All people was shocked to seek out out Joshua was Meghan Markle’s first boyfriend. He’s an activist, actor, and TV persona. Moreover, Joshua just lately gave an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thewikibiography.com



To me this is old news, we've known for years just go through this thread. I'm not sure I care how old she is since experience teaches her nothing.
As Lady C says that she constantly lies to our courts and to our faces is far more worrying.
I care more that she's trying to pass-off children as her own/H's, brought up in a completely different culture/country to be the line of succession (how Lady Megbeth is that?)
I am hugely concerned that she continuing to meddle in US politics and charities worldwide, as though she has some business/blessing by BRF. Lady Megbeth and Half-wit is rent out their titles like the cheap liars they are.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I care more that she's trying to pass-off children as her own/H's, brought up in a completely different culture/country to be the line of succession (how *Lady Megbeth* is that?)



OMG


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Chanbal    The *Lady Megbeth nickname *deserves the Vlad!
Brilliant!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Chanbal *Lady Megbeth *deserves the Vlad!
> Brilliant!
> 
> View attachment 5272016



Oh no she doesn't. I feel the estimated 1 millions in jewelry she amassed within 9 months ofmarriage are already more than she deserved.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I might give up Raptor in favour of Lady Megbeth, it cracks me up


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh no she doesn't. I feel the estimated 1 millions in jewelry she amassed within 9 months ofmarriage are already more than she deserved.



LOL, you are correct. I meant @Chanbal should receive a tiara for the brilliant nickname.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oops, totally misread that!


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> Is there a new Oprah show?


I was thinking it's Ellen's show.


----------



## csshopper

This has to be Karma, or a really good inside joke.

I clicked on a link to OK magazine because of the teaser blurb about how Lady Megbeth and Half-wit ( great one!)will be spending their preciously private Christmas this year.

This sentence with the bolded phrase about friends and colleagues should, when clicked, go to back up information for the item, as it does for other bolded statements in the article: "They'll have some get-togethers with friends and colleagues who've been by their side through thick and thin this year," the source adds.

Being curious and dubious I did click on the link. Since, as we would have guessed after 80,891 posts of history with these two, there were evidently no friends or even colleagues who could be identified, the back up link took me to articles about Prince Charles' visit to Barbados and references to the claims he is the one questioning Archie's skin tone.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might give up Raptor in favour of Lady Megbeth, it cracks me up


 Why not since you found the nickname in the DM on Sept 5th. See your post below and you've been credited with it on The List.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Maggie Muggins the DM comments section never disappoints. Someone just called Raptor Lady MegBeth


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG I'm getting old. I don't remember that moment at all


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

We used to call them 'Senior Moments' back in the days, but I imagine that must be anti-something these days.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> LOL, you are correct. I meant @Chanbal should receive a tiara for the brilliant nickname.


Haha! While I would love the tiara (many thanks to @CarryOn2020) , I think it needs to be given to (or shared with ) @papertiger

Oops, @Maggie Muggins just reminded us about @QueenofWrapDress

That tiara is indeed very special.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still maintain he'd never married her had Diana lived - and I doubt she'd have loved her manipulative a*s.


As much as I love Diana, and have practically every book and magazine on her, I do think she was extremely jealous and actually went as far as to make sure every female member of her staff was nowhere near as attractive as she was.  She made sure she was the most beautiful woman in the room, and not that I think Meegain is all that attractive, I very much doubt that they would be "thick as thieves"   Harry was a child when Diana died and the version a child sees of their mother is never the same as the person everyone else sees.  He can say what he likes about her, but most of it is a fantasy.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a hard time understanding her thinking pattern, but I guess it fits with the narrative of her *growing up oh so poor?* Which is a really weird fetish to have if you are so full of yourself and love to mingle with the 1%ers.


We all know that she DID NOT GROW UP SO POOR .. but then I thought about something; the fact that she oftentimes went with her Dad to the set of the TV Show that he worked on (Married With Children) .. and seeing the stars of that show get that "star treatment".  So, seeing that, yeah .. she probably thought (in her NARC mind) that she was not living the life that SHE deserved and in comparison, she was "growing up poor"!  It's so UFB to me, as in my talks with the friends that knew Meghan (and her Dad) during her High School days, they were by NO means "poor".  The schools that Meghan went to?!? .. NOT CHEAP; the dance & voice programs that her Dad paid for .. NOT CHEAP; the Plastic Surgery and Dental work that she had done in her youth / teen years .. NOT CHEAP, so this whole idea of her growing up poor .. WAS/IS IN HER HEAD and just shows how SICK she is!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA because two narcissists could never co-exist and D like M craved attention and the media fawning over her despite claiming otherwise. She posed and waited for the cameras to snap the pics like in this one below.
> View attachment 5271858
> 
> She was always trying to outshine C, like the WH dance with Travolta and her on-stage dance routine for C's birthday. Yes, I believe Lady C was right when she said that D wanted the marriage more than C and that she was the domineering spouse in the marriage.


I think lady C is a bit harsh on Diana as of course she’s very much on the Royals side.

The reality is it was a perfect storm.

D was young and ambitious and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.
She was also pretty, stylish, approachable and charismatic - exactly what the press were looking for to sell royal content and all traits Charles lacks (not that he doesn’t have qualities just not the kind that sells papers)

If they’d have been a more compatible couple they would’ve made a great team but they just weren’t. At least it made the royals learn the lesson that they should just let them pick their own spouses. They do still need to work on their vetting procedure though 

I do think H would’ve never married M if D was around but for different reasons. I feel like the guilt surrounding what happened to D  and how badly it shook H (even compared to W) was a significant factor in them allowing the marriage to go ahead so quickly and making it a spectacle equal (financially not aesthetically) to W the crown prince’s. If D was still around then they would’ve made M wait and I don’t think either her nice girl act or their bond would have lasted being put through the wringer.


csshopper said:


> This has to be Karma, or a really good inside joke.
> 
> I clicked on a link to OK magazine because of the teaser blurb about how Lady Megbeth and Half-wit ( great one!)will be spending their preciously private Christmas this year.
> 
> This sentence with the bolded phrase about friends and colleagues should, when clicked, go to back up information for the item, as it does for other bolded statements in the article: "They'll have some get-togethers with friends and colleagues who've been by their side through thick and thin this year," the source adds.
> 
> Being curious and dubious I did click on the link. Since, as we would have guessed after 80,891 posts of history with these two, there were evidently no friends or even colleagues who could be identified, the back up link took me to articles about Prince Charles' visit to Barbados and references to the claims he is the one questioning Archie's skin tone.


How can they have colleagues when they ‘run’ their own business…Sorry, I mean charity!
Surely they are an employer and they have employees?
These poor ‘colleagues’ don’t even get a day off for Christmas  
That would be a job I would quit for my mental health for sure.

Maybe they are indeed going to Barbados on a charm offensive  after all it’s a bit embarrassing for them that an entire country came out as team Charles against them


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> Cee Jay knows people who knew her back in high school so maybe we can ask CEE Jay to dig deeper.  It would’ve meant she was”left back” a few years in school if this is true.  I know I call her Duchess Dummy but I’m finding this a bit hard to believe.


Her age is accurate; my friend's son is the same exact age and he just had a birthday recently .. 40.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> I hope the members here are doing well and not affected by the Kentucky tornado. Very sad what's happening in that region.


Thank you @Chanbal.  Very kind of you for your post. My non-profit in Kentucky had major damage at the track. Thankful no one at non-profit wasn’t injured or worse at their homes and facilities. Unfortunate for others injured or perished. Worse tornado in Kentucky history.


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## Chanbal

It's almost Christmas and the Holiday Cards are being released.


----------



## csshopper

Thanks to all the wonderful posters here with knowledge to share about the Romanov's, I got hooked and when this showed up on my Apple News feed it piqued my interest, here are some of them today.


*This Is What It's Like Being a Member of One of Europe's ...*
https://www.vice.com/en/article/z3n...mber-of-one-of-europes-defunct-royal-families - 359k - Cached - Similar pages 
Nov 26, 2021 *...* This Is What It's Like Being a Member of One of Europe's *Defunct Royal Families*. Littered around Europe are descendants of some of history's ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I do think H would’ve never married M if D was around but for different reasons. I feel like the guilt surrounding what happened to D  and how badly it shook H (even compared to W) was a significant factor in them allowing the marriage to go ahead so quickly and making it a spectacle equal (financially not aesthetically) to W the crown prince’s. If D was still around then they would’ve made M wait and I don’t think either her nice girl act or their bond would have lasted being put through the wringer.



That's a great point, I never saw that side of the coin. I was thinking more along the lines of he wouldn't have been so messed up to fall for her shtick and he might have taken advice from his mother but it makes so much sense.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to defend anyone, that rumor is false.
> IMO Definitely the JS case is very odd.





sdkitty said:


> I'm calling BS on that "rumor"



Haha not my rumor. 
What’s weird is she claims to know him well in the middle of the story (in her tweet).

There’s not one of them I trust on either side, so nothing would surprise me.

eta - the link keeps disappearing ... 
here’s the tweet - now, back to  our original scheduled programming.




https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fl...sie-smollett-an-attempted-modern-day-lynching


----------



## Mendocino

Chanbal said:


> According to recent developments, she might be 44. According to Lady C's last video, the court documents stated that MM is 13 years younger than SM (information provided to court by MM), and SM is 57.




I think M is 42. From documentation submitted to the appeals court (I believe this was from an email M sent to Jason Knauf on 10 Dec 2018 at 18:01). Meghan's statements from the email are prefaced by asterisks:

"Mr Scobie had earlier submitted the list of topics to discuss, and Meghan had filled in the details about relations with her father and half-sister Samantha under a series of headings.
These included:
**Family: M’s relationship with half-siblings (including date/timing questions)*
*They were teenagers when they moved into her parents’ home prior to Meghan being born.
*Doria left Tom when Meghan was two years old (moved to the other side of town 45 minutes away). His other children were 15 and 17 years old."

Samantha is the eldest sibling, so according to what Meghan wrote she is 15 years younger than Samantha. Samantha (born in 1964) is currently 57. 57-15=42


----------



## Mendocino

I just read Ceejay's post. So now I've heard three ages discussed: 40, 42, and 44. Maybe we could have a contest about this (just kidding).

Full disclosure: when Diana was pregnant with William my college friends and I hosted a party where we had a "Name the Royal Baby Contest". The winning entry was "Orca, Prince of W(h)ales".


----------



## Mendocino

Chanbal said:


> It's almost Christmas and the Holiday Cards are being released.




Harry half hidden by the tree! Pure comedy gold!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> Haha not my rumor.
> What’s weird is she claims to know him well in the middle of the story (in her tweet).
> 
> There’s not one of them I trust on either side, so nothing would surprise me.
> 
> eta - the link keeps disappearing ...
> here’s the tweet - now, back to  our original scheduled programming.
> 
> View attachment 5272144
> 
> 
> https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fl...sie-smollett-an-attempted-modern-day-lynching


a lot of people wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt...too bad he was lying


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> As much as I love Diana, and have practically every book and magazine on her, I do think she was extremely jealous and actually went as far as to make sure every female member of her staff was nowhere near as attractive as she was.  She made sure she was the most beautiful woman in the room, and not that I think Meegain is all that attractive, I very much doubt that they would be "thick as thieves"   Harry was a child when Diana died and the version a child sees of their mother is never the same as the person everyone else sees.  He can say what he likes about her, but most of it is a fantasy.


sadly we'll never know how the Meghan thing would have worked out if Diana was alive.  I do think if she hadn't died Harry might not be the angry man-boy he is today.  But on the other hand, how much of that has to do with jealousy of his older brother and being labelled "the spare"?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG I'm getting old. I don't remember that moment at all


What's done cannot be undone


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Maggie Muggins the DM comments section never disappoints. Someone just called Raptor Lady MegBeth



And just like that … @QueenofWrapDress and @papertiger deserves their Vlad tiara as well.


----------



## Chanbal

Unless I read that QE is writing her own 'tell all' book, nothing surprises me anymore.   


*The Duchess of Sussex's father is rumoured to be in talks with publishers to churn out an "explosive" account of his experience as a dad to Meghan Markle *_during a turbulent 18-months which has seen allegations levelled at the Royal Family and the publication of a letter between the Duchess and her father which was found to have breached privacy laws.

*Neil Sean claimed what publishers are interested in is Thomas Markle “correcting the rights and the wrongs” through a book.*

He said: “We all know there are some discrepancies allegedly, over how she was educated and who paid for that.

“Exactly what sort of a father was he towards her?

“And no doubt his version of the reason why he wasn’t able to attend that splendid royal wedding all those years ago now.”_









						Thomas Markle 'nothing to lose' if he pushes ahead with tell-all book
					

THOMAS MARKLE has "nothing to lose" if he forges ahead to pen a tell-all book telling his side of the drama with Harry and Meghan, according to a royal expert.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> And just like that … @QueenofWrapDress and @papertiger deserves their Vlad tiara as well.
> 
> View attachment 5272319



What?  

No emeralds?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> What?
> 
> No emeralds?



Be advised - Eugenia and others [ahem] may try to pull it off your head. 
Enjoy!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps you prefer something else from the  Delhi Durbar Parure and the Cambridge Emeralds?










						Duchess Kate Blog
					






					hrhduchesskate.blogspot.com


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps you prefer something else from the  Delhi Durbar Parure and the Cambridge Emeralds?
> 
> View attachment 5272490
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Kate Blog
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hrhduchesskate.blogspot.com



Fine, I'm not fussy, any of these will do


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> Her age is accurate; my friend's son is the same exact age and he just had a birthday recently .. 40.


I buy that ...  But she said there was a 13 year age difference between her and Samantha - in her famous legal brief, where she apologized for not remembering ....
So, if she is 40, then the number 13 is wrong in the legal brief, she was wrong in the legal brief - I buy that too, I guess we should chalk that lie up to worrying over HMTQ's health ?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Unless I read that QE is writing her own 'tell all' book, nothing surprises me anymore.
> 
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex's father is rumoured to be in talks with publishers to churn out an "explosive" account of his experience as a dad to Meghan Markle *_during a turbulent 18-months which has seen allegations levelled at the Royal Family and the publication of a letter between the Duchess and her father which was found to have breached privacy laws.
> 
> *Neil Sean claimed what publishers are interested in is Thomas Markle “correcting the rights and the wrongs” through a book.*
> 
> He said: “We all know there are some discrepancies allegedly, over how she was educated and who paid for that.
> 
> “Exactly what sort of a father was he towards her?
> 
> “And no doubt his version of the reason why he wasn’t able to attend that splendid royal wedding all those years ago now.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle 'nothing to lose' if he pushes ahead with tell-all book
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has "nothing to lose" if he forges ahead to pen a tell-all book telling his side of the drama with Harry and Meghan, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


TM is a loose cannon, the title said it all, he has nothing to lose


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> TM is a loose cannon, the title said it all, he has nothing to lose



H&M deserve to have a loose cannon or two aimed their way after what they put the BRF through. Gives them a taste of what it is like. Unfortunately the press won’t be salivating over Thomas’ story the way they were over Meghan’s. It doesn’t suit the narrative they want to tell.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> H&M deserve to have a loose cannon or two aimed their way after what they put the BRF through. Gives them a taste of what it is like. Unfortunately the press won’t be salivating over Thomas’ story the way they were over Meghan’s. It doesn’t suit the narrative they want to tell.



You are so right. With H&M, a loose cannon would soothe lots of ruffled feathers.  Bring it on and bring it quickly, please.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> H&M deserve to have a loose cannon or two aimed their way after what they put the BRF through. Gives them a taste of what it is like. Unfortunately the press won’t be salivating over Thomas’ story the way they were over Meghan’s. It doesn’t suit the narrative they want to tell.





CarryOn2020 said:


> You are so right. With H&M, a loose cannon would soothe lots of ruffled feathers.  Bring it on and bring it quickly, please.


They deserve to have a few loose cannons aimed at their falsehoods or false consciousness, but unfortunately some press circles seem to ignore whatever doesn't fit a certain rhetoric. 

Yesterday I posted a rather shocking video that provided a link between the Montecitos (and SS) and a certain charity. I removed the video when I realized there was a picture of a US political figure on it, but below it's an article about the charity. In any event, the video claims that this particular charity misled donors about building schools in Kenya whereas certain public figures were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to appear at its events. It was one more eye opener for me about nonprofit charities/foundations. 



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/we-charity-misled-donors-records-show-1.6251985


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are so right. With H&M, a loose cannon would soothe lots of ruffled feathers.  Bring it on and bring it quickly, please.


Harry will probably sue Markle on behalf of his WIFE


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> They deserve to have a few loose cannons aimed at their falsehoods or false consciousness, but unfortunately some press circles seem to ignore whatever doesn't fit a certain rhetoric.
> 
> Yesterday I posted a rather shocking video that provided a link between the Montecitos (and SS) and a certain charity. I removed the video when I realized there was a picture of a US political figure on it, but below it's an article about the charity. In any event, the video claims that this particular charity misled donors about building schools in Kenya whereas certain public figures were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to appear at its events. It was one more eye opener for me about nonprofit charities/foundations.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/we-charity-misled-donors-records-show-1.6251985


*"It was one more eye opener for me about nonprofit charities/foundations"*

It is the holidays, and giving time ...
I wind up every year getting the latest data on charities before I give ... you can look up the percent that goes to help someone for every dollar given, more eye opening stuff.

Years, ago, I was  employed by a company that promoted employee donations to the favorite corporate charity. There was a drive every year, and we would get a brochure saying how the charity expenses were ONLY 10 % ! ie 90 cents went to help people for every dollar given.  And this was one of the good  low-expense efficient charities.


----------



## rose60610

Why should Thomas Markle be prevented from telling HIS truth?


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Why should Thomas Markle be prevented from telling HIS truth?


He should be able to speak his mind …

I guess it used to be … back in the day when dinosaurs walked the earth … there was nothing preventing anyone from speaking their mind EXCEPT common sense eg I will be despised if I say that so maybe I should choose to shut up because I don’t want to lose the friendship of everyone … 

Gotta accept the collateral damages ….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It's almost Christmas and the Holiday Cards are being released.



The graphics remind me of Michael Jackson 
when his kids were little and they went out, the kids faces were always covered, like with veils or masks, goofy looking … 
ok MJ was a musical genius but maybe not so good as a stylist


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> What?
> 
> No emeralds?


HELLLLLLOOOOOO I want the emeralds and what I want, I get !
cue : sounds of foot stomping


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> He should be able to speak his mind …
> 
> I guess it used to be … back in the day when dinosaurs walked the earth … there was nothing preventing anyone from speaking their mind EXCEPT common sense eg I will be despised if I say that so maybe I should choose to shut up because I don’t want to lose the friendship of everyone …
> 
> Gotta accept the collateral damages ….



Agree completely.
Now, where is Doria?  Surely, someone has offered her a lucrative book deal, yes?  Seems so strange that there has been no mention of her.  Hmmmm,


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> HELLLLLLOOOOOO I want the emeralds and what I want, I get !
> cue : sounds of foot stomping



Haaaaaa.  Well, as H&M were told, they get what QE gives them.  It does seem like the BRF has plenty of emeralds to share with each other, but who knows?  I would be grateful to wear  just the little brooch, but I don’t think like a princess  diva


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Unless I read that QE is writing her own 'tell all' book, nothing surprises me anymore.
> 
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex's father is rumoured to be in talks with publishers to churn out an "explosive" account of his experience as a dad to Meghan Markle *_during a turbulent 18-months which has seen allegations levelled at the Royal Family and the publication of a letter between the Duchess and her father which was found to have breached privacy laws.
> 
> *Neil Sean claimed what publishers are interested in is Thomas Markle “correcting the rights and the wrongs” through a book.*
> 
> He said: “We all know there are some discrepancies allegedly, over how she was educated and who paid for that.
> 
> “Exactly what sort of a father was he towards her?
> 
> “And no doubt his version of the reason why he wasn’t able to attend that splendid royal wedding all those years ago now.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle 'nothing to lose' if he pushes ahead with tell-all book
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has "nothing to lose" if he forges ahead to pen a tell-all book telling his side of the drama with Harry and Meghan, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Ooooooh, oooooooh, ooooooh .. bring it ON Thomas!!!!!


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> Be advised - Eugenia and others [ahem] may try to pull it off your head.
> Enjoy!
> 
> View attachment 5272489


For the love of God, that's stunning!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> They deserve to have a few loose cannons aimed at their falsehoods or false consciousness, but unfortunately some press circles seem to ignore whatever doesn't fit a certain rhetoric.
> 
> Yesterday I posted a rather shocking video that provided a link between the Montecitos (and SS) and a certain charity. I removed the video when I realized there was a picture of a US political figure on it, but below it's an article about the charity. In any event, the video claims that this particular charity misled donors about building schools in Kenya whereas certain public figures were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to appear at its events. It was one more eye opener for me about nonprofit charities/foundations.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/we-charity-misled-donors-records-show-1.6251985


perfect fit for them


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree completely.
> Now, where is Doria?  Surely, someone has offered her a lucrative book deal, yes?  Seems so strange that there has been no mention of her.  Hmmmm,


they bought her a business and who knows what else....she's not gonna cross that daughter of hers


----------



## scarlet555

marietouchet said:


> TM is a loose cannon, the title said it all, *he has nothing to lose*



Let's hear it... this one I might buy just in hopes it makes it to the best seller list...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Thomas Markle 'nothing to lose' if he pushes ahead with tell-all book
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has "nothing to lose" if he forges ahead to pen a tell-all book telling his side of the drama with Harry and Meghan, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Good for TM and I hope he reveals the truth about every lie, every gimmick and every story that M used to bolster her image, popularity and cashflow. Ready for M to blow a gasket.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Her age is accurate; my friend's son is the same exact age and he just had a birthday recently .. 40.


Yes, also wouldn't her siblings/father know her real age and tell us if she lied?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good for TM and I hope he reveals the truth about every lie, every gimmick and every story that M used to bolster her image, popularity and cashflow. Ready for M to blow a gasket.
> View attachment 5272895



I'm torn. On the one hand, I would love to see every little lie exposed and her short affair with the A list being ended by her skeletons. On the other hand, I'm pretty tired of the other Markles and their big mouths and attentionwhoring ways as well, plus they could spill gallons of hot tea but they completely lack the lobby to change peoples' minds, they will just be critizised for being spiteful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, also wouldn't her siblings/father know her real age and tell us if she lied?



I think Thomas confirmed her birthdate at some point (the one that makes her 40).


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm torn. On the one hand, I would love to see every little lie exposed and her short affair with the A list being ended by her skeletons. On the other hand, I'm pretty tired of the other Markles and their big mouths and attentionwhoring ways as well, plus they could spill gallons of hot tea but they completely lack the lobby to change peoples' minds, they will just be critizised for being spiteful.


that's what I'm thinking ....he won't be believed


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> that's what I'm thinking ....he won't be believed


I think people will be more willing to believe him now than they were three years ago. He may be a liar, but as they say, it takes one to know one.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I think people will be more willing to believe him now than they were three years ago. He may be a liar, but as they say, it takes one to know one.


I don't really like that he's going for the attention but someone probably approached him with a tempting offer and I imagine he can use the money.  He's not living down in Mexico because he's rich


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> that's what I'm thinking ....he won't be believed


Sad that when anyone wants to know more about Minor Footnote Markle, the main sources of info are fawning biographies by sycophants or tell-alls by her estranged family. You will doubt even the words from her own mouth since she is so prone to bending the truth. Would not be surprised if, apart from terminal forgetfulness due to pregnancy, she also makes excuses about suffering from uncontrollable lying due to stress.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Sad that when anyone wants to know more about Minor Footnote Markle, the main sources of info are fawning biographies by sycophants or tell-alls by her estranged family. You will doubt even the words from her own mouth since she is so prone to bending the truth. Would not be surprised if, apart from terminal forgetfulness due to pregnancy, she also makes excuses about suffering from uncontrollable lying due to stress.


no, she will never admit to a lie....maybe a mistake if caught


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't really like that he's going for the attention but someone probably approached him with a tempting offer and I imagine he can use the money.  He's not living down in Mexico because he's rich


He does have a pension and Soc Security so he isn't destitute, but yes it is cheaper for sure.  I think he wants to cash in at this point and doesn't care if it doesn't look good.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He does have a pension and Soc Security so he isn't destitute, but yes it is cheaper for sure.  I think he wants to cash in at this point and doesn't care if it doesn't look good.


I don't know how large his pension is or whether he has savings but living down there in Mexico is much less expensive than in CA.  I do know someone who has a home down there and who has quite a good income though.  There are a lot of Americans down there enjoying the proximity to the ocean for a small fraction of what it would cost here.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't know how large his pension is or whether he has savings but living down there in Mexico is much less expensive than in CA.  I do know someone who has a home down there and who has quite a good income though.  There are a lot of Americans down there enjoying the proximity to the ocean for a small fraction of what it would cost here.


Exactly.  Much less expensive than San Diego as you know.  He was in the union so he has a nice pension. He has Medicare and the union picks up the 20% of the allowed Medicare charge.   If he starts poormouthing, then I have to wonder about where/how  he is spending it.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *"It was one more eye opener for me about nonprofit charities/foundations"*
> 
> It is the holidays, and giving time ...
> I wind up every year getting the latest data on charities before I give ... you can look up the percent that goes to help someone for every dollar given, more eye opening stuff.
> 
> Years, ago, I was  employed by a company that promoted employee donations to the favorite corporate charity. There was a drive every year, and we would get a brochure saying how the charity expenses were ONLY 10 % ! ie 90 cents went to help people for every dollar given.  And this was one of the good  low-expense efficient charities.


I have been mostly donating to schools, American Red Cross and organizations that target homelessness…  I believe those are OK, but I agree on the importance of checking the percentages that go to those who need it.


----------



## Chanbal

Time for one more video.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> HELLLLLLOOOOOO I want the emeralds and what I want, I get !
> cue : sounds of foot stomping



You've made me cry now    

I may never be OK again  

but I forgive you  

Here have a daisy from my field wild-garden


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I have been mostly donating to schools, American Red Cross and organizations that target homelessness…  I believe those are OK, but I agree on the importance of checking the percentages that go to those who need it.


I like to look at charity navigator and find organizations who don't pay big salaries to their CEO's


----------



## papertiger

Debbini said:


> For the love of God, that's stunning!!



  Step       away from the my emeralds

Otherwise, there's no telling what I may do say


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## plumed

marietouchet said:


> *"It was one more eye opener for me about nonprofit charities/foundations"*
> 
> It is the holidays, and giving time ...
> I wind up every year getting the latest data on charities before I give ... you can look up the percent that goes to help someone for every dollar given, more eye opening stuff.
> 
> Years, ago, I was  employed by a company that promoted employee donations to the favorite corporate charity. There was a drive every year, and we would get a brochure saying how the charity expenses were ONLY 10 % ! ie 90 cents went to help people for every dollar given.  And this was one of the good  low-expense efficient charities.



Charities have to pay their staff, rent, utilities & telephone, insurance, accounting, IT, website, office supplies, etc. just like for-profit businesses, plus they have to fundraise for almost every dollar and pay people to process all those donations. Then they face relentless pressure to do all of it without spending any money on the basics of actually existing. If they aren't paying staff and don't have offices or websites or telephones, how exactly are they supposed to implement their missions? Ten percent is incredibly lean overhead, and even the outfits that "rate" charities have asked donors to stop punishing nonprofits for an outdated measure of efficiency. Honestly, nonprofits would be more efficient if they had enough decently paid staff to deliver on their mission.


----------



## xincinsin

plumed said:


> Charities have to pay their staff, rent, utilities & telephone, insurance, accounting, IT, website, office supplies, etc. just like for-profit businesses, plus they have to fundraise for almost every dollar and pay people to process all those donations. Then they face relentless pressure to do all of it without spending any money on the basics of actually existing. If they aren't paying staff and don't have offices or websites or telephones, how exactly are they supposed to implement their missions? Ten percent is incredibly lean overhead, and even the outfits that "rate" charities have asked donors to stop punishing nonprofits for an outdated measure of efficiency. Honestly, nonprofits would be more efficient if they had enough decently paid staff to deliver on their mission.


One of the most successful charities in my country had a sudden downfall. They were incredibly successful at fund-raising. Then the success went to their CEO's head. He started charging a lot of things to the charity: trips to Vegas flying 1st class, luxury car rental, renovation of his office to meet his expensive taste. It was the last that made his castle crumble - he ordered gold-plated taps and people started enquiring into his lifestyle. It was discovered that a good portion of the donations went to maintain his lifestyle. 

Ten per cent is indeed incredibly lean, and will not cover overheads unless the charity is run solely by unpaid volunteers in rent-free premises.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger Guru seems to be shopping for a Christmas gift.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  Much less expensive than San Diego as you know.  He was in the union so he has a nice pension. He has Medicare and the union picks up the 20% of the allowed Medicare charge.   If he starts poormouthing, then I have to wonder about where/how  he is spending it.


It may not be the money at this point in his life. Apparently he is not in good health, probably like many at this stage, speaking from experience, hoping for living as stress free as possible, reaping the emotional benefits of adult relationships with children, enjoying grandchildren, easing on out.

 Seems this should have been a reasonable expectation, instead it’s this sh** show. 

Feeling betrayed, misrepresented, exasperated, especially after the revelation that “dear Daddy” letter had no love behind it, only manipulation I think he’s said “Enough” and wants a record of “his truth” before he dies.

Don’t necessarily agree, but do understand how he must feel, and if it benefits his mental health, well his is every bit important as hers. A concept completely incomprehensible to the supreme narcissist Lady Megbeth, I think she underestimated her father and figured she’d worked him her whole life and he would continue to quietly take it.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eeeeeek, please forgive me.  My post was inappropriate. I loved your post and meant no disrespect.  Humble apologies.
> ETA:  I’m awful with my online sarcasm.  I should avoid it.  Please ignore my post. Thank you.
> 
> View attachment 5268289


LOLOL!  I was teasing, I swear!  I am very sarcastic too.  No offense was taken.  Sorry if my post made it seem like I was!  Forgive me for the delay.  I just got back from Paris and have 20+ pages to read!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Nothing new here, just make sure you don't sign up for the apparently useless $680 app…
> View attachment 5268846
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> There is nothing like an out of touch foreign born permanent A list celebrity who says if your job isn't making you happy, then you should q...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Call me cheap, but I'll spends thousands on a Birkin, but refuse to pay $1 for an app, so no way in H E L L would I pay $680 (or even 68 cents) to listen to his drivel.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Me too! And she's the kind of lady who could do a great G & T or a nice cup of tea, depending on the occasion and the time of day.
> 
> Among other things, she loves animals, has rescue dogs, is a fanatical reader on a broad range of subjects, has a wicked sense of humor according to friends who have been quoted over the years, is a doting grandmother and a loved mother, and I'm sure has some great stories to be shared with the closest confidants.
> 
> It's a tribute to her that Prince Phillip recognized her worth and appreciated her contributions to the family and the Monarchy. It's Camilla who was tagged to assume his Book Club and the Commander of the Royal Rifles, supposedly two of his favorite Patronages. He made the effort in his last months of mobility to manage appearances at two engagements of great importance to him: Princess Beatrice's wedding and the passing on of the Royal Rifles to his daughter-in-law, The Duchess of Cornwall.
> 
> Neil Sean in one of his You Tube broadcasts recently pointed out a lovely bit about The Duchesses of Cornwall and Cambridge. At the Remembrance Day appearance of Camilla, Catherine, and Sophie on the Balcony, Catherine was in the middle where the Queen would normally have stood. Some might have thought Camilla, as next in line to fill that space when she stands with Charles in the future, would be in the middle but she stood obviously at ease where she was off to Catherine's side. They could be seen amicably sharing come comments prior to the start of the ceremony. Once it ended and they turned to exit and go back inside, subtly Catherine motioned Camilla to take the lead and she and Sophie followed behind her. It seems a small thing but his point was it speaks volumes about having class and manners, Catherine's grace to acknowledge Camilla as the elder and more senior Royal, and what it demonstrated about Catherine's feelings for her.
> 
> The contrast among the two Duchesses and Sophie's behaviors vs the classless rudeness of the woman in Montecito who pushes and elbows her way through life is really staggering. She's like a bunion on a big toe, out of place, always irritating, and needing to be permanently removed!


These three women always show grace and true class.  Having had a bunionectomy, ITA that Megain is similar to one.


----------



## purseinsanity

Traveladdie said:


> I prefer if they would not have let them die (agree with the article that they didn't think the family would be murdered) but I have yet to read a historical account or book that does not state that George ,in the end, did exactly that. I agree, Nicholas was not a good leader at all. *I do feel like this story is not as black and white as history teaches us*. It is probably why the subject is still so sensitive within the family.


I've come to believe that about most "historical accounts".  Whoever wrote them gave their own spin.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just ordered my copy to read over Christmas! You might enjoy the author's Insta, she does all kinds of cool stuff, e.g. a series on the treasures of Indian maharajas.


What's the name of the book?  That sounds right up my alley!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL!  I was teasing, I swear!  I am very sarcastic too.  No offense was taken.  Sorry if my post made it seem like I was!  Forgive me for the delay.  I just got back from Paris and have 20+ pages to read!


Back from Paris, oh noooo!!!  
I love and miss Paris. I hope you had a great time there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What's the name of the book?  That sounds right up my alley!



The Cartiers by Francesca Cartier Brickell. But do get the paperback as it has additional info added!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Mendocino said:


> I just read Ceejay's post. So now I've heard three ages discussed: 40, 42, and 44. Maybe we could have a contest about this (just kidding).
> 
> Full disclosure: when Diana was pregnant with William my college friends and I hosted a party where we had a "Name the Royal Baby Contest". The winning entry was "Orca, Prince of W(h)ales".


That’s brilliant!

Her age may be more of a white lie  because lying about your age is normal in showbiz and it’s a bit academic really because we all knew she was no ingenue from day 1.

I do suspect if she is 42/44 she avoided mentioning it so people didn’t make ‘40 year old virgin’ jokes when they saw her in the WHITE tablecloth and veil.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s brilliant!
> 
> Her age may be more of a white lie  because lying about your age is normal in showbiz and it’s a bit academic really because we all knew she was no ingenue from day 1.
> 
> I do suspect if she is 42/44 she avoided mentioning it so people didn’t make ‘40 year old virgin’ jokes when they saw her in the WHITE tablecloth and veil.


Frankly, she might have lied about it so often that she no longer correctly remembers her own age.

One of the most popular Cantopop singers is 71 this year and he has a running gag with his fans that he is forever 25. It helped that he was quite a baby face and looked youthful for a ridiculously long time. 25 is better than forever being known as 40


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Cartiers by Francesca Cartier Brickell. But do get the paperback as it has additional info added!



The author has numerous ‘book talks’ posted on her site. She may have a YouTube channel, too.  You do need to leave your name and email address.  Here’s one:








						The Cartiers : The Untold Story Webinar — The Cartiers: Francesca Cartier Brickell
					

This webinar is about the story of the three Cartier brothers, the third generation of Cartiers to run the family firm in the early 20th century.




					www.the-cartiers.com
				






purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL!  I was teasing, I swear!  I am very sarcastic too.  No offense was taken.  Sorry if my post made it seem like I was!  Forgive me for the delay.  I just got back from Paris and have 20+ pages to read!



Um, Paris???? in December???  I don’t care what H&M say, you definitely know how to live and live well!  Welcome back. As you can see, the toxic two have been fairly quiet recently, but that has not stopped us


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Call me cheap, but I'll spends thousands on a Birkin, but refuse to pay $1 for an app, so no way in H E L L would I pay $680 (or even 68 cents) to listen to his drivel.


I’m the same with all this whacky yoga and goop stuff. I always say ‘if you are going to tell me money isn’t the root of happiness then why are you charging so much? ‘ whereas I know my jeweller and my bag designer are in it for the money at least.
Add on - especially if that app is selling details about its user’s mental health to other  companies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Cartiers by Francesca Cartier Brickell. But do get the paperback as it has additional info added!


Thank you!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The author has numerous ‘book talks’ posted on her site. She may have a YouTube channel, too.  You do need to leave your name and email address.  Here’s one:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Cartiers : The Untold Story Webinar — The Cartiers: Francesca Cartier Brickell
> 
> 
> This webinar is about the story of the three Cartier brothers, the third generation of Cartiers to run the family firm in the early 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-cartiers.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um, Paris???? in December???  I don’t care what H&M say, you definitely know how to live and live well!  Welcome back. As you can see, the toxic two have been fairly quiet recently, but that has not stopped us


Thank you!  Paris at Christmas time is quite magical!


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, also wouldn't her siblings/father know her real age and tell us if she lied?


I agree ... several  things in favor of her being 40 years old: the silly 40/40 stuff this year, family has not corrected the age of 40
It would look REAL bad if the bday were proved wrong in light of the 40/40 and birthdays are in public records -  to which some people have access ( lawyers and geneologists sp?).


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> One of the most successful charities in my country had a sudden downfall. They were incredibly successful at fund-raising. Then the success went to their CEO's head. He started charging a lot of things to the charity: trips to Vegas flying 1st class, luxury car rental, renovation of his office to meet his expensive taste. It was the last that made his castle crumble - he ordered gold-plated taps and people started enquiring into his lifestyle. It was discovered that a good portion of the donations went to maintain his lifestyle.
> 
> Ten per cent is indeed incredibly lean, and will not cover overheads unless the charity is run solely by unpaid volunteers in rent-free premises.



I remember that! S$600k/year and that was a lot more money at that time considering inflation and all. And strangely enough, the amount paid being “peanuts” remark from someone’s wife. All that exposed from trying to sue the national newspaper.


----------



## bag-mania

Guess who _didn’t_ get named on the list of the 20 most admired men and women of 2021. Hint: the Queen and Oprah did make the cut.










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Fail to Make 'Most Admired' List for 2021
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview did not earn them a place on the 2021 "most admired" list, with only one royal making the cut.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Guess who _didn’t_ get named on the list of the 20 most admired men and women of 2021. Hint: the Queen and Oprah did make the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Fail to Make 'Most Admired' List for 2021
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview did not earn them a place on the 2021 "most admired" list, with only one royal making the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I guess they couldn't afford the price of being put on that list. Donating olive oil cakes is more their level.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Guess who _didn’t_ get named on the list of the 20 most admired men and women of 2021. Hint: the Queen and Oprah did make the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Fail to Make 'Most Admired' List for 2021
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview did not earn them a place on the 2021 "most admired" list, with only one royal making the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Oh, did SS forget to tranfer the money in time?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Guess who _didn’t_ get named on the list of the 20 most admired men and women of 2021. Hint: the Queen and Oprah did make the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Fail to Make 'Most Admired' List for 2021
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview did not earn them a place on the 2021 "most admired" list, with only one royal making the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I was worried they would make the cover of Time again somehow ... They don't have as much money (or impact) as Elon.


----------



## csshopper

Dare we hope the lies, hypocrisies, pontifications, exaggerations, bullying, conniving character assassinations perpetrated by Lady Megbeth and Harry the Hazbeen are finally being recognized and realization is starting to take hold:  there is NOTHING to admire here?


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Unless I read that QE is writing her own 'tell all' book, nothing surprises me anymore.
> 
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex's father is rumoured to be in talks with publishers to churn out an "explosive" account of his experience as a dad to Meghan Markle *_during a turbulent 18-months which has seen allegations levelled at the Royal Family and the publication of a letter between the Duchess and her father which was found to have breached privacy laws.
> 
> *Neil Sean claimed what publishers are interested in is Thomas Markle “correcting the rights and the wrongs” through a book.*
> 
> He said: “We all know there are some discrepancies allegedly, over how she was educated and who paid for that.
> 
> “Exactly what sort of a father was he towards her?
> 
> “And no doubt his version of the reason why he wasn’t able to attend that splendid royal wedding all those years ago now.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle 'nothing to lose' if he pushes ahead with tell-all book
> 
> 
> THOMAS MARKLE has "nothing to lose" if he forges ahead to pen a tell-all book telling his side of the drama with Harry and Meghan, according to a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I often miss the old days - before we had even heard the name “Markle” and Harry was the family jokester who got on famously with W&K…the constant media barrage by these people gets boring!


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> I often miss the old days - before we had even heard the name “Markle” and Harry was the family jokester who got on famously with W&K…the constant media barrage by these people gets boring!


I suspect he misses the old days too.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> I suspect he misses the old days too.



LOL - good point!  Bet he’s surprised to learn that not only is he expected to play second fiddle to his brother, but he is also expected (at least by her) to play second fiddle to his wife!  (Harry, you fool, why didn’t you listen to your older brother?!?!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. A therapist's answer to how doctors can tell if someone is faking an illness. He gave examples, but this sentence struck me:

"Some people feel like the common diagnoses are not big or special enough to accurately represent their struggles, so they cosplay something worse."

Sounds familiar? Nice comfortable upperish Middle class childhood isn't cutting it, so Sizzler salad bar - maybe good enough for other people, but obviously way beneath you - and working before the legal age it is. Getting along with your family isn't Orphan Annie enough to make your in-laws wanting to be the family you never had. Saying you expected more of an A list treatment sounds bratty even to you, so you make up suicidal thoughts. Another random celebrity got tons of sympathy after a drawn out miscarriage at a late pregnancy state, so you penned a dramatic story that read like the worst dime novel. I can go on and on.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> It may not be the money at this point in his life. Apparently he is not in good health, probably like many at this stage, speaking from experience, hoping for living as stress free as possible, reaping the emotional benefits of adult relationships with children, enjoying grandchildren, easing on out.
> 
> Seems this should have been a reasonable expectation, instead it’s this sh** show.
> 
> Feeling betrayed, misrepresented, exasperated, especially after the revelation that “dear Daddy” letter had no love behind it, only manipulation I think he’s said “Enough” and wants a record of “his truth” before he dies.
> 
> Don’t necessarily agree, but do understand how he must feel, and if it benefits his mental health, well his is every bit important as hers. A concept completely incomprehensible to the supreme narcissist Lady Megbeth, I think she underestimated her father and figured she’d worked him her whole life and he would continue to quietly take it.


I don't understand why she markled him and embraced her mother.  It seems he was the one who doted on her, paid for her education, her dental work, her nose job.  Now she is setting her mother up in business and shunning her dad.  I guess she must have her reasons - valid or not.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Guess who _didn’t_ get named on the list of the 20 most admired men and women of 2021. Hint: the Queen and Oprah did make the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Fail to Make 'Most Admired' List for 2021
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview did not earn them a place on the 2021 "most admired" list, with only one royal making the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


If they _*had*_ made the list, we'd know it was because of money talking.  There is not one.single.admirable trait in either of them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Guess who _didn’t_ get named on the list of the 20 most admired men and women of 2021. Hint: the Queen and Oprah did make the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Fail to Make 'Most Admired' List for 2021
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview did not earn them a place on the 2021 "most admired" list, with only one royal making the cut.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com





rose60610 said:


> I guess they couldn't afford the price of being put on that list. Donating olive oil cakes is more their level.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, did SS forget to tranfer the money in time?





purseinsanity said:


> If they _*had*_ made the list, we'd know it was because of money talking.  There is not one.single.admirable trait in either of them.


----------



## Mendocino

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooh, oooooooh, ooooooh .. bring it ON Thomas!!!!!



Especially if he has the paper trail that provides third party confirmation of his claims.


----------



## Mendocino

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m the same with all this whacky yoga and goop stuff. I always say ‘if you are going to tell me money isn’t the root of happiness then why are you charging so much? ‘ whereas I know my jeweller and my bag designer are in it for the money at least.
> Add on - especially if that app is selling details about its user’s mental health to other  companies.



Many people don't read the terms of use and privacy policy, so while they may not be paying for the app with money they are certainly paying with their personal information, which is being sold to data brokers. There are some apps that claim that the data they share is anonymized but it's basically child's play to un-anonymize it.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> This has to be Karma, or a really good inside joke.
> 
> I clicked on a link to OK magazine because of the teaser blurb about how Lady Megbeth and Half-wit ( great one!)will be spending their preciously private Christmas this year.
> 
> This sentence with the bolded phrase about friends and colleagues should, when clicked, go to back up information for the item, as it does for other bolded statements in the article: "They'll have some get-togethers with friends and colleagues who've been by their side through thick and thin this year," the source adds.
> 
> Being curious and dubious I did click on the link. Since, as we would have guessed after 80,891 posts of history with these two, there were evidently no friends or even colleagues who could be identified, the back up link took me to articles about Prince Charles' visit to Barbados and references to the claims he is the one questioning Archie's skin tone.


The same story popped up in my feed today, but from one of those gossip sites that have a Pakistan website address. It claims that they are spending Christmas with pals like David Foster & wife. Also claims that they were invited back to spend Christmas with the BRF but turned it down because they prefer to have a meaningful "private" celebration with their kids with all those thoughtful gifts they have purchased. Howling with laughter.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> The same story popped up in my feed today, but from one of those gossip sites that have a Pakistan website address. It claims that they are spending Christmas with pals like David Foster & wife. Also claims that they were invited back to spend Christmas with the BRF but turned it down because they prefer to have a meaningful "private" celebration with their kids with all those thoughtful gifts they have purchased. Howling with laughter.


There’s a YouTube commentator HG Tudor who does a series on Harry’s Wife. His latest is titled It’ll Be A Cold Cold Christmas and he shreds this story and also says what others have, the friends are phantoms. Interesting how wide spread this has become. The phony PR planted story has backfired on them like so much they have done.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> He does have a pension and Soc Security so he isn't destitute, but yes it is cheaper for sure.  I think he wants to cash in at this point and doesn't care if it doesn't look good.


From what my friends (who know Thomas & Meghan) told me recently (as I told them about this 'book'), yeah .. he was not without his issues, BUT .. they also said that if you crossed him and lied about him, he is 100% for-sure going to "set it straight" (his truth I guess).  As such .. this should get interesting, but unfortunately .. yes, I think the US Media will portray this as him being "mean" and "spiteful".


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> From what my friends (who know Thomas & Meghan) told me recently (as I told them about this 'book'), yeah .. he was not without his issues, BUT .. they also said that if you crossed him and lied about him, he is 100% for-sure going to "set it straight" (his truth I guess).  As such .. this should get interesting, but unfortunately .. yes, I think the US Media will portray this as him being "mean" and "spiteful".


I guess people believe what they want to believe.  I've tried to look at H&M through the lens of someone who likes them but it doesn't work for me.  I see a couple of greedy posers.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you!  Paris at Christmas time is quite magical!


*YES*!!! .. years ago, the HB and I scored the deal of the century!  Air France had a deal where if you bought a ticket (_for $500 from Boston_), you would get the 2nd ticket for $50 .. are you freakin' kidding me?!?!?!?  You better believe we bought those tickets tout-suite and planned our trip for the week before Christmas!  

Unfortunately, we didn't have the greatest rental (_a 5th-floor walk-up atelier in the 1st ar_) .. but, we were close to the Châtelet Metro such that we could pretty much go anywhere .. and that's EXACTLY what we did!  OMG .. Paris is the BEST during Christmas time .. it is IMO the City that has the most amazing decorations .. so tastefully done, and while it is rather chilly there in December, what's better than finding a lovely bistro off the Champs that serves the BEST Soupe à l'Oignon!!?!      

The other great thing was that we were very close (literally across the street) from a Patisserie such that the HB would get up early in the morning such that he could get some Croissants, Pain au Chocolat (for me) and of course, a Baguette!!!  Oh geez .. now I'm hungry!!!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> *YES*!!! .. years ago, the HB and I scored the deal of the century!  Air France had a deal where if you bought a ticket (_for $500 from Boston_), you would get the 2nd ticket for $50 .. are you freakin' kidding me?!?!?!?  You better believe we bought those tickets tout-suite and planned our trip for the week before Christmas!
> 
> Unfortunately, we didn't have the greatest rental (_a 5th-floor walk-up atelier in the 1st ar_) .. but, we were close to the Châtelet Metro such that we could pretty much go anywhere .. and that's EXACTLY what we did!  OMG .. Paris is the BEST during Christmas time .. it is IMO the City that has the most amazing decorations .. so tastefully done, and while it is rather chilly there in December, what's better than finding a lovely bistro off the Champs that serves the BEST Soupe à l'Oignon!!?!
> 
> The other great thing was that we were very close (literally across the street) from a Patisserie such that the HB would get up early in the morning such that he could get some Croissants, Pain au Chocolat (for me) and of course, a Baguette!!!  Oh geez .. now I'm hungry!!!


Paris is such a beautiful city.  It's a shame they have had so much political strife in recent years.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand why she markled him and embraced her mother.  It seems he was the one who doted on her, paid for her education, her dental work, her nose job.  Now she is setting her mother up in business and shunning her dad.  I guess she must have her reasons - valid or not.


Pretty simple IMO .. her mother keeps her mouth shut, her Father (Thomas) won't .. because he feels strongly about having to 'RIGHT' her 'truth'!


----------



## poopsie

Sounds like the acorn didn't fall far from the tree


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Sounds like the acorn didn't fall far from the tree


Perhaps, but I'm hoping that TM is more honest and ethical and the exact opposite of his lying-scheming-devious-avaricious-famewhoring daughter.


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> Pretty simple IMO .. her mother keeps her mouth shut, her Father (Thomas) won't .. because he feels strongly about having to 'RIGHT' her 'truth'!


And she was pushing the biracial unique selling point during the run-up to the wedding, so Doria fit the narrative better. Plus, as you said, her mother zips her lips. Imagine how TM would have roared when he heard Hazard blabbering about the family she never had.


----------



## Chanbal

@Maggie Muggins the Sun is competing with you.   













						Here's to you Harry and Meghan... gong but never forgotten
					

FOR my final column of the rollercoaster year of 2021, I present my annual Old Moore’s Almanac awards – aided and abetted, as ever, by the invaluable feedback you send my way each week. It wouldn’t…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> From what my friends (who know Thomas & Meghan) told me recently (as I told them about this 'book'), yeah .. he was not without his issues, BUT .. *they also said that if you crossed him and lied about him, he is 100% for-sure going to "set it straight" *(his truth I guess).  As such .. this should get interesting, but unfortunately .. yes, I think the US Media will portray this as him being "mean" and "spiteful".





poopsie said:


> Sounds like the acorn didn't fall far from the tree


If he is an overall honest person, I can see him being very upset by his daughter's falsehoods despite loving her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


>



You know a bitter, drawn-out war of verbal attrition over who has the best camel coat is a battle I can get behind!     
we should do nothing less for the queen of coats.



Chanbal said:


> If he is an overall honest person, I can see him being very upset by his daughter's falsehoods despite loving her.


I agree, let’s not forget she’s basically called him a bad father repeatedly. I think a lot of people would want to explain their side and he does kind of get the foil hat treatment by the media. 

I personally see nothing wrong with him doing it for the money as between the couple themselves, lady C and other YouTube channels And the press at large it looks like this is quite the lucrative little industry


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Even in that long list of fashion disasters, this brown outfit truly was one of the worst. And it didn't help that in many photos, Methane appeared to be trying to do some kind of authoritative wide-legged stride that just made her thighs look thick and her trouser hems look flappy.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> If he is an overall honest person, I can see him being very upset by his daughter's falsehoods despite loving her.



The press on both sides of the Atlantic have basically portrayed him as being an uncouth, money-grubbing lowlife. The public’s opinion of him is pretty firmly set at this stage, however unfair and inaccurate it may be.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The press on both sides of the Atlantic have basically portrayed him as being an uncouth, money-grubbing lowlife. The public’s opinion of him is pretty firmly set at this stage, however unfair and inaccurate it may be.



And yet, he has won Emmy’s. Other actors cannot say _that_ (ahem, MM). Personally, I could use some lighting tips 






						Thomas Markle - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



_Markle worked as a lighting director at WTTW-TV Channel 11 in the 1970s.[10] In 1975, he received a Chicago / Midwest Emmy Award for Outstanding Achievement for Individual Excellence: Non Performers for his lighting design work on the channel's Made in Chicago program.[11] He worked on the television series General Hospital and Married... with Children.[12][13][14]
_
*Awards*
_In 1982, Markle was one of the 14 named co-recipients of a Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Achievement in Design Excellence for a Daytime Drama Series for work on General Hospital,[15] and in 2011, he shared a Daytime Emmy Award with Vincent Steib for Outstanding Achievement in Lighting Direction for a Drama Series for work on General Hospital.[16]He was also nominated (with various co-nominees) for Daytime Emmy Awards for work on General Hospital on seven other occasions.[15]

Markle was nominated, along with two other co-nominees, for a Primetime Emmy Award in 1986 for Outstanding Lighting Direction (Electronic) for a Miniseries or a Special for the lighting design for the 58th Academy Awards._



jelliedfeels said:


> You know a bitter, drawn-out war of verbal attrition over who has the best camel coat is a battle I can get behind!
> we should do nothing less for the queen of coats.



Yasssss!  Bring on the battle.  As typical, it may not be the coat itself, but the way it is worn.  Take Kate’s coat away and I’m guessing she still looks good. Take away MM’s coat, oh my, no, please don’t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> You know a bitter, drawn-out war of verbal attrition over who has the best camel coat is a battle I can get behind!
> we should do nothing less for the queen of coats.



Kate has better everything only because she has heard of the alien concept of a seamstress.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate has better everything only because she has heard of the alien concept of a seamstress.



and an iron

(and I am usually the last one to notice)


----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


>




*The Rumpled Royals!  LOL!

ETA:  Maybe just “The Rumps” for short.  Double entendre.*


----------



## lazeny

papertiger said:


> and an iron
> 
> (and I am usually the last one to notice)



Kate is tall and has a model's built, it's a little unfair to compare. And she can pull of midi dresses. 

Regardless, if one is not as gifted physically, but has money and connections, it's almost criminal not to hire a skilled tailor. Meghan can look as beautiful in clothes that fit.


----------



## xincinsin

lazeny said:


> Kate is tall and has a model's built, it's a little unfair to compare. And she can pull of midi dresses.
> 
> Regardless, if one is not as gifted physically, but has money and connections, it's almost criminal not to hire a skilled tailor. Meghan can look as beautiful in clothes that fit.


I wonder what happened to the people who actually dared to give her fashion advice. Just because she looks like a mess half the time doesn't mean that in the past there was no brave/foolhardy soul who tried to advise her. Did she go "Methane knows best" condescendingly or did she Markle everyone who dared tell her that the dress didn't fit?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I wonder what happened to the people who actually dared to give her fashion advice. Just because she looks like a mess half the time doesn't mean that in the past there was no brave/foolhardy soul who tried to advise her. Did she go "Methane knows best" condescendingly or did she Markle everyone who dared tell her that the dress didn't fit?



It is not about body shape. It is about having a tailor and a stylist.

As someone else mentioned earlier, it is possible that these clothes are freebies so they cannot be altered. Based on her _Suits_ wardrobe, somebody did dress her appropriately. Early on as a royal, she looked fine in her clothes. Seems like it was around the Australia tour that she unraveled (pun intended .

Ooooh, wait a sec. Was she deliberately dressing poorly so the press would criticize her?  Then, she could say, “Seee, they hate me.”   H&M surely wouldn’t do _that_ , would they?


----------



## xincinsin

Just for laughs 
I'm imagining these chicks at the Monteshitshow resort. Picture #12 looks like that pose Methane did.









						Artist Paints Chicks Doing Yoga Poses, And Here Are The Best 15 Pics
					

Tree pose? Downward-facing dog? If these sound familiar to you, I assume you have tried doing yoga.




					www.boredpanda.com


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Just for laughs
> I'm imagining these chicks at the Monteshitshow resort. Picture #12 looks like that pose Methane did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artist Paints Chicks Doing Yoga Poses, And Here Are The Best 15 Pics
> 
> 
> Tree pose? Downward-facing dog? If these sound familiar to you, I assume you have tried doing yoga.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.boredpanda.com


And laugh I did!  These were too cute.  Made my morning.


----------



## Chanbal

One more on Ellen's show, why Little Miss Forgetful is silent…


----------



## csshopper

Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.

Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four. 

This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work. 

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
*The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.

Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.

Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.

'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.

However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The press on both sides of the Atlantic have basically portrayed him as being an uncouth, money-grubbing lowlife. The public’s opinion of him is pretty firmly set at this stage, however unfair and inaccurate it may be.


Selected press in the UK is starting to be a little more sympathetic to him, so things may change. I know, it's almost a lost cause. Well, we still have the Aussies…


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


Another paid article… Thanks for posting it.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


LOL...parental leave from what?  Harry has participated in a couple of panels?  what has she done since she moved to CA?  delivered food one day?  had sandwiches sent to a non-profit?  made a fool of herself on Ellen?
Oh they did one podcast where other people talked about how they were impacted by the virus.  And they went on Oprah to smear the RF.  
Their non-profit has no available information on what they've done.  
Posers!


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


Why is she now age 39?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.




Here’s the thing — I do not care how many paid-staff tell me H&M are the happiest people on this earth, I do not buy it.
   Anyone who falls for that BS will be noted as a dumb-a##.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Even in that long list of fashion disasters, this brown outfit truly was one of the worst. And it didn't help that in many photos, Methane appeared to be trying to do some kind of authoritative wide-legged stride that just made her thighs look thick and her trouser hems look flappy.


My guess is she saw it on someone like Victoria Beckham who has really tiny hips and thought she would look exactly the same as her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


$1.7B for Betterup???  No ***** way


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jesus in the headlines!!
 









						Meghan Markle's 'mask slipped' in interview, says body language expert
					

In the unearthed clip analysed by YouTuber Jesus Enrique Rosas, the Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen chatting with host Ruben Jay in 2016 ahead of a mid-season premiere of Suits.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

lazeny said:


> Kate is tall and has a model's built, it's a little unfair to compare. And she can pull of midi dresses.
> 
> Regardless, if one is not as gifted physically, but has money and connections, it's almost criminal not to hire a skilled tailor. Meghan can look as beautiful in clothes that fit.


clothes that fit would be great progress.  and she isn't fat.  but she will never have Kate's model body.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jesus in the headlines!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'mask slipped' in interview, says body language expert
> 
> 
> In the unearthed clip analysed by YouTuber Jesus Enrique Rosas, the Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen chatting with host Ruben Jay in 2016 ahead of a mid-season premiere of Suits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wish he would do a video collage of all the examples he has outed. He nailed her reaction during the wedding ceremony when the jaw significantly tightened as she reached for Haz's hand and came up short. Easily missed but Jesus called it out. Lady Megbeth has been seeping venom from the very beginning and up until The Body Language Guy has gotten away with it.


----------



## CeeJay

*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
*The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*


*Spotify deal* - what have they done??? .. "news" in the BIZ is that Spotify is NOT happy at present, and besides .. did they get that *£18million *up-front? .. highly doubtful, *don't believe it*! 
*Netflix deal* - really? .. for what? .. what have they come up with, and again .. "news" in the BIZ is that everything Megalomaniac has proposed, Netflix has said "_Nope .. not interested_".  Again, did they get that *$100 million* up-front? .. highly doubtful, *don't believe it*! 
*Better-Up start-up* - *$1.7billion*?!?!?! .. HA-HA-HA-HA, sure-sure-sure .. what utter BS!!!!  I'm working for a start-up right now and we are all getting paid .. $0.00, but .. yes, if there is Venture Capital $$$ .. people do get paid, but let me tell you .. the days of "angel money" are long gone and if the Venture Capital doesn't start seeing a return soon??? .. not buying this, *don't believe it*! 
*Book deal* - *£18M*??? .. not even sure what to say about this, but I think the folks who gave him the money will be sorely disappointed in the end .. we'll see, *not sure I'm buying this BS*!


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> *Meghan, 39*, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


_I see she's still hanging on to that 39. _


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.




Who knew doing *absolutely nothing* would pay so well!


----------



## Mendocino

jelliedfeels said:


> You know a bitter, drawn-out war of verbal attrition over who has the best camel coat is a battle I can get behind!
> we should do nothing less for the queen of coats.



My love affair with camel coats began when I saw Barbra Streisand in "The Way We Were".


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jesus in the headlines!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'mask slipped' in interview, says body language expert
> 
> 
> In the unearthed clip analysed by YouTuber Jesus Enrique Rosas, the Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen chatting with host Ruben Jay in 2016 ahead of a mid-season premiere of Suits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



LMAO as i initially read this as Gee-Zuss in the headlines (well, tis the season after all) and wondered when He would be weighing in on these two


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is not about body shape. It is about having a tailor and a stylist.
> 
> As someone else mentioned earlier, it is possible that these clothes are freebies so they cannot be altered. Based on her _Suits_ wardrobe, somebody did dress her appropriately. Early on as a royal, she looked fine in her clothes. Seems like it was around the Australia tour that she unraveled (pun intended .
> 
> Ooooh, wait a sec. Was she deliberately dressing poorly so the press would criticize her?  Then, she could say, “Seee, they hate me.”   H&M surely wouldn’t do _that_ , would they?


I think this might be part of it as these are the same people who hire a PR agency to tell everyone  they want privacy.

Whenever I see her swearing her ignorance with her clay coloured clothes sagging around her, I cannot help but feel she is taking the idea of portraying herself as a lumpenprolateriat a little too literally.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Just for laughs
> I'm imagining these chicks at the Monteshitshow resort. Picture #12 looks like that pose Methane did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Artist Paints Chicks Doing Yoga Poses, And Here Are The Best 15 Pics
> 
> 
> Tree pose? Downward-facing dog? If these sound familiar to you, I assume you have tried doing yoga.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.boredpanda.com


Aww they are just adorable 


csshopper said:


> Where's Scoobie Doo? Send in the subs, and we have Methane's Make Up Artist Daniel Martin as spokesperson. How Royal, snark snark snark.
> 
> Perhaps a prelude to THE family Christmas picture being released where we will be treated to some bleary view of the happy little isolated family of four.
> 
> This is the intro to the article published in the DM today, the full sugar article about Daniel and the Gang is in People magazine. If he's to be believed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen are struggling with the balance of work-family. Not how he portrays it but I'd bet the problem is really too much family time, too little work.
> 
> *Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are 'Loving Life as a Family of Four'*
> *The pair have an £18million Spotify deal  and a Netflix deal which could be worth as much as $100 million, while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up and a four-book deal worth at least £18M*
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are loving family life with Archie, 2, and six-month-old Lilibet, but are experiencing the 'challenge' of finding the best work-life balance, make-up artist Daniel Martin has revealed.
> 
> Speaking in a new interview with People magazine, the Duchess of Sussex's close pal said the couple had 'struck a rhythm as a foursome'.
> 
> Meghan, 39, who lives in a $14million sprawling mansion in Montecito, California, has been lobbying for US Congress to consider to make paid family leave law for all Americans, citing her own experience as a new working mother.
> 
> 'It's about finding that work-life balance now. They're experiencing it themselves,' Daniel said.
> 
> However, despite their apparent struggle to find a balance, the couple have largely been on parental leave since the birth of their daughter Lilibet in June.


Is he counting himself in the 4? And Omid? 
He must be thankful he’s still working at the job he must so love after making such a streaky mess of her fake tan.


Mendocino said:


> My love affair with camel coats began when I saw Barbra Streisand in "The Way We Were".


I love it! Barbra doesn’t get enough credit for how stylish she is. 


lanasyogamama said:


> My guess is she saw it on someone like Victoria Beckham who has really tiny hips and thought she would look exactly the same as her.


I think so, problem is VB is a) thinner than thin and b) has established her slightly eccentric aesthetic. This sort of modern Annie Hall disguises herself as a 60s sex kitten but keeps the oversized element is not an easy look to pull off at all. 


xincinsin said:


> Why is she now age 39?


I told you, she HAS to be able to travel back in time as she must be going to the 2000s to get extensions that bad.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins the Sun is competing with you.
> 
> View attachment 5274476
> 
> View attachment 5274477
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's to you Harry and Meghan... gong but never forgotten
> 
> 
> FOR my final column of the rollercoaster year of 2021, I present my annual Old Moore’s Almanac awards – aided and abetted, as ever, by the invaluable feedback you send my way each week. It wouldn’t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


 No, it's you, who found the nickname, 'Fresh Prince of Hot Air' and it's on The List with you user name from some time ago. And now, I must thank you for your #33, Tone Deaf, from the above article and #34 Captain Candy Ass, from a previous post. Congratulations.


----------



## gracekelly

Gosh so busy that they are having problems coordinating work and home life!  I'm curious, does anyone know what they actually work at?  Asking for a friend.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Gosh so busy that they are having problems coordinating work and home life!  I'm curious, does anyone know what they actually work at?  Asking for a friend.


Possibly secretly taking drama lessons to appear more sincere when complaining about her ordeals at BP and in the UK so that the Body Language Guy will be unable to reveal her vile personality.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Possibly secretly taking drama lessons to appear more sincere when complaining about her ordeals at BP and in the UK so that the Body Language Guy will be unable to reveal her vile personality.


I can't even imagine what it's like to be her.  Craving fame and adulation.  Succeeding beyond one's wildest dreams and then making it a FT job to try to keep it - without actually doing anything productive.  How much of the negative social media stuff does she see?  does it bother her?  I hope so.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I can't even imagine what it's like to be her.  Craving fame and adulation.  Succeeding beyond one's wildest dreams and then making it a FT job to try to keep it - without actually doing anything productive.  How much of the negative social media stuff does she see?  does it bother her?  I hope so.


Perhaps she doesn't see as much as there is. The social media algorithms create echo chambers, so if she keeps reading the "good stuff" and less of the critiques, the search engines and algorithms will "learn" to show her more of what she likes. When Hazard accused a paltry 50 or so Twitter accounts of being responsible for most of the so-called hate towards Methane, I remember thinking that there are probably a lot more unfriendly accounts not picked up by that suspect Bot Sentinel report because many people who don't like her also find her so irrelevant to life, the universe and everything that they simply dismiss her.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Gosh so busy that they are having problems coordinating work and home life!  I'm curious, does anyone know what they actually work at?  *Asking for a friend.*


I appreciate you asking that for me. I'm really interested in learning what Ginger Guru and his amnesic wife do for a living.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> No, it's you, who found the nickname, 'Fresh Prince of Hot Air' and it's on The List with you user name from some time ago. And now, I must thank you for your #33, Tone Deaf, from the above article and #34 Captain Candy Ass, from a previous post. Congratulations.
> View attachment 5275033
> View attachment 5275034


Haha, I'm starting to feel embarrassed by so many awards. I humbly thank you.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jesus in the headlines!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'mask slipped' in interview, says body language expert
> 
> 
> In the unearthed clip analysed by YouTuber Jesus Enrique Rosas, the Duchess of Sussex, 40, can be seen chatting with host Ruben Jay in 2016 ahead of a mid-season premiere of Suits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The Body Language Guy has been discovered by DM, this is amazing.


----------



## Chanbal

The concern of the day is about work/life balance for the overworked couple, and twitter has answers…


----------



## Chanbal

This one is even better


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The concern of the day is about work/life balance for the overworked couple, and twitter has answers…
> View attachment 5275320



Haven‘t we known for a *long* time that H&M are out of balance? With work? With life?


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


>




To my eye, this is one of MM’s most notable sartorial failings.  She paid a fortune for the clothes that she wore in NYC, and this is what she looks like?!?!  Yet again, another complete fail on selecting appropriate fabrics - and made worse by swanning around in this get-up when NY temps were in the high 70s.  When will she ever learn?!?!


----------



## Luvbolide

1LV said:


> And laugh I did!  These were too cute.  Made my morning.



OMG - for some reason I could not stop laughing at #2!!  So random and yet hysterical!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Luvbolide said:


> OMG - for some reason I could not stop laughing at #2!!  So random and yet hysterical!


I loved these.  Was such a fun read.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Luvbolide said:


> To my eye, this is one of MM’s most notable sartorial failings.  She paid a fortune for the clothes that she wore in NYC, and this is what she looks like?!?!  Yet again, another complete fail on selecting appropriate fabrics - and made worse by swanning around in this get-up when NY temps were in the high 70s.  When will she ever learn?!?!



Before marriage - [whispers, to my eye, she looked much better] :




In 2019 - maybe this is the beginning of the fall?


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> To my eye, this is one of MM’s most notable sartorial failings.  She paid a fortune for the clothes that she wore in NYC, and this is what she looks like?!?!  Yet again, another complete fail on selecting appropriate fabrics - and made worse by swanning around in this get-up when NY temps were in the high 70s.  When will she ever learn?!?!



We didn’t learn until later that she wore those long heavy coats to cover up the microphones and other wires she was wearing to covertly record the conversations.


----------



## csshopper

*The Body Language Guy - YouTube*
https://www.youtube.com/c/thebodylanguageguy - Cached - Similar pages
Jesús Enrique Rosas (*The Body Language Guy*)'s all videos, in order. Enjoy! 8: ...

The newest one with this sub title says it all:
*Could Meghan And Harry Be Emotionally Underdeveloped?*


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> The newest one says it all:
> *Could Meghan And Harry Be Emotionally Underdeveloped?*


Here is the video by the renowned Body Language Guy for your convenience! You may also be able to access it soon on DM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pap walk alert, but Kate steals the show in beautiful red sweater 









						Meghan Markle goes undercover for a solo shopping trip in Montecito
					

DailyMail.com spotted Meghan Markle on a shopping trip in Montecito, California on Wednesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				













						Kate Middleton wears red knit similar to Diana's 'Black Sheep' jumper
					

The Duchess of Cambridge, 39, appeared to pay tribute to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana with her choice of outfit to host her Christmas carol concert programme for ITV.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Here is the video by the renowned Body Language Guy for your convenience! You may also be able to access it soon on DM.



Thanks for making the link Chanbal!

I think it's a thought provoking piece, his insights are interesting. He must really irritate the Harkle media grinders, especially since he’s on instagram and twitter also. Using actual, not photoshopped, images of Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen validates his analysis in a way it would hard for the handlers to discredit. But, if publication of his work widens beyond the DM into an even broader audience they may try.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I appreciate you asking that for me. I'm really interested in learning what Ginger Guru and his amnesic wife do for a living.


You’re so welcome!  I knew that your inquiring mind needed to know!  I am still researching this and will let you and the rest of our friends here know the results as soon as they are obtained.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Pap walk alert, but Kate steals the show in beautiful red sweater
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle goes undercover for a solo shopping trip in Montecito
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com spotted Meghan Markle on a shopping trip in Montecito, California on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton wears red knit similar to Diana's 'Black Sheep' jumper
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 39, appeared to pay tribute to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana with her choice of outfit to host her Christmas carol concert programme for ITV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I love undercover shopping trips that are papped and include all the merched brands. This is when you know for sure that a person doesn’t want to be noticed. So clever of her!


 I like Kate’s sweater better.


----------



## mellibelly

gracekelly said:


> I love undercover shopping trips that are papped and include all the merched brands. This is when you know for sure that a person doesn’t want to be noticed. So clever of her!


Absolutely correct! Staged & merched pap walk. From the comment section of the DM:
jishphto is Josh Carr-Hummerston who was the hired photographer by Markle for this "advertising" piece when makes money for her. Notice the quick mention of Massimo Dutti wool coat, Tamara Mellon boots, LeSpecs Air Heart sunglasses and then the names of shops she visited. She's getting a cut for all those mentions. Put together by Sunshine Sachs and sold to DM as an exclusive. Wake up folks.


----------



## mellibelly

Also, she goes everywhere with a bodyguard? She’s not that important. A c lister at best.


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> Absolutely correct! Staged & merched pap walk. From the comment section of the DM:
> jishphto is Josh Carr-Hummerston who was the hired photographer by Markle for this "advertising" piece when makes money for her. Notice the quick mention of Massimo Dutti wool coat, Tamara Mellon boots, LeSpecs Air Heart sunglasses and then the names of shops she visited. She's getting a cut for all those mentions. Put together by Sunshine Sachs and sold to DM as an exclusive. Wake up folks.


Did someone here post this comment? : "That's a housewares shop. She must need more plates."


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> Also, she goes everywhere with a bodyguard? She’s not that important. A c lister at best.


She needs someone to carry the packages.*smirk*  Remember that old phrase "legend in her own mind?"  That sums it up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> Also, she goes everywhere with a bodyguard? She’s not that important. A c lister at best.



You got that completely wrong. She has more clout than the future queen of the UK.


----------



## Roxanna

Well, in this latest  pics MM looks considerably thinner.  Either she already lost weight or there is  some other reason.
Also, I am not sure how upscale that store is, but she definitely downscaled her outfit budget.  Interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I love undercover shopping trips that are papped and include all the merched brands. This is when you know for sure that a person doesn’t want to be noticed. So clever of her!
> 
> 
> I like Kate’s sweater better.


I don't get it
If she arranged it why is she all covered with mask, hat, etc?  the mask could be required by the stores but the weather doesn't call for a hat
Looks like a very cute little town


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> If she arranged it why is she all covered with mask, hat, etc?  the mask could be required by the stores but the weather doesn't call for a hat
> Looks like a very cute little town


She is just merching the coat, boots etc.  I don't think she actually wants you to see what she looks like.  She is fulfilling  an obligation from the looks of it.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> If she arranged it why is she all covered with mask, hat, etc?  the mask could be required by the stores but the weather doesn't call for a hat
> Looks like a very cute little town


Perhaps she's tired of the Body Language Guy reading her body/face and figured to try and outsmart him by covering up?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> If she arranged it why is she all covered with mask, hat, etc?  the mask could be required by the stores but the weather doesn't call for a hat
> Looks like a very cute little town


She is pretending to be shopping incognito. Down the road, she will be weeping that she can't even do her shopping in peace. The paps are dogging her steps. And Prophet Hazard will be full of righteous indignation, claiming that he foresaw the press would never let them be even though they are now living "private" lives. Idiots...


----------



## xeyes

Speaking of her bodyguard...






						Blind Item #8
					

It feels like the alliterate one's favorite bodyguard spends more time alone with her than her husband.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## redney

It was 62 degrees and sunny today in Montecito. She needs a wool coat, why again? Is she smuggling a hidden camera and mic into Pierre LaFonde for their Netfilx show? "Here's Meggy, picking up some organic pasta sauce and a few throw pillows from Pierre LaFonde?" 

I've lived in Santa Barbara. Pierre LaFonde is a super cute little store. https://www.pierrelafond.com/

She's a clown.


----------



## AbbytheBT

redney said:


> It was 62 degrees and sunny today in Montecito. She needs a wool coat, why again? Is she smuggling a hidden camera and mic into Pierre LaFonde for their Netfilx show? "Here's Meggy, picking up some organic pasta sauce and a few throw pillows from Pierre LaFonde?"
> 
> I've lived in Santa Barbara. Pierre LaFonde is a super cute little store. https://www.pierrelafond.com/
> 
> She's a clown.


LOL - I have lived in SB/Montecito area too. And frequently visit family in So Cal. Nobody uses or needs heavy wool coats. Especially if getting in/out of cars within steps and in/out of small stores. Nor do grown women wear knit beanies. Sun hats, wool felt, bucket hats - yes.  No beanies unless you are skater grrrrl  - or hiding bad hair


----------



## Chanbal

Roxanna said:


> Well, in this latest  pics MM looks considerably thinner.  *Either she already lost weight or there is  some other reason.*
> Also, I am not sure how upscale that store is, but she definitely downscaled her outfit budget.  Interesting.


A possible explanation is that she didn't need to wear wired microphones on the shopping spree. She didn't want to be recorded haggling.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> She is pretending to be shopping incognito. Down the road, she will be weeping that she can't even do her shopping in peace. The paps are dogging her steps. And *Prophet Hazard* will be full of righteous indignation, claiming that he foresaw the press would never let them be even though they are now living "private" lives. Idiots...


@Maggie Muggins are you there? xincinsin needs another award.


----------



## Chanbal

This is also a good one.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> You’re so welcome!  I knew that your inquiring mind needed to know!  I am still researching this and will let you and the rest of our friends here know the results as soon as they are obtained.


I know that we can count on you!


----------



## csshopper

Does she get more grift if she purchases something in a shop vs a quick pop in and out with her pap capturing it’s name in the photo? Have always actually worked to earn my money so don’t know the finer points of their avaricous pursuit for a gratuitous lifestyle.

Full disclosure, my friend’s sister, who lives in Montecito, does not like Lady Megbeth and Haz. Her observation of this was “out of touch with the community vibe in apparel + a “pap”  trailing her + a “ bodyguard” to schlepp bags, of course she intended to be recognized.” The lady also says M and H will never be accepted by some in Montecito and there are those who think even less of her for allowing herself to be humiliated by another local with a reputation, Ellen.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Does she get more grift if she purchases something in a shop vs a quick pop in and out with her pap capturing it’s name in the photo? Have always actually worked to earn my money so don’t know the finer points of their avaricous pursuit for a gratuitous lifestyle.
> 
> Full disclosure, my friend’s sister, who lives in Montecito, does not like Lady Megbeth and Haz. Her observation of this was “out of touch with the community vibe in apparel + a “pap”  trailing her + a “ bodyguard” to schlepp bags, of course she intended to be recognized.” The lady also says M and H will never be accepted by some in Montecito and there are those who think even less of her for allowing herself to be humiliated by another local with a reputation, Ellen.


This an interesting observation. What is happening in Montecito is no different than what happened with the aristos of Harry’s  set inEngland. _She’s not one of us. The chip on her shoulder should be getting even bigger. _


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> This an interesting observation. What is happening in Montecito is no different than what happened with the aristos of Harry’s  set inEngland. _She’s not one of us. The chip on her shoulder should be getting even bigger. _



Well frankly it would be hard for anyone to be accepted when you dress so ridiculously inappropriately that you stick out like a sore thumb in your neighborhood. The number of people who wear long coats and beanies in 65 degree weather in SoCal during the day hopping out of the car to run a quick errand is about equal to the number of people who wear them in NY at 80 degrees.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins are you there? xincinsin needs another award.


Prophet Hazard by @xincinsin is already on The List. 
However there are several more users with new nicknames that need to be acknowledged, thanked and congratulated.         

@Sophisticatted
For your #2, The Rumpled Royals.  
For your #3, The Rumps, a Gold Ribbon.  


@papertiger
For your #4, Half-wit.   

@sdkitty
For your #4, Posers.   

@needlv
For your #8, Wayward Duo.  

@jelliedfeels
For your #11, Lumpenprolateriat, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.  



@CarryOn2020
For your #21, Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic, from the comments on the video in your post #80,811, The List #21 Ribbon.  
For your #22, Dearie dreary MM, The List #22 Ribbon.  




@xincinsin
For your #33, Douchebag of Sucks, The List #33 Ribbon.  
For your #34, MegaMaw, The List #34 Ribbon.  
For your #35, Minor Footnote Markle,  The List #35 Ribbon.  





@Chanbal
For your #35, His amnesic wife, The List #35 Ribbon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Prophet Hazard by @xincinsin is already on The List.
> However there are several more users with new nicknames that need to be acknowledged, thanked and congratulated.
> 
> @Sophisticatted
> For your #2, The Rumpled Royals.
> For your #3, The Rumps, a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276098
> 
> @papertiger
> For your #4, Half-wit.
> 
> @sdkitty
> For your #4, Posers.
> 
> @needlv
> For your #8, Wayward Duo.
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> For your #11, Lumpenprolateriat, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.
> View attachment 5276099
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020
> For your #21, Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic, from the comments on the video in your post #80,811, The List #21 Ribbon.
> For your #22, Dearie dreary MM, The List #22 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276100
> View attachment 5276101
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> For your #33, Douchebag of Sucks, The List #33 Ribbon.
> For your #34, MegaMaw, The List #34 Ribbon.
> For your #35, Minor Footnote Markle,  The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276102
> View attachment 5276103
> View attachment 5276104
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> For your #35, His amnesic wife, The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276108



@Maggie Muggins, you have outdone yourself  Thank you for the honors.

How about a French desert befitting the French Saint Honore:


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Well frankly it would be hard for anyone to be accepted when you dress so ridiculously inappropriately that you stick out like a sore thumb in your neighborhood. The number of people who wear long coats and beanies in 65 degree weather in SoCal during the day hopping out of the car to run a quick errand is about equal to the number of people who wear them in NY at 80 degrees.



The greedy, aspirational eyes would make it difficult for me to talk to her.  She is one of those pushy types who must be the center of attention. Hazzie is the same way.  Complete turn-off’s. [do I hear a nickname?  Turn-off Tossers?  Turn-off Toffs?]


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Pap walk alert, but Kate steals the show in beautiful red sweater
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle goes undercover for a solo shopping trip in Montecito
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com spotted Meghan Markle on a shopping trip in Montecito, California on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton wears red knit similar to Diana's 'Black Sheep' jumper
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 39, appeared to pay tribute to her late mother-in-law Princess Diana with her choice of outfit to host her Christmas carol concert programme for ITV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She’s shopping??? Be still my beating heart!   Oh I can buy the stuff she did too!! Thank God!!!

You know, I think the connection to D might be a bit forced, I just thought red+white= Christmas myself.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Before marriage - [whispers, to my eye, she looked much better] :
> 
> View attachment 5275442
> 
> 
> In 2019 - maybe this is the beginning of the fall?
> View attachment 5275445


Well duh, everyone knows it’s hard to win their heart if you spend all your time scowling, shrieking and lying while dressed like a sack of clay.
You can bet she saved all that for when they were safely married


mellibelly said:


> Absolutely correct! Staged & merched pap walk. From the comment section of the DM:
> jishphto is Josh Carr-Hummerston who was the hired photographer by Markle for this "advertising" piece when makes money for her. Notice the quick mention of Massimo Dutti wool coat, Tamara Mellon boots, LeSpecs Air Heart sunglasses and then the names of shops she visited. She's getting a cut for all those mentions. Put together by Sunshine Sachs and sold to DM as an exclusive. Wake up folks.


Weird she doesn’t tell everyone where her hair is from-
I’m sure the sugars are dying to get 
tendrils.

Et tu Massimo Dutti?   Why is the wig trying to ruin coats for everyone when she lives in a warm climate?





mellibelly said:


> Also, she goes everywhere with a bodyguard? She’s not that important. A c lister at best.


Are you kidding? Someone could cosh her with an organic kombucha or decapitate her with a throw pillow at any moment!
Besides let’s not forget she is fulfilling that man’s dream job of being ever ready to take a right hook to the face for her and her naff man.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> If she arranged it why is she all covered with mask, hat, etc?  the mask could be required by the stores but the weather doesn't call for a hat
> Looks like a very cute little town


Botched is springing to mind for some reason. 


Chanbal said:


> A possible explanation is that she didn't need to wear wired microphones on the shopping spree. She didn't want to be recorded haggling.


“Don’t you know who I AM? I should get this for free! Listen peasant I’ve got paps outside… well a pap…but you can bet he came when I called him. People all over the U.K. are going to know your store sells plates. Think of the money you will make provided they want to mimic my every move!”


Maggie Muggins said:


> Prophet Hazard by @xincinsin is already on The List.
> However there are several more users with new nicknames that need to be acknowledged, thanked and congratulated.
> 
> @Sophisticatted
> For your #2, The Rumpled Royals.
> For your #3, The Rumps, a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276098
> 
> @papertiger
> For your #4, Half-wit.
> 
> @sdkitty
> For your #4, Posers.
> 
> @needlv
> For your #8, Wayward Duo.
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> For your #11, Lumpenprolateriat, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.
> View attachment 5276099
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020
> For your #21, Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic, from the comments on the video in your post #80,811, The List #21 Ribbon.
> For your #22, Dearie dreary MM, The List #22 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276100
> View attachment 5276101
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> For your #33, Douchebag of Sucks, The List #33 Ribbon.
> For your #34, MegaMaw, The List #34 Ribbon.
> For your #35, Minor Footnote Markle,  The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276102
> View attachment 5276103
> View attachment 5276104
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> For your #35, His amnesic wife, The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276108


as always I am impressed by the level of effort you put into this list and very happy to receive my trophy. Thank you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M need a new blanket????


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M need a new blanket????
> 
> 
> View attachment 5276168


Harry was getting cold sleeping out in the chicken coop.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> This is also a good one.




The fake kids get me every time!


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> This an interesting observation. What is happening in Montecito is no different than what happened with the aristos of Harry’s  set inEngland. _She’s not one of us. The chip on her shoulder should be getting even bigger. _



looks like her best option to be accepted is to go back to Sizzler’s to find her people!


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Prophet Hazard by @xincinsin is already on The List.
> However there are several more users with new nicknames that need to be acknowledged, thanked and congratulated.
> 
> @Sophisticatted
> For your #2, The Rumpled Royals.
> For your #3, The Rumps, a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276098
> 
> @papertiger
> For your #4, Half-wit.
> 
> @sdkitty
> For your #4, Posers.
> 
> @needlv
> For your #8, Wayward Duo.
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> For your #11, Lumpenprolateriat, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.
> View attachment 5276099
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020
> For your #21, Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic, from the comments on the video in your post #80,811, The List #21 Ribbon.
> For your #22, Dearie dreary MM, The List #22 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276100
> View attachment 5276101
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> For your #33, Douchebag of Sucks, The List #33 Ribbon.
> For your #34, MegaMaw, The List #34 Ribbon.
> For your #35, Minor Footnote Markle,  The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276102
> View attachment 5276103
> View attachment 5276104
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> For your #35, His amnesic wife, The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276108


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> looks like her best option to be accepted is to go back to Sizzler’s to find her people!


As a Sizzler fan, I'm certain I speak for other Sizzler fans and the Ragland family: she's too good for us now. Don't come back!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins, you have outdone yourself  Thank you for the honors.
> 
> How about a French desert befitting the French Saint Honore:
> View attachment 5276130



@Maggie Muggins will have to eat this with State-side residents as UK royal-subjects are not allowed anything French atm, they've locked the UK out (of France) from tomorrow   I wasn't even planning to go and I feel rejected.


----------



## Annawakes

Does anyone have a pic of her bodyguard’s face handy?  I want to see if he’s cute.    Or if she picked someone who looks like her


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> @Maggie Muggins will have to eat this with State-side residents as UK royal-subjects are not allowed anything French atm, they've locked the UK out (of France) from tomorrow   I wasn't even planning to go and I feel rejected.


Blame it on Omegcron


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Does anyone have a pic of her bodyguard’s face handy?  I want to see if he’s cute.    Or if she picked someone who looks like her


Someone who looks like her would be handy. He can wear her dress and divert the paps in a decoy car while she ducks into Hot Air One to get home. Finally, the truth behind the oversized ill-fitting clothes! They have to fit the bodyguard!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> @Maggie Muggins will have to eat this with State-side residents as UK royal-subjects are not allowed anything French atm, they've locked the UK out (of France) from tomorrow   I wasn't even planning to go and I feel rejected.



I am usually pretty stoic and I'm a hermit at the best of days, but it's really starting to get old.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Someone who looks like her would be handy. He can wear her dress and divert the paps in a decoy car while she ducks into Hot Air One to get home. Finally, the truth behind the oversized ill-fitting clothes! They have to fit the bodyguard!


I’m picturing this…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> French Saint Honore


Thank you. I shall savour it while drinking my tea with my little finger in the air and then gently dabbing my lips with my serviette.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Does she get more grift if she purchases something in a shop vs a quick pop in and out with her pap capturing it’s name in the photo? Have always actually worked to earn my money so don’t know the finer points of their avaricous pursuit for a gratuitous lifestyle.
> 
> Full disclosure, my friend’s sister, who lives in Montecito, does not like Lady Megbeth and Haz. Her observation of this was “out of touch with the community vibe in apparel + a “pap”  trailing her + a “ bodyguard” to schlepp bags, of course she intended to be recognized.” The lady also says M and H will never be accepted by some in Montecito and there are those who think even less of her for allowing herself to be humiliated by another local with a reputation, Ellen.





gracekelly said:


> This an interesting observation. What is happening in Montecito is no different than what happened with the aristos of Harry’s  set inEngland. _She’s not one of us. The chip on her shoulder should be getting even bigger. _


I'm not surprised by this. The Ginger Guru and the Amnesic of Montecito are not interesting people to talk to. Most people prefer to live private lives and avoid becoming part of a corny soap opera.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> This an interesting observation. What is happening in Montecito is no different than what happened with the aristos of Harry’s  set inEngland. _She’s not one of us. The chip on her shoulder should be getting even bigger. _


She doesn't want to be one of them. She thinks she is better than them and expected them to want to be like her.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Blame it on *Omegcron*


@Maggie Muggins, @xincinsin did it again!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This an interesting observation. What is happening in Montecito is no different than what happened with the aristos of Harry’s  set inEngland. _She’s not one of us. The chip on her shoulder should be getting even bigger. _


the people there are, I assume for the most part, quite wealthy.  they don't need to worship a Z-list actress and a fallen prince


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> She doesn't want to be one of them. She thinks she is better than them and expected them to want to be like her.


She is trying hard; PR team releasing who are the big boys and girls in Montecito.  

_With the theme “Holiday Magic,” it was indeed a magical evening for the 1st Annual Montecito Holiday Car Parade. Huge nod to the co-chairs Sharon Byrne, Mindy Denson, and Dana Newquist, along with their committee members, for a most upbeat treat for our town and its annual visitors…

"*Thanks to the many parade sponsors including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle who were first to donate*, Montecito Journal, Nina Terzian, Riskin Partners, Penelope & Adam Bianchi, Sean Fahey, Robert Pavloff, Pane E Vino, Village Properties, Noozhawk, Montecito Fire Protection District, and Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office."_









						1st Annual Montecito Car Parade of Lights - Montecito
					

With the theme “Holiday Magic,” it was indeed a magical evening for the 1st Annual Montecito Holiday Car Parade. Huge nod to the co-chairs Sharon Byrne, Mindy Denson, and Dana Newquist, along with their committee members, for a most upbeat treat for our town and its annual visitors.  Kids from 1...




					www.montecitojournal.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is she the kind of person who constantly *tells* people how they can make some extra bucks? constantly giving advice on recipes? constantly one-upping the person? requesting clicks on her sites?

 Various sources have said she is a ‘humble-bragger’ which gets tiresome quickly.

_*Definition of humblebrag*

: to make a seemingly modest, self-critical, or casual statement or reference that is meant to draw attention to one's admirable or impressive qualities or achievements.

 People make themselves look smart, humble-bragging about reading what's billed as one of the 20th century's most difficult books.
 —Mark Chiusano 

In the study, college students were asked to write down how they'd answer a question about their biggest weakness in a job interview. Results showed that more than three-quarters of participants humblebragged, usually about being a perfectionist or working too hard.— Shana Leibowitz

Beyond the angel's wings, there was preening and posing and fake modesty, perhaps best represented when he humblebragged to the audience that his "One Less Lonely Girl" choice had "come all the way from Sweden just to see me."— Ben Fisher








						Definition of HUMBLEBRAG
					

to make a seemingly modest, self-critical, or casual statement or reference that is meant to draw attention to one's admirable or impressive qualities or achievements… See the full definition




					www.merriam-webster.com
				



_


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I love undercover shopping trips that are papped and include all the merched brands. This is when you know for sure that a person doesn’t want to be noticed. So clever of her!
> 
> 
> I like Kate’s sweater better.


Kate’s sweater was for an event, and well chosen, whereas MM was indeed pappd, by someone who knew she’d be there 
Hate those knit hats for celebs, I own one for dog walks in glacial weather, mine is lined, and I cringe about the sloppy look every time I do so


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you. I shall savour it while drinking my tea with my little finger in the air and then gently dabbing my lips with my serviette.


And you stirred back and forth, not in a circle …LOL


----------



## marietouchet

deleted .. sorry


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Prophet Hazard by @xincinsin is already on The List.
> However there are several more users with new nicknames that need to be acknowledged, thanked and congratulated.
> 
> @Sophisticatted
> For your #2, The Rumpled Royals.
> For your #3, The Rumps, a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276098
> 
> @papertiger
> For your #4, Half-wit.
> 
> @sdkitty
> For your #4, Posers.
> 
> @needlv
> For your #8, Wayward Duo.
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> For your #11, Lumpenprolateriat, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.
> View attachment 5276099
> 
> 
> @CarryOn2020
> For your #21, Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic, from the comments on the video in your post #80,811, The List #21 Ribbon.
> For your #22, Dearie dreary MM, The List #22 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276100
> View attachment 5276101
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> For your #33, Douchebag of Sucks, The List #33 Ribbon.
> For your #34, MegaMaw, The List #34 Ribbon.
> For your #35, Minor Footnote Markle,  The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276102
> View attachment 5276103
> View attachment 5276104
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> For your #35, His amnesic wife, The List #35 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5276108


Nicknames are the best part of this INVALUABLE thread that has helped me chuckle my way through COVID 
I thank all of you …


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I'm not surprised by this. The Ginger Guru and the Amnesic of Montecito are not interesting people to talk to. Most people prefer to live private lives and avoid becoming part of a corny soap opera.





xincinsin said:


> She doesn't want to be one of them. She thinks she is better than them and expected them to want to be like her.



Don't forget, he said she saved him  .

OK, wait... 

Or

Was it he saved her? 

One or the other 

OK, wait... 

 

Was it that they'd planned their commercial charitable enterprise(s) escape all along as the evidence all points to


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Before marriage - [whispers, to my eye, she looked much better] :
> 
> View attachment 5275442
> 
> 
> In 2019 - maybe this is the beginning of the fall?
> View attachment 5275445


Ok, the handbag handles, lower shot … can’t quite make it out …
An expensive Hermes twilly ?
A Cloth table napkin ?
A twilly still in its plastic bag ???

was thinking , I wonder if MM was trying to co-opt GREEN in her BRF days, make it her signature color, so she would stand out better
HMTQ owns all the brights, Camilla does blue, pink, mint pastels, and Kate owns red and black
who wants to own beige ??? MM did a lot of beige too

Remember the green cape outfit, there was a green pull with leather skirt outfit , now this hunter green dress


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> *Remember the green cape outfit,* there was a green pull with leather skirt outfit , now this hunter green dress


  I try very hard to forget that green cape outfit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins, @xincinsin did it again!


 Thank you dear @Chanbal, but Omegcron by @xincinsin is already on The List.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Ok, the handbag handles, lower shot … can’t quite make it out …
> An expensive Hermes twilly ?
> A Cloth table napkin ?
> A twilly still in its plastic bag ???
> 
> was thinking , I wonder if MM was trying to co-opt GREEN in her BRF days, make it her signature color, so she would stand out better
> HMTQ owns all the brights, Camilla does blue, pink, mint pastels, and Kate owns red and black
> who wants to own beige ??? MM did a lot of beige too
> 
> Remember the green cape outfit, there was a green pull with leather skirt outfit , now this hunter green dress



Green the color of $$$$$


ETA:  yesterday’s clothes looked like they were several years old, possibly  2016-ish? Long coat, boots, beanie, sunglasses. The lady in front of her was in sneakers, leggings, tunic top - a very 2022 look.   I think the boots are pre-marriage.  
My point - either she has very little money OR she is stuck in that time frame. I’m thinking she is stuck.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> And you stirred back and forth, not in a circle …LOL


Definitely, everything was perfect à la Hercule Poirot.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Green the color of $$$$$
> 
> 
> ETA:  yesterday’s clothes looked like they were several years old, possibly  2016-ish? Long coat, boots, beanie, sunglasses. The lady in front of her was in sneakers, leggings, tunic top - a very 2022 look.   I think the boots are pre-marriage.
> My point - either she has very little money OR she is stuck in that time frame. I’m thinking she is stuck.


She seems to think in stereotypes: poor people eat at Sizzler, royalty are above the law, Meghan Markle is entitled to tell porkie pies. Maybe this is her stereotype of rich famous princess dressing down to anonymously shop with the commoners.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> She seems to think in stereotypes: poor people eat at Sizzler, royalty are above the law, Meghan Markle is entitled to tell porkie pies. Maybe this is her stereotype of rich famous princess dressing down to anonymously shop with the commoners.


You know I am almost offended at her Sizzler remarks, there was a time when I was thrilled to eat there, and on general principles why poo-poo a business , not as if the company is accused of discrimination against underage space  aliens


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> You know I am almost offended at her Sizzler remarks, there was a time when I was thrilled to eat there, and on general principles why poo-poo a business , not as if the company is accused of discrimination against underage space  aliens



100% agree.
To add on, it shows how utterly inept she is. Remember she has a *double major in theater and international studies* from Northwestern's School of Communication, an elite private school.  She must have skipped all the classes in diplomacy.

In the spoiler is US News article about the International Studies major.  Doubt MM can answer many questions about complex global affairs. She only knows 1 answer.



Spoiler: What is International Studies major?






			https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/international-studies-major-overview
		

An international/global studies major strives to understand globalization and how it affects a country’s culture and society. Unlike international relations majors, who focus on politics and the interactions between countries, international studies majors assess the anthropological, historical and religious aspects of countries.
*What Is an International Studies Major?*

An international studies major examines the connections between international and regional issues. Students can concentrate on a language and an area of the world while learning how to analyze complex global affairs. Programs aim to expand students' understanding of different cultures and produce graduates interested in finding ways to respond to global challenges.
*Common Coursework International Studies Majors Can Expect*

International studies majors can expect to take a range of classes, as many programs use a multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary curriculum. Students take courses in history, anthropology, economics, literature, politics and other social sciences. This approach aims to provide students with the broad knowledge and analytical skills to understand the world’s problems. Majors may also take classes on topics such as global health, terrorism, human rights and environmental emergencies.
An integral part of international studies coursework is advanced language classes. Many programs require students to concentrate on a foreign language and a region. Students can develop their language abilities and learn more about a country’s culture and history by studying abroad. Depending on the program, students may study abroad for a summer, a semester or a year.
International studies majors may need to complete a final thesis or capstone project. In some cases, the thesis may be based on coursework or research students complete while studying abroad.
*How to Know if This Major Is the Right Fit for You*

International studies majors should be interested in events happening in other countries and on the global stage. They should also enjoy learning about other cultures. Having a knack for learning foreign languages would be useful for this degree, as some programs emphasize proficiency and coursework in a second language.
Students who enjoy creative problem-solving and who are invested in tackling complex problems, such as economic inequality or human rights issues, should consider this major.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree.
> To add on, it shows how utterly inept she is. Remember she has a *double major in theater and international studies* from Northwestern's School of Communication, an elite private school.  She must have skipped all the classes in diplomacy.
> 
> In the spoiler is US News article about the International Studies major.  Doubt MM can answer many questions about complex global affairs. She only knows 1 answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: What is International Studies major?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/international-studies-major-overview
> 
> 
> An international/global studies major strives to understand globalization and how it affects a country’s culture and society. Unlike international relations majors, who focus on politics and the interactions between countries, international studies majors assess the anthropological, historical and religious aspects of countries.
> *What Is an International Studies Major?*
> 
> An international studies major examines the connections between international and regional issues. Students can concentrate on a language and an area of the world while learning how to analyze complex global affairs. Programs aim to expand students' understanding of different cultures and produce graduates interested in finding ways to respond to global challenges.
> *Common Coursework International Studies Majors Can Expect*
> 
> International studies majors can expect to take a range of classes, as many programs use a multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary curriculum. Students take courses in history, anthropology, economics, literature, politics and other social sciences. This approach aims to provide students with the broad knowledge and analytical skills to understand the world’s problems. Majors may also take classes on topics such as global health, terrorism, human rights and environmental emergencies.
> An integral part of international studies coursework is advanced language classes. Many programs require students to concentrate on a foreign language and a region. Students can develop their language abilities and learn more about a country’s culture and history by studying abroad. Depending on the program, students may study abroad for a summer, a semester or a year.
> International studies majors may need to complete a final thesis or capstone project. In some cases, the thesis may be based on coursework or research students complete while studying abroad.
> *How to Know if This Major Is the Right Fit for You*
> 
> International studies majors should be interested in events happening in other countries and on the global stage. They should also enjoy learning about other cultures. Having a knack for learning foreign languages would be useful for this degree, as some programs emphasize proficiency and coursework in a second language.
> Students who enjoy creative problem-solving and who are invested in tackling complex problems, such as economic inequality or human rights issues, should consider this major.


How to marry a royal?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Will you guys still like me if I admit to loving my cashmere beanies? I’m in Boston if that helps my case!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> She is trying hard; PR team releasing who are the big boys and girls in Montecito.
> 
> _With the theme “Holiday Magic,” it was indeed a magical evening for the 1st Annual Montecito Holiday Car Parade. Huge nod to the co-chairs Sharon Byrne, Mindy Denson, and Dana Newquist, along with their committee members, for a most upbeat treat for our town and its annual visitors…
> 
> "*Thanks to the many parade sponsors including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle who were first to donate*, Montecito Journal, Nina Terzian, Riskin Partners, Penelope & Adam Bianchi, Sean Fahey, Robert Pavloff, Pane E Vino, Village Properties, Noozhawk, Montecito Fire Protection District, and Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1st Annual Montecito Car Parade of Lights - Montecito
> 
> 
> With the theme “Holiday Magic,” it was indeed a magical evening for the 1st Annual Montecito Holiday Car Parade. Huge nod to the co-chairs Sharon Byrne, Mindy Denson, and Dana Newquist, along with their committee members, for a most upbeat treat for our town and its annual visitors.  Kids from 1...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net



Well, at least they left off the “Duchess”!!


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> Well, at least they left off the “Duchess”!!


I read a rant by a sugar in some Twitter feed that was less than fawning. The sugar was screaming that it was disrespectful to call Methane "Meghan Markle" because she was no longer a commoner; she must be addressed as DOS which I happily translated as Dreadful Ogress Sucks.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I read a rant by a sugar in some Twitter feed that was less than fawning. The sugar was screaming that it was disrespectful to call Methane "Meghan Markle" because she was no longer a commoner; she must be addressed as DOS which I happily translated as Dreadful Ogress Sucks.


And another coffee splatter hits the screen, "Dreadful Ogress Sucks" is brilliant.

Note to Maggie Muggins as you add this to the list: Blessings to you for keeping up with the rampant wit shared here, it would be impossible to remember them without you.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> I read a rant by a sugar in some Twitter feed that was less than fawning. The sugar was screaming that it was disrespectful to call Methane "Meghan Markle" because she was no longer a commoner; she must be addressed as DOS which I happily translated as Dreadful Ogress Sucks.


Don't you think it's Sunshine Sachs manipulating all this?

I read an article in Maclean's magazine (a reputable magazine here in Canada) that showed how social media can be controlled as soon as a negative comment comes out.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Will you guys still like me if I admit to loving my cashmere beanies? I’m in Boston if that helps my case!



I've no idea if living in Boston helps your case, but I still like you. 

There again, I'm wearing a multi-coloured wool hat, hand-knitted in Nepal and bought in Haight-Ashbury 2006.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I read a rant by a sugar in some Twitter feed that was less than fawning. The sugar was screaming that it was disrespectful to call Methane "Meghan Markle" because she was no longer a commoner; she must be addressed as DOS which I happily translated as Dreadful Ogress Sucks.



From a legal POV, if she still uses/has docs by/in the name 'Meghan Markel' it's not disrespectful and lawful. 

Although I agree DOS suits her rather better as DOS =* Disk Operating System. * Fortunately, I only own/use a Mac.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Will you guys still like me if I admit to loving my cashmere beanies? I’m in Boston if that helps my case!



Oh yes, rest assured, we love everyone, beanie and all.  Really, it’s all in the attitude - shoulders back, head held high, give ‘‘em the ‘drop dead’ look, no hiding behind sunglasses.  

Kinda like Nicky Hilton hailing a cab in NYC - note the people (tourists?) behind her :gasp:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> From a legal POV, if she still uses/has docs by/in the name 'Meghan Markel' it's not disrespectful and lawful.
> 
> Although I agree DOS suits her rather better as DOS =* Disk Operating System. * Fortunately, I only own/use a Mac.


As long as we could insert that Disk up and far enough to call her (DOS) Duchess of Sigmoid.


----------



## CeeJay

Roxanna said:


> Well, in this latest  pics MM looks considerably thinner.  Either she already lost weight or there is  some other reason.
> Also, I am not sure how upscale that store is, but she definitely downscaled her outfit budget.  Interesting.


None of the stores that she went into *aren't* UPSCALE big-time!!!  That area doesn't have 'el-cheapo' stuff, anywhere!


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> She doesn't want to be one of them. She thinks she is better than them and expected them to want to be like her.


Respectfully disagree. MM wanting to live in Montecito was entirely aspirational. She equated it with class, money and higher social position. She was never going to fit into that in the UK despite Harry’s title and she thought she could get it here in the US. Ellen’s treatment of her on the show was nothing more than telling MM  in a mean way that it would never happen. Ellen made a fool of her and made sure everyone saw it and knew it. If anything it made MM a laughing stock to her neighbors.


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> Well, at least they left off the “Duchess”!!


She is working on her new image (Ellen Degeneres's phase), but be assured that not using that "Duchess" must have been very painful. Even worse than pulling teeth!


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> I read a rant by a sugar in some Twitter feed that was less than fawning. The sugar was screaming that it was disrespectful to call Methane "Meghan Markle" because she was no longer a commoner; she must be addressed as DOS which I happily translated as Dreadful Ogress Sucks.


Well, if the bonehead 'sugar' is in the US, then he/she is as stupid as he/she is delusional!!! .. in the US, we don't use effin' titles, we got rid of that as a result of the revolutionary war and then amended the constitution in the 1800's to indicate "no titles" from foreign countries!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh yes, rest assured, we love everyone, beanie and all.  Really, it’s all in the attitude - shoulders back, head held high, give ‘‘em the ‘drop dead’ look, no hiding behind sunglasses.
> 
> Kinda like Nicky Hilton hailing a cab in NYC - note the people (tourists?) behind her :gasp:
> 
> View attachment 5276567
> 
> 
> View attachment 5276569


HA .. yeah, tourists indeed .. that's what you have to do in NYC to get a cab!!! .. get in the road and put up that hand, scream & shout!!


----------



## xeyes

Maggie Muggins said:


> As long as we could insert that Disk up and far enough to call her (DOS) Duchess of Sigmoid.



Or perhaps she’s a denial-of-service (DoS) attack. Apparently attempting to shut down a high-profile target (BRF) by trying to control everything and take all their resources...









						What is a denial of service attack (DoS) ?
					

A Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack is an attack meant to shut down a machine or network, making it inaccessible to its intended users.




					www.paloaltonetworks.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> She is trying hard; PR team releasing who are the big boys and girls in Montecito.
> 
> _With the theme “Holiday Magic,” it was indeed a magical evening for the 1st Annual Montecito Holiday Car Parade. Huge nod to the co-chairs Sharon Byrne, Mindy Denson, and Dana Newquist, along with their committee members, for a most upbeat treat for our town and its annual visitors…
> 
> "*Thanks to the many parade sponsors including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle who were first to donate*, Montecito Journal, Nina Terzian, Riskin Partners, Penelope & Adam Bianchi, Sean Fahey, Robert Pavloff, Pane E Vino, Village Properties, Noozhawk, Montecito Fire Protection District, and Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1st Annual Montecito Car Parade of Lights - Montecito
> 
> 
> With the theme “Holiday Magic,” it was indeed a magical evening for the 1st Annual Montecito Holiday Car Parade. Huge nod to the co-chairs Sharon Byrne, Mindy Denson, and Dana Newquist, along with their committee members, for a most upbeat treat for our town and its annual visitors.  Kids from 1...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net


Interesting that it’s the first one, I’m confused as I got the impression Montecito was a rural area with big gated mansions set off the road and not much else- is this wrong?


marietouchet said:


> And you stirred back and forth, not in a circle …LOL


See I’m such a slob I didn’t even know about that 


marietouchet said:


> Ok, the handbag handles, lower shot … can’t quite make it out …
> An expensive Hermes twilly ?
> A Cloth table napkin ?
> A twilly still in its plastic bag ???
> 
> was thinking , I wonder if MM was trying to co-opt GREEN in her BRF days, make it her signature color, so she would stand out better
> HMTQ owns all the brights, Camilla does blue, pink, mint pastels, and Kate owns red and black
> who wants to own beige ??? MM did a lot of beige too
> 
> Remember the green cape outfit, there was a green pull with leather skirt outfit , now this hunter green dress


Thank you! That bag is driving me nuts. It looks like it was a nice tortoiseshell clutch and when she left the dinner table she got her napkin trapped in it and has just been using it to mop things up ever since.  I don’t know but I feel like the bag is  from Skinny Dip- it looks really like their style.

I think you are bang on the money (M loves her greens) about her wanting a  signature colour. I do think they all seem to have a preferred hue or whole colour each. Funnily enough, I’d say Anne has taken beiges and browns already- I feel like she’s very Burberry, Barbour and riding boots.


lanasyogamama said:


> Will you guys still like me if I admit to loving my cashmere beanies? I’m in Boston if that helps my case!


Beanies are amazing. I love all hats but they are easily the easiest to incorporate into an outfit. I’m most certainly with you on this and cashmere… swoon! Are they neutrals or bright colours? 



papertiger said:


> From a legal POV, if she still uses/has docs by/in the name 'Meghan Markel' it's not disrespectful and lawful.
> 
> Although I agree DOS suits her rather better as DOS =* Disk Operating System. * Fortunately, I only own/use a Mac.


Yes if she wanted to change her maiden name I see no problem with calling her Windsor (I think it would be) but there’s no way I’m calling her by a title she shouldn’t be using in the US. And i’m not calling her just Megan because she isn’t my friend and she is not and never will be Cher.

DOs operating—- makes me think of lady C going ‘she’s an OP-ER-RATOR! A REAL operator’ in her most enunciated tone but it also makes me picture those women who used to put phone calls through the wire switch board and it makes me wonder whether that’s what M has to do to Harry’s synapses so he can remember his lines


----------



## marietouchet

Photo says it all, note model is standing on pedestal, and skirt hangs way below the pedestal


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> From a legal POV, if she still uses/has docs by/in the name 'Meghan Markel' it's not disrespectful and lawful.
> 
> Although I agree DOS suits her rather better as DOS =* Disk Operating System. * Fortunately, I only own/use a Mac.


Honestly, I get it, Meghan Markle is the easiest name, most of us can spell and pronounce it and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor is too long for most forms , ignoring all permutations of Sussex


----------



## AbbytheBT

lanasyogamama said:


> Will you guys still like me if I admit to loving my cashmere beanies? I’m in Boston if that helps my case!


For sure!!!! now that I live way up North, I never leave house without a beanie in the bag and always looking to indulge in more cashmere!!  TBH, I think the no beanie in SoCal code has more to do with sweating heads and awkwardness of rearranging damp hair.  Here in snow country we wear them all day!


----------



## CeeJay

AbbytheBT said:


> For sure!!!! now that I live way up North, I never leave house without a beanie in the bag and always looking to indulge in more cashmere!!  TBH, I think the no beanie in SoCal code has more to do with sweating heads and awkwardness of rearranging damp hair.  Here in snow country we wear them all day!


You would be surprised at all the beanies you see in SoCal (well - LA area), since it's very much a "hipster" icon!  When in certain parts, like Silverlake, Culver City, Studio City, West Hollywood, etc. .. you see them a-plenty!  Honestly, I always kind of crack up at it because, yes .. they really aren't a needed accessory here!  Then again, I sometimes wonder if they are also used to cover up those balding spots (hello Hazza)?!?!!?


----------



## bellecate

Well we are know to whom she would be referencing, if this was real. 
Sorry for the language on this, I don’t know how to cover it. But this made me laugh out loud when I saw it.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Did someone here post this comment? : "That's a housewares shop. She must need more plates."


I'm sure she does after reading this about Kate in VF yesterday:


> "Another friend told the magazine that the royal is adapting admirably to her recent increase in responsibilities and is the best possible candidate for the position. “She is ready to step into those shoes with ease and is perfect for the job,” they said. Another insider close to the royal household added, that she is “more and more impressive as time goes on. She is a focused and professional woman.” This comes after yet another source confided to the outlet that the Duchess of Cambridge is “flourishing” ahead of her 40th birthday next month and “she has really come into her own.”





> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/20...paign=VF_CH_121821&utm_term=VYF_Cocktail_Hour


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I read a rant by a sugar in some Twitter feed that was less than fawning. The sugar was screaming that it was disrespectful to call Methane "Meghan Markle" because she was no longer a commoner; she must be addressed as DOS which I happily translated as Dreadful Ogress Sucks.


someone ought to tell these "sugars" that she spent very little time as a working royal and she doesn't deserve to be called by that title


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> someone ought to tell these "sugars" that she spent very little time as a working royal and she doesn't deserve to be called by that title


Funny, I think she has proven herself to be very _common._


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> She is working on her new image (Ellen Degeneres's phase), but be assured that not using that "Duchess" must have been very painful. Even worse than pulling teeth!


New image?  Bank robbing?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

For you @jelliedfeels 
Laugh-in's Lily Tomlin as Ernestine the telephone operator calling General Motors.  "One ringy dingy + 1 SNORT"


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Honestly, I get it, Meghan Markle is the easiest name, most of us can spell and pronounce it and Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor is too long for most forms , ignoring all permutations of Sussex


Didn't William and Harry use Wales as their surname while in the military? Why not just Harry and Meghan Wales? I'm sure she'd be thrilled being Mrs. Wales instead of the Duchess of Sussex


----------



## charlottawill

tiktok said:


> Well frankly it would be hard for anyone to be accepted when you dress so ridiculously inappropriately that you stick out like a sore thumb in your neighborhood. The number of people who wear long coats and beanies in 65 degree weather in SoCal during the day hopping out of the car to run a quick errand is about equal to the number of people who wear them in NY at 80 degrees.


Between this getup and her NY outfits you'd think she's still in Toronto.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it
> If she arranged it why is she all covered with mask, hat, etc?  the mask could be required by the stores but the weather doesn't call for a hat
> Looks like a very cute little town


I believe much of CA reinstated indoor mask mandates this week - I know LA did. Montecito is a nice place with a lot of wealthy people looking to keep a low profile. I'm sure H&M's presence is not appreciated by many of them.


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> It was 62 degrees and sunny today in Montecito. She needs a wool coat, why again? Is she smuggling a hidden camera and mic into Pierre LaFonde for their Netfilx show? "Here's Meggy, picking up some organic pasta sauce and a few throw pillows from Pierre LaFonde?"
> 
> I've lived in Santa Barbara. Pierre LaFonde is a super cute little store. https://www.pierrelafond.com/
> 
> She's a clown.


Good point about a camera and mic, it's quite possible.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The greedy, aspirational eyes would make it difficult for me to talk to her.


I imagine she's one of those people who look right past you if you are of no use to them.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I believe much of CA reinstated indoor mask mandates this week - I know LA did. Montecito is a nice place with a lot of wealthy people looking to keep a low profile. I'm sure H&M's presence is not appreciated by many of them.


yes, all of CA has mask mandate except for the SF area....not being that strictly enforced this time but for the most part people going into retail stores are masked


----------



## CarryOn2020

Change is in the air


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

IMHO this explains the beanie -


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Didn't William and Harry use Wales as their surname while in the military? Why not just Harry and Meghan Wales? I'm sure she'd be thrilled being Mrs. Wales instead of the Duchess of Sussex


Well technically Mountbatten-Windsor is the family last name although like  one no uses it …

lots of UK nobles have multiple hyphenated last names, as many as four names glued together, awkward, so there is a sort of abbreviation/nickname substitute for all that …

Nobles use the fief name as a last name, presupposing one has a title and fief … what does THAT a mean ?
Ex Edward is the Earl of Wessex, Earl is his title, and Wessex is his fief, in the good olde days, one owned the land in the fief, but was yesterday ..
Anyway the Countess of Wessex Is (nicknamed) Sophie Wessex, in acknowledgement of husband’s title , shorter than M-W, the press calls her Sophie W regularly

So, William and Harry using Wales as last name still acknowledges a title and fief, their father’s title and fief

so, if H&M wanted to go title-less, USA Style, they should use M-W, which is just odd in the UK,

Their case is unique, since, there is sentiment that they do not deserve to use the name M-W, having besmirched it, they need to pick something less controversial, maybe Markle

It is a complicated medieval system of nemenclature


----------



## bellecate

Meghan Spotted but was this a pap shot set up or was it something a little darker? - YouTube 
Link to a Murky Meg YouTube video. Interesting point she has in that she doesn't believe it was a Pap photo but actually a fashion photographer mememe hired herself. She shows the reasons behind why she thinks this. I agree with her.  Her desperation is showing.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Change is in the air



Ooof! The Queen: "Godspeed, dear Harry."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Meghan Spotted but was this a pap shot set up or was it something a little darker? - YouTube
> Link to a Murky Meg YouTube video. Interesting point she has in that she doesn't believe it was a Pap photo but actually a fashion photographer mememe hired herself. She shows the reasons behind why she thinks this. I agree with her.  Her desperation is showing.



 Oh definitely, this was one of her paid photographers - note the copyright on all of the photos.  It could be part of the Nflix docudrama or it could be a desperate attempt to get in the headlines. [Of course a simple photo of the kids would do that.]


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh definitely, this was one of her paid photographers - note the copyright on all of the photos.  It could be part of the Nflix docudrama or it could be a desperate attempt to get in the headlines. [Of course a simple photo of the kids would do that.]



The odd thing - this is the first time I have seen a picture of her where she is not looking direct at the camera…!

this was set up though.  How desperate she is to merch retailers for small $$.  How far she has fallen….


----------



## Kevinaxx

csshopper said:


> while Prince Harry has a reported $1.7billion position at Silicon Valley start-up Better Up


This must be majority in stock and speaking of a ten year plus type of compensation. No way any pe/vc will continue to pour into better up based on prince william. They’re not dummies.


----------



## Kevinaxx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Change is in the air



This reminds me of 



Except harry the pumpkin is no Prince Charming.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks and congratulations to the following members for the new nicknames.
     

@Kevinaxx
For your first, Harry the Pumpkin, welcome to The List.  


@papertiger
For your #5, DOS = Disk Operating System, welcome to the Nickname Master's Club. 



@jelliedfeels
For your #12, Her Naff Man, welcome to the Early Bird Club. 



@CarryOn2020
For your #23, Turn-Off Tossers, The List #23 Ribbon. 
For your #24, Turn-Off Toffs, The List #24 Ribbon. 
For your #25, Humble-Bragger, The List #25 Ribbon. 







@Chanbal
For your #36, The Amnesic of Montecito, The List #36 Ribbon. 



@xincinsin
For your #36, Dreadful Ogress Sucks, The List #36 Ribbon.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> New image?  Bank robbing?
> 
> View attachment 5276735
> View attachment 5276737


It took me some time, but this is who she reminded me of. 



[


----------



## Mendocino

bellecate said:


> Well we are know to whom she would be referencing, if this was real.
> Sorry for the language on this, I don’t know how to cover it. But this made me laugh out loud when I saw it.
> View attachment 5276706



I love it! The caption is perfect in light of all the unexpected things that happened this year. I would reply to her using my favorite British  saying: I'll put the kettle on."


----------



## Mendocino

Deleted


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> It took me some time, but this is who she reminded me of.
> View attachment 5276992
> View attachment 5276991
> 
> [


The invisibility runs in the family


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> I've no idea if living in Boston helps your case, but I still like you.
> 
> There again, I'm wearing a multi-coloured wool hat, hand-knitted in Nepal and bought in Haight-Ashbury 2006.



I wear a cashmere beany aswell, although not the way she wears it, I'm too old.....But I wear it to keep my head warm as we are around 5° celsius, while she wears it....I don't know why, as someone has said temps in Cali are too high for a coat and hat...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dare I say this - she is lacking the ‘rich-mom’ energy, even the ‘cool-girl’ energy.
Maybe she should listen to Tinx. She can thank us later.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Photo says it all, note model is standing on pedestal, and skirt hangs way below the pedestal


I love red but this looks naff  on the model in a posed photo so it wasn’t going to look great in real life especially when, you know, no one else was in a ballgown.  



charlottawill said:


> Didn't William and Harry use Wales as their surname while in the military? Why not just Harry and Meghan Wales? I'm sure she'd be thrilled being Mrs. Wales instead of the Duchess of Sussex


She’d probably think it was a fat joke 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Change is in the air



Isn’t that when she ‘forgot’ to curtesy on the way out?



Maggie Muggins said:


> For you @jelliedfeels
> Laugh-in's Lily Tomlin as Ernestine the telephone operator calling General Motors.  "One ringy dingy + 1 SNORT"



exactly! That’s so funny when she talks about 1m on fighting smog and 49m on advertising…. Sounds very familiar


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It took me some time, but this is who she reminded me of.
> View attachment 5276992
> View attachment 5276991
> 
> [


was thinking this was the Shadow, played by the now-besmirched Alec Baldwin 
no, it is the INVISIBLE man/woman


----------



## jelliedfeels

duna said:


> I wear a cashmere beany aswell, although not the way she wears it, I'm too old.....But I wear it to keep my head warm as we are around 5° celsius, while she wears it....I don't know why, as someone has said temps in Cali are too high for a coat and hat...


No one, ever, has gotten as old as these two


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I wear a cashmere beany aswell, although not the way she wears it, I'm too old.....But I wear it to keep my head warm as we are around 5° celsius, while she wears it....I don't know why, as someone has said temps in Cali are too high for a coat and hat...


yes, I can see wearing a hat if it's really cold (you actually need to where you live) but I doubt it's lower than 55 degress (if that low) in Montecito.  Just checked - today forecast is for 55 degrees.  so no need for a cashmere hat.  as far as the coat, something like a rain coat or a leather jacket would be reasonable, not a true winter coat.  not sure what her coat is made of.
Interesting that her mask is so large it goes under her sunnies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> yes, I can see wearing a hat if it's really cold (you actully need to where you live) but I doubt it's lower than 55 degress (if that low) in Montecito.  Just checked - today forecast is for 55 degrees.  so no need for a cashmere hat.  as far as the coat, something like a rain coat or a leather jacket would be reasonable, not a true winter coat.  not sure what her coat is made of.
> Interesting that her mask is so large it goes under her sunnies.


It's an odd get-up. Huge mask, giant sunnies, clothes out of season. And all that hair arranged to drape in front, nothing down her back. It's like a photo illustrating "Anything worth doing, is worth over-doing."


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> The invisibility runs in the family





marietouchet said:


> was thinking this was the Shadow, played by the now-besmirched Alec Baldwin
> no, it is the INVISIBLE man/woman


Haha, it looks like more people made that connection. That one and a NY burrito…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Haha, it looks like more people made that connection. That one and a NY burrito…




He has trained us well


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> yes, I can see wearing a hat if it's really cold (you actually need to where you live) but I doubt it's lower than 55 degress (if that low) in Montecito.  Just checked - today forecast is for 55 degrees.  so no need for a cashmere hat.  as far as the coat, something like a rain coat or a leather jacket would be reasonable, not a true winter coat.  not sure what her coat is made of.
> Interesting that her mask is so large it goes under her sunnies.


Not to defend her, but that is how the KN95s fit. I hate them, I find them really uncomfortable. I know KN95s are preferable but I just wear the blue surgical ones or cloth, and they're not even very comfortable. I have great respect for medical professionals who have to wear N95s all day. I have seen many photos of what they do to your skin after a twelve hour shift.

And if your sunglasses don't rest atop the mask they tend to fog up in cold weather. I've been dealing with it for over a year living in a cold climate and it is so annoying.


----------



## rose60610

I wonder if Meghan paid for her purchases using the Archewell Foundation credit card. I can't see HER paying for anything with her own money. Does Montecito take payments in British pounds (from their allowance from Chuck)?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if Meghan paid for her purchases using the Archewell Foundation credit card. I can't see HER paying for anything with her own money. Does Montecito take payments in British pounds (from their allowance from Chuck)?


maybe she posted a pic with the store name showing and got some free goodies


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if Meghan paid for her purchases using the Archewell Foundation credit card. I can't see HER paying for anything with her own money. Does Montecito take payments in British pounds (from their allowance from Chuck)?


If he is giving them one, I'm sure their allowance is direct deposited to their bank account and converted to dollars. I can't see Harry driving up to the teller window with a check signed by his father.


----------



## mellibelly

Has this been posted? Yet another instance of the mask slipping. This video along with the Larry King interview really drive home what a psychopath she is. Imagine what she’s like behind closed doors without cameras on her. Really feel for the kids (if they exist) and the bullied staff.


----------



## csshopper

She just-does-not-get-it! Narcissists never do.

One of the reasons the famous and wealthy move to Montecito is because of the privacy it provides them, it's a feature in real estate advertising, it's understood, for example, celebrities are "real people" and can go about their business under the radar. Not Methane, she might as well have put Kleig lights on herself. She achieved her objective, she got noticed, but, once again, NOT is the way she hoped for. 

The Montecito resident I was talking to the other day said to many of them the Sussexes came with tarnished titles, their behaviors  "appalling". She cited Haz dumping his obligations to his military patronage to attend the Disney premier so he could solicit work for the wife, and her chirpy comment, "it's why we came".  Local Montecito people, and there are many, "in the industry" were offended on Bob Iger's behalf for him being very publicly put on the spot in front of a world wide audience. It made an impression, invitations in Montecito have not been made as host/hostesses fear the embarrassment of the toxic twosome using opportunities to badger people. The James Corden bus tour of Beverly Hills with Haz using a stranger's loo, evidently caused a little angst as there were (fortunately unfounded) fears a similar stunt might be planned for the Santa Barbara area. While in LA, the staged photo op in the military cemetery and the visit to the pre school to plant flowers with the kids, "using the dead and other people's children" was not well received. 

Even before the Ellen debacle, enough people had seen the repeated incidents of Methane's elbows flying as she pushed her husband and others out of the way to get to the center or a group or the most important person. Harry juggling balls outside the window like some entertainer hired for a kid's birthday, she said led to jokes she would not repeat.

One point this lady made, really struck me and I would bet all I have that Lady Megbeth and her Halfwit Husband have never ever processed this: 

They arrived in a new community with a very visible set of baggage: failure to honor commitments to family and country, cutting off all family, relentlessly spinning easily disproved lies, hypocritical preaching, and it's continued with shameful behaviors as Prince Phillip was dying, documented incidents of the Markling of anyone who dared not worship at Methane's feet, Haz cutting off life long friends. The Oprah interview to deliberately hurt and embarrass the RF.  Sneaky recording on the faux royal tour of NY. 

As she said,  it leads people to ask themselves the question: Why would I want the Sussexes in my life and risk being treated that way? True, there are some, for the association with a Title, but it seems many more, not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> As she said, it leads people to ask themselves the question: *Why would I want the Sussexes in my life and risk being treated that way? *True, there are some, for the association with a Title, but it seems many more, not.



Thank you for this excellent post. It covers all of the essentials. In the past, Hazzie has indicated he is not interested in anyone trying to gain BRF access through him. He knows the BRF has a process to vet people and he doesn’t have the authority to disregard that. Besides most people with money have their own connections and would not need his help in arranging favors from the BRF, so his title doesn’t impress anyone in his neighborhood.  IIRC, Wallis&Ed were surprised that most people weren’t interested in them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The Montecito resident I was talking to the other day said to many of them the Sussexes came with tarnished titles, their behaviors  "appalling".



And this coming from Americans which have no reason to feel warmly for the monarchy and/or the BRF.



> She cited Haz dumping his obligations to his military patronage to attend the Disney premier so he could solicit work for the wife, and her chirpy comment, "it's why we came".  Local Montecito people, and there are many, "in the industry" were offended on Bob Iger's behalf for him being very publicly put on the spot in front of a world wide audience. It made an impression, invitations in Montecito have not been made as host/hostesses fear the embarrassment of the toxic twosome using opportunities to badger people. The James Corden bus tour of Beverly Hills with Haz using a stranger's loo, evidently caused a little angst as there were (fortunately unfounded) fears a similar stunt might be planned for the Santa Barbara area. While in LA, the staged photo op in the military cemetery and the visit to the pre school to plant flowers with the kids, "using the dead and other people's children" was not well received.
> 
> Even before the Ellen debacle, enough people had seen the repeated incidents of Methane's elbows flying as she pushed her husband and others out of the way to get to the center or a group or the most important person. Harry juggling balls outside the window like some entertainer hired for a kid's birthday, she said led to jokes she would not repeat.



Oh wow. I did not expect people outside of our bubble to pay attention and I'm very happy to learn it has indeed been noticed.



> They arrived in a new community with a very visible set of baggage: failure to honor commitments to family and country, cutting off all family, relentlessly spinning easily disproved lies, hypocritical preaching, and it's continued with shameful behaviors as Prince Phillip was dying, documented incidents of the Markling of anyone who dared not worship at Methane's feet, Haz cutting off life long friends. The Oprah interview to deliberately hurt and embarrass the RF.  Sneaky recording on the faux royal tour of NY.
> 
> As she said,  it leads people to ask themselves the question: Why would I want the Sussexes in my life and risk being treated that way? True, there are some, for the association with a Title, but it seems many more, not.



Montecito crowd, keep up the good work and don't let yourself be fooled!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> If he is giving them one, I'm sure their allowance is direct deposited to their bank account and converted to dollars. I can't see Harry driving up to the teller window with a check signed by his father.


I'm sure they have people to do all their errands


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> Has this been posted? Yet another instance of the mask slipping. This video along with the Larry King interview really drive home what a psychopath she is. Imagine what she’s like behind closed doors without cameras on her. Really feel for the kids (if they exist) and the bullied staff.



and this was before she became the Duchess....


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> IIRC, Wallis&Ed were surprised that most people weren’t interested in them.


This exactly, and history is repeating itself with the Dumbartons.


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> Has this been posted? Yet another instance of the mask slipping. This video along with the Larry King interview really drive home what a psychopath she is. Imagine what she’s like behind closed doors without cameras on her. Really feel for the kids (if they exist) and the bullied staff.



I


sdkitty said:


> and this was before she became the Duchess....


I'm sure that interviewer knew what she was doing when she leaned on his shoulder.  uugh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> and this was before she became the Duchess....


"Who you looking for?" Priceless. I'm sure she does it all the time.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure they have people to do all their errands


Oh for sure.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> "Who you looking for?" Priceless. I'm sure she does it all the time.


she should have asked him "do you know who I am?"


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Oh for sure.


really seeing how she behaves (in the video above for instance), it's kind of sickening that she is living in that mansion and enjoying all the privilege....or maybe she's not really enjoying it....she is so artificial she may not have real feelings - unless you count insecurity and ambition


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for this excellent post. It covers all of the essentials. In the past, Hazzie has indicated he is not interested in anyone trying to gain BRF access through him. He knows the BRF has a process to vet people and he doesn’t have the authority to disregard that. Besides most people with money have their own connections and would not need his help in arranging favors from the BRF, so his title doesn’t impress anyone in his neighborhood.  IIRC, Wallis&Ed were surprised that most people weren’t interested in them.


.. but, why didn't they VET the Megalomaniac???  Given all the rumors about the "Yacht Girl", her behavior behind the scenes on Suits, her constant markling of those no longer "useful" to her, etc. etc. etc. -- I just don't get it!!!  It will be mighty interesting to see what Thomas (her markled father) put into that book that he is supposed to be writing about her!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Change is in the air



Slightly off topic, but in case you missed it this is amusing. I can't believe her gown cost a quarter mil 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...dding-dress-3-fans-compare-Meghan-Markle.html


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> really seeing how she behaves (in the video above for instance), it's kind of sickening that she is living in that mansion and enjoying all the privilege....or maybe she's not really enjoying it....she is so artificial she may not have real feelings - unless you count insecurity and ambition


She wanted the wealth and power but may not have bargained for the magnifying glass she is living under when she set her sights on Harry.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> really seeing how she behaves (in the video above for instance), it's kind of sickening that she is living in that mansion and enjoying all the privilege....or maybe she's not really enjoying it....she is so artificial she may not have real feelings - unless you count insecurity and ambition


I'm not sure people like her can ever "truly" be happy; there's always SOMETHING that they want/need (and in her case .. she wants that FAME and ADORATION)!!  I had a gal who used to work for me in the past who had some similarities (although not as bad) as Meghan and she whined constantly about this, that & the other.  She was never happy, and let me tell you .. I bent over backwards to appease her on some points (working from home 2 days/week, working different hours so that she could pick up her children from school, etc.).  It finally got to the point though, when she just pushed me too far and I lost it .. I just told her, "_You have a choice, you either suck it up since you don't seem to realize that you have a lot more than most folks, OR .. you leave .. period_"!  Well, she did go out and find another job and left, and I was actually relieved!  But, as you might suspect, sure enough .. 2 weeks later, I get a phone call from her complaining about how horrible her new boss was and "could she come back?"!!!  Uggh -- some people!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. but, why didn't they VET the Megalomaniac???  Given all the rumors about the "Yacht Girl", her behavior behind the scenes on Suits, her constant markling of those no longer "useful" to her, etc. etc. etc. -- I just don't get it!!!  It will be mighty interesting to see what Thomas (her markled father) put into that book that he is supposed to be writing about her!


you mean the RF vet her?  even if they did, H was determined to have her


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> .. but, why didn't they VET the Megalomaniac???  Given all the rumors about the "Yacht Girl", her behavior behind the scenes on Suits, her constant markling of those no longer "useful" to her, etc. etc. etc. -- I just don't get it!!!  It will be mighty interesting to see what Thomas (her markled father) put into that book that he is supposed to be writing about her!


I'm sure the palace knew all about her past, but also knew if they tried to dissuade Harry from marrying her he would stubbornly forge ahead anyway. They probably figured they'd look better if they appeared to be welcoming her with open arms and let the couple self destruct on their own, which they seem to be doing a pretty good job of thus far. William would never have been allowed to marry someone with such an "interesting" background.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I'm not sure people like her can ever "truly" be happy; there's always SOMETHING that they want/need (and in her case .. she wants that FAME and ADORATION)!!  I had a gal who used to work for me in the past who had some similarities (although not as bad) as Meghan and she whined constantly about this, that & the other.  She was never happy, and let me tell you .. I bent over backwards to appease her on some points (working from home 2 days/week, working different hours so that she could pick up her children from school, etc.).  It finally got to the point though, when she just pushed me too far and I lost it .. I just told her, "_You have a choice, you either suck it up since you don't seem to realize that you have a lot more than most folks, OR .. you leave .. period_"!  Well, she did go out and find another job and left, and I was actually relieved!  But, as you might suspect, sure enough .. 2 weeks later, I get a phone call from her complaining about how horrible her new boss was and "could she come back?"!!!  Uggh -- some people!


yes, I could be wrong but she seem to me to be just an empty shell of a person......I almost feel sorry for "H"...and BTW who calls their husband by his first initial?  is she showing him who is boss?  You used to be royalty, now you're my slave!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> It's an odd get-up. Huge mask, giant sunnies, clothes out of season. And all that hair arranged to drape in front, nothing down her back. It's like a photo illustrating "Anything worth doing, is worth over-doing."


ITA. Could she be set up like in the movies where the spyware is hidden (small mic/cam) in the eyeglasses and doesn't it look like something other than hair is hidden under the beanie since most of her hair/mop (two ugly strands) is hanging down her front? It makes one wonder if she was recording her outing for maybe Netflix.


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> I'm not sure people like her can ever "truly" be happy; there's always SOMETHING that they want/need (and in her case .. she wants that FAME and ADORATION)!!  I had a gal who used to work for me in the past who had some similarities (although not as bad) as Meghan and she whined constantly about this, that & the other.  She was never happy, and let me tell you .. I bent over backwards to appease her on some points (working from home 2 days/week, working different hours so that she could pick up her children from school, etc.).  It finally got to the point though, when she just pushed me too far and I lost it .. I just told her, "_You have a choice, you either suck it up since you don't seem to realize that you have a lot more than most folks, OR .. you leave .. period_"!  Well, she did go out and find another job and left, and I was actually relieved!  But, as you might suspect, sure enough .. 2 weeks later, I get a phone call from her complaining about how horrible her new boss was and "could she come back?"!!!  Uggh -- some people!


You deserve a (long-suffering) award!  
Yes, I've noticed that people like her are never happy with their lot in life. They always want and believe they deserve something more, something better. Every one of my office narcs was a whiner.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> you mean the RF vet her?  even if they did, H was determined to have her


H put out the famous - don’t bother my girl friend - letter to the tabloids when they were dating …
but by that letter, he was trotting out an “everybody is against her” mantra very early on
Yes, no doubt the BRF vetted her, heck, their security is provided by the Met, and vetting their charges is part of their job
Did Charles get the info and offer the report/info to his son ? Sure, at least in Executive summary form … Did H read or believe the report ?
Doubt it, he had made his mind up ahead of time, everybody is against us


----------



## Luvbolide

This may be my own failure of imagination, but I can’t help but wonder what the Difficult Duo can possibly use all this footage of themselves for.  The notion that their day to day lives - or their fake royal tour of NYC - can be somehow be spun into an interesting documentary boggles my mind.  It wasn’t even interesting as it happened.  I don’t know how this all works, but my assumption is that Netflix has the right (or maybe obligation) to review and critique the projects before accepting- and paying for - them.  I watch (or at least scope out) lots of things on Netflix.  Have yet to see something as boring as “Defrocked Prince and D List Former Actress fake royal tour while wearing insanely inappropriate clothing”.  Plus it has been over a year since their whoop-de-do deal with Netflix was announced and it seems like the thing is dead in the water.  Maybe I am just missing something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> This may be my own failure of imagination, but I can’t help but wonder what the Difficult Duo can possibly use all this footage of themselves for.  The notion that their day to day lives - or their fake royal tour of NYC - can be somehow be spun into an interesting documentary boggles my mind.  It wasn’t even interesting as it happened.  I don’t know how this all works, but my assumption is that Netflix has the right (or maybe obligation) to review and critique the projects before accepting- and paying for - them.  I watch (or at least scope out) lots of things on Netflix.  Have yet to see something as boring as “Defrocked Prince and D List Former Actress fake royal tour while wearing insanely inappropriate clothing”.  Plus it has been over a year since their whoop-de-do deal with Netflix was announced and it seems like the thing is dead in the water.  Maybe I am just missing something.


I'm still boggled that with their dearth of imagination, lack of original thought and penchant for plagiarism, they pulled enough strings to score the deals. It was definitely an inside job. 

Any update on the eponymous Pearl aka Meghan's Mary Sue? The way it was trumpeted in July made it sound like it was already in the works for a long time.


----------



## rose60610

We haven't seen photos of their home decorated for Christmas, have we? So they probably suck. I'd hope they bought gifts for the young children of the BRF, you know, the family they TRASHED. Can you imagine if they hadn't bought gifts for the kids? If the Kate, Beatrice don't mention the gifts (if they DID receive them) you can bet Meghan will because she couldn't stand not being publicly thanked and will blab about how generous she and H are "despite all the hostility and racism".


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

William is looking GREAT CONSIDERING HIS SLAKER WANKER bro who walked out on him, his dead grandfather, stressed grandmother, numerous children and keeping a monarchy intact during a pandemic.

Have I missed anything?


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> We haven't seen photos of their home decorated for Christmas, have we? So they probably suck. I'd hope they bought gifts for the young children of the BRF, you know, the family they TRASHED. Can you imagine if they hadn't bought gifts for the kids? If the Kate, Beatrice don't mention the gifts (if they DID receive them) you can bet Meghan will because she couldn't stand not being publicly thanked and will blab about how generous she and H are "despite all the hostility and racism".


Bulk purchase of waffle makers and her recipe for organic waffles? If it worked for Archificial...


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> We haven't seen photos of their home decorated for Christmas, have we? So they probably suck. I'd hope they bought gifts for the young children of the BRF, you know, the family they TRASHED. Can you imagine if they hadn't bought gifts for the kids? If the Kate, Beatrice don't mention the gifts (if they DID receive them) you can bet Meghan will because she couldn't stand not being publicly thanked and will blab about how generous she and H are "despite all the hostility and racism".



Years ago, I read that the BRF insists on simple, common gifts, preferably with a humorous twist.
 Perhaps H&M will send a .pdf of The Bench.   Fun times  









						Jewels, Fabergé Eggs, and a Singing Toy Hamster: How the Royals Give and Receive Holiday Gifts
					

Even for the monarchy, the gifts that meant the most were personal, sentimental ones from friends and family.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_This appreciation for *gifts that were fun instead of grand *seems to have greatly touched Crawford. “They were unsophisticated about presents, and the smallest gift gave an immense amount of pleasure,” she writes. “One year when they had been loaded with chocolates and all kinds of expensive presents, what pleased both of them more than anything else were small ladybird brooches given to them by Lilibet’s nursemaid, Bobo.”_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Queen's putting her foot down:


----------



## marietouchet

This article flashed by me in my morning news , I caught a glance at the title, was hooked, and found it by googling, a Vanity Fair article that is being fussy about  letting me cite it, being behind a paywall , but the whole thing is there if you Google the title 

great article on how the paps work, and BRF details too, off topic in that 
It is about A not HandM but informative

*Epstein Had a Precise Plan”: How the Only Known Photo of Prince Andrew and the Pedophile Happened*


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Queen's putting her foot down:



One article reported at least 3 BRF helicopter flights, with a BRF member on board, had serious malfunctions-emergency landings, the same helo in each case, the Queen’s
the BRF does not own a fleet of them, only one any more


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> .. but, *why didn't they VET the Megalomaniac??? * Given all the rumors about the "Yacht Girl", her behavior behind the scenes on Suits, her constant markling of those no longer "useful" to her, etc. etc. etc. -- I just don't get it!!!  It will be mighty interesting to see what Thomas (her markled father) put into that book that he is supposed to be writing about her!


I'm positive the BRF vetted her, but Prince Dufus wouldn't listen because Lady Yoga-Legs-Spread-Wipe-Apart had already indoctrinated him into the Victimhood Club. IMO, the look HMTQ gave her at the wedding says it all.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Queen's putting her foot down:



Also, in the annual BRF budget, analyzed here some months ago, helo flights represent a BIG chunk of the money spent
Boris is promoting green travel by rail, so, taking the train rather than flying helps promote the currently fashionable green agenda
so, fewer flights is good for the BRF brand


----------



## Sophisticatted

AND it allows THE QUEEN to throw some shade at Mr. & Ms. “We’re only one plane crash away from the monarchy”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> This article flashed by me in my morning news , I caught a glance at the title, was hooked, and found it by googling, a Vanity Fair article that is being fussy about  letting me cite it, being behind a paywall , but the whole thing is there if you Google the title
> 
> great article on how the paps work, and BRF details too, off topic in that
> It is about A not HandM but informative
> 
> *Epstein Had a Precise Plan”: How the Only Known Photo of Prince Andrew and the Pedophile Happened*



Wow, great article!  Thanks so much. Below is a snippet.  Sounds just like Hazzie. Hmmmm.









						“Epstein Had a Precise Plan”: How the Only Known Photo of Prince Andrew and the Pedophile Happened
					

On a freezing weekend in December 2010, a team of tabloid investigators tailed the queen’s favorite son through New York City—and traced him to the mansion of a convicted sex criminal. A decade later, those present still want to know what each man wanted from the other.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_“The root problem is you cannot have the sovereign’s children out hunting for money. This has come back to haunt them over and over again. How do you properly represent the family? How do you finance multimillion-dollar homes and travel all over the world representing the brand? How do you live? So what do you do? You’re in a constant search for money.”

Sixty-one years ago, when Andrew Albert Christian Edward was born, such a scenario would have seemed preposterous. He was the favorite from birth, the irresistible, blue-eyed, blond baby boy, number one in the hearts of everyone from Princess Diana to the queen. He was the prince who wanted to be normal, to be called “Andy,” who insisted on serving in the military like everyone else. He was the “swashbuckling” young helicopter pilot with the trim physique and horse’s grin, whose public appearances were compared to Beatlemania. (“Girls started screaming…Near hysteria gripped the tightly-packed throng”); the heartthrob roaring up to the members-only nightclub Tramp in a silver Jaguar with his beauty of the week, the party boy with the “Lothario lifestyle,” leading the “choo choo train” line dances at parties in Buckingham Palace; the Playboy Prince taken off the market for 18 months by an American photographer and actor three years his senior named *Koo Stark* (“I was waiting in his rooms at Buckingham Palace when he stepped in, the returning hero with a red rose between his teeth,” Stark recently wrote in Tatler magazine of his valiant 1982 return from the Falklands war); who broke a million hearts when he married his princess, the feisty redheaded “Fergie” in 1986, only to be sent off to duty and eventual divorce. (“I married my boy, who happened to be a prince, because I loved him—and still do—my only condition being, ‘I have to be with you,’” she told Harper’s Bazaar in 2007. “And two weeks after the wedding, the courtiers told Andrew, who thought he’d be stationed in London, ‘You have to go to sea.’”)
_


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> This article flashed by me in my morning news , I caught a glance at the title, was hooked, and found it by googling, a Vanity Fair article that is being fussy about  letting me cite it, being behind a paywall , but the whole thing is there if you Google the title
> 
> great article on how the paps work, and BRF details too, off topic in that
> It is about A not HandM but informative
> 
> *Epstein Had a Precise Plan”: How the Only Known Photo of Prince Andrew and the Pedophile Happened*


This video talks about profiting from staged paparazzi photos that are sold around the world, and the 'model/actor' profits about 1/4 or 1/2 of the sales price…  Not bad! $$$$


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Queen's putting her foot down:



I saw an article on the Sun about QE asking Will not to fly together with his family. It looks like he used to fly helicopters and take his family with him. Can you imagine QE's anxiety? I don't understand why Ginger Guru is still in the line of succession.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More from the VF article - definitely sums up Hazzie’s life. 

_*The fairy tale began to crumble and crack: The toothy smile receded; the trim physique widened; the proximity to the throne diminished year by year, as higher-ranking royal children were born, and Andrew, “not the heir, but the spare,” sank from second in line to the throne at birth to ninth today, as if each passing year were some sort of punishment.* His calendar, not so full any more, soon included visits by his old friend Ghislaine Maxwell, who was able to “just breeze into the Palace like she was one of the royal family,” says former Royalty Protection officer *Paul Page,* who was convicted in 2009 of running a fraudulent 3 million pound investment scheme from inside Buckingham Palace. “We thought it was unusual because she was the daughter of the disgraced media tycoon Robert Maxwell, and I remember thinking, It’s not a good look for someone of Ghislaine’s father’s reputation to be mixing with the royal family. But that was neither here nor there to Prince Andrew. As far as he was concerned, she was allowed to come in and go as she pleased. We were instructed not to put her name in the visitors’ book.”_



Chanbal said:


> I don't understand why Ginger Guru is still in the line of succession.



Birthright.
He needs to step  man up (step down?) and renounce his LoS and title. As long as he refuses, he shows what jerk he is. Or Charles is paying him to stay.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

VigeeLeBrun said:


> William is looking GREAT CONSIDERING HIS SLAKER WANKER bro who walked out on him, his dead grandfather, stressed grandmother, numerous children and keeping a monarchy intact during a pandemic.
> 
> Have I missed anything?


He is looking great. 

Thankfully William is the future of the Monarchy!

Maybe a nod for trying to reinflate his father who was flattened being thrown under the bus by the SLANKER WANKER (good one!) ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Also, in the annual BRF budget, analyzed here some months ago, helo flights represent a BIG chunk of the money spent
> Boris is promoting green travel by rail, so, taking the train rather than flying helps promote the currently fashionable green agenda
> so, fewer flights is good for the BRF brand



Oh does he. Maybe he might want to promote no government parties when the rest of the country is in lock-down   (I'm a bit fed up with politicians in general, especially our very own in Germany who are completely useless fighting the plague it seems)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> AND it allows THE QUEEN to throw some shade at Mr. & Ms. “We’re only one plane crash away from the monarchy”.



This is quite easily the most f*cked up thing she's ever done. Just how could ANYONE, even a raging narcissist think this is even remotely funny or ok to think, let alone say out loud.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh does he. Maybe he might want to promote no government parties when the rest of the country is in lock-down   (I'm a bit fed up by politicians in general, especially our very own in Germany who are completely useless fighting the plague it seems)



I agree. I’m fed up with all the doom&gloom media-chatter on this side of the pond. We must expect better because we get what we expect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _ “We thought it was unusual because she was the daughter of the disgraced media tycoon Robert Maxwell, and I remember thinking, It’s not a good look for someone of Ghislaine’s father’s reputation to be mixing with the royal family. But that was neither here nor there to Prince Andrew. As far as he was concerned, she was allowed to come in and go as she pleased. We were instructed not to put her name in the visitors’ book.”_




For some reason, until last week it had eluded me completely that Maxwell is actually British. And I certainly had no clue Andy and her were close friends.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

csshopper said:


> He is looking great.
> 
> Thankfully William is the future of the Monarchy!
> 
> Maybe a nod for trying to reinflate his father who was flattened being thrown under the bus by the *SLANKER* WANKER (good one!) ?



Genius!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason, until last week it had eluded me completely that Maxwell is actually British. And I certainly had no clue Andy and her were close friends.



Just google her father, Robert Maxwell.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Will you guys still like me if I admit to loving my cashmere beanies? I’m in Boston if that helps my case!


We call them toques in Toronto and I have many (some even Chanel) and love them for the cold weather. It's really all you see.

(But how can they navigate in the slush in those heels...  I'm impressed!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> We call them toques in Toronto and I have many (some even Chanel) and love them for the cold weather. It's really all you see.
> 
> (But how can they navigate in the slush in those heels...  I'm impressed!)
> 
> View attachment 5278038



Notice how MM is holding on to JM, looks similar to how she hangs on to Hazz.  Does she have difficulty walking?  I know she has the bunions, this seems different though. Maybe it is a vision issue.  Seems most abnormal, imo.


----------



## poopsie

It's the no gloves that gets me


----------



## Maggie Muggins

@Jayne1 said
"We call them toques in Toronto and I have many (some even Chanel) and love them for the cold weather. It's really all you see."

Most French Canadians spell it 'tuque' and pronounce it this way as did most English speakers where I grew up.








						How to pronounce TUQUE in English
					

How to pronounce tuque. How to say tuque. Listen to the audio pronunciation in the Cambridge English Dictionary. Learn more.




					dictionary.cambridge.org
				



ET fix quote


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> (But how can they navigate in the slush in those heels...  I'm impressed!)



Very...surprising given that the sugars' explanation for her holding onto Harry for dear life used to be "She just can't walk well in heels" (which obviously was always a stupid excuse...if your shoes criple you and make you rely on walking aids, don't wear them).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how MM is holding on to JM, looks similar to how she hangs on to Hazz.  Does she have difficulty walking?  I know she has the bunions, this seems different though. Maybe it is a vision issue.  Seems most abnormal, imo.



I thought they were just trying to be cute for the cameras. It's definitely not her usual death grip.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought they were just trying to be cute for the cameras. It's definitely not her usual death grip.


But it is the dominant grip/position as MM's thumb is on top JM's hand.


----------



## Kevinaxx

poopsie said:


> It's the no gloves that gets me


I will say, I’ve brought a few pairs and they always seem to end up missing. Same with umbrellas… but umbrellas esp the long ones are easier to spot then a pair of gloves.

though I’ve never lived anywhere with snow season, only visited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I'm still boggled that with their dearth of imagination, lack of original thought and penchant for plagiarism, they pulled enough strings to score the deals. It was definitely an inside job.
> 
> Any update on the eponymous Pearl aka Meghan's Mary Sue? The way it was trumpeted in July made it sound like it was already in the works for a long time.


We haven’t heard anything no….. a lot of tv pitches never come to fruition anyway and I do not think they have the patience or the planning to get into animation if they can’t run a simple chat podcast. 

As for this idea the little girl is her but she’s also in the show I think thats got to be the worst evil doppelgänger reveal since pretty little liars. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, great article!  Thanks so much. Below is a snippet.  Sounds just like Hazzie. Hmmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Epstein Had a Precise Plan”: How the Only Known Photo of Prince Andrew and the Pedophile Happened
> 
> 
> On a freezing weekend in December 2010, a team of tabloid investigators tailed the queen’s favorite son through New York City—and traced him to the mansion of a convicted sex criminal. A decade later, those present still want to know what each man wanted from the other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _“The root problem is you cannot have the sovereign’s children out hunting for money. This has come back to haunt them over and over again. How do you properly represent the family? How do you finance multimillion-dollar homes and travel all over the world representing the brand? How do you live? So what do you do? You’re in a constant search for money.”
> 
> Sixty-one years ago, when Andrew Albert Christian Edward was born, such a scenario would have seemed preposterous. He was the favorite from birth, the irresistible, blue-eyed, blond baby boy, number one in the hearts of everyone from Princess Diana to the queen. He was the prince who wanted to be normal, to be called “Andy,” who insisted on serving in the military like everyone else. He was the “swashbuckling” young helicopter pilot with the trim physique and horse’s grin, whose public appearances were compared to Beatlemania. (“Girls started screaming…Near hysteria gripped the tightly-packed throng”); the heartthrob roaring up to the members-only nightclub Tramp in a silver Jaguar with his beauty of the week, the party boy with the “Lothario lifestyle,” leading the “choo choo train” line dances at parties in Buckingham Palace; the Playboy Prince taken off the market for 18 months by an American photographer and actor three years his senior named *Koo Stark* (“I was waiting in his rooms at Buckingham Palace when he stepped in, the returning hero with a red rose between his teeth,” Stark recently wrote in Tatler magazine of his valiant 1982 return from the Falklands war); who broke a million hearts when he married his princess, the feisty redheaded “Fergie” in 1986, only to be sent off to duty and eventual divorce. (“I married my boy, who happened to be a prince, because I loved him—and still do—my only condition being, ‘I have to be with you,’” she told Harper’s Bazaar in 2007. “And two weeks after the wedding, the courtiers told Andrew, who thought he’d be stationed in London, ‘You have to go to sea.’”)_





CarryOn2020 said:


> More from the VF article - definitely sums up Hazzie’s life.
> 
> _*The fairy tale began to crumble and crack: The toothy smile receded; the trim physique widened; the proximity to the throne diminished year by year, as higher-ranking royal children were born, and Andrew, “not the heir, but the spare,” sank from second in line to the throne at birth to ninth today, as if each passing year were some sort of punishment.* His calendar, not so full any more, soon included visits by his old friend Ghislaine Maxwell, who was able to “just breeze into the Palace like she was one of the royal family,” says former Royalty Protection officer *Paul Page,* who was convicted in 2009 of running a fraudulent 3 million pound investment scheme from inside Buckingham Palace. “We thought it was unusual because she was the daughter of the disgraced media tycoon Robert Maxwell, and I remember thinking, It’s not a good look for someone of Ghislaine’s father’s reputation to be mixing with the royal family. But that was neither here nor there to Prince Andrew. As far as he was concerned, she was allowed to come in and go as she pleased. We were instructed not to put her name in the visitors’ book.”_
> 
> 
> 
> Birthright.
> He needs to step  man up (step down?) and renounce his LoS and title. As long as he refuses, he shows what jerk he is. Or Charles is paying him to stay.


I can accept that Andrew should be considered innocent until proven guilty and all that just like anyone else but…. I have always thought he had a weird veneer and reading all these frothy descriptions of him just adds to the impression he is a fake.

Charles seems like he is weak and
but is probably good at heart.
Edward seems to think he is smarter than he is but is amenable.
Anne is easily the most dynamic and interesting of the siblings but she reigns herself in a bit.
Andrew? You probably couldn’t tell what he was like if you met him everyday.

you can’t help wondering what he and GM even had in common or talked about if they were such good friends?

On Charles paying Harry- I don’t think it’s impossible he’s still funding them but let’s be honest H would be in no hurry to given up those titles even if the cheques stopped coming 
I think Charles is doing quite well out of this H scandal actually, I’ve said he seems quite weak so this sort of King Lear role plays to his strengths and gets him some sympathy.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Very...surprising given that the sugars' explanation for her holding onto Harry for dear life used to be "She just can't walk well in heels" (which obviously was always a stupid excuse...if your shoes criple you and make you rely on walking aids, don't wear them).


Can't even say how many times I would see some of the young gals at work TRYING to walk on these very "fashionable" shoes, and more than a few times, they would take a stumble (especially in the snow - really?? .. WTH are they thinking???).  While I would always help them up (if I could), for some reason .. I just can't help myself in cracking up when someone falls (heck - I do it even when I stumble!).  Winter weather, especially when there is black ice (ice under the snow), is NOT the time for fashionable footwear!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> We call them toques in Toronto and I have many (some even Chanel) and love them for the cold weather. It's really all you see.
> 
> (But how can they navigate in the slush in those heels...  I'm impressed!)
> View attachment 5278038



You’re too nice, I’m rolling my eyes!


----------



## CeeJay

Kevinaxx said:


> I will say, I’ve brought a few pairs and they always seem to end up missing. Same with umbrellas… but umbrellas esp the long ones are easier to spot then a pair of gloves.
> 
> though I’ve never lived anywhere with snow season, only visited.


HA!!! .. I'm the same, EVERY year I had to buy a new pair (actually more than just 1 pair) of new gloves because I would find that one glove (and usually the left hand and I'm right-handed)!  Thankfully, that did not occur with my boots!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> We call them toques in Toronto and I have many (some even Chanel) and love them for the cold weather. It's really all you see.
> 
> (But how can they navigate in the slush in those heels...  I'm impressed!)
> 
> View attachment 5278038


Yes, strange given she usually couldn’t walk in heels at the best of times. 
Perhaps that’s what the security obsession is really about. She needs a burly man to pick her up and carry her to her destination once the photo op is over. Sorry not sorry weedy Haz  

If you live in Canada you surely need a hat collection because surely one is always drying off? You could share them on the hat thread too


poopsie said:


> It's the no gloves that gets me


the death grip turns them into fingerless gloves then rags within a week and she was a ‘struggling actress’ at the time.


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> the death grip turns them into fingerless gloves then rags within a week and she was a ‘struggling actress’ at the time.


Not according to the sugars, or even herself .. somehow, all of a sudden .. she was propelled to be the STAR of the show, don't you remember that?!?!  HA HA HA


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how MM is holding on to JM, looks similar to how she hangs on to Hazz.  Does she have difficulty walking?  I know she has the bunions, this seems different though. Maybe it is a vision issue.  Seems most abnormal, imo.


Those are LA boots for an LA woman. They are not meant for any kind of weather other than sun, dry pavement and 60 degrees. JM's aren't much better. I've lived in MN for sixteen years and walk a lot. I have multiple pairs of serious winter footwear by Merrell and Sorel, and a spiked pair of winter sneakers by a Finnish company called Icebugs. I'll bet MM doesn't own a serious pair of winter boots even having lived in Toronto,  and there are some great looking ones by the Canadian brand La Canadienne.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Those are LA boots for an LA woman. They are not meant for any kind of weather other than sun, dry pavement and 60 degrees. JM's aren't much better. I've lived in MN for sixteen years and walk a lot. I have multiple pairs of serious winter footwear by Merrell and Sorel, and a spiked pair of winter sneakers by a Finnish company called Icebugs. I'll bet MM doesn't own a serious pair of winter boots even having lived in Toronto,  and there are some great looking ones by the Canadian brand La Canadienne.


Right?!?!?!? .. and it just cracks me up when I see all these LA women wearing Uggs!  I hear 'ya on the Winter boots; mine were the quintessential boot from LL Bean and what I loved about them is that LL Bean would repair them at no cost!  My boots made a few trips up to Freeport, ME to get "repaired"!


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?!?!? .. and it just cracks me up when I see all these LA women wearing Uggs!  I hear 'ya on the Winter boots; mine were the quintessential boot from LL Bean and what I loved about them is that LL Bean would repair them at no cost!  My boots made a few trips up to Freeport, ME to get "repaired"!


Bean boots are the OG of winter footwear. Unfortunately I've never been able to wear them comfortably.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> You’re too nice, I’m rolling my eyes!


Ha ha... it's not that I'm being nice, it's that you can slip and break an ankle on icy or slushy streets, so to be able to walk in heels is quite an achievement!  Also very brave.

I think that's  why they are hanging on to each other.  It helps with balance for both.

Also... the snow and salt will ruin those boots quite quickly, so just wearing lovely boots in bad weather is... well, not something I would do.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?!?!? .. and it just cracks me up when I see all these LA women wearing Uggs!  I hear 'ya on the Winter boots; mine were the quintessential boot from LL Bean and what I loved about them is that LL Bean would repair them at no cost!  My boots made a few trips up to Freeport, ME to get "repaired"!


I'm not a fan of uggs.  you see a lot of women wearing them with shorts here.  and the bedroom slipper uggs and just plain bedroom slippers being worn outside is ridiculous.
I think we can partly blame (or credit) Oprah in part for this trend.


----------



## redney

Uggs in So Cal have been a thing for beach/surfer people since the early 90s, way before they were mass marketed and sold everywhere. Most serious surfers picked them up when they were an Aussie thing. The natural fleece warms wet feet and still allows them to breathe.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bought a pair of very very very early eggs that were made in Australia, I think we are talking mid to late 90s and they are amazing quality. I still use them as inside slippers. But once they move to China the quality fell off quickly


----------



## rose60610

I was also wondering about the boots she and the friend were wearing. I believe both were SUEDE, in SLUSH?  What? If she was trying to pass herself off as a poor struggling actress, then why was she wearing dress boots in such crappy walking conditions?  Even if she wasn't watching her pennies, why ruin suede boots by wearing them in slush?  Nothing she does makes any sense. Even if you got footwear treated, there has to be a limit, they can only take so much. 

I agree with the above posters. Slippers and Uggs in warm weather are weird. Slippers outdoors in any weather are weird. Come on, you're not a three year old who wandered out the door. It's bad enough I bought a pair of knock off Uggs scuffs to wear indoors in the winter (Chicago), but they'll never see natural daylight. They were $6 at TJ Maxx, a penny more and I'd have said no way. They're ugly but I hate to admit, kinda comfy. But outdoors? I'd croak first.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I was also wondering about the boots she and the friend were wearing. I believe both were SUEDE, in SLUSH?  What? If she was trying to pass herself off as a poor struggling actress, then why was she wearing dress boots in such crappy walking conditions?  Even if she wasn't watching her pennies, why ruin suede boots by wearing them in slush?  Nothing she does makes any sense. Even if you got footwear treated, there has to be a limit, they can only take so much.
> 
> I agree with the above posters. Slippers and Uggs in warm weather are weird. Slippers outdoors in any weather are weird. Come on, you're not a three year old who wandered out the door. It's bad enough I bought a pair of knock off Uggs scuffs to wear indoors in the winter (Chicago), but they'll never see natural daylight. They were $6 at TJ Maxx, a penny more and I'd have said no way. They're ugly but I hate to admit, kinda comfy. But outdoors? I'd croak first.


No.....back then she was probably not trying to pass herself off as a poor, struggling actress.  More likely she was trying to pass herself off as the star of that cable show when she was actually in a supporting role.
Now, on hindsight and when the narrative is convenient, she talks about her modest upbringing (going to the lowly Sizzler) and her days as a struggling actress crawling through the trunk to get into her car.  What a bunch of crap.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I'm not a fan of uggs.  you see a lot of women wearing them with shorts here.  and the bedroom slipper uggs and just plain bedroom slippers being worn outside is ridiculous.
> I think we can partly blame (or credit) Oprah in part for this trend.


I always thought Uggs stood for Ugg-Ly until the pandemic hit and I had a sudden penchant for slippers.  Now I’m the proud owner of three pairs


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> I was also wondering about the boots she and the friend were wearing. I believe both were SUEDE, in SLUSH?  What? If she was trying to pass herself off as a poor struggling actress, then why was she wearing dress boots in such crappy walking conditions?  Even if she wasn't watching her pennies, why ruin suede boots by wearing them in slush?  Nothing she does makes any sense. Even if you got footwear treated, there has to be a limit, they can only take so much.
> 
> I agree with the above posters. Slippers and Uggs in warm weather are weird. Slippers outdoors in any weather are weird. Come on, you're not a three year old who wandered out the door. It's bad enough I bought a pair of knock off Uggs scuffs to wear indoors in the winter (Chicago), but they'll never see natural daylight. They were $6 at TJ Maxx, a penny more and I'd have said no way. They're ugly but I hate to admit, kinda comfy. But outdoors? I'd croak first.


ITA.  I can’t stand the trend of wearing slippers as outer wear and pajamas in public (unless they’re LV or something but I still couldn’t personally do it, LOL!).  I also hate mismatched socks.  My 16 year old daughter tells me “everyone does it” and “who cares they’re socks”, but she knows we’ll enough not to do it, especially if I’m around


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’m definitely in the minority in this but I think the lines of what is a co-ord set and mules and what is pjs and slippers are very blurred and fashion is all about once unconventional or taboo styles becoming mainstream and then passé and then back again so I think it’s inevitable. I personally want beach pyjamas to make a comeback 

I also love Uggs and sheepskin boots as they are warm and light. Most winter boots are like putting my wide flat feet in a vice and then they weigh a ton too. Sure they are not flattering but my god have they made my feet happy.


----------



## csshopper

Ugg lover here too. Love that when the slippers get “oogy” as my granddaughter calls it, new sole inserts can be purchased. On my 3rd set in my original Uggs. Sigh, one of life’s little pleasures, on my feet as I type this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m definitely in the minority in this but I think the lines of what is a co-ord set and mules and what is pjs and slippers are very blurred and fashion is all about once unconventional or taboo styles becoming mainstream and then passé and then back again so I think it’s inevitable. I personally want beach pyjamas to make a comeback
> 
> I also love Uggs and sheepskin boots as they are warm and light. Most winter boots are like putting my wide flat feet in a vice and then they weigh a ton too. Sure they are not flattering but my god have they made my feet happy.



Wake me when these come back


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And there I was thinking antivaxxers were crazy.



These are bots, right? Both of those tweets are clearly written by the same “person” with different account names.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> These are bots, right? Both of those tweets are clearly written by the same “person” with different account names.


Teresa Holmes. Don't think it's a bot. Long history of strident tweets supporting Methane. Hails her as Queen and American Princess. Supports violence against paps.


----------



## duna

Still no Christmas card from the Dastardly Duo....Thank goodness for that.....it would probably show the 2 kids 100 meters away, with their backs turned to the camera and in blurry black and white!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watch it with the sound off.  Our BodyLanguageGuy will have fun with this:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comedy gold!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch it with the sound off.  Our BodyLanguageGuy will have fun with this:




That woman is sending Morse with her eyes for help.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?!?!? .. and it just cracks me up when I see all these LA women wearing Uggs!  I hear 'ya on the Winter boots; mine were the quintessential boot from LL Bean and what I loved about them is that LL Bean would repair them at no cost!  My boots made a few trips up to Freeport, ME to get "repaired"!


Love that Freeport store, heck I just love Maine!

As for winter footwear, living in the Chicago-land area I live in my Uggs & Sorels all winter but even wearing Uggs I slipped on ice & slush and broke my ankle one winter. M & friend focus on appearance over safety (and warmth!!).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> Ha ha... it's not that I'm being nice, it's that you can slip and break an ankle on icy or slushy streets, so to be able to walk in heels is quite an achievement!  Also very brave.
> 
> I think that's  why they are hanging on to each other.  It helps with balance for both.
> 
> Also... the snow and salt will ruin those boots quite quickly, so just wearing lovely boots in bad weather is... well, not something I would do.


Salt destroys nice footwear.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Some Sugar got caught defrauding people. 






						Instagram
					






					www.instagram.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch it with the sound off.  Our BodyLanguageGuy will have fun with this:



Megain is like a cat playing with a mouse before it kills it.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I can’t stand the trend of wearing slippers as outer wear and pajamas in public (unless they’re LV or something but I still couldn’t personally do it, LOL!).  I also hate mismatched socks.  My 16 year old daughter tells me “everyone does it” and “who cares they’re socks”, but she knows we’ll enough not to do it, especially if I’m around


Ahh, teenage daughters....


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> Love that Freeport store, heck I just love Maine!
> 
> As for winter footwear, living in the Chicago-land area I live in my Uggs & Sorels all winter but even wearing Uggs I slipped on ice & slush and broke my ankle one winter. M & friend focus on appearance over safety (and warmth!!).


Sorry about your ankle, hope it healed completely. I'm in MN and am clumsy to begin with. I live in fear of falling on ice and breaking something, so every year I search for my holy grail of no slip footwear. I've amassed quite a collection. Merrell uses Vibram soles marketed under the name of Arctic Grip and Icetrek. They're both pretty good, but I'm sure MM wouldn't be caught dead in anything so unsightly. Appearance is always first with her.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch it with the sound off.  Our BodyLanguageGuy will have fun with this:



You called it. The Body Language Guy has analyzed this on You Tube and she is cringe worthy. He includes the Christmas visit to the military base also.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch it with the sound off.  Our BodyLanguageGuy will have fun with this:





csshopper said:


> You called it. The Body Language Guy has analyzed this on You Tube and she is cringe worthy. He includes the Christmas visit to the military base also.


For your convenience….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Comedy gold!



You seem to have forgotten the back (or the front ) of their exquisite Holiday Card.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And there I was thinking antivaxxers were crazy.



LOL
would have been better if H had been princess margaret rather than the duke of windsor
what a bunch of crap


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, this is why she thinks of herself as a _global citizen_???  Ok, right, you go gurl

_In December 2014, Meghan Markle, along with country star and USO tour vet Kellie Pickler, USO tour vet and comedian Rob Riggle, “Glee” co-star Dianna Agron, former Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher and then-Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister, went on a USO tour with with then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey.

A first-time USO tour participant, *Markle visited five countries – Spain, Italy, Turkey, Afghanistan and England *– during her tour and entertained thousands of service members and their families.

“I have always had such a profound respect for our nation’s troops and military families,” Markle said. “I cannot thank them enough for everything they do for us.” _









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were USO Supporters Before They Were Engaged
					

As the world waits in anticipation of the couple's royal wedding on May 19, we've pulled together our four favorite USO and military support moments featuring the British prince and the Suits actress.




					www.uso.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

Speaking of footwear -


----------



## duna

Excuse my ignorance but what is USO?


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> Excuse my ignorance but what is USO?



Apologies, I should have included that info.

_United Service Organizations, Inc. (USO) is a non-profit 501(ϲ)(3) organization (EIN/Tax ID: 13-1610451) and not part of the Department of Defense (DoD). The appearance of DoD visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement._


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies, I should have included that info.
> 
> _United Service Organizations, Inc. (USO) is a non-profit 501(ϲ)(3) organization (EIN/Tax ID: 13-1610451) and not part of the Department of Defense (DoD). The appearance of DoD visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement._



Thanks a lot, no problem!


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Sorry about your ankle, hope it healed completely. I'm in MN and am clumsy to begin with. I live in fear of falling on ice and breaking something, so every year I search for my holy grail of no slip footwear. I've amassed quite a collection. Merrell uses Vibram soles marketed under the name of Arctic Grip and Icetrek. They're both pretty good, but I'm sure MM wouldn't be caught dead in anything so unsightly. Appearance is always first with her.


Thank you, yes everything healed nicely. 

I had surgery even while saying "no way!", smartest thing I ever did but the x-ray showing the metal plate with SCREWS(!) in my ankle/leg bones nearly made me lose my lunch, not ever looking at that again. Thanks for the recommends on safe footwear. I shoulda mentioned that M calls the paps so she has to look (in her mind) camera-ready at all times, me--I just don't want to fall.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Bean boots are the OG of winter footwear. Unfortunately I've never been able to wear them comfortably.


Yes .. you do have to 'break them in', but I always found that if I wore a heavier pair of socks during the breaking-in period, they wouldn't bother me as much!  Once they are broken-in, and the fact that LLB keeps on repairing them, they are (IMO) the best winter boot/shoe evah!!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'm not a fan of uggs.  you see a lot of women wearing them with shorts here.  and the bedroom slipper uggs and just plain bedroom slippers being worn outside is ridiculous.
> I think we can partly blame (or credit) Oprah in part for this trend.


Yes, I see that here too .. T-shirt (or even a sleeveless t-shirt), shorts & then those stupid Uggs!  I had a few pair back East, but to be honest, they are not really the best shoe to wear when there is snow on the ground .. especially when there is ice underneath the snow (referred to as "Black Ice").  They are comfortable though, and with the shearling inners, nice and warm on the feet.  I've also seen the Pajamas BS here in LA, to the point were some gals seem to actually wear their Pajamas along with their slippers .. going out for coffee or the like .. SO RIDICULOUS!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, I see that here too .. T-shirt (or even a sleeveless t-shirt), shorts & then those stupid Uggs!  I had a few pair back East, but to be honest, they are not really the best shoe to wear when there is snow on the ground .. especially when there is ice underneath the snow (referred to as "Black Ice").  They are comfortable though, and with the shearling inners, nice and warm on the feet.  I've also seen the Pajamas BS here in LA, to the point were some gals seem to actually wear their Pajamas along with their slippers .. going out for coffee or the like .. SO RIDICULOUS!


I saw a woman shopping with her kids. all three in PJs.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And there I was thinking antivaxxers were crazy.



The *DELUSION* of these sugars is really *EPIC*!  IMO, there is truly something wrong upstairs .. like the elevator/lift does not reach the top floor .. *~B-O-I-N-G~ / ~T-H-U-N-K~*


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wake me when these come back
> 
> View attachment 5278507


Minnetonka (I believe that is the spelling) still makes a version of these (shoes & small boots).  I have the loafer version of these and JUST LOVE THEM!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Minnetonka (I believe that is the spelling) still makes a version of these (shoes & small boots).  I have the loafer version of these and JUST LOVE THEM!



Yessss! You are correct.  They are now in my cart.  









						3-Layer Fringe Boot
					

<p><span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>FABULOUS FRINGE</strong></span>  <br /><span style="font-size: large;"><em>Our most popular fringe boots are an instant classic.</em> </span>  <br /><span style="font-size: large;">Wear these famous and versatile boots with your favorite mini skirt...




					www.minnetonkamoccasin.com
				



_BOHO CHIC
Boot Match: 3-Layer Fringe Boot
Style Personality: You love carefree, flowing pieces. Influenced by hippie styles, your wardrobe is filled with crochet, fringe, and natural fabrics.
How to wear: The 3-Layer Fringe Boot has a free-spirited vibe with three layers of suede fringe. Coming up to mid-calf, the festival-ready boot looks striking with lightweight dresses. Wear with a flowy, floral sundress or cream-colored crochet dress._


----------



## redney

CeeJay said:


> Right?!?!?!? .. and it just cracks me up when I see all these LA women wearing Uggs!  I hear 'ya on the Winter boots; mine were the quintessential boot from LL Bean and what I loved about them is that LL Bean would repair them at no cost!  My boots made a few trips up to Freeport, ME to get "repaired"!


Times they are a'changin'. LL Bean now charges to repair Bean boots and it takes 6-8 weeks (or less) and costs $39+ depending on the boot. https://www.llbean.com/llb/shop/518049?page=service-plans


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Our favourite - not - gold digger really went for the wrong husband.

Dubai ruler must pay ex-wife 700 million in divorce settlement


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Our favourite - not - gold digger really went for the wrong husband.
> 
> Dubai ruler must pay ex-wife 700 million in divorce settlement


I think a huge narcissist like Meglomaniac would have a hard time swallowing being wife #6 to even an insanely wealthy man.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> I think a huge narcissist like Meglomaniac would have a hard time swallowing being wife #6 to even an insanely wealthy man.



He wasn't married to all of them at the same time. He only has one other wife, his first wife and cousin. He had already divorced the others when he married Haya, some of them ridiculously quick.

I personally never understood why a rich, beautiful, educated woman from one of the leading royal houses of the Arab world who had her own career would think it was a great idea to marry him.


----------



## poopsie

CeeJay said:


> Can't even say how many times I would see some of the young gals at work TRYING to walk on these very "fashionable" shoes, and more than a few times, they would take a stumble (especially in the snow - really?? .. WTH are they thinking???).  While I would always help them up (if I could), for some reason .. I just can't help myself in cracking up when someone falls (heck - I do it even when I stumble!).  Winter weather, especially when there is black ice (ice under the snow), is NOT the time for fashionable footwear!



Oh the folly of youth 
I lived in those rope wedge Sbicca's in the 70's and basic pumps or Candie's slides in the 80's.  But those were nothing compared to the monstrosities that are in "fashion" now. To this day I'm amazed at how fast I could run in those pumps when I had to. 
Every week at Del Mar some chick would go down in my section. According to the security guards there were multiple incidents every day of chicks falling off their shoes. Some were hurt as in separated shoulders, broken bones etc. One of them fell down the stairs and took several others with her.


----------



## jennlt

redney said:


> I think a huge narcissist like Meglomaniac would have a hard time swallowing being wife #6 to even an insanely wealthy man.



I think she'd find $everal hundred million rea$on$ to overlook that small detail


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Our favourite - not - gold digger really went for the wrong husband.
> 
> Dubai ruler must pay ex-wife 700 million in divorce settlement



Thanks for sharing. It makes my mundane life as a non-gazillionaire so amazing compared to these people and people like our lovely Meg who literally doesn’t know what it means to be comfortable in her own skin for even a second of her life.


----------



## kemilia

poopsie said:


> Oh the folly of youth
> I lived in those rope wedge Sbicca's in the 70's and basic pumps or Candie's slides in the 80's.  But those were nothing compared to the monstrosities that are in "fashion" now. To this day I'm amazed at how fast I could run in those pumps when I had to.
> Every week at Del Mar some chick would go down in my section. According to the security guards there were multiple incidents every day of chicks falling off their shoes. Some were hurt as in separated shoulders, broken bones etc. One of them fell down the stairs and took several others with her.


Candies! I'd forgotten them!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



Not seeing as clearly these days even with glasses, so on first sight of 4 bobble heads I thought, "Oh my gosh they've released a card with Lilibet on it." Enlarged the picture and LOL it's Doria.   Then I thought, well, maybe Lilibet has turned out to look like her so this would be appropriate.  Will we ever know?

Since Catherine's Christmas Carol Concert at Westminster Abby is being broadcast Christmas Eve, perhaps a Christmas card and intro to Lilibet then? Or maybe they will attempt to upstage the Queen's Annual Christmas Message since they have the name Lilibet in common? Or maybe Lady Megbeth and her Handbag are sitting in the Chicken Coop pouting, not feeling loved and adored enough for their self perceived wonderfulness and will not send any greetings?  

Overall, my reaction is one big YAWN.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

kemilia said:


> Candies! I'd forgotten them!



We called them Barbie doll slides


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He wasn't married to all of them at the same time. He only has one other wife, his first wife and cousin. He had already divorced the others when he married Haya, some of them ridiculously quick.
> 
> *I personally never understood why a rich, beautiful, educated woman from one of the leading royal houses of the Arab world who had her own career would think it was a great idea to marry him.*


I remember when Haya married Sheik Mohammed, most people on the various royal-related forums/blogs were extremely surprised and felt that the marriage was suggested and/or sanctioned by her brother, King Abdullah of Jordan so that Haya wouldn't become a drain on his finances because he was already paying for Rania's expensive tastes.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Yes .. you do have to 'break them in', but I always found that if I wore a heavier pair of socks during the breaking-in period, they wouldn't bother me as much!  Once they are broken-in, and the fact that LLB keeps on repairing them, they are (IMO) the best winter boot/shoe evah!!


There's a reason they've been selling them for 100 years.


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> We called them Barbie doll slides


My college roommate's boyfriend had a more colorful name for them....


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Oh the folly of youth
> I lived in those rope wedge Sbicca's in the 70's and basic pumps or Candie's slides in the 80's.  But those were nothing compared to the monstrosities that are in "fashion" now. To this day I'm amazed at how fast I could run in those pumps when I had to.
> Every week at Del Mar some chick would go down in my section. According to the security guards there were multiple incidents every day of chicks falling off their shoes. Some were hurt as in separated shoulders, broken bones etc. One of them fell down the stairs and took several others with her.


Candies!!! LOL!  I wore them all summer back then even though I didn't find them all that comfortable.  The folly of youth!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this is why she thinks of herself as a _global citizen_???  Ok, right, you go gurl
> 
> _In December 2014, Meghan Markle, along with country star and USO tour vet Kellie Pickler, USO tour vet and comedian Rob Riggle, “Glee” co-star Dianna Agron, former Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher and then-Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister, went on a USO tour with with then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey.
> 
> A first-time USO tour participant, *Markle visited five countries – Spain, Italy, Turkey, Afghanistan and England *– during her tour and entertained thousands of service members and their families.
> 
> “I have always had such a profound respect for our nation’s troops and military families,” Markle said. “I cannot thank them enough for everything they do for us.” _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were USO Supporters Before They Were Engaged
> 
> 
> As the world waits in anticipation of the couple's royal wedding on May 19, we've pulled together our four favorite USO and military support moments featuring the British prince and the Suits actress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.uso.org


.. and *WHAT TYPE OF ENTERTAINMENT* did she provide, hmmmmmm?  Hummer-girl?!?!  Tank-girl???  Paratrooper-girl???


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I saw a woman shopping with her kids. all three in PJs.


That's sad, what are you teaching your kids with something like that???  Then again, having seen Kyle Richards with her daughter behaving like she did in our local supermarket, dropping F-Bombs like she was in the middle of a war .. well, that's another great thing to show your daughter!  Just wait till she reaches the teenage years and acts like YOU did??? .. you'll wonder "how on Earth did she get to be that way?" .. amazing how parents sometimes forget that it's THEIR behavior that the kids mirror!


----------



## CeeJay

redney said:


> Times they are a'changin'. LL Bean now charges to repair Bean boots and it takes 6-8 weeks (or less) and costs $39+ depending on the boot. https://www.llbean.com/llb/shop/518049?page=service-plans


WOW .. I'm disappointed in this!!!  Sheesh, is there any American companies left that actually don't think FIRST about THEIR profits???


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Oh the folly of youth
> I lived in those rope wedge Sbicca's in the 70's and basic pumps or Candie's slides in the 80's.  But those were nothing compared to the monstrosities that are in "fashion" now. To this day I'm amazed at how fast I could run in those pumps when I had to.
> Every week at Del Mar some chick would go down in my section. According to the security guards there were multiple incidents every day of chicks falling off their shoes. Some were hurt as in separated shoulders, broken bones etc. One of them fell down the stairs and took several others with her.


HA HA HA .. as I said before, don't know why, but I laugh like hell when someone takes a spill (even at myself).  Gosh, wore Candies too, but most of the time .. I wore a shoe with a kitten heel because I'm so tall and would tower over men (and let me tell you, a man with a Napoleonic complex is NO fun to work with .. and especially for!!).   Yes, I was good friends with one of the security guards at the Insurance Company I worked at (my first job out of university), and he used to tell me about the montage that they would put together at the end of the year for their Christmas bash!  Some were funny, but some were pretty pathetic .. like really?!?!? .. having sex in the stairwell in between floors??? .. get a room for cripes sake!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. I'm disappointed in this!!!  Sheesh, is there any American companies left that actually don't think FIRST about THEIR profits???


Unfortunately, people were taking advantage of their policies.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> My college roommate's boyfriend had a more colorful name for them....


Even though I wore them (for a short period of time .. a month or so because I also found them uncomfortable as heck), I and other friends used to refer to them as 'FMP' ('f#ck-me-pumps')!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Is this a joke? 


_David Boies, the star attorney representing Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her legal action against Prince Andrew, may seek to depose Meghan Markle as part of Giuffre’s civil suit, as he believes she may have picked up “important knowledge” about the embattled royal’s behavior.

“*She is somebody we can count on to tell the truth,” Boies told The Daily Beast*.

Markle, he said, was a potential deposition subject for three reasons: “*One; she is in the U.S*. so we have jurisdiction over her. *Two; she is somebody who obviously, at least for a period of time, was a close associate of Prince Andrew* and hence is in a position to perhaps have seen what he did, and perhaps if not to have seen what he did to have heard people talk about it. Because of her past association with him, she may very well have important knowledge, and will certainly have some knowledge.
“*Three; she is somebody who we can count on to tell the truth*. She checks all three boxes.”_



https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-is-a-mystery-even-to-the-queen-who-is-paying


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?
> 
> 
> _David Boies, the star attorney representing Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her legal action against Prince Andrew, may seek to depose Meghan Markle as part of Giuffre’s civil suit, as he believes she may have picked up “important knowledge” about the embattled royal’s behavior.
> 
> “*She is somebody we can count on to tell the truth,” Boies told The Daily Beast*.
> 
> Markle, he said, was a potential deposition subject for three reasons: “*One; she is in the U.S*. so we have jurisdiction over her. *Two; she is somebody who obviously, at least for a period of time, was a close associate of Prince Andrew* and hence is in a position to perhaps have seen what he did, and perhaps if not to have seen what he did to have heard people talk about it. Because of her past association with him, she may very well have important knowledge, and will certainly have some knowledge.
> “*Three; she is somebody who we can count on to tell the truth*. She checks all three boxes.”_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-is-a-mystery-even-to-the-queen-who-is-paying



For one hot minute, I thought they were going to get her testimony because she was one of Epstein's girls.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this is why she thinks of herself as a _global citizen_???  Ok, right, you go gurl
> 
> _In December 2014, Meghan Markle, along with country star and USO tour vet Kellie Pickler, USO tour vet and comedian Rob Riggle, “Glee” co-star Dianna Agron, former Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher and then-Washington Nationals pitcher Doug Fister, went on a USO tour with with then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey.
> 
> A first-time USO tour participant, *Markle visited five countries – Spain, Italy, Turkey, Afghanistan and England *– during her tour and entertained thousands of service members and their families.
> 
> “I have always had such a profound respect for our nation’s troops and military families,” Markle said. “I cannot thank them enough for everything they do for us.” _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were USO Supporters Before They Were Engaged
> 
> 
> As the world waits in anticipation of the couple's royal wedding on May 19, we've pulled together our four favorite USO and military support moments featuring the British prince and the Suits actress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.uso.org


"A first-time USO tour participant": I think it was her only tour? Bob Hope she is not.
The on-stage video was cringey. The other performers were edging away from her. Wonder what her off-stage behaviour was like that it inspired such a reaction.



CeeJay said:


> Minnetonka (I believe that is the spelling) still makes a version of these (shoes & small boots).  I have the loafer version of these and JUST LOVE THEM!


I had short suede fringed boots by Red Wing. RW does not seem to make them any more but Minnetonka still does! (I want!)








						Classic Fringe Hardsole Boot
					

HARDSOLE WITH HISTORY  Iconic throwback that still stands out today.   With one foot in the past and the other in the future, this traditional moccasin boot has been in our family since 1967. Handmade from the softest, most supple suede, it’s easy to feel why this iconic fringe boot is one of...




					www.minnetonkamoccasin.com


----------



## rose60610

From Sizzler to Sussex, Meghan has always been a fashion disaster.  Perhaps she'll gift H a whole new pile of grey polo's for Christmas.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Make sure you check your mail, the gold leaf invitation is arriving.


----------



## redney

So the Jacka$$es of Montecito are inviting people they don't know to attend a barbeque at 11:30am US Pacific Time on Christmas Eve?  

Talk about desperate and pathetic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Make sure you check your mail, the gold leaf invitation is arriving.
> View attachment 5279086



Oh. 
[sending invitations 3 days before Christmas!!! Who does _that_!  ]
um, I have other plans. Thanks anyway. Merry Christmas.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Make sure you check your mail, the gold leaf invitation is arriving.
> View attachment 5279086


If they get a minimum number of RSVPs, their PR will rebrand the BBQ as an intimate gathering of close friends and a "sweet nod" to Prince Philip who loved BBQs. Invisibet's first word might be (gasp!) "barbecue".


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> So the Jacka$$es of Montecito are inviting people they don't know to attend a barbeque at 11:30am US Pacific Time on Christmas Eve?
> 
> Talk about desperate and pathetic.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh.
> [sending invitations 3 days before Christmas!!! Who does _that_!  ]
> um, I have other plans. Thanks anyway. Merry Christmas.





xincinsin said:


> If they get a minimum number of RSVPs, their PR will rebrand the BBQ as an intimate gathering of close friends and a "sweet nod" to Prince Philip who loved BBQs. Invisibet's first word might be (gasp!) "barbecue".



Did I mention that the invitations to the barbecue may include a copy of the chair or bench? 

I read somewhere that the author keeps acquiring copies of the masterpiece to donate and/or give as Christmas gifts, so the book looks popular.


----------



## mellibelly

This is old but man did I LOL


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And there I was thinking antivaxxers were crazy.



Extremely strong bad fanfic vibes.



redney said:


> I think a huge narcissist like Meglomaniac would have a hard time swallowing being wife #6 to even an insanely wealthy man.


oh I dunno, she could play Mind games in the harem, claim the prettiest one is insanely jealous of her, try and get some servants sacked, throw some coffee about, somehow make an abaya look like a stripper’s tear off and of course, think of the money!

I think she’d certainly be busier than she was with her ‘acting.’


Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?
> 
> 
> _David Boies, the star attorney representing Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her legal action against Prince Andrew, may seek to depose Meghan Markle as part of Giuffre’s civil suit, as he believes she may have picked up “important knowledge” about the embattled royal’s behavior.
> 
> “*She is somebody we can count on to tell the truth,” Boies told The Daily Beast*.
> 
> Markle, he said, was a potential deposition subject for three reasons: “*One; she is in the U.S*. so we have jurisdiction over her. *Two; she is somebody who obviously, at least for a period of time, was a close associate of Prince Andrew* and hence is in a position to perhaps have seen what he did, and perhaps if not to have seen what he did to have heard people talk about it. Because of her past association with him, she may very well have important knowledge, and will certainly have some knowledge.
> “*Three; she is somebody who we can count on to tell the truth*. She checks all three boxes.”_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/princ...-is-a-mystery-even-to-the-queen-who-is-paying



This just shows what a nobody she is as everyone who might know something and has got any influence has run to the hills!

On the other hand, she does know a thing or two about transactional relationships, so perhaps she can give the elderly judge some pointers.

I think that third point is just trolling though.  


Chanbal said:


> Did I mention that the invitations to the barbecue may include a copy of the chair or bench?
> 
> I read somewhere that the author keeps acquiring copies of the masterpiece to donate and/or give as Christmas gifts, so the book looks popular.


it’s the bbq fuel.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Funny coincidence…  today I’m wearing a Christmas jumper and loose slacks with this pattern-


And mr Jellied asked why I went out with my pyjamas on


----------



## CentralTimeZone

redney said:


> So the Jacka$$es of Montecito are inviting people they don't know to attend a barbeque at 11:30am US Pacific Time on Christmas Eve?
> 
> Talk about desperate and pathetic.


That's also when they will release their xmas card as well. Never change Harkles never change.


----------



## charlottawill

hollieplus2 said:


> That's also when they will release their xmas card as well. Never change Harkles never change.


I will be waiting with bated breath.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Make sure you check your mail, the gold leaf invitation is arriving.
> View attachment 5279086


So they casually invited Mariah Carey? I'm sure the plan is to film it for Netflix and they of course expect her to sing "All I Want For Christmas Is You". Pathetic. Mariah's reaction:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think that third point is just trolling though.



That said, she'll absolutely get out "the truth" if she can harm someone in the process.

As if she ever got to the inner workings of that family.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> "A first-time USO tour participant": I think it was her only tour? Bob Hope she is not.
> The on-stage video was cringey. The other performers were edging away from her. Wonder what her off-stage behaviour was like that it inspired such a reaction.
> 
> 
> I had short suede fringed boots by Red Wing. RW does not seem to make them any more but Minnetonka still does! (I want!)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Classic Fringe Hardsole Boot
> 
> 
> HARDSOLE WITH HISTORY  Iconic throwback that still stands out today.   With one foot in the past and the other in the future, this traditional moccasin boot has been in our family since 1967. Handmade from the softest, most supple suede, it’s easy to feel why this iconic fringe boot is one of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.minnetonkamoccasin.com


well, she could be related to Bob Hope - the sloping nose


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> So they casually invited Mariah Carey? I'm sure the plan is to film it for Netflix and they of course expect her to sing "All I Want For Christmas Is You". Pathetic. Mariah's reaction:



Is this an actual story or a rumor?  I would think if they were having a party an inviting people on such short notice it would be people who live in their community - not people (like Maria and Barbra) who live two hours away?
and now the covid situation could mess them up again.  so sad


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> Is this an actual story or a rumor?  I would think if they were having a party an inviting people on such short notice it would be people who live in their community - not people (like Maria and Barbra) who live two hours away?
> and now the covid situation could mess them up again.  so sad


Maria is in Aspen, an annual family trip at Christmas  according to a recent article.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Did I mention that the invitations to the barbecue may include a copy of the chair or bench?
> 
> I read somewhere that the author keeps acquiring copies of the masterpiece to donate and/or give as Christmas gifts, so the book looks popular.


The Bench is discounted again on Amazon and still not selling, it’s #17, 380.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?
> 
> _David Boies, the star attorney representing Virginia Roberts Giuffre in her legal action against Prince Andrew, may seek to depose Meghan Markle as part of Giuffre’s civil suit, as he believes she may have picked up “important knowledge” about the embattled royal’s behavior.
> 
> “*She is somebody we can count on to tell the truth LIES, LIES and MORE LIES” Boies told The Daily Beast*._


Mr. Boies .. I've fixed that for you .. (_*what a dumba$$ he is, 100% DELUSIONAL*_)!!


----------



## CeeJay

redney said:


> So the Jacka$$es of Montecito are inviting people they don't know to attend a barbeque at 11:30am US Pacific Time on Christmas Eve?
> 
> Talk about desperate and pathetic.


Well, they did the same to their wedding, right???  George & Amal Clooney noted that they had not even met the two of them before the wedding, but they attended anyhow!  Got to give Reese Witherspoon credit here, as she also noted that she had not met them before getting an invitation to their wedding, but unlike the Clooney's, she decided to stay home!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, they did the same to their wedding, right???  George & Amal Clooney noted that they had not even met the two of them before the wedding, but they attended anyhow!  Got to give Reese Witherspoon credit here, as she also noted that she had not met them before getting an invitation to their wedding, but unlike the Clooney's, she decided to stay home!


that says it all right there
she invited no one from her family except doria but invited complete strangers....how would the "sugars" explain that?


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## Chanbal

"_What's the point of it?_", it's not uncommon in Europe. I still can't understand how the use (and abuse) of the titles happened in the US. Two nincompoops and a powerful PR…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> "_What's the point of it?_", it's not uncommon in Europe. I still can't understand how the use (and abuse) of the titles happened in the US. Two nincompoops and a powerful PR…




She is absolutely correct. Maybe in aristocratic circles the titles matter, but I doubt it. In those aristo circles, everyone knows who everyone is, so there is no need for a title. So, why do they cling to it? Why does Andrew? Do Hazz and Andrew attend any ‘meetings’ of all the Dukes? Do they attend any parties?

The important thing is the LoS. *Renounce*.  
Both Hazz and Andy should renounce, but Andy?  Good grief, could he bring more dishonor to his title?  Money issues, sex issues, wowzee. 






						Dukes in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Well, they did the same to their wedding, right???  George & Amal Clooney noted that they had not even met the two of them before the wedding, but they attended anyhow!  Got to give Reese Witherspoon credit here, as she also noted that she had not met them before getting an invitation to their wedding, but unlike the Clooney's, she decided to stay home!


I would have gone if invited!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I would have gone if invited!



to the wedding or the bar-b-q?  Or both?


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> to the wedding or the bar-b-q?  Or both?


Wedding, yes, I didn’t know then what I know now!!

The bbq, only maybe go to spy and tell y’all everything!


----------



## gracekelly

I wouldn’t pass up a Royal Wedding either as it would give me a chance to wear a hat, but if Meghan wasn’t going to pay for my first class airfare, I would stay home lol!


----------



## redney

The wedding was a globally televised event. Outside of the BRF members and British aristocracy, anyone invited who wanted to be 'seen' as hob-nobbing with BRF and the aristocracy attended (cough, Clooneys, Oprah, cough).

A barbeque on Christmas Eve planned solely to 'upstage' Catherine's Carol Event television broadcast is ridic and hopefully all those invited celebrities see through it, as Mariah Carey supposedly has. Who, except the most desperate, would leave their families and holiday plans, to schlep to Santa Barbara for a few hours with these two grifters?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Christmas Eve is a family night for me, so I doubt I could spare some time. Plus I do not live in Cali, so it would involve travel. 
The wedding, no — too much of a cluster.  Perhaps a wedding dinner at the Palace would be fun.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I’m messy so I would have gone to the wedding just to observe the BRF dynamic at the reception when the media isn’t there.

But BBQs on Christmas Eve are not a thing. And that’s typically a day people spend with their own families. It just doesn’t make any sense and looks very much like the DoS is competing with the DoC in her own head. The one-sidedness is very loser-y.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Well, they did the same to their wedding, right???  George & Amal Clooney noted that they had not even met the two of them before the wedding, but they attended anyhow!  Got to give Reese Witherspoon credit here, as she also noted that she had not met them before getting an invitation to their wedding, but unlike the Clooney's, she decided to stay home!


They must have hit it off somewhere. IIRC Amal Clooney hosted MM's lavish Manhattan baby shower. I think she haas since wised up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

LMAO it's going to be RAINING the rest of the week all up and down California. 
This storm has been in the news for days. And yet she STILL planned a bar-b-q?


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> _..he believes she may have picked up “important knowledge” about the embattled royal’s behavior._


An intriguing prospect, but aside from the fact that she was too old for Epstein, what could she have on Andrew that occurred after she met Harry? If something related to Andrew and Epstein was told to her, wouldn't it be thrown out in court as simply hearsay?


----------



## TC1

charlottawill said:


> An intriguing prospect, but aside from the fact that she was too old for Epstein, what could she have on Andrew that occurred after she met Harry? If something related to Andrew and Epstein was told to her, wouldn't it be thrown out in court as simply hearsay?


LOL, Like Judge Judy says "you can't tell me what someone else supposedly said"


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> LOL, Like Judge Judy says "you can't tell me what someone else supposedly said"



True, it wouldn’t work in a courtroom, but … please sit by me and tell me everything


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, it wouldn’t work in a courtroom, but … please sit by me and tell me everything



That is pretty much what is going on!  Right now the case is in the discovery phase -  or will be once the Motion to Dismiss is heard and assuming the motion is denied.  In discovery the hearsay rule does not apply - the idea is to find out as much as you can about each other's case and evidence.  This is done through depositions, written questions called interrogatories and documents which are requested by side A and turned by side B.  

David Boies, who is neither stupid or delusional is basically pimping  the BRF by showing them what they are in for.  Although Boies said he has no plans to try to get a deposition of the Queen, he mentioned the possibility of trying to depose Charles.  MM is perfect to throw into the mix - for one thing, she is subject to jurisdiction here, so all of those arguments are out the window (whereas they are very much in play for Charles,for example).  Everyone knows that "recollections may vary"  - I think he said MM will be truthful because he knows that she will insist on telling what she calls "her truth", which we all know is "not true"!  So if she does get subpoenaed, will the BRF hire a lawyer to try to block the depo and, failing that, represent her at the depo?  Will MM refuse any lawyer hired and paid for by the BRF or will she show up and insist on being deposed without counsel present.  I can't imagine that she would hire her own attorney ($$$$).  

So is the BRF willing to run the risk of another out of control (and lying) MM situation?   After all, she already lied in court once!  H told her that he participated in conversations about racial issues/skin color, what if he told her about participating in or overhearing conversations about Andrew? I think it is a long shot that MM heard or participated in any conversations about Andrew's issues, but Boies won't know that until he asks the questions. There are some things Andrew's lawyer can do to try to end run any depo of MM, but at this point Boies wants them to see the worst case scenario.  Boies is hoping that applying this sort of pressure will encourage the powers that be to throw cash at him to get this whole unpredictable mess behind them.  He is basically showing them - and everyone else - how ugly this can get and that the BRF is unable to control the situation.


----------



## lallybelle

What makes anyone think that MM would know anything about what happened back then? Like Andrew was going to tell her out of all people, any possible shady **** he was into? She wasn't even around. I don't quite get it.


----------



## charlottawill

lallybelle said:


> What makes anyone think that MM would know anything about what happened back then? Like Andrew was going to tell her out of all people, any possible shady **** he was into? She wasn't even around. I don't quite get it.


My guess is it's just a lawyer's ploy to put an unwanted spotlight on the BRF in an attempt to extract a settlement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> My guess is it's just a lawyer's ploy to put an unwanted spotlight on the BRF in an attempt to extract a settlement.



Gasp, the audacity of _those _Americans    
First, the colonials. Then Wallis. Then Markle. Now this!@$€


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> So the Jacka$$es of Montecito are inviting people they don't know to attend a barbeque at 11:30am US Pacific Time on Christmas Eve?
> 
> Talk about desperate and pathetic.


Don't they realise that the Carol concert was recorded last week, the pictures have been seen and talked about to the initial impact has been made?


----------



## Morgan R




----------



## Annawakes

I actually like this Christmas card.  It’s finally normal, for once.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> I actually like this Christmas card.  It’s finally normal, for once.



Agree, makes me wonder why all the drama, all the fuss, all the secrecy


----------



## Roxanna

Well, jeans, bracelets on Harry and his full head of hear. No visible brands. Yet. Interesting. Kids are very cute, however angle makes pic very generic. It would be really hard to recognise them if seen again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Roxanna said:


> Well, jeans, bracelets on Harry and his full head of hear. No visible brands. Yet. Interesting. Kids are very cute, however angle makes pic very generic. It would be really hard to recognise them if seen again.



So, more drama, more fuss, more $$$$?

Here’s the photographer:



eta:  too little, too late, world has moved on


----------



## Goodfrtune

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836


Why is she dressed in a sweater when the rest are dressed for warmer temperatures? Does this woman ever listen to a weather report?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

A shame they had to mention that families with one child aren’t a family. According to H’s wife you need two kids for that. And cynical me, I believe the photo so photoshopped the children look nothing like that. Just MHO.


----------



## Aimee3

Why such an old photo for a holiday card? I read that photo was taken in the summer!


----------



## lanasyogamama

They really dislike only children, don’t they? Not the first time they’ve stepped on our toes.


----------



## Annawakes

Yuck.  I liked the Christmas photo until I read the caption.  When Archie grows up and sees that he’s going to wonder why he wasn’t enough to make them a family.  Gross, disgusting!


----------



## Sharont2305

Annawakes said:


> Yuck.  I liked the Christmas photo until I read the caption.  When Archie grows up and sees that he’s going to wonder why he wasn’t enough to make them a family.  Gross, disgusting!


My hubby and I have one child, aren't we a family?


----------



## Annawakes

Sharont2305 said:


> My hubby and I have one child, aren't we a family?


Us too!! We have one child and we know we’re a family.  They’re nuts.


----------



## sdkitty

Archie's hair is a gorgeous shade of red.  Lily will be lucky if she gets that color.  I don't care for Harry's beard.  I like that she has the baby laughing.  Have to admit it's a nice photo.


----------



## Sharont2305

Couldn't she (cos you just know she wrote it) have just said "Happy Holidays from our family to yours" and left it at that?


----------



## Annawakes

Yeah, I was thinking the card would’ve been so much nicer if they just left out that whole sentence about Archie not being enough.


----------



## xincinsin

Didn't they make some insinuation before that having more than 2 kids was wrong? They make a career out of putting their feet in their mouths. 

The caption was stupid. The photo - I dunno, I kept checking to see if Hazard had his bald spot or they added hair again. The son looks really different from that so-called pap shot of him half a year ago.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> My hubby and I have one child, aren't we a family?





Annawakes said:


> Us too!! We have one child and we know we’re a family.  They’re nuts.



I’m an only with an only. It’s odd since she was basically raised as an only.


----------



## carmen56

Sharont2305 said:


> My hubby and I have one child, aren't we a family?



I don’t know what Raptor’s assertion makes us, we don’t have any human children, just furry ones!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Betcha Hazzie is the only royal wearing ripped jeans in his Christmas picture!


----------



## sdkitty

maybe whatever royal was speculating about how the babies would come out was hoping for the outcome they got.  Harry's red hair but a nicer red and skin that's more pigmented - not super pale as most redheads are.  A very nice combo actually.


----------



## mia55

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836



This is a beautiful card and they all look genuinely happy but the caption ruins it all


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Very nice card. Finally! Baby is adorbs, btw.


----------



## purseinsanity

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836


He’s wearing ripped jeans.  You know, to seem more like one of us.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> A shame they had to mention that families with one child aren’t a family. According to H’s wife you need two kids for that. And cynical me, I believe the photo so photoshopped the children look nothing like that. Just MHO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5279843


And of course they have to mention their donations.  They can’t do anything without tooting their own horns.  What did they donate?  Baseball caps?  Olive lemon cakes?


----------



## kemilia

Aimee3 said:


> Why such an old photo for a holiday card? I read that photo was taken in the summer!


It was probably a pic they liked (but no merching!).


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Why such an old photo for a holiday card? I read that photo was taken in the summer!


How old would the baby have been if this photo was taken in the summer?


----------



## LittleStar88

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836



Kids are cute. I actually like this picture.

One thing though… Harry looks like he’s wearing the Southern California Starter Pack: Barefoot, torn denim, beaded bracelets bought from Venice street vendor.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> A shame they had to mention that families with one child aren’t a family. According to H’s wife you need two kids for that. And cynical me, I believe the photo so photoshopped the children look nothing like that. Just MHO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5279843





sdkitty said:


> Archie's hair is a gorgeous shade of red.  Lily will be lucky if she gets that color.  I don't care for Harry's beard.  I like that she has the baby laughing.  Have to admit it's a nice photo.


My 2 cents:
The Christmas card is distasteful. I wonder if the hair is photoshopped, it wouldn't be their first time doing it. The  message from becoming a family after Lilibet to referring to their own donations on a card is pure poor taste.


----------



## csshopper

I am an only child and for all 77 years of my life I have been part of a family. I did not need a sibling to make it one.

And, St. Meghan and Harry I DO NOT NEED YOU TO “make donations on my behalf” I take care of that on my own.

True to form, even at Christmas, you don’t know when to shut up.


----------



## Chanbal

Potential sources of inspiration???


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> maybe whatever royal was speculating about how the babies would come out was hoping for the outcome they got.  Harry's red hair but a nicer red and skin that's more pigmented - not super pale as most redheads are.  A very nice combo actually.



I’m guessing all of the colors are photoshopped.   A’s foot seems extra long, eyes don’t really line up and MM’s thighs are huge.
Of course, I could be wrong.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are the bare feet a ‘sweet nod’ to Sarah and her scandal?  Seriously, why the bare feet?


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> The Christmas card is distasteful. I wonder if the hair is photoshopped, it wouldn't be their first time doing it. The  message from becoming a family after Lilibet to referring to their own donations on a card is pure poor taste.


Hair is TOTALLY retouched and highlighted. Archie's the most..H's second..M's made to look darker and fuller..I think even the baby was given a red tinge.


----------



## Roxanna

Chanbal said:


> Potential sources of inspiration???



Inspiration wise... William, I guess it's him  in that pic is definitely  smilingly  reacting to his mom. Lilies face is slightly unhappy grimaced and she is pulling away.  It might mean nothing, she is tiny baby. However in comparison it doesn't look nice.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I’m an only child. My husband is an only child. And we don’t have children. I guess we are a minus family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Their first Christmas card with the one kid said ‘from our family to yours’.
Every.single.thing. is a clumsy mess with them. Always.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Roxanna said:


> Inspiration wise... William, I guess it's him  in that pic is definitely  smilingly  reacting to his mom. Lilies face is slightly unhappy grimaced and she is pulling away.  It might mean nothing, she is tiny baby. However in comparison it doesn't look nice.


I dislike Meghan as much as anyone but to me it looks like that baby is laughing


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Hair is TOTALLY retouched and highlighted. Archie's the most..H's second..M's made to look darker and fuller..I think even the baby was given a red tinge.


so assuming you're correct we may never know the color of these kids skin or hair....at least until someone get a pap picture and posts it w/o retouching


----------



## youngster

I like the Christmas card, the kids are both very cute.  I agree that the images were definitely photoshopped and the red hair touched up.  I also only need a "Merry Christmas or Happy New Year or Happy Holidays" message, no need to mention unverifiable charitable donations.

Harry looks a bit too California casual for me too but whatever.  I love what @LittleStar88 wrote above *". . .  Harry looks like he’s wearing the Southern California Starter Pack: Barefoot, torn denim, beaded bracelets bought from Venice street vendor."  *


----------



## jelliedfeels

Well now we know why the Christmas card took so long they were photoshopping the bald spots till the eleventh hour  

Bit disappointed with this one tbh…apart from the colour and fonts making it look like an 80s steakhouse menu, the punctuation being worse than mine when I’m drunk and the sentiment being as crass as urinal graffiti and half as sincere…not much to comment on. It is missing the usual flair for the crap I have come to associate with their brand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilibet Diana christening details included in Harry's memoir
					

LILIBET Diana's christening details will be included in Prince Harry's memoir after the ceremony took place in "secret", a royal commentator claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s daughter has already been christened in a “top secret” ceremony, according to royal commentator Neil Sean. Citing a source, Mr Neil also claimed the details of the service will be included in Prince Harry’s memoir, the release of which is awaited next year. The Duke of Sussex’s book may also reveal the godmother and godfather of their children and include pictures of Lilibet Diana with older brother Archie.

Speaking on his YouTube channel, Mr Sean said: “According to a very good source out in LA – and, as ever, we have to say allegedly – the daughter of Harry and Meghan has indeed been christened all top secret allegedly.

"But what’s interesting here is we won't get to know anything about that particular end of it until the book comes out."

He continued: “Apparently that could now become a chapter within the book, this is the book Of course that prince harry has signed a mega-deal for with that publishing house for quite a lot of money now.


“When you think about it, it would make perfect sense you know putting pictures in like that finding out who the guests are – the godmother, the godfather – that possibly has a selling point not necessarily to the public but of course to newspapers and magazines that may wish to license that story and reprint it on the same day around the world it could be very profitable.”

Express.co.uk contacted representatives for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.

Prince Harry and Meghan’s daughter, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40 at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, CA. 

The royal couple released a statement through their non-profit organisation site, Archewell, which read: “It is with great joy that Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, welcome their daughter, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, to the world”.

“On June 4, we were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili. She is more than we could have ever imagined, and we remain grateful for the love and prayers we’ve felt from across the globe. Thank you for your continued kindness and support during this very special time for our family.”

_


----------



## redney

Good grief. "Top secret" and you must buy a book to read about it  These idiots are delusional anyone really cares other than their deranged sugars.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bellecate said:


> A shame they had to mention that families with one child aren’t a family. According to H’s wife you need two kids for that. And cynical me, I believe the photo so photoshopped the children look nothing like that. Just MHO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5279843


Yes indeed. One child not a family. Three or more children selfish, environmental nightmare   
Aren’t we lucky they are here to show us the way


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## mia55

Chanbal said:


> Potential sources of inspiration???




The Kardashians are hard working women and it’s an insult to them to be compared with Harry and Megan. Since I heard about these two, I’ve developed a vast amount of respect for Kardashians.


----------



## charlottawill

Goodfrtune said:


> Why is she dressed in a sweater when the rest are dressed for warmer temperatures? Does this woman ever listen to a weather report?!


Some people, like my husband, are cold all the time. Our thermostat can read 80 degrees, I'll be in a T shirt but he'll have a hoodie on.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> A shame they had to mention that families with one child aren’t a family. According to H’s wife you need two kids for that. And cynical me, I believe the photo so photoshopped the children look nothing like that. Just MHO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5279843


The family comment is dumb, but I believe those really are the children. I'll give credit where due, they look pretty cute.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> He’s wearing ripped jeans.  You know, to seem more like one of us.


It's true, you'll never see that on the Cambridges, or bare feet. Harry's gone full California.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Southern California Starter Pack


----------



## Lodpah

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836


Lilibet looks like a cutie!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lilibet Diana christening details included in Harry's memoir
> 
> 
> LILIBET Diana's christening details will be included in Prince Harry's memoir after the ceremony took place in "secret", a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s daughter has already been christened in a “top secret” ceremony, according to royal commentator Neil Sean. Citing a source, Mr Neil also claimed the details of the service will be included in Prince Harry’s memoir, the release of which is awaited next year. The Duke of Sussex’s book may also reveal the godmother and godfather of their children and include pictures of Lilibet Diana with older brother Archie.
> 
> Speaking on his YouTube channel, Mr Sean said: “According to a very good source out in LA – and, as ever, we have to say allegedly – the daughter of Harry and Meghan has indeed been christened all top secret allegedly.
> 
> "But what’s interesting here is we won't get to know anything about that particular end of it until the book comes out."
> 
> He continued: “Apparently that could now become a chapter within the book, this is the book Of course that prince harry has signed a mega-deal for with that publishing house for quite a lot of money now.
> 
> 
> “When you think about it, it would make perfect sense you know putting pictures in like that finding out who the guests are – the godmother, the godfather – that possibly has a selling point not necessarily to the public but of course to newspapers and magazines that may wish to license that story and reprint it on the same day around the world it could be very profitable.”
> 
> Express.co.uk contacted representatives for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan’s daughter, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40 at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, CA.
> 
> The royal couple released a statement through their non-profit organisation site, Archewell, which read: “It is with great joy that Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, welcome their daughter, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, to the world”.
> 
> “On June 4, we were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili. She is more than we could have ever imagined, and we remain grateful for the love and prayers we’ve felt from across the globe. Thank you for your continued kindness and support during this very special time for our family.”_


Wow.  I can hardly wait to spend money on that book to find out about the baby's Christening.  Beyond ridiculous.  I'd wager to bet they aren't religious either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Harry, as the spare, may be throwing some shade at his brother, as in “you may be the first born but it took ME to make us a family”.

Regarding poor Archie, his Papa and Mama gave him the least Royal of names (Archie Harrison) for starters, have torn him away from any relatives except the cipher Doria, stashing him in the midst of acres of secluded land in California. Now have announced  in the most public way possible, he wasn't sufficient enough to make them whole so they had to have a sister (I believe they did the scientific things to make certain of the gender) and to make the impact of her arrival forever immortalized, bestowed on her the MOST Royal of names
"Lilibet Diana." 

All this from the A hole who whinged and whined in a pod cast about "generational pain".

"I don't think we should be pointing the finger or blaming anybody but certainly when it comes to parenting, if I've experienced some form of pain or suffering because of the pain or suffering that perhaps my father or my parents suffered, *I'm going to make sure I break that cycle so that I don't pass it on," he told the podcast hosts.

"We as parents should be doing the most we can to try and say 'you know what, that happened to me, I'm going to make sure that doesn't happen to you."*

They are off to a spectacular FAILURE in meeting that objective, and need to turn it around damn fast if they don't want another miserable psyche damaged male in the lineage.

How pathetic we can rescue animals, but this poor kid is s t u c k.

edit to add:  One definition of cipher, " a person of no power and is used by others to achieve a particular purpose"


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It's true, you'll never see that on the Cambridges, or bare feet. Harry's gone full California.


and thinks he has nice feet, worthy of showing off


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM’s thighs are huge.


Ooof....plates smashing in 3..2..1


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Well now we know why the Christmas card took so long they were photoshopping the bald spots till the eleventh hour
> 
> Bit disappointed with this one tbh…apart from the colour and fonts making it look like an 80s steakhouse menu, the punctuation being worse than mine when I’m drunk and the sentiment being as crass as urinal graffiti and half as sincere…not much to comment on. It is missing the usual flair for the crap I have come to associate with their brand.


They should have skipped the unnecessary copy and just wished everyone Merry Christmas. But it's no different than so many of the humble bragging cards we've received over the years. They really went for the common touch.


----------



## AbbytheBT

xincinsin said:


> How old would the baby have been if this photo was taken in the summer?


I am gonna guess baby around 3.5 months at most - so that would put pic around mid Sept 2021? 

Personally - I have a real problem with something like a “secret” baptism in a Christian church in the western world. We aren‘t in Roman times or communist countries where a child or family‘s christian identity and church affiliation could life threatening. 
In modern, free society, the church sacraments are meant to be shared, public declarations/affirmations of a families intent to raise their child in the christian faith, with the help of community. 

News and attendance at christian baptisms are also meant to be celebrations! Not hidden, secretive activities.  Is this a continuation of their persecution story? That the Harkles feared a public uprising for christening their baby?? lol


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Wow.  I can hardly wait to spend money on that book to find out about the baby's Christening.  Beyond ridiculous.  I'd wager to bet they aren't religious either.


"Secret christening"   Yeah, if that's a teaser to buy the book it's not working on me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> How old would the baby have been if this photo was taken in the summer?


Wasn’t the baby born in June? If they took it in August/September she’d be 3 months and she looks about that assuming she was 7/8lbs at birth. My baby is a much bigger girl- she’s already grown out of half her 3-6months clothes 



Roxanna said:


> Inspiration wise... William, I guess it's him  in that pic is definitely  smilingly  reacting to his mom. Lilies face is slightly unhappy grimaced and she is pulling away.  It might mean nothing, she is tiny baby. However in comparison it doesn't look nice.


Wow it does have a lot of similarities with the kardashian one stylewise but we already knew they are desperate enough to copy the ks once it’s passé. I feel like everyone does the pose where you lift the baby in the air at least once  

You are right they got a much better pic of baby W though…. You would think these agency babies would know how to pose for the camera


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I would have gone if invited!


I wonder how much a wedding gift would be for a couple living off the finances of the royal family.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> so assuming you're correct we may never know the color of these kids skin or hair....at least until someone get a pap picture and posts it w/o retouching


No way would Meg use a surrogate who wasn't fair.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On another site, some have posted that the photo gives Old Navy vibes - perhaps it really is an advert for Old Navy.
Ya kno, “good genes run in the family”  - it was one of ON‘s slogans.  H&M are such a joke.


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> No way would Meg use a surrogate who wasn't fair.


If it's H&M's sperm and egg, a surrogate's race or ethnicity wouldn't matter.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lilibet Diana christening details included in Harry's memoir
> 
> 
> LILIBET Diana's christening details will be included in Prince Harry's memoir after the ceremony took place in "secret", a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s daughter has already been christened in a “top secret” ceremony, according to royal commentator Neil Sean. Citing a source, Mr Neil also claimed the details of the service will be included in Prince Harry’s memoir, the release of which is awaited next year. The Duke of Sussex’s book may also reveal the godmother and godfather of their children and include pictures of Lilibet Diana with older brother Archie.
> 
> Speaking on his YouTube channel, Mr Sean said: “According to a very good source out in LA – and, as ever, we have to say allegedly – the daughter of Harry and Meghan has indeed been christened all top secret allegedly.
> 
> "But what’s interesting here is we won't get to know anything about that particular end of it until the book comes out."
> 
> He continued: “Apparently that could now become a chapter within the book, this is the book Of course that prince harry has signed a mega-deal for with that publishing house for quite a lot of money now.
> 
> 
> “When you think about it, it would make perfect sense you know putting pictures in like that finding out who the guests are – the godmother, the godfather – that possibly has a selling point not necessarily to the public but of course to newspapers and magazines that may wish to license that story and reprint it on the same day around the world it could be very profitable.”
> 
> Express.co.uk contacted representatives for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan’s daughter, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40 at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, CA.
> 
> The royal couple released a statement through their non-profit organisation site, Archewell, which read: “It is with great joy that Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, welcome their daughter, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, to the world”.
> 
> “On June 4, we were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili. She is more than we could have ever imagined, and we remain grateful for the love and prayers we’ve felt from across the globe. Thank you for your continued kindness and support during this very special time for our family.”_


Ooooh, a reason to buy the idiot's book: I can FINALLY get details about the top secret christening.  
Does anyone (else besides me ...not) give a $hit??


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Wasn’t the baby born in June? If they took it in August/September she’d be 3 months and she looks about that assuming she was 7/8lbs at birth. My baby is a much bigger girl- she’s already grown out of half her 3-6months clothes
> 
> 
> Wow it does have a lot of similarities with the kardashian one stylewise but we already knew they are desperate enough to copy the ks once it’s passé. I feel like everyone does the pose where you lift the baby in the air at least once
> 
> You are right they got a much better pic of baby W though…. You would think these agency babies would know how to pose for the camera


Hmmm...would Megain be desperate enough to do a HazMeg sex tape with a golden shower a la Kim?  We already know about her peeing...


----------



## queennadine

Lilibet is precious. Archie doesn’t look like either of them. The family and donation caption was in poor taste, unsurprisingly.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm...would Megain be desperate enough to do a HazMeg sex tape with a golden shower a la Kim?  We already know about her peeing...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

redney said:


> If it's H&M's sperm and egg, a surrogate's race or ethnicity wouldn't matter.


I wasn't assuming Meg has healthy eggs though.  And so far, the oldest child is all Harry.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Ooooh, a reason to buy the idiot's book: I can FINALLY get details about the top secret christening.
> Does anyone (else besides me ...not) give a $hit??


I don't either!  Why would I spend money to read about something that might not have really taken place? This is, after all, the emasculated mess who sat by his wife's side and let her lie to a worldwide audience about marrying in secret days before the official ceremony. Complete disrespect to the Church for starters.


----------



## poopsie

First we had Double Secret Probation, now these two bring us Double Secret Purgation


----------



## mellibelly

Thankfully Cringe is wearing nude socks/slippers to cover up those bunions. Not a fan of Harry’s nasty hobbit feet again. I guess it’s a sweet nod at how Californian and cool they are now, unlike the “stuffy” royal family that wears shoes lmao! I live in Venice Beach and I don’t get the barefoot themed Xmas photo. I see they used his fake Time magazine hair. The kids hair color is also clearly photoshopped. Now that caption

This was so close to being a good Xmas photo (wear shoes, keep the “authentic” bald spot and hair colors, generic happy holiday message) but nooo they have a knack for screwing it up per usual.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Ooooh, a reason to buy the idiot's book: I can FINALLY get details about the top secret christening.
> Does anyone (else besides me ...not) give a $hit??


Right! We’re not their family so who cares?


----------



## tiktok

According to Harry and Meghan there were no families in China for decades! I’m so grateful for the insight. They teach us things even through their Christmas cards!


----------



## Lodpah

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes indeed. One child not a family. Three or more children selfish, environmental nightmare
> Aren’t we lucky they are here to show us the way


Poor Archie. What a horrible thing for them to say.


----------



## papertiger

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836



Harry's got his hair on again


----------



## papertiger

Goodfrtune said:


> Why is she dressed in a sweater when the rest are dressed for warmer temperatures? Does this woman ever listen to a weather report?!



DOS feels the cold


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> They really dislike only children, don’t they? Not the first time they’ve stepped on our toes.



Don't worry, although one is a hobby, they think 3 kids constitutes overpopulation (and getting pushed down the line of succession) 

Anyway, JCMH wishes he was an only child and so does MegaMouth, so their words are motivated by jealousy (as usual)


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Don't worry, although one is a hobby, they think 3 kids constitutes overpopulation (and getting pushed down the line of succession)
> 
> Anyway, JCMH wishes he was an only child and so does MegaMouth, so their words are motivated by jealousy (as usual)



So easy to feel Hazzie’s  hatred of his family, even on a Christmas card.  Interesting A is looking at none of the 3.
  We hear ya, Arch, we hear ya loud and clear.


----------



## Laila619

She is such a smug person. Her comment was tone deaf and insulting to: Archie, only children, parents of only children, childless couples, and women going through infertility who want a second but can’t. She just couldn’t have left it at “Happy holidays” or “Merry Christmas” like a normal person. She has to be preachy, superior, and condescending even on a freakin’ CARD.


----------



## rose60610

The card is OK, I hate Harry's ripped jeans and bare feet look. It's nice that Meghan decided not to wear the Saudi blood diamond earrings, she isn't wearing any jewelry at all that's showing. They're just gosh darned normal people dontcha know?   Making mention of their donations? Ugh. Tacky. Desperate. In other words, consistent.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> So easy to feel Hazzie’s  hatred of his family, even on a Christmas card.  Interesting A is looking at none of the 3.
> We hear ya, Arch, we hear ya loud and clear.



Can you imagine A reading that card in the future poor boy. 

And calling the baby 'Lillibet' on the card. 

They can dress as casually as they like but it's still a formal announcement. Long live the real Lillibet, Charlie better get a grip and no more family helicopter rides for Will and Co, that's all I can say.


----------



## CeeJay

Luvbolide said:


> David Boies, who is neither stupid or delusional is basically pimping  the BRF by showing them what they are in for.  Although Boies said he has no plans to try to get a deposition of the Queen, he mentioned the possibility of trying to depose Charles.  MM is perfect to throw into the mix - for one thing, she is subject to jurisdiction here, so all of those arguments are out the window (whereas they are very much in play for Charles,for example).  Everyone knows that "recollections may vary"  - I think he said MM will be truthful because he knows that she will insist on telling what she calls "her truth", which we all know is "not true"!  So if she does get subpoenaed, will the BRF hire a lawyer to try to block the depo and, failing that, represent her at the depo?  Will MM refuse any lawyer hired and paid for by the BRF or will she show up and insist on being deposed without counsel present.  I can't imagine that she would hire her own attorney ($$$$).


.. if they really think that MM will be truthful??, well .. okay .. BUT, is she going to TALK about Andrew??? .. IMO, NOPE .. she wouldn't be able to stop herself from talking about the most important person in the world .. HERSELF!  I simply don't see this happening .. period!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lilibet Diana christening details included in Harry's memoir
> 
> 
> LILIBET Diana's christening details will be included in Prince Harry's memoir after the ceremony took place in "secret", a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s daughter has already been christened in a “top secret” ceremony, according to royal commentator Neil Sean. Citing a source, Mr Neil also claimed the details of the service will be included in Prince Harry’s memoir, the release of which is awaited next year. The Duke of Sussex’s book may also reveal the godmother and godfather of their children and include pictures of Lilibet Diana with older brother Archie.
> 
> Speaking on his YouTube channel, Mr Sean said: “According to a very good source out in LA – and, as ever, we have to say allegedly – the daughter of Harry and Meghan has indeed been christened all top secret allegedly.
> 
> "But what’s interesting here is we won't get to know anything about that particular end of it until the book comes out."
> 
> He continued: “Apparently that could now become a chapter within the book, this is the book Of course that prince harry has signed a mega-deal for with that publishing house for quite a lot of money now.
> 
> 
> “When you think about it, it would make perfect sense you know putting pictures in like that finding out who the guests are – the godmother, the godfather – that possibly has a selling point not necessarily to the public but of course to newspapers and magazines that may wish to license that story and reprint it on the same day around the world it could be very profitable.”
> 
> Express.co.uk contacted representatives for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex for comment.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan’s daughter, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, was born on Friday, June 4 at 11:40 at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in Santa Barbara, CA.
> 
> The royal couple released a statement through their non-profit organisation site, Archewell, which read: “It is with great joy that Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, welcome their daughter, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, to the world”.
> 
> “On June 4, we were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili. She is more than we could have ever imagined, and we remain grateful for the love and prayers we’ve felt from across the globe. Thank you for your continued kindness and support during this very special time for our family.”_


Just because you didn't take out a full page ad, or have the Queen attend doesn't make it a "secret" It's just a regular christening.


----------



## CeeJay

Morgan R said:


> View attachment 5279836


Oh .. did the Megalomaniac do the Calligraphy for the card!??!?!?! .. and hmmmmm, how much photoshopping has been done?? .. Harry's hair (looks more 'full' than normal) and Archie's hair?!?! .. is it really that red (if I recall correctly, prior beach pictures with Meghan & Archie made it look like his hair was brown, not Red).


----------



## Luvbolide

Annawakes said:


> Yuck.  I liked the Christmas photo until I read the caption.  When Archie grows up and sees that he’s going to wonder why he wasn’t enough to make them a family.  Gross, disgusting!



I had the same reaction - card was okay, but that statement - yuck!  Why do they feel the need to mention charitable donations?  And then they don’t mention the charities, which I would have been interested to see.  But the kicker for me is the ridiculous statement that the donations were “on your behalf”.  So patronizing.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Archie's hair is a gorgeous shade of red.  Lily will be lucky if she gets that color.  I don't care for Harry's beard.  I like that she has the baby laughing.  Have to admit it's a nice photo.


Is the baby laughing or crying??? .. to me, it doesn't really look like Lilibet is laughing!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> And calling the baby 'Lillibet' on the card.


I am sure if anyone calls the baby Lili in MM's presence they will be met with an icy glare and be sternly corrected, "Her name is Lilibet". So effing pretentious.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> It's true, you'll never see that on the Cambridges, or bare feet. Harry's gone full California.



Well, full *Southern *California, maybe!  By this time in Northern California we are wearing sandals!!


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Oh .. did the Megalomaniac do the Calligraphy for the card!??!?!?! .. and hmmmmm, how much photoshopping has been done?? .. Harry's hair (looks more 'full' than normal) and Archie's hair?!?! .. is it really that red (if I recall correctly, prior beach pictures with Meghan & Archie made it look like his hair was brown, not Red).


It did look very dark in the beach pics, so I assumed he looked like her. Here he looks nothing like her. I know blond toddlers can have dark hair as adults, but going from dark to red seems a bit odd.


----------



## charlottawill

Laila619 said:


> She is such a smug person. Her comment was tone deaf and insulting to: Archie, only children, parents of only children, childless couples, and women going through infertility who want a second but can’t. She just couldn’t have left it at “Happy holidays” or “Merry Christmas” like a normal person. She has to be preachy, superior, and condescending even on a freakin’ CARD.


New name for the list - The Duchess of Smugness


----------



## Aimee3

xincinsin said:


> How old would the baby have been if this photo was taken in the summer?


Well baby was supposedly born June 4 so if taken end of July, 2 months; end of august would make her 3 months.  But since they don’t tell the truth, who knows?


----------



## gracekelly

Top secret christening?  Did the attendees even know what they were attending or who the baby was?  Color me thinking that this is pretentious BS.  As far as the card is concerned, too much photoshopping for my taste and you can't really see what these children look like.  The picture looks like an ad for laundry detergent. "Oh look your clothes are so clean and fresh and smell so good!"  No way does Archie have hair that color in real life.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> And calling the baby 'Lillibet' on the card.



This jumped out at me too. I had assumed they would use "Lily" for the child on a regular basis, with  "Lilibet" on her official birth certificate, given that that is the Queen's private nickname used by only a tiny number of people on this earth.  Instead, they are apparently taking it for their own use with no shame.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Top secret christening?  Did the attendees even know what they were attending or who the baby was?  Color me thinking that this is pretentious BS.  As far as the card is concerned, too much photoshopping for my taste and you can't really see what these children look like.  The picture looks like an ad for laundry detergent. "Oh look your clothes are so clean and fresh and smell so good!"  No way does Archie have hair that color in real life.


maybe I was naive thinking what a beautiful hair color archie has....but there are kids that have that color


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> maybe I was naive thinking what a beautiful hair color archie has....but there are kids that have that color


Any fans of Wheel of Time ? Series now on Amazon Prime …
one of the band of five heroes has red curly hair , just like that


----------



## KellyObsessed

I think the photo is adorable and the children are so cute!    I personally know a bi-racial child with a very similar hair colour and she is absolutely stunning.  Very fair, un-freckled skin,with the most gorgeous curls, they look positively unreal.


----------



## queennadine

Also meant to comment on the alleged secret christening…I call BS. They don’t seem like the types to care about that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

mellibelly said:


> Thankfully Cringe is wearing nude socks/slippers to cover up those bunions. Not a fan of Harry’s nasty hobbit feet again. I guess it’s a sweet nod at how Californian and cool they are now, unlike the “stuffy” royal family that wears shoes lmao! I live in Venice Beach and I don’t get the barefoot themed Xmas photo. I see they used his fake Time magazine hair. The kids hair color is also clearly photoshopped. Now that caption
> 
> This was so close to being a good Xmas photo (wear shoes, keep the “authentic” bald spot and hair colors, generic happy holiday message) but nooo they have a knack for screwing it up per usual.





gracekelly said:


> Top secret christening?  Did the attendees even know what they were attending or who the baby was?  Color me thinking that this is pretentious BS.  As far as the card is concerned, too much photoshopping for my taste and you can't really see what these children look like.  The picture looks like an ad for laundry detergent. "Oh look your clothes are so clean and fresh and smell so good!"  No way does Archie have hair that color in real life.



There’s no way that is Archie’s hair color.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I think H&M were again copying the W&K.  Casual and a smiling, loving Christmas photo.







Princess Charlotte, Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Louis and Prince George on a family trip to Jordan.
KENSINGTON PALACE


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Any fans of Wheel of Time ? Series now on Amazon Prime …
> one of the band of five heroes has red curly hair , just like that


Yes!  that series had to grow on me the same way that GOT did.  I like it very much!  Crushing on the Warder guy.  Very handsome!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> maybe I was naive thinking what a beautiful hair color archie has....but there are kids that have that color


There are, and I knew three sisters who had red haired parents and each girl was freakishly redder than the one before her.  I don't think that his color is that red and maybe be brown with reddish overtones at best.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> It did look very dark in the beach pics, so I assumed he looked like her. Here he looks nothing like her. I know blond toddlers can have dark hair as adults, but going from dark to red seems a bit odd.


It doesn't happen.  Hair darkens with age even for red heads.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> I think H&M were again copying the W&K.  Casual and a smiling, loving Christmas photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Charlotte, Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Louis and Prince George on a family trip to Jordan.
> KENSINGTON PALACE
> 
> 
> View attachment 5280196



There is no way for us to know who the kids are, if the kids are theirs, if all 4 posed together for this, etc.   We get this random heavily photoshopped photo and are told to believe it’s them. Yeah, right. As has often been the case with them, lots of stuff seems off in this photo. We know they lie, we know they have access to all kinds of Hwood make-believe, we know how they have manipulated us in the past.  We won’t get fooled again.


ETA:  something is indeed wrong with her XXL thumb:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is no way for us to know who the kids are, if the kids are theirs, if all 4 posed together for this, etc.   We get this random heavily photoshopped photo and are told to believe it’s them. Yeah, right. As has often been the case with them, lots of stuff seems off in this photo. We know they lie, we know they have access to all kinds of Hwood make-believe, we know how they have manipulated us in the past.  We won’t get fooled again.
> 
> 
> ETA:  something is indeed wrong with her XXL thumb:
> 
> View attachment 5280207


I thought you were nitpicking but upon closer inspection that is rather odd. You are sharp-eyed. And that she has her index finger extended. Pretend you're holding a baby in that position. Would you have your finger extended like that? It's like the pinky extended while holding a teacup gesture.


----------



## charlottawill

Hermes Zen said:


> I think H&M were again copying the W&K.  Casual and a smiling, loving Christmas photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Charlotte, Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Louis and Prince George on a family trip to Jordan.
> KENSINGTON PALACE
> 
> 
> View attachment 5280196


I get the distinct impression that Charlotte, like her great aunt Princess Anne, will not suffer fools like her aunt MM gladly when she is older.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I thought you were nitpicking but upon closer inspection that is rather odd. You are sharp-eyed. And that she has her index finger extended. Pretend you're holding a baby in that position. Would you have your finger extended like that? It's like the pinky extended while holding a teacup gesture.


My first thought at looking at that picture was who holds a baby up high with their index finger pointing up?  Megain never seems to know how to hold a child properly, IMO.  Also interesting that they're all barefoot except the Douchess.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I get the distinct impression that Charlotte, like her great aunt Princess Anne, will not suffer fools like her aunt MM gladly when she is older.



Charlotte is more regal at her young age than GivesMePain will be, ever.


----------



## AbbytheBT

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is no way for us to know who the kids are, if the kids are theirs, if all 4 posed together for this, etc.   We get this random heavily photoshopped photo and are told to believe it’s them. Yeah, right. As has often been the case with them, lots of stuff seems off in this photo. We know they lie, we know they have access to all kinds of Hwood make-believe, we know how they have manipulated us in the past.  We won’t get fooled again.
> 
> 
> ETA:  something is indeed wrong with her XXL thumb:
> 
> View attachment 5280207


OMG - now I can’t unsee that hand. After seeing so many manipulated photos and knowing what can be done …..I am afraid I cannot believe any image released by the Harkles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I thought you were nitpicking but upon closer inspection that is rather odd. You are sharp-eyed. And that she has her index finger extended. Pretend you're holding a baby in that position. Would you have your finger extended like that? It's like the pinky extended while holding a teacup gesture.



It isn’t my original thought - I saw it on other sites.  I can spot the obvious photoshopping, but the more detailed stuff goes right over my head until someone points it out.  To me, this proves we must be discerning when looking at other people’s photos. Nothing is what we think it is.


----------



## octopus17

papertiger said:


> DOS feels the cold


That'll be because of all the cold shoulders she's received...


----------



## charlottawill

Hermes Zen said:


> I think H&M were again copying the W&K.  Casual and a smiling, loving Christmas photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Charlotte, Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Louis and Prince George on a family trip to Jordan.
> KENSINGTON PALACE
> 
> 
> View attachment 5280196


To be fair, if we didn't know who the people were in the second photo we'd probably say what a nice looking family. Same with the first. Some might even find W&K's staging somewhat pretentious. I guess since he's heir to the throne he can get away with it. If you've ever used any of the card services like Shutterfly, the samples there generally look more like H&M's than W&K's. We always tried to keep it simple with our kids. Now that they're grown we just use the dog


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t my original thought - I saw it on other sites.  I can spot the obvious photoshopping, but the more detailed stuff goes right over my head until someone points it out.  To me, this proves we must be discerning when looking at other people’s photos. Nothing is what we think it is.


I am always fascinated when I read photoshopping analyses by others. So many things I miss until it's pointed out to me.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is no way for us to know who the kids are, if the kids are theirs, if all 4 posed together for this, etc.   We get this random heavily photoshopped photo and are told to believe it’s them. Yeah, right. As has often been the case with them, lots of stuff seems off in this photo. We know they lie, we know they have access to all kinds of Hwood make-believe, we know how they have manipulated us in the past.  We won’t get fooled again.
> 
> 
> ETA:  something is indeed wrong with her XXL thumb:
> 
> View attachment 5280207


Yes, we’ve seen photos of M holding baby Archie in an odd way too. Something is not right with her fingers.


----------



## mellibelly

KellyObsessed said:


> I think the photo is adorable and the children are so cute!    I personally know a bi-racial child with a very similar hair colour and she is absolutely stunning.  Very fair, un-freckled skin,with the most gorgeous curls, they look positively unreal.


Yes the children are cute. Thankfully they look a lot like their father as a youngster. Nutmeg was a rather…unfortunate looking child to put it delicately.


----------



## mellibelly

Somewhat off topic but thank you to the poster that brought up replacing Ugg insoles. I had no idea! Just popped my new sheepskin insoles into my old Uggs and loving this coziness during our LA rainstorm.
The Ugg discussion in this thread made me research the brand more. Growing up in SoCal I always thought of Uggs as surfer/apres beach wear. The founder was an Australian surfer living in Santa Monica and attending UCLA business school. The more you know…


----------



## TimeToShop

Hermes Zen said:


> Yes, we’ve seen photos of M holding baby Archie in an odd way too. Something is not right with her fingers.



Not just with her thumb. There is something off about the baby. That dark line in front of her forehead gives the baby a square head. It’s like it cuts it off. Her right hand, those fingers look awfully long. The shadow on the glass behind  - from the angle of the photographer it seems off. No one else has a shadow.


----------



## TimeToShop

gracekelly said:


> It doesn't happen.  Hair darkens with age even for red heads.



Are there redheads in her family?


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is no way for us to know who the kids are, if the kids are theirs, if all 4 posed together for this, etc.   We get this random heavily photoshopped photo and are told to believe it’s them. Yeah, right. As has often been the case with them, lots of stuff seems off in this photo. We know they lie, we know they have access to all kinds of Hwood make-believe, we know how they have manipulated us in the past.  We won’t get fooled again.
> 
> 
> ETA:  something is indeed wrong with her XXL thumb:
> 
> View attachment 5280207


Good catch! What’s that brown color on the baby’s right side lip?


----------



## bisbee

OMG…if you were all scientists and put as much effort into fighting Corona as you did analyzing that photo, we would have a cure by now.


----------



## rose60610

Photoshopping is one thing. AI created people is another. I vote AI created kids. At first glance the photo is cute. Second glance, does Archie looks a little older than 2-1/2 considering his DOB is 5/6/19? Opinions? Remember, the Markle's are soooooo important they moved thousands of miles to seek privacy. So it'd stand to reason they want to hide their kids as they stick their own noses in front of every camera they can find.


----------



## Hermes Zen

WOW took a closer look at that thumb!   Good catch @CarryOn2020!


----------



## Chanbal

One more analysis of the Christmas card.


----------



## Chanbal

Have fun!   


The wait is over. Almost two full weeks after the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge released their knee-heavy Middle Eastern-themed Christmas card, the Sussexes have finally settled on their stoop and published their own end-of-year tableau of domestic bliss. And it’s truly very nice, if you like that sort of thing.

*What a year it’s been for Britain’s unofficial ambassadors to Santa Barbara.* An annus dramaticus, if that’s a word, which it is not. The Sussexes’ 2021 started with a declaration that they will not be returning as working royals and would instead prefer a quiet life in California – a pledge they instantly underscored by conducting an exclusive, marmalade-dropping interview with the most famous television host on the planet.

They had a daughter, Lilibet. They got really into chickens. The Duchess won a major legal battle. And the Duke – please, just call him Harry – managed to secure a real job, working in Silicon Valley as chief impact officer at a start-up, which sees him... um, errrr, well, kind of… nope, I’ve just Googled for 10 minutes and still have no idea. I think he says “Hey guys!” a lot and repeatedly underlines the word “vibes” on a whiteboard but, as I say, I have no idea.

The main thing is that they’re happy, which is abundantly clear in the new Christmas card. There’s the four of them, swathed in 50 shades of denim, huddled on the front step of their home, Meghan and Harry beaming at baby Lilibet and Archie looking like he’s trying to escape. The “card” is really a sort of e-bookmark, under a cursive “Happy Holidays” and with a gentle message underneath, explaining that they have kindly donated to a number of charitable causes “on your behalf”. Which is great, because we’ve all been very busy.

There is a lot to take in, but here’s a few things that shoot through your mind as you look at it. Don’t deny it – this is your truth.

*1. Do they own shoes?*
If you are a watcher of these things, you’ll know that Prince Harry’s aversion to footwear is becoming legendary. It’s almost as if when he’s previously referenced the suffocating confines of growing up in an institution that saw his life mapped out for him, he was actually just referring to the fact he had to wear socks a lot in England.
This is a man who is so grounded, so connected to the earth, that he will not be inhibited by cotton and leather and laces. They were absent in February, when the unshod couple announced their latest pregnancy, and the whole family (bar Meghan, whose nude pump we will choose to ignore) is on board now.
The Cambridges, in their Christmas card? Shoes aplenty. Couldn’t move for shoes. That’s because they’re stiff and conform to the system, man. Harry, and Archie, and even Lili? They’ve got their bare feet on the ground, or at least near the ground. It’s better for their spirit, it’s better for the planet and it’s better for the alignment of the foot. Or to put that last point another way, it helps you… Archewell. We got there in the end, thank you.

*2. A little bit of knee goes a long way*
As has been mentioned, the Cambridges’ Christmas portrait put more emphasis on knees than a Cossack health conference. William had his fully out, as did George and Louis. Kate even had to put her hand on one of her husband’s, as if to say, “Show some respect, Willsy, nobody needs to see that.”
Well, the Sussexes can’t claim they don’t read the press, because they’ve obviously heard that criticism and decided that less is more. “If knees are what we’re doing this year, we’re going to be classy about it,” you can imagine Meghan saying, as she bit into Harry’s Levis and tore a small hole while the photographer set up. “There – you’re giving the people what they want, but you’re not being gratuitous about it. We’re not having another incident like when I showed my entire shoulders and it was deemed a hate crime even though Kate had done it before.”

*3. Why is Archie dressed as Simon Cowell?*
 know children like to wear fancy dress costumes all year round – Captain America to feed the ducks, Princess Elsa at a funeral, sometimes they just cannot be dissuaded – but surely they could have convinced Archie to change out of his Etsy-bought “SIMON COWELL / PHILIP GREEN AUTHENTIC HALLOWE'EN OUTFIT WITH REAL WORKING BUTTONS AND TOBACCO SCENT, kids size 3-6 years” for this special occasion? Otherwise he looks very cool. 

*4. Lilibet looks like a laugh*
That’s it, she just does. Overall, great kids, 10/10.

*5. Why do some of the letters in “Happy Holidays” not overlay the photograph, but others do?*
It’s possible you didn’t think this, but once you notice it, it does grate slightly.

*6. “HSH Alexi Lubomirski”*
Tiny thing, but Alexi Lubomirski, the credited photographer – who also took the couple’s wedding and engagement photographs – has the official title “His Serene Highness”, thanks to his links to European royalty. And that is an outstanding moniker, far, far better than HRH or Duke or Duchess or chief impact officer. I wouldn’t renounce that one either.  

*7. Lovely picture, but the text…*
“This year, 2021” – thank you, I actually did think it was still 2020 – “we welcomed our daughter, Lilibet, to the world.” Correct. Anything else happen this year for the family? That’s it, that’s the only notable event in the round robin letter? OK, fine, yep. “Archie made us a ‘Mama’ and a ‘Papa’, and Lili made us a family.” Technically you already are a family as three, but go on...
“*As we look forward to 2022, we have made donations on your behalf to several organisations…*” Well, thank you, and they are all very worthy American causes, but “on your behalf” does make it sound like they’ve deducted a tenner from every one of their Instagram followers, in the manner of a school telling its parents the history trip to Ypres “is entirely optional, but we’ve already sent you an invoice for £120 – please let us know if you’d rather your child not take part”. Check your bank statements.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

bisbee said:


> OMG…if you were all scientists and put as much effort into fighting Corona as you did analyzing that photo, we would have a cure by now.


At 75yrs (next month), I'm a little too old to start a new career, but I'm willing to follow the guidelines to help contain Corona and the Omicron variant. Although, there will never be cure, they will eventually be controlled through vaccinations, just like polio, influenza, measles etc. also have no cure, but are contained through vaccinations. 
So I salute and cheer all the posters on this thread for helping us through the epidemic with anecdotes, jokes, stories etc, so that we could all laugh, cry, hoot and holler in the privacy of our own homes. Also kudos to all the members who had to work through it all to keep life as close a possible to normal. As result, I'm unable to find fault with anyone, who spent time on here in whatever fashion they chose. Thanks.


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> Somewhat off topic but thank you to the poster that brought up replacing Ugg insoles. I had no idea! Just popped my new sheepskin insoles into my old Uggs and loving this coziness during our LA rainstorm.
> The Ugg discussion in this thread made me research the brand more. Growing up in SoCal I always thought of Uggs as surfer/apres beach wear. The founder was an Australian surfer living in Santa Monica and attending UCLA business school. The more you know…


mellibelly, You’re welcome, it was me. My latest pair are keeping me warm, too. Loving the rain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Some people, like my husband, are cold all the time. Our thermostat can read 80 degrees, I'll be in a T shirt but he'll have a hoodie on.


I doubt that's the case with her if she wore a dress with the Mariana Trench between her boobs to an evening event


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> I wasn't assuming Meg has healthy eggs though.  And so far, the oldest child is all Harry.


I read this as ‘the oldest child is Harry.’ Seems apt.

I would also like to announce I put a pound in a charity box today so I hope you all know I have made donations in your names in honour of good causes close to our hearts and I am awaiting my buckets of praise  

I would also like to say… Have a very happy Christmas Eve (my favourite day of the season) and a very Merry Christmas everyone! Hope you all have a lot of fun and thank you for all the fun conversations xxx


----------



## CarryOn2020

there is someone in the window   above MM’s left knee.  Eeeeeeek!


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I read this as ‘the oldest child is Harry.’ Seems apt.
> 
> I would also like to announce I put a pound in a charity box today so I hope you all know I have made donations in your names in honour of good causes close to our hearts and I am awaiting my buckets of praise
> 
> I would also like to say… Have a very happy Christmas Eve (my favourite day of the season) and a very Merry Christmas everyone! Hope you all have a lot of fun and thank you for all the fun conversations xxx



I've donated  to global causes on all your behalves too: Donkeys and Gucci

*Happy Holidays everybody*


----------



## duna

I thought their Christmas card would be much worst to be honest: the picture is sweet, although I cannot judge how much it has been photoshopped. Maybe a bit too casual (ripped jeans) BUT, what TOTALLY ruins it is the text.... it's amazing how these two can NEVER do something right!


----------



## zen1965

mia55 said:


> This is a beautiful card and they all look genuinely happy but the caption ruins it all


This all day.
And of course they had to blow their own trumpet again regarding their supposed donations. On a Christmas card. Who does that?
No class.


----------



## xincinsin

zen1965 said:


> This all day.
> And of course they had to blow their own trumpet again regarding their supposed donations. On a Christmas card. Who does that?
> No class.


Not so much the condescension of having helped us peasants do the "right thing" by donating on our behalves, but the way they like to be mysterious about it. Maybe the donation was in the form of those letters and phone calls, lending his/her/their names to a cause. They are not shy about doing PR when a money donation is involved (the promised cash donation to the restaurant and at the polo match), so when they are coy like this, I tend to suspect donations in kind with an inflated value.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Not so much the condescension of having helped us peasants do the "right thing" by donating on our behalves, but the way they like to be mysterious about it. Maybe the donation was in the form of those letters and phone calls, lending his/her/their names to a cause. They are not shy about doing PR when a money donation is involved (the promised cash donation to the restaurant and at the polo match), so when they are coy like this, I tend to suspect donations in kind with an inflated value.



Could be _sweet nods_, could be listing the charity’s name on their website. Doubt actual dollars exchanged hands.


----------



## bellecate

Tomorrow is Christmas!!
I’d like to wish everyone here the very Merriest of Christmas.  Picture taken as we drive to our son’s for the holidays  
Edited to add no photoshopping was done as is the case for the ‘Photoshopping Duo’ .


----------



## jelly-baby

This thread is new to me!  Being in the UK, I'm aware that H&M don't have many fans here.  I was always curious what those in the US thought of them now they inhabit your country...


----------



## rose60610

Since Meghan and Harry feel so obligated to donate to causes "on behalf of us", then I'd like to request something they could do on behalf of of ME. They can shut their stupid mouths for once and not whine about how hard their lives are in their 19 bathroom house and their other assets that THEY didn't buy with money they made THEMSELVES but came from the family they trash. They are the most ungrateful losers I've heard of yet some consider them as role models for others?  Indeed, society can be effed up.


----------



## youngster

@bellecate, gorgeous photo!.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Yes!  that series had to grow on me the same way that GOT did.  I like it very much!  Crushing on the Warder guy.  Very handsome!


The warden Land is TDF also was Stefan - him we remember from Vikings
I just cannot remember the name of the young hero , the Archie-maxi me , Rand ?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *there is someone in the window*   above MM’s left knee.  Eeeeeeek!
> 
> View attachment 5280406


Santa or Marcus A, what do you think?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> in the manner of a school telling its parents the history trip to Ypres “is entirely optional, but we’ve already sent you an invoice for £120 – please let us know if you’d rather your child not take part”


    I'm dying....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I read this as ‘the oldest child is Harry.’ Seems apt.
> 
> I would also like to announce I put a pound in a charity box today so I hope you all know I have made donations in your names in honour of good causes close to our hearts and I am awaiting my buckets of praise
> 
> I would also like to say… Have a very happy Christmas Eve (my favourite day of the season) and a very Merry Christmas everyone! Hope you all have a lot of fun and thank you for all the fun conversations xxx


You guys are killing it today


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I read this as ‘the oldest child is Harry.’ Seems apt.
> *I would also like to announce I put a pound in a charity box today so *I hope you all know I have made donations in your names in honour of good causes close to our hearts and I am awaiting my buckets of praise
> 
> I would also like to say… Have a very happy Christmas Eve (my favourite day of the season) and a very Merry Christmas everyone! Hope you all have a lot of fun and thank you for all the fun conversations xxx


Thanks @jelliedfeels, I'm touched by your generosity.

I would like to announce that I am donating $1 per each one of your posts to Archewhatever in your  names. Oh please, there is no need to get mad at me! I use monopoly money like Miss Little Forgetful and Ginger Guru.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I've donated  to global causes on all your behalves too: Donkeys and Gucci
> 
> *Happy Holidays everybody*


Dear Santa, would you mind including VCA? A certain blue agate necklace has stuck in my mind.

Happy Holidays to all!


----------



## Chanbal

jelly-baby said:


> This thread is new to me!  Being in the UK, I'm aware that H&M don't have many fans here.  I was always curious what those in the US thought of them now they inhabit your country...


Now you know! Welcome to the most popular thread about one of the most unpopular couples.


----------



## Chanbal

The suitcase with their shoes never made into America…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, indeed, we have spent the Covid days in the arena fighting the good fight, keeping the dastardly duo honest, and loving every moment. Being just a thread () on TPF, we have given a _sweet nod _to our Hermes silks and have become socially responsible.

Thank you to all of our posters who give their valuable time to this cause. You truly give the best gifts. 
Merry Christmas and Happy 2022
     




*Silk with a generous quality*
_A Hermès carré is more than just a scarf, particularly when it is socially responsible. Limited editions are regularly produced in support of actions by local non-profit organisations. The square takes sides when it comes to women’s and children’s rights, preserving the environment, protecting endangered species, and supporting art._


			https://www.hermes.com/us/en/story/135686-silk-generous-quality/


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The suitcase with their shoes never made into America…



One of the comments pointed out that Hazard's hand is very pale when compared to the attached arm. They think it was photoshopped. This photo is starting to sound like a jigsaw.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The suitcase with their shoes never made into America…



One of the commenters wonders where Archie's right arm has disappeared to in the picture. I'd say he looks like he's hanging on to something for dear life, but it can't possibly be H's bollocks because those disappeared when he came into contact with the Yacht Girl Deadly Claws.
Merry, Happy and Joyous Christmas to all.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> One of the commenters wonders where Archie's right arm has disappeared to in the picture. I'd say he looks like he's hanging on to something for dear life, but it can't possibly be H's bollocks because those disappeared when he came into contact with the Yacht Girl Deadly Claws.
> Merry, Happy and Joyous Christmas to all.
> View attachment 5280588


Merry Christmas


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more analysis of the Christmas card.



I think Jesus might be a member because we pointed out all his observations already!  Good job everyone!


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> One of the comments pointed out that Hazard's hand is very pale when compared to the attached arm. They think it was photoshopped. This photo is starting to sound like a jigsaw.


Another comment claimed Lili's head is oddly shaped. I don't have any opinion on that, but, considering the position of the "family", the baby is further from the camera than her brother, yet her head looks larger than his. That does look weird. Maybe they took the baby from another photo and pasted her in, resulting in Methane's deformed hand and the mismatch in size.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Another comment claimed Lili's head is oddly shaped. I don't have any opinion on that, but, considering the position of the "family", the baby is further from the camera than her brother, yet her head looks larger than his. That does look weird. Maybe they took the baby from another photo and pasted her in, resulting in Methane's deformed hand and the mismatch in size.


it's beginning to sound like the baby may have been photoshopped in....how sad if true


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> it's beginning to sound like the baby may have been photoshopped in....how sad if true


I'm just wondering: with an excellent photographer at their disposal and presumably no limit of time for the shoot, how could there be no photos good enough to use for a greeting card? Why was there a need to be so unauthentic  ? It's not like Hazard can venture out of the house with a rug on his head every day so that he matches his augmented photos.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I'm just wondering: with an excellent photographer at their disposal and presumably no limit of time for the shoot, how could there be no photos good enough to use for a greeting card? Why was there a need to be so unauthentic  ? It's not like Hazard can venture out of the house with a rug on his head every day so that he matches his augmented photos.



Surely the skilled professional photographer who signed the photo with his HSH, surely he did not make all of these mistakes? Would H&M mess up the photo just to keep people talking about it? They must be on the _high end of deranged_ , imo.


----------



## Lodpah

Merry Christmas everyone! Have been binging on JCS criminal psychology on YouTube. I swear every woman in there has something in common with MM. Socialpathetic, narcissistic and straight out evil persona. The Jodie Arias personality traits MM I feel definitely has.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Since Meghan and Harry feel so obligated to donate to causes "on behalf of us", then I'd like to request something they could do on behalf of of ME. They can shut their stupid mouths for once and not whine about how hard their lives are in their 19 bathroom house and their other assets that THEY didn't buy with money they made THEMSELVES but came from the family they trash. They are the most ungrateful losers I've heard of yet some consider them as role models for others?  Indeed, society can be effed up.


This all day!    The world’s shyest couple exceeded my expectations actually. They showed the children, not that you can really tell what they look like, which I did not expect. Plus they managed to take a simple photograph and photoshop it to death   I think on the whole, they were true to form by taking something that should have been simple and straightforward and ruining it.   They have set their pattern and 2022 will bring more of the same.  They should name their reality show The Misadventures of Harry and Meghan.   So far what they have been doing is similar to Lucy at the candy factor. Starting out with decent intentions, most times, and then screwing it up.  I’m leaving out their dastardly behavior towards their respective families. That is a whole other issue for which there is no sympathy extended.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely the skilled professional photographer who signed the photo with his HSH, surely he did not make all of these mistakes? Would H&M mess up the photo just to keep people talking about it? They must be on the _high end of deranged_ , imo.


I was wondering about this. Surely the photographer realized that he would be the one to suffer the blowback criticism. Of course with Meghan demanding final approval he was screwed right there. Wonder if he learned his lesson?


----------



## gracekelly

Merry Christmas to all!  

My donation is a bag of chicken feed being sent directly to the Casa Monstercito chicken coop.   I am sending it there directly so it won’t be traded or sold by the homeowners to fund their heating bill. I want to know that the rescued chicks are fed, fat and happy. My other big donation is to the poor folks who suffered from the tornado  Going by Harry’s torn jeans, it looks like he won’t be sending any of his own clothing as it is in worse shape that the clothing blown to bits by the tornado victims. Meghan has none to send as it all gets returned unwashed to the person who finds things for her to wear and merch.   They are saving  the children’s clothing to send off to Africa and will take it there on their next trip, whenever that is.  Meghan is currently checking out bushes in Botswana via Travalyst that need killing.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Merry Christmas Everyone! I’m binge watching Hallmark Christmas movies.  No chance of M being in one.  Believe her Hallmark attempt was a romance. She should have done one of their royal romance movies.

Have a wonderful day and weekend.  Cheers


----------



## zinacef

Somebody is gonna be playing the piano or bagpipe or violin tomorrow— M actually having a level 5 panic rehearsal right now. Or maybe a demo calligraphy
class —— how to write christmas greetings in Happy holidays style during the bar-b-que party at exactly 1130 in montecito, anybody got invited here?


----------



## CarryOn2020

zinacef said:


> Somebody is gonna be playing the piano or bagpipe or violin tomorrow— M actually having a level 5 panic rehearsal right now. Or maybe a demo calligraphy
> class —— how to write christmas greetings in Happy holidays style during the bar-b-que party at exactly 1130 in montecito, anybody got invited here?



Maybe a ballet dance as a ‘sweet nod’ to we all know who?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Post from this morning    It included another Body Language Guy short video about H&M Christmas Card.  I've removed the photos except for Jesus' video below.  Enjoy!

*Prince Harry rejected Christmas tradition with Meghan Markle: 'I find this stuff weird'*
*PRINCE HARRY rejected a Christmas tradition with Meghan Markle, saying "I find this stuff weird", an unearthed account claims.*
By CHARLIE SMITH
17:47, Fri, Dec 24, 2021 | UPDATED: 17:47, Fri, Dec 24, 2021

Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, have marked this Christmas by publishing the first picture of their daughter Lilibet Diana, six months. The official snap, published on the couple’s Christmas card also features their other first, Archie Harrison, two. The image was taken by photographer Alexi Lubomirski in the summer of this year at the couple’s home. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who famously stepped back from their royal roles, welcomed Lilibet, their second child, earlier this year.

The young family left the UK and now live in the star-studded Montecito area of Santa Barbara, California.

The Sussexes have not revealed their full Christmas plans this year, but they are expected to spend the holiday in the US.

While the couple have shown their love for the festive period in recent weeks, Harry was once reported to have rejected a Christmas tradition with Meghan.

Five years ago, the couple were spotted going Christmas tree shopping just weeks after their relationship was revealed by the Sunday Express.

Meghan and Harry were offered mistletoe by Ollie Wilkinson, a staff member at the Pines and Needles shop in Battersea Park, according to BBC News.

He said: “I said ‘would you like this mistletoe’ and she [Meghan] said ‘yes that would be great’.

“He then squeezed one of the berries on it and was like ‘I find this stuff weird’ and then she was like ‘oh, I really like it’.

“Then he walked off with the tree on his shoulder, holding her hand, and she was holding in her other hand a bunch of mistletoe.”

The couple reportedly shelled out £65 on a 6ft Nordmann Fir tree from the south London store.

Meghan was still Harry’s girlfriend at the time and was famous in the US as one of the stars of legal drama ‘Suits’.

The pair were said to have held hands during their Christmas outing, one of the first after Harry confirmed their relationship in November 2016.

Another staff member, Zaqia Crawford, who like Meghan is from the US, also recalled meeting the couple at the Battersea store.

She said: “They came in to buy a tree, they were looking at trees and I went over to help them pick the tree.

“They knew exactly which tree they wanted – it wasn’t exactly a long process.

“They were really friendly, really nice... I didn’t know it was them at all.”

Since leaving their royal roles behind Meghan and Harry have continued their charity and humanitarian work.
The couple touched on this in their Christmas card, announcing that they had donated to several groups.
They wrote: “This year, 2021, we welcomed our daughter, Lilibet, to the world.
“Archie made us a ‘Mama’ and a ‘Papa’, and Lili made us a family.

“As we look forward to 2022, we have made donations on your behalf to several organisations that honour and protect families.”
The organisations included Team Rubicon, a charity which uses the experience of military veterans in emergencies and has helped resettle refugees from Afghanistan.
Meghan and Harry signed off by adding: “Wishing you a happy holiday season and a prosperous New Year, from our family to yours! As ever, Harry, Meghan, Archie & Lili.”


*Prince Harry and Meghan's Christmas card discussed by YouTuber*








						Prince Harry rejected Christmas tradition with Meghan Markle: 'Weird'
					

PRINCE HARRY rejected a Christmas tradition with Meghan Markle, saying "I find this stuff weird", an unearthed account claims.




					www.express.co.uk
				




https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-carol-concert-Queen-Bee-Westminster-Abbey-vn


EDIT:  TAKE TWO - Something went wrong.  Apologies. 

*Prince Harry and Meghan's Christmas card discussed by YouTuber*

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...an-markle-lilibet-first-photo-spt?jwsource=em


EDIT:  TAKE THREE  -  oh well.      Was trying to avoid you from going to the article website.  Not tech savvy.


----------



## zinacef

A little hard but she certainly can do some ballet pirouette moves while doing calligraphy— some killer visuals, got to be extra.


----------



## rose60610

zinacef said:


> the bar-b-que party at exactly 1130 in montecito, anybody got invited here?



Umm, unfortunately I can't make it (cough).


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Merry Christmas Everyone! I’m binge watching Hallmark Christmas movies.  No chance of M being in one.  Believe her Hallmark attempt was a romance. She should have done one of their royal romance movies.
> 
> Have a wonderful day and weekend.  Cheers


That was the peak of her acting career.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Umm, unfortunately I can't make it (cough).



It's OK.. It was rained out.  Feel better.  ( know that cough was just for effect


----------



## csshopper

Don't remember if we have ever linked to a YouTuber, PDina?  She's an American WOC sharing her perspective. I watched her latest on the photo, "The Sad Reality Behind this Photo Shoot," am going to go back and view some other segments when I have time, this one caught my eye: "Is Meghan Markle a Black Woman?"

Her photo analysis included, what was for me, a new insight, I had not thought about the impact of seeing this picture on the people they have harmed, Thomas, Samantha, the Royals, the British public who had such high hopes for them. She says she focuses on examining what is behind actions and she is speaking to people who have followed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen (not names she uses) and knows their history, what their actions and words have been, that people who don't know about them and just think "oh, sweet happy couple" are not her audience.

Note: while typing this got a message from a friend gushing about the Duchess of Cambridge doing piano accompaniment to Tom Walker singing about the loss of loved ones around the Christmas table,  "Those Who Cannot Be Here this Year." Hadn't been revealed in the earlier ads for the Concert this evening. Took time to watch the vid on Youtube. He says lovely things about her in an interview, whole thing is heart warming.

The sound you hear is the explosion in Montecito and the super picture hype deflating. Catherine is a force to be reckoned with.

One last bit, news item about Oprah's gathering at her house today. Conspicuous absence of 4 people who live in the 'Hood.


----------



## charlottawill

Merry Christmas to all! May you share peace, joy and good health with your loved ones. A little visual treat:



> https://www.today.com/video/inside-princess-diana-s-childhood-home-during-the-holidays-129509957913


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> It's OK.. It was rained out.  Feel better.  ( know that cough was just for effect



Rained out? What is Meghan going to do with all those Olive Oil Lemon Cakes? Oh wait. She's going to donate them and take the write off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Prince Harry rejected Christmas tradition with Meghan Markle: 'I find this stuff weird'



So, Hazzie finds mistletoe “weird” and the US 1st amendment “bonkers”.   Who raised this jerk?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Rained out? What is Meghan going to do with all those Olive Oil Lemon Cakes? Oh wait. She's going to donate them and take the write off.


Put them on the compost pile where they belonged in the first place!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazzie finds mistletoe “weird” and the US 1st amendment “bonkers”.   Who raised this jerk?


He is saying that because no one wants to kiss him.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Don't remember if we have ever linked to a YouTuber, PDina?  She's an American WOC sharing her perspective. I watched her latest on the photo, "The Sad Reality Behind this Photo Shoot," am going to go back and view some other segments when I have time, this one caught my eye: "Is Meghan Markle a Black Woman?"
> 
> Her photo analysis included, what was for me, a new insight, I had not thought about the impact of seeing this picture on the people they have harmed, Thomas, Samantha, the Royals, the British public who had such high hopes for them. She says she focuses on examining what is behind actions and she is speaking to people who have followed Lady Megbeth and Hazbeen (not names she uses) and knows their history, what their actions and words have been, that people who don't know about them and just think "oh, sweet happy couple" are not her audience.
> 
> Note: while typing this got a message from a friend gushing about the Duchess of Cambridge doing piano accompaniment to Tom Walker singing about the loss of loved ones around the Christmas table,  "Those Who Cannot Be Here this Year." Hadn't been revealed in the earlier ads for the Concert this evening. Took time to watch the vid on Youtube. He says lovely things about her in an interview, whole thing is heart warming.
> 
> The sound you hear is the explosion in Montecito and the super picture hype deflating. Catherine is a force to be reckoned with.
> 
> One last bit, news item about Oprah's gathering at her house today. Conspicuous absence of 4 people who live in the 'Hood.


Meg started attacking the 16 new toilets with a sledgehammer after that Kate video posted.  It's a shame because they were recently installed.  They should have taken my advice and buy plastic dishes.


----------



## 1LV

I watched the video of Kate playing the piano while Tom Walker sang, and I have to admit I felt a little bit sorry for MM.


----------



## Chloe302225

One says you can hear her MM's wails all the way in the U.K.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazzie finds mistletoe “weird” and the US 1st amendment “bonkers”.   Who raised this jerk?


The UK is famed for keeping alive the Druidic (sic) custom of mistletoe
Isnt the stuff highly poisonous ? Must scurry to go look that up

ps having scurried off to do my research , first thing that comes up on Google … 

“About poison: Mistletoe has a reputation as *a poisonous plant*. While the European species Viscum album is reportedly toxic, American mistletoe is not deadly. Better to keep it away from little kids and pets, though, and if you are concerned, stick with artificial mistletoe for decorative purposes.”


----------



## A1aGypsy

gracekelly said:


> It doesn't happen.  Hair darkens with age even for red heads.



Not to support these two but, I had black hair for two years and then it fell out and grew in red. And I have three red headed friends and we have all gotten lighter with age (although, I’m talking older now) so, it’s entirely possible.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> One says you can hear her MM's wails all the way in the U.K.




Asking for a friend - ahem, Is a charity donation equal to a stellar piano performance by a future Queen of England [after Cams, of course]?











						Kate delights fans with surprise piano performance with Tom Walker
					

Kate recorded the song with Tom Walker in the Chapter House of Westminster Abbey, one day before a community carol service on December 8 which was shown on ITV this evening.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Saw this on another site — did not know she had done this with the Suits cast.  They begin around the 2:11 mark. 
Is lip syncing the same as a stellar piano performance in front of zillions?


----------



## Roxanna

Catherine was amazing. Natural and really good .


----------



## tiktok

Roxanna said:


> Catherine was amazing. Natural and really good .




British people, you have a pretty stellar future queen!


----------



## Lucille68

A1aGypsy said:


> Not to support these two but, I had black hair for two years and then it fell out and grew in red. And I have three red headed friends and we have all gotten lighter with age (although, I’m talking older now) so, it’s entirely possible.


I am also a redhead and my color has definitely lightened with age.  I am also not supporting these two lol.


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> Meg started attacking the 16 new toilets with a sledgehammer after that Kate video posted.  It's a shame because they were recently installed.  They should have taken my advice and buy plastic dishes.



If they're avoiding plastic might I suggest a monthly subscription to a nice set of Corellle dinnerware?


----------



## Chanbal

I was at Am*z*n to get a few last minute gifts for kids, and I didn't see the bench on display. I wonder if Little Miss Forgetful bought all of them. Finding Freebees has also been removed from its previous place in the store, probably not selling…


----------



## Lodpah

Chloe302225 said:


> One says you can hear her MM's wails all the way in the U.K.



I hope a wellness check is on done on the children, chickens and staff. She must be frothing at the mouth and coming out her ears too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## KellyObsessed

rose60610 said:


> Photoshopping is one thing. AI created people is another. I vote AI created kids. At first glance the photo is cute. Second glance, does Archie looks a little older than 2-1/2 considering his DOB is 5/6/19? Opinions? Remember, the Markle's are soooooo important they moved thousands of miles to seek privacy. So it'd stand to reason they want to hide their kids as they stick their own noses in front of every camera they can find.


 I wish I could post a photo of my great nephew who just turned two.  He looks like he is 4.  It's so weird, and he is also very mature and serious. He walks in wearing his backpack, like he is coming home from school.


----------



## xincinsin

KellyObsessed said:


> I wish I could post a photo of my great nephew who just turned two.  He looks like he is 4.  It's so weird, and he is also very mature and serious. He walks in wearing his backpack, like he is coming home from school.


The extremes of life: your older-than-his-years great nephew and our toxic duo who are mentally spoilt brats.


----------



## xincinsin

This is hilarious.








						Meghan Markle crowned ‘the most intelligent British royal’ in new study
					

She’s a right royal genius!




					nypost.com
				



The entity "Oxford Royale" that did the survey said: "Life as a royal isn’t always an easy job and involves a lot of dealing with extensive scrutiny and life in the public spotlight, and Meghan Markle’s academic strengths have equipped her perfectly for this role." They seem to have forgotten Ms Perfectly Equipped failed and claimed to have become suicidal.

I think this is just a PR gimmick. Oxford Royale Academy has mixed reviews online. It operates in prestigious university premises under contract for venue usage, but is not affiliated with any of the universities. Sounds like a for-profit company, so I have grave doubts about this study they did which appears to be very superficial: they simply checked and ranked education results. IMO, the academy is  aiming to get in the news and entice potential students to sign up.

ETA: if the survey was for Most Cunning and Shameless royal, I might give a


----------



## elvisfan4life

The mad woman must be off the scale watching the reaction to beautiful Kates televised carol concert - elegant in red playing the piano - a song with poignant touching lyrics about the first Christmas dealing with  the loss of the one you love - no doubt for our gracious Queen but also every grieving relative of a covid victim this year


----------



## TimeToShop

xincinsin said:


> One of the comments pointed out that Hazard's hand is very pale when compared to the attached arm. They think it was photoshopped. This photo is starting to sound like a jigsaw.



Not just that, his arm is weirdly wrinkly. Archie’s right forearm is odd/not there. The whole thing is off but what do you expect from them.

Whether you celebrate or not, I hope you all have a wonderful day!


----------



## Roxanna

It's actually puzzling, after you mentioned it, I looked again  at pic posted and noticed that Harry's  head in this pic is disproportionately large to his own arm. Weirdly off indeed.


----------



## Roxanna

Double


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely the skilled professional photographer who signed the photo with his HSH, surely he did not make all of these mistakes? Would H&M mess up the photo just to keep people talking about it? They must be on the _high end of deranged_ , imo.


I was thinking that perhaps the photographer even though he’s royalty, is just not good at photoshopping.

He probably wanted to make some adjustments and did it poorly. Just because he’s royalty doesn’t make him an excellent photographer or excellent photoshopper.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I was thinking that perhaps the photographer even though he’s royalty, is just not good at photoshopping.
> 
> He probably wanted to make some adjustments and did it poorly. Just because he’s royalty doesn’t make him an excellent photographer or excellent photoshopper.



IMO this photo is H&M’s work, probably more Hazzie than MM.  Repeatedly, Hazz has told us how much he detests Royal traditions. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out this is his attempt to thumb his long nose at all of us. His snarky, sarcastic side is a bit much for me. His entitled side is worse than his mother’s (known for poking friends’ backsides with her umbrella).  He deserves zero attention, yet here we are. 

Perhaps Alexi’s book could help him.  Perhaps H&M will stay out of the news in 2022. Hey, it’s Christmas - a girl can dream. Cheers. all.


From 2015 Harpers Bazaar article:

_A true renaissance man, Lubomirski wears a number of hats. After studying at The University of Brighton in the UK, the once aspiring fashion designer decided to try out a different medium and became Mario Testino's photography assistant. "He really taught me to open my eyes to everything," Lubomirski told Bazaar. "It was incredible to sit next to Mario Testino and just watch him work. You could be sitting in front of the Queen of England watching him make her smile or Gwyneth Paltrow trying to make her feel sexy when she [wasn't feeling] sexy." He quickly stepped into his own spotlight, so to speak, becoming one of the world's top fashion photographers, who has shot the likes of Lupita Nyong'o, Julia Roberts, Catherine Zeta Jones, Kate Winslet, Victoria Beckham, and Anne Hathaway—many for Harper's Bazaar.

But it's another hat—or a crown, rather—that he told me about over coffee at the Bazaar offices. At age 11, Lubormirski discovered a Polish royal lineage on his father's side that dates as far back as 500 years. It was a Princess Diaries moment of sorts but with a catch—the house's reign had ended, and Alexi's seat would be the first not to bear any royal accouterments. "In one generation, everything flipped completely," he says. "I was one generation away from 500 years of history."

Regardless, Lubomirski, encouraged by his mother, took his legacy to heart. "*If you are to be a prince in today's world," she told him when he was young, "you have to be a prince in your heart and actions." Since then, he has lived life according to the spirit of the William Shakespeare quote from Henry VI, Part 3 that opens Lubomirski's new book, Princely Advice for a Happy Life: "My crown is in my heart, not on my head." In other words: live like a gent.*

With two young sons of his own, Lubomirski was inspired to write Princely Advice for a Happy Life as a way to pass down the legacy of the Lubormirski line. In charming, Emily Post-style bites, the pocket-sized book compiles "Chivalry lessons from my father, romance lessons from my mother, vocabulary lessons from my uncle, and spiritual lessons from my wife," he writes.

The most poignant secrets of his temperament, however, are not detailed in this book. He spilled to Bazaar what he says is the most important lesson he's learned about maintaining a lasting relationship: "You have got to be a cheesy romantic!" And, oh, is he. A traditional wedding anniversary with his wife Giada, formerly a curator for Milk Studios whom he wed six years ago, was not enough; "I decided to do a month-iversary every month on the 8th, as we got married on the 8th," he reveals. "I write a poem, I give her a rose, and I give her a pearl. It is an incredible relationship tool because on the 8th of every month you are not necessarily best friends, so I am forced to concentrate on everything I love about her rather than the fact she told me off about the toothpaste." And what of the pearls he gifts her? "She keeps them in this glass jar next to our bed so you get to see the physical idea of our love growing. When we have a granddaughter, then we will string them on a necklace on her wedding day." Swoon._

_https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/art-books-music/a11280/alexi-lubormisk-princely-advice-book/_


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this photo is H&M’s work, probably more Hazzie than MM.  Repeatedly, Hazz has told us how much he detests Royal traditions. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out this is his attempt to thumb his long nose at all of us. His snarky, sarcastic side is a bit much for me. His entitled side is worse than his mother’s (known for poking friends’ backsides with her umbrella).  He deserves zero attention, yet here we are.
> 
> Perhaps Alexi’s book could help him.  Perhaps H&M will stay out of the news in 2022. Hey, it’s Christmas - a girl can dream. Cheers. all.
> 
> 
> From 2015 Harpers Bazaar article:
> 
> _A true renaissance man, Lubomirski wears a number of hats. After studying at The University of Brighton in the UK, the once aspiring fashion designer decided to try out a different medium and became Mario Testino's photography assistant. "He really taught me to open my eyes to everything," Lubomirski told Bazaar. "It was incredible to sit next to Mario Testino and just watch him work. You could be sitting in front of the Queen of England watching him make her smile or Gwyneth Paltrow trying to make her feel sexy when she [wasn't feeling] sexy." He quickly stepped into his own spotlight, so to speak, becoming one of the world's top fashion photographers, who has shot the likes of Lupita Nyong'o, Julia Roberts, Catherine Zeta Jones, Kate Winslet, Victoria Beckham, and Anne Hathaway—many for Harper's Bazaar.
> 
> But it's another hat—or a crown, rather—that he told me about over coffee at the Bazaar offices. At age 11, Lubormirski discovered a Polish royal lineage on his father's side that dates as far back as 500 years. It was a Princess Diaries moment of sorts but with a catch—the house's reign had ended, and Alexi's seat would be the first not to bear any royal accouterments. "In one generation, everything flipped completely," he says. "I was one generation away from 500 years of history."
> 
> Regardless, Lubomirski, encouraged by his mother, took his legacy to heart. "*If you are to be a prince in today's world," she told him when he was young, "you have to be a prince in your heart and actions." Since then, he has lived life according to the spirit of the William Shakespeare quote from Henry VI, Part 3 that opens Lubomirski's new book, Princely Advice for a Happy Life: "My crown is in my heart, not on my head." In other words: live like a gent.*
> 
> With two young sons of his own, Lubomirski was inspired to write Princely Advice for a Happy Life as a way to pass down the legacy of the Lubormirski line. In charming, Emily Post-style bites, the pocket-sized book compiles "Chivalry lessons from my father, romance lessons from my mother, vocabulary lessons from my uncle, and spiritual lessons from my wife," he writes.
> 
> The most poignant secrets of his temperament, however, are not detailed in this book. He spilled to Bazaar what he says is the most important lesson he's learned about maintaining a lasting relationship: "You have got to be a cheesy romantic!" And, oh, is he. A traditional wedding anniversary with his wife Giada, formerly a curator for Milk Studios whom he wed six years ago, was not enough; "I decided to do a month-iversary every month on the 8th, as we got married on the 8th," he reveals. "I write a poem, I give her a rose, and I give her a pearl. It is an incredible relationship tool because on the 8th of every month you are not necessarily best friends, so I am forced to concentrate on everything I love about her rather than the fact she told me off about the toothpaste." And what of the pearls he gifts her? "She keeps them in this glass jar next to our bed so you get to see the physical idea of our love growing. When we have a granddaughter, then we will string them on a necklace on her wedding day." Swoon._
> 
> _https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/art-books-music/a11280/alexi-lubormisk-princely-advice-book/_


He sounds like a jerk. Don’t buy any of this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> He sounds like a jerk. Don’t buy any of this.



Aren’t they all?  I believe proper manners at the manor ended long ago.


----------



## csshopper

Archie's hair looks "off", it looks like someone outlined his hair with not a single one out of place, especially on the side and around the ear, and then filled it in. Maybe with extracolor left from doing his Papa's hair? At first glance I thought maybe Archie had a cap or wig on. I have 3 great grandsons in his age range and have never seen any one of them with such perfectly trimmed hair. It's a trivial detail I know but is just so typical of their manipulation of reality. Don't mean to appear to pick on the little boy, he has enough to deal with, this picture highlights his parent's fixation on his sister, all eyes but his are lazered on her, the future money making member of the family with Great Granny's name. Wonder if she gets her own Foundation in due time so there are two sources for funneling $$$?

To me, one of the worst photoshop fails is that creepy long thumb of Lady Megbeth's and the trigger fingered forefinger pointed at the sky. 

Enough, I'm sounding like the Grinch.

 To all the wonderful posters who gather here: Wherever you are in the world wishing you a lovely Saturday and to those who celebrate it, a very "Merry Christmas".


----------



## Sharont2305

Also Harry's hand looks swollen. 
I wonder what offended them with The Queens Speech this year?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> _A true renaissance man, Lubomirski wears a number of hats. After studying at The University of Brighton in the UK, the once aspiring fashion designer decided to try out a different medium and became Mario Testino's photography assistant. "He really taught me to open my eyes to everything," Lubomirski told Bazaar. "It was incredible to sit next to Mario Testino and just watch him work. You could be sitting in front of the Queen of England watching him make her smile or Gwyneth Paltrow trying to make her feel sexy when she [wasn't feeling] sexy." He quickly stepped into his own spotlight, so to speak, becoming one of the world's top fashion photographers, who has shot the likes of Lupita Nyong'o, Julia Roberts, Catherine Zeta Jones, Kate Winslet, Victoria Beckham, and Anne Hathaway—many for Harper's Bazaar.
> 
> But it's another hat—or a crown, rather—that he told me about over coffee at the Bazaar offices. At age 11, Lubormirski discovered a Polish royal lineage on his father's side that dates as far back as 500 years. It was a Princess Diaries moment of sorts but with a catch—the house's reign had ended, and Alexi's seat would be the first not to bear any royal accouterments. "In one generation, everything flipped completely," he says. "I was one generation away from 500 years of history."
> 
> Regardless, Lubomirski, encouraged by his mother, took his legacy to heart. "*If you are to be a prince in today's world," she told him when he was young, "you have to be a prince in your heart and actions." Since then, he has lived life according to the spirit of the William Shakespeare quote from Henry VI, Part 3 that opens Lubomirski's new book, Princely Advice for a Happy Life: "My crown is in my heart, not on my head." In other words: live like a gent.*_


Oh please - this reminds me of "Prince" Stanislaw Radziwill who used his Polish title even though it was an empty title and people just humoured him by using it.


----------



## pukasonqo

Jayne1 said:


> Oh please - this reminds me of "Prince" Stanislaw Radziwill who used his Polish title even though it was an empty title and people just humoured him by using it.


 I might declare myself PukaSonqo, Inca Princess (Ñusta) even thought the Inca Empire ended 500 plus yrs ago, “princess” is an european term and i am not sure that women were considered royalty or had dynastic value
Didn’t some Greek princess’ mum declared herself an Inca princess? Inaccurate as she was from Ecuador which was part of the Inca Empire but not its centre…
Why is this obsession with royalty? (she asks while reading a royalty thread) None of them got there because of merit but because of sheer luck at birth and as far as I can see no royal has ever done anything to change or improve the living conditions  of their subjects (which baffles me is the level of adoration they ellicit) 
 Anyway, I am off to remove one of my subjects from the cupboard he is in


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Oh please - this reminds me of "Prince" Stanislaw Radziwill who used his Polish title even though it was an empty title and people just humoured him by using it.


And Princess Lee loved to use it as well.  She probably thought she was one upping her sister.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Oh please - this reminds me of "Prince" Stanislaw Radziwill who used his Polish title even though it was an empty title and people just humoured him by using it.



Exactly - perfect comparison. I didn’t realize this was the photographer for their wedding photo. Ick. 
Imo it was a lousy photo and cheap way to pacify the curiousity about the kids/bots.  Apologies if I sound too Grinch-y, none  of this nonsense is impressive to me.  I just found out Kate plays the flute!!  Posted the article in W&K thread.   Cheers, all.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly - perfect comparison. *I didn’t realize this was the photographer for their wedding photo. Ick.*
> Imo it was a lousy photo and cheap way to pacify the curiousity about the kids/bots.  Apologies if I sound too Grinch-y, none  of this nonsense is impressive to me.  I just found out Kate plays the flute!!  Posted the article in W&K thread.   Cheers, all.



What? I guess once a photographer is "broken in" to concede to the idiotic, bizarre demands of Whack-Job-Tignanello and Ginger Grifter you gotta keep him considering all the time spent to train him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> What? I guess once a photographer is "broken in" to concede to the idiotic, bizarre demands of Whack-Job-Tignanello and Ginger Grifter you gotta keep him considering all the time spent to train him.











						Here's Everything You Should Know About Alexi Lubomirski, the Official Royal Wedding Photographer
					

He is a prince himself!




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




Here’s how we know it’s all fake — not one negative comment on his twitter feed


----------



## Allisonfaye

Sophisticatted said:


> When this is all over, as we all imagine that it will be.  Harry (and hopefully his children) will return to the UK.  I believe there was hope, once, that he would become a working Royal again.  Now, I think that hope has been extinguished, never to be revived.  He will end up hidden away on an estate in the country.  He and his children will be given all the privacy in the world!
> 
> Here’s my take on the skin color debate, it’s much better to idly speculate what it might be, before the birth, than what I experienced. I’m causcasion. According to DNA analysis well over 90% of my DNA comes from England, Ireland, Scotland and another large percentage from Scandinavia, with a smidgeon from France & Germany. So, I am fair with brown hair and blue green eyes. DH is 1st generation Chinese-American. (Black hair, brown eyes.). Our kids have my coloring. DS has my eyes. MIL once asked me in a nasty, accusatory manner, “*WHEN *are his eyes going to turn brown?!?”.  My reply was, “Maybe they’re NOT going to turn brown!”
> 
> And they HAVEN’T!!!  Muahahaha



I think this is virtually not possible unless SHE has a recessive gene in her heritage. So maybe SHE had relations with the Chinese equivalent of the milkman. You should ask her. 

I am blue eyed blonde and I married a 100% Italian. EVERYONE in their family is brown/brown. I looked his parents and all the nieces and nephews and I knew to almost a 100% certainly, my kids would have brown eyes. 

What I thought was interesting was that out of 4 daughters, 3 had blue eyes and one had brown. My mom and dad were both brown/brown and only children. So even though my dad had. 75% chance of having brown eyed kids, he had 75% of his kids with blue eyes. I know his mom was recessive because she had green eyes. I am fascinated by genetics.

Sorry for OT.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

HMTQ's 2021 Christmas Message
HM looks so emaciated this year.


----------



## purseinsanity

Roxanna said:


> Catherine was amazing. Natural and really good .



Is there anything she can’t do??


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> there certainly seem to be plenty of people taking advatage of government handouts here in So Cal lately but IDK if it's that different from the rest of the country.  My DH is about the hardest working person I know - much more than me.  He is a So Cal native and I'm from the east coast.  So you can't really generalize



When I was living in LA, I interviewed for a job at a financial firm. He specifically told me he picked me because I was from the Midwest and Midwest people had a good work ethic.


----------



## Allisonfaye

duna said:


> I still don't understand what's racist about talking about a future baby and who it will look like, families do it all the time. My sister's sons are mixed race since her husband was Jamaican. They are both parents now and we talked about who their kids would look like and nobody even remotely thought it was racism. As it happened my eldest nephew, who is quite dark and married a tipical English rose, blond with blue eyes, their daughter is blond with blue eyes. My other nephew, who is less dark than his brother and who also married a white English girl, their son is white and their daughter is darker. There are all kinds of possibilities when mixed race people have a child, so I find wondering who the child will look like totally normal. Of course duchess Disney would make it a racist thing, she always plays the racist card when it suits her!



It's a thing. You can make lots of money playing the race card now.


----------



## Allisonfaye

LittleStar88 said:


> He looks like a boob. A happy, infatuated man-boy boob.



Haha. I thought you were saying he was infatuated by the boobs, which in the first picture it does look like.


----------



## redney

Allisonfaye said:


> It's a thing. You can make lots of money playing the race card now.


? How does someone make lots of money playing the race card now?


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> What? I guess once a photographer is "broken in" to concede to the idiotic, bizarre demands of Whack-Job-Tignanello and Ginger Grifter you gotta keep him considering all the time spent to train him.


So they either brainwashed him or fed him their special Kool Aid


----------



## xincinsin

redney said:


> ? How does someone make lots of money playing the race card now?


In Methane's case, maybe she thought playing the race card would get her sympathy, and sympathy would lead to megamillion deals. If she is really coming out with a wellness book, no doubt there will be chapters on how she overcame racial prejudice to rise to the top of the sewer pipe.

Where I am, anyone playing the race card gets fined a lot of money for inciting racial tension. Some idiots still do it and then cry victim when they get slapped with a fine. There is no curing stupid.


----------



## Lodpah

Queen fails to mention Harry & Meghan in Xmas message but praises Wills & Kate
					

THE Queen has failed mention Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in her Christmas address while praising Prince William and Kate. Her Majesty delivered a poignant traditional festive address this year a…



					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

Yes and the Queen didn’t mention Prince Andrew either. The Queen gave a beautiful Christmas address and included much about Prince Phillip.  Why muddy the speech with H&M !  They didn’t help the Queen with anything this year except give her pain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Grande Latte

Hermes Zen said:


> Yes and the Queen didn’t mention Prince Andrew either. The Queen gave a beautiful Christmas address and included much about Prince Phillip.  Why muddy the speech with H&M !  They didn’t help the Queen with anything this year except give her pain.



I agree. I thought the Queen's message is beautifully touching. Not everything is about H&M. Everyone chooses to hear what they want.


----------



## Jktgal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this photo is H&M’s work, probably more Hazzie than MM.  Repeatedly, Hazz has told us how much he detests Royal traditions. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out this is his attempt to thumb his long nose at all of us. His snarky, sarcastic side is a bit much for me. His entitled side is worse than his mother’s (known for poking friends’ backsides with her umbrella).  He deserves zero attention, yet here we are.
> 
> Perhaps Alexi’s book could help him.  Perhaps H&M will stay out of the news in 2022. Hey, it’s Christmas - a girl can dream. Cheers. all.
> 
> 
> From 2015 Harpers Bazaar article:
> 
> _A true renaissance man, Lubomirski wears a number of hats. After studying at The University of Brighton in the UK, the once aspiring fashion designer decided to try out a different medium and became Mario Testino's photography assistant. "He really taught me to open my eyes to everything," Lubomirski told Bazaar. "It was incredible to sit next to Mario Testino and just watch him work. You could be sitting in front of the Queen of England watching him make her smile or Gwyneth Paltrow trying to make her feel sexy when she [wasn't feeling] sexy." He quickly stepped into his own spotlight, so to speak, becoming one of the world's top fashion photographers, who has shot the likes of Lupita Nyong'o, Julia Roberts, Catherine Zeta Jones, Kate Winslet, Victoria Beckham, and Anne Hathaway—many for Harper's Bazaar.
> 
> But it's another hat—or a crown, rather—that he told me about over coffee at the Bazaar offices. At age 11, Lubormirski discovered a Polish royal lineage on his father's side that dates as far back as 500 years. It was a Princess Diaries moment of sorts but with a catch—the house's reign had ended, and Alexi's seat would be the first not to bear any royal accouterments. "In one generation, everything flipped completely," he says. "I was one generation away from 500 years of history."
> 
> Regardless, Lubomirski, encouraged by his mother, took his legacy to heart. "*If you are to be a prince in today's world," she told him when he was young, "you have to be a prince in your heart and actions." Since then, he has lived life according to the spirit of the William Shakespeare quote from Henry VI, Part 3 that opens Lubomirski's new book, Princely Advice for a Happy Life: "My crown is in my heart, not on my head." In other words: live like a gent.*
> 
> With two young sons of his own, Lubomirski was inspired to write Princely Advice for a Happy Life as a way to pass down the legacy of the Lubormirski line. In charming, Emily Post-style bites, the pocket-sized book compiles "Chivalry lessons from my father, romance lessons from my mother, vocabulary lessons from my uncle, and spiritual lessons from my wife," he writes.
> 
> The most poignant secrets of his temperament, however, are not detailed in this book. He spilled to Bazaar what he says is the most important lesson he's learned about maintaining a lasting relationship: "You have got to be a cheesy romantic!" And, oh, is he. A traditional wedding anniversary with his wife Giada, formerly a curator for Milk Studios whom he wed six years ago, was not enough; "I decided to do a month-iversary every month on the 8th, as we got married on the 8th," he reveals. "I write a poem, I give her a rose, and I give her a pearl. It is an incredible relationship tool because on the 8th of every month you are not necessarily best friends, so I am forced to concentrate on everything I love about her rather than the fact she told me off about the toothpaste." And what of the pearls he gifts her? "She keeps them in this glass jar next to our bed so you get to see the physical idea of our love growing. When we have a granddaughter, then we will string them on a necklace on her wedding day." Swoon._
> 
> _https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/art-books-music/a11280/alexi-lubormisk-princely-advice-book/_


"Assistant to Mario Testino" should ring alarm bells.


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> "Assistant to Mario Testino" should ring alarm bells.


Oh ... wow!


----------



## redney

xincinsin said:


> In Methane's case, maybe she thought playing the race card would get her sympathy, and sympathy would lead to megamillion deals. If she is really coming out with a wellness book, no doubt there will be chapters on how she overcame racial prejudice to rise to the top of the sewer pipe.
> 
> Where I am, anyone playing the race card gets fined a lot of money for inciting racial tension. Some idiots still do it and then cry victim when they get slapped with a fine. There is no curing stupid.


Methane tried and it only seemed to backfire on her. I thought it sounded racist of the poster saying it's "a thing" insinuating POC who "play the race card" do so and "make money."


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Is there anything she can’t do??



Here's some things Kate can't (won't) do:  Whine about how hard her royal life is, complain, feel sorry for herself, be an ingrate, brag about needing tons of security guards, wear ill-fitting clothes, beg for privacy then stick her face in front of any camera she can, cut off the Queen, take people inside chicken coops, use dead soldiers as props, alert the media when she makes a cake, and demand sympathy for her luxurious life, to name a few.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Queen fails to mention Harry & Meghan in Xmas message but praises Wills & Kate
> 
> 
> THE Queen has failed mention Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in her Christmas address while praising Prince William and Kate. Her Majesty delivered a poignant traditional festive address this year a…
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


Why would she?  She probably couldn’t come up with one single positive thing that they did all year!  I found it nice that she did mention Camilla, especially since she’s been vilified by the general public for so long.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jktgal said:


> "Assistant to Mario Testino" should ring alarm bells.


Wait, why?  He photographed Diana?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Wait, why?  He photographed Diana?


Quote from Mario Testino Wiki Bio
In January 2018, Testino was accused by 13 male assistants and models who worked with him of sexual harassment. Models Roman Barrett, Jason Fedele and Ryan Locke complained about his behaviour during campaigns in the 1990s.


----------



## Mendocino

Happy Boxing and Two Turtle Doves Day! This meme reminds me of someone.


----------



## xincinsin

Mendocino said:


> Happy Boxing and Two Turtle Doves Day! This meme reminds me of someone.
> 
> View attachment 5281502


Ahh, the best of British sarcasm, so deadpan that those with zombie brain just don't get it


----------



## Mendocino

xincinsin said:


> Ahh, the best of British sarcasm, so deadpan that those with zombie brain just don't get it


I love the dry British sense of humor.  I remember when I finally realized that when a British person said they were disappointed or that something was "regrettable" it meant that they were angry.


----------



## Mendocino

And now we have the BRF to thank for the very useful phrase "Recollections may vary."


----------



## Allisonfaye

xincinsin said:


> In Methane's case, maybe she thought playing the race card would get her sympathy, and sympathy would lead to megamillion deals. If she is really coming out with a wellness book, no doubt there will be chapters on how she overcame racial prejudice to rise to the top of the sewer pipe.
> 
> Where I am, anyone playing the race card gets fined a lot of money for inciting racial tension. Some idiots still do it and then cry victim when they get slapped with a fine. There is no curing stupid.



Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have been doing it for decades. They are amateurs compared to the current crop of extortionists. 

Jusse Smollett tried it and failed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Allisonfaye said:


> Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have been doing it for decades. They are amateurs compared to the current crop of extortionists.
> 
> Jusse Smollett tried it and failed.


I think people of all races are getting a little tired of using racism as an excuse.  I am not white, but "racism" is not my first line of defense.  I am in no way saying it does not exist.  I had an incident with a woman just last week; I'm just saying that with the world getting smaller and smaller and more interracial marriages, hopefully someday it'll actually be a thing of the past.


----------



## purseinsanity

I hope everyone who celebrates had a very lovely Christmas yesterday!  Happy Boxing Day to those who celebrate that.  I am looking forward to the new year, hopefully with more blessings and HEALTH and more entertainment from all of you, with hopefully less of these two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

Study finds that Meghan Markle is the ‘most intelligent member of the Royal family’
					

As well as being the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle has now taken home the title of “the most intelligent British royal,” according to a study from Oxford Royale.Using the royal family member’s A-level results and looking at the rankings of the universities they studied at, the academy was...




					www.indy100.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

pukasonqo said:


> Study finds that Meghan Markle is the ‘most intelligent member of the Royal family’
> 
> 
> As well as being the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle has now taken home the title of “the most intelligent British royal,” according to a study from Oxford Royale.Using the royal family member’s A-level results and looking at the rankings of the universities they studied at, the academy was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indy100.com


Oxford Royale must have received an Archie-unwell donation to bestow this title on the Scheming Narcissistic Prima Donna or they were comparing her to her inane husband, the manboy with the lowest IQ on the royal intelligence chart. Also, they might be confusing 'cunning' (defined as skill in achieving one's ends by deceit) with intelligence.


----------



## 1LV

pukasonqo said:


> Study finds that Meghan Markle is the ‘most intelligent member of the Royal family’
> 
> 
> As well as being the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle has now taken home the title of “the most intelligent British royal,” according to a study from Oxford Royale.Using the royal family member’s A-level results and looking at the rankings of the universities they studied at, the academy was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indy100.com


Oxford Royale?  A summer school for teens?  Seriously?


----------



## Sophisticatted

The e on the end lets you know it’s a joke.


----------



## Lodpah

*This* Royal Has the Most Popular Smile, According to New Report
					

Feast your eyes on this intriguing new research about which member of the British royal family has the most popular smile.Altima...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## marietouchet

Watched last  episode of Wheel of Time
Yes, Rand is absolutely a maxi-me to Archie, lush curly red hair


----------



## marietouchet

I had a deep thought … 
the story of the miscarriage , sad that was, and I wondered why MM chose to share the story and in the NY TIMES (so public …) … 

Maybe she is at odds a bit with People Over the brouhaha over the article which cited the 5 friends talking about her relations with dad ??? i could be wrong … 
she writes an op-Ed she chooses the words , cuts out all the inexact stories from the  friends ? she got to pick the EXACT words 
But the matter was private, why reveal? At all ? Perhaps it was a way to address all the stories of the moon bumps and surrogates by saying she had been trying …
it would be interesting to reread the op-Ed and dissect the EXACt words


----------



## marietouchet

DM finally prints underwhelming retraction/correction of the MM letter to daddy, the judge dictated the exact size of the minute piece, believe it or not

the bit talks about copyright infringement not invasion of privacy 

wondering how to share this , which came from OS Twitter account, ok, the screenshot is congested but actually is quite informative

Page 3 of DM is shown , with Boris, wife, dog and baby etc getting the big fat photo, while the retraction is the tee tiny bit at top left of DM page
OS tweet is overlaid on bottom of tabloid page …


----------



## Luvbolide

Mendocino said:


> Happy Boxing and Two Turtle Doves Day! This meme reminds me of someone.
> 
> View attachment 5281502



This is one of my favorite lines delivered by Dame Maggie in the entire show!!  She excels at deadpan delivery!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Time for another nickname roundup. Thanks and congratulations to everyone, for the new nicknames added to The List today.             

@VigeeLeBrun
For your first nickname, Slanker Wanker Bro, welcome to The List.  


@redney
For your first nickname, Jacka$$es of Montecito, welcome to The List.  


@Laila619
For your first nickname, Preachy, Superior, and Condescending Even On a Freakin’ CARD, welcome to The List.  



@LittleStar88 
For your #2 nickname, Happy, Infatuated Man-Boy Boob.  

@bellecate
For your #3, Photoshopping Duo, a Gold Ribbon.  



@charlottawill
For your #6, The Duchess of Smugness.  

@Luvbolide
For your #5, Difficult Duo, welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.  
For your #6, Defrocked Prince.  
For your #7, D List Former Actress, a Gold Medal. 




@gracekelly
For your #9, The World’s Shyest Couple.   

@rose60610
For #10, Whack-Job-Tignanello, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club.  
For #11, Ginger Grifter, welcome to the Eager Beaver Club.  




@purseinsanity
For #26, GivesMePain, The List #26 Ribbon.  



@xincinsin
For #37, Mentally Spoilt Brats, The List #37 Ribbon.  
For #38, Most Cunning and Shameless Royals, The List #38.


----------



## Sharont2305

Luvbolide said:


> This is one of my favorite lines delivered by Dame Maggie in the entire show!!  She excels at deadpan delivery!


OT, but one of my favourite lines from her is "What is a weekend?" brilliant, I chuckle EVERY Time.


----------



## Luvbolide

Sharont2305 said:


> OT, but one of my favourite lines from her is "What is a weekend?" brilliant, I chuckle EVERY Time.



i love her!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think people of all races are getting a little tired of using racism as an excuse.  I am not white, but "racism" is not my first line of defense.  I am in no way saying it does not exist.  I had an incident with a woman just last week; I'm just saying that with the world getting smaller and smaller and more interracial marriages, hopefully someday it'll actually be a thing of the past.



I couldn't agree more with you, and I can't wait for racism to be a thing of the past.
Interracial marriages help to open minds against racism that comes from ignorance. Though, one of the worst forms of racism comes from opportunism, one of the most difficult forms to fight against. Accusing people of being racists the way it was done during OW's interview belongs to that category imo.


----------



## Chanbal

One more opinion on QE's speech.


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> i love her!


Me too! The Network that aired the TV series in the US treated everyone to a free showing on Christmas Day of the 2019 Downton Abbey movie. It was like spending a few hours with old friends, and heightens anticipation for the next movie premiering in 2022.

After viewing it I was reflecting on the excellent cast and thought in comparison it's laughable to refer to Lady Megbeth as an 
actress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## queennadine

Hope everyone had a Merry Christmas!

I noticed a couple of odd things about the Christmas card photo upon further inspection (sorry if they have been mentioned): 

1. Lilibet’s right hand: what would be her middle and ring fingers look too long for a few month old baby (since she was allegedly born in June and this pic was taken over the summer)

2. Lilibet’s bloomers or diaper cover: her thigh is exposed on the right side of MM’s arm but the bloomers appear longer, covering her legs, on the left side of MM’s arm.   It’s not possible for bloomers or a diaper cover to be longer in the front but then brief-style on the bum.


----------



## charlottawill

queennadine said:


> Hope everyone had a Merry Christmas!
> 
> I noticed a couple of odd things about the Christmas card photo upon further inspection (sorry if they have been mentioned):
> 
> 1. Lilibet’s right hand: what would be her middle and ring fingers look too long for a few month old baby (since she was allegedly born in June and this pic was taken over the summer)
> 
> 2. Lilibet’s bloomers or diaper cover: her thigh is exposed on the right side of MM’s arm but the bloomers appear longer, covering her legs, on the left side of MM’s arm.   It’s not possible for bloomers or a diaper cover to be longer in the front but then brief-style on the bum.


There are some super sleuths around here 

Not that we ever would, but I'd love to see the original version of the photo.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Why such an old photo for a holiday card? I read that photo was taken in the summer!


Speaking from my own experience, lots of people use a photo for their Christmas card that is from earlier in the year, such as a vacation photo or family event. I had slim pickings for our card this year since we did not travel due to COVID.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo, seems highly inappropriate to call someone’s laughter _infectious_, especially during a pandemic. 
One more reason why H&M will always be losers:









						Meghan and Harry recall touching moment 'The Arch' Desmond Tutu met Archie
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex paid tribute to Archbishop Tutu of South Africa who died on Sunday at the age of 90.




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



It read: _"Archbishop Tutu will be remembered for his optimism, his moral clarity, and his joyful spirit.

"He was an icon for racial justice and beloved across the world. It was only two years ago that he held our son, Archie, while we were in South Africa.

"'Arch and The Arch' he had joked, his *infectious laughter ringing through the room*, relaxing anyone in his presence.

"He remained a friend and will be sorely missed by all."_


----------



## needlv




----------



## csshopper

I did a Google search and can't find any reference to the RF making a comment or acknowledgement to the Sussex Christmas Card or Lilibet's debut?

Fast forward to the Queen's Christmas day message praising Prince Charles, Camilla, Duke of Cambridge and Catherine. Her Majesty sent a strong visual message with screens void of photos or mention of the Suckesses. "Spot on"  they deserve none.

Then the Body Language Guy analyzed the meaning of the part of her address including references to Tradition and the significance of Carols "as long as the tune is well known." He said those 8 words linked to Tradition are the Queen's rebuke to her grandson and wife: failure to honor Tradition, bedrock of the Monarchy, and in effect, choosing to sing their own tune and not be part of the Family. Masterful.

Multiple media sites, probably bought off by Sunshine Sucks, tried to capture some small crumb by saying the Queen made a touching reference to Lilibet or similar language. What an exaggeration! Lilibet was not mentioned by name, but was merely one of the 4 new additions to the family this year to which she referred.

All this added to The Duchess of Cambridge owning the Internet for days, the Christmas scenes of family rallying around the Queen, and no mention of missing the Montecitans, must have Lady Megbeth and HASbeen in absolute rage. Their revenge, whatever it is, will be ugly because that's how they play it, an off key tune shrieked at the world.

edit to a phrase


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo, seems highly inappropriate to call someone’s laughter _infectious_, especially during a pandemic.
> One more reason why H&M will always be losers:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry recall touching moment 'The Arch' Desmond Tutu met Archie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex paid tribute to Archbishop Tutu of South Africa who died on Sunday at the age of 90.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It read: _"Archbishop Tutu will be remembered for his optimism, his moral clarity, and his joyful spirit.
> 
> "He was an icon for racial justice and beloved across the world. It was only two years ago that he held our son, Archie, while we were in South Africa.
> 
> "'Arch and The Arch' he had joked, his *infectious laughter ringing through the room*, relaxing anyone in his presence.
> 
> "He remained a friend and will be sorely missed by all."_


The *losers *must be busy sweeping up all the carnage of broken plates as it took them longer to post their message than I thought it would. More of their hypocrisy on display, noting "his moral clarity" something completely absent in both of them.


----------



## Chanbal

Associated Newspapers Limited (owns DM) could be buying serializations rights to Tom Bower's book…


----------



## xincinsin

queennadine said:


> Hope everyone had a Merry Christmas!
> 
> I noticed a couple of odd things about the Christmas card photo upon further inspection (sorry if they have been mentioned):
> 
> 1. Lilibet’s right hand: what would be her middle and ring fingers look too long for a few month old baby (since she was allegedly born in June and this pic was taken over the summer)
> 
> 2. Lilibet’s bloomers or diaper cover: her thigh is exposed on the right side of MM’s arm but the bloomers appear longer, covering her legs, on the left side of MM’s arm.   It’s not possible for bloomers or a diaper cover to be longer in the front but then brief-style on the bum.


You're right!  
Okay, so they not only photoshopped the baby, they photoshopped portions of her  Composite Baby - sounds like some strange magical being from the comics...  

My guess: in the original photo, baby wasn't smiling/laughing so much, so they took her head and front of body from another photo. The two photos were likely shot max ten seconds apart, so the poses would be similar enough to do a composite. They had to enlarge the imported portion slightly to cover the original image, hence Methane's deformed hand, baby not to scale, baby clothes length going wonky. But they couldn't enlarge her too much, otherwise she would become Gargantuan Baby, so they tried to match the bits of the original image that were not covered. If you do a close-up of the fingers, you can see what appears to be a join (her finger becomes suddenly slimmer).


I also saw a comment that says poor baby's forehead was sliced off because the person photoshopping used the dark strip of wood as the guide for inserting the cut-&-paste job.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> You're right!
> Okay, so they not only photoshopped the baby, they photoshopped portions of her  Composite Baby - sounds like some strange magical being from the comics...
> 
> My guess: in the original photo, baby wasn't smiling/laughing so much, so they took her head and front of body from another photo. The two photos were likely shot max ten seconds apart, so the poses would be similar enough to do a composite. They had to enlarge the imported portion slightly to cover the original image, hence Methane's deformed hand, baby not to scale, baby clothes length going wonky. But they couldn't enlarge her too much, otherwise she would become Gargantuan Baby, so they tried to match the bits of the original image that were not covered. If you do a close-up of the fingers, you can see what appears to be a join (her finger becomes suddenly slimmer).
> View attachment 5282217
> 
> I also saw a comment that says poor baby's forehead was sliced off because the person photoshopping used the dark strip of wood as the guide for inserting the cut-&-paste job.
> View attachment 5282219



Doesn’t stuff like this ruin a photographer’s reputation? I realize every customer is different with different wants/needs.
Still, this photoshopped photo is such a *bad* job.  Ick.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t stuff like this ruin a photographer’s reputation? I realize every customer is different with different wants/needs.
> Still, this is such a *bad* job.  Ick.


I think this is quite typical of Hazard & Methane tactics: they never expect anyone to fact-check or scrutinize or compare. Married in secret 3 days early - of course! My dog was too old to go to the UK - definitely! Flying by private jet is bad for the planet but good for me - naturally!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> You're right!
> Okay, so they not only photoshopped the baby, they photoshopped portions of her  Composite Baby - sounds like some strange magical being from the comics...
> 
> My guess: in the original photo, baby wasn't smiling/laughing so much, so they took her head and front of body from another photo. The two photos were likely shot max ten seconds apart, so the poses would be similar enough to do a composite. They had to enlarge the imported portion slightly to cover the original image, hence Methane's deformed hand, baby not to scale, baby clothes length going wonky. But they couldn't enlarge her too much, otherwise she would become Gargantuan Baby, so they tried to match the bits of the original image that were not covered. If you do a close-up of the fingers, you can see what appears to be a join (her finger becomes suddenly slimmer).
> View attachment 5282217
> 
> I also saw a comment that says poor baby's forehead was sliced off because the person photoshopping used the dark strip of wood as the guide for inserting the cut-&-paste job.
> View attachment 5282219



LOLOL this card is starting to seem like nothing but a joke!  

It vaguely reminds me of my 83 year old MIL's Christmas card a few years ago, and of the errors that can happen with bad photo editing.  She wanted a card with all her grandchildren in a tennis theme, and had one picture of 4 of her 6 grandchildren smiling in tennis outfits, looking like a Ralph Lauren ad.  My two children were not in Connecticut at the time the picture was taken, and instead of asking for help with photoshop, MIL decided to take matters into her own hands.  She literally cut out my two children's heads out of other pictures, and pasted them behind their cousins with random tennis balls floating around.  She mailed these out to all her friends and family.  I was horrified when we got ours, since it looked like a magazine ad ruined by two decapitated children's heads in the background!


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL this card is starting to seem like nothing but a joke!
> 
> It vaguely reminds me of my 83 year old MIL's Christmas card a few years ago, and of the errors that can happen with bad photo editing.  She wanted a card with all her grandchildren in a tennis theme, and had one picture of 4 of her 6 grandchildren smiling in tennis outfits, looking like a Ralph Lauren ad.  My two children were not in Connecticut at the time the picture was taken, and instead of asking for help with photoshop, MIL decided to take matters into her own hands.  She literally cut out my two children's heads out of other pictures, and pasted them behind their cousins with random tennis balls floating around.  She mailed these out to all her friends and family.  I was horrified when we got ours, since it looked like a magazine ad ruined by two decapitated children's heads in the background!


I'm impressed that she was so tech savvy. My MIL, when she was in her 60s, once yelled at me for not responding to her page (yes, pagers - the good ole days!). I asked her how she sent me the page, and it turned out that she only did half the steps. In effect, she "hung up" before the page was sent. She was not tech savvy, but too stubborn to admit that she made a mistake.

Since the greeting card was also compared with the Kardashians, I remember Kim once admitting that she photoshopped one of her kids into a photo. I think the kid was unwell or in a bad mood, so she didn't take part in the shoot. Not much blowback since she gave the context pretty quickly when eagle eyes spotted the discrepancies.


----------



## csshopper

I have learned to accept my technological limitations, which is why my posts sometimes come minus the item that it references, an excellent current example: Neil Sean's current youtube report on what his palace sources tell him was the Royal reaction to "the card". No surprise, not a positive one.

Most fun is reading the comments following it, plus comments on other you tube sites about the Christmas card photo. Obviously I am not on the sugar's sites, but the sane and rational part of the population who comment have dissected the photo and consensus is typical manipulation by Papa and Mama, up to and including are the kids real or photo doubles, and how many bits  from how many pictures does it take to make a whole child? More laughingstock material for Lady Megbeth and Haz, not viewed as trustworthy about anything even their children, and the lagging interest grows as they insult our intelligences .


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Just a thought. If M paid this Alixi guy for the picture(s), then she was entitled to use them as she pleased. Having managed her blog, The Tig, she was arrogant enough to believe herself capable of photoshopping people since she could photoshop her beautiful calligraphy on poopy ads. However, it's one thing to scribble beautiful statements or whatever on images and quite another to cut and paste body parts from one pic to another.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

They probably just used this photographer because of his “royalty” and possibly his ties to Testino (Diana photographer).  It suits their faux royal court of California theme.  Plus, Meg might want to auction off some ill-fitting clothes … _for charity._


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just a thought. If M paid this Alixi guy for the picture(s), then she was entitled to use them as she pleased. Having managed her blog, The Tig, she was arrogant enough to believe herself capable of photoshopping people since she could photoshop her beautiful calligraphy on poopy ads. However, it's one thing to scribble beautiful statements or whatever on images and quite another to cut and paste body parts from one pic to another.


His Serene Highness released the same photo on his IG, so I'd say they did the cobbling job together.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember, he did H&M’s wedding photos, so my guess he knows Hazzie.  Since Hazzie wants to protect his kids as much as possible, he is responsible for this lazy photoshop, imo.  Maybe some other EuroRoyals will tell us the real story.  For now, we know the photo is one more misrepresentation in a long list of misrepresentations.  And we know it was released about 30 minutes before QE released it.  Tacky, tacky behavior from the TackyTwo.

_Discussing the timing of the card release as the Queen released images and photos from her Christmas speech, co-host Richard Bacon said: 'They released their card half an hour before Buckingham Palace and the Queen did.








						Kate Garraway asks if Meghan's Christmas card was to 'usurp the queen'
					

The TV host, 54, who will tonight be appearing in Royal Carols: Together At Christmas, organised by Kate Middleton, discussed the card on Good Morning Britain today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, he did H&M’s wedding photos, so my guess he knows Hazzie.  Since Hazzie wants to protect his kids as much as possible, he is responsible for this lazy photoshop, imo.  Maybe some other EuroRoyals will tell us the real story.  For now, we know the photo is one more misrepresentation in a long list of misrepresentations.  And we know it was released about 30 minutes before QE released it.  Tacky, tacky behavior from the TackyTwo.
> 
> _Discussing the timing of the card release as the Queen released images and photos from her Christmas speech, co-host Richard Bacon said: 'They released their card half an hour before Buckingham Palace and the Queen did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Garraway asks if Meghan's Christmas card was to 'usurp the queen'
> 
> 
> The TV host, 54, who will tonight be appearing in Royal Carols: Together At Christmas, organised by Kate Middleton, discussed the card on Good Morning Britain today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I keep snickering when I read in articles like this that she is a "working mum"


----------



## Jktgal

The royals use fashion photographers - isn't fashion photogpraphy = photoshop central?


purseinsanity said:


> Wait, why?  He photographed Diana?


Yes, and also William and Kate, I think. My post has a link to an NYT article about the sexual harassment allegations. Seems he and Bruce Webber are persona non grata at mainstream fashion magazines now.



xincinsin said:


> His Serene Highness released the same photo on his IG, so I'd say they did the cobbling job together.


Serene Highness my ash. Probably why Unserene Lownesses chose him - peas in pods etc.


----------



## Jktgal

Just noticed QueenofWrapDress is banned. Did something happen here? (have looked back a few pages but can not find anything but noticed the note in her avatar).


----------



## Chanbal

Jktgal said:


> Just noticed QueenofWrapDress is banned. Did something happen here? (have looked back a few pages but can not find anything but noticed the note in her avatar).


@QueenofWrapDress is likely taking some time off from TPF, I don't think she is banned. She probably needs a break from Little Miss Forgetful and Ginger Guru.


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> The royals use fashion photographers - isn't fashion photogpraphy = photoshop central?


I was reading an interview with a photog who specializes in wedding shoots, and she frankly states that they touch up the photos because their job is to make the bride and groom look fantastic on their big day. But the examples she quoted were mainly stuff like filters, soft focus, colour enhancement, and cropping. Half a baby replacement is pretty extreme and probably made possible only because Methane's dark blue sweater arm diagonally bisected the child.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I was reading an interview with a photog who specializes in wedding shoots, and she frankly states that they touch up the photos because their job is to make the bride and groom look fantastic on their big day. But the examples she quoted were mainly stuff like filters, soft focus, colour enhancement, and cropping. Half a baby replacement is pretty extreme and probably made possible only because Methane's dark blue sweater arm diagonally bisected the child.



Sure, I understand the ‘touch-up’ concept. This photo is something different entirely. I have convinced myself that Hazzie did it deliberately with the intention to mock the masses.  Another criticism is the way the writing overlays only some parts of the photo. IMO it is distracting. My eye likes consistency. 

Serena used him in 2019 for her Harper’s Bazaar shoot.  Interesting.








						Serena Williams Poses Unretouched for Harper's BAZAAR
					

The tennis champion bares all for our airbrush-free August issue, and opens up about last year’s controversy at the US Open.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



BY SERENA WILLIAMS AND PHOTOGRAPHS BY ALEXI LUBOMIRSKI; FASHION EDITOR: MIGUEL ENAMORADO
JUL 9 2019, 8:00 AM EDT


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress is likely taking some time off from TPF, I don't think she is banned. She probably needs a break from Little Miss Forgetful and Ginger Guru.



Oh nooooo, if you click on her name, it says ‘banned’.  What happened?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh nooooo, if you click on her name, it says ‘banned’.  What happened?


Oh no!  I just learned one more thing today with the help of Urban D.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Oh no!  I just learned one more thing today with the help of Urban D.




What did you learn?


----------



## Chanbal

MiniMabel said:


> What did you learn?


The instructions I found online were to read loud and fast the 2 words before 'banned'…


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh nooooo, if you click on her name, it says ‘banned’.  What happened?


I tried Following.her and tpf allows me to do so. If she were banned, wouldn't her account be suspended?


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> They probably just used this photographer because of his “royalty” and possibly his ties to Testino (Diana photographer).  It suits their faux royal court of California theme.  Plus, Meg might want to auction off some ill-fitting clothes … _for charity._


half of the London celebu-spawn, children of 80s- 90s stars, the kids all worked as Testino assistants as their first jobs


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

xincinsin said:


> I tried Following.her and tpf allows me to do so. If she were banned, wouldn't her account be suspended?


No, banned members' posts are left up


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if this site has been hacked?


----------



## Roxanna

Oh, no, no...I really hope  Queenofwrapdress will be back soon. She is great contributor at least to this thread.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, he did H&M’s wedding photos, so my guess he knows Hazzie.  Since Hazzie wants to protect his kids as much as possible, he is responsible for this lazy photoshop, imo.  Maybe some other EuroRoyals will tell us the real story.  For now, we know the photo is one more misrepresentation in a long list of misrepresentations.  And we know it was released about 30 minutes before QE released it.  Tacky, tacky behavior from the TackyTwo.
> 
> _Discussing the timing of the card release as the Queen released images and photos from her Christmas speech, co-host Richard Bacon said: 'They released their card half an hour before Buckingham Palace and the Queen did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Garraway asks if Meghan's Christmas card was to 'usurp the queen'
> 
> 
> The TV host, 54, who will tonight be appearing in Royal Carols: Together At Christmas, organised by Kate Middleton, discussed the card on Good Morning Britain today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I looked at that link and it is the first time I've seen the entire card. It is beyond tacky.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress is likely taking some time off from TPF, I don't think she is banned. She probably needs a break from Little Miss Forgetful and Ginger Guru.


Yes, it would appear to me that her ban is self-imposed - "Sofa King Banned"


----------



## poopsie

needlv said:


>





Wait............there's a MRS?!?!?


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> Yes, it would appear to me that her ban is self-imposed - "Sofa King Banned"


No. As far as I know, any banned member has that tag added next to their names by the mods so is not a self-imposed ban


----------



## Vlad

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if this site has been hacked?





Roxanna said:


> Queenofwrapdress





pukasonqo said:


> No. As far as I know, any banned member has that tag added next to their names by the mods so is not a self-imposed ban



Queenofwrapdress received a temp ban for a week.


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> No. As far as I know, any banned member has that tag added next to their names by the mods so is not a self-imposed ban


Did not know that, thanks.


----------



## sdkitty

maybe this has been posted?
she must be gloating - Harry - who loves to sue people must be esctatic
Meghan Markle Handed Front-Page Apology By UK Tabloid – Deadline


----------



## Roxanna

Vlad said:


> Queenofwrapdress received a temp ban for a week.


Thank you for letting us know.


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> Did not know that, thanks.


No probs, it took me a while to work out what SFKB meant, I was going on thinking who or what this Sofa King was!


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> No probs, it took me a while to work out what SFKB meant, I was going on thinking who or what this Sofa King was!


Found this comment on a thread devoted to the subject. Apparently I'm not the only one who has made the assumption. 

"However I’ve seen some clueless members over the years choose to put “Sofa King Banned” under their own avatar or in their signature when they decide to ban themselves from buying more bags. Apparently they don’t understand the original meaning."


----------



## marietouchet

interesting Youtube video on the Scandalous Children of King George V, search under that title , the boys were a bit rowdy but the only daughter , Pss Mary was quite upstanding
The boys joined the military and had affairs
Mary did charitable works, Girl Guides, headed the WWII womens part of the military - don’t recall name, earned title of Pss Royal , she did not get that at birth , rather much like Pss Anne
the women of this family are the strong ones

And the women, including the Queen Mum and Queen Mary, created the ethos where the association  of a royal with a good cause helped the cause immensely

for years, the royals did not give to charity, at least it was not reported, rather, they lent their presence to a cause

H and M are finding out that they have to give to charity, just simply associating themselves is not enough to help a cause


----------



## Sophisticatted

marietouchet said:


> interesting Youtube video on the Scandalous Children of King George V, search under that title , the boys were a bit rowdy but the only daughter , Pss Mary was quite upstanding
> The boys joined the military and had affairs
> Mary did charitable works, Girl Guides, headed the WWII womens part of the military - don’t recall name, earned title of Pss Royal , she did not get that at birth , rather much like Pss Anne
> the women of this family are the strong ones



It seems like an every other generation thing with this family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> It seems like an every other generation thing with this family.


well, Mary, QEII Elizbaeth, Anne are in successive generations … and Charles had only boys 
The daughters of previous generations and centuries, hmmm, different times, all they did was to get married 
High hopes for Charlotte


----------



## Chanbal

Thanks @Vlad for letting us know. We are a close-knit community here, so we worry when one of our most active members stops posting.   

No worries @QueenofWrapDress, things have been very slow these days. Ginger Guru is likely busy working on his memories or forgot to mail the check to SS. That photoshopped picture on the Christmas card may have costed him all his December's allowance.


----------



## Lodpah

Interesting point I read somewhere that those alleged charities they donated too on behalf of us commoners have not thanked them publicly. 

Been watching JCS Criminal psychology and MM fits the 9 characteristics of a true narcissist and handbag fits about six I think.


----------



## Chanbal

First anniversary, celebrations are in order!


----------



## rose60610

pukasonqo said:


> Study finds that Meghan Markle is the ‘most intelligent member of the Royal family’
> 
> 
> As well as being the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle has now taken home the title of “the most intelligent British royal,” according to a study from Oxford Royale.Using the royal family member’s A-level results and looking at the rankings of the universities they studied at, the academy was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.indy100.com



"Study finds"?  Let's do a study HERE and report OUR study. Just a thought......


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Thanks @Vlad for letting us know. We are a close-knit community here, so we worry when one of our most active members stops posting.
> 
> No worries @QueenofWrapDress, things have been very slow these days. Ginger Guru is likely busy working on his memories or forgot to mail the check to SS. That photoshopped picture on the Christmas card may have costed him all his December's allowance.



Should we have a "Welcome Back" party for her after her PF exile?  No Tignanello or Lemon Olive Oil cakes allowed. Although to keep in the spirit of things it is suitable to wear something ill fitting and/or talk trash about family members and throw them under the bus if they've given you millions of dollars and the ability to live a lavish lifestyle.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Should we have a "*Welcome Back" party *for her after her PF exile?  No Tignanello or Lemon Olive Oil cakes allowed. Although to keep in the spirit of things it is suitable to wear something ill fitting and/or talk trash about family members and throw them under the bus if they've given you millions of dollars and the ability to live a lavish lifestyle.


Brilliant, I love the idea. Count me in!


----------



## Chanbal

A funny video on a NYT best selling author.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> A funny video on a NYT best selling author.



Her stans must be spending their Christmas $$ on something else, certainly not her book. It's tumbled to #27,027 on Amazon


----------



## mia55

Lodpah said:


> Interesting point I read somewhere that those alleged charities they donated too on behalf of us commoners have not thanked them publicly.
> 
> Been watching JCS Criminal psychology and MM fits the 9 characteristics of a true narcissist and handbag fits about six I think.



I saw one of them which has only one member in the charity thanked them on LinkedIn. Reshma  is also owner of “girls who code” charity and opened Marshallsplanformom. I’m guessing it’s more a PR gimmick than a real donation.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jktgal said:


> The royals use fashion photographers - isn't fashion photogpraphy = photoshop central?
> 
> *Yes, and also William and Kate, I think.* My post has a link to an NYT article about the sexual harassment allegations. Seems he and Bruce Webber are persona non grata at mainstream fashion magazines now.
> 
> 
> Serene Highness my ash. Probably why Unserene Lownesses chose him - peas in pods etc.


Hugo Burnand was the Cambridges wedding photographer.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hugo Burnand was the Cambridges wedding photographer.


Sounds like a talented and very interesting guy who is fortunate to do what he loves for a living. This is a good article:


> https://www.townandcountrymag.com/s...iversary-photographer-hugo-burnand-interview/


----------



## xincinsin

mia55 said:


> I saw one of them which has only one member in the charity thanked them on LinkedIn. Reshma  is also owner of “girls who code” charity and opened Marshallsplanformom. I’m guessing it’s more a PR gimmick than a real donation.
> 
> View attachment 5283193


Someone with a tremendous amount of power? Such an exaggeration.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Brilliant, I love the idea. Count me in!




@rose60610 Ab-sofa-king-lutley!  I’m here for the celebration!


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> In Methane's case, maybe she thought playing the race card would get her sympathy, and sympathy would lead to megamillion deals. If she is really coming out with a wellness book, no doubt there will be chapters on how she overcame racial prejudice to rise to the top of the sewer pipe.
> 
> *Where I am, anyone playing the race card gets fined a lot of money for inciting racial tension. *Some idiots still do it and then cry victim when they get slapped with a fine. There is no curing stupid.



How refreshing! Which country?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

I don’t understand - criminalizing speaking out against oppression is a good thing? How can that be?


----------



## Lodpah

mia55 said:


> I saw one of them which has only one member in the charity thanked them on LinkedIn. Reshma  is also owner of “girls who code” charity and opened Marshallsplanformom. I’m guessing it’s more a PR gimmick than a real donation.
> 
> View attachment 5283193


I don’t trust these “boutique” charities. Nowadays I prefer to give directly to local charities that I know, i.e., local food banks, animal shelters and such. Too many people creating charities.


----------



## xincinsin

Katel said:


> How refreshing! Which country?


Singapore.



A1aGypsy said:


> I don’t understand - criminalizing speaking out against oppression is a good thing? How can that be?


No oppression. The ones getting fined are trying to rile up people to be against another race or culture. To take a recent example, someone of one race went on social media to complain about the noise created by a wedding that was held near her house by a couple of another race. The expletive-peppered post was uncomplimentary of the other race in general, implying that because the neighbourhood weddings were relatively "cheap", the divorce rate was correspondingly high. And she ignored the fact that the wedding was a one day affair while her own race holds noisy 3 to 7 day funeral wakes in the same venues.

Singapore isn't perfect, but I fully support taking down people who try to generate us against them mentality.

Back to our favourite toxic pair now


----------



## Chanbal

I would think being called the Clouds of Montecito is an upgrade for them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> H and M are finding out that they have to give to charity, just simply associating themselves is not enough to help a cause


True, but this 'charitable' couple aka the Emesis-Inducing, Hit-or-Miss, Self-Proclaimed Entrepreneurs will only give as little as is needed to keep their unnewsworthy faces in the public eye.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> I would think being called the Clouds of Montecito is an upgrade for them.



LOVE THIS!!  Sooo when Clouds of Montecito disappear, we all have BRIGHTER DAYS!


----------



## rose60610

If Methane could shut her stupid mouth for five minutes and if Hazard could take control of his own gonads for five minutes we'd all have a brighter day. Don't hold your breath.


----------



## Chanbal

It's time for some reading material! #3


*We're closing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles in 2021. Here's number three: Julie Burchill writing in November about the Meghan Markle revelations at the Court of Appeal. *

_‘Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been, leading inevitably to the low point she has now reached this week, after she apologised to the Court of Appeal for ‘forgetting’ information about the Finding Freedom biography. For there are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events.

The Windsor’s motto ‘Never complain, never explain’ was thought to have been introduced by the Queen Mother in 1936. A few years before she said, when it was suggested that the princesses Elizabeth and Margaret should be evacuated to a safer place like many British children of the time, that ‘the children won't leave without me. I won't leave without the King – and the King will never leave.’ This was probably one of the most outstanding examples of duty on the part of a ruling family ever witnessed, and one which has been practised to the nth degree by the Queen. This is one of the reasons why even blood-thirsty **********s such as myself admire her. She has carried out her work without complaint for 70 of her 95 years, understanding that massive privilege negates the right to complain. The never explaining bit is more problematic and can make her seem remote. But imagine if she did step in, sleeves rolled up like the late Barbara Windsor in EastEnders, to defend one of her ghastly sons: ‘My boy nevver touched ‘er - ‘e’s a good boy, ‘e is!’ It would be hilarious – but very unQueenly.

There are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events
Meghan Markle, on the other hand, was raised in California, a place where letting it all out is presumed to be healthy. At first I found Meghan refreshing; it was lovely to see a woman marrying into such a staid family declaring herself a feminist, and indeed more than 70 female MPs wrote an open letter castigating the media for its misogynistic treatment of this multi-cultural breath of fresh air. When the Duchess won her case against Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Mail on Sunday, many fair-minded people believed that justice had been done.
How naive this seems now. Though the Duchess had been assumed to have quit her acting career in order to spend more time with her merchandise (Lilibet Diana Ltd becoming a beloved younger sister to Archewell Inc) perhaps she was actually performing her most convincing role yet; that of a loving daughter unwillingly estranged from her darling dad, distraught when the clammy claws of the press got their hands on private correspondence.

But now her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, has thrillingly blabbed that the letter the duchess wrote to her father appeared to have been stage-managed for public performance, having texted him ‘Obviously everything I have drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked, so I have been meticulous in my word choice.’ And then of course her poor addled dad hit back; it’s like when the Beatles broke up and John and Paul kept recording *****y songs about each other rather than sit down in a room and have it out.

When Diana: Her True Story was published, we knew right away that the princess had whispered directly into Andrew Morton’s ear; you could hear her troubled yet brave voice clearly. Similarly, the sickly fan-fawn Finding Freedom, though ostensibly written independently by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, carried the see-how-I-suffer stamp of the Duchess’s expensively-shod foot all over it.

And now, despite her denial of any involvement with the book, the Duchess has had her memory jogged after Mr Knauf testified that the book was discussed ‘on a routine basis’ by the Duchess. Some particularly sickening messages from Markle to Knauf on calling her father ‘daddy’: ‘Given I’ve only ever called him daddy it may make sense… and in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heartstrings’. And: I ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated... and if he leaks it then that’s on his conscious (sic) but at least the world will know the truth. Words I could never voice publicly.’ She also appears to have briefed the authors on her relationship with her half-siblings, including that her half-sister Samantha had lost custody of all three of her children by different fathers, which Samantha disputes. Let’s hear it for sisterhood!

The Duchess has provided several excuses for denying any contact with Scobie and Durand during the Associated Newspapers case. But I think it more likely that she is habitually ‘perpetuating falsehoods’ as she so ickily accused the Royal Family of doing during the Oprah interview, without even knowing she’s doing it. When she claimed that she and Prince Harry had had a private wedding before the nasty big common one that supposedly cost us plebs £30 million, was she telling the truth? When she said she had never had any interest in the British Royal Family, was she being honest? Her close childhood friend Ninaki Priddy has said, ‘The Royal Family was something she found fascinating. She had Diana: Her True Story on her bookshelf. I wasn’t shocked or even surprised to hear about Prince Harry. I know she used to love The Princess Diaries — films about a commoner who becomes part of a Royal Family. She was very taken with that idea.’

Markle has used, albeit amateurishly, many people on her rise to – well, what? The Sussex cred is rapidly falling in celebrity circles; the Royal Family are reportedly disgusted by the Netflix deal which will take the dollar from the company which made The Crown.

Dishonourably, Markle has used the very real evils of racism and misogyny to conceal her true mission – ceaseless promotion of herself to a level of sainthood, or at least Oprah-hood. But the curtain has been pulled aside and, as with the Wizard of Oz, we see the C-list actress, growing old in a profession obsessed with youth, manipulating a damaged and dim young man for her own ends. In short, what I memorably named ‘The Grabdication.’

The Telegraph writes: ‘Her admission that she misled the court in a sworn statement also raises the issue of whether she committed perjury though legal experts suggest her actions have not crossed the threshold for what is a criminal offence that carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment’ – giving the possibility of being detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure an entirely new spin. Either way, recollections will be unlikely to vary when Meghan Markle goes down in history._









						Most-read 2021: Meghan has been found out
					

We’re closing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles in 2021. Here’s number three: Julie Burchill writing in November about the Meghan Markle revelations at the Court of Appeal.  ‘Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> It's time for some reading material! #3
> View attachment 5283806
> 
> *We're closing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles in 2021. Here's number three: Julie Burchill writing in November about the Meghan Markle revelations at the Court of Appeal. *
> 
> _‘Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been, leading inevitably to the low point she has now reached this week, after she apologised to the Court of Appeal for ‘forgetting’ information about the Finding Freedom biography. For there are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events.
> 
> The Windsor’s motto ‘Never complain, never explain’ was thought to have been introduced by the Queen Mother in 1936. A few years before she said, when it was suggested that the princesses Elizabeth and Margaret should be evacuated to a safer place like many British children of the time, that ‘the children won't leave without me. I won't leave without the King – and the King will never leave.’ This was probably one of the most outstanding examples of duty on the part of a ruling family ever witnessed, and one which has been practised to the nth degree by the Queen. This is one of the reasons why even blood-thirsty **********s such as myself admire her. She has carried out her work without complaint for 70 of her 95 years, understanding that massive privilege negates the right to complain. The never explaining bit is more problematic and can make her seem remote. But imagine if she did step in, sleeves rolled up like the late Barbara Windsor in EastEnders, to defend one of her ghastly sons: ‘My boy nevver touched ‘er - ‘e’s a good boy, ‘e is!’ It would be hilarious – but very unQueenly.
> 
> There are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events
> Meghan Markle, on the other hand, was raised in California, a place where letting it all out is presumed to be healthy. At first I found Meghan refreshing; it was lovely to see a woman marrying into such a staid family declaring herself a feminist, and indeed more than 70 female MPs wrote an open letter castigating the media for its misogynistic treatment of this multi-cultural breath of fresh air. When the Duchess won her case against Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Mail on Sunday, many fair-minded people believed that justice had been done.
> How naive this seems now. Though the Duchess had been assumed to have quit her acting career in order to spend more time with her merchandise (Lilibet Diana Ltd becoming a beloved younger sister to Archewell Inc) perhaps she was actually performing her most convincing role yet; that of a loving daughter unwillingly estranged from her darling dad, distraught when the clammy claws of the press got their hands on private correspondence.
> 
> But now her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, has thrillingly blabbed that the letter the duchess wrote to her father appeared to have been stage-managed for public performance, having texted him ‘Obviously everything I have drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked, so I have been meticulous in my word choice.’ And then of course her poor addled dad hit back; it’s like when the Beatles broke up and John and Paul kept recording *****y songs about each other rather than sit down in a room and have it out.
> 
> When Diana: Her True Story was published, we knew right away that the princess had whispered directly into Andrew Morton’s ear; you could hear her troubled yet brave voice clearly. Similarly, the sickly fan-fawn Finding Freedom, though ostensibly written independently by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, carried the see-how-I-suffer stamp of the Duchess’s expensively-shod foot all over it.
> 
> And now, despite her denial of any involvement with the book, the Duchess has had her memory jogged after Mr Knauf testified that the book was discussed ‘on a routine basis’ by the Duchess. Some particularly sickening messages from Markle to Knauf on calling her father ‘daddy’: ‘Given I’ve only ever called him daddy it may make sense… and in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heartstrings’. And: I ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated... and if he leaks it then that’s on his conscious (sic) but at least the world will know the truth. Words I could never voice publicly.’ She also appears to have briefed the authors on her relationship with her half-siblings, including that her half-sister Samantha had lost custody of all three of her children by different fathers, which Samantha disputes. Let’s hear it for sisterhood!
> 
> The Duchess has provided several excuses for denying any contact with Scobie and Durand during the Associated Newspapers case. But I think it more likely that she is habitually ‘perpetuating falsehoods’ as she so ickily accused the Royal Family of doing during the Oprah interview, without even knowing she’s doing it. When she claimed that she and Prince Harry had had a private wedding before the nasty big common one that supposedly cost us plebs £30 million, was she telling the truth? When she said she had never had any interest in the British Royal Family, was she being honest? Her close childhood friend Ninaki Priddy has said, ‘The Royal Family was something she found fascinating. She had Diana: Her True Story on her bookshelf. I wasn’t shocked or even surprised to hear about Prince Harry. I know she used to love The Princess Diaries — films about a commoner who becomes part of a Royal Family. She was very taken with that idea.’
> 
> Markle has used, albeit amateurishly, many people on her rise to – well, what? The Sussex cred is rapidly falling in celebrity circles; the Royal Family are reportedly disgusted by the Netflix deal which will take the dollar from the company which made The Crown.
> 
> Dishonourably, Markle has used the very real evils of racism and misogyny to conceal her true mission – ceaseless promotion of herself to a level of sainthood, or at least Oprah-hood. But the curtain has been pulled aside and, as with the Wizard of Oz, we see the C-list actress, growing old in a profession obsessed with youth, manipulating a damaged and dim young man for her own ends. In short, what I memorably named ‘The Grabdication.’
> 
> The Telegraph writes: ‘Her admission that she misled the court in a sworn statement also raises the issue of whether she committed perjury though legal experts suggest her actions have not crossed the threshold for what is a criminal offence that carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment’ – giving the possibility of being detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure an entirely new spin. Either way, recollections will be unlikely to vary when Meghan Markle goes down in history._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most-read 2021: Meghan has been found out
> 
> 
> We’re closing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles in 2021. Here’s number three: Julie Burchill writing in November about the Meghan Markle revelations at the Court of Appeal.  ‘Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


Slow clap!


----------



## A1aGypsy

xincinsin said:


> Singapore.
> 
> 
> No oppression. The ones getting fined are trying to rile up people to be against another race or culture. To take a recent example, someone of one race went on social media to complain about the noise created by a wedding that was held near her house by a couple of another race. The expletive-peppered post was uncomplimentary of the other race in general, implying that because the neighbourhood weddings were relatively "cheap", the divorce rate was correspondingly high. And she ignored the fact that the wedding was a one day affair while her own race holds noisy 3 to 7 day funeral wakes in the same venues.
> 
> Singapore isn't perfect, but I fully support taking down people who try to generate us against them mentality.
> 
> Back to our favourite toxic pair now



Ah. Okay. I figured I was missing something. I thought you meant people who complained that they (or others) were the subject of discrimination due to their race were punished. Thank you for clarifying!


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> And now, despite her denial of any involvement with the book, the Duchess has had her memory jogged after Mr Knauf testified that the book was discussed ‘on a routine basis’ by the Duchess. Some particularly sickening messages from Markle to Knauf on calling her father ‘daddy’: ‘Given I’ve only ever called him daddy it may make sense… and in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heartstrings’. And: I ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated... *and if he leaks it then that’s on his conscious (sic)* but at least the world will know the truth. Words I could never voice publicly.’ She also appears to have briefed the authors on her relationship with her half-siblings, including that her half-sister Samantha had lost custody of all three of her children by different fathers, which Samantha disputes. Let’s hear it for sisterhood!



The mere idea of having a conscience is so utterly foreign to MM that she can't even use it properly in a sentence    I doubt she's conscious of that fact, however.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It's time for some reading material! #3
> View attachment 5283806
> 
> *We're closing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles in 2021. Here's number three: Julie Burchill writing in November about the Meghan Markle revelations at the Court of Appeal. *
> 
> _‘Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been, leading inevitably to the low point she has now reached this week, after she apologised to the Court of Appeal for ‘forgetting’ information about the Finding Freedom biography. For there are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events.
> 
> The Windsor’s motto ‘Never complain, never explain’ was thought to have been introduced by the Queen Mother in 1936. A few years before she said, when it was suggested that the princesses Elizabeth and Margaret should be evacuated to a safer place like many British children of the time, that ‘the children won't leave without me. I won't leave without the King – and the King will never leave.’ This was probably one of the most outstanding examples of duty on the part of a ruling family ever witnessed, and one which has been practised to the nth degree by the Queen. This is one of the reasons why even blood-thirsty **********s such as myself admire her. She has carried out her work without complaint for 70 of her 95 years, understanding that massive privilege negates the right to complain. The never explaining bit is more problematic and can make her seem remote. But imagine if she did step in, sleeves rolled up like the late Barbara Windsor in EastEnders, to defend one of her ghastly sons: ‘My boy nevver touched ‘er - ‘e’s a good boy, ‘e is!’ It would be hilarious – but very unQueenly.
> 
> There are not different truths for different people; there is one true version of events
> Meghan Markle, on the other hand, was raised in California, a place where letting it all out is presumed to be healthy. At first I found Meghan refreshing; it was lovely to see a woman marrying into such a staid family declaring herself a feminist, and indeed more than 70 female MPs wrote an open letter castigating the media for its misogynistic treatment of this multi-cultural breath of fresh air. When the Duchess won her case against Associated Newspapers, which publishes the Mail on Sunday, many fair-minded people believed that justice had been done.
> How naive this seems now. Though the Duchess had been assumed to have quit her acting career in order to spend more time with her merchandise (Lilibet Diana Ltd becoming a beloved younger sister to Archewell Inc) perhaps she was actually performing her most convincing role yet; that of a loving daughter unwillingly estranged from her darling dad, distraught when the clammy claws of the press got their hands on private correspondence.
> 
> But now her former communications secretary, Jason Knauf, has thrillingly blabbed that the letter the duchess wrote to her father appeared to have been stage-managed for public performance, having texted him ‘Obviously everything I have drafted is with the understanding that it could be leaked, so I have been meticulous in my word choice.’ And then of course her poor addled dad hit back; it’s like when the Beatles broke up and John and Paul kept recording *****y songs about each other rather than sit down in a room and have it out.
> 
> When Diana: Her True Story was published, we knew right away that the princess had whispered directly into Andrew Morton’s ear; you could hear her troubled yet brave voice clearly. Similarly, the sickly fan-fawn Finding Freedom, though ostensibly written independently by Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, carried the see-how-I-suffer stamp of the Duchess’s expensively-shod foot all over it.
> 
> And now, despite her denial of any involvement with the book, the Duchess has had her memory jogged after Mr Knauf testified that the book was discussed ‘on a routine basis’ by the Duchess. Some particularly sickening messages from Markle to Knauf on calling her father ‘daddy’: ‘Given I’ve only ever called him daddy it may make sense… and in the unfortunate event that it leaked it would pull at the heartstrings’. And: I ‘toiled over every detail which could be manipulated... and if he leaks it then that’s on his conscious (sic) but at least the world will know the truth. Words I could never voice publicly.’ She also appears to have briefed the authors on her relationship with her half-siblings, including that her half-sister Samantha had lost custody of all three of her children by different fathers, which Samantha disputes. Let’s hear it for sisterhood!
> 
> The Duchess has provided several excuses for denying any contact with Scobie and Durand during the Associated Newspapers case. But I think it more likely that she is habitually ‘perpetuating falsehoods’ as she so ickily accused the Royal Family of doing during the Oprah interview, without even knowing she’s doing it. When she claimed that she and Prince Harry had had a private wedding before the nasty big common one that supposedly cost us plebs £30 million, was she telling the truth? When she said she had never had any interest in the British Royal Family, was she being honest? Her close childhood friend Ninaki Priddy has said, ‘The Royal Family was something she found fascinating. She had Diana: Her True Story on her bookshelf. I wasn’t shocked or even surprised to hear about Prince Harry. I know she used to love The Princess Diaries — films about a commoner who becomes part of a Royal Family. She was very taken with that idea.’
> 
> Markle has used, albeit amateurishly, many people on her rise to – well, what? The Sussex cred is rapidly falling in celebrity circles; the Royal Family are reportedly disgusted by the Netflix deal which will take the dollar from the company which made The Crown.
> 
> Dishonourably, Markle has used the very real evils of racism and misogyny to conceal her true mission – ceaseless promotion of herself to a level of sainthood, or at least Oprah-hood. But the curtain has been pulled aside and, as with the Wizard of Oz, we see the C-list actress, growing old in a profession obsessed with youth, manipulating a damaged and dim young man for her own ends. In short, what I memorably named ‘The Grabdication.’
> 
> The Telegraph writes: ‘Her admission that she misled the court in a sworn statement also raises the issue of whether she committed perjury though legal experts suggest her actions have not crossed the threshold for what is a criminal offence that carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment’ – giving the possibility of being detained at Her Majesty’s Pleasure an entirely new spin. Either way, recollections will be unlikely to vary when Meghan Markle goes down in history._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most-read 2021: Meghan has been found out
> 
> 
> We’re closing the year by republishing our ten most popular articles in 2021. Here’s number three: Julie Burchill writing in November about the Meghan Markle revelations at the Court of Appeal.  ‘Speaking her truth’ has been one of Meghan Markle’s USPs – and what an absolute disaster it’s been...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


that's all well and good but she won in court and the newspaper had to print a front page apology.....so her sugars seem to have no worries for now


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> that's all well and good but she won in court and the newspaper had to print a front page apology.....so her sugars seem to have no worries for now


Since TM is now said to be writing a tell-all, I suppose he too will have to be mindful of how much he uses from this letter and any other correspondence from her, so as not to fall foul of the copyright law.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Since TM is now said to be writing a tell-all, I suppose he too will have to be mindful of how much he uses from this letter and any other correspondence from her, so as not to fall foul of the copyright law.


But isn't the USA copyright law different than the UK in that TM would have greater latitude to publish more examples of 'M's so-called truths'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> But isn't the USA copyright law different than the UK in that TM would have greater latitude to publish more examples of 'M's so-called truths'.



Seems the US laws are similar to UK, but I am not an attorney so do check with your attorney before publishing anything 
ETA: TM lives in Mexico - does that change anything?

_A personal letter is subject to copyright protection – regardless of whether the letter is published or unpublished. In most cases, the writer of the letter is the copyright owner of the letter. As the recipient of the letter, you exercise control over the tangible copy which you may keep, sell, or discard. However, you do not have the right to reproduce, publish, or exercise any of the copyright owner’s other exclusive rights in the letter.

There have been lawsuits over the unauthorized use of personal letters. For example, an unauthorized biography of J.D. Salinger was enjoined after the author included extensive verbatim passages of Salinger’s unpublished letters without Salinger’s permission.

Also, if the letters include information that qualifies as “private”, you must also consider privacy issues in addition to copyright law issues before doing anything with the letters.






						What Are Your Rights in Personal Letters You Receive?
					

Have any friends, family, or romantic interests sent you personal letters you believe would make a juicy novel or expose? I recently responded to a query regarding an individual who wanted to compile letters received from other people into a...



					www.guidethroughthelegaljungleblog.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems the US laws are similar to UK, but I am not an attorney so do check with your attorney before publishing anything
> ETA: TM lives in Mexico - does that change anything?
> 
> _A personal letter is subject to copyright protection – regardless of whether the letter is published or unpublished. In most cases, the writer of the letter is the copyright owner of the letter. As the recipient of the letter, you exercise control over the tangible copy which you may keep, sell, or discard. However, you do not have the right to reproduce, publish, or exercise any of the copyright owner’s other exclusive rights in the letter.
> 
> There have been lawsuits over the unauthorized use of personal letters. For example, an unauthorized biography of J.D. Salinger was enjoined after the author included extensive verbatim passages of Salinger’s unpublished letters without Salinger’s permission.
> 
> Also, if the letters include information that qualifies as “private”, you must also consider privacy issues in addition to copyright law issues before doing anything with the letters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Are Your Rights in Personal Letters You Receive?
> 
> 
> Have any friends, family, or romantic interests sent you personal letters you believe would make a juicy novel or expose? I recently responded to a query regarding an individual who wanted to compile letters received from other people into a...
> 
> 
> 
> www.guidethroughthelegaljungleblog.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Maybe he could get around it by paraphrasing it in his own words, rather than quoting direct.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Maybe he could get around it by paraphrasing it in his own words, rather than quoting direct.


That's a great idea and if TM reads this thread, we should give him pointers as in: Chapter ** Para **. "I received a wonderful letter from my dear daughter, M just before the wedding in which she called me Daddy, just like she used to do when she wanted money for school or plastic surgery to fix her nose and gaping teeth or a chauffeur to her ballet and acting lessons or maybe just to pull at my heartstrings so that I would give in to all her little whims."


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Maybe he could get around it by paraphrasing it in his own words, rather than quoting direct.



Does that count as a ‘privacy’ violation?  Idk, seems like since the letter has been printed in a global paper and MM’s texts&comments have been publicised that the rules would be different. I guess we will find out.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Maybe he could get around it by paraphrasing it in his own words, rather than quoting direct.


The other way around privacy and /or copyright … is to quote only brief snippets … the DM lost the suit by publishing too much 
Brevity in all things


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

Pathetic, Lady Megbeth is so hungry to get her name on the net, we are “treated” to a New Year’s Day article about her special “symbolic jewelry” purchased in 2020 for $20,000.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems the US laws are similar to UK, but I am not an attorney so do check with your attorney before publishing anything
> ETA: TM lives in Mexico - does that change anything?
> 
> _A personal letter is subject to copyright protection – regardless of whether the letter is published or unpublished. In most cases, the writer of the letter is the copyright owner of the letter. As the recipient of the letter, you exercise control over the tangible copy which you may keep, sell, or discard. However, you do not have the right to reproduce, publish, or exercise any of the copyright owner’s other exclusive rights in the letter.
> 
> There have been lawsuits over the unauthorized use of personal letters. For example, an unauthorized biography of J.D. Salinger was enjoined after the author included extensive verbatim passages of Salinger’s unpublished letters without Salinger’s permission.
> 
> Also, if the letters include information that qualifies as “private”, you must also consider privacy issues in addition to copyright law issues before doing anything with the letters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Are Your Rights in Personal Letters You Receive?
> 
> 
> Have any friends, family, or romantic interests sent you personal letters you believe would make a juicy novel or expose? I recently responded to a query regarding an individual who wanted to compile letters received from other people into a...
> 
> 
> 
> www.guidethroughthelegaljungleblog.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



but again, I think DM lawyers were going along the lines of, if she had it mind to discuss on the merits of calling him 'Daddy' with a view of "tug at heartstrings" with a Palace official. Was the letter actually leaked by TM/DM or did her anticipation of the public's perception constitute her own co-conspiracy to create a letter in the manner of private when actually writing a public document.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Pathetic, Lady Megbeth is so hungry to get her name on the net, we are “treated” to a New Year’s Day article about her special “symbolic jewelry” purchased in 2020 for $20,000.


Oh, that's just a pittance for Her Heinous. She'll probably just wear it once to merch.

I was relooking at the Time cover after noticing all that photoshopping on the holiday card. It always bothered me how unbalanced and disproportionate both of them looked. Does anyone think Methane's exceedingly hirsute head was pasted on that body? The head always looked too big to me and had a "pop-out" vibe. Maybe it was a similar case as in Composite Baby: they pasted the head and had to enlarge it as well as add extra hair to cover the original less desirable head/expression.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Oh, that's just a pittance for Her Heinous. She'll probably just wear it once to merch.
> 
> I was relooking at the Time cover after noticing all that photoshopping on the holiday card. It always bothered me how unbalanced and disproportionate both of them looked. Does anyone think Methane's exceedingly hirsute head was pasted on that body? The head always looked too big to me and had a "pop-out" vibe. Maybe it was a similar case as in Composite Baby: they pasted the head and had to enlarge it as well as add extra hair to cover the original less desirable head/expression.


Yes, i sometimes wonder if we have ever seen what she really looks like. Probably the picture of her showing some bald scalp taken on one of her outings with the Queen is the most accurate one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sounds like they’re looking to move?









						Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## redney

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


 good god these fools and their PR hacks are exhausting.


----------



## oldbag

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Perhaps they can no longer afford the house and property. It must suck up money like a wood chipper.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



But they said that was going to be their forever home! Does having a second child mean that 16 bathrooms is no longer enough?


----------



## kipp

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



This is hilarious!  "not over the moon"---good grief!


----------



## csshopper

First property tax payment was due Dec 1, delinquent after the 10th. Second installment due February 1. Might have been a shock, especially with Charles’ checkbook reportedly closed, no Spotify or Netflix productions, and a decrepit Bench sitting in the Amazon basement.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

They’ve gone from merchers to flippers.  How pedestrian.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Yep, it sounds about right.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> First property tax payment was due Dec 1, delinquent after the 10th. Second installment due February 1. Might have been a shock, especially with Charles’ checkbook reportedly closed, no Spotify or Netflix productions, and a decrepit Bench sitting in the Amazon basement.


They definitely did not expect the running cost. I'm wondering - with all the bragging about their Netflix and Spotify multimillion dollar deals and JCMH's multiple jobs, will the income tax folks also be scrutinizing their submissions?


----------



## Chanbal

Ellen not happy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lots of rumors about Hazzie‘s whereabouts, whether they rent or own the money pit, how much money they actually have -
Looks like we are in for a bumpy ride.  

In case you missed this part of the wedding:


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Happy new year everyone!

Maybe this is why they registered in the much more affordable Delaware 


If they can’t hack the competition in CA they might have a chance as real housewives of Wilmington.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Actually now I feel bad for the people of Delaware.
It does really tickle me though to think a couple of years ago this ‘private’ couple decided they were just too big for Canada and that they were going to become the toast of the  SoCal high rollers


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Yep, it sounds about right.



Let’s not forget the 18-24 months before one dog got run over and the other became ‘too old’ to fly.

I wonder how long they’ve had those chickens for…. Perhaps the ‘treasured colleagues and employees’ will be invited to a grand feast of roast chickens served with their p45s.


----------



## Luvbolide

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Well, we know the neighbors will be happy!  Apparently MM has been repeatedly whining to the HOA that security is inadequate and must be increased - all at the HOA’s expense, of course!  I think they should take this chance to leave Calif. !!


----------



## lanasyogamama

One article mentioned Malibu. Do you think they’d like that better? Closer to Hollywood?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Also, their house always looked 90s McMansion to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My guesses -
— they were renters and the lease is almost up, so it’s ok for H&M to criticize the house (most selllers avoid criticizing their property b/c it lowers the sell price)
— they will be unhappy anywhere they live. H would be fine in jolly ole England, but MM will always feel like an outsider anywhere she goes. I’m sure the docs have a name for this.
— perhaps A doesn’t like his school or H&M dislike that he is treated like all the others. Ya kno, a royal deserves special attention.
— Malibu?  Nah, as a DM commenter said, _“heard there was a lovely home for sale on Chunga-Changa - nice and private” _


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> They’ve gone from merchers to flippers.  How pedestrian.


It has worked out very well for neighbor Ellen and her wife Portia de Rossi. Maybe MM thinks she and Harry can also score big by flipping mansions. Their other ventures appear to be pretty much dead in the water and the upkeep on that place is surely insane. Not to mention it's ostentatious and ugly.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> Well, we know the neighbors will be happy!  Apparently MM has been repeatedly whining to the HOA that security is inadequate and must be increased - all at the HOA’s expense, of course!  I think they should take this chance to leave Calif. !!


Security only necessitated by their arrival. I'm sure their neighbors are thinking "Don't let the gate hit you on the way out".


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> One article mentioned Malibu. Do you think they’d like that better? Closer to Hollywood?


You mean closer to being ignored and excluded by A listers? I doubt it. But who knows how her mind works?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Also, their house always looked 90s McMansion to me.


The exterior reminded me of the 80s soap Dynasty.


----------



## Chanbal

Surprised this has not been posted here yet. It's unbelievable… I don't know the people involved. 









						Journalist says Queen should have died instead of Betty White
					

Nylah Burton,  who has written several articles arguing in favour of the Sussexes and critiquing the Royal Family, reacted as many did to the television legend's death but put a bizarre spin on it.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler: There is more…


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess is they will try for nyc.


----------



## jennlt

The moment MM realized she had the upper hand. Literally.


----------



## jennlt

I can't take credit for these but thought I'd share : Smughan Smirkle


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> My guess is they will try for nyc.



Would Andrew‘s court case have an impact? Would NYC’s .1%-ers really accept H&M? 

Imo H&M are following Wallis&Ed’s pattern. Iirc, they bounced around until they realized they were not welcomed at the “It” parties. Eventually, they landed in France.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Surprised this has not been posted here yet. It's unbelievable… I don't know the people involved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Journalist says Queen should have died instead of Betty White
> 
> 
> Nylah Burton,  who has written several articles arguing in favour of the Sussexes and critiquing the Royal Family, reacted as many did to the television legend's death but put a bizarre spin on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: There is more…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5286287


I love the Golden Girls.
Betty White was too good to be associated with this kind of ****. I think the man’s tweet might be sarcasm but IDK.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Would Andrew‘s court case have an impact? Would NYC’s .1%-ers really accept H&M?
> 
> Imo H&M are following Wallis&Ed’s pattern. Iirc, they bounced around until they realized they were not welcomed at the “It” parties. Eventually, they landed in France.


yes I think they are struggling to find a place- the social returns are diminishing as people realise they will be discarded or defamed or (if you are lucky) the sneaky tart will just come on to _your_ husband. We all know she tried it with Serena’s man and I wouldn’t be surprised if she had a crack at Jay Z but he felt he could do better


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would Andrew‘s court case have an impact? Would NYC’s .1%-ers really accept H&M?
> 
> Imo H&M are following Wallis&Ed’s pattern. Iirc, they bounced around until they realized they were not welcomed at the “It” parties. Eventually, they landed in France.


I think they realized that Montecito is too private for them.

They would be very lucky if they would land in Paris with a hefty allowance and a beautiful house like W&E.


----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would Andrew‘s court case have an impact? Would NYC’s .1%-ers really accept H&M?
> 
> Imo H&M are following Wallis&Ed’s pattern. Iirc, they bounced around until they realized they were not welcomed at the “It” parties. Eventually, they landed in France.



I don’t think Andrew’s case would have much impact.  Although any attention is positive attention for MeGain.  I think they would choose a high security building and someplace with a Who’s Who of residents so they could do a forced elbow rubbing in the elevators.  It would put them in a city where the paparazzi play and also would be close to DC and her old stomping grounds of Toronto.  It also puts them in a shorter and more direct flight path to Great Britain.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I think they realized that Montecito is too private for them.
> 
> They would be very lucky if they would land in Paris with a hefty allowance and a beautiful house like W&E.


I have given this some thought and one idea is that horror of horrors!  Migraine is either extremely lucky or had good advice  If they really bought it, it has proven to be a good investment because in the  last 18  months all property prices have skyrocketed.   If they just fronted for the Russian guy, he will make a ton of money and the Harkles will get a cut because having them live there took off some of the taint of his owning it.  Now it can be marketed as a “royal” residence. That house is a teardown and some developer will build and flip.


----------



## DoggieBags

Sophisticatted said:


> I don’t think Andrew’s case would have much impact.  Although any attention is positive attention for MeGain.  I think they would choose a high security building and someplace with a Who’s Who of residents so they could do a forced elbow rubbing in the elevators.  It would put them in a city where the paparazzi play and also would be close to DC and her old stomping grounds of Toronto.  It also puts them in a shorter and more direct flight path to Great Britain.


A 4 or 5 bedroom condo in one of the top buildings in NYC would cost more than their current place in Montecito. I‘m guessing it would have to be a condo because I doubt they’d get approval from any of the boards of the top coops in the city. They’d have to show a minimum net worth of xx times the cost of the apartment they’re planning on buying in their board applications. Plus they would need to shell out for a weekend/summer place in the Hamptons. I wonder if they have the net worth to pay for all that.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> A 4 or 5 bedroom condo in one of the top buildings in NYC would cost more than their current place in Montecito. I‘m guessing it would have to be a condo because I doubt they’d get approval from any of the boards of the top coops in the city. They’d have to show a minimum net worth of xx times the cost of the apartment they’re planning on buying in their board applications. Plus they would need to shell out for a weekend/summer place in the Hamptons. I wonder if they have the net worth to pay for all that.


If a co-op looked into all their moans about needing security, they would never be approved, Prince or not.  They would have to find a house and it wouldn’t  be in Manhattan. There are many places 20 min away from the city that would work and while they are not cheap either, it would be less than the city.    They would still be closer to a real city than they are now.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I have given this some thought and one idea is that horror of horrors!  Migraine is either extremely lucky or had good advice  If they really bought it, it has proven to be a good investment because in the  last 18  months all property prices have skyrocketed.   If they just fronted for the Russian guy, he will make a ton of money and the Harkles will get a cut because having them live there took off some of the taint of his owning it.  Now it can be marketed as a “royal” residence. That house is a teardown and some developer will build and flip.


It's hard to lose money on real estate in CA. I think it will sell for $25 mil, probably more. Don't know if it's true or not but Haze bragged about taking out a mortgage like the poor folk when they bought it.


----------



## Traveladdie

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Good for them! If they are not happy with their residence, Harry and Meghan should find their forever home in order to raise those beautiful children.


----------



## Traveladdie

redney said:


> ? How does someone make lots of money playing the race card now?


Yes, please I want to know too! I didn't know there was money to be made from my ancestors pain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

NYC! What about the girls?! (Chickens)


----------



## Traveladdie

KellyObsessed said:


> I wish I could post a photo of my great nephew who just turned two.  He looks like he is 4.  It's so weird, and he is also very mature and serious. He walks in wearing his backpack, like he is coming home from school.


Yep. I am very tall. Even when I was three, I had very long limbs and looks a year or two older.


----------



## Traveladdie

Chloe302225 said:


> One says you can hear her MM's wails all the way in the U.K.



I have no idea if MM would care of not. I would hope she would be as impressed as the rest of us. This was very cool of Kate to do.


----------



## Traveladdie

jelly-baby said:


> This thread is new to me!  Being in the UK, I'm aware that H&M don't have many fans here.  I was always curious what those in the US thought of them now they inhabit your country...


I will say that this thread is always an eye opener for me. I don't know anyone who dislikes them. Most of the people I know in real life or those I see online love MM and are thrilled that she and Harry are living in the US. However, it makes total sense that because of some obvious factors/issues they would not be popular either in the UK or in the US.


----------



## Traveladdie

Hermes Zen said:


> I think H&M were again copying the W&K.  Casual and a smiling, loving Christmas photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Charlotte, Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Louis and Prince George on a family trip to Jordan.
> KENSINGTON PALACE
> 
> 
> View attachment 5280196


Both photos are wonderful. The kids all look healthy and their parents seem truly happy. Such a gift that they share holiday pictures with us. Additionally, I have no doubt they were both retouched. *shrugs*


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> If a co-op looked into all their moans about needing security, they would never be approved, Prince or not.  They would have to find a house and it wouldn’t  be in Manhattan. There are many places 20 min away from the city that would work and while they are not cheap either, it would be less than the city.    They would still be closer to a real city than they are now.


Approval requirements for condos and coops differ substantially in nyc. Assuming you can demonstrate you have the finances to afford to purchase a condo, the condo board can still exercise a right of first refusal in order to deny a potential purchaser’s application. This would mean the condo association would purchase the apartment and each apartment owner in the building would be assessed their proportionate share of the purchase price. There would have to be something truly egregious about the potential purchaser in order for a condo board to justify exercising this very expensive option. So Assuming the Montecito duo had the finances, they would be able to buy a place in any of the top condo buildings. Coop boards have way more latitude in rejecting potential purchasers. They don’t even have to give a reason for the rejection. With all the baggage the 2 bring (security requirements, negative publicity, etc.), I would bet they would not be able to get approval from any of the boards of the top coops in the city.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> But they said that was going to be their forever home! Does having a second child mean that 16 bathrooms is no longer enough?



But, darling, 18 months is a veritable _eternity _in la-la-land
I'm sure it will be forever in their hearts as the place where they became a family


----------



## Lodpah

Traveladdie said:


> Good for them! If they are not happy with their residence, Harry and Meghan should find their forever home in order to raise those beautiful children.


Deleted


----------



## poopsie

lanasyogamama said:


> One article mentioned Malibu. Do you think they’d like that better? Closer to Hollywood?



It's still a "retreat" community full of A-listers and actual movers and shakers that would have no more inclination to include them than the good people of Montecito
By now it should be obvious even to them that they will forever be outsiders in H'wood. She has no talents (that we can prove  ) to trade on. No voice overs, no invites.......nothing.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like they’re looking to move?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry want to sell £11m mansion they 'aren't over the moon about'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are said to like the area of Montecito, which is also home to chat show queens Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres, but are thinking of selling their nine-bedroom home where they live with Archie and Lilibet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I guess they are only surviving there, not thriving.....assuming this is a true story, I wonder what they want?  something in a better part of the town?  something smaller? (probably not)


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> I guess they are only surviving there, not thriving.....assuming this is a true story, I wonder what they want?  something in a better part of the town?  something smaller? (probably not)



As I've said before, Hazzie must be bored out of his gourd there. He'd see more action in one weekend in Isla Vista than his entire 18 months in Montecito.
IDK how the actual age demographics break down, but I would _hazard _a guess that H&M are on the younger end of the spectrum. Montecito isn't known for action. Any socializing is most likely  close intimate gatherings.  Who knows-------maybe there is a dark, seamy underbelly of orgies and opium dens but no one participating with two brain cells would invite Mouthy Meg or Henpecked Harry to join in. 
I can only imagine the amount of self medicating that Hazmat is engaging in. Unless you're along for the ride that can get really old really quick


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I guess they are only surviving there, not thriving.....assuming this is a true story, I wonder what they want?  something in a better part of the town?  something smaller? (probably not)



More attention. Lots more attention. Someone to sue. Releasing the info about A’s school seems an obvious attempt to attract paps.
IMO we do not need nor want members of the BRF over here, especially the ones who lecture us and have little discernible talent (just ask Ellen).  Post pandemic, we only want the highest quality experiences, kinda like Kate’s piano playing.   H&M aren’t _*it*_.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> As I've said before, Hazzie must be bored out of his gourd there. He'd see more action in one weekend in Isla Vista than his entire 18 months in Montecito.
> IDK how the actual age demographics break down, but I would _hazard _a guess that H&M are on the younger end of the spectrum. Montecito isn't known for action. Any socializing is most likely  close intimate gatherings.  Who knows-------maybe there is a dark, seamy underbelly of orgies and opium dens but no one participating with two brain cells would invite Mouthy Meg or Henpecked Harry to join in.
> I can only imagine the amount of self medicating that Hazmat is engaging in. Unless you're along for the ride that can get really old really quick


I couldn't agree more, Ginger Guru must be very bored talking with the chickens. I would prefer Nott Cott to their tasteless (16 or 19 restroom-) mansion in Montecito. Unless one has plenty of friends in the area, Montecito is too bucolic for me.


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> As I've said before, Hazzie must be bored out of his gourd there. He'd see more action in one weekend in Isla Vista than his entire 18 months in Montecito.
> IDK how the actual age demographics break down, but I would _hazard _a guess that H&M are on the younger end of the spectrum. Montecito isn't known for action. Any socializing is most likely  close intimate gatherings.  Who knows-------maybe there is a dark, seamy underbelly of orgies and opium dens but no one participating with two brain cells would invite Mouthy Meg or Henpecked Harry to join in.
> I can only imagine the amount of self medicating that Hazmat is engaging in. Unless you're along for the ride that can get really old really quick


I'm sure Harry would love a weekend in Isla Vista right about now.


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure Harry would love a weekend in Isla Vista right about now.



Who wouldn't?
I could go for reliving my college glory days! Even though the entire Carter admin was a blur now that I think on it 
Boola boola!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> Who wouldn't?
> I could go for reliving my college glory days! Even though the entire Carter admin was a blur now that I think on it
> Boola boola!!!


We are the same age it seems


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Security only necessitated by their arrival. I'm sure their neighbors are thinking "Don't let the gate hit you on the way out".



absolutely!  I believe she is the only one complaining about inadequate security.  And since Ginge and Cringe can’t afford what she considers to be adequate security, she is no doubt congratulating herself for finding a way to try to foist that cost onto someone else.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

So I was watching the David Foster documentary on Netflix. I think the relationship with the Fosters and the Monster Duo is not as strong as their PR puts out. The connection with the Fosters and the MD is David Foster was friends with the former Prime Minister Mulroney and DF attended a wedding of the ex PM kid.  To make a long story short and all, DF is Canadian and of course, the Mulroneys are Canadian, I think when Malicious Meg dropped her friend JM like a hot sack of hot coals, I can guess where the loyalties of the Fosters sided. Ok, back to watching the documentary.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I think they realized that Montecito is too private for them.
> 
> They would be very lucky if they would land in Paris with a hefty allowance and a beautiful house like W&E.


Very good point.
I also suspect after the PR at the shops & the Christmas fair therehas been a neighbourhood intervention as all their wealthy neighbours who _actually like _their privacy and they left LA because they don’t want to run into a pap on their village errands  


poopsie said:


> As I've said before, Hazzie must be bored out of his gourd there. He'd see more action in one weekend in Isla Vista than his entire 18 months in Montecito.
> IDK how the actual age demographics break down, but I would _hazard _a guess that H&M are on the younger end of the spectrum. Montecito isn't known for action. Any socializing is most likely  close intimate gatherings.  Who knows-------maybe there is a dark, seamy underbelly of orgies and opium dens but no one participating with two brain cells would invite Mouthy Meg or Henpecked Harry to join in.
> I can only imagine the amount of self medicating that Hazmat is engaging in. Unless you're along for the ride that can get really old really quick


If she’s young for Montecito do we think she was attempting a _Hot in Cleveland_ manoeuvre? 
Unfortunately for her she wasn’t the big success she was hoping for with the elite couples (or the husbands at least…)

I agree, I don’t think he’s the sort of person who would enjoy reflecting on himself and his choices for any amount of time. I think she likes it because she can put her Baby Jane manoeuvres on him with ease now he’s isolated and also you can’t see the latest botches that well over Zoom.


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> absolutely!  I believe she is the only one complaining about inadequate security.  And since Ginge and Cringe can’t afford what she considers to be adequate security, she is no doubt congratulating herself for finding a way to try to foist that cost onto someone else.


The topic of security has not really come up for two years 
It was a big deal then because they no longer had taxpayer-funded security, and had to pay for it themselves while daddy was cutting them off
Yeah they still have folks following them in public, but as many as before ???


----------



## marietouchet

Remember the story of Elton sending his private plane to take them to Ibiza - or some equivalent $$$$ warm place for a vacay with Sir Elton ?? H&M took a lot of heat for the carbon footprint of the private plane trips. Then Elton came to their rescue and said he contributed to a green charity  to offset their emissions.

Well, listening to a documentary on Youtube - the witty Stephen Fry talking about the work of Gutenberg & the printing press

I did not know... The Bible was not the first Gutenberg project.  He started printing Indulgences for the Catholic Church. A rich medieval person bought his way into heaven - big payment to Church - and in exchange got a Church certificate (called an indulgence). The certificate said he was going to get into Heaven. See Wiki for more accurate discussion. 

Fry was likening the green charity donations - to offset emissions - to indulgences.  Thought that was a witty metaphor


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guesses -
> — they were renters and the lease is almost up, so it’s ok for H&M to criticize the house (most selllers avoid criticizing their property b/c it lowers the sell price)
> — they will be unhappy anywhere they live. H would be fine in jolly ole England, but MM will always feel like an outsider anywhere she goes. I’m sure the docs have a name for this.
> — perhaps A doesn’t like his school or H&M dislike that he is treated like all the others. Ya kno, a royal deserves special attention.
> — Malibu?  Nah, as a DM commenter said, _“heard there was a lovely home for sale on Chunga-Changa - nice and private” _



It's been rumoured they were renters quite a few times. 

It makes sense timeline-wise


----------



## Sophisticatted

I would also believe that they are professional squatters.


----------



## TC1

Perhaps Tyler Perry has a vacant home they can squat in to save some $$$ for awhile??


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> It's been rumoured they were renters quite a few times.
> 
> It makes sense timeline-wise


I thought the “detectives” on this thread found the official papers and mortgage that proved the despicable duo did purchase the house; or am I mistaken?


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I thought the “detectives” on this thread found the official papers and mortgage that proved the despicable duo did purchase the house; or am I mistaken?



Not sure


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder if they (or their employees) are doing anything on the Netflix plan.  Seems like they're becoming irrelevant.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> It's been rumoured they were renters quite a few times.
> 
> It makes sense timeline-wise


It's possible they are renters, but the house was indeed sold in 2020 for $14,650,000. Its current estimate value is $23,892,000 and its current assessed value is $13,286,000 (less than its purchase price of 2020). It should cost about $60,000-$70,000/month (mortgage + taxes + insurance), which I would think is well within the Harkles's big budget.  
If it is true that this tasteless mansion is back on the market, it would be interesting to know for how much…


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> Perhaps Tyler Perry has a vacant home they can squat in to save some $$$ for awhile??


Nope, if the rumors about the interactions between the Harkles and TP'staff are true. I sincerely hope they are not. 



Spoiler: Rumors only












						Tyler Perry Does Not Like People Disrespecting His Staff
					

Tyler Perry treats his staff like proper human beings. When Meghan used and abused them, he kicked her and Harry out of his home.




					cjhawkings.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if they (or their employees) are doing anything on the Netflix plan.  Seems like they're becoming irrelevant.


NS makes a valid point on the important difference between bringing in money and making money.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Nope, if the rumors about the interactions between the Harkles and TP'staff are true. I sincerely hope they are not.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rumors only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Does Not Like People Disrespecting His Staff
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry treats his staff like proper human beings. When Meghan used and abused them, he kicked her and Harry out of his home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cjhawkings.com




Woah - she has quite a mouth on her, doesn’t she?  Seems like an awfully detailed story to have been entirely made up.  Not to mention that there have been several similar incidents reported about her.  By this point, I have no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that the Distasteful Duchess really does see herself as far above we common folk.  She is a nasty piece of work, isn’t she?!?!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> NS makes a valid point on the important difference between bringing in money and making money.



I was thinking too that covid affected their prospects
So many events cancelled, etc.
....will see what happens


Hopefully they missed their chance to become icons   (I think that's what she wants)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ouch, if true.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch, if true.




Ouch…


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> If a co-op looked into all their moans about needing security, they would never be approved, Prince or not.  They would have to find a house and it wouldn’t  be in Manhattan. There are many places 20 min away from the city that would work and while they are not cheap either, it would be less than the city.    They would still be closer to a real city than they are now.


Westchester County and even the southwest part of Connecticut (or further up - Ridgefield County) have PLENTY of places that these two could find, but if they think that they got pish-pished in Montecito, HA .. just wait till they try to fit in with these folks (especially the old Yankee $$$).


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It's possible they are renters, but the house was indeed sold in 2020 for $14,650,000. Its current estimate value is $23,892,000 and its current assessed value is $13,286,000 (less than its purchase price of 2020). It should cost about $60,000-$70,000/month (mortgage + taxes + insurance), which I would think is well within the Harkles's big budget.
> If it is true that this tasteless mansion is back on the market, it would be interesting to know for how much…
> 
> View attachment 5287021


It was purchased but we don’t know by whom. May not have been them and they were in fact renters.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> It was purchased but we don’t know by whom. May not have been them and they were in fact renters.


Likely some Trust .. which may not even be a Trust 'owned' by them .. who knows?!?!?!  

Like someone else said before, she is NEVER going to be happy wherever she lives, whatever she does .. she really wants to be the "QUEEN" of the world .. she is one SICK person IMO!


----------



## Chanbal

There is nothing like a good conversation between like minded pals!


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting view on the $25M deal…


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> It's been rumoured they were renters quite a few times.
> 
> It makes sense timeline-wise


If so, he lied to someone in the press about getting a mortgage like a regular person as an example of their newfound financial independence.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> Woah - she has quite a mouth on her, doesn’t she?  Seems like an awfully detailed story to have been entirely made up.  Not to mention that there have been several similar incidents reported about her.  By this point, I have no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that the Distasteful Duchess really does see herself as far above we common folk.  She is a nasty piece of work, isn’t she?!?!


But plenty of people have bought what she is selling, based on what I've read elsewhere.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch, if true.



That's not that much considering the size of their estate... Even if it's only the first half?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> An interesting view on the $25M deal…




I agree with him that everything has been gone over with a fine tooth-comb, we are actually sick of these two. 

I didn't know until recently, but both (former) Edward (VIII) and Wallis wrote memoirs with their _The King's Story_ and _The Heart Has its Reasons

_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> There is nothing like a good conversation between like minded pals!




 I'm really NOT falling over myself to buy a mansion the present occupants are "not over the moon" with in less than a couple of years.

I don't think H&M will win salespeople of the year award in '22.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> That's not that much considering the size of their estate... Even if it's only the first half?



On other sites, there are reports/rumors that the actual bill is around $140,000. The first installment of about $70K was due in Nov., 2021 and was paid 3 days before the delinquent date.  So, this is the second installment which isn’t due until Feb(?) or so.  Imo there are too many rumors to know the truth. Perhaps the toxic-two start some of those rumors just to add to the confusion.  Who knows? Who really cares?


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, it's time that we respectfully ask HMTQ to deal with the two ingrates once and for all.
> View attachment 5195926
> 
> PS Sorry the cartoonist misspelt Elizabeth.


Honestly , I get the reason for the misspelling 
Mum was name ELIZABETH after HMTQ, but lived  in the US where an S was more usual 
and one day I woke up, not knowing how to spell her name 
And Mum was not the type of LADY to be amused that you had to ask for the spelling , WHAT do you mean you forgot ignorant spawn of mine ???


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm really NOT falling over myself to buy a mansion the present occupants are "not over the moon" with in less than a couple of years.
> 
> I don't think H&M will win salespeople of the year award in '22.


I keep having a ROMANTIC ( translate : unrealistic ) view of Buck House, must be divine to live there …Montecito cannot compare …

I remember a talk show blurb from Fergie , she complained about living at BP, it was SOOOO FARRRRR from the kitchens to one’s rooms, that the food eaten in a room full of Rembrandts was always cold


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I'm really NOT falling over myself to buy a mansion the present occupants are "not over the moon" with in less than a couple of years.
> 
> I don't think H&M will win salespeople of the year award in '22.


Shoppers for a home at that price are smart enough to read between the lines and will know they really mean "This place is bleeding us dry".


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> It was purchased but we don’t know by whom. May not have been them and they were in fact renters.


There was a mention long ago in one of the UK papers (DM or Sun?) that the purchase was in the name of a LLC that Methane set up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Shoppers for a home at that price are smart enough to read between the lines and will know they really mean "This place is bleeding us dry".



First timers in the Mcmansion world were easily duped, bought into the myth rather than the reality. Didn’t do the research, pay for their own inspectors, ask the correct questions, etc.  Maybe no one at the palace/family advised them.    Not criticizing the previous owners, many of us quickly found numerous flaws in this choice and location, so the info was certainly available.


----------



## LittleStar88

I still believe that the cost of the house (mortgage, taxes, maintenance, etc) are being run through a business (Archwell pays) and they’re not paying any of it out of their own personal “income”, including not paying taxes on the financial benefit of living in the house.

It could be costing more than the business has coming in to afford. Or that they’re not getting The social benefits of living amongst the wealthy and famous so time to look for new poaching ground?

Honestly I don’t think Harry can give up the barefoot SoCal lifestyle. He seems to be enjoying that permanent vacation in the sunshine vibe.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I still believe that the cost of the house (mortgage, taxes, maintenance, etc) are being run through a business (Archwell pays) and they’re not paying any of it out of their own personal “income”, including not paying taxes on the financial benefit of living in the house.
> 
> It could be costing more than the business has coming in to afford. Or that they’re not getting The social benefits of living amongst the wealthy and famous so time to look for new poaching ground?
> 
> Honestly I don’t think Harry can give up the barefoot SoCal lifestyle. He seems to be enjoying that permanent vacation in the sunshine vibe.


The SoCal lifestyle is very seductive if you have the money to support it.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> There was a mention long ago in one of the UK papers (DM or Sun?) that the purchase was in the name of a LLC that Methane set up.


It is common, especially among the wealthy and prominent, to put homes in the name of an LLC, often for privacy but also for more questionable purposes. 


> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...property-buyers-use-llcs-legit-not/102387054/


----------



## Chanbal

From Montecito to the UK?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, never thought I’d see her on UK soil again!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, never thought I’d see her on UK soil again!


You, QE, and many of us here.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> From Montecito to the UK?



Don't know about this.  After all Harry has done to insult his family, I don't see them facilitating a move back for him, so if he wants to go back he is on his own.  I don't think that Charles is going to offer Highgrove to him or building a mansion on an  estate as he had offered previously.  

Many unanswered questions regarding the Montecito house.  Did he rent?  Did he really own?  Is it sold or for sale?  I think they would get an extremely good price for it even though it is a teardown.  The property is worth much more now than when they moved in.  So even if they don't own it, the Russian may want them out so he can sell it and make more money.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Don't know about this.  After all Harry has done to insult his family, I don't see them facilitating a move back for him, so if he wants to go back he is on his own.  I don't think that Charles is going to offer Highgrove to him or building a mansion on an  estate as he had offered previously.
> 
> Many unanswered questions regarding the Montecito house.  Did he rent?  Did he really own?  Is it sold or for sale?  I think they would get an extremely good price for it even though it is a teardown.  The property is worth much more now than when they moved in.  So even if they don't own it, the Russian may want them out so he can sell it and make more money.



From what I understood, their pad in the UK would be independent of the BRF. Would this be their primary residence? I doubt it, it's difficult to believe that Little Miss Forgetful would want that. 

It looks like they purchased the Montecito mansion from Scarface in 2020, possibly using a trust. You are right, they will likely make a huge profit on the house if they decide to sell. 









						What Prince Harry And Meghan Markle’s Home Purchase Shows Us About Financial Planning For The Wealthy
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's recent home purchase in Santa Barbara illustrates some of the financial planning issues faced by the wealthy.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022. 



Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5287360


King Archie. Princess Lilly (sic). Meghan Thee Duchess. Queen Doria. 

These people are insane.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, never thought I’d see her on UK soil again!


I wonder if Charles extended an olive branch because the Queen is dying?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The property is worth much more now than when they moved in.  So even if they don't own it, the Russian may want them out so he can sell it and make more money.


This is an excellent point. The house just never struck me as their style. Maybe he struck a sweetheart deal with them knowing that their residency would drive up the value. I'm sure some enterprising individual in the gossip world will dig up the truth eventually.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5287360


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> From Montecito to the UK?




I know he claims to have excellent sources but I don’t believe the part about them going back to the UK. Not at all.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I know he claims to have excellent sources but I don’t believe the part about them going back to the UK. Not at all.


On the whole, I am not a fan of this guy.  I don't like his videos.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> An interesting view on the $25M deal…




Thanks for sharing this - it was very interesting.  Can’t help but think that if Sunshine & S was smart - and not just expensive - they would read things like this and help craft a strategy that rebuts the negative stuff.  (Dream on…)


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Wow, never thought I’d see her on UK soil again!


That Tesco guy, who hoped QE & gang would die in a car crash in a tunnel, may have offered his true King and Queen a sweet deal on the groceries.
Woman couldn't cut it as a duchess. What makes her stans think that she can cut it as Queen? She has the backbone of a collapsible walking stick.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> But plenty of people have bought what she is selling, based on what I've read elsewhere.



True, but that just makes those who believe her not very discriminating while she continues to be a nasty piece of work.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> This is an excellent point. *The house just never struck me as their style*. Maybe he struck a sweetheart deal with them knowing that their residency would drive up the value. I'm sure some enterprising individual in the gossip world will dig up the truth eventually.


I thought it was very them because, from the drone shots, it looked uninspiring  

But yeah, I imagine her style would have been a lot more grandiose, and more accessible to ambush by paps. In a pre-Covid world, the tabloid headlines would have read "_The Douchess and her handbag partied all night at (exclusive event) before retiring at 2am to their secluded (19-bathroom) estate._"


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> From Montecito to the UK?




The only reason H should be hoping for a return (if he's allowed) is to get the kids on British soil.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5287360



Thanks, I've keyed these into my Outlook Cal so I can set reminders


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> This is an excellent point. The house just never struck me as their style. Maybe he struck a sweetheart deal with them knowing that their residency would drive up the value. I'm sure some enterprising individual in the gossip world will dig up the truth eventually.



My money's on them looking for a named architect mid-century Modern. 

Something that will look very opposite to trad. palaces but great on posters, photo ops, vlogs and visual podcast.


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> The only reason H should be hoping for a return (if he's allowed) is to get the kids on British soil.



Tax issues, maybe ?

He's still British and I am sure I saw something saying he had no intention to apply for US citizenship - the rules about which I know less than nothing. However he has been away without return to the UK such that he would now be considered NOT RESIDENT for UK tax purposes. Non-Domicile and Non-Resident is a very complex area of taxation and not my area of expertise BUT he can no longer be a "Crown Servant" (eg. UK embassy staff or Armed Forces working overseas for long durations and treated as if they were in the UK for tax purposes)

Possible move (nearer) to Washington DC to further her political aspirations, maybe ?
What do we think ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

xincinsin said:


> That Tesco guy, who hoped QE & gang would die in a car crash in a tunnel, may have offered his true King and Queen a sweet deal on the groceries.
> Woman couldn't cut it as a duchess. What makes her stans think that she can cut it as Queen?* She has the backbone of a collapsible walking stick.*


Brilliant


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> Tax issues, maybe ?
> 
> He's still British and I am sure I saw something saying he had no intention to apply for US citizenship - the rules about which I know less than nothing. However he has been away without return to the UK such that he would now be considered NOT RESIDENT for UK tax purposes. Non-Domicile and Non-Resident is a very complex area of taxation and not my area of expertise BUT he can no longer be a "Crown Servant" (eg. UK embassy staff or Armed Forces working overseas for long durations and treated as if they were in the UK for tax purposes)
> 
> Possible move (nearer) to Washington DC to further her political aspirations, maybe ?
> What do we think ?



That's another good point. Stupid of him to default like that. 

I think she scuppered any political ambition on the Ellen show


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I thought it was very them because, from the drone shots, it looked uninspiring
> 
> But yeah, I imagine her style would have been a lot more grandiose, and more accessible to ambush by paps. In a pre-Covid world, the tabloid headlines would have read "_The Douchess and her handbag partied all night at (exclusive event) before retiring at 2am to their secluded (19-bathroom) estate._"


I meant it seemed stuffy and dated to me, not something that I'd expect to appeal to someone their age.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I know he claims to have excellent sources but I don’t believe the part about them going back to the UK. Not at all.


I don't think they are moving back to the UK, but buying there a second house is believable. It's possible that Ginger needs an address in the UK and the BRF is not giving them one.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> That's another good point. Stupid of him to default like that.
> 
> *I think she scuppered any political ambition on the Ellen show*


I hope you are right. Our quota of lousy politicians is full.


----------



## Chanbal

Murky Meg chimes in on the sale of Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

RAINDANCE said:


> Possible move (nearer) to Washington DC to further her political aspirations, maybe ?
> What do we think ?



Yes, let her come around here. They'll eat her alive.


----------



## duna

I bet they're running out of money..... I would have stayed at Frog Cott, much nicer than these Cali mansions....my personal taste and no offence to all you lovely Cali ladies


----------



## MiniMabel

charlottawill said:


> I wonder if Charles extended an olive branch because the Queen is dying?



Queen Elizabeth II is not dying. Where did you get that from?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Knowing that the future holds many Royal Family Events, (the Jubilee, for starters), I can see Meg wanting to move as nearby as possible in the hopes of paps at least stalking her to get a reaction.  She may hope that proximity equals invites, or hope there’s less of an opportunity for exclusion based on distance and the various excuses given for why she couldn’t be at other gatherings. 

If Harry is starting to get a clue (is he even capable of that?), then having the kids in the Kingdom would be a good idea, and rebuilding bridge with his family in a personal capacity would also be a good idea.  It wouldn’t surprise me if he is starting to miss his old life (friends and family).


----------



## gracekelly

@papertiger Re  Mid  century LA based architects. Richard Neutra and Paul Williams come to mind.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, should we anticipate more broken dishes?


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I meant it seemed stuffy and dated to me, not something that I'd expect to appeal to someone their age.



It seemed quite appropriate for a middle-age couple 

Although they keep going on about their security, I think it isn't accessible enough. I think she wants to be Queen among the beauty-queens. Maybe they should move to Queens


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hello! says this place could be their next purchase - 








						Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties
					





					www.bhhscalifornia.com
				




Fitting that it is located in Birnam Wood, no?









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could upgrade Montecito mansion to neighbouring £22m chateau
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's neighbours in Montecito have put their home on the market – and it's fit for royalty




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## rose60610

You mean the Harkles can't pay/barter their property taxes with unsold copies of The Bench?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Maybe she should try auctioning off her hats?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Sophisticatted said:


> Knowing that the future holds many Royal Family Events, (the Jubilee, for starters), I can see Meg wanting to move as nearby as possible in the hopes of paps at least stalking her to get a reaction.  She may hope that proximity equals invites, or hope there’s less of an opportunity for exclusion based on distance and the various excuses given for why she couldn’t be at other gatherings.
> 
> If Harry is starting to get a clue (is he even capable of that?), then having the kids in the Kingdom would be a good idea, and rebuilding bridge with his family in a personal capacity would also be a good idea.  It wouldn’t surprise me if he is starting to miss his old life (friends and family).


I don't think she will ever move back to the UK as home base. Too risky in the event of a divorce. She will always maintain permanent residency in the US.


----------



## rose60610

In three years' time, they've lived in three different countries-UK, Canada, US. Is any country good enough for them? They treat the Globe like their Merry-Go-Round. I wish they'd just buy an island somewhere, name it Chunga Changa, establish themselves as King and Queen over a population of 4 and be done with it.


----------



## poopsie

papertiger said:


> That's another good point. Stupid of him to default like that.
> 
> *I think she scuppered any political ambition on the Ellen show*



Oh, I dunno about that. The current bar is set so low as to be nonexistent


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> In three years' time, they've lived in three different countries-UK, Canada, US. Is any country good enough for them? They treat the Globe like their Merry-Go-Round. I wish they'd just buy an island somewhere, name it Chunga Changa, establish themselves as King and Queen over a population of 4 and be done with it.



They excel at virtual invites so this would work!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think they believe it will increase their reputation or legitimacy to have a place in UK. Frankly it does look silly to bang on about being a Duchess in a country you can barely find on a map.


----------



## TC1

I don't think H has ever given taxes a moments thought until perhaps this year. Taxes are for us plebs!


----------



## Chloe302225

Harry and Meghan Archewell charity raised less than $50,000 in 2020
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent more money on legal fees for their charities than they raised for their new non-profit Archewell in 2020, filings obtained by DailyMail.com reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> Queen Elizabeth II is not dying. Where did you get that from?


I did not say she is dying, I'm sorry if it read that way. At least I hope she's not dying imminently. But someone her age can go to bed at any time and not wake up. See: Betty White. 

I was simply saying that perhaps Charles wants to make peace with Harry because he knows the Queen could go at any time, be it tomorrow or in two years, and Harry was close to her before MM showed up. As the future king it is in his interest to appear as the better person to the public and attempt a reconciliation while the Queen is still alive.


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> Harry and Meghan Archewell charity raised less than $50,000 in 2020
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent more money on legal fees for their charities than they raised for their new non-profit Archewell in 2020, filings obtained by DailyMail.com reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Hmm, a bit of deceptive reporting. Archewell had only been founded in October of 2020, barely enough time to do anything. I'll be surprised if they don't have much more impressive donations for 2021.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hello! says this place could be their next purchase -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bhhscalifornia.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fitting that it is located in Birnam Wood, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could upgrade Montecito mansion to neighbouring £22m chateau
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's neighbours in Montecito have put their home on the market – and it's fit for royalty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


That place is ridiculous. And I don't mean that in a good way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I did not say she is dying, I'm sorry if it read that way. At least I hope she's not dying imminently. But someone her age can go to bed at any time and not wake up. See: Betty White.
> 
> I was simply saying that perhaps Charles wants to make peace with Harry because he knows the Queen could go at any time, be it tomorrow or in two years, and Harry was close to her before MM showed up. As the future king it is in his interest to appear as the better person to the public and attempt a reconciliation while the Queen is still alive.



I understood your meaning.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hello! says this place could be their next purchase -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bhhscalifornia.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fitting that it is located in Birnam Wood, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could upgrade Montecito mansion to neighbouring £22m chateau
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's neighbours in Montecito have put their home on the market – and it's fit for royalty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


LOL if they can't afford their $14+ million house, we are expected to believe they can afford a $29.5 million one??

It looks like a rip off of a mini Versailles...is that why Megain likes it?  Off with all our heads?  Let us eat (olive lemon) cake?


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> LOL if they can't afford their $14+ million house, we are expected to believe they can afford a $29.5 million one??
> 
> It looks like a rip off of a mini Versailles...is that why Megain likes it?  Off with all our heads?  Let us eat (olive lemon) cake?



I was just getting ready to post that the high ceilings look like they were built to give the perfect acoustics for her to scream "Off with their heads!" to great effect but you beat me to it


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> LOL if they can't afford their $14+ million house, we are expected to believe they can afford a $29.5 million one??
> 
> It looks like a rip off of a mini Versailles...is that why Megain likes it?  Off with all our heads?  Let us eat (olive lemon) cake?


The listing says it was "inspired" by Versailles. As usual, money can't buy taste or class.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hello! says this place could be their next purchase -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bhhscalifornia.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fitting that it is located in Birnam Wood, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could upgrade Montecito mansion to neighbouring £22m chateau
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's neighbours in Montecito have put their home on the market – and it's fit for royalty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


LOLOL the realtor's last name is Omidi.  All roads lead to Omid.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> The listing says it was "inspired" by Versailles. As usual, money can't buy taste or class.


Oh does it?!!?  I saw the realtor's last name and didn't look further, LOL.


----------



## jennlt

Does anyone else remember the "Queen of Versailles"?


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> Does anyone else remember the "Queen of Versailles"?
> 
> View attachment 5288164


I remember her on Below Deck.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I remember her on Below Deck.


If H and MM play their cards right, that could be them in a few more years.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> If H and MM play their cards right, that could be them in a few more years.


If I recall correctly, The "Queen of Versailles" lost a child to addiction.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> If I recall correctly, The "Queen of Versailles" lost a child to addiction.



I was referring to an appearance on Below Deck for H and MM. I didn't recall her (Jackie) losing a child to addiction but that is a tragic loss.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I was referring to an appearance on Below Deck for H and MM. I didn't recall her (Jackie) losing a child to addiction but that is a tragic loss.


I think Captain Lee spoke about them both losing children to addiction.

Anyway, back to topic, maybe that's the only way H and Megain will ride a majesty..."The Majesty of the Seas"?


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I think Captain Lee spoke about them both losing children to addiction.
> 
> Anyway, back to topic, maybe that's the only way H and Megain will ride a majesty..."The Majesty of the Seas"?



Or maybe the Queen Mary 2? They could cover up the "ary" so it just says "Queen M" for her voyage

If they made an appearance on Below Deck, The Body Language Guy (Jesus Enrique Rosas) would have a treasure trove of footage for his YouTube channel


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I bet they're running out of money..... I would have stayed at Frog Cott, much nicer than these Cali mansions....my personal taste and no offence to all you lovely Cali ladies


I'm not very excited about Frog Cott, but I would have stayed at Nott Cott as I enjoy London a lot. If they had been more patient and less greedy, QE would have given them one of the large Kensington Palace apartments imo.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> Does anyone else remember the "Queen of Versailles"?
> 
> View attachment 5288164


Can't believe I'm saying it but this place is in marginally better taste than the Montecito one. The Montecito one looks like a Disney structure on steroids.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I'm not very excited about Frog Cott, but I would have stayed at Nott Cott as I enjoy London a lot. If they had been more patient and less greedy, QE would have given them one of the large Kensington Palace apartments imo.


I don't think the Harkles wanted to stay in KP because of the constant scrutiny they'd be subjected to by staffers and such.  I thought privacy was part of the reason they renovated the "cottage".


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I'm not very excited about Frog Cott, but I would have stayed at Nott Cott as I enjoy London a lot. If they had been more patient and less greedy, QE would have given them one of the large Kensington Palace apartments imo.


Absolutely. She could have had so much if she had been patient.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> That place is ridiculous. And I don't mean that in a good way.


Don't you love the gold and pink faucets?   



charlottawill said:


> I don't think the Harkles wanted to stay in KP because of the constant scrutiny they'd be subjected to by staffers and such.  I thought privacy was part of the reason they renovated the "cottage".


I think the reason behind the move to Frogmore Cottage had nothing to do with privacy. Ginger Guru and Little Miss Forgetful are very difficult people and they were just dispatched to Frogmore (away from Will & Kate).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5287360



TBF, we need W&K’s calendar. We can count on H&M to try to steal their thunder 

RE: these houses.  It’s possible these have been used as Hwood sets.  Pink and gold faucet *√*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Nope, if the rumors about the interactions between the Harkles and TP'staff are true. I sincerely hope they are not.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rumors only
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Does Not Like People Disrespecting His Staff
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry treats his staff like proper human beings. When Meghan used and abused them, he kicked her and Harry out of his home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cjhawkings.com


Yikes.
The brother’s shadow thing is very high strung drama perhaps TP had them over to get inspiration perhaps for
“Madea goes *really* nuts” or “madea’s narcissist management”


CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch, if true.



Oh Harry do you want to live like common people now? 


CarryOn2020 said:


> First timers in the Mcmansion world were easily duped, bought into the myth rather than the reality. Didn’t do the research, pay for their own inspectors, ask the correct questions, etc.  Maybe no one at the palace/family advised them.    Not criticizing the previous owners, many of us quickly found numerous flaws in this choice and location, so the info was certainly available.


Ermm, are you forgetting they are such real estate mavens they realised frog cott wasn’t good enough hours after completion at public expense? 

We all hate the mansion and think their former home was nicer but let’s not forget H can sleep in the yard year round in CA.



CeeJay said:


> Likely some Trust .. which may not even be a Trust 'owned' by them .. who knows?!?!?!
> 
> Like someone else said before, she is NEVER going to be happy wherever she lives, whatever she does .. she really wants to be the "QUEEN" of the world .. she is one SICK person IMO!





LittleStar88 said:


> I still believe that the cost of the house (mortgage, taxes, maintenance, etc) are being run through a business (Archwell pays) and they’re not paying any of it out of their own personal “income”, including not paying taxes on the financial benefit of living in the house.
> 
> It could be costing more than the business has coming in to afford. Or that they’re not getting The social benefits of living amongst the wealthy and famous so time to look for new poaching ground?
> 
> Honestly I don’t think Harry can give up the barefoot SoCal lifestyle. He seems to be enjoying that permanent vacation in the sunshine vibe.


I think you are both on the money on this they’ll have tied it up in so much red tape to avoid paying taxes but fingers crossed they’ve been a bit too noisy about it for the IRS.


Chanbal said:


> Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5287360


Good to know Black Widow’s birthday unsure how it fits with the other dates


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hello! says this place could be their next purchase -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bhhscalifornia.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fitting that it is located in Birnam Wood, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could upgrade Montecito mansion to neighbouring £22m chateau
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's neighbours in Montecito have put their home on the market – and it's fit for royalty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


That’s brilliant and there is no way Lady Megbeth & third codpiece are getting that joke


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Don't you love the gold and pink faucets?


The funny thing is, I took the pic below in a powder room at the Ritz Paris:


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> H can sleep in the yard year round in CA.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever. 

Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


Welcome back!    We missed you


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.



You were missed, good to have you back! 

Mwah


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


So glad to see you back!  You were definitely missed!


----------



## bellecate

Hope she spends her £1 wisely.


----------



## papertiger

^ and from the Guardian Newspaper: 







*Meghan to receive just £1 from Mail on Sunday for privacy invasion*

Jim Waterson Media editor
Wed, 5 January 2022, 6:00 am






Photograph: Peter Foley/EPA
The Mail on Sunday will pay the Duchess of Sussex just £1 in damages for invading her privacy by publishing a private letter she had sent to her father.
The nominal sum is set out in court documents that also formally confirm that the newspaper – and its sister website MailOnline – has accepted defeat and will not be taking the long-running case to a supreme court appeal.
The outlet will also pay an unspecified sum for the separate case of infringing Meghan’s copyright by publishing large chunks of the letter.
Mark Stephens, a media lawyer, suggested that the nominal settlement for the privacy aspect suggested a weakness in that aspect of Meghan’s case: “Normally for that kind of invasion of privacy you would expect £75,000 to £125,000. It does show that the curation of her reputation was an area where she had effectively invaded her own privacy.”

The newspaper’s publisher has also agreed to pay a confidential sum in damages for copyright infringement. The Mail on Sunday also faces having to cover a substantial part of Meghan’s legal costs, which could be more than £1m.
Related: How Meghan took personal risks in Mail on Sunday privacy victory
The duchess had always said that her three-year legal battle against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and sister website MailOnline, was more about principles than money.
As part of the court settlement the Mail outlets have also been ordered to avoid disclosing the names of five of Meghan’s friends who anonymously spoke to People magazine for a 2018 article about the royal. The newspaper had previously sought to name the individuals in legal proceedings.
The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline were also ordered to carry front and homepage declarations that they had lost the legal case, with the courts even specifying which font the statements should appear in. The outlets chose to do that on Boxing Day, one of the quietest news days of the year.
Associated Newspapers had argued that Meghan’s case should have gone to trial but judges concluded ruled otherwise.
A ruling at the start of December said the duchess had a “reasonable expectation” of privacy regarding the contents of the letter to her father, Thomas Markle.
“Those contents were personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest,” said appeal judge Sir Geoffrey Vos.
Meghan celebrated that victory by calling for a reshaping of the tabloid industry and spoke of how she had been patient in the face of “deception, intimidation, and calculated attacks” and criticised a “tabloid industry that conditions people to be cruel, and profits from the lies and pain that they create”.
At the time Associated Newspapers claimed it was willing to take the case to the supreme court but this turned out to be an empty threat.
Focus is now likely to turn to the actions of the duchess’s husband, Prince Harry, who is suing both Rupert Murdoch’s News UK and Daily Mirror publisher Reach over phone-hacking claims in a case that could be heard later this year.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _But it's another hat—or a crown, rather—that he told me about over coffee at the Bazaar offices. At age 11, Lubormirski discovered a Polish royal lineage on his father's side that dates as far back as 500 years. It was a Princess Diaries moment of sorts but with a catch—the house's reign had ended, and Alexi's seat would be the first not to bear any royal accouterments. "In one generation, everything flipped completely," he says. "I was one generation away from 500 years of history."
> 
> Regardless, Lubomirski, encouraged by his mother, took his legacy to heart. "*If you are to be a prince in today's world," she told him when he was young, "you have to be a prince in your heart and actions." Since then, he has lived life according to the spirit of the William Shakespeare quote from Henry VI, Part 3 that opens Lubomirski's new book, Princely Advice for a Happy Life: "My crown is in my heart, not on my head." In other words: live like a gent.*_




I think I can see now why Raptor is fond of him. They share the same ego.


_



			The most poignant secrets of his temperament, however, are not detailed in this book. He spilled to Bazaar what he says is the most important lesson he's learned about maintaining a lasting relationship: "You have got to be a cheesy romantic!" And, oh, is he. A traditional wedding anniversary with his wife Giada, formerly a curator for Milk Studios whom he wed six years ago, was not enough; "I decided to do a month-iversary every month on the 8th, as we got married on the 8th," he reveals. "I write a poem, I give her a rose, and I give her a pearl. It is an incredible relationship tool because on the 8th of every month you are not necessarily best friends, so I am forced to concentrate on everything I love about her rather than the fact she told me off about the toothpaste." And what of the pearls he gifts her? "She keeps them in this glass jar next to our bed so you get to see the physical idea of our love growing. When we have a granddaughter, then we will string them on a necklace on her wedding day." Swoon.
		
Click to expand...

_
WTF  And I'm all for grand gestures and gifts of jewelry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I was reading an interview with a photog who specializes in wedding shoots, and she frankly states that they touch up the photos because their job is to make the bride and groom look fantastic on their big day. But the examples she quoted were mainly stuff like filters, soft focus, colour enhancement, and cropping. Half a baby replacement is pretty extreme and probably made possible only because Methane's dark blue sweater arm diagonally bisected the child.



I really feel Photoshop is like Botox. Just enough to look fresh and glowy, not enough to be obvious, and it's really hard to find someone who is stellar at their craft.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Surprised this has not been posted here yet. It's unbelievable… I don't know the people involved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Journalist says Queen should have died instead of Betty White
> 
> 
> Nylah Burton,  who has written several articles arguing in favour of the Sussexes and critiquing the Royal Family, reacted as many did to the television legend's death but put a bizarre spin on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: There is more…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5286287



I read that when it unfolded on Twitter and I was stunned. Disclaimer, I still have 10 pages to go, but do we have word what happened with her and her Vogue etc. gigs? Then again Vogue published a really nasty piece of hers upon the death of Philip, so apparently they are cool with this.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read that when it unfolded on Twitter and I was stunned. Disclaimer, I still have 10 pages to go, but do we have word what happened with her and her Vogue etc. gigs? Then again Vogue published a really nasty piece of hers upon the death of Philip, so apparently they are cool with this.


There’s a petition on change.org to have Vogue fire her.  Not very promising.  I had hoped she would end up in the receiving line of a soup kitchen.

eta:  Ok, I don’t really wish that on anyone but I do find her and Vogue repulsive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


Welcome back Queen!
What better way to spend to January?


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> ^ and from the Guardian Newspaper:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan to receive just £1 from Mail on Sunday for privacy invasion*
> 
> Jim Waterson Media editor
> Wed, 5 January 2022, 6:00 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photograph: Peter Foley/EPA
> The Mail on Sunday will pay the Duchess of Sussex just £1 in damages for invading her privacy by publishing a private letter she had sent to her father.
> The nominal sum is set out in court documents that also formally confirm that the newspaper – and its sister website MailOnline – has accepted defeat and will not be taking the long-running case to a supreme court appeal.
> The outlet will also pay an unspecified sum for the separate case of infringing Meghan’s copyright by publishing large chunks of the letter.
> Mark Stephens, a media lawyer, suggested that the nominal settlement for the privacy aspect suggested a weakness in that aspect of Meghan’s case: “Normally for that kind of invasion of privacy you would expect £75,000 to £125,000. It does show that the curation of her reputation was an area where she had effectively invaded her own privacy.”
> 
> The newspaper’s publisher has also agreed to pay a confidential sum in damages for copyright infringement. The Mail on Sunday also faces having to cover a substantial part of Meghan’s legal costs, which could be more than £1m.
> Related: How Meghan took personal risks in Mail on Sunday privacy victory
> The duchess had always said that her three-year legal battle against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and sister website MailOnline, was more about principles than money.
> As part of the court settlement the Mail outlets have also been ordered to avoid disclosing the names of five of Meghan’s friends who anonymously spoke to People magazine for a 2018 article about the royal. The newspaper had previously sought to name the individuals in legal proceedings.
> The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline were also ordered to carry front and homepage declarations that they had lost the legal case, with the courts even specifying which font the statements should appear in. The outlets chose to do that on Boxing Day, one of the quietest news days of the year.
> Associated Newspapers had argued that Meghan’s case should have gone to trial but judges concluded ruled otherwise.
> A ruling at the start of December said the duchess had a “reasonable expectation” of privacy regarding the contents of the letter to her father, Thomas Markle.
> “Those contents were personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest,” said appeal judge Sir Geoffrey Vos.
> Meghan celebrated that victory by calling for a reshaping of the tabloid industry and spoke of how she had been patient in the face of “deception, intimidation, and calculated attacks” and criticised a “tabloid industry that conditions people to be cruel, and profits from the lies and pain that they create”.
> At the time Associated Newspapers claimed it was willing to take the case to the supreme court but this turned out to be an empty threat.
> Focus is now likely to turn to the actions of the duchess’s husband, Prince Harry, who is suing both Rupert Murdoch’s News UK and Daily Mirror publisher Reach over phone-hacking claims in a case that could be heard later this year.


Oh I love this. This is just hilarious!!!

she did say it was about the principle not the money so she should be very happy with this

I wonder what £1 will get her these days …chicken feed? Packet of crisps? A copy of the bench?


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> A copy of the bench?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Remember the story of Elton sending his private plane to take them to Ibiza - or some equivalent $$$$ warm place for a vacay with Sir Elton ?? H&M took a lot of heat for the carbon footprint of the private plane trips. Then Elton came to their rescue and said he contributed to a green charity  to offset their emissions.
> 
> Well, listening to a documentary on Youtube - the witty Stephen Fry talking about the work of Gutenberg & the printing press
> 
> I did not know... The Bible was not the first Gutenberg project.  He started printing Indulgences for the Catholic Church. A rich medieval person bought his way into heaven - big payment to Church - and in exchange got a Church certificate (called an indulgence). The certificate said he was going to get into Heaven. See Wiki for more accurate discussion.
> 
> Fry was likening the green charity donations - to offset emissions - to indulgences.  Thought that was a witty metaphor



Also, from an environmental viewpoint planting a tree is simply not the same as never taking that private jet trip.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5288480
> 
> Hope she spends her £1 wisely.





papertiger said:


> ^ and from the Guardian Newspaper:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan to receive just £1 from Mail on Sunday for privacy invasion*
> 
> Jim Waterson Media editor
> Wed, 5 January 2022, 6:00 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photograph: Peter Foley/EPA
> The Mail on Sunday will pay the Duchess of Sussex just £1 in damages for invading her privacy by publishing a private letter she had sent to her father.
> The nominal sum is set out in court documents that also formally confirm that the newspaper – and its sister website MailOnline – has accepted defeat and will not be taking the long-running case to a supreme court appeal.
> The outlet will also pay an unspecified sum for the separate case of infringing Meghan’s copyright by publishing large chunks of the letter.
> Mark Stephens, a media lawyer, suggested that the nominal settlement for the privacy aspect suggested a weakness in that aspect of Meghan’s case: “Normally for that kind of invasion of privacy you would expect £75,000 to £125,000. It does show that the curation of her reputation was an area where she had effectively invaded her own privacy.”
> 
> The newspaper’s publisher has also agreed to pay a confidential sum in damages for copyright infringement. The Mail on Sunday also faces having to cover a substantial part of Meghan’s legal costs, which could be more than £1m.
> Related: How Meghan took personal risks in Mail on Sunday privacy victory
> The duchess had always said that her three-year legal battle against Associated Newspapers, the publisher of the Mail on Sunday and sister website MailOnline, was more about principles than money.
> As part of the court settlement the Mail outlets have also been ordered to avoid disclosing the names of five of Meghan’s friends who anonymously spoke to People magazine for a 2018 article about the royal. The newspaper had previously sought to name the individuals in legal proceedings.
> The Mail on Sunday and MailOnline were also ordered to carry front and homepage declarations that they had lost the legal case, with the courts even specifying which font the statements should appear in. The outlets chose to do that on Boxing Day, one of the quietest news days of the year.
> Associated Newspapers had argued that Meghan’s case should have gone to trial but judges concluded ruled otherwise.
> A ruling at the start of December said the duchess had a “reasonable expectation” of privacy regarding the contents of the letter to her father, Thomas Markle.
> “Those contents were personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest,” said appeal judge Sir Geoffrey Vos.
> Meghan celebrated that victory by calling for a reshaping of the tabloid industry and spoke of how she had been patient in the face of “deception, intimidation, and calculated attacks” and criticised a “tabloid industry that conditions people to be cruel, and profits from the lies and pain that they create”.
> At the time Associated Newspapers claimed it was willing to take the case to the supreme court but this turned out to be an empty threat.
> Focus is now likely to turn to the actions of the duchess’s husband, Prince Harry, who is suing both Rupert Murdoch’s News UK and Daily Mirror publisher Reach over phone-hacking claims in a case that could be heard later this year.



Did I read this well? MM is getting 1 pound ($1.36 US dollars) from DM as compensation for privacy invasion.  It's now believable that she will donate 100% of that money to charity.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! The one pound settlement may have costed Ginger's inheritance half of a million pounds. I wonder if this is why Ginger is considered a Head for Business!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Oops, should we anticipate more broken dishes?
> View attachment 5287833



MM is lucky this wasn’t a “Do and Don’t “ article, with her heading up the Don’t category!!  Pretty soon she will need to invest in throwing platters as plates must be starting to feel rather small.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


welcome back...sucks being blocked


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


>




I wonder if she will have to pay the wire transfer fees to get the 1 pound from DM. 

Poor MM, the funds will not be enough to buy a bottle of her favorite wine to celebrate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.



Yay! Welcome back! I have missed you  
It certainly saddened to me to find out something like that _could_ happen and _did_ happen, especially over a holiday. IMO  it’s a game-changer. Still, welcome back. Hope your holidays were the happiest 

RE: catching up?  Nah, there hasn’t been too much traffic here. Seems the toxic two are turn-offs


----------



## Roxanna

Delighted to see you back, QueenofWD.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


WHAT?!?!? .. well, join an illustrious group of us who have had this happen to us!  You can, BTW .. ask "why" if you know who put the kibash on you.  Glad you're back, but totally hear you on catching up!!


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5288480
> 
> Hope she spends her £1 wisely.



Spoiler alert for those who aren't familiar with Leon Uris

Sounds like the end of QBVII where the jury awarded Kelno with a ha'penny  as damages for the libel


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.





CeeJay said:


> WHAT?!?!? .. well, join an illustrious group of us who have had this happen to us!  You can, BTW .. ask "why" if you know who put the kibash on you.  Glad you're back, but totally hear you on catching up!!



Ditto. I was sent to the PF woodshed for a while. It's nice to chat with former (not necessarily rehabilitated ) inmates. PFers with a clean record don't know what it's like on the inside. My PF rap sheet isn't too long, but I can relate to others who've served time. It doesn't take long to "catch up" with Prince and Mrs. Loser since whatever they do is always reliably idiotic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if she will have to pay the wire transfer fees to get the 1 pound from DM.
> 
> Poor MM, the funds will not be enough to buy a bottle of her favorite wine to celebrate.
> 
> View attachment 5288680



Oh my. I don't drink and never bothered to look up that wine, but I'm kind of not surprised it's on the pricey end. She is so pretentious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> WHAT?!?!? .. well, join an illustrious group of us who have had this happen to us!  You can, BTW .. ask "why" if you know who put the kibash on you.  Glad you're back, but totally hear you on catching up!!



Oh, they gave a reason, it's just that I plead not guilty  I'll say it's just no fun seeing new developments when I can't chat with y'all about it and have to be annoyed all by myself 

Speaking of new developments, you've done a fine job dissecting the Christmas card (I can do without seeing pictures of Raptor at all, I saw the Di connection, but I did think it could have been so much worse...it was pretty inoffensive for them) - but have we talked about why now?

I truly think no reputable magazine was offering the huge bucks and mega-spread they had expected and at some point they HAD to show the phantom child, so they gave it the charity spin.


----------



## gracekelly

Queenie and Rose, you took one for the team.  For this we all love you!  Well, we love you anyway   

Could I feel sorry for the hapless duo that they are not happy in their forever home?  I could, but I don't think that I will.  We all called out the problems with the place and location when they bought it.  Another case of not thinking it through.  It isn't the place for young children and they are too far from the hub of business.  The place is a money pit to boot.  I doubt that Harry ever changed even a light bulb in his life.  Dealing with a large home is not something he would be familiar with.  

Chunga Changa is still open for residency.


----------



## bellecate

Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996



oh please. she couldn't wait to tell "her truth"


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996


"Were" not "we're"!! Are we supposed to take seriously someone who doesn't know the difference??


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996



Are they still playing the Diana card?  Yawn.

If that doesn’t work, they will try the Lilibet card.  Sheeesh, is there  no end to this?  Kate’s birthday is January 9 - expect some kind of kerfuffle.  Yawn. Yawn.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they still playing the Diana card?  Yawn.
> 
> If that doesn’t work, they will try the Lilibet card.  Sheeesh, is there  no end to this?  Kate’s birthday is January 9 - expect some kind of kerfuffle.  Yawn. Yawn.



I have no doubt they will make some kind of "sweet nod" to the Queen. I'm sure they're panicking that their grand scheme to conquer the hearts and minds of America is not going according to (her) plan.


----------



## marietouchet

Does anyone have substantive info that they want to move or is this FAKE NEWS ???
of course, one story was too good to ignore, showings are taking place but only by invite 

on another subject… have we discussed that ARCHEWELL only had $50k of receipts last year, with outlays exceeding that (cost more than $50k to close up shop on Sussexroyal)


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. I don't drink and never bothered to look up that wine, but I'm kind of not surprised it's on the pricey end. She is so pretentious.


Yep, there are plenty of great wines out there that don't cost ~$150/bottle. She is certainly pretentious.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996


It looks like they are comparing Oprah to Martin Bashir. Oops, I don't think OW will be pleased.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are comparing Oprah to Martin Bashir. Oops, I don't think OW will be pleased.


First Tyler Perry now Oprah? Nice work Duke and Duchess of Burningbridges.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> In three years' time, they've lived in three different countries-UK, Canada, US. Is any country good enough for them? They treat the Globe like their Merry-Go-Round. I wish they'd just buy an island somewhere, name it Chunga Changa, establish themselves as King and Queen over a population of 4 and be done with it.


What happen to H's love of Africa?  Has he even been back since the royal tour?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996



     

Excuse me while I try to catch my breath.

I guess being nobodies on the verge of being broke isn't all that much fun, hu?


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> What happen to H's love of Africa?  Has he even been back since the royal tour?


He may still love Africa but I sincerely doubt she does. She played along to get the ring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996


Wow they are tap dancing to save their lives!  Oprah made them do it?  Did she make them lie? It's true that there was no real fact checking by Oprah's staff and the false newspaper didn't help.  I didn't see Harry and Meghan tied to their chairs to do the interview.  I have no respect for people who just use excuse after excuse to explain their bad behavior.  I think people are tired of them and their whining.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Wow they are tap dancing to save their lives!  Oprah made them do it?  Did she make them lie? It's true that there was no real fact checking by Oprah's staff and the false newspaper didn't help.  I didn't see Harry and Meghan tied to their chairs to do the interview.  I have no respect for people who just use excuse after excuse to explain their bad behavior.  I think people are tired of them and their whining.


I don't think they want to piss of Oprah. Yikes!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Wow they are tap dancing to save their lives!  Oprah made them do it?  Did she make them lie? It's true that there was no real fact checking by Oprah's staff and the false newspaper didn't help.  I didn't see Harry and Meghan tied to their chairs to do the interview.  I have no respect for people who just use excuse after excuse to explain their bad behavior.  I think people are tired of them and their whining.


Even if OW convinced them that the interview would be a good idea to sway public opinion to their side, and that may have worked since there was a post-broadcast survey showing that many Americans were sympathetic, the overacting on their part was their own contribution to the sham of a truth.

M: I'll lay on the smoky eye and dab my eyes at crucial points. It will look like I'm breaking down when I reveal how badly I was treated. Tug at the heartstrings!

H: I'll time my entry to reinforce the agony we felt when I told her about the racist comment. That will turn people against my family. How dare they expect us to pay for anything ourselves! Financial independence means they should give us money to live as we wish!

OW: Great ideas! I'll go "No...o...o...o..." at regular intervals to make sure Oprah fans know the extent of my disbelief that such horrors happened to you! My credibility will ensure no one questions you.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> I don't think they want to piss of Oprah. Yikes!


Oprah will just ghost them.  How about that story that Meghan had a fight with Doria and threw her out and Doria went over to Oprah's house.  There hasn't been a word about Doria in a long time.  I expected Christmas pictures of her with the family even if they didn't show the faces of the children.


----------



## xincinsin

This funny fact just appeared on my feed.








						Meghan Markle's £100,000 engagement ring is 'dazzlingly expensive'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE owns the world's most Googled royal engagement ring according to new research, after marrying into the Royal Family nearly four years ago.




					www.express.co.uk
				



The only reason Methane's engagement ring tops the searches is because she isn't satisfied with what Hazard gave her and does shoddy upgrades.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Six carats? Is that with the side stones and the band? No way that center stone is six carats.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> First Tyler Perry now Oprah? Nice work Duke and Duchess of Burningbridges.


Yep! The Aussies put it nicely: 'a woman at war with everyone'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Six carats? Is that with the side stones and the band? No way that center stone is six carats.



This is a 6 carat cushion cut.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Six carats? Is that with the side stones and the band? No way that center stone is six carats.


It's good to have you back


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a 6 carat cushion cut.
> 
> View attachment 5289272


Maybe she picked up a bargain on eBay:


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> I don't think they want to piss of Oprah. Yikes!



Maybe that is why they want to move!


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a 6 carat cushion cut.
> 
> View attachment 5289272



Isn't Not-So-Hilarious Baldwin's ring about 6 carats?  Her ring looks like an ice skating rink compared with MM's.


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting opinion.   

_A Woman Of Substance author *Barbara Taylor Bradford*, who was handed an OBE by the Queen, claims the *Duchess of Sussex** tried — and failed — to outshine Her Majesty*.

'*Meghan came to the UK imagining she'd be the star of the red carpet, even though she wasn't much more than a starlet in America,*' she says of the U.S. former actress.

'What she didn't realise is that we already have a shining star on the red carpet, someone who's been there for 70 years. She's called the Queen.'_









						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Meghan Markle is a starlet, not a star
					

RICHARD EDEN: A Woman Of Substance author Barbara Taylor Bradford, who was handed an OBE by the Queen, claims the Duchess of Sussex tried - and failed - to outshine Her Majesty.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> An interesting opinion.
> 
> _A Woman Of Substance author *Barbara Taylor Bradford*, who was handed an OBE by the Queen, claims the *Duchess of Sussex** tried — and failed — to outshine Her Majesty*.
> 
> '*Meghan came to the UK imagining she'd be the star of the red carpet, even though she wasn't much more than a starlet in America,*' she says of the U.S. former actress.
> 
> 'What she didn't realise is that we already have a shining star on the red carpet, someone who's been there for 70 years. She's called the Queen.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Meghan Markle is a starlet, not a star
> 
> 
> RICHARD EDEN: A Woman Of Substance author Barbara Taylor Bradford, who was handed an OBE by the Queen, claims the Duchess of Sussex tried - and failed - to outshine Her Majesty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I agree that Methane thought she was going to be a star. Part of the whole Diana v.2 deal. And I do believe her hightailing it back to the US was because her star wasn't shining as brightly or rising as swiftly as she expected. She believed that she was going to outshine all the other members of the BRF, Hazard's family would bow down before her superior intellect and frightfully modern ideas, that the common rabble would be mesmerized by her cutesy tongue-poking and salacious pelvis thrusts, and that she would become the Queen of Hearts. I'm not sure if she can be faulted for her assumptions. Obviously her "charms" worked on Hazard, and she must have thought he was a typical Brit and member of the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These people scare me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I agree that *Methane thought she was going to be a star. Part of the whole Diana v.2 deal.* And I do believe her hightailing it back to the US was because her star wasn't shining as brightly or rising as swiftly as she expected. She believed that she was going to outshine all the other members of the BRF, Hazard's family would bow down before her superior intellect and frightfully modern ideas, that the common rabble would be mesmerized by her cutesy tongue-poking and salacious pelvis thrusts, and that she would become the Queen of Hearts. I'm not sure if she can be faulted for her assumptions. Obviously her "charms" worked on Hazard, and she must have thought he was a typical Brit and member of the BRF.



Well said.  That attitude is there from the beginning. I want to know who led her to believe that she would be a star as a married-in.  Oprah? Hazzie? Markus? I read somewhere that William said she is a _disruptor _which is not good for the BRF, an institution based on history and order.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These people scare me.



queen doria?  king archie?  what idiots


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said.  That attitude is there from the beginning. I want to know who led her to believe that she would be a star as a married-in.  Oprah? Hazzie? Markus? I read somewhere that William said she is a _disruptor _which is not good for the BRF, an institution based on history and order.


I doubt anyone needed to tell her she was going to be a star.  I think the narcissist could come up with this on her own


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> Isn't Not-So-Hilarious Baldwin's ring about 6 carats?  Her ring looks like an ice skating rink compared with MM's.


According to a jeweler quoted on Page Six Hilarious's upgrade is 8-10 carats.


> https://pagesix.com/2019/05/08/alec-baldwin-upgrades-wife-hilarias-engagement-ring-to-800k-rock/


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said.  That attitude is there from the beginning. *I want to know who led her to believe that she would be a star *as a married-in.  Oprah? Hazzie? Markus? I read somewhere that William said she is a _disruptor _which is not good for the BRF, an institution based on history and order.



Nobody tells Meghan what to believe, SHE TELLS THEM. While it's difficult for the sane among us to understand the mentality of someone barging into a centuries-old institution and thinking she will revamp and mondernize it, that is exactly what happened. Her grasping for power and influence was greater than what the job actually allows.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said.  That attitude is there from the beginning. *I want to know who led her to believe that she would be a star as a married-in.*  Oprah? Hazzie? Markus? I read somewhere that William said she is a _disruptor _which is not good for the BRF, an institution based on history and order.



I really think it was her inflated ego. I just don't fully understand how seeing she wasn't even a true star in her native OR adopted country (Canada I mean). It's not like Harry found himself a Grace Kelly.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nobody tells Meghan what to believe, SHE TELLS THEM. While it's difficult for the sane among us to understand the mentality of someone barging into a centuries-old institution and thinking she will revamp and mondernize it, that is exactly what happened. Her grasping for power and influence was greater than what the job actually allows.


her story is really a case of truth is stranger than fiction.  she was a supporting actor an a regular cable tv show that didn't have a huge audience (I would guess maybe ten percent of what a show like Friends had).  somehow - apparently through her excellent networking skills - she was able (at a rather ripe age) to land a prince from the most famous RF in the world.  AND that wasn't enough.  She was merely surviving, not thriving.  No wonder we all find this interesting to "talk" about.  It's close to unbelievable.  But it is getting less and less interesting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> queen doria?  king archie?  what idiots



Speaking of Doria: I really believe there was a, uh, disagreement, and it also shows us how the Harkles' PR machine works. There was no need to shove Doria down our collective throats like this from the few random sightings of her. Then there's rumour of a fight and boom, it's like Doria fell off the face of the earth. No pap pics, no sugary PR articles from one day to another, and she's yet to resurface. 

I wonder what she did, try to talk some sense into her lunatic spawn? Ask for financial compensation? Or did Raptor just feel she didn't need the narrative of being oh so close to Mommy anymore?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of Doria: I really believe there was a, uh, disagreement, and it also shows us how the Harkles' PR machine works. There was no need to shove Doria down our collective throats like this from the few random sightings of her. Then there's rumour of a fight and boom, it's like Doria fell off the face of the earth. No pap pics, no sugary PR articles from one day to another, and she's yet to resurface.
> 
> I wonder what she did, try to talk some sense into her lunatic spawn? Ask for financial compensation? Or did Raptor just feel she didn't need the narrative of being oh so close to Mommy anymore?


mom isn't useful to her anymore (or right now)?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Nobody tells Meghan what to believe, SHE TELLS THEM. *While it's difficult for the sane among us to understand the mentality of someone barging into a centuries-old institution and thinking she will revamp and mondernize it*, that is exactly what happened. Her grasping for power and influence was greater than what the job actually allows.



To me, it makes sense that she had someone older, wiser, financially-able guiding her every step of the way. Perhaps Ben Mulroney made the introductions.  On her own, she doesn’t seem _that_ smart, clever, gifted, etc. Ellen proved that.  IMO


----------



## rose60610

For the one and only family member to attend Meghan Mangle's wedding there sure isn't much talk or attention given to Doria, especially since they've been geographically close.

And MM's visions of being Diana 2.0 didn't pan out. Regardless of some of the things said about Diana here, I think it's accurate to say that Diana was authentic and genuine in her empathy for other people. And by and large she was a likable person in general. I was never crazy about her but considering Camilla was in the shadows for the whole marriage I can't blame her for that bitterness. Fashionwise, we have to remember that it was the 80's. And her entire wardrobe FIT VERY WELL!

Whenever MM opens her stupid "widdle goilie poo poo voice" mouth she calculates which lies will have the greatest impact for her sugars and make headlines. Such as throwing the BRF under the bus. And of course, any criticism of her is met with the knee jerk reaction race card. She's as authentic as the worst soap opera.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Oprah will just ghost them.  How about that story that Meghan had a fight with Doria and threw her out and Doria went over to Oprah's house.  There hasn't been a word about Doria in a long time.  I expected Christmas pictures of her with the family even if they didn't show the faces of the children.


Oh you think it’s time for fiery expose part two?
Part one- baby boy Harry abandoned at 40 by elitist family 
Part two- Single Mom Doria abandoned by elitist Daughter…
Escandalo!!!


	

		
			
		

		
	
I dunno, on the one hand she bought her some shell business to launder money through….on the other hand if the money’s running out  

I think Scobie should find his freedom and start spilling the beans…after all it’d help his obvious desire to get a career in reality tv going. He could do celebrity big brother! 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Six carats? Is that with the side stones and the band? No way that center stone is six carats.


It’s 6 carats if you count Diana’s ring
which she should’ve got as her true heir 

I agree. It’s nowhere near. I clock that as a 3 carat centre stone tops and it’s always been a wonky design. I do think it is very symbolic of their union though


Also on what planet has that absolute non entity of a ring ever touched the scale of talked about?

It’s up against such contenders as Liz Taylor’s ice rink, Paris Hilton’s ring which really fired up the canary diamond trend, Kim and Bey’s knuckle dusters, All 50 of Mariah’s legendary e rings, Diana’s ring,ScarJo’s brown coathook and of course, let’s not forget the absolute blazer Camilla has- it’s not even close to best ring in the royal family



I think this says it all tbh.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> According to a jeweler quoted on Page Six Hilarious's upgrade is 8-10 carats.


Well now I’ve got to google it and find out yet another thing about Hilary Baldwin while still never seeing her crazy ass mentioned outside this forum 


add on- it’s a boring ring Hilaria!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I love that guy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These people scare me.



Love the spelling -  Lilly

And if Doris is Queen, then does that not push MM down the totem pole ???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s 6 carats if you count Diana’s ring
> which she should’ve got as her true heir







> I agree. It’s nowhere near. I clock that as a 3 carat centre stone tops and it’s always been a wonky design. I do think it is very symbolic of their union though



I agree with all three assessments.



> It’s up against such contenders as Liz Taylor’s ice rink, Paris Hilton’s ring which really fired up the canary diamond trend, Kim and Bey’s knuckle dusters, All 50 of Mariah’s legendary e rings, Diana’s ring,ScarJo’s brown coathook and of course, let’s not forget the absolute blazer Camilla has- it’s not even close to best ring in the royal family



I'll say there IS too much of a good thing. Bey's, the Kardashians', Liz's famous ring are vulgar. Camilla's is gorgeous though.



> View attachment 5289786



That's because her husband is actually loaded


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I had to google Scarlett's. WTH is that.

I mean, get what you love even if it is hideous, but do you really want to wear something like this every day for the next 50 years, no matter what other jewelry you're wearing?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I had to google Scarlett's. WTH is that.
> 
> I mean, get what you love even if it is hideous, but do you really want to wear something like this every day for the next 50 years, no matter what other jewelry you're wearing?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I had to google Scarlett's. WTH is that.
> 
> I mean, get what you love even if it is hideous, but do you really want to wear something like this every day for the next 50 years, no matter what other jewelry you're wearing?


it's probably in a safe or bank vault....she's either wearing a dupe or just not wearing it all the time I'd venture


----------



## tannim44

sdkitty said:


> Excuse me for going OT but as much as I dislike Meghan, I've found a "celeb" who is think is actually much worse - Elizabeth Holmes.  Hope she does a substantial amount of time for her crimes.


Give credit where credit is due though, Holmes found a rich guy and got his family to love her.  His dad actually attended her trial and sat with the family.  MM should really get some tips from Holmes on how to make friends and influence people.  Holmes may be going to prison for fraud, but people who know her seem to like her much better than anybody likes MM.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> That place is ridiculous. And I don't mean that in a good way.


I liked the bathroom faucets and that was all. The rest was hideous (apologies to any TPF'ers that have similar homes).


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I had to google Scarlett's. WTH is that.
> 
> I mean, get what you love even if it is hideous, but do you really want to wear something like this every day for the next 50 years, no matter what other jewelry you're wearing?


Yes it’s really quirky let’s say… I go in stages of thinking it’s creative and then thinking it’s awful and back again.
 tbh I think a lot of these ice rinks stay in the safe most of the time.

I do think some of them are just big for the sake of it and have no design at all


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> He may still love Africa but I sincerely doubt she does. She played along to get the ring.


You must mean she _pee'd_ along to get the ring.


----------



## xincinsin

In the minority here, I love ScarJo's ring. It's really unusual and I love brown diamonds.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a 6 carat cushion cut.
> 
> View attachment 5289272


Great to have you back! And I also thought 6 carats would be larger than her center stone (and imo she has never "been over the moon" with that ring either, too many alterations).


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> In the minority here, I love ScarJo's ring. It's really unusual and I love brown diamonds.


It's by Taffin .. and their jewelry ain't cheap by any means!!!  While I love my Diamond ring (since I designed and fabricated it), in general .. I'm not a HUGE fan of sparkling white diamonds .. I prefer the 'natural' tones.  My grey diamond (set in 18k Rose Gold) pinkie ring always gets comments and it is a favorite of mine for sure!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> mom isn't useful to her anymore (or right now)?


I had assumed she'd move Doria in with them like Michelle O moved her mother into the WH. But who am I kidding?


----------



## sdkitty

tannim44 said:


> Give credit where credit is due though, Holmes found a rich guy and got his family to love her.  His dad actually attended her trial and sat with the family.  MM should really get some tips from Holmes on how to make friends and influence people.  Holmes may be going to prison for fraud, but people who know her seem to like her much better than anybody likes MM.


read the book
yes, people who she finds helpful like her.  but the way the treated her employees was horrific


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I had to google Scarlett's. WTH is that.
> 
> I mean, get what you love even if it is hideous, but do you really want to wear something like this every day for the next 50 years, no matter what other jewelry you're wearing?


You're being very generous. 50 years is optimistic for a celebrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Camilla's is gorgeous though.


Would you have a pic? I'm just curious and too lazy to Google right now.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> Would you have a pic? I'm just curious and too lazy to Google right now.


----------



## LittleStar88

Camilla Parker Bowles' Engagement Ring Is About as Luxe as It Gets
					

The Duchess of Cornwall's bling doesn't get the attention it deserves.




					www.goodhousekeeping.com


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of Doria: I really believe there was a, uh, disagreement, and it also shows us how the Harkles' PR machine works. There was no need to shove Doria down our collective throats like this from the few random sightings of her. Then there's rumour of a fight and boom, it's like Doria fell off the face of the earth. No pap pics, no sugary PR articles from one day to another, and she's yet to resurface.
> 
> I wonder what she did, try to talk some sense into her lunatic spawn? Ask for financial compensation? Or did Raptor just feel she didn't need the narrative of being oh so close to Mommy anymore?


Probably thought Doria wasn't good enough to help raise her royal spawn. She probably wanted a Norland nanny, even though she seemed to want to reject all that is British. Including Harry at some point.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love that guy.




sort of gives new meaning to the old saw "penny wise pound foolish"


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love that guy.



"Poundland Duchess" ??  Does that mean what I think it means?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> You're being very generous. 50 years is optimistic for a celebrity.



True, but I like to believe even they don't go into a marriage thinking in 5 years they'll have another one anyway


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Camilla Parker Bowles' Engagement Ring Is About as Luxe as It Gets
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cornwall's bling doesn't get the attention it deserves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodhousekeeping.com


That is an appropriate ring for an older woman. You need bigger rings on older hands to distract from the veins and age spots. But she has very nice hands for a horsewoman of a certain age.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but I like to believe even they don't go into a marriage thinking in 5 years they'll have another one anyway


You'd be surprised. You've heard the term "starter wife"?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> *Probably thought Doria wasn't good enough to help raise her royal spawn.* She probably wanted a Norland nanny, even though she seemed to want to reject all that is British. Including Harry at some point.


Really? The classes didn't help, really??? 

_Eager to continue the emotional and practical support, the 62-year-old has signed up to grandparenting lessons with baby expert Brandi Jordan, according to reports.

Known as 'The Baby Sleep Fairy' and based in Los Angeles, Brandi charges a string of A-list clients £5,000 for sessions._









						Meghan's mum 'signs up to £5,000 grandparenting class' after Baby Sussex's birth
					

Doria Ragland has reportedly signed up to classes with LA-based 'sleep fairy' Brandi Jordan who has provided advice to celebrities such as Megan Fox, Rosamund Pike and Julia Stiles




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love that guy.



The burns keep coming  





xincinsin said:


> In the minority here, I love ScarJo's ring. It's really unusual and I love brown diamonds.





CeeJay said:


> It's by Taffin .. and their jewelry ain't cheap by any means!!!  While I love my Diamond ring (since I designed and fabricated it), in general .. I'm not a HUGE fan of sparkling white diamonds .. I prefer the 'natural' tones.  My grey diamond (set in 18k Rose Gold) pinkie ring always gets comments and it is a favorite of mine for sure!


Grey and rose gold sounds so cool.

I don’t think the stone is the problem on scar jo’s it is that hideous band. It’s the same colour and I think material as a ceramic watch strap and It just looks like a curtain finial. The diamond seems like it was glued onto it last minute.

I have a similar issue with M’s ring, actually, it looked off-balance to begin with as though they just stuck the diamonds on at random and (imho) further gussying up the band with pave just makes it even busier.



charlottawill said:


> "Poundland Duchess" ??  Does that mean what I think it means?


I assume it’s an allusion to the British discount chain where M could pick one £1 item with her winnings but I guess it could also be referring to how she got into these vaunted circles


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> That is an appropriate ring for an older woman. You need bigger rings on older hands to distract from the veins and age spots. But she has very nice hands for a horsewoman of a certain age.



I went the opposite direction and downsized all my rings considerably
My fingers are on the short side and that first joint to knuckle is especially small so it doesn't take much to be a knuckle duster
Several years ago I was photographing some rings for sale and was horrified when I saw them on my Dad's hands. I have been self conscious of them ever since

Camilla's looks great on her


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s ScarJo’s third ER so she’s had time to think about it!









						Scarlett Johansson’s Engagement Ring Proves She’s Finally Getting What She Wants
					

When the third time's the charm, the ring is often bigger, better, and much more personal.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## caramelize126

charlottawill said:


> "Poundland Duchess" ??  Does that mean what I think it means?





jelliedfeels said:


> I assume it’s an allusion to the British discount chain where M could pick one £1 item with her winnings but I guess it could also be referring to how she got into these vaunted circles



LOL!
Poundland is the UK version of the dollar store here in the US so I think he means the discount version of the Duchess of Cambridge... but I agree with Jellied it might be a play on words lol


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Really? The classes didn't help, really???
> 
> _Eager to continue the emotional and practical support, the 62-year-old has signed up to grandparenting lessons with baby expert Brandi Jordan, according to reports.
> 
> Known as 'The Baby Sleep Fairy' and based in Los Angeles, Brandi charges a string of A-list clients £5,000 for sessions._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's mum 'signs up to £5,000 grandparenting class' after Baby Sussex's birth
> 
> 
> Doria Ragland has reportedly signed up to classes with LA-based 'sleep fairy' Brandi Jordan who has provided advice to celebrities such as Megan Fox, Rosamund Pike and Julia Stiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Why am I not surprised that there is a "baby sleep fairy" in LA who charges over $6000?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

caramelize126 said:


> LOL!
> Poundland is the UK version of the dollar store here in the US so I think he means the discount version of the Duchess of Cambridge... but I agree with Jellied it might be a play on words lol


That's where my gutter mind went since I am not familiar with the British entity.


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> I went the opposite direction and downsized all my rings considerably
> My fingers are on the short side and that first joint to knuckle is especially small so it doesn't take much to be a knuckle duster
> Several years ago I was photographing some rings for sale and was horrified when I saw them on my Dad's hands. I have been self conscious of them ever since
> 
> Camilla's looks great on her


I find myself opting for larger rings than I would have worn twenty or thirty years ago. Small delicate rings look terrible on my gnarly hands. I need rings with some substance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m confused - the ring was never 6 carats, it is under 5. Is there another ring?


_Harry designed the three-stone stunner for his fiancée himself (swoon), which features a *three-carat cushion cut center diamond *from Botswana, a place that holds special meaning to the couple. While Princess Diana's engagement ring became off the market when Prince William proposed to Kate Middleton, Harry still followed in his older brother's sentimental footsteps by choosing jewels that once belonged to his late mother. The *center stone is surrounded by two round diamonds (estimated at just under a carat each) *from her personal jewelry collection, paying tribute to the fact that her presence will follow them on this lifelong journey.








						Meghan Markle's Engagement Ring: Everything You Need to Know
					

Here’s everything we know about Meghan Markle’s engagement ring and wedding band, including changes and new additions.




					www.brides.com
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

MM's lawyer seems to have liked a comment depicting her client as ridiculous, would this be possible?


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s ScarJo’s third ER so she’s had time to think about it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scarlett Johansson’s Engagement Ring Proves She’s Finally Getting What She Wants
> 
> 
> When the third time's the charm, the ring is often bigger, better, and much more personal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I guess SNL pays well


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll say there IS too much of a good thing. Bey's, the Kardashians', Liz's famous ring are vulgar. Camilla's is gorgeous though.


I agree.  

Meg is trying to appear kinda royal, not new money Hollywood, conspicuous/ostentatious and vulgar as you wrote.

When I see these knuckle-dusters, I think who do you think you are - royalty?  Because royalty is far more modest and restrained.


----------



## CeeJay

Yes - OT, but here are my rings (designs and fabrication by your’s truly - me!) ..


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with all three assessments.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll say there IS too much of a good thing. Bey's, the Kardashians', Liz's famous ring are vulgar. Camilla's is gorgeous though.
> 
> 
> 
> That's because her husband is actually loaded


I disagree. They _all_ have money. But Charles has taste. So does Camilla. I mean--look at her jewelry! It's refined, tasteful, elegant, discreet _and_ expensive. And her cute little pins are the VCA lucky animals . . . https://thecrownchronicles.co.uk/je...lery-van-cleef-arpels-lucky-animals-brooches/


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much has happened and I wasn't there for it! I didn't abandon you though, I was informed in a rather condescending tone I was blocked for a whole two weeks after "way too many warnings" (I didn't receive a single on, neither on thread nor in the notifications) for a supposed crime I honestly would love to see receipts for, but whatever.
> 
> Anyway, it might take me the better part of January to catch up.


So glad to have you back!


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh I love this. This is just hilarious!!!
> 
> she did say it was about the principle not the money so she should be very happy with this
> 
> I wonder what £1 will get her these days …chicken feed? Packet of crisps? *A copy of the bench?*


I think she can get TWO copies of The Bench!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Sounds like there may be a little panicking going on in a California 19 bathroom household.
> View attachment 5288996


I suppose Oprah was also responsible for the words that came out of their mouths?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> This funny fact just appeared on my feed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's £100,000 engagement ring is 'dazzlingly expensive'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE owns the world's most Googled royal engagement ring according to new research, after marrying into the Royal Family nearly four years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only reason Methane's engagement ring tops the searches is because she isn't satisfied with what Hazard gave her and does shoddy upgrades.


At what point does one stop calling it an "engagement ring"?  It's a new ring.  She's been engaged, married (two, three, maybe more times), and had two children.  It ain't an engagement any more!


----------



## tiktok

Deleted


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> At what point does one stop calling it an "engagement ring"?  It's a new ring.  She's been engaged, married (two, three, maybe more times), and had two children.  It ain't an engagement any more!



No surprise, the article incorrectly states the diamonds in this ring are 6 carats.  Not true.  
We all know what _“just under a carat” _really means, don‘t we? 

_Harry designed the three-stone stunner for his fiancée himself (swoon), which features a *three-carat cushion cut center diamond *from Botswana, a place that holds special meaning to the couple. While Princess Diana's engagement ring became off the market when Prince William proposed to Kate Middleton, Harry still followed in his older brother's sentimental footsteps by choosing jewels that once belonged to his late mother. The *center stone is surrounded by two round diamonds (estimated at just under a carat each)* from her personal jewelry collection, paying tribute to the fact that her presence will follow them on this lifelong journey._


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> Yes - OT, but here are my rings (designs and fabrication by your’s truly - me!) ..
> View attachment 5290104
> View attachment 5290105
> View attachment 5290106


That pinky ring is


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> At what point does one stop calling it an "engagement ring"?  It's a new ring.  She's been engaged, married (two, three, maybe more times), and had two children.  It ain't an engagement any more!


Push present, though I detest that term.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> I disagree. They _all_ have money. But Charles has taste. So does Camilla. I mean--look at her jewelry! It's refined, tasteful, elegant, discreet _and_ expensive. And her cute little pins are the VCA lucky animals . . . https://thecrownchronicles.co.uk/je...lery-van-cleef-arpels-lucky-animals-brooches/



I was not saying Charles has no money, I was trying to dig at Raptor.

Harry isn't that rich compared to Jay-Z to begin with, his money is probably tied up in trusts and - again other than Jay-Z - he has a wife who herself owns peanuts compared to everyone else in that round but has very expensive taste and somehow thinks she is owed the world.

But yeah, I'm not a fan of stones that make it difficult to raise your hand only to prove you can pay for them


----------



## Mendocino

poopsie said:


> Spoiler alert for those who aren't familiar with Leon Uris
> 
> Sounds like the end of QBVII where the jury awarded Kelno with a ha'penny  as damages for the libel



I love Leon Uris' books! I read QBVll a very long time ago and learned a lot of lessons from it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Push present, though I detest that term.



Did she get a new ring? I’m still confused. She has 3 different rings that were given to her on 3 different occasions, correct? 
Calling it the engagement ring distinguishes it from the gold band given to her at the wedding ceremony and from the diamond e ring she got when A was born, correct???


----------



## rose60610

Six carats symbolic for 6th in line?


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Yes - OT, but here are my rings (designs and fabrication by your’s truly - me!) ..
> View attachment 5290104
> View attachment 5290105
> View attachment 5290106


Very nice!!!


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she get a new ring? I’m still confused. She has 3 different rings that were given to her on 3 different occasions, correct?
> Calling it the engagement ring distinguishes it from the gold band given to her at the wedding ceremony and from the diamond e ring she got when A was born, correct???


How about the ring through Harry’s nose?


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5290306


If Handbag and his wife don't get that they're basically fodder for memes now, then que sera sera.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> Six carats symbolic for 6th in line?


Well . . . for some people six is the number of man and it's a very, very bad number.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CeeJay said:


> Yes - OT, but here are my rings (designs and fabrication by your’s truly - me!) ..
> View attachment 5290104
> View attachment 5290105
> View attachment 5290106


Wow these are so bold and geometric. You are a really talented jeweller. I love the shaped bezel (?) setting on your pinkie ring, the textured bezel on your engagement ring and I really like the hammered disc. Oh and the moon is gorgeous too.
yes love them all! The patterns you’ve worked into the gold are so amazing.


CarryOn2020 said:


> No surprise, the article incorrectly states the diamonds in this ring are 6 carats.  Not true.
> We all know what _“just under a carat” _really means, don‘t we?
> 
> _Harry designed the three-stone stunner for his fiancée himself (swoon), which features a *three-carat cushion cut center diamond *from Botswana, a place that holds special meaning to the couple. While Princess Diana's engagement ring became off the market when Prince William proposed to Kate Middleton, Harry still followed in his older brother's sentimental footsteps by choosing jewels that once belonged to his late mother. The *center stone is surrounded by two round diamonds (estimated at just under a carat each)* from her personal jewelry collection, paying tribute to the fact that her presence will follow them on this lifelong journey._


‘Just under a carat really means’ …true ahilarious! 
thank you! I knew I’d heard a different number before. I suppose maybe it’s pushing for 6 total if it’s over 1carat in pave but I just don’t see that. The 3 carat against the 2 under 1s is so out of balance. It drives me nuts. Make the centre stone 2 carat if you want to keep the flanking stones. Mind you, I’m sure little miss humble wouldn’t like me downgrading her diamond  
If she was smart she’d have said he needed another 3 carat jamming in to the centre shank  so they represent the _real family_ of 4 they finally are.


purseinsanity said:


> I suppose Oprah was also responsible for the words that came out of their mouths?


Maybe they’d claim they were edited misleadingly like those headlines they photoshopped 

personally, I think they are crazy, she may not be peak power level at the moment but I would NOT mess with Oprah.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. I had to google Scarlett's. WTH is that.
> 
> I mean, get what you love even if it is hideous, but do you really want to wear something like this every day for the next 50 years, no matter what other jewelry you're wearing?



I had to Google Scarlett's ring (I didn't even know who Scarlett was, then I got it) I find the ring hideous, but I'm not a diamond girl. I much prefer MM's ring to Beyonce's, also I Googled Camilla's which is lovely IMO. Although they're worth less I much prefer old cut diamonds to modern ones. Especially if they come from the British RF, they have history aswell.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she get a new ring? I’m still confused. She has 3 different rings that were given to her on 3 different occasions, correct?
> Calling it the engagement ring distinguishes it from the gold band given to her at the wedding ceremony and from the diamond e ring she got when A was born, correct???



She has the original engagement ring, a plain gold wedding band and an eternity band given to her for Archie's birth, at which point the engagement ring's setting was changed as well. She did not receive a whole new ring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> The 3 carat against the 2 under 1s is so out of balance. It drives me nuts.



Yesss. Those stones were always too big to be mere accents but too small to make a true 3-stone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I had to Google Scarlett's ring (I didn't even know who Scarlett was, then I got it) I find the ring hideous, but I'm not a diamond girl. I much prefer MM's ring to Beyonce's, also I Googled Camilla's which is lovely IMO. Although they're worth less I much prefer old cut diamonds to modern ones. Especially if they come from the British RF, they have history aswell.



I love antique diamonds. I follow Victor Barbone (NYC) and Hancocks (London) on Instagram who do miraculous things with them. Victor Barbone's style matches my taste more, but Hancocks' social media person is super lovely and chatty.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These people scare me.



Omg.  How old is this person?  Eleven?  Twelve?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she get a new ring? I’m still confused. She has 3 different rings that were given to her on 3 different occasions, correct?
> Calling it the engagement ring distinguishes it from the gold band given to her at the wedding ceremony and from the diamond e ring she got when A was born, correct???


I have no idea at this point.


----------



## papertiger

Have we had this yet?


I'm horrified but not surprised that Me-gain's lawyer is making her client out to be a) a victim and b) a career woman 






*‘Bullying’ often used to damage career women, says Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer*

India McTaggart
Thu, 6 January 2022, 8:38 pm






Former members of Royal household staff have claimed they were personally ‘humiliated’ by the Duchess of Sussex - Chris Jackson/Getty Images
Allegations of bullying are used “very freely” to damage “career women”, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer has said, as she likened aides who complained about her behaviour to children.
Jenny Afia, who has represented the Duchess in her legal battles against the press, said that the term “bullying” is used “very, very casually” as she dismissed serious allegations about her client’s treatment of staff while at the palace.
Saying her seven-year-old daughter recently accused her of bullying after being asked to brush her teeth, Ms Afia suggested the phrase was used too easily without due cause.
Former members of staff have claimed they were personally “humiliated” by the Duchess, with one calling the experience “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation”.
In a formal complaint sent internally in October 2018, which came to light last March, the Duchess is accused of driving two personal assistants out of the Royal household and undermining the confidence of another aide.
A spokesman for the Duchess has already strenuously denied the allegations, calling them a calculated smear campaign against “someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma”.




Jenny Afia said that she could not believe that the Duchess of Sussex would ever bully anyone - BBC
In the BBC podcast series Harry, Meghan and the Media, Ms Afia addressed the accusations head-on.
“I think the first thing is to be really clear about what bullying is because the term gets used very, very casually,” she said.
“My daughter called me a bully last week when I asked her to brush her teeth – she’s seven years old. So, the term is used very freely and it’s a very, very damaging term as we know, particularly I think for career women.”
In an interview with Amol Rajan, the BBC’s media editor, she added: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally.
“The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that… It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all and I’ve seen her at very stressful times.”
The bullying allegations are now the subject of an internal review at the palace. There are no plans for it to be made public, despite comments from the Duchess’s lawyer alleged victims may view as provocative.
Any findings which result in changes to formal policies, such as a new mechanism to report challenging behaviour by members of the Royal family towards their staff, will be detailed in the next annual review.
Buckingham Palace declined to comment.

The five-part podcast, presented by Rajan, is a spin-off of The Princes and the Press, a two-part television documentary broadcast last November.
Then, Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace joined forces to release a strongly-worded statement to the programme, warning that “overblown and unfounded claims” from anonymous sources had been presented as fact.
The Royal households had not participated further in the show, believing that they were not given enough information about the allegations being made and who was making them.
Ms Afia had been authorised by the Duchess to appear on camera to defend the couple against the various claims made against them in the print press.
The series aimed to examine the relationship between the monarchy and media, in particular how the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex have dealt with the British press throughout their lives.
The story about the Duchess’s treatment of staff came to light in The Times shortly before the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.




Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary - Max Mumby/Indigo
It detailed how in 2018, Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary, submitted a formal complaint outlining his deep concerns about behaviour in the workplace.
He described the Duchess’s treatment of one employee as “totally unacceptable”, saying she “seems intent on always having someone in her sights”.
“We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards [an anonymous staff member],” he said.
Last March, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said they were “clearly very concerned” about the allegations against the Duchess, confirming that the palace’s HR team would be looking into it.
Ms Afia told Rajan that the story of the Duchess being a bully is “absolutely untrue” but added that “she wouldn’t want to negate anyone’s personal experiences”.
The release of the podcast had been significantly delayed, with further edits to the programme after the broadcast of the television show.


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> *I had to Google Scarlett's ring *(I didn't even know who Scarlett was, then I got it) I find the ring hideous, but I'm not a diamond girl. I much prefer MM's ring to Beyonce's, also I Googled Camilla's which is lovely IMO. Although they're worth less I much prefer old cut diamonds to modern ones. Especially if they come from the British RF, they have history aswell.


Is this the ring? I don't like it.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> I'm horrified but not surprised that Me-gain's lawyer is making her client out to be a) a victim and b) a career woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *‘Bullying’ often used to damage career women, says Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer*
> 
> India McTaggart
> Thu, 6 January 2022, 8:38 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former members of Royal household staff have claimed they were personally ‘humiliated’ by the Duchess of Sussex - Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Allegations of bullying are used “very freely” to damage “career women”, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer has said, as she likened aides who complained about her behaviour to children.
> Jenny Afia, who has represented the Duchess in her legal battles against the press, said that the term “bullying” is used “very, very casually” as she dismissed serious allegations about her client’s treatment of staff while at the palace.
> Saying her seven-year-old daughter recently accused her of bullying after being asked to brush her teeth, Ms Afia suggested the phrase was used too easily without due cause.
> Former members of staff have claimed they were personally “humiliated” by the Duchess, with one calling the experience “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation”.
> In a formal complaint sent internally in October 2018, which came to light last March, the Duchess is accused of driving two personal assistants out of the Royal household and undermining the confidence of another aide.
> A spokesman for the Duchess has already strenuously denied the allegations, calling them a calculated smear campaign against “someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jenny Afia said that she could not believe that the Duchess of Sussex would ever bully anyone - BBC
> In the BBC podcast series Harry, Meghan and the Media, Ms Afia addressed the accusations head-on.
> “I think the first thing is to be really clear about what bullying is because the term gets used very, very casually,” she said.
> “My daughter called me a bully last week when I asked her to brush her teeth – she’s seven years old. So, the term is used very freely and it’s a very, very damaging term as we know, particularly I think for career women.”
> In an interview with Amol Rajan, the BBC’s media editor, she added: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally.
> “The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that… It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all and I’ve seen her at very stressful times.”
> The bullying allegations are now the subject of an internal review at the palace. There are no plans for it to be made public, despite comments from the Duchess’s lawyer alleged victims may view as provocative.
> Any findings which result in changes to formal policies, such as a new mechanism to report challenging behaviour by members of the Royal family towards their staff, will be detailed in the next annual review.
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
> 
> The five-part podcast, presented by Rajan, is a spin-off of The Princes and the Press, a two-part television documentary broadcast last November.
> Then, Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace joined forces to release a strongly-worded statement to the programme, warning that “overblown and unfounded claims” from anonymous sources had been presented as fact.
> The Royal households had not participated further in the show, believing that they were not given enough information about the allegations being made and who was making them.
> Ms Afia had been authorised by the Duchess to appear on camera to defend the couple against the various claims made against them in the print press.
> The series aimed to examine the relationship between the monarchy and media, in particular how the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex have dealt with the British press throughout their lives.
> The story about the Duchess’s treatment of staff came to light in The Times shortly before the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary - Max Mumby/Indigo
> It detailed how in 2018, Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary, submitted a formal complaint outlining his deep concerns about behaviour in the workplace.
> He described the Duchess’s treatment of one employee as “totally unacceptable”, saying she “seems intent on always having someone in her sights”.
> “We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards [an anonymous staff member],” he said.
> Last March, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said they were “clearly very concerned” about the allegations against the Duchess, confirming that the palace’s HR team would be looking into it.
> Ms Afia told Rajan that the story of the Duchess being a bully is “absolutely untrue” but added that “she wouldn’t want to negate anyone’s personal experiences”.
> The release of the podcast had been significantly delayed, with further edits to the programme after the broadcast of the television show.



If her career is to destroy the royal family, she is a 'career woman'…


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was not saying Charles has no money, I was trying to dig at Raptor.
> 
> Harry isn't that rich compared to Jay-Z to begin with, his money is probably tied up in trusts and - again other than Jay-Z - he has a wife who herself owns peanuts compared to everyone else in that round but has very expensive taste and somehow thinks she is owed the world.
> 
> But yeah, I'm not a fan of stones that make it difficult to raise your hand only to prove you can pay for them


However, as my mother used to say, "jewelry shrinks"!


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> Is this the ring? I don't like it.
> View attachment 5290582


I don't know if this was it. It was described as a _brown_ diamond . . . We all know what that means. Gosh, who picked this out--the fiancé? Scarlett? Maybe it was gifted to them to start a run on brown diamonds?


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Is this the ring? I don't like it.
> View attachment 5290582



Me, neither.  The stone doesn't look very secure and doesn't go well with the band. A stunning stone which isn't meant for a "trendy" setting, in my view, but as long as the wearer loves it?!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I have no idea at this point.


me either nor do I care


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5290306


I don’t think he could manage even that without Jason K and his team’s help. Luckily M probably writes his deeply personal letters for him.


papertiger said:


> Have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> I'm horrified but not surprised that Me-gain's lawyer is making her client out to be a) a victim and b) a career woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *‘Bullying’ often used to damage career women, says Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer*
> 
> India McTaggart
> Thu, 6 January 2022, 8:38 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former members of Royal household staff have claimed they were personally ‘humiliated’ by the Duchess of Sussex - Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Allegations of bullying are used “very freely” to damage “career women”, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer has said, as she likened aides who complained about her behaviour to children.
> Jenny Afia, who has represented the Duchess in her legal battles against the press, said that the term “bullying” is used “very, very casually” as she dismissed serious allegations about her client’s treatment of staff while at the palace.
> Saying her seven-year-old daughter recently accused her of bullying after being asked to brush her teeth, Ms Afia suggested the phrase was used too easily without due cause.
> Former members of staff have claimed they were personally “humiliated” by the Duchess, with one calling the experience “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation”.
> In a formal complaint sent internally in October 2018, which came to light last March, the Duchess is accused of driving two personal assistants out of the Royal household and undermining the confidence of another aide.
> A spokesman for the Duchess has already strenuously denied the allegations, calling them a calculated smear campaign against “someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jenny Afia said that she could not believe that the Duchess of Sussex would ever bully anyone - BBC
> In the BBC podcast series Harry, Meghan and the Media, Ms Afia addressed the accusations head-on.
> “I think the first thing is to be really clear about what bullying is because the term gets used very, very casually,” she said.
> “My daughter called me a bully last week when I asked her to brush her teeth – she’s seven years old. So, the term is used very freely and it’s a very, very damaging term as we know, particularly I think for career women.”
> In an interview with Amol Rajan, the BBC’s media editor, she added: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally.
> “The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that… It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all and I’ve seen her at very stressful times.”
> The bullying allegations are now the subject of an internal review at the palace. There are no plans for it to be made public, despite comments from the Duchess’s lawyer alleged victims may view as provocative.
> Any findings which result in changes to formal policies, such as a new mechanism to report challenging behaviour by members of the Royal family towards their staff, will be detailed in the next annual review.
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
> 
> The five-part podcast, presented by Rajan, is a spin-off of The Princes and the Press, a two-part television documentary broadcast last November.
> Then, Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace joined forces to release a strongly-worded statement to the programme, warning that “overblown and unfounded claims” from anonymous sources had been presented as fact.
> The Royal households had not participated further in the show, believing that they were not given enough information about the allegations being made and who was making them.
> Ms Afia had been authorised by the Duchess to appear on camera to defend the couple against the various claims made against them in the print press.
> The series aimed to examine the relationship between the monarchy and media, in particular how the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex have dealt with the British press throughout their lives.
> The story about the Duchess’s treatment of staff came to light in The Times shortly before the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary - Max Mumby/Indigo
> It detailed how in 2018, Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary, submitted a formal complaint outlining his deep concerns about behaviour in the workplace.
> He described the Duchess’s treatment of one employee as “totally unacceptable”, saying she “seems intent on always having someone in her sights”.
> “We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards [an anonymous staff member],” he said.
> Last March, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said they were “clearly very concerned” about the allegations against the Duchess, confirming that the palace’s HR team would be looking into it.
> Ms Afia told Rajan that the story of the Duchess being a bully is “absolutely untrue” but added that “she wouldn’t want to negate anyone’s personal experiences”.
> The release of the podcast had been significantly delayed, with further edits to the programme after the broadcast of the television show.



Career woman? Some might say working girl is closer to the truth 

Afia is making the most logical defence for the case and getting paid handsomely for it I’m sure.

I DO agree with her that terms like bully get thrown around. It’s one of those words people use to try and silence those they don’t like. It’s a very emotive term.

as is, let’s see….trauma, Victimised, traumatised, depression, suicidal, racist, privacy, prejudiced, misogynistic, isolated, compassion, giving, tireless, humanitarian … need I continue? 

It just seems a BIT rich coming from the messenger of two of biggest embodiments of hyperbole going.

I think Afia seems a bit contemptuous of the whole thing tbh and that includes the woman she ‘knows so well.’

add on- I appreciate this has been an eventful couple of years but I feel this enquiry is a bit too little too late tbh.

I mean, why didn’t they name and shame at the time to try and get her in line? Or did they already know the duo were bailing? What were they going to do if H&M didn’t leave? Tell staff to put up with it? Open an intern programme? Relocate H&M’s office to Antarctica?


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> “I think the first thing is to be really clear about what bullying is because the term gets used very, very casually,” she said.
> *“My daughter called me a bully last week when I asked her to brush her teeth – she’s seven years old*. So, the term is used very freely and it’s a very, very damaging term as we know, particularly I think for career women.”
> In an interview with Amol Rajan, the BBC’s media editor, she added: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally.
> “The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that… It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all and I’ve seen her at very stressful times.”
> The bullying allegations are now the subject of an internal review at the palace. There are no plans for it to be made public, despite comments from the Duchess’s lawyer alleged victims may view as provocative.



Is this what the world has come to? Everyone is a bully every time kids/people are told to do something they should be doing anyway but don't want to? 

I can easily believe Meghan "It's not my job to coddle them" bullied her staff. Since Meghan plays reverse onus of proof on the BRF, then by all means she should be held to the same standard. We're seeing this more and more, accusing people of crimes (basically slander and/or libel) then the media runs with the allegation as "proof" if the subject of the allegation is a media target. Since Meghan enjoys suing people, is she suing the Palace staff for the "bullying" accusations? Why not? If the staff is lying, wouldn't the Palace be forking out a lot of money to Meghan for damages? She isn't one to turn down a buck. She's already accused them of being racists so what's preventing her from suing them for staffs' allegations? Oh wait! I'd LOVE to see that trial trotting out her pattern of proven lies ("we got married three days before the royal wedding", etc).  It'd really be great if Meghan could be held liable for all her wedding and security costs during her stay with the BRF. It'd never happen, but just the threat might get her to STFU for 24 hours.


----------



## jelliedfeels

rose60610 said:


> Is this what the world has come to? Everyone is a bully every time kids/people are told to do something they should be doing anyway but don't want to?
> 
> I can easily believe Meghan "It's not my job to coddle them" bullied her staff. Since Meghan plays reverse onus of proof on the BRF, then by all means she should be held to the same standard. We're seeing this more and more, accusing people of crimes (basically slander and/or libel) then the media runs with the allegation as "proof" if the subject of the allegation is a media target. Since Meghan enjoys suing people, is she suing the Palace staff for the "bullying" accusations? Why not? If the staff is lying, wouldn't the Palace be forking out a lot of money to Meghan for damages? She isn't one to turn down a buck. She's already accused them of being racists so what's preventing her from suing them for staffs' allegations? Oh wait! I'd LOVE to see that trial trotting out her pattern of proven lies ("we got married three days before the royal wedding", etc).  It'd really be great if Meghan could be held liable for all her wedding and security costs during her stay with the BRF. It'd never happen, but just the threat might get her to STFU for 24 hours.


I wouldn’t rush to the assumption Afia’s tooth story ever happened. I would assume that, like Columbo, she has a relative pertinent to every situation if it can win your confidence


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> How about the ring through Harry’s nose?


HA .. and THAT ring would be the BIGGEST OF ALL in the world!!


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> Wow these are so bold and geometric. You are a really talented jeweller. I love the shaped bezel (?) setting on your pinkie ring, the textured bezel on your engagement ring and I really like the hammered disc. Oh and the moon is gorgeous too.
> yes love them all! The patterns you’ve worked into the gold are so amazing.


Thank you so much; yes "patterning" the metal (using old-school forging techniques which is what I learned) is a HUGE thing for me as I like to "see" the artisan's hand in Jewelry.  I'm the same with a lot of artisan things, if it looks "manufactured", then it's NOT for me!  I used to work trade shows with my Metalsmithing Professor, and they were quite interesting .. and I quickly realized that there was no way that I would be doing the "Retail" (e.g., high-end stores/boutiques) type of work .. because when you are using high-karat gold and diamonds and just 'giving' them the work to put in their boutique without any advertising/merchandising per se, then you are giving then a small-business loan (easily $10k, but with mine, it was more like $50k+).  Nope .. I'll do the bespoke work thank you!


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> I'm horrified but not surprised that Me-gain's lawyer is making her client out to be a) a victim and b) a career woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *‘Bullying’ often used to damage career women, says Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer*
> 
> India McTaggart
> Thu, 6 January 2022, 8:38 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former members of Royal household staff have claimed they were personally ‘humiliated’ by the Duchess of Sussex - Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Allegations of bullying are used “very freely” to damage “career women”, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer has said, as she likened aides who complained about her behaviour to children.
> Jenny Afia, who has represented the Duchess in her legal battles against the press, said that the term “bullying” is used “very, very casually” as she dismissed serious allegations about her client’s treatment of staff while at the palace.
> Saying her seven-year-old daughter recently accused her of bullying after being asked to brush her teeth, Ms Afia suggested the phrase was used too easily without due cause.
> Former members of staff have claimed they were personally “humiliated” by the Duchess, with one calling the experience “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation”.
> In a formal complaint sent internally in October 2018, which came to light last March, the Duchess is accused of driving two personal assistants out of the Royal household and undermining the confidence of another aide.
> A spokesman for the Duchess has already strenuously denied the allegations, calling them a calculated smear campaign against “someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jenny Afia said that she could not believe that the Duchess of Sussex would ever bully anyone - BBC
> In the BBC podcast series Harry, Meghan and the Media, Ms Afia addressed the accusations head-on.
> “I think the first thing is to be really clear about what bullying is because the term gets used very, very casually,” she said.
> “My daughter called me a bully last week when I asked her to brush her teeth – she’s seven years old. So, the term is used very freely and it’s a very, very damaging term as we know, particularly I think for career women.”
> In an interview with Amol Rajan, the BBC’s media editor, she added: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally.
> “The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that… It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all and I’ve seen her at very stressful times.”
> The bullying allegations are now the subject of an internal review at the palace. There are no plans for it to be made public, despite comments from the Duchess’s lawyer alleged victims may view as provocative.
> Any findings which result in changes to formal policies, such as a new mechanism to report challenging behaviour by members of the Royal family towards their staff, will be detailed in the next annual review.
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
> 
> The five-part podcast, presented by Rajan, is a spin-off of The Princes and the Press, a two-part television documentary broadcast last November.
> Then, Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace joined forces to release a strongly-worded statement to the programme, warning that “overblown and unfounded claims” from anonymous sources had been presented as fact.
> The Royal households had not participated further in the show, believing that they were not given enough information about the allegations being made and who was making them.
> Ms Afia had been authorised by the Duchess to appear on camera to defend the couple against the various claims made against them in the print press.
> The series aimed to examine the relationship between the monarchy and media, in particular how the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex have dealt with the British press throughout their lives.
> The story about the Duchess’s treatment of staff came to light in The Times shortly before the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary - Max Mumby/Indigo
> It detailed how in 2018, Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary, submitted a formal complaint outlining his deep concerns about behaviour in the workplace.
> He described the Duchess’s treatment of one employee as “totally unacceptable”, saying she “seems intent on always having someone in her sights”.
> “We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards [an anonymous staff member],” he said.
> Last March, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said they were “clearly very concerned” about the allegations against the Duchess, confirming that the palace’s HR team would be looking into it.
> Ms Afia told Rajan that the story of the Duchess being a bully is “absolutely untrue” but added that “she wouldn’t want to negate anyone’s personal experiences”.
> The release of the podcast had been significantly delayed, with further edits to the programme after the broadcast of the television show.


Combine the two terms and I would agree that she is a career victim.



Happyish said:


> I don't know if this was it. It was described as a _brown_ diamond . . . *We all know what that means*. Gosh, who picked this out--the fiancé? Scarlett? Maybe it was gifted to them to start a run on brown diamonds?


Sorry for not getting the message, but what does it mean?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Combine the two terms and I would agree that she is a career victim.
> 
> 
> Sorry for not getting the message, but what does it mean?



I think it means:
Flat brown and pale yellow diamonds are the most commonly found, are abundant and are very found down the alphabetical spectrum. Often diamonds 'brown' 'pale-yellow' diamonds are neither white enough to be called 'colourless' nor strongly coloured enough to be called vivid 'yellow' or even interesting to be strong 'red-brown' etc. Still anything above a 2ct is still rare enough to get traded and graded but it's a chump that buys a pastel, murky stone.


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> Have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> I'm horrified but not surprised that Me-gain's lawyer is making her client out to be a) a victim and b) a career woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *‘Bullying’ often used to damage career women, says Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer*
> 
> India McTaggart
> Thu, 6 January 2022, 8:38 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former members of Royal household staff have claimed they were personally ‘humiliated’ by the Duchess of Sussex - Chris Jackson/Getty Images
> Allegations of bullying are used “very freely” to damage “career women”, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyer has said, as she likened aides who complained about her behaviour to children.
> Jenny Afia, who has represented the Duchess in her legal battles against the press, said that the term “bullying” is used “very, very casually” as she dismissed serious allegations about her client’s treatment of staff while at the palace.
> Saying her seven-year-old daughter recently accused her of bullying after being asked to brush her teeth, Ms Afia suggested the phrase was used too easily without due cause.
> Former members of staff have claimed they were personally “humiliated” by the Duchess, with one calling the experience “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation”.
> In a formal complaint sent internally in October 2018, which came to light last March, the Duchess is accused of driving two personal assistants out of the Royal household and undermining the confidence of another aide.
> A spokesman for the Duchess has already strenuously denied the allegations, calling them a calculated smear campaign against “someone who has been the target of bullying herself and is deeply committed to supporting those who have experienced pain and trauma”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jenny Afia said that she could not believe that the Duchess of Sussex would ever bully anyone - BBC
> In the BBC podcast series Harry, Meghan and the Media, Ms Afia addressed the accusations head-on.
> “I think the first thing is to be really clear about what bullying is because the term gets used very, very casually,” she said.
> “My daughter called me a bully last week when I asked her to brush her teeth – she’s seven years old. So, the term is used very freely and it’s a very, very damaging term as we know, particularly I think for career women.”
> In an interview with Amol Rajan, the BBC’s media editor, she added: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone physically or emotionally.
> “The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do, I can’t believe she would ever do that… It just doesn’t match my experience of her at all and I’ve seen her at very stressful times.”
> The bullying allegations are now the subject of an internal review at the palace. There are no plans for it to be made public, despite comments from the Duchess’s lawyer alleged victims may view as provocative.
> Any findings which result in changes to formal policies, such as a new mechanism to report challenging behaviour by members of the Royal family towards their staff, will be detailed in the next annual review.
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
> 
> The five-part podcast, presented by Rajan, is a spin-off of The Princes and the Press, a two-part television documentary broadcast last November.
> Then, Buckingham Palace, Clarence House and Kensington Palace joined forces to release a strongly-worded statement to the programme, warning that “overblown and unfounded claims” from anonymous sources had been presented as fact.
> The Royal households had not participated further in the show, believing that they were not given enough information about the allegations being made and who was making them.
> Ms Afia had been authorised by the Duchess to appear on camera to defend the couple against the various claims made against them in the print press.
> The series aimed to examine the relationship between the monarchy and media, in particular how the Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex have dealt with the British press throughout their lives.
> The story about the Duchess’s treatment of staff came to light in The Times shortly before the Sussexes’ bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary - Max Mumby/Indigo
> It detailed how in 2018, Jason Knauf, the former Kensington Palace communications secretary, submitted a formal complaint outlining his deep concerns about behaviour in the workplace.
> He described the Duchess’s treatment of one employee as “totally unacceptable”, saying she “seems intent on always having someone in her sights”.
> “We have had report after report from people who have witnessed unacceptable behaviour towards [an anonymous staff member],” he said.
> Last March, a Buckingham Palace spokesman said they were “clearly very concerned” about the allegations against the Duchess, confirming that the palace’s HR team would be looking into it.
> Ms Afia told Rajan that the story of the Duchess being a bully is “absolutely untrue” but added that “she wouldn’t want to negate anyone’s personal experiences”.
> The release of the podcast had been significantly delayed, with further edits to the programme after the broadcast of the television show.



The only career H's first wife seems to have is trying (and failing) to bring down the Royal Family. 
Edited to add, @Chanbal didn't see your post. Guess great minds......


----------



## Happyish

xincinsin said:


> Combine the two terms and I would agree that she is a career victim.
> 
> 
> Sorry for not getting the message, but what does it mean?


Brown diamonds, in the industry, black too, have traditionally been regarded as industrial grade and of negligible value. A "garbage stone," as a jeweler I know would say.

Some of this changed when brown diamonds were renamed, "cognac." Despite the more attractive name, they're still brown and their value is negligible. Certainly, they pale in comparison to a white diamond, not to mention the ultra-rare pinks or blues in terms of value, not to mention attractiveness and scarcity.

As regional areas known for certain gemstones have become inaccessible (Afghanistan, Mogoc) or mined-out (South Africa), (and remember coral, lapis and turquoise), jewelers have turned to other lesser value stones. A pink tourmaline is easier and less expensive to source than a fine ruby, as is a topaz to a sapphire, or a white topaz to a diamond, etc. each of which are far less costly to a manufacturing jeweler, even high-end ones such as Verdura and Van Cleef. (Indeed, the majority of VCA alhambra is comprised of low-value semi-precious stones--not that they're not pretty, just that the materials are not particularly expensive--this was the aim of the boutique line to make it more accessible and affordable, of which the Alhambra was a part.)

Past standards such as rubies, diamonds, emeralds and sapphires commonly used in the 50's through the 70's, have now been relegated to "high-jewelry." These types of stones are no longer common in every-day jewelry.

Hence, the appeal of a brown diamond. A jeweler can buy a 5-carat stone at a fraction of the cost of a colorless diamond. Obviously Scarlett is proud to have this, but knowing something about diamonds and value, I wouldn't want this as an engagement ring--or for that matter, in any piece of jewelry.


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> Brown diamonds, in the industry, black too, have traditionally been regarded as industrial grade and of negligible value. A "garbage stone," as a jeweler I know would say.
> 
> Some of this changed when brown diamonds were renamed, "cognac." Despite the more attractive name, they're still brown and their value is negligible. Certainly, they pale in comparison to a white diamond, not to mention the ultra-rare pinks or blues in terms of value, not to mention attractiveness and scarcity.
> 
> As regional areas known for certain gemstones have become inaccessible (Afghanistan, Mogoc) or mined-out (South Africa), (and remember coral, lapis and turquoise), jewelers have turned to other lesser value stones. A pink tourmaline is easier and less expensive to source than a fine ruby, as is a topaz to a sapphire, or a white topaz to a diamond, etc. each of which are far less costly to a manufacturing jeweler, even high-end ones such as Verdura and Van Cleef. (Indeed, the majority of VCA alhambra is comprised of low-value semi-precious stones--not that they're not pretty, just that the materials are not particularly expensive--this was the aim of the boutique line to make it more accessible and affordable, of which the Alhambra was a part.)
> 
> Past standards such as rubies, diamonds, emeralds and sapphires commonly used in the 50's through the 70's, have now been relegated to "high-jewelry." These types of stones are no longer common in every-day jewelry.
> 
> Hence, the appeal of a brown diamond. A jeweler can buy a 5-carat stone at a fraction of the cost of a colorless diamond. Obviously Scarlett is proud to have this, but knowing something about diamonds and value, I wouldn't want this as an engagement ring--or for that matter, in any piece of jewelry.


maybe Colin is a thrifty guy and got a good deal on the ring...and she didn't want to hurt his feelings to accepted it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> Brown diamonds, in the industry, black too, have traditionally been regarded as industrial grade and of negligible value. A "garbage stone," as a jeweler I know would say.
> 
> Some of this changed when brown diamonds were renamed, "cognac." Despite the more attractive name, they're still brown and their value is negligible. Certainly, they pale in comparison to a white diamond, not to mention the ultra-rare pinks or blues in terms of value, not to mention attractiveness and scarcity.
> 
> As regional areas known for certain gemstones have become inaccessible (Afghanistan, Mogoc) or mined-out (South Africa), (and remember coral, lapis and turquoise), jewelers have turned to other lesser value stones. A pink tourmaline is easier and less expensive to source than a fine ruby, as is a topaz to a sapphire, or a white topaz to a diamond, etc. each of which are far less costly to a manufacturing jeweler, even high-end ones such as Verdura and Van Cleef. (Indeed, the majority of VCA alhambra is comprised of low-value semi-precious stones--not that they're not pretty, just that the materials are not particularly expensive--this was the aim of the boutique line to make it more accessible and affordable, of which the Alhambra was a part.)
> 
> Past standards such as rubies, diamonds, emeralds and sapphires commonly used in the 50's through the 70's, have now been relegated to "high-jewelry." These types of stones are no longer common in every-day jewelry.
> 
> Hence, the appeal of a brown diamond. A jeweler can buy a 5-carat stone at a fraction of the cost of a colorless diamond. Obviously Scarlett is proud to have this, but knowing something about diamonds and value, I wouldn't want this as an engagement ring--or for that matter, in any piece of jewelry.



I love this thread, I always learn something new.                 

(that said, I don't take issue with the colour as much as I question the design choices  )


----------



## PooFerret

Hello, I am PooFerret,
I discovered your forum just after Christmas 2021 and it seems to be a nice place to join.  I’m a happily married middle-aged woman (happily child-free, and loving my guinea pigs).  I am gradually getting to the end of my Law degree which is a MASSIVE slog at the mo’.  I am a Royalist - I am Bristish/Canadian, however my family ancestry goes back to the US and I am a Daughter of the American Revolution.  I know that may offend some people but that is what I was born into - I have a camp on both sides

That’s me for the mo’, and I hope to enjoy and contribute to everyones’ discussions

Best from Poo ❤


----------



## PooFerret

Err…just Me-again- sorry, just finding my way around this forum


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Is this the ring? I don't like it.
> View attachment 5290582


For years I thought I wanted a big pear shaped diamond some day, but I've outgrown it. That stone is not bad, but I don't get the setting.


----------



## lallybelle

It's the band for me. It totally doesn't go or even look secure for that matter.


----------



## PooFerret

Regarding beautiful stones on rings:  hand-made local silver with local stones - it means so much more (to me anyway).


----------



## Chanbal

Love it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Her making me like Piers might be pretty high up on my list of unforgiveable things she's done.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her making me like Piers might be pretty high up on my list of unforgiveable things she's done.


I never paid attention to him before, and I'm almost a fan now…


----------



## PooFerret

If I may, I would like to discuss the definition of ‘bully’ with Megtox’s lawyer


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> I never paid attention to him before, and I'm almost a fan now…


I knew of him because of reading Kinky Friedman’s books (crime) but never been interested in him as I don’t agree w his views 
Still not a fan of either (him or the Boopsie Oopsie Twins eg: MM and H) but it adds to the entertainment


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PooFerret

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her making me like Piers might be pretty high up on my list of unforgiveable things she's done.


When is this woman likely to stop? She is shameless. I can’t wait for the days before Catherine’s birthday, because this grifter is going to be shameless yet again!


----------



## CarryOn2020

From their own neighborhood - ouch!
H&M‘s part of the article in spoiler 









						2021: The Year in Review - Montecito
					

It was a year full of questions, sometimes without many answers. But we persevered. As a staff, we took a few moments to reflect on our 2021s, which featured a few tears, triumphant returns, overwhelming innovation, and news that no one likes to report. Here’s a look at eight of our standout...




					www.montecitojournal.net
				





Spoiler: Hot dog!



It is 18 months since *Queen Elizabeth*’s grandson, *Prince Harry*, Duke of Sussex, and his actress wife, *Meghan Markle*, bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bath Riven Rock home on seven-and-a-half acres in our rarefied enclave for $14.65 million.

Having covered the British Royal Family for 45 years during my colorful career, including the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail in London, as well as ABC Network News, I found myself somewhat ironically living just a tiara’s toss or two from the tony twosome’s new home with their son, *Archie*, and now seven-month-old daughter, *Lilibet*, named in honor of Britain’s longest reigning monarch’s childhood nickname.

I was bombarded with calls on the acquisition appearing on all three major TV networks, CNN, and Fox News, as well as doing interviews with many of the world’s top publications, including the London Daily Mail, my former employer, France’s Le Figaro and Germany’s Der Spiegel.

Even after 1,000 years, the Royal Family, now known as the Windsors since World War II, still fascinates.

The move by *Prince William*’s younger brother to America has drawn comparisons with the late Duke of Windsor, briefly King Edward VIII, who gave up his throne to marry “the woman he loved,” American divorcee Wallis Simpson from Baltimore.

Harry was undoubtedly the golden boy of Buckingham Palace, enormously popular in Britain, having served two tours of service with the British Army in Afghanistan, and immersing himself doing good deeds.

But all that ended when he gave up royal duties much to the disappointment of the Queen, who will celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next summer, the same time Harry is due to deliver a tell-all tome for Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.

Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess.

During their time in our Eden by the Beach the dynamic duo has rarely been seen, other than dining at Lucky’s with music man *David Foster* and, last year, buying a Christmas tree at a pop-up site at La Cumbre Plaza, instead choosing to stay hunkered down with their young children and security team in Montecito.

But now, as more and more people sensibly get vaccinated against the deadly COVID disease, both of them seem to be going more public, with Harry seen walking their black Labrador rescue, Pula, on Miramar Beach, and pedaling his bike, with his minders in a black Range River closely behind.

*I’m told His Royal Highness, who memorably drove an electric-powered E-type Jaguar from Windsor Castle after his wedding to the Frogmore House reception, was absolutely fascinated by the 27-foot-long Oscar Meyer weinermobile when it visited Montecito in October and even asked to drive it. Talk about hot dog!*

More recently the couple donated money towards the first ever Montecito Holiday Car Parade and earlier this month Meghan was spotted fashionably attired in a Massimo Dutti wool coat and Tamara Mellon boots wearing sunglasses and a mask, discreetly shopping accompanied by a bodyguard upstairs at Pierre Lafond in the Upper Village. She’s also been spotted at the children’s clothing store Poppy and the home furnishings shop, Hudson Grace, at the Montecito Country Mart.

Harry and Meghan are said to be staying here for Christmas and New Year while his brother the Duke of Cambridge, 39, and wife, *Catherine*, are scheduled to be meeting with other members of the Royal Family at Sandringham in Norfolk, the sprawling stately pile built for the future King Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son in 1862.

The formerly close relationship between the two brothers is now rumored to be at a breaking point after Harry and Meghan’s incendiary interview with fellow Montecito neighbor *Oprah Winfrey* earlier this year and they barely said a single word to each other when they attended their grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral at Windsor in April — which I covered for Fox News — and the unveiling of a new statue to their mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, where they spent their childhoods, in July.

Hopefully 2022 will mend the considerable fracture between the future King William V and Harry, and we’ll continue to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex get more involved in the neighborhood they have chosen to make their family home.

— Richard Mineards


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> From their own neighborhood - ouch!
> H&M‘s part of the article in spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2021: The Year in Review - Montecito
> 
> 
> It was a year full of questions, sometimes without many answers. But we persevered. As a staff, we took a few moments to reflect on our 2021s, which featured a few tears, triumphant returns, overwhelming innovation, and news that no one likes to report. Here’s a look at eight of our standout...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hot dog!
> 
> 
> 
> It is 18 months since *Queen Elizabeth*’s grandson, *Prince Harry*, Duke of Sussex, and his actress wife, *Meghan Markle*, bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bath Riven Rock home on seven-and-a-half acres in our rarefied enclave for $14.65 million.
> 
> Having covered the British Royal Family for 45 years during my colorful career, including the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail in London, as well as ABC Network News, I found myself somewhat ironically living just a tiara’s toss or two from the tony twosome’s new home with their son, *Archie*, and now seven-month-old daughter, *Lilibet*, named in honor of Britain’s longest reigning monarch’s childhood nickname.
> 
> I was bombarded with calls on the acquisition appearing on all three major TV networks, CNN, and Fox News, as well as doing interviews with many of the world’s top publications, including the London Daily Mail, my former employer, France’s Le Figaro and Germany’s Der Spiegel.
> 
> Even after 1,000 years, the Royal Family, now known as the Windsors since World War II, still fascinates.
> 
> The move by *Prince William*’s younger brother to America has drawn comparisons with the late Duke of Windsor, briefly King Edward VIII, who gave up his throne to marry “the woman he loved,” American divorcee Wallis Simpson from Baltimore.
> 
> Harry was undoubtedly the golden boy of Buckingham Palace, enormously popular in Britain, having served two tours of service with the British Army in Afghanistan, and immersing himself doing good deeds.
> 
> But all that ended when he gave up royal duties much to the disappointment of the Queen, who will celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next summer, the same time Harry is due to deliver a tell-all tome for Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> 
> Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess.
> 
> During their time in our Eden by the Beach the dynamic duo has rarely been seen, other than dining at Lucky’s with music man *David Foster* and, last year, buying a Christmas tree at a pop-up site at La Cumbre Plaza, instead choosing to stay hunkered down with their young children and security team in Montecito.
> 
> But now, as more and more people sensibly get vaccinated against the deadly COVID disease, both of them seem to be going more public, with Harry seen walking their black Labrador rescue, Pula, on Miramar Beach, and pedaling his bike, with his minders in a black Range River closely behind.
> 
> *I’m told His Royal Highness, who memorably drove an electric-powered E-type Jaguar from Windsor Castle after his wedding to the Frogmore House reception, was absolutely fascinated by the 27-foot-long Oscar Meyer weinermobile when it visited Montecito in October and even asked to drive it. Talk about hot dog!*
> 
> More recently the couple donated money towards the first ever Montecito Holiday Car Parade and earlier this month Meghan was spotted fashionably attired in a Massimo Dutti wool coat and Tamara Mellon boots wearing sunglasses and a mask, discreetly shopping accompanied by a bodyguard upstairs at Pierre Lafond in the Upper Village. She’s also been spotted at the children’s clothing store Poppy and the home furnishings shop, Hudson Grace, at the Montecito Country Mart.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are said to be staying here for Christmas and New Year while his brother the Duke of Cambridge, 39, and wife, *Catherine*, are scheduled to be meeting with other members of the Royal Family at Sandringham in Norfolk, the sprawling stately pile built for the future King Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son in 1862.
> 
> The formerly close relationship between the two brothers is now rumored to be at a breaking point after Harry and Meghan’s incendiary interview with fellow Montecito neighbor *Oprah Winfrey* earlier this year and they barely said a single word to each other when they attended their grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral at Windsor in April — which I covered for Fox News — and the unveiling of a new statue to their mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, where they spent their childhoods, in July.
> 
> Hopefully 2022 will mend the considerable fracture between the future King William V and Harry, and we’ll continue to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex get more involved in the neighborhood they have chosen to make their family home.
> 
> — Richard Mineards


I like the "with his minders." Sounds like a person who needs watching and kept from self harm.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> From their own neighborhood - ouch!
> H&M‘s part of the article in spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2021: The Year in Review - Montecito
> 
> 
> It was a year full of questions, sometimes without many answers. But we persevered. As a staff, we took a few moments to reflect on our 2021s, which featured a few tears, triumphant returns, overwhelming innovation, and news that no one likes to report. Here’s a look at eight of our standout...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hot dog!
> 
> 
> 
> It is 18 months since *Queen Elizabeth*’s grandson, *Prince Harry*, Duke of Sussex, and his actress wife, *Meghan Markle*, bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bath Riven Rock home on seven-and-a-half acres in our rarefied enclave for $14.65 million.
> 
> Having covered the British Royal Family for 45 years during my colorful career, including the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail in London, as well as ABC Network News, I found myself somewhat ironically living just a tiara’s toss or two from the tony twosome’s new home with their son, *Archie*, and now seven-month-old daughter, *Lilibet*, named in honor of Britain’s longest reigning monarch’s childhood nickname.
> 
> I was bombarded with calls on the acquisition appearing on all three major TV networks, CNN, and Fox News, as well as doing interviews with many of the world’s top publications, including the London Daily Mail, my former employer, France’s Le Figaro and Germany’s Der Spiegel.
> 
> Even after 1,000 years, the Royal Family, now known as the Windsors since World War II, still fascinates.
> 
> The move by *Prince William*’s younger brother to America has drawn comparisons with the late Duke of Windsor, briefly King Edward VIII, who gave up his throne to marry “the woman he loved,” American divorcee Wallis Simpson from Baltimore.
> 
> Harry was undoubtedly the golden boy of Buckingham Palace, enormously popular in Britain, having served two tours of service with the British Army in Afghanistan, and immersing himself doing good deeds.
> 
> But all that ended when he gave up royal duties much to the disappointment of the Queen, who will celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next summer, the same time Harry is due to deliver a tell-all tome for Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> 
> Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess.
> 
> During their time in our Eden by the Beach the dynamic duo has rarely been seen, other than dining at Lucky’s with music man *David Foster* and, last year, buying a Christmas tree at a pop-up site at La Cumbre Plaza, instead choosing to stay hunkered down with their young children and security team in Montecito.
> 
> But now, as more and more people sensibly get vaccinated against the deadly COVID disease, both of them seem to be going more public, with Harry seen walking their black Labrador rescue, Pula, on Miramar Beach, and pedaling his bike, with his minders in a black Range River closely behind.
> 
> *I’m told His Royal Highness, who memorably drove an electric-powered E-type Jaguar from Windsor Castle after his wedding to the Frogmore House reception, was absolutely fascinated by the 27-foot-long Oscar Meyer weinermobile when it visited Montecito in October and even asked to drive it. Talk about hot dog!*
> 
> More recently the couple donated money towards the first ever Montecito Holiday Car Parade and earlier this month Meghan was spotted fashionably attired in a Massimo Dutti wool coat and Tamara Mellon boots wearing sunglasses and a mask, discreetly shopping accompanied by a bodyguard upstairs at Pierre Lafond in the Upper Village. She’s also been spotted at the children’s clothing store Poppy and the home furnishings shop, Hudson Grace, at the Montecito Country Mart.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are said to be staying here for Christmas and New Year while his brother the Duke of Cambridge, 39, and wife, *Catherine*, are scheduled to be meeting with other members of the Royal Family at Sandringham in Norfolk, the sprawling stately pile built for the future King Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son in 1862.
> 
> The formerly close relationship between the two brothers is now rumored to be at a breaking point after Harry and Meghan’s incendiary interview with fellow Montecito neighbor *Oprah Winfrey* earlier this year and they barely said a single word to each other when they attended their grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral at Windsor in April — which I covered for Fox News — and the unveiling of a new statue to their mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, where they spent their childhoods, in July.
> 
> Hopefully 2022 will mend the considerable fracture between the future King William V and Harry, and we’ll continue to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex get more involved in the neighborhood they have chosen to make their family home.
> 
> — Richard Mineards


While reading that link I was hearing the voice of Lady Whistledown from Bridgerton in my head.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> From their own neighborhood - ouch!
> H&M‘s part of the article in spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2021: The Year in Review - Montecito
> 
> 
> It was a year full of questions, sometimes without many answers. But we persevered. As a staff, we took a few moments to reflect on our 2021s, which featured a few tears, triumphant returns, overwhelming innovation, and news that no one likes to report. Here’s a look at eight of our standout...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hot dog!
> 
> 
> 
> It is 18 months since *Queen Elizabeth*’s grandson, *Prince Harry*, Duke of Sussex, and his actress wife, *Meghan Markle*, bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bath Riven Rock home on seven-and-a-half acres in our rarefied enclave for $14.65 million.
> 
> Having covered the British Royal Family for 45 years during my colorful career, including the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail in London, as well as ABC Network News, I found myself somewhat ironically living just a tiara’s toss or two from the tony twosome’s new home with their son, *Archie*, and now seven-month-old daughter, *Lilibet*, named in honor of Britain’s longest reigning monarch’s childhood nickname.
> 
> I was bombarded with calls on the acquisition appearing on all three major TV networks, CNN, and Fox News, as well as doing interviews with many of the world’s top publications, including the London Daily Mail, my former employer, France’s Le Figaro and Germany’s Der Spiegel.
> 
> Even after 1,000 years, the Royal Family, now known as the Windsors since World War II, still fascinates.
> 
> The move by *Prince William*’s younger brother to America has drawn comparisons with the late Duke of Windsor, briefly King Edward VIII, who gave up his throne to marry “the woman he loved,” American divorcee Wallis Simpson from Baltimore.
> 
> Harry was undoubtedly the golden boy of Buckingham Palace, enormously popular in Britain, having served two tours of service with the British Army in Afghanistan, and immersing himself doing good deeds.
> 
> But all that ended when he gave up royal duties much to the disappointment of the Queen, who will celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next summer, the same time Harry is due to deliver a tell-all tome for Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> 
> Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess.
> 
> During their time in our Eden by the Beach the dynamic duo has rarely been seen, other than dining at Lucky’s with music man *David Foster* and, last year, buying a Christmas tree at a pop-up site at La Cumbre Plaza, instead choosing to stay hunkered down with their young children and security team in Montecito.
> 
> But now, as more and more people sensibly get vaccinated against the deadly COVID disease, both of them seem to be going more public, with Harry seen walking their black Labrador rescue, Pula, on Miramar Beach, and pedaling his bike, with his minders in a black Range River closely behind.
> 
> *I’m told His Royal Highness, who memorably drove an electric-powered E-type Jaguar from Windsor Castle after his wedding to the Frogmore House reception, was absolutely fascinated by the 27-foot-long Oscar Meyer weinermobile when it visited Montecito in October and even asked to drive it. Talk about hot dog!*
> 
> More recently the couple donated money towards the first ever Montecito Holiday Car Parade and earlier this month Meghan was spotted fashionably attired in a Massimo Dutti wool coat and Tamara Mellon boots wearing sunglasses and a mask, discreetly shopping accompanied by a bodyguard upstairs at Pierre Lafond in the Upper Village. She’s also been spotted at the children’s clothing store Poppy and the home furnishings shop, Hudson Grace, at the Montecito Country Mart.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are said to be staying here for Christmas and New Year while his brother the Duke of Cambridge, 39, and wife, *Catherine*, are scheduled to be meeting with other members of the Royal Family at Sandringham in Norfolk, the sprawling stately pile built for the future King Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son in 1862.
> 
> The formerly close relationship between the two brothers is now rumored to be at a breaking point after Harry and Meghan’s incendiary interview with fellow Montecito neighbor *Oprah Winfrey* earlier this year and they barely said a single word to each other when they attended their grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral at Windsor in April — which I covered for Fox News — and the unveiling of a new statue to their mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, where they spent their childhoods, in July.
> 
> Hopefully 2022 will mend the considerable fracture between the future King William V and Harry, and we’ll continue to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex get more involved in the neighborhood they have chosen to make their family home.
> 
> — Richard Mineards


It sounds like Richard Mineards is having a lot of fun at the expense of his neighbors.

_"…Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
*Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess*"._


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I like the "with his minders." Sounds like a person who needs watching and kept from self harm.


According to the Oxford Dictionary, it is informal British: a bodyguard employed to protect a celebrity or criminal.
"he was accompanied by his personal minder".

So, celeb or criminal?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It sounds like Richard Mineards is having a lot of fun at the expense of his neighbors.
> 
> _"…Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> *Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess*"._


But he's not wrong.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



That's a "Mom, please shut up" look if there ever was one.


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> That's a "Mom, please shut up" look if there ever was one.



I don't think there was a "please" in that look


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I think it means:
> Flat brown and pale yellow diamonds are the most commonly found, are abundant and are very found down the alphabetical spectrum. Often diamonds 'brown' 'pale-yellow' diamonds are neither white enough to be called 'colourless' nor strongly coloured enough to be called vivid 'yellow' or even interesting to be strong 'red-brown' etc. Still anything above a 2ct is still rare enough to get traded and graded but it's a chump that buys a pastel, murky stone.





Happyish said:


> Brown diamonds, in the industry, black too, have traditionally been regarded as industrial grade and of negligible value. A "garbage stone," as a jeweler I know would say.
> 
> Some of this changed when brown diamonds were renamed, "cognac." Despite the more attractive name, they're still brown and their value is negligible. Certainly, they pale in comparison to a white diamond, not to mention the ultra-rare pinks or blues in terms of value, not to mention attractiveness and scarcity.
> 
> As regional areas known for certain gemstones have become inaccessible (Afghanistan, Mogoc) or mined-out (South Africa), (and remember coral, lapis and turquoise), jewelers have turned to other lesser value stones. A pink tourmaline is easier and less expensive to source than a fine ruby, as is a topaz to a sapphire, or a white topaz to a diamond, etc. each of which are far less costly to a manufacturing jeweler, even high-end ones such as Verdura and Van Cleef. (Indeed, the majority of VCA alhambra is comprised of low-value semi-precious stones--not that they're not pretty, just that the materials are not particularly expensive--this was the aim of the boutique line to make it more accessible and affordable, of which the Alhambra was a part.)
> 
> Past standards such as rubies, diamonds, emeralds and sapphires commonly used in the 50's through the 70's, have now been relegated to "high-jewelry." These types of stones are no longer common in every-day jewelry.
> 
> Hence, the appeal of a brown diamond. A jeweler can buy a 5-carat stone at a fraction of the cost of a colorless diamond. Obviously Scarlett is proud to have this, but knowing something about diamonds and value, I wouldn't want this as an engagement ring--or for that matter, in any piece of jewelry.


Thank you! I'm a sapphire and emerald girl, so diamonds aren't very on my radar.

I might be the only person here who doesn't mind the ceramic band setting, although I wouldn't buy it myself. I like old silver.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



MM just exudes . . . pure evil.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of Doria: I really believe there was a, uh, disagreement, and it also shows us how the Harkles' PR machine works. There was no need to shove Doria down our collective throats like this from the few random sightings of her. Then there's rumour of a fight and boom, it's like Doria fell off the face of the earth. No pap pics, no sugary PR articles from one day to another, and she's yet to resurface.
> 
> I wonder what she did, try to talk some sense into her lunatic spawn? Ask for financial compensation? Or did Raptor just feel she didn't need the narrative of being oh so close to Mommy anymore?



on one of the Thomas Markle interviews he mentioned he is still in touch with Doria.  So perhaps that was enough for MM to markle her own mother….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It sounds like Richard Mineards is having a lot of fun at the expense of his neighbors.
> 
> _"…Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> *Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess*"._



RM should tell us more, perhaps take some photos 
Hazzie may not know much about the inner workings of the BRF - most of his recollections would be those of a child, right?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Ok, now I'm convinced he's a member here.  We discuss something, Jesus makes a video.  Give us a shoutout Jesus!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> That's a "Mom, please shut up" look if there ever was one.


The look she gave to her mother was more than 'please shut up', it was terrifying…


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> The look she gave to her mother was more than 'please shut up', it was terrifying…



With the actions she’s thus displayed I would think she’s actually an abuser. She’s no Diana V2, more Leona Helmsley.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


>




I’m surprised that she didn’t get whiplash snapping her head around like that.  She looks like a badly acted psycho when she does that.


----------



## Chanbal

Hear, hear!  


_Meghan Markle__'s lawyer says that 'bullying' is a word casually bandied around to discredit working women.

How opportune, considering that her client stands accused of having mistreated Palace staff. Jenny Afia argued that 'bullying' is 'used very freely and it's a very, very damaging term, particularly for career women'.

She was being interviewed for a podcast and compared royal aides to children for complaining that Meghan was guilty of emotional cruelty and manipulation when she was their boss before moving to California. Meghan strongly denies the accusations.

*On behalf of all 'career women', I say to Ms Afia: do not patronise us.*

Our work defines us. Unlike Meghan, who was a TV soap actress before marrying into the Royal Family, I have worked for three decades as a 'career woman' and been boss to hundreds of staff.

I have only ever made one employee cry. That was Alastair Campbell, whom I had to sack from the Daily Mirror. And he didn't exactly shrink into obscurity, becoming Prime Minister Blair's puppetmaster.

However Meghan's lawyer tries to turn the argument into one about career women, the Duchess of Sussex remains accused of personally humiliating former Palace staff, driving two assistants out of the Royal Household and undermining the confidence of another aide.

Jason Knauf, Kensington Palace's communications secretary at the time, submitted a formal complaint expressing his concerns, describing Meghan's treatment of an employee as 'totally unacceptable'.

Bullying is not, as Ms Afia claims, a word over-casually used to harm career women. According to the dictionary, it means 'treating in an overbearing manner; to intimidate'.

It's word to describe people of either sex who really are bullies._









						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Meghan's lawyer has insulted all of us career women
					

AMANDA PLATELL: Meghan Markle's lawyer Jenny Afia (pictured) says that 'bullying' is a word casually bandied around to discredit working women.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> I don't think there was a "please" in that look


I was trying to be polite. More likely "Mom STFU"


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I was trying to be polite. More likely "Mom STFU"


I doubt she used "Mom".


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I was trying to be polite. More likely "Mom STFU"


You are getting there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is the full video of the ‘event’ - the ‘stare’ happens aground the 15:45 mark.  Hazzie looks and behaves soooo awkwardly.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I think it means:
> Flat brown and pale yellow diamonds are the most commonly found, are abundant and are very found down the alphabetical spectrum. Often diamonds 'brown' 'pale-yellow' diamonds are neither white enough to be called 'colourless' nor strongly coloured enough to be called vivid 'yellow' or even interesting to be strong 'red-brown' etc. Still anything above a 2ct is still rare enough to get traded and graded but it's a chump that buys a pastel, murky stone.





Happyish said:


> Brown diamonds, in the industry, black too, have traditionally been regarded as industrial grade and of negligible value. A "garbage stone," as a jeweler I know would say.
> 
> Some of this changed when brown diamonds were renamed, "cognac." Despite the more attractive name, they're still brown and their value is negligible. Certainly, they pale in comparison to a white diamond, not to mention the ultra-rare pinks or blues in terms of value, not to mention attractiveness and scarcity.
> 
> As regional areas known for certain gemstones have become inaccessible (Afghanistan, Mogoc) or mined-out (South Africa), (and remember coral, lapis and turquoise), jewelers have turned to other lesser value stones. A pink tourmaline is easier and less expensive to source than a fine ruby, as is a topaz to a sapphire, or a white topaz to a diamond, etc. each of which are far less costly to a manufacturing jeweler, even high-end ones such as Verdura and Van Cleef. (Indeed, the majority of VCA alhambra is comprised of low-value semi-precious stones--not that they're not pretty, just that the materials are not particularly expensive--this was the aim of the boutique line to make it more accessible and affordable, of which the Alhambra was a part.)
> 
> Past standards such as rubies, diamonds, emeralds and sapphires commonly used in the 50's through the 70's, have now been relegated to "high-jewelry." These types of stones are no longer common in every-day jewelry.
> 
> Hence, the appeal of a brown diamond. A jeweler can buy a 5-carat stone at a fraction of the cost of a colorless diamond. Obviously Scarlett is proud to have this, but knowing something about diamonds and value, I wouldn't want this as an engagement ring--or for that matter, in any piece of jewelry.


Funnily enough I was thinking about this the other day mainly about the Alhambra line and the relative cheapness of mother of Pearl and malachite.
I feel like we are through with fine jewellery’s value being based on the value of the stones and a lot more of the value is based on design elements  and of course brand recognition.

Of course black and brown stones can be beautiful and with lab stones too I think we are getting closer and closer to the day when it’s recognised that diamonds’ value do not come from their rarity. When you think about it, a similar thing has already happened with pearls with the advent of cultured pearls and they are still prized.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> From their own neighborhood - ouch!
> H&M‘s part of the article in spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2021: The Year in Review - Montecito
> 
> 
> It was a year full of questions, sometimes without many answers. But we persevered. As a staff, we took a few moments to reflect on our 2021s, which featured a few tears, triumphant returns, overwhelming innovation, and news that no one likes to report. Here’s a look at eight of our standout...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hot dog!
> 
> 
> 
> It is 18 months since *Queen Elizabeth*’s grandson, *Prince Harry*, Duke of Sussex, and his actress wife, *Meghan Markle*, bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bath Riven Rock home on seven-and-a-half acres in our rarefied enclave for $14.65 million.
> 
> Having covered the British Royal Family for 45 years during my colorful career, including the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail in London, as well as ABC Network News, I found myself somewhat ironically living just a tiara’s toss or two from the tony twosome’s new home with their son, *Archie*, and now seven-month-old daughter, *Lilibet*, named in honor of Britain’s longest reigning monarch’s childhood nickname.
> 
> I was bombarded with calls on the acquisition appearing on all three major TV networks, CNN, and Fox News, as well as doing interviews with many of the world’s top publications, including the London Daily Mail, my former employer, France’s Le Figaro and Germany’s Der Spiegel.
> 
> Even after 1,000 years, the Royal Family, now known as the Windsors since World War II, still fascinates.
> 
> The move by *Prince William*’s younger brother to America has drawn comparisons with the late Duke of Windsor, briefly King Edward VIII, who gave up his throne to marry “the woman he loved,” American divorcee Wallis Simpson from Baltimore.
> 
> Harry was undoubtedly the golden boy of Buckingham Palace, enormously popular in Britain, having served two tours of service with the British Army in Afghanistan, and immersing himself doing good deeds.
> 
> But all that ended when he gave up royal duties much to the disappointment of the Queen, who will celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next summer, the same time Harry is due to deliver a tell-all tome for Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> 
> Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess.
> 
> During their time in our Eden by the Beach the dynamic duo has rarely been seen, other than dining at Lucky’s with music man *David Foster* and, last year, buying a Christmas tree at a pop-up site at La Cumbre Plaza, instead choosing to stay hunkered down with their young children and security team in Montecito.
> 
> But now, as more and more people sensibly get vaccinated against the deadly COVID disease, both of them seem to be going more public, with Harry seen walking their black Labrador rescue, Pula, on Miramar Beach, and pedaling his bike, with his minders in a black Range River closely behind.
> 
> *I’m told His Royal Highness, who memorably drove an electric-powered E-type Jaguar from Windsor Castle after his wedding to the Frogmore House reception, was absolutely fascinated by the 27-foot-long Oscar Meyer weinermobile when it visited Montecito in October and even asked to drive it. Talk about hot dog!*
> 
> More recently the couple donated money towards the first ever Montecito Holiday Car Parade and earlier this month Meghan was spotted fashionably attired in a Massimo Dutti wool coat and Tamara Mellon boots wearing sunglasses and a mask, discreetly shopping accompanied by a bodyguard upstairs at Pierre Lafond in the Upper Village. She’s also been spotted at the children’s clothing store Poppy and the home furnishings shop, Hudson Grace, at the Montecito Country Mart.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are said to be staying here for Christmas and New Year while his brother the Duke of Cambridge, 39, and wife, *Catherine*, are scheduled to be meeting with other members of the Royal Family at Sandringham in Norfolk, the sprawling stately pile built for the future King Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son in 1862.
> 
> The formerly close relationship between the two brothers is now rumored to be at a breaking point after Harry and Meghan’s incendiary interview with fellow Montecito neighbor *Oprah Winfrey* earlier this year and they barely said a single word to each other when they attended their grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral at Windsor in April — which I covered for Fox News — and the unveiling of a new statue to their mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, where they spent their childhoods, in July.
> 
> Hopefully 2022 will mend the considerable fracture between the future King William V and Harry, and we’ll continue to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex get more involved in the neighborhood they have chosen to make their family home.
> 
> — Richard Mineards


*Queen Elizabeth*’s grandson, *Prince Harry*, Duke of Sussex, and his actress wife
The absolute shade in this description alone is killing me 
You can tell they were about as welcome as a pickup artist in a convent. 


purseinsanity said:


> Ok, now I'm convinced he's a member here.  We discuss something, Jesus makes a video.  Give us a shoutout Jesus!


I am convinced some of these YouTube types are at the very least lurkers on here. There’s so much material to hand for inspiration  


Chanbal said:


> Hear, hear!
> View attachment 5291175
> 
> _Meghan Markle__'s lawyer says that 'bullying' is a word casually bandied around to discredit working women.
> 
> How opportune, considering that her client stands accused of having mistreated Palace staff. Jenny Afia argued that 'bullying' is 'used very freely and it's a very, very damaging term, particularly for career women'.
> 
> She was being interviewed for a podcast and compared royal aides to children for complaining that Meghan was guilty of emotional cruelty and manipulation when she was their boss before moving to California. Meghan strongly denies the accusations.
> 
> *On behalf of all 'career women', I say to Ms Afia: do not patronise us.*
> 
> Our work defines us. Unlike Meghan, who was a TV soap actress before marrying into the Royal Family, I have worked for three decades as a 'career woman' and been boss to hundreds of staff.
> 
> I have only ever made one employee cry. That was Alastair Campbell, whom I had to sack from the Daily Mirror. And he didn't exactly shrink into obscurity, becoming Prime Minister Blair's puppetmaster.
> 
> However Meghan's lawyer tries to turn the argument into one about career women, the Duchess of Sussex remains accused of personally humiliating former Palace staff, driving two assistants out of the Royal Household and undermining the confidence of another aide.
> 
> Jason Knauf, Kensington Palace's communications secretary at the time, submitted a formal complaint expressing his concerns, describing Meghan's treatment of an employee as 'totally unacceptable'.
> 
> Bullying is not, as Ms Afia claims, a word over-casually used to harm career women. According to the dictionary, it means 'treating in an overbearing manner; to intimidate'.
> 
> It's word to describe people of either sex who really are bullies._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Meghan's lawyer has insulted all of us career women
> 
> 
> AMANDA PLATELL: Meghan Markle's lawyer Jenny Afia (pictured) says that 'bullying' is a word casually bandied around to discredit working women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Another thing I don’t like about this pair is it’s given this individual (Platell) something in common with me - hasn’t made me like her though


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Funnily enough I was thinking about this the other day mainly about the Alhambra line and the relative cheapness of mother of Pearl and malachite.
> I feel like we are through with fine jewellery’s value being based on the value of the stones and a lot more of the value is based on design elements  and of course brand recognition.
> 
> Of course black and brown stones can be beautiful and with lab stones too I think we are getting closer and closer to the day when it’s recognised that diamonds’ value do not come from their rarity. When you think about it, a similar thing has already happened with pearls with the advent of cultured pearls and they are still prized.



It's been the same for centuries, it's a question of getting the best (intense, clearest, most uniform) turquoise or lapis, the finest, clearest most vivid purple amethyst etc. The best jewellery is assessed by the finest craftsmanship as well as materials.  Cheap stones in plenty supply doesn't mean the _very_ best are in plenty supply. And yes, VCA Alambra is that company's entry level product so it makes sense.

It's been a long time since black and brown diamonds were either discarded or only used industrially. Fawaz Gruosi used black (and white) diamonds in the 1990s for de Grosogono and sparked a whole wave of black and white diamond jewellery that made the price of black diamonds soar (comparatively speaking). Similarly 'Cognac' diamonds is a brand term first used in the 1980s to market diamonds founds in the Argyle Diamond mine, shift perspectives of taste and bump the prices.  

Lab diamonds are basically glass, just made with carbon. 

IMO, natural pearls are completely different because finding and harvesting is so dangerous and labour intensive it's hardly worth it. As someone who's held a £500, 000 natural pearl necklace in my hands, the difference between a nice cultured (farmed) pearls of any kind/size and well matched, strand of natural tear-drop graduated natural pearls is about 100 years and the price of nice apartment, not something I'd want to wear round my neck everyday. 

Still very large, natural untreated diamonds are all rare, whatever someone's colour preference. M's stone is a very nice stone and suits her fingers and hand very well. The pale yellow with the black ceramic  (can't remember whose it was now) is an edgy, contemporary ring, not a typical E-ring, but the unusual black setting goes well with the fancy cut and colour. 

I like black and brown diamonds but they are what they are, and I'm wearing black ceramic rings right now (Cartier). Jewellery is about taste, expression and sentimentality. 

If I was asking someone to marry me, I'd ask my gf/bf what kind of ring _s/he_ wanted not just present a done deal (prob. why H didn't, he knew no ring would be big/grand enough) but if I was the recipient of a nice ring like M's first setting/stone would have kept it because that's the one my beloved chose. IMO, neither H&M really thinks about the other's feelings. I think_ she_ thinks her ring is not Diana's nor Liz Taylor's Krupp and will be forever miffed, and Harry is - Hap-hazard.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's been the same for centuries, it's a question of getting the best (intense, clearest, most uniform) turquoise or lapis, the finest, clearest most vivid purple amethyst etc. The best jewellery is assessed by the finest craftsmanship as well as materials.  Cheap stones in plenty supply doesn't mean the _very_ best are in plenty supply. And yes, VCA Alambra is that company's entry level product so it makes sense.
> 
> It's been a long time since black and brown diamonds were either discarded or only used industrially. Fawaz Gruosi used black (and white) diamonds in the 1990s for de Grosogono and sparked a whole wave of black and white diamond jewellery that made the price of black diamonds soar (comparatively speaking). Similarly 'Cognac' diamonds is a brand term first used in the 1980s to market diamonds founds in the Argyle Diamond mine, shift perspectives of taste and bump the prices.
> 
> Lab diamonds are basically glass, just made with carbon.
> 
> IMO, natural pearls are completely different because finding and harvesting is so dangerous and labour intensive it's hardly worth it. As someone who's held a £500, 000 natural pearl necklace in my hands, the difference between a nice cultured (farmed) pearls of any kind/size and well matched, strand of natural tear-drop graduated natural pearls is about 100 years and the price of nice apartment, not something I'd want to wear round my neck everyday.
> 
> Still very large, natural untreated diamonds are all rare, whatever someone's colour preference. M's stone is a very nice stone and suits her fingers and hand very well. The pale yellow with the black ceramic  (can't remember whose it was now) is an edgy, contemporary ring, not a typical E-ring, but the unusual black setting goes well with the fancy cut and colour.
> 
> I like black and brown diamonds but they are what they are, and I'm wearing black ceramic rings right now (Cartier). Jewellery is about taste, expression and sentimentality.
> 
> If I was asking someone to marry me, I'd ask my gf/bf what kind of ring _s/he_ wanted not just present a done deal (prob. why H didn't, he knew no ring would be big/grand enough) but if I was the recipient of a nice ring like M's first setting/stone would have kept it because that's the one my beloved chose. IMO, neither H&M really thinks about the other's feelings. I think_ she_ thinks her ring is not Diana's nor Liz Taylor's Krupp and will be forever miffed, and Harry is - Hap-hazard.


It is an interesting area how colours and styles come in and out of favour. I love rubies and garnets and they seem to be a bit out of the limelight atm and then the victorians didn’t seem to really care for diamonds. 

Yes I’m in two minds about asking about an e ring on the one hand it’s nice to be surprised but on the other hand it’s best to get what you want.
I can see why H didn’t enquire though…
“You know that koh-I-noor stone? Don’t I deserve something special?”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the full video of the ‘event’ - the ‘stare’ happens aground the 15:45 mark.  Hazzie looks and behaves soooo awkwardly.




Ugh. Does she still do that? This patronizing, fake-concerned face with huge eyes, raised eyebrows and wrinkled forehead? It was her go-to face when interacting with her subjects.


----------



## needlv

Haha - I hope the Daily Mail pays her in pennies… (pence)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Haha - I hope the Daily Mail pays her in pennies… (pence)



The comments and nicknames are so funny: The 'Dollar Duchess' and the 'beast of her own ego'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks and congratulations to members for the latest nicknames.
               

@pukasonqo
For you first nickname,  Boopsie Oopsie Twins, welcome to The List.  



@PooFerret
For your first nickname, Megtox, welcome to the blog and The List.  



@Jktgal
For your #2, Unserene Lownesses.  

@DoggieBags
For your #3, Montecito Duo, a Gold Ribbon.  


@Sophisticatted
For your #4, Merchers to Flippers.
Your #5, Professional Squatters, welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.  



@jennit
For your #6, Smughan Smirkle.  

@poopsie
For your #6, Outsiders in H'wood.  
For your #7, Mouthy Meg, here's a Gold Medal.  
For your #8, Henpecked Harry.  



@charlottawill
For your #7, Duke and Duchess of Burningbridges, a Gold Medal.  



@Luvbolide
For your #8, Distasteful Duchess.  

@Lodpah
For your #8, Monster Duo.  

@rose60610
For your #12, Mrs. Loser, welcome to the Early Bird Club.  



@jelliedfeels
For your #13, Sneaky Tart, welcome to the Busy Bee Club.  
For your #14, Third Codpiece, welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.  




@QueenofWrapDress
From the Tourre Bakahai tweet that you posted:
your #14, Poundland Duchess, welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.  
your #15, Calculating Liar, welcome the Hooting Owl Club.  




@Chanbal
For your #37, Clouds of Montecito, The List #37 Ribbon.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



That Death Stare was a reflex action: How DARE you interrupt me! Off with her head! 

I'd bet it wasn't a one-time thing. I wonder if there are other instances captured on video, or she reserves this for her nearest and "dearest". She does seem to have a stock library of behaviour, like striking the provocative poses if a BFF's husband wanders close. Sham method acting?


----------



## Chanbal

A long but interesting article on the Montecitos' charities. 









						Archewell is outshone by cat sanctuary and boy in a tent
					

The Archewell Foundation is described on its own website as 'an impact-driven non-profit created by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_*The two charities collectively spent more on legal fees than they raised in profitable donations.*_

*SECRET STATE*

_Transparency campaigners have attacked the decision to register the Archewell Foundation and the Sussexes' associated companies in the eastern state of Delaware, despite it having been founded and based thousands of miles away in California.

Delaware is known as the 'Switzerland of the U.S.' for its lack of corporate transparency.

Registering a company in Delaware doesn't require the disclosure of the identities of the owners and all financial information relating to the firm is kept confidential._

*WHERE NEXT?*

_How much of the couple's millions will go to Archewell's good causes and how much to Chez Sussex remains to be seen. Last year, 'sources close to Harry and Meghan' said Archewell would begin in earnest 'when the time is right'.

The next Archewell results will not be released until early 2023.

Until then, the Sussexes run the risk of appearing to be — on Archewell's account sheets at least — gilded onlookers rather than charity big-hitters.

They certainly have a lot of catching up to do before they overtake the likes of the Ty-Nant cat sanctuary._


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> A long but interesting article on the Montecitos' charities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell is outshone by cat sanctuary and boy in a tent
> 
> 
> The Archewell Foundation is described on its own website as 'an impact-driven non-profit created by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*The two charities collectively spent more on legal fees than they raised in profitable donations.*_
> 
> *SECRET STATE*
> 
> _Transparency campaigners have attacked the decision to register the Archewell Foundation and the Sussexes' associated companies in the eastern state of Delaware, despite it having been founded and based thousands of miles away in California.
> 
> Delaware is known as the 'Switzerland of the U.S.' for its lack of corporate transparency.
> 
> Registering a company in Delaware doesn't require the disclosure of the identities of the owners and all financial information relating to the firm is kept confidential._
> 
> *WHERE NEXT?*
> 
> _How much of the couple's millions will go to Archewell's good causes and how much to Chez Sussex remains to be seen. Last year, 'sources close to Harry and Meghan' said Archewell would begin in earnest 'when the time is right'.
> 
> The next Archewell results will not be released until early 2023.
> 
> Until then, the Sussexes run the risk of appearing to be — on Archewell's account sheets at least — gilded onlookers rather than charity big-hitters.
> 
> They certainly have a lot of catching up to do before they overtake the likes of the Ty-Nant cat sanctuary._


they should be funding Archwell with their own money.....basically it seems the only thing they have accomplished is one half-hour podcast and her childrens book


----------



## pukasonqo

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks and congratulations to members for the latest nicknames.
> 
> 
> @pukasonqo
> For you first nickname,  Boopsie Oopsie Twins, welcome to The List.
> View attachment 5291486
> 
> 
> @PooFerret
> For your first nickname, Megtox, welcome to the blog and The List.
> View attachment 5291494
> 
> 
> @Jktgal
> For your #2, Unserene Lownesses.
> 
> @DoggieBags
> For your #3, Montecito Duo, a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5291495
> 
> @Sophisticatted
> For your #4, Merchers to Flippers.
> Your #5, Professional Squatters, welcome to the Nickname Master's Club.
> View attachment 5291496
> 
> 
> @jennit
> For your #6, Smughan Smirkle.
> 
> @poopsie
> For your #6, Outsiders in H'wood.
> For your #7, Mouthy Meg, here's a Gold Medal.
> For your #8, Henpecked Harry.
> View attachment 5291511
> 
> 
> @charlottawill
> For your #7, Duke and Duchess of Burningbridges, a Gold Medal.
> View attachment 5291512
> 
> 
> @Luvbolide
> For your #8, Distasteful Duchess.
> 
> @Lodpah
> For your #8, Monster Duo.
> 
> @rose60610
> For your #12, Mrs. Loser, welcome to the Early Bird Club.
> View attachment 5291513
> 
> 
> @jelliedfeels
> For your #13, Sneaky Tart, welcome to the Busy Bee Club.
> For your #14, Third Codpiece, welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.
> View attachment 5291516
> View attachment 5291517
> 
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress
> From the Tourre Bakahai tweet that you posted:
> your #14, Poundland Duchess, welcome to the Golden Retriever Club.
> your #15, Calculating Liar, welcome the Hooting Owl Club.
> View attachment 5291520
> View attachment 5291521
> 
> 
> @Chanbal
> For your #37, Clouds of Montecito, The List #37 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5291523


Yay, thank you!!


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> Haha - I hope the Daily Mail pays her in pennies… (pence)




She looks like she is demented in this pic! The Duchess of Dementia!


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> The absolute shade in this description alone is killing me


You are absolutely right, I didn't catch that. The nice wording would have been "his wife, actress Meghan Markle". "His actress wife" without mentioning her name is a total put down.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> they should be funding Archwell with their own money.....basically it seems the only thing they have accomplished is one half-hour podcast and her childrens book


Let's not forget his lucrative role as a corporate executive 
<iframe title="vimeo-player" src="" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Let's not forget his lucrative role as a corporate executive
> <iframe title="vimeo-player" src="" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



yeah, right


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



fabulous


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chloe302225 said:


>




We know plates are breaking at Monteshitshow Mansion 

Catherine looks stunning and she's aging gracefully


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> We know plates are breaking at Monteshitshow Mansion
> 
> Catherine looks stunning and she's aging gracefully


how dare this non-Hollywood person look so great?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> fabulous


So regal. Love the waves.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> We know plates are breaking at Monteshitshow Mansion
> 
> Catherine looks stunning and she's aging gracefully


They softened her eyeliner for these and it makes her look so much younger.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



did you post in the thread so Meghan would see it?


----------



## PooFerret

Thank you so much for my award  I am utterly humbled and will therefore be donating your kind offerings to PooFerretWell - a charitable trust based on a small island somewhere near Delaware or, er, the Bahamas.  I will use my quasi gravelly voice to TELL you how HUMBLE I AM.
For now, I am going to go and stroke my rescue chickens  and bathe in my glory… THANK YOU ALL


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> We know plates are breaking at Monteshitshow Mansion
> 
> Catherine looks stunning and she's aging gracefully


That last one looks like it's out of the Victorian Era.  She's so Classy with a C!


----------



## PooFerret

Wondering about the Richter scale at Montecito at the mo’ on viewing the photos of a beautiful, graceful  future queen.  Who likes a bet?  What’s it going to be:  ‘humanitarian’ work, race card or a photo of Lilbet?


----------



## papertiger

Another:


----------



## LittleStar88

Chloe302225 said:


>




THAT is how you wear a red dress.


----------



## PooFerret

I am loving how the BFR have completely rubbed their noses in it by clearly displaying the ring and Diana’s earrings  IMO wondering if Hazza is desperate to get off the compound now and score some snow with Corden?


----------



## needlv

PooFerret said:


> I am loving how the BFR have completely rubbed their noses in it by clearly displaying the ring and Diana’s earrings  IMO wondering if Hazza is desperate to get off the compound now and score some snow with Corden?


I think that’s a fan account.

this is the official one and I love her dress… gorgeous!


----------



## PooFerret

Err, no, I am not a ‘fan’ of anyone, I am too f*cking old to be swayed by any of this and it merely amuses me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies, wrong thread


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> They softened her eyeliner for these and it makes her look so much younger.



She can definitely lay off all that eyeliner, and definitely should. It's really harsh looking. I think a light smoky eye look would be nicer


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> She can definitely lay off all that eyeliner, and definitely should. It's really harsh looking. I think a light smoky eye look would be nicer



The same advice should be followed by the former actress, now hustler…


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> She can definitely lay off all that eyeliner, and definitely should. It's really harsh looking. I think a light smoky eye look would be nicer


The eyeliner criticism has been around since their wedding, both toward her and her sister. I'm glad she finally listened to someone. Now I'd like to see her trim her hair about 4-6 inches. Her hair is unquestionably fabulous, but I think it should be a bit shorter. Just my opinion, don't come at me...


----------



## needlv

And the BRF response:


----------



## zen1965

I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

zen1965 said:


> I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).


Nope. IMO, those photos look nothing like Catherine. The photo in the red dress bears no resemblance to her whatsoever and if I hadn't been told it was her I would have never guessed.


----------



## needlv

zen1965 said:


> I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).



yes I don’t like the red dress one.  I keep looking at her shoulder (the one without the sleeve), as it looks odd.   Too much photoshop?

But the white dress in the looking off to the side pose is very regal…


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


>



Things I noticed in the video:
Meghan pulling on Harry's arm when he went in for the double-cheek kiss with the woman. Was she pulling him away to stop him from doing it or was she being her typical grabby self?
The constant touching of her hair. She's not the only person who does this (Kardashians are famous for this), but it annoys the fcuk out of me. Every five minutes (or more) she's touching her hair.  If it's such a nuisance and flying in your face, wear it pulled back FFS.

I would love our Body Language Guy to do an assessment of their engagement video where Meghan is unable to let go of Harry's hand.  I would also like his take on 'the hand'. You know, how every time you see her place her hand on the back of Harry's shoulder, he salivates. No wait, that was Pavlov's dog. Well whatever, same thing.
Not to mention this event in which Harry gets the death stare for merely speaking to someone. I mean, lets face it, he's the real draw - the one people pay to see, real royalty - not the married-in.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> Things I noticed in the video:
> Meghan pulling on Harry's arm when he went in for the double-cheek kiss with the woman. Was she pulling him away to stop him from doing it or was she being her typical grabby self?
> The constant touching of her hair. She's not the only person who does this (Kardashians are famous for this), but it annoys the fcuk out of me. Every five minutes (or more) she's touching her hair.  If it's such a nuisance and flying in your face, wear it pulled back FFS.
> 
> I would love our Body Language Guy to do an assessment of their engagement video where Meghan is unable to let go of Harry's hand.  I would also like his take on 'the hand'. You know, how every time you see her place her hand on the back of Harry's shoulder, he salivates. No wait, that was Pavlov's dog. Well whatever, same thing.
> Not to mention this event in which Harry gets the death stare for merely speaking to someone. I mean, lets face it, he's the real draw - the one people pay to see, real royalty - not the married-in.


Wonder if there are different versions of the "Hand on His Back"? It's like a reverse gear button. All she has to do is touch his back and he will shut up/step aside/change direction. Batteries Not Included.


----------



## Luvbolide

zen1965 said:


> I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).



right there with you!  To me there is something odd looking about her face and hair.  She is barely recognizable.  I do like the ones of her in the white gown, especially after seeing so many others here.  Maybe I just prefer her looking more casual and not so portrait-y.


----------



## Luvbolide

V0N1B2 said:


> Nope. IMO, those photos look nothing like Catherine. The photo in the red dress bears no resemblance to her whatsoever and if I hadn't been told it was her I would have never guessed.



Totally agree - I do like the white ones, though.


----------



## Luvbolide

V0N1B2 said:


> Things I noticed in the video:
> Meghan pulling on Harry's arm when he went in for the double-cheek kiss with the woman. Was she pulling him away to stop him from doing it or was she being her typical grabby self?
> The constant touching of her hair. She's not the only person who does this (Kardashians are famous for this), but it annoys the fcuk out of me. Every five minutes (or more) she's touching her hair.  If it's such a nuisance and flying in your face, wear it pulled back FFS.
> 
> I would love our Body Language Guy to do an assessment of their engagement video where Meghan is unable to let go of Harry's hand.  I would also like his take on 'the hand'. You know, how every time you see her place her hand on the back of Harry's shoulder, he salivates. No wait, that was Pavlov's dog. Well whatever, same thing.
> Not to mention this event in which Harry gets the death stare for merely speaking to someone. I mean, lets face it, he's the real draw - the one people pay to see, real royalty - not the married-in.



That ridiculous bug-eyed stare drives me nuts.  It is one thing to shoot someone a glance, but she so obviously opens hereyes as far as she can and stares.  I wonder what she thinks she is communicating when she does that.  She looks like a lunatic!


----------



## Sharont2305

Interesting to see that both the official Instagram accounts of Prince Charles and Camilla (Clarence House) and The Queen (Royal Family) have posted an actual post wishing Catherine a Happy Birthday. Meagain only had birthday wishes via Insta stories.


----------



## lanasyogamama

zen1965 said:


> I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).


They took me a minute to warm up to, she didn’t look like herself to me, but now I love them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Meghan has to be beside herself with the photos though, they are going to be in a museum, like forever. That is a legacy you don’t get from an Ellen appearance and sending T shirts about your bday to celebs.


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Meghan has to be beside herself with the photos though, they are going to be in a museum, like forever. That is a legacy you don’t get from an Ellen appearance and sending T shirts about your bday to celebs.


When the photos come to Anglesey, I am most definitely going.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> From their own neighborhood - ouch!
> H&M‘s part of the article in spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2021: The Year in Review - Montecito
> 
> 
> It was a year full of questions, sometimes without many answers. But we persevered. As a staff, we took a few moments to reflect on our 2021s, which featured a few tears, triumphant returns, overwhelming innovation, and news that no one likes to report. Here’s a look at eight of our standout...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hot dog!
> 
> 
> 
> It is 18 months since Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and *his actress wife*, Meghan Markle, bought a nine-bedroom, 16-bath Riven Rock home on seven-and-a-half acres in our rarefied enclave for $14.65 million.
> 
> Having covered the British Royal Family for 45 years during my colorful career, including the Daily Mirror and Daily Mail in London, as well as ABC Network News, I found myself somewhat ironically living just a tiara’s toss or two from the tony twosome’s new home with their son, *Archie*, and now seven-month-old daughter, *Lilibet*, named in honor of Britain’s longest reigning monarch’s childhood nickname.
> 
> I was bombarded with calls on the acquisition appearing on all three major TV networks, CNN, and Fox News, as well as doing interviews with many of the world’s top publications, including the London Daily Mail, my former employer, France’s Le Figaro and Germany’s Der Spiegel.
> 
> Even after 1,000 years, the Royal Family, now known as the Windsors since World War II, still fascinates.
> 
> The move by *Prince William*’s younger brother to America has drawn comparisons with the late Duke of Windsor, briefly King Edward VIII, who gave up his throne to marry “the woman he loved,” American divorcee Wallis Simpson from Baltimore.
> 
> Harry was undoubtedly the golden boy of Buckingham Palace, enormously popular in Britain, having served two tours of service with the British Army in Afghanistan, and immersing himself doing good deeds.
> 
> But all that ended when he gave up royal duties much to the disappointment of the Queen, who will celebrate her Platinum Jubilee next summer, the same time Harry is due to deliver a tell-all tome for Penguin-Random House under a contract reportedly worth an astounding $20 million.
> 
> Quite what he’ll serve up for that figure at such a relatively young age is anyone’s guess.
> 
> During their time in our Eden by the Beach the dynamic duo has rarely been seen, other than dining at Lucky’s with music man *David Foster* and, last year, buying a Christmas tree at a pop-up site at La Cumbre Plaza, instead choosing to stay hunkered down with their young children and security team in Montecito.
> 
> But now, as more and more people sensibly get vaccinated against the deadly COVID disease, both of them seem to be going more public, with Harry seen walking their black Labrador rescue, Pula, on Miramar Beach, and pedaling his bike, with his minders in a black Range River closely behind.
> 
> *I’m told His Royal Highness, who memorably drove an electric-powered E-type Jaguar from Windsor Castle after his wedding to the Frogmore House reception, was absolutely fascinated by the 27-foot-long Oscar Meyer weinermobile when it visited Montecito in October and even asked to drive it. Talk about hot dog!*
> 
> More recently the couple donated money towards the first ever Montecito Holiday Car Parade and earlier this month Meghan was spotted fashionably attired in a Massimo Dutti wool coat and Tamara Mellon boots wearing sunglasses and a mask, discreetly shopping accompanied by a bodyguard upstairs at Pierre Lafond in the Upper Village. She’s also been spotted at the children’s clothing store Poppy and the home furnishings shop, Hudson Grace, at the Montecito Country Mart.
> 
> Harry and Meghan are said to be staying here for Christmas and New Year while his brother the Duke of Cambridge, 39, and wife, *Catherine*, are scheduled to be meeting with other members of the Royal Family at Sandringham in Norfolk, the sprawling stately pile built for the future King Edward VII, Queen Victoria’s son in 1862.
> 
> The formerly close relationship between the two brothers is now rumored to be at a breaking point after Harry and Meghan’s incendiary interview with fellow Montecito neighbor *Oprah Winfrey* earlier this year and they barely said a single word to each other when they attended their grandfather the Duke of Edinburgh’s funeral at Windsor in April — which I covered for Fox News — and the unveiling of a new statue to their mother, Princess Diana, at Kensington Palace, where they spent their childhoods, in July.
> 
> Hopefully 2022 will mend the considerable fracture between the future King William V and Harry, and we’ll continue to see the Duke and Duchess of Sussex get more involved in the neighborhood they have chosen to make their family home.
> 
> — Richard Mineards


 Thank you @CarryOn2020 for your #26 nickname, His Actress Wife, from the above article. Here is The List #26 Ribbon with my apologies for missing it when I posted the last group of nicknames.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, I am so sorry for posting this on the wrong thread. My mistake, lack of coffee … 










						Kate Middleton is jewel in Royal Family crown Princess Diana would be proud of
					

ON her 40th birthday, Kate has not only become the woman her husband’s mother might have been but has undoubtedly surpassed even Diana’s ambition. She has shown all the qualities needed to become a…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

I meant to post this instead. The Harkles want to become Entertainment Moguls.


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> Things I noticed in the video:
> Meghan pulling on Harry's arm when he went in for the double-cheek kiss with the woman. Was she pulling him away to stop him from doing it or was she being her typical grabby self?
> The constant touching of her hair. She's not the only person who does this (Kardashians are famous for this), but it annoys the fcuk out of me. Every five minutes (or more) she's touching her hair.  If it's such a nuisance and flying in your face, wear it pulled back FFS.
> 
> I would love our Body Language Guy to do an assessment of their engagement video where Meghan is unable to let go of Harry's hand.  I would also like his take on 'the hand'. You know, how every time you see her place her hand on the back of Harry's shoulder, he salivates. No wait, that was Pavlov's dog. Well whatever, same thing.
> Not to mention this event in which Harry gets the death stare for merely speaking to someone. I mean, lets face it, he's the real draw - the one people pay to see, real royalty - not the married-in.


Damn she is scary. Harry better watch his step.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> *I would love our Body Language Guy to do an assessment of their engagement video* where Meghan is unable to let go of Harry's hand.  I would also like his take on 'the hand'. You know, how every time you see her place her hand on the back of Harry's shoulder, he salivates. No wait, that was Pavlov's dog. Well whatever, same thing.
> Not to mention this event in which Harry gets the death stare for merely speaking to someone. I mean, lets face it, he's the real draw - the one people pay to see, real royalty - not the married-in.


There is hope, some people here believe he hears us.


----------



## charlottawill

Re the negative comments about Catherine's photos, I think some here may have missed the theme of the shoot:

"The Duchess collaborated with the Italian-born fashion photographer on a shoot inspired by 19th Century photography, which was the focus for her undergraduate thesis."

I think they did a wonderful job. The third photo instantly made me think of Queen Victoria.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Oops, I am so sorry for posting this on the wrong thread. My mistake, lack of coffee …
> View attachment 5292465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton is jewel in Royal Family crown Princess Diana would be proud of
> 
> 
> ON her 40th birthday, Kate has not only become the woman her husband’s mother might have been but has undoubtedly surpassed even Diana’s ambition. She has shown all the qualities needed to become a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Sooooooo many mistaken posts...


----------



## jelliedfeels

I don’t think the red or white photos of Catherine are good. I think the photographer got lucky she is so photogenic they can fudge it because they are not well composed pictures. You can see they are going for the John Singer-Sargent look but it’s just lacking the detail and emotion to me.

Ultimately it shouldn’t matter that Catherine is prettier than M because looks shouldn’t matter for the role. Thing is, M’s shady character shows through her ‘Hollywood’ looks. I don’t know much about Catherine as a person but I think we can all agree she’s much better at projecting charm.

The double rub though, would be if Catherine actually IS a nasty piece-of-work and not only do the majority of people think she’s nicer than M but she would also a much better actress than M too. Can you imagine?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Have we discussed them trying to sell their house yet?


----------



## bag-mania

Allisonfaye said:


> Have we discussed them trying to sell their house yet?



It was mentioned a few days ago. There didn’t seem to be enough verifiable information to show whether it was true. Has anything more come out about it?


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> Have we discussed them trying to sell their house yet?


Several pages back.
Plus rumour that they are asking for NottCott.
And a story popped up in my feed that Methane wants to move to LA


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> It was mentioned a few days ago. There didn’t seem to be enough verifiable information to show whether it was true. Has anything more come out about it?



Not to my knowledge. As usual, I can't keep up with this thread.


----------



## marietouchet

Reading assignment ... 

I just got a copy of the Angela Kelly book - it is available for about $25. Just started, and not finished.  It is starting out to be an interesting read. Lots of photos. 

It is a great eyeopener. AK is effusive in her respect for HMTQ. Very discreet. Very according to protocol. 

One book tidbit - HMTQ does not wear fabrics worn by others.

I can imagine now how tiaragate happened ... the loosy-goosy style of MM is totally at odds with the status quo. 
---- 
*The Other Side of the Coin: The Queen, the Dresser and the Wardrobe Hardcover – Illustrated, October 29, 2019*

https://www.amazon.com/Other-Side-C...b1c67&pd_rd_wg=OTVT9&pd_rd_i=0062982559&psc=1 

There is another book - a collector's edition at about $250 - about the Jubilee wardrobe, I dont have that one.


----------



## redney

zen1965 said:


> I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).


I'm with you. Her head looks too large somehow - like a "lollipop." The other portraits are stunning.


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> I must be the odd one out but I am not a fan of Catherine‘s photo in the red dress. To me she looks washed out and too thin (generally speaking I think she is very photogenic).


she looks a bit bony on the upper body but still beautiful IMO


----------



## Sophisticatted

marietouchet said:


> Reading assignment ...
> 
> I just got a copy of the Angela Kelly book - it is available for about $25. Just started, and not finished.  It is starting out to be an interesting read. Lots of photos.
> 
> It is a great eyeopener. AK is effusive in her respect for HMTQ. Very discreet. Very according to protocol.
> 
> One book tidbit - HMTQ does not wear fabrics worn by others.
> 
> I can imagine now how tiaragate happened ... the loosy-goosy style of MM is totally at odds with the status quo.
> ----
> *The Other Side of the Coin: The Queen, the Dresser and the Wardrobe Hardcover – Illustrated, October 29, 2019*
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Other-Side-C...b1c67&pd_rd_wg=OTVT9&pd_rd_i=0062982559&psc=1
> 
> There is another book - a collector's edition at about $250 - about the Jubilee wardrobe, I dont have that one.



I just finished that book.  I checked it out of the library.  TBH,  mostly I skimmed it and looked at the pictures.  What’s funny, though, is there is a section about the Queen having a photo session with putting her hands in her pockets.  When I saw Catherine’s new photos with her hands in the pocket of the red dress, I remembered that tidbit from the book.  LOL!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oops, I am so sorry for posting this on the wrong thread. My mistake, lack of coffee …
> View attachment 5292465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton is jewel in Royal Family crown Princess Diana would be proud of
> 
> 
> ON her 40th birthday, Kate has not only become the woman her husband’s mother might have been but has undoubtedly surpassed even Diana’s ambition. She has shown all the qualities needed to become a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


What a lovely article!


----------



## csshopper

I can only dream, but, wish there would be world wide distribution in major media outlets with side by sides of Methane guzzling her baby bottle in response to Ellen's command, and any of the photo shoot pictures of the future Queen. No class and high class.

Haven't seen any reports of Birthday wishes from the Harkles to the future Queen? Last year it was reported by Harper's Bazaar they did it "privately."


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Nope. IMO, those photos look nothing like Catherine. The photo in the red dress bears no resemblance to her whatsoever and if I hadn't been told it was her I would have never guessed.


So glad I’m not the only one who did a double take.  I was starting to think something was wrong with my eyes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> There is another book - a collector's edition at about $250 - about the Jubilee wardrobe, I dont have that one.



I was looking for that one, found what you found, and then...there's a German translation for 15 bucks  Now I would have preferred the original but can't beat that price and the fact it's still in print.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Haven't seen any reports of Birthday wishes from the Harkles to the future Queen? Last year it was reported by Harper's Bazaar they did it "privately."



This year they don't even pretend anymore


----------



## Sophisticatted

One more about the book: This photograph was my favorite: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/a...oble-order-thistle-and-chief-chiefs-born-1926

ETA: and Meghan will never, ever, EVER be able to get her grubby little hands on that tiara!


----------



## gracekelly

I think that Kate looks wonderful.  The photos are different and out of the box for portraits. I think it is a nice change for the official type portraits.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> One more about the book: This photograph was my favorite: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/a...oble-order-thistle-and-chief-chiefs-born-1926
> 
> ETA: and Meghan will never, ever, EVER be able to get her grubby little hands on that tiara!


That is a stunning picture.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> One more about the book: This photograph was my favorite: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/a...oble-order-thistle-and-chief-chiefs-born-1926
> 
> ETA: and Meghan will never, ever, EVER be able to get her grubby little hands on that tiara!



A behind the scenes look - from AK’s book 






Kelly attends to Queen Elizabeth II during a photoshoot on moors near Balmoral in Scotland.Photo: courtesy Angela Kelly

ETA: the link - https://www.vogue.com/article/queen-elizabeth-ii-royal-dresser-book


----------



## Aimee3

I wish Catherine was wearing a simple crown in the white dress photos.  I think it would’ve been lovely with her waves.  Does anyone know why she wasn’t wearing one?


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess for her lack of headgear, is that she is still a Duchess.  She is not yet the Princess of Wales, and she is not yet the Queen Consort.  I think she is saving the headgear for those times.  Rather thoughtful to set this precedent considering her SIL is you-know-who!  I remember reading that William did not want to give up his princely title upon marriage.  He requested that Catherine be made a Princess instead, but the Queen felt it would set a worrying precedent.  After everything Sussex, it’s easy to see why the Queen knows best.


----------



## Aimee3

Sophisticatted said:


> My guess for her lack of headgear, is that she is still a Duchess.  She is not yet the Princess of Wales, and she is not yet the Queen Consort.  I think she is saving the headgear for those times.  Rather thoughtful to set this precedent considering her SIL is you-know-who!  I remember reading that William did not want to give up his princely title upon marriage.  He requested that Catherine be made a Princess instead, but the Queen felt it would set a worrying precedent.  After everything Sussex, it’s easy to see why the Queen knows best.


But duchesses can wear crowns, or is it just for weddings and heads of state receptions? I think there were photos of Catherine in a tiara at a reception?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was looking for that one, found what you found, and then...there's a German translation for 15 bucks  Now I would have preferred the original but can't beat that price and the fact it's still in print.


I saw that one but my German is so dreadful 
I am appreciating THE EXACT LANGUAGE used by Angela, her reverence for the jewelry, for example
when I am at my PC, not iPad, I will post a snippet about the Vladimir tiara 
I am assuming that just showing a tidbit , that will get you all to buy the book, that I shall not run afoul of copyright , after all, we learned that the DM a published TOO MUCH of the letter, per the fair use of copyright laws 

what we learn here amazes me …


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> But duchesses can wear crowns, or is it just for weddings and heads of state receptions? I think there were photos of Catherine in a tiara at a reception?


Catherine has worn tiaras for state occasions and at her wedding
Diana wore tiaras for formal photographs, the BRF ladies used to wear tiaras for James Bond premieres, but that is a thing of the past, the bling seems to come out now only for brides and state dinners

English Duchesses wear coronets - little tiny crowns - at the coronation
Only the UK monarch wears a crown ??? But, Charles had some sort of coronet/crown when invested as Prince of Wales
see Wiki on ducal coronets, and the difference between tiaras, diadems and crowns, they do a much better job than I would, if you want to nitpick terminology


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I saw that one but my German is so dreadful
> I am appreciating THE EXACT LANGUAGE used by Angela, her reverence for the jewelry, for example
> when I am at my PC, not iPad, I will post a snippet about the Vladimir tiara
> I am assuming that just showing a tidbit , that will get you all to buy the book, that I shall not run afoul of copyright , after all, we learned that the DM a published TOO MUCH of the letter, per the fair use of copyright laws
> 
> what we learn here amazes me …



I bought it when it first came out - AK is someone I would love to have a coffee with. Her stories are the best


----------



## Lodpah

Charles May Cancel His Plan to Give Harry and Meghan This Royal Property
					

This drama would be hard to come back from.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## octopus17

I really like the black and white side pic of her wearing a white dress with one of the ribbons going through her fingers


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Charles May Cancel His Plan to Give Harry and Meghan This Royal Property
> 
> 
> This drama would be hard to come back from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Well why shouldn't he if they've abandoned family and country in favor of "privacy" in the US?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Catherine has worn tiaras for state occasions and at her wedding
> Diana wore tiaras for formal photographs, the BRF ladies used to wear tiaras for James Bond premieres, but that is a thing of the past, the bling seems to come out now only for brides and state dinners
> 
> English Duchesses wear coronets - little tiny crowns - at the coronation
> Only the UK monarch wears a crown ??? But, Charles had some sort of coronet/crown when invested as Prince of Wales
> see Wiki on ducal coronets, and the difference between tiaras, diadems and crowns, they do a much better job than I would, if you want to nitpick terminology


I would “settle” for a tiara.  I’d love to wear one at least once in my lifetime!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I would “settle” for a tiara.  I’d love to wear one at least once in my lifetime!



Perhaps do a google search for British Royal Family replica tiaras.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Aimee3 said:


> But duchesses can wear crowns, or is it just for weddings and heads of state receptions? I think there were photos of Catherine in a tiara at a reception?



I’m sorry.  I didn’t explain my thoughts clearly.  I feel she left off the tiaras as a show of humility, since there are others who “deserve” to wear them more due to rank.  Kind of like how she was center stage on the balcony for an event recently, but let Camilla leave first as a show of honor and respect.

ETA: we all know M would wear ALL the tiaras she could.  One a a headpiece, one as a headband (ala Diana), one as a necklace, one as a belt… all at the same time.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I feel she left off the tiaras as a show of humility


Exactly


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m sorry.  I didn’t explain my thoughts clearly.  I feel she left off the tiaras as a show of humility, since there are others who “deserve” to wear them more due to rank.  Kind of like how she was center stage on the balcony for an event recently, but let Camilla leave first as a show of honor and respect.
> 
> ETA: we all know M would wear ALL the tiaras she could.  One a a headpiece, one as a headband (ala Diana), one as a necklace, one as a belt… all at the same time.


You can take the girl out of LA but you can't take the LA out of the girl.


----------



## csshopper

The Body Language Guy has a current YouTube Video about the portraits, he is a fan of the Duchess and presents interesting comments. Seen through his lens they make an even more powerful statement I think.


----------



## needlv

Catherine’s birthday has now gone and there was no stunt from the Duchess of Montecito… has anyone checked to see if she is ok?

maybe she injured herself with all the plate throwing…


----------



## Lodpah

Grass may no longer be greener for Harry and Meghan as California hit with hosepipe ban
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's gardens could be under threat after a hosepipe ban was imposed in Montecito, where their £11 million mansion boasts nearly eight acres of rolling lawns.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Grass may no longer be greener for Harry and Meghan as California hit with hosepipe ban
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's gardens could be under threat after a hosepipe ban was imposed in Montecito, where their £11 million mansion boasts nearly eight acres of rolling lawns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Harry, be a raindrop, and quelch the thirst from your parched lands yourself.


----------



## Katel

Sophisticatted said:


> One more about the book: ...
> *...ETA: and Meghan will never, ever, EVER be able to get her grubby little hands on that tiara!*



nor will she ever inherit the title “Princess of Wales” <<insert crashing dishware flung by the teeth gnashing Monteshitshow dweller>>


----------



## Lodpah

Read on Quora, MMM (Meglomaniac, Manipulative Meghan) is laying low due to the humiliation she put herself through on Ellen's show. Ellen knew what she was doing to her. Meghan is right alongside Fergie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I remember reading that William did not want to give up his princely title upon marriage.  He requested that Catherine be made a Princess instead, but the Queen felt it would set a worrying precedent.  After everything Sussex, it’s easy to see why the Queen knows best.



He hasn't given up his princely title as in he still keeps it, but the dukedom ranks higher than it so that's how he is known now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> I would “settle” for a tiara.  I’d love to wear one at least once in my lifetime!



As some of you may know, I keep an extensive wishlist over on 1stdibs, mostly for inspiration purposes. I had put a bunch of tiaras on there because I like to look at them.

So once in a while I go through the list, move and delete stuff, and I was really surprised to see at least five of them - each priced around the cost of an apartment - had sold in the past few months. What's going on, all going to the Middle East for a gaudy billionaire's wedding or are people stocking up for the jubilee or something?


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I wish Catherine was wearing a simple crown in the white dress photos.  I think it would’ve been lovely with her waves.  Does anyone know why she wasn’t wearing one?



It was her birthday, a personal occasion.


----------



## needlv

Anyone seen this gossip on tumblr?  It’s possible Eugenie was telling family gossip to MM who leaked it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Anyone seen this gossip on tumblr?  It’s possible Eugenie was telling family gossip to MM who leaked it?




Oh wow, that's a ton to unpack. 

1. I am not convinced anyone would still like Raptor in that family, but let's pretend it is so. Is that girl stupid to go against the whole family? What good did she think would come out of it for her?

2. Now I don't like Edo either. He gives off strange vibes.

3. It is sh*tty to mistreat a child, but to be honest, August IS the first grandchild for the Yorks. Doesn't take away from them loving Wolfie. 

I'm kind of surprised, I always thought Eugenie was quiet and sensible, but maybe not.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It would be kind of shocking if there weren’t some drama with those girls given their parents.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The only reason I can think why a York would support team Sussex at this time is because Will, and maybe Charles are anti-Andy, which may also have a trickle down effect.  Helping Team Sussex is a form of revenge because it hurts Will and Charles.  

I always had the impression the sisters were closer than this, but I’ve never really followed them.

Also, the frolicking on a yacht Brooksbank photos seem like a bigger issue (not to belittle the illness and death of his parent).  it’s just that after those photos were released, his body language toward photographers seems angry and the body language between the couple seems awkward.  Also, IIRC, he did not show up for the “family” Christmas concert.

As a grandkid adopted in, who displaced “the oldest”, I don’t like ranking the kids.  There are no prizes given for the sort of thing.  In my family, the parents of the “displaced” kid, told my sister when she was in elementary school (several years after I joined the family) that I was not a REAL member of the family.  I’m not sure what they hoped to achieve by that, but my sister heard them wrong and thought that SHE was adopted.  She whispered this revelation to me after her visit with them.

This sister turned out to be very narcissistic and jealous of me.  At one family gathering(over a decade later), she decided to let me know that I was not a REAL member of the family with a smirk on her face.  I guess it made her feel better.  Again, it’s pointless.  Major points to Bea (and any other RF member) if she treats all the children in her household with the same amount of love and respect!!!


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Well why shouldn't he if they've abandoned family and country in favor of "privacy" in the US?


The idea to give Highgrove to Harry is 20 year  old OBSOLETE news
There was talk of that when H left Eton - 20 years ago - what would he do with his life? C suggested he become a farmer with the idea of taking over Highgrove. Pss Anne has a huge estate and does farming and lives off the proceeds ... All of QEII's kids had/has large income producing estates ... 
H wanted to go into the military, may have even poo-pooed the idea of farming so the idea of his getting Highgrove evaporated 
William, on the other hand, has taken farming classes somewhat recently

There are two major hurdles to H getting Highgrove now
1. Death duties ... HUGE issue ... would H even want the tax liability ???
2. HUGE Public uproar to give away UK property to someone who lives in CA

If C becomes king, I see him keeping Highgrove, to avoid the death duties issue, at least for a while, he might loan out the place to George perhaps


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m just hoping the NottCott rumors are true.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m just hoping the NottCott rumors are true.



I hope the NottCott rumors for one of the Cambridge kids are true.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm kind of surprised, I always thought Eugenie was quiet and sensible, but maybe not.



There are numerous photos of Eug and even Bea giving Kate the side-eye throughout the years, even before Raptor. IMO they really do come across as jealous cousins of the future king. Given Sarah and Andy’s jealousy of Charles and their love of drama, this tumblr account has a loud _ring of truth.  _Thank you, @QueenofWrapDress for the post _









						Kate Middleton 'Reduced' Princesses Beatrice And Eugenie To ‘Walk-On’ Parts Of Royal Life
					

Kate Middleton snubbed Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie on multiple occasions. And it all started in 2008 before she married Prince William.




					www.latintimes.com
				



Ever since she [Kate] joined the British clan, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie’s roles were reduced. The royal siblings were particularly enraged when the mom of three was tapped to join Queen Elizabeth II on their solo engagement during the Diamond Jubilee.

Even before Kate Middleton tied the knot with Prince William, Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s daughters already felt snubbed by the future Queen. In 2008, they were asked to give up their front-row seats at the London Fashion Show to make way for Middleton and her younger sister, Pippa Middleton. But, at that time, they refused to give up their spot.

Things became much worse for the royals after Prince William and Kate Middleton refused to invite Fergie to their royal wedding at Westminster Abbey. Since Ferguson is no longer an official member of the royal family after her divorce from Prince Andrew, the Cambridges felt that there was no need for her to be at their nuptials.

_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I will say, I adore William and Kate, but not inviting Fergie WAS kind of a petty jerk move. After all, she is the mother of his cousins, and come one now, as if they'd even seen her amongst the hundreds of guests.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Grass may no longer be greener for Harry and Meghan as California hit with hosepipe ban
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's gardens could be under threat after a hosepipe ban was imposed in Montecito, where their £11 million mansion boasts nearly eight acres of rolling lawns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


I can't believe anyone in so cal has eight acres of grass.....we (and our neighbors, except for a couple of homes with wells) have no grass


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I will say, I adore William and Kate, but not inviting Fergie WAS kind of a petty jerk move. After all, she is the mother of his cousins, and come one now, as if they'd even seen her amongst the hundreds of guests.


I agree, but do you think they had concerns that she would sell details of the reception to the tabloids?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I will say, I adore William and Kate, but not inviting Fergie WAS kind of a petty jerk move. After all, she is the mother of his cousins, and come one now, as if they'd even seen her amongst the hundreds of guests.



I thought they did this out of respect for Phillip.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was today years old when I learned how to use the multiquote function. Oops.



lanasyogamama said:


> I agree, but do you think they had concerns that she would sell details of the reception to the tabloids?



Mh, fair enough.



CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought they did this out of respect for Phillip.



Philip was my favourite royal ever, buuut...I still think there could have been ways. Seat her far away, don't invite her to be in the family pictures. And isn't it quite common in the UK to invite people to the ceremony, but not the reception? I don't know.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was today years old when I learned how to use the multiquote function. Oops.
> 
> 
> 
> Mh, fair enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Philip was my favourite royal ever, buuut...I still think there could have been ways. Seat her far away, don't invite her to be in the family pictures. I don't know.


I just tried to use multi quote and it said no message selected


----------



## Sophisticatted

Diana wasn’t speaking to Fergie at the time of her death.  Apparently, Sarah said something about borrowing a pair of Diana’s shoes and ending up with a foot fungus, so Diana was offended and froze her out.  William may still find that type of behavior unforgivable.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sophisticatted said:


> Diana wasn’t speaking to Fergie at the time of her death.  Apparently, Sarah said something about borrowing a pair of Diana’s shoes and ending up with a foot fungus, so Diana was offended and froze her out.  William may still find that type of behavior unforgivable.


Ew!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hope the NottCott rumors for one of the Cambridge kids are true.
> 
> 
> 
> There are numerous photos of Eug and even Bea giving Kate the side-eye throughout the years, even before Raptor. IMO they really do come across as jealous cousins of the future king. Given Sarah and Andy’s jealousy of Charles and their love of drama, this tumblr account has a loud _ring of truth.  _Thank you, @QueenofWrapDress for the post _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton 'Reduced' Princesses Beatrice And Eugenie To ‘Walk-On’ Parts Of Royal Life
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton snubbed Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie on multiple occasions. And it all started in 2008 before she married Prince William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latintimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever since she [Kate] joined the British clan, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie’s roles were reduced. The royal siblings were particularly enraged when the mom of three was tapped to join Queen Elizabeth II on their solo engagement during the Diamond Jubilee.
> 
> Even before Kate Middleton tied the knot with Prince William, Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s daughters already felt snubbed by the future Queen. In 2008, they were asked to give up their front-row seats at the London Fashion Show to make way for Middleton and her younger sister, Pippa Middleton. But, at that time, they refused to give up their spot.
> 
> Things became much worse for the royals after Prince William and Kate Middleton refused to invite Fergie to their royal wedding at Westminster Abbey. Since Ferguson is no longer an official member of the royal family after her divorce from Prince Andrew, the Cambridges felt that there was no need for her to be at their nuptials.
> View attachment 5293165
> _


that photo of Eugenie is horrid....as far as the pecking order, Kate didn't create that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I just tried to use multi quote and it said no message selected


I have not yet attempted the ominous multi quote. One day, maybe. I'm not very tech savvy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Philip was my favourite royal ever, buuut...I still think there could have been ways. Seat her far away, don't invite her to be in the family pictures. And isn't it quite common in the UK to invite people to the ceremony, but not the reception? I don't know.



Sarah was one of the first to embarrass the BRF.  When the “toe” scandal news broke, Phillip, who cared greatly about QE and her reputation, was furious. When Fergie continued to embarrass the family, he couldn’t tolerate her.  Imo it makes sense. Thinking of the BRF as a company, it cannot succeed if  its ‘employees’ embarrass the company. Public perception is everything. Diana and Fergie knew exactly what they were doing and willingly brought embarrassment on the family. This is why I find Charles’s tolerance of H&M’s mess so confusing - he knows the damage could be irreparable. Seems Phillip was the only one who could take a stand. 









						The Duchess of Cambridge's cold relationship with Beatrice and Eugenie
					

The relationship between Kate, Beatrice and Eugenie has not always been easy, the Mail can reveal. The three young royals are said to have something of a frosty friendship.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_Then Diana, the link between the two sets of children, died. And Fergie succeeded in embarrassing the family over and over again — offering access to Prince Andrew for money in 2010, to give just one example.

Charles sought to distance himself from Fergie. ‘He cannot stand even the mention of her name,’ said the source.

As the girls remain commendably loyal to their mother, perhaps it was inevitable that some kind of rift would appear between the cousins — and, in turn, with Kate._


----------



## kemilia

V0N1B2 said:


> Nope. IMO, those photos look nothing like Catherine. The photo in the red dress bears no resemblance to her whatsoever and if I hadn't been told it was her I would have never guessed.


I agree with you. 

None of these photos look like her, the genuine smile isn't there, neither is her "sparkle". The red dress is ho-hum and while the white one looks royal (for like 1890) and I get that was the idea, it also looks childish, imo (though hilighting the ring must be causing an entire place-settings for 12 to go crashing in Cali). 

I wonder how much grief H has had to endure over his handing over the ring to his brother for Catherine. We have seen PLENTY of M's facial reactions to small slights ... (thank you body language guy!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> I agree with you.
> 
> None of these photos look like her, the genuine smile isn't there, neither is her "sparkle". The red dress is ho-hum and while the white one looks royal (for like 1890) and I get that was the idea, it also looks childish, imo (though hilighting the ring must be causing an entire place-settings for 12 to go crashing in Cali).
> 
> I wonder how much grief H has had to endure over his handing over the ring to his brother for Catherine. We have seen PLENTY of M's facial reactions to small slights ... (thank you body language guy!)



_Small_ slights?


----------



## xincinsin

kemilia said:


> I wonder how much grief H has had to endure over his handing over the ring to his brother for Catherine. We have seen PLENTY of M's facial reactions to small slights ... (thank you body language guy!)


It just occurred to me that Methane, having "lost" the sapphire ring, would have expected Hazard to make it up to her with a ring that would outshine the Diana ring. And thus her discontent started with the "puny" three diamonds. All that Botswana and Diana sentiment counted for nothing if the rocks weren't larger than walnuts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: the frosty friendship between Kate and the York girls. I live next to my cousin, I see him several times a week, I have yet to exchange more than hi and bye with his newest girlfriend. Even if they got married, I doubt we'd suddenly be close friends outside of family functions, and there is no ill feelings whatsoever between us.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This showed up in my FB timeline.




And God spoke to Adam:
"You're the first human!"

Adam: "And who's that over there?"

"No clue, she was here already when I came."



I think her last years could have been less stress- and painful without the clowns throwing eggs and rotten tomatoes, but she was there long before Harry found himself a demon spawn and her legacy will live on when nobody even laughs at the troublesome two anymore.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was today years old when I learned how to use the multiquote function. Oops.
> 
> 
> 
> Mh, fair enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Philip was my favourite royal ever, buuut...I still think there could have been ways. Seat her far away, don't invite her to be in the family pictures. And isn't it quite common in the UK to invite people to the ceremony, but not the reception? I don't know.


Usually the other way around, not invited to the wedding or the meal after, which we'd call the reception or wedding breakfast, but invited to the evening do (party) only.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If Mememe had Diana’s ring it would by just a matter of time before it was auctioned off.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> Read on Quora, MMM (Meglomaniac, Manipulative Meghan) is laying low due to the humiliation she put herself through on Ellen's show. Ellen knew what she was doing to her. Meghan is right alongside Fergie.


HA!!! .. she would HOPE that the Ellen Show is her only means of humiliation; their CONSTANT need to be the PR News of the Day adds to that Humiliation Factor .. let's see .. what?, in the 90% percentile now?!?!?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sophisticatted said:


> One more about the book: This photograph was my favorite: https://www.nationalgalleries.org/a...oble-order-thistle-and-chief-chiefs-born-1926
> 
> ETA: and Meghan will never, ever, EVER be able to get her grubby little hands on that tiara!


I love this photo too such richness of textures and colour. 


purseinsanity said:


> Harry, be a raindrop, and quelch the thirst from your parched lands yourself.


I forgot all about this particularly clunky image of his- thank you for reminding me! 



needlv said:


> Anyone seen this gossip on tumblr?  It’s possible Eugenie was telling family gossip to MM who leaked it?



For the life of me, I cannot bring myself to care what Eug thinks  
I still find the most interesting thing about this article that people were quite shocked by the ‘trendy’ names chosen by H&M but it is now apparently open season with minor royals going with names that are… not classic choices let’s say. 


sdkitty said:


> I can't believe anyone in so cal has eight acres of grass.....we (and our neighbors, except for a couple of homes with wells) have no grass


Yes aside from H&M I would be delighted if they tore up all these stupid  lawns in unfavourable climates and designed gardens that are actually fitting for the area’s weather and ecosystem. It makes me so annoyed the amount of water and other resources that goes into cultivating useless grass 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was today years old when I learned how to use the multiquote function. Oops.
> 
> 
> 
> Mh, fair enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Philip was my favourite royal ever, buuut...I still think there could have been ways. Seat her far away, don't invite her to be in the family pictures. And isn't it quite common in the UK to invite people to the ceremony, but not the reception? I don't know.


Personally, I think both these reasons about Fergie were true but that she was also a convenient scapegoat for the sleaze and dirt on Andrew. They were probably hoping once she was gone the scandals could stay buried….


Sophisticatted said:


> Diana wasn’t speaking to Fergie at the time of her death.  Apparently, Sarah said something about borrowing a pair of Diana’s shoes and ending up with a foot fungus, so Diana was offended and froze her out.  William may still find that type of behavior unforgivable.


We all now know Fergie takes feet very seriously..

Maybe H&M weren’t  the worst ex royal expose after all


----------



## csshopper

Per Royal protocol, if Kate encounters the York sisters she has to curtsy to them as they are blood Princesses and her rank is only through her marriage to William. If William is with Kate, the blood Princesses are the ones to have to curtsy. Of course, once Kate becomes Queen everyone will have to curtsy to her. Even the Harkles. 

In the meantime, seems like Eug and Bea could enjoy their little special moments of being curtsied to and move on.  Must be hard, however, when your parents are a Sex Pervert who liked girls your age and your Mother repeatedly made a fool of herself. To Fergie's credit, however, she is said to have never bashed the RF, is very supportive of the Queen. 

There was a period of time when the sisters had dismal fashion advice and dressed in some "interesting" attire, definitely at the other end of the spectrum from Kate. Many of the worst pictures are reprinted and reprinted so hard to forget. Eugenie is married to a Tequila salesman and Beatrice to a titled Italian, with a family Villa for vacation visits. Beatrice seems to have blossomed in her romance/marriage and more quickly lost the post baby weight. Eugenie has appeared to not be so fortunate, a condition to which many of us can sympathetically relate, and has looked a little dowdy in some of the recent photos. Photos of her husband's frolic with nearly nude women on a yacht while she was home with the baby could not have helped. His absence at the Christmas Carol program seemed odd, the other spouses managed to make it. Since he was seen skiing the next week, grieving his father should not have prevented his participation. The Ski Chalet, scene of reportedly many happy holidays and a unique claim to fame for the Yorks, is desperately being sold in an attempt to keep Dad out of prison. Eugenie may be hurting on many levels. 

The Cambridges with the solid, loving, cohesive Middletons in the background must seem like life on another planet to them while the messy Markle menagerie Haz signed on for, more relatable to their reality. Plus, I used to read the York girls were "favorite granddaughters" and the Queen and Prince Phillip did make an effort for Beatrice's nuptials, but it seems lately that "favorite" adjective has most often preceded Lady Louise's name. Many ways in which jealousy can be sparked.

Messy all around, but would have thought Eugenie in particular would be smart enough to figure out it's the long game that's important and aligning herself with H and M is not going to gain her anything.  She does live in Frogmore, but that largesse depends more on the RF total, not H and M.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> If Mememe had Diana’s ring it would by just a matter of time before it was auctioned off.


The memory of dear Diana is too painful for her to wear that ring. Even if she didn’t know who the royal family were before she married him. Now Lorraine Schwartz… that’s a designer with positive vibes


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Reading assignment ...
> 
> I just got a copy of the Angela Kelly book - it is available for about $25. Just started, and not finished.  It is starting out to be an interesting read. Lots of photos.
> 
> It is a great eyeopener. AK is effusive in her respect for HMTQ. Very discreet. Very according to protocol.
> 
> One book tidbit - HMTQ does not wear fabrics worn by others.
> 
> I can imagine now how tiaragate happened ... the loosy-goosy style of MM is totally at odds with the status quo.
> ----
> *The Other Side of the Coin: The Queen, the Dresser and the Wardrobe Hardcover – Illustrated, October 29, 2019*
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Other-Side-C...b1c67&pd_rd_wg=OTVT9&pd_rd_i=0062982559&psc=1
> 
> There is another book - a collector's edition at about $250 - about the Jubilee wardrobe, I dont have that one.


Book snippets , start with the one without photo
ANgela and QEII have first visit with newly selected jeweler. he gets first look at Vladimir tiara which need s a repair
The ladies carefully vet him and there is shock and awe at the sight of the tiara
Compare to story of MM needing tiara so her hairdresser can play with it

loving the book , big thumbs up, if you want to learn what goes on in the palace, this is a good start


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m sorry.  I didn’t explain my thoughts clearly.  I feel she left off the tiaras as a show of humility, since there are others who “deserve” to wear them more due to rank.  *Kind of like how she was center stage on the balcony for an event recently, but let Camilla leave first as a show of honor and respect.*
> 
> ETA: we all know M would wear ALL the tiaras she could.  One a a headpiece, one as a headband (ala Diana), one as a necklace, one as a belt… all at the same time.


I believe they followed the order of precedence since this was a formal public engagement. Camella entered first on the balcony, followed by Catherine and then Sophie and then they exited the balcony in the same fashion: Camilla, Catherine, Sophie. If the Queen had been present, she would have entered and left first followed by the others in the same order as above. IMO people give Catherine too much credit where it isn't necessarily due.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> I just tried to use multi quote and it said no message selected





bellecate said:


> I have not yet attempted the ominous multi quote. One day, maybe. I'm not very tech savvy.



I promise you that if I can multi-quote, anyone can do it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> The idea to give Highgrove to Harry is 20 year  old OBSOLETE news
> There was talk of that when H left Eton - 20 years ago - what would he do with his life? C suggested he become a farmer with the idea of taking over Highgrove. Pss Anne has a huge estate and does farming and lives off the proceeds ... All of QEII's kids had/has large income producing estates ...
> H wanted to go into the military, may have even poo-pooed the idea of farming so the idea of his getting Highgrove evaporated
> William, on the other hand, has taken farming classes somewhat recently
> 
> There are two major hurdles to H getting Highgrove now
> 1. Death duties ... HUGE issue ... would H even want the tax liability ???
> 2. HUGE Public uproar to give away UK property to someone who lives in CA
> 
> *If C becomes king, I see him keeping Highgrove, to avoid the death duties issue, at least for a while, he might loan out the place to George perhaps*


If I not mistaken, they can turn properties, artifacts, and whatever over to the crown to avoid paying duties. I believe PP did exactly this with some of his assets so HMTQ can enjoy them during her lifetime without paying duty and then they remain property of the crown to pass duty-free to the next monarch.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I promise you that if I can multi-quote, anyone can do it


I did in the past but currently having trouble


----------



## CarryOn2020

Deleted


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Let me see...the person who actually wore it and got photographed? Besides the fact one person's clothes always fit and one person's never do?

These people scare me.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I know we manipulate images here for entertainment purposes, but this is a totally disgusting appropriation of someone else's image that will reappear on the net as the Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl instead of Catherine.


----------



## pukasonqo

Maggie Muggins said:


> I know we manipulate images here for entertainment purposes, but this is a totally disgusting appropriation of someone else's image that will reappear on the net as the Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl instead of Catherine.


That is a lot of time and effort put into this…don’t they have other things to do than invest their mental and emotional well being into someone that, let’s be honest, would not p$&* on them if they were on fire?
Not MM’s fault but her stans are certainly a sandwich short of a picnic


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m removing the post. It is too offensive.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> I know we manipulate images here for entertainment purposes, but this is a totally disgusting appropriation of someone else's image that will reappear on the net as the Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl instead of Catherine.


This is sick.  I had to look at the picture a couple of times, unbelievable…


----------



## rose60610

I just glossed over a couple of articles about Ellen and Meghan. Ugh. How stupid can she get? What an idiot. She's still trying to find a way to connect with people. She couldn't do it by begging for sympathy (Not many people have asked me  if I'm OK), pretending to be formal and dignified (photo op in cemetery at soldiers' graves and Harry's uniform with medals), posing in matronly pictures (barefoot under the model tree with a ginormous belly at about two to three months along), desperate meetings with U.N. officials (meeting with undersecretaries with heavy coats in warm weather), and now the Ellen show doing weird stuff, pranks (one was eating chips like a squirrel). You know the world hates her when she gets hundreds of negative comments in the Washington Post, of all papers, about the Ellen interview. The few commenters defending her in WAPO calling everyone else "racist" and "misogynist" got slammed. 

When will it dawn on her that the only reason people liked her was when she had a positive connection with the BRF? SHE destroyed that. If Harry wasn't part of the BRF nobody would care about him either. These people are a total disaster. The more they sink the more desperate they try to be liked. Let's guess. It's their handler's fault!
 They can't fathom why they're not the world's most beloved people. Or...maybe they think so and are waiting for the rest of us to finally realize it.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I can't believe anyone in so cal has eight acres of grass.....we (and our neighbors, except for a couple of homes with wells) have no grass


The rich are different than you and I. I don't recall the specifics, but actor Tom Selleck got what amounted to a hand slap for illegally acquiring water for his SoCal property some years ago during the ongoing drought. Meanwhile, over the past ten years I see more and more artificial turf front lawns when I visit my daughters in LA.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Anyone seen this gossip on tumblr?  It’s possible Eugenie was telling family gossip to MM who leaked it?



This is intriguing. I recall reading when the Harkles shared their baby news with members of the royal family at Eugenie's wedding, they got criticism from some for stealing her spotlight. I was neutral about them at the time. My thinking was that Harry, supposedly being close to his cousins, may have already shared the news with her and had her approval to announce it to other family members at the wedding. The above gossip, if true, might support that idea.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hope the NottCott rumors for one of the Cambridge kids are true.
> 
> 
> 
> There are numerous photos of Eug and even Bea giving Kate the side-eye throughout the years, even before Raptor. IMO they really do come across as jealous cousins of the future king. Given Sarah and Andy’s jealousy of Charles and their love of drama, this tumblr account has a loud _ring of truth.  _Thank you, @QueenofWrapDress for the post _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton 'Reduced' Princesses Beatrice And Eugenie To ‘Walk-On’ Parts Of Royal Life
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton snubbed Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie on multiple occasions. And it all started in 2008 before she married Prince William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latintimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever since she [Kate] joined the British clan, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie’s roles were reduced. The royal siblings were particularly enraged when the mom of three was tapped to join Queen Elizabeth II on their solo engagement during the Diamond Jubilee.
> 
> Even before Kate Middleton tied the knot with Prince William, Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s daughters already felt snubbed by the future Queen. In 2008, they were asked to give up their front-row seats at the London Fashion Show to make way for Middleton and her younger sister, Pippa Middleton. But, at that time, they refused to give up their spot.
> 
> Things became much worse for the royals after Prince William and Kate Middleton refused to invite Fergie to their royal wedding at Westminster Abbey. Since Ferguson is no longer an official member of the royal family after her divorce from Prince Andrew, the Cambridges felt that there was no need for her to be at their nuptials.
> View attachment 5293165
> _


I suspect Eugenie and MM bonded over a common hatred of Catherine.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> It just occurred to me that Methane, having "lost" the sapphire ring, would have expected Hazard to make it up to her with a ring that would outshine the Diana ring. And thus her discontent started with the "puny" three diamonds. All that Botswana and Diana sentiment counted for nothing if the rocks weren't larger than walnuts.


Psst, Harry, you could have saved yourself a lot of grief and she would have been none the wiser....


> https://www.italojewelry.com/halo-two-tone-emerald-cut-engagement-ring-211907.html


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> her stans are certainly a sandwich short of a picnic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The rich are different than you and I. I don't recall the specifics, but actor Tom Selleck got what amounted to a hand slap for illegally acquiring water for his SoCal property some years ago during the ongoing drought. Meanwhile, over the past ten years I see more and more artificial turf front lawns when I visit my daughters in LA.


I'm disgusted with tom sellek with his water stealing and hawking of reverse mortgages....he should be ashamed of himself having a long running tv series and doing all of this greedy stuff


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This is intriguing. I recall reading when the Harkles shared their baby news with members of the royal family at Eugenie's wedding, they got criticism from some for stealing her spotlight. I was neutral about them at the time. My thinking was that Harry, supposedly being close to his cousins, may have already shared the news with her and had her approval to announce it to other family members at the wedding. The above gossip, if true, might support that idea.



But she did not only supposedly inform the family at the wedding, she pranced around in front of the press with her flat 6-week stomach and made them guess the pregnancy by neither buttoning up her coat fully nor leaving it open. She is a nasty piece of work.

At that time I wasn't a fan but didn't really care to form a real opinion, but I saw her and immediately thought "She's trying to make the media wonder if she's pregnant". ON SOMEONE ELSE'S WEDDING, A DAY OR TWO BEFORE THEY ANNOUNCED ANYWAY. Ew.

(not yelling at you by the way, but four years later and I'm still stunned)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I suspect Eugenie and MM bonded over a common hatred of Catherine.



That's actually a great point. How petty.


----------



## Chanbal

Who requested this one?


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> I know we manipulate images here for entertainment purposes, but this is a totally disgusting appropriation of someone else's image that will reappear on the net as the Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl instead of Catherine.


Does the photographer have any legal recourse in the misappropriation of his work? Don't know how these things work, but if he does I hope they get slammed. 

IF Maggot and her Eunuch had any Class at all they would see to it this was removed and offer an apology. It would be a PR plus for them to do so. This is not just a personal photo, it is one commissioned for the National Portrait Gallery as a historical record of the future Queen. It's a slam on Britain, not just Kate.

This is a new low, but given the source, not particularly surprising.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I'm disgusted with tom sellek with his water stealing and hawking of reverse mortgages....he should be ashamed of himself having a long running tv series and doing all of this greedy stuff


This! Plus he is a PIA to work with according to people who worked on his show.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I'm disgusted with tom sellek with his water stealing and hawking of reverse mortgages....he should be ashamed of himself having a long running tv series and doing all of this greedy stuff


My opinion of him has changed for the worse over the years for a variety of reasons.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Does the photographer have any legal recourse in the misappropriation of his work? Don't know how these things work, but if he does I hope they get slammed.
> 
> IF Maggot and her Eunuch had any Class at all they would see to it this was removed and offer an apology. It would be a PR plus for them to do so. This is not just a personal photo, it is one commissioned for the National Portrait Gallery as a historical record of the future Queen. It's a slam on Britain, not just Kate.
> 
> This is a new low, but given the source, not particularly surprising.


I believe the photographer owns the copyright to the photos and they cannot be reproduced without their permission. At least that's how it works in the US. But the internet may be a much murkier area legally.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But she did not only supposedly inform the family at the wedding, she pranced around in front of the press with her flat 6-week stomach and made them guess the pregnancy by neither buttoning up her coat fully nor leaving it open. She is a nasty piece of work.
> 
> At that time I wasn't a fan but didn't really care to form a real opinion, but I saw her and immediately thought "She's trying to make the media wonder if she's pregnant". ON SOMEONE ELSE'S WEDDING, A DAY OR TWO BEFORE THEY ANNOUNCED ANYWAY. Ew.
> 
> (not yelling at you by the way, but four years later and I'm still stunned)


An article from USA Today had a differing take on it:


> https://www.usatoday.com/story/life...de-royal-wedding-princess-eugenie/1611802002/


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hope the NottCott rumors for one of the Cambridge kids are true.
> 
> 
> 
> There are numerous photos of Eug and even Bea giving Kate the side-eye throughout the years, even before Raptor. IMO they really do come across as jealous cousins of the future king. Given Sarah and Andy’s jealousy of Charles and their love of drama, this tumblr account has a loud _ring of truth.  _Thank you, @QueenofWrapDress for the post _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton 'Reduced' Princesses Beatrice And Eugenie To ‘Walk-On’ Parts Of Royal Life
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton snubbed Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie on multiple occasions. And it all started in 2008 before she married Prince William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latintimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ever since she [Kate] joined the British clan, Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie’s roles were reduced. The royal siblings were particularly enraged when the mom of three was tapped to join Queen Elizabeth II on their solo engagement during the Diamond Jubilee.
> 
> Even before Kate Middleton tied the knot with Prince William, Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson’s daughters already felt snubbed by the future Queen. In 2008, they were asked to give up their front-row seats at the London Fashion Show to make way for Middleton and her younger sister, Pippa Middleton. But, at that time, they refused to give up their spot.
> 
> Things became much worse for the royals after Prince William and Kate Middleton refused to invite Fergie to their royal wedding at Westminster Abbey. Since Ferguson is no longer an official member of the royal family after her divorce from Prince Andrew, the Cambridges felt that there was no need for her to be at their nuptials.
> View attachment 5293165
> _





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I will say, I adore William and Kate, but not inviting Fergie WAS kind of a petty jerk move. After all, she is the mother of his cousins, and come one now, as if they'd even seen her amongst the hundreds of guests.



From what we now know of Fergie's poor decisions, financial judgement and personal indiscretions in the past, including her own links with certain criminal US billionaires and related British socialites, I think it showed sound judgement.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Who requested this one?



This was interesting to me because when slowed down, there were things that I noticed.  When Charles stops to speak to Harry and tell him not to go in and then you see Harry reply and give a wave of his hand, it looks like he is being very rude and  sarcastic with  the manner in which, he tells his father to go ahead into the room. I believe that he was insulted by not being allowed to join in the viewing  and I am sure it remains on his laundry list of grievances against his father. Meghan looks like she is fully ready to defy the order not to go in  because she just doesn't give a sh*t what Charles is telling them to do.  It isn't until they are really reprimanded by the courtiers, that they fully get the message.  At that point, we had weepy Meghan sitting down with the others in the main room.  Harry knew what he was supposed to do, but thought he would push the edge of the envelope and his wife was fully supporting this.  I think the refrain at their home is "who do they think they are and we are just as good and important as they are."  This really came to head many months later at the Commonwealth Service when they pushed to be part of the procession and William ameliorated the situation by having the Cambs drop out even though the the order of service listed them as walking.  That too is on Harry's little list of grievances.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> My opinion of him has changed for the worse over the years for a variety of reasons.


I do sometimes watch blue bloods but if I thought my doing so I was helping him I would stop


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This! Plus he is a PIA to work with according to people who worked on his show.


Oh, great.....not only to I disagree with most of what he does, now he's an AH personally too


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I do sometimes watch blue bloods but if I thought my doing so I was helping him I would stop


I've never watched it, I prefer to keep my Thomas Magnum memories intact


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I've never watched it, I prefer to keep my Thomas Magnum memories intact


yes, back when we didn't know he was an AH


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

It's becoming more and more clear to me that once Maggot shoe horned her way into Harry's circle, she was sweet and agreeable as much as she had to be to get to the altar. The second she got the ring on the finger, Act Take #2 was in play. Virtually every action and photo op was supposed to leverage her into having more status than anyone else in the BRF, and probably THE WORLD. Being the narcissist and sociopath she is, she's in agony wondering why she isn't being called by world leaders and the heads of Hollywood to advise them on what to do on the international stage. She's important, you know. Now we know just how important she is. She was talked into eating chips like a squirrel by Ellen. Her dreams of world domination are somewhat CRASHING DOWN.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s an edited version. This event happened after the December church walk where everyone was oh-so-happy (not).  When slowed down to .25, Hazzie behaves worse than a spoiled brat, more like an entitled jerk with zero respect for anyone. MM behaves like the typical daft American tourist. Why? What did she gain from behaving this way?

The facial expressions reflect the high tension, especially around the 3:05 mark. Princess Margaret’s son is looking all around, clearly wishing to be somewhere else, anywhere. I do not see Princess Anne, but she was there.

These people are such a dysfunctional mess that it is difficult to feel much sympathy for any of them, except QE. She must be so relieved when these ‘family’ events are over - she well understands that you can‘t choose your family, even when you are Queen 



ETA: around the 3:20 mark, QE is fiddling with her handbag - not sure what it means, in slow motion it looks like she is desperately sending a ‘help’ message. William, Charles, Hazzie look very uncomfortable.


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #5
					

You know I am not a fan of the alliterate one, but it is primarily because of her hypocrisy and her constant need for attention. I have neve...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Does the photographer have any legal recourse in the misappropriation of his work? Don't know how these things work, but if he does I hope they get slammed.
> 
> IF Maggot and her Eunuch had any Class at all they would see to it this was removed and offer an apology. It would be a PR plus for them to do so. This is not just a personal photo, it is one commissioned for the National Portrait Gallery as a historical record of the future Queen. It's a slam on Britain, not just Kate.
> 
> This is a new low, but given the source, not particularly surprising.



I don’t have twitter, otherwise I would report the photo. Apparently, the so-called sugars will stop at nothing.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> It's becoming more and more clear to me that once Maggot shoe horned her way into Harry's circle, she was sweet and agreeable as much as she had to be to get to the altar. The second she got the ring on the finger, Act Take #2 was in play. Virtually every action and photo op was supposed to leverage her into having more status than anyone else in the BRF, and probably THE WORLD. Being the narcissist and sociopath she is, she's in agony wondering why she isn't being called by world leaders and the heads of Hollywood to advise them on what to do on the international stage. She's important, you know. Now we know just how important she is. She was talked into eating chips like a squirrel by Ellen. Her dreams of world domination are somewhat CRASHING DOWN.


In her delusional mind, she forgot that people are not as gullible to her “charms” as she thought. 

She’s just a nasty piece of work. She alienated most anyone who disagrees with her it seems. I think when she markled Jessica Mulroney it was a big mistake. JM family is powerful on the world stage and people seeing how she treats people and faux humanitarian attempts don’t appear sincere. 

We have not seen anymore support from Amal Clooney, Serena Williams or even MObama.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> *Does the photographer have any legal recourse in the misappropriation of his work? Don't know how these things work, but if he does I hope they get slammed.*
> 
> IF Maggot and her Eunuch had any Class at all they would see to it this was removed and offer an apology. It would be a PR plus for them to do so. This is not just a personal photo, it is one commissioned for the National Portrait Gallery as a historical record of the future Queen. It's a slam on Britain, not just Kate.
> 
> This is a new low, but given the source, not particularly surprising.


In the USA, the photos are considered the photographer's intellectual property and as such the photographer has the exclusive copyright of said photos, but as we all know laws covering copyright ownership vary from country to country.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> An article from USA Today had a differing take on it:


I don't recall the rushing in part, but I do remember the media frenzy and all those photos of her coat strategically unbuttoned over the abdomen. If she rushed, she obviously did it slowly so that multiple good snaps could be taken. I was naive about her then and wondered: "Gee, doesn't she have a coat that fits her?" This was of course years before I found out about her merching and coat-flicking. Coats are such an important prop for her, probably ranks them higher than the Handbag.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sheeesh!
I wanna go home.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I’m not sure why I feel the need to defend Tom Selleck but my understanding is that it was discovered that he didn’t know the water was improperly obtained, he had paid for it and thought it was being brought in legally as opposed to being obtained illegally (it was lawfully paid for but driving it out of where it came from was the problem) and the lawsuit was withdrawn after he paid minor costs but admitted no knowledge.

It really sounds like they tried to make an example of him and ended up with egg on their faces?  And there were shenanigans but they went after the wrong person.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sheeesh!
> I wanna go home.
> View attachment 5293568


 "What the hell have I gotten myself into? Should have gone after Bezos."


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> In her delusional mind, she forgot that people are not as gullible to her “charms” as she thought.
> 
> She’s just a nasty piece of work. She alienated most anyone who disagrees with her it seems. I think when she markled Jessica Mulroney it was a big mistake. JM family is powerful on the world stage and people seeing how she treats people and faux humanitarian attempts don’t appear sincere.
> 
> We have not seen anymore support from Amal Clooney, Serena Williams or even MObama.



You're absolutely right! Where is even ONE of the people she invited to her wedding? Just ONE? Besides Oprah who was her accomplice in slandering the BRF.  The silence speaks volumes.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> "What the hell have I gotten myself into? Should have gone after Bezos."



Give her time. Like about ten minutes. Maggot is probably pondering ways to get rid of Sanchez. She knows she can always stow her kids with Huh?arry.  And there's always Elon. Maggot hates leaving a carbon footprint. Except, of course, if it's a private jet to take her somewhere. And kindly overlook the 19 bathroom mansion. That's rumored to be up for sale......


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m not sure why I feel the need to defend Tom Selleck but my understanding is that it was discovered that he didn’t know the water was improperly obtained, he had paid for it and thought it was being brought in legally as opposed to being obtained illegally (it was lawfully paid for but driving it out of where it came from was the problem) and the lawsuit was withdrawn after he paid minor costs but admitted no knowledge.
> 
> It really sounds like they tried to make an example of him and ended up with egg on their faces?  And there were shenanigans but they went after the wrong person.


Even though he bought it legally, it just looked bad for him to be buying it for his avocado farm during a historic drought. According to the LA Times it was 1.4 million gallons over several years, while other residents were ripping out lawns. He wasn't the only one though, other celebs were called out for excessive water usage for lawns and pools.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: around the 3:20 mark, QE is fiddling with her handbag - not sure what it means, in slow motion it looks like she is desperately sending a ‘help’ message. William, Charles, Hazzie look very uncomfortable.


 HMTQ doesn't fiddle with her purse, but I've read a few articles where it states that HM's purse contains the usual items like reading glasses, lipstick, hankie, mints, among other things, but HM also uses her purse to signal her lady-in-waiting when she needs assistance or is ready to leave. Apparently, it all depends on how and where she positions the purse.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> Give her time. Like about ten minutes. Maggot is probably pondering ways to get rid of Sanchez. She knows she can always stow her kids with Huh?arry.  And there's always Elon. Maggot hates leaving a carbon footprint. Except, of course, if it's a private jet to take her somewhere. And kindly overlook the 19 bathroom mansion. That's rumored to be up for sale......


I don't know. I think he's more into accomplished women. I mean his ex wife was a great business woman and his current girlfriend is not a slouch either. She's a helicopter pilot also. Meghan would be more of a side thing. I mean MM's "googly" eyes are way past her prime. These billionaire types may be rich but even they have standards. They don't need the "status" of MM's "pedigree".

Sanchez would rip MM to pieces.  There's no doubt in my mind. That chick is one tough woman. So yeah, bullies, when confronted retreat like the French Army (an inside military joke).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> You're absolutely right! Where is even ONE of the people she invited to her wedding? Just ONE? Besides Oprah who was her accomplice in slandering the BRF.  The silence speaks volumes.


She might be on the outs and outs with the great O. We shall see.


----------



## V0N1B2

rose60610 said:


> …the Ellen show doing weird stuff, pranks (one was eating chips like a squirrel). You know the world…


Ooohhh! So that’s why this gif popped up. I couldn’t figure out what the heck it was from.


----------



## Lodpah

V0N1B2 said:


> Ooohhh! So that’s why this gif popped up. I couldn’t figure out what the heck it was from.


Stay classy Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory to feed your insatiable/bloody-thirst for fame. You’ll end up with an ego like Lady Bathory.


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> I can only dream, but, wish there would be world wide distribution in major media outlets with side by sides of Methane guzzling her baby bottle in response to Ellen's command, and any of the photo shoot pictures of the future Queen. No class and high class.
> 
> Haven't seen any reports of Birthday wishes from the Harkles to the future Queen? Last year it was reported by Harper's Bazaar they did it "privately."



Blech  - they are so petty.  She really is a woman at war with everyone.  Rise above it, honey.  You can even have one of your far-too-many Archewell employees do it.  Hell, doesn’t even have to be sincere.  Just do it!
Doncha wonder who is going to teach their kids how to be kind and gracious?!?!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Who requested this one?




I love the Body Language Guy!!  Perhaps instead of subtly pointing to the floor, Charles should have yelled “Back off, b*tch”!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5293563
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #5
> 
> 
> You know I am not a fan of the alliterate one, but it is primarily because of her hypocrisy and her constant need for attention. I have neve...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Not sure where that comes from? I don't recall a discussion of her hitting a child. 

Then again, throwing hot tea at staff seems pretty violent to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> An article from USA Today had a differing take on it:





xincinsin said:


> I don't recall the rushing in part, but I do remember the media frenzy and all those photos of her coat strategically unbuttoned over the abdomen. If she rushed, she obviously did it slowly so that multiple good snaps could be taken. I was naive about her then and wondered: "Gee, doesn't she have a coat that fits her?" This was of course years before I found out about her merching and coat-flicking. Coats are such an important prop for her, probably ranks them higher than the Handbag.



Yeah, pretty sure the little show for the media happened after they exited the church, because like Xincinsin I vividly remember the scenario. Even video footage, not just pictures.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Give her time. Like about ten minutes. Maggot is probably pondering ways to get rid of Sanchez. She knows she can always stow her kids with Huh?arry.  And there's always Elon. Maggot hates leaving a carbon footprint. Except, of course, if it's a private jet to take her somewhere. And kindly overlook the 19 bathroom mansion. That's rumored to be up for sale......



That was my hope all along, but at this point I feel she really has nowhere to go. She is not that charming, she is not that beautiful, she has no real talent, and in her show biz circles she's considere ageing, plus I like to think most accomplished men would see right through her manipulative games. Harry was the lucky strike of her life.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure where that comes from? I don't recall a discussion of her hitting a child.
> 
> Then again, throwing hot tea at staff seems pretty violent to me.



gossip is embellishing the “MM bullied Charlotte” story at the dress fitting. The blind is commenting on MM not having hit charlotte.

note everyone is silent on the bullying allegation though…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure where that comes from? I don't recall a discussion of her hitting a child.
> 
> Then again, throwing hot tea at staff seems pretty violent to me.



Oh, and there is video of her slapping the hand of the guy who wanted to help her get out of the car before the wedding ceremony (hers, not Eugenie's). While this is not "There was blood" violence, it is completely inappropriate and she's lucky at that point nobody would have even thought of formal complaints.


----------



## MiniMabel

Maggie Muggins said:


> I know we manipulate images here for entertainment purposes, but this is a totally disgusting appropriation of someone else's image that will reappear on the net as the Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl instead of Catherine.




Agreed, this is sickening, truly disgusting.  Catherine is the future Queen of England and her three new portraits are in perpetuity as part of the personal history of her, her husband, family / Royal family and the people of Great Britain. 

To see someone paste an image of Prince Harry's wife's face over Catherine's face is beyond the pale.  How low do some people descend?  Such nasty creatures. There is clearly no respect or morals from such individuals. 

William, and most other people, will be livid.  I hope the photographer can sue them for manipulation of the image. I want to cry at such sacrilege.


----------



## xincinsin

Snickering - after the crazy squaddies pasted Methane's face on Catherine's birthday portrait, someone helpfully did a version with Hazard's face  
The Dastardly Duo do love black and white shots


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So this came up in my recommendations and she expressed exactly what I was feeling. I like Lady C but I did not enjoy her victim blaming tendendies re: Andrew.

But also, did you know Leilani's mother grew up with Lady C?




Anyway, for those of you who don't know Leilani, she is NOT a fan of Raptor's and it's probably pretty hard to accuse her of racism.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was my hope all along, but at this point I feel she really has nowhere to go. She is not that charming, she is not that beautiful, she has no real talent, and in her show biz circles she's considere ageing, plus I like to think most accomplished men would see right through her manipulative games. Harry was the lucky strike of her life.


Lucky for her, not so lucky for him.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was my hope all along, but at this point I feel she really has nowhere to go. She is not that charming, she is not that beautiful, she has no real talent, and in her show biz circles she's considere ageing, plus I like to think most accomplished men would see right through her manipulative games. Harry was the lucky strike of her life.


not defending her but I must disagree on the "not charming" part.  apparently she must be very charming when she wants to be.  that's (I assume) how she made all those connections and landed a prince.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> In her delusional mind, she forgot that people are not as gullible to her “charms” as she thought.
> 
> She’s just a nasty piece of work. She alienated most anyone who disagrees with her it seems. I think when she markled Jessica Mulroney it was a big mistake. JM family is powerful on the world stage and people seeing how she treats people and faux humanitarian attempts don’t appear sincere.
> 
> We have not seen anymore support from Amal Clooney, Serena Williams or even MObama.


They are all very accomplished, and to the best of my knowledge, non-drama seeking women  Why would they want to be associated with her? What would they possibly have to gain from it?


----------



## Chanbal

One more mystery solved by the Body Language Sherlock!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> I know we manipulate images here for entertainment purposes, but this is a totally disgusting appropriation of someone else's image that will reappear on the net as the Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl instead of Catherine.


I didn’t even realise this was meant to be crunchy nut herself  

The only way they can make her look good is if they keep C’s nose, hair and body and avoid adding the excessive fillers then you’ve got to question whether it’s even an image of M in the picture - more like Tuvix the transporter accident


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> not defending her but I must disagree on the "not charming" part.  apparently she must be very charming when she wants to be.  that's (I assume) how she made all those connections and landed a prince.


Agree.  I think she is exceptionally charming (when she wants to be) and her face around the time she met H is gorgeous.

We are definitely seeing through her charming-ness now, but then, it really worked.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So this came up in my recommendations and she expressed exactly what I was feeling. I like Lady C but I did not enjoy her victim blaming tendendies re: Andrew.
> 
> But also, did you know Leilani's mother grew up with Lady C?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, for those of you who don't know Leilani, she is NOT a fan of Raptor's and it's probably pretty hard to accuse her of racism.



I like her, but as with so many talkers on youtube, she really should edit her videos down to just the facts, with only a few cute bits thrown in.

In other words, these videos go on for far too long to get to the one or two points they are trying to make.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> not defending her but I must disagree on the "not charming" part.  apparently she must be very charming when she wants to be.  that's (I assume) how she made all those connections and landed a prince.



You are right. Not everyone has the narcissist radar, so I'm sure enough people are subsceptible to the fake charm and love bombing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> not defending her but I must disagree on the "not charming" part.  apparently she must be very charming when she wants to be.  that's (I assume) how she made all those connections and landed a prince.


I'd expect her to be charming in a cloying kind of way as in overacting or emoting like a z-lister that leaves one with that all over body icky feeling.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> One more mystery solved by the Body Language Sherlock!



If we look back on this thread, we'll see that most of us had already figured it out.


----------



## csshopper

Did I miss something?  I had circled the "8th, Freedom Announcement Day,"  in red on my calendar breathlessly waiting for the coming wonderfulness to transpire, but pffft, the date has come and gone and all seems nefariously quiet in Montecito. They are either still recuperating from their raucous holiday celebrations at their faux castle heap in Montecito where supplicants come to worship, you know the carloads of friends who clog local streets to reach them. NOT! Or, Lady Megbeth is frantically dictating to her Dim Witted Scribe revisions to his pending Volume of Vituperation in a futile attempt to more deeply annihilate William and especially Catherine, whose most recent ascent waaaay beyond anything they could ever aspire to, must be causing a mental health crisis, let alone an epic reduction in china. Time for paper plates?



Chanbal said:


> Please mark your calendar for important dates in 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ginger Avenger?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5287360


----------



## charlottawill

Given that their first year of "freedom" was not the rousing success they envisioned, I imagine they're laying low and trying to figure out how to salvage the mess they've made of their lives.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Given that their first year of "freedom" was not the rousing success they envisioned, I imagine they're laying low and trying to figure out how to salvage the mess they've made of their lives.


I doubt she sees it that way


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> not defending her but I must disagree on the "not charming" part.  apparently she *must be very charming when she wants to be*.  that's (I assume) how she made all those connections and landed a prince.



Agreed. *must be very charming when she wants to be*. And...when she NEEDS to be, the way some criminals can be super charming and friendly to gain a victim's confidence, then move in for the kill.  Then they sit back, proud of themselves for duping the victim and enjoying their ill-gotten gains. Harry may or may not be miserable right now, regardless, at this point he's like captured prey being squeezed by the python.


----------



## bellecate

Guess H’s first wife has been busy learning a new accent.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. *must be very charming when she wants to be*. And...when she NEEDS to be, the way some criminals can be super charming and friendly to gain a victim's confidence, then move in for the kill.  Then they sit back, proud of themselves for duping the victim and enjoying their ill-gotten gains. Harry may or may not be miserable right now, regardless, at this point he's like captured prey being squeezed by the python.


deleted


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> I like her, but as with so many talkers on youtube, she really should edit her videos down to just the facts, with only a few cute bits thrown in.
> 
> In other words, these videos go on for far too long to get to the one or two points they are trying to make.


Yes, my attention span is waaay to short for those videos.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Lodpah said:


> I don't know. I think he's more into accomplished women. I mean his ex wife was a great business woman and his current girlfriend is not a slouch either. She's a helicopter pilot also. Meghan would be more of a side thing. I mean MM's "googly" eyes are way past her prime. These billionaire types may be rich but even they have standards. They don't need the "status" of MM's "pedigree".
> 
> Sanchez would rip MM to pieces.  There's no doubt in my mind. That chick is one tough woman. So yeah, bullies, when confronted retreat like the French Army (an inside military joke).



ITA. But in Meghan's delusional mind, I think she believes she's irresistible by all. Especially with the "Duchess" title. However, the squirrel charade could be the first sign of Meghan's retreat from her attempt at World Domination. Maybe she realizes the only acting gigs she's capable of are those involving rodents.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> ITA. But in Meghan's delusional mind, I think she believes she's irresistible by all. Especially with the "Duchess" title. However, the squirrel charade could be the first sign of Meghan's retreat from her attempt at World Domination. Maybe she realizes the only acting gigs she's capable of are those involving rodents.


yes, the Duchess title she got by manipulating a dunce


----------



## CarryOn2020

Any chance H&M realize what an offensive joke they are to most of the world?  Nah.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looking forward to these:


----------



## jennlt

Hmmm...


----------



## Chanbal

Very short, but very interesting…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't have receipts as I can't pull up the screenshots people posted due to not being a member at that specific site, but apparently Eugenie deleted a bunch of comments asking her why she didn't congratulate Kate for her birthday. This is seriously getting ridiculous for a member of a family whose motto is "Never complain, never explain", and I'm not sure why she'd be so invested in hating her cousin's wife. Surely she knows - even better than Raptor - she was never going to play first violin in that family? So weird.

ETA: What's even weirder, she deleted a bunch of stuff referencing Kate and Raptor, but left up mentions of both Andrew and her husband's, uh, unfortunate pictures being cuddly with bikini girls. What gives?


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger Guru resembles a deer, rabbit, idiot.. caught in the headlights! 










						Prince Harry’s life in US ‘a million miles from what he wanted’
					

PRINCE Harry currently resembles a "rabbit in the headlights", a PR guru has claimed - and his new life in the States with Meghan Markle is "a million miles from what he wanted".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Guess H’s first wife has been busy learning a new accent.
> 
> View attachment 5294092


How is it that she and Hilarious Baldwin have yet to become BFFs?


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> not defending her but I must disagree on the "not charming" part.  apparently she must be very charming when she wants to be.  that's (I assume) how she made all those connections and landed a prince.
> [/
> 
> Well, Alina Howard’s song comes to my mind as to how she “charms” men.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking forward to these:



Wouldn't you just love to know her unfiltered thoughts on the Harkles?


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Ginger Guru resembles a deer, rabbit, idiot.. caught in the headlights!
> View attachment 5294205
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s life in US ‘a million miles from what he wanted’
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry currently resembles a "rabbit in the headlights", a PR guru has claimed - and his new life in the States with Meghan Markle is "a million miles from what he wanted".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


As the man he’s become? Dude never grew up. He’s a 7 year old imbecile with the IQ of same stuck in a man’s body. I can just imagine his conversations he has with his low hanging fruit of a wife. Really deep and penetrating conversations . . . yeah right.


----------



## Chanbal

Kate Middleton set to take Princess Diana's title 'when the time comes
					

KATE MIDDLETON is set to become the next Princess of Wales, taking the title from Diana, when Charles becomes King, an expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Ginger Guru resembles a deer, rabbit, idiot.. caught in the headlights!
> View attachment 5294205
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s life in US ‘a million miles from what he wanted’
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry currently resembles a "rabbit in the headlights", a PR guru has claimed - and his new life in the States with Meghan Markle is "a million miles from what he wanted".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



_“He’s got a sense of importance and power, but when *the puppet masters in America that are managing the Harry and Meghan show realise they can’t get much more out of them they will be off*, and he'll be on the sidelines. I feel really sorry for Harry.”_

Are the puppet masters there, yet?
I feel like it’s been long enough.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> How is it that she and Hilarious Baldwin have yet to become BFFs?


Two women in the kitchen is too many my mother used to say. Their egos most likely would have them tearing each other to pieces.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Disclosure: As long as those 2 keep denigrating my Queen, Queen Elizabeth, the harder I’ll clap back. There. I said it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Kate Middleton set to take Princess Diana's title 'when the time comes
> 
> 
> KATE MIDDLETON is set to become the next Princess of Wales, taking the title from Diana, when Charles becomes King, an expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




Well, we're all experts then, because we already knew this. And, news flash: there is another Princess of Wales already, she just does not use the title.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Given that their first year of "freedom" was not the rousing success they envisioned, I imagine they're laying low and trying to figure out how to salvage the mess they've made of their lives.


That would require introspection, of which neither seem capable. They look at the past and see only how they were wronged and deserve better.



bellecate said:


> Guess H’s first wife has been busy learning a new accent.
> 
> View attachment 5294092


I hope this isn't true. What qualifies her to give out an Oscar? Maybe she can give out a Golden Raspberry instead.

Sure, actresses have to learn to pick up accents quickly, but if she does this, then it means she really thinks she is "playing a part". Fake accent for a Duchess faking it as a royal and a humanitarian.




CarryOn2020 said:


> _“He’s got a sense of importance and power, but when *the puppet masters in America that are managing the Harry and Meghan show realise they can’t get much more out of them they will be off*, and he'll be on the sidelines. I feel really sorry for Harry.”_
> 
> Are the puppet masters there, yet?
> I feel like it’s been long enough.


I think there was a puppet master managing Methane's campaign to leash Hazard. It was too swift a conquest. Probably brokered by Markus Anderson and Soho House because someone wanted a tame royal to advance their ambitions, and Soho recommended Ms Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals as the honey trap.

But I believe once she got the ring on her finger, she thought she was No.1 and stopped taking advice. That's why her projects are tanking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not trying to pry (ahem), is there any more info on this 2018 story?  Seems she knew several of these Etonian lads.  









						Resurfaced snap shows Meghan Markle and Eddie Redmayne in Istanbul
					

The picture shows Meghan, 37, and Eddie, 36, with London-based photographer Jason Bailey in Istanbul in 2015. They are believed to have been there for the launch of the new Soho House.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Any chance H&M realize what an offensive joke they are to most of the world?  Nah.



That's impossible because the Self-Righteous Douchebaguette of Montecito believes she is better than everyone else.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Guess H’s first wife has been busy learning a new accent.
> 
> View attachment 5294092


I believe Madonna did the same thing during her stint in England while married to Guy Ritchie.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Douchebaguette


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Wouldn't you just love to know her unfiltered thoughts on the Harkles?


Yes, she is one of my three favourite royal women with whom I would love to have a tête-à-tête over lunch.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Ginger Guru resembles a deer, rabbit, idiot.. caught in the headlights!
> View attachment 5294205
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s life in US ‘a million miles from what he wanted’
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry currently resembles a "rabbit in the headlights", a PR guru has claimed - and his new life in the States with Meghan Markle is "a million miles from what he wanted".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The photo in that link of him getting out of the car speaks volumes.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I believe Madonna did the same thing during her stint in England while married to Guy Ritchie.


you can pick up an accent while living abroad but when you're back home for an extended period of time, you would revert to your original way of speaking


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking forward to these:




Yes!!  Would love to hear Jesus’ take.  Sadly, I think Anne is the closest thing left to Prince Philip and I would love to hear more!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> The photo in that link of him getting out of the car speaks volumes.


Yes, he looks like he needs a mental health intervention and pronto if he is to be saved from the She-Devil, but I'm not excusing his complicity in trying to destroy his family.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, he looks like he needs a mental health intervention and pronto if he is to be saved from the She-Devil, but I'm not excusing his complicity in trying to destroy his family.


Maybe Butter...oops I mean BetterUp will give him an employee discount for their counseling services. Whatever, it looks like the shoulder tapping exercises and sessions with the chickens are not alleviating any anxiety he feels. Since London is a "trigger" for him, supposedly, he needs to stay away from the Jubilee.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to pry (ahem), is there any more info on this 2018 story?  Seems she knew several of these Etonian lads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Resurfaced snap shows Meghan Markle and Eddie Redmayne in Istanbul
> 
> 
> The picture shows Meghan, 37, and Eddie, 36, with London-based photographer Jason Bailey in Istanbul in 2015. They are believed to have been there for the launch of the new Soho House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She was so desperate to score big. Look at the way she was hanging off of the photographer in that photo. She probably schmoozed up to him to gain entry to the parties.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> She was so desperate to score big. Look at the way she was hanging off of the photographer in that photo. She probably schmoozed up to him to gain entry to the parties.


In my HS days, someone like M would have been labelled as 'easy' a label that no self-respecting girl wanted, but no one ever specified how many partners one needed to equate to being easy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Ginger Guru resembles a deer, rabbit, idiot.. caught in the headlights!
> View attachment 5294205
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s life in US ‘a million miles from what he wanted’
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry currently resembles a "rabbit in the headlights", a PR guru has claimed - and his new life in the States with Meghan Markle is "a million miles from what he wanted".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Be careful what you wish for.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> In my HS days, someone like M would have been labelled as 'easy' a label that no self-respecting girl wanted, but no one ever specified how many partners one needed to equate to being easy.


Yes. And in my head I can hear my grandmother tsk tsking  and referring to her as a “guttersnipe.”


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, we're all experts then, because we already knew this. And, news flash: there is another Princess of Wales already, she just does not use the title.


I think Duchess sounds better for a grown woman anyway. I'd rather go by Duchess if I had to choose - as if I ever will haha.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Yes. And in my head I can hear my grandmother tsk tsking  and referring to her as a “guttersnipe.”


I think the more appropriate term our grandmothers would have used for someone like MM is a "roundheel".


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Yes. And in my head I can hear my grandmother tsk tsking  and referring to her as a “guttersnipe.”


lol! My gran had a made up word  for this.  My mother knew the exact meaning of the word and it was pretty bad. I guess it was so bad that gran had to make up the word because it didn't exist yet.lololol!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Ginger Guru resembles a deer, rabbit, idiot.. caught in the headlights!
> View attachment 5294205
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s life in US ‘a million miles from what he wanted’
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry currently resembles a "rabbit in the headlights", a PR guru has claimed - and his new life in the States with Meghan Markle is "a million miles from what he wanted".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


What a difference five years makes....


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, we're all experts then, because we already knew this. And, news flash: there is another Princess of Wales already, she just does not use the title.


We are all royal experts. It's smart that Camilla doesn't use the title of Princess of Wales imo. It was her discreet posture that transformed her in a likable member of the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

Today is the day of short videos for the BLG, this one is about masks.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Yes. And in my head I can hear my grandmother tsk tsking  and referring to her as a “guttersnipe.”


And my mother would have been shaking her head and agreeing with your GM.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> We are all royal experts. It's smart that Camilla doesn't use the title of Princess of Wales imo. It was her discreet posture that transformed her in a likable member of the BRF.



She appears to be a woman with common sense.  She knew that the public would be all over her in an even worse way if she used that title.  I still think she is going to opt for Princess Consort unless Charles absolutely insists on Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> What a difference five years makes....
> View attachment 5294403



When you’re happy and you know it, your face will certainly show it.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Yes. And in my head I can hear my grandmother tsk tsking  and referring to her as a “guttersnipe.”


The first time I came across the term "village bike", I wondered (a) why the village had to share one bicycle, and (b) why a woman was equated to a bicycle. Oh, to be young and clueless again!


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> The first time I came across the term "village bike", I wondered (a) why the village had to share one bicycle, and (b) why a woman was equated to a bicycle. Oh, to be young and clueless again!


In the Navy, the "bicycle" is known as a "wet deck."


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting video, the author applies the Body Language Guy's tutorials to analyze the Harkles's weeding.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Interesting video, the author applies the Body Language Guy's tutorials to analyze the Harkles's weeding.



Good video. She's extremely jealous of the Duchess of Cambridge.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Interesting video, the author applies the Body Language Guy's tutorials to analyze the Harkles's weeding.



Thinking that maybe we read too much into Methane's jaw-clenching. The woman is so p*ssed at the world that she seems to be clenching a lot over everything. It's likely only significant if there are other behavioural clues at the same time (like the death glare or the Markle Claw). All that clenching leads to excessive dental wear and tear, thus reminding me of the "dental" appointment in white linen dress which Hazard transmogrified into a pity-party medical appointment for an "alleged" miscarriage.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> In the Navy, the "bicycle" is known as a "wet deck."



So what is the male equivalent?  Women get horrid labels but do men get a pass??

we should do as your gran did - make up a name for men….


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> So what is the male equivalent?  Women get horrid labels but do men get a pass??
> 
> we should do as your gran did - make up a name for men….


I'd like to know that too. One of my narcs was a "sailor with a mistress in every port" and bragged about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Today is the day of short videos for the BLG, this one is about masks.




Ha. I feel validated.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Good video. She's extremely jealous of the Duchess of Cambridge.


The thing that stands out to me the most is that Doria didn't ride to the front of the church with her, where she could have helped her exit the car and arrange her train, as Kate's father and sister did. That does suggest that MM wanted the spotlight completely on her, but maybe there was another reason we are unaware of. I wasn't watching the ceremony that closely at the time, but in watching this I also don't see the genuine warmth you typically see with couples at the altar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> The thing that stands out to me the most is that Doria didn't ride to the front of the church with her, where she could have helped her exit the car and arrange her train, as Kate's father and sister did. That does suggest that MM wanted the spotlight completely on her, but maybe there was another reason we are unaware of. I wasn't watching the ceremony that closely at the time, but in watching this I also don't see the genuine warmth you typically see with couples at the altar.



Even with Bea and Sarah there, Andrew helped Eug with her gown — when someone is struggling, it is normal to help out, no? Doria‘s behavior is just odd Imo. Of about 600 guests, she had no one to sit with her??? None? No one?  This is why I suspect O’s hand in the entire, very expensive spectacle and why I believe it’s all a sham.  The more drama, the better.  The BRF should have learned by now to get its house in order. Maybe Andy’s case will cause them to take action on the Hazz show.   It’s time.  

Watching Hazz’s face when Charlotte walked by is interesting. MM does not give Charlotte the bouquet. He looks puzzled.  Wonder what happened?  Did MM change the plan without letting him know?


----------



## A1aGypsy

needlv said:


> So what is the male equivalent?  Women get horrid labels but do men get a pass??
> 
> we should do as your gran did - make up a name for men….



Or just give it up? I have to admit, the degradation makes me uncomfortable. Women should be free to have as many relationships as they like without public scorn or labels. As you point out, men are. In fact, they are championed for it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> So what is the *male equivalent*?  Women get horrid labels but do men get a pass??
> 
> we should do as your gran did - make up a name for men….


Wiki has a huge list for males called: Thesaurus: promiscuous man


----------



## Sophisticatted

In college, a friend call man whores “He Hoes”.


----------



## 1LV

A1aGypsy said:


> Or just give it up? I have to admit, the degradation makes me uncomfortable. Women should be free to have as many relationships as they like without public scorn or labels. As you point out, men are. In fact, they are championed for it.


What’s good for the one should be as good for the other.  I don’t like a double standard whether or not I’m on board with what’s happening.


----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


> Even with Bea and Sarah there, Andrew helped Eug with her gown — when someone is struggling, it is normal to help out, no? Doria‘s behavior is just odd Imo. Of about 600 guests, she had no one to sit with her??? None? No one?  This is why I suspect O’s hand in the entire, very expensive spectacle and why I believe it’s all a sham.  The more drama, the better.  The BRF should have learned by now to get its house in order. Maybe Andy’s case will cause them to take action on the Hazz show.   It’s time.
> 
> Watching Hazz’s face when Charlotte walked by is interesting. MM does not give Charlotte the bouquet. He looks puzzled.  Wonder what happened?  Did MM change the plan without letting him know?



This made me think, and I bet Meghan wanted to be alone and would have even welcomed a wardrobe mishap.  It would have fit her victim narrative.  The fact that she was thwarted by the helpful Palace Aide, is probably why she slapped him.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> She appears to be a woman with common sense.  She knew that the public would be all over her in an even worse way if she used that title.  I still think she is going to opt for Princess Consort unless Charles absolutely insists on Queen.



I still have a hard time liking Camilla, but I was impressed that she has that book club with interesting sounding books.  As an avid reader myself, it is a quality that I always like to find in others.

I do agree that she is playing her cards well on the Princess/Queen issue. I am sure that she felt a lot of the resistance and pressure from others. But rather than railing against it, using the race card (oops, thinking of someone else there  ), shoving herself down peoples’ throats, etc., she stayed above the fray and went about doing her duties - and never complains as per her MIL.  It has served her well and I do admire the way she has gone about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How can H&M promote themselves with the Andy debacle happening in real time?  I agree, this tarnishes the entire BRF.  So, why did she marry into this family?  Didn’t get the choice tiara, didn’t get much jewelry, didn’t get a palace, didn’t get respect, didn’t get ____.









						Experts say Prince Andrew's public image will NEVER recover
					

Specialists in reputation management told MailOnline that allegations against the Duke of York (pictured with Virginia Giuffre and Ghislaine Maxwell) have tarnished the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  this is the wrong time/wrong country to be associated with this kind of scandal


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> The first time I came across the term "village bike", I wondered (a) why the village had to share one bicycle, and (b) why a woman was equated to a bicycle. Oh, to be young and clueless again!



sadly, I am old and clueless!  That is not a term that I have heard before…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Luvbolide said:


> sadly, I am old and clueless!  That is not a term that I have heard before…


LOL, like you, there are so many things I had never heard of before, but then with so much time on my hands and being so curious nosy, I research everything until I find an answer. Just reading this thread is a learning experience and being able to laugh my head off makes it worthwhile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Thinking that maybe we read too much into Methane's jaw-clenching. The woman is so p*ssed at the world that she seems to be clenching a lot over everything. It's likely only significant if there are other behavioural clues at the same time (like the death glare or the Markle Claw). All that clenching leads to excessive dental wear and tear, thus reminding me of the "dental" appointment in white linen dress which Hazard transmogrified into a pity-party medical appointment for an "alleged" miscarriage.


Excess dental wear, teeth clenching, let’s chip in for a night guard for MM


----------



## marietouchet

Does anyone buy the story that they are moving back to Nott Cott?

I don’t for a second … but where does this nonsense come from ? maybe H is looking to use Nott Cott during the Jubilee since Eugenie is at Frog Cott. Something tells me he has no intention of stuffing the whole fam into Nott Cott …

the Jubilee calendar is out, it is like three weeks of stuff, I don’t see MM putting up with three weeks of being in the background, so, my guess, H will make another solo trip skipping some of the festivities


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Does anyone buy the story that they are moving back to Nott Cott?
> 
> I don’t for a second … but where does this nonsense come from ? maybe H is looking to use Nott Cott during the Jubilee since Eugenie is at Frog Cott. Something tells me he has no intention of stuffing the whole fam into Nott Cott …
> 
> the Jubilee calendar is out, it is like three weeks of stuff, I don’t see MM putting up with three weeks of being in the background, so, my guess, H will make another solo trip skipping some of the festivities



Would MM really connect herself further to this failed institution that seems to reward bad behavior? She was never really all in to begin with as our BLG points out.  Seems like it would be detrimental to her ‘brand’.  Call it Covid, call it old age, call it whatever, with A’s case looming in the background, I would hope that celebrations are toned down. I would hope that most businesses dissolve these Royal connections.  It’s just gross that Netflix, etc. are supporting this family. Times have changed, we know more about life behind the gates. The shine is off royalty. They no longer deserve the spotlight.  If QE had been any other CEO, she would have been encouraged to step down. Same for Charles.  Just my 2 cents.


----------



## xincinsin

1LV said:


> What’s good for the one should be as good for the other.  I don’t like a double standard whether or not I’m on board with what’s happening.


It's worse when it crosses borders. We had a gift shop here in my country called "Precious Thots" - being shortened form for "Thoughts". The Americans who came here mocked it in social media because in the US, "thot" had been given a derogatory meaning.

ETA: The slur "thot" is believed to have been coined around 2011. My local gift shop had been around for a few decades, I believe. So we were quite taken aback by the raucous mudslinging and cultural imposition.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would MM really connect herself further to this failed institution that seems to reward bad behavior? She was never really all in to begin with as our BLG points out.  Seems like it would be detrimental to her ‘brand’.  Call it Covid, call it old age, call it whatever, with A’s case looming in the background, I would hope that celebrations are toned down. I would hope that most businesses dissolve these Royal connections.  It’s just gross that Netflix, etc. are supporting this family. Times have changed, we know more about life behind the gates. The shine is off royalty. They no longer deserve the spotlight.  If QE had been any other CEO, she would have been encouraged to step down. Same for Charles.  Just my 2 cents.


I think she will connect herself to anything to further her self-glorification. That's why she isn't giving up on the title. Other people who scream about wanting privacy and living a normal life would not be trumpeting their title at every chance. 

But, having said that, I doubt she would return to the UK unless her PR firm and stans can do a positive spin on things and surround her with rabid fans to wall away the detractors. She is more likely to do a media blast in the US to fill the tabloids and friendly broadsheets with "fond reminiscing of her pal the Queen", saccharine sweet nods (trot out baby to establish connection to HM), and use the tried and trusted tactic of anonymous friends leaking to the media about how the rest of the BRF bullied her. I find it so hard not to roll my eyes  when those stories pop up in my feed - with sources being all these unidentifiable intimate friends of the couple! Can we just say Sunshine Sucks?


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> It's worse when it crosses borders. We had a gift shop here in my country called "Precious Thots" - being shortened form for "Thoughts". The Americans who came here mocked it in social media because in the US, "thot" had been given a derogatory meaning.
> 
> ETA: The slur "thot" is believed to have been coined around 2011. My local gift shop had been around for a few decades, I believe. So we were quite taken aback by the raucous mudslinging and cultural imposition.


Yikes! Not exactly what I had in mind, but I get your point.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I think she will connect herself to anything to further her self-glorification. That's why she isn't giving up on the title. Other people who scream about wanting privacy and living a normal life would not be trumpeting their title at every chance.
> 
> But, having said that, I doubt she would return to the UK unless her PR firm and stans can do a positive spin on things and surround her with rabid fans to wall away the detractors. She is more likely to do a media blast in the US to fill the tabloids and friendly broadsheets with "fond reminiscing of her pal the Queen", saccharine sweet nods (trot out baby to establish connection to HM), and use the tried and trusted tactic of anonymous friends leaking to the media about how the rest of the BRF bullied her. I find it so hard not to roll my eyes  when those stories pop up in my feed - with sources being all these unidentifiable intimate friends of the couple! Can we just say Sunshine Sucks?



The potential for A’s mess to taint lots of people is huge! How can she claim to be a champion of women when her children’s ‘great uncle’ (????) is a sex abuser?  Ooooh, treading very carefully, she needs to make a very public display of supporting the women, much like M Gates had to do.  Remember A has tied himself to the JeffE ‘agreement’ from 2009.  She can’t claim she didn’t know.

Forget the night guard, they need plates, lots of plates.

I agree with Oprah:


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The potential for A’s mess to taint lots of people is huge! How can she claim to be a champion of women when her children’s ‘great uncle’ (????) is a sex abuser?  Ooooh, treading very carefully, she needs to make a very public display of supporting the women, much like M Gates had to do.  Remember A has tied himself to the JeffE ‘agreement’ from 2009.  She can’t claim she didn’t know.
> 
> Forget the night guard, they need plates, lots of plates.
> 
> I agree with Oprah:
> View attachment 5294889


Wasn't it Virginia Giuffre's attorney who is trying to pull Methane into it? Methane has her work cut out for her if the alleged victim is dragging her in, and the alleged abuser is her husband's uncle, and if any yachts are involved.


----------



## CeeJay

Lodpah said:


> As the man he’s become? Dude never grew up. He’s a 7 year old imbecile with the IQ of same stuck in a man’s body. I can just imagine his conversations he has with his low hanging fruit of a wife. Really deep and penetrating conversations . . . yeah right.


I really wonder how many conversations these two actually have???  Meghan likely spends all her time "plotting" her or their next 'scheme' making sure that the nanny(ies) are taking care of the kids.  Meanwhile, I bet HapHazza is playing his video games or internet games .. he must be BORED out of his mind (although if he's taking any drugs - then he might not care).  

Bottom line, I think their "marriage" is just "show" now.  Meghan spawned her 2 'meal tickets'; what else does she need to do other than .. well?? .. find a richer 4th/5th? husband?!?!  Watch out Elon Musk .. he seems stupid enough to get involved with not the best women!


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't it Virginia Giuffre's attorney who is trying to pull Methane into it? Methane has her work cut out for her if the alleged victim is dragging her in, and the alleged abuser is her husband's uncle, and if any yachts are involved.



yes, it is her attorney David Boies who spoke of possibly deposing Charles, or MM.  then he threw in that he thought she would be honest.  He is mostly pimping people.  I am sure he would love to depose Charles, but Charles is not subject to the jurisdiction of US courts.  MM, as a US citizen residing in California, is.  He is no doubt aware of her perjury in connection with her own recent lawsuit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> I still have a hard time liking Camilla, but I was impressed that she has that book club with interesting sounding books.  As an avid reader myself, it is a quality that I always like to find in others.



I always check in with that book club. I really liked when she had her son on there, his videos (he's a food writer) were both entertaining and educational.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Does anyone buy the story that they are moving back to Nott Cott?



 No. That thing has like one bedroom and it's in the Cambridges' backyard (plus, in the UK which gives Raptor herpes).


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> So what is the male equivalent?  Women get horrid labels but do men get a pass??
> 
> we should do as your gran did - make up a name for men….


I always called men like this horndogs.   They would go after anything. Totally indiscriminate.   You wouldn’t want to be seen with men like this.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I always check in with that book club. I really liked when she had her son on there, his videos (he's a food writer) were both entertaining and educational.



oh, I missed that - thank you, I will check it out!!


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> I still have a hard time liking Camilla, but I was impressed that she has that book club with interesting sounding books.  As an avid reader myself, it is a quality that I always like to find in others.
> 
> I do agree that she is playing her cards well on the Princess/Queen issue. I am sure that she felt a lot of the resistance and pressure from others. But rather than railing against it, using the race card (oops, thinking of someone else there  ), shoving herself down peoples’ throats, etc., she stayed above the fray and went about doing her duties - and never complains as per her MIL.  It has served her well and I do admire the way she has gone about it.


As far as I know, she never publicly addressed the criticism about her and just carried on. A good example of redemption through positive actions. I suspect that many have changed their minds about her and perhaps feel more negatively regarding Diana and her behavior.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> As far as I know, she never publicly addressed the criticism about her and just carried on. A good example of redemption through positive actions. I suspect that many have changed their minds about her and perhaps feel more negatively regarding Diana and her behavior.


I think Camilla is a pragmatist. She can lose a lot by putting up a fuss and getting bad press, but she has had bad press and knows what that is like. She knows how to curtsy and has done it all her life. She has seen what happened to Andrew, Harry, Fergie, all ghosted. 

Also, what does she gain by being pushy? She has her man. When Charles is King, she will outrank all the other British royals, regardless of title. Charles will not have her curtsying to the Yorks... Queen or Princess Consort is a moot point


----------



## Jayne1

Luvbolide said:


> I still have a hard time liking Camilla, but I was impressed that she has that book club with interesting sounding books.  As an avid reader myself, it is a quality that I always like to find in others.
> 
> I do agree that she is playing her cards well on the Princess/Queen issue. I am sure that she felt a lot of the resistance and pressure from others. But rather than railing against it, using the race card (oops, thinking of someone else there  ), shoving herself down peoples’ throats, etc., she stayed above the fray and went about doing her duties - and never complains as per her MIL.  It has served her well and I do admire the way she has gone about it.


Camilla's a natural, she was always a natural fit for the role as wife and duchess.  It's just he wasn't allowed to marry her and she knew it and went her own way at the time.

But we can see her doing everything right - standing back, performing her duties, being pleasant and smiling and comfortable around the BRF. She was always suitable for the role (and Charles is so happy.)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> How can H&M promote themselves with the Andy debacle happening in real time?  I agree, this tarnishes the entire BRF.  So, why did she marry into this family?  Didn’t get the choice tiara, didn’t get much jewelry, didn’t get a palace, didn’t get respect, didn’t get ____.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Experts say Prince Andrew's public image will NEVER recover
> 
> 
> Specialists in reputation management told MailOnline that allegations against the Duke of York (pictured with Virginia Giuffre and Ghislaine Maxwell) have tarnished the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this is the wrong time/wrong country to be associated with this kind of scandal


I believe she was almost done with her C-list (or Z-list @CeeJay) actress career, marrying Hazz gave her a big opportunity to interact with A-listers. 

She didn't get the tiara she wanted, but she still got several valuable jewelry pieces (those earrings ), and at one point, she was a candidate for a nice big apartment at Kensington Palace. She could have had a sweet life in the UK.  

However, I wonder if she realized that Fergie got very little after divorcing Andy, and she rushed to bring Hazz's money to the US where laws are different.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not trying to pry (ahem), is there any more info on this 2018 story?  Seems she knew several of these Etonian lads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Resurfaced snap shows Meghan Markle and Eddie Redmayne in Istanbul
> 
> 
> The picture shows Meghan, 37, and Eddie, 36, with London-based photographer Jason Bailey in Istanbul in 2015. They are believed to have been there for the launch of the new Soho House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This article says Meghan was 37 years old in 2015?  
nvm, I see it said published in 2018. Phew, can't keep this all straight!


----------



## Chanbal

So Eugenie is the mole…


----------



## jennlt

needlv said:


> So what is the male equivalent?  Women get horrid labels but do men get a pass??
> 
> we should do as your gran did - make up a name for men….


In the interest of equality, I use bimbo or himbo, depending on which term serves my purpose


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> So Eugenie is the mole…




Ooooh, the jealous Yorks - parents and daughters.  They are their own worse enemy or frenemy.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh, this is not good. Let's hope he is not a stan of "_our queen_", aka "_Thee Duchess_". He is maybe just an equestrian aficionado.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> I believe she was almost done with her C-list (or Z-list @CeeJay) actress career, marrying Hazz gave her a big opportunity to interact with A-listers.
> 
> She didn't get the tiara she wanted, but she still got several valuable jewelry pieces (those earrings ), and at one point, she was a candidate for a nice big apartment at Kensington Palace. She could have had a sweet life in the UK.
> 
> However, I wonder if she realized that Fergie got very little after divorcing Andy, and she rushed to bring Hazz's money to the US where laws are different.




I would imagine that some of Harry's money/assets is/are in some kind of trust? And most of the British Royal Family's properties are not personally owned so I wouldn't think that they could sell anything.  I think there would be some strong legal protections in place which couldn't be overridden regardless of where Harry lives.  Also, he didn't take USA citizenship so that may negate his wife's ambitions to snaffle much if that was an ambition of that person, depending on laws? Mind you, they must be getting through a fair bit of lolly so how much is left?!

I was sad to see Princess Diana's stunning aquamarine ring worn by Harry's wife....that sounds mean, sadly, but jewellery like that should, in my view, be worn by a working royal in the UK which is what Diana was, really, even after her divorce, and should have stayed in the UK. The jewellery is very valuable, personally and financially, and I just don't think that Harry's wife deserves it (or any of Diana's jewellery/watch) after her (and his) appalling behaviour on the Oprah show, and subsequently.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I really wonder how many conversations these two actually have???  Meghan likely spends all her time "plotting" her or their next 'scheme' making sure that the nanny(ies) are taking care of the kids.  Meanwhile, I bet HapHazza is playing his video games or internet games .. he must be BORED out of his mind (although if he's taking any drugs - then he might not care).
> 
> Bottom line, I think their "marriage" is just "show" now.  Meghan spawned her 2 'meal tickets'; what else does she need to do other than .. well?? .. find a richer 4th/5th? husband?!?!  Watch out Elon Musk .. he seems stupid enough to get involved with not the best women!


Admittedly I'm speculating but to me their relationship doesn't seem real.  Nothing about her seems genuine to me.  So yes, I suspect she puts all her energy into plotting and scheming how to become an icon like Diana.  How to retain the level of fame she has and to increase it.
I hope she has peaked and it's all downhill from here.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I think Camilla is a pragmatist. She can lose a lot by putting up a fuss and getting bad press, but she has had bad press and knows what that is like. She knows how to curtsy and has done it all her life. She has seen what happened to Andrew, Harry, Fergie, all ghosted.
> 
> Also, what does she gain by being pushy? She has her man. When Charles is King, she will outrank all the other British royals, regardless of title. Charles will not have her curtsying to the Yorks... Queen or Princess Consort is a moot point



Very well said, and the same is true of  Catherine.   These are women that can’t be hurt by Harry or Meghan.  As these two women rise, the Sussex just sink more.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Admittedly I'm speculating but to me their relationship doesn't seem real.  Nothing about her seems genuine to me.  So yes, I suspect she puts all her energy into plotting and scheming how to become an icon like Diana.  How to retain the level of fame she has and to increase it.
> I hope she has peaked and it's all downhill from here.


Eventually the scheming and plotting will reach a level where her husband and children will feel ignored. They are probably being ignored right now, but the children are too young to know it and Harry is panicked to see it.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Eventually the scheming and plotting will reach a level where her husband and children will feel ignored. They are probably being ignored right now, but the children are too young to know it and Harry is panicked to see it.


yes, the kids are just babies really....Harry probably gets a few crumbs to make him feel important.  He is, after all, here ticket to fame and fortune.


----------



## Chanbal

MiniMabel said:


> I would imagine that some of Harry's money/assets is/are in some kind of trust? And most of the British Royal Family's properties are not personally owned so I wouldn't think that they could sell anything.  I think there would be some strong legal protections in place which couldn't be overridden regardless of where Harry lives.  Also, he didn't take USA citizenship so that may negate his wife's ambitions to snaffle much if that was an ambition of that person, depending on laws? Mind you, they must be getting through a fair bit of lolly so how much is left?!
> 
> I was sad to see Princess Diana's stunning aquamarine ring worn by Harry's wife....that sounds mean, sadly, but jewellery like that should, in my view, be worn by a working royal in the UK which is what Diana was, really, even after her divorce, and should have stayed in the UK. The jewellery is very valuable, personally and financially, and I just don't think that Harry's wife deserves it (or any of Diana's jewellery/watch) after her (and his) appalling behaviour on the Oprah show, and subsequently.


Yeah, most of Hazz's money/assets should be relatively controlled under the BRF, but it looks like the millions of pounds left to by his mother (and great grandmother?) have been available to him here in the US. From what I read, we are talking about $40M + Diana's jewelry, a lot more than what Fergie got…


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No. That thing has like one bedroom and it's in the Cambridges' backyard (plus, in the UK which gives Raptor herpes).


Now I'll be thinking of her as "Herpes Meg"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I can imagine the NottCott story being true.  It would be a not so subtle way of saying, “You can have this PRIVELEGE because you are still family.  It’s not a comfortable dwelling for a family of 4, but if you need a place to stay, you can stay there.”  Also, it means they are in a separate dwelling and can’t interfere/spy on anything going on in the other establishments.  And, it seems like a bit of a fish bowl, so it would be hard for them to do something like surreptitiously invite a media mogul over for tea in the garden.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They should not go. IMO they will look even more inauthentic than they already do.  It will not help their brand.  [And why do  Nflix/Oprah/Gayle/etc. need  to be connected to this family?]  H&M can honor QE in the privacy of their own home, wherever that may be.  The BRF needs to be careful how they celebrate.

Times are tough, really tough.  Everything should be toned down, simple and elegant.
Jewels, lavish dinners, Harkles, tiaras, expensive gowns


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should not go. IMO they will look even more inauthentic than they already do.  It will not help their brand.  [And why do  Nflix/Oprah/Gayle/etc. need  to be connected to this family?]  H&M can honor QE in the privacy of their own home, wherever that may be.  The BRF needs to be careful how they celebrate.
> 
> Times are tough, really tough.  Everything should be toned down, simple and elegant.
> Jewels, lavish dinners, Harkles, tiaras, expensive gowns



  But, but, but, the jewels are the best part…

damn you, Andrew…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Yeah, most of Hazz's money/assets should be relatively controlled under the BRF, but it looks like the millions of pounds left to by his mother (and great grandmother?) have been available to him here in the US. From what I read, we are talking about $40M + Diana's jewelry, a lot more than what Fergie got…


Most people could lead a life beyond their wildest dreams with that amount, but it is not nearly enough to keep MM in the manner to which she thinks she is entitled - multiple mansions, private jet, legions of people at her beck and call. All that doesn't come cheaply.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> So Eugenie is the mole…



The problem I have with this is that the sisters are very close and I can't see one of them marrying a man that that doesn't like the other sister.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Most people could lead a life beyond their wildest dreams with that amount, but it is not nearly enough to keep MM in the manner to which she thinks she is entitled - multiple mansions, private jet, *legions of people at her beck and call.* All that doesn't come cheaply.


Yes, she would need legions of people at her beck and call so she could bully them at her own discretion then fire them when they complain.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> The problem I have with this is that the sisters are very close and I can't see one of them marrying a man that that doesn't like the other sister.


ITA. It's gossip and people want to believe the worst of Beatrice and Eugenie because of their parents as if one can choose one's parents and yet, they've been ridiculed and mocked since childhood.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> The problem I have with this is that the sisters are very close and I can't see one of them marrying a man that that doesn't like the other sister.


I see your point, but families have their issues. The sisters might not be as close as we think they are. Another possibility is that they are indeed close, but decided to play in both teams, Eugenie on "Dear M" and Beatrice on QE/Will, so they have all fronts covered.

Do you remember Eugenie's statement on the 40 birthday? "_To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce._" It's a rather awkward statement after the infamous interview.









						Princess Eugenie shares 40th birthday message to 'dear Meghan'
					

Taking to her Instagram Stories, Eugenie, 31, wrote: 'To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe it’s the Clooney connection.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s possible E & B had a falling-out, especially since Bea stole the *Best E.V.E.R.* for weddings by wearing one of QE’s dresses.  She did receive lots of well-deserved admiration for that.  She,  who has been ridiculed her entire life for her looks, showed everyone her true beauty. She got *the* dress, *the *tiara, *the *chapel*, *and a much cuter guy than deadbeat Dave who stood her up.

I’m guessing windows in Monteshito have started breaking.


----------



## Chanbal

She was so impolite here…


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> I think Camilla is a pragmatist. She can lose a lot by putting up a fuss and getting bad press, but *she has had bad press and knows what that is like.* She knows how to curtsy and has done it all her life. She has seen what happened to Andrew, Harry, Fergie, all ghosted.
> 
> Also, what does she gain by being pushy? She has her man. When Charles is King, she will outrank all the other British royals, regardless of title. Charles will not have her curtsying to the Yorks... Queen or Princess Consort is a moot point





Jayne1 said:


> Camilla's a natural, she was always a natural fit for the role as wife and duchess.  It's just *he wasn't allowed to marry her* and she knew it and went her own way at the time.
> 
> But *we can see her doing everything right* - standing back, performing her duties, *being pleasant* and smiling and comfortable around the BRF. She was always suitable for the role (and Charles is so happy.)



Agreed. Diana was an extremely sympathetic figure, Charles was seen as an awkward guy. People responded to Diana's warmth and genuine caring for other people, Charles didn't have a great personality IMO that attracted public admiration.  And then for Diana to die in a car crash at a young age? Instant Sainthood status. As a result, after Diana, any woman Charles would have a relationship with was certainly going to get bludgeoned by the press and public. And Camilla got hammered. HARD. For quite a while. Obviously, having been involved with Charles when he was married didn't help. She played the looooooooooong game and has come out on top. She does make Charles happy. I think she turned him into a much more likable person. He's at ease with her. She does stand back and performs the duties, yet she is an extremely strong person, not some helpless airhead wimp. Hearing Meghan complain after what Camilla went through? And Kate for that matter? Kate got hammered as well.  Meghan brought on 99% of her criticisms herself with stupid statements and actions. Considering the antics Ellen got her to do--munching chips like a squirrel, etc, I don't think there's any coming back from that. She looked absolutely crazy. Even that was bad acting, yet sadly, she looked like she was having fun doing all that stuff. She enjoyed looking like an idiot. She's happiest when looking like an idiot. She must be in bliss.


----------



## Gimmethebag

I don’t know why we have to not like Camilla if we also liked Diana. Charles never should have married Diana and what she went through was legit bananas. You can feel for her and admire her style and philanthropy… 

But Camilla was not some short term fling. Charles has been pretty dedicated to her for decades now. She comes across as someone who is funny, quick, and hard working. She supports domestic abuse survivors and she always came across like she is pretty good to Charles’ boys in addition to her own kids.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I see your point, but families have their issues. The sisters might not be as close as we think they are. Another possibility is that they are indeed close, but decided to play in both teams, Eugenie on "Dear M" and Beatrice on QE/Will, so they have all fronts covered.
> 
> Do you remember Eugenie's statement on the 40 birthday? "_To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce._" It's a rather awkward statement after the infamous interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie shares 40th birthday message to 'dear Meghan'
> 
> 
> Taking to her Instagram Stories, Eugenie, 31, wrote: 'To celebrate dear Meghan's 40th birthday I'm contributing 40 minutes of mentorship to support women reentering the workforce.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It might be a personal connection that makes the difference. The narc who made my life miserable - even after he had caused havoc and horror for 5 years, he still had people who were friends with him. Three main reasons: his rotten behaviour did not impact them so they saw no reason not to be friends with him, he was buttering up certain people so they never saw the dark side, and lastly, some people just felt that someone who appeared so friendly and helpful deserved the benefit of the doubt and a chance at redemption (many many many chances).

There were stories that Methane ran in the same circles as Eugenie. So she might have treated Eugenie right, especially if it's true that Harry was close to Fergie and the 2 girls. Wasn't it Fergie who gave her a crash course in curtseying? I also think it's a matter of survival. For Eugenie, it's safer for her to treat Methane as a friend rather than invite the ire of a malcontent who thinks nothing of telling lies and spreading rumours to backstab indiscriminately.


----------



## needlv

MiniMabel said:


> I would imagine that some of Harry's money/assets is/are in some kind of trust? And most of the British Royal Family's properties are not personally owned so I wouldn't think that they could sell anything.  I think there would be some strong legal protections in place which couldn't be overridden regardless of where Harry lives.  Also, he didn't take USA citizenship so that may negate his wife's ambitions to snaffle much if that was an ambition of that person, depending on laws? Mind you, they must be getting through a fair bit of lolly so how much is left?!
> 
> I was sad to see Princess Diana's stunning aquamarine ring worn by Harry's wife....that sounds mean, sadly, but jewellery like that should, in my view, be worn by a working royal in the UK which is what Diana was, really, even after her divorce, and should have stayed in the UK. The jewellery is very valuable, personally and financially, and I just don't think that Harry's wife deserves it (or any of Diana's jewellery/watch) after her (and his) appalling behaviour on the Oprah show, and subsequently.



I don’t think MM has any of Dianas jewellery other than in her engagement ring.  Pics of the aquamarine, when up close, show its a copy.  MM bought herself her own Cartier tank watch and labelled it “to MM from MM” - it was mistakenly thought to be Diana’s in various publications.  I believe Diana’s sisters are the executors of her estate and I think the jewellery is under lock and key.

Even items Catherine wears that are attributed to Diana are really belonging to the Queen/crown.

it’s all smoke and mirrors with those two grifters….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Raptor made it into US history books. WTF. And also, dear author, she never got British citizenship. Please don't let sugars write textbooks.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Raptor made it into US history books. WTF. And also, dear author, she never got British citizenship. Please don't let sugars write textbooks.



A stark and scary example of ”facts” being manipulated to fit a narrative.  A gossip rag is one thing, but a school textbook??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> A stark and scary example of ”facts” being manipulated to fit a narrative.  A gossip rag is one thing, but a school textbook??



Right?


----------



## charlottawill

1LV said:


> A stark and scary example of ”facts” being manipulated to fit a narrative.  A gossip rag is one thing, but a school textbook??


That is alarming and absolutely disgraceful. I can just imagine what other misinformation is making its way into textbooks.


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> That is alarming and absolutely disgraceful. I can just imagine what other misinformation is making its way into textbooks.


Exactly.  Sure makes one stop and wonder.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yeah, most of Hazz's money/assets should be relatively controlled under the BRF, but it looks like the millions of pounds left to by his mother (and great grandmother?) have been available to him here in the US. From what I read, we are talking about $40M + Diana's jewelry, a lot more than what Fergie got…


The way they live, $40 million may not last that long.  Unless they invest a good portion of it wisely.  "Wise" doesn't seem like a term that would apply to them but who knows?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla's a natural, she was always a natural fit for the role as wife and duchess.  *It's just he wasn't allowed to marry her* and she knew it and went her own way at the time.
> 
> But we can see her doing everything right - standing back, performing her duties, being pleasant and smiling and comfortable around the BRF. She was always suitable for the role (and Charles is so happy.)


From what I've read, it was Camilla who refused to marry Charles because at that point in her life, she felt she couldn't deal with the pomp and circumstance of becoming a royal.


----------



## rose60610

1LV said:


> A stark and scary example of ”facts” being manipulated to fit a narrative.  A gossip rag is one thing, but a school textbook??



And let's not forget how angry parents at school board meetings are characterized when they legitimately complain about a curriculum.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> That is alarming and absolutely disgraceful. I can just imagine what other misinformation is making its way into textbooks.


Not shocking to me any more, at least not in the US.  Considering all the nonsense going on, history is being written in whoever's "truth" is paying for the publications!  When you can't trust major "news" publications like the NYT, what can be trusted?  After hearing all the stories my son came home telling me was being taught in his high school, for the first time in my life, I'm seriously reconsidering sending my daughter to college.  They aren't being taught how to think critically on their own, but rather being told what to think.  I'm trying to talk her into going to university in Europe!  I don't need to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for her to be brain washed into the current US wokedom way of thinking.


----------



## lanasyogamama

From what my daughter tells me about her history class, it’s pretty bleak.  She was telling me the other day that they learned how people walking past the first class seats on the airplane is class distinction! I told her if you’re in a position to fly anywhere, you’re not that badly off. Never mind that there are so many other things they should be learning!


----------



## rose60610

Our friends sent their daughter to Northwestern, paid cash for the whole thing, no loans. They scrimped and scraped for years to do so.  Her freshman year there, all students were sent a letter from the school stating what was and wasn't appropriate for Halloween costumes. We thought, 'these are young adults, at an expensive and prestigious university, and they're being told how to dress for Halloween'? WTF! 

These same friends said they couldn't wait to be asked to make donations to the school. They had their choice responses all laid out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Andrew was stripped of his military titles, patronages and HRH and the sugars are all over Twitter demanding Harry gets his back because "they shouldn't have been removed in the first place".

I'm currently calling all my former employers demanding to get my work titles and benefits back because why not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Andrew was stripped of his military titles, patronages and HRH and the sugars are all over Twitter demanding Harry gets his back because "they shouldn't have been removed in the first place".
> 
> I'm currently calling all my former employers demanding to get my work titles and benefits back because why not.



Imo They need to be careful pushing this narrative. Rumor is MM met PA on a yacht. This is why the Eug story randomly appeared recently. Apparently there are more connections to be made.  Seems the ship continues to sink.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo PA’s HRH style does not really solve the issue. PA isn’t being ‘stripped’, he is simply not going to use the *style* HRH. H&M have proven the Duke and Duchess titles carry as much weight as the HRH style, especially to those who know very little about monarchy. QE needs to ‘persuade’ all of them to renounce their LoS and remove the Duke titles. Sarah continues to publish childrens(!!!!) books with her Duchess title as does MM. So, this HRH style is not that huge of a loss. Renouncing the LoS would be.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Andrew was stripped of his military titles, patronages and HRH and the sugars are all over Twitter demanding Harry gets his back because "they shouldn't have been removed in the first place".
> 
> I'm currently calling all my former employers demanding to get my work titles and benefits back because why not.



 Harry is the one who decided to step down. And the sugars want to tell TQ how to run her business?  . Maybe Andrew can join Harry and Meghan here to help out with their Netflix shows and get his own hundred million for doing so. This country is getting to be that screwed up so why not? Ooooh! Just thought of something: Andrew, Meghan and Harry can produce a doc on what it's like to be part of the BRF and end up in disgrace. The final frame can be them hanging out with rescue chickens and Meghan eating chips like a squirrel. From riches and respect to rags and repulsion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Harry is the one who decided to step down. And the sugars want to tell TQ how to run her business?  . Maybe Andrew can join Harry and Meghan here to help out with their Netflix shows and get his own hundred million for doing so. This country is getting to be that screwed up so why not? Ooooh! Just thought of something: Andrew, Meghan and Harry can produce a doc on what it's like to be part of the BRF and end up in disgrace. The final frame can be them hanging out with rescue chickens and Meghan eating chips like a squirrel. From riches and respect to rags and repulsion.



Alternative ending — they read books to children


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> From what I've read, it was Camilla who refused to marry Charles because at that point in her life, she felt she couldn't deal with the pomp and circumstance of becoming a royal.


From what I read, she was not a virgin, among other things, and was not suitable. Therefore Charles had to find a young girl with no experience...

Was it only that she would not marry him or that the family did not want her to marry him?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> From what I read, she was not a virgin, among other things, and was not suitable. Therefore Charles had to find a young girl with no experience...
> 
> Was it only that she would not marry him or that the family did not want her to marry him?



Probably both. The BRF didn't think her suitable, but Lady C - who ran in the same circles - claims Camilla was truly in love with her first husband at that time and wanted to marry him.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Probably both. The BRF didn't think her suitable, but Lady C - who ran in the same circles - claims Camilla was truly in love with her first husband at that time and wanted to marry him.


Pragmatic? Camilla knew she had no future with Charles and found a hot guy could marry? She accepted reality and had a family. 

Well whatever, they seem so happy now.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Raptor made it into US history books. WTF. And also, dear author, she never got British citizenship. Please don't let sugars write textbooks.




Wow, if you can't even get facts right.  what's more, it would be a British citizen or UK National. 

How stupid are these people that they don't know how to use a mainstream search-engine? (Rhetorical question)


----------



## marietouchet

Andrew has lost his appointments and HRH, same as H
H and M has whined for a long time that they were treated worse than A, that is a non issue now 
they both still have the duchies, which could be removed if A does not settle and matter goes to ugly trial OR if H’s book is super nasty


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Andrew has lost his appointments and HRH, same as H
> H and M has whined for a long time that they were treated worse than A, that is a non issue now
> they both still have the duchies, which could be removed if A does not settle and matter goes to ugly trial OR if H’s book is super nasty



Both of them can still use the Duke title and maintain their place in the LoS. A can still live at Windsor, drive luxury cars, keep his security.  Other than the military patronages, what else did they lose?  A stopped using HRH last year.  I feel like I am missing something.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Andrew has lost his appointments and HRH, same as H
> H and M has whined for a long time that they were treated worse than A, that is a non issue now
> they both still have the duchies, which could be removed if A does not settle and matter goes to ugly trial OR if H’s book is super nasty



If I'm not mistaken, Andrew lost his HRH but H hasn't lost it, he just can't use it


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> If I'm not mistaken, Andrew lost his HRH but H hasn't lost it, he just can't use it



*Duke of York will also be banned from using the styling 'HRH' in any capacity, according to a royal source*

Does being _banned_ _from using_ mean the HRH has been taken away? Nevertheless, both can use their Duke title. That seems to be where the $$$$ is.

ETA: If I am reading these articles correctly, today he ‘returned’ his military patronages. Last year, he stopped using the HRH.  IMO they need to go further - _encourage_ him and his daughters to renounce LoS, samesie for Hazzie.









						Veterans demand Queen strips Andrew of his military honours
					

Buckingham Palace said: 'With The Queen's approval and agreement, The Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to The Queen.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Duke of York will also be banned from using the styling 'HRH' in any capacity, according to a royal source*
> 
> Does being _banned_ _from using_ mean the HRH has been taken away? Nevertheless, both can use their Duke title. That seems to be where the $$$$ is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Veterans demand Queen strips Andrew of his military honours
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace said: 'With The Queen's approval and agreement, The Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to The Queen.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Andrew's lost the HRH forever. No bowing to him anymore (literally). Handshake only (if you absolutely had to  )

Harry can't use HRH (on temp basis) whilst he (and she) are on a mission to become billionaires/rule the world. Just think of their HRH's as white typeface on white paper. They're there but invisible. No bowing, no curtsies.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Wow, if you can't even get facts right.  what's more, it would be a British citizen or UK National.
> 
> How stupid are these people that they don't know how to use a mainstream search-engine? (Rhetorical question)


And school districts are spending millions of taxpayer dollars on crap like this.


----------



## Luvbolide

Maggie Muggins said:


> From what I've read, it was Camilla who refused to marry Charles because at that point in her life, she felt she couldn't deal with the pomp and circumstance of becoming a royal.



So she didn’t want to deal with marrying him but was just fine openly carrying on an affair with him when he was married to (a painfully innocent 19 year old) someone else?  Hmmmm…


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> Andrew's lost the HRH forever. No bowing to him anymore (literally). Handshake only (if you absolutely had to  )
> 
> Harry can't use HRH (on temp basis) whilst he (and she) are on a mission to become billionaires/rule the world. Just think of their HRH's as white typeface on white paper. They're there but invisible. No bowing, no curtsies.



Oooohhhh - Andrew is not going to like that no bowing part!!  Funny how the people who least deserve the privileges/trappings of royalty are the ones who love them the most.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> So she didn’t want to deal with marrying him but was just fine openly carrying on an affair with him when he was married to (a painfully innocent 19 year old) someone else?  Hmmmm…


I've heard various versions. He was going into the navy and she didn't want to wait around, then she met and fell in love with Parker-Bowles and was happy with him for some time. Depending whose story you want to believe, being in the same social circle they always remained friends, but their affair didn't resume until his marriage hit the rocks. In any event, she was always considered unacceptable to be his bride because of her "past".


----------



## lanasyogamama

How long until we hear how they’ve been working “QUIETLY BEHIND THE SCENES”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm currently calling all my former employers demanding to get my work titles and benefits back because why not.


While brushing my teeth last night, I was musing on Hazard's encouraging people to quit jobs they didn't like. Maybe he thinks in TW's country, unemployment benefits are forever? And that's why he is so bitter that the Bank of Dad isn't paying his way from cradle to grave? 

One of my narcs was slacking off to the point that we had to issue fair warning to him. His reply: I have worked for this company for 20 years. The company should take care of me for the next 20 years. IOW, he intended to coast along from his mid-40s till retirement because the company "owed" him. I can imagine Hazard thinking in that way


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I've heard various versions. He was going into the navy and she didn't want to wait around, then she met and fell in love with Parker-Bowles and was happy with him for some time. *Depending whose story you want to believe, being in the same social circle they always remained friends, but their affair didn't resume until his marriage hit the rocks.* In any event, she was always considered unacceptable to be his bride because of her "past".


I've heard this as well while some other versions add that when the marriage started to break down, Diana was first to have an affair with one of her bodyguards even before Charles resumed his relationship with Camilla. If Diana was as domineering and manipulative as Lady C indicated, maybe Charles took time-outs to avoid her tantrums, but "Recollections may vary" could apply here as well.


----------



## Chanbal

Yep!


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've heard this as well while some other versions add that when the marriage started to break down, Diana was first to have an affair with one of her bodyguards even before Charles resumed his relationship with Camilla. If Diana was as domineering and manipulative as Lady C indicated, maybe Charles took time-outs to avoid her tantrums, but "Recollections may vary" could apply here as well.


 As they say, there are two sides to every story but the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So true.

ETA: that was in reaction to Chanbal/Piers.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Yep!



"The Sussex clowns"...Piers, tell us how you really feel


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So true.
> 
> ETA: that was in reaction to Chanbal/Piers.


And because of COVID, I don't think she even has the comfort of being able to spend time with the relatives that she does like, especially the grandchildren.


----------



## Chanbal

Why are the Harkles still listed on the monarchy website? This question is still without an answer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why are the Harkles still listed on the monarchy website? This question is still without an answer.




I had no idea.  
Of course, they should be removed from the website.  The sooner they do it, the better.


----------



## Chanbal

Her impoliteness continues…


----------



## Sophisticatted

Is the smell of fear in the air in Montecito?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I had no idea.
> Of course, they should be removed from the website.  The sooner they do it, the better.


Yeah, I don't know what the Firm is waiting for to remove them from the website. This is the perfect time to implement the right changes in the monarchy imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Duke of York will also be banned from using the styling 'HRH' in any capacity, according to a royal source*
> 
> Does being _banned_ _from using_ mean the HRH has been taken away? Nevertheless, both can use their Duke title. That seems to be where the $$$$ is.
> 
> ETA: If I am reading these articles correctly, today he ‘returned’ his military patronages. Last year, he stopped using the HRH.  IMO they need to go further - _encourage_ him and* his daughters to renounce LoS*, samesie for Hazzie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Veterans demand Queen strips Andrew of his military honours
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace said: 'With The Queen's approval and agreement, The Duke of York's military affiliations and Royal patronages have been returned to The Queen.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Do you mean, "The Sins of the Fathers Visited Upon the Children?" I'm not religious, but I believe in justice and don't understand why Andrew's children should be punished for his mistakes.


----------



## bellecate

Sophisticatted said:


> Is the smell of fear in the air in Montecito?


I think so. I wonder if they are finally realizing they need that Royal connection and are quietly trying ways to strengthen that connection. While H's first wife may think it's beneath her to need that it may have pinged in some deep dark recess of her brain that they must try it.


----------



## Katel

1LV said:


> A stark and scary example of ”facts” being manipulated to fit a narrative.  A gossip rag is one thing, but a school textbook??





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right?





charlottawill said:


> That is alarming and absolutely disgraceful. I can just imagine what other misinformation is making its way into textbooks.





1LV said:


> Exactly.  Sure makes one stop and wonder.





purseinsanity said:


> Not shocking to me any more, at least not in the US.  Considering all the nonsense going on, history is being written in whoever's "truth" is paying for the publications!  When you can't trust major "news" publications like the NYT, what can be trusted?  After hearing all the stories my son came home telling me was being taught in his high school, for the first time in my life, I'm seriously reconsidering sending my daughter to college.  They aren't being taught how to think critically on their own, but rather being told what to think.  I'm trying to talk her into going to university in Europe!  I don't need to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for her to be brain washed into the current US wokedom way of thinking.





lanasyogamama said:


> From what my daughter tells me about her history class, it’s pretty bleak.  She was telling me the other day that they learned how people walking past the first class seats on the airplane is class distinction! I told her if you’re in a position to fly anywhere, you’re not that badly off. Never mind that there are so many other things they should be learning!
Click to expand...


PRECISELY


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Sophisticatted said:


> Is the smell of fear in the air in Montecito?


It's probably why they are so quiet.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It's probably why they are so quiet.


Giuffre's lawyer wants to depose MM? MM met PA on a yacht? The pieces are starting to fall into place.


----------



## Chanbal

Andrew's circle! Would he be referring to the infamous yacht trips?   


_Speaking exclusively to The Sun, Meghan’s dad Thomas said: “Quite honestly, I feel that if Meghan knows anything about this, she should speak to law enforcement in the States.

“*I know she has had some dealings with Andrew, of course she has, and if she has been to any events or venues he has, she needs to speak out.*

“She has no right to refuse to do so, really.

“I understand that Andrew’s reputation is damaging to the royal family.

“*If she knows anything and has been involved in Andrew’s circle in any way, shape or form, it’s her duty to speak about it.*

“She’s not exempt from this because she’s a Duchess.

“In fact by leaving the UK and taking her prince with her she gave up the right to be a Duchess.”_









						Meg's dad tells her to alert cops if she knows anything about Andrew 'rape'
					

MEGHAN Markle’s dad has urged her to speak to US law enforcement if she “knows anything” about Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s claim she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew. Thomas Markle Sr, 77, …




					thesun.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Does he know something?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Do you mean, "The Sins of the Fathers Visited Upon the Children?" I'm not religious, but I believe in justice and don't understand why Andrew's children should be punished for his mistakes.



Agree, the children should not be punished necessarily for the father‘s behavior. In reality, they are so far down the line, it won’t matter, especially when the Cambridge kids have children. My thinking is these titles should be reserved for working royals. The Sussex and York’s need to step out of the LoS. _They are not working royals._ Anne and Edward are. Let them move up.

Bea is married to an Italian count, so she will carry that title. Bea and Eug are not working royals.  Sarah,  absolutely needs to lose the title. With her books, she makes money off of it.  Should Louis take the title, it would add confusion for his wife.  Just my 2 cents, subject to change.









						Succession
					

The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.




					www.royal.uk


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Does he know something?


If he is referring to a pre-duchess time, he might.


----------



## Chanbal

One more job offer for Hazz


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> One more job offer for Hazz



Too funny! Give that person a raise.


----------



## Luvbolide

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've heard this as well while some other versions add that when the marriage started to break down, Diana was first to have an affair with one of her bodyguards even before Charles resumed his relationship with Camilla. If Diana was as domineering and manipulative as Lady C indicated, maybe Charles took time-outs to avoid her tantrums, but "Recollections may vary" could apply here as well.



In my experience, recollections tend to vary widely, particularly when it involves matters of the heart!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Her impoliteness continues…




Maybe I am giving her too much credit, but I can’t help but think that MM’s chronic refusal to observe basic protocol about who walks with, before and after whom is just that - refusal rather than being nervous, forgetful or anything else.  From minute one she has been running her mouth about bringing fresh air to the stale old institution.  Of course, her actions were rude and inappropriate and reflected poorly on her, not on the institution.  But that’s our MM!!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> If he is referring to a pre-duchess time, he might.


Do we think he was paid for this?  It’s actually a nonspecific comment. He may be saying it just to tweak.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> Maybe I am giving her too much credit, but I can’t help but think that MM’s chronic refusal to observe basic protocol about who walks with, before and after whom is just that - refusal rather than being nervous, forgetful or anything else.  From minute one she has been running her mouth about bringing fresh air to the stale old institution.  Of course, her actions were rude and inappropriate and reflected poorly on her, not on the institution.  But that’s our MM!!


She was pressing her luck and stomping over the line to see how much she could get away with. And I do think that with all that bellowing about how she was a "breath of fresh air" and how the press at first made much of her USPs, she thought she could do no wrong. After all, even during the dating phase, she had Hazard convinced that she was a victim of life, so there was guaranteed support from the dimwit no matter what she did wrong.


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Maybe I am giving her too much credit, but I can’t help but think that MM’s chronic refusal to observe basic protocol about who walks with, before and after whom is just that - refusal rather than being nervous, forgetful or anything else.  From minute one she has been running her mouth about bringing fresh air to the stale old institution.  Of course, her actions were rude and inappropriate and reflected poorly on her, not on the institution.  But that’s our MM!!


Just rude and pushy thinking she is more important


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> Just rude and pushy thinking she is more important



Yep!  And so totally in keeping with her assessment of her own fabulosity.


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Yep!  And so totally in keeping with her assessment of her own fabulosity.


She reminds me of my SIL who thinks that if she can talk over you in a conversation, you won’t realize that she doesn’t know what she is talking about.   She lectures me on Hermes and Chanel  and she owns neither. Meghan barges into a room and pushes herself on you so you will think she is important even though she is not. That’s why she always pushed infront of Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## periogirl28

gracekelly said:


> She reminds me of my SIL who thinks that if she can talk over you in a conversation, you won’t realize that she doesn’t know what she is talking about.*   She lectures me on Hermes and Chanel  and she owns neither. *Meghan barges into a room and pushes herself on you so you will think she is important even though she is not. That’s why she always pushed infront of Harry.



OMG seriously?


----------



## gracekelly

periogirl28 said:


> OMG seriously?


Yep. Ok, she has one Hermes scarf lol!  She is always asking me how much I own of each brand and I won’t tell her. Drives her nuts haha!


----------



## Hermes Zen

The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s are eerily quiet to me. Rumor of maybe the Monteshito is up for sale. H&M are still on the royal website. Maybe a deal to go back to become royals again are in the works. No more Netflix, Spotify etc. Cause nothing appears to be working, who knows. C pays back all up front $$$$$$$$$’s given to H&M to get them out of any potential lawsuits. If it’s just H going back, I can see selling the mansion to buy another property for M. Take the children back to the UK (don’t we wish). C pays off M SUBSTANTIALLY. The Q be happy to have H and the great grandchildren in the UK. H will be back helping as a working royal again with all his military titles. H got two children out of this marriage, he’s happy. Queen happy, H happy and M happy.  Plus, C and W&K happy.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s are eerily quiet to me. Rumor of maybe the Monteshito is up for sale. H&M are still on the royal website. Maybe a deal to go back to become royals again are in the works. No more Netflix, Spotify etc. Cause nothing appears to be working, who knows. C pays back all up front $$$$$$$$$’s given to H&M to get them out of any potential lawsuits. If it’s just H going back, I can see selling the mansion to buy another property for M. Take the children back to the UK (don’t we wish). C pays off M SUBSTANTIALLY. The Q be happy to have H and the great grandchildren in the UK. H will be back helping as a working royal again with all his military titles. H got two children out of this marriage, he’s happy. Queen happy, H happy and M happy.  Plus, C and W&K happy.


H would still be untrustworthy. All he would need is another social climber/jungle pisser to come along and he'd be head over heels again. I don't think he has the mental ability to be adulting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thinking is these titles should be reserved for working royals.



This is completely not how it works, though, and it does make sense it doesn't work this way as a safety net.



> Bea is married to an Italian count, so she will carry that title.



No she won't, at least not inside the UK.



> Should Louis take the title, it would add confusion for his wife.



Louis Cambrige? Where does that come from, besides the fact that is like 30 years in the future as the gifting of royal dukedoms is usually tied to a wedding?


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> H would still be untrustworthy. All he would need is another social climber/jungle pisser to come along and he'd be head over heels again. I don't think he has the mental ability to be adulting.


I know I wouldn't but you don't think he learned his lesson?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German media is running with the story that Meghan gave a speech at her wedding (apparently unusual?) and while doing so made digs towards the BRF. At her freaking wedding. As per Omid Scobie. Have we heard about this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I know I wouldn't but you don't think he learned his lesson?



No, but I also don't think there's a 2nd Raptor in the whole wide world. I've never seen someone as ruthless.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> I know I wouldn't but you don't think he learned his lesson?


I get the feeling from his complicity that the lessons he learnt are not the service and duty types, but more of the self-enrichment methods type. And if he has been mentally conditioned to be aggrieved at his status in life, he is not going to be content again. He will always be a powder keg.

I also don't think Methane will take a one-time pay-off. If she lets Hazard go, she is going to want to milk this for as long as she can, which means hanging on to her title, alimony and joint custody for her meal tickets. She will consider them her right to have because she was made to "suffer" for two years. But I doubt Hazard wants to leave her. He thinks she saved him. And I'm certain she has been reinforcing that message of salvation every day. People like us who point out her lies are just fodder for her to impress on him how victimized she is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German media is running with the story that Meghan gave a speech at her wedding (apparently unusual?) and while doing so made digs towards the BRF. At her freaking wedding. As per Omid Scobie. Have we heard about this?



But also, if this came from Omid - who wasn't invited, was he? - they must have given that info to him. So they were once again PROUD of being disruptive. Ew.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Does he know something?


I doubt it, more likely just being his usual pot stirring self.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is completely not how it works, though, and it does make sense it doesn't work this way as a safety net.
> 
> 
> 
> No she won't, at least not inside the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> Louis Cambrige? Where does that come from, besides the fact that is like 30 years in the future as the gifting of royal dukedoms is usually tied to a wedding?


Second son. Andrew is and the Queens father was Duke of York prior to his brother abdicating. I think they should stop that protocol /tradition and find Louis another title on marriage.


----------



## Luvbolide

Heee’s baaaack!  Word from Omid this morning that Ginge will be discussing his “personal stories and challenges” next month in some virtual seminar put on by Butter Cup or whatever that stupid start up of his is called.  Sounds like a recipe for disaster - and an opportunity to float some trial balloons for his upcoming “memoir”.  Maybe he wants to outshine Uncle Andy and see if he can get even more attention than Andrew is these days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Second son. Andrew is and the Queens father was Duke of York prior to his brother abdicating. I think they should stop that protocol /tradition and find Louis another title on marriage.



I'm not sure that's a set tradition, though, because the title has to be available. As in, had Andrew had a son the title would not go to any son other than his, and he might still be alive on Louis' wedding day as well. Plus this is morbid, but if the title IS available, chances are Fergie's will be vacant as well especially as her parents didn't live to nearly 100.

But yes, I sure hope they can find the poor kid a title that didn't make headlines for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> Heee’s baaaack!  Word from Omid this morning that Ginge will be discussing his “personal stories and challenges” next month in some virtual seminar put on by Butter Cup or whatever that stupid start up of his is called.  Sounds like a recipe for disaster - and an opportunity to float some trial balloons for his upcoming “memoir”.  Maybe he wants to outshine Uncle Andy and see if he can get even more attention than Andrew is these days.



Will he be talking about his difficulties to find his backbone and other, more delicate body parts? If not I'm not interested.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, but I also don't think there's a 2nd Raptor in the whole wide world. I've never seen someone as ruthless.


You haven’t met my SIL then.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bellecate said:


> You haven’t met my SIL then.


 Oh dear - poor you - I have one too


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Will he be talking about his difficulties to find his backbone and other, more delicate body parts? If not I'm not interested.



i wondered if he might be talking about the challenge of getting Netflix and Spotify to pay him without providing any content. Butter Cup is much easier to deal with - he just has to turn up and start babbling.  No good material?  No problem!  Recruit the Princess Perennial Victim and make some stuff up.  Then declare victory, et voila!


----------



## jennlt

Luvbolide said:


> *From minute one she has been running her mouth about bringing fresh air to the stale old institution.*



I don't know about fresh air but she certainly is full of hot air   



*Full of hot air - Idioms by The Free Dictionary*
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com › full+of+hot+air

Full of lies, exaggerations, or nonsense.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> Heee’s baaaack!  Word from Omid this morning that Ginge will be discussing his “personal stories and challenges” next month in some virtual seminar put on by Butter Cup or whatever that stupid start up of his is called.  Sounds like a recipe for disaster - and an opportunity to float some trial balloons for his upcoming “memoir”.  Maybe he wants to outshine Uncle Andy and see if he can get even more attention than Andrew is these days.


I can't decide if I should cut Caveman a wee bit of slack for trying his best to bring home some bread and butter, since his overlord had no luck bringing home the bacon - she only earned one pound from her latest court case and still hasn't found any big brand which wants her to be their "face".


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Will he be talking about his difficulties to find his backbone and other, more delicate body parts? If not I'm not interested.


Like a ventriloquist dummy, he’ll be talking about whatever SHE tells him to talk about.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Andrew's lost the HRH forever. No bowing to him anymore (literally). Handshake only (if you absolutely had to  )
> 
> Harry can't use HRH (on temp basis) whilst he (and she) are on a mission to become billionaires/rule the world. Just think of their HRH's as white typeface on white paper. They're there but invisible. No bowing, no curtsies.


Key difference, A is in the UK, where people do bows/curtsies and it matters, lack of them will hurt
H is in the US, people don’t have a clue, so, no one would bow to him, that may hurt but it has nothing to do with the HRH status


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Key difference, A is in the UK, where people do bows/curtsies and it matters, lack of them will hurt
> H is in the US, people don’t have a clue, so, no one would bow to him, that may hurt but it has nothing to do with the HRH status



IMO, people that rely on A for their wages will continue to bow, scrape and fawn 

and 

Didn't dignitaries bow to Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their recent trip to NY? They are non-HRH (for the moment) and US citizens are not obliged to bow/curtsy to any foreign dignitaries.

No one seems to know the rules


----------



## Sophisticatted

IF Louis is given a Duchy, then maybe he will become another Duke of Cambridge like his father.  I could see a slimmed down future monarchy doing away with that tradition, also.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> IMO, people that rely on A for their wages will continue to bow, scrape and fawn
> 
> and
> 
> Didn't dignitaries bow to Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their recent trip to NY? They are non-HRH (for the moment) and US citizens are not obliged to bow/curtsy to any foreign dignitaries.
> 
> No one seems to know the rules



Over here, we do indeed know the rules *and the laws - *something your royals should learn, no?
For all we know, some of those _dignitaries _could be Brits. For some reason, there are (too?) many Brits over here. Hmmmm.
Please, take them back asap.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> IMO, people that rely on A for their wages will continue to bow, scrape and fawn
> 
> and
> 
> Didn't dignitaries bow to Duke and Duchess of Sussex on their recent trip to NY? They are non-HRH (for the moment) and US citizens are not obliged to bow/curtsy to any foreign dignitaries.
> 
> No one seems to know the rules


Yes, there was bowing on the NY trip, not sure if it was Americans doing so or foreign dignitaries at the UN. I have read it is optional for Americans to bow/curtsy to royals but some Americans do anyway, some recent first ladies, if I remember

AGREE no one seems to know the rules 

AND also agree with another point you made, it sounds like A has lost the HRH forever, whereas H&M still have it, but cant use it - a subtle difference
I did read an interview - with Sophie Wessex - she stated her children have their HRHs, but dont use them, the children can decide for themselves when they are of age.  This is yet again a 3rd flavor of HRH, and HRH in-waiting of sorts

I have no real idea what it means to have the HRH and not use it.  Surely no use for business purposes. But what does that mean for curtsies and precedence?  It is a moot point for A, he will not be getting invites to the Jubilee


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> IF Louis is given a Duchy, then maybe he will become another Duke of Cambridge like his father.  I could see a slimmed down future monarchy doing away with that tradition, also.


It's actually a Dukedom not a Duchy. There's only two Duchies, Cornwall and Lancaster.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I've heard various versions. He was going into the navy and she didn't want to wait around, then she met and fell in love with Parker-Bowles and was happy with him for some time. Depending whose story you want to believe, being in the same social circle they always remained friends, but their affair didn't resume until his marriage hit the rocks. In any event, she was always considered unacceptable to be his bride because of her "past".


times sure did change
H marrying a twice-before-married woman almost 40 years old and getting the huge production wedding


----------



## Lodpah

I love the Queen. She throws some shade.









						The Queen reportedly used the 'same model' to oust Andrew as she did with Harry and Meghan, to protect the royal family from bad PR
					

The Queen is said to have held crisis summits with both parties before announcing their departures from royal life.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> I get the feeling from his complicity that the lessons he learnt are not the service and duty types, but more of the self-enrichment methods type. And if he has been mentally conditioned to be aggrieved at his status in life, he is not going to be content again. He will always be a powder keg.
> 
> I also don't think Methane will take a one-time pay-off. If she lets Hazard go, she is going to want to milk this for as long as she can, which means hanging on to her title, alimony and joint custody for her meal tickets. She will consider them her right to have because she was made to "suffer" for two years. But I doubt Hazard wants to leave her. He thinks she saved him. And I'm certain she has been reinforcing that message of salvation every day. People like us who point out her lies are just fodder for her to impress on him how victimized she is.


Wake UP Harry!  Time to ruuuun!! 

Agree (was brief last night. long day and ready for sleep), she will want more than a substantial payoff that includes more over the years to feed her hungry greedy gripping clawing beaachy hands!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> She reminds me of my SIL who thinks that if she can talk over you in a conversation, you won’t realize that she doesn’t know what she is talking about.   She lectures me on Hermes and Chanel  and she owns neither. Meghan barges into a room and pushes herself on you so you will think she is important even though she is not. That’s why she always pushed infront of Harry.


As in, ‘don’t waste your money on expensive brands’ or ‘this is how you correctly care for barenia, you philistine’ or ‘Chanel is a little known brand founded by Gabrielle Chanel who you won’t have heard of..’ style lecturing? 



xincinsin said:


> She was pressing her luck and stomping over the line to see how much she could get away with. And I do think that with all that bellowing about how she was a "breath of fresh air" and how the press at first made much of her USPs, she thought she could do no wrong. After all, even during the dating phase, she had Hazard convinced that she was a victim of life, so there was guaranteed support from the dimwit no matter what she did wrong.


I think you are on the money here. The U.K. rolled out the welcome mat but it just fed her ego. Now the welcome mats are in short supply.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I love the Queen. She throws some shade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen reportedly used the 'same model' to oust Andrew as she did with Harry and Meghan, to protect the royal family from bad PR
> 
> 
> The Queen is said to have held crisis summits with both parties before announcing their departures from royal life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



IMO her ‘summits’ did nothing to stop H&M from merching their titles.  Every single thing they have done has included their titles. Every thing. Every introduction. Every advert. Every book.  [it won’t change A either].  They continue to get free housing, free transportation, free clothing, etc.  IMO she has not received the message that people dislike the lack of authenticity. Doubt Charles will change much and William will be too old to change. YMMV.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I love the Queen. She throws some shade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen reportedly used the 'same model' to oust Andrew as she did with Harry and Meghan, to protect the royal family from bad PR
> 
> 
> The Queen is said to have held crisis summits with both parties before announcing their departures from royal life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Hey they all got off lucky. There was a time when it would have been "Off with their heads!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Hey they all got off lucky. There was a time when it would have been "Off with their heads!"



To be honest, that method was a lot more thorough


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> I know I wouldn't but you don't think he learned his lesson?


If it comes to it, daddy and granny have learnt their lesson to properly screen the candidates and after all that’s what really matters  

I feel like they would try and steer him to some sensible distant cousin if they were in that scenario. No more meeting ‘actresses’ over a rolled up banknote in the soho club toilets.


xincinsin said:


> I can't decide if I should cut Caveman a wee bit of slack for trying his best to bring home some bread and butter, since his overlord had no luck bringing home the bacon - she only earned one pound from her latest court case and still hasn't found any big brand which wants her to be their "face".


well that’ll be an excellent first paragraph for his speech    Perhaps it could be accompanied by a video montage of him trying out various odd jobs with hilarious results.Maybe he could be in the dumb & dumber remake!


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> H would still be untrustworthy. All he would need is another social climber/*jungle pisser* to come along and he'd be head over heels again. I don't think he has the mental ability to be adulting.



@Maggie Muggins  This may be the best yet [no offence to anyone else].

*ETA:  Jungle pisser *-


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is completely not how it works, though, and it does make sense it doesn't work this way as a safety net.
> 
> I know it doesn’t work this way now. Since QE has made such a distinction between the working & non-working royals, maybe it’s worth considering.  BTW, working/non-working royals gives me a Westminster Dog Show vibe
> 
> No she won't, at least not inside the UK.
> Seems to be some confusion. Wikipedia says she is HRH Prcss Bea. Express says she is same as Sophie.  Please, please do not take time to clarify this for me. I’m ok with not knowing the correct title. I have no intention of meeting her.  I’m already on info overload with this Andy and Hazzie show. I know you have better things to do, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice title: Why Bea now holds same title as Sophie Wessex
> 
> 
> PRINCESS BEATRICE has recently married Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi, and she has received a new title in the process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Louis Cambrige? Where does that come from, besides the fact that is like 30 years in the future as the gifting of royal dukedoms is usually tied to a wedding? The only thing about Louis I know or want to know is that he is adorable and shows himself to have a fun personality. Cheers.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> No more meeting ‘actresses’ over a rolled up banknote in the soho club toilets.




But quite possibly true.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> daddy and granny have learnt their lesson to properly screen the candidates and after all that’s what really matters


I have often suspected the palace was well aware of her interesting past and let him forge ahead away since he was no longer the spare, but they clearly underestimated the embarrassment it would cause them.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry’s hardship is nothing compared to common folks and poor people. We have nothing in common with him. He has the means to get private help and he will never starve and has access to the best medical care in the world. So tell me again what’s the problem? IDGAF what his problems are. He can lay low if he wants to and take his low hanging fruit and mouth breather wife with him.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Harry’s hardship is nothing compared to common folks and poor people. We have nothing in common with him. He has the means to get private help and he will never starve and has access to the best medical care in the world. So tell me again what’s the problem? IDGAF what his problems are. He can lay low if he wants to and take his low hanging fruit and mouth breather wife with him.


yes, it may be true that money doesn't buy happiness but he is still better off than most of the people in the world...has never had to work a day in his life.....unless you count his military service, which I imagine was voluntary and he didn't do that that long

and his Wife - spoiled by her father all her young years and now trying to make it appear she grew up with no privilege.....granted, she didn't have the level of wealth and privilege that Harry had but she really didn't struggle....unless you count going to Sizzler


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Harry’s hardship is nothing compared to common folks and poor people. We have nothing in common with him. He has the means to get private help and he will never starve and has access to the best medical care in the world. So tell me again what’s the problem? IDGAF what his problems are. He can lay low if he wants to and take his low hanging fruit and mouth breather wife with him.



I'm kind of where you're at. Yes, it must be painful and traumatic to lose your mother and it's not a better experience only because you're living in a palace, have polo ponies and private schools...but otherwise he doesn't even know what hardship is, he can get help for whatever problems he has, he can work or not, and the fact that 25 years later he's still nowhere near healing tells me maybe he doesn't want to get better. Apparently his little corner as the poor orphan who's been wronged by everyone is...comfortable.

Plus, what his supporters always seem to forget: he has a brother who went through exactly the same, yet somehow he is no complete trainwreck.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm kind of where you're at. Yes, it must be painful and traumatic to lose your mother and it's not a better experience when you're living in a palace, have polo ponies and private schools...but otherwise he doesn't even know what hardship is, he can get help for whatever problems he has, he can work or not, and the fact that 25 years later he's still nowhere near healing tells me maybe he doesn't want to get better. Apparently his little corner as the poor orphan who's been wronged by everyone is...comfortable.


poor little orphan - that cracks me up....thanks for the laugh


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> poor little orphan - that cracks me up....thanks for the laugh


Little Orphan Harry - I don't have the photoshop skills to make an image or else I would.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm kind of where you're at. Yes, it must be painful and traumatic to lose your mother and it's not a better experience only because you're living in a palace, have polo ponies and private schools...but otherwise he doesn't even know what hardship is, he can get help for whatever problems he has, he can work or not, and the fact that 25 years later he's still nowhere near healing tells me maybe he doesn't want to get better. Apparently his little corner as the poor orphan who's been wronged by everyone is...comfortable.
> 
> Plus, what his supporters always seem to forget: he has a brother who went through exactly the same, yet somehow he is no complete trainwreck.


Exactly! Well said. If anything he should have learned compassion and what a hard life is, after all he’s been to Africa so many times and has witnessed true hardship. Proves that he’s an idiot, lying and stupid man. That’s why he met his equal. Their small minds think alike. Two frickin narcissistic and social paths! I fear for their children. I hope they have their own security from those two idiots.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Harry - Peter Principal


charlottawill said:


> Little Orphan Harry - I don't have the photoshop skills to make an image or else I would.


i see what you did there lol! Make a meme of little orphan Annie with Harry


----------



## CarryOn2020

Creepy behavior


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> IF Louis is given a Duchy, then maybe he will become another Duke of Cambridge like his father.  I could see a slimmed down future monarchy doing away with that tradition, also.


There used to be lots of dukedoms and they were effectively recycled. Given out,then reverting to the crown 50 years later when the line of the Duke died out.
But, there are lots of Kents, Gloucesters. I thought York would revert but legislation may change things allowing Beatrice to inherit and carry it on.
They are almost running out of the classic royal dukedoms
With York and Sussex being such difficulties, I don’t see anyone getting a dukedom automatically. The recipient would have to earn it over a period of years, rather like Anme who got Princess Royal the hard way , by earning it


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> There used to be lots of dukedoms and they were effectively recycled. Given out,then reverting to the crown 50 years later when the line of the Duke died out.
> But, there are lots of Kents, Gloucesters. I thought York would revert but legislation may change things allowing Beatrice to inherit and carry it on.
> They are almost running out of the classic royal duchies
> With York and Sussex being such difficulties, I don’t see anyone getting a duchy automatically. The recipient would have to earn it over a period of years, rather like Anme who got Princess Royal the hard way , by earning it



Since B and E are not ‘working royals’, how could they possibly earn it?
Anne is a working royal and deserves every honour and award she has earned.

ETA: in 2022, royalty needs to smarten up. Spain has, Netherlands has. What is wrong with the BRF?  NM, the list is endless. imo.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since B and E are not ‘working royals’, how could they possibly earn it?
> Anne is a working royal and deserves every honour and award she has earned.
> 
> ETA: in 2022, royalty needs to smarten up. Spain has, Netherlands has. What is wrong with the BRF?  NM, the list is endless. imo.


I believe when PC is king he will listen to PW re cleaning things up in order for the monarchy to survive. Despite the nickname "Workshy Wills", I believe he is growing gracefully into his eventual role and will become a trusted advisor to PC.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Harry - Peter Principal
> 
> i see what you did there lol! Make a meme of little orphan Annie with Harry


I would have if I had the skills.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since B and E are not ‘working royals’, how could they possibly earn it?
> Anne is a working royal and deserves every honour and award she has earned.
> 
> ETA: in 2022, royalty needs to smarten up. Spain has, Netherlands has. What is wrong with the BRF?  NM, the list is endless. imo.


B might inherit the dukedom of York. Parliament is considering an across the board change that would allow women to inherit, mostly they are excluded. The legislation has nothing to do with her personally or her being/not being a working royal.
I am sure the idea was for Andrew’s son, working royal or not, to inherit the dukedom, but he did not have one.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Exactly! Well said. If anything he should have learned compassion and what a hard life is, after all he’s been to Africa so many times and has witnessed true hardship. Proves that he’s an idiot, lying and stupid man. That’s why he met his equal. Their small minds think alike. Two frickin narcissistic and social paths! I fear for their children. I hope they have their own security from those two idiots.


Africa, Invictus and the Commonwealth: all of which Harry Antoinette and the wife professed they had bonds with or would make it their focus. Hot Air Harry and the Mouth are clinging to Invictus only to make money from it. 

I take personal offence that a seamstress had to toil to embroider my national flower on a veil for an unworthy wench.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



If true I don’t think the BRF would finance them as long as he’s joined at the hip with his master.


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting analysis of the current situation.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



That's crazy. Unless she meant a royal warrant from the Exalted Court of Monteshitshow.


----------



## Lodpah

This picture is heart breaking and those two nasty, blood thirst and evil people can't stand back and go quietly into their privacy world. They have to be out front and center with their sobby story of being victims. It's because of this Queen that they have "clout" to be who they are. Karma can't come fast enough to set them back, way back to the end of the line. I kinda didn't want to post the picture in the event Duchess of Wickedness sees it and starts jumping and clapping her hands with glee with that Chucky Bride grin on her, while her douchebag, handbag of a husband just follows along rote-style.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Will he be talking about his difficulties to find his backbone and other, more delicate body parts? If not I'm not interested.


Ummm, I'm not sure I want to hear about his search for his balls.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm kind of where you're at. Yes, it must be painful and traumatic to lose your mother and it's not a better experience only because you're living in a palace, have polo ponies and private schools...but otherwise he doesn't even know what hardship is, he can get help for whatever problems he has, he can work or not, and the fact that 25 years later he's still nowhere near healing tells me maybe he doesn't want to get better. Apparently* his little corner as the poor orphan who's been wronged by everyone* is...comfortable.
> 
> Plus, what his supporters always seem to forget: he has a brother who went through exactly the same, yet somehow he is no complete trainwreck.


LOL, "Henderella".


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Royal Warrants???  For US restaurants???  WTF.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> Royal Warrants???  For US restaurants???  WTF.


The Delusion is real lol.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I don’t think royal warrants would even work abroad, wouldn’t everyone assume it’s about as authentic as the Outback Steakhouse?


----------



## Lodpah

The second pic I thought she was about to do the Exorcist neck rotating move. The first picture you can see per personal demon Paya (the Hispanic version name)  controlling her. For those who don't know, when a person is "demonic possessed" their features change and evolve throughout. They don't stay constant.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




She can't be that stupid, can she?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She can't be that stupid, can she?


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


>





Chanbal said:


>




Her life has come full circle and Sizzler is open with it's $5.00 salad bar and no reservations required


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> B might inherit the dukedom of York. Parliament is considering an across the board change that would allow women to inherit, mostly they are excluded. The legislation has nothing to do with her personally or her being/not being a working royal.
> I am sure the idea was for Andrew’s son, working royal or not, to inherit the dukedom, but he did not have one.



None of the recent Dukes of York had a son inherit the title - the last before Andrew was the Queens father and before that her grandfather George V


----------



## Luvbolide

Lodpah said:


> If true I don’t think the BRF would finance them as long as he’s joined at the hip with his master.



I thought they already got a big check from Charles to get them started, not to continue in perpetuity.  Just because they have ridiculous notions and zero money management skills - too bad, so sad!  Would love to know how much of the nearly 1/2 million in credit card debt was spent on her ridiculously ill-fitting wardrobe!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m sorry, I’m having a brain fart, who is TW?


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m sorry, I’m having a brain fart, who is TW?


The Wife aka MM


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t think royal warrants would even work abroad, wouldn’t everyone assume it’s about as authentic as the Outback Steakhouse?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> She can't be that stupid, can she?


They imposed themselves as duke and duchess in the US, didn't they? 

@QueenofWrapDress You bet!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m sorry, I’m having a brain fart, who is TW?


The Wife!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They imposed themselves as duke and duchess in the US, didn't they?
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress You bet!



Seeee, this is why those titles must be removed/renounced.  The HRH may bring in lots of bows but the Duke/Duchess brings in the money. The people of York and Sussex have requested removal.  If QE/Charles/William  wanted this to happen, it would. As others have said, all of this blustering about patronages is meaningless. In no way are A&H and their wives suffering.  Life goes on.


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> I thought they already got a big check from Charles to get them started, not to continue in perpetuity.  Just because they have ridiculous notions and zero money management skills - too bad, so sad!  Would love to know how much of the nearly 1/2 million in credit card debt was spent on her ridiculously I’ll-fitting wardrobe!


They have the Diana money, but surely no regular money/income from Charles/HMTQ
H famously said he was cut off by Charles 

And as to money from HMTQ, I don’t think she could/would do it, if discovered this would be catastrophic. The Andrew mess - he is broke? - makes any payment to non working royals too controversial, if discovered by the press.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> The Wife aka MM



Thank you!


----------



## marietouchet

I love recent stories … they want out of Casa Montecito due to the number of bathrooms. There is a drought in CA, water restrictions, and they cannot afford to flush in all 16? 18? baths and fill pool, water dying landscape 

it failed to register with me, they have 9 en suite bedrooms


----------



## Chanbal

Is the author referring to the wood in the vast gardens of Montecito?   

*The Queen was RIGHT to axe Prince Andrew for the sake of the monarchy, but more royal dead wood STILL needs the chop if 'The Firm' is to survive in the long-term, Her Majesty's biographer AN WILSON argues*
_…
Then there are the truly appalling Sussexes over in America, seemingly doing their best to embarrass the Queen and undermine the monarchy with their every utterance —*while shamelessly milking their royal connections.*

They whinge about the constraints of Harry's royal upbringing and profess a desire to live out of the limelight in their nine-bedroom, 16-bathroom, luxury Californian pad* while expecting their children to be termed HRH.

Harry was left an extremely rich man after legacies from his tragic mother and grandmothe*r, and it is as absurd as it is offensive for him to complain that his father cut him off without a bean.

So, although the Queen, in the year of her Platinum Jubilee, has done the right and necessary thing by axing Andrew, there is still a lot of dead wood in the Royal Family waiting for the hacksaw and the bonfire.

At any moment this year, when it might be hoped that we can celebrate the monarchy and the Queen's magnificent custodianship of this cherished institution, one of these bad smells can waft up, and we shall have our attention diverted from all the good which Her Majesty does.

Prince Harry's biography is due out later this year…_









						AN WILSON: Queen was RIGHT to axe Prince Andrew for sake of monarchy
					

A.N. WILSON: The utter humiliation of Andrew is long overdue, but it does pose some worrying questions. The first is, how come the Royal Family still contains such black sheep?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She can't be that stupid, can she?


No, she probably thinks she can just scam some restaurant staffer who has no knowledge of such things.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> The Wife aka MM


Oh, I thought it was "The Witch"


----------



## Luvbolide

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m sorry, I’m having a brain fart, who is TW?



thank you figure that one out, either!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> And as to money from HMTQ, I don’t think she could/would do it, if discovered this would be catastrophic. The Andrew mess - he is broke? - makes any payment to non working royals too controversial, if discovered by the press.



I'd think they can make payments to non-working royals from their personal money just fine, but maybe not to s*x offenders and traitors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*Harry was left an extremely rich man after legacies from his tragic mother and grandmothe*r, and it is as absurd as it is offensive for him to complain that his father cut him off without a bean._



Great-grandmother. I'll never unterstand how the writer, the editor, possibly the final editor, a whole group of people, can't find such an obvious mistake before getting their piece published.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Great-grandmother. I'll never unterstand how the writer, the editor, possibly the final editor, a whole group of people, can't find such an obvious mistake before getting their piece published.



Diana = mother. Charles = son of QE. QE = grandmother.  No???

ETA:  or is the money in question from QE’s mother?
ETA2:  He and Andy surely received money from Phillip.  These people have plenty of money to spend as they wish.


----------



## Sophisticatted

jennlt said:


> The Wife aka MM



I was wondering the same thing, but I just assumed it stood for The Witch.  Lol.


----------



## Chanbal

Would this be the reason why some people are uncharacteristically quiet?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> No, she probably thinks she can just scam some restaurant staffer who has no knowledge of such things.



Isn’t that another form of bullying? Intimidation?


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> I love recent stories … they want out of Casa Montecito due to the number of bathrooms. There is a drought in CA, water restrictions, and they cannot afford to flush in all 16? 18? baths and fill pool, water dying landscape
> 
> it failed to register with me, they have 9 en suite bedrooms


The sad thing is, if they do actually own it and sell, with the CA market being what it is they will likely make a hefty profit that will keep them afloat for a few more years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Would this be the reason why some people are uncharacteristically quiet?




Some say the Ellen show silenced them. They were shocked at the disrespect  humiliation. Bravo, Ellen.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t that another form of bullying? Intimidation?


Remember "Whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets"?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some say the Ellen show silenced them. They were shocked at the disrespect. Haaaaa. Bravo, Ellen.


I think a better word is humiliation.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana = mother. Charles = son of QE. QE = grandmother.  No???
> 
> ETA:  or is the money in question from QE’s mother?
> ETA2:  He and Andy surely received money from Phillip.  These people have plenty of money to spend as they wish.


He inherited money from Queen Mother Elizabeth.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I think a better word is humiliation.



Yes, much better word.
[I haven’t had my coffee yet.]


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana = mother. Charles = son of QE. QE = grandmother.  No???
> 
> ETA:  or is the money in question from QE’s mother?
> ETA2:  He and Andy surely received money from Phillip.  These people have plenty of money to spend as they wish.


I believe part of the money available to him came from his great-grandmother. Together with his mother's money, it seems he had >$40M available to establish himself here in the US.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I believe part of the money available to him came from his great-grandmother. Together with his mother's money, it seems he had >$40M available to establish himself here in the US.


$40mil just doesn't go as far as it used to, especially in SoCal


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> Oh, I thought it was "The Witch"


Or "The Wench" (on The Bench). The options are endless


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Thanks and Congratulations to the following members for the latest nicknames.         

@Hermes Zen
#3, The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s here's a Gold Ribbon.  


@Luvbolide
#9, Duchess of Dementia.  
#10, Princess Perennial Victim, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club.  



@Lodpah
#9 Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory.  

@rose60610
#13 Captured prey being squeezed by the python (H), welcome to the Busy Bee Club.  



@QueenofWrapDress
#16 Troublesome Two, welcome to the Roaring Lion Club.  



@purseinsanity
 #27 Herpes Meg, here The List #27 Ribbon.  



@Chanbal & Piers Morgan
#38, The Sussex Clowns, here's the The List #38 Ribbon.  




@xincinsin
#39 Ms. Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals, here's The List#39 Ribbon. 
#40 Social Climber/Jungle Pisser, here's The List #40 Ribbon.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some say the *Ellen show silenced them*. They were shocked at the disrespect  humiliation. Bravo, Ellen.


As a result of the Ellen's show "_Were you silent or were you silenced? Meghan: The latter._" 

The article is very interesting, I had to increase its font to be able to read it.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks and Congratulations to the following members for the latest nicknames.
> 
> @Hermes Zen
> #3, The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s here's a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297848
> 
> @Luvbolide
> #9, Duchess of Dementia.
> #10, Princess Perennial Victim, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club.
> View attachment 5297849
> 
> 
> @Lodpah
> #9 Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory.
> 
> @rose60610
> #13 Captured prey being squeezed by the python (H), welcome to the Busy Bee Club.
> View attachment 5297850
> 
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress
> #16 Troublesome Two, welcome to the Roaring Lion Club.
> View attachment 5297851
> 
> 
> @purseinsanity
> #27 Herpes Meg, here The List #27 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297855
> 
> 
> @Chanbal & Piers Morgan
> #38, The Sussex Clowns, here's the The List #38 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297861
> 
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> #39 Ms. Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals, here's The List#39 Ribbon.
> #40 Social Climber/Jungle Pisser, here's The List #40 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297866
> View attachment 5297867


@Maggie Muggins Thank you, I was surprised and honored by this award. 
Congratulations to all, in particular to our champion @xincinsin. Keep up the good work!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Diana = mother. Charles = son of QE. QE = grandmother.  No???
> 
> ETA:  or is the money in question from QE’s mother?
> ETA2:  He and Andy surely received money from Phillip.  These people have plenty of money to spend as they wish.


Inherited from his Great Grandmother, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> As a result of the Ellen's show "_Were you silent or were you silenced? Meghan: The latter._"
> 
> The article is very interesting, I had to increase its font to be able to read it.



The comments are not in their favor. These 2 plus Andy have generated so much ill will and negative press for the BRF and the UK that one would think the institution would take strong action  Any other CEO would have been dismissed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  or is the money in question from QE’s mother?



Yes. She left him more than Wills because he obviously will inherit plenty.


----------



## rose60610

So why does a woman who claims to be for sustainability and takes pride in peeing in the woods need a mansion with 19 bathrooms? Wouldn't an outhouse suffice?  If M&H paid 14 million for the house and sold it for 30, a lousy 16 million profit before taxes wouldn't get them very far if they've already burned through the money they started out with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> So why does a woman who claims to be for sustainability and takes pride in peeing in the woods need a mansion with 19 bathrooms? Wouldn't an outhouse suffice?  If M&H paid 14 million for the house and sold it for 30, a lousy 16 million profit before taxes wouldn't get them very far if they've already burned through the money they started out with.


and if they want to buy another house, the prices are up on buying as well as selling.  even if they don't buy another huge estate, they would want something worthy of their magnificence.  Where we live (in so cal) a very modest home in a very desirable neighborhood can easily go for over a million dollars.  I'm talking a three-bedroom home built in the 60's.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks and Congratulations to the following members for the latest nicknames.
> 
> @Hermes Zen
> #3, The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s here's a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297848
> 
> @Luvbolide
> #9, Duchess of Dementia.
> #10, Princess Perennial Victim, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club.
> View attachment 5297849
> 
> 
> @Lodpah
> #9 Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory.
> 
> @rose60610
> #13 Captured prey being squeezed by the python (H), welcome to the Busy Bee Club.
> View attachment 5297850
> 
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress
> #16 Troublesome Two, welcome to the Roaring Lion Club.
> View attachment 5297851
> 
> 
> @purseinsanity
> #27 Herpes Meg, here The List #27 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297855
> 
> 
> @Chanbal & Piers Morgan
> #38, The Sussex Clowns, here's the The List #38 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297861
> 
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> #39 Ms. Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals, here's The List#39 Ribbon.
> #40 Social Climber/Jungle Pisser, here's The List #40 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297866
> View attachment 5297867


Thank you so much @Maggie Muggins !  So HAPPY to receive from you!  

Have a wonderful Saturday!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Borrowing from a famous persona:


Please discuss what you want done with The List that has now reached nine pages. Someone mentioned awards a while back, but I don’t know how to conduct a survey here, so all ideas are welcome.

The List
NB: The name of the poster in brackets indicates the person, who either invented the nickname or gleaned it from media sources.

-A c-grade f-boy [jelliedfeels]
-A fork-tongued devious manipulative piece of work who only wants to protect your privacy so you can sell it [Piers Morgan & Chanbal]
-A Gormless Desperate Reality TV Star On Her Vomit-Making Ellen Cheese-      Fest [Piers Morgan & Chanbal]
-A Low Rate, Low Class ("Formidable A-List Celebrity and Social Activist" My A$$!), Lying, Two Faced, Disgusting and Pathetic Excuse For a Woman           [purseinsanity]
-Ameoba (H) and Paramecian (M) [CeeJay]
-America’s Very Own Beloved Planet Warriors [VON1B2]
-Archie’s Papa [CarryOn2020]
-Arses of Montecito [csshopper]
-A Smirking Hooker Scoring a Big Trick On A Street Corner, Quickly Dragging  Her Hapless Client Away [csshopper]
-Avaricious Commoner [EverSoElusive]
-A Whiny, Balding Gargoyle [jelliedfeels]
-Ball-less Wonder [purseinsanity]
-Bandwagon Preachers [xincinsin]
-Baron of Hesaheel [gracekelly]
-Baroness, Countess, Duchess of Pump Pump [Maggie Muggins]
-Bar Stewards [Sharont2305]
-Beast of Her Own Ego [Maggie Muggins]
-Beige Blandness of Montecito [Genie27]
-Boopsie Oopsie Twins [pukasonqo]
-Bozo Formerly Known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince [Genie27]
-Briefcase Girl With Delusions of Grandeur [Luvbolide]
-BunkerBoy [Chanbal]
-Burger King [purseinsanity]
-Calculating Liar [QueenofWrapDress]
-Candyass, A Timid or Cowardly Person (H) [Chanbal]
-Captain Candy Ass [Chanbal]
-Captain Hairball and Toenail [Katel]
-Captured Prey Being Squeezed by the Python [rose60610]
-Carbon Foot Prince [Chanbal]
-Cheap Prince and His Greedy Hag [breakfastatcartier]
-Chicken Brain (H) [Maggie Muggins]
-Chicken Feet (M) [Maggie Muggins]
-Chief Negative Impact Officer [csshopper]
-Chief of Negative Impact [csshopper]
-Chief of No Impact [purseinsanity]
-Clouds of Montecito [Chanbal]
-Clueless Prince [rose60610]
-Cockold Prince [EverSoElusive]
-Commissioner Against Online Misinformation (H) [xincinsin]
-Conceited Psycho [EverSoElusive]
-Cowardly Prince [Lodpah]
-Dastardly Duo [LittleStar88]
-Dearie Dreary MM [CarryOn2020]
-Defrocked Prince [Luvbolide]
-Demasculated Haz [purseinsanity]
-Demon Seed [breakfastatcartier]
-Desperate Ducka$s [EverSoElusive]
-Despicable Duo [Maggie Muggins]
-Devil Incarnate [Maggie Muggins]
-Diabolical Duo [Norm.Core]
-Difficult Duo [Luvbolide]
-Dilettante Duke [CarryOn2020]
-D List Former Actress [Luvbolide]
-Dimwit Duo [jennit]
-Dirty Harry & Meghan Me Me [Chanbal]
-Disastrous Duo [CarryOn2020]
-Disgusting Duo [xincinsin]
-Distasteful Duchess [Luvbolide]
-Drama Mama [SomethingGoodCanWork]
-Douchebag of Sucks [xincinsin]
-Douchess [csshopper]
-Douchess Dullness [CeeJay]
-DOS = Disk Operating System [papertiger]
-Dreadful Ogress Sucks [xincinsin]
-Duchess Denial [Aimee3]
-Duchess Desperate [rose60610]
-Duchess Desperateforrelevance [needlv]
-Duchess Disney [csshopper]
-Duchess Do-gooder [bag-mania]
-Duchess Dummy [Aimee3]
-Duchess Dunce [Norm.Core]
-Duchess Golddigger [needlv]
-Duchess Lookatme [needlv]
-Duchess Moaning Markle [csshopper]
-Duchess of Bandwagon [Chanbal]
-Duchess of Dementia [Luvbolide]
-Duchess of Narsussex [QueenofWrapDress]
-Duchess of Noclass [charlottawill]
-Duchess of Sigmoid [Maggie Muggins]
-Duchess of Sizzler [needlv]
-Duchess Pump Pump [SomethingGoodCanWork]
-Duchess Sh!t Show [EverSoElusive]
-Duchess Tabloidfodder [needlv]
-Duke and Duchess of Burningbridges [charlottawill]
-Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat [jennit]
-Duke and Duchess of Windbag [charlottawill]
-Duke Huffalot [Maggie Muggins]
-Duke of Montecito [Chanbal]
-Duke of Thin Air and Tantrums [QueenofWrapDress]
-Dupe and Deceit of Sussex [le_junkie]
-Duke Dumbdumberbarton [SomethingGoodCanWork]
-Dumpy, Snotty Tart [jelliedfeels]
-Dungstunk (Meghan) [purseinsanity]
-El Chimpo [poopsie]
-Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl [Maggie Muggins]
-Emesis-Inducing, Hit-or-Miss, Self-Proclaimed Entrepreneurs [Maggie            Muggins]
-Evil Hollywood [EverSoElusive]
-Flowerpot and Hardly There [gracekelly]
-Fresh Prince of Hot Air [Chanbal]
-Friar 6 [Chanbal]
-Ginger Guru [Chanbal]
-Grabby Grifters of Montecit [K.D.]
-Grifters [csshopper]
-Ginge and Cringe [purseinsanity]
-Ginger Grifter [rose60610]
-GivesMePain [purseinsanity]
-Gullible Ginger [charlottawill]
-Hairy the Hairdresser [Genie27]
-Half-Wit [papertiger]
-Handcuffed Harry [CeeJay]
-Hap-Hazza [CeeJay]
-Hapless [CeeJay]
-Happy, Infatuated Man-Boy Boob [LittleStar88]
-Harkles [csshopper]
-HarkleSparkler [CarryOn2020]
-Harriet (Harry) [mellibelly]
-Harry Antoinette [needlv]
-Harry’s First Wife [elvisfan4life]
-Harry the Dim [Luvbolide]
-Harry the “Handbag” [papertiger]
-Harry the Hairdresser [Chanbal]
-Harry the Horrible [csshopper]
-Harry the Pumpkin [Kevinaxx]
-Haz [purseinsanity]
-Hazardous Harry Lodpah]
-Hazardous Waste [purseinsanity]
-HazBeen [purseinsanity]
-Hazmat [mellibelly]
-HazNoBalls [mellibelly]
-Hazzie and Horrid [DeMonica]
-Hector [Chanbal]
-Heinous Harry [Aimee3]
-Helium [le-junkie]
-Henpeck (Harry) [CeeJay]
-Henpecked Harry [poopsie]
-Henry the Woke [Chanbal]
-Her Inane Husband [Maggie Muggins]
-Her Heinous [xincinsin]
-Her Lowness [purseinsanity]
-Her Naff Man [jelliedfeels]
-Herpes Meg [purseinsanity]
-Her Royal Clowness [EverSoElusive]
-Hex-Agon-Hazard [CeeJay]
-High Priest of the True Goddess [jelliedfeels]
-His Actress Wife [CarryOn2020]
-His Amnesic Wife [Chanbal]
-His/Her Royal Anus [Katel]
-His/Her Royal Heinous [Sophisticatted
-Holier-Than-Thou-Meghan-Who-Will-Stoop-At-Nothing [rose60610]
-Hollow (H) [le_junkie]
-Hot Mess of Montecito [charlottawill]
-Hot Pants Meggie [bellecate]
-Humble-Bragger [CarryOn2020]
-I’m-better-than-you-common-people [Luvbolide]
-Impact Idiots [Betty-Lou]
-Inconsequential Sidekick (H) [lanasyogamama]
-Jacka$$es of Montecito [redney]
-Jack(s) of All Trades, Master(s) of None [purseinsanity]
-Jezebel and Ahab [Lodpah]
-Judas of Sussex [Maggie Muggins]
-Juggling Jester [csshopper]
-Just Call Me Harry aka JCMH [xeyes]
-Karen Markle [breakfastatcartier]
-King and Queen of Zero Follow Through [Luvbolide]
-Lady Megbeth [QueenofWrapDress]
-Lady Muck [Lounorada]
-Lady Yoga-Legs-Spread-Wide-Apart [Maggie Muggins]
-Little Miss Briefcase [jelliedfeels]
-Little Miss Forgetful [needlv]
-Louse and Spouse [mellibelly]
-Lumpenprolateriat [jelliedfeels]
-Lying Liar Duchess [QueenofWrapDress]
-Lying phony social climber with no style and a meh personality and a mediocre career as a d list actress [muddledmint]
-Lying-Scheming-Devious-Avaricious-Famewhoring Daughter [Maggie Muggins]
-MacBish [Chanbal]
-Macho Meg [purseinsanity]
-Madame (too long) pants on fire [jelliedfeels]
-Madam Moron [xincinsin]
-Maggot [csshopper]
-Maggotry [csshopper]
-Maleficent of Montecito aka MoM [Annawakes]
-Malicious Meghan [Lodpah]
-Malodorous (Meghan) [CeeJay]
-Malodorous Moochers of Montecito [Katel]
-Manchild (Harry) [bisousx]
-Mangle Markle [rose60610]
-Markdown [mellibelly]
-Markle Debacle [xincinsin]
-Marklenator [EverSoElusive]
-Markley Sparkly Squad [puseinsanity]
-Master of the Chicken Coop [gracekelly]
-Master Manipulator [CeeJay]
-Matronly Moron of the Manor [csshopper]
-Meager (M) [le_junkie]
-Medusa [purseinsanity]
-Megabrag ‘fashion-A-lista [papertiger]
-Megadeath [mellibellly]
-Mega-FauxPas [xincinsin]
-Me Gain [Katel]
-Megain [purseinsanity]
-Megaladum [purseinsanity]
-Megalodon [bag-mania]
-Meg-a-lo-maniac [CeeJay]
-MegaMaw [xincinsin]
-Megamouths [xincinsin]
-Megaphone [QueenofWrapDress]
-Megaphoney [lanasyogamama]
-Megaphony [Chanbal]
-Meggie Moaner [gracekelly]
-Meggy Marbles [Chanbal]
-Meggypoo [csshopper]
-Meghag the Camp Guard [Maggie Muggins]
-Meghan Liar Markle aka MLM [jelliedfeels]
-Maghan Make-a-Buck [rose60610]
-Meghan McBeth [Lodpah]
-Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory [Lodpah]
-Megnochio [CarryOn2020]
-Megtox [PooFerret]
-Meh [lanasyogamama]
-Melodramatic [CeeJay]
-Me-Me-Me-Grow-My-Wallet [rose60610]
-Menace [CeeJay]
-MentallySpoilt Brats [xincinsin]
-Merchalot [Icyjade]
-Merchers to Flippers [Sophisticatted]
-Merching Meg [poopsie]
-Mermaid [Annawakes]
-Methane [purseinsanity]
-Methanol [CeeJay]
-Micro-celebrities [CarryOn2020 & Chanbal]
-Migraine [poopsie]
-Minor Footnote Markle [xincinsin]
-Miscreant Megnut [EverSoElusive]
-Miseryghan [rose60610]
-Misinformationous Twosome [SomethingGoodCanWork]
-Miss If-I’m-not-invited-I’ll-stage-my-own-Oscars [QueenofWrapDress]
-Miss: nobody asked if I was ok [breakfastatcartier]
-Miss the Mark-le [poopsie]
-Mistress of Misinformation [xincinsin]
-Moaning Markle [bag-mania]
-Money Hungry A-Hole Harry [Hermes Zen]
-Monster Duo [Lodpah]
-Montebozos [lanasyogamama]
-Montecito Duo [DoggieBags]
-Montecito Marauders [Betty-Lou]
-Montecito Moaner [Betty-Lou]
-Montepsycho Duchess [VON1B2]
-Monteshitsuxxess [Aminamina]
-Monumental Moron [CeeJay]
-Mordor [Norm.Core]
-Morons of Montecito [xincinsin]
-Most Cunning and Shameless Royals [xincinsin]
-Mother Theresa of Montecito [Chanbal]
-Mouthy Meg [poopsie]
-Mr. and Mrs Bandwagon [Chanbal]
-Mr. Nonsense [Chanbal]
-Mr. Prophecy [xincinsin]
-Mrs. Hypocrisy [Chanbal]
-Mrs. Loseer [rose60610]
-Mrs. Shy [Chanbal]
-Ms. Egomaniac [QueenofWrapDress]
-Ms. Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals [xincinsin]
-Ms. I-Don’t-Wear-Anything-That-Fits [rose60610]
-Multi-Task Markle [xincinsin]
-Murky Magpies [Jktgal]
-My’EGO Markle [Maggie Muggins]
-Nasty Pieces of Work [sdkitty]
-Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic [CarryOn2020]
-Narcissistic Publicity-Craving Ho [csshopper]
-Needy and Greedy [xincinsin]
-NeverWas (M) [mellibelly]
-Non Working Royals aka NRW [marietouchet]
-Nope and Dope [gracekelly]
-No Relevance Self-Marketing Losers [scarlet555]
-NutMeg [jennit]
-Omegcron [xincinsin]
-Outsiders in H’wood [poopsie]
-Pathetic Prince [EverSoElusive]
-Pearl [CarryOn2020]
-Perpetually Frowning Baldie [jelliedfeels]
-Pet Dumper [bag-mania]
-Petulant Prat [xincinsin]
-Photoshopping Duo [bellecate]
-Pinky & The Brain [Lounorada]
-Pinocchio, the Duchess of Deception [csshopper]
-Pompous Ass (H) [sdkitty]
-Pompous Azz [csshopper]
-Posers [sdkitty]
-Poster Boy-Man-Child-Wimp [csshopper]
-Poundland Duchess [QueenofWrapDress]
-Preachy, Superior, and Condescending Even On a Freakin’ CARD [Laila619]
-Pride and Vanity [CarryOn2020]
-Prince Dufus [Maggie Muggins]
-Prince Harzardous [CeeJay]
-Prince(ss) Hairbrain [purseinsanity]
-Prince of Polo [Chanbal]
-Prince-Of-Pomposity and his Moppet-Megalomaniac side-piece [CeeJay]
-Prince Piss Ant [rose60610]
-Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury [xincinsin]
-Prince Pity Pot [CarryOn2020]
-Prince Puke and His Pukess [Aimee3]
-Princess Hairball (H&M) [Katel]
-Princess Hairy (Harry) [Lounorada]
-Princess Mew Mew [Genie27]
-Princess Perennial Victim [Luvbolide]
-Princess Pinocchio [purseinsanity]
-Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy [bellecate]
-Professional Squatters [Sophisticatted]
-Professional Victims [Chanbal]
-Prophet Hazard and Saint Methane [xincinsin]
-Psychic Harry and Mystic Meg [Sophie-Rose]
-Puddin’ Heads (aka soft in the head) [jennit]
-Puerile Princess [DoggieBags]
-Pump-Pump (M) [Chanbal]
-Pump-Pump-Squat [CarryOn2020]
-Puppet (H) [Aimee3]
-Puppeteer (M) [Aimee3]
-Radioactive [purseinsanity]
-Raptor [QueenofWrapDress]
-Rapacious Raptor [xincinsin]
-Royal Crassness [le_junkie]
-Royal Family of MonteShitShow [xincinsin]
-Royal Ingrates of Montecito [EverSoElusive]
-Royal Reject [needlv]
-Saint Meghan, Patroness of Liars and Truth Twisters [xincinsin]
-Scheming Narcissistic Prima Donna [Maggie Muggins]
-Self-Indulgent Duo [Maggie Muggins]
-Self-Righteous Douchebaguette of Montecito [Maggie Muggins]
-She Who Emasculates Her Husband [csshopper]
-She-Devil [Maggie Muggins]
-She Who Shall Remain Nameless [csshopper]
-She Who Shouldn’t be Obeyed [gracekelly]
-Skid Markle [mellibelly]
-Slanker Wanker Bro [VigeeLeBrun]
-Sledgehammers to Your Eyes [purseinsanity]
-Smarmy Smarmets [Betty-Lou]
-Smirk and Jerk [millibelly]
-Smughan Smirkle [jennit]
-Sneaky Tart [jelliedfeels]
-Social Climber/Jungle Pisser [xincinsin]
-Spectacular U-Turn [CarryOn2020]
-Spready Chicken Legs [EverSoElusive]
-Stale Tart [jelliedfeels]
-St. Meghan [csshopper]
-Strumpet [csshopper]
-Stupid Cow [QueenofWrapDress]
-Termagent Wretch [xincinsin]
-Terminal Whiner [xincinsin]
-Terrible Twosome [CarryOn2020]
-Terrible Woman [xincinsin]
-The Amnesic of Montecito [Chanbal]
-The Artist Formerly Known as Harry [QueenofWrapDress]
-The Big Zero (H) [Maggie Muggins]
-The Clown Duchess [Chanbal]
-The Commissioner of the Commission on Information Disorder at the Aspen Institute [Maggie Muggins]
-The Despicable Duo [Maggie Muggins]
-The Di-Nameic Duo [purseinsanity]
-The Discount and Discountess of Disinformation [jennit]
-The Dollar Duchess [Maggie Muggins]
-The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo [gracekelly]
-The Douche Formallly Known as a Prince [poopsie]
-The Duchess of California [QueenofWrapDress]
-The Duchess of Smugness [charlottawill]
-The Duchess of Trash [xincinsin]
-The Ducka$s [EverSoElusive]
-The Dumpster Fire Camo’d by the Red Carpet [xincinsin]
-The Earl of Dunnothing [gracekelly]
-Thee Duchess of the Royal Tigeth [breakfastatcartier]
-Thee Mouth [xincinsin]
-The Ever So Self-Absorbed DumbErtons [EverSoElusive]
-The expendable (H) [csshopper]
-The Face of the Poo fragrance [xincinsin]
-The Fauxmatarians [CarryOn2020 & Chanbal]
-The Glimmer Twins [marietouchet]
-The Harlem Woketrotters [mellibelly]
-The HiHo Couple [CarryOn220]
-The Lying Duchess [Lodpah]
-The Madame of Montecito [Chanbal]
-The Maleficent of Montecito [poopsie
-The Manboy With the Lowest IQ on the Royal Intelligence Chart [Maggie Muggins]
-The MarkleMarketeers [CarryOn2020 & Chanbal]
-The Montecito Messenger [Betty-Lou]
-The Montecito Morons [xincinsin]
-The Monte-know-nothings [DoggieBags]
-The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s [Hermes Zen]
-The Other Two (H&M) [sdkitty]
-The Planet Saviors [tiktok]
-The Rain Drop [Chanbal]
-The Rapacious Wife [csshopper]
-The Red Brillo Pad [csshopper]
-The Red-Headed Husband of Miss Information [papertiger]
-The Rumpled Royals [Sophisticatted]
-The Rumps [Sophisticatted]
-The Spare and the Snare [QueenofWrapDress]
-The SuckAzzes [mellibelly]
-The Sucksexxes [puseinsanity]
-The Sussex Clowns [Piers Morgan & Chanbal
-The Sussex Eunuch [CarryOn2020]
-The Tabloid Royals [CarryOn2020]
-The Unfortunate-Lapse-of-Memory(my-ar$e)LyingWitch [Maggie Muggins]
-The Ventriloquist Dummy aka Harry [Maggie Muggins]
-The Wench on the Bench [xincinsin]
-The Wife [stansy]
-The Witch [xincinsin]
-The Witch of Montecito [Maggie Muggins]
-The Woke [Maggie Muggins]
-The World’s Shyest Couple [gracekelly]
-Those B.st.rds [Hermes Zen]
-Tiresome Twosome [xincinsin]
-Third Codpiece [jelliedfeels]
-This Totally Uselessly Preposterously Loathsome Thumb-Sucking Whining Little Turd [csshopper]
-Toad and Toadette [Maggie Muggins]
-Tone Deaf [Chanbal]
-ToxicTwo [CarryOn2020]
-Treacherous TIG [charlottawill]
-Troublesome Two [QueenofWrapDress]
-Tungsten [VON1B2]
-Turn-Off Toffs [CarryOn2020]
-Turn-Off Tossers [CarryOn2020]
-Twats of Montecito [xincinsin]
-Two-Faced Twerp [Chanbal]
-TRFKATS (the royals formerly known as the sussexes) [CarryOn2020]
-Turducken Two [CarryOn2020]
-Unnewsworthy Faces [Maggie Muggins]
-Unserene Lowness [Jktgal]
-Unscrupulous Couple [Maggie Muggins]
-Vainglorious [CeeJay]
-Veneers Face [breakfastatcartier]
-Whack-Job-Tignanello [rose60610]
-Wayward Duo [needlv]
-Wee Wittle Prince H [Maggie Muggins]
-Woko Ono [Maggie Muggins]
-Word Salad Twins [bag-mania]
-Yacht Girl Deadly Claws [Maggie Muggins]

Numbers
#6 [Stansy]
#6 and His Plus 1 [bellecate]
#666 [QueenofWrapDress]

PR Teams Nicknames
Ahmed Scabies [Katel]
Omid Scooby-doo [Annawakes]
Omits-A-Lot [needlv]
Scabies [Annawakes]
Sunshine NutSacks [mellibelly]
Sunshine Sucks [purseinsanity]

Nicknames For Later Use
Harry’s Ex-Wife [elvisfan4life]
The Ex-Duchess of Sussex [elvisfanforlife]

Foundation Nicknames
Arsewipe Charity [Nico61]

Blog Nicknames
Thee Duchess’s Royal Tigeth [breakfastatcartier]


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks and Congratulations to the following members for the latest nicknames.
> 
> @Hermes Zen
> #3, The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s here's a Gold Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297848
> 
> @Luvbolide
> #9, Duchess of Dementia.
> #10, Princess Perennial Victim, welcome to the Energizer Bunny Club.
> View attachment 5297849
> 
> 
> @Lodpah
> #9 Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory.
> 
> @rose60610
> #13 Captured prey being squeezed by the python (H), welcome to the Busy Bee Club.
> View attachment 5297850
> 
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress
> #16 Troublesome Two, welcome to the Roaring Lion Club.
> View attachment 5297851
> 
> 
> @purseinsanity
> #27 Herpes Meg, here The List #27 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297855
> 
> 
> @Chanbal & Piers Morgan
> #38, The Sussex Clowns, here's the The List #38 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297861
> 
> 
> 
> @xincinsin
> #39 Ms. Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals, here's The List#39 Ribbon.
> #40 Social Climber/Jungle Pisser, here's The List #40 Ribbon.
> View attachment 5297866
> View attachment 5297867



Thanks Maggie Muggins! There's no shortage of nicknames for Duchess Dimwit and Prince Pouty.


----------



## Sophisticatted

rose60610 said:


> Thanks Maggie Muggins! There's no shortage of nicknames for Duchess Dimwit and *Prince Pouty*.



I first read that as Prince Poultry (King of the Chickens!).  Must get glasses.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m curious if they move if they’ll want the new house to cost more to prove how “successful” they are.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m curious if they move if they’ll want the new house to cost more to prove how “successful” they are.


my guess is they would move to a neighborhood where Hollywood "elites" live...or maybe to New York - more urban for "H" and plenty of wealthy and powerful people there


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> I love recent stories … they want out of Casa Montecito due to the number of bathrooms. There is a drought in CA, water restrictions, and they cannot afford to flush in all 16? 18? baths and fill pool, water dying landscape
> 
> it failed to register with me, they have 9 en suite bedrooms


Do people in huge estates like this actually utalize all the rooms or do they mostly make use of just a few rooms?

In other words, aren't most of the rooms unused?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Perhaps they’ll try for residence at a Mike Meldman property.  He was a Casamigos partner with George Clooney and Rande Gerber.   Jack Brooksbank was frolicking on a yacht while “doing business” for Casamigos.









						How Mike Meldman Got the Rich and Famous to Live in Resorts - Hart Howerton
					

The Milwaukee native and Stanford graduate started out with plans for a career in law — but he told Insider that idea was scrapped when he bombed the LSATs.




					www.harthowerton.com


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Do people in huge estates like this actually utalize all the rooms or do they mostly make use of just a few rooms?
> 
> In other words, aren't most of the rooms unused?


My guess is yes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> times sure did change
> H marrying a twice-before-married woman almost 40 years old and getting the huge production wedding


It doesn't really matter who H married as he was already #6; it could've have been a vulture or a jackass or some other creature. Oops, my bad, he did!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> my guess is they would move to a neighborhood where Hollywood "elites" live...or maybe to New York - more urban for "H" and plenty of wealthy and powerful people there


She'll be even more out of her league if she thinks she will fit in with the real money in NY. The Montecito crowd will seem friendly in comparison. Personality wise she would fit in as an UES wife, but the Harkles don't have the money to compete with hedge fund wives and the like.


----------



## redney

rose60610 said:


> So why does a woman who claims to be for sustainability and takes pride in peeing in the woods need a mansion with 19 bathrooms? Wouldn't an outhouse suffice?  If M&H paid 14 million for the house and sold it for 30, a lousy 16 million profit before taxes wouldn't get them very far if they've already burned through the money they started out with.


They would need to pay off their mortgage first, further reducing any "profit."


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> Do people in huge estates like this actually utalize all the rooms or do they mostly make use of just a few rooms?
> 
> In other words, aren't most of the rooms unused?


I always wonder this! I feel guilty for not spending enough time in my formal living room!


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> She'll be even more out of her league if she thinks she will fit in with the real money in NY. The Montecito crowd will seem friendly in comparison. Personality wise she would fit in as an UES wife, but the Harkles don't have the money to compete with hedge fund wives and the like.



She’s be a hit as a real housewife.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I always wonder this! I feel guilty for not spending enough time in my formal living room!


When we were still in a house (we downsized to 1300SF seven years ago and love it!) I would purposely sit in the living room, having tea, reading, or just some quiet time. It was relaxing but it really was wasted space.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s be a hit as a real housewife.


I've said here several times she is destined for one of the franchises down the road. I'm sure Andy Cohen has a contract all ready to go for her.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I've said here several times she is destined for one of the franchises down the road. I'm sure Andy Cohen has a contract all ready to go for her.


I would love to see her with Andy on NYE drinking and talking about everyone.  Loose cannon!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> my guess is they would move to a neighborhood where Hollywood "elites" live...or maybe to New York - more urban for "H" and plenty of wealthy and powerful people there


Aston Kutcher and Mila Kunis just sold their BH home for 10 mill.  It was quite large and really beautiful and move in perfect.  Not private enough for their majesties I suspect.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> my guess is they would move to a neighborhood where Hollywood "elites" live...or maybe to New York - more urban for "H" and plenty of wealthy and powerful people there


These two couldn't handle NYC.  You need to have brains, talent and money.  They have none of the above.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> These two couldn't handle NYC.  You need to have brains, talent and money.  They have none of the above.


but they don't see it that way 
and it's not like they'd have to actually work


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I would love to see her with Andy on NYE drinking and talking about everyone.  Loose cannon!


Andy and Anderson are cute together on NYE. Andy and MM? Not so much, imo. I just want her to fade into oblivion, although I know that won't happen anytime soon.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Oh, I thought it was "The Witch"


Or "The Wench".


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> Oh, I thought it was "The Witch"



My first thought was Train Wreck


----------



## lanasyogamama

Holy moly









						Prince Harry says: Give me back my bodyguards — Daily Mail
					

Lawyers acting for Harry have written a 'pre-action protocol' letter to the Home Office, indicating they will seek a judicial review if continued security is not provided by the UK.




					apple.news


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I honestly doubt they can make anyone pay for their security...but what exactly is wrong with these two chancers?


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt they can make anyone pay for their security...*but what exactly is wrong with these two chancers?*



My first guess would be a lot


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Holy moly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says: Give me back my bodyguards — Daily Mail
> 
> 
> Lawyers acting for Harry have written a 'pre-action protocol' letter to the Home Office, indicating they will seek a judicial review if continued security is not provided by the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


This must have something to do with the Andrew train wreck …. Is all I can think … H is getting nasty

did the reports on Andrew say that his security was being taken away ??? I don’t remember seeing that , so alleged pervert A still has it , but H does not ??? Am I wrong ??

the DM article says that A “could” lose his security , it costs 2M pounds a year …


----------



## lanasyogamama

I truly feel for the Queen, dealing with all this at her age.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Holy moly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says: Give me back my bodyguards — Daily Mail
> 
> 
> Lawyers acting for Harry have written a 'pre-action protocol' letter to the Home Office, indicating they will seek a judicial review if continued security is not provided by the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


Off with them both!  (I'll just pretend to be in QEII's head!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt they can make anyone pay for their security...but what exactly is wrong with these two chancers?



IMO Same as what is wrong with Andy, perhaps even Margaret.  Perhaps - Entitled, privileged, delusional, etc.
This, though, is a different level of entitlement.


_The Queen is understood to have been made aware of her grandson's action, which is thought to be the *first time a member of the Royal Family has brought a case against Her Majesty's Government.*

A source said: 'Harry's argument in a nutshell is: *'You got the law wrong.' *He feels the decision to remove his security was wrong. Pre-action protocol was sent by Harry's lawyers to the Home Office a couple of months ago. This is essentially a precursor to a judicial review.'

Suggesting why Harry may have chosen now – two years after 'Megxit' – to launch his legal bid, the source added: 'When Harry came back last April for Prince Philip's funeral, he was given security. But when he came back in the summer, he wasn't.' _


ETA: Now, can QE/Charles/Will remove those titles?


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Holy moly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says: Give me back my bodyguards — Daily Mail
> 
> 
> Lawyers acting for Harry have written a 'pre-action protocol' letter to the Home Office, indicating they will seek a judicial review if continued security is not provided by the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


I believe the people in the UK, including his relatives, will be very supportive of him not traveling.


----------



## marietouchet

More details on the rationale for the request, too dangerous to go to UK and his US security do not have access to the same intelligence as the Met/UK police

Prince Harry to fight against removal of police protection in UK










						Harry to fight against removal of UK police protection
					

PRINCE HARRY has filed for a judicial review against the Home Office over a decision that prevents him from getting police protection in the UK.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I believe the people in the UK, including his relatives, will be very supportive of him not traveling.




Is this about money???  Oh my.  Are the rumors true?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this designed to knock Andy off the front page?   Is Eug involved in this effort?   
IMO none of these people can be trusted.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Maggie Muggins  This may be the best yet [no offence to anyone else].
> 
> *ETA:  Jungle pisser *-
> 
> View attachment 5297259


Thanks. Social Climber/Jungle Pisser is already on the freshly posted The List. (post #82,488)


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Same as what is wrong with Andy, perhaps even Margaret.  Perhaps - Entitled, privileged, delusional, etc.
> This, though, is a different level of entitlement.
> 
> 
> _The Queen is understood to have been made aware of her grandson's action, which is thought to be the *first time a member of the Royal Family has brought a case against Her Majesty's Government.*
> 
> A source said: 'Harry's argument in a nutshell is: *'You got the law wrong.' *He feels the decision to remove his security was wrong. Pre-action protocol was sent by Harry's lawyers to the Home Office a couple of months ago. This is essentially a precursor to a judicial review.'
> 
> Suggesting why Harry may have chosen now – two years after 'Megxit' – to launch his legal bid, the source added: 'When Harry came back last April for Prince Philip's funeral, he was given security. But when he came back in the summer, he wasn't.' _
> 
> 
> ETA: Now, can QE/Charles/Will remove those titles?


He's always suing someone....uugh


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt they can make anyone pay for their security...but what exactly is wrong with these two chancers?


Lack of attention, body guards draw interest.  Plus, they probably have no money for their own. 

The audacity of expecting British citizens to pay for American security is staggering.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Uh, yeah, this will happen /snark

_As it stands, Harry feels “unable to return” with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet due to high threat levels. He’s arguing that his privately funded US protection team *needs access to the necessary UK intelligence *to keep his family safe as opposed to using taxpayer funded security._


			https://twitter.com/scobie


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO Same as what is wrong with Andy, perhaps even Margaret.  Perhaps - Entitled, privileged, delusional, etc.
> This, though, is a different level of entitlement.
> 
> 
> _The Queen is understood to have been made aware of her grandson's action, which is thought to be the *first time a member of the Royal Family has brought a case against Her Majesty's Government.*
> 
> A source said: 'Harry's argument in a nutshell is: *'You got the law wrong.' *He feels the decision to remove his security was wrong. Pre-action protocol was sent by Harry's lawyers to the Home Office a couple of months ago. This is essentially a precursor to a judicial review.'
> 
> Suggesting why Harry may have chosen now – two years after 'Megxit' – to launch his legal bid, the source added: 'When Harry came back last April for Prince Philip's funeral, he was given security. But when he came back in the summer, he wasn't.' _


You are being too harsh on Hazz @CarryOn2020. Laws are wrong in the UK, the 1st amendment is bonkers in the US… only pearls of wisdom coming out of little Hazz .


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> You are being too harsh on Hazz @CarryOn2020. Laws are wrong in the UK, the 1st amendment is bonkers in the US… only pearls of wisdom coming out of little Hazz .




You are correct. I have been too harsh on Hazz, Ando, the BRF, etc. 
Is there is Better-Up class I can take? Perhaps an Oprah MasterClass?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> You are being too harsh on Hazz @CarryOn2020. Laws are wrong in the UK, the 1st amendment is bonkers in the US… only pearls of wisdom coming out of little Hazz .



I don't recall ever experiencing going from liking a "celeb" to disliking him so much


----------



## CarryOn2020

This won’t help Hazzie’s case - curses, those  pesky facts!


----------



## marietouchet

The security gimmick , it is technically an action against the Uk government not the BRF

but the timing - Jubilee year etc - is payback to the BRF. H has lost the same stuff as alleged criminal Andrew, and H wants a pound of flesh

H could have brought the action two years ago… this is an excuse for not coming to the UK next summer


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> The security gimmick , it is technically an action against the Uk government not the BRF
> 
> but the timing - Jubilee year etc - is payback to the BRF. H has lost the same stuff as alleged criminal Andrew, and H wants a pound of flesh
> 
> H could have brought the action two years ago…


He and his Wife apparently spend most of their energy scheming - as opposed to running their foundation or producing the content they are supposed to be providing for Netflix


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The security gimmick , it is technically an action against the Uk government not the BRF
> 
> but the timing - Jubilee year etc - is payback to the BRF. H has lost the same stuff as alleged criminal Andrew, and H wants a pound of flesh
> 
> H could have brought the action two years ago…



They were flush with money and potential back then. Now, 2 kids, Covid restrictions, the Ellen show, the O interview, the NYC trip etc., their world has changed. They have repeatedly failed and floundered. Clearly, the force is not with them.


----------



## bellecate

Everytime yo think they can't sink any lower.....


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Uh, yeah, this will happen /snark
> 
> _As it stands, Harry feels “unable to return” with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet due to high threat levels. He’s arguing that his privately funded US protection team *needs access to the necessary UK intelligence *to keep his family safe as opposed to using taxpayer funded security._
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/scobie




...........well documented neo-Nazi threats? 
What did he do? Refuse to return the uniform?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They were flush with money and potential back then. Now, 2 kids, Covid restrictions, the Ellen show, the O interview, the NYC trip etc., their world has changed. They have repeatedly failed and floundered. Clearly, the force is not with them.
> 
> View attachment 5298435


Doncha know they are Never wrong.  It's everyone else who is wrong.  I can imagine her sitting there telling "H" he should sue the British govt (or whoever the current defendant) and him with his pouty boy face angrily saying "Yes wife! we will sue them!"


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> ...........well documented neo-Nazi threats?
> What did he do? Refuse to return the uniform?


LOL
priceless


----------



## Chanbal

"_Less is more_" is a concept that doesn't work for Little Miss Forgetful.   

*Royal insiders say the monarchy is counting on one person to save the family’s reputation amidst an ongoing sea of scandal: future queen Kate Middleton.*

_“As the Prince Andrew scandal shows, the monarchy is in desperate need of reassuringly conventional royal performers,” Patrick Jephson, the former chief of staff for Kate’s mother-in-law Princess Diana, told The Post exclusively. “*Catherine is just what these troubled royal times need* —* it’s no exaggeration that the Windsors’ future lies in her hands.”*

It’s been a week of hell for the royal family, following the announcement that Prince Andrew will spend the rest of his life in the wilderness after being stripped of his HRH and military titles by his mother, Queen Elizabeth, amid a sex assault lawsuit.

Add to this the continued tensions of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle having left the institution and accused an unnamed senior member of the royal family of questioning their son Archie’s complexion.

It’s no wonder a small team of advisers is focused on shaping Kate’s legacy.

This week, we got the first glimpse of her as a future queen in three stunning portraits released to celebrate her 40th birthday — and they include a couple of very deliberately placed nods to the past.
In the photos by Paolo Roversi, Kate wears the iconic sapphire and diamond engagement ring that belonged to her husband’s late mother, Diana, as well as the former Princess of Wales’ Collingwood Pearl earrings.

“It’s a very calculated decision by Kate and William to keep including Diana in anything that is about setting out a new royal chapter,” Bethan Holt, fashion director of the UK Daily Telegraph, told The Post. “It’s very clever of Kate to keep her memory alive.”

Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge, has worn the earrings on a number of other occasions in the past few years.

“*Monarchy is the ultimate long game … because unlike business, politics or media stardom, royalty is for life and its time horizons are infinite,” said Jephson. “Catherine has mastered that long game and that’s a very significant achievement.”*

And she’s needed more than ever, and not just because of the scandals but also because she and William are much more popular than the next king, Prince Charles, and his second wife, Camilla.

“Charles and Camilla don’t seem to have the global pull and there seems to be this absolute campaign to make William and Kate the family’s global stars,” said Holt, the author of “The Duchess of Cambridge: A Decade of Modern Royal Style.”

“There seems to be a whole royal family operation to elevate the Cambridges.”

One highly placed palace source added: “If Charles and Diana had made a go of it we wouldn’t be talking like this. Because Charles and Camilla put their own needs and happiness first [having an affair that helped lead to the end of Charles and Diana’s marriage], we are in a continuing constitutional bind that means that *William and Kate are the Windsors’ last cards*.”

It remains to be seen how Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, will be known when Charles becomes king, but Kate will be given the title of Princess of Wales — just as Diana once was.

*There is also, no doubt, the goal of highlighting the differences between Kate and her sister-in-law, Markle.

“When Kate came in, she said, ‘I’m going to learn the ropes.’ Meghan said, ‘I’m going to hit the ground running,'” said the palace source. “Learning the ropes is a lifetime job; hitting the ground running is not the royal style, and for good reason. You have to know who you’re running to — and who’s alongside you.”*

Kate officially entered royal life when she wed William on April 29, 2011. The couple now have three children: Prince George, 8 and himself a future king; Princess Charlotte, 6; and 3-year-old Prince Louis.

One source who knows the Middleton family revealed: “Kate has a tiny team surrounding her day to day. *She’s not part of the royal circus — for her, less is more.”*…_









						Royal family’s ‘future lies in Kate Middleton’s hands’: Insiders
					

With the royal family in chaos over Prince Andrew’s scandals and Prince Harry’s rejection, a team is making sure Middleton — the future queen — is poised to save the monarchy.




					pagesix.com


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> They were flush with money and potential back then. Now, 2 kids, Covid restrictions, the Ellen show, the O interview, the NYC trip etc., their world has changed. They have repeatedly failed and floundered. Clearly, the force is not with them.
> 
> View attachment 5298435


When he got paid $500k by JPMorgan right after Megxit to ramble on about his mental health issues due to Diana’s death to a select group of the Bank’s high net worth clients, Classless and Clueless probably thought easy money would just keep rolling in. But COVID hit and paid speaking engagements for anyone not in the medical field dried up and their cash flow projections based on xx number of paid speaking engagements per year went into the toilet. They appear to have kept spending thinking they would find other sources of revenue but nothing has panned out so far.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> When he got paid $500k by JPMorgan right after Megxit to ramble on about his mental health issues due to Diana’s death to a select group of the Bank’s high net worth clients, Classless and Clueless probably thought easy money would just keep rolling in. But COVID hit and paid speaking engagements for anyone not in the medical field dried up and their cash flow projections based on xx number of paid speaking engagements per year went into the toilet. They appear to have kept spending thinking they would find other sources of revenue but nothing has panned out so far.


wouldn't it be great to see them go live in a regular 3-bedroom home and do their own chores, grocery shopping, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This just in:


----------



## bellecate

*From May 2011,*
Prince Andrew’s daughters are to be stripped of their 24-hour police protection after a growing row over the £500,000 annual cost. 
Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie are the biggest losers of a Scotland Yard review of security for the Royal Family.
The princesses, *fifth and sixth in line to the throne*, will be given protection only when they attend official events on behalf of the Royal Family.

So H perhaps 6th in line isn't such a deciding factor.


----------



## Chanbal

Of course, Netfl*x needs to sponsor the security of its most valuable employee. 


*Prince Harry*_* does pick his moments, doesn't he? *

Just in case the Queen had temporarily forgotten about the nightmare that he and the Duchess of Sussex have visited upon her in recent months, here he is to remind her that, whatever other pressing issues she might have on her plate, it's all about HIM.

*What a whining, pathetic bore this man has become.

What an entitled, tedious little ingrate.*

Not content with trashing his family, splashing his grievances all over the world's front pages and kicking his 95-year-old granny when she's down, he's now demanding that she – and the British taxpayer – stump up for the privilege.

Let's be in no doubt: it was Harry and Meghan's own decision to leave behind their Royal trappings in search of a different life in America. Theirs and theirs alone…_









						SARAH VINE: If Prince Harry wants security for the family, ask Netflix
					

SARAH VINE: Let's be in no doubt: it was Harry and Meghan's own decision to leave behind their Royal trappings in search of a different life in America. Theirs and theirs alone.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Of course, Netfl*x needs to sponsor the security of its most valuable employee.
> View attachment 5298466
> 
> *Prince Harry*_* does pick his moments, doesn't he? *
> 
> Just in case the Queen had temporarily forgotten about the nightmare that he and the Duchess of Sussex have visited upon her in recent months, here he is to remind her that, whatever other pressing issues she might have on her plate, it's all about HIM.
> 
> *What a whining, pathetic bore this man has become.
> 
> What an entitled, tedious little ingrate.*
> 
> Not content with trashing his family, splashing his grievances all over the world's front pages and kicking his 95-year-old granny when she's down, he's now demanding that she – and the British taxpayer – stump up for the privilege.
> 
> Let's be in no doubt: it was Harry and Meghan's own decision to leave behind their Royal trappings in search of a different life in America. Theirs and theirs alone…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: If Prince Harry wants security for the family, ask Netflix
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Let's be in no doubt: it was Harry and Meghan's own decision to leave behind their Royal trappings in search of a different life in America. Theirs and theirs alone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


whining, pathetic bore is a good description.....also pouty man-boy


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be great to see them go live in a regular 3-bedroom home and do their own chores, grocery shopping, etc.


Why not? A lot of people way more important than them do that.

They may end up in Rosarito asking TM to use his guest bedroom. Though, I don't wish that to TM.


----------



## Lodpah

poopsie said:


> ...........well documented neo-Nazi threats?
> What did he do? Refuse to return the uniform?


In other words we are running out of money.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> He's always suing someone....uugh


Well he really is an American now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> "_Less is more_" is a concept that doesn't work for Little Miss Forgetful.
> 
> *Royal insiders say the monarchy is counting on one person to save the family’s reputation amidst an ongoing sea of scandal: future queen Kate Middleton.*
> 
> _“As the Prince Andrew scandal shows, the monarchy is in desperate need of reassuringly conventional royal performers,” Patrick Jephson, the former chief of staff for Kate’s mother-in-law Princess Diana, told The Post exclusively. “*Catherine is just what these troubled royal times need* —* it’s no exaggeration that the Windsors’ future lies in her hands.”*
> 
> It’s been a week of hell for the royal family, following the announcement that Prince Andrew will spend the rest of his life in the wilderness after being stripped of his HRH and military titles by his mother, Queen Elizabeth, amid a sex assault lawsuit.
> 
> Add to this the continued tensions of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle having left the institution and accused an unnamed senior member of the royal family of questioning their son Archie’s complexion.
> 
> It’s no wonder a small team of advisers is focused on shaping Kate’s legacy.
> 
> This week, we got the first glimpse of her as a future queen in three stunning portraits released to celebrate her 40th birthday — and they include a couple of very deliberately placed nods to the past.
> In the photos by Paolo Roversi, Kate wears the iconic sapphire and diamond engagement ring that belonged to her husband’s late mother, Diana, as well as the former Princess of Wales’ Collingwood Pearl earrings.
> 
> “It’s a very calculated decision by Kate and William to keep including Diana in anything that is about setting out a new royal chapter,” Bethan Holt, fashion director of the UK Daily Telegraph, told The Post. “It’s very clever of Kate to keep her memory alive.”
> 
> Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge, has worn the earrings on a number of other occasions in the past few years.
> 
> “*Monarchy is the ultimate long game … because unlike business, politics or media stardom, royalty is for life and its time horizons are infinite,” said Jephson. “Catherine has mastered that long game and that’s a very significant achievement.”*
> 
> And she’s needed more than ever, and not just because of the scandals but also because she and William are much more popular than the next king, Prince Charles, and his second wife, Camilla.
> 
> “Charles and Camilla don’t seem to have the global pull and there seems to be this absolute campaign to make William and Kate the family’s global stars,” said Holt, the author of “The Duchess of Cambridge: A Decade of Modern Royal Style.”
> 
> “There seems to be a whole royal family operation to elevate the Cambridges.”
> 
> One highly placed palace source added: “If Charles and Diana had made a go of it we wouldn’t be talking like this. Because Charles and Camilla put their own needs and happiness first [having an affair that helped lead to the end of Charles and Diana’s marriage], we are in a continuing constitutional bind that means that *William and Kate are the Windsors’ last cards*.”
> 
> It remains to be seen how Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, will be known when Charles becomes king, but Kate will be given the title of Princess of Wales — just as Diana once was.
> 
> *There is also, no doubt, the goal of highlighting the differences between Kate and her sister-in-law, Markle.
> 
> “When Kate came in, she said, ‘I’m going to learn the ropes.’ Meghan said, ‘I’m going to hit the ground running,'” said the palace source. “Learning the ropes is a lifetime job; hitting the ground running is not the royal style, and for good reason. You have to know who you’re running to — and who’s alongside you.”*
> 
> Kate officially entered royal life when she wed William on April 29, 2011. The couple now have three children: Prince George, 8 and himself a future king; Princess Charlotte, 6; and 3-year-old Prince Louis.
> 
> One source who knows the Middleton family revealed: “Kate has a tiny team surrounding her day to day. *She’s not part of the royal circus — for her, less is more.”*…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal family’s ‘future lies in Kate Middleton’s hands’: Insiders
> 
> 
> With the royal family in chaos over Prince Andrew’s scandals and Prince Harry’s rejection, a team is making sure Middleton — the future queen — is poised to save the monarchy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


That's an awful lot of pressure to put on her.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Classless and Clueless


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Holy moly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says: Give me back my bodyguards — Daily Mail
> 
> 
> Lawyers acting for Harry have written a 'pre-action protocol' letter to the Home Office, indicating they will seek a judicial review if continued security is not provided by the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


Boy I go out for a few hours and the you know what appears to have hit the fan.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> He feels the decision to remove his security was wrong.


Of course he does now that the cash is drying up. He decided to step away from public life as a royal, he can figure out how to protect his family on his dime, not that of UK or US taxpayers.


----------



## charlottawill

I like to imagine the Queen sending this brief note:

Harry my dear boy,
I am so sorry to hear you and your family will not be able to join us for my jubilee.
All the best,
Gan Gan


----------



## octopus17

I'm quite happy about them never returning to the UK, in fact more than happy. They wanted their freedom, well now they've got it. Just stay away, you're not welcome here.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt they can make anyone pay for their security...but what exactly is wrong with these two chancers?



Wait, apparently he is fighting them over the privilege to pay *himself* for police protection (instead of just hiring security like anyone else). So bizarre.

ETA: late to the party, I didn't see the discussion had already four more pages!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Exactly! Well said. If anything he should have learned compassion and what a hard life is, after all he’s been to Africa so many times and has witnessed true hardship. Proves that he’s an idiot, lying and stupid man. That’s why he met his equal. Their small minds think alike. Two frickin narcissistic and social paths! I fear for their children. I hope they have their own security from those two idiots.


The only thing H knows about compassion is perhaps how to spell it and even that is iffy. He was too busy being the Clown Prince to realize how others lived and suffered even in Africa. IMO, he regurgitated speeches written by the palace staff without completely understanding their meaning especially when feelings were being expressed. H's only concerns were about H's feelings and how he suffered when his mother died and, he stoked that fire until it consumed his entire being in spite of receiving mental health care. Then came along a Sneaky Selfish Sweet-Talking Viper, who lured him into her nest of lies and deceit. If he were to return to UK, he would require extensive mental health rehab.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Uh, yeah, this will happen /snark
> 
> _As it stands, Harry feels “unable to return” with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet due to high threat levels. He’s arguing that his privately funded US protection team *needs access to the necessary UK intelligence *to keep his family safe as opposed to using taxpayer funded security._
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/scobie




I'm so over their poor victim cries. I would also like to see those neo-nazi threats because IMHO it's mostly in their heads.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> H could have brought the action two years ago… this is an excuse for not coming to the UK next summer



Thank god. So everyone else can enjoy the jubilee without walking on eggshells, waiting for the next move of the lunatic and her handbag or fearing their private conversations are being recorded.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> They were flush with money and potential back then. Now, 2 kids, Covid restrictions, the Ellen show, the O interview, the NYC trip etc., their world has changed. They have repeatedly failed and floundered. Clearly, the force is not with them.
> 
> View attachment 5298435


Except I don't think they'll ever realize they were wrong.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*There is also, no doubt, the goal of highlighting the differences between Kate and her sister-in-law, Markle.*_



Kate and Markle


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Boy I go out for a few hours and the you know what appears to have hit the fan.



I guess that will teach you to get your priorities straight from now on!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I believe the people in the UK, including his relatives, will be very supportive of him not traveling.



He’s making Britain sound more dangerous than his tour of Afghanistan 

Reminds me of this.


H believes he cannot safely return to the U.K….. be still my beating heart! However will we go on without him?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Boy I go out for a few hours and the you know what appears to have hit the fan.


I re-read the DM article carefully , H is demanding security in the UK , not the US
Ok a legal mess , suing the govt not the family , and the Sussexes have a taste for never letting go of legal proceedings
And the timing is nasty, nothing will get thru the courts before the Jubilee, so this is just pique - making people think something prevents his return
Badly done H, just send your regrets instead of taking legal action


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> I re-read the DM article carefully , H is demanding security in the UK , not the US
> Ok a legal mess , suing the govt not the family , and the Sussexes have a taste for never letting go of legal proceedings
> And the timing is nasty, nothing will get thru the courts before the Jubilee, so this is just pique - making people think something prevents his return
> Badly done H, just send your regrets instead of taking legal action


I think they were looking for free security here when they first arrived but they got shut down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not that I agree with Hazz, on another site, someone pointed out that Hazz’s security team(?) cannot carry guns in the UK. Royal Protection Officers can. Is this true?  Ya kno, QE did have a ‘crossbow incident’ recently.

Also, rumor is this suit was started last fall and that this is the 3rd time Hazz has filed this suit. True? The speculation is the DM was going to print the story so Hazz leaked it. Now, who told Hazz what the DM was planning?  Eug?  Will? The DM?  Also, speculation is the bullying info will be released this week.

So, everyone at their stations. It could be a bumpy week.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I re-read the DM article carefully , H is demanding security in the UK , not the US
> Ok a legal mess , suing the govt not the family , and the Sussexes have a taste for never letting go of legal proceedings
> And the timing is nasty, nothing will get thru the courts before the Jubilee, so this is just pique - making people think something prevents his return
> Badly done H, just send your regrets instead of taking legal action



Yes, his team can carry guns here, the USA.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so over their poor victim cries. I would also like to see those neo-nazi threats because IMHO it's mostly in their heads.


Probably like the comments about the color of the baby's skin.


----------



## xincinsin

So many sweeping statements in that pompous declaration by Hazard's legal counsel: 

"As is widely known..." Widely known by whom?
"... his security was compromised, due to the absence of police protection, whilst leaving a charity event" Blame it on the police? What compromise? No one gripped his arm or touched his back, so he lost his way to the toilet?

You know what would be the perfect solution?
"Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne" Remove him from the LOS and his lifelong security risk would immediately downgrade.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> So many sweeping statements in that pompous declaration by Hazard's legal counsel:
> 
> "As is widely known..." Widely known by whom?
> "... his security was compromised, due to the absence of police protection, whilst leaving a charity event" Blame it on the police? What compromise? No one gripped his arm or touched his back, so he lost his way to the toilet?
> 
> You know what would be the perfect solution?
> "Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne" Remove him from the LOS and his lifelong security risk would immediately downgrade.


Even with that, due to their exaggerated sense of self-importance they will still think they are targets. But I doubt they're rich enough to be kidnapping targets.


----------



## rose60610

ITA with the above posts. M&H get 150+ million from Netflix, etc (on top of what they supposedly already had) and can't afford the security they believe they need? And they want Lilibet to meet Grandma? Has Lilibet met Grandpa Markle or any of the Markle relatives who live thousands of miles closer? The only reason they want Lilibet with TQ is for the photos that they can sell for $$$. They can't get that kind of money if Lilibet was photographed with Meghan's family. They could still get a lot with M's family, but COME ON, the REAL money is Lilibet with TQ, you know TWO "Lilibets" in one photo. TQ is 95, Meghan is petrified TQ may pass away before she can cash in while baby Lilibet is still unable to utter "Mom, you're such an embarrassing grifting jerk".


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be great to see them go live in a regular 3-bedroom home and do their own chores, grocery shopping, etc.


There's a reality show I'd watch - "Hanging with the Harkles". "In today's episode "The Duchess" visits Home Goods to pick up some accessories for their new nest in Rancho Cucamonga, and then pops into Costco to stock up on toilet paper."


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> ITA with the above posts. M&H get 150+ million from Netflix, etc (on top of what they supposedly already had) and can't afford the security they believe they need? And they want Lilibet to meet Grandma? Has Lilibet met Grandpa Markle or any of the Markle relatives who live thousands of miles closer? The only reason they want Lilibet with TQ is for the photos that they can sell for $$$. They can't get that kind of money if Lilibet was photographed with Meghan's family. They could still get a lot with M's family, but COME ON, the REAL money is Lilibet with TQ, you know TWO "Lilibets" in one photo. TQ is 95, Meghan is petrified TQ may pass away before she can cash in while baby Lilibet is still unable to utter "Mom, you're such an embarrassing grifting jerk".


I think that's what they might get from Netflix over a period of time as they provide content, but I don't believe they got anything near that up front. Netflix has legions of lawyers and they are not stupid.


----------



## gracekelly

The answer is obvious.  Harry needs to maintain strict privacy and not leave his abode, wherever it might be.  No contact with the outside world in any manner shape or form.  

His ego is talking or very he has severe delusional thoughts and it could be a combo of both.  The ego causes him to think that he is sought after, important and the next savior of humanity.  He wants to be equal with William as we already know, so he is demanding the same type of security.  He is asking for state run security because they have access to information that a private security firm would not be able to get.  Why that should be important to someone in his low position is  puzzling. Is he afraid of terroists?  Alien abduction?  (The aliens from outer space don't want him either)    I think he is afraid of being called names in public and people laughing at him.  All the security in the world won't stop that or improve his reputation.  In the end, this will be the final excuse as to why he is not going back to the UK.  He will use this to mask the fact that he wasn't invited and no one wants him back.  Is he planning on using this in his book?  You bet he is.  It is on the list of insults the poor fellow has suffered since being born.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> There's a reality show I'd watch - "Hanging with the Harkles". "In today's episode "The Duchess" visits Home Goods to pick up some accessories for their new nest in Rancho Cucamonga, and then pops into Costco to stock up on toilet paper."


Tomorrow's episode is returning to Home Goods to buy more dishes.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> There's a reality show I'd watch - "Hanging with the Harkles". "In today's episode "The Duchess" visits Home Goods to pick up some accessories for their new nest in Rancho Cucamonga, and then pops into Costco to stock up on toilet paper."



Is anyone else wondering if this might become a reality? The Kardashian's got their start this way, albeit they started when the K kids were teenagers. They're billionaires now, if you believe the reports. Who wants to bet that Meghan will come out with her own fragrance in time for Christmas '22?  If she can't nail Elon before then, we're probably gonna start seeing some more merch.


----------



## lanasyogamama

There’s no way Spotify or Netflix will pay if they don’t provide content.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Is anyone else wondering if this might become a reality? The Kardashian's got their start this way, albeit they started when the K kids were teenagers. They're billionaires now, if you believe the reports. Who wants to bet that Meghan will come out with her own fragrance in time for Christmas '22?  If she can't nail Elon before then, we're probably gonna start seeing some more merch.


Meghan stinks.  Not sure how many bots and stans can buy "Smell like Me Me Me!!! to actually line their pockets.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Would this be the reason why some people are uncharacteristically quiet?



Ooooh! They might receive new titles after all: Crime Lord and Lady or Don and Dona or Jail Birds. I can hardly wait!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Meghan stinks.  Not sure how many bots and stans can buy "Smell like Me Me Me!!! to actually line their pockets.



ITA Meghan stinks. But if people bought the fragrance as a gag gift for others who they know can't stand her, it could make some serious cash. Like, enough to buy a whole season's worth of ill fitting clothes and another flock of rescue chickens. And another vise for Harry's ball$.  The current vise is probably getting worn out.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> ITA Meghan stinks. But if people bought the fragrance as a gag gift for others who they know can't stand her, it could make some serious cash. Like, enough to buy a whole season's worth of ill fitting clothes and another flock of rescue chickens. And another vise for Harry's ball$.  *The current vise is probably getting worn out.*


I doubt it.  The current one (size XS) is probably way too big for his family jewels.


----------



## Toby93

Gimmethebag said:


> I don’t know why we have to not like Camilla if we also liked Diana. Charles never should have married Diana and what she went through was legit bananas. You can feel for her and admire her style and philanthropy…
> 
> But Camilla was not some short term fling. Charles has been pretty dedicated to her for decades now. She comes across as someone who is funny, quick, and hard working. She supports domestic abuse survivors and she always came across like she is pretty good to Charles’ boys in addition to her own kids.


Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.


----------



## rose60610

Toby93 said:


> Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.



Great post!


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.


I don't dislike Camilla, but both Cs behaved poorly carrying on that affair. I wasn't even a royal watcher and I can never ever get  "Charles the tampon" out of my mind.

ETA: I admit a bias against those who commit adultery and that applies to Diana too.


----------



## tiktok

Toby93 said:


> Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.



I definitely have a moral issue with people who conduct adulterous affairs, so I’m not some big fan of Camilla’s, but I very much disagree that Camilla was the reason Diana was desperately unhappy. When your husband cheats on you the reason isn’t his mistress, it’s you and your husband - only you two are responsible for  your relationship and your choices in the marriage.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *IMO Same as what is wrong with Andy, perhaps even Margaret.  Perhaps - Entitled, privileged, delusional, etc.*
> This, though, is a different level of entitlement.
> 
> 
> _The Queen is understood to have been made aware of her grandson's action, which is thought to be the *first time a member of the Royal Family has brought a case against Her Majesty's Government.*
> 
> A source said: 'Harry's argument in a nutshell is: *'You got the law wrong.' *He feels the decision to remove his security was wrong. Pre-action protocol was sent by Harry's lawyers to the Home Office a couple of months ago. This is essentially a precursor to a judicial review.'
> 
> Suggesting why Harry may have chosen now – two years after 'Megxit' – to launch his legal bid, the source added: 'When Harry came back last April for Prince Philip's funeral, he was given security. But when he came back in the summer, he wasn't.' _
> 
> 
> ETA: Now, can QE/Charles/Will remove those titles?


The spares' nightmares when they realize that they have become a minute cog in the Wheel of (Royal) Fortune.  Here, I define 'Fortune' as a power that favorably or unfavorably governs one's life.


----------



## Chanbal

The Palace (or QE) should be sympathetic with Hazz and address his security concerns by removing him from the line of succession.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.


Diana never really loved him, she just wanted him to love her.  Plus she had a few lovers while married.

That marriage was a disaster from the beginning.


----------



## Yanca

charlottawill said:


> I think they were looking for free security here when they first arrived but they got shut down.




The Security thing is so bizarre, true his  US security can not carry guns in the UK, and according to their press release they are willing to pay from their own pocket protection from " state police" then why not just hire a UK based private security? why  file for judicial review from the home office? It seems that they just want to press the GOvt to provide state security for them when they are there? even if they are non working, just because he was a Royal??  They can not just help themselves from suing everyone


----------



## xincinsin

Yanca said:


> They can not just help themselves from suing everyone


Someone mentioned that they needed an alternative income source.
Professional litigant?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yanca said:


> The Security thing is so bizarre, true his  US security can not carry guns in the UK, and according to their press release they are willing to pay from their own pocket protection from " state police" then why not just hire a UK based private security? why  file for judicial review from the home office? It seems that they just want to press the GOvt to provide state security for them when they are there? even if they are non working, just because he was a Royal??  They can not just help themselves from suing everyone



I agree - there are some legitimate questions about these ‘visits’. Is it just a photo op as many suspect? If QE wanted this visit, wouldn’t she pay for the security?   His security concerns, too, are legitimate and need to be addressed. It seems there are several, reasonable solutions beyond what he is suggesting — giving his team access to UK’s files.  Weird request/demand, IMO, as everything with this BRF is. Seems like it could be resolved without a court case.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Is anyone else wondering if this might become a reality? The Kardashian's got their start this way, albeit they started when the K kids were teenagers. They're billionaires now, if you believe the reports. Who wants to bet that Meghan will come out with her own fragrance in time for Christmas '22?  If she can't nail Elon before then, we're probably gonna start seeing some more merch.


Nothing would surprise me at this point. She's all about the cash. Dignity went out the window after the Ellen debacle.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems like it could be resolved without a court case.


No doubt, but that would deprive them of the attention they thrive on.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.


Agreed, but the narrative has shifted to one where Charles and Camilla were just social friends until his marriage hit the rocks, Diana cheated first,  and then he resumed an affair with Camilla. Only the three of them (and maybe a dozen of their closest friends haha) really knew the truth. We can only speculate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Diana never really loved him, she just wanted him to love her.  Plus she had a few lovers while married.
> 
> That marriage was a disaster from the beginning.


ITA. I've mentioned before that Diana dreamed of becoming Princess of Wales from a very young age and she'd sit in her bedroom gazing at a picture of Charles dressed in his Prince of Wales regalia dreaming about it. I'm guessing she was more infatuated with the PofW than with Charles. Yes, she also had lovers, but she forgot to mention in her famous interview that there were four or maybe more in the marriage and most people just believed her version of the events.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This won’t help Hazzie’s case - curses, those  pesky facts!



"Keep a low profile & shut-up, Haz."

Fat chance as long as he's with her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so over their poor victim cries. I would also like to see those neo-nazi threats because IMHO it's mostly in their heads.


Yes I was worried this might be a bit too political but I was like what well-documented threats? Would these be on the same day as the photoshopped racist headlines apparently came out?

If memory serves Britain has not had a neo nazi attack in years at all. (Thank god) Talk about overstating the risk.


rose60610 said:


> Is anyone else wondering if this might become a reality? The Kardashian's got their start this way, albeit they started when the K kids were teenagers. They're billionaires now, if you believe the reports. Who wants to bet that Meghan will come out with her own fragrance in time for Christmas '22?  If she can't nail Elon before then, we're probably gonna start seeing some more merch.


I really don’t want her to hook up with Elon and I doubt it will happen.

I feel like this is the year he and Azaelia Banks finally admit they are true soul mates  


purseinsanity said:


> I doubt it.  The current one (size XS) is probably way too big for his family jewels.


Yet another case of his rocks coming up short for M. 


Maggie Muggins said:


> The spares' nightmares when they realize that they have become a minute cog in the Wheel of (Royal) Fortune.  Here, I define 'Fortune' as a power that favorably or unfavorably governs one's life.




Andre Rieu’s Face is all of us when M turned the corner in that red saggy dress & fake tan.


----------



## K.D.

Apparently this is what started the debate: 





> The application for a judicial review - a challenge in the High Court against the decision of a public body or government department - follows a security incident in London in July 2021 when the duke's car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.











						Prince Harry in legal fight to pay for UK police protection
					

The Duke of Sussex wants to be able to pay for a team of officers when he visits with his family.



					www.bbc.com
				




I think it's telling that the response from a government spokesperson is 'we don't give details, so security is not compromised' and the Sussexes tell all about their lack of security, thus giving some people ideas probably?  


> A government spokesperson said the UK's "protective security system is rigorous and proportionate".
> They added: "It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements. To do so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals' security."


----------



## xincinsin

That offer Hazard made to pay for UK police protection when he comes a-visiting? That alleged offer was made at the Sandringham Summit. I'd like to know at which point of the negotiations he made the offer. When he was grandly offering for his wench and him to be globetrotting moneyspinning independently wealthy celebs? After his half-in/half-out offer was turned down? When he was grasping for his last vestiges of royal privilege?

How does the timeline work out? Hazard claimed in the mother of all lies aka the OW interview, that the withdrawal of police protection took them by surprise when they were across the Pond living it up as "internationally protected" idiots. This latest tale seems to imply that it was already discussed during the summit. Otherwise, why would he be offering to pay for UK police protection? Is selective amnesia contagious? Maybe Methane infected him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

In what wacky universe is paparazzi trying to get photos of a public figure/celeb a security incident? Surely it’s the norm & he should be grateful anyone was interested.


----------



## Icyjade

So the Queen’s children (Princess Anne, Wessexes, etc) don’t have security except when they are on duty but the dastardly duo who are just the grandchildren requires security all the time? 

Right. 

I keep thinking nothing much they do will surprise me anymore but they keep raising to new heights. Amazing.


----------



## djuna1

Harry first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for himself and his family in January of 2020 at Sandringham.That offer was dismissed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

djuna1 said:


> Harry first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for himself and his family in January of 2020 at Sandringham.That offer was dismissed.



Yes because our country doesn’t want armed police (or indeed anyone) apart from in the most dangerous and immediate of situations and some privileged idiot who walked out of the job he wants the benefits for  and his d list dog of a wife doing a photo op doesn’ qualify as that.

he can hire all the gun-toting rent a-rambos he wants in the US and he’s welcome to stay there and enjoy it but that’s not our culture and it’s not a reasonable request.

add on- sorry if this qualifies as political mods but I feel it is relevant.


----------



## xincinsin

Apart from getting kidnapped and held hostage for ransom, is there any threat risk? The "others who have left public office" may have knowledge of official secrets. What does Hazard have to offer the desperate kidnapper? 

Make your life simpler, Hazard. Don't come home to the traps, tabloids and triggers. Home is where your hussy is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> He wants to be equal with William as we already know, so he is demanding the same type of security.



They should have nipped that in the bud by refusing his ridiculous demand of a wedding budget equal to William's. You know, the future king, not the ex-spare.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Camilla may be dedicated and hard working, but it's difficult to get over the fact that she was carrying out an affair with Charles for most of his married life and was the reason that Diana was so desperately unhappy in her marriage.  Slinking around behind Dianas back and sleeping with Charles is not a quality that a lot of us admire or forget.



I'm not a fan of anyone getting involved with a married person, but I'll go out on a limb and say Charles was the one who first took vows and then slinked behind his wife's back and cheated on her, making her "desperately unhappy" in the process. Besides the fact that by all accounts they just weren't compatible and would have been unhappy either way. If he can be forgiven, Camilla can be as well, especially seeing those two are good for each other and have been going strong for decades.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> When your husband cheats on you the reason isn’t his mistress, it’s you and your husband - only you two are responsible for  your relationship and your choices in the marriage.



That said, some people are just cheaters. They don't need a reason, their spouse might not necessarily have done anything wrong, it's just what they do.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not a fan of anyone getting involved with a married person, but I'll go out on a limb and say Charles was the one who first took vows and then slinked behind his wife's back and cheated on her, making her "desperately unhappy" in the process. Besides the fact that by all accounts they just weren't compatible and would have been unhappy either way. If he can be forgiven, Camilla can be as well, especially seeing those two are good for each other and have been going strong for decades.



yes, agreed.  I think Charles sent Camilla flowers who’s the was on his honeymoon with Diana.  He was always an @ss.  Diana did some horrid things later  during their marriage but it was Charles who strayed first.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, apparently he is fighting them over the privilege to pay *himself* for police protection (instead of just hiring security like anyone else). So bizarre.
> 
> ETA: late to the party, I didn't see the discussion had already four more pages!



It's not about who pay. 

Reading between the lines, he wants to bring in security that (want to) carry arms. 

We have very strict laws on who is allowed to carry guns on our streets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> It's not about who pay.
> 
> Reading between the lines, he wants to bring in security that (want to) carry arms.
> 
> We have very strict laws on who is allowed to carry guns on our streets.


I read it as he also wants his hired guns to have access to police intel. If it's such a chore coming to the UK, I do hope he takes, as always, the easy route and just forget about coming. I'm certain that he just wants to bring his clown home for photo ops and merch more coats.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I read it as he also wants his hired guns to have access to police intel. If it's such a chore coming to the UK, I do hope he takes, as always, the easy route and just forget about coming. I'm certain that he just wants to bring his clown home for photo ops and merch more coats.



He doesn't get it's not just about him, but there are things called laws and setting-up precedents. He really thinks he is the centre of the Universe. They are so sickeningly self-important. 

Does he really think he's a target for Neo-Nazis?  Happily dressing-up as one 2005 as a merry jape, he obviously doesn't see the irony of that paranoid statement. 

No bodyguard/CPO is allowed to own/carry any sort of gun and I hope never will, anyone can proclaim themselves a bodyguard with a few background checks.  No-one has even been allowed to own a handgun since the mid-'90s following the Dunblane Massacre 1996. We have enough problems with knives (also illegal). 

The only way he'd get an armed guard is to pay for British armed forces/armed police to accompany him and our services are not for hire (unless your national embassy needs protecting - then you get armed-police with machine guns). Last time I checked, they don't represent any country, least of all the UK.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think he clams to want this for a short visit, *hoping to set a precedent* before moving back/spending more and more time there.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> How does the timeline work out? Hazard claimed in the mother of all lies aka the OW interview, that the withdrawal of police protection took them by surprise when *they were across the Pond living it up as* *"internationally protected" idiots.* This latest tale seems to imply that it was already discussed during the summit. Otherwise, why would he be offering to pay for UK police protection? Is selective amnesia contagious? Maybe Methane infected him.


You nailed it, the designation is perfect.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Nothing like British humor: "_We must learn to bear the loss_"


----------



## marietouchet

Guns/no guns, paparazzi, intel /no intel , it is all a smokescreen

The TIMING of the security press release, WHY NOW ? This is issue is two years old, it was put to bed for his last two trips 

He is trying to gain sympathy for not going to the Jubilee, the sugars will eat it up and his critics are distracted

The Andrew mess gives him a bit of cover paradoxically … I noticed a lot of us hanging out in the Andrew thread in the last weeks


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The sugars are forever stuck on highschool drama.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, but the narrative has shifted to one where Charles and Camilla were just social friends until his marriage hit the rocks, Diana cheated first,  and then he resumed an affair with Camilla. Only the three of them (and maybe a dozen of their closest friends haha) really knew the truth. We can only speculate.



People tend to forget that Camilla cheated on her husband with Charles long before Diana came on the scene. And to be fair I believe Camilla’s husband cheated too. Infidelity was apparently the norm in their social scene. That doesn’t mean cheaters ever truly accept infidelity as acceptable when it happens to them. They only believe it’s okay when they do it because they have a very good reason, they are horny. 

I don’t believe Diana cheated first. Charles was still emotionally involved with Camilla before the wedding, even if he was able to keep his pants on.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Guns/no guns, paparazzi, intel /no intel , it is all a smokescreen
> 
> The TIMING of the security press release, WHY NOW ? This is issue is two years old, it was put to bed for his last two trips
> 
> He is trying to gain sympathy for not going to the Jubilee, the sugars will eat it up and his critics are distracted
> 
> The Andrew mess gives him a bit of cover paradoxically … I noticed a lot of us hanging out in the Andrew thread in the last weeks


I wonder if they were invited to attend the Jubilee. It's like giving excuses for not attending an event when there is no invitation. Ob*m*'s birthday party comes to mind…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It's not about who pay.
> 
> Reading between the lines, he wants to bring in security that (want to) carry arms.
> 
> We have very strict laws on who is allowed to carry guns on our streets.



As I understand it, he doesn't even want to bring armed forces  but pay the *Met Police* not only because they can carry but also they have access to British intelligence. I might misinterpret the significance here but the way I do interpret it is the guy needs help, urgently, quickly and thoroughly. Who does he think he is, Emperor of the Galaxy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> He doesn't get it's not just about him, but there are things called laws and setting-up precedents. *He really thinks he is the centre of the Universe.* They are so sickeningly self-important.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I understand it, he doesn't even want to bring armed forces  but pay the *Met Police* not only because they can carry but also they have access to British intelligence. I might misinterpret the significance here but the way I do interpret it is the guy needs help, urgently, quickly and thoroughly. *Who does he think he is, Emperor of the Galaxy?*



Great minds think alike


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh!


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!



He is such an embarrassment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> People tend to forget that Camilla cheated on her husband with Charles long before Diana came on the scene.



Oh I don't (and I'm not into any of it). BUT I really dislike the narrative of "Look what Camilla did to Di". No she didn't, Charles did.

I have no respect for homewreckers who actively go after married men - that was obviously not the situation with Camilla - and only marginally more for women who don't actively pursue but still know of the marriage, but still, HE took vows, not the tramp.

ETA: saying women because I feel women in itself aren't as susceptible but maybe I'm prejudiced.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!




I love how Kate is just ignoring the sulky toddler. Maybe that's why she's so good with kids, she had a decade of practice!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love how Kate is just ignoring the sulky toddler. Maybe that's why she's so good with kids, she had a decade of practice!


Would love to know what caused the pouty face. And this appears to be pre-MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A comment, great question:
_Is the Dutch Govt providing security for him when he is in the Netherlands for the Invictus Games?_


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> People tend to forget that Camilla cheated on her husband with Charles long before Diana came on the scene. And to be fair I believe Camilla’s husband cheated too. Infidelity was apparently the norm in their social scene. That doesn’t mean cheaters ever truly accept infidelity as acceptable when it happens to them. They only believe it’s okay when they do it because they have a very good reason, they are horny.
> 
> I don’t believe Diana cheated first. Charles was still emotionally involved with Camilla before the wedding, even if he was able to keep his pants on.


Apparently Andrew Parker Bowles couldn’t keep his pants on for most of the marriage.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Where have I seen that face before...oh I know! 11yo Raptor being mouthy to her father.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sugars are forever stuck on highschool drama.



Note to H&M and their stans.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Would love to know what caused the pouty face. And this appears to be pre-MM.



Yes, it was when the UK hosted the Olympics. Looks like they were watching Zara’s competition.  Still doesn’t explain the fuss-face.









						The Royal Family Joins in the Olympic Fun — See All the Pics!
					

Kate Middleton looked nervous during Zara's competition.




					www.popsugar.com


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> ITA. I've mentioned before that Diana dreamed of becoming Princess of Wales from a very young age and she'd sit in her bedroom gazing at a picture of Charles dressed in his Prince of Wales regalia dreaming about it. I'm guessing she was more infatuated with the PofW than with Charles. Yes, she also had lovers, but she forgot to mention in her famous interview that there were four or maybe more in the marriage and most people just believed her version of the events.


Diana was so manipulative, and look who Harry married!


----------



## CarryOn2020

More of those pesky facts:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently Andrew Parker Bowles couldn’t keep his pants on for most of the marriage.



These people are so weird to me. Can you imagine having tea or going hunting with your spouse's side piece and generally seeing them all the time because you're running in the same circles? I'd be so not interested.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> More of those pesky facts:




Sometimes I'm so caught up in their maelstrom of drama that I completely miss the obvious. Thankfully there's always someone ready to point it out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW have they already let Tonga know their hearts go out to them and they'll send lemon cakes shortly?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Diana was so manipulative, and look who Harry married!


It's like the saying: Sons marry their mother and daughters marry their fathers. I'm sure that after losing his mother's protection, H fell for M's protective claws arms. I've often seen couples marry their parents' exact character-like replica.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is a good article on the current drama. There are concerns about Lilib*t not having had a chance to meet QE & Charles due to security reasons, but there is not a single mention to visiting TM (or any other family members on the mother's side). TM has often asked for an opportunity to meet his grandkids, and can easily drive to Montecito without the need of any security. I can't understand how there are people out there that still support this entitled couple and its hypocrisy… 

“_In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
Lilibet, who is now seven months, has yet to meet her great-grandmother the Queen, grandfather the Prince of Wales and other members of the family face to face._









						Prince Harry files a claim for judicial review against Home Office decision over police protection
					

Harry wants to bring his son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet to visit from the US, but he and his family are “unable to return to his home” because it is too dangerous, a legal representative said.




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who does he think he is, Emperor of the Galaxy?





papertiger said:


> He really thinks he is the centre of the Universe. They are so sickeningly self-important.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Great minds think alike



Looks like Harry has been recruiting potential bodyguards for a while


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Hasn't he seen photos of Catherine taking the children to and from school and to shops with only one protection officer?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh I don't (and I'm not into any of it). BUT I really dislike the narrative of "Look what Camilla did to Di". No she didn't, Charles did.
> 
> I have no respect for homewreckers who actively go after married men - that was obviously not the situation with Camilla - and only marginally more for women who don't actively pursue but still know of the marriage, but still, HE took vows, not the tramp.
> 
> ETA: saying women because I feel women in itself aren't as susceptible but maybe I'm prejudiced.



Both Charles and Camilla cheated on their spouses. No amount of finger pointing at others can erase that fact. If some want to believe that that is their personal business and it shouldn’t influence the way we view them, well that’s up to the individual. Goodness knows we have had plenty of cheating presidents over the years. Personal life and public life used to be separate, but that changed in recent decades.

I won’t put C&C up on a pedestal of virtue for their good works because they are only doing their job, being working royals and doing what they are tasked to do.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW have they already let Tonga know their hearts go out to them and they'll send lemon cakes shortly?



the footage of that was insane!


----------



## marietouchet

And one more thought about the TIMING of SECURITYGATE …

doing it now, allows the story to meet the publication date for the book

Controversy sells and this is win-win, security is denied = VICTIM OF a mean UK government, security is provided = BIG VICTORY after two years of being denied, he is a victim all around


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Hasn't he seen photos of Catherine taking the children to and from school and to shops with only one protection officer?



But you don't understand. Who'd want to harrass a future queen when they can go after the Z-lister!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But you don't understand. Who'd want to harrass a future queen when they can go after the Z-lister!


You're right, I'd forgotten, lol


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I won’t put C&C up on a pedestal of virtue for their good works because they are only doing their job, being working royals and doing what they are tasked to do.


Then the same criteria should apply to William and Catherine since they are just doing the job they are paid to do and shouldn't be placed on a pedestal either. Just saying and not pointing a finger at anyone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I get paid to do my job, but I'm also pretty good at what I do


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Diana never really loved him, she just wanted him to love her.  Plus she had a few lovers while married.
> 
> That marriage was a disaster from the beginning.


but Diana was basically a child when they married....Charles was a grownup so should have known better


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> “_In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
> Lilibet, who is now seven months, has yet to meet her great-grandmother the Queen, grandfather the Prince of Wales and other members of the family face to face._



Most importantly, the Nflix overlords demand video of the meeting. Iirc the deadline for the docudrama is coming up soon.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Nothing like British humor: "_We must learn to bear the loss_"



"bear the loss"?  they did it to themselves....just shut up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> "bear the loss"?  they did it to themselves....just shut up



I read it as "The British people have to accept their beloved Sussexes are never, ever coming back, but we'll learn to live with it". Or maybe it was just my inner snark speaking


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is a good article on the current drama. There are concerns about Lilib*t not having had a chance to meet QE & Charles due to security reasons, but there is not a single mention to visiting TM (or any other family members on the mother's side). TM has often asked for an opportunity to meet his grandkids, and can easily drive to Montecito without the need of any security. I can't understand how there are people out there that still support this entitled couple and its hypocrisy…
> 
> “_In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
> Lilibet, who is now seven months, has yet to meet her great-grandmother the Queen, grandfather the Prince of Wales and other members of the family face to face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry files a claim for judicial review against Home Office decision over police protection
> 
> 
> Harry wants to bring his son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet to visit from the US, but he and his family are “unable to return to his home” because it is too dangerous, a legal representative said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


remove him from the line of succession - problem solved


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> She reminds me of my SIL who thinks that if she can talk over you in a conversation, you won’t realize that she doesn’t know what she is talking about.   She lectures me on Hermes and Chanel  and she owns neither. Meghan barges into a room and pushes herself on you so you will think she is important even though she is not. That’s why she always pushed infront of Harry.


Are you kidding me??? .. *she lectures YOU*?!?! .. the Queen of Hermes ('cos I've seen them in person and they are AMAZING) on Hermes and Chanel?  What an A-HOLE (sad to say, kind of sound like my oldest sister)!!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> and if they want to buy another house, the prices are up on buying as well as selling.  even if they don't buy another huge estate, they would want something worthy of their magnificence.  Where we live (in so cal) a very modest home in a very desirable neighborhood can easily go for over a million dollars.  I'm talking a three-bedroom home built in the 60's.


Heck .. I live in the Valley, in a "Village" with primarily Mid-Century Modern homes built in the 60's & 70's.  What I have seen, is that many of the original homeowners (who are now in their 80's) never really updated their homes (which is really sad IMO)!  These are not really big houses per se (ours is 1400 sqft - the largest in the Village), some don't have pools and many don't have a "yard" per se (again - we are SO lucky in that our original owner was the MCM Architect who built all the houses here .. so we have a good-sized yard for LA)!!  

Yet, these folks are asking over $1m for these houses .. 2 or 3 bedroom, old appliances, wicked-old bathrooms, etc. -- it really amazes me because most of them are big-time TEAR DOWNS!  Unfortunately, that's pretty much what is happening .. a developer or new family comes in and tears down the entire house .. then trying to build the quintessential F-UGLY White Box house .. forgetting that there really is not that much land to work on .. and a "lap pool" .. seriously?!?! .. why bother!  Mind you, we are thrilled that our house will likely garner easily over $1.5m, but we also know that it's very likely that someone will tear it down and that's sad to me because it really is a great example of an MCM house!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> This must have something to do with the Andrew train wreck …. Is all I can think … H is getting nasty
> 
> did the reports on Andrew say that his security was being taken away ??? I don’t remember seeing that , so alleged pervert A still has it , but H does not ??? Am I wrong ??
> 
> the DM article says that A “could” lose his security , it costs 2M pounds a year …


If Andy is to now become a "Private Citizen", then WHY SHOULD the British Taxpayer pay for HIS security?!?!?  

So, with HapHazard asking for a security team ("for his children - they would be in such danger"), does this mean that he and Megalomaniac are planning to go to the UK for the Jubilee???  I bet he thinks that he would be up there on the Balcony with the Queen and I don't think that will happen!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Heck .. I live in the Valley, in a "Village" with primarily Mid-Century Modern homes built in the 60's & 70's.  What I have seen, is that many of the original homeowners (who are now in their 80's) never really updated their homes (which is really sad IMO)!  These are not really big houses per se (ours is 1400 sqft - the largest in the Village), some don't have pools and many don't have a "yard" per se (again - we are SO lucky in that our original owner was the MCM Architect who built all the houses here .. so we have a good-sized yard for LA)!!
> 
> Yet, these folks are asking over $1m for these houses .. 2 or 3 bedroom, old appliances, wicked-old bathrooms, etc. -- it really amazes me because most of them are big-time TEAR DOWNS!  Unfortunately, that's pretty much what is happening .. a developer or new family comes in and tears down the entire house .. then trying to build the quintessential F-UGLY White Box house .. forgetting that there really is not that much land to work on .. and a "lap pool" .. seriously?!?! .. why bother!  Mind you, we are thrilled that our house will likely garner easily over $1.5m, but we also know that it's very likely that someone will tear it down and that's sad to me because it really is a great example of an MCM house!


crazy market....homes in less affluent areas here, further from the coast, old and not remodelled are being snapped up for $700k


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, it was when the UK hosted the Olympics. Looks like they were watching Zara’s competition.  Still doesn’t explain the fuss-face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family Joins in the Olympic Fun — See All the Pics!
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton looked nervous during Zara's competition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com


I remember watching the three of them at that, and they appeared to be having a great time whenever the cameras were on them. Maybe Prince Poutyface didn't care for that gentleman paying so much attention to Kate.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Well he really is an American now.


Huh?!?! .. don't 'get' your comment!  There are a LOT of us Americans who are a LOT better behaved, polite, smart, humble, grateful, and SINCERE!  Please do not judge Harry as one of us, he will NEVER be .. but, sadly .. Meghan?? .. well, she was born/lived in LA and unfortunately, along with her narcissism, a lot of "entitleitis" behavior (epic in some cases).


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Heck .. I live in the Valley, in a "Village" with primarily Mid-Century Modern homes built in the 60's & 70's.  What I have seen, is that many of the original homeowners (who are now in their 80's) never really updated their homes (which is really sad IMO)!  These are not really big houses per se (ours is 1400 sqft - the largest in the Village), some don't have pools and many don't have a "yard" per se (again - we are SO lucky in that our original owner was the MCM Architect who built all the houses here .. so we have a good-sized yard for LA)!!
> 
> Yet, these folks are asking over $1m for these houses .. 2 or 3 bedroom, old appliances, wicked-old bathrooms, etc. -- it really amazes me because most of them are big-time TEAR DOWNS!  Unfortunately, that's pretty much what is happening .. a developer or new family comes in and tears down the entire house .. then trying to build the quintessential F-UGLY White Box house .. forgetting that there really is not that much land to work on .. and a "lap pool" .. seriously?!?! .. why bother!  Mind you, we are thrilled that our house will likely garner easily over $1.5m, but we also know that it's very likely that someone will tear it down and that's sad to me because it really is a great example of an MCM house!


To their credit, if you watch Flip or Flop on HGTV Tarek and Christina usually do a pretty nice job of giving older homes in your area new life. I hadn't watched for a while, but I caught two new episodes the other night, and because of the overheated CA market I could not believe the profits they are now making relative to a few years ago. 

My daughter and her husband are tearing down a perfectly nice brick bungalow in a desirable suburb of another state that could be renovated/expanded and building a big house. It is a tasteful, architecturally designed one, but it will stick out like a sore thumb between their neighbors. They're hardly the only ones doing this in the neighborhood. They have not even started but already have a profit. Builders buy up old homes and sell new homes sight unseen for exorbitant prices. It's crazy.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Huh?!?! .. don't 'get' your comment!  There are a LOT of us Americans who are a LOT better behaved, polite, smart, humble, grateful, and SINCERE!  Please do not judge Harry as one of us, he will NEVER be .. but, sadly .. Meghan?? .. well, she was born/lived in LA and unfortunately, along with her narcissism, a lot of "entitleitis" behavior (epic in some cases).


I am American, it was a joke about the litigious nature of many, not all, Americans. Maybe she took her role on Suits a little too seriously and now considers herself a legal expert.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Huh?!?! .. don't 'get' your comment!  There are a LOT of us Americans who are a LOT better behaved, polite, smart, humble, grateful, and SINCERE!  Please do not judge Harry as one of us, he will NEVER be .. but, sadly .. Meghan?? .. well, she was born/lived in LA and unfortunately, along with her narcissism, a lot of "entitleitis" behavior (epic in some cases).


and plenty of us yanks who don't going around suing people on a regular basis (though I'll admit I do have a friend who seems to find it empowering to hire an attorney even when she isn't likely to gain anything from it)


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> but Diana was basically a child when they married....Charles was a grownup so should have known better


Diana was practically forced upon him and having to manage a wife who is basically a child must have been difficult for a guy raised to be the future king.


sdkitty said:


> "bear the loss"?  they did it to themselves....just shut up


British humour - satire and irony.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I am American, it was a joke about the litigious nature of many, not all, Americans. Maybe she took her role on Suits a little too seriously and now considers herself a legal expert.


I knew you meant litigious. lol. Americans sue more than other countries, or so I've read.


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> Diana never really loved him, she just wanted him to love her.  Plus she had a few lovers while married.
> 
> That marriage was a disaster from the beginning.



I seem to recall something about Charles being pressured to marry someone......_anyone _at the time. I don't think he was all that keen on the idea. Under those circumstances _any _marriage was bound to be a disaster


----------



## poopsie

xincinsin said:


> Someone mentioned that they needed an alternative income source.
> Professional litigant?



Especially since their last "victory" got them what.......a pound?


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I am American, it was a joke about the litigious nature of many, not all, Americans. Maybe she took her role on Suits a little too seriously and now considers herself a legal expert.


Sad but true, I agree with you there .. seems like any little 'difference' causes the parties to be in court .. crazy indeed!  My neighbor across the street (*#1*) has been renovating their house (_since the son moved out - they will likely sell soon_).  Well, the stupid neighbor on the corner (*#2*) whose house is across the street from #1 .. got all pissy about the various trucks and the noise (since they have a new baby).  Again, keeping that entitleitis in mind out here, #2 is suing #1 .. saying that they (#1) had not "informed" them (#2) of the extensive renovations!!!!  What really slays me about this, is .. on what "grounds" are they suing???  The other thing that gets me, is that we live not far from the Van Nuys Airport .. which has become WAY TOO ACTIVE with "supposedly" non-commercial planes (727's, etc.) flying out all hours of the day.  I know, for me?? .. those planes are WAY TOO noisy and they literally fly at horrible hours (5am - everyday, I'm woken up by a 'private' big-a$$ jet that goes from LA to SF numerous times per day).  To me?? .. that plane noise is a LOT WORSE than what I heard from across the street!  It's just a ridiculous lawsuit!


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Diana was practically forced upon him and having to manage a wife who is basically a child must have been difficult for a guy raised to be the future king.
> 
> British humour - satire and irony.



Don’t feel too sorry for him. He had many years to pick out a wife. He wouldn’t do it. He dated around and slept with many but he didn’t want to tie the knot. I understand his granny kind of pushed Diana on him, but it’s a far cry to say he was forced to marry her. He had his chance to select someone that fit the criteria and that he actually cared for, but he kept dragging his feet because he enjoyed living the life of a bachelor prince.

Besides, are we really supposed to respect a man in his 30s if he basically rolled over and agreed to marry some girl because his grandmother liked her?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> and plenty of us yanks who don't going around suing people on a regular basis (though I'll admit I do have a friend who seems to find it empowering to hire an attorney even when she isn't likely to gain anything from it)


Same here, I have an extremely litigious acquaintance who is suing someone and what kind of cracks me up, is that she ends up having to pay more than what she receives (if she receives ANYTHING at all)!!!  I've told her numerous times that she needs to read up on being a landlord and the tenant's rights .. especially in Massachusetts!  Sheesh ..


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Besides, are we really supposed to respect a man in his 30s if he basically rolled over and agreed to marry some girl because his grandmother liked her?


Well, the BRF aren't like the rest of us. lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Well, the BRF aren't like the rest of us. lol



I think we can all be grateful for that!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Don’t feel too sorry for him. He had many years to pick out a wife. He wouldn’t do it. He dated around and slept with many but he didn’t want to tie the knot. I understand his granny kind of pushed Diana on him, but it’s a far cry to say he was forced to marry her. He had his chance to select someone that fit the criteria and that he actually cared for, but he kept dragging his feet because he enjoyed living the life of a bachelor prince.
> 
> Besides, are we really supposed to respect a man in his 30s if he basically rolled over and agreed to marry some girl because his grandmother liked her?


The story that I recall reading is that his uncle Louis Mountbatten, along with the Queen Mother, urged him to act quickly with Diana because "There aren't many 19 year old virgins around".


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> If Andy is to now become a "Private Citizen", then WHY SHOULD the British Taxpayer pay for HIS security?!?!?
> 
> So, with HapHazard asking for a security team ("for his children - they would be in such danger"), does this mean that he and Megalomaniac are planning to go to the UK for the Jubilee???  I bet he thinks that he would be up there on the Balcony with the Queen and I don't think that will happen!


Royal Lodge is on the Windsor property. That alone would have security watching the house. The Queen will provide security for him if he ventures outside.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The story that I recall reading is that his uncle Louis Mountbatten, along with the Queen Mother, urged him to act quickly with Diana because "There aren't many 19 year old virgins around".


She and Lady Fermoy, Diana’s grandmother were the matchmakers. They tried with another sister, and she wasn’t interested.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Same here, I have an extremely litigious acquaintance who is suing someone and what kind of cracks me up, is that she ends up having to pay more than what she receives (if she receives ANYTHING at all)!!!  I've told her numerous times that she needs to read up on being a landlord and the tenant's rights .. especially in Massachusetts!  Sheesh ..


right - my friend sued a guy who she knew had no money....no certifiable income as he had his own business.  she said she wanted to see him in handcuffs.  guess she thought he would be treated like a criminal in a civil case


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Huh?!?! .. don't 'get' your comment!  There are a LOT of us Americans who are a LOT better behaved, polite, smart, humble, grateful, and SINCERE!  Please do not judge Harry as one of us, he will NEVER be .. but, sadly .. Meghan?? .. well, she was born/lived in LA and unfortunately, along with her narcissism, a lot of "entitleitis" behavior (epic in some cases).


Meghan would behave as she does no matter where she lived. If she had the same parents,she would turn out just the same. I’m from the East and I would say that people on the west coast are nicer and friendlier on the whole. Ready to be slammed for this comment.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> The story that I recall reading is that his uncle Louis Mountbatten, along with the Queen Mother, urged him to act quickly with Diana because "There aren't many 19 year old virgins around".


Plus, Diana pretended to like the outdoorsy stuff that the BRF loves. Horses, grouse shooting in Scotland, general country life, but she would never go once married. She preferred London, shopping and parties, etc.

Not a good thing to do since C and D had so little in common to begin with.


----------



## rose60610

I knew both Diana and Charles fooled around, wasn't aware to the extent that they did. Sounds like Charles shagged everyone he knew so the "acceptable" choices left were limited. 

As for security for H&M, I wouldn't put them past faking their own kidnapping for the ransom payment. Question is, would anyone  pay?


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> crazy market....homes in less affluent areas here, further from the coast, old and not remodelled are being snapped up for $700k



With the new granny flat laws any property can be income property now. And rents being what they are you could easily have your tenants pay your mortgage for you


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Sad but true, I agree with you there .. seems like any little 'difference' causes the parties to be in court .. crazy indeed!  My neighbor across the street (*#1*) has been renovating their house (_since the son moved out - they will likely sell soon_).  Well, the stupid neighbor on the corner (*#2*) whose house is across the street from #1 .. got all pissy about the various trucks and the noise (since they have a new baby).  Again, keeping that entitleitis in mind out here, #2 is suing #1 .. saying that they (#1) had not "informed" them (#2) of the extensive renovations!!!!  What really slays me about this, is .. on what "grounds" are they suing???  The other thing that gets me, is that we live not far from the Van Nuys Airport .. which has become WAY TOO ACTIVE with "supposedly" non-commercial planes (727's, etc.) flying out all hours of the day.  I know, for me?? .. those planes are WAY TOO noisy and they literally fly at horrible hours (5am - everyday, I'm woken up by a 'private' big-a$$ jet that goes from LA to SF numerous times per day).  To me?? .. that plane noise is a LOT WORSE than what I heard from across the street!  It's just a ridiculous lawsuit!



As long as the renovator is properly permitted the complainer doesn't have a case against them. Maybe with the city, but they are used to dealing with complainers. Towns have ordinances limiting working hours for contractors and homeowners for a reason, and as long as the contractors abide by those the complainers are out of luck. Sorry if it interferes with baby's nap times, but that's life. 

My daughter previously lived in walking distance to LAX. I could not believe how much they paid for their house, and then what sold it for two years later. She bought white noise machines for the bedrooms but they don't do much. You could sit on their patio and watch planes taking off every ten minutes or so, not directly overhead, off to the side. And it was pretty much from 4-5AM to 12AM-1AM. There wasn't much of a break. So due to COVID, general CA fatigue and the nature of their jobs they fled to another state and haven't looked back. I envy them.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Meghan would behave as she does no matter where she lived. If she had the same parents,she would turn out just the same.
> 
> 
> I’m from the East and I would say that people on the west coast are nicer and friendlier on the whole. Ready to be slammed for this commen



deleted


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> *Plus, Diana pretended to like the outdoorsy stuff that the BRF loves.* Horses, grouse shooting in Scotland, general country life, but she would never go once married. She preferred London, shopping and parties, etc.
> 
> Not a good thing to do since C and D had so little in common to begin with.



sounds familiar


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Meghan would behave as she does no matter where she lived. If she had the same parents,she would turn out just the same. I’m from the East and I would say that people on the west coast are nicer and friendlier on the whole. Ready to be slammed for this comment.


I'm from the east, spend a fair amount of time on the west because of having kids there, live in the midwest. There are good and bad wherever you go. I think the stereotype is that west coasters are more laid back, but it really depends where you are. I would not call the RHoBH,OC or the Kartrashians laid back.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm from the east, spend a fair amount of time on the west because of having kids there, live in the midwest. There are good and bad wherever you go. I think the stereotype is that west coasters are more laid back, but it really depends where you are. I would not call the RHoBH,OC or the Kartrashians laid back.


agree, people are people....just the affect and the accents are different


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I knew both Diana and Charles fooled around, wasn't aware to the extent that they did. *Sounds like Charles shagged everyone* he knew so the "acceptable" choices left were limited.
> 
> As for security for H&M, I wouldn't put them past faking their own kidnapping for the ransom payment. Question is, would anyone  pay?



I have read that the thinking was - since Diana [an aristocrat herself] was well acquainted with the ‘rules’ of monarchy, she understood what she marrying into. So, wonder why don’t we have a “Monaco” situation, several out-of-wedlock offspring? Wouldn’t it be funny if they started coming forward now and Hazzi must split his inheritance  Just a funny thought.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

rose60610 said:


> I knew both Diana and Charles fooled around, wasn't aware to the extent that they did. Sounds like Charles shagged everyone he knew so the "acceptable" choices left were limited.
> 
> As for security for H&M, I wouldn't put them past faking their own kidnapping for the ransom payment. Question is, would anyone  pay?


Reminds me of a movie with Danny DeVito. his wife gets kidnapped IIRC and he doesn’t want to get her back so won’t pay the ransom.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Plus, Diana pretended to like the outdoorsy stuff that the BRF loves. Horses, grouse shooting in Scotland, general country life, but she would never go once married. She preferred London, shopping and parties, etc.



Just like a girl I heard of who went grocery shopping in jeans and rainboots - apparently a look the British upper class loves when being casual - and was super interested in military history of the UK. 

Ahahahahaha.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said: 


           I knew both Diana and Charles fooled around, wasn't aware to the extent that they did. Sounds like Charles shagged everyone he knew so the "acceptable" choices left were limited.

*As for security for H&M, I wouldn't put them past faking their own kidnapping for the ransom payment. Question is, would anyone  pay?        *






Aimee3 said:


> Reminds me of a movie with Danny DeVito. his wife gets kidnapped IIRC and he doesn’t want to get her back so won’t pay the ransom.



I was thinking more on the lines of Fargo. What could go wrong!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Here is a good article on the current drama. There are concerns about Lilib*t not having had a chance to meet QE & Charles due to security reasons, but there is not a single mention to visiting TM (or any other family members on the mother's side). TM has often asked for an opportunity to meet his grandkids, and can easily drive to Montecito without the need of any security. I can't understand how there are people out there that still support this entitled couple and its hypocrisy…
> 
> “_In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
> Lilibet, who is now seven months, has yet to meet her great-grandmother the Queen, grandfather the Prince of Wales and other members of the family face to face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry files a claim for judicial review against Home Office decision over police protection
> 
> 
> Harry wants to bring his son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet to visit from the US, but he and his family are “unable to return to his home” because it is too dangerous, a legal representative said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


Oh poor H & M CRY ME A RIVER!!  IMO this is to cover up Crooked-Clawed-Hand-Mommy-Dearest M holding back the children from meeting their Great grandmother! I had said she’d do that when they vacated the UK with Archie.  Beeeach!  Poor children!!


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> “_In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
> Lilibet, who is now seven months, has yet to meet her great-grandmother the Queen, grandfather the Prince of Wales and other members of the family face to face._



I think this is what this latest kerfuffle is about.  They desperately want a photo of the baby (or both children) with QEII so that they can use it for decades and decades and pull it out periodically and post it widely when Harry and children have dropped down to 15th or 20th in line and then even further.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> I think this is what this latest kerfuffle is about.  They desperately want a photo of the baby (or both children) with QEII so that they can use it for decades and decades and pull it out periodically and post it widely when Harry and children have dropped down to 15th or 20th in line and then even further.


Yes.  Naming her Lilibet Diana was not the magic trick they thought it would be. Stupid Sot and the Wife overestimated their value to the Monarchy. If the Queen really wanted to see them, she would extend a specific invitation for a visit, put them up in Windsor Castle and the RF protection would be available. Not happening so the temper tantrums in Montecito commenced. With the Andrew problem to deal with for potentially months, why would she want 2 more miserable examples of family rot, H and M on display??????

Re: Camilla. I think the Queen recently bestowing her highest Honor on Camilla may be a preemptive move on the part of a wily old lady (said this with affection) to defuse what is anticipated to be a nasty accounting of Camilla and his Father in Hazbeen's book.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Reminds me of a movie with Danny DeVito. his wife gets kidnapped IIRC and he doesn’t want to get her back so won’t pay the ransom.



 The movie was Ruthless People. Bette Midler played the kidnapped wife who Danny DeVito was hoping the kidnappers would murder because he didn’t want her back. The couple who kidnapped her kept reducing the price of the ransom and couldn’t understand why the husband refused to pay it causing Bette Midler to utter this famous line.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have read that the thinking was - since Diana [an aristocrat herself] was well acquainted with the ‘rules’ of monarchy, she understood what she marrying into. So, wonder why don’t we have a “Monaco” situation, several out-of-wedlock offspring? Wouldn’t it be funny if they started coming forward now and Hazzi must split his inheritance  Just a funny thought.


I think Charles is smarter than Prince Albert, not that that's saying much.


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> Borrowing from a famous persona:
> View attachment 5297967
> 
> Please discuss what you want done with The List that has now reached nine pages. Someone mentioned awards a while back, but I don’t know how to conduct a survey here, so all ideas are welcome.
> 
> The List
> NB: The name of the poster in brackets indicates the person, who either invented the nickname or gleaned it from media sources.
> 
> -A c-grade f-boy [jelliedfeels]
> -A fork-tongued devious manipulative piece of work who only wants to protect your privacy so you can sell it [Piers Morgan & Chanbal]
> -A Gormless Desperate Reality TV Star On Her Vomit-Making Ellen Cheese-      Fest [Piers Morgan & Chanbal]
> -A Low Rate, Low Class ("Formidable A-List Celebrity and Social Activist" My A$$!), Lying, Two Faced, Disgusting and Pathetic Excuse For a Woman           [purseinsanity]
> -Ameoba (H) and Paramecian (M) [CeeJay]
> -America’s Very Own Beloved Planet Warriors [VON1B2]
> -Archie’s Papa [CarryOn2020]
> -Arses of Montecito [csshopper]
> -A Smirking Hooker Scoring a Big Trick On A Street Corner, Quickly Dragging  Her Hapless Client Away [csshopper]
> -Avaricious Commoner [EverSoElusive]
> -A Whiny, Balding Gargoyle [jelliedfeels]
> -Ball-less Wonder [purseinsanity]
> -Bandwagon Preachers [xincinsin]
> -Baron of Hesaheel [gracekelly]
> -Baroness, Countess, Duchess of Pump Pump [Maggie Muggins]
> -Bar Stewards [Sharont2305]
> -Beast of Her Own Ego [Maggie Muggins]
> -Beige Blandness of Montecito [Genie27]
> -Boopsie Oopsie Twins [pukasonqo]
> -Bozo Formerly Known as Prince. Aka Clown Prince [Genie27]
> -Briefcase Girl With Delusions of Grandeur [Luvbolide]
> -BunkerBoy [Chanbal]
> -Burger King [purseinsanity]
> -Calculating Liar [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Candyass, A Timid or Cowardly Person (H) [Chanbal]
> -Captain Candy Ass [Chanbal]
> -Captain Hairball and Toenail [Katel]
> -Captured Prey Being Squeezed by the Python [rose60610]
> -Carbon Foot Prince [Chanbal]
> -Cheap Prince and His Greedy Hag [breakfastatcartier]
> -Chicken Brain (H) [Maggie Muggins]
> -Chicken Feet (M) [Maggie Muggins]
> -Chief Negative Impact Officer [csshopper]
> -Chief of Negative Impact [csshopper]
> -Chief of No Impact [purseinsanity]
> -Clouds of Montecito [Chanbal]
> -Clueless Prince [rose60610]
> -Cockold Prince [EverSoElusive]
> -Commissioner Against Online Misinformation (H) [xincinsin]
> -Conceited Psycho [EverSoElusive]
> -Cowardly Prince [Lodpah]
> -Dastardly Duo [LittleStar88]
> -Dearie Dreary MM [CarryOn2020]
> -Defrocked Prince [Luvbolide]
> -Demasculated Haz [purseinsanity]
> -Demon Seed [breakfastatcartier]
> -Desperate Ducka$s [EverSoElusive]
> -Despicable Duo [Maggie Muggins]
> -Devil Incarnate [Maggie Muggins]
> -Diabolical Duo [Norm.Core]
> -Difficult Duo [Luvbolide]
> -Dilettante Duke [CarryOn2020]
> -D List Former Actress [Luvbolide]
> -Dimwit Duo [jennit]
> -Dirty Harry & Meghan Me Me [Chanbal]
> -Disastrous Duo [CarryOn2020]
> -Disgusting Duo [xincinsin]
> -Distasteful Duchess [Luvbolide]
> -Drama Mama [SomethingGoodCanWork]
> -Douchebag of Sucks [xincinsin]
> -Douchess [csshopper]
> -Douchess Dullness [CeeJay]
> -DOS = Disk Operating System [papertiger]
> -Dreadful Ogress Sucks [xincinsin]
> -Duchess Denial [Aimee3]
> -Duchess Desperate [rose60610]
> -Duchess Desperateforrelevance [needlv]
> -Duchess Disney [csshopper]
> -Duchess Do-gooder [bag-mania]
> -Duchess Dummy [Aimee3]
> -Duchess Dunce [Norm.Core]
> -Duchess Golddigger [needlv]
> -Duchess Lookatme [needlv]
> -Duchess Moaning Markle [csshopper]
> -Duchess of Bandwagon [Chanbal]
> -Duchess of Dementia [Luvbolide]
> -Duchess of Narsussex [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Duchess of Noclass [charlottawill]
> -Duchess of Sigmoid [Maggie Muggins]
> -Duchess of Sizzler [needlv]
> -Duchess Pump Pump [SomethingGoodCanWork]
> -Duchess Sh!t Show [EverSoElusive]
> -Duchess Tabloidfodder [needlv]
> -Duke and Duchess of Burningbridges [charlottawill]
> -Duke and Duchess of Diddly Squat [jennit]
> -Duke and Duchess of Windbag [charlottawill]
> -Duke Huffalot [Maggie Muggins]
> -Duke of Montecito [Chanbal]
> -Duke of Thin Air and Tantrums [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Dupe and Deceit of Sussex [le_junkie]
> -Duke Dumbdumberbarton [SomethingGoodCanWork]
> -Dumpy, Snotty Tart [jelliedfeels]
> -Dungstunk (Meghan) [purseinsanity]
> -El Chimpo [poopsie]
> -Easy Give It Away for Five Dollars Yacht Girl [Maggie Muggins]
> -Emesis-Inducing, Hit-or-Miss, Self-Proclaimed Entrepreneurs [Maggie            Muggins]
> -Evil Hollywood [EverSoElusive]
> -Flowerpot and Hardly There [gracekelly]
> -Fresh Prince of Hot Air [Chanbal]
> -Friar 6 [Chanbal]
> -Ginger Guru [Chanbal]
> -Grabby Grifters of Montecit [K.D.]
> -Grifters [csshopper]
> -Ginge and Cringe [purseinsanity]
> -Ginger Grifter [rose60610]
> -GivesMePain [purseinsanity]
> -Gullible Ginger [charlottawill]
> -Hairy the Hairdresser [Genie27]
> -Half-Wit [papertiger]
> -Handcuffed Harry [CeeJay]
> -Hap-Hazza [CeeJay]
> -Hapless [CeeJay]
> -Happy, Infatuated Man-Boy Boob [LittleStar88]
> -Harkles [csshopper]
> -HarkleSparkler [CarryOn2020]
> -Harriet (Harry) [mellibelly]
> -Harry Antoinette [needlv]
> -Harry’s First Wife [elvisfan4life]
> -Harry the Dim [Luvbolide]
> -Harry the “Handbag” [papertiger]
> -Harry the Hairdresser [Chanbal]
> -Harry the Horrible [csshopper]
> -Harry the Pumpkin [Kevinaxx]
> -Haz [purseinsanity]
> -Hazardous Harry Lodpah]
> -Hazardous Waste [purseinsanity]
> -HazBeen [purseinsanity]
> -Hazmat [mellibelly]
> -HazNoBalls [mellibelly]
> -Hazzie and Horrid [DeMonica]
> -Hector [Chanbal]
> -Heinous Harry [Aimee3]
> -Helium [le-junkie]
> -Henpeck (Harry) [CeeJay]
> -Henpecked Harry [poopsie]
> -Henry the Woke [Chanbal]
> -Her Inane Husband [Maggie Muggins]
> -Her Heinous [xincinsin]
> -Her Lowness [purseinsanity]
> -Her Naff Man [jelliedfeels]
> -Herpes Meg [purseinsanity]
> -Her Royal Clowness [EverSoElusive]
> -Hex-Agon-Hazard [CeeJay]
> -High Priest of the True Goddess [jelliedfeels]
> -His Actress Wife [CarryOn2020]
> -His Amnesic Wife [Chanbal]
> -His/Her Royal Anus [Katel]
> -His/Her Royal Heinous [Sophisticatted
> -Holier-Than-Thou-Meghan-Who-Will-Stoop-At-Nothing [rose60610]
> -Hollow (H) [le_junkie]
> -Hot Mess of Montecito [charlottawill]
> -Hot Pants Meggie [bellecate]
> -Humble-Bragger [CarryOn2020]
> -I’m-better-than-you-common-people [Luvbolide]
> -Impact Idiots [Betty-Lou]
> -Inconsequential Sidekick (H) [lanasyogamama]
> -Jacka$$es of Montecito [redney]
> -Jack(s) of All Trades, Master(s) of None [purseinsanity]
> -Jezebel and Ahab [Lodpah]
> -Judas of Sussex [Maggie Muggins]
> -Juggling Jester [csshopper]
> -Just Call Me Harry aka JCMH [xeyes]
> -Karen Markle [breakfastatcartier]
> -King and Queen of Zero Follow Through [Luvbolide]
> -Lady Megbeth [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Lady Muck [Lounorada]
> -Lady Yoga-Legs-Spread-Wide-Apart [Maggie Muggins]
> -Little Miss Briefcase [jelliedfeels]
> -Little Miss Forgetful [needlv]
> -Louse and Spouse [mellibelly]
> -Lumpenprolateriat [jelliedfeels]
> -Lying Liar Duchess [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Lying phony social climber with no style and a meh personality and a mediocre career as a d list actress [muddledmint]
> -Lying-Scheming-Devious-Avaricious-Famewhoring Daughter [Maggie Muggins]
> -MacBish [Chanbal]
> -Macho Meg [purseinsanity]
> -Madame (too long) pants on fire [jelliedfeels]
> -Madam Moron [xincinsin]
> -Maggot [csshopper]
> -Maggotry [csshopper]
> -Maleficent of Montecito aka MoM [Annawakes]
> -Malicious Meghan [Lodpah]
> -Malodorous (Meghan) [CeeJay]
> -Malodorous Moochers of Montecito [Katel]
> -Manchild (Harry) [bisousx]
> -Mangle Markle [rose60610]
> -Markdown [mellibelly]
> -Markle Debacle [xincinsin]
> -Marklenator [EverSoElusive]
> -Markley Sparkly Squad [puseinsanity]
> -Master of the Chicken Coop [gracekelly]
> -Master Manipulator [CeeJay]
> -Matronly Moron of the Manor [csshopper]
> -Meager (M) [le_junkie]
> -Medusa [purseinsanity]
> -Megabrag ‘fashion-A-lista [papertiger]
> -Megadeath [mellibellly]
> -Mega-FauxPas [xincinsin]
> -Me Gain [Katel]
> -Megain [purseinsanity]
> -Megaladum [purseinsanity]
> -Megalodon [bag-mania]
> -Meg-a-lo-maniac [CeeJay]
> -MegaMaw [xincinsin]
> -Megamouths [xincinsin]
> -Megaphone [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Megaphoney [lanasyogamama]
> -Megaphony [Chanbal]
> -Meggie Moaner [gracekelly]
> -Meggy Marbles [Chanbal]
> -Meggypoo [csshopper]
> -Meghag the Camp Guard [Maggie Muggins]
> -Meghan Liar Markle aka MLM [jelliedfeels]
> -Maghan Make-a-Buck [rose60610]
> -Meghan McBeth [Lodpah]
> -Meghan-Megalomaniac-who-would-do-anything-for-fame-and-glory [Lodpah]
> -Megnochio [CarryOn2020]
> -Megtox [PooFerret]
> -Meh [lanasyogamama]
> -Melodramatic [CeeJay]
> -Me-Me-Me-Grow-My-Wallet [rose60610]
> -Menace [CeeJay]
> -MentallySpoilt Brats [xincinsin]
> -Merchalot [Icyjade]
> -Merchers to Flippers [Sophisticatted]
> -Merching Meg [poopsie]
> -Mermaid [Annawakes]
> -Methane [purseinsanity]
> -Methanol [CeeJay]
> -Micro-celebrities [CarryOn2020 & Chanbal]
> -Migraine [poopsie]
> -Minor Footnote Markle [xincinsin]
> -Miscreant Megnut [EverSoElusive]
> -Miseryghan [rose60610]
> -Misinformationous Twosome [SomethingGoodCanWork]
> -Miss If-I’m-not-invited-I’ll-stage-my-own-Oscars [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Miss: nobody asked if I was ok [breakfastatcartier]
> -Miss the Mark-le [poopsie]
> -Mistress of Misinformation [xincinsin]
> -Moaning Markle [bag-mania]
> -Money Hungry A-Hole Harry [Hermes Zen]
> -Monster Duo [Lodpah]
> -Montebozos [lanasyogamama]
> -Montecito Duo [DoggieBags]
> -Montecito Marauders [Betty-Lou]
> -Montecito Moaner [Betty-Lou]
> -Montepsycho Duchess [VON1B2]
> -Monteshitsuxxess [Aminamina]
> -Monumental Moron [CeeJay]
> -Mordor [Norm.Core]
> -Morons of Montecito [xincinsin]
> -Most Cunning and Shameless Royals [xincinsin]
> -Mother Theresa of Montecito [Chanbal]
> -Mouthy Meg [poopsie]
> -Mr. and Mrs Bandwagon [Chanbal]
> -Mr. Nonsense [Chanbal]
> -Mr. Prophecy [xincinsin]
> -Mrs. Hypocrisy [Chanbal]
> -Mrs. Loseer [rose60610]
> -Mrs. Shy [Chanbal]
> -Ms. Egomaniac [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Ms. Hungry-For-Fame-&-Flexible-In-Morals [xincinsin]
> -Ms. I-Don’t-Wear-Anything-That-Fits [rose60610]
> -Multi-Task Markle [xincinsin]
> -Murky Magpies [Jktgal]
> -My’EGO Markle [Maggie Muggins]
> -Nasty Pieces of Work [sdkitty]
> -Narcissistic Fib-o-Matic [CarryOn2020]
> -Narcissistic Publicity-Craving Ho [csshopper]
> -Needy and Greedy [xincinsin]
> -NeverWas (M) [mellibelly]
> -Non Working Royals aka NRW [marietouchet]
> -Nope and Dope [gracekelly]
> -No Relevance Self-Marketing Losers [scarlet555]
> -NutMeg [jennit]
> -Omegcron [xincinsin]
> -Outsiders in H’wood [poopsie]
> -Pathetic Prince [EverSoElusive]
> -Pearl [CarryOn2020]
> -Perpetually Frowning Baldie [jelliedfeels]
> -Pet Dumper [bag-mania]
> -Petulant Prat [xincinsin]
> -Photoshopping Duo [bellecate]
> -Pinky & The Brain [Lounorada]
> -Pinocchio, the Duchess of Deception [csshopper]
> -Pompous Ass (H) [sdkitty]
> -Pompous Azz [csshopper]
> -Posers [sdkitty]
> -Poster Boy-Man-Child-Wimp [csshopper]
> -Poundland Duchess [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Preachy, Superior, and Condescending Even On a Freakin’ CARD [Laila619]
> -Pride and Vanity [CarryOn2020]
> -Prince Dufus [Maggie Muggins]
> -Prince Harzardous [CeeJay]
> -Prince(ss) Hairbrain [purseinsanity]
> -Prince of Polo [Chanbal]
> -Prince-Of-Pomposity and his Moppet-Megalomaniac side-piece [CeeJay]
> -Prince Piss Ant [rose60610]
> -Prince Pisspot and his Pwincess Perjury [xincinsin]
> -Prince Pity Pot [CarryOn2020]
> -Prince Puke and His Pukess [Aimee3]
> -Princess Hairball (H&M) [Katel]
> -Princess Hairy (Harry) [Lounorada]
> -Princess Mew Mew [Genie27]
> -Princess Perennial Victim [Luvbolide]
> -Princess Pinocchio [purseinsanity]
> -Prince Wokeness of Hypocrisy [bellecate]
> -Professional Squatters [Sophisticatted]
> -Professional Victims [Chanbal]
> -Prophet Hazard and Saint Methane [xincinsin]
> -Psychic Harry and Mystic Meg [Sophie-Rose]
> -Puddin’ Heads (aka soft in the head) [jennit]
> -Puerile Princess [DoggieBags]
> -Pump-Pump (M) [Chanbal]
> -Pump-Pump-Squat [CarryOn2020]
> -Puppet (H) [Aimee3]
> -Puppeteer (M) [Aimee3]
> -Radioactive [purseinsanity]
> -Raptor [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Rapacious Raptor [xincinsin]
> -Royal Crassness [le_junkie]
> -Royal Family of MonteShitShow [xincinsin]
> -Royal Ingrates of Montecito [EverSoElusive]
> -Royal Reject [needlv]
> -Saint Meghan, Patroness of Liars and Truth Twisters [xincinsin]
> -Scheming Narcissistic Prima Donna [Maggie Muggins]
> -Self-Indulgent Duo [Maggie Muggins]
> -Self-Righteous Douchebaguette of Montecito [Maggie Muggins]
> -She Who Emasculates Her Husband [csshopper]
> -She-Devil [Maggie Muggins]
> -She Who Shall Remain Nameless [csshopper]
> -She Who Shouldn’t be Obeyed [gracekelly]
> -Skid Markle [mellibelly]
> -Slanker Wanker Bro [VigeeLeBrun]
> -Sledgehammers to Your Eyes [purseinsanity]
> -Smarmy Smarmets [Betty-Lou]
> -Smirk and Jerk [millibelly]
> -Smughan Smirkle [jennit]
> -Sneaky Tart [jelliedfeels]
> -Social Climber/Jungle Pisser [xincinsin]
> -Spectacular U-Turn [CarryOn2020]
> -Spready Chicken Legs [EverSoElusive]
> -Stale Tart [jelliedfeels]
> -St. Meghan [csshopper]
> -Strumpet [csshopper]
> -Stupid Cow [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Termagent Wretch [xincinsin]
> -Terminal Whiner [xincinsin]
> -Terrible Twosome [CarryOn2020]
> -Terrible Woman [xincinsin]
> -The Amnesic of Montecito [Chanbal]
> -The Artist Formerly Known as Harry [QueenofWrapDress]
> -The Big Zero (H) [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Clown Duchess [Chanbal]
> -The Commissioner of the Commission on Information Disorder at the Aspen Institute [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Despicable Duo [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Di-Nameic Duo [purseinsanity]
> -The Discount and Discountess of Disinformation [jennit]
> -The Dollar Duchess [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Dook and Dookess of Monstershiteo [gracekelly]
> -The Douche Formallly Known as a Prince [poopsie]
> -The Duchess of California [QueenofWrapDress]
> -The Duchess of Smugness [charlottawill]
> -The Duchess of Trash [xincinsin]
> -The Ducka$s [EverSoElusive]
> -The Dumpster Fire Camo’d by the Red Carpet [xincinsin]
> -The Earl of Dunnothing [gracekelly]
> -Thee Duchess of the Royal Tigeth [breakfastatcartier]
> -Thee Mouth [xincinsin]
> -The Ever So Self-Absorbed DumbErtons [EverSoElusive]
> -The expendable (H) [csshopper]
> -The Face of the Poo fragrance [xincinsin]
> -The Fauxmatarians [CarryOn2020 & Chanbal]
> -The Glimmer Twins [marietouchet]
> -The Harlem Woketrotters [mellibelly]
> -The HiHo Couple [CarryOn220]
> -The Lying Duchess [Lodpah]
> -The Madame of Montecito [Chanbal]
> -The Maleficent of Montecito [poopsie
> -The Manboy With the Lowest IQ on the Royal Intelligence Chart [Maggie Muggins]
> -The MarkleMarketeers [CarryOn2020 & Chanbal]
> -The Montecito Messenger [Betty-Lou]
> -The Montecito Morons [xincinsin]
> -The Monte-know-nothings [DoggieBags]
> -The Monteshito Massive Pain in the A..’s [Hermes Zen]
> -The Other Two (H&M) [sdkitty]
> -The Planet Saviors [tiktok]
> -The Rain Drop [Chanbal]
> -The Rapacious Wife [csshopper]
> -The Red Brillo Pad [csshopper]
> -The Red-Headed Husband of Miss Information [papertiger]
> -The Rumpled Royals [Sophisticatted]
> -The Rumps [Sophisticatted]
> -The Spare and the Snare [QueenofWrapDress]
> -The SuckAzzes [mellibelly]
> -The Sucksexxes [puseinsanity]
> -The Sussex Clowns [Piers Morgan & Chanbal
> -The Sussex Eunuch [CarryOn2020]
> -The Tabloid Royals [CarryOn2020]
> -The Unfortunate-Lapse-of-Memory(my-ar$e)LyingWitch [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Ventriloquist Dummy aka Harry [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Wench on the Bench [xincinsin]
> -The Wife [stansy]
> -The Witch [xincinsin]
> -The Witch of Montecito [Maggie Muggins]
> -The Woke [Maggie Muggins]
> -The World’s Shyest Couple [gracekelly]
> -Those B.st.rds [Hermes Zen]
> -Tiresome Twosome [xincinsin]
> -Third Codpiece [jelliedfeels]
> -This Totally Uselessly Preposterously Loathsome Thumb-Sucking Whining Little Turd [csshopper]
> -Toad and Toadette [Maggie Muggins]
> -Tone Deaf [Chanbal]
> -ToxicTwo [CarryOn2020]
> -Treacherous TIG [charlottawill]
> -Troublesome Two [QueenofWrapDress]
> -Tungsten [VON1B2]
> -Turn-Off Toffs [CarryOn2020]
> -Turn-Off Tossers [CarryOn2020]
> -Twats of Montecito [xincinsin]
> -Two-Faced Twerp [Chanbal]
> -TRFKATS (the royals formerly known as the sussexes) [CarryOn2020]
> -Turducken Two [CarryOn2020]
> -Unnewsworthy Faces [Maggie Muggins]
> -Unserene Lowness [Jktgal]
> -Unscrupulous Couple [Maggie Muggins]
> -Vainglorious [CeeJay]
> -Veneers Face [breakfastatcartier]
> -Whack-Job-Tignanello [rose60610]
> -Wayward Duo [needlv]
> -Wee Wittle Prince H [Maggie Muggins]
> -Woko Ono [Maggie Muggins]
> -Word Salad Twins [bag-mania]
> -Yacht Girl Deadly Claws [Maggie Muggins]
> 
> Numbers
> #6 [Stansy]
> #6 and His Plus 1 [bellecate]
> #666 [QueenofWrapDress]
> 
> PR Teams Nicknames
> Ahmed Scabies [Katel]
> Omid Scooby-doo [Annawakes]
> Omits-A-Lot [needlv]
> Scabies [Annawakes]
> Sunshine NutSacks [mellibelly]
> Sunshine Sucks [purseinsanity]
> 
> Nicknames For Later Use
> Harry’s Ex-Wife [elvisfan4life]
> The Ex-Duchess of Sussex [elvisfanforlife]
> 
> Foundation Nicknames
> Arsewipe Charity [Nico61]
> 
> Blog Nicknames
> Thee Duchess’s Royal Tigeth [breakfastatcartier]


If anyone deserves an award it’s you!!!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'm from the east, spend a fair amount of time on the west because of having kids there, live in the midwest. There are good and bad wherever you go. I think the stereotype is that west coasters are more laid back, but it really depends where you are. I would not call the RHoBH,OC or the Kartrashians laid back.


Those are not "real" people.


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> If Andy is to now become a "Private Citizen", then WHY SHOULD the British Taxpayer pay for HIS security?!?!?
> 
> So, with HapHazard asking for a security team ("for his children - they would be in such danger"), does this mean that he and Megalomaniac are planning to go to the UK for the Jubilee???  I bet he thinks that he would be up there on the Balcony with the Queen and I don't think that will happen!


A should have lost his security when removed as senior royal, but that was (supposedly) temporary, so, maybe no one has gotten around to removing it for good ?
Yesterday’s pix of him and Sarah in a car, did show a security car right behind them
Heck, Pss Anne gets security only when working and A is not a working royal


----------



## Maggie Muggins

1LV said:


> If anyone deserves an award it’s you!!!


Thank you. It was fun and kept me out of trouble during the pandemic.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Yes.  Naming her Lilibet Diana was not the magic trick they thought it would be. Stupid Sot and the Wife overestimated their value to the Monarchy. If the Queen really wanted to see them, she would extend a specific invitation for a visit, put them up in Windsor Castle and the RF protection would be available. Not happening so the temper tantrums in Montecito commenced. With the Andrew problem to deal with for potentially months, why would she want 2 more miserable examples of family rot, H and M on display??????
> 
> Re: Camilla. I think the Queen recently bestowing her highest Honor on Camilla may be a preemptive move on the part of a wily old lady (said this with affection) to defuse what is anticipated to be a nasty accounting of Camilla and his Father in Hazbeen's book.



I'm sure QEII is thinking damage limitation(s) all-round: Platinum Jubilee ring-fenced, hiding Andrew in an invisible cloak and leaving the message for H&M that Her Majesty is OOO until further notice.

The ongoing saga of the calamitous twosome are too much like hard work. That these munchkins are suing One's Government, planning to take them to High Court if necessarily, over grandiose delusions that a few UK reporters (or whoever) amount to a life-threatening danger would jump the shark in any sitcom. I think QEII has had enough of their 'humour'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think QEII has had enough of their 'humour'.



And I don't blame her one bit.


----------



## pukasonqo

NVM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The story that I recall reading is that his uncle Louis Mountbatten, along with the Queen Mother, urged him to act quickly with Diana because "There aren't many 19 year old virgins around".


maybe he thought Diana would be compliant and he could do whatever he wanted


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I'm sure QEII is thinking damage limitation(s) all-round: Platinum Jubilee ring-fenced, hiding Andrew in an invisible cloak and leaving the massage for H&M that Her Majesty is OOO until further notice.
> 
> The ongoing saga of the calamitous twosome are too much like hard work. That these munchkins are suing One's Government, planning to take them to High Court if necessarily, over grandiose delusions that a few UK reporters (or whoever) amount to a life-threatening danger would jump the shark in any sitcom. I think QEII has had enough of their 'humour'.


Yes! In fact their grand delusions are so expansive I'm surprised the munchkins haven't tried to claim the British National who took hostages in a Texas Synagogue was actually on his way to CA to capture them, but got distracted. 

They are insufferable and I agree, I think Gran is "not amused." Haz is like a pesky gnat, keep swatting until the nuisance factor boils over and then get out the bug spray and "Zap!"


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Yes! In fact their grand delusions are so expansive I'm surprised the munchkins haven't tried to claim the British National who took hostages in a Texas Synagogue was actually on his way to CA to capture them, but got distracted.
> 
> They are insufferable and I agree, I think Gran is "not amused." Haz is like a pesky gnat, keep swatting until the nuisance factor boils over and then get out the bug spray and "Zap!"


I can hardly wait for the zap


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the proximity to Andy will give Eugenie valuable information to share on this podcast. Sorry if I sound sarcastic, but I'm tired of so much hypocrisy linked to some members of this family. Hopefully, she is genuine.


----------



## Chanbal

His Royal Shyness


----------



## Chanbal

Valid points…


----------



## oldbag

.


Aimee3 said:


> Reminds me of a movie with Danny DeVito. his wife gets kidnapped IIRC and he doesn’t want to get her back so won’t pay the ransom.


Same with the Ransom of Red Chief by O Henry. He made his kidnappers so miserable they ended up paying his father to take him back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Valid points…




Really, they Sussexes need to get lost.


----------



## Chanbal

With QE slowing down, Prince Andrew gone .. it has been difficult to redistribute all the charities & posts. NS says that allegedly Charles has been contacted by Hazz who is available to assist in any way…
In other words, it sounds like Hazz and TW are despaired for more royal material ($$$$).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> With QE slowing down, Prince Andrew gone .. it has been difficult to redistribute all the charities & posts. NS says that allegedly Charles has been contacted by Hazz who is available to assist in any way…
> In other words, it sounds like Hazz and TW are despaired for more royal material ($$$$).




If Chas does this, grants security, then all the posturing about how tough he and Will are - all of that was one huge lie.
Time will tell.

RE: A’s security - from the DM’s teddy bear article:

*Prince Andrew may have to fund his own security after being stripped of his title, warns former head of royal protection *
_The Duke of York may eventually have to fund his own security, a former head of royal protection said last night.
Even after being restricted from his duties, Prince Andrew as a senior royal had been given round-the-clock Scotland Yard protection at an annual cost of £2million to the taxpayer.
A decision on whether to *continue providing protection will be based on the threat level he faces*, retired Chief Superintendent Dai Davies said.
‘Whether [or not] he continues to use his titles, he remains the Queen’s son,’ Mr Davies added. ‘*Whether or not he is still afforded specialist protection will be based entirely around how serious intelligence suggests the threat level will be.’*
Mr Davies, who led the Metropolitan Police’s royalty protection unit, explained: ‘*If the threat level is low, then like junior royals and his own daughters he will have to fund protection himself.’ *
Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice received official protection until 2011 but now foot the bill themselves, probably with some help from their father.
*The threat level is determined by Home Office advisers, the Queen’s private security and a specialist committee*, Mr Davies said.
It is likely that, in the short term, Prince Andrew’s protection will continue, he added. 
‘Clearly now he is open to all kinds of vilification given he is very much in the limelight and has been accused of some serious things, so they will have to be careful,’ Mr Davies said.
‘I think they will be very cautious until there has been a very thorough assessment and *he will remain protected at least in the short term. There are very strong feelings about him at the moment and suggestions he did not tell the truth, so that threat is there.’*
A spokesman from Scotland Yard said the force does not discuss matters of protection.
The full cost of royal security is kept from the public as Scotland Yard argues it would compromise safety. But it is believed to cost taxpayers well in excess of £125million a year._


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> His Royal Shyness
> View attachment 5299337


His Royal Shyness...
I wonder if they are implying that Hazard is a shyster  



CarryOn2020 said:


> If Chas does this, grants security, then all the posturing about how tough he and Will are - all of that was one huge lie.
> Time will tell.
> 
> RE: A’s security - from the DM’s teddy bear article:
> 
> *Prince Andrew may have to fund his own security after being stripped of his title, warns former head of royal protection *
> _The Duke of York may eventually have to fund his own security, a former head of royal protection said last night.
> Even after being restricted from his duties, Prince Andrew as a senior royal had been given round-the-clock Scotland Yard protection at an annual cost of £2million to the taxpayer.
> A decision on whether to *continue providing protection will be based on the threat level he faces*, retired Chief Superintendent Dai Davies said.
> ‘Whether [or not] he continues to use his titles, he remains the Queen’s son,’ Mr Davies added. ‘*Whether or not he is still afforded specialist protection will be based entirely around how serious intelligence suggests the threat level will be.’*
> Mr Davies, who led the Metropolitan Police’s royalty protection unit, explained: ‘*If the threat level is low, then like junior royals and his own daughters he will have to fund protection himself.’ *
> Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice received official protection until 2011 but now foot the bill themselves, probably with some help from their father.
> *The threat level is determined by Home Office advisers, the Queen’s private security and a specialist committee*, Mr Davies said.
> It is likely that, in the short term, Prince Andrew’s protection will continue, he added.
> ‘Clearly now he is open to all kinds of vilification given he is very much in the limelight and has been accused of some serious things, so they will have to be careful,’ Mr Davies said.
> ‘I think they will be very cautious until there has been a very thorough assessment and *he will remain protected at least in the short term. There are very strong feelings about him at the moment and suggestions he did not tell the truth, so that threat is there.’*
> A spokesman from Scotland Yard said the force does not discuss matters of protection.
> The full cost of royal security is kept from the public as Scotland Yard argues it would compromise safety. But it is believed to cost taxpayers well in excess of £125million a year._


The entire description for why PA needs protection at the moment (basically so he doesn't get lynched) could apply to Hazard and his wench, but I would ROFL if Hazard were to say "My wife needs protection because there are very strong feelings about her at the moment and suggestions she did not tell the truth".


----------



## csshopper

It‘s more like the public needs protection from the Harkle sugars, there are seriously deranged sounding people in that group.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does this thread show up on the main page?  It seems to be missing on my page.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> With QE slowing down, Prince Andrew gone .. it has been difficult to redistribute all the charities & posts. NS says that allegedly Charles has been contacted by Hazz who is available to assist in any way…
> In other words, it sounds like Hazz and TW are despaired for more royal material ($$$$).



I'm beginning to wonder if Neil Sean is just pulling stories out of a hat with unnamed sources just to stay relevant.
ET remove unnecessary quote


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if Neil Sean is just pulling stories out of a hat with unnamed sources just to stay relevant.



The BLG video is one of his best. Perfect summary of the H&M security issues.
Hint:  QE has nothing to do with it and Hazzi knows it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does this thread show up on the main page?  It seems to be missing on my page.


I can see it on my page. It could have been a temporary issue.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> With QE slowing down, Prince Andrew gone .. it has been difficult to redistribute all the charities & posts. NS says that allegedly Charles has been contacted by Hazz who is available to assist in any way…
> In other words, it sounds like Hazz and TW are despaired for more royal material ($$$$).



Charles' expression: "You can't be serious my boy".


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Scoobie, he is feeling the pain of his masters.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here what I am seeing - perhaps it’s just a glitch. Of course, it is a full moon  

Here:



Not here:


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Poor Scoobie, he is feeling the pain of his masters.




Since we’re only going back 20 years instead of looking at the more current (nonexistent) protection for other non-working royals, can someone please check the history books re the security detail of Wallis Simpson? Might be super relevant for H&M in 2022.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Since we’re only going back 20 years instead of looking at the more current (nonexistent) protection for other non-working royals, can someone please check the history books re the security detail of Wallis Simpson? Might be super relevant for H&M in 2022.



Great question - here’s the report:









						Edward Mrs Simpson
					

King Edward VIII Mrs Simpson abdication American journalist




					www.professionalsecurity.co.uk
				




_On the eve of Edward VIII’s abdication, Sir John Simon agreed to Mrs Simpson still having two bodyguards, although it was ‘a most exceptional measure’ because Mrs Simpson and Edward would now be private citizens. To avoid public criticism, Simon suggested keeping the arrangement ‘as quiet as possible’. To avoid having to answer questions in Parliament, Simon suggested that Edward pay for the guarding himself._


----------



## Sophisticatted

One of the things that Angela Kelly’s book mentioned is how there are security sensors on the grounds.  So, really, all Harry needs to do is come for a visit and stay on the grounds and BAM! security.


----------



## needlv

So PA is unhappy but MM and H are going to attend the jubilee.  This is why they are fussing about security.



For those who want to read without the paywall



			archive.md
		



_Many royal watchers might have assumed that the guillotine falling on Andrew’s royal life would see him fade into the shadows forever, wearing his cloak of invisibility over the four-day Jubilee celebrations in June. But royal aides say that “while he has no reason” to be alongside the Queen at “official” moments such as trooping the colour, “that doesn’t stop him turning up to the Jubilee service of thanksgiving, where other family will be present as non-working royals.”* Harry and Meghan will also attend.*_


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Here is a good article on the current drama. There are concerns about Lilib*t not having had a chance to meet QE & Charles due to security reasons, but there is not a single mention to visiting TM (or any other family members on the mother's side). TM has often asked for an opportunity to meet his grandkids, and can easily drive to Montecito without the need of any security. I can't understand how there are people out there that still support this entitled couple and its hypocrisy…
> 
> “_In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home.”
> Lilibet, who is now seven months, has yet to meet her great-grandmother the Queen, grandfather the Prince of Wales and other members of the family face to face._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry files a claim for judicial review against Home Office decision over police protection
> 
> 
> Harry wants to bring his son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet to visit from the US, but he and his family are “unable to return to his home” because it is too dangerous, a legal representative said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk



well of course poor old TM also isn’t a billionaire so that might be a bit of a problem  


xincinsin said:


> His Royal Shyness...
> I wonder if they are implying that Hazard is a shyster
> 
> 
> The entire description for why PA needs protection at the moment (basically so he doesn't get lynched) could apply to Hazard and his wench, but I would ROFL if Hazard were to say "My wife needs protection because there are very strong feelings about her at the moment and suggestions she did not tell the truth".


I think QE thinks A is in more danger  for what he knows & I would imagine this is not a danger for H. To me, it seems unlikely that even A is threatened really.  I don’t see anyone getting mad enough at H&M- it’s just tabloid fodder end of the day.


Chanbal said:


> Poor Scoobie, he is feeling the pain of his masters.



Poor lad is clutching at straws too. The issue is H wants guns Omid!


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> So PA is unhappy but MM and H are going to attend the jubilee.  This is why they are fussing about security.
> 
> 
> 
> For those who want to read without the paywall
> 
> 
> 
> archive.md
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Many royal watchers might have assumed that the guillotine falling on Andrew’s royal life would see him fade into the shadows forever, wearing his cloak of invisibility over the four-day Jubilee celebrations in June. But royal aides say that “while he has no reason” to be alongside the Queen at “official” moments such as trooping the colour, “that doesn’t stop him turning up to the Jubilee service of thanksgiving, where other family will be present as non-working royals.”* Harry and Meghan will also attend.*_



We shall see what happens. I think a lot of feelers are being put out at the moment. Hopefully they might start getting the message the general public doesn’t want them around even if they are all the closest, happiest family going


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here what I am seeing - perhaps it’s just a glitch. Of course, it is a full moon
> 
> Here:
> View attachment 5299418
> 
> 
> Not here:
> View attachment 5299417


That's interesting, I can see it. 
Here:


Here:


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> People tend to forget that Camilla cheated on her husband with Charles long before Diana came on the scene. And to be fair I believe Camilla’s husband cheated too. Infidelity was apparently the norm in their social scene. That doesn’t mean cheaters ever truly accept infidelity as acceptable when it happens to them. They only believe it’s okay when they do it because they have a very good reason, they are horny.
> 
> I don’t believe Diana cheated first. Charles was still emotionally involved with Camilla before the wedding, even if he was able to keep his pants on.


As much as I am a fan of the Royal family, I can see them for what they are.  They are all just a bit "off" and they all come with emotional baggage. That's probably why Diana fit in so well in the beginning.  She was from that world of aristocrats and was well aware of the rules


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe he thought Diana would be compliant and he could do whatever he wanted



That’s exactly what he thought. She was young, excited to have been chosen, and eager to please. He thought she would be easy to control.

He needed to get her pregnant pronto so he could have heirs and his family would get off his back. William was born 11 months later.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Yes.  *Naming her Lilibet Diana was not the magic trick they thought it would be.* Stupid Sot and the Wife overestimated their value to the Monarchy. If the Queen really wanted to see them, she would extend a specific invitation for a visit, put them up in Windsor Castle and the RF protection would be available. Not happening so the temper tantrums in Montecito commenced. With the Andrew problem to deal with for potentially months, why would she want 2 more miserable examples of family rot, H and M on display??????
> 
> Re: Camilla. I think the Queen recently bestowing her highest Honor on Camilla may be a preemptive move on the part of a wily old lady (said this with affection) to defuse what is anticipated to be a nasty accounting of Camilla and his Father in Hazbeen's book.


Someone earlier in this thread said the little tot will grow up to learn that she was named not out of love, but instead to hurt her great grandma. It's very sad that the dastardly duo would weaponize (allegedly) their own baby.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh, Piers is inspired!  


*THERE are now three cast-iron certainties in life: death, taxes, and Prince Harry behaving like a shameless, deluded, woefully entitled hypocrite.*

There was a wearisome inevitability that just when the Queen least needed her renegade royal grandson to pipe up whining again from his Californian mansion, he would do exactly that.

*For the past year, Harry seems to have delighted in making his 95-year-old grandmother’s life more difficult during the most difficult times of her life.*

When the Queen’s husband Prince Philip was dying in hospital last March, Harry and his equally narcissistic wife Meghan went on TV to whack the Monarchy and spray-gun (without providing any evidence) the Royal Family as a bunch of callous racists.

And now, as she reels from taking what must have been an unbelievably hard - but very necessary - decision to publicly humiliate her middle son Prince Andrew over the appalling Epstein/Maxwell sex abuse scandal, Harry rears his perpetually angry, over-privileged head once more to rub salt into her emotional wounds.

His latest moan is a demand to have British police protection when he and his family are in this country.

*The petulant prince is threatening legal action - is there ever a time when he isn’t? - unless the Home Office caves and restores the royal security he enjoyed before his dramatic flounce to America.*

If he goes through with his threat, it will be the first time any royal has ever sued Her Majesty’s Government, and, of course, causes the Queen yet another massive headache at the worst possible time.

Harry’s legal representative said in a statement: "The UK will always be Prince Harry's home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in. With the lack of police protection, comes too great a personal risk.

"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex personally fund a private security team for their family, yet that security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK. In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home."

*What a load of disingenuous, self-serving, elitist poppycock.

It takes a rare kind of brass neck to want the right to trash the Royal Family whenever it suits you but also insist on enjoying the trappings of being a member of that family without performing any of the, often mundane, duties that come with those trappings.

But since they quit Britain, Harry and Meghan have proven themselves to be only interested in one thing: making as much money as fast as possible by ruthlessly exploiting their royal status.*

And to do so by behaving in the most laughably hypocritical manner - from preaching about the environment whilst using private jets like taxis, to banging on about poverty while throwing lavish baby showers and constantly bleating about privacy at the same time as giving endless commercially beneficial interviews about their private life.

It’s got to the stage where every time they open their mouths to lecture us all on some new woke virtue-signalling cause, it’s a sure-fire certainty they will be exposed soon afterwards for doing the very opposite themselves.

And they’re quite happy to spew blatant nonsense in the process of playing up to their self-styled myth of being the world’s biggest victims.

After furiously denying any involvement in the repulsively sycophantic and clearly semi-authorised book about them, Finding Freedom, it emerged during Meghan’s recent court battle with the Mail on Sunday that she had in fact co-operated with it.

The couple’s then-chief aide Jason Knauf said in a witness statement that the book was “discussed on a routine basis” and “directly with the duchess multiple times in person and over email”.

He said Meghan provided him with briefing points to share with the book’s authors and revealed an email from Harry which said: “I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it. Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there.”

Princess Pinocchio later issued a grovelling apology to the court but insisted she didn’t remember any of her fulsome literary co-operation.

*What convenient amnesia for a woman who supposedly prides herself on having a great memory!*

This latest legal row perfectly exemplifies the Sussexes’ desire to have their royal cake and eat it.

They don’t want to do any actual work for the Royal Family after falling out with most of them following their constant public attacks.

Nor do they want to live in Britain, the place that bestowed them with their royal titles. After all, why bother turning out for community fairs in East London or new hospitals in rainy Manchester when you can have sun-kissed cocktails with Oprah in Santa Barbara?

*But they very much do want to keep their royal status so they can trade off being royals in the US without fulfilling a moment’s duty to earn them.*

And they’re even more desperate to keep all the good stuff that comes with being a royal - like police protection when they’re in the UK.

There’s just one problem with this: they’re not entitled to it.

Only active royals who do their duty on behalf of the British taxpayers deserve that kind of protection, not runaways who’ve deserted their duty.

Harry and Meghan aren’t real royals anymore, they’re just another pair of Hollywood celebrities on the make.

And like any other celebrities, they can sort their own protection when they come here, just as they do in America.

They can certainly afford to thanks to their humongous multi-million-dollar deals with the likes of Netflix and Spotify.

*The bottom line is this: why should these two money-grabbing clowns get preferential treatment over people who actually live and work here?*

Like many public figures with a high profile in Britain, I’ve received nasty death threats, one of which – as The Sun recently reported - is currently going through a legal process.

But that doesn’t entitle me to full-time police protection, even if, like Harry has done, I offered to pay for it myself.

No, if I want that, I’d have to get my own personal security team and request police help with any specific incident or threat like everyone else.

That’s what the Sussexes should do, too.

*But Harry doesn’t see it that way because every pore of his body drips with shocking entitlement, just as it does with Prince Andrew.*

To be clear, I don’t equate his antics with his uncle’s far more serious situation involving sexual abuse allegations that he has so shamefully failed to properly answer to but continued to deny.

However, they have both badly damaged the reputation of the Royal Family with their conduct and by doing so, imperilled the very future of the Monarchy.

They’ve also caused grievous distress to the Queen at the most vulnerable time of her entire reign.

Her Platinum Jubilee this year should be a wonderful celebration of everything she and the Monarchy represent.

Instead, it now looks doomed to be over-shadowed by Prince Privacy Harry’s ‘tell-all’ book later this year which will doubtless contain a load more family-bashing, and by the even worse threat of Andrew either appearing in court where his lurid and possibly criminal sex life will fill global headlines for weeks, or with him paying off a woman who says he sexually abused her when she was 17.

All of this will hurt the Queen even more.

All of it is an absolute disgrace.

*Shame on you, Harry and Andrew. *

Where the Queen’s proven herself to be the very best of royalty, you two – in very different ways - have proven yourselves to be the very worst.









						Harry behaving like a hypocrite is wearisomely inevitable, says Piers Morgan
					

THERE are now three cast-iron certainties in life: death, taxes, and Prince Harry behaving like a shameless, deluded, woefully entitled hypocrite. There was a wearisome inevitability that just when…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> So PA is unhappy but MM and H are going to attend the jubilee.  This is why they are fussing about security.
> 
> 
> 
> For those who want to read without the paywall
> 
> 
> 
> archive.md
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Many royal watchers might have assumed that the guillotine falling on Andrew’s royal life would see him fade into the shadows forever, wearing his cloak of invisibility over the four-day Jubilee celebrations in June. But royal aides say that “while he has no reason” to be alongside the Queen at “official” moments such as trooping the colour, “that doesn’t stop him turning up to the Jubilee service of thanksgiving, where other family will be present as non-working royals.”* Harry and Meghan will also attend.*_



OMG I hope not. Surely they don't need more wailing and gnashing and blubbering in London. The California Kingsize couple will just take offence at everything because nothing is good enough for them. Hazard freaks out at the sound of camera clicks.

If they do come, I'm sure the paps will swarm them because Methane will send out their daily itinerary to every pap pal and her misshapen-nose BFF Omid will trumpet their whereabouts each day.



jelliedfeels said:


> well of course poor old TM also isn’t a billionaire so that might be a bit of a problem


Dear Methane is probably worried that her dad will get lost coming from Mexico to California. Remember how she went into panic mode because she didn't know the way to his house?


----------



## Chanbal

Am I reading this well? This can't be right. 








						Blind Item #2
					

The ginger haired one is implying through a recent statement that the US is covering the costs of his security and also providing Secret Ser...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Am I reading this well? This can't be right.
> View attachment 5299464
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> The ginger haired one is implying through a recent statement that the US is covering the costs of his security and also providing Secret Ser...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



No way! I don’t believe it. “Implying” doesn’t mean it’s true. I seem to remember NYC ponied up to cover security for them during their visit last fall but that’s the only time we knew for sure they were being covered.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> "Charles was still emotionally involved with Camilla before the wedding."


As evidenced by the bracelet engraved with "C&C" that Diana found days before the wedding, but her sisters told her it was too late to back out.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Am I reading this well? This can't be right.
> View attachment 5299464
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> The ginger haired one is implying through a recent statement that the US is covering the costs of his security and also providing Secret Ser...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


I think he's full of it, no surprise. From the Secret Service website, and he is by no means a head of state:
"We ensure the safety of *the president, the vice president, their families*, the White House, the vice president's residence, visiting foreign heads of state, former United States presidents and their spouses, and events of national significance."
I'll be p*ssed off if he and his trash monster wife are getting protection at US taxpayer expense.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh, Piers is inspired!
> View attachment 5299449
> 
> *THERE are now three cast-iron certainties in life: death, taxes, and Prince Harry behaving like a shameless, deluded, woefully entitled hypocrite.*
> 
> There was a wearisome inevitability that just when the Queen least needed her renegade royal grandson to pipe up whining again from his Californian mansion, he would do exactly that.
> 
> *For the past year, Harry seems to have delighted in making his 95-year-old grandmother’s life more difficult during the most difficult times of her life.*
> 
> When the Queen’s husband Prince Philip was dying in hospital last March, Harry and his equally narcissistic wife Meghan went on TV to whack the Monarchy and spray-gun (without providing any evidence) the Royal Family as a bunch of callous racists.
> 
> And now, as she reels from taking what must have been an unbelievably hard - but very necessary - decision to publicly humiliate her middle son Prince Andrew over the appalling Epstein/Maxwell sex abuse scandal, Harry rears his perpetually angry, over-privileged head once more to rub salt into her emotional wounds.
> 
> His latest moan is a demand to have British police protection when he and his family are in this country.
> 
> *The petulant prince is threatening legal action - is there ever a time when he isn’t? - unless the Home Office caves and restores the royal security he enjoyed before his dramatic flounce to America.*
> 
> If he goes through with his threat, it will be the first time any royal has ever sued Her Majesty’s Government, and, of course, causes the Queen yet another massive headache at the worst possible time.
> 
> Harry’s legal representative said in a statement: "The UK will always be Prince Harry's home and a country he wants his wife and children to be safe in. With the lack of police protection, comes too great a personal risk.
> 
> "The Duke and Duchess of Sussex personally fund a private security team for their family, yet that security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK. In the absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return to his home."
> 
> *What a load of disingenuous, self-serving, elitist poppycock.
> 
> It takes a rare kind of brass neck to want the right to trash the Royal Family whenever it suits you but also insist on enjoying the trappings of being a member of that family without performing any of the, often mundane, duties that come with those trappings.
> 
> But since they quit Britain, Harry and Meghan have proven themselves to be only interested in one thing: making as much money as fast as possible by ruthlessly exploiting their royal status.*
> 
> And to do so by behaving in the most laughably hypocritical manner - from preaching about the environment whilst using private jets like taxis, to banging on about poverty while throwing lavish baby showers and constantly bleating about privacy at the same time as giving endless commercially beneficial interviews about their private life.
> 
> It’s got to the stage where every time they open their mouths to lecture us all on some new woke virtue-signalling cause, it’s a sure-fire certainty they will be exposed soon afterwards for doing the very opposite themselves.
> 
> And they’re quite happy to spew blatant nonsense in the process of playing up to their self-styled myth of being the world’s biggest victims.
> 
> After furiously denying any involvement in the repulsively sycophantic and clearly semi-authorised book about them, Finding Freedom, it emerged during Meghan’s recent court battle with the Mail on Sunday that she had in fact co-operated with it.
> 
> The couple’s then-chief aide Jason Knauf said in a witness statement that the book was “discussed on a routine basis” and “directly with the duchess multiple times in person and over email”.
> 
> He said Meghan provided him with briefing points to share with the book’s authors and revealed an email from Harry which said: “I totally agree that we have to be able to say we didn’t have anything to do with it. Equally, you giving the right context and background to them would help get some truths out there.”
> 
> Princess Pinocchio later issued a grovelling apology to the court but insisted she didn’t remember any of her fulsome literary co-operation.
> 
> *What convenient amnesia for a woman who supposedly prides herself on having a great memory!*
> 
> This latest legal row perfectly exemplifies the Sussexes’ desire to have their royal cake and eat it.
> 
> They don’t want to do any actual work for the Royal Family after falling out with most of them following their constant public attacks.
> 
> Nor do they want to live in Britain, the place that bestowed them with their royal titles. After all, why bother turning out for community fairs in East London or new hospitals in rainy Manchester when you can have sun-kissed cocktails with Oprah in Santa Barbara?
> 
> *But they very much do want to keep their royal status so they can trade off being royals in the US without fulfilling a moment’s duty to earn them.*
> 
> And they’re even more desperate to keep all the good stuff that comes with being a royal - like police protection when they’re in the UK.
> 
> There’s just one problem with this: they’re not entitled to it.
> 
> Only active royals who do their duty on behalf of the British taxpayers deserve that kind of protection, not runaways who’ve deserted their duty.
> 
> Harry and Meghan aren’t real royals anymore, they’re just another pair of Hollywood celebrities on the make.
> 
> And like any other celebrities, they can sort their own protection when they come here, just as they do in America.
> 
> They can certainly afford to thanks to their humongous multi-million-dollar deals with the likes of Netflix and Spotify.
> 
> *The bottom line is this: why should these two money-grabbing clowns get preferential treatment over people who actually live and work here?*
> 
> Like many public figures with a high profile in Britain, I’ve received nasty death threats, one of which – as The Sun recently reported - is currently going through a legal process.
> 
> But that doesn’t entitle me to full-time police protection, even if, like Harry has done, I offered to pay for it myself.
> 
> No, if I want that, I’d have to get my own personal security team and request police help with any specific incident or threat like everyone else.
> 
> That’s what the Sussexes should do, too.
> 
> *But Harry doesn’t see it that way because every pore of his body drips with shocking entitlement, just as it does with Prince Andrew.*
> 
> To be clear, I don’t equate his antics with his uncle’s far more serious situation involving sexual abuse allegations that he has so shamefully failed to properly answer to but continued to deny.
> 
> However, they have both badly damaged the reputation of the Royal Family with their conduct and by doing so, imperilled the very future of the Monarchy.
> 
> They’ve also caused grievous distress to the Queen at the most vulnerable time of her entire reign.
> 
> Her Platinum Jubilee this year should be a wonderful celebration of everything she and the Monarchy represent.
> 
> Instead, it now looks doomed to be over-shadowed by Prince Privacy Harry’s ‘tell-all’ book later this year which will doubtless contain a load more family-bashing, and by the even worse threat of Andrew either appearing in court where his lurid and possibly criminal sex life will fill global headlines for weeks, or with him paying off a woman who says he sexually abused her when she was 17.
> 
> All of this will hurt the Queen even more.
> 
> All of it is an absolute disgrace.
> 
> *Shame on you, Harry and Andrew. *
> 
> Where the Queen’s proven herself to be the very best of royalty, you two – in very different ways - have proven yourselves to be the very worst.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry behaving like a hypocrite is wearisomely inevitable, says Piers Morgan
> 
> 
> THERE are now three cast-iron certainties in life: death, taxes, and Prince Harry behaving like a shameless, deluded, woefully entitled hypocrite. There was a wearisome inevitability that just when…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


I hope someone stops H before he causes more damage. He is like an Incurable-Pus-Draining-Cancerous-Lesion that grows until it squeezes the life from you and as such, he seems hell-bent on hurting everyone in his path, including his granny until he get his own way.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> TM has often asked for an opportunity to meet his grandkids, and can easily drive to Montecito without the need of any security.


He may have done stupid things, but I have to feel sorry for the man. By all accounts he seems to have done his best for his daughter, and this is how she treats him? Is she that ashamed of him? It's really sad. How hard would it be for her to let him visit them in Montecito? Are we missing something?


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz is giving Andy a run for his money…


----------



## Chanbal

I don't understand why they need to pay about $10K/day for security in Montecito.  

NO HAZ-ARD *Prince Harry’s claim he’s ‘unsafe’ in UK rubbished by ex-Met chief who says he’s ‘creating scenarios that don’t exist’*
Now the former head of Scotland Yard’s royal protection unit says Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.

*His and Meghan’s security was costing taxpayers around £5million a year when they lived in Britain.*

They now fund their lifestyle thanks to his multi million-pound Netflix and Spotify deals — and Harry says he would not burden the taxpayer with his policing costs.

But it is understood that government officials refused his demands fearing it would open the door to any wealthy individual to use The Met’s crack team as their private police force.

Harry considers himself a security risk for life because he is sixth in line to the throne, and a target from extremist threats because of his two tours of combat in Afghanistan.

*Now the former head of Scotland Yard’s royal protection unit says Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.*

Dai Davies told the Mirror: “*A lot of these issues appear to be greatly inflamed by Harry and his advisors, it really doesn’t need to be so fraught.*

"*If ever there was a proper credible threat to Prince Harry or his family then the Met would take the appropriate action.*

“If he or his family were to return to Britain in an official capacity or to support the Queen during the Platinum Jubilee events I’m sure he would be afforded the necessary protection.

“I would argue robustly against his case that he is not safe in the UK. If ever the British intelligence services did discover a threat to him and his family they are hardly going to sit on it. It appears that Harry is creating scenarios that do not exist.”

Speaking to Mail Online he added: "You can’t just hire the services of Scotland Yard as and when you feel like it.

"These are highly trained personal protection officers with access to sensitive intelligence, it is not like when football clubs pay for officers to be at football games."

It is estimated 24-hour police security for Harry’s family would cost him £80,000 a week.

*He officially quit royal duty in April 2020. In the US, he, Meghan and children Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet are protected by £7,000-a-day security guards*.









						Harry's 'unsafe' claim rubbished as ex-Met chief says he'd never be left at risk
					

A FORMER royal protection chief has rubbished Prince Harry’s claim that his return to the UK is “unsafe”. The Duke is seeking round-the-clock police protection because his “security was compromised…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> He may have done stupid things, but I have to feel sorry for the man. By all accounts he seems to have done his best for his daughter, and this is how she treats him? Is she that ashamed of him? It's really sad. How hard would it be for her to let him visit them in Montecito? Are we missing something?


I think Methane has a sliding scale for any sentiments of the heart. The more useful you are, the higher up the scale you are placed. 

It's interesting that the Suits cast are still supportive of her. She must not be Markling her Hollywood and acting contacts.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Hazz is giving Andy a run for his money…



Lololol!  He’s brutal!  Yoko Mono Meghan Markle!  He called her terrifying!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I don't understand why they need to pay about $10K/day for security in Montecito.
> 
> NO HAZ-ARD *Prince Harry’s claim he’s ‘unsafe’ in UK rubbished by ex-Met chief who says he’s ‘creating scenarios that don’t exist’*
> Now the former head of Scotland Yard’s royal protection unit says Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.
> 
> *His and Meghan’s security was costing taxpayers around £5million a year when they lived in Britain.*
> 
> They now fund their lifestyle thanks to his multi million-pound Netflix and Spotify deals — and Harry says he would not burden the taxpayer with his policing costs.
> 
> But it is understood that government officials refused his demands fearing it would open the door to any wealthy individual to use The Met’s crack team as their private police force.
> 
> Harry considers himself a security risk for life because he is sixth in line to the throne, and a target from extremist threats because of his two tours of combat in Afghanistan.
> 
> *Now the former head of Scotland Yard’s royal protection unit says Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.*
> 
> Dai Davies told the Mirror: “*A lot of these issues appear to be greatly inflamed by Harry and his advisors, it really doesn’t need to be so fraught.*
> 
> "*If ever there was a proper credible threat to Prince Harry or his family then the Met would take the appropriate action.*
> 
> “If he or his family were to return to Britain in an official capacity or to support the Queen during the Platinum Jubilee events I’m sure he would be afforded the necessary protection.
> 
> “I would argue robustly against his case that he is not safe in the UK. If ever the British intelligence services did discover a threat to him and his family they are hardly going to sit on it. It appears that Harry is creating scenarios that do not exist.”
> 
> Speaking to Mail Online he added: "You can’t just hire the services of Scotland Yard as and when you feel like it.
> 
> "These are highly trained personal protection officers with access to sensitive intelligence, it is not like when football clubs pay for officers to be at football games."
> 
> It is estimated 24-hour police security for Harry’s family would cost him £80,000 a week.
> 
> *He officially quit royal duty in April 2020. In the US, he, Meghan and children Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet are protected by £7,000-a-day security guards*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's 'unsafe' claim rubbished as ex-Met chief says he'd never be left at risk
> 
> 
> A FORMER royal protection chief has rubbished Prince Harry’s claim that his return to the UK is “unsafe”. The Duke is seeking round-the-clock police protection because his “security was compromised…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Politely saying that Harry is delusional.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I don't understand why they need to pay about $10K/day for security in Montecito.
> 
> NO HAZ-ARD *Prince Harry’s claim he’s ‘unsafe’ in UK rubbished by ex-Met chief who says he’s ‘creating scenarios that don’t exist’*
> Now the former head of Scotland Yard’s royal protection unit says Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.
> 
> *His and Meghan’s security was costing taxpayers around £5million a year when they lived in Britain.*
> 
> They now fund their lifestyle thanks to his multi million-pound Netflix and Spotify deals — and Harry says he would not burden the taxpayer with his policing costs.
> 
> But it is understood that government officials refused his demands fearing it would open the door to any wealthy individual to use The Met’s crack team as their private police force.
> 
> Harry considers himself a security risk for life because he is sixth in line to the throne, and a target from extremist threats because of his two tours of combat in Afghanistan.
> 
> *Now the former head of Scotland Yard’s royal protection unit says Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.*
> 
> Dai Davies told the Mirror: “*A lot of these issues appear to be greatly inflamed by Harry and his advisors, it really doesn’t need to be so fraught.*
> 
> "*If ever there was a proper credible threat to Prince Harry or his family then the Met would take the appropriate action.*
> 
> “If he or his family were to return to Britain in an official capacity or to support the Queen during the Platinum Jubilee events I’m sure he would be afforded the necessary protection.
> 
> “I would argue robustly against his case that he is not safe in the UK. If ever the British intelligence services did discover a threat to him and his family they are hardly going to sit on it. It appears that Harry is creating scenarios that do not exist.”
> 
> Speaking to Mail Online he added: "You can’t just hire the services of Scotland Yard as and when you feel like it.
> 
> "These are highly trained personal protection officers with access to sensitive intelligence, it is not like when football clubs pay for officers to be at football games."
> 
> It is estimated 24-hour police security for Harry’s family would cost him £80,000 a week.
> 
> *He officially quit royal duty in April 2020. In the US, he, Meghan and children Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet are protected by £7,000-a-day security guards*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's 'unsafe' claim rubbished as ex-Met chief says he'd never be left at risk
> 
> 
> A FORMER royal protection chief has rubbished Prince Harry’s claim that his return to the UK is “unsafe”. The Duke is seeking round-the-clock police protection because his “security was compromised…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


The security firm must love this job. All they have to do is pander to his paranoia and her self-importance.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Bad and all as Andrew is he is a million times better than Harry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Good point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Poor Scoobie, he is feeling the pain of his masters.




Refer to the tweet I just posted. I was focussing more on Harry's motives than the facts, but that guy - a seasoned journalist, not a propaganda minister - claims Camilla's security was *retired* police officers. Which completely makes sense, because in what world can you just go out and book police for your personal use?

But also, Scobie at a new low calling Camilla a mistress at that point in their relationship. Ew.


----------



## needlv




----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great question - here’s the report:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edward Mrs Simpson
> 
> 
> King Edward VIII Mrs Simpson abdication American journalist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.professionalsecurity.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _On the eve of Edward VIII’s abdication, Sir John Simon agreed to Mrs Simpson still having two bodyguards, although it was ‘a most exceptional measure’ because Mrs Simpson and Edward would now be private citizens. To avoid public criticism, Simon suggested keeping the arrangement ‘as quiet as possible’. To avoid having to answer questions in Parliament, Simon suggested that Edward pay for the guarding himself._



Harry doesn't just want a couple of bodyguards, by the sounds of things, he wants a full police escort wherever he goes and MI5 officers at the ready. 

It's great to know they would have nothing better to do for the whole time the Spoiled-Bratz dolls are in London. 

BTW, addition to the gig rider: H will also need at least one mental health expert as London "triggers" him. Arrange!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Harry doesn't just want a couple of bodyguards, by the sounds of things, he wants a full police escort wherever he goes and MI5 officers at the ready.
> 
> It's great to know they would have nothing better to do for the whole time the Spoiled-Bratz dolls are in London.
> 
> BTW, addition to the gig rider: H will also need at least one mental health expert as London "triggers" him. Arrange!


He's just afraid that the neo-Nazis from whom he borrowed his costume will want to bring him to a pub to catch up.

Mental health expert? Wasn't it established that it wouldn't look right for a royal to have therapy (as per the exalted Saint Meghan)? Hazard will probably "want" to get triggered so that he can have fresh material for "The MeMeMe You See Again". I'm sure a few autographed bananas will calm him down after the London Eye looks him in the eye.


----------



## needlv

And maybe eggs, but definitely loud boos wherever they go…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> No way! I don’t believe it. “Implying” doesn’t mean it’s true. I seem to remember NYC ponied up to cover security for them during their visit last fall but that’s the only time we knew for sure they were being covered.


They were probably referring to paid security at some selected events like the ones in NYC. I'm still puzzled how (and why) these 2 private citizens were able to get the state to sponsor their security.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> He may have done stupid things, but I have to feel sorry for the man. By all accounts he seems to have done his best for his daughter, and this is how she treats him? Is she that ashamed of him? It's really sad. How hard would it be for her to let him visit them in Montecito? Are we missing something?


It's very sad. If I remember well, one of his complains was that his daughter changed since she joined the soho people who apparently helped her to connect with Hazz. I don't know if she changed or not, or who the people behind them are, but what it looks like is that Hazz and TW deserve each other.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> And maybe eggs, but definitely loud boos wherever they go…



"_Lawyers acting for Harry, who stepped down from Royal duties two years ago, wrote 'pre-action protocol' letter to Home Office_.."

I wonder if their lawyers are also writing letters requesting security for the couple during visits in the US, like the one in NYC. 

It looks like security brings additional perks.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> *Harry is “creating scenarios that don't exist” in regards to his safety.*


Of course he does, it makes him feel more important than he actually is.


----------



## marietouchet

For a latecomer to the Harkle party, a handy dandy summary of all The reasons some suspect their progeny was delivered by space aliens , amusing read


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> the Spoiled-Bratz dolls



Oh my gosh, my daughter loved those Bratz dolls about twenty years ago.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Oh!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Meet him at the airport with a police escort to pacify him and then put him in a straitjacket and drive him to the nearest mental hospital to be deprogrammed from the selfish beetch's brainwashing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Here is Angela's video.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> They were probably referring to paid security at some selected events like the ones in NYC. I'm still *puzzled how (and why) these 2 private citizens were able to get the state to sponsor their security.*



My guess is they asked for security and those in New York government and the UN considered them to be important celebrities (dignitaries?) worthy of protection. We have to keep in mind there are many people who don’t follow what they are doing like we do.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## marietouchet

You guys are going bananas over the SECURITYGATE lol  They dont WANT to go to the Jubilee, and will do anything to get out of the invite - this is simple guys LOL

PS the calendar of events has been published, so, surely BP sent the invites, the Harkles have received invites
Now did they get invited to everything? Can Harry wear military outfit ? 
No, they have been invited to just enough stuff and likely sent a bunch of caveats (no intel, no guns, no military outfits)
The Harkles are POd at the scope and limitations of the invites but dont want to publicly say no


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> My guess is they asked for security and those in New York government and the UN considered them to be important celebrities (dignitaries?) worthy of protection. We have to keep in mind there are many people who don’t follow what they are doing like we do.



I wouldn't be surprised if they had their lawyers request the security based on whatever laws they could find to benefit them, including being in the line of succession.



marietouchet said:


> You guys are going bananas over the SECURITYGATE lol  They dont WANT to go to the Jubilee, and will do anything to get out of the invite - this is simple guys LOL
> 
> PS the calendar of events has been published, so, surely BP sent the invites, the Harkles have received invites
> Now did they get invited to everything? Can Harry wear military outfit ?
> No, they have been invited to just enough stuff and likely sent a bunch of caveats (no intel, no guns, no military outfits)
> The Harkles are POd at the scope and limitations of the invites but dont want to publicly say no


We understand well that this new security issue has multiple purposes, including keeping them in the limelight. They wouldn't want to attend the Jubilee as private citizens.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> You guys are going bananas over the SECURITYGATE lol  They dont WANT to go to the Jubilee, and will do anything to get out of the invite - this is simple guys LOL
> 
> PS the calendar of events has been published, so, surely BP sent the invites, the Harkles have received invites
> Now did they get invited to everything? Can Harry wear military outfit ?
> No, they have been invited to just enough stuff and likely sent a bunch of caveats (no intel, no guns, no military outfits)
> The Harkles are POd at the scope and limitations of the invites but dont want to publicly say no



IMO this was Hazzi publicly telling Nflix that he cannot provide video for the docudrama. There will be no _last_ videos of QE with his kids.  He had to make it public to generate sympathy. He also needed an extra chapter for his book. Additionally, he needs people to tune in to his ButterCup chat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Her great-grandmother.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> You guys are going bananas over the SECURITYGATE lol  They dont WANT to go to the Jubilee, and will do anything to get out of the invite - this is simple guys LOL



I'm not so sure about it. I'm more team "There's no invite (at least not to the extent they wanted) but they need to save face and creating drama is the only way they know how".


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure about it. I'm more team "There's no invite (at least not to the extent they wanted) but they need to save face and creating drama is the only way they know how".


Agree they did not receive ALL ACCESS passes to the rock show


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bet he also wouldn’t have been too happy to be there in a suit if the rest of the family were in their military uniforms. No idea if that is what they will be wearing or not.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>




That’s ridiculous on so many levels. Archie “met” his great grandmother, grandfather, and uncle ONCE when he was only a couple of months old. He doesn’t remember any of it. His sister hasn’t been cheated out of anything he supposedly had. Unless the narrative is supposed to imply that that the Queen has been cheated out of the glory of seeing Lilibet.


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Really sounds like the Harkles' current security is just not up to the job. Not. 

Honestly, if it was me I'd let them know I won't be available for their US security anymore either. It's not like they need the money and can't find another client.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I think Methane has a sliding scale for any sentiments of the heart. The more useful you are, the higher up the scale you are placed.
> 
> It's interesting that the Suits cast are still supportive of her. She must not be Markling her Hollywood and acting contacts.


Well that and they are all has-beens and they are just happy the press are talking to them about anything 
So many actors make an entire lifestyle out of being ensemble cast in a tv show 20 years ago.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> That’s ridiculous on so many levels. Archie “met” his great grandmother, grandfather, and uncle ONCE when he was only a couple of months old. He doesn’t remember any of it. His sister hasn’t been cheated out of anything he supposedly had. Unless the narrative is supposed to imply that that the Queen has been cheated out of the glory of seeing Lilibet.


I think the point they're making is that while Lilibet is 7 mos. and has never met the Queen, Archie is 3 y.o. and has never met Thomas Markle. A photo of the first would be worth big bucks to the Harkles, a photo of the second would be of little value to them. All about the bucks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That’s ridiculous on so many levels. Archie “met” his great grandmother, grandfather, and uncle ONCE when he was only a couple of months old. He doesn’t remember any of it. His sister hasn’t been cheated out of anything he supposedly had. Unless the narrative is supposed to imply that that the Queen has been cheated out of the glory of seeing Lilibet.


I think it means Lilib*t doesn't have a photo-op with QE yet. I read somewhere that her parents had planned a big party for her 1st birthday… I'm not sure if the queen was informed.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> No further comments…



"The Artist Formerly Known As Prince Harry"  , although as a Minnesota resident I am offended on behalf of Prince.


----------



## charlottawill

Don't know who that gentleman is but he is hilarious and spot on in his assessment of Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Don't know who that gentleman is but he is hilarious and spot on in his assessment of Harry.



National Nuisance! Love it.


----------



## Pivoine66

Chanbal said:


> I think it means Lilib*t doesn't have a photo-op with QE yet. I read somewhere that her parents had planned a big party for her 1st birthday… I'm not sure if the queen was informed.
> View attachment 5299776


I can imagine the grandfather (father of the former actress) TM would be delighted to throw a birthday party for his granddaughter and also to meet his now three-year-old grandson for the first time.

I wish the Queen that finally her outstanding event, Her Platinum Jubilee, is the topic and not constantly overshadowed by H and his wife.

Wouldn't two people who are constantly calling on others to show compassion voluntarily restrain themselves completely so that the Queen, out of respect for her as both H's grandmother and as Queen, who has served GB so relentlessly and selflessly for 70 years, can enjoy her year to the full?


----------



## gracekelly

This is just full on PR self pimping. They needed something to get them into the news in a victim position. Plus, as @marietouchet pointed out, it adds to their excuse not to show up. He wants a red carpet, 21 gun salute, and the band playing God Save The Duke of Sussex.  Not happening.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> People tend to forget that Camilla cheated on her husband with Charles long before Diana came on the scene. And to be fair I believe Camilla’s husband cheated too. Infidelity was apparently the norm in their social scene. That doesn’t mean cheaters ever truly accept infidelity as acceptable when it happens to them. They only believe it’s okay when they do it because they have a very good reason, they are horny.
> 
> I don’t believe Diana cheated first. Charles was still emotionally involved with Camilla before the wedding, even if he was able to keep his pants on.


We'll never know who truly cheated first on the other, emotionally or physically or whatever.  I do think in upper societies of British (and French) culture, cheating is often accepted and tolerated.


----------



## bellecate

This is the Harkles puffing up their chests playing a childish game of "Don't you know who I am?", with absolutely no regard for the damage and hurt it places upon the family. For shame.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The more I think about it, the more I wish Charles' office would make a few discreet phone calls and Omid would never work again in the UK. I'm petty like this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> This is the Harkles puffing up their chests playing a childish game of "Don't you know who I am?", with absolutely no regard for the damage and hurt it places upon the family. For shame.



Oh we know exactly who they are...nobodies in the grand scheme of the BRF and not special enough to make it on their own.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> We'll never know who truly cheated first on the other, emotionally or physically or whatever.  I do think in upper societies of British (and French) culture, cheating is often accepted and tolerated.


Camilla is said to have teased upon meeting Charles that since her great-grandmother was his great-father's mistress, why don't they have a go at it?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> The movie was Ruthless People. Bette Midler played the kidnapped wife who Danny DeVito was hoping the kidnappers would murder because he didn’t want her back. The couple who kidnapped her kept reducing the price of the ransom and couldn’t understand why the husband refused to pay it causing Bette Midler to utter this famous line.



They don't make movies like they used to.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> The security firm must love this job. All they have to do is pander to his paranoia and her self-importance.


I'm sure dealing with them is exhausting.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure dealing with them is exhausting.


hopefully they are kinder than Uncle Andy to staff and security


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> He's just afraid that the neo-Nazis from whom he borrowed his costume will want to bring him to a pub to catch up.
> 
> *Mental health expert? *Wasn't it established that it wouldn't look right for a royal to have therapy (as per the exalted Saint Meghan)? Hazard will probably "want" to get triggered so that he can have fresh material for "The MeMeMe You See Again". I'm sure a few autographed bananas will calm him down after the London Eye looks him in the eye.


I think Harry is a mental health expert because he personally has a lot of mental issues!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>




Lili has met Doria, so I'm confused.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> This is the Harkles puffing up their chests playing a childish game of "Don't you know who I am?", with absolutely no regard for the damage and hurt it places upon the family. For shame.


I am getting this mental image of a monkey beating his chest to scare off another male.  It ain’t working Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> This is just full on PR self pimping. They needed something to get them into the news in a victim position. Plus, as @marietouchet pointed out, it adds to their excuse not to show up. He wants a red carpet, 21 gun salute, and the band playing God Save The Duke of Sussex.  Not happening.


I hope the Queen does not give in to the petulant whining of her man child grandson. I can understand her wanting her family to be together to celebrate her milestone, but if given the chance the Harkles will use any opportunity to upstage her and other members of the BRF. Ignoring them is the best course of action, but I'm sure it will be difficult for the Queen to do so.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I think it means Lilib*t doesn't have a photo-op with QE yet. I read somewhere that her parents had planned a big party for her 1st birthday… I'm not sure if the queen was informed.
> View attachment 5299776


They will never get that picture of Lili and TQ. She is way too smart for that.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Meghan would behave as she does no matter where she lived. If she had the same parents,she would turn out just the same. I’m from the East and I would say that people on the west coast are nicer and friendlier on the whole. Ready to be slammed for this comment.


@gracekelly .. remember, I'm also from the East Coast (Connecticut), and I would totally agree with you on that front!  I always used to blame us being that way due to the long Winters, but .. wait a minute .. Chicago has long Winters too but yet, the people are a LOT more friendly there!  Also found that in the Southeast, but .. something about New England and the greater NY area?? .. you are friends for life!  I talk to my friends back East, and it's like we just start up where we left off .. kind of hard to explain, but I'm sure you totally understand what I'm saying!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> @gracekelly .. remember, I'm also from the East Coast (Connecticut), and I would totally agree with you on that front!  I always used to blame us being that way due to the long Winters, but .. wait a minute .. Chicago has long Winters too but yet, the people are a LOT more friendly there!  Also found that in the Southeast, but .. something about New England and the greater NY area?? .. you are friends for life!  I talk to my friends back East, and it's like we just start up where we left off .. kind of hard to explain, but I'm sure you totally understand what I'm saying!


so CA people are more friendly in the surface but it doesn't necessarily go deep?  whereas in your case, the east coast friends are deeper friendships?


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> @gracekelly .. remember, I'm also from the East Coast (Connecticut), and I would totally agree with you on that front!  I always used to blame us being that way due to the long Winters, but .. wait a minute .. Chicago has long Winters too but yet, the people are a LOT more friendly there!  Also found that in the Southeast, but .. something about New England and the greater NY area?? .. you are friends for life!  *I talk to my friends back East, and it's like we just start up where we left off .. *kind of hard to explain, but I'm sure you totally understand what I'm saying!


I find people in the East Coast very friendly. I love those nice parties during the long winters.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! I bet they would have tons of security around them. No cameras though…


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> They will never get that picture of Lili and TQ. She is way too smart for that.


All their disgusting lying antics may have finally been “the straw that broke the camel’s back.  The Queen may have finally just gotten to the point wihere she feels “the H3LL with them!”


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Well that and they are all has-beens and they are just happy the press are talking to them about anything
> So many actors make an entire lifestyle out of being ensemble cast in a tv show 20 years ago.


She's hoping for a "Reunion" show. She needs more recent footage than squatting on a sidewalk, slurping a baby bottle and chewing like a squirrel, all with a deranged persona. Those images are immortal, they will follow her everywhere.


----------



## Chanbal

The press is not favorable to their last requests. It's probably better if they don't accept Charles's hospitality. 



_In public, Prince Harry and Meghan are forever banging on about their love for the Queen.

But like most virtue signalling, woketopian multi-millionaires, their woolly words are never followed up by good deeds.

Harry is the polar opposite of his exceptional grandmother, who, throughout her reign, has kept her public pronouncements to a minimum and allowed herself to be judged by her actions.

*I believe the couple’s latest legal outburst amounts to nothing short of emotional blackmail.*_


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, this is good!


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good!




This couple is seriously deranged. You need a lawyer to review everything you say about them. I suggest the media stops talking about them completely and then they won’t be able to complain or sue.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this really their position?


*Meghan's friend Omid Scobie puts the boot in over Prince Andrew: Journalist compares how Duke of York kept his titles until the Queen's 'hand was finally forced'... while Prince Harry was 'stripped of privilege' after Megxit*

*Omid Scobie says 'ring of protection' around Prince Andrew was 'confusing'*
*Claims threat to 'Brand Windsor' forced the 'institution's hand' over the Duke*
*Says there was 'no sympathetic support behind palace walls' for Prince Harry*
*Mr Scobie works for Harper's Bazaar and co-wrote Finding Freedom biography*











						Meghan's friend Omid Scobie puts the boot in over Prince Andrew
					

Omid Scobie said the 'threat to Brand Windsor and the family business' had 'finally forced the institution's hand' after the Queen removed Prince Andrew's honorary military roles last Thursday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

So he’s not a “Royal reporter” anymore? Now he’s a “friend”?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Yanca

Scoobie, the mouth piece is getting bolder and bolder with his tweets inciting hate against the BRF, everyday it seemed that his only job is to attack the BRF, tweets passive aggressive about Prince William and Kate. You don't have to be pro or against monarchy to get the feel that his tweets are to rile the squad. He is Vile pretending to be a "journalist" he should just come out and say that the is a paid mouthpiece for Megadrama.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> They will never get that picture of Lili and TQ. She is way too smart for that.


From your lips to God’s ear.


----------



## 1LV

Aimee3 said:


> All their disgusting lying antics may have finally been “the straw that broke the camel’s back.  The Queen may have finally just gotten to the point wihere she feels “the H3LL with them!”


Fingers crossed!


----------



## LizzieBennett

bag-mania said:


> That’s ridiculous on so many levels. Archie “met” his great grandmother, grandfather, and uncle ONCE when he was only a couple of months old. He doesn’t remember any of it. His sister hasn’t been cheated out of anything he supposedly had. Unless the narrative is supposed to imply that that the Queen has been cheated out of the glory of seeing Lilibet.


Don't they mean his other grandfather?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good!




Does that thing ever shut up. She'd be the one her kidnappers return because she's driving them crazy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(he caught that it's in fact the Platinum Jubilee a bit later)


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> They were probably referring to paid security at some selected events like the ones in NYC. I'm still puzzled how (and why) these 2 private citizens were able to get the state to sponsor their security.



Well............it's NY
Doubt they'd get anything if they visited say.......Dallas or Miami
Maybe that was one of the things she wanted to talk to the gruesome one about........getting state funded protection


----------



## jennlt

The Markle sparple?


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I think Harry is a mental health expert because he personally has a lot of mental issues!



Straight from the "it takes one to know one" school of medicine


----------



## bellecate

H’s problem solved.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Cue the next lawsuit 









						Princes Andrew and Harry will be denied Queen’s Platinum Jubilee medal
					

Dukes of York and Sussex ineligible to receive medal rewarding members of the Armed Forces following removal of their honorary titles




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> hopefully they are kinder than Uncle Andy to staff and security


Kind is not a word I've heard used to describe MM.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *The more I think about it, the more I wish Charles' office would make a few discreet phone calls and Omid would never work again in the UK. I'm petty like this.*



I wish we had a "TPF Ambassador of Information on the Implementation of Action to Thwart the Despicable Duo From Sabotaging HMTQ's Platinum Jubilee" (sorry, but I just had to make the title longer than that of the Commissioner of the Commission, etc. for Butter Cup Mental Health or whatever.) and then they could relay to Charles and the BRF all our excellent suggestions on how to stop JCMH and Thee Wife and their ugly machinations from destroying Granny's Party. 
Any volunteers???


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I bet he also wouldn’t have been too happy to be there in a suit if the rest of the family were in their military uniforms. No idea if that is what they will be wearing or not.


I believe for such a significant event uniforms for men *who are entitled to wear them *will be the dress code. I'm sure Harry will be offended if he can't wear one, but no worries, he can hang out with Uncle Andy in solidarity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That guy is really not a fan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Cue the next lawsuit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princes Andrew and Harry will be denied Queen’s Platinum Jubilee medal
> 
> 
> Dukes of York and Sussex ineligible to receive medal rewarding members of the Armed Forces following removal of their honorary titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk



I mean, I can see how it is a bitter pill to swallow that you're basically on the same level as an alleged sex offender...but he brought it all onto himself.

As someone on Twitter commented wisely, Harry - as opposed to Andrew - was not stripped of his military titles. He was given the option to stay and keep them, he declined and rode off into the sunset.


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Cue the next lawsuit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princes Andrew and Harry will be denied Queen’s Platinum Jubilee medal
> 
> 
> Dukes of York and Sussex ineligible to receive medal rewarding members of the Armed Forces following removal of their honorary titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


Well, it's not a done deal yet!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5300149



It is so sad that her Jubilee is being overshadowed by her son and grandson's reprehensible behavior.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Well, it's not a done deal yet!



At the rate we're going this thread will be 10k pages by June


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Cue the next lawsuit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princes Andrew and Harry will be denied Queen’s Platinum Jubilee medal
> 
> 
> Dukes of York and Sussex ineligible to receive medal rewarding members of the Armed Forces following removal of their honorary titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


he must be incensed to be in the same category as Andrew....love it


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I believe for such a significant event uniforms for men *who are entitled to wear them *will be the dress code. I'm sure Harry will be offended if he can't wear one, but no worries, he can hang out with Uncle Andy in solidarity.



This reminds me of Phillip’s funeral. No one else could wear the uniform because Hazzi couldn’t.
This guy has received way too many privileges. Such a baby.

Just do it.

*New humiliation for Andrew and Harry? Buckingham Palace officials mull ways of axing them as two of the four Counsellors of State who would deputise for an ailing monarch after they both lost right to use their HRH titles*

*Andrew and Harry have been stripped of royal patronages and military titles*
*Counsellors of State are authorised to carry out most of the official duties*
*But Buckingham Palace sources now say those statuses also now under threat *


----------



## SittinInCoach

gracekelly said:


> Lololol!  He’s brutal!  Yoko Mono Meghan Markle!  He called her terrifying!


 nvm


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It is so sad that her Jubilee is being overshadowed by her son and grandson's reprehensible behavior.



If it needs to be said, I’ll say it (sweet nod to Cousin Greg) -  if the BRF, QE, Charles, W, - if they had acted earlier and with strength, this would *not* be happening now. They chose to kick the troubles to curb.  Big mistake.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not a good look, imo:













						Princess Eugenie seen for first time since returning from Switzerland
					

Princess Eugenie, 31, who is 12th in line to the throne, was spotted in the back of Range Rover Vogue hybrid electric car while being driven out of Royal Lodge in the grounds of Windsor Great Park in Berkshire.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the comments:
_Principessa Pinocchio, it sounds so much better in Italian 

_


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If it needs to be said, I’ll say it (sweet nod to Cousin Greg) -  if the BRF, QE, Charles, W, - if they had acted earlier and with strength, this would *not* be happening now. They chose to kick the troubles to curb.  Big mistake.


The Queen had her head in the sand with Andrew. He is said to be (or was) her favorite and she had a maternal blind spot for his transgressions. MM was a no win situation. If they had put their foot down about Prince Pouty marrying her they would have been called racists. So they welcomed her, threw a 50mil wedding bash, gave them a mansion to live in and still got called racists.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hanging on to those medals:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not a good look, imo:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5300189
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie seen for first time since returning from Switzerland
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie, 31, who is 12th in line to the throne, was spotted in the back of Range Rover Vogue hybrid electric car while being driven out of Royal Lodge in the grounds of Windsor Great Park in Berkshire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That's her "Where's Eugenie?" outfit.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> That's her "Where's Eugenie?" outfit.


sorry if it's not ok to say but I never thought either of those girls was very attractive


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> sorry if it's not ok to say but I never thought either of those girls was very attractive



How dare you disparage these visions of loveliness!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well, it seems there's a scheduling conflict re: the baby's birthday party hosted by the Queen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *New humiliation for Andrew and Harry? Buckingham Palace officials mull ways of axing them as two of the four Counsellors of State who would deputise for an ailing monarch after they both lost right to use their HRH titles*
> 
> *Andrew and Harry have been stripped of royal patronages and military titles*
> *Counsellors of State are authorised to carry out most of the official duties*
> *But Buckingham Palace sources now say those statuses also now under threat *



You know, I was very vocal about how displeased I was with the lack of action from the BRF, but I'm starting to feel slightly bad for him.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> How dare you disparage these visions of loveliness!
> View attachment 5300208


If the dress and the coat weren't bad enough.  They did it to insult Catherine.


----------



## tiktok

charlottawill said:


> How dare you disparage these visions of loveliness!
> View attachment 5300208



Actually this photo shows the problem - there’s nothing wrong with their looks, they just have no idea how to dress their figures (or faces), and especially how to dress age-appropriately. They pretty consistently dress like someone 30 years their senior with no fashion sense.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I think it means Lilib*t doesn't have a photo-op with QE yet. I read somewhere that her parents had planned a big party for her 1st birthday… I'm not sure if the queen was informed.
> View attachment 5299776


This was the most misleading title I've ever encountered. Kudos to whichever Hello hack who brilliantly combined two separate events into a piece of attractive clickbait.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> *two of the four Counsellors of State*


Who are the other two - Charles and William?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, it seems there's a scheduling conflict re: the baby's birthday party hosted by the Queen.



New Headline:

*QUEEN SKIPS JUBILEE TO ATTEND LILIBET'S FIRST BIRTHDAY PARTY!*

Fooled ya!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> New Headline:
> 
> *QUEEN SKIPS JUBILEE TO ATTEND LILIBET'S FIRST BIRTHDAY PARTY!*
> 
> Fooled ya!


Every time I read Lilibet I cringe. Using the queen's childhood nickname as their daughter's given name was not a sweet nod, it was an in your face way to permanently connect her to the Queen, even after the Harkles are long divorced. I hope it comes back to bite them in the *ss when she's a difficult teen and hates them for her name.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good!



From the comments, I learned a new word today.
Susie Dent posted: "Word of the day is ‘sparple’ (14th century): to deflect unwanted attention from one thing by making a big deal of another."

Wow, so now we have Markle Sparple and doesn't it have a nice ring to it. 

ETA: sorry @jennit  I see you've posted this already.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> New Headline:
> 
> *QUEEN SKIPS JUBILEE TO ATTEND LILIBET'S FIRST BIRTHDAY PARTY!*
> 
> Fooled ya!


They wish.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> How dare you disparage these visions of loveliness!
> View attachment 5300208


it's like sara and andrew resemble each other and the girls got the worst of both of them....sorry


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Every time I read Lilibet I cringe. Using the queen's childhood nickname as their daughter's given name was not a sweet nod, it was an in your face way to permanently connect her to the Queen, even after the Harkles are long divorced. I hope it comes back to bite them in the *ss when she's a difficult teen and hates them for her name.


Same here.  A private name from the Queens father,  now has its own domain and will now be used for future merchandising and any number of money making schemes.  Harry should be ashamed of himself for letting this happen.  He would have known it was private and should have remained that way.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> he must be incensed to be in the same category as Andrew....love it


anyone seen what the "sugars" are saying about this?  H is a second-hand victim of racism?


----------



## CarryOn2020

I think of the casino:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That guy is really not a fan.



That's why I love him!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> At the rate we're going this thread will be 10k pages by June


June is 5 months away...we'll get there by March at the latest!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> anyone seen what the "sugars" are saying about this?  H is a second-hand victim of racism?


One of the most privileged white guys of all time is a "second hand victim of racism"???


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> One of the most privileged white guys of all time is a "second hand victim of racism"???


Of course....doncha know.  His Wife is a victim and therefore, he is too.  At least we haven't heard lately that he's afraid the paps will kill her like they did (in his mind) his mother


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Of course....doncha know.  His Wife is a victim and therefore, he is too.  At least we haven't heard lately that he's afraid the paps will kill her like they did (in his mind) his mother


Wow, if we can be whatever just by association, I am blessed!  I am a physician, a lawyer, a judge, a veteran, an architect, a former chef for the President, the cousin of a Senator, a model, a hedge funder, former member of the CIA, and on and on and on!  Damn I am accomplished!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Wow, if we can be whatever just by association, I am blessed!  I am a physician, a lawyer, a judge, a veteran, an architect, a former chef for the President, the cousin of a Senator, a model, a hedge funder, former member of the CIA, and on and on and on!  Damn I am accomplished!


aren't you fortunate


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not a good look, imo:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5300189
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie seen for first time since returning from Switzerland
> 
> 
> Princess Eugenie, 31, who is 12th in line to the throne, was spotted in the back of Range Rover Vogue hybrid electric car while being driven out of Royal Lodge in the grounds of Windsor Great Park in Berkshire.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I guess it says solidarity with Daddy


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Lili has met Doria, so I'm confused.


Hmm, are there any pics of Doria and the baby? Or recent ones of Doria and Archificial? Doria seems to have dropped out of sight.



Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good!



Do we need to start a demonic possession folder? Note the complete blackness of her eyeballs in this pic. Either her mascara has run, or she is auditioning for a remake of The X Files.



jennlt said:


> The Markle sparple?



I love this word!



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I can see how it is a bitter pill to swallow that you're basically on the same level as an alleged sex offender...but he brought it all onto himself.
> 
> As someone on Twitter commented wisely, Harry - as opposed to Andrew - was not stripped of his military titles. He was given the option to stay and keep them, he declined and rode off into the sunset.


He will probably whine that he was forced to decline since they weren't offering him an A-lister deal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Hmm, are there any pics of Doria and the baby? Or recent ones of Doria and Archificial? Doria seems to have dropped out of sight.
> 
> 
> Do we need to start a demonic possession folder? Note the complete blackness of her eyeballs in this pic. Either her mascara has run, or she is auditioning for a remake of The X Files.
> 
> 
> I love this word!
> 
> 
> He will probably whine that he was forced to decline since they weren't offering him an A-lister deal.


Well no one forced him to sign on with the Z lister.


----------



## charlottawill

Be careful what you wish for Harry:


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Well no one forced him to sign on with the Z lister.


Some day down the road, Methane will hire a ghost writer to create her definitive biography filled with her truth: the Hollywood star who gave up a glittering career to marry a prince, the social champion who was bullied in real life, the saintly almost orphan with abusive family and in-laws. Coffee table tome version available with photos of her glamourous life. 

An honest library would catalogue it under fiction.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Well no one forced him to sign on with the Z lister.


unless you count witchcraft


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> unless you count witchcraft



This is indeed scary - BLG, where are are you?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

just read the BBC apology. Princess Perjury wanted to make it clear that she apologised to the court for forgetting the emails. She didn't apologize for misleading the court. Riiiiight! You know, I think this will be her go-to excuse in future. Gosh! How can you expect me to remember what I told Omid? JK didn't give me access to the emails I sent him, so I can't be held responsible for what I said about my own life.

I clicked into a stan's twitter feed to see what they are saying. This diabetic-level sugar is jubilant that the Soursexes are "winning" all the way. And she doesn't see the contradiction in what she is saying: she screams that the BRF are racist and they dislike the biracial liar (because "racist", you know), then in the midst of the fawning, also says that she is unhappy that TQ won't "save and protect" the Soursexes. The mental disconnect and circular arguments are alarming. "Save" the whining whipped and wife from what? (How's that for alliteration?  )


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good!



She got off lightly, it should have read, “she apologized for lying to the Court.”
That’s the real truth.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is indeed scary - BLG, where are are you?
> 
> View attachment 5300323


This would be good for a caption contest 
"I told you I wanted it shaken and not stirred!"


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> This would be good for a caption contest
> "I told you I wanted it shaken and not stirred!"


Thought bubble over Harry: "Meghan, owwww...you're hurting meeee!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Good for Charles!   They are despaired for money, big money!


_The insiders continued that the Prince of Wales funded his son's royal lifestyle. He used to go on massive shopping sprees and glamorous vacations, even buying everyone drinks and meals at expensive restaurants.

But, these all ended when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to exit their royal life in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, they are now reportedly turning to the next person in line to the British Throne to help them with their "*serious money issues*."

The same informants added, however, that his "pleas have fallen on deaf ears." This is said to be despite Prince Charles singing praises for his two sons in a recent essay about climate change.

The Duke of Sussex allegedly thought that his father would agree after learning about the Newsweek material. But, it is "you are either in or you are out of the family" for the next British Monarch._









						Prince Harry Asking For Financial Help, But Prince Charles Is 'Not Budging': Report
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly facing "serious financial troubles" in the United States.




					www.btimesonline.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Good for Charles.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Good for Charles!   They are despaired for money, big money!
> View attachment 5300369
> 
> _The insiders continued that the Prince of Wales funded his son's royal lifestyle. He used to go on massive shopping sprees and glamorous vacations, even buying everyone drinks and meals at expensive restaurants.
> 
> But, these all ended when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to exit their royal life in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, they are now reportedly turning to the next person in line to the British Throne to help them with their "*serious money issues*."
> 
> The same informants added, however, that his "pleas have fallen on deaf ears." This is said to be despite Prince Charles singing praises for his two sons in a recent essay about climate change._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Asking For Financial Help, But Prince Charles Is 'Not Budging': Report
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly facing "serious financial troubles" in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com


What is the "Newsweek material" that Hazard thought would get the ATM moving?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Good for Charles!   They are despaired for money, big money!
> View attachment 5300369
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Asking For Financial Help, But Prince Charles Is 'Not Budging': Report
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly facing "serious financial troubles" in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com



thank you, @Chanbal
Quotes, quotes, quotes to lighten our days:

_*The insiders continued that the Prince of Wales funded his son's royal lifestyle. He used to go on massive shopping sprees and glamorous vacations, even buying everyone drinks and meals at expensive restaurants.  *

But, these all ended when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to exit their royal life in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, they are now reportedly turning to the next person in line to the British Throne to help them with their "serious money issues."

*The same informants added, however, that his "pleas have fallen on deaf ears." [William????] *This is said to be despite Prince Charles singing praises for his two sons in a recent essay about climate change.

The Duke of Sussex allegedly thought that his father would agree after learning *about the Newsweek material*. ?????? But, it is "you are either in or you are out of the family" for the next British Monarch. [Charles or Willam????]

This is not the first time reports of "financial issues" involving Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have come to light. In mid-2021, royal experts said that they could be in such a problem despite previously closing their massive deals with Netflix and Spotify, according to OK! magazine.

Daniela Elser explained that the Sussex Royals could likely find themselves "out of pocket" if the projects do not pay off. *She noted that their "money-making ability is pegged to their ability to generate good PR.*"    Hence, if the interest toward them wanes, then "their value could plummet," leading to a potential write-off.

*Amid all the assertions, though, no proof or piece of evidence has surfaced to support the stories. In addition, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have yet to make a statement regarding the allegations.  *

Therefore, the latest claims about them remain speculative as no one can prove their legitimacy._


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder what is the Newsweek material. I don't think is this one!  









						Piers Morgan Calls Prince Harry 'Entitled Hypocrite' Over Security Lawsuit
					

Prince Harry is suing the British government for refusing him police protection during U.K. visits—saying he and Meghan Markle cannot return without it.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> thank you, @Chanbal
> Quotes, quotes, quotes to lighten our days:
> 
> _*The insiders continued that the Prince of Wales funded his son's royal lifestyle. He used to go on massive shopping sprees and glamorous vacations, even buying everyone drinks and meals at expensive restaurants.*
> 
> But, these all ended when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to exit their royal life in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, they are now reportedly turning to the next person in line to the British Throne to help them with their "serious money issues."
> 
> The same informants added, however, that his "pleas have fallen on deaf ears." This is said to be despite Prince Charles singing praises for his two sons in a recent essay about climate change.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex allegedly thought that his father would agree after learning about the Newsweek material. But, it is "you are either in or you are out of the family" for the next British Monarch.
> 
> This is not the first time reports of "financial issues" involving Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have come to light. In mid-2021, royal experts said that they could be in such a problem despite previously closing their massive deals with Netflix and Spotify, according to OK! magazine.
> 
> Daniela Elser explained that the Sussex Royals could likely find themselves "out of pocket" if the projects do not pay off. *She noted that their "money-making ability is pegged to their ability to generate good PR.*"    Hence, if the interest toward them wanes, then "their value could plummet," leading to a potential write-off.
> 
> *Amid all the assertions, though, no proof or piece of evidence has surfaced to support the stories. In addition, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have yet to make a statement regarding the allegations.*
> 
> Therefore, the latest claims about them remain speculative as no one can prove their legitimacy._


can't wait for their value to plummet


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> aren't you fortunate


Nope.  I am Victim #1 following HazMeg's logic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Nope.  I am Victim #1 following HazMeg's logic.



HazMeg!!!! 
this is the absolute best thread on the internet!


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> What is the "Newsweek material" that Hazard thought would get the ATM moving?


I want to know that too. It might be the one in which Charles stated: "_And my younger son, Harry, has passionately highlighted the impact of climate change, especially in relation to Africa, and committed his charity to being net zero."_

Gosh, did Hazz believe that Charles was being serious? Charles is only playing his game, and mentioning Hazz's name was part of it. 









						Prince Charles Says "Our Children Are Judging Us" on Climate Change
					

The heir to the British throne, a longtime environmentalist, on the price of inaction if we fail to protect "this planet we call home."




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> HazMeg!!!!
> this is the absolute best thread on the internet!


I wonder who reads this
I saw on online story yesterday (not about H&M) that quoted something I'd said....but it could very well be someone else said the same thing


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> HazMeg!!!!
> this is the absolute *best thread on the internet*!


I couldn't have gotten through COVID without it and without you all!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I wonder who reads this
> I saw on online story yesterday (not about H&M) that quoted something I'd said....but it could very well be someone else said the same thing


I truly believe Jesus the Body Language Guy and many others are lurkers here!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I wonder who reads this
> I saw on online story yesterday (not about H&M) that quoted something I'd said....but it could very well be someone else said the same thing


Lucky it was you. If it was Princess Perjury, she would be suing for copyright infringement


----------



## carmen56

charlottawill said:


> Who are the other two - Charles and William?



Yes.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good for Charles.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



How did Prince Penury imply that the US government was paying for/subsidising his security expenses? I wonder what he thought "financial independence" means.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> can't wait for their value to plummet


Pretty sure it already has. Those Netflix and Spotify lawyers are getting ready to initiate their clawback clauses any day now.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good!



Another man learns that if you become M’s bootlicker you are just more liable to get kicked.   


CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this really their position?
> 
> 
> *Meghan's friend Omid Scobie puts the boot in over Prince Andrew: Journalist compares how Duke of York kept his titles until the Queen's 'hand was finally forced'... while Prince Harry was 'stripped of privilege' after Megxit*
> 
> *Omid Scobie says 'ring of protection' around Prince Andrew was 'confusing'*
> *Claims threat to 'Brand Windsor' forced the 'institution's hand' over the Duke*
> *Says there was 'no sympathetic support behind palace walls' for Prince Harry*
> *Mr Scobie works for Harper's Bazaar and co-wrote Finding Freedom biography*
> 
> View attachment 5299978
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's friend Omid Scobie puts the boot in over Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> Omid Scobie said the 'threat to Brand Windsor and the family business' had 'finally forced the institution's hand' after the Queen removed Prince Andrew's honorary military roles last Thursday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I mean it doesn’t have to be either/or, Omid,  I am deeply contemptuous of both. I just also happen to find embarrassing grandstanding and fashion fails more entertaining to discuss than allegations of statutory rape and sex trafficking and comparing the two seems in poor taste but hey whatever


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> So he’s not a “Royal reporter” anymore? Now he’s a “friend”?


I still think he’s desperate to get on celeb big brother. He thinks he can be the new Gemma Collins. 


bellecate said:


> H’s problem solved.
> 
> View attachment 5300068


Can you imagine how awesome it’d be if she was born eldest after the equal inheritance law came in and we would one day get the reign of Queen Anne the second?  Sorry Charles but it’s true.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> If it needs to be said, I’ll say it (sweet nod to Cousin Greg) -  if the BRF, QE, Charles, W, - if they had acted earlier and with strength, this would *not* be happening now. They chose to kick the troubles to curb.  Big mistake.


100% agree and I was just about to say this. They’ve had close to two years to deal with these problems (& hey they could have done something about A in the 90s when he was acting so disreputably but they probably  thought it was buried when they sorted out fergie.)
I know they might use the Covid excuse but to me that makes it even easier to sort out your mess in house if you aren’t doing your normal events schedule and there are fewer journalists around. 
They dragged their heels hoping the issues would die in the shuffle but now they haven’t they are hoping to milk sympathy by banging on about the jubilee and how old the queen is but it isn’t exclusively her job to solve these issues anyway.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Good for Charles!   They are despaired for money, big money!
> View attachment 5300369
> 
> _The insiders continued that the Prince of Wales funded his son's royal lifestyle. He used to go on massive shopping sprees and glamorous vacations, even buying everyone drinks and meals at expensive restaurants.
> 
> But, these all ended when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to exit their royal life in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, they are now reportedly turning to the next person in line to the British Throne to help them with their "*serious money issues*."
> 
> The same informants added, however, that his "pleas have fallen on deaf ears." This is said to be despite Prince Charles singing praises for his two sons in a recent essay about climate change.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex allegedly thought that his father would agree after learning about the Newsweek material. But, it is "you are either in or you are out of the family" for the next British Monarch._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Asking For Financial Help, But Prince Charles Is 'Not Budging': Report
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly facing "serious financial troubles" in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com


I can believe the shopping sprees and the holidays (and the unmentioned scar face mountains of coke) but I’m amazed to hear he ever bought anyone else a drink tbh. 


xincinsin said:


> Hmm, are there any pics of Doria and the baby? Or recent ones of Doria and Archificial? Doria seems to have dropped out of sight.
> 
> 
> Do we need to start a demonic possession folder? Note the complete blackness of her eyeballs in this pic. Either her mascara has run, or she is auditioning for a remake of The X Files.
> 
> 
> I love this word!
> 
> 
> He will probably whine that he was forced to decline since they weren't offering him an A-lister deal.


I think the fillers are casting a very deep shadow over her beady eyes either that or pazuzu is playing the long game for a remake of the exorcist.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> 100% agree and I was just about to say this. They’ve had close to two years to deal with these problems (& hey they could have done something about A in the 90s when he was acting so disreputably but they probably  thought it was buried when they sorted out fergie.)
> I know they might use the Covid excuse but to me that makes it even easier to sort out your mess in house if you aren’t doing your normal events schedule and there are fewer journalists around.
> They dragged their heels hoping the issues would die in the shuffle but now they haven’t they are hoping to milk sympathy by banging on about the jubilee and how old the queen is but it isn’t exclusively her job to solve these issues anyway.


It would do a lot for their credibility if they can shut the louts down, but it's likely too late. TW has firmly established her credentials as a professional victim.


----------



## Aminamina

charlottawill said:


> Every time I read Lilibet I cringe. Using the queen's childhood nickname as their daughter's given name was not a sweet nod, it was an in your face way to permanently connect her to the Queen, even after the Harkles are long divorced. I hope it comes back to bite them in the *ss when she's a difficult teen and hates them for her name.


I agree. And as a childhood nickname it’s fine but as a real name to me it rings ridiculous.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Oh joy, can’t wait to hear the reports on this BUTTER Up gig in a few days. 

*Prince Harry's first engagement of the year revealed*
*The royal has spoken openly about mental health*
JANUARY 13, 2022 - 22:42 GMT BY MATTHEW MOORE

*Prince Harry's* first engagement of 2022 has been revealed, as the royal *will be taking part in a virtual event with BetterUp on 3 February.*

The royal is the Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp, a professional coaching and mental health, and joined the charity last year. For the event, *he will team up with BetterUp's CEO, Alexi Robichaux, and the pair will discuss their "bold commitment" to the company's Inner Work initiative*. They will also be joined by a host of guest speakers including Jacinta Jimenez, BetterUp's VP of Coach Innovation and a trained psychologist.










						Prince Harry's first engagement of the year revealed – see here
					

Prince Harry's first engagement of the year has been revealed, and it's a cause that's close to his heart



					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> She got off lightly, it should have read, “she apologized for lying to the Court.”
> That’s the real truth.



I don't know if you would be given the chance that you lied to court, I think it's called perjury - which is an offence


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Oh joy, can’t wait to hear the reports on this BUTTER Up gig in a few days.
> 
> *Prince Harry's first engagement of the year revealed*
> *The royal has spoken openly about mental health*
> JANUARY 13, 2022 - 22:42 GMT BY MATTHEW MOORE
> 
> *Prince Harry's* first engagement of 2022 has been revealed, as the royal *will be taking part in a virtual event with BetterUp on 3 February.*
> 
> The royal is the Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp, a professional coaching and mental health, and joined the charity last year. For the event, *he will team up with BetterUp's CEO, Alexi Robichaux, and the pair will discuss their "bold commitment" to the company's Inner Work initiative*. They will also be joined by a host of guest speakers including Jacinta Jimenez, BetterUp's VP of Coach Innovation and a trained psychologist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's first engagement of the year revealed – see here
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's first engagement of the year has been revealed, and it's a cause that's close to his heart
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com



Is there anything they do that isn't "close to their heart"? 

There's so much twiddly, cutesy spin on these two they're contributing to the global diabetes crisis


----------



## xincinsin

"The royal is the Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp, a professional coaching and mental health, and *joined the charity last year*."  

I thought Buttercup was a for-profit thingy. It's a charity?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's our Lady MegBeth for you.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If the BBC caves to her, I’ll lose all respect for them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tourre is all of us.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "The royal is the Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp, a professional coaching and mental health, and *joined the charity last year*."
> 
> I thought Buttercup was a for-profit thingy. It's a charity?



It most certainly is not a charity. They are working on an IPO. 


> https://www.fastcompany.com/90618584/prince-harry-betterup-startup


*The company charges employers a monthly subscription fee per employee for access to the platform and its coaches. Clients include Airbnb, Google, Hilton, and Warner Media, and individuals can also sign up for the platform through a free trial.*


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> pazuzu


   The list is endless


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourre is all of us.



I took a trip down the side path to check out the abusive stan who called Tourre a slave. She reposts a lot of stan tweets, including some which claim Princess Perjury is their true queen and Prince Penury is a war hero. They also claim the UK won't let Prince Penury have police protection because they want to do away with him in the same way they did away with his mother. Conspiracy Lala Land.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That’s disgusting


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I don't know if you would be given the chance that you lied to court, I think it's called perjury - which is an offence


Yeah, the lack of perjury charges puzzle me, she wasted a lot of time for the court …
Does no one else think like me that the court case was a GIANT ORCHESTRATED effort by BP? 
She had to admit perjury, the retraction was microscopic
BP wanted no court case, she admitted misdoing, they have something on her that caused her to settle with barely a whimper


----------



## lanasyogamama

Could the has beens be looking at this home? (They wish)


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Yeah, the lack of perjury charges puzzle me, she wasted a lot of time for the court …
> Does no one else think like me that the court case was a GIANT ORCHESTRATED effort by BP?
> She had to admit perjury, the retraction was microscopic
> BP wanted no court case, she admitted misdoing, they have something on her that caused her to settle with barely a whimper


The stans claim (with much celebration) that she was awarded millions (millions plus one pound?).

I'd love to see her charged with perjury. One day it will happen, considering how much she lies and how often she sues.


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments… 


_The medals will be awarded on February 6 to mark the Queen's 70 years on the throne and while the list of recipients has not yet been finalised, all members of the Royal Family are expected to be given one…

Meanwhile Buckingham Palace officials are considering how to remove the role of Counsellors of State from the Duke of York and the Duke of Sussex - a potentially significant position that the pair still possess.

The duo, who are ninth and sixth in line to the throne respectively, have already been stripped of their royal patronages and military titles by the Queen - and both asked not to use the handle His Royal Highness.

*Palace sources confirmed they are still two of the four Counsellors of State, who would be called upon to take the place of the Queen if she were unable to carry out her duties because of illness or absence abroad.*_ 









						Prince Andrew and Harry WILL receive Queen's Platinum Jubilee medals
					

The medals will be awarded to mark the Queen's 70 years on the throne and while the list of recipients has not yet been finalised, all members of the Royal Family are expected to be given one.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> No further comments…
> View attachment 5300779
> 
> _The medals will be awarded on February 6 to mark the Queen's 70 years on the throne and while the list of recipients has not yet been finalised, all members of the Royal Family are expected to be given one…
> 
> Meanwhile Buckingham Palace officials are considering how to remove the role of Counsellors of State from the Duke of York and the Duke of Sussex - a potentially significant position that the pair still possess.
> 
> The duo, who are ninth and sixth in line to the throne respectively, have already been stripped of their royal patronages and military titles by the Queen - and both asked not to use the handle His Royal Highness.
> 
> *Palace sources confirmed they are still two of the four Counsellors of State, who would be called upon to take the place of the Queen if she were unable to carry out her duties because of illness or absence abroad.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Harry WILL receive Queen's Platinum Jubilee medals
> 
> 
> The medals will be awarded to mark the Queen's 70 years on the throne and while the list of recipients has not yet been finalised, all members of the Royal Family are expected to be given one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That would make the medals meaningless to all the members of the BRF who don't shirk their responsibilities and who don't exhibit conduct unbecoming the family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5300779



Oh really? What was Raptor's service, ridding the BRF of the National Nuisance?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Could the has beens be looking at this home? (They wish)




Besides the tacky new money look...this is disgusting. Nobody needs a house that expensive, how about you go save some lives.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the tacky new money look...this is disgusting. Nobody needs a house that expensive, how about you go save some lives.


I couldn’t agree more


----------



## Chanbal

They likely want the BRF to roll out the red carpet for them… 











						Bored Harry is trying to tell us he wants to come home – I bet we’ll welcome him with open arms
					

Far from having exiled himself forever, the Duke of Sussex sees a future here... he just needs to stop throwing his toys out of the pram




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## TC1

You all mean to tell me the food trucks H and MM sent to the MLK volunteers yesterday didn't even make this thread?   ouch, they need to try harder


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't see him come back with his demon at all. Besides her not wanting to be in the UK, who would want her around? Harry, as awful as he has been, is family. I personally would be a lot more willing to deal with a sh*tty sibling than with their sh*tty spouse to be honest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> You all mean to tell me the food trucks H and MM sent to the MLK volunteers yesterday didn't even make this thread?   ouch, they need to try harder



Or they need to learn to not make such a fuss elsewhere if they want anyone to notice their pretentious good deed at the same time.


----------



## Chanbal

With Daniel Craig retiring from 007, Hazz could apply for the role and return to the service of Her Majesty. He would have access to all those gadgets to protect his '40yo girl'.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Thinking back, wasn’t one of their reasons for leaving London that “wAsN’t  sAfE”?


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> You all mean to tell me the food trucks H and MM sent to the MLK volunteers yesterday didn't even make this thread?   ouch, they need to try harder


Sorry we were very busy with Hazz's security and those 6-12 sandwiches fell to the cracks.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> "The royal is the Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp, a professional coaching and mental health, and *joined the charity last year*."
> 
> I thought Buttercup was a for-profit thingy. It's a charity?



It could have been a freudian slip. 

For some people, charity = for-profit.


----------



## Yanca

The Harkles thought they will have a cheap PR for the food truck they " donated" yesterday. They are so transparent, they always ride on whatever holiday or event here in the US, throw some sandwiches for us peasants and it will be splash all over the news. Compassion in action they say.  so contrived.


----------



## xincinsin

TC1 said:


> You all mean to tell me the food trucks H and MM sent to the MLK volunteers yesterday didn't even make this thread?   ouch, they need to try harder


Is this when we get to use our new word? Prince Penury's misguided use of Markle Sparple?


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Oh joy, can’t wait to hear the reports on this BUTTER Up gig in a few days.
> 
> *Prince Harry's first engagement of the year revealed*
> *The royal has spoken openly about mental health*
> JANUARY 13, 2022 - 22:42 GMT BY MATTHEW MOORE
> 
> *Prince Harry's* first engagement of 2022 has been revealed, as the royal *will be taking part in a virtual event with BetterUp on 3 February.*
> 
> The royal is the Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp, a professional coaching and mental health, and joined the charity last year. For the event, *he will team up with BetterUp's CEO, Alexi Robichaux, and the pair will discuss their "bold commitment" to the company's Inner Work initiative*. They will also be joined by a host of guest speakers including Jacinta Jimenez, BetterUp's VP of Coach Innovation and a trained psychologist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's first engagement of the year revealed – see here
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's first engagement of the year has been revealed, and it's a cause that's close to his heart
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


So, unless things have changed, Americans generally call their mothers and fathers mom and dad or mommy and daddy, right?  But in the case of the fake royal, M, she is going to be called Mama?  and her husband Papa?  Then again, what's the source of this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> So, unless things have changed, Americans generally call their mothers and fathers mom and dad or mommy and daddy, right?  But in the case of the fake royal, M, she is going to be called Mama?  and her husband Papa?  Then again, what's the source of this?



I have my doubts the kids will even recognize her, I don't see her spending much time with them unless it's a photo op. Remember when baby Archie wanted to wriggle his way from her lap to approach Harry?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> The movie was Ruthless People. Bette Midler played the kidnapped wife who Danny DeVito was hoping the kidnappers would murder because he didn’t want her back. The couple who kidnapped her kept reducing the price of the ransom and couldn’t understand why the husband refused to pay it causing Bette Midler to utter this famous line.



Loved that movie!


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Could the has beens be looking at this home? (They wish)



I saw that yesterday - isn't it ridiculous? That's not a home, it's a resort.


----------



## Chanbal

Way to go! @Tourre


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He's doing the Lord's work


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's doing the Lord's work



More delusions of grandeur?

RE: Jubilee medals = more trinkets to clutter our thinking. When QE/Chas/W takes away these Counsellors of State  positions and the titles, then I will believe they mean business. Until then, it’s all smoke and mirrors.










						Prince Andrew and Harry WILL receive Queen's Platinum Jubilee medals
					

The medals will be awarded to mark the Queen's 70 years on the throne and while the list of recipients has not yet been finalised, all members of the Royal Family are expected to be given one.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*How Andrew and Harry would be embarrassed by their possible removal as  Counsellors of State *
_Prince Andrew and Prince Harry both face losing their roles as Counsellors of State which would be hugely embarrassing for them and an unprecedented move that *would require an Act of Parliament to make it happen.*
Counsellors of State are authorised to carry out most of the official duties of the Sovereign, such as attending Privy Council meetings, signing routine documents and receiving credentials of new ambassadors to the UK.
The position of Counsellor of State was provided for in 1937 under the Regency Act. Prior to 1937, Regency Acts were drafted and passed only in necessity - with nine separate Acts to cover various eventualities since 1728. 
Shortly after George VI became king in 1936, a new Regency Act was passed which provided a rule for all future reigns. It was then that the new Counsellor of State office was created to cover short-term absences._


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> That would make the medals meaningless to all the members of the BRF who don't shirk their responsibilities and who don't exhibit conduct unbecoming the family.


I want to see which uniform either of them will choose to wear it on. lololol!  NONE!


----------



## gracekelly

i 


Chanbal said:


> Good for Charles!   They are despaired for money, big money!
> View attachment 5300369
> 
> _The insiders continued that the Prince of Wales funded his son's royal lifestyle. He used to go on massive shopping sprees and glamorous vacations, even buying everyone drinks and meals at expensive restaurants.
> 
> But, these all ended when Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to exit their royal life in the United Kingdom. Accordingly, they are now reportedly turning to the next person in line to the British Throne to help them with their "*serious money issues*."
> 
> The same informants added, however, that his "pleas have fallen on deaf ears." This is said to be despite Prince Charles singing praises for his two sons in a recent essay about climate change.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex allegedly thought that his father would agree after learning about the Newsweek material. But, it is "you are either in or you are out of the family" for the next British Monarch._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Asking For Financial Help, But Prince Charles Is 'Not Budging': Report
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly facing "serious financial troubles" in the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com


I don't believe for a second that Harry bought anything for anybody or paid for drinks and dinner.  He is a moocher from waaaaaay back.  Massive spending spree?  I find that one hard to swallow as well.  The only thing I believe is that he went begging to the Bank of Dad.  Once they bought that house, all bets were off even if they weren't off to start with.  If Charles gives him 5 cents, he is a fool.  I don't think that Charles and William will let him back in after what he has said and done.  It would be more than obvious that it was just for money.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I want to see which uniform either of them will choose to wear it on. lololol!  NONE!


Their Uniforms = The Emperor's New Clothes!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I want to see which uniform either of them will choose to wear it on. lololol!  NONE!



That hurt.


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> i
> 
> I don't believe for a second that Harry bought anything for anybody or paid for drinks and dinner.  He is a moocher from waaaaaay back.  Massive spending spree?  I find that one hard to swallow as well.  The only thing I believe is that he went begging to the Bank of Dad.  Once they bought that house, all bets were off even if they weren't off to start with.  If Charles gives him 5 cents, he is a fool.  I don't think that Charles and William will let him back in after what he has said and done.  It would be more than obvious that it was just for money.



… and we haven’t even seen his book(s) yet! How much more throwing under buses is happening there?


----------



## Chanbal

From the French (Translation and original article's link provided below): 

*La stratégie rusée de Meghan Markle qui expliquerait le nouveau scandale d’Harry*
*R. P. *| Publié le 18 janvier 2022 | Mis à jour le 18 janvier 2022

*Meghan Markle's cunning strategy that would explain Harry's new scandal*

_"Egocentric hypocrite", "spoiled child"... the British press does not mince words about Prince Harry these days. The Duke of Sussex has reignited already existing tensions by demanding full police protection on his family's trips to the UK. For this, the exiled prince did not hesitate to initiate legal proceedings which tense everyone, from the tabloids to the monarchy. *But a royal expert believes there is a hidden reason behind this frontal attack.

“She will never return to this country”*

"I think Meghan is never going to go back to this country and I think that's a very good excuse not to go there anymore," says author Phil Dampier. *"I don't think Harry actually expects to win this case," he adds. “Harry could come, but it gives Meghan a good excuse not to be there and not to bring the children,”* we read again as the long-awaited jubilee of Elizabeth II is fast approaching. As a reminder, the former actress has not been to the UK since their move to California and the Queen has never been able to meet Lilibet. “If his role within the Institution has changed, it is not the case of his label as a member of the royal family or the danger that he and his family run,” said a spokesperson for the prince in the media to justify this strong choice. It remains to know the true nature of this posture._









						La stratégie rusée de Meghan Markle qui expliquerait le nouveau scandale d’Harry
					

La posture explosive du prince pourrait s’avérer utile à l’ancienne actrice.




					parismatch.be


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, where does it come from that the Queen is just dying to meet the baby who shall not be named? Not only does she have plenty of great-grandchildren, this is the woman who returned from a lenghty royal tour and didn't see her toddler son for three days, after she had kind of taken inventory of what was going on in her kingdom. I doubt she's losing sleep over #6's kids.


----------



## Chanbal

I bet she regretted to have sued the DM. 

*EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware*

*DailyMail.com can reveal Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are setting up a network of companies based in the opaque tax haven Delaware*
*Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal*
*One of the firms appears to be set up for Harry's multi-million-dollar memoir book deal*
*Names for the companies include an intriguing Japanese term for deal making and a reference to Meghan's freckles in Spanish*
*Another is named after a river flowing through Colombia and Venezuela*
*The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow, who has worked with the Duchess for years*
*Also appearing on company filings for the firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer, a well-connected money guru *
*Royal tycoons: Harry and Meghan's 11 Delaware-based companies revealed *
*Peca Publishing*, LLC - Set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench. Peca means 'freckle' in Spanish 
*Orinoco Publishing*, LLC – Registered on December 22, 2021. It is unclear what the couple will use Orinoco for, though it is likely it was set up to hold the rights for Harry's blockbuster book deal with Penguin Random House for his memoir, due for publication later this year
*Cobblestone Lane*, LLC - Incorporated in Delaware in February 2020 and five days later was used as the applicant to file for the Archewell trademark
*IPHW*, LLC - A second trademark logo for Archewell was filed, with just the letters 'AW' on top of each other. It was filed  under Delaware firm, IPHW LLC
*Archewell Audio*, LLC - Registered in November 2021. Used to facilitate the Sussexes' high-profile entertainment deals with Netflix and Spotify 
*Archewell Productions*, LLC - Entertainment company used for businesses with lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals 
*Baobab Holdings*, LLC -Set up in February 2021. According to company documents, the firm was for 'investments'. The distinctive baobab tree is native to Africa and Australia
*Bridgemount*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021
*Hampshire*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021. The name may be a reference to Harry and Meghan's memorable holiday at a Hampshire five-star 18th century Georgian mansion where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019
*Nemawashi* *Holdings*, LLC -Set up September 2020 and was described only as a 'holding company'. Nemawashi is a Japanese term meaning the informal process of quietly laying the foundation for a project
*RPV Holdings*, LLC - Set up in August 2020











						Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
					

Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Good grief, make it stop.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I bet she regretted to have sued the DM.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are setting up a network of companies based in the opaque tax haven Delaware*
> *Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal*
> *One of the firms appears to be set up for Harry's multi-million-dollar memoir book deal*
> *Names for the companies include an intriguing Japanese term for deal making and a reference to Meghan's freckles in Spanish*
> *Another is named after a river flowing through Colombia and Venezuela*
> *The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow, who has worked with the Duchess for years*
> *Also appearing on company filings for the firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer, a well-connected money guru *
> *Royal tycoons: Harry and Meghan's 11 Delaware-based companies revealed *
> *Peca Publishing*, LLC - Set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench. Peca means 'freckle' in Spanish
> *Orinoco Publishing*, LLC – Registered on December 22, 2021. It is unclear what the couple will use Orinoco for, though it is likely it was set up to hold the rights for Harry's blockbuster book deal with Penguin Random House for his memoir, due for publication later this year
> *Cobblestone Lane*, LLC - Incorporated in Delaware in February 2020 and five days later was used as the applicant to file for the Archewell trademark
> *IPHW*, LLC - A second trademark logo for Archewell was filed, with just the letters 'AW' on top of each other. It was filed  under Delaware firm, IPHW LLC
> *Archewell Audio*, LLC - Registered in November 2021. Used to facilitate the Sussexes' high-profile entertainment deals with Netflix and Spotify
> *Archewell Productions*, LLC - Entertainment company used for businesses with lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals
> *Baobab Holdings*, LLC -Set up in February 2021. According to company documents, the firm was for 'investments'. The distinctive baobab tree is native to Africa and Australia
> *Bridgemount*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021
> *Hampshire*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021. The name may be a reference to Harry and Meghan's memorable holiday at a Hampshire five-star 18th century Georgian mansion where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019
> *Nemawashi* *Holdings*, LLC -Set up September 2020 and was described only as a 'holding company'. Nemawashi is a Japanese term meaning the informal process of quietly laying the foundation for a project
> *RPV Holdings*, LLC - Set up in August 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
> 
> 
> Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Great! Now I have that Enya song (Orinoco Flow) stuck in my head  _Sail away, sail away, sail away_... Which is what I wish these two would do!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, Lady C has a new video out and the title says Raptor has been offered a senate seat in NY? That can't be true, can it? Obviously I could just watch the video but I'm trying to start my reading year off on the right foot.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good grief, make it stop.


A few intriguing sentences from the DM article:

_On January 2, 2022 the company filed an ‘application to register as a foreign limited liability company’, noting it was incorporated on February 27, 2020 in Delaware. *Unlike Harry and Meghan’s other companies, it shares a business address with the British Consulate-General in Los Angeles*, rather than being based at Genow’s offices.

All financial information relating to the company is kept confidential. The move appeared to show that Meghan planned to keep her and Harry's business as opaque as possible – and stuck to their plans, incorporating every one of their following companies in the secretive state._


----------



## CarryOn2020

The fraudsters keep the bs rolling.  Set up shell companies, old trick.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I bet she regretted to have sued the DM.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are setting up a network of companies based in the opaque tax haven Delaware*
> *Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal*
> *One of the firms appears to be set up for Harry's multi-million-dollar memoir book deal*
> *Names for the companies include an intriguing Japanese term for deal making and a reference to Meghan's freckles in Spanish*
> *Another is named after a river flowing through Colombia and Venezuela*
> *The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow, who has worked with the Duchess for years*
> *Also appearing on company filings for the firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer, a well-connected money guru *
> *Royal tycoons: Harry and Meghan's 11 Delaware-based companies revealed *
> *Peca Publishing*, LLC - Set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench. Peca means 'freckle' in Spanish
> *Orinoco Publishing*, LLC – Registered on December 22, 2021. It is unclear what the couple will use Orinoco for, though it is likely it was set up to hold the rights for Harry's blockbuster book deal with Penguin Random House for his memoir, due for publication later this year
> *Cobblestone Lane*, LLC - Incorporated in Delaware in February 2020 and five days later was used as the applicant to file for the Archewell trademark
> *IPHW*, LLC - A second trademark logo for Archewell was filed, with just the letters 'AW' on top of each other. It was filed  under Delaware firm, IPHW LLC
> *Archewell Audio*, LLC - Registered in November 2021. Used to facilitate the Sussexes' high-profile entertainment deals with Netflix and Spotify
> *Archewell Productions*, LLC - Entertainment company used for businesses with lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals
> *Baobab Holdings*, LLC -Set up in February 2021. According to company documents, the firm was for 'investments'. The distinctive baobab tree is native to Africa and Australia
> *Bridgemount*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021
> *Hampshire*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021. The name may be a reference to Harry and Meghan's memorable holiday at a Hampshire five-star 18th century Georgian mansion where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019
> *Nemawashi* *Holdings*, LLC -Set up September 2020 and was described only as a 'holding company'. Nemawashi is a Japanese term meaning the informal process of quietly laying the foundation for a project
> *RPV Holdings*, LLC - Set up in August 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
> 
> 
> Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



"Royal Tycoons" seems a little premature. To date it seems like it's just a stack of paper. For example: Peca didn't do much for her: The Bench is currently 1/2 off @ Amazon and ranked #30,027 in Books.

Maybe they are planning to move to Delaware so they can visit their money, if they ever actually make any.

11 Reasons for the Royal Family to cut all ties, take back the titles, and definitely remove 6 from the The Counselors of State position. And Charles, lock up the check book, you're being played.

Archie is set up to be the money making meal ticket attracting the attention for his grubby parents. Wonder how long until his sister is brought on board for the avaricious ones?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why set up so many different companies instead of just one?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, Lady C has a new video out and the title says Raptor has been offered a senate seat in NY? That can't be true, can it? Obviously I could just watch the video but I'm trying to start my reading year off on the right foot.


Utter nonsense about the Senate seat. Schumer and Gillibrand aren't going anywhere.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Why set up so many different companies instead of just one?


To keep all the balls they're juggling separate for tax and legal reasons.  Wait till they start dropping them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why are QE/Chas/W still not taking action?  Are they in on it, too?
From the DM:








+14








+14



The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow (left), who has worked with the Duchess for years. Also appearing on company filings for the firms firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer (right), a well-connected money guru


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
					

Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The DM is going to continue to be on the warpath with these two to my delight and that of many others.  So much for privacy, Harkles.  Every time you ask for something, the DM will trot out something alluding to your great wealth.    Stress on the work alluding, because I think they are broke.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Utter nonsense about the Senate seat. Schumer and Gillibrand aren't going anywhere.


I think Lady CC needs to check her meds.  Migraine has no claims to being a resident of NY and couldn't run for dog catcher.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> To keep all the balls they're juggling separate for tax and legal reasons.  Wait till they start dropping them.


I shudder to think of THESE legal and accounting bills.  They still have to pay off Schillings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
> 
> 
> Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The DM is going to continue to be on the warpath with these two to my delight and that of many others.  So much for privacy, Harkles.  Every time you ask for something, the DM will trot out something alluding to your great wealth.    Stress on the work alluding, because I think they are broke.



All of that, plus the DM will name names, post photos, and do the work that the BRF should be doing.
 Keep asking the tough questions - why are QE/C/W protecting these 2?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I shudder to think of THESE legal and accounting bills.  They still have to pay off Schillings.



It is entirely possible real dollars are not being exchanged. Guessing free tickets to RF functions and other ‘gifts’ are being exchanged. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> well-connected money guru


So was Bernie Madoff


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe it’s time to call _game over _on this _royal_ nonsense? 

A comment from the DM article:
_
Bryce - a taxpayer, Southampton, United Kingdom, 25 minutes ago

ROYALS & TAX HAVENS, WHAT A SHOCKER._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is entirely possible real dollars are not being exchanged. Guessing free tickets to RF functions and other ‘gifts’ are being exchanged. Just my 2 cents.


Don't kid yourself, attorneys like to be paid the same as the rest of the world.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Don't kid yourself, attorneys like to be paid the same as the rest of the world.


at least as much
maybe more....who makes out in the class action suits?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I shudder to think of THESE legal and accounting bills.  They still have to pay off Schillings.


I'm sure they are not billing the Harkles by the hour as most reputable law firms do. They probably struck some kind of deal to get a cut of the profits from books, TV, etc. And those whopping profits from The Bench aren't going to pay for a mansion in Brentwood.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure they are not billing the Harkles by the hour as most reputable law firms do. They probably struck some kind of deal to get a cut of the profits from books, TV, etc. And those whopping profits from The Bench aren't going to pay for a mansion in Brentwood.


seems to be they'd be smart to bill them by the hour


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe it’s time to call _game over _on this _royal_ nonsense?
> 
> A comment from the DM article:
> 
> _Bryce - a taxpayer, Southampton, United Kingdom, 25 minutes ago
> 
> ROYALS & TAX HAVENS, WHAT A SHOCKER._



_RICH PEOPLE AND TAX HAVENS, WHAT A SHOCKER._

Fixed that for him


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> seems to be they'd be smart to bill them by the hour


For sure, but I doubt TW will agree to that because those hours will add up real fast in real dollars that they likely don't have.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> For sure, but I doubt TW will agree to that because those hours will add up real fast in real dollars that they likely don't have.


so the attorney has worked with "the duchess" for years?  so before H?  maybe he's not that prominent.  I don't see a prominent attorney giving them a deal


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why are QE/Chas/W still not taking action?  Are they in on it, too?
> From the DM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +14
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +14
> 
> 
> 
> The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow (left), who has worked with the Duchess for years. Also appearing on company filings for the firms firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer (right), a well-connected money guru


Even without telling me who they are, I'd have guessed they're from LA and work in law and/or the entertainment industry.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> so the attorney has worked with "the duchess" for years?  so before H?  maybe he's not that prominent.  I don't see a prominent attorney giving them a deal


Bingo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From 2020 - the BRF knew this, so why not call on Parliament for removal?  Weak, weak, weak. Imo.









						Markle Markle kept her lawyer and agent despite joining royal family
					

Meghan Markle's high-powered team has discreetly moved the Duchess' company Frim Fram Inc from California to notoriously secretive state Delaware, DailyMail.com can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: Frim Fram? oh so cute!


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> _RICH PEOPLE AND TAX HAVENS, WHAT A SHOCKER._
> 
> Fixed that for him



Royals (Andy  ) have had issues with this for years.  I could be wrong,  Isn’t Chas being accused of it now?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Don't kid yourself, attorneys like to be paid the same as the rest of the world.



Yes, they do indeed. They can charge a fee and still take advantage of the BRF parties, free tickets, hotels, whatever. 
IMO Hazzi has a huge stack of quid-pro-quo’s to distribute.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2020 - the BRF knew this, so why not call on Parliament for removal?  Weak, weak, weak. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Markle Markle kept her lawyer and agent despite joining royal family
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's high-powered team has discreetly moved the Duchess' company Frim Fram Inc from California to notoriously secretive state Delaware, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I remember a few month ago when trying to figure out, unsuccessfully it seems, Doria and her role in Montecito, references to her Loving Kindness Senior Care Company showing the same law office address were mentioned and it was noted Raptor had facilitated it with Genow.  I think maybe the offices are in a swamp, the odors drift in all directions.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Royals (Andy  ) have had issues with this for years.  I could be wrong,  Isn’t Chas being accused of it now?


Rich people (which by definition includes royals) always walk a fine line between tax avoidance (legal) and tax evasion (illegal).


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Loving Kindness Senior Care Company


That name alone sounds shady.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think Lady CC needs to check her meds.  Migraine has no claims to being a resident of NY and couldn't run for dog catcher.


Maybe TW thinks she can pull a Hillary ******* by buying a home in NY and then running for office. Again, delusional.


----------



## Gal4Dior

charlottawill said:


> Maybe TW thinks she can pull a Hillary ******* by buying a home in NY and then running for office. Again, delusional.



Except, hate Hillary or love her, at least that woman was qualified to run.

Maggot has no experience but being a failed social media influencer and D list supporting actress on a cable television show.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz does love his grandmother, father, brother… 


*Details about the Royal family`s security arrangements could be heard in court for the first time, if the Duke of Sussex`s bid for a judicial review of his police protection is successful.*

_The Duke is seeking a judicial review into a Home Office decision about his security arrangements, arguing he should be able to pay for specialist Met Police officers to protect his family.

If a review is granted, the case will be heard in the High Court. Although he could technically appear in person, it is expected that lawyers for the Duke and the Home Office would make their arguments in front of a judge.

The first stage of paperwork was filed by the Duke's lawyers in September. It has not yet been decided if there is an arguable case for judicial review.

*The hearings are typically public in front of a judge, and could require discussion of the Duke`s security arrangements, his demands for further protection and the taxpayer-funded service provided to keep members of the Royal family safe.*

All information about royal security has previously been considered so secret it is never discussed in public by the police, Home Office or palace, which refuses to comment on any aspect of protection however minor.

The Duke could apply for sensitive information to be heard in private, with members of the media excluded for part of the hearing, but there are no guarantees such a request would be granted.
Experts said much of the hearing would likely be granular legal detail about the process of Home Office decision-making.

A spokesman for the Home Office said of the Duke’s security requests: “It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements. To do so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”

A spokeswoman for the Duke said he “remains willing to cover the cost of security”, but added: “As is widely known, others who have left public office and have an inherent threat risk receive police protection at no cost to them.”

The Duke believes the private security they employ in the US would not be able to “necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK” leaving his family “unable” to visit.

*It was revealed on Tuesday that the Duke and Duchess have set up a network of 11 companies in the tax haven state of Delaware.*

The companies were incorporated by the Duchess’s long-time attorney Richard Genow and her business manager Andrew Meyer.

*The companies all appear to have names with sentimental value to the California-based couple.* Hampshire LLC could allude to the place where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019 and Baobab Holdings, LLC may be named after the Baobab tree which is native to Africa and Australia. 

Among the filings, which were first reported by MailOnline, are two publishing firms. Peca Publishing LLC was set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench.
"Peca" means freckles in Spanish, and the name could allude to the book she published as a child - "a face without freckles is a sky without stars".

The second, is called Orinoco Publishing LLC - apparently named after the river that flows through Colombia and Venezuela. This could have been set up to hold the rights for the Duke’s much anticipated memoir, due for publication later this year.

Buckingham Palace declined to comment._



			archive.ph


----------



## Yanca

Chanbal said:


> Hazz does love his grandmother, father, brother…
> View attachment 5301374
> 
> *Details about the Royal family`s security arrangements could be heard in court for the first time, if the Duke of Sussex`s bid for a judicial review of his police protection is successful.*
> 
> _The Duke is seeking a judicial review into a Home Office decision about his security arrangements, arguing he should be able to pay for specialist Met Police officers to protect his family.
> 
> If a review is granted, the case will be heard in the High Court. Although he could technically appear in person, it is expected that lawyers for the Duke and the Home Office would make their arguments in front of a judge.
> 
> The first stage of paperwork was filed by the Duke's lawyers in September. It has not yet been decided if there is an arguable case for judicial review.
> 
> *The hearings are typically public in front of a judge, and could require discussion of the Duke`s security arrangements, his demands for further protection and the taxpayer-funded service provided to keep members of the Royal family safe.*
> 
> All information about royal security has previously been considered so secret it is never discussed in public by the police, Home Office or palace, which refuses to comment on any aspect of protection however minor.
> 
> The Duke could apply for sensitive information to be heard in private, with members of the media excluded for part of the hearing, but there are no guarantees such a request would be granted.
> Experts said much of the hearing would likely be granular legal detail about the process of Home Office decision-making.
> 
> A spokesman for the Home Office said of the Duke’s security requests: “It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements. To do so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”
> 
> A spokeswoman for the Duke said he “remains willing to cover the cost of security”, but added: “As is widely known, others who have left public office and have an inherent threat risk receive police protection at no cost to them.”
> 
> The Duke believes the private security they employ in the US would not be able to “necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK” leaving his family “unable” to visit.
> 
> *It was revealed on Tuesday that the Duke and Duchess have set up a network of 11 companies in the tax haven state of Delaware.*
> 
> The companies were incorporated by the Duchess’s long-time attorney Richard Genow and her business manager Andrew Meyer.
> 
> *The companies all appear to have names with sentimental value to the California-based couple.* Hampshire LLC could allude to the place where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019 and Baobab Holdings, LLC may be named after the Baobab tree which is native to Africa and Australia.
> 
> Among the filings, which were first reported by MailOnline, are two publishing firms. Peca Publishing LLC was set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench.
> "Peca" means freckles in Spanish, and the name could allude to the book she published as a child - "a face without freckles is a sky without stars".
> 
> The second, is called Orinoco Publishing LLC - apparently named after the river that flows through Colombia and Venezuela. This could have been set up to hold the rights for the Duke’s much anticipated memoir, due for publication later this year.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment._
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph




With all the things Hazza and Megnuts are doing, they seemed to really want to destroy the Royal Family, they have this Bot sentinels reports on tweeter, calling all tweeter and YouTube accounts that questions them- hate accounts ,  Scoobie out of control with his passive aggressive tweets,  their PR on overload about the " sandwiches they donated" the Harkles  seemed to want to silence everyone the does not like them, or question them, maybe they know already about this thread,, Hi Harkles you may fool some people, but most  will see right though  you and your antics, and you can't silenced everyone.  Be decent human beings with honest intentions and you will receive what you deserve. You get what you throw out there in the universe.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Yanca said:


> With all the things Hazza and Megnuts are doing, they seemed to really want to destroy the Royal Family, they have this Bot sentinels reports on tweeter, calling all tweeter and YouTube accounts that questions them- hate accounts ,  Scoobie out of control with his passive aggressive tweets,  their PR on overload about the " sandwiches they donated" the Harkles  seemed to want to silence everyone the does not like them, or question them, maybe they know already about this thread,, Hi Harkles you may fool some people, but most  will see right though  you and your antics, and you can't silenced everyone.  Be decent human beings with honest intentions and you will receive what you deserve. You get what you throw out there in the universe.



What's the phrase?

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes? In that sense, they're BIG WINNERS!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Hazz does love his grandmother, father, brother…
> View attachment 5301374
> 
> *Details about the Royal family`s security arrangements could be heard in court for the first time, if the Duke of Sussex`s bid for a judicial review of his police protection is successful.*
> 
> _The Duke is seeking a judicial review into a Home Office decision about his security arrangements, arguing he should be able to pay for specialist Met Police officers to protect his family.
> 
> If a review is granted, the case will be heard in the High Court. Although he could technically appear in person, it is expected that lawyers for the Duke and the Home Office would make their arguments in front of a judge.
> 
> The first stage of paperwork was filed by the Duke's lawyers in September. It has not yet been decided if there is an arguable case for judicial review.
> 
> *The hearings are typically public in front of a judge, and could require discussion of the Duke`s security arrangements, his demands for further protection and the taxpayer-funded service provided to keep members of the Royal family safe.*
> 
> All information about royal security has previously been considered so secret it is never discussed in public by the police, Home Office or palace, which refuses to comment on any aspect of protection however minor.
> 
> The Duke could apply for sensitive information to be heard in private, with members of the media excluded for part of the hearing, but there are no guarantees such a request would be granted.
> Experts said much of the hearing would likely be granular legal detail about the process of Home Office decision-making.
> 
> A spokesman for the Home Office said of the Duke’s security requests: “It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements. To do so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”
> 
> A spokeswoman for the Duke said he “remains willing to cover the cost of security”, but added: “As is widely known, others who have left public office and have an inherent threat risk receive police protection at no cost to them.”
> 
> The Duke believes the private security they employ in the US would not be able to “necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK” leaving his family “unable” to visit.
> 
> *It was revealed on Tuesday that the Duke and Duchess have set up a network of 11 companies in the tax haven state of Delaware.*
> 
> The companies were incorporated by the Duchess’s long-time attorney Richard Genow and her business manager Andrew Meyer.
> 
> *The companies all appear to have names with sentimental value to the California-based couple.* Hampshire LLC could allude to the place where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019 and Baobab Holdings, LLC may be named after the Baobab tree which is native to Africa and Australia.
> 
> Among the filings, which were first reported by MailOnline, are two publishing firms. Peca Publishing LLC was set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench.
> "Peca" means freckles in Spanish, and the name could allude to the book she published as a child - "a face without freckles is a sky without stars".
> 
> The second, is called Orinoco Publishing LLC - apparently named after the river that flows through Colombia and Venezuela. This could have been set up to hold the rights for the Duke’s much anticipated memoir, due for publication later this year.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment._
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



HazzI loves drama.

Someone in that Palace needs to take note - HazzMegNuts won’t stop until they truly are no longer royals. Take away titles, the Councilor thing, the LoS, and anything else you have not told us about. At that point, the world will say _so what _whenever he spouts off.  Just do it and be done with this nonsense. Please.


----------



## CarryOn2020

yeah???


----------



## charlottawill

LVSistinaMM said:


> Except, hate Hillary or love her, at least that woman was qualified to run.
> 
> Maggot has no experience but being a failed social media influencer and D list supporting actress on a cable television show.


Like I said, she's delusional.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Does "good news" = juicy??


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Does "good news" = juicy??



I’ll believe when it happens. Interesting this “journalist” feels the need to tweet that message. 


Somehow this seems much more appropriate:


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> That name alone sounds shady.



Makes me think of that movie I Care A Lot


----------



## Chanbal

A sign of welcome to Little Miss Forgetful from Will & Kate…


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> until they truly are no longer royals.


But then they'll torment us forever about how badly the RF treated them.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, this is good! Imagine having them in your family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> But then they'll torment us forever about how badly the RF treated them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good! Imagine having them in your family.



I guess Australia won't be rolling out the red carpet for them anytime soon.


----------



## Lodpah

Hey I’m a real victim! Not faux victim. I got robbed at the Bellagio yesterday with my Goyard Artois on my shoulder. Second time I got robbed at the Bellagio. So there those two imbeciles, I


gracekelly said:


> Don't kid yourself, attorneys like to be paid the same as the rest of the world.


i work for attorneys they don’t do trades. They have staff to pay, rent, etc.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good! Imagine having them in your family.



"Meghan having a whinge".   Sounds better than the US version "Meghan whining".


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> HazzI loves drama.
> 
> Someone in that Palace needs to take note - HazzMegNuts won’t stop until they truly are no longer royals. Take away titles, the Councilor thing, the LoS, and anything else you have not told us about. At that point, the world will say _so what _whenever he spouts off.  Just do it and be done with this nonsense. Please.


Little Miss Forgetful must have regretted to go after ANL. DM will leave no stone unturned.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Hey I’m a real victim! Not faux victim. I got robbed at the Bellagio yesterday with my Goyard Artois on my shoulder. Second time I got robbed at the Bellagio. So there those two imbeciles, I
> 
> i work for attorneys they don’t do trades. They have staff to pay, rent, etc.



Perhaps _trades _is misleading. A better word may be _gifts. _Also, most attorneys do _pro bono _work_.  _Sounds like H&M may qualify for that__


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> yeah???
> 
> View attachment 5301429




QE 3.0


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good! Imagine having them in your family.




OMG that picture! 

Meghan: "Everything is going according to plan. I should be Queen of England by 2030."
Harry: "I wish I had skipped Soho House that night".


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I got robbed at the Bellagio yesterday with my Goyard Artois on my shoulder. Second time I got robbed at the Bellagio.


Oh no! I'm so sorry to hear that. Maybe the Bellagio needs to review their security protocols? Can you file a claim with them?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Hazz does love his grandmother, father, brother…
> View attachment 5301374
> 
> *Details about the Royal family`s security arrangements could be heard in court for the first time, if the Duke of Sussex`s bid for a judicial review of his police protection is successful.*
> 
> _The Duke is seeking a judicial review into a Home Office decision about his security arrangements, arguing he should be able to pay for specialist Met Police officers to protect his family.
> 
> If a review is granted, the case will be heard in the High Court. Although he could technically appear in person, it is expected that lawyers for the Duke and the Home Office would make their arguments in front of a judge.
> 
> The first stage of paperwork was filed by the Duke's lawyers in September. It has not yet been decided if there is an arguable case for judicial review.
> 
> *The hearings are typically public in front of a judge, and could require discussion of the Duke`s security arrangements, his demands for further protection and the taxpayer-funded service provided to keep members of the Royal family safe.*
> 
> All information about royal security has previously been considered so secret it is never discussed in public by the police, Home Office or palace, which refuses to comment on any aspect of protection however minor.
> 
> The Duke could apply for sensitive information to be heard in private, with members of the media excluded for part of the hearing, but there are no guarantees such a request would be granted.
> Experts said much of the hearing would likely be granular legal detail about the process of Home Office decision-making.
> 
> A spokesman for the Home Office said of the Duke’s security requests: “It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements. To do so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”
> 
> A spokeswoman for the Duke said he “remains willing to cover the cost of security”, but added: “As is widely known, others who have left public office and have an inherent threat risk receive police protection at no cost to them.”
> 
> The Duke believes the private security they employ in the US would not be able to “necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK” leaving his family “unable” to visit.
> 
> *It was revealed on Tuesday that the Duke and Duchess have set up a network of 11 companies in the tax haven state of Delaware.*
> 
> The companies were incorporated by the Duchess’s long-time attorney Richard Genow and her business manager Andrew Meyer.
> 
> *The companies all appear to have names with sentimental value to the California-based couple.* Hampshire LLC could allude to the place where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019 and Baobab Holdings, LLC may be named after the Baobab tree which is native to Africa and Australia.
> 
> Among the filings, which were first reported by MailOnline, are two publishing firms. Peca Publishing LLC was set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench.
> "Peca" means freckles in Spanish, and the name could allude to the book she published as a child - "a face without freckles is a sky without stars"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The second, is called Orinoco Publishing LLC - apparently named after the river that flows through Colombia and Venezuela. This could have been set up to hold the rights for the Duke’s much anticipated memoir, due for publication later this year.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment._



synonym for “bully”  - Prince Harry aka  Harry the Horrible


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> "Meghan having a whinge".   Sounds better than the US version "Meghan whining".


I was just thinking that if Harry does go back for the HMTQ's Platinum Jubilee, he should stay at Whinger Castle


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I bet she regretted to have sued the DM.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are setting up a network of companies based in the opaque tax haven Delaware*
> *Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal*
> *One of the firms appears to be set up for Harry's multi-million-dollar memoir book deal*
> *Names for the companies include an intriguing Japanese term for deal making and a reference to Meghan's freckles in Spanish*
> *Another is named after a river flowing through Colombia and Venezuela*
> *The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow, who has worked with the Duchess for years*
> *Also appearing on company filings for the firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer, a well-connected money guru *
> *Royal tycoons: Harry and Meghan's 11 Delaware-based companies revealed *
> *Peca Publishing*, LLC - Set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench. Peca means 'freckle' in Spanish
> *Orinoco Publishing*, LLC – Registered on December 22, 2021. It is unclear what the couple will use Orinoco for, though it is likely it was set up to hold the rights for Harry's blockbuster book deal with Penguin Random House for his memoir, due for publication later this year
> *Cobblestone Lane*, LLC - Incorporated in Delaware in February 2020 and five days later was used as the applicant to file for the Archewell trademark
> *IPHW*, LLC - A second trademark logo for Archewell was filed, with just the letters 'AW' on top of each other. It was filed  under Delaware firm, IPHW LLC
> *Archewell Audio*, LLC - Registered in November 2021. Used to facilitate the Sussexes' high-profile entertainment deals with Netflix and Spotify
> *Archewell Productions*, LLC - Entertainment company used for businesses with lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals
> *Baobab Holdings*, LLC -Set up in February 2021. According to company documents, the firm was for 'investments'. The distinctive baobab tree is native to Africa and Australia
> *Bridgemount*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021
> *Hampshire*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021. The name may be a reference to Harry and Meghan's memorable holiday at a Hampshire five-star 18th century Georgian mansion where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019
> *Nemawashi* *Holdings*, LLC -Set up September 2020 and was described only as a 'holding company'. Nemawashi is a Japanese term meaning the informal process of quietly laying the foundation for a project
> *RPV Holdings*, LLC - Set up in August 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
> 
> 
> Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ho him yawn people with disparate businesses - speaking , books , charity all do it
Former pres and his wife who ran for Pres also have six-packs of LLCs
Good strategy to separate income streams for him and her in case marriage does not last


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> Oh no! I'm so sorry to hear that. Maybe the Bellagio needs to review their security protocols? Can you file a claim with them?


I tried. They don’t anything. I asked them to see in the camera but they cited security privacy issues (for the criminals) at least that I what think. They took my wallet and all my bankroll and credit cards. Bellagio won’t even give me a ride to the hotel. I’m done with them. Twice in got robbed there.


----------



## Mendocino

Aimee3 said:


> Reminds me of a movie with Danny DeVito. his wife gets kidnapped IIRC and he doesn’t want to get her back so won’t pay the ransom.


Ruthless People.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is indeed scary - BLG, where are are you?
> 
> View attachment 5300323


M looks like a psycho talking to her hand while H looks drunk staring at his hand and slurring, "Where that other hand come from?"


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I tried. They don’t anything. I asked them to see in the camera but they cited security privacy issues (for the criminals) at least that I what think. They took my wallet and all my bankroll and credit cards. Bellagio won’t even give me a ride to the hotel. I’m done with them. Twice in got robbed there.


At least file a police report and let them know you are doing so. They can't show you the security footage but someone from their security team can review it. Unless they're blowing you off because it happens all the time. If that's the case I'd take my money elsewhere. You may want to go on TripAdvisor.com forums and post your story as a warning to others.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Ho him yawn people with disparate businesses - speaking , books , charity all do it
> Former pres and his wife who ran for Pres also have six-packs of LLCs
> Good strategy to separate income streams for him and her in case marriage does not last



Yes, you are correct. Many do it, most of us do not. I guess Delaware has taken over the Cayman’s for this sort of thing or are they still in the biz?  There is something smarmy and sleazy about a royal in the LoS doing it. imo.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> At least file a police report and let them know you are doing so. They can't show you the security footage but someone from their security team can review it. Unless they're blowing you off because it happens all the time. If that's the case I'd take my money elsewhere. You may want to go on TripAdvisor.com forums and post your story as a warning to others.


I was on hold with Metro and security told me it’s not worth it. I was on hold a long time. When I get home I’ll call them and definitely will file a report. I’m done with Bellagio. I don’t care about my tier status but I will go on trip report, twice! Got robbed there.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> I bet she regretted to have sued the DM.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are setting up a network of companies based in the opaque tax haven Delaware*
> *Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal*
> *One of the firms appears to be set up for Harry's multi-million-dollar memoir book deal*
> *Names for the companies include an intriguing Japanese term for deal making and a reference to Meghan's freckles in Spanish*
> *Another is named after a river flowing through Colombia and Venezuela*
> *The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow, who has worked with the Duchess for years*
> *Also appearing on company filings for the firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer, a well-connected money guru *
> *Royal tycoons: Harry and Meghan's 11 Delaware-based companies revealed *
> *Peca Publishing*, LLC - Set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench. Peca means 'freckle' in Spanish
> *Orinoco Publishing*, LLC – Registered on December 22, 2021. It is unclear what the couple will use Orinoco for, though it is likely it was set up to hold the rights for Harry's blockbuster book deal with Penguin Random House for his memoir, due for publication later this year
> *Cobblestone Lane*, LLC - Incorporated in Delaware in February 2020 and five days later was used as the applicant to file for the Archewell trademark
> *IPHW*, LLC - A second trademark logo for Archewell was filed, with just the letters 'AW' on top of each other. It was filed  under Delaware firm, IPHW LLC
> *Archewell Audio*, LLC - Registered in November 2021. Used to facilitate the Sussexes' high-profile entertainment deals with Netflix and Spotify
> *Archewell Productions*, LLC - Entertainment company used for businesses with lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals
> *Baobab Holdings*, LLC -Set up in February 2021. According to company documents, the firm was for 'investments'. The distinctive baobab tree is native to Africa and Australia
> *Bridgemount*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021
> *Hampshire*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021. The name may be a reference to Harry and Meghan's memorable holiday at a Hampshire five-star 18th century Georgian mansion where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019
> *Nemawashi* *Holdings*, LLC -Set up September 2020 and was described only as a 'holding company'. Nemawashi is a Japanese term meaning the informal process of quietly laying the foundation for a project
> *RPV Holdings*, LLC - Set up in August 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
> 
> 
> Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Should be pecas as she has more than one
However, “peca” is also the second person singular in Spanish  for “sinned” (el/ella peca)
I seriously have too much time in my breaks!


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> Should be pecas as she has more than one
> However, “peca” is also the second person singular in Spanish  for “sinned” (el/ella peca)
> I seriously have too much time in my breaks!


In this case 'sinned' is more appropriate.


----------



## Mendocino

kemilia said:


> Loved that movie!



I loved that line!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, you are correct. Many do it, most of us do not. I guess Delaware has taken over the Cayman’s for this sort of thing or are they still in the biz?  There is something smarmy and sleazy about a royal in the LoS doing it. imo.



Delaware has long been favored by corporations, but this is a good article about how increasingly in recent years they've given the Caymans a run for the money, which is what things always come down to:


> https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/business/how-delaware-thrives-as-a-corporate-tax-haven.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think Lady CC needs to check her meds.  Migraine has no claims to being a resident of NY and couldn't run for dog catcher.



I mean, FWIW, someone could have written in with this and she might have refuted it, I have no idea.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hazz does love his grandmother, father, brother…
> View attachment 5301374



Funny how he's so concerned with his security, but not everyone else's. First giving details about the Cambridge's country home to be published in Finding Freebies and now exposing the security of the whole family. He is sick and disgusting and someone needs to stop him - but I still have a vivid idea who's been in his ear about security all along.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I saw that yesterday - isn't it ridiculous? That's not a home, it's a resort.


I saw the word "nightclub" repeated and I wondered if it had 2 nightclubs. I mean, for a resort home like that, no one even proof reads the ad copy?


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2020 - the BRF knew this, so why not call on Parliament for removal?  Weak, weak, weak. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Markle Markle kept her lawyer and agent despite joining royal family
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's high-powered team has discreetly moved the Duchess' company Frim Fram Inc from California to notoriously secretive state Delaware, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Frim Fram? oh so cute!



Flim Flam, more like!


----------



## Chanbal

Always so much drama with the Montecitos. 


_She added: *'I think Charles is very brave, very honourable and it should really be Harry that apologises to him and try to get back in his good books but I think this looks as though it's the other way round' *

Charles is also said to be 'desperate to see his grandchildren'.

A source told the Mirror last week: 'The Prince of Wales has been saddened that he hasn't had the opportunity to spend time with his grandchildren, which he really does miss.

'He is a fantastic grandfather and loves playing the role immensely and it's certainly fair to say he feels there is something missing from his life without the ability to get to know Harry's children.

'This is something he is hoping to remedy which is why he made the gesture for Harry, Meghan and the children to stay with him if they wanted to, whenever they may come home for a period of time. _









						Meghan and Harry 'won't stay with Charles as it will be 'awkward'
					

The Prince of Wales, 73, offered to have his family to stay with him in the UK in the hope of meeting Lilibet for the first time, a source claimed this week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Always so much drama with the Montecitos.
> View attachment 5301908
> 
> _She added: *'I think Charles is very brave, very honourable and it should really be Harry that apologises to him and try to get back in his good books but I think this looks as though it's the other way round' *
> 
> Charles is also said to be 'desperate to see his grandchildren'.
> 
> A source told the Mirror last week: 'The Prince of Wales has been saddened that he hasn't had the opportunity to spend time with his grandchildren, which he really does miss.
> 
> 'He is a fantastic grandfather and loves playing the role immensely and it's certainly fair to say he feels there is something missing from his life without the ability to get to know Harry's children.
> 
> 'This is something he is hoping to remedy which is why he made the gesture for Harry, Meghan and the children to stay with him if they wanted to, whenever they may come home for a period of time. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'won't stay with Charles as it will be 'awkward'
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales, 73, offered to have his family to stay with him in the UK in the hope of meeting Lilibet for the first time, a source claimed this week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Accurate comment on that article - wonder if it's someone lurking here? Maybe we should extend an invitation? 

"He won't stay with his father, simply because he will be with his Netflix crew and the pair of them will want to keep all communications open between them, Omid Scobee and their PR team. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors."


----------



## Chanbal

According to this article, Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank seem to be working as the Royal Carrier Pigeons… 

_As a result, the former Suits star “is using them as de facto message bearers to pass along her warm wishes to the Windsors,” the source alleged.

“*However, she’s also making excuses for her and Harry’s public bashing of the family, along with veiled pleas for sympathy and understanding*.”

But it turns out that other members of the Royal Family aren’t as convinced by the couple’s messages and “are well aware of what’s going on and aren’t fooled by it,” the source added._



			Meghan Markle 'using' Princess Eugenie as a Royal Family informant, source says
		

:


----------



## lanasyogamama

Eugenie may want to think about which horse she’s betting on.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Accurate comment on that article - wonder if it's someone lurking here? Maybe we should extend an invitation?
> 
> "He won't stay with his father, simply because he will be with his Netflix crew and the pair of them will want to keep all communications open between them, Omid Scobee and their PR team. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors."


Yeah, you are right. Charles doesn't have enough room at Clarence House to accommodate their Netfl*x crew and dear Scoobie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> Eugenie may want to think about which horse she’s betting on.



Maybe she inherited the poor judgement gene from her parents...


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe she inherited the poor judgement gene from her parents...


or the jealousy gene that seems to also run in the family…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“*However, she’s also making excuses for her and Harry’s public bashing of the family, along with veiled pleas for sympathy and understanding*.”_



I would really like to hear her excuse for their abysmal actions while her supposedly beloved grandfather was on his death bed (as you all know, my breaking point with Harry). Or while we're at it, for making her nearly 100yo grandmother's life living hell.

Give me Bea - who has her issues with certain family members but supposedly drew the line where her grandparents were concerned - any day.

That said, Zara is my favourite and I'd honestly love to see her and Anne deal with the a*sholes.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the tacky new money look...this is disgusting. Nobody needs a house that expensive, how about you go save some lives.



I don't know how much this house costs and I find it hideous, but doubt they can afford it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I don't know how much this house costs and I find it hideous, but doubt they can afford it.



Apparently it is currently listed for 295 million dollars. 295 million. I just can't.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> According to this article, Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank seem to be working as the Royal Carrier Pigeons…
> 
> _As a result, the former Suits star “is using them as de facto message bearers to pass along her warm wishes to the Windsors,” the source alleged.
> 
> “*However, she’s also making excuses for her and Harry’s public bashing of the family, along with veiled pleas for sympathy and understanding*.”
> 
> But it turns out that other members of the Royal Family aren’t as convinced by the couple’s messages and “are well aware of what’s going on and aren’t fooled by it,” the source added._
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'using' Princess Eugenie as a Royal Family informant, source says
> 
> 
> :


Yes, I can see it now: the smirk on her face as she Zooms for 40 minutes with Eugenie to empower her with faux feminine righteousness. 

"Tell them that if they don't understand why we had to spill our guts to Oprah, then they must lack basic empathy! Surely they are reasonable people and they will open their castle gates and wallets to us. They don't want the children to suffer, do they? Tell the Queen that I am appealing to her as a woman and a mother. That will tug at her heartstrings. It worked with the ITV boss, so it should work on her. If she doesn't cave, warn her that she will never see Harry or my kids again. That should scare her!"


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently it is currently listed for 295 million dollars. 295 million. I just can't.



 I have no words....


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> I don't know how much this house costs and I find it hideous, but doubt they can afford it.


It looks like the sort of mansion that a Bond villain would build on some remote island. Does it have a helipad? Princess Perjury would definitely want a helipad


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently it is currently listed for 295 million dollars. 295 million. I just can't.


That was the original asking price. Didn't sell, developer is bankrupt (gee I wonder why?) so it will be sold at auction, most likely for a fraction of that.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> It looks like the sort of mansion that a Bond villain would build on some remote island. Does it have a helipad? Princess Perjury would definitely want a helipad



Surprisingly, it doesn't. Likely for zoning reasons.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps _trades _is misleading. A better word may be _gifts. _Also, most attorneys do _pro bono _work_.  _Sounds like H&M may qualify for that__


If they get pro bono work then they are the ultimate grifters, grifting anybody.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait, I read it was Eugenie telling the others the Harkles' aren't that bad, now that xincinsin quotes it again I think they mean Raptor pleading with Eugenie 

Doesn't matter much re: my posting though, because if my cousin and spouse did that to my grandparents I'd be, uh, unavailable going forward.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Hey I’m a real victim! Not faux victim. I got robbed at the Bellagio yesterday with my Goyard Artois on my shoulder. Second time I got robbed at the Bellagio. So there those two imbeciles, I
> 
> i work for attorneys they don’t do trades. They have staff to pay, rent, etc.


ouch!  robbed of your lovely bag and more importantly, the contents.  right off your shoulder?  IDK what you could have done to prevent that....fight with the thief?
Makes me want to stay off the LV strip.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I tried. They don’t anything. I asked them to see in the camera but they cited security privacy issues (for the criminals) at least that I what think. They took my wallet and all my bankroll and credit cards. Bellagio won’t even give me a ride to the hotel. I’m done with them. Twice in got robbed there.


wow, I'd be done with Bellagio too


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It looks like the sort of mansion that a Bond villain would build on some remote island. Does it have a helipad? Princess Perjury would definitely want a helipad



I'm a Bond villain, but I'd rather live in a grass-covered underground bunker so all national/international intelligence can't find me on Google and know how much I paid for my 49 bathrooms


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Hey I’m a real victim! Not faux victim. I got robbed at the Bellagio yesterday with my Goyard Artois on my shoulder. Second time I got robbed at the Bellagio. So there those two imbeciles, I
> 
> i work for attorneys they don’t do trades. They have staff to pay, rent, etc.



So sorry  

Puts H&M's whinging into perspective


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Surprisingly, it doesn't. Likely for zoning reasons.


The perfect excuse for her to reject it then, without mentioning anything as plebian as $$$$. "H dear, yes, I know it has more than 40 bathrooms, but there's no helipad. You know Elton and David will be popping by to discuss Pearl. They need to have a place to park their bird."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The essence of the difference.


----------



## xincinsin

Bot Sentinel, the for-profit watchdog, has released a 4th report alleging that Princess Perjury is persecuted, according to The Cut.


			https://www.thecut.com/2022/01/new-report-meghan-markle-was-focus-of-twitter-hate-campaign.html#comments
		


One of the comments explains what the so-called "hate" actually is - sheer disbelief.
_Hi, I think that one issue that causes people in the UK to respond differently than people in the USA is that we've seen a different perspective on things. Here in the UK, Harry and Meghan were on TV teaching us how to access free, confidential, immediate help for mental health difficulties using an NHS link. Meghan said "From today there's a new way to turn things around."   

So it was just strange and surprising to hear them on US TV telling Oprah that no-one told them how to get mental health help, and they thought they had to go to HR. Just like Oprah was saying "Whaaaat?"  we were saying that in other places. Their intervention here was so successful that the NHS website actually crashed for a whole day. But they never learned how to go to that link? 

It is reminiscent of how they teach us about carbon emissions....but themselves use private jets.

People in England respond in a panic if you make them worry that they've been irresponsible or done something wrong, and so the poor old Archbishop had to defend himself against what would have been a criminal offense, saying "It would have been a criminal offense if I'd done that," the poor old Master of the Rolls had to defend his understanding of the truth, saying, "An unfortunate lapse of memory at best." The poor old Queen had to defend her understanding of what Charles might have said,  saying"Recollections may vary."  The Home Secretary is being asked to justify why Harry can't purchase special police protection (the police is a public service).

No one is attacking them, it is not hatred, it is "Whaaaaat?" _

I was reading reviews of Bot Sentinel. One review said: "Bot Sentinel used to be a great tool to weed out the bots and fake accounts, but now it is used as a tool by its creator to mass target those who do not align with his political beliefs and block them. His biased app is also a tool for Centrists to blacklist and mass block those who are real, actual, live people who lean to the Left or the Right. Many marginalized accounts, including mine as a person with disabilities, have been listed as "disruptive" and "problematic." The Bot Sentinel app is silencing all of our voices."  I'm inclined to believe that Sunshine Sucks paid for those "Poor MeMeMe" reports to reinforce Her Heinous's victim image.


----------



## Aimee3

Lodpah, I’m so sorry to hear about what happened.  Horrible that Bellagio wouldn’t show the security footage to law enforcement!  You’d think they’d want to know who the crook is so they can watch him/her if they see them lurking around!


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> Accurate comment on that article - wonder if it's someone lurking here? Maybe we should extend an invitation?
> 
> "He won't stay with his father, simply because he will be with his Netflix crew and the pair of them will want to keep all communications open between them, Omid Scobee and their PR team. All the rest is just smoke and mirrors."



King Lear, Act 1, Scene 4: How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Lodpah, I’m so sorry to hear about what happened.  Horrible that Bellagio wouldn’t show the security footage to law enforcement!  You’d think they’d want to know who the crook is so they can watch him/her if they see them lurking around!


right
that's a high end casino.  you would think they would want their guest to feel safe - and be safe.  I actually think casinos are safe due to the cameras...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

For some reason it wouldn't embedd though it's not a reel, but...every single things sounds absolutely believable.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason it wouldn't embedd though it's not a reel, but...every single things sounds absolutely believable.
> 
> View attachment 5302214


much as I like to participate in this thread there's a big part of me that just wants these two to fade into oblivion


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> much as I like to participate in this thread there's a big part of me that just wants these two to fade into oblivion



It is indeed a thought I've entertained in the past.


----------



## Chanbal

Not surprised!


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> much as I like to participate in this thread there's a big part of me that just wants these two to fade into oblivion


Well should that happen, highly unlikely, we would have to come up with a new thread where we could all hang out.  I feel like I know a lot of you so well.  I’d definitely miss you.  It’s gotten to the point where I don’t even have to look at the poster’s name, as I  know who it is by their style of writing.


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure what they are waiting for…


----------



## csshopper

No surprise that "Pearl" tries to be faux Disney: (1) Lady Megbeth resides in a mental Fantasyland where she rules, and (2) she thinks she's besting Bob Eiger/real Disney because her elephant voice over schtick did not generate interest or further offers of employment, so she will show them: thud. 

Just to get a first hand look as the mask slips and the evil seeps out, I would be the one to approach her and say "Hello NutMeg" while looking her straight in the eye and holding the stare.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> right
> that's a high end casino.  you would think they would want their guest to feel safe - and be safe.  I actually think casinos are safe due to the cameras...


I think the cameras are there as much to protect the casino as the guests. You can be sure if they suspect someone is trying to rip them off (like by counting cards) their security will be all over the surveillance footage. Unfortunately as Lodpah found out, casinos are prime hunting ground for pickpockets and the like.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> No surprise that "Pearl" tries to be faux Disney: (1) Lady Megbeth resides in a mental Fantasyland where she rules, and (2) she thinks she's besting Bob Eiger/real Disney because her elephant voice over schtick did not generate interest or further offers of employment, so she will show them: thud.
> 
> Just to get a first hand look as the mask slips and the evil seeps out, I would be the one to approach her and say "Hello NutMeg" while looking her straight in the eye and holding the stare.


If I had the pleasure (misfortune?) to meet her I would give her a prolonged "B*tch, I see right through your sh*t" stare down. None of this don't look her in the eye crap. Unbelievable. I look forward to her inevitable downfall. It can't come soon enough.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The essence of the difference.




*".....she wanted to set an example rather than be an exception to the rules."

"....Johnson's staff packed their suitcases full of booze and held not one but two parties at Number 10."*

A perfect illustration of the difference between a member of the Greatest Generation and members of the "Me First" generation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Not sure what they are waiting for…




*Just do it *


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> If I had the pleasure (misfortune?) to meet her I would give her a prolonged "B*tch, I see right through your sh*t" stare down. None of this don't look her in the eye crap. Unbelievable. I look forward to her inevitable downfall. It can't come soon enough.


Unless you are a helpless person, don't s peak English  or a child, you wouldn't be able to get near her.  That is why she wants all the security.  She doesn't want anyone who could challenge her with a look or a conversation/comment to get close to her.  She wants to remain in the bubble of Planet Meghan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> *".....she wanted to set an example rather than be an exception to the rules."
> 
> "....Johnson's staff packed their suitcases full of booze and held not one but two parties at Number 10."*
> 
> A perfect illustration of the difference between a member of the Greatest Generation and members of the "Me First" generation.



Explains why we are in the mess we are in.  Who do we thank for this mess?
NM, I have some ideas. The good news is the people who created this mess must also live in it.  For most, their egos are suffering from lack of adoration - as we see with the disastrous duo.


----------



## carmen56

If Prince Charles is so desperate to see Archificial and meet Invisibet, why doesn’t he fly to the US and see them there?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Not surprised!



Sounds just like the people I know in Santa Barbara who were told to never look at her directly, especially not in the eyes, whenever she'd enter their place of employment!    Like Medusa.  AKA Megusa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MegR has superior bike riding skills - look how she dodges the hordes [aka, paps?]











						Meg Ryan rides her bike on the Sussexes' private road
					

A local tells DailyMail.com, 'Meg riding her bike in there shows she's just like the rest of us, hoping to get a glimpse of them'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Sounds just like the people I know in Santa Barbara who were told to never look at her directly, especially not in the eyes, whenever she'd enter their place of employment!    Like Medusa.  AKA Megusa.



It might be all for the good of the people avoiding to be turned into stone by her gaze. Or having their soul sucked out.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Sophie stared her down!


----------



## rose60610

Wait, Meghan gave orders to a city's residents not to look at her directly? Who does that? So...if she moved to LA, NYC or other metropolis, then tens of millions must obey her?  If I lived in Montecito and looked at her, who would arrest me? What would I be charged with? Wasting time? What if she approached someone in Montecito, what recourse would THEY have? If Elon or Bezos came to town, would they be forgiven for striking up a conversation with her?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> much as I like to participate in this thread there's a big part of me that just wants these two to fade into oblivion



But then where would we go? No other celebrity thread compares.  Besides if they go down, I want them to go down in a flaming mess of embarrassment and scandal. That would be the most satisfying.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Unless you are a helpless person, don't s peak English  or a child, you wouldn't be able to get near her.  That is why she wants all the security.  She doesn't want anyone who could challenge her with a look or a conversation/comment to get close to her.  She wants to remain in the bubble of Planet Meghan.


There was a staged photo of her doing some Christmas shopping in the Montecito village, and a local woman was within feet of her as she exited a shop - oh the horror!  I'm sure the local didn't give a sh*t who she was and just went about her business. TW is a legend in her own mind.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> MegR has superior bike riding skills - look how she dodges the hordes [aka, paps?]
> 
> View attachment 5302292
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg Ryan rides her bike on the Sussexes' private road
> 
> 
> A local tells DailyMail.com, 'Meg riding her bike in there shows she's just like the rest of us, hoping to get a glimpse of them'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


After reading that article I can't decide if Ryan is stalking them or might be eyeing the Harkle's estate as a potential flip. Her current home looks far nicer and much more down to earth than Monteshitshow.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> After reading that article I can't decide if Ryan is stalking them or might be eyeing the Harkle's estate as a potential flip. Her current home looks far nicer and much more down to earth than Monteshitshow.


it's her neighborhood....maybe she just wanted to go for a ride
Her home also looks like a lot to me for one person (or maybe two if her son lives with her)
If I had that kind of money I'd prefer a more modest sized home on the beach or a cozy Spanish style home.  Who wants to rattle around in a mansion?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Two thoughts come to mind about Meg Ryan riding her bike into Montecito

1. She’s so entitled to think that privacy signs don’t apply to her
2. She wants to flip the property


----------



## CarryOn2020

When ya know, ya know - keep up the good work, Tourre

Clownish?  



We’re goin ridin on the freeway…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This guy is everything.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> it's her neighborhood....maybe she just wanted to go for a ride
> Her home also looks like a lot to me for one person (or maybe two if her son lives with her)
> If I had that kind of money I'd prefer a more modest sized home on the beach or a cozy Spanish style home.  Who wants to rattle around in a mansion?


Her son is all grown, but she has her daughter Daisy still at home I think.  She remodels homes and resells.  Wonder if that is the plan for Montecito.  I thought her permanent home was NYC.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This guy is everything.


Would love to know who he really is.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Her son is all grown, but she has her daughter Daisy still at home I think.  She remodels homes and resells.  Wonder if that is the plan for Montecito.  I thought her permanent home was NYC.


she was adorable when younger, then went a bit too far with the PS (IMO)


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> When ya know, ya know - keep up the good work, Tourre
> 
> Clownish?
> 
> 
> 
> We’re goin ridin on the freeway…
> View attachment 5302343



What's funny is the sheer amount of misinformation they put out, then turn around and proclaim how dangerous misinformation is!  Hypocrisy, HazMeg be thy name.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Would love to know who he really is.



According to BotSentinel, he is “disruptive”.  Swoon, don’t we all love a bad boy?



			https://botsentinel.com/profile/400023315


----------



## Annawakes

sdkitty said:


> she was adorable when younger, then went a fit too far with the PS (IMO)


This is too true.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to BotSentinel, he is “disruptive”.  Swoon, don’t we all love a bad boy?
> 
> 
> 
> https://botsentinel.com/profile/400023315


Wait, so is BotSentinel an offshoot of Scientology?  Is Disruptive the new version of Suppressive Persons?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> it's her neighborhood....maybe she just wanted to go for a ride
> Her home also looks like a lot to me for one person (or maybe two if her son lives with her)
> If I had that kind of money I'd prefer a more modest sized home on the beach or a cozy Spanish style home.  Who wants to rattle around in a mansion?


But I believe it said she was on their private drive. Maybe she just wanted to say hello. It is a lot of house for one person.


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> Two thoughts come to mind about Meg Ryan riding her bike into Montecito
> 
> 1. She’s so entitled to think that privacy signs don’t apply to her
> 2. She wants to flip the property


My thoughts exactly. She may have heard through the grapevine that they were looking to sell and was scouting it out as a flip. The new hobby of rich people.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> After reading that article I can't decide if Ryan is stalking them or might be eyeing the Harkle's estate as a potential flip. Her current home looks far nicer and much more down to earth than Monteshitshow.



Maybe Rob Lowe dared her to ride up there. The other celebrities living in Montecito must see H&M as a source of amusement and curiosity.


----------



## bellecate

Guess they aren’t getting much interest.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> a source of amusement and curiosity.


Or unwelcome nuisances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> Two thoughts come to mind about Meg Ryan riding her bike into Montecito
> 
> 1. She’s so entitled to think that privacy signs don’t apply to her
> 2. She wants to flip the property


I'm going with #2.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> When ya know, ya know - keep up the good work, Tourre
> 
> Clownish?
> 
> 
> 
> We’re goin ridin on the freeway…
> View attachment 5302343



We re going ridin on the freeway … reminds of Aretha‘s song which goes

We re goin ridinon the freeway of love in our pink Cadillac


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Guess they aren’t getting much interest.
> 
> View attachment 5302394


If they are selling it for about $16-17M, they will not be making much money on it. Selling a house is costly…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> We re going ridin on the freeway … reminds of Aretha‘s song which goes
> 
> We re goin ridinon the freeway of love in our pink Cadillac



I was going to rewrite the song, but I couldn’t that to Aretha. Ya kno, ridin on the freeway of hate, etc.  I couldn’t do it


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you need a good news story, see the spoiler.




Spoiler: Dukes



Not all Dukes&Duchesses are misfits. If you have never searched for the Dukes of Richmond and Gordon, well, you are in for a treat. Almost all the non-BRF Dukes are men of distinction and grace.







						About Us | Goodwood House | Goodwood, West Sussex
					

Discover the history of Goodwood House and the Estate, one of England's finest country stately homes.




					www.goodwood.com
				




For more info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dukes_in_the_United_Kingdom



ETA: maybe the non-royal Dukes could write QE a letter requesting removal of the title from A&H.  Doubt it has ever been done, if they don’t do it, who will?


----------



## charlottawill

carmen56 said:


> If Prince Charles is so desperate to see Archificial and meet Invisibet, why doesn’t he fly to the US and see them there?



COVID? Doesn't want to leave his mother alone for long at this point? Who knows what the truth of all this is.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Wait, Meghan gave orders to a city's residents not to look at her directly? Who does that? So...if she moved to LA, NYC or other metropolis, then tens of millions must obey her?  If I lived in Montecito and looked at her, who would arrest me? What would I be charged with? Wasting time? What if she approached someone in Montecito, what recourse would THEY have? If Elon or Bezos came to town, would they be forgiven for striking up a conversation with her?


My friends were told by their employer that those were her instructions.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Guess they aren’t getting much interest.
> 
> View attachment 5302394


So they _are_ selling it?


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> If Prince Charles is so desperate to see Archificial and meet Invisibet, why doesn’t he fly to the US and see them there?



Nobody is desperate to see those kids except for the stans.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> When ya know, ya know - keep up the good work, Tourre
> 
> Clownish?
> 
> 
> 
> We’re goin ridin on the freeway…
> View attachment 5302343



That car is a Markle Sparbler.   Urban Dictionary definition of Sparbler. 






						Urban Dictionary: Sparbler
					

A device used by a well known rotund comedian as a result of complaints by his good lady wife about skid marks in his big white pants. A dozen or so pieces of toilet paper are rolled up like a cigar and inserted between the cheeks of the buttocks to soak up any unpleasantness.




					www.urbandictionary.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> That car is a Markle Sparbler.   Urban Dictionary definition of Sparbler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: Sparbler
> 
> 
> A device used by a well known rotund comedian as a result of complaints by his good lady wife about skid marks in his big white pants. A dozen or so pieces of toilet paper are rolled up like a cigar and inserted between the cheeks of the buttocks to soak up any unpleasantness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.urbandictionary.com



 Eeeek  I had no idea. Isn’t this the nickname that was mentioned yesterday?  Fixing it now.  Too late.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eeeek I had no idea. Isn’t this the nickname that was mentioned yesterday? Fixing it now. Too late.


@CarryOn2020, I think you were looking for Markle Sparple, I wouldn't worry too much, because you've just created a new nickname for MM that means butt wad, something actually resembling MM.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> If they are selling it for about $16-17M, they will not be making much money on it. Selling a house is costly…


According to data on real estate site Zillow.com, the asking price is about 2 mil over what they paid, but closing costs are 8% plus an amount noted for prep and repair.  Maybe all the hurled plates did some damage?


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> According to data on real estate site Zillow.com, the asking price is about 2 mil over what they paid, but closing costs are 8% plus an amount noted for prep and repair.  Maybe all the hurled plates did some damage?



My understanding is that they would need to pay capital gains tax on all profit over $500k. So they’ll owe the taxes, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

csshopper said:


> According to data on real estate site Zillow.com, the asking price is about 2 mil over what they paid, but closing costs are 8% plus an amount noted for prep and repair.  Maybe all the hurled plates did some damage?



There's also a cost to buying the property, so altogether I think you're looking at nearly 10% of the sale price in transaction costs.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> So they _are_ selling it?


Looks like it from this. But who knows with them.


----------



## rose60610

Maybe Meg Ryan rode her bike because Ellen dared her to.


----------



## csshopper

Interesting, they can’t seem to have added any attraction to the property, no sparkle with the markle and her handbag.

Purchased June 18, 2020

January 1, 2022 it leaks they “are not over the moon” with it and might be looking to move.

BUT, real estate agent says it’s been “active 154 days” which means approximately in August 2021 they put it on the market. That is not a good sign. May be a part of Harry’s stupid irrational behaviors, it must be a blow to his massively inflated ego to have become an ordinary homeowner with a pile of a house to unload, instead of sparking a bidding war to buy a house where he and the wife graced the premises.


----------



## Chanbal

The duke and duchess of Nefl*x …  Godfather, mafia members with attorneys registered in Beverly Hill


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Looks like it from this. But who knows with them.


I found old listings, but nothing current. Though, they will make a huge profit if it sells close to the Est. below.
The listing on the murky meg post is old, it was last updated on 02/23/2020 (from before the Nefli*xes) https://lauriewoolner.com/for-sale/765-rockbridge-93108/CW19-513704/.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I found old listings, but nothing current. Though, they will make a huge profit if it sells close to the Est. below.
> The listing on the murky meg post is old, it was last updated on 02/23/2020 (before it was purchased by the Nefli*xes.
> View attachment 5302593



Redfin and Zillow estimates are around $24 mil. In my experience they're more reliable. But as any realtor will tell you, a house is only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. Many listings in CA are selling well above list price with multiple offers, but I don't know if that will be true in this case.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I found old listings, but nothing current. Though, they will make a huge profit if it sells close to the Est. below.
> The listing on the murky meg post is old, it was last updated on 02/23/2020 (from before the Nefli*xes) https://lauriewoolner.com/for-sale/765-rockbridge-93108/CW19-513704/.
> View attachment 5302593




From DM, 2020:
_Harry and Meghan's $14.7million home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house. The mansion, known as 'The Chateau', was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25million in 2009_








						Death threats of Russian who sold Harry & Meg $14.7m Montecito home
					

Ekaterina Loginova, 30, lived in the Californian mansion bought by Harry and Meghan in June when she was dating the man who sold it to them - Russian banking boss Sergey Grishim, 58.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Selling So Soon? Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's California Home Was No Fairy Tale
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly trying to sell the Montecito mansion they bought 18 months ago and looking to buy another.




					www.realtor.com
				



*Will their home sell for a profit?*
_Even if they sell so soon after buying, and despite steep closing costs, Lorimer believes the couple could stand to make a substantial profit.

“I’ve been selling luxury real estate in Los Angeles for quite some time, and I can tell you that when a house has a celebrity pedigree, it surely enhances the exit price,” he says._

He notes that the Sussexes’ home has a “particularly delicious selling point” because there are many homes in Southern California that have been owned by stars, “but only two or three that have been owned by British royalty.”


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Redfin and Zillow estimates are around $24 mil. In my experience they're more reliable. But as any realtor will tell you, a house is only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. Many listings in CA are selling well above list price with multiple offers, but I don't know if that will be true in this case.


Absolutely, the ultimate price will be determined by what it sells for. At one point, that particular house was on the market for >$20M and sold for ~$14.5M to the Netflixes. I still don't understand why one needs 19 bathrooms.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> According to data on real estate site Zillow.com, the asking price is about 2 mil over what they paid, but closing costs are 8% plus an amount noted for prep and repair.  Maybe all the hurled plates did some damage?


It will be sold “as is” because it is a tear down.


----------



## xincinsin

Andre Neveling, a lightweight hack, wrote a puff piece on the Harkles for the South China Morning Post. He is a Soursex stan and likes to gush about how incredible Princess Perjury is. So far, I don't see any personal contact with the Harkles but I'm sure from his a*s-kissing prose that he is dying to be the next Scobie.









						How Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will take 2022 by storm
					

From a possible Buckingham Palace visit for Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee to a Hollywood red carpet debut at the Oscars, the Sussexes’ year is looking to be an eventful one indeed




					www.scmp.com


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Andre Neveling, a lightweight hack, wrote a puff piece on the Harkles for the South China Morning Post. He is a Soursex stan and likes to gush about how incredible Princess Perjury is. So far, I don't see any personal contact with the Harkles but I'm sure from his a*s-kissing prose that he is dying to be the next Scobie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan Markle and Prince Harry will take 2022 by storm
> 
> 
> From a possible Buckingham Palace visit for Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee to a Hollywood red carpet debut at the Oscars, the Sussexes’ year is looking to be an eventful one indeed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scmp.com



They're good fodder for "lightweight hack(s)". Anyone in the media writing/creating content about them guarantees a certain amount of readers and generate reactions.

People will read it whether or not they agree, and that's all he needs. 

And I suppose someone has to like them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yanca said:


> The Harkles thought they will have a cheap PR for the food truck they " donated" yesterday. They are so transparent, they always ride on whatever holiday or event here in the US, throw some sandwiches for us peasants and it will be splash all over the news. Compassion in action they say.  so contrived.


It smacks of the Victorian sensibility as you say - giving out food to get a worthy peasants not money of course.

I’m all for food banks as a way of tackling food waste and helping people in financial difficulties eat a varied diet…. but aren’t  these people  actually campaigning about racism? Who is to say they need food handouts anyway? Is the assumption they must be poor because they volunteer?
I suppose they would think that because their charity most certainly pays them for their time.  



QueenofWrapDress said:


> For some reason it wouldn't embedd though it's not a reel, but...every single things sounds absolutely believable.
> 
> View attachment 5302214


She’s a Disney princess dontcha know   


sdkitty said:


> much as I like to participate in this thread there's a big part of me that just wants these two to fade into oblivion


The real question is what is this thread going to transform into when they really are dead in the water or are  we just going to emigrate to another obscure thread? N sync revival(?) and won’t know what’s hit them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We can talk about crafts! (I have been unsuccessfully trying to buy freaking wool for a baby blanket and at this point the research is consuming me. Why no colours in a nice quality at a decent price point? Guess the kid will get it for their first day of elementary school)


----------



## jelliedfeels

carmen56 said:


> If Prince Charles is so desperate to see Archificial and meet Invisibet, why doesn’t he fly to the US and see them there?


I agree but he would get a very ‘return of the native’ style greeting with his daughter in law glancing out the window at him before hurriedly hiding herself and god knows who else under the bed. Perhaps if he’s really lucky central casting will come through for a short notice lawn photo op.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> it's her neighborhood....maybe she just wanted to go for a ride
> Her home also looks like a lot to me for one person (or maybe two if her son lives with her)
> If I had that kind of money I'd prefer a more modest sized home on the beach or a cozy Spanish style home.  Who wants to rattle around in a mansion?


Dracula.

Wait a minute…. Everything’s starting to make sense now!  


charlottawill said:


> After reading that article I can't decide if Ryan is stalking them or might be eyeing the Harkle's estate as a potential flip. Her current home looks far nicer and much more down to earth than Monteshitshow.


I doubt she’d be that interested in them. Meg Ryan has had her own time on the A list and she’s met plenty of actual celebs. Why would she want to see two angry baldies?


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We can talk about crafts! (I have been unsuccessfully trying to buy freaking wool for a baby blanket and at this point the research is consuming me. Why no colours in a nice quality at a decent price point? Guess the kid will get it for their first day of elementary school)


Try the sales section at filati - this is where I get my yarn for baby blankets


----------



## Stansy

jelliedfeels said:


> Dracula.
> 
> Wait a minute…. Everything’s starting to make sense now!
> 
> I doubt she’d be that interested in them. Meg Ryan has had her own time on the A list and she’s met plenty of actual celebs. *Why would she want to see two angry baldies*?


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> From DM, 2020:
> _Harry and Meghan's $14.7million home features nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms along with a games room, gym, tennis courts and tea house. The mansion, known as 'The Chateau', was built in 2003 and previously sold for $25million in 2009_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Death threats of Russian who sold Harry & Meg $14.7m Montecito home
> 
> 
> Ekaterina Loginova, 30, lived in the Californian mansion bought by Harry and Meghan in June when she was dating the man who sold it to them - Russian banking boss Sergey Grishim, 58.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Selling So Soon? Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's California Home Was No Fairy Tale
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly trying to sell the Montecito mansion they bought 18 months ago and looking to buy another.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.realtor.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will their home sell for a profit?
> _Even if they sell so soon after buying, and despite steep closing costs, Lorimer believes the couple could stand to make a substantial profit.
> 
> “I’ve been selling luxury real estate in Los Angeles for quite some time, and I can tell you that when a house has a celebrity pedigree, it surely enhances the exit price,” he says._
> 
> He notes that the Sussexes’ home has a “particularly delicious selling point” because there are many homes in Southern California that have been owned by stars, “*but only two or three that have been owned by British royalty*.”




No.  The Harkles are not British Royalty in any way, shape or form. Some people are really deluded.


----------



## Jktgal

what what, is their new gig flipping houses??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Funny how just 18 months ago this was their "forever home".


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funny how just 18 months ago this was their "forever home".


As in everything else they do, they have the attention span of Dory, conveniently voiced by Ellen DeGeneres.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger Guru bored, no!  The UK is very lucky that Will is the heir and not the spare.
View attachment 5302932




			https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/survivor-william-concerned-with-shoah-lessons-harry-didnt-take-it-seriously/:girlsigh
		

:


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> There's also a cost to buying the property, so altogether I think you're looking at nearly 10% of the sale price in transaction costs.


at least I would think.  five or six percent RE commission, closing costs, capital gains


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funny how just 18 months ago this was their "forever home".



It's just like the celebrity interpretation of "till death do us part".


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Ginger Guru bored, no!  The UK is very lucky that Will is the heir and not the spare.
> View attachment 5302932
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/survivor-william-concerned-with-shoah-lessons-harry-didnt-take-it-seriously/:girlsigh
> 
> 
> :



Why does this article not surprise me?  Sigh...


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> Why does this article not surprise me?  Sigh...


Because you are an educated member of this forum/thread!?


----------



## TC1

Makes me snicker that they need armed security with all these "threats" in the US and UK and you can literally google their home address. Private life...mmhmm, sure


----------



## LittleStar88

They're legends in their own minds


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I'm pretty sure both the nation and the family - including Philip looking on from his cloud - will breathe a sigh of relief. They can focus on the occasion instead of being kept on their toes wondering what the next fuss will be. 

And I sure hope Raptor's wreath will get lost in transit...what's she going to pick this time, bright pink?


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m sure if Charles went to them, not only would it feed their egos, all paps would be alerted and the entire area would be bugged with audio and video recording devices.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m sure if Charles went to them, not only would it feed their egos, all paps would be alerted and the entire area would be bugged with audio and video recording devices.



The problem I have with this is that Charles is entirely not the supplicant nor the guilty party in this scenario, but it would be totally twisted that way...the next king travelling to California to make amends to his mistreated younger son and misunderstood wife. Just...no.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>




He didn’t make any attempt to see his grandfather when he was on his deathbed. Instead he smeared his family with Oprah. No one would believe his presence at a memorial service would be out of genuine feelings for the man. The H&M self-promotion roadshow is not wanted.


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> According to data on real estate site Zillow.com, the asking price is about 2 mil over what they paid, but closing costs are 8% plus an amount noted for prep and repair.  Maybe all the hurled plates did some damage?


Correct. tbh I think they bought a white elephant the last guy couldn’t shift  and thought all the free PR it was getting would convince people to buy it but I think the survey must be a whole semaphore alphabet of red flags.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funny how just 18 months ago this was their "forever home".


They would forever be paying the mortgage off it certainly  


TC1 said:


> Makes me snicker that they need armed security with all these "threats" in the US and UK and you can literally google their home address. Private life...mmhmm, sure


when you put it like that it’s amazing that Meg Ryan wasn’t swept up by an entire team of commandos as she approached the perimeter but maybe he only needs that in the badlands of Kensington palace.


----------



## piperdog

bag-mania said:


> The H&M self-promotion roadshow is not wanted.


Actually, the H&M self-promotion at home is not wanted, either, but we seem to be stuck with it. 

However, I truly hope they leave Phillip's memorial and all of HMTQ's jubilee events alone. I know they won't because 1) they don't have a shred of decency between them; and 2) these events would provide much-desired spotlights for them. They really don't seem to care a bit about the senior-citizen, lifetime public servants who are the intended focus of these events for the rest of the world.


----------



## bag-mania

piperdog said:


> Actually, the H&M self-promotion at home is not wanted, either, but we seem to be stuck with it.
> 
> However, I truly hope they leave Phillip's memorial and all of HMTQ's jubilee events alone. I know they won't because 1) they don't have a shred of decency between them; and 2) these events would provide much-desired spotlights for them. They really don't seem to care a bit about the senior-citizen, lifetime public servants who are the intended focus of these events for the rest of the world.



Maybe they can just send a VERY SPECIAL wreath and get the publicity about it and be done with it.


----------



## Chanbal

Following NS's example, allegedly…
In one of Lady C's videos, she confirms that Meghan has her eyes on Diane Feinstein's seat. The talk about a New York seat was likely one more of their usual tactics to mislead people. Also, Harry's lawsuit was to 'save face' and to  provide content for Netflix…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Meghan has her eyes on Diane Feinstein's seat


Dream on Meghan, dream on.


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> Dream on Meghan, dream on.



I wouldn't be too sure about that.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Dream on Meghan, dream on.


It might be Mrs. Neflix's dream, but it would certainly be our nightmare…


----------



## lallybelle

Not to be morbid but DiFi is going to pass away in that seat because she'll never retire and Newsom will have to appoint someone...


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> I wouldn't be too sure about that.


Sadly, you may be right.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they *can just send a VERY SPECIAL wreath* and get the publicity about it and be done with it.


With a handwritten message "_showing off her renowned calligraphy". _


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Harry's lawsuit was to 'save face'


Which face was the two-faced twit trying to save? The 'compassion in action' face or the Ginger Whinger face?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lallybelle said:


> Not to be morbid but DiFi is going to pass away in that seat because she'll never retire and Newsom will have to appoint someone...


This assumes she goes while Newsom is still in office. Newsom's chances of re-election are good at this point but it's still early in the game.


----------



## lallybelle

charlottawill said:


> This assumes she goes while Newsom is still in office. Newsom's chances of re-election are good at this point but it's still early in the game.



That's true.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Correct. tbh I think they bought a white elephant the last guy couldn’t shift  and thought all the free PR it was getting would convince people to buy it but I think the survey must be a whole semaphore alphabet of red flags.
> 
> 
> They would forever be paying the mortgage off it certainly
> 
> when you put it like that it’s amazing that Meg Ryan wasn’t swept up by an entire team of commandos as she approached the perimeter but maybe he only needs that in the badlands of Kensington palace.


well, Meg Ryan, in her day was a bigger star than Meghan ever dreamed of being....so if they knew it was her I'm sure she'd be welcomed


----------



## Lodpah

Credit to Jonathon Lynch on Quora. Best explanation of Hangbag’demands: I did not know Scumbag was given a mini van with his security lol while last in GB. 


If anyone could pay for police protection, which is what Harry is deceptively implying, then every Sheikh, Dick and Harry would be paying for them. Yes, the police can be paid for but generally this is done by corporations and entities such as football clubs and supermarkets i.e. that the police are paid for to police and protect hundreds or thousands of people for specific periods of time.

So what is really going on here? Remember when it was implied that Archie would not get a Prince title because of institutional racism? The very same manipulation is at play here. Harry is banking on the idea that everday Americans (their target audience) are not up to speed on the protocol and rules surrounding the protection of Royals in the same way that they were banking on them not up to speed on title protocol i.e. their son would get a Prince title per the rules but only when his father ascended to the throne as the monarch, that it had nothing to do with racism but the reality was that his kids wouldn’t get titles anyway under the long touted slimmed down monarchy under Charles.

This type of emotional manipulation is done on purpose but done covertly. Harry knows full well that security is given based on a risk assessment by the Home Office, that the Royals don't dictate what level of personal police protection they receive. Obviously the Queen and Charles have 24/7 protection but they could pay for additional private security which is what rank and filers like Harry can also do out of their own pocket. I'm sure this is presumably what the likes of Andy is getting as a non-working embarrassment when he goes out and about. A listers are capable of using private security to travel worldwide. They are capable of doing it discreetly and seemlessly. The reality is that the optics for an egotistical Harry is that a fleet of high-end vehicles swanning them around the UK (such as their faux Royal tour in NY) is much better than the likes of the VW mini-van which was what Harry used for airport transfer after the Diana statue unveiling. The bruising his ego must have taken likely provoked him to try and regain his status as an internationally protected person who was "born into the risk". Funny how others born into the same risk aren't as vocal as he is and are entirely capable of living their lives in peace and security.

Ultimately, their visiting the UK shouldn't even be a dilemma for them because it does not follow that they would want any part in the Jubilee celebrations of an institution which caused Harry genetic pain and which resulted in his wife becoming suicidal. The problem for them is that they need the association of Royalty as their unique selling point in the US, they are relative nobodies without that association. With no involvement then their status as persona non grata becomes stark and their selling point obliterated. What he is trying to do here is invoke sympathy and play the victim (again). He's imploring the types who don't read beyond the headlines to think that his toxic (and racist) family won't stump up the cash to protect him and his young family. He is, like Meghan, "pulling at heart strings" because his family will be unable to visit and appreciate the UK even though there are neo-nazi’s stalking every street corner in Harry’s paranoia. Even worse, poor little Lilibet won't ever meet her namesake. It's telling that Meghan's father has been vocal in the media about wanting to see his grandkids but has gotten the cold shoulder. As such I’ll spare my tears about Harry unable to have his daughter meet his grandmother because of security concerns. In addition, when they become no shows at Jubilee coverage in the summer then their excuse is already built in i.e. we wanted to be there but they wouldn’t protect my family.

Harry's likely hope is that such media manipulations and misinformation gain traction and that the Bank of Dad will give them a royal bail out to cut off the PR backlash or possibly quell them into silence in the Jubilee year via a hefty bank transfer. I am convinced that, assuming they are even wanted, that they could have long visited the Royal family incognito. The reality is that they've very understandably been cold shouldered and their situation is becoming desperate now because even starting off a life of financial independence with millions in inheritance then that money can get dissipated frighteningly quickly in California when you simulataneously want to live a millionaire lifestyle but you have no income coming in. Such desperation can lead to Prince Harry going so far as to sue the UK government (his grandmothers government) and demand his internationally protected person status as the grandson of the monarch/son of the future monarch be re-instated. The gambit is thus that if he succeeds and the UK goverment (i.e. those in charge of Royal security) relents and then their security costs while living in the US become minimal. I’m not sure how this is funded in the US but presumably there would be no more VW mini-vans.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This woman is so weird at the best of days (besides this example, what's with the just talking to herself while everyone else avoids to even look at her...I've seen it on several occasions)...did she drug Harry or how did she do it?

ETA: as someone who is occasionally on a film set I can confirm that after x hours everyone's spirit weakens, and nobody, absolutely nobody wants to drag it out longer than necessary, especially not when running late already.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well, Meg Ryan, in her day was a bigger star than Meghan ever dreamed of being....so if they knew it was her I'm sure she'd be welcomed



"Was" being the operative word. These are the "cool kids" MM yearns to hang with:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-Cindy-Crawford-Rande-Gerber-Nobu-Malibu.html


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> "Was" being the operative word. These are the "cool kids" MM yearns to hang with:
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-Cindy-Crawford-Rande-Gerber-Nobu-Malibu.html


and of course, even though M never made it to Meg's level in show-biz, she achieved her dream of fame and fortune another way - networking


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> and of course, even though M never made it to Meg's level in show-biz, she achieved her dream of fame and fortune another way



Fame and fortune can be fleeting. Fingers crossed.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, Meg Ryan, in her day was a bigger star than Meghan ever dreamed of being....so if they knew it was her I'm sure she'd be welcomed



If Meg Ryan ever rode by my house on her bike I’d probably invite her in. I bet she’s got some great stories.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It might be Mrs. Neflix's dream, but it would certainly be our nightmare…


Meh...California has already gone to $hit.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, Meg Ryan, in her day was a bigger star than Meghan ever dreamed of being....so if they knew it was her I'm sure she'd be welcomed


Where would she sit?  They have no furniture.  On a  pile of The Bench books, perhaps? lololol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow, this really looks like _her _[ya kno, from a distance].
Guessing the coat is Max Mara, but which one and what color?   It‘s too short for the Icon coat and the color is light for ‘camel’.













						The Crown's Elizabeth Debicki continues filming series five in London
					

The Australian actress, 31, who was filming scenes in London, effortlessly channelled Princess Diana by opting for a camel coat - a signature piece in the late royal's wardrobe.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Where would she sit?  They have no furniture.  On a  pile of The Bench books, perhaps? lololol!


Oh come on, they have that whitish sofa near those weird prints gifted by OW. Or was it rented?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh come on, they have that whitish sofa near those weird prints gifted by OW. Or was it rented?



They have 19 “thrones” - surely one is available.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Can anything Hazzi writes be as awful as these letters from the Duke of Windsor?   Ewwww.

_In March, 1953, the Duke of Windsor again visited London when his mother, Queen Mary, was dying.

Writing of doctors’ reports that his mother’s condition had improved, the duke said: “*Ice in place of blood in the veins must be a fine preservative.”*

After the duke learned his mother had left him only three small boxes and a pair of candlesticks, he wrote to the duchess:

*“What a smug stinking lot my relations are and you’ve never seen such a seedy worn out bunch of old hags most of them have become.”*

Throughout their letters the duke and duchess used code names including Cookie for the Queen Mother, *Shirley Temple for Queen Elizabeth II*, and Cry Baby for Winston Churchill.









						Letters to Duchess of Windsor : Duke Called Relatives 'Seedy Bunch of Old Hags'
					

A British newspaper today published letters by the late Duke and Duchess of Windsor that reveal the bitterness of their 30-year feud with the Royal Family after he abdicated the throne.




					www.latimes.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is a great question!  



_*Brains clearly don't play a big part in Harry's lifestyle, so he's probably unaware of what he's done. But does Meghan, somehow, somewhere, have any sense that she really could have played a role in the history of a 1,000-year old monarchy and she's given it up for a deal with Netflix? It's certainly come at a price.*_








						Do self-serving Sussexes realise all they've lost? VIRGINIA BLACKBURN
					

IN HIS latest bid to court popularity and influence people (not), Prince Harry is demanding that he be afforded the same protection he was given as a working Royal, although he's offered to pay for it himself. Harry and Meghan really do not get it. The Prince was born into a world of enormous...




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The loss is indeed big for the Netflixes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

The original tree house was built for Princes William and Harry for William's 7th birthday in 1989. 
Here's the video of the playpark opening.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry believes he's deserving and needs an overwhelming amount of security if he were to go to England, does that mean he can't go anywhere? Can he travel ANYWHERE? I mean, if he needs sooooooo much security, where CAN he go to be safe? He's miffed that TQ won't fork out the entire Scotland Yard for him, so can he possible travel on a private jet anywhere else without a bunch of SWAT Teams that he wants other people to pay for?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman is so weird at the best of days (besides this example, what's with the just talking to herself while everyone else avoids to even look at her...I've seen it on several occasions)...did she drug Harry or how did she do it?
> 
> ETA: as someone who is occasionally on a film set I can confirm that after x hours everyone's spirit weakens, and nobody, absolutely nobody wants to drag it out longer than necessary, especially not when running late already.



I don’t buy it. When has she ever had the acting talent needed to do recognisable impressions?   Also, she seems ignorant in general so I doubt she’d know much about golden era Hollywood.

She can only do Joan Crawford via Faye Dunaway by virtue of them having similar levels of aggression (though still different talent levels.)

add on - if he was a rescue dog bogie might have got named before she got him- with the last two dogs my mum rescued she kept the names they got in the shelter because they were used to them even though she didn’t like the names that much.


----------



## csshopper

Looks like people are not rushing to subscribe to Netflix in anticipation of the arrival of Pearl.... 

*Netflix stock sinks by 22% to $399 a share the day after streaming giant said it would only add 2.5m new subscribers - fewer than HALF the 5.9m analysts had forecast *


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh! It's so current… 



			https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Honestly, had they just found out the spotlight is not for them and quietly went away, I would not have held that against them for one minute and I think most people would have been sympathetic. But they've been nothing but disgraceful and disruptive since (plus, we all know the reasons they gave are entirely made up).


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> "William's 7th birthday in 1989."


I can't help but wonder if that started Hazy on his path of brotherly resentment.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! It's so current…
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/



Chanbal, thanks once again for a great post. You share from informative sources, many unique especially for members like me who are not on Instagram and Twitter, and all bring something to this conversation.  Thoroughly enjoy it!


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Looks like people are not rushing to subscribe to Netflix in anticipation of the arrival of Pearl....
> 
> *Netflix stock sinks by 22% to $399 a share the day after streaming giant said it would only add 2.5m new subscribers - fewer than HALF the 5.9m analysts had forecast*



We can only hope. Whatever Netflix gave them already is too much for the nothing they have produced despite having over a year now. Netflix is going to lose out on the deal, just like Spotify.

I suspect the Netflix drop is people getting tired of being nickel-and-dimed every month by all of the streaming options. The subscriptions seem cheap at first but they all add up.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! It's so current…
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.takimag.com/article/the-end-game/



I don't think MM ever intended to settle into the quiet reserved life of the wife of a British royal, like Sophie Wessex. She set her sights on Hazy and went in for the kill, fully intending to bring him back to CA and to leverage the American appetite for the royal family, especially tragic Diana and her two motherless boys, to her advantage.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I suspect the Netflix drop is people getting tired of being nickel-and-dimed every month by all of the streaming options. The subscriptions seem cheap at first but they all add up.


Exactly this.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, had they just found out the spotlight is not for them and quietly went away, I would not have held that against them for one minute and I think most people would have been sympathetic. But they've been nothing but disgraceful and disruptive since (plus, we all know the reasons they gave are entirely made up).


They were told you're either in or you're out, there's no in between, but that's what they've been trying to do and isn't working.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I suspect the Netflix drop is people getting tired of being nickel-and-dimed every month by all of the streaming options. The subscriptions seem cheap at first but they all add up.



Honestly, if I didn't have a spot in the family plan I wouldn't pay for it. The Euro offers are ridiculous (very little of the cool stuff but a ton of 20yo movies) and Netflix US seems to spend a good chunk of money on hunting down VPN users because I basically had to change mine several times during just one episode of my chosen series. It was so annoying I just gave up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Netflix US seems to spend a good chunk of money on hunting down VPN users because I basically had to change mine several times during just one episode of my chosen series. It was so annoying I just gave up.



For Netflix it's mission accomplished. From PC Magazine:  
"Note however that many companies, and especially Netflix, are adept at detecting and blocking VPN use."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> For Netflix it's mission accomplished. From PC Magazine:
> "Note however that many companies, and especially Netflix, are adept at detecting and blocking VPN use."



I mean, fair enough...but maybe step up your game then, will you Netflix? 

P.S. Not interested in watching Pearl, you can keep that one for yourself.


----------



## Chanbal

Wish the words were better, but the post (underlined) is still interesting.  What's wrong with People magazine?


----------



## Chanbal

AMANDA PLATELL: Didn't lots of us break rules in lockdown?
					

AMANDA PLATELL: How many of us could say we have never sneaked in a friend or family member under cover of darkness or had a drink with neighbours in our back gardens.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5304507
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMANDA PLATELL: Didn't lots of us break rules in lockdown?
> 
> 
> AMANDA PLATELL: How many of us could say we have never sneaked in a friend or family member under cover of darkness or had a drink with neighbours in our back gardens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Fingers crossed, the _rainmakers_ stay off the grid and remain quiet.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fingers crossed, the _rainmakers_ stay off the grid and remain quiet.


It rained a lot in the past days, I'll be mailing them lemon cake as a token of appreciation.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Wish the words were better, but the post (underlined) is still interesting.  What's wrong with People magazine?




So weird that they live in CA and there’s still a moderate to severe drought in the entire state!


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> So weird that they live in CA and there’s still a moderate to severe drought in the entire state!


The Senate elections are only in November, the skill is to be used as a campaign promise. Sorry!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I can't help but wonder if that started Hazy on his path of brotherly resentment.


He was only 5 years old at the time, but maybe old enough to notice a significant difference between William, who was perhaps accorded more deference than himself and I suppose the Green-Eyed Monster can appear at any age.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> He was only 5 years old at the time, but maybe old enough to notice a significant difference between William, who was perhaps accorded more deference than himself and I suppose the Green-Eyed Monster can appear at any age.


Five is plenty old enough for even a not particularly bright child to notice an older sibling is being treated more favorably.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Five is plenty old enough for even a not particularly bright child to notice an older sibling is being treated more favorably.


I would think the parents gave Hazz a comparable gift for his b-day. The problem with Hazz is as you said, he is not particularly bright. A bright person would realize the huge privilege that is being born in a family with so many resources. He could have studied/worked and become a useful member of this society.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I would think the parents gave Hazz a comparable gift for his b-day. The problem with Hazz is as you said, he is not particularly bright. A bright person would realize the huge privilege that is being born in a family with so many resources. He could have studied/worked and become a useful member of this society.



My guess - all of these troubled BRF members have Andi’s attitude - I’m royal, you can’t touch me. 
That one statement sums what is wrong in QE’s house. Imo Bea and Eug have the same attitude. Icky.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Wish the words were better, but the post (underlined) is still interesting.  What's wrong with People magazine?



Next we will learn that Princess Perjury is still a virgin... Oops, Saint Princess Perjury.


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Next we will learn that Princess Perjury is still a virgin... Oops, Saint Princess Perjury.


I’m flummoxed by this lie of hers. I’m sure her attorneys got those emails during discovery so what happened? Those documents would have to have been submitted via declaration and her attorneys would have seen it. Something is not right. I think her PR spanned it somehow. Amy lawyers here who can chime in?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(I haven't watched so I don't know what the verdict is here)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

No takers? People not wanting their name attached to hers?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (I haven't watched so I don't know what the verdict is here)



Sorry, but I've tried watching maybe 3 of her vids already and I can't finish them because she is very annoying and always laughing at her own quips, that aren't that funny.


----------



## Freak4Coach

rose60610 said:


> Wait, Meghan gave orders to a city's residents not to look at her directly? Who does that? So...if she moved to LA, NYC or other metropolis, then tens of millions must obey her?  If I lived in Montecito and looked at her, who would arrest me? What would I be charged with? Wasting time? What if she approached someone in Montecito, what recourse would THEY have? If Elon or Bezos came to town, would they be forgiven for striking up a conversation with her?



i usually just lurk here but I had to say this was my first thought when I read your post…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Fair enough, our enemy's enemy doesn't have to be our friend!

That said, I don't think I've watched more than a few snippets because I don't want to spend all my spare time on the Harkles really so I have no clue how annoying she is.

ETA: that was for @Maggie Muggins


----------



## charlottawill

BTW, for those of you who don't follow the very funny Celeste Barber on IG, she posted this yesterday:


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (I haven't watched so I don't know what the verdict is here)



If they did use the same surrogate it would have to have been Archie's. Lilibet was born in June 2021, 7 months ago.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't want to spend all my spare time on the Harkles


It really can be a rabbit hole


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> (I haven't watched so I don't know what the verdict is here)



I just remembered I never commented on her last vid on here.
I 89% agree with her, Lady C is a massive hypocrite on Andrew as she while she rightly stresses that he is innocent until proven guilty  she has no problem casting aspersions on Virginia Guiffre’s character. Equally V could be guilty of criminal acts but be innocent by virtue of compulsion/ extreme circumstances but it’s a civil case anyway. 
However! She didn’t need to start dragging Lady C being intersex and her upbringing into it. Also I’m pretty sure her name is Georgie now so I don’t buy her mum knows her if she thinks it’s her ‘dead name.’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, but I've tried watching maybe 3 of her vids already and I can't finish them because she is very annoying and always laughing at her own quips, that aren't that funny.


ITA.  She probably has good insights, but her videos are soooo long and she gets off on too many tangents.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> However! She didn’t need to start dragging Lady C being intersex and her upbringing into it.



See, I never made it to that part and I'm honestly not a fan. Just as I like Lady C in all her eccentric glory but cannot deal with the victim blaming of a minor.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> If they did use the same surrogate it would have to have been Archie's. Lilibet was born in June 2021, 7 months ago.


I think MM really was pregnant with Archie. We don't know about the second one, whose existence is cloaked in more mystery. I do believe she may have done IVF for Archie. She got pregnant pretty quickly for someone of "advanced maternal age". She may have had eggs on ice and was waiting for her victim. I am hearing of this with young women I know who are over 30.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> If they did use the same surrogate it would have to have been Archie's. Lilibet was born in June 2021, 7 months ago.


Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were "too busy to practice because of their work schedules", my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> No takers? People not wanting their name attached to hers?
> View attachment 5305124


They should have had one at the start. Maybe MM fired the person.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were "too busy to practice because of their work schedules", my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.



She didn't want to take the chance of losing her figure or losing out on a part.  I loved her statement that she "would have as many children as she could."  Sure she would, as long as another person carried the baby and another person cared for it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

charlottawill said:


> Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were "too busy to practice because of their work schedules", my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.



It might just be that she just didn’t want to publicly throw open her medical history and her “inability” to have children.  Being glib might be easier.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I think MM really was pregnant with Archie. We don't know about the second one, whose existence is cloaked in more mystery. I do believe she may have done IVF for Archie. She got pregnant pretty quickly for someone of "advanced maternal age". She may have had eggs on ice and was waiting for her victim. I am hearing of this with young women I know who are over 30.


I think she did IVF for both.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> She didn't want to take the chance of losing her figure or losing out on a part.  I loved her statement that she "would have as many children as she could."  Sure she would, as long as another person carried the baby and another person cared for it.


Sounds like babies are more like accessories to complete her "look".


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> It might just be that she just didn’t want to publicly throw open her medical history and her “inability” to have children.  Being glib might be easier.


I think you're being kind. I'm more cynical. Plenty of prominent women have been open about their fertility struggles, often to the benefit of other women. My sense with her is that it is just an issue of convenience. Again, that is just my opinion.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think she did IVF for both.


Not that there's anything wrong with that. Thousands of women do.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Not that there's anything wrong with that. Thousands of women do.


Just making a statement of my thought and not a judgement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were "too busy to practice because of their work schedules", my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.



This might be an unpopular opinion, but coming from a country where surrogacy is illegal because of ethical concerns it kind of disgusts me slightly that people go ahead and order a baby only because they are oh so self-important (as opposed to medical reasons). Oh well.


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This might be an unpopular opinion, but coming from a country where surrogacy is illegal because of ethical concerns it kind of disgusts me slightly that people go ahead and order a baby only because they are oh so self-important (as opposed to medical reasons). Oh well.


We have been discussing this in the Priyanka Chopra thread!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think she did IVF for both.



I'm erring on the side of "She was pregnant at least with Archie" as well, but I still think the fake belly (like, three months ahead, fluctuating between trimesters and folding over, creasing, inflating while moving) was sick. Just...why. Normal people are happy if they are not super big and can still move several months into the pregnancy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were "too busy to practice because of their work schedules", my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.


OMG, that’s so sad. If she doesn’t have time to get pregnant, how is she possibly going to have any time to raise a child? Apparently that will all be left to the hired help. That’s unbelievable and frankly devastating


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> OMG, that’s so sad. If she doesn’t have time to get pregnant, how is she possibly going to have any time to raise a child? Apparently that will all be left to the hired help. That’s unbelievable and frankly devastating


Now I understand why she and Raptor are supposedly "besties."


----------



## Happyish

I'm curious and maybe someone will know the answer. Before MM married Harry there was a great deal of talk about the fact she would be renouncing her American citizenship. At first it was phrased as a condition precedent to the marriage, then later I believe the dialog changed to something she intended to do rather than something she had to do. Does anyone know if she actually renounced her US citizenship?


----------



## Happyish

Happyish said:


> I'm curious and maybe someone will know the answer. Before MM married Harry there was a great deal of talk about the fact she would be renouncing her American citizenship. At first it was phrased as a condition precedent to the marriage, then later I believe the dialog changed to something she intended to do rather than something she had to do. Does anyone know if she actually changed her citizenship?


----------



## gracekelly

Happyish said:


> I'm curious and maybe someone will know the answer. Before MM married Harry there was a great deal of talk about the fact she would be renouncing her American citizenship. At first it was phrased as a condition precedent to the marriage, then later I believe the dialog changed to something she intended to do rather than something she had to do. Does anyone know if she actually renounced her US citizenship?


She did not.  If she had, she wouldn't have been able to enter the US so easily.  Other Brits have dual US/UK citizenship  if they want it.  I don't know if that would fly for a member of the Royal Family.  In that instance, you might have to give up your birth citizenship.


----------



## V0N1B2

Happyish said:


> I'm curious and maybe someone will know the answer. Before MM married Harry there was a great deal of talk about the fact she would be renouncing her American citizenship. At first it was phrased as a condition precedent to the marriage, then later I believe the dialog changed to something she intended to do rather than something she had to do. Does anyone know if she actually renounced her US citizenship?


She hardly had time. They only lived in the UK for a year and a half since she got married. Between all the trips to Australia and Africa, she probably don't have the time to study for her citizenship test. At the time, yeah you know, she was gonna "hit the ground running, modernize the Monarchy, and become a British subject" but I guess wanting to be famous in America was more important.  I mean, they've already lived in the US longer that she was in England.
Besides, who would want to become a citizen in that horribly racist country that was known for slavery, oppression and shooting random Black people just jogging down the road.   /sarcasm


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> OMG, that’s so sad. If she doesn’t have time to get pregnant, how is she possibly going to have any time to raise a child? Apparently that will all be left to the hired help. That’s unbelievable and frankly devastating


Exactly!!! As I said, it seems like more of an accessory to her lifestyle. Or maybe she felt the need to keep up with the other Jonas brothers, who both have children.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Now I understand why she and Raptor are supposedly "besties."


They were, I don't know if they still are. Chopra was supposedly mad at MM for not attending her three day wedding in India. MM said she was advised not to travel to India because of her pregnancy. I can't fault her for that. Who knows with these people? Their friendships often seem tenuous at best.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> I'm curious and maybe someone will know the answer. Before MM married Harry there was a great deal of talk about the fact she would be renouncing her American citizenship. At first it was phrased as a condition precedent to the marriage, then later I believe the dialog changed to something she intended to do rather than something she had to do. Does anyone know if she actually renounced her US citizenship?


Talk is all it ever was or will be. She has no intention of renouncing her US citizenship.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were *"too busy to practice because of their work schedules"*, my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.


For real?  Too busy to practice (ie s e x??) or practice being a parent?  One of the many reasons I can't stand Priyanka Chopra.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> For real?  Too busy to practice (ie s e x??) or practice being a parent?  One of the many reasons I can't stand Priyanka Chopra.



She was joking, about the sex part.


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...riyanka-welcome-baby-girl-12-weeks-early.html


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She was joking, about the sex part.


Maybe not.  There are rumors about her husband and that he bats for the the other team.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don’t want to offend anyone, what was he thinking?


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t want to offend anyone, what was he thinking?




So rude.


----------



## octopus17

I love this thread, just saying ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this when MM had called Omid so he could take photos?  Clearly, Hazz and Kate are displeased. Comilla’s look is priceless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love love Zara 
ETA: from 2015, more photos here:


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this when MM had called Omid so he could take photos?  Clearly, Hazz and Kate are displeased. Comilla’s look is priceless.



This one picture may have swayed my opinion of Camilla quite a bit more to the like side.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love Zara



Charles looks like he has lost weight in this photo.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, but I've tried watching maybe 3 of her vids already and I can't finish them because she is very annoying and always laughing at her own quips, that aren't that funny.


They all need to edit their videos.

In this case, for example, she wasn't going to talk about something because she had no proof and proceeds to talk about it and then says she's glad she didn't talk about it.

Edit that out!

Anyway, I agree with you.  lol


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t want to offend anyone, what was he thinking?




Did you read the comments there? Someone called them Boo and Bedbug 

Don't they usually travel with an assistant who can hold such things for them? Maybe they gave them the day off? More likely let them go because they can't afford one anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love Zara
> ETA: from 2015, more photos here:



They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Charles looks very relaxed and they appear to be close.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz who?


----------



## Chanbal

They have almost the rate of one company per toilet!  

_Last week, *it emerged that the couple had set up 11 companies in Delaware*, the state known for its flexible business laws and low personal income tax rates.
The Telegraph *can reveal that two further companies were registered *on the same date, by the same lawyer and business manager who have represented the Duchess since she was an actress.
They appear to have names which are meaningful to the couple, with *one – Cloverdale Inc – bearing the same name as the street that the Duchess lived on with her mother in Los Angeles* when she was young.Both Cloverdale and a second company, Riversoul Productions Inc, are set up explicitly in the “entertainment” industry, and join companies Hampshire LLC, Bridgemont LLC and IPHW LLC._



			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

He wants money and material for his memoir…  Well, so much for financial independence!


_“It has been suggested to Harry he may live to regret any lingering family bitterness, and he has taken that on board.

“There is a feeling he is coming back more into the fold and wants to be closer to his family.”

The Royals are expecting Harry to return from his California home for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee in June, but it could be without Meghan, 40, Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet.
_








						Harry in secret talks with Prince Charles in bid to heal rift before Jubilee
					

PRINCE Harry has held secret talks with Prince Charles in a bid to heal their rift ahead of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. It follows Harry’s claims he’s been stripped of money and security.  He is …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> He wants money and material for his memoir…  Well, so much for financial independence!
> View attachment 5305580
> 
> _“It has been suggested to Harry he may live to regret any lingering family bitterness, and he has taken that on board.
> 
> “There is a feeling he is coming back more into the fold and wants to be closer to his family.”
> 
> The Royals are expecting Harry to return from his California home for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee in June, but it could be without Meghan, 40, Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry in secret talks with Prince Charles in bid to heal rift before Jubilee
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has held secret talks with Prince Charles in a bid to heal their rift ahead of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. It follows Harry’s claims he’s been stripped of money and security.  He is …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



I smell a trap. Tread carefully, BRF. [Making him renounce those blasted titles would be an excellent measure of his authenticity, imo]


----------



## bellecate

Calling these crazies unbalanced and pathetic is being kind. Are they just sad creatures or extremely scary.


----------



## pukasonqo

bellecate said:


> Calling these crazies unbalanced and pathetic is being kind. Are they just sad creatures or extremely scary.
> View attachment 5305645


 Do this people have a life at all? Luckily is not the 1500s or we would be “treated” to seeing them drawn, hang and quartered (or something else as horrifying) for threatening the royal family
Wonder is they’ll be investigated, no idea if treason (or the suggestion of it) is still a crime


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These completely unhinged people.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> He wants money and material for his memoir…  Well, so much for financial independence!
> View attachment 5305580
> 
> _“It has been suggested to Harry he may live to regret any lingering family bitterness, and he has taken that on board.
> 
> “There is a feeling he is coming back more into the fold and wants to be closer to his family.”
> 
> The Royals are expecting Harry to return from his California home for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee in June, but it could be without Meghan, 40, Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry in secret talks with Prince Charles in bid to heal rift before Jubilee
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has held secret talks with Prince Charles in a bid to heal their rift ahead of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. It follows Harry’s claims he’s been stripped of money and security.  He is …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Secret talks? 

Son calls father and makes headlines


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“There is a feeling he is coming back more into the fold and wants to be closer to his family.”_



Cool, but who would want to be closer to that treacherous loser with his demon spawn in his ear?


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> Wait, Meghan gave orders to a city's residents not to look at her directly? Who does that? So...if she moved to LA, NYC or other metropolis, then tens of millions must obey her?  If I lived in Montecito and looked at her, who would arrest me? *What would I be charged with? Wasting time?* What if she approached someone in Montecito, what recourse would THEY have? If Elon or Bezos came to town, would they be forgiven for striking up a conversation with her?


Hilarious - Love it!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These completely unhinged people.



Interesting…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> but it could be without Meghan, 40, Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet.


And so it begins....


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Calling these crazies unbalanced and pathetic is being kind. Are they just sad creatures or extremely scary.
> View attachment 5305645


That idiot, who appears to have used a real name, is now under the watchful eye of MI5.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> Do this people have a life at all? Luckily is not the 1500s or we would be “treated” to seeing them drawn, hang and quartered (or something else as horrifying) for threatening the royal family
> Wonder is they’ll be investigated, no idea if treason (or the suggestion of it) is still a crime


I'm sure that person is now on MI5's radar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Interesting…




And still I wonder...who is it who so badly wants to make a medioce z-lister with a grating personality a thing? And why?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> That idiot, who appears to have used a real name, is now under the watchful eye of MI5.



I'd like to see them charged with something. I am not worried those keyboard warriors will ever act on it, but I'm tired of people spewing hatred and violence without being held responsible. Being on an intelligence blacklist won't harm them. But a hefty fine might.


----------



## MiniMabel

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure that person is now on MI5's radar.




I hope so.


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And still I wonder...who is it who so badly wants to make a medioce z-lister with a grating personality a thing? And why?



Such a good question!


----------



## sdkitty

this is behind a paywall but sounds like business, not family.  sad
Prince Harry and Prince Charles Hold ‘Secret Talks’ to Mend Relationship (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And still I wonder...who is it who so badly wants to make a medioce z-lister with a grating personality a thing? And why?


Could they be financed or backed up by groups who want to abolish the monarchy?


----------



## Chanbal

For Hazz, only the best ($$$$)! 

_*J.R. Moehringer, 57, is the highest paid ghostwriter in the business.* A Pulitzer prize winner, he began his journalism career at the New York Times and later wrote for the Los Angeles Times. *He is said to have earned seven figures for writing Prince Harry’s memoir due to be published late this year.* Still, *his name n*ever appeared in the advance news the publisher released on the royal’s upcoming book — *nor will it appear on the cover next fall*._









						Meet the ghostwriters who secretly pen bestselling celebrity memoirs
					

Even former first lady Michelle *****, who had a huge 2018 bestseller called “Becoming” and received a whopping $60 million joint advance with her husband for both ***** memoirs, used a “collaborat…




					nypost.com


----------



## pukasonqo

BVBookshop said:


> Could they be financed or backed up by groups who want to abolish the monarchy?


Unlikely. Betonce has her crazy stans and she is not royalty.
**********s seek to abolish the monarchy on legal terms (and honestly I’d rather Australia became a republic), these followers are keyboard warriors, invested on somebody who doesn’t know or care about them
Wonder if there is a book about the psychology of stans…


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Maybe not.  There are rumors about her husband and that he bats for the the other team.


LOL - him too?  these rumors seem to be around a lot of celebs....the two I believe are tom cruise and travolta.  travolta was photographed kissing a man and has had complaints against him for unwanted advances on men.  Cruise hasn't but I just find him inauthentic in general


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Charles looks very relaxed and they appear to be close.


kinda like a genuine family - as opposed to a "son" who left the fold and is now negotiating with his father?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> He wants money and material for his memoir…  Well, so much for financial independence!
> View attachment 5305580
> 
> _“It has been suggested to Harry he may live to regret any lingering family bitterness, and he has taken that on board.
> 
> “There is a feeling he is coming back more into the fold and wants to be closer to his family.”
> 
> The Royals are expecting Harry to return from his California home for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee in June, but it could be without Meghan, 40, Archie, two, and seven-month-old Lilibet._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry in secret talks with Prince Charles in bid to heal rift before Jubilee
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has held secret talks with Prince Charles in a bid to heal their rift ahead of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee. It follows Harry’s claims he’s been stripped of money and security.  He is …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


wants to be "closer" to his family in order to keep the benefits of royalty


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> For Hazz, only the best ($$$$)!
> 
> _*J.R. Moehringer, 57, is the highest paid ghostwriter in the business.* A Pulitzer prize winner, he began his journalism career at the New York Times and later wrote for the Los Angeles Times. *He is said to have earned seven figures for writing Prince Harry’s memoir due to be published late this year.* Still, *his name n*ever appeared in the advance news the publisher released on the royal’s upcoming book — *nor will it appear on the cover next fall*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the ghostwriters who secretly pen bestselling celebrity memoirs
> 
> 
> Even former first lady Michelle *****, who had a huge 2018 bestseller called “Becoming” and received a whopping $60 million joint advance with her husband for both ***** memoirs, used a “collaborat…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


How do you make a memoir out of a dull life? He was born rich and privileged and has done absolutely nothing of interest 
I imagine he can let us know (in case we weren’t aware) how Diana’s death affected him and how he feel trapped in his privileged life until “rescued” by MM
Interestingly, he clings for dear life to any vestige of privilege


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> LOL - him too?  these rumors seem to be around a lot of celebs....the two I believe are tom cruise and travolta.  travolta was photographed kissing a man and has had complaints against him for unwanted advances on men.  Cruise hasn't but I just find him inauthentic in general



I’ve heard the Tom Cruise thing. Back in the 90’s I knew a girl who worked in Hollywood/movie business and she was talking about it back then.


----------



## redney

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ve heard the Tom Cruise thing. Back in the 90’s I knew a girl who worked in Hollywood/movie business and she was talking about it back then.


Agreed. The rumors about Tom Cruise and John Travolta have been around since the 90s if not before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> How do you make a memoir out of a dull life? He was born rich and privileged and has done absolutely nothing of interest
> I imagine he can let us know (in case we weren’t aware) how Diana’s death affected him and how he feel trapped in his privileged life until “rescued” by MM
> Interestingly, he clings for dear life to any vestige of privilege


don't forget how diana's death was due to the paps and he's afraid the same thing could happen to his Wife


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> don't forget how diana's death was due to the paps and he's afraid the same thing could happen to his Wife


She'd better stop calling them then.


----------



## Chanbal

If true, cheers to Will! 

*Prince William allegedly made the decision not to invite Meghan Markle to Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee celebration this year.*
_
In its Jan. 24 issue, *Woman’s Day** claimed that the queen decided to delegate the task of inviting guests to her Platinum Jubilee to Prince William *because she has a very busy schedule. The queen’s age has also been catching up to her.

Prince William immediately accepted the job on hand and decided that it would be best if his sister-in-law will be banned from attending the event. After all, the last thing that the Duke of Cambridge wants is for the drama to ensue on the queen’s special day.

“Meghan’s made things hard enough without her swanning back into the UK and having all the headlines be about her again. Wills just doesn’t want the drama she always seems to bring,” the source said.

The insider added that Markle already learned that she won’t be invited to the queen’s Platinum Jubilee, and she couldn’t be more humiliated.

“*Meghan can’t bear the thought of how humiliating it would be if people found out she wasn’t invited. She’s trying to reach him but is being stonewalled by his staff. *William has made it clear the damage is done and he has no interest in speaking to her. This is a catastrophe for Meghan, who’s realized she still needs to be connected with the royal family to keep her high profile,” the source said.

*The Duchess of Sussex is also allegedly worried about how much impact Prince William has on the queen.* And she couldn’t help but worry that her brother-in-law would also encourage the monarch to cut her and Prince Harry off for good._










						Prince William Allegedly Banned Meghan Markle From Attending Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee
					

Prince William doesn't want Meghan Markle to attend Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration.




					www.entertaintimes.com


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> If true, cheers to Will!
> 
> *Prince William allegedly made the decision not to invite Meghan Markle to Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee celebration this year.*
> 
> _In its Jan. 24 issue, *Woman’s Day** claimed that the queen decided to delegate the task of inviting guests to her Platinum Jubilee to Prince William *because she has a very busy schedule. The queen’s age has also been catching up to her.
> 
> Prince William immediately accepted the job on hand and decided that it would be best if his sister-in-law will be banned from attending the event. After all, the last thing that the Duke of Cambridge wants is for the drama to ensue on the queen’s special day.
> 
> “Meghan’s made things hard enough without her swanning back into the UK and having all the headlines be about her again. Wills just doesn’t want the drama she always seems to bring,” the source said.
> 
> The insider added that Markle already learned that she won’t be invited to the queen’s Platinum Jubilee, and she couldn’t be more humiliated.
> 
> “*Meghan can’t bear the thought of how humiliating it would be if people found out she wasn’t invited. She’s trying to reach him but is being stonewalled by his staff. *William has made it clear the damage is done and he has no interest in speaking to her. This is a catastrophe for Meghan, who’s realized she still needs to be connected with the royal family to keep her high profile,” the source said.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex is also allegedly worried about how much impact Prince William has on the queen.* And she couldn’t help but worry that her brother-in-law would also encourage the monarch to cut her and Prince Harry off for good._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William Allegedly Banned Meghan Markle From Attending Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Prince William doesn't want Meghan Markle to attend Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


if this is accurate, good for Will!  Hey Meg-lo-maniac, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.


----------



## Annawakes

What did she think was going to happen?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> For Hazz, only the best ($$$$)!
> 
> _*J.R. Moehringer, 57, is the highest paid ghostwriter in the business.* A Pulitzer prize winner, he began his journalism career at the New York Times and later wrote for the Los Angeles Times. *He is said to have earned seven figures for writing Prince Harry’s memoir due to be published late this year.* Still, *his name n*ever appeared in the advance news the publisher released on the royal’s upcoming book — *nor will it appear on the cover next fall*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the ghostwriters who secretly pen bestselling celebrity memoirs
> 
> 
> Even former first lady Michelle *****, who had a huge 2018 bestseller called “Becoming” and received a whopping $60 million joint advance with her husband for both ***** memoirs, used a “collaborat…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Thanks, that was very interesting. I always assumed celebs had a lot of help from outside sources, even if they didn't readily acknowledge it.


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> if this is accurate, good for Will!  Hey Meg-lo-maniac, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.



I hope every word of it is true, but Woman's Day is hardly Pulitzer winning journalism.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> LOL - him too?  these rumors seem to be around a lot of celebs....the two I believe are tom cruise and travolta.  travolta was photographed kissing a man and has had complaints against him for unwanted advances on men.  Cruise hasn't but I just find him inauthentic in general



I've enjoyed some of their movies but both Cruise and Travolta always gave me creep vibes.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I hope every word of it is true, but Woman's Day is hardly Pulitzer winning journalism.


True, but if it made its way into a magazine like this I start thinking it could be true. It was a deliberate plant in that this magazine will be looked at by a wider demographic. Bazaar and Vogue aren’t picked up at the grocery checkout for browsing the way WD is. This one was being sent to me in the mail unsolicited for a while. Obviously TQ realizes that William is the  stronger person where Harry is concerned. She also knows that he will have to deal with his brother for a longer time than Charles


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Cool, but who would want to be closer to that treacherous loser with his demon spawn in his ear?


Exactly. Do not trust that unhinged, easily manipulated, unappreciative  child of yours, Charles.


----------



## Chanbal

Rumors seem to be true… Windsor Castle was supposed to be their love nest!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Rumors seem to be true… Windsor Castle was supposed to be their love nest!




The comments on that are  :
"Windsor  Castle is for the  reigning  monarch  not bit  part  supporting players  in  that  palace  soap  opera."


----------



## charlottawill

Something refreshing to cleanse the palate of the spoiled Sussexes:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The comments on that tweet are vicious, they make this thread look like fan mail.

ETA: the Windsor Castle tweet, not George playing football.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love Zara
> ETA: from 2015, more photos here:



She's obviously close to Uncle Charles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Calling these crazies unbalanced and pathetic is being kind. Are they just sad creatures or extremely scary.
> View attachment 5305645


Why aren't these investigated as actual threats?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> If true, cheers to Will!
> 
> *Prince William allegedly made the decision not to invite Meghan Markle to Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee celebration this year.*
> 
> _“*Meghan can’t bear the thought of how humiliating it would be if people found out she wasn’t invited. She’s trying to reach him but is being stonewalled by his staff. *William has made it clear the damage is done and he has no interest in speaking to her. This is a catastrophe for Meghan, who’s realized she still needs to be connected with the royal family to keep her high profile,” the source said.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex is also allegedly worried about how much impact Prince William has on the queen.* _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William Allegedly Banned Meghan Markle From Attending Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Prince William doesn't want Meghan Markle to attend Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


You might've wanted to think about that earlier, Megusa.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The comments on that tweet are vicious, they make this thread look like fan mail.
> 
> ETA: the Windsor Castle tweet, not George playing football.



The Markle Monster! Love it!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Why aren't these investigated as actual threats?


They may very well be. This individual may have visitors soon for all we know.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Megusa


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> They may very well be. This individual may have visitors soon for all we know.



Drones
I just wave at them now


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not that Monaco is a perfect example (cough, cough), what a refreshing attitude from Charlotte - she is 35:

_“*I’m not a princess*,” Casiraghi, who is *11th in line* to the Monégasque throne, once told Vogue Paris. “My mother is, not me. I am the niece of a head of state. And with this status, I have some *representational duties, nothing very constraining or very exceptional.”* 
…
Perhaps in an effort to not have to answer these questions, *Casiraghi doesn’t often speak to the press*. “Sometimes she goes on TV, mostly in a serious and successful talk show on the public channel France 5, to promote Les Rencontres Philosophiques de Monaco,” Delassus says. “She despises tabloids…and she is never on social media.”

“We all have suffered the effects of malicious words or judgements,” she told writer Massimo Gramellini in 2019. “Sometimes people may criticize the way you look, or even your family, things that have nothing to do with our intrinsic values. I have been there. I have listened to hard words about me. *But you have to put some distance.*”








						The “Princess Philosopher” Who Isn’t Technically a Princess: Charlotte Casiraghi of Monaco
					

Cofounder of a philosophical think tank and a Karl Lagerfeld muse, Princess Grace’s granddaughter is the ultimate multihyphenate.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not that Monaco is a perfect example (cough, cough), what a refreshing attitude from Charlotte - she is 35:
> 
> _“*I’m not a princess*,” Casiraghi, who is *11th in line* to the Monégasque throne, once told Vogue Paris. “My mother is, not me. I am the niece of a head of state. And with this status, I have some *representational duties, nothing very constraining or very exceptional.”*
> …
> Perhaps in an effort to not have to answer these questions, *Casiraghi doesn’t often speak to the press*. “Sometimes she goes on TV, mostly in a serious and successful talk show on the public channel France 5, to promote Les Rencontres Philosophiques de Monaco,” Delassus says. “She despises tabloids…and she is never on social media.”
> 
> “We all have suffered the effects of malicious words or judgements,” she told writer Massimo Gramellini in 2019. “Sometimes people may criticize the way you look, or even your family, things that have nothing to do with our intrinsic values. I have been there. I have listened to hard words about me. *But you have to put some distance.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The “Princess Philosopher” Who Isn’t Technically a Princess: Charlotte Casiraghi of Monaco
> 
> 
> Cofounder of a philosophical think tank and a Karl Lagerfeld muse, Princess Grace’s granddaughter is the ultimate multihyphenate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



She looks just like her mother


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Rumors seem to be true… Windsor Castle was supposed to be their love nest!



Thanks for the laugh.   Yes, our dear M believed that monarchs were elected by popularity contests just like the HS prom king/queen and since they were now more popular than HMTQ, #1, and #2, (choke, cough, cough) they should be the next monarchs.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks for the laugh.   Yes, our dear M believed that monarchs were elected by popularity contests just like the HS prom king/queen and since they were now more popular than HMTQ, #1, and #2, (choke, cough, cough) they should be the next monarchs.


It is a testament to her narcissism that she believed she and Hazy could somehow alter the line of succession.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks for the laugh.   Yes, our dear M believed that monarchs were elected by popularity contests just like the HS prom king/queen and since they were now more popular than HMTQ, #1, and #2, (choke, cough, cough) they should be the next monarchs.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks for the laugh.   Yes, our dear M believed that monarchs were elected by popularity contests just like the HS prom king/queen and since they were now more popular than HMTQ, #1, and #2, (choke, cough, cough) they should be the next monarchs.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> She's obviously close to Uncle Charles.


Is that her son?  He’s growing so fast!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Is that her son?  He’s growing so fast!



Son?? Mon chere, that is the lovely Miss Mia Tindall.  I think she is 8 now.  Here’s a photo from last year:


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> That idiot, who appears to have used a real name, is now under the watchful eye of MI5.


With a name as unusual as that, even I Googled it immediately to see who was this potential arsonist and possible murderer (I'm sure anyone with this mindset is not going to make sure that the palace is empty before setting fire to it).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It is a testament to her narcissism that she believed she and Hazy could somehow alter the line of succession.


Narcissism and ignorance.  Dangerous combo.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Narcissism and ignorance.  Dangerous combo.



And a whole lot of hubris!


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> It is a testament to her narcissism that she believed she and Hazy could somehow alter the line of succession.


Maybe she thought the Brits cast votes to pick the next monarch.

I cannot fathom what goes on in the mind of the rabid stans who are praising her as their true queen. I'm also wondering if Princess Perjury ever acknowledges the Sussex Squad. Or she ignores their existence so that if and when they commit crimes in her name, she can trot out the plausible deniability excuse.

Also wondering what in the world they teach at NorthWestern.


----------



## elvisfan4life

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she thought the Brits cast votes to pick the next monarch.
> 
> I cannot fathom what goes on in the mind of the rabid stans who are praising her as their true queen. I'm also wondering if Princess Perjury ever acknowledges the Sussex Squad. Or she ignores their existence so that if and when they commit crimes in her name, she can trot out the plausible deniability excuse.
> 
> Also wondering what in the world they teach at NorthWestern.



i hope it’s not long before William takes the throne and sorts them out - Game of Thrones here we come only one winner but how to punish the losers!!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Is that her son?  He’s growing so fast!


Photo from 2015.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They are worse than a bunch of 15yo having to call the suicide line after Take That broke up.


----------



## xincinsin

There's a nutcase stan called oddy nocky Nate who last year called for squaddies to storm the palace and kill the BRF.

There is free speech, and there is incitement to commit violence. The latter is not the former.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Found on Twitter completely unrelated to the Sussexes, but oh so fitting.



> "A bull does not become king just by entering the palace, but the palace becomes a barn."


----------



## duna

redney said:


> Agreed. The rumors about Tom Cruise and John Travolta have been around since the 90s if not before.



Also Clooney....


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Rumors seem to be true… Windsor Castle was supposed to be their love nest!




Told you so, told you so  

I bet QEII was like  er...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I still wonder...obviously the American Narc thought she would get her way, but Harry? He KNEW the answer would be no, so why even bother?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still wonder...obviously the American Narc thought she would get her way, but Harry? He KNEW the answer would be no, so why even bother?


I think she fed him a lot of “it’s a new time, the world is changing” bs.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I think she fed him a lot of “it’s a new time, the world is changing” bs.


Plus assuring him that the "people" (peasants) support them. He probably sees himself as revolutionary and a change-maker.


----------



## Sophisticatted

papertiger said:


> Told you so, told you so
> 
> I bet QEII was like  er...



To the old SERVANT’S QUARTERS, she said!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still wonder...obviously the American Narc thought she would get her way, but Harry? He KNEW the answer would be no, so why even bother?



I’ve wondered this, too. He surely had to know the rules, the protocol. To violate all things royal is bizarre. On the other hand, if it is true he yelled at Angela Kelley about the tiara, then it is possible the doofus did not know how things work. I cannot imagine being that unaware - at 35?  Then again, remember Andy’s attitude - “you can’t touch me, I’m royal”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Plus assuring him that the "people" (peasants) support them. He probably sees himself as revolutionary and a change-maker.


The modern hero and freedom-fighter, Duke Harry Che Guevara of Montecito?


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think “going along with it” allowed him to unleash his seething anger and resentment.  I think he knew he wouldn’t win, but that making life difficult for others and then spinning it in the media, would give him some satisfaction.  I think the Queen and Charles know that this is an issue that may not be resolved while they are alive, hence the reason why William is given most of the decision making power.  They are allowing William to begin as he intends to go on, and not have to “inherit” their solutions for dealing with Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Also wondering what in the world they teach at NorthWestern.


And I believed she studied foreign relations.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> There's a nutcase stan called oddy nocky Nate who last year called for squaddies to storm the palace and kill the BRF.
> 
> There is free speech, and there is incitement to commit violence. The latter is not the former.
> 
> View attachment 5306558


Twitter will be the death of us all.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still wonder...obviously the American Narc thought she would get her way, but Harry? He KNEW the answer would be no, so why even bother?


She probably convinced him that they would be "agents of change" and shake up a dusty old institution.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She probably convinced him that they would be "agents of change" and shake up a dusty old institution.



I don't know why that is, but for some reason I find it easier to digest she tricked him into marriage and somehow turned him into her puppet than completely disregarding, uh, facts. Facts he grew up with, facts that have been facts for centuries. So weird.


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> Also Clooney....


haven't heard that about Clooney and don't believe it


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> I think “going along with it” allowed him to unleash his seething anger and resentment.  I think he knew he wouldn’t win, but that making life difficult for others and then spinning it in the media, would give him some satisfaction.  I think the Queen and Charles know that this is an issue that may not be resolved while they are alive, hence the reason why William is given most of the decision making power.  They are allowing William to begin as he intends to go on, and not have to “inherit” their solutions for dealing with Harry.


maybe I'm not reading enough on this thread but I don't get what you're saying.  TQ and Charles are not doing anything but letting William decide? when? now or after the queen and Charles die and William is king.  that could easily be ten years or more.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm not reading enough on this thread but I don't get what you're saying.  TQ and Charles are not doing anything but letting William decide? when? now or after the queen and Charles die and William is king.  that could easily be ten years or more.


HMTQ put William in charge of BP, to prepare him for his future role and most people don't realize that the courtiers and advisers make the decisions that are then approved by whoever is in charge. As an aside, I wonder if the people, who want William to ascend the throne 'very soon' realize that it means HM's and Charles's demise.


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm not reading enough on this thread but I don't get what you're saying.  TQ and Charles are not doing anything but letting William decide? when? now or after the queen and Charles die and William is king.  that could easily be ten years or more.



there have been a lot of reports that the Queen and Charles are deferring to William.  For example, it’s been rumored that William is handling the Jubilee guest list and has banned TW from attending.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> there have been a lot of reports that the Queen and Charles are deferring to William.  For example, it’s been rumored that William is handling the guest list and has banned TW from attending.


thanks
now what is "TW"?


----------



## lanasyogamama

The witch?


----------



## lanasyogamama

The scarfing is escalating!


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> thanks
> now what is "TW"?


Meghan.  People here have taken to referring to her as TW (the wife), there was an article recently about the Harkles in Montecito where the author threw some shade and referred to her, not by name, but has Harry’s wife.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Meghan.  People here have taken to referring to her as TW (the wife), there was an article recently about the Harkles in Montecito where the author threw some shade and referred to her, not by name, but has Harry’s wife.


Well, Harry seem to love the say those words "MY WIFE"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve wondered this, too. He surely had to know the rules, the protocol. To violate all things royal is bizarre. On the other hand, if it is true he yelled at Angela Kelley about the tiara, then it is possible the doofus did not know how things work. I cannot imagine being that unaware - at 35?  Then again, remember Andy’s attitude - “you can’t touch me, I’m royal”.


They are all the same I’m afraid


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> HMTQ put William in charge of BP, to prepare him for his future role and most people don't realize that the courtiers and advisers make the decisions that are then approved by whoever is in charge. As an aside, I wonder if the people, who want William to ascend the throne 'very soon' realize that it means HM's and Charles's demise.


Not nesessarily both could abdicate


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Not nesessarily both could abdicate


Prince Charles can't abdicate until he is King.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> haven't heard that about Clooney and don't believe it


There were rumors during his years as a serial dater, but they seem to have quieted down since he became a husband and dad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I check Dan Wootton on Twitter once in a while because I like to see what kind of excuses he comes up with in favour of the Sussexes, and that guy is becoming more unhinged by the day. Not only has he very strange opinions re: the plague, he has no problem smearing collegues publicly, many of them more accomplished than he is.

If I were the Sussexes I'd start to wonder how it's always the lunatics I attract.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> And I believed she studied foreign relations.


She was likely only paying attention to the lectures covering "Divide, Conquer, Subjugate" and "Scorched Earth Strategy".


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> there have been a lot of reports that the Queen and Charles are deferring to William.  For example, it’s been rumored that William is handling the Jubilee guest list and has banned TW from attending.


I would believe that the Queen is giving a lot more decision making authority to Charles these days, who in turn is sharing it with or delegating certain responsibilities to William. The Firm, like any well run company, most likely has a very clearly delineated succession plan in place.


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> And I believed* she studied foreign relations*.



Yet her relations are completely foreign to her.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> haven't heard that about Clooney and don't believe it





charlottawill said:


> There were rumors during his years as a serial dater, but they seem to have quieted down since he became a husband and dad.



Yes, but also Cruise, Travolta and many other people have married and had kids, also to stop rumours.....who know....

Sorry, back to topic


----------



## gracekelly

Sophisticatted said:


> Meghan.  People here have taken to referring to her as TW (the wife), there was an article recently about the Harkles in Montecito where the author threw some shade and referred to her, not by name, but has Harry’s wife.


I believe calling her TW was started by the author of the HarryMarkle blog.

There is merit to your theory that Harry is saying things to tweak his family. it’s his nasty streak going full bore. It also provides him with the media coverage he craves. He doesn’t want to be forgotten and doesn’t care how he achieves it.

If true that William has banned her, it might also be his way of keeping his brother away as well. So perhaps the demand for security is just another excuse for Harry not to show up and prove he is being victimized.  It also provides him with another way to slam his family.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I would believe that the Queen is giving a lot more decision making authority to Charles these days, who in turn is sharing it with or delegating certain responsibilities to William. The Firm, like any well run company, most likely has a very clearly delineated succession plan in place.


I see Camilla’s hand in this.  She wants less stress for her husband and also believes that William is tougher regarding Harry.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Maybe not.  There are rumors about her husband and that he bats for the the other team.


Maybe he’s having an affair with John Legend… I swear he’s in the closet…funny these guys get scary fake fame fanatics to be their beards…..

Wait a minute, now I’m wondering about Hazbeen…



sdkitty said:


> LOL - him too?  these rumors seem to be around a lot of celebs....the two I believe are tom cruise and travolta.  travolta was photographed kissing a man and has had complaints against him for unwanted advances on men.  Cruise hasn't but I just find him inauthentic in general


I think Travolta is an open secret at this point. Tom cruise- I think he’s a religious nut I don’t think he’s that into any humans full stop. He wants to stay chaste for the Uber alien  or whatever.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Rumors seem to be true… Windsor Castle was supposed to be their love nest!



Wow. I’m amazed at her restraint I thought it’d be Buckingham palace.

Also Justin is looking fiiiiiinnnneeee!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I believe calling her TW was started by the author of the HarryMarkle blog.
> 
> There is merit to your theory that Harry is saying things to tweak his family. it’s his nasty streak going full bore. It also provides him with the media coverage he craves. He doesn’t want to be forgotten and doesn’t care how he achieves it.
> 
> If true that William has banned her, it might also be his way of keeping his brother away as well. So perhaps the demand for security is just another excuse for Harry not to show up and prove he is being victimized.  It also provides him with another way to slam his family.


I hate that Harry has turned into this nasty man


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe he’s having an affair with John Legend… I swear he’s in the closet…funny these guys get scary fake fame fanatics to be their beards…..
> 
> Wait a minute, now I’m wondering about Hazbeen…
> 
> 
> I think Travolta is an open secret at this point. Tom cruise- I think he’s a religious nut I don’t think he’s that into any humans full stop. He wants to stay chaste for the Uber alien  or whatever.


Tom Cruise is a sad case....has a rep for being really nice to crews and fans but has sold his soul to that cult


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are worse than a bunch of 15yo having to call the suicide line after Take That broke up.



Don’t joke about the *trauma* of my youth 

I mean, the crazy thing is they do have a point, everyone in tbe BRF shouldn’t be preaching environmentalism in one breath and charting private flights in the other, but I can’t bring myself to get into Twitter over it


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are worse than a bunch of 15yo having to call the suicide line after Take That broke up.



On the helo flight to Sandringham, she is 95 years old, and will be there for her father’s death anniversary ie anniversary of her accession , first one without late husband 
I give her a pass


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I check Dan Wootton on Twitter once in a while because I like to see what kind of excuses he comes up with in favour of the Sussexes, and that guy is becoming more unhinged by the day. Not only has he very strange opinions re: the plague, he has no problem smearing collegues publicly, many of them more accomplished than he is.
> 
> If I were the Sussexes I'd start to wonder how it's always the lunatics I attract.


Eh?
he’s anti H&M isn’t he? I don’t have Twitter but doesn’t he get posted here quite often?



jennlt said:


> Yet her relations are completely foreign to her.


Oh I don’t know, I think relations has more to do with her rise in showbiz than, say, acting or charisma…


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Don’t joke about the *trauma* of my youth
> 
> I mean, the crazy thing is they do have a point, everyone in tbe BRF shouldn’t be preaching environmentalism in one breath and charting private flights in the other, but I can’t bring myself to get into Twitter over it



In general I would agree, except if it's Raptor's stans criticizing the recent travel of the Queen, then no! Seeing the photo of the Queen snapped through the window of the car during that portion of her journey was heartbreaking to me. She looks tired and worn and sad. These are not criticisms, she is 95 years old and has been through so much emotional upheaval this past year she is a marvel to be upright. 

She used a helicopter for one leg of her journey, and so the stans get their knickers in a knot about it. Sorry, to me they can stuff it and cut her some slack.


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> In general I would agree, except if it's Raptor's stans criticizing the recent travel of the Queen, then no! Seeing the photo of the Queen snapped through the window of the car during that portion of her journey was heartbreaking to me. She looks tired and worn and sad. These are not criticisms, she is 95 years old and has been through so much emotional upheaval this past year she is a marvel to be upright.
> 
> She used a helicopter for one leg of her journey, and so the stans get their knickers in a knot about it. Sorry, to me they can stuff it and cut her some slack.


I don’t know. I feel sorry for her on a personal level for losing her husband but I don’t really see how riding a helicopter or not is any consolation tbh. In general, I think it’s disingenuous to act like the royal life is environmentally friendly because multiple residences and that amount of travel is massively above the average citizens but it is what it is. 

my point was that some of these points are reasonable it just feels like everything is so partisan that everyone has to explain their intentions all the times


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Don’t joke about the *trauma* of my youth



I was there as well, but I wasn't a stan. I was generally a teenager who just couldn't be bothered 



> I mean, the crazy thing is they do have a point, everyone in tbe BRF shouldn’t be preaching environmentalism in one breath and charting private flights in the other, but I can’t bring myself to get into Twitter over it



I mean, it's probably a lot less fuss to have a quick helicopter flight than get a police escort to drive out or something. 

I could be wrong but I really don't think girlfriend was quite as indignant when Harry and Succubus took three private jets within 10 days because they urgently needed to go on vacation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> On the helo flight to Sandringham, she is 95 years old, and will be there for her father’s death anniversary ie anniversary of her accession , first one without late husband
> I give her a pass



It broke me a little reading she's staying at Wood Farm. She never stayed on the farm until Philip's health declined and she went to spend time with him, she always lodged at Sandringham House.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Eh?
> he’s anti H&M isn’t he? I don’t have Twitter but doesn’t he get posted here quite often?



At the beginning he was - I think that's why I initially read his tweets - but at some point he changed his tune. I can't remember details, but I think I posted a few of his suddendly gushing tweets because I was so confused.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At the beginning he was - I think that's why I initially read his tweets - but at some point he changed his tune. I can't remember details, but I think I posted a few of his suddendly gushing tweets because I was so confused.


Oh interesting. So he’s probably trying to work all the angles…maybe he’ll get on big brother with Scobie  

M might be joining them too at this rate…seems like they’ve run out of weekly story money


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know why that is, but for some reason I find it easier to digest she tricked him into marriage and somehow turned him into her puppet than completely disregarding, uh, facts. Facts he grew up with, facts that have been facts for centuries. So weird.


Drugs can do funny things to a persons thinking process. I’m not saying, but I’ve always wondered if that was her control method with him.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> And I believed she studied foreign relations.



I don't think she could have attended many lectures, she still hasn't done her homework


----------



## jelliedfeels

bellecate said:


> Drugs can do funny things to a persons thinking process. I’m not saying, but I’ve always wondered if that was her control method with him.


I *personally* think he’s been into the coke since his 20s. It’s a big part of the Rah London lifestyle and he has always had a coke-fuelled energy to him to me- lively and confident but confrontational.
I have no doubt she knows her way around a line looking at her busted nose and maybe they are into other stuff as well. Maybe she put E in his morning tea so he feels like he’s soooo in love.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> maybe I'm not reading enough on this thread but I don't get what you're saying.  TQ and Charles are not doing anything but letting William decide? when? now or after the queen and Charles die and William is king.  that could easily be ten years or more.



I don't think they're differing, I think they're side-stepping. 

William's is less easy for Harry to throw his bitter and twisted vitriol at - I can hear either one saying to the other "let Wills do the guest-list so he can take the rap"


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I *personally* think he’s been into the coke since his 20s. It’s a big part of the Rah London lifestyle and he has always had a coke-fuelled energy to him to me- lively and confident but confrontational.
> I have no doubt she knows her way around a line looking at her busted nose and maybe they are into other stuff as well. Maybe she put E in his morning tea so he feels like he’s soooo in love.



In all seriousness, you may be very close to the truth with everything you've said. 

Many a party couple bonded over mutual complicity as well as romance


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> I don't think she could have attended many lectures, she still hasn't done her homework



She prefers to give lectures rather than attend them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> I don't think she could have attended many lectures, she still hasn't done her homework



I mean OMG, can you imagine having her in your class?


----------



## Jayne1

elvisfan4life said:


> Not nesessarily both could abdicate


The queen and her son will never abdicate.


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> She prefers to give lectures rather than attend them



Sorry, I meant to quote you for my last post. 

I must be heavily influenced by M, I'll just like and quote my own posts


----------



## Sophisticatted

I don’t know the difference, in distance and time, beween the helicopter ride and a car ride, but blood clots can be an issue if one is sedentary for too long.  I imagine it would be harder for the Queen to make a pit stop to stretch and move her legs while traveling that it would be for the average person.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Also Justin is looking fiiiiiinnnneeee!


That's from an SNL skit, has to be at least five years ago.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> The queen and her son will never abdicate.


I never said they would ! I said they could


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I don’t know the difference, in distance and time, beween the helicopter ride and a car ride, but blood clots can be an issue if one is sedentary for too long.  I imagine it would be harder for the Queen to make a pit stop to stretch and move her legs while traveling that it would be for the average person.


This is a very valid point. I don't know how long the drive is, but maybe her doctor recommended helicopter vs. car for that reason. It actually makes a lot of sense.


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> The queen and her son will never abdicate.


Agree, she has been at it too long to stop now, and is succeeding at passing the torch gracefully
He has waited too long for his turn to give up any bit of it


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> This is a very valid point. I don't know how long the drive is, but maybe her doctor recommended helicopter vs. car for that reason. It actually makes a lot of sense.


I read that it is 140 miles on winding English roads, 4 -5 hours ???


----------



## TC1

I think we can give HMTQ a pass on saving the environment for a short helo ride. It's not like she's standing on a soapbox preaching and flying private at every opportunity. Then telling the world how many children to have to not be a burden.


----------



## Chanbal

Well, well… It's time for news! 



_They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."

*The jobs are being offered to applicants on short six-month contracts based in Los Angeles…*

The Sun reported in November that Harry and Meghan were working to protect the £18million deal after failing to muster up any content.

With only one show under their belts, the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.

Meanwhile, Harry has appeared on numerous other podcasts including Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert in May, where he said his life was like Jim Carrey film The Truman Show.

They both also found time to sit down for their sensational Oprah interview in March last year — while the Duchess later played pranks on the Ellen DeGeneres show._









						Spotify takes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s podcast 'into its own hands' after couple produce NO content for a YEAR
					

SPOTIFY is taking Harry and Meghan’s £18million podcast project “into its own hands” by hiring a host of in-house producers to finally help deliver content. The streaming giant ha…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I hate that Harry has turned into this nasty man



He’s has had a huge chip on his shoulder since 3 or 4 years old.  Guessing this is why no ladies in the UK wanted to marry him. Perhaps why Andi had difficulty, too. Although A was frequently described as a ‘catch’, now we are finding out what a jerk he was/is.  Charles, Andi, Hazzie were described as the ‘happy‘ bachelors, but reality could have been very different.  William seemed to have the most grounded single life.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Well, well… It's time for news!
> 
> View attachment 5307029
> 
> _They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."
> 
> *The jobs are being offered to applicants on short six-month contracts based in Los Angeles…*
> 
> The Sun reported in November that Harry and Meghan were working to protect the £18million deal after failing to muster up any content.
> 
> With only one show under their belts, the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.
> 
> Meanwhile, Harry has appeared on numerous other podcasts including Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert in May, where he said his life was like Jim Carrey film The Truman Show.
> 
> They both also found time to sit down for their sensational Oprah interview in March last year — while the Duchess later played pranks on the Ellen DeGeneres show._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify takes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s podcast 'into its own hands' after couple produce NO content for a YEAR
> 
> 
> SPOTIFY is taking Harry and Meghan’s £18million podcast project “into its own hands” by hiring a host of in-house producers to finally help deliver content. The streaming giant ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



It rather sounds like they're being coddled by Spotify. Is that Spotify's job?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Well, well… It's time for news!
> 
> View attachment 5307029
> 
> _They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."
> 
> *The jobs are being offered to applicants on short six-month contracts based in Los Angeles…*
> 
> The Sun reported in November that Harry and Meghan were working to protect the £18million deal after failing to muster up any content.
> 
> With only one show under their belts, the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.
> 
> Meanwhile, Harry has appeared on numerous other podcasts including Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert in May, where he said his life was like Jim Carrey film The Truman Show.
> 
> They both also found time to sit down for their sensational Oprah interview in March last year — while the Duchess later played pranks on the Ellen DeGeneres show._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify takes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s podcast 'into its own hands' after couple produce NO content for a YEAR
> 
> 
> SPOTIFY is taking Harry and Meghan’s £18million podcast project “into its own hands” by hiring a host of in-house producers to finally help deliver content. The streaming giant ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Call me crazy, I thought the clients supplied the content to the company, not vice versa.

ETA:  this proves they are useless without a script written by someone else.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Well, well… It's time for news!
> 
> View attachment 5307029
> 
> _They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."
> 
> *The jobs are being offered to applicants on short six-month contracts based in Los Angeles…*
> 
> The Sun reported in November that Harry and Meghan were working to protect the £18million deal after failing to muster up any content.
> 
> With only one show under their belts, the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.
> 
> Meanwhile, Harry has appeared on numerous other podcasts including Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert in May, where he said his life was like Jim Carrey film The Truman Show.
> 
> They both also found time to sit down for their sensational Oprah interview in March last year — while the Duchess later played pranks on the Ellen DeGeneres show._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify takes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s podcast 'into its own hands' after couple produce NO content for a YEAR
> 
> 
> SPOTIFY is taking Harry and Meghan’s £18million podcast project “into its own hands” by hiring a host of in-house producers to finally help deliver content. The streaming giant ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Can they seriously call it a Harry and Meghan podcast if Spotify hires are going to write, create, and produce the entire thing? 

I can understand being desperate to get some return on their investment but Spotify is throwing good money after bad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> He’s has had a huge chip on his shoulder since 3 or 4 years old.  Guessing this is why no ladies in the UK wanted to marry him. Perhaps why Andi had difficulty, too. Although A was frequently described as a ‘catch’, now we are finding out what a jerk he was/is.  Charles, Andi, Hazzie were described as the ‘happy‘ bachelors, but reality could have been very different.  William seemed to have the most grounded single life.


William seems better all around - personality, looks.  Diana would be proud of him.  Wonder how she'd feel about the other son.  Of course, she would love him but would she be disappointed?  or maybe he would have turned out differently if she had survived.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Call me crazy, I thought the clients supplied the content to the company, not vice versa.
> 
> ETA:  this proves they are useless without a script written by someone else.


right....what is their value?  Harry's name?  their "job" is being done for them


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Can they seriously call it a Harry and Meghan podcast if Spotify hires are going to write, create, and produce the entire thing?
> 
> I can understand being desperate to get some return on their investment but Spotify is throwing good money after bad.


It would have been much cheaper to just license H & MM's names for the podcast.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> right....what is their value?  Harry's name?  their "job" is being done for them



GMTA!


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> GMTA!


Spotify should just "fire" them for non-performance.  but I guess if they tried to get out of the contract, they would be sued....and called racists


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> It would have been much cheaper to just license H & MM's names for the podcast.



H&M would never sign off on a license deal because they would have received a lot less and THEY WANTED ALL THE MONEY. It was easier for them to act like they intended to follow through for over a year and wait until Spotify finally figured out they had been played.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> It rather sounds like they're being coddled by Spotify. Is that Spotify's job?


Trying to salvage a bad business decision it seems. They were in a hurry to throw money at the Harkles because of their high profile, without any indication that the Harkles could actually produce any content of value. Now they're probably somewhat reluctant to cut them loose, again because of their high profile. I think some heads may roll at Spotify over this.


----------



## Chanbal

Charles is relieved and happy to share…   











						Meghan Markle Won’t Be Staying With Prince Charles Anytime Soon - Daily Soap Dish
					

Talk about more than just a little awkward. There’s a new report that says should Prince Harry and Meghan Markle find their way back across the pond and in London anytime soon, the last place that the Duchess of Sussex will want to crash at, is at her father-in-law Prince Charles’ estate. Here’s...




					dailysoapdish.com


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Trying to salvage a bad business decision it seems. They were in a hurry to throw money at the Harkles because of their high profile, without any indication that the Harkles could actually produce any content of value. Now they're probably somewhat reluctant to cut them loose, again because of their high profile. I think some heads may roll at Spotify over this.


seems to me that doing a podcast (with help) wouldn't be that hard.  Dax Shephard does it and so do a lot of other people.  they just didn't want to be bothered? 
after accepting the big paycheck?  what does this do to their reputation?  who else will want to do business with them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Well, well… It's time for news!
> 
> View attachment 5307029
> 
> _They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."_



Well, I hope they're asking for their money back.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, I hope they're asking for their money back.


sounds like they are doing their work for them and paying them......great to have a title, huh?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> seems to me that doing a podcast (with help) wouldn't be that hard.  Dax Shephard does it and so do a lot of other people.  they just didn't want to be bothered?
> after accepting the big paycheck?  what does this do to their reputation?  who else will want to do business with them?


How about they're boring, don't really have much to say and the people who do don't really want to talk to them. I certainly have zero interest in listening to them. Maybe it's age related, but I'm not into the whole podcast thing anyway. If anyone here watched the Netflix series "Stay Close", I loved the character Lorraine's voice message greeting, "Please leave a brief message, I don't want to listen to your podcast"


----------



## lanasyogamama

I listen to a lot of podcasts. I would say doing a podcast completely independently is a lot of work. Trying to sell ads, doing sound production and editing, coming up with content etc. They literally only had to do the content  piece and couldn’t come up with a thing.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> sounds like they are doing their work for them and paying them......great to have a title, huh?



Spotify did all the work on that first little snippet of a podcast for them back in December of 2020. All Harry and Meghan had to do was read a short script that was written for them. We'll see if they can be bothered to even do that much for the new ones or if they will have to hire a host.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I listen to a lot of podcasts. I would say doing a podcast completely independently is a lot of work. Trying to sell ads, doing sound production and editing, coming up with content etc. They literally only had to do the content  piece and couldn’t come up with a thing.


I think they sold Spotify on being able to land high profile guests for their podcasts and then couldn't deliver. Who would want to listen to just the two of them prattle on about anything?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

I would love to get a peek at the Spotify contract
sounds like they failed to cover their ass-ets by including a produce or forfeit clause. 
I certainly hope they weren't dumb enough to pay them 100% up front without one


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> I would love to get a peek at the Spotify contract
> sounds like they failed to cover their ass-ets by including a produce or forfeit clause.
> I certainly hope they weren't dumb enough to pay them 100% up front without one


I highly doubt Spotify paid the full contract amount up front. If they did, they've got some incompetent lawyers.


----------



## Sophisticatted

So, are Harry and Meg still required to show up for this (appear in the podcast)?  Or not?

or is this like Spotify’s version of Jame’s Corden’s paternity leave/NBC’s hunt for a new Jeopardy host? (In both cases, various famous people took turns filling in and/or trying out).


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> I read that it is 140 miles on winding English roads, 4 -5 hours ???


2hrs 45mins


----------



## bag-mania

Even the new podcast concept sounds boring as sh!t. They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features *"the voices of high profile women."*

Being a woman myself won't make me care about whoever Spotify considers to be "high profile" or make me want to listen to their POV. There are millions of podcast choices out there. I don't have time to listen to crap.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Even the new podcast concept sounds boring as sh!t. They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features *"the voices of high profile women."*
> 
> Being a woman myself won't make me care about whoever Spotify considers to be "high profile" or make me want to listen to their POV. There are millions of podcast choices out there. I don't have time to listen to crap.



Plus, if I was a high profile woman - completely neutral towards the Sussexes - I'd have my assisstant do a check, and the minute they unearthed all the whining and fussing and sueing and trashtalking and drama I'd be out of there so fast.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Charles is relieved and happy to share…
> View attachment 5307072
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Won’t Be Staying With Prince Charles Anytime Soon - Daily Soap Dish
> 
> 
> Talk about more than just a little awkward. There’s a new report that says should Prince Harry and Meghan Markle find their way back across the pond and in London anytime soon, the last place that the Duchess of Sussex will want to crash at, is at her father-in-law Prince Charles’ estate. Here’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysoapdish.com



They don't want to go back and see Charles because they know they are trashing Charles in Harry's biography (being written for release later this year). God only knows what Harry will say in that book but we can be certain it won't reflect well on his father and brother.


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> I highly doubt Spotify paid the full contract amount up front. If they did, they've got some incompetent lawyers.



I would hope not
But as previously mentioned this looks like they are throwing good money after bad. They are no longer the fresh exciting kids they were perceived to be when Spotify jumped to sign them up. Their value has plummeted.
Personally I would cut my losses and claw back what I could.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I would hope not
> But as previously mentioned this looks like they are throwing good money after bad. They are no longer the fresh exciting kids they were perceived to be when Spotify jumped to sign them up. Their value has plummeted.
> Personally I would cut my losses and claw back what I could.


maybe they are still thought to be popular?


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> 2hrs 45mins


That may be difficult without stopping for a 95 yr. old woman.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Can they seriously call it a Harry and Meghan podcast if Spotify hires are going to write, create, and produce the entire thing?
> 
> I can understand being desperate to get some return on their investment but Spotify is throwing good money after bad.


I do not feel sorry for Spot*fy. With so many talented people out there that need job opportunities, they invested all those millions of dollars in 2 people without any proven track record of success (aka idiots).


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> So, are Harry and Meg still required to show up for this (appear in the podcast)?  Or not?
> 
> or is this like Spotify’s version of Jame’s Corden’s paternity leave/NBC’s hunt for a new Jeopardy host? (In both cases, various famous people took turns filling in and/or trying out).


It's pretty funny to have guest hosts for hosts who were never there to begin with.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They don't want to go back and see Charles because they know they are trashing Charles in Harry's biography (being written for release later this year). God only knows what Harry will say in that book but we can be certain it won't reflect well on his father and brother.


My 2 cents:
Going back and trashing Charles are 2 independent events in their unique minds. Charles paid for their exorbitant requests while in the UK, and they still trashed him during the OW's interview.

The problem is that MM was likely not invited to attend the Jubilee. Further, Charles wouldn't allow a Nefl*x crew at Clarence House, and he is likely not offering to pay for a private jet to transport them and their staff.


----------



## bellecate

Would be nice if their pseudo empire crumbled. Collecting money, denigrating their family’s while expecting positive recognition for just being needs zero rewards.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> Going back and trashing Charles are 2 independent events in their unique minds. Charles paid for their exorbitant requests while in the UK, and they still trashed him during the OW's interview.
> 
> The problem is that MM was likely not invited to attend the Jubilee. Further, Charles wouldn't allow a Nefl*x crew at Clarence House, and he is likely not offering to pay for a private jet to transport them and their staff.



True enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like they are still insisting on a UK Christening!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Would be nice if their pseudo empire crumbled. Collecting money, denigrating their family’s while expecting positive recognition for just being needs zero rewards.
> View attachment 5307138


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Plus, if I was a *high profile woman* - completely neutral towards the Sussexes - I'd have my assisstant do a check, and the minute they unearthed all the whining and fussing and sueing and trashtalking and drama I'd be out of there so fast.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are still insisting on a UK Christening!



Reminds me of a factoid from history .. 
in the Middle Ages, one baptized ASAP after birth, for fear the child might die unbaptized and not go t9 Heaven


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Even the new podcast concept sounds boring as sh!t. They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features *"the voices of high profile women."*
> 
> Being a woman myself won't make me care about whoever Spotify considers to be "high profile" or make me want to listen to their POV. There are millions of podcast choices out there. I don't have time to listen to crap.


If she couldn't attract much interest in her "40 for 40" initiative, how do they expect to attract high profile women for this?


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> 2hrs 45mins


I drive slowwww LOL , I would stop for lunch


----------



## A1aGypsy

marietouchet said:


> Reminds me of a factoid from history ..
> in the Middle Ages, one baptized ASAP after birth, for fear the child might die unbaptized and not go t9 Heaven



There are many who hold the same belief now.


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> I think they sold Spotify on being able to land high profile guests for their podcasts and then couldn't deliver. Who would want to listen to just the two of them prattle on about anything?



This


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> I drive slowwww LOL , I would stop for lunch


That's part of the fun of road trips. In the last few years before she died at 85, my mother needed a stop midway during a two hour car ride to visit relatives. And I don't imagine the Queen uses public rest stops.


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> There are many who hold the same belief now.


Back in the 90s a close friend who is a devout Catholic gently criticized me for not having our daughter baptized by the age of two for that reason. My husband and I were raised in Protestant churches but are not religious. I felt horrible and consulted with a local pastor of a church of the faith I attended as a child, where we were among the many Christmas and Easter Christians. He was very kind and put my mind at ease, tactfully saying that idea was nonsense. My daughters were never baptized and they have no issue with it. They are among the more than 50% of millennials who do not identify with any religion.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Trying to salvage a bad business decision it seems. They were in a hurry to throw money at the Harkles because of their high profile, without any indication that the Harkles could actually produce any content of value. Now they're probably somewhat reluctant to cut them loose, again because of their high profile. I think some heads may roll at Spotify over this.



I'm no expert on Hollywood deals but I'd be really surprised if either Spotify or Netflix is out any truly serious money in the long run. I'd imagine that they paid Harry and MM some money up front but most of those huge contracts would likely be dependent on the volume and success of the content they produced.  So Spotify might just be trying to get some value out of whatever they have paid them.  Still, so foolish of Spotify.  They know that producing an actual, regular, interesting podcast is a full time job all on its own and requires a huge amount of creativity and hard work.  Those two were never going to devote themselves to it.  But, yeah, give them an entire crew coming up with ideas and writing it for them and they'll show up a couple hours a week to read the script.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they are still insisting on a UK Christening!



As if she really cares. Has anyone seen the Harkles attending church in Montecito over the past year, or are they avoiding that for security reasons?


----------



## A1aGypsy

charlottawill said:


> Back in the 90s a close friend who is a devout Catholic gently criticized me for not having our daughter baptized by the age of two for that reason. My husband and I were raised in Protestant churches but are not religious. I felt horrible and consulted with a local pastor of a church of the faith I attended as a child, where we were among the many Christmas and Easter Christians. He was very kind and put my mind at ease, tactfully saying that idea was nonsense. My daughters were never baptized and they have no issue with it. They are among the more than 50% of millennials who do not identify with any religion.



I assure you, I wasn’t commenting on the propriety of the act, I was just saying that there are many people in the world who still believe in the urgency of baptism. It may be a dying belief but it is wasn’t left in the Middle Ages. (Ie. There are those who would look down their noses at the Sussex’ behaving in such a fashion)


----------



## octopus17

marietouchet said:


> Reminds me of a factoid from history ..
> in the Middle Ages, one baptized ASAP after birth, for fear the child might die unbaptized and not go t9 Heaven


I think that might be true for some even now. My own late father was baptized pretty quickly over a kitchen sink in Belfast. Not sure how that worked tbh, but apparently it did  .


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> I assure you, I wasn’t commenting on the propriety of the act, I was just saying that there are many people in the world who still believe in the urgency of baptism. It may be a dying belief but it is wasn’t left in the Middle Ages. (Ie. There are those who would look down their noses at the Sussex’ behaving in such a fashion)


Oh I didn't mean to suggest that you did. I just was always amazed at that belief.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I thought Lilibet already had a “top secret” christening.  I also thought the “group christening” was probably offered and rejected.  They need to realize they aren’t that singularly special.  

Regarding Spotify, I’m sure there are plenty of women in Hollywood (and elsewhere) who might like to try podcasting.  A chance to pivot from acting (or whatever) to something else.  For the charity minded, a change to shout out about a cause.  (A real cause, not an H&M cause).  I think whether or not they HAVE to put up with Meghan and Harry would be a deciding factor.


----------



## charlottawill

Cornflower Blue said:


> I think that might be true for some even now. My own late father was baptized pretty quickly over a kitchen sink in Belfast. Not sure how that worked tbh, but apparently it did  .


Apparently not uncommon back in the day, just saw something similar on a TV show set in London in the early 60s.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I thought Lilibet already had a “top secret” christening.


Like their top secret vows before their wedding. They stood out by the chicken coop and said "We hereby christen you Lilibet Diana".


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> As if she really cares. Has anyone seen the Harkles attending church in Montecito over the past year, or are they avoiding that for security reasons?


Exactly


----------



## lanasyogamama

Unfortunately, I could see them attracting some women like Brené Brown who sell tons and tons of books and could bring in a big following.


----------



## Lodpah

Oh please Harry! You two are desperate to make content for Netflix and Spotify. You can’t trash your family and then this. You are are so stupid and dumb to think we won’t get it.








						Prince Harry's New Legal Battle Suggests How Eager He Is For the Queen to Meet His Daughter Lilibet
					

Although Prince Harry has made solo trips across the pond to visit with members of the royal family and join them for special events, the Duke of Sussex’s wife, Meghan Markle, and their two children have yet to return to the U.K. But now, it seems, Harry is eager for his family on both sides […]




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Unfortunately, I could see them attracting some women like Brené Brown who sell tons and tons of books and could bring in a big following.



I can't for the life of me see why she would want to be associated with these two, because they have none. 

 "Brown is known in particular for her research on shame, vulnerability, and leadership."


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brené_Brown


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Oh please Harry! You two are desperate to make content for Netflix and Spotify. You can’t trash your family and then this. You are are so stupid and dumb to think we won’t get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's New Legal Battle Suggests How Eager He Is For the Queen to Meet His Daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> Although Prince Harry has made solo trips across the pond to visit with members of the royal family and join them for special events, the Duke of Sussex’s wife, Meghan Markle, and their two children have yet to return to the U.K. But now, it seems, Harry is eager for his family on both sides […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


He's afraid she will die and he will be cut loose by Charles and William. I'm sure that is the plan for after the Queen passes. There has been talk for years about reducing the size of the BRF, and Andrew and Harry will be the first to go.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Well, well… It's time for news!
> 
> View attachment 5307029
> 
> _They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."
> 
> *The jobs are being offered to applicants on short six-month contracts based in Los Angeles…*
> 
> The Sun reported in November that Harry and Meghan were working to protect the £18million deal after failing to muster up any content.
> 
> With only one show under their belts, the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.
> 
> Meanwhile, Harry has appeared on numerous other podcasts including Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert in May, where he said his life was like Jim Carrey film The Truman Show.
> 
> They both also found time to sit down for their sensational Oprah interview in March last year — while the Duchess later played pranks on the Ellen DeGeneres show._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify takes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s podcast 'into its own hands' after couple produce NO content for a YEAR
> 
> 
> SPOTIFY is taking Harry and Meghan’s £18million podcast project “into its own hands” by hiring a host of in-house producers to finally help deliver content. The streaming giant ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Why doesn't Spotify kick their a$$es to the curb?  And make them repay whatever monies were fronted?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Like their top secret vows before their wedding. They stood out by the chicken coop and said "We hereby christen you Lilibet Diana".


Isn’t that what they in voodoo ? They use chickens ?


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Why doesn't Spotify kick their a$$es to the curb?  And make them repay whatever monies were fronted?


It's likely a delicate situation for Spotify. As mentioned upthread, the Harkles will find a way to portray themselves as victims if they do. Spotify jumped into bed too quickly with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone put this together, I had no idea


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Oh please Harry! You two are desperate to make content for Netflix and Spotify. You can’t trash your family and then this. You are are so stupid and dumb to think we won’t get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's New Legal Battle Suggests How Eager He Is For the Queen to Meet His Daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> Although Prince Harry has made solo trips across the pond to visit with members of the royal family and join them for special events, the Duke of Sussex’s wife, Meghan Markle, and their two children have yet to return to the U.K. But now, it seems, Harry is eager for his family on both sides […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


I don't want to click on this article, it looks like one more of their despaired PR releases.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Charles is relieved and happy to share…
> View attachment 5307072
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Won’t Be Staying With Prince Charles Anytime Soon - Daily Soap Dish
> 
> 
> Talk about more than just a little awkward. There’s a new report that says should Prince Harry and Meghan Markle find their way back across the pond and in London anytime soon, the last place that the Duchess of Sussex will want to crash at, is at her father-in-law Prince Charles’ estate. Here’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysoapdish.com


somehow I don't think feeling awkward is in her playbook


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Charles is relieved and happy to share…
> View attachment 5307072
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Won’t Be Staying With Prince Charles Anytime Soon - Daily Soap Dish
> 
> 
> Talk about more than just a little awkward. There’s a new report that says should Prince Harry and Meghan Markle find their way back across the pond and in London anytime soon, the last place that the Duchess of Sussex will want to crash at, is at her father-in-law Prince Charles’ estate. Here’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysoapdish.com


Authors, writers and actors love the word "devastated" meaning, *"*brought to a state of ruin or destruction." I would understand Charles being upset, sad and disappointed in H's behaviour,  just not ruined or destroyed, but exaggerations sell stories and that's why IMO people and events appear fake when the narrative is carried too far.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> That's part of the fun of road trips. In the last few years before she died at 85, my mother needed a stop midway during a two hour car ride to visit relatives. And I don't imagine the Queen uses public rest stops.


Reminds me of my mother who was 84 when she died. She absolutely hated using public facilities. I drove her to all her appointments and short shopping sprees and the last thing she did before leaving the house and first thing coming back was to use the BR.


----------



## Chanbal

Where's Waldo Doria? NS doesn't know, the question remains unanswered.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Where's Waldo Doria? NS doesn't know, the question remains unanswered.



Maybe she doesn't want to go down with a ship that be sinkin'


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Where's Waldo Doria? NS doesn't know, the question remains unanswered.




Is this confirmed as DR’s house? Wikipedia says she lives in this neighborhood. 








						5127 Angeles Vista Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90043 | Zillow
					

5127 Angeles Vista Blvd, Los Angeles CA, is a Single Family home that contains 1400 sq ft and was built in 1941.It contains 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms.This home last sold for $234,349 in January 1994.   The Zestimate for this Single Family is $1,008,900, which has decreased by $31,403 in the...




					www.zillow.com


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It's likely a delicate situation for Spotify. As mentioned upthread, the Harkles will find a way to portray themselves as victims if they do. Spotify jumped into bed too quickly with them.


It's purely a business transaction.  You don't deliver, you get fired.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Reminds me of my mother who was 84 when she died. She absolutely hated using public facilities. I drove her to all her appointments and short shopping sprees and the last thing she did before leaving the house and first thing coming back was to use the BR.


I'm like that now!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone put this together, I had no idea



Ivanka, Angie, Letizia…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Ivanka, Angie, Letizia…



She strives for what she perceives as elegance and style by imitating others she admires, yet still seems to miss the mark most of the time.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Maybe she doesn't want to go down with a ship that be sinkin'



Is she silent or is she silenced? 





CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this confirmed as DR’s house? Wikipedia says she lives in this neighborhood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5127 Angeles Vista Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90043 | Zillow
> 
> 
> 5127 Angeles Vista Blvd, Los Angeles CA, is a Single Family home that contains 1400 sq ft and was built in 1941.It contains 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms.This home last sold for $234,349 in January 1994.   The Zestimate for this Single Family is $1,008,900, which has decreased by $31,403 in the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zillow.com



It's possible, but she is likely in the Montecito compound behind big walls.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> It's purely a business transaction.  You don't deliver, you get fired.


They deserve to be fired, but it seems Spotify is doing the work for them. 
Spotify doesn't seem to have courage to fire them. See what happened to the BRF during OW's interview…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5307393


If only it would be true about Harry vowing to never return.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> They deserve to be fired, but it seems Spotify is doing the work for them.
> Spotify doesn't seem to have courage to fire them. See what happened to the BRF during OW's interview…


They are adept at spinning the narrative to twist their own ineptitude into victimhood. Spotify might get bad press for dropping them, but coddling them like this seems way out of normal business practice. Is anyone pulling strings for them? Are there links between Spotify and BetterUp or Sunshine Sachs? Someone not so great was hired at the company where I worked because she was the rumoured lover of someone on our board of directors.

Which high profile woman wants to be in their podcast? The same high profile women who were roped into 40x40? They should have done a 2-for-1 and done their podcast recordings at the same time. Unless 40x40 fizzled out very fast too and all those BFFs weren't keen to lend their influence/branding to enrich the Soursexes.

In post 83176 (page 5546), @bellecate posted an advert for hiring a production designer for Pearl. The wording, especially the multiple namedrops, makes it clear that it's a personal prestige product for Princess Perjury. It sounds to me that she thinks she is on the same level as, perhaps, Spielberg, and working for her would be something to crow about on the resume.


----------



## Mendocino

Cornflower Blue said:


> I think that might be true for some even now. My own late father was baptized pretty quickly over a kitchen sink in Belfast. Not sure how that worked tbh, but apparently it did  .



I was baptized ASAP. It's my understanding that a layperson can perform a baptism if circumstances warrant it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Well, well… It's time for news!
> 
> View attachment 5307029
> 
> _They are recruiting new in-house staff to work with Harry and Meghan's Archewell Audio for a show that features "the voices of high profile women."
> 
> *The jobs are being offered to applicants on short six-month contracts based in Los Angeles…*
> 
> The Sun reported in November that Harry and Meghan were working to protect the £18million deal after failing to muster up any content.
> 
> With only one show under their belts, the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.
> 
> Meanwhile, Harry has appeared on numerous other podcasts including Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert in May, where he said his life was like Jim Carrey film The Truman Show.
> 
> They both also found time to sit down for their sensational Oprah interview in March last year — while the Duchess later played pranks on the Ellen DeGeneres show._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify takes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s podcast 'into its own hands' after couple produce NO content for a YEAR
> 
> 
> SPOTIFY is taking Harry and Meghan’s £18million podcast project “into its own hands” by hiring a host of in-house producers to finally help deliver content. The streaming giant ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I’m in the minority but I feel like Spotify hasn’t done too badly out of this. I feel like they paid them a greater chunk than most of their producers, sure (more than 2p a play ) but they have gotten a lot of publicity out of this deal and tbh I feel like that’s what they bought it for in the beginning. Also they’ve got this one show out of them which has done crap numbers and clearly established they don’t need to protect them like they would a Joe Rogan.

I’m sure they will cobble something together to make a limited series and then quietly drop them but in a way this being such a cringe fest has given them more press presence than a couple of episodes of embarrassing chit chat delivered in a timely manner would have done. Even the Oprah scorched Earth fest didn’t get crazy ratings and they’ve spent their ammunition now.

I would love it if they got the actors who played them in lifetime to replace them though. 
perhaps the content could be one of those ‘celebs read mean tweets’ style show too?


jennlt said:


> It would have been much cheaper to just license H & MM's names for the podcast.


It would’ve and I think they might wind up doing it but as I said before I don’t think it’s got the brand recognition to even make that worth it.  


sdkitty said:


> Spotify should just "fire" them for non-performance.  but I guess if they tried to get out of the contract, they would be sued....and called racists


I personally think spotify aren’t worried about that. I feel like a beloved celeb who is, well, _actually black_ could call the company racist and it’d barely make a splash in the water. I think the corporate is just too big and too anonymous to get undermined by that kind of allegation. It works on an individual not a company. 


sdkitty said:


> sounds like they are doing their work for them and paying them......great to have a title, huh?


Isn’t it just? No wonder he no longer wants you to just call him Harry. 


charlottawill said:


> I think they sold Spotify on being able to land high profile guests for their podcasts and then couldn't deliver. Who would want to listen to just the two of them prattle on about anything?


I agree they were meant to be an interview podcast. Pretty funny celebs have been sat at home(s) pontificating for two years and they still haven’t managed to get anyone to do a speech for them.
I want lady c and piers moron to surprise  guest their show purely for the gag of it 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone put this together, I had no idea



The shade. I can’t believe how funnily her waist is photoshopped in that polo neck profile. It’s hilarious. Yeah hate to say it but Ivanka looks better in every shot and it’s got nothing to do with her being white and blonde and everything to do with a little thing called tailoring.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cornflower Blue said:


> I think that might be true for some even now. My own late father was baptized pretty quickly over a kitchen sink in Belfast. Not sure how that worked tbh, but apparently it did  .



In an emergency, everyone who's baptized themselves can baptize a baby with whatever water you have. In dire need it doesn't have to be a priest or holy water. If the baby makes it people may opt for a "proper" second baptism, especially as the emergency one doesn't cover all rites.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I thought Lilibet already had a “top secret” christening.  I also thought the “group christening” was probably offered and rejected.  They need to realize they aren’t that singularly special.



I can believe that. They probably offered and the starlet wasn't coming if she couldn't be the leading role, as usual.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Oh please Harry! You two are desperate to make content for Netflix and Spotify. You can’t trash your family and then this. You are are so stupid and dumb to think we won’t get it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's New Legal Battle Suggests How Eager He Is For the Queen to Meet His Daughter Lilibet
> 
> 
> Although Prince Harry has made solo trips across the pond to visit with members of the royal family and join them for special events, the Duke of Sussex’s wife, Meghan Markle, and their two children have yet to return to the U.K. But now, it seems, Harry is eager for his family on both sides […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



 If he was that eager for the Queen to meet the invisible baby, he'd pack up and just go, it's not like he has to walk on foot through enemy territory.


----------



## gelbergirl

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Meghan and the Jubilee.
A decent person would go across the pond with her husband and children and act like a lady.


----------



## needlv

gelbergirl said:


> It'll be interesting to see what happens with Meghan and the Jubilee.
> A decent person would go across the pond with her husband and children and act like a lady.



i don’t think the “decent person” you are referring to was  invited.  Why risk  another Oprah tell-all?

the family should just ice them out.  “Sorry, you stepped “back” and London triggers H, so to avoid causing further mental distress to either H or M,  we are not including either of the minor royals going forward.  Privately the family will stay in touch….”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> It'll be interesting to see what happens with Meghan and the Jubilee.
> A decent person would go across the pond with her husband and children and act like a lady.



Sure, if she is invited. Plus this chick really lacks in the lady department, I have been astonished by her sheer lack of manners many times. I shouldn't be too surprised though, the narc in my life thinks they are above social norms as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Indeed.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Netfl*x is following in Spot*fy's footsteps… 


*Is Netflix taking over Harry and Meghan's projects too? Now streaming giant advertises for staff on behalf of royal couple after Spotify takes Sussexes' Archewell podcasts 'into its own hands'*

*Netflix is looking for a production designer for the couple's streaming debut, Pearl, about a young girl*
*Their £120m deal with the TV giant is yet to get into full swing more than 16 months after couple signed up *
*Couple's Archewell Audio was launched in December 2020 and has produced 35 minutes of content*
*The £18million podcast deal was pledged to promote 'shared values' but no content since December 2020*
*The audio giant has taken over production, with only one show streamed, hiring at least one new producer*









						Is Netflix taking matters into their own hands too?
					

Netflix, whose stock tumbled more than 20 per cent on Friday after warning subscriber growth would slow in 2022, placed the advert for a production designer on Instagram.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If he was that eager for the Queen to meet the invisible baby, he'd pack up and just go, it's not like he has to walk on foot through enemy territory.


I think what he is eager for is a picture of Queen Elizabeth with his daughter.  Meghan will be some kinda pissed if QE passes before.


----------



## Chanbal

A comedy?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> A comedy?
> View attachment 5307548


A comedy or a joke?


----------



## LittleStar88

1LV said:


> A comedy or a joke?



Or a joke of a comedy?


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> A comedy or a joke?





LittleStar88 said:


> Or a joke of a comedy?


Surreal comedy!?


----------



## jennlt

1LV said:


> A comedy or a joke?





LittleStar88 said:


> Or a joke of a comedy?





Chanbal said:


> Surreal comedy!?



A comedy of errors most likely.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> A comedy?
> View attachment 5307548



They don't know what Pearl is going to be so they are covering all bases. So the Spotify podcast is going to be about high-profile women and the cartoon series is going to be about famous women in history. Who knew Prince Harry was going to become such a symbol for women?

I joke. Harry doesn't have a role in any of these production projects. It's all going to be extremely dull, but educational programming. Kids aren't going to be clamoring to watch Pearl, but maybe they will be forced to watch an episode in school.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

From the mind of MM sounds like the trailer to a horror movie


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> They are adept at spinning the narrative to twist their own ineptitude into victimhood. Spotify might get bad press for dropping them, but coddling them like this seems way out of normal business practice. Is anyone pulling strings for them? Are there links between Spotify and BetterUp or Sunshine Sachs? *Someone not so great was hired at the company where I worked because she was the rumoured lover of someone on our board of directors.*
> 
> Which high profile woman wants to be in their podcast? The same high profile women who were roped into 40x40? They should have done a 2-for-1 and done their podcast recordings at the same time. Unless 40x40 fizzled out very fast too and all those BFFs weren't keen to lend their influence/branding to enrich the Soursexes.
> 
> In post 83176 (page 5546), @bellecate posted an advert for hiring a production designer for Pearl. The wording, especially the multiple namedrops, makes it clear that it's a personal prestige product for Princess Perjury. It sounds to me that she thinks she is on the same level as, perhaps, Spielberg, and working for her would be something to crow about on the resume.


Your workplace sounds _interesting_.  Between this and the narcissist you've worked with...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Kids aren't going to be clamoring to watch Pearl, but maybe they will be forced to watch an episode in school.


Oh yes! The tactic of selling  a book in exchange of a donation seems to work for them.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> A comedy?
> View attachment 5307548


Maybe Pearl will emulate "influential women" like the Douchess of Sussex, hence it'll be a comedy, since DoS is not inspirational or influential?


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe Pearl will emulate "influential women" like the Douchess of Sussex, hence it'll be a comedy, since DoS is not inspirational or influential?


yes, she's inspirational ......the venus flytrap of networkers


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> A comedy or a joke?





LittleStar88 said:


> Or a joke of a comedy?





Chanbal said:


> Surreal comedy!?





jennlt said:


> A comedy of errors most likely.



I can almost picture Megusa, doing standup and every joke falling flat.  Cue the "Ba dump dump".


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> A comedy of errors most likely.


BTW Love your pup picture!


----------



## gelbergirl

1LV said:


> I think what he is eager for is a picture of Queen Elizabeth with his daughter.  Meghan will be some kinda pissed if QE passes before.



I'll bet Andrew's daughters get the pics of their little one with the Queen before M&H's Archie and Lilibet


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In an emergency, everyone who's baptized themselves can baptize a baby with whatever water you have. In dire need it doesn't have to be a priest or holy water. If the baby makes it people may opt for a "proper" second baptism, especially as the emergency one doesn't cover all rites.



They don't want the christening, in so much as they want the presents, after-show party and photo ops.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> They don't want the christening, in so much as they want the presents, after-show party and photo ops.


Don't forget the sound bytes and sneaky footage for their never upcoming Netflix tell all!


----------



## 1LV

gelbergirl said:


> I'll bet Andrew's daughters get the pics of their little one with the Queen before M&H's Archie and Lilibet


I hope so.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> They don't want the christening, in so much as they want the presents, after-show party and photo ops.


agree - as I've said before, I doubt they're religious....M was raised by a new-age type mom, right?


----------



## TC1

You know H&M will turn on Netflix and say something like...they couldn't in good conscience follow through with any shows based on the portrayal of the Royal Family on The Crown


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> agree - as I've said before, I doubt they're religious....M was raised by a new-age type mom, right?


Plus, M seems to be willing to change her religion as often as her underwear, so how religious can she really be?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

With so many falsehoods linked to the Netflixes, one could wonder if a certain birthday date was 'arranged' to coincide with the festivities… 

_Lilli’s birthday will be on June 4, 2022, during the weekend of festivities to mark the Queen’s 70 years on the throne from June 2 to June 5._









						Lilibet Diana’s birthday falls on meaningful day for Queen this year - ‘Very excited!’
					

LILIBET DIANA will celebrate her first birthday on June 4, which happens to fall on a special day for her great-grandmother, the Queen.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

I think that Migraine actually convinced NF and Spotify that she could come up with content, produce and edit because she was an ACTRESS with so much EXPERIENCE. They must be trying to salvage this fiasco to save face.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> With so many falsehoods linked to the Netflixes, one could wonder if a certain birthday date was 'arranged' to coincide with the festivities…
> 
> _Lilli’s birthday will be on June 4, 2022, during the weekend of festivities to mark the Queen’s 70 years on the throne from June 2 to June 5._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lilibet Diana’s birthday falls on meaningful day for Queen this year - ‘Very excited!’
> 
> 
> LILIBET DIANA will celebrate her first birthday on June 4, which happens to fall on a special day for her great-grandmother, the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


She probably was induced or had a C section.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *I think that Migraine actually convinced NF and Spotify that she could come up with content, produce and edit because she was an ACTRESS with so much EXPERIENCE.* They must be trying to salvage this fiasco to save face.


The above together with access to multiple royals and A-listers. She has plenty of wedding pictures to support such claims.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> For real?  Too busy to practice (ie s e x??) or practice being a parent?  One of the many reasons I can't stand Priyanka Chopra.



Look who showed up in my mailbox today.   I'm sure it's on the PC thread already.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I don't want to click on this article, it looks like one more of their despaired PR releases.



Yahoo news? Right there with Huffpost, NYT, People etc 
I refuse to click on them too


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone put this together, I had no idea




A good companion piece:


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> Authors, writers and actors love the word "devastated" meaning, *"*brought to a state of ruin or destruction." I would understand Charles being upset, sad and disappointed in H's behaviour,  just not ruined or destroyed, but exaggerations sell stories and that's why IMO people and events appear fake when the narrative is carried too far.



The one bit of hyperbole that _really_ grinds my gears is "gutted" 
I wish I had a dollar for every time I have hollered at my screen over someone being gutted that they found a piece of lint in their new bag. I would easily be able to afford some of the jewelry that I covet over in that forum. 
"over the moon" completes my teeth gnashing exacta


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I think that Migraine actually convinced NF and Spotify that she could come up with content, produce and edit because she was an ACTRESS with so much EXPERIENCE. They must be trying to salvage this fiasco to save face.


Is there any connection between NETFLIX and SPOTIFY ? since they are both kinda taking over their relationships with HMM at the same time ... sounds to me like someone picked up the phone and called the other company

I get it HMM has produced nothing except for litigation and family angst, and the BOOK will occupy most of 2022 with all of its litigious subject matter and family angst


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> the BOOK will occupy most of 2022 with all of its litigious subject matter and family angst



Poor woman must be bracing herself for it. God forbid she goes before her jubilee, H is too stupid to realize he wlll be blamed.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> A good companion piece:



wow, that copying is hard to deny


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> Poor woman must be bracing herself for it. God forbid she goes before her jubilee, H is too stupid to realize he wlll be blamed.




apparently all of Philips belongings are still at wood farm so hopefully she can immerse herself and forget all about her errant family members


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> The one bit of hyperbole that _really_ grinds my gears is "gutted"
> I wish I had a dollar for every time I have hollered at my screen over someone being gutted that they found a piece of lint in their new bag. I would easily be able to afford some of the jewelry that I covet over in that forum.
> "over the moon" completes my teeth gnashing exacta


What about "sweet nod"?    Need a mouth guard yet?


----------



## CarryOn2020

More truth, pls -


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> A good companion piece:




And wait, there’s more copying -  Chelsea ******* wrote this book years ago









						Children's Book Review: She Persisted Around the World: 13 Women Who Changed History by Chelsea Clinton
					

******* expands the reach of her bestselling picture book She Persisted, highlighting 13 women who have made history internation...




					www.publishersweekly.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> More truth, pls -



The comments...."Peckerhead"...."so he'd have something to do besides drugs and partying"...


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5307393


Even if Prince Penury threatened to never let his kids meet his family, I hope they remain firm. Sure, there will be heartbreak and, based on how Princess Perjury treats her own family, it's a given that they will follow through, but if the BRF give in, the Soursexes will use those children as bargaining chips forever.



bag-mania said:


> I joke. Harry doesn't have a role in any of these production projects. It's all going to be extremely dull, but educational programming. Kids aren't going to be clamoring to watch Pearl, but maybe they will be forced to watch an episode in school.


The audiovisual required viewing when the teacher goes through the history book with the fake description of the Duchess of Deception.



Chanbal said:


> With so many falsehoods linked to the Netflixes, one could wonder if a certain birthday date was 'arranged' to coincide with the festivities…
> 
> _Lilli’s birthday will be on June 4, 2022, during the weekend of festivities to mark the Queen’s 70 years on the throne from June 2 to June 5._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lilibet Diana’s birthday falls on meaningful day for Queen this year - ‘Very excited!’
> 
> 
> LILIBET DIANA will celebrate her first birthday on June 4, which happens to fall on a special day for her great-grandmother, the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


One gossip rag popped up in my feed with the headline: Queen's Jubilee clashes with L*libet's birthday. Right, because HMTQ deliberately wanted to sabotage the babe's birthday 



marietouchet said:


> Is there any connection between NETFLIX and SPOTIFY ? since they are both kinda taking over their relationships with HMM at the same time ... sounds to me like someone picked up the phone and called the other company
> 
> I get it HMM has produced nothing except for litigation and family angst, and the BOOK will occupy most of 2022 with all of its litigious subject matter and family angst


Maybe Spotify and Netflix engage the same legal firm? Or the same person brokered both deals for them and has now informed them that the Soursexes have run out of steam.



purseinsanity said:


> What about "sweet nod"?    Need a mouth guard yet?


Every time the media uses "sweet nod", I get the mental image of a lecherous oldster winking and tipping his head at some nubile young woman on his lap ... Oops, maybe I'm just recalling that photo of Methane cavorting with her client.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Your workplace sounds _interesting_.  Between this and the narcissist you've worked with...


My personal theory is that the media industry attracts a higher number of wackos. I've interviewed people for a perfectly normal admin job and they ask if they will get a chance to hobnob with the stars. Errrr, no, but you may get to check their transport claims?

The narc I mention most was always flaking out during company events. He would be given a certain duty, but go MIA because he saw a famous face and just had to abandon his post to go ingratiate himself with him/her. Once, he sneaked off to the reception table and introduced himself to all the guests and told them it was "his" event.



TC1 said:


> You know H&M will turn on Netflix and say something like...they couldn't in good conscience follow through with any shows based on the portrayal of the Royal Family on The Crown


Might mention how inhumane the two companies are to expect new parents on 5-month maternity leave and living their best life to actually put in a lick of work. They are too busy thriving, you ingrates!


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> agree - as I've said before, I doubt they're religious....M was raised by a new-age type mom, right?


From previous posts it sounds like she was mainly raised/lived with her father.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> We'll never know who truly cheated first on the other, emotionally or physically or whatever.  I do think in upper societies of British (and French) culture, cheating is often accepted and tolerated.


According to my many European colleagues, the general consensus is that as long as the husband takes care of the wife and children ($$$$$) -AND- both parties are discreet, then it’s pretty much a given that there will be a mistress (at least one if not more).  Heck, when the HB and I met up with my Italian cousin in the Lido Tarquinia, she very casually introduced us to her “boyfriend” and when I asked about her husband, she informed me that he was in Rome .. likely with his favorite mistress.


----------



## Chanbal

Hanging out with the Harkles!


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, of coursed! 
Oprah told viewers that no topic was off-limits on that infamous interview. However, it looks like Andy was off-limits. MM and Hazz informed that they didn't want to talk about him. I wonder why…


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> so CA people are more friendly in the surface but it doesn't necessarily go deep?  whereas in your case, the east coast friends are deeper friendships?


Yes, that’s how it seems .. not that it’s horrible to have people more friendly from the beginning..


----------



## Lodpah

Hmmm . . . this has been in my head. I think there's a connection with the TW and Prince Andrew through her yachting days. There's some entanglement there I think with Epstein, PA and TW. I notice she's quick to harass the other royals but not PA.  Maybe that's why she has stayed off topic about him.  This is going to be spectacular when if there is a connection and it all comes out. After all, there was a rumor that one of Prince Harry's friend was on a boat with her. Maybe too many rich British men have encountered her on those supposedly "yachting" days and maybe the scrutiny was just too much. Just surmising, but it could be probable or nothing at all.


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> Hmmm . . . this has been in my head. I think there's a connection with the TW and Prince Andrew through her yachting days. There's some entanglement there I think with Epstein, PA and TW. I notice she's quick to harass the other royals but not PA.  Maybe that's why she has stayed off topic about him.  This is going to be spectacular when if there is a connection and it all comes out. After all, there was a rumor that one of Prince Harry's friend was on a boat with her. Maybe too many rich British men have encountered her on those supposedly "yachting" days and maybe the scrutiny was just too much. Just surmising, but it could be probable or nothing at all.



I agree, I wouldn't be at all surprised.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Yes, that’s how it seems .. not that it’s horrible to have people more friendly from the beginning..


Also, a lot of So Cal people are from other places.  A good friend of mine is from the mid west but has been here for years and years.  good friend of DH is from Michigan.  so these people bring their attitudes to the mix.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Hanging out with the Harkles!



He's such a darling! (When he says he would watch Hanging Out with the Harkles so that others won't have to  )


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Even if Prince Penury threatened to never let his kids meet his family, I hope they remain firm. Sure, there will be heartbreak and, based on how Princess Perjury treats her own family, it's a given that they will follow through, but if the BRF give in, the Soursexes will use those children as bargaining chips forever.
> 
> 
> The audiovisual required viewing when the teacher goes through the history book with the fake description of the Duchess of Deception.
> 
> 
> One gossip rag popped up in my feed with the headline: Queen's Jubilee clashes with L*libet's birthday. Right, because HMTQ deliberately wanted to sabotage the babe's birthday
> 
> 
> Maybe Spotify and Netflix engage the same legal firm? Or the same person brokered both deals for them and has now informed them that the Soursexes have run out of steam.
> 
> 
> Every time the media uses "sweet nod", I get the mental image of a lecherous oldster winking and tipping his head at some nubile young woman on his lap ... Oops, maybe I'm just recalling that photo of Methane cavorting with her client.


Netflix and Spotify seem to be "friends"
....have a partnership
Spotify debuts a ‘Netflix Hub’ featuring music and podcasts tied to Netflix shows and movies | TechCrunch


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> He's such a darling! (When he says he would watch Hanging Out with the Harkles so that others won't have to  )


And you KNOW she’s seen the videos!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Cardi B is getting the sugars going


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> Cardi B is getting the sugars going




She spelled her name wrong. She forgot the "i" in MeGain


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Cardi B is getting the sugars going



Ugh, she is trash. Rich trash for sure, but trash. They should get along very well.


----------



## csshopper

Given the millions Cardi B was awarded in her YouTube Defamation suit, Methane has probably called her hoping to find out how to generate a 4 million dollar settlement.

Major difference between Cardi B and Methane.

The YouTuber who lost to Cardi B _admitted to spreading deliberate lies_. Based on a few references in news articles to the material, it was nasty. One example cited: the accuser, falsely, claimed Cardi B f---ed herself with a soda bottle while performing on stage at a stripper club. 

Methane is incapable of doing so, but she needs to realize any damages from YouTube exposure are her own doing and well documented. No one is "speculating" about her behaviors, they are all on screen for the world to see, and hear. Thank you Body Language Guy and others.


----------



## gracekelly

The one word we haven’t used for  Migraine is braggart. When you stop and think about it, it pretty much describes  everything about her from the very beginning. We were politely calling her overreaching,  but I think braggart is better suited.   Every failure and there have been so many leads right back to this. If Harry has half a brain, which he doesn’t, he would see his. He bought right into her boasts and he is living “her truth” which is nothing more than a work of fiction.   One day he will give a “sweet nod” to this and be “gutted.”


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> What about "sweet nod"?   Need a mouth guard yet?


No, but that reminds me that I have to call my dentist and check on my crowns as my employer insurance is done end of this month


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> No, but that reminds me that I have to call my dentist and check on my crowns as my employer insurance is done end of this month



You could always call him up next year and demand he still pays for them because you deserve it.


----------



## rose60610

Any bets that D-Lister has plans to gag us all on Valentine's Day? Another ill fitting red dress? Giving us a lecture about love despite the fact she bashes everyone she's related to? A red velvet olive oil cake--to donate, of course.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Cardi B is getting the sugars going



Perhaps she can go halves on her libel payment since M only got a pound for hers 

Honestly I’d love to see it. It’d be the code switch of the millennium for miss prissy M.


charlottawill said:


> A good companion piece:



They have so much in common! Yah know given they both relied on their daddies to get ahead in life and in showbiz and can’t quite admit it.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You could always call him up next year and demand he still pays for them because you deserve it.



I'll be retired
not sure whether I'm or


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> I'll be retired
> not sure whether I'm or



Yeah, just like Harry who still wants all the perks of his old job


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> They have so much in common! Yah know given they both relied on their daddies to get ahead in life and in showbiz and can’t quite admit it.


The funny thing is, the former guy has said he would "date her" if she weren't his daughter, but he has made a number of nasty comments about MM. Perhaps he secretly has a thing for her?


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, just like Harry who still wants all the perks of his old job



Harry left "voluntarily"
I'm sort of being forced out. I hadn't planned on retiring at 65 but the pandemic changed that. I have the best job in the world as far as I'm concerned. Management used the lockdowns to put through all the anti labor changes that they would never have been able to do otherwise. Now my "perks" wouldn't be what they used to and I'd do better with my pension. I worked hard for 35+ years for those benefits, so no NOT just like Harry IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Harry left "voluntarily"
> I'm sort of being forced out. I hadn't planned on retiring at 65 but the pandemic changed that. I have the best job in the world as far as I'm concerned. Management used the lockdowns to put through all the anti labor changes that they would never have been able to do otherwise. Now my "perks" wouldn't be what they used to and I'd do better with my pension. I worked hard for 35+ years for those benefits, so no NOT just like Harry IMO



I was trying to make a joke that apparently got completely lost through two attempts. I'm sorry I annoyed you, not my intention and I'd never suggest you or anyone here is a leech like either of the Sussexes.


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was trying to make a joke that apparently got completely lost through two attempts. I'm sorry I annoyed you, not my intention and I'd never suggest you or anyone here is a leech like either of the Sussexes.



I'm sorry I misunderstood  
I'm just so upset about the entire situation. 
I'm sitting here looking at the check I just wrote for my union dues. I STILL can't make a decision. Should I stay or should I go. Sigh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Jus saying . . . get him away from all previous attachments. TW must have seen this.


----------



## oldbag

poopsie said:


> Harry left "voluntarily"
> I'm sort of being forced out. I hadn't planned on retiring at 65 but the pandemic changed that. I have the best job in the world as far as I'm concerned. Management used the lockdowns to put through all the anti labor changes that they would never have been able to do otherwise. Now my "perks" wouldn't be what they used to and I'd do better with my pension. I worked hard for 35+ years for those benefits, so no NOT just like Harry IMO


I retired early because the stress was breaking me down between management and a few snarky co workers. I made the decision to be happy. I was sonewhat nervous because of the drop in income but by the first full day of my retirement I knew I made the right decision. I have adjusted to my money and I appreciate every day that I can mostly do what I want. It only took me 43 years to get there. I wish you all the very best.


----------



## charlottawill

oldbag said:


> I retired early because the stress was breaking me down between management and a few snarky co workers. I made the decision to be happy. I was sonewhat nervous because of the drop in income but by the first full day of my retirement I knew I made the right decision. I have adjusted to my money and I appreciate every day that I can mostly do what I want. It only took me 43 years to get there. I wish you all the very best.


They say people such as yourself are making up a large part of the "Great Resignation". Enjoy your retirement, you've earned it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> I'm sorry I misunderstood
> I'm just so upset about the entire situation.
> I'm sitting here looking at the check I just wrote for my union dues. I STILL can't make a decision. Should I stay or should I go. Sigh.



No, I feel bad I didn't sense it's such a tense and painful subject for you. I can be dim like that. I'm sorry you were treated the way you were and I wish you will make the right decision for you


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Jus saying . . . get him away from all previous attachments. TW must have seen this.
> 
> View attachment 5309016



I think that's from a series they did with doubles. There were a few with William and Kate as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

NM


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think that's from a series they did with doubles. There were a few with William and Kate as well.



Is it supposed to be Pippa?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> She probably was induced or had a C section.



or someone was


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think that's from a series they did with doubles. There were a few with William and Kate as well.


I was just about to ask "Why have I never seen this before?". If it were real it would have been all over the media.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> *Is there any connection between NETFLIX and SPOTIFY *? since they are both kinda taking over their relationships with HMM at the same time ... sounds to me like someone picked up the phone and called the other company
> 
> I get it HMM has produced nothing except for litigation and family angst, and the BOOK will occupy most of 2022 with all of its litigious subject matter and family angst



I think my eyes are going, I read Matrix and Shopify - which is fairly apt for the hapless couple


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> What about "sweet nod"?    Need a mouth guard yet?



OMG, I can't bear it


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Chickens coming home to roost 

Actually, the chickens could have done a better job - and have worked harder


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> They say people such as yourself are making up a large part of the "Great Resignation". Enjoy your retirement, you've earned it!


well, I can very well understand someone 65 making that decision....I'm having a bit of trouble with all the young ones deciding they don't want to work.  guess, as "H" says, it's not bringing them joy?  but how will they pay the bills?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well, I can very well understand someone 65 making that decision....I'm having a bit of trouble with all the young ones deciding they don't want to work.  guess, as "H" says, it's not bringing them joy?  but how will they pay the bills?



Bank of Mommy and Daddy


----------



## Sophisticatted

Lodpah said:


> Jus saying . . . get him away from all previous attachments. TW must have seen this.
> 
> View attachment 5309016


Not sure that’s real.  There is a photographer who uses lookalikes to create these types of photos.  I know she did a set with “Harry” and “Pippa” set at the Royal Wedding Reception.

ETA: Alison Jackson is the photographer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh really?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well, I can very well understand someone 65 making that decision....I'm having a bit of trouble with all the young ones deciding they don't want to work.  guess, as "H" says, it's not bringing them joy?  but how will they pay the bills?


For many of them, it's not that they don't want to work, they don't want to end up burned out and miserable as many have seen with their parents. But I think they've also been fed a myth that your job should be your primary source of happiness in life. I heard someone wisely say you should love your job some days, like it most days and hate it occasionally. That seems realistic. Another point of view is that work is work and you should find "joy" outside of your work.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh really?



Interesting, given that there have been rumors that Serena had ditched TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> For many of them, it's not that they don't want to work, they don't want to end up burned out and miserable as many have seen with their parents. But I think they've also been fed a myth that your job should be your primary source of happiness in life. I heard someone wisely say you should love your job some days, like it most days and hate it occasionally. That seems realistic. Another point of view is that work is work and you should find "joy" outside of your work.



Taking a break is certainly recommended when the person has earned it as SW has.
Don’t know about the AR guy, but we all know Hazzie did not earn his millions.


----------



## bellecate

Interesting, says a lot about both H and TW.


----------



## xeyes

Whoa. If this is true (about the interview, at least), then it would be a bridge WAY too far.





__





						Today's Blind Items - The Interview
					

The interview was filmed, but I do not know if it is for a documentary or the book that is being written. My guess is it is going to be used...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a break is certainly recommended when the person has earned it as SW has.
> Don’t know about the AR guy, but we all know Hazzie did not earn his millions.


Serena's the draw, no one wants to listen to the other two.


----------



## charlottawill

xeyes said:


> Whoa. If this is true (about the interview, at least), then it would be a bridge WAY too far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Interview
> 
> 
> The interview was filmed, but I do not know if it is for a documentary or the book that is being written. My guess is it is going to be used...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


It sounds quite plausible though. I skimmed the comments and someone described Harry as being "c*ntstruck" by MM. That's a new one on me.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> well, I can very well understand someone 65 making that decision....I'm having a bit of trouble with all the young ones deciding they don't want to work.  guess, as "H" says, it's not bringing them joy?  but how will they pay the bills?



Between the Bank of Mom&Dad and the current admin printing up billions in fiat money to hand out as freebies I guess the pressure is off. Throw in debt forgiveness and there you have it.


----------



## xeyes

lanasyogamama said:


> Cardi B is getting the sugars going




Yeah, about that...





__





						Blind Item #2
					

The A list rapper wants to meet with the alliterate one. The alliterate one will be reminded of the criminal cases still moving forward agai...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think my eyes are going, I read Matrix and Shopify - which is fairly apt for the hapless couple


I think the spelling checker changed it to Shopify until I fixed it


----------



## marietouchet

FYI , see Andrew thread ,  A is demanding a jury trial , he is not going away anytime soon
So BOOK + TRIAL in the Jubilee year, sad for the Queen

Also she has been photographed BEING DRIVEN at Sandringham , hmmm , in the past, she has driven herself


----------



## Chanbal

xeyes said:


> Whoa. If this is true (about the interview, at least), then it would be a bridge WAY too far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Interview
> 
> 
> The interview was filmed, but I do not know if it is for a documentary or the book that is being written. My guess is it is going to be used...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


I had to read this twice.  The way the Nefl*xes have been using Diana, I believe this is true (about the interview). Hazz needs to make a point on Diana's dead, racism towards Dodi … He needs to justify $25M. I feel sorry for QE…



Spoiler: [SIZE=5]Mohamed Al Fayed[/SIZE]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xeyes said:


> Whoa. If this is true (about the interview, at least), then it would be a bridge WAY too far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Interview
> 
> 
> The interview was filmed, but I do not know if it is for a documentary or the book that is being written. My guess is it is going to be used...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



OMFG.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Between the Bank of Mom&Dad and the current admin printing up billions in fiat money to hand out as freebies I guess the pressure is off. Throw in debt forgiveness and there you have it.


but the govt money - extra unemployment, stimulus checks - is done, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> FYI , see Andrew thread ,  A is demanding a jury trial , he is not going away anytime soon
> So BOOK + TRIAL in the Jubilee year, sad for the Queen
> 
> Also she has been photographed BEING DRIVEN at Sandringham , hmmm , in the past, she has driven herself



What exactly is wrong with these people. The Queen has aged dramatically since her loss, the last she needs is more and more and more piled onto her by her a*shole relatives.


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> but the govt money - extra unemployment, stimulus checks - is done, right?



Did they finally cut back? After two extensions what are the odds on another? 
My unemployment was extended again but without the bonus. I wasn't expecting it to be what it is since there was so little work. I keep seeing things about rounds of stimulus offers but as I'm apparently exempt I don't delve as deeply as I probably should


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow. Way down buried in the comments on that blind...remember the blood diamonds? Apparently the murder victim was a nephew of Dodi's mother.


----------



## Lodpah

Sophisticatted said:


> Not sure that’s real.  There is a photographer who uses lookalikes to create these types of photos.  I know she did a set with “Harry” and “Pippa” set at the Royal Wedding Reception.
> 
> ETA: Alison Jackson is the photographer.


Oh I see. Well then I guess it’s not real.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG.


I just edited my previous post to include a recent video of Al Fayed. If Hazz goes ahead with this, it will be very harmful to the BRF. This is crazy. A new low for the Neflixes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies for mentioning this yet again — if the BRF had handled this from Day1, we would not be here discussing it.


----------



## Chanbal

Cut ties with Sp$t$FY? This must be the joke of the day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Cut ties with Sp$t$FY? This must be the joke of the day.




 
So, I see what they’re doing. The anti-vaxx position will be the reason they haven’t produced any content for Spotify. 
Hmmm, will they pay back the money, too?  This is too easy - feels like a set-up.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bank of Mommy and Daddy


Or handouts


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, I see what they’re doing. The anti-vaxx position will be the reason they haven’t produced any content for Spotify.
> Hmmm, will they pay back the money, too?  This is too easy - feels like a set-up.


In his mind, Spotify owns him more money. The seconds of a prince are priceless…

Did you have a chance to watch Al Fayed's interview (post #83,533-spoiler)? If Hazz's book goes on that direction, he will need a lot more money from Spotify and Neflix. I don't think the BRF will give him another quid.


----------



## Chanbal

The Neflixes are finally reunited with family…


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Cut ties with Sp$t$FY? This must be the joke of the day.



This is the Neil Young brouhaha .. NH disapproves of Joe Rohan’s position on Vax and says Spotify can choose to keep JR or NH
just listened to chat on news program about the spat - NH used to be left wing and people are surprised at his anti-freedom of speech desire to curb JR - or at least that is what the news program hosts were saying

IMHO HMM staying at Spotify has more to do With producing product than it has to do with faxes or Freedom of Speech 

but … thinking back … the wheels in my mind are turning slowly …. H was against freedom of speech about 15 mos ago , I think 

I order what H thinks about the vax he demanded for third world countries, I need to know whether he favors vax mandates for those countries LOL


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> This is the Neil Young brouhaha .. NH disapproves of Joe Rohan’s position on Vax and says Spotify can choose to keep JR or NH
> just listened to chat on news program about the spat - NH used to be left wing and people are surprised at his anti-freedom of speech desire to curb JR - or at least that is what the news program hosts were saying
> 
> IMHO HMM staying at Spotify has more to do With producing product than it has to do with faxes or Freedom of Speech
> 
> but … thinking back … the wheels in my mind are turning slowly …. H was against freedom of speech about 15 mos ago , I think
> 
> I order what H thinks about the vax he demanded for third world countries, I need to know whether he favors vax mandates for those countries LOL


I heard Neil Young doesn’t own most of his music so it was basically an empty threat to Spotify. Gets his name out.


----------



## bellecate

Too bad H and TW don’t squawk to Spotify, maybe Spotify would then pull them.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> It sounds quite plausible though. I skimmed the comments and someone described Harry as being "c*ntstruck" by MM. That's a new one on me.


It’s been said envy other word out the TW’s mouth is the f word. She has been  described as having the most vulgar language.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies for mentioning this yet again — if the BRF had handled this from Day1, we would not be here discussing it.


It's true, but then hindsight is 20/20. I don't think anyone expected the (allegedly) sweet divorcee actress/orphan to become Megusa (almost typed Godzilla) or the swift emergence of the inner fiend.

Anyone thinks Methane will start putting Netflix and Spotify on par with the BRF? You know, they are forcing her to fulfill contractual obligations while she is busy being a mother and empowered femme fatale? That should be entertaining to watch.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The Neflixes are finally reunited with family…



That's as close as he's ever going to get to them if it's up to her.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> It’s been said envy other *word out the TW’s mouth is the f word*. She has been  described as having the most vulgar language.


From the other thread, it's also a favorite for uncle Andy. Could this be yacht language?


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> It’s been said envy other word out the TW’s mouth is the f word. She has been  described as having the most vulgar language.


Totally believe it. It's also been said that people who use the f word regularly have high intelligence. You know she'd latch onto that.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> That's as close as he's ever going to get to them if it's up to her.


Well, he may have a few more opportunities. I'm under the impression that they joined the Hollywood section of Madame Tussauds.


----------



## Jayne1

bellecate said:


> Interesting, says a lot about both H and TW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5309063
> View attachment 5309064
> View attachment 5309065


Wow.  What is going on with Oprah.  She has an attachment to Meg for some reason.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I had to read this twice.  The way the Nefl*xes have been using Diana, I believe this is true (about the interview). Hazz needs to make a point on Diana's dead, racism towards Dodi … He needs to justify $25M. I feel sorry for QE…
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: [SIZE=5]Mohamed Al Fayed[/SIZE]






Chanbal said:


> In his mind, Spotify owns him more money. The seconds of a prince are priceless…
> 
> Did you have a chance to watch Al Fayed's interview (post #83,533-spoiler)? If Hazz's book goes on that direction, he will need a lot more money from Spotify and Neflix. I don't think the BRF will give him another quid.



Idk, I’ve seen several YT videos about this ‘conspiracy’. Al Fayed doesn’t seem to have the proof. IIRC his court case was thrown out for lack of evidence. [ I’ll need to research that, so pls don’t quote me.] The most logical answer is she got in a car with a drunk driver.

In this article, they blame the BBC - sheeesh, which is it? MI6 or BBC or someone else?  Absolutely, it was a tragic accident. Absolutely, Hazzie should have help to deal with it.  Heck, he doesn’t seem to be able to handle real life, so it isn’t too surprising that he cannot handle losing a parent.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Wow.  What is going on with Oprah.  She has an attachment to Meg for some reason.


The interview, remember?


----------



## bellecate

Sure hope some of this stuff is true. I chuckle over thinking TW getting told ‘no thanks’.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Idk, I’ve seen several YT videos about this ‘conspiracy’. Al Fayed doesn’t seem to have the proof. IIRC his court case was thrown out for lack of evidence. [ I’ll need to research that, so pls don’t quote me.] The most logical answer is she got in a car with a drunk driver.
> 
> In this article, they blame the BBC - sheeesh, which is it? MI6 or BBC or someone else?  Absolutely, it was a tragic accident. Absolutely, Hazzie should have help to deal with it.  Heck, he doesn’t seem to be able to handle real life, so it isn’t too surprising that he cannot handle losing a parent.



I also believe that it was an unfortunate car accident. It must have been very painful for Al Fayed to lose his son. As far as I know, he never tried to profit from the tragic situation. I always saw a father in a lot of pain behind those theories. I feel sorry for him.


----------



## Sophisticatted

bellecate said:


> Sure hope some of this stuff is true. I chuckle over thinking TW getting told ‘no thanks’.
> View attachment 5309227
> View attachment 5309228
> View attachment 5309229



isnt Catherine the patron in Britain? Sounds like she wants to compete with Catherine, again. “Service is universal, and all that.

Some more Alison Jackson pics:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...oil-royal-rumble-lookalikes-brawl-artist.html


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I also believe that it was an unfortunate car accident. It must have been very painful for Al Fayed to lose his son. As far as I know, he never tried to profit from the tragic situation. I always saw a father in a lot of pain behind those theories. I feel sorry for him.


I think grieving parents want to blame someone, preferably someone still alive (the drunk driver is dead and the car that allegedly sideswiped them can't be found). There was an episode on CSI that had a young girl who died horribly through a series of unfortunate incidents. When the CSI team explained to the parents that there was no murderer or reason for her death, they rejected it and demanded that a murderer be identified. I think that's how Al Fayed feels. I know that would be how I would feel.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> Sure hope some of this stuff is true. I chuckle over thinking TW getting told ‘no thanks’.
> View attachment 5309227
> View attachment 5309228
> View attachment 5309229


That video of her yapping away while Serena's mother pointedly ignores her is hilarious. The way in which she caught Hazard's eye must have been extremely scripted and stage-managed because she really isn't all that good at interpersonal interaction.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I also believe that it was an unfortunate car accident. It must have been very painful for Al Fayed to lose his son. As far as I know, he never tried to profit from the tragic situation. I always saw a father in a lot of pain behind those theories. I feel sorry for him.



Exactly. Some old articles:

1997: the driver’s drugs found in the car:  https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1997-09-11-9709110234-story.html
1998: Rumors, lots of rumors: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/21/weekinreview/di-and-dodi-rumors-and-mongers.html
2021: Al Fayed’s other children: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eds-children-casts-shadow-twilight-years.html


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The interview, remember?


Yes, she wanted the interview but at the same time she was so kind to Meg and never once challenged her.

 If Tyler Perry was in her ear, I don’t understand why she would give Meg such a positive appearing platform.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> Wow.  What is going on with Oprah.  She has an attachment to Meg for some reason.


Part of it was Oprah covertly getting back at the Royal Family who did not go prostate in adoration of her and did not respond to her attempts to interview members.

And I know this sounds like a stretch, but Oprah had serious issues and literally scars, psychological and physical, from an abusive grandmother. She has discussed this. Trashing a grandmother, even a queenly one, would not bother her. In fact, I think she encouraged it in her directing of the Interview.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> The way in which she caught Hazard's eye must have been extremely scripted and stage-managed because she really isn't all that good at interpersonal interaction.


Use your imagination....


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The most logical answer is she got in a car with a drunk driver.


The only survivor was her bodyguard in the front passenger seat, who was wearing a seat belt. I've read that wearing a seat belt would likely have saved her life too. But people don't want to believe something so ordinary. Conspiracy theories are much more intriguing.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh really?



No shade to Serena but I’m not sure any of these people have ever held a normal job so I’m not sure how relevant their suggestions would be.



xeyes said:


> Whoa. If this is true (about the interview, at least), then it would be a bridge WAY too far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Interview
> 
> 
> The interview was filmed, but I do not know if it is for a documentary or the book that is being written. My guess is it is going to be used...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Oh if Harry goes full Dan Aykroyd his glamour career as a balding bad boy turned blue-eyed charity worker will be dead in the water. People will think a***well is a branch of the flat Earth society. I’d love to see it! Two years down the line they could be talking heads on the history channel’s alien astronaut show  and M’s awful wig will finally no longer be the worst hair on set. 


bellecate said:


> Interesting, says a lot about both H and TW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5309063
> View attachment 5309064
> View attachment 5309065


I’ve no doubt Oprah has fingers in a lot of  pies but can she really have that much influence over Tyler Perry especially now she’s sort of retired?  Has she plugged his movies a lot or something? He seems pretty asset rich.
I’ve no doubt M made his staff’s life a living hell and it brought this association to an end but I’m inclined to think TP instigated it because he thought it’d prove lucrative before he saw these two couldn’t sell popcorn at a cinema.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Taking a break is certainly recommended when the person has earned it as SW has.
> Don’t know about the AR guy, but we all know Hazzie did not earn his millions.



and his life has been one long break


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Cut ties with Sp$t$FY? This must be the joke of the day.



Yeah they’d happily drop them like hot bricks especially compared to Rogan. Rogan may have said something unpopular but it is obvious he makes tons of money. H on the other hand….


Lodpah said:


> It’s been said envy other word out the TW’s mouth is the f word. She has been  described as having the most vulgar language.


I see her swearing a lot when she’s screaming at her staff and I can envision that takes up half of her daily speech but I don’t buy she’s someone who swears when she’s not mad tbh. I find the way she expresses herself to be highly contrived and prissy so I can’t believe she’d casually swear for fear of seeming ‘common’ 


Chanbal said:


> From the other thread, it's also a favorite for uncle Andy. Could this be yacht language?


Yeah this is a common misapprehension, very posh British people swear casually all the time, I’m pretty sure the Queen will say ‘ I need a f-ing gin’ when she’s not on camera. Being uptight about swearing is considered very bourgeois.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies for mentioning this yet again — if the BRF had handled this from Day1, we would not be here discussing it.



I don't disagree with you, but I also don't think anyone could have known how completely out of control Harry would spiral.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Did you have a chance to watch Al Fayed's interview (post #83,533-spoiler)? If Hazz's book goes on that direction, he will need a lot more money from Spotify and Neflix. I don't think the BRF will give him another quid.



Not only that, it might be the straw that broke the camel's back. They have treated him - both of them really - with kid gloves. I am inclined to feel slightly sorry if they finally come off.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> It’s been said envy other word out the TW’s mouth is the f word. She has been  described as having the most vulgar language.


I wonder if she is one of those who uses the F word with abandon and without logic. I once read a fanfic written by (I am assuming) a teenager. Almost every sentence had the F word inserted gratuitously. I kept on reading because, if you ignore the Fs, it actually had a great plot and good character development. Around Chapter 9, my brain stuttered to a halt. I realized that I had just read one of the sentences where there was no swearing, and my brain had helpfully inserted an F-bomb to go with the flow


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Sure hope some of this stuff is true. I chuckle over thinking TW getting told ‘no thanks’.
> View attachment 5309227
> View attachment 5309228
> View attachment 5309229



You bet Kate never has had to write in to anyone begging them to make her a patron or let her speak a few words.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly. Some old articles:
> 
> 1997: the driver’s drugs found in the car:  https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1997-09-11-9709110234-story.html
> 1998: Rumors, lots of rumors: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/21/weekinreview/di-and-dodi-rumors-and-mongers.html
> 2021: Al Fayed’s other children: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eds-children-casts-shadow-twilight-years.html



I didn't even know he has more children...I think I was surprised an Arab billionaire would have an only child but the way he behaved suggested it. I hate to say it, but like Harry he needs to get over it. You don't ever fully recover from losing a child I guess, BUT he should have focussed on the children he still has instead of sidelining them in favour of being completely obsessed with the one he lost.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even know he has more children...I think I was surprised an Arab billionaire would have an only child but the way he behaved suggested it. I hate to say it, but like Harry he needs to get over it. You don't ever fully recover from losing a child I guess, BUT he should have focussed on the children he still has instead of sidelining them in favour of being completely obsessed with the one he lost.


I think he was the favourite son. I don't personally like Dodi from the accounts of his behaviour, but I also think he was pretty typical of the jetset crowd then.


----------



## xincinsin

This author of something called "Lady Di Look Book" compared Methane's so-called mogul style to Princess Di's wardrobe (Methane must be ecstatic  ). I can't believe that someone who writes so atrociously has a book published. Just count the number of times she uses "kind of" without any added value to the sentence!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. That's kind of bad.


----------



## amante

Remember how H said during The Interview that he was signed with Netflix and Spotify only because he needed to provide for his family? If I were an executive from the streaming giants, I'd be pretty pissed off at this ungrateful talentless slacker. So many people with so much more talent and experience--not to mention a better attitude--would have pumped out the next Squid Game (or at the very least Princess Switch) by now.

Just a random thought. Apologies if this has been mentioned before.

ETA: what one lacks in talent, one makes up with enthusiasm--is def not Harry's motto!
ETA2: I do appreciate H's bluntness, he could have spun the Interview into his personal PR stunt but his other half was taking care of that so...

[for what it's worth, I actually am somewhat sympathetic to H&M, but they shoot themselves in the foot so frequently!]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

bellecate said:


> Sure hope some of this stuff is true. I chuckle over thinking TW getting told ‘no thanks’.
> View attachment 5309227
> View attachment 5309228
> View attachment 5309229


The Duchess of Complaining!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

So what was it? Was she murdered by TRF or hounded to death by the paps?


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Interesting, says a lot about both H and TW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5309063
> View attachment 5309064
> View attachment 5309065


really?
Oprah forced Tyler Perry?  they are friends and he is very wealthy and powerful.  If anything she might have asked him for a favor.


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> Did they finally cut back? After two extensions what are the odds on another?
> My unemployment was extended again but without the bonus. I wasn't expecting it to be what it is since there was so little work. I keep seeing things about rounds of stimulus offers but as I'm apparently exempt I don't delve as deeply as I probably should


I suppose some of the people who are quitting their not-joyful jobs may be under the laws that prohibit eviction and living rent-free.  but I think that's ending soon in CA


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, she wanted the interview but at the same time she was so kind to Meg and never once challenged her.
> 
> If Tyler Perry was in her ear, I don’t understand why she would give Meg such a positive appearing platform.


My 2 cents, of course!
I think both OW and GK were planning on entertaining ($$$) the 'royal' drama for a longer period of time. They were both taken by surprise by the strong public reaction to the interview. They didn't anticipate the lack of public sympathy toward the Harkles after the delivery of their 'truth' (many of the falsehoods were immediately listed in newspapers all over the world). Both OW and GK have apparently distanced themselves from the couple, which I think it's a smart approach for them.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents, of course!
> I think both OW and GK were planning on entertaining ($$$) the 'royal' drama for a longer period of time. They were both taken by surprise by the strong public reaction to the interview. They didn't anticipate the lack of public sympathy toward the Harkles after the delivery of their 'truth' (many of the falsehoods were immediately published in newspapers all over the world).


I thought a large number of Americans bought their act


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> he should have focussed on the children he still has instead of sidelining them in favour of being completely obsessed with the one he lost.


He was "over the moon" - "sweet nod" to Poopsie  - at the prospect of his beloved son marrying into the BRF. Many viewed Diana as the most desirable woman on the planet. Despite his wealth and success he had never been accepted by the upper tier of British society. It would have been the ultimate f-you if Dodi had married Diana, not that her close friends believed that was going to happen anyway. Everyone assumed the ring Dodi bought days before the accident was an engagement ring, but her friends say she had no interest in marrying him, he was just a pleasant diversion. But Mohammed Fayed has lived with this fantasy, and believes that they were killed by palace insiders, for decades. I understand the monument he had erected at Dodi's grave is quite something. Poor man.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> He was "over the moon" - "sweet nod" to Poopsie  - at the prospect of his beloved son marrying into the BRF. Many viewed Diana as the most desirable woman on the planet. Despite his wealth and success he had never been accepted by the upper tier of British society. It would have been the ultimate f-you if Dodi had married Diana, not that her close friends believed that was going to happen anyway. Everyone assumed the ring Dodi bought days before the accident was an engagement ring, but her friends say she had no interest in marrying him, he was just a pleasant diversion. But Mohammed Fayed has lived with this fantasy, and believes that they were killed by palace insiders, for decades. I understand the monument he had erected at Dodi's grave is quite something. Poor man.



This was in Harrod's until 2018 when it was removed. During the time it was on display we were in London, shopping in Harrod's and heading to the escalators saw this impossible to miss statue. We agreed with the "tacky and tasteless" reviews. There was also a photo display that felt more like an alter.




The memorial in 2007
Location Harrods department store, London Designer William Mitchell
Type:Sculpture Material: Bronze Dedicated to Diana, Princess of Wales,  Dodi Fayed



1998 memorial to Diana and Dodi in Harrods



Alternative view showing the Egyptian carvings that form the background to both of the Dodi and Diana monuments.
_*Innocent Victims*_ is a bronze statue of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed, which was on display at the Harrods department store in London, England, between 2005 and 2018. It was commissioned by Dodi's father Mohamed Al-Fayed when he owned Harrods, and designed by William Mitchell.

*Design and creation[edit]*
The statue was designed by London-born sculptor William Mitchell,[3] who had worked for the Al-Fayed family for more than 40 years, and was cast in bronze using the lost wax method at the Bronze Age Foundry in East London.[1] It depicts Diana and Dodi facing each other, clad in loose clothing that clings to their bodies. They are said to be dancing in Mediterranean waves. Dodi's right arm is raised and appears to be releasing a large bird, said to be an albatross symbolising "freedom and eternity".[4] Diana's left arm is also raised, gripping Dodi's hand. Their other arms are below their waists, the fingers just touching. There is a forward momentum in their poses, Diana's right leg bent and exposed by a dress cut to the top of her thigh. Dodi's right leg is completely off the base of the statue. Both are bare-footed. The inner curve of the wings of the bird has been described as forming a double D.[5] The statue drew considerable criticism for its artistic merit, being widely described as “tacky” and "tasteless".

Mitchell also designed the Egyptian escalator at Harrods and the associated carvings which form the background to both of the Dodi and Diana monuments.

edited to add info on design and creation


----------



## bag-mania

Dodi was kind of a playboy wasn’t he? Rich and able to do whatever he pleased. I read he dated lots of famous women, including Julia Roberts, Brooke Shields, Winona Ryder and Nancy Sinatra.

Diana only dated him for a few months before the accident so we’ll never know what would have happened in their relationship. She had learned a hard lesson about not jumping into marriage right away.


----------



## amante

(sorry off-topic, but ) I predict that H&M won't divorce--at least in 2022. For one thing, Spotify and Netflix are finally strong arming them to cough up the work they were contracted to do. H&M are less incentivized to divorce when they need to push out projects and publicly debut them.

Juicy tidbit: according to the San Jose Mercury News, Netflix and Spotify themselves are hiring producers and designers, as opposed to H&M's production company. Such helpless babies...



> More than a year after that single episode, Spotify is looking to hire three in-house producers for full-time, six-month assignments, to create and launch Archwell Audio shows that feature “the voices of high-profile women,” the Times UK reported.
> Meanwhile, Andrea Oxley, who describes herself as a recruiting researcher for original animated series at Netflix Animation, has posted on Instagram saying the company is looking to hire a production designer for “Meghan Markle’s project, ‘Pearl,” the Daily Beast reported. “Think you have what it takes? Oxley said. “Apply now on our website!”











						Netflix and Spotify finally address Harry and Meghan’s lack of output
					

So far, in return for multi-million dollar contracts with the couple, Spotify has received just one Christmas special and Netflix is waiting on Harry’s “Heart of Invictus” series.




					www.mercurynews.com
				




(also please excuse me if this has been mentioned before)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> He was "over the moon" - "sweet nod" to Poopsie  - at the prospect of his beloved son marrying into the BRF. Many viewed Diana as the most desirable woman on the planet. Despite his wealth and success he had never been accepted by the upper tier of British society. It would have been the ultimate f-you if Dodi had married Diana, not that her close friends believed that was going to happen anyway. Everyone assumed the ring Dodi bought days before the accident was an engagement ring, but her friends say she had no interest in marrying him, he was just a pleasant diversion. But Mohammed Fayed has lived with this fantasy, and believes that they were killed by palace insiders, for decades. I understand the monument he had erected at Dodi's grave is quite something. Poor man.


Before Dodi, Diana dated Hasnat Khan, a British-Pakistani surgeon, with whom she was supposedly in love and then she dated Dodi hoping to make Hasnat jealous when he'd see them together in the media.


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> (sorry off-topic, but ) I predict that H&M won't divorce--at least in 2022. For one thing, Spotify and Netflix are finally strong arming them to cough up the work they were contracted to do. H&M are less incentivized to divorce when they need to push out projects and publicly debut them.
> 
> Juicy tidbit: according to the San Jose Mercury News, Netflix and Spotify themselves are hiring producers and designers, as opposed to H&M's production company. Such helpless babies...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix and Spotify finally address Harry and Meghan’s lack of output
> 
> 
> So far, in return for multi-million dollar contracts with the couple, Spotify has received just one Christmas special and Netflix is waiting on Harry’s “Heart of Invictus” series.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mercurynews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (also please excuse me if this has been mentioned before)


There was gossip that the work done on Pearl so far is not usable as the animation is copycat Disney. Also, the gossip says Pearl is a Mary Sue, and that Methane used photos of pre-teen herself as the inspiration for the look of the character.

I don't think they will divorce so long as they believe there is still $$$$ to be made. If the cash isn't pouring in, it certainly isn't their fault  . They will blame someone else. I'm waiting to see who will be their chosen scapegoat to explain away their lack of output.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> There was gossip that the work done on Pearl so far is not usable as the animation is copycat Disney. Also, the gossip says Pearl is a Mary Sue, and that Methane used photos of pre-teen herself as the inspiration for the look of the character.
> 
> I don't think they will divorce so long as they believe there is still $$$$ to be made. If the cash isn't pouring in, it certainly isn't their fault  . They will blame someone else. I'm waiting to see who will be their chosen scapegoat to explain away their lack of output.



Oh, you better believe Pearl is a Mary Sue! She is the animated embodiment of Meghan herself. Everything Pearl does is going to be PERFECT and WONDERFUL!


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Before Dodi, Diana dated Hasnat Khan, a British-Pakistani surgeon, with whom she was supposedly in love and then she dated Dodi hoping to make Hasnat jealous when he'd see them together in the media.


Didn't know about that, but I knew she had a relationship with him. Can't remember where I saw it, but I read an in depth story recently claiming that he was the love of her life and she wanted to marry him, but he ended it because he didn't want the constant spotlight that followed her. She supposedly met his family and was studying his faith. There's also this:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Hasnat-Khan-breaks-silence-savage-Bashir.html


----------



## csshopper

Maybe Harry's Wife will stay until the point in the future where, if she ever encountered them, she would have to curtsy to Queen Catherine. THAT would be a picture to record for history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Before Dodi, Diana dated Hasnat Khan, a British-Pakistani surgeon, with whom she was supposedly in love and then she dated Dodi hoping to make Hasnat jealous when he'd see them together in the media.


This isn't the one I was thinking of, but it is a very good read about their relationship. 


> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/royals/2013/09/princess-diana-love-hasnat-khan


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Maybe Harry's Wife will stay until the point in the future where, if she ever encountered them, she would have to curtsy to Queen Catherine. THAT would be a picture to record for history.


Haha but it's never going to happen. That could be another twenty years, and I do not see the Harkles together in twenty years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> There was gossip that the work done on Pearl so far is not usable as the animation is copycat Disney.



Oh, Disney is VERY sue-happy. They even go after cottage law cookie decorators (basically people making and selling cookies out of their homes).



> Also, the gossip says *Pearl is a Mary Sue*, and that Methane used photos of pre-teen herself as the inspiration for the look of the character.



What does that mean?


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> This author of something called "Lady Di Look Book" compared Methane's so-called mogul style to Princess Di's wardrobe (Methane must be ecstatic  ). I can't believe that someone who writes so atrociously has a book published. Just count the number of times she uses "kind of" without any added value to the sentence!
> 
> View attachment 5309431


Is google translate writing books now? That’s some clunky prose  


csshopper said:


> This was in Harrod's until 2018 when it was removed. During the time it was on display we were in London, shopping in Harrod's and heading to the escalators saw this impossible to miss statue. We agreed with the "tacky and tasteless" reviews. There was also a photo display that felt more like an alter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The memorial in 2007
> Location Harrods department store, London Designer William Mitchell
> Type:Sculpture Material: Bronze Dedicated to Diana, Princess of Wales,  Dodi Fayed
> 
> 
> 
> 1998 memorial to Diana and Dodi in Harrods
> 
> 
> 
> Alternative view showing the Egyptian carvings that form the background to both of the Dodi and Diana monuments.
> _*Innocent Victims*_ is a bronze statue of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed, which was on display at the Harrods department store in London, England, between 2005 and 2018. It was commissioned by Dodi's father Mohamed Al-Fayed when he owned Harrods, and designed by William Mitchell.
> 
> *Design and creation[edit]*
> The statue was designed by London-born sculptor William Mitchell,[3] who had worked for the Al-Fayed family for more than 40 years, and was cast in bronze using the lost wax method at the Bronze Age Foundry in East London.[1] It depicts Diana and Dodi facing each other, clad in loose clothing that clings to their bodies. They are said to be dancing in Mediterranean waves. Dodi's right arm is raised and appears to be releasing a large bird, said to be an albatross symbolising "freedom and eternity".[4] Diana's left arm is also raised, gripping Dodi's hand. Their other arms are below their waists, the fingers just touching. There is a forward momentum in their poses, Diana's right leg bent and exposed by a dress cut to the top of her thigh. Dodi's right leg is completely off the base of the statue. Both are bare-footed. The inner curve of the wings of the bird has been described as forming a double D.[5] The statue drew considerable criticism for its artistic merit, being widely described as “tacky” and "tasteless".
> 
> Mitchell also designed the Egyptian escalator at Harrods and the associated carvings which form the background to both of the Dodi and Diana monuments.
> 
> edited to add info on design and creation


To be honest, since they unveiled that statue of mr G from summer heights high dragging it up as Diana this summer - I’ve come to think more highly of Al-Fayad’s statue. That and it might be just nostalgia, maybe, I feel Harrods is missing a bit of flair without it.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, Disney is VERY sue-happy. They even go after cottage law cookie decorators (basically people making and selling cookies out of their homes).
> 
> 
> 
> What does that mean?


"Mary Sue is a term used to describe a fictional character, usually female, who is seen as too perfect and almost boring for lack of flaws, originally written as an idealized version of an author in fanfiction."

Don't feel bad, I had to look it up


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, Disney is VERY sue-happy. They even go after cottage law cookie decorators (basically people making and selling cookies out of their homes).
> 
> 
> 
> What does that mean?


A Mary Sue is a creator’s self-insert character who is good at everything immediately
 and beloved by everyone in the narrative and clearly exists to flatter the creator’s ego.

Also in fan fiction circles a Mary Sue will often have a romance with the hot character of the series. So it’s like if I wrote a story about, say, twilight and Edward abandoned Bella because he’s so in love with this cool new girl called Jelly who is very clever and beautiful and can do Kung fu.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What does that mean?







__





						Mary Sue - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## jelliedfeels

Also on Mary sue’s it has struck me as funny that it’s so associated with women and the romance genre when almost every star vehicle action movie or cop show is about an increasingly ageing and chubby Steven Seagal or Liam neeson barking at his team of caged writers to knock up yet another movie about how he’s a bad ass navy seal cum commando cum cop who kills men half his age and twice his size with one punch


----------



## Lodpah

'Someone's going to get hurt' Meghan Markle faces cruel 'end game' as Duchess under attack
					

MEGHAN MARKLE is regularly targeted by online trolls - and the abuse won't stop until "someone is hurt" or tension "boils over", a data analyst fears.




					news.google.com


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Also on Mary sue’s it has struck me as funny that it’s so associated with women and the romance genre when almost every star vehicle action movie or cop show is about an increasingly ageing and chubby Steven Seagal or Liam neeson barking at his team of caged writers to knock up yet another movie about how he’s a bad ass navy seal cum commando cum cop who kills men half his age and twice his size with one punch



The male equivalent of a Mary Sue is called a Gary Stu!


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Lodpah said:


> 'Someone's going to get hurt' Meghan Markle faces cruel 'end game' as Duchess under attack
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE is regularly targeted by online trolls - and the abuse won't stop until "someone is hurt" or tension "boils over", a data analyst fears.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.google.com


She doesn't read anything about herself so it shouldn't be affecting her too much. Her fans and just as if not more crazy than the ones they are complaining about.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> and his life has been one long break


H takes a break from his breaks by pretending to work and preaching gobbledeegook to us.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> This author of something called "Lady Di Look Book" compared Methane's so-called mogul style to Princess Di's wardrobe (Methane must be ecstatic  ). *I can't believe that someone who writes so atrociously has a book published.* Just count the number of times she uses "kind of" without any added value to the sentence!


Well, don't forget *The Bench* **


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Before Dodi, Diana dated Hasnat Khan, a British-Pakistani surgeon, with whom she was supposedly in love and then she dated Dodi hoping to make Hasnat jealous when he'd see them together in the media.


I think Diana had the emotional stability of a teenager.  I guess Haz takes after her in that department.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> There was gossip that the work done on Pearl so far is *not usable as the animation is copycat Disney*. Also, the gossip says Pearl is a Mary Sue, and that Methane used photos of pre-teen herself as the inspiration for the look of the character.


No F'in' way!  You mean to tell me that Megusa is copying someone else's work???  NO!  I don't believe it!  (Clutch my pearls!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I thought a large number of Americans bought their act


It's possible. Though, the Americans they wanted to impress might not have been that impressed. A good example is a former president that didn't invite them for a big celebration…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It's possible. Though, the Americans they wanted to impress might not have been that impressed. A good example is a former president that didn't invite them for a big celebration…



I think you got that wrong, we all know they were just too busy and had too many things going on in the big wide world to attend not only said birthday, but multiple other occasions they of course were invited to.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> 'Someone's going to get hurt' Meghan Markle faces cruel 'end game' as Duchess under attack
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE is regularly targeted by online trolls - and the abuse won't stop until "someone is hurt" or tension "boils over", a data analyst fears.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.google.com


boo hoo


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> boo hoo



Or as Megpie would allegedly say "boo f*****g hoo


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> 'Someone's going to get hurt' Meghan Markle faces cruel 'end game' as Duchess under attack
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE is regularly targeted by online trolls - and the abuse won't stop until "someone is hurt" or tension "boils over", a data analyst fears.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.google.com


Different opinions…


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I think Diana had the emotional stability of a teenager.  I guess Haz takes after her in that department.


She definitely could have benefited from therapy, but back then it would have been unthinkable for someone in her position. Maybe with a good therapist history would have taken a different course.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the all thing about security has to do with a business trip…  



_But now, royal commentator Neil Sean has suggested that the Duke of Sussex planned to make the trip overseas to conduct research for his memoir.

Neil claimed that Harry is keen to reconnect with people who had been close to his late mother Princess Diana to gather testimony for a “respectful” chapter of his book.

But, he suggested, the prince is unable to conduct these interviews online, because of fears about conversations being leaked, and therefore needs to return to the UK in person.

“One can only think about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s paranoia at such a lengthy chat,” Neil claimed._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the all thing about security has to do with a business trip…
> 
> 
> 
> _But now, royal commentator Neil Sean has suggested that the Duke of Sussex planned to make the trip overseas to conduct research for his memoir.
> 
> Neil claimed that Harry is keen to reconnect with people who had been close to his late mother Princess Diana to gather testimony for a “respectful” chapter of his book.
> 
> But, he suggested, the prince is unable to conduct these interviews online, because of fears about conversations being leaked, and therefore needs to return to the UK in person.
> 
> “One can only think about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s paranoia at such a lengthy chat,” Neil claimed._




Who would talk to him?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Or as Megpie would allegedly say "boo f*****g hoo


OMG, I've said those same words when hubby would tell me some 'sob story' about some self-absorbed person he knew. Slapping my wrist!


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, wow, wow…  He makes great points.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It's possible. Though, the Americans they wanted to impress might not have been that impressed. A good example is a former president that didn't invite them for a big celebration…


Maybe a sign of decline, they did not win The People's Choice award last October for the Interview. I know Oprah's name was the one on the nomination list, but if there had been enough love for the subject matter I think it would have won. But it didn't. I say this hopefully, over time their actions, non actions, and blatherings are eroding their popularity.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who would talk to him?


That emoji


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Maybe a sign of decline, they did not win The People's Choice award last October for the Interview. I know Oprah's name was the one on the nomination list, but if there had been enough love for the subject matter I think it would have won. But it didn't. I say this hopefully, over time their actions, non actions, and blatherings are eroding their popularity.


You may want to watch the video I posted (#83,620). Here is some info on the author:
_Kyle Edward Kulinski is an American political commentator and media host. Kulinski is the host and producer of The Kyle Kulinski Show… A self-described left-wing populist… _I didn't know about him, the info is from Wikipedia. 

From left to right, people I rightly displeased with the Harkles and their deals.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> No F'in' way!  You mean to tell me that Megusa is copying someone else's work???  NO!  I don't believe it!  (Clutch my pearls!)



So long as they're yours

I bet when Megatron was storming through the House Palace, the Queen was clutching hers

Her special name was 'Pearl'  , it was just another rouse to get more jewels


----------



## Lodpah

She’s what? 11 years from being 50 and can’t act like a grown woman? Pathetic. Who cares Meghan! Handle your business like a grown woman and you ain’t in high school anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> She’s what? 11 years from being 50 and can’t act like a grown woman? Pathetic. Who cares Meghan! Handle your business like a grown woman and you ain’t in high school anymore.



10 

but 
in all my years
the most important thing I've learned is, 
that past 21, 
not only is age 
only a number
but 
_some_ people decide to 
_never_ grow up.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Wow, wow, wow…  He makes great points.



It can't be easy to do a good podcast that people will actually want to listen to. I have no idea what he earns from his podcast, but you can be sure it is nowhere near 30mil and his resentment is evident. I can't fault him for that, but I have a hard time seeing any real difference between podcasting and the crowded field of talk radio. My impression is that podcasting is just talk radio aimed at younger generations. I think millennials associate talk radio with their parents and grandparents listening to the likes of Larry King and Rush Limbaugh. I've never cared for talk radio and I have no interest in podcasts, but it seems everywhere I turn someone is promoting their podcast. Now get off my lawn!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Wow, wow, wow…  He makes great points.




This is an excellent explanation of what is and has been happening in many areas, not just podcasts. The incompetent elites get the big dollars while the little guy gets shut out. Ugh. Thank you for posting.

Looking forward to more z-list content from the entitled two. Oh, how the sparks will fly on the sinking Disney ship:










						Disney sparks outrage after debuting new look for Minnie Mouse
					

Disneyland Paris unveiled the famous character's brand new outfit on Tuesday via Twitter in honor of the park's 30th anniversary, but it was met with a very cold shoulder from fans.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

*GOAL  *Wrong sport, sorry  









						Kate Middleton replaces Prince Harry as patron of English rugby
					

The Duchess of Cambridge (pictured) will become the first member of the Royal Family to take on one of Prince Harry's patronages as the new figurehead of English rugby.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

One more opinion…


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the all thing about security has to do with a business trip…
> 
> 
> 
> _But now, royal commentator Neil Sean has suggested that the Duke of Sussex planned to make the trip overseas to conduct research for his memoir.
> 
> Neil claimed that Harry is keen to reconnect with people who had been close to his late mother Princess Diana to gather testimony for a “respectful” chapter of his book.
> 
> But, he suggested, the prince is unable to conduct these interviews online, because of fears about conversations being leaked, and therefore needs to return to the UK in person.
> 
> “One can only think about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s paranoia at such a lengthy chat,” Neil claimed._




It's called 'burning your bridges' for a reason.

Westminster Bridge is _just_ about holding 
London Bridge is a 'trigger' 
Millennium Bridge is in de Nile 
Let's not even talk about the Tower


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Neil claimed that Harry is keen to reconnect with people who had been close to his late mother Princess Diana to gather testimony for a “respectful” chapter of his book._



Oh, will that be the one or two respectful pages in the whole book?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, will that be the one or two respectful pages in the whole book?


first of all, I can't imagine him being capable of writing a book so there would have to be a ghostwriter, right?
and if he trashes his family, I don't know how they could fail to cut him off.  Yes, blood is thicker than water but there are limits to what anyone can take


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> first of all, I can't imagine him being capable of writing a book so there would have to be a ghostwriter, right?
> and if he trashes his family, I don't know how they could fail to cut him off.  Yes, blood is thicker than water but there are limits to what anyone can take



Yes there is:

Prince Harry's Ghostwriter


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes there is:
> 
> Prince Harry's Ghostwriter


of course
H makes me sick


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> It can't be easy to do a good podcast that people will actually want to listen to. I have no idea what he earns from his podcast, but you can be sure it is nowhere near 30mil and his resentment is evident. I can't fault him for that, but I have a hard time seeing any real difference between podcasting and the crowded field of talk radio. My impression is that podcasting is just talk radio aimed at younger generations. I think millennials associate talk radio with their parents and grandparents listening to the likes of Larry King and Rush Limbaugh. I've never cared for talk radio and I have no interest in podcasts, but it seems everywhere I turn someone is promoting their podcast. Now get off my lawn!!


The Harkles want to appeal to 'progressive' young generations. So, I was pleased to see that Kulinski isn't buying their crap.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> first of all, I can't imagine him being capable of writing a book so there would have to be a ghostwriter, right?
> and if he trashes his family, I don't know how they could fail to cut him off.  Yes, blood is thicker than water but there are limits to what anyone can take


Can't take credit, just reposting this from a few days back:


> https://nypost.com/2022/01/22/meet-the-ghostwriters-who-pen-bestselling-celebrity-memoirs/


Moehringer's memoir is the basis of the recent Affleck/Clooney production "The Tender Bar".


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, will that be the one or two respectful pages in the whole book?


I've almost a headache trying to understand what Neil meant by '_a "respectful" chapter of his book_.'


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I've almost a headache trying to understand what Neil meant by '_a "respectful" chapter of his book_.'


That suggests to me the rest will be a hatchet job on the rest of the family.


----------



## Chanbal

TW will not be pleased…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is an excellent explanation of what is and has been happening in many areas, not just podcasts. The incompetent elites get the big dollars while the little guy gets shut out. Ugh. Thank you for posting.
> 
> Looking forward to more z-list content from the entitled two. Oh, how the sparks will fly on the sinking Disney ship:
> View attachment 5309969
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disney sparks outrage after debuting new look for Minnie Mouse
> 
> 
> Disneyland Paris unveiled the famous character's brand new outfit on Tuesday via Twitter in honor of the park's 30th anniversary, but it was met with a very cold shoulder from fans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This guy has every reason to be peeved.  It isn't just that they are incompetent elites, it is that they are so incompetent that after hiring an expert, they still couldn't do it.  I am of the opinion that all of these experts jump ship once they get a taste of what Migraine has to offer in  the way of opinions.

Spotify is throwing away their money. 
Stupid


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the all thing about security has to do with a business trip…
> 
> 
> 
> _But now, royal commentator Neil Sean has suggested that the Duke of Sussex planned to make the trip overseas to conduct research for his memoir.
> 
> Neil claimed that Harry is keen to reconnect with people who had been close to his late mother Princess Diana to gather testimony for a “respectful” chapter of his book.
> 
> But, he suggested, the prince is unable to conduct these interviews online, because of fears about conversations being leaked, and therefore needs to return to the UK in person.
> 
> “One can only think about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s paranoia at such a lengthy chat,” Neil claimed._



I read a report speculating that the security brouhaha is the first step in a bid to get back on the IPP list. Then he can demand free security from every country he goes to for "work". Sounds like the sort of self-serving plotting.they like to do.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I read a report speculating that the security brouhaha is the first step in a bid to get back on the IPP list. Then he can demand free security from every country he goes to for "work". *Sounds like the sort of self-serving plotting.they like to do.*



And he still demands answers about his drop in popularity, he wants to know why!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> And he still demands answers about his drop in popularity, he wants to know why!




Is this about Invictus? He wants the free security wherever he travels. Article from 2021:

 
_Harry will appear on camera and serve as executive producer of the docuseries, though a premiere date has yet to be announced._








						Heart of Invictus
					

The couple's first Netflix series will center on Harry's beloved Invictus Games, a seven-day sporting event he created in 2014 to help aid the physical,




					www.popsugar.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is an excellent explanation of what is and has been happening in many areas, not just podcasts. The incompetent elites get the big dollars while the little guy gets shut out. Ugh. Thank you for posting.
> 
> Looking forward to more z-list content from the entitled two. Oh, how the sparks will fly on the sinking Disney ship:
> View attachment 5309969
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disney sparks outrage after debuting new look for Minnie Mouse
> 
> 
> Disneyland Paris unveiled the famous character's brand new outfit on Tuesday via Twitter in honor of the park's 30th anniversary, but it was met with a very cold shoulder from fans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm so sick of everything woke.  First M&Ms, and MM.  Enough already.  Focus on things besides freaking candy and cartoons.


----------



## Lucille68

purseinsanity said:


> I'm so sick of everything woke.  First M&Ms, and MM.  Enough already.  Focus on things besides freaking candy and cartoons.


The woke will eventually woke themselves.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'm so sick of everything woke.  First M&Ms, and MM.  Enough already.  Focus on things besides freaking candy and cartoons.



Who knew Minnie Mouse was supposed to be a symbol? Last I knew she was a fun character who existed purely for entertainment purposes. I guess absolutely everything must have a deeper meaning in today’s hypersensitive climate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Who knew Minnie Mouse was supposed to be a symbol? Last I knew she was a fun character who existed purely for entertainment purposes. I guess absolutely everything must have a deeper meaning in today’s hypersensitive climate.



Whaaa?? She has put up with _that_* mouse *for years while wearing those yellow shoes!  She’s a* strong woman!  *


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this about Invictus? He wants the free security wherever he travels. Article from 2021:
> 
> 
> _Harry will appear on camera and serve as executive producer of the docuseries, though a premiere date has yet to be announced._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heart of Invictus
> 
> 
> The couple's first Netflix series will center on Harry's beloved Invictus Games, a seven-day sporting event he created in 2014 to help aid the physical,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com


It looks like he wants to get the perks of a working royal on his trips. He seems to have succeeded in NY.

NS's video is about his recent demands, he wants answers to why his popularity dropped in the UK. I wonder if he is blaming the BRF for stopping to clean his mess.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaa?? She has put with _that_* mouse *for years while wearing those yellow shoes!  She’s a* strong woman!  *



When she first started dating Mickey I’m sure she thought she could improve his fashion sense. She was wrong. She can’t even get him to wear a shirt half the time!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles want to appeal to 'progressive' young generations. So, I was pleased to see that Kulinski isn't buying their crap.


Progressive young generations are waking up to the very real threats of climate change extremes turning the world upside down, cycles in a pandemic that foretell the possibility of destroyed social and economic institutions, global political turmoil that ebbs and flows.

Meghan getting her feelings hurt because no one asks how she is and Harry whining about Daddy closing the checkbook is not relevant to them. Given the death rates around the world from Covid, millions are enduring their own grief, Harry monetizing his Mother's death 25 years on is proving him a loathsome thumb sucker. Any pity party for him is withering.

It's a joke to claim they are "woke." They are so clueless to the reality outside their walled fortress they are asleep and drooling on their chins. And as for "racism" what is more racist than discounting, neglecting, refusing to acknowledge, giving no attention to, flat out ignoring the black half of your racial identity family, all the while scheming, lying, cheating and abusing to attain every iota of perceived white privilege you can grasp the Markle claws around from the white, especially, royal family.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Progressive young generations are waking up to the very real threats of climate change extremes turning the world upside down, cycles in a pandemic that foretell the possibility of destroyed social and economic institutions, global political turmoil that ebbs and flows.
> 
> Meghan getting her feelings hurt because no one asks how she is and Harry whining about Daddy closing the checkbook is not relevant to them. Given the death rates around the world from Covid, millions are enduring their own grief, Harry monetizing his Mother's death 25 years on is proving him a loathsome thumb sucker. Any pity party for him is withering.
> 
> It's a joke to claim they are "woke." They are so clueless to the reality outside their walled fortress they are asleep and drooling on their chins. *And as for "racism" what is more racist than discounting, neglecting, refusing to acknowledge, giving no attention to, flat out ignoring the black half of your racial identity family*, all the while scheming, lying, cheating and abusing to attain every iota of perceived white privilege you can grasp the Markle claws around from the white, especially, royal family.


I love you, csshopper. You have such a way with words  

I never understood why she claimed to be practically an orphan and dismissed her relatives on both sides. Did she not anticipate people would question her attitude? Was she so self-absorbed that she thought everyone would just fall to their knees to worship the self-made millionaire/humanitarian that she claimed to be?


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I love you, csshopper. You have such a way with words
> 
> I never understood why she claimed to be practically an orphan and dismissed her relatives on both sides. Did she not anticipate people would question her attitude? Was she so self-absorbed that she thought everyone would just fall to their knees to worship the self-made millionaire/humanitarian that she claimed to be?


Thank you xincinsin, back at you


----------



## tiktok

xincinsin said:


> I love you, csshopper. You have such a way with words
> 
> I never understood why she claimed to be practically an orphan and dismissed her relatives on both sides. Did she not anticipate people would question her attitude? Was she so self-absorbed that she thought everyone would just fall to their knees to worship the self-made millionaire/humanitarian that she claimed to be?



Well initially it was more believable that her family just sucked - some families do, and her siblings and father talking to the media definitely helped paint that picture. But then they ruined their credibility with their own actions (like throwing his family under the bus as well as a train and a few trucks on international TV).

In everything they do their egos are literally their worst enemies. They have something going and then they ruin it for themselves.


----------



## amante

1. Regardless of their personal characteristics, H&M's marriage is very delicate and high-risk for divorce. They both come from divorced parents, M herself has been divorced, they moved to a new country and have no real friends/support network, cash flow is a very big issue for them with regards to paying for security, they have different personalities (stiff upper lip vs whatever M said about needing to live not just exist), they have very little shared experience (short engagement although all the drama they've been through can bond them together in an "us vs the world" mentality).

2. Moving to Montecito was a dumb move. Hollywood is still about face time and networking in person. They should have moved to Calabasas or Hidden Hills, anything closer to Hollywood. Especially when they have two young children, commuting back and forth is a pain in the a**. I think there's a possibility that they'll move houses in the immediate future. Also, side perk: Archie is pre-school age, so if they move now M&H can strategize and place Archie in a pre-school popular with the Hollywood power players' kids.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

tiktok said:


> Well initially it was more believable that her family just sucked - some families do, and her siblings and father talking to the media definitely helped paint that picture. But then they ruined their credibility with their own actions (like throwing his family under the bus as well as a train and a few trucks on international TV).
> 
> In everything they do their egos are literally their worst enemies. They have something going and then they ruin it for themselves.


I'm beginning to believe that because she got into this relationship with mercenary motives, she is ascribing the same motives to the relatives. So she is "protecting" her pie from them. She doesn't want to share.

Not excusing Hazard's bad behaviour, but I doubt he would have considered a career in showbiz if TW had not persuaded him that it was viable. All those negotiations and wheeling & dealing that happened before Megxit must have bolstered their confidence that their star was bright above Hollywood. And they deluded themselves with the 50/50 proposal that they must have thought the BRF would accept. The beginning of their end was at the summit when the BRF took back a lot of things that Hazard must have banked on keeping: free-flow funds, military honours, security and perks. 

If not for Covid, I believe they would have enjoyed a phase of fame and glory on talkshows before their star collapsed.


----------



## amante

xincinsin said:


> If not for Covid, I believe they would have enjoyed a phase of fame and glory on talkshows before their star collapsed.


I agree. Covid was a spanner in the works.

I've been trying to ignore this for weeks, but this I was reading Elle.com a few weeks ago and on the suggested stories bar was "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry reportedly did a "very private" video call with Kate Middleton for her birthday
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex played a small part in Kate's 40th birthday festivities."

Oh really? I guess it wasn't so private then. I wonder who leaked it? Was it Kate? I really don't know. 
(also notice how ostensibly the topic is Kate's 40th, yet in both the headline and subheading the subjects of the sentences are H&M)
Focus on Pearl, Invictus docu and your podcast! Stop piggybacking on the BRF! Fire the PR who planted this in Elle! It looks so pathetic! H&M claim that it was Catherine who made Meghan cry and that they were victims of racism yet they keep glomming onto their alleged abusers


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Austrian magazine titles: "Meghan and Harry push The Queen and Cambridges off the pedestal". Well, they were the couple most spoken about in the press in 2021. 

I don't know about you, but I'd rather have good press than lots of it


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> This guy has every reason to be peeved.  It isn't just that they are incompetent elites, it is that they are so incompetent that after hiring an expert, they still couldn't do it.  I am of the opinion that all of these experts jump ship once they get a taste of what Migraine has to offer in  the way of opinions.
> 
> Spotify is throwing away their money.
> Stupid



In all seriousness, these companies have been stupid. Dupable, gullible, half-wits have made mistakes inside both companies, and I hope heads will roll.

What evidence did they actually have to bet on these imbeciles? What did they imagine would (not) happen? It was as sure as night follows day these two wouldn't get anything together unless everything was done for them and they show up for the 'go live' signal. They have both been fronts all their lives.

Did they have a proven track record creating content, media production, organising events?

I have inside knowledge, but for all that money (probably promised COD - one hopes) could they not guess JCMH just turns up at Invictus and fronts the 'brand'?

Why would they think someone with only acting credentials is suddenly able to turn into and media empire builder? Other actors, dancers and so on have gone from to stage to boardrooms, but they've proven themselves first before outside investors part with a cent. 

Some people have said that content is hard to create.  It's not really, especially for creative ideas people. But it takes originality, graft-time rigour, time management, mundane, everyday work, and these two glamour-twins have had people to do the 'grey' stuff for them all their lives. It's for self-starters and team players.

This couple identifies with creative business people, but they are quite the opposite, they are just autocratic manipulators and dictators. There was evidence of this way before Spotify or Netflix ever invited them to work with them.

The only thing these 2 know how to do is blackmail and embarrass their respective families and countries.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Austrian magazine titles: "Meghan and Harry push The Queen and Cambridges off the pedestal". Well, they were the couple most spoken about in the press in 2021.
> 
> I don't know about you, but I'd rather have good press than lots of it



That's where their money went. 
SS puts out a 'good news story' every other day about them. 
It's not news, it's PR, plain and simple.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is an excellent explanation of what is and has been happening in many areas, not just podcasts. The incompetent elites get the big dollars while the little guy gets shut out. Ugh. Thank you for posting.
> 
> Looking forward to more z-list content from the entitled two. Oh, how the sparks will fly on the sinking Disney ship:
> View attachment 5309969
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disney sparks outrage after debuting new look for Minnie Mouse
> 
> 
> Disneyland Paris unveiled the famous character's brand new outfit on Tuesday via Twitter in honor of the park's 30th anniversary, but it was met with a very cold shoulder from fans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It'll be a Walt Disney NFT next


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> I agree. Covid was a spanner in the works.
> 
> I've been trying to ignore this for weeks, but this I was reading Elle.com a few weeks ago and on the suggested stories bar was "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry reportedly did a "very private" video call with Kate Middleton for her birthday
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex played a small part in Kate's 40th birthday festivities."
> 
> Oh really? I guess it wasn't so private then. I wonder who leaked it? Was it Kate? I really don't know.
> (also notice how ostensibly the topic is Kate's 40th, yet in both the headline and subheading the subjects of the sentences are H&M)
> Focus on Pearl, Invictus docu and your podcast! Stop piggybacking on the BRF! Fire the PR who planted this in Elle! It looks so pathetic! H&M claim that it was Catherine who made Meghan cry and that they were victims of racism yet they keep glomming onto their alleged abusers


Birthday wishes from them are always ultra private, and why would that be? They blast everything else. I believe they run these stories to peacock their graciousness, and because they know their victim would not bother to correct the fake news.


----------



## xincinsin

amante said:


> 2. Moving to Montecito was a dumb move. Hollywood is still about face time and networking in person. They should have moved to Calabasas or Hidden Hills, anything closer to Hollywood. Especially when they have two young children, commuting back and forth is a pain in the a**. I think there's a possibility that they'll move houses in the immediate future. Also, side perk: Archie is pre-school age, so if they move now *M&H can strategize and place Archie in a pre-school popular with the Hollywood power players' kids*.


Would this work? If they had been low-key, this type of networking might be successful, but now that they are known to be bit players hungry for connections, would the power players give them a way into the upper echelons? Archie and the babe might make connections if they turn out to be good people, but Methane and her uncouth mannerisms (and her Handbag) would be a social embarrassment the same way as she views her father and family as an embarrassment. The Body Language Guy made a good point in one of his videos (the one about podcasts) when he pointed out that A listers may not deem a perceived association with the couple as something beneficial. Don't call us, we'll call you?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Birthday wishes from them are always ultra private, and why would that be? They blast everything else. I believe they run these stories to peacock their graciousness, and because they know their victim would not bother to correct the fake news.



Totally, they _know_ no one is going to make a fuss over correcting a story over a bogus call that never happened.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Word.


----------



## Chanbal

Week in Review


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> In all seriousness, these companies have been stupid. Dupable, gullible, half-wits have made mistakes inside both companies, and I hope heads will roll.
> 
> What evidence did they actually have to bet on these imbeciles? What did they imagine would (not) happen? It was as sure as night follows day these two wouldn't get anything together unless everything was done for them and they show up for the 'go live' signal. They have both been fronts all their lives.
> 
> Did they have a proven track record creating content, media production, organising events?
> 
> I have inside knowledge, but for all that money (probably promised COD - one hopes) could they not guess JCMH just turns up at Invictus and fronts the 'brand'?
> 
> Why would they think someone with only acting credentials is suddenly able to turn into and media empire builder? Other actors, dancers and so on have gone from to stage to boardrooms, but they've proven themselves first before outside investors part with a cent.
> 
> Some people have said that content is hard to create.  It's not really, especially for creative ideas people. But it takes originality, graft-time rigour, time management, mundane, everyday work, and these two glamour-twins have had people to do the 'grey' stuff for them all their lives. It's for self-starters and team players.
> 
> This couple identifies with creative business people, but they are quite the opposite, they are just autocratic manipulators and dictators. There was evidence of this way before Spotify or Netflix ever invited them to work with them.
> 
> The only thing these 2 know how to do is blackmail and embarrass their respective families and countries.


Magnificent post!  Wish you could send it to the numbskulls who believed their BS that they could do this. The Sussex are probably using the same _we are victim_s tactics as their excuse plus her pregnancy and the lawsuit for why their  attention was diverted from actual work. Let the companies send in more experts. It won’t change the fact that these two are incapable.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I love you, csshopper. You have such a way with words
> 
> I never understood why she claimed to be practically an orphan and dismissed her relatives on both sides. Did she not anticipate people would question her attitude? Was she so self-absorbed that she thought everyone would just fall to their knees to worship the self-made millionaire/humanitarian that she claimed to be?





gracekelly said:


> Magnificent post!  Wish you could send it to the numbskulls who believed their BS that they could do this. The Sussex are probably using the same _we are victim_s tactics as their excuse plus her pregnancy and the lawsuit for why their  attention was diverted from actual work. Let the companies send in more experts. It won’t change the fact that these two are incapable.


they're having their work done for them....apparently their capability or lack thereof doesn't matter


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Week in Review



You can’t rush brilliance and  podcast from the chickens!  Lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> they're having their work done for them....apparently their capability or lack thereof doesn't matter


 Maybe. I think the stumbling block was, is, and will always be that they won’t take advice from professionals.  There will be massive fights and nothing will get done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Maybe. I think the stumbling block was, is, and will always be that they won’t take advice from professionals.  There will be massive fights and nothing will get done.


well then they should not be paid


----------



## gracekelly

amante said:


> I agree. Covid was a spanner in the works.
> 
> I've been trying to ignore this for weeks, but this I was reading Elle.com a few weeks ago and on the suggested stories bar was "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry reportedly did a "very private" video call with Kate Middleton for her birthday
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex played a small part in Kate's 40th birthday festivities."
> 
> Oh really? I guess it wasn't so private then. I wonder who leaked it? Was it Kate? I really don't know.
> (also notice how ostensibly the topic is Kate's 40th, yet in both the headline and subheading the subjects of the sentences are H&M)
> Focus on Pearl, Invictus docu and your podcast! Stop piggybacking on the BRF! Fire the PR who planted this in Elle! It looks so pathetic! H&M claim that it was Catherine who made Meghan cry and that they were victims of racism yet they keep glomming onto their alleged abusers


The Sussex specialize in comments that they know will never be responded to by the family. They have made this an art form.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well then they should not be paid


They should not get a dime and be sued themselves for lack of specific performance. They are in violation of the contract.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They should not get a dime and be sued themselves for lack of specific performance. They are in violation of the contract.


I'd love to see that.  spotify and netflix have plenty of money for lawyers


----------



## poopsie

amante said:


> 2. Moving to Montecito was a dumb move. Hollywood is still about face time and networking in person. They should have moved to Calabasas or Hidden Hills, anything closer to Hollywood. Especially when they have two young children, commuting back and forth is a pain in the a**. I think there's a possibility that they'll move houses in the immediate future. Also, side perk: Archie is pre-school age, so if they move now M&H can strategize and place Archie in a pre-school popular with the Hollywood power players' kids.



I was thinking about this when I read that Aaron Rogers recently sold his house in Del Mar.
We dodged a bullet! LOL









						Aaron Rodgers sells California home as fate with Packers looms
					

The Mediterranean-style house had an offer pending within a week of its hitting the market last October.




					nypost.com


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Progressive young generations are waking up to the very real threats of climate change extremes turning the world upside down, cycles in a pandemic that foretell the possibility of destroyed social and economic institutions, global political turmoil that ebbs and flows.
> 
> Meghan getting her feelings hurt because no one asks how she is and Harry whining about Daddy closing the checkbook is not relevant to them. Given the death rates around the world from Covid, millions are enduring their own grief, Harry monetizing his Mother's death 25 years on is proving him a loathsome thumb sucker. Any pity party for him is withering.
> 
> It's a joke to claim they are "woke." They are so clueless to the reality outside their walled fortress they are asleep and drooling on their chins. And as for "racism" what is more racist than discounting, neglecting, refusing to acknowledge, giving no attention to, flat out ignoring the black half of your racial identity family, all the while scheming, lying, cheating and abusing to attain every iota of perceived white privilege you can grasp the Markle claws around from the white, especially, royal family.



If it was only climate change they were touting that would be great. Hell, I'm old enough to remember celebrating the very first Earth Day. It was a big deal back then. 
I fear that their climate change stance is the smiley face that hides an entirely different agenda. Thanks to the pandemic many parents got a wake up call on the woke curriculum their children were receiving in public schools.


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> I was thinking about this when I read that Aaron Rogers recently sold his house in Del Mar.
> We dodged a bullet! LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aaron Rodgers sells California home as fate with Packers looms
> 
> 
> The Mediterranean-style house had an offer pending within a week of its hitting the market last October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Nice house, but I'm sure she would think it far below their station in life. I still think they'll end up in NY. And then after the inevitable divorce it will be easier for him to get to NY from London to visit the kids than from London to LA.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh, this is hilarious


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMG, she offers to hold his hat????!!!!!  Hope we get to see the full video of this event.


ETA: this is the garden party for Charles’s 70th birthday - the one where LCC says they were asked to leave.  As far as I know, the outdoor part of the video is the one the has been analyzed. This indoor clip is very revealing - Camilla whispers ‘help’, MM gives Cam the evil eye, Charles fusses about the heat, Hazzie needs someone to hold his hat.  These people!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My favourite from that event: Harry follows Charles and Camilla outside as per his rank, and Raptor claws her claw into him to make him stop and sail past him. Because, you know, the nobody newcomer deserves is and should probably have gone before Charles.

ETA: I can't make out Camilla saying "Help", but that b*tchy look Raptor throws her? Can she not once be appropriate?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My favourite from that event: Harry follows Charles and Camilla outside as per his rank, and Raptor claws her claw into him to make him stop and sail past him. Because, you know, the nobody newcomer deserves is and should probably have gone before Charles.
> 
> ETA: I can't make out Camilla saying "Help", but that b*tchy look Raptor throws her? Can she not once be appropriate?



I slowed the video down. C&C were giggling when they came in. It looks like Hazz is giving Cam fussy looks, so she looks away. He glares at whoever she turned to. Cam kinda whispers it, then grimaces. IIRC this event happened shortly after the wedding, so I guess the shine had worn off.  IMO it shows MM’s behavior was indeed completely inappropriate from the beginning. Charles and Cam are senior royals, aka -the boss. Seems like MM would want to go the extra mile in those early days to please everyone. Unless…she knew she would be leaving.  Hazzi not knowing what to do with his hat = comedy gold.

I would like to see the entire video of the inside view, not just a clip. Also, who leaked this inside view and when did they do it ? 
Are gloves really off?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, she offers to hold his hat????!!!!!  Hope we get to see the full video of this event.
> 
> 
> ETA: this is the garden party for Charles’s 70th birthday - the one where LCC says they were asked to leave.  As far as I know, the outdoor part of the video is the one the has been analyzed. This indoor clip is very revealing - Camilla whispers ‘help’, MM gives Cam the evil eye, Charles fusses about the heat, Hazzie needs someone to hold his hat.  These people!



I can't help but think this is one of the dullest conversations ever.  
Sounds like an SNL skit about NPR.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, she offers to hold his hat????!!!!!  Hope we get to see the full video of this event.
> 
> 
> ETA: this is the garden party for Charles’s 70th birthday - the one where LCC says they were asked to leave.  As far as I know, the outdoor part of the video is the one the has been analyzed. This indoor clip is very revealing - Camilla whispers ‘help’, MM gives Cam the evil eye, Charles fusses about the heat, Hazzie needs someone to hold his hat.  These people!




They look like they've never met each other, so British. And then the American tries to be er, helpful (credit to her) but it's just so funny.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> They look like they've never met each other, so British. And then the American tries to be er, helpful (credit to her) but it's just so funny.



The way Hazz and Charles look at her hand - priceless.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> They look like they've never met each other, so British. And then the American tries to be er, helpful (credit to her) but it's just so funny.


Where is Charles' hat? Did he bring a hat holder?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Where is Charles' hat? Did he bring a hat holder?



But of course. He has a team of people for that. 
Dimwit apparently doesn’t know to bring his own people


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Where is Charles' hat? Did he bring a hat holder?



Do you mean Camilla? 

Can you imagine? She would have told him to toss it 

He would have given it to a 'flunky' to put in the cloakroom I should imagine


----------



## CarryOn2020

Royal SHOCK claim: Prince Charles has 'two men to help him get DRESSED'
					

PRINCE Charles has been dubbed the "pampered Prince" by staff members in a documentary, with his biographer claiming he has two men to "help him get dressed in the morning".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## rhyvin

So it’s a valet...? Or someone else?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Who knew Minnie Mouse was supposed to be a symbol? Last I knew she was a fun character who existed purely for entertainment purposes. I guess absolutely everything must have a deeper meaning in today’s hypersensitive climate.


Disney appropriated Snow White from the Grimm Brothers (written in 1812) and Cinderella from Charles Perrault who created many of the fairytales we know today so it's normal for them to appropriate 'woke' from from the woke crowd.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Royal SHOCK claim: Prince Charles has 'two men to help him get DRESSED'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles has been dubbed the "pampered Prince" by staff members in a documentary, with his biographer claiming he has two men to "help him get dressed in the morning".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I once read that when he is a guest at someone's country house, the host must remove their furniture from the guest room because he brings his own with him.


----------



## chowlover2

charlottawill said:


> I once read that when he is a guest at someone's country house, the host must remove their furniture from the guest room because he brings his own with him.


" dead "


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Royal SHOCK claim: Prince Charles has 'two men to help him get DRESSED'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles has been dubbed the "pampered Prince" by staff members in a documentary, with his biographer claiming he has two men to "help him get dressed in the morning".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



This is completely normal in royal households (at least one). 

They are called valets - the word you use for your parking attendants. 

In the military, they used to be called one's batman and high-ranking officers had one.


----------



## papertiger

chowlover2 said:


> " dead "





charlottawill said:


> I once read that when he is a guest at someone's country house, the host must remove their furniture from the guest room because he brings his own with him.



That's not true.

He (meaning his servants) brought his own cases and trunks, writing and correspondence box, Gentleman's toiletry case, sports equipment (including rifle) and wardrobe. 

In the field (military) they often had campaign trunks and portable desks (that someone else had to carry).


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Royal SHOCK claim: Prince Charles has 'two men to help him get DRESSED'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Charles has been dubbed the "pampered Prince" by staff members in a documentary, with his biographer claiming he has two men to "help him get dressed in the morning".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The assistant who helped with the dressing up: isn't that rather common with rich people even now? It was a given in all the Regency era novels I've read. In Austen novels, it was always implied that an extra pair of hands was required to get Elizabeth Bennett or Emma ready for the day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Was true in Roman times, too.
Personally, I think it is an excellent idea. I could use a ‘prep’ team.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Do you mean Camilla?
> 
> Can you imagine? She would have told him to toss it
> 
> He would have given it to a 'flunky' to put in the cloakroom I should imagine


Been thinking about Camilla, she is way far down in the BRF popularity polls, just about H A and M, despite being letter perfect since her marriage, in others words she good deeds of the last 20 past years have not made up for her fling with C while he was married to D

Catherine is way up in the polls, she had been unpopular during her child bearing years, but the public has forgiven/forgotten that 

interesting difference between the women


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> The assistant who helped with the dressing up: isn't that rather common with rich people even now? It was a given in all the Regency era novels I've read. In Austen novels, it was always implied that an extra pair of hands was required to get Elizabeth Bennett or Emma ready for the day.


Angela’s book says the Queen dresses herself unless she needs help with a zip or some awkward piece of regalia , those cloaks are awfully heavy

Of course, HMTQ has/had a staff of like 10-12 designing, organizing, caring for the wardrobe incl regalia like the Garter and Thistle cloaks - historical pieces, I am sure the staff is smaller these days due to COVID

HMTQ’s wardrobe is loaned out for countless exhibitions

So, I doubt Charles has help getting dressed in the morning, unless regalia is required
But, yes, C must have a staff - 4 ??? - to organize, clean, maintain his military uniforms, medals, cloaks etc

Angela’s book is a must read if you are interested in the work behind caring for those wardrobes, the attention to detail in outfit selection each day is mind boggling eg gotta wear a Tartan in Scotland


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> Angela’s book says the Queen dresses herself unless she needs help with a zip or some awkward piece of regalia , those cloaks are awfully heavy
> 
> Of course, HMTQ has/had a staff of like 10-12 designing, organizing, caring for the wardrobe incl regalia like the Garter and Thistle cloaks - historical pieces, I am sure the staff is smaller these days due to COVID
> 
> HMTQ’s wardrobe is loaned out for countless exhibitions
> 
> So, I doubt Charles has help getting dressed in the morning, unless regalia is required
> But, yes, C must have a staff - 4 ??? - to organize, clean, maintain his military uniforms, medals, cloaks etc
> 
> *Angela’s book is a must read *if you are interested in the work behind caring for those wardrobes, the attention to detail in outfit selection each day is mind boggling eg gotta wear a Tartan in Scotland



Is Angela's book "The other side of the coin"?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> The assistant who helped with the dressing up: isn't that rather common with rich people even now? It was a given in all the Regency era novels I've read. *In Austen novels, it was always implied that an extra pair of hands was required to get Elizabeth Bennett or Emma ready for the day.*


Yes! For those who watched Downton Abbey, Mary and her sister had a lady's maid to help dress them. The men had valets and when Mathew refused to let his valet dress him, he was told that it was unfair of him to prevent his valet from doing his job.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Angela’s book says the Queen dresses herself unless she needs help with a zip or some awkward piece of regalia , those cloaks are awfully heavy
> 
> Of course, HMTQ has/had a staff of like 10-12 designing, organizing, caring for the wardrobe incl regalia like the Garter and Thistle cloaks - historical pieces, I am sure the staff is smaller these days due to COVID
> 
> HMTQ’s wardrobe is loaned out for countless exhibitions
> 
> So, I doubt Charles has help getting dressed in the morning, unless regalia is required
> But, yes, C must have a staff - 4 ??? - to organize, clean, maintain his military uniforms, medals, cloaks etc
> 
> Angela’s book is a must read if you are interested in the work behind caring for those wardrobes, the attention to detail in outfit selection each day is mind boggling eg gotta wear a Tartan in Scotland



I'm sure she has help for official functions. The laying out of clothes jewellery is all part of her job.


----------



## csshopper

Increasingly as he ages there are pictures of the 73 year old Charles where his swollen fingers are visible, in one they were red and looked like sausages. On those days I think a Valet to button him up, get all the medals pinned on straight, and tie his shoelaces so he doesn’t trip over himself would be essential.

Through the years there have been articles about his frugality with clothing and shoes. He has things mended and refurbished to an astonishing degree. i remember one picture of a jacket so patched the original material was hardly identifiable. He may have the equivalent of an Angela Kelly on his staff to tend to his mending, who could be a second Valet?

Not his biggest fan, but there are aspects about him I greatly admire and cut him some slack on the more trivial things like his grooming habits.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was true in Roman times, too.
> Personally, I think it is an excellent idea. I could use a ‘prep’ team.


The Kardashians and most celebrities certainly have prep teams!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> I slowed the video down. C&C were giggling when they came in. It looks like Hazz is giving Cam fussy looks, so she looks away. He glares at whoever she turned to. Cam kinda whispers it, then grimaces. IIRC this event happened shortly after the wedding, so I guess the shine had worn off.  IMO it shows MM’s behavior was indeed completely inappropriate from the beginning. Charles and Cam are senior royals, aka -the boss. Seems like MM would want to go the extra mile in those early days to please everyone. Unless…she knew she would be leaving.  Hazzi not knowing what to do with his hat = comedy gold.
> 
> I would like to see the entire video of the inside view, not just a clip. Also, who leaked this inside view and when did they do it ?
> Are gloves really off?


No one leaked it, it was on a news report on the same day.


----------



## Sharont2305

I suppose its the same with all senior Royals, regarding official engagements I remember back in the 80s watching the fly on the wall documentary about Charles and Diana. Her dresser documented every piece of clothing she had for official engagements, each item had a label on it with details of when it was worn, where it was worn and with what hat, jewellery etc. These things are planned meticulously, probably so she wasn't wearing the same outfit close together. They know what they have planned to wear a few weeks in advance I'm sure. Maybe a couple of options depending on the weather. I'm sure in some cases they go down the "I'll wear this tomorrow" route (especially Catherine) if they're doing something sporty or outdoorsy where we've seen her dressed down in jeans etc. Apart from that, it's all planned, months in advance for a Royal tour abroad.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm sure she has help for official functions. The laying out of clothes jewellery is all part of her job.


Agree, there is help laying out clothes and jewels, but the Queen gets dressed herself on a day -to-day basis.

Yes, she has help putting on crowns (Angela details the work required put on the crown and cloak at Parliament). And of course, once removed, her jewels are scoped up and removed to the ginormous vaults.

The curating of the wardrobe and jewels is mind boggling. 

I believe AK says that HMTQ does her own makeup, except for photo shoots. The hair is another matter, I dont remember if AK mentions that


----------



## marietouchet

One other tidbit from Angela 

WOW - the Queen's staff (10-12 people) spends HOURS making sure every outfit has been maintained perfectly. Iron, steam, brush, freshen up bent flowers on hats. Trim on hats is adjusted. Hems, tailoring checked every time. METICULOUS METICULOUS METICULOUS. This is not exactly dressing HMTQ just making her look good. 

So, the staff does not so much help her to put on dresses, as it makes sure the dresses delivered for wearing are IMPECCABLE. ANd 3 dresses are selected per day, if one does not work another is available.

HMTQ has a totally different audience than a celeb on a red carpet. The celeb faces the camera and shows her best side. But HMTQ is photographed from all sides, nothing can be hidden from view. And HMTQ wants to be seen - bright colors


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> One other tidbit from Angela
> 
> WOW - the Queen's staff (10-12 people) spends HOURS making sure every outfit has been maintained perfectly. Iron, steam, brush, freshen up bent flowers on hats. Trim on hats is adjusted. Hems, tailoring checked every time. METICULOUS METICULOUS METICULOUS. This is not exactly dressing HMTQ just making her look good.
> 
> So, the staff does not so much help her to put on dresses, as it makes sure the dresses delivered for wearing are IMPECCABLE. ANd 3 dresses are selected per day, if one does not work another is available.
> 
> HMTQ has a totally different audience than a celeb on a red carpet. The celeb faces the camera and shows her best side. But HMTQ is photographed from all sides, nothing can be hidden from view. And HMTQ wants to be seen - bright colors



When reports talk about PC needing 2 people to help him dress, they mean similarly. They don't mean someone has to hold each trouser leg for the Prince, they mean maintaining the wardrobe(s) shine his shoes, pack/unpack for travel, liaise with tailors and cleaners etc and laying out on a day to day and special occasion basis. 

Saying PC needs 2 people to dress him is just to make people react. Stirring the pot. All click bait. 

We not only have to dress ourselves but maintain/manage our wardrobes, so having a valet, a lady's maid is still more than we'll ever experience.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> That's not true.
> 
> He (meaning his servants) brought his own cases and trunks, writing and correspondence box, Gentleman's toiletry case, sports equipment (including rifle) and wardrobe.
> 
> In the field (military) they often had campaign trunks and portable desks (that someone else had to carry).


I once read the the Queen has her own toilet seat when she travels and quite frankly - I would do the same if I could.  lol


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Been thinking about Camilla, she is way far down in the BRF popularity polls, just about H A and M, despite being letter perfect since her marriage, in others words she good deeds of the last 20 past years have not made up for her fling with C while he was married to D
> 
> Catherine is way up in the polls, she had been unpopular during her child bearing years, but the public has forgiven/forgotten that
> 
> interesting difference between the women


Camilla isn't all that pretty in photographs, but I read she is sexy and attractive in real life with a fabulous sense of humour.

Since we never get to see them in real life, I guess people just go on the photographs they see and who is better looking.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I once read the the Queen has her own toilet seat when she travels and quite frankly - I would do the same if I could.  lol


I read that regarding PC. Supposedly it's a long standing joke and his sister gave it to him. As Papertiger said, a lot of what we read is just clickbait.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla isn't all that pretty in photographs, but I read she is sexy and attractive in real life with a fabulous sense of humour.
> 
> Since we never get to see them in real life, I guess people just go on the photographs they see and who is better looking.


I've seen Camilla looking very nice in photos. I do think she could find a more flattering hairstyle. Some people look better in person than in photos, and vice versa - i.e. models who photograph well but when you see them on TV they're not that impressive.


----------



## Kevinaxx

Chanbal said:


> the streaming platform has so far paid the couple £500,000 for each minute.


Way back, someone calculated that bill gates would actually lose money if he took the few seconds to bend down and pick up a $100 bill. At £500k/minute that’s £8.3k per second and fx current has it as £1 = roughly $1.34 so it’s $11.16k per second.

“Despite holding the title of the world’s richest man, Bill Gates has admitted that he would stoop to pick up a $100 bill, even though it would not be worth his time.

The Microsoft co-founder, said to be worth about $72 billion, is estimated to earn around $114.16 interest per second, making the effort required a poor investment of his time.”

in 2014:https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ld-still-pick-up-a-dollar100-bill-zbkjhkj77d8

the harkles Are the worst thing to have happened to UK/US for the past decade easily, and I know folks from UK keep telling us we can keep harrumph but please have mercy on us and take the harkles back.


----------



## Kevinaxx

Chanbal said:


> Charles is relieved and happy to share…
> View attachment 5307072
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Won’t Be Staying With Prince Charles Anytime Soon - Daily Soap Dish
> 
> 
> Talk about more than just a little awkward. There’s a new report that says should Prince Harry and Meghan Markle find their way back across the pond and in London anytime soon, the last place that the Duchess of Sussex will want to crash at, is at her father-in-law Prince Charles’ estate. Here’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dailysoapdish.com


Psh, more of her extra BS. Trying to get ahead of the narrative by saying _*she*_ doesn’t want to as if it was even *on* the table to begin with.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> When reports talk about PC needing 2 people to help him dress, they mean similarly. They don't mean someone has to hold each trouser leg for the Prince, they mean maintaining the wardrobe(s) shine his shoes, pack/unpack for travel, liaise with tailors and cleaners etc and laying out on a day to day and special occasion basis.
> 
> Saying PC needs 2 people to dress him is just to make people react. Stirring the pot. All click bait.
> 
> We not only have to dress ourselves but maintain/manage our wardrobes, so having a valet, a lady's maid is still more than we'll ever experience.


Several years ago we had to fly to our daughter's wedding in another state. I spent weeks on both my and my husband's wardrobe prep and packing for a four day weekend. I totally understand why the Queen has someone to do all her maintenance and prep.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I've seen Camilla looking very nice in photos. I do think she could find a more flattering hairstyle. Some people look better in person than in photos, and vice versa - i.e. models who photograph well but when you see them on TV they're not that impressive.


Yes, I remember back in the Diana days, those who knew both said that although Diana was really pretty, she was a bit admittedly dumb, but Camilla was vivacious and sexy in real life, something Diana was not.

I always think of that when I see photos of Camilla.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I remember back in the Diana days, those who knew both said that although Diana was really pretty, she was a bit admittedly dumb, but Camilla was vivacious and sexy in real life, something Diana was not.
> 
> I always think of that when I see photos of Camilla.


I don't think Diana was all that dumb. I think she was young and lacked the life experience that Camilla had when she entered Charles' social circle.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> The Kardashians and most celebrities certainly have prep teams!


I've heard celebrities say it takes their glam squads 4-5 hours to get them ready for red carpet events.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla isn't all that pretty in photographs, but I read she is sexy and attractive in real life with a fabulous sense of humour.
> 
> Since we never get to see them in real life, I guess people just go on the photographs they see and who is better looking.


and some people are more photogenic than others....I had an office friend who was attractive but not beautiful....she looked great in photos - bone structure maybe


----------



## Mendocino

papertiger said:


> This is completely normal in royal households (at least one).
> 
> They are called valets - the word you use for your parking attendants.
> 
> In the military, they used to be called one's batman and high-ranking officers had one.


In Downton Abbey Mr. Bates, Lord Grantham's former batman, to be his valet. [Edit] I mean Lord G. asked Bates to be his valet.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was true in Roman times, too.
> Personally, I think it is an excellent idea. I could use a ‘prep’ team.


I don't think I could stand having someone(s) help me dress.  Makeup and hair on the other hand...


----------



## papertiger

Mendocino said:


> In Downton Abbey Mr. Bates, Lord Grantham's former batman, to be his valet.



A good valet is hard to find.
Button your waistcoat (vest) incorrectly and they'll all know you didn't go to public school (private school)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> A good valet is hard to find.
> Button your waistcoat (vest) incorrectly and they'll all know you didn't go to public school (private school)
> 
> View attachment 5311762



I have not watched Downtown Abbey, but I think I'd love the Dowager Countess  She's the Queen of Throwing Shade.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have not watched Downtown Abbey, but I think I'd love the Dowager Countess  She's the Queen of Throwing Shade.



She is, and she has all the best lines


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think I could stand having someone(s) help me dress.  Makeup and hair on the other hand...


Hair, yes please!  I'll do my own makeup.

Diana had her hair blown out twice a day, especially if she went to the gym first thing in the morning. She wanted to be pretty for the paps she called to spontaneously photograph her running errands around London.


----------



## lvstratus

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla isn't all that pretty in photographs, but I read she is sexy and attractive in real life with a fabulous sense of humour.
> 
> Since we never get to see them in real life, I guess people just go on the photographs they see and who is better looking.



Camilla sexy and attractive?   This is subjective obviously, but I have seen her in person in one occasion, and I disagree.
I would as far as saying that she looks nicer in pictures.
Also, her style is so awful. Perhaps if she were to change her hairstyle we could see some improvement.


----------



## purseinsanity

Kevinaxx said:


> Way back, someone calculated that bill gates would actually lose money if he took the few seconds to bend down and pick up a $100 bill. At £500k/minute that’s £8.3k per second and fx current has it as £1 = roughly $1.34 so it’s $11.16k per second.
> 
> “Despite holding the title of the world’s richest man, Bill Gates has admitted that he would stoop to pick up a $100 bill, even though it would not be worth his time.
> 
> The Microsoft co-founder, said to be worth about $72 billion, is estimated to earn around $114.16 interest per second, making the effort required a poor investment of his time.”
> 
> in 2014:https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ld-still-pick-up-a-dollar100-bill-zbkjhkj77d8
> 
> the harkles Are the worst thing to have happened to UK/US for the past decade easily, and I know folks from UK keep telling us we can keep harrumph but please have mercy on us and take the harkles back.


Kind of a silly calculation, since Gates earns money whether he's actively doing something or not.  Must be nice!!


----------



## Kevinaxx

purseinsanity said:


> Kind of a silly calculation, since Gates earns money whether he's actively doing something or not.  Must be nice!!


I know lol, I was just thinking the insanity of over £100 per minute much less £500k for the harkles and the gates example was the closest I can think of.

and at least his charity giving is a significant  impact.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I'm a little OCD about germs so I wipe down my hotel rooms as soon as I arrive with Lysol wipes.  This is way before COVID.  I also wonder how clean the "clean" towels are in the room or if they're leftover from the previous guest.  I always called down for clean towels too.  Now I just travel with my own.  Haven't done bedsheets yet, but getting there.  Someone else's idea of clean might not be my idea of clean!


I wonder about the mattresses and what is doing under those sheets.  lol


----------



## xincinsin

Is CNN pro-Soursex? Their reporter did a positive spin on Spotify stepping in to extract product from the blissed-out Morons of Monteshitshow.








						The Sussexes' streaming shake-up
					

Harry and Meghan inked several media deals after relocating to the United States.




					edition.cnn.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Is CNN pro-Soursex? Their reporter did a positive spin on Spotify stepping in to extract product from the blissed-out Morons of Monteshitshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes' streaming shake-up
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan inked several media deals after relocating to the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com


CNN is pro-woke, so I'd assume yes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> A good valet is hard to find.
> Button your waistcoat (vest) incorrectly and they'll all know you didn't go to public school (private school)
> 
> View attachment 5311762


I mean, who doesn’t wish they had a Jeeves in their lives to sort their life out and steer them away from fashion faux pas?


Speaking of which, I don’t really care about Minnie Mouse because CBA and they are constantly bringing out New models to make their fans buy more stuff but my gosh is a Hilary-style squared out pant suit a weird choice for a character I always assumed was a child.



Jayne1 said:


> Hair, yes please!  I'll do my own makeup.
> 
> Diana had her hair blown out twice a day, especially if she went to the gym first thing in the morning. She wanted to be pretty for the paps she called to spontaneously photograph her running errands around London.


My god would I love to have a a hair stylist follow me around   
nicki Minaj is apparently very close with her main hair stylist and she gets through about 5 wigs a photo shoot so it makes sense it’s a full time job


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think I could stand having someone(s) help me dress.  Makeup and hair on the other hand...


LOL, I don't know about the full dressing part, but on mornings like this one, having someone pop in to fasten the damn bra would have been welcomed. Widowhood can really suck sometimes.


----------



## Aimee3

csshopper said:


> LOL, I don't know about the full dressing part, but on mornings like this one, having someone pop in to fasten the damn bra would have been welcomed. Widowhood can really suck sometimes.


Haha i know they say the “proper” way to put on a bra is to NOT fasten it in the front and then twist it around but I have never managed to do it correctly. The only one I ever knew who could do it was my mother!


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Haha i know they say the “proper” way to put on a bra is to NOT fasten it in the front and then twist it around but I have never managed to do it correctly. The only one I ever knew who could do it was my mother!


I suffered from a frozen shoulder a few years ago and became a fan of front-fastening bras.


----------



## Mendocino

papertiger said:


> A good valet is hard to find.
> Button your waistcoat (vest) incorrectly and they'll all know you didn't go to public school (private school)
> 
> View attachment 5311762



I remember this scene! Violet had the best lines and Maggie Smith is a great actress!


----------



## Mendocino

csshopper said:


> LOL, I don't know about the full dressing part, but on mornings like this one, having someone pop in to fasten the damn bra would have been welcomed. Widowhood can really suck sometimes.


I attended a wedding where I had to pray that there was a female manning the hotel reception desk and parkour down to said desk to ask her to pull my back zipper all the way up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla isn't all that pretty in photographs, but I read she is sexy and attractive in real life with a fabulous sense of humour.
> 
> Since we never get to see them in real life, I guess people just go on the photographs they see and who is better looking.



IMO her fun personality shines through all the photographs









						Prince Charles Has Two Men Help Him Get Dressed Every Morning and Iron His Shoelaces
					

Find out some of the bizarre things Prince Charles reportedly has his staff do for him and why he is called the "pampered prince."




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



There is one claim about his behavior that the Prince of Wales has denied and it’s that he brings his own toilet seat with him when he travels. the Prince of Wales has deniedWales has denied and it’s that he brings his own toilet seat with him when he travels.
The claim was made in Tom Bower 2018 biography titled Rebel Prince, The Power, Passion and Defiance Of Prince Charles. In it, Bower wrote that the royal brings along his own seat and luxury toilet paper when he takes trips abroad._Rebel Prince, The Power, Passion and Defiance Of Prince Charles_. In it, Bower wrote that the royal brings along his own seat and luxury toilet paper when he takes trips abroad.

When the prince was asked about this during a royal visit to Australia he said, *“My own what?! Oh, don’t believe all that crap. The very idea!”*
_His wife, Camilla, then chimed in and added, “Don’t you believe that.”_


----------



## rose60610

Whatever perks the BRF has and all the staff/servants who dress them, etc, it seems Meghan demands all that and MORE. Now she's stuck in CA, no one wants to see her. Notice how when they went to the UN, etc, they were the ones who invited themselves. No one wanted Harry on the USS Intrepid. The photos I saw were weird, all the forced fake laughter by guests who had a purpose being there were obligated to speak to them. ugh. Has it dawned on them that no one except the bots gives them any likes? Where's Amal, or the Beckhams, or anyone else? No one is seen with them. No one want to be the only person to invite them to their house. You know M&H would jump to visit any A lister. If any are invited to their 19 bathroom mansion, no one takes them up on it. Meghan is 100% toxic and made Harry radioactive as well. This couple is doomed and they have only themselves to blame. Do they really think Harry or their kids have any realistic chance of becoming King? By rejecting the BRF and slandering them, they've effectively fired themselves. So why all the security other than window-dressing? They're desperate to pass themselves off as being soooo important.


----------



## marietouchet

Kevinaxx said:


> I know lol, I was just thinking the insanity of over £100 per minute much less £500k for the harkles and the gates example was the closest I can think of.
> 
> and at least his charity giving is a significant  impact.


Interesting article this week on Gates foundation, in Wall St Journal - serious journalism, new members for board of directors, one of whom is the head of the London School of Economics - wow , serious folks 

OK, question for the masses .. who is on the board of Archewell, lemme have your ideas … I figure must be woke females only .. Minnie Mouse, Gwyneth Paltrow, Grimes ?????


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> When the prince was asked about this during a royal visit to Australia he said, “My own what?! Oh, don’t believe all that crap. The very idea!”
> _His wife, Camilla, then chimed in and added, “Don’t you believe that.”_



I think the claim is silly, but I also have a hard time believing Charles said "crap" in public


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Is CNN pro-Soursex? Their reporter did a positive spin on Spotify stepping in to extract product from the blissed-out Morons of Monteshitshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes' streaming shake-up
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan inked several media deals after relocating to the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com


CNN a is very liberal, tending to the woke end of the spectrum
Their star was Chris Cuomo, brother of Andrew Cuomo ex governor of NY, CC was fired for collaborating with AC when AC was disgraced due to harassment of women staff


----------



## bag-mania

lvstratus said:


> Camilla sexy and attractive?   This is subjective obviously, but I have seen her in person in one occasion, and I disagree.
> I would as far as saying that she looks nicer in pictures.
> Also, her style is so awful. Perhaps if she were to change her hairstyle we could see some improvement.



I’m with you there. We can say Camilla is many things but sexy and attractive would not be among them. That said, a plain looking woman can certainly look sexy to her lovers.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Is CNN pro-Soursex? Their reporter did a positive spin on Spotify stepping in to extract product from the blissed-out Morons of Monteshitshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes' streaming shake-up
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan inked several media deals after relocating to the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com



CNN was extremely pro-Sussex at the time of Megxit. I don’t know if they still are as much but it wouldn’t surprise me.


----------



## charlottawill

lvstratus said:


> Camilla sexy and attractive?   This is subjective obviously, but I have seen her in person in one occasion, and I disagree.
> I would as far as saying that she looks nicer in pictures.
> Also, her style is so awful. Perhaps if she were to change her hairstyle we could see some improvement.


Well we know Diana called her the Rottweiler


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Interesting article this week on Gates foundation, in Wall St Journal - serious journalism, new members for board of directors, one of whom is the head of the London School of Economics - wow , serious folks
> 
> OK, question for the masses .. who is on the board of Archewell, lemme have your ideas … I figure must be woke females only .. Minnie Mouse, Gwyneth Paltrow, Grimes ?????



Michelle O, Hillary, NancyP, Amal, Oprah, Gayle, Julia Carey (Cordon’s wife), Elton, any of her wedding attendees
actually, these are her fantasy members 








						Oprah Winfrey, the Beckhams, and the Clooneys Were Among the First Guests at the Royal Wedding
					

Here's a look at all the famous names at today's big event.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Michelle O, Hillary, NancyP, Amal, Oprah, Gayle, Julia Carey (Cordon’s wife), Elton, any of her wedding attendees
> actually, these are her fantasy members
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey, the Beckhams, and the Clooneys Were Among the First Guests at the Royal Wedding
> 
> 
> Here's a look at all the famous names at today's big event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


With all the media coverage she has gotten over the past five years, I've never heard of anyone from MM's high school or college days coming forward in support of her. Did she even have any friends? I find it odd....


----------



## charlottawill

lvstratus said:


> Camilla sexy and attractive?   This is subjective obviously, but I have seen her in person in one occasion, and I disagree.
> I would as far as saying that she looks nicer in pictures.
> Also, her style is so awful. Perhaps if she were to change her hairstyle we could see some improvement.


I just browsed some pics of young Camilla and it's hard to dispute what you say.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Haha i know they say the “proper” way to put on a bra is to NOT fasten it in the front and then twist it around but I have never managed to do it correctly. The only one I ever knew who could do it was my mother!


That was a goal of mine when I had rotator cuff surgery.  I stayed away from the front closing also because I didn't want any pull on my shoulder.  I used a strapless band bra and it didn't give the best shape, but it was better than nothing.

As for Camilla, I think her wit and personality make up for any deficiencies  in the looks department.  She looks like great fun and looks to have a very upbeat personality.  Perhaps a gene she inherited from Alice Keppel.  




__





						alice keppel - Google Search
					





					www.google.com
				




The Sussex reside in the  universe of the whining complaining people.  I can't imagine that being with them is very much fun.  The pictures of Harry with other people  at Bemelmans Bar were painful.  Apparently he never stopped talking and the people looked like they wanted to escape.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> With all the media coverage she has gotten over the past five years, I've never heard of anyone from MM's high school or college days coming forward in support of her. Did she even have any friends? I find it odd....


Where were all her sorority sisters at her wedding?  Oh, right, they were washing their hair.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think the claim is silly, but I also have a hard time believing Charles said "crap" in public


You never know...maybe he was joking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> With all the media coverage she has gotten over the past five years, I've never heard of anyone from MM's high school or college days coming forward in support of her. Did she even have any friends? I find it odd....



She has HAD some very wealthy _friends:_
yes, these are *old* articles:
_








						Meghan Markle’s college BFF defends her on Instagram
					

“Meg’s M.O. has always been kindness; goodwill runs in her bones.”




					pagesix.com
				



_








						Meghan Markle's best friends passionately defend her following palace bullying claims
					

Meghan Markle's best friends Daniel Martin, Lindsay Roth and Janina Gavankar defend her following palace bullying claims – see their passionate posts




					www.hellomagazine.com
				












						Who are the friends Meghan Markle turned up to Wimbledon with?
					

Lindsay Roth and Genevieve Hillis go way back with Meghan.




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I’m with you there. We can say Camilla is many things but sexy and attractive would not be among them. That said, *a plain looking woman can certainly look sexy to her lovers.*


 
I can't help but think of Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. She wasn't stunning looking, but she knew how to appeal (and work FAST). She married Churchill's son mainly for Winston's connections. The son himself was trouble and a disaster. No matter, it was all about climbing the ladder. Here's part of a Wiki: 

Beside two additional marriages, Pamela Harriman had numerous affairs with men of prominence and wealth. During her marriage to Randolph Churchill, she had romantic involvements with men, including Harriman, who, much later became her third husband; Edward R. Murrow; and John J "Jock" Whitney. Notable consorts after her divorce from Churchill included Prince Aly Khan, Gianni Agnelli, and Baron Elie de Rothschild.

Churchill became well known for her attention to detail with men. When involved romantically with a man, she paid extremely close attention to his desires and preferences, and went to any lengths necessary to satisfy his needs during the affair. William S. Paley, briefly a consort during WWII, said: "She is the greatest courtesan of the century", meaning it as a compliment. The more critical Max Hastings said, acerbically, "she was ... described as having become 'a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings'."

In 1948 she moved to Paris and began a five-year-long romance with Gianni Agnelli, a noted playboy and heir to the Fiat empire, who was a year younger than she was. She described this as the happiest period of her life. In August 1952 Pamela walked in on him embracing a young woman, Anne-Marie d'Estainville, at a party. Later that night Agnelli sustained a severe leg injury in a car accident while bringing d'Estainville home. By Pamela's account, she nursed him back to health while he was in the hospital, then while he was convalescing in Turin they decided together to end their relationship.

Her next significant relationship was with Baron de Rothschild, who was married. He supported her financially, and she was schooled in art history and wine-making during this clandestine and short relationship. During this time she also had affairs with the writer Maurice Druon and with the shipping magnate Stavros Niarchos. 

In 1959, she met Broadway producer Leland Hayward, who was still married to Slim Hawks. He proposed to her, and after her marriage ultimatum to Rothschild was rejected, she accepted Hayward's offer and moved to New York City. The day Hayward's divorce was final, she became the fifth Mrs. Hayward with the ceremony taking place in Carson City, Nevada on 4 May 1960. Hayward was rich with income from his productions, notably the very successful The sound of Music,  allowing for a lavish and luxurious lifestyle mostly between their residence in New York City and the Westchester County estate "Haywire." Haywire also became the name of the memoirs of her stepdaughter Brooke Hayward. Her step granddaughter through Brooke was Marin Hopper. Pamela Hayward stayed with her husband until his death on 18 March 1971.

*The day after Hayward's funeral, Pamela arranged to resume her acquaintance with her former lover, Harriman, then 79 years old* and recently widowed. They were married on 27 September 1971. With this marriage, her social focus was moved to Washington, D.C., where he owned a townhouse in Georgetown  from which they entertained many notable people. Harriman, a railroad heir, was wealthy and also bought an estate in Virginia and a private jet. With Harriman's involvement and links in the ********ic Party, her political career began. Her last marriage lasted until his death in 1986. In later years, she had many legal problems with Harriman's children concerning the inheritance.

I read her biography. No fictional character comes close. She did end up inheriting Harriman's estate, about $200 million, a lot of money back then  .  So I can see Camilla charming anyone she needs to, and she and Charles do seem happy together. On the other hand, how do you top a King?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has some very wealthy _friends:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s college BFF defends her on Instagram
> 
> 
> “Meg’s M.O. has always been kindness; goodwill runs in her bones.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's best friends passionately defend her following palace bullying claims
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's best friends Daniel Martin, Lindsay Roth and Janina Gavankar defend her following palace bullying claims – see their passionate posts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who are the friends Meghan Markle turned up to Wimbledon with?
> 
> 
> Lindsay Roth and Genevieve Hillis go way back with Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


Ok, two of the articles date to 2019, a while ago


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I can't help but think of Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. She wasn't stunning looking, but she knew how to appeal (and work FAST). She married Churchill's son mainly for Winston's connections. The son himself was trouble and a disaster. No matter, it was all about climbing the ladder. Here's part of a Wiki:
> 
> Beside two additional marriages, Pamela Harriman had numerous affairs with men of prominence and wealth. During her marriage to Randolph Churchill, she had romantic involvements with men, including Harriman, who, much later became her third husband; Edward R. Murrow; and John J "Jock" Whitney. Notable consorts after her divorce from Churchill included Prince Aly Khan, Gianni Agnelli, and Baron Elie de Rothschild.
> 
> Churchill became well known for her attention to detail with men. When involved romantically with a man, she paid extremely close attention to his desires and preferences, and went to any lengths necessary to satisfy his needs during the affair. William S. Paley, briefly a consort during WWII, said: "She is the greatest courtesan of the century", meaning it as a compliment. The more critical Max Hastings said, acerbically, "she was ... described as having become 'a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings'."
> 
> In 1948 she moved to Paris and began a five-year-long romance with Gianni Agnelli, a noted playboy and heir to the Fiat empire, who was a year younger than she was. She described this as the happiest period of her life. In August 1952 Pamela walked in on him embracing a young woman, Anne-Marie d'Estainville, at a party. Later that night Agnelli sustained a severe leg injury in a car accident while bringing d'Estainville home. By Pamela's account, she nursed him back to health while he was in the hospital, then while he was convalescing in Turin they decided together to end their relationship.
> 
> Her next significant relationship was with Baron de Rothschild, who was married. He supported her financially, and she was schooled in art history and wine-making during this clandestine and short relationship. During this time she also had affairs with the writer Maurice Druon and with the shipping magnate Stavros Niarchos.
> 
> In 1959, she met Broadway producer Leland Hayward, who was still married to Slim Hawks. He proposed to her, and after her marriage ultimatum to Rothschild was rejected, she accepted Hayward's offer and moved to New York City. The day Hayward's divorce was final, she became the fifth Mrs. Hayward with the ceremony taking place in Carson City, Nevada on 4 May 1960. Hayward was rich with income from his productions, notably the very successful The sound of Music,  allowing for a lavish and luxurious lifestyle mostly between their residence in New York City and the Westchester County estate "Haywire." Haywire also became the name of the memoirs of her stepdaughter Brooke Hayward. Her step granddaughter through Brooke was Marin Hopper. Pamela Hayward stayed with her husband until his death on 18 March 1971.
> 
> *The day after Hayward's funeral, Pamela arranged to resume her acquaintance with her former lover, Harriman, then 79 years old* and recently widowed. They were married on 27 September 1971. With this marriage, her social focus was moved to Washington, D.C., where he owned a townhouse in Georgetown  from which they entertained many notable people. Harriman, a railroad heir, was wealthy and also bought an estate in Virginia and a private jet. With Harriman's involvement and links in the ********ic Party, her political career began. Her last marriage lasted until his death in 1986. In later years, she had many legal problems with Harriman's children concerning the inheritance.
> 
> I read her biography. No fictional character comes close. She did end up inheriting Harriman's estate, about $200 million, a lot of money back then  .  So I can see Camilla charming anyone she needs to, and she and Charles do seem happy together. On the other hand, how do you top a King?



She sounds fascinating. There are a rare few women who have a gift for being able to morph themselves into whatever their lover most desires. 
Greatest courtesan of the century indeed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Ok, two of the articles date to 2019, a while ago



These were the first ones that popped up in Google.  No one here should expect me to do any more research than that


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has HAD some very wealthy _friends:_
> yes, these are *old* articles:
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s college BFF defends her on Instagram
> 
> 
> “Meg’s M.O. has always been kindness; goodwill runs in her bones.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's best friends passionately defend her following palace bullying claims
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's best friends Daniel Martin, Lindsay Roth and Janina Gavankar defend her following palace bullying claims – see their passionate posts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who are the friends Meghan Markle turned up to Wimbledon with?
> 
> 
> Lindsay Roth and Genevieve Hillis go way back with Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


Gotta say, those sound pretty positive. But people do change.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I can't help but think of Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. She wasn't stunning looking, but she knew how to appeal (and work FAST). She married Churchill's son mainly for Winston's connections. The son himself was trouble and a disaster. No matter, it was all about climbing the ladder. Here's part of a Wiki:
> 
> Beside two additional marriages, Pamela Harriman had numerous affairs with men of prominence and wealth. During her marriage to Randolph Churchill, she had romantic involvements with men, including Harriman, who, much later became her third husband; Edward R. Murrow; and John J "Jock" Whitney. Notable consorts after her divorce from Churchill included Prince Aly Khan, Gianni Agnelli, and Baron Elie de Rothschild.
> 
> Churchill became well known for her attention to detail with men. When involved romantically with a man, she paid extremely close attention to his desires and preferences, and went to any lengths necessary to satisfy his needs during the affair. William S. Paley, briefly a consort during WWII, said: "She is the greatest courtesan of the century", meaning it as a compliment. The more critical Max Hastings said, acerbically, "she was ... described as having become 'a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings'."
> 
> In 1948 she moved to Paris and began a five-year-long romance with Gianni Agnelli, a noted playboy and heir to the Fiat empire, who was a year younger than she was. She described this as the happiest period of her life. In August 1952 Pamela walked in on him embracing a young woman, Anne-Marie d'Estainville, at a party. Later that night Agnelli sustained a severe leg injury in a car accident while bringing d'Estainville home. By Pamela's account, she nursed him back to health while he was in the hospital, then while he was convalescing in Turin they decided together to end their relationship.
> 
> Her next significant relationship was with Baron de Rothschild, who was married. He supported her financially, and she was schooled in art history and wine-making during this clandestine and short relationship. During this time she also had affairs with the writer Maurice Druon and with the shipping magnate Stavros Niarchos.
> 
> In 1959, she met Broadway producer Leland Hayward, who was still married to Slim Hawks. He proposed to her, and after her marriage ultimatum to Rothschild was rejected, she accepted Hayward's offer and moved to New York City. The day Hayward's divorce was final, she became the fifth Mrs. Hayward with the ceremony taking place in Carson City, Nevada on 4 May 1960. Hayward was rich with income from his productions, notably the very successful The sound of Music,  allowing for a lavish and luxurious lifestyle mostly between their residence in New York City and the Westchester County estate "Haywire." Haywire also became the name of the memoirs of her stepdaughter Brooke Hayward. Her step granddaughter through Brooke was Marin Hopper. Pamela Hayward stayed with her husband until his death on 18 March 1971.
> 
> *The day after Hayward's funeral, Pamela arranged to resume her acquaintance with her former lover, Harriman, then 79 years old* and recently widowed. They were married on 27 September 1971. With this marriage, her social focus was moved to Washington, D.C., where he owned a townhouse in Georgetown  from which they entertained many notable people. Harriman, a railroad heir, was wealthy and also bought an estate in Virginia and a private jet. With Harriman's involvement and links in the ********ic Party, her political career began. Her last marriage lasted until his death in 1986. In later years, she had many legal problems with Harriman's children concerning the inheritance.
> 
> I read her biography. No fictional character comes close. She did end up inheriting Harriman's estate, about $200 million, a lot of money back then  .  So I can see Camilla charming anyone she needs to, and she and Charles do seem happy together. On the other hand, how do you top a King?


Truman Capote incurred the forever wrath of Babe Paley by outing her husband's affair with Pamela after Babe had confided in him.  It appeared in a piece in Vanity Fair that was part of a book he was writing.  Apparently she came home to find him attempting to scrub the menstrual (Pamela's) blood off the bedsheets.  Capote was dropped from the social sphere of all these rich women who had confided in him and he never recovered. 

 $200 million sounds like a nice chunk of change even now.

Meghan could never achieve any of this with her  personality.  Too self centered in all things and not as smart.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I miss Truman, Dominick Dunne, the Swans, etc.
Those guys could _write, _dish the dirt and still get the ‘party invites’ (usually). Such a gift


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Truman Capote incurred the forever wrath of Babe Paley by outing her husband's affair with Pamela after Babe had confided in him.  It appeared in a piece in Vanity Fair that was part of a book he was writing.  Apparently she came home to find him attempting to scrub the menstrual (Pamela's) blood off the bedsheets.  Capote was dropped from the social sphere of all these rich women who had confided in him and he never recovered.
> 
> $200 million sounds like a nice chunk of change even now.
> 
> Meghan could never achieve any of this with her  personality.  Too self centered in all things and not as smart.



Can't say that I blame Babe Paley and the rest of her crowd. That was very foolish of Capote, not to mention TMI. He could have taken this wise advice:

I have tales to tell, but I don't tell them. Discretion. Discretion. 
-- Gregory Peck


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Airplanes too.  I used to wipe down my tray, arm rests, belts, windows, even the air and call button.  People used to look at me like I was nuts.  Not so much any more.



I'm a big fan of the small gesture of washing hands as soon as I enter the house after running errands. There is actually stuff that won't be killed/removed by desinfectants but only warm water and soap.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm a big fan of the small gesture of washing hands as soon as I enter the house after running errands. There is actually stuff that won't be killed/removed by desinfectants but only warm water and soap.


Another sister from another mother! I'm finding all the sisters I never had here  I have always done this and I can't imagine not doing it. But I've had to train my husband over the past two years.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I can't help but think of Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. She wasn't stunning looking, but she knew how to appeal (and work FAST). She married Churchill's son mainly for Winston's connections. The son himself was trouble and a disaster. No matter, it was all about climbing the ladder. Here's part of a Wiki:
> 
> Beside two additional marriages, Pamela Harriman had numerous affairs with men of prominence and wealth. During her marriage to Randolph Churchill, she had romantic involvements with men, including Harriman, who, much later became her third husband; Edward R. Murrow; and John J "Jock" Whitney. Notable consorts after her divorce from Churchill included Prince Aly Khan, Gianni Agnelli, and Baron Elie de Rothschild.
> 
> Churchill became well known for her attention to detail with men. When involved romantically with a man, she paid extremely close attention to his desires and preferences, and went to any lengths necessary to satisfy his needs during the affair. William S. Paley, briefly a consort during WWII, said: "She is the greatest courtesan of the century", meaning it as a compliment. The more critical Max Hastings said, acerbically, "she was ... described as having become 'a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings'."
> 
> In 1948 she moved to Paris and began a five-year-long romance with Gianni Agnelli, a noted playboy and heir to the Fiat empire, who was a year younger than she was. She described this as the happiest period of her life. In August 1952 Pamela walked in on him embracing a young woman, Anne-Marie d'Estainville, at a party. Later that night Agnelli sustained a severe leg injury in a car accident while bringing d'Estainville home. By Pamela's account, she nursed him back to health while he was in the hospital, then while he was convalescing in Turin they decided together to end their relationship.
> 
> Her next significant relationship was with Baron de Rothschild, who was married. He supported her financially, and she was schooled in art history and wine-making during this clandestine and short relationship. During this time she also had affairs with the writer Maurice Druon and with the shipping magnate Stavros Niarchos.
> 
> In 1959, she met Broadway producer Leland Hayward, who was still married to Slim Hawks. He proposed to her, and after her marriage ultimatum to Rothschild was rejected, she accepted Hayward's offer and moved to New York City. The day Hayward's divorce was final, she became the fifth Mrs. Hayward with the ceremony taking place in Carson City, Nevada on 4 May 1960. Hayward was rich with income from his productions, notably the very successful The sound of Music,  allowing for a lavish and luxurious lifestyle mostly between their residence in New York City and the Westchester County estate "Haywire." Haywire also became the name of the memoirs of her stepdaughter Brooke Hayward. Her step granddaughter through Brooke was Marin Hopper. Pamela Hayward stayed with her husband until his death on 18 March 1971.
> 
> *The day after Hayward's funeral, Pamela arranged to resume her acquaintance with her former lover, Harriman, then 79 years old* and recently widowed. They were married on 27 September 1971. With this marriage, her social focus was moved to Washington, D.C., where he owned a townhouse in Georgetown  from which they entertained many notable people. Harriman, a railroad heir, was wealthy and also bought an estate in Virginia and a private jet. With Harriman's involvement and links in the ********ic Party, her political career began. Her last marriage lasted until his death in 1986. In later years, she had many legal problems with Harriman's children concerning the inheritance.
> 
> I read her biography. No fictional character comes close. She did end up inheriting Harriman's estate, about $200 million, a lot of money back then  .  So I can see Camilla charming anyone she needs to, and she and Charles do seem happy together. On the other hand, how do you top a King?


she must have been a very charming woman (in addition to any sexual prowess).  there are some people who are magnets for the opposite sex.  I've known a couple of women who, to me and to other women, weren't that attractive but to the men, they were apparently very hot


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I’m with you there. We can say Camilla is many things but sexy and attractive would not be among them. That said, a plain looking woman can certainly look sexy to her lovers.


I don’t know about that. Some women are not that attractive but their pheromones are strong to the opposite sex. It’s that certain thing they possess. Whether it’s their attitude or how they carry themselves is what makes them sexy. Sometimes a glint in their eyes, the way they talk and hold their conversations, etc. So many bubbleheads with rich men but then it goes south. Many attractive women do possess it to, to be fair.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she must have been a very charming woman (in addition to any sexual prowess).  there are some people who are magnets for the opposite sex.  I've known a couple of women who, to me and to other women, weren't that attractive but to the men, they were apparently very hot



I am completely fascinated how these women - in a time where divorce was frowned upon no less - managed to snag one high profile husband after another well into their middle ages. Nowadays the freshly divorced billionaire goes looking for a 25yo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Can't say that I blame Babe Paley and the rest of her crowd. That was very foolish of Capote, not to mention TMI. He could have taken this wise advice:
> 
> I have tales to tell, but I don't tell them. Discretion. Discretion.
> -- Gregory Peck



Generally, I agree with keeping secrets.
On the other hand, at a certain point, a betrayal is expected. Camilla and Kate  understand this. Diana, Fergie, MM - no.
_“What did they expect?” he would say. “I’m a writer.”

Capote felt the swans didn’t keep up their end of the bargain: He’d amuse them, impress at their parties, share his intellect, and he’d take what he wanted and use it.









						The story that destroyed Truman Capote — and high society
					

They were his swans, the most beautiful, stylish, wealthy and envied women in all of New York. And he, Truman Capote, was their ultimate trophy: the boy genius whose masterpiece, “In Cold Blood,” m…




					nypost.com
				



_


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am completely fascinated how these women - in a time where divorce was frowned upon no less - managed to snag one high profile husband after another well into their middle ages. Nowadays the freshly divorced billionaire goes looking for a 25yo.


well, Jeff Bezos - one of the richest men in the world - left his wife for a woman who is 51, only a few years younger than him.  so I guess she knows how to work her charms too


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she must have been a very charming woman (in addition to any sexual prowess).  there are some people who are magnets for the opposite sex.  I've known a couple of women who, to me and to other women, weren't that attractive but to the men, they were apparently very hot


I know many will disagree, but I believe many powerful and successful men are attracted to more than just a pretty face. Qualities like humor and intelligence last, while looks generally don't. This may be why C&C have been together for so long.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am completely fascinated how these women - in a time where divorce was frowned upon no less - managed to snag one high profile husband after another well into their middle ages. Nowadays the freshly divorced billionaire goes looking for a 25yo.


To his credit, Bezos is with someone age appropriate.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I know many will disagree, but I believe many powerful and successful men are attracted to more than just a pretty face. Qualities like humor and intelligence last, while looks generally don't. This may be why C&C have been together for so long.


yes, and there is such a thing as chemistry


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> To his credit, Bezos is with someone age appropriate.


and I love that his wife was left very rich and has been doing great things with her money


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well, Jeff Bezos - one of the richest men in the world - left his wife for a woman who is 51, only a few years younger than him.  so I guess she knows how to work her charms too


Her third high profile partner. First an NFL player, then one of the most powerful agents in Hollywood, now the richest man in the world. She must be doing something right.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> and I love that his wife was left very rich and has been doing great things with her money


And I heard she remarried a teacher from her kids' school.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> yes, and there is such a thing as chemistry


Totally.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm a big fan of the small gesture of washing hands as soon as I enter the house after running errands. There is actually stuff that won't be killed/removed by desinfectants but only warm water and soap.



First thing I do when I walk through the door! After I take off my shoes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Interesting article this week on Gates foundation, in Wall St Journal - serious journalism, new members for board of directors, one of whom is the head of the London School of Economics - wow , serious folks
> 
> OK, question for the masses .. who is on the board of Archewell, lemme have your ideas … I figure must be woke females only .. Minnie Mouse, Gwyneth Paltrow, Grimes ?????


Might be a dangerous job. IIRC, there were questions asked when Sussex Royal was wound up, and Hazard declared that he and TW had little to do with running their foundation, throwing responsibility to his board of directors.


----------



## octopus17

purseinsanity said:


> I'm a little OCD about germs so I wipe down my hotel rooms as soon as I arrive with Lysol wipes.  This is way before COVID.  I also wonder how clean the "clean" towels are in the room or if they're leftover from the previous guest.  I always called down for clean towels too.  Now I just travel with my own.  Haven't done bedsheets yet, but getting there.  Someone else's idea of clean might not be my idea of clean!


It's the bedspread on top of any duvets/sheets/blankets that freaks me out. Apparently it's one of the least laundered items and I truely shudder to think of the multiple 'contaminants' it may harbour ...


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> First thing I do when I walk through the door! After I take off my shoes.


Too funny! Must be some connection between our shared habits and our shared love of handbags.

And if you really want to start an internet battle, bring up the subject of shoes vs. no shoes in the house.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> I can't help but think of Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman. She wasn't stunning looking, but she knew how to appeal (and work FAST). She married Churchill's son mainly for Winston's connections. The son himself was trouble and a disaster. No matter, it was all about climbing the ladder. Here's part of a Wiki:
> 
> Beside two additional marriages, Pamela Harriman had numerous affairs with men of prominence and wealth. During her marriage to Randolph Churchill, she had romantic involvements with men, including Harriman, who, much later became her third husband; Edward R. Murrow; and John J "Jock" Whitney. Notable consorts after her divorce from Churchill included Prince Aly Khan, Gianni Agnelli, and Baron Elie de Rothschild.
> 
> Churchill became well known for her attention to detail with men. When involved romantically with a man, she paid extremely close attention to his desires and preferences, and went to any lengths necessary to satisfy his needs during the affair. William S. Paley, briefly a consort during WWII, said: "She is the greatest courtesan of the century", meaning it as a compliment. The more critical Max Hastings said, acerbically, "she was ... described as having become 'a world expert on rich men's bedroom ceilings'."
> 
> In 1948 she moved to Paris and began a five-year-long romance with Gianni Agnelli, a noted playboy and heir to the Fiat empire, who was a year younger than she was. She described this as the happiest period of her life. In August 1952 Pamela walked in on him embracing a young woman, Anne-Marie d'Estainville, at a party. Later that night Agnelli sustained a severe leg injury in a car accident while bringing d'Estainville home. By Pamela's account, she nursed him back to health while he was in the hospital, then while he was convalescing in Turin they decided together to end their relationship.
> 
> Her next significant relationship was with Baron de Rothschild, who was married. He supported her financially, and she was schooled in art history and wine-making during this clandestine and short relationship. During this time she also had affairs with the writer Maurice Druon and with the shipping magnate Stavros Niarchos.
> 
> In 1959, she met Broadway producer Leland Hayward, who was still married to Slim Hawks. He proposed to her, and after her marriage ultimatum to Rothschild was rejected, she accepted Hayward's offer and moved to New York City. The day Hayward's divorce was final, she became the fifth Mrs. Hayward with the ceremony taking place in Carson City, Nevada on 4 May 1960. Hayward was rich with income from his productions, notably the very successful The sound of Music,  allowing for a lavish and luxurious lifestyle mostly between their residence in New York City and the Westchester County estate "Haywire." Haywire also became the name of the memoirs of her stepdaughter Brooke Hayward. Her step granddaughter through Brooke was Marin Hopper. Pamela Hayward stayed with her husband until his death on 18 March 1971.
> 
> *The day after Hayward's funeral, Pamela arranged to resume her acquaintance with her former lover, Harriman, then 79 years old* and recently widowed. They were married on 27 September 1971. With this marriage, her social focus was moved to Washington, D.C., where he owned a townhouse in Georgetown  from which they entertained many notable people. Harriman, a railroad heir, was wealthy and also bought an estate in Virginia and a private jet. With Harriman's involvement and links in the ********ic Party, her political career began. Her last marriage lasted until his death in 1986. In later years, she had many legal problems with Harriman's children concerning the inheritance.
> 
> I read her biography. No fictional character comes close. She did end up inheriting Harriman's estate, about $200 million, a lot of money back then  .  So I can see Camilla charming anyone she needs to, and she and Charles do seem happy together. On the other hand, how do you top a King?


I remember her. She was featured in Vogue a lot.

You know how Diana famously pretended to love country living and outdoor activities, but once married, refused to leave London's big city fun?

It used to make me think of Pamela Harriman and how she would have stayed the course.  It's what got the guy and how she would keep the guy. Except for Agnelli, he was the only one who refused to marry her.


----------



## Chanbal

Movie time…


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that prefer cartoons…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that prefer cartoons…


----------



## purseinsanity

Cornflower Blue said:


> It's the bedspread on top of any duvets/sheets/blankets that freaks me out. Apparently it's one of the least laundered items and I truely shudder to think of the multiple 'contaminants' it may harbour ...


100%!!!  I take it off.  I’m always paranoid a porno was filmed there and they forgot to clean it


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> 100%!!!  I take it off.  I’m always paranoid a porno was filmed there and they forgot to clean it


Maybe I'm naive, but I like to think the hotels we stay at are not the settings for porn. Then again, with phone cameras, who knows these days? 

I do recall many moons ago staying at lesser places that had bedspreads and not wanting the kids to sit on them. Most places today have duvets that get changed with the sheets. It's those throws at the foot of the bed I worry about now


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
					

Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Kevinaxx

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5312174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Wow he takes the whole those who cannot, teach, to a whole ‘nother level.

wahts next? Teaching folks how to have good credit and be financially savvy when he was on the credit I mean good Graces of his dad the same one he bad mouths and the stans sympathize with (low key sucking up so he will inherit enough money to go and buy himself a “palace” because double digit bathrooms isn’t enough for TW).


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Maybe I'm naive, but *I like to think the hotels we stay at are not the settings for porn*. Then again, with phone cameras, who knows these days?
> 
> I do recall many moons ago staying at lesser places that had bedspreads and not wanting the kids to sit on them. Most places today have duvets that get changed with the sheets. It's those throws at the foot of the bed I worry about now


LOLOL!  My husband is low maintenance in pretty much everything except travel.  We've stayed in some really phenomenal hotels.  I hope nothing skeevy is going on in those places, but there are many rich folks that are a little too freaky for my taste 

Just to keep it on topic, I don't even want to know what freaky things Megusa did to entice Haz.  I suppose they weren't on duvets, being out in the bush and all.


----------



## purseinsanity

Kevinaxx said:


> Wow he takes the whole those who cannot, teach, to a whole ‘nother level.
> 
> wahts next? Teaching folks how to have good credit and be financially savvy when he was on the credit I mean good Graces of his dad the same one he bad mouths and the stans sympathize with (low key sucking up so he will inherit enough money to go and buy himself a “palace” because double digit bathrooms isn’t enough for TW).


I'll one up you and say he not only cannot, he can't teach either, but he can preach!


----------



## Debbini

xincinsin said:


> I suffered from a frozen shoulder a few years ago and became a fan of front-fastening bras.


Same thing happened to me.


----------



## Chanbal

Kevinaxx said:


> Wow he takes the whole those who cannot, teach, to a whole ‘nother level.
> 
> wahts next? *Teaching folks how to have good credit and be financially savvy* when he was on the credit I mean good Graces of his dad the same one he bad mouths and the stans sympathize with (low key sucking up so he will inherit enough money to go and buy himself a “palace” because double digit bathrooms isn’t enough for TW).


Harry, the new Suze Orman! I can see why they are called '_Grandiose Narcissists_'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5312174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


This is hilarious. He doesn't work. What burnout or productivity issues is he going to talk about? Any bets that his recommended solution is to quit?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5312174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


But, wait, he already covered this topic, remember? If you aren’t feeling joy, just Quit You Job. 

The Clueless Dunderhead gives the world new comic material, memes to follow. He’s regurgatating TW’s word salads.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> But, wait, he already covered this topic, remember? If you aren’t feeling joy, just Quit You Job.
> 
> *The Clueless Dunderhead gives the world new comic material, memes to follow memes to follow*. He’s regurgatating TW’s word salads.



 
I’m here for it.  
We need some laughter. BLG needs a new video, too.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> You know how Diana famously pretended to love country living and outdoor activities, but once married, refused to leave London's big city fun?



She wouldn’t have been the first young wife who tried to show interest in what her husband enjoyed and his hobbies. But it gets old if the husband doesn’t reciprocate and show interest in anything she likes.

With royalty, they expect everything must be done to please them. I can’t blame Diana for losing interest when Charles wasn’t making any effort.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5312174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Next up: Harry to lecture about How To Attract a Woman By Just Being Yourself and Having No Connections.  Followed by: How to Overcome Multitudes of Hardships From Your Upbringing.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m here for it.
> We need some laughter. BLG needs a new video, too.


H and M need to do something new so BLG can dissect it.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Next up: Harry to lecture about How To Attract a Woman By Just Being Yourself and Having No Connections.  Followed by: How to Overcome Multitudes of Hardships From Your Upbringing.


How to Attract Your Soulmate by being Nice and Kind to Rescue Chickens
Bonus content: Overcoming Generational Pain 
Early Bird Sign-up: Free copy of The Bench


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> *I'm a little OCD about germs so I wipe down my hotel rooms as soon as I arrive with Lysol wipes*.  This is way before COVID.  I also wonder how clean the "clean" towels are in the room or if they're leftover from the previous guest. I always called down for clean towels too.  *Now I just travel with my own*.  Haven't done bedsheets yet, but getting there.  Someone else's idea of clean might not be my idea of clean!



I'm glad I'm not the only one who does this, lol!! And have been doing it ages before Covid!


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> Camilla isn't all that pretty in photographs, but I read she is sexy and attractive in real life with a fabulous sense of humour.
> 
> Since we never get to see them in real life, I guess people just go on the photographs they see and who is better looking.


Camilla has got much better looking as she ages -I have had the pleasure of meeting her  when she opened a hospital ward some years ago and she is very relaxed and has a lovely natural smile isn’t scared to laugh loudly and is probably the most down to earth


bag-mania said:


> I’m with you there. We can say Camilla is many things but sexy and attractive would not be among them. That said, a plain looking woman can certainly look sexy to her lovers.


Attraction is not all about looks. Camilla knows how to keep Charles happy which I’m my opinion can’t be an easy job she has so much more to offer than Diana who would have made a better reality tv star than a royal


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> You know how Diana famously pretended to love country living and outdoor activities, but once married, refused to leave London's big city fun?



Ha. Can't blame her, I LOVE country living but I'm not into outdoor activities besides horse riding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Off topic maybe have an ocd thread just for you two please ?



I understand not being interested in cleaning habits on a gossip thread, but the throwing around of a medical diagnosis makes me uneasy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
Not much discussion of Harry or his wife here, let’s stick to topic please


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm a big fan of the small gesture of washing hands as soon as I enter the house after running errands. There is actually stuff that won't be killed/removed by desinfectants but only warm water and soap.


I didn't do this before Covid but now I'm compulsive.  Wash hands then disinfect phone and usually car keys first thing when I get home.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

The comments really are hilarious!  Hazzi’s chat will be mocked, guaranteed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5312174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


that is hilarious....a guy who has had everything handed to him and who now "works" just when he wants to for a short period time - talking about productivity........Insane......these people who "hired" him must be morons


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


>



seems to be just the opinions of two people but I hope it's true


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a sample of the BetterUp comments — mercy:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That last comment  But also, thanks to the first person who brought up Harry's treatment of Philip again because I really think it doesn't get any sh*ttier.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These are not bad either:



> Reading about your initiatives with Royals who have no professional qualifications or in-depth knowledge on the subjects they talk about…..the better question is where could you be spending your money more efficiently!!!





> Screwing over my grandmother and most of my English family, dragging everyone to court when my wife has a tantrum, photoshopping my bald patch, and not letting my kids meet their entire family on one side





> Nowhere. I manage my resources well. I don’t subscribe to @Betterup, nor to @netflix or
> @spotify. So the money I save there is used to support other serious and better initiatives such as @TheOceanCleanup
> .





> Thinking of employment discrimination such as Harry No Experience getting a senior role with no previous experience or talent and taking work away from real talent that has had to slog their guts out for their experience, just so BetterUp could capitalise on the British title.





> Every time I have an idea I'm spending energy setting up loads of new companies in Delaware so I can give the illusion of being "successful" without ever actually producing anything. That energy might be better spent getting my tax affairs in order for when the IRS come calling



I need to stop quoting, these comments are gold!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One more.



> Giving interviews and writing books that invade the privacy of others while screaming blue murder that my own privacy must be respected.  Embarrassing my family because I can't control mine or my wife's jealousy and paranoia.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments really are hilarious!  Hazzi’s chat will be mocked, guaranteed



Must remember to check the comments again later to see if any deranged stan frothing at the mouth will charge to their defense


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> that is hilarious....a guy who has had everything handed to him and who now "works" just when he wants to for a short period time - talking about productivity........Insane......these people who "hired" him must be morons


I have mixed feeling about this. Hazz preaching to others about work productivity, without any credentials or work experience, is so ridiculous that makes me laugh out loud. However, Hazz taking the jobs of qualified people, and and making a ton of money, just because of his royal connections is disgusting.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I have mixed feeling about this. Hazz preaching to others about work productivity, without any credentials or work experience, is so ridiculous that makes me laugh out loud. However, Hazz taking the jobs of qualified people, and and making a ton of money, just because of his royal connections is disgusting.


I agree....on the other hand, the "jobs" he is taking are pretty much created for him, right?  not a job that would go to someone else if he didn't take it?
I did literally LOL at this story about him preaching about productivity.  As much as I like participating in this thread, I can hardly wait for these two to get their comeuppance - the day when no one cares what they say or do


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



How f'n ironic....first of all they haven't done any "work" except the one half hour podcast....secondly, they will continue to "work" with spotify.....this is just them trying to be on the right side of the aisle while not doing anything......UUGH
If they really want to "do" something why not quit Spotify as others have done?  Oh, there is no content to take down?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I do love the snark.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is a good translation of Mr. and Mrs. Ginger Guru's latest statement:


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> How f'n ironic....first of all they haven't done any "work" except the one half hour podcast....secondly, they will continue to "work" with spotify.....this is just them trying to be on the right side of the aisle while not doing anything......UUGH
> If they really want to "do" something why not quit Spotify as others have done?  Oh, there is no content to take down?



See @ToureeBakahai's translation. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do love the snark.





Chanbal said:


> Here is a good translation of Mr. and Mrs. Ginger Guru's latest statement:




@ToureeBakahai is popular here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Are these people suggesting someone way senior was passed up (is that a verb?) to make Raptor feel welcome? Those ugly racists?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I hadn't even read the statement before coming here, but...you people are a smidge away from being sued for breech of contract because you took the money but didn't deliver. I feel this statement in this situation is rich.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I hadn't even read the statement before coming here, but...you people are a smidge away from being sued for breech of contract because you took the money but didn't deliver. I feel this statement in this situation is rich.


Here is another wise comment on the statement.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I'll one up you and say he not only cannot, he can't teach either, but he can preach!



And leech!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5312174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to lecture bosses on productivity at first public gig in months
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out in his first public appearance in 10 months, speaking at an online lecture for US firm BetterUp alongside tennis star Serena Williams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



"Harry will share his thoughts on burn-out..." 

That's got to be a joke. Anyone see him sitting in traffic on the 405 last year?

Didn't think so...


----------



## rose60610

They're quoted as saying they've worked to address "the real-time global misinformation crisis"?????  How?????? by accusing the BRF of all things racist, how she felt suicidal, and was treated horribly? If "misinformation" bothers them so much, they can start addressing the issue by STFU. Everything they say is a pack of lies and a plea for sympathy and money.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> They're quoted as saying they've worked to address "the real-time global misinformation crisis"?????  How?????? by accusing the BRF of all things racist, how she felt suicidal, and was treated horribly? If "misinformation" bothers them so much, they can start addressing the issue by STFU. Everything they say is a pack of lies and a plea for sympathy and money.


excellent question - how?  I guess if they say they worked that's good enough


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> excellent question - how?  I guess if they say they worked that's good enough



Right. They must think that throwing the BRF under the bus, beating up on the hired help, and whining about how hard it is to be rich and famous counts as "work".


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Right. They must think that throwing the BRF under the bus, beating up on the hired help, and whining about how hard it is to be rich and famous counts as "work".


they are detestable


----------



## jelliedfeels

Also, why is this Rogan thing coming out now? He said something that was perceived as negative months ago and he even apologised? Last time I checked he wasn’t telling people he’s a doctor or any kind of political authority and he apologised - so it’s a dead story to me.

His whole podcast is about interviewing everyone in the zeitgeist, including pretty fringe people, why would he ignore one of the biggest global issues of recent years?

I think H is just annoyed he hasn’t been invited on to discuss his Daddy issues. Obviously M has never been a big or interesting enough celeb to make Rogan either.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


>



I’m just sitting here waiting for them to silence the misinformation about where exactly H’s hairline starts. Or whether the Dumpychess has had PS.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Also, why is this Rogan thing coming out now? He said something that was perceived as negative months ago and he even apologised? Last time I checked he wasn’t telling people he’s a doctor or any kind of political authority and he apologised - so it’s a dead story to me.
> 
> His whole podcast is about interviewing everyone in the zeitgeist, including pretty fringe people, why would he ignore one of the biggest global issues of recent years?
> 
> I think H is just annoyed he hasn’t been invited on to discuss his Daddy issues. Obviously M has never been a big or interesting enough celeb to make Rogan either.


H&M are idiots but Rogan is a bad guy - anti-science, racist, etc.
Not sure what you're saying he apologized for


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> Several years ago we had to fly to our daughter's wedding in another state. I spent weeks on both my and my husband's wardrobe prep and packing for a four day weekend. I totally understand why the Queen has someone to do all her maintenance and prep.


It's overwhelming. How many times have I packed for a trip only to realize (after arrival) that I forgot to pack the shoes or the bag, or the slip or something else? It takes a village. Usually of just one!
Given the importance of an appearance and her appearance, the Queen can't afford to be frazzled by a last-minute crisis, be it a handbag, damaged article of clothing or a broken heel. I can't fault her for having a team. I would love to have one if I could . .  .


----------



## lallybelle

It's coming out again because he doesn't stop. There is always some moronic **** coming out of his mouth, not to mention what he said the other day was hella racist. He is a piece of ****.

Now why these idiots are running their mouths while they have been paid/and/or promoted by Spotify is another story. Watch this will be their excuse after it came out last week that Spotify was going to have to make up their content because they've done nothing.


----------



## Croisette7

Cornflower Blue said:


> It's the bedspread on top of any duvets/sheets/blankets that freaks me out. Apparently it's one of the least laundered items and I truely shudder to think of the multiple 'contaminants' it may harbour ...


I agree 100% with you ... it freaks me out, how often do they change the mattresses and pillows ... never!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



I don't feel badly for Spotify at all, but this is yet another case of them biting the hand that feeds them!


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> Not that other women's reproductive choices are any of my business, but after reading that Chopra said she used a surrogate because she and Jonas were "too busy to practice because of their work schedules", my eyes rolled back in my head and d*mn near stayed there. So their surrogate (who has done it five times) gave birth at 27 weeks and the baby will likely need greater care than a healthy newborn. But I guess Chopra can afford to hire round the clock nurses so as not to interfere with her filming schedule.


Actually, this is so taken out of context, and multiple times removed that it's little more than fake news. The "too busy to practice," was an unexplained phrase that came from a Vanity Fair article which had nothing to do with children or family, but apparently had to do with her music . . . When Chopra moved to this country a second time she had a recording contract . . . 
So to now give it some nefarious application is really unwarranted.
Let's give credit where credit is due. Ms. Chopra-Jonas seems to do everything remarkably well and is gorgeous to boot, and while I'd love to hate her, I think she's absolutely fabulous.


----------



## purseinsanity

As expected, Haz and Megusa are front and center on the People website "calling out COVID misinformation" on Spotify.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> It's overwhelming. How many times have I packed for a trip only to realize (after arrival) that I forgot to pack the shoes or the bag, or the slip or something else? It takes a village. Usually of just one!
> Given the importance of an appearance and her appearance, the Queen can't afford to be frazzled by a last-minute crisis, be it a handbag, damaged article of clothing or a broken heel. I can't fault her for having a team. I would love to have one if I could . .  .



And someone who shall not be named should have taken notice the minute she stepped into the fold, so a lot of embarrassing and unsightly events could have been avoided.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


>




What?!?!?!  No threats to remove their content from Spotify?!  Oh yes - forgot that there is none.  Gringe and Cringe need to mind their own business and “work” on their own projects instead of yapping about others.  How can they not see how ridiculous they are?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder if their staff rolls eyes at them or if they are delusional as well.


----------



## csshopper

Luvbolide said:


> What?!?!?!  No threats to remove their content from Spotify?!  Oh yes - forgot that there is none.  Gringe and Cringe need to mind their own business and “work” on their own projects instead of yapping about others.  *How can they not see how ridiculous they are?!
> *



The Body Language Guy's latest video explains their blindness, they are "GRANDIOSE Narcissists."


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> The Body Language Guy's latest video explains their blindness, they are "GRANDIOSE Narcissists."


LOVE LOVE LOVE the BLG … well spoken , explains well and communicates 
When discussing MM cradling her moonbump, he always mispronounces it , on purpose, to emphasize the awkwardness of her action via the awkwardness of his pronunciation , he say CRAHHHDLE not CRAYDLE , and I laugh


----------



## marietouchet

Jumping on the Neil Young bandwagon …. Hmm do they have any leverage at Spotify ????









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT cut ties with Spotify
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (pictured in September) said they have reached out to the music streaming service to 'express our concerns'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## TC1

Only they won't pull out of their Spotify agreement, they can't afford to give back the cash. Just thought they would pile on as the premise of an excuse for no content.


----------



## Lodpah

They’re just setting Spotify up for a lawsuit. Their game is to deflect from their inadequacy to produce content. What exactly do they want Spotify to do? Shut down free speech? Let them continue releasing their drivel as it will surely make people turn against them. I’m astounded at their lack of grasping real life issues.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I don't feel badly for Spotify at all, but this is yet another case of them biting the hand that feeds them!


They are going to use this as their excuse as to why they did not create podcasts.  Of course, it isn't true because they have had over a year when Rogan wasn't even spouting his nonsense to the public.  They need something to piggyback on to keep the sugars and the gullible public happy.  It is pretty obvious that Scobie is their full time paid mouthpiece.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Jumping on the Neil Young bandwagon …. Hmm do they have any leverage at Spotify ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT cut ties with Spotify
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (pictured in September) said they have reached out to the music streaming service to 'express our concerns'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They can't cut ties because if Spotify wants some money returned, they have already spent it.  Can't get anything from a stone.


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> Also, why is this Rogan thing coming out now? He said something that was perceived as negative months ago and he even apologised? Last time I checked he wasn’t telling people he’s a doctor or any kind of political authority and he apologised - so it’s a dead story to me.
> 
> His whole podcast is about interviewing everyone in the zeitgeist, including pretty fringe people, why would he ignore one of the biggest global issues of recent years?
> 
> I think H is just annoyed he hasn’t been invited on to discuss his Daddy issues. Obviously M has never been a big or interesting enough celeb to make Rogan either.


He has promoted false information and broadcast that he took ivermectin when he had Covid.  His target audience is on average 24 years old and think that if it’s allowed on Spotify then it must be the truth.  How many lives has he endangered with his version of the truth?  Much like Netflix promoting their Diana story and the gruesome twosome staying silent, it’s all about the money with those two.  There are no principles involved.  It’s all hypocrisy.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Jumping on the Neil Young bandwagon …. Hmm do they have any leverage at Spotify ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will NOT cut ties with Spotify
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (pictured in September) said they have reached out to the music streaming service to 'express our concerns'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


No.  It’s because his catalog is owned primarily by pharma:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lallybelle

OK but if he sold it, he already has his money. He's not against Spotify promoting disinfo because of who bought his catolog, but sure go off Mikehunt.


----------



## redney

purseinsanity said:


> No.  It’s because his catalog is owned primarily by pharma:



LOL that tweet is hilarious and so wrong.    Blackstone is an investment management company, not specializing in any particular industry (they bought Hilton Hotels in an LBO and took it private before it got back on its feet and went public again). Blackstone did make an investment in Hipgnosis and partner with partner with Mercuriadis to invest $1bn US to acquire song catalogues and music rights, but it doesn't own it outright. Blackstone's Chairman (and CEO) is Stephen Schwarzman who has no previous affiliation with pharma. Jeffrey Kindler is the current CEO of Centrexion Corp since 2013. He is, however, a "senior advisor" to Blackstone for its investments in Blackstone Tactical Opportunities (Tac Opps) and Blackstone Growth (BXG).

Don't believe everything on the Twitters, kids!


----------



## Helventara

purseinsanity said:


> No.  It’s because his catalog is owned primarily by pharma:



Sorry OOT but that tweet is incorrect. Kindler retired from Pfizer more than 10 years ago. Chairman of Blackstone is the founder (who is not Kindler).  No link whatsoever between Young and Pharma along the ownership line.  Cannot believe the stretch some Twitterati (who is this Mike Hunt?) resorts to to spread hate.


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> Also, why is this Rogan thing coming out now? He said something that was perceived as negative months ago and he even apologised? Last time I checked he wasn’t telling people he’s a doctor or any kind of political authority and he apologised - so it’s a dead story to me.
> 
> His whole podcast is about interviewing everyone in the zeitgeist, including pretty fringe people, why would he ignore one of the biggest global issues of recent years?
> 
> I think H is just annoyed he hasn’t been invited on to discuss his Daddy issues. Obviously M has never been a big or interesting enough celeb to make Rogan either.


Yes Rogan likes to talk to fringe people eg Elon - who is very out of favor in Wash DC, Graham Hancock - lost ancient high tech civilsations, a recent chat with the holder of many vax patents about their use and politicization
thought provoking podcasts  is the term that  comes to mind


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> No.  It’s because his catalog is owned primarily by pharma:




Follow the $$$$$


----------



## poopsie

BVBookshop said:


> Sorry OOT but that tweet is incorrect. Kindler retired from Pfizer more than 10 years ago. Chairman of Blackstone is the founder (who is not Kindler).  No link whatsoever between Young and Pharma along ownership line.  Cannot believe the stretch some Twitterati (who is this Mike Hunt?) resorts to to spread hate.



Hate is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?


----------



## redney

double post


----------



## poopsie

Toby93 said:


> He has promoted false information and broadcast that he took ivermectin when he had Covid.  His target audience is on average 24 years old and think that if it’s allowed on Spotify then it must be the truth.  How many lives has he endangered with his version of the truth?  Much like Netflix promoting their Diana story and the gruesome twosome staying silent, it’s all about the money with those two.  There are no principles involved.  It’s all hypocrisy.



And if certain others put out information it _must_ be the truth?


----------



## Lodpah

I need to get this off my chest. I want to tell Harry that me as veteran who served in the Army, I didn’t serve for you Harry! So don’t go trying to change our freedom of speech. You won’t dare face your own military cause they probably don’t have respect for you. After all, you were called Bunker Harry. I’ve been on exercises with the Brit’s/Scots and trust me, you’re  not even on the same level as one of their fingers. They’re real men. You look like a man but your a frickin toddler. They probably kept you from “commanding’ cause you would most likely had your men killed.
I think most military have the utmost respect for this colonel than you would ever get. He kept his cool and didn’t complain.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Toby93

*Duplicate post


----------



## bellecate

The irony of H taking 5 months paternity leave then to prepare to lecture on productivity.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> The Body Language Guy's latest video explains their blindness, they are "GRANDIOSE Narcissists."


that sums it up pretty well


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> The irony of H taking 5 months paternity leave then to prepare to lecture on productivity.
> View attachment 5312868
> View attachment 5312869
> View attachment 5312870


Leave from what?  he's never had a FT job in his life except for the military


----------



## Chanbal

_*The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge*, who currently split their time between their London home Kensington Palace and their weekend home Amner Hall in Norfolk *plan to relocate to Windsor*, according to the Telegraph, as they see it as 'the perfect place' to raise , Prince George, eight,  Princess Charlotte, six,  and Prince Louis, three.
The relocation, which would* bring the family closer to *both* the Queen* and Kate's parents in Bucklebury, is the most significant sign yet that *the couple are preparing to take on a far more senior role at the heart of the Royal Family*._









						William and Kate 'will move to the quiet corner of Berkshire'
					

The couple who currently split their time between their London home Kensington Palace and their weekend home Amner Hall in Norfolk plan to relocate to Windsor, according to the Telegraph




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## rose60610

I never knelt at the altar of Spotify, Twitter, Facebook and all the other stuff out there in awesome wonder believing any of them are even remotely paragons of truth and justice. So all this "bla, bla, bla I'm pulling my act if so-and-so is there" garbage is just a bunch of noise and drama for attention.  Neil Young, WHO CARES?  I hate to break it to Neil, but my life hasn't been affected. 

If Meghan and/or Harry can spout their crap on any platform without repercussions, than so can anybody else.  Come on, Al Qaeda has a social media presence, so spare me.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> The irony of H taking 5 months paternity leave then to prepare to lecture on productivity.
> View attachment 5312868
> View attachment 5312869
> View attachment 5312870


She was born June 4.  It's almost February.  That's *8 MONTHS* and he knows about productivity??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> The irony of H taking 5 months paternity leave then to prepare to lecture on productivity.



I can't help but wonder...the Sussexes are full of themselve alright. But what about BetterUp? Did they really misread the room like this and thought people would welcome this nonsense?


----------



## Chanbal

I see his point. 33 minutes of work in 2 years, we are talking about a productivity rate of 0.0001…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan and/or Harry can spout their crap on any platform without repercussions, than so can anybody else.  Come on, Al Qaeda has a social media presence, so spare me.



Hizbollah has a media relations department that at one point in time used to send out birthday wishes to journalists.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I see his point. 33 minutes of work in 2 years, we are talking about a productivity rate of 0.00006…



They've done what they do best: JUMP ON BANDWAGONS on topics they have zero clue about, but will get them more PR through Sunshine Sucks.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> I never knelt at the altar of Spotify, Twitter, Facebook and all the other stuff out there in awesome wonder believing any of them are even remotely paragons of truth and justice. So all this "bla, bla, bla I'm pulling my act if so-and-so is there" garbage is just a bunch of noise and drama for attention.  Neil Young, WHO CARES?  I hate to break it to Neil, but my life hasn't been affected.
> 
> If Meghan and/or Harry can spout their crap on any platform without repercussions, than so can anybody else.  Come on, Al Qaeda has a social media presence, so spare me.



Can't these people see themselves?
Harry thinking that the First Amendment is bonkers and Old Man Neil warbling about rocking in a free world that would presumably include freedom of speech.........even and especially speech you don't agree with. Don't even get me started on the needle and the damage done  
I may just have to check out this Spotify........


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hizbollah has a *media relations department* that at one point in time used to send out birthday wishes to journalists.


The Nefl*xes may need to hire that 'media relations department', it looks like they missed sending their birthday wishes to OW. 









						Oprah Winfrey gets flooded with birthday tributes from celeb friends
					

Iconic media mogul Oprah Winfrey is celebrating her 68th birthday on Saturday, January 29.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> The Nefl*xes may need to hire that 'media relations department', it looks like they missed sending their birthday wishes to OW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey gets flooded with birthday tributes from celeb friends
> 
> 
> Iconic media mogul Oprah Winfrey is celebrating her 68th birthday on Saturday, January 29.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



That _has _to be misinformation! You _know _they send birthday wishes privately......like they do with W&K 

Can't wait to see who claims to have Markle'd who first


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Leave from what?  he's never had a FT job in his life except for the military


.. and even that is questionable, some have said that others did his job!


----------



## Chanbal

Twitter is on fire with the lecture on productivity.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


>




It would be delightful if Spotify was invited to call in to discuss their views!  The man hasn’t held a job in his entire life.  Would love to hear a candid assessment of his BS from one of the participants.  I’d be fuming if my company was wasting $$ on this garbage.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He chose a crazy nutjob and eternal ridicule over a tightknit family where he could have been advisor to at least one, possibly three kings. I wonder if he's still telling himself that's exactly what he wanted or if he's secretly regretting it every wake minute.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

I'm not so sure that a guy who couldn't handle riches galore given to him on a silver platter, a staff of servants and private jets at his disposal was the best pick to talk about job productivity.  Now...Meghan...she's a piece of work. She nails Harry and convinces him that not only was HE "trapped", but the whole BRF is "trapped".  I have to wonder that if the BRF agreed to provide H&M with all the security they claim to need, plus all the money they wanted, if Meghan would still have spewed all the charges of racism and feelings of suicide she hurled at the BRF. Notice how none of this came out until AFTER they were cut off after THEY were the ones who wanted to break off from the BRF.  Ungrateful freaks.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He chose a crazy nutjob and eternal ridicule over a tightknit family where he could have been advisor to at least one, possibly three kings. I wonder if he's still telling himself that's exactly what he wanted or if he's secretly regretting it every wake minute.



Feels like he has gone so far over the edge that he does ridiculous stuff like commenting on political issues and telling all of us what we should believe and do so he doesn’t have the time or bandwidth to actually take some time to think about where his life is and where it is going.  (Like to hell in a handbasket!).


----------



## CeeJay

So, who is the audience of this "conference" where they will have him babbling?  They should be EMBARRASSED big-time!


----------



## CeeJay

Luvbolide said:


> It would be delightful if Spotify was invited to call in to discuss their views!  The man hasn’t held a job in his entire life.  Would love to hear a candid assessment of his BS from one of the participants.  I’d be fuming if my company was wasting $$ on this garbage.


HA - I just pretty much posted the same and YOU BET if I was in the audience, boy-oh-boy, would I give a word-by-word "review" and it would likely NOT BE pretty!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> So, who is the audience of this "conference" where they will have him babbling?  They should be EMBARRASSED big-time!



IIRC it is _free, _but participants must create an account that gives BU all kinds of privileges to share your info with whoever they want.
Caveat emptor.


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> Feels like he has gone so far over the edge that he does ridiculous stuff like commenting on political issues and telling all of us what we should believe and do so he doesn’t have the time or bandwidth to actually take some time to think about where his life is and where it is going.  (Like to hell in a handbasket!).


I think he just says what he thinks he needs to say to fit in with the right people - or what his Wife tells him to say - for the same reason.  I don't believe this idiot who when younger wore a nazi uniform thinking it was funny is suddenly so principled and righteous.  Granted he's older now but still.  these two are a couple of grifters IMO.  Nothing genuine about them, including their relationship.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> I'm not so sure that a guy who couldn't handle riches galore given to him on a silver platter, a staff of servants and private jets at his disposal was the best pick to talk about job productivity.  Now...Meghan...she's a piece of work. She nails Harry and convinces him that not only was HE "trapped", but the whole BRF is "trapped".  I have to wonder that if the BRF agreed to provide H&M with all the security they claim to need, plus all the money they wanted, if Meghan would still have spewed all the charges of racism and feelings of suicide she hurled at the BRF. Notice how none of this came out until AFTER they were cut off after THEY were the ones who wanted to break off from the BRF.  Ungrateful freaks.


Remember, she is a classic NARCISSIST .. and as such, SHE WILL NEVER BE HAPPY .. EVER!  Nothing that Harry, the BRF, anyone for that matter would make her happy!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Remember, she is a classic NARCISSIST .. and as such, SHE WILL NEVER BE HAPPY .. EVER!  Nothing that Harry, the BRF, anyone for that matter would make her happy!


really when you think about it, it's almost a miracle that this D-list (or z-list) cable TV supporting actress has become a household name.  Unfortunately.  must be a narcissist's dream. 

 Oh but wait - she's not happy.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> IIRC it is _free, _but participants must create an account that gives BU all kinds of privileges to share your info with whoever they want.
> Caveat emptor.



Okay .. so, is it the "International Integrated Reporting Council" or the "If I Recall Correctly" or "If I Remember Correctly"?  

If it's the 1st one, then I bet I'm in it!


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> She was born June 4.  It's almost February.  That's *8 MONTHS* and he knows about productivity??


He might be very productive at changing nappies, feeding the chooks and doing nothing


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Okay .. so, is it the "International Integrated Reporting Council" or the "If I Recall Correctly" or "If I Remember Correctly"?
> 
> If it's the 1st one, then I bet I'm in it!



If I remember correctly


ETA:  A friendly public service announcement:  with many of these ‘tech’ companies [and others], your data belongs to them, not you.  There are legitimate privacy concerns with these online ‘services’.


----------



## redney

pukasonqo said:


> He might be very productive at changing nappies, feeding the chooks and doing nothing


THE WIFE wouldn't let the 6TH IN LINE change nappies. They have people for that, I'm sure.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> He might be very productive at changing nappies, feeding the chooks and doing nothing



I doubt he would involve himself in the first two. Doing nothing is where he excels.  His gaming skills may be A+ level, but who knows.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The Nefl*xes may need to hire that 'media relations department', it looks like they missed sending their birthday wishes to OW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey gets flooded with birthday tributes from celeb friends
> 
> 
> Iconic media mogul Oprah Winfrey is celebrating her 68th birthday on Saturday, January 29.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They sent her an "intimate, private message"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Twitter is on fire with the lecture on productivity.
> View attachment 5312968


I love that quote by Ben Franklin!:

"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."  Brilliant!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> He might be very productive at changing nappies, feeding the chooks and doing nothing


I highly doubt even that.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> THE WIFE wouldn't let the 6TH IN LINE change nappies. They have people for that, I'm sure.


well, maybe if it keeps him busy and out of her hair while she meets with the PR team to plan her next move
It could be interesting if one of the PR people left and talked about what went on but they surely have NDAs


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if their staff rolls eyes at them or if they are delusional as well.


I'm pretty sure they would roll their eyes when her back is turned....do you get HBO?  there's a new series The Gilded Age about wealthy people in late 1800's New York.  One of the main characters is a very ambitious new money wife of a mogul who desperately wants to be in with the old money people.  She has an assistant who talks behind her back all the time.


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


> She was born June 4.  It's almost February.  That's *8 MONTHS* and he knows about productivity??


As someone who works a lot of the time (except when on tPF ), I was in between jobs for October, November and December so I worked part time.  DH told me to take a break, but I felt utterly unproductive and guilty just sitting around.  These fools do absolutely nothing.  WTF do they do with their time??  Doesn't a life of being bratty and useless get old??


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> As someone who works a lot of the time (except when on tPF ), I was in between jobs for October, November and December so I worked part time.  DH told me to take a break, but I felt utterly unproductive and guilty just sitting around.  These fools do absolutely nothing.  WTF do they do with their time??  Doesn't a life of being bratty and useless get old??


Scheming and planning how to get attention from the media and the public is hard work doncha know


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> As someone who works a lot of the time (except when on tPF ), I was in between jobs for October, November and December so I worked part time.  DH told me to take a break, but I felt utterly unproductive and guilty just sitting around.  These fools do absolutely nothing.  WTF do they do with their time??  Doesn't a life of being bratty and useless get old??



Some days, I think this is their biggest issue - they live in a bubble, just like some other royals. 
The less they interact with real people in real time, the less able they are to ‘read the room’.


----------



## rose60610

I think they live in a small bubble where the few people they have contact with treat them like they're extremely important and special, either genuinely or forced to.  Therefore they think everyone loves them. But they don't dare go outside the bubble any more than they have to where mere mortals are ordered to not look at them. But remember, they really care about everyone and love rescuing things  . In England, every appearance was staged (right?) or at least planned. The people they have here staging their appearances are lost. They're running out of audiences who want them.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> As someone who works a lot of the time (except when on tPF ), I was in between jobs for October, November and December so I worked part time.  DH told me to take a break, but I felt utterly unproductive and guilty just sitting around.  These fools do absolutely nothing.  WTF do they do with their time??  Doesn't a life of being bratty and useless get old??


It gave him time to work on his juggling act and maybe he coached TW on how to squat on cue. And then he took a nap.


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> As someone who works a lot of the time (except when on tPF ), I was in between jobs for October, November and December so I worked part time.  DH told me to take a break, but I felt utterly unproductive and guilty just sitting around.  These fools do absolutely nothing.  WTF do they do with their time??  Doesn't a life of being bratty and useless get old??



i suspect that these two think that their value lies in grand thinking on the highest plane - and not doing mundane tasks that anyone can do.  So I suspect that they do a lot of web surfing looking for gobbledygook to copy and spew out, then discuss it among themselves, then go for a walk/bike ride on the beach where they further refine their thoughts.  And return home with a completely blank mind so they go play with the rescue chickens.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> I suspect that these two think that their value lies in grand thinking on the highest plane


Agreed. They seem to be the definition of arrogant.


----------



## bag-mania

Out of curiosity I checked the Archewell website. It hasn’t had an update since mid-November. Their web employee(s) must have quit, perhaps due to nonpayment.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Out of curiosity I checked the Archewell website. It hasn’t had an update since mid-November. Their web employee(s) must have quit, perhaps due to nonpayment.



Sheesh!  I recall feeling bad for the folks that they hired - many of them seemed very qualified, particularly the gal they got from the Gates Foundation.  Imagine going from something so professional and well respected and ending up with people who are incapable of doing anything with respect to podcasts or material for Netflix. Seems all that Cringe and Ging can do is cash checks…and whine.


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> Sheesh!  I recall feeling bad for the folks that they hired - many of them seemed very qualified, particularly the gal they got from the Gates Foundation.  Imagine going from something so professional and well respected and ending up with people who are incapable of doing anything with respect to podcasts or material for Netflix. Seems all that Cringe and Ging can do is cash checks…and whine.



Well, everyone should have one crappy job on their resume to show how they’ve paid their dues. Archewell can serve that purpose!


----------



## Chanbal

The heroes of Spot*fy!


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> The heroes of Spot*fy!



Did the Archewells threatened w withdrawing their extended catalog of…one podcast?
That would really scare Spotify because who are Joni Mitchell and Neil Young comparing to the Archewells and their influence


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I actively dislike Perez, but he is apparently not a fan.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hizbollah has a media relations department that at one point in time used to send out birthday wishes to journalists.


I'd bet good money that Al Qaeda and Hizbollah pay less for media relations than the Soursexes.

Wondering what "meet this moment" means. Is it the same type of vaguely positive action like running towards struggle and hitting the ground running?


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> I'd bet good money that Al Qaeda and Hizbollah pay less for media relations than the Soursexes.
> 
> Wondering what "meet this moment" means. Is it the same type of vaguely positive action like running towards struggle and hitting the ground running?


They didn’t find a way to use “sweet nod”


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> Sheesh!  I recall feeling bad for the folks that they hired - many of them seemed very qualified, particularly the gal they got from the Gates Foundation.  Imagine going from something so professional and well respected and ending up with people who are incapable of doing anything with respect to podcasts or material for Netflix. Seems all that Cringe and Ging can do is cash checks…and whine.


is that woman still with them?


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> is that woman still with them?



I think she announced she was leaving a few months ago?


----------



## LittleStar88

They're such coattail-riders. Jump on any and every opportunity to get their names attached to the flavor of the moment issue. Incapable of doing anything original. Gag me.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I think she announced she was leaving a few months ago?


hopefully.  can you imagine being a highly qualified person and taking orders from M?  (I saw Meghan because I doubt "H" has much to say)


----------



## Chanbal

Compared to the Little Miss Forgetful, the protagonists of the story below are amateurs.  This is the interesting story of Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince, Frédéric Prinz von Anhalt who got his title by adoption, and continues with the tradition A way to live in the US by merching royal titles: 

_Von Anhalt is no stranger to the mechanisms of adoption. In fact, that is precisely how he, a policeman’s son from a working-class family in Wallhausen, Germany, came to be Prince Frederic… 

“*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. “I would like to adopt somebody and give him the tool. In America, it works. People want to know who you are and that is how they judge you…”*

Von Anhalt hopes that this adoption goes smoother than the five previous ones he’s made — all of them while married to Gabor.

“They left. One guy went to Dubai and showed off,” said the prince, adding that another used the title to promote a chain of strip clubs in Germany. “What am I supposed to do? Once they had the title, they took off. Zsa Zsa said you have to marry a lot of guys until you find the right guy. I think it is the same thing with adopting.”

He told The Post that his “sons” paid for the titles and still retain them.

Von Anhalt has also used his title to confer knighthoods that he sold for $50,000 to $100,000 each. According to The Hollywood Reporter, he admitted to making more than $10 million through these services. “I never counted the money,” he told The Post, adding that the cash went as easily as it came. “I had an expensive wife and also an expensive life.”_





__





						Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince adopting grown man to inherit title
					

Prince Frederic von Anhalt, the widower of Zsa Zsa Gabor, stars on the new TV show “Adults Adopting Adults,” premiering Jan. 31 on A&E. He’s adopting Kevin Feucht, 27, to inhe…




					nypost.com


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> hopefully.  can you imagine being a highly qualified person and taking orders from M?  (I saw Meghan because I doubt "H" has much to say)


I'm sure it was almost unsurvivable for her after working at the Gates Foundation and she decided she'd rather thrive.
Maybe they gave her a lemon olive oil cake as a parting gift?


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that still need clarification, the word is *won't*…


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I think she announced she was leaving a few months ago?


apparently she was being asked to do things beyond the scope of her job so she left but is still in an advisory position via her own company.  note at the end of the article she's asked specifically about Meghan and Melissa Gates and chooses to answer about women leaders in general rather than about them specifically.

Catherine St-Laurent, Meghan Markle's Chief of Staff, Is Stepping Into Her Own | Marie Claire (US) |


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Compared to the Little Miss Forgetful, the protagonists of the story below are amateurs.  This is the interesting story of Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince, Frédéric Prinz von Anhalt who got his title by adoption, and continues with the tradition A way to live in the US by merching royal titles:
> 
> _Von Anhalt is no stranger to the mechanisms of adoption. In fact, that is precisely how he, a policeman’s son from a working-class family in Wallhausen, Germany, came to be Prince Frederic…
> 
> “*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. “I would like to adopt somebody and give him the tool. In America, it works. People want to know who you are and that is how they judge you…”*
> 
> Von Anhalt hopes that this adoption goes smoother than the five previous ones he’s made — all of them while married to Gabor.
> 
> “They left. One guy went to Dubai and showed off,” said the prince, adding that another used the title to promote a chain of strip clubs in Germany. “What am I supposed to do? Once they had the title, they took off. Zsa Zsa said you have to marry a lot of guys until you find the right guy. I think it is the same thing with adopting.”
> 
> He told The Post that his “sons” paid for the titles and still retain them.
> 
> Von Anhalt has also used his title to confer knighthoods that he sold for $50,000 to $100,000 each. According to The Hollywood Reporter, he admitted to making more than $10 million through these services. “I never counted the money,” he told The Post, adding that the cash went as easily as it came. “I had an expensive wife and also an expensive life.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince adopting grown man to inherit title
> 
> 
> Prince Frederic von Anhalt, the widower of Zsa Zsa Gabor, stars on the new TV show “Adults Adopting Adults,” premiering Jan. 31 on A&E. He’s adopting Kevin Feucht, 27, to inhe…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Fascinating. And he acknowledged what I've said before, that the Gabor sisters were the original Kardashians:

"Having been married to a woman he describes as a prototype Kardashian...".


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is not alone…

_Piers Morgan has vocally condemned anti-vaxxers on Twitter and told them to "**** off" when he got his booster jab in November.

However, the former Good Morning Britain host reacted with characteristic venom to Harry and Meghan's statement, reported on Twitter by royal author Omid Scobie, whose biography Finding Freedom contained at least some input from the couple's spokesperson._












						Prince Harry, Meghan labelled "disingenuous clowns" over Joe Rogan stance
					

Harry and Meghan joined criticisms of Spotify and Rogan but sparked a backlash from the likes of Piers Morgan and Candace Owens.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Compared to the Little Miss Forgetful, the protagonists of the story below are amateurs.  This is the interesting story of Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince, Frédéric Prinz von Anhalt who got his title by adoption, and continues with the tradition A way to live in the US by merching royal titles:
> 
> _Von Anhalt is no stranger to the mechanisms of adoption. In fact, that is precisely how he, a policeman’s son from a working-class family in Wallhausen, Germany, came to be Prince Frederic…
> 
> “*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. “I would like to adopt somebody and give him the tool. In America, it works. People want to know who you are and that is how they judge you…”*
> 
> Von Anhalt hopes that this adoption goes smoother than the five previous ones he’s made — all of them while married to Gabor.
> 
> “They left. One guy went to Dubai and showed off,” said the prince, adding that another used the title to promote a chain of strip clubs in Germany. “What am I supposed to do? Once they had the title, they took off. Zsa Zsa said you have to marry a lot of guys until you find the right guy. I think it is the same thing with adopting.”
> 
> He told The Post that his “sons” paid for the titles and still retain them.
> 
> Von Anhalt has also used his title to confer knighthoods that he sold for $50,000 to $100,000 each. According to The Hollywood Reporter, he admitted to making more than $10 million through these services. “I never counted the money,” he told The Post, adding that the cash went as easily as it came. “I had an expensive wife and also an expensive life.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince adopting grown man to inherit title
> 
> 
> Prince Frederic von Anhalt, the widower of Zsa Zsa Gabor, stars on the new TV show “Adults Adopting Adults,” premiering Jan. 31 on A&E. He’s adopting Kevin Feucht, 27, to inhe…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Eeek another loser.  I remember that clinger on.  He made me gag almost as much as Haz and MeMe.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Fascinating. And he acknowledged what I've said before, that the Gabor sisters were the original Kardashians:
> 
> "Having been married to a woman he describes as a prototype Kardashian...".


Yep.  Famous for being famous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Fascinating. And he acknowledged what I've said before, that the Gabor sisters were the original Kardashians:
> 
> "Having been married to a woman he describes as a prototype Kardashian...".





purseinsanity said:


> Eeek another loser.  I remember that clinger on.  He made me gag almost as much as Haz and MeMe.



It is indeed a fascinating story. He is a little different than the Ginger Gurus imo.
He is very open on using royal titles for profit in the US, not being hypocrite at least. He is also not using his royal title as a qualification to preach others. Not defending him though.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It is indeed a fascinating story. He is a little different than the Ginger Gurus imo.
> *He is very open on using royal titles for profit in the US, not being hypocrite at least. He is also not using his royal title as a qualification to preach others. *Not defending him though.


Very true.  I can respect that, just as I respect the Kardashians (can't believe I just said that) for owning what they do and not making any excuses.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Compared to the Little Miss Forgetful, the protagonists of the story below are amateurs.  This is the interesting story of Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince, Frédéric Prinz von Anhalt who got his title by adoption, and continues with the tradition A way to live in the US by merching royal titles:
> 
> _Von Anhalt is no stranger to the mechanisms of adoption. In fact, that is precisely how he, a policeman’s son from a working-class family in Wallhausen, Germany, came to be Prince Frederic…
> 
> “*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. “I would like to adopt somebody and give him the tool. In America, it works. People want to know who you are and that is how they judge you…”*
> 
> Von Anhalt hopes that this adoption goes smoother than the five previous ones he’s made — all of them while married to Gabor.
> 
> “They left. One guy went to Dubai and showed off,” said the prince, adding that another used the title to promote a chain of strip clubs in Germany. “What am I supposed to do? Once they had the title, they took off. Zsa Zsa said you have to marry a lot of guys until you find the right guy. I think it is the same thing with adopting.”
> 
> He told The Post that his “sons” paid for the titles and still retain them.
> 
> Von Anhalt has also used his title to confer knighthoods that he sold for $50,000 to $100,000 each. According to The Hollywood Reporter, he admitted to making more than $10 million through these services. “I never counted the money,” he told The Post, adding that the cash went as easily as it came. “I had an expensive wife and also an expensive life.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince adopting grown man to inherit title
> 
> 
> Prince Frederic von Anhalt, the widower of Zsa Zsa Gabor, stars on the new TV show “Adults Adopting Adults,” premiering Jan. 31 on A&E. He’s adopting Kevin Feucht, 27, to inhe…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



That guy took being a gold digger to the next level. As creepy as he is I have to give him credit for managing to parlay a purchased royal title into a lifetime of wealth. He proved that the word “prince” impresses people even if it has zero authority or influence behind it.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He chose a crazy nutjob and eternal ridicule over a tightknit family where he could have been advisor to at least one, possibly three kings. I wonder if he's still telling himself that's exactly what he wanted or if he's secretly regretting it every wake minute.


I agree. I don't understand why they left.

They had security, wealth, privilege, a host of advisors and the unparalleled opportunity to promote a social agenda guaranteed to reach a world forum. They could have done as much or as little as they wanted.

Didn't they realize that any problems they had would simply follow them wherever they went? I'm quite sure that the racism, criticism and lack of support-namely everything they complained of is still occurring, albeit without the protection not to mention the goodwill of The Firm. Whatever they did (short of pedophilia) would have been given the benefit of the doubt. Instead they have subjected themselves to ridicule and the longer this goes on, the likelihood there is no going back.

Watching Harry hack his purported expertise in the workplace, his ritual blaming of the media for his mother's death, their mental health issues, how attacked they feel and how beleaguered they are, is embarrassing to watch. I wish they would act like adults, shut-up and get on with their life. Isn't that what they wanted? 

But Harry is reverting to form--his mother did exactly the same. However, now, he has Megan to support and add to his victimization. They are a perfect pair. 

Early on I suspected the marriage wouldn't last and Harry would realize how much he has lost. Now with two children I'm not so sure. It depends on his strength of character. Will he always be hen-pecked or will he see the light one day and stand up for himself? But even if he goes back, the tarnish is there-it will never be the same. He will be praised by some, and reviled by others and will probably have to live like a recluse. Reminds me in some ways of Brideshead Revisited . . .


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Very true.  I can respect that, just as I respect the Kardashians (can't believe I just said that) for owning what they do and not making any excuses.


Absolutely! However, I can't understand the supporters of these people.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That guy took being a gold digger to the next level. As creepy as he is I have to give him credit for managing to parlay a purchased royal title into a lifetime of wealth. *He proved that the word “prince” impresses people even if it has zero authority or influence behind it.*


What makes me sad is that one can still use and abuse of worthless titles in the 21st century.


----------



## rose60610

Why be impressed with someone just because they have a title? If they've made something of themselves independent of their title, then OK. TQ, Charles and William at least uphold the traditions they were born into and carry out their duties with next to no complaint. My highest admiration is for those who start out with nothing and become successful because they've taken risks, worked their a$$es off and sacrificed everything with no guarantees of making it.  Their street cred is far more valuable than a spoiled Prince and his do-nothing idiot wife who believe the world revolves around them while they do nothing but whine and lie.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> As someone who works a lot of the time (except when on tPF ), I was in between jobs for October, November and December so I worked part time.  DH told me to take a break, but I felt utterly unproductive and guilty just sitting around.  These fools do absolutely nothing.  WTF do they do with their time??  Doesn't a life of being bratty and useless get old??



The only time I have ever been clinically depressed in my life was for about 2 months when I didn't have a job. I got a job and I was fine.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> The only time I have ever been clinically depressed in my life was for about 2 months when I didn't have a job. I got a job and I was fine.


but if you were depressed for a reason - being out of work - that's different from clinical depression.  for example Robin Williams had clinical depression.  it's physical I think.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> They sent her an "intimate, private message"


Yes! Probably telling OW to go straight to hell for convincing them to throw the BRF under the bus and luring them into the catastrophic interview. It has to be OW's fault because doncha you know, they are innocent like newborn babes,  but people just like to blame them for everything.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I'd bet good money that Al Qaeda and Hizbollah pay less for media relations than the Soursexes.
> 
> Wondering what "meet this moment" means. Is it the same type of vaguely positive action like running towards struggle and hitting the ground running?



It’s on the ‘sweet nod’ list of meaningless jargon.




Chanbal said:


> “*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. *



*Tool out of the title! *Best line of the day!* *

Disingenouos clowns, spreading disinformation — oooooh, how low can they go ?




bag-mania said:


> That guy took being a gold digger to the next level.



Is he offering a master class in this level of gold-digging? I don’t want the low-level crumbs that H&M are throwing us. This guy knows the drill. That is expertise I can support


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> but if you were depressed for a reason - being out of work - that's different from clinical depression.  for example Robin Williams had clinical depression.  it's physical I think.



I wasn't depressed because I was out of work. My brain wasn't occupied enough. I could tell. I have also had periods where was crazy, swamped busy at work and I thrive in that environment. I know it's brain chemistry. I think it's why people procrastinate when they have a big project to do. They can only work when they are under some pressure. Not ALL people. Interestingly, (maybe only to me), my daughter said to me that she does better in school when she has a lot to do. I noticed she is finally starting to understand how to plan and to get her stuff done.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From our friends at Urban Dictionary:

_Tool: (noun)

1.) A guy with a hugely over-inflated ego, who in an attempt to get un-due attention for himself, will act like a jackass, because, in his deluded state, he will think it's going to make him look cool, or make others want to be like him. The person may even insincerely apologize later on, but only in an attempt to get more attention, or to excuse his blatantly intentional, and unrepentantly tool-ish behavior.

2.) Someone whose ego FAR exceeds his talent, intelligence, and likeability. But, of course, he is clueless regarding that fact. He erroneously thinks he is THE MAN!_


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Piers is not alone…
> 
> _Piers Morgan has vocally condemned anti-vaxxers on Twitter and told them to "**** off" when he got his booster jab in November.
> 
> However, the former Good Morning Britain host reacted with characteristic venom to Harry and Meghan's statement, reported on Twitter by royal author Omid Scobie, whose biography Finding Freedom contained at least some input from the couple's spokesperson._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan labelled "disingenuous clowns" over Joe Rogan stance
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan joined criticisms of Spotify and Rogan but sparked a backlash from the likes of Piers Morgan and Candace Owens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com




I'd like to give a sweet nod to Piers, who has inspired me.

*You Get What You Pay For?*
They jumped on the Spotify bandwagon
When they saw their poll numbers were sagging
But in the Twitterverse
Judgement came swift and terse
And the couple received quite a dragging


----------



## Aimee3

I think H and TW didn’t like being so far down on the totem pole in the UK and thought if they came to the USA, they’d be the royalty America doesn’t have (nor do we want, if I can speak for most of us).  It’s not working out like they thought it would.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> I think H and TW didn’t like being so far down on the totem pole in the UK and thought if they came to the USA, they’d be the royalty America doesn’t have (nor do we want, if I can speak for most of us).  It’s not working out like they thought it would.


^^^^^Count me in! 

I don't know who Joe Rogan is, pardon my ignorance. Though, PM's words below make sense to me:

_A pair of two-bit minor British royal family renegades best known for spewing outrageously harmful misinformation to Oprah Winfrey are trying to suppress an American’s First Amendment right to free speech?

*I wouldn’t trust Meghan “Princess Pinocchio” Markle *— who last year pressured UK company ITV to fire me for calling out her lies — *to make me a cup of tea, let alone preach to the world about truth and honesty.*

How dare she and her equally hypocritical husband, Harry, make any demands from a company that’s paid them a fortune to so far produce one podcast that was so bad, I needed urgent brain cell restoration surgery after enduring it?_










						Give me Joe Rogan over cancel culture vultures like Harry and Meghan anytime
					

Spotify should do us all a favor by tearing up Meghan and Harry’s contract and giving their money to Joe Rogan for more of his shows.




					nypost.com


----------



## Bag*Snob

sdkitty said:


> but if you were depressed for a reason - being out of work - that's different from clinical depression.  for example Robin Williams had clinical depression.  it's physical I think.




Robin Williams had Lewy Body Dementia, not clinical depression.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, that chick is difficult anyway. A psychologist who went so far to diagnose the whole Markle family on Twitter to make Raptor out to be the good guy, which as I understand is pretty unethical.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. “I would like to adopt somebody and give him the tool. In America, it works. People want to know who you are and that is how they judge you…”*_



I'd be so p*ssed if I was an actual member of the main family tree and had to deal with these people strutting around using the family name.


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> is that woman still with them?



Don’t know - I don’t recall seeing anything about Archewell employees beyond the fact that they were hired.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Compared to the Little Miss Forgetful, the protagonists of the story below are amateurs.  This is the interesting story of Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince, Frédéric Prinz von Anhalt who got his title by adoption, and continues with the tradition A way to live in the US by merching royal titles:
> 
> _Von Anhalt is no stranger to the mechanisms of adoption. In fact, that is precisely how he, a policeman’s son from a working-class family in Wallhausen, Germany, came to be Prince Frederic…
> 
> “*I made a tool out of the title,” he told The Post. “I would like to adopt somebody and give him the tool. In America, it works. People want to know who you are and that is how they judge you…”*
> 
> Von Anhalt hopes that this adoption goes smoother than the five previous ones he’s made — all of them while married to Gabor.
> 
> “They left. One guy went to Dubai and showed off,” said the prince, adding that another used the title to promote a chain of strip clubs in Germany. “What am I supposed to do? Once they had the title, they took off. Zsa Zsa said you have to marry a lot of guys until you find the right guy. I think it is the same thing with adopting.”
> 
> He told The Post that his “sons” paid for the titles and still retain them.
> 
> Von Anhalt has also used his title to confer knighthoods that he sold for $50,000 to $100,000 each. According to The Hollywood Reporter, he admitted to making more than $10 million through these services. “I never counted the money,” he told The Post, adding that the cash went as easily as it came. “I had an expensive wife and also an expensive life.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zsa Zsa Gabor’s widower prince adopting grown man to inherit title
> 
> 
> Prince Frederic von Anhalt, the widower of Zsa Zsa Gabor, stars on the new TV show “Adults Adopting Adults,” premiering Jan. 31 on A&E. He’s adopting Kevin Feucht, 27, to inhe…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Ooooh Oooooh I've been an orphan since 1992
If I go on a gender bender would he consider adopting me?!?!?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, that chick is difficult anyway. A psychologist who went so far to diagnose the whole Markle family on Twitter to make Raptor out to be the good guy, which as I understand it is pretty unethical.



My 2 cents:
I never heard of KW prior to the above post (disclosure). A brief search shows that she is only an adjunct junior faculty at UIC (#103 in US News). It's possible that she is after name recognition via jumping on bandwagons instead of publishing in peer-reviewed journals.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd be so p*ssed if I was an actual member of the main family tree and had to deal with these people strutting around using the family name.


Haha, not so fast… The adoptive mother, princess Marie Auguste von Anhalt was also paid.   

"_As part of the arrangement, he supplemented the princess with an additional 2,000 Deutsch marks per month, the then-equivalent of about $700. “She got a good deal,” said the prince, who owned a spa and sauna business at the time. “She got the money and I got the title. Her children and grandchildren had titles as well_.”


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Ooooh Oooooh I've been an orphan since 1992
> If I go on a gender bender would he consider adopting me?!?!?


I don't see why not! It seems to be a simple business transaction. The last one that he adopted was not even an orphan "_His mother and father are both fine with it_.” So, hello princess Poopsie!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Haha, not so fast… The adoptive mother, princess Marie Auguste von Anhalt was also paid.
> 
> "_As part of the arrangement, he supplemented the princess with an additional 2,000 Deutsch marks per month, the then-equivalent of about $700. “She got a good deal,” said the prince, who owned a spa and sauna business at the time. “She got the money and I got the title. Her children and grandchildren had titles as well_.”



Yes, but the main line is her brother and his children. He got so annoyed with her and her adopted offsprings' shenanigans he made it so (don't ask me, Nobility Law is its own law speciality and I have no clue haha) that his daughters keep their title upon marriage and can give them to their children, which is pretty unheard of in German aristocracy (apparently we do however give, say, an earldom to ALL sons, but just one gets the estate and it doesn't necessarily have to be the oldest).

In fact, I didn't know the Frederic guy paid a *woman* to adopt him which is completely wild...he can probably carry the family name but he most certainly has no actual title whatsoever.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but the main line is her brother and his children. He got so annoyed with her and her adopted offsprings' shenanigans he made it so (don't ask me, Nobility Law is its own law speciality and I have no clue haha) that his daughters keep their title upon marriage and can give them to their children, which is pretty unheard of in German aristocracy (apparently we do however give, say, an earldom to ALL sons, but just one gets the estate and it doesn't necessarily have to be the oldest).
> 
> In fact, I didn't know the Frederic guy paid a *woman* to adopt him which is completely wild...he can probably carry the family name but he most certainly has no actual title whatsoever.



I don’t know how he manages to make money off of it. I know he spent Zsa Zsa’s cash but then she spent a lot of it herself. What does a prince title get you in America except maybe a good table at a restaurant?


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  Famous for being famous.


Other than Eva Gabor being on the sitcom Green Acres, I only recall them being talk show and game show regulars in the 60s and 70s.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know how he manages to make money off of it. I know he spent Zsa Zsa’s cash but then she spent a lot of it herself. What does a prince title get you in America except maybe a good table at a restaurant?


It gets you a D list actress who is a divorcee and a fake backyard wedding


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I remember correctly
> 
> 
> ETA:  A friendly public service announcement:  with many of these ‘tech’ companies [and others], your data belongs to them, not you.  There are legitimate privacy concerns with these online ‘services’.


Oh, I'm well aware of that .. I rarely post on Facebook anymore, and don't put up many photos!  I was on Instagram quite a bit before, but have moved back on that as well .. just not "feeling" a lot of the social media lately and I REALLY LOATHE the fact that they put their "logic" in place to show you certain things .. if I wanted to see that CRAP, I could do it just as well on TV!  Don't even get me started on the Tik-Tok stuff, but when I saw how much $$$$$ these kids are making on Tik-Tok and Youtube, Instagram, etc. - it kind of makes me sick!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> That guy took being a gold digger to the next level.


The way he met Gabor is certainly interesting - crashed an A list party hosted by Hollywood powerhouse Sidney Sheldon. The funny thing is, it sounds like a storyline right out of a Sheldon novel. MM could have taken pointers from him. 


> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/l...r-past-as-he-auctions-her-belongings-1092187/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that still need clarification, the word is *won't*…



You know, I kind of crack up with the whole thought of them using this "MISINFORMATION" in regards to Spotify .. because, *THEIR WHOLE EXISTENCE AND HYPOCRITICAL SPEECHES, TALKS, WORDS, ETC. -- IS MISINFORMATION* .. think about it?!?!?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

TC1 said:


> It gets you a *D list* *Z-LIST* actress who is a divorcee and a fake backyard wedding


fixed that for you .. c'mon folks, a D-List is too good for her!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that still need clarification, the word is *won't*…



More likely _can't. _


----------



## poopsie

So. Sounds like maybe Spotify _did _foolishly pay them all up front. I doubt they'd be asking for a few hundred thou back.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Other than Eva Gabor being on the sitcom Green Acres, I only recall them being talk show and game show regulars in the 60s and 70s.


Zsa Zsa was in movies way back in the day....not sure how big a star she was....probably more of a personality or sex symbol


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Zsa Zsa was in movies way back in the day....not sure how big a star she was....probably more of a personality or sex symbol


I knew she was in some movies, I'd just be hard pressed to name one.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know how he manages to make money off of it. I know he spent Zsa Zsa’s cash but then she spent a lot of it herself. *What does a prince title get you in America except maybe a good table at a restaurant?*


 Are we forgetting Spot*fy & Netfl*x deals, OW, ED, TP and several other BFFs, security when visiting NYC…?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I knew she was in some movies, I'd just be hard pressed to name one.


nothing major
quote from IMBD
Undoubtedly the woman who had come to epitomize what we recognize today as "celebrity", Zsa Zsa Gabor, is better known for her many marriages, personal appearances, her "dahlink" catchphrase, her actions, gossip, and quotations on men, rather than her film career. Zsa Zsa Gabor was born Sári Gabor in Budapest, Hungary, to Jolie Gabor (née Janka ...


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I knew she was in some movies, I'd just be hard pressed to name one.



I think she had more husbands than she had movie roles.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Zsa Zsa was in movies way back in the day....not sure how big a star she was....probably more of a personality or sex symbol


According to her last hubby (NYP), “_She wasn’t famous for her movies; she was famous for the [nine] men she married_”


----------



## Chanbal

The may have already achieved that mark.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Do these “Frederick” titles come with a luxe blue sash, a yellow ribboned brooch and the diamonds?   
Hazzi has a sash, but cannot wear it, right?  MM never got the sash, did she?  Do Bea and Eug have a sash?

_It's not at all surprising that it took Kate several years to earn her two royal orders. The Queen only bestows these awards to members of her family after they've logged copious hours of work and completed many, many engagements._








__





						Kate Middleton Is Decked Out in Royal Honors at Tonight's Diplomatic Reception
					

The Duchess was wearing two Royal Orders, which were awarded by Queen Elizabeth herself.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> According to her last hubby (NYP), “_She wasn’t famous for her movies; she was famous for the [nine] men she married_”



I remember this - she slapped the policeman. 









						Zsa Zsa Gabor, the Beverly Hills cop and  'the slap heard 'round the world'
					

Before O.J.




					www.latimes.com
				




ETA: note the sash and the diamonds


----------



## Chanbal

_Harry and Meghan the ‘*prince and princess of cancellation*’. _


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hubs says today one of the broadcasters called H&M _HarryMeg_. He was so pleased he knew who they were. 

Apparently, H&M have been fodder for the Fox folks for awhile.  From March, 2021:
_I just read the same stuff you do. It turns out only *grand-brats *in direct line of succession can be princes.

So tough beans on toast, Archie -- the best you'll ever be is a *super-wealthy earl*.

Life is so unfair._

*There's nothing I like more than royal on royal action. It doesn't matter who loses -- we all win!*








						Gutfeld on Harry and Meghan slamming the royals in tell-all interview
					

Here's what we learned from the Oprah interview with Meghan and Harry. Forget about the COVID deaths. The drug overdoses. The actual suicides. Markle's the real victim.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hubs says today one of the broadcasters called H&M _HarryMeg_. He was so pleased he knew who they were.
> 
> Apparently, H&M have been fodder for the Fox folks for awhile.  From March, 2021:
> _I just read the same stuff you do. It turns out only *grand-brats *in direct line of succession can be princes.
> 
> So tough beans on toast, Archie -- the best you'll ever be is a *super-wealthy earl*.
> 
> Life is so unfair._
> 
> *There's nothing I like more than royal on royal action. It doesn't matter who loses -- we all win!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gutfeld on Harry and Meghan slamming the royals in tell-all interview
> 
> 
> Here's what we learned from the Oprah interview with Meghan and Harry. Forget about the COVID deaths. The drug overdoses. The actual suicides. Markle's the real victim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com


Not a fan of him but he's right.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hubs says today one of the broadcasters called H&M _HarryMeg_. He was so pleased he knew who they were.
> 
> Apparently, H&M have been fodder for the Fox folks for awhile.  From March, 2021:
> _I just read the same stuff you do. It turns out only *grand-brats *in direct line of succession can be princes.
> 
> So tough beans on toast, Archie -- the best you'll ever be is a *super-wealthy earl*.
> 
> Life is so unfair._
> 
> *There's nothing I like more than royal on royal action. It doesn't matter who loses -- we all win!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gutfeld on Harry and Meghan slamming the royals in tell-all interview
> 
> 
> Here's what we learned from the Oprah interview with Meghan and Harry. Forget about the COVID deaths. The drug overdoses. The actual suicides. Markle's the real victim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com


Meghan, the actress shows that she can play the victim… He is right.

Prince Harry is like a flashlight without batteries, useless…


----------



## Chanbal

Potential trouble in Montecito, oops! Kate might become the next Colonel-in-Chief…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tell it like it is, Jesus.


----------



## bag-mania

“Anxious in seconds” perfectly describes      her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tell it like it is, Jesus.



Agree with BLG, but I think if one covers M's face except for the mouth, it looks like a fake smile in that picture. Killer Eyes + Fake Smile = MM


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> Agree with BLG, but I think if one covers M's face except for the mouth, it looks like a fake smile in that picture. Killer Eyes + Fake Smile = MM







(If you click on Frank he talks)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Let me take a wild guess...because she isn't a complete psycho mistreating others who actually does her job and manages to do it humbly and heartfelt?


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Let me take a wild guess...because she isn't a complete psycho mistreating others who actually does her job and manages to do it humbly and heartfelt?




Why Kate is more popular than Meghan? There isn't enough bandwidth to list all the reasons.


----------



## lanasyogamama

He actually says it’s because Kate retains an air of mystery- there aren’t tons of videos of her speaking, and she surprises is with things like the piano playing.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> He actually says it’s because Kate retains an air of mystery- there aren’t tons of videos of her speaking, and she surprises is with things like the piano playing.


I've read in the past that that air of mystery, not letting the public see behind the curtain, is key to the ongoing survival of the monarchy. But it has been chipped away at so much in recent decades it has reached the point where its future may be in question.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> I've read in the past that that air of mystery, not letting the public see behind the curtain, is key to the ongoing survival of the monarchy. But it has been chipped away at so much in recent decades it has reached the point where its future may be in question.


I know I find celebs way less interesting now that they share so much on social media.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I know I find celebs way less interesting now that they share so much on social media.



It's because so many of them reveal themselves to be unlikable or freakin' nuts. Before social media we could enjoy the illusion.


----------



## Chanbal

_Harry and Meghan should ‘tackle misinformation’ by ‘cancelling themselves’   

The world's most privileged victims… _


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> It's because so many of them reveal themselves to be unlikable or freakin' nuts. Before social media we could enjoy the illusion.


Not social media...but too much media in general. I mean, a lot of folks thought Tom Cruise seemed like decent guy until the Oprah couch jumping incident and the whack job behaviour afterward.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

More from the Aussies:
_We do need to hear from them, don't we…   _
The Bench vs. The Plank


----------



## purseinsanity

What a crock of $hit. WTF are they doing exactly to make the world a better place? 
I copied and pasted so no unnecessary clicks were obtained 
The comments were what I found really interesting. *Not.a.single.one.buying.their.BS*! 



*Prince Harry Doesn’t Want to ‘Rob’ His Kids of a Relationship With Their Cousins Amid Security Fight*
By Eliza Thompson
January 31, 2022
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. F
The battle continues. *Prince Harry* wants to take *Meghan Markle* and their kids for a visit with *Queen Elizabeth II*, but he’s determined to win his fight for property security first.
*Everything to Know About Prince Harry's Fight for Security in the U.K.*
“Harry has his heart set on returning to the U.K. to see the queen with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, but that will only happen if the government takes the appropriate measures to protect his family,” an insider exclusively tells _Us Weekly_ of the Duke of Sussex, 37. “He refuses to put them at risk. Their safety comes before anything else.”

Earlier this month, the Invictus Games founder applied for a judicial review regarding a previous Home Office decision that ruled he could not personally fund police protection for himself and his wife, 40, and their children Archie, 2, and Lilibet, 7 months, while in the U.K.
“Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats,” Harry’s legal spokesperson said in a January 15 statement. “While his role within the Institution has changed, his profile as a member of the royal family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.”
The queen’s grandson previously offered to pay for police protection after stepping down from his royal duties in January 2020, but that offer was dismissed. Since the family’s move to California, the former helicopter pilot has personally funded a private security team, but he argued that a similar arrangement would not work in his home country.
“That security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK,” the statement added. “In absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return home.”
In addition to seeing his grandmother, the BetterUp CIO wants his kids to meet Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 6, and Prince Louis, 3.
*“Harry and Meghan are doing everything they can to make the world a better place *and feel it would be wrong to rob their children of the opportunity of getting to know their cousins,” the insider adds. “It’s obviously difficult because of the distance factor, so Harry sweetly organized a special Zoom call with *Prince William* so that the cousins could get to see each other.”
_With reporting by Travis Cronin_


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> What a crock of $hit. WTF are they doing exactly to make the world a better place?
> I copied and pasted so no unnecessary clicks were obtained
> The comments were what I found really interesting. *Not.a.single.one.buying.their.BS*!
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Doesn’t Want to ‘Rob’ His Kids of a Relationship With Their Cousins Amid Security Fight*
> By Eliza Thompson
> January 31, 2022
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. F
> The battle continues. *Prince Harry* wants to take *Meghan Markle* and their kids for a visit with *Queen Elizabeth II*, but he’s determined to win his fight for property security first.
> *Everything to Know About Prince Harry's Fight for Security in the U.K.*
> “Harry has his heart set on returning to the U.K. to see the queen with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, but that will only happen if the government takes the appropriate measures to protect his family,” an insider exclusively tells _Us Weekly_ of the Duke of Sussex, 37. “He refuses to put them at risk. Their safety comes before anything else.”
> 
> Earlier this month, the Invictus Games founder applied for a judicial review regarding a previous Home Office decision that ruled he could not personally fund police protection for himself and his wife, 40, and their children Archie, 2, and Lilibet, 7 months, while in the U.K.
> “Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats,” Harry’s legal spokesperson said in a January 15 statement. “While his role within the Institution has changed, his profile as a member of the royal family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.”
> The queen’s grandson previously offered to pay for police protection after stepping down from his royal duties in January 2020, but that offer was dismissed. Since the family’s move to California, the former helicopter pilot has personally funded a private security team, but he argued that a similar arrangement would not work in his home country.
> “That security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK,” the statement added. “In absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return home.”
> In addition to seeing his grandmother, the BetterUp CIO wants his kids to meet Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 6, and Prince Louis, 3.
> *“Harry and Meghan are doing everything they can to make the world a better place *and feel it would be wrong to rob their children of the opportunity of getting to know their cousins,” the insider adds. “It’s obviously difficult because of the distance factor, so Harry sweetly organized a special Zoom call with *Prince William* so that the cousins could get to see each other.”
> _With reporting by Travis Cronin_



Gag me with a spoon 
Saw that on my feed earlier and just kept scrolling


----------



## charlottawill

*"doing everything they can to make the world a better place"...*"rob"... "sweetly"...the hyperbole is always strong with the Harkles isn't it?


----------



## Sophisticatted

How does meeting the cousins = making the world a better place???  OH!  Maybe a demonstrated “connection” to the RF would make THEIR world a better place ($$$), and they are USING the children to try to achieve that end.  Ugh!  SMH!  

Of course lil bro is Skyping with big bro, since big bro is reputed to be in charge of the Jubilee guest list and has deliberately NOT invited TW.

The “distance factor difficulty” is their own damn fault.  I don’t think they expected that the BRF would not care if they stayed away.  Panic is setting in.


----------



## bag-mania

I don't know how much of this "we want to see family but because [insert obstacle here] we can't" is actually coming from them. This reeks of Sunshine Sachs trying to paint a rosy picture of them holding out an olive branch when the reality is the opposite.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't know how much of this "we want to see family but because [insert obstacle here] we can't" is actually coming from them. This reeks of Sunshine Sachs trying to paint a rosy picture of them holding out an olive branch when the reality is the opposite.


I doubt Sunshine Sachs does anything without checking with her highness


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *“Harry and Meghan are doing everything they can to make the world a better place *and feel it would be wrong to rob their children of the opportunity of getting to know their cousins,” the insider adds. “It’s obviously difficult because of the distance factor, so Harry sweetly organized a special Zoom call with *Prince William* so that the cousins could get to see each other.”
> _With reporting by Travis Cronin_


Many of us feel that everything they touch becomes worse, I wonder why.


----------



## CeeJay

TC1 said:


> Not social media...but too much media in general. I mean, a lot of folks thought Tom Cruise seemed like decent guy until the Oprah couch jumping incident and the whack job behaviour afterward.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO true!!! .. honestly, I've stopped buying a lot of the fashion magazines (or others for that matter) because I was sick of seeing all these celebrities .. give me the models any day.  Honestly, I find myself becoming very disinterested in a LOT of the social media .. yet I see a LOT of people making a lot of $$$ now on Instagram, YouTube, Tik-Tok .. and a lot of it is all merchandising!  I don't know, maybe it's me and living in California too long .. just get me nice T-shirts, jeans and sandals .. but I do have to admit that I cannot do without my Chanel Espadrilles (always the linen ones)!!


----------



## CeeJay

Sophisticatted said:


> The “distance factor difficulty” is their own damn fault.  I don’t think they expected that the BRF would not care if they stayed away.  Panic is setting in.


EXACTLY .. if they had moved to NYC, then it's usually only 5 to 6 hours to London (yes - I once had a flight from Boston to Heathrow where we caught a major tailwind and got to London in 5 hours .. not even a damn coffee shop was open - uggh)!!!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> What a crock of $hit. WTF are they doing exactly to make the world a better place?
> I copied and pasted so no unnecessary clicks were obtained
> The comments were what I found really interesting. *Not.a.single.one.buying.their.BS*!
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Doesn’t Want to ‘Rob’ His Kids of a Relationship With Their Cousins Amid Security Fight*
> By Eliza Thompson
> January 31, 2022
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. F
> The battle continues. *Prince Harry* wants to take *Meghan Markle* and their kids for a visit with *Queen Elizabeth II*, but he’s determined to win his fight for property security first.
> *Everything to Know About Prince Harry's Fight for Security in the U.K.*
> “Harry has his heart set on returning to the U.K. to see the queen with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, but that will only happen if the government takes the appropriate measures to protect his family,” an insider exclusively tells _Us Weekly_ of the Duke of Sussex, 37. “He refuses to put them at risk. Their safety comes before anything else.”
> 
> Earlier this month, the Invictus Games founder applied for a judicial review regarding a previous Home Office decision that ruled he could not personally fund police protection for himself and his wife, 40, and their children Archie, 2, and Lilibet, 7 months, while in the U.K.
> “Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats,” Harry’s legal spokesperson said in a January 15 statement. “While his role within the Institution has changed, his profile as a member of the royal family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.”
> The queen’s grandson previously offered to pay for police protection after stepping down from his royal duties in January 2020, but that offer was dismissed. Since the family’s move to California, the former helicopter pilot has personally funded a private security team, but he argued that a similar arrangement would not work in his home country.
> “That security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK,” the statement added. “In absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return home.”
> In addition to seeing his grandmother, the BetterUp CIO wants his kids to meet Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 6, and Prince Louis, 3.
> *“Harry and Meghan are doing everything they can to make the world a better place *and feel it would be wrong to rob their children of the opportunity of getting to know their cousins,” the insider adds. “It’s obviously difficult because of the distance factor, so Harry sweetly organized a special Zoom call with *Prince William* so that the cousins could get to see each other.”
> _With reporting by Travis Cronin_



Their actions speak much louder than their words - this has always been their downfall. 
QE, C&C, W&K = actions and words match. That is why they are considered winners.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And another lie :smh:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> And another lie :smh:


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


>



It should be called
A FILM ABOUT A DOUCHESS WHO TALKS PURE ****E


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

If they really wanted to get back to the UK and see H’s family (assuming anyone from his family would want to see them) it could certainly be arranged privately.  But H and TW only want to do it with all the fanfare they think they deserve.  (Didn’t H fly back quietly without TW and no one knew about it until he had returned to the USA? I seem to remember reading that.  And I think he flew commercial then too?)


----------



## Happyish

purseinsanity said:


> What a crock of $hit. WTF are they doing exactly to make the world a better place?
> I copied and pasted so no unnecessary clicks were obtained
> The comments were what I found really interesting. *Not.a.single.one.buying.their.BS*!
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Doesn’t Want to ‘Rob’ His Kids of a Relationship With Their Cousins Amid Security Fight*
> By Eliza Thompson
> January 31, 2022
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. F
> The battle continues. *Prince Harry* wants to take *Meghan Markle* and their kids for a visit with *Queen Elizabeth II*, but he’s determined to win his fight for property security first.
> *Everything to Know About Prince Harry's Fight for Security in the U.K.*
> “Harry has his heart set on returning to the U.K. to see the queen with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, but that will only happen if the government takes the appropriate measures to protect his family,” an insider exclusively tells _Us Weekly_ of the Duke of Sussex, 37. “He refuses to put them at risk. Their safety comes before anything else.”
> 
> Earlier this month, the Invictus Games founder applied for a judicial review regarding a previous Home Office decision that ruled he could not personally fund police protection for himself and his wife, 40, and their children Archie, 2, and Lilibet, 7 months, while in the U.K.
> “Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats,” Harry’s legal spokesperson said in a January 15 statement. “While his role within the Institution has changed, his profile as a member of the royal family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.”
> The queen’s grandson previously offered to pay for police protection after stepping down from his royal duties in January 2020, but that offer was dismissed. Since the family’s move to California, the former helicopter pilot has personally funded a private security team, but he argued that a similar arrangement would not work in his home country.
> “That security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK,” the statement added. “In absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return home.”
> In addition to seeing his grandmother, the BetterUp CIO wants his kids to meet Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 6, and Prince Louis, 3.
> *“Harry and Meghan are doing everything they can to make the world a better place *and feel it would be wrong to rob their children of the opportunity of getting to know their cousins,” the insider adds. “It’s obviously difficult because of the distance factor, so Harry sweetly organized a special Zoom call with *Prince William* so that the cousins could get to see each other.”
> _With reporting by Travis Cronin_



This certainly gives them a convenient excuse for not visiting, which they probably never intended to do in the first place. While it's possible Harry would visit alone, it affords Megan purported justification for refusing to go back to the UK with the royal progeny while at the same time punishing the family, for the perceived slights.

Interesting, she's used every excuse to avoid a visit. After staying in Canada for an extended period including Christmas over two years ago, they went to the UK, met with the Canadian consulate to thank them for hosting them in their country, then Megan abruptly left. I believe she only spent two days in the UK. She did not see the royal family and Archie was not with her on the trip, so it was obvious she did not intend to day stay any prolonged period. Archie was in Canada with a nanny/babysitter.

Later, Harry went back to the UK for discussions with the Queen, his father and William regarding their reduced role in the family. Again, Megan remained behind, now ensconced in Beverly Hills. Finally, Harry went back w/o Megan for Prince Phillips' funeral. Again, she did not accompany him on the ostensible reason that she was pregnant and could not travel. Obviously this was pretextual as a few weeks later--and even more pregnant, she flew to New York. To me, the failure to attend Prince Phillips' funeral was unforgivable and insulting. She may not have been close to Phillip, but her indifference to his importance, not to mention the significance of his death to Harry, not to mention the Queen and the nation is appalling, showed poor judgment not to mention a profound lack of courtesy.

I'm sure she will make sure to do something similar re the Queen's Jubilee.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happyish said:


> Later, Harry went back to the UK for discussions with the Queen, his father and William regarding their reduced role in the family.



Rumor is he was there to collect his portion from Phillip’s will.  Always about the $$$.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> If they really wanted to get back to the UK and see H’s family (assuming anyone from his family would want to see them) it could certainly be arranged privately.  But H and TW only want to do it with all the fanfare they think they deserve.  (Didn’t H fly back quietly without TW and no one knew about it until he had returned to the USA? I seem to remember reading that.  And I think he flew commercial then too?)


I would think the kids have also cousins from the M*rkle and R*gland families, but the Nefl*xes don't seem to have plans to visit them. They don't have royal titles, and probably not enough money to be relevant to the couple from Montecito.


----------



## Chanbal

The Netfl*xes PR machine is attacking Piers again. 


_Piers Morgan was forced out of his TV presenter job after a complaint by Meghan Markle—but is now using a New York Post column to attack her in America.

The former Good Morning Britain host left his high profile role at ITV after explosive on-air exchanges following Meghan and Prince Harry's Oprah Winfrey interview in March 2021.

The Duchess of Sussex lodged a formal complaint and Morgan was asked to apologize. However, he refused, choosing to catapult his career into an uncertain future rather than back down._









						Piers Morgan—forced out by Meghan—uses new column to attack her in U.S.
					

Meghan Markle's victory over regular critic Piers Morgan has not removed the thorn from her side, but moved it closer to home.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

quick question - is The Repair Shop located in H&M’s dukedom?   If so, they are missing golden opportunity to promote that part of the UK.  If not, good - we do not need them to ruin it. 


_The Repair Shop is filmed at the Weald and Downland Living Museum in Singleton, Chichester. Situated right next to the South Downs National Park, most of the repairs take place at this location as well. While some projects are moved by cast and crew to the nearby smithery and wagon shed.

The museum describes itself as a “hidden gem in the South East, quintessentially British in a picture perfect setting.








						Where is The Repair Shop filmed?
					

With it's beautiful leafy surroundings, many fans of BBC One's hit show The Repair Shop want to know where the series is filmed in the UK.




					www.goodto.com
				




The Repair Shop is filmed in *the Court Barn of the Weald and Downland Living Museum in Singleton, West Sussex*. Located in the Lavant Valley, the museum has been open since the 1970s and has been home to The Repair Shop since filming began in 2017._








						Where is BBC's The Repair Shop filmed - and can you visit the restoration barn?
					

The BBC One show, hosted by Will Kirk and Suzie Fletcher, follows the restoration of family heirlooms, as professional craftsmen work to bring them back to life




					www.nationalworld.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumor is he was there to collect his portion from Phillip’s will.  Always about the $$$.


He wouldn't miss an opportunity to collect. It seems that we will never know what's in the will... 









						What fresh hell must Philip’s will contain to make the royal family look any worse? | Catherine Bennett
					

If a bid for dignity was behind the secrecy of his last testament, I’ve got news for Judge McFarlane




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## rose60610

So Maggot and Handout are using their own children as a bargaining chip for loads of taxpayer funded security?  .....I thought that THEY were the ones who wanted to break away from the BRF.  To what...escape all the publicity and to find themselves?  So they "escaped" and insert their stupid know-nothing word salad faces into anything they can. Now they want to barge into the BRF under the "play with cousins" excuse?  Well, their kiddies could know the cousins very well had Mummy Misfit and Daddy Derelict not whored themselves out for even greater fame and fortune. Which doesn't seem to be working. Not even after claiming the BRF is racist and made Maggot suicidal. So NOW they want to cozy up to the cousins? Bbbbbbbbbut I thought the BRF was racist because Duchess of Duplicity said so. So why would they even want to return? If the BRF is that bad, then why expose your own kids to them? so your kids can mingle with racist viewed cousins?  Me thinks something is rotten in the state of Denmark. But just think of all the dollar signs that pictures of Archie and Lilibet could get while visiting the Tower or London, riding a double decker bus, eating fish and chips, and cozying up to the Queen could get. What are they really looking for? More invented excuses to hurl money making accusations? M&H can't be trusted whatsoever.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Honestly, I find myself becoming very disinterested in a LOT of the social media .. yet I see a LOT of people making a lot of $$$ now on Instagram, YouTube, Tik-Tok .. and a lot of it is all merchandising!


I stop following anyone who starts shilling/endorsing products.  They have to label it an ad and yet they still get so many likes and comments - for something they are paid to promote.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I must have missed Harry going through the qualification to become a virologist/epidemiologist/infectious disease specialist.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must have missed Harry going through the qualification to become a virologist/epidemiologist/infectious disease specialist.



How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.


----------



## rose60610

And let's not forget he and Maggot are experts at rescuing things. Question is, who's going to rescue society from their stupidity and self-adulation?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is he promoting  another ‘conspiracy theory’ now?
   First and always, his mom. Now, the pandemic?


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.


Duke of Dunning-Kruger might be a more appropriate title for him.


----------



## chowlover2

CarryOn2020 said:


> quick question - is The Repair Shop located in H&M’s dukedom?   If so, they are missing golden opportunity to promote that part of the UK.  If not, good - we do not need them to ruin it.
> 
> 
> _The Repair Shop is filmed at the Weald and Downland Living Museum in Singleton, Chichester. Situated right next to the South Downs National Park, most of the repairs take place at this location as well. While some projects are moved by cast and crew to the nearby smithery and wagon shed.
> 
> The museum describes itself as a “hidden gem in the South East, quintessentially British in a picture perfect setting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where is The Repair Shop filmed?
> 
> 
> With it's beautiful leafy surroundings, many fans of BBC One's hit show The Repair Shop want to know where the series is filmed in the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodto.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Repair Shop is filmed in *the Court Barn of the Weald and Downland Living Museum in Singleton, West Sussex*. Located in the Lavant Valley, the museum has been open since the 1970s and has been home to The Repair Shop since filming began in 2017._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where is BBC's The Repair Shop filmed - and can you visit the restoration barn?
> 
> 
> The BBC One show, hosted by Will Kirk and Suzie Fletcher, follows the restoration of family heirlooms, as professional craftsmen work to bring them back to life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nationalworld.com


I never miss an episode of The Repair Shop, we don't have anything like that in the US. There's another show filmed in Wales that is similar to The Repair Shop, but more like Lara Spencer's old show Flea Market Flip.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Ouch


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> The may have already achieved that mark.



You could never dislike them as much as we do


----------



## Helventara

Aimee3 said:


> If they really wanted to get back to the UK and see H’s family (assuming anyone from his family would want to see them) *it could certainly be arranged privately.*  But H and TW only want to do it with all the fanfare they think they deserve.  (Didn’t H fly back quietly without TW and no one knew about it until he had returned to the USA? I seem to remember reading that.  And I think he flew commercial then too?)



Also, when they dated?  It was all unknown and private. Who knew he flew back and forth to Canada?  No one knew until H issued that press release saying the paps harrased his GF. I thought at that time it was a bit weird. Like it was an announcement that MM was his GF. Now it all makes sense. MM didn’t like that it was too private


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.


Don’t forget chicken farmer and expert on telling others what to do


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BVBookshop said:


> Also, when they dated?  It was all unknown and private. Who knew he flew back and forth to Canada?  No one knew until H issued that press release saying the paps harrased his GF. I thought at that time it was a bit weird. Like it was an announcement that MM was his GF. Now it all makes sense. MM didn’t like that it was too private



You might be onto something. Apparently she called the cops numerous times for stalking and harrassment (while still working on Suits), but not once could they find even the tiniest clue?


----------



## xincinsin

BVBookshop said:


> Also, when they dated?  It was all unknown and private. Who knew he flew back and forth to Canada?  No one knew until H issued that press release saying the paps harrased his GF. I thought at that time it was a bit weird. Like it was an announcement that MM was his GF. Now it all makes sense. MM didn’t like that it was too private


Wasn't there also a story (with photos) that she deliberately walked about town showing off a necklace with dangling charms of their initials to make sure everyone knew she had planted her flag?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't there also a story (with photos) that she deliberately walked about town showing off a necklace with dangling charms of their initials to make sure everyone knew she had planted her flag?



Yes, and all the ladies in the UK breathed a sigh of relief  Their moms and dads cheered with glee 
ETA: he was never considered a ‘catch’ 









						The Meghan Mini Initial Necklace - Choose 2 Initials
					

Yes We Created This Famous Necklace for Meghan Markle We Have The Purchase Order!Hand Delivered To Meghan Markle In Toronto And We Are Proud Of It!   Our Meghan Markle Story  It was such an honor for us at The Right Hand Gal, to create our famous M&H mini initial asymmetrical necklace for Meghan...




					therighthandgal.com
				














						Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle pictured wearing customised necklace with 'H' and 'M' charms
					

Duty called Prince Harry away from Meghan Markle’s side after a brief reunion in Canada this week, but it seems the Prince may have left his girlfriend a romantic keepsake after she was spotted wearing a necklace with their initials on it.




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## MiniMabel

pukasonqo said:


> Don’t forget *chicken farmer* and expert on telling others what to do




I read "chicken charmer"!


----------



## bag-mania

I haven’t been following Piers but it’s good to hear he is still keeping busy.  









						Piers Morgan—Forced Out by Meghan—Uses New Column To Attack Her in U.S.
					

Meghan Markle's victory over regular critic Piers Morgan has not removed the thorn from her side, but moved it closer to home.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I haven’t been following Piers but it’s good to hear he is still keeping busy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan—Forced Out by Meghan—Uses New Column To Attack Her in U.S.
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's victory over regular critic Piers Morgan has not removed the thorn from her side, but moved it closer to home.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


This is not the only Newsweek article in which this same author defends Miss Little Forgetful by attacking Piers. For the ones that want to avoid clicking on propaganda from the Nefl*xes PR, I posted part of it on a previous post.


----------



## Chanbal

The drama continues thanks to DM's long memory.   Though, Joe Rogan may have been a visionary on the Netfl*xes saga. 


_Rogan, 54, was discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave the Royal Family with Mike Baker, a former CIA officer and security expert, *on a podcast which first aired in January 2020*, *shortly after Megxit was announced*.

'*It's that little America hussy he's hooked up with. She's going to turn him into a Kardashian,' he joked when imitating Her Majesty. 'That little American hussy has ruined my prince*'.

It comes after Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, said they had expressed concerns to Spotify about the 'all too real consequences of COVID-19 misinformation on its platform'.

But the couple said they were committed to continuing their reported £18million deal with the streaming giant 'to ensure changes to its platform are made to help address this public health crisis'._









						Joe Rogan mimics the Queen in unearthed podcast about Megxit
					

Rogan, 54, was discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave the British Royal Family with Mike Baker, a former CIA officer and security expert, on a podcast which first aired in January 2020.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The drama continues thanks to DM's long memory.   Though, Joe Rogan may have been a visionary on the Netfl*xes saga.
> View attachment 5315035
> 
> _Rogan, 54, was discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave the Royal Family with Mike Baker, a former CIA officer and security expert, *on a podcast which first aired in January 2020*, *shortly after Megxit was announced*.
> 
> '*It's that little America hussy he's hooked up with. She's going to turn him into a Kardashian,' he joked when imitating Her Majesty. 'That little American hussy has ruined my prince*'.
> 
> It comes after Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, said they had expressed concerns to Spotify about the 'all too real consequences of COVID-19 misinformation on its platform'.
> 
> But the couple said they were committed to continuing their reported £18million deal with the streaming giant 'to ensure changes to its platform are made to help address this public health crisis'._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Rogan mimics the Queen in unearthed podcast about Megxit
> 
> 
> Rogan, 54, was discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave the British Royal Family with Mike Baker, a former CIA officer and security expert, on a podcast which first aired in January 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Even worse, she made the Kardashians look hardworking!


----------



## tiktok

lanasyogamama said:


> Even worse, she made the Kardashians look hardworking!



…and classy.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> You could never dislike them as much as we do


Many people in the US don't even know that the Nefl*xes exist, good for them! In this case, "_ignorance is bliss_." 
It looks like their PR machine has been trying to rehabilitate their image in the UK. Not an easy task though!


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.



Don't forget he's also an expert on mothers (as she is, on what constitutes a family)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.


He needs to study Proctology. Being a dunderheaded whinge, he doesn't comprehend he's full of s*** and his ignorant verbal diarrhea only generates laughter and distain.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Ouch



 Duchess Delusional take note, it's not swigging from a baby bottle, mimicking a rodent gnashing chips, or squatting on a public sidewalk,
 THIS is how one becomes "relatable."


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry could never look so good in the role!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.


And an expert on CofE ecclesiastical and UK government rules regarding back garden weddings.  Plus, lest I forget, an expert on the Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and the bonkers First Amendment.


----------



## gracekelly

In retrospect I think it’s a shame that Ellen didn’t require Meghan to wear a diaper when she was drinking from the baby bottle. The Daily Mail would  have been happy to post that picture along with their apology to her.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> He needs to study Proctology. Being a dunderheaded whinge, he doesn't comprehend he's full of s*** and his ignorant verbal diarrhea only generates laughter and distain.


He needs a verbal enema.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The drama continues thanks to DM's long memory.   Though, Joe Rogan may have been a visionary on the Netfl*xes saga.
> View attachment 5315035
> 
> _Rogan, 54, was discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave the Royal Family with Mike Baker, a former CIA officer and security expert, *on a podcast which first aired in January 2020*, *shortly after Megxit was announced*.
> 
> '*It's that little America hussy he's hooked up with. She's going to turn him into a Kardashian,' he joked when imitating Her Majesty. 'That little American hussy has ruined my prince*'.
> 
> It comes after Harry, 37, and Meghan, 40, said they had expressed concerns to Spotify about the 'all too real consequences of COVID-19 misinformation on its platform'.
> 
> But the couple said they were committed to continuing their reported £18million deal with the streaming giant 'to ensure changes to its platform are made to help address this public health crisis'._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Rogan mimics the Queen in unearthed podcast about Megxit
> 
> 
> Rogan, 54, was discussing the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave the British Royal Family with Mike Baker, a former CIA officer and security expert, on a podcast which first aired in January 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm impressed with his foresight! (In this case.)


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Don't forget *he's also an expert on mothers* (as she is, on what constitutes a family)


Young mothers!


----------



## rose60610

Harry is an expert on the First Amendment, the one he criticizes yet allows HIM to say the most stupid things and get away with.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Many people in the US don't even know that the Nefl*xes exist, good for them! In this case, "_ignorance is bliss_."
> It looks like their PR machine has been trying to rehabilitate their image in the UK. Not an easy task though!
> View attachment 5315043


30 things I never knew I never knew but know for sure I'll never care.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't there also a story (with photos) that she deliberately walked about town showing off a necklace with dangling charms of their initials to make sure everyone knew she had planted her flag?


That is so eighth grade.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Anyone hearing windows breaking in Monteshito land?
ETA:  RFU?


----------



## oldbag

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, and all the ladies in the UK breathed a sigh of relief  Their moms and dads cheered with glee
> ETA: he was never considered a ‘catch’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan Mini Initial Necklace - Choose 2 Initials
> 
> 
> Yes We Created This Famous Necklace for Meghan Markle We Have The Purchase Order!Hand Delivered To Meghan Markle In Toronto And We Are Proud Of It!   Our Meghan Markle Story  It was such an honor for us at The Right Hand Gal, to create our famous M&H mini initial asymmetrical necklace for Meghan...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> therighthandgal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5314916
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle pictured wearing customised necklace with 'H' and 'M' charms
> 
> 
> Duty called Prince Harry away from Meghan Markle’s side after a brief reunion in Canada this week, but it seems the Prince may have left his girlfriend a romantic keepsake after she was spotted wearing a necklace with their initials on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


Yeah well I have a necklace with dangling charms one of which is Baby Yoda, a grizzly bear, well you get the idea


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone hearing windows breaking in Monteshito land?
> ETA:  RFU?



RFU - Rugby Football Union
RFL - Rugby Football League


----------



## Annawakes

I’m always impressed by her grace and composure.  It’s not easy catching a ball while being lifted in the air simultaneously.  She makes it look so easy.

It’s night and day, the difference between those two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> 30 things I never knew I never knew but know for sure I'll never care.


And will continue without knowing. I didn't accept the cookies to read the article…


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, and all the ladies in the UK breathed a sigh of relief  Their moms and dads cheered with glee
> ETA: he was never considered a ‘catch’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan Mini Initial Necklace - Choose 2 Initials
> 
> 
> Yes We Created This Famous Necklace for Meghan Markle We Have The Purchase Order!Hand Delivered To Meghan Markle In Toronto And We Are Proud Of It!   Our Meghan Markle Story  It was such an honor for us at The Right Hand Gal, to create our famous M&H mini initial asymmetrical necklace for Meghan...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> therighthandgal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5314916
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle pictured wearing customised necklace with 'H' and 'M' charms
> 
> 
> Duty called Prince Harry away from Meghan Markle’s side after a brief reunion in Canada this week, but it seems the Prince may have left his girlfriend a romantic keepsake after she was spotted wearing a necklace with their initials on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


She looks quite...different...in that photo.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, and all the ladies in the UK breathed a sigh of relief  Their moms and dads cheered with glee
> ETA: he was never considered a ‘catch’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Meghan Mini Initial Necklace - Choose 2 Initials
> 
> 
> Yes We Created This Famous Necklace for Meghan Markle We Have The Purchase Order!Hand Delivered To Meghan Markle In Toronto And We Are Proud Of It!   Our Meghan Markle Story  It was such an honor for us at The Right Hand Gal, to create our famous M&H mini initial asymmetrical necklace for Meghan...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> therighthandgal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5314916
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle pictured wearing customised necklace with 'H' and 'M' charms
> 
> 
> Duty called Prince Harry away from Meghan Markle’s side after a brief reunion in Canada this week, but it seems the Prince may have left his girlfriend a romantic keepsake after she was spotted wearing a necklace with their initials on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk


If this company openly uses her photos to advertise the necklace, was this a merching stunt?


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> What a crock of $hit. WTF are they doing exactly to make the world a better place?
> I copied and pasted so no unnecessary clicks were obtained
> The comments were what I found really interesting. *Not.a.single.one.buying.their.BS*!
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry Doesn’t Want to ‘Rob’ His Kids of a Relationship With Their Cousins Amid Security Fight*
> By Eliza Thompson
> January 31, 2022
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. F
> The battle continues. *Prince Harry* wants to take *Meghan Markle* and their kids for a visit with *Queen Elizabeth II*, but he’s determined to win his fight for property security first.
> *Everything to Know About Prince Harry's Fight for Security in the U.K.*
> “Harry has his heart set on returning to the U.K. to see the queen with Meghan, Archie and Lilibet, but that will only happen if the government takes the appropriate measures to protect his family,” an insider exclusively tells _Us Weekly_ of the Duke of Sussex, 37. “He refuses to put them at risk. Their safety comes before anything else.”
> 
> Earlier this month, the Invictus Games founder applied for a judicial review regarding a previous Home Office decision that ruled he could not personally fund police protection for himself and his wife, 40, and their children Archie, 2, and Lilibet, 7 months, while in the U.K.
> “Prince Harry inherited a security risk at birth, for life. He remains sixth in line to the throne, served two tours of combat duty in Afghanistan, and in recent years his family has been subjected to well-documented neo-Nazi and extremist threats,” Harry’s legal spokesperson said in a January 15 statement. “While his role within the Institution has changed, his profile as a member of the royal family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.”
> The queen’s grandson previously offered to pay for police protection after stepping down from his royal duties in January 2020, but that offer was dismissed. Since the family’s move to California, the former helicopter pilot has personally funded a private security team, but he argued that a similar arrangement would not work in his home country.
> “That security cannot replicate the necessary police protection needed whilst in the UK,” the statement added. “In absence of such protection, Prince Harry and his family are unable to return home.”
> In addition to seeing his grandmother, the BetterUp CIO wants his kids to meet Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 6, and Prince Louis, 3.
> *“Harry and Meghan are doing everything they can to make the world a better place *and feel it would be wrong to rob their children of the opportunity of getting to know their cousins,” the insider adds. “It’s obviously difficult because of the distance factor, so Harry sweetly organized a special Zoom call with *Prince William* so that the cousins could get to see each other.”
> _With reporting by Travis Cronin_



We need a barf emoji! (And I say that as someone who hates that emoji!). If only this thoroughly distasteful duo could see that they could make real inroads into making the world a better place by SHUTTING THE F*** UP and leaving the rest of us alone!!


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> I’m always impressed by her grace and composure.  It’s not easy catching a ball while being lifted in the air simultaneously.  She makes it look so easy.
> 
> It’s night and day, the difference between those two.


She always looks comfortable in her body and Meghan never does and I think that is the reason why her clothes never look quite right aside from the fitting issues.


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> We need a barf emoji! (And I say that as someone who hates that emoji!). If only this thoroughly distasteful duo could see that they could make real inroads into making the world a better place by SHUTTING THE F*** UP and leaving the rest of us alone!!


I really don't know how they are going to maintain their high profile.  with the constant barrage of political and celeb news, just going around trying to be politically correct and claiming to do good deeds (while not parting with any significant wealth) is not going to generate that much interest.  Their foundation hasn't done anything.  they haven't done anything for spotify or netflix.
They would have been better off staying in GB and doing their royal duties.  She would not be as high in the pecking order as Kate but she could still be a role model for young girls (esp of color)
The could have copied Diana and adopted causes to promote.

Guess H can stir up some trouble with the family and get in the news but how many times can that be a big story?  The RF should shut the whole thing down.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> I would think the kids have also cousins from the M*rkle and R*gland families, but the Nefl*xes don't seem to have plans to visit them. They don't have royal titles, and probably not enough money to be relevant to the couple from Montecito.



You are right - there would be little ($$$$) to gain from photos with Markles and/or Raglands.  But think of how much they imagine they can sell photos of their mythical kids with TQ and/or their cousins!

if they really wanted their small kids to meet TQ and their cousins, they should arrange some other time to go.  Showing up for a 4 day visit packed with emotion and activities will be tiring enough for TQ, the last thing she will need is Gringe and Cringe following her around and tugging on her skirt to get her attention.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> RFU - Rugby Football Union
> RFL - Rugby Football League



Yes, thank you, I know. I was being immature, maybe vulgar,  and thinking of the Royal FU which is perfect for Hazzi.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> She looks quite...different...in that photo.



Always with the tongue out…sheesh.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> She always looks comfortable in her body and Meghan never does and I think that is the reason why her clothes never look quite right aside from the fitting issues.


Catherine always wears clothes suitable to the occasion. If Megalomaniac had been appointed I bet she would have shown up on the field in her usual mile high stilettos. I can’t even imagine her attempting to run


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must have missed Harry going through the qualification to become a virologist/epidemiologist/infectious disease specialist.




Hmmmmm…totally uninformed Harry - your remarks sound a lot like the kind of thing that Joe Rogan might say, no?!?!  Unfortunate that you have never learned to think before you speak.  Oh, what do I know, maybe you are thinking as hard as you can….


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> How did you miss that?!!?  In case you missed this, he's also a mental health, national security, environment, Human Resources, and yoga expert as well.



Don’t forget juggling!!


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Catherine always wears clothes suitable to the occasion. If Megalomaniac had been appointed I bet she would have shown up on the field in her usual mile high stilettos. I can’t even imagine her attempting to run


You are right, I can't recall ever seeing a picture of her in athletic or casual attire. I thought the stilettos she wore for the infamous interview stuck out like a sore thumb.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always with the tongue out…sheesh.


I was looking at her nose, which to me looks quite different today.


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> Duchess Delusional take note, it's not swigging from a baby bottle, mimicking a rodent gnashing chips, or squatting on a public sidewalk,
> THIS is how one becomes "relatable."



love this video!  She looks like she is really enjoying herself in all of the rugby videos released today.  So nice to see!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> Catherine always wears clothes suitable to the occasion. If Megalomaniac had been appointed I bet she would have shown up on the field in her usual mile high stilettos. I can’t even imagine her attempting to run


And an outfit that costs minimum $8000!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always with the tongue out…sheesh.


I hate that.  I sometimes imagine her faking a smile so hard that she accidentally bites the tip off


----------



## Chanbal

Neil Sean in one of his most recent videos confirmed that zoom calls with the Cambridges are nonexistent. Will is still having a hard time dealing with the presence of the Nefl*xes' lawyer during The Princes and the Press-BBC. As you may recall, they authorized the lawyer to talk about the bullying claims, which are part of an ongoing investigation by the Palace. All allegedly, of course.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> You are right, I can't recall ever seeing a picture of her in athletic or casual attire. I thought the stilettos she wore for the infamous interview stuck out like a sore thumb.



These are before marriage:


----------



## CarryOn2020

When they went boating:




old article:








						Meghan Markle’s Veja sneakers are 25% off in Amazon’s Big Style Sale
					

Emily Ratajkowski, Katie Holmes, Reese Witherspoon are also fans.




					pagesix.com


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> if they really wanted their small kids to meet TQ and their cousins, they should arrange some other time to go.  Showing up for a 4 day visit packed with emotion and activities will be tiring enough for TQ, *the last thing she will need is Gringe and Cringe following her around and tugging on her skirt* to get her attention so that she can let Methane go ahead of her..


Let me amend that.


----------



## bellecate

He always has great artwork.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*"They seem to be existing in a different place, and that place is much healthier,"* Scobie told People. "Meghan famously spoke about that it was not enough to survive—*we are now in the thrive chapter."*
> According to Scobie, the couple are "really excited" to take on new projects in the coming months with organizations "aligned with their interests," as well as the interests of Archewell. Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.
> *"They're a couple who do very well in those moments of human interaction. They need to be on the ground,*" Scobie continued. "They say that the proof is in the pudding, and *what we are about to see is that pudding*."_


Reviving an old post: I wonder how Scobie is going to spin it, now that we know the pudding didn't materialize, and the thriving couple probably didn't even get the ingredients ready.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: Kate and rugby. A German gossip rag ran an article how she stole Harry's patronage from him. I don't know, for the onlooker it seems she stepped up after he abandoned his role.


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Kate and rugby. A German gossip rag ran an article how she stole Harry's patronage from him. I don't know, for the onlooker it seems she stepped up after he abandoned his role.




I think that the Queen gives out the patronages. Catherine loves rugby and would have very graciously accepted to have become the patron after Harry did, as you say, abandon his role.....deliberately.

How dare anyone say Catherine stole them! That makes my blood boil!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, thank you, I know. I was being immature, maybe vulgar,  and thinking of the Royal FU which is perfect for Hazzi.


Actually, after I posted, I realised what you meant, lol. Indeed. 

Joint engagement, Oops, wrong thread!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "...the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor."


Did I miss something?


----------



## 1LV

"...the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor."

Oh thank goodness!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The full quote:


CarryOn2020 said:


> Fans of the couple should also expect them to make more in-person appearances once the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a factor.



My understanding is that the “Covid-19 pandemic” will continue into 2050 [at least].  So, we shouldn’t expect to see them until then, right?


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> The full quote:
> 
> 
> My understanding is that the “Covid-19 pandemic” will continue into 2050 [at least].  So, we shouldn’t expect to see them until then, right?


If only, lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

M&H appear in numerous places for days without their kids. Their hired help takes care of the kids. For days on end without mom and dad. So why not send the nannies to take the kids to England to "get to know the cousins"? That would be the best of all worlds. Surely M&H are too ashamed  busy to visit the BRF, and all the security demands could be lessened if M&H just shut their stupid mouths and stayed home for once. Or they can schedule another United Nations trip to meet with the under-under-under-under secretary of event planning at the same time the kids are playing with Future King George. I mean, it's soooooo important that Archie and Lilibet get to know the cousins, right? The nannies can take care of everything. They already do. Problem solved!


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones claiming a marriage of convenience, be informed that Little Miss Forgetful was already a princess before the acclaimed $42 million dollars wedding. There is also a video clip on today's newspaper.










						Meghan Markle plays a 'princess' MURDERER in unearthed clip
					

MEGHAN Markle has left fans stunned after playing a murderer ‘princess’ in an unearthed TV drama episode. The Duchess of Sussex, 40, appeared in the fourth season of ABC crime series Ca…




					www.thesun.ie


----------



## Chanbal

Serena wants to make sure Ginger Guru receives all the deserved attention.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must have missed Harry going through the qualification to become a virologist/epidemiologist/infectious disease specialist.



I wonder how much of this can be specifically attributed to him, rather than some publicist/spokesperson who makes things up for purposes of keeping H & K "relevant." It's the kind of banal comment I would expect a spokesperson to say. It's also the kind of banal comment I would expect from someone who wants everyone to feel good and not be depressed . . .

However, and the point is, I thought they wanted a quiet life and to live as "normal people" -- away from public view. As so many have noted, this incessant need to remark on _everything_ and to self-promote is incompatible with everything they claim to have wanted.

Basically, they want their cake and to eat it too. I do too, but somewhere along the path to adulthood I realized that wasn't going to happen.

Megan is smart and a scrapper. Look how far she came. You'd think she'd get it by now--the role of victim just isn't working. And Harry!? My gosh, he was hugely popular--albeit when shielded by the royal family, but without--the tarnish is showing. Without the institution, he's nothing.

_But isn't that what they wanted . . . Careful what you wish for . . ._


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Kate and rugby. A German gossip rag ran an article how she stole Harry's patronage from him. I don't know, for the onlooker it seems she stepped up after he abandoned his role.


Is the German press pro Cringe and Gringe?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The full quote:
> 
> 
> My understanding is that the “Covid-19 pandemic” will continue into 2050 [at least].  So, *we shouldn’t expect to see them until then, right?*


Or at least until Prince Philip's will becomes public.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For the ones claiming a marriage of convenience, be informed that Little Miss Forgetful was already a princess before the acclaimed $42 million dollars wedding. There is also a video clip on today's newspaper.
> View attachment 5316087
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle plays a 'princess' MURDERER in unearthed clip
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle has left fans stunned after playing a murderer ‘princess’ in an unearthed TV drama episode. The Duchess of Sussex, 40, appeared in the fourth season of ABC crime series Ca…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie


She's now promoted to Queen Attempted Murderer.  BRF reputation wise at least.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Serena wants to make sure Ginger Guru receives all the deserved attention.



Maybe she just doesn't want to be recorded with *him*?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Kate and rugby. A German gossip rag ran an article how she stole Harry's patronage from him. I don't know, for the onlooker it seems she stepped up after he abandoned his role.





MiniMabel said:


> I think that the Queen gives out the patronages. Catherine loves rugby and would have very graciously accepted to have become the patron after Harry did, as you say, abandon his role.....deliberately.
> 
> How dare anyone say Catherine stole them! That makes my blood boil!


Kate is doing a wonderful job, and the royals are very lucky by having her join the family. Though, I hope that her image is not going to be overused. Present and Past patrons of England Rugby, fans must be delighted.










						Kate Middleton, Prince Charles and Camilla visit Trinity Buoy Wharf
					

Kate, 40, joined Charles and Camilla on a visit to The Prince's Foundation training site for arts and culture at Trinity Buoy Wharf, in London, on Thursday morning.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

I often (and sometimes strongly) disagree with TC, but I'm trying to make up my mind about the statements below:

_“Fake Duchess and Brain-Dead Husband Threaten Spotify,” Carlson accused the royal pair of contributing to pro-censorship demands faced by many companies today…
They’re not going anywhere,” Carlson said, shifting the topic to the couple’s own endeavors. “These two grifters have a $25 million podcast deal with Spotify for essentially no work.” _









						Tucker Rips ‘Fake’ Markle, ‘Brain-Dead’ Harry Over Spotify
					

The royal couple have voiced concerns about the spread of misinformation on podcasts like Joe Rogan’s.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Is the German press pro Cringe and Gringe?



Not anymore. They bought into the "poor bullied princess" cr*p for a bit, but by now it's the outlier here and there who still defends them.


----------



## Happyish

BVBookshop said:


> Also, when they dated?  It was all unknown and private. Who knew he flew back and forth to Canada?  No one knew until H issued that press release saying the paps harrased his GF. I thought at that time it was a bit weird. Like it was an announcement that MM was his GF. Now it all makes sense. MM didn’t like that it was too private


That comes directly from his mothers' playbook . . .


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I often (and sometimes strongly) disagree with TC, but I'm trying to make up my mind about the statements below:
> 
> _“Fake Duchess and Brain-Dead Husband Threaten Spotify,” Carlson accused the royal pair of contributing to pro-censorship demands faced by many companies today…
> They’re not going anywhere,” Carlson said, shifting the topic to the couple’s own endeavors. “These two grifters have a $25 million podcast deal with Spotify for essentially no work.” _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tucker Rips ‘Fake’ Markle, ‘Brain-Dead’ Harry Over Spotify
> 
> 
> The royal couple have voiced concerns about the spread of misinformation on podcasts like Joe Rogan’s.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


This is funny. Carlson spreads quite a bit of misinformation himself, but it appears that even he can't stomach their level of hypocrisy.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> This is funny. Carlson spreads quite a bit of misinformation himself, but it appears that even he can't stomach their level of hypocrisy.


This is why I even hesitated in posting the article here. Though, it looks like that such level of hypocrisy is difficult to stomach for many people across the 'political' spectrum. I read somewhere that allegedly there is a letter in preparation for his employer.


----------



## bag-mania

Disgust with Harry and Meghan is a unifying belief that everyone can get behind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Disgust with Harry and Meghan is a unifying belief that everyone can get behind.


They provided entertainment during the most difficult months of covid. They are now unifying the US against hypocrisy, or should I say the world?  Cheers to the Nefl*xes then!


----------



## Aimee3

rose60610 said:


> M&H appear in numerous places for days without their kids. Their hired help takes care of the kids. For days on end without mom and dad. So why not send the nannies to take the kids to England to "get to know the cousins"? That would be the best of all worlds. Surely M&H are too ashamed  busy to visit the BRF, and all the security demands could be lessened if M&H just shut their stupid mouths and stayed home for once. Or they can schedule another United Nations trip to meet with the under-under-under-under secretary of event planning at the same time the kids are playing with Future King George. I mean, it's soooooo important that Archie and Lilibet get to know the cousins, right? The nannies can take care of everything. They already do. Problem solved!


This is brilliant!  No one knows what the nannies look like, and we certainly don't know what the kids look like either.  They could walk about without any security and be perfectly off the radar.  But of course, that's not what H and TW want at all.  Such hypocrisy!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is why I even hesitated in posting the article here. Though, it looks like that such level of hypocrisy is difficult to stomach for many people across the 'political' spectrum. I read somewhere that allegedly there is a letter in preparation for his employer.


For FOX News .. or for HapHazzard's "employer" (BetterUp?)


----------



## Happyish

rose60610 said:


> M&H appear in numerous places for days without their kids. Their hired help takes care of the kids. For days on end without mom and dad. So why not send the nannies to take the kids to England to "get to know the cousins"? That would be the best of all worlds. Surely M&H are too ashamed  busy to visit the BRF, and all the security demands could be lessened if M&H just shut their stupid mouths and stayed home for once. Or they can schedule another United Nations trip to meet with the under-under-under-under secretary of event planning at the same time the kids are playing with Future King George. I mean, it's soooooo important that Archie and Lilibet get to know the cousins, right? The nannies can take care of everything. They already do. Problem solved!


A toddler and an infant getting to know their cousins'??? Pleeeease  . . . 
I wonder, what's the real agenda?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is why I even hesitated in posting the article here. Though, it looks like that such level of hypocrisy is difficult to stomach for many people across the 'political' spectrum. I read somewhere that allegedly there is a letter in preparation for his employer.


I'm surprised they haven't taken credit for the upheaval at CNN


----------



## Chanbal

CeeJay said:


> For FOX News .. or for HapHazzard's "employer" (BetterUp?)


F*X (TC's employer)


----------



## csshopper

Hmmm. The real Royal Cousins are all photographed, videoed in the public domain repeatedly from birth.

With exception of a few pictures, the faux Royal Cousins, especially faux Archie, and now faux Lilibet have been disguised, photoshopped, all but facially airbrushed.

Begs the question, would the Suckesses allow cousin's group photos given their professed paranoia for privacy? Have their kids wear Covid masks, sit with their heads down, or be forevermore on the outskirts and in profile?

Or, for the sake of the almighty US dollar and British pound sterling, would they relax their stance and let the camera shutters click on? 

The real Royals do not monetize their children, but the faux ones hope to.


----------



## rose60610

Happyish said:


> A toddler and an infant getting to know their cousins'??? Pleeeease  . . .
> I wonder, what's the real agenda?



Their real agenda anywhere they go is make a buck any way they can, no matter how much they have to lie, whine, and beg for pity. Using their own kids as bargaining chips? No problem! I think they're desperate to get pictures taken with TQ so they can sell them. She's 95 now, they're probably in a hurry so Archie and Lilibet need to pose fast for those pictures to earn their keep. Meghan cranked out her meal tickets as fast as she could. It's time to collect. Nothing is too low for them.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> "under-under-under-under secretary of event planning"


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Kate is doing a wonderful job, and the royals are very lucky by having her join the family. Though, I hope that her image is not going to be overused.


Just a few years ago she and William were considered lazy leeching royals by many. I think now that the kids are a little older they're working to dispel that image for both.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> allegedly there is a letter in preparation for his employer.


Well we know that they excel at letter writing, as opposed to podcasting or producing streaming content.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> A toddler and an infant getting to know their cousins'??? Pleeeease  . . .
> I wonder, what's the real agenda?


My guess is maintaining an illusion of family harmony in order to stay in the Queen's will.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> My guess is maintaining an illusion of family harmony in order to stay in the Queen's will.


the Queen Mum set up trusts for her great grand kids ie the William / Harry generation
My guess would be
QEII will have done the same and Lili and Archie should not be cut out due to silliness of parents.After all, B and E should not be blacklisted for their parents sins either


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> the Queen Mum set up trusts for her great grand kids ie the William / Harry generation
> !y guess would be
> QEII will have done the same and Lili and Archie should not be cut out due to silliness of parents.After all, B and E should not be blacklisted for their parents sins either


Agreed, I'm not talking about the kids. Hazy is probably hoping for a generous bequest from Gran to keep their lifestyle afloat.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, I'm not talking about the kids. Hazy is probably hoping for a generous bequest from Gran to keep their lifestyle afloat.



He may have one. Does anyone think the Queen’s will has been changed in the last few years? For some reason I believe she has left it alone, both for Harry and Andrew.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

If nothing else, he's consistent with this gibberish. Disclosure: I read no further than the headline.

Poor widdle Prince got burnt out. Netflix, Spotify, BetterUp, beware, he can't do any work more difficult than feeding the chickens and whining, oh yes, and filing lawsuits.

May the Universe crash down on his balding head for all the "bad stuff" he has done and is continuing to do.

I N S U F F E R A B L E  - can't wait for the fall out on You Tube etc.

Edited to add: if  "he sees a BetterUp Coach  regularly" and can't do any better than this after all that help, it does not say much for the value of the Company. 


*Harry's woke guide to business: Duke tells firms they should 'give everyone time to focus on themselves', claims he suffered 'burn out' and says 'bad stuff' is 'lessons from the universe' (in toe-curling lecture from his $14m mansion)*

*Prince Harry, 38, appeared at virtual conference for startup BetterUp today in his role as Chief Impact Officer*
*The event, at which he was joined by Serena Williams, marked the Duke of Sussexes' first appearance of 2022*
*Dished out business advice as he spoke of importance of employers giving staff 'time to focus on themselves'*
*Duke of Sussex also spoke about how he now tries to see 'bad stuff' as 'a lesson from the universe' *
*Revealed he sees a BetterUp coach regularly while Serena said he often shares his advice with her  *
*Ahead of the appearance, his journalist friend Omid Scobie had told how he would share 'personal stories' *
*Comes after Katie Nicholl said he 'doesn't want to cause any more upset' after 'realising toll on the Queen'*


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> If nothing else, he's consistent with this gibberish. Disclosure: I read no further than the headline.
> 
> Poor widdle Prince got burnt out. Netflix, Spotify, BetterUp, beware, he can't do any work more difficult than feeding the chickens and whining, oh yes, and filing lawsuits.
> 
> May the Universe crash down on his balding head for all the "bad stuff" he has done and is continuing to do.
> 
> I N S U F F E R A B L E  - can't wait for the fall out on You Tube etc.
> 
> 
> *Harry's woke guide to business: Duke tells firms they should 'give everyone time to focus on themselves', claims he suffered 'burn out' and says 'bad stuff' is 'lessons from the universe' (in toe-curling lecture from his $14m mansion)*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 38, appeared at virtual conference for startup BetterUp today in his role as Chief Impact Officer*
> *The event, at which he was joined by Serena Williams, marked the Duke of Sussexes' first appearance of 2022*
> *Dished out business advice as he spoke of importance of employers giving staff 'time to focus on themselves'*
> *Duke of Sussex also spoke about how he now tries to see 'bad stuff' as 'a lesson from the universe' *
> *Revealed he sees a BetterUp coach regularly while Serena said he often shares his advice with her  *
> *Ahead of the appearance, his journalist friend Omid Scobie had told how he would share 'personal stories' *
> *Comes after Katie Nicholl said he 'doesn't want to cause any more upset' after 'realising toll on the Queen'*


he is basically an "empty suit"....I'm sure Serena needs his counsel.  Ha.  a champion who worked for her success.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> he is basically an "empty suit"....I'm sure Serena needs his counsel. Ha. a champion who worked for her success.


Their backgrounds could not be more different. She was born with very little and has achieved great success. He was born with everything and has accomplished nothing. The movie King Richard is very good if you haven't seen it.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> he is basically an "empty suit"....I'm sure Serena needs his counsel.  Ha.  a champion who worked for her success.


In addition to her remarkable talent as an athlete, Serena has a good sense of humor…


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> If nothing else, he's consistent with this gibberish. Disclosure: I read no further than the headline.
> 
> Poor widdle Prince got burnt out. Netflix, Spotify, BetterUp, beware, he can't do any work more difficult than feeding the chickens and whining, oh yes, and filing lawsuits.
> 
> May the Universe crash down on his balding head for all the "bad stuff" he has done and is continuing to do.
> 
> I N S U F F E R A B L E  - can't wait for the fall out on You Tube etc.
> 
> Edited to add: if  "he sees a BetterUp Coach  regularly" and can't do any better than this after all that help, it does not say much for the value of the Company.
> 
> 
> *Harry's woke guide to business: Duke tells firms they should 'give everyone time to focus on themselves', claims he suffered 'burn out' and says 'bad stuff' is 'lessons from the universe' (in toe-curling lecture from his $14m mansion)*
> 
> *Prince Harry, 38, appeared at virtual conference for startup BetterUp today in his role as Chief Impact Officer*
> *The event, at which he was joined by Serena Williams, marked the Duke of Sussexes' first appearance of 2022*
> *Dished out business advice as he spoke of importance of employers giving staff 'time to focus on themselves'*
> *Duke of Sussex also spoke about how he now tries to see 'bad stuff' as 'a lesson from the universe' *
> *Revealed he sees a BetterUp coach regularly while Serena said he often shares his advice with her  *
> *Ahead of the appearance, his journalist friend Omid Scobie had told how he would share 'personal stories' *
> *Comes after Katie Nicholl said he 'doesn't want to cause any more upset' after 'realising toll on the Queen'*


You need sound for your post. Here are some wise words…


----------



## charlottawill

Apologies if this has been posted previously


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Apologies if this has been posted previously



"Nutmeg"???  Really BLG?  I know you're reading this, so give us a shoutout!  No way is he coming up with these names himself!   Give credit where credit is due!  @Maggie Muggins has an entire awards list she can help you out with if you need help remembering who said what, you lurker, you.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> You need sound for your post. Here are some wise words…



He really is just talking out of his a$$ isn't he??  His hair is looking sparser without continuous live photoshop.  He's not Italian, yet seems to talk with his hands quite a bit.  Every time he says "high" or "up" or "big", he makes motions with his hands, as if to seem more important, or as if none of his audience know what the words mean.  We ain't Lilibet the second, Haz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like he’s had work done, plumped up a bit, and continues to “land planes” with each talk.




full disclosure: I just watched the twitter clips posted here, mostly with sound off. Something about his voice lately - it sounds tense, stressed. Nothing I want to hear.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> He really is just talking out of his a$$ isn't he??  His hair is looking sparser without continuous live photoshop.  He's not Italian, yet seems to talk with his hands quite a bit.  Every time he says "high" or "up" or "big", he makes motions with his hands, as if to seem more important, or as if none of his audience know what the words mean.  We ain't Lilibet the second, Haz.


He is still getting to grips with the inner work, because he didn't do any outer work so far… so he did not reach the pinnacle. Oops, I got a sudden headache trying to understand all these bumpy concepts.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> full disclosure: I just watched the twitter clips posted here, mostly with sound off. Something about his voice lately - it sounds tense, stressed. Nothing I want to hear.


He offered some pearls of wisdom. Please be prepared and turn on the sound.


----------



## csshopper

The major issue is Harry the Husk no longer has anything good inside to work with. 

He’s all corrosive bile constantly being churned by his keeper, the “GRANDIOSE Narcissist”.


----------



## rose60610

Did he say that HE is seeing a BetterUp coach?  For what? For the same stuff HE is supposed to be an expert on?  "Lessons from the Universe"???  
He should just create his own "Psychic Hotline" and answer the phones himself to "coach" callers. He could tell them: "Your troubles will disappear only if you make a sizable donation to Archewell Foundation. We already have your credit card information since we've billed you $19.95 for this call. Then you will find inner peace. I promise, because I'm a mental health expert. This is a lesson from the Universe."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if the “big gestures” are something the royals learn.  Big gestures can be seen in photos and videos more easily and make it seem like they are engaged and doing something important.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



OMG, H looks like hell with flushed face and scalp, pinpoint pupils, and out-of-his-wits stare. Not saying he is indulging, but several drugs are known to cause that kind of look or maybe it's just being too close to venomous M for too long.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hear ye, hear ye - Supreme Posters of the Galaxy, we must all join hands so we can begin to link to the Universe. Only then will the Universe give everything to The Most Exalted Prince of the Universe. On the count of 3, join me as we fly high to our mother ship
=======

FFS, what is wrong with SW? Why did she lower herself to this dimwit’s level? Why doesn’t the BRF stop him?

Let’s use that famous bard in that famous play to tell QE and Charles:


_My liege and madam. To expostulate
What majesty should be, what duty is,
Why day is day, night, night, and time is time —
Were nothing but to waste night, day, and time.
Therefore, *since brevity is the soul of wit, *
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
*I will be brief.* *Your noble son is mad.*
Mad call I it, for to define true madness,
What is't but to be nothing else but mad?
But let that go._


----------



## xincinsin

Oh, this is quite upsetting. Is she getting her head grafted onto various bodies? It's like the Invasion of the Body Snatchers! (remake with the Douchess in the lead role as alien)
Princess Pretentious is now allegedly a kickboxer  Who manufactures this drivel?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hear ye, hear ye - Supreme Posters of the Galaxy, we must all join hands so we can begin to link to the Universe. Only then will the Universe give everything to The Most Exalted Prince of the Universe. On the count of 3, join me as we fly high to our mother ship
> =======
> 
> FFS, what is wrong with SW? Why did she lower herself to this dimwit’s level? Why doesn’t the BRF stop him?
> 
> Let’s use that famous bard in that famous play to tell QE and Charles:
> 
> 
> _My liege and madam. To expostulate
> What majesty should be, what duty is,
> Why day is day, night, night, and time is time —
> Were nothing but to waste night, day, and time.
> Therefore, *since brevity is the soul of wit, *
> And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
> *I will be brief.* *Your noble son is mad.*
> Mad call I it, for to define true madness,
> What is't but to be nothing else but mad?
> But let that go._
> 
> View attachment 5316707


Great one CarryOn2020!
The Bard was prophetic: 
*“That he's mad, 'tis true,
'tis true 'tis pity,
And pity 'tis, 'tis true
—a foolish figure,”*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> "Nutmeg"???  Really BLG?  I know you're reading this, so give us a shoutout!  No way is he coming up with these names himself!   Give credit where credit is due!  @Maggie Muggins has an entire awards list she can help you out with if you need help remembering who said what, you lurker, you.


Not only that, but sometimes, it seemed the BLG's videos were posted after TPF members had already reached similar opinions and conclusions re M's actions and reactions through discussions on this thread. I suppose I shouldn't blame him for "borrowing" from our very own intuitive posters.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> He really is just talking out of his a$$ isn't he??  His hair is looking sparser without continuous live photoshop.  *He's not Italian, yet seems to talk with his hands quite a bit. * Every time he says "high" or "up" or "big", he makes motions with his hands, as if to seem more important, or as if none of his audience know what the words mean. We ain't Lilibet the second, Haz.


Since he is in constant contact with M, her weird gesticulations are probably rubbing off on him. I've also noticed this with some of my married friends where one adopts the other's mannerisms.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Not only that, but sometimes, it seemed the BLG's videos were posted after TPF members had already reached similar opinions and conclusions re M's actions and reactions through discussions on this thread. I suppose I shouldn't blame him for "borrowing" from our very own intuitive posters.


I sometimes venture into Reddit and they too reach conclusions similar to ours. Perhaps we are all united in our X-ray analysis of the Princessa of Poop and her Pointless Prince.


----------



## Gal4Dior

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Omg his head is like a chia pet - day 3.


----------



## rose60610

InStyle Magazine is saying "Prince Charles is Reportedly Ready to Reconcile with Prince Harry" 

When they say "reportedly" it sounds like a sleazy rumor.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> InStyle Magazine is saying "Prince Charles is Reportedly Ready to Reconcile with Prince Harry"
> 
> When they say "reportedly" it sounds like a sleazy rumor.


I was interested enough to go and find this article. Very lightweight journalism quoting anonymous sources and filled with empty verbiage. Marie Claire is used as a data source, so I'd guess this article is derivative: the "reporter" read half a dozen tabloids and compiled a story from what he read.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Not only that, but sometimes, it seemed the BLG's videos were posted after TPF members had already reached similar opinions and conclusions re M's actions and reactions through discussions on this thread. *I suppose I shouldn't blame him for "borrowing" from our very own intuitive posters.*


I do!  He's basically doing what Megusa does. Using others' work and taking credit. I'm not happy with you Jesus Enrique Rosas! 
I've noticed that trend for awhile now.  He made a whole video of their Christmas card using our observations, then starts calling them the Harkles, now Nutmeg, the final straw!!


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> Just a few years ago she and William were considered lazy leeching royals by many. I think now that the kids are a little older they're working to dispel that image for both.


I really think that was all down to the Queen, it was the same for her, she was a Navy wife out in Malta. She loved it and it was a chance of some kind of normal life till she became Queen (sooner than hoped as it turned out to be) 
She knew how important it was for William and Catherine to do that too, and they did. I hated the workshy Wills and Duchess Dolittle names they were given by the press, as usual The Queen knew what she was doing and now it's paying off.


----------



## needlv

Sharont2305 said:


> I really think that was all down to the Queen, it was the same for her, she was a Navy wife out in Malta. She loved it and it was a chance of some kind of normal life till she became Queen (sooner than hoped as it turned out to be)
> She knew how important it was for William and Catherine to do that too, and they did. I hated the workshy Wills and Duchess Dolittle names they were given by the press, as usual The Queen knew what she was doing and now it's paying off.



I don’t agree with the  criticisms  of Catherine wanting to spend time with her children when they were much smaller…. Labelling  her as “workshy” during that period is particularly harsh.


----------



## oldbag

LVSistinaMM said:


> Omg his head is like a chia pet - day 3.


Looking closely at this photo I believe Harry has his tongue sticking out. He looks inane and I don't know what his purpose is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Yes, Will and Kate were criticized early on, but I think that was part of the territory. The British press is HARSH, even if W&K worked 24/7 the press at the time still would have been hard on them. So I'm not convinced they were "lazy". Contrast that with the 99.999% positive press Meghan got when she was dating, then married, Harry. SHE screwed it up with her whining after clawing her way into the BRF. The whining part, I believe, was part of her plan but it backfired. Maybe she thought she could pity herself into the lineup for Queen by forcing Kate and Will to step down by feeling sorry for her.  She sure as hell put on the boo-hoo-poor-me act. Not a wise move in a culture known for their stiff upper lip. Especially after inserting yourself into a world of untold luxuries and then whining that you have it-oh-so-hard. When that didn't work she yanked out the race card and doubled down, knowing full well that at least the spineless U.S. media would fold and bow to her. Of course that worked, and here she is! In sunny California. But even that is starting to erode. She's crafty to an extent, but a total idiot when it comes to PR. Taking refuge in your sugars isn't the way to global domination.


----------



## bag-mania

oldbag said:


> Looking closely at this photo I believe Harry has his tongue sticking out. He looks inane and I don't know what his purpose is.



I didn’t notice that, I’m hoping the camera caught him as he was starting to speak because I don’t think he’s done that before. His eyes look super vacuous though, like there isn’t a thought in his head.


----------



## xincinsin

I've been speculating (over my dinner) about whom else she could throw under the bus. If and when COVID eases off and the duo try to get big in showbiz, they will wind up on chat shows and interview programmes where the host isn't Oprah. 

If anyone asks them point-blank about her selective amnesia, I wager she will cast blame on her father. You see, Thomas Markle raised her in the make-believe Hollywood world. He didn't socialize her into the real world. So if she does anything wrong, it's obviously his fault. What do you think?


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> I do!  He's basically doing what Megusa does. Using others' work and taking credit. I'm not happy with you Jesus Enrique Rosas!
> I've noticed that trend for awhile now.  He made a whole video of their Christmas card using our observations, then starts calling them the Harkles, now Nutmeg, the final straw!!


To be fair, there are many sites and forums that have these Meg discussions and criticisms and they also use these nicknames.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> If anyone asks them point-blank about her selective amnesia, I wager she will cast blame on her father. You see, Thomas Markle raised her in the make-believe Hollywood world. He didn't socialize her into the real world. So if she does anything wrong, it's obviously his fault. What do you think?



An interview like that will never happen. Meghan only accepts softball interviews where she knows the questions ahead of time. She’ll never address the lying, she’s put that behind her and expects everyone else to as well. Besides, 99% of the media here supports and goes easy on her.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> To be fair, there are many sites and forums that have these Meg discussions and criticisms and they also use these nicknames.



I agree. Many of our nicknames happened organically during discussion and it is reasonable to assume other boards that don’t care for her came up with them too. Nutmeg is a given!


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> To be fair, there are many sites and forums that have these Meg discussions and criticisms and they also use these nicknames.


Doesn't matter.  We are the most important and everyone else show bow down to us.  (Following Megusa's philosophy!  )


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Doesn't matter.  We are the most important and everyone else show bow down to us.  (Following Megusa's philosophy!  )


I try to imagine being her.  I am nothing like her so I could be wrong but I think she must have been elated to land a prince and become so famous.  So why ruin everything?  I don't really believe it was the British tabloids that drove them out.  Seems she couldn't put up with the discipline.  
She's never going to be a big movie star, so what is it they are going to be?  Doesn't seem like they are doing Anything as philanthropists.  So professional celebrities?  Guess maybe they will be the royal (in their minds) Kardashians. But with Spotify podcasts instead of reality TV.
Sorry to beat a dead horse.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I try to imagine being her.  I am nothing like her so I could be wrong but I think she must have been elated to land a prince and become so famous.  So why ruin everything?  I don't really believe it was the British tabloids that drove them out.  Seems she couldn't put up with the discipline.
> She's never going to be a big movie star, so what is it they are going to be?  Doesn't seem like they are doing Anything as philanthropists.  So professional celebrities?  Guess maybe they will be the royal (in their minds) Kardashians. But with Spotify podcasts instead of reality TV.
> Sorry to beat a dead horse.


Some people's minds are so twisted, there's no point in trying to see things from their perspective or figuring out what their logic is, because there is none.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> He really is just talking out of his a$$ isn't he??  *His hair is looking sparser without continuous live photoshop. * He's not Italian, yet seems to talk with his hands quite a bit. Every time he says "high" or "up" or "big", he makes motions with his hands, as if to seem more important, or as if none of his audience know what the words mean. We ain't Lilibet the second, Haz.


Really?


----------



## Chanbal

Opinions around twitter!


----------



## rose60610

Harry said that if people did their "inner work" then everything else would fall into place? Really? He talks like he was born into some kind of royalty where everything is given to you, structured, orchestrated, rehearsed and pre-arranged for you without you having to lift a finger. Oh wait....


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Harry said that if people did their "inner work" then everything else would fall into place? Really? He talks like he was born into some kind of royalty where everything is given to you, structured, orchestrated, rehearsed and pre-arranged for you without you having to lift a finger. Oh wait....


I think he just says what he's told to say by The Wife


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Really?



You just gave my 87 year old mom a great laugh.


----------



## Annawakes

I listened to him for less than 30 seconds.  I heard gibberish.  Is “inner work” some sort of trademarked concept?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Harry said that if people did their "inner work" then everything else would fall into place? Really? He talks like he was born into some kind of royalty where everything is given to you, structured, orchestrated, rehearsed and pre-arranged for you without you having to lift a finger. Oh wait....


It looks like the "inner work" is about done.


----------



## TC1

Ahhhh good old "inner work" Some of us live paycheck to paycheck and are pretty burnt out by Covid. Now, if I could sit back in my mansion, live off my parents and spread nonsense on the internet I'm sure I would feel SO MUCH better


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> I listened to him for less than 30 seconds.  I heard gibberish.  Is “inner work” some sort of trademarked concept?


Just an industry buzz word. This sums it up perfectly:


----------



## gracekelly

Inner work on an empty brain. It won’t take long to make it tidy.  Clear out all that resentment and there won’t be anything left.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the "inner work" is about done.



They should try Windex.  That works on anything.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Where are all his bead bracelets? I assumed, since he wore them constantly, they were important to him, meant something.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



He has shark eyes...dead inside.  I guess that mental windshield was cleaned so well, there's nothing inside of it.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> He has shark eyes...dead inside.  I guess that mental windshield was cleaned so well, there's nothing inside of it.



 I have to bring out one of my favorite quotes from Jaws.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Some people's minds are so twisted, there's no point in trying to see things from their perspective or figuring out what their logic is, because there is none.


right and she has probably had delusions of grandeur since she was very young


----------



## rose60610

Harry has been brainwashed. His circuit board has been cleared. How else do you explain a high profile member of the world's most famous family who had everything at his fingertips schlepping to America with a Z-lister whiny wife to live with "rescue" chickens? Even those damned chickens were staged, they weren't saved from anything. On the other hand, Prince Andrew is a loser so just being a royal is no guarantee of having substance between the ears. When there are people as dimwitted as Harry, it explains why there are so many nuisance calls trying to sell you extended car warranties. Somebody falls for that crap. For Meghan, bagging a famous prince probably makes her feel invincible. Maybe that's why she never shuts up and believes we all care what she says.


----------



## csshopper

Inner Work is nothing new.

Google the term "Inner Work"and there are list of citations for articles, books (looked one up on Amazon, published in 1986 with multiple reprints, _Inner Work: Using Dreams and Active Imagination for Personal Growth by Robert A Johnson, a Jungian analyst.)_

Workbooks on how to Work on Inner Work - that was fun to type!

There's an Apple PodCast "InnerWorks"

One of the most interesting because it is not Butter (not a typo) Up:
https://inner-works.today/copyright/  I tried to cut and paste the blurb about the Copyright and was blocked because it's protected.          The owner Rob Taylor is very serious about his ownership spelled out in detail on the site. Might be makings of a lawsuit about names being too similar? Only an "*s*" stands between this company which has a different approach (Metaphysics, Spirituality,Poetry and Photography) and Haz's cronies.

Maybe what Haz really needs is a detox diet.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think TW really did think that she would be an A-lister upon coming to America.  There were a lot of blind items around the time of her arrival, stating that she would only work with “top tier” directors, etc.

the CIO title is funny, because on parenting message boards, it is often shorthand for “crying it out” related to sleep training infants.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Opinions around twitter!



.. and yet again, Piers Morgan NAILED it .. seriously?!?!?! .. and it appears as though BetterUp has 'registered' this whole "InnerWork" concept?!?!?!  HA HA HA HA .. oh yeah, I can see this happening at the big-time Financial Services companies around Wall Street .. trying to posh this crap out to their employees, but you know DARN well that when it comes down to it, they are still going to be expecting your 80 hours/week of sweat & tears .. trust me, I know this all too well!


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Just an industry buzz word. This sums it up perfectly:



THIS, THIS and THIS .. how did this BS company ever get funding??????  You have legitimate businesses trying to get VC funding and yet this STUPIDITY gets funded and then hires high-priced .. WHAT??? .. aholes, etc.?  I do think, however, that they thought bringing Haphazzard onboard as the CIO would bring them more "corporate" business .. but what corporation (especially here in the states .. where it's all about the MONEY) would even bring them on/in???? 

Kind of disappointed that Serena was part of this; didn't think her friendship with Meghan was still afloat, but talk about a difference in what she has done with herself .. and then Mr. BONEHEAD!  They should have put up the 'BEFORE' (Harry) and 'AFTER' (Serena) signs above their heads!


----------



## Toby93

Piers is fired up over this! £367 a month??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Harry said that if people did their "inner work" then everything else would fall into place? Really? He talks like he was born into some kind of royalty where everything is given to you, structured, orchestrated, rehearsed and pre-arranged for you without you having to lift a finger. Oh wait....



Tailor made for the participation trophy generations that are most likely their target audience


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rather than criticise Hazzie, perhaps we should thank him for exposing hypocrisy - hypocrisy of the BRF (#_ForeverRoyal_), hypocrisy of the mental health industry, hypocrisy of Oprah and TV interviews, hypocrisy of Nflix and Spotifly, hypocrisy of the _green_ movement, etc.  Seems like he really excels at this. Diana kinda did the same thing, only she was much less cynical and much less divisive. So which industry will he turn to next?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Harry-Krishna -    why didn’t we think of this?


----------



## bag-mania

Geez, Harry is a clueless @sshole. Here's a man who doesn't have to work and has never known anything but luxury, yet he's telling us how much he needs to meditate EVERY day for self-care. There isn't an eyeroll emoji big enough for the disgust I feel!


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rather than criticise Hazzie, perhaps we should thank him for exposing hypocrisy - hypocrisy of the BRF (#_ForeverRoyal_), hypocrisy of the mental health industry, hypocrisy of Oprah and TV interviews, hypocrisy of Nflix and Spotifly, hypocrisy of the _green_ movement, etc.  Seems like he really excels at this. Diana kinda did the same thing, only she was much less cynical and much less divisive. So which industry will he turn to next?



politics and the msm come to mind


----------



## bag-mania

Thank you, PageSix!

*Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’*
Millionaire exiled royal Prince Harry was mocked online Friday after moaning about suffering “burnout” — and telling everyone to take time away from their jobs to do “the inner work” on themselves.

“Mental fitness is the pinnacle, it’s what you’re aiming for,” the California-based British prince said in an online talk as part of his new gig as chief impact officer of mental health coaching service BetterUp.

Harry admitted he had “experienced burnout,” saying, “I was burning the candle at both ends.”

“That is when you are forced to look inside yourself. The only way that you can really combat it … is the inner work,” he told his new boss, BetterUp CEO Alexi Robichaux, on their “Inner Work Day.”

The prince now takes around 45 minutes each morning “either for workouts, take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate,” he said.

“I know that I need to meditate every single day,” he continued, complaining that “self-care is the first thing that drops away” when life gets tough.

Even those without such understanding bosses should also meditate and do the inner work, he said.

“The good thing is you can make time — and if you don’t have time, then you probably need to make time even more,” he told Robichaux.

“The world’s becoming hotter and hotter, more complicated,” he said, adding that having control of your emotions “almost feels like a superpower.”

He said his own coaches helped “washing the windscreen and clearing those filters so that you can be able to see your own life and the reality of that life more clearly.”

“It’s a work in progress. Some days are great, some days are really hard,” he said, saying he was also being “schooled by the universe.”

Part of the chat was alongside tennis legend Serena Williams, a best friend of Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle — who said the prince was “actually one of my coaches.”

“Whenever I see him, he’s always solving all my life’s problems,” she said of her California neighbor.

But Williams’ rave reviews were not shared by everyone, with many mocking the woke prince online.

“Prince Harry increasingly sounds like a candidate for the much-missed Transcendental Meditation Party, whose chief policy involved curing traffic jams by encouraging everyone to levitate through the power of thought,” tweeted GB News host Colin Brazier.

London politician Susan Hall suggested that it proves that the prince “lives in his very privileged bubble without any understanding of the real world.”

Daily Telegraph columnist Nick Timothy also observed that “Harry has nothing but ‘me time’ and he seems permanently and utterly miserable.”

Royal biographer Angela Levin also shared some of Harry’s more out-there remarks, commenting with a simple, “Gosh!”









						Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’
					

Prince Harry said he now takes around 45 minutes each morning to workout, “take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## poopsie

“It’s a work in progress. Some days are great, some days are really hard,” he said, saying he was also being *“schooled by the universe.”*https://pagesix.com/2021/03/08/serena-williams-pays-tribute-to-meghan-markle-after-oprah-tv-special/

I believe we used to call that KARMA


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Thank you, PageSix!
> 
> *Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’*
> “Mental fitness is the pinnacle, it’s what you’re aiming for,” the California-based British prince said in an online talk as part of his new gig as chief impact officer of mental health coaching service BetterUp.
> 
> Harry admitted he had “experienced burnout,” saying, *“I was burning the candle at both ends.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said he now takes around 45 minutes each morning to workout, “take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Does he know what that term means?  It doesn't really apply to people who get high and drunk at the same time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He was raised in the Church of England, yes?  Many people in times of difficulty turn to their faith.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Thank you, PageSix!
> 
> *Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’*
> Millionaire exiled royal Prince Harry was mocked online Friday after moaning about suffering “burnout” — and telling everyone to take time away from their jobs to do “the inner work” on themselves.
> 
> “Mental fitness is the pinnacle, it’s what you’re aiming for,” the California-based British prince said in an online talk as part of his new gig as chief impact officer of mental health coaching service BetterUp.
> 
> Harry admitted he had “experienced burnout,” saying, “I was burning the candle at both ends.”
> 
> “That is when you are forced to look inside yourself. The only way that you can really combat it … is the inner work,” he told his new boss, BetterUp CEO Alexi Robichaux, on their “Inner Work Day.”
> 
> The prince now takes around 45 minutes each morning “either for workouts, take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate,” he said.
> 
> “I know that I need to meditate every single day,” he continued, complaining that “self-care is the first thing that drops away” when life gets tough.
> 
> Even those without such understanding bosses should also meditate and do the inner work, he said.
> 
> “The good thing is you can make time — and if you don’t have time, then you probably need to make time even more,” he told Robichaux.
> 
> “The world’s becoming hotter and hotter, more complicated,” he said, adding that having control of your emotions “almost feels like a superpower.”
> 
> He said his own coaches helped “washing the windscreen and clearing those filters so that you can be able to see your own life and the reality of that life more clearly.”
> 
> “It’s a work in progress. Some days are great, some days are really hard,” he said, saying he was also being “schooled by the universe.”
> 
> Part of the chat was alongside tennis legend Serena Williams, a best friend of Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle — who said the prince was “actually one of my coaches.”
> 
> “Whenever I see him, he’s always solving all my life’s problems,” she said of her California neighbor.
> 
> But Williams’ rave reviews were not shared by everyone, with many mocking the woke prince online.
> 
> “Prince Harry increasingly sounds like a candidate for the much-missed Transcendental Meditation Party, whose chief policy involved curing traffic jams by encouraging everyone to levitate through the power of thought,” tweeted GB News host Colin Brazier.
> 
> London politician Susan Hall suggested that it proves that the prince “lives in his very privileged bubble without any understanding of the real world.”
> 
> Daily Telegraph columnist Nick Timothy also observed that “Harry has nothing but ‘me time’ and he seems permanently and utterly miserable.”
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin also shared some of Harry’s more out-there remarks, commenting with a simple, “Gosh!”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said he now takes around 45 minutes each morning to workout, “take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



This monkey lives in his own reality. Legend in his own mind. Just parrots whatever they tell him to say. And he's idiot enough to think people fall for this nonsense.

He'd schlep the virtues of hamburgers for Burger King if they paid him enough.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> This monkey lives in his own reality. Legend in his own mind. Just parrots whatever they tell him to say. And *he's idiot enough to think people fall for this nonsense.*
> 
> He'd schlep the virtues of hamburgers for Burger King if they paid him enough.



Shhhhh. Because people have fallen for this nonsense for centuries, he’s Royal, he tells us lil people what to believe, what to think, how to live.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> “It’s a work in progress. Some days are great, some days are really hard,” he said, saying he was also being *“schooled by the universe.”*https://pagesix.com/2021/03/08/serena-williams-pays-tribute-to-meghan-markle-after-oprah-tv-special/
> 
> I believe we used to call that KARMA



I assumed being "schooled by the universe" meant some 13-year-old from across the country beat Harry's @ss in Minecraft or some other video game. He certainly doesn't have any real problems to worry about.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Say this louder, please:


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Louder*, please:


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I assumed being "schooled by the universe" meant some 13-year-old from across the country beat Harry's @ss in Minecraft or some other video game. He certainly doesn't have any real problems to worry about.



Yeah................maybe he was talking about the Marvel Universe


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Yeah................maybe he was talking about the Marvel Universe



***Off to imagine the Avengers beating up Harry's whiny self.***


----------



## kipp

I'm a big fan of meditation so I won't slam Hazbeen for that, but the "burning the candle at both ends" nonsense?  I'm guessing that he and TW are probably spending most of their time trying to figure how to make more $$$$$ while doing as little as possible---no wonder he is burnt out.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Louder*, please:




Probably costs less per month than a Better Up subscription!


----------



## CarryOn2020

kipp said:


> I'm a big fan of meditation so I won't slam Hazbeen for that, but the "burning the candle at both ends" nonsense?  I'm guessing that he and TW are probably spending most of their time trying to figure how to make more $$$$$ while doing as little as possible---no wonder he is burnt out.



Agree, I am, too.  Meditation for *profit* — um,  — by unqualified entitled Royals.  Hard no.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> I'm a big fan of meditation so I won't slam Hazbeen for that, but the "burning the candle at both ends" nonsense?  I'm guessing that he and TW are probably spending most of their time trying to figure how to make more $$$$$ while doing as little as possible---no wonder he is burnt out.



Well, being married to Meghan can't be easy. If she ain't happy, Harry won't be happy. Serves him right if you ask me!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the "inner work" is about done.



Someone is cleaning an empty head, that looks similar to the maids scrubbing the chamber pots in the good old days. Same difference, I guess.


----------



## csshopper

On the BetterUp client list

BetterUp has 10 strategic partners and customers. BetterUp recently partnered with U.S. Air Force on December 12, 2021.


DateTypeBusiness PartnerCountryNews SnippetSources12/16/2021ClientU.S. Air ForceUnited StatesBetterUp® Partners with United States Air Force to Provide Virtual Learning and Development Program
SAN FRANCISCO -- -- BetterUp , the human transformation company and inventor of virtual coaching , announced today an award of a sole source contract by The Department of the Air Force to enroll more than 1,500 Airmen and Guardians across multiple Air Force Major Commands , including the newly established Space Force .1


----------



## poopsie

Thinking about karma.......it was inevitable


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Thank you, PageSix!
> 
> *Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’*
> Millionaire exiled royal Prince Harry was mocked online Friday after moaning about suffering “burnout” — and telling everyone to take time away from their jobs to do “the inner work” on themselves.
> 
> “Mental fitness is the pinnacle, it’s what you’re aiming for,” the California-based British prince said in an online talk as part of his new gig as chief impact officer of mental health coaching service BetterUp.
> 
> Harry admitted he had “experienced burnout,” saying, “I was burning the candle at both ends.”
> 
> “That is when you are forced to look inside yourself. The only way that you can really combat it … is the inner work,” he told his new boss, BetterUp CEO Alexi Robichaux, on their “Inner Work Day.”
> 
> The prince now takes around 45 minutes each morning “either for workouts, take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate,” he said.
> 
> “I know that I need to meditate every single day,” he continued, complaining that “self-care is the first thing that drops away” when life gets tough.
> 
> Even those without such understanding bosses should also meditate and do the inner work, he said.
> 
> “The good thing is you can make time — and if you don’t have time, then you probably need to make time even more,” he told Robichaux.
> 
> “The world’s becoming hotter and hotter, more complicated,” he said, adding that having control of your emotions “almost feels like a superpower.”
> 
> He said his own coaches helped “washing the windscreen and clearing those filters so that you can be able to see your own life and the reality of that life more clearly.”
> 
> “It’s a work in progress. Some days are great, some days are really hard,” he said, saying he was also being “schooled by the universe.”
> 
> Part of the chat was alongside tennis legend Serena Williams, a best friend of Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle — who said the prince was “actually one of my coaches.”
> 
> “Whenever I see him, he’s always solving all my life’s problems,” she said of her California neighbor.
> 
> But Williams’ rave reviews were not shared by everyone, with many mocking the woke prince online.
> 
> “Prince Harry increasingly sounds like a candidate for the much-missed Transcendental Meditation Party, whose chief policy involved curing traffic jams by encouraging everyone to levitate through the power of thought,” tweeted GB News host Colin Brazier.
> 
> London politician Susan Hall suggested that it proves that the prince “lives in his very privileged bubble without any understanding of the real world.”
> 
> Daily Telegraph columnist Nick Timothy also observed that “Harry has nothing but ‘me time’ and he seems permanently and utterly miserable.”
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin also shared some of Harry’s more out-there remarks, commenting with a simple, “Gosh!”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’
> 
> 
> Prince Harry said he now takes around 45 minutes each morning to workout, “take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


LOL
so he's a self-help ghuru now?  and serena is best friends with Meghan?
you can't make this sheet up


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> so he's a self-help ghuru now?  and serena is best friends with Meghan?
> you can't make this sheet up.....maybe he and his WIFE will start a church where they can preach - and have it on TV of course


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> On the BetterUp client list
> 
> BetterUp has 10 strategic partners and customers. BetterUp recently partnered with U.S. Air Force on December 12, 2021.
> 
> 
> DateTypeBusiness PartnerCountryNews SnippetSources12/16/2021ClientU.S. Air ForceUnited StatesBetterUp® Partners with United States Air Force to Provide Virtual Learning and Development Program
> SAN FRANCISCO -- -- BetterUp , the human transformation company and inventor of virtual coaching , announced today an award of a sole source contract by The Department of the Air Force to enroll more than 1,500 Airmen and Guardians across multiple Air Force Major Commands , including the newly established Space Force .1



US government and military are good/notorious at wasting money and overpaying for things.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> On the BetterUp client list
> 
> BetterUp has 10 strategic partners and customers. BetterUp recently partnered with U.S. Air Force on December 12, 2021.
> 
> 
> DateTypeBusiness PartnerCountryNews SnippetSources12/16/2021ClientU.S. Air ForceUnited StatesBetterUp® Partners with United States Air Force to Provide Virtual Learning and Development Program
> SAN FRANCISCO -- -- BetterUp , the human transformation company and inventor of virtual coaching , announced today an award of a sole source contract by The Department of the Air Force to enroll more than 1,500 Airmen and Guardians across multiple Air Force Major Commands , including the newly established Space Force .1



It's been no secret that the "woke-ification" of our military is now a cornerstone of the new agenda so this falls right into place.
I live in a military town and you hear things


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rather than criticise Hazzie, perhaps we should thank him for exposing hypocrisy - hypocrisy of the BRF (#_ForeverRoyal_), hypocrisy of the mental health industry, hypocrisy of Oprah and TV interviews, hypocrisy of Nflix and Spotifly, hypocrisy of the _green_ movement, etc.  Seems like he really excels at this. Diana kinda did the same thing, only she was much less cynical and much less divisive. *So which industry will he turn to next?*



Colonial Penn Life Insurance?  You can't be turned down for any reason, so that's the mental self-care aspect of it. But what are the premiums? They'd probably trigger an anxiety attack so you're back to Square One, oops. And I heard Meghan can do voiceovers for Lemon Olive Oil Cake commercials. Ingredients include organic eggs laid by rescue chickens.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rather than criticise Hazzie, perhaps we should thank him for exposing hypocrisy - hypocrisy of the BRF (#_ForeverRoyal_), hypocrisy of the mental health industry, hypocrisy of Oprah and TV interviews, hypocrisy of Nflix and Spotifly, hypocrisy of the _green_ movement, etc.  Seems like he really excels at this. Diana kinda did the same thing, only she was much less cynical and much less divisive. *So which industry will he turn to next?*



Reverse mortgages gets my vote!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> so he's a self-help ghuru now?  and *serena’s husband *is best friends with Meghan?
> you can't make this sheet up



This seems more accurate, imo
Remember this event - I won’t post the vulgar photos:


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, I am, too.  Meditation for *profit* — um,  — by unqualified entitled Royals.  Hard no.



I agree, and can also add that I actually don't find Harry's overall message objectionable - yes, it's good to do inner work, great. A truly revolutionary concept we've never heard before. And maybe BetterUp has qualified coaches that can help, fine, whatever. 
What I find objectionable is the messenger's alignment with his statements - if you truly do inner work you learn that constantly playing the victim and throwing your family under the bus sitting in a multi-million dollar mansion isn't an example of someone who has grown enough as a person they can lecture anyone else about it. The first step in inner work is to recognize that you, not everyone else in the world except you, are responsible for your behavior. I can't believe people see this guy as any sort of role model for successful therapy or any other sort of "inner work".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Geez, Harry is a clueless @sshole. Here's a man who doesn't have to work and has never known anything but luxury, yet he's telling us how much he needs to meditate EVERY day for self-care. *There isn't an eyeroll emoji big enough for the disgust I feel!*


Will this do?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Geez, Harry is a clueless @sshole. Here's a man who doesn't have to work and has never known anything but luxury, yet he's telling us how much he needs to meditate EVERY day for self-care. There isn't an eyeroll emoji big enough for the disgust I feel!


maybe he needs to meditate to survive his Wife's domination.....certainly not because he's working So Hard


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Piers is fired up over this! £367 a month??



Thanks for posting this article. It is shocking what these people are doing. 

_BetterUp, which now has more than 3,000 coaches worldwide, charges £367 a month for every employee who signs up. That’s £4,400 a year.

So Harry, who is reportedly being paid millions of dollars to be Chief Impact Officer, is exploiting both his royal title (without which nobody, least of all BetterUp, would care what he says) and the issue of mental health for vast financial gain both to himself and his employer.

And, like almost everything he and his wife Meghan have done since flouncing out of Britain and royal duty, it stinks of hypocrisy and ruthless commercialism._


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry-Krishna -    why didn’t we think of this?




OMG - hilarious!!  Coming soon to an airport near you!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> On the BetterUp client list
> 
> BetterUp has 10 strategic partners and customers. BetterUp recently partnered with U.S. Air Force on December 12, 2021.
> 
> 
> DateTypeBusiness PartnerCountryNews SnippetSources12/16/2021ClientU.S. Air ForceUnited StatesBetterUp® Partners with United States Air Force to Provide Virtual Learning and Development Program
> SAN FRANCISCO -- -- BetterUp , the human transformation company and inventor of virtual coaching , announced today an award of a sole source contract by The Department of the Air Force to enroll more than 1,500 Airmen and Guardians across multiple Air Force Major Commands , including the newly established Space Force .1


I wonder if BetterUp got this particular client via government connections of a former royal…


----------



## Luvbolide

I am still laughing so hard at the image of H “burning the candle at both ends” that I have tears rolling down my cheeks.  Wonder if he knows that this expression is not about actual candles…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this article. It is shocking what these people are doing.
> 
> _BetterUp, which now has more than 3,000 coaches worldwide, charges £367 a month for every employee who signs up. That’s £4,400 a year.
> 
> So Harry, who is reportedly being paid millions of dollars to be Chief Impact Officer, is exploiting both his royal title (without which nobody, least of all BetterUp, would care what he says) and the issue of mental health for vast financial gain both to himself and his employer.
> 
> And, like almost everything he and his wife Meghan have done since flouncing out of Britain and royal duty, it stinks of hypocrisy and ruthless commercialism._


he and his uncle are both really tainting the dignity of the family


----------



## pukasonqo

My candle burns at both ends; 
It will not last the night; 
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends— It gives a lovely light!
-Edna St Vincent Millay

But apparently the original expression goes back to France (1610)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if BetterUp got this particular client via government connections of a former royal…



Somewhere in this thread, we have posted our results of searching the history of BetterUp and its well-connected Silicon Valley founders. Iirc, they aren’t the sweet, innocent philanthropists or reformers that they want their customers to believe they are. 
As always, caveat emptor.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> My candle burns at both ends;
> It will not last the night;
> But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends— It gives a lovely light!
> -Edna St Vincent Millay
> 
> But apparently the original expression goes back to France (1610)



Y’all inspired me to look it up - hilarious that he uses it 









						burn the candle at both ends
					

burn the candle at both ends Meaning to exhaust someone’s energies or resources by leading a hectic life. to engage in an activity, usually work-related, from early morning ... <a class="rm" href="https://www.theidioms.com/burn-the-candle-at-both-ends/">Read on</a>



					www.theidioms.com
				



_The idiom was translated from French in 1611. It can be found in Randal Cotgrave’s dictionary. Initially the idiom meant that one was dissipating one’s wealth. Meaning that you were causing your money to disappear. This is because candles were expensive and burning them cost money. *If you were burning the candle at both ends you were being wasteful.* You would also have to hold the candle horizontally, leading to the wax dripping off and being wasted.

The idiom has since taken on a different meaning. Both ends refer to the end and beginning of the day. If you have to light a candle then we assume it is dark outside. Thus, if you burn it in the morning you are up before the sun and if you burn it at night it is already dark when you finish._

Source: www.theidioms.com


----------



## octopus17

I find it very hard to get my head around how he is now. It's like he's in thrall to some sort of cult or strange belief system that lives in a different reality (to the one I'm living in anyway). Whatever floats his boat I guess...


----------



## gracekelly

I certainly hope that Meghan isn't  the influence that caused Serena to tweak her face.  If so, who knows what she will look like in a few years.


----------



## gracekelly

Cornflower Blue said:


> I find it very hard to get my head around how he is now. It's like he's in thrall to some sort of cult or strange belief system that lives in a different reality (to the one I'm living in anyway). Whatever floats his boat I guess...



It is a cult of one with one follower. Guess which is which.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Somewhere in this thread, we have posted our results of searching the history of BetterUp and its well-connected Silicon Valley founders. Iirc, they aren’t the sweet, innocent philanthropists or reformers that they want their customers to believe they are.
> As always, caveat emptor.


Absolutely, they are far from philanthropists or reformers. The US A*r contract seems to be very recent, this is why I thought that Hazz may have used some of his connections.


----------



## Chanbal

Let's see what the BLG thinks about Dr. Hazz


----------



## Chanbal

_He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.

"What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.

"Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_









						Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
					

EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"




					www.ok.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #10
					

I think the ginger haired one needs to look around at the entire world before talking about being burned out. From what? From literally what?




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Let's see what the BLG thinks about Dr. Hazz




Excellent video! Imo, Hazz has always done the bouncy, hyper-hand movements paired with the standard greeting of “Hi guys!”. Possibly because he was _Diana’s son, _this guy was oversold to the masses from day 1.  His schtick [gimmick] has not aged well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk





ETA: does Hazz need a shovel?


----------



## Lodpah

Not to derail from these two hop-a-longs but has anyone seen what Katharine  McFee has done to her face? No more cute cheeks. Well she is friends with the TW.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent video! Imo, Hazz has always done the bouncy, hyper-hand movements paired with the standard greeting of “Hi guys!”. Possibly because he was _Diana’s son, _this guy was oversold to the masses from day 1.  His schtick [gimmick] has not aged well.


He is right about Hazz being a salesman for BetterWhatever. However, his sales pitch can be harmful to people. Allegedly, mental health professionals in the UK are becoming concerned with Ginger Guru because of his lack of qualification.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> He is right about Hazz being a salesman for BetterWhatever. However, his sales pitch can be harmful to people. Allegedly, mental health professionals in the UK are becoming concerned with Ginger Guru because of his lack of qualification.




page 4615.  Have a look, most of us said all of this way back then in July, 2021.  The BRF could have stopped him then, but noooo, they allowed him to pitch himself as an expert. Similar to how Andi was allowed to present himself as a businessman - haaaa.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> page 4615.  Have a look, most of us said all of this way back then in July, 2021.  The BRF could have stopped him then, but noooo, they allowed him to pitch himself as an expert. Similar to how Andi was allowed to present himself as a businessman - haaaa.


Yes, you are absolutely right! It's all laid out there.

Taking a fresh look at the video clip of Megalomaniac shared byEverSoElusive, I got a chill down my spine. Not only does her mask slip but look at her hands, the Markle Claw instinctively forms in sync with the evil face. Damn that woman is scary! 

Watching the Body Language Guy videos has been an education. 

Thanks for reviving this, CarryOn2020.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk



Oh interesting. None of what’s written in the tabloids about H&M is true, but they use the tabloids to learn what had been said behind their backs by other royal family members. Logical and consistent as always.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk



When will this idiot be fired?  That whole middle paragraph is just absurd.  “What I found really interesting…”. Uh, Omid - you just made yourself part of the story.  Nobody cares what you think - professional  journalists do not discuss their private feelings or opinions in the pieces that they write.  

This is so far out of bounds…love that he goes after Camilla when he claims to be on the royal beat, or whatever he calls it.  He should just hold himself as H&M publicist.  It’s not as if he fooled anyone anyway!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> He is right about Hazz being a salesman for BetterWhatever. However, his sales pitch can be harmful to people. Allegedly, mental health professionals in the UK are becoming concerned with Ginger Guru because of his lack of qualification.




Harry the Dim doesn’t even have qualifications to discuss real life, much less any qualifications to be lecturing people on mental health issues. He’s never had a job, paid a bill, given a moment’s thought to budgeting or running a household. He has not ever had an iota of responsibility and yet he thinks his views are so important that we must hear them.

You would think that after the heavy criticism of his advice to simply quit any job that stresses you or you don’t like he would at least be pulling back on some of this crap…

well, I for one am going to stop paying attention to the man behind the curtain!!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> ***Off to imagine the Avengers beating up Harry's whiny self.***


I, for one, would love to snap my fingers and make Haz and MeMe disappear for good!


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> I certainly hope that Meghan isn't  the influence that caused Serena to tweak her face.  If so, who knows what she will look like in a few years.


Lord knows, Serena’s self-esteem would be in need of serious counselling if she decided she wanted to look like the crunchy nut corny flake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk


Yep, much better to get a daily tongue lashing from the majority of the internet


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if the “big gestures” are something the royals learn.  Big gestures can be seen in photos and videos more easily and make it seem like they are engaged and doing something important.



It's called over-compensating - for knowing that you really don't know what the 'ell one's talking about


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> I listened to him for less than 30 seconds.  I heard gibberish.  Is “inner work” some sort of trademarked concept?



Prob already bout the domain name


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I assumed being *"schooled by the universe" *meant some 13-year-old from across the country beat Harry's @ss in Minecraft or some other video game. He certainly doesn't have any real problems to worry about.



I think you're on to something...

Sometimes _our_ Harry gets a little mixed-up. He gets Eton mixed-up with Hogworts




No Harry, you're not that Harry, remember, you're the_ other_ Harry


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> I am still laughing so hard at the image of H “burning the candle at both ends” that I have tears rolling down my cheeks.  Wonder if he knows that this expression is not about actual candles…



It is in the UK, at least that's how it started


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> You need sound for your post. Here are some wise words…




Is he going completely bald? His hair has thinned to much even in the front/center.

Also, I've said it before, he looks like an alcoholic or something. Not well.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk





The spin is making me dizzy!! What a load of codswallop!!


----------



## Sophisticatted

MiniMabel said:


> The spin is making me dizzy!! What a load of codswallop!!



Yeah, I don’t get it. It *seems* like he’s saying that if the Queen took back the patronage for herself , then TW would be ok with it, but that evil, grasping Camilla came along and *took *it for herself!

As if anyone, especially the RF cares what she thinks or feels about this, AFTER she’s abandoned her post!

As if she and the Queen actually had some real, or mental telepathy conversation about her potentially leaving the post if things got too hard and the Queen was ok with it and formed a backup plan giving *Herself *more work to do at this time in her life (I don’t think I need to list all the Queen’s difficulties right now).

As if she can make Camilla look bad (for actually doing her duty!) and make herself look good in comparison!

TW is such a crazy person who hates other women!


----------



## papertiger

Cornflower Blue said:


> I find it very hard to get my head around how he is now. It's like he's in thrall to some sort of cult or strange belief system that lives in a different reality (to the one I'm living in anyway). Whatever floats his boat I guess...



A parallel universe where one of the most successful black female sportswomen in history (playing her first professional match at 13)  thanks whiney Princey-wincey for his life-coaching



jelliedfeels said:


> Lord knows, Serena’s self-esteem would be in need of serious counselling if she decided she wanted to look like the crunchy nut corny flake.



Such an inspiring, beautiful and strong Black woman. I'm shook and shocked at the words coming out of her mouth right now.

You couldn't pay me _any_ amount of money to thank some born-into-privilege man for his words of 'wisdom'. What the 'ell would he know about "losing"?  I am embarrassed on her behalf.

Sad that his mother died, but that boy-man has never had to worry about anything in his life. He is one of the only people in the world to be born with a safety-net under lifetime guarantee.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk



Megatoxic and Hurry-away should have had it said to their faces so they could have gone quicker.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Even those damned chickens were staged, they weren't saved from anything.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> Lord knows, Serena’s self-esteem would be in need of serious counselling if she decided she wanted to look like the crunchy nut corny flake.


In general, even very successful people have their 'less assertive' phases. It's difficult to understand why a hardworking and self-made woman would support this.



papertiger said:


> A parallel universe where one of the most successful black female sportswomen in history (playing her first professional match at 13)  thanks whiney Princey-whinsy for his life-coaching
> 
> Such an inspiring, beautiful and strong Black woman. I'm shook and shocked at the words coming out of her mouth right now.
> 
> You couldn't pay me _any_ amount of money to thank some born-into-privilege man for his words of 'wisdom'. What the 'ell would he know about "losing"?  I am embarrassed on her behalf.
> 
> Sad that his mother died, but that boy-man has never had to worry about anything in his life. He is one of the only people in the world to be born with a safety-net under lifetime guarantee.


I initially thought that she was joking about Hazz being her coach. However, endorsing unqualified people to talk about mental health can be serious imo. I hope she will distance herself from this mess.


----------



## Chanbal

News made into Page Six!   


_*Millionaire exiled royal Prince Harry *was mocked online Friday after moaning about suffering “burnout” — and *telling everyone to take time away from their jobs to do “the inner work” on themselves…*

Part of the chat was alongside tennis legend Serena Williams, a best friend of Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle — who said the prince was “actually one of my coaches.”

“Whenever I see him, he’s always solving all my life’s problems,” she said of her California neighbor.

But Williams’ rave reviews were not shared by everyone, with many mocking the woke prince online.

“Prince Harry increasingly sounds like a candidate for the much-missed Transcendental Meditation Party, whose chief policy involved curing traffic jams by encouraging everyone to levitate through the power of thought,” tweeted GB News host Colin Brazier.

London politician Susan Hall suggested that it proves that* the prince “lives in his very privileged bubble without any understanding of the real world.”*

Daily Telegraph columnist Nick Timothy also observed that “Harry has nothing but ‘me time’ and he seems permanently and utterly miserable.”

Royal biographer Angela Levin also shared some of Harry’s more out-there remarks, commenting with a simple, “*Gosh!*”_










						Prince Harry mocked for whining about burnout, meditation, ‘inner work’
					

Prince Harry said he now takes around 45 minutes each morning to workout, “take the dog for a walk, get out in nature, maybe meditate.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> codswallop!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> “Prince Harry increasingly sounds like a candidate for the much-missed Transcendental Meditation Party, whose chief policy involved curing traffic jams by encouraging everyone to levitate through the power of thought,”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> In general, even very successful people have their 'less assertive' phases.


True, lots of athletes and execs use coaches to keep their head in the game, but hopefully ones better qualified than Prince Hazy.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I think you're on to something...
> 
> Sometimes _our_ Harry gets a little mixed-up. He gets Eton mixed-up with Hogworts
> 
> View attachment 5317913
> 
> 
> No Harry, you're not that Harry, remember, you're the_ other_ Harry
> 
> 
> View attachment 5317912


The hair genes in that family are cruel. Lush locks that are gone by forty.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The hair genes in that family are cruel. Lush locks that are gone by forty.



There are worse things I'm sure


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> True, lots of athletes and execs use coaches to keep their head in the game, but hopefully ones better qualified than Prince Hazy.



You mean the ones like Serena really used


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why does Serena’s skin tone look so bleached out?


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Why does Serena’s skin tone look so bleached out?



I wonder if she is sick, hopefully not!


----------



## gracekelly

The only way Serena sits next to Harry and listens to his nonsense is if she is getting paid to do it, or she really has a screw loose. I’m hoping it is the former and not the latter, but that face tweaking and skin bleaching has me fearing it is  the latter.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The only way Serena sits next to Harry and listens to his nonsense is if she is getting paid to do it, or she really has a screw loose. I’m hoping it is the former and not the later, but that face tweaking and skin bleaching has me fearing it is  the latter.


she doesn't need money, does she?  maybe they really are "friends".....she doesn't know how to say no?
the skin thing could be just the photo?


----------



## LittleStar88

Surprisingly H & M are not sufficiently outraged to quit Spotify yet… ??? They must REALLY need the money.









						Joe Rogan apologizes after a compilation of him using racial slurs spreads
					

Joe Rogan issued an apology on Instagram Saturday after a compilation of the podcaster frequently using the n-word on his podcast spread widely on social media.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't need money, does she?  maybe they really are "friends".....she doesn't know how to say no?
> the skin thing could be just the photo?


I think it's just the lighting.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> There are worse things I'm sure


Like his congenital lack of brain cells.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Surprisingly H & M are not sufficiently outraged to quit Spotify yet… ??? They must REALLY need the money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Rogan apologizes after a compilation of him using racial slurs spreads
> 
> 
> Joe Rogan issued an apology on Instagram Saturday after a compilation of the podcaster frequently using the n-word on his podcast spread widely on social media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


of course they need the money.....and what do they have to take off spotify? one podcast? LOL....not a catalogue of music like Neil Young.
I get what you're saying though - they could say they want out of their contract.  but would they have to give back money?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> The hair genes in that family are cruel. Lush locks that are gone by forty.



As I was saying....


----------



## charlottawill

The Queen, upon hearing that the Harkles would not be attending her Jubilee:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Hair Club for Men?


----------



## rose60610

Serena has lots of sources of income so it doesn't surprise me that she's also on the BetterUp bandwagon. She taught tennis on MasterClass, has/had? a clothing line and who knows what else in addition to sponsorships. She's leveraged her successful tennis career/fame into her own multi-faceted industry.  Well, good on her. BetterUp must be flush with cash to nab household names to promote their brand. The last thing Serena needs is to associate with losers like Meghan and Harry. They sully her reputation.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Serena has lots of sources of income so it doesn't surprise me that she's also on the BetterUp bandwagon. She taught tennis on MasterClass, has/had? a clothing line and who knows what else in addition to sponsorships. She's leveraged her successful tennis career/fame into her own multi-faceted industry.  Well, good on her. BetterUp must be flush with cash to nab household names to promote their brand. The last thing Serena needs is to associate with losers like Meghan and Harry. They sully her reputation.



I don't know much about the structure of BetterUp. I've been looking for info re their IPO, but I wonder if it's essentially a pyramid scheme where companies get a discount for bringing other companies in. I'm not sure how many individuals would be willing to pay for this out of their own pockets. I think it will be more of an employee perk, like free gym memberships. Anyone here looking for a side hustle? You too can become a BetterUp coach:


> https://www.fountain.com/betterup/apply/2019-betterup-coaches-55fcd304-f364-4acd-aa6d-eb43a556a917


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5317766
> 
> _He says: "Meghan does have some private patronages that she has held on to, such as Mayhew and SmartWorks, but I think given that the National Theatre patronage came from The Queen, she was always under the understanding that it would go back to her should she walk away.
> 
> "What I found really interesting about the coverage of that handover was a source claiming that Camilla was "miffed" Meghan had originally been given the role, which gives you further insight into some of the true feelings of how other members of the Royal family felt about Harry and Meghan long before they even stepped away.
> 
> "Even now, Harry and Meghan are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before they left. If anything, these stories are perhaps a reminder to them that they made the right decision."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'still learning what was said behind their backs'
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Royal writer Omid Scobie shares how Harry and Meghan are being "reminded they made the right decision"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk


Definitely based on bullet points from "I'm Such a Fraud" Markle. This is the new narrative to lay the ground for Hazard's revisionist history memoir. They were given plum roles by TQ and the rest of the BRF were jealous. I'd revise the statement as "Even now, the BRF are still learning about things that went on behind their backs or behind the scenes before Horror and Macabre left."

This is all part of their quest to be the Eternal Victim. You've got to find new reasons for stanpathy in order to generate income.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Hair Club for Men?


New partnership!


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> As I was saying....



Head shape , it is all about head shape 
W H and Diana all have a head that is narrower at the top, triangular 
Diana’s head shape was hidden by the luxuriant bangs 
it shows quite a bit on William these days 
H’s last video on BetterUp, he has a shorter haircut - more of a buzz cut now rather than the unruly mop of the last decade - anyway, you can see the family head shape noticeably now on H


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I don't know much about the structure of BetterUp. I've been looking for info re their IPO, but I wonder if it's essentially a pyramid scheme where companies get a discount for bringing other companies in. I'm not sure how many individuals would be willing to pay for this out of their own pockets. I think it will be more of an employee perk, like free gym memberships. Anyone here looking for a side hustle? You too can become a BetterUp coach:


What qualifications do you need to be a BetterUp coach?  I am asked for more info when signing up for the Victoria Beckham makeup newsletter!


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Serena has lots of sources of income so it doesn't surprise me that she's also on the BetterUp bandwagon. She taught tennis on MasterClass, has/had? a clothing line and who knows what else in addition to sponsorships. She's leveraged her successful tennis career/fame into her own multi-faceted industry.  Well, good on her. BetterUp must be flush with cash to nab household names to promote their brand. The last thing Serena needs is to associate with losers like Meghan and Harry. They sully her reputation.


Wonder if S felt she owed H&M for the invite to the wedding, S got to go to the church, brunch and dinner
only 200 got invited to the dinner


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Wonder if S felt she owed H&M for the invite to the wedding, S got to go to the church, brunch and dinner
> only 200 got invited to the dinner



More likely Alexi offered her a stake in the company.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I was noticing his hair.  It does seem as if he's really balding and growing fuzz at the same time.

However, balding is something that happens naturally and can't be controlled unless people go the Hollywood route with transplants and grafting and whatever else they do, so I feel like we shouldn't be too mean.  Most men do not want to go bald.

But I bet Harry does not want to resemble Will in any way, so would want better hair.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> The only way Serena sits next to Harry and listens to his nonsense is if she is getting paid to do it, or she really has a screw loose. I’m hoping it is the former and not the latter, but that face tweaking and skin bleaching has me fearing it is  the latter.


I see Serena on so many commercials for different products.  Not sure why she feels the need to sell herself though.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> However, balding is something that happens naturally and can't be controlled unless people go the Hollywood route with transplants and grafting and whatever else they do, so I feel like we shouldn't be too mean. Most men do not want to go bald.


True, and all men handle it differently. John Travolta wore hairpieces until very recently, whereas Bruce Willis embraced his baldness years ago. It's no different than women going gray and deciding to color or not to color. To each their own.


----------



## poopsie

Jayne1 said:


> I see Serena on so many commercials for different products.  Not sure why she feels the need to sell herself though.



As long as she doesn't wind up on Dancing With The Stars


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> “It’s a work in progress. Some days are great, some days are really hard,” he said, saying he was also being “schooled by the universe.”



Where does all this new age stuff come from...did they initiate him into a cult?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Say this louder, please:




On the other hand, next time Raptor is "suicidal" he can get her a subscription instead of whining their private secretary didn't make an appointment.


----------



## lallybelle

So I just read that the Queen's  message said Camilla is to be Queen Consort when Charles ascends , so not Princess Consort in deference to Diana as was thought.


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> It is in the UK, at least that's how it started



Oh yes, I know how the expression started - what I meant (but didn’t articulate very well) is that Harry doesn’t need to go into the dining room, fetch a candle and literally light both ends.  I doubt anyone has used the expression to apply to Harry, after all.


----------



## papertiger

lallybelle said:


> *So I just read that the Queen's  message said Camilla is to be Queen Consort when Charles ascends* , so not Princess Consort in deference to Diana as was thought.



Yup, currently M in chez Montecito,

Harry has his fingers in his ears as I type


----------



## rose60610

If (divorced) Camilla gets to be Queen Consort then it should reason that Kate will also eventually become Queen Consort. 

What was that about one plane crash away...


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> As long as she doesn't wind up on Dancing With The Stars


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lallybelle said:


> So I just read that the Queen's  message said Camilla is to be Queen Consort when Charles ascends , so not Princess Consort in deference to Diana as was thought.



I approve. She can't live forever in the shadow of a woman who died 25+ years ago.


----------



## poopsie

Oh lordy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> If (divorced) Camilla gets to be Queen Consort then it should reason that Kate will also eventually become Queen Consort.



What else would Kate become?


----------



## creme fraiche

Princess of Wales, causing lazy journalists to call her Princess Kate.  Omid Scabies, with his current Duchess Kate, will have to switch to calling Catherine this.  His mistress will not be pleased.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I think a BRAIN transplant would’ve been better.  Oh wait, I’m not so sure he H has a brain.


----------



## octopus17

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I consider it a credit to Eton College that they actually got him to pass anything in whatever capacity ....


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I approve. She can't live forever in the shadow of a woman who died 25+ years ago.


It will be 25 years in August, and I'm sure anyone and everyone who can will cash in on it.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I see Serena on so many commercials for different products.  Not sure why she feels the need to sell herself though.



It might have something to do with coming from a relatively poor background and feeling that she'll never have enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> I think a BRAIN transplant would’ve been better.  Oh wait, I’m not so sure he H has a brain.


He could get a xenotransplant, a chicken brain will do.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I see Serena on so many commercials for different products.  Not sure why she feels the need to sell herself though.


It's the drug of celebrity.  She doesn't want to give it up and it makes money. Another female athlete will come along and take her place eventually, so the time to make money is now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> It's the drug of celebrity.  She doesn't want to give it up and it makes money. Another female athlete will come along and take her place eventually, so the time to make money is now.



She is 40 years old.  Some call that young


----------



## charlottawill

I was just reading about the Queen's announcement and going through photos accompanying the story. Came across this one, which I've seen a number of times but never noticed that her great-granddaughter was holding her purse. Too cute! 

Kudos to Camilla. She kept her head down, went about her job quietly and has now been rewarded for her discretion and loyalty.


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, their house stinks! 








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's US home engulfed in rotten smell
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle left the Royal Family in 2020 and ever since have lived in the US with their children - but now their mansion is being engulfed with an awful smell from a nearby bird sanctuary




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is 40 years old.  Some call that young


Well I call 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 young…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Well I call 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 young…


You're as young as you feel.


----------



## octopus17

^I've been in a situation where it's been me, my mother, and a great aunt or two, and after a bit we're all chit chatting away and the whole age thing became absolutely meaningless. It was all family and women together and age meant nothing. We were all one.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is good!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It was 9 months precisely, but I also feel this is a slippery slope. No doubt she wasted other people's money like there's no tomorrow though. Only the best for our little Raptor. What Raptor wants Raptor gets.

ETA: that was re: Raptor's clothing budget.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is good!
> 
> View attachment 5318689



It’s good that he is being mocked. Compare QE’s positive statements about service and life to his fussing and moaning.
Long live the Queen!


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, their house stinks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's US home engulfed in rotten smell
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle left the Royal Family in 2020 and ever since have lived in the US with their children - but now their mansion is being engulfed with an awful smell from a nearby bird sanctuary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



It's probably The Stench from The Bench.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s good that he is being mocked. Compare QE’s positive statements about service and life to his fussing and moaning.
> Long live the Queen!



Scomid doesn't get that hard work will erase some prior bad publicity and actions.  If he wants to pick a fight with Camilla, he picked the wrong person.  She will wipe the floor with him and Sparkles.  She may be kinder to Harry, but not by much.  The Queen is seeing the end coming closer and she wants to make her wishes known sooner rather than later.  I wouldn't be surprised it PP mentioned doing this for Camilla to her.  He was a believer in doing your duty and hard work.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, their house stinks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's US home engulfed in rotten smell
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle left the Royal Family in 2020 and ever since have lived in the US with their children - but now their mansion is being engulfed with an awful smell from a nearby bird sanctuary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Makes me think of that faux pas of his regarding penguins living at the North Pole.  Apparently, when you visit Antarctica, the penguin population is so large, the stench is not to be believed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s good that he is being mocked. Compare QE’s positive statements about service and life to his fussing and moaning.
> Long live the Queen!




Does this Omid Scobie person even really exist? Has he ever been seen in the same room as TW? Are we sure they're not actually the same person?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



That's a lot of money to pay to look like a hot mess most of the time.


----------



## PurpleLilac

MissThing said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed before but I alwasy thought the paternity runopoirs around prince harry and Diana's other lovers were just crazy rumours.  Now I'm not so sure.


I don't think these two look alike at all.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s good that he is being mocked. Compare QE’s positive statements about service and life to his fussing and moaning.
> Long live the Queen!





Gee I didn't realize OS is a fan of Camilla - from the Oxford Dictionary:

NORTHERN ENGLISH•SCOTTISH
pleasant; nice.
"she's a canny lass"


----------



## charlottawill

PurpleLilac said:


> I don't think these two look alike at all.


Harry looks like Charles and Philip, and the hair is probably from the Spencer side. Although maybe The Firm now wishes those rumors were true. It would be an easy way to wash their hands of him.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> The hair genes in that family are cruel. Lush locks that are gone by forty.


It definitely looks odd in the latest video.  Even the Christmas photo and the trip in the Fall it looked much fuller?


----------



## csshopper

Gran has decreed. Wow, bet that caught the Suckesses off guard, speculation has been  6 will attack Camilla in his forthcoming toxic tome. Will he trash the future Queen now that the current one has issued her endorsement statement?

It’s only just begun officially, but already it feels like the Jubilee is positively affecting people.  I think if the Dumbartons continue down their contentious path to harm the Monarchy at any point during this time, there will be an even greater demand for them to be cut off. For the sake of the Monarchy to try to retain any respect I think the Queen would do it. She’s  already shown she’s capable of it through her dealings with Andrew.


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> I've been speculating (over my dinner) about whom else she could throw under the bus. If and when COVID eases off and the duo try to get big in showbiz, they will wind up on chat shows and interview programmes where the host isn't Oprah.
> 
> If anyone asks them point-blank about her selective amnesia, I wager she will cast blame on her father. You see, Thomas Markle raised her in the make-believe Hollywood world. He didn't socialize her into the real world. So if she does anything wrong, it's obviously his fault. What do you think?





bag-mania said:


> An interview like that will never happen. Meghan only accepts softball interviews where she knows the questions ahead of time. She’ll never address the lying, she’s put that behind her and expects everyone else to as well. Besides, 99% of the media here supports and goes easy on her.



An interview like that will never happen because at some point, no one could be paid enough to interview them (please let it be soon!).


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Does this Omid Scobie person even really exist? Has he ever been seen in the same room as TW? Are we sure they're not actually the same person?



Remember his father is in marketing.  Something about the apple and the tree may apply.

_Scobie was born in Wales and grew up in Oxford with his younger brother and parents, a Persian social worker mother and a British *marketing director father*.






						Omid Scobie - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Prior to the wedding, QE called Dor*a and Little Miss Forgetful to welcome them to the UK and asked if there was anything she could do to make the day ahead easier for them…


----------



## Chanbal

Let's see if QC makes sure Charles keeps his plans to slim down the monarchy…


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> You're as young as you feel.


When it comes to feeling young, I actually feel as old as dirt sometimes. I could swear dirt would worship my longevity if possible.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Prior to the wedding, QE called Dor*a and Little Miss Forgetful to welcome them to the UK and asked if there was anything she could do to make the day ahead easier for them…



Methane will probably say it was lip service. After all, she has already claimed that no one asked her if she was okay. Of course she may hold back this information for now as she does not have the relevant emails to jog her memory  



csshopper said:


> Gran has decreed. Wow, bet that caught the Suckesses off guard, speculation has been  6 will attack Camilla in his forthcoming toxic tome. Will he trash the future Queen now that the current one has issued her endorsement statement?
> 
> It’s only just begun officially, but already it feels like the Jubilee is positively affecting people.  I think if the Dumbartons continue down their contentious path to harm the Monarchy at any point during this time, there will be an even greater demand for them to be cut off. For the sake of the Monarchy to try to retain any respect I think the Queen would do it. She’s  already shown she’s capable of it through her dealings with Andrew.


My guess is that Hazard will attack everyone. He will hedge his bets by not naming people who were "mean" to him, using the same tactic as the racist skin colour story. So his tome will be filled with tales of "I don't want to say who, but SOMEONE did this to me". If you look at the stories which Sunshine Sucks feeds to the media, you'll notice that it is almost 100% anonymous. Even when the story is about something nice about H&M or the person is showing support, the source almost always remains cloaked in mystery. All that makes me believe is that the story was manufactured.

I do hope that they are taken out of the LoS. Such an embarrassment no matter which way you look at it.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is 40 years old.  Some call that young



I am with you, but most high intensity sports like tennis notoriously burn-out athletes even younger than that. 

There are many other tennis related things she could do without getting mixed-up in the sham of a business.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What else would Kate become?


Exactly, Diana would've been Queen Consort, Catherine will be Queen Consort. Camilla should also automatically be Queen Consort but at the time she was still hated and blamed for what happened and no one wanted her to be Queen so it was thought Princess Consort would be more appropriate when the time comes. Time heals and people are more accepting of her now so it's only right she becomes Queen Consort. She's paid her dues as it were. I'm glad the Queen said its her wish that Camilla becomes Queen Consort. That will mean a lot. 
The only thing I'm still totally against is that she could've been publicly titled Princess of Wales, even though officially she is. No way I'd be accepting her as Princess of my country!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> If (divorced) Camilla gets to be Queen Consort then it should reason that Kate will also eventually become Queen Consort.
> 
> What was that about one plane crash away...


Kate was always going to be Queen consort the issue with Camilla was not Diana but her divorce but given Charles is also divorced it was always hypocritical


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> If (divorced) Camilla gets to be Queen Consort then it should reason that Kate will also eventually become Queen Consort.
> 
> What was that about one plane crash away...


The Queen at 10 was the equivalent of Princess Beatrice taking the throne now - the daughter of the second son of George V


----------



## Goodfrtune

gracekelly said:


> Makes me think of that faux pas of his regarding penguins living at the North Pole.  Apparently, when you visit Antarctica, the penguin population is so large, the stench is not to be believed.


As one who has been there, I can confirm that the stench is incredible but it’s worth it!


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Sunday!


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Kate was always going to be Queen consort the issue with Camilla was not Diana but her divorce but given Charles is also divorced it was always hypocritical


I don't think it was because of Camilla being divorced per se, it was the circumstances surrounding the infidelities and Charles and Camilla being blamed for Diana's death (as in if Camilla wasn't around then Charles and Diana's marriage would have been fine) 
I remember nobody wanted Camilla to be Queen Consort at all so Princess was decided to pacify the masses.


----------



## rose60610

elvisfan4life said:


> Kate was always going to be Queen consort the issue with Camilla was not Diana but her divorce but given Charles is also divorced it was always hypocritical



Oh. Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## Sharont2305

No doubt M will take this as a sweet nod to herself, same colour that she wore at H&Ms wedding *eyeroll


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> No doubt M will take this as a sweet nod to herself, same colour that she wore at H&Ms wedding *eyeroll



Thanks for that lovely video. We're so used to seeing her on official occasions, it's nice to see her looking relaxed and comfortable. The comments are worth reading too, very positive. She is clearly admired, respected and beloved by so many.


----------



## Mendocino

elvisfan4life said:


> Kate was always going to be Queen consort the issue with Camilla was not Diana but her divorce but given Charles is also divorced it was always hypocritical



But since Diana had passed away several years before Camilla and Charles married from an ecclesiastical viewpoint wouldn't he be considered widowed?


----------



## purseinsanity

lallybelle said:


> So I just read that the Queen's  message said Camilla is to be Queen Consort when Charles ascends , so not Princess Consort in deference to Diana as was thought.


Haz will be pleased.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, their house stinks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's US home engulfed in rotten smell
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle left the Royal Family in 2020 and ever since have lived in the US with their children - but now their mansion is being engulfed with an awful smell from a nearby bird sanctuary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


"Nearby bird refuge"...their chicken coop??


----------



## purseinsanity

Mendocino said:


> But since Diana had passed away several years before Camilla and Charles married from an ecclesiastical viewpoint wouldn't he be considered widowed?


I think one is only widowed if still legally married during the spouse's death.  Since they were no longer married, it's just "divorced".


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> No doubt M will take this as a sweet nod to herself, same colour that she wore at H&Ms wedding *eyeroll



She doesn't need reading glasses???!!!  I'm half her age and can't see beyond the tip of my nose!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> No doubt M will take this as a sweet nod to herself, same colour that she wore at H&Ms wedding *eyeroll



That video is so sweet! Her hair is amazing die her age. That guy looks like he needs a higher chair!


----------



## kipp

purseinsanity said:


> She doesn't need reading glasses???!!!  I'm half her age and can't see beyond the tip of my nose!


Not only this, she seems quite vigorous and with it!  Amazing!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It might have something to do with coming from a relatively poor background and feeling that she'll never have enough.


the one who gets me is Jennifer Aniston.  She has a lot of money still coming in from friends and so many endorsements - Aveeno, Living Proof, an airline, smart water.....plus others. I guess one can never have too much money.  when she gets older she may be hawking reverse mortgages like someone else we know


----------



## lanasyogamama

Will HazMat send congratulations?


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> the one who gets me is Jennifer Aniston.  She has a lot of money still coming in from friends and so many endorsements - Aveeno, Living Proof, an airline, smart water.....plus others. I guess one can never have too much money.  when she gets older she may be hawking reverse mortgages like someone else we know


I hope not, but we will see!


----------



## Mendocino

purseinsanity said:


> I think one is only widowed if still legally married during the spouse's death.  Since they were no longer married, it's just "divorced".



Ah! I see. Thank you for the clarification.


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> I was noticing his hair.  It does seem as if he's really balding and growing fuzz at the same time.
> 
> However, balding is something that happens naturally and can't be controlled unless people go the Hollywood route with transplants and grafting and whatever else they do, so I feel like we shouldn't be too mean.  Most men do not want to go bald.
> 
> But I bet Harry does not want to resemble Will in any way, so would want better hair.


I still remember H making a comment about W losing his hair, a "haha" type of comment when they were still like friends

How does it feel now, H? Not so funny, huh?


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> the one who gets me is Jennifer Aniston.  She has a lot of money still coming in from friends and so many endorsements - Aveeno, Living Proof, an airline, smart water.....plus others. I guess one can never have too much money.  when she gets older she may be hawking reverse mortgages like someone else we know


Yeah, I saw Aniston do something about eyedrops recently and she has some kind of probiotic ad on TV as well. I don’t know if it’s a probiotic because I don’t really pay attention, but it’s something you digest.

Anyway, you do wonder why they keep at it. It’s not like they need the money and doesn’t it kind of cheapen their brand?


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Yeah, I saw Aniston do something about eyedrops recently and she has some kind of probiotic ad on TV as well. I don’t know if it’s a probiotic because I don’t really pay attention, but it’s something you digest.
> 
> Anyway, you do wonder why they keep at it. It’s not like they need the money and doesn’t it kind of cheapen their brand?


I can only guess that maybe she's one of those people who never has enough - afraid it will all be lost tomorrow


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> Yeah, I saw Aniston do something about eyedrops recently and she has some kind of probiotic ad on TV as well. I don’t know if it’s a probiotic because I don’t really pay attention, but it’s something you digest.
> 
> Anyway, you do wonder why they keep at it. It’s not like they need the money and doesn’t it kind of cheapen their brand?


Her "Friends" money must be unreal, I don't get why she still does these ads.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Her "Friends" money must be unreal, I don't get why she still does these ads.


according to the Internet her net worth is $300 million


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> according to the Internet her net worth is $300 million



As with the Harkles, can they pay the monthly costs? Taxes on those McMansions, their car costs, clothing costs, medical costs,  etc. all add up.  They can burn through their money quickly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Her skin is still beautiful.  In awe of this amazing woman!


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> Oh. Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Will HazMat send congratulations?


Guessing a hard "No".  Using a term of endearment  "my darling wife has been my own steadfast support throughout,"  along with the tone of the Queen's statement noting "Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service" will probably have sent him speed dialing his ButterUp Coach and/or accessing drugs.

He and TW are SO out of her league if they think will win a smear campaign against the Queen. As one of the Royal commentators said, "this was masterful" (1) choose a significant moment in history, the Jubilee, to make the announcement (2) use to advantage the love, respect, admiration in which she is held to say "it is my sincere wish." (3) draw parallels between her mother's supporting role in the Monarchy and Phillip's support of her, so it makes clear Camilla's role as Queen Consort is part of a continuum. (4) making it an affirmative statement "I _know_ you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me", not "I hope".

The Queen reaffirming "my life will always be devoted to your service" and signing the document "Your Servant, Elizabeth R" emphasizes the chasm between her values and those of the cut and run Suckesses.

GingerWinge now has to face the prospect of dealing with not only his Grandmother the Queen, but going forward his father as King officially bolstered by a Queen Consort, which I think does make a difference in how Charles would view disloyalty from the toxic duo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh, it is happening - no sympathy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Do Charles and Camilla have their own thread?









						Camilla’s risen above the royal circus fray with grace & duty unlike Meg & Harry
					

“HELLO Piers, how’s my rhino?” asked Britain’s next queen, Camilla Parker-Bowles, the last time we met a few weeks ago. “I hope you’re still taking good care of it?” “…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do Charles and Camilla have their own thread?
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/1...itter&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1644174141-1


As much as I detest H&M I don't really know what they have to do with this story
I guess the point is since H has hitched his wagon totally to his dead mother, he would not be happy about this?  But William apparently doesn't have a problem and I thought the two boys got along ok with camilla


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> As much as I detest H&M I don't really know what they have to do with this story
> I guess the point is since H has hitched his wagon totally to his dead mother, he would not be happy about this?  But William apparently doesn't have a problem and I thought the two boys got along ok with camilla



 They can get along with Cams and still disagree that she should be QC.  Both things can be true.
Kinda surprised W&K didn’t post a bit more : 

_In a post published to Her Majesty's official Instagram account, @theroyalfamily, a snippet of her letter published to mark the 70th anniversary of her own Accession, which declares her public backing of Duchess Camilla's succession *was 'liked' by Prince William and Kate via their own Instagram account, @dukeanduchessofcambridge.*








						Prince William and Kate Middleton react publicly after Queen's declaration for Duchess Camilla to become 'Queen Consort'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have reacted publicly after the Queen's official Jubilee statement asking for support for Duchess Camilla as 'Queen Consort' - details




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



_


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I can only guess that maybe she's one of those people who never has enough - afraid it will all be lost tomorrow


Khloe Kardashian with her migraine medication ad is what cracks me up.  She looks so photoshopped, I keep thinking maybe if you hadn't yanked your face so far back, you wouldn't have any headaches!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Khloe Kardashian with her migraine medication ad is what cracks me up.  She looks so photoshopped, I keep thinking maybe if you hadn't yanked your face so far back, you wouldn't have any headaches!


when I first saw the tv commercial, I was saying that looks like KK.....looking sexy.....using sex to sell migraine meds?


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Guessing a hard "No".  Using a term of endearment  "my darling wife has been my own steadfast support throughout,"  along with the tone of the Queen's statement noting "Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service" will probably have sent him speed dialing his ButterUp Coach and/or accessing drugs.
> 
> He and TW are SO out of her league if they think will win a smear campaign against the Queen. As one of the Royal commentators said, "this was masterful" (1) choose a significant moment in history, the Jubilee, to make the announcement (2) use to advantage the love, respect, admiration in which she is held to say "it is my sincere wish." (3) draw parallels between her mother's supporting role in the Monarchy and Phillip's support of her, so it makes clear Camilla's role as Queen Consort is part of a continuum. (4) making it an affirmative statement "I _know_ you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me", not "I hope".
> 
> The Queen reaffirming "my life will always be devoted to your service" and signing the document "Your Servant, Elizabeth R" emphasizes the chasm between her values and those of the cut and run Suckesses.
> 
> GingerWinge now has to face the prospect of dealing with not only his Grandmother the Queen, but going forward his father as King officially bolstered by a Queen Consort, which I think does make a difference in how Charles would view disloyalty from the toxic duo.


This isn't the Queen's first go around.  She and her counselors know what they're doing!  Now please, cut of HazMeg for good!


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> Khloe Kardashian with her migraine medication ad is what cracks me up.  She looks so photoshopped, I keep thinking maybe if you hadn't yanked your face so far back, you wouldn't have any headaches!


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> when I first saw the tv commercial, I was saying that looks like KK.....looking sexy.....using sex to sell migraine meds?



Boy did they miss that one   
"not tonight dear I have a headache"  is the oldest trick in the book


----------



## CarryOn2020

Okaaay, the lackluster W&K response is noted along with H&M’s lack of comment. 


_The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have also not commented publicly on the Queen's statement, but did retweet the Royal Family's post, which included the Queen's announcement. 

They also shared a news story on their joint Instagram account.








						Harry and Meghan silent as Queen celebrates platinum jubilee
					

Harry and Meghan (pictured) are yet to provide any public comment nearly a day on from the Queen's historic platinum jubilee announcement, released at 10pm on Saturday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> This is good!
> 
> View attachment 5318689



I really hope this is some kind of joke.  Have some damned pride you fool - and stop all of this bleating and whining.  Nobody is going to feel sympathy for you past the difficulty of losing your mom at a young age.  Sadly, many others share that sadness but at some point you went from a child struggling with this to an adult who is still whining publicly and who uses this to start a litany of problems.  You need to has learned to manage the grief and get on with life.  You have had every advantage in life, but insist on whining and playing the victim.  Enough!!

And I am not going to comment on your whining victim of a wife - $1 million in clothes in a year?  She ought to be ashamed.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> I really hope this is some kind of joke.  Have some damned pride you fool - and stop all of this bleating and whining.  Nobody is going to feel sympathy for you past the difficulty of losing your mom at a young age.  Sadly, many others share that sadness but at some point you went from a child struggling with this to an adult who is still whining publicly and who uses this to start a litany of problems.  You need to has learned to manage the grief and get on with life.  You have had every advantage in life, but insist on whining and playing the victim.  Enough!!
> 
> And I am not going to comment on your whining victim of a wife - $1 million in clothes in a year?  She ought to be ashamed.


Not a fan of MM, but I seem to recall reading that the Duchess of Cambridge got a generous clothing allowance from Charles, so perhaps she did too?

I do believe MM has taken the spark of Harry's feelings of being the poor misunderstood neglected Prince and fanned it into a raging fire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Not a fan of MM, but I seem to recall reading that the Duchess of Cambridge got a generous clothing allowance from Charles, so perhaps she did too?



Kate did spend a fraction of what Raptor spent. I don't have the numbers ready, but I remember reading a comparison back then.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW a German magazine ran a story how Harry - don't know at what occasion though, he has talked a lot recently...the iTV docu maybe? - shared how he and Raptor nearly broke up early on (we were so close!  ), how she sent him to therapy (after maintaining for years it was actually William) aaand the best part: nothing really helped, but meeting and marrying Raptor did.

I can't recall if we've talked about that one...but if you ask me, meeting and marrying Raptor was the nail in the coffin of his sanity.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate did spend a fraction of what Raptor spent. I don't have the numbers ready, but I remember reading a comparison back then.


Several articles mentioned that in 2018, Kate supposedly spent about $90k on clothes while Meghan spent over $500k excluding the cost of her wedding dress.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate did spend a fraction of what Raptor spent. I don't have the numbers ready, but I remember reading a comparison back then.


And Catherine  actually bought a lot more clothing with her allowance and the cost of the pieces ranged from high to low. Plus she re-wears things.   Considering that MM did basically nothing during her short tenure, it was very avaricious on her part.  Catherine did many more events during the same time period and she was pregnant part of the time.

Retrospective review of MM's clothing shows that she came from the school, and probably still does, that if it is expensive it must be good and right for you.  My answer to that is no and no.  She has proven many times that she can take a luxury brand  garment and have it fit is so poorly, and worn incorrectly that she looks like a train wreck.  The end result is that something of quality ends up looking cheap.  I never thought that clothing from Loro Piana, for instance,  could look that bad on anyone, but she managed it.  What a rare talent!


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> Several articles mentioned that in 2018, Kate supposedly spent about $90k on clothes while Meghan spent over $500k excluding the cost of her wedding dress.


GEEEZUSSSS, if I had 500k to spend on clothing, I would look like a gazillion bucks!  And it would fit perfectly!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> GEEEZUSSSS, if I had 500k to spend on clothing, I would look like a gazillion bucks!  And it would fit perfectly!



Honestly, I could dress fabulously with 500000 bucks and buy an apartment with what I didn't spend.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, I could dress fabulously with 500000 bucks and buy an apartment with what I didn't spend.


You forgot a nice car to go with that apartment and the clothes


----------



## Chanbal

A potential reason behind QE's verdict. 

*DAN WOOTTON: The idea of Queen Camilla makes me deeply uneasy but I accept the Queen's verdict that royal status is earned through conduct and commitment to duty not a right – Harry and Meghan should take note*

_In a letter which she poignantly signed 'Your Servant', the Queen wrote: 'When, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes King, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me. And it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service.'

The move, which simply confirms legal precedent, is highly controversial nonetheless…

The other intriguing factor behind the Queen's announcement is it shows the true extent of her modernisation during seven decades on the throne.

The woman who denied her own sister marital happiness, is now saying that being royal isn't simply about bloodlines or custom, it's about conduct and commitment.

Camilla will be Queen Consort on merit because she has been dutiful for many years. Prince Harry and Meghan are not considered working royals because they refused to be dutiful._

_*And have no doubt that the scheming Sussexes in Montecito are a big factor behind the Queen's timing.*

As I have previously revealed for MailOnline, *royal courtiers* – especially those close to Prince Charles – *are gripped with fear about the publication of Harry's tell-all autobiography, which they expect to be particularly brutal towards Camilla*.

*By making this announcement now, it will make it easier for the Cornwalls to weather the likely storm heading in their direction by providing rock-solid security about Camilla's future role.*

Harry will likely feel personally betrayed and livid by the decision, given his entire mission now seems to be to destabilise and potentially even bring down the monarchy.

William, by contrast, who understandably has all his own complicated and deeply personal issues with Camilla, now accepts the happiness and stability of his father must be put first given the weight of the role he will likely take on one day as an old man.

So I will try to accept the Queen's desire and shake the uneasiness that I feel deep within me about this decision.

But Charles must do all he can to honour the memory of Diana whose unique place in royal history as the ultimate moderniser should never be forgotten, even when we're referring to the woman formerly known as The Rottweiler as Queen Camilla._









						The idea of Queen Camilla makes me deeply uneasy
					

DAN WOOTTON: On the day she marks an unprecedented 70 years on the throne, we're not talking about Her Majesty's historic achievement that will likely never be repeated.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> You forgot a nice car to go with that apartment and the clothes


An apartment, nice car, and clothes all for 500K… not in Montecito for sure.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Not a fan of MM, but I seem to recall reading that the Duchess of Cambridge got a generous clothing allowance from Charles, so perhaps she did too?





I would be surprised if Kate spent nearly as much.  Not only does she wear things more than once, most of her clothes are a fraction of the cost of MM’s.  
I always thought there was some sort of unwritten rule that women in these very visible political roles (including First Ladies) should wear clothing that is not designer and is not jaw-dropping expensive.  Gowns and jewels are obviously a different story!  And secondarily, it is expected that they will clothing designed by people from their own country.  

Or maybe these notions are old and outdated.

Kate wore a teal coat in the last week or 2 and I remember being surprised at how inexpensive it was because it looked so nice on her.  Her usual perfect fit!  As I recall, the cost was in the neighborhood of 300 pounds.

So, of course, MM loses out on both points - she spent a fortune on designer clothing, yet she managed to look a mess in everything she wore.  Wonder how much of it she will wear a second time!


----------



## Chanbal

The weatherman was morgled!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This is good!
> 
> View attachment 5318689


Poor Wee Wittle Hahway, somebody's got your number: Duke Of Dipshittery.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> An apartment, nice car, and clothes all for 500K… not in Montecito for sure.



Probably not anywhere in California, sadly!!


----------



## csshopper

It’s now coming out that Charles spoke with both sons prior to the Queen’s Jubilee decree about her wishes for Camilla to be Queen Consort.

The timing isn’t clear, but I wonder if it coincided with some statements from the Suckess flaks that Hazbeen was going to tone things down in deference to his Grandmother? Running scared?   Maybe he is finally realizing he and the missus are expendable as slack offs with no sense of duty or loyalty, qualities  his Gran holds dear and rewards those like Camilla who live them.

 Hazbeen is losing his hair, stuck in a stinky house which will now be harder to sell with that revelation, tethered to a wack job wife, continuously outed as a buffoon, incapable of professional work so Spotify and Netflix have to employ clean up crews, and teetering on the brink of being officially dumped by the RF. What a strange definition of “Freedom”. Perfect example of “be careful what you wish for”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let the good times roll!  
5 years ago?  Hmmm, no wonder Hazzi jumped ship.
ETA: he knew his demanding selfish self would not be welcomed.  Cams is too smart for that nonsense.

*EXCLUSIVE: Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown containing the Koh-i-Noor diamond to wear at Charles's coronation - and he won permission to call her 'Queen Camilla' in his vows YEARS ago*

*The Queen declared it was 'sincere wish' for Camilla to become Queen consort in statement on Saturday night*
*Charles changed his coronation vows to include 'Queen Camilla' five years ago with mother's blessing*
*She will have Queen Mother’s platinum and diamond crown placed on her head when Charles is made king*
*Charles and Camilla said they  were 'touched and honoured' by Queen's gesture as she marks 70-year reign*









						Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown
					

EXCLUSIVE: The insertion of his wife's title was included as part of a general reworking of plans for the Westminster Abbey ceremony up to five years ago, a senior palace source said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> I really hope this is some kind of joke.  Have some damned pride you fool - and stop all of this bleating and whining.  Nobody is going to feel sympathy for you past the difficulty of losing your mom at a young age.  Sadly, many others share that sadness but at some point you went from a child struggling with this to an adult who is still whining publicly and who uses this to start a litany of problems.  You need to has learned to manage the grief and get on with life.  You have had every advantage in life, but insist on whining and playing the victim.  Enough!!
> 
> And I am not going to comment on your whining victim of a wife - $1 million in clothes in a year?  She ought to be ashamed.



It is a joke - he never said it


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Does this Omid Scobie person even really exist? Has he ever been seen in the same room as TW? Are we sure they're not actually the same person?


I'm more interested in the co-author Carolyn Durand. Omid seems to be taking all the "credit" for Funding Freebies.


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> I would be surprised if Kate spent nearly as much.  Not only does she wear things more than once, most of her clothes are a fraction of the cost of MM’s.
> I always thought there was some sort of unwritten rule that women in these very visible political roles (including First Ladies) should wear clothing that is not designer and is not jaw-dropping expensive.  Gowns and jewels are obviously a different story!  And secondarily, it is expected that they will clothing designed by people from their own country.
> 
> Or maybe these notions are old and outdated.
> 
> Kate wore a teal coat in the last week or 2 and I remember being surprised at how inexpensive it was because it looked so nice on her.  Her usual perfect fit!  As I recall, the cost was in the neighborhood of 300 pounds.
> 
> So, of course, MM loses out on both points - she spent a fortune on designer clothing, yet she managed to look a mess in everything she wore.  Wonder how much of it she will wear a second time!



Katherine is not in political role. The Crown is supposed to be above politics. 

There are no written rules for the BRF, expensive or cheap, commercially it matters more and it would look in poor taste not to wear visibly British designers/labels. Barbour, Gloverall, McQueen, Launer, Saville Row, Harris Tween, even high-street labels, doesn't matter so long as what they wear supports UK industry. 

Apart from bags and shoes, Diana only visibly started wearing notable French and Italian designers on public engagements after her divorce. 

Multiple choice question: MM got away with wearing whatever she liked because 
a) she didn't understand 
b) she didn't know 
c) she didn't care or 
d) she was going to ask for cash-back and sponsorship deals once worn
?


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Multiple choice question: MM got away with wearing whatever she liked because
> a) she didn't understand
> b) she didn't know
> c) she didn't care or
> d) she was going to ask for cash-back and sponsorship deals once worn
> ?


All of the above!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _The other intriguing factor behind the Queen's announcement is it shows the true extent of her modernisation during seven decades on the throne.
> 
> The woman who denied her own sister marital happiness, is now saying that being royal isn't simply about bloodlines or custom, it's about conduct and commitment._



For a royal reporter he got that truly wrong. It is not about conduct and commitment, but a perk that comes with marriage, and has nothing to do with royal bloodlines. It's just as much her husband's title like the Princess of Wales or Duchess of Cornwall.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For a royal reporter he got that truly wrong. It is not about conduct and commitment, but a perk that comes with marriage, and has nothing to do with royal bloodlines. It's just as much her husband's title like the Princess of Wales or Duchess of Cornwall.


It pretty much applies to any aspect of life. I find it very irritating when people marry or enter a new company, and expect the family they marry into or the company which hired them to totally transform to suit them, and then they complain on AITA about how ill-treated they are ...    One of my bosses once moaned: I hired him to solve problems, not create them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Katherine is not in political role. The Crown is supposed to be above politics.
> 
> There are no written rules for the BRF, expensive or cheap, commercially it matters more and it would look in poor taste not to wear visibly British designers/labels. Barbour, Gloverall, McQueen, Launer, Saville Row, Harris Tween, even high-street labels, doesn't matter so long as what they wear supports UK industry.
> 
> Apart from bags and shoes, Diana only visibly started wearing notable French and Italian designers on public engagements after her divorce.
> 
> Multiple choice question: MM got away with wearing whatever she liked because
> a) she didn't understand
> b) she didn't know
> c) she didn't care or
> d) she was going to ask for cash-back and sponsorship deals once worn
> ?


e) All of the above … X


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For a royal reporter he got that truly wrong. It is not about conduct and commitment, but a perk that comes with marriage, and has nothing to do with royal bloodlines. It's just as much her husband's title like the Princess of Wales or Duchess of Cornwall.


You may want to give Dan W a break, his admiration for Diana is likely affecting the way he perceives QE's announcement. Though, I believe he is right about the timing of such verdict being related to the Montecito's behavior, and the upcoming release of Hazz's book.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is embarrassing… 


_Spotify's massive deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry has now reportedly become a "regret." The company "very much" rues making and closing the contract following the couple's failure to launch.

There is little information as to why the couple, alongside their foundation, have yet to produce any significant audio series for Spotify. But, reports said that the podcast arm of the pair's production company, Archewell Audio appears to be experiencing "growing pains" these days.

In maintaining the narrative, the insider continued that Spotify even had to make its own move to get its money's worth. As alleged, they paid Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about $25 million for the deal.

The company reportedly had to hire producers to try and produce content under the said deal. "They are really struggling to make it work," causing the regret to arise.

It is noted, though, that Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…









						Meghan Markle Heartbreak: Spotify Allegedly 'Regrets' Closing Deal With Sussexes
					

Spotify has reportedly taken matters into their own hands regarding their deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry due to the lack of content.




					www.btimesonline.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This is embarrassing…
> View attachment 5319846
> 
> _Spotify's massive deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry has now reportedly become a "regret." The company "very much" rues making and closing the contract following the couple's failure to launch.
> 
> There is little information as to why the couple, alongside their foundation, have yet to produce any significant audio series for Spotify. But, reports said that the podcast arm of the pair's production company, Archewell Audio appears to be experiencing "growing pains" these days.
> 
> In maintaining the narrative, the insider continued that Spotify even had to make its own move to get its money's worth. As alleged, they paid Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about $25 million for the deal.
> 
> The company reportedly had to hire producers to try and produce content under the said deal. "They are really struggling to make it work," causing the regret to arise.
> 
> It is noted, though, that Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Heartbreak: Spotify Allegedly 'Regrets' Closing Deal With Sussexes
> 
> 
> Spotify has reportedly taken matters into their own hands regarding their deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry due to the lack of content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com


In other words, the Douchess would have a cryfest the likes of which would stun the world, and Spotify would rather not be dragged in the mud by her innuendoes and allegations and possible suicidal ideations. Could it be that some vapid supporter paid out so much cold hard cash that Spotify can't justify just writing it off? Oh, to be a fly on the wall at a meeting discussing this con job...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> A potential reason behind QE's verdict.
> 
> *DAN WOOTTON: The idea of Queen Camilla makes me deeply uneasy but I accept the Queen's verdict that royal status is earned through conduct and commitment to duty not a right – Harry and Meghan should take note*
> 
> _In a letter which she poignantly signed 'Your Servant', the Queen wrote: 'When, in the fullness of time, my son Charles becomes King, I know you will give him and his wife Camilla the same support that you have given me. And it is my sincere wish that, when that time comes, Camilla will be known as Queen Consort as she continues her own loyal service.'
> 
> The move, which simply confirms legal precedent, is highly controversial nonetheless…
> 
> The other intriguing factor behind the Queen's announcement is it shows the true extent of her modernisation during seven decades on the throne.
> 
> *The woman who denied her own sister marital happiness, is now saying that being royal isn't simply about bloodlines or custom, it's about conduct and commitment.*
> 
> Camilla will be Queen Consort on merit because she has been dutiful for many years. Prince Harry and Meghan are not considered working royals because they refused to be dutiful.
> 
> *And have no doubt that the scheming Sussexes in Montecito are a big factor behind the Queen's timing.*
> 
> As I have previously revealed for MailOnline, *royal courtiers* – especially those close to Prince Charles – *are gripped with fear about the publication of Harry's tell-all autobiography, which they expect to be particularly brutal towards Camilla*.
> 
> *By making this announcement now, it will make it easier for the Cornwalls to weather the likely storm heading in their direction by providing rock-solid security about Camilla's future role.*
> 
> Harry will likely feel personally betrayed and livid by the decision, given his entire mission now seems to be to destabilise and potentially even bring down the monarchy.
> 
> William, by contrast, who understandably has all his own complicated and deeply personal issues with Camilla, now accepts the happiness and stability of his father must be put first given the weight of the role he will likely take on one day as an old man.
> 
> So I will try to accept the Queen's desire and shake the uneasiness that I feel deep within me about this decision.
> 
> But Charles must do all he can to honour the memory of Diana whose unique place in royal history as the ultimate moderniser should never be forgotten, even when we're referring to the woman formerly known as The Rottweiler as Queen Camilla._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of Queen Camilla makes me deeply uneasy
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: On the day she marks an unprecedented 70 years on the throne, we're not talking about Her Majesty's historic achievement that will likely never be repeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


_*"The woman who denied her own sister marital happiness, is now saying that being royal isn't simply about bloodlines or custom, it's about conduct and commitment."*_

What a load of horse manure! It's been mentioned several times that HMTQ told Margaret that she would accept her marriage to divorced Group Captain Peter Townsend, but Margaret didn't want to be known as Mrs. Townsend nor did she want to lose the benefits associated with her position as a princess. At the time, she performed only easy, but very few royal duties and yet she enjoyed all the privileges her princess title afforded her particularly all the public accolades and reverence wherever she went.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> _*"The woman who denied her own sister marital happiness, is now saying that being royal isn't simply about bloodlines or custom, it's about conduct and commitment."*_
> 
> What a load of horse manure! It's been mentioned several times that HMTQ told Margaret that she would accept her marriage to divorced Group Captain Peter Townsend, but Margaret didn't want to be known as Mrs. Townsend nor did she want to lose the benefits associated with her position as a princess. At the time, she performed only easy, but very few royal duties and yet she enjoyed all the privileges her princess title afforded her particularly all the public accolades and reverence wherever she went.


Exactly. She valued being a royal princess more than marrying the man. Her choice…


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> Exactly. She valued being a royal princess more than marrying the man. Her choice…


Yup the original whinging number 2 -followed by Andrew then Harry


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is embarrassing…
> View attachment 5319846
> 
> _Spotify's massive deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry has now reportedly become a "regret." The company "very much" rues making and closing the contract following the couple's failure to launch.
> 
> There is little information as to why the couple, alongside their foundation, have yet to produce any significant audio series for Spotify. But, reports said that the podcast arm of the pair's production company, Archewell Audio appears to be experiencing "growing pains" these days.
> 
> In maintaining the narrative, the insider continued that Spotify even had to make its own move to get its money's worth. As alleged, they paid Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about $25 million for the deal.
> 
> The company reportedly had to hire producers to try and produce content under the said deal. "They are really struggling to make it work," causing the regret to arise.
> 
> It is noted, though, that Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Heartbreak: Spotify Allegedly 'Regrets' Closing Deal With Sussexes
> 
> 
> Spotify has reportedly taken matters into their own hands regarding their deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry due to the lack of content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com


In the real world you get fired if you don't do your job. I guess it's good to be high-profile and therefore viewed as untouchable.


----------



## Chanbal

Is Montecito trying to get rid of its most "notable' residents?  From the Montecito Journal: 










						Slice of Life - Montecito
					

The Broadway run of the show Waitress may have ended prematurely because of COVID, but the American Theatre Guild’s touring production at the Granada served up a highly entertaining show. With music and lyrics by Grammy winner Sara Bareilles, the production, based on a 2007 comedy-drama film of...




					www.montecitojournal.net


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> In the real world you get fired if you don't do your job. I guess it's good to be high-profile and therefore viewed as untouchable.


Down the road, when memory of this has faded, they will likely twist the narrative into one of difficult angsty choice between seizing the moment to spend more time with their baby and working hard to fulfill commercial obligations. Of course baby won that heartwrenching battle. Such noble sentiments befitting the champion of paid parental leave, you know. In actuality, they probably weighed their options and decided that spouting garbage at Butter Up was the easy option compared to producing podcasts.


----------



## Chanbal

And there is more: 

*"Meghan Markle does not like to spend her days with Prince Charles under one roof when in the United Kingdom. She only reportedly wants to be at Windsor Castle with Queen Elizabeth II.*

_An insider spoke with National Enquirer and revealed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex turned the 
Prince of Wales down following his invitation to stay with him when they return to the country. While a stay at Windsor would allow the Queen to spend time with her grandchildren from the former working royals, it is said to be an "emotional blackmail" from the Sussex Royals_."

_








						Meghan Markle Will Only Stay With Queen Elizabeth II And Not Prince Charles, Insider Claims
					

Prince Charles reportedly asked Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to stay with him upon return to the United Kingdom.




					www.btimesonline.com
				



_


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is embarrassing…
> View attachment 5319846
> 
> _Spotify's massive deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry has now reportedly become a "regret." The company "very much" rues making and closing the contract following the couple's failure to launch.
> 
> There is little information as to why the couple, alongside their foundation, have yet to produce any significant audio series for Spotify. But, reports said that the podcast arm of the pair's production company, Archewell Audio appears to be experiencing "growing pains" these days.
> 
> In maintaining the narrative, the insider continued that Spotify even had to make its own move to get its money's worth. As alleged, they paid Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about $25 million for the deal.
> 
> The company reportedly had to hire producers to try and produce content under the said deal. "They are really struggling to make it work," causing the regret to arise.
> 
> It is noted, though, that Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Heartbreak: Spotify Allegedly 'Regrets' Closing Deal With Sussexes
> 
> 
> Spotify has reportedly taken matters into their own hands regarding their deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry due to the lack of content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com


is this credible?  I don't see anything that quotes any person from Spotify


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> And there is more:
> 
> *"Meghan Markle does not like to spend her days with Prince Charles under one roof when in the United Kingdom. She only reportedly wants to be at Windsor Castle with Queen Elizabeth II.*
> 
> _An insider spoke with National Enquirer and revealed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex turned the
> Prince of Wales down following his invitation to stay with him when they return to the country. While a stay at Windsor would allow the Queen to spend time with her grandchildren from the former working royals, it is said to be an "emotional blackmail" from the Sussex Royals_."
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Will Only Stay With Queen Elizabeth II And Not Prince Charles, Insider Claims
> 
> 
> Prince Charles reportedly asked Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to stay with him upon return to the United Kingdom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Quelle surprise


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> is this credible?  I don't see anything that quotes any person from Spotify


I don't know. Though, knowing how prone to sue the couple is, I would think the author of the article has some support for the statement.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> _The company reportedly had to hire producers to try and produce content under the said deal. "They are really struggling to make it work," causing the regret to arise.
> 
> It is noted, though, that *Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. *As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…



I wonder how long until Spotify is forced to take legal action? I wonder how much Spotify paid them upfront and how much of that $25 million was deferred for a year or two or three down the road?    It would be humiliating for both sides to go the legal route so I'm sure H and MM will make some effort to show up and narrate something that has been written and produced by others.  Whether it's any good or successful is an entirely other matter.   They perhaps are coming to realize that they've bitten off more than they can chew and that producing a podcast is a full-time job requiring actual talent. Spotify will likely not make this mistake again.  Too bad their shareholders are going to pay for it.

Harry and MM should take note though that everyone in media everywhere will also be taking note of how this goes down, including Netflix.  They are unlikely to get any kind of new deal with anyone else if this truly goes south.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m wondering if Spotify had to leak something before Megan and Harry say they’re leaving because of Joe Rogan.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is embarrassing…
> View attachment 5319846
> 
> _*Spotify's massive deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry has now reportedly become a "regret." The company "very much" rues making and closing the contract following the couple's failure to launch.*
> 
> There is little information as to why the couple, alongside their foundation, have yet to produce any significant audio series for Spotify. But, reports said that the podcast arm of the pair's production company, Archewell Audio appears to be experiencing "growing pains" these days.
> 
> In maintaining the narrative, the insider continued that Spotify even had to make its own move to get its money's worth. As alleged, they paid Meghan Markle and Prince Harry about $25 million for the deal.
> 
> The company reportedly had to hire producers to try and produce content under the said deal. "They are really struggling to make it work," causing the regret to arise.
> 
> It is noted, though, that Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Heartbreak: Spotify Allegedly 'Regrets' Closing Deal With Sussexes
> 
> 
> Spotify has reportedly taken matters into their own hands regarding their deal with Meghan Markle and Prince Harry due to the lack of content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com



No sh*t Sherlock

I'm glad I don't have shares in that company


----------



## papertiger

I guess the good thing is no media company will ever work with them again (at least pay up front). 

I've actually never known media or music companies to pay up front so it just shows it all depends on how brazen you are and how much 'front' you have. 

Couple of con-artists basically.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I guess the good thing is no media company will ever work with them again (at least pay up front).
> 
> I've actually never known media or music companies to pay up front so it just shows it all depends on how brazen you are and how much 'front' you have.
> 
> Couple of con-artists basically.


she doesn't have much talent (z-list actress/social climber) he has none - just does what she tells him I think


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Exactly. She valued being a royal princess more than marrying the man. Her choice…


More recent information is that the glow was off that relationship, and Margaret didn’t really want to marry him, so TQ gave her an easy out with the decision.   I don’t think that Margaret was ever considered a hardworking royal. She certainly was nothing like Princess Anne. In fact, I think that Meghan thought her life woukd be more like Margaret’s and she would show up for a few events, swan around the rest of the time, have people defer to her title, party and travel.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I guess the good thing is no media company will ever work with them again (at least pay up front).
> 
> I've actually never known media or music companies to pay up front so it just shows it all depends on how brazen you are and how much 'front' you have.
> 
> Couple of con-artists basically.


If Spotify gave them the full amount, then corporate heads should roll for stupidity. At this point they are trying to save face, but somehow, I don’t think the Harkles are cooperating with them.  Someone feeling insulted?  Since the Harkle‘s specialty is shooting themselves in the foot, they may have outsmarted themselves.   Any corporate entity should take notice of their poor track record.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Katherine is not in political role. The Crown is supposed to be above politics.
> 
> There are no written rules for the BRF, expensive or cheap, commercially it matters more and it would look in poor taste not to wear visibly British designers/labels. Barbour, Gloverall, McQueen, Launer, Saville Row, Harris Tween, even high-street labels, doesn't matter so long as what they wear supports UK industry.
> 
> Apart from bags and shoes, Diana only visibly started wearing notable French and Italian designers on public engagements after her divorce.
> 
> Multiple choice question: MM got away with wearing whatever she liked because
> a) she didn't understand
> b) she didn't know
> c) she didn't care or
> d) she was going to ask for cash-back and sponsorship deals once worn
> ?


I'm going with e) C + D


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't have much talent (z-list actress/social climber) he has none - just does what she tells him I think


i have to give her credit for being a first class b*ll sh*tter   She managed to convince someone of her ability to create, write, and produce content. He is only good for the title and name recognition and I doubt that much was expected from him in the way of brains.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> And there is more:
> 
> *"Meghan Markle does not like to spend her days with Prince Charles under one roof when in the United Kingdom. She only reportedly wants to be at Windsor Castle with Queen Elizabeth II.*
> 
> _An insider spoke with *National Enquirer* and revealed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex turned the
> Prince of Wales down following his invitation to stay with him when they return to the country. While a stay at Windsor would allow the Queen to spend time with her grandchildren from the former working royals, it is said to be an "emotional blackmail" from the Sussex Royals_."
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Will Only Stay With Queen Elizabeth II And Not Prince Charles, Insider Claims
> 
> 
> Prince Charles reportedly asked Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to stay with him upon return to the United Kingdom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


National Enquirer! I'm still  at the thought of the National Enquirer seriously reporting the truth about anything specially when citing "an insider". I roll my eyes when reporters quote a palace source, a valuable source or a close friend who wishes to remain anonymous because in my mind's eye I see them pulling these willing contributors out of thin air to put whatever spin they choose on any given situation.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> i have to give her credit for being a first class b*ll sh*tter   She managed to convince someone of her ability to create, write, and produce content. He is only good for the title and name recognition and I doubt that much was expected from him in the way of brains.


I think she is only good for the name recognition she got from him - Duchess indeed


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like a big part of MeMore’s problem was that while there is a lot of money, jewelry, property, none of it would ever really be owned by her.  It’s all ultimately is owned by the family, not individuals who can sell it or do whatever they please with it.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers has been spot on in the royal drama since I joined this thread. So, if Piers is happy, I'm happy!   (pure joke)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> More recent information is that the glow was off that relationship, and Margaret didn’t really want to marry him, so TQ gave her an easy out with the decision.   I don’t think that Margaret was ever considered a hardworking royal. She certainly was nothing like Princess Anne. In fact, I think that Meghan thought her life woukd be more like Margaret’s and she would show up for a few events, swan around the rest of the time, have people defer to her title, party and travel.


Yes, Margaret was a party girl and jet setter.  Dappled in drugs, lived the high life with no responsibilities.  Plus, people had to curtsey to her. Hard to give up, I guess.

This isn't from what I've read, although I've done that, this is what I remember reading in Life and Look magazines at the time.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let the good times roll!
> 5 years ago?  Hmmm, no wonder Hazzi jumped ship.
> ETA: he knew his demanding selfish self would not be welcomed.  Cams is too smart for that nonsense.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown containing the Koh-i-Noor diamond to wear at Charles's coronation - and he won permission to call her 'Queen Camilla' in his vows YEARS ago*
> 
> *The Queen declared it was 'sincere wish' for Camilla to become Queen consort in statement on Saturday night*
> *Charles changed his coronation vows to include 'Queen Camilla' five years ago with mother's blessing*
> *She will have Queen Mother’s platinum and diamond crown placed on her head when Charles is made king*
> *Charles and Camilla said they  were 'touched and honoured' by Queen's gesture as she marks 70-year reign*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The insertion of his wife's title was included as part of a general reworking of plans for the Westminster Abbey ceremony up to five years ago, a senior palace source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This momentous gesture by the Queen feels like a visual exclamation point to her words of support for Camilla.

Raptor must have shrieked when this was revealed. She demanded but was not granted, a tiara SHE wanted. Contrast to Camilla, who it is reported has never asked for or expected anything to be given to her, and she gets offered a crown, one of THE most significant ones, the priceless crown with the Koh-i-Noor Diamond!

By the time Mr and Mrs Harry Windsor sell their smelly house there might not be any breakable items left for the movers to pack.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _It is noted, though, that Spotify will not take legal action against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. As of now, they are allegedly doing "everything in their power" to resolve the matter_…



Why though. You bet I'd not be giving out 25 millions as a gift because they are so cute or something.


----------



## Jayne1

Did Spotify really pay them upfront?  Hard to believe.  If so, someone needs to be fired, but no one ever is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Is Montecito trying to get rid of its most "notable' residents?  From the Montecito Journal:
> View attachment 5319971
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Slice of Life - Montecito
> 
> 
> The Broadway run of the show Waitress may have ended prematurely because of COVID, but the American Theatre Guild’s touring production at the Granada served up a highly entertaining show. With music and lyrics by Grammy winner Sara Bareilles, the production, based on a 2007 comedy-drama film of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net



So if Harry and Andrew are fired, will Bea and Eugenie step up? I wouldn't trust Eugenie that much TBH.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> And there is more:
> 
> *"Meghan Markle does not like to spend her days with Prince Charles under one roof when in the United Kingdom. She only reportedly wants to be at Windsor Castle with Queen Elizabeth II.*
> 
> _An insider spoke with National Enquirer and revealed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex turned the
> Prince of Wales down following his invitation to stay with him when they return to the country. While a stay at Windsor would allow the Queen to spend time with her grandchildren from the former working royals, it is said to be an "emotional blackmail" from the Sussex Royals_."
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Will Only Stay With Queen Elizabeth II And Not Prince Charles, Insider Claims
> 
> 
> Prince Charles reportedly asked Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to stay with him upon return to the United Kingdom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.btimesonline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Well, maybe the Brooksbanks let them stay in the guestroom.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> GEEEZUSSSS, if I had 500k to spend on clothing, I would look like a gazillion bucks!  And it would fit perfectly!



meh.........I'd still probably dress like I was on my way to the gym
BUT my bags and jewelry would be EPIC!


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> National Enquirer! I'm still  at the thought of the National Enquirer seriously reporting the truth about anything specially when citing "an insider". I roll my eyes when reporters quote a palace source, a valuable source or a close friend who wishes to remain anonymous because in my mind's eye I see them pulling these willing contributors out of thin air to put whatever spin they choose on any given situation.


I still remember their headline “Elvis’s ghost made me pregnant “ lol


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, Margaret was a party girl and jet setter.  Dappled in drugs, lived the high life with no responsibilities.  Plus, people had to curtsey to her. Hard to give up, I guess.
> 
> This isn't from what I've read, although I've done that, this is what I remember reading in Life and Look magazines at the time.


I met her once - very rude and arrogant

Met Camilla once - very down to earth friendly approachable engaging intelligent witty and funny


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> More recent information is that the glow was off that relationship, and Margaret didn’t really want to marry him, so TQ gave her an easy out with the decision.   I don’t think that Margaret was ever considered a hardworking royal. She certainly was nothing like Princess Anne. In fact, I think that Meghan thought her life woukd be more like Margaret’s and she would show up for a few events, swan around the rest of the time, have people defer to her title, party and travel.


It seems that a lot of royal engagements involve being face to face with children, the elderly and disabled - in other words, having to  show empathy to others. We all know how well the Harkle's visit to the school in Harlem went, so maybe it's best if MM is not doing those kinds of appearances. She certainly is no Diana.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m wondering if Spotify had to leak something before Megan and Harry say they’re leaving because of Joe Rogan.


If Spotify is leaking anything it is cash. I read that Rogan's contract is $100 mil.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, Margaret was a party girl and jet setter.  Dappled in drugs, lived the high life with no responsibilities.  Plus, people had to curtsey to her. Hard to give up, I guess.
> 
> This isn't from what I've read, although I've done that, this is what I remember reading in Life and Look magazines at the time.


She lived hard and consequently died relatively young. She is an anomaly in her family when it comes to longevity.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you missed this - the Earl of Snowden attended the Trinity Wharf event with Kate, Camilla and Charles. He arrived on his own bicycle, had no security, and left on his own bicycle. Imagine that - no security, no fanfare, wow.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this - the Earl of Snowden attended the Trinity Wharf event with Kate, Camilla and Charles. He arrived on his own bicycle, had no security, and left on his own bicycle. Imagine that - no security, no fanfare, wow.



Oh, no security, no fanfare… I'm sorry that is not royal by the standards of the Nefl*xes!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

He’s a good fit for that event, given his design career.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this - the Earl of Snowden attended the Trinity Wharf event with Kate, Camilla and Charles. He arrived on his own bicycle, had no security, and left on his own bicycle. Imagine that - no security, no fanfare, wow.



Despite being the Queen's nephew he seems pretty down to earth.


----------



## Katel

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like a big part of *MeMore’s* problem was that while there is a lot of money, jewelry, property, none of it would ever really be owned by her.  It’s all ultimately is owned by the family, not individuals who can sell it or do whatever they please with it.


MeMore


----------



## Chanbal

Do you think DM is helping Hazz write his memoir? 









						News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
					

All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Do you think DM is helping Hazz write his memoir?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Doubtful.  The piece makes Charles seem very sympathetic and Diana sound like a vengeful nutcase.  Calling Camilla to tell her she'd sent someone to kill her in the middle of the night and to look out the window??    Haz won't blame Saint Diana for anything.  It's only the BRF's fault.

"She loved her boys more than anyone else on earth — but she wanted them to love her better than anyone else, too. She wanted 100 per cent of them, in the same way that she had wanted 100 per cent of Charles, to the exclusion of all others.
Her love for them was almost obsessive, and it was possessive. One of her favourite phrases was: ‘Who loves you most?’"

That right there tells me no way in He11 would Diana and Meg have gotten along.


----------



## carmen56

When Charles becomes king, it's possible that the Cambridges will move into Windsor Castle.  I can hear Raptor's screams and the sound of plates and windows shattering from here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Doubtful.  The piece makes Charles seem very sympathetic and Diana sound like a vengeful nutcase.  Calling Camilla to tell her she'd sent someone to kill her in the middle of the night and to look out the window??    Haz won't blame Saint Diana for anything.  It's only the BRF's fault.
> 
> "She loved her boys more than anyone else on earth — but she wanted them to love her better than anyone else, too. She wanted 100 per cent of them, in the same way that she had wanted 100 per cent of Charles, to the exclusion of all others.
> Her love for them was almost obsessive, and it was possessive. One of her favourite phrases was: ‘Who loves you most?’"
> 
> That right there tells me no way in He11 would Diana and Meg have gotten along.



Imo Diana was a vengeful nutcase. The more stories we hear about her erratic and desperate behaviour tells me she was disturbed. Of course, Charles has his own issues, but Diana took it to a new level. She must have been exhausting to be around.  All of this does explain Hazzie’s erratic behaviour. Is it nature or nurture?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo Diana was a vengeful nutcase. The more stories we hear about her erratic and desperate behaviour tells me she was disturbed. Of course, Charles has his own issues, but Diana took it to a new level. She must have been exhausting to be around.


I always knew that.  I was a little older than her and thought she was so destructive. My opinion was not a popular one, especially with women the same age as Diana who projected their feelings onto her and felt a kinship.


----------



## Hermes Zen

carmen56 said:


> When Charles becomes king, it's possible that the Cambridges will move into Windsor Castle.  I can hear Raptor's screams and the sound of plates and windows shattering from here!


I can't wait to see this happen!  BUT, where will H&M and family stay when they come to visit?    Not at Windsor Castle?  You know Megs will expect it!  Maybe theres room to bunk with the staff.  OH NO, wouldn't want to put the staff through that!


----------



## Lodpah

I just had to post this again. YMMV.


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Zen said:


> I can't wait to see this happen!  BUT, where will H&M and family stay when they come to visit?    Not at Windsor Castle?  You know Megs will expect it!  Maybe theres room to bunk with the staff.  OH NO, wouldn't want to put the staff through that!


The Tower of London would be perfect for them, so secure.


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> The Tower of London would be perfect for them, so secure.


I had thought that too but to far for the Harkles from the 'IN People"!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo Diana was a vengeful nutcase. The more stories we hear about her erratic and desperate behaviour tells me she was disturbed. Of course, Charles has his own issues, but Diana took it to a new level. She must have been exhausting to be around.  All of this does explain Hazzie’s erratic behaviour. Is it nature or nurture?





Jayne1 said:


> *I always knew that*.  I was a little older than her and thought she was so destructive. My opinion was not a popular one, especially with women the same age as Diana who projected their feelings onto her and felt a kinship.


Same here, I saw through D almost from the beginning. Coworkers and friends carried on ad nauseam about her, but I said very little, because no one would've believed me. Funny thing though, I had worn my hair short and brushed back long before the Di cut became popular, but no one ever noticed until one day a coworker asked me if I had my hair done à la Di and I felt like replying, "She copied me!" Also, it seemed that any female named Diana, was automatically called Lady Di and one actually wore the Di hairstyle for some time.
Yes, Diana was well loved and long after her funeral some people still couldn't talk about her without tearing up. 
Finally, I agree with those who see some of the same behaviours (NPD) between Diana and both H and M.


----------



## mellibelly

His breakdown of the chicken coop “we got married 3 days before the wedding” lie is hilarious


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> I always knew that.  I was a little older than her and thought she was so destructive. My opinion was not a popular one, especially with women the same age as Diana who projected their feelings onto her and felt a kinship.


I think there were quite a few of us who could see through Diana’s public image - to be honest there is a lot of similarity with Megan and that may have attracted Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Do you think DM is helping Hazz write his memoir?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Good thing William apparently had a very different childhood...can you imagine what would have happened to him if he had actually been there all along with the added burden of being his mother's confidant?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let the good times roll!
> 5 years ago?  Hmmm, no wonder Hazzi jumped ship.
> ETA: he knew his demanding selfish self would not be welcomed.  Cams is too smart for that nonsense.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown containing the Koh-i-Noor diamond to wear at Charles's coronation - and he won permission to call her 'Queen Camilla' in his vows YEARS ago*
> 
> *The Queen declared it was 'sincere wish' for Camilla to become Queen consort in statement on Saturday night*
> *Charles changed his coronation vows to include 'Queen Camilla' five years ago with mother's blessing*
> *She will have Queen Mother’s platinum and diamond crown placed on her head when Charles is made king*
> *Charles and Camilla said they  were 'touched and honoured' by Queen's gesture as she marks 70-year reign*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The insertion of his wife's title was included as part of a general reworking of plans for the Westminster Abbey ceremony up to five years ago, a senior palace source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She'll be given the tiara - _to wear_ at Charles' coronation, not just given it.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this - the Earl of Snowden attended the Trinity Wharf event with Kate, Camilla and Charles. He arrived on his own bicycle, had no security, and left on his own bicycle. Imagine that - no security, no fanfare, wow.




and probably went back to work like anyone else would, good for him.

I can just see H&M on a tandem singing 'Daisy, Daisy' - now there would be a perfect photo op


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Do you think DM is helping Hazz write his memoir?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Someone haz to


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> His breakdown of the chicken coop “we got married 3 days before the wedding” lie is hilarious




"He chooses to engage with a chicken"


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Do you think DM is helping Hazz write his memoir?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> News Headlines | Today's UK & World News | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> All the latest breaking UK and world news with in-depth comment and analysis, pictures and videos from MailOnline and the Daily Mail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


While a lot of what she writes may be true, Penny Junor has always been on "Team Charles". It's easy to trash someone who is dead.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> I just had to post this again. YMMV.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5320662


My gosh they’ve both aged like salad.


I don’t really have much to say about Margaret or Diana besides musing that it’s funny we’ve gone from royals being unable or reluctant to marry a divorcee or even a non-virgin at the risk of losing their title…
To number 6 throwing a lavish state wedding with a divorced con artist… sorry I mean ‘actress’…. Sorry I mean A list actor 

oh and he’s using his titles even when he’s no longer working too…

Progress I guess?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> While a lot of what she writes may be true, Penny Junor has always been on "Team Charles". *It's easy to trash someone who is dead.*



Exactly. Charles has had the benefit of 25+ years of public relations efforts devoted to rehabilitating his reputation and painting a nicer history for him. I can tell from what I read in this thread how well the campaign has worked. Those of us who followed the disaster that was Charles and Diana’s marriage back at the time know there were no hidden secrets. The tabloid press never held back like they do today. They reported EVERYTHING, no matter how embarrassing. The affairs on both sides were widely documented.

So when someone writes a book many years after the fact about crazy things Diana supposedly said or did that weren’t known about before, particularly things like phone calls that the author could not possibly have been privy to, I’m calling BS. These inflammatory books sell very well and they don’t have to contain truth. Because dead people cannot sue for defamation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> While a lot of what she writes may be true, Penny Junor has always been on "Team Charles". It's easy to trash someone who is dead.



Absolutely agree.  No one really wants to speak ill of the dead.
Here is what Paul Burrell wrote in his 2003 book about Diana and her brother:




__





						'I pray you get treatment'
					

Earl Spencer accused Princess Diana of being mentally ill, the latest letters published by former royal butler Paul Burrell reveal today.




					www.standard.co.uk
				






Spoiler: Full article



*'I pray you get treatment'*
21 October 2003
E
arl Spencer accused Princess Diana of being mentally ill, the latest letters published by former royal butler Paul Burrell reveal today.
Burrell's book, A Royal Duty, serialised in the Daily Mirror, tells how Diana's relationship with her brother was distant and cold. *Rebecca Smith *and *Patrick Sawer *report on the latest insights into the Princess's life.

*The 'cruel' letter *

As Earl Spencer gave his elegant funeral oration praising Diana at Westminster Abbey, Paul Burrell recalled a hurtful letter he had sent the Princess a year earlier.

Diana's brother had written to her in April 1996 saying that after years of neglect on both sides their relationship was the weakest he had with any of his sisters, and that he had become a "peripheral part" of her life.

Worse, Spencer accused Diana of being a "fickle friend" who was manipulative and deceitful.

Diana read the letter to Burrell. It said: "I fear for you. I know how manipulation and deceit are parts of the illness . . . I pray that you are getting appropriate and sympathetic treatment for your mental problems."

It was a far cry from his words at the Abbey that "Diana remained throughout a very insecure person - most childlike in her desires to do good for others so she could release herself from deep feelings of unworthiness of which her eating disorders were merely a symptom."

The Earl had refused her request to live at the Spencer family home at Althorp, Northamptonshire, because of the police and press presence that would follow.

Burrell said that letter drove the princess to tears, as did his request for the return of the Spencer tiara she wore on her wedding day. He accuses Spencer of hypocrisy for refusing her request to live at Althorp but accepting her body in death.

*The private funeral *

After the funeral Burrell sat awkwardly between the princess's mother Frances Shand Kydd and Prince Charles at Althorp.

The Earl was called out of the room by a butler and returned after five minutes to announce: "Diana is home."

After the private 30-minute ceremony, the details of which Burrell does not disclose, he picked up a handful of earth and threw it down onto the gold plate of the coffin, which read Diana - Princess of Wales 1961-1997.

Burrell then stood up and said aloud: "Goodbye, Your Royal Highness" - a title Diana was stripped of when she was divorced from Charles.

In the drawing room afterwards Earl Spencer switched on the TV, showing highlights of the funeral. The room fell silent as it began re-playing his speech. Burrell writes: "I have never been caught in such an awkward moment. But Prince Charles was clearly not standing for a repeat performance of the humiliation. He put down his cup and said to WIlliam and Harry: "I think it's about time we were leaving."

*Camilla *

Diana grew increasingly suspicious that Charles was regularly seeing Camilla Parker Bowles.

Burrell had already been forced to abandon his meticulous diary of who was expected at Highgrove after Prince Charles confronted him over how the Princess knew who had been there in her absence.

Diana would apparently sneak a look at the diary and was able to discover who had been, or was due, for lunch or dinner.

By late 1989 and into 1990 the truce was failing and when Charles and Diana were both at Highgrove and once the boys were asleep, staff would hear raised voices and doors slamming.

"I walked into the sitting room one Saturday evening and the card table I had carefully set for dinner for two was in chaos. Glasses were overturned and broken, herb salt in a dish had been scattered and the white linen tablecloth was soaked with spilled water," Burrell writes.

Charles would frequently give instructions for dinner to be served early, saying he would retire afterwards. Dinner would be rushed and a car would be heard leaving the drive, returning only in the early hours.

During a visit to police officers stationed on the gate at Highgrove, they revealed that on these evening drives Charles would usually do a 22-mile round trip, 11 miles there and 11 miles

*James Hewitt *

In the summer of 1989 Diana went into Burrell's pantry and said: "I want to ask you something, Paul. I would like you to run an errand for me. I don't want ... anyone else to know about it."

He was to go to Kemble railway station and pick up James Hewitt. Burrell was determined not to let her down - saying he knew this "special friend" brought her excitement and happiness.

Burrell writes that over the years arranging secret meeting for male guests became the norm.

The princess was waiting for them when they arrived at Highgrove and thanked Burrell, who said simply: "Just call me when you need me again Your Royal Highness," before returning to

*Tiggy *

Diana was furious when Charles hired Tiggy Legge-Bourke as nanny to William and Harry as she was immediately dubbed a "surrogate mother". Diana regarded Tiggy as a threat.

Buoyed by her triumphant interview on Panorama, in which she said she wanted to be "the queen of people's hearts", she felt she could take on anyone - and Tiggy was next.

Diana came face to face with her adversary at the Christmas lunch for the staff.

She marched straight up to Tiggy, asked how she was and said: "So sorry to hear about the baby." Tiggy fled the room in tears and Diana was overjoyed. The barbed greeting sent shockwaves through the royal household, with Charles livid and the Queen "aghast."

Tiggy's lawyers decried the "malicious lies" circulating and a "discreet" investigation was launched by the Queen's private secretary Sir Robert Fellowes.

Sir Robert telephoned Diana, who told him that Tiggy was having an affair with Charles and had even undergone an abortion.

Diana told Burrell after the phone call: "There, now it's all official. Robert has promised to investigate the allegations."

But Sir Robert concluded the allegations were false and wrote to Diana: "Her relationship with the Prince of Wales has never been anything but a professional one. On the date of the supposed abortion she was at Highgrove with William and Harry. It is in your own best interests that you withdraw these allegations."

When the findings were delivered to Diana she simply exclaimed: "Typical."

*Diana's engagement ring *

The Queen chose Diana's engagement ring from a selection presented by crown jeweller David Thomas.

Charles then gave his opinion and finally Lady Diana gave hers. Diana accepted what had been decided for fear of appearing rude and ungrateful.

She later told Burrell: "I would never have chosen something quite so gaudy. If I had the chance again it would be more elegant and simple."



Another article about this book:




__





						‘LOVING’ BROTHER TRASHED PRINCESS: EARL’S POISON PEN LETTER TO DI A YEAR BEFORE HIS TWO-FACED EULOGYCAME
					

The blowhard brother of the late Princess Diana – who lovingly eulogized his sister as a saint in death – cruelly accused her of being mentally ill in a poison-pen letter written only a…




					nypost.com
				




Apparently, he sued and won. This reminds me of the mess that was Diana and Charles. Daily, there was a _new _report. All of it salacious and intrusive. Most of us thought it would stop with the divorce, but she continued to call the paps. Ugh.









						Princess Diana's Brother Charles Spencer Claims Legal Victory over Lie That He 'Deprived Diana of a Home'
					

'It was wrong to suggest [Earl Spencer] had refused to help his sister or had failed to protect her,' The Times newspaper printed in its 'Corrections and Clarifications' column on Thursday




					people.com


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> My gosh they’ve both aged like salad.


Too funny!


----------



## charlottawill

carmen56 said:


> When Charles becomes king, it's possible that the Cambridges will move into Windsor Castle.  I can hear Raptor's screams and the sound of plates and windows shattering from here!


Well with the way things are going she may be TFW* by then. One can only hope.

*The Former Wife


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good thing William apparently had a very different childhood...can you imagine what would have happened to him if he had actually been there all along with the added burden of being his mother's confidant?


Lots of people have a rough childhood for a multitude of reasons yet rise above it and become successful adults. Granted, Harry suffered a traumatic loss of his mother at a young age, but he has had everything handed to him and could have sought help to deal with his grief once he became an adult. I think he enjoys wallowing and she encourages him.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good thing William apparently had a very different childhood...can you imagine what would have happened to him if he had actually been there all along with the added burden of being his mother's confidant?


I think he unfortunately was as well.  I'd read before Diana would go to William for comfort.  Sounds like such a toxic environment for children.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Lots of people have a rough childhood for a multitude of reasons yet rise above it and become successful adults. Granted, Harry suffered a traumatic loss of his mother at a young age, but he has had everything handed to him and could have sought help to deal with his grief once he became an adult. I think he enjoys wallowing and she encourages him.


agree totally....yes, the loss of his mother and the public spectacle around it would have been traumatic but he had so many advantages
And I'd like to add that by all accounts, Charles was quite good with them after Diana passed.....so it's not like they were passed to a wicked stepmother or anything like that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I think he unfortunately was as well.  I'd read before Diana would go to William for comfort.  Sounds like such a toxic environment for children.



I was being sarcastic  Because we all know William went through everything Harry went through and more but managed to grow into a likeable and useful member of society.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> And I'd like to add that by all accounts, Charles was quite good with them after Diana passed.....so it's not like they were passed to a wicked stepmother or anything like that



They have even both publicly said Camilla is far from the wicked stepmother stereotype.


----------



## gracekelly

Even adding a few grains of salt to PJ’s story, the essentials are there to see that history is repeating itself with Harry. He is exhibiting the same erratic behaviors and his choice of a woman who mirrors many of the same controlling behaviors of his mother is troubling. I feel sorry for these children.   We may joke about the broken crockery, but I am thinking there is something to it. I don’t think their home life is very calm. It’s possible that Harry is doing more dish breaking than Meghan. Lots of screaming and shouting. No wonder Harry feels the need to “work” on himself everyday.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They have even both publicly said Camilla is far from the wicked stepmother stereotype.


She projects a calm and warm demeanor coupled with a strong character.. No wonder. Charles  is happy with her.

@papertiger  Glad you mention the “wear” and not “given” regarding the Coronation crown. The majority of people think she is going to take it home and keep it in the closet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

These precious Montecito vignettes 

_“I can understand them locking down during the pandemic, as many people have, to keep their kids safe but I think as we come out of this crisis we’ll be seeing more of them in the community,” says former Royal correspondent Richard Mineards, who lives near the couple in Montecito. “Harry’s been out on his bicycle and walking his adopted Labrador on Miramar Beach and she’s been out shopping in both the upper village and lower village and they seem to be very, very happy as far as I can see.”_








						Keeping up with the Sussexes: What’s next for Prince Harry and Meghan?
					

It’s been eighteen months since Harry and Meghan upped sticks and relocated to the States. Martha Hayes checks in on Montecito’s most famous couple




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I think he unfortunately was as well.  I'd read before Diana would go to William for comfort.  *Sounds like such a toxic environment for children*.


Yes, it's sad that William as her confidant had to provide emotional support for an adult when it should've have been the reverse and probably forced him to mature early. If it's true that Diana needed the boys' frequent reassurances they loved her the most above everybody, having to choose one parent over the other could've been traumatic for both. It certainly doesn't sound like a happy and normal childhood for anyone.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was being sarcastic  Because we all know William went through everything Harry went through and more but managed to grow into a likeable and useful member of society.


Oh, sorry.  Haven't had my coffee yet!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> While a lot of what she writes may be true, Penny Junor has always been on "Team Charles". It's easy to trash someone who is dead.



If not By Appointment, it's obviously 'with approval'. 

It's a pre-emptive "recollections may vary" strike to knock the novelty value of Haz-bin Loudin 'memoirs'


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> These precious Montecito vignettes
> 
> _“I can understand them locking down during the pandemic, as many people have, to keep their kids safe but I think as we come out of this crisis we’ll be seeing more of them in the community,” says former Royal correspondent Richard Mineards, who lives near the couple in Montecito. “Harry’s been out on his bicycle and walking his adopted Labrador on Miramar Beach and she’s been out shopping in both the upper village and lower village and they seem to be very, very happy as far as I can see.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keeping up with the Sussexes: What’s next for Prince Harry and Meghan?
> 
> 
> It’s been eighteen months since Harry and Meghan upped sticks and relocated to the States. Martha Hayes checks in on Montecito’s most famous couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


A paid for article


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> While a lot of what she writes may be true, Penny Junor has always been on "Team Charles". It's easy to trash someone who is dead.


True about trashing  the dead, but also a reminder that a woman with major issues  could have become Q of E so be happy that Camilla is a normal person.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, sorry.  Haven't had my coffee yet!


Here you go!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> If not By Appointment, it's obviously 'with approval'.
> 
> It's a pre-emptive "recollections may vary" strike to knock the novelty value of Haz-bin Loudin 'memoirs'


“Haz-bin-Loudin” is top drawer papertiger!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> These precious Montecito vignettes
> 
> _“I can understand them locking down during the pandemic, as many people have, to keep their kids safe but I think as we come out of this crisis we’ll be seeing more of them in the community,” says former Royal correspondent Richard Mineards, who lives near the couple in Montecito. “Harry’s been out on his bicycle and walking his adopted Labrador on Miramar Beach and she’s been out shopping in both the upper village and lower village and they seem to be very, very happy as far as I can see.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keeping up with the Sussexes: What’s next for Prince Harry and Meghan?
> 
> 
> It’s been eighteen months since Harry and Meghan upped sticks and relocated to the States. Martha Hayes checks in on Montecito’s most famous couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


 What a pathetic, puff piece.

Talking about why Raptor has been out of sight recently, Neil Sean in a recent video said the plan is to have Raptor become more of an enigma as Greta Garbo was in her day, then have her make big appearances since her value is in what she wears etc. Made me gag.

One such event might be upcoming? In a prior video he said Netflix wants them on the red carpet at the Academy Awards to “merch” them. Seems like that would be Netflix getting pennies back on the megabucks thrown away on this duo.


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> What a pathetic, puff piece.
> 
> Talking about why Raptor has been out of sight recently, Neil Sean in a recent video said the plan is to have Raptor become more of an enigma as Greta Garbo was in her day, then have her make big appearances since her value is in what she wears etc. Made me gag.
> 
> One such event might be upcoming? In a prior video he said *Netflix wants them on the red carpet at the Academy Awards* to “merch” them. Seems like that would be Netflix getting pennies back on the megabucks thrown away on this duo.



I'm ok with this - we can see what hot mess of a dress she chooses


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> What a pathetic, puff piece.
> 
> Talking about why Raptor has been out of sight recently, Neil Sean in a recent video said the plan is to have Raptor become more of an enigma as Greta Garbo was in her day, then have her make big appearances since her value is in what she wears etc. Made me gag.
> 
> One such event might be upcoming? In a prior video he said Netflix wants them on the red carpet at the Academy Awards to “merch” them. Seems like that would be Netflix getting pennies back on the megabucks thrown away on this duo.


I believe Oscar viewership is waaaaay down.  I certainly haven't watched for several years, when once upon a time it was a must for me, especially the red carpet.  The mere mention of them being there will likely turn more people off, not draw them in, IMO.
Plus, I think we are way past the point of her being an enigma.  We even know she likes to pee in the woods!


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> Same here, I saw through D almost from the beginning. Coworkers and friends carried on ad nauseam about her, but I said very little, because no one would've believed me. Funny thing though, I had worn my hair short and brushed back long before the Di cut became popular, but no one ever noticed until one day a coworker asked me if I had my hair done à la Di and I felt like replying, "She copied me!" Also, it seemed that any female named Diana, was automatically called Lady Di and one actually wore the Di hairstyle for some time.
> Yes, Diana was well loved and long after her funeral some people still couldn't talk about her without tearing up.
> Finally, I agree with those who see some of the same behaviours (NPD) between Diana and both H and M.



Remember the Hamill Wedge?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> True about trashing  the dead, but also a reminder that a woman with major issues  could have become Q of E so be happy that Camilla is a normal person.



Yes, but let's keep in mind that Diana was not the only woman who was involved with Charles who went off the deep end. Poor Dale Tryon (aka Kanga) is the forgotten lover who Charles kept along with Camilla.

The two mistresses had a lot in common. Both Camilla and Kanga chose Charles to be the godfather to the sons they had with their husbands. Both women named those sons after Charles, although Camilla used "Charles" as her son's middle name. And both despised each other.

Post-affair with Charles, Kanga spiraled into a mental crisis. She was a cancer survivor who had an addiction to painkillers. At one point she fell from a window at the rehab clinic and everyone assumed she jumped, although she claimed she was pushed. Her behavior became erratic. She told friends she was convinced someone was trying to kill her. She sadly still tried to contact Charles up until the end and was seen following him in her wheelchair at a polo match in 1997. Kanga came to a tragic end only a few months after Diana's death when she died of sepsis. These days all mention of Kanga has pretty much been scrubbed away in an attempt to clean up Charles' reputation to prepare him to eventually take the throne. For the last 25 years we have constantly been barraged with a fairytale story that Charles and Camilla were star-crossed lovers who were always meant to be together.

So are we to take from Kanga's tale that Charles is attracted to mentally-unbalanced women? Or, is being emotionally involved with Charles enough to drive a woman nuts? I'd vote for the 2nd choice, but really neither one looks good for a future king.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Remember the Hamill Wedge?


OMG, I'm getting too old for this, I had to look it up to remember, and yes, everybody and their dogs and cats had to have it. Aren't fads wonderful?! 
The Beatles?!


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Remember the Hamill Wedge?


Years after, Dorothy Hamill married an Orthopedist and was a neighbor of my parents.  My sister baby sat her daughter and I thought that was the coolest thing ever!


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> OMG, I'm getting too old for this, I had to look it up to remember, and yes, everybody and their dogs and cats had to have it. Aren't fads wonderful?!
> The Beatles?!


Thank God for the Beatles!
My mother had me in Shirley Temple curls in the 3rd grade and I freaking hated it. She steadfastly refused to let me cut my hair so I hacked at it myself. My dad bought me a pair of Beatle boots and I wore them until I couldn't shove my feet into them any more


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Remember the Hamill Wedge?



Remember it? I had one, baby!


----------



## poopsie

So how come the Meggsy Messy Bun hasn't taken off?


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> Even adding a few grains of salt to PJ’s story, the essentials are there to see that history is repeating itself with Harry. He is exhibiting the same erratic behaviors and his choice of a woman who mirrors many of the same controlling behaviors of his mother is troubling. I feel sorry for these children.   We may joke about the broken crockery, but I am thinking there is something to it. I don’t think their home life is very calm. It’s possible that Harry is doing more dish breaking than Meghan. Lots of screaming and shouting. No wonder Harry feels the need to “work” on himself everyday.


I hope they have a safe/panic room at Monteshito where they can throw and scream to their hearts content!


----------



## Hermes Zen

poopsie said:


> Thank God for the Beatles!
> My mother had me in Shirley Temple curls in the 3rd grade and I freaking hated it. She steadfastly refused to let me cut my hair so I hacked at it myself. My dad bought me a pair of Beatle boots and I wore them until I couldn't shove my feet into them any more
> View attachment 5321313


You are so cute!  My mother also did the Shirley Templet curls and the last time was for a family wedding when I was 12!  Now that I'm typing this I cringe!!  Waaay to old for those curls!


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Thank God for the Beatles!
> My mother had me in Shirley Temple curls in the 3rd grade and I freaking hated it. She steadfastly refused to let me cut my hair so I hacked at it myself. My dad bought me a pair of Beatle boots and I wore them until I couldn't shove my feet into them any more
> View attachment 5321313


So cute!


----------



## poopsie

Hermes Zen said:


> You are so cute!  My mother also did the Shirley Templet curls and the last time was for a family wedding when I was 12!  Now that I'm typing this I cringe!!  Waaay to old for those curls!


IKR!
I always cringe when I hear people say how much fun dressing up little girls is


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let the good times roll!
> 5 years ago?  Hmmm, no wonder Hazzi jumped ship.
> ETA: he knew his demanding selfish self would not be welcomed.  Cams is too smart for that nonsense.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown containing the Koh-i-Noor diamond to wear at Charles's coronation - and he won permission to call her 'Queen Camilla' in his vows YEARS ago*
> 
> *The Queen declared it was 'sincere wish' for Camilla to become Queen consort in statement on Saturday night*
> *Charles changed his coronation vows to include 'Queen Camilla' five years ago with mother's blessing*
> *She will have Queen Mother’s platinum and diamond crown placed on her head when Charles is made king*
> *Charles and Camilla said they  were 'touched and honoured' by Queen's gesture as she marks 70-year reign*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camilla is to be given the Queen Mother's priceless 1937 crown
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The insertion of his wife's title was included as part of a general reworking of plans for the Westminster Abbey ceremony up to five years ago, a senior palace source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


WHOA .. the *Koh-i-Noor* Diamond?!?! .. it's spectacular (you learn about the Koh-i-Noor when taking the GIA Diamonds classes)!!!  HA - Megalomaniac's "blood diamonds" from the murderous Saudi Prince (Mohammed bin Salman) don't even come close!!!


----------



## Hermes Zen

poopsie said:


> IKR!
> I always cringe when I hear people say how much fun dressing up little girls is


Right!  I think it is okay on two year old.  I have a birthday photo where I kinda looked like Shirley Temple-ish. BUT the wedding photo Luckily the curls didn't stay up the whole day.  My hair was long and heavy and the humidity in Asia pulled the curls down. Thank goodness!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> WHOA .. the *Koh-i-Noor* Diamond?!?! .. it's spectacular (you learn about the Koh-i-Noor when taking the GIA Diamonds classes)!!!  HA - Megalomaniac's "blood diamonds" from the murderous Saudi Prince (Mohammed bin Salman) don't even come close!!!



No kidding! That beauty would stay in my jewellery closet for the duration of my reign


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I think he unfortunately was as well.  I'd read before Diana would go to William for comfort.  Sounds like such a toxic environment for children.


There's the oft repeated anecdote of William passing tissues under the bathroom door to his crying mother, but we don't know if it really happened.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They have even both publicly said Camilla is far from the wicked stepmother stereotype.


So the question is, will Harry throw her under the bus for big bucks?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

charlottawill said:


> So the question is, will Harry throw her under the bus for big bucks?


From what we have seen so far, it seems like a given.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I believe Oscar viewership is waaaaay down.  I certainly haven't watched for several years, when once upon a time it was a must for me, especially the red carpet.  The mere mention of them being there will likely turn more people off, not draw them in, IMO.
> Plus, I think we are way past the point of her being an enigma.  We even know she likes to pee in the woods!


Oscar ratings get worse every year. Not many people care about the actual ceremony, the pre-show events are the draw.


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> Remember the Hamill Wedge?


I attempted that when I was sixteen. It wasn't pretty.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Oscar ratings get worse every year. Not many people care about the actual ceremony, the pre-show events are the draw.


part of it is Covid affecting the ceremonies and maybe also that the studio pics are getting less representation than Netflix


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Oscar ratings get worse every year. Not many people care about the actual ceremony, the pre-show events are the draw.



Even those pre-shows are heavily scripted and staged now. Back in the day, those ‘conversations’ were seemed spontaneous and fun - or maybe the acting was better


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> So the question is, will Harry throw her under the bus for big bucks?


After hearing about the Koh-i-Noor Diamond, the Duchess of Envy and Jealousy might fabricate a few nasty stories about Camilla, that she will claim come from 'anonymous palace sources' and will order H to include in the book.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Even those pre-shows are heavily scripted and staged now. Back in the day, those ‘conversations’ were seemed spontaneous and fun - or maybe the acting was better


do you miss joan rivers?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> So the question is, will Harry throw her under the bus for big bucks?


No question.  I'm sure he'll throw anyone and everyone under the bus under the big umbrella of "The Big Bad BRF".


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Oscar ratings get worse every year. Not many people care about the actual ceremony, the pre-show events are the draw.


I stopped watching because I personally don't care to hear what actors' political opinions are, nor did I care for all their constant preaching.  Thank your agent, the studio, your parents and God, then get TF off the stage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> No question.  I'm sure he'll throw anyone and everyone under the bus under the big umbrella of "The Big Bad BRF".



New book idea:  “Under The Bus” by Seymour Butz
[can’t resist the 6th grade humor]


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> do you miss joan rivers?


You just KNOW what Joan would have to say about MM and her fashion sense.


----------



## rcy

sdkitty said:


> do you miss joan rivers?



i miss not just joan rivers but also all the pure indulgence of the red carpet. i WANT to know what they're wearing and their jewelry... that is why i watch the red carpet... not for some random actor's political stance or cause of the day.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> You just KNOW what Joan would have to say about MM and her fashion sense.


She'd probably call her the Duchess of Schmatta.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> do you miss joan rivers?


Her red carpet coverage and after shows were so fun!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> So how come the Meggsy Messy Bun hasn't taken off?


I'd rather look like Gladys Ormphby with a bun and hairnet than M with her low bun and ugly tendrils. Besides, it looks like Gladys has more fashion sense than M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> No kidding! That beauty would stay in my *jewellery closet* for the duration of my reign
> 
> View attachment 5321427



LOL good luck with that because I'm sure it will be returned to the triple or quadruple locked vault immediately after the coronation.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'd rather look like Gladys Ormphby with a bun and hairnet than M with her low bun and ugly tendrils. Besides, it looks like Gladys has more fashion sense than M.
> View attachment 5321671


"The Harkles, 2050, London, awaiting the coronation parade of King William and Queen Catherine".


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> So how come the Meggsy Messy Bun hasn't taken off?



Could it be because it adds to her sloppy demeanor? Messy buns on others can look very good, but on Meghan? I hate the tendrils. Reminds me of the 70's hairstyle with smock tops and Earth shoes. Ugh. She has the Midas touch in reverse! Everything she touches gets ruined! She can make a $10,000 dress look like it came from a clearance bin at the dollar store. Her hair could great, but like with everything else, she looks like a dork in a style that would look nice on somebody else.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> These precious Montecito vignettes
> 
> _“I can understand them locking down during the pandemic, as many people have, to keep their kids safe but I think as we come out of this crisis we’ll be seeing more of them in the community,” says former Royal correspondent Richard Mineards, who lives near the couple in Montecito. “Harry’s been out on his bicycle and walking his adopted Labrador on Miramar Beach and she’s been out shopping in both the upper village and lower village and they seem to be very, very happy as far as I can see.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keeping up with the Sussexes: What’s next for Prince Harry and Meghan?
> 
> 
> It’s been eighteen months since Harry and Meghan upped sticks and relocated to the States. Martha Hayes checks in on Montecito’s most famous couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk


The above article was likely released by the Netflixes' PR, it sounds like paid publicity for them. Very helpful if they are trying to sell  “_The Chateau of Riven Rock_” aka as the 16- (or 19) toilet mansion.
The rumor is that they are planning to relocate… 

_The new mansion in Montecito is "not working out" for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. This comes as the royal-born Prince reportedly wants to relocate to a much smaller property.

Life & Style covered the latest allegation, which emerged from an unnamed source. As stated, *the Duke of Sussex prefers to have "less financial responsibilities" these days, causing them to put their home back on the market.

But, the Duchess of Sussex is allegedly not on the same page with her husband. She does not want to "downgrade,"* unlike the youngest Wales prince…_




			https://www.btimesonline.com/articles/153575/20220206/prince-harry-reportedly-prefers-less-financial-responsibilities-smaller-home.htm:girlsigh
		

:


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle claim debunked: Duchess analysed Kate wedding despite 'not following royals'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE discussed the "pomp" surrounding the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's wedding in a throwback blog post despite claiming in her Oprah Winfrey interview that royal events were "not something she followed".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Could it be because it adds to her sloppy demeanor? Messy buns on others can look very good, but on Meghan? I hate the tendrils. Reminds me of the 70's hairstyle with smock tops and Earth shoes. Ugh. She has the Midas touch in reverse! Everything she touches gets ruined! She can make a $10,000 dress look like it came from a clearance bin at the dollar store. Her hair could great, but like with everything else, she looks like a dork in a style that would look nice on somebody else.


Even before I knew anything about her, I thought her messy hair at the wedding didn't do justice to the simple elegance of her dress.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She'd probably call her the Duchess of Schmatta.


And tell her to comb her hair and find a good tailor.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> LOL good luck with that because I'm sure it will be returned to the triple or quadruple locked vault immediately after the coronation.


How many protection guys just for the crown?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5321728
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle claim debunked: Duchess analysed Kate wedding despite 'not following royals'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE discussed the "pomp" surrounding the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's wedding in a throwback blog post despite claiming in her Oprah Winfrey interview that royal events were "not something she followed".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Saying it was debunked is a polite way of saying she lied.  Gee, what a surprise.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> How many protection guys just for the crown?


Look for the Harkles to complain that they can't get the same level of security that a lousy crown does.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> And there is more:
> 
> *"Meghan Markle does not like to spend her days with Prince Charles under one roof when in the United Kingdom. She only reportedly wants to be at Windsor Castle with Queen Elizabeth II.*
> 
> There’s speculation the Cambridges may be headed to Windsor in the future. Of course Megalomaniac would want to sleep there first. Frankly, I think this is one of those narcissistic manufactured situations The Body Language Guy talks about. It will never happen and her rabid  stans will shriek she’s a victim because the Queen denied her.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The above article was likely released by the Netflixes' PR, it sounds like paid publicity for them. Very helpful if they are trying to sell  “_The Chateau of Riven Rock_” aka as the 16- (or 19) toilet mansion.
> The rumor is that they are planning to relocate…
> 
> _The new mansion in Montecito is "not working out" for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. This comes as the royal-born Prince reportedly wants to relocate to a much smaller property.
> 
> Life & Style covered the latest allegation, which emerged from an unnamed source. As stated, *the Duke of Sussex prefers to have "less financial responsibilities" these days, causing them to put their home back on the market.
> 
> But, the Duchess of Sussex is allegedly not on the same page with her husband. She does not want to "downgrade,"* unlike the youngest Wales prince…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.btimesonline.com/articles/153575/20220206/prince-harry-reportedly-prefers-less-financial-responsibilities-smaller-home.htm:girlsigh
> 
> 
> :


Contrary to popular belief that infidelity is the chief cause of divorce, I've heard that more marriages end over financial issues.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> You just KNOW what Joan would have to say about MM and her fashion sense.


I miss the days of comedy where everyone was equally insulted!  Before woke-ness set in and everyone was perennially insulted.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Contrary to popular belief that infidelity is the chief cause of divorce, I've heard that more marriages end over financial issues.


True.  I think disagreements about the children can be added to that.  Having them or raising them.  I can just imagine these two dunces discovering how much that money pit costs to run per month.  Did he think the electricity and water were free?  The house and grounds kept up all by themselves?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I miss the days of comedy where everyone was equally insulted!  Before woke-ness set in and everyone was perennially insulted.


Don Rickles at the peak of his insult comedy days would have had a field day with them.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> True.  I think disagreements about the children can be added to that.  Having them or raising them.  I can just imagine these two dunces discovering how much that money pit costs to run per month.  Did he think the electricity and water were free?  The house and grounds kept up all by themselves?


He's never had to give it a thought before. All those people bowing to him since the day he was born magically took care of it all.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> He's never had to give it a thought before. All those people bowing to him since the day he was born magically took care of it all.


I think the Japanese Princess who married and moved to NYC,  had a better idea about what real life had in store for her than these two, and she was even more pampered than Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What….
Gasp:

_Today, tourists who see the diamond in the Tower of London are often surprised by its small size, especially in comparison with the two much larger Cullinan diamonds displayed alongside it: in fact, at present *the Koh-i-Noor is only the 90th-largest diamond in the world*._

Ewwww:
_Yet, as my years of research into the Koh-i-Noor have confirmed, *many of the diamond’s owners – Shah Shuja among them – have indeed suffered in the most appalling ways*, and its history is littered with owners who have been blinded, slow-poisoned, tortured to death, burned in oil, threatened with drowning, crowned with molten lead and assassinated by their own family and closest bodyguards. Even the passengers and crew of HMS Medea were scythed down by a cholera epidemic and storms as the vessel carried the Koh-i-Noor across the seas from India to England in 1850._




__





						Koh-i-Noor: The History Of The Desired, Stolen And Cursed Diamond | HistoryExtra
					

The Koh-i-Noor is a gem of international renown, as divisive as it is beautiful. William Dalrymple explores its murky history



					www.historyextra.com
				




Okaaay, you can have it


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah

Did they not congratulate the Queen on Sunday?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I know Adele’s had a massive glow up anyway but putting her next to M in that ill fitting mesh dress is making Adele look especially slim. M looks like bent legs in black stockings.

it just goes to show why M was so desperate to control the press in the early days- they weren’t doing enough photoshop the shady ******.




bag-mania said:


> Yes, but let's keep in mind that Diana was not the only woman who was involved with Charles who went off the deep end. Poor Dale Tryon (aka Kanga) is the forgotten lover who Charles kept along with Camilla.
> 
> The two mistresses had a lot in common. Both Camilla and Kanga chose Charles to be the godfather to the sons they had with their husbands. Both women named those sons after Charles, although Camilla used "Charles" as her son's middle name. And both despised each other.
> 
> Post-affair with Charles, Kanga spiraled into a mental crisis. She was a cancer survivor who had an addiction to painkillers. At one point she fell from a window at the rehab clinic and everyone assumed she jumped, although she claimed she was pushed. Her behavior became erratic. She told friends she was convinced someone was trying to kill her. She sadly still tried to contact Charles up until the end and was seen following him in her wheelchair at a polo match in 1997. Kanga came to a tragic end only a few months after Diana's death when she died of sepsis. These days all mention of Kanga has pretty much been scrubbed away in an attempt to clean up Charles' reputation to prepare him to eventually take the throne. For the last 25 years we have constantly been barraged with a fairytale story that Charles and Camilla were star-crossed lovers who were always meant to be together.
> 
> So are we to take from Kanga's tale that Charles is attracted to mentally-unbalanced women? Or, is being emotionally involved with Charles enough to drive a woman nuts? I'd vote for the 2nd choice, but really neither one looks good for a future king.


Yes there’s definitely a press fed myth, even in the Crown, that Charles only cheated with Camilla.
I don’t know about poor Kanga. I do think
its perfectly fair to say C&D’s marriage was a sham but it’s purpose was to create a future king and therefore for royal purposes it was successful enough.



bag-mania said:


> Remember it? I had one, baby!


TBF I don’t think it’s that bad. It’s sort of retro enough to start looking edgy. Any geometric bob style can look cool but it’s a bold choice


poopsie said:


> So how come the Meggsy Messy Bun hasn't taken off?


Because it’s been and gone and is now passé 

M is so desperately clinging to her youth she’s still wearing her 2006 ‘hot girl #6’ heyday hair.


I mean just look at how xtina wore her hair in the 00s- they were all at it. (Source- I wore bad messy buns then too.) it’ll make a comeback but we all know Ms not gonna be the one.


Maggie Muggins said:


> I'd rather look like Gladys Ormphby with a bun and hairnet than M with her low bun and ugly tendrils. Besides, it looks like Gladys has more fashion sense than M.
> View attachment 5321671


Yes there’s a lot to be said for a nice practical bun and I love ‘old lady’ stuff. I’ve not seen a hair net in the wild for years though  

M would do herself a massive favour if she switched her wigs up. Something like these would be much more flattering and modern  on her now.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Did they not congratulate the Queen on Sunday?



No.  They did a sweet nod to her by opting to do a very special, ultra "PRIVATE" Zoom call with Her Majesty, so she could spend quality time looking at her namesake on the telly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Yet, as my years of research into the Koh-i-Noor have confirmed, *many of the diamond’s owners – Shah Shuja among them – have indeed suffered in the most appalling ways*, and its history is littered with owners who have been blinded, slow-poisoned, tortured to death, burned in oil, threatened with drowning, crowned with molten lead and assassinated by their own family and closest bodyguards. Even the passengers and crew of HMS Medea were scythed down by a cholera epidemic and storms as the vessel carried the Koh-i-Noor across the seas from India to England in 1850._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Koh-i-Noor: The History Of The Desired, Stolen And Cursed Diamond | HistoryExtra
> 
> 
> The Koh-i-Noor is a gem of international renown, as divisive as it is beautiful. William Dalrymple explores its murky history
> 
> 
> 
> www.historyextra.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okaaay, you can have it



Re: cursed jewelry. The tiara that flew with Philip's sister  - that came from the BRF as a wedding gift to a princess that married into German nobility IIRC - the day she died is quite destructive, too. And it didn't bend a spike in a plane crash that killed everyone else. I remember thinking if that thing was mine I'd bury it in the deepest vault never to see the sunlight again, but at this point I think they should have presented it to Raptor, maybe it would have dampened her arrogance a bit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Like in, dismantled and partly sold? Mh.


----------



## pukasonqo

NVM


----------



## duna

William Dalrymple's book "The Koo-i-Noor" is very interesting: I read it recently and the history of the stone is pretty incredible!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> William Dalrymple's book "The Koo-i-Noor" is very interesting: I read it recently and the history of the stone is pretty incredible!



Wow, thank you! I love to read those science-y but not textbook-y stuff and that guy has quite a few interesting titles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lodpah said:


> Did they not congratulate the Queen on Sunday?



They didn’t, but I’m not sure William and Kate did either?


----------



## csshopper

The Ca


lanasyogamama said:


> They didn’t, but I’m not sure William and Kate did either?


They reposted the Queen’s letter to their Instagram account and tagged it with “like”.

Several articles claim William recognizes she makes his father happy and that he respects his grandmother’s decision.

The trio’s Royal outing last week, where Kate attended after Charles extended an invitation to her to accompany he and Camilla, was I’m sure intended to send a message of support. They all seemed to genuinely enjoy their time together.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I believe this has already been posted here, but it doesn't hurt to question Hazz's endorsements again… If the post below is true, I have not enough words to express what I feel at the present time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I believe this has already been posted here, but it doesn't hurt to question Hazz's endorsements again… If the post below is true, I have not enough words to express what I feel at the present time.




My guess is it is true.  He is invested in numerous companies - this 2021 article says he has a 100 company portfolio. Also, the article mentions his interest in mental health and career coaching.









						Why Alexis Ohanian Is Investing In This Career Coaching Startup
					

The Reddit founder led the Grand’s $2.4 million pre-seed round.




					www.forbes.com
				




ETA: Also, it is possible Serena herself is an investor. She has her own set of portfolio companies.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> How many protection guys just for the crown?


Probably several, but they would also take into consideration the number of woke wackos, detractors, haters and anti-this-and-that that could be lurking around and there could be a massive security force for the entire coronation ceremony and related events.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Um, Everyone in the Royal Family Is Moving to a New House
					

Wills and Kate’s country home is going up for rent?!




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				




Not sure how informed and true this article is, but it says that in addition to Fort Belvedere, Frogmore *House* is also being considered for the Cambridges.  Can you imagine how jealous and livid the Harkles would be if that came to pass?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like in, dismantled and partly sold? Mh.


Exactly what I was thinking. They needed to pay the electric bill


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> There's the oft repeated anecdote of William passing tissues under the bathroom door to his crying mother, but *we don't know if it really happened.*



And if it did happen, we don’t know that it happened more than once. I doubt most women would want their motherhood defined by one incident which may only have encompassed a few minutes.

Every year the stories about Diana become wilder and less likely to be true. It is almost certainly backlash from all the aggrandizing that occurred immediately following her death.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> And if it did happen, we don’t know that it happened more than once. I doubt most women would want their motherhood defined by one incident which may only have encompassed a few minutes.
> 
> Every year the stories about Diana become wilder and less likely to be true. It is almost certainly backlash from all the aggrandizing that occurred immediately following her death.


I think the opposite. The gloves are off regarding her behavior. She was out of control and  Harry inherited that gene. If her sainthood is tainted somewhat, then Harry’s campaign using her as a symbol becomes more tarnished. Of course that might be the object if one is to believe that certain powers are trying to bring Harry down a few pegs. ( unintentional pun! Lol!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> Um, Everyone in the Royal Family Is Moving to a New House
> 
> 
> Wills and Kate’s country home is going up for rent?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure how informed and true this article is, but it says that in addition to Fort Belvedere, Frogmore *House* is also being considered for the Cambridges.  Can you imagine how jealous and livid the Harkles would be if that came to pass?



OMG if this comes true I will never stop laughing, and I'm not generally a very gleeful person. 

That said, they might just add a third residence instead of giving up Anmer Hall (I ALWAYS want to type Amner because it rolls off the tongue easier). After all, the Queen and Charles have multiple homes as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think the opposite. The gloves are off regarding her behavior. She was out of control and  Harry inherited that gene. If her sainthood is tainted somewhat, then Harry’s campaign using her as a symbol becomes more tarnished. Of course that might be the object if one is to believe that certain powers are trying to bring Harry down a few pegs. ( unintentional pun! Lol!)



I am not a Diana fan, but geez, can't the woman rest in peace. She's been dead for a quarter of a century, I'd be fine if people stopped throwing mud.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think the opposite. The gloves are off regarding her behavior. She was out of control and  Harry inherited that gene. If her sainthood is tainted somewhat, then Harry’s campaign using her as a symbol becomes more tarnished. Of course that might be the object if one is to believe that certain powers are trying to bring Harry down a few pegs. ( unintentional pun! Lol!)



The gloves were never on before Diana died. I remember those horrible headlines about Diana and Fergie back in the day. There was constant ridicule of their weight which would NEVER make it to print in today’s more sensitive, less shaming, age. The tabloids loved to print unflattering photos of them with clever headlines like “Porky.” By comparison, the press had little to say about Charles and Andrew (until the affairs started up all around). Diana was troubled to be sure, but certainly not to the exaggerated degree we’re hearing in the last several years.

The authors of these so-called royal biographies were not actually there. They are relying on hearsay at best and outright fabrication at worst to make their books exciting and interesting so they will sell. To bring it back to Harry and Meghan, “Finding Freedom” is also considered to be a royal biography and we know how much truth was in that book.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> And if it did happen, we don’t know that it happened more than once. I doubt most women would want their motherhood defined by one incident which may only have encompassed a few minutes.
> 
> Every year the stories about Diana become wilder and less likely to be true. It is almost certainly backlash from all the aggrandizing that occurred immediately following her death.





gracekelly said:


> I think the opposite. The gloves are off regarding her behavior. She was out of control and  Harry inherited that gene. If her sainthood is tainted somewhat, then Harry’s campaign using her as a symbol becomes more tarnished. Of course that might be the object if one is to believe that certain powers are trying to bring Harry down a few pegs. ( unintentional pun! Lol!)


Harry should let the memory of his mother rest in peace. Diana may have been a problematic person, but she had a good heart. She was beautiful, original, and had empathy and courage. She married ten years too young, and Charles not being 100% invested in their marriage may have been very disturbing for her. I'm not blaming Charles, Diana was probably too childish to understand him. She could have had a great life after the divorce, and I always felt sorry that she didn't have a chance to see her kids grow.


----------



## poopsie

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'd rather look like Gladys Ormphby with a bun and hairnet than M with her low bun and ugly tendrils. Besides, it looks like Gladys has more fashion sense than M.
> View attachment 5321671



Want a walnetto?


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> do you miss joan rivers?



More and more all the time 
I _*lived*_ for Fashion Police


----------



## rose60610

For all the detracting comments about Diana, one remembers she was 19 when she married Charles. Between Charles' relationship with Camilla, the media, the pressure to crank out heirs ASAP, etc, it isn't surprising that Diana had problems. I'm not giving her a 100% pass--she was an adult and was raised as a royal herself. No one forced her to marry Charles, and the lure of the BRF's trappings must have been tempting.  

My point is, look at the treatment given to today's celebrities. For example, Chrissy Teigen, who was 25 when she bullied a teen age girl. Teigen was given a pass in the media and her sugars for "BEING ONLY 25 WHEN SHE TOLD A TEENAGE GIRL THAT SHE HOPES DIES".  These days, society is excusing all kinds of behaviors for adult idiots. I'm tired of the bla bla bla excuses given to young adults.

Meghan was a 36 year old retread bride when she married Harry.  And it's absolutely nauseating when she gloms onto the "poor little me" narratives about being oh-so-naive about the BRF. HELLO, she clawed her way into it and then claims she knew nothing about curtseying to TQ? And that people should feel sorry for her? The media early on were crazy about her, the BRF gave her breaks and Harry adored her.  How much of an idiot do you have to be to screw all that up?  Harry was never going to be King, unless, of course, if you count the "airplane crash" theory. But that didn't stop her from cutting off TQ at events.  She truly must believe the world rotates around her.  For all of Diana's faults, they pale in comparison to Meghan's illusions of grandeur.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Harry should let the memory of his mother rest in peace. Diana may have been a problematic person, but she had a good heart. She was beautiful, original, and had empathy and courage. She married ten years too young, and Charles not being 100% invested in their marriage may have been very disturbing for her. I'm not blaming Charles, Diana was probably too childish to understand him. She could have had a great life after the divorce, and I always felt sorry that she didn't have a chance to see her kids grow.



I always feel like I become the default Diana apologist on the thread and I want to make it clear that I understand she had issues, serious issues.

Unlike you, I don’t give Charles a pass. He was an experienced man in his 30s, she was a very naive 19-year-old. He selected her (or let his grandmother pick for him and how lame is that for a grown man?) Anyway, there was never anything close to balance in their relationship. Charles, as the royal heir, always held all the power. The only thing Diana had that Charles didn’t was the popularity with the people. Charles isn’t a particularly charismatic man, then or now.

By today’s standards, I think a woman with Diana’s severe eating disorder and her other problems would be viewed a little bit more sympathetically. She didn’t want to be miserable and she wasn’t faking it. But nobody had any patience for any of that back in the 80s. You were expected to get your act together and don’t cause any trouble or embarrassment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

poopsie said:


> More and more all the time
> I _*lived*_ for Fashion Police


I was crying on the day that she died and I was trying to explain to my husband that once I watched fashion police on Friday night I felt like the weekend was really underway.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I doubt most women would want their motherhood defined by one incident which may only have encompassed a few minutes.


Amen to that!


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> Want a walnetto?


I have happy memories of watching Laugh-In with my family. How many families actually even watch shows together today?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I was crying on the day that she died and I was trying to explain to my husband that once I watched fashion police on Friday night I felt like the weekend was really underway.


She was one of the funniest women of her time but got screwed out of a plum late night job when her mentor, Johnny Carson, got his knickers in a twist because he thought she was being disloyal to him by going to a competing network.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I have happy memories of watching Laugh-In with my family. How many families actually even watch shows together today?



We used to have a family/TV room growing up!


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We used to have a family/TV room growing up!


I mandate it. My daughter comes down and watches a show with us from 9 to 10 every night before bed. It gets us a little family time and keeps her off her screen right before going to sleep.


----------



## jennlt

rose60610 said:


> Meghan was a 36 year old *retread* bride



Retread    
It makes her sound like one of the tires on that bus she likes to throw people under


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I was crying on the day that she died and I was trying to explain to my husband that once I watched fashion police on Friday night I felt like the weekend was really underway.


After the Harkles' NY disaster I wished she was still around to skewer MM's wardrobe choices.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG if this comes true I will never stop laughing, and I'm not generally a very gleeful person.
> 
> That said, they might just add a third residence instead of giving up Anmer Hall (I ALWAYS want to type Amner because it rolls off the tongue easier). After all, the Queen and Charles have multiple homes as well.


"So, what about Prince William and Kate Middleton? They’ll keep apartment 1A at Kensington Palace but *are also set to inherit Windsor Castle"*

Will they own the property outright, or just be granted use of it until he becomes king? Not familiar with these things.


----------



## Sharont2305

rose60610 said:


> For all the detracting comments about Diana, one remembers she was 19 when she married Charles. Between Charles' relationship with Camilla, the media, the pressure to crank out heirs ASAP, etc, it isn't surprising that Diana had problems. I'm not giving her a 100% pass--she was an adult and was raised as a royal herself. No one forced her to marry Charles, and the lure of the BRF's trappings must have been tempting.
> 
> My point is, look at the treatment given to today's celebrities. For example, Chrissy Teigen, who was 25 when she bullied a teen age girl. Teigen was given a pass in the media and her sugars for "BEING ONLY 25 WHEN SHE TOLD A TEENAGE GIRL THAT SHE HOPES DIES".  These days, society is excusing all kinds of behaviors for adult idiots. I'm tired of the bla bla bla excuses given to young adults.
> 
> Meghan was a 36 year old retread bride when she married Harry.  And it's absolutely nauseating when she gloms onto the "poor little me" narratives about being oh-so-naive about the BRF. HELLO, she clawed her way into it and then claims she knew nothing about curtseying to TQ? And that people should feel sorry for her? The media early on were crazy about her, the BRF gave her breaks and Harry adored her.  How much of an idiot do you have to be to screw all that up?  Harry was never going to be King, unless, of course, if you count the "airplane crash" theory. But that didn't stop her from cutting off TQ at events.  She truly must believe the world rotates around her.  For all of Diana's faults, they pale in comparison to Meghan's illusions of grandeur.


Diana wasn't Royal pre marriage, she was an aristocrat.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> And if it did happen, we don’t know that it happened more than once. I doubt most women would want their motherhood defined by one incident which may only have encompassed a few minutes.
> 
> Every year the stories about Diana become wilder and less likely to be true. It is almost certainly backlash from all the aggrandizing that occurred immediately following her death.


I thought half of the stories came from her own confessions to Andrew Morton?  She did her fair share of oversharing.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I always feel like I become the default Diana apologist on the thread and I want to make it clear that I understand she had issues, serious issues.
> 
> Unlike you, I don’t give Charles a pass. He was an experienced man in his 30s, she was a very naive 19-year-old. He selected her (or let his grandmother pick for him and how lame is that for a grown man?) Anyway, there was never anything close to balance in their relationship. Charles, as the royal heir, always held all the power. The only thing Diana had that Charles didn’t was the popularity with the people. Charles isn’t a particularly charismatic man, then or now.
> 
> By today’s standards, I think a woman with Diana’s severe eating disorder and her other problems would be viewed a little bit more sympathetically. She didn’t want to be miserable and she wasn’t faking it. But nobody had any patience for any of that back in the 80s. You were expected to get your act together and don’t cause any trouble or embarrassment.


People are rather complex. Despite being in his 30s, Charles was likely fighting some of his demons. He probably wanted a companion as a wife instead of a pretty princess, but didn't have the courage to go against his family. I may be wrong, but I think Charles is overall a decent person, and doesn't deserve to be treated the way he is being treated by the Nefl*xes. He is now older (and wiser?), so it's possible that, if Diana was still alive, they could have become good friends.

In contrast to Diana, I don't think Hazz's wife is a good person. Hazz is very problematic and the wife may bring out his worst qualities. All allegedly of course!


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Diana wasn't Royal pre marriage, she was an aristocrat.


Which is why she should have known what she was getting into. These people know how things are done over there.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> In contrast to Diana, I don't think Hazz's wife is a good person. *Hazz is very problematic and the wife may bring out his worst qualities*. All allegedly of course!


I believe this is the root of the matter. She is his enabler.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Which is why she should have known what she was getting into. These people know how things are done over there.


Aristocrat or not, she was a very young woman who had led a sheltered life. While she had the girlish romantic notion that he truly was her prince, others viewed her as a royal brood mare with the proper pedigree. They were doomed from the start. So much pain could have been spared for all involved if the RF did not have the outdated mindset that Camilla was not suitable because she had "a past".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Aristocrat or not, she was a very young woman who had led a sheltered life. While she had the girlish romantic notion that he truly was her prince, others viewed her as a royal brood mare with the proper pedigree. They were doomed from the start. So much pain could have been spared for all involved if the RF did not have the outdated mindset that Camilla was not suitable because she had "a past".


She was naive, even if her own sisters had a chance with Charles and decided they didn't want the job?

Totally agree about the virgin thing.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Aristocrat or not, she was a very young woman who had led a sheltered life. While she had the girlish romantic notion that he truly was her prince, others viewed her as a royal brood mare with the proper pedigree. They were doomed from the start. So much pain could have been spared for all involved if the RF did not have the outdated mindset that Camilla was not suitable because she had "a past".


I agree diana was very young......19 is a baby.  she would have been dazzled to be selected by the prince.  as far as Camilla, I'm not totally clear on the whole situation.  she married someone else, right?  are you thinking she would have married charles rather than her husband?  I'm not sure of the timeline of her divorce.  wouldn't charles have been married by the time she divorced.


----------



## Chanbal

The problem is that the 'good things' are likely preaching about carbon footprints while flying on private jets and living in oversized mansions… They need a lot of money to support their extravagant life style. 










						Harry and Meghan are 'very money driven'  royal expert claims
					

The couple, who have an £18M deal with Spotify and a £100M deal with Netflix, want to get to a level where they can 'earn lots of money and do good things', Richard Mineards told The Evening Standard




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> People are rather complex. Despite being in his 30s, Charles was likely fighting some of his demons. *He probably wanted a companion as a wife instead of a pretty princess*, but didn't have the courage to go against his family. I may be wrong, but I think Charles is overall a decent person, and doesn't deserve to be treated the way he is being treated by the Nefl*xes. He is now older (and wiser?), so it's possible that, if Diana was still alive, they could have become good friends.
> 
> In contrast to Diana, I don't think Hazz's wife is a good person. Hazz is very problematic and the wife may bring out his worst qualities. All allegedly of course!



He didn’t want a wife at all. At least not right then. But it wasn’t up to him. He had to breed an heir and he’d dragged his feet as long as he could. His family had to put the pressure on him.

I agree with you. I think like so many divorced couples, over time the bitterness would have subsided and they would have been able to get along eventually. Unfortunately she died at the peak of their animosity and the relationship is forever frozen in time at that point.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> More and more all the time
> I _*lived*_ for Fashion Police


I miss Joan too.  I LOVED Fashion Police and I also loved that Joan Rivers made fun of herself as well.  She didn't pretend she didn't have plastic surgery; she owned it.  She made fun of her flaws as well as others'.


----------



## Chanbal

This is good


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I agree diana was very young......19 is a baby.  she would have been dazzled to be selected by the prince.  as far as Camilla, I'm not totally clear on the whole situation.  she married someone else, right?  are you thinking she would have married charles rather than her husband?  I'm not sure of the timeline of her divorce.  wouldn't charles have been married by the time she divorced.


From what I understand, their timing was always off. He went in the Royal Navy, she didn't want to wait around for him. She met, fell in love with and married Andrew PB, had a family and was happy for a time. Meanwhile Charles was being pressured to marry because he was 30. So of the available candidates Diana was the most suitable. By the time Camilla's marriage went south, Charles was married. Throughout they remained friends, but to what extent has always been the subject of debate.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The problem is that the 'good things' are likely preaching about carbon footprints while flying on private jets and living in oversized mansions… They need a lot of money to support their extravagant life style.
> View attachment 5322388
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are 'very money driven'  royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The couple, who have an £18M deal with Spotify and a £100M deal with Netflix, want to get to a level where they can 'earn lots of money and do good things', Richard Mineards told The Evening Standard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wouldn't we all like to earn $12 mil a year


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> She was naive, even if her own sisters had a chance with Charles and decided they didn't want the job?
> 
> Totally agree about the virgin thing.


The story goes she wanted out when she learned the truth about Charles and Camilla right before the wedding, but her own sisters told her it was too late to back out. I think she did have some understanding of the "marital arrangements" of her class, did the stiff upper lip thing and went through with it anyway, perhaps thinking she would ultimately prevail over Camilla. The rest, as they say, is history.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG on the current smear campaign against Diana, who benefits from it? A morbid free pass to Hazz… follow the money…


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Wouldn't we all like to earn $12 mil a year


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is good




Oh to be a fly on the wall in that moment....


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The problem is that the 'good things' are likely preaching about carbon footprints while flying on private jets and living in oversized mansions… They need a lot of money to support their extravagant life style.
> View attachment 5322388
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are 'very money driven'  royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The couple, who have an £18M deal with Spotify and a £100M deal with Netflix, want to get to a level where they can 'earn lots of money and do good things', Richard Mineards told The Evening Standard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The James Corden AMA (ask me anything) on Reddit is one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen. They ROASTED him.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



Just think of the handbags we could buy!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> "So, what about Prince William and Kate Middleton? They’ll keep apartment 1A at Kensington Palace but *are also set to inherit Windsor Castle"*
> 
> Will they own the property outright, or just be granted use of it until he becomes king? Not familiar with these things.



Only Balmoral Castle and the Sandringham can be inherited. The rest is managed by the Crown Estates


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> From what I understand, their timing was always off. He went in the Royal Navy, she didn't want to wait around for him. She met, fell in love with and married Andrew PB, had a family and was happy for a time. Meanwhile Charles was being pressured to marry because he was 30. So of the available candidates Diana was the most suitable. By the time Camilla's marriage went south, Charles was married. Throughout they remained friends, but to what extent has always been the subject of debate.



Charles wasn’t looking to get married when he and Camilla first dated. Even if he had been, there was that virgin rule that would have excluded her. Camilla was ready to get married so she moved on to Parker Bowles and they were married the next year. Charles went on to sew his wild oats throughout the 70s and he dated lots of women. That important bit of information doesn’t seem to get reported anymore in our age of “Camilla has always been Charles’ one true love” rhetoric. 

Fun fact: Camilla’s husband Andrew Parker Bowles used to date Charles‘s sister, Anne. They all liked to keep it in the same circle.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The problem is that the 'good things' are likely preaching about carbon footprints while flying on private jets and living in oversized mansions… They need a lot of money to support their extravagant life style.
> View attachment 5322388
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are 'very money driven'  royal expert claims
> 
> 
> The couple, who have an £18M deal with Spotify and a £100M deal with Netflix, want to get to a level where they can 'earn lots of money and do good things', Richard Mineards told The Evening Standard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


they want to be rich just by being themselves.....they don't do anything productive or entertaining.  the foundation hasn't done anything that I know of.
she can't act (at least not at a high level).  he has no discernable skills.
Some people may not like celebs who "preach" about things like the environment.  But they also earn a very good living by performing.  You may not like Meryl Streep's or Leonardo Dicaprio's politics but they have made their mark by Working - Acting.  Not just some idiots posturing and expecting to be enriched by that.

James Corden may not be a great talent but apparently people find him entertaining and he gets paid for that.

If they wanted to be enriched just for being themselves they should have stayed in the RF.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Charles wasn’t looking to get married when he and Camilla first dated. Even if he had been, there was that virgin rule that would have excluded her. Camilla was ready to get married so she moved on to Parker Bowles and they were married the next year. Charles went on to sew his wild oats throughout the 70s and he dated lots of women. That important bit of information doesn’t seem to get reported anymore in our age of “Camilla has always been Charles’ one true love” rhetoric.
> 
> Fun fact: Camilla’s husband Andrew Parker Bowles used to date Charles‘s sister, Anne. They all liked to keep it in the same circle.


I learned that from watching The Crown


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I learned that from watching The Crown



And some people say TV can’t be educational.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> they want to be rich just by being themselves.....they don't do anything productive or entertaining.  the foundation hasn't done anything that I know of.
> she can't act (at least not at a high level).  he has no discernable skills.
> Some people may not like celebs who "preach" about things like the environment.  But they also earn a very good living by performing.  You may not like Meryl Streep's or Leonardo Dicaprio's politics but they have made their mark by Working - Acting.  Not just some idiots posturing and expecting to be enriched by that.
> 
> James Corden may not be a great talent but apparently people find him entertaining and he gets paid for that.
> 
> If they wanted to be enriched just for being themselves they should have stayed in the RF.



The Harkles' anthem - an oldie but goodie:


----------



## octopus17

Chanbal said:


> This is good



Yes, but I am seriously disturbed by the Abba music played in conjunction with it...


----------



## sdkitty

H&M should hear what Dolly Parton is doing - providing full college tuition for all the theme park employees, including PT and seasonal!  Now that is something real.


----------



## Sophisticatted

They’ve already had the opportunity to *earn *the kind of money they want.  They got the contracts, they just haven’t done the actual work required.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> They’ve already had the opportunity to *earn *the kind of money they want.  They got the contracts, they just haven’t done the actual work required.


maybe because they aren't capable...no worries, people have been hired to do it for them


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Wouldn't we all like to earn $12 mil a year


Especially for doing nothing!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Charles wasn’t looking to get married when he and Camilla first dated. Even if he had been, there was that virgin rule that would have excluded her. Camilla was ready to get married so she moved on to Parker Bowles and they were married the next year. Charles went on to sew his wild oats throughout the 70s and he dated lots of women. That important bit of information doesn’t seem to get reported anymore in our age of “Camilla has always been Charles’ one true love” rhetoric.
> 
> Fun fact: Camilla’s husband Andrew Parker Bowles used to date Charles‘s sister, Anne. *They all liked to keep it in the same circle.*


AKA inbreeding 
Reminds me of high school when all the popular kids would be breaking up and hooking up with each other, sleeping their way through the whole circle of "friends".  I remember thinking what cesspools they must all be.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> H&M should hear what Dolly Parton is doing - providing full college tuition for all the theme park employees, including PT and seasonal!  Now that is something real.


  Surely you jest!  Those two??  They'd probably try to get Dolly to pay for their two bundles of joy. Or they'd send lemon cakes to a top few, because sending them to all is just too much work.


----------



## Chanbal

TW says hi


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo the media has played an exceptional role in perpetuating the C-C-D_ myth. _ The media pitched the story as a battle between the women because _that_ story sold newspapers and books (omg, those books). It’s a tale as old as time - soap operas have made a fortune selling it. There was, though, another person in the myth that should be remembered. Fergie - she played a role in all the drama, too. Apparently, she is part of the H&M drama, too. [certainly there were others, but she sticks out due to the O factor].

None of these people are paragons of virtue nor role models for our youth. They are powerful people with an agenda. BLG is correct - follow the $$$$.


----------



## Sophisticatted

What did the RF do to Harry?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> What did the RF do to Harry?



They allowed W to have fun meetings of tea and cookies with GanGan. He had to stay home with his nanny.
They made him attend those boring events. He had to wear ridiculous clothes and smile. Those damn smiles.
They made him walk in his mother’s funeral procession. Note that he was 12, just a sweet baby boy. No one else in the whole wide world could understand his pain.
[he doesn’t like being told what to do - perhaps he had a video game scheduled with his online _friends]. _
They made him attend Eton where he was expected to do homework. Homework, ffs.  He’s a royal.
They made him pose for _pictures_ 
Ad nauseam 

ETA: Rumor is he doesn’t like to wear shoes. In all seriousness, lots of what he complains about is indicative of autism. 
Just my opinion.




__





						Autism Awareness Month: Barefoot for Autism - ID Action
					

Guest article by Kris Steinmetz, Autism Society of Iowa executive director        Children and adults with autism can have a reaction to...




					idaction.org


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They allowed W to have fun meetings of tea and cookies with GanGan. He had to stay home with his nanny.
> They made him attend those boring events. He had to wear ridiculous clothes and smile. Those damn smiles.
> They made him walk in his mother’s funeral procession. Note that he was 12, just a sweet baby boy. No one else in the whole wide world could understand his pain.
> [he doesn’t like being told what to do - perhaps he had a video game scheduled with his online _friends]. _
> They made him attend Eton where he was expected to do homework. Homework, ffs.  He’s a royal.
> They made him pose for _pictures_
> Ad nauseam
> 
> ETA: Rumor is he doesn’t like to wear shoes. In all seriousness, lots of what he complains about is indicative of autism.
> Just my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Autism Awareness Month: Barefoot for Autism - ID Action
> 
> 
> Guest article by Kris Steinmetz, Autism Society of Iowa executive director        Children and adults with autism can have a reaction to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> idaction.org


I think he has the royal spare syndrome.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear, Haz is lecturing again. Today it is about HIV. No mention of Cams.
As much as I applauded and supported Diana when she stood against stereotyping the disease, Hazzi with his hand-waving and shoulder shrugging seems to minimize and diminish her contribution.  He simply has not developed the necessary _gravitas_ to be taken seriously.









						Prince Harry vows to continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work
					

Prince Harry urged Britons to 'go and get a test' for the illness during the 30-minute call with ex-Wales captain Gareth Thomas, who he is friends with,  to mark National HIV Testing Week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, Haz is lecturing again. Today it is about HIV. No mention of Cams.
> As much as I applauded and supported Diana when she stood against stereotyping the disease, Hazzi with his hand-waving and shoulder shrugging seems to minimize and diminish her contribution.  He simply has not developed the necessary _gravitas_ to be taken seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry vows to continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work
> 
> 
> Prince Harry urged Britons to 'go and get a test' for the illness during the 30-minute call with ex-Wales captain Gareth Thomas, who he is friends with,  to mark National HIV Testing Week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They really need to stop hopping on and off bandwagons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is good




What is this fake grin anyway. She really thinks people buy her shtick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Camilla was ready to get married so she moved on to Parker Bowles and they were married the next year. Charles went on to sew his wild oats throughout the 70s and he dated lots of women. That important bit of information doesn’t seem to get reported anymore in our age of “Camilla has always been Charles’ one true love” rhetoric.



I don't think these are mutually exclusive, though. People don't end up with their soulmate all the time because circumstances.


----------



## amante

sdkitty said:


> they want to be rich just by being themselves.....they don't do anything productive or entertaining.  the foundation hasn't done anything that I know of.
> she can't act (at least not at a high level).  he has no discernable skills.
> Some people may not like celebs who "preach" about things like the environment.  But they also earn a very good living by performing.  You may not like Meryl Streep's or Leonardo Dicaprio's politics but they have made their mark by Working - Acting.  Not just some idiots posturing and expecting to be enriched by that.
> 
> James Corden may not be a great talent but apparently people find him entertaining and he gets paid for that.
> 
> If they wanted to be enriched just for being themselves they should have stayed in the RF.



That's exactly what they want to be: influencers (aka idiots posturing and expecting to be enriched by that), philanthropy edition. I mean, if you're interesting enough and take good enough pictures, it has worked for many people so I can see their "business plan."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Austrian magazin titles "Barely any friends: Meghan and Harry sucking up to Hollywood stars".


----------



## Sharont2305

Prince Charles has tested positive for covid again. He had it in March 2020 with only mild symptoms. 
Hope he's OK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Where does this randomly come from now?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Charles has tested positive for covid again. He had it in March 2020 with only mild symptoms.
> Hope he's OK.


 
Ugh. They say each time you get it the potential damage to the body is bigger. Especially at his age and assumed not so stellar health.


----------



## amante

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does this randomly come from now?





National HIV Testing Week is back! From Monday 7 February we're calling on people across the country to ‘give HIV the finger’.


National HIV Testing Week is a great opportunity for you to get tested and encourage others to do the same, particularly those from groups most affected by HIV, including gay and bisexual men and black African men and women.


This year’s campaign follows National HIV Testing Week 2021’s record-breaking success — more people than ever before took action and got tested. It’s crucial that we maintain this momentum as we work towards ending new cases of HIV by 2030.


Regular HIV testing benefits each and every one of us. People can live with HIV for a long time without any symptoms, testing is the only way to know your status. The sooner you know it, the sooner you can get on treatment if needed and avoid passing the virus on to anyone else. Most people will get a negative result but whatever happens, it’s important to know that anyone diagnosed with HIV in the UK can access free treatment and support.





__





						National HIV Testing Week returns for 2022 | Terrence Higgins Trust
					

The campaign runs from Monday 7 February to encourage everyone to get tested and give HIV the finger.




					www.tht.org.uk
				








__





						National HIV Testing Day  | 2021 | Dear Colleague Letters | NCHHSTP | CDC
					

National HIV Testing Day June 25, 2021




					www.cdc.gov


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> National HIV Testing Week is back! From Monday 7 February we're calling on people across the country to ‘give HIV the finger’.
> 
> 
> National HIV Testing Week is a great opportunity for you to get tested and encourage others to do the same, particularly those from groups most affected by HIV, including gay and bisexual men and black African men and women.
> 
> 
> This year’s campaign follows National HIV Testing Week 2021’s record-breaking success — more people than ever before took action and got tested. It’s crucial that we maintain this momentum as we work towards ending new cases of HIV by 2030.
> 
> 
> Regular HIV testing benefits each and every one of us. People can live with HIV for a long time without any symptoms, testing is the only way to know your status. The sooner you know it, the sooner you can get on treatment if needed and avoid passing the virus on to anyone else. Most people will get a negative result but whatever happens, it’s important to know that anyone diagnosed with HIV in the UK can access free treatment and support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> National HIV Testing Week returns for 2022 | Terrence Higgins Trust
> 
> 
> The campaign runs from Monday 7 February to encourage everyone to get tested and give HIV the finger.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tht.org.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> National HIV Testing Day  | 2021 | Dear Colleague Letters | NCHHSTP | CDC
> 
> 
> National HIV Testing Day June 25, 2021
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cdc.gov



I’m missing something.  Are we in June?  Why is Hazz talking about this? He is in the USA, not the UK, right?


----------



## amante

@CarryOn2020 Sorry, I copy and pasted the wrong National HIV Testing Day/Week. I've corrected my post to show the UK's National HIV Testing Week 2022

ETA: If you click The Times article the tweeter linked, in the first few lines it says H was talking with a British sportsperson and they were directing their conversation at the UK public.

ETA2: You can buy an at-home self-test for HIV from UK drugstores so the original tweeter's point that HIV testing is going to jam the NHS is uninformed and irrelevant.


----------



## rose60610

Hmmm. Haz is preaching HIV awareness, in other words, trotting out his dead mother's memory AGAIN for more clicks and attention. So when is Meghan going to dance with John Travolta?  I bet a pair of Manolo's she's begging to make that happen and she's got the long, off-the-shoulder black gown waiting. Of course it won't fit properly, another accurate prediction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## amante

rose60610 said:


> Hmmm. Haz is preaching HIV awareness, in other words, trotting out his dead mother's memory AGAIN for more clicks and attention.


H has always been active with HIV awareness; his charity Sentebale supports children affected by HIV in Lesotho.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the evaluation of whether you need an hiv test is part of a general well visit exam now. What is he banging on about?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is in the USA, not the UK, right?


Maybe he doesn't know?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the evaluation of whether you need an hiv test is part of a general well visit exam now. What is he banging on about?


They can't allow a week to go by without saying something they think will keep them relevant. Making a statement like this doesn't cost them anything and keeps them in the news.


----------



## rose60610

amante said:


> H has always been active with HIV awareness; his charity Sentebale supports children affected by HIV in Lesotho.



You're right. Thanks for setting the record straight. Meghan will take his legit concern for HIV awareness and milk it for every Diana Dollar they can get out of it. Notice how he vows to "continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work", he can't simply state he's doing the promoting for the good of general health. Somebody who's been dead for 25 years will always carry more weight than him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

amante said:


> @CarryOn2020 Sorry, I copy and pasted the wrong National HIV Testing Day/Week. I've corrected my post to show the UK's National HIV Testing Week 2022
> 
> ETA: If you click The Times article the tweeter linked, in the first few lines it says H was talking with a British sportsperson and they were directing their conversation at the UK public.
> 
> ETA2: You can buy an at-home self-test for HIV from UK drugstores so the original tweeter's point that HIV testing is going to jam the NHS is uninformed and irrelevant.



Thank you. Still, Hazz does not live in the UK. He is not the most [*knowledgeable*] person to lecture on UK health issues. Seems irresponsible imo.  As Tourre says, their healthcare system is busy.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> They can't allow a week to go by without saying something they think will keep them relevant. Making a statement like this doesn't cost them anything and keeps them in the news.



Exactly. Seems like he could have tweeted something or have his PR ‘team’ do it. But noooo, he needs to make another video where he waves and shrugs and talks about himself and his own HIV test which distracts from the message   Another epic fail.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz doesn't miss an opportunity to use his mother's name.








						Prince Harry vows to continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work
					

Prince Harry urged Britons to 'go and get a test' for the illness during the 30-minute call with ex-Wales captain Gareth Thomas, who he is friends with,  to mark National HIV Testing Week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tell us another one, Hazz 


From the DM article - as awful as it is to read this, it is worse to watch the video -  can’t someone switch off his camera, please?

_Harry said: 'I could never fill her shoes, especially in this particular space, but because of what she did and what she stood for and how vocal she was about this issue… it's a converging of all these different pieces.

'There's a way out of it, and if there's a way out of it and we know there's a solution, _*I'm like a typical guy*_. I just want to help fix things.'_

Seriously, a “typical guy” actually fixes things. He does not simply _help_. _  _


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. Still, Hazz does not live in the UK. He is not the most [*knowledgeable*] person to lecture on UK health issues. Seems irresponsible imo.  As Tourre says, their healthcare system is busy.


He is no authority to lecture anyone on medical care ANYWHERE unless he has an MD, DO, PhD, DPM or DDS.  His mother brought awareness to the disease, not lecture us.  That’s why he pi$$es me off.  Both of them.  Stay in your lane.  If you can’t pass an art class in elementary school without your teacher, STFU!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tell us another one, Hazz
> 
> 
> From the DM article - as awful as it is to read this, it is worse to watch the video -  can’t someone switch off his camera, please?
> 
> _Harry said: 'I could never fill her shoes, especially in this particular space, but because of what she did and what she stood for and how vocal she was about this issue… it's a converging of all these different pieces.
> 
> 'There's a way out of it, and if there's a way out of it and we know there's a solution, _*I'm like a typical guy*_. I just want to help fix things.'_
> 
> Seriously, a “typical guy” actually fixes things. He does not simply _help_. __


OMG shut up, shut up, shut UP!  You’re NOT a “typical guy”, you spoiled, overprivileged POS!

…Apparently I’m on a rampage today.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> OMG shut up, shut up, shut UP!  You’re NOT a “typical guy”, you spoiled, overprivileged POS!
> 
> …*Apparently I’m on a rampage today.*



*Me, too.  *This was one video too many, imo.


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> The story goes she wanted out when she learned the truth about Charles and Camilla right before the wedding, but her own sisters told her it was too late to back out. I think she did have some understanding of the "marital arrangements" of her class, did the stiff upper lip thing and went through with it anyway, perhaps thinking she would ultimately prevail over Camilla. The rest, as they say, is history.


The tea towels had been printed !!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Hmmm. Haz is preaching HIV awareness, in other words, trotting out his dead mother's memory AGAIN for more clicks and attention. So when is Meghan going to dance with John Travolta?  I bet a pair of Manolo's she's begging to make that happen and she's got the long, off-the-shoulder black gown waiting. Of course it won't fit properly, another accurate prediction.


Ugh! I did not need that mental image of Methane cosplaying again.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Tell us another one, Hazz
> 
> 
> From the DM article - as awful as it is to read this, it is worse to watch the video -  can’t someone switch off his camera, please?
> 
> _Harry said: 'I could never fill her shoes, especially in this particular space, but because of what she did and what she stood for and how vocal she was about this issue… it's a converging of all these different pieces.
> 
> 'There's a way out of it, and if there's a way out of it and we know there's a solution, _*I'm like a typical guy*_. I just want to help fix things.'_
> 
> Seriously, a “typical guy” actually fixes things. He does not simply _help_. __


He really does speak badly, doesn't he? Rambles on incoherently and just veers from point to point without logical development. He reminds me of this guy who used to work with me. My boss then moaned that every time she used a particularly impressive word, the lightbulb would blink on over his head and he would try to insert that word into every conversation for the next week. Hazard's speech is all about sounding impressive. Guess they can't afford to have Sunshine Sucks write a script for him, or Methane wants the dunce she married to look as foolish as possible so that she looks intelligent in comparison.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Ugh! I did not need that mental image of Methane cosplaying again.
> 
> 
> He really does speak badly, doesn't he? Rambles on incoherently and just veers from point to point without logical development. He reminds me of this guy who used to work with me. My boss then moaned that every time she used a particularly impressive word, the lightbulb would blink on over his head and he would try to insert that word into every conversation for the next week. Hazard's speech is all about sounding impressive. Guess they can't afford to have Sunshine Sucks write a script for him, or Methane wants the dunce she married to look as foolish as possible so that she looks intelligent in comparison.


Are you sure you didn't actually work with Haz AND Megusa?


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> The tea towels had been printed !!!


I think her sister's comment was something like "Too late Duch, your face is already on the tea towels". Along with teacups, plates and everything else imaginable.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, Haz is lecturing again. Today it is about HIV. No mention of Cams.
> As much as I applauded and supported Diana when she stood against stereotyping the disease, Hazzi with his hand-waving and shoulder shrugging seems to minimize and diminish her contribution.  He simply has not developed the necessary _gravitas_ to be taken seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry vows to continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work
> 
> 
> Prince Harry urged Britons to 'go and get a test' for the illness during the 30-minute call with ex-Wales captain Gareth Thomas, who he is friends with,  to mark National HIV Testing Week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I actually took a deep breath and tried to watch this drivel.  I could only stomach half.  He gesticulates wildly as usual and brings up "Mum" every chance he gets.  What a shameless $hit.  If he's worried about HIV in Botswana, go there and help however you can, and bring attention to it.  Don't blabber on and on for a minute, then go on to the next topic du jour next week.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Queen faces days of Covid testing
					

Buckingham Palace last night refused to confirm whether the 95-year-old monarch had tested positive or negative for the coronavirus after meeting  Prince Charles, fuelling fears for her health.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> _'There's a way out of it, and if there's a way out of it and we know there's a solution, _*I'm like a typical guy*_. I just want to help fix things.'_



A "typical guy" couldn't make Migraine's heart go "pumpity pump".  Only famous rich ones can do that. And if she can destroy their families, so much the better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

amante said:


> Regular HIV testing benefits each and every one of us. People can live with HIV for a long time without any symptoms, testing is the only way to know your status.



Yeah, or you just live a low risk lifestyle. I am seriously surprised, they make it sound like the UK is a HIV hotspot. I have never heard of getting tested just because being promoted in Germany.


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does this randomly come from now?



Prince Harry asks Britons to take HIV test. The rest of the world would like him to take an IQ test.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> No further comments…




But in the comments someone says that's untrue. I have since done a million other things so I can't recall if it was a short time when they did it or only if the other bloodtests kind of match the risk factors so to speak. I have no clue which one it is, but I'll say Angela's statement struck me as odd. There are a gazillion blood tests for the most mundane things, some people have chronical illness that needs to be monitored closely, can you imagine all of them got an extra HIV test just because?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> A "typical guy" couldn't make Migraine's heart go "pumpity pump".  Only famous rich ones can do that. And if she can destroy their families, so much the better.



I pressed the laughing smilie, but it's actually so sad.


----------



## csshopper

OMG, he's at it again, Mummy Deare$t, resurrected for a few minutes for him to bumble his way into the spotlight.

Ironic his upcoming book supposedly emphasizes his recent history, "not as the prince I was born but as the man I have become,"
which he evidently and mistakenly views as being positive. Stupid sod can't shut up enough to "read the crowd" and recognize "the man he has become" is increasing viewed as a buffoon, and his participation ends up trivializing important subjects. The HIV campaign now being the latest as his motives for preaching are so transparent. As for being a "man" maybe in calendar years, but not in emotional ones, and not helped at all that TW has had his balls firmly in her claws for several years and shows no signs of giving them back. 

Not arguing against the HIV campaign, nor mental health support, my issue is the preacher. He's turning people off and the focus on what should be important is diluted.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Are you sure you didn't actually work with Haz AND Megusa?


Sadly I've worked with a guy who was a combo of the two, all their worse traits rolled into one. Worst years of my life. The Deadly Duo are quite typical narcs. It's their high profile that makes them exceptionally disturbing and damaging.


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> Prince Harry asks Britons to take HIV test. *The rest of the world would like him to take an IQ test*.



The test results might surprise him, but not us…  
Hazz, you are not typical! 







__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.md


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> Prince Harry asks Britons to take HIV test. The rest of the world would like him to take an IQ test.


Is it bad I just assume he’s had a scare recently with one of his call-girls and thinks everyone else is in the same boat?

I mean, hiv tests are a good thing but why just the British? Why not promote (or even sponsor) HIV testing in Lesotho, where it is a far more prevalent disease, and where fighting it was the central purpose of that charity you founded and used to work….oh wait you don’t care anymore if it doesn’t get you clicks. Got it.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But in the comments someone says that's untrue. I have since done a million other things so I can't recall if it was a short time when they did it or only if the other bloodtests kind of match the risk factors so to speak. I have no clue which one it is, but I'll say Angela's statement struck me as odd. There are a gazillion blood tests for the most mundane things, some people have chronical illness that needs to be monitored closely, can you imagine all of them got an extra HIV test just because?


I agree with you. Things have changed a lot since Diana, and I would think the UK doesn't need him to preach about HIV.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But in the comments someone says that's untrue. I have since done a million other things so I can't recall if it was a short time when they did it or only if the other bloodtests kind of match the risk factors so to speak. I have no clue which one it is, but I'll say Angela's statement struck me as odd. There are a gazillion blood tests for the most mundane things, some people have chronical illness that needs to be monitored closely, can you imagine all of them got an extra HIV test just because?


Yes it is untrue, there is actually a campaign to bring it in as part of routine blood work/ GP registration ATM. I think she is getting it confused with blood donation policy, because all donors are tested for HIV I believe.


----------



## Chanbal

This person makes a valid point. I don't know what the UK is waiting for to fix this royal mess. Both Hazz and Andy should be replaced asap…


----------



## CarryOn2020

If they accept women, Lady Louise and Lady Sarah would be perfect for that role.
If they don’t accept women, then change the rules asap!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This person makes a valid point. I don't know what the UK is waiting for to fix this royal mess.



I agree that they need to tidy up the house household but arguably W or C could easily do it remotely with the internet. I mean Richard the first officially ruled the country even though he spent most of his life out on crusade killing innocent people  
Edward the seventh spent long periods of time travelling too. There are precedents.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree that they need to tidy up the house household but arguably W or C could easily do it remotely with the internet. I mean Richard the first officially ruled the country even though he spent most of his life out on crusade killing innocent people
> edward the seventh spent long periods of time travelling too. There are precedents.


Absolutely, we live in the time of zoom meetings (one of Hazz multiple skills ). Though, I would think that people in the UK would like to minimize the risk of having the Netfl*xes imposing themselves (their area of proficiency) in the monarchy.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they accept women, Lady Louise and Lady Sarah would be perfect for that role.
> *If they don’t accept women, then change the rules asap!*


----------



## Chanbal

If Hazz is indeed one of the two top-secret advisors to The Crown recently hired by Nefl*x, we may learn the zoom call with QE, that didn't happen, happened!


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> If Hazz is indeed one of the two top-secret advisors to The Crown recently hired by Nefl*x, we may learn the zoom call with QE, that didn't happen, happened!



Pretends to be shocked *clutches pearls*


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Queen didn’t use Zoom, it’s not very secure.


----------



## LittleStar88

The Queen uses Webex for video calls.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, Haz is lecturing again. Today it is about HIV. No mention of Cams.
> As much as I applauded and supported Diana when she stood against stereotyping the disease, Hazzi with his hand-waving and shoulder shrugging seems to minimize and diminish her contribution.  He simply has not developed the necessary _gravitas_ to be taken seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry vows to continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work
> 
> 
> Prince Harry urged Britons to 'go and get a test' for the illness during the 30-minute call with ex-Wales captain Gareth Thomas, who he is friends with,  to mark National HIV Testing Week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


him trying to ride on his dead mother's coattails is getting to be very annoying


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Hazz doesn't miss an opportunity to use his mother's name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry vows to continue Princess Diana's 'unfinished' HIV work
> 
> 
> Prince Harry urged Britons to 'go and get a test' for the illness during the 30-minute call with ex-Wales captain Gareth Thomas, who he is friends with,  to mark National HIV Testing Week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> him trying to ride on his dead mother's coattails is getting to be very annoying


This disease is not the death sentence it used to be.  The drugs have been amazing and people don't even have to take the multiple daily pills that they once did.  The focus should be on prevention of transmission.  Telling people to go out and be tested is ????  Where did that really come from?  Did some PR genius think this was a good idea?  Just another way to drag up his mother.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This disease is not the death sentence it used to be.  The drugs have been amazing and people don't even have to take the multiple daily pills that they once did.  The focus should be on prevention of transmission.  Telling people to go out and be tested is ????  Where did that really come from?  Did some PR genius think this was a good idea?  Just another way to drag up his mother.


yes, unless he's talking about third world countries or something?


----------



## charlottawill

I just want to say, hanging around here is educational. Today on Jeopardy one of the categories was "The British Royal Family". I knew all the answers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they accept women, Lady Louise and Lady Sarah would be perfect for that role.
> If they don’t accept women, then change the rules asap!


Lady Louise is only 18, minimum age is 21.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "...Hazzi with his *hand-waving and shoulder shrugging*..."



He reminds me of a popular ventriloquist's dummy back in the 60s. His mouth moves but the words are never his. All you need to do is 
photoshop TW's head into the picture.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This is good



That pic was taken June 8, 2018 (same as the one below) celebrating HMTQ's birthday. I can't understand why they would be fussing about standing in the back row when others more important than them are there as well. Camilla is hardly visible behind Andrew. William stands behind Catherine who's in front with the children.



Here's another pic with M's phony smile.


Remember, there was an accident in the carriage parade and everyone except M seemed quite concerned.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> That pic was taken June 8, 2018 (same as the one below) celebrating HMTQ's birthday. I can't understand why they would be fussing about standing in the back row when others more important than them are there as well. Camilla is hardly visible behind Andrew. William stands behind Catherine who's in front with the children.
> 
> View attachment 5323554
> 
> Here's another pic with M's phony smile.
> View attachment 5323561
> 
> Remember, there was an accident in the carriage parade and everyone except M seemed quite concerned.
> View attachment 5323564


So that would have been right after their wedding? She was still on her best behavior I guess, at least when the cameras were rolling. Sadly, you can see how much the Queen has aged since then. But then so have I


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> This disease is not the death sentence it used to be.  The drugs have been amazing and people don't even have to take the multiple daily pills that they once did.  The focus should be on prevention of transmission.  Telling people to go out and be tested is ????  Where did that really come from?  Did some PR genius think this was a good idea?  Just another way to drag up his mother.


Maybe he is getting financial rewards from the makers of the home HIV Test Kits.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Lady Louise is only 18, minimum age is 21.


Fun fact, Lady Louise was the last baby to wear the original Christening gown.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's another pic with M's phony smile.
> View attachment 5323561


I always find this hand gesture very weird no matter who does it. It's like they are holding an imaginary phone. Or they are pretending to be Oh So Sweet by cradling their own cheek. Very affected gesture.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I always find this hand gesture very weird no matter who does it. It's like they are holding an imaginary phone. Or they are pretending to be Oh So Sweet by cradling their own cheek. Very affected gesture.



Ugh. It’s one of her “I’m so cute and carefree” poses.


----------



## amante

Chanbal said:


> No further comments…






> So now the NHS Trust _is_ introducing _routine testing_ for _HIV_ for anyone coming to A&E [Amante: Accidents & Emergency aka Emergency Room in the US] who needs a _blood test_.


Sunday 19 July 2015 22:34, UK








						Blood Test Patients To Be Checked For HIV
					

Doctors at St Thomas' Hospital in London are expecting to detect three or four cases of HIV every week.




					news.sky.com
				






> An independent commission has called on the UK government to end new HIV transmissions by 2030 and normalise HIV testing wherever blood is taken, including at GP surgeries, screening appointments, and in emergency departments.


BMJ    2020;    371     doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m4694    (Published 01 December 2020)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they accept women, Lady Louise and Lady Sarah would be perfect for that role.
> If they don’t accept women, then change the rules asap!


Quote from Wiki re  Counsellors of State : " Counsellors of state are the monarch's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who meet the following specifications: they must be British subjects of full age (21, but 18 for the heir apparent and presumptive) who are domiciled in the United Kingdom and not disqualified from becoming monarch.[6][7] During a regency, the next four eligible people in the line of succession after the regent may be counsellors (and the monarch's spouse).[8]"

The Wiki article also states that only senior members of TRF may be Counsellors. So as of now the only senior royals in the line of succession are Charles and William. (I will feel the earth tremble when I hear the collective sighs of relief from TPF members as they read the following): Prince Dufus is no longer eligible since he lives outside the UK. Andrew may have been removed because he is retarded retired. By my calculations they would need to appoint 2 more senior royals in the line of succession. I'm hoping for Anne, but she's after Edward in the line of succession.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> That pic was taken June 8, 2018 (same as the one below) celebrating HMTQ's birthday. I can't understand why they would be fussing about standing in the back row when others more important than them are there as well. Camilla is hardly visible behind Andrew. William stands behind Catherine who's in front with the children.
> 
> View attachment 5323554
> 
> Here's another pic with M's phony smile.
> View attachment 5323561
> 
> Remember, there was an accident in the carriage parade and everyone except M seemed quite concerned.
> View attachment 5323564


what white teeth meghan has....very Hollywood


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Telling people to go out and be tested is ????  Where did that really come from?



This discussion made me curious. Here's the CDC's position:

"CDC recommends that *everyone between the ages of 13 and 64* get tested for HIV at least once as part of routine health care. For those at higher risk, CDC recommends getting tested at least once a year."

I think I had one a few years ago. I seem to recall my doctor recommending one during an annual exam, along with other lab work, even though I was considered low risk. 

And then there's this - People generally seems to be pro-H&M:  



> https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-constant-support-gareth-thomas-hiv-campaign/


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Quote from Wiki re  Counsellors of State : " Counsellors of state are the monarch's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who meet the following specifications: they must be British subjects of full age (21, but 18 for the heir apparent and presumptive) who are domiciled in the United Kingdom and not disqualified from becoming monarch.[6][7] During a regency, the next four eligible people in the line of succession after the regent may be counsellors (and the monarch's spouse).[8]"
> 
> The Wiki article also states that only senior members of TRF may be Counsellors. So as of now the only senior royals in the line of succession are Charles and William. (I will feel the earth tremble when I hear the collective sighs of relief from TPF members as they read the following): Prince Dufus is no longer eligible since he lives outside the UK. Andrew may have been removed because he is retarded retired. By my calculations they would need to appoint 2 more senior royals in the line of succession. I'm hoping for Anne, but she's after Edward in the line of succession.



I'm glad they finally changed the law regarding succession. Anne should have been ahead of Andrew and Edward. I'm sure she is intellectually.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I'm glad they finally changed the law regarding succession. Anne should have been ahead of Andrew and Edward. I'm sure she is intellectually.


They changed the line of succession to chronological order starting with William's children. Anne is 17 and still after Edward although she's much better than most before her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Quote from Wiki re  Counsellors of State : " Counsellors of state are the monarch's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who meet the following specifications: they must be British subjects of full age (21, but 18 for the heir apparent and presumptive) who are domiciled in the United Kingdom and not disqualified from becoming monarch.[6][7] During a regency, the next four eligible people in the line of succession after the regent may be counsellors (and the monarch's spouse).[8]"
> 
> The Wiki article also states that only senior members of TRF may be Counsellors. So as of now the only senior royals in the line of succession are Charles and William. (I will feel the earth tremble when I hear the collective sighs of relief from TPF members as they read the following): Prince Dufus is no longer eligible since he lives outside the UK. Andrew may have been removed because he is retarded retired. By my calculations they would need to appoint 2 more senior royals in the line of succession. I'm hoping for Anne, but she's after Edward in the line of succession.



Thank you for the info. Imo, Clearly, this needs to be rethought/reworked/redone. Perhaps the group should be for *working* royals only. Andrew and his daughters should not be anywhere near this decision. Hazz, too.  Just imagine what they will do to Charles, then William.    Power corrupts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you for the info. Imo, Clearly, this needs to be rethought/reworked/redone. Perhaps the group should be for *working* royals only. Andrew and his daughters should not be anywhere near this decision. Hazz, too.  Just imagine what they will do to Charles, then William.    Power corrupts.


This can't be changed on a whim. The Monarch has to issue Letters Patent that must be approved by Parliament. She can't just remove someone from the line of succession, but as previously mentioned, since Dufus can no longer act as counselor of state because he's living in USA, HM might have already dealt with this problem without notifying us and if H's children remain in the US, they would both be ineligible to serve in that capacity as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they accept women, Lady Louise and Lady Sarah would be perfect for that role.
> If they don’t accept women, then change the rules asap!



Lady Louise is 17 years old. Maybe let her turn legal and finish her education first   But her dad could move up. And Lady Sarah is way down the line of succession.

To answer your question, Counsellors of State are usually the first few adults in the line of succession, as #4 is a girl, I guess it can be a woman. I vote Anne.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> If Hazz is indeed one of the two top-secret advisors to The Crown recently hired by Nefl*x, we may learn the zoom call with QE, that didn't happen, happened!




Surprise surprise!


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does this randomly come from now?




Honestly - what a buffoon Harry is.  I guess the good news is that even when he issues ridiculous edicts like this, virtually no one is paying attention to him. Why would he think that people in the UK want to take his advice about anything?!?!


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> I always find this hand gesture very weird no matter who does it. It's like they are holding an imaginary phone. Or they are pretending to be Oh So Sweet by cradling their own cheek. Very affected gesture.



MM excels at affected!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Has there been an uptick in the number of HIV cases in the UK?


----------



## amante

The goal of the new aggressive HIV testing is complete eradication of new HIV transmissions by 2030


----------



## carmen56

lanasyogamama said:


> Has there been an uptick in the number of HIV cases in the UK?



Not to my knowledge.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m missing something.  Are we in June?  Why is Hazz talking about this? He is in the USA, not the UK, right?





charlottawill said:


> Maybe he doesn't know?


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> Prince Harry asks Britons to take HIV test. The rest of the world would like him to take an IQ test.



What's an IQ test?


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> Pretends to be shocked *clutches pearls*



Duchess pretends to be helpful to the Queen *clutches QEII's pearls*


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is this still being debated?  Wow.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, is this still being debated?  Wow.




Why would she? It's not a government or legislative matter really. And to be honest, I'd love to see a few more incidents were the Queen makes people aware of decisions she has made


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would she? It's not a government or legislative matter really. And to be honest, I'd love to see a few more incidents were the Queen makes people aware of decisions she has made



I agree. QE knows the rules, she knows what she can and cannot do, so why is this a “thing”? 
Or does this signal there will be a battle ahead?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Was it an early book promotion or because William was getting positive press?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was it an early book promotion or because William was getting positive press?



H is trying to rebrand himself and stay out of controversial issues and W's way ... 
The military and rugby are no longer HIS things, vaxs are too controversial and yes, he is setting himself up for THE BOOK


----------



## CeeJay

Sophisticatted said:


> They’ve already had the opportunity to *earn *the kind of money they want.  They got the contracts, they just haven’t done the actual work required.


.. and that will be their modis operandi!!  The two of them actually “working” - HA!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> TW says hi



Wait?!?! .. the biographer of his book is saying this?!?!  So, it sounds like the book is going to be the whining and sniveling autobiography of a man-child who is such a victim of others .. hmmmm, where did he got those ideas?!?! .. and will people be sympathetic to this?!?!  What an effin’ idiot!!!!!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was it an early book promotion or because William was getting positive press?



Both.
Hazbeen needs to get his thumb out of his mouth, crawl out of his mental crib, and come to grips with the fact his Mummy died 25 years ago and during that time countless people world wide have been carrying forward her work, all without celebrating themselves as saviors and merching her name.

Plus, he and TW will be actively trying to distract and tarnish the Jubilee, with extra effort into blunting anything  positive about Camilla now it's been announced she will be Queen Consort.

Their ignoring the Queen's historic 70 year Anniversary this week is so vilely petty it's shocking how very very low they go. The despicable little whiner needs to remember some significant family history. She's his GRANDMOTHER and the one time in her reign she suffered a fall in positive public opinion was the result of her putting that role ahead of her others. Remember the flak for her staying at Balmoral and not immediately returning to London when Diana was killed? Evidently 6 chooses to ignore it.
*Queen was 'deeply hurt' by the criticism over the handling of Diana's death: Former aide reveals monarch's upset at public backlash after the family remained at Balmoral*

*Queen 'deeply hurt' by criticism on how she handled Princes Diana's death*
*Her former aide Sir Malcolm Ross said 'her priority were her grandchildren'*
*He told BBC documentary it was The Queen's decision to stage a royal funeral*
*Television special is the third princes have appeared on about mother's death*
 
Even Diana’s own sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale, says she backed the monarch’s judgement.

‘If you were the grandmother of a 12-year-old and a 15-year-old whose mother had just been killed in a car crash, she did absolutely the right thing. 

'If I had been her, I would have done that. Why would you bring them to London? 

'Why don’t you let them get over the start of the shock in the bosom of their own family?’ she asks.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. and that will be their modis operandi!!  The two of them actually “working” - HA!!!!


I doubt they are capable of doing much....they really just want to sell their brand I think


----------



## rose60610

"With Prince Charles isolating and Prince William abroad, is Prince Andrew limbering up in case he needs to be a Counsellor of State - or can Prince Harry do it, virtually?"

If Harry could do whatever 'virtually', then why couldn't Prince Charles do the same thing 'virtually' himself while he's in isolation? And if Elizabeth can be Queen, what's the big deal with another woman being a "Counsellor of State"?  I'd trust one of the corgi's before Harry or Andrew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> She's his GRANDMOTHER and the one time in her reign she suffered a fall in positive public opinion was the result of her putting that role ahead of her others. Remember the flak for her staying at Balmoral and not immediately returning to London when Diana was killed? Evidently 6 chooses to ignore it.



And Philip - you know, the grandfather they trashed while he was lying on his death bed - was the boys' fiercest advocate when planning the funeral.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> "With Prince Charles isolating and Prince William abroad, is Prince Andrew limbering up in case he needs to be a Counsellor of State - or can Prince Harry do it, virtually?"
> 
> If Harry could do whatever 'virtually', then why couldn't Prince Charles do the same thing 'virtually' himself while he's in isolation? And if Elizabeth can be Queen, what's the big deal with another woman being a "Counsellor of State"?  I'd trust one of the corgi's before Harry or Andrew.


Andrew has been Counsellor of State since 1986, but I'm hoping that HM will remove him soon. Harry has been since 1984, but that probably won't last much longer since he doesn't reside in the UK. Anne held the position from 1971 to 2003 and Edward from 1985 to 2005 after turning 21. Here's hoping Anne resumes the role again.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I love bedtime storytime!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was it an early book promotion or because William was getting positive press?



Promotions galore in the run up to the book publication, I'd be expecting. And if he'd wanted to carry on anything started by Diana, he could have done it a lot earlier, not when he is in his late 30s and needs to hype the connection for cash.



sdkitty said:


> I doubt they are capable of doing much....they really just want to sell their brand I think


They probably thought that as A listers (their delusional perception of themselves), people would be beating a path to their door and flinging money at them just for being them. Not even in a non-Covid world would that be realistic.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Both.
> Hazbeen needs to get his thumb out of his mouth, crawl out of his mental crib, and come to grips with the fact his Mummy died 25 years ago and during that time countless people world wide have been carrying forward her work, all without celebrating themselves as saviors and merching her name.
> 
> Plus, he and TW will be actively trying to distract and tarnish the Jubilee, with extra effort into blunting anything  positive about Camilla now it's been announced she will be Queen Consort.
> 
> Their ignoring the Queen's historic 70 year Anniversary this week is so vilely petty it's shocking how very very low they go. The despicable little whiner needs to remember some significant family history. She's his GRANDMOTHER and the one time in her reign she suffered a fall in positive public opinion was the result of her putting that role ahead of her others. Remember the flak for her staying at Balmoral and not immediately returning to London when Diana was killed? Evidently 6 chooses to ignore it.
> *Queen was 'deeply hurt' by the criticism over the handling of Diana's death: Former aide reveals monarch's upset at public backlash after the family remained at Balmoral*
> 
> *Queen 'deeply hurt' by criticism on how she handled Princes Diana's death*
> *Her former aide Sir Malcolm Ross said 'her priority were her grandchildren'*
> *He told BBC documentary it was The Queen's decision to stage a royal funeral*
> *Television special is the third princes have appeared on about mother's death*
> 
> Even Diana’s own sister, Lady Sarah McCorquodale, says she backed the monarch’s judgement.
> 
> ‘If you were the grandmother of a 12-year-old and a 15-year-old whose mother had just been killed in a car crash, she did absolutely the right thing.
> 
> 'If I had been her, I would have done that. Why would you bring them to London?
> 
> 'Why don’t you let them get over the start of the shock in the bosom of their own family?’ she asks.


The only thing Haz is A list at is being an A-hole.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder what Hazz is going to have on his memoir that has not been previously published on DM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what Hazz is going to have on his memoir that has not been previously published on DM.




Look at Cams rockin those shoulders!


----------



## bag-mania

I love how there are so many articles today about the horrible smell near their house.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s mansion engulfed by foul smell
					

There is something fishy in Montecito, and it’s penetrated the former royals’ nearly $15 million mansion.




					nypost.com


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I love how there are so many articles today about the horrible smell near their house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s mansion engulfed by foul smell
> 
> 
> There is something fishy in Montecito, and it’s penetrated the former royals’ nearly $15 million mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


"Other reports surfaced that the stink may have come directly from the home of the royal couple themselves."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> "Other reports surfaced that the stink may have come directly from the home of the royal couple themselves."


“Moral decay” 
“Rotten to the core”
”Something fishy going on there”
They do muck around in chicken ****.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> “Moral decay”
> “Rotten to the core”
> ”Something fishy going on there”
> They do muck around in chicken ****.



-this happened after they moved in - hmmm, wth are they doing?
-perhaps they did not pay the contractor and this is his revenge - just as in _Succession_
-is this why Rob Lowe moved out?



_This isn’t the first time Harry and Meghan have had to deal with odor issues. Last year, it was reported that they had been living near a legal cannabis factory, which have proliferated in the area since weed farming was legalized in 2016.

The couple’s mansion is situated near 20 large greenhouses full of cannabis plants — leaving the luxury suburb reeking of weed. Neighbors made a string of complaints, spurring the company to install new “odor control systems.”

Gregory Gandrud told the Sunday Mirror: “The stink was getting stronger and heading their way. I was driving along the freeway and was hit hard by the smell. It doesn’t make you high but it’s not what you want driving at 70 mph.”

“I had to pull over. It made me completely lose my train of thought. Lots of people here are suffering.”








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s mansion engulfed by foul smell
					

There is something fishy in Montecito, and it’s penetrated the former royals’ nearly $15 million mansion.




					nypost.com
				



_


----------



## Happyish

DoggieBags said:


> Several articles mentioned that in 2018, Kate supposedly spent about $90k on clothes while Meghan spent over $500k excluding the cost of her wedding dress.


I don't think this is at all accurate. Kate has a lot of dresses made for her by Alexander McQueen. These are custom, not off-the-rack, and the cost is impossible to quantity. Accordingly, the conclusion that she spent 1/10th of what Megan did on clothes isn't accurate.


----------



## Happyish

papertiger said:


> Katherine is not in political role. The Crown is supposed to be above politics.
> 
> There are no written rules for the BRF, expensive or cheap, commercially it matters more and it would look in poor taste not to wear visibly British designers/labels. Barbour, Gloverall, McQueen, Launer, Saville Row, Harris Tween, even high-street labels, doesn't matter so long as what they wear supports UK industry.
> 
> Apart from bags and shoes, Diana only visibly started wearing notable French and Italian designers on public engagements after her divorce.
> 
> Multiple choice question: MM got away with wearing whatever she liked because
> a) she didn't understand
> b) she didn't know
> c) she didn't care or
> d) she was going to ask for cash-back and sponsorship deals once worn
> ?


All of the above . . .


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> “Moral decay”
> “Rotten to the core”
> ”Something fishy going on there”
> They do muck around in chicken ****.


The DM is having a field day with the stink story lolol!  It writes itself.


----------



## Chanbal

This sounds about right!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Andrew has been Counsellor of State since 1986, but I'm hoping that HM will remove him soon. *Harry has been since 1984,* but that probably won't last much longer since he doesn't reside in the UK. Anne held the position from 1971 to 2003 and Edward from 1985 to 2005 after turning 21. Here's hoping Anne resumes the role again.



Is that a typo? Was he even born in 1984?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what Hazz is going to have on his memoir that has not been previously published on DM.




Oh please. The dimwit had to watch The Crown to find out about the affair?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that a typo? Was he even born in 1984?



*maybe this Counselor position is a courtesy title?   *

_Sussexroyal.com - I did *not* click the link. 
Born: September 15, 1984 (age 37 years), St Mary's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Full name: Henry Charles Albert David
Spouse: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (m. 2018)
Children: Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor
Education: Royal Military Academy Sandhurst (2005–2006), Eton College (1998–2003), Wetherby Preparatory School, Ludgrove School_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It is not a courtesy position though, they need to be prepared to do the Queen's job if need be.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I love how there are so many articles today about the horrible smell near their house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s mansion engulfed by foul smell
> 
> 
> There is something fishy in Montecito, and it’s penetrated the former royals’ nearly $15 million mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Not what you need when selling. No amount of freshly baked bread essence is going to cover that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Not what you need when selling. No amount of freshly baked bread essence is going to cover that.



Just what I thought. Nobody is going to shell out multiple millions to never be able to open a window or use the garden.


----------



## DoggieBags

Happyish said:


> I don't think this is at all accurate. Kate has a lot of dresses made for her by Alexander McQueen. These are custom, not off-the-rack, and the cost is impossible to quantity. Accordingly, the conclusion that she spent 1/10th of what Megan did on clothes isn't accurate.


If you recall, Kate gave birth to her 3rd child in 2018 so her public engagements schedule was most likely scaled back for at least the first half of that year. She also reuses many of her custom made outfits unlike Megan who doesn’t appear to re-use any of outfits.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is not a courtesy position though, they need to be prepared to do the Queen's job if need be.



Exactly.
So, based on the fact that a newborn was added to the ‘group’, I’m thinking this ‘group’ is more about the line of succession and less about ability.  I really have no idea how the UK system works. At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn 
:frazzled:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly.
> So, based on the fact that a newborn was added to the ‘group’, I’m thinking this ‘group’ is more about the line of succession and less about ability.  I really have no idea how the UK system works. At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn
> :frazzled:



Is it a fact, though? That was my initial question, and I rather doubt it. So the heir to the throne became a CoS at age 18, the current #2 at age 21, but the then #3 by birth? Yeah, no.

ETA: Wikipedia says he became CoS in 2005.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly.
> So, based on the fact that a newborn was added to the ‘group’, I’m thinking this ‘group’ is more about the line of succession and less about ability.  I really have no idea how the UK system works. At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn
> :frazzled:



That's how monarchy and aristocracy works. They are born and bred to rule, the rest of us plebs have to learn and work until we demonstrate our ability to manage and/or lead.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that a typo? Was he even born in 1984?


Sorry, I wrote Harry's birthday, but it should read, that he was eligible in 2018 and was active from 2005 according to Wiki.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Maggie Muggins said:


> Andrew has been Counsellor of State since 1986, but I'm hoping that HM will remove him soon. Harry has been *since 1984*, but that probably won't last much longer since he doesn't reside in the UK. Anne held the position from 1971 to 2003 and Edward from 1985 to 2005 after turning 21. Here's hoping Anne resumes the role again.


Correction: 
Sorry, I wrote Harry's birthday, but it should read, that he was eligible in 2018 and was active from 2005 according to Wiki.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> If you recall, Kate gave birth to her 3rd child in 2018 so her public engagements schedule was most likely scaled back for at least the first half of that year. She also reuses many of her custom made outfits unlike Megan who doesn’t appear to re-use any of outfits.


Re-using or upcycling outfits was something that Diana did too (occasionally). No matter how hard Methane tries to cosplay her late MIL, she just fails at copying her style.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The DM is having a field day with the stink story lolol!  It writes itself.


is the home actually listed for sale?  if this smell story is true they may have to lower the price


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> is the home actually listed for sale?  if this smell story is true they may have to lower the price



They'd also have to want the publicity, and not many wealthy do.


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Hazz may not be as negative about Camilla on his book as anticipated. In the comment section of this video there are 2 intriguing comments for TPF detectives (check Spoiler). If true, people will be upset imo. 



Spoiler: Rumors?



1) "_allegedly PC is bringing Haz back to work with the armed forces/vets_"
2) allegedly, "_Better Up is now listed on the front page of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust"_


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Hazz may not be as negative about Camilla on his book as anticipated. In the comment section of this video there are 2 intriguing comments for TPF detectives (check Spoiler). If true, people will be upset imo.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rumors?
> 
> 
> 
> 1) "_allegedly PC is bringing Haz back to work with the armed forces/vets_"
> 2) allegedly, "_Better Up is now listed on the front page of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust"_



#2 Spoiler is true: Butter Up is giving free coaching to QCT young entrepreneurs.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly.
> So, based on the fact that a newborn was added to the ‘group’, I’m thinking this ‘group’ is more about the line of succession and less about ability.  I really have no idea how the UK system works. *At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn*
> :frazzled:





xincinsin said:


> #2 Spoiler is true: Butter Up is giving free coaching to QCT young entrepreneurs.


This is giving major credibility to Hazz et al. as coaches and huge free publicity at the highest level. @CarryOn2020, I'm with you : _At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn…_











						The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust
					

The Queen's Commonwealth Trust champions, funds and connects young leaders who are working hard to change the world.




					www.queenscommonwealthtrust.org


----------



## Sophisticatted

This is heartening.  It means he may be returning to his family.  They are actually interested in helping him vs. exploiting him.  Unlike TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Hazz may not be as negative about Camilla on his book as anticipated. In the comment section of this video there are 2 intriguing comments for TPF detectives (check Spoiler). If true, people will be upset imo.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rumors?
> 
> 
> 
> 1) "_allegedly PC is bringing Haz back to work with the armed forces/vets_"
> 2) allegedly, "_Better Up is now listed on the front page of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust"_




Well said, Neil. We are indeed getting bored with H&M.
RE: Hazz returning - yes, yes, take him back. We have had enough. Tyvm.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Is the house in TW’s name?  Or owned by one of her “Delaware companies”?  These rumors may be part of the chess vs. checkers game.  Let the Harkles get bogged down in debt.  Make a deal (several, actually) to free/reclaim Harry and keep TW in the US.  Harry and the kids go to the Jubilee, TW stays home, Harry and the kids don’t return to the US.  TW has no money to fight it because she’s bogged down in her portion of the debts and has a house she can’t sell because it smells.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Serena may even be part of the plan.  Both with BetterUp and with using her connections to distract Meg with becoming a “patron of American tennis” which will never come to fruition, but TW doesn’t know that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> Is the house in TW’s name?  Or owned by one of her “Delaware companies”?  These rumors may be part of the chess vs. checkers game.  Let the Harkles get bogged down in debt.  Make a deal (several, actually) to free/reclaim Harry and keep TW in the US.  Harry and the kids go to the Jubilee, TW stays home, Harry and the kids don’t return to the US.  *TW has no money to fight it* because she’s bogged down in her portion of the debts and has a house she can’t sell because it smells.



No, the BRF cannot cut her off. Nope. We don’t really like her, but if the BRF treats her shabbily, the uproar will be enormous! She needs to go with Hazzi and the kids (edited so that point is clear).  Cheers, all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, the BRF cannot cut her off. Nope. We don’t really like her, but if the BRF treats her shabbily, the uproar will be enormous! She needs to go, too.



LOL!  Maybe they can give her one of those uninhabited islands nearby and rename it Chunga Changa just for her.

ETA:  I don’t think they will really cut her off, I think they will make a deal with her.  I think she won’t be ready to make a deal until she realizes how deeply mired down in debt she is.  Of course there will be NDAs, so any knowledge we get will be rumor.  I’m sure she will want to stay in the US to work on her “stardom”.  Of course, maybe she’ll do a “half in, half out” program where she appears to parent her children and get along with the BRF and then spends the rest of the time working in North America on her career.  If she plays nice, they may even wrangle some strings for her on their side of the pond.  I’m assuming there’s going to be a divorce.


----------



## Chanbal

Sophisticatted said:


> Is the house in TW’s name?  Or owned by one of her “Delaware companies”?  These rumors may be part of the chess vs. checkers game.  Let the Harkles get bogged down in debt.  Make a deal (several, actually) to free/reclaim Harry and keep TW in the US.  *Harry and the kids go to the Jubilee, TW stays home, Harry and the kids don’t return to the US.*  TW has no money to fight it because she’s bogged down in her portion of the debts and has a house she can’t sell because it smells.





Sophisticatted said:


> Serena may even be part of the plan.  Both with BetterUp and with using her connections to distract Meg with becoming a “patron of American tennis” which will never come to fruition, but TW doesn’t know that.


I don't consider TW an intelligent woman, but she is far too smart to fall for that. During Hazz and TW's last trip to the UK, Arch*e stayed behind. So, no risks taken…


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## MiniMabel

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5325265





Duchess Catherine is stunning, a beautiful lady inside and out.  The other.....the way she's looking at Catherine is very unsettling.


----------



## sdkitty

MiniMabel said:


> Duchess Catherine is stunning, a beautiful lady inside and out.  The other.....the way she's looking at Catherine is very unsettling.


much as I dislike M, I have to say they both have serious expressions in this picture


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> is the home actually listed for sale?  if this smell story is true they may have to lower the price


And/or delay it.
The source of the odor is a huge salt marsh bird refuge where the water gets stagnant.
Supposedly it will be remedied in the Fall when new piping is scheduled to be installed 
.


----------



## MiniMabel

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike M, I have to say they both have serious expressions in this picture



To me, MM has a supercilious expression on her face and looks very calculating/cunning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, I wrote Harry's birthday, but it should read, that he was eligible in 2018 and was active from 2005 according to Wiki.



He was eligible from 2005 when he turned 21 though? The one thing that confused me that Wiki claims both Charles and Andrew replaced the Duke of Gloucester which obviously can't be right. I think one of them might have been the Duke of Kent instead. But to be honest, I feel one needs a degree to understand the finetuning of the Royal machinery...which is why I'm going back to watching royal recipes on Youtube


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is giving major credibility to Hazz et al. as coaches and huge free publicity at the highest level. @CarryOn2020, I'm with you : _At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn…_
> 
> View attachment 5325125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust
> 
> 
> The Queen's Commonwealth Trust champions, funds and connects young leaders who are working hard to change the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.queenscommonwealthtrust.org



Who thought that was a good idea?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, the BRF cannot cut her off. Nope. We don’t really like her, but if the BRF treats her shabbily, the uproar will be enormous! She needs to go with Hazzi and the kids (edited so that point is clear).  Cheers, all.



I just read another pretty nasty rumour of her alleged yachting days. At this point I feel it could go both ways...the BRF trying to avoid the embarrassment for Harry and the kids by appeasing her or telling her in no uncertain terms to f*ck off with a small settlement if she doesn't want her reputation destroyed beyond her wildest dreams. I do think they are always about deescalation, but at some point even they must be fed up with a crazy, impertinent grifter and she can't know if they are bluffing or not (the hook, they need to be willing to go all the way if need be).

This all given Harry finally sees the light and agrees to a divorce obviously.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read another pretty nasty rumour of her alleged yachting days. At this point I feel it could go both ways...the BRF trying to avoid the embarrassment for Harry and the kids by appeasing her or telling her in no uncertain terms to f*ck off with a small settlement if she doesn't want her reputation destroyed beyond her wildest dreams. I do think they are always about deescalation, but at some point even they must be fed up with a crazy, impertinent grifter and she can't know if they are bluffing or not (the hook, they need to be willing to go all the way if need be).
> 
> This all given Harry finally sees the light and agrees to a divorce obviously.


you think she'd go away for a small settlement?
she's not going to let go of the golden goose easily


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read another pretty nasty rumour of her alleged yachting days. At this point I feel it could go both ways...the BRF trying to avoid the embarrassment for Harry and the kids by appeasing her or telling her in no uncertain terms to f*ck off with a small settlement if she doesn't want her reputation destroyed beyond her wildest dreams. I do think they are always about deescalation, but at some point even they must be fed up with a crazy, impertinent grifter and she can't know if they are bluffing or not (the hook, they need to be willing to go all the way if need be).
> 
> This all given Harry finally sees the light and agrees to a divorce obviously.


What is the rumor?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> What is the rumor?



Basically the same as always, but they brought out a "witness" who worked with her (apparently he's said it before and didn't get sued), and they also claimed she was a...stand-in or something for porn material. And more about Markus Anderson's side gigs as a high class pimp for Soho House and her harrassing London members to introduce her to their rich friends.

The thing is, it could all be haters, but it is kind of interesting to me that the Duchess of Lawsuit goes to court over an alleged copper bathtub but lets people call her a prostitute without batting an eyelash.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> you think she'd go away for a small settlement?
> she's not going to let go of the golden goose easily



Not likely. It would be an enormous settlement and it would be in writing that a divorce would have to be publicly presented as if Meghan was the aggrieved party and whatever went wrong in the marriage was all on Harry. 

However, I don’t believe Harry is going anywhere. He made his choice and he cannot undo the damage he has done to his family’s reputation.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Not likely. It would be an enormous settlement and it would be in writing that a divorce would have to be publicly presented as if Meghan was the aggrieved party and whatever went wrong in the marriage was all on Harry.
> 
> However, I don’t believe Harry is going anywhere. He made his choice and he cannot undo the damage he has done to his family’s reputation.


Even if she grew to detest him, I don't think she'd let go without a huge settlement.
Him?  who knows?  he seems to be under her control and he has the kids


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, it could all be haters, but it is kind of interesting to me that the Duchess of Lawsuit goes to court over an alleged copper bathtub but lets people call her a prostitute without batting an eyelash.



I can’t stand her but I think it probably is haters. Either way, if she acknowledged the yacht girl rumors by filing a lawsuit it would bring it to the attention of mainstream media and then millions of people would hear about it who currently have no idea. She doesn’t want that.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Even if she grew to detest him, I don't think she'd let go without a huge settlement.
> Him?  who knows?  he seems to be under her control and he has the kids



Have we seen any sign he’s unhappy with her? I can’t think of any.


----------



## poopsie

It's an interesting situation. Plenty of scenarios either way.
IMO she will tire of him first, if she hasn't already. But things haven't exactly gone to plan. Contrary to the s#!t Sunshine Sachs is churning out it doesn't look like the world is beating a path to their door. At least not the VIPs that she wants. Good luck also on trading up on Haz.  What man in that category would possibly see her as a catch? 
Hair Brain Harry has staked everything on a bad pony. He's been outed as a dim witted tool incapable of functioning on his own.  However there are still plenty of gold digging women who would be interested in him. Well. YKWIM


----------



## bag-mania

She hitched her wagon to him and I think she will stick with it. It’s not like she has a line of rich men knocking down the door to meet her. He’s the best she’s going to get.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Have we seen any sign he’s unhappy with her? I can’t think of any.


IDK....I guess one can be dominated and be happy with that.  We really have no idea what goes on in their private life but if she is a narcissist then she wouldn't have any love to give, right?  I suppose it's possible she is not who we think she is or that if she doesn't love him she can act like she does and make him happy.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Have we seen any sign he’s unhappy with her? I can’t think of any.


he is trying to provide for his family and for now he is the one with the paying gigs 
she won’t tire of him, at least for a bit


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> IDK....I guess one can be dominated and be happy with that.  We really have no idea what goes on in their private life but if she is a narcissist then she wouldn't have any love to give, right?  I suppose it's possible she is not who we think she is or that if she doesn't love him she can act like she does and make him happy.


He's been "dominated" I e. told what to do since birth. He may protest it isn't so or rebel against it when in truth he relies on it. 
Their "love" seems to be more of parent/child than adult romantic love no matter how sappily she looked at him and clung to him. She made him feel..... probably for the first time in his life that he was "in charge" in the beginning, knowing full well how damaged and weak he really was


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "..her harassing London members to introduce her to their rich friends."


This I do not doubt for a second.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> He's been "dominated" I e. told what to do since birth. He may protest it isn't so or rebel against it when in truth he relies on it.
> Their "love" seems to be more of parent/child than adult romantic love no matter how sappily she looked at him and clung to him. She made him feel..... probably for the first time in his life that he was "in charge" in the beginning, knowing full well how damaged and weak he really was



Yeah, with her Damsel in Distress and Poor Orphan Annie shtick.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This is giving major credibility to Hazz et al. as coaches and huge free publicity at the highest level. @CarryOn2020, I'm with you : _At this moment, I’m not even sure I am willing to learn…_
> 
> View attachment 5325125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust
> 
> 
> The Queen's Commonwealth Trust champions, funds and connects young leaders who are working hard to change the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.queenscommonwealthtrust.org


From Wiki The Queen's Trust Commonwealth Trust

First two paragraphs:
"The Queen's Commonwealth Trust, also known as QCT, was launched on 21 April 2018 (the Queen's 92nd birthday) with her patronage and her grandson *Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex** as president*. [3] After marriage, Harry's wife* Meghan was appointed vice president later that year*. The couple retained their positions until February 2021.[4]
The QCT seeks to elevate the work of young people in their efforts for change and to equalize their efforts with professional organisations.[5] The Trust operates as a network for young changemakers throughout the Commonwealth, to fund, connect, and platform discussions and projects on a local level.[6] Periodically, online QCT chat sessions are conducted and uploaded to YouTube for public viewing.[7]"

This inquiring mind wishes to know if Prince Dufus actually brought BetterUp on board while president of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust and was then rewarded with the position of 'Chief Dufus of Blah Blah' for BetterUp.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz's wife would agree with this.


----------



## Chanbal

One more lesson from Little Miss Forgetful. Please take notes…


----------



## poopsie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, with her Damsel in Distress and Poor Orphan Annie shtick.



and it worked!
because he _finally _could feel in charge
IMO his problem was that he was always  prodded and poked and shoved around -----go here do this say that so that *he looked at everything as an obligation rather than an opportunity*
i highly doubt that going to university was his choice. It showed. He treated it as a drudgery rather than the opportunity to network with the future movers and shakers of his generation. _That's _what college is _really _for---making the connections that will propel you forward into your future. The right school. the right clubs, the right fraternity, the right roommate. You can check books out of the library that will give you the equivalent of a college "education"
The spark that he seemed to exhibit with the military was all a farce. He was given the opportunity to play at being a "real" soldier, that's all


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> One more lesson from Little Miss Forgetful. Please take notes…



so they are making her dominance a positive thing....OK


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> so they are making her dominance a positive thing....OK



They say the best defense is a good offense


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> They say the best defense is a good offense


I'd like to see the person who wrote this describe how she pulls and pushes him and gets in front of him when he's trying to speak to someone......guess that's a good thing too


----------



## poopsie

sdkitty said:


> I'd like to see the person who wrote this describe how she pulls and pushes him and gets in front of him when he's trying to speak to someone......guess that's a good thing too



I think you missed the point of  the best defense being a good offense
It's a way to get ahead of the negativity by gaining control of the spin on the narrative.  
So to speak.
Or it could just be a helpful tip if you want to bet on the SB tomorrow


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> I think you missed the point of  the best defense being a good offense
> It's a way to get ahead of the negativity by gaining control of the spin on the narrative.
> So to speak.
> Or it could just be a helpful tip if you want to bet on the SB tomorrow


I get it
Just saying it's one thing to say that touching your partner at times to get him to shut up is a good thing, quite another to physically drag him away when he's trying to talk to someone, push in front of him, etc.
Spin that


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I get it
> Just saying it's one thing to say that touching your partner at times to get him to shut up is a good thing, quite another to physically drag him away when he's trying to talk to someone, push in front of him, etc.
> Spin that


I like that video where she is shown not letting go of his hand as he tries to approach someone else. The arms stretch to their max. Reminds me of kindergarden kids who go around two by two, and one kiddie gets distracted by... a butterfly? And his partner tries to pull him back before the teacher notices.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Not what you need when selling. No amount of freshly baked bread essence is going to cover that.


More lemon cakes!!!  The lemons might be more help


----------



## CarryOn2020

This ‘bird sanctuary’ was there when they bought the house, right?  So, the ‘smell’ issue should have been well known to the real estate agent.









						Andree Clark Bird Refuge - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so they are making her dominance a positive thing....OK



Here is the article. Believe it or not, she quotes the body language guy who we post frequently here. Apparently his snarkiness is a bit too subtle for this Marie Claire writer.

She concludes her article with this line: How relatable is it to politely tell your partner to stop talking? We've all been there.   









						The Silent Gesture Meghan Markle Uses to Get Prince Harry to Stop Talking in Public
					

Honestly, this is really relatable.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This ‘bird sanctuary’ was there when they bought the house, right?  So, the ‘smell’ issue should have been well known to the real estate agent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andree Clark Bird Refuge - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


Scarface reduced the asking price by almost $10M. I wonder if the birds played a role…


----------



## rose60610

So Meghan has her tricks to make Haz shut up. What can anyone do to made HER STFU? There's only so many pairs of blood diamond earrings you can throw at her.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> So Meghan has her tricks to make Haz shut up. What can anyone do to made HER STFU? There's only so many pairs of blood diamond earrings you can throw at her.


She takes cash too, untraceable unmarked used notes please in a variety of denominations.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, with her Damsel in Distress and Poor Orphan Annie shtick.


The Body Language Guy did a You Tube video “It’s Just a Matter ot Time” late January I think. He described their relationship as enablers of each other, no empathy or respect for each other, both huge  Narcissists, said neither cared about lying and all the crap in the Oprah interview, they had used her. Oprah caught on and it’s why the Interview, he claimed, disappeared from the Internet. He goes into speculation about what a divorce would be like. Not pretty. I don’ think he used the word “love” at all.

i would post it, but am a total fumble fingers with linking things when I’m on my iPad, or as my kids say, ”technology challenged”.


----------



## Chanbal

Life goes on without the Nefl*xes, R. Andy…

*Charles and Camilla to be crowned side by side: Prince of Wales's plans for a scaled down coronation codenamed 'Operation Golden Orb' that will be shorter and cheaper are revealed*

*Service at Westminster Abbey will be shorter and cheaper than in the past under plans being drawn up*
*Last week the Queen declared it was her 'sincere wish' that Camilla would be known as Queen Consort when, 'in the fullness of time', her son becomes King*
* Behind the scenes, plans are under way for an overhaul of the only remaining religious Coronation in Europe*
*Prince Philip, as a male consort, was not entitled to be crowned, but instead knelt before his wife during the Coronation and pledged to be her 'liege man of life and limb'*
*Last time a Queen Consort was crowned was in 1937 when the Queen's mother, Elizabeth, sat alongside King George VI*
*MoS understands that Charles wishes to use a new design on the official insignia which appears on postboxes and police officers' uniforms – choosing the simpler Tudor Crown to replace the current St Edward's design *
_A source said: 'It will be a slimmed-down Monarchy on display throughout. I wouldn't be surprised to see just Charles and Camilla, Kate and William and their children on the Buckingham Palace balcony afterwards.'_









						Charles and Camilla to be crowned side by side
					

The Prince of Wales has already let it be known that he favours a leaner, more modern Monarchy and his Coronation service - whenever it comes - is expected to set the tone for his reign.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Promises, promises -









						Prince Harry's book will 'shake royals to core' with true feelings about Camilla
					

Prince Harry's friends predict the Duke of Sussex won't hold back on his stepmother, the newly announced future Queen Consort, in his forthcoming memoirs




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> The Body Language Guy did a You Tube video “It’s Just a Matter ot Time” late January I think. He described their relationship as enablers of each other, no empathy or respect for each other, both huge  Narcissists, said neither cared about lying and all the crap in the Oprah interview, they had used her. Oprah caught on and it’s why the Interview, he claimed, disappeared from the Internet. He goes into speculation about what a divorce would be like. Not pretty. I don’ think he used the word “love” at all.
> 
> i would post it, but am a total fumble fingers with linking things when I’m on my iPad, or as my kids say, ”technology challenged”.


@csshopper


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wait. What.   _Invisible contract??? _ Tell us more, please.

__


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What.   _Invisible contract???
> 
> _



I think it's a reference to Hazz's wife claims that there is an 'unspoken agreement ' between tabloids and the Palace.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> @csshopper



Thank You Chanbal, you're the best! Thanks for rescuing me.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Thank You Chanbal, you're the best! Thanks for rescuing me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

An old video that explains so very much - 
Them: give us a tear in your left eye
Her: give me 3 seconds


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I think it's a reference to Hazz's wife claims that there is an 'unspoken agreement ' between tabloids and the Palace.


Nah, I also remember her claims of palace parties for the tabloids, which had the tabloid reporters "indignantly" asking why they were never invited. If the tabloids are not being cruel to Camilla now, I think it's most likely out of respect to TQ. Her message was humility itself, and it would reflect badly on anyone to mock her.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> An old video that explains so very much -
> Them: give us a tear in your left eye
> Her: give me 3 seconds



Wasn't it her left eye that she delicately dabbed during that disgraceful OW interview? 1


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> This ‘bird sanctuary’ was there when they bought the house, right?  So, the ‘smell’ issue should have been well known to the real estate agent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andree Clark Bird Refuge - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org



Farms sometimes smell but not nature reserves, animals don't rear themselves intensively.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Farms sometimes smell but not nature reserves, animals don't rear themselves intensively.



So, it must be the nearby weed growers because they say it isn’t them.  Or is it


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> An old video that explains so very much -
> Them: give us a tear in your left eye
> Her: give me 3 seconds





Blimey, she's in love with herself.  As are, to be fair, most of the so-called influencers and such-like attention seekers and narcissists on social media. Shallow individuals.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Will Charles really cut his own son off and deny him a place on the palace balcony after the coronation ? I can’t see it


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> Will Charles really cut his own son off and deny him a place on the palace balcony after the coronation ? I can’t see it



QE has with Andrew, so why can’t Charles?
ETA: the key words should be *working royals. * Why should the non-working group be on the balcony? 
Yes, to me it sounds a bit like the Westminster Dog Show


----------



## xincinsin

elvisfan4life said:


> Will Charles really cut his own son off and deny him a place on the palace balcony after the coronation ? I can’t see it


They are d*mned if they do, and d*mned if they don't. Mr and Mrs Professional Victim will be accusing the BRF of being heartless no matter what happens, because the BRF can never satiate their rapacious maw. I foresee decades of delicate balancing to both keep the traitors at arm's length and yet not so far that their shenanigans go under the radar. 

Hazard and Methane are vipers in the bosom. I'd say the best policy now is to continue issuing a firm correction every time the pernicious pair make a particularly egregious media statement (i.e., big fat lie).


----------



## Sophisticatted

I can see Charles leaving Harry off the balcony.  I can see the balcony being about the *future of the monarchy*.  So only Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, and maybe George.  Possibly Charlotte and Louis so as not to exclude them, they are a part of the Cambridge household, after all, and next in line should something happen to George.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Working Royals (Balcony Wavers)*
QE
Charles
Camilla
William
Kate
George
Charlotte
Louis
Anne
Tim?
Edward
Sophie
Lady Louise?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Will Charles really cut his own son off and deny him a place on the palace balcony after the coronation ? I can’t see it



Didn’t Harry already cut off his father, grandmother, and the rest of the royal family two years ago? He wasn’t kicked out. He made his decision and he did it in the most dramatic, public way he could.

The coronation will be biggest moment in the spotlight of Charles’ life and he’s not going to share it or have it diminished by gossip or controversy about Harry and Meghan. He’s going to have the people standing with him who he still trusts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> -this happened after they moved in - hmmm, wth are they doing?
> -perhaps they did not pay the contractor and this is his revenge - just as in _Succession_
> -is this why Rob Lowe moved out?
> 
> 
> 
> _This isn’t the first time Harry and Meghan have had to deal with odor issues. Last year, it was reported that they had been living near a legal cannabis factory, which have proliferated in the area since weed farming was legalized in 2016.
> 
> The couple’s mansion is situated near 20 large greenhouses full of cannabis plants — leaving the luxury suburb reeking of weed. Neighbors made a string of complaints, spurring the company to install new “odor control systems.”
> 
> Gregory Gandrud told the Sunday Mirror: “The stink was getting stronger and heading their way. I was driving along the freeway and was hit hard by the smell. It doesn’t make you high but it’s not what you want driving at 70 mph.”
> 
> “I had to pull over. It made me completely lose my train of thought. Lots of people here are suffering.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s mansion engulfed by foul smell
> 
> 
> There is something fishy in Montecito, and it’s penetrated the former royals’ nearly $15 million mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


This happens in desirable niche areas all the time. The moment it gets too well known everyone starts bailing out and one of tbe surveyors discovers some horrendous problem that screws up everything in a three mile radius. Even with demand inCalifornia this place is in danger of becoming a ghost town with the crunchy nut  playing the new Miss Havisham in her never-satis house 


CarryOn2020 said:


> *maybe this Counselor position is a courtesy title?  *
> 
> _Sussexroyal.com - I did *not* click the link.
> Born: September 15, 1984 (age 37 years), St Mary's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
> Full name: Henry Charles Albert David
> Spouse: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (m. 2018)
> Children: Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor
> Education: Royal Military Academy Sandhurst (2005–2006), Eton College (1998–2003), Wetherby Preparatory School, Ludgrove School_


Well it wouldn’t be the only lie on that website   


papertiger said:


> They'd also have to want the publicity, and not many wealthy do.


I had wondered about this. I do think the guy sold them the teardown for the publicity and heck he got his money off it  but moving forward I wouldn’t want my address and details of my move in the public domain. I mean aside from the fact the house is hideous.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Basically the same as always, but they brought out a "witness" who worked with her (apparently he's said it before and didn't get sued), and they also claimed she was a...stand-in or something for porn material. And more about Markus Anderson's side gigs as a high class pimp for Soho House and her harrassing London members to introduce her to their rich friends.
> 
> The thing is, it could all be haters, but it is kind of interesting to me that the Duchess of Lawsuit goes to court over an alleged copper bathtub but lets people call her a prostitute without batting an eyelash.


I don’t think MA is a pimp per se but I do think men who run exclusive London clubs feel honour bound to ensure that there’s always a couple of ladies who are _up for a good time and an easy life_ about to make sure these rich men get their end away and if MA can leverage some more lasting connection between man and mistress… so much the better for MA.


bag-mania said:


> I can’t stand her but I think it probably is haters. Either way, if she acknowledged the yacht girl rumors by filing a lawsuit it would bring it to the attention of mainstream media and then millions of people would hear about it who currently have no idea. She doesn’t want that.


Wisely put. There’s a lot of plausible deniability in those sort of rumours. Ultimately the majority royal men traditionally wind up in bed with actresses who don’t do much in the way of acting since the days of Nell Gwynne at least so no one is asking too many questions as it just seems the way of things tbf,


bag-mania said:


> Here is the article. Believe it or not, she quotes the body language guy who we post frequently here. Apparently his snarkiness is a bit too subtle for this Marie Claire writer.
> 
> She concludes her article with this line: How relatable is it to politely tell your partner to stop talking? We've all been there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Silent Gesture Meghan Markle Uses to Get Prince Harry to Stop Talking in Public
> 
> 
> Honestly, this is really relatable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Umm no ‘politely’ telling your OH to stop talking in public is a bit weird and patronising actually. saying ‘shut up’ during a private row is emotions running high and understandable but trying to keep them quiet in public when you’re  in a perfectly fine mood is calculating and demeaning IMO.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> An old video that explains so very much -
> Them: give us a tear in your left eye
> Her: give me 3 seconds



Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...
The tendrils, the buffalo stance, the cradling of her head in her hand, the coy 'oh are you all here for little ol' me?' , the constant playing with and stroking her hair (possibly my biggest pet peeve of all time)... It was such a highly stylized production for a minute and a half clip. Like a modelling shoot for Vogue but without Naomi Campbell.


----------



## Chanbal

It's hard to understand what "meaningless" means in the Nefl*xes context. The titles were what brought them multi-million dollar deals, security in NYC, private jet rides… It sounds a lot more than a nickname to me.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Working Royals (Balcony Wavers)*
> QE
> Charles
> Camilla
> William
> Kate
> George
> Charlotte
> Louis
> Anne
> Tim?
> Edward
> Sophie
> Lady Louise?



Zara and Mike Tindall? 

Also, it's time for Anne and Edward replace Andy and Hazz in QE's Council of State imo.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think for the coronation, the balcony wavers will be the king and queen, the future king(s) and queen, and their children.

I think other future balcony occupants will be family members who remain in good standing.

I think the Cambridges will continue to invite family members on both sides to events where they (the Cambridges) are in the spotlight.

Charles will determine/declare the “working royal” situation when he becomes king.  William will do the same when he becomes king.


----------



## Chanbal

TW may not be pleased… 










						William & Kate to ‘inherit Her Majesty's home’ as her unusual hobby is revealed
					

PRINCE William and Kate are set to inherit the Queen’s beloved home, Windsor Castle, as it’s claimed Prince Charles finds it “too noisy”. Charles and Camilla currently reside in Clarence House but …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Happyish

poopsie said:


> and it worked!
> because he _finally _could feel in charge
> IMO his problem was that he was always  prodded and poked and shoved around -----go here do this say that so that *he looked at everything as an obligation rather than an opportunity*
> i highly doubt that going to university was his choice. It showed. He treated it as a drudgery rather than the opportunity to network with the future movers and shakers of his generation. _That's _what college is _really _for---making the connections that will propel you forward into your future. The right school. the right clubs, the right fraternity, the right roommate. You can check books out of the library that will give you the equivalent of a college "education"
> The spark that he seemed to exhibit with the military was all a farce. He was given the opportunity to play at being a "real" soldier, that's all


That's a great point. And now he's free to make his own mistakes. Just like the rest of us . . .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> and it worked!
> because he _finally _could feel in charge
> IMO his problem was that he was always  prodded and poked and shoved around -----go here do this say that so that *he looked at everything as an obligation rather than an opportunity*
> i highly doubt that going to university was his choice. It showed. He treated it as a drudgery rather than the opportunity to network with the future movers and shakers of his generation. _That's _what college is _really _for---making the connections that will propel you forward into your future. The right school. the right clubs, the right fraternity, the right roommate. You can check books out of the library that will give you the equivalent of a college "education"
> The spark that he seemed to exhibit with the military was all a farce. He was given the opportunity to play at being a "real" soldier, that's all



He didn't go to university, just to military school. I don't think it's too much asked of any kid to finish highschool.


----------



## Happyish

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t Harry already cut off his father, grandmother, and the rest of the royal family two years ago? He wasn’t kicked out. He made his decision and he did it in the most dramatic, public way he could.
> 
> The coronation will be biggest moment in the spotlight of Charles’ life and he’s not going to share it or have it diminished by gossip or controversy about Harry and Meghan. He’s going to have the people standing with him who he still trusts.


Maybe the best way to diminish the gossip would be to include them. It may be fiction, but it makes them look like one big happy family . . .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I like that video where she is shown not letting go of his hand as he tries to approach someone else. The arms stretch to their max. Reminds me of kindergarden kids who go around two by two, and one kiddie gets distracted by... a butterfly? And his partner tries to pull him back before the teacher notices.



I remember that one well. Like, who does that? It is so silly and inappropriate.

Another one of my faves was the evening event where she was rather pregnant and wearing the white shirt and black skirt. You can clearly see on video he wants to let go of her hand and she YANKS it like an unruly child or dog.

And say what you will, I never found their OTT PDA cute and oh so in love. None of us can bring our husbands to work and all but make out. And that's just what it was, their freaking job.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The Body Language Guy did a You Tube video “It’s Just a Matter ot Time” late January I think. He described their relationship as enablers of each other, no empathy or respect for each other, both huge  Narcissists, said neither cared about lying and all the crap in the Oprah interview, they had used her. Oprah caught on and it’s why the Interview, he claimed, disappeared from the Internet. He goes into speculation about what a divorce would be like. Not pretty. I don’ think he used the word “love” at all.
> 
> i would post it, but am a total fumble fingers with linking things when I’m on my iPad, or as my kids say, ”technology challenged”.



Interesting. I used to think he was indeed in love with her but she was in love with the title and the cash and the connections, plus IMO he displayed a lot of the signs of an narcisstic enabler (as in, enabler of the narcissist and at the same time their victim).

Now I'd appreciate a divorce, it's just...I don't see him moving anytime soon and she really has nowhere else to go.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Philip, as a male consort, was not entitled to be crowned, but instead knelt before his wife during the Coronation and pledged to be her 'liege man of life and limb'*



And he was, from the day he swore his oath until the day he died.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting. I used to think he was indeed in love with her but she was in love with the title and the cash and the connections, plus IMO he displayed a lot of the signs of an narcisstic enabler (as in, enabler of the narcissist and at the same time their victim).
> 
> Now I'd appreciate a divorce, it's just...I don't see him moving anytime soon and she really has nowhere else to go.


He's stuck. Do you really think he has the strength of character to leave? I don't think so--not unless someone else comes along who similarly dominates him.
Harry's playing true to form, a modern-day King Edward to Megan as the Duchess of Windsor, albeit with the internet.


----------



## bag-mania

Happyish said:


> Maybe the best way to diminish the gossip would be to include them. It may be fiction, but it makes them look like one big happy family . . .



There isn’t a good enough actor in the whole bunch of them to pull off that illusion. And that includes she who made a career out of acting. It would be an interesting image of uncomfortable people who don’t like each other pretending they are happy.

Charles didn’t even hang around to see his son when he came back to England last year. He is not a magnanimous man. He’s not sharing his big day with them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Zara and Mike Tindall?
> 
> Also, it's time for Anne and Edward replace Andy and Hazz in QE's Council of State imo.



They won't, it will be Beatrice and Eugenie. As far as I am concerned Eugenie can go hang out with the Sussexes far, far away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TW may not be pleased…
> View attachment 5326027
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William & Kate to ‘inherit Her Majesty's home’ as her unusual hobby is revealed
> 
> 
> PRINCE William and Kate are set to inherit the Queen’s beloved home, Windsor Castle, as it’s claimed Prince Charles finds it “too noisy”. Charles and Camilla currently reside in Clarence House but …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



OT but I've always loved this picture of Wills and Kate. And BTW, she re-wore the blouse last year or so.


----------



## Chanbal

I still have 2/3 of this video to watch, but it sounds interesting so far… 
_"QUEEN ENSNARED by Harry & Meghan dealings/should we PITY Meghan?/STINKING house/ CHARLES loved Diana"_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Charles loved Diana? Like what, a cute puppy? I vividly remember (well, "remember"...I watched just that scene recently) their engagement interview when her answer to "Are you in love?" was a beaming "Yes!" (paraphrased) and his charming reply was "Whatever love is" with the sourest face.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry and Meghan are included in Charles' coronation/festivities, you know full well they'll try their damndest to steel the spotlight for at least a few minutes. It'd give Meghan an opportunity to cut in front of Camilla and/or Kate somewhere and then feign "Oh I didn't know she was near me".  And wouldn't Harry demand to be there, after all, if something happened to Will and his whole family, Harry steps up  . Hopefully Charles and the rest realize they would be foolish to risk whatever the two loose cannons might choose to do.    Harry and Meghan can't be trusted, pure and simple.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> If Harry and Meghan are included in Charles' coronation/festivities, you know full well they'll try their damndest to steel the spotlight for at least a few minutes. It'd give Meghan an opportunity to cut in front of Camilla and/or Kate somewhere and then feign "Oh I didn't know she was near me".  And wouldn't Harry demand to be there, after all, if something happened to Will and his whole family, Harry steps up  . Hopefully Charles and the rest realize they would be foolish to risk whatever the two loose cannons might choose to do.    Harry and Meghan can't be trusted, pure and simple.



Seriously. There aren't enough handlers to ensure they won't make a scene.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charles loved Diana? Like what, a cute puppy? I vividly remember (well, "remember"...I watched just that scene recently) their engagement interview when her answer to "Are you in love?" was a beaming "Yes!" (paraphrased) and his charming reply was "Whatever love is" with the sourest face.



Yes! It was as if doing an engagement interview was the most distasteful and beneath-him thing anyone had ever asked of him. It’s no wonder he got the reputation of being a cold fish.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Yes! It was as if doing an engagement interview was the most distasteful and beneath-him thing anyone had ever asked of him. It’s no wonder he got the reputation of being a cold fish.



He didn't even bother to fake it. We get it, you didn't really want to get married, but maybe you should have stood up against grandma then instead of taking a naive kid for the ride who thought Prince Charming had knocked on her father's castle door.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Yes t


bag-mania said:


> Yes! It was as if doing an engagement interview was the most distasteful and beneath-him thing anyone had ever asked of him. It’s no wonder he got the reputation of being a cold fish.


yes, it’s bizarre clangers like this thay make me not have a lot of belief in this royal machinery at all. Hard to think these people are born to rule when they can barely parse how to act in an easy to read situation. In the words of the immortal Judy Garland ‘Smile!’ Charles you are _meant_ to be generating millions in tourism with the promise of a true fairytale wedding. Diana got it and she was barely out of school.


----------



## Happyish

bag-mania said:


> There isn’t a good enough actor in the whole bunch of them to pull off that illusion. And that includes she who made a career out of acting. It would be an interesting image of uncomfortable people who don’t like each other pretending they are happy.
> 
> Charles didn’t even hang around to see his son when he came back to England last year. He is not a magnanimous man. He’s not sharing his big day with them.


My read is a bit different. I think he's very magnanimous. He stepped-up and acted as a father to Megan, walking her down the aisle. He did everything possible to make her feel wanted and accepted within the family. Not only did Harry and Megan then turn their backs on him but they have been critical of everything he stands and everything he's said and done--and have done so publicly. My guess is that he feels hurt and betrayed.
At some point enough is enough. You don't hold out your hand when you know it's going to be bitten-off.


----------



## poopsie

Happyish said:


> My read is a bit different. I think he's very magnanimous. He stepped-up and acted as a father to Megan, walking her down the aisle. He did everything possible to make her feel wanted and accepted within the family. Not only did Harry and Megan then turn their backs on him but they have been critical of everything he stands and everything he's said and done--and have done so publicly. My guess is that he feels hurt and betrayed.
> At some point enough is enough. *You don't hold out your hand when you know it's going to be bitten-off.*



I can still see her slapping away the hand that was offered to help her out of the car


----------



## bag-mania

Happyish said:


> At some point enough is enough. You don't hold out your hand when you know it's going to be bitten-off.



I agree with this completely. Charles was done with them after the Oprah interview. He feels betrayed by his son and he’s not going to pretend otherwise. Nor should he.

They don’t belong on that balcony.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> An old video that explains so very much -
> Them: give us a tear in your left eye
> Her: give me 3 seconds



Full of fakeness, as usual.


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> Will Charles really cut his own son off and deny him a place on the palace balcony after the coronation ? I can’t see it


Please.  Let us have a moment to dream at least!


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...
> The tendrils, the buffalo stance, the cradling of her head in her hand, the coy 'oh are you all here for little ol' me?' , the constant playing with and stroking her hair (possibly my biggest pet peeve of all time)... It was such a highly stylized production for a minute and a half clip. Like a modelling shoot for Vogue but without Naomi Campbell.


I also found it funny that for showing her "favorite spots", it mostly consisted of her pointing in directions or walking past stories, and mostly just showed her.  Good Lord, I cannot stand her.  Is it possible to hate someone you don't personally know?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

706895"]
An old video that explains so very much -
Them: give us a tear in your left eye
Her: give me 3 seconds



[/QUOTE]
Wow. She was so not cut out to be a member of the BRF. Totally and forever an LA girl. But she needed a rich, high profile husband and he was ripe for the picking.


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> Will Charles really cut his own son off and deny him a place on the palace balcony after the coronation ? I can’t see it


I believe it will depend on how he treats Camilla in his book. If he trashes her, he's even more of an idiot than we already think he is. That would likely be the nail in the coffin of his relationship with his father.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I also found it funny that for showing her "favorite spots", it mostly consisted of her pointing in directions or walking past stories, and mostly just showed her.  Good Lord, I cannot stand her.  Is it possible to hate someone you don't personally know?



I wouldn't say I hate her, but I dislike her so intensely that I refuse to watch any videos with her where she actually talks if I can help it. Which is why I miss a lot of the good stuff haha.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wouldn't say I hate her, but I dislike her so intensely that I refuse to watch any videos with her where she actually talks if I can help it. Which is why I miss a lot of the good stuff haha.


She literally makes my skin crawl.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wouldn't say I hate her, but I dislike her so intensely that I refuse to watch any videos with her where she actually talks if I can help it. Which is why I miss a lot of the good stuff haha.


My daughter watched Suits pre-H&M because she liked the male leads. I never had any interest in watching it, even less so now.


----------



## Happyish

poopsie said:


> I can still see her slapping away the hand that was offered to help her out of the car


Sorry-I'm playing catch-up. What was the car incident?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Yes! It was as if doing an engagement interview was the most distasteful and beneath-him thing anyone had ever asked of him. It’s no wonder he got the reputation of being a cold fish.


My impression was that he was socially awkward and uncomfortable in front of the camera, until I later learned about Camilla. Then it all made sense. Imagine how that comment made Diana feel.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> Sorry-I'm playing catch-up. What was the car incident?


At the wedding, someone extended a hand to help her out of the car and she slapped it away. It was very odd, and it has been contrasted here to Kate being assisted by her sister and father, like normal human beings.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes t
> 
> yes, it’s bizarre clangers like this thay make me not have a lot of belief in this royal machinery at all. Hard to think these people are born to rule when they can barely parse how to act in an easy to read situation. In the words of the immortal Judy Garland ‘Smile!’ Charles you are _meant_ to be generating millions in tourism with the promise of a true fairytale wedding. Diana got it and she was barely out of school.


I think Charles can best be described as a reluctant heir.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> My daughter watched Suits pre-H&M because she liked the male leads. I never had any interest in watching it, even less so now.



I don't watch a lot of TV so the first time I heard of her was when the news of them dating broke.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She’s super annoying in that video, but boy was she way prettier than she is now.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Charles loved Diana? Like what, a cute puppy? *I vividly remember (well, "remember"...I watched just that scene recently) their engagement interview when her answer to "Are you in love?" was a beaming "Yes!" (paraphrased) and his charming reply was* "Whatever love is"* with the sourest face.


Didn't get to "_Charles loved Diana_" part of the video yet. Charles's answer "_Whatever love is_" sounds rather honest to me; he liked Diana, but not enough for a simple 'yes' imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s super annoying in that video, but boy was she way prettier than she is now.



Yeah, she should have stuck with that one plastic surgeon and/or have known when to stop.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Didn't get to "_Charles loved Diana_" part of the video yet. Charles's answer "_Whatever love is_" sounds rather honest to me; he liked Diana, but not enough for a simple 'yes' imo.



Being asked the love question in your engagement interview on freaking national TV is maybe not the time and place to be brutally honest, though.

I adore Lady C when she isn't victim blaming, but I also notice a habit of going all in defending people she feels somewhat loyal to. She isn't super nuanced re: e.g. Charles, even Andrew, and she made a huge fuss about people calling Epstein a pedophile and insisted it was young teens he liked, not children for the sake of precision. I'm all for using the right terms but honestly lady, read the room and who cares what kind of perv he actually was. Possibly he was neither into children nor teens but just liked to make money off them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Does her video start with Santa Claus is coming to town?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

OLD HABITS *Inside Anna Delvey’s life after jail where she compared herself to Meghan Markle and flaunted ‘wealth’ on Instagram*
The 31-year-old German-born fake heiress, whose real name is Anna Sorokin, was found guilty of eight charges in 2019 including grand larceny in the second degree, attempted grand larceny, and theft of services.

Sorokin, who's played by Julia Garner in the new series, was sentenced to four to 12 years in state prison, fined $24,000, and ordered to pay restitution of about $199,000.

*But the con woman was released on parole in February of last year when she temporarily went to live at a luxury hotel in New York and hired a film crew to document her post-prison life.*

In her freedom, Sorokin traipsed around New York and posted on her Instagram account, where she's reposted news articles about herself as well as posts that seem to flaunt her "wealth" to her over 152,000 followers, including videos of her eating caviar and shopping at high-end retailer Net-a-Porter.

*A month after her release, Sorokin even shared a post where she compares herself to Duchess Meghan Markle, saying: " I too know what it feels like to lose my voice. Meghan X DelveyMail.com, you see it."*









						Inside Anna Delvey's life after jail where she compared herself to Meghan Markle
					

THE unbelievable story of Anna Delvey takes to the silver screen in Friday’s release of the long-awaited series Inventing Anna. The Netflix series tells of Delvery’s fall from grace fro…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Happyish said:


> Maybe the best way to diminish the gossip would be to include them. It may be fiction, but it makes them look like one big happy family . . .


If they are excluded, no fiction will be required. Best way is to keep it simple on the BRF end. You know that no matter what happens, Methane's anonymous friends and her partner-in-plastic-surgery Omid will spin a different story anyway for the media.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Speaking of the Oscars, I saw that Kristen Stewart got a Best Actress nomination for playing Diana. Did anyone see that movie? I never thought Stewart was capable of a best actress caliber performance.


----------



## Chanbal

_The more stupid the narcissist, the more public and pathetic will be the display of insecurity… _


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> She literally makes my skin crawl.


There have been bits on The Body Language Guy where he catches the mask slipping and the evil oozing out and I have caught myself involuntarily shuddering.


----------



## Chanbal

According to NS, no zoom calls with QE or other members. QE is aware of the lack of security of any potential conversation… QE has yet to see the mysterious LiBeth. All allegedly, of course!


----------



## Chanbal

Super Bowl 2022: Eugenie came in support of the Netflixes…


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


>




And where is Meghan?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> And where is Meghan?


At home, they could only afford 2 tickets.   For PR purposes, it's more important to show off in the US that the royal connections are strong.


----------



## lanasyogamama

What about sEcUrItY???


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, no zoom calls with QE or other members. QE is aware of the lack of security of any potential conversation… QE has yet to see the mysterious LiBeth. All allegedly, of course!



The Pakistan-hosted gossip sites like geo.tv and news international have been blowing up my newsfeed over the weekend, blaring about an ultra-secret meeting where the babe was introduced to HMTQ. Clickbait...


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


>



Did he get more hair again?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Did he get more hair again?


 Hair implants?


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> what white teeth meghan has....very Hollywood


Yup .. capped White, bought & paid for by her Dad in her teen years.  However, if you look at her 'dental history', you will see that the caps got bigger over the years .. VERY Hollywood!


----------



## Chanbal

DM is on the case! If TW is at the Super Bowl, she will be found!   
*Where's Meghan? Prince Harry leaves his wife at home to attend Super Bowl with cousin Princess Eugenie - whose father Prince Andrew is facing US civil rape case*

*The California-based royal was snapped at Los Angeles Crypto Stadium Sunday*
*He and his cousin Eugenie enjoyed VIP seating*
*Both royals wore black face masks for the outdoor game*
*Face coverings are mandated for large outdoor events in LA county *









						Prince Harry attends Super Bowl with cousin Princess Eugenie
					

Prince Harry sat in the stands with Eugenie at the SoFi Stadium to see the Los Angeles Rams beat the Cincinnati Bengals 23-20 in a fourth-quarter comeback at Super Bowl LVI last night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

I’m sure Meghan is at home watching her children like the devoted mother she is.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure Meghan is at home watching her children like the devoted mother she is.


I still think that he had only 2 tickets…


----------



## csshopper

When you have no friends, a cousin will do.

Did she bring her son for a play date with the cousins?

Answers any questions about which “team” she’s on.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder what Harry thought of the spectacle that is the Super Bowl. I bet he leaned over to his cousin and said “this is bonkers!”


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> What about sEcUrItY???



There were so many celebrities packed into that stadium. I doubt Harry got much notice.


----------



## Happyish

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of the Oscars, I saw that Kristen Stewart got a Best Actress nomination for playing Diana. Did anyone see that movie? I never thought Stewart was capable of a best actress caliber performance.


She was wonderful in Into The Wild--it was a breakout role for her.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Super Bowl 2022: Eugenie came in support of the Netflixes…
> View attachment 5326541


To me that doesn’t look like Harry. Hair is too straight, even on the sides. Unless he has a lot of product in it, which he never has before, the texture is also different. Eyes are too close together.  What are they playing at now?


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> To me that doesn’t look like Harry. Hair is too straight, even on the sides. Unless he has a lot of product in it, which he never has before, the texture is also different. Eyes are too close together.  What are they playing at now?



I think it’s him. Here’s a view from another angle. Note the vacant look in his eyes.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> To me that doesn’t look like Harry. Hair is too straight, even on the sides. Unless he has a lot of product in it, which he never has before, the texture is also different. Eyes are too close together.  What are they playing at now?


It's possible that he has hair extensions. They kept their masks during the game, which is very useful to avoid lip reading. 





__





						Salons see 200% rise in MALE hair extensions
					

Citing Harry Styles, Oliver Cheshire and David Beckham as their hair inspiration, more men are turning to extensions to add volume to thin, fine hair.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				











						Distinguished Mens Wig by HIM HairUWear | Human Haiir Blend
					

Distinguished by HIM is the perfect classic men's hairstyle. Cropped sides with a longer top add a dignified style. A lace front and monofilament top add a natural appearance, while the blend of human hair and synthetic locks make this wig truly remarkable. Color Shown: M56S




					www.headcovers.com


----------



## youngster

I'd guess Eugenie was invited by Harry as he likely managed to score 2 tickets free  for all of his "hard work".  Eugenie is the only one who would show up, I think. There isn't anyone else he could have invited.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Didn't get to "_Charles loved Diana_" part of the video yet. Charles's answer "_Whatever love is_" sounds rather honest to me; he liked Diana, but not enough for a simple 'yes' imo.



My impression of Charles and several other British royals is that they strongly dislike being questioned. They give the impression that they are so superior to us riff raff that we should *never* *question* their choices. It is snobbishness and arrogance at it worst [or finest].  In that engagement interview, Charles clearly dislikes the questions. Only later did we learn what he was hiding. Hazz has the same attitude toward questions as well. His regular guy schtick is bs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> At home, they could only afford 2 tickets.   For PR purposes, it's more important to show off in the US that the royal connections are strong.



Is she hunting chicks for her dad? Is he? 
No wonder Montecito stinks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> DM is on the case! If TW is at the Super Bowl, she will be found!
> *Where's Meghan? Prince Harry leaves his wife at home to attend Super Bowl with cousin Princess Eugenie - whose father Prince Andrew is facing US civil rape case*
> 
> *The California-based royal was snapped at Los Angeles Crypto Stadium Sunday*
> *He and his cousin Eugenie enjoyed VIP seating*
> *Both royals wore black face masks for the outdoor game*
> *Face coverings are mandated for large outdoor events in LA county *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry attends Super Bowl with cousin Princess Eugenie
> 
> 
> Prince Harry sat in the stands with Eugenie at the SoFi Stadium to see the Los Angeles Rams beat the Cincinnati Bengals 23-20 in a fourth-quarter comeback at Super Bowl LVI last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




And this is how MM will become a sympathetic figure to Americans. Leave her at home with the 2 kids under 4 while he is having fun??? With the pedo’s perv’s daughter??? Eug looks lots like Ghislaine here. Now, Eugenie, we already know what her hubs is up to. Truly, a disgusting duo.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is she hunting chicks for her dad? Is he?
> No wonder Montecito stinks.


Yep! I read somewhere that Hazz got his tickets via the Salesforce/BetterUp connection and had to make an appearance at the request of his employer. He brought his cousin to the Salesforce box, because Eugenie was better for the brand than TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Yep! I read somewhere that Hazz got his tickets via the Salesforce/BetterUp connection and had to make an appearance at the request of his employer. He brought his cousin to the Salesforce box, because Eugenie was better for the brand than TW.



What is with Hazzi’s Miami Vice look?

ETA: the real power couples - the BRF doesn’t carry any weight here   Hazz and Eug are so far out of their lane that it’s comical. 



	

		
			
		

		
	
\









						Hollywood Super Bowl hypocrisy: Outrage as stars flout mask mandate
					

Hollywood stars were out in force on Sunday for the Super Bowl, but despite appearing to be indoors in private boxes they flouted the state's mask mandates, which require facial coverings.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is with Hazzi’s Miami Vice look?
> 
> ETA: the real power couples - the BRF doesn’t carry any weight here   Hazz and Eug are so far out of their lane that it’s comical.
> 
> View attachment 5326646
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> \
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood Super Bowl hypocrisy: Outrage as stars flout mask mandate
> 
> 
> Hollywood stars were out in force on Sunday for the Super Bowl, but despite appearing to be indoors in private boxes they flouted the state's mask mandates, which require facial coverings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Both Hazz and cousin seem so out of place. They don't seem to be enjoying the event, probably annoyed that others are taking the spotlight.
Hazz and TW's lost their chance to be a part of the Hollywood crowd because of their ridiculous behavior. Finding Freebies, OW's interview, the many staged photo-ops… damaged their image. The exaggerated use of the UK titles in the US didn't help. They called too much attention to themselves. TW is now trying the Greta Garbo's reclusive approach, but it's probably too late for her.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Hazz and cousin seem so out of place. They don't seem to be enjoying the event, probably annoyed that others are taking the spotlight.



Do they even know the rules of the game or are they there just for PR? As an immigrant I can say from personal experience it’s not easy to understand or truly get into American football if you didn’t grow up with it so I wouldn’t bet on them having any idea what’s going on.


----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> Both Hazz and cousin seem so out of place. They don't seem to be enjoying the event, probably annoyed that others are taking the spotlight.
> Hazz and TW's lost their chance to be a part of the Hollywood crowd because of their ridiculous behavior. Finding Freebies, OW's interview, the many staged photo-ops… damaged their image. The exaggerated use of the UK titles in the US didn't help. They called too much attention to themselves. TW is now trying the Greta Garbo's reclusive approach, but it's probably too late for her.


But, when Greta Garbo did the reclusive approach she was sincere. She once said " I never said I want to be alone, I said I wanted to be LET alone, and there is all the difference". She practiced what she preached to the end of her life. Beauty, style, and determination, three words which will never be on the same page as TW. I feel like I need to keep up the family reputation. She uis my third cousin.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> There were so many celebrities packed into that stadium. I doubt Harry got much notice.


You’re right. One article had paragraphs of A listers, then they were mentioned separately, like an add on. He must have been disappointed, no paparazzi to ***** about.

Maybe Eugenia was his tag along with hopes of scoring a job through her Cousin’s connections. She and Jack will probably not be getting money  from her parents and I doubt Jack is a  multi millionaire. She’s in a tough spot, every article references her father..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> You’re right. One article had paragraphs of A listers, then they were mentioned separately, like an add on. He must have been disappointed, no paparazzi to ***** about.
> 
> Maybe Eugenia was his tag along with hopes of scoring a job through her Cousin’s connections. She and Jack will probably not be getting money  from her parents and I doubt Jack is a  multi millionaire. She’s in a tough spot, *every article references her father.*



As well those articles should. Imo she and her sis need to answer many questions about their upbringing before the US market will accept them. Even then, we do not want royalty swanning around over here. The more we learn about Hazzi, it’s time to doubt those Andi and Sarah were perfect parents. Chuck & Diana were not.   Can’t all the BRF to stay on their shores?  NM, I know the answer - they are desperate for our $$$$.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> OLD HABITS *Inside Anna Delvey’s life after jail where she compared herself to Meghan Markle and flaunted ‘wealth’ on Instagram*
> The 31-year-old German-born fake heiress, whose real name is Anna Sorokin, was found guilty of eight charges in 2019 including grand larceny in the second degree, attempted grand larceny, and theft of services.
> 
> Sorokin, who's played by Julia Garner in the new series, was sentenced to four to 12 years in state prison, fined $24,000, and ordered to pay restitution of about $199,000.
> 
> *But the con woman was released on parole in February of last year when she temporarily went to live at a luxury hotel in New York and hired a film crew to document her post-prison life.*
> 
> In her freedom, Sorokin traipsed around New York and posted on her Instagram account, where she's reposted news articles about herself as well as posts that seem to flaunt her "wealth" to her over 152,000 followers, including videos of her eating caviar and shopping at high-end retailer Net-a-Porter.
> 
> *A month after her release, Sorokin even shared a post where she compares herself to Duchess Meghan Markle, saying: " I too know what it feels like to lose my voice. Meghan X DelveyMail.com, you see it."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Anna Delvey's life after jail where she compared herself to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> THE unbelievable story of Anna Delvey takes to the silver screen in Friday’s release of the long-awaited series Inventing Anna. The Netflix series tells of Delvery’s fall from grace fro…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


One con artist to another.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


>



Is he wearing a toupee?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Fun One             vs        The Sour Grapes?


----------



## LittleRunningDog

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is she hunting chicks for her dad? Is he?
> No wonder Montecito stinks.


Are you really accusing Eugenie of somehow being involved in her fathers offence?  Because thats uncalled for and unfair.  You seem to be getting carried away.  If you hate the Royals so much why spend all your time researching and yapping about them


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Is he wearing a toupee?



Most likely, it’s a toup. Due to piss poor color match, it could that ‘hair in a can’ stuff. Or is it “heir in a can” 
Whatever it is, it is an awful look. His face, too, appears to have had work done or he is heavily drugged. The MiamiVice look is most definitely *not* coming back, so it makes him look more like a _poseur_. She looks just as ridiculous as he does.  They both need to get off my lawn. Now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleRunningDog said:


> Are you really accusing Eugenie of somehow being involved in her fathers offence?  Because thats uncalled for and unfair.  You seem to be getting carried away.  If you hate the Royals so much why spend all your time researching and yapping about them



I am waiting for the facts, of course. This is a gossip thread, Eug has been identified as the ‘mole’, and she put herself at the most watched sporting event we have [when her father is involved with a scandalous trial]. I don’t say this lightly, the more we learn about Andy’s behavior, the more questions we need to ask. Consider his friends, consider his business dealings, etc. Imo it is important that the truth of the BRF is told - good or bad. Why?  Because Hazzi, Chas et al have been lecturing us ad infinitum and it appears they will continue to do so.  Our public needs to be educated about who these so-called elites really are. Our elites receive tremendous criticisms, so should the BRF, especially if they intend to live here.  As always, just my opinion, ymmv.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleRunningDog

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am waiting for the facts, of course. This is a gossip thread, Eug has been identified as the ‘mole’, and she put herself at the most watched sporting event we have [when her father is involved with a scandalous trial]. I don’t say this lightly, the more we learn about Andy’s behavior, the more questions we need to ask. Consider his friends, consider his business dealings, etc. Imo it is important that the truth of the BRF is told - good or bad. Why?  Because Hazzi, Chas et al have been lecturing us ad infinitum and it appears they will continue to do so.  Our public needs to be educated about who these so-called elites really are. Our elites receive tremendous criticisms, so should the BRF, especially if they intend to live here.  As always, just my opinion, ymmv.


I wonder what the people in your real life would make of what you’re saying here.  And I don’t see any education in here, just cruelty.  I’m out.


----------



## xincinsin

oldbag said:


> But, when Greta Garbo did the reclusive approach she was sincere. She once said " I never said I want to be alone, I said I wanted to be LET alone, and there is all the difference". She practiced what she preached to the end of her life. Beauty, style, and determination, three words which will never be on the same page as TW. I feel like I need to keep up the family reputation. She uis my third cousin.


I think the twosome or one of them once protested that they never said they wanted privacy, claimed it was words put into their mouths. 

Interestingly, this article in Vogue from May 2020 says they were living in a rented property. Is this before 19-toilet mansion?








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have a Privacy Problem
					

The couple seeks a life with less media intrusion. Will they ever get it?




					www.vogue.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s Monday and it’s Valentine’s Day  
Cheers,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's the look my cat has while sinking teeth into its prey.


----------



## lanasyogamama

All the other celebrity pictures from the Super Bowl show people socializing and having a good time. These two look like  they are in side-by-side Dentist chairs.


----------



## papertiger

Valentine's presents for Nutmeg and Hens-R-Us

I DON"T NEED A PRINCE BY MY SIDE TO BE A PRINCESS for her 

& 

Voice of a Snake for him


----------



## limom

I don’t perceive Eugénie as a mole but rather as a friend to her cousin. And god knows Harry needs friends atm.
And not for nothing, she is not responsible for the abhorrent behaviors of her father or her mother for that matter.. 
And if the Sussex decide to visit his motherland, she can possibly play peacemaker in that messy family.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I would like to think that they spent their time at the game strategizing *his* return to the fold.  He looks dead inside.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> I would like to think that they spent their time at the game strategizing *his* return to the fold.  He looks dead inside.


He does, doesn't he? Part of me thinks, its your own fault and part of me thinks what the hell has she done to you?


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> QE has with Andrew, so why can’t Charles?
> ETA: the key words should be *working royals. * Why should the non-working group be on the balcony?
> Yes, to me it sounds a bit like the Westminster Dog Show
> [/QUOTE





csshopper said:


> When you have no friends, a cousin will do.
> 
> Did she bring her son for a play date with the cousins?
> 
> Answers any questions about which “team” she’s on.


the mole is unmasked


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> I would like to think that they spent their time at the game strategizing *his* return to the fold.  He looks dead inside.



It is bizarre isn’t it? There were 70,000 people in that stadium and they were all having a better time than him. Even if you don’t like football that kind of insane energy and enthusiasm is infectious. Yet there he is sitting like a bump on a log.


----------



## elvisfan4life

I was prepared to give Eugenie the benefit of the doubt before


----------



## Chanbal

oldbag said:


> *But, when Greta Garbo did the reclusive approach she was sincere.* She once said " I never said I want to be alone, I said I wanted to be LET alone, and there is all the difference". She practiced what she preached to the end of her life. Beauty, style, and determination, three words which will never be on the same page as TW. I feel like I need to keep up the family reputation. She uis my third cousin.



Allegedly, sincerity & originality are not within TW's strong suits!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It is bizarre isn’t it? There were 70,000 people in that stadium and they were all having a better time than him. Even if you don’t like football that kind of insane energy and enthusiasm is infectious. Yet there he is sitting like a bump on a log.


Quite the opposite of his animated self in the BetterUp videos. Could it be due to anti-depressant meds? I've had people tell me some can make you feel numb.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Is he wearing a toupee?


Put my money on male hair extensions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> I don’t perceive Eugénie as a mole but rather as a friend to her cousin. And god knows Harry needs friends atm.
> And not for nothing, she is not responsible for the abhorrent behaviors of her father or her mother for that matter..
> And if the Sussex decide to visit his motherland, she can possibly play peacemaker in that messy family.


Welcome back!  Missed you here.


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> Welcome back!  Missed you here.


Thanks darling likewise


----------



## Chanbal

This is terrible.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Quite the opposite of his animated self in the BetterUp videos. Could it be due to anti-depressant meds? I've had people tell me some can make you feel numb.



It’s impossible to know for sure but maybe he was overwhelmed? The noise would be deafening at times and if he didn’t really want to be there…

Or maybe he was grumpy because most people didn’t recognize him.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Valentine's to All



Spoiler: TREAT from Twitter



:


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It’s impossible to know for sure but maybe he was overwhelmed? The noise would be deafening at times and if he didn’t really want to be there…
> 
> Or maybe he was grumpy because most people didn’t recognize him.


I know I wouldn't have.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It’s impossible to know for sure but maybe he was overwhelmed? The noise would be deafening at times and if he didn’t really want to be there…
> 
> *Or maybe he was grumpy because most people didn’t recognize him.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> He does, doesn't he? Part of me thinks, its your own fault and part of me thinks what the hell has she done to you?



This. I'm at a point where I am angry at him, but then I look at this shell of a man and can't help but feel bad for him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I'm at a point where I am angry at him, but then I look at this shell of a man and can't help but feel bad for him.



Imo The only thing he is sad about is his lack of $$$ and maybe that bad smell overwhelming his neighbors. He stands by all the other stuff.   He has had anger issues from day 1. It’s why the other women left him.



ETA:  Eug is in LA for _work_, Cams has the Covid, Andi wants the original photo so he can prove it was photoshopped. Okaaay.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo The only thing he is sad about is his lack of $$$ and maybe that bad smell overwhelming his neighbors. He stands by all the other stuff.   He has had anger issues from day 1. It’s why the other women left him.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  Eug is in LA for _work_, Cams has the Covid, Andi wants the original photo so he can prove it was photoshopped. Okaaay.



I also like this one from the same author.


----------



## LittleStar88

In a sea full of celebs at the superbowl, they looked like just a couple of nobodies. 

Incredibly shocked that Meghan didn't go - just to leg hump the celebs there.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> I was prepared to give Eugenie the benefit of the doubt before



I don’t know what to think of Eugenie. Part of me believes she inherited her mother’s bad judgment. I never thought Fergie meant any harm to anyone but it is like every single decision she has ever made in her life has been wrong, almost a curse of poor choices.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know what to think of Eugenie. Part of me believes she inherited her mother’s bad judgment. I never thought Fergie meant any harm to anyone but it is like every single decision she has ever made in her life has been wrong, almost a curse of poor choices.



Maybe Andy’s extremely poor judgment, too?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. I'm at a point where I am angry at him, but then *I look at this shell of a man and can't help but feel bad for him.*



I feel sorry for the entire family.

*Duchess of Cornwall feared 'that minx' Meghan Markle was 'a self-seeking troublemaker' who would not 'sacrifice career to silently serve' the monarchy, royal biographer claims*

*Meghan Markle, 40, was branded 'that minx' by the Duchess of Cornwall*
*Camilla 'found it hard to believe' the Duchess of Sussex would 'silently serve'*
*Royal biographer Tom Bower has claimed the two women never saw eye-to-eye *
*Added Camilla thought the former actress was 'a self-seeking troublemaker'*
_Meghan Markle was branded 'that minx' by the Duchess of Cornwall, who thought she was 'a self-seeking troublemaker', a royal biographer has claimed.

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is currently living in her $14 million mansion in California having stepped back from royal duty last year, never saw eye-to-eye with the Duchess of Cornwall, according to Tom Bower.

The commentator, who is currently working on a biography of Meghan, has said Camilla was long 'suspicious' of the Duchess' intentions. 

He told The Sun the duo never got along, explaining: '[Camilla] found it hard to believe that Meghan would sacrifice her career and independence to serve silently as a team player devoted to the monarchy.'

*However he added that the Duchess remained 'tight lipped' about her dislike for Meghan.*

Tom said that Camilla acted as a 'comfort' to Prince Charles after the Sussexes gave a series of explosive interviews last year.

He added: 'During those inevitably endless, tortured and inconclusive conversations, Camilla is the sort who would refer to Meghan as 'that minx' — the self-seeking trouble- maker whose antics will always end in tears.' 

*Meanwhile the royal biographer suggested the Duke and Duchess' silence  over the Queen's declaration that Camilla would one day by Queen Consort was 'Meghan’s way of declaring war.'*_









						Meghan Markle was branded 'that MINX' by Camilla, expert claims
					

Royal biographer Tom Bower told The Sun the Duchess of Cornwall was 'suspicious' of the Duchess of Sussex's intentions but remained 'tight-lipped'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Andy’s extremely poor judgment, too?



True. I will give Eugenie this, she is obviously loyal to Harry. In her position there’s absolutely no benefit to her to support him and yet she does. If nothing else she is a good friend.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I also like this one from the same author.




To be fair, nobody seemed to be snapping many pics! It must have been a wake up call to see how little they stand out in a crowd when they aren’t introduced with their beloved titles.  




Chanbal said:


> I feel sorry for the entire family.
> 
> *Duchess of Cornwall feared 'that minx' Meghan Markle was 'a self-seeking troublemaker' who would not 'sacrifice career to silently serve' the monarchy, royal biographer claims*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, was branded 'that minx' by the Duchess of Cornwall*
> *Camilla 'found it hard to believe' the Duchess of Sussex would 'silently serve'*
> *Royal biographer Tom Bower has claimed the two women never saw eye-to-eye *
> *Added Camilla thought the former actress was 'a self-seeking troublemaker'*
> _Meghan Markle was branded 'that minx' by the Duchess of Cornwall, who thought she was 'a self-seeking troublemaker', a royal biographer has claimed.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is currently living in her $14 million mansion in California having stepped back from royal duty last year, never saw eye-to-eye with the Duchess of Cornwall, according to Tom Bower.
> 
> The commentator, who is currently working on a biography of Meghan, has said Camilla was long 'suspicious' of the Duchess' intentions.
> 
> He told The Sun the duo never got along, explaining: '[Camilla] found it hard to believe that Meghan would sacrifice her career and independence to serve silently as a team player devoted to the monarchy.'
> 
> *However he added that the Duchess remained 'tight lipped' about her dislike for Meghan.*
> 
> Tom said that Camilla acted as a 'comfort' to Prince Charles after the Sussexes gave a series of explosive interviews last year.
> 
> He added: 'During those inevitably endless, tortured and inconclusive conversations, Camilla is the sort who would refer to Meghan as 'that minx' — the self-seeking trouble- maker whose antics will always end in tears.'
> 
> *Meanwhile the royal biographer suggested the Duke and Duchess' silence  over the Queen's declaration that Camilla would one day by Queen Consort was 'Meghan’s way of declaring war.'*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was branded 'that MINX' by Camilla, expert claims
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Tom Bower told The Sun the Duchess of Cornwall was 'suspicious' of the Duchess of Sussex's intentions but remained 'tight-lipped'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I mean, where’s the lie?!


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> It’s impossible to know for sure but maybe he was overwhelmed? The noise would be deafening at times and if he didn’t really want to be there…
> 
> Or maybe he was grumpy because most people didn’t recognize him.


From HELLO Magazine, seems he was reallllly under the radar in spite of an unusually full head of bright red hair:

"Their presence went unnoticed by photographers, but the NFL UK Twitter account shared a picture of the pair and wrote: "Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie in the house at #SBLVI."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *Duchess of Cornwall feared 'that minx' Meghan Markle was 'a self-seeking troublemaker' who would not 'sacrifice career to silently serve' the monarchy, royal biographer claims*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 40, was branded 'that minx' by the Duchess of Cornwall*
> *Camilla 'found it hard to believe' the Duchess of Sussex would 'silently serve'*
> *Royal biographer Tom Bower has claimed the two women never saw eye-to-eye *
> *Added Camilla thought the former actress was 'a self-seeking troublemaker'*




Sounds about right, even the derogatory name (I had to look it up and it said overly flirtatious woman).


_*



			Meanwhile the royal biographer suggested the Duke and Duchess' silence  over the Queen's declaration that Camilla would one day by Queen Consort was 'Meghan’s way of declaring war.'
		
Click to expand...

*_

I mean...talking to herself like usual while nobody even looks at her?

Any Game of Thrones watchers? I happened to see a short clip of Khal Drogo who's challenged by one of his underlings. He treats him with complete disregard, walks around dropping his knifes and turning his back on him while telling him very poetically what he'll do to his dead body before cutting his throat with the guy's own sword and ripping out his tongue.

That's kind of how I imagine a showdown between Camilla and Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> True. I will give Eugenie this, she is obviously loyal to Harry. In her position there’s absolutely no benefit to her to support him and yet she does. If nothing else she is a good friend.



It could be either of these two: she is indeed a bit naive and loyal to her close childhood friend, OR she is suffering from the same virus as the Netflixes (bitter jealousy) and doesn't care what that means for her as long as she can make the Cambridges' and Charles' life a little more miserable. I used to think the former but at this point I'm undecided.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It could be either of these two: she is indeed a bit naive and loyal to her close childhood friend, OR she is suffering from the same virus as the Netflixes (bitter jealousy) and doesn't care what that means for her as long as she can make the Cambridges' and Charles' life a little more miserable. I used to think the former but at this point I'm undecided.



As long as she is getting any perks and funding because she is royal I’d think she would be careful whose toes she stepped on. Maybe she truly is Switzerland in this dispute and she refuses to take sides.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> In a sea full of celebs at the superbowl, they looked like just a couple of nobodies.
> 
> Incredibly shocked that Meghan didn't go - just to leg hump the celebs there.


Maybe she knew she would be ignored and didn't want to face the humiliation. This way she can say she stayed home with a sick baby and sound like a devoted mother.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> To be fair, nobody seemed to be snapping many pics! It must have been a wake up call to see how little they stand out in a crowd when they aren’t introduced with their beloved titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, where’s the lie?!


And I'm sure in private she used stronger language than "minx" or "adventuress from CA".


----------



## charlottawill

"the Queen of the UK and Commonwealth never intended her noble position to be a passport to two of her unemployed grandchildren acting like a couple of wanabee A-list American celebs at the Super Bowl in California."

This. When she goes it will be the end of an era. The passing of the scepter from the "Greatest Generation" to the "What's In It For Me Generation?".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> As long as she is getting any perks and funding because she is royal I’d think she would be careful whose toes she stepped on. Maybe she truly is Switzerland in this dispute and she refuses to take sides.



I don't think she does...maybe the house. But otherwise, didn't Andrew have to step in and fund both the girls' security and maintenance a few years ago?


----------



## carmen56

I don’t have any time for Camilla but to give her her due, in the case of Raptor her perception was spot on.


----------



## Aimee3

charlottawill said:


> And I'm sure in private she used stronger language than "minx" or "adventuress from CA".


I’m not a fan of Camilla (still see her as the home wrecker be it true or not) but I imagine she would recognize a gold digging divorce b itch immediately!


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> As long as she is getting any perks and funding because she is royal I’d think she would be careful whose toes she stepped on. Maybe she truly is Switzerland in this dispute and she refuses to take sides.


In all honesty we wouldn’t know who these people are if they weren’t born into privilege and riches
As annoying as MM is she got where she is by sheer will power, social climbing and ruthlessness 
In a sense she deserves what she got (even if the prince remains a toad) she worked for it!
JCMH and Eugenie just lucked out at birth


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ouch.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ouch.



I think the post fails to mention that Hazz couldn't find help for his wife's suicide claims, but he seems to be OK with being a mental health coach in California. (All allegedly, of course)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> To me that doesn’t look like Harry. Hair is too straight, even on the sides. Unless he has a lot of product in it, which he never has before, the texture is also different.* Eyes are too close together.  *What are they playing at now?



 he's only half an inch from being a cyclops as it is


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> In all honesty we wouldn’t know who these people are if they weren’t born into privilege and riches
> As annoying as MM is she got where she is by sheer will power, social climbing and ruthlessness
> In a sense she deserves what she got (even if the prince remains a toad) she worked for it!
> JCMH and Eugenie just lucked out at birth


Whatever you want to call MM, she is not stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Whatever you want to call MM, she is not stupid.



But then she does the most stupid things. I find it very confusing.


----------



## charlottawill

Harry and National Anthem singer Mickey Guyton - he looks happy, for a change. Interestingly, one of the comments said what I was thinking, that MM stayed home because she is pregnant. Hmm...




And this would draw a sellout crowd  :


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He looks cheerful but still so...unhealthy.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He looks cheerful but still so...unhealthy.


Too much heat, sun, booze? Or just takes after his father? His genes were not intended to live in sunny CA.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Harry and National Anthem singer Mickey Guyton - he looks happy, for a change. Interestingly, one of the comments said what I was thinking, that MM stayed home because she is pregnant. Hmm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this would draw a sellout crowd  :



Oooooh, there's gonna be some 'splaining to do once he gets home!!


----------



## gracekelly

Minx is code for b*tch


----------



## bag-mania

I want to know where Eugenie spent the night. Was she invited back to Montecito to visit with Meghan and meet the kids? Did she stay in a luxury suite in LA and she’s already flying home?


----------



## bag-mania

Okay, so the Meghan fangirl who writes for Vanity Fair says Eugenie brought her husband and baby with her and that they stayed behind with Meghan during the Super Bowl. I knew this information had to have been leaked to someone.   









						Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie’s Super Bowl 2022 Outing Included a Bit of Dancing
					

Meghan Markle and Jack Brooksbank reportedly stayed behind in Santa Barbara as the royal cousins sat in the Salesforce box and danced in their seats during the halftime show.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Okay, so the Meghan fangirl who writes for Vanity Fair says Eugenie brought her husband and baby with her and that they stayed behind with Meghan during the Super Bowl. I knew this information had to have been leaked to someone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie’s Super Bowl 2022 Outing Included a Bit of Dancing
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Jack Brooksbank reportedly stayed behind in Santa Barbara as the royal cousins sat in the Salesforce box and danced in their seats during the halftime show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



Maybe MM and Jack swapped yacht tales.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> Maybe she knew she would be ignored and didn't want to face the humiliation. This way she can say she stayed home with a sick baby and sound like a devoted mother.


Or she's had more work done and isn't ready to be seen.


----------



## csshopper

What an interesting dynamic, the Royals get to attend the Super Bowl and sit in a private box and the Commoners get left with the kids in the stinky house.  Maybe Haz and Cousin held hands and made a run for it?

Can only image the intensive RF bashing that transpired, the Yorks have been Anti Charles  at least since he took the Princesses' state funded security away years ago. Maybe even the Queen at this point, but definitely, Charles, Camilla, Auntie Ann, Edward, Sophie, Will and Kate were probably sliced and diced and the walls dripped green with angry envy. BUT, how do they handle the elephant in the room, the creature who occupies the bottom of the popularity polls with the Grifters, Prince Andrew?????

Did Eug and family fly commercial, or does Jack's position as Brand Ambassador for tequila give him access to a private jet?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> What an interesting dynamic, the Royals get to attend the Super Bowl and sit in a private box and the Commoners get left with the kids in the stinky house.  Maybe Haz and Cousin held hands and made a run for it?
> 
> Can only image the intensive RF bashing that transpired, the Yorks have been Anti Charles  at least since he took the Princesses' state funded security away years ago. Maybe even the Queen at this point, but definitely, Charles, Camilla, Auntie Ann, Edward, Sophie, Will and Kate were probably sliced and diced and the walls dripped green with angry envy. BUT, how do they handle the elephant in the room, the creature who occupies the bottom of the popularity polls with the Grifters, Prince Andrew?????
> 
> Did Eug and family fly commercial, or does Jack's position as Brand Ambassador for tequila give him access to a private jet?


Doubtful. "Brand ambassadors" are a dime a dozen and I don't see Clooney or Gerber offering him a private jet.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The tequila thing has A-list ties.  Clooney, Gerber, Meldman.  Even though they sold the company, they still have a deal where they make money off of it.  I’m sure TW would like to get more close and personal with those tequila ties, especially if the blackball rumors are true.  She stayed home to “network”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Can only image the intensive RF bashing that transpired, the Yorks have been Anti Charles  at least since he took the Princesses' state funded security away years ago. Maybe even the Queen at this point, but definitely, Charles, Camilla, Auntie Ann, Edward, Sophie, Will and Kate were probably sliced and diced and the walls dripped green with angry envy. BUT, how do they handle the elephant in the room, the creature who occupies the bottom of the popularity polls with the Grifters, Prince Andrew?????
> 
> Did Eug and family fly commercial, or does Jack's position as Brand Ambassador for tequila give him access to a private jet?



I imagine Meghan got Jack drinking and then tried to pump him for scandalous Royal tidbits of what has been happening with the family since Megxit. They must be so desperate for material to put in Harry’s book. Harry’s job was to keep Eugenie away and distracted for several hours.

See, that’s how H&M work as a team!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I imagine Meghan got Jack drinking and then tried to pump him for scandalous Royal tidbits of what has been happening with the family since Megxit. They must be so desperate for material to put in Harry’s book. Harry’s job was to keep Eugenie away and distracted for several hours.
> 
> See, that’s how H&M work as a team!


Jack strikes me as a nice guy, but a dim bulb.  Doubt that he knows anything juicy.  He probably knows more about celebs than the family.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> Okay, so the Meghan fangirl who writes for Vanity Fair says Eugenie brought her husband and baby with her and that they stayed behind with Meghan during the Super Bowl. I knew this information had to have been leaked to someone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Princess Eugenie’s Super Bowl 2022 Outing Included a Bit of Dancing
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Jack Brooksbank reportedly stayed behind in Santa Barbara as the royal cousins sat in the Salesforce box and danced in their seats during the halftime show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Supposedly  Clooney and his tequila company had a pre game celebration in LA. Doesn’t Eugenie’s  husband still work for them?  If so, he passed on the party and stayed with TW?  So many pieces to this puzzle.


----------



## bag-mania

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Supposedly  Clooney and his tequila company had a pre game celebration in LA. Doesn’t Eugenie’s  husband still work for them?  If so, he passed on the party and stayed with TW?  So many pieces to this puzzle.



Maybe he took Meghan to the tequila party and the kiddies were left at home with the nannies.


----------



## Happyish

limom said:


> I don’t perceive Eugénie as a mole but rather as a friend to her cousin. And god knows Harry needs friends atm.
> And not for nothing, she is not responsible for the abhorrent behaviors of her father or her mother for that matter..
> And if the Sussex decide to visit his motherland, she can possibly play peacemaker in that messy family.


I believe Eugenie Jack Brooksbank, and their son, August are living at Frogmore. Harry and Megan still own it. Obviously they're close otherwise I doubt they'd be living there.
Gosh, so much is being read into a single expression or a partial hand-gesture representing a milli-second caught on camera. That's not at all fair, let alone reasonable. 
Some kindness please?


----------



## limom

Happyish said:


> I believe Eugenie Jack Brooksbank, and their son, August are living at Frogmore. Harry and Megan still own it. Obviously they're close otherwise I doubt they'd be living there.
> Gosh, so much is being read into a single expression or a partial hand-gesture representing a milli-second caught on camera. That's not at all fair, let alone reasonable.
> Some kindness please?


Am I impaired already?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Harry and National Anthem singer Mickey Guyton - he looks happy, for a change. Interestingly, one of the comments said what I was thinking, that MM stayed home because she is pregnant. Hmm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this would draw a sellout crowd  :



He looks happier with this girl than with TW, is that right?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Maybe he took Meghan to the tequila party and the kiddies were left at home with the nannies.



There was a party but all the pics and publicity focus on Cindy nearing her 56th birthday, her past work in commercials, and all the NFL quarterbacks that were present. No mention of George Clooney being present, nor any references to Jack Brookbanks, label Ambassador.

*Cindy Crawford and husband Rande Gerber attend Casamigos pre-Super Bowl bash in Beverly Hills alongside NFL quarterbacks*


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## poopsie

If grudge holding was an Olympic sport she would occupy all three spots on the podium in perpetuity
She is all in it to win it


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe that’s why Eugenie had her phone out.  He was using her phone to text well wishes to Camilla.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> It’s impossible to know for sure but maybe he was overwhelmed? The noise would be deafening at times and if he didn’t really want to be there…
> 
> Or maybe he was grumpy because most people didn’t recognize him.


I truly sympathize with anyone who can't stand noise. Hubby took me to baseball games years ago and it was so ear splitting it gave me severe migraines and I stopped going and I haven't attended anything with wild cheering fans again.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> The tequila thing has A-list ties.  Clooney, Gerber, Meldman.  Even though they sold the company, they still have a deal where they make money off of it.  I’m sure TW would like to get more close and personal with those tequila ties, especially if the blackball rumors are true.  She stayed home to “network”.


For sure. Clooney and Gerber sold it to Diageo for $700 mil, but they still are active in the company. I doubt Brooksbank is "the" brand manager. He's probably one of several dozen, it's really just a marketing role. He likely didn't warrant an invite to their Beverly Hills bash, much less a private jet. I'm sure MM would have given up her firstborn to attend that party. So Harry took his two tickets from Salesforce, invited his ally Eugenie, while MM and Jack stayed with the kids to spare her the humiliation of not being invited to any A list parties or boxes. Everything they do is calculated for maximum attention despite their pleas for privacy.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Maybe he took Meghan to the tequila party and the kiddies were left at home with the nannies.


Interesting theory but you know she would have let the world know she attended.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> He looks happier with this girl than with TW, is that right?


The BLG agrees with me!!!  I'm now a body language expert, accepting congratulations!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The BLG agrees with me!!!  I'm now a body language expert, accepting congratulations!



As Tyra Banks would say, he's smizing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Happyish said:


> I believe Eugenie Jack Brooksbank, and their son, August are living at Frogmore. *Harry and Megan still own it*. Obviously they're close otherwise I doubt they'd be living there.
> Gosh, so much is being read into a single expression or a partial hand-gesture representing a milli-second caught on camera. That's not at all fair, let alone reasonable.
> Some kindness please?


They are only renting Frogmore Cottage and I hope HM doesn't renew their lease when it comes due.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I imagine Meghan got *Jack drinking and then tried to pump him for scandalous Royal tidbits *of what has been happening with the family since Megxit. They must be so desperate for material to put in Harry’s book. Harry’s job was to keep Eugenie away and distracted for several hours.
> 
> See, that’s how H&M work as a team!


Since Eugenie isn't a working royal and Jack has his own job, I'd be surprised if they are kept abreast of anything significant.


----------



## xincinsin

I think we have to remember that, as nasty as the duo are, they are also people who have many facets. While they might be mean and greedy, they might also be nice in some ways. I don't really believe that anyone is 100% evil (although the world often tries to convince me otherwise). So for Eugenie, Harry might be her cousin/best buddy. He can be that as well as a snivelling weasel. The two are not contradictory or mutually exclusive.

Why was Methane not at the Super Bowl? I'd go with the 2 tickets reason, Occam's razor. Hazard really isn't so high on the company totem pole that he would be given more. 

Methane might simply be one of the Americans who don't enjoy watching Super Bowl, as well as not be tempted to go there if she doesn't get a chance to sashay with the A listers. She doesn't seem to like sports all that much. When she flew to the States to watch Serena play, her eyes were not on the game as she vacuously monologued next to Serena's mother. And her Wimbledon foray was just a stunt to show how important she was. Does she actually take part in any sports?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Interesting theory but you know she would have let the world know she attended.



Unless she wanted to keep her attendance low key because she was on the hunt for rich husband #2. 

Naw, those wealthy LA guys would see through her from miles away.


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> Interesting theory but you know she would have let the world know she attended.


 
She isn't getting invited _anywhere_
If you looked up 'buzzkill' in a dictionary it would say "see her"
At one time her husband would have been welcome, but nowadays who wouldn't fear getting getting put on the spot for a job for TW


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Unless she wanted to keep her attendance low key because she was on the hunt for rich husband #2.
> 
> Naw, those wealthy LA guys would see through her from miles away.


And she's too old for them anyway


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> And she's too old for them anyway



I am not sure that is true.  Wasn’t Jeff Bezo’s girlfriend about the same age? MM still has a shot at finding someone!


----------



## rose60610

Since Kate was recently named Rugby Patron, perhaps Meghan didn't want to be at a spectator at a sports event lest someone make a comparison  .
Does Charles pay for Eugenie's security? Just wonderin' .
Meghan may not be stupid as in very low IQ, but at the same time she isn't all that bright when it comes to reading a room. To think she thought she was capable of making the BRF concede to her wishes, as in making her the center of attention at all times, as in making them pay for their security AFTER basically telling them to go to hell; as in getting invited to the White House, as in expecting to be appointed to some top political job, she's delusional.


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> I am not sure that is true.  Wasn’t Jeff Bezo’s girlfriend about the same age? MM still has a shot at finding someone!



Right, Bezos is 57, Sanchez is 51. Did Meghan really think Harry had the clout to demand security and a river flow of money AFTER cutting ties with the BRF?  IMO, Lilibet was a pawn in a desperate attempt to get back into the good graces of the BRF. Poor kid, finding out she was named after her great great grandmother only as a money grab. Considering Meghan's track record, any guy would have to be willingly blind to date her after she divorces the ginger.


----------



## bellecate

Things could get interesting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ouch.




Remember last week when he told us he’s a “regular guy”.
Yeah, oh yeah, because every regular guy I know had 2 SuperBowl tickets. *Not*
  Btw, he had those tickets when he made that comment.



pukasonqo said:


> *In all honesty we wouldn’t know who these people are if they weren’t born into privilege and riches
> As annoying as MM is she got where she is by sheer will power, social climbing and ruthlessness*
> In a sense she deserves what she got (even if the prince remains a toad) she worked for it!
> JCMH and Eugenie just lucked out at birth




So true. If they stayed out of the limelight [as other royals do], we still wouldn’t know who they are.
MM played it smart by staying home with the kids. The ‘bored born-in’s’ looked miserable.

@xincinsin
_As annoying as MM is she got where she is by sheer will power, social climbing and ruthlessness_

She needs to be given maximum credit for that - the sheer will power is strong in her. . As the Real Housewives show us, none of that social climbing is easy. Many other women shrunk from a Hazzi marriage, but she (a nearly 40 yr old divorcee) saw the possibilities and stepped up, so go ahead, give ‘em hell, MM.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Since Kate was recently named Rugby Patron, perhaps Meghan didn't want to be at a spectator at a sports event lest someone make a comparison  .
> Does Charles pay for Eugenie's security? Just wonderin' .
> Meghan may not be stupid as in very low IQ, but at the same time she isn't all that bright when it comes to reading a room. To think she thought she was capable of making the BRF concede to her wishes, as in making her the center of attention at all times, as in making them pay for their security AFTER basically telling them to go to hell; as in getting invited to the White House, as in expecting to be appointed to some top political job, she's delusional.


There are definitely different kinds of intelligence:  some people are intelligent in academics, some in athletics, some artistically, and others are gifted in being with people.  Megain seems to think she’s crafty, and maybe to an extent she is since she did land herself a prince, but she’s a dunce when dealing with people and social graces.  She certainly wasn’t very intelligent at her craft (how many of us really heard of her before Haz??) and she can’t even write or have a thought without plagiarizing someone.  IMO Camilla perfectly described her as a minx.  MinxyMegain


----------



## purseinsanity




----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> There are definitely different kinds of intelligence:  some people are intelligent in academics, some in athletics, some artistically, and others are gifted in being with people.  Megain seems to think she’s crafty, and maybe to an extent she is since she did land herself a prince, but she’s a dunce when dealing with people and social graces.  She certainly wasn’t very intelligent at her craft (how many of us really heard of her before Haz??) and she can’t even write or have a thought without plagiarizing someone.  IMO Camilla perfectly described her as a minx.  MinxyMegain



For a moment, consider this — maybe she was pretending to be the ‘dunce’, the unintelligent American? Maybe the plagiarizing  was deliberate because she wanted to show how little the pretentious ‘pomp and circumstances’ stuff mattered to her?  Maybe all of her fashion missteps were deliberate?  Should we consider that?

ETA: to clarify, it was her way of mocking all the things the BRF is criticized for. Showing up to an event for 5 seconds while dressed to the 9’s and claiming they’ve made a difference - maybe?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> For a moment, consider this — maybe she was pretending to be the ‘dunce’, the unintelligent American? Maybe the plagiarizing  was deliberate because she wanted to show how little the pretentious ‘pomp and circumstances’ stuff mattered to her?  Maybe all of her fashion missteps were deliberate?  Should we consider that?
> 
> ETA: to clarify, it was her way of mocking all the things the BRF is criticized for. Showing up to an event for 5 seconds while dressed to the 9’s and claiming they’ve made a difference - maybe?


Nah.  She’s not of that high a caliber of actress


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can believe The Impertinent One being impertinent, but if the book is coming out soonish, wouldn't it be off to the printer any day now?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> I believe Eugenie Jack Brooksbank, and their son, August are living at Frogmore. Harry and Megan still own it.



They don't. It's part of the Crown Estate so the Queen owns it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Does Charles pay for Eugenie's security? Just wonderin' .



Andrew does. Or did when he wasn't out of work.


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe The Impertinent One being impertinent, but if the book is coming out soonish, wouldn't it be off to the printer any day now?




My best guess is that the RF is putting pressure on the publisher.  They are probably making it clear that they will sue for every section of slander.  H&M might have gotten some money up front, but probably need a product for more money at the backend.


----------



## needlv

Harry seems to have a lot of new hair in that photo of him and Eugenie at the super bowl…. Is he wearing a toupee?


----------



## needlv

Hmmm….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> @xincinsin
> _As annoying as MM is she got where she is by sheer will power, social climbing and ruthlessness_
> 
> She needs to be given maximum credit for that - the sheer will power is strong in her. . As the Real Housewives show us, none of that social climbing is easy. Many other women shrunk from a Hazzi marriage, but she (a nearly 40 yr old divorcee) saw the possibilities and stepped up, so go ahead, give ‘em hell, MM.


Not sure why you pointed this out to me, dear @CarryOn2020.
I don't dispute that she put in immense effort to snare Hazard, although I'm not going to call it "credit" - a word which has positive connotations for me. 

I don't agree that her effort gives her the right or entitlement to make life difficult for the BRF. She didn't like the "job", she walked away, good for her. But her tearing down of her own family and her in-laws reflects badly on her own moral fibre. No one else is saying the Raglands and the Markles are scum of the earth. Methane and her cronies are the only ones painting them as toxic people she discarded. And her tall tales about her short term suffering as a royal in the UK have as many holes as a lace doily. She is just calling them names to prop up her status as the Eternal Victim, which could be profitable if spun right.



CarryOn2020 said:


> For a moment, consider this — maybe she was pretending to be the ‘dunce’, the unintelligent American? Maybe the plagiarizing  was deliberate because she wanted to show how little the pretentious ‘pomp and circumstances’ stuff mattered to her?  Maybe all of her fashion missteps were deliberate?  Should we consider that?
> 
> ETA: to clarify, it was her way of mocking all the things the BRF is criticized for. Showing up to an event for 5 seconds while dressed to the 9’s and claiming they’ve made a difference - maybe?


I doubt she has the subtlety to mock them. Her approach seems to be more sledgehammer than embroidery needle. If she wanted to show that she could do better than their lip service, she would have put in the effort to really make a difference. It wasn't beyond her, the ladies at the Grenfell Community Kitchen spoke well of her. 

The plagiarism predated her relationship with Hazard, so it's more likely part of her narcissistic behaviour: if it sounds good, she'll copy it because she thinks the audience will not recognise the source.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Not sure why you pointed this out to me, dear @CarryOn2020.
> I don't dispute that she put in immense effort to snare Hazard, although I'm not going to call it "credit" - a word which has positive connotations for me.
> 
> I don't agree that her effort gives her the right or entitlement to make life difficult for the BRF. She didn't like the "job", she walked away, good for her. But her tearing down of her own family and her in-laws reflects badly on her own moral fibre. No one else is saying the Raglands and the Markles are scum of the earth. Methane and her cronies are the only ones painting them as toxic people she discarded. And her tall tales about her short term suffering as a royal in the UK have as many holes as a lace doily. She is just calling them names to prop up her status as the Eternal Victim, which could be profitable if spun right.
> 
> 
> I doubt she has the subtlety to mock them. Her approach seems to be more sledgehammer than embroidery needle. If she wanted to show that she could do better than their lip service, she would have put in the effort to really make a difference. It wasn't beyond her, the ladies at the Grenfell Community Kitchen spoke well of her.
> 
> The plagiarism predated her relationship with Hazard, so it's more likely part of her narcissistic behaviour: if it sounds good, she'll copy it because she thinks the audience will not recognise the source.



Apologies, I was not pointing it out to you. I was agreeing that it indeed did take ‘immense effort to snare’ Hazz. I do give her ‘credit’ for staying with a guy who has many problems. Based on the definition, “commend someone for (a quality or achievement), “_especially with reluctance or surprise_”,  she deserves to be recognized for that effort. Other women bolted.

Imo wearing ill-fitting clothes is mocking the perfectly dressed royals. Presentation is everything in that world, so to present herself in a sloppy manner, wow, it is making a powerful statement. Sure, it is disrespectful, but she did not care one bit. She knew she would leave asap. The Grenfell Kitchen visits proved she could dress appropriately when she wanted to.

Again, just my opinion. It was absolutely not my intention to offend you or anyone. I thought you had made an insightful point and I was trying to support that. I apologize and will make every effort to avoid doing it again.  All the best to you and all.  

ETA: The reason I did an @+your name is because the _reply_ button was not working properly. Hope that makes sense. 
Humble  apologies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies, I was not pointing it out to you. I was agreeing that it indeed did take ‘immense effort to snare’ Hazz. I do give her ‘credit’ for staying with a guy who has many problems. Based on the definition, “commend someone for (a quality or achievement), “_especially with reluctance or surprise_”,  she deserves to be recognized for that effort. Other women bolted.



I mean, it's not like she stays because she truly loves the guy and takes her vows seriously. She just has nowhere else to go really. I have no doubt she'd mail Harry her rings the minute something better came along. The others? They just weren't as fame-hungry and bribeable.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe The Impertinent One being impertinent, but if the book is coming out soonish, wouldn't it be off to the printer any day now?



No, there is still plenty of time. It was supposed to be released by the end of the year but I am skeptical about that deadline. As far as I can tell it isn’t available for pre-order and doesn’t have a title or cover yet. My guess: the publisher got a look at the first draft and said it wasn’t what they were promised in the contract. They are paying him many millions, they want something that is going to SELL.


----------



## Roxanna

Guys, I think,  personally you are greatly overestimate TW,  her sloppiness was  just what it was  but not of some genius dark deep thought process.  She just did not think it would be beneficial, also perhaps  she assumed that the price of garments will  make it perfectly fit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> No, there is still plenty of time. It was supposed to be released by the end of the year but I am skeptical about that deadline. As far as I can tell it isn’t available for pre-order and doesn’t have a title or cover yet. My guess: the publisher got a look at the first draft and said it wasn’t what they were promised in the contract. They are paying him many millions, they want something that is going to SELL.



Ah, I thought early June so the Queen's jubilee could be truly spoiled


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> her tall tales about her short term suffering as a royal in the UK have as many holes as a lace doily.





xincinsin said:


> I doubt she has the subtlety to mock them. Her approach seems to be more sledgehammer than embroidery needle.



  Great writing!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, I thought early June so the Queen's jubilee could be truly spoiled



If they could have been ready in time Harry might have tried to spoil it. Alas, it is difficult to write a compelling memoir about someone who doesn’t do anything. I don’t envy his ghost writer. He’s supposed to be talented but he has a challenging task.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Oops, edited to add, this is just a story about how the celebrities didn’t wear their masks.









						Prince Harry Joined Throng of Maskless Celebrities at Super Bowl
					

Prince Harry had a mask on at some point during the Super Bowl, but he ditched it at another point and joined a VERY large crowd of celebrities and others who flaunted COVID protocols ... and, real talk, the rules are looking increasingly ridiculous.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, it's not like she stays because she truly loves the guy and takes her vows seriously. She just has nowhere else to go really. *I have no doubt she'd mail Harry her rings the minute something better came along.* The others? They just weren't as fame-hungry and bribeable.


But, only after replacing the diamonds with fake stones.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> For a moment, consider this — *maybe she was pretending to be the ‘dunce’, the unintelligent American?* Maybe the plagiarizing  was deliberate because she wanted to show how little the pretentious ‘pomp and circumstances’ stuff mattered to her?  Maybe all of her fashion missteps were deliberate?  Should we consider that?
> 
> ETA: to clarify, it was her way of mocking all the things the BRF is criticized for. Showing up to an event for 5 seconds while dressed to the 9’s and claiming they’ve made a difference - maybe?



If Meghan was "pretending to be the 'dunce' ", then it's the best acting she's ever done  . I agree she mocked the BRF when she cut in front of the Queen at Charles' 50th anniversary as Prince of Wales ceremony, and claimed she didn't know anything about curtseying in front of the Queen. But I think she loved all the pomp at her gazillion dollar wedding and spending millions on Frogmore when she knew she was going to dump the BRF. She's just a fraud through and through. Her clothes probably fit much better during her yacht girl days.


----------



## Chanbal

Rumors circulating on Twitter about history lessons and a very dedicated student.


----------



## Chanbal

Mystery solved by the BLG: the reason why the glorious "Queen of Paparazzi Speed Dialing" missed the event.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Rumors circulating on Twitter about history lessons and a very dedicated student.




Now I really don't think she was trying to snag Charles, just like I don't think she thought she could make William divorce Kate and ride into the sunset with her. I do think - judging from her completely inappropriate behaviour we've witnessed - she was all over them in a weirdly sexualized way because that's what narcs and histrionic personalities tend to do and we've seen her do it in interviews and on other occasions as well. She probably thought she was charming and would have them bow to her every wish in no time.

ETA: she wasn't more fascinated by the history of the BRF than she was enamoured with British military history. Please.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I really don't think she was trying to snag Charles, like I don't think she thought she could make William divorce Kate and ride into the sunset with her. I do think - judging from her completely inappropriate behaviour we've witnessed - she was all over them in a weirdly sexualized way because that's what narcs tend to do and we've seen her do it in interviews and on other occasions as well. She probably thought she was charming and would have them bow to her every wish in no time.
> 
> ETA: she wasn't more fascinated by the history of the BRF than she was enamoured with British military history. Please.


She was possibly trying to become Charles's favorite 'daughter in law.' Allegedly, a similar approached used with TM when he could be useful to her.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oops, edited to add, this is just a story about how the celebrities didn’t wear their masks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Joined Throng of Maskless Celebrities at Super Bowl
> 
> 
> Prince Harry had a mask on at some point during the Super Bowl, but he ditched it at another point and joined a VERY large crowd of celebrities and others who flaunted COVID protocols ... and, real talk, the rules are looking increasingly ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



The picture was taken when Hazz was already off duty, so no need for masks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Mystery solved by the BLG: the reason why the glorious "Queen of Paparazzi Speed Dialing" missed the event.





BLG - love love his comment on Hazz’s photo with singer.

One of the commenters:
"People are loving Prince Harry going full American" *really what people, who are they, not this person (me)*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *She was possibly trying to become Charles's favorite 'daughter in law.'* Allegedly, a similar approached used with TM when he could be useful to her.


And called him 'Daddy in law' to tug at his heartstrings.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think she wouldn’t mind engendering hatred in Camilla and Catherine.  It’s more dramatic that way.

William scarfed her and Charles threw her out of the garden party.


----------



## youngster

Sophisticatted said:


> I think she wouldn’t mind engendering hatred in Camilla and Catherine.  It’s more dramatic that way.
> 
> *William scarfed her* and Charles threw her out of the garden party.



LOL!  I love that.


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t think that Charles  and Camilla are burning up the phone wires talking to Meghan or Harry.   I think the lawyers are. Charles may have sent a personal communication to Harry to tell him not to diss Camilla and the family, but any strong words are going to be handled by the lawyers. I think that Harry can say he doesn’t like her, but if he points to specific things, he has to be able to back up the statement or be sued for libel. The lawyers can tie up this book for so long that it will no longer have enough relevance for people to buy it. If that happens, it won’t be published.

Eugenie might have carried the message to Harry that though her father was in trouble, and had to give up his HRH and patronages, his family will support him because he didn’t  trash them.  Harry on the other hand, will receive no such support if he continues on this destructive  path.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Th book printing industry is having major issues right now.  An author I like had her paperback version canceled over it. 





__





						Books overboard! Supply chain headaches leave publishing all at sea | Publishing | The Guardian
					

Containers full of books at the bottom of the ocean are just one problem for an industry facing a host of shortages




					amp.theguardian.com


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Th book printing industry is having major issues right now.  An author I like had her paperback version canceled over it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Books overboard! Supply chain headaches leave publishing all at sea | Publishing | The Guardian
> 
> 
> Containers full of books at the bottom of the ocean are just one problem for an industry facing a host of shortages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.theguardian.com



That is what is so frustrating. Proven authors are having to negotiate for their new titles. New, unproven writers are having more trouble than ever getting a foot in the door and it was never easy.

Yet if you are a well-known celebrity you will be handed a big, fat check before you produce one word. It’s the same with Spotify. All those poor (literally!) podcasters who work their day jobs while producing a quality podcast each week, while this two bums read one half hour script in a year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

If Eugenie can come over for the SB, other royals can come over to visit H&M. But that hasn't happened, has it? None of their wedding guests are knocking at their door either (except for Oprah who got $$$ for doing so). Hmm. Was their trip to the U.N. supposed to generate an appointment for an ambassadorship somewhere? Maybe if Meghan had brought an olive oil cake she'd be U.S. ambassador to the U.K. by now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Th book printing industry is having major issues right now.  An author I like had her paperback version canceled over it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Books overboard! Supply chain headaches leave publishing all at sea | Publishing | The Guardian
> 
> 
> Containers full of books at the bottom of the ocean are just one problem for an industry facing a host of shortages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.theguardian.com



Yeah it is so annoying. Stuck at home and my favourite series is late with the next book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW Andrew and Giuffre settled for a generous but unknown amount of money. Somehow the tweet won't embed.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah it is so annoying. Stuck at home and my favourite series is late with the next book.


Sickening to think of the resources wasted on publishing The Bench when they might have made publication of something entertaining and meaningful possible.

edited to add:Interesting Amazon has removed the discount  price on the hardcover version and it's back to original price. Given these ratings, maybe it's a last ditch attempt to recoup some losses?

Best Sellers Rank: #2,645,847 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
#3,630 in Poetry for Early Learning
#4,592 in Children's Boys & Men Books (Books)
#4,634 in Children's Books on the U.S.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW Andrew and Giuffre settled for a generous but unknown amount of money. Somehow the tweet won't embed.


An angry face because, a) Andrew is slime whether it's all true or not and shouldn't be let off with just cash settlements and B) I don't believe she is the innocent the media is painting her to be and C) not her first payout. All just my personal opinion.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW Andrew and Giuffre settled for a generous but unknown amount of money. Somehow the tweet won't embed.


Yep.  He doesn't admit guilt and she can't find the original picture that his lawyers claimed was doctored.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> An angry face because, a) Andrew is slime whether it's all true or not and shouldn't be let off with just cash settlements and B) I don't believe she is the innocent the media is painting her to be and C) not her first payout. All just my personal opinion.



You are correct on all points.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Sickening to think of the resources wasted on publishing The Bench when they might have made publication of something entertaining and meaningful possible.
> 
> edited to add:Interesting Amazon has removed the discount  price on the hardcover version and it's back to original price. Given these ratings, maybe it's a last ditch attempt to recoup some losses?
> 
> Best Sellers Rank: #2,645,847 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
> #3,630 in Poetry for Early Learning
> #4,592 in Children's Boys & Men Books (Books)
> #4,634 in Children's Books on the U.S.


Honestly, forget a discount.  You couldn't pay me enough to take a copy!


----------



## Chanbal

More opinions on the SB event:


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> An angry face because, a) Andrew is slime whether it's all true or not and shouldn't be let off with just cash settlements and B) I don't believe she is the innocent the media is painting her to be and C) not her first payout. All just my personal opinion.



Andrew was low hanging fruit pure and simple. 
I'm sure there are an untold number of men out there who she could have gone after but if she had chances are she never would have lived to spend her "winnings"
I have no use for these women who play the victim card when it is convenient for them. How many years did TW suffer in silence before she decided to play the race card.


----------



## Chanbal

Seeing is believing…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on many reports from people who knew Andi, he had this coming.  Congrats to her lawyers for speaking truth to power.  Guessing A’s lawyers tried all kinds of intimidation.  Maybe all the royals will straighten up and do better.  Maybe.

ETA - the Counselor role. According to the REden article, the law needs to be changed.

_By law, the counsellors of state are the monarch’s spouse and the next four adults in the line of succession. An Act of Parliament would be needed to remove Andrew and Harry, perhaps replacing them with Princess Anne and the Duchess of Cornwall._


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> An angry face because, a) Andrew is slime whether it's all true or not and shouldn't be let off with just cash settlements and B) I don't believe she is the innocent the media is painting her to be and C) not her first payout. All just my personal opinion.


Andrew received a much bigger punishment, for him, by having his HRH and patronages taken away.  His ego has been very damaged by this.  That is all a much bigger cost to him than the money, which probably is going to be paid by TQ.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> Andrew was low hanging fruit pure and simple.
> I'm sure there are an untold number of men out there who she could have gone after but if she had chances are she never would have lived to spend her "winnings"
> I have no use for these women who play the victim card when it is convenient for them. How many years did TW suffer in silence before she decided to play the race card.


She, really her attorneys,  went for the man who would be embarrassed the most.  All these other politicians and businessmen have shells of iron.  They knew that Andrew could not ignore this.  His retaliation IMO, was insisting on the jury trial.  His attorneys knew that she could never tolerate questioning.  We would have been treated to weeping sessions and delays etc.  I think that this forced her to settle and perhaps for not as much as people think.  In the meantime, Andrew will just have to crawl under a rock for a long time unless his arrogance prevents this and he gets into even more trouble.

I find it interesting that this came out whilst Eugenie is in the US, unless she already went back.  If here, the press would be camping by her doorstep for a comment.


----------



## bag-mania

I can't believe they let Harry hold the Lombardi Trophy! WTF 

*PRINCE HARRY
MVP TREATMENT W/ RAMS AFTER SB LVI*






*Prince Harry* got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams following the team's Super Bowl victory ... even getting to touch the sport's most coveted prize.

The official Rams account just posted these photos of the Duke of Sussex getting an up-close-and-personal look at the Lombardi Trophy after L.A. won the game. The attached caption ... “Feelin’ like royalty.”





In the pics, you see Harry in the Rams locker room, checking out the hardware alongside team owner *Stan Kroenke* and others, while laughing it up ... sans any face coverings.

We should say, however, while seated in the stands with his cousin, *Princess Eugenie*, he was indeed wearing a mask. But it seems like when he was behind the scenes and undetected, or so he thought, he *ditched the cloth* as well ... like countless others were already doing.





Like we told you ... as it stands, the rule in L.A. County is that everyone is supposed to mask up indoors ... even though California at large has already lifted the mandate. Despite this, a good majority of folks at the game -- famous or not -- didn’t give a hoot ... and enjoyed themselves with their mugs set free.

Harry's a big England soccer fan ... so the Rams game wasn't exactly the football he's used to!









						Prince Harry Gets MVP Treatment from Rams Post-Win at Super Bowl LVI
					

Prince Harry got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I can't believe they let Harry hold the Lombardi Trophy! WTF
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY
> MVP TREATMENT W/ RAMS AFTER SB LVI*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams following the team's Super Bowl victory ... even getting to touch the sport's most coveted prize.
> 
> The official Rams account just posted these photos of the Duke of Sussex getting an up-close-and-personal look at the Lombardi Trophy after L.A. won the game. The attached caption ... “Feelin’ like royalty.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the pics, you see Harry in the Rams locker room, checking out the hardware alongside team owner *Stan Kroenke* and others, while laughing it up ... sans any face coverings.
> 
> We should say, however, while seated in the stands with his cousin, *Princess Eugenie*, he was indeed wearing a mask. But it seems like when he was behind the scenes and undetected, or so he thought, he *ditched the cloth* as well ... like countless others were already doing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like we told you ... as it stands, the rule in L.A. County is that everyone is supposed to mask up indoors ... even though California at large has already lifted the mandate. Despite this, a good majority of folks at the game -- famous or not -- didn’t give a hoot ... and enjoyed themselves with their mugs set free.
> 
> Harry's a big England soccer fan ... so the Rams game wasn't exactly the football he's used to!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets MVP Treatment from Rams Post-Win at Super Bowl LVI
> 
> 
> Prince Harry got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _By law, the counsellors of state are the monarch’s spouse and the next four adults in the line of succession. An Act of Parliament would be needed to remove Andrew and Harry, perhaps replacing them with Princess Anne and the Duchess of Cornwall._



Not sure how Anne and Camilla play into this. Four adults in line of succession, with Andrew and Harry gone next in line will be Beatrice and Eugenie. Plus, Camilla will be CoS eventually anyway.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I can't believe they let Harry hold the Lombardi Trophy! WTF
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY
> MVP TREATMENT W/ RAMS AFTER SB LVI*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams following the team's Super Bowl victory ... even getting to touch the sport's most coveted prize.
> 
> The official Rams account just posted these photos of the Duke of Sussex getting an up-close-and-personal look at the Lombardi Trophy after L.A. won the game. The attached caption ... “Feelin’ like royalty.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the pics, you see Harry in the Rams locker room, checking out the hardware alongside team owner *Stan Kroenke* and others, while laughing it up ... sans any face coverings.
> 
> We should say, however, while seated in the stands with his cousin, *Princess Eugenie*, he was indeed wearing a mask. But it seems like when he was behind the scenes and undetected, or so he thought, he *ditched the cloth* as well ... like countless others were already doing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like we told you ... as it stands, the rule in L.A. County is that everyone is supposed to mask up indoors ... even though California at large has already lifted the mandate. Despite this, a good majority of folks at the game -- famous or not -- didn’t give a hoot ... and enjoyed themselves with their mugs set free.
> 
> Harry's a big England soccer fan ... so the Rams game wasn't exactly the football he's used to!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets MVP Treatment from Rams Post-Win at Super Bowl LVI
> 
> 
> Prince Harry got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



I have no problem with this. Schmoozing it up is the kind of thing he _should_ be doing. 
What I do have a problem with is when he steps outside his lane and opens his mouth


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> I have no problem with this. Schmoozing it up is the kind of thing he _should_ be doing.
> What I do have a problem with is when he steps outside his lane and opens his mouth


Schmoozing is all he does.  He hasn't created or done anything of real substance.  He is working his way to becoming a greeter a Walmart.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I can't believe they let Harry hold the Lombardi Trophy! WTF
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY
> MVP TREATMENT W/ RAMS AFTER SB LVI*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams following the team's Super Bowl victory ... even getting to touch the sport's most coveted prize.
> 
> The official Rams account just posted these photos of the Duke of Sussex getting an up-close-and-personal look at the Lombardi Trophy after L.A. won the game. The attached caption ... “Feelin’ like royalty.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the pics, you see Harry in the Rams locker room, checking out the hardware alongside team owner *Stan Kroenke* and others, while laughing it up ... sans any face coverings.
> 
> We should say, however, while seated in the stands with his cousin, *Princess Eugenie*, he was indeed wearing a mask. But it seems like when he was behind the scenes and undetected, or so he thought, he *ditched the cloth* as well ... like countless others were already doing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like we told you ... as it stands, the rule in L.A. County is that everyone is supposed to mask up indoors ... even though California at large has already lifted the mandate. Despite this, a good majority of folks at the game -- famous or not -- didn’t give a hoot ... and enjoyed themselves with their mugs set free.
> 
> Harry's a big England soccer fan ... so the Rams game wasn't exactly the football he's used to!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets MVP Treatment from Rams Post-Win at Super Bowl LVI
> 
> 
> Prince Harry got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Harry was looking at that trophy as if he was trying to calculate he could get for it if he stole it.  The Crown jewels are out for him now, so the trophy is a possibility.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read another pretty nasty rumour of her alleged yachting days. At this point I feel it could go both ways...the BRF trying to avoid the embarrassment for Harry and the kids by appeasing her or telling her in no uncertain terms to f*ck off with a small settlement if she doesn't want her reputation destroyed beyond her wildest dreams. I do think they are always about deescalation, but at some point even they must be fed up with a crazy, impertinent grifter and she can't know if they are bluffing or not (the hook, they need to be willing to go all the way if need be).
> 
> This all given Harry finally sees the light and agrees to a divorce obviously.


OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH .. do tell, we "_*INQUIRING minds MUST know*_" (a famous line from one of the US Tabloids way back in the day)!


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> I have no problem with this. Schmoozing it up is the kind of thing he _should_ be doing.
> What I do have a problem with is when he steps outside his lane and opens his mouth



It bugs me. Of all the celebrities there, Harry gets the VIP treatment. His royalty made the difference. It does make me wonder where Eugenie was while Harry was in the locker room.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It bugs me. Of all the celebrities there, Harry gets the VIP treatment. His royalty made the difference. It does make me wonder where Eugenie was while Harry was in the locker room.



Imo anyone who wanted an invite could have gotten one to the locker room. It is probably included in his freebie ticket. The NFL should have refused and not allowed the desperate photo-op. But, they themselves are kinda desperate for headlines and $$$.

Last week in the SB run-up, I did hear on a BBC report that ‘football was coming home’ in America.  Um, note to the UK: football never left America. We aren’t the UK, so that song won’t work here.  Let’s keep the UK stuff in the UK, especially the never-do-well princes and their offspring. Please.

ETA: he can drool all over the trophy if he wants. Notice they did not show him any rings - the real jewels.








						The Super Bowl rings
					

Take a look at all of the Super Bowl rings from past years!




					www.nfl.com
				






ETA2: old article that explains the bling:








						Pats get Super Bowl rings to show they're 'still here'
					

The ring design features 422 diamonds and the team's "Still Here" motto.




					www.si.com


----------



## limom

poopsie said:


> Andrew was low hanging fruit pure and simple.
> I'm sure there are an untold number of men out there who she could have gone after but if she had chances are she never would have lived to spend her "winnings"
> I have no use for these women who play the victim card when it is convenient for them. How many years did TW suffer in silence before she decided to play the race card.


Low hanging fruit?
He is the son of the Queen of England.
The victim blaming is astonishing.
She was trafficked.
As women, we have to do better for real.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo anyone who wanted an invite could have gotten one to the locker room. It is probably included in his freebie ticket. The NFL should have refused and not allowed the desperate photo-op. But, they themselves are kinda desperate for headlines and $$$.
> 
> * Last week in the SB run-up, I did hear on a BBC report that ‘football was coming home’ in America.  Um, note to the UK: football never left America. We aren’t the UK, so that song won’t work here. Let's keep the UK stuff in the UK,* especially the never-do-well princes and their offspring. Please.
> 
> ETA: he can drool all over the trophy if he wants. Notice they did not show him any rings - the real jewels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Super Bowl rings
> 
> 
> Take a look at all of the Super Bowl rings from past years!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nfl.com



The NFL has been playing games in London and Mexico City for years. There are rumors of establishing permanent teams there. 
I am unfamiliar with the song or the BBC reference, but are they talking about football as soccer?


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Basically the same as always, but they brought out a "witness" who worked with her (apparently he's said it before and didn't get sued), and they also claimed she was a...stand-in or something for porn material. And more about Markus Anderson's side gigs as a high class pimp for Soho House and her harrassing London members to introduce her to their rich friends.
> 
> The thing is, it could all be haters, but it is kind of interesting to me that the Duchess of Lawsuit goes to court over an alleged copper bathtub but lets people call her a prostitute without batting an eyelash.


Hmmmmm .. well, interesting .. because my Music biz friends told me that she bugged the ever-living hell out of them during the time that she was "friends" with their son (_who was the male lead in their high school's Senior play_) .. that they *ABSOLUTELY HAD TO* introduce her to a *FAMOUS MUSICIAN* (_not just some kettle fry_ ..) but *THE HEAD HONCHO* (_for example .. ERIC CLAPTON, *not* one of this band members_) .. because *SHE *had to *meet HIM* so that *HE would see *her *GODDESS *qualities (her '*NATURAL BEAUTY*', her '*ACTING TALENT*', her '*SUPREME INTELLECT*', her '*SO SWEET & GIVING PERSONALITY*' .. and maybe even her '*YACHTING TALENTS*') such that the artisan would *just HAVE TO* include her in his life, his music, his video .. blah, blah, blah .. blaech !!!!!

Of course, my friends *WOULD NOT oblige*!  A funny story that my friend told me, was that megalomaniac tried to use the "_you forgot" routine .. when she would say "well, remember MxxMxx, I still have to meet up with Eric when he's in town next week on [date/time] as you already made the reservation at [restaurant]_" .. like my friend had all forgotten about "their date"!  Bottom line, my friend told me that Meghan was one of the most manipulating people she had ever met (_and this is someone who dealt with all the very well-known musicians, etc._!!!) and when Meghan married dumb-Ha$$ .. she said "_oh geez, well good luck to him, he won't last long_"!!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> More opinions on the SB event:




Why would she be booed? That implies people care about her. More likely she'd be ignored, a fate worse than death to her.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait. What.   _Invisible contract??? _ Tell us more, please.
> 
> __



Now, she is an example of great Plastic Surgery work!  She is still a mature woman, but not pulled back like her face was stuck in the bus door!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Like we told you ... as it stands, the rule in L.A. County is that everyone is supposed to mask up indoors ... even though California at large has already lifted the mandate. Despite this, a good majority of folks at the game -- famous or not -- didn’t give a hoot ... and enjoyed themselves with their mugs set free.


Rules for thee, not for me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> Now, she is an example of great Plastic Surgery work!  She is still a mature woman, but not pulled back like her face was stuck in the bus door!



Apparently, the plastic surgery docs cannot smooth out the wrinkles around her lip line. 
The photos of her lipstick settling in the lines = eeeek


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> "..not pulled back like her face was stuck in the bus door!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That caption though 



Also, why is this woman forever stuck in middle school? "If you don't like me I'll find you stupid too."


----------



## CeeJay

I'm sure someone posted this prior; I just can't keep up and my wonderful (SIC) arthritis prevents me (somedays) from being able to be 'online'!  The comments are EPIC!!! 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-10514835/Meghan-Markle-no-intention-returning-UK.html


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo anyone who wanted an invite could have gotten one to the locker room. It is probably included in his freebie ticket. The NFL should have refused and not allowed the desperate photo-op. But, they themselves are kinda desperate for headlines and $$$.
> 
> Last week in the SB run-up, I did hear on a BBC report that ‘football was coming home’ in America.  Um, note to the UK: football never left America. We aren’t the UK, so that song won’t work here.  Let’s keep the UK stuff in the UK, especially the never-do-well princes and their offspring. Please.
> 
> ETA: he can drool all over the trophy if he wants. Notice they did not show him any rings - the real jewels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Super Bowl rings
> 
> 
> Take a look at all of the Super Bowl rings from past years!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nfl.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5328191
> 
> ETA2: old article that explains the bling:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pats get Super Bowl rings to show they're 'still here'
> 
> 
> The ring design features 422 diamonds and the team's "Still Here" motto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.si.com


It was the UK NFL group that posted the picture of Haz and Eug in the SB. It has to do with NFL games being played abroad, more money and publicity and all that crap. Haz was being used, he got into the SB in exchange. What he's best at.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That caption though
> 
> 
> 
> Also, why is this woman forever stuck in middle school? "If you don't like me I'll find you stupid too."



HA HA HA HA @QueenofWrapDress !!!! .. *G*reat *M*inds *T*hink *A*like (*GMTA*)!!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That caption though
> 
> 
> 
> Also, why is this woman forever stuck in middle school? "If you don't like me I'll find you stupid too."




TAKE THE TITLE AWAY N O W. The longer she has it the more it tarnishes the Royal Family and all the people of the Commonwealth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> her '*SO SWEET & GIVING PERSONALITY*'



Ok, this might just be the most shocking thing I've ever read about her. Sweet and giving my a*s. The delusion is strong.



> Bottom line, my friend told me that Meghan was one of the most manipulating people she had ever met (_and this is someone who dealt with all the very well-known musicians, etc._!!!) and when Meghan married dumb-Ha$$ .. she said "_oh geez, well good luck to him, he won't last long_"!!



He's only still around because she doesn't have better options.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Why would she be booed? That implies people care about her. More likely she'd be ignored, a fate worse than death to her.



Kanye was booed which I thought was really sh*tty because he had his kid or kids (not sure how many of them) with him.


----------



## poopsie

limom said:


> Low hanging fruit?
> He is the son of the Queen of England.
> The victim blaming is astonishing.
> She was trafficked.
> As women, we have to do better for real.



I said what I said
So at NO POINT could she have not walked away? 
Don't see her as a completely blameless victim. 
I'm doing just fine, thank you. But I take full responsibility for the mistakes and poor choices I've made and would never EVER allow myself to be portrayed as a victim for them.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> she was all over them in a weirdly sexualized way because that's what narcs and histrionic personalities tend to do and we've seen her do it in interviews and on other occasions as well. She probably thought she was charming and would have them bow to her every wish in no time.





Chanbal said:


> She was possibly trying to become Charles's favorite 'daughter in law.' Allegedly, a similar approached used with TM when he could be useful to her.


ITA 
It was the modus operandi for my worst office narc. He used to tell us about how hard he tried to make himself more buff to attract potential partners (he had a live-in lover but was on the hunt to upgrade). And he would try his best to look involved and wise during staff meetings so as to impress the boss. I heard from colleagues that he was very miffed that his efforts failed and could not understand why he wasn't the boss's favourite.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> More opinions on the SB event:



Sigh! Such coveted tickets and no one was there or not there who actually wanted to watch the game


----------



## xincinsin

limom said:


> Low hanging fruit?
> He is the son of the Queen of England.
> The victim blaming is astonishing.
> She was trafficked.
> As women, we have to do better for real.


There was talk that she joined up with her traffickers and lured other young women (her friends and classmates) into the web. One of the victims' mothers was interviewed about it. She said her daughter was still traumatized after all these years. So while I agree Giuffre was a victim, there may have been a point when the fly became a spider herself.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Sigh! Such coveted tickets and no one was there or not there who actually wanted to watch the game


Who was the guest of whom ?
did E get tix through her husband , not impossible …, then invite her cousin ?
Did H invite E ? must Have been arranged some time ago, you don’t just go zip out to the Super Bowl in the days of COVID ….
I doubt E was an envoy of the BRF, who would have asked she go unnoticed and not be seen at the biggest party of all time …


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I can't believe they let Harry hold the Lombardi Trophy! WTF
> 
> *PRINCE HARRY
> MVP TREATMENT W/ RAMS AFTER SB LVI*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams following the team's Super Bowl victory ... even getting to touch the sport's most coveted prize.
> 
> The official Rams account just posted these photos of the Duke of Sussex getting an up-close-and-personal look at the Lombardi Trophy after L.A. won the game. The attached caption ... “Feelin’ like royalty.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the pics, you see Harry in the Rams locker room, checking out the hardware alongside team owner *Stan Kroenke* and others, while laughing it up ... sans any face coverings.
> 
> We should say, however, while seated in the stands with his cousin, *Princess Eugenie*, he was indeed wearing a mask. But it seems like when he was behind the scenes and undetected, or so he thought, he *ditched the cloth* as well ... like countless others were already doing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like we told you ... as it stands, the rule in L.A. County is that everyone is supposed to mask up indoors ... even though California at large has already lifted the mandate. Despite this, a good majority of folks at the game -- famous or not -- didn’t give a hoot ... and enjoyed themselves with their mugs set free.
> 
> Harry's a big England soccer fan ... so the Rams game wasn't exactly the football he's used to!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets MVP Treatment from Rams Post-Win at Super Bowl LVI
> 
> 
> Prince Harry got some serious MVP treatment from the L.A. Rams
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


TheMinx is going to be pi$$ed!!!!  What she wouldn't give to be in a locker room full of athletic, rich, half naked men to schmooze and rub their backs whilst batting her fake lashes??!!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> There was talk that she joined up with her traffickers and lured other young women (her friends and classmates) into the web. One of the victims' mothers was interviewed about it. She said her daughter was still traumatized after all these years. So while I agree Giuffre was a victim, there may have been a point when the fly became a spider herself.


ITA.  I don't believe in victim shaming if they're truly victims.  (Jesse Smollet, anyone?)  When I first heard of her, my gut response was to 100% believe her and decry everyone involved.  The more I've read though, I think she was more complicit than she lets on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> TheMinx is going to be pi$$ed!!!!  What she wouldn't give to be in a locker room full of athletic, rich, half naked men to schmooze and rub their backs whilst batting her fake lashes??!!


She wouldn't have been allowed in anyway. It's still difficult for women sports reporters to get the same access as their male counterparts.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> She wouldn't have been allowed in anyway. It's still difficult for women sports reporters to get the same access as their male counterparts.


But... but... She is a DUCHESS! Actually, all she had to do was: refuse to let go of Hazard's hand until she had no choice. Then, as Hazard was about to step into the locker room, she taps him on the back, he automatically steps aside, she cuts in and enters the door.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She wouldn't have been allowed in anyway. It's still difficult for women sports reporters to get the same access as their male counterparts.


Semantics.  This is the Minx we are talking about!


----------



## Debbini

limom said:


> Low hanging fruit?
> He is the son of the Queen of England.
> The victim blaming is astonishing.
> She was trafficked.
> As women, we have to do better for real.


I agree!! Victim blaming makes me ill.


----------



## tiktok

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  I don't believe in victim shaming if they're truly victims.  (Jesse Smollet, anyone?)  When I first heard of her, my gut response was to 100% believe her and decry everyone involved.  The more I've read though, I think she was more complicit than she lets on.



It’s possible she was complicit at some point (I don’t know, I haven’t read much about her), but I wouldn’t want to judge someone whose psyche was screwed up by monsters like Epstein and Maxwell at a young and vulnerable age, and has been used by many rich and powerful men (who now pay or extort their way out of accountability). This kind of abuse can really mess with people’s sense of right and wrong especially when they’re young and impressionable.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> There was talk that she joined up with her traffickers and lured other young women (her friends and classmates) into the web. One of the victims' mothers was interviewed about it. She said her daughter was still traumatized after all these years. So while I agree Giuffre was a victim, there may have been a point when the fly became a spider herself.



Andrew is a slime, Epstein was worse and so was Maxwell. Maxwell and Epstein were the worst kind of human traffickers (Allegedly) as she flew via helicopter - the girls/ women to his island who then couldn’t leave easily….

whilst Virginia was young and  maybe, seduced by the money, lifestyle and perhaps had a broken background, I don’t believe she was completely clean - with other women suggesting she also introduced them to Epstein.

But she *was* a minor who was trafficked.  And for that she has my sympathy.

And Andrew is gross.

I suggest she now uses the case as a precedent to go after the other wealthy men that haven’t been named.  And Maxwells court records have been sealed - so I find that fact disturbing.

That is all.

Back on topic, rumour is that H and MM are suffering marital difficulties because of him taking Eugenie to Super Bowl,… or maybe she is recovering from another plastic surgery…


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> I suggest she now uses the case as a precedent to go after the other wealthy men that haven’t been named.  And Maxwells court records have been sealed - so I find that fact disturbing.
> 
> That is all.
> 
> Back on topic, rumour is that H and MM are suffering marital difficulties because of him taking Eugenie to Super Bowl,… or maybe she is recovering from another plastic surgery…


There was some legal analysis that mentioned the statute of limitations was running out for her to go after anyone, so she sued the one who had the most to lose and was most likely to pay up. I'm not a lawyer or I don't know that much about American law. Maybe someone with legal knowhow can confirm this.

But, yes, back to topic. Even if they are having a spat, who would know? They have a choice of bedrooms to decamp to if they are feuding, unlike us mere mortals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Didn’t Epstein loan money to Fergie?  He seems like the type of person who would extract a quid pro quo. Idk, I guess it is possible she was part of the sordid scheme, too. Charles’s ‘friendship’ with the UK trafficker raises numerous questions, too. Shady characters with shady behaviors.

The thing about royals - almost all of them - is they lead what many consider to be decadent lives. Plenty of photos show that drugs, drink, sex, etc. are daily habits to these people.  Problem is that they believe they have divine authority to lead us.  No. Hard no.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> I said what I said
> *So at NO POINT could she have not walked away?
> Don't see her as a completely blameless victim.*
> I'm doing just fine, thank you. But I take full responsibility for the mistakes and poor choices I've made and would never EVER allow myself to be portrayed as a victim for them.



I have no problem discussing her current - adult - actions in a critical way (I do think she was after money more than redemption, but then again, if she was wronged, she can squeeze whomever involved dry as far as I am concerned), but going after a minor who legally can't consent and was entangled in a whole trafficking network is awful. It is why I basically stopped watching Lady C's videos.

It's cool you apparently were a smart teenager (or just a boring one like me), but it shows privilege to claim she could have just walked away. Victims of domestic violence are rarely physically chained to their abuser neither, yet it takes strength, courage and a whole lot of deprogramming.

ETA: and if she did lure other young girls to their doom? (admittedly I haven't followed the case at all beyond the absolute basics) Maybe one of them will come forward and sue her, it really doesn't make a difference re: Andrew's behaviour (then again, what does the picture they pulled up prove besides they fact they've met? He could entirely be her scapegoat, but he probably didn't frequent Epstein's properties to drink coffee).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are H&M involved in this or have they started one of their own?  Imo many of the charitable organisations fail to measure up. Maybe this one is different ?

_HRH Princess Eugenie has been working against modern slavery since 2012. She helped set up Key to Freedom, a social enterprise initiative that supports and facilitates a route to market for products made by the survivors of trafficking at the Women’s Interlink Foundation. _








						Our Team
					

HRH Princess Eugenie of York and Julia de Boinville at the United Nations Our Story EUGENIE AND JULES ARE BEST FRIENDS AND ABOLITIONISTS We met on the bus on our way to a school trip and knew at on…




					theantislaverycollective.org


----------



## Sharont2305

limom said:


> Low hanging fruit?
> He is the son of the Queen of England.
> The victim blaming is astonishing.
> She was trafficked.
> As women, we have to do better for real.


Actually she's Queen Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. 
Not England


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That caption though
> 
> 
> 
> Also, why is this woman forever stuck in middle school? "If you don't like me I'll find you stupid too."



She would've won us over if she'd behaved and done her job properly. We are not a lost cause.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Didn’t Epstein loan money to Fergie?  He seems like the type of person who would extract a quid pro quo. Idk, I guess it is possible she was part of the sordid scheme, too. Charles’s ‘friendship’ with the UK trafficker raises numerous questions, too. Shady characters with shady behaviors.
> 
> The thing about royals - almost all of them - is they lead what many consider to be decadent lives. Plenty of photos show that drugs, drink, sex, etc. are daily habits to these people.  Problem is that they believe they have divine authority to lead us.  No. Hard no.


I really don't think Andrew's family was in on it. Fergie, Eugenie and Beatrice may have their own skeletons in the closet, but with Giuffre's legal team playing hard ball for her, if there was any whiff of involvement, they would have dragged the women in too. Just because one member of the family is delinquent doesn't mean the others are the same. They might not be saints,but they are likely just normal people albeit with a lot of money, polo ponies, security guards, palaces etc. I doubt HMTQ and Princess Anne are into drinks and drugs even if other members of the BRF are.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> She would've won us over if she'd behaved and done her job properly. We are not a lost cause.



I think she was received with open arms by both family and people. She blew that one herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Idk, does a _grovelling apology_ make it all ok?  Not for me, I won’t buy her children’s books.

_Meanwhile, Fergie had her own Epstein problems. 

In 2011, she made a groveling apology after it emerged that she had accepted more than $20,000 from him to help clear a personal debt. Epstein had given the money to one of Fergie’s assistants at Andrew’s request.

But the payment, which came after Epstein’s release from prison in 2009 over child sex offenses, caused a storm when it became public.

The duchess subsequently admitted she had made a “gigantic error of judgement” and offered a “heartfelt” apology.
Speaking to the Evening Standard, she said: “I deeply regret Jeffrey Epstein became involved in any way with me. I abhor pedophilia and any sexual abuse of children and know that this was a gigantic error of judgment on my behalf.”

Sources later told the Daily Mail that Epstein was so furious by the use of the term “pedophilia” that he attempted to sue Fergie._









						Prince Andrew has a secret weapon on his legal defense team: ex-wife Fergie
					

Multiple sources told The Post that Fergie — known as Sarah, Duchess of York, since her divorce from the Queen’s second son in 1996 — is so supportive of Andrew that she has been in the room …




					pagesix.com
				




ETA: I believe in forgiveness. Have A&F asked for it? I just haven’t read or heard A or F state in an interview why they did what they did. I have not heard them say the words “I am sorry”.  Deep regrets are not quite the same, in my culture.  At least Hugh Grant did the interview, said the words and stated how he intended to work on himself. If A&F have done that, I haven’t read it. My unpopular view : QE and Charles should apologise for covering for A, too.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> She would've won us over if she'd behaved and done her job properly. We are not a lost cause.



M would never last in a normal job - not for a day


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> She would've won us over if she'd behaved and done her job properly. We are not a lost cause.



Hope this doesn’t offend


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think she was received with open arms by both family and people. She blew that one herself.



Sure did


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope this doesn’t offend
> 
> View attachment 5328602



Self-entitled, badly behaved people are a PITA and should - go away


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It sounds absolutely believable to me. Swipe for screenshots of the article.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It sounds absolutely believable to me. Swipe for screenshots of the article.




There is another side to this story. Where was MM’s staff? Why was Kate’s staff standing around MM if they were not willing to assist? Why didn’t Kate say something to smooth the ruffled feathers? Perhaps to MM, staff is staff. If there was such a clear line of difference, why wasn’t this clearly stated? Glorifying one royal while criticising another, especially a newcomer, is not cool.  Such a dysfunctional group of people.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Are you expecting me to answer all these questions, or are you just thinking out loud?

I think that was at a time when she didn't have her own staff right at the beginning. They were assisting her as a temporary solution, they were just not bowing to her every whim because that was not their main job. But really, does it matter? A grown woman doesn't stomp her feet and make a scene when she doesn't get her way, and a decent human being doesn't treat staff sh*tty, be it your waiter or your personal assistant. It's not the palace's fault Raptor didn't grow up around servants and thought she could treat them like bondslaves.

P.S. Not sure I get "Why were they even around her?" I doubt they sat at her bedside, they were probably at their office.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The questions are rhetorical and not directed at you personally.  
Imo the story is highly questionable. It is entirely possible the staff are not telling the full truth, too. MM’s behavior is no worse than the way Andi treats his staff imo. The teddy bears story pushed me into a new reality.  As a USA citizen, I may dislike some of MM’s nonsense, but I see it for what it is. If this story is true which I doubt, it seems the royals and their staff take themselves way too seriously. If there is job to do, then whoever should do it.  Interesting that these people cannot get along.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Eh, we’re talking about a person who demanded a staffer hand over a tiara without permission.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> Eh, we’re talking about a person who demanded a staffer hand over a tiara without permission.



Then had her fiancé yell at said staffer and pick a fight with his grandmother, incidentally not only his matriarch but also his sovereign AND employer.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> Eh, we’re talking about a person who demanded a staffer hand over a tiara without permission.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Then had her fiancé yell at said staffer and pick a fight with his grandmother, incidentally not only his matriarch but also his sovereign AND employer.



She even got her spoilt brat fiancé to force the issue and threaten the employee.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> Eh, we’re talking about a person who demanded a staffer hand over a tiara without permission.


Also the person who sent her security on coffee runs, IIRC.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Then had her fiancé yell at said staffer and pick a fight with his grandmother, incidentally not only his matriarch but also his sovereign AND employer.



Forgot to add, and owner of the tiara in question.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wait, hold up.  The MakleNews IG post did *not* say this was the tiara incident, linked below.
I have read the MarkleNews IG comments. As someone said, it is interesting this old story is being rehashed *now*. One day after Andy’s mess. Sheesh, Andi’s PR is as bad as H&M’s.

RE: tiara story - if QE had decided which tiara MM was going to wear, then QE should have told MM this is the one and be done with it. Making it into a guessing game of which one will she choose seems very silly and immature. If Kate’s staff were not willing to help MM, then they should stay away from MM.  Heavenly days, this is sounding like MeanGirls, part 20.  Kind of the same behavior as in Hazzie’s story of MM’s first meeting with QE.  These people must be some of the most juvenile folks on the planet.  ick.









						Queen's biting words to Harry over Meghan's 'tiara tantrum' are revealed
					

According to one royal biographer, Her Majesty was not amused by tiara-gate.




					www.yahoo.com
				




ETA: this reflects poorly on the BRF and all staff working for it.  Hazzi, too, looks worse and worse.  Good on MM staying home with the kids.  FWIW I really dislike starting my day defending MM, but sheesh, this pile-on is unfair.  The IG author should name names, not hide behind “I cannot reveal my sources.”  Puhleeeze.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, hold up.  The MakleNews IG post did *not* say this was the tiara incident, linked below.



Neither did we, we were just adding to the list of questionable behaviour.



> RE: tiara story - if QE had decided which tiara MM was going to wear, then QE should have told MM this is the one and be done with it. Making it into a guessing game of which one will she choose seems very silly and immature.



Where does is come from that the Queen played petty games over the tiara or even that she wasn't willing to let her have some say?



> If Kate’s staff were not willing to help MM, then they should stay away from MM.



Yeah, they should just have requested to work from home indefinitely just to be sure. Even better, just leave the country while she's there.

Not sure what made you suddenly turn into a big defender of unfairly treated and wronged Raptor, but some of your...solutions are a bit unreasonable.



> The IG author should name names, not hide behind “I cannot reveal my sources.”  Puhleeeze.



It was the royal biographer telling the author of the article he couldn't name names...which probably didn't faze said author one bit as it's not unusual in journalism.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> She even got her spoilt brat fiancé to force the issue and threaten the employee.
> 
> View attachment 5328722



That is on him. Shows his weakness and ineffectiveness. All things considered, it is not at all surprising.


----------



## lanasyogamama

How do these apartments in Kensington work? Is it like a regular apartment building where people have their own entrance with a key, or is it more just that you have your designated rooms but people pass through some common areas. It’s so confusing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Sophisticatted

According to Cote de Texas (interior designer who blogs/blogged about architecture and interior design) Apt. 1A is more like a 4 story mansion.  Not sure how the part fits into the whole.

ETA: replying to lanasyogamam’s question.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a short video about the lady that compared herself to Hazz's wife. I remember to have read about her a few years  ago, and it's an incredible story of a con artist. The video is simple, but it's a good introduction to the subject for the ones that are not familiar with Anna Sorokin (aka Anna Delvey).


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Self-entitled, badly behaved people are a PITA and should - go away
> 
> View attachment 5328615
> 
> 
> View attachment 5328616





papertiger said:


> Sure did
> 
> 
> papertiger said:
> 
> 
> 
> M would never last in a normal job - not for a day
> 
> View attachment 5328613
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5328614
Click to expand...

Haha.  Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is getting some love today!


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> According to Cote de Texas (interior designer who blogs/blogged about architecture and interior design) Apt. 1A is more like a 4 story mansion.  Not sure how the part fits into the whole.
> 
> ETA: replying to lanasyogamam’s question.


I've heard it's as big as a city block.


> https://www.housedigest.com/402872/...dletons-stunning-kensington-palace-apartment/


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Actually she's Queen Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.
> Not England


And she did Meghan a huge favor by allowing her to wear a tiara that is part of the Crown Jewels. What an honor!  An honor that wasn’t appreciated. 

I don’t know about you folks, but I have difficulty with heavy things sitting on my head or pressing it.   I even have difficulty with headbands. I think being given a choice of three tiara to choose from was based on fit, looks and comfort. It was not a guessing game   It was a practical approach and kindly meant.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, hold up.  The MakleNews IG post did *not* say this was the tiara incident, linked below.
> I have read the MarkleNews IG comments. As someone said, it is interesting this old story is being rehashed *now*. One day after Andy’s mess. Sheesh, Andi’s PR is as bad as H&M’s.
> 
> RE: tiara story - if QE had decided which tiara MM was going to wear, then QE should have told MM this is the one and be done with it. Making it into a guessing game of which one will she choose seems very silly and immature. If Kate’s staff were not willing to help MM, then they should stay away from MM.  Heavenly days, this is sounding like MeanGirls, part 20.  Kind of the same behavior as in Hazzie’s story of MM’s first meeting with QE.  These people must be some of the most juvenile folks on the planet.  ick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's biting words to Harry over Meghan's 'tiara tantrum' are revealed
> 
> 
> According to one royal biographer, Her Majesty was not amused by tiara-gate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: this reflects poorly on the BRF and all staff working for it.  Hazzi, too, looks worse and worse.  Good on MM staying home with the kids.  FWIW I really dislike starting my day defending MM, but sheesh, this pile-on is unfair.  The IG author should name names, not hide behind “I cannot reveal my sources.”  Puhleeeze.



Clear as mud


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> And she did Meghan a huge favor by allowing her to wear a tiara that is part of the Crown Jewels. What an honor!  An honor that wasn’t appreciated.
> 
> I don’t know about you folks, but I have difficulty with heavy things sitting on my head or pressing it.   I even have difficulty with headbands. I think being given a choice of three tiara to choose from was based on fit, looks and comfort. It was not a guessing game   It was a practical approach and kindly meant.


MM would have gone with this look if possible.  Photo from Bryan Cranston’s Super Sweet 60.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> It was not a guessing game   It was a practical approach and kindly meant.



Ahhh, the voice of reason. “A practical approach” which is exactly what I would expect from someone, QE, who had witnessed this ‘tiara situation’ for many brides.  She would know how to handle a bride with skill, finesse and minimum upset.  Hazzi, not so much.
This is why I question parts of this story.


----------



## zen1965

Happyish said:


> I believe Eugenie Jack Brooksbank, and their son, August are living at Frogmore. Harry and Megan still own it. Obviously they're close otherwise I doubt they'd be living there.
> Gosh, so much is being read into a single expression or a partial hand-gesture representing a milli-second caught on camera. That's not at all fair, let alone reasonable.
> Some kindness please?



Harry and Meghan do not own Frogmore. They never did.


----------



## Happyish

zen1965 said:


> Harry and Meghan do not own Frogmore. They never did.


I thought it was a gift from the Queen, which they're now renting out.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> I thought it was a gift from the Queen, which they're now renting out.



According to Wikipedia:

In 2019, the house was converted into a four-bedroom-and-nursery single-family home at a reported cost of £2.4 million from the Sovereign Grant for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex prior to the birth of their son, Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, in May 2019.[12][13] As a property of a royal palace of state and designated heritage site, Frogmore Cottage was always scheduled to be renovated, regardless of occupant.[14][15]However, after the Duke and Duchess announced in January 2020 that they intended to step down as senior working members of the royal family and move (at least partially) to North America, they "shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage".[16] In September, that sum was reportedly settled in full by the Duke.[17][18]

In November 2020, it was reported that Princess Eugenie and her husband, Jack Brooksbank had taken up residence at Frogmore.[19][20][21] The couple currently reside in the cottage with their son.[22][23]


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Trying to see if there is room for "tHe FirSt aMmendMent is BoNkerz"


----------



## papertiger

Happyish said:


> I thought it was a gift from the Queen, which they're now renting out.



She can't give it away because it doesn't belong to her, it's owned by Crown Estates.


----------



## Vintage Leather

One reason why the BRF does get a lot more side-eye than many celebrities or politicians is because they are legally required to show us the receipts. 

So we know how much Charles spends on Kate and Megan’s wardrobe, and we know how big their homes are and how much renovations cost 

Interestingly, royals cannot receive gifts while doing their duties unless they are wedding gifts. The Saudis give Camilla three magnificent necklaces? TheCanadians give Kate a Harry Winston Polar Bear? Legally, all of that belongs to the Crown Estates with a lifetime loan to the stated recipient


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, hold up.  The MakleNews IG post did *not* say this was the tiara incident, linked below.
> I have read the MarkleNews IG comments. As someone said, it is interesting this old story is being rehashed *now*. One day after Andy’s mess. Sheesh, Andi’s PR is as bad as H&M’s.
> 
> RE: tiara story - if QE had decided which tiara MM was going to wear, then QE should have told MM this is the one and be done with it. Making it into a guessing game of which one will she choose seems very silly and immature. If Kate’s staff were not willing to help MM, then they should stay away from MM.  Heavenly days, this is sounding like MeanGirls, part 20.  Kind of the same behavior as in Hazzie’s story of MM’s first meeting with QE.  These people must be some of the most juvenile folks on the planet.  ick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's biting words to Harry over Meghan's 'tiara tantrum' are revealed
> 
> 
> According to one royal biographer, Her Majesty was not amused by tiara-gate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: this reflects poorly on the BRF and all staff working for it.  Hazzi, too, looks worse and worse.  Good on MM staying home with the kids.  FWIW I really dislike starting my day defending MM, but sheesh, this pile-on is unfair.  The IG author should name names, not hide behind “I cannot reveal my sources.”  Puhleeeze.



How strange you are but everyone is entitled to their opinion thank goodness for the ignore button bye


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> How do these apartments in Kensington work? Is it like a regular apartment building where people have their own entrance with a key, or is it more just that you have your designated rooms but people pass through some common areas. It’s so confusing!



Lol
Think many mansions in some luxury gated paradise - an apartment can have 40 rooms plus servant quarters


----------



## CarryOn2020

For those who prefer solid facts, take a moment and notice who Hazzi is standing next to.  It’s Stan Kroenke, who is worth an estimated $10.7billion.  Stan has donated to W’s EarthShot, too.  I can connect these dots easily.  BTW, the ‘minx’ story is now reported as false.









						Prince Harry gets hands on Super Bowl trophy in LA Rams' locker room
					

The Duke of Sussex, who watched the game in the stands with his cousin Princess Eugenie, stripped off his mask as he congratulated the players and coaches after their victory.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Fun Fact:  According to Google, UK has 171 billionaires. USA has 614. Now you know.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz may have one more opportunity to throw his father under the bus…


----------



## rose60610

Could it be? Could it  p o s s i b l y ? ? ? ?  be that Meghan realizes she's a drag on whatever is left of Harry's popularity and that's why she stayed home from the SB so Haz could insert himself in the trophy room to suck up hobnob to billionaires? Or was that BetterUp's idea, to leave Meghan behind? Was Eugenie brought in to use her husband as a prop to stay with Meghan? Why couldn't all four go to the SB? Something is really weird here. But something is always really weird with them. Eugenie seems to be the only royal left who has the time of day for Harry. Question: where do all the bodyguards for all the celebrities hangout when they attend the SB? Is there, like, a bodyguard closet checkroom?


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Is there, like, a bodyguard closet checkroom?



 You don't see them but they're in the background in case anything happens.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Could it be? Could it  p o s s i b l y ? ? ? ?  be that Meghan realizes she's a drag on whatever is left of Harry's popularity and that's why she stayed home from the SB so Haz could insert himself in the trophy room to suck up hobnob to billionaires? Or was that BetterUp's idea, to leave Meghan behind? Was Eugenie brought in to use her husband as a prop to stay with Meghan? *Why couldn't all four go to the SB? *Something is really weird here. But something is always really weird with them. Eugenie seems to be the only royal left who has the time of day for Harry. Question: where do all the bodyguards for all the celebrities hangout when they attend the SB? Is there, like, a bodyguard closet checkroom?



I’m certain they were only given 2 tickets. An average Super Bowl ticket this year cost between $4,000 and $5,000. The seats where Harry and Eugénie were sitting were probably worth a lot more.

It’s a shame that the spectacle that is the Super Bowl effectively excludes the average football fans who are loyal. They follow their team for years hoping they will finally make it to the championship game, and then they find buying a ticket to see it is beyond the means of most.


----------



## Chanbal

Well, John Wayne and Elvis earned those titles…   



_She said of Megxit: “*I think their actions were perceived as individual, self-centred actions.*_”

_Professor Otnes commented: *"Meghan doesn't understand that the popularity that she could enjoy in that brand has everything to do with royalty and very little to do with Meghan - and very little to do with Harry.*”

She believes their branding, as well as being disrupted by pandemics and international politics, or overshadowed by Royal Family celebrations in the UK, is further muddled by the message sent by their titles…

“*They call John Wayne ‘The Duke’ - that's what they call John Wayne. They called Elvis ‘The King*._


----------



## CentralTimeZone

rose60610 said:


> Could it be? Could it  p o s s i b l y ? ? ? ?  be that Meghan realizes she's a drag on whatever is left of Harry's popularity and that's why she stayed home from the SB so Haz could insert himself in the trophy room to suck up hobnob to billionaires? Or was that BetterUp's idea, to leave Meghan behind? Was Eugenie brought in to use her husband as a prop to stay with Meghan? Why couldn't all four go to the SB? Something is really weird here. But something is always really weird with them. Eugenie seems to be the only royal left who has the time of day for Harry. Question: where do all the bodyguards for all the celebrities hangout when they attend the SB? Is there, like, a bodyguard closet checkroom?


Nah she likes to go underground and then make a big splash. The superbowl isn't big enough. She'll emerge at the Oscar's for the Kate at the bond premier moment. She wasn't wasting her PR on a football game.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> There is another side to this story. Where was MM’s staff? Why was Kate’s staff standing around MM if they were not willing to assist? Why didn’t Kate say something to smooth the ruffled feathers? Perhaps to MM, staff is staff. If there was such a clear line of difference, why wasn’t this clearly stated? Glorifying one royal while criticising another, especially a newcomer, is not cool.  Such a dysfunctional group of people.



I remember that, at least in the beginning, W&C and H&M shared staff.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I’m certain they were only given 2 tickets. An average Super Bowl ticket this year cost between $4,000 and $5,000. The seats where Harry and Eugénie were sitting were probably worth a lot more.
> 
> It’s a shame that the spectacle that is the Super Bowl effectively excludes the average football fans who are loyal. They follow their team for years hoping they will finally make it to the championship game, and then they find buying a ticket to see it is beyond the means of most.


I agree, slightly OT, but I partially blame the half time shows becoming such enormous spectacle. As being at a superbowl seems increasingly a matter of celebrity prestige of being at an ‘it event’ than about being a sport fan. Also good-old-fashioned greed on the part of the organisers wanting to price the working man out of the event.

I struggle to believe that gunge or Eugenia have any deep interest in American football given its obvious inferiority to rugby


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Could it be? Could it  p o s s i b l y ? ? ? ?  be that Meghan realizes she's a drag on whatever is left of Harry's popularity and that's why she stayed home from the SB so Haz could insert himself in the trophy room to suck up hobnob to billionaires? Or was that BetterUp's idea, to leave Meghan behind? Was Eugenie brought in to use her husband as a prop to stay with Meghan? Why couldn't all four go to the SB? Something is really weird here. But something is always really weird with them. Eugenie seems to be the only royal left who has the time of day for Harry. Question: where do all the bodyguards for all the celebrities hangout when they attend the SB? Is there, like, a bodyguard closet checkroom?


Surely,  E and H did not pay for their seats ... Why would E buy tix for a USA football game ? And if H bought the tix,  I doubt E flew over - without baby or husband -  because H had an extra ticket to offer her 

I assume the SB tix were gifted ...

MY GUESS, the tix came from CASAMIGOS - the tequila company that Brooksbank works for ... I am thinking that Brooksbank was at the SB just not in the shot since he was working ...  E offered the extra seat to her nearby cousin - who did not have to travel far , she was there with husband. E scored Frogmore Cottage thanks to H, so, she was making nice to offer him an extra ticket.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Happy that this was canceled!


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz & TW have been major contributors, but this could be posted in more than one thread…


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty this may not be the green dress that you like so much, but look at the emeralds…


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I’m certain they were only given 2 tickets. An average Super Bowl ticket this year cost between $4,000 and $5,000. The seats where Harry and Eugénie were sitting were probably worth a lot more.
> 
> It’s a shame that the spectacle that is the Super Bowl effectively excludes the average football fans who are loyal. They follow their team for years hoping they will finally make it to the championship game, and then they find buying a ticket to see it is beyond the means of most.


They were sitting in a private suite, large sections of this stadium are dedicated of huge suites owned/leased by major corporations.  They have private entrances, high security, all the perks of food and beverage, private restrooms, some are furnished like corporate board rooms.

From a company that coordinates this kind of operation, Suiteexperiencegroup.com,
"Super Bowl LVI suites in Los Angeles will range in price from $500,000-$2.5MM. Included in the price will be game tickets, access to a private suite, an ultra-premium food and beverage package (beer, wine, liquor included). Pricing will vary based on suite size and location."

From Harpers Bazaar: "While it's easy to imagine many brands vying to host the Duke of Sussex, he watched the game in a suite sponsored by Salesforce, one of the official partners of BetterUp, the mental health and coaching platform where he's currently chief impact officer. The company was also an advertiser during the game, premiering a commercial starring Matthew McConaughey to encourage consumers and corporate giants to think about their value systems."


----------



## rose60610

Of course Harry didn't pay for the tickets. BetterUp wanted him there to look like a show pony and he looked miserable being there. And what a hypocrite. He and Maggot use other people (and dead soldiers) in attempts to make themselves look like caring people for PR. Salesforce has plenty of $$$ to pay for Maggot and Brooksbank to be there, so it's telling that they weren't. It probably bugged Harry to have to be on his good behavior in the SB suite with all the top shelf perks that come with. He probably wanted to get trashed on somebody else's dime but he couldn't do it in the public eye. Well, who wouldn't want to get trashed if you had to live with Maggot-- so I'll give him a pass on that one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Salesforce didn’t get their value for that money!


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Of course Harry didn't pay for the tickets. BetterUp wanted him there to look like a show pony and he looked miserable being there. And what a hypocrite. He and Maggot use other people (and dead soldiers) in attempts to make themselves look like caring people for PR. Salesforce has plenty of $$$ to pay for Maggot and Brooksbank to be there, so it's telling that they weren't. It probably bugged Harry to have to be on his good behavior in the SB suite with all the top shelf perks that come with. He probably wanted to get trashed on somebody else's dime but he couldn't do it in the public eye. Well, who wouldn't want to get trashed if you had to live with Maggot-- so I'll give him a pass on that one.


I think she made him give up drinking


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty this may not be the green dress that you like so much, but look at the emeralds…
> View attachment 5329918



How old is she, younger than his children from his first marriage? (I don't know if he was married before, but he's nearing 70)

ETA: googled, the woman is 51. What potion is she drinking


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How old is she, younger than his children from his first marriage? (I don't know if he was married before, but he's nearing 70)
> 
> ETA: googled, the woman is 51. What potion is she drinking


she's beautiful but picture looks a bit blurry?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She looks really young with great skin in other pictures too, though.


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty this may not be the green dress that you like so much, but look at the emeralds…
> View attachment 5329918


Oh. My . . . !!!!


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> For those who prefer solid facts, take a moment and notice who Hazzi is standing next to.  It’s Stan Kroenke, who is worth an estimated $10.7billion.  Stan has donated to W’s EarthShot, too.  I can connect these dots easily.  BTW, the ‘minx’ story is now reported as false.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry gets hands on Super Bowl trophy in LA Rams' locker room
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who watched the game in the stands with his cousin Princess Eugenie, stripped off his mask as he congratulated the players and coaches after their victory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fun Fact:  According to Google, UK has 171 billionaires. USA has 614. Now you know.



Ol Stan married into the Walmart family.
Is that figure of $10 billion before or after he paid for SoFi? Estimated costs on _that _boondoggle are as high as $5+ billion. He isn't getting any rent from the Chargers squatting there and just paid out a tidy sum to St Louis as reparations for moving the Rams back to LA.
All of which might explain why every.single.time. I go to Wally World the prices are higher. I was astonished to see that cat food was cheaper at Target and PetSmart than WM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> I remember that, at least in the beginning, W&C and H&M shared staff.



Thanks so much, Duna. 
I had forgotten this important detail which explains why there were so many misunderstandings.




poopsie said:


> Ol Stan married into the Walmart family.
> Is that figure of $10 billion before or after he paid for SoFi? Estimated costs on _that _boondoggle are as high as $5+ billion. He isn't getting any rent from the Chargers squatting there and just paid out a tidy sum to St Louis as reparations for moving the Rams back to LA.
> All of which might explain why every.single.time. I go to Wally World the prices are higher. I was astonished to see that cat food was cheaper at Target and PetSmart than WM.



Guessing he pays a fraction of what is owed. Somehow these deals always work to the billionaire’s advantage.  As much as the world changes, it really doesn’t change at all.  With his friendship H&M have nothing to worry about [not that they ever did].




Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty this may not be the green dress that you like so much, but look at the emeralds…
> View attachment 5329918



Wow oh wow! That’s how royal is done   Elegant, beautiful, poised, etc.
@Chanbal, you find the best stuff!  I’m in awe.  Thank you.


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> I’m certain they were only given 2 tickets. An average Super Bowl ticket this year cost between $4,000 and $5,000. The seats where Harry and Eugénie were sitting were probably worth a lot more.
> 
> It’s a shame that the spectacle that is the Super Bowl effectively excludes the average football fans who are loyal. They follow their team for years hoping they will finally make it to the championship game, and then they find buying a ticket to see it is beyond the means of most.



Things have been changing in the NFL under Goodell's reign and not for the better IMO. The average fan is already priced out of going to regular games. Seat licenses--- paying for the right to buy a seat----are the going thing. Parking in many places is as much as a seat. Beers are $10, food even more. Luxury suites are considered a necessity. 
There is no room for the loyal fan going forward. Look at the musical chairs of teams leaving strong fan bases for supposed greener pastures. 
let's see if Buffalo caves to the league's demand for a new stadium. 
my guess says the Bills are leaving


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks so much, Duna.
> I had forgotten this important detail which explains why there were so many misunderstandings.
> *Guessing he pays a fraction of what is owed. Somehow these deals always work to the billionaire’s advantage.  As much as the world changes, it really doesn’t change at all.  With his friendship H&M have nothing to worry about [not that they ever did].*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow oh wow! That’s how royal is done   Elegant, beautiful, poised, etc.
> @Chanbal, you find the best stuff!  I’m in awe.  Thank you.



I highly doubt Stan is friendly with the Harkles. They are on opposite sides of the political fence for one.  That looked like a photo opportunity nothing more. Of course Haz could  always show that pic should he ever need to be hired as a WM greeter as has been mentioned here.
Pretty sure Stan footed the majority of the costs himself. That was one of the selling points on reestablishing the NFL in LA. A new stadium was required, and the city wasn't going to pony up-----that's how the Chargers wound up there.
Original cost estimates for SoFi were around $1-$2 billion. Then covid hit delays ensued and costs just kept rising and rising.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She looks really young with great skin in other pictures too, though.


She can afford the world's best skincare and probably doesn't spend much time in the sun.


----------



## bellecate

If true certainly reflects badly on Beatrice.


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> Things have been changing in the NFL under Goodell's reign and not for the better IMO. The average fan is already priced out of going to regular games. Seat licenses--- paying for the right to buy a seat----are the going thing. *Parking in many places is as much as a seat. *Beers are $10, food even more. Luxury suites are considered a necessity.
> There is no room for the loyal fan going forward. Look at the musical chairs of teams leaving strong fan bases for supposed greener pastures.
> let's see if Buffalo caves to the league's demand for a new stadium.
> my guess says the Bills are leaving



Case in point: Parking at a Chicago Cubs game last year was $80. I'm not a big follower of pro sports myself, though I'd love to attend the Kentucky Derby   .


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I highly doubt Stan is friendly with the Harkles. They are on opposite sides of the political fence for one.  That looked like a photo opportunity nothing more. Of course Haz could  always show that pic if the were ever to need to be hired as a WM greeter as has been mentioned here.
> Pretty sure Stan footed the majority of the costs himself. That was one of the selling points on reestablishing the NFL in LA. A new stadium was required, and the city wasn't going to pony up-----that's how the Chargers wound up there.
> Original cost estimates for SoFi were around $1-$2 billion. Then covid hit delays ensued and costs just kept rising and rising.




Imo it is mind-boggling how much is spent on these complexes. He may not be besties with H&M, but he is a contributor to W’s Earth Shot and, now, this SB tour with Hazz. I can only guess at _quid pro quos._




rose60610 said:


> Case in point: Parking at a Chicago Cubs game last year was $80. I'm not a big follower of pro sports myself, though I'd love to attend the Kentucky Derby   .



The Derby is one of the top 10 experiences I’ve had.  Lots of laughter, lots of eye-candy, lots of old-fashion hospitality.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Case in point: Parking at a Chicago Cubs game last year was $80. I'm not a big follower of pro sports myself, though I'd love to attend the Kentucky Derby   .



Derby is great. Worked lots of them. My good friend from college was the race announcer for Churchill until his death and I stayed with him.
The first time I went we stayed at a hotel a few towns away as everything in Louisville is booked for that week. 
Churchill is in a residential area and lots of folks in the neighborhood rent their streets out for parking. Everyone is selling barbq and refreshments as you walk by their place.


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it is mind-boggling how much is spent on these complexes. He may not be besties with H&M, but he is a contributor to W’s Earth Shot and, now, this SB tour with Hazz. I can only guess at _quid pro quos._
> The Derby is one of the top 10 experiences I’ve had.  Lots of laughter, lots of eye-candy, lots of old-fashion hospitality.



I seriously doubt there would be any quid pro quo going on. Stan moves in a completely different realm and I can't see him needing _anything_ that the Harkles could _possibly_ have to offer. Could he be interested in Butter Cups touchy-feely crap? I'm sure he has people for that.  
While he contributed to Will's project it's probably just one of many things he has going on. I could see him giving Charles and  Will more attention but nothing really meaningful.

You didn't mention the mint juleps at the Derby. Those suckas will kick your azz
First time there I went in a day or so early to pick up my credentials. I downed 2 or 3 of 'em. Next thing I couldn't find my stuff and had to shamefully go back to the office for replacements. They laughed and said I was the third person that had happened to that day.


----------



## poopsie

rose60610 said:


> Case in point: Parking at a Chicago Cubs game last year was $80. I'm not a big follower of pro sports myself, though I'd love to attend the Kentucky Derby   .



Oh the irony
You're in the Chicago area, right?
Well.........you just lost  magnificent historical Arlington Park thanks to Churchill. Their operating company owned AP and the nearby casino. Guess which one they backed.
They did the same thing to Hollywood Park in Inglewood CA. Now home to SoFi Stadium


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> Derby is great. Worked lots of them. My good friend from college was the race announcer for Churchill until his death and I stayed with him.
> The first time I went we stayed at a hotel a few towns away as everything in Louisville is booked for that week.
> Churchill is in a residential area and lots of folks in the neighborhood rent their streets out for parking. Everyone is selling barbq and refreshments as you walk by their place.



The run for the roses!  I believe QE has attended the Derby. I have family in Kentucky so they tell some of the best Derby stories.  After walking through the gates, the first person we saw was someone selling those delicious concoctions. It was such a civilized way to greet people. If ya go, it is required that ya get the mint julep(s).  Love love that place and all who make it happen.  Fun times.


----------



## CarryOn2020

That stadium already has a history.  Article says it will be used for the 2028 Olympics and other international games. One more reason to love TPF - I had no idea about this place. 

Interesting article on how the NFL owners approved the stadium. Those billionaire guys are fierce. Bob Iger, mercy. 








						How Stan Kroenke and NFL turned SoFi Stadium into $5-billion reality
					

SoFi Stadium, the NFL's crown jewel, was the the culmination of Rams owner Stan Kroenke's vision and the NFL's desire to return to the L.A. market.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> The run for the roses!  I believe QE has attended the Derby. I have family in Kentucky so they tell some of the best Derby stories.  After walking through the gates, the first person we saw was someone selling those delicious concoctions. It was such a civilized way to greet people. If ya go, it is required that ya get the mint julep(s).  Love love that place and all who make it happen.  Fun times.



I expect we'll be seeing the Harkles there one of these days. 
If they they can get someone to pay their way, of course


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> If true certainly reflects badly on Beatrice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5330154



How so...the one who went to the US was Eugenie?


----------



## Sophisticatted

The Queen used to have some horses stabled in Lexington, KY.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> The Queen used to have some horses stabled in Lexington, KY.



It was shown on The Crown, although not quite accurately.



> https://www.courier-journal.com/sto...n-elizabeth-really-visit-kentucky/4308962002/


----------



## charlottawill

>


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> I struggle to believe that gunge or Eugenia have any deep interest in American football given its obvious inferiority to rugby



And hockey is better than both of them!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How so...the one who went to the US was Eugenie?


My comment that it would reflect poorly on her was in thinking she told the H and TW about it who then spread it to media to deflect on her dad's situation. Knowing they would put it out there to say something negative about his family . Pure conjecture on my part.


----------



## rose60610

poopsie said:


> Oh the irony
> You're in the Chicago area, right?
> Well.........you just lost  magnificent historical Arlington Park thanks to Churchill. Their operating company owned AP and the nearby casino. Guess which one they backed.
> They did the same thing to Hollywood Park in Inglewood CA. Now home to SoFi Stadium



You're 100% correct.  Lots of sad people around here as a result. That track was gorgeous. There's a real possibility that the Chicago Bears will move to the location. The current Soldier Field downtown holds "only 61,500", too small to host a potential Super Bowl. Chicago Mayor Clueless said she'd put a roof on it to entice the Bears to stay. That doesn't address the seating capacity.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Wow oh wow! That’s how royal is done  Elegant, beautiful, poised, etc.*
> @Chanbal, you find the best stuff!  I’m in awe.  Thank you.


Thank you @CarryOn2020!
What a contrast!_  _


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> If true certainly reflects badly on Beatrice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5330154


Eugenie seems to be a jealous person, a great match for Hazz and TW imo.


----------



## Chanbal

This is so cute


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Thank you @CarryOn2020!
> What a contrast!_ _
> View attachment 5330279


What the hell was she thinking? If she did this she'd be one of the cool Montecito kids? Incredibly stupid and reeks of desperation. She'll never live this down.


----------



## 1LV

rose60610 said:


> You're 100% correct.  Lots of sad people around here as a result. That track was gorgeous. There's a real possibility that the Chicago Bears will move to the location. The current Soldier Field downtown holds "only 61,500", too small to host a potential Super Bowl. Chicago Mayor Clueless said she'd put a roof on it to entice the Bears to stay. That doesn't address the seating capacity.


“Mayor Clueless”. . . In a nutshell.


----------



## poopsie

1LV said:


> “Mayor Clueless”. . . In a nutshell.



I thought @rose60610 was being very kind with  that description


----------



## 1LV

poopsie said:


> I thought @rose60610 was being very kind with  that description


No doubt.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## poopsie

mellibelly said:


>


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Unless she wanted to keep her attendance low key because she was on the hunt for rich husband #2.
> 
> Naw, those wealthy LA guys would see through her from miles away.





bellecate said:


> If true certainly reflects badly on Beatrice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5330154





bellecate said:


> My comment that it would reflect poorly on her was in thinking she told the H and TW about it who then spread it to media to deflect on her dad's situation. Knowing they would put it out there to say something negative about his family . Pure conjecture on my part.


This is making me feel badly for E. I don’t see why she can’t just want to maintain a relationship with her cousin because he’s her cousin without it being part of the wider family drama. 

As to feeding them stories, it’s really not hard for the press to get both good and bad stories on the royals, especially this cash for honours stuff that pretty much every public figure indulges in and gets accused off, journalists don’t need thirdhand info from E to H to figure that kind of story out. 

TBH I think the royals are happy with all the press they are getting. No one can say they are irrelevant when they are getting so much exposure and everyone seems to be going easy on Andrew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> My comment that it would reflect poorly on her was in thinking she told the H and TW about it who then spread it to media to deflect on her dad's situation. Knowing they would put it out there to say something negative about his family . Pure conjecture on my part.



Yeah, but where did it come from *Beatrice* even spoke to him? Rumours have is she's fiercely loyal to her grandparents and not a fan of the Sussexes' ongoing temper tantrum, plus you rarely hear about her since she had the baby.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This is making me feel badly for E. I don’t see why she can’t just want to maintain a relationship with her cousin because he’s her cousin without it being part of the wider family drama.



Honestly, I'd be fine with her staying by Harry. It's her public fawning over Raptor where I draw the line. Blood is thicker than water.


----------



## jelliedfeels

B


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, I'd be fine with her staying by Harry. It's her public fawning over Raptor where I draw the line. Blood is thicker than water.


I think we can fairly surmise it’s a ‘love me love my wife’ scenario.
Also the main BRF are openly cordial when they publicly acknowledge H&M themselves. I’m not critiquing the BRF’s actions here I’m just saying the whole family’s policy is being publicly nice to M so to me E isn’t betraying the family code here.

Add on- if there is something more political to the cousins’ social, I think that it is more likely that Eug was sent FOR the BRF rather than against them. 

She is there as a symbol they are a united family for the sugars and to publicly show the US press that the lines of communication are open. She’s a minor royal & she’s not widely liked so it doesn’t matter if the anti-H&M public don’t like what she’s doing. Whereas we all know that if C or W went to California they would get completely roasted across the board for capitulating and it would damage the entire family’s popularity.

On a practical level, if he really isn’t talking to his dad anymore, they do need someone on the ground if/when the deathcom1 divorce kicks off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

*stand by, not stay by.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I think we can fairly surmise it’s a ‘love me love my wife’ scenario.
> Also the main BRF are openly cordial when they publicly acknowledge H&M themselves. I’m not critiquing the BRF’s actions here I’m just saying the whole family’s policy is being publicly nice to M so to me E isn’t betraying the family code here.


They have to show superficial pleasantness to avoid the idiots weeping about how no one treats them nice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

New day, new trial - court is in session 
Put the kettle on, it’s gonna be a long day:



*Failed to show respect — wow*


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> New day, new trial - court is in session
> Put the kettle on, it’s gonna be a long day:
> 
> 
> 
> *Failed to show respect — wow*
> View attachment 5330574



Can I say double wow??!!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## MiniMabel

I honestly don't think the British press will spend much time on these people. They're not interesting; they're an irritation and downright insufferable with their behaviour.  How he can think it's too dangerous in the UK for them is beyond words.  They're nowhere near as important as they think they are.

This is Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee Year and the focus is, rightly, on her. 

The Harkles are inconsequential in comparison and I can't imagine why they'd think they're welcome in the UK with their appalling attitude.


----------



## lanasyogamama

MiniMabel said:


> I honestly don't think the British press will spend much time on these people. They're not interesting; they're an irritation and downright insufferable with their behaviour.  How he can think it's too dangerous in the UK for them is beyond words.  They're nowhere near as important as they think they are.
> 
> This is Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee Year and the focus is, rightly, on her.
> 
> The Harkles are inconsequential in comparison and I can't imagine why they'd think they're welcome in the UK with their appalling attitude.


The funny thing is that ignoring them is most hurtful of all!


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’re definitely going to need to throw a few boxed lunches or a bagel spread at a local charity this week.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Thank you @CarryOn2020!
> What a contrast!_ _
> View attachment 5330279



I can't get over how idiotic this was. In no galaxy is this even remotely humorous. It's just beyond stupid. Maybe some teenagers would do this as a dare to goof off for their teenage friends, but somebody who married the grandson of QEII?????  Somebody who claims she wants privacy?  Even if she were hired for a movie role that did this, it'd still be stupid. Question: Does anyone know how much she got paid to do this?  There had to be major money involved.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really hope they laugh into his face. Can you imagine someone else trying to buy intelligence information?

Plus, the point is...pointless. I'm sure if British intelligence knew of a terroristic attack on #6, TW and offspring they'd let somebody know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> New day, new trial - court is in session
> Put the kettle on, it’s gonna be a long day:
> 
> 
> 
> *Failed to show respect — wow*




Explain it so me once again. So he is indeed eligible for police security if needed and made all this fuss only because he's an a*shole? Also love how Home Office doesn't mince words haha.


----------



## Chanbal

News from Ginger the guru, mental health coach, wizard, victim…  

_"LONDON (AP) — *Lawyers for Prince Harry told a court hearing on Friday, February 18, that the British royal is unwilling to bring his children to his homeland because it is not safe. Harry has launched a legal challenge to the U.K. government’s refusal to let him personally pay for police protection when he comes to Britain.*

Prince Harry says he ‘warned’ Twitter CEO ahead of US Capitol riot
His legal team says Harry wants to bring his children — Archie, who is almost 3, and 8-month-old Lilibet — to visit his home country from the U.S. but that is too risky without police protection.

Senior members of Britain’s royal family are given taxpayer-funded police protection, but Harry lost that when he and his wife Meghan stepped down as working royals and moved to the United States in 2020. The couple said their decision was due to what they described as unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media…"_









						Prince Harry feels unsafe bringing kids to UK, his lawyers say
					

LONDON (AP) — Lawyers for Prince Harry told a court hearing on Friday that the British royal is unwilling to bring his children to his homeland because it is not safe.




					www.news10.com
				



Opinions:


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> News from Ginger the guru, mental health coach, wizard, victim…
> 
> _"LONDON (AP) — *Lawyers for Prince Harry told a court hearing on Friday, February 18, that the British royal is unwilling to bring his children to his homeland because it is not safe. Harry has launched a legal challenge to the U.K. government’s refusal to let him personally pay for police protection when he comes to Britain.*
> 
> Prince Harry says he ‘warned’ Twitter CEO ahead of US Capitol riot
> His legal team says Harry wants to bring his children — Archie, who is almost 3, and 8-month-old Lilibet — to visit his home country from the U.S. but that is too risky without police protection.
> 
> Senior members of Britain’s royal family are given taxpayer-funded police protection, but Harry lost that when he and his wife Meghan stepped down as working royals and moved to the United States in 2020. The couple said their decision was due to what they described as unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media…"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry feels unsafe bringing kids to UK, his lawyers say
> 
> 
> LONDON (AP) — Lawyers for Prince Harry told a court hearing on Friday that the British royal is unwilling to bring his children to his homeland because it is not safe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news10.com



I think PH would do better paying a therapist(s) to help him/wife with paranoia


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think PH would do better paying a therapist(s) to help him/wife with paranoia



Oh, she isn't paranoid. She knew exactly what she was doing when she kept calling Toronto police, and she knows EXACTLY what she is doing when she feeds into his paranoia and fears.


----------



## lanasyogamama

US resident Harry Wales is the sickest burn of the day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute. Harry says it's "too risky" to bring his own kids to the U.K. without "police protection"?  And the claim is that even the BRF won't allow HIM to pay for POLICE protection?  Well, then why is it so important to have *police* protection if he's willing to pay for security? Why does the security have to be police? I thought he paid for his own private security anyway, so what's the big deal? Just bring his own security team with him. Problem solved!  You're welcome Harry! 

Or... is the real issue Harry just doesn't want to pay for any security? Or...is the real issue they haven't been invited anyway and this is some stupid desperate excuse for them to say they can't show up?  And why is the U.K., of all countries, "dangerous"?  It's not like he's coming to, um, like, Chicago. How many security agents does Harry need? 

Harry and Maggot are the ones who wanted out of the BRF. So why should they expect to make any demands of the local police? It'd be like any other important people (actual important people) to make demands on any other country's local police. They can bring their own security.


----------



## rose60610

Cut/paste from Channel 10: 
During a hearing at the High Court in London, Harry’s lawyer Shaheed Fatima said the duke “does not feel safe when he is in the U.K. given the security arrangements applied to him.”

“It goes without saying that he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart,” she said. “Most of all, this is and always will be, his home.”

****************************************************************************

What charities? I thought he was canned from them all. Aren't his friends free to come to California to visit? If they didn't want to come because of Covid, then why do they want to see him when he goes back? And "this will always be his home"??? Oh. What does Maggot have to say about THAT?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute. Harry says it's "too risky" to bring his own kids to the U.K. without "police protection"?  And the claim is that even the BRF won't allow HIM to pay for POLICE protection?  Well, then why is it so important to have *police* protection if he's willing to pay for security? Why does the security have to be police? I thought he paid for his own private security anyway, so what's the big deal? Just bring his own security team with him. Problem solved!  You're welcome Harry!
> 
> Or... is the real issue Harry just doesn't want to pay for any security? Or...is the real issue they haven't been invited anyway and this is some stupid desperate excuse for them to say they can't show up?  And why is the U.K., of all countries, "dangerous"?  It's not like he's coming to, um, like, Chicago. How many security agents does Harry need?
> 
> Harry and Maggot are the ones who wanted out of the BRF. So why should they expect to make any demands of the local police? It'd be like any other important people (actual important people) to make demands on any other country's local police. They can bring their own security.


Prince Dufus wants his armed US security team to protect him in the UK, but only authorized police forces are allowed to carry guns there. He is so paranoid and and such a drama queen, that he probably imagines himself going down in a flurry of bullets at the U.K. Corral.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, she isn't paranoid. She knew exactly what she was doing when she kept calling Toronto police, and she knows EXACTLY what she is doing when she feeds into his paranoia and fears.



That just confirms her her extreme narcism needs attention - of the professional kind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Prince Dufus wants his armed US security team to protect him in the UK, but only authorized police forces are allowed to carry guns there. He is so paranoid and and such a drama queen, that he probably imagines himself going down in a flurry of bullets at the U.K. Corral.



He wants much more than that.
He wants his private security to have access to the same intelligence reports that police/MI6/special forces/royal protection forces, etc. have.  He wants all the intel.  All. All of it. Because, ya kno, his mother and, I guess, the UK is so much more unsafe than LA.

ETA: *if* his USA security is getting that from our authorities, I have a problem with that.  I do not believe they share that info.

ETA2: as others have said, if the intelligence service intercepted a credible threat to H&M, they would act on it asap. The idea that they knowingly would let harm come to him is absurd and offensive.


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, these two are so transparent.  MM won't let him take the children to the UK so he is using the security as an excuse.  She hasn't had an original idea since age 11 so she has them being chased and stalked similar to when she lived in Toronto and figured out that she could get free publicity by calling the police to her home.  He didn't seem to have a problem walking around the football stadium with thousands of people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On one level, I’m sure it must be extremely frightening to live with these fears. Losing his wife would cause him unbearable pain. I understand that. So, then stay home. There is no need for a balcony photo that they say Charles wants.  Seriously, life is more important than these photos.  Times are different now than they were for QE. No need to try to recreate moments from long ago.  Considering all that has happened recently, it is time to scale back all of this staged stuff that looks out-of-date.  Just my 2 cents.


----------



## lallybelle

He says his paid for US security isn't good enough to use in the UK because they can't get Intel reports from British agencies. So he wants to pay for Police protection, but from what I understand you just can't "hire" the police, understandable. God he's become such an insufferable brat. Who the hell does he think is gonna come after him that his security guard needs government intel reports?????


----------



## gracekelly

lallybelle said:


> He says his paid for US security isn't good enough to use in the UK because they can't get Intel reports from British agencies. So he wants to pay for Police protection, but from what I understand you just can't "hire" the police, understandable. God he's become such an insufferable brat. Who the hell does he think is gonna come after him that his security guard needs government intel reports?????


Even aliens from space won't want him.  If he hired retired RPO men, they would still have friends actively working who would pass along any creditable threat info.  He is must blowing smoke out of his a*s.  If I didn't know better, I would say all of this is a cry for help.  I just think it is excuses and attempts to be relevant.  I wonder if retired RPO would refuse to work for him since he is such a berk.

berk   (bɜrk ) noun. British, *Slang*. *a stupid person*; fool.


----------



## CarryOn2020

> _Prince Harry: I've been, you know, nicknamed the "bullet magnet" already.  _
> 
> 
> 
> _He was such a high-value target. Jihadist websites were literally calling for his head. Many people believed Harry's presence would have presented too much of a risk to his own men, a fact that William, who is also in the army, acknowledged._
Click to expand...

From 2007, worth a read:








						In honor of Diana
					

NBC's Matt Lauer speaks with Prince William and Prince Harry on the tenth anniversary of the death of their mother, Princess Diana.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## youngster

This is all an excuse to skip out on the Platinum Jubilee celebrations.  His children wouldn't be safe so he can't bring them to the UK and so, of course, MM will stay home with them and send a nice bouquet to the Queen. H and MM were probably told what their roles would be limited to during the Jubilee and neither of them liked that they would be relegated to the side.  Neither probably wanted to risk being heckled by crowds and treated with distant politeness by everyone else.  So, maybe Harry shows up for a couple events and MM conveniently stays stateside with the children.  It's so transparent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> a flurry of bullets at the *U.K. Corral.*


----------



## rose60610

It's best neither M nor H show up at the Jubilee. Can you imagine? They'd have to do SOMETHING to steal some of the spotlight and put THEIR mark on The Queen's celebration of 70 years of service. That's how insufferable they are. Anything to promote their brand!


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> “It goes without saying that *he does want to come back to see family and friends and to continue to support the charities that are so close to his heart,*” she said. “Most of all, this is and always will be, his home.”


1) Family & Friends- why would he want to visit family that he called 'racist' or old friends that he didn't invited to his wedding? It's puzzling!  
2) Charities- if he really wants to support charities, he should donate the money needed for his security in the UK to those organizations. That would make a real difference!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> It's best neither M nor H show up at the Jubilee. Can you imagine? They'd have to do SOMETHING to steal some of the spotlight and put THEIR mark on The Queen's celebration of 70 years of service. That's how insufferable they are. Anything to promote their brand!


Sources close to Miss Harkle confirmed that she intends to visit the UK this year, allegedly…
Very sorry for the inconvenience this may bring to our members in the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Harry has 
Harry has picked up the ability to BS.  He thought he could ride roughshod over them. No doubt an idea that came from TW who has difficulties with  the truth.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Sources close to Miss Harkle confirmed that she intends to visit the UK this year, allegedly…
> Very sorry for the inconvenience this may bring to our members in the UK.



I always have trouble with this guy. He never really says anything new.


----------



## poopsie

Let's not dismiss his concerns so lightly


----------



## pukasonqo

poopsie said:


> Let's not dismiss his concerns so lightly
> View attachment 5330961


Should get one for my ginger cat, Miles,  as my other cat, Ichabod, has a very low opinion of his right to exist


----------



## Lodpah

My question is does have the security clearance for him and his wife to access classified intel docs? Those are for eyes only people. The delusion is real.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I always have trouble with this guy. He never really says anything new.


Yep, but entertaining when doing a boring task.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> This is all an excuse to skip out on the Platinum Jubilee celebrations.  His children wouldn't be safe so he can't bring them to the UK and so, of course, MM will stay home with them and send a nice bouquet to the Queen. H and MM were probably told what their roles would be limited to during the Jubilee and neither of them liked that they would be relegated to the side.  Neither probably wanted to risk being heckled by crowds and treated with distant politeness by everyone else.  So, maybe Harry shows up for a couple events and MM conveniently stays stateside with the children.  It's so transparent.


Exactly. I will admit to surprise if he shows up at all He is so kitty  whipped by her.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I can't get over how idiotic this was. In no galaxy is this even remotely humorous. It's just beyond stupid. Maybe some teenagers would do this as a dare to goof off for their teenage friends, but somebody who married the grandson of QEII?????  Somebody who claims she wants privacy?  Even if she were hired for a movie role that did this, it'd still be stupid. Question: Does anyone know how much she got paid to do this?  There had to be major money involved.


I doubt she got paid anything as a guest on Ellen's show. She got pranked by Ellen, who loves practical jokes, but I believe she is a mean spirited person. I think MM went along with it because she was trying to cozy up to her. I don't like MM but I can't help feel somewhat sorry for her because this clip will live on in internet eternity.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I doubt she got paid anything as a guest on Ellen's show. She got pranked by Ellen, who loves practical jokes, but I believe she is a mean spirited person. I think MM went along with it because she was trying to cozy up to her. I don't like MM but I can't help feel somewhat sorry for her because this clip will live on in internet eternity.


$726 standard rate


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2007, worth a read:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In honor of Diana
> 
> 
> NBC's Matt Lauer speaks with Prince William and Prince Harry on the tenth anniversary of the death of their mother, Princess Diana.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com



I can see that being true when he was in Afghanistan, but I have a hard time believing any jihadist group was planning an assassination on British soil.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Sources close to Miss Harkle confirmed that she intends to visit the UK this year, allegedly…
> Very sorry for the inconvenience this may bring to our members in the UK.



Are there any countries who would invite them over, pick up the tab for expenses, let them bring armed guards in and share intelligence, fete them and praise them? 

Sorry, forgot the part where they would have a tag-along film crew and be wired up to tape everyone's conversation.


----------



## tiktok

xincinsin said:


> Are there any countries who would invite them over, pick up the tab for expenses, let them bring armed guards in and share intelligence, fete them and praise them?
> 
> Sorry, forgot the part where they would have a tag-along film crew and be wired up to tape everyone's conversation.



Narnia, Atlantis and Chunga-Changa.


----------



## Chanbal

_The DISTURBING Reason Harry Keeps Lying About EVERYTHING _


----------



## Chanbal

Very economical indeed…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Have him removed from the line to the throne, problem solved!










						Harry 'says he SHOULD get security as he's 'in immediate line to the throne'
					

PRINCE Harry insists he should still receive taxpayer-funded security as he is in “immediate” line to the throne, court papers say. The Duke of Sussex is suing the Home Office because i…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

He really should be removed from the LoS, thus depriving him of his main argument. He may have been born a prince, grown into a brat, but he has definitely matured into an obnoxious wimp. 

Does Parliament have to take action for this? Maybe Boris will step up to divert attention from his other woes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Have him removed from the line to the throne, problem solved!
> View attachment 5331403
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'says he SHOULD get security as he's 'in immediate line to the throne'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry insists he should still receive taxpayer-funded security as he is in “immediate” line to the throne, court papers say. The Duke of Sussex is suing the Home Office because i…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



And only one plane crash away as well!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Richard is right, imo


----------



## rose60610

"Immediate" line to the throne? Should William take this as a threat to his whole family? 

If Harry considers himself King material, then he should effing start acting like it. And if he really thinks he has a snowball's chance of becoming King, why did he willingly resign from royal duties and move out of the country?  IMO he took himself out of line when he did exactly that. Too good for royal duties but he'll swoop in as King?  Oh wait. They have to pimp every nickel they can get before their titles are taken away. Maggot wants to be Queen but "yearns for privacy". OK, got  it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, the minute George was born that was it with immediate for Harry...before the line went Charles - Wills - Harry, not it goes Charles - Wills - all three kiddos - back to Harry. It is not just more people added, it's a completely different line now. He is a sideline.


----------



## marietouchet

I compromised about copyrights and added a shot of only the relevant part of the Times article, cf infra

The only question is whether H qualifies for security, meanwhile he is being disrespectful

Somehow, I prefer the placid journalism of the Times, without banners, colors and CAPITAL letters that scream 



Likely behind the paywall at the Times
Harry did not offer to pay for police guards, court is told 





__





						The Times & The Sunday Times
					

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

The Duke of Sussex has devolved into a little boy stamping his foot so he can be recognized by the adults.  The problem with this is that the adults are going to put him in the corner for a time out.  His lie is like swearing he didn't take a piece of the  chocolate cake made for his brother's birthday party and he has  chocolate smeared all over his face.  That he doesn't see this is very sad.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> The Duke of Sussex has devolved into a little boy stamping his foot so he can be recognized by the adults.  The problem with this is that the adults are going to put him in the corner for a time out.  His lie is like swearing he didn't take a piece of the  chocolate cake made for his brother's birthday party and he has  chocolate smeared all over his face.  That he doesn't see this is very sad.



Chocolate? What chocolate?


----------



## papertiger

He's really finding it very hard to give-up. He wants his cake and eat it too. Actually, I think he wants everyone else's cake as @gracekelly wrote  




*Prince Harry will renew Frogmore Cottage lease to keep serving Queen*

Hannah Furness
Sat, 19 February 2022, 5:58 pm







The Queen greets Prince Harry at the 2015 Chelsea Flower Show - Julian Simmonds
The Duke of Sussex has renewed his soon-to-expire lease on Frogmore Cottage and will continue to be allowed to deputise for the Queen, the Telegraph understands.
The Duke, who lives in California but is still a UK citizen, is eligible to serve his grandmother as one of her four Counsellors of State because he qualifies as being domiciled in Britain thanks to his old Windsor address.
He and the Duchess have had to decide whether to renew the lease, which expires on March 31. The Telegraph understands that they plan to continue the arrangement.
Until now, that decision has been considered a matter for the Sussex family, with the Duke this week insisting he still considers the UK "home" but feels unsafe visiting because of unresolved security arrangements.
Through lawyers, he has emphasised his wish to return to Britain to see his family and friends, as well as his old charity patronages, but has so far returned on only a handful of occasions since moving his family to the USA.
A spokesman for the Duke said: "There are no planned changes to the current arrangement."




The Duke of Sussex has renewed his soon-to-expire lease on Frogmore Cottage - Alamy
In September 2020, the Sussexes paid back £2.4 million for renovations to Frogmore Cottage, including rent up to March 2022, in a complicated arrangement detailed only in part in the palace annual accounts.
Princess Eugenie, Jack Brooksbank and their son, August, are reported to have been living there while her cousin is in California.
Details of Prince Harry’s UK living arrangements have unexpectedly become a constitutional matter, The Telegraph has learned, thanks to his role as one of the Queen's four remaining Counsellors of State.
A source with extensive knowledge of the legal issues said counsellors must only be "domiciled" in the UK, with two historic examples of individuals who lived abroad while remaining in the role – one against his will as a prisoner of war and the other working in a realm.
As the four adults next in line to the throne, the Prince of Wales, Duke of Cambridge, Duke of Sussex and Duke of York can undertake some of the Queen's duties at her request should she fall temporarily ill.
While the role has been little-known to the public for decades, it is now at the centre of significant concerns about what should happen if the Queen is unable to fulfill her duties for a short period of time through illness or injury.
Earlier this year, the Duke of Cambridge was overseas while the Prince of Wales was in isolation with Covid, leaving both out of action.
The Duke of York has stepped down from public duties entirely since his infamous Newsnight interview about his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.
This week he paid a reported £12 million to Virginia Guiffre to settle a US civil lawsuit in which she accused him of sexual assault and rape when she was under age. Critics have argued that he must be stripped of the role.
Dr Craig Prescott, an expert in UK constitutional law, said change seemed "inevitable", while Hugo Vickers, the historian, said: "If Prince Andrew is not taking part in royal life, then he shouldn't be taking part as a counsellor of state either."

Buckingham Palace insists the Counsellors of State can only be changed through legislation, with the decision lying with Parliament. But constitutional experts have told The Telegraph it would never realistically happen unless the Queen herself requested it.
The only two changes to the position during the Queen's reign – to add the Queen Mother and Duke of Edinburgh – have come as a direct result of Her Majesty asking Parliament.
One source with knowledge of the legal issues said it was "quite clear-cut that there was nothing disqualifying" the Duke of York from remaining in the role, which falls to the four people next in line to the throne over the age of 21.
It has recently been reported that the Duchess of Cornwall may be made an additional Counsellor of State. She will become one anyway at the accession of Prince Charles as the spouse of a monarch.
At the Queen’s request through letters patent, counsellors are able to carry out most of her official duties including Privy Council meetings, signing routine documents and receiving the credentials of new ambassadors. They cannot create peers or appoint a Prime Minister, and can only dissolve Parliament at the express instruction of the monarch.
The mechanism was last used in 2015, when the Queen went on tour to Malta.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Chocolate? What chocolate?
> 
> View attachment 5331935



Augustus joining Violet and Veruca! Is it inevitable that something about Harry and Meghan’s Netflix contract will come out that will make Mike appear soon?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, I don't keep people on the payroll who don't deliver either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I must admit, Frogmore Cottage is really one of the uglier royal properties. Plus, is that stripe of lawn the garden? It looks like its back is build into a hedge.

Not that I feel sorry at all for the Netflixes.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't keep people on the payroll who don't deliver either.



about time someone holds these two accountable for something


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must admit, Frogmore Cottage is really one of the uglier royal properties. Plus, is that stripe of lawn the garden? It looks like its back is build into a hedge.
> 
> Not that I feel sorry at all for the Netflixes.


I'm sure MM expected Frogmore House and was very unhappy to learn she was getting Frogmore Cottage, and no doubt believed it was beneath Harry's rank. So they stormed off to Montecito and bought the tackiest mansion she could find in their price range.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure MM expected Frogmore House and was very unhappy to learn she was getting Frogmore Cottage, and no doubt believed it was beneath Harry's rank. So they stormed off to Montecito and bought the tackiest mansion she could find in their price range.



Rumor has it, she wanted to live in Windsor Castle with The Queen. (This was after the Kensington Kerfuffles, separating their court from the Cambridges, etc.). The Queen doled out Frogmore Cottage nearby.

Quite the “know your role, and manage your expectations accordingly” statement.  IMO


----------



## csshopper

Hazbeen and Megalomania think they are the center of the universe so this must come as major SHOCK, she plays Diana, gets nominated for an award for her performance. Yet is so completely disinterested in the Duo she doesn't even know they have been living in CA. 
*Kristen Stewart Says She Was Unaware Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Moved to California: 'I Wonder Where'*


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> Rumor has it, she wanted to live in Windsor Castle with The Queen. (This was after the Kensington Kerfuffles, separating their court from the Cambridges, etc.). The Queen doled out Frogmore Cottage nearby.
> 
> Quite the “know your role, and manage your expectations accordingly” statement.  IMO



Now they don't have one they should give-up the cottage and find a place to suit themselves like every other person in the UK.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Hazbeen and Megalomania think they are the center of the universe so this must come as major SHOCK, she plays Diana, gets nominated for an award for her performance. Yet is so completely disinterested in the Duo she doesn't even know they have been living in CA.
> *Kristen Stewart Says She Was Unaware Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Moved to California: 'I Wonder Where'*



Well, to be fair I don’t think Kristen Stewart knows very much. She’s not exactly a bright bulb, even among actors. 

It shows Hollywood isn’t knocking on Harry and Meghan’s door however.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Hazbeen and Megalomania think they are the center of the universe so this must come as major SHOCK, she plays Diana, gets nominated for an award for her performance. Yet is so completely disinterested in the Duo she doesn't even know they have been living in CA.
> *Kristen Stewart Says She Was Unaware Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Moved to California: 'I Wonder Where'*


OMG she is unaware of where the Duchess lives?  How dare she say that?


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> Quite the “know your role, and manage your expectations accordingly” statement. IMO


And that p*ssed her off even more, so they went the racism route to have an excuse to head for the US, where she thought they'd be properly welcomed as royalty and all the right doors would open for them. Oopsies.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> And that p*ssed her off even more, so they went the racism route to have an excuse to head for the US, where she thought they'd be properly welcomed as royalty and all the right doors would open for them. Oopsies.


I think the excitement about her becoming a Duchess may be lessening....but I suspect she will still have plenty of POC defending her at every turn


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Hazbeen and Megalomania think they are the center of the universe so this must come as major SHOCK, she plays Diana, gets nominated for an award for her performance. Yet is so completely disinterested in the Duo she doesn't even know they have been living in CA.
> *Kristen Stewart Says She Was Unaware Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Moved to California: 'I Wonder Where'*


I am dubious of her claim, but it's pretty funny just as a slap to the Harkles.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I think the excitement about her becoming a Duchess may be lessening....but I suspect she will still have plenty of POC defending her at every turn


You mean the POC she has either tried to distance herself from or embrace as the situation warrants?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must admit, Frogmore Cottage is really one of the uglier royal properties. Plus, is that stripe of lawn the garden? It looks like its back is build into a hedge.
> 
> Not that I feel sorry at all for the Netflixes.


It looks like a Post Office of a prison half way house.  Horrible!  I take it that it is not allowed to put in some nice landscaping to soften the look.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It looks like a Post Office of a prison half way house.  Horrible!  I take it that it is not allowed to put in some nice landscaping to soften the look.


The photo of FC is an old one …. I remember major landscaping renovations were part of the 2 million pounds of upgrades … and a security fence , gate that might prevent getting new photos


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I must admit, Frogmore Cottage is really one of the uglier royal properties. Plus, is that stripe of lawn the garden? It looks like its back is build into a hedge.
> 
> Not that I feel sorry at all for the Netflixes.


It's definitely better looking from the front, but not one of the biggest royal properties


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Sources close to Miss Harkle confirmed that she intends to visit the UK this year, allegedly…
> Very sorry for the inconvenience this may bring to our members in the UK.



I would think that she has to be either completely clueless, or has b*lls of steel to set foot in the UK after throwing the entire family under the bus.  I know I would never show my face there again after the Oprah debacle.


----------



## Chanbal

The Nefl*xes and DM: the love story of the century!  

*EXCLUSIVE: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a SECRET... then - just minutes after the story broke - his PR machine tried to put a positive spin on the dispute*

_*Prince Harry*__* tried to keep details of his legal battle to reinstate his police protection secret from the public,* The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

High Court documents show he sought a far-reaching confidentiality order on documents and witness statements surrounding his case against the Government.

*But the Home Office argued for transparency*, saying 'there must be a sufficiently good reason, in the wider public interest, to justify the departure from open justice that such an order involves'.

Both sides then agreed that some papers would be made public with the Home Office agreeing to carry out a 'confidentiality exercise' to determine what would be kept secret, even though it caused 'an unprecedented expenditure of time and resources'.

When The Mail on Sunday last month revealed that Harry was suing the Government, his spin-doctors swung into action, briefing journalists that Harry was being denied the right to pay for bodyguards.

It led to inaccurate reports across the media, such as the BBC headline: 'Prince Harry in legal fight to pay for UK police protection.'

As documents lodged at the High Court last week show, no such offer to pay was made in the Prince's initial 'pre-action' letters to the Home Office, suggesting he expected British taxpayers to cover it…_









						EXCLUSIVE: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight a secret
					

Prince Harry tried to keep details of his legal battle to reinstate his police protection secret from the public, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder who dared to drop off JCMH at the airport in a simple brown van…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Granted, Frogmore Cottage isn't pretty from the outside, but come on, it was built in 1801 and the grifters got over 2 million to renovate it. On the inside it's probably gorgeous, however if after the renovations it bears any resemblance to Maggot's tailoring habits she may have ruined it. Giving the shaft to the family that gave you unlimited luxuries, a globally televised wedding, a house, etc is beyond the pale. What did they expect--to move in to Buckingham Palace and close it off to public tours?  Even if they didn't like Frogmore they went on enough trips to not have to look at it much. Totally ungrateful losers.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry faces hefty bill if he loses security battle as 'public purse hit'
					

PRINCE Harry faces coughing up a hefty bill if he loses his High Court battle for security to cover the hit to the public purse. The Duke of Sussex, 37, launched legal action against the Government…




					www.thesun.ie


----------



## Katel

Toby93 said:


> It's definitely better looking from the front, but not one of the biggest royal properties


In the past, wasn’t FC the servant’s quarters? Poor poor MeMeMegain and Hazben … surely horrifying for them.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5332341
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces hefty bill if he loses security battle as 'public purse hit'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry faces coughing up a hefty bill if he loses his High Court battle for security to cover the hit to the public purse. The Duke of Sussex, 37, launched legal action against the Government…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie


If he has to pay, this might take away his penchant for suing


----------



## gracekelly

Katel said:


> In the past, wasn’t FC the servant’s quarters? Poor poor MeMeMegain and Hazben … surely horrifying for them.


It was servants quarters. To be honest, and in her defense, MM might have found that insulting and racist. .


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Hazbeen and Megalomania think they are the center of the universe so this must come as major SHOCK, she plays Diana, gets nominated for an award for her performance. Yet is so completely disinterested in the Duo she doesn't even know they have been living in CA.
> *Kristen Stewart Says She Was Unaware Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Moved to California: 'I Wonder Where'*


LOLOL.  Kristen Stewart being “disinterested” perfectly sums up her role in every movie she’s been in, IMO!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TBF, I am friendly with the wife of a guy who was part of his security detail in the US a few times pre-Meghan and he says he was nice and a fun guy on these occasions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

THIS.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> Rumor has it, she wanted to live in Windsor Castle with The Queen. (This was after the Kensington Kerfuffles, separating their court from the Cambridges, etc.). The Queen doled out Frogmore Cottage nearby.
> 
> Quite the “know your role, and manage your expectations accordingly” statement.  IMO



Apparently they also asked for Frogmore House for when they established their own court because they claimed they'd then need the space. See how that went for them  on both accounts


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> It looks like a Post Office of a prison half way house.  Horrible!  I take it that it is not allowed to put in some nice landscaping to soften the look.



Why not...I doubt a neglected garden counts as heritage  That said, that is a fairly old picture, they probably did clean up around it at some point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> It's definitely better looking from the front, but not one of the biggest royal properties



It is! I never saw that side.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5332341
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces hefty bill if he loses security battle as 'public purse hit'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry faces coughing up a hefty bill if he loses his High Court battle for security to cover the hit to the public purse. The Duke of Sussex, 37, launched legal action against the Government…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie



and who will pay if he wins or costs are not awarded?


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL.  Kristen Stewart being “disinterested” perfectly sums up her role in every movie she’s been in, IMO!



TBF, she usually plays disinterested or 'difficult' women.


Have we had this? Apologies if we have.

I think this demonstrates how a)insecure and b) unprofessional these 2 are as a couple. M cannot let go of H's hand, she literally makes herself and hm look like an idiot at one point.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> It was servants quarters. To be honest, and in her defense, MM might have found that insulting and racist. .


Does this mean all those other cottages that the Queen houses royals in are also servants quarters? If so, then she can hardly argue that it was racist. In my opinion, Methane doesn't believe in working her way up. She always leveraged on someone else to climb. So she likely thought that her charm and Hazard would leapfrog her into a castle or palace right away.

Methane and Hazard remind me of Ugly People. I'm neither from UK or USA, but I've encountered their citizens who think their place of birth affords them a higher status. So Hazard feels it is his right to call the First Amendment bonkers, and Methane thinks she can bully her UK staff because of her "amazing" US/Cali work ethic.


----------



## 1LV

Just read Queen Elizabeth has tested positive for COVID.  Sad and scary news to wake up to.  

Hey Harry, Meg!  Want to get in another kick while she’s down?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleRunningDog

xincinsin said:


> Does this mean all those other cottages that the Queen houses royals in are also servants quarters? If so, then she can hardly argue that it was racist. In my opinion, Methane doesn't believe in working her way up. She always leveraged on someone else to climb. So she likely thought that her charm and Hazard would leapfrog her into a castle or palace right away.
> 
> Methane and Hazard remind me of Ugly People. I'm neither from UK or USA, but I've encountered their citizens who think their place of birth affords them a higher status. So Hazard feels it is his right to call the First Amendment bonkers, and Methane thinks she can bully her UK staff because of her "amazing" US/Cali work ethic.


Barns, pubs, former mews, even pigsties and milking parlours etc get converted into luxury homes in the uk.  And it’s not uncommon for rows of cottages to be knocked through into 1 large home, I have friend that did it.  Former use adds interest rather than making it undesirable.

Eta - the derelict barn next to my mothers house, where we played as kids, sold for £1.8m a few years ago.  It was astonishing to see what they’d done with it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since the past is prologue, if interested, take a look back to Jan, 2020.  All of these articles could have been written yesterday.

RE: Counselors of State - A&H, simply renounce. Your worries will end. Perhaps BLG could advocate for this, too.  




Spoiler: Look back












						'Megxit', 'Queen's fury': The UK (and US) papers are having a field day over the bombshell royal news
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are quitting royal life.




					www.thejournal.ie
				












						Queen says Harry and Meghan to have 'period of transition' in UK and Canada - as it happened
					

Monarch says she would have preferred couple to remain full-time working royals as day of talks ends




					www.theguardian.com
				






			https://mobile.twitter.com/hashtag/SandringhamSummit?src=hashtag_click


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It was servants quarters. To be honest, and in her defense, MM might have found that insulting and racist. .



If we still kept servants (not staff) and other members of the BRF were not housed in similar accommodation you/they may have a point. A 4 bed property that was still servants' quarters would have had 4 bunks to a bedroom to share and rooms downstairs to house their tools, equipment and workshops.

The top of every grand house in the UK were also all servants quarters, all now converted and cost a small fortune.


----------



## papertiger

From the 'lover' of the couple the DMoS - I have edited out the pics:

*EXCLUSIVE: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a SECRET... then - just minutes after the story broke - his PR machine tried to put a positive spin on the dispute*

*Prince Harry sought far-reaching confidentiality, High Court documents show *
*He had tried to keep details of his legal battle about police protection private  *
*However the Home Office argued for transparency over the legal documents*
By KATE MANSEY FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY

PUBLISHED: 22:26, 19 February 2022 | UPDATED: 00:42, 20 February 2022


Prince Harry tried to keep details of his legal battle to reinstate his police protection secret from the public, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
High Court documents show he sought a far-reaching confidentiality order on documents and witness statements surrounding his case against the Government.
But the Home Office argued for transparency, saying 'there must be a sufficiently good reason, in the wider public interest, to justify the departure from open justice that such an order involves'.

Prince Harry tried to keep details of his legal battle to reinstate his police protection secret from the public.
Both sides then agreed that some papers would be made public with the Home Office agreeing to carry out a 'confidentiality exercise' to determine what would be kept secret, even though it caused 'an unprecedented expenditure of time and resources'.
When The Mail on Sunday last month revealed that Harry was suing the Government, his spin-doctors swung into action, briefing journalists that Harry was being denied the right to pay for bodyguards.
It led to inaccurate reports across the media, such as the BBC headline: 'Prince Harry in legal fight to pay for UK police protection.'
*As documents lodged at the High Court last week show, no such offer to pay was made in the Prince's initial 'pre-action' letters to the Home Office, suggesting he expected British taxpayers to cover it.*

The revelations are a crushing rebuttal to Harry's initial public statement that implied he had always been willing to foot the bill.
Nor did he offer to pay when he visited the UK last June to unveil a statue to his mother, Princess Diana.
Home Office lawyers state that it was only in later correspondence that the offer was made.
That led to fury last night that aides acting for Harry sought to confuse the mainstream media's response to the story, ironic given the Prince now has a role with a Silicon Valley firm tackling 'misinformation' online.
As royal author David McClure, tweeted: 'Once more confusion about the accuracy of messages coming out of the Sussex camp. First Harry offers to pay, then when he visits the UK, he does not.'
The Duke launched his claim in September, more than 18 months after the Government's RAVEC (Royal and VIP Executive Committee) decided he would be stripped of his full state-funded security.

But court papers reveal that Harry still maintains 'exceptional status', which means he could be afforded protection depending on the nature of his visits, assessed on a 'case-by-case basis'.
Harry argues that 'while his role within the institution has changed, his profile as a member of the Royal Family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.'
*Yet his initial bid to get the decision overturned did not mention he would pay anything. Court papers say: 'The offer [to pay] is now advanced in the Claimant's witness statement...but notably was not advanced to RAVEC in June 2021 or in any of the pre-action correspondence which followed.'
It adds that Harry's recent offer to pay is nevertheless 'irrelevant' because 'personal protective security by the police is not available on a privately financed basis, and RAVEC does not make decisions...on the basis that any financial contribution could be sought or obtained to pay for it'.*
When The Mail on Sunday first broke the story, lawyers and PR advisers acting for the Sussexes sought to put their own gloss on it.

*The revelations are a crushing rebuttal to Harry's initial public statement that implied he had always been willing to foot the bill*
Just six minutes after The Mail on Sunday's world exclusive, the Press Association, apparently having been given an advanced briefing by Harry's camp, reported that the Duke had offered 'to pay personally for UK police protection' and quoted his lawyer saying: 'He remains willing to cover the cost of security.'
Omid Scobie, a journalist known to be supportive of the Sussexes, also appeared to have been briefed by Harry's team.
Five hours after this newspaper told the Prince's aides we were planning a story, Scobie told his 76,000 Twitter followers: 'Prince Harry has applied for a judicial review of a Home Office decision not to allow him to personally pay for police protection for himself and his family when they are in the UK, a legal representative for the Sussexes confirms.'
Harry's team only responded to this newspaper after this inaccurate version of events had been tweeted.
Further questions were raised last night about the legal fight.
Former Minister Norman Baker said: 'The police are not a commodity to buy like a pack of biscuits.
If Harry has concerns about a specific threat, he should share those with the police.
Otherwise, it is open to him to engage security staff on any visits. Personally, I would have thought he was at more risk in gun-mad America than over here.'
*Home Office QC Robert Palmer has said that if Harry loses, the Government will 'seek the costs incurred in full, including those of the confidentiality exercise'.*


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan thought getting a cottage was racist, surely she'd have cried about it to Oprah in the disaster interview. Oh wait, she said QEII was nice, TQ offered to share her blanket on the train "because it was chilly", remember? (So why wasn't Meghan furnished with her own damned blanket, it's not like it was TQ's first train ride and the BRF goes unprepared.)  Was this an olive branch (not), or an expectation that QEII would turn on her own family and support Meghan's outrageous claims? In Maggot's conniving mind maybe she thinks that if Andrew would shell out major $$ to settle without going to court then she could get major bucks by spewing flame throwing allegations. Granted, that case was far off at the time, but it was probably a given it would happen. Payoffs to shut up.


----------



## Chanbal

This!


----------



## Chanbal

The major reason why the Harkles renewed Frogmore imo. A UK address comes with many perks…

*Prince Harry renews soon-to-expire lease on Frogmore Cottage - making him still eligible to serve the Queen as a Counsellor because he has a UK address despite living in California*

*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have renewed the lease on Frogmore Cottage*
*The Duke of Sussex is eligible to continue serving as a Counsellor of State for his grandmother because he qualifies as being domiciled in the Windsor address  *
*As one of four adults next in line to the throne, Harry can step in for the Queen *
*It comes as the Duke begins his High Court legal battle over police protection  *









						Prince Harry renews soon-to-expire lease on Frogmore Cottage
					

The Duke of Sussex, who lives in California is eligible to continue serving his grandmother as one of her four Counsellors of State because he qualifies as being domiciled in Britain




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

So Eugenie and family can continue to reside there and be beholden to them?


----------



## rose60610

Wouldn't you hate to have Meghan as your landlord  ?


----------



## xincinsin

If Aspen was not populated with Hazard's cronies, he would not be feeling so entitled to blare out misinformation indiscriminately, safe in his assumption that the self-appointed guardians of the internet would not turn on him.


----------



## rose60610

For somebody who says the First Amendment is 'bonkers', he sure takes full advantage of it.


----------



## Chanbal

A very valid point from reddit: "_Harry's problem is Harry_"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



This is terrible news. Wishing QE a speedy recovery!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The major reason why the Harkles renewed Frogmore imo. A UK address comes with many perks…
> 
> *Prince Harry renews soon-to-expire lease on Frogmore Cottage - making him still eligible to serve the Queen as a Counsellor because he has a UK address despite living in California*
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have renewed the lease on Frogmore Cottage*
> *The Duke of Sussex is eligible to continue serving as a Counsellor of State for his grandmother because he qualifies as being domiciled in the Windsor address  *
> *As one of four adults next in line to the throne, Harry can step in for the Queen *
> *It comes as the Duke begins his High Court legal battle over police protection  *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry renews soon-to-expire lease on Frogmore Cottage
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who lives in California is eligible to continue serving his grandmother as one of her four Counsellors of State because he qualifies as being domiciled in Britain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So much for "stepping back" from royal life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> So much for "stepping back" from royal life.


They thought stepping back meant less work, but the same amount of perks.


----------



## K.D.

Toby93 said:


> It's definitely better looking from the front, but not one of the biggest royal properties


I'd happily take it off their hands. As the property market stands, many people their age (and to be fair, the younger you are the worse it gets) aren't able to buy a house or one that can also house a family with kids. The entitlement is ridiculous. I'll get of my soapbox and continue rearranging my furniture in my humble flat, which I was lucky enough to buy...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleRunningDog said:


> Barns, pubs, former mews, even pigsties and milking parlours etc get converted into luxury homes in the uk.  And it’s not uncommon for rows of cottages to be knocked through into 1 large home, I have friend that did it.  Former use adds interest rather than making it undesirable.



Right! And nobody does barn remodels like the UK (or maybe our derelict farm buildimgs are just ugly to begin with  )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> *Home Office QC Robert Palmer has said that if Harry loses, the Government will 'seek the costs incurred in full, including those of the confidentiality exercise'.*



Robert Palmer might be the one person ever laying down the law with them, and I'm all here for it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My heart sank when I read the Queen's Covid news. Hopefully her mild case will stay that way. 

(But also, maybe she doesn't have to work while being even mildly sick with a volatile plague just weeks before her milestone???).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Because that's what they do best. Maybe their only talent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT, speaking of the Queen I watched a documentary and they showed the guestbook of Glamis Castle (where her mother was born and raised). First there was a clumsy Lilibet in block letters, then an Elizabeth (Lilibet) in cursive, later an Elizabeth & Philip and even later an Elizabeth R & Philip.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right! And nobody does barn remodels like the UK (or maybe our derelict farm buildimgs are just ugly to begin with  )


I would be interested in a show about UK remodels, like all the ones here in the US on HGTV.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Robert Palmer might be the one person ever laying down the law with them, and I'm all here for it.


I assume it's not this Robert Palmer


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I assume it's not this Robert Palmer




Good enough excuse to play the song, thank you!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder who dared to drop off JCMH at the airport in a simple brown van…



I could not help but laugh at that. Years ago we had a rental minivan (hard to avoid traveling with kids) on a trip. It was a lighter shade of brown, but a friend that we were visiting said it looked like a turd on wheels.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5332341
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces hefty bill if he loses security battle as 'public purse hit'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry faces coughing up a hefty bill if he loses his High Court battle for security to cover the hit to the public purse. The Duke of Sussex, 37, launched legal action against the Government…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie


boo hoo
If he doesn't feel safe bringing his Wife and kids to England, then he doesn't have to bring them.  They made their bed; now they should lay in it.


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> Good enough excuse to play the song, thank you!


Love this!


----------



## kemilia

Did JCMH recently fly somewhere? Back to the UK or is this an old pic.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I assume it's not this Robert Palmer




@charlottawill, thank you, you gave me a great laugh to start the day out here on the west coast!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I would be interested in a show about UK remodels, like all the ones here in the US on HGTV.



Check out "Restoration Home" on Youtube...though I'm often underwhelmed with the results.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My heart sank when I read the Queen's Covid news. Hopefully her mild case will stay that way.
> 
> (But also, maybe she doesn't have to work while being even mildly sick with a volatile plague just weeks before her milestone???).


she's very old but with a mild case and the best care I think she will probably be OK


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Prince Dufus wants his armed US security team to protect him in the UK, but only authorized police forces are allowed to carry guns there. He is so paranoid and and such a drama queen, that he probably imagines himself going down in a flurry of bullets at the U.K. Corral.


I loved this pun. Truly hilarious!

if you watch guy Ritchie films while drinking poisoned tea, eating Yorkshire puddings with ground glass  and letting an amateur knife thrower practise on you then you too may experience the self-inflicted & extremely British terror H experiences when he comes to the U.K. (or disagrees with the wife.)


LittleRunningDog said:


> Barns, pubs, former mews, even pigsties and milking parlours etc get converted into luxury homes in the uk.  And it’s not uncommon for rows of cottages to be knocked through into 1 large home, I have friend that did it.  Former use adds interest rather than making it undesirable.
> 
> Eta - the derelict barn next to my mothers house, where we played as kids, sold for £1.8m a few years ago.  It was astonishing to see what they’d done with it.


Isn’t the spa at the soho house chain called the ‘cow shed’ due to its former use? Hmmm   

Not to get too much into talking about Covid on this thread but it does strike me as a bit ‘one rule for thee and another for me’  that  the queen can  just carry on working even with a positive diagnosis whereas the current council policy at my community centre is they aren’t allowed to come in with any cold symptoms even with a negative test.


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> I loved this pun. Truly hilarious!
> 
> if you watch guy Ritchie films while drinking poisoned tea, eating Yorkshire puddings with ground glass  and letting an amateur knife thrower practise on you then you too may experience the self-inflicted & extremely British terror H experiences when he comes to the U.K. (or disagrees with the wife.)
> 
> Isn’t the spa at the soho house chain called the ‘cow shed’ due to its former use? Hmmm
> 
> Not to get too much into talking about Covid on this thread but it does strike me as a bit ‘one rule for thee and another for me’  that  the queen can  just carry on working even with a positive diagnosis whereas the current council policy at my community centre is they aren’t allowed to come in with any cold symptoms even with a negative test.



Maybe she is working from home


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> Maybe she is working from home


Which one? 

To me, it is just a bit of a bizarre morality play. The queen lives and interacts with numerous servants everyday, even if she’s isolating she won’t be cooped up deprived of human contact or necessary services the way people who need community help are being. Perhaps the comparison is unfair but it just seems like royal PR flummery.


----------



## CarryOn2020

According to DM, she met with Andrew every day last week.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to DM, she met with Andrew every day last week.


As a mom, I would meet with him (privately) as many times as required


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> I could not help but laugh at that. Years ago we had a rental minivan (hard to avoid traveling with kids) on a trip. It was a lighter shade of brown, but a friend that we were visiting said it looked like a turd on wheels.



A new name for H lol


----------



## StylishMD

charlottawill said:


> I would be interested in a show about UK remodels, like all the ones here in the US on HGTV.


There is a show called Grand Design on Brit Box via Amazon Prime that is exactly this. 
It is fascinating


----------



## Chanbal

Little Miss Forgetful will grace the UK with her presence…


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, speaking of the Queen I watched a documentary and they showed the guestbook of Glamis Castle (where her mother was born and raised). First there was a clumsy Lilibet in block letters, then an Elizabeth (Lilibet) in cursive, later an Elizabeth & Philip and even later an Elizabeth R & Philip.


Now that really tugs at MY heart strings


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Little Miss Forgetful will grace the UK with her presence…



I remember there was a scene from some movie when the populace lining the streets expressed their displeasure by turning their backs on the VIP travelling down the road. Maybe that will happen to Princess Perjury. Much more dignified than throwing eggs and tomatoes, won't get charged with assault, and I'm sure it will get picked up by all the major international news agencies.


----------



## Chanbal

The Nefl*xes are former president and vice president of this charity. 
What a mess!

*Royal charity spent 98% of its cash raised in one year on paying just 10 staff, probe reveals*

_A Royal charity that has partnered with Prince Harry’s life coaching firm paid its staff 98 per cent of the money it raised in a year, the Daily Mail can reveal.

*The Queen**’s Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.*

Over half of the cash went to its five most senior executives who earned £420,000 between them, Charity Commission accounts show.

The figures raise questions over how much emphasis the organisation, with the Queen as patron, puts on charitable endeavours.

The QCT was set up to provide funding, tools and support for young Commonwealth leaders to help them transform their communities across agriculture, education, employability and more.

*The QCT has already raised eyebrows for promoting online coaching company BetterUp, which employs Prince Harry as its chief impact officer. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had been president and vice president of QCT before they stepped down from royal duties a year ago.

Now it has entered a partnership with BetterUp and runs testimonials on its website describing Prince Harry’s business as ‘truly phenomenal’, the Observer reported.*

David Haigh, chief executive of London consultancy Brand Finance, said the QCT should have carried out a careful due diligence process to ensure the charitable partnership was appropriate.

He said: ‘Any company which is supported by the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust is going to gain credibility, and this will be of economic value.’

*But QCT told the Mail the BetterUp deal was ‘a generous one-off gift from Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, as the Former President of QCT, in order to support young people’. Although BetterUp is providing support to young leaders for free at the QCT, it usually charges up to £360 per month for its virtual coaching services. *It comes after the QCT made supermodel *Naomi Campbell its first Global Ambassador last year, despite her own charity, Fashion for Relief (FFR), being under investigation.

The Charity Commission is probing allegations that FFR spent £1.6million on a fundraising gala in Cannes, France, yet gave only £5,000 to good causes over the same period. *

The Queen launched the QCT in 2018. The next year it was given a one-off £2.7million donation from the Queen’s Trust, which then closed.

But the latest figures show it is eating into that donation to keep afloat, with total expenditures last year at £1.5million despite the small amounts raised.

A spokesman for the charity said: ‘The impact of Covid-19 has been felt across the charitable sector – and impacted fundraising for many – QCT included.’_









						Royal charity spent 98% of its cash paying 10 staff
					

The Queen 's Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

This is not right!
*Prince Harry renews lease for £2.4m UK home to allow him to deputise if Queen is ill*








						Prince Harry renews lease for £2.4m UK home so he can deputise if Queen is ill
					

Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle lived at Frogmore Cottage before moving to Canada and then the US in 2020 - but the Duke of Sussex recently insisted the UK is "still home"




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is not right!
> *Prince Harry renews lease for £2.4m UK home to allow him to deputise if Queen is ill*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry renews lease for £2.4m UK home so he can deputise if Queen is ill
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle lived at Frogmore Cottage before moving to Canada and then the US in 2020 - but the Duke of Sussex recently insisted the UK is "still home"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


He can insist all he wants that the UK is still home, but TW will never consider the UK her home. My guess is it will be the breaking point for them. Will it be the good old "irreconcilable differences", or the more modern "conscious uncoupling"? Time will tell....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> He can insist all he wants that the UK is still home, but TW will never consider the UK her home. My guess is it will be the breaking point for them. Will it be the good old "irreconcilable differences", or the more modern "conscious uncoupling"? Time will tell....


Maybe not "home" but I'm sure someone as superficial as TW will love having multiple addresses across the globe.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The Nefl*xes are former president and vice president of this charity.
> What a mess!
> 
> *Royal charity spent 98% of its cash raised in one year on paying just 10 staff, probe reveals*
> 
> _A Royal charity that has partnered with Prince Harry’s life coaching firm paid its staff 98 per cent of the money it raised in a year, the Daily Mail can reveal.
> 
> *The Queen**’s Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.*
> 
> Over half of the cash went to its five most senior executives who earned £420,000 between them, Charity Commission accounts show.
> 
> The figures raise questions over how much emphasis the organisation, with the Queen as patron, puts on charitable endeavours.
> 
> The QCT was set up to provide funding, tools and support for young Commonwealth leaders to help them transform their communities across agriculture, education, employability and more.
> 
> *The QCT has already raised eyebrows for promoting online coaching company BetterUp, which employs Prince Harry as its chief impact officer. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had been president and vice president of QCT before they stepped down from royal duties a year ago.
> 
> Now it has entered a partnership with BetterUp and runs testimonials on its website describing Prince Harry’s business as ‘truly phenomenal’, the Observer reported.*
> 
> David Haigh, chief executive of London consultancy Brand Finance, said the QCT should have carried out a careful due diligence process to ensure the charitable partnership was appropriate.
> 
> He said: ‘Any company which is supported by the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust is going to gain credibility, and this will be of economic value.’
> 
> *But QCT told the Mail the BetterUp deal was ‘a generous one-off gift from Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, as the Former President of QCT, in order to support young people’. Although BetterUp is providing support to young leaders for free at the QCT, it usually charges up to £360 per month for its virtual coaching services. *It comes after the QCT made supermodel *Naomi Campbell its first Global Ambassador last year, despite her own charity, Fashion for Relief (FFR), being under investigation.
> 
> The Charity Commission is probing allegations that FFR spent £1.6million on a fundraising gala in Cannes, France, yet gave only £5,000 to good causes over the same period. *
> 
> The Queen launched the QCT in 2018. The next year it was given a one-off £2.7million donation from the Queen’s Trust, which then closed.
> 
> But the latest figures show it is eating into that donation to keep afloat, with total expenditures last year at £1.5million despite the small amounts raised.
> 
> A spokesman for the charity said: ‘The impact of Covid-19 has been felt across the charitable sector – and impacted fundraising for many – QCT included.’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal charity spent 98% of its cash paying 10 staff
> 
> 
> The Queen 's Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They will just use the same excuse as they did for Sussex Royal: Oh, we weren't really involved. It's run by the board.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> The Nefl*xes are former president and vice president of this charity.
> What a mess!
> 
> *Royal charity spent 98% of its cash raised in one year on paying just 10 staff, probe reveals*
> 
> _A Royal charity that has partnered with Prince Harry’s life coaching firm paid its staff 98 per cent of the money it raised in a year, the Daily Mail can reveal.
> 
> *The Queen**’s Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.*
> 
> Over half of the cash went to its five most senior executives who earned £420,000 between them, Charity Commission accounts show.
> 
> The figures raise questions over how much emphasis the organisation, with the Queen as patron, puts on charitable endeavours.
> 
> The QCT was set up to provide funding, tools and support for young Commonwealth leaders to help them transform their communities across agriculture, education, employability and more.
> 
> *The QCT has already raised eyebrows for promoting online coaching company BetterUp, which employs Prince Harry as its chief impact officer. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had been president and vice president of QCT before they stepped down from royal duties a year ago.
> 
> Now it has entered a partnership with BetterUp and runs testimonials on its website describing Prince Harry’s business as ‘truly phenomenal’, the Observer reported.*
> 
> David Haigh, chief executive of London consultancy Brand Finance, said the QCT should have carried out a careful due diligence process to ensure the charitable partnership was appropriate.
> 
> He said: ‘Any company which is supported by the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust is going to gain credibility, and this will be of economic value.’
> 
> *But QCT told the Mail the BetterUp deal was ‘a generous one-off gift from Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, as the Former President of QCT, in order to support young people’. Although BetterUp is providing support to young leaders for free at the QCT, it usually charges up to £360 per month for its virtual coaching services. *It comes after the QCT made supermodel *Naomi Campbell its first Global Ambassador last year, despite her own charity, Fashion for Relief (FFR), being under investigation.
> 
> The Charity Commission is probing allegations that FFR spent £1.6million on a fundraising gala in Cannes, France, yet gave only £5,000 to good causes over the same period. *
> 
> The Queen launched the QCT in 2018. The next year it was given a one-off £2.7million donation from the Queen’s Trust, which then closed.
> 
> But the latest figures show it is eating into that donation to keep afloat, with total expenditures last year at £1.5million despite the small amounts raised.
> 
> A spokesman for the charity said: ‘The impact of Covid-19 has been felt across the charitable sector – and impacted fundraising for many – QCT included.’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal charity spent 98% of its cash paying 10 staff
> 
> 
> The Queen 's Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wow - I find this really shocking.  To be so closely associated with the Queen and to be basically taking money under false pretenses.  Who is going to want to contribute to a charity that does this?  And if you can’t trust the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, who can you trust?  I hope that there is an investigation done on where all this money went and who authorized it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The Nefl*xes are former president and vice president of this charity.
> What a mess!
> 
> *Royal charity spent 98% of its cash raised in one year on paying just 10 staff, probe reveals*
> 
> _A Royal charity that has partnered with Prince Harry’s life coaching firm paid its staff 98 per cent of the money it raised in a year, the Daily Mail can reveal.
> 
> *The Queen**’s Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.*
> 
> Over half of the cash went to its five most senior executives who earned £420,000 between them, Charity Commission accounts show.
> 
> The figures raise questions over how much emphasis the organisation, with the Queen as patron, puts on charitable endeavours.
> 
> The QCT was set up to provide funding, tools and support for young Commonwealth leaders to help them transform their communities across agriculture, education, employability and more.
> 
> *The QCT has already raised eyebrows for promoting online coaching company BetterUp, which employs Prince Harry as its chief impact officer. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had been president and vice president of QCT before they stepped down from royal duties a year ago.
> 
> Now it has entered a partnership with BetterUp and runs testimonials on its website describing Prince Harry’s business as ‘truly phenomenal’, the Observer reported.*
> 
> David Haigh, chief executive of London consultancy Brand Finance, said the QCT should have carried out a careful due diligence process to ensure the charitable partnership was appropriate.
> 
> He said: ‘Any company which is supported by the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust is going to gain credibility, and this will be of economic value.’
> 
> *But QCT told the Mail the BetterUp deal was ‘a generous one-off gift from Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, as the Former President of QCT, in order to support young people’. Although BetterUp is providing support to young leaders for free at the QCT, it usually charges up to £360 per month for its virtual coaching services. *It comes after the QCT made supermodel *Naomi Campbell its first Global Ambassador last year, despite her own charity, Fashion for Relief (FFR), being under investigation.
> 
> The Charity Commission is probing allegations that FFR spent £1.6million on a fundraising gala in Cannes, France, yet gave only £5,000 to good causes over the same period. *
> 
> The Queen launched the QCT in 2018. The next year it was given a one-off £2.7million donation from the Queen’s Trust, which then closed.
> 
> But the latest figures show it is eating into that donation to keep afloat, with total expenditures last year at £1.5million despite the small amounts raised.
> 
> A spokesman for the charity said: ‘The impact of Covid-19 has been felt across the charitable sector – and impacted fundraising for many – QCT included.’_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal charity spent 98% of its cash paying 10 staff
> 
> 
> The Queen 's Commonwealth Trust (QCT) brought in £796,106 from donors but paid out £787,314 in staff costs to its ten employees in the 12 months to March 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Chanbal said:


> This is not right!
> *Prince Harry renews lease for £2.4m UK home to allow him to deputise if Queen is ill*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry renews lease for £2.4m UK home so he can deputise if Queen is ill
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle lived at Frogmore Cottage before moving to Canada and then the US in 2020 - but the Duke of Sussex recently insisted the UK is "still home"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I’m disappointed but I’m not surprised. 

This all adds to my general thesis that Harry the half baked prince and the switch witch’s grandstanding and lies couldn’t bring down the monarchy (and,  in fact, I think they’ve enjoyed the renewed interest and publicity) but the couple’s continued involvement in shady dealings seemingly with the support of the family, (not to mention A’s case) could well be a turning point for a lot of former supporters.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Not to get too much into talking about Covid on this thread but it does strike me as a bit ‘one rule for thee and another for me’  that  the queen can  just carry on working even with a positive diagnosis whereas the current council policy at my community centre is they aren’t allowed to come in with any cold symptoms even with a negative test.



I understood this as working from her home office? This is after all the woman who refused an exemption the government offered her for Philip's funeral. 

I mean, I worked from the ICU once the pain killers kicked in (sometime around day 3)


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I understood this as working from her home office? This is after all the woman who refused an exemption the government offered her for Philip's funeral.
> 
> I mean, I worked from the ICU once the pain killers kicked in (sometime around day 3)


I sort of knew P’s funeral was going to come up when I commented on this. To me, that whole story and the way it was reported as a sign of the Queen’s virtue is exactly the double standard I am noticing. There’s been numerous examples of peasant class people in U.K. who have been prevented from seeing their dying relatives at all, bodies that had no funerals at all, medical care cancelled and various other small and large cruelties yet the story that’s being reported is how heroic this one individual was that she declined to have a slightly less grandiose funeral than she was ENTITLED  to have for no reason other than her bloodline.

I’m not saying she herself is a bad person but the idea that her and this family are exceptional or heroic is the PR swill I’m not munching.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m not saying she herself is a bad person but the idea that her and this family are exceptional or heroic is the PR swill I’m not munching.



_Wordle!  PR swill_, indeed. Thank you for saying it


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I sort of knew P’s funeral was going to come up when I commented on this. To me, that whole story and the way it was reported as a sign of the Queen’s virtue is exactly the double standard I am noticing. There’s been numerous examples of peasant class people in U.K. who have been prevented from seeing their dying relatives at all, bodies that had no funerals at all, medical care cancelled and various other small and large cruelties yet the story that’s being reported is how heroic this one individual was that she declined to have a slightly less grandiose funeral than she was ENTITLED  to have for no reason other than her bloodline.
> 
> I’m not saying she herself is a bad person but the idea that her and this family are exceptional or heroic is the PR swill I’m not munching.


I think it goes with the territory. Royalty, celebrities, even the local beau, are placed on pedestals. Most of them have clay feet. Methane's stans have put her on so high a pedestal that they cannot even see her feet  

I do admire TQ's father. I think it took courage to stay in London during the war. One guy I dated was upset when we broke up. I didn't have the heart to tell him that I broke up with him because he was a coward. When we were discussing what ifs, he said he would abandon even his own parents and flee on the first flight he could board if our country was invaded. Any fondness I had for him died a swift death.


----------



## marietouchet

It is a holiday, so I don’t have to rush to the computer for work , lucky me - I work from home … trying to find time to walk the dog , clean kitchen dishes, start laundry and worry if I need to reschedule Wed appointment since ice storm is expected … medical exercises for bad back … not complaining … just lots of balls to juggle 
then I read H’s recipe for success - it sounds so EASY  - send kid to school, put the other one down to a nap, and take time for mindfulness
Wish I had staff to clear my schedule for ME TIME every morning 

as one commercial said, it is not exercise that is hard, it is getting to the gym that is hard


----------



## rose60610

Luvbolide said:


> Wow - I find this really shocking.  To be so closely associated with the Queen and to be basically taking money under false pretenses.  *Who is going to want to contribute to a charity that does this?  And if you can’t trust the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, who can you trust? * I hope that there is an investigation done on where all this money went and who authorized it.



Exactly. This is going to turn off a lot of people.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> He can insist all he wants that the UK is still home, but TW will never consider the UK her home. My guess is it will be the breaking point for them. Will it be the good old "irreconcilable differences", or the more modern "conscious uncoupling"? Time will tell....





xincinsin said:


> Maybe not "home" but I'm sure someone as superficial as TW will love having multiple addresses across the globe.


My 2 cents:
TW will be happy to consider home whatever city/country brings millions of dollars, pounds, euros…to her companies/ charitable foundations. Also, there is plenty of space in her big heart for multiple homes.


----------



## Annawakes

What a waste of time and resources this lawsuit is!!


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m disappointed but I’m not surprised.
> 
> This all adds to my general thesis that Harry the half baked prince and the switch witch’s grandstanding and lies couldn’t bring down the monarchy (and,  in fact, I think they’ve enjoyed the renewed interest and publicity) but the couple’s continued involvement in shady dealings seemingly with the support of the family, (not to mention A’s case) could well be a turning point for a lot of former supporters.


I feel sorry for QE, she doesn't need to have her name associated to this. However, I don't understand what the Palace is waiting for to fix this mess.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> They will just use the same excuse as they did for Sussex Royal: Oh, we weren't really involved. It's run by the board.





Luvbolide said:


> Wow - I find this really shocking.  To be so closely associated with the Queen and to be basically taking money under false pretenses.  Who is going to want to contribute to a charity that does this?  And if you can’t trust the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, who can you trust?  I hope that there is an investigation done on where all this money went and who authorized it.


Why was the establishment of Archwhatever such a priority for the Netfl*xes?

According to newspapers, it raised less than $50K in 2020, which indicates that the Nefl*xes did not contribute to it with significant money from their multi-million dollar deals and Hazz's inheritances.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I think it goes with the territory. Royalty, celebrities, even the local beau, are placed on pedestals. Most of them have clay feet. Methane's stans have put her on so high a pedestal that they cannot even see her feet
> 
> I do admire TQ's father. I think it took courage to stay in London during the war. One guy I dated was upset when we broke up. I didn't have the heart to tell him that I broke up with him because he was a coward. When we were discussing what ifs, he said he would abandon even his own parents and flee on the first flight he could board if our country was invaded. Any fondness I had for him died a swift death.


While being a coward is definitely not attractive I am kind of impressed by his self-awareness. Many people tend to picture themselves as the outspoken heroes like good old H&M, of course, who think they ended racism and global warming and are just doing their victory lap on Afghanistan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QE is an admirable woman and doesn't deserve what the Netfl*xes are doing to her.  











						'Thinner and frailer' Queen is closely monitored after catching Covid
					

Her Majesty will be 'carefully monitored' this week with staff taking a 'sensible' approach after Buckingham Palace yesterday said she had tested positive for coronavirus.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> While being a coward is definitely not attractive I am kind of impressed by his self-awareness. Many people tend to picture themselves as the outspoken heroes like good old H&M, of course, who think they ended racism and global warming and are just doing their victory lap on Afghanistan.


Hmm, not sure if he was "self-aware". He was trying to impress me with his survival instinct, I think, but all that went through my mind was: if he can abandon his parents, he would certainly abandon his wife and kids too. Definitely a courtship epic fail.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> QE is an admirable woman and doesn't deserve what the Netfl*xes are doing to her.
> 
> View attachment 5333523
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Thinner and frailer' Queen is closely monitored after catching Covid
> 
> 
> Her Majesty will be 'carefully monitored' this week with staff taking a 'sensible' approach after Buckingham Palace yesterday said she had tested positive for coronavirus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I hope Harry has seen the recent pictures of her.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Why was the establishment of Archwhatever such a priority for the Netfl*xes?
> 
> According to newspapers, it raised less than $50K in 2020, which indicates that the Nefl*xes did not contribute to it with significant money from their multi-million dollar deals and Hazz's inheritances.


Money laundry? Diversion tactic? Tax haven?
Their setting up a network of more than 10 companies makes me think that they want shells to route funds through so that any traceability is muddied.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope Harry has seen the recent pictures of her.



Harry is only thinking about Harry now. And Meghan. He is that consumed in his own self-portrayal of victimhood.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Absolutley Hazzie is only thinking of himself.  Of course he is. This is exactly what his (selfish) parents and other relatives taught and allowed him to do.  No one should be surprised at that. A baby is not born thinking “I am special because I am royal so I deserve protection”.  That nonsense is learned behavior.  Just my 2 cents, not adjusted for inflation.


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


> This!




Put me down for Team Anne!!


----------



## Chanbal

I've no words…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a reminder what Hazz thought way back when - everyone should understand that he has almost zero love for England.  He said it, he meant it. Now, QE needs to call Parliament asap.  Shame on Charles for not handling this years ago.  MM had nothing to do with _this_.


----------



## Silverplume

Chanbal said:


> I've no words…




This should be emailed/IMd/DMd/texted/sent by telegram to Hazzy every single day.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Little Miss Forgetful will grace the UK with her presence…



I think (and Brits please correct me if you disagree) if she was bothered my negative tabloid attention before, it's gonna be worse if she goes back in the future.  and a lot of Brits won't welcome her either.  She still has some loyal fans - like the author/WOC I saw talking about her a while ago - but not sure she has enough of that to outweigh the negative.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I sort of knew P’s funeral was going to come up when I commented on this. To me, that whole story and the way it was reported as a sign of the Queen’s virtue is exactly the double standard I am noticing. There’s been numerous examples of peasant class people in U.K. who have been prevented from seeing their dying relatives at all, bodies that had no funerals at all, medical care cancelled and various other small and large cruelties yet the story that’s being reported is how heroic this one individual was that she declined to have a slightly less grandiose funeral than she was ENTITLED  to have for no reason other than her bloodline.
> 
> I’m not saying she herself is a bad person but the idea that her and this family are exceptional or heroic is the PR swill I’m not munching.



I get what you are saying, but also: there are tons of people who would have just accepted the privilege bestowed upon them, no questions asked.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope Harry has seen the recent pictures of her.



Why would he care. His grandfather was actively dying and he sat on Oprah gazing admiringly at his wife spewing the most outrageous lies about his family.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope Harry has seen the recent pictures of her.


He didn't seem to care when pictures of a frail looking Philip coming out of the hospital made the press, so I doubt these move him much.  Unless of course, he thinks she'll pass, then security will be out the window as he races to his "forever home", the UK to show the Queen how much he cares before her will is read.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles "Duchess Meghan or Queen Elizabeth...who is the most influential royal?" Are these people for real  BTW I didn't open the article to read the verdict.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Does H renewing a lease in the UK have anything to do with his resident status in the US? He can't be on a diplomat visa..because he isn't one.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German magazine titles "Duchess Meghan or Queen Elizabeth...who is the most influential royal?" Are these people for real  BTW I didn't open the article to read the verdict.



No comment


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I've no words…



Picture caption should read: Lady Fame-Whore riding her Harry-Ass to fame and fortune.


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> He didn't seem to care when pictures of a frail looking Philip coming out of the hospital made the press, so I doubt these move him much.  Unless of course, he thinks she'll pass, then security will be out the window as he races to his "forever home", the UK to show the Queen how much he cares before her will is read.


Don’t forget the picture of her holding her namesake!


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Maybe not "home" but I'm sure someone as superficial as TW will love having multiple addresses across the globe.


Well if rumors are true about selling the current one for something more "manageable", I don't see that happening.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley Hazzie is only thinking of himself.  Of course he is. This is exactly what his (selfish) parents and other relatives taught and allowed him to do.  No one should be surprised at that. A baby is not born thinking “I am special because I am royal so I deserve protection”.  That nonsense is learned behavior.  Just my 2 cents, not adjusted for inflation.


Same applies to TW. I think her parents treated her as a special snowflake, as so many have in recent history. Now get off my lawn!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley Hazzie is only thinking of himself.  Of course he is. This is exactly what his (selfish) parents and other relatives taught and allowed him to do.  No one should be surprised at that. A baby is not born thinking “I am special because I am royal so I deserve protection”.  That nonsense is learned behavior.  Just my 2 cents, not adjusted for inflation.


Learned from which relatives, I'm wondering. Diana and Fergie? Diana's butler? Andrew his fellow spare? Do narcs have something different about them that makes them react differently to the same stimuli? Otherwise why would there be so many stories of a narc sibling making trouble for his/her brothers and sisters?

I think the BRF did him a disservice by "managing" his image so that he escaped censure for his poor academic & military performance, party lifestyle and alleged drugs and drink. Spoilt brat - they are the Dudley Dursleys of Monteshitshow.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Well if rumors are true about selling the current one for something more "manageable", I don't see that happening.


There are also contradictory stories that they are selling because they need a bigger place. I'm not even going to speculate which version is true. I'll just wait for the moving vans.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> There are also contradictory stories that they are selling because they need a bigger place. I'm not even going to speculate which version is true. I'll just wait for the moving vans.


How could a family of four need more than nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms, give or take?


----------



## Aimee3

charlottawill said:


> How could a family of four need more than nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms, give or take?


Well they probably do need
MOre bathrooms. They are so full of S(&7 that perhaps 16 can’t contain it all. 
I’m watching The Gilded Age (Julien Fellowes) and TW (like the gilded age character who wants to be accepted into society at all costs) might be thinking she needs a huge ballroom to entertain all her Hollywood good friends…the ones who won’t attend her party if invited.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> There are also contradictory stories that they are selling because they need a bigger place. I'm not even going to speculate which version is true. I'll just wait for the moving vans.


Moving vans?  That would be necessary if the had anything to move.  I think that a U-Haul will suffice.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Well they probably do need
> MOre bathrooms. They are so full of S(&7 that perhaps 16 can’t contain it all.
> I’m watching The Gilded Age (Julien Fellowes) and TW (like the gilded age character who wants to be accepted into society at all costs) might be thinking she needs a huge ballroom to entertain all her Hollywood good friends…the ones who won’t attend her party if invited.


Off topic, but that Russell woman is easy to dislike.  Remember when Meghan was house hunting and said she need a conference room for business meetings?  Covid pretty much put an end to that need, but in any event, she has a lot of bathrooms where she probably took most of her conferences.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> How could a family of four need more than nine bedrooms and sixteen bathrooms, give or take?


In one of my wilder fantasies, I imagine them having themed rooms because a woke couple like them must be enjoying an exciting nightlife. I also imagine them cavorting in a castle-themed dwelling like this hotel below. Although not mentioned in the link, the first time I came across a description of the hotel, it mentioned that it had a "naughty" room with leather-covered benches.



			https://www.agoda.com/en-sg/sato-castle-motel/hotel/taipei-tw.html


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Moving vans?  That would be necessary if the had anything to move.  I think that a U-Haul will suffice.


Armoured van? There were stories that she made off with some valuables.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> In one of my wilder fantasies, I imagine them having themed rooms because a woke couple like them must be enjoying an exciting nightlife. I also imagine them cavorting in a castle-themed dwelling like this hotel below. Although not mentioned in the link, the first time I came across a description of the hotel, it mentioned that it had a "naughty" room with leather-covered benches.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.agoda.com/en-sg/sato-castle-motel/hotel/taipei-tw.html


I'm not singling you out.  You're just the most recent one using "woke" as an apparently dirty word.

Here is the Merriam Webster definition:

*QUOTE
Definition of woke*
(Entry 1 of 2)
chiefly US slang
*: *aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)But we will only succeed if we reject the growing pressure to retreat into cynicism and hopelessness. … We have a moral obligation to "stay woke," take a stand and be active; challenging injustices and racism in our communities and fighting hatred and discrimination wherever it rises.— Barbara Lee… argued that … Brad Pitt is not only woke, but the wokest man in Hollywood … because he uses his status—and his production company Plan B—to create space for artists of color, with such films as _12 Years a Slave, Selma_, and the upcoming film _Moonlight_.— Giselle Defares

UNQUOTE

While I'm very much in agreement that some people - and certainly H&M are hypocrites, being "woke" in itself isn't a bad thing IMO and I think some people may be using it as code for "liberal" (since we are not allowed to talk politics here)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> In one of my wilder fantasies, I imagine them having themed rooms because a woke couple like them must be enjoying an exciting nightlife. I also imagine them cavorting in a castle-themed dwelling like this hotel below. Although not mentioned in the link, the first time I came across a description of the hotel, it mentioned that it had a "naughty" room with leather-covered benches.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.agoda.com/en-sg/sato-castle-motel/hotel/taipei-tw.html


They can go to The Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, which is much closer to SB.  The Inn has been known for decades for the theme rooms and is a popular honeymoon spot.









						110 Unique Guest Rooms — Madonna Inn | World-Famous California Hotel
					

Browse our collection of uniquely themed guest rooms - no two rooms are alike!




					www.madonnainn.com
				




The Love Nest




or The Cave Room





The tackiness is part of the charm,  Meg should love it,


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> In one of my wilder fantasies, I imagine them having themed rooms because a woke couple like them must be enjoying an exciting nightlife. I also imagine them cavorting in a castle-themed dwelling like this hotel below. Although not mentioned in the link, the first time I came across a description of the hotel, it mentioned that it had a "naughty" room with leather-covered benches.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.agoda.com/en-sg/sato-castle-motel/hotel/taipei-tw.html



Check out this place. The stuff of nightmares, and an easy drive from Montecito 



> https://www.madonnainn.com/viewrooms


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> They can go to The Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, which is much closer to SB.  The Inn has been known for decades for the theme rooms and is a popular honeymoon spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 110 Unique Guest Rooms — Madonna Inn | World-Famous California Hotel
> 
> 
> Browse our collection of uniquely themed guest rooms - no two rooms are alike!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.madonnainn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Love Nest
> View attachment 5334021
> 
> 
> 
> or The Cave Room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tackiness is part of the charm,  Meg should love it,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5334022


Haha beat me to it


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> They can go to The Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, which is much closer to SB.  The Inn has been known for decades for the theme rooms and is a popular honeymoon spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 110 Unique Guest Rooms — Madonna Inn | World-Famous California Hotel
> 
> 
> Browse our collection of uniquely themed guest rooms - no two rooms are alike!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.madonnainn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Love Nest
> View attachment 5334021
> 
> 
> 
> or The Cave Room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tackiness is part of the charm,  Meg should love it,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5334022


Elvis?!  Is that you in there??!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I'm not singling you out.  You're just the most recent one using "woke" as an apparently dirty word.
> 
> Here is the Merriam Webster definition:
> 
> *QUOTE
> Definition of woke*
> (Entry 1 of 2)
> chiefly US slang
> *: *aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)But we will only succeed if we reject the growing pressure to retreat into cynicism and hopelessness. … We have a moral obligation to "stay woke," take a stand and be active; challenging injustices and racism in our communities and fighting hatred and discrimination wherever it rises.— Barbara Lee… argued that … Brad Pitt is not only woke, but the wokest man in Hollywood … because he uses his status—and his production company Plan B—to create space for artists of color, with such films as _12 Years a Slave, Selma_, and the upcoming film _Moonlight_.— Giselle Defares
> 
> UNQUOTE
> 
> While I'm very much in agreement that some people - and certainly H&M are hypocrites, being "woke" in itself isn't a bad thing IMO and I think some people may be using it as code for "liberal" (since we are not allowed to talk politics here)


Thanks for the definition. Not using "woke" as a dirty word, just a descriptor since that appears to be how they perceive themselves and their target audience. Maybe I should have used the quotes, since I may have used it sarcastically 

ETA I'm not against anyone who proclaims to be woke. My mum used to say: one type of rice, eaten by 100 different types of people. I am very tolerant of views that are different from mine, although I also subscribe to "Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins." My ex-boss and some colleagues used to tell me that I should learn to school my facial expressions better, because I looked immensely incredulous when listening to narcs spout their lies. They called it "being tactful"


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> I seriously doubt there would be any quid pro quo going on. Stan moves in a completely different realm and I can't see him needing _anything_ that the Harkles could _possibly_ have to offer. Could he be interested in Butter Cups touchy-feely crap? I'm sure he has people for that.
> While he contributed to Will's project it's probably just one of many things he has going on. I could see him giving Charles and  Will more attention but nothing really meaningful.
> 
> You didn't mention the mint juleps at the Derby. Those suckas will kick your azz
> First time there I went in a day or so early to pick up my credentials. I downed 2 or 3 of 'em. Next thing I couldn't find my stuff and had to shamefully go back to the office for replacements. They laughed and said I was the third person that had happened to that day.


HA HA HA .. yup, I hear 'ya on that front .. worked for one of the booze vendors (and mind you, I was not an employee but a Management Consultant to the CEO of the company) .. and figured that that Irish part of me would hold me in shape in regards to those Mint Juleps!  Boy-oh-boy was I SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WRONG; thank god that the CEO thought it pretty darn funny that his "Yankee Lady" (he loved to call me this) was bombed off her butt!  So, they brought over a lot of greasy food and iced tea to "make me feel better" .. yeah, okay .. barfed my brains out most of the evening!  Needless to say, the next day?? .. I could not even SMELL those Mint Juleps lest I get sick all over again (I'm weird like that - if I get sick on something, even the smell will get to me).  I have not had a Mint Julep ever again .. and this was a very long time ago!


----------



## bag-mania

Oh yes. That Kentucky Bourbon is excellent but it can sure do a number on you. Always drink it carefully, especially when it’s sweetened up with sugar and mint.


----------



## wisconsin

papertiger said:


> From the 'lover' of the couple the DMoS - I have edited out the pics:
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: How Prince Harry tried to keep his legal fight with the government over police bodyguards a SECRET... then - just minutes after the story broke - his PR machine tried to put a positive spin on the dispute*
> 
> *Prince Harry sought far-reaching confidentiality, High Court documents show *
> *He had tried to keep details of his legal battle about police protection private  *
> *However the Home Office argued for transparency over the legal documents*
> By KATE MANSEY FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY
> 
> PUBLISHED: 22:26, 19 February 2022 | UPDATED: 00:42, 20 February 2022
> 
> 
> Prince Harry tried to keep details of his legal battle to reinstate his police protection secret from the public, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> High Court documents show he sought a far-reaching confidentiality order on documents and witness statements surrounding his case against the Government.
> But the Home Office argued for transparency, saying 'there must be a sufficiently good reason, in the wider public interest, to justify the departure from open justice that such an order involves'.
> 
> Prince Harry tried to keep details of his legal battle to reinstate his police protection secret from the public.
> Both sides then agreed that some papers would be made public with the Home Office agreeing to carry out a 'confidentiality exercise' to determine what would be kept secret, even though it caused 'an unprecedented expenditure of time and resources'.
> When The Mail on Sunday last month revealed that Harry was suing the Government, his spin-doctors swung into action, briefing journalists that Harry was being denied the right to pay for bodyguards.
> It led to inaccurate reports across the media, such as the BBC headline: 'Prince Harry in legal fight to pay for UK police protection.'
> *As documents lodged at the High Court last week show, no such offer to pay was made in the Prince's initial 'pre-action' letters to the Home Office, suggesting he expected British taxpayers to cover it.*
> 
> The revelations are a crushing rebuttal to Harry's initial public statement that implied he had always been willing to foot the bill.
> Nor did he offer to pay when he visited the UK last June to unveil a statue to his mother, Princess Diana.
> Home Office lawyers state that it was only in later correspondence that the offer was made.
> That led to fury last night that aides acting for Harry sought to confuse the mainstream media's response to the story, ironic given the Prince now has a role with a Silicon Valley firm tackling 'misinformation' online.
> As royal author David McClure, tweeted: 'Once more confusion about the accuracy of messages coming out of the Sussex camp. First Harry offers to pay, then when he visits the UK, he does not.'
> The Duke launched his claim in September, more than 18 months after the Government's RAVEC (Royal and VIP Executive Committee) decided he would be stripped of his full state-funded security.
> 
> But court papers reveal that Harry still maintains 'exceptional status', which means he could be afforded protection depending on the nature of his visits, assessed on a 'case-by-case basis'.
> Harry argues that 'while his role within the institution has changed, his profile as a member of the Royal Family has not. Nor has the threat to him and his family.'
> *Yet his initial bid to get the decision overturned did not mention he would pay anything. Court papers say: 'The offer [to pay] is now advanced in the Claimant's witness statement...but notably was not advanced to RAVEC in June 2021 or in any of the pre-action correspondence which followed.'
> It adds that Harry's recent offer to pay is nevertheless 'irrelevant' because 'personal protective security by the police is not available on a privately financed basis, and RAVEC does not make decisions...on the basis that any financial contribution could be sought or obtained to pay for it'.*
> When The Mail on Sunday first broke the story, lawyers and PR advisers acting for the Sussexes sought to put their own gloss on it.
> 
> *The revelations are a crushing rebuttal to Harry's initial public statement that implied he had always been willing to foot the bill*
> Just six minutes after The Mail on Sunday's world exclusive, the Press Association, apparently having been given an advanced briefing by Harry's camp, reported that the Duke had offered 'to pay personally for UK police protection' and quoted his lawyer saying: 'He remains willing to cover the cost of security.'
> Omid Scobie, a journalist known to be supportive of the Sussexes, also appeared to have been briefed by Harry's team.
> Five hours after this newspaper told the Prince's aides we were planning a story, Scobie told his 76,000 Twitter followers: 'Prince Harry has applied for a judicial review of a Home Office decision not to allow him to personally pay for police protection for himself and his family when they are in the UK, a legal representative for the Sussexes confirms.'
> Harry's team only responded to this newspaper after this inaccurate version of events had been tweeted.
> Further questions were raised last night about the legal fight.
> Former Minister Norman Baker said: 'The police are not a commodity to buy like a pack of biscuits.
> If Harry has concerns about a specific threat, he should share those with the police.
> Otherwise, it is open to him to engage security staff on any visits. Personally, I would have thought he was at more risk in gun-mad America than over here.'
> *Home Office QC Robert Palmer has said that if Harry loses, the Government will 'seek the costs incurred in full, including those of the confidentiality exercise'.*


Gun- mad America is right. No safe places left unfortunately. And yes I am sticking to topic.


----------



## sdkitty

wisconsin said:


> Gun- mad America is right. No safe places left unfortunately. And yes I am sticking to topic.


they're always suing someone


----------



## shiba

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutley Hazzie is only thinking of himself.  Of course he is. This is exactly what his (selfish) parents and other relatives taught and allowed him to do.  No one should be surprised at that. A baby is not born thinking “I am special because I am royal so I deserve protection”.  That nonsense is learned behavior.  Just my 2 cents, not adjusted for inflation.


There was a story of him running away as a small child and when his handler finally found him in the streets, H replied back that he was safe because all the cars must stop for him because he is a Prince.


----------



## purseinsanity

shiba said:


> There was a story of him running away as a small child and when his handler finally found him in the streets, H replied back that he was safe because all the cars must stop for him because he is a Prince.


The delusion and grandiosity started early on.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> The delusion and grandiosity started early on.


But you can't blame a young child for thinking that if his earliest memories are of everyone bowing and curtsying to his family everywhere they go.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They can go to The Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, which is much closer to SB.  The Inn has been known for decades for the theme rooms and is a popular honeymoon spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 110 Unique Guest Rooms — Madonna Inn | World-Famous California Hotel
> 
> 
> Browse our collection of uniquely themed guest rooms - no two rooms are alike!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.madonnainn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Love Nest
> View attachment 5334021
> 
> 
> 
> or The Cave Room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tackiness is part of the charm,  Meg should love it,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5334022


Great idea, they can enjoy his-and-her toilet rooms…


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones in need of retail therapy…


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't have chance to watch this video yet, but the old man looks delighted!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> For the ones in need of retail therapy…



Their noses are just above where it would smell bad 
Oops, must be tactful. I mean, "fragrant", "aromatic"...


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


>




My beloved Sussex  I really do hope they lose their Sussex title: it's such a beautiful county and doesn't deserve to be associated with these two ungrateful spoiled brats!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Their noses are just above where it would smell bad
> Oops, must be tactful. I mean, "fragrant", "aromatic"...


How about "malodorous"?


----------



## Sophisticatted

xincinsin said:


> Their noses are just above where it would smell bad
> Oops, must be tactful. I mean, "fragrant", "aromatic"...



Dont worry.  She’s merched a spray for that.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The Cambridges have lots of fun events in March, the plates will be flying.


----------



## CarryOn2020

An aside:

Happy palindrome day! Once-in-a-lifetime Twosday Tuesday numbers line up to create 22.2.22 date that won't come around for another 200 years
    •    The date is also an ambigram, which means it's the same when digits reversed
    •    Social media was awash with excitement, with many pointing out other quirks


----------



## Chanbal

When will the COVID-19 pandemic end?


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't know about this. It happened in 2018, so prior joining this educational thread. 



_Samantha Markle's outspoken words about her half-sister Meghan Markle have landed her in some hot water.

According to The Times U.K., the police royalty and specialty protection unit put Samantha on what is called a "fixated persons list" due to her "reputational risk" on the royals.

*The Times reports that Meghan's personal officers spoke with Scotland Yard's Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) about Samantha and the consequences of what would happen if she tried to reach out to the Duchess of Sussex in person again*._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this. It happened in 2018, so prior joining this educational thread.
> 
> 
> 
> _Samantha Markle's outspoken words about her half-sister Meghan Markle have landed her in some hot water.
> 
> According to The Times U.K., the police royalty and specialty protection unit put Samantha on what is called a "fixated persons list" due to her "reputational risk" on the royals.
> 
> *The Times reports that Meghan's personal officers spoke with Scotland Yard's Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) about Samantha and the consequences of what would happen if she tried to reach out to the Duchess of Sussex in person again*._




From 2019:

*EXCLUSIVE: I am NOT 'fixated' on my sister Meghan - and here is the proof: Samantha Markle reveals her legal battle against 'smear' that she was on police list of dangers to the royals*

*Samantha Markle had faced claims she was on a list compiled by cops of 'fixated people' considered a danger to the royal family*
*She hired lawyers in London to demand the Metropolitan Police  - who guard the royals - hand over any information they held on her and was told there is none*
*Samantha, Meghan's half-sister who lives in Gloucester, Virginia, tells DailyMailTV: 'I'm pretty sure my sister knows that I'm not fixated'*
*She added: 'It was a horrible PR strategy - people have to be responsible and accountable. People can't get away with starting rumors like that'*
*The Metropolitan Police told Samantha in a letter that it had scoured files at the special center for monitoring stalkers and there was nothing on her*
*The Duchess of Sussex, 37, has started maternity leave from royal duties ahead of giving birth to her first child with Prince Harry *









						Meghan Markle's sister: I have proof I am not 'fixated' danger to her
					

Samantha Markle, 54, tells DailyMailTV that police in London have told her they do not have information on her in their files and she is not on a list of 'fixated' people who are threats to Meghan.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this. It happened in 2018, so prior joining this educational thread.
> 
> 
> 
> _Samantha Markle's outspoken words about her half-sister Meghan Markle have landed her in some hot water.
> 
> According to The Times U.K., the police royalty and specialty protection unit put Samantha on what is called a "fixated persons list" due to her "reputational risk" on the royals.
> 
> *The Times reports that Meghan's personal officers spoke with Scotland Yard's Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) about Samantha and the consequences of what would happen if she tried to reach out to the Duchess of Sussex in person again*._




Samantha will not be silenced. Although we haven't heard anything from her for about a year until now. I don't think her book did that well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> When will the COVID-19 pandemic end?




Not gonna lie, after glossing over Philip's health like they did (which I fully understand, it's not that they owe the public everything) I'll believe it when I see her emerge in good health.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Great idea, they can enjoy his-and-her toilet rooms…
> View attachment 5334132
> View attachment 5334130


I think you mean throne rooms


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know about this. It happened in 2018, so prior joining this educational thread.
> 
> 
> 
> _Samantha Markle's outspoken words about her half-sister Meghan Markle have landed her in some hot water.
> 
> According to The Times U.K., the police royalty and specialty protection unit put Samantha on what is called a "fixated persons list" due to her "reputational risk" on the royals.
> 
> *The Times reports that Meghan's personal officers spoke with Scotland Yard's Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) about Samantha and the consequences of what would happen if she tried to reach out to the Duchess of Sussex in person again*._




The woman is sick. And I don't mean Samantha.

ETA: just read that apparently it was untrue, but eh.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think the reason she was put on that list is because she and a tv crew showed up at the gates unannounced and demanded to see her sister.  IIRC.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

For all the security "concerns" they always have, why wasn't Samantha a "risk" to Harry while they were dating? But was only a risk to the whole BRF during the wedding and after they married? I'm no expert on private security, but my guess is that BRF private security could PROBABLY handle Samantha without her being put on The List. 

Let's discuss being "fixated". M&H are "fixated" on the illusion that they require tons of security. OK. From who? And why? They also seem to be FIXATED on their opinion that they are super important on the world stage despite the fact that they are not invited anywhere. They simply invite themselves. And when Meghan sends an olive oil cake, we MUST hear about it! This, from the people who brag about needing privacy and tons of security. 

The only ones who are "fixated" are M&H. They're fixated on how much money they can make no matter how dirty they have to be about lying about other people.


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Elvis?!  Is that you in there??!


Who me ?

The jungle room isn’t that tacky


----------



## Chanbal

As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## TC1

Can you imagine the glee Meghan would have making up a list to give to BP of everyone she considered a threat?


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Can you imagine the glee Meghan would have making up a list to give to BP of everyone she considered a threat?



Oh man, that would be a very long list. It would include everyone all the way back to the kid who knocked her down in 2nd grade.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.




I'm so surprised. Not.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> For all the security "concerns" they always have, why wasn't Samantha a "risk" to Harry while they were dating? But was only a risk to the whole BRF during the wedding and after they married? I'm no expert on private security, but my guess is that BRF private security could PROBABLY handle Samantha without her being put on The List.
> 
> Let's discuss being "fixated". M&H are "fixated" on the illusion that they require tons of security. OK. From who? And why? They also seem to be FIXATED on their opinion that they are super important on the world stage despite the fact that they are not invited anywhere. They simply invite themselves. And when Meghan sends an olive oil cake, we MUST hear about it! This, from the people who brag about needing privacy and tons of security.
> 
> The only ones who are "fixated" are M&H. They're fixated on how much money they can make no matter how dirty they have to be about lying about other people.


The fixation is that they maintain a media blitz about themselves.   They know they really don’t need the security it is just all about creating an aura of importance. That’s why he wants it in UK. He wants people to wonder who that person is in the Rolls who needs a bunch of other cars front and back in a motorcade.   If Harry really believes he needs protection, then they should just lock him up in a psych hospital.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Samantha will not be silenced. Although we haven't heard anything from her for about a year until now. I don't think her book did that well.


Perhaps a reflection on the fact that people don’t care about Meghan.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.




I'll give H&M security

 To the Tower


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.



Well, it was money better spent for the BRF than paying misc living expenses (private planes) for H&M. At least C invested in a crown/government owned building that stays in the UK


----------



## bag-mania

*PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE
WE DON'T BEEF WITH ALL THE ROYALS ...
We Had Real Beef With Princess Eugenie!!!*





*Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* got a taste of what they left behind in the U.K. ... because one of the royals made her way to the U.S. for a little chow and a little conversation.

*Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.






Backgrid
It seems Harry and Eugenie have a close connection ... closer than he has with some of the other royals, including his dad and his brother.






Harry took Eugenie to the Super Bowl the weekend before ... so it sure seems the 2 are pretty close.

They certainly have a U.K. connection ... Eugenie and Jack now live in Frogmore Cottage ... the same place Harry and Meghan lived before bolting England.

The dinner came on the heels of a grievance Harry had about the royals protecting his kids.  As we reported, Harry will not take *Archie* and *Lilibet *to the *Queen*'s Platinum Jubilee in June because the fam *refuses to provide security* for the kids.
So, in a way, dinner with Eugenie is like the mountain coming to Muhammed.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Well, it was money better spent for the BRF than paying misc living expenses (private planes) for H&M. At least C invested in a crown/government owned building that stays in the UK


Good point!  At least  Frog Cot is modernized and livable for some member of the family.   We will see how long Eugenie stays there.


----------



## bag-mania

Eugenie and family stayed with them a whole week! Maybe they will be moving to California too.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE
> WE DON'T BEEF WITH ALL THE ROYALS ...
> We Had Real Beef With Princess Eugenie!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* got a taste of what they left behind in the U.K. ... because one of the royals made her way to the U.S. for a little chow and a little conversation.
> 
> *Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Backgrid
> It seems Harry and Eugenie have a close connection ... closer than he has with some of the other royals, including his dad and his brother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry took Eugenie to the Super Bowl the weekend before ... so it sure seems the 2 are pretty close.
> 
> They certainly have a U.K. connection ... Eugenie and Jack now live in Frogmore Cottage ... the same place Harry and Meghan lived before bolting England.
> 
> The dinner came on the heels of a grievance Harry had about the royals protecting his kids.  As we reported, Harry will not take *Archie* and *Lilibet *to the *Queen*'s Platinum Jubilee in June because the fam *refuses to provide security* for the kids.
> So, in a way, dinner with Eugenie is like the mountain coming to Muhammed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


OMG!  If that is Meghan, she looks awful!  Wearing another circus tent, so much for my thinking she’s on a strict diet.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Eugenie and family stayed with them a whole week! Maybe they will be moving to California too.


E and J paid rent to the Harkles that was less than a hotel. Kidding. Not kidding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I'll give H&M security
> 
> To the Tower


They can have the Anne Boleyn suite.


----------



## Annawakes

Yikes.  They made sure to stage plenty of wide-open mouth laughs.  “Look at us!!!  We’re having so much fun!!!!”


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> OMG!  If that is Meghan, she looks awful!  Wearing another circus tent, so much for my thinking she’s on a strict diet.



It's hard to tell what is going on under there. My guess is she was wearing a wire to get info for the book.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Yikes.  They made sure to stage plenty of wide-open mouth laughs.  “Look at us!!!  We’re having so much fun!!!!”



Staged is the word. The photos are by Backgrid, the pap agency celebrities call when they want to do a pap walk, or in this case, a pap dinner.

Notice how Harry was instructed to look enthralled by Meghan's every move!


----------



## bag-mania

Actually now that I really look at it, Harry looks more enthralled by Eugenie. It still doesn't take away from the fact that celebrities don't get outdoor seating at fancy restaurants and have paps taking shots of them through the plastic sheeting, unless they really WANT it.


----------



## bag-mania

What the ????

*Meghan Markle's Giorgio Armani gown worn during bombshell Oprah interview is set to go on display at the Fashion Museum in Bath after being named the 2021 'dress of the year'*

*The black and white silk dress worn by Meghan Markle during her bombshell Oprah interview is set to go display at the Fashion Museum in Bath this year *
*Duchess wore  black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's SS22 Cruise Collection*
*Visitors to Bath's Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the dress as past of the : 'A History of Fashion in 100 Objects' exhibition*
In the biggest royal interview for decades, Meghan made claims about racism within the royal family, saying members of the Firm were worried about how 'dark' their child's skin would be.

The Duchess of Sussex also claimed Kate Middleton made her cry before she married Harry in a row over flowergirl dresses, while Harry said his father Charles stopped taking his calls after he began 'taking matters into his own hands'. 

Viewed by an estimate 60 million viewers across the world, it became one of the defining pop-cultural moments of 2021, the highly anticipated two-hour television interview aired in nearly 70 countries.








The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection, which is still available to buy in the US.

It's well known that members of the Royal family often use outfits to send a message through their choice of style, colour or motif. 

Experts speculated the Duchess chose a dress with a lotus flower design due to the flower's symbolic association with rebirth, self-regeneration and spiritual enlightenment, and its ability to flourish despite seemingly challenging conditions.

Visitors to the Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the famous dress for themselves when it goes on display as the final item in the headline exhibition, A History of Fashion in 100 Objects.

Each year, the Fashion Museum invites a top name from the fashion industry to select a Dress of the Year that encapsulates the prevailing mood of fashion, represents the past year, and captures the imagination.

This year's selectors are Dazed magazine's Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton. The pair's Dress of Hope was selected as Dress of the Year 2020, and they went on to have a monumental year, with Kamara appointed Editor-in-Chief of Dazed and Wrighton appointed Art Director. 

Kamara was also honoured at the 2021 British Fashion Awards, winning the Isabella Blow Award for Fashion Creator.

Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton said: 'In today's hyper-stylised pop culture, the Dress of the Year now has the potential to also be 'meme of the year' and we both latched upon Meghan and Harry's now iconic interview with Oprah as the definitive anti-establishment moment that will forever endure in the British collective consciousness.

'Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a divine pregnancy, framed the Duchess in black against the bountiful landscaping of Tyler Perry's Hollywood garden. 

'This look now, through sheer association with a viral television moment, is firmly engrained in our pop culture psyche.'

Rosemary Harden, Fashion Museum Manager, said: 'This is a fabulous addition to the Fashion Museum collection. There are moments in history that are all about the dress and Meghan's interview with Oprah was just such an occasion. 

'The softly structured Armani dress with beautiful appliquéd lotus flower motif was part of a carefully curated look, guaranteed to send messages, and to imprint itself in our consciousness time and time again. 

'Thank you to Ibrahim and Gareth for this landmark selection for the Dress of the Year Collection, and to Armani for most generously gifting the dress to the Museum.'

Councillor Dine Romero, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Communities and Culture at Bath & North East Somerset Council, said: 'We're delighted that this iconic dress will be added to the Fashion Museum collection to represent a key moment of 2021. 

'We look forward to seeing it on display at the Museum, where local residents and visitors will be able to admire it up-close.'









						Meghan Markle's Oprah dress set to go on display at the Fashion Museum
					

The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> OMG!  If that is Meghan, she looks awful!  Wearing another circus tent, so much for my thinking she’s on a strict diet.



So, no body makeover?   Gosh, this is another level of awful.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## bag-mania

It looks like something her friend Ellen DeGeneres would wear, only Ellen's would fit better.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Annawakes said:


> Yikes.  They made sure to stage plenty of wide-open mouth laughs.  “Look at us!!!  We’re having so much fun!!!!”


It’s so contrived and fake!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Good point!  At least  Frog Cot is modernized and livable for some member of the family.   We will see how long Eugenie stays there.


The whole thing about E & Frog Cot have been sketchy at best

E has digs at Kensington Palace so she does not live at FC full time, I guess FC is her country house - near Grandmum and daddy ? 
Stories that E lives in one wing of FC only ... what is that all about ???? 
Is she paying rent to H? to the crown ?? Why did she get it, rather than say Beatrice???

And the 2M pounds of FC reno ... another fuzzy story ...
H&M moved in just before A was born, and were gone in how many months ????  while feuding with the BRF, and barely surviving while on a trip to Africa ...
I dont doubt the place needs/needed major reno, but it takes time .... to draw plans, pick contractor, get PLANS APPROVED - the building is min Class II historical - that is slow stuff 

H&M moved out before the reno could possibly have been completed ... Was some of it cancelled??? 

How come no one has an UPDATED picture of FC post reno? After the new coat of paint ???


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> An aside:
> 
> Happy palindrome day! Once-in-a-lifetime Twosday Tuesday numbers line up to create 22.2.22 date that won't come around for another 200 years
> •    The date is also an ambigram, which means it's the same when digits reversed
> •    Social media was awash with excitement, with many pointing out other quirks



My  favorite was Pi Day  3.14.15


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, no body makeover?   Gosh, this is another level of awful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5334600


Is her husband not permitted to be photographed at these staged dinners?
I just see H & M looking like open mouthed guppies


----------



## lanasyogamama

There is no way anyone wears their jacket over their shoulders like that if they’re trying to eat food, unless they think it will look good in a picture


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.




doesn’t this mean, after all, that the UK public paid for it?



bag-mania said:


> What the ????
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Giorgio Armani gown worn during bombshell Oprah interview is set to go on display at the Fashion Museum in Bath after being named the 2021 'dress of the year'*
> 
> *The black and white silk dress worn by Meghan Markle during her bombshell Oprah interview is set to go display at the Fashion Museum in Bath this year *
> *Duchess wore  black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's SS22 Cruise Collection*
> *Visitors to Bath's Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the dress as past of the : 'A History of Fashion in 100 Objects' exhibition*
> In the biggest royal interview for decades, Meghan made claims about racism within the royal family, saying members of the Firm were worried about how 'dark' their child's skin would be.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex also claimed Kate Middleton made her cry before she married Harry in a row over flowergirl dresses, while Harry said his father Charles stopped taking his calls after he began 'taking matters into his own hands'.
> 
> Viewed by an estimate 60 million viewers across the world, it became one of the defining pop-cultural moments of 2021, the highly anticipated two-hour television interview aired in nearly 70 countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection, which is still available to buy in the US.
> 
> It's well known that members of the Royal family often use outfits to send a message through their choice of style, colour or motif.
> 
> Experts speculated the Duchess chose a dress with a lotus flower design due to the flower's symbolic association with rebirth, self-regeneration and spiritual enlightenment, and its ability to flourish despite seemingly challenging conditions.
> 
> Visitors to the Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the famous dress for themselves when it goes on display as the final item in the headline exhibition, A History of Fashion in 100 Objects.
> 
> Each year, the Fashion Museum invites a top name from the fashion industry to select a Dress of the Year that encapsulates the prevailing mood of fashion, represents the past year, and captures the imagination.
> 
> This year's selectors are Dazed magazine's Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton. The pair's Dress of Hope was selected as Dress of the Year 2020, and they went on to have a monumental year, with Kamara appointed Editor-in-Chief of Dazed and Wrighton appointed Art Director.
> 
> Kamara was also honoured at the 2021 British Fashion Awards, winning the Isabella Blow Award for Fashion Creator.
> 
> Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton said: 'In today's hyper-stylised pop culture, the Dress of the Year now has the potential to also be 'meme of the year' and we both latched upon Meghan and Harry's now iconic interview with Oprah as the definitive anti-establishment moment that will forever endure in the British collective consciousness.
> 
> 'Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a divine pregnancy, framed the Duchess in black against the bountiful landscaping of Tyler Perry's Hollywood garden.
> 
> 'This look now, through sheer association with a viral television moment, is firmly engrained in our pop culture psyche.'
> 
> Rosemary Harden, Fashion Museum Manager, said: 'This is a fabulous addition to the Fashion Museum collection. There are moments in history that are all about the dress and Meghan's interview with Oprah was just such an occasion.
> 
> 'The softly structured Armani dress with beautiful appliquéd lotus flower motif was part of a carefully curated look, guaranteed to send messages, and to imprint itself in our consciousness time and time again.
> 
> 'Thank you to Ibrahim and Gareth for this landmark selection for the Dress of the Year Collection, and to Armani for most generously gifting the dress to the Museum.'
> 
> Councillor Dine Romero, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Communities and Culture at Bath & North East Somerset Council, said: 'We're delighted that this iconic dress will be added to the Fashion Museum collection to represent a key moment of 2021.
> 
> 'We look forward to seeing it on display at the Museum, where local residents and visitors will be able to admire it up-close.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Oprah dress set to go on display at the Fashion Museum
> 
> 
> The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



the bird poop dress?!?


----------



## poopsie

bag-mania said:


> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE
> WE DON'T BEEF WITH ALL THE ROYALS ...
> We Had Real Beef With Princess Eugenie!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



When your salad won't stop making jokes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, no body makeover?   *Gosh, this is another level of awful.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5334600


Nope, she looks great. 
Oops, wrong pic!


----------



## mellibelly

lanasyogamama said:


> There is no way anyone wears their jacket over their shoulders like that if they’re trying to eat food, unless they think it will look good in a picture



No one (with style) wears a jacket over their shoulders like that anymore. She’s such a try hard. Looks like the FUPA enhancing trousers are here to stay


----------



## Chanbal

Coincidence? Would the Neflixes (and their PR) do this on purpose?


----------



## mellibelly

Katel said:


> the bird poop dress?!?



Exactly! Pigeon droppings. Looks like no lotus I’ve ever seen, even with artistic license.

The article states the O interview happened in Tyler Perry’s garden?!


----------



## Annawakes

From the article posted above about the bird poop dress:

this caught my eye in its sheer ridiculousness:

“Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a _divine_ pregnancy”

Divine???????  Like she’s some sort of goddess or something? Quick someone find how those two designers who picked that dress are related to A**well.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, what a difference from a certain appearance on the Ellen DeGeneres show.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Staged is the word. The photos are by Backgrid, the pap agency celebrities call when they want to do a pap walk, or in this case, a pap dinner.
> 
> Notice how Harry was instructed to look enthralled by Meghan's every move!



Is that as good a royal connection as it gets now? A third grad royal cousin on a business trip? I just wonder what the Brooksbanks get out of it. 

(not talking about their private relationship - though I still don't understand how any member of that family would even look at Raptor after Oprah - but the staged pap pics)


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> doesn’t this mean, after all, that the UK public paid for it?


I would think Charles used his own personal funds.



Katel said:


> the bird poop dress?!?



You are damn right!


----------



## Aimee3

Annawakes said:


> From the article posted above about the bird poop dress:
> 
> this caught my eye in its sheer ridiculousness:
> 
> “Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a _divine_ pregnancy”
> 
> Divine???????  Like she’s some sort of goddess or something? Quick someone find how those two designers who picked that dress are related to A**well.


I know what you mean. The “divine” jumped out at me too!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.




“Micro-celebrities”!  His best work yet!!


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder who is leaking Hazz's emails…


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> I would think Charles used his own personal funds.



But doesn't their extreme wealth ultimately come from centuries of “payments” from the British/Commonwealth/etc.,  citizen?

This dress!?!? Who did they pay for the press???  Ugh, can someone with PS skills add a poo blob to the mannequin? From the look on her face, poor thing is already horrified to be wearing that dress.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder who is leaking Hazz's emails…




Yet Harry is completely unconcerned about his wife’s gifted blood diamonds. Curious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This was in response to the history lessons shtick with Charles. She really does lack any sense for appropriate behaviour.


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Meghan Markle's Giorgio Armani gown worn during bombshell Oprah interview is set to go on display at the Fashion Museum in Bath after being named the 2021 'dress of the year'


2021 Dress of the year? I know my choice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Is she paying rent to H? to the crown ?? Why did she get it, rather than say Beatrice???



Beatrice's husband is a real estate mogul (and gosh, does he develop nice city houses and, uh, APARTMENTS), so maybe she doesn't need/want a royal property?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Coincidence? Would the Neflixes (and their PR) do this on purpose?



Another publicity bomb for the Hapless Harkles and Hanger on Eugenie, oh, yes, and Jack was there too. So their carefully staged dinner date was supposed to generate great interest, particularly for the Malevolent one who has mostly been in hiding since the debacle on Ellen's show. Sunshine Sucks probably looked at the Royal Calendar and decided to pitch the dinner pic in an attempt to nullify some of Kate's publicity for her visit to Denmark relative to her work in Early Childhood Education.

Sunshine Sucks probably predicted a discreet regal visit from The Duchess of Cambridge in Denmark, moderate headline fodder.

Then, Poof to that!  She literally bursts out of one story slide at the Lego Play Lab and gleefully, yet regally, makes a grand entrance in flaming red no less, giggling in self deprecating humor about how she had to do it. Every little kid and many adults seeing this can relate and wish they were there. Meganomaniac will never ever understand the difference between this example of being "relatable" and her attempt by imitating a rodent chomping on crackers, sucking on a baby bottle, and squatting on the pavement.

Re: the paparazzi photo: Harry looks like he has grown even more hair and his goggly eyed, slobberingly attentive look at his cousin Eugenie is downright creepy.

edited to correct "Lego Museum" to "Lego Play Lab"


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Yet Harry is completely unconcerned about his wife’s gifted blood diamonds. Curious.


Selective principles/ truth…


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Beatrice's husband is a real estate mogul (and gosh, does he develop nice city houses and, uh, APARTMENTS), so maybe she doesn't need/want a royal property?


Yeah , agree , but have wondered how big a MOGUL is he ??? no disrespect but nice digs in London cost more than Beatrice’s measly trust of 5m pounds from the Queen Mum


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> An aside:
> 
> Happy palindrome day! Once-in-a-lifetime Twosday Tuesday numbers line up to create 22.2.22 date that won't come around for another 200 years
> •    The date is also an ambigram, which means it's the same when digits reversed
> •    Social media was awash with excitement, with many pointing out other quirks


The local press ran the story that the Registry of Marriages was inundated with bookings because people wanted this date. It certainly would not allow any forgetful spouse to say he/she forgot their anniversary


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> As many of us suspected, Charles picked up the bill for the Netfl*xes' renovation of Frogmore Cottage.



There was a story saying that the repayment was made from the transition funds that were earmarked for H&M's departure from royal life. That was why Hazard was so bitter about being "financially cut-off" - because they received less than what they expected.



bag-mania said:


> What the ????
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Giorgio Armani gown worn during bombshell Oprah interview is set to go on display at the Fashion Museum in Bath after being named the 2021 'dress of the year'*
> 
> *The black and white silk dress worn by Meghan Markle during her bombshell Oprah interview is set to go display at the Fashion Museum in Bath this year *
> *Duchess wore  black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's SS22 Cruise Collection*
> *Visitors to Bath's Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the dress as past of the : 'A History of Fashion in 100 Objects' exhibition*
> In the biggest royal interview for decades, Meghan made claims about racism within the royal family, saying members of the Firm were worried about how 'dark' their child's skin would be.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex also claimed Kate Middleton made her cry before she married Harry in a row over flowergirl dresses, while Harry said his father Charles stopped taking his calls after he began 'taking matters into his own hands'.
> 
> Viewed by an estimate 60 million viewers across the world, it became one of the defining pop-cultural moments of 2021, the highly anticipated two-hour television interview aired in nearly 70 countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection, which is still available to buy in the US.
> 
> It's well known that members of the Royal family often use outfits to send a message through their choice of style, colour or motif.
> 
> Experts speculated the Duchess chose a dress with a lotus flower design due to the flower's symbolic association with rebirth, self-regeneration and spiritual enlightenment, and its ability to flourish despite seemingly challenging conditions.
> 
> Visitors to the Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the famous dress for themselves when it goes on display as the final item in the headline exhibition, A History of Fashion in 100 Objects.
> 
> Each year, the Fashion Museum invites a top name from the fashion industry to select a Dress of the Year that encapsulates the prevailing mood of fashion, represents the past year, and captures the imagination.
> 
> This year's selectors are Dazed magazine's Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton. The pair's Dress of Hope was selected as Dress of the Year 2020, and they went on to have a monumental year, with Kamara appointed Editor-in-Chief of Dazed and Wrighton appointed Art Director.
> 
> Kamara was also honoured at the 2021 British Fashion Awards, winning the Isabella Blow Award for Fashion Creator.
> 
> Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton said: 'In today's hyper-stylised pop culture, the Dress of the Year now has the potential to also be 'meme of the year' and we both latched upon Meghan and Harry's now iconic interview with Oprah as the definitive anti-establishment moment that will forever endure in the British collective consciousness.
> 
> 'Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a divine pregnancy, framed the Duchess in black against the bountiful landscaping of Tyler Perry's Hollywood garden.
> 
> 'This look now, through sheer association with a viral television moment, is firmly engrained in our pop culture psyche.'
> 
> Rosemary Harden, Fashion Museum Manager, said: 'This is a fabulous addition to the Fashion Museum collection. There are moments in history that are all about the dress and Meghan's interview with Oprah was just such an occasion.
> 
> 'The softly structured Armani dress with beautiful appliquéd lotus flower motif was part of a carefully curated look, guaranteed to send messages, and to imprint itself in our consciousness time and time again.
> 
> 'Thank you to Ibrahim and Gareth for this landmark selection for the Dress of the Year Collection, and to Armani for most generously gifting the dress to the Museum.'
> 
> Councillor Dine Romero, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Communities and Culture at Bath & North East Somerset Council, said: 'We're delighted that this iconic dress will be added to the Fashion Museum collection to represent a key moment of 2021.
> 
> 'We look forward to seeing it on display at the Museum, where local residents and visitors will be able to admire it up-close.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Oprah dress set to go on display at the Fashion Museum
> 
> 
> The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This ranks for me like Time picking some supervillain for its Person of The Year. They said it was the person, good or bad, who made the most impact. So in this case, I suppose they went for "most controversy and memes" as the qualifying criterion. Either that or there's a backdoor connection like most matters which exalt them. Does the museum accept large donations?



Annawakes said:


> From the article posted above about the bird poop dress:
> 
> this caught my eye in its sheer ridiculousness:
> 
> “Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a _divine_ pregnancy”
> 
> Divine???????  Like she’s some sort of goddess or something? Quick someone find how those two designers who picked that dress are related to A**well.


"Divine" like virgin birth? Confirmation of HazNoBalls! 
It was just a matter of time before their PR machinery tried to give her "goddess" status. Their stans will suck it up.



jennlt said:


> 2021 Dress of the year? I know my choice.
> View attachment 5334836


Count me in!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I have to say, Harry actually looks HAPPY in that picture. I imagine being so far away from his family is tough.

I have no doubt that there were issues in that family and being the spare can be difficult, especially in the face of a divorce and losing one’s mum so young. But I can’t help but wonder if he still believes the consequences from his response to everything was all worth it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Honestly, I don’t think anyone else in the world would be willing to have a dinner out with TW, especially for a pap shot.   I think she grasped whatever opportunity she could to be seen out and about at a trendy place, hobnobbing with ANYONE famous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> *I have to say, Harry actually looks HAPPY in that picture.* I imagine being so far away from his family is tough.
> 
> I have no doubt that there were issues in that family and being the spare can be difficult, especially in the face of a divorce and losing one’s mum so young. But I can’t help but wonder if he still believes the consequences from his response to everything was all worth it.


My 2 cents:
I wouldn't read much into it. The pap shots were arranged and the pictures selected to show to the world how happy they all are.


----------



## Chanbal

_Why Oprah ERASED Harry And Meghan's Interview From The Internet: _Credibility & Legacy


----------



## bag-mania

A1aGypsy said:


> I have to say, Harry actually looks HAPPY in that picture. I imagine being so far away from his family is tough.
> 
> I have no doubt that there were issues in that family and being the spare can be difficult, especially in the face of a divorce and losing one’s mum so young. But I can’t help but wonder if he still believes the consequences from his response to everything was all worth it.



I’m sure he is genuinely happy to be with Eugenie, but some of that exaggerated joy is him playing to the photographer. I wonder how long Eugénie has been there and how long she’ll stay. We know it has already been several days at least. Funny how they likely ate out and visited various sites together all last week and yet there were zero paparazzi photos. They can be incognito when they choose.

Hopefully Eugenie doesn’t buy a house there too. Southern California doesn’t need to become a haven for second tier royals.


----------



## Chanbal

_Speaking to LBC, she said: "*What annoyed me incredibly is he said he was in the immediate line of succession.

"Does he really think he's got a chance to be king when he's behaved like this*?

"*The Queen's got to stand up to it*.

"I think she's got to stop him being the Counsellor of State and that means when she can't manage or unwell, they become stand-ins._









						Prince Harry blasted for claiming to be in 'direct line of succession'
					

PRINCE HARRY sparked fury in royal expert Angela Levin who questioned the Duke of Sussex's chance of becoming king in the future.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> *PRINCE HARRY & MEGHAN MARKLE
> WE DON'T BEEF WITH ALL THE ROYALS ...
> We Had Real Beef With Princess Eugenie!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle* got a taste of what they left behind in the U.K. ... because one of the royals made her way to the U.S. for a little chow and a little conversation.
> 
> *Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Backgrid
> It seems Harry and Eugenie have a close connection ... closer than he has with some of the other royals, including his dad and his brother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry took Eugenie to the Super Bowl the weekend before ... so it sure seems the 2 are pretty close.
> 
> They certainly have a U.K. connection ... Eugenie and Jack now live in Frogmore Cottage ... the same place Harry and Meghan lived before bolting England.
> 
> The dinner came on the heels of a grievance Harry had about the royals protecting his kids.  As we reported, Harry will not take *Archie* and *Lilibet *to the *Queen*'s Platinum Jubilee in June because the fam *refuses to provide security* for the kids.
> So, in a way, dinner with Eugenie is like the mountain coming to Muhammed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I suspect they knew photogs were sitting outside, thus the table right next to the window and the "very joyous" expressions.
And come on, they "took Eugenie and Jack" out for dinner?  Do we really believe they actually paid??


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



LOLOL, I need Depends sooner than I thought, especially reading this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> Honestly, I don’t think anyone else in the world would be willing to have a dinner out with TW, especially for a pap shot.   I think she grasped whatever opportunity she could to be seen out and about at a trendy place, hobnobbing with ANYONE famous.


Trendy? Is this one of those places where she offered a royal warrant for a reservation?


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL, I need Depends sooner than I thought, especially reading this thread.


Me too.

This gives us the opportunity to see what the dress was meant to look like, not the sloppy, ill fitting, dressing gown version as worn by Messy Meeeghan.  With apologies to the people of Bath, this isn’t a major prize is it?


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Me too.
> 
> This gives us the opportunity to see what the dress was meant to look like, not the sloppy, ill fitting, dressing gown version as worn by Messy Meeeghan.  With apologies to the people of Bath, this isn’t a major prize is it?


That mannequin is what M *thinks* she looks like.


----------



## redney

purseinsanity said:


> I suspect they knew photogs were sitting outside, thus the table right next to the window and the "very joyous" expressions.
> And come on, they "took Eugenie and Jack" out for dinner?  Do we really believe they actually paid??


They knew the paps were there because they called them. No way they actually paid for the meal; more likely they asked to be paid to be there. Monetize!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yeah , agree , but have wondered how big a MOGUL is he ??? no disrespect but nice digs in London cost more than Beatrice’s measly trust of 5m pounds from the Queen Mum



A quick Google search reveals in the past years his company has developed properties worth around a 3/4 billion (GBP that is). How that translates to personal wealth I don't know, but it doesn't sound too shabby.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*"Does he really think he's got a chance to be king when he's behaved like this*?_



Behaviour or not, he won't be king simply because there are five more people in front of him.


----------



## Luvbolide

jennlt said:


> 2021 Dress of the year? I know my choice.
> View attachment 5334836



had the exact same dress in mind for “Dress of the Year”!!


----------



## papertiger

Katel said:


> But doesn't their extreme wealth ultimately come from centuries of “payments” from the British/Commonwealth/etc.,  citizen?
> 
> This dress!?!? Who did they pay for the press???  Ugh, can someone with PS skills add a poo blob to the mannequin? From the look on her face, poor thing is already horrified to be wearing that dress.
> 
> View attachment 5334823



The BFF was almost broke at one point, and that was when they had an Empire (that turned into The Commonwealth).

The BFF 'payments' come from the British tax payer via the Sovereign Grant, various Duchys (Privy Purse). Anyone who's on the Working Royal list gets money from the SG.

Landowners/the 'Landed Gentry' (like the Queen, PC, Duke of Westminster etc) make money by leasing parts of their estates, mostly farms but woodland, sporting (shooting) estates, business, mining, access rights etc, tenanting (mostly farms, pockets of land stables, houses, mews - but sometimes whole villages) and farming themselves (PC has the Duchy Organics brand). Buck Pally and other residences open to the public (or partially) so sell truck loads of souvenirs (usually in collaboration with By Appointment brands like Halcyon Days) online and in stores, never mind the entrance fees.

This is all _separate_ income from that generated by Crown Estates (who can also take over property and land unclaimed).

The UK operates a quite unique system of a leasehold system that was founded on Feudal Law. Whilst you may own the lease to your house or flat (apartment) for a few months or 999 years, it's only yours (and your inheritors) for as long as that lease. The Freehold may well belong to someone else (or a company) and HUGE amounts of land are still owned by the aristocracy including the BRF. There are usually conditions regarding that lease, some that may seem archaic, but if you break the terms of that lease (don't repair the roof or swear in the garden, can't keep a hamster etc) they are still biding by law. The property comes back to the Freeholder once the lease is up to sell again (to you or someone else) but it always comes back. At one time it was almost impossible to find freehold property, the land where villages, towns, even cities were built on were owned by landLORDS (where we get the word from) slowly some of these were sold off when inheritance tax and other debts (like owed wages) meant the upper-classes had to, but much still in the UK isn't - including the Duke's estate I live on. We own our house freehold but lease half our garden from the Duke's estate - and the mining rights _under_ our house are his (we have gold in our hills!)

A gentleman was a _gentle_man because he didn't work. Others worked for him (and his lady). That left the aristocracy to further their 'careers' in society by lunching, competing in amateur sport and taking holidays all with each other. The closer to the King/Queen you were, the higher you were in society - whatever your title, that way the BRF could give you a higher one that came with more LAND. The Duke of Sussex doesn't own Sussex but in the past he would have. This is also why getting close to the Queen is still so important to H(&M). There maybe no more land atm, but there is money and power, possibly a whole estate somewhere in the future that Harry will be hoping PC or PW will bestow upon him sometime.

If we are waiting for the downfall of Harry, think again. He will be propped-up again and again and again. The hand he bites at again and again and again _will_ continue to feed him  (and his family) unless he is literally a threat to the existence of the monarchy. *IMO*, that he remains in the LoS and/or eligible to deputise for the Queen as a Counsellor, he _is_ a danger to the rest of the BRF, perhaps even the UK. However, he would have been told _by_ the BRF that he needs to retain a UK residence (Frogmore Cottage) to stay eligible  - they want him back and rehabilitate his reputation IMO.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I'm not singling you out.  You're just the most recent one using "woke" as an apparently dirty word.
> 
> Here is the Merriam Webster definition:
> 
> *QUOTE
> Definition of woke*
> (Entry 1 of 2)
> chiefly US slang
> *: *aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)But we will only succeed if we reject the growing pressure to retreat into cynicism and hopelessness. … We have a moral obligation to "stay woke," take a stand and be active; challenging injustices and racism in our communities and fighting hatred and discrimination wherever it rises.— Barbara Lee… argued that … Brad Pitt is not only woke, but the wokest man in Hollywood … because he uses his status—and his production company Plan B—to create space for artists of color, with such films as _12 Years a Slave, Selma_, and the upcoming film _Moonlight_.— Giselle Defares
> 
> UNQUOTE
> 
> While I'm very much in agreement that some people - and certainly H&M are hypocrites, being "woke" in itself isn't a bad thing IMO and I think some people may be using it as code for "liberal" (since we are not allowed to talk politics here)


I think woke is a word with more than one definition and like many political terms it can be both complimentary and pejorative like radical.

Short explanation- I think a thing that frequently gets lost in translation is the sarcasm.  call H&M woke the same way they’d call them charitable, elegant or family orientated. Words also evolve and change: especially slang where they often slide from positive cool use to so very uncool it is ironic to use it.


long rant-
While it may be code for liberal or the left of American discourse in a broader sense- i think that’s a bit of a reductive view to say woke = liberal as it also exists as a trendy term outside of that country’s discourse as a way of describing broader global cultural trends.
In this particular case the British  were making fun of Prince Harry for ‘going woke’ when he was becoming a self appointed expert on race and mental health from his glass house of privilege and a very dodgy past before he even started trying to tell the Americans how to run things and making their  political allegiances clear.

In American media even, we can see shows like Curb Your Enthusiasm that are clearly liberal in politics but are also satirising some of the hot topics of social justice.

Finally I think more and more woke has rapidly moved to mainly ironical usage myself where it means a cynical and usually corporate attempt to use an issue or group to prove one’s moral credentials. This would make the term extremely applicable to H&M’s half-arsed co-opting of anti-black discrimination and mental health issues in my humble opinion.




CarryOn2020 said:


> From 2019:
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: I am NOT 'fixated' on my sister Meghan - and here is the proof: Samantha Markle reveals her legal battle against 'smear' that she was on police list of dangers to the royals
> 
> Samantha Markle had faced claims she was on a list compiled by cops of 'fixated people' considered a danger to the royal family
> She hired lawyers in London to demand the Metropolitan Police  - who guard the royals - hand over any information they held on her and was told there is none
> Samantha, Meghan's half-sister who lives in Gloucester, Virginia, tells DailyMailTV: 'I'm pretty sure my sister knows that I'm not fixated'
> She added: 'It was a horrible PR strategy - people have to be responsible and accountable. People can't get away with starting rumors like that'
> The Metropolitan Police told Samantha in a letter that it had scoured files at the special center for monitoring stalkers and there was nothing on her
> The Duchess of Sussex, 37, has started maternity leave from royal duties ahead of giving birth to her first child with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's sister: I have proof I am not 'fixated' danger to her
> 
> 
> Samantha Markle, 54, tells DailyMailTV that police in London have told her they do not have information on her in their files and she is not on a list of 'fixated' people who are threats to Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


While I know this story is not true, it would explain why H was so desperate to press for protection in the crazy Wild West badlands of Kensington since apparently anyone who is vaguely critical of them is a nuclear threat  


gracekelly said:


> OMG!  If that is Meghan, she looks awful!  Wearing another circus tent, so much for my thinking she’s on a strict diet.


Video footage of the dinner:



I did think the extreme makeover book was a good idea but tbf she’s married him now   She doesn’t need to be that industrious
Also think of the humiliation if it flops then she couldn’t claim a bigger fan base than Richard Simmons.


----------



## duna

jennlt said:


> 2021 Dress of the year? I know my choice.
> View attachment 5334836



YESSSS!

The Armani poop dress is too hideous for words!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> What the ????
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Giorgio Armani gown worn during bombshell Oprah interview is set to go on display at the Fashion Museum in Bath after being named the 2021 'dress of the year'*
> 
> *The black and white silk dress worn by Meghan Markle during her bombshell Oprah interview is set to go display at the Fashion Museum in Bath this year *
> *Duchess wore  black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's SS22 Cruise Collection*
> *Visitors to Bath's Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the dress as past of the : 'A History of Fashion in 100 Objects' exhibition*
> In the biggest royal interview for decades, Meghan made claims about racism within the royal family, saying members of the Firm were worried about how 'dark' their child's skin would be.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex also claimed Kate Middleton made her cry before she married Harry in a row over flowergirl dresses, while Harry said his father Charles stopped taking his calls after he began 'taking matters into his own hands'.
> 
> Viewed by an estimate 60 million viewers across the world, it became one of the defining pop-cultural moments of 2021, the highly anticipated two-hour television interview aired in nearly 70 countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection, which is still available to buy in the US.
> 
> It's well known that members of the Royal family often use outfits to send a message through their choice of style, colour or motif.
> 
> Experts speculated the Duchess chose a dress with a lotus flower design due to the flower's symbolic association with rebirth, self-regeneration and spiritual enlightenment, and its ability to flourish despite seemingly challenging conditions.
> 
> Visitors to the Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the famous dress for themselves when it goes on display as the final item in the headline exhibition, A History of Fashion in 100 Objects.
> 
> Each year, the Fashion Museum invites a top name from the fashion industry to select a Dress of the Year that encapsulates the prevailing mood of fashion, represents the past year, and captures the imagination.
> 
> This year's selectors are Dazed magazine's Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton. The pair's Dress of Hope was selected as Dress of the Year 2020, and they went on to have a monumental year, with Kamara appointed Editor-in-Chief of Dazed and Wrighton appointed Art Director.
> 
> Kamara was also honoured at the 2021 British Fashion Awards, winning the Isabella Blow Award for Fashion Creator.
> 
> Ibrahim Kamara and Gareth Wrighton said: 'In today's hyper-stylised pop culture, the Dress of the Year now has the potential to also be 'meme of the year' and we both latched upon Meghan and Harry's now iconic interview with Oprah as the definitive anti-establishment moment that will forever endure in the British collective consciousness.
> 
> 'Meghan's wrap dress by Armani, worn to showcase a divine pregnancy, framed the Duchess in black against the bountiful landscaping of Tyler Perry's Hollywood garden.
> 
> 'This look now, through sheer association with a viral television moment, is firmly engrained in our pop culture psyche.'
> 
> Rosemary Harden, Fashion Museum Manager, said: 'This is a fabulous addition to the Fashion Museum collection. There are moments in history that are all about the dress and Meghan's interview with Oprah was just such an occasion.
> 
> 'The softly structured Armani dress with beautiful appliquéd lotus flower motif was part of a carefully curated look, guaranteed to send messages, and to imprint itself in our consciousness time and time again.
> 
> 'Thank you to Ibrahim and Gareth for this landmark selection for the Dress of the Year Collection, and to Armani for most generously gifting the dress to the Museum.'
> 
> Councillor Dine Romero, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, Communities and Culture at Bath & North East Somerset Council, said: 'We're delighted that this iconic dress will be added to the Fashion Museum collection to represent a key moment of 2021.
> 
> 'We look forward to seeing it on display at the Museum, where local residents and visitors will be able to admire it up-close.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Oprah dress set to go on display at the Fashion Museum
> 
> 
> The Duchess wore a long, black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's Spring/Summer 2022 Cruise Collection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’m a grade A snotty over-intellectualiser of pop culture and even I died of secondhand embarrassment at that quote from Kamara and Wrighton. Nothing says anti-establishment like Oprah Winfrey  

Also 60 mill globally is nothing! That is a total flop. Britain alone is 6 billion people. Manchester City vs Liverpool apparently got 3.2 billion people globally and they are hardly going to say that was some iconic statement of the world’s understanding of  British society because football is something meatheads care about not big brain fashion culture people.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> The BFF was almost broke at one point, and that was when they had an Empire (that turned into The Commonwealth).
> 
> The BFF 'payments' come from the British tax payer via the Sovereign Grant, various Duchys (Privy Purse). Anyone who's on the Working Royal list gets money from the SG.
> 
> Landowners/the 'Landed Gentry' (like the Queen, PC, Duke of Westminster etc) make money by leasing parts of their estates, mostly farms but woodland, sporting (shooting) estates, business, mining, access rights etc, tenanting (mostly farms, pockets of land stables, houses, mews - but sometimes whole villages) and farming themselves (PC has the Duchy Organics brand). Buck Pally and other residences open to the public (or partially) so sell truck loads of souvenirs (usually in collaboration with By Appointment brands like Halcyon Days) online and in stores, never mind the entrance fees.
> 
> This is all _separate_ income from that generated by Crown Estates (who can also take over property and land unclaimed).
> 
> The UK operates a quite unique system of a leasehold system that was founded on Feudal Law. Whilst you may own the lease to your house or flat (apartment) for a few months or 999 years, it's only yours (and your inheritors) for as long as that lease. The Freehold may well belong to someone else (or a company) and HUGE amounts of land are still owned by the aristocracy including the BRF. There are usually conditions regarding that lease, some that may seem archaic, but if you break the terms of that lease (don't repair the roof or swear in the garden, can't keep a hamster etc) they are still biding by law. The property comes back to the Freeholder once the lease is up to sell again (to you or someone else) but it always comes back. At one time it was almost impossible to find freehold property, the land where villages, towns, even cities were built on were owned by landLORDS (where we get the word from) slowly some of these were sold off when inheritance tax and other debts (like owed wages) meant the upper-classes had to, but much still in the UK isn't - including the Duke's estate I live on. We own our house freehold but lease half our garden from the Duke's estate - and the mining rights _under_ our house are his (we have gold in our hills!)
> 
> A gentleman was a _gentle_man because he didn't work. Others worked for him (and his lady). That left the aristocracy to further their 'careers' in society by lunching, competing in amateur sport and taking holidays all with each other. The closer to the King/Queen you were, the higher you were in society - whatever your title, that way the BRF could give you a higher one that came with more LAND. The Duke of Sussex doesn't own Sussex but in the past he would have. This is also why getting close to the Queen is still so important to H(&M). There maybe no more land atm, but there is money and power, possibly a whole estate somewhere in the future that Harry will be hoping PC or PW will bestow upon him sometime.
> 
> If we are waiting for the downfall of Harry, think again. He will be propped-up again and again and again. The hand he bites at again and again and again _will_ continue to feed him  (and his family) unless he is literally a threat to the existence of the monarchy. *IMO*, that he remains in the LoS and/or eligible to deputise for the Queen as a Counsellor, he _is_ a danger to the rest of the BRF, perhaps even the UK. However, he would have been told _by_ the BRF that he needs to retain a UK residence (Frogmore Cottage) to stay eligible  - they want him back and rehabilitate his reputation IMO.


Beautifully put. The call is most definitely coming from inside the house.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m a grade A snotty over-intellectualiser of pop culture and even I died of secondhand embarrassment at that quote from Kamara and Wrighton. Nothing says anti-establishment like Oprah Winfrey



You're correct,

"Carefully curated" - most overused and misrepresented word of recent woke years, as is the word 'academic' 

Since H&M didn't renounce their titles it wasn't an 'anti-establishment moment' it was family feud b*tchfest 

and let's face it, it's not even M's to give, but if M thought there was iconic milage in the piece it would have been kept for investment posterity or have been accepted at the Met (NY) where she prob first tried to off-load donate. 

Bath isn't even in Sussex, it's in Somerset.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



This makes sense. EE has the sense to know that you don’t take over the public school girl magazine vogue U.K. is (let’s be honest it’s tatler for the under 100’s) and go against the Lady Colin Campbell class.

Now if he could just sort out how busted the photography is despite the fact amateurs  can create editorial level images at home just for their instas


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> This makes sense. EE has the sense to know that you don’t take over the public school girl magazine vogue U.K. is (let’s be honest it’s tatler for the under 100’s) and go against the Lady Colin Campbell class.
> 
> Now if he could just sort out how busted the photography is despite the fact amateurs  can create editorial level images at home just for their instas



Could be, but I'm sure she would have had an invite, EE plays at being nice to everyone, after all he's been a globally successful stylist 'forever' and fashion is very cliquy = you don't get there by not at least pretending to be diplomatic. 

I've bought the last 2 eds of Vogue - so squeaky clean they hurt my teeth. 

What we need is a new alt fashion mag like Pop or The Face, Nylon - wait a min....   

If Tatler is now The (new) Lady 

Who is the readership demographic for The Lady?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> and let's face it, it's not even M's to give, but if M thought there was iconic milage in the piece it would have been kept for investment posterity or have been accepted at the Met (NY) where she prob first tried to off-load donate.
> 
> Bath isn't even in Sussex, it's in Somerset.



I was under the impression the dress which will be displayed in Bath is not Meghan’s actual interview dress but another Armani just like it (possibly in a smaller size). The design is not an exclusive and the article said it is still available for purchase.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Could be, but I'm sure she would have had an invite, EE plays at being nice to everyone, after all he's been a globally successful stylist 'forever' and fashion is very cliquy = you don't get there by not at least pretending to be diplomatic.
> 
> I've bought the last 2 eds of Vogue - so squeaky clean they hurt my teeth.
> 
> What we need is a new alt fashion mag like Pop or The Face, Nylon - wait a min....
> 
> If Tatler is now The (new) Lady
> 
> Who is the readership demographic for The Lady?


Well to be fair to The Lady until very recently it was much closer to a more middle Class version of ‘the people’s friend’ or ‘yours’  female general interest, short fiction and puzzles variety than it was a Society or fashion focused magazine. It has now tried to pivot into society/current affairs sphere with absolutely disastrous consequences for its readership (so I’ve heard). I do not understand how a magazine can misjudge its place in the market so badly (meanwhile the people’s friend and yours are still chugging on)  until I remember they had a giant staff shake up and brought in some ‘names’ who had nothing but contempt for the publication as it was.

I think vogue is representative of the sanitised, corporate & essentially least cool version of fashion and it always has been. The face, love, nylon, another, dazed like magazines of the world come and go but vogue is an institution that relies on its celebs and advertisers. A guy who knows how to schmooze celebrities is a must have and I think he’s great at a positive spin. Indeed if you ever want a fun drinking game get out an EE era issue and drink every time you see the word ‘joy’ or ‘joyful’.

That is fine & in fact it is a big part of the business after all but geez is it too much to ask for a the face of one of the most famous celebs in the world in your christmas edition to be in focus?
These look like her mum took them with an iPhone 5.





To bring it back to M, I think he knows those stocks are down. Someone who has become a running joke of the mail online isn’t going to get £5 out of someone at a newsstand. 
I think they knew she wasn’t a seller even in the halcyon days of her editorial issue, I mean how else do we explain that them forgoing putting such a beautiful and modest woman on the cover and instead sticking all the most discussed and influential women and girls there instead… I mean that was subtle as a sledgehammer.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I was under the impression the dress which will be displayed in Bath is not Meghan’s actual interview dress but another Armani just like it (possibly in a smaller size). *The design is not an exclusive and the article said it is still available for purchase*.


I was sniggering when I read that. Probably too ex for her stans to snap up and those who could afford it aren't impressed by it.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> To bring it back to M, I think he knows those stocks are down. Someone who has become a running joke of the mail online isn’t going to get £5 out of someone at a newsstand.
> I think they knew she wasn’t a seller even in the halcyon days of her editorial issue, I mean how else do we explain that them forgoing putting such a beautiful and modest woman on the cover and instead sticking all the most discussed and influential women and girls there instead… I mean that was subtle as a sledgehammer.


Which magazine was it that she got on the front cover of? The one where she had on the porno expression for Wild About Harry? I'm beginning to think that was more the real her than the faux mogul of the Time cover.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I was sniggering when I read that. Probably too ex for her stans to snap up and those who could afford it aren't impressed by it.



If they wait another six months maybe it will turn up at TJ Maxx.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If we are waiting for the downfall of Harry, think again. He will be propped-up again and again and again. The hand he bites at again and again and again _will_ continue to feed him  (and his family) unless he is literally a threat to the existence of the monarchy. *IMO*, that he remains in the LoS and/or eligible to deputise for the Queen as a Counsellor, he _is_ a danger to the rest of the BRF, perhaps even the UK. However, he would have been told _by_ the BRF that he needs to retain a UK residence (Frogmore Cottage) to stay eligible  - they want him back and rehabilitate his reputation IMO.



I can't entirely blame them...I do wish they'd cut him off because I don't suffer fools gladly and I do share your thoughts of his behaviour being damaging and possibly dangerous at this point, but I'd probably do the same for my brother. I would however not extend a finger to keep that thing he married from drowning in front of me, and I'd make sure she couldn't get her grubby hands on even a squarefoot of land or a single penny I granted him in case of divorce.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5334981
> 
> 
> _Speaking to LBC, she said: "*What annoyed me incredibly is he said he was in the immediate line of succession.
> 
> "Does he really think he's got a chance to be king when he's behaved like this*?
> 
> "*The Queen's got to stand up to it*.
> 
> "I think she's got to stop him being the Counsellor of State and that means when she can't manage or unwell, they become stand-ins._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry blasted for claiming to be in 'direct line of succession'
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY sparked fury in royal expert Angela Levin who questioned the Duke of Sussex's chance of becoming king in the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Andrew used to be in the immediate line of succession too and he's now constitutionally irrelevant in terms of line of succession so.....it's only a matter of time Harry!


----------



## bag-mania

DM is reporting that Larry David just bought a house in Montecito. There’s another celebrity in the neighborhood who won’t be inviting Harry and Meghan over. 

His house is beautiful and was less than half the price of the Sussex estate.









						Larry David snaps up $5.7M Montecito home near Meghan and Harry
					

Comedian and actor Larry David snapped up a $5.7million four-bedroom, four and half bath Montecito home, just blocks away from the Pacific Ocean in October, DailyMail.com can reveal.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Which magazine was it that she got on the front cover of? The one where she had on the porno expression for Wild About Harry? I'm beginning to think that was more the real her than the faux mogul of the Time cover.



Vanity Fair.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> DM is reporting that Larry David just bought a house in Montecito. There’s another celebrity in the neighborhood who won’t be inviting Harry and Meghan over.
> 
> His house is beautiful and was less than half the price of the Sussex estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry David snaps up $5.7M Montecito home near Meghan and Harry
> 
> 
> Comedian and actor Larry David snapped up a $5.7million four-bedroom, four and half bath Montecito home, just blocks away from the Pacific Ocean in October, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It is a lovely house. From that DM story, "Montecito locals are famous for ignoring the rich and famous" Sorry Megs


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I was under the impression the dress which will be displayed in Bath is not Meghan’s actual interview dress but another Armani just like it (possibly in a smaller size). The design is not an exclusive and the article said it is still available for purchase.



Then actually, what's the #@&% point? Just go into Armani and try it on


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It is a lovely house. From that DM story, "Montecito locals are famous for ignoring the rich and famous" Sorry Megs



It is. And it looks cozy, not like that thing that could well be a theme park.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> DM is reporting that Larry David just bought a house in Montecito. There’s another celebrity in the neighborhood who won’t be inviting Harry and Meghan over.
> 
> His house is beautiful and was less than half the price of the Sussex estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry David snaps up $5.7M Montecito home near Meghan and Harry
> 
> 
> Comedian and actor Larry David snapped up a $5.7million four-bedroom, four and half bath Montecito home, just blocks away from the Pacific Ocean in October, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wonder if he knows about the smell?  He definitely will not like that.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Well to be fair to The Lady until very recently it was much closer to a more middle Class version of ‘the people’s friend’ or ‘yours’  female general interest, short fiction and puzzles variety than it was a Society or fashion focused magazine. It has now tried to pivot into society/current affairs sphere with absolutely disastrous consequences for its readership (so I’ve heard). I do not understand how a magazine can misjudge its place in the market so badly (meanwhile the people’s friend and yours are still chugging on)  until I remember they had a giant staff shake up and brought in some ‘names’ who had nothing but contempt for the publication as it was.
> 
> I think vogue is representative of the sanitised, corporate & essentially least cool version of fashion and it always has been. The face, love, nylon, another, dazed like magazines of the world come and go but vogue is an institution that relies on its celebs and advertisers. A guy who knows how to schmooze celebrities is a must have and I think he’s great at a positive spin. Indeed if you ever want a fun drinking game get out an EE era issue and drink every time you see the word ‘joy’ or ‘joyful’.
> 
> That is fine & in fact it is a big part of the business after all but geez is it too much to ask for a the face of one of the most famous celebs in the world in your christmas edition to be in focus?
> These look like her mum took them with an iPhone 5.
> 
> View attachment 5335216
> 
> View attachment 5335217
> 
> To bring it back to M, I think he knows those stocks are down. Someone who has become a running joke of the mail online isn’t going to get £5 out of someone at a newsstand.
> I think they knew she wasn’t a seller even in the halcyon days of her editorial issue, I mean how else do we explain that them forgoing putting such a beautiful and modest woman on the cover and instead sticking all the most discussed and influential women and girls there instead… I mean that was subtle as a sledgehammer.



I usd to think that about Vogue, now I just think it's Elle (UK) under a different name. 

I used to love Dazed, literally one of my favourite bad-weather days out would be Borders Charring Cross Rd with Vogue Italia, Vogue France, Pop, Dazed, Nylon and goodness knows what in German and sit reading for hours with endless coffee. I can even remember mulling over which jacket(s) to buy next in Blakes Covent Garden whilst flipping through. 

Cosmo at all are so pro H&M they may as well be Mills and Boon X Hello. Must be publishing word for word SS PR sheets as they roll in.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Then actually, what's the #@&% point? Just go into Armani and try it on



Why for the publicity of course! Who knew or cared that Bath has its own fashion museum before yesterday?

With any luck they have more interesting exhibits than that dress but those wouldn't have received any attention from the media. But they mention Meghan and suddenly here comes the press beating a path to the door of their obscure little museum.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Hazz, he miscalculated megxit, hazxit, or whatever term he prefers for his big time foolishness…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And yet when Kate is out and about in private, she has often just one person in civil clothes with her. Because she doesn't completely overestimate herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Poor Hazz, he miscalculated megxit, hazxit, or whatever term he prefers for his big time foolishness…




Looks like the A+ team!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ouch!  Shade for the Hazz:


----------



## Chanbal

Why would the Netflixes sue TMZ for their own press releases? 

_Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been urged to sue TMZ for publishing paparazzi pictures of a dinner with Princess Eugenie.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed with Harry's cousin and her husband Jack Brooksbank over the weekend at a restaurant in Santa Barbara.

The pictures were released by TMZ on Tuesday and show the two couples arriving and sitting around a table in what appears to be an outside dining area surrounded by see-through plastic screens._









						Meghan and Harry Urged to Sue Over Pictures at Restaurant With Eugenie
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed having dinner with Princess Eugenie and images have been published on gossip site TMZ. Now a lawyer has told Newsweek the couple may be able to sue.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Why for the publicity of course! *Who knew or cared that Bath has its own fashion museum before yesterday?*
> 
> With any luck they have more interesting exhibits than that dress but those wouldn't have received any attention from the media. But they mention Meghan and suddenly here comes the press beating a path to the door of their obscure little museum.



I did  - and Bath is a beautiful and uniquely interesting place for at least 3 reasons (fashion isn't one IMO)

Yup, riding on the coattails of people that live on hand-outs, breadcrumbs, borrowed identity, a wing and and a prayer


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> Why for the publicity of course! Who knew or cared that Bath has its own fashion museum before yesterday?
> 
> With any luck they have more interesting exhibits than that dress but those wouldn't have received any attention from the media. But they mention Meghan and suddenly here comes the press beating a path to the door of their obscure little museum.



It’s actually a very cute little museum and one of the top tourist attractions in Bath. I had a really positive impression of it… that is until I saw this piece of unwelcome news about them having no judgment when it comes to fashion whatsoever. Even if you don’t see the can’t-be-unseen bird droppings it’s a mediocre, unmemorable dress at best.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Why would the Netflixes sue TMZ for the their own press release?
> 
> _Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been urged to sue TMZ for publishing paparazzi pictures of a dinner with Princess Eugenie.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed with Harry's cousin and her husband Jack Brooksbank over the weekend at a restaurant in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The pictures were released by TMZ on Tuesday and show the two couples arriving and sitting around a table in what appears to be an outside dining area surrounded by see-through plastic screens._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Urged to Sue Over Pictures at Restaurant With Eugenie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed having dinner with Princess Eugenie and images have been published on gossip site TMZ. Now a lawyer has told Newsweek the couple may be able to sue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



They wouldn't dare sue because it would come out that they arranged it with the paparazzi. TMZ is careful about what they do and as a result they rarely get sued. They have never lost a case to my knowledge, the few times anyone tried.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why would the Netflixes sue TMZ for the their own press release?
> 
> _Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been urged to sue TMZ for publishing paparazzi pictures of a dinner with Princess Eugenie.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed with Harry's cousin and her husband Jack Brooksbank over the weekend at a restaurant in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The pictures were released by TMZ on Tuesday and show the two couples arriving and sitting around a table in what appears to be an outside dining area surrounded by see-through plastic screens._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Urged to Sue Over Pictures at Restaurant With Eugenie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed having dinner with Princess Eugenie and images have been published on gossip site TMZ. Now a lawyer has told Newsweek the couple may be able to sue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Because not enough people saw the TMZ report.   Ya kno, the world issues have been pulling in more views.  How dare world issues overtake H&M, the audacity


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> It’s actually a very cute little museum and one of the top tourist attractions in Bath. I had a really positive impression of it… that is until I saw this piece of unwelcome news about them having no judgment when it comes to fashion whatsoever. Even if you don’t see the can’t-be-unseen bird droppings it’s a mediocre, unmemorable dress at best.



I wonder if they have had people calling them to complain about the inclusion of Meghan's dress.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And yet when Kate is out and about in private, she has often just one person in civil clothes with her. Because she doesn't completely overestimate herself.


And some of it is about leaks ... 

I doubt Kate alerts paps that she will be at M&S at 2 pm on Wed, she may appear, then a mere mortal takes a fuzzy pic with phone - the photo is from a distance, taken from the wrong angle , candid photo

WHEREAS, we suspect M of alerting the paps, she appears and beautifully focused snap is taken of her looking straight at camera , not a candid photo at all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch!  Shade for the Hazz:




Incidentally, both are cursed with a jealous troublemaker of a SIL.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Because not enough people saw the TMZ report.   Ya kno, the world issues have been pulling in more views.  How dare world issues overtake H&M, the audacity



I'm surprised the two of them haven't issued a press release about how upset and concerned they are over the situation in the Ukraine and urged world leaders to do something to fix it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5335309



And once again he looks drunk. And I'm not saying this to insult him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I'm surprised the two of them haven't issued a press release about how upset and concerned they are over the situation in the Ukraine and urged world leaders to do something to fix it.



I'm sure they would if they could think of anything to say. The situation is so far over their spoiled little heads that even they recognize it.


----------



## csshopper

Remember when David Foster was touted as Haz’s surrogate father and he and his wife Katherine McPhee were supposedly the Suckess new BFF’s?

Baby Rennie Foster just had a First Birthday party, pics on line.

Snarkle snarkle, no sign of Markle or her handbag husband.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Remember when David Foster was touted as Haz’s surrogate father and he and his wife Katherine McPhee were supposedly the Suckess new BFF’s?
> 
> Baby Rennie Foster just had a First Birthday party, pics on line.
> 
> Snarkle snarkle, no sign of Markle or her handbag husband.



Maybe the Fosters gave him back. You know, like those people who return their Russian orphans for misbehaving.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> DM is reporting that Larry David just bought a house in Montecito. There’s another celebrity in the neighborhood who won’t be inviting Harry and Meghan over.
> 
> His house is beautiful and was less than half the price of the Sussex estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry David snaps up $5.7M Montecito home near Meghan and Harry
> 
> 
> Comedian and actor Larry David snapped up a $5.7million four-bedroom, four and half bath Montecito home, just blocks away from the Pacific Ocean in October, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It looks like an actual home.


----------



## TC1

TMZ is the go-to for celebs to sell pics to. They won't be sued. H & M sold them the pics..because they would get the most views on that site. They have to pretend to be outraged because that's their schtick. PrIvaCY PleAse


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Then actually, what's the #@&% point? Just go into Armani and try it on


Or go buy it, put a brown wig in a very hot tumble dryer for six hours and put both on, go to the museum and start spouting the same 6 inane comments repeatedly in order to begin your thrilling new life as one of those animatronic mannequins?

Even that might be a less painfully naff way to spend the year then how the two judges must have for the interview to be their highlight 


Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5335309


It’s the aristocratic way baby!  



tiktok said:


> It’s actually a very cute little museum and one of the top tourist attractions in Bath. I had a really positive impression of it… that is until I saw this piece of unwelcome news about them having no judgment when it comes to fashion whatsoever. Even if you don’t see the can’t-be-unseen bird droppings it’s a mediocre, unmemorable dress at best.


Yes I love Bath and the fashion museum I do appreciate it is not London or Oxford levels of global renown and I do agree I think they are hoping to get in the mail online and it worked but I also think they may live to regret it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hu? Crazy Tarot lady swears she saw it with her own eyes while it was up. I do have my doubts about her pregnancies, but I do think it would be completely inacceptable for Kensington Palace to make an announcement like this, on Twitter, with a typo. Plus, how come we never discussed it?


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I think woke is a word with more than one definition and like many political terms it can be both complimentary and pejorative like radical.
> 
> Short explanation- I think a thing that frequently gets lost in translation is the sarcasm.  call H&M woke the same way they’d call them charitable, elegant or family orientated. Words also evolve and change: especially slang where they often slide from positive cool use to so very uncool it is ironic to use it.
> 
> 
> long rant-
> While it may be code for liberal or the left of American discourse in a broader sense- i think that’s a bit of a reductive view to say woke = liberal as it also exists as a trendy term outside of that country’s discourse as a way of describing broader global cultural trends.
> In this particular case the British  were making fun of Prince Harry for ‘going woke’ when he was becoming a self appointed expert on race and mental health from his glass house of privilege and a very dodgy past before he even started trying to tell the Americans how to run things and making their  political allegiances clear.
> 
> In American media even, we can see shows like Curb Your Enthusiasm that are clearly liberal in politics but are also satirising some of the hot topics of social justice.
> 
> Finally I think more and more woke has rapidly moved to mainly ironical usage myself where it means a cynical and usually corporate attempt to use an issue or group to prove one’s moral credentials. This would make the term extremely applicable to H&M’s half-arsed co-opting of anti-black discrimination and mental health issues in my humble opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> While I know this story is not true, it would explain why H was so desperate to press for protection in the crazy Wild West badlands of Kensington since apparently anyone who is vaguely critical of them is a nuclear threat
> 
> Video footage of the dinner:
> 
> 
> 
> I did think the extreme makeover book was a good idea but tbf she’s married him now   She doesn’t need to be that industrious
> Also think of the humiliation if it flops then she couldn’t claim a bigger fan base than Richard Simmons.



You have made some good points.  But I think a lot of people are weaponizing the word.  Here is what Meghan McCain said about the show And Just Like That in an op ed:

QUOTE:
McCain concluded her column by writing, "Wokeness kills everything and I am disappointed to tell you that ‘And Just Like That’ is another victim of Hollywood trying to placate a specific audience and not the original one, which was made it [sic] a hit in the first place."


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Crazy Tarot lady swears she saw it with her own eyes while it was up. I do have my doubts about her pregnancies, but I do think it would be completely inacceptable for Kensington Palace to make an announcement like this, on Twitter, with a typo. Plus, how come we never discussed it?
> 
> View attachment 5335378



As H would say BOOM!

-

Told you so  - my truth 

Could also be faked I guess but then what is reality anyway


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Crazy Tarot lady swears she saw it with her own eyes while it was up. I do have my doubts about her pregnancies, but I do think it would be completely inacceptable for Kensington Palace to make an announcement like this, on Twitter, with a typo. Plus, how come we never discussed it?
> 
> View attachment 5335378


This has fake written all over it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> You have made some good points.  But I think a lot of people are weaponizing the word.  Here is what Meghan McCain said about the show And Just Like That in an op ed:
> 
> QUOTE:
> McCain concluded her column by writing, "Wokeness kills everything and I am disappointed to tell you that ‘And Just Like That’ is another victim of Hollywood trying to placate a specific audience and not the original one, which was made it [sic] a hit in the first place."


Sorry if this is OT 

I mean not to pretend I know Megan McCain’s exact intention in writing this article and I don’t really care about her opinion either way but I would say that particular quote is a bit ambiguous as to whether the word ‘wokeness’ here has the positive definition of being aware and addressing social inequality or the negative/ironic definition of being a shallow bandwagon jumping of the same social issues.

That said, I do agree that the word is weaponised to make fun of those who use it positively as part of the ongoing partisan culture war on things that are pretty ephemeral. which in turn does contribute to accelerating the slide into sarcasm that slang experiences.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? Crazy Tarot lady swears she saw it with her own eyes while it was up. I do have my doubts about her pregnancies, but I do think it would be completely inacceptable for Kensington Palace to make an announcement like this, on Twitter, with a typo. Plus, how come we never discussed it?
> 
> View attachment 5335378


Please tarot lady, if you are a lurker on this thread, please join and become a full on contributor as we would very much appreciate the spicy posts even if they are about as true as H being triggered by London.

Also Jesus the body language guy just join already! I can’t believe that user name is taken and we are lacking male representation!


----------



## csshopper

TC1 said:


> This has fake written all over it.


Especially since it is supposedly from Kensington Palace. 

It's an evil attempt to make William and Kate look bad.  They would not do anything like this, but speaking of evil, I seriously would not be surprised to some day find out the Malevolent one planted it, left it on line briefly and then deleted it, in hopes someone might have seen it. Then she could shuffle the Victim Card Deck and pull out a new one.


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> I'm surprised the two of them haven't issued a press release about how upset and concerned they are over the situation in the Ukraine and urged world leaders to do something to fix it.



Give them time.  Surely they know how to resolve all problems.  By suggesting that "somebody do something".


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Give them time.  Surely they know how to resolve all problems.  By suggesting that "somebody do something".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> You have made some good points.  But I think a lot of people are weaponizing the word.  Here is what Meghan McCain said about the show And Just Like That in an op ed:
> 
> QUOTE:
> McCain concluded her column by writing, "Wokeness kills everything and I am disappointed to tell you that ‘And Just Like That’ is another victim of Hollywood trying to placate a specific audience and not the original one, which was made it [sic] a hit in the first place."



The AJLT show was awful, not really due to ‘wokeness’ but due to substandard, hackneyed writing and horrible acting. 
Skilled writers with original thoughts  and talented actors make any TV or movie show stand out.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> The AJLT show was awful, not really due to ‘wokeness’ but due to substandard, hackneyed writing and horrible acting.
> Skilled writers with original thoughts  and talented actors make any TV or movie show stand out.


It just wasn’t fun.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry sues again!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry sues again!



so annoying
wonder if suing makes him feel like a real man - a grownup


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> so annoying
> wonder if suing makes him feel like a real man - a grownup



What else they got (to do)?


----------



## taetaebear

What would they be if they weren't the Queen's relatives? ...


----------



## papertiger

taetaebear said:


> What would they be if they weren't the Queen's relatives? ...



Living on a bench somewhere in the middle of Nowheresville. 

Certainly not living off her book _The Bench_


----------



## rose60610

I think the term "woke", started out as a well intentioned term in the 1940's for heightened awareness of social issues.  Then it seemed  in recent years (some) people went into overdrive to out-woke each other, finding racism absolutely everywhere and claiming that absolutely everybody and everything is racist. We see celebrities who don't like somebody for whatever reason calling them "RACIST!" even when the reason has zero to do with racism. Then we see journalists proudly using racist terms against certain minorities, (Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for example), and completely getting away with it. We see Markle's sugars calling her critics "racists" for pointing out her hypocrisy and idiotic actions. When any initially well-intentioned term becomes weaponized to absurd hypocritical extremes, it's only a matter to time before it becomes a derisive adjective.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Why would the Netflixes sue TMZ for their own press releases?
> 
> _Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been urged to sue TMZ for publishing paparazzi pictures of a dinner with Princess Eugenie.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed with Harry's cousin and her husband Jack Brooksbank over the weekend at a restaurant in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The pictures were released by TMZ on Tuesday and show the two couples arriving and sitting around a table in what appears to be an outside dining area surrounded by see-through plastic screens._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Urged to Sue Over Pictures at Restaurant With Eugenie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed having dinner with Princess Eugenie and images have been published on gossip site TMZ. Now a lawyer has told Newsweek the couple may be able to sue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Sue for what exactly?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so annoying
> wonder if suing makes him feel like a real man - a grownup



Lawsuits are another on their list of money-grabbing making ventures, like creating a charity. I wouldn't be surprised if he resorts to the old slip-and-fall scam in the supermarket someday if he gets really desperate.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry sues again!



Another day, another suit.  These people initiate lawsuits more than some people change their underwear!


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Another publicity bomb for the Hapless Harkles and Hanger on Eugenie, oh, yes, and Jack was there too. So their carefully staged dinner date was supposed to generate great interest, particularly for the Malevolent one who has mostly been in hiding since the debacle on Ellen's show. Sunshine Sucks probably looked at the Royal Calendar and decided to pitch the dinner pic in an attempt to nullify some of Kate's publicity for her visit to Denmark relative to her work in Early Childhood Education.
> 
> Sunshine Sucks probably predicted a discreet regal visit from The Duchess of Cambridge in Denmark, moderate headline fodder.
> 
> Then, Poof to that!  *She literally bursts out of one story slide at the Lego Play Lab and gleefully, yet regally, makes a grand entrance in flaming red no less, giggling in self deprecating humor about how she had to do it. Every little kid and many adults seeing this can relate and wish they were there.* Meganomaniac will never ever understand the difference between this example of being "relatable" and her attempt by imitating a rodent chomping on crackers, sucking on a baby bottle, and squatting on the pavement.
> 
> Re: the paparazzi photo: Harry looks like he has grown even more hair and his goggly eyed, slobberingly attentive look at his cousin Eugenie is downright creepy.
> 
> edited to correct "Lego Museum" to "Lego Play Lab"



OMG I so would!
I was a kid before there were Chuck E Cheese and bouncy castles. Plus having a November birthday in NE Ohio we were pretty much relegated to basement rec rooms for parties.
There needs to be adult versions available. We have a Dave&Busters but that's a poor substitute for ball rooms and bouncy castles. 
I really miss Malibu Grand Prix now that I think of it.
I hope Kate enjoyed her play day!


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> I'm sure they would if they could think of anything to say. The situation is so far over their spoiled little heads that even they recognize it.



Simone would have to draw Harry a map maybe a penguin could explain it to him


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> It looks like an actual home.


And the location is better, closer to the ocean.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe the Fosters gave him back. You know, like those people who return their Russian orphans for misbehaving.


Darn that's mean but I laughed!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Are they now advertising for QS supplies?  
From my google search, QS Supplies is a store in the UK that sells toilets and other bathroom supplies. 


*Meghan Markle lives in a 'luxurious' Montecito mansion with a luscious bathroom*

_However, QS supplies have provided Express.co.uk with digital 360 walkthroughs of Meghan and Harry’s luxurious bathroom.









						Meghan Markle's 'luxurious' bathroom looks like a 'top five-star hotel' in £11.2m mansion
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry live in Montecito, Santa Barbara in an £11.2million mansion. Many of their rooms have been kept under wraps, however pictures of their luxurious bathroom have been revealed to Express.co.uk. So what does it look like?




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe this is why they are suing the “unfriendlyDM” 









						Queen could strip Harry of key role because he does not live in the UK
					

The House of Commons Library published guidance on what arrangements can be put in place if a monarch is unable to perform their royal duties and has said Harry should not be eligible to stand in.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Who is paying the lawyers? 


_The Duke of Sussex has launched a High Court libel action against the publisher of the Daily Mail.
Court filings show *Harry filed a claim against Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL) on Wednesday afternoon.

It is not known which of the publishers' titles, which also includes The Mail On Sunday and MailOnline, the claim relates to, and there is no indication which article is complained of.

The duke is currently bringing privacy claims against News Group Newspapers, which publishes The Sun, and Mirror Group Newspapers,* now Reach, which publishes The Mirror, over alleged phone hacking and unlawful information gathering.

*Harry, 37, is also involved in litigation against the Home Office over his security arrangements when he is in the UK.
He is bringing a High Court challenge against a Home Office decision not to allow him to personally pay for police protection for himself and his family while in the UK.*

Harry wants to bring his son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet to visit from the US, but his lawyers say he and his family are "unable to return to his home" because it is too dangerous.

It follows an incident in London in the summer of 2021 when his security was compromised after his car was chased by paparazzi photographers as he left a charity event.

His wife, the Duchess of Sussex, previously brought a successful privacy claim against ANL over articles which reproduced parts of a "personal and private" handwritten letter to her estranged father, Thomas Markle.

Meghan was awarded £1 nominal damages, along with an undisclosed sum which she donated to charity, after winning her case.

ANL was also ordered to issue a front-page apology and pay the duchess's legal costs.
An appeal by ANL was dismissed by senior judges in December last year.

A spokesperson for the duke said: "I can confirm the duke has filed a complaint against Associated Newspapers Limited."



			archive.md
		

_


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry sues again!



If only someone could help him to understand:

       (1) He has become tiresome with the string of legal actions

       (2) It ultimately erodes what little "brand" they had as no one will want to be associated with them for fear of being sued.


Chanbal said:


> Are they now advertising for QS supplies?
> From my google search, QS Supplies is a store in the UK that sells toilets and other bathroom supplies.
> View attachment 5335682
> 
> *Meghan Markle lives in a 'luxurious' Montecito mansion with a luscious bathroom*
> 
> _However, QS supplies have provided Express.co.uk with digital 360 walkthroughs of Meghan and Harry’s luxurious bathroom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'luxurious' bathroom looks like a 'top five-star hotel' in £11.2m mansion
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry live in Montecito, Santa Barbara in an £11.2million mansion. Many of their rooms have been kept under wraps, however pictures of their luxurious bathroom have been revealed to Express.co.uk. So what does it look like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Are they numbered 1 - 16 , as in “please use #6, I’m not certain if there are fresh towels in the others.” Are some designated “Men” and some “Women”.? Is there a designated storeroom for the pallets of tissue needed to keep 16 stocked?

if this is representative of the others, yuck! Looks like a dismal  “Before” in a home improvement show on TV.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Are they now advertising for QS supplies?
> From my google search, QS Supplies is a store in the UK that sells toilets and other bathroom supplies.
> View attachment 5335682
> 
> *Meghan Markle lives in a 'luxurious' Montecito mansion with a luscious bathroom*
> 
> _However, QS supplies have provided Express.co.uk with digital 360 walkthroughs of Meghan and Harry’s luxurious bathroom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'luxurious' bathroom looks like a 'top five-star hotel' in £11.2m mansion
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry live in Montecito, Santa Barbara in an £11.2million mansion. Many of their rooms have been kept under wraps, however pictures of their luxurious bathroom have been revealed to Express.co.uk. So what does it look like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


That is the most unused bathroom I have ever seen.  Where is all the stuff you always have in your bathroom..  How about the toilet?  Until I see the stuff and the toilet, it isn't her bathroom


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe this is why they are suing the “unfriendlyDM”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen could strip Harry of key role because he does not live in the UK
> 
> 
> The House of Commons Library published guidance on what arrangements can be put in place if a monarch is unable to perform their royal duties and has said Harry should not be eligible to stand in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My 2 cents:
The Counsellor of State  issue could be easily solved by 1) removing Hazz due to not residing in the UK (he would never resign), and 2) replacing Andy with Beatrice. I think Andy would resign at his mother's request, and his daughter is the next in line.
Princess Anne as the second child of QE should take Hazz's place imo.

"_*Prince Harry*_* should not be eligible to stand in for the Queen as a Counsellor of State because he no longer resides in the country, a new parliamentary briefing paper reveals.*

_But Prince Andrew could still stand in for his mother should she become incapacitated, despite having to step down from public duties and relinquish his HRH title because of the Epstein scandal.

This week the House of Commons Library quietly published for the first time guidance on what arrangements can be put in place if a monarch is unable to perform their royal functions."_


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> _Why Oprah ERASED Harry And Meghan's Interview From The Internet: _Credibility & Legacy




Ahahahahahahaha … “boulder of salt”!!!!  Love this guy - he gets funnier by the week!!  Thanks for sharing this!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Why would the Netflixes sue TMZ for their own press releases?
> 
> _Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been urged to sue TMZ for publishing paparazzi pictures of a dinner with Princess Eugenie.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed with Harry's cousin and her husband Jack Brooksbank over the weekend at a restaurant in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The pictures were released by TMZ on Tuesday and show the two couples arriving and sitting around a table in what appears to be an outside dining area surrounded by see-through plastic screens._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Urged to Sue Over Pictures at Restaurant With Eugenie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed having dinner with Princess Eugenie and images have been published on gossip site TMZ. Now a lawyer has told Newsweek the couple may be able to sue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Don’t see how they could sue for this, even without the element of them alerting the paps.  What sort of reasonable expectation of privacy is there when going out in public and sitting in the front of a restaurant in an illuminated “window”.  Not to mention parading around in a group of four hoping to attract as much attention as possible.  It is not as if they were in a windowless private room and eating in privacy.  
They are so ridiculous!


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry sues again!


----------



## Luvbolide

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry sues again!




He’s hilarious!  Maybe he is going for the family record of $$ won via litigation!  Should be a snap since the family record stands at $1!  (well, 1 pound!)

As speaking engagements have dried up and Spotify and Netflix are showing signs of unhappiness with zero movement toward producing content, the Harkles are hoping that they can turn litigation into a revenue stream.

Too bad he filed this in the UK where they have a “loser pays” system…


----------



## rose60610

I thought when you were in public you were fair game to be photographed. So on what grounds can they sue for being seen in a restaurant? Happens to other celebrities all the time.


----------



## Luvbolide

rose60610 said:


> I think the term "woke", started out as a well intentioned term in the 1940's for heightened awareness of social issues.  Then it seemed  in recent years (some) people went into overdrive to out-woke each other, finding racism absolutely everywhere and claiming that absolutely everybody and everything is racist. We see celebrities who don't like somebody for whatever reason calling them "RACIST!" even when the reason has zero to do with racism. Then we see journalists proudly using racist terms against certain minorities, (Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for example), and completely getting away with it. We see Markle's sugars calling her critics "racists" for pointing out her hypocrisy and idiotic actions. When any initially well-intentioned term becomes weaponized to absurd hypocritical extremes, it's only a matter to time before it becomes a derisive adjective.



Can’t let this just go by - what journalists proudly used racist terms against Justice Thomas?


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Are they now advertising for QS supplies?
> From my google search, QS Supplies is a store in the UK that sells toilets and other bathroom supplies.
> View attachment 5335682
> 
> *Meghan Markle lives in a 'luxurious' Montecito mansion with a luscious bathroom*
> 
> _However, QS supplies have provided Express.co.uk with digital 360 walkthroughs of Meghan and Harry’s luxurious bathroom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'luxurious' bathroom looks like a 'top five-star hotel' in £11.2m mansion
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry live in Montecito, Santa Barbara in an £11.2million mansion. Many of their rooms have been kept under wraps, however pictures of their luxurious bathroom have been revealed to Express.co.uk. So what does it look like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I certainly hope that these are the “before” pics - it looks like someone literally shoved a bunch of stand-alone units together, even though they are different colors and shapes/heights.  With a bench to sit on that is at twice as long as the space allotted for it and some kind of ridiculous fireplace that faces the door rather than warming/lighting up the room.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Are they now advertising for QS supplies?
> From my google search, QS Supplies is a store in the UK that sells toilets and other bathroom supplies.
> View attachment 5335682
> 
> *Meghan Markle lives in a 'luxurious' Montecito mansion with a luscious bathroom*
> 
> _However, QS supplies have provided Express.co.uk with digital 360 walkthroughs of Meghan and Harry’s luxurious bathroom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 'luxurious' bathroom looks like a 'top five-star hotel' in £11.2m mansion
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry live in Montecito, Santa Barbara in an £11.2million mansion. Many of their rooms have been kept under wraps, however pictures of their luxurious bathroom have been revealed to Express.co.uk. So what does it look like?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



That fireplace is fugly. Nouveau riche gaudy bathroom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the ol boy is fuming because the DM exposed his big lie to the Met Officers .  Ha ha, now he thinks suing is his salvation.
What a jerk.  Charles may want to stop this nonsense because it sullies QE’s reign as well as his.
IMO.


couldn’t resist this:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> The Counsellor of State  issue could be easily solved by 1) removing Hazz due to not residing in the UK (he would never resign), and 2) replacing Andy with Beatrice. I think Andy would resign at his mother's request, and his daughter is the next in line.
> Princess Anne as the second child of QE should take Hazz's place imo.
> 
> "_*Prince Harry*_* should not be eligible to stand in for the Queen as a Counsellor of State because he no longer resides in the country, a new parliamentary briefing paper reveals.*
> 
> _But Prince Andrew could still stand in for his mother should she become incapacitated, despite having to step down from public duties and relinquish his HRH title because of the Epstein scandal.
> 
> This week the House of Commons Library quietly published for the first time guidance on what arrangements can be put in place if a monarch is unable to perform their royal functions."_



Anne and Edward are my choices.  The rules should be changed to be _working royals only_.  Imo.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anne and Edward are my choices.  The rules should be changed to be _working royals only_.  Imo.


You have my vote!


----------



## Chanbal

Who was the fourth adult at dinner?


----------



## Chanbal

Excellent point!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Excellent point!




_Craving rejection _strangely enough, I can see how she would be like that. For those who work at the Palace, surely there are rules, procedures, policies about communicating with a ‘royal’ and rules for the royals when communicating with staff. For example, wonder if any of the staff can chat with Charles or Camilla. My guess is no.  Clearly MM needed her own personal assistant (aka, guard).

from TMZ - it kinda looks like him, I guess:
*Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.


Does Hazzie’s hand look odd?  Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Craving rejection _strangely enough, I can see how she would be like that. For those who work at the Palace, surely there are rules, procedures, policies about communicating with a ‘royal’ and rules for the royals when communicating with staff. For example, wonder if any of the staff can chat with Charles or Camilla. My guess is no.  Clearly MM needed her own personal assistant (aka, guard).
> 
> from TMZ - it kinda looks like him, I guess:
> *Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.
> View attachment 5335837
> 
> Does Hazzie’s hand look odd?  Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?


Why does Harry look like he’s stuffing food into his mouth with his hand?  Looks like how Cookie Monster stuffs cookies into his mouth…apologies to Cookie Monster!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Backgrid needs to explain these photos. This looks like a really odd dinner, especially photos 4 and 5. 








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Craving rejection _strangely enough, I can see how she would be like that. For those who work at the Palace, surely there are rules, procedures, policies about communicating with a ‘royal’ and rules for the royals when communicating with staff. For example, wonder if any of the staff can chat with Charles or Camilla. My guess is no.  Clearly MM needed her own personal assistant (aka, guard).
> 
> from TMZ - it kinda looks like him, I guess:
> *Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.
> View attachment 5335837
> 
> Does Hazzie’s hand look odd?  Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?


Jack’s placement is deliberate, he doesn’t generate headlines unless it’s yachting with a group of half naked women minus his wife, so he’s seated off center back to parking lot where the paps were probably planted. Gives a clearer access to the money targets, Raptor, Haz, and Eug the Mole. They threw him a bone by staging
 a shot that looks like he’s the source of whatever is causing Raptor to cause to bray like a donkey, mouth wide open. Such a regular guy that Jack.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does Hazzie’s hand look odd? * Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?*


I wonder if he wears wedding rings on both hands, one for the secret marriage and another one for the public marriage.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Craving rejection _strangely enough, I can see how she would be like that. For those who work at the Palace, surely there are rules, procedures, policies about communicating with a ‘royal’ and rules for the royals when communicating with staff. For example, wonder if any of the staff can chat with Charles or Camilla. My guess is no.  Clearly MM needed her own personal assistant (aka, guard).
> 
> from TMZ - it kinda looks like him, I guess:
> *Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.
> View attachment 5335837
> 
> *Does Hazzie’s hand look odd?  Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?*


@CarryOn2020  said " *Does Hazzie’s hand look odd?  Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?*  "



Chanbal said:


> *I wonder if he wears wedding rings on both hands, one for the secret marriage and another one for the public marriage.*


To recreate H's picture, place your left hand, palm down, across your mouth with your left pinkie resting on the right side of your lips and voilà.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




This sounds a bit out there. I can believe Raptor was once again inappropriate with an influential, rich guy, but Harry's supposed answer and his supposed text about a baby and a toddler hitting it off is just plain weird.


----------



## duna

I really hope there's a Palace enquiry regarding M's bullying allegations: she can't get away with *everything, *which seems the case so far. 

I've said this before and I'll say it again: back in their engagement period someone I know and who is "in the know", told me M was a horrible person who bullied staff.... I didn't beleive it at the time as I rather liked her, but since then she has shown her true self, and my friend was absolutely right!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Craving rejection _strangely enough, I can see how she would be like that. For those who work at the Palace, surely there are rules, procedures, policies about communicating with a ‘royal’ and rules for the royals when communicating with staff. For example, wonder if any of the staff can chat with Charles or Camilla. My guess is no.  Clearly MM needed her own personal assistant (aka, guard).
> 
> from TMZ - it kinda looks like him, I guess:
> *Princess Eugenie* and hubby *Jack Brooksbank* broke bread with Harry and Meghan in Santa Barbara over the weekend.
> View attachment 5335837
> 
> Does Hazzie’s hand look odd?  Does he wear his wedding ring on his right hand?


I don’t know if his hand looks odd, but I do hate when people touch their face, esp in public.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, in the privacy of my own home, I did try putting the  hand to the face, but I couldn’t work out the _gray_ shoulder. 
Since he is wearing all black, I guess that is not his shoulder. His shoulder and arm are curled in front of him - [physically protecting his heart? I’m still a novice on body language].   So, rather than sitting up straight like most 40 yr old men do, he is all curled up with his fingers in his mouth - almost like a fetal position. Maybe he is cringing at the braying hyena on this right. So many questions.

Looking for BLG to do his analysis


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The shade.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking for BLG to do his analysis


 See if you find it here:


----------



## Chanbal

Scoobie, minister of propaganda for MM is not happy!


----------



## Chanbal

It might not be the Oscars, but it's still an invite… 


_‘If Meghan Markle’s watching – I’m sure she is – if you want to be my first guest, we have a bit of unfinished business. I’m available.’
_








						Piers Morgan invites Meghan Markle to new show to 'settle unfinished business'
					

Could it happen?




					metro.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie, minister of propaganda for MM is not happy!




I find his conduct seriously bewildering. It is one thing to worship the ground Raptor walks on, another to publicly diss whomever he can get ahold of to drive his point home. In addition, it's kind of stupid when it's the future queen.


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find his conduct seriously bewildering. It is one thing to worship the ground Raptor walks on, another to publicly diss whomever he can get ahold of to drive his point home. In addition, it's kind of stupid when it's the future queen.




Agreed, his comment is very distasteful.....rather disturbing, in fact.  A poor quality individual who is surely past his sell-by date?.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking for BLG to do his analysis





Chanbal said:


> See if you find it here:



So according to the BLG video, the pictures were taken at Caruso's Restaurant - Rosewood Miramar Beach. Very convincing indeed!

This is a very interesting choice of restaurant, since Caruso represents big money (also a major donor) and is running for mayor in LA. It's also quite interesting that the pictures were carefully taken and did not include any reference to the restaurant (e.g., restaurant's name), which possibly indicates that the restaurant didn't want to pay for 'royal' advertisement.


----------



## Chanbal

In Piers's own words:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> So according to the BLG video, the pictures were taken at Caruso's Restaurant - Rosewood Miramar Beach. Very convincing indeed!
> 
> This is a very interesting choice of restaurant, since Caruso represents big money (also a major donor) and is running for mayor in LA. It's also quite interesting that the pictures were carefully taken and did not include any reference to the restaurant (e.g., restaurant's name), which possibly indicates that the restaurant didn't want to pay for 'royal' advertisement.



Interesting, indeed.  Plus, it is part of the Rosewood group. Lots of connections.

BLG scores again with the “creepy Goya painting”. 




MiniMabel said:


> Agreed, his comment is very distasteful.....rather disturbing, in fact.  A poor quality individual who is surely past his sell-by date?.



_Disturbing, distasteful _and  disgusting.  Interesting he feels so confident in posting garbage like that - thought twitter had monitors.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> In Piers's own words:




Whaaa? Express your thoughts _without_ being shamed????  Even if the roaring crowd disagrees with you????
Sign me up, please.


----------



## bellecate

Interesting read. Leaves me with a grimy feel. If true there is almost a micro of pity in me for Harry. Okay, maybe not, the nasty way he’s slagged his family.


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if he wears wedding rings on both hands, one for the secret marriage and another one for the public marriage.



All he needs is one............in his nose


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> Interesting read. Leaves me with a grimy feel. If true there is almost a micro of pity in me for Harry. Okay, maybe not, the nasty way he’s slagged his family.
> View attachment 5336283


I wrote a while ago the connection. DF was friends with the Mulroneys. I think when MM markled Jessica everything came tumbling down.  Apparently DF was long time friends with the family. I watched DF's documentary. He does not suffer fools, and he's pretty tough. Not that I like him or anything but that's what I think happened.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> See if you find it here:



Sometimes the BLG really outdoes himself!  This was one of those times... very informative!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> I wrote a while ago the connection. DF was friends with the Mulroneys. I think when MM markled Jessica everything came tumbling down.  Apparently DF was long time friends with the family. I watched DF's documentary. He does not suffer fools, and he's pretty tough. Not that I like him or anything but that's what I think happened.


DF and the Mulroneys are both Canadian and go way back and even though DF moved to the States years ago, he says he's still a proud Canadian. I can see him valuing his friendship with the Mulroneys.


----------



## csshopper

Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers. 

Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.

My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.  

*Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages 
11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers.
> 
> Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
> Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.
> 
> My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.
> 
> *Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages
> 11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...
> 
> View attachment 5336369




Once known, can't be unknown  

Edited to say I'm referring to the blurb not the photo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

No jewelry? Shocking.


----------



## poopsie

Another one giving me major Edgar vibes. Holy wow


----------



## MiniMabel

csshopper said:


> Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers.
> 
> Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
> Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.
> 
> My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.
> 
> *Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages
> 11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...
> 
> View attachment 5336369




Pardon?  Regal?  No, this is just a person who thinks highly of herself; her (and her husband's) behaviour is poor and is nowhere near the standard expected of a person who is unfortunately (although hopefully the titles etc will be removed and they will be plain Mr and Mrs Something) a member of the BRF.  

I don't think the photo is flattering at all. It looks manipulated, unfortunately.

The photos of Duchess Catherine are far superior, and she already looks like the real Queen she will one day be.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry needs to go back to the UK. There's a world crisis going on now. He can do a lot more good to his reputation and his country.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Why does Harry look like he’s stuffing food into his mouth with his hand?  Looks like how Cookie Monster stuffs cookies into his mouth…apologies to Cookie Monster!!!


I thought it looked like he was sucking three of his fingers...like the big baby he is!


----------



## MiniMabel

Lodpah said:


> Harry needs to go back to the UK. There's a world crisis going on now. He can do a lot more good to his reputation and his country.



The UK doesn't want him. His (and his wife's) reputation is beyond repair.  They could never be taken seriously after spouting so many lies.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Hmmm, she's hitting on yet another old, rich man.  SHOCKER.    

And Haz says they're jealous because of how "HOT" his wife is???  The only thing making her hot is her incessant use of overcoats in 80 degree weather!


----------



## poopsie

Her inappropriate behavior goes back to her teens and who knows, maybe even before that
I don't think she knows any other way to relate to men


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers.
> 
> Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
> Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.
> 
> My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.
> 
> *Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages
> 11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...
> 
> View attachment 5336369


Regal??  This looks like an old picture of her head photoshopped onto someone else's body.  And she's trying out her coy, flirtatious batting of her eyelashes.


----------



## bellecate

Lots of differences in not many months. Darkened her hair, darker foundation?


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Lots of differences in not many months. Darkened her hair, darker foundation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5336467
> View attachment 5336468


Hmmm, maybe she's embracing her black half now.  You know, whenever it's convenient!


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Lots of differences in not many months. Darkened her hair, darker foundation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5336467
> View attachment 5336468



That's not unusual for many women though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

bellecate said:


> Lots of differences in not many months. Darkened her hair, darker foundation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5336467
> View attachment 5336468



That is a lot of Botox.


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm, she's hitting on yet another old, rich man.  SHOCKER.
> 
> And Haz says they're jealous because of how "HOT" his wife is???  The only thing making her hot is her incessant use of overcoats in 80 degree weather!



Hot expired several years ago. 




purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm, maybe she's embracing her black half now.  You know, whenever it's convenient!



I noticed that too.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Lots of differences in not many months. Darkened her hair, darker foundation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5336467
> View attachment 5336468


where did the mole come from?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> where did the mole come from?


Cindy Crawford.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Regal??  This looks like an old picture of her head photoshopped onto someone else's body.  And she's trying out her coy, flirtatious batting of her eyelashes.


Either she was fooling us in the pap picture with the oversized clothing, or she lost a ton of weight or this is photoshopped.  She still is of the mindset that messy hair is OK.  Guess what?  It isn't, especially for a formal portrait.  Looking like you just rolled out of bed is not a good look.

ETA: Oh I get it!  Messy hair is supposed to make you look younger.  Guess what?  It just makes you look messy.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Either she was fooling us in the pap picture with the oversized clothing, or she lost a ton of weight or this is photoshopped.  She still is of the mindset that messy hair is OK.  Guess what?  It isn't, especially for a formal portrait.  Looking like you just rolled out of bed is not a good look.


Maybe she's thinking back on her days as a yacht girl, when looking like you just got out of bed was considered a positive?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's thinking back on her days as a yacht girl, when looking like you just got out of bed was considered a positive?


Certainly possible.  She is one of these women who either feel the need and /or believe that they are always desirable.  If the stories about her throwing herself at Prince Charles and  David Foster are true,  this could be her mindset.  Harry will think it great that all these men want her, because he swallowed the Kool Aid.  Maybe she did the same with George Clooney, because they are another couple ghosting them.  She probably ignored Jack Brooksbank because he is unimportant.

Little Rennie Foster had his first birthday party and the Sussex family was not invited.   Very telling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers.
> 
> Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
> Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.
> 
> My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.
> 
> *Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages
> 11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...
> 
> View attachment 5336369



A new pic? Unless that's heavily photoshopped she hasn't had that weight in a while.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Why would the Netflixes sue TMZ for their own press releases?
> 
> _Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been urged to sue TMZ for publishing paparazzi pictures of a dinner with Princess Eugenie.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed with Harry's cousin and her husband Jack Brooksbank over the weekend at a restaurant in Santa Barbara.
> 
> The pictures were released by TMZ on Tuesday and show the two couples arriving and sitting around a table in what appears to be an outside dining area surrounded by see-through plastic screens._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Urged to Sue Over Pictures at Restaurant With Eugenie
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were photographed having dinner with Princess Eugenie and images have been published on gossip site TMZ. Now a lawyer has told Newsweek the couple may be able to sue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


That article is just more clickbait. While one lawyer suggests they may have grounds to sue (of course he would!), another more reasonable (and less sue happy) one says they really don't have a legal leg to stand on since they opted to sit in a publicly visible spot. If they were concerned about privacy they could have eaten inside the restaurant. In fact, many fine dining restaurants have private dining rooms for those who actually want privacy. You know they wanted to be seen and photographed laughing it up with the Brooksbanks.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A new pic? Unless that's heavily photoshopped she hasn't had that weight in a while.


Photoshopped or not, that is not a flattering photo. Even if I did not know who she was, I would not consider that the facial expression of a warm, caring and genuine person. In that photo she comes across as scheming or devious rather than regal. The camera doesn't lie.


----------



## bellecate

Just no.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Hot expired several years ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Just no.
> View attachment 5336533



So, another tacky outfit that doesn’t fit? 
 Ok, this could be fun. *not*.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers.
> 
> Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
> Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.
> 
> My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.
> 
> *Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages
> 11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...
> 
> View attachment 5336369


She is finally coming out as the Witch of Montecito.


----------



## V0N1B2

bellecate said:


> Just no.
> View attachment 5336533


Past recipients of this award recognizing special achievement and distinguished public service are:
LeBron James
Rihanna
Muhammad Ali
Rev. Jessie Jackson
Jay-Z
Colin Powell
Condoleezza Rice





I mean… really? How much did they pay for it, because they have absolutely nothing in common with the above-named people. I’m beginning to get the feeling that nothing, and I mean nothing will ever bring this couple down. I bet she could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Just no.
> View attachment 5336533


WTAF have they, especially her, done for the NAACP???


----------



## bellecate

Ahhh, this helps explain it.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> Past recipients of this award recognizing special achievement and distinguished public service are:
> LeBron James
> Rihanna
> Muhammad Ali
> Rev. Jessie Jackson
> Jay-Z
> Colin Powell
> Condoleezza Rice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean… really? How much did they pay for it, because they have absolutely nothing in common with the above-named people. I’m beginning to get the feeling that nothing, and I mean nothing will ever bring this couple down. *I bet she could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and….*


Well, I'm sure if she did, she's give an Alec Baldwinesque interview, crying in another bird poop dress, making herself the victim and not at all at fault.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Ahhh, this helps explain it.
> View attachment 5336545


I swear, the list of organizations I have lost every iota of respect for grows longer by the minute.  If you can buy an award, it means $hit.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This response cracked me up.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.



That's what I was waiting for!  The dynamic duo's two cents on another world crisis!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> This response cracked me up.



Yes, all global leaders, do as they instruct and "Stand with the people of Ukraine".  I'm sure the virtual standing and verbal salad will help Ukrainians to the core.  
These two need to STFU, GTH, GTFO, and whatever other acronym possible to disappear.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> That's what I was waiting for!  The dynamic duo's two cents on another world crisis!


I think they should get their own seat in the UN security Council.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> where did the mole come from?


*UPDATE:* Evidently from an "prior" face.

This picture and the accompanying article from the GOODTOKNOW site was posted in the Apple News Feed from this morning. The headline is contemporary, but like many of you I thought the picture looked a little "off" but posted the item as it appeared on line.

Many of your comments mirrored questions I had about the photo.

Looked up the photographer who is credited for the photo, marcogrob, and his Instagram posting mentions taking photos of Meghan at a UN_Women function where she was a guest speaker in 2014.

Making this photo EIGHT years old. 

As with so many baffling Suckess decisions, why drag this out now and in the context of her "Royalty"


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Just no.
> View attachment 5336533





CarryOn2020 said:


> So, another tacky outfit that doesn’t fit?
> Ok, this could be fun. *not*.


I need these emojis: 
Sorry @CarryOn2020, I can't laugh at the thought of the tacky outfit yet.
@bellecate thanks for finding evidence that this is another recognition purchased via Sunshine S.


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.



Welp. Problem solved.


----------



## octopus17

I am truely sick of the pair of them and wish they would just shut up.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I think they should get *their own seat* in the UN security Council.


With Whoopee Cushions to let people know that they are farting from both ends.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I need these emojis:
> Sorry @CarryOn2020, I can't laugh at thought of the tacky outfit yet.
> @bellecate thanks for finding evidence that this is another purchased recognition via Sunshine S.



Neither can I. They really are the tiresome two.  



Cornflower Blue said:


> I am truely sick of the pair of them and wish they would just shut up.



They won’t. They have money, connections, and their dream life.  :yawn:



bellecate said:


> Ahhh, this helps explain it.



@bellecate excellent find. Thank you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, the list of organizations I have lost every iota of respect for grows longer by the minute.  If you can buy an award, it means $hit.



Most awards _are_ bought. Fact.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, the list of organizations I have lost every iota of respect for grows longer by the minute.  If you can buy an award, it means $hit.



True. And if you need to buy an awared, you are even bigger losers than we thought.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I think they should get their own seat in the UN security Council.



Please don't give them ideas


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.




What...Harry didn't write in to the president saying he had inside information?


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, a more suitable recognition!   

"_Contracts not honored and hidden money_"
TW and Ginger Guru
"_The Gotha Scammers_"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think they should get their own seat in the UN security Council.



Don't summon the Kraken.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cornflower Blue said:


> I am truely sick of the pair of them and wish they would just shut up.



You and me both.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What...Harry didn't write in to the president saying he had inside information?



This is prob why MI5/6 won't give H  (British) intelligence. Coz the guy has already proven himself a traitor and - and without any intelligence of his own


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> A more suitable recognition!
> 
> "_Contracts not honored and hidden money_"
> TW and Ginger Guru
> "_The Gotha Scammers_"



They will be sued for libel if they don't have proof.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Do I understand this correctly - they created an award and now are receiving an award??  This is next level scamming.

_The NAACP-Archewell Digital Civil Rights Award is a *newly* established annual award that is supported by the couple’s global nonprofit, Archewell Foundation, and administered by the NAACP. The award will honor individuals who are not only leaders of transformational change in progressing civil and human rights, but who also seek advancements in the digital rights space and work to expand equity.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Receive President’s Award at NAACP Image Awards
					

The couple's Archewell Foundation will team with the NAACP on the newly created NAACP-Archewell Digital Civil Rights Award.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com
				




ETA: rumor on LSA that the guy in the TMZ photos is Markus A, not Jack.   _


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't summon the Kraken.


Funny, that is what I tell my orange clueless boofhead (cat) when he is looking for his not so welcoming feline housemate


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> They will be sued for libel if they don't have proof.


If the Harkles are going to sue all magazines in Europe that publish this type of articles about them, they will need a lot more money than they have.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do I understand this correctly - they created an award and now are receiving an award??  This is next level scamming.
> 
> _The NAACP-Archewell Digital Civil Rights Award is a *newly* established annual award that is supported by the couple’s global nonprofit, Archewell Foundation, and administered by the NAACP. The award will honor individuals who are not only leaders of transformational change in progressing civil and human rights, but who also seek advancements in the digital rights space and work to expand equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Receive President’s Award at NAACP Image Awards
> 
> 
> The couple's Archewell Foundation will team with the NAACP on the newly created NAACP-Archewell Digital Civil Rights Award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: rumor on LSA that the guy in the TMZ photos is Markus A, not Jack.  _


I wasn't able to read everything, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
1) The Harkles are recipients of an award from an organization that lists Sunshine S. as media contact.
2) The Harkles created a new award and the recipient is the lady that wrote a praising article about them full of inaccuracies. All allegedly, of course.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.




Ah, that didn't take long. I knew they would not be able to resist putting out a statement.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

youngster said:


> Ah, that didn't take long. I knew they would not be able to resist putting out a statement.


They should really shut up and donate and not spew their b*llshit. I am from Romania and we are already receiving and helping people from Ukraine and the last thing I wanna see is their preaching and hypocritical behavior with their fake concern


----------



## jelliedfeels

Can’t find the post but I agree And just like that wasn’t great but I think the show just doesn’t work without Samantha, to me, she’s both the main comic character and the biggest B plot star of the friends. I’m sorry Miranda but they were kind of doomed. 




csshopper said:


> Apologies for the messy post, as I've admitted before, not the most nimble with data transfers.
> 
> Warning: Reading the full article on the GoodtoKnow site may induce vomiting.
> Also some info on Instagram and Twitter I think, but I'm not signed up on them.
> 
> My opinion, "Regal" NO!  "Snarky, sly, cunning and disdainful", YES.  At the most base level, Royal pictures do not include scraggly messy bun bits sticking out in profile. There is a comparison made in the article between this and one of Kate's 40th birthday pictures.
> 
> *Meghan Markle looks 'regal' in new portrait hinting at powerful ...*
> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/meghan-markle-regal-new-portrait-powerful-future-651876 - 410k - Cached - Similar pages
> 11 hours ago *...* *Meghan Markle* has sent out a 'regal' message to fans with the release of a *new portrait* that is seemingly hinting at a powerful future for ...
> 
> View attachment 5336369





bellecate said:


> Lots of differences in not many months. Darkened her hair, darker foundation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5336467
> View attachment 5336468


Not to be a know it all but I can’t understand how anyone can’t immediately tell this is an old photo as she’s missing about 2 pounds of filler in her face and she could still curl her lip upwards 

I guess we all anticipate the photoshop to be heavy with this one. I suppose latter point would also explain how she could still look skinny.


purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm, maybe she's embracing her black half now.  You know, whenever it's convenient!


I don’t think any self-respecting black woman would wear a weave that tangled.

I can’t believe she’s 40 and still hasn’t realised the whole advantage of wearing extensions is you can change it when it gets matted. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Do I understand this correctly - they created an award and now are receiving an award??  This is next level scamming.
> 
> _The NAACP-Archewell Digital Civil Rights Award is a *newly* established annual award that is supported by the couple’s global nonprofit, Archewell Foundation, and administered by the NAACP. The award will honor individuals who are not only leaders of transformational change in progressing civil and human rights, but who also seek advancements in the digital rights space and work to expand equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Receive President’s Award at NAACP Image Awards
> 
> 
> The couple's Archewell Foundation will team with the NAACP on the newly created NAACP-Archewell Digital Civil Rights Award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: rumor on LSA that the guy in the TMZ photos is Markus A, not Jack.  _


Well that’s pretty cringe inducing for everyone involved - well spotted.
I mean I know The NAACP must be desperate for some buzz given a lot of media attention has been devoted exclusively to another organisation for the last few years and that must have hit their donations but Jesus have some integrity.


----------



## tiktok

99% of comments are aligned with this thread.


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> They can go to The Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, which is much closer to SB.  The Inn has been known for decades for the theme rooms and is a popular honeymoon spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 110 Unique Guest Rooms — Madonna Inn | World-Famous California Hotel
> 
> 
> Browse our collection of uniquely themed guest rooms - no two rooms are alike!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.madonnainn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Love Nest
> View attachment 5334021
> 
> 
> 
> or The Cave Room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tackiness is part of the charm,  Meg should love it,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5334022


Don't knock it until you've tried it.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> Past recipients of this award recognizing special achievement and distinguished public service are:
> LeBron James
> Rihanna
> Muhammad Ali
> Rev. Jessie Jackson
> Jay-Z
> Colin Powell
> Condoleezza Rice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean… really? How much did they pay for it, because they have absolutely nothing in common with the above-named people. I’m beginning to get the feeling that nothing, and I mean nothing will ever bring this couple down. I bet she could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and….


Well, they did achieve something special - in the negative sense...  
Why are they getting awards for doing nothing?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Well, they did achieve something special - in the negative sense...
> Why are they getting awards for doing nothing?



What else they gotta do?   

Actually, I feel happiest when they do nothing, it's when they even _try_ to do stuff I get worried.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> What else they gotta do?
> 
> Actually, I feel happiest when they do nothing, it's when they even _try_ to do stuff I get worried.


So true....


----------



## Luvbolide

duna said:


> I really hope there's a Palace enquiry regarding M's bullying allegations: she can't get away with *everything, *which seems the case so far.
> 
> I've said this before and I'll say it again: back in their engagement period someone I know and who is "in the know", told me M was a horrible person who bullied staff.... I didn't beleive it at the time as I rather liked her, but since then she has shown her true self, and my friend was absolutely right!



A private law firm was hired to do an investigation into the bullying a few months ago, as I recall.  At least in the US, reports from such inves


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.



It's got that "we said it first (me, me, me, me!); line up behind us" tone. I'm afraid not only is she a bully, she is a playground bully.


----------



## Sferics

lanasyogamama said:


> I do hate when people touch their face, esp in public.


What? I didn't know, this is a thing?!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sferics said:


> What? I didn't know, this is a thing?!


It may just be a “me” thing! I imagine all the germs they’re touching on doorknobs, etc, getting right into eyes nose and mouth, plus the pimples it could cause!


----------



## Chanbal

One more 'achievement' for the allegedly heroes of bandwagons!
I don't know if I should cry or laugh. The allegedly nincompoops have the rare talent of turning news about a terrifying event (war) into this type of responses:










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle say they 'stand with' people of Ukraine
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were ridiculed on social media today after intervening in the Ukraine crisis with a statement condemning Vladimir Putin's invasion.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

no further comments


----------



## piperdog

papertiger said:


> Please don't give them ideas


They can take turns being the Ambassador from Chunga Changa.


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #1
					

Apparently the ginger haired one wants to make his living suing people who write about him or criticize him. He just looks even more whiny.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

piperdog said:


> They can take turns being the Ambassador from Chunga Changa.



I'm sure they have more worthy candidates in Chunga Chunga


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were able to suss out which side they need to stand on.



there's another side to stand on?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> Apparently the ginger haired one wants to make his living suing people who write about him or criticize him. He just looks even more whiny.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Whiny and greedy - he never knows when to STOP

Pride before a fall


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> It may just be a “me” thing! I imagine all the germs they’re touching on doorknobs, etc, getting right into eyes nose and mouth, plus the pimples it could cause!


I'm the same way. I think it started when I was a teen and I worried that touching my face would aggravate my acne. To this day I pretty much only touch my face to put makeup on.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True. And if you need to buy an awared, you are even bigger losers than we thought.


So when can we expect them to get their star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame? Oh wait, they'd have to pay something like $60k for that, so not anytime soon.


----------



## Sferics

lanasyogamama said:


> It may just be a “me” thing! I imagine all the germs they’re touching on doorknobs, etc, getting right into eyes nose and mouth, plus the pimples it could cause!


Oh okay, I see, and you're right of course...and yes, I'd never touch my face without washing my hands before. Where was my brain?


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting view!


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> 99% of comments are aligned with this thread.



I don't see what they have done to deserve this....sad to think it's been bought


----------



## TC1

lanasyogamama said:


> It may just be a “me” thing! I imagine all the germs they’re touching on doorknobs, etc, getting right into eyes nose and mouth, plus the pimples it could cause!


Oh, same here. It's a big thing for me. I can't stand it..or when people put their fingers near or in their mouth. Umm, no. One of the biggest messages of how to avoid Covid in the ad campaigns here from the government were "frequent hand washing and avoid touching your face"


----------



## Sferics

I totally love how they put on that super strong light on the table. This is exactly what you want for such an event...so eye-friendly and cosy, isn't it? It had nothing to do with better light for the paps, hm?


----------



## Chanbal

Strong views. It's a long article… 



_The NAACP recently announced that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, whose sole accomplishment in the last two years is one 35-minute Spotify podcast, are being given the NAACP President’s Award for heeding “the call to social justice” and “the struggle for equity.” It’s just another self-aggrandizing award given to a pointless and selfish couple who live a life of immense privilege while giving little of themselves or their money to charity…

But apparently, *this pointless, directionless and talentless couple will now be given the President’s Award by the NAACP *(National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), a civil rights organization in the United States. In addition, the couple are also partnering with the NAACP through their charity Archewell…_

*But what have Harry and Meghan done to advance “social justice” or “civil rights?” Absolutely nothing…*

_The only reasons why they are receiving this award is that they probably bought it through the partnership with the NAACP and their status as a biracial royal couple. That’s it…

When Harry and Meghan took too many private jets while chastising others about the impact of air travel on climate change, the public and media called foul. When Meghan continually broke royal protocol and walked in front of her husband, the public and media caught on to her distain for royal traditions, protocols and the institution. And, when Meghan accumulated $1,000,000 in maternity outfits and could never stop clutching her baby bump, whether large or nonexistent, people called her out…

They aren’t. *Real change takes effort, honesty, integrity, grit, determination, humility, honor, passion, sacrifice and love. Harry and Meghan have none of these qualities, well, except for love. They love money, titles and themselves.*_









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Be Given Award by NAACP for ‘Social Justice.’ It’s Just Another Self-Aggrandizing Moment for the Directionless Couple
					

The NAACP recently announced that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, whose sole accomplishment in the last two years is one 35-minute Spotify podcast, are being given the NAACP President’s Award for h…




					royalnewsnetwork.com


----------



## poopsie

V0N1B2 said:


> Past recipients of this award recognizing special achievement and distinguished public service are:
> LeBron James
> Rihanna
> Muhammad Ali
> Rev. Jessie Jackson
> Jay-Z
> Colin Powell
> Condoleezza Rice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean… really? How much did they pay for it, because they have absolutely nothing in common with the above-named people. I’m beginning to get the feeling that nothing, and I mean nothing will ever bring this couple down. I bet she could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and….



lebron is a tool


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, the list of organizations I have lost every iota of respect for grows longer by the minute.  If you can buy an award, it means $hit.



The participation trophy kids are running things now


----------



## poopsie

pukasonqo said:


> Funny, that is what I tell my orange clueless boofhead (cat) when he is looking for his not so welcoming feline housemate



You can't tell cats _anything  _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Strong views. It's a long article…
> View attachment 5337071
> 
> 
> _The NAACP recently announced that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, whose sole accomplishment in the last two years is one 35-minute Spotify podcast, are being given the NAACP President’s Award for heeding “the call to social justice” and “the struggle for equity.” It’s just another self-aggrandizing award given to a pointless and selfish couple who live a life of immense privilege while giving little of themselves or their money to charity…
> 
> But apparently, *this pointless, directionless and talentless couple will now be given the President’s Award by the NAACP *(National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), a civil rights organization in the United States. In addition, the couple are also partnering with the NAACP through their charity Archewell…_
> 
> *But what have Harry and Meghan done to advance “social justice” or “civil rights?” Absolutely nothing…*
> 
> _The only reasons why they are receiving this award is that they probably bought it through the partnership with the NAACP and their status as a biracial royal couple. That’s it…
> 
> When Harry and Meghan took too many private jets while chastising others about the impact of air travel on climate change, the public and media called foul. When Meghan continually broke royal protocol and walked in front of her husband, the public and media caught on to her distain for royal traditions, protocols and the institution. And, when Meghan accumulated $1,000,000 in maternity outfits and could never stop clutching her baby bump, whether large or nonexistent, people called her out…
> 
> They aren’t. *Real change takes effort, honesty, integrity, grit, determination, humility, honor, passion, sacrifice and love. Harry and Meghan have none of these qualities, well, except for love. They love money, titles and themselves.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Will Be Given Award by NAACP for ‘Social Justice.’ It’s Just Another Self-Aggrandizing Moment for the Directionless Couple
> 
> 
> The NAACP recently announced that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, whose sole accomplishment in the last two years is one 35-minute Spotify podcast, are being given the NAACP President’s Award for h…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalnewsnetwork.com


Shame shame shame. How much was the organization given for this travesty


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> there's another side to stand on?


The other side might have jewels to offer!


----------



## poopsie

Maybe she can go assist Sean Penn if she feels that strongly about it


----------



## papertiger

Sferics said:


> I totally love how they put on that super strong light on the table. This is exactly what you want for such an event...so eye-friendly and cosy, isn't it? It had nothing to do with better light for the paps, hm?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337027



Shy paranoids don't normally take window seats at cafes and restaurants either


----------



## charlottawill

Sferics said:


> I totally love how they put on that super strong light on the table. This is exactly what you want for such an event...so eye-friendly and cosy, isn't it? It had nothing to do with better light for the paps, hm?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337027


I'd need my sunglasses with that


----------



## bag-mania

Has Eugenie gone home yet or will we be treated to photos of another royal California outing next week?


----------



## Chanbal

If I hadn't joined this thread, I wouldn't be able to believe in so many absurds.


_The Duke of Sussex has complained that he was not given the identities of those behind a decision to deny him police protection when he is in the UK, the High Court has heard._


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> If I hadn't joined this thread, I wouldn't be able to believe in so many absurds.
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex has complained that he was not given the identities of those behind a decision to deny him police protection when he is in the UK, the High Court has heard._



The Prince of Paranoia


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> If I hadn't joined this thread, I wouldn't be able to believe in so many absurds.
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex has complained that he was not given the identities of those behind a decision to deny him police protection when he is in the UK, the High Court has heard._



Does he want to sue them and individually intimidate them into giving in?
He wants to create the impression of a faceless Big Brother denying him his rights.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> If I hadn't joined this thread, I wouldn't be able to believe in so many absurds.
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex has complained that he was not given the identities of those behind a decision to deny him police protection when he is in the UK, the High Court has heard._



Yeah because that would be super appropriate!


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> Does he want to sue them and individually intimidate them into giving in?
> He wants to create the impression of a faceless Big Brother denying his his rights.



Ironically, Harry the Hypocrite wants to deny them the same right of privacy to which he thinks he is entitled.


----------



## octopus17

Chanbal said:


> If I hadn't joined this thread, I wouldn't be able to believe in so many absurds.
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex has complained that he was not given the identities of those behind a decision to deny him police protection when he is in the UK, the High Court has heard._



His sense of entitlement is off the scale !! He is beyond the pale...


----------



## marietouchet

Cornflower Blue said:


> His sense of entitlement is off the scale !! He is beyond the pale...


It is as if he is saying his family is more in danger in his native land than in California


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> It is as if he is saying his family is more in danger in his native land than in California


Showing that he acknowledges that he doesn't need ANY protection here, despite trying to get it when they arrived. He doesn't need it here because no one cares or knows who he is. The only threat  that Harry has in the UK is that of being bombarded with rotten tomatoes.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Does he want to sue them and individually intimidate them into giving in?
> He wants to create the impression of a faceless Big Brother denying his his rights.


If the Sussex read the social media despite claims to not do so, they will see that he is now considered to be the "suing Prince."  The man on the street has his number.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

His next step might be to try to list who gets police protection and question why they get it and he doesn't.
Fatima QC and Jenny Afia: We have determined that the entity codenamed Downing St PM has police protection. Said entity was not entitled to this as his birthright. What was the decision making process that granted him the protection and why is it not afforded to my client who has a weightier claim to it due to his inclusion in the line of succession?

I thought QCs were respected lawyers and not such base guns for hire that have to be rebuked by the judge. Hazard might as well hire Giuliani and Powell.


----------



## Chanbal

Hope the BLG is right: "_How Meghan's Political Push Became A SAD JOKE"   _


----------



## bag-mania

So help me, here’s the actual headline Elle magazine used for the pap shots of them at dinner with Eugenie. We are supposed to believe it’s rare for Meghan to be off-duty. Can someone please remind me when Meghan Markle was last  “on duty?” I think the last time she did anything was that New York City trip last fall where they stormed the UN. 

*Here's A Rare Look At Meghan Markle's Off-Duty Double Date Style*
The Duchess of Sussex was photographed out with Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie, and Jack Brooksbank in Santa Barbara.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Showing that he acknowledges that he doesn't need ANY protection here, despite trying to get it when they arrived. He doesn't need it here because no one cares or knows who he is. The only threat  that Harry has in the UK is that of being bombarded with rotten tomatoes.


He makes more of an azz of himself all the time. Jesus, the BLG, did his due diligence and identified the restaurant setting where the supposedly ribald dinner that had the royals braying for the cameras took place. Not only were they front and center, illuminated with garishly bright candles, they were sat at a table along the perimeter of the outside dining area. They were exposed to open beach, any sniper who had any interest in doing harm would have felt he/she had been treated to open targets in a shooting gallery.  Hypocrite Harry on display again.

His real fear about security in London is, as you said, being bombarded by rotten tomatoes, the boos to he and TW might necessitate wearing noise cancelling headphones. Also would blot out if someone shouted "Meghan, Squat!" and she flashed back to the Ellen Show and dropped her butt to the ground.

Their mockable pronouncements and behaviors are past the point of any redeeming statements or activities. They may as well flush the $$$ spent at Sunshine Sucks down one of their 16 toilets. Oprah caught on to them too late and has had to retreat, the NAACP, may come to regret being used as part of their show. 


bag-mania said:


> So help me, here’s the actual headline Elle magazine used for the pap shots of them at dinner with Eugenie. We are supposed to believe it’s rare for Meghan to be off-duty. Can someone please remind me when Meghan Markle was last  “on duty?” I think the last time she did anything was that New York City trip last fall where they stormed the UN.
> 
> *Here's A Rare Look At Meghan Markle's Off-Duty Double Date Style*
> The Duchess of Sussex was photographed out with Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie, and Jack Brooksbank in Santa Barbara.


“Style” what style?   Must be slow at Elle these days. This article is useless.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> So help me, here’s the actual headline Elle magazine used for the pap shots of them at dinner with Eugenie. We are supposed to believe it’s rare for Meghan to be off-duty. Can someone please remind me when Meghan Markle was last  “on duty?” I think the last time she did anything was that New York City trip last fall where they stormed the UN.
> 
> *Here's A Rare Look At Meghan Markle's Off-Duty Double Date Style*
> The Duchess of Sussex was photographed out with Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie, and Jack Brooksbank in Santa Barbara.


I read somewhere that allegedly Eugenie will be participating in Netflix and Spotify with the Harkles.


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> lebron is a tool


Tbf I’m sure there’s someone someone doesn’t like out of everyone on the list but at least I can tell you what career all of them had.

I can’t believe that none of the academics at the NACCP didn’t notice that they are promoting a biracial woman who is only promoted by the media because she married a more famous white man (not to mention that white man has been publicly criticised for being racist in the past)
& that’s a pretty lousy throwback of a message.

Actually, I’m sure a lot of them did but money talked and I hope money continues talking in their donations drying up after this stunt.




Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that allegedly Eugenie will be participating in Netflix and Spotify with the Harkles.


Personally I would welcome this. I can’t believe everyone in the family has proven as immune to their top notch education as Harry. 
Surely she’s been taught to play the piano or flute or something and we might finally get a minute of vague entertainment with one of their products as she bangs out ‘when the saints come marching in’ or ‘hot cross buns’


----------



## V0N1B2

jelliedfeels said:


> ….
> Surely she’s been taught to play the piano or flute or something and we might finally get a minute of vague entertainment with one of their products as she bangs out ‘when the saints come marching in’ or ‘hot cross buns’


#DEAD


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## redney

Hm, is Vladimir Putin available? Seems to be up her alley...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He seems too busy to date these days. 

(also, he's rumoured to have a longtime relationship with a former gymnastics world champion 30 years younger than him)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




I do wonder...everyone but the poor idiot knows or what is the deal?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Did anyone spot a small item in the Mail today reporting that Chelsey Davy has just had a baby boy. 

Delighted for her - it must be annoying that she is still primarily known as Harry's ex despite her accomplishments. (She did Law at Leeds - highly regarded law school and not easy to get a place there - as well as training contract with/working at 2 top tier Law firms in London*)

I used to think Chelsey would be Harry's Camilla - a late second marriage to the one he should not have let get away.
Today, I would advise her to run for the hills if he ever came near her. I suspect that Meghan has the capacity to be the ex-wife from hell.

* not just pretending to be a legal executive like someone else


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Did anyone spot a small item in the Mail today reporting that Chelsey Davy has just had a baby boy.



I didn't even know she was dating anyone.



> I used to think Chelsey would be Harry's Camilla - a late second marriage to the one he should not have let get away.
> Today, I would advise her to run for the hills if he ever came near her.



Yeah. I fully understand why she bowed out in the first place, but also, I am 100% positive with her he wouldn't have spiraled so out of control.



> I suspect that Meghan has the capacity to be the ex-wife from hell.



OMG yes. Good thing she completely lost interest in Trevor.


----------



## csshopper

RAINDANCE said:


> Did anyone spot a small item in the Mail today reporting that Chelsey Davy has just had a baby boy.
> 
> Delighted for her - it must be annoying that she is still primarily known as Harry's ex despite her accomplishments. (She did Law at Leeds - highly regarded law school and not easy to get a place there - as well as training contract with/working at 2 top tier Law firms in London*)
> 
> I used to think Chelsey would be Harry's Camilla - a late second marriage to the one he should not have let get away.
> Today, I would advise her to run for the hills if he ever came near her. I suspect that Meghan has the capacity to be the ex-wife from hell.
> 
> * not just pretending to be a legal executive like someone else


Smart lady to have moved beyond a loser like Hazbeen. Amazing how achievable privacy and discretion are when the person genuinely chooses to live a circumspect life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Royal author Richard Kay on Harry and Chelsey:



> "And I suspect unless something catastrophic happens, they will marry.”



And something catastrophic did indeed happen, albeit after their split.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> Hm, is Vladimir Putin available? Seems to be up her alley...


Wow, you read my mind! According to Wikipedia, he is single!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The one problem I see here: can you imagine that guy being led around by an iron claw around his ...? I don't, and I doubt Raptor is interested in being put in her place at all.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



People are just shocked by so much alleged greed, corruption…


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The one problem I see here: can you imagine that guy being led around by an iron claw around his ...? I don't, and I doubt Raptor is interested in being put in her place at all.


It could work. They share a dream… allegedly


Spoiler: The dream


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I shouldn't laugh because everything is possible with these two. I want to know who the freaking shadow figure is, because those two losers aren't smart, talented, important or influential all on their own, and at this point I doubt they even have the cash to pay for all that sh*t that is supposed to make them look better.

ETA: that was about the Nobel Peace Prize.


----------



## Chanbal

Simple and meaningful imo


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I shouldn't laugh because everything is possible with these two. *I want to know who the freaking shadow figure is*, because those two losers aren't smart, talented, important or influential all on their own, and at this point I doubt they even have the cash to pay for all that sh*t that is supposed to make them look better.
> 
> ETA: that was about the Nobel Peace Prize.


----------



## Chanbal

Yes, please! 










						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Can't Harry and Meghan please put a sock in it?
					

PLATELL'S PEOPLE: What is so drearily predictable is their deluded belief that we linger on every one of their profound words.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that allegedly Eugenie will be participating in Netflix and Spotify with the Harkles.



Don’t know where that rumor is coming from but it wouldn’t surprise me. I think Eugenie does work on a podcast, doesn’t she? If the true purpose of her visit was to spill whatever dirt she has so H&M can profit from it, then she doesn’t have much sense. Was there a film crew following them at the Super Bowl? That would have been a tip off that something was up.


----------



## Mqosam7171307

Chanbal said:


> Yes, please!
> View attachment 5337724
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Can't Harry and Meghan please put a sock in it?
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: What is so drearily predictable is their deluded belief that we linger on every one of their profound words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



But Perjury Barbie and White Savior Harry were given an award by the NAACP, so they’re, like, practically on the same level as the President, YOU GUYS.  I personally could not form my own opinion on the conflict until these two Mensa members weighed in.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He seems too busy to date these days.
> 
> (also, he's rumoured to have a longtime relationship with a former gymnastics world champion 30 years younger than him)


Also has a child with her.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah. I fully understand why she bowed out in the first place, but also, I am 100% positive with her he wouldn't have spiraled so out of control.


Relationships in which there is an intellectual imbalance don't often succeed, if you get my drift.


----------



## csshopper

Shade falling on the Markles and the NAACP Award they purchased for themselves. They receive it tonight.

Meantime, hours ahead of all that with plenty of time for major international press coverage: (1) The international Sixth Nations Rugby Championship game between England and Wales was played. Extra spotlights shining on it as it's the first time the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were there as competitive Patrons, he for England, she for Wales. More emphasis as the Duchess replaced the Hapless Hazbeen Harry as the Wales Patron and this was her first Championship in that role. To make it even better, Prince George accompanied his parents, maybe as a "referee?"  He seems to have had a growth spurt, delightful to see him and to see his interactions with his parents. England defeated Wales, 23 -19.

(2) MEMEMEghan and her Handbag shared their Archewell Foundation platitudes about the war in Ukraine yesterday. I have visions of a  "Templates for All Occasions" File on the office computers, and when needed, with a few clicks, one is retrieved and the blanks are filled in. "Send"  and they sit back waiting for rapturous praise to rain down on them for their expressed thoughts.

In contrast, across the pond, the future King and Queen of England, real royalty, posted a personal message of support to President Volodymyr Zelenska and "all of Ukraine's People" referencing the time the two couples met in 2020 at Buckingham Palace. A picture of that meeting, currently being reposted, shows two young couples engaged in conversation where the Duke and Duchess learned about the  President's "hope and optimism for Ukraine's future". Knowing the Ukraine President and his Wife are parents of two children and that the President has acknowledged his family is in danger of assassination, the Cambridge's Tweet has a certain poignancy I think. It is unusual for any politically tinged communication to come from the RF, but this one comes from the hearts of two good people sharing genuine concern, not from a dubious charity seeking headlines.

The Markles will get publicity, they always do, if for no other reason than to see what she stuffs her body in tonight, but if Sunshine Sucks thought they were buying the big deal of the day, oops, they should have checked the calendar before they opened the check book.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> Must be slow at Elle these days. This article is useless.



They keep trying to make fetch happen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

poopsie said:


> lebron is a tool


I live in Chicago-land--don't get me started on Jesse Jackson (or his son or daughter-in-law, both spent time in the slammer).


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Shade falling on the Markles and the NAACP Award they purchased for themselves. They receive it tonight.
> 
> Meantime, hours ahead of all that with plenty of time for major international press coverage: (1) The international Sixth Nations Rugby Championship game between England and Wales was played. Extra spotlights shining on it as it's the first time the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were there as competitive Patrons, he for England, she for Wales. More emphasis as the Duchess replaced the Hapless Hazbeen Harry as the Wales Patron and this was her first Championship in that role. To make it even better, Prince George accompanied his parents, maybe as a "referee?"  He seems to have had a growth spurt, delightful to see him and to see his interactions with his parents. England defeated Wales, 23 -19.
> 
> (2) MEMEMEghan and her Handbag shared their Archewell Foundation platitudes about the war in Ukraine yesterday. I have visions of a  "Templates for All Occasions" File on the office computers, and when needed, with a few clicks, one is retrieved and the blanks are filled in. "Send"  and they sit back waiting for rapturous praise to rain down on them for their expressed thoughts.
> 
> In contrast, across the pond, the future King and Queen of England, real royalty, posted a personal message of support to Presidentd Volodymyr Zelenska and "all of Ukraine's People" referencing the time the two couples met in 2020 at Buckingham Palace. A picture of that meeting, currently being reposted, shows two young couples engaged in conversation where the Duke and Duchess learned about the  President's "hope and optimism for Ukraine's future". Knowing the Ukraine President and his Wife are parents of two children and that the President has acknowledged his family is in danger of assassination, the Cambridge's Tweet has a certain poignancy I think. It is unusual for any politically tinged communication to come from the RF, but this one comes from the hearts of two good people sharing genuine concern, not from a dubious charity seeking headlines.
> 
> The Markles will get publicity, they always do, if for no other reason than to see what she stuffs her body in tonight, but if Sunshine Sucks thought they were buying the big deal of the day, oops, they should have checked the calendar before they opened the check book.


I am also looking forward to whatever she wears (badly). She will not disappoint.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Shade falling on the Markles and the NAACP Award they purchased for themselves. They receive it tonight.
> 
> Meantime, hours ahead of all that with plenty of time for major international press coverage: (1) The international Sixth Nations Rugby Championship game between England and Wales was played. Extra spotlights shining on it as it's the first time the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were there as competitive Patrons, he for England, she for Wales. More emphasis as the Duchess replaced the Hapless Hazbeen Harry as the Wales Patron and this was her first Championship in that role. To make it even better, Prince George accompanied his parents, maybe as a "referee?"  He seems to have had a growth spurt, delightful to see him and to see his interactions with his parents. England defeated Wales, 23 ain down on them for their expressed thoughts.
> 
> In contrast, across the pond, the future King and Queen of England,
> /QUOTE]





csshopper said:


> Shade falling on the Markles and the NAACP Award they purchased for themselves. They receive it tonight.
> 
> Meantime, hours ahead of all that with plenty of time for major international press coverage: (1) The international Sixth Nations Rugby Championship game between England and Wales was played. Extra spotlights shining on it as it's the first time the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge were there as competitive Patrons, he for England, she for Wales. More emphasis as the Duchess replaced the Hapless Hazbeen Harry as the Wales Patron and this was her first Championship in that role. To make it even better, Prince George accompanied his parents, maybe as a "referee?"  He seems to have had a growth spurt, delightful to see him and to see his interactions with his parents. England defeated Wales, 23 -19.
> 
> In contrast, across the pond, the future King and Queen of England,


Apologies to correct you, it's the Six Nations not Sixth. He was there as Patron of the Wales Rugby Union, she was for England. 
They are the future King and Queen of the UK. 
Sorry again.


----------



## Lounorada

V0N1B2 said:


> More of The Hand in action.
> No no Harry, me first. I'm next in line after Camilla. Me. Not you. Me.
> Me me me me me me me me me me me me me





V0N1B2 said:


> It's like she read a couple of books on neurolinguistic programming. Put your hand on Harry's back and *poof* he steps aside and lets her walk in front. Every.Single.Time.









gracekelly said:


> I would not suggest her reading this site before bedtime.  It could keep her awake.









gracekelly said:


> Logan Roy would have told her that if she didn’t shape up, she would be lucky to find a job working as a hostess on one of his cruise ships


Logan Roy would more likely tell her...






Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5264717









pukasonqo said:


> But not enough concern to suggest that MM should not wear the diamond earrings gifted by a Saudi royal probably involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi









Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5267208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People stuck in jobs that don't bring them joy should QUIT, says Harry
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex told US business magazine Fast Company that 'with self-awareness comes the need for change' and that the many job resignations during the pandemic 'aren't all bad'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk









Chanbal said:


> I bet she regretted to have sued the DM.
> 
> *EXCLUSIVE: Harry and Meghan are setting up a complex network of 11 companies - named after the Duchess's freckles (Peca), a South American river (Orinoco) and their 'babymoon' (Hampshire) - all based in tax haven Delaware*
> 
> *DailyMail.com can reveal Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are setting up a network of companies based in the opaque tax haven Delaware*
> *Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal*
> *One of the firms appears to be set up for Harry's multi-million-dollar memoir book deal*
> *Names for the companies include an intriguing Japanese term for deal making and a reference to Meghan's freckles in Spanish*
> *Another is named after a river flowing through Colombia and Venezuela*
> *The companies are all headquartered in the Beverly Hills offices of attorney Richard Genow, who has worked with the Duchess for years*
> *Also appearing on company filings for the firms is her business manager Andrew Meyer, a well-connected money guru *
> *Royal tycoons: Harry and Meghan's 11 Delaware-based companies revealed *
> *Peca Publishing*, LLC - Set up in September 2020 and used by Meghan to hold the rights for her children's book The Bench. Peca means 'freckle' in Spanish
> *Orinoco Publishing*, LLC – Registered on December 22, 2021. It is unclear what the couple will use Orinoco for, though it is likely it was set up to hold the rights for Harry's blockbuster book deal with Penguin Random House for his memoir, due for publication later this year
> *Cobblestone Lane*, LLC - Incorporated in Delaware in February 2020 and five days later was used as the applicant to file for the Archewell trademark
> *IPHW*, LLC - A second trademark logo for Archewell was filed, with just the letters 'AW' on top of each other. It was filed  under Delaware firm, IPHW LLC
> *Archewell Audio*, LLC - Registered in November 2021. Used to facilitate the Sussexes' high-profile entertainment deals with Netflix and Spotify
> *Archewell Productions*, LLC - Entertainment company used for businesses with lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals
> *Baobab Holdings*, LLC -Set up in February 2021. According to company documents, the firm was for 'investments'. The distinctive baobab tree is native to Africa and Australia
> *Bridgemount*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021
> *Hampshire*, LLC - Entertainment company founded in January 2021. The name may be a reference to Harry and Meghan's memorable holiday at a Hampshire five-star 18th century Georgian mansion where they had a three-night stay in the final weeks of Meghan's pregnancy in Spring 2019
> *Nemawashi* *Holdings*, LLC -Set up September 2020 and was described only as a 'holding company'. Nemawashi is a Japanese term meaning the informal process of quietly laying the foundation for a project
> *RPV Holdings*, LLC - Set up in August 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan setting up tangled network of companies in Delaware
> 
> 
> Meghan's longtime lawyer and business manager have incorporated 11 companies and a trust for the couple since April 2020, state filings reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


OK DailyMail!






Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5332341
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry faces hefty bill if he loses security battle as 'public purse hit'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry faces coughing up a hefty bill if he loses his High Court battle for security to cover the hit to the public purse. The Duke of Sussex, 37, launched legal action against the Government…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.ie









bag-mania said:


> What the ????
> 
> *Meghan Markle's Giorgio Armani gown worn during bombshell Oprah interview is set to go on display at the Fashion Museum in Bath after being named the 2021 'dress of the year'*
> 
> *The black and white silk dress worn by Meghan Markle during her bombshell Oprah interview is set to go display at the Fashion Museum in Bath this year *
> *Duchess wore  black triple silk georgette dress with deep front, lotus flower embroidery and matching belt from Giorgio Armani's SS22 Cruise Collection*
> *Visitors to Bath's Fashion Museum will soon be able to see a version of the dress as past of the : 'A History of Fashion in 100 Objects' exhibition*


Seriously? The bird-sh*t dress???!!!






Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5335309









lanasyogamama said:


> Harry sues again!



ANOTHER lawsuit?


Who does he think he is? Chief Suer of the world?
He's more like a _sewer _rat.




Chanbal said:


> _*The Duke of Sussex has complained that he was not given the identities of those behind a decision to deny him police protection when he is in the UK, the High Court has heard.*_


----------



## lanasyogamama

Any predictions for tonight’s outfit? Will she try to have her metallic moment, a La Kate and Camilla at the Bond premiere? Or is it a future presidential candidate lewk with a pantsuit?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Any predictions for tonight’s outfit? Will she try to have her metallic moment, a La Kate and Camilla at the Bond premiere? Or is it a future presidential candidate lewk with a pantsuit?



Whatever it is it will be a size too small and not flattering on her figure.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Whatever it is it will be a size too small and not flattering on her figure.


so NAACP show is on TV tonight?  she will surely have some platitudes and so will "H"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> so NAACP show is on TV tonight?  she will surely have some platitudes and so will "H"



I don't even know if I have capacities for these two clowns tonight. They are not even entertaining anymore.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even know if I have capacities for these two clowns tonight. They are not even entertaining anymore.


no
I'll read about it here tomorrow......not gonna sit and watch those two idiots.  I wish they'd be booed


----------



## Katel

sdkitty said:


> so NAACP show is on TV tonight?  she will surely have some platitudes and so will "H"


These two really have a knack for terribly bad timing


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Apologies to correct you, it's the Six Nations not Sixth. He was there as Patron of the Wales Rugby Union, she was for England.
> They are the future King and Queen of the UK.
> Sorry again.


 Sharon,  Don't be sorry. Thank you for posting this!  I appreciate learning and they deserve to be accurately described.


----------



## SomethingGoodCanWork

I remember it like yesterday, when I too mentioned President Vladimir Putin in an appreciative post or two- and had them deleted while- admittedly very sweetly- being asked by a mod/admin to please not bring up Putin. Those were the days!


----------



## sdkitty

SomethingGoodCanWork said:


> I remember it like yesterday, when I too mentioned President Vladimir Putin in an appreciative post or two- and had them deleted while- admittedly very sweetly- being asked by a mod/admin to please not bring up Putin. Those were the days!


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5337906
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337922
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Logan Roy would more likely tell her...
> View attachment 5337919
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337929
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337930
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337934
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK DailyMail!
> View attachment 5337940
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337955
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously? The bird-sh*t dress???!!!
> View attachment 5337956
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337972
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ANOTHER lawsuit?
> View attachment 5338006
> 
> Who does he think he is? Chief Suer of the world?
> He's more like a _sewer _rat.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5338023


We missed you here @Lounorada.


----------



## poopsie

Any 411 on Doria's whereabouts these days


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5337906
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337922
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Logan Roy would more likely tell her...
> View attachment 5337919
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337929
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337930
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337934
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK DailyMail!
> View attachment 5337940
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337955
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously? The bird-sh*t dress???!!!
> View attachment 5337956
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5337972
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ANOTHER lawsuit?
> View attachment 5338006
> 
> Who does he think he is? Chief Suer of the world?
> He's more like a _sewer _rat.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5338023


Babe, you struck gold today!


----------



## gracekelly

Katel said:


> These two really have a knack for terribly bad timing


They are fighting Vladdie P for attention.  They lose.


----------



## Chanbal

poopsie said:


> Any 411 on Doria's whereabouts these days


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> so NAACP show is on TV tonight?  she will surely have some platitudes and so will "H"


They will come out holding hands and then she will push him out of the way at the podium.  I am expecting an ill fitting dress from a name designer who will be forever markled by her wearing it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

poopsie said:


> Any 411 on Doria's whereabouts these days



I think she got markled.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think she got markled.



Sure feels that way, doesn’t it?  Maybe she’s locked in the stinky mansion taking care of 2 young kids (for free) so H&M can fling themselves at every chance to sprinkle their ridiculous thoughts around…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> Sure feels that way, doesn’t it?  Maybe she’s locked in the stinky mansion taking care of 2 young kids (for free) so H&M can fling themselves at every chance to sprinkle their ridiculous thoughts around…



I honestly think the rumours of a fall-out are true. I'd have to go back to see when the shoving their oh so close relationship with her down our throats via drip-drip-drip feed stopped...sometime after the baby was born maybe?

ETA: it is kind of funny though that they can't even control their grudges to the extend to being able to just pretend everything is sunshine and roses, because nobody would be any wiser had they just continued.

ETA2: not sure that's even formal English, but I have a raging tooth- and headache, so bare with me


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> Any 411 on Doria's whereabouts these days



Doria has served her purpose and an aging mother is an extraneous, unnecessary accessory to Meghan now that there are babies to exploit. I imagine Doria was tossed back wherever she was was when her daughter invited her to the wedding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Doria has served her purpose and an aging mother is an extraneous, unnecessary accessory to Meghan now that there are babies to exploit. I imagine Doria was tossed back wherever she was was when her daughter invited her to the wedding.



Iirc and I could be wrong, she missed Lii’s birth, stopped by the house later or some story like that.

RE: my guess for  tonight’s gown - not sure gold would look good on her (plus, she does not have Kitty’s figure)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc and I could be wrong, she missed Lii’s birth, stopped by the house later or some story like that.
> 
> RE: my guess for  tonight’s gown - not sure gold would look good on her (plus, she does not have Kitty’s figure)
> 
> View attachment 5338178



She will wear whatever is the most expensive gown a famous designer was willing to pay her to wear or donate to her, no matter what it looks like.

Their history of horrible timing continues unabated. How does their proclaimed concern about the war mesh with the complete tone deafness of celebrating themselves at an event the very next day? I know the award was bought for them weeks ago but their timing is always the worst.


----------



## gracekelly

For your amusement.















KINSEY SCHOFIELD

@kinseyschofield
YOWZA. H&M themed Mardi Gras float from the Krewe d’Etat parade last night. H coming out of a toilet and M wearing a sash that reads, “Windsor Whiner” 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 #NewOrleans #MardiGras2022


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> For your amusement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KINSEY SCHOFIELD
> 
> @kinseyschofield
> YOWZA. H&M themed Mardi Gras float from the Krewe d’Etat parade last night. H coming out of a toilet and M wearing a sash that reads, “Windsor Whiner”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #NewOrleans #MardiGras2022


The sugars are melting in R A G E. They keep asserting everyone in the US loves them and she's going to be President some day. This makes clear that is a pile of s*** bigger than 16 flushers could handle. Amazing! I wonder how the crowd reacted as it flowed along.


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> For your amusement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KINSEY SCHOFIELD
> 
> @kinseyschofield
> YOWZA. H&M themed Mardi Gras float from the Krewe d’Etat parade last night. H coming out of a toilet and M wearing a sash that reads, “Windsor Whiner”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #NewOrleans #MardiGras2022



Krewe d'Etat is such a clever name!


----------



## bag-mania

For those of us in the US the NAACP awards show is being televised and it started a few minutes ago. I can’t bring myself to watch it but for anyone interested it is appropriately being shown on Comedy Central (No, I’m not kidding).


----------



## Toby93

From the award show.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> From the award show.....



Thanks, for two people who just won an award they don’t look particularly happy. Did you watch it?


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Thanks, for two people who just won an award they don’t look particularly happy. Did you watch it?


No, I saw that Piers Morgan had posted a pic.  He had this to say about them:

"Imagine giving these two clowns an award when their only claim to fame is trashing their families on TV, ruthlessly exploiting their royal titles for vast financial gain, and preaching about equality and environment from their California mansion & private jets? Hilarious."


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc and I could be wrong, she missed Lii’s birth, stopped by the house later or some story like that.
> 
> RE: my guess for  tonight’s gown - not sure gold would look good on her (plus, she does not have Kitty’s figure)
> 
> View attachment 5338178


Oh gosh!


----------



## bag-mania

Here is _People_’s ass kissing article about it. It was as bad as you would expect.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Receive Honor at the NAACP Image Awards: 'We Feel Very Proud'
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry received the President's Award at the NAACP Image Awards in recognition of special achievement and distinguished public service.




					people.com


----------



## Toby93

Oops...duplicate post


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> For your amusement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KINSEY SCHOFIELD
> 
> @kinseyschofield
> YOWZA. H&M themed Mardi Gras float from the Krewe d’Etat parade last night. H coming out of a toilet and M wearing a sash that reads, “Windsor Whiner”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #NewOrleans #MardiGras2022


More pics here. Brilliant choice for Mardi Gras!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Here is _People_’s ass kissing article about it. It was as bad as you would expect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Receive Honor at the NAACP Image Awards: 'We Feel Very Proud'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry received the President's Award at the NAACP Image Awards in recognition of special achievement and distinguished public service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Prefer to give a click to DM.   









						Harry and Meghan pay tribute to the people of Ukraine
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle asked for the world to help support the Ukraine as they accepted the President's Award at the NAACP Image Awards on Saturday for their public service achievements.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mendocino

Video of the parade float in action


----------



## Chanbal

I needed this post after reading their speech on DM. Thanks Piers for helping me to keep my sanity.


----------



## lanasyogamama

A train Megs? Mmmmmkay.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> so NAACP show is on TV tonight?  she will surely have some platitudes and so will "H"


Sigh.  I so wish Golden Girls was still on Saturday nights.  Funny it's airing tonight.  Historically a night of low TV ratings.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Sigh.  I so wish Golden Girls was still on Saturday nights.  Funny it's airing tonight.  Historically a night of low TV ratings.


The Golden Girls were great. Here is an entertaining post for you.


----------



## Chanbal

Who wore it best?


----------



## Mendocino

Chanbal said:


> Who wore it best?



I don't remember Diana wearing this gown. She looks stunning in it. It was a gorgeous color for her and the design was so classic it doesn't look dated at all.


----------



## Mendocino

Mendocino said:


> I don't remember Diana wearing this gown. She looks stunning in it. It was a gorgeous color for her and the design was so classic it doesn't look dated at all.


Forgot to add that M's gown doesn't look as if it has been properly fitted in the upper chest. The turquoise scarf over her bust looks very droopy and the fabric covering the bust line doesn't look as if its lying properly.  Compare it to Diana's bodice and I think you'll see what I mean.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Apparently, Doria was trotted out for the awards


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Who wore it best?



What I honed in on are her feet. What shoes is she wearing? Doesn’t look like much of one to me. What I see are her crooked toes. They look very odd to me. I recall someone posting way back that she has toe probs. I can see that now.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh!



Yep, she has him well trained


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> No, I saw that Piers Morgan had posted a pic.  He had this to say about them:
> 
> "Imagine giving these two clowns an award when their only claim to fame is trashing their families on TV, ruthlessly exploiting their royal titles for vast financial gain, and preaching about equality and environment from their California mansion & private jets? Hilarious."
> View attachment 5338284



Is it just me or is she several shades darker than usual?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mendocino said:


> Forgot to add that M's gown doesn't look as if it has been properly fitted in the upper chest. The turquoise scarf over her bust looks very droopy and the fabric covering the bust line doesn't look as if its lying properly.  Compare it to Diana's bodice and I think you'll see what I mean.



It doesn't fit during the midsection either. I'll say it could have been worse (red monstrosity anyone?), but still, how hard is it with all that money to look, ya know, good?


----------



## Sharont2305

I immediately thought of this dress


----------



## Sharont2305

She had to hold the award first, then quickly handed it to Harry. Is that code for "I'm doing the talking"


----------



## Gal4Dior

Megain has some wonky toes. Does some one have a closeup of those hideous feet she has? Even the costly bunion surgery couldn’t fix that ugly.

Also, once a dress made for her that looks as if it were not, and not only that, it was a terrible style to pick for her figure.

#fail once again!


----------



## needlv

From the neck up - she looks good.  Good makeup and hair.  Her eye makeup isn’t making me shudder….

But when you zoom out and see the full length outfit I cringe.  Not fitting around her mid section, missing bra/ underwear and her toes, and spray tan….


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> From the neck up - she looks good.  Good makeup and hair.  Her eye makeup isn’t making me shudder….
> 
> But when you zoom out and see the full length outfit I cringe.  Not fitting around her mid section, missing bra/ underwear and her toes, and spray tan….


Her make-up - seems to me like she reverted to her pre-Hazard Suits era look.

Horrible dress or maybe she did her "sorcery" and made it look horrible. Any clue yet which designer was duped into converting the curtains into a gown?


----------



## rose60610

Only she could turn a one shoulder dress into a muumuu. Is that her new way of hiding Spanx lines? Harry's glum face makes him look like an undertaker in that tux. For a guy that probably has ten tuxes, that one looks rented. Or has he inherited Meghan's ability to turn something nice into a fail?


----------



## Stansy

xincinsin said:


> Her make-up - seems to me like she reverted to her pre-Hazard Suits era look.
> 
> Horrible dress or maybe she did her "sorcery" and made it look horrible. Any clue yet which designer was duped into converting the curtains into a gown?


The designer has been identified as Christopher John Rogers.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t know what it is, but that prettiness she once has is just gone.


----------



## Chanbal

Mendocino said:


> Forgot to add that M's gown doesn't look as if it has been properly fitted in the upper chest. The turquoise scarf over her bust looks very droopy and the fabric covering the bust line doesn't look as if its lying properly.  Compare it to Diana's bodice and I think you'll see what I mean.


Diana had a great body frame. Kate is also a lucky one that can wear almost anything. MM has a more difficult frame to work with, but it is her greed and lack of kindness that makes her attire look terribly unfit imo.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Apparently, Doria was trotted out for the awards


It took me a long time to find the proof, but it's here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I immediately thought of this dress
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5338430


Twitter is busy finding potential sources of inspiration…


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Twitter is busy finding potential sources of inspiration…



LOL, brilliant. 
Shhh, don't tell Megan that Bjorn is divorced or is divorcing his second wife. He's worth about $300m.


----------



## bag-mania

DM noticed she was wearing Diana’s bracelet.









						Meghan Markle wears £2K dress at NAACP awards
					

The royal couple, who live in a $14m mansion in Montecito, California, attended the NAACP awards on Saturday at Pasadena Civic Auditorium.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

no further comments…


----------



## carmen56

Sharont2305 said:


> I immediately thought of this dress
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5338430


Love these colours on Diana.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Apparently, Doria was trotted out for the awards


yes, it was a good day to be a WOC


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> From the neck up - she looks good.  Good makeup and hair.  Her eye makeup isn’t making me shudder….
> 
> But when you zoom out and see the full length outfit I cringe.  Not fitting around her mid section, missing bra/ underwear and her toes, and spray tan….


I love the color of the dress....her wig looks OK.  I haven't watched the video.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## sdkitty

So H said they have chosen a life of service.  What service have they performed?  delivering sandwiches to a handful of non-profit employees?  what money have they given?  surely if they had made any significant donations it would have been publicized.  What they seem to have chosen is a life of attention-seeking.


----------



## Chanbal

Stansy said:


> The designer has been identified as Christopher John Rogers.


Christopher is allegedly a favorite designer of Michelle O. and several celebrities.









						How Christopher John Rogers is leaving his mark in fashion
					

Designer Christopher John Rogers sits down with TODAY’s Jenna Bush Hager to talk about his rise in the fashion world over the last couple years and how going to church became an inspiration for him.




					www.today.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Christopher is allegedly a favorite designer of Michelle O. and several celebrities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Christopher John Rogers is leaving his mark in fashion
> 
> 
> Designer Christopher John Rogers sits down with TODAY’s Jenna Bush Hager to talk about his rise in the fashion world over the last couple years and how going to church became an inspiration for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


of course


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


>




Hate to say it but Doria's dress isn't too flattering either. Pro tip: you size UP, then take it to a tailor to adjust the too big parts, you don't just squeeze into the size your smallest part barely fits in and hope the seams don't break.


----------



## sdkitty

this is behind a paywall but made me LOL
maybe the reason they were brought together was to live a life of service
Prince Harry Says He and Meghan Markle Were ‘Brought Together for a Reason’ (thedailybeast.com)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this is behind a paywall but made me LOL
> maybe the reason they were brought together was to live a life of service
> Prince Harry Says He and Meghan Markle Were ‘Brought Together for a Reason’ (thedailybeast.com)


What he _*meant*_ to say was, "We were brought together to live a life of _*self*_ service".  Not self service like pumping gas, but you know what I mean.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> What he _*meant*_ to say was, "We were brought together to live a life of _*self*_ service".  Not self service like pumping gas, but you know what I mean.


I wonder if he actually believes this.....his Wife probably told him so
I did watch part of the acceptance speech.  He always refers to her as his Wife - makes him feel like a big boy I think
Maybe his emotional growth was stopped at age 10 (or whatever age he was when his mom died)


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> no
> I'll read about it here tomorrow......not gonna sit and watch those two idiots.  I wish they'd be booed


I finished watching Inventing Anna last night and couldn't help but think of the similarities with MM.


----------



## bag-mania

“Brought together for a reason”

Perhaps as a sign of the approach of the end times maybe?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I finished watching Inventing Anna last night and couldn't help but think of the similarities with MM.


Oh, another con artist


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> this is behind a paywall but made me LOL
> maybe the reason they were brought together was to live a life of service
> Prince Harry Says He and Meghan Markle Were ‘Brought Together for a Reason’ (thedailybeast.com)


Yeah, your title and your family's wealth you dipshit.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Oh, another con artist


They seem to be everywhere these days.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t know what it is, but that prettiness she once has is just gone.


She is 40 and the bloom is off the rose so to speak. Coco Chanel said “Nature gives you the face you have at twenty. Life shapes the face you have at thirty. But at fifty you get the face you deserve.” In fairness, I think if we did not know what an unlikeable person she is we'd be kinder. The dress isn't bad, just doesn't fit her properly, and I don't like the thigh high slit. That says to me she thinks she has great legs.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chloe302225 said:


>



How is it that Doria looks better than Megain? No custom design, just classy, fitted properly, and not overly done.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> She is 40 and the bloom is off the rose so to speak. Coco Chanel said “Nature gives you the face you have at twenty. Life shapes the face you have at thirty. But at fifty you get the face you deserve.” In fairness, I think if we did not know what an unlikeable person she is we'd be kinder. The dress isn't bad, just doesn't fit her properly, and I don't like the thigh high slit. That says to me she thinks she has great legs.


Ha ha on the legs.  I think we see her through the lens of what we perceive her character to be.  
but even if I didn't dislike her, I would not think those legs were great.  and she doesn't have the body type of her deceased MIL or her sister-in-law, who looks so great in clothes.  Ironic since she is the Big Star.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LVSistinaMM said:


> How is it that Doria looks better than Megain? No custom design, just classy, fitted properly, and not overly done.



But it does not fit properly. It is pulling in different places, the worst over her left boob/under her left arm.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Ha ha on the legs.  I think we see her through the lens of what we perceive her character to be.
> but even if I didn't dislike her, I would not think those legs were great.  and she doesn't have the body type of her deceased MIL or her sister-in-law, who looks so great in clothes.  Ironic since she is the Big Star.



The thing is, there are women far more unfortunate in the body department who look way better and more put together. It is her insistence to wear unflattering styles and her refusal to get. A. Tailor. (and comb her hair) that is the culprit. Also, I really don't know how she manages to always wear wrinkly stuff. The only thing that ever creases that badly on me is 100% linen.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> *She is 40 and the bloom is off the rose so to speak.* Coco Chanel said “Nature gives you the face you have at twenty. Life shapes the face you have at thirty. But at fifty you get the face you deserve.” In fairness, I think if we did not know what an unlikeable person she is we'd be kinder. The dress isn't bad, just doesn't fit her properly, and I don't like the thigh high slit. That says to me she thinks she has great legs.



This is Meghan’s rose these days. She has to get all she can before the last petal falls and time isn’t exactly on her side so she’s getting a little worried.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But it does not fit properly. It is pulling in different places, the worst over her left boob/under her left arm.



It shows the difference between a dress which was actually made for the woman and one which was overnighted by the designer in the size requested. Meghan isn’t wearing any bespoke pieces. Her mom certainly isn’t getting any.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> More pics here. Brilliant choice for Mardi Gras!



As if I couldn’t love New Orleans more. Amazing place. I love it. Favourite place in US dare I say.  Though honestly the caricatures are quite flattering. Where ate the bald spots? 


Chanbal said:


> Who wore it best?





Stansy said:


> Christopher John Rogers.


Thank you. It makes sense because I recognise colour blocking but he never seems to fit his garment to the celeb wearing it. 


Chanbal said:


> Twitter is busy finding potential sources of inspiration…


I mean they aren’t wrong, 

it amazes me she retains all the stylistic mistakes of a 16 year old at her first social while having the face more botched than Cher in her 70s.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hate to say it but Doria's dress isn't too flattering either. Pro tip: you size UP, then take it to a tailor to adjust the too big parts, you don't just squeeze into the size your smallest part barely fits in and hope the seams don't break.


That’s not the same dress though surely? The neckline is completely different. She’s wearing an asymmetric neck with either a halter neck or a black necklace  not a Princess cut. Chances are doria id wearing a normal high street dress. Thought tbf that gown Lana del Rey picked up at Dillards was both more interesting and better fitting


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Harry's glum face makes him look like an undertaker in that tux. *For a guy that probably has ten tuxes, that one looks rented. *Or has he inherited Meghan's ability to turn something nice into a fail?



They made sure their NAACP awards outfits were created by Black designers so that they could get glowing credit for it from the press. They don’t miss a trick you know. His tux was from Ozwald Boateng.


----------



## jelliedfeels

LVSistinaMM said:


> How is it that Doria looks better than Megain? No custom design, just classy, fitted properly, and not overly done.


I think it’s dressing understated vs mutton dressed as lamb in a single pic tbh. 
The lady on the left looks great in bright colours but she isn’t trying to dress like  Barbie with an apple body and ratty weave. A more full cover style and a shorter hair cut would cover a lot of sins for M ( the crazy thing is it’s more fashionable  too) but it’s hard for a showgirl to give up the show,
Though I still don’t think D is in the dress in the picture as it’s a different neckline. She looks good though - appropriate for the event I’d say. 


bag-mania said:


> This is Meghan’s rose these days. She has to get all she can before the last petal falls and time isn’t exactly on her side so she’s getting a little worried.
> 
> View attachment 5338766


How dare you! The beast had far more of his own long flowing hair  
I mean the thing is she’d look so much better if she dropped the 00s trends and tried to dress more sort of modern Zimmerman style with a lob hair do


----------



## A1aGypsy

I suspect part of the problem is her hair won’t do a lob. I have curly hair and it isn’t as easy as just combing it (good god no. No combs ever on dry hair) or hack it off short (Felicity anyone?).  Also, if it is short you can’t use the weaves to give it weight. If I straight iron my hair, it sticks straight out from my head. It doesn’t fall. And there is no good way to sleep on short curly hair to keep it in check so you are washing it every morning which kills it. Curly hair can really be awful. Having said all of that, she did seem to have better hair when she was on Suits. I’m assuming the studio paid for it.

I think her mom looks nice. Chic, appropriate, understated. I cringe a bit at championing Princess Di’s body given what we now know about how she maintained it. And I hate comparing body shapes. Although I will shake my head at the train and also the self awarding while the situation in the Ukraine unfolds. It seems so incredibly out of touch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aand...one more!


----------



## jelliedfeels

A1aGypsy said:


> I suspect part of the problem is her hair won’t do a lob. I have curly hair and it isn’t as easy as just combing it (good god no. No combs ever on dry hair) or hack it off short (Felicity anyone?).  Also, if it is short you can’t use the weaves to give it weight. If I straight iron my hair, it sticks straight out from my head. It doesn’t fall. And there is no good way to sleep on short curly hair to keep it in check so you are washing it every morning which kills it. Curly hair can really be awful. Having said all of that, she did seem to have better hair when she was on Suits. I’m assuming the studio paid for it.
> 
> I think her mom looks nice. Chic, appropriate, understated. I cringe a bit at championing Princess Di’s body given what we now know about how she maintained it. And I hate comparing body shapes. Although I will shake my head at the train and also the self awarding while the situation in the Ukraine unfolds. It seems so incredibly out of touch.


I bet money on that hair is a wig. You can do any hair with a wig so why not something flattering?

I don’t know I mean I’m not 100 but going from the young photos of her she seems to be a 2b loose wave so I don’t think she’s ever had proper curly hair.

Some of her hair looks like it’s extensions then some of it looks like a wig so I assume it’s both. I think a lot of them are full wigs you can’t tell me what she’s wearing last night is her actual hair and it’s the same stuff that was looking supremely crunchy with the blonde dip job several months ago.  No shame in wearing a wig but no reason you can’t wear a flattering one either- her hair would look busted on 00s reality tv.

The self rewarding was cringe but to me I don’t think it’s because of the Ukraine - I mean there’s always a conflict somewhere in the world - to me it’s cringe because they gave a positive representation of black people award to a white guy in a SS uniform and someone who claimed to be Latina or white until being black suited her,


----------



## csshopper

She contacted the designer so guessing she probably had something specific in mind and to get the job he did as he was told. Given
how thoroughly she researches Diana's wardrobe and other notables, she may even have sent him pictures with "One like this" clipped on it.

From VOGUE on line:
''...And she did it all while wearing a blue-ombre dress with a flowing cape, that was bold, bombastic, and quintessentially Christopher John Rogers.


Christopher John Rogers, the New York based Black designer, is a bonafide darling of the fashion world due to his kaleidoscopic designs and impeccable tailoring. In 2021, he received the American Womenswear Designer of the Year award from the Council of Fashion Designers of America, just two years after winning the grand prize from the CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund. His legion of celebrity fans includes Michelle *****, Adele, Gabrielle Union, and Lady Gaga. Now the Duchess is joining their ranks, and casting a well-deserved spotlight on Rogers’s designs. 


Rogers received an email from the Duchess about a month ago, asking if he’d like to work together. Soon after, they hopped on a call to virtually meet. “I was immediately struck by her warmth and just her overall demeanor—her sense of ease and confidence within herself,” says Rogers. “We quickly touched on this idea of a reveal. She hadn’t really stepped out like this in a while.” (The NAACP Awards is her first public appearance of 2022. Previously, she attended the Salute To Freedom Gala in November 2021.)  

I saw a citation somewhere else that Doria's dress is Burberry and the designer of the Handbag's tux is British.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t know I mean I’m not 100 but going from the young photos of her she seems to be a 2b loose wave so I don’t think she’s ever had proper curly hair.



She had very tight curls in the video where she was being a little sh*t to her father.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> “I was immediately struck by her warmth and just her overall demeanor—her sense of ease and confidence within herself,” says Rogers.



Do these people interact with someone else than we see mainly on video??? Because that's not what I see at all.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do these people interact with someone else than we see mainly on video??? Because that's not what I see at all.



Meghan can schmooze with the best of them when she needs something. It’s like when she love bombs someone, only slightly less intense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Meghan can schmooze with the best of them when she needs something. It’s like when she love bombs someone, only slightly less intense.



She could love bomb me all she wants, I know enough about her to not buy any of it.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She could love bomb me all she wants, I know enough about her to not buy any of it.



If only everyone knew about her. There are obviously still many who buy what she’s selling. Although fewer than a year ago. Hopefully it is a trend that continues.


----------



## bellecate

The difference between TW 'swanning' in (I'm here world) and Diana's graceful entrance.


----------



## poopsie

Mendocino said:


> Forgot to add that M's gown doesn't look as if it has been properly fitted in the upper chest. The turquoise scarf over her bust looks very droopy and the fabric covering the bust line doesn't look as if its lying properly.  Compare it to Diana's bodice and I think you'll see what I mean.



LMAO
I've been binge-streaming old Project Runway episodes for the past week and her dress looks like something one of the filler designers would put out on the "show us who you are as a designer" first challenges. 
I think Michael Kors would say that you are being too kind in your assessment


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They made sure their NAACP awards outfits were created by Black designers so that they could get glowing credit for it from the press. They don’t miss a trick you know. His tux was from Ozwald Boateng.


does anyone know whether there was any backlash from the black community re this fake award....or are they still backing her as a WOC? (in general, of course)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> It took me a long time to find the proof, but it's here!




DORIA LIVES!!!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

poopsie said:


> DORIA LIVES!!!!!!


Doria has better legs than her daughter


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do these people interact with someone else than we see mainly on video??? Because that's not what I see at all.


Quid pro quo: He looks at her with dollar signs dancing around her head and a new name to add to the client list.

                      She looks at him as a sure source of publicity and maybe someone she can charm into forwarding nice comments about     
                      her to his other clients she craves association with, particularly MO.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aand...one more!



He's helping out with the Ukrainian crisis as well.  I found it interesting that the Harkles didn't jump on that band wagon.  Now we know why!  He markled the Harkles!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Doria has better legs than her daughter


She also has better manners than her daughter.


----------



## EmilyM11

purseinsanity said:


> He's helping out with the Ukrainian crisis as well.  I found it interesting that the Harkles didn't jump on that band wagon.  Now we know why!  He markled the Harkles!


Polish person here: still a chance for the Harkles to help. We’ve just received 200k fugitives from Ukraine with hundreds of thousands still waiting at the borders. We need money and good publicity for the cause. Oh wait…


----------



## sdkitty

EmilyM111 said:


> Polish person here: still a chance for the Harkles to help. We’ve just received 200k fugitives from Ukraine with hundreds of thousands still waiting at the borders. We need money and good publicity for the cause. Oh wait…


right
why haven't we heard that they made a large donation?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> right
> why haven't we heard that they made a large donation?



Hey, there are two lemon olive oil cakes in the mail to the Ukraine. Meghan cannot help it if they are caught up in customs. She is doing her part!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hey, there are two lemon olive oil cakes in the mail to the Ukraine. Meghan cannot help it if they are caught up in customs. She is doing her part!


Seriously, if they have this foundation and their life's work is supposed to be service, why aren't they doing something about the situation in the Ukraine besides talking?  Is no one publicly challenging their BS?


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> Seriously, if they have this foundation and their life's work is supposed to be service, why aren't they doing something about the situation in the Ukraine besides talking?  Is no one publicly challenging their BS?


Archewell was reported in January as only earning $50,000 , Nannies would have covered babysitting for the night, but they had to pay for new clothes, transportation, the Award, etc so no $ left over to help others. "Self service" dictates they come first and talk is cheap. No way would they ever tap into personal funds.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Seriously, if they have this foundation and their life's work is supposed to be service, why aren't they doing something about the situation in the Ukraine besides talking?  Is no one publicly challenging their BS?



All they can do is talk. It’s their brand, saying they are concerned about a problem and telling others to fix it. It’s baffling why there are still people willing to prop them up and pretend they actually do anything.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> From the award show.....



Whoever did the design for the backdrop projection must have designed her dress.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> “Brought together for a reason”
> 
> Perhaps as a sign of the approach of the end times maybe?



Brought together for a treason, more like


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think M’s legs would have been admired in the 90s, like when Lara Flynn Boyle wore the ballerina dress. But now people love a strong leg like Carrie Underwood and Beyoncé.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

EmilyM111 said:


> Polish person here: still a chance for the Harkles to help. We’ve just received 200k fugitives from Ukraine with hundreds of thousands still waiting at the borders. We need money and good publicity for the cause. Oh wait…



Perhaps someone should tell them this is how you actually help and not just do all their virtue signalling.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Perhaps someone should tell them this is how you actually help and not just do all their virtue signalling.
> View attachment 5338956



Imagine that, plain ol’ movie stars offering to donate up to a million dollars out of their own pockets.

Can they do that? Surely you must have a charitable foundation with lots of employees, big corporate donors giving you money, endless word salad, and lots of meaningless awards in order to help. The audacity of Ryan and Blake thinking they can possibly make a difference by just writing a big check!


----------



## CeeJay

poopsie said:


> Any 411 on Doria's whereabouts these days


ZIPPO .. not a word nor photograph; wonder if she's been "markled"??????  Since Meghan really doesn't have any 'need' for her anymore? .. IMO, I would say the answer to my question is *YES*!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

On second look, Doria looks far better than MM - D’s body looks fit and toned while MM’s looks oddly proportioned. D’s natural smile, styled hair, and poise make her stand out.

ETA: has anyone mentioned MM’s toes - eeek


----------



## bag-mania

I hope they made the most of their PR ploy today. The Screen Actors Guild Awards are tonight and it’s the first time there has been a live red carpet event since Covid. When people are talking about fashion tomorrow they won’t be talking about Meghan’s blue dress.

I suppose it’s possible they finagled an invitation but I kind of doubt it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This entrance, that tail, omg


----------



## CarryOn2020

She missed the neck swirl. It makes the difference.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> right
> why haven't we heard that they made a large donation?


Only if they can make a large donation with someone else's money or food or essentials...

Are there enough copies left of The Bench to use as barricades?


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> She missed the neck swirl. It makes the difference.





Maybe she actually learned that she can’t pull that off from the neck-less green get up.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> So H said they have chosen a life of service.  What service have they performed?  delivering sandwiches to a handful of non-profit employees?  what money have they given?  surely if they had made any significant donations it would have been publicized.  What they seem to have chosen is a life of attention-seeking.


Let's not forget the lemon olive oil cake sent to World Central Kitchen volunteers in Chicago, a selfless action worthy of a presidential medal.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> does anyone know whether there was any backlash from the black community re this fake award....or are they still backing her as a WOC? (in general, of course)


Here's at least one example that was on Twitter. I'm sure there are others, my access to Twitter is what I can read from attachments posted here, and then I get cut off for not being signed up. There may be even more after the Bishop's.

A WOC life long friend remarked on seeing Doria pictured, she wondered how much Doria charges them for her appearances to give her daughter some much needed relevance. She is the parent, who it has been claimed, told her daughter at any early age to "not give away the milk", make them pay.









Bishop Talbert Swan

@TalbertSwan

Why? As a life member and the longest serving president in the 104 yr history of the Greater Springfield, MA Chapter, I’m embarrassed. Was there no one engaged in the justice struggle for Black people in this nation worthy of this award? Or is this really just about ‘IMAGE?’
Quote Tweet












NAACP Image Awards®

@naacpimageaward
 · 22h
Congratulations to our President’s Award recipients Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. #NAACPImageAwards


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> She contacted the designer so guessing she probably had something specific in mind and to get the job he did as he was told. Given
> how thoroughly she researches Diana's wardrobe and other notables, she may even have sent him pictures with "One like this" clipped on it.
> 
> From VOGUE on line:
> ''...And she did it all while wearing a blue-ombre dress with a flowing cape, that was bold, bombastic, and quintessentially Christopher John Rogers.
> 
> 
> Christopher John Rogers, the New York based Black designer, is a bonafide darling of the fashion world due to his kaleidoscopic designs and impeccable tailoring. In 2021, he received the American Womenswear Designer of the Year award from the Council of Fashion Designers of America, just two years after winning the grand prize from the CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund. His legion of celebrity fans includes Michelle *****, Adele, Gabrielle Union, and Lady Gaga. Now the Duchess is joining their ranks, and casting a well-deserved spotlight on Rogers’s designs.
> 
> 
> Rogers received an email from the Duchess about a month ago, asking if he’d like to work together. Soon after, they hopped on a call to virtually meet. “I was immediately struck by her warmth and just her overall demeanor—her sense of ease and confidence within herself,” says Rogers. “We quickly touched on this idea of a reveal. She hadn’t really stepped out like this in a while.” (The NAACP Awards is her first public appearance of 2022. Previously, she attended the Salute To Freedom Gala in November 2021.)
> 
> I saw a citation somewhere else that Doria's dress is Burberry and the designer of the Handbag's tux is British.





CarryOn2020 said:


> She missed the neck swirl. It makes the difference.



He’s been in the news before.  I think he was most famously worn by KH at the inauguration. He did a really nice collaboration with target.


I said before he doesn’t fit the clothes to the celeb and maybe that was a little harsh. I do think the cuts he seems to favour dont cinch the waist though, that’s his artistic choice but it does not suit M.

This dress though, tbf to her, would only suit someone really tall with swept back hair and even then I feel like it’d still  look a bit Star Trek but whatever if you can pay people to give you an award to say how charitable and conscious you are you can most certainly find a couple of lickspittles to say your dress looks edgy and you are gorgeous.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> ... and she doesn't have the body type of her deceased MIL or her sister-in-law, who looks so great in clothes.  Ironic since she is the Big Star.


Actually, Diana had a thick, high waist, but was tall with slender hips and great tailoring.


----------



## Chanbal

EmilyM111 said:


> Polish person here: still a chance for the Harkles to help. We’ve just received 200k fugitives from Ukraine with hundreds of thousands still waiting at the borders. We need money and good publicity for the cause. Oh wait…


Hi @EmilyM111, I'm very sorry for the terrible situation in that part of Europe. It's so sad. 
Elon Musk is using his Starlink satellite and providing a major help to Ukraine. I'm sure many others will join.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG likes the choice of the 'royal' dress, Ginger Guru is constipated…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM11

Chanbal said:


> Hi @EmilyM111, I'm very sorry for the terrible situation in that part of Europe. It's so sad.
> Elon Musk is using his Starlink satellite and providing a major help to Ukraine. I'm sure many others will join.


Of course and also all citizens of the neighbouring countries are helping as well! I was just being sarcastic as I followed this thread for quite a while (under old nickname) and their “concern” made me gag.


----------



## xincinsin

H&M see themselves as leaders, as guiding lights for mere mortals. I doubt they see any need to contribute their own money or effort, which goes towards making sure they live the life of luxury that they are entitled to.


bag-mania said:


> All they can do is talk. It’s their brand, saying they are concerned about a problem and telling others to fix it. It’s baffling why there are still people willing to prop them up and pretend they actually do anything.



I'm wondering what they promised that they can ride on so many coat tails.


----------



## duna

I have no idea what an NAACP award is, but whoever decided to give them one, is not in his/her right mind

While Diana and Kate have the figure to pull that kind of dress off, MM does NOT! I won't even mention the bad fit and the slit at the side....


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The BLG likes the choice of the 'royal' dress, Ginger Guru is constipated…






This guy's def a lurker


----------



## xincinsin

I was googling the award and Dr Wiki says "Winners are selected by the NAACP president in recognition of special achievement and distinguished public service." So, Sunshine Sucks only needed to wine & dine and "persuade" one person to give that award. Sounds like a bargain to me. I guess we should stay tuned to how many more awards they can buy & bribe for the talentless couple.


----------



## Chanbal

People aren't happy…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> People aren't happy…




I hope more of this comes out. There must be so many long term members of the NAACP who are wondering at the selection.


----------



## Chanbal

EmilyM111 said:


> Of course and also all citizens of the neighbouring countries are helping as well! I was just being sarcastic as I followed this thread for quite a while (under old nickname) and their “concern” made me gag.


Allegedly, they 'help' with lemon cakes in exchange for free publicity in favor of 'their brand.' Not what Ukraine needs at the present time imo. 

Keep reading and posting. This thread seems to have a 'therapeutic role', it helped many of us during covid…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I hope more of this comes out. There must be so many long term members of the NAACP who are wondering at the selection.


It looks like there are plenty of people that didn't approve…


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> This guy's def a lurker


He reads our posts, we watch his videos… It seems all good towards the common purpose of unveiling hypocrisy.


----------



## Chanbal

@bag-mania one more for you!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> He reads our posts, we watch his videos… It seems all good towards the common purpose of unveiling hypocrisy.



Even he can't get me to like the hideous dress though, and it's OTT (I say this as someone who will do sequins, full-length, and a tiara to the supermarket - but I don't claim to be be saving the World)


----------



## LittleStar88

The USA is filled to the brim with people far more deserving of this award .... What an insult to those people. 

I know it has been said already, but these two have done absolutely NOTHING to earn this. They bought it. 

How do these two sleep at night???


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> The USA is filled to the brim with people far more deserving of this award .... What an insult to those people.
> 
> I know it has been said already, but these two have done absolutely NOTHING to earn this. They bought it.
> 
> How do these two sleep at night???


how does the person who agreed to give them the award sleep at night?


----------



## Chanbal

Some people never miss the opportunity of jumping on a bandwagon... Moved the links to Spoiler because the level of hypocrisy may be too high for a Monday.



Spoiler: opportunism


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> How do these two sleep at night???



They probably sleep quite well in a luxurious bedroom on a glorious, sprawling estate they bought with money they didn’t earn themselves. You can bet they believe they deserve all of it and more. The world truly is an unfair place.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> The USA is filled to the brim with people far more deserving of this award .... What an insult to those people.
> 
> I know it has been said already, but these two have done absolutely NOTHING to earn this. They bought it.
> 
> _*How do these two sleep at night???*_



From some of the neighbors who have left the area, the smell is awful. Maybe they are sleep deprived


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cover your eyes:


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

“ Paid for praises “  It’s a new world


----------



## bag-mania

Did anyone watch their speech? Were they given thundering applause or was it more of a polite smattering?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wow, the comments in this post by People! Everyone is over them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Also, Hazzy looks miserable


----------



## lanasyogamama

I thought it was interesting that BLG says AOC is Meg’s competition in the political space.  AOC has waaaaay thicker skin than Meg.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Some people never miss the opportunity of jumping on a bandwagon... Moved the links to Spoiler because the level of hypocrisy may be too high for a Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: opportunism



who is Emily Nash?  why should anyone care what the Duchess thinks?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Cover your eyes:



In a world where you see size 15 louboutins on Rupaul’s drag race every week there’s no excuse wearing heels that don’t fit with a custom dress. It’s so weird. Does she have to pay for her shoes and she just picks up whatever’s on discount regardless of the size or something?

 But even then you can have most shoes stretched a bit.

Mind you I still can’t do the mental gymnastics to clear wearing that hair with this Star Trek dress so IDK.

Just to reiterate what a lot of people are saying I definitely think the NACCP did it for the controversy but I really think it’s a terrible idea for their credibility.
I mean you shouldnt have to be a long term member of NACCP to win the award, you shouldn’t need to be black, you don’t need to have raised a record amount of money or to be employed primarily in charity or community work but for none of the above to be true of the inaugural choice is just embarrassing (& that’s ignoring the fact they paid for it.)

 Why was it not enough to name the award after your joke charity and then give it to someone vaguely deserving to give it a bit of credibility? Bizarre.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I thought it was interesting that BLG says AOC is Meg’s competition in the political space.  AOC has waaaaay thicker skin than Meg.


Not to get political but that comparison is a major insult to anyone who has had to actually work at politics and creating a buzz to get a seat. Regardless of them both being women M has much more in common with these celebrities/celebrity’s kids who try to waltz into cushy seats leveraging their existing fame.

On a purely shallow image level AOC is also much younger and better looking.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Also, Hazzy looks miserable



He’s lonely. He’s wishing he could be hanging out with Eugenie.


----------



## Aimee3

That dress reminds me of something I’d tie on when I’d get out of the pool.  Even the color seemed “beachy” to me.  But the shoes and her feet were way worse.  She should only wear closed toe shoes.  I’m surprised she dares to bare those feet.  Cinderella she’s not!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Some people never miss the opportunity of jumping on a bandwagon... Moved the links to Spoiler because the level of hypocrisy may be too high for a Monday.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: opportunism




Just. Shut. The. F*ck. Up. (not you, Chanbal. Raptor obviously)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Also, Hazzy looks miserable



But...but...he and his FANTASTIC WIFE were brought together for a reason!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I thought it was interesting that BLG says AOC is Meg’s competition in the political space.  AOC has waaaaay thicker skin than Meg.



And far more accomplishments.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But...but...he and his FANTASTIC WIFE were brought together for a reason!



He is such an idiot. Yeah, a hurricane is brought together with land for a reason too, but that doesn’t mean we should embrace the havoc and destruction. Moron!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He is such an idiot. Yeah, a hurricane is brought together with land for a reason too, but that doesn’t mean we should embrace the havoc and destruction. Moron!



Seriously. I don't even doubt they were brought together for a reason (if by fate or someone way smarter than them), but I am positive it wasn't the reason Harry wants to believe in.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> He is such an idiot. Yeah, a hurricane is brought together with land for a reason too, but that doesn’t mean we should embrace the havoc and destruction. Moron!





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. I don't even doubt they were brought together for a reason (if by fate or someone way smarter than them), but I am positive it wasn't the reason Harry wants to believe in.


Is there a missing 't'?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. I don't even doubt they were brought together for a reason (if by fate or someone way smarter than them), but I am positive it wasn't the reason Harry wants to believe in.


Together because: She had to pee in the woods, and he had some tissues handy?  

Sorry, I KNOW that is low snark, but these two get more repulsive with every outing.


----------



## LittleStar88

Those toes


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Together because: She had to pee in the woods, and he had some tissues handy?
> 
> Sorry, I KNOW that is low snark, but these two get more repulsive with every outing.



Rumor is he would not be the one with the tissues.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, nothing you can do when the toe fairy wasn't kind to you...but why wouldn't you wear shoes were said toes don't hang over the rim? Especially the woman who usually struts around in shoes at least a size too big?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, nothing you can do when the toe fairy wasn't kind to you...but why wouldn't you wear shoes were said toes don't hang over the rim? Especially the woman who usually struts around in shoes at least a size too big?


In my experience, even with the right shoe size when you wear heels that high your foot gets pushed forward and toe overhang is almost impossible to avoid. I wore (hobbled around in) shoes like that very occasionally when I was young, but just looking at that picture makes my feet hurt.


----------



## charlottawill

Someone (like a decent stylist) should tell MM this is how it is done.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Someone (like a decent stylist) should tell MM this is how it is done.
> 
> View attachment 5339647



Something tells me they've tried to no avail.

But Amy looks stunning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> In my experience, even with the right shoe size when you wear heels that high your foot gets pushed forward and toe overhang is almost impossible to avoid. I wore (hobbled around in) shoes like that very occasionally when I was young, but just looking at that picture makes my feet hurt.



I honestly can't remember, I gave up heels basically when I ruined my knee a few years ago. Once it was kind of healed I had unweaned myself from 4" heels


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Those toes
> 
> View attachment 5339629


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> He’s been in the news before.  I think he was most famously worn by KH at the inauguration. He did a really nice collaboration with target.
> View attachment 5339076



WTF did he do? Go through my Junior High 69-71 yearbooks for "inspiration"?
Those look like the Simplicity patterns we used
Same fabrics too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

lanasyogamama said:


> Also, Hazzy looks miserable


Because now, instead of "handing out small prizes" as Royals...they have to pay for large prizes and pretend to be shocked as they pat themselves on the back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Someone (like a decent stylist) should tell MM this is how it is done.
> 
> View attachment 5339647



Noticing the short flounce in the back.  Women of a certain age should avoid the long tail (train?), imo.




poopsie said:


> WTF did he do? Go through my Junior High 69-71 yearbooks for "inspiration"?
> Those look like the Simplicity patterns we used
> Same fabrics too



Some have said it is the Star Trek look or Abba or Diana: you decide


----------



## poopsie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noticing the short flounce in the back.  Women of a certain age should avoid the long tail (train?), imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some have said it is the Star Trek look or Abba or Diana: you decide




Those ABBA looks are from later in the 70's...........my early college years IIRC
I was referring to the Target collab looks


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> They probably sleep quite well in a luxurious bedroom on a glorious, sprawling estate they bought with money they didn’t earn themselves. You can bet they believe they deserve all of it and more. The world truly is an unfair place.


Well you know what am old saying says: Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> They probably sleep quite well in a luxurious bedroom on a glorious, sprawling estate they bought with money they didn’t earn themselves. You can bet they believe they deserve all of it and more. The world truly is an unfair place.


Well you know what am old saying says: Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Noticing the short flounce in the back.  Women of a certain age should avoid the long tail (train?), imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some have said it is the Star Trek look or Abba or Diana: you decide




Not body shaming here, but serious question - has she no eyes? Can she not see this?


----------



## Chanbal

Agree with the BLG, great question!


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Agree with the BLG, great question!




The comments pretty much line up with what has been discussed here..........that she was horrid to his help
Wonder when the last time she or Doria "visited" with Oprah


----------



## zinacef

Maybe Tyler Perry should have been given this NAACP award—- he has given so much compared to these 2. The president of this org must’ve been starstruck or something to have met “Royals”, no royals from the previous state or university where he used to be employed. plain insult to the organization and the ideas it represent.


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> Not body shaming here, but serious question - has she no eyes? Can she not see this?
> 
> View attachment 5339773


Inspiration sources?


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Also, Hazzy looks miserable



No-one paid him (extra) to smile


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Inspiration sources?




Considering some of his other options, it was not the _worst choice_, imo
Still, I would have chosen a different designer for my return to the limelight.









						Collection 007
					

Christopher John Rogers




					christopherjohnrogers.com
				







			https://www.net-a-porter.com/variants/images/22250442025658280/in/w1365_q60.jpg


----------



## csshopper

Plates are smashing again in Montecito: all that hard work of buying an Award, anointing a candidate for the Supreme Court gets overshadowed by the news of the Queen traveling to Frogmore Cottage, (you remember Suckesses, your old house,) to meet with the Cambridges and Beatrice. The article in the DM says Eugenie and Jack were not believed to have been at home on Sunday afternoon when this took place.

Sending a message of who REALLY owns Frogmore ???? Wily woman the Queen, never underestimate her! The Cambridges in Frogmore!


*Queen recovers from Covid...then drives to family reunion: Her Majesty spends time with William and Kate, Princess Beatrice and her baby daughter Sienna on trip to Windsor after battling virus*

*The Queen, 95, has enjoyed an afternoon with family and friends this weekend *
*Monarch, who tested positive for Covid just over a week ago, went to Frogmore*
*She met with Princess Beatrice, the Duchess of Cambridge and their children*


----------



## rose60610

So what other (prominent) awards are up for sale that we can expect Duchess Moron and Duke of Hazzard to purchase?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Plates are smashing again in Montecito: all that hard work of buying an Award, anointing a candidate for the Supreme Court gets overshadowed by the news of the Queen traveling to Frogmore Cottage, (you remember Suckesses, your old house,) to meet with the Cambridges and Beatrice. The article in the DM says Eugenie and Jack were not believed to have been at home on Sunday afternoon when this took place.
> 
> Sending a message of who REALLY owns Frogmore ???? Wily woman the Queen, never underestimate her! The Cambridges in Frogmore!
> 
> 
> *Queen recovers from Covid...then drives to family reunion: Her Majesty spends time with William and Kate, Princess Beatrice and her baby daughter Sienna on trip to Windsor after battling virus*
> 
> *The Queen, 95, has enjoyed an afternoon with family and friends this weekend *
> *Monarch, who tested positive for Covid just over a week ago, went to Frogmore*
> *She met with Princess Beatrice, the Duchess of Cambridge and their children*



I read the whole article and I'm still unsure if they met in Frogmore Cottage or Frogmore House. 

But also...it mentions how the Cambridges are looking for a possible home on the Windsor estate aaand that the castle is earmarked for them in the future. Now if that doesn't make someone drive a bus into a china store...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now if that doesn't make someone drive a bus into a china store...


----------



## V0N1B2

poopsie said:


> WTF did he do? Go through my Junior High 69-71 yearbooks for "inspiration"?
> Those look like the Simplicity patterns we used
> Same fabrics too


It’s funny you wrote that because that was all I could see looking at the designs. They looked exactly like the pictures you’d see flipping through those giant Simplicity and Butterick books. Ahh, memories…..


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Agree with the BLG, great question!



Isn’t that him though in that group shot with Doris and the lady in the floral dress?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just saw a German headline that she had on jewelry worth around 350000 bucks.


----------



## V0N1B2

charlottawill said:


> In my experience, even with the right shoe size when you wear heels that high your foot gets pushed forward and toe overhang is almost impossible to avoid. I wore (hobbled around in) shoes like that very occasionally when I was young, but just looking at that picture makes my feet hurt.


Totally agree. 
I don’t know why she insists on wearing the 120mm heels. I know she prefers Aquazzurra (as do I) but almost all of his shoes come in 70 & 90mm heel heights. So much more comfortable and your feet don’t push forward. Again - a real stylist would tell her this, but I think we all know she doesn’t listen.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly can't remember, I gave up heels basically when I ruined my knee a few years ago. Once it was kind of healed I had unweaned myself from 4" heels


I tried on some high heels from my closet recently and it seems I've lost the skill of walking in them


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Agree with the BLG, great question!



did he ever hang with them?  or just loan them the house at O's request?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I tried on some high heels from my closet recently and it seems I've lost the skill of walking in them


I never had it. I think you have to have a good sense of balance to wear them comfortably, and I have always been clumsy.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> did he ever hang with them?  or just loan them the house at O's request?


I believe it was a favor to Oprah.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I never had it. I think you have to have a good sense of balance to wear them comfortably, and I have always been clumsy.


I never wore the super tall skinny heels like Melania but mine were probably four inches....once you stop wearing them, I guess you'd have to learn to walk in them all over again


----------



## lanasyogamama

Heels look really out of place to me these days unless it’s a very formal occasion.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I never wore the super tall skinny heels like Melania but mine were probably four inches....once you stop wearing them, I guess you'd have to learn to walk in them all over again


When my husband and I were first dating I had a pair that were about four inches. They were strictly for walking from the car into a restaurant. He thought they were very sexy. Men have no idea how hard it is to walk in them.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Heels look really out of place to me these days unless it’s a very formal occasion.


It surprises me that the women on the Today show wear high heels most days. I've also noticed it on the women on my local news.


----------



## poopsie

V0N1B2 said:


> It’s funny you wrote that because that was all I could see looking at the designs. They looked exactly like the pictures you’d see flipping through those giant Simplicity and Butterick books. Ahh, memories…..


Definitely Simplicity.......or maybe McCall's. Butterick was upscale. Not quite Vogue level but still nicer.
Actually our favorite things were peasant blouses. Some elastic at the neck and sleeves, side seams and a hem. No buttons, zippers or darts to mess with.
I really miss those days too.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It surprises me that the women on the Today show wear high heels most days. I've also noticed it on the women on my local news.


well, they are sitting,right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> When my husband and I were first dating I had a pair that were about four inches. They were strictly for walking from the car into a restaurant. He thought they were very sexy. Men have no idea how hard it is to walk in them.


I used to wear them to work - no issue


----------



## Sophisticatted

Bea’s husband does high end real estate development and design.  Perhaps the Cambridges are looking at Frogmore House and Edo is helping with plans and ideas???

ETA: Bea helped refurbish the Queen’s childhood playhouse. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rounds-Windsor-generations-royals-played.html


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well, they are sitting,right?


True, but they do stand quite a bit during the several hours they're on the air.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> It surprises me that the women on the Today show wear high heels most days. I've also noticed it on the women on my local news.


I was just saying to my husband that it’s time to let the local newscasters wear more modern clothes instead of those 90s dresses.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I used to wear them to work - no issue


I just never got the hang of it. I wore sneakers to commute and then put heels on when I got to work where I sat at a desk all day.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> It surprises me that the women on the Today show wear high heels most days. I've also noticed it on the women on my local news.


Sadly news shows still focus on the ladies bodies


----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on the premiers, awards shows, etc., it seems the trends are bare shoulders, bare leg, deep cleavage, a train and jewels. So, MM checked all the trends, except thankfully the cleavage - yawn.

Maybe it’s the disastrous world situation, maybe it’s that the  pandemic showed us we do not need this garish display of privilege, maybe I need a nap, something about these articles give me the creeps.









						Blake Lively leads the glamour at The Adam Project premiere in NYC
					

Blake Lively led the glamour in a rainbow gown at the premiere of her husband Ryan Reynolds's new film The Adam Project.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

V0N1B2 said:


> Isn’t that him though in that group shot with Doris and the lady in the floral dress?


Sorry, my bad, it's Anthony Anderson (and his mum).
I don't have a TV so IDK who any of these people are (but I do remember him from Law & Order)

Those twitter comments were gold. My favourite one was this:
"I'm sorry but they ain't do sh!t. She forgot she was black and his family reminded her"
Dayam!







I do wonder tho, how Harry was able to cope with all those flashbulbs going off. Did every camera flash take him it "straight back"? Did his PTSD kick in as soon as he got backstage, or did it take longer, like until he got home.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Based on the premiers, awards shows, etc., it seems the trends are bare shoulders, bare leg, deep cleavage, a train and jewels. So, MM checked all the trends, except thankfully the cleavage - yawn.
> 
> Maybe it’s the disastrous world situation, maybe it’s that the  pandemic showed us we do not need this garish display of privilege, maybe I need a nap, something about these articles  me the creeps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blake Lively leads the glamour at The Adam Project premiere in NYC
> 
> 
> Blake Lively led the glamour in a rainbow gown at the premiere of her husband Ryan Reynolds's new film The Adam Project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


But at least they put their own real money (one million) where their mouth is, unlike the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> Isn’t that him though in that group shot with Doris and the lady in the floral dress?


The gentleman in the group shot has the same beard style of TP, but it's not TP. TP should have been the one receiving the award, he has helped many people.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> Totally agree.
> I don’t know why she insists on wearing the 120mm heels. I know she prefers Aquazzurra (as do I) but almost all of his shoes come in 70 & 90mm heel heights. So much more comfortable and your feet don’t push forward. Again - a real stylist would tell her this, but I think we all know she doesn’t listen.


I think she does it because wearing very high heels makes her look slimmer. Unfortunately, shoes in >50mm heel heights have been forbidden to enter my closet for several years.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I think she does it because wearing very high heels makes her look slimmer. Unfortunately, shoes in >50mm heel heights have been forbidden to enter my closet for several years.


Oh my I’ve got pairs of Louboutins in boxes unworn and I need to sell since I just wear low heels now.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> How do these two sleep at night???


Like babies.  Most narcissists do.


----------



## Sharont2305

I'd imagine it was Frogmore House that they met at, it is private and the Queen goes there often to walk the dogs in its grounds. Sounds like they spent time outside so again, very private. 
No way would it be Frogmore Cottage, I don't think even the Queen would impose on someone's private space when the 'tenants' are not there, even though she still owns it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> WTF did he do? Go through my Junior High 69-71 yearbooks for "inspiration"?
> Those look like the Simplicity patterns we used
> Same fabrics too


Oh wow  you are so right!
that can’t be unseen but I do still like them. I guess there’s nothing new in fashion lol.
I have noticed the peasant dresses from Zimmerman and the like are very like the 70s peasant dresses.


zinacef said:


> Maybe Tyler Perry should have been given this NAACP award—- he has given so much compared to these 2. The president of this org must’ve been starstruck or something to have met “Royals”, no royals from the previous state or university where he used to be employed. plain insult to the organization and the ideas it represent.


TP did get an honorary Oscar and he’s loaded so he’s not doing too badly but I doubt he’ll ever get anything as it’s well known the intellectual/media types who are on the board at these things think he makes unedifying crap.
M has never done anything that worthy  with her public life artistically or socially but she has the veneer of being progressive so they are more at peace with that than you know what’s actually popular or made it by hard work

Tbh im surprised the oscars people got over themselves enough to recognise him but once you’ve given the Farley brothers a best picture Oscar….


V0N1B2 said:


> Sorry, my bad, it's Anthony Anderson (and his mum).
> I don't have a TV so IDK who any of these people are (but I do remember him from Law & Order)
> 
> Those twitter comments were gold. My favourite one was this:
> "I'm sorry but they ain't do sh!t. She forgot she was black and his family reminded her"
> Dayam!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do wonder tho, how Harry was able to cope with all those flashbulbs going off. Did every camera flash take him it "straight back"? Did his PTSD kick in as soon as he got backstage, or did it take longer, like until he got home.



as funny as the comment is I have to disagree, I don’t think M forgot she was black. Sure she’d say she was white or Latina when it suited her but she was most definitely marketing herself as a woman of colour in her Elle(?) essay where she was giving the old Olivia munn ‘the only possible reason I don’t get A list starring roles is because I’m mixed and I’m definitely not a crap actress’ line and in the British media at least the fact she was biracial was brought up all the time as a positive influence and as progressive in the run up to the wedding and her short time as a working royal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5339662


I won’t make fun of her toes because I am cursed with hideous feet.  I do take issue with that meme because even though I can actually pick things up with my toes (special gift I love to gross people out with ), sandals and flip flops are the only shoes that are comfortable nowadays!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think she does it because wearing very high heels makes her look slimmer. Unfortunately, shoes in >50mm heel heights have been forbidden to enter my closet for several years.



Seriously. I just found a boot with a 500 mm heel that looked stylish (because I often find low heels look matronely and go with actual flats instead) and that I can walk on. I bought it in three versions/two colours and thinking about a fourth. I only don't because eh, I barely leave the house at the moment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Sure she’d say she was white or Latina when it suited her but she was most definitely marketing herself as a woman of colour in her Elle(?) essay where she was giving the old Olivia munn *‘the only possible reason I don’t get A list starring roles is because I’m mixed and I’m definitely not a crap actress’* line and in the British media at least the fact she was biracial was brought up all the time as a positive influence and as progressive in the run up to the wedding and her short time as a working royal.



The delusion is strong with this one


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> So what other (prominent) awards are up for sale that we can expect Duchess Moron and Duke of Hazzard to purchase?


The way Sunshine Sucks throws money around on their behalf, they will probably go for a Lifetime Achievement award somewhere


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Based on the premiers, awards shows, etc., it seems the trends are bare shoulders, bare leg, deep cleavage, a train and jewels. So, MM checked all the trends, except thankfully the cleavage - yawn.
> 
> Maybe it’s the disastrous world situation, maybe it’s that the  pandemic showed us we do not need this garish display of privilege, maybe I need a nap, something about these articles give me the creeps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blake Lively leads the glamour at The Adam Project premiere in NYC
> 
> 
> Blake Lively led the glamour in a rainbow gown at the premiere of her husband Ryan Reynolds's new film The Adam Project.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's allllllllll PR 

The more skin and dolly-looks, the more reposts, clicks and likes 

@lanasyogamama @marietouchet like those local news broadcaster women  who probably studied English Lit and Int Journalism (often _much_ younger than their male counterparts)

What is all boils down to, whoever and wherever a woman, she still has to look like she's wearing a bathing suit with a number on her wrist a la Miss World 1968. 

Had M come on to pick up her trophy award in a well fitted LBD (hats off to Doria) rather than that sad Blue-screen curtain trying to impersonate the Ukrainian flag (either make a statement or dress appropriately) and borrowed summer sandals (those were definitely 'stylists own') then _maybe _I would have had some respect. I said maybe


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> The way Sunshine Sucks throws money around on their behalf, they will probably go for a Lifetime Achievement award somewhere



Boom! 

 

Bets are on for the Nobel Peace prize


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Boom!
> 
> 
> 
> Bets are on for the Nobel Peace prize



Honestly, it would p*ss me off more than giving one to a reformed terrorist. Which is kind of sad.


----------



## jennlt

Hey Harry and Meghan,
Put your money where your mouth is and match my donation to World Central Kitchen's Ukraine efforts!


----------



## elvisfan4life

Frogmore - the royal burial grounds are also there too for more minor royals


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I was just saying to my husband that it’s time to let the local newscasters wear more modern clothes instead of those 90s dresses.


don't get me started on the local news.  I think ours buy their own wardrobe and it can vary a lot.  we have one who is on a local channel, not affiliated with a network who I swear wears a full wig.  the clothing is more noticeable on the "weather girls" who are shot standing up


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The way Sunshine Sucks throws money around on their behalf, they will probably go for a Lifetime Achievement award somewhere



I believe it. Harry’s book is supposed to be his memoir. Don’t most famous people write those when they are in their 60s or older? He’s in his 30s and I guess he is basically telling us he doesn’t expect to accomplish anything of note for the rest of his life. At least that’s how I am taking it.


----------



## Chanbal

One more book coming up soon, this time by Valentine Low. As you well know, Low is the journalist that published that interesting piece in the Times about the allegations of bullying by TW without being sued by the Netfl*xes. 

_Headline has acquired *Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown* by the Times’ royal correspondent Valentine Low.

Senior commissioning editor Fiona Crosby acquired UK and Commonwealth rights from Toby Mundy at Aevitas. North American rights were acquired by Charles Spicer, executive editor at St Martin’s Press. *Courtiers will be published in hardback, e-book and audiobook on 29th September 2022*._









						Headline lifts lid on monarchy with Low's royal insight
					

Headline has acquired Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown by the Times’ royal correspondent Valentine Low.




					www.thebookseller.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I believe it. Harry’s book is supposed to be his memoir. *Don’t most famous people write those when they are in their 60s or older? He’s in his 30s *and I guess he is basically telling us he doesn’t expect to accomplish anything of note for the rest of his life. At least that’s how I am taking it.


He can't wait, he needs the money now.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't want to be near Montecito today…


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> that sad Blue-screen curtain trying to impersonate the Ukrainian flag


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> Hey Harry and Meghan,
> Put your money where your mouth is and match my donation to World Central Kitchen's Ukraine efforts!
> View attachment 5340246


They're looking under the sofa cushions for their donation.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I believe it. Harry’s book is supposed to be his memoir. Don’t most famous people write those when they are in their 60s or older? He’s in his 30s and I guess he is basically telling us he doesn’t expect to accomplish anything of note for the rest of his life. At least that’s how I am taking it.



I always thought it was strange for celebs to write their memoirs at relatively young ages, but this clarified it for me:

"A memoir is *a narrative, written from the perspective of the author, about an important part of their life*. It's often conflated with autobiography, but there are a few important differences. An autobiography is also written from the author's perspective, but the narrative spans their entire life."

So maybe we'll be treated to several more from him in the coming decades. I can hardly wait.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I always thought it was strange for celebs to write their memoirs at relatively young ages, but this clarified it for me:
> 
> "A memoir is *a narrative, written from the perspective of the author, about an important part of their life*. It's often conflated with autobiography, but there are a few important differences. An autobiography is also written from the author's perspective, but the narrative spans their entire life."
> 
> So maybe we'll be treated to several more from him in the coming decades. I can hardly wait.


well, the good news is we don't have to read them.....can't wait for them to become irrelevant


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I don't want to be near Montecito today…



With all those bedrooms and bathrooms surely they could take in a refugee family or two if they were so inclined.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> With all those bedrooms and bathrooms surely they could take in a refugee family or two if they were so inclined.


really - they should Do Something.  It's one thing for other public figures like the actors at the SAG awards to express support and not necessarily do anything concrete.  But H&M don't act, don't do any work.  Their "job" is supposedly philanthropy? activism?
The have a helluva nerve IMO and the NAACP should be embarrassed to have given them that award


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I don't want to be near Montecito today…




I love the cat looks like Winston Churchill


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> With all those bedrooms and bathrooms surely they could take in a refugee family or two if they were so inclined.



You bet. Our neighbours already took in a mother with two small children and they do not have 16 bathrooms.


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> Hey Harry and Meghan,
> Put your money where your mouth is and match my donation to World Central Kitchen's Ukraine efforts!
> View attachment 5340246


I've joined you. Let's wait now for the Netfl*xes, I bet we will need a lot of popcorn.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You bet. Our neighbours already took in a mother with two small children and they do not have 16 bathrooms.


that is impressive
Meghan could put them in a wing of the house where she'd never have to see them - except for photo ops


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> that is impressive
> Meghan could put them in a wing of the house where she'd never have to see them - except for photo ops


But, but...think of the security issues!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> But, but...think of the security issues!


and of course, at this time getting them here could be very difficult.  but still - they could do SOMETHING


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I've joined you. Let's wait now for the Netfl*xes, I bet we will need a lot of popcorn.
> View attachment 5340403



I donated as well, plus a donation to an animal rights organisation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> don't get me started on the local news.  I think ours buy their own wardrobe and it can vary a lot.  we have one who is on a local channel, not affiliated with a network who I swear wears a full wig.  the clothing is more noticeable on the "weather girls" who are shot standing up



Yes! I saw a segment on Extra! or some TV show like that a while back that said that all the weather women from around the country are in some big Facebook group and they share links for cheap dresses from Amazon that look good on camera.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> that is impressive
> Meghan could put them in a wing of the house where she'd never have to see them - except for photo ops



I don't even like them because they are not the most pleasant people, but they really rose to the occasion, went shopping to equip the kitchen with everything they could possibly need, bought the kids a few small toys etc. And my mother tells me they took in refugees in 2015 too which completely went over my head at the time.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I donated as well, plus a donation to an animal rights organisation.


There is a cat cafe in Lviv where the owners said they will stay no matter what happens because they love their cats.








						Ukrainian Cat Cafe Stays Open To Care For Its 20 Residents Even During The War
					

They're all staying together no matter what.




					www.thedodo.com
				




ETA: I also donated to the International Animal Protection League in Kyiv but I posted the World Central Kitchen here because of the H & MM connection. If they can use their celebrity/notoriety/inherited wealth to help then I wish they would step up and do so.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes! I saw a segment on Extra! or some TV show like that a while back that said that all the weather women from around the country are in some big Facebook group and they share links for cheap dresses from Amazon that look good on camera.


in our area, the "weather girls" pretty much all dress in "sexy" tight dresses.  some with what I'd call a good figure and some not so great.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I'd imagine it was Frogmore House that they met at, it is private and the Queen goes there often to walk the dogs in its grounds. Sounds like they spent time outside so again, very private.
> No way would it be Frogmore Cottage, I don't think even the Queen would impose on someone's private space when the 'tenants' are not there, even though she still owns it.


On a learning curve here, if the reference in an article is “Frogmore” as this was, it will always mean “Frogmore _House” _and never  “Frogmore _Cottage_” which will always be identified with both words?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even like them because they are not the most pleasant people, but they really rose to the occasion, went shopping to equip the kitchen with everything they could possibly need, bought the kids a few small toys etc. And my mother tells me they took in refugees in 2015 too which completely went over my head at the time.


goes to show I guess you can be less pleasant but still good people


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> There is a cat cafe in Lviv where the owners said they will stay no matter what happens because they love their cats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian Cat Cafe Stays Open To Care For Its 20 Residents Even During The War
> 
> 
> They're all staying together no matter what.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedodo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: I also donated to the International Animal Protection League in Kyiv but I posted the World Central Kitchen here because of the H & MM connection. If they can use their celebrity/notoriety/inherited wealth to help then I wish they would step up and do so.


Really.....they should be doing something and publicizing it.  Isn't that what they are about?  For once, do something positive that won't be criticized.  How about this?  I've heard that Africans trying to get to Poland from Ukraine are being turned away at the border.  How about that for a cause?  Let's see the great WOC step up and try to help them in some way.  (actually, don't know what she could do but she could try; and I mean something other than talk about it)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Really.....they should be doing something and publicizing it.  Isn't that what they are about?  For once, do something positive that won't be criticized.  How about this?  I've heard that Africans trying to get to Poland from Ukraine are being turned away at the border.  How about that for a cause?  Let's see the great WOC step up and try to help them in some way.  (actually, don't know what she could do but she could try; and I mean something other than talk about it)



What could she do but lecture and "urge" whomever though? They are completely irrelevant.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What could she do but lecture and "urge" whomever though? They are completely irrelevant.


I don't know.  Could money help?


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes! I saw a segment on Extra! or some TV show like that a while back that said that all the weather women from around the country are in some big Facebook group and they share links for cheap dresses from Amazon that look good on camera.



One of my local weather ladies has this dress!!


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes! I saw a segment on Extra! or some TV show like that a while back that said that all the weather women from around the country are in some big Facebook group and they share links for cheap dresses from Amazon that look good on camera.


Funny. There is one weather girl here, who no matter what she wears, looks tacky and cheap. All of them are beyond thin and can wear anything, so why this particular one looks so awful is something I don’t get.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> He can't wait, he needs the money now.


It’s not a real bio. It is a gossip and slander exercise.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> It’s not a real bio. It is a gossip and slander exercise.



It's like everyday is Festivus with  him.............a perpetual Airing of Grievances


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO this is a next level boss move.  Sure, sure, several Hwood actors/actresses have kicked in $1million [basically, chump change for them]. That’s a nice start and I certainly hope they make good on those donations,  but $5million cash.  Next level boss move.
Bstrong, indeed.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> On a learning curve here, if the reference in an article is “Frogmore” as this was, it will always mean “Frogmore _House” _and never  “Frogmore _Cottage_” which will always be identified with both words?


I think you're right. We have an estate near here called Vaynol which refers to the actual estate and indeed there is a Vaynol Cottage there. Very interesting rumours surrounding the last people who lived there and the RF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> It’s not a real bio. It is a gossip and slander exercise.



That’s what Finding Freedom was. It will be interesting to see what he does in the new book to up the ante.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

The amount of times the Mexican weather girls turn their back to the camera is hilarious


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What could she do but lecture and "urge" whomever though? They are completely irrelevant.



The Lviv Cat Café could use a couple erstwhile royals to clean the litter boxes. I imagine Netflix and Spotify would agree that is a task commensurate with their skill level.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Go f*** yourself. What is wrong with these people.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wasn’t there a trial happening? What’s going on?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Funny. There is one weather girl here, who no matter what she wears, looks tacky and cheap. All of them are beyond thin and can wear anything, so why this particular one looks so awful is something I don’t get.


we had one who was gorgeous, and she left to go do RE.  Occasionally we see one who is quite large, wearing the same type right dress.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Go f*** yourself. What is wrong with these people.


is this on Twitter?  Can someone go there and ask them what H&M have done to help?


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## LittleStar88

It is so amusing how these two throw themselves out there so desperately, try to buy their way into everything... Yet still remain completely invisible.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Go f*** yourself. What is wrong with these people.


I didn't realize how rabid these "fans" are until I commented on a post about them recently. The replies were vicious and someone told me that my white a** knows nothing about what this couple has been through and what they have done for the community


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> One of my local weather ladies has this dress!!
> 
> View attachment 5340498


I'm sorry, I know these women are not highly paid, but that dress doesn't look good on any of them.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> The amount of times the Mexican weather girls turn their back to the camera is hilarious



If I show this to my husband I have a feeling the next time we are in Cabo he will want to check the local weather report on TV instead of just looking at his phone


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I donated as well, plus a donation to an animal rights organisation.


I went with Doctors Without Borders and the International Red Cross, but I'd like to help an animal aid group - may I ask who you donated to?


----------



## lallybelle

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO this is a next level boss move.  Sure, sure, several Hwood actors/actresses have kicked in $1million [basically, chump change for them]. That’s a nice start and I certainly hope they make good on those donations,  but $5million cash.  Next level boss move.
> Bstrong, indeed.




She's been doing things like this for a while for different emergencies/disasters here and in places around the world. She gets her people up and mobilized. Fundraises, gets supplies where they need to go etc. Bethany is awesome.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> True, but they do stand quite a bit during the several hours they're on the air.


the weather girls do but people like hosts of the morning talk shows?  not so much as far as I can recall. I think the idea is that the high heels make their legs look good while sitting.


----------



## charlottawill

lallybelle said:


> She's been doing things like this for a while for different emergencies/disasters here and in places around the world. She gets her people up and mobilized. Fundraises, gets supplies where they need to go etc. Bethany is awesome.


Aside from the RH drama, she gets things done. She started the Skinny Girl cocktail brand and then sold it for $100 million in 2011.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'm sorry, I know these women are not highly paid, but that dress doesn't look good on any of them.


I know it is all relative, but...

*U.S. Average*
$139,458



			https://www.comparably.com/salaries/salaries-for-tv-meteorologist


----------



## mellibelly

Hmm how about the same for the Olive Garden mansion of Montecito?! The Netflixes clearly rent from an oligarch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Fair enough.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I know it is all relative, but...
> 
> *U.S. Average*
> $139,458
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.comparably.com/salaries/salaries-for-tv-meteorologist



I think that might be on the high side, but I always take figures like these with a grain of salt. 


> https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Weather-Forecaster-Salary





> https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/What-Is-the-Average-Meteorologist-Salary-by-State


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not certain H&M’s Cali mansion was built by a Russian oligarch, but maybe the Vancouver rental was. So sad they allow this swirl of confusion. Just be honest and authentic, rather than shifty and dodgy.

*Old articles*

_And so the story sat, until a few days later on Jan. 3 when the Daily Mailreported the stay had been arranged by Canadian musical icon David Foster, who knows the owner but wouldn’t identify them. Foster’s wife is a friend of Meghan Markle’s and that’s how he came to know they needed a place to stay.

In that article, it was also reported that Foster had once arranged for “Russian oligarch Yuri Milner, who at one time owned more than eight per cent of Facebook and five per cent of Twitter, to rent the property around 2014, but that the California-based tech magnate did not own the house.”








						Confusion reigns in stories on ownership of Meghan and Harry's luxury Saanich digs
					

British press link mansion to a Russian oligarch, David Foster and "a mysterious" Canadian billionaire. Truth is it's owned by a very Victoria B.C. company called the Towner Bay Country Club.




					vancouversun.com
				



_








						Confusion reigns in stories on ownership of Meghan and Harry's luxury Saanich digs
					

British press link mansion to a Russian oligarch, David Foster and "a mysterious" Canadian billionaire. Truth is it's owned by a very Victoria B.C. company called the Towner Bay Country Club.




					vancouversun.com
				




The Cali McMansion:








						Tycoon who built Harry & Meg's £11m mansion reveals expensive running costs
					

THE tycoon who built Harry and Meghan’s £11million new home has revealed the lavish details behind the mansion – and also issued a warning about mudslides. Multi-millionaire businessman Terry Cunni…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Cali McMansion:


Those maintenance figures!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

> But therein lies the crux of the issue: The Cambridges and the Sussexes are not the same.
> 
> And that has nothing to do with nationality or where they live or race, and everything to do with the fact that there is only one duo who actually still carries real political heft, an uncomfortable fact that Harry and Meghan either don't grasp or are happy to pretend otherwise.



Daniela Elser: Mockery Over Harry and Meghan's Ukraine Statement Highlights Issue


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> I didn't realize how rabid these "fans" are until I commented on a post about them recently. The replies were vicious and someone told me that my white a** knows nothing about what this couple has been through and what they have done for the community


You don't think they're bots?  I always think they are bots, paid for by Sunshine Sachs.


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> The Lviv Cat Café could use a couple erstwhile royals to clean the litter boxes. I imagine Netflix and Spotify would agree that is a task commensurate with their skill level.


Nefl*x is raising prices again, they probably need more money to support their protégés.


----------



## Chanbal

Some news outlets are reporting this story. It would be the end of the monarchy imo.









						Meghan and Harry's comeback plan to RETURN as 'part-time royals'
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry hope to return to the UK as "part-time royals" when Prince Charles ascends the throne, a royal author has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Some news outlets are reporting this story. It would be the end of the monarchy imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's comeback plan to RETURN as 'part-time royals'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry hope to return to the UK as "part-time royals" when Prince Charles ascends the throne, a royal author has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


They can't be trusted and they've proven that, so I doubt the BRF will take them back.


----------



## Sophisticatted

THEY may have hopes for that, but I don’t think it will happen.  Charles can’t stand to be anywhere near Harry.  William has a say, too, and won’t allow it.  Furthermore, while Harry will always be part of the family, TW has shown so much disrespect to the family and the general population, she has no hope for that life ever again.

The only way I can see _some_ support for the rumor is if they are dangling that carrot to get Harry and the kids in proximity in the anticipation of an eventual divorce and custody battle.  (But I don’t see them honoring any implied promises of a return to working royal life).


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not certain H&M’s Cali mansion was built by a Russian oligarch, but maybe the Vancouver rental was.




The Harkles “purchased” the Montecito home from a Russian oligarch, Sergey Grishin. He appears to be a pretty unsavory character. Personally, I don’t believe they bought the home. Even the Body Language Guy thinks they rent from the oligarch. Handbag keeps the Frogmore lease so he can keep the Counsellor of State role.








						Harry & Meg gave millions to a man who made her life hell, says ex-wife
					

THE wife of the Scarface Russian who sold his home to Harry and Meghan has told how he made her life hell. The couple paid £11million for the nine-bedroom California home owned by billionaire ex-ba…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5340650


Tbh this is why I don’t like the royals having social media. If they aren’t political entities why do they need to post their view online anyway?

  Of course this is a serious issue but even when it’s something petty like who wishes who happy birthday it just devolves into a spat about who said or didn’t say what to whom. Tbh I do think their royal team knows this comparison will be made (after all royal corrospondents usually stick to the highlighted topics) and I just find it totally demeaning to the gravity of the situation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I went with Doctors Without Borders and the International Red Cross, but I'd like to help an animal aid group - may I ask who you donated to?



A local group who drove out to get shelter pets out and drop off supplies. As I understand at this point it is nearly impossible to do so due to destroyed infrastructure and massive shelling. They were looking for fosters too but we already have a bunch of critters and no room we could declare pet shelter. Seeing that at this point they cannot offer the usual "perks" of fostering (as in, pay for food and vet appointments) maybe this will help someone else to foster.

I just saw a call for donations for Ukraine's military service dogs as well, but not in English. I quickly googled and found these:

https://www.ifaw.org/eu/news/emergency-aid-ukraine

https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/how-you-can-support-animal-protection-organisations-ukraine


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> You don't think they're bots?  I always think they are bots, paid for by Sunshine Sachs.



Speaking of bots...wouldn't you know it, since Russia has disabled Twitter a ton of troublemakers on several topics du jour (e.g. vaccinations or going after Canada's prime minister - picking two random topics I remember - have all but ceased).


----------



## chowlover2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A local group who drove out to get shelter pets out and drop off supplies. As I understand at this point it is nearly impossible to do so due to destroyed infrastructure and massive shelling. They were looking for fosters too but we already have a bunch of critters and no room we could declare pet shelter. Seeing that at this point they cannot offer the usual "perks" of fostering (as in, pay for food and vet appointments) maybe this will help someone else to foster.
> 
> I just saw a call for donations for Ukraine's military service dogs as well, but not in English. I quickly googled and found these:
> 
> https://www.ifaw.org/eu/news/emergency-aid-ukraine
> 
> https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/how-you-can-support-animal-protection-organisations-ukraine


Thank you!


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A local group who drove out to get shelter pets out and drop off supplies. As I understand at this point it is nearly impossible to do so due to destroyed infrastructure and massive shelling. They were looking for fosters too but we already have a bunch of critters and no room we could declare pet shelter. Seeing that at this point they cannot offer the usual "perks" of fostering (as in, pay for food and vet appointments) maybe this will help someone else to foster.
> 
> I just saw a call for donations for Ukraine's military service dogs as well, but not in English. I quickly googled and found these:
> 
> https://www.ifaw.org/eu/news/emergency-aid-ukraine
> 
> https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/how-you-can-support-animal-protection-organisations-ukraine



I donated to Ifaw yesterday after checking it out on Charity Navigator. It has 3 out of 4 stars, probably because it's CEO makes almost $400,000/yr., but it was one of the few I could verify at all.

I also donated to the International Animal Protection League because it was recommended by TheDodo.com so I decided it was worth a shot.


----------



## EmilyM11

I don't know whether I can share anything (so no links) here but Polish government website has a lot of verified links to various ways of helping (financial, material, legal etc.). It's also in English.


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> I donated to Ifaw yesterday after checking it out on Charity Navigator. It has 3 out of 4 stars, probably because it's CEO makes almost $400,000/yr., but it was one of the few I could verify at all.
> 
> I also donated to the International Animal Protection League because it was recommended by TheDodo.com so I decided it was worth a shot.


I have been using the American Red Cross for many years as my preferential organization to donate to major catastrophes. I also donate to a number of local organizations. This was my first time donating to the World Central Kitchen and, unless I hear about ambiguous association, I plan to keep it on my list. Its role of providing meals in response to catastrophes is a very important one. 

I certainly don't want to donate to organizations that sponsor lifestyles like the one in the video below.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Those maintenance figures!!!!


they're living like royals.  wonder if they can keep it up.  Oh, supposedly they're selling.  maybe they will downsize.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> I have been using the American Red Cross for many years as my preferential organization to donate to major catastrophes. I also donate to a number of local organizations. This was my first time donating to the World Central Kitchen and, unless I hear about ambiguous association, I plan to keep it on my list. Its role of providing meals in response to catastrophes is a very important one.
> 
> I certainly don't want to donate to organizations that sponsor lifestyles like the one in the video below.




The American Red Cross is a fantastic organization that I donate to on a monthly basis but I was specifically looking for Ukrainian-focused charities because I want to help that country, it's people and it's animals as much as I possibly can right now. I think World Central Kitchen is a wonderful non-profit despite it's PR misstep with the fickle, feckless "philanthropists".

With Harry's war experience and extensive network of wealthy contacts, the attack on Ukraine is a cause where he should really be able to shine and instead, apart from one milquetoast statement calling for someone else to do something, it's basically been crickets from him. What a letdown but not a surprise.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I have been using the American Red Cross for many years as my preferential organization to donate to major catastrophes. I also donate to a number of local organizations. This was my first time donating to the World Central Kitchen and, unless I hear about ambiguous association, I plan to keep it on my list. Its role of providing meals in response to catastrophes is a very important one.
> 
> I certainly don't want to donate to organizations that sponsor lifestyles like the one in the video below.



I just checked International Rescue Committee on Charity Navigator.  Salary of CEO:
*David Miliband, President, CEO*
*$967,236 (0.12% of Total Expenses)*

Seems like a lot to me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Some news outlets are reporting this story. It would be the end of the monarchy imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's comeback plan to RETURN as 'part-time royals'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry hope to return to the UK as "part-time royals" when Prince Charles ascends the throne, a royal author has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Agree that H&M _want_ to return for the Jubilee celebrations. But.
The latest awards event perhaps was an effort to show they could be ‘red carpet’ ready, but it was another failure with a negative reception. These ‘come-back’ stories are about as *tacky* as anything H&M have done. There is a proper order for these things so this seems like another attempt for them to “jump the line” and to weaken Charles before he has even started. 

In an _US_ magazine article dated March 2020, this same author said:

_“I think Harry will be like a lost soul in the U.S.,” Quinn said in the documentary. “It will be far worse for Harry in America than Meghan in England. *Because he’s not as tough as she is*.”








						Prince Harry Will Be a 'Lost Soul' in L.A., Royal Author Tom Quinn Claims
					

Prince Harry will find it hard to adjust to life in Los Angeles with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son Archie, royal author Tom Quinn claims — read more




					www.usmagazine.com
				



_


----------



## jennlt

EmilyM111 said:


> I don't know whether I can share anything (so no links) here but Polish government website has a lot of verified links to various ways of helping (financial, material, legal etc.). It's also in English.



Here is the link to the Polish Government website's Ukrainian assistance page -  https://www.pomagamukrainie.gov.pl/


----------



## MiniMabel

lanasyogamama said:


> The amount of times the Mexican weather girls turn their back to the camera is hilarious





They look cheap and nasty and fake.....that sounds mean but, honestly, they look like cartoons.  Is plastic surgery endemic there?   What a sorry situation to perpetuate certain "types".  Aren't they in the 21st century yet?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree that H&M _want_ to return for the Jubilee celebrations.


Not because they want to reunite. They want to monetize the event for themselves, which means shoving people aside to get to the front of the balcony, protocol be d*mned. Here's hoping Hazard will remain so paranoid that he doesn't come back for a looooong time. 

Wondering how much longer Netflix and Spotify will wait for product. One of the gossip sites said Netflix has already rejected the pilot for Pearl.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Some news outlets are reporting this story. It would be the end of the monarchy imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's comeback plan to RETURN as 'part-time royals'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry hope to return to the UK as "part-time royals" when Prince Charles ascends the throne, a royal author has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




No chance. They've burnt each and every bridge. There would be a huge public resistance; after all, they'll want security (because the UK is SO dangerous) and expect the public to pay. Haha!  They're deluded.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> The American Red Cross is a fantastic organization that I donate to on a monthly basis but I was specifically looking for Ukrainian-focused charities because I want to help that country, it's people and it's animals as much as I possibly can right now. I think World Central Kitchen is a wonderful non-profit despite it's PR misstep with the fickle, feckless "philanthropists".
> 
> With Harry's war experience and extensive network of wealthy contacts, the attack on Ukraine is a cause where he should really be able to shine and instead, apart from one milquetoast statement calling for someone else to do something, it's basically been crickets from him. What a letdown but not a surprise.


someone may find this info from Charity Navigator interesting....
Humanitarian Response to the Ukrainian-Russian Crisis : Charity Navigator


----------



## sdkitty

MiniMabel said:


> They look cheap and nasty and fake.....that sounds mean but, honestly, they look like cartoons.  Is plastic surgery endemic there?   What a sorry situation to perpetuate certain "types".  Aren't they in the 21st century yet?


looks like they are fans of the Kardashians


----------



## EmilyM11

jennlt said:


> Here is the link to the Polish Government website's Ukrainian assistance page -  https://www.pomagamukrainie.gov.pl/


Thanks - its that page. I don’t think it covers animal help. I donated via Patreon to an animal shelter in Ukraine.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> No chance. They've burnt each and every bridge. There would be a huge public resistance; after all, they'll want security (because the UK is SO dangerous) and expect the public to pay. Haha!  *They're deluded.*



Exactly. They want to return for some merching, but mostly for the fame and the freebies - the free security, free housing, free transportation, free very fine dining, etc.  They want to be ‘half in, half out’ royals. They want a paid role in Charles’s regime.  They probably can get enough money to live 6 months [tax free] in the US and 6 months completely  free in the UK.  Seems like the Beckhams tried this a few years ago, only without the taxpayer freebies.  They actually had to earn their money.  For H&M, just imagine the ‘jet-set, always on the go, oh so busy, crazy busy, look at meeee’ life they could have.

*They're deluded.*


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly. They want to return for some merching, but mostly for the fame and the freebies - the free security, free housing, free transportation, free very fine dining, etc.  They want to be ‘half in, half out’ royals. They want a paid role in Charles’s regime.  They probably can get enough money to live 6 months [tax free] in the US and 6 months completely  free in the UK.  Seems like the Beckhams tried this a few years ago, only without the taxpayer freebies.  They actually had to earn their money.  For H&M, just imagine the ‘jet-set, always on the go, oh so busy, crazy busy, look at meeee’ life they could have.
> 
> *They're deluded.*


being royal is the only thing that makes them interesting


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Wondering how much longer Netflix and Spotify will wait for product. One of the gossip sites said Netflix has already rejected the pilot for Pearl.



As much as I want that to be true it’s probably a rumor. Netflix was hiring people to work on Pearl only a month ago so I doubt there is anything existing yet to reject. Animation takes time to produce. Meghan didn’t do anything but give her idea, other people who know what they are doing have to make it happen since Archewell Productions is sorely lacking in talent and follow through.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> They look cheap and nasty and fake.....that sounds mean but, honestly, they look like cartoons.  Is plastic surgery endemic there?   What a sorry situation to perpetuate certain "types".  Aren't they in the 21st century yet?



I'm not a fan, but that look is very appealing in some cultures. It's not really anything new in the US either. Big "booties" have become more mainstream thanks to the Kardashians and other celebrities.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> looks like they are fans of the Kardashians


Might be the other way around. I think curvy figures have long been desirable for Latina women.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Might be the other way around. I think curvy figures have long been desirable for Latina women.


maybe but aren't the large curvy backsides usually more attributed to black women? (before Kim K and her sisters appropriated them)?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> “I think Harry will be like a lost soul in the U.S.,” Quinn said in the documentary. “It will be far worse for Harry in America than Meghan in England. *Because he’s not as tough as she is*.”


Exactly. I've always believed he would be miserable living in SoCal. I suspect "Megxit" was largely her doing, and her agenda from day one. She expected to return to her native CA and become a global superstar on the level of Diana. Never gonna happen.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Exactly. I've always believed he would be miserable living in SoCal. I suspect "Megxit" was largely her doing, and her agenda from day one. She expected to return to her native CA and become a global superstar on the level of Diana. Never gonna happen.


yes, I agree.  We could be wrong but H seems like a fish out of water in So Cal to me


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> maybe but aren't the large curvy backsides usually more attributed to black women? (before Kim K and her sisters appropriated them)?


As I said, they've always been popular in some cultures. And look at JLo - she was famous long before the Ks. They've just taken it to the extreme.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, I agree.  We could be wrong but H seems like a fish out of water in So Cal to me



I might be in the minority but I don’t think he’s unhappy in CA, or at least no more unhappy than is his norm no matter where he is.

He’s still getting accolades for doing little to nothing like when he was a working royal. The only difference is he has only one person giving him his assignments, Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> being royal is the only thing that makes them interesting



Him maybe. Her, not so much because she truly sucks at it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Him maybe. Her, not so much because she truly sucks at it.


I agree but she's still being called Duchess by many Americans


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Him maybe. Her, not so much because she truly sucks at it.


it's hard to hold onto the image of the sweet little boy walking behind his mother's casket after all the sheet he's pulled in recent years


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I might be in the minority but I don’t think he’s unhappy in CA*, or at least no more unhappy than is his norm no matter where he is.*
> 
> He’s still getting accolades for doing little to nothing like when he was a working royal. The only difference is he has only one person giving him his assignments, Meghan.


I pretty much agree with you. His unhappiness is not tied to being in CA. He wasn’t that much into the country lifestyle even in UK. . He did go hunting, but she put a stop to that so he wouldn’t be able to do that no matter where he lived. There are plenty of places to hunt in the US. He could play polo and did a bit of that here, but she probably didn’t want him paying out for a string of polo ponies.  I think he misses going out drinking with the press corps who were more than happy to buy as long as they were given tidbits of gossip. As a married family man he wouldn‘t be able to do that no matter where he lived. Maybe it boils down to not really being happy being married.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I pretty much agree with you. His unhappiness is not tied to being in CA. He wasn’t that much into the country lifestyle even in UK. . He did go hunting, but she put a stop to that so he wouldn’t be able to do that no matter where he lived. There are plenty of places to hunt in the US. He could play polo and did a bit of that here, but she probably didn’t want him paying out for a string of polo ponies.  I think he misses going out drinking with the press corps who were more than happy to buy as long as they were given tidbits of gossip. As a married family man he wouldn‘t be able to do that no matter where he lived. Maybe it boils down to not really being happy being married.


have to admit we don't know how happy he is in the marriage.....from my POV how could be be happy being married to the greedy, bossy woman?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> it's hard to hold onto the image of the sweet little boy walking behind his mother's casket after all the sheet he's pulled in recent years


I thought he looked resentful. At the time people thought it was because he resented PP’s wanting the boys to walk behind the casket. I previously said he was mad at his mother and resentful for the manner in which she died. If she had died of an illness he would have understood it better. She died having a meaningless fling with a meaningless  man. There was no dignity in that. Harry has a deep seeded anger towards his mother that he hides with overcompensation of her memory. That is the difference between how the two brothers speak about her. William doesn’t need to deify her.  Harry does so he can live with his anger and use her memory to manipulate.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> have to admit we don't know how happy he is in the marriage.....from my POV how could be be happy being married to the greedy, bossy woman?


At the beginning he probably thought she knew what she was talking about and he wasn’t smart enough or experienced enough to see through the BS. He has had the last two years to see it has t worked the way she promised.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I thought he looked resentful. At the time people thought it was because he resented PP’s wanting the boys to walk behind the casket. I previously said he was mad at his mother and resentful for the manner in which she died. If she had died of an illness he would have understood it better. She died having a meaningless fling with a meaningless  man. There was no dignity in that. Harry has a deep seeded anger towards his mother that he hides with overcompensation of her memory. That is the difference between how the two brothers speak about her. William doesn’t need to deify her.  Harry does so he can live with his anger and use her memory to manipulate.



He could be angry with her that she died, he also never got beyond that age where she was the all-beautiful, all-powerful, all-perfect mother figure that some boys worship.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> He could be angry with her that she died, he also never got beyond that age where she was the all-beautiful, all-powerful, all-perfect mother figure that some boys worship.


Yes and he didn’t have to go through the teenage years being told what he might want to do was wrong or her telling him to shape up and buckle down at school.


----------



## pukasonqo

MiniMabel said:


> They look cheap and nasty and fake.....that sounds mean but, honestly, they look like cartoons.  Is plastic surgery endemic there?   What a sorry situation to perpetuate certain "types".  Aren't they in the 21st century yet?


Unfortunately plastic surgery is big in South America and sexism is rampant
I remember watching a doco about how Venezuela prepared its candidates to Miss Venezuela and the girl paraded in front of the pageant director who will go:boobs, ass, nose or lips, boobs…meaning they were getting surgery in those areas
I always wonder what became of those who didn’t win the Miss Venezuela title…weather girls maybe?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on what I’ve read about him, he was never the sweet little boy.  Some palace staff say he was a terror - kicking their shins, riding his trike or bike into them, smarting off, running off from the security, etc.  ‘Sweet little boy’ was the media who had their own agenda.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Good works are happening across this world  









						Hotlips by Solange
					

Official website for Hotlips & Hotscripts silver & enamel rings by Solange Azagury-Partridge. Exclusive colours & patterns. Worldwide shipping. The iconic lip shaped rings first released in 1995 are the embodiment of the perfect lipstick on a beautiful, pouty, kissable mouth.




					hotlipsbysolange.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

One more video from the BLG… He makes a very good point.
_Self-serving glorified influencers._


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I might be in the minority but I don’t think he’s unhappy in CA, or at least no more unhappy than is his norm no matter where he is.
> 
> He’s still getting accolades for doing little to nothing like when he was a working royal. The only difference is he has only one person giving him his assignments, Meghan.



And for all we know he is flying back and forth whenever he wants.  If he is unhappy, it’s about the lack of $$$$$ imo.

ETA:  since Eug just visited, I’m guessing she is stirring up some of this chatter. It takes the media off Andy.  Could be a quid pro quo, too - she champions H&M’s return and he champions A’s return.  Clearly, I simply do not trust these people or their words.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I thought he looked resentful. At the time people thought it was because he resented PP’s wanting the boys to walk behind the casket. I previously said he was mad at his mother and resentful for the manner in which she died. If she had died of an illness he would have understood it better. She died having a meaningless fling with a meaningless  man. There was no dignity in that. Harry has a deep seeded anger towards his mother that he hides with overcompensation of her memory. That is the difference between how the two brothers speak about her. William doesn’t need to deify her.  Harry does so he can live with his anger and use her memory to manipulate.



Harry’s psyche isn’t anywhere near that complex. What we see is who he is. No hidden depths involved.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Traminer

How about simply ignoring those two?


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Kick Off Women's History Month with a Special Announcement
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry announced the organizations that will benefit from new grants from their Archewell Foundation for Women's History Month.




					people.com
				




Always making announcements but no action. Legends in their own minds.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Results are in!

*Meghan and Harry haven’t just burned bridges in UK…they’ve ‘incinerated’ them! — Poll*
*MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry should not come back to the UK as part-time working royals, according to Express.co.uk readers.*
_Overwhelmingly, the majority – 97 percent (10,483) — said “no”, Meghan and Harry should not be allowed to come back as part-time royals. 

Just two percent (267) said “yes”, they should be allowed to change their minds and come back, and a further one percent (32 people) said they just didn’t know. 

In the comments, it was clear that people felt too much had happened between the Duke and Duchess and the rest of the Royal Family. _








						Meghan and Harry have ‘incinerated' bridges in UK – poll results
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry should not come back to the UK as part-time working royals, according to Express.co.uk readers.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> being royal is the only thing that makes them interesting


Even that isn't helping any more.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I previously said he was mad at his mother and resentful for the manner in which she died. If she had died of an illness he would have understood it better. She died having a meaningless fling with a meaningless  man. There was no dignity in that. Harry has a deep seeded anger towards his mother that he hides with overcompensation of her memory. That is the difference between how the two brothers speak about her. William doesn’t need to deify her.  Harry does so he can live with his anger and use her memory to manipulate.


I think that's quite brilliant!


----------



## poopsie

I think Harry is very mean spirited
Nature vs nurture?
IMO he was born that way and his over indulgent upbringing just solidified it. It was covered up with the carefully cultivated good chap Harry facade. 
He seems like the kind of person that even when he is joking and pranking there is an undercurrent of meanness.
Weren't there rumors/stories of him abusing sex workers?


----------



## CarryOn2020

poopsie said:


> I think Harry is very mean spirited
> Nature vs nurture?
> IMO he was born that way and his over indulgent upbringing just solidified it. It was covered up with the carefully cultivated good chap Harry facade.
> He seems like the kind of person that even when he is joking and pranking there is an undercurrent of meanness.
> Weren't there rumors/stories of him abusing sex workers?



Yes, those rumors are out there. So, too, are the ones about him throwing stink bombs at weddings as well as other grotesque behaviors [such as stripping a groomsman naked at the bachelor party]. The guy has issues.

Ugly thought: Wonder if he is throwing stink bombs around his Monteshito property and blaming the stink on the birds


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Kick Off Women's History Month with a Special Announcement
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry announced the organizations that will benefit from new grants from their Archewell Foundation for Women's History Month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always making announcements but no action. Legends in their own minds.


Quoting the BLG: self-serving glorified influencers!!!


----------



## Chanbal

the trapped brother…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Give = what legends do 
Take = well, you know


----------



## bag-mania

Well, Black History Month is over for another year and Women’s History Month has begun. Time to put away the old and bring in the new. I wonder which women’s organization will give them a big award this month. 

Because marrying a prince and having him take you away to a life of luxury personifies what being a feminist is all about.









						Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Continue to Prove They’re Feminists
					

The royals are offering grants to four leading organizations working to advance gender equity.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Well, Black History Month is over for another year and Women’s History Month has begun. Time to put away the old and bring in the new. I wonder which women’s organization will give them a big award this month.
> 
> Because marrying a prince and having him take you away to a life of luxury personifies what being a feminist is all about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Continue to Prove They’re Feminists
> 
> 
> The royals are offering grants to four leading organizations working to advance gender equity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Those calligraphy bananas are given equal stature as UN speeches. My mind broke. xincinsin.com is rebooting...


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Because marrying a prince and having him take you away to a life of luxury personifies what being a feminist is all about.


I don't even have words to express how I feel about TW's claim to be a feminist. It is so disrespectful to women imo. Feminist ≠ Opportunist


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Based on what I’ve read about him, he was never the sweet little boy.  Some palace staff say he was a terror - kicking their shins, riding his trike or bike into them, smarting off, running off from the security, etc.  ‘Sweet little boy’ was the media who had their own agenda.


I didn't like him almost from the beginning because he was so rude, always sticking out his tongue in public and even less after reading the story when William was 'complaining' about having to be king someday and H immediately volunteered to take his place. While most people saw H as being genuinely kind with his offer, I saw him as jealous and envious of his brother. I firmly believe H's bad boy personality was real rather than him just putting on an act.

ET correct typo


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I don't even have words to express how I feel about TW's claim to be a feminist. It is so disrespectful to women imo. Feminist ≠ Opportunist



Every lift up she has ever had has been because a man was there for her use as her boost up. If she had stayed in Toronto with Cory, it would have been the same with his connections.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



This makes total sense.  They would have shown the crowd clapping for them and maybe giving a standing ovation.


----------



## csshopper

I want to know how much these grants for Women’s groups are in terms of real dollars: $100?  $1000.?

Seriously, last figure I remember reading was Archewell had only generated $50,000.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lanasyogamama said:


> This makes total sense.  They would have shown the crowd clapping for them and maybe giving a standing ovation.


It's better with no audience so we can imagine these kinds of reactions to the Numbskulls receiving this award and then spouting their word salad speeches.


----------



## bag-mania

So here is how she got the blue dress. Basically she hit this guy up and he got free advertising out of it. He puts it in a nicer way.

Rogers spoke with _Vogue_ about how the stunning look came to be — starting with an email from Meghan about a month ago asking if he wanted to collaborate with her. It wasn't long before they jumped on a virtual call to talk more.

"I was immediately struck by her warmth and just her overall demeanor — her sense of ease and confidence within herself," Rogers said. "We quickly touched on this idea of a reveal. She hadn't really stepped out like this in a while."









						Meghan Markle Reached Out to Her NAACP Image Awards Dress Designer Over Email: 'I Was Struck by Her Warmth'
					

Christopher John Rogers told Vogue about how he connected with Meghan Markle and designed her dress for the NAACP Image Awards.




					people.com


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> So here is how she got the blue dress. Basically she hit this guy up and he got free advertising out of it. He puts it in a nicer way.
> 
> Rogers spoke with _Vogue_ about how the stunning look came to be — starting with an email from Meghan about a month ago asking if he wanted to collaborate with her. It wasn't long before they jumped on a virtual call to talk more.
> 
> "I was immediately struck by her warmth and just her overall demeanor — her sense of ease and confidence within herself," Rogers said. "We quickly touched on this idea of a reveal. She hadn't really stepped out like this in a while."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reached Out to Her NAACP Image Awards Dress Designer Over Email: 'I Was Struck by Her Warmth'
> 
> 
> Christopher John Rogers told Vogue about how he connected with Meghan Markle and designed her dress for the NAACP Image Awards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Her usual MO - get a freebie by offering a collab. She gets the goods and convinces the sucker that association with the Sussex brand will be beneficial.



csshopper said:


> I want to know how much these grants for Women’s groups are in terms of real dollars: $100?  $1000.?
> 
> Seriously, last figure I remember reading was Archewell had only generated $50,000.


I've noticed that their effusive PR never mentions $ figures when they claim that the Suckesses have contributed to something and imply that money is involved. I guess reclusive philanthropists like them don't want the world to know the value of their good deeds


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> "wanted to collaborate"


If I had a dollar for every time I see that phrase on someone's Instagram I'd be rich.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> If I had a dollar for every time I see that phrase on someone's Instagram I'd be rich.



Isn’t it the go-to move of all the influencers out there?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> So here is how she got the blue dress. Basically she hit this guy up and he got free advertising out of it. He puts it in a nicer way.
> 
> Rogers spoke with _Vogue_ about how the stunning look came to be — starting with an email from Meghan about a month ago asking if he wanted to collaborate with her. It wasn't long before they jumped on a virtual call to talk more.
> 
> "I was immediately struck by her warmth and just her overall demeanor — her sense of ease and confidence within herself," Rogers said. "We quickly touched on this idea of a reveal. She hadn't really stepped out like this in a while."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reached Out to Her NAACP Image Awards Dress Designer Over Email: 'I Was Struck by Her Warmth'
> 
> 
> Christopher John Rogers told Vogue about how he connected with Meghan Markle and designed her dress for the NAACP Image Awards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Looking at the picture with that story, are these her shoes? Very DSW looking for a very non-DSW price. Not that there's anything wrong with DSW, I've gotten plenty of shoes there. 


> https://www.saksfifthavenue.com/pro...3158143.html?dwvar_0400013158143_color=SILVER


----------



## chowlover2

poopsie said:


> It's like everyday is Festivus with  him.............a perpetual Airing of Grievances


You slay me!


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


>



That can explain H looking so glum.  He isn't an actor and probably felt stupid.


----------



## csshopper

The Body Language Guy is not the only one "reading" Haz and Raptor, Dr. Lillian Glass is a body language expert hired by the Express UK to analyze their appearance at the NAACP Awards:

*'Clearly not happy' Harry 'fish out of water' in US appearance as Meghan 'in her element'*
*PRINCE Harry was "clearly not happy" during his appearance on stage over the weekend, while his wife Meghan Markle appeared "in her element", according to a body language expert.*
She told Express.co.uk: “Harry looked like a fish out of water as he didn't know what to do or how to comfort himself as he looked down at the award and examined it and then rocked back and forth and pulled away from Meghan.

“He straightened up for a while when she quickly turned her head towards him and shot him a not so pleasant look indicating that he was on stage and to be aware of it and to shape up.

“He purses his lips in embarrassment and then cocks his head like a wounded puppy and then looks at the camera.
“He is not smiling the whole time he is up there. He then forgets and looks back at her and looks down and then returns to facing the camera.
“While looking at the camera he continues to rock back and forth like a child that feels uncomfortable because they have a full bladder.”

Dr Glass claims this was a further cue that showed his discomfort.

She said: “His rocking back and forth indicates he really doesn't want to be there as further punctuated by his lack of a smile and dull eyes.

“Meghan on the other hand is in her element as she looks directly into the camera and speaks eloquently.”
Dr Glass went on to add that the Duke’s appearance was surprising, considering his history in the limelight.
She said: “One would think that growing up in front of a camera and having spoken to countless groups he would know how to act when receiving an award on stage but it confirms that the body doesn't lie and Harry is clearly not happy and uncomfortable as indicated through his body language at this event.”


----------



## Luvbolide

jennlt said:


> Hey Harry and Meghan,
> Put your money where your mouth is and match my donation to World Central Kitchen's Ukraine efforts!
> View attachment 5340246



Well said, Jose!!  Couldn’t agree more!!


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> He’s in his 30s and I guess he is basically telling us he doesn’t expect to accomplish anything of note for the rest of his life.



Why change now?!?!


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> I always thought it was strange for celebs to write their memoirs at relatively young ages, but this clarified it for me:
> 
> "A memoir is *a narrative, written from the perspective of the author, about an important part of their life*. It's often conflated with autobiography, but there are a few important differences. An autobiography is also written from the author's perspective, but the narrative spans their entire life."
> 
> So maybe we'll be treated to several more from him in the coming decades. I can hardly wait.



I had forgotten until I read it somewhere today, but Harry the Dim’s book deal is for four books.  The first one now, the second one after the Queen passes away and who knows what else.  Except that there is also talk that MM will write some sort of “wellness” crap.  Sadly, I can see hers doing well with the same young girls who are her devoted fans.  I expect most adults would pass on it!

the whole thing is rather


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> Unfortunately plastic surgery is big in South America and sexism is rampant
> I remember watching a doco about how Venezuela prepared its candidates to Miss Venezuela and the girl paraded in front of the pageant director who will go:boobs, ass, nose or lips, boobs…meaning they were getting surgery in those areas
> I always wonder what became of those who didn’t win the Miss Venezuela title…weather girls maybe?


You made me think of a documentary I was watching on wannabe k pop idols, there was  a particular girl group where the bosses decided their gimmick was they were all going to have a full face of plastic surgery to transform them.
Needless to say they didn’t become the new BTS and I can’t help wondering what kind of debt they and all the people chasing fame must be in, it seems so manipulative, extortion even, I do wonder about plastic surgery addiction as well.



			
				Chanbal post: 35036615 said:
			
		

>



This is funny but I wish they’d blurred the guy’s name out - hopefully he won’t get backlash for the truth.


charlottawill said:


> If I had a dollar for every time I see that phrase on someone's Instagram I'd be rich.


It’s so pretentious isn’t it? Haha 





charlottawill said:


> Looking at the picture with that story, are these her shoes? Very DSW looking for a very non-DSW price. Not that there's anything wrong with DSW, I've gotten plenty of shoes there.


The whole look is very bargain bin. Ropey, tight shoes, cheap wig, fillers, lots of fake tan and an OTT gown that was really not tailored for her for a custom job.

She doesn’t really suit blue but I suppose they didn’t want to put her in a warm tone after all those lobster jokes when she wore the red with the patchy fake tan.

It’s weird she doesn’t seem to suit any colour. Maybe mauves and pinks? You know very flatter the vicious dowager duchess  colour palates

Actually I’m sorry that’s an insult to dowager duchesses everywhere.


----------



## Luvbolide

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5340650



It’s because they are racist.  

(JK of course!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A lot to unpack here. So if true even only in part, someone was in a full-on narcisstic rage for months. Which I don't think I've ever heard of (the narcisst just not stopping raging and fighting back).

BTW this came from another board but it was later confirmed it is indeed a transcript from a recent Youtube video by someone called Bookworm.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> It’s because they are racist.
> 
> (JK of course!)


If white people don't support her, they are racist.
If POC don't support her, they are ... jealous?
If WOC don't support her, they are ... extremely jealous?
I'm Asian. I suppose her sugars will say I'm both racist and jealous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And also...comments are quite interesting.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A lot to unpack here. So if true even only in part, someone was in a full-on narcisstic rage for months. Which I don't think I've ever heard of (the narcisst just not stopping raging and fighting back).
> 
> BTW this came from another but it was later confirmed it is indeed a transcript from a recent Youtube video by someone called Bookworm.



Convoluted tale, but certainly possible as it has been alleged many times that she had a drug or cigarette addiction. Although if true, that means she didn't factor in the difficulty of meeting her illicit needs after marriage. Sniffing lines of cocaine is bad for the nose, IIRC. Does that account for her nose jobs?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Her usual MO - get a freebie by offering a collab. She gets the goods and convinces the sucker that association with the Sussex brand will be beneficial.
> 
> 
> I've noticed that their effusive PR never mentions $ figures when they claim that the Suckesses have contributed to something and imply that money is involved. I guess reclusive philanthropists like them don't want the world to know the value of their good deeds



Collab means when a person or team collaborates with another to create something extra special that reinforces both personalities/brand DNAs.

Since when has_ collaboration_ meant 'I'll wear your shower curtain' X  'I'll lend you my shower curtain'?


----------



## Traminer

gracekelly said:


> Every lift up she has ever had has been because a man was there for her use as her boost up. If she had stayed in Toronto with Cory, it would have been the same with his connections.



Who is that "she" in the picture? I don't know her.


----------



## jennlt

Luvbolide said:


> Well said, Jose!!  Couldn’t agree more!!


I don't want to get Jose Andres in trouble so I need to clarify that I'm the one who called out the Disastrous Duo to match my donation. I didn't do a great job with the screen shot because I cut off the letter of thanks from Jose but left his signature above my receipt. 
Jose, you have my deepest apologies if you get sued


----------



## Annawakes

I’m no body language expert but even I could tell he looked uncomfortable during the “award”.  Maybe he does have traumatic experiences with flashbulbs and being in the spotlight.  I feel the teeniest bit sorry for him now.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> I’m no body language expert but even I could tell he looked uncomfortable during the “award”.  Maybe he does have traumatic experiences with flashbulbs and being in the spotlight.  I feel the teeniest bit sorry for him now.



Judging from past observation, he's just not a very good bluffer/liar. He always looks uncomfortable when he knows she's telling lies (Oprah int sitting) or they're on thin ground (Oprah chicken shot) or he knows he's talking nonsense (self-care/Butter-up BetterUp.

Being awarded with a prize he knows they bought for doing nothing and being applauded by canned applause to a room of no-one is bound to show on his face/demeanour/BL. 

He is used to be applauded (by real people) for for just walking into a room.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Judging from past observation, he's just not a very good bluffer/liar. He always looks uncomfortable when he knows she's telling lies (Oprah int sitting) or they're on thin ground (Oprah chicken shot) or he knows he's talking nonsense (self-care/Butter-up BetterUp.
> 
> Being awarded with a prize he knows they bought for doing nothing and being applauded by canned applause to a room of no-one is bound to show on his face/demeanour/BL.
> 
> He is used to be applauded (by real people) for for just walking into a room.


I doubt many people are of Methane's calibre, able to crow with glee as she publically declares herself a fraud.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> You made me think of a documentary I was watching on wannabe k pop idols, there was  a particular girl group where the bosses decided their gimmick was they were all going to have a full face of plastic surgery to transform them.
> Needless to say they didn’t become the new BTS and I can’t help wondering what kind of debt they and all the people chasing fame must be in, it seems so manipulative, extortion even, I do wonder about plastic surgery addiction as well.
> 
> This is funny but I wish they’d blurred the guy’s name out - hopefully he won’t get backlash for the truth.
> 
> It’s so pretentious isn’t it? Haha
> The whole look is very bargain bin. Ropey, tight shoes, cheap wig, fillers, lots of fake tan and an OTT gown that was really not tailored for her for a custom job.
> 
> She doesn’t really suit blue but I suppose they didn’t want to put her in a warm tone after all those lobster jokes when she wore the red with the patchy fake tan.
> 
> It’s weird she doesn’t seem to suit any colour. Maybe mauves and pinks? You know very flatter the vicious dowager duchess  colour palates
> 
> Actually I’m sorry that’s an insult to dowager duchesses everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5341926




I didn’t like the dress either. The color just seemed cheap to me. 

It’s interesting that you said colors don’t seem to suit her. I actually thought that deep green looked really pretty with the leather skirt, but I see what you mean. Interestingly, Tom and Lorenzo said a while back that she really loves neutrals, so maybe when she was more connected to her personal style, versus trying to get access to whatever the most expensive pieces she knew this herself.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> I doubt many people are of Methane's calibre, able to crow with glee as she publically declares herself a fraud.




I’m sure I would look super uncomfortable pretending that I was standing in front of a huge crowd if I weren’t!


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I’m no body language expert but even I could tell he looked uncomfortable during the “award”.  Maybe he does have traumatic experiences with flashbulbs and being in the spotlight.  I feel the teeniest bit sorry for him now.



Whenever you find yourself feeling sorry for him keep in mind that he did it all to himself. This isn’t something that just happened to him, he made it happen through his active scheming and participation. No sympathy here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A lot to unpack here. So if true even only in part, someone was in a full-on narcisstic rage for months. Which I don't think I've ever heard of (the narcisst just not stopping raging and fighting back).
> 
> BTW this came from another board but it was later confirmed it is indeed a transcript from a recent Youtube video by someone called Bookworm.



I don’t buy a word of this.

1. The tone is very judgemental and puts blame for mental health problems on the patient which is just outdated not to mention immoral. I don’t see a staffer ever wanting to present themselves in that way. They are super polite and cautious.

2. Also if it was found out you were spilling on your employer’s medical history in a discretion heavy job like this your career would be dead, so where’s the motivation to spill? It can’t be just plain old spite as if this behaviour is the result of mental illness then they’d realise that would illicit sympathy & let her off the hook so to speak.

3. on the topic of drug use, this reads like it was written by someone who thinks the royal family would be scandalised by a heavy drinker and who doesn’t know the queen likes a gin and dubonnet for lunch everyday. 
there is no way H or his wife would have any trouble whatsoever in Having drugs suit their fancy brought to them on a silver tray. I hate to shatter any illusions of British propriety but just because weed is illegal here does not mean it isn’t common. Besides which Harry has been smashing the cocaine for most of his adult life so I doubt he’d be scandalised by anyone lighting up. All in all I feel like this was written by a non-British resident.

4. Very importantly this sounds very much how a layman would hodgepodge together various mental problems and not a cohesive description of a particular mental illness

5. On a purely practical note the timescale on this is stupid. They had a whirlwind romance, then she turned out to be an addict, she had some form of psychotic break while pregnant, then they tried to section her, then her husband made preparations to ‘first mrs Rochester’ his wife in remote Canada? Then they moved to LA and tried to make it in Hollywood ALL in the course of _under 3 years?_

6. finally, let’s be cynical do we REALLY see Harry devoting himself to the care of a deeply mentally disturbed woman or do we see him dropping her for a fresh skirt and a good time and letting the family pick up the tab on a quick divorce?


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> It’s because they are racist.
> 
> (JK of course!)





xincinsin said:


> If white people don't support her, they are racist.
> If POC don't support her, they are ... jealous?
> If WOC don't support her, they are ... extremely jealous?
> I'm Asian. I suppose her sugars will say I'm both racist and jealous.



It's hard to justify why they desire so much to be with people they call racists …


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Convoluted tale, but certainly possible as it has been alleged many times that she had a drug or cigarette addiction. Although if true, that means she didn't factor in the difficulty of meeting her illicit needs after marriage. Sniffing lines of cocaine is bad for the nose, IIRC. Does that account for her nose jobs?


They both clearly love coke  and ‘hosts’ like Markus Anderson would be queuing up to supply them with whatever they wanted. It’s the perfect opportunity to have the royal ear and the influential tongue at its most unguarded moments. The car just needs to drive discreetly through the gates like other people have been known to do. I think that H’s predilection brought those two together in the first place. 

Any legal drug like cigarettes or booze the footmen would bring them morning or night no questions asked. The queen’s mother loved her gin and fags.


----------



## bag-mania

What is Markus Anderson doing these days? Seems like he fell off the face of the earth. Now there’s a tell-all book I’d be interested in reading.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> What is Markus Anderson doing these days? Seems like he fell off the face of the earth. Now there’s a tell-all book I’d be interested in reading.



Supposedly, he was the one dining with H&M&Eug. It wasn’t Jack.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Every lift up she has ever had has been because a man was there for her use as her boost up. If she had stayed in Toronto with Cory, it would have been the same with his connections.


I strongly dislike users


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> I want to know how much these grants for Women’s groups are in terms of real dollars: $100?  $1000.?
> 
> Seriously, last figure I remember reading was Archewell had only generated $50,000.


yes, it is somewhat puzzling....they only have $50K but they live in the mansion with 19 bathrooms?  this is coming out of Harrys inheritance?  or Charles is still carrying them?


----------



## rose60610

If M&H have *so much influence*, then what has BetterUp contributed to help Ukraine? I read where they've raised hundreds of millions in funding for the company. OK. So now what? They have celebrities, including a spoiled prince on the payroll, who, with his noxious wife, love to insert themselves in every big news story for personal publicity. So where are the dollars to help out a worthy cause? And if Harry has such a successful soldier background, where are his words of solidarity with the people of Ukraine in fighting their enemy? And is the President of Ukraine really expected to personally thank grifters when he himself has picked up a rifle to help defend his own country? Yes, he's thanked the Cambridges, because they are people WHO MATTER. The Sussexes? They're self-aggrandizing a******s that don't give a damn about Ukraine except using it to promote themselves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This!


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> "...do we REALLY see Harry devoting himself to the care of a deeply mentally disturbed woman or do we see him dropping her for a fresh skirt and a good time and letting the family pick up the tab on a quick divorce?"



That's a tough one. I think "the Firm" would tell him, "You made your bed, now you have to lie in it", especially since children are involved. If he was viewed as abandoning her and their children it might reflect badly on the monarchy. Stiff upper lip and all, not to mention the damage already caused by the mess with Andrew. But I believe this account is largely speculation and rumor.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly, he was the one dining with H&M&Eug. It wasn’t Jack.



I don’t buy that. Why would Mr. Low-Profile suddenly pop out of the woodwork for a staged pap event? I’m willing to bet it was Jack.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the awards ceremony with no audience - 
It occurs to me that throughout her career(?) MM rarely performed live.  Pre-recorded is her preferred mode.  This could be why the royal gig was so stressful for her.


----------



## rose60610

Has Serena Williams gotten anything from NAACP? Here's from Women's Wear Daily yesterday: 

"Serena Williams stepped out for the front row of the Balmain show in full boss mode just one day after announcing her early-stage venture capital firm, Serena Ventures, has raised $111 million.

The tennis great had long been working on the venture behind the scenes before Tuesday’s big news, she told WWD.

“I feel like I’ve had a secret for four years,” she said. “I’ve been investing for nine years so it’s something I’ve been doing for a really long time, and I’ve been building this team for over four years, so this is nothing new, but it’s good to finally tell the world about it.”

The fund is geared toward diversity and investing in female entrepreneurs, and will focus on crypto, web3 and fintech for women, she said. “It’s really interesting because less than 2 percent of all VC money goes to women — that number went up to like 3 or 4 percent — but still that number is still really shocking. It’s insane. So I started that thinking, ‘Wow, I have to work with women like me, that look like me, and just women in general to change to be able to write big checks.”

***************************************************************************

It goes without saying Serena has worked extremely hard and is successful. Good for her. She also invests wisely and leverages her fame/talent. Again, great for her.  So you know that's the reason the Gruesome Grifters want to glom onto her and riff off her self made accomplishments.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I don’t buy that. Why would Mr. Low-Profile suddenly pop out of the woodwork for a staged pap event? I’m willing to bet it was Jack.



And you could be correct.  

In a world that finds itself on the brink of WW3,  
In a world on the brink, CBS thought it _smart?/wise?/clever?_ to broadcast billionaire Melinda Gates’s drama with her ex
In this kind of world, anything is possible imo


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> And you could be correct.
> 
> In a world that finds itself on the brink of WW3,
> In a world on the brink, CBS thought it _smart?/wise?/clever?_ to broadcast billionaire Melinda Gates’s drama with her ex
> In this kind of world, anything is possible imo
> 
> View attachment 5342235



Television is about escapism. It’s amazing how the human mind can completely detach when it doesn’t want to face reality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Has Serena Williams gotten anything from NAACP? Here's from Women's Wear Daily yesterday:
> 
> "Serena Williams stepped out for the front row of the Balmain show in full boss mode just one day after announcing her early-stage venture capital firm, Serena Ventures, has raised $111 million.
> 
> The tennis great had long been working on the venture behind the scenes before Tuesday’s big news, she told WWD.
> 
> “I feel like I’ve had a secret for four years,” she said. “I’ve been investing for nine years so it’s something I’ve been doing for a really long time, and I’ve been building this team for over four years, so this is nothing new, but it’s good to finally tell the world about it.”
> 
> The fund is geared toward diversity and investing in female entrepreneurs, and will focus on crypto, web3 and fintech for women, she said. “It’s really interesting because less than 2 percent of all VC money goes to women — that number went up to like 3 or 4 percent — but still that number is still really shocking. It’s insane. So I started that thinking, ‘Wow, I have to work with women like me, that look like me, and just women in general to change to be able to write big checks.”
> 
> ***************************************************************************
> 
> It goes without saying Serena has worked extremely hard and is successful. Good for her. She also invests wisely and leverages her fame/talent. Again, great for her.  So you know that's the reason the Gruesome Grifters want to glom onto her and riff off her self made accomplishments.


She doesn't need fluff awards. She has the real thing.


----------



## Sophisticatted

rose60610 said:


> It goes without saying Serena has worked extremely hard and is successful. Good for her. She also invests wisely and leverages her fame/talent. Again, great for her.  So you know that's the reason the Gruesome Grifters want to glom onto her and riff off her self made accomplishments.



I think it may go both ways.  I think Serena and her husband are using their name recognition.  They are smart about it.  Keeping enough of a distance, not claiming to be best buddies.  Less likely to be splattered by the negativity that surrounds the Sussexes.  If anyone gets Markled in this relationship, it will be the Harkles.


----------



## bellecate

Out in the woods for a walk this morning and came upon this. It seemed to remind me of some dress I had seen somewhere.


----------



## Luvbolide

jennlt said:


> I don't want to get Jose Andres in trouble so I need to clarify that I'm the one who called out the Disastrous Duo to match my donation. I didn't do a great job with the screen shot because I cut off the letter of thanks from Jose but left his signature above my receipt.
> Jose, you have my deepest apologies if you get sued



fear not, I knew it wasn’t truly from Jose, as even if he felt that way, he wouldn’t publicly say it. My response was intended to be younger in cheek, which doesn’t come across well in writing!


----------



## poopsie

jelliedfeels said:


> 5. On a purely practical note the timescale on this is stupid. They had a whirlwind romance, then she turned out to be an addict, she had some form of psychotic break while pregnant, then they tried to section her, then her husband made preparations to ‘first mrs Rochester’ his wife in remote Canada? Then they moved to LA and tried to make it in Hollywood ALL in the course of _under 3 years?_
> 
> 6. finally, let’s be cynical do we REALLY see Harry devoting himself to the care of a deeply mentally disturbed woman or do we see him dropping her for a fresh skirt and a good time and letting the family pick up the tab on a quick divorce?



Personally I have no problem with the time line. Three years is plenty of time. Assuming they really met as stated everything is pretty much laid out as to when they moved etc. Of course  we have no  idea of what was going on behind the curtain so to speak
If Harry dropped her that would be like admitting that the people he has resented all his life were right and he was wrong and he would be facing the biggest WE TOLD YOU SO in history. So of course he has to double down to prove them  wrong


----------



## jelliedfeels

poopsie said:


> Personally I have no problem with the time line. Three years is plenty of time. Assuming they really met as stated everything is pretty much laid out as to when they moved etc. Of course  we have no  idea of what was going on behind the curtain so to speak
> If Harry dropped her that would be like admitting that the people he has resented all his life were right and he was wrong and he would be facing the biggest WE TOLD YOU SO in history. So of course he has to double down to prove them  wrong


I can see him doing that if he realised she was just a bit of a harridan but the situation was still beneficial enough for him. I just don’t see him having the substance to cope with having a spouse who is struggling to the point of breakdown, especially as a newlywed, I think he’d be out the door and into soho for a good time (maybe then send her divorce papers and the wedding ring back in the mail.He’d want to cut his losses and he’s clearly not a loyal person.


charlottawill said:


> That's a tough one. I think "the Firm" would tell him, "You made your bed, now you have to lie in it", especially since children are involved. If he was viewed as abandoning her and their children it might reflect badly on the monarchy. Stiff upper lip and all, not to mention the damage already caused by the mess with Andrew. But I believe this account is largely speculation and rumor.


I don’t think there’s much stigma in divorce. That ship very much sailed with Charles and Diana. Andrew dropped fergie and Anne divorced too. Public persona wise Harry the ‘cheeky lad’ was exactly the kind of guy to marry in haste and divorce at leisure with little criticism too.

The royals are very protective of their own family and I can’t imagine they’d feel any great loyalty to some ageing American actress who wouldnt stick to the dress code so I can’t see them insisting he stand by her.
Besides they would be able to spin it as ‘the kinder thing to not put a fragile woman through the demanding rigours of royal life’ 

 Yes it’d be embarrassing for a bit after
but what is this current timeline if not embarrassing?


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Out in the woods for a walk this morning and came upon this. It seemed to remind me of some dress I had seen somewhere.
> View attachment 5342364
> View attachment 5342365



What is the purpose of the painted stones? That one isn't particularly fancy but I've seen some with cute pictures or inspirational messages painted on them. People leave them places, usually by a sidewalk or under a tree. I don’t know if bystanders are supposed to take them somewhere new and leave them or what.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> What is the purpose of the painted stones? That one isn't particularly fancy but I've seen some with cute pictures or inspirational messages painted on them. People leave them places, usually by a sidewalk or under a tree. I don’t know if bystanders are supposed to take them somewhere new and leave them or what.


In this case those are real bird droppings on the stone. I would advise not taking that one.     We do spend more time out in the woods than at home and in our travels have come across many painted stones. I have always left them for the next person to enjoy.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> In this case those are real bird droppings on the stone. I would advise not taking that one.     We do spend more time out in the woods than at home and in our travels have come across many painted stones. I have always left them for the next person to enjoy.



Is it real bird poop? I thought they were white squiggles drawn by someone without much imagination.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> What is the purpose of the painted stones? That one isn't particularly fancy but I've seen some with cute pictures or inspirational messages painted on them. People leave them places, usually by a sidewalk or under a tree. I don’t know if bystanders are supposed to take them somewhere new and leave them or what.




*Here's Why You're Going to See Painted Rocks Hidden Everywhere*

It's a nationwide scavenger hunt meant to promote positivity and kindness.





By Katelyn ChefUpdated March 09, 2020








						Here's Why You're Going to See Painted Rocks Hidden Everywhere
					

Hidden painted rocks are the focus of a nationwide scavenger hunt meant to promote positivity and kindness.




					www.marthastewart.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Here's Why You're Going to See Painted Rocks Hidden Everywhere*
> 
> It's a nationwide scavenger hunt meant to promote positivity and kindness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By Katelyn ChefUpdated March 09, 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's Why You're Going to See Painted Rocks Hidden Everywhere
> 
> 
> Hidden painted rocks are the focus of a nationwide scavenger hunt meant to promote positivity and kindness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marthastewart.com



Thank you! I knew people must be doing it for a reason.


----------



## Aminamina

rose60610 said:


> If M&H have *so much influence*, then what has BetterUp contributed to help Ukraine? I read where they've raised hundreds of millions in funding for the company. OK. So now what? They have celebrities, including a spoiled prince on the payroll, who, with his noxious wife, love to insert themselves in every big news story for personal publicity. So where are the dollars to help out a worthy cause? And if Harry has such a successful soldier background, where are his words of solidarity with the people of Ukraine in fighting their enemy? And is the President of Ukraine really expected to personally thank grifters when he himself has picked up a rifle to help defend his own country? Yes, he's thanked the Cambridges, because they are people WHO MATTER. The Sussexes? They're self-aggrandizing a******s that don't give a damn about Ukraine except using it to promote themselves.


#NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!

Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
#NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


----------



## jennlt

Luvbolide said:


> fear not, I knew it wasn’t truly from Jose, as even if he felt that way, he wouldn’t publicly say it. My response was intended to be younger in cheek, which doesn’t come across well in writing!



 Oops, I should have known it was a sweet nod


----------



## jennlt

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine



Please stay safe and stay strong. We stand with Ukraine


----------



## lanasyogamama

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


I am glad you’re safe. Praying for the Ukraine


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


WOW .. I can't even imagine what you and your people are going through!  Effin' Putin .. I really wish the Russian people could somehow take him out; I know that all of my Russian friends over there are NOT happy about this war as we all are not happy either!!  Please, please, please stay safe and we are ALL behind you!!!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


Thank you for your information. Every person I know stands with Ukraine and hopes for a rapid and effective end to Putin’s mad and vicious war against your country.  This is a march across Europe. He will not stop.  The world must stop him.   I wish peace and security for you and your family and your country.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It's hard to justify why they desire so much to be with people they call racists …



Reminds me of Pretty Woman:  "And what happened when he saved the princess?  She saved him right back."

Gag me.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> They both clearly love coke  and ‘hosts’ like Markus Anderson would be queuing up to supply them with whatever they wanted. It’s the perfect opportunity to have the royal ear and the influential tongue at its most unguarded moments. The car just needs to drive discreetly through the gates like other people have been known to do. I think that H’s predilection brought those two together in the first place.
> 
> Any legal drug like cigarettes or booze the footmen would bring them morning or night no questions asked. The queen’s mother loved her gin and fags.


If she is a drug addict, I find the claim that she made Haz stop smoking cigarettes and stop eating meat even more hysterical.
Meat?  BAD
Cigarettes?  BAD BAD
Cocaine?  GOOOOOD


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A lot to unpack here. So if true even only in part, someone was in a full-on narcisstic rage for months. Which I don't think I've ever heard of (the narcisst just not stopping raging and fighting back).
> 
> BTW this came from another board but it was later confirmed it is indeed a transcript from a recent Youtube video by someone called Bookworm.



Interesting  theories, but I have to disagree with the weed use.

Weed only became legal in Canada in 2018 and Meg was gone by then.  So maybe she was using something else -  I always thought she perhaps took something to stay so skinny and twitchy and she also have used weed, but it wasn't legal weed if she did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think that H’s predilection brought those two together in the first place.



Now that gives a whole new meaning to "We were brought together for a reason."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> And if Harry has such a successful soldier background, where are his words of solidarity with the people of Ukraine in fighting their enemy?



TBF we do prefer when they just keep their mouths shut.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This!




Oh wow, that looks beautiful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine



I had no clue you were in the middle of it all and I'm so sorry. Is there anything we can do to help?


----------



## marietouchet

peace to all, everywhere, and this applies to all


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t think there’s much stigma in divorce.


I agree. I wasn't referring to that at all. I meant that he might be viewed by many as abandoning his marriage vows as soon as the going got tough, especially if any of the mental illness story is true. In my opinion it would be another blow for the monarchy, although at this point a lot of people either want them to go or are indifferent. And it was a different situation with his parents. Unlike his father, he willingly went (or was led by the balls) into this marriage. If they divorce you can be sure it will be ugly. She'll milk it for all she can - he's abandoning his mentally fragile wife and innocent young children yada yada.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I've read this several times, and apparently I am just not smart enough to make the connection between what Wootton said and how William "didn't give up Rose".

But also, they should be ashamed of themselves.


----------



## charlottawill

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


Puck Futin. Hitler is saving him a seat in a place that's much warmer than Russia. I wish you and your son safe passage to wherever you're headed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Listen up Prince Dufus and Lady Famewhore, unlike you, some people do make a difference in this world! 
HMTQ made a donation to the DEC Ukraine Humanitarian Appeal.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


Wow, I can't imagine what you're going through!  I'm so glad you and your son are safe!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Television is about escapism. It’s amazing how the human mind can completely detach when it doesn’t want to face reality.


Yep, that's how I see this thread. When the covid pandemic was starting to improve, someone decided to start a war. After reading the horrifying headlines today, this (thread) is a great place to be.


----------



## pukasonqo

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


 Stay safe, not much I can do except donate and support Ukraine
United we stand


----------



## rose60610

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine



We pray you and your son are safe. Ukrainians are demonstrating what raw courage, bravery and resilience are to the rest of the world.   God bless your family and Ukraine.


----------



## Chanbal

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine


Stay save, and keep us posted.


----------



## lallybelle

Get all the popcorn! 

MEGHAN MARKLE SUED
SISTER CLAIMS LIES TO OPRAH, OTHERS
... Her 'Rags to Royalty' Story is Total BS!!!









						Meghan Markle's Sister Samantha Sues Her, Claims Lies About Growing Up Poor
					

Meghan Markle is being sued by her half sister Samantha over the Oprah Winfrey interview.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Chanbal

Team Samantha on this one.


----------



## bag-mania

Go Samantha!!!!!!!!!!!
I was wondering where she’s been and she’s a comin’ back strong.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine



I know this is off topic but I hope you will share your story when you are able, down the road.  There are many of us who want to hear from you and from any other members of tPF who are from Ukraine.  I am glad to know that you and your son are currently safe.  I have been in awe of the courage, commitment, and perseverance of the Ukrainian people and want so badly for my government to help more now, immediately.


----------



## bellecate

lallybelle said:


> Get all the popcorn!
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE SUED
> SISTER CLAIMS LIES TO OPRAH, OTHERS
> ... Her 'Rags to Royalty' Story is Total BS!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Sister Samantha Sues Her, Claims Lies About Growing Up Poor
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is being sued by her half sister Samantha over the Oprah Winfrey interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've read this several times, and apparently I am just not smart enough to make the connection between what Wootton said and how William "didn't give up Rose".
> 
> But also, they should be ashamed of themselves.



Why do her sugars all think people are jealous of Methane? It's incroyable!

Hello called her a "goddess" in that blue-green gauze curtain. And before that, another publication described one of her pregnancies as "divine". I think Sunshine Sucks is trying to steer the victim narrative from "poor little abused princess" to "venerate the wonderful god, reborn from her miserable mortal life".


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, war is not the answer.  Who would have thought in 2022 that all the great and powerful minds could not stop this!
Just like with Hitler, it was the soldiers who did the dirty deeds. Same in this situation. If only these soldiers had the strength of their convictions to say NO. What makes people, presumably decent people, follow orders that they know are wrong, wrong for all mankind, wrong for the earth?  Firing missiles at a nuclear reactor? Stop it.









						Ukrainian nuclear power plant 'could suffer Fukushima-style meltdown'
					

Russian troops had attacked the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which is the largest in Europe, in the early hours of Friday, with CCTV capturing a fierce gun battle between Russians and Ukrainians.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




@Aminamina, may God bless you, your family and everyone through this mess. 

ETA:  all the self-centered Hwood and billionaire prima-donnas should stop with these premieres, fake award shows and other nonsense. Either solve these issues or sit in your tacky McMansions and be quiet.  Yeah, Melinda and H&M, we are “flipping you off”.

ETA2: when we know better, we are supposed to do better.  So, all these billionaires know better, now why aren’t they doing better?


----------



## bellecate




----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA2: when we know better, we are supposed to do better. So, all these billionaires know better, now why aren’t they doing better?



I agree with your post. In response to this statement of yours, let's credit Elon Musk with redirecting his satellite to focus on giving Ukraine better internet access.  Good on Musk.  As for other billionaires?  Well.......most likely (let's hope) there are actions taken we won't be privy to.  When the 2004 tsunami happened, for example, an uber wealthy woman I knew of (now deceased) made connections to send many millions of dollars of aid to the area who also remained anonymous. War is different, but I'd like to think there are people who are able to contribute materials and/or mega cash to the Ukrainian fight.


----------



## csshopper

*Russian businessman has put a $1 million bounty on Vladimir ...*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk › news › article-10574093



11 hours ago — Russian businessman Alex Konanykhin, 55, has offered a $1m bounty for Putin's arrest - by posting a 'Wanted: Dead or Alive' poster online.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

I thought you may be interested in this attempt to breakdown H and MMS costs each month…









						Crazy cost of Meghan and Harry’s daily life
					

COMMENT




					www.news.com.au


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Exactly. I've always believed he would be miserable living in SoCal. I suspect "Megxit" was largely her doing, and her agenda from day one. She expected to return to her native CA and become a global superstar on the level of Diana. Never gonna happen.


100% agree!


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> At the beginning he probably thought she knew what she was talking about and he wasn’t smart enough or experienced enough to see through the BS. He has had the last two years to see it has t worked the way she promised.


If you read any biography on Diana (and I have probably read way too many) they all say the same thing in so many words.  Diana was obsessed with Charles and went out of her way to flatter and charm him and was h*ll bent on marrying him.  It looks like Meegain did the exact same thing, right down to wearing Diana's perfume.  Look how well Charles marriage turned out.  I don't expect Haz's to turn out any different.  Both men didn't really know the woman they married as they didn't get to know them properly.  William and Catherine on the other hand gave it 10 years before they took the leap.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> If you read any biography on Diana (and I have probably read way too many) they all say the same thing in so many words.  Diana was obsessed with Charles and went out of her way to flatter and charm him and was h*ll bent on marrying him.  It looks like Meegain did the exact same thing, right down to wearing Diana's perfume.  Look how well Charles marriage turned out.  I don't expect Haz's to turn out any different.  Both men didn't really know the woman they married as they didn't get to know them properly.  William and Catherine on the other hand gave it 10 years before they took the leap.


Agree. But MeMeMeAgain was twice Diana's age, so her "I'm a cute and naive victim" act is a lot less palatable or believable.


----------



## Sharont2305

A photo of the Queen and granddaughter Louise and some of the great grandchildren. 
Ouch.


----------



## jelliedfeels

So have the no politics rules been suspended or something? Serious question.


----------



## jelliedfeels

@Aminamina just to clarify, my post was in no way a criticism of you sharing your story. I admire your bravery in the face of a danger I am lucky enough to have never faced and I think it’s reasonable to expect people to post personal updates of any kind.


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine
> I’ve been on the run with my son in tow for several days. And now when I finally have a safe stop and internet connection, let me tell you:  Ukraine is fighting Putin’s hell and all the ********-masters from in and out of country are Nothing to people of Ukraine. Saving our children, Staying alive and helping our Armed Forces fight the crazy beast is our main concern. Now Prince Charles and Camilla have visited Ukrainian community in London and it was a cordial meeting and it mattered!
> 
> Peace is the biggest treasure in the world
> #NoFlyZoneOverUkraine



I'm sure I speak for so many, whatever our culture or belief system, our thoughts and prayers are with you and yours


----------



## duna

I'm s**t scared of WW3 here in Europe.....


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> So have the no politics rules been suspended or something? Serious question.



IMO (rather than with my official MOD hat on) this thread hovers around political topics nearly all the time because although H&M are not supposed to either (Royal protocol whether in or out of Working Royals) the gruesome twosome play with politics as toddlers pick-up matches. We call them out for it, and hence at times the thread goes beyond the state of their marriage or fashion sense. 

@Aminamina commented on the difference between C&C visiting the Ukrainian community in London against H&M continued bandwagon jumping and merely paying lip-servce to such a serious issue, she also happened to mention she was traveling through a war-zone. 

This is our community, and like some Royals express their personal sympathy for those affected by hardship, we express ours to those that are going through unimaginably hard time. It's possible to do this, without writing about the situation itself since that would be a change of topic. 

Like H&M there are many that shouldn't wield the power they have acquired, at least H&M are not in charge of an army. This thread is escapist fun for some and more serious for some of us that are discussed that these representatives of the UK have said our country is too dangerous to visit (one of the few whose police do not regularly carry guns) undemocratic (because H chose not to change his status to be able to vote) and question why the RF should be above politics (because we decided to separate Divine Right from Divine Rule - hence our Lower and Upper House). 

These are not benign celebs like may others, H&M are quite dangerous with_ their_ playing at being political, they are certainly divisive. Discussing Harry being/not being a Queen's Counsellor of State may not mean much to many that post on this thread but for UK res and citizens it's quite worrying that someone who criticises the US Constitution and thinks BRF should be able to vote should be giving advice to any Sovereign Monarch.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Speaking of the Counsellor of state issue, what do people think is going to happen? It sounds like he can’t hang onto it if he isn’t primarily a resident of England.


----------



## LittleRunningDog

papertiger said:


> IMO (rather than with my official MOD hat on) this thread hovers around political topics nearly all the time because although H&M are not supposed to either (Royal protocol whether in or out of Working Royals) the gruesome twosome play with politics as toddlers pick-up matches. We call them out for it, and hence at times the thread goes beyond the state of their marriage or fashion sense.
> 
> @Aminamina commented on the difference between C&C visiting the Ukrainian community in London against H&M continued bandwagon jumping and merely paying lip-servce to such a serious issue, she also happened to mention she was traveling through a war-zone.
> 
> This is our community, and like some Royals express their personal sympathy for those affected by hardship, we express ours to those that are going through unimaginably hard time. It's possible to do this, without writing about the situation itself since that would be a change of topic.
> 
> Like H&M there are many that shouldn't wield the power they have acquired, at least H&M are not in charge of an army. This thread is escapist fun for some and more serious for some of us that are discussed that these representatives of the UK have said our country is too dangerous to visit (one of the few whose police do not regularly carry guns) undemocratic (because H chose not to change his status to be able to vote) and question why the RF should be above politics (because we decided to separate Divine Right from Divine Rule - hence our Lower and Upper House).
> 
> These are not benign celebs like may others, H&M are quite dangerous with_ their_ playing at being political, they are certainly divisive. Discussing Harry being/not being a Queen's Counsellor of State may not mean much to many that post on this thread but for UK res and citizens it's quite worrying that someone who criticises the US Constitution and thinks BRF should be able to vote should be giving advice to any Sovereign Monarch.


No regular army however they’re complicit in fostering hate and lies by tacit encouragement of their online mob of febrile maniacs.


----------



## bag-mania

I’ve got to say it, hats off to Samantha! She took Meghan’s own signature move, filing a frivolous libel lawsuit, and threw it right back at her. I don’t think Samantha expects it to go to court or to win the case, but she’s getting her POV out there in a way that the media will report it. That’s a better strategy than when her book came out last year and the press ignored it.


----------



## papertiger

LittleRunningDog said:


> No regular army however they’re complicit in fostering hate and lies by tacit encouragement of their online mob of febrile maniacs.



Very good point!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> *Russian businessman has put a $1 million bounty on Vladimir ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk › news › article-10574093
> 
> 
> 
> 11 hours ago — Russian businessman Alex Konanykhin, 55, has offered a $1m bounty for Putin's arrest - by posting a 'Wanted: Dead or Alive' poster online.



I mean...his plight is not wrong, but I'd rather private citizens wouldn't take matters into her own hands like this, trying to rile up some poor idiot who'd see his life changed by that wad of cash.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> William and Catherine on the other hand gave it 10 years before they took the leap.



And William has said publicly is wasn't only about getting to know each other, but to make absolutely, 100% sure Kate understood what she was getting into.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## V0N1B2

lallybelle said:


> Get all the popcorn!
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE SUED
> SISTER CLAIMS LIES TO OPRAH, OTHERS
> ... Her 'Rags to Royalty' Story is Total BS!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Sister Samantha Sues Her, Claims Lies About Growing Up Poor
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is being sued by her half sister Samantha over the Oprah Winfrey interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I think a lot of regular readers here knew that, even though Samantha was originally raked over the coals on this thread by some posters. I hope that she is listened to and not dismissed as Meghan's crazy unstable half-sister. I wonder if this will open up an whole 'nuther set of questions as to why it was Samantha driving her around and not Doria. I wonder how Meghan will react to being called out. Probably like Hilaria Baldwin - just pretend it didn't happen and pop out another kid.  

@bellecate I'm on the 9am ferry this morning to your neck of the woods. Don't buy up all the popcorn at Thrifty Foods before I can pick some up for myself, okay?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So much for "He's always had a bad relationship with the press." Swipe for story.


----------



## xincinsin

lallybelle said:


> Get all the popcorn!
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE SUED
> SISTER CLAIMS LIES TO OPRAH, OTHERS
> ... Her 'Rags to Royalty' Story is Total BS!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Sister Samantha Sues Her, Claims Lies About Growing Up Poor
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is being sued by her half sister Samantha over the Oprah Winfrey interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I can't stop  
Her Hollywood lawyer Michael Kump said, "This baseless and absurd lawsuit is just a continuation of a pattern of *disturbing behavior*." And it applies equally well to Princess Perjury.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I can't stop
> Her Hollywood lawyer Michael Kump said, "This baseless and absurd lawsuit is just a continuation of a pattern of *disturbing behavior*." And it applies equally well to Princess Perjury.



Yeah, I was going to say, is he talking about Samantha or Raptor?


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


>




Pure class. This is how it's done.  Dignified and discreet.


----------



## Chanbal

@Aminamina Hope you and your family are safe. Sending you lots of love and strength to believe that better days will come soon. People all over the world are mobilizing to help those affected by this horrific war. Stay strong, and stay safe!


----------



## csshopper

MiniMabel said:


> Pure class. This is how it's done.  Dignified and discreet.


The Queen has donated funds
The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall have donated funds
The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have donated funds
Hazbeen and Raptor have donated word salad


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> If she is a drug addict, I find the claim that she made Haz stop smoking cigarettes and stop eating meat even more hysterical.
> Meat?  BAD
> Cigarettes?  BAD BAD
> Cocaine?  GOOOOOD


From LA to brighton to Sydney there’s lots of coke-fuelled vegetarian fitness fanatics out there  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've read this several times, and apparently I am just not smart enough to make the connection between what Wootton said and how William "didn't give up Rose".
> 
> But also, they should be ashamed of themselves.



So the logic is he’s got some mistress so he was mean to M because K was jealous? WTF? Haha how does that even follow?


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Speaking of the Counsellor of state issue, what do people think is going to happen? It sounds like he can’t hang onto it if he isn’t primarily a resident of England.



He only has to re-lease Frogmore Cottage, which he has been advised to do. He doesn't have to primarily reside here, he just has to have an address.


----------



## jelliedfeels

V0N1B2 said:


> I think a lot of regular readers here knew that, even though Samantha was originally raked over the coals on this thread by some posters. I hope that she is listened to and not dismissed as Meghan's crazy unstable half-sister. I wonder if this will open up an whole 'nuther set of questions as to why it was Samantha driving her around and not Doria. I wonder how Meghan will react to being called out. Probably like Hilaria Baldwin - just pretend it didn't happen and pop out another kid.
> 
> @bellecate I'm on the 9am ferry this morning to your neck of the woods. Don't buy up all the popcorn at Thrifty Foods before I can pick some up for myself, okay?


Yeah I feel I owe her an apology tbh, the poor woman has had to gaze into the abyss for 4 decades now and the world gaslight her about it.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much for "He's always had a bad relationship with the press." Swipe for story.




M has ostracised so many of the people H used to get on well with. 

It's like a cult thing


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> He only has to re-lease Frogmore Cottage, which he has been advised to do. He doesn't have to primarily reside here, he just has to have an address.


Oh that’s too bad. BLG made it sound like it had to be his primary residence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So much for "He's always had a bad relationship with the press." Swipe for story.




If only he had spoken out sooner, much sooner:









						Real reason Prince Harry is ‘miserable’
					

A photographer who has toured with the British royal family for more than 40 years has revealed why he stopped going on “miserable” trips with Prince Harry after he met Meghan Markle.




					www.news.com.au


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've read this several times, and apparently I am just not smart enough to make the connection between what Wootton said and how William "didn't give up Rose".





jelliedfeels said:


> So the logic is he’s got some mistress so he was mean to M because K was jealous? WTF? Haha how does that even follow?


I've come to the conclusion that for Wootten, H&M and their stans, logic isn't their strongest suit along with integrity, honesty, empathy and loyalty. I'll stop here before I get writer's cramp adding all the other qualities they lack, but feel free (with my thanks) to complete the list for me.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Why do her sugars all think people are jealous of Methane? It's incroyable!
> 
> Hello called her a "goddess" in that blue-green gauze curtain. And before that, another publication described one of her pregnancies as "divine". I think Sunshine Sucks is trying to steer the victim narrative from "poor little abused princess" to "venerate the wonderful god, reborn from her miserable mortal life".


Maybe they're trying to pretend she's Aphrodite, arising from the sea foam in her blue dress to bless us all?

Interesting that she was born from the foam of the castrated genitals of Uranus.  Sounds familiar...


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> A photo of the Queen and granddaughter Louise and some of the great grandchildren.
> Ouch.



How can she include the other great grandchildren when she's never met one and barely seen the other??


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If only he had spoken out sooner, much sooner:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Real reason Prince Harry is ‘miserable’
> 
> 
> A photographer who has toured with the British royal family for more than 40 years has revealed why he stopped going on “miserable” trips with Prince Harry after he met Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


My 2 cents:
They love to be in the spotlight. So, I don't think '_they just hated the media_,' they hated the media that they couldn't control. They need the media to release their self-serving propaganda; otherwise, they wouldn't pay allegedly millions of dollars to PR agencies. 

“_I just find it very depressing with them. __They just hated the media __and it was miserable so I ducked out of them and sort of went with Charles to New Zealand and you know places like that_.”


----------



## Chanbal

Samantha's lawsuit, here are the 15 pages…


----------



## Chanbal

Dan Wootton in support of Samantha … wow


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Dan Wootton in support of Samantha … wow



Bring it on, Samantha has pictures and probably support from other family for corroboration. 

MEEEghan is not having a good week. TIME magazine is out with its "WOMEN OF THE YEAR" issue, her wannabe friend Amal in all her glory on the cover, and a certain Montecito resident is not on the list of 12. Maybe Sunshine Sucks has run low on cash for promotional purchases.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Bring it on, Samantha has pictures and probably support from other family for corroboration.
> 
> MEEEghan is not having a good week. TIME magazine is out with its "WOMEN OF THE YEAR" issue, her wannabe friend Amal in all her glory on the cover, and a certain Montecito resident is not on the list of 12. Maybe Sunshine Sucks has run low on cash for promotional purchases.


Shows, yet again, she is nothing without her dummy husband and the titles from the family which they claim to loathe so much.


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> I think a lot of regular readers here knew that, even though Samantha was originally raked over the coals on this thread by some posters. I hope that she is listened to and not dismissed as Meghan's crazy unstable half-sister. I wonder if this will open up an whole 'nuther set of questions as to why it was Samantha driving her around and not Doria. I wonder how Meghan will react to being called out. Probably like Hilaria Baldwin - just pretend it didn't happen and pop out another kid.
> 
> @bellecate I'm on the 9am ferry this morning to your neck of the woods. Don't buy up all the popcorn at Thrifty Foods before I can pick some up for myself, okay?


The popcorn’s all yours, I’m off in the woods for a few days and am well stocked in popcorn for reading these threads. Enjoy our beautiful town.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> So the logic is he’s got some mistress so he was mean to M because K was jealous? WTF? Haha how does that even follow?



I don't know! Make it make sense!


----------



## Chanbal

More about the Frogmore time…


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> The popcorn’s all yours, I’m off in the woods for a few days and am well stocked in popcorn for reading these threads. Enjoy our beautiful town.


One more piece for your stay 'in the woods'…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This woman is so extra, I don't even know. Rattling an unlocked gate to enhance her "I was incarcerated" narrative   

I have one question though...isn't Frogmore kind of out in the woods? Which embassies would be near?

ETA: unless embassy has a meaning I don't know, there are no embassies or even consulates in Windsor at all.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Samantha's lawsuit, here are the 15 pages…



Wow . I’ve read through all the pages. It certainly highlights how incredibly nasty the lying pair are. Every word out of their mouths are lies and seem to be aimed to hurt someone. I do feel bad for Samantha, what she has to put up with because of these…. I can’t even come up with a term for how disgusting they are.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman is so extra, I don't even know. Rattling an unlocked gate to enhance her "I was incarcerated" narrative
> 
> I have one question though...isn't Frogmore kind of out in the woods? Which embassies would be near?
> 
> ETA: unless embassy has a meaning I don't know, there are no embassies or even consulates in Windsor at all.


It was Nottingham Cottage the wild parties were held, within KP grounds. A lot of Embassies are very close by.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

To my untrained eye, it appears what we have here is one unstable person, H, married another unstable person (M).  In LasVegas, we saw his alcohol/drug-fueled behavior.  If true that they both are seriously off-balance [unstable] , the BRF was likely very happy for them to leave. Now, when will Trev speak up?

ETA: Diana’s issues are well documented. Her father had issues with the alcohol as did other family members.

Old article 

_“The Spencers are difficult,” Elizabeth, the Queen Mother once observed to a friend, according to *Tina Brown*’s The Diana Chronicles. Indeed, the role of the aristocratic family of Diana, Princess of Wales, for centuries has been that of royal disrupter. This legacy stretches to the 14th century, with their disputed ancestor Hugh Despenser’s alleged torrid affair with King Edward II and Despenser’s eventual brutal execution. Clever, charming, and fiery, much like Diana, her ancestors learned how to play the royal game—and then ripped up the rule book._









						A Brief History of Princess Diana’s Fiery Family
					

From Diana’s rebellious sister to the court favorite immortalized in an Oscar-winning film, the Spencer family’s legacy for disruption and glamour goes back centuries.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> Wow . I’ve read through all the pages. It certainly highlights how incredibly nasty the lying pair are. Every word out of their mouths are lies and seem to be aimed to hurt someone. I do feel bad for Samantha, what she has to put up with because of these…. I can’t even come up with a term for how disgusting they are.


I printed it out. I’m going to read it. I worked for a First Amendment rights attorney and there is a difference between libel and slander. I hope Sam’s lawyer is good. The mere fact that is is out there is not going to endear TW to those people she wants to claw to. Good move Samantha! You have a voice too.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


>



He’s right. Everyone gets canceled for things they said in the past but Harry gets a pass? It proves that money talks. Their PR are able to spin it the way they want. These 2 have lots of money to buy their reputation. Sick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> It was Nottingham Cottage the wild parties were held, within KP grounds. A lot of Embassies are very close by.



You are right, my brain is starting to malfunction a lot on me these days   I even thought "Why would they complain to KP" which obviously makes a lot more sense with NottCott.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Those maintenance figures!!!!


How can they afford that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> How can they afford that?



My bet: they can't.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> *Russian businessman has put a $1 million bounty on Vladimir ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk › news › article-10574093
> 
> 
> 
> 11 hours ago — Russian businessman Alex Konanykhin, 55, has offered a $1m bounty for Putin's arrest - by posting a 'Wanted: Dead or Alive' poster online.



Someone needs to take one for the team 
calling Ilich Ramirez Sanchez
Release The Jackal!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

25 million$$$$ If she can do it, why can’t H&M?  Kudos to Bethany and her supporters:









						Bethenny Frankel raises over $10 million for Ukrainian refugees
					

Bethenny Frankel announced that her organization B Strong has raised over $10 million in aid to help relocate Ukrainian refugees and $15 million in humanitarian aid for the country.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> 25 million$$$$ If she can do it, why can’t H&M?  Kudos to Bethany and her supporters:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel raises over $10 million for Ukrainian refugees
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel announced that her organization B Strong has raised over $10 million in aid to help relocate Ukrainian refugees and $15 million in humanitarian aid for the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Meghan could only dream of being as influential as one of the Real Housewives!


----------



## csshopper

I've always wondered why Trev has been absolutely silent about his ex: A gentleman? Throwing shade that she is not significant enough for comment?  Relief?  Fear?


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> *He’s right. Everyone gets canceled for things they said in the past but Harry gets a pass? *It proves that money talks. Their PR are able to spin it the way they want. These 2 have lots of money to buy their reputation. Sick.


Not only he gets a pass, but receives an award from the the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is a woman with a law degree, a PhD and a published author. I find it rather scary.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Dan Wootton in support of Samantha … wow



I think that one place they got Meghan was writing that letter to P*e*l*o*s*i and the letter was later disseminated.  She is lying in print.  Most of what SM is alleging is considered slander.  I wonder if she would go after Scobie for libel considering that was in print.  He didn't check his sources.  SM is asking for a pittance in damages so it is more that she wants her story out there than looking for the money.  There must be another card up her sleeve or her attorney would not have taken this on if he didn't smell big money in there someplace.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> *Russian businessman has put a $1 million bounty on Vladimir ...*
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk › news › article-10574093
> 
> 
> 
> 11 hours ago — Russian businessman Alex Konanykhin, 55, has offered a $1m bounty for Putin's arrest - by posting a 'Wanted: Dead or Alive' poster online.


I've seen a few 'blurbs' about this man and others who are trying to get rid of Putin, but .. IMO, the biggest problem is likely going to be in FINDING the a$$wipe!!!  It wouldn't surprise me one bit if he is hiding away somewhere that many don't even know exists!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> More about the Frogmore time…



From what I understand, during her time on Suits .. she "confessed" to someone (maybe her "best friend" who has since been markled in Toronto) that in order to stay that thin, all she did was COKE and exercise .. barely ate.  From what I've heard from friends out here in the industry, it is not that uncommon for many of the "starlets" (especially the younger ones) to get into a serious COKE habit because of the weight 'restrictions' that TV/Movies put on them .. especially, heaven forbid, you are the lead actress!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

poopsie said:


> Someone needs to take one for the team
> calling Ilich Ramirez Sanchez
> Release The Jackal!!!!


I hope not because he would probably be helping Putin as he is a Marxist-Leninist and a Stasi and KGB supporter now serving 3 life terms in a French prison after being convicted of terrorism.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> I've always wondered why Trev has been absolutely silent about his ex: A gentleman? Throwing shade that she is not significant enough for comment?  Relief?  Fear?


He’s not thirsty? Or he’s one of those that believes it will all come out eventually?


----------



## 1LV

Maybe her ex knows nothing hurts a narcissist like being ignored.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> I've seen a few 'blurbs' about this man and others who are trying to get rid of Putin, but .. IMO, the biggest problem is likely going to be in FINDING the a$$wipe!!!  It wouldn't surprise me one bit if he is hiding away somewhere that many don't even know exists!



Rumor is he is with his family in a bomb shelter [private] in Siberia.  He can run, but not hide. Rumor is Microsoft is cutting off their Office programs. Apple already cut the apps. TechnoWizards are powerful people.   




Maggie Muggins said:


> I hope not because he would probably be helping Putin as he is a Marxist-Leninist and a Stasi and KGB supporter now serving 3 life terms in a French prison after being convicted of terrorism.



Dear @poopsie was expressing her frustration with this mess.  I feel it, too.  The egos and brutality of these people are  beyond comprehension imo.  It is 2022, let’s give peace a chance.  Seriously.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He is a slob, too -  ewwww!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a woman with a law degree, a PhD and a published author. I find it rather scary.



Just because one is "intelligent" doesn't mean one has common sense!

I personally find her vitriol "deeply evil".


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is a slob, too -  ewwww!



The slob thing wouldn't surprise me.  Haz often looks unkempt to me.  He probably reeks of cigarettes (or weed), alcohol and chicken poop.


----------



## Chanbal

_Extracted from *Queen Of Our Times: The Life Of Elizabeth II *by Robert Hardman_
*When Charles offered to walk her down the aisle, Meghan replied: Can we meet halfway? And how the Queen knew Harry had left Britain for good as 'they'd taken the dogs': Two of the gems from a landmark new biography of the Queen by ROBERT HARDMAN*









						ROBERT HARDMAN: When Charles offered to walk Megan down the aisle
					

ROBERT HARDMAN: Even for a Nobel Prize-winning leader of the free world, this had been one of the great nights of his life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know! Make it make sense!


So, I think the twisted reasoning is something like this:

W is mad that he “had to” cut ties with his brother, because K couldn’t get along with M (because of her huge jealousy of M).  In retaliation, W “refuses” to cut ties with Rose, because he’s already given up one relationship for K.

I think that’s it???


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is a slob, too -  ewwww!




From the article... 

"_He doesn't flush the toilet and there's toothpaste all over the sink. Worst of all, he leaves his dirty underwear on the floor for the help to deal with..._"

I hope the help gets paid really well to flush the royal poo and scrub the skids from his undies. None of this surprises me.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> He’s right. *Everyone gets canceled for things they said in the past but Harry gets a pass?* It proves that money talks. Their PR are able to spin it the way they want. These 2 have lots of money to buy their reputation. Sick.


One more reply for you…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> One more reply for you…



The stans will rewrite history to defend Prince Penury. I saw one version that said HM is a nazi and PW tricked Hazard into wearing the Nazi costume. The idiot was conditioned to behave that way and so cannot be held responsible.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a woman with a law degree, a PhD and a published author. I find it rather scary.



Interesting - she is a Methane fan because she pins all of the problems to Methane being treated unfairly as a WOC. In Mar 2021, it seems she got into a heated debate with Piers Morgan regarding the lie-filled OW interview. I wonder if that debate is on the net somewhere.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they're trying to pretend she's Aphrodite, arising from the sea foam in her blue dress to bless us all?
> 
> Interesting that she was born from the foam of the castrated genitals of Uranus.  Sounds familiar...
> 
> View attachment 5343165


Would The Little Mermaid be more appropriate? You know, she saved the prince, lost her voice for lurve, and hopefully will turn into seafoam and bubble out of our view.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## octopus17

csshopper said:


> I've always wondered why Trev has been absolutely silent about his ex: A gentleman? Throwing shade that she is not significant enough for comment?  Relief?  Fear?


Maybe he wants to live a quiet life with minimal drama, move on and be happy. He's well out of it and good luck to him...


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> Interesting - she is a Methane fan because she pins all of the problems to Methane being treated unfairly as a WOC. In Mar 2021, it seems she got into a heated debate with Piers Morgan regarding the lie-filled OW interview. I wonder if that debate is on the net somewhere.


It was I believe in March 2021 and there are plenty of videos on YouTube. I don’t know how to do a link to them on my phone.


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> Interesting - she is a Methane fan because she pins all of the problems to Methane being treated unfairly as a WOC. In Mar 2021, it seems she got into a heated debate with Piers Morgan regarding the lie-filled OW interview. I wonder if that debate is on the net somewhere.





bellecate said:


> It was I believe in March 2021 and there are plenty of videos on YouTube. I don’t know how to do a link to them on my phone.



She’s hard to listen to (I did not get too far) - is this it?


----------



## rose60610

It doesn't surprise me in the least that M&H are slobs. They're "too good" to pick up after themselves, they'd rather live in filth if servants didn't clean up after them. There are people like that. They live in filth because they're too effing lazy to wash anything. I'm not talking about a "lived in" look with a few newspapers lying about, I'm talking dirty dishes left on the table/counter and clothes on the floor and things FAR worse. Some people are apparently OK with filth! M&H strike me as that type.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> Would The Little Mermaid be more appropriate? You know, she saved the prince, lost her voice for lurve, and hopefully will turn into seafoam and bubble out of our view.


Adding: forgot about the bunions. In the original tale, the little mermaid was tormented by pain when she walked.


----------



## xincinsin

Ah, the stans are cracking me up.
I was reading the comments on one of BLG's Youtube videos about Hazard's whining for Met police security. One of the stans (Andrew Haywood) claims that because Methane is exceptionally beautiful, she needs protection from kidnapping and sexually motivated attacks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> From what I've heard from friends out here in the industry, it is not that uncommon for many of the "starlets" (especially the younger ones) to get into a serious COKE habit because of the weight 'restrictions' that TV/Movies put on them .. especially, heaven forbid, you are the *lead actress*!



Not a problem Raptor had.


----------



## Chanbal

Who is paying for this?


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the subject of books, interesting title choice for OW


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Saturday!


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> From what I understand, during her time on Suits .. she "confessed" to someone (maybe her "best friend" who has since been markled in Toronto) that in order to stay that thin, all she did was COKE and exercise .. barely ate.  From what I've heard from friends out here in the industry, it is not that uncommon for many of the "starlets" (especially the younger ones) to get into a serious COKE habit because of the weight 'restrictions' that TV/Movies put on them .. especially, heaven forbid, you are the lead actress!



and it's not just the weight issue, to be 'sociable' one has to join-in with whatever the publicist/producer/director/agent and his/her friends do. 

It's not part of the Me Too story but it should be, there is huge pressure to 'party' hard if you want to get on. 

I can't blame young women or men for this, not even Nutmeg, but carrying it on long after the 'big break' is stupid, dangerous and about adult choices.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is a slob, too -  ewwww!




Maybe it's really simple, they're horrible people
Maybe the details are superfluous, they only want to help people
So long as those people are not their staff, family, friends or anyone they've ever know.
Maybe they rent the kids with the house
After all, their lives are history (rewritten) every truth stretched beyond recognition, and their every working minute a work of fiction


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is a slob, too -  ewwww!



this all sounds plausible, but it reeks of opportunism


----------



## CarryOn2020

Old story:



Katie Couric said that Prince Harry stunk of cigarettes and alcohol when she met him in 2012, the Daily Mail reported.
In her new memoir, the veteran news anchor said that the royal was in his "wild-oats sowing phase."
Prince Harry has previously said that he leaned on drugs and alcohol to cope with his mental health struggles.









						Katie Couric says Prince Harry had cigarettes and alcohol oozing from 'every pore' before he met Meghan Markle
					

In Katie Couric's new memoir, "Going There," the veteran journalist said that she met the royal during his "wild-oats sowing phase" in 2012.




					www.insider.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Old story:
> 
> 
> 
> Katie Couric said that Prince Harry stunk of cigarettes and alcohol when she met him in 2012, the Daily Mail reported.
> In her new memoir, the veteran news anchor said that the royal was in his "wild-oats sowing phase."
> Prince Harry has previously said that he leaned on drugs and alcohol to cope with his mental health struggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katie Couric says Prince Harry had cigarettes and alcohol oozing from 'every pore' before he met Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> In Katie Couric's new memoir, "Going There," the veteran journalist said that she met the royal during his "wild-oats sowing phase" in 2012.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com


this was years ago....I don't think he's allowed to indulge in these things anymore


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this was years ago....I don't think he's allowed to indulge in these things anymore


He is a Prince!!!  He can do anything he wants!!!

...Just as soon as TW gives him his balls back.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> She’s hard to listen to (I did not get too far) - is this it?



I couldn't finish this vid. She reminds me of someone who took the same leadership course that I attended during the mid 60’s with a chapter called, ‘Shout the Man Down’ where the instructor asked us to form two lines, with the first person from each side going to the front of the room to shout down their opponent each one yelling and screaming about his/her own topics creating a veritable cacophony. The winner (the loudest and most persistent) went to the end of their line while the loser sat down. I had a good set of lungs and several inane topics to scream about so I fared well until I (at 5ft 2in and 100lbs) was matched with a 6ft and 200lb fireman with a booming voice (oh yes, firemen and policemen were strongly advised to take these courses). I screamed and yelled, but unable to shut him up, I climbed on top of a desk and shouted louder. Stunned, he slowed down while I babbled on at the top of my lungs until I was declared the winner. In the end, we all had a good laugh at ourselves, but I never liked yelling and I'm glad I never resorted to this kind of performance to assert leadership during my entire career. However I think Prince Dufus and Lady MeMeGain could and would use similar tactics to silence anyone who contradicts or disagrees with them.


----------



## poopsie

purseinsanity said:


> The slob thing wouldn't surprise me.  Haz often looks unkempt to me. * He probably reeks of cigarettes (or weed), alcohol and chicken poop.*




They need to bottle that
Eau de Eunuch
Toilet water


----------



## bag-mania

Love how Daily Mail takes it upon themselves to show us how Harry’s ex is doing well and is so happy with her baby and boyfriend. Take that, Harry!   









						How Prince Harry's ex Chelsy Davy found her Happy Ever After
					

Were she still in a relationship with Prince Harry, Chelsy Davy's first born would have been celebrated around the world and introduced to the Queen within days, writes ANTONIA HOYLE.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Love this.


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> They need to bottle that
> Eau de Eunuch
> Toilet water


ala Chanel No.5?  
Just think of the shop shelves lined with "No.1 Eau de Eunuch"  to "No.16 Eau de Eunuch". 
So many opportunities to spread their names, which of course would be front and center on each bottle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Love this.




I'm celebrating everyone who tells it like it is. 

BTW Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher are matching donations up to 3 millions as well.


----------



## poopsie

csshopper said:


> ala Chanel No.5?
> Just think of the shop shelves lined with "No.1 Eau de Eunuch"  to "No.16 Eau de Eunuch".
> So many opportunities to spread their names, which of course would be front and center on each bottle.



We could just settle on #6 
Unless/until W&K necessitate a change in the order


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Love how Daily Mail takes it upon themselves to show us how Harry’s ex is doing well and is so happy with her baby and boyfriend. Take that, Harry!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Prince Harry's ex Chelsy Davy found her Happy Ever After
> 
> 
> Were she still in a relationship with Prince Harry, Chelsy Davy's first born would have been celebrated around the world and introduced to the Queen within days, writes ANTONIA HOYLE.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She dodged a MASSIVE bullet!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Love this.



Interesting.  Another Russian Oligarch connection.


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> They need to bottle that
> *Eau de Eunuch*
> Toilet water


OMG


----------



## rose60610

Eau Poor Me #6


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Eau Poor Me #6



They'll need a bottle of Eau Poor Me #6 for each one of their 16 toilettes.


----------



## Luvbolide

Katel said:


> She’s hard to listen to (I did not get too far) - is this it?




Unreal - she succeeded in making Piers M sound well-reasoned and composed.  I only made it about half way through - all she did is shout over him the entire time.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> Unreal - she succeeded in making Piers M sound well-reasoned and composed.  I only made it about half way through - all she did is shout over him the entire time.


I'm having second thoughts about viewing it. The picture on the link is very significantly chosen then, since her wide open maw dwarfs the rest of her face. This lady is said to have credibility and frequently is invited on talk shows. I shall have to check if her credibility is based on her opinionated behaviour (media likes controversy) or if she actually does have the chops.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> I'm having second thoughts about viewing it. The picture on the link is very significantly chosen then, since her wide open maw dwarfs the rest of her face. This lady is said to have credibility and frequently is invited on talk shows. I shall have to check if her credibility is based on her opinionated behaviour (media likes controversy) or if she actually does have the chops.



I am going with opinionated behavior.  And very big mouth, rarely closed.  In my experience, non-stop bellowing is not a very persuasive way to convince others.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Katel

River’s take on the scene, her outfit … “trotters belong on the farm”


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Interesting.  Another Russian Oligarch connection.



At the end of the day the Crown Estate is the owner of all the land the oligarchs big mansions sit on in Kensington palace gardens they only have a 100 year lease on them


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> At the end of the day the Crown Estate is the owner of all the land the oligarchs big mansions sit on in Kensington palace gardens they only have a 100 year lease on them



and if they break conditions of their leases for any reason they will be subject to due process. The same wouldn't probably be true of H&M. 

There is also a gated Russian diplomatic owned buildings/community housing military attaches in Hampstead and Highgate (Borough of Haringey/Barnet) of which is owned Freehold by the Russian Federation.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Katel said:


> She’s hard to listen to (I did not get too far) - is this it?



I do understand her pain though it must be very hard to resist telling off Piers the moment you are face to face even if it doesn’t do your argument much good  



purseinsanity said:


> The slob thing wouldn't surprise me.  Haz often looks unkempt to me.  He probably reeks of cigarettes (or weed), alcohol and chicken poop.


You are getting dangerously close to making him sound down to Earth and likeable 
 I Feel like those chickens were either bundled in the back of a van or an oven the moment that scene was wrapped.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I Feel like those chickens were either bundled in the back of a van or an oven the moment that scene was wrapped.


----------



## csshopper

Katel said:


> River’s take on the scene, her outfit … “trotters belong on the farm”



River's commentary about the fit of M's gowns is a total hoot,  loved her description about the fitting at the bust line. 

 River said M needs to recognize "women of a certain age need some scaffolding, some upholstery. You've got to use some scaffolding, fabric, corsetry to firm things up, otherwise it's like two hamsters in a handbag quarreling."


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> At the end of the day the Crown Estate is the owner of all the land the oligarchs big mansions sit on in Kensington palace gardens they only have a 100 year lease on them


I was referring more to their lawyers and their own estate in CA.  The blood diamonds also spring to mind.  This couple is hardly the caring, humanitarian people they claim to be.  All they care about is money.  In one sense, thank God they live today, not back hundreds of years when they would have been even running more rampant, probably literally killing whoever got in their way.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> You are getting dangerously close to making him sound down to Earth and likeable
> I Feel like those chickens were either bundled in the back of a van or an oven the moment that scene was wrapped.


*Clutch pearls*, OMG that was not my intent AT ALL!  Reeking of alcohol, weed, and chicken poop is about as disgusting as it can get (although my coworker reeking of dirty feet, BO, Frito chips, cigarettes and alcohol probably still takes first place).


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

This People article is so appallingly full of lies and exaggerations it makes me wonder if it was bought as an advertisement for them rather than actually written by a writer for the website. It has Sunshine Sachs written all over it and isn’t laid out the way People normally does its articles.

ETA: This adoring piece was absolutely purchased. It doesn’t even try to provide evidence for its over the top claims about Meghan’s “greatness.”








						Meghan Markle's Trailblazing Feminism Through the Years, in Honor of Women's History Month
					

In honor of Women's History Month, we're looking back on some of Meghan Markle's most inspiring moments




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Don't take all hope from us like this Jesus.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

No… Would it be possible?


----------



## poopsie

If the last two years have taught us nothing else it is that _anything_ is possible
I have no faith in Charles
As an old school royal his ability to "read the room" and take others opinions into account is suspect. 
I fear he will be very weak in standing up to his second spawn


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> No… Would it be possible?
> View attachment 5345406



Ugh. And wait a minute. If this dastardly request WERE granted, were the idiots going to move back? Did they really think they were missed SO MUCH that they could just get any title they wanted (of course that would have been King and Queen), but still. So, is that saying that Meghan's wreath didn't work?  You mean she could have saved $300 of symbolic BS since it wasn't enough to secure new titles? I'm glad the Queen didn't agree to give The Heavily Pregnant One a princess title.  If Charles grants them anything, I'd think the backlash would be huge.


----------



## gracekelly

poopsie said:


> If the last two years have taught us nothing else it is that _anything_ is possible
> I have no faith in Charles
> As an old school royal his ability to "read the room" and take others opinions into account is suspect.
> I fear he will be very weak in standing up to his second spawn


Whilst true that anything can happen, I do think that Charles will not cave to these two.  He was shell shocked by their demands and the way he, TQ and family were treated.  People who are used to behaving in a courtly fashion and with very good manners are very shocked when street fighting and underhanded behavior appears  on their doorstep.  He has had time and advice since that all happened and he won't put himself in that position again.  For one thing, William won't let him.

There is a mindset that it never hurts to ask for the moon and the stars because there is always the chance that you will get lucky.  Meghan seems to be of this mindset.  Tiaragate, Apartment 1 at Kensington, Windsor Castle, SussexRoyal,  HRH,  military patronages, half in  and half out etc.  So far they have drawn a zero batting record.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tuck that in???  Gross:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> No… Would it be possible?
> View attachment 5345406



Ok, I completely misread. My answer:


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But honestly, while it sounds outrageous and completely nuts, we've seen them invite themselves to events they weren't invited to, demanding a wedding as costly as the heir to the throne's and throwing a fit because the Cambridges were part of a procession and they weren't. I wouldn't be all that surprised.


----------



## bag-mania

poopsie said:


> I have no faith in Charles
> I fear he will be very weak in standing up to his second spawn



He may be weak but he won’t forget a betrayal. Harry and Meghan made him look bad in that Oprah interview that was seen by millions. When you think of words that describe Charles, forgiving is definitely not one of them.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> No… Would it be possible?
> View attachment 5345406


Eh, I take this with a large grain of salt. On what basis did he (they) think this would be an appropriate request? Or was the approach "It would be an honor to have this title to honor my beloved late grandfather'? If it is true, that is some king sized balls.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He may be weak but he won’t forget a betrayal. Harry and Meghan made him look bad in that Oprah interview that was seen by millions. When you think of words that describe Charles, forgiving is definitely not one of them.



As others have said, Hazz is his son.  Charles will always welcome him imo.
ETA:  Agree, he will be a weak king, nothing like his mother. Although W gets lots of press about how tough he is, we will have to wait to see if that is true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> There is a mindset that it never hurts to ask for the moon and the stars because there is always the chance that you will get lucky.



Seriously. One of my siblings just moved - not even fully unpacked - and found a letter from a neighbour in their letter box asking if they'd be interested in swapping flats as the person had toured the apartment earlier but was turned down. The apartment they have is significantly smaller with worse layout and has literally no advantage besides a bigger kitchen, which they didn't fail to mention as a perk. Their reasoning? They want to move in their bf and would really like the other apartment. 

Yeah, no b*tch 




> Meghan seems to be of this mindset.  Tiaragate, Apartment 1 at Kensington, Windsor Castle, SussexRoyal,  HRH,  military patronages, half in  and half out etc.  So far they have drawn a zero batting record.



That's kind of satisfying, though.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Good for him! I doubt the Harkles even have that net worth, much less disposable cash.


----------



## CeeJay

Maggie Muggins said:


> I couldn't finish this vid. She reminds me of someone who took the same leadership course that I attended during the mid 60’s with a chapter called, ‘Shout the Man Down’ where the instructor asked us to form two lines, with the first person from each side going to the front of the room to shout down their opponent each one yelling and screaming about his/her own topics creating a veritable cacophony. The winner (the loudest and most persistent) went to the end of their line while the loser sat down. I had a good set of lungs and several inane topics to scream about so I fared well until I (at 5ft 2in and 100lbs) was matched with a 6ft and 200lb fireman with a booming voice (oh yes, firemen and policemen were strongly advised to take these courses). I screamed and yelled, but unable to shut him up, I climbed on top of a desk and shouted louder. Stunned, he slowed down while I babbled on at the top of my lungs until I was declared the winner. In the end, we all had a good laugh at ourselves, but I never liked yelling and I'm glad I never resorted to this kind of performance to assert leadership during my entire career. However I think Prince Dufus and Lady MeMeGain could and would use similar tactics to silence anyone who contradicts or disagrees with them.


WOW .. WHAT?!?! .. what a course, never heard of this type of thing! 

In my "executive leadership" course (and especially when it related to women), the Woman must always go to the conference room first and make sure to get the "power seat" (typically the seat at the top of the table and opposite the conference room door)! 

The woman must always make sure to also wear a "power suit"; most types .. fairly plain black or Navy Blue, and not to wear "fluffy" blouses or other superfluous items that would take the attention away from themselves.  The woman should NEVER, EVER remove their blazer jacket!!! (This is one that I said BS to many times especially when going through menopause)!! 

The woman should always, always, always make sure NOT to scream or shout, but always make sure to speak clearly with a lowered tenor (sound familiar?! - Theranos 'founder') .. and at a slower pace such that if the opposing parties start to speak loudly and fast, by keeping your voice steady and at a slower pace, you are forcing them to LISTEN. 

.. and it goes on .. 

Some things did seem to work; others I thought were just so darn silly .. and to be honest, I seemed to have worse issues with some of my female counterparts, subordinates .. then the men!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Eh, I take this with a large grain of salt. *On what basis did he (they) think this would be an appropriate request?* Or was the approach "It would be an honor to have this title to honor my beloved late grandfather'? If it is true, that is some king sized balls.



See my posting below CarryOn's about Leo. Their brains are somehow not wired correctly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> As others have said, Hazz is his son.  Charles will always welcome him imo.



Family members can be estranged for years. I have seen zero evidence that Harry and Charles have been in direct contact since Oprah. Charles went so far as to leave town when Harry came back for the statue unveiling. He wouldn’t arrange for a private meeting with his son. No, I don’t think Charles will be welcoming Harry back any time soon, and NEVER if Meghan comes with him.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> He may be weak but he won’t forget a betrayal. Harry and Meghan made him look bad in that Oprah interview that was seen by millions. When you think of words that describe Charles, forgiving is definitely not one of them.


Plus his ego.  When the Duke of Windsor was told to take a hike out of the country, it was because his brother said that there was only room for one King of the United Kingdom. Charles has to maintain his position the same way.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> No… Would it be possible?
> View attachment 5345406


First, it's the title of a dukedom not principality. Second, the title reverted to Charles after Prince Philip's death. Third, the title is to be conferred on Edward when Charles accedes to the throne as per Prince Philip's wishes.


----------



## csshopper

poopsie said:


> If the last two years have taught us nothing else it is that _anything_ is possible
> I have no faith in Charles
> As an old school royal his ability to "read the room" and take others opinions into account is suspect.
> I fear he will be very weak in standing up to his second spawn


If his son attacks Camilla in the due to be published book, I have fingers crossed it would negate any attempt Hazbeen and TW make to try to slither their way back into the RF. Someone, maybe Camilla or William, might be successful in pointing out to Charles his own standing with his subjects could be irrevocable damaged if Hazbeen and TW are still lodged near or at the bottom of the popularity polls when the time comes. Also, if "Mummy" (can't help but cringe when I hear a 70+ year old man refer to his mother as "Mummy") finally found the gumption to sort out her wayward sleazy son Andrew, then he, Charles, should follow her example, and deal with his son.

We can hope.


----------



## poopsie

gracekelly said:


> Whilst true that anything can happen, I do think that Charles will not cave to these two.  He was shell shocked by their demands and the way he, TQ and family were treated.  People who are used to behaving in a courtly fashion and with very good manners are very shocked when street fighting and underhanded behavior appears  on their doorstep.  He has had time and advice since that all happened and he won't put himself in that position again.  For one thing, William won't let him.
> 
> There is a mindset that it never hurts to ask for the moon and the stars because there is always the chance that you will get lucky.  Meghan seems to be of this mindset.  Tiaragate, Apartment 1 at Kensington, Windsor Castle, SussexRoyal,  HRH,  military patronages, half in  and half out etc.  So far they have drawn a zero batting record.



I hope you're right!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> First, it's the title of a dukedom not principality. Second, the title reverted to Charles after Prince Philip's death. Third, the title is to be conferred on Edward when Charles accedes to the throne as per Prince Philip's wishes.



That was basically my answer, until I read the second tweet attached to the first one.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> "...the title is to be conferred on Edward when Charles accedes to the throne as per Prince Philip's wishes."


I'm sure that went over well with the Harkles. I can just imagine her complaining about ancient rules and customs. Time to bring the monarchy into the 21st century and all. That was surely her game plan from day one.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> No… Would it be possible?
> View attachment 5345406



Er, NO LOL, not even possible. 

PP's His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, Baron Greenwich, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Extra Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Member of the Order of Merit,

The title would be the Duke of Edinburgh, you can't be a Prince of a city. 

Harry is the son of the Prince of Wales, if Charles becomes King, William will be PoW, and Harry will stay Duke of Sussex .


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Family members can be estranged for years. I have seen zero evidence that Harry and Charles have been in direct contact since Oprah. Charles went so far as to leave town when Harry came back for the statue unveiling. He wouldn’t arrange for a private meeting with his son. No, I don’t think Charles will be welcoming Harry back any time soon, and NEVER if Meghan comes with him.


As they say, time heals all wounds. Perhaps Charles is softening. Or not. All we can do is speculate. I think the public would be divided 50/50 if he welcomed then back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Family members can be estranged for years. I have seen zero evidence that Harry and Charles have been in direct contact since Oprah. Charles went so far as to leave town when Harry came back for the statue unveiling. He wouldn’t arrange for a private meeting with his son. No, I don’t think Charles will be welcoming Harry back any time soon, and NEVER if Meghan comes with him.



IMO if Charles can get Hazz, MM, A&L on the balcony with W&K&kids, that will be C’s dream-come-true.  Charles wants, even needs, the public to think certain things about him - forgiving, healer, kind, smart, blah blah. All of these stories are preparing the public for it.  Very similar to the C&D divorce - tons of ‘shocked’ press even tho everyone knew C&D did not get along.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Er, NO LOL, not even possible.
> 
> PP's His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth, Baron Greenwich, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Extra Knight of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Member of the Order of Merit,
> 
> The title would be the Duke of Edinburgh, you can't be a Prince of a city.
> 
> Harry is the son of the Prince of Wales, if Charles becomes King, William will be PoW, and Harry will stay Duke of Sussex .



There's a second tweet attached to the first one. It says that apparently the troublesome two wanted the titles created for them so Raptor wouldn't have to endure Kate becoming Princess of Wales without compensation. I only saw it after I typed out basically what you said minus all of Philip's titles 

I'm between "They can't be that crazy" (as in, at least Harry KNOWS that's not how it works, ever) and "I'm not too surprised" after all the stuff they thought they were entitled to, e.g. being part of the procession, having the same wedding budget as the Cambridges, crashing an event they were not invited to trying to push in front of the Queen.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's a second tweet attached to the first one. It says that apparently the troublesome two wanted the titles created for them so Raptor wouldn't have to endure Kate becoming Princess of Wales without compensation. I only saw it after I typed out basically what you said minus all of Philip's titles
> 
> I'm between "They can't be that crazy" (as in, at least Harry KNOWS that's not how it works, ever) and "I'm not too surprised" after all the stuff they thought they were entitled to, e.g. being part of the procession, having the same wedding budget as the Cambridges, crashing an event they were not invited to trying to push in front of the Queen.


"Without compensation"??  WTF!  Megain really thinks she's something, doesn't she? 
My MIL is moving into assisted living and trying to get rid of as many of her antiques as possible.  She lives in CT, as do DH's two siblings.  We live in CA, so we are getting the short end of the stick in a sense because both DH's sister and brother's wife have put their claims on almost everything.  I'm not expecting "compensation", since it's my problem I don't have time off to fly over there and mark my territory.  Oh, and my MIL actually likes me and I've never gone on Oprah to b**ch about her!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's a second tweet attached to the first one. It says that apparently the troublesome two wanted the titles created for them so Raptor wouldn't have to endure Kate becoming Princess of Wales without compensation. I only saw it after I typed out basically what you said minus all of Philip's titles
> 
> I'm between "They can't be that crazy" (as in, at least Harry KNOWS that's not how it works, ever) and "I'm not too surprised" after all the stuff they thought they were entitled to, e.g. being part of the procession, having the same wedding budget as the Cambridges, crashing event they were not invited to trying to push in front of the Queen.






It doesn't work like that. 

He is already a Prince. The Prince of Wales position is always the first-born son and he will be King. The Queen wasn't made so because she was a woman. They didn't just say okey dokey we'll make something else up for her. 

This rumour was probably started by one of those people who really thinks queen Bey and drag queen Rupaul are actual actual Queens.  Takes more than a costume. These people must think Buckingham Palace is in some part of Euro Disney. 




I can just imagine the good people of Scotland, many of who want nothing to do with anything or anyone English, having what would be a Prince of Scotland (since Edinburgh is the capital). 

If it came to pass, then Harry better stay away from Scotland or he'll need that security he so craves.


----------



## poopsie

Braveheart................Part Deux


----------



## purseinsanity

poopsie said:


> Braveheart................Part Deux


I swear I just watched Braveheart (again) last night!  I read the Scots loved it but the Irish, not so much.  Apparently, I like any movies with gory battle scenes.  Not sure what that says about me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> This rumour was probably started by one of those people who really thinks queen Bey and drag queen Rupaul are actual actual Queens. Takes more than a costume. These people must think Buckingham Palace is in some part of Euro Disney.



Wait, what!  Bey and RuPaul aren’t real queens??? BP isn’t part of Euro-Dis???  Sheesh, the things we read on TPF. 
Is Burger King not the real king???


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tuck that in???  Gross:



A good example of how things never seem to really go away: this was from the Daily Mail, October 11, 2017. 

Looked up her Hollywood stats, she was in some real clunkers, "Dysfunctional Friends" being one of them. 

But perhaps thinking ahead,  on the data site IMBd, she is already credited with "Writer:1 episode of Pearl" and also as "Producer: Pearl."  

*'Tuck it in!' Little-known Meghan Markle film sees Harry's lady playing a glamorous photographer - who tells a male model his manhood is TOO big*

*The Suits actress, 36, starred in little-known 2011 film Dysfunctional Friends*
*Markle played photographer Terry who shoots male models in their underwear*
*The comedy scene sees Markle's character telling her subject to 'tuck it in' referring to his 'distracting' manhood*
*Meghan and Harry have been dating since 2016 and made their first public appearance at the Invictus Games last month*


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO if Charles can get Hazz, MM, A&L on the balcony with W&K&kids, that will be C’s dream-come-true.  Charles wants, even needs, the public to think certain things about him - forgiving, healer, kind, smart, blah blah. All of these stories are preparing the public for it.  Very similar to the C&D divorce - tons of ‘shocked’ press even tho everyone knew C&D did not get along.



Such a photo op as you described is too great a risk. Charles knows he cannot trust them to behave themselves. A balcony photo of a sullen Harry scowling and a frighteningly beaming Meghan knocking children and old ladies out of the way to get to the front row is not how Charles wants to be immortalized into British history.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Such a photo op as you described is too great a risk. Charles knows he cannot trust them to behave themselves. A balcony photo of a sullen Harry scowling and a *frighteningly beaming Meghan knocking children and old ladies out of the way to get to the front row *is not how Charles wants to be immortalized into British history.


The frightening thing is how very likely this will be, and she will start barging ahead way earlier than the balcony. The pats of power will be constant as she gets the larger Hazard to clear the way for her, then step aside as she swans in (I apologize to swans for comparing them to this harpy vulture). 

Unless the stans use their bodies to put up a protective barricade, I'm sure the non-fans will welcome Methane with some tomatoes if she tries to beam her way through any crowds.


----------



## Katel

papertiger said:


> It doesn't work like that.
> …
> View attachment 5345455
> 
> …. *I can just imagine the good people of Scotland, many of who want nothing to do with anything or anyone English, having what would be a Prince of Scotland (since Edinburgh is the capital).*
> 
> If it came to pass, then Harry better stay away from Scotland or he'll need that security he so craves.


This! TU 



purseinsanity said:


> I swear I just watched Braveheart (again) last night!  I read the Scots loved it but the Irish, not so much.  Apparently, I like any movies with gory battle scenes.  Not sure what that says about me.


You’re a warrior, deary - I’d choose you for my battalion any day.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> A good example of how things never seem to really go away: this was from the Daily Mail, October 11, 2017.
> 
> Looked up her Hollywood stats, she was in some real clunkers, "Dysfunctional Friends" being one of them.
> 
> But perhaps thinking ahead,  on the data site IMBd, she is already credited with "Writer:1 episode of Pearl" and also as "Producer: Pearl."
> 
> *'Tuck it in!' Little-known Meghan Markle film sees Harry's lady playing a glamorous photographer - who tells a male model his manhood is TOO big*
> 
> *The Suits actress, 36, starred in little-known 2011 film Dysfunctional Friends*
> *Markle played photographer Terry who shoots male models in their underwear*
> *The comedy scene sees Markle's character telling her subject to 'tuck it in' referring to his 'distracting' manhood*
> *Meghan and Harry have been dating since 2016 and made their first public appearance at the Invictus Games last month*


IMBd and Wikipedia are all reliant on user generated content. I'm sure Methane has a lackey somewhere to make sure her pages are suitably updated for her glory.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> WOW .. WHAT?!?! .. what a course, never heard of this type of thing!
> 
> In my "executive leadership" course (and especially when it related to women), the Woman must always go to the conference room first and make sure to get the "power seat" (typically the seat at the top of the table and opposite the conference room door)!
> 
> The woman must always make sure to also wear a "power suit"; most types .. fairly plain black or Navy Blue, and not to wear "fluffy" blouses or other superfluous items that would take the attention away from themselves.  The woman should NEVER, EVER remove their blazer jacket!!! (This is one that I said BS to many times especially when going through menopause)!!
> 
> The woman should always, always, always make sure NOT to scream or shout, but always make sure to speak clearly with a lowered tenor (sound familiar?! - Theranos 'founder') .. and at a slower pace such that if the opposing parties start to speak loudly and fast, by keeping your voice steady and at a slower pace, you are forcing them to LISTEN.
> 
> .. and it goes on ..
> 
> Some things did seem to work; others I thought were just so darn silly .. and to be honest, I seemed to have worse issues with some of my female counterparts, subordinates .. then the men!


I was actually implying that Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu, who yelled and screamed at Piers Morgan without pause while defending Megain, must've taken a similar leadership course, but only remembered the particular event that I described in my post. In fact, the course was structured to teach us that we could use our personal strengths to effectively handle any situation.


----------



## Luvbolide

poopsie said:


> If the last two years have taught us nothing else it is that _anything_ is possible
> I have no faith in Charles
> As an old school royal his ability to "read the room" and take others opinions into account is suspect.
> I fear he will be very weak in standing up to his second spawn



Sad to say, I agree with you.  My heart sank when I saw the stories about H&M coming back part-time.  I don’t see Charles having the inner strength to deal with Hazmat -I can just hear him saying that there is much work to be done and a slimmed down royal family, so having a couple of part-timers would help pick up the slack.  

I find myself wishing once again that we could skip over Charles and go directly to William and Kate.  Le sigh…


----------



## carmen56

poopsie said:


> If the last two years have taught us nothing else it is that _anything_ is possible
> I have no faith in Charles
> As an old school royal his ability to "read the room" and take others opinions into account is suspect.
> I fear he will be very weak in standing up to his second spawn



I fear you may be right.  Hopefully William will act as his father's backbone.


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Sad to say, I agree with you.  My heart sank when I saw the stories about H&M coming back part-time.  I don’t see Charles having the inner strength to deal with Hazmat -I can just hear him saying that there is much work to be done and a slimmed down royal family, so having a couple of part-timers would help pick up the slack.
> 
> I find myself wishing once again that we could skip over Charles and go directly to William and Kate.  Le sigh…


These stories are PR plants in overdrive.  The PR people have had success with other people and situations by planting the  seed of a thought and watching it grow in the public consciousness to the point where, people expect it to happen and perhaps want it to happen.  In this case, it won't happen.  Too much negativity killed that seed and it ain't gonna grow no matter how much fertilizer is put on it.  This reminds me of my French teacher in middle school who used to say that wishing won't make it so, but hard work will.  I think we all know that hard work is not in the Harkle vocabulary.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> Sad to say, I agree with you.  My heart sank when I saw the stories about H&M coming back part-time.  I don’t see Charles having the inner strength to deal with Hazmat -I can just hear him saying that there is much work to be done and a slimmed down royal family, so having a couple of part-timers would help pick up the slack.
> 
> I find myself wishing once again that we could skip over Charles and go directly to William and Kate.  Le sigh…


They've got other part-timers on UK soil who are a lot less troublesome. They do not need Diva and Dirtbag.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5345456
> 
> 
> It doesn't work like that.
> 
> He is already a Prince. The Prince of Wales position is always the first-born son and he will be King. The Queen wasn't made so because she was a woman. They didn't just say okey dokey we'll make something else up for her.
> 
> This rumour was probably started by one of those people who really thinks queen Bey and drag queen Rupaul are actual actual Queens.  Takes more than a costume. These people must think Buckingham Palace is in some part of Euro Disney.
> 
> View attachment 5345455
> 
> 
> I can just imagine the good people of Scotland, many of who want nothing to do with anything or anyone English, having what would be a Prince of Scotland (since Edinburgh is the capital).
> 
> If it came to pass, then Harry better stay away from Scotland or he'll need that security he so craves.


Same here in Wales, a lot of people have never wanted an English Prince of Wales.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> These stories are PR plants in overdrive.  The PR people have had success with other people and situations by planting the  seed of a thought and watching it grow in the public consciousness to the point where, people expect it to happen and perhaps want it to happen.  In this case, it won't happen.  Too much negativity killed that seed and it ain't gonna grow no matter how much fertilizer is put on it.  This reminds me of my French teacher in middle school who used to say that wishing won't make it so, but hard work will.  I think we all know that hard work is not in the Harkle vocabulary.



I agree. That's how it's supposed to work, in their case it's not so much PR as propaganda.

it's just not possible. You couldn't trust either one of them, not for one minute.

The Queen is not going to live at Buckingham Palace anymore (from what I've read) and will instead reside at Windsor. I don't know what that means for meetings with the Prime Minister and state functions, so this is where Counsellors of State could normally step in.


----------



## xincinsin

Prince and Princess of the Commonwealth ... got a nice ring to that 

But that is not where the big bucks are, so I'm spared from their overlordship


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Same here in Wales, a lot of people have never wanted an English Prince of Wales.



I remember seeing a (dramatised) film of Charles' time there, they showed how unpopular it was.

You could x 100 in Scotland. Even the 'No' voters would turn.

I mean, did Harry even bother going going to Dumbarton when made Earl, does he even care where it is on the map? Evidently, Harry is one half of the most selfish, narc, greedy couples ever (and when talking starlets-in-Hollywood/BRF, that is really saying something)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Prince and Princess of the Commonwealth ... got a nice ring to that
> 
> But that is not where the big bucks are, so I'm spared from their overlordship



Australia would love that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It doesn't work like that.
> 
> He is already a Prince. The Prince of Wales position is always the first-born son and he will be King. The Queen wasn't made so because she was a woman. They didn't just say okey dokey we'll make something else up for her.



Oh, I know that. More ridiculous people either don't or thought just throwing it out there would build pressure.



> This rumour was probably started by one of those people who really thinks queen Bey and drag queen Rupaul are actual actual Queens.  Takes more than a costume. These people must think Buckingham Palace is in some part of Euro Disney.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> A good example of how things never seem to really go away: this was from the Daily Mail, October 11, 2017.
> 
> Looked up her Hollywood stats, she was in some real clunkers, "Dysfunctional Friends" being one of them.
> 
> But perhaps thinking ahead,  on the data site IMBd, she is already credited with "Writer:1 episode of Pearl" and also as "Producer: Pearl."
> 
> *'Tuck it in!' Little-known Meghan Markle film sees Harry's lady playing a glamorous photographer - who tells a male model his manhood is TOO big*
> 
> *The Suits actress, 36, starred in little-known 2011 film Dysfunctional Friends*
> *Markle played photographer Terry who shoots male models in their underwear*
> *The comedy scene sees Markle's character telling her subject to 'tuck it in' referring to his 'distracting' manhood*
> *Meghan and Harry have been dating since 2016 and made their first public appearance at the Invictus Games last month*



I never watched Suits, but I once caught a glimpse of a Disney movie where she was basically playing herself, the oversexualized friend in skimpy clothes (note, once again she wasn't the lead). The acting was cringe-worthy. And now this. How did she even get cast for Suits?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never watched Suits, but I once caught a glimpse of a Disney movie where she was basically playing herself, the oversexualized friend in skimpy clothes (note, once again she wasn't the lead). The acting was cringe-worthy. And now this. How did she even get cast for Suits?


I've only watched snippets on Youtube, but I've heard it said that she was also playing herself there: the flirty ambitious pretender.


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never watched Suits, but I once caught a glimpse of a Disney movie where she was basically playing herself, the *oversexualized friend in skimpy clothes *(note, once again she wasn't the lead). The acting was cringe-worthy. And now this. How did she even get cast for Suits?


I watched Suits as I am a sucker for court room / lawyer dramas. Basically, same role. She was cast as the office eye candy (not the main character) and wore stuffed clingy white-shirt and pencil-skirt highlighting certain assets. It was confusing as she wasn’t that well endowed in her real street clothing.

Other female actresses in the show wore well-fitted, beautiful clothes. Esp Gina Torres' character.  But hers, it was almost always anything goes, as long as it showcased the jutting front and back.

Imagine my shock when the press release came out from Prince Harry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> 25 million$$$$ If she can do it, why can’t H&M?  Kudos to Bethany and her supporters:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel raises over $10 million for Ukrainian refugees
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel announced that her organization B Strong has raised over $10 million in aid to help relocate Ukrainian refugees and $15 million in humanitarian aid for the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm very impressed with what Bethenny is doing.  I may send some money to that organization. I saw her on TV yesterday and she was saying just ten or fifteen dollars can help buy someone a train ticket.
 Agree - why can't H&M do something like this?  Bethenny is a businesswoman.  The Harkles supposed main role in life is philanthropy, right?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm very impressed with what Bethenny is doing.  I may send some money to that organization. I saw her on TV yesterday and she was saying just ten or fifteen dollars can help buy someone a train ticket.
> Agree - why can't H&M do something like this?  Bethenny is a businesswoman.  The Harkles supposed main role in life is philanthropy, right?



It’s the difference between saying you care and actually caring. H&M love to pay lip service but their words are meaningless. Some people are talkers and others are doers.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO if Charles can get Hazz, MM, A&L on the balcony with W&K&kids, that will be C’s dream-come-true.  Charles wants, even needs, the public to think certain things about him - forgiving, healer, kind, smart, blah blah. All of these stories are preparing the public for it.  Very similar to the C&D divorce - tons of ‘shocked’ press even tho everyone knew C&D did not get along.



Eeeeeeeek! I hope not. Even if an invitation were sent I'd hope it'd get lost. H&M were the ones who dumped the BRF, not the other way around. For them to even WANT to come back speaks of nauseating opportunism. If they came back for any ceremony everyone would be forced to plaster on a fake happy face. And regardless, afterward we all know full well M&H would lie their heads off about being treated horribly even if they turned the ceremony into the Sussex Family Show starring the Ever-Suffering Duchess of Sussex  Mother Extraordinaire Global Philanthropist. They can't be trusted whatsoever.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> The Harkles supposed main role in life is philanthropy, right?



The Harkles aren't philanthropists but they play them on TV


----------



## rose60610

Were it not for PF I wouldn't know who Bethenny Frankel is. Having read a little about her I like the way she explained she was in show business for the money and knew full well she'd get a lot of criticism. She has a thick skin. And appears to be a genuine philanthropist. She does a lot more than send olive oil cakes.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> If his son attacks Camilla in the due to be published book, I have fingers crossed it would negate any attempt Hazbeen and TW make to try to slither their way back into the RF. Someone, maybe Camilla or William, might be successful in pointing out to Charles his own standing with his subjects could be irrevocable damaged if Hazbeen and TW are still lodged near or at the bottom of the popularity polls when the time comes. Also, if "Mummy" (can't help but cringe when I hear a 70+ year old man refer to his mother as "Mummy") finally found the gumption to sort out her wayward sleazy son Andrew, then he, Charles, should follow her example, and deal with his son.
> 
> We can hope.


I agree with this; I think Camilla is a pretty strong lady .. and she obviously has some influence over Charles (let's face it .. he likely went to bat for her re: Queen Consort).  In addition, I think William will also take issue if they come back .. especially given the latest bit of news that I saw the other day re: "When Charles becomes King, Hazbeen & Megalomaniac will come back to the UK as .. WAIT .. 'Part-Time Senior Royals' .. since Charles will be the one who will 'modernize' the monarchy".  In other words, they think that when Charles becomes King, they can come back on a part-time basis, "market" themselves using their titles .. and basically, pick & choose which events they want to go to!!!  Seriously?!?! .. I don't think many others (remember Princess Anne) will allow that!


----------



## elvisfan4life

Luvbolide said:


> Sad to say, I agree with you.  My heart sank when I saw the stories about H&M coming back part-time.  I don’t see Charles having the inner strength to deal with Hazmat -I can just hear him saying that there is much work to be done and a slimmed down royal family, so having a couple of part-timers would help pick up the slack.
> 
> I find myself wishing once again that we could skip over Charles and go directly to William and Kate.  Le sigh…



Charles is weak
Camilla is not - never underestimate her power over Charles -any attempt to slag off Camilla in this amusingly called biography tome we are promised will backfire badly


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> This! TU
> 
> *
> You’re a warrior, deary - I’d choose you for my battalion any day. *


Awww, thank you!!!  Ditto!!


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "Diva and Dirtbag"


 That's "THE Diva and THE Dirtbag" to you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's a second tweet attached to the first one. It says that apparently the troublesome two wanted the titles created for them so Raptor wouldn't have to endure Kate becoming Princess of Wales without compensation. I only saw it after I typed out basically what you said minus all of Philip's titles
> 
> I'm between "They can't be that crazy" (as in, at least Harry KNOWS that's not how it works, ever) and "I'm not too surprised" after all the stuff they thought they were entitled to, e.g. being part of the procession, having the same wedding budget as the Cambridges, crashing an event they were not invited to trying to push in front of the Queen.


"Harry KNOWS that's not how it works", and yet he sat there and let her spout all her nonsense and lies on Oprah, about their son not being given any titles because he is black.  Harry knows exactly why his son has no title, and had to have explained it to her, and yet she still went on national TV and "spoke her truth"!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> "Harry KNOWS that's not how it works", and yet he sat there and let her spout all her nonsense and lies on Oprah, about their son not being given any titles because he is black.  *Harry knows exactly why his son has no title*, and had to have explained it to her, and yet she still went on national TV and "spoke her truth"!



Because his parents refuse to give him the courtesy title he actually has


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But really...I don't think I've ever seen adults be so jealous and tit-for-tat.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> "Harry KNOWS that's not how it works", and yet he sat there and let her spout all her nonsense and lies on Oprah, about their son not being given any titles because he is black.  Harry knows exactly why his son has no title, and had to have explained it to her, and yet she still went on national TV and "spoke her truth"!


I can see her not accepting that as a reason.  “But Hhhhhhaz, that’s why we have to demand change! We will modernize the monarchy!”


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Were it not for PF I wouldn't know who Bethenny Frankel is. Having read a little about her I like the way she explained she was in show business for the money and knew full well she'd get a lot of criticism. She has a thick skin. And appears to be a genuine philanthropist. She does a lot more than send olive oil cakes.


Sadly, I watch Real Housewives of New York and knew exactly who she is 
I liked her sharp wit at first, but she became a know it all as time went on and the richer she got.
I found her somewhat irritating especially with the hurricane Puerto Rico, because she seemed to be loving the attention more than helping the people there, and watching her hand out gift cards on camera seemed a little condescending to me.
I'll give credit where it's due though, and if she truly has raised that much money for the Ukrainian victims, props to her!


----------



## kemilia

rose60610 said:


> Were it not for PF I wouldn't know who Bethenny Frankel is. Having read a little about her I like the way she explained she was in show business for the money and knew full well she'd get a lot of criticism. She has a thick skin. And appears to be a genuine philanthropist. She does a lot more than send olive oil cakes.


When RHNYC was first on, BF was one of the first housewives (though she was single). 

During the following seasons, though most hated her (because she was, imo, smart and had more brains than the rest put together), I felt that she would be the one housewife I would ask for business advice--she knew her stuff (except she was not so good at relationships). She's hard as nails and follows through.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> When RHNYC was first on, BF was one of the first housewives (though she was single).
> 
> During the following seasons, though most hated her (because she was, imo, smart and had more brains than the rest put together), I felt that she would be the one housewife I would ask for business advice--she knew her stuff (except she was not so good at relationships). She's hard as nails and follows through.


I've never watched any of the real housewives franchises but I'm familiar with some of the women, mainly from Andy Cohen's WWHL.  I think Betthenny is impressive.  She's been successful in business and her rescue work can't be denied.  I don't know if she's been an attention-seeker with it at times but she seems to be doing very good work with the Ukraine.  I was trying to decide who to donate to and after seeing her on TV talking about what they were doing, I chose her organization.


----------



## bag-mania

Believe it or not, it has been a year since the Oprah interview. How time flies!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Believe it or not, it has been a year since the Oprah interview. How time flies!


and what have they done?  Oh, received an award from NAACP


----------



## Chanbal

_Harry's DISTURBING Body Language Could Reveal A SECRET _


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I think Betthenny is impressive.  She's been successful in business and her rescue work can't be denied.  I don't know if she's been an attention-seeker with it at times but she seems to be doing very good work with the Ukraine.  I was trying to decide who to donate to and *after seeing her on TV talking about what they were doing,* I chose her organization.


That's something the subjects of this thread never do, except in very vague terms. You can't pin down a lot of what they did, except for a cake and maybe some books or sandwiches or gift cards - and that is murky too because of the story that they expected a $5 donation for the book and the sandwiches n gift cards were donated by someone else but they took credit.


----------



## Chanbal

What we do for PR… 










						Prince Harry is slammed for attending a rodeo in Texas
					

Prince Harry, 37, was pictured attending the Stockyards Rodeo event in Fort Worth on Saturday, surprising attendees who know of his wife, Meghan Markel's, years of animal rights activism.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> What we do for PR…
> View attachment 5346484
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is slammed for attending a rodeo in Texas
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, was pictured attending the Stockyards Rodeo event in Fort Worth on Saturday, surprising attendees who know of his wife, Meghan Markel's, years of animal rights activism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She is an animal rights activist? The same way she is vegetarian? Electively and selectively?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Sadly, Hazz didn’t realize he was in Fort Worth, not the Australian outback or an Indiana Jones movie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

People on twitter are having fun…


----------



## rose60610

Harry went to a rodeo? A rodeo? Really? To see bucking polo ponies? I guess it really was his first rodeo .  Sorry Haz, is that the closest you're allowed to come to horses these days? What is he going to do next? Attend a monster truck rally then enter a pie eating contest?  Is Haz trying to appeal to every facet of 'murica for wifey's potential run for office? In that case, he must love our First Amendment...oh wait!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sadly, Hazz didn’t realize he was in Fort Worth, not the Australian outback or an Indiana Jones movie


That was my first thought:  he looks like a wimpy Crocodile Dundee!


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> That was my first thought:  he looks like a wimpy Crocodile Dundee!


I'd like to see a pic of him next to The Rock ...


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> She is an animal rights activist? The same way she is vegetarian? Electively and selectively?


Duh!  Didn't you know?  Not only is she an animal rights activist, she's also a women's rights, environmental, anti war, veterans, AIDS, vaccine, yoga, anti-establishment and Sussex' rights activist!


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I'd like to see a pic of him next to The Rock ...





purseinsanity said:


> Duh!  Didn't you know?  Not only is she an animal rights activist, she's also a women's rights, environmental, anti war, veterans, AIDS, vaccine, yoga, anti-establishment and Sussex' rights activist!



DM loves the Netfl*xes, the choice of title for the article…


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Harry went to a rodeo? A rodeo? Really? To see bucking polo ponies? I guess it really was his first rodeo .  Sorry Haz, is that the closest you're allowed to come to horses these days? What is he going to do next? *Attend a monster truck rally then enter a pie eating contest?*  Is Haz trying to appeal to every facet of 'murica for wifey's potential run for office? In that case, he must love our First Amendment...oh wait!


I bet you he'll win contest for biggest mouth!  And then indulge in some fried pickles and oreos.  It'll be bonkers!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> I was actually implying that Dr Shola Mos-Shogbamimu, who yelled and screamed at Piers Morgan without pause while defending Megain, must've taken a similar leadership course, but only remembered the particular event that I described in my post. In fact, the course was structured to teach us that we could use our personal strengths to effectively handle any situation.


I would love to go to that course especially if the tall firefighters were always involved.  


Chanbal said:


>



Immediate thought seeing this expression….
	

		
			
		

		
	



I think we all know what he’s murmuring to himself.


----------



## csshopper

He is such a doofus. As one of the commentators said about his NAACP appearance, he looks constipated. 

It may be a pout since no fuss was being made over his presence.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Scroll for slide 3.


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I would love to go to that course especially if the tall firefighters were always involved.
> 
> Immediate thought seeing this expression….
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5346579
> 
> I think we all know what he’s murmuring to himself.


Great.  Thanks a lot!  Now I’m going to have nightmares tonight about serial killers!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sadly, Hazz didn’t realize he was in Fort Worth, not the Australian outback or an Indiana Jones movie



Ha. I saw the pictures earlier and thought "That does not look like an American cowboy hat, more like...Australian?" Obviously I am no pro re: cowboy hats at all, but apparently I wasn't alone in my train of thought.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha. I saw the pictures earlier and thought "That does not look like an American cowboy hat, more like...Australian?" Obviously I am no pro re: cowboy hats at all, but apparently I wasn't alone in my train of thought.


Maybe that's why the woman staring at him had such a wrinkled brow: "What in the world is he wearing on his head?"


----------



## Sophisticatted

He actually looks uncomfortable and miserable in that rodeo photo.  Is he trying to get big $ donors/sponsorships from Texas.  Have they given up on the California elite?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sophisticatted said:


> He actually looks uncomfortable and miserable in that rodeo photo.  Is he trying to get big $ donors/sponsorships from Texas.  Have they given up on the California elite?


That picture is a complete failure!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ha. I saw the pictures earlier and thought "That does not look like an American cowboy hat, more like...Australian?" Obviously I am no pro re: cowboy hats at all, but apparently I wasn't alone in my train of thought.





xincinsin said:


> Maybe that's why the woman staring at him had such a wrinkled brow: "What in the world is he wearing on his head?"





Sophisticatted said:


> He actually looks uncomfortable and miserable in that rodeo photo.  Is he trying to get big $ donors/sponsorships from Texas.  Have they given up on the California elite?





lanasyogamama said:


> That picture is a complete failure!


He wouldn't risk to blend in.


----------



## youngster

What in the world is he doing at a Texas rodeo?  Any reason given for this appearance other than publicity?
Oh, maybe he's filming something for their rumored Netflix reality show? You know, like the old Simple Life with Paris Hilton except learning about the U.S. See him at a rodeo, at the superbowl, etc.  Maybe we'll see him on a cross country trip via Greyhound bus next or going to Mount Vernon or Gettysburg.


----------



## Sferics

lanasyogamama said:


> I think M’s legs would have been admired in the 90s, like when Lara Flynn Boyle wore the ballerina dress. But now people love a strong leg like Carrie Underwood and Beyoncé.



I think Kate has the perfect ones.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> What in the world is he doing at a Texas rodeo?  Any reason given for this appearance other than publicity?
> Oh, maybe he's filming something for their rumored Netflix reality show? You know, like the old Simple Life with Paris Hilton except learning about the U.S. See him at a rodeo, at the superbowl, etc.  Maybe we'll see him on a cross country trip via *Greyhound bus* next or going to Mount Vernon or Gettysburg.


I am still scarred from my parents making me take Greyhound buses for trips home from college (it was only two hours away.  They couldn't pick me up???  ).


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> DM loves the Netfl*xes, the choice of title for the article…
> 
> View attachment 5346558



Did he tell them that he thinks the First Amendment is BoNkErS? I'm sure that would go over really well with this crowd


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> What we do for PR…
> View attachment 5346484
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is slammed for attending a rodeo in Texas
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, was pictured attending the Stockyards Rodeo event in Fort Worth on Saturday, surprising attendees who know of his wife, Meghan Markel's, years of animal rights activism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


wow....did the Wife allow this?  We have an annual rodeo where I live and I won't go as I feel the poor animals haven't volunteered for this and it's not fun for them (and I don't call myself an animal activist)


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Great.  Thanks a lot!  Now I’m going to have nightmares tonight about serial killers!


sorry, I hate it when you can’t something out of your head.

We might have to do some extreme aversion training and confront a more horrific image…


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> sorry, I hate it when you can’t something out of your head.
> 
> We might have to do some extreme aversion training and confront a more horrific image…
> View attachment 5346879


----------



## sdkitty

last night I watched the Downton Abbey movie. After the movie, they had a bunch of promos for other British shows.  One was about Harry.  One of the main points they made was that he has a very bad temper.  They showed as an example him acting up on the polo field.  (they also said he was a better athlete than Will)
So - if he has this fiery temper, can he really be endlessly dominated without going off?  wonder what goes on in their home


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> *Did he tell them that he thinks the First Amendment is BoNkErS?* I'm sure that would go over really well with this crowd


Of course not! Dear Hazz is such a crowd pleaser ($$$$)…


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> sorry, I hate it when you can’t something out of your head.
> 
> We might have to do some extreme aversion training and confront a more horrific image…
> View attachment 5346879


You are torturing @sdkitty


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I bet you he'll win contest for biggest mouth!  And then indulge in some fried pickles and oreos.  It'll be bonkers!!!



Uh-oh. You just made me wonder about something: Harry and The Wife might organize a Chili Cook-Off competition. And donate $10 of the proceeds to charity. It'd be an excuse (trap) to get celebrities to come to their home for photo ops. 

I still can't imagine Haz at a rodeo. Did he tell his chauffeur he wanted to go to Rodeo Drive but ended up at a real rodeo?


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> I am still scarred from my parents making me take Greyhound buses for trips home from college (it was only two hours away.  They couldn't pick me up???  ).


It was a different time!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



Kate and Will both looked AMAZING that day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Would Hazz be looking for a wealthy replacement in Texas? I would be impressed by such generosity. 



Spoiler: Rumor - Unbelievable


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Uh-oh. You just made me wonder about something: Harry and The Wife might organize a Chili Cook-Off competition. And donate $10 of the proceeds to charity. It'd be an excuse (trap) to get celebrities to come to their home for photo ops.
> 
> I still can't imagine Haz at a rodeo. Did he tell his chauffeur he wanted to go to Rodeo Drive but ended up at a real rodeo?


Does he look like a Rodeo Drive customer?


----------



## Chanbal

YEE HAW!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Everyone is in TX this week - the energy folks, the rodeo folks, the NEast elite (Cornelia Guest), this errant prince and today the US Pres.  For some states, it would be a bit nerve wracking  but we are used to the attention, darlings. It’s why we love the big hair


----------



## 1LV

Harry, Harry, Harry. I don’t even know where to begin.  Who the hell dressed you? Like the missus you’re trying too way hard.  

P.S.  Can’t wait to see his boots.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I am still scarred from my parents making me take Greyhound buses for trips home from college (it was only two hours away.  They couldn't pick me up???  ).


A guy I dated in college many years ago was doing an internship for a semester and I rode Greyhound quite a few times on weekends to visit him. It was eye opening.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



well, maybe that's true for the people she's spouting off at


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Would Hazz be looking for a wealthy replacement in Texas? I would be impressed by such generosity.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rumor - Unbelievable




I don't see it yet. I'd cheer, though.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't see it yet. I'd cheer, though.


without him she wouldn't be a duchess, just a rich divorcee and former z-list actress


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> without him she wouldn't be a duchess, just a rich divorcee and former z-list actress


Divorce didn't stop Luann on RHoNY from using her Countess by marriage title when it was advantageous.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> without him she wouldn't be a duchess, just a rich divorcee and former z-list actress


Maybe she'll start going by "The Actress Formerly Know As The Duchess of Sussex"


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't see it yet. I'd cheer, though.


You are right! It looks like the trip to Texas is not to find a wealthy replacement as part of a possible divorce settlement… 
It appears that J. B. is also visiting Texas and is speaking at the Tarrant County Resource Connection about expanding access to health care and benefits for veterans (according to @According2Taz).


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> without him she wouldn't be a duchess, just a rich divorcee and former z-list actress



with 2 kids under 4


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleRunningDog

charlottawill said:


> Divorce didn't stop Luann on RHoNY from using her Countess by marriage title when it was advantageous.


Or Lady Colin Campbell, and they were only together about a month before separating


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> Divorce didn't stop Luann on RHoNY from using her Countess by marriage title when it was advantageous.



Meghan can always make a music video!

Side note, for some reason when I hear this song, I think of the Tan Mom song


----------



## Chanbal

Brilliant reply to what it appears to be Hello's paid propaganda…


----------



## purseinsanity

Sophisticatted said:


> He actually looks uncomfortable and miserable in that rodeo photo.  Is he trying to get big $ donors/sponsorships from Texas.  Have they given up on the California elite?


I don't think woke folk go very far in Texas.  I wouldn't hold my breath if I were them.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Would Hazz be looking for a wealthy replacement in Texas? I would be impressed by such generosity.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rumor - Unbelievable



If I were the BRF, I don't care WTF was happening if divorce was truly on the table.  I'd do everything in my power to get rid of TW.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> A guy I dated in college many years ago was doing an internship for a semester and I rode Greyhound quite a few times on weekends to visit him. It was eye opening.


My favorite (not) memory was when a filthy man reeking of BO and cigarettes sat down next to me (afternoon ride, BTW), looked around to see if anyone was watching, pulled out from his tattered raincoat a bottle wrapped in a brown paper bag, put his finger next to his lips and whispered, "Shhhhhhhh" at me before taking a swig and literally hiccuping.  He then offered me a drink.    I come from a culture supposedly overprotective of its children. I don't think my parents subscribed much to that line of thinking!


----------



## youngster

1LV said:


> Harry, Harry, Harry. I don’t even know where to begin.  Who the hell dressed you? Like the missus you’re trying too way hard.
> 
> P.S.  Can’t wait to see his boots.



Like they say . . . All hat, no cattle.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think woke folk go very far in Texas.  I wouldn't hold my breath if I were them.



I was just thinking he’s lucky the young cowboys on the rodeo circuit are super polite. Nobody is going to give him a hard time but I bet a lot of them wonder why he was there.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I was just thinking he’s lucky the young cowboys on the rodeo circuit are super polite. Nobody is going to give him a hard time but I bet a lot of them wonder why he was there.


Makes me wonder: who invited them? Or was the Sunshine Sucks finger in this pie too?


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I am still scarred from my parents making me take Greyhound buses for trips home from college (it was only two hours away.  They couldn't pick me up???  ).



But it helped make you the person you are today!


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> sorry, I hate it when you can’t something out of your head.
> 
> We might have to do some extreme aversion training and confront a more horrific image…
> View attachment 5346879



Is it St. Patrick's day already? 

I thought time was moving fast, but this is ridiculous


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> last night I watched the Downton Abbey movie. After the movie, they had a bunch of promos for other British shows.  One was about Harry.  One of the main points they made was that he has a very bad temper.  They showed as an example him acting up on the polo field.  (they also said he was a better athlete than Will)
> So - if he has this fiery temper, can he really be endlessly dominated without going off?  *wonder what goes on in their home*



Sedatives before meal times?


----------



## csshopper

Sunshine Sucks must have a "bucket list" to try to sell Haz to America. Super Bowl - Check; Texas Rodeo - Check; NAACP Award - Check; Prositute yourself to Oprah - Check; Visit the Big Apple, see the UN, Twin Towers Memorial - Check

Maybe next up surf lessons off the coast, skiing in Aspen, hiking a volcano in Hawaii, Cotton Candy at the Iowa State Fair in the middle of the Country, Clam Chowder in Boston (but not while Kate and Wiliam visit later this year), Chilin' in Key West, descent into the Grand Canyon etc. etc.

One major problem with the ones already completed, he looks like a pouty, snotty little kid who would rather be home playing with the chickens. So completely self absorbed in his misery/victim schtick he's wasted his time, there's not a huge interest in him and that's not the script TW sold him when she unrolled her plans to get the heck out of London ASAP. 

As for the divorce speculation, I don't think he has the balls to do it. It would take initiative and being hated at home in the UK, and no apparent support in the US, he'd almost have to go to Africa, and what to do about Archie and Lilibet?

They are so T I R E S O M E.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think woke folk go very far in Texas.  I wouldn't hold my breath if I were them.


not sure what city he was in but I understand Austin is less conservative


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe he likes the smell of bull^%€@ - it reminds him of Monteshito.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Sunshine Sucks must have a "bucket list" to try to sell Haz to America. Super Bowl - Check; Texas Rodeo - Check; NAACP Award - Check; Prositute yourself to Oprah - Check; Visit the Big Apple, see the UN, Twin Towers Memorial - Check
> 
> Maybe next up surf lessons off the coast, skiing in Aspen, hiking a volcano in Hawaii, Cotton Candy at the Iowa State Fair in the middle of the Country, Clam Chowder in Boston (but not while Kate and Wiliam visit later this year), Chilin' in Key West, descent into the Grand Canyon etc. etc.
> 
> One major problem with the ones already completed, he looks like a pouty, snotty little kid who would rather be home playing with the chickens. So completely self absorbed in his misery/victim schtick he's wasted his time, there's not a huge interest in him and that's not the script TW sold him when she unrolled her plans to get the heck out of London ASAP.
> 
> As for the divorce speculation, I don't think he has the balls to do it. It would take initiative and being hated at home in the UK, and no apparent support in the US, he'd almost have to go to Africa, and what to do about Archie and Lilibet?
> 
> They are so T I R E S O M E.


yes the are tiresome and sorry to repeat myself but What Are They Doing in regard to the Ukraine?  What have they donated?  Don't they have any money to spare?
I Really don't understand how anyone can take them seriously as humanitarians.  Whoever at NAACP made that decision should hang their heads in shame.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> So - if he has this fiery temper, can he really be endlessly dominated without going off?  wonder what goes on in their home



She is smarter than he is. She can completely dominate him in such a way that he does not realize he is being dominated. Remember, he believes he is protecting her. She can play on that aspect of his personality and get him to do whatever she wants. Whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> yes the are tiresome and sorry to repeat myself but What Are They Doing in regard to the Ukraine?  What have they donated?  *Don't they have any money to spare?*
> I Really don't understand how anyone can take them seriously as humanitarians.  Whoever at NAACP made that decision should hang their heads in shame.


Did you see his hat?


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Did you see his hat?


they're disgusting


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Did you see his hat?



I know. He was at a rodeo. In Texas. The opportunity to buy a really nice Stetson was right there.  

I guess he was waiting around for someone to give him one. He’s not accustomed to spending his own money.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I was just thinking he’s lucky the young cowboys on the rodeo circuit are super polite. Nobody is going to give him a hard time but I bet a lot of them *wonder why he was there*.



Maybe he was there to check out King Ranch, it's the closest thing to, you know, his chance to rule over a kingdom?


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Maybe he was there to check out King Ranch, it's the closest thing to, you know, his chance to rule over a kingdom?



If so, a sad miscalculation on his part. The mighty King Ranch is in Kingsville, TX which is about 400 miles south of FW, about a 7 hour drive.





__





						The King Ranch Legacy - King Ranch
					

In 1853, Captain Richard King purchased a creek-fed oasis in the Wild Horse Desert of South Texas, sparking generations of integrity, preservation, and innovation. King Ranch now covers 825,000 acres—more land than the state of Rhode Island. Over the course …




					king-ranch.com


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> I know. He was at a rodeo. In Texas. The opportunity to buy a really nice Stetson was right there.
> 
> I guess he was waiting around for someone to give him one. He’s not accustomed to spending his own money.


Right!  Really nice Stetsons don’t come cheap.  He looked more like a Keebler elf than a cowboy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Right!  Really nice Stetsons don’t come cheap.  He looked more like a Keebler elf than a cowboy.







__





						Hats & Caps - King Ranch Saddle Shop
					

Shop our men's hats and caps for a wide selection of stylish caps for men.  We offer both mesh back and unstructured caps for everyone in mind.




					www.krsaddleshop.com
				




RE: Stetsons - made in Garland, TX - about an hour’s drive from FW. Of course, most western shops have those. With a modicum of effort, he could have been appropriately outfitted. Such a shame, such a missed opportunity to win some good will.
Hope he leaves soon.








						John B. Stetson Company - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because his parents refuse to give him the courtesy title he actually has


Would that title be the Earl of Dumbarton?  The one she rejected because it had the word *dumb* in it?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I know. He was at a rodeo. In Texas. The opportunity to buy a really nice Stetson was right there.
> 
> I guess he was waiting around for someone to give him one. He’s not accustomed to spending his own money.



I've been trying to avoid the unbearable news about the war. So, cowboy Harry is being entertaining. Who would guess that the Lego Group was a visionary…


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Divorce didn't stop Luann on RHoNY from using her Countess by marriage title when it was advantageous.


There is no way she is giving up the title....


----------



## CarryOn2020

I appreciate any diversion from the horrible world news , but _this_ is next level diversion 



ETA:  *that* is his ‘enjoying’ face


----------



## charlottawill

Hazy, this is how it's done here.  You're not even close.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> They've got other part-timers on UK soil who are a lot less troublesome. They do not need Diva and Dirtbag.



Frankly, I don’t think that anyone needs Ginge & Cringe.  Kind of amazing to think about all of the turmoil this duo has caused in just a couple of years.


----------



## Mendocino

lanasyogamama said:


> Kate and Will both looked AMAZING that day.


That pic of William! as Uncle Jesse would say on Full House, have mercy!


----------



## needlv

I have to ask, is Daily Beast source MM herself?  It’s written in a way that she has given a demand list to the RF for their return, using kids as bait.

the last bit about the balcony to me makes it seem like the source is MM herself…










						Prince Harry Plans Private Visit to See Queen, but May Miss Her Platinum Jubilee
					

A source says Prince Harry may make a private visit to introduce Lilibet to the Queen, although Harry and Meghan may be frozen out of the public Platinum Jubilee celebrations.




					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Jayne1

If they were to divorce (big if) the BRF should not let him come crawling back with his tail between his legs.

Once a traitor, always a traitor.


----------



## Mendocino

1LV said:


> Harry, Harry, Harry. I don’t even know where to begin.  Who the hell dressed you? Like the missus you’re trying too way hard.
> 
> P.S.  Can’t wait to see his boots.


----------



## Mendocino

sdkitty said:


> not sure what city he was in but I understand Austin is less conservative


Austin has been referred to as The People's Republic of Austin. Also, Keep Austin Weird has adorned many a t-shirt.


----------



## charlottawill

Mendocino said:


> Austin has been referred to as The People's Republic of Austin. Also, Keep Austin Weird has adorned many a t-shirt.


I'm told by a friend that it's changing due to the influx of Silicon Valley refugees and their deep pockets, and not necessarily for the better. Too many Teslas.


----------



## Mendocino

charlottawill said:


> I'm told by a friend that it's changing due to the influx of Silicon Valley refugees and their deep pockets, and not necessarily for the better. Too many Teslas.


Yes,  lots of Californians are moving to Texas.They would probably feel very much at home in Austin.


----------



## Mendocino

Mendocino said:


>




One of the lines of the song, "There'll be a load of compromisin', on the road to my horizon" really reminds me of H.


----------



## rose60610

Mendocino said:


> One of the lines of the song, "There'll be a load of compromisin', on the road to my horizon" really reminds me of H.



Except Harry's "compromisin' " ain't got no "horizon" as long as The Wife has control of his rod and his rodeo ways. And Harry's lights are gonna be shinin' on The Wife because he'll have been bludgeoned by the elbow gut blow to knock him out of the picture.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> not sure what city he was in but I understand Austin is less conservative


Yeah I’ve heard Austin is very hipster. I’ve only been to San Antonio.

It’s my understanding that most of the big Texas cities are pretty rich. Not to mention Texans are meant to be proverbial for being generous tippers and big spenders.
Im not sure any local businesses will be holding out to make lucrative deals with the two hobbit-footed tightwads.

I also can’t quite imagine H having an easy way about him with the normal Hank Hill Texans. He’s definitely lost his veneer of the common touch.

Add on- I’m glad he’s not raking up the air miles on pointless vanity trips while pledging practically nothing to environmental and humnitarian charities. 


Mendocino said:


> One of the lines of the song, "There'll be a load of compromisin', on the road to my horizon" really reminds me of H.


All together now…

"There'll be a load of compromisin', on the road to my horizon
But I’m going to be where the press violate my priiivvaaaccccyyy!!!
Like a rhinestone bad boy frowning out at the crowd while in my wife’s clawing tow,
Like a rhinestone bad boy, getting angry letters from the celebs I pretend to know
And no offers coming over the phone…."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes the are tiresome and sorry to repeat myself but What Are They Doing in regard to the Ukraine?  What have they donated?  Don't they have any money to spare?
> I Really don't understand how anyone can take them seriously as humanitarians.  Whoever at NAACP made that decision should hang their heads in shame.



Not to toot my own horn, but my tiny village - smallest community in the whole county - has already gathered, sorted, packed, labelled (in four languages) a sh*tton of donations from both private citizens and local companies and is on its way to deliver them (just saw a video of the crew crossing Poland). And because Twitter is full of "Racists, now that's it's Europeans you care", we showed up in 2015 as well. In fact, that village took in their first refugees that got basically adopted by everyone in the early 80s and the then mayor made it his personal cause.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Would that title be the Earl of Dumbarton?  The one she rejected because it had the word *dumb* in it?



Yes!

ETA: I always thought it was Dum-barton though, not Dumb-arton, but eh, Girlfriend isn't a native speaker I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I have to ask, is Daily Beast source MM herself?  It’s written in a way that she has given a demand list to the RF for their return, using kids as bait.
> 
> the last bit about the balcony to me makes it seem like the source is MM herself…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Plans Private Visit to See Queen, but May Miss Her Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> A source says Prince Harry may make a private visit to introduce Lilibet to the Queen, although Harry and Meghan may be frozen out of the public Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com





I hope the BRF laughed into her face or better yet, acted as if that list got lost.

Does she really not unterstand the Queen has a ton of great-grandchildren and #6, 7  and 8 aren't all that high up the ladder (as in, unless something horrible happens to six other people, they are completely nonimportant, merely supporting acts? Raptor of all people should know how replacable the supporting acts are)? Soon they'll be #12 or something.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hats & Caps - King Ranch Saddle Shop
> 
> 
> Shop our men's hats and caps for a wide selection of stylish caps for men.  We offer both mesh back and unstructured caps for everyone in mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.krsaddleshop.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RE: Stetsons - made in Garland, TX - about an hour’s drive from FW. Of course, most western shops have those. With a modicum of effort, he could have been appropriately outfitted. Such a shame,* such a missed opportunity to win some good will.*
> Hope he leaves soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> John B. Stetson Company - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org



Story of his life!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Would that title be the Earl of Dumbarton?  The one she rejected because it had the word *dumb* in it?



She didn't reject it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She didn't reject it.



Please explain...I have a varying recollection


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please explain...I have a varying recollection



He is the Earl, and therefore she is the Countess of Dumbarton 

He is the Duke, and she is therefore the Duchess of Sussex


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> He is the Earl, and therefore she is the Countess of Dumbarton
> 
> He is the Duke, and she is therefore the Duchess of Sussex



Oh, we were talking about Archie and his courtesy title...he could be styled as Earl of Dumbarton which of course was not good enough for The Countess. When they announced he'd be a private citizen I said that very minute at least one of them was pissed he wasn't equally titled to the Cambridge children, which was later kind of confirmed.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, we were talking about Archie and his courtesy title...he could be styled as Earl of Dumbarton which of course was not good enough for The Countess. When they announced he'd be a private citizen I said that very minute at least one of them was pissed he wasn't equally titled to the Cambridge children, which was later kind of confirmed.


I think the first son of an Earl is titled a Viscount. Any other sons are called The Honourable.... 
Daughters are titled Lady. 

However, not sure in this scenario as Earl is the secondary title for Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I think the first son of an Earl is titled a Viscount. Any other sons are called The Honourable....
> Daughters are titled Lady.
> 
> However, not sure in this scenario as Earl is the secondary title for Harry.



Archie is the eldest son of a duke, though. The difference is that Harry is *The* Earl of Dumbarton and Archie could be Earl of Dumbarton until he inherits the dukedom. The son of the current Duke of Northumberland is Earl Percy. The son of the current Duke of Norfolk is Earl of Arundel. The current Duke of Westminster used to be Earl Grosvenor. 

Should Archie have a son in Harry's lifetime, that son would be Lord (not Baron) Kilkeel after Harry's third peerage.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Archie is the eldest son of a duke, though. The difference is that Harry is *The* Earl of Dumbarton and Archie could be Earl of Dumbarton until he inherits the dukedom. The son of the current Duke of Northumberland is Earl Percy. The son of the current Duke of Norfolk is Earl of Arundel. The current Duke of Westminster used to be Earl Grosvenor.
> 
> Should Archie have a son in Harry's lifetime, that son would be Lord (not Baron) Kilkeel after Harry's third peerage.



Anyway, he'll be Price Archie soon enough (if/when Charles accedes to the Throne). Nut-jobs decided not to give him the Prince title at birth not QEII. 

Ridiculous, he'll be an American Prince without any knowledge or understanding of his heritage, history or culture - oh wait, perhaps I'm thinking about Prince Haz-bin Loud-din


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Anyway, he'll be Price Archie soon enough (if/when Charles accedes to the Throne). Nut-jobs decided not to give him the Prince title at birth not QEII.
> 
> Ridiculous, he'll be an American Prince without any knowledge or understanding of his heritage, history or culture - oh wait, perhaps I'm thinking about Prince Haz-bin Loud-din


Heritage, history, culture?
Methane only cares about $$$$$, tiaras and castles. Maybe she will start a campaign for Hazard's descendants to all have a generous allowance because they were born into a life of risk.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m surprised there wasn’t any word salad for international women’s day.  Keeping quiet is not her forte.  SS must be working overtime.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m from Texas and he looks ridiculous.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I also can’t quite imagine H having an easy way about him with the normal Hank Hill Texans. He’s definitely lost his veneer of the common touch.



Hank has spoken on Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Anyway, he'll be Price Archie soon enough (if/when Charles accedes to the Throne). Nut-jobs decided not to give him the Prince title at birth not QEII.



Wasn't it her grandfather, though? (The Queen's, not nutjob's) The Cambridge children have princely titles because their dad is in DIRECT line to the throne  Nutjob and Handbag (I still think it was more Nutjob because Handbag...he grew up in The Firm and was supposedly familiar with company policies) didn't think a courtesy Earl was good enough, so if it wasn't Prince Archie it was private citizen Archie and they could spin it into their foke (fake-woke) narrative.



> Ridiculous, he'll be an American Prince without any knowledge or understanding of his heritage, history or culture - oh wait, perhaps I'm thinking about *Prince Haz-bin Loud-din*





This is such a good point, though. Years ago I picked up some light holiday reading and  it was the story of an American journalist who in her late 30s met a distant cousin at a wedding who happend to be a minor Scottish peer. They fell in love, got married, had a surprise baby because OMG she was an ancient 39 and didn't think she could get pregnant anymore (...).

Anyway, the Scot turned out to be difficult to live with (though I'll say her personality seems pretty unlikeable as well) and completely broke (but still landed with a family seat). A divorce took place, and what did the American do? Took the heir to the estate and beelined it back to the US. I remember being so completely taken aback.

And to make it worse, the jerk then gave several interviews (to promote the book I guess) about how the Scot was awful to live with and a complete messie, and THE WORST let the kid participate in those interviews and badmouth his father. At that point I completely regretted having lined her pockets with my purchase.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Annawakes said:


> I’m surprised there wasn’t any word salad for international women’s day.  Keeping quiet is not her forte.  SS must be working overtime.


I was very surprised


----------



## lanasyogamama

River said a couple things in this video that cracked me up.

1. Called them “the Duke and Duchess of Not Much”
2. Said that the lack of proper undergarments made it look like there were two hamsters fighting under the dress!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Also I realized the dress reminds me of this swimsuit, which was very popular two years ago.









						The Long Torso Sidestroke -  Seaweed & Seaglass & White Sand
					

Slip into The Long Torso Sidestroke and start ticking off items on your bucket list. This swimsuit is built to move with you, but stays perfectly in place where you need it most, thanks to the unique design and construction that offers stability and compression. The one-shoulder strap makes this...




					www.summersalt.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> I’m surprised there wasn’t any word salad for international women’s day.  Keeping quiet is not her forte.  SS must be working overtime.


No splash page on the Aarghwell site to promote Her Heinous's long history of feminist empowerment activism? 
Maybe the SS strategy is to let others sing her praises. Wasn't there a couple of magazines bleating about the God(awful)dess?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to toot my own horn, but my tiny village - smallest community in the whole county - has already gathered, sorted, packed, labelled (in four languages) a sh*tton of donations from both private citizens and local companies and is on its way to deliver them (just saw a video of the crew crossing Poland). And because Twitter is full of "Racists, now that's it's Europeans you care", we showed up in 2015 as well. In fact, that village took in their first refugees that got basically adopted by everyone in the early 80s and the then mayor made it his personal cause.


that's wonderful
I hadn't heard about that stuff on Twitter.  Probably good that I don't go there.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> No splash page on the *Aarghwell* site to promote Her Heinous's long history of feminist empowerment activism?
> Maybe the SS strategy is to let others sing her praises. Wasn't there a couple of magazines bleating about the God(awful)dess?


Tee hee!


----------



## Chanbal

I would like to know how much they pay for the alleged propaganda/misinformation about them.

They are mentioned twice in The Morning Show - Season 2 (Apple TV), I can't recall if episode 1 or 2.

The first mention is about Arch*e and the celebration of the birth of a royal baby, and the second informs that Meghan and Harry renounced the throne.  One can't escape their propaganda…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would like to know how much they pay for the alleged propaganda/misinformation about them.
> 
> They are mentioned twice in The Morning Show - Season 2 (Apple TV), I can't recall if episode 1 or 2.
> 
> The first mention is about Arch*e and the celebration of the birth of a royal baby, and the second informs that Meghan and Harry renounced the throne.  One can't escape their propaganda…


on the other hand, Reese Witherspoon turned down a wedding invite from them


----------



## Chanbal

Today's news about the war is excruciating to say the least. I hope @Aminamina and her family are safe.

Here is some humor to help brighten these very days!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The first mention is about Arch*e and the celebration of the birth of a royal baby, and the second informs that *Meghan and Harry renounced the throne.*  One can't escape their propaganda…



  

This is comedy gold.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This had me in tears this morning


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> Hazy, this is how it's done here.  You're not even close.
> 
> View attachment 5347401



This one for me please save a horse ride a cowboy springs to mind


----------



## rose60610

Maybe Nutjob was silent on International Women's Day because, well, privacy. I know the first thing I'd do if I sought privacy so much is leave my country and go to a rodeo to hang out with cowboys, making sure the whole world saw my archeologist outfit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Today's news about the war is excruciating to say the least. I hope @Aminamina and her family are safe.



I feel like I've spent all my adult life following conflicts from the day I set foot into university. I changed career paths slightly to do food journalism (mostly happy topics), but I still did and to this day do a lot of conflict and war related "activism" for the lack of a better word and at this point I just feel exhausted. But then just zoning out and posting about recipes feels completely wrong. But I really don't think I want to look at another picture of today's incident.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Have H&M done anything for Ukraine?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Have H&M done anything for Ukraine?



not that I've heard - unless announcing their solidary counts


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Have H&M done anything for Ukraine?



Just word salad


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> Just word salad


The fact that they have not made a six or seven figure donation says to me they really are cash strapped. You know she'd love the good press Bethenny Frankel and other celebs are getting. Although to be fair, I haven't heard anything from the Clooneys, who most certainly are not short on cash. But they and many others just may be making contributions quietly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> This had me in tears this morning



What a lovely voice amid the horror. Thank you for sharing.


----------



## A1aGypsy

sdkitty said:


> on the other hand, Reese Witherspoon turned down a wedding invite from them



I think this has been dispelled. She was pretty excited about the wedding and live tweeting during it.


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> I think this has been dispelled. She was pretty excited about the wedding and live tweeting during it.
> 
> View attachment 5348100



I could be wrong, but my impression from this article is that she wasn't actually there, she was watching it on TV like other celebs. I don't think she'd have been allowed to live tweet from the ceremony. 


> https://variety.com/2018/biz/news/celebrity-reactions-royal-wedding-1202816802/


----------



## kipp

charlottawill said:


> The fact that they have not made a six or seven figure donation says to me they really are cash strapped. You know she'd love the good press Bethenny Frankel and other celebs are getting. Although to be fair, I haven't heard anything from the Clooneys, who most certainly are not short on cash. But they and many others just may be making contributions quietly.


Apparently, Leo DiCaprio is donating a 1 million$ to Ukraine relief.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Have H&M done anything for Ukraine?




They are dragging William because he said something along the lines of how awful it is to see war in Europe and that it's usual in, uh, other parts of the world. ETA: it seems all he said was that it's very alien to see war in Europe and the stuff everyone is enraged about is due to the creativity of others, but I am not 100 % sure.

I'm sure he did not mean it like it came across, but really, the racist sh*t I've heard Western journalist say on live TV is amazing in a horrible way.

I said to my friend I wanted two motto t-shirts, but for very different reasons:

"Russian war ship, go f*ck yourself" and "Relatively civilized, relatively European".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> Apparently, Leo DiCaprio is donating a 1 million$ to Ukraine relief.



Read that too...his maternal grandmother was born in Odessa I think?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

To get back to topic, at this point I am watching them like a scientific experiment that provides you with findings you never expected. I can honestly say they have given me many "Never have I ever seen people - at least not adults - act this way" moments. And it's usually embarrassing or extremely petty moments.


----------



## purseinsanity

kipp said:


> Apparently, Leo DiCaprio is donating a 1 million$ to Ukraine relief.


I'd read $10 million.  Wonder which, if any, it is?


----------



## A1aGypsy

charlottawill said:


> I could be wrong, but my impression from this article is that she wasn't actually there, she was watching it on TV like other celebs. I don't think she'd have been allowed to live tweet from the ceremony.



Sorry, I didn’t mean she went to the wedding and was tweeting from it, I meant, I believe it has been dispelled that she was invited and turned them down.

During the wedding she was at home, live tweeting and very excited about it and positive about Markle in general. If she had been invited she would have been there.

Also, for what this is worth:








						Like Us, Reese Witherspoon Is A Massive Meghan Markle Fan
					

Reese Witherspoon rode around London looking for a Meghan Markle souvenir, and she was successful in finding the perfect present. Read more on Grazia Daily.



					graziadaily.co.uk
				




I wish I could find where I originally read that this was not true. I think the whole thing came from Reddit.


----------



## Aminamina

Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before. 
Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


>




here is the original post for Leo - let’s hope it’s real


----------



## Chanbal

Beauty and heartthrob…


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> Apparently, Leo DiCaprio is donating a 1 million$ to Ukraine relief.


Actually, I believe it's $10 mil.


----------



## charlottawill

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


So glad you made it out safely! I cannot imagine what you and your fellow Ukrainians are going through.


----------



## Chanbal

@Aminamina It's great to hear that you and your son are OK. Munich is a beautiful city and Germany seems to be doing a great job welcoming people affected by this horrible war, the links below may offer some valuable information. Stay safe!









						@ksvarnon | Linktree
					

Resources: BIPOC & Slavic Ukrainian Refugees Resources: Disabled Ukrainians




					linktr.ee
				






			https://www.thelocal.de/20220308/reader-question-how-is-germany-supporting-refugees-from-ukraine/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Part 2


----------



## poopsie

Chanbal said:


> Beauty and heartthrob…




OMG! SCUT FARKUS !!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.



I'll PM in a minute.


----------



## sdkitty

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


bless you
our hearts are with you and your people


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> not that I've heard - unless announcing their solidary counts


oops...solidarity


----------



## bellecate

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.



You are certainly in our hearts at this time. So glad you are safe.


----------



## jennlt

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.



So happy to hear that you and your son are safe


----------



## kipp

purseinsanity said:


> I'd read $10 million.  Wonder which, if any, it is?


It's $10 million.  I stand corrected.  Thank you.


----------



## charlottawill

Hmmm....this looks familiar....maybe she could add to her collection of bird poop dresses. It would show off those great legs. 



> https://www.sanctuaryclothing.com/products/the-sweatshirt-dress-markings-tie-dye?variant=39643364786227?¤cy=USD&utm_medium=product_sync&utm_source=google&utm_content=sag_organic&utm_campaign=sag_organic&gclid=CjwKCAiAvaGRBhBlEiwAiY-yMMoTovywadJRuTv4t6ky9LtyRJGN7YvC6AZE79Li3SmYJRiimpsadRoCZQYQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


Blessings for you and your homeland.  Safe travels.  And peace.


----------



## 1LV

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


Words fail me, but my heart and my prayers are with you.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


Praying for your safety and for your whole country.  I hope this ends soon.


----------



## Lodpah

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


Godspeed to you and your family and country. Praying for a peaceful resolution.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


So happy to hear you are safe!  You are constantly in our thoughts and prayers.


----------



## Chanbal

American TV hosts seem to have joined the Aussies and Brits… @bag-mania Is it possible?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh!     

“_Harry and Meghan pay tens of thousands of dollars to hire a special FBI-type agent to do background checks on potential hires. They’re not just digging for criminal records or verifying referrals. They want to know everything. Details about your family – even grandparents – personal relationships, what kind of town you come from, your spending habits…_”









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Allegedly Dubbed As Horrible Bosses From Hell Because Of Their Extreme Rules
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are allegedly rude and weird bosses to their household staff.




					www.entertaintimes.com


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> The fact that they have not made a six or seven figure donation says to me they really are cash strapped. You know she'd love the good press Bethenny Frankel and other celebs are getting. Although to be fair, I haven't heard anything from the Clooneys, who most certainly are not short on cash. But they and many others just may be making contributions quietly.


Bethenny Frankel raised a lot of money through donations. Surely the Markles could do the same, isn't that what Archi-whatever is for?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!
> 
> “_Harry and Meghan pay tens of thousands of dollars to hire a special FBI-type agent to do background checks on potential hires. They’re not just digging for criminal records or verifying referrals. They want to know everything. Details about your family – even grandparents – personal relationships, what kind of town you come from, your spending habits…_”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Allegedly Dubbed As Horrible Bosses From Hell Because Of Their Extreme Rules
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are allegedly rude and weird bosses to their household staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


I think they're the horrible ______ from He*l.  Fill in the blank with whatever you desire!


----------



## Hermes Zen

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


So happy to read your post and to hear you and your son are safe now. I cannot imagine what you and your country have been going through. Sending you and all affected prayers, hugs and wish for an end to this nightmare very soon.


----------



## csshopper

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


Aminamina- celebrating your safety and your sons, the atrocities being directed at the Ukrainian people are beyond comprehension. Thank goodness you were able to get to safety. When our family made a donation to Doctors Without Borders last week, we never envisioned the breadth of the horrors they might be treating. No civilized person deliberately bombs a Maternity and Children's Hospital, P's depravity defies description. Praying for you and your son as you find your way in Germany.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> No civilized person deliberately bombs a Maternity and Children's Hospital, P's depravity defies description.



He's been bombing hospital and schools in Syria for years, it's just the people in power chose to ignore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I kind of lost the link and can't be bothered to go find it, but apparently the "cute" story about Fergie having Raptor to teach how to curtsy were just as fake as the narrative she met The Queen spontaneously. She knew it was coming and apparently spent the afternoon practising on her own as told in, you guessed it, Finding Freebies. Why is it this woman can never just simply tell the truth.


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## duna

I'm in shock that neither the UK (I'm English although I don't live there now) nor the US are taking any Ukrainian refugees....at least that's what the media have said here in Italy.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> The fact that they have not made a six or seven figure donation says to me they really are cash strapped. You know she'd love the good press Bethenny Frankel and other celebs are getting. Although to be fair, I haven't heard anything from the Clooneys, who most certainly are not short on cash. *But they and many others just may be making contributions quietly.*


Because most people wouldn't want or need to brag. But we know the Harkles are floating around on hot air, so they desperately seek attention.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I kind of lost the link and can't be bothered to go find it, but apparently the "cute" story about Fergie having Raptor to teach how to curtsy were just as fake as the narrative she met The Queen spontaneously. She knew it was coming and apparently spent the afternoon practising on her own as told in, you guessed it, Finding Freebies. *Why is it this woman can never just simply tell the truth.*


I'm betting she leads a very boring life when she isn't lying. 

My office narc embellished his life greatly and, as his long-suffering neighbour, I held back the guffaws as he carefully tailored and amended the same story for different audiences. Listening to him clumsily craft cover-ups when someone asked a pointed question was  Take for instance, when he spoke to a more elite colleague, he claimed to enjoy a glass of wine every evening. When he spoke to "lower echelon" colleagues, it morphed into a mug of beer which he obviously thought would make him connect better to the commoners. In the same way, Methane "adjusts" her life to suit her audience: practically an orphan, poor struggling college student, poor struggling waitress/calligrapher, beat-up car, etc etc.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I'm betting she leads a very boring life when she isn't lying.
> 
> My office narc embellished his life greatly and, as his long-suffering neighbour, I held back the guffaws as he carefully tailored and amended the same story for different audiences. Listening to him clumsily craft cover-ups when someone asked a pointed question was  Take for instance, when he spoke to a more elite colleague, he claimed to enjoy a glass of wine every evening. When he spoke to "lower echelon" colleagues, it morphed into a mug of beer which he obviously thought would make him connect better to the commoners. In the same way, Methane "adjusts" her life to suit her audience: practically an orphan, poor struggling college student, poor struggling waitress/calligrapher, beat-up car, etc etc.



All narcissists believe they are smarter than everyone around them. It never occurs to them to think others have them figured out. When called out on their falsehoods, they never acknowledge they were sloppy with their lies because they believe they can do no wrong. Blame is always going to be cast at someone else.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Because most people wouldn't want or need to brag. But we know the Harkles are floating around on hot air, so they desperately seek attention.


I bet they’ll get someone else to leak a rumor that they made a huge anonymous donation.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

duna said:


> I'm in shock that neither the UK (I'm English although I don't live there now) nor the US are taking any Ukrainian refugees....at least that's what the media have said here in Italy.


I have not read or heard this but if accurate, I join your shock.  Add ashamed.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Bethenny Frankel raised a lot of money through donations. Surely the Markles could do the same, isn't that what Archi-whatever is for?


that's what I keep asking!  WTF are they?  not royal, not actors, apparently not philanthropists either, nor activists


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

duna said:


> I'm in shock that neither the UK (I'm English although I don't live there now) nor the US are taking any Ukrainian refugees....at least that's what the media have said here in Italy.





Lilliesdaughter said:


> I have not read or heard this but if accurate, I join your shock.  Add ashamed.



I can't speak for the entire US or UK but I did see this article about the state of Ohio accepting Ukrainian refugees in the US. 

And I'm sure H&M are freshening the linens and towels in their spare 10 bedrooms and all 19 bathrooms in anticipation of fulfilling their humanitarian roles by welcoming displaced Ukrainians into their spacious home.









						Gov. Mike DeWine preparing Ohio for influx of Ukrainian refugees
					

"Ohio will be very welcoming to these refugees."




					www.wkyc.com


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> I can't speak for the entire US or UK but I did see this article about the state of Ohio accepting Ukrainian refugees in the US.
> 
> And I'm sure H&M are freshening the linens and towels in their spare 10 bedrooms and all 19 bathrooms in anticipation of fulfilling their humanitarian roles by welcoming displaced Ukrainians into their spacious home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gov. Mike DeWine preparing Ohio for influx of Ukrainian refugees
> 
> 
> "Ohio will be very welcoming to these refugees."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wkyc.com


I thought it was easier for them to travel to European countries - and they want to go back home which I hope they can do before too long.


----------



## youngster

duna said:


> I'm in shock that neither the UK (I'm English although I don't live there now) nor the US are taking any Ukrainian refugees....at least that's what the media have said here in Italy.



I think we will, I'd be shocked if we did not eventually take many. There are already about a million people in the U.S. with Ukrainian heritage and I'm sure many of them are working to bring other family members over.  I also thought Ukrainians themselves might wish to stay in Europe with the hope they could eventually go back to their homes and rebuild their country or support their government in exile (if it comes to that).  But, I think they would be very welcome here.


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> I thought it was easier for them to travel to European countries - and they want to go back home which I hope they can do before too long.



It's definitely quicker for them to find temporary housing in Europe but as those countries reach capacity it will be necessary for the rest of the world to welcome refugees. If they don't have family or friends in Europe, some Ukrainians may choose to start over in other parts of the world. After seeing the incomprehensible damage caused to Ukraine, it will be decades before it is rebuilt and rebuilding can only start after the hostilities cease.

 My heart hurts for these people who just want peace and to be safe n their own homes.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think we will, I'd be shocked if we did not eventually take many. There are already about a million people in the U.S. with Ukrainian heritage and I'm sure many of them are working to bring other family members over.  I also thought Ukrainians themselves might wish to stay in Europe with the hope they could eventually go back to their homes and rebuild their country or support their government in exile (if it comes to that).  But, I think they would be very welcome here.


I was surprised when I heard there were quite a few Americans living in Ukraine.  They were advised to get out and hopefully they did.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> The fact that they have not made a six or seven figure donation says to me they really are cash strapped. You know she'd love the good press Bethenny Frankel and other celebs are getting. Although to be fair, I haven't heard anything from the Clooneys, who most certainly are not short on cash. But they and many others just may be making contributions quietly.


Just wanted to add one more point: if the Clooneys don't contribute a cent, we shouldn't judge them either. They didn't get on a soapbox and make word salad, inviting the world to follow their lead. People may have different priorities, and the world now is too awash with tragedies and causes. Some may prefer to contribute to medical research or scholarships. The Harkles prefer to link their names to whatever is in the news, spout empty platitudes and bask in reflected glory.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Just wanted to add one more point: if the Clooneys don't contribute a cent, we shouldn't judge them either. They didn't get on a soapbox and make word salad, inviting the world to follow their lead. People may have different priorities, and the world now is too awash with tragedies and causes. Some may prefer to contribute to medical research or scholarships. The Harkles prefer to link their names to whatever is in the news, spout empty platitudes and bask in reflected glory.


right
the Clooneys actually work.  she is an attorney and he is an actor/producer.  they don't put themselves out there as activists


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> I would love to go to that course especially if the tall firefighters were always involved.


They were older than most of the young ladies including me, who were attending the course and they were polite and well behaved married men.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I bet they’ll get someone else to leak a rumor that they made a huge anonymous donation.



Dear media, you read it here first!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I thought it was easier for them to travel to European countries - and they want to go back home which I hope they can do before too long.


Canada is taking, as we do.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Bethenny Frankel raised a lot of money through donations. Surely the Markles could do the same, isn't that what Archi-whatever is for?


If they knew what they were doing. Bethenny has a proven track record in business. They don't.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I kind of lost the link and can't be bothered to go find it, but apparently the "cute" story about Fergie having Raptor to teach how to curtsy were just as fake as the narrative she met The Queen spontaneously. She knew it was coming and apparently spent the afternoon practising on her own as told in, you guessed it, Finding Freebies. Why is it this woman can never just simply tell the truth.


After you spin lies for so long you lose track of the truth.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I think we will, I'd be shocked if we did not eventually take many. There are already about a million people in the U.S. with Ukrainian heritage and I'm sure many of them are working to bring other family members over.  I also thought Ukrainians themselves might wish to stay in Europe with the hope they could eventually go back to their homes and rebuild their country or support their government in exile (if it comes to that).  But, I think they would be very welcome here.


I haven't heard any talk yet on the local news here about taking in Ukrainian refugees, but there's a big Ukrainian influence in Northeast Minneapolis. There is a church that is renowned for its pierogi fundraisers, and a sausage store founded by Ukrainian immigrants that draws customers from miles around, especially tailgaters stocking up on football Sundays. The area was settled over a hundred years ago by Polish and Ukrainian immigrants. Minnesotans really stepped up for Afghan refugees last summer, I'm sure they will for Ukrainians too.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think they're the horrible ______ from He*l.  Fill in the blank with whatever you desire!


If what's written in the article about Hazz and TW is true, it's truly shocking. Who are these people?


----------



## Chanbal

On Hazz's push to be an "_American Prince"…_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And again he looks so unhealthily ruddy. He can't be overheated or sunburned all the time?


----------



## carmen56

duna said:


> I'm in shock that neither the UK (I'm English although I don't live there now) nor the US are taking any Ukrainian refugees....at least that's what the media have said here in Italy.



I’m also English, and ashamed of the government’s response to the Ukrainian refugee situation.  I believe the requirements are being slightly relaxed so that more refugees can come to the U.K.  Up until last night around 1000 visas had been issued to Ukrainians with family here - those applying for a visa have been put through hoops and pushed from pillar to post in order to get that visa.  Their treatment has been shameful and the rules only relaxed now because of public outcry and the newspapers.  For the life of me I can’t understand why these genuine refugees are being treated in this way when those that come across illegally from France, without papers, just stroll up a beach in Kent and disappear into the ether.  But that’s another story.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> On Hazz's push to be an "_American Prince"…_



He really effed up with that hat.  It’s his Mike Dukakis moment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> I'm in shock that neither the UK (I'm English although I don't live there now) nor the US are taking any Ukrainian refugees....at least that's what the media have said here in Italy.



My hope is that once this critical time settles down, countries will step up. Right now, it seems too chaotic to make long term decisions. Two weeks ago these precious people were living their _normal_ lives.  They were not expecting to be uprooted, so let’s just get everyone to safety. Then, we can figure out best options.  By all accounts, this will be one of the largest migrations(?) of humans ever. It’s all so heartbreaking. Just my opinion.

RE: Hazz - he looks awful, and it isn’t just his unkempt clothes.

ETA:  Something about these public announcements of donations seem in bad taste. What we’ve seen in the past is that these donations rarely happen, so I’m taking a wait-and-see view.


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> I haven't heard any talk yet on the local news here about taking in Ukrainian refugees, but there's a big Ukrainian influence in Northeast Minneapolis. There is a church that is renowned for its pierogi fundraisers, and a sausage store founded by Ukrainian immigrants that draws customers from miles around, especially tailgaters stocking up on football Sundays. The area was settled over a hundred years ago by Polish and Ukrainian immigrants. Minnesotans really stepped up for Afghan refugees last summer, I'm sure they will for Ukrainians too.


That sausage store you mention is a favorite of mine and my husband. Every thing we have ever had has been delicious and the decore looks like something out of eastern europe, if we are on the same page as per description. We come by bus from uptown and he brings home meat and I bring home a pastry or two. The place is always jumping. The church is beautiful.


----------



## rose60610

M&H are two of the most self-absorbed people ever. For them to utter a single word about any tragic situation is an obvious plea and ploy for attention. They won't donate a single penny to anything if they don't get publicity for it. Cakes? Wreaths? Hats? All in the media.  Delivering food to homes during Covid? Meghan had to pull down her mask so everyone knew it was HER. 

Come ON Nobel Prize Nominating Committee, what are you waiting for???? M&H must be nominated for a NOBEL !!!!  They cheapen all other awards they've been given, they'd might as well drag the Nobel Prize into the gutter, too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Come ON Nobel Prize Nominating Committee, what are you waiting for???? M&H must be nominated for a NOBEL !!!!  They cheapen all other awards they've been given, they'd might as well drag the Nobel Prize into the gutter, too.



I beg you, do NOT put that out into the universe. Maybe it doesn't understand satire.


----------



## pukasonqo

On the other hand one of my classmates is off to Ukraine w Medecins sans Frontiers 
Very proud of her, she has worked as an RN in a remote Aboriginal community, been to Africa w MSF (they had to be evacuated) and now Ukraine 
Actions no empty words


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wishing her a safe return! Not all heros wear capes.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dear media, you read it here first!


Don't you mean BLG you read it here first?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Don't you mean BLG you read it here first?



Yeah at this point he owes us all a dinner invitation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> On the other hand one of my classmates is off to Ukraine w Medecins sans Frontiers
> Very proud of her, she has worked as an RN in a remote Aboriginal community, been to Africa w MSF (they had to be evacuated) and now Ukraine
> *Actions no empty words*



  

As usual, it takes everyday men and women to clean up the billionaires’ mess - grrrrr.  
 Kudos, blessings and safety to her and her group.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> After you spin lies for so long you lose track of the truth.


Tell them long enough, you start thinking that was the truth!

My husband exaggerated a story about me to tease me and has kept it up for so long (quarter century!) now that he swears it really happened.    I always say, to be an excellent liar, you have to have an iron clad memory.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> If what's written in the article about Hazz and TW is true, it's truly shocking. Who are these people?


Ginger beard and Meg Poo!


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> After you spin lies for so long you lose track of the truth.



Yup
They lie when the truth would sound better


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> American TV hosts seem to have joined the Aussies and Brits… @bag-mania Is it possible?



This looks worse every time I see him with his Indiana Jones hat. Yaahoo.


----------



## charlottawill

oldbag said:


> That sausage store you mention is a favorite of mine and my husband. Every thing we have ever had has been delicious and the decore looks like something out of eastern europe, if we are on the same page as per description. We come by bus from uptown and he brings home meat and I bring home a pastry or two. The place is always jumping. The church is beautiful.


It is walking distance for us. It can be dangerous to your waistline


----------



## charlottawill

poopsie said:


> Yup
> They lie when the truth would sound better


Exactly. I'll be interested to hear what Samantha Markle has to say, since she has already refuted with photos some of little sister's claims that she wasn't close to her half-siblings while growing up. It would have drawn less attention if MM had just acknowledged her real relationship with her father and her half-siblings at the start. By denying them at every turn she just invited greater scrutiny.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> American TV hosts seem to have joined the Aussies and Brits… @bag-mania Is it possible?



I actually watched this yesterday and came here to post it, but then those damn real life responsibilities distracted me


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And again he looks so unhealthily ruddy. He can't be overheated or sunburned all the time?


I think a lot of it is just the curse of his genes. Look how ruddy his father looks most of the time. William does to a lesser extent at times, but he's not a ginger - they redden up even faster.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I think a lot of it is just the curse of his genes. Look how ruddy his father looks most of the time. William does to a lesser extent at times, but he's not a ginger - they redden up even faster.



But I never noticed it when he was still a working royal, AKA not completely under the influence of his voodoo doll holder. Unless in the pictures where he was very obviously drunk.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But I never noticed it when he was still a working royal, AKA not under the iron fist of his voodoo doll holder. Unless in the pictures where he was very obviously drunk.


He always seems to have a rosy glow to me, drunk or not. He's like a delicate English rose.


----------



## bag-mania

Geez, _People_ thinks the most important part of an interview with Camilla is that there was a photo of Charles walking Meghan down the aisle on a table. 










						Prince Charles and Camilla Keep a Sweet Portrait from Prince Harry and Meghan's Wedding in Living Room
					

Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall have a sweet portrait from Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's wedding in their living room at Clarence House.




					people.com


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> He really effed up with that hat.  It’s his Mike Dukakis moment.


It looks like his hat from his "gap year" experience working on the ranch in Australia. Raptor has expended all the family budget for clothing and he had to go dig it out of the closet so he could pretend to be a "cowboy". Should have saved the effort, he looks like such a hapless dolt, no personality, no vitality, some dummy propped up against the wall.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> It looks like his hat from his "gap year" experience working on the ranch in Australia. Raptor has expended all the family budget for clothing and he had to go dig it out of the closet so he could pretend to be a "cowboy". Should have saved the effort, he looks like such a hapless dolt, no personality, no vitality, some dummy propped up against the wall.



His eyes tell the story - nobody is home, the lights are off.

RE: William’s war of words - this shows the power of H&M’s ‘all about *meeee* squad’. When the day should have been about the atrocities in Ukraine, the twitter-verse has been dominated by words William never said. Such a tangled web they have woven.


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> It is walking distance for us. It can be dangerous to your waistline


Sometimes I suffer from kolache withdrawal.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!
> 
> “_Harry and Meghan pay tens of thousands of dollars to hire a special FBI-type agent to do background checks on potential hires. They’re not just digging for criminal records or verifying referrals. They want to know everything. Details about your family – even grandparents – personal relationships, what kind of town you come from, your spending habits…_”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Allegedly Dubbed As Horrible Bosses From Hell Because Of Their Extreme Rules
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are allegedly rude and weird bosses to their household staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


Could this be a planted story to emphasize how seriously the Harkles take their security, how they are under constant threat from undercover scullery maids, thereby boosting their reason for needing enhanced security wherever their royal butts go?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> His eyes tell the story - nobody is home, the lights are off.
> 
> RE: William’s war of words - this shows the power of H&M’s ‘all about *meeee* squad’. When the day should have been about the atrocities in Ukraine, the twitter-verse has been dominated by words William never said. Such a tangled web they have woven.


V I L E people attract V I L E supporters.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## pukasonqo

csshopper said:


> It looks like his hat from his "gap year" experience working on the ranch in Australia. Raptor has expended all the family budget for clothing and he had to go dig it out of the closet so he could pretend to be a "cowboy". Should have saved the effort, he looks like such a hapless dolt, no personality, no vitality, some dummy propped up against the wall.



He should know that we don’t have cowboys in Oz but “jackaroos” (or jillaroos if you are a girl) who don’t wear Stetsons 
Maybe he was bringing the Commonwealth to the fore!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Geez, _People_ thinks the most important part of an interview with Camilla is that there was a photo of Charles walking Meghan down the aisle on a table.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Camilla Keep a Sweet Portrait from Prince Harry and Meghan's Wedding in Living Room
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall have a sweet portrait from Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's wedding in their living room at Clarence House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Off topic, but not really since this is Purseforum, can anyone here identify the bag Emerald Fennell is carrying in the picture with Camilla in that article? I love it, and her whole ensemble.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Off topic, but not really since this is Purseforum, can anyone here identify the bag Emerald Fennell is carrying in the picture with Camilla in that article? I love it, and her whole ensemble.



_She teamed the oversized quilt with a quirky handbag by Italian fashion house *Maison Schiaparelli*, statement gold earrings and a chunky matching necklace. 








						Duchess of Cornwall meets Emerald Fennell who played her in The Crown
					

Camilla, 74, met Emerald Fennell, who played her in the fourth season of The Crown as she hosted a reception to mark International Women's Day at Clarence House.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				










						Anatomy jewelry bag - E-SHOP - Ready-to-Wear | Maison Schiaparelli
					

Bag in black calfskin with double-gusset construction featuring a central zip pocket and anatomical gilded brass adornments. Link chain....




					www.schiaparelli.com
				



_


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _She teamed the oversized quilt with a quirky handbag by Italian fashion house *Maison Schiaparelli*, statement gold earrings and a chunky matching necklace.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Cornwall meets Emerald Fennell who played her in The Crown
> 
> 
> Camilla, 74, met Emerald Fennell, who played her in the fourth season of The Crown as she hosted a reception to mark International Women's Day at Clarence House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anatomy jewelry bag - E-SHOP - Ready-to-Wear | Maison Schiaparelli
> 
> 
> Bag in black calfskin with double-gusset construction featuring a central zip pocket and anatomical gilded brass adornments. Link chain....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.schiaparelli.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I seem to recall the former FLOTUS wearing something with sleeves like that, but the pics in the DM link make it look too big for Emerald. But that is a very cool bag. Thanks!


----------



## gracekelly

pukasonqo said:


> He should know that we don’t have cowboys in Oz but “jackaroos” (or jillaroos if you are a girl) who don’t wear Stetsons
> Maybe he was bringing the Commonwealth to the fore!


What's a drover?


----------



## 1LV

Harry looked absolutely nothing like a cowboy. Fish outta water, and it showed. I can only imagine the snickers and comments made by real cowboys as he walked by.  Go home, Cali Harry.


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> What's a drover?











						Drover (Australian) - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				












						Jackaroo (trainee) - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				




On my defense, I am not born and bred in Oz


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wishing her a safe return! Not all heros wear capes.


Thank you!


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "...they are under constant threat from undercover scullery maids"


----------



## xincinsin

An artist I know is donating some of her proceeds to World Central Kitchen for the Ukraine relief effort. She isn't a bigtime entrepreneur but she is doing what she can. H&M are/were already in bed with WCK and I don't see them running towards the struggle. I hope that Jose guy is regretting the flowery prose he wrote for TIME.









						Karla Gudeon Art & Design | Original Art & Gifts for the Home
					

KGA&D is a women-owned small business with handmade original art and inclusive gifts for all occasions made in the USA. Tree of Life, Hamsa, & Strong Women art, watercolor engravings, fine art custom paintings, modern judaica, ketubah, coasters, stationery & gift cards.




					karlagudeon.com


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> An artist I know is donating some of her proceeds to World Central Kitchen for the Ukraine relief effort. She isn't a bigtime entrepreneur but she is doing what she can. H&M are/were already in bed with WCK and I don't see them running towards the struggle. I hope that Jose guy is regretting the flowery prose he wrote for TIME.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karla Gudeon Art & Design | Original Art & Gifts for the Home
> 
> 
> KGA&D is a women-owned small business with handmade original art and inclusive gifts for all occasions made in the USA. Tree of Life, Hamsa, & Strong Women art, watercolor engravings, fine art custom paintings, modern judaica, ketubah, coasters, stationery & gift cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karlagudeon.com


Thank you for the link.  I’ve earmarked one already, and passed it on.


----------



## Luvbolide

Annawakes said:


> I’m from Texas and he looks ridiculous.



lived in California my entire life and even I thought he looked like he had wandered in from Australia and couldn’t figure out what was going on.  And yes, he looked ridiculous.  I still cannot figure out what in the hell he thought he was doing.  Maybe he is trapped in that little boy phase where they want to be cowboys.


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> Could this be a planted story to emphasize how seriously the Harkles take their security, how they are under constant threat from undercover scullery maids, thereby boosting their reason for needing enhanced security wherever their royal butts go?



I don’t think it is planted - been mentioned several times and places that they have retained Gavin deBecker’s group for security, which I expect includes vetting potential employees.  It would be interesting to know if they recommended going into this level of detail (aka intrusion) or if the Delusions-of-Grandeur Harkles did.  The group is top tier in their field and apparently hella expensive.


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> I don’t think it is planted - been mentioned several times and places that they have retained Gavin deBecker’s group for security, which I expect includes vetting potential employees.  It would be interesting to know if they recommended going into this level of detail (aka intrusion) or if the Delusions-of-Grandeur Harkles did.  The group is top tier in their field and apparently hella expensive.


"Planted" in the sense that the Harkles want to stuff it down our throats how in danger they are and how they investigate every employee. Their hire of top-notch security is known, but usually people who hire private security don't publicize what their security is doing. 

I used to work for a government concern, and was baffled when one of my colleagues complained that she may have been investigated. I mean, we had to sign a confidentiality NDA-style document when we joined, and it went unspoken that our background would be checked. Some of us even applied for security clearance for certain areas of work. She suddenly realized what it meant to join the unit after being there for 10 years (face-palm). (No, she wasn't one of those who had to apply for extra levels of security clearance.)


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


>



As usual, Scabies has his facts wrong.  They misquoted Will and he's running with the fake narrative.


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> Harry looked absolutely nothing like a cowboy. Fish outta water, and it showed. I can only imagine the snickers and comments made by real cowboys as he walked by.  Go home, Cali Harry.


I can picture him wearing sneakers with sloppy socks instead of cowboy boots.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I can picture him wearing sneakers with sloppy socks instead of cowboy boots.


I wonder if he will find his way to the Tony Lama Outlet store for boots


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> An artist I know is donating some of her proceeds to World Central Kitchen for the Ukraine relief effort. She isn't a bigtime entrepreneur but she is doing what she can. H&M are/were already in bed with WCK and I don't see them running towards the struggle. I hope that Jose guy is regretting the flowery prose he wrote for TIME.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karla Gudeon Art & Design | Original Art & Gifts for the Home
> 
> 
> KGA&D is a women-owned small business with handmade original art and inclusive gifts for all occasions made in the USA. Tree of Life, Hamsa, & Strong Women art, watercolor engravings, fine art custom paintings, modern judaica, ketubah, coasters, stationery & gift cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karlagudeon.com



Thanks for passing this along.  She even has Notorious RBG stuff!  Think I will order a few things.  Very nice of her to do this.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if he will find his way to the Tony Lama Outlet store for boots



I’m still trying to figure out how he found his way to Fort Worth!!

wonder what he will do next to prove how “American” he has become.  Maybe he could dress up as Uncle Sam on the Fourth of July!!  (Beats dressing in a Nazi uniform!)


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> *I’m still trying to figure out how he found his way to Fort Worth!!*
> 
> wonder what he will do next to prove how “American” he has become.  Maybe he could dress up as Uncle Sam on the Fourth of July!!  (Beats dressing in a Nazi uniform!)


Private jet?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Private jet?



Well, it wasn't on a polo pony


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Private jet?





papertiger said:


> Well, it wasn't on a polo pony



Thanks for the early morning laugh. I needed it after the latest from Ukraine.


----------



## sdkitty

Oh no - TW has been left out the Time Magazine's women of the year
TIME Women of the Year Red Carpet Photos: Kacey Musgraves – SheKnows


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Poor thing. Is SS broke?


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> Private jet?



Is there any other way for the Harkles!?!?


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> Oh no - TW has been left out the Time Magazine's women of the year
> TIME Women of the Year Red Carpet Photos: Kacey Musgraves – SheKnows



Think I’ll open a couple of windows to see if I can hear plates shattering from here!


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> Think I’ll open a couple of windows to see if I can hear plates shattering from here!


wonder is she called SS and ripped someone a new one


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> wonder is she called SS and ripped someone a new one



I think you’re right - definitely not the day to be working at SS.  They should all just take today off….


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> I think you’re right - definitely not the day to be working at SS.  They should all just take today off….


maybe people are noticing that she isn't doing Anything about anything.  we can hope


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Oh no - TW has been left out the Time Magazine's women of the year
> TIME Women of the Year Red Carpet Photos: Kacey Musgraves – SheKnows


I'm sure it's bad enough for her to not be included on a list like this, but to not even be invited to the dinner where there were other guests of dubious accomplishment had to be a real blow to her. I mean what has Kate Bosworth done of note lately? Charli D'Amelio, a TikTok star? Unless guests had to buy a pricey ticket. That might explain it.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure it's bad enough for her to not be included on a list like this, but to not even be invited to the dinner where there were other guests of dubious accomplishment had to be a real blow to her. I mean what has Kate Bosworth done of note lately? Charli D'Amelio, a TikTok star? Unless guests had to buy a pricey ticket. That might explain it.


they're hopefully on the road to irrelevance - in spite of the NAACP award


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> Oh no - TW has been left out the Time Magazine's women of the year
> TIME Women of the Year Red Carpet Photos: Kacey Musgraves – SheKnows


This is significant. Many of these women are involved in what Raptor views as “her” issues/projects. Their work exposes how completely, totally lame she is with her self promotions of lemon olive cakes, a one time sandwich truck stopping by, Starbucks coffees, free copies of her book, etc. and word salad pronouncements of her “involvement”

TIME finally got one award right.


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> This is significant. Many of these women are involved in what Raptor views as “her” issues/projects. Their work exposes how completely, totally lame she is with her self promotions of lemon olive cakes, a one time sandwich truck stopping by, Starbucks coffees, free copies of her book, etc. and word salad pronouncements of her “involvement”
> 
> TIME finally got one award right.



I was thinking the same as I read about what some of the women were being lauded for.  She still hasn’t realized that if she would focus on a couple of areas she might make some forward progress.  Instead she ricochets from one topic to another, running her mouth but little else. She’s like a little kid with a massive sugar overload.


----------



## gracekelly

Luvbolide said:


> Think I’ll open a couple of windows to see if I can hear plates shattering from here!


They ran out of money and moved on to paper, so you might have difficulty hearing the plates being torn.


----------



## Chanbal

The use of the UK titles is tasteless…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> Oh no - TW has been left out the Time Magazine's women of the year
> TIME Women of the Year Red Carpet Photos: Kacey Musgraves – SheKnows


I thought for sure we would be seeing that awful red dress or the white go-go dancer dress again, thank you Time Mag.


----------



## EverSoElusive

For a moment I thought this was Manic Meg  

Look at this video: https://www.instagram.com/reel/Ca5aC18jLi7/?utm_medium=copy_link

Face, hair and demeanor very similar to Manic Meg. Main giveaway that she's not is her nose.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG is bringing the green cape dress loved by many here… @sdkitty


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> The BLG is bringing the green cape dress loved by many here… @sdkitty



Oh wow, if looks could kill from Sophie. And at the end she couldn't bare to look at M. 
M going in between the chairs rather than follow her husband around them. I never noticed that before.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if he will find his way to the Tony Lama Outlet store for boots


He'd probably go to Timberland, mistakenly thinking it's owned by record producer Timbaland, so he can tell him how MeggyPoo can sing.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor thing. *Is SS broke*?


No, MM and Haz are.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure it's bad enough for her to not be included on a list like this, but to not even be invited to the dinner where there were other guests of dubious accomplishment had to be a real blow to her. I mean what has Kate Bosworth done of note lately? Charli D'Amelio, a TikTok star? Unless guests had to buy a pricey ticket. That might explain it.


This list is ridiculous.  Half the women have done what of worth exactly?  Charli D'Amilio??  WTF.  So tiktok now makes you a Woman of the Year?  Acting?  Music?  Alexandra Dardario??  Isla Fischer?  Kate Bosworth?  Kerry Washington??  So basically they're doing their jobs?  I guess we here are all women of the year then!  Cheers, ladies!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> they're hopefully on the road to irrelevance - in spite of the NAACP award


I think too many people have caught on that the NAACP award was irrelevant as well, considering it was bought.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He's not wrong.


----------



## bellecate

They should also be known as the Cowardly Duo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The BLG is bringing the green cape dress loved by many here… @sdkitty



I think some of his analyses are a bit of a stretch, but this is spot on. Sophie is a favorite of the Queen and on good terms with Kate. She sees through MM's BS, and MM knows it. Unlike MM, Sophie is not an actress and can't, or chooses not to, hide her feelings. Both Sophie and Kate made missteps early on, but they watched, learned and grew into their roles. Conventional wisdom says this is the best way to master any new job. But MM thinks she knows it all, and look how well that is turning out for her.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> This list is ridiculous.  Half the women have done what of worth exactly?  Charli D'Amilio??  WTF.  So tiktok now makes you a Woman of the Year?  Acting?  Music?  Alexandra Dardario??  Isla Fischer?  Kate Bosworth?  Kerry Washington??  So basically they're doing their jobs?  I guess we here are all women of the year then!  Cheers, ladies!


Some were just guests at the dinner. Here's the list of the twelve honorees:


> https://time.com/collection/women-of-the-year/


I'm sure like all affairs of this type you had to drop a good deal of cash for a ticket. People will do so just to be seen at it, especially the influencer generation.


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #11
					

The ginger haired one could go alone of course if he is so worried about security for his family. It isn't about that though, it is because ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## charlottawill

So on my way home I passed an older gentleman in a BMW sedan. Now this may seem unremarkable, but what caught my eye was the life size image of the Queen on the rear passenger window. It was supposed to appear as if she was waving at passersby. I thought it was cute, but then I wondered what he thinks of the Harkles. My guess would be he's not a fan.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5350388
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #11
> 
> 
> The ginger haired one could go alone of course if he is so worried about security for his family. It isn't about that though, it is because ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Makes me wonder if she's given him an ultimatum - it's them or me. Hmm....


----------



## poopsie

charlottawill said:


> So on my way home I passed an older gentleman in a BMW sedan. Now this may seem unremarkable, but what caught my eye was the life size image of the Queen on the rear passenger window. It was supposed to appear as if she was waving at passersby. I thought it was cute, but then I wondered what he thinks of the Harkles. My guess would be he's not a fan.



I wonder if they were in need of some Grey Poupon


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This guy is such a f*cking loser. It's probably best he is not there to disturb everyone else's genuine mourning.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This guy is such a f*cking loser. It's probably best he is not there to disturb everyone else's genuine mourning.



right - the paps are going to cause the death of his Wife


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This guy is such a f*cking loser. It's probably best he is not there to disturb everyone else's genuine mourning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> They should also be known as the Cowardly Duo.
> View attachment 5350346


I'm SHOCKED!


Not.


----------



## lanasyogamama

As soon as possible?  Puh-leez spare us???


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll say it - I am relieved and delighted H&M are staying away.  
No one needs nor wants their toxic brand, especially now.
There, I said it.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> As soon as possible?  Puh-leez spare us???


He's a coddled and spoiled man child of a grandson. I'm sure Philip's death was a huge blow to her, but she'll move on from this. He's the one who may live to regret his actions.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Come ON Nobel Prize Nominating Committee, what are you waiting for???? M&H must be nominated for a NOBEL !!!!  They cheapen all other awards they've been given, they'd might as well drag the Nobel Prize into the gutter, too.


OMG, it would be such an insult to all the great women, who have received Nobel Prizes. We would probably feel a major earth quake as the deceased ladies all roll over in their graves and we would hear a collective earth-shattering cry from the ladies, who are still alive. Female Nobel Laureates

ET correct spelling


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's not wrong.



I'm sorry for nitpicking but the People's Vaccine message made me wince with its bad English.


----------



## Annawakes

xincinsin said:


> I'm sorry for nitpicking but the People's Vaccine message made me wince with its bad English.


Same!  I winced too.  I thought about saying something about it but thought it might be nit picky.    Glad I’m not the only one!! I lose all respect for people who can’t (or won’t) proofread.


----------



## octopus17

It is shocking that he has descended to this level.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_That’s_ mission is so very important 

Do they really pay real dollars for these messages? Really?


----------



## Chanbal

In one of the last Neil Sean's videos, he mentioned that the Palace can't find the HR person that TW claimed to have spoken with about her 'dark thoughts' when in the UK. Allegedly, the Palace needs her help to find that person.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I'm sorry for nitpicking but the People's Vaccine message made me wince with its bad English.





Annawakes said:


> Same!  I winced too.  I thought about saying something about it but thought it might be nit picky.    Glad I’m not the only one!! I lose all respect for people who can’t (or won’t) proofread.


You are not alone…


----------



## Chanbal

Great questions! 










						Harry and Meghan's 'life of service' is underwhelming so far!
					

On the face of it, Meghan and Harry's year that began with the hype and rage of their Oprah interview doesn't seem to have added up to much.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## RAINDANCE

A well-placed source this week told the Mail that the Royal Family were 'absolutely dreading' its publication. *'God knows what one-eyed nonsense will be in it,' the source said.  *


in these terrible times, that made me laugh


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> In one of the last Neil Sean's videos, he mentioned that the Palace can't find the HR person that TW claimed to have spoken with about her 'dark thoughts' when in the UK. Allegedly, the Palace needs her help to find that person.



that was about the most ridiculous thing she said IMO.  An aggressive woman like her married to a prince and she claims she went to HR for help?  HR is for employees.  She was a boss (who allegedly abused the staff).  Did she think of herself as an employee?  Really an outrageous claim IMO


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> In one of the last Neil Sean's videos, he mentioned that the Palace can't find the HR person that TW claimed to have spoken with about her 'dark thoughts' when in the UK. Allegedly, the Palace needs her help to find that person.




Dark thoughts? You mean like the one about the Cambridges' plane crashing? Or the kind she's having here?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _That’s_ mission is so very important
> 
> Do they really pay real dollars for these messages? Really?


Whether she herself crafted it or it was one of their hired hands (assuming they still have any), she is a Northwestern grad and should know better. We know he didn't write it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's not wrong.



I wonder what "work together" means.....H&M just have to say everyone should be vaccinated and they get credit for "work"?


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really hope they laugh into his face. Can you imagine someone else trying to buy intelligence information?
> 
> Plus, the point is...pointless. I'm sure if British intelligence knew of a terroristic attack on #6, TW and offspring they'd let somebody know.





Chanbal said:


> News from Ginger the guru, mental health coach, wizard, victim…
> 
> _"LONDON (AP) — *Lawyers for Prince Harry told a court hearing on Friday, February 18, that the British royal is unwilling to bring his children to his homeland because it is not safe. Harry has launched a legal challenge to the U.K. government’s refusal to let him personally pay for police protection when he comes to Britain.*
> 
> Prince Harry says he ‘warned’ Twitter CEO ahead of US Capitol riot
> His legal team says Harry wants to bring his children — Archie, who is almost 3, and 8-month-old Lilibet — to visit his home country from the U.S. but that is too risky without police protection.
> 
> Senior members of Britain’s royal family are given taxpayer-funded police protection, but Harry lost that when he and his wife Meghan stepped down as working royals and moved to the United States in 2020. The couple said their decision was due to what they described as unbearable intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media…"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry feels unsafe bringing kids to UK, his lawyers say
> 
> 
> LONDON (AP) — Lawyers for Prince Harry told a court hearing on Friday that the British royal is unwilling to bring his children to his homeland because it is not safe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news10.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinions:



This is all pretextual. It gives them justification for not attending the Royal Jubilee. It also makes it the Royal Family' fault (as if). It's all manufactured in their quest for martyrdom. They claimed they wanted to live quietly. Why don't they?
If I recall, shortly before MM & H announced their departure from the RF, a prince in one of the Scandinavian countries moved to New York with his family to pursue a career in banking. You never hear about them.


----------



## rose60610

After all we've seen, I wonder if the real reason none of Meghan's family (except Doria) was invited to the wedding was so they couldn't respond to: "What was Meghan like growing up?", or "You must be so proud of her", etc, or say something like: "Wow, Meghan, this wedding cake is a lot bigger than all your other ones".


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> After all we've seen, I wonder if the real reason none of Meghan's family (except Doria) was invited to the wedding was so they couldn't respond to: "What was Meghan like growing up?", or "You must be so proud of her", etc, or say something like: "Wow, Meghan, this wedding cake is a lot bigger than all your other ones".


actually I think Doria's family spoke well of her as a child even after being excluded from the wedding guest list


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

Is MM still friends with _anyone_ that was invited to the wedding? Priyanka Chopra, Oprah, Jessica Mulroney, George and Amal Clooney . . . ?


----------



## purseinsanity

Happyish said:


> Is MM still friends with _anyone_ that was invited to the wedding? Priyanka Chopra, Oprah, Jessica Mulroney, George and Amal Clooney . . . ?


----------



## Happyish

purseinsanity said:


>


None?


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> Is MM still friends with _anyone_ that was invited to the wedding? Priyanka Chopra, Oprah, Jessica Mulroney, George and Amal Clooney . . . ?


I'm pretty sure George Clooney said they did not know the Harkles prior to the wedding, they got an invitation and said what the hell, let's go. Keep in mind, the Clooneys have an estate near London. Same situation with Oprah as far as I know, but she flew from CA. Honestly, if I received an invitation I'd probably have done the same. But it is odd to invite people you've never met to your wedding and exclude family members.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Great questions!
> View attachment 5350743
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's 'life of service' is underwhelming so far!
> 
> 
> On the face of it, Meghan and Harry's year that began with the hype and rage of their Oprah interview doesn't seem to have added up to much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Maybe that's why he flew to Texas for the rodeo. Bored out of his mind in Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

Happyish said:


> Is MM still friends with _anyone_ that was invited to the wedding? Priyanka Chopra, Oprah, Jessica Mulroney, George and Amal Clooney . . . ?



Oprah got her big interview, that’s what she most wanted out of them. In that sense she has no further use for Meghan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm sure they Dutch government will sell him intel information. Not.


----------



## poopsie

What a wanker


----------



## octopus17

^Come on now poopsie, tell us how you really feel....


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> that was about the most ridiculous thing she said IMO.  An aggressive woman like her married to a prince and she claims she went to HR for help?  HR is for employees.  She was a boss (who allegedly abused the staff).  Did she think of herself as an employee?  Really an outrageous claim IMO



She speaks as if she was an employee of The Firm and not a member of the Royal Family
It sounds more dramatic too: pesky and fearless actress rebels against ancient, exploitative institution (I can see it but w Audrey Hepburn on the role, sorry)
Which is interesting, do they sign contracts? And if they do can H&M be sued for breaching theirs?


----------



## CeeJay

Aminamina said:


> Girls, girls, my dear girls! I am overwhelmed by your kind support and sincere warmth. Please, know I am thankful to each and everyone of you  - you know who you are! from the bottom of my heart. I can’t thank enough for all the help and donations you make to help Ukraine in every aspect! Together we can win the joy and beauty of our priceless peace back. My life has decisively changed before 5 AM on Feb the 24th when I heard the sound of bomb blast in my beautiful and peaceful hometown. And then another one and…seeing my son staring in shock at the sky in front of the terrace doors he ran to when another blast was heard:”Mom, I am scared…” We are at the safe place now and thank God, shortly going to arrive in Munich, Germany  to seek temporary protection, as the refugees, I guess. If anyone is aware what steps should I take and where to go on arrival, etc., please PM. I have never been to Germany before.
> Mods, I apologise if the posts I have made go against tPF rules. Yours truly.


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO glad that you got out safely; I cannot even imagine what your countrymen & countrywomen are going through, especially when that despot is bombing civilians (especially when told that there would be a temporary ceasefire)!  I keep hoping that the Russian people will rise up against that Tyrant, but (like Hitler) .. when people hear non-stop propaganda and not the REAL news, sadly .. some don't believe what is truly going on.  Such a truly hideous and unnecessary situation!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure they Dutch government will sell him intel information. Not.



From CDAN

*Blind Item #11*


The ginger haired one could go alone of course if he is so worried about security for his family. It isn't about that though, it is because the alliterate one never wants to step foot in the country again. If it wasn't security, it would be something else.

He is going to fly all that way, and not hop over the channel to see his grandmother.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> From CDAN
> 
> *Blind Item #11*
> 
> 
> The ginger haired one could go alone of course if he is so worried about security for his family. It isn't about that though, it is because the alliterate one never wants to step foot in the country again. If it wasn't security, it would be something else.
> 
> He is going to fly all that way, and not hop over the channel to see his grandmother.



Maybe she doesn't want to see him?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Maybe she doesn't want to see him?


I don't think she would ever say that.  I think she would see him privately.  The only hang up I can think of is if they wanted him to isolate first or take a Covid test.  I don't think the rest of the family has any use for him.  If he is going after Camilla in his book, then he will be fully ghosted.


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry launches 'awkward' promo video for the Invictus Games
					

Prince Harry has released a video, filmed in his Montecito mansion, promoting this year's Invictus Games. It shows him learning Dutch, before ripping off his hoodie top to reveal an all-orange outfit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



He received much criticism for stating that he was going to the games and not the memorial service.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry launches 'awkward' promo video for the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has released a video, filmed in his Montecito mansion, promoting this year's Invictus Games. It shows him learning Dutch, before ripping off his hoodie top to reveal an all-orange outfit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He received much criticism for stating that he was going to the games and not the memorial service.


good...he's an AH


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> good...he's an AH


Well that is nothing new lolololol!


----------



## gracekelly

This is why Harry doesn't want to go back.  He knows that this is what he will be told.



			https://monophy.com/media/w6a2L6KtQpr56/monophy.gif


----------



## bellecate

If he wants to dress like a doofus and act the fool all the time, then that’s okay do it. But then he needs to stop playing at being some  serious Royal bent on saving the world his way. I feel great compassion for his family having to put up with his destructive nonsense on such a public scale.


----------



## charlottawill

Is this how he and TW think they are "modernizing" the monarchy? Or has it been his dream since childhood to be a clown? He's certainly succeeded.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m surprised he agreed to wear orange.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprised he agreed to wear orange.



Orange Foolius.


----------



## poopsie

bellecate said:


> If he wants to dress like a doofus and act the fool all the time, then that’s okay do it. But then he needs to stop playing at being some  serious Royal bent on saving the world his way. I feel great compassion for his family having to put up with his destructive nonsense on such a public scale.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5351435
> View attachment 5351436



Well, that ought to endear him to the Irish
NOT


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> If he is going after Camilla in his book, then he will be fully ghosted.



He is all but ghosted already. Don’t believe those occasional planted headlines that claim his relationship with his family is mending. I don’t think Charles and William talk to him at all. Any communication is done through staff. I imagine the Queen is being protected from having to talk directly to him as well. He has proven he cannot be trusted to keep personal conversations private.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5351436



Why. Is. He. So. Pink. All the time. Seriously, does he get drunk before he leaves  the house/appears on Zoom?


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure they Dutch government will sell him intel information. Not.





gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry launches 'awkward' promo video for the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has released a video, filmed in his Montecito mansion, promoting this year's Invictus Games. It shows him learning Dutch, before ripping off his hoodie top to reveal an all-orange outfit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He received much criticism for stating that he was going to the games and not the memorial service.


----------



## Happyish

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry launches 'awkward' promo video for the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has released a video, filmed in his Montecito mansion, promoting this year's Invictus Games. It shows him learning Dutch, before ripping off his hoodie top to reveal an all-orange outfit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He received much criticism for stating that he was going to the games and not the memorial service.


As he should. Shame on him. I have lost all respect for him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> As he should. Shame on him. I have lost all respect for him.



I was still maintaining a soft spot for him through a lot of his shenanigans (and I still do believe it's Raptor who's driving most of this sh*t), but I will hold the grudge about how he sat on Oprah spewing lies about his family - and keeping quiet while the demon spawn made up even more outrageous lies - while his supposedly beloved grandfather was dying forever. The grandfather BTW who was his fiercest advocate when it came to his mother's funeral arrangements.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry launches 'awkward' promo video for the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has released a video, filmed in his Montecito mansion, promoting this year's Invictus Games. It shows him learning Dutch, before ripping off his hoodie top to reveal an all-orange outfit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He received much criticism for stating that he was going to the games and not the memorial service.


OMG, I am horrifically mortified for him!  How embarrassing!  What an idiot!


----------



## octopus17

bellecate said:


> If he wants to dress like a doofus and act the fool all the time, then that’s okay do it. But then he needs to stop playing at being some  serious Royal bent on saving the world his way. I feel great compassion for his family having to put up with his destructive nonsense on such a public scale.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5351435
> View attachment 5351436


 I can't believe he actually did that video - he needs someone (other than TW) to manage him bigtime


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> He really effed up with that hat.  It’s his Mike Dukakis moment.


I'm likely one of the very few who 'get' what you are saying here!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is he wearing makeup?  True, his face is almost always pink, but this looks like he is trying to cover up his bad, uneven skin. It is difficult to know. What stood out to me in this video is the tone in his voice. It sounds flat, even at the end when he should be speaking with an enthusiastic tone.  _He really does need those palace media folks. _


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> This list is ridiculous.  Half the women have done what of worth exactly?  Charli D'Amilio??  WTF.  So tiktok now makes you a Woman of the Year?  Acting?  Music?  Alexandra Dardario??  Isla Fischer?  Kate Bosworth?  Kerry Washington??  So basically they're doing their jobs?  I guess we here are all women of the year then!  Cheers, ladies!


Seriously?!?! .. Charli D'Amilio??? (who just "dances" to music on her videos - and it's not like she is that great)!  Alexandra Dardario?? .. for what?? (anyone ever seen the movie "Lost Girls & Love Hotels"??? .. big-time kinda weird IMO).  Guess it doesn't take too much anymore for one to get the award!


----------



## Annawakes

I haven’t watched his embarrassing video.  But now they both have videos of themselves doing cringeworthy things.  How strange.  Something is seriously not right with either of them.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Seriously?!?! .. Charli D'Amilio??? (who just "dances" to music on her videos - and it's not like she is that great)!  Alexandra Dardario?? .. for what?? (anyone ever seen the movie "Lost Girls & Love Hotels"??? .. big-time kinda weird IMO).  Guess it doesn't take too much anymore for one to get the award!


They did not get the award, they just bought tickets to attend the dinner. Here's the list of honorees:



> https://time.com/collection/women-of-the-year/


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, please!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



He looks a pimp


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, please!



There was definitely a “substance“ onboard


----------



## Chanbal

I'll bring the


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, please!



He heard you…


----------



## Lodpah

I know it’s Breitbart but they called Harry disgraced Prince and Controversial Megan. These two are insane. Most of the world, if not the entire world,  except that little island of India, Santibel, is vaccinated. The problem is some people don’t want to be vaccinated. They are so extra extra extra.









						Harry and Meghan Try To Stay Relevant by Pushing Covid Fear Agenda
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle joined a celebrity and world leader call to supposedly warn the world that the "pandemic is not over".




					www.breitbart.com


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> He looks a pimp



I thought he looked like a beer guy at a Giants game!!  I wonder which he would consider “worse”.

I admit to getting a big kick out of the IGames promo video that he and TQ did with the O_amas.  He was sweet to the Q and she was funny and charming.  Seems that without several of his family members he is just boring and weird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I know it’s Breitbart but they called Harry disgraced Prince and Controversial Megan. These two are insane. Most of the world, if not the entire world,  except that little island of India, Santibel, is vaccinated. The problem is some people don’t want to be vaccinated. They are so *extra* extra extra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Try To Stay Relevant by Pushing Covid Fear Agenda
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle joined a celebrity and world leader call to supposedly warn the world that the "pandemic is not over".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.breitbart.com



Extra is the perfect word for them     along with many others  
They surely must realize their star has faded, their moment gone.  Best to stay home with the kids.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> I know it’s Breitbart but they called Harry disgraced Prince and Controversial Megan. These two are insane. Most of the world, if not the entire world,  except that little island of India, Santibel, is vaccinated. The problem is some people don’t want to be vaccinated. They are so extra extra extra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Try To Stay Relevant by Pushing Covid Fear Agenda
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle joined a celebrity and world leader call to supposedly warn the world that the "pandemic is not over".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.breitbart.com


I don't really have a problem with people who want to take their chances with being unvaccinated. Live and let die.
My MIL was in the ICU recently and one of her sons could not visit her as he is unvaxx. And he remains unvaxx because he is married to a woman who is mentally unwell, refuses to be vaccinated and believes that covering herself up in black clothes will keep the virus away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Hazard did the video in the same room that Methane did her crappy birthday video? Is that their Cringe Room?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I don't really have a problem with people who want to take their chances with being unvaccinated. Live and let die.



I'd agree if it wasn't for them to spread the virus way more than vaccinated people and taking up hospital capacities that could be used elsewhere when they catch the plague. E.g. the young mother with cancer who couldn't get surgery because within 100 miles there was no ICU bed. And her specific kind of cancer has only a very narrow window before it's totally out of control.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Hazard did the video in the same room that Methane did her crappy birthday video? Is that their *Cringe Room*?



OMG I'm laughing so hard.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd agree if it wasn't for them to spread the virus way more than vaccinated people and taking up hospital capacities that could be used elsewhere when they catch the plague. E.g. the young mother with cancer who couldn't get surgery because within 100 miles there was no ICU bed. And her specific kind of cancer has only a very narrow window before it's totally out of control.


We had a young woman who was an anti-vaxxer - very Methane-like. Spewed a lot of garbage but spun "her truth" in such a way that she had numerous followers. She was finally arrested and charged when she connived with a doctor to submit false vaccination declarations in a bid to have her cake and eat it too. I'd suggest Hazard donate his orange outfit to her, but the prisoners here wear a different colour.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry launches 'awkward' promo video for the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has released a video, filmed in his Montecito mansion, promoting this year's Invictus Games. It shows him learning Dutch, before ripping off his hoodie top to reveal an all-orange outfit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He received much criticism for stating that he was going to the games and not the memorial service.


Geez, that house is so beige. I'm surprised they haven't spray-painted the plant beige too.


----------



## wisconsin

xincinsin said:


> I don't really have a problem with people who want to take their chances with being unvaccinated. Live and let die.
> My MIL was in the ICU recently and one of her sons could not visit her as he is unvaxx. And he remains unvaxx because he is married to a woman who is mentally unwell, refuses to be vaccinated and believes that covering herself up in black clothes will keep the virus away.


Sorry, he can still get vaccinated. He does not have an excuse.


----------



## papertiger

I don't know if our US cousins ever had the Tango Man, but I think JCMH has been at the demon orange drink. Perhaps we should now call him FD&C Nr.6?

from https://guidingstars.com/nutrition-science/orange-real-artificial/ :

*"FD&C Yellow No.* *6, *also known as Sunset Yellow, is an artificial orange color. It was approved as part of the 1938 Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. It is one of only 9 synthetic food colors granted approval for widespread use in food in the US." 

 Megs should have never left him unsupervised with Dylon and artificial food colourings

Trigger warning: Do not look at the following images if you suffer from anything


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> Geez, that house is so beige. I'm surprised they haven't spray-painted the plant beige too.



with any luck they'll paint everything else orange so we can't see him


----------



## xincinsin

wisconsin said:


> Sorry, he can still get vaccinated. He does not have an excuse.


You need to understand his situation. He lives with a mentally unstable wife who will go berserk if he gets vaccinated.

It is easy for us to say he has no excuse, but then we do not have to live with his wife. She is my SIL and I do not blame him for not wanting to cross her.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> He looks a pimp



I'm thinking rapper Flavor Flav


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I know it’s Breitbart but they called Harry disgraced Prince and Controversial Megan. These two are insane. Most of the world, if not the entire world,  except that little island of India, Santibel, is vaccinated. The problem is some people don’t want to be vaccinated. They are so extra extra extra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Try To Stay Relevant by Pushing Covid Fear Agenda
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle joined a celebrity and world leader call to supposedly warn the world that the "pandemic is not over".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.breitbart.com



To be fair Africa, which is near and dear to them, has a low vaccination rate. I think that is where they want to focus their efforts:



> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/world/covid-vaccinations-tracker.html


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Cornflower Blue said:


> I can't believe he actually did that video - he needs someone (other than TW) to manage him bigtime


The real question is what kind of wife would let or even make her husband look like a complete fool instead of kindly suggesting a better alternative. IMO, only a reprehensible and depraved bi!ch hell-bent on further hurting his family would behave as such. It could also provide her with more evidence that H is too stupid to share custody of the children if or when they divorce. Or maybe TW just wants a video of H behaving as inanely as she did with Ellen. 

ET correct grammar


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> The real question is what kind of wife would let or even make her husband look like a complete fool instead of kindly suggesting a better alternative. IMO, only a reprehensible and depraved bi!ch hell-bent on further hurting his family would behave as such. It could also provide her with more evidence that H is too stupid to share custody of the children if or when they divorce.



She is not in a position to criticize him. Are you forgetting her ridiculous stunt on Ellen?


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if there is a connection between TW's appearance at the Ellen Degeneres show and Hazz's ridiculous orange outfit. Misery loves company…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if there is a connection between TW's appearance at the Ellen Degeneres show and Hazz's ridiculous orange outfit. Misery loves company…




I'm thinking it's their pathetic need for attention at any cost.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Harry is a trendsetter! Who knew? Looks like orange is in for Spring. I just saw this banner ad on Purseblog:


----------



## Chanbal

One can't express his/her opinion without retaliations… 









						Meghan Markle snubbed by royal chef Richard Corrigan
					

Richard Corrigan says he wouldn't roll out the red carpet for the Duchess of Sussex




					www.geo.tv


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I'm thinking it's their pathetic need for attention at any cost.


Greed for money at any cost… They are being paid by Nefl*x, aren't they?


----------



## LittleStar88

papertiger said:


> I don't know if our US cousins ever had the Tango Man, but I think JCMH has been at the demon orange drink. Perhaps we should now call him FD&C Nr.6?
> 
> from https://guidingstars.com/nutrition-science/orange-real-artificial/ :
> 
> *"FD&C Yellow No.* *6, *also known as Sunset Yellow, is an artificial orange color. It was approved as part of the 1938 Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. It is one of only 9 synthetic food colors granted approval for widespread use in food in the US."
> 
> Megs should have never left him unsupervised with Dylon and artificial food colourings
> 
> Trigger warning: Do not look at the following images if you suffer from anything
> 
> View attachment 5351926
> 
> 
> View attachment 5351925



OMG Laughing so hard right now.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> She is not in a position to criticize him. Are you forgetting her ridiculous stunt on Ellen?



I’ll never forget that. Classic!


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> As he should. Shame on him. I have lost all respect for him.


what a fool


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I don't really have a problem with people who want to take their chances with being unvaccinated. Live and let die.
> My MIL was in the ICU recently and one of her sons could not visit her as he is unvaxx. And he remains unvaxx because he is married to a woman who is mentally unwell, refuses to be vaccinated and believes that covering herself up in black clothes will keep the virus away.


sorry but that last part is so ridiculous I had to laugh....I know it sad but....


----------



## lanasyogamama

kemilia said:


> Geez, that house is so beige. I'm surprised they haven't spray-painted the plant beige too.


I think that beige look is getting really dated right now. At least for myself, I am so drawn to more saturated colors with some interest, the whole farrow and ball look.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

At this point I’m all for Thomas and Samantha saying whatever they please. It’s far too late to keep it classy. Hell, let her half brother have a crack at her as well. Everyone speaks their truth! Meghan has had such a huge advantage over them for years with the press clinging to her every lie and blindly supporting her. If it makes them feel better and especially if they can make money off of their relation to her, have at it! She would do it to them if she could.


----------



## Chanbal

The outfit can be purchased at costume-works…


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> To be fair Africa, which is near and dear to them, has a low vaccination rate. I think that is where they want to focus their efforts:


True. I did read tho that lots of people in Africa don’t trust the vaccine but then I don’t know how true that is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Lots of insight in this video.  Thomas  pays attention to LCC and several others often quoted here. So glad that he is supporting Samantha and the truth. She has been the victim of much too much vitriol.  Interesting that he expects MM to settle.  Hmmm.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> At this point I’m all for Thomas and Samantha saying whatever they please. It’s far too late to keep it classy. Hell, let her half brother have a crack at her as well. Everyone speaks their truth! Meghan has had such a huge advantage over them for years with the press clinging to her every lie and blindly supporting her. If it makes them feel better and especially if they can make money off of their relation to her, have at it! She would do it to them if she could.


None of this would be happening if she had just been honest from the start. The more she lies, the deeper the hole she digs for herself. As I recall, before William and Kate married the British tabloids wrote disparaging things about her family - her family was too working class, her mother worked as a flight attendant, her mother's brother had some shady background, her brother's partying ways, etc. But ten years later it has all died down. Why? Because she kept her mouth shut, her head down and learned the ways of her new family, while still remaining very close to her own. MM thought she could mold Harry to her wishes but completely underestimated the strength of his family's influence.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> At this point I’m all for Thomas and Samantha saying whatever they please. It’s far too late to keep it classy. Hell, let her half brother have a crack at her as well. Everyone speaks their truth! Meghan has had such a huge advantage over them for years with the press clinging to her every lie and blindly supporting her. If it makes them feel better and especially if they can make money off of their relation to her, have at it! She would do it to them if she could.



My fear is they will just play into her narrative of "They are trash and she had every right to cut them off".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My fear is they will just play into her narrative of "They are trash and she had every right to cut them off".


if they're trash, then what is she?  that man raised her.....sorry I'm repeating myself but I think he literally spoiled her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> MM thought she could mold Harry to her wishes but completely underestimated the strength of his family's influence.



I mean...she made him move continents, slay his family and generally act like an idiot (now, he's acted like an idiot before, but more in an offensive than in a ridiculous clown way).


----------



## papertiger

Only have time to post the link but the headlines say: 

*"Thomas Markle slams daughter Meghan 'and her ginger husband' Prince Harry as he says he will give evidence for daughter Samantha in legal battle with her half-sister"*









						Meghan Markle's father says he is willing to give evidence against her
					

Meghan Markle's father Thomas, 77, said he would be willing to give evidence against her in a lawsuit lodged by her half-sister Samantha, 57, who claims she 'lied' about her past in her Oprah interview.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

Never forget!


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting views!


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG on Orange Harry!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The BLG on Orange Harry!




Batman villain 
 BLG


----------



## wisconsin

xincinsin said:


> You need to understand his situation. He lives with a mentally unstable wife who will go berserk if he gets vaccinated.
> 
> It is easy for us to say he has no excuse, but then we do not have to live with his wife. She is my SIL and I do not blame him for not wanting to cross her.


I meet people like that everyday.I usually tell them that they don’t have to share this with their unstable or unreasonable spouse. But yes, I do feel for him and his terrible situation.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Batman villain
> BLG


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




oooooh, he has some junk in his trunk


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> The BLG on Orange Harry!




I love the BLG but I can’t do 1.5 hours!  I prefer his short punchy video analysis…. I did sit through most of the Inskip wedding one.  One of the commenters mentioned she wasn’t invited to the Inskip wedding, gatecrashed and H had another +1 there….!!!  I had heard about gatecrashing the wedding, but does anyone recall if H took someone else to the wedding?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My fear is they will just play into her narrative of "They are trash and she had every right to cut them off".



Her supporters believed that from the beginning and the true stans won’t listen to any criticism of them. However, I bet there are many people who bought into the original romantic royal wedding narrative who are rethinking their opinion these days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The crazy yeller now goes after William. The burn though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> I love the BLG but I can’t do 1.5 hours!  I prefer his short punchy video analysis….


I totally agree, I don’t have an hour and a half, esp if I can’t switch apps!!


----------



## limom

This is the best soap opera coming from the house of Windsor in ages, imho.
I can’t help but stan.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think Harry ever thinks about the fact that his kids not having a relationship with Williams will make it much easier for the future king George to keep them out of the mix?


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Harry ever thinks about the fact that his kids not having a relationship with Williams will make it much easier for the future king George to keep them out of the mix?



The last thing Harry and Meghan are thinking about are their accessories, um, I mean kids. Those two are only thinking of themselves.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Harry ever thinks about the fact that his kids not having a relationship with Williams will make it much easier for the future king George to keep them out of the mix?


Too full of self-righteousness to think about anyone else. And if he is ever asked about it, he would accuse the BRF of not accepting that veritable forest of olive branches which he had proffered. He gave them an out, you know: all HMTQ had to do was lead an apology to his allegedly upset wife.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...she made him move continents, slay his family and generally act like an idiot (now, he's acted like an idiot before, but more in an offensive than in a ridiculous clown way).


For sure, but I believe he will resent it at some point.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I bet there are many people who bought into the original romantic royal wedding narrative who are rethinking their opinion these days.


I was one of them. I knew very little about her, watched the wedding and thought good for them. But then reality reared its ugly head.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Never forget!



But wait, there's more! Meet Princess Possessive Pouty. The comments: "It’s the crushed up zopiclone she sprinkles over his morning Coco Pops to keep him compliant."  And as discussed with the Christmas photo, there is something off with her left thumb.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I totally agree, I don’t have an hour and a half, esp if I can’t switch apps!!


I'm with you, a >1-hour video is too long. Though, it would be interesting to have the BLG's input on this photo:


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Harry ever thinks about the fact that his kids not having a relationship with Williams will make it much easier for the future king George to keep them out of the mix?


I don't think Haz thinks at all.

Ever.

About anything.


----------



## lanasyogamama

What he SHOULD be thinking about is that she will seek to destroy him like she tried to destroy his family if she decides it’s not working out.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles' connections being exposed. I bet Tulloch is not happy with this publicity…


_Questions over the identity of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's rumored Russian benefactor have taken on a new importance following a slew of sanctions against Putin's allies after his invasion of Ukraine.

The ex-royal couple posted their support of Ukraine on their Archewell charity Instagram profile on Monday, writing 'We stand with the people of Ukraine' and the hashtags #stopwar, #standwithukraine, #closethesky, and #sendnatotoukraine.

*But when asked who gave the Sussexes access to the eight-bed waterfront property for two months for their 2019 Christmas getaway, Harry and Meghan stayed silent*…

Tulloch is known among the Russian elite as a go-to London attorney for the super wealthy billionaires and well-connected politicians, using complex corporate structures in secretive jurisdictions around the world.

*The 66-year-old has managed to remain largely out of the public eye until DailyMail.com exposed his link to Harry and Meghan's vacation mansion in 2020– *despite having managed the companies of at least 28 Russian and Eastern European oligarchs and business tycoons as well as firms linked to Elton John and Kylie Minogue…

*One of Tulloch's previous clients is Put*n's former right hand man*, Igor Shuvalov (left, with Put*n). Shuvalov, who served as First Deputy Prime Minister from 2012 to 2018, was added to the State Department's sanctions list last week as a member of Putin's inner circle… _









						Sussexes' Vancouver mansion linked to sanctioned Russian oligarch
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stayed at a mansion linked to a lawyer whose clients include a sanctioned Russian, when they left the UK in 2019, DailyMail.com can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## AbbytheBT

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles' connections being exposed. I bet Tulloch is not happy with this publicity…
> View attachment 5352913
> 
> _Questions over the identity of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's rumored Russian benefactor have taken on a new importance following a slew of sanctions against Putin's allies after his invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> The ex-royal couple posted their support of Ukraine on their Archewell charity Instagram profile on Monday, writing 'We stand with the people of Ukraine' and the hashtags #stopwar, #standwithukraine, #closethesky, and #sendnatotoukraine.
> 
> *But when asked who gave the Sussexes access to the eight-bed waterfront property for two months for their 2019 Christmas getaway, Harry and Meghan stayed silent*…
> 
> Tulloch is known among the Russian elite as a go-to London attorney for the super wealthy billionaires and well-connected politicians, using complex corporate structures in secretive jurisdictions around the world.
> 
> *The 66-year-old has managed to remain largely out of the public eye until DailyMail.com exposed his link to Harry and Meghan's vacation mansion in 2020– *despite having managed the companies of at least 28 Russian and Eastern European oligarchs and business tycoons as well as firms linked to Elton John and Kylie Minogue…
> 
> *One of Tulloch's previous clients is Put*n's former right hand man*, Igor Shuvalov (left, with Put*n). Shuvalov, who served as First Deputy Prime Minister from 2012 to 2018, was added to the State Department's sanctions list last week as a member of Putin's inner circle… _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes' Vancouver mansion linked to sanctioned Russian oligarch
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stayed at a mansion linked to a lawyer whose clients include a sanctioned Russian, when they left the UK in 2019, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I can only hope that we are about to learn much, much more about how they acquired the Montecito house (purchase? lease?) from a Russian oligarch


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> I'm with you, a >1-hour video is too long. Though, it would be interesting to have the BLG's input on this photo:




what is interesting about this photo, to me, is that he is messing with his wedding ring while deep in miserable thought.  I’m sure the BLG would have some insight on that.


----------



## sdkitty

AbbytheBT said:


> I can only hope that we are about to learn much, much more about how they acquired the Montecito house (purchase? lease?) from a Russian oligarch


wouldn't that be something.....what would that do to their credibility?
I hope some diligent reporter is digging into this story


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

It stinks when your shady connections that get you free housing and jewelry are exposed AND people finally care!


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> It stinks when your shady connections that get you free housing and jewelry are exposed AND people finally care!



I'm sure H&MM are too busy running towards the struggle to even notice


----------



## csshopper

How interesting, playing the RealEstate Game with Russian connections all the while possibly dripping in blood diamonds.

They should have T shirts printed to wear: “I AM FOR SALE: Submit all reasonable offers (our definition) to Sunshine Sucks for review. Title extra.”

As for the Orange idiot, it occurred to me his extreme need for security might be due to a fear if he was ever kidnapped and held for ransom, no one would pay to get him back. The dolt doesn’t realize she will squeeze the juice out of him and the remaining pulp will not be pretty.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> How interesting, playing the RealEstate Game with Russian connections all the while possibly dripping in blood diamonds.
> 
> They should have T shirts printed to wear: “I AM FOR SALE: Submit all reasonable offers (our definition) to Sunshine Sucks for review. Title extra.”
> 
> As for the Orange idiot, it occurred to me his extreme need for security might be due to a fear if he was ever kidnapped and held for ransom, no would pay to get him back. The dolt doesn’t realize she will squeeze the juice out of him and the *remaining pulp* will not be pretty.


Maybe he does and that's why he was in orange??


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #2
					

It was never a good look for the alliterate one and her husband that they took the free pace to live in the north of the border country. Now...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Oh, I'm sure she said that, hence him being totally crushed. I just don't believe for a minute she meant it. It was just one more tool in her box of manipulation.

Also, for someone crying hysterically as soon as the lights were off her make-up sure looks good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles' connections being exposed. I bet Tulloch is not happy with this publicity…
> View attachment 5352913
> 
> _Questions over the identity of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's rumored Russian benefactor have taken on a new importance following a slew of sanctions against Putin's allies after his invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> The ex-royal couple posted their support of Ukraine on their Archewell charity Instagram profile on Monday, writing 'We stand with the people of Ukraine' and the hashtags #stopwar, #standwithukraine, #closethesky, and #sendnatotoukraine.
> 
> *But when asked who gave the Sussexes access to the eight-bed waterfront property for two months for their 2019 Christmas getaway, Harry and Meghan stayed silent*…
> 
> Tulloch is known among the Russian elite as a go-to London attorney for the super wealthy billionaires and well-connected politicians, using complex corporate structures in secretive jurisdictions around the world.
> 
> *The 66-year-old has managed to remain largely out of the public eye until DailyMail.com exposed his link to Harry and Meghan's vacation mansion in 2020– *despite having managed the companies of at least 28 Russian and Eastern European oligarchs and business tycoons as well as firms linked to Elton John and Kylie Minogue…
> 
> *One of Tulloch's previous clients is Put*n's former right hand man*, Igor Shuvalov (left, with Put*n). Shuvalov, who served as First Deputy Prime Minister from 2012 to 2018, was added to the State Department's sanctions list last week as a member of Putin's inner circle… _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes' Vancouver mansion linked to sanctioned Russian oligarch
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stayed at a mansion linked to a lawyer whose clients include a sanctioned Russian, when they left the UK in 2019, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Keep asking questions, hold these ‘royals’ to account. It’s about time the truth gets told.




Sophisticatted said:


> what is interesting about this photo, to me, is that he is messing with his wedding ring while deep in miserable thought.  I’m sure the BLG would have some insight on that.



Some of it could be that he knew their plan. This happened in Jan, 2019.  The Sentebale charity supposedly was near and dear to him. They had A’s birth and the South Africa tour ahead of them. Looking at the photos, she seems bored. They say she is 5 months pregnant here.  Recollections may vary  








						Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Have Date Night at Cirque du Soleil! | meghan markle prince harry cirque du soleil 04 - Photo
					

Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Have Date Night at Cirque du Soleil!: Photo #4213051. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (aka Meghan Markle) attend the Cirque du Soleil Premiere Of Totem at Royal Albert Hall on Wednesday evening…




					www.justjared.com


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, I'm sure she said that, hence him being totally crushed. I just don't believe for a minute she meant it. It was just one more tool in her box of manipulation.
> 
> Also, for someone crying hysterically as soon as the lights were off her make-up sure looks good.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of it could be that he knew their plan. This happened in Jan, 2019.  The Sentebale charity supposedly was near and dear to him. They had A’s birth and the South Africa tour ahead of them. Looking at the photos, she seems bored. They say she is 5 months pregnant here.  Recollections may vary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Have Date Night at Cirque du Soleil! | meghan markle prince harry cirque du soleil 04 - Photo
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Have Date Night at Cirque du Soleil!: Photo #4213051. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (aka Meghan Markle) attend the Cirque du Soleil Premiere Of Totem at Royal Albert Hall on Wednesday evening…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justjared.com



There are plenty of news reports out there about Hazz being dumb, but it's hard to believe that he never questioned TW's motivations. Would he be that dumb?


----------



## Chanbal

From the creative minds at twitter…


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles' connections being exposed. I bet Tulloch is not happy with this publicity…
> View attachment 5352913
> 
> _Questions over the identity of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's rumored Russian benefactor have taken on a new importance following a slew of sanctions against Putin's allies after his invasion of Ukraine.
> 
> The ex-royal couple posted their support of Ukraine on their Archewell charity Instagram profile on Monday, writing 'We stand with the people of Ukraine' and the hashtags #stopwar, #standwithukraine, #closethesky, and #sendnatotoukraine.
> 
> *But when asked who gave the Sussexes access to the eight-bed waterfront property for two months for their 2019 Christmas getaway, Harry and Meghan stayed silent*…
> 
> Tulloch is known among the Russian elite as a go-to London attorney for the super wealthy billionaires and well-connected politicians, using complex corporate structures in secretive jurisdictions around the world.
> 
> *The 66-year-old has managed to remain largely out of the public eye until DailyMail.com exposed his link to Harry and Meghan's vacation mansion in 2020– *despite having managed the companies of at least 28 Russian and Eastern European oligarchs and business tycoons as well as firms linked to Elton John and Kylie Minogue…
> 
> *One of Tulloch's previous clients is Put*n's former right hand man*, Igor Shuvalov (left, with Put*n). Shuvalov, who served as First Deputy Prime Minister from 2012 to 2018, was added to the State Department's sanctions list last week as a member of Putin's inner circle… _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes' Vancouver mansion linked to sanctioned Russian oligarch
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stayed at a mansion linked to a lawyer whose clients include a sanctioned Russian, when they left the UK in 2019, DailyMail.com can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Surprised? Same couple of which one wore diamond earrings gifted by the Saudis when the Jamal Khashoggi murder took place
I am sure if we look closer to the history of some of the jewels the RF has we will find an unsavoury provenance but at least they are discreet


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> What he SHOULD be thinking about is that she will seek to destroy him like she tried to destroy his family if she decides it’s not working out.


I have a feeling that if things go bad with them and she tries to pull her usual sh*t, the royal family will close ranks around him. I'm sure they've got dirt on her collected prior to the marriage that they're saving it as their insurance policy should the need arise.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> I have a feeling that if things go bad with them and she tries to pull her usual sh*t, the royal family will close ranks around him. I'm sure they've got dirt on her collected prior to the marriage that they're saving it as their insurance policy should the need arise.


That would be nice to see


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> From the creative minds at twitter…



Seems like only yesterday he was mocking his brother's hair loss. You know what they say about karma....


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> There are plenty of news reports out there about Hazz being dumb, but it's hard to believe that he never questioned TW's motivations. Would he be that dumb?


The best explanation I've read is that he was, pardon the expression, c*ntstruck.


----------



## rose60610

Now that covid restrictions have been/in the process of being lifted, how are the Harkles going to explain the absence of visitors to their mansion? It isn't as though there aren't enough bathrooms to accommodate gaggles of party-goers. Oh wait, is this where the "we don't have many visitors because we value our privacy" schtick comes in when the RSVP regrets from all the studio heads  and A-listers come back?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I have a feeling that if things go bad with them and she tries to pull her usual sh*t, the royal family will close ranks around him. I'm sure they've got dirt on her collected prior to the marriage that they're saving it as their insurance policy should the need arise.



That's my hope as well.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Now that covid restrictions have been/in the process of being lifted, how are the Harkles going to explain the absence of visitors to their mansion? It isn't as though there aren't enough bathrooms to accommodate gaggles of party-goers. Oh wait, is this where the "we don't have many visitors because we value our privacy" schtick comes in when the RSVP regrets from all the studio heads  and A-listers come in?


You'd think she'd want to throw a star-studded lavish housewarming party, if she wasn't afraid of all the declined invitations plus their lack of cash flow. Party planners, caterers, florists, musicians, etc.don't come cheap and all expect to get paid up front in cash.


----------



## TC1

Can you imagine? Hazz "Honey, we have to hide in Canada, do you know anyone from your Suit's days?"
MM " Hmmm, I do know someone from my yachting past"
I don't think they have the same definition of yachting from H's upbringing


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> The best explanation I've read is that he was, pardon the expression, c*ntstruck.



Yep, his brain isn’t the organ that’s doing his thinking.


----------



## Chanbal

It would be more like a swarm of flies on the wall in Montecito Palace…  




_*Oh, to have been*_* a fly on the wall in Montecito Palace *_*as Harry and Meghan settled down to watch the 75th British Academy Film Awards with a tub of ethically sourced kale chips on Sunday.* After all it was only a few minutes in, as Rebel Wilson announced the winner of the Outstanding British Film Award, that the evening’s host skewered the pair in front of 2.8 million viewers.

“From drama, to horror, to fantasy... Harry and Meghan’s interview with Oprah had it all,” deadpanned the 42-year-old Australian actress known for her dry sense of humour. “Unfortunately that’s not nominated in this category, but some incredible films are.” The joke alone could have been shrugged off – if only it had bombed…  _

*There was only unanimous laughter.

When you consider that these are some of the woke-ist characters on the planet, and more importantly Meghan and Harry’s “people”,* it tells you all you need to know about what the accepted view is today, almost exactly a year after that interview…

_Now that they are an accepted part of the ‘comedy narrative’ – that presenters can get an easy laugh sending up – the couple should steel themselves for more jibes to come. But perhaps even this is preferable to the day the jokes stop, and they are not mentioned at all._





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> _*But perhaps even this is preferable to the day the jokes stop, and they are not mentioned at all.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



aka,  the Wallis Simpson effect


----------



## bellecate

I wonder if some of the stuff coming out these days are things that H’s handlers managed to keep out of circulation and nowadays it doesn’t get scrubbed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> _But perhaps even this is preferable to the day the jokes stop, *and they are not mentioned at all*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


That would be their (especially her) ultimate nightmare!


----------



## bellecate

The one who will be King and the one who wants to be king.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> The one who will be King and the one who wants to be king.
> View attachment 5353354


God, William must be so embarrassed. 
I'm starting to think the BRF will get the last laugh.  Megain thought she would sneak in out of nowhere like Wil E Coyote, steal a handsome prince from under them, and use him as a pawn, all the while trying to undermine their 1000 year old history.  What she actually got was the nincompoop spare who lacks brain cells and while easily manipulated, must get so tiresome to have to tell him everything.  He always looks so unkempt and scruffy.  Stale and smelly.  Ick.
Be careful what you wish for kids!


----------



## bag-mania

Samantha’s Twitter account has been suspended. Buzzfeed “News” is 100% pro-Meghan and they accused Samantha of constantly posting negative stuff about Meghan on Twitter (which, let’s face it, she probably did). Why is it that Buzzfeed and the rest of the web crap sites out there get so outraged when their heroine is criticized but give Meghan a free pass on all her lies without a word?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> aka,  the Wallis Simpson effect


Yep, but in contrast to TW, Wallis may have liked not to have been in the limelight. She was known for her discretion and elegance.


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> Samantha’s Twitter account has been suspended. Buzzfeed “News” is 100% pro-Meghan and they accused Samantha of constantly posting negative stuff about Meghan on Twitter (which, let’s face it, she probably did). Why is it that Buzzfeed and the rest of the web crap sites out there get so outraged when their heroine is criticized but give Meghan a free pass on all her lies without a word?



Theresalongofanpage (@ barkjack) got targeted by the Sussex squad and taken down by Twitter.

It seems there are bot swarms which can target accounts and falsely report to Twitter its spam.  The user then has to appeal to stop their account being shut down.

the blog is still going here:https://theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com/


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Samantha’s Twitter account has been suspended. Buzzfeed “News” is 100% pro-Meghan and they accused Samantha of constantly posting negative stuff about Meghan on Twitter (which, let’s face it, she probably did). Why is it that Buzzfeed and the rest of the web crap sites out there get so outraged when their heroine is criticized but give Meghan a free pass on all her lies without a word?



 Sachs?


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Theresalongofanpage (@ barkjack) *got targeted by the Sussex squad and taken down by Twitter.*
> 
> It seems there are bot swarms which can target accounts and falsely report to Twitter its spam.  The user then has to appeal to stop their account being shut down.
> 
> the blog is still going here:https://theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com/



The squad people seem very active in going after non-sympathizers of TW. I like this German law...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> I love the BLG but I can’t do 1.5 hours!  I prefer his short punchy video analysis…. I did sit through most of the Inskip wedding one.  One of the commenters mentioned she wasn’t invited to the Inskip wedding, gatecrashed and H had another +1 there….!!!  I had heard about gatecrashing the wedding, but does anyone recall if H took someone else to the wedding?


needlv,
BLG heard you or someone sent him a message because he has now posted a summary, 8 minute segment that analyzes the clechched jaw, Markle claw, death stare etc. I'm left with one major question: since Haz was obviously uncomfortable, why didn't Haz cut and run from this toxic woman who crashed a wedding of his best friend? If she ends up destroying him he has only his stupid self to blame.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Samantha’s Twitter account has been suspended. Buzzfeed “News” is 100% pro-Meghan and they accused Samantha of constantly posting negative stuff about Meghan on Twitter (which, let’s face it, she probably did). Why is it that Buzzfeed and the rest of the web crap sites out there get so outraged when their heroine is criticized but give Meghan a free pass on all her lies without a word?


That pi$$es me off.  Twitter allows pedophiles and actual terrorists to have platforms and Megain herself can spew lie after lie, but Samantha's is taken down?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> needlv,
> BLG heard you or someone sent him a message because he has *now posted a summary, 8 minute segment* that analyzes the clechched jaw, Markle claw, death stare etc. I'm left with one major question: since Haz was obviously uncomfortable, why didn't Haz cut and run from this toxic woman who crashed a wedding of his best friend? If she ends up destroying him he has only his stupid self to blame.


----------



## Toby93

Does no one realise that she is not being "searched" on google for positive reasons


"Meghan Markle remains the most influential member of the Royal Family, beating Kate Middleton and the Queen to the top spot. The Duchess of Sussex pulls in a total of 7.4 million Google searches a month, and she also features in 10.4 million Instagram hashtags. In 2021 alone, Meghan had 11,200 articles written about her, making the Duchess the most mentioned and searched-for royal.

The Duchess made waves across the world after she and her husband Prince Harry left the UK in 2020 and later provided a tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March the following year.

She pulls in double the media mentions, Instagram hashtags and searches of the Queen, who is the second most influential royal, and Kate Middleton, who ranks as third most influential.

The research, by creative resource Design Bundles, calculated global Google searches, media mentions and Instagram hashtags for 29 of the most popular royals in the world, to see which one had the biggest influence of all."


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Does no one realise that she is not being "searched" on google for positive reasons
> View attachment 5353488
> 
> "Meghan Markle remains the most influential member of the Royal Family, beating Kate Middleton and the Queen to the top spot. The Duchess of Sussex pulls in a total of 7.4 million Google searches a month, and she also features in 10.4 million Instagram hashtags. In 2021 alone, Meghan had 11,200 articles written about her, making the Duchess the most mentioned and searched-for royal.
> 
> The Duchess made waves across the world after she and her husband Prince Harry left the UK in 2020 and later provided a tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March the following year.
> 
> She pulls in double the media mentions, Instagram hashtags and searches of the Queen, who is the second most influential royal, and Kate Middleton, who ranks as third most influential.
> 
> The research, by creative resource Design Bundles, calculated global Google searches, media mentions and Instagram hashtags for 29 of the most popular royals in the world, to see which one had the biggest influence of all."


So true!
I feel very fortunate to work in an office where "Meghan Markle" is the byword for irrelevance and stupidity.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> needlv,
> BLG heard you or someone sent him a message because he has now posted a summary, 8 minute segment that analyzes the clechched jaw, Markle claw, death stare etc. I'm left with one major question: since Haz was obviously uncomfortable, why didn't Haz cut and run from this toxic woman who crashed a wedding of his best friend? If she ends up destroying him he has only his stupid self to blame.


That's what I don't understand.  Why would he supposedly not like her, take someone else, she crashes the wedding, hangs all over him, and he goes on to propose??


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Keep asking questions, hold these ‘royals’ to account. It’s about time the truth gets told.


If it is true that 7 years ago the asking price of their house was $49.5M, it's really surprising that they were able to purchase it for $14.5M.


_This masterpiece that took nearly five years to create, can now be yours for *$49,5 million*._






						The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million – eXtravaganzi
					

The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million




					www.extravaganzi.com


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> That's what I don't understand.  Why would he supposedly not like her, take someone else, she crashes the wedding, hangs all over him, and he goes on to propose??


FOMO? Love-bombing?
Maybe she was already offering him Hollywood dreams before the proposal. He was said to be not that happy with his royal duties, the girls he seriously pursued previously had not been willing to go to the altar with him, and here comes a woman who claims on a magazine cover to be wild over him, pays her own airfare to fly to him (there were stories that Hazard expected his girlfriends to pay their own expenses), gives him exciting visits to the supermarket, pursues him incessantly and offers him an alternative wealthy lifestyle option so that he can rival his brother.


----------



## xincinsin

I checked Design Bundles - the "online resource" company that issued that research finding about Methane being the most influential royal. They have no credible reputation for research of any kind. It's like that so-called voice expert who claimed that Methane had the best voice for podcasts and audiobooks and that guy who identified Twitter accounts who spewed M hatred. All of them have questionable credibility.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> That's what I don't understand.  Why would he supposedly not like her, take someone else, she crashes the wedding, hangs all over him, and he goes on to propose??



Perhaps she had photos of Hazzie behaving inappropriately?  It’s an old trick, a bit mean but the stakes are high.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> If it is true that 7 years ago the asking price of their house was $49.5M, it's really surprising that they were able to purchase it for $14.5M.
> View attachment 5353492
> 
> _This masterpiece that took nearly five years to create, can now be yours for *$49,5 million*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million – eXtravaganzi
> 
> 
> The Chateau of Riven Rock, Montecito On Sale for $49,5 Million
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.extravaganzi.com



Sounds like a classic quid pro quo  OR  somebody knew the _chateau_ had serious issues


----------



## rose60610

Toby93 said:


> Does no one realise that she is not being "searched" on google for positive reasons
> View attachment 5353488
> 
> "Meghan Markle remains the most influential member of the Royal Family, beating Kate Middleton and the Queen to the top spot. The Duchess of Sussex pulls in a total of 7.4 million Google searches a month, and she also features in 10.4 million Instagram hashtags. In 2021 alone, Meghan had 11,200 articles written about her, making the Duchess the most mentioned and searched-for royal.
> 
> The Duchess made waves across the world after she and her husband Prince Harry left the UK in 2020 and later provided a tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March the following year.
> 
> She pulls in double the media mentions, Instagram hashtags and searches of the Queen, who is the second most influential royal, and Kate Middleton, who ranks as third most influential.
> 
> The research, by creative resource Design Bundles, calculated global Google searches, media mentions and Instagram hashtags for 29 of the most popular royals in the world, to see which one had the biggest influence of all."




People search Google for all sorts of reasons. Such as, "What do I do when my sewer backs up", or, "Did Epstein really kill himself?", so.....


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> That's what I don't understand.  Why would he supposedly not like her, take someone else, she crashes the wedding, hangs all over him, and he goes on to propose??



Maybe it went like this: "Harry, let's spend the night together, for old time's sake".  Then she used every move from her yacht girl days and some that she researched afterward.


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> That's what I don't understand.  Why would he supposedly not like her, take someone else, she crashes the wedding, hangs all over him, and he goes on to propose??



Faking a pregnancy?


----------



## Luvbolide

bellecate said:


> The one who will be King and the one who wants to be king.
> View attachment 5353354



Well, suppose he could be King of the Clowns…nah…not funny enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Toby93 said:


> Does no one realise that she is not being "searched" on google for positive reasons
> View attachment 5353488
> 
> "Meghan Markle remains the most influential member of the Royal Family, beating Kate Middleton and the Queen to the top spot. The Duchess of Sussex pulls in a total of 7.4 million Google searches a month, and she also features in 10.4 million Instagram hashtags. In 2021 alone, Meghan had 11,200 articles written about her, making the Duchess the most mentioned and searched-for royal.
> 
> The Duchess made waves across the world after she and her husband Prince Harry left the UK in 2020 and later provided a tell-all interview with Oprah Winfrey in March the following year.
> 
> She pulls in double the media mentions, Instagram hashtags and searches of the Queen, who is the second most influential royal, and Kate Middleton, who ranks as third most influential.
> 
> The research, by creative resource Design Bundles, calculated global Google searches, media mentions and Instagram hashtags for 29 of the most popular royals in the world, to see which one had the biggest influence of all."



maybe it is just me, but I don’t equate “most searched for” with “influence”.  Perhaps she is being searched for because she is the most disliked.  And then, of course, there are those searching her name as they say “she did whaaaat “!


----------



## purseinsanity

Haz looks more and more like an idiot daily.

Juggling like a fool in the window of a lame, horrible failure of a birthday video that was crying for attention.  (The video and him both.)
Pretending to be a football fan.
Pretending to be Indiana Jones/Crocodile Dundee at, of all places, a Texan rodeo.
The orange outfit?  Practicing for prison??  
Say no more.


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> Haz looks more and more like an idiot daily.
> 
> Juggling like a fool in the window of a lame, horrible failure of a birthday video that was crying for attention.  (The video and him both.)
> Pretending to be a football fan.
> Pretending to be Indiana Jones/Crocodile Dundee at, of all places, a Texan rodeo.
> The orange outfit?  Practicing for prison??
> Say no more.



I think this is trying (desperately) to get back the “cheeky chappie” persona that the BRF PR team magically presented for Haz all those years when he fell out of pubs drunk, got caught naked in Vegas etc.

it just looks so stupid now.  Haznoballs is 37, with two kids.  Time to grow up!  (way past time …actually)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Don't forget to swipe


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Does no one realise that she is not being "searched" on google for positive reasons
> View attachment 5353488



These people might not fully understand what "influential" means.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These people might not fully understand what "influential" means.


Echoes of Princess Bride...


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, I'm sure she said that, hence him being totally crushed. I just don't believe for a minute she meant it. It was just one more tool in her box of manipulation.
> 
> Also, for someone crying hysterically as soon as the lights were off her make-up sure looks good.


And not one person in that box or the ones either side have come forward to confirm or deny it.
You'd hear her crying hysterically, wouldn't you?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think she emotionally manipulated him into thinking that his life would be terrible without her. Narcissists can do that, frankly they thrive on it. To be honest the last example I read of it was how Pete Davidson treated Larry David’s daughter. She writes about it in her book, and it makes me wonder with all these other women he dated since have gone through.


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't post this yesterday to avoid clutter, but I think it deserves a spot here:


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> The one who will be King and the one who wants to be king.
> View attachment 5353354


The man who will be King and his court jester.


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> The man who will be King and his court jester.


Ouch!


----------



## Chanbal

I wish I didn't click on their PR, but I did. So, the reason why he would be "on food stamps" is in the Spoiler. 





Spoiler: PR story?



*Meghan Markle thanked Simon Rex for turning down tabloid offers to claim they slept together*
Raechal Shewfelt
·Editor, Yahoo Entertainment
Mon, March 14, 2022, 5:53 PM
Simon Rex was, admittedly, in need of some serious cash when multiple tabloids in the United Kingdom wanted him to say that he had slept with Meghan Markle, a co-star on a March 2005 episode of the UPN sitcom _Cuts_. No, it never happened — although they went to lunch once, as friends — but the tabs were willing to give him $70,000 to say that it did.
“I was broke as f***! I really needed the money,” Rex told _The Guardian_ in an interview published Friday. "But I'll be on food stamps before I do that."
Rex said that Markle thanked him in a letter, which he framed and keeps at his home in Joshua Tree in Southern California.
"She said: 'It's nice to know there are still good people," Rex said.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wish I didn't click on their PR, but I did. So, the reason why he would be "on food stamps" is in the Spoiler.
> 
> View attachment 5353773
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: PR story?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle thanked Simon Rex for turning down tabloid offers to claim they slept together*
> Raechal Shewfelt
> ·Editor, Yahoo Entertainment
> Mon, March 14, 2022, 5:53 PM
> Simon Rex was, admittedly, in need of some serious cash when multiple tabloids in the United Kingdom wanted him to say that he had slept with Meghan Markle, a co-star on a March 2005 episode of the UPN sitcom _Cuts_. No, it never happened — although they went to lunch once, as friends — but the tabs were willing to give him $70,000 to say that it did.
> “I was broke as f***! I really needed the money,” Rex told _The Guardian_ in an interview published Friday. "But I'll be on food stamps before I do that."
> Rex said that Markle thanked him in a letter, which he framed and keeps at his home in Joshua Tree in Southern California.
> "She said: 'It's nice to know there are still good people," Rex said.


The Guardian ran this story? Must be a slow news day.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wish I didn't click on their PR, but I did. So, the reason why he would be "on food stamps" is in the Spoiler.
> 
> View attachment 5353773
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: PR story?
> 
> 
> 
> *Meghan Markle thanked Simon Rex for turning down tabloid offers to claim they slept together*
> Raechal Shewfelt
> ·Editor, Yahoo Entertainment
> Mon, March 14, 2022, 5:53 PM
> Simon Rex was, admittedly, in need of some serious cash when multiple tabloids in the United Kingdom wanted him to say that he had slept with Meghan Markle, a co-star on a March 2005 episode of the UPN sitcom _Cuts_. No, it never happened — although they went to lunch once, as friends — but the tabs were willing to give him $70,000 to say that it did.
> “I was broke as f***! I really needed the money,” Rex told _The Guardian_ in an interview published Friday. "But I'll be on food stamps before I do that."
> Rex said that Markle thanked him in a letter, which he framed and keeps at his home in Joshua Tree in Southern California.
> "She said: 'It's nice to know there are still good people," Rex said.



I find it impossible to believe a tabloid would offer him $70,000 to say he slept with her. $70 maybe. It’s 2022 and it’s no secret Meghan had a sex life before Harry. There’s nothing in a story like that worth paying for, true or not. It’s another PR stunt to attempt to make Meghan look like a victim, a highly desirable, sexual victim at that! Not buying it.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I find it impossible to believe a tabloid would offer him $70,000 to say he slept with her. $70 maybe. It’s 2022 and it’s no secret Meghan had a sex life before Harry. There’s nothing in a story like that worth paying for, true or not. It’s another PR stunt to attempt to make Meghan look like a victim, a highly desirable, sexual victim at that! Not buying it.


It's a cheap PR stunt, and I fall for it and clicked on the link. It looks like they are pushing again the victim rhetoric, and trying to cancel SM.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It's a cheap PR stunt, and I fall for it and clicked on the link. It looks like they are pushing again the victim rhetoric, and trying to cancel SM.




Sadly, I don’t think Harry had to contact anyone. There are many stans working for these awful web sites like Buzzfeed doing Harry’s job for him. Twitter likely takes accusations of violations more seriously when they come from members of the “press.”


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I find it impossible to believe a tabloid would offer him $70,000 to say he slept with her. $70 maybe. It’s 2022 and it’s no secret Meghan had a sex life before Harry. There’s nothing in a story like that worth paying for, true or not. It’s another PR stunt to attempt to make Meghan look like a victim, a highly desirable, sexual victim at that! Not buying it.


Maybe yacht girls get a premium?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't forget to swipe





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't forget to swipe



"snatch package on wheels"  That's one I've never heard.


----------



## charlottawill

"They give turtlenecks a bad name"  I come here for the laughs and am seldom disappointed


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I think she emotionally manipulated him into thinking that his life would be terrible without her. Narcissists can do that, frankly they thrive on it. To be honest the last example I read of it was how Pete Davidson treated Larry David’s daughter. She writes about it in her book, and it makes me wonder with all these other women he dated since have gone through.


I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These people might not fully understand what "influential" means.





xincinsin said:


> Echoes of Princess Bride...


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I find it impossible to believe a tabloid would offer him $70,000 to say he slept with her. $70 maybe. It’s 2022 and it’s no secret Meghan had a sex life before Harry. There’s nothing in a story like that worth paying for, true or not. It’s another PR stunt to attempt to make Meghan look like a victim, a highly desirable, sexual victim at that! Not buying it.


This is the weirdest humblebrag…. Look at me everyone I’m not committing libel for profit! Aren’t I amazing?

I suppose that would seem impressive to a certain couple in retrospect.

Also in what universe would you offer a nobody that money to say they slept with another d-lister - it’s not like anyone thought she was a virgin.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> "They give turtlenecks a bad name"  I come here for the laughs and am seldom disappointed




They could be in a band together and call it the Deluded Narcs (it has a double meaning in Britain). 

Awful when stupid people wear bad clothes, it's a bl**dy disaster when they wear classic choices - for other people. 

Let's jest celebrate Any Warhol, Audrey Hepburn, Sade, Marilyn and Yves Saint Laurent in theirs and forget the Deluded Narcs (including Steve Jobs who ripped everyone else's work off anyway)


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….


But did he really date that many? I only know of two by name, Chelsey Davy and Cressida Bonas. Partying naked in Las Vegas doesn't count.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….


Mommy issues?


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> But did he really date that many? I only know of two by name, Chelsey Davy and Cressida Bonas. Partying naked in Las Vegas doesn't count.


I think they were referring to  Pete Davidson.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> But did he really date that many? I only know of two by name, Chelsey Davy and Cressida Bonas. Partying naked in Las Vegas doesn't count.



If I read it correctly, that post about dating famous women was about Pete Davidson, not Hazz. 



lanasyogamama said:


> I think she emotionally manipulated him into thinking that his life would be terrible without her. Narcissists can do that, frankly they thrive on it. To be honest the last example I read of it was how *Pete Davidson* treated Larry David’s daughter. She writes about it in her book, and it makes me wonder with all these other women he dated since have gone through.


----------



## Chanbal

Agenda allegedly pushed by pro-Harkles…


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….


No, he didn’t grow up with money. His dad was a fire fighter who died on 9/11 in the towers.


----------



## limom

lanasyogamama said:


> No, he didn’t grow up with money. His dad was a fire fighter who died on 9/11 in the towers.


Surprised he got access to LD’s daughter as her mother is not one to play with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisousx

lanasyogamama said:


> I think she emotionally manipulated him into thinking that his life would be terrible without her. Narcissists can do that, frankly they thrive on it. To be honest the last example I read of it was how Pete Davidson treated Larry David’s daughter. She writes about it in her book, and it makes me wonder with all these other women he dated since have gone through.



Can we get cliff notes? I hadn’t heard of Pete at all until he started dating Kim.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently yachting is not the only way to prostitute yourself.


----------



## lanasyogamama

limom said:


> Surprised he got access to LD’s daughter as her mother is not one to play with.


I read about that in the book as well!


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> Surprised he got access to LD’s daughter as her mother is not one to play with.


Who is her mother?


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently yachting is not the only way to prostitute yourself.




The *right* thing to do would be donate any profiting from disabled veterans to Invictus. _Run towards the struggle_.

But we all know by now the only thing they do is anything that puts money in their pockets. I'd say _Do Better_ but we all know they shamelessly do only do what is $elf-$erving.

On another note - that orange getup looks like Dollar Store costuming. Very patronizing and tastless towards the Dutch. He could have done something classy but seems that is not possible for him.

Between the orange getup and the juggling outside of the window, I would be SO MORTIFIED as his spouse for anyone to see this silliness, let alone broadcast to the general public. It's like they trained the family dog to do tricks - only a grown man is not as cute as the family dog.

Their "handlers" must be very convincing and hardcore YES people. Because so much of what they do is a serious NO.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bisousx said:


> Can we get cliff notes? I hadn’t heard of Pete at all until he started dating Kim.



I just grabbed this one screenshot from an article about some of what she went through when she decided to break it off.
Some other things I remember is that he constantly accused her of flirting with men, like if a waiter took her order at a restaurant, he would tell her that she definitely didn’t love him because she didn’t kiss him enough or call him enough or who knows what. He would pick fights late at night so that she would get no sleep, all those things that you hear about an abusive relationships.


From https://www.eonline.com/amp/news/12...bout-pete-davidson-and-ariana-grandes-romance


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….


His father was a firefighter killed 9-11


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> Who is her mother?


A Long Islander from Dix Hills whom I heard is smart as a whip.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….


He's not even a poor little rich boy. He grew up in Staten Island, NY, the son of a firefighter who died on 9/11. I imagine that is a factor in his mental health issues. And until recently he was still living with his mother. 


bellecate said:


> I think they were referring to  Pete Davidson.


Sorry, my reading fail


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I read it correctly, that post about dating famous women was about Pete Davidson, not Hazz.


Sorry, my reading fail.


----------



## charlottawill

bisousx said:


> Can we get cliff notes? I hadn’t heard of Pete at all until he started dating Kim.





> https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/pictures/pete-davidsons-complete-dating-history/


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> His father was a firefighter killed 9-11


Which is why, Grace was rightfully given, imo.


----------



## papertiger

Which thread am I on?


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> This is the weirdest humblebrag…. Look at me everyone I’m not committing libel for profit! Aren’t I amazing?
> 
> I suppose that would seem impressive to a certain couple in retrospect.
> 
> Also in what universe would you offer a nobody that money to say they slept with another d-lister - it’s not like anyone thought she was a virgin.



I’m sure he expects to be rewarded for his loyalty to Meghan. That only goes to show how little he actually knows her.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo. He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….



Rumor has it Pete has an enormous schlong. Oh, and I guess he’s funny too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Rumor has it he has an enormous schlong. Oh, and I guess he’s funny too.



Which forum am I on?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Between the orange getup and the juggling outside of the window, I would be SO MORTIFIED as his spouse for anyone to see this silliness, let alone broadcast to the general public.



Yeah, but said spouse drank from a baby bottle, squatted down as if to pee and talked gibberish on national TV, so...


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Which forum am I on?



Sorry! Let’s see if I can put the thread back on track. Harry and Pete have both dated women way more attractive than they are. Harry got them with his royal title, while Pete got them with…

Hmm, not my best effort. I’ll go sit in the corner now.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but said spouse drank from a baby bottle, squatted down as if to pee and talked gibberish on national TV, so...



Right?!

Their lack of judgment is so mind-boggling.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Sorry! Let’s see if I can put the thread back on track. Harry and Pete have both dated women way more attractive than they are. Harry got them with his royal title, while Pete got them with…
> 
> Hmm, not my best effort. I’ll go sit in the corner now.



I'd go with killer sense of humor and big peen over royal title in a heartbeat. 

Especially when the royal title dude wants to be "Just Harry". Between the orange getup and juggling like a clown in the background there is no prize to be found there.


----------



## jennlt

Proof she was the weakest link


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but said spouse drank from a baby bottle, squatted down as if to pee and talked gibberish on national TV, so...


I was about to say the same thing 
Let's play this or that!

This:  Eating a cookie like a squirrel
Popping a squat
Drinking out of a baby bottle...all on national TV

That:  Wearing a Dumb and Dumber costume
Wearing an Indian Jones/Crocodile Dundee hat while pretending to be a good old American Southern boy
Juggling as you're locked outside while your wife does important (in her head) work indoors
...all while pretending to be a prince.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> *I'd go with killer sense of humor and big peen over royal title in a heartbeat.*
> 
> Especially when the royal title dude wants to be "Just Harry". Between the orange getup and juggling like a clown in the background there is no prize to be found there.


I don't know  
With those two as choices, picking one is like Sophie's Choice but in a weird scenario where you don't want either one.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Which thread am I on?


went off on tangent about pete davidson, who is dating kim K


----------



## LittleStar88

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know
> With those two as choices, picking one is like Sophie's Choice but in a weird scenario where you don't want either one.



But if you HAD to choose Thing One or Thing Two... I'm thinking of the long game. 

The sense of humor won't fade. But having to be your partner's mommy gets really tired really quick.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure he expects to be rewarded for his loyalty to Meghan. That only goes to show how little he actually knows her.


She already bestowed her reward: a letter that he can leak and which is carefully worded to tug at heartstrings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> But if you HAD to choose Thing One or Thing Two... I'm thinking of the long game.
> 
> The sense of humor won't fade. But having to be your partner's mommy gets really tired really quick.



All true - plus- the royal comes with a _job_   Ya gotta show up, smile, shake hands, look immaculate, behave with impeccable manners, etc.  For spoiled MM, it was exhausting. Hazzie, too, thought it was dreadful.  Pete would lower everyone’s expectations and make it fun, but he certainly has issues.   Bird in a cage or freedom?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This should put us back on topic -


----------



## Chanbal

Spreading the news…


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> But if you HAD to choose Thing One or Thing Two... I'm thinking of the long game.
> 
> The sense of humor won't fade. But having to be your partner's mommy gets really tired really quick.


True.  Sense of humor hopefully won't fade, but the "big peen" might...not work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jenayb

purseinsanity said:


> True.  Sense of humor hopefully won't fade, but the "big peen" might...not work.



BP, respectively.


----------



## gracekelly

Putting on a tin foil hat for a moment.  We all were suspicious and found it very interesting that these two should have any relationship at all with Russian businessmen.  The story was that the mansion in Canada belonged to a friend of David Foster and he was the facilitator for that.  We then had them "buying" the mansion in Montecito.  What did these Russians think they were going to get out of a relationship with #6?  Did they view Harry as a foot in the door?  Did they think he could be another Andrew vis a vis introductions for business deals?  To add another layer to my hat, I question this demand that Harry made to be privy to intelligence information.  Of course he wants to know if there are any creditable threats to himself, but it could be more.  Why should he have any access at all to any security information?  What does he think he could learn and sell to the right people?  What has Harry done in the past that leads him to believe that he is at risk of bodily injury?  I will take off the tin foil hat now


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> This should put us back on topic -


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean, it’s amazing how many famous women he has dated given *he looks like shaggy from the live action scooby doo.* He’s not famous here at all so I assumed he was just a poor little rich boy with a lot of school connections but sounds like there’s something darker here too….



    So true!!! Shaggy has more brains, though.

ETA: OOPS!!!!  I WAS READING QUICKLY AND THOUGHT THE "SHAGGY" REFERENCE WAS TO HARRY.  THEN I READ MORE POSTS AND DID A PALM SLAP.  Sorry.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


>



This is when you are invited as opposed to pushing your way into the party.  That entire UN appearance was a shameful fiasco.  They were treated politely until they weren't and the door was shown to them.


----------



## csshopper

Sophie, impeccably groomed, sincere, gracious, appropriately acknowledging her hosts, listening as well as participating. Showing how real royalty works.

 She is the antidote to the grubby, pushing, preachy wanna be, who showed up months ago, elbows thrust out to plow through everyone else, her ginger handbag trailing in her wake. The woman who went on to sucking baby bottles in public, chomping chipmunk imitations and squatting on a sidewalk. 

The contrast is staggering.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This should put us back on topic -




I clicked by accident while scrolling by, so had to endure the Little Mermaid shtick...the way she talks with all that eyebrow action is so freaking annoying. And no Raptor, you didn't have some kind of earth-shattering epiphany. You are just not that special.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I honestly doubt Kate ever walked around telling the world "I married a prince". As Lady C would say: vulgar.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> This should put us back on topic -



So much smirking!


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nothing in that piece I wouldn't believe in a heartbeat.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> So much smirking!



She overwhelms herself, thinking she’s so clever.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Putting on a tin foil hat for a moment.  We all were suspicious and found it very interesting that these two should have any relationship at all with Russian businessmen.  The story was that the mansion in Canada belonged to a friend of David Foster and he was the facilitator for that.  We then had them "buying" the mansion in Montecito.  What did these Russians think they were going to get out of a relationship with #6?  Did they view Harry as a foot in the door?  Did they think he could be another Andrew vis a vis introductions for business deals?  To add another layer to my hat, I question this demand that Harry made to be privy to intelligence information.  Of course he wants to know if there are any creditable threats to himself, but it could be more.  Why should he have any access at all to any security information?  What does he think he could learn and sell to the right people?  What has Harry done in the past that leads him to believe that he is at risk of bodily injury?  I will take off the tin foil hat now


well, it's possible he's indebted to some bad people but hopefully this is a stretch.  and hopefully his request for security info won't go anywhere


----------



## xeyes

gracekelly said:


> Putting on a tin foil hat for a moment.  We all were suspicious and found it very interesting that these two should have any relationship at all with Russian businessmen.  The story was that the mansion in Canada belonged to a friend of David Foster and he was the facilitator for that.  We then had them "buying" the mansion in Montecito.  What did these Russians think they were going to get out of a relationship with #6?  Did they view Harry as a foot in the door?  Did they think he could be another Andrew vis a vis introductions for business deals?  To add another layer to my hat, I question this demand that Harry made to be privy to intelligence information.  Of course he wants to know if there are any creditable threats to himself, but it could be more.  Why should he have any access at all to any security information?  What does he think he could learn and sell to the right people?  What has Harry done in the past that leads him to believe that he is at risk of bodily injury?  I will take off the tin foil hat now





sdkitty said:


> well, it's possible he's indebted to some bad people but hopefully this is a stretch.  and hopefully his request for security info won't go anywhere



Hopefully, this is an even stronger argument against giving him the info. Demonstrated lack of discretion + ties with Russian businessmen + access to sensitive information seems a pretty risky mix at the moment; that could easily be used to deny him access, and it would be hard for them to argue against it when they’ve made such a big production out of spilling the beans on the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> well, it's possible he's indebted to some bad people but hopefully this is a stretch.  and hopefully his request for security info won't go anywhere


If he gets kidnapped, I'm more likely to say "Whom did he offend?" rather than be worried about his extremities. 
His stans will probably accuse me of victim-blaming and rail about the trials of being born with risk


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> … I question this demand that Harry made to be privy to intelligence information.  Of course he wants to know if there are any creditable threats to himself, but it could be more.  Why should he have any access at all to any security information?  What does he think he could learn and sell to the right people?  What has Harry done in the past that leads him to believe that he is at risk of bodily injury?


I read that Harry’s demand for security in the UK allows him to access intelligence and the reason he wants intelligence information is for his memoir.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> I read that Harry’s demand for security in the UK allows him to access intelligence and the reason he wants intelligence information is for his memoir.


Speechless...


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I read that Harry’s demand for security in the UK allows him to access intelligence and the reason he wants intelligence information is for his memoir.


if the memoir is basically written and finished, how would this access to intelligence help?    A memoir is of things past and not things current.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> If he gets kidnapped, I'm more likely to say "Whom did he offend?" rather than be worried about his extremities.
> His stans will probably accuse me of victim-blaming and rail about the trials of being born with risk



If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> For sure, but I believe he will resent it at some point.


I agree. I keep thinking of Brideshead Revisited.


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.


Well, the fake claims of Paparazi chasing him from one of the events last time he was home certainly got exposed!


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> if the memoir is basically written and finished, how would this access to intelligence help?    A memoir is of things past and not things current.



One word: Netflix


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> I read that Harry’s demand for security in the UK allows him to access intelligence and the reason he wants intelligence information is for his memoir.



In that case, I have the perfect solution for Harry! He and Raptor make up crap all the time, so why do they even need "official security information"?  They can just make up more crap! And all the security people and/or government spooks can do is reply "we can neither confirm nor deny".  We know full well that about 80% of his "memoirs" is going to be fake, bragging, humble bragging, embellished and pity-seeking.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? *There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. *I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.



There are similarities in how narcissists operate. Jussie is still yelling to anyone who will listen that he cannot be locked up and if anything happens to him in jail it will be the judge’s fault. Um, no, it will be his own fault for being a liar and trying to deceive the world to make himself famous as a victim.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.


yes, that guy in Chicago basically ruined his own life for attention


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.



Don't you have to have some *value* to get kidnapped? SiXtH In LiNe is not valuable enough.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Don't you have to have some *value* to get kidnapped? SiXtH In LiNe is not valuable enough.


If the kidnappers were Sussex stans (or they read People), they would be thoroughly convinced of Handbag's lurve for Methane and they would kidnap her instead, so that Handbag would pay a ransom. How ironic that would be!


----------



## LittleStar88

I should add that the Jussie situation - he framed it as a hate crime against himself. That scenario would be more believable for Meghan and Harry.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> if the memoir is basically written and finished, how would this access to intelligence help?    A memoir is of things past and not things current.


His memoir is probably is full of "his truths" and thus, fluid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.


I wouldn't put it past her.  Just like the Chicago doofus, she'll claim racism as well.  
You stage something, are found out, and punished, yet it's everyone else who is racist and at fault and you did nothing wrong.  
I'm sorry, but it's like the Boy Who Cried Wolf.  You claim racism for everything, at some point, people stop caring.


----------



## V0N1B2

gracekelly said:


> if the memoir is basically written and finished, how would this access to intelligence help?    A memoir is of things past and not things current.


Mummy
He can finally blame someone, anyone for her death - instead of a plain 'ol drunk/speeding driver.
That just so.... pedestrian. There's got to be a bigger conspiracy, right? I think that's what his wife has told him, anyway.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> if the memoir is basically written and finished, how would this access to intelligence help?    A memoir is of things past and not things current.


is it finished as in gone to press?

To me, access to intelligence meant access to all sorts of past information that could make his book more enticing and confirm his mindset that the BRF are awful people.

But maybe I'm just assuming too much...


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> is it finished as in gone to press?
> 
> To me, access to intelligence meant access to all sorts of past information that could make his book more enticing and confirm his mindset that the BRF are awful people.
> 
> But maybe I'm just assuming too much...


You are making an interesting point about his trying to make them look bad, but I don't think that even if they shared with him, they would give him info from the past.  I am pretty sure that he is looking for real time information and that is one reason I don't trust him.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, the fake claims of Paparazi chasing him from one of the events last time he was home certainly got exposed!


Staging a kidnapping would be beyond stupidity.  If he reads the newspapers, if he knows how, he can see the story of the woman in California who after a long period of time was found to have lied about two women abducting her.  I was rather impressed that the police kept investigating this and caught her in the lie.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> His memoir is probably is full of "his truths" and thus, fluid.


Well, as a famous monarch has said, "recollections may vary." lolololol!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if he will do the rounds on the morning and evening chat shows to promote the book.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Staging a kidnapping would be beyond stupidity.  If he reads the newspapers, if he knows how, he can see the story of the woman in California who after a long period of time was found to have lied about two women abducting her.  I was rather impressed that the police kept investigating this and caught her in the lie.



Oh yes, the Pappini case! I can't believe she did that to run off with her ex-boyfriend. And he ended up telling the police that she was with him. What a mess!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if he will do the rounds on the morning and evening chat shows to promote the book.



Only if prerecorded with editing approval - unless they offer to pay him a huge cash amount.  He is _royal_, after all.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> If Harry gets kidnapped, would you put it past him & Raptor to have it staged? There was a little bit of that going around recently in Chicago but the imposter was found guilty of framing his own assault, is going to jail for a short while, and has to pay restitution to the CPD for all the drama he caused. I wouldn't put it past Raptor at all, though all hands on deck  and probably the FBI would be on the case. They'd have to do something brilliant to pull it off successfully (so that part's out) . I'm convinced she's AT LEAST thought about it. She can't get enough of manufactured drama and pity.


I may be in the minority here, but I think staging a kidnapping would be a bridge too far even for them.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> yes, that guy in Chicago basically ruined his own life for attention


It's really a shame, because he is a talented singer.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Well, as a famous monarch has said, "recollections may vary." lolololol!


The Queen knows how to throw shade in the most dignified way possible.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if he will do the rounds on the morning and evening chat shows to promote the book.


This is an interesting point.  Will the chat shows jump on this or show good taste by not have the British Royal Family openly dissed on TV?  Gayle King might do it because she is Oprah's toady.  Then again, maybe not because she is Oprah's toady haha!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> One word: *Netflix*


I wasn't able to cancel Netfl*x, but I have a major achievement to report. A couple of weeks ago, Netfl*x put up an announcement about another plan increase, and instead of clicking to acknowledge my new rate, I changed to their cheapest plan. I don't think DH noticed the plan change yet.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I wasn't able to cancel Netfl*x, but I have a major achievement to report. A couple of weeks ago, Netfl*x put up an announcement about another plan increase, and instead of clicking to acknowledge my new rate, I changed to their cheapest plan. I don't think DH noticed the plan change yet.


Sounds like my husband.  The only thing he would notice would be his not be able to watch a particular sporting event.  If that happened, I would hear about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I may be in the minority here, but I think staging a kidnapping would be a bridge too far even for them.


It would require planning and foresight that is beyond them. To start with, they would have to get around their own top-notch security. 

Just speculating: maybe when the contract is up for renewal, they will haggle over the price, drag their feet over renewing, cut back on manpower required, and thus create seeming holes in their security. The kidnapping doesn't even have to actually take place. H&M can just get an anonymous BFF to leak it that a kidnapping attempt was thwarted, thus promoting their victim image, bolster their cries of danger and racism, point a figurative finger to everyone who isn't giving them money and intel for better security (aka Bank of Dad). Lifetime can fictionalize it in their next movie to enhance the faked danger.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> This is an interesting point.  Will the chat shows jump on this or show good taste by not have the British Royal Family openly dissed on TV?  Gayle King might do it because she is Oprah's toady.  Then again, maybe not because she is Oprah's toady haha!



Good taste? Ratings is the name of the game. The US morning shows will be competing for an exclusive, along with Anderson Cooper, 60 Minutes, etc. MM will make sure she gets on air with him and whine to a likely sympathetic Don Lemon about how racist the BRF is. She'll be beside herself with all the attention.


----------



## Chanbal

We will need a lot of popcorn!



1) Ginger Guru vs The Home Office
2) Ginger Guru vs _The Mail on Sunday_ 
3) M*rkle vs M*rkle


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW's lawyers need popcorn too…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> We will need a lot of popcorn!
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Ginger Guru vs The Home Office
> 2) Ginger Guru vs _The Mail on Sunday_
> 3) M*rkle vs M*rkle



Looks like they are making a career of it. That one pound win must have been a shot in the arm for them. Start small, and build up to a couple of million pennies.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW's lawyers need popcorn too…




"....blistering attack on his daughter"

Well if she can speak her "truth", she has to expect that he will speak his too.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> This is an interesting point.  Will the chat shows jump on this or show good taste by not have the British Royal Family openly dissed on TV?  Gayle King might do it because she is Oprah's toady.  Then again, maybe not because she is Oprah's toady haha!


He will have to do the chat shows to promote the book , it is probably in his contract


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> He will have to do the chat shows to promote the book , it is probably in his contract


He might storm off-screen if the chat shows don't throw softball questions. Just imagine if he has to do book signings and have to deal with the great unwashed. However will his security cope?


----------



## Jktgal

charlottawill said:


> Orange Foolius.



Clown prince


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## LittleStar88

I wonder if they have a Festivus pole in the house. I bet every day is Festivus for Meghan!


----------



## Chanbal

Selling @etsy like hotcakes for only $140. Could someone pass this info to Charles? Allegedly, the poor man paid ~$1M for unfitted clothes. Had he known about Etsy…










						Meghan Markle Inspired GREEN Dress Custom Made Pencil With | Etsy
					

**EU customers please note there might be additional custom charges** •• ALL items are made when order, for both standard size and custom size ••  Inspired by Meghan Markle, this stunning emerald green dress offers a pencil cut body-hugging fit. A matching flowing asymmetrical cape drapes




					www.etsy.com


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


>



Insufferable twat


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Selling @etsy like hotcakes for only $140. Could someone pass this info to Charles? Allegedly, the poor man paid ~$1M for unfitted clothes. Had he known about Etsy…
> View attachment 5355515
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Inspired GREEN Dress Custom Made Pencil With | Etsy
> 
> 
> **EU customers please note there might be additional custom charges** •• ALL items are made when order, for both standard size and custom size ••  Inspired by Meghan Markle, this stunning emerald green dress offers a pencil cut body-hugging fit. A matching flowing asymmetrical cape drapes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com


I must say this model looks fab in it - that tiny waist! It makes Methane look even more like a leprechuan in comparison.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Selling @etsy like hotcakes for only $140. Could someone pass this info to Charles? Allegedly, the poor man paid ~$1M for unfitted clothes. Had he known about Etsy…
> View attachment 5355515
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Inspired GREEN Dress Custom Made Pencil With | Etsy
> 
> 
> **EU customers please note there might be additional custom charges** •• ALL items are made when order, for both standard size and custom size ••  Inspired by Meghan Markle, this stunning emerald green dress offers a pencil cut body-hugging fit. A matching flowing asymmetrical cape drapes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com


We so need to get over the green dress, when the red formal is so much more dreadful LOL


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> We so need to get over the green dress, when the red formal is so much mor dreadful LOL


I think the expensive white potato sack mini dress from New York with the tiny neck hole was worst of all.


----------



## csshopper

First of all, my skin starts crawling with thoughts of scabies when I read the name Omid Scobie.

Full article in the DM and on other sites.

If this is supposed to enhance Haz in the eyes of the world, they have sadly miscalculated, I hope.

He seeks to gain points by writing lovingly of his Grandmother, yet will seek to destroy the people who are important to her. To me it speaks to the total depravity of this sniveling man child and the greed and avarice of his handlers and TW in encouraging him. Of course any attack on Camilla will hurt Her Majesty, who has lovingly supported Camilla and acknowledged it so very publicly. The same with Charles, William, Catherine and anyone else he feels he needs to tear down to make his pitiful self seem more grand.

*Prince Harry 'will go out of his way' to not criticise Queen in memoir*
Prince Harry will 'go out of his way' to not criticise the Queen in his upcoming bombshell memoir, Meghan Markle's friend Omid Scobie has claimed.

The Duke of Sussex, 37, is set to publicly spill all on his relationship with his estranged family in an explosive £14.7million ($20million) memoir due to be published later this year.

The Finding Freedom author has said Harry, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California having stepped back from royal duty, 'really wants to celebrate her life and his relationship with her in that book.'

It comes after friends of the Duke  warned his no-holds barred book will lay bare his true feelings towards his step-mother Camilla and is likely to 'shake the monarchy to its core'.


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the expensive white potato sack mini dress from New York with the tiny neck hole was worst of all.



I saw a comment on Reddit that she looks like a thumb in this picture     

Truly an unfortunate combination of dress choice and camera angle. I personally would be so embarrassed if it were me.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



I was tempted to say something mean about MM not knowing how to cross her legs but I'll refrain.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Selling @etsy like hotcakes for only $140. Could someone pass this info to Charles? Allegedly, the poor man paid ~$1M for unfitted clothes. Had he known about Etsy…
> View attachment 5355515
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Inspired GREEN Dress Custom Made Pencil With | Etsy
> 
> 
> **EU customers please note there might be additional custom charges** •• ALL items are made when order, for both standard size and custom size ••  Inspired by Meghan Markle, this stunning emerald green dress offers a pencil cut body-hugging fit. A matching flowing asymmetrical cape drapes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com




Oh, such glamorous and feminine clothes from the 1940's and 1950's.  This is how it's done, but very, very few ladies have a figure like this.....wish I did! 

MM hasn't a hope to wear such tailored clothes; you'd need to be verrrrrrrry slim indeed and wear foundation garments, too, which I'm sure the model in the green dress is definitely doing.

Anyway, just love the sheer elegance!


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I must say this model looks fab in it - that tiny waist! It makes *Methane look even more like a leprechuan* in comparison.



Bearing mind the date and all wearing green, that's being very unkind to leprechuans


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> We will need a lot of popcorn!
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Ginger Guru vs The Home Office
> 2) Ginger Guru vs _The Mail on Sunday_
> 3) M*rkle vs M*rkle



The hat trick! Who is paying the legal bills?


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the expensive white potato sack mini dress from New York with the tiny neck hole was worst of all.



  I give you white potato sack, but raise you the 'worst'

As worst, my money is on the _hideous_ red-on-red-on-red poly-blend pyjama 'ensemble' she polluted NY, NY with. There is no one alive that could make that look good, and she took it to a new level of low.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I was tempted to say something mean about MM not knowing how to cross her legs but I'll refrain.



Wait. What.
You mean the “Princess Diaries” were wrong ???? Julie Andrews tricked us? Anne Hathaway, too? How could they?
Real life and Hwood life are supposed to be the same, right?  Won’t  somebody always be there to tell me, a nearly 40 yr old college-educated divorcee, exactly what to do?


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Bearing mind the date and all wearing green, that's being very unkind to leprechuans


I stand corrected, esp on this day. Leprechauns look better than her any day. The way her mask slips, perhaps it would be more appropriate to liken her to the demoness in Chinese horror stories who uses masks made from the faces of her victims. But then those demonesses were true succubi while Methane is just crass.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What should have been a nice looking skirt - turns tragic in daylight.



ETA:  chic?
This was when she they had advisors - gasp


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if he will do the rounds on the morning and evening chat shows to promote the book.



 Of course! Gotta hawk the merch!  And the next time either one visits school children, they'll force a story hour and read it to them: "the big bad monarchy refused to pay for our security so we lied to Netflix about creating content   had an interview with Oprah to lie our heads off  tell her our truth because we'll do anything for a buck .


----------



## Toby93




----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5355757



This summer?! They move slower than molasses in the winter at getting anything completed. I would have been fired from my job long ago if I took this long to complete just one thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> What should have been a nice looking skirt - turns tragic in daylight.
> View attachment 5355700
> 
> 
> ETA:  chic?
> This was when she they had advisors - gasp
> 
> View attachment 5355705



She's so predictable, she _must_ have her Diana comparisons


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> It would require planning and foresight that is beyond them.



You're right. Plus, Raptor can't act well enough to be convincing that they'd been kidnapped. But I have to wonder if she'd plan to ditch her detail and claim she'd been threatened in the 20 minutes she was out of sight. It'd be her word against everyone else's, and that's what she loves to do. The sugars would back her up.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> I give you white potato sack, but raise you the 'worst'
> 
> As worst, my money is on the _hideous_ red-on-red-on-red poly-blend pyjama 'ensemble' she polluted NY, NY with. There is no one alive that could make that look good, and she took it to a new level of low.
> 
> View attachment 5355678




This game is way too much fun.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> This game is way too much fun.



Can you find better worse?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I think the expensive white potato sack mini dress from New York with the tiny neck hole was worst of all.



I vote for the red dress back in the UK, not because it was especially awful - in fact, if I remember correctly it even kind of fit - but because it was so respectless. And we know she did it intentionally.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Prince Harry will 'go out of his way' to not criticise the Queen in his upcoming bombshell memoir, *Meghan Markle**'s friend Omid Scobie *has claimed.



A very one-sided "friendship", isn't it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

MiniMabel said:


> Oh, such glamorous and feminine clothes from the 1940's and 1950's.  This is how it's done, but very, very few ladies have a figure like this.....wish I did!
> 
> MM hasn't a hope to wear such tailored clothes; you'd need to be verrrrrrrry slim indeed and wear foundation garments, too, which I'm sure the model in the green dress is definitely doing.
> 
> Anyway, just love the sheer elegance!



Jup, I was going to say, it's not even the figure it's the undergarments which do the heavy lifting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> What should have been a nice looking skirt - turns tragic in daylight.
> View attachment 5355700



Has her choice of underwear made anyone else think she knew exactly how see-through the skirt was?


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I give you white potato sack, but raise you the 'worst'
> 
> As worst, my money is on the _hideous_ red-on-red-on-red poly-blend pyjama 'ensemble' she polluted NY, NY with. There is no one alive that could make that look good, and she took it to a new level of low.
> 
> View attachment 5355678


The definition of a hot mess.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What should have been a nice looking skirt - turns tragic in daylight.
> View attachment 5355700


Maybe she was channeling Diana again with the see through skirt.  Except Megain was intentional.  (Maybe Diana's was too??)


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> She's so predictable, she _must_ have her Diana comparisons
> 
> View attachment 5355762
> View attachment 5355763


Sorry just saw your post!


----------



## sdkitty

interestingly, this says Meghan is releasing a podcast - not Meghan & H.  and they're still calling her Duchess
Meghan Markle Will Release Her First Spotify Podcast This Summer | HuffPost Entertainment


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> interestingly, this says Meghan is releasing a podcast - not Meghan & H.  and they're still calling her Duchess
> Meghan Markle Will Release Her First Spotify Podcast This Summer | HuffPost Entertainment



Is she going to tell the story again how at age 11 she wrote a feminist letter and changed a whole industry?


----------



## papertiger

sun said:


> interestingly, this says Meghan is releasing a podcast - not Meghan & H.  and they're still calling her Duchess
> Meghan Markle Will Release Her First Spotify Podcast This Summer | HuffPost Entertainment



Wait, what? Wait, this couldn't be a  sucks diversion tactic could it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she was channeling Diana again with the see through skirt.  Except Megain was intentional.  (Maybe Diana's was too??)



Definitely a Diana wannabe, here’s the real problem - Diana was _20_-ish when that happen, not yet married, not yet divorced.  She did not have too many of those fashion disasters as a working royal, if any.  Huge difference - one is due to the inexperience of youth, the other is _willful disrespect_.  Plus, Hazz has his own set of disasters - wrinkles, untucked shirts, exposed underwear, scruffy shoes, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is she going to tell the story again how at age 11 she wrote a feminist letter and changed a whole industry?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> interestingly, this says Meghan is releasing a podcast - not Meghan & H.  and they're still calling her Duchess
> Meghan Markle Will Release Her First Spotify Podcast This Summer | HuffPost Entertainment



Guessing it will be a 10-15 minute lecture, maybe both kids will giggle at the end.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Guessing it will be a 10-15 minute lecture*, maybe both kids will giggle at the end.
> 
> View attachment 5355895



*"Guessing it will be a 10-15 100-115 minute lecture"*

You may be guessing right, it'll just feel a l o t longer


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Wait, what? Wait, this could be a  sucks diversion tactic could it?
> 
> View attachment 5355888



It only took her a year and a half to come up with an hour of content. Who am I kidding? IF she does a podcast I bet it won’t be more than 20 minutes.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing it will be a 10-15 minute lecture, maybe both kids will giggle at the end.
> 
> View attachment 5355895



That’s her sassy briefcase girl pose!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> It only took her a year and a half to come up with an hour of content. Who am I kidding? IF she does a podcast I bet it won’t be more than 20 minutes.



That'll be 20 minutes too long for me


----------



## bellecate

Just came across this. Creepy, also have the removed TW’s little finger?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> That'll be 20 minus too long for me



If we knew how many hours we’ve spent on this thread over the past five years I bet we would be horrified. Meghan has stolen away a part of our lives. On the other hand, she has brought us together as a community united in our feelings.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bellecate said:


> Just came across this. Creepy, also have the removed TW’s little finger?
> View attachment 5355926
> View attachment 5355927


I’m not a fan of Julia Roberts as a person, but there’s no denying that she has a really great on screen presents that Meghan could never match.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> If we knew how many hours we’ve spent on this thread over the past five years I bet we would be horrified. Meghan has stolen away a part of our lives. On the other hand, she has brought us together as a community united in our feelings.



Meghan and Harry are better entertainment than they could ever produce.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> If we knew how many hours we’ve spent on this thread over the past five years I bet we would be horrified. Meghan has stolen away a part of our lives. On the other hand, she has brought us together as a community united in our feelings.



The pandemic gave us this time. We are a voice for truth, and the world needs the truth to be told - now more than ever.  If these two had not deceived so many, we would not be here. If the media did its job, rather than spew bogus PR, we would not be here.  All H&M need to do is stop the lectures, stop the lies, stop their hate, stop their hypocrisy.  For most, exiting the world stage would be easy.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The pandemic gave us this time. We are a voice for truth, and the world needs the truth to be told - now more than ever.  If these two had not deceived so many, we would not be here. If the media did its job, rather than spew bogus PR, we would not be here.  All H&M need to do is stop the lectures, stop the lies, stop their hate, stop their hypocrisy.  For most, exiting the world stage would be easy.



Only I can’t blame the pandemic. I was already pretty much living here well before the first known case of Covid. Maybe I should be embarrassed about that but I think it’s funny.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Only I can’t blame the pandemic. I was already pretty much living here well before the first known case of Covid. Maybe I should be embarrassed about that but I think it’s funny.



I came on board on March 27, 2020.
That was 2 weeks after the pandemic began. 2 weeks - that was all I could take of the closures. No shopping, no Starbucks, no Hermes, no volunteering, no travel. I know, I know it seems frivolous [and it is], still I had no idea what to do with my time, no idea of all the changes that would happen in these 2 years. This, though, has been a fun place to be, a relief, a support. Thanks to all for getting me through it. Now, we need distractions from the horrors of the war. Together, we can get through this. Hugs, blessings, peace, love to all.

Maybe, just maybe, H&M have done some good, after all.     Ut oh, I am falling down the hole. A good bagslap helps.


----------



## Hermes Zen

bellecate said:


> Just came across this. Creepy, also have the removed TW’s little finger?
> View attachment 5355926
> View attachment 5355927


Hmmm interesting.  That's her left hand and we've noticed the thumb looking odd also.  Wonder if she had an accident or had a deformity?  Has anyone ever seen a clear photo of her left hand?  Someone mentioned M had prob with her foot or feet.  Maybe another reason for M to hang on to H and others as we've seen in photos.  Could be why she's done yoga for years to give her good balance.  I'll stop   anyway, interesting.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Just came across this. Creepy, also have the removed TW’s little finger?
> View attachment 5355926
> View attachment 5355927


Another day, another delusion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> A good bagslap helps.


----------



## Annawakes

Her absolute worst worst worst outfit was that bedsheet Dior caftan with the weird belly lines and lumpy chest.


----------



## bag-mania

Ladies, there's no need for it to become a competition. There are literally dozens of Meghan fashion failures! She has worn something to offend everyone's eye, no matter what styles you love or hate,


----------



## bellecate

Then there is this $29,000 Canadian (£17,478) monstrosity.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Then there is this $29,000 Canadian (£17,478) monstrosity.
> View attachment 5356071



Yeesh! I am going to divert attention from that beige mess to point out how she loves to carry a portfolio because she thinks it makes her look like she’s got lots of amazing ideas and big plans.


----------



## lanasyogamama

We should do a March Madness bracket!


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> We should do a March Madness bracket!


And maybe have the red formal compete directly with the white floral mini skirt ??? 
Cool …


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> We should do a March Madness bracket!


More like Meghan Madness


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Hmmm interesting.  That's her left hand and we've noticed the thumb looking odd also.  Wonder if she had an accident or had a deformity?  *Has anyone ever seen a clear photo of her left hand?*  Someone mentioned M had prob with her foot or feet.  Maybe another reason for M to hang on to H and others as we've seen in photos.  Could be why she's done yoga for years to give her good balance.  I'll stop   anyway, interesting.


Maybe we should examine all those Markle Claw photos...

ETA: the wedding (or fake wedding according to Methane) - Hazard had to put a ring on her left hand! And the close-ups of the TRANSFORMERS! engagement ring.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ladies, there's no need for it to become a competition. There are literally dozens of Meghan fashion failures! She has worn something to offend everyone's eye, no matter what styles you love or hate,


You are absolutely right. The price tag ensemble deserves an honourable mention.


----------



## Chanbal

_He said: "Harry and Meghan are living like hermits in a 26-room house.

"They never have parties they never have guests, I think the only guests they have are their million dollar lawyers._









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'are living like hermits in a 26-room house' blasts Thomas Markle
					

Thomas Markle spoke to Dan Wootton about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's lifestyle




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## needlv

Annawakes said:


> Her absolute worst worst worst outfit was that bedsheet Dior caftan with the weird belly lines and lumpy chest.



THIS -  and the fact it cost about GBP90,000 (USD 120k or so).  









						Meghan Markle's Lavish Morocco Wardrobe Includes $120K Dior Gown
					

Meghan Markle's clothing during her and Prince Harry's Morocco tour reportedly amounts to over $100,000.




					www.ibtimes.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Of course *rolls eyes*


----------



## Annawakes

Again with the typos


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> Her absolute worst worst worst outfit was that bedsheet Dior caftan with the weird belly lines and lumpy chest.



Ah, the caftan that could have bought someone an apartment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

I saw this and thought about the contrast to the self importance of Harry, who feels he needs police protection in order to step foot back in the UK....   I know there are protection officers, but they are well out of sight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand my favourite. I need ice for the burn I suffered just reading this


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of course *rolls eyes*



who is this Carly person?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aaand my favourite. I need ice for the burn I suffered just reading this



why is this just Meghan's podcast, not H&M's?  Is this a trial balloon to see how she could do post-divorce?


----------



## papertiger

From Sky news:

*Camilla replaces Meghan as royal patron of National Theatre*






Fri, 18 March 2022, 6:48 am


The Duchess of Cornwall has been made royal patron of the National Theatre by the Queen, taking over from Meghan who was withdrawn from the role when she and Prince Harry stepped down as senior royals.
The new role for Camilla marks another sign of the Queen's faith in the Duchess of Cornwall, after she revealed her wish to endorse her as the future Queen Consort in her Platinum Jubilee message last month.
The National Theatre patronage was one of two royal patronages the Queen handed to Meghan in 2019.
In 2021, following a review the year after the Sussexes stepped down as senior working royals, Meghan’s National Theatre patronage was taken away.


A 'privilege' for the theatre
The National Theatre said it was delighted Camilla, who is a long-standing supporter of the arts, was taking on the role and described her as a devoted fan of theatre.
Director and joint chief executive of the National Theatre, Rufus Norris, said: "It is a privilege to welcome the Duchess of Cornwall as the National Theatre's Royal Patron.
"The duchess shares our belief that theatre enriches our lives in so many ways and that everyone should have access to the arts and creativity no matter where they are in the world."
Camilla's existing patronages include: The Royal Academy of Dance, Royal Society of Literature, Friends of The Royal Academy, London Chamber Orchestra, National Youth Orchestra, Theatre Royal Bath, Unicorn Theatre for Children and Georgian Theatre Royal.
The Queen has been associated with the National Theatre since its earliest days at the Old Vic in the 1960s and last visited with the Duke of Edinburgh in 2013 as part of its 50th anniversary celebrations.
Review of the Sussexes
Prince Harry and Meghan, who relocated to the US after announcing they were stepping back as senior royals, now live in California.
During the review of the Sussexes, Meghan also had to give up her role as vice-president of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust, but kept her two private patronages: Smart Works and animal charity Mayhew.
Prince Harry lost his royal patronages and his honorary military roles, with the Duchess of Cambridge later taking over as patron of the Rugby Football Union and the Rugby Football League.
The Sussexes had wanted to keep the positions, with a spokesperson for the couple saying in a statement at the time: "We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of course *rolls eyes*






Annawakes said:


> Again with the typos



They're working the interns harder than hard at Mega's mansion, who's got time to proof read?

H&M have to counter so much Mz Information




Probably don't even get a chance for a lunch break


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> who is this Carly person?



A writer and editor for HuffPost.


----------



## sdkitty

so Netflix is hers (not theirs) but Invictus is theirs (not just his?)
Meghan and Harry issue harrowing statement on Ukraine grief as Invictus vet killed in war | Royal | News | Express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aaand my favourite. I need ice for the burn I suffered just reading this



Yep, their PR is working hard… It's disgusting. 

_An Archewell Audio spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday that the studio had encouraging conversations with Spotify executives regarding the platform’s misinformation policies and practices. As a result, the studio is moving forward with the production of Archewell’s first podcast series, from the Duchess of Sussex, which is expected to release this summer, the spokesperson said._









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle’s Archewell Audio Decides to Stay at Spotify to Launch First Series
					

The studio's first podcast series from the Duchess of Sussex is expected to launch this summer.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yep, their PR is working hard… It's disgusting.
> 
> _An Archewell Audio spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday that the studio had encouraging conversations with Spotify executives regarding the platform’s misinformation policies and practices. As a result, the studio is moving forward with the production of Archewell’s first podcast series, from the Duchess of Sussex, which is expected to release this summer, the spokesperson said._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle’s Archewell Audio Decides to Stay at Spotify to Launch First Series
> 
> 
> The studio's first podcast series from the Duchess of Sussex is expected to launch this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


so she's the boss of Spotify?


----------



## Chanbal

Miss USA and Kate, the style icon! More broken whatever in Montecito…


----------



## lanasyogamama

Annawakes said:


> Again with the typos


A chipmunk has better attention to detail


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Miss USA and Kate, the style icon! More broken whatever in Montecito…



this gown worn by sharon stone in Casino is kinda similar


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

One more pearl from twitter!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of course *rolls eyes*



Scamwell


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Beauty and heartthrob…



Surely the main throb is those toes?

I was going to say I feel bad this is  us to comment on a child’s looks, then I remembered this is inviting us to romanticise and to a degree sexualise these people as kids - which is even weirder.


Toby93 said:


> I saw this and thought about the contrast to the self importance of Harry, who feels he needs police protection in order to step foot back in the UK....   I know there are protection officers, but they are well out of sight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5356385


Harry: but but but that CAN’T be my brother…it’s probably just Kermit and Robin the Frog.

H prefers his personal protection to be a human convoy of 7 foot tall beefy  men with machine guns barking at everyone to get out of the way because you know he wants privacy and discretion.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aaand my favourite. I need ice for the burn I suffered just reading this



This podcast has got a worse release date wait than Sherlock and I’m sure they will find a way to outdo that show’s decline.

I’m sure all the people who quit in outrage over Rogan (yes all 30 of them) will subscribe to hear her Bon mots then unsubscribe again when they realise episode 3 comes out in 2035.


sdkitty said:


> so Netflix is hers (not theirs) but Invictus is theirs (not just his?)
> Meghan and Harry issue harrowing statement on Ukraine grief as Invictus vet killed in war | Royal | News | Express.co.uk


Using someone’s death like that is so sick. There’s no way they are that close to anyone at these games for them to be making statements about them.


sdkitty said:


> so she's the boss of Spotify?


No wonder their stock is tumbling. Jay z must be laughing his head off.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



Megsy, there will come a day when you wish that Variety mentions you at all. Can't come soon enough for the rest of us.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> who is this Carly person?



Young UK writer working for the New York office of HuffPost. She writes about royals, entertainment, and fashion. Obviously a stan as well.





__





						Pardon Our Interruption
					





					muckrack.com


----------



## V0N1B2

lanasyogamama said:


> A chipmunk has better attention to detail


Speaking of chipmunks


----------



## lanasyogamama

So Harry got fired from the pod?


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> so Netflix is hers (not theirs) but Invictus is theirs (not just his?)
> Meghan and Harry issue harrowing statement on Ukraine grief as Invictus vet killed in war | Royal | News | Express.co.uk


can you just see her explaining to "H" how this should be the case?.....I have this idea (rightly or wrongly) that she could talk to him like one would to a child and he would just go along with whatever she says


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> can you just see her explaining to "H" how this should be the case?.....I have this idea (rightly or wrongly) that she could talk to him like one would to a child and he would just go along with whatever she says


“Haz, you need to remain _*mysterious”*_

As if that ship didn’t sail long ago.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> So Harry got fired from the pod?



More like they gave up the pretense that he was in any way involved in the planning and production. I’m sure he will be available should Meghan want him to read a script or embarrass himself in some manner for Spotify.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> More like they gave up the pretense that he was in any way involved in the planning and production. I’m sure he will be available should Meghan want him to read a script or embarrass himself in some manner for Spotify.


even if he wasn't involved in the planning, they could have credited him I think.....The WIFE decided she should get the credit I think
I wonder at what point he's going to realize the cost of taking this WIFE


----------



## csshopper

Sunshine Sucks, Odious Omid and all the Scurrilous Stans may already be gearing up in an attempt to override the coming revelations from Thomas and Samantha. When photos and old family video are used to show real truths, it will take more than Princess Pinocchio’s usual word salads and misinformation to blunt them.  Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Daddy or his Accountant still had cancelled checks or payment receipts for tuition fees, dance lessons, car purchase etc.? 

Seems like a new strategy to split The Ginger and TW in hopes one of them will cease being viewed as a laughingstock, actually doing/saying something appropriate, sincere, altruistic, honest and generate some support that then reflects on both. Frankly, think it’s NOT going to be successful, we have seen too much of their real selves, all the rot on public display. And more to come with the Putrid Prince’s book


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> even if he wasn't involved in the planning, they could have credited him I think.....The WIFE decided she should get the credit I think
> I wonder at what point he's going to realize the cost of taking this WIFE



Maybe she insisted on having something that was all hers since she has to share the spotlight with Harry most of the time. She wants credibility for being something other than a famous man’s wife, which is all she is.

If he was ever going to come to that realization it would have happened already. We must accept that Harry is exactly where he wants to be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So royalinsta claims Raptor wasn't invited. What do we think, would the BRF go that far pre divorce?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Y'all think this out-of-control ego is somehow painful?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I give you white potato sack, but raise you the 'worst'
> 
> As worst, my money is on the _hideous_ red-on-red-on-red poly-blend pyjama 'ensemble' she polluted NY, NY with. There is no one alive that could make that look good, and she took it to a new level of low.
> 
> View attachment 5355678


You can make it look good if you know what you are doing.  Here is a blogger.




And of course she had to copy kate.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So royalinsta claims Raptor wasn't invited. What do we think, would the BRF go that far pre divorce?



With all of these royals present, the security would be huge and tight, but not good enough for Harry.  He want to be in a bullet proof bubble on wheels.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> One more pearl from twitter!



Where is Bethenny Frankel's name?


----------



## gracekelly

They had to make an announcement that they donated?  Pathetic.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> You can make it look good if you know what you are doing.  Here is a blogger.
> 
> View attachment 5356782
> 
> 
> And of course she had to copy kate.
> 
> View attachment 5356783



I wasn't getting at the monochromatic nature of the red. More the colour of shapeless, baggy seperates, made worse from aging tunback cuffs and detail.


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> Speaking of chipmunks


Every time I see scenes from this show, I am impressed at her total lack of common sense.  Some people would find a hole to crawl into and never come out after the responses to this.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I wasn't getting at the monochromatic nature of the red. More the colour of shapeless, baggy seperates, made worse from aging tunback cuffs and detail.


I know you were talking about style.  The pictures I posted show fit and styling from intelligent women.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Miss USA and Kate, the style icon! More broken whatever in Montecito…




Add Martha to the list -


----------



## Happyish

bellecate said:


> Then there is this $29,000 Canadian (£17,478) monstrosity.
> View attachment 5356071


What about this is $29,000 Canadian?


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the LP red coat

TBF, LP owns this mess.  I have not seen any photos of anyone looking picture perfect in that coat, not even their own models.





ETA:  MM owns _this_ mess:







__





						Meghan Markle steps up her boss lady game in Emporio Armani and Loro Piana ensembles during her trip to NYC
					

Meghan Markle donned back to back monochromatic outfits during her visit to NYC for the Global Citizen Live event.




					www.pinkvilla.com


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So royalinsta claims Raptor wasn't invited. What do we think, would the BRF go that far pre divorce?



Yes. I think they would due to the rude, attention seeking behavior she has shown in the past, along with her demonstrated desire to “cash in”.

She is a protocol, decorum, and PR nightmare (deliberately)!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Add Martha to the list -




Wow, Martha is looking great at 80!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I wasn't getting at the monochromatic nature of the red. More the colour of shapeless, baggy seperates, made worse from aging tunback cuffs and detail.


Topped by a rat’s nest hairdo dragging down her head. One of her worst ever I think.


----------



## gracekelly

Happyish said:


> What about this is $29,000 Canadian?


Even at Loro Piana prices and Brunello prices.  $29K?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> Megsy, there will come a day when you wish that Variety mentions you at all. Can't come soon enough for the rest of us.


I just noticed they got a bit of revenge by using a pic of her from a few noses back 

Julia Roberts should join Sam’s suit if M is really telling people they have similar noses.


bag-mania said:


> Maybe she insisted on having something that was all hers since she has to share the spotlight with Harry most of the time. She wants credibility for being something other than a famous man’s wife, which is all she is.
> 
> If he was ever going to come to that realization it would have happened already. We must accept that Harry is exactly where he wants to be.


This is very astutely put. He clearly takes her ‘not being taken seriously’ very seriously (Tbf his blood is the only reason he’s ever been famous & that’s pretty arbitrary too)

she’s going to get a participation prize panegyric fest that’ll quickly run out of steam because there’s only a number of ways you can skate around her being famous for being married to a man. Then perhaps she can throw open the floor to other women who want to rehabilitate their reputation or just bask in shallow praise… paging Chrissy Tegan! Hello Ellen? We promise we still you are funny and nice!

Let’s face it though. They might need to go all out drama at this stage and get Jada Pinkett Smith in to show them how to really make a chat show out of your marriage 

I can’t find the message now but talking about the new tell all book by H - I don’t think he’s going to Land any big punches.

We all know the title and notion of royalty IS his only moneymaker and prestige so there has to be at least a veneer of house honour about it all. 
Therefore Camilla and to a lesser extent Catherine are the only two people he could possibly have a go at. Camilla fits the bill better as having a hard time with your stepmother is a common trope and it’s therefore relatable. Also Diana points. Kate might work for the people who seem to think this entire thing has been an extended envy-fuelled cat fight but I think a lot of people find that a bit grating. Also both of them are  a) more liked than him and b) it’s a fine line of not looking like some bitter misogynist and let’s face it H isn’t one for fine anything.


Frankly I’d respect  Haz more if he did actually take a stance on shady issues like:
Andrew’s job as a  military and arms advisor
Andrew’s friendships with convicted felon and deceased felon
Andrew’s rape allegations
How he himself went from casually dropping slurs against Afghanis to piously informing the world of his anti-racist credentials in just a few short years.
To what extent is the commonwealth restitution for the horrors of the empire
I’d even settle for knowing how much the family are still bank rolling them.

Thing is that would require some actual moral courage rather than only grandstanding when it’s pretty much a unanimous vote aka “FYI guys disease=bad”


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the LP red coat
> 
> TBF, LP owns this mess.  I have not seen any photos of anyone looking picture perfect in that coat, not even their own models.
> 
> View attachment 5356798
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  MM owns _this_ mess:
> 
> View attachment 5356799
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle steps up her boss lady game in Emporio Armani and Loro Piana ensembles during her trip to NYC
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle donned back to back monochromatic outfits during her visit to NYC for the Global Citizen Live event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pinkvilla.com


Michael Kors on project runway M’s outfit edition:

“You achieved the impossible. She has camel toe in baggy pants”
“It’s the length from HELL” 
“She’s a mess just standing there so travelling is going to be a no”

and the number one most relevant:
“where do I start? You basically took a checklist of everything that could turn tacky….”

(Side note: MK gets a lot of stick for being fatphobic on that show but I think he gets scapegoated as they all were as was the entire fashion industry at the time. Also he’s the only funny judge and the most informative one too.)


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I know you were talking about style.  The pictures I posted show fit and styling from intelligent women.



Agreed, the other ladies in red looked immaculate and showed stunning style.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Y'all think this out-of-control ego is somehow painful?




So if it was me, and I was asked by Archewell or her PR to change the word “ex-royals”, I would change it to “MINOR Royals”


----------



## mellibelly

Can’t believe the Ginger Moron got more money than Britney Spears for his memoir. $20 million to her $15 million WTH! That publisher is going to regret it big time when his sales are on par with The Stench.


----------



## Lodpah

Now we might know why he made unreasonable demands to return for the memorial.









						Harry & Meg asked to present at Oscars next week - after Philip memorial snub
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan have been asked to present an award at next weekend’s Oscars. The couple were approached at the end of last year and offered the pick of gongs. It is understood they were be…



					www.the-sun.com


----------



## octopus17

Imo he looks dreadful in the pics/videos I've seen of him recently. He looks lost, as if his soul has been sucked out of him. I'm nearly beginning to feel a bit sorry for him tbh...


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Now we might know why he made unreasonable demands to return for the memorial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg asked to present at Oscars next week - after Philip memorial snub
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan have been asked to present an award at next weekend’s Oscars. The couple were approached at the end of last year and offered the pick of gongs. It is understood they were be…
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


Please tell me this is not true. The Oscar ratings have been in a downward slide for years, the producers must think this will keep people tuned in until the end of the show. It won't.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Add Martha to the list -



Now there's a couple of ladies I'd like to have cocktails with. The stories they could tell.....


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Ginger Guru and TW are supposed not to be named in the presence of OW.


----------



## Chanbal

She could smell the presence of photographers, despite looking uncomfortable holding Arch*e…


----------



## charlottawill

Cornflower Blue said:


> Imo he looks dreadful in the pics/videos I've seen of him recently. He looks lost, as if his soul has been sucked out of him. I'm nearly beginning to feel a bit sorry for him tbh...


William urged him to not rush into marriage but we know how that went. I can't feel too sorry for him.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> so Netflix is hers (not theirs) but Invictus is theirs (not just his?)
> Meghan and Harry issue harrowing statement on Ukraine grief as Invictus vet killed in war | Royal | News | Express.co.uk


Ha ha, I thought it was most apt that their statement was described as "harrowing" rather than the war or the death.



Chanbal said:


> Yep, their PR is working hard… It's disgusting.
> 
> _An Archewell Audio spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday that the studio had encouraging conversations with Spotify executives regarding the platform’s misinformation policies and practices. As a result, the studio is moving forward with the production of Archewell’s first podcast series, from the Duchess of Sussex, which is expected to release this summer, the spokesperson said._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle’s Archewell Audio Decides to Stay at Spotify to Launch First Series
> 
> 
> The studio's first podcast series from the Duchess of Sussex is expected to launch this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


Take note how they are spinning it. They are implying that the lack of work done and zero  production accomplished is due to H&M having concerns about misinformation on Spotify. A moral work stoppage or strike. If they were so morally upright, they would have cut ties (and refunded Spotify their money). Now that Her Heinous is "satisfied" with the moral rectitude of  her chosen platform, work can proceed.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> If we knew how many hours we’ve spent on this thread over the past five years I bet we would be horrified. Meghan has stolen away a part of our lives. On the other hand, she has brought us together as a community united in our feelings.



  Agreed!


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> Even at Loro Piana prices and Brunello prices.  $29K?


The $29 K is in Canadian dollars and I didn't realize they had added in the cost of her watch when quoting the price. Here are the figures from a different site that breaks down the prices of the beige outfit.

*Meghan Markle's wears €78,000 worth of clothes and jewellery during New York trip*

"On Saturday, Meghan kicked off the day with another visit to the UN in an all beige ensemble. She popped her €3,731 Max Mara camel coat back on and added a pair of €547 Max Mara high-waisted camel wool trousers.

She wore the Cartier Love Bracelet again, but this time added a €10,225 Cartier watch to the mix! This look cost a whooping €20,380!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Ginger Guru and TW are supposed not to be named in the presence of OW.




“_Their truth_”  - that is where it went all wrong for OW, GK, H&M. The statements are either true or false / fact or fiction. Anything else is simply equivocating. O has had plenty of experience with authors, actors, etc. who have equivocated. She used to be a better interviewer who cut through the nonsense. Not anymore.

[_use ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself.]
"“Not that we are aware of,she equivocated"_





Chanbal said:


> She could smell the presence of photographers, despite looking uncomfortable holding Arch*e…




That dress should be added to the Worst Dresses collection.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> The $29 K is in Canadian dollars and I didn't realize they had added in the cost of her watch when quoting the price. Here are the figures from a different site that breaks down the prices of the beige outfit.
> 
> *Meghan Markle's wears €78,000 worth of clothes and jewellery during New York trip*
> 
> "On Saturday, Meghan kicked off the day with another visit to the UN in an all beige ensemble. She popped her €3,731 Max Mara camel coat back on and added a pair of €547 Max Mara high-waisted camel wool trousers.
> 
> She wore the Cartier Love Bracelet again, but this time added a €10,225 Cartier watch to the mix! This look cost a whooping €20,380!"


The woman is living proof that you can take expensive fine quality garments and make them look like ca-ca


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Yep, their PR is working hard… It's disgusting.
> 
> _An Archewell Audio spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday that the studio had encouraging conversations with Spotify executives regarding the platform’s misinformation policies and practices. As a result, the studio is moving forward with the production of Archewell’s first podcast series, from the Duchess of Sussex, which is expected to release this summer, the spokesperson said._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle’s Archewell Audio Decides to Stay at Spotify to Launch First Series
> 
> 
> The studio's first podcast series from the Duchess of Sussex is expected to launch this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com


Now I get why they keep banging on about this ‘misinformation’ thing…they want to see how much they can get away with on her podcast. 

Funnily enough I’m pretty sure scooby calls them ex-royals in his execrable hagiography.


mellibelly said:


> Can’t believe the Ginger Moron got more money than Britney Spears for his memoir. $20 million to her $15 million WTH! That publisher is going to regret it big time when his sales are on par with The Stench.


That’s sexism and elitism for you, I guess. 


Lodpah said:


> Now we might know why he made unreasonable demands to return for the memorial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg asked to present at Oscars next week - after Philip memorial snub
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan have been asked to present an award at next weekend’s Oscars. The couple were approached at the end of last year and offered the pick of gongs. It is understood they were be…
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


This isn’t going to do much to help the Oscar’s reputation  for being an insider club making naff and dated choices totally divorced from both  the creative vanguard AND popular taste is it? 

Don’t think it’ll help the ratings either.

 Maybe H&M’s security offered to help sweep away the homeless for free this year?

On the plus side this just gave the comedy commentators some free material


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> The woman is living proof that you can take expensive fine quality garments and make them look like ca-ca



or perhaps she is just horrible in dressing her body shape.  Some of the clothes are lovely but she doesn’t dress for her shape.  She is dressing as though she is Gisele….


----------



## needlv

mellibelly said:


> Can’t believe the Ginger Moron got more money than Britney Spears for his memoir. $20 million to her $15 million WTH! That publisher is going to regret it big time when his sales are on par with The Stench.



Wasn’t it $20M for four books?

The bench was one
H memoirs
then
a book by M (most likely about their divorce)
and a fourth book ?

but honestly I didn’t believe the $20M.  It was probably $2M and their PR upped the $ and made a show about profits going to sentebale charity.  Profits After expenses and they paid themselves.  Charity will be lucky if it sees $50


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> or perhaps she is just horrible in dressing her body shape.  Some of the clothes are lovely but she doesn’t dress for her shape.  She is dressing as though she is Gisele….


I was thinking about this. She’s a funny one in that she wears so many different styles  and looks bad in all of them. 

It all comes down to this grinding need to be the pouty sexy sexpot all the time when that just looks a bit dated/boring.

She’s an apple body type I would say but in contrast one of the frustrating things about  being an hourglass recommendations is it’s usually ‘saucy secretary pencil skirt to flaunt your gorgeous curves’ and quite frankly pencil Skirts suck and these looks ain’t practical.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> or perhaps she is just horrible in dressing her body shape.  Some of the clothes are lovely but she doesn’t dress for her shape.  She is dressing as though she is Gisele….


When a narc repeats or hears a lie often enough, it can become his/her truth. In this case, she likely believes she really is an ex-supermodel.


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> With all of these royals present, the security would be huge and tight, but not good enough for Harry.  He want to be in a bullet proof bubble on wheels.



Is the Pope-mobile available?!


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> The woman is living proof that you can take expensive fine quality garments and make them look like ca-ca



It is her secret superpower - taking clothing from good lines made from beautiful fabrics and turning each outfit into a horror show…


----------



## papertiger

H&M making headlines in the UK gossip mags rags this week (again)


----------



## Luvbolide

needlv said:


> Wasn’t it $20M for four books?
> 
> The bench was one
> H memoirs
> then
> a book by M (most likely about their divorce)
> and a fourth book ?
> 
> but honestly I didn’t believe the $20M.  It was probably $2M and their PR upped the $ and made a show about profits going to sentebale charity.  Profits After expenses and they paid themselves.  Charity will be lucky if it sees $50



I haven’t paid attention to the $ involved, but it is definitely 4 books.  The “memoir” this year (supposedly holding some back out of respect for the Queen).  A second book in the same vein, except no holds barred because it will come out after the Queen passes away and a third book, this one written by MM - I would imagining me some kind of lifestyle BS.  Though it could be her rags-to-“Princess” life of service.  Gag…
Can’t recall the fourth…


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I was thinking about this.* She’s a funny one in that she wears so many different styles  and looks bad in all of them.*
> 
> It all comes down to this grinding need to be the pouty sexy sexpot all the time when that just looks a bit dated/boring.
> 
> She’s an apple body type I would say but in contrast one of the frustrating things about  being an hourglass recommendations is it’s usually ‘saucy secretary pencil skirt to flaunt your gorgeous curves’ and quite frankly pencil Skirts suck and these looks ain’t practical.



It takes a special talent

Still

Netflicks and Spotify will be glad she has _some_ kind of talent


----------



## carmen56

Luvbolide said:


> It is her secret superpower - taking clothing from good lines made from beautiful fabrics and turning each outfit into a horror show…



Raptor should take a leaf out of Kate’s book and find a couple of styles that suit her and stick with them.  The money Raptor spends on clothes, she can afford little tweaks or changes to the style to make sure they fit properly.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Now I get why they keep banging on about this ‘misinformation’ thing…they want to see how much they can get away with on her podcast.
> 
> Funnily enough I’m pretty sure scooby calls them ex-royals in his execrable hagiography.
> 
> That’s sexism and elitism for you, I guess.
> 
> This isn’t going to do much to help the Oscar’s reputation  for being an insider club making naff and dated choices totally divorced from both  the creative vanguard AND popular taste is it?
> 
> Don’t think it’ll help the ratings either.
> 
> Maybe H&M’s security offered to help sweep away the homeless for free this year?
> 
> On the plus side this just gave the comedy commentators some free material


I don't want to believe they're presenting at the Oscars.  And I haven't found the story anywhere else.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Please tell me this is not true. The Oscar ratings have been in a downward slide for years, the producers must think this will keep people tuned in until the end of the show. It won't.



I used to watch the Oscars every year with DH or DH and friends.  We'd have seen most or all of the movies and it was fun to look at the gowns and watch the arrival red carpet. The last decade or so, I'm lucky if I've seen one or two of the nominated movies each year so I have no interest and DH and I both just stopped caring.  In particular though, this year, it just seems wrong to get dressed to the max, with their $100K swag bags, when there is such horror going on in the world. Wearing a little flag pin and commenting on how they "stand" with those suffering doesn't cut it for me.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's the real reason that Kate and William skipped the BAFTA's. It just seems wrong to party lavishly like that. Tone deaf, bad optics.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I will not tape or turn on the Oscars this year if there is even a chance they get to present best picture.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If they do, you know that the wife lobbied extremely hard for this to match the Cambridges appearance at the Bond premiere.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I will not tape or turn on the Oscars this year if there is even a chance they get to present best picture.


again - I don't believe it.  Best picture?  on what grounds would they be chosen to do that?  makes no sense


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> again - I don't believe it.  Best picture?  on what grounds would they be chosen to do that?  makes no sense


Is Sunshine Sucks involved again?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Is Sunshine Sucks involved again?


the "report" from the US Sun - whatever that is and they use British spelling - says "it's up in the air"


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> the "report" from the US Sun - whatever that is and they use British spelling - says "it's up in the air"


Oh good, that makes it sound like one of those things they floated out there so that people believe it was potentially happening.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh good, that makes it sound like one of those things they floated out there so that people believe it was potentially happening.



Coz U no, JCMH is fitting fighting all that Mz Information stuff U gut get wiz za MEDIA 

Still barking working well-passed bed-time overtime in Montechino Montecito


----------



## purseinsanity

Cornflower Blue said:


> Imo he looks dreadful in the pics/videos I've seen of him recently. He looks lost, as if his soul has been sucked out of him. I'm nearly beginning to feel a bit sorry for him tbh...


He looks like he made a deal with the devil.  Oh wait…


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I used to watch the Oscars every year with DH or DH and friends.  We'd have seen most or all of the movies and it was fun to look at the gowns and watch the arrival red carpet. The last decade or so, I'm lucky if I've seen one or two of the nominated movies each year so I have no interest and DH and I both just stopped caring.  In particular though, this year, it just seems wrong to get dressed to the max, with their $100K swag bags, when there is such horror going on in the world. Wearing a little flag pin and commenting on how they "stand" with those suffering doesn't cut it for me.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's the real reason that Kate and William skipped the BAFTA's. It just seems wrong to party lavishly like that. Tone deaf, bad optics.


Could not agree more.


----------



## Chanbal

Dump Harry before the wedding, nah… 


_A source said: “It did feel like that if the palace was not able to stand up and support his girlfriend, against some of that disgusting coverage . . . then who in their right mind would ever consider entering into a relationship [with him] in the future? He was very exercised about some of that coverage. He definitely felt that if nothing was done to support her, then she would be, ‘I’m not sure this is what I signed up for’.” Another said: “*He was freaking out, saying, ‘She’s going to dump me*’.”_





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.md


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh good, that makes it sound like one of those things they floated out there so that people believe it was potentially happening.


about the US Sun....a tabloid which has H&M as a favorite subject
Rupert Murdoch launches US Sun | TheHill


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> They're working the interns harder than hard at Mega's mansion, who's got time to proof read?
> 
> H&M have to counter so much Mz Information
> 
> View attachment 5356451
> 
> 
> Probably don't even get a chance for a lunch break
> 
> View attachment 5356456


Too. Dang. Funny!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



Her narcissism and his stupidity will be their undoing. She could have had a life of privilege and comfort, but she blew it all by herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I used to watch the Oscars every year with DH or DH and friends.  We'd have seen most or all of the movies and it was fun to look at the gowns and watch the arrival red carpet. The last decade or so, I'm lucky if I've seen one or two of the nominated movies each year so I have no interest and DH and I both just stopped caring.  In particular though, this year, it just seems wrong to get dressed to the max, with their $100K swag bags, when there is such horror going on in the world. Wearing a little flag pin and commenting on how they "stand" with those suffering doesn't cut it for me.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's the real reason that Kate and William skipped the BAFTA's. It just seems wrong to party lavishly like that. *Tone deaf, bad optics.*



So true with so many people.  Can’t they read the room?
Most CEOs have figured it out - flaunting one’s wealth just doesn’t work, especially now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So royalinsta claims Raptor wasn't invited. What do we think, would the BRF go that far pre divorce?



If the BRF drew a line in the sand all I can say is it’s about time.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Her narcissism and his stupidity will be their undoing. *She could have had a life of privilege and comfort*, but she blew it all by herself.



. . . and lived a life of service to the UK and Commonwealth.  Showing up at retirement homes and veteran memorial services and half-way houses means a lot to the people at those places and the staff, even if it isn't particularly glamorous at times. If they really wanted to make a difference, demonstrate compassion and "shine a light", this refugee crisis is the perfect opportunity and, being further down the line of succession, I don't see why they couldn't have gone to Poland to see what's going on there and launched a Bethany Frankel type fundraiser to help refugees in a meaningful way.  Instead, they sit in Cali working on a podcast.  Yes, those refugees are really going to appreciate a MM podcast. Maybe she'll bake them a lemon olive oil cake.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> . . . and lived a life of service to the UK and Commonwealth.  Showing up at retirement homes and veteran memorial services and half-way houses means a lot to the people at those places and the staff, even if it isn't particularly glamorous at times. If they really wanted to make a difference, demonstrate compassion and "shine a light", this refugee crisis is the perfect opportunity and, being further down the line of succession, I don't see why they couldn't have gone to Poland to see what's going on there and launched a Bethany Frankel type fundraiser to help refugees in a meaningful way.  Instead, they sit in Cali working on a podcast.  Yes, those refugees are really going to appreciate a MM podcast. Maybe she'll bake them a lemon olive oil cake.


Do we seriously believe she bakes?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



This take on things sounds pretty good to me and makes some sense re Spotify and NF.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Do we seriously believe she bakes?


I don't know what to believe in, I'm referring to the last Lady C video posted today.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Do we seriously believe she bakes?


The only thing in relation to baking with this woman is that her stories are half baked lies.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Take note how they are spinning it. They are implying that the lack of work done and zero  production accomplished is due to H&M having concerns about misinformation on Spotify. A moral work stoppage or strike. If they were so morally upright, they would have cut ties (and refunded Spotify their money). Now that Her Heinous is "satisfied" with the moral rectitude of  her chosen platform, work can proceed.



I have to admit having a grudging respect for the way they manipulate the press. They (or those working on their behalf) are masterful at getting their lies repeated with the media being thrilled to do it. The only reason we know the truth is we are following them closely. Most people are not.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't want to believe they're presenting at the Oscars.  And I haven't found the story anywhere else.



The Oscars are a joke, as are award shows in general. Popularity has been dropping in recent years. I wouldn’t be sorry if those self-congratulatory events became a thing of the past, like beauty pageants.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The Oscars are a joke, as are award shows in general. Popularity has been dropping in recent years. I wouldn’t be sorry if those self-congratulatory events became a thing of the past, like beauty pageants.


it may not be what it used to be but it's still the most prestigious Hollywood award and the Z-list actress and her dufus former prince husband have no business being there


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I have to admit having a grudging respect for the way they manipulate the press. They (or those working on their behalf) are masterful at getting their lies repeated with the media being thrilled to do it. The only reason we know the truth is we are following them closely. Most people are not.


I agree.  I think it is because they are paying top dollar to the masters.


----------



## LittleStar88

no security?


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> I used to watch the Oscars every year with DH or DH and friends.  We'd have seen most or all of the movies and it was fun to look at the gowns and watch the arrival red carpet. The last decade or so, I'm lucky if I've seen one or two of the nominated movies each year so I have no interest and DH and I both just stopped caring.  In particular though, this year, it just seems wrong to get dressed to the max, with their $100K swag bags, when there is such horror going on in the world. Wearing a little flag pin and commenting on how they "stand" with those suffering doesn't cut it for me.  I wouldn't be surprised if that's the real reason that Kate and William skipped the BAFTA's. It just seems wrong to party lavishly like that. Tone deaf, bad optics.


I mean, tbf, whatever they have at the BAFTAs is slumming it compared to the environment W&K already inhabit so it’s not exactly a sacrifice for them 
Whereas for many other production people getting an award nomination or win is the highlight of their career and I don’t begrudge them celebrating it with a pizzazz event. There’s also the fact Hollywood is a vicarious thrill sort of place by its very nature - after all the golden age of Hollywood was during and after World War Two which makes today’s problems look like small beer really. 

I think the Oscars have lost their allure precisely because we, the Audience, have rarely seen their picks, lots of great work gets unrecognised and their choices are just too formulaic.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> He looks like he made a deal with the devil.  Oh wait…


It’s like Liz Hurley’s bedazzled but with an _even worse _actress in lead.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remind me again why Hwood _needs_ the Oscars. Is it simply to promote their movies, their actors?
We all know how rigged it is, so it is not about excellence.  The pandemic showed us that we the audience do not these awards shows.  I am all for taking them off the air.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remind me again why Hwood _needs_ the Oscars. Is it simply to promote their movies, their actors?
> We all know how rigged it is, so it is not about excellence.  The pandemic showed us that we the audience do not these awards shows.  I am all for taking them off the air.



It exists solely for the film industry to stroke their own egos and celebrate themselves. For decades it’s been a fashion show. It serves no other purpose and never has.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

LittleStar88 said:


> no security?
> 
> View attachment 5357659


Paid friends?


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> Is Sunshine Sucks involved again?


Sunshine Sucks indeed. They’re making a big stink about dropping the    Hollywood Foreign Press Association as clients for their lack of diversity and meanwhile they rep/repped the Lying Harkles, Jussie Smollet and Harvey Weinstein. Sunshine Nutsack, professional faux woke performative bull$hitter$.

Edited to add: I fully believe Nutsack is behind the Oscar presenter rumor. No way in hades those two are invited anywhere near the Oscars now. Possibly they were invited when working royals and had to turn it down (you know TW was livid about that). She probably offered her services as a presenter the same way she offered to present the trophy at the US Open. In her warped mind this means they’re “in talks” and it’s “on the table”. Meanwhile everyone is laughing their asses off at her lame offer. Without being a working royal, she’s a nobody here in Hollywood.


----------



## gracekelly

the-best-soap-opera-ever

anonymous  asked:

My daughter is married to a man on one of the Oscar committees. He worked on many things, but regardless, all of what was considered Oscar business passed under his eyes. I asked if Megan and Harry were invited, over the past 2 years, invited to present or to attend. They were not invited then and are not invited now. No one would sit at their table and if it were known they were coming the "Regrets Only" responses would be flying in the door. I do not think people realize how disliked they are


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> If they really wanted to make a difference, demonstrate compassion and "shine a light", this refugee crisis is the perfect opportunity and, being further down the line of succession, I don't see why they couldn't have gone to Poland to see what's going on there and launched a Bethany Frankel type fundraiser to help refugees in a meaningful way.



What a silly idea youngster, nobody would have had time to give them the attention they deserve and to take a gazillion pictures because people would have been busy with a an actual crisis, a constant stream of displaced people and bombings creeping closer to the Polish border.

Speaking of lemon cake, I made a French lemon cake (it has crème fraîche!) that's a two day production (bake, baste in lemon syrup, let sit over night, glaze) for tomorrow to greet spring in style.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It exists solely for the film industry to stroke their own egos and celebrate themselves. For decades it’s been a fashion show. It serves no other purpose and never has.


For me, the best part was watching Joan Rivers' fashion commentary, and that's a thing of the past.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> the-best-soap-opera-ever
> 
> anonymous  asked:
> 
> My daughter is married to a man on one of the Oscar committees. He worked on many things, but regardless, all of what was considered Oscar business passed under his eyes. I asked if Megan and Harry were invited, over the past 2 years, invited to present or to attend. They were not invited then and are not invited now. No one would sit at their table and if it were known they were coming the "Regrets Only" responses would be flying in the door. I do not think people realize how disliked they are


I don't think _they _realize how disliked they are.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> no security?
> 
> View attachment 5357659


Alone at the rodeo, alone at dinner in Hwood. Hmmm, seeing a pattern here?


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> the-best-soap-opera-ever
> 
> anonymous  asked:
> 
> My daughter is married to a man on one of the Oscar committees. He worked on many things, but regardless, all of what was considered Oscar business passed under his eyes. I asked if Megan and Harry were invited, over the past 2 years, invited to present or to attend. They were not invited then and are not invited now. No one would sit at their table and if it were known they were coming the "Regrets Only" responses would be flying in the door. I do not think people realize how disliked they are



That's a relief! Besides, they couldn't enjoy their privacy which is sooooo important to them if they attended the Oscars.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Alone at the rodeo, alone at dinner in Hwood. Hmmm, seeing a pattern here?



A girl can dream!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A girl can dream!


I find it interesting that she hasn't been seen out and about solo, for a girls' night, lunch, weekend, etc. I'm sure it's not for lack of childcare. No friends is more like it. Maybe she's realized the hole she's dug for herself and is wallowing in her robe with bags of Oreos every night in her tacky mansion of questionable ownership.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I don't think _they _realize how disliked they are.


I think they are probably laughed at more than anything.  She for being so delusional in thinking that she would be accepted as one of the acting community and he because he is married to her, and attempting to do the same.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> wallowing in her robe with bags of Oreos



  That would explain her puffy face .


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think they are probably laughed at more than anything.  She for being so delusional in thinking that she would be accepted as one of the acting community and he because he is married to her, and attempting to do the same.


calling her a B-list TV actress would be generous.....all of her "cred" comes from the Duchess title


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> the-best-soap-opera-ever
> 
> anonymous  asked:
> 
> My daughter is married to a man on one of the Oscar committees. He worked on many things, but regardless, all of what was considered Oscar business passed under his eyes. I asked if Megan and Harry were invited, over the past 2 years, invited to present or to attend. They were not invited then and are not invited now. No one would sit at their table and if it were known they were coming the "Regrets Only" responses would be flying in the door. I do not think people realize how disliked they are


This made my day! There IS some hope for humanity.


----------



## xincinsin

I was asking Prof Google about the Oscar story and it surfaced once in Jan about how Methane was going to relaunch her Hollywood career by presenting a major award at the Oscars, and further back last year about how they were going to present Best Picture. Recycled story? And what Hollywood career? Some of the drivel out there tries to make it sound like Methane was an A-lister and bigger than Grace Kelly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I was asking Prof Google about the Oscar story and it surfaced once in Jan about how Methane was going to relaunch her Hollywood career by presenting a major award at the Oscars, and further back last year about how they were going to present Best Picture. Recycled story? And what Hollywood career? Some of the drivel out there tries to make it sound like Methane was an A-lister and bigger than Grace Kelly.


How on earth does presenting an Oscar equate to relaunching her career? The powers that be in Hwood know exactly where she is, but they haven't been beating a path to her door. The Duchess of Delusion strikes again.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Dump Harry before the wedding, nah…
> View attachment 5357547
> 
> _A source said: “It did feel like that if the palace was not able to stand up and support his girlfriend, against some of that disgusting coverage . . . then who in their right mind would ever consider entering into a relationship [with him] in the future? He was very exercised about some of that coverage. He definitely felt that if nothing was done to support her, then she would be, ‘I’m not sure this is what I signed up for’.” Another said: “*He was freaking out, saying, ‘She’s going to dump me*’.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.md


What does "_He was very *exercised* about some of that coverage." _mean? H took a jog around the palace grounds to work up an appetite for more roast chicken? 

Not that I dispute this story. I'm pretty sure Methane gaslighted him a lot to whip up the FOMO before she got the ring on her finger.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> What does "_He was very *exercised* about some of that coverage." _mean? H took a jog around the palace grounds to work up an appetite for more roast chicken.



 I like your imagery, but they meant the alternate definition for the word.

From Merriam-Webster:
*Exercised*
occupy the thoughts of; worry or perplex.
"the knowledge that a larger margin was possible still exercised him"


----------



## Katel

Lady C says today that Megan told a childhood friend, after not getting a period as a teen, that she was intersex (or hermaphrodite).

Starts around 3 min.

(ETA: she’s very careful to say she does not know if it’s true or not, and she’s very respectful about the topic and says it’s a lot more common than anyone really knows.)


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> Lady C says today that Megan told a childhood friend, after not getting a period as a teen, that she was intersex (or hermaphrodite).
> 
> Starts around 3 min



I take this with a large amount of salt. Weren't there also rumors of Wallis Simpson being a hermaphrodite? Did MM fashion herself to some extent after Simpson, consciously or not? From Wikipedia:

Wallis's memoirs _The Heart Has Its Reasons_ were published in 1956, and biographer Charles Higham said that "facts were remorselessly rearranged in what amounted to a self-performed face-lift". He describes the Duchess as "charismatic, electric and compulsively ambitious".[134]

Fictional depictions of the Duchess include the novel _Famous Last Words_ (1981) by Canadian author Timothy Findley, which portrays her as a manipulative conspirator,[135] and Rose Tremain's short story "The Darkness of Wallis Simpson" (2006), which depicts her more sympathetically in her final years of ill health.[136] *Hearsay and conjecture have clouded assessment of the Duchess of Windsor's life, not helped by her own manipulation of the truth. But there is no document which proves directly that she was anything other than a victim of her own ambition, who lived out a great romance that became a great tragedy.*[137] In the opinion of her biographers, "she experienced the ultimate fairy tale, becoming the adored favorite of the most glamorous bachelor of his time. The idyll went wrong when, ignoring her pleas, he threw up his position to spend the rest of his life with her."[137] The Duchess herself is reported to have summed up her life in a sentence: "You have no idea how hard it is to live out a great romance."[138]


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t know much about Wallis. Was she anywhere near as devious as Meghan?

I know she used her, um, skills and assets to secure the highest status for herself she could. However, that was not at all uncommon for women at that period in time, was it? It’s not like women had many options to make their own fortunes or have successful careers then. Did Wallis deceive Edward to get him to do what she wanted?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Does anyone know who Yankee Wally is? All the Royal watchers on Twitter are talking about her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Katel said:


> Lady C says today that Megan told a childhood friend, after not getting a period as a teen, that she was intersex (or hermaphrodite).
> 
> Starts around 3 min



I’m very disappointed with Lady C for posting this kind of click bait speculation especially given her own life.

If M or indeed anyone has gender identity issues it is their choice when they talk publicly about them - they don’t need outing but my other problem is doesn’t this kind of speculation make it seem like being trans is a bad thing?

For the most part, this story sounds like rot, lots of women don’t have periods for lots of reasons.

Also, I just don’t buy that a trans or intersex spouse would be allowed into the royal family purely because they make such a fuss about the bloodline and babies.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know much about Wallis. Was she anywhere near as devious as Meghan?
> 
> I know she used her, um, skills and assets to secure the highest status for herself she could. However, that was not at all uncommon for women at that period in time, was it? It’s not like women had many options to make their own fortunes or have successful careers then. Did Wallis deceive Edward to get him to do what she wanted?



I'll just say this: Wallis' clothes actually FIT.


----------



## pukasonqo

I thought the issue w WS was she had Triple X syndrome (not sure where I read that)
MM is not unique, I didn’t get my period until I was 17 and was often  confused with a boy (I admit that I encouraged that myself by dressing and acting boyishly)
MM certainly like drama, now are we supposed to conjecture is she or isn’t she? 
Would anybody care one way or another? Or not only the BRF is racist but also is against LBGTI people now represented by MM?


----------



## CarryOn2020

So.
Is LCC saying H&M did use a surrogate?  That’s all I want to know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Fear not, nobody thinks they should be there.


----------



## Katel

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m very disappointed with Lady C for posting this kind of click bait speculation especially given her own life.
> 
> If M or indeed anyone has gender identity issues it is their choice when they talk publicly about them - they don’t need outing but my other problem is doesn’t this kind of speculation make it seem like being trans is a bad thing?
> 
> For the most part, this story sounds like rot, lots of women don’t have periods for lots of reasons.
> 
> *Also, I just don’t buy that a trans or intersex spouse would be allowed into the royal family purely because they make such a fuss about the bloodline and babies.*



Right (bolded). And she’s verrry careful to say that maybe Meghan  was in typical drama mode and made it up and that she (Lady C) doesn’t know if it’s true or not. Out of respect, she’s not talked to the family, says some family issues should remain private. Because of her background especially, she’s very respectful and careful about the topic and gives honor (I felt). I didn’t get a click-baity sort of feel from what I’ve heard so far (the first half). She is an obvious (to me, anyway) advocate for anyone facing these questions and says it’s a lot more common than anyone really knows.



CarryOn2020 said:


> So.
> Is LCC saying H&M did use a surrogate?  That’s all I want to know.


Me too. But jelliedfeels’ comment about the BRF allowing the marriage re: bloodlines gives me pause.


----------



## Chanbal

Candace on racism and first amendments rights…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So.
> Is LCC saying H&M did use a surrogate?  That’s all I want to know.


It's a very private matter and I've no idea why Lady C made that video. I wish she didn't. Though, the all story about fake pregnant bellies is very weird. Too many apparent falsehoods linked to the Harkles, including their presence at the Oscars.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Does anyone know who Yankee Wally is? All the Royal watchers on Twitter are talking about her.


She has been exposing the Harkles on YT.


----------



## Chanbal

One more confirmation. 






__





						Blind Item #1
					

Don't believe the hype. The alliterate one and her ginger pup were not going to present the Best Actress award. It will be presented in the ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Does anyone know who Yankee Wally is? All the Royal watchers on Twitter are talking about her.





Chanbal said:


> She has been exposing the Harkles on YT.


There was quite a furore last year because the stans went after Yankee Wally and got her cancelled/account suspended on some platforms because he/she is critical of the dastardly duo. If I'm not mistaken, the nutcases also went after others like Murky Meg and doxxed them.

ETA: there is an allegation that one of the Buzzfeed journalists (pro-Nutmeg) was involved in doxxing Yankee Wally.








						YouTubers Come Under Fire From Sussex Squad Harpies
					

YouTubers are being blamed for Harry and Meghan's issues and three have become the main target in a so-called "report" on "hate accounts."




					cjhawkings.com
				











						Yankee Wally Gets Suspended From YouTube For Her Opinions
					

YouTuber Yankee Wally has been suspended from YouTube for having an opinion on Meghan Markle and her many lies.




					cjhawkings.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe I'm easily amused, but I can't stop laughing


----------



## Luvbolide

rose60610 said:


> I'll just say this: Wallis' clothes actually FIT.



Yes, they fit beautifully and we’re a perfect canvas for her gorgeous jewelry.


----------



## pukasonqo

I do feel sorry for MM even thought a lot of this drama was of her own making I don’t think she understood what was she getting into and what was expected of her
She was never going to “modernize” the BRF and probably should have read about Grace Kelly becoming Princess of Monaco and how she adapted to a life away from Hollywood (I know, GK was A list while MM never made into the big league)
Plus I am not sure that JCMH was a great catch


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> I do feel sorry for MM even thought a lot of this drama was of her own making I don’t think she understood what was she getting into and what was expected of her
> She was never going to “modernize” the BRF and probably should have read about Grace Kelly becoming Princess of Monaco and how she adapted to a life away from Hollywood (I know, GK was A list while MM never made into the big league)
> Plus I am not sure that JCMH was a great catch



I don't. She rushed into it before her victim could get away to advance herself, and I'm pretty sure while it's somewhat like parenting - you don't know how it really is until you're left with a tiny human to keep alive - she was told in detail but chose to ignore any and all advice because for some reason she thought she was better than that. 

I've said it before, I really do think nobody - and that includes us - would have uttered a negative word had they just announced the public life wasn't for her and that's why they were retiring, and had they just gone away to live a quiet life. Alas, the real problem was her ego couldn't deal with being the eternal #Doesn'tCount, she never wished to live a private life, and her lack of manners and decorum is astonishing.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't. She rushed into it before her victim could get away to advance herself, and I'm pretty sure while it's somewhat like parenting - you don't know how it really is until you're left with a tiny human to keep alive - she was told in detail but chose to ignore any and all advice because for some reason she thought she was better than that.
> 
> I've said it before, I really do think nobody - and that includes us - would have uttered a negative word had they just announced the public life wasn't for her and that's why they were retiring, and had they just gone away to live a quiet life. Alas, the real problem was her ego couldn't deal with being the eternal #Doesn'tCount, she never wished to live a private life, and her lack of manners and decorum is astonishing.


I don’t feel sorry for her either. I think she saw him as her ticket to a life of luxury and privilege and ignored the life of service part of the equation. I don’t think she had any grand plan to transform the BRF going into this. She pushed for the marriage as fast as possible before he could tire of her. Once married, she saw how much boring work was involved and pushed him to move to the US while she still had him under control. I don’t think she did much research or planning. The Ginger Fribble may be a useless twit but from a wealth and status point he’s still a substantial upward move from her prior husbands even with the bulk of the money tied up in the BRF where he can’t access it without the approval of the Queen or Prince Charles. Going along with the assumption re her lack of prior research and planning, I don’t think she realized how expensive their current lifestyle is to maintain. Or maybe she thinks they can keep spending because the BRF would step in to prevent the spectacle of Harry declaring bankruptcy.


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> I do feel sorry for MM even thought a lot of this drama was of her own making I don’t think she understood what was she getting into and what was expected of her
> She was never going to “modernize” the BRF and probably should have read about Grace Kelly becoming Princess of Monaco and how she adapted to a life away from Hollywood (I know, GK was A list while MM never made into the big league)
> Plus I am not sure that JCMH was a great catch


I don't think she attempted to understand. She makes a big deal in her whining about how she was allegedly left in the dark about many things. Maybe she really equated being a royal with being a celebrity. She expected a script with her as leading lady and was appalled when it didn't happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> Or maybe she thinks they can keep spending because the BRF would step in to prevent the spectacle of Harry declaring bankruptcy.



Which is probably true.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know much about Wallis. Was she anywhere near as devious as Meghan?
> 
> I know she used her, um, skills and assets to secure the highest status for herself she could. However, that was not at all uncommon for women at that period in time, was it? It’s not like women had many options to make their own fortunes or have successful careers then. Did Wallis deceive Edward to get him to do what she wanted?


I'll be charitable and just say she used her feminine wiles to charm him into abdicating. I see parallels between her and MM, but Wallis was undoubtedly a much more refined and sophisticated woman.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fear not, nobody thinks they should be there.



Major shade thrown, no reference to “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex” or “Prince Harry and his wife” or even “Harry and Meghan”.

 Just “these two.”

Another Sunshine Sucks misjudgment in marketing by false rumor that has backfired?


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> I do feel sorry for MM even thought a lot of this drama was of her own making I don’t think she understood what was she getting into and what was expected of her
> She was never going to “modernize” the BRF and probably should have read about Grace Kelly becoming Princess of Monaco and how she adapted to a life away from Hollywood (I know, GK was A list while MM never made into the big league)
> Plus I am not sure that JCMH was a great catch


He was a great catch for an aging (by Hwood standards) actress best known for a supporting role in a moderately successful TV show. It's not like she would have been offered plum roles in big productions when Suits ended. She knew she was reaching her expiration date, and he was low hanging fruit. She could have had a very privileged and comfortable life if not for her ambition and narcissism.


----------



## Chanbal

Is there any place without SS's participation? 











						Sunshine Sachs, PR Firm for HFPA, Drops Embattled Golden Globes Organization
					

Sunshine Sachs, the longtime PR firm for the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, has dropped the organization behind the Golden Globe as a client, Variety has confirmed. The PR firm has represente…




					variety.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Is there any place without SS's participation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sunshine Sachs, PR Firm for HFPA, Drops Embattled Golden Globes Organization
> 
> 
> Sunshine Sachs, the longtime PR firm for the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, has dropped the organization behind the Golden Globe as a client, Variety has confirmed. The PR firm has represente…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com



It was too good to be true that Hollywood would invite the idiots to give out an Oscar without some major pulling of strings.



charlottawill said:


> I'll be charitable and just say she used her feminine wiles to charm him into abdicating. I see parallels between her and MM, but Wallis was undoubtedly a much more refined and sophisticated woman.


I read the Wiki version of Wallis' life and found it quite "funny OMG" that the person who summarized her life basically said she didn't want an abdication. Like Methane, she wanted to be Queen. And like Methane, she rewrote her life in her memoirs to put herself in a good light. 

BTW, does anyone think Methane had a boob job? She wasn't very busty during the wedding, after her Deal or No Deal implants were removed. But she was bursting out of that brown shirt at NYC and her chest was prominent in the red outfit on the same trip.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> BTW, does anyone think Methane had a boob job? She wasn't very busty during the wedding, after her Deal or No Deal implants were removed. But she was bursting out of that brown shirt at NYC and her chest was prominent in the red outfit on the same trip.



My guess is pretending to breastfeed.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> It was too good to be true that Hollywood would invite the idiots to give out an Oscar without some major pulling of strings.


Yep, several of their participations are apparently linked to SS's contacts and not to their merits. It looks like the Oscars may have pushed them back…


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> It was too good to be true that Hollywood would invite the idiots to give out an Oscar without some major pulling of strings.
> 
> 
> I read the Wiki version of Wallis' life and found it quite "funny OMG" that the person who summarized her life basically said she didn't want an abdication. Like Methane, she wanted to be Queen. And like Methane, she rewrote her life in her memoirs to put herself in a good light.
> 
> BTW, does anyone think Methane had a boob job? She wasn't very busty during the wedding, after her Deal or No Deal implants were removed. But she was bursting out of that brown shirt at NYC and her chest was prominent in the red outfit on the same trip.


Baby weight most likely. Been there. Plus, bad outfit, bra, light. Those looked real, not like implants. And then in the awful red gown on that trip she looked smaller on top.


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> I do feel sorry for MM even thought a lot of this drama was of her own making I don’t think she understood what was she getting into and what was expected of her
> She was never going to “modernize” the BRF and probably should have read about Grace Kelly becoming Princess of Monaco and how she adapted to a life away from Hollywood (I know, GK was A list while MM never made into the big league)
> Plus I am not sure that JCMH was a great catch


I don't feel sorry for her.  I don't like people who use people.


----------



## rose60610

Umm....note to Methane and JCMH, here's what REAL STAR POWER can do: 

"Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher announced Thursday they had reached their goal, raising more than $30 million to help the people in Ukraine following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of the country in February."

That's beats a *&%$#%$@ lemon olive oil cake and hollow bellowed tweets any day of the week.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know much about Wallis. Was she anywhere near as devious as Meghan?
> 
> I know she used her, um, skills and assets to secure the highest status for herself she could. However, that was not at all uncommon for women at that period in time, was it? It’s not like women had many options to make their own fortunes or have successful careers then. Did Wallis deceive Edward to get him to do what she wanted?


Wallis was born into great wealth herself. She was very much the glamourous socialite and dinner party hostess in London and I think she was primarily into a social queen bee mindset rather than a career. 

Apparently she wanted to be Ed the 8th’s mistress (this would give her great power and swag) not David the duke’s wife (Ed was known as David to friends) & she asked him not to abdicate for her.

This is part of the reason why I think she was a bit of a cover reason- the reality is he had fascist sympathies & later got moved from a military post in France for being too positive about their Nazi opposition.

They were sent to the Caribbean & he was made governor of Barbados and Wallis was fuming because she want to be a city socialite not stuck in some tropical paradise where no one cares about  her outfits.

They move around quite a lot- lots of dinner parties and sickening Hermes bags, platinum jewellery, severe monochromatic tea dresses and skirt suits. She had a great style and definitely made an impression but I think she never quite got to where she wanted to be.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Umm....note to Methane and JCMH, here's what REAL STAR POWER can do:
> 
> "Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher announced Thursday they had reached their goal, raising more than $30 million to help the people in Ukraine following Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of the country in February."
> 
> That's beats a *&%$#%$@ lemon olive oil cake and hollow bellowed tweets any day of the week.


and they actually work as actors.....compared to H&M whose primary role is supposed to be activists or serving others or whatever it is they claim


----------



## Chloe302225

jelliedfeels said:


> Wallis was born into great wealth herself. She was very much the glamourous socialite and dinner party hostess in London and I think she was primarily into a social queen bee mindset rather than a career.
> 
> Apparently she wanted to be Ed the 8th’s mistress (this would give her great power and swag) not David the duke’s wife (Ed was known as David to friends) & she asked him not to abdicate for her.
> 
> This is part of the reason why I think she was a bit of a cover reason- the reality is he had fascist sympathies & later got moved from a military post in France for being too positive about their Nazi opposition.
> 
> They were sent to the Caribbean & he was made governor of Barbados and Wallis was fuming because she want to be a city socialite not stuck in some tropical paradise where no one cares about  her outfits.
> 
> They move around quite a lot- lots of dinner parties and sickening Hermes bags, platinum jewellery, severe monochromatic tea dresses and skirt suits. She had a great style and definitely made an impression but I think she never quite got to where she wanted to be.



Slight correction - he was the Governor of the Bahamas not Barbados.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Wallis was born into great wealth herself. She was very much the glamourous socialite and dinner party hostess in London and I think she was primarily into a social queen bee mindset rather than a career.
> 
> Apparently she wanted to be Ed the 8th’s mistress (this would give her great power and swag) not David the duke’s wife (Ed was known as David to friends) & she asked him not to abdicate for her.
> 
> This is part of the reason why I think she was a bit of a cover reason- the reality is he had fascist sympathies & later got moved from a military post in France for being too positive about their Nazi opposition.
> 
> They were sent to the Caribbean & he was made governor of Barbados and Wallis was fuming because she want to be a city socialite not stuck in some tropical paradise where no one cares about  her outfits.
> 
> They move around quite a lot- lots of dinner parties and sickening Hermes bags, platinum jewellery, severe monochromatic tea dresses and skirt suits. She had a great style and definitely made an impression but I think she never quite got to where she wanted to be.



I do remember the frenzy over her jewelry collection when it was auctioned after her death for a record amount, including celebrity bidders like Elizabeth Taylor and Joan Collins:


> https://people.com/royals/on-this-d...ons-historic-jewelry-collection-went-on-sale/


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> but I think she never quite got to where she wanted to be.



In that regard I believe Meghan will prove to have something in common with Wallis besides being a divorced American marrying royalty.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Wallis was born into great wealth herself. She was very much the glamourous socialite and dinner party hostess in London and I think she was primarily into a social queen bee mindset rather than a career.
> 
> Apparently she wanted to be Ed the 8th’s mistress (this would give her great power and swag) not David the duke’s wife (Ed was known as David to friends) & she asked him not to abdicate for her.
> 
> This is part of the reason why I think she was a bit of a cover reason- the reality is he had fascist sympathies & later got moved from a military post in France for being too positive about their Nazi opposition.
> 
> They were sent to the Caribbean & he was made governor of Barbados and Wallis was fuming because she want to be a city socialite not stuck in some tropical paradise where no one cares about  her outfits.
> 
> They move around quite a lot- lots of dinner parties and sickening Hermes bags, platinum jewellery, severe monochromatic tea dresses and skirt suits. She had a great style and definitely made an impression but I think she never quite got to where she wanted to be.


Another slight correction.  Wallis  had good family background and wealthy relatives, but she and her mother had to be supported by them after her father died, so I wouldn't say she was born into great wealth.  She was another woman who was looking for money and the social status attached to it.  

She was a consummate hostess and knew how things should be done.  She fit right into upper class British society whether by upbringing or by educating herself, but she did it, unlike TW who was too busy machinating to bother learning anything.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I do remember the frenzy over her jewelry collection when it was auctioned after her death for a record amount, including celebrity bidders like Elizabeth Taylor and Joan Collins:


Yes, and it was the Duke who had most of it made for her, and the pieces were unique.    Apparently he would go to Cartier and TELL them what he wanted.  If he was around today, he could have been a jewelry designer and made a bundle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, Wallis was indeed aspirational, probably seldom felt she was good enough. In the W&S interviews, the Duke comes across as quite particular about everything - looks, hair, style, lighting, food, even his word choice. Supposedly his parties were kinda wild [for a royal].  I can only guess his upbringing was a nightmare.

Perhaps this is why Hazz goes the opposite direction with his bare feet, wrinkles, chicken coop nonsense. MM never had H’s level of excess [or access], so she was most likely uncomfortable with that level of wealth.  Just my armchair psych 2 cents.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, I really do think *nobody - and that includes us - would have uttered a negative word *had they just announced the public life wasn't for her and that's why they were retiring, and had they just gone away to live a quiet life. Alas, the real problem was her ego couldn't deal with being the eternal #Doesn'tCount, she never wished to live a private life, and her lack of manners and decorum is astonishing.



So true. No one would have cared if Hazzie had not made such a big!big!big! deal about Diana’s death and MM’s press. Wonder if he realizes he overplayed all of this.  Supposedly, in the early days of marriage, William used Diana as his excuse for not working.  Eventually he heard the public outcry and stepped up. Of course he was younger when he married than Hazz was - 28 vs 33. [and his wife was much more grounded than MM]. 

Maybe now that they are older, the statue has been revealed (ahem), and we’ve seen plenty of negative behavior from one of them , maybe the _magic of Diana’s sons_  has worn off.  They are who they are.  We can all move on - until Kate steps out in a golden gown


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yes, and it was the Duke who had most of it made for her, and the pieces were unique.    Apparently he would go to Cartier and TELL them what he wanted.  If he was around today, he could have been a jewelry designer and made a bundle.



I can totally appreciate the craftmanship of her pieces, but most I them are so awfully loud.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps this is why Hazz goes the opposite direction with his bare feet, wrinkles, chicken coop nonsense. MM never had H’s level of excess [or access], so she was most likely uncomfortable with that level of wealth.  Just my armchair psych 2 cents.



She didn't seem too uncomfortable spending Charles' money on an engagement dress for 25000 bucks (Kate's was 400, Beatrice's around the same price range. Never bothered to look up Eugenie's as I didn't like it haha) and on more ill-fitting clothes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Supposedly, in the early days of marriage, William used Diana as his excuse for not working.



But didn't he have an actual job as an emergency helicopter pilot through those years when he didn't work for, uh, the family business? I'll admit I wasn't that invested in any of them back then.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But didn't he have an actual job as an emergency helicopter pilot through those years when he didn't work for, uh, the family business? I'll admit I wasn't that invested in any of them back then.



Yes he did, he was stationed in Wales and Norfolk during those years. The move to KP fulltime also coincided with his leaving of that job.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can totally appreciate the craftmanship of her pieces, but most I them are so awfully loud.


They are loud lol! Her style of dress was severe and extremely tailored so it made a good contrast.  Plus she wanted to be looked at, so the jewelry served that purpose as well.  She wasn't pretty, so she had to wear something that was.


----------



## lallybelle

I wouldn't say William used Diana as an excuse not to work. As pointed out, he was a rescue pilot etc. BUT I believe that's why he & Kate were "slow" to get engaged etc. He wanted to make sure she was ready and understood what would be expected of her especially given what Diana went through. I do believe some of the public did think that they were a bit slow to pick up on their official duties, especially when Kate was a new Mom. But seeing how they have grown into their roles, I don't think they could really ask for much better.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't seem too uncomfortable spending Charles' money on an engagement dress for 25000 bucks (Kate's was 400, Beatrice's around the same price range. Never bothered to look up Eugenie's as I didn't like it haha) and on more ill-fitting clothes.



I agree with those who say she bought the most expensive clothes just because she could.  Doesn’t matter if the item looks good on her,  she was buying expensive clothes _because she could_.  Very nouveau-riche. Imo it shows her lack of comfort with money. Ymmv.




lallybelle said:


> I wouldn't say William used Diana as an excuse not to work. As pointed out, he was a rescue pilot etc. BUT I believe that's why he & Kate were "slow" to get engaged etc. He wanted to make sure she was ready and understood what would be expected of her especially given what Diana went through. I do believe some of the public did think that they were a bit slow to pick up on their official duties, especially when Kate was a new Mom. But seeing how they have grown into their roles, I don't think they could really ask for much better.



Those were the rumors that he was using Diana as his reason for not doing *royal* duties [aka, work].  Since his mum married young and had very little  experience of life in the non-royal work world, he wanted time to learn, time to grow, to be with his family, time for Kate to adjust. Anything but royal work [some thought it was slap at Charles, who knows? ]   Yes, he did work.  Of course, he did not _need_ to work as a pilot _ -  _his expenses were covered by QE. Some feel that his ‘work’ should be for the Crown and only for the Crown. Ymmv.

When Haz tried to use similar excuses, it failed miserably. Most thought he was too old for that excuse. Understandably, both sons have issues. One has adapted much better than the other. 

  Here is an old article where W addresses the ‘work-shy’ rumors.









						Prince William rejects tag of work-shy royal: 'I take duty seriously'
					

In interviews marking Queen’s 90th birthday, Duke of Cambridge says he is thinking of how to modernise royal family




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can totally appreciate the craftmanship of her pieces, but most I them are so awfully loud.


They are certainly statement pieces.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But didn't he have an actual job as an emergency helicopter pilot through those years when he didn't work for, uh, the family business? I'll admit I wasn't that invested in any of them back then.


He did, but in more recent years he was told he had to give it up because it was too risky for a future monarch. Before he and Kate married he landed a helicopter on the Middleton's property once and caught flak from the press for it - frivolous, wasting public resources, yada yada. I believe there was a period when George and Charlotte were babies that he was figuring out his place in The Firm, and that's when the Workshy Wills nickname was coined by the tabloids.


----------



## Sharont2305

lallybelle said:


> I wouldn't say William used Diana as an excuse not to work. As pointed out, he was a rescue pilot etc. BUT I believe that's why he & Kate were "slow" to get engaged etc. He wanted to make sure she was ready and understood what would be expected of her especially given what Diana went through. I do believe some of the public did think that they were a bit slow to pick up on their official duties, especially when Kate was a new Mom. But seeing how they have grown into their roles, I don't think they could really ask for much better.


It was the best thing for them to do and the Queen approved of them having a normal start to their marriage. She went through some sort of normalcy at the start of her marriage to  Philip when he was stationed in Malta. She was a living a naval wife's life just like the others.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> It was the best thing for them to do and the Queen approved of them having a normal start to their marriage. She went through some sort of normalcy at the start of her marriage to  Philip when he was stationed in Malta. She was a living a naval wife's life just like the others.


I had forgotten the Malta part. I am actually going there soon. I wonder if there's anything of interest to see related to their time there?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I had forgotten the Malta part. I am actually going there soon. I wonder if there's anything of interest to see related to their time there?



I think you can visit their residence? But don't take my word for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> He did, but in more recent years he was told he had to give it up because it was too risky for a future monarch. Before he and Kate married he landed a helicopter on the Middleton's property once and caught flak from the press for it - frivolous, wasting public resources, yada yada. I believe there was a period when George and Charlotte were babies that he was figuring out his place in The Firm, and that's when the Workshy Wills nickname was coined by the tabloids.



Imo W was caught between a father who doesn’t like being upstaged _[W is not the heir, I am] _ and his own commitment to royal duties. So, he chose to avoid upstaging his dad - that makes sense. It turned out to be a win-win - his dad could swan about the world while he and Kate raised 3 adorables. The critics are always out there, glad he chose wisely.  Paraphrasing @QueenofWrapDress’s earlier comment, if H&M had walked away quietly and skipped the lectures and the O tell-all, few(er) people would criticize. Their failure was pushing their half-in/half-out agenda.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think you can visit their residence? But don't take my word for it.


Thanks, I will look into it.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps this is why Hazz goes the opposite direction with his bare feet, wrinkles, chicken coop nonsense. *MM never had H’s level of excess [or access], so she was most likely uncomfortable with that level of wealth.*  Just my armchair psych 2 cents.


From my armchair, I'd say she got the wrong idea what being Hazard's wife would entail. She focused on the good parts like the neverending stream of money, but the work and service part sailed right through one ear and out the other. She saw it as a life of indolence. And likely imagined that with her elevation to duchess, no one could ever tell her to do anything again. She called the shots.

One of my friends married a guy from a much humbler background. She was the daughter of a millionaire, back when being a millionaire meant something. I'm told that once the wedding date was set, he started treating the chauffeur and maid as his servants to order around. So likely he thought marrying a rich wife meant power over underlings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> From my armchair, I'd say she got the wrong idea what being Hazard's wife would entail. She focused on the good parts like the neverending stream of money, but the work and service part sailed right through one ear and out the other. She saw it as a life of indolence. And likely imagined that with her elevation to duchess, no one could ever tell her to do anything again. She called the shots.
> 
> One of my friends married a guy from a much humbler background. She was the daughter of a millionaire, back when being a millionaire meant something. I'm told that once the wedding date was set, he started treating the chauffeur and maid as his servants to order around. So likely he thought marrying a rich wife meant *power over underlings*.



Agree to all of that, she probably never had to manage a household staff.  Plus, MM’s experience in the world of work was ‘acting’ which typically is not a 9-5 job. On a tv series, for a second tier character, it may be 12 hour days once/twice a week.  Then it’s a long vacation.  Royal work is quite different. Imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I'm told that once the wedding date was set, he started treating the chauffeur and maid as his servants to order around. So likely he thought marrying a rich wife meant power over underlings.



That would have given me serious second thoughts.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That would have given me serious second thoughts.


Not saying that the guy was a narc. I'm pretty sure he wasn't. But he did love-bomb my friend. Another friend worked in the same company as they did, and he says it was quite embarrassing how often he came across them necking in the back stairwell. The rich friend was very petite and the guy would put her on his lap like she was a child.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Not saying that the guy was a narc. I'm pretty sure he wasn't. But he did love-bomb my friend. Another friend worked in the same company as they did, and he says it was quite embarrassing how often he came across them necking in the back stairwell. The rich friend was very petite and the guy would put her on his lap like she was a child.


did they marry?  are they still married?


----------



## Chanbal

Papers lead charge to protect freedom of speech from misused data laws
					

Ministers have been urged to halt Britain's drift towards privacy laws that help the rich and powerful dodge scrutiny. Last year Justice Secretary Dominic Raab vowed to overhaul the Human Rights Act.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

According to NS, TW could make a solo appearance at the Oscars…  Hope he is wrong!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, TW could make a solo appearance at the Oscars…  Hope he is wrong!



seems like BS to me....he is implying not only will Meghan be there but she will be paid?
Is he some sort of stan?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, TW could make a solo appearance at the Oscars…  Hope he is wrong!




I prefer to believe it’s garbage. Anything about Meghan is going to get tons of views. I think most of these YouTubers make up the most outrageous stories they can to bring in the bucks.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, TW could make a solo appearance at the Oscars…  Hope he is wrong!



NO. ONE. WANTS. YOU. THERE. 

Don't you have to be invited by the Academy? And from everything I've read about this in recent days, they don't like her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, TW could make a solo appearance at the Oscars…  Hope he is wrong!




She will get boo’ed


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




It’s best he stays away. Doubtful Invictus will be much of a success at this time.  
 Love her smocked dress.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

charlottawill said:


> NO. ONE. WANTS. YOU. THERE.
> 
> Don't you have to be invited by the Academy? And from everything I've read about this in recent days, they don't like her.


SS represents the Oscars so she could potentially be there. Though I think with actual stars of nominated movies being denied an invite this would look horrible. I do think they'll show up to Elton's after part but that would still look bad as they are not attending PP's memorial like 24 hours later.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

hollieplus2 said:


> I do think they'll show up to Elton's after part but that would still look bad as they are not attending PP's memorial like 24 hours later.



I think they left all reservations regarding what might look bad behind them a long time ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

hollieplus2 said:


> SS represents the Oscars so she could potentially be there. Though I think with actual stars of nominated movies being denied an invite this would look horrible. I do think they'll show up to Elton's after part but that would still look bad as they are not attending PP's memorial like 24 hours later.



They do try so very hard to be relevant, don’t they?

ETA: I am planning to attend, too, if and only if the weather is pleasant. 
[yes, I am being snarky - anyone can say they are _planning_ to attend]


----------



## charlottawill

hollieplus2 said:


> SS represents the Oscars so she could potentially be there. Though I think with actual stars of nominated movies being denied an invite this would look horrible. I do think they'll show up to Elton's after part but that would still look bad as they are not attending PP's memorial like 24 hours later.


The part about them (her?) attending Elton's after party I'd believe, seeing as how she and Harry stayed at his estate in France - remember they used his private jet? Elton defended them by saying he felt an obligation to his dear late friend Diana to keep Harry and his family safe. Maybe that's where the whole protection delusion started. 

P.S., Per a report on ET, there is concern about Oscars being a COVID superspreader event in light of the post-BAFTA COVID outbreak. 

P.P.S. They also said Rachel Ziegler, who plays Maria in the Best Picture nominated remake of West Side Story, cannot even get an invite to the ceremony. That's ridiculous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That would have given me serious second thoughts.


And third and fourth thoughts.


----------



## rose60610

IF she attends the Oscars, I don't believe any designer would want to admit they designed her outfit. It'd be guaranteed to fit horribly. Besides, it's March 27, and the dress would have to be done by now, so we'd probably know if she were certain to attend?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> IF she attends the Oscars, I don't believe any designer would want to admit they designed her outfit. It'd be guaranteed to fit horribly. Besides, it's March 27, and the dress would have to be done by now, so we'd probably know if she were certain to attend?


I think (and hope) the whole thing is BS.  She's never even been in a movie (unless you count Lifetime)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They do try so very hard to be relevant, don’t they?
> 
> ETA: I am planning to attend, too, if and only if the weather is pleasant.
> [yes, I am being snarky - anyone can say they are _planning_ to attend]


Will meet you there then. If weather permits, of course.


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> I think (and hope) the whole thing is BS.  She's never even been in a movie (unless you count Lifetime)



She was in Horrible Bosses for thirty seconds as the UPS delivery girl.


----------



## Chanbal

_*Why we should all care that 'Yankee Wally' was yanked off You Tube *_by Trish Randall   













						Why we should all care that 'Yankee Wally' was yanked off You Tube
					

This week, a small YouTube channel with 47,000 subscribers, Yankee Wally, disappeared.  Several years of videos are gone.  Most people, most readers here, probably never heard of this channel.  But this should concern us...




					www.americanthinker.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Was the invitation for Rachel Zegler sent to Rachel Zane by mistake? That would be the only explanation for TW to get an invitation to the Oscars. That and Sachs, of course! 









						‘West Side Story’ star Rachel Zegler says she wasn’t invited to Oscars 2022
					

“i will root for west side story from my couch and be proud of the work we so tirelessly did 3 years ago,” the breakout actress wrote on social media.




					pagesix.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



he has become so annoying with all his whining and suing


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




He can dish it out but can’t take it.  There is a word for that.

Hey Charles, this is on you. Handle this kid. These lawsuits are *intolerable*, especially with the world on the brink of WW3.





Spoiler: the article



*Prince Harry Says Tabloid Caused 'Considerable Distress' in Libel Lawsuit*
By Jack Royston On 3/21/22 at 2:30 PM EDT
Prince Harry accused a U.K. tabloid of causing "upset and distress and injury to his feelings" with an exclusive story *about his police security*, _Newsweek_ can reveal.

The Duke of Sussex's lawyers said in a new libel lawsuit that the _Mail on Sunday_was responsible for "distortion and misrepresentation of the facts".

*The case relates to whether Prince Harry lied about having always been willing to pay for his police protection—a suggestion he says is defamatory, a court filing shows.*

The California-based royal is suing through the High Court, in London, over the newspaper's coverage of a lawsuit he filed against the U.K. government.

The _MoS_ is the same newspaper famously and successfully sued by Harry's wife Meghan Markle for breach of privacy and copyright during a saga that lasted three years.

A court filing, seen by _Newsweek_, read: "[Prince Harry] has been upset (but sadly unsurprised) by [the Mail's] distortion and misrepresentation of the facts in breach of the most basic journalistic standards and ethics."


The _Mail on Sunday_ broke the story in January, prompting the duke's legal representative to issue a statement saying he had offered to pay for the security detail himself in a meeting with the royals in 2020.

A Home Office court filing later said Harry had not made the offer during early correspondence for the judicial review, which he applied for in September 2021. However, it made no mention one way or the other of any offer at the meeting with the royals in 2020.

The _Mail on Sunday_ then ran a story headlined: "REVEALED: How Harry tried to keep his legal fight over bodyguards secret....then minutes after MoS broke story his PR machine tried to put positive spin on the dispute."

Quoted in the court filing, the article read: "The revelations are a crushing rebuttal to Harry's initial public statement that implied he had always been willing to foot the bill."

The duke's court filing read: "The Home Office's [filing] clearly only claims that [Prince Harry] did not advance his offer to pay to RAVEC [the Royal and VIP Executive Committee] at the time of [Prince Harry's] visit to Great Britain in June 2021 or in the pre-action correspondence that followed.

"It does not refer to or dispute in any way what was stated in [Prince Harry's] public statement and his reference to the fact that he 'first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for him and his family in January 2020 at Sandringham. That offer was dismissed. He remains willing to cover the cost of security, as not to impose on the British taxpayer'."

_For more royal news and commentary check out _Newsweek_'s _The Royal Report_podcast:_
Harry's lawyers said in the paperwork that the meaning of the _Mail_'s article was that he "lied in his initial public statements."

They said the account was untrue and defamatory and brought down an avalanche of criticism in web article comments.

Their court filing reads: "It must have been plain to [The _Mail on Sunday_] that by giving these serious allegations such huge publicity in the terms and manner that it did, leading to inevitable repetition and the feeding frenzy of hostile comments it could not but cause [Prince Harry's] reputation substantial damage and cause considerable distress and hurt to [Prince Harry], as has been the case."

It added: "[The Mail's] refusal to take down the Online Article and/or even mark it as the subject of a legal claim (in accordance with standard industry practice) and/or publish an apology to [Prince Harry] has meant that [Prince Harry] has been unable to mitigate at least some of the serious harm done to his reputation by virtue of the widespread and continuing dissemination of the Articles.

"As a result of [the Mail's] conduct pleaded above, [Prince Harry] has suffered increased upset and distress and injury to his feelings."

Prince Harry is seeking damages for libel at the High Court, in London, and an injunction barring the newspaper from repeating the claims he says are defamatory.

He also wants the newspaper to publish a summary of any judgement made by the court.

_Newsweek_ has approached Prince Harry and the _Mail on Sunday_ for comment.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> She will get boo’ed


well, if the people on this thread were there, we might boo her, but I doubt the Oscar attendees would do that...wouldn't want to risk being called racists


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is the kind of coverage they want    As we all know, “ya can’t always get what ya want”  









						Kate dons khaki trousers and simple white T-shirt on third day of tour
					

William and Kate began the third date of their trip learning about the history of the site, located in the Chiquibul Forest, and took in the country's tallest man-made structure - known as the 'sky palace'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well, if the people on this thread were there, we might boo her, but I doubt the Oscar attendees would do that...wouldn't want to risk being called racists



Look at those faces. We see you, Mel. They love risks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




We suffer injury to our sanity every day at the hand of the troublesome two. Please take several seats, Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another angle:



Full credit: https://www.businessinsider.com/oscars-mistake-audience-reaction-photo-2017-2   This photo is when the speaker messed up the best picture


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We suffer injury to our sanity every day at the hand of the troublesome two. Please take several seats, Harry.


if only....does he not see how unattractive all this public anger is?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> if only....does he not see how unattractive all this public anger is?



Good judgement doesn't seem to be one of his main qualities.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good judgement doesn't seem to be one of his main qualities.


we can see that from his choice of WIFE


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> did they marry?  are they still married?


They married lavishly. His rich FIL gave them an apartment in a tony part of town. I heard he had funding to start his own company. After that, we drifted apart. I think they are still married. She was quite independent but she very much liked being a Daddy's girl, so if he carried on coddling her in the same vein, they would have been happy together.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> They married lavishly. His rich FIL gave them an apartment in a tony part of town. I heard he had funding to start his own company. After that, we drifted apart. I think they are still married. She was quite independent but she very much liked being a Daddy's girl, so if he carried on coddling her in the same vein, they would have been happy together.


guess it's working for them


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> he has become so annoying with all his whining and suing


It's the only way he knows how to make money.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the kind of coverage they want    As we all know, “ya can’t always get what ya want”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate dons khaki trousers and simple white T-shirt on third day of tour
> 
> 
> William and Kate began the third date of their trip learning about the history of the site, located in the Chiquibul Forest, and took in the country's tallest man-made structure - known as the 'sky palace'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Kate, as always, looks stunning in that gown. But in a hot humid jungle climate I would die in those pants, even if I were as thin as she is. I'd have opted for some looser fitting trousers in a lighter fabric.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the kind of coverage they want    As we all know, “ya can’t always get what ya want”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate dons khaki trousers and simple white T-shirt on third day of tour
> 
> 
> William and Kate began the third date of their trip learning about the history of the site, located in the Chiquibul Forest, and took in the country's tallest man-made structure - known as the 'sky palace'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's very simple, they get the coverage they deserve.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look at those faces. We see you, Mel. They love risks.
> 
> View attachment 5359562


The woman behind him studying her nails - "Is this thing over yet?"


----------



## Mendocino

Sharont2305 said:


> It was the best thing for them to do and the Queen approved of them having a normal start to their marriage. She went through some sort of normalcy at the start of her marriage to  Philip when he was stationed in Malta. She was a living a naval wife's life just like the others.


I agree. Also, William was on active duty with the RAF and his duty station was in Wales.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another angle:
> 
> View attachment 5359563
> 
> Full credit: https://www.businessinsider.com/oscars-mistake-audience-reaction-photo-2017-2   This photo is when the speaker messed up the best picture


Haha The Rock and Matt Damon crack me up.


----------



## charlottawill

Mendocino said:


> I agree. Also, William was on active duty with the RAF and his duty station was in Wales.


I recall pictures of them walking (relatively) alone on the beach and Kate doing grocery shopping, trying to be a normal newlywed couple.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> It was the best thing for them to do and the Queen approved of them having a normal start to their marriage. She went through some sort of normalcy at the start of her marriage to  Philip when he was stationed in Malta. She was a living a naval wife's life just like the others.


how about the queen being a mechanic during the war?  that is something


----------



## Mendocino

sdkitty said:


> how about the queen being a mechanic during the war?  that is something


I believe this photo was from her military service.


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> SS represents the Oscars so she could potentially be there. Though I think with actual stars of nominated movies being denied an invite this would look horrible. I do think they'll show up to Elton's after part but that would still look bad as they are not attending PP's memorial like 24 hours later.



I’m sure the Academy Awards pays Sunshine Sachs much, much more than Meghan and Harry do. The twosome won’t be foisted on the awards show if they are not wanted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mendocino said:


> I believe this photo was from her military service.
> 
> View attachment 5359693



Another one:












						Ever seen The Queen change a car tyre? Unseen pictures of Her Majesty serving in World War II
					

Amateur photographs taken in March 1945 show the then Princess Elizabeth fixing up an ambulance and a truck during mechanical training at Camberley, Surrey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, that fake hair is just too much.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mendocino said:


> I agree. Also, William was on active duty with the RAF and his duty station was in Wales.


Yes, here on Anglesey.


----------



## Annawakes

Has this been posted?  Camilla takes over Royal Theater patronage:









						Meghan Markle Loses Patronage To Camilla Parker-Bowles
					

After weeks of speculation, Camilla Parker Bowles has officially taken over one of Meghan Markle's most prominent patronages.




					www.suggest.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She didn't lose it, she abandoned her post.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't lose it, she abandoned her post.


Yes, it was taken back to the Queen who has now handed it over to Camilla.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She didn't lose it, she abandoned her post.



Exactly. It is annoying when their fans act like they have had anything taken away from them. They quit their jobs and moved away! That they foolishly expected to be paid for making an occasional phone call to the patronages doesn’t mean they get to keep them. Those groups deserve better than to be used like that.


----------



## Chanbal

A well written article…   D-List… Z-List @CeeJay



Spoiler: The all thing!



*The Rise And Fall Of Meghan Markle: How A B-List Actress Became The ‘Queen Of Woke’*

_In 2016, the only people who had heard of Meghan Markle were fans of the USA Network legal drama “Suits” and the handful of moviegoers who noticed her cameo in the 2011 comedy “Horrible Bosses.” The rest of the world was blissfully ignorant of the woman who was destined to disrupt the British monarchy simply by making one ginger-haired “spare heir” prince fall in love with her.
Today, however, the name Meghan Markle typically elicits some kind of response from everyone. *To fans, she is an enchanted example of a fairy tale come true — *one in which a blue-blooded royal forsook his family and country, valiantly fighting to protect his true love’s honor in the face of blatant, explicit racism, not the least of which originated among the aforementioned royal elites.
*Then there are those who see the Duchess of Sussex as a ruthless gold-digger who sought fame and fortune by any means necessary.* Her ladder climb included snatching away an affable yet aimless British royal who often played third wheel to his older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, who was still clearly traumatized by the death of his mother, Princess Diana. To her critics, Meghan saw a weakness and exploited it.
No one will ever know Meghan Markle’s true motivations except for the duchess herself. But we can at least break down how one royal romance spawned a person who was unofficially dubbed the “Queen of Woke.”
*November 2017: Prince Harry Pops the Question to American Actress Meghan Markle*
Meghan and Harry met on a blind date in 2016. The press soon caught wind of their romance, especially after Harry was seen jetting off to Toronto, where Meghan was living and filming “Suits.” While their clandestine vacations and courtship were newsworthy, the couple really began to make headlines on the day Harry proposed.
At that point, he and Meghan had been dating for around 18 months and were clearly smitten with each other. However, older brother Prince William allegedly warned Harry not to rush into marriage. This is rumored to be the beginning of the royal rift between these former best friend brothers that still makes things awkward to this day.
*April 2018: A Royal Wedding*
Everyone loves a royal wedding, right? Well, not exactly. There were rumors of drama from day one, with some palace sources saying Meghan made Kate cry during a flower girl dress fitting. (Stay tuned: This tiff comes up again a few years later after Meghan agreed to do a bombshell interview with Oprah.) No matter what actually happened, things were off to a rocky start when it came to Meghan joining the family.
Even the date the couple chose — Saturday, May 19, 2018 — was controversial. According to Reader’s Digest, the late Queen Victoria thought May weddings were unlucky. As the rhyme goes, “Marry in May, and rue the day.” How true that would turn out to be.
These may not seem like important details, but they serve as the beginning of the drama Meghan causes in the royal family.
*October 15, 2018: Expecting a New Royal Baby*
Fans were overjoyed to find out a royal baby was coming when Harry and Meghan made the announcement in the fall of 2018. But the addition of a baby meant even more controversy was coming as Meghan refused to do things “the royal way.” This kicked off with the duchess hosting a celebrity-studded baby shower in New York City in February 2019, which was apparently seen as quite gauche by royal family standards. And it only got worse from there.
*November 2018: Meghan and Harry Move Out of Kensington Palace*
Many royal followers believe perceptions of Harry and Meghan started to shift when they decided to leave Kensington Palace, where they were close to William, Kate, and their three children, and move to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. While some interpret this moment as the beginning of the pair’s never-ending quest for privacy, others view it differently.
Not only did this move intensify rumors about Harry and William feuding, but critics saw it as the couple — with Meghan leading the charge — being ungrateful for what they were given. Since they were expecting, Frogmore underwent a massive, multi-million-dollar renovation. The couple’s new digs included a gym, yoga studio, and nursery, along with top-of-the-line security.
Plus, the Sussexes moving away from Kensington only intensified those rumors about Harry and William feuding.
*December 2018: Royal Staff Won’t Stop Quitting; Meghan Gets Blamed*
It could be a coincidence. But, then again, the simplest explanation is usually true, and the facts show that *three royal aides resigned between the time Meghan and Harry were married in May 2018 and December of that year.* Notably, this included the couple’s private secretary, Samantha Cohen, who announced she was leaving after serving the royal family for 17 years.
Press from that period included a Daily Mail article in which a palace aide and assistant named *“Melissa” admitted she quit because of “Hurricane Meghan” ruining the positive vibe with palace staff. *She [Meghan] allegedly drove away staff due to her “particular brand of ‘up and at ’em’ West Coast energy” and tendency of “getting up at 5am [and] bombarding aides with texts.”
Furthermore, a source told The Mirror that “Meghan put a lot of demands on her [Melissa] and it ended up with her in tears.”
*April 2019: @SussexRoyal Is Born*
Just one month before their actual son was born, Meghan and Harry debuted a new Instagram account, cementing their recent split from Kensington Palace and the royal offices that came with it.
Royal insiders insisted splitting offices made sense and happened all the time. But, once again, this change contributed to the narrative that Meghan and Harry were forging an identity separate from the other royal family members.
*May 6, 2019: Another Ginger-Haired Heir Is Born*
The birth of a royal baby is enough to make the most fervent critic set aside any animosity to admire the cute new infant. But the arrival of Archie Harrison was also steeped in drama and controversy. First, *he was not born at St. Mary’s Hospital like many other royal babies* — including both William and Harry as well as the three Cambridge children, George, Charlotte, and Louis — had been. This meant Meghan did not pose on the steps for a photo op like Kate did. In fact, *Meghan and Harry decided to announce Archie’s birth in their own time, as shared in a statement nearly a month before his arrival: “The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family.”*
Additionally, the couple privately selected their own photographer and kept his christening secret.
During this time, rumors started circulating that Meghan felt sorry for Kate having to pose for post-birth photos. *Meghan also allegedly turned down Queen Elizabeth’s offer of using her medical team*, which consisted of male doctors. She opted for a female doctor for the delivery instead.
*October 2019: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex Sue the Tabloids*
Harry and Meghan were on a royal tour of Africa when they announced they planned to sue the UK tabloid newspaper Mail on Sunday and its parent company, claiming they published one of Meghan’s private letters without permission. The letter in question was between Meghan and her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
Harry released a statement in response.
“Unfortunately, my wife has become one of the latest victims of a British tabloid press that wages campaigns against individuals with no thought to the consequences — a ruthless campaign that has escalated over the past year, throughout her pregnancy and while raising our newborn son,” he said.
“The positive coverage of the past week from these same publications exposes the double standards of this specific press pack that has vilified her almost daily for the past nine months; they have been able to create lie after lie at her expense simply because she has not been visible while on maternity leave. She is the same woman she was a year ago on our wedding day, just as she is the same woman you’ve seen on this Africa tour,” he continued.
“Though we have continued to put on a brave face — as so many of you can relate to — I cannot begin to describe how painful it has been,” he said.
In conclusion, the Duke of Sussex recalled Princess Diana and how she was treated by the press.
“Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised [sic] to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”
*Late October 2019: Meghan Admits She’s ‘Not OK’*
The ITV documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey” was the first time Meghan shared some of her feelings regarding the British press’s bullying. She recalled how British friends tried to warn her that would happen.
“When I first met my now husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy,” Meghan recalled.
“But my British friends said to me, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’ And I very naively thought — I’m American, we don’t have that there — what are you talking about? That doesn’t make any sense … I didn’t get it. So it’s been … complicated.”
Meghan said she had tried to put on a brave face, but it just all got too much.
“I’ve said for a long time to H — that’s what I call him — it’s not enough to just survive something, right? That’s not the point of life. You’ve got to thrive; you’ve got to feel happy,” Meghan continued.
*“I’ve really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip … I’ve tried, I’ve really tried.”
When asked if she was “OK,” the duchess said she really wasn’t.
January 2020: Prince Harry and Meghan Quit the Royal Family*
The world was shocked when Harry and Meghan announced their decision to step down as senior royals in January 2020.
At the time, the Sussexes claimed they’d be splitting time between the United Kingdom and North America to “raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity.”
It was clear that royal officials were blindsided by this announcement. After weeks of hammering out details, it was announced that the pair would lose their “royal highness” titles but Harry would retain his place in the line of succession.
Among other things, the pair demanded more privacy and freedom from the relentless British press that had been intent on making their lives miserable.
*July 2020: Harry and Meghan Settle in California*
The duke and duchess spent time house-hopping first in Canada and then in areas of California. They made the decision to stay in California permanently by purchasing a sprawling mansion in Santa Barbara
“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex moved into their family home in July of this year,” a rep for the couple told People in August of 2020. “They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family.”
*August 2020: Royal Fans Start a Frenzy Over “Finding Freedom” Biography*
“Finding Freedom” is not an officially authorized biography, however, authors Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie are known to have close ties at the palace and access to insider information. The book details what was thought to be the beginning of the rift between William and Harry.
As mentioned earlier, apparently, William told his younger brother not to rush into a serious relationship with Meghan. According to the biography, Harry thought William was being a snob, and nothing was the same after that.
When it came to choosing between blood and love, Harry picked Meghan. And her detractors hated her more for it.
*December 2020: Harry and Meghan Sign with Spotify*
After landing a multi-year Netflix deal in September 2020, the Sussexes inked a contract with Spotify to host and produce podcasts as another step in the direction of making their own money on their own terms.
“What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction,” Harry and Meghan said in a statement (via Yahoo). “With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other’s stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are.”
To date, there hasn’t been much action on the Harry and Meghan podcast front despite the lucrative deal they struck.
*March 7, 2021: Meghan and Harry Sit Down with Oprah*
Fresh off the announcement of their second pregnancy on Valentine’s Day, the Sussexes sat down with Oprah for a tell-all interview that attracted more than 17 million viewers, Washington Post reported. The interview was chock-full of shocking moments, including the following most talked-about reveals:_

_An unnamed person in the royal family made rude comments about how dark baby Archie’s skin would be before he was born. According to Meghan, Harry was there when it happened. “They were saying they didn’t want him to be a prince, which would be different to protocol, and that he wasn’t going to receive security. This went on for the last few months of our pregnancy,” Meghan said._
_Meghan had suicidal thoughts following the horrific falsities and alleged “lack of support” while part of the royal family. “I just didn’t want to be alive anymore. That was clear and real and frightening and a constant thought.”_
_Harry and Meghan got married in a secret ceremony three days before the royal wedding._
_Kate Middleton made Meghan cry just before her wedding, not the other way around as was originally reported._
_Prince Charles wouldn’t take Harry’s calls. Also, the Duke of Sussex said Meghan helped him realize how unhappy he was all along. “I was trapped and I didn’t know I was trapped. … My father and my brother, they are trapped, they don’t get to leave,” Harry told Oprah._
_The couple also revealed that their unborn baby was a girl.
*September 15, 2021: Meghan Wears the Pants on the Cover of Time Magazine *
In case anyone was still wondering who wore the pants in Meghan and Harry’s relationship, Time Magazine made it quite clear by putting the couple’s photo on the cover as part of their annual Time100 list. The image drew criticism due to the overall composition, which shows Meghan standing front and center and Harry hunched over and hiding behind her.
Many critics saw it as* a metaphor for their relationship*.
*September 2021: Piers Morgan Gets Fired and Dubs Meghan Markle the “Queen of Woke”*
The feud between outspoken British news host Piers Morgan and Meghan is legendary. It all came to a head in September 2021 when the former “Good Morning Britain” host gave the duchess her least flattering nickname.
Following the Oprah interview, Piers declared he didn’t believe a word Meghan had said. Critics came after him with claims of racism. In a later interview with The Sun, Piers addressed the drama saying Meghan is a “whiny, forked-tongue actress” and that the court ruling in his favor was a “resounding defeat for Princess Pinocchio.”
“The woke brigade think they can vilify, shame, silence and get fired anyone who has an opinion they don’t like. Meghan Markle is the queen of this culture, who personally sought to have me lose my job — and succeeded.”
He added, “Why are she and Prince Harry entitled to have their opinion but I’m not entitled to mine?”
All of these events helped contribute to the rapidly deteriorating image of Meghan Markle. Is she an innocent victim of a relentless British press? A social climber? A woman who fell in love and just wants a happily ever after? The world may never know for sure. But in the meantime, many will continue to see her as the Queen of Woke.
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire._


----------



## Chanbal

The drama continues… 










						Harry Accuses Tabloid of Running 'Gratuitous' Photos of Meghan and Kids
					

Prince Harry is suing a tabloid for libel over an article about his police security dispute with the U.K. government, court documents seen by Newsweek show.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The drama continues…
> View attachment 5360093
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Accuses Tabloid of Running 'Gratuitous' Photos of Meghan and Kids
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is suing a tabloid for libel over an article about his police security dispute with the U.K. government, court documents seen by Newsweek show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



Sad, selfish and a waste of time.  Not what we need now or ever.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh, he plans to send a video ???


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> A well written article…   D-List… Z-List @CeeJay
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The all thing!
> 
> 
> 
> *The Rise And Fall Of Meghan Markle: How A B-List Actress Became The ‘Queen Of Woke’*
> 
> _In 2016, the only people who had heard of Meghan Markle were fans of the USA Network legal drama “Suits” and the handful of moviegoers who noticed her cameo in the 2011 comedy “Horrible Bosses.” The rest of the world was blissfully ignorant of the woman who was destined to disrupt the British monarchy simply by making one ginger-haired “spare heir” prince fall in love with her.
> Today, however, the name Meghan Markle typically elicits some kind of response from everyone. *To fans, she is an enchanted example of a fairy tale come true — *one in which a blue-blooded royal forsook his family and country, valiantly fighting to protect his true love’s honor in the face of blatant, explicit racism, not the least of which originated among the aforementioned royal elites.
> *Then there are those who see the Duchess of Sussex as a ruthless gold-digger who sought fame and fortune by any means necessary.* Her ladder climb included snatching away an affable yet aimless British royal who often played third wheel to his older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, who was still clearly traumatized by the death of his mother, Princess Diana. To her critics, Meghan saw a weakness and exploited it.
> No one will ever know Meghan Markle’s true motivations except for the duchess herself. But we can at least break down how one royal romance spawned a person who was unofficially dubbed the “Queen of Woke.”
> *November 2017: Prince Harry Pops the Question to American Actress Meghan Markle*
> Meghan and Harry met on a blind date in 2016. The press soon caught wind of their romance, especially after Harry was seen jetting off to Toronto, where Meghan was living and filming “Suits.” While their clandestine vacations and courtship were newsworthy, the couple really began to make headlines on the day Harry proposed.
> At that point, he and Meghan had been dating for around 18 months and were clearly smitten with each other. However, older brother Prince William allegedly warned Harry not to rush into marriage. This is rumored to be the beginning of the royal rift between these former best friend brothers that still makes things awkward to this day.
> *April 2018: A Royal Wedding*
> Everyone loves a royal wedding, right? Well, not exactly. There were rumors of drama from day one, with some palace sources saying Meghan made Kate cry during a flower girl dress fitting. (Stay tuned: This tiff comes up again a few years later after Meghan agreed to do a bombshell interview with Oprah.) No matter what actually happened, things were off to a rocky start when it came to Meghan joining the family.
> Even the date the couple chose — Saturday, May 19, 2018 — was controversial. According to Reader’s Digest, the late Queen Victoria thought May weddings were unlucky. As the rhyme goes, “Marry in May, and rue the day.” How true that would turn out to be.
> These may not seem like important details, but they serve as the beginning of the drama Meghan causes in the royal family.
> *October 15, 2018: Expecting a New Royal Baby*
> Fans were overjoyed to find out a royal baby was coming when Harry and Meghan made the announcement in the fall of 2018. But the addition of a baby meant even more controversy was coming as Meghan refused to do things “the royal way.” This kicked off with the duchess hosting a celebrity-studded baby shower in New York City in February 2019, which was apparently seen as quite gauche by royal family standards. And it only got worse from there.
> *November 2018: Meghan and Harry Move Out of Kensington Palace*
> Many royal followers believe perceptions of Harry and Meghan started to shift when they decided to leave Kensington Palace, where they were close to William, Kate, and their three children, and move to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. While some interpret this moment as the beginning of the pair’s never-ending quest for privacy, others view it differently.
> Not only did this move intensify rumors about Harry and William feuding, but critics saw it as the couple — with Meghan leading the charge — being ungrateful for what they were given. Since they were expecting, Frogmore underwent a massive, multi-million-dollar renovation. The couple’s new digs included a gym, yoga studio, and nursery, along with top-of-the-line security.
> Plus, the Sussexes moving away from Kensington only intensified those rumors about Harry and William feuding.
> *December 2018: Royal Staff Won’t Stop Quitting; Meghan Gets Blamed*
> It could be a coincidence. But, then again, the simplest explanation is usually true, and the facts show that *three royal aides resigned between the time Meghan and Harry were married in May 2018 and December of that year.* Notably, this included the couple’s private secretary, Samantha Cohen, who announced she was leaving after serving the royal family for 17 years.
> Press from that period included a Daily Mail article in which a palace aide and assistant named *“Melissa” admitted she quit because of “Hurricane Meghan” ruining the positive vibe with palace staff. *She [Meghan] allegedly drove away staff due to her “particular brand of ‘up and at ’em’ West Coast energy” and tendency of “getting up at 5am [and] bombarding aides with texts.”
> Furthermore, a source told The Mirror that “Meghan put a lot of demands on her [Melissa] and it ended up with her in tears.”
> *April 2019: @SussexRoyal Is Born*
> Just one month before their actual son was born, Meghan and Harry debuted a new Instagram account, cementing their recent split from Kensington Palace and the royal offices that came with it.
> Royal insiders insisted splitting offices made sense and happened all the time. But, once again, this change contributed to the narrative that Meghan and Harry were forging an identity separate from the other royal family members.
> *May 6, 2019: Another Ginger-Haired Heir Is Born*
> The birth of a royal baby is enough to make the most fervent critic set aside any animosity to admire the cute new infant. But the arrival of Archie Harrison was also steeped in drama and controversy. First, *he was not born at St. Mary’s Hospital like many other royal babies* — including both William and Harry as well as the three Cambridge children, George, Charlotte, and Louis — had been. This meant Meghan did not pose on the steps for a photo op like Kate did. In fact, *Meghan and Harry decided to announce Archie’s birth in their own time, as shared in a statement nearly a month before his arrival: “The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family.”*
> Additionally, the couple privately selected their own photographer and kept his christening secret.
> During this time, rumors started circulating that Meghan felt sorry for Kate having to pose for post-birth photos. *Meghan also allegedly turned down Queen Elizabeth’s offer of using her medical team*, which consisted of male doctors. She opted for a female doctor for the delivery instead.
> *October 2019: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex Sue the Tabloids*
> Harry and Meghan were on a royal tour of Africa when they announced they planned to sue the UK tabloid newspaper Mail on Sunday and its parent company, claiming they published one of Meghan’s private letters without permission. The letter in question was between Meghan and her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
> Harry released a statement in response.
> “Unfortunately, my wife has become one of the latest victims of a British tabloid press that wages campaigns against individuals with no thought to the consequences — a ruthless campaign that has escalated over the past year, throughout her pregnancy and while raising our newborn son,” he said.
> “The positive coverage of the past week from these same publications exposes the double standards of this specific press pack that has vilified her almost daily for the past nine months; they have been able to create lie after lie at her expense simply because she has not been visible while on maternity leave. She is the same woman she was a year ago on our wedding day, just as she is the same woman you’ve seen on this Africa tour,” he continued.
> “Though we have continued to put on a brave face — as so many of you can relate to — I cannot begin to describe how painful it has been,” he said.
> In conclusion, the Duke of Sussex recalled Princess Diana and how she was treated by the press.
> “Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised [sic] to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”
> *Late October 2019: Meghan Admits She’s ‘Not OK’*
> The ITV documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey” was the first time Meghan shared some of her feelings regarding the British press’s bullying. She recalled how British friends tried to warn her that would happen.
> “When I first met my now husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy,” Meghan recalled.
> “But my British friends said to me, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’ And I very naively thought — I’m American, we don’t have that there — what are you talking about? That doesn’t make any sense … I didn’t get it. So it’s been … complicated.”
> Meghan said she had tried to put on a brave face, but it just all got too much.
> “I’ve said for a long time to H — that’s what I call him — it’s not enough to just survive something, right? That’s not the point of life. You’ve got to thrive; you’ve got to feel happy,” Meghan continued.
> *“I’ve really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip … I’ve tried, I’ve really tried.”
> When asked if she was “OK,” the duchess said she really wasn’t.
> January 2020: Prince Harry and Meghan Quit the Royal Family*
> The world was shocked when Harry and Meghan announced their decision to step down as senior royals in January 2020.
> At the time, the Sussexes claimed they’d be splitting time between the United Kingdom and North America to “raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity.”
> It was clear that royal officials were blindsided by this announcement. After weeks of hammering out details, it was announced that the pair would lose their “royal highness” titles but Harry would retain his place in the line of succession.
> Among other things, the pair demanded more privacy and freedom from the relentless British press that had been intent on making their lives miserable.
> *July 2020: Harry and Meghan Settle in California*
> The duke and duchess spent time house-hopping first in Canada and then in areas of California. They made the decision to stay in California permanently by purchasing a sprawling mansion in Santa Barbara
> “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex moved into their family home in July of this year,” a rep for the couple told People in August of 2020. “They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family.”
> *August 2020: Royal Fans Start a Frenzy Over “Finding Freedom” Biography*
> “Finding Freedom” is not an officially authorized biography, however, authors Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie are known to have close ties at the palace and access to insider information. The book details what was thought to be the beginning of the rift between William and Harry.
> As mentioned earlier, apparently, William told his younger brother not to rush into a serious relationship with Meghan. According to the biography, Harry thought William was being a snob, and nothing was the same after that.
> When it came to choosing between blood and love, Harry picked Meghan. And her detractors hated her more for it.
> *December 2020: Harry and Meghan Sign with Spotify*
> After landing a multi-year Netflix deal in September 2020, the Sussexes inked a contract with Spotify to host and produce podcasts as another step in the direction of making their own money on their own terms.
> “What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction,” Harry and Meghan said in a statement (via Yahoo). “With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other’s stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are.”
> To date, there hasn’t been much action on the Harry and Meghan podcast front despite the lucrative deal they struck.
> *March 7, 2021: Meghan and Harry Sit Down with Oprah*
> Fresh off the announcement of their second pregnancy on Valentine’s Day, the Sussexes sat down with Oprah for a tell-all interview that attracted more than 17 million viewers, Washington Post reported. The interview was chock-full of shocking moments, including the following most talked-about reveals:_
> 
> _An unnamed person in the royal family made rude comments about how dark baby Archie’s skin would be before he was born. According to Meghan, Harry was there when it happened. “They were saying they didn’t want him to be a prince, which would be different to protocol, and that he wasn’t going to receive security. This went on for the last few months of our pregnancy,” Meghan said._
> _Meghan had suicidal thoughts following the horrific falsities and alleged “lack of support” while part of the royal family. “I just didn’t want to be alive anymore. That was clear and real and frightening and a constant thought.”_
> _Harry and Meghan got married in a secret ceremony three days before the royal wedding._
> _Kate Middleton made Meghan cry just before her wedding, not the other way around as was originally reported._
> _Prince Charles wouldn’t take Harry’s calls. Also, the Duke of Sussex said Meghan helped him realize how unhappy he was all along. “I was trapped and I didn’t know I was trapped. … My father and my brother, they are trapped, they don’t get to leave,” Harry told Oprah._
> _The couple also revealed that their unborn baby was a girl.
> *September 15, 2021: Meghan Wears the Pants on the Cover of Time Magazine *
> In case anyone was still wondering who wore the pants in Meghan and Harry’s relationship, Time Magazine made it quite clear by putting the couple’s photo on the cover as part of their annual Time100 list. The image drew criticism due to the overall composition, which shows Meghan standing front and center and Harry hunched over and hiding behind her.
> Many critics saw it as* a metaphor for their relationship*.
> *September 2021: Piers Morgan Gets Fired and Dubs Meghan Markle the “Queen of Woke”*
> The feud between outspoken British news host Piers Morgan and Meghan is legendary. It all came to a head in September 2021 when the former “Good Morning Britain” host gave the duchess her least flattering nickname.
> Following the Oprah interview, Piers declared he didn’t believe a word Meghan had said. Critics came after him with claims of racism. In a later interview with The Sun, Piers addressed the drama saying Meghan is a “whiny, forked-tongue actress” and that the court ruling in his favor was a “resounding defeat for Princess Pinocchio.”
> “The woke brigade think they can vilify, shame, silence and get fired anyone who has an opinion they don’t like. Meghan Markle is the queen of this culture, who personally sought to have me lose my job — and succeeded.”
> He added, “Why are she and Prince Harry entitled to have their opinion but I’m not entitled to mine?”
> All of these events helped contribute to the rapidly deteriorating image of Meghan Markle. Is she an innocent victim of a relentless British press? A social climber? A woman who fell in love and just wants a happily ever after? The world may never know for sure. But in the meantime, many will continue to see her as the Queen of Woke.
> The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire._




*Actually, she's now gone from the 'Queen of Woke' to the 'Butt of Joke'.*


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, he plans to send a video ???



Absolute tosh! Why does he think he is so special? Why don't all the other grandchildren stand up at the Abbey to say their bit too? Ridiculous.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, he plans to send a video ???




What an a** Harry is.  Too bad his grandfather isn’t here to set him straight.  He and his family are in fine shape to travel, a video would only be possibly okay if he were physically unable to attend.  We all know his “safety” BS is just that.  If he went, he and his family would be in the same royal security bubble as the others will be in.  

Not to mention playing with fire with his grandmother at this point. She has become quite a bit more frail in recent weeks and there is talk about perhaps modifying things to make it possible for her to attend and participate. Would not surprise me to see some things tweaked for the Jubilee festivities. And still he refuses to grow up and arrange an under the radar visit to her - with or without his family. Did he not learn anything during his grandfather’s final months?

Patently absurd for him to whine about wanting to be included.  All he has to do is show up.  A video is just more of his half-in-half-out BS.  He is infuriating!!


----------



## bag-mania

I used to think it was only Meghan who was the attention hog. He’s every bit the attention-seeking missile she is!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I used to think it was only Meghan who was the attention hog. He’s every bit the attention-seeking missile she is!


probably but then again, he may be following her orders


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> probably but then again, he may be following her orders



He needs direction I’m sure. He’s not much in the thinking and planning department. Still he seems to be enjoying his regular statements to the press about whoever he believes did him wrong that particular week.


----------



## Chanbal

On The Telegraph today… 



*The Duke of Sussex suffered “substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress” after a Mail on Sunday report about one of his other court cases inspired a “feeding frenzy of hostile comments” online, his lawyers have claimed.*
_The Duke is suing The Mail on Sunday over what he believes is a defamatory exclusive story which told “*how Harry tried to keep his legal fight over bodyguards secret … then minutes after MoS broke the story his PR machine tried to put positive spin on the dispute*”.
His lawyers say the story, and subsequent “adverse and hostile” online comments, were “self-evidently exceptionally serious and damaging” and constitute an “attack on his honesty and integrity” which “undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work”.
He has “suffered serious damage to his reputation and substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress which is continuing”, they say, in a High Court case seeking “aggravated damages” for the Duke.
The Mail on Sunday story refers to a separate legal case brought by the Duke against the Home Office. He is seeking judicial review of the Government’s decision not to provide police protection for him and his family when they are in the UK.

The newspaper first revealed he was taking legal action in an online story on the evening of January 15, and in print on January 16.

After the paper went to print, and shortly after it was posted on MailOnline, the Duke’s team sent out a statement confirming that the Duke was seeking judicial review, believing the UK to be unsafe for his family to return to, and noting: “The Duke first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for himself and his family in January of 2020 at Sandringham…”_

*When the court case had its first hearing on February 18th, lawyers acting for the Government appeared to challenge that statement, saying the offer of payment “was notably not advanced to Ravec [the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures]” when the Duke visited the UK in June 2021 or in any of the immediate correspondence which followed…*



			archive.ph


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The drama continues…
> View attachment 5360093
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Accuses Tabloid of Running 'Gratuitous' Photos of Meghan and Kids
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is suing a tabloid for libel over an article about his police security dispute with the U.K. government, court documents seen by Newsweek show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


OMG STFU already!!!!


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chanbal said:


> *The Duke of Sussex suffered “substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress” after a Mail on Sunday report about one of his other court cases inspired a “feeding frenzy of hostile comments” online, his lawyers have claimed.*
> The Duke is suing The Mail on Sunday over what he believes is a defamatory exclusive story which told “*how Harry tried to keep his legal fight over bodyguards secret … then minutes after MoS broke the story his PR machine tried to put positive spin on the dispute*”.
> His lawyers say the story, and subsequent “adverse and hostile” online comments, were “self-evidently exceptionally serious and damaging” and constitute an “attack on his honesty and integrity” which “undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work”.
> He has “suffered serious damage to his reputation and substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress which is continuing”, they say, in a High Court case seeking “aggravated damages” for the Duke.
> The Mail on Sunday story refers to a separate legal case brought by the Duke against the Home Office. He is seeking judicial review of the Government’s decision not to provide police protection for him and his family when they are in the UK.
> 
> When the court case had its first hearing on February 18th, lawyers acting for the Government appeared to challenge that statement, saying the offer of payment “was notably not advanced to Ravec [the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures]” when the Duke visited the UK in June 2021 or in any of the immediate correspondence which followed.



“attack on his honesty and integrity” *[HE HAD THIS TO BEGIN WITH?]*

“undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work” *[Pretty certain he was extremely unqualified or fit to be involved in any of the "work" he's participated in - like Chief Impact Officer?]*

“suffered serious damage to his reputation and substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress which is continuing” *[Pretty certain his own actions, like wearing a swastika to a Halloween Party, being caught naked in a Las Vegas hotel room, disowning his own family, believing he was actually talking to Greta about Chunga Changa, and providing cringeworthy 'advice' as a mental health counselor is enough to cause substantial hurt to others, embarrassment to himself, and distress to his own family]

In conclusion....WHAT A JOKE.*


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I used to think it was only Meghan who was the attention hog. He’s every bit the attention-seeking missile she is!


She's a better teacher than actress.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She's a better teacher than actress.


Only at certain things.  She certainly sucks as a student!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Only at certain things.  She certainly sucks as a student!


It's ironic that he probably watched and learned from her, as she should have done with the royals from the start of their relationship.


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> “attack on his honesty and integrity” *[HE HAD THIS TO BEGIN WITH?]*
> 
> “undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work” *[Pretty certain he was extremely unqualified or fit to be involved in any of the "work" he's participated in - like Chief Impact Officer?]*
> 
> “suffered serious damage to his reputation and substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress which is continuing” *[Pretty certain his own actions, like wearing a swastika to a Halloween Party, being caught naked in a Las Vegas hotel room, disowning his own family, believing he was actually talking to Greta about Chunga Changa, and providing cringeworthy 'advice' as a mental health counselor is enough to cause substantial hurt to others, embarrassment to himself, and distress to his own family]
> 
> In conclusion....WHAT A JOKE.*


He is obviously looking for money He has really gotten desperate to sink this low. Pains and suffering,and unable to earn a living.  He has become a true American  if he was a citizen he would be trying to go out on disability and get SSI


----------



## rose60610

If Harry is using the security excuse not to participate in the Jubilee, then it's only right he use the security excuse for EVERYTHING, like rodeos, the Super Bowl, going out to lunch, travel, etc.  He can use Zoom for everything so he can stay home and STFU with his insufferable wife.  Security, you know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> On The Telegraph today…
> View attachment 5360182



Or maybe it was your own actions, Harry. I increasingly find my patience with him running low.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> If Harry is using the security excuse not to participate in the Jubilee, then it's only right he use the security excuse for EVERYTHING, like rodeos, the Super Bowl, going out to lunch, travel, etc.  He can use Zoom for everything so he can stay home and STFU with his insufferable wife.  Security, you know.


Oh no, it only applies to the UK, where he has generational trauma.  
Every other country he can roam about as he pleases.


----------



## lanasyogamama

One might argue that bringing a new lawsuit every week “_undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work”._


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> Lady C says today that Megan told a childhood friend, after not getting a period as a teen, that she was intersex (or hermaphrodite).


Lady C raises the possibility the rumor might be linked to TW's habit to jump on bandwagons. It looks like gender identity was a rather fashionable subject at the time she allegedly confided in her childhood friend.


----------



## csshopper

While the Royals are out working, the Haz and TW (will finally admit from day one I read this as The Wh---", not Wife) are sitting on their skinny butts, Haz sucking his thumb, figuring out how to get into the news. Suing regularly seems to work.

Imagine Maggot is also busy duplicating, saving, filing, every single phrase that comes from Caribbean protestors about racism in the Commonwealth. "See I told you so."  She must be incandescent with Will and especially Kate. Cambridge is synonymous with Class; Sussex with Sludge.

BTW, an email from Netflix about their rate increase gave several options for communicating. They heard from me that because their business practices included outrageous outlays for two of the most irrelevant people on the planet, who have played them for fools by providing no product, they would not get one more cent from me. Furthermore, NOTHING coming H and M would warrant even a half cent more and I am but one of many now former subscribers who feels Netflix has been demeaned by this association. Told them all the meaningful ways I plan to spend the former Netflix fees.  Felt good and I heard somewhere (maybe Neil Sean?) Netflix is beginning to get the message.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I used to think it was only Meghan who was the *attention hog*. He’s every bit the attention-seeking missile she is!


H has been seeking attention from the beginning and behaving inappropriately throughout his entire life and IMO, he enjoyed being called the bad boy prince.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Oh no, it only applies to *the UK, where he has generational trauma.*
> Every other country he can roam about as he pleases.



You have a great point! (Most of) the BRF is beloved by many generations, and Hazbeen has become persona non grata in his own country.  I don't yet see his old buddies lining up to come to the U.S., either, where ALL HIS SECURITY IS. They can't use covid as an excuse anymore. Golly, Haz, where are all your buddies? Oh wait, they weren't A-listers or shiny celebrities so they didn't make the wedding invite list with all your pretend friends. Other than your snake cousin Eugenie, none of your family has been here either.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He needs direction I’m sure. He’s not much in the thinking and planning department. Still he seems to be enjoying his regular statements to the press about whoever he believes did him wrong that particular week.


he just seems nasty now......I wonder what Diana would think.  She would have to be more proud  of Will


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> H has been seeking attention from the beginning and behaving inappropriately throughout his entire life and IMO, he enjoyed being called the bad boy prince.


well, that's over...now he's the angry bitter former prince
and I might add balding.....not cute anymore


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> On The Telegraph today…
> View attachment 5360182
> 
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex suffered “substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress” after a Mail on Sunday report about one of his other court cases inspired a “feeding frenzy of hostile comments” online, his lawyers have claimed.*
> _The Duke is suing The Mail on Sunday over what he believes is a defamatory exclusive story which told “*how Harry tried to keep his legal fight over bodyguards secret … then minutes after MoS broke the story his PR machine tried to put positive spin on the dispute*”.
> His lawyers say the story, and subsequent “adverse and hostile” online comments, were “self-evidently exceptionally serious and damaging” and constitute an “attack on his honesty and integrity” which “undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work”.
> He has “suffered serious damage to his reputation and substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress which is continuing”, they say, in a High Court case seeking “aggravated damages” for the Duke.
> The Mail on Sunday story refers to a separate legal case brought by the Duke against the Home Office. He is seeking judicial review of the Government’s decision not to provide police protection for him and his family when they are in the UK.
> 
> The newspaper first revealed he was taking legal action in an online story on the evening of January 15, and in print on January 16.
> 
> After the paper went to print, and shortly after it was posted on MailOnline, the Duke’s team sent out a statement confirming that the Duke was seeking judicial review, believing the UK to be unsafe for his family to return to, and noting: “The Duke first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for himself and his family in January of 2020 at Sandringham…”_
> 
> *When the court case had its first hearing on February 18th, lawyers acting for the Government appeared to challenge that statement, saying the offer of payment “was notably not advanced to Ravec [the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures]” when the Duke visited the UK in June 2021 or in any of the immediate correspondence which followed…*
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



This is stupid.  You have to show actual loss ($).  Hurt feelings doesn’t cut it.

And really, when the world is watching Russia  invade another country and millions of people having to flee with what they can carry - he is suing over hurt feelings?


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> A well written article…   D-List… Z-List @CeeJay
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The all thing!
> 
> 
> 
> *The Rise And Fall Of Meghan Markle: How A B-List Actress Became The ‘Queen Of Woke’*
> 
> _In 2016, the only people who had heard of Meghan Markle were fans of the USA Network legal drama “Suits” and the handful of moviegoers who noticed her cameo in the 2011 comedy “Horrible Bosses.” The rest of the world was blissfully ignorant of the woman who was destined to disrupt the British monarchy simply by making one ginger-haired “spare heir” prince fall in love with her.
> Today, however, the name Meghan Markle typically elicits some kind of response from everyone. *To fans, she is an enchanted example of a fairy tale come true — *one in which a blue-blooded royal forsook his family and country, valiantly fighting to protect his true love’s honor in the face of blatant, explicit racism, not the least of which originated among the aforementioned royal elites.
> *Then there are those who see the Duchess of Sussex as a ruthless gold-digger who sought fame and fortune by any means necessary.* Her ladder climb included snatching away an affable yet aimless British royal who often played third wheel to his older brother, Prince William, and his wife, Kate Middleton, who was still clearly traumatized by the death of his mother, Princess Diana. To her critics, Meghan saw a weakness and exploited it.
> No one will ever know Meghan Markle’s true motivations except for the duchess herself. But we can at least break down how one royal romance spawned a person who was unofficially dubbed the “Queen of Woke.”
> *November 2017: Prince Harry Pops the Question to American Actress Meghan Markle*
> Meghan and Harry met on a blind date in 2016. The press soon caught wind of their romance, especially after Harry was seen jetting off to Toronto, where Meghan was living and filming “Suits.” While their clandestine vacations and courtship were newsworthy, the couple really began to make headlines on the day Harry proposed.
> At that point, he and Meghan had been dating for around 18 months and were clearly smitten with each other. However, older brother Prince William allegedly warned Harry not to rush into marriage. This is rumored to be the beginning of the royal rift between these former best friend brothers that still makes things awkward to this day.
> *April 2018: A Royal Wedding*
> Everyone loves a royal wedding, right? Well, not exactly. There were rumors of drama from day one, with some palace sources saying Meghan made Kate cry during a flower girl dress fitting. (Stay tuned: This tiff comes up again a few years later after Meghan agreed to do a bombshell interview with Oprah.) No matter what actually happened, things were off to a rocky start when it came to Meghan joining the family.
> Even the date the couple chose — Saturday, May 19, 2018 — was controversial. According to Reader’s Digest, the late Queen Victoria thought May weddings were unlucky. As the rhyme goes, “Marry in May, and rue the day.” How true that would turn out to be.
> These may not seem like important details, but they serve as the beginning of the drama Meghan causes in the royal family.
> *October 15, 2018: Expecting a New Royal Baby*
> Fans were overjoyed to find out a royal baby was coming when Harry and Meghan made the announcement in the fall of 2018. But the addition of a baby meant even more controversy was coming as Meghan refused to do things “the royal way.” This kicked off with the duchess hosting a celebrity-studded baby shower in New York City in February 2019, which was apparently seen as quite gauche by royal family standards. And it only got worse from there.
> *November 2018: Meghan and Harry Move Out of Kensington Palace*
> Many royal followers believe perceptions of Harry and Meghan started to shift when they decided to leave Kensington Palace, where they were close to William, Kate, and their three children, and move to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor. While some interpret this moment as the beginning of the pair’s never-ending quest for privacy, others view it differently.
> Not only did this move intensify rumors about Harry and William feuding, but critics saw it as the couple — with Meghan leading the charge — being ungrateful for what they were given. Since they were expecting, Frogmore underwent a massive, multi-million-dollar renovation. The couple’s new digs included a gym, yoga studio, and nursery, along with top-of-the-line security.
> Plus, the Sussexes moving away from Kensington only intensified those rumors about Harry and William feuding.
> *December 2018: Royal Staff Won’t Stop Quitting; Meghan Gets Blamed*
> It could be a coincidence. But, then again, the simplest explanation is usually true, and the facts show that *three royal aides resigned between the time Meghan and Harry were married in May 2018 and December of that year.* Notably, this included the couple’s private secretary, Samantha Cohen, who announced she was leaving after serving the royal family for 17 years.
> Press from that period included a Daily Mail article in which a palace aide and assistant named *“Melissa” admitted she quit because of “Hurricane Meghan” ruining the positive vibe with palace staff. *She [Meghan] allegedly drove away staff due to her “particular brand of ‘up and at ’em’ West Coast energy” and tendency of “getting up at 5am [and] bombarding aides with texts.”
> Furthermore, a source told The Mirror that “Meghan put a lot of demands on her [Melissa] and it ended up with her in tears.”
> *April 2019: @SussexRoyal Is Born*
> Just one month before their actual son was born, Meghan and Harry debuted a new Instagram account, cementing their recent split from Kensington Palace and the royal offices that came with it.
> Royal insiders insisted splitting offices made sense and happened all the time. But, once again, this change contributed to the narrative that Meghan and Harry were forging an identity separate from the other royal family members.
> *May 6, 2019: Another Ginger-Haired Heir Is Born*
> The birth of a royal baby is enough to make the most fervent critic set aside any animosity to admire the cute new infant. But the arrival of Archie Harrison was also steeped in drama and controversy. First, *he was not born at St. Mary’s Hospital like many other royal babies* — including both William and Harry as well as the three Cambridge children, George, Charlotte, and Louis — had been. This meant Meghan did not pose on the steps for a photo op like Kate did. In fact, *Meghan and Harry decided to announce Archie’s birth in their own time, as shared in a statement nearly a month before his arrival: “The Duke and Duchess look forward to sharing the exciting news with everyone once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family.”*
> Additionally, the couple privately selected their own photographer and kept his christening secret.
> During this time, rumors started circulating that Meghan felt sorry for Kate having to pose for post-birth photos. *Meghan also allegedly turned down Queen Elizabeth’s offer of using her medical team*, which consisted of male doctors. She opted for a female doctor for the delivery instead.
> *October 2019: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex Sue the Tabloids*
> Harry and Meghan were on a royal tour of Africa when they announced they planned to sue the UK tabloid newspaper Mail on Sunday and its parent company, claiming they published one of Meghan’s private letters without permission. The letter in question was between Meghan and her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
> Harry released a statement in response.
> “Unfortunately, my wife has become one of the latest victims of a British tabloid press that wages campaigns against individuals with no thought to the consequences — a ruthless campaign that has escalated over the past year, throughout her pregnancy and while raising our newborn son,” he said.
> “The positive coverage of the past week from these same publications exposes the double standards of this specific press pack that has vilified her almost daily for the past nine months; they have been able to create lie after lie at her expense simply because she has not been visible while on maternity leave. She is the same woman she was a year ago on our wedding day, just as she is the same woman you’ve seen on this Africa tour,” he continued.
> “Though we have continued to put on a brave face — as so many of you can relate to — I cannot begin to describe how painful it has been,” he said.
> In conclusion, the Duke of Sussex recalled Princess Diana and how she was treated by the press.
> “Though this action may not be the safe one, it is the right one. Because my deepest fear is history repeating itself. I’ve seen what happens when someone I love is commoditised [sic] to the point that they are no longer treated or seen as a real person. I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces.”
> *Late October 2019: Meghan Admits She’s ‘Not OK’*
> The ITV documentary “Harry and Meghan: An African Journey” was the first time Meghan shared some of her feelings regarding the British press’s bullying. She recalled how British friends tried to warn her that would happen.
> “When I first met my now husband, my friends were really happy because I was so happy,” Meghan recalled.
> “But my British friends said to me, ‘I’m sure he’s great, but you shouldn’t do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life.’ And I very naively thought — I’m American, we don’t have that there — what are you talking about? That doesn’t make any sense … I didn’t get it. So it’s been … complicated.”
> Meghan said she had tried to put on a brave face, but it just all got too much.
> “I’ve said for a long time to H — that’s what I call him — it’s not enough to just survive something, right? That’s not the point of life. You’ve got to thrive; you’ve got to feel happy,” Meghan continued.
> *“I’ve really tried to adopt this British sensibility of a stiff upper lip … I’ve tried, I’ve really tried.”
> When asked if she was “OK,” the duchess said she really wasn’t.
> January 2020: Prince Harry and Meghan Quit the Royal Family*
> The world was shocked when Harry and Meghan announced their decision to step down as senior royals in January 2020.
> At the time, the Sussexes claimed they’d be splitting time between the United Kingdom and North America to “raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity.”
> It was clear that royal officials were blindsided by this announcement. After weeks of hammering out details, it was announced that the pair would lose their “royal highness” titles but Harry would retain his place in the line of succession.
> Among other things, the pair demanded more privacy and freedom from the relentless British press that had been intent on making their lives miserable.
> *July 2020: Harry and Meghan Settle in California*
> The duke and duchess spent time house-hopping first in Canada and then in areas of California. They made the decision to stay in California permanently by purchasing a sprawling mansion in Santa Barbara
> “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex moved into their family home in July of this year,” a rep for the couple told People in August of 2020. “They have settled into the quiet privacy of their community since their arrival and hope that this will be respected for their neighbors, as well as for them as a family.”
> *August 2020: Royal Fans Start a Frenzy Over “Finding Freedom” Biography*
> “Finding Freedom” is not an officially authorized biography, however, authors Carolyn Durand and Omid Scobie are known to have close ties at the palace and access to insider information. The book details what was thought to be the beginning of the rift between William and Harry.
> As mentioned earlier, apparently, William told his younger brother not to rush into a serious relationship with Meghan. According to the biography, Harry thought William was being a snob, and nothing was the same after that.
> When it came to choosing between blood and love, Harry picked Meghan. And her detractors hated her more for it.
> *December 2020: Harry and Meghan Sign with Spotify*
> After landing a multi-year Netflix deal in September 2020, the Sussexes inked a contract with Spotify to host and produce podcasts as another step in the direction of making their own money on their own terms.
> “What we love about podcasting is that it reminds all of us to take a moment and to really listen, to connect to one another without distraction,” Harry and Meghan said in a statement (via Yahoo). “With the challenges of 2020, there has never been a more important time to do so, because when we hear each other, and hear each other’s stories, we are reminded of how interconnected we all are.”
> To date, there hasn’t been much action on the Harry and Meghan podcast front despite the lucrative deal they struck.
> *March 7, 2021: Meghan and Harry Sit Down with Oprah*
> Fresh off the announcement of their second pregnancy on Valentine’s Day, the Sussexes sat down with Oprah for a tell-all interview that attracted more than 17 million viewers, Washington Post reported. The interview was chock-full of shocking moments, including the following most talked-about reveals:_
> 
> _An unnamed person in the royal family made rude comments about how dark baby Archie’s skin would be before he was born. According to Meghan, Harry was there when it happened. “They were saying they didn’t want him to be a prince, which would be different to protocol, and that he wasn’t going to receive security. This went on for the last few months of our pregnancy,” Meghan said._
> _Meghan had suicidal thoughts following the horrific falsities and alleged “lack of support” while part of the royal family. “I just didn’t want to be alive anymore. That was clear and real and frightening and a constant thought.”_
> _Harry and Meghan got married in a secret ceremony three days before the royal wedding._
> _Kate Middleton made Meghan cry just before her wedding, not the other way around as was originally reported._
> _Prince Charles wouldn’t take Harry’s calls. Also, the Duke of Sussex said Meghan helped him realize how unhappy he was all along. “I was trapped and I didn’t know I was trapped. … My father and my brother, they are trapped, they don’t get to leave,” Harry told Oprah._
> _The couple also revealed that their unborn baby was a girl.
> *September 15, 2021: Meghan Wears the Pants on the Cover of Time Magazine *
> In case anyone was still wondering who wore the pants in Meghan and Harry’s relationship, Time Magazine made it quite clear by putting the couple’s photo on the cover as part of their annual Time100 list. The image drew criticism due to the overall composition, which shows Meghan standing front and center and Harry hunched over and hiding behind her.
> Many critics saw it as* a metaphor for their relationship*.
> *September 2021: Piers Morgan Gets Fired and Dubs Meghan Markle the “Queen of Woke”*
> The feud between outspoken British news host Piers Morgan and Meghan is legendary. It all came to a head in September 2021 when the former “Good Morning Britain” host gave the duchess her least flattering nickname.
> Following the Oprah interview, Piers declared he didn’t believe a word Meghan had said. Critics came after him with claims of racism. In a later interview with The Sun, Piers addressed the drama saying Meghan is a “whiny, forked-tongue actress” and that the court ruling in his favor was a “resounding defeat for Princess Pinocchio.”
> “The woke brigade think they can vilify, shame, silence and get fired anyone who has an opinion they don’t like. Meghan Markle is the queen of this culture, who personally sought to have me lose my job — and succeeded.”
> He added, “Why are she and Prince Harry entitled to have their opinion but I’m not entitled to mine?”
> All of these events helped contribute to the rapidly deteriorating image of Meghan Markle. Is she an innocent victim of a relentless British press? A social climber? A woman who fell in love and just wants a happily ever after? The world may never know for sure. But in the meantime, many will continue to see her as the Queen of Woke.
> The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire._




The article glossed over quite a few major things -  including the proven lies on Oprah, the manifesto terms/demands, the “service is universal” slap back, the “I am not ok” statement was made in a country where women experience the most horrific violence and there is crushing poverty issues, the merching  of the wreath during the funeral… etc.  

To be honest, their biggest and stupidest things they did was the Oprah tell all and not producing anything for Spotify or Netflix.  No one (A listers, business execs or otherwise) wants to associate with them given that whatever is discussed will either be leaked or be on the next Oprah or other interview.  And they got these big deals with Spotify and Netflix and then didn’t produce much if anything.  So who wants to go into business when It’s clear they can’t deliver?.  They markled themselves…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> well, that's over...now he's the angry bitter former prince
> and I might add balding.....not cute anymore


I agree however, I never found him cute as he always seemed too needy and  desperate for approval and recognition.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Golly, Haz, where are all your buddies? Oh wait, they weren't A-listers or shiny celebrities so they didn't make the wedding invite list with all your pretend friends. Other than your snake cousin Eugenie, none of your family has been here either.



Naw. They came from the oldest, richest families of Europe, it's just that Raptor went to work removing them from Harry's circle as soon as the wedding date was set.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> To be honest, their biggest and stupidest things they did was the Oprah tell all and not producing anything for Spotify or Netflix.  No one (A listers, business execs or otherwise) wants to associate with them given that whatever is discussed will either be leaked or be on the next Oprah or other interview.  And they got these big deals with Spotify and Netflix and then didn’t produce much if anything.  So who wants to go into business when It’s clear they can’t deliver?.  They markled themselves…



Netflix would’ve been absolutely thrilled if Harry and Meghan had saved all their dirt for a Netflix show. Instead they sold it to Oprah and still took the millions from Netflix for doing nothing. I don’t feel bad about Spotify and Netflix getting hosed. They deserve it for being so stupid.


----------



## Chanbal

_Piers Morgan, 56, has been left furious by a complaint from the Duke of Sussex regarding his press coverage. The former Good Morning Britain presenter has remarked that *the "little twerp" needs to remember "there's a war raging" when he is "bleating" about his problems*.

Piers left his raging comment *in response to* the latest news story on the infamous Prince Harry.

*The Duke of Sussex has claimed he suffered "substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress" after a Mail on Sunday report about one of his other court cases*._


----------



## csshopper

Haz could benefit from a premium package at ButterUp. Oops, ‍“forgot” he’s the one who gets paid to tell others how to have it, do it better. That Co. is even more stupid than Netfix and Spotify.


----------



## Chanbal

Incredible talent on Twitter…


----------



## Chanbal

_According to insiders, William has decided that, rather than wait for Harry and wife Meghan Markle to decline, he’s simply not going to invite them. “William still loves Harry – that will never change – but his apparent insensitivity makes him persona non grata at the moment and it will take some miracle for that to change,” says a source close to Wills, who will be turning 40 on 21 June._









						Meghan Markle & Prince Harry banned from Prince William’s 40th
					

While insiders had hoped that time would heal Prince Harry and Prince William's wounds, it seems the reverse has happened. Read more on heatworld.




					heatworld.com


----------



## Chanbal

Video #2 TM looks so frail, it's rather painful to see his suffering…
It looks like he started noticing some character changes in TW during high school, college, but mostly after she joined the Soho House in Canada…  Also, his YT colleague invited him to attend the Jubilee and report from the UK.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5360492
> 
> _According to insiders, William has decided that, rather than wait for Harry and wife Meghan Markle to decline, he’s simply not going to invite them. “William still loves Harry – that will never change – but his apparent insensitivity makes him persona non grata at the moment and it will take some miracle for that to change,” says a source close to Wills, who will be turning 40 on 21 June._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry banned from Prince William’s 40th
> 
> 
> While insiders had hoped that time would heal Prince Harry and Prince William's wounds, it seems the reverse has happened. Read more on heatworld.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> heatworld.com


Well, I mean, if he can't show up for Prince Phillips's ceremony or the Jubilee, how could he possibly face security risks attending Will's birthday party???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal

I hope the BLG doesn't get silenced, he is hilarious…


----------



## rose60610

Awwww, the hucksters aren't invited  won't be going to Will's party. So...will they send him a Birthday Wreath? Complete with a 40 page explanation on the SYMBOLISM of all the components? Maybe it'll get lost  misplaced among the many gifts from Heads of State who don't need to get begged will be happy to give a gift. I wonder how much security will be at THAT party? Plenty, I'm sure, but NOT ENOUGH for Hazbeen........ .


----------



## bellecate

Did they sell their place? What did they buy?


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Did they sell their place? What did they buy?
> 
> View attachment 5360589
> View attachment 5360590


This is likely misinformation. Ellen would have to be very delusional to think that Ginger Guru and TW would help her to stay relevant. However, I believe the Montecitos are interested in having their own talk show, and this type of news serves also to test the waters.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I hope the BLG doesn't get silenced, he is hilarious…



He got me at "too many tacos at Joselito's food truck."  BLG just keeps getting funnier.  He could go on the road with a lecture tour and do very well.

I have to say that I think that aside from these claims being pathetic and ridiculous, they are the result of a deeply disturbed mind that is being aided and abetted by a greedy law firm.  It is extremely obvious that this is a money grab.  Meghan's copyright lawsuit was not as blatant as this.  These claims about pain, suffering and the inability to make a livelihood to support his family are all needed to sue for money.. All the buzz words are present and he will want a jury trial so he can tug at heart strings.  No judge would fall for this and really should just kick it out.  Does he think that ANL is going to fall for this?  Heck no!  They won't!  On the whole, this could also be viewed as just another publicity grab.  Keep his name out there and it doesn't matter what it is about as long as it is out there.  Gee, whatever happened to that need for privacy?????


When is someone going to tell the emperor that he isn't wearing any clothes and looks like a fool?


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Did they sell their place? What did they buy?
> 
> View attachment 5360589
> View attachment 5360590


Another work of fiction.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Did they sell their place? What did they buy?
> 
> View attachment 5360589
> View attachment 5360590



That sounds like a big load of BS to me.  None of it rings true.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is likely misinformation. Ellen would have to be very delusional to think that Ginger Guru and TW would help her to stay relevant. However, I believe the Montecitos are interested in having their own talk show, and this type of news serves also to test the waters.



I hope H&M do get their own talk show. Let them spend zillions on creating it, producing it, and then no one will watch it, even their stans will be bored to tears.  Clearly, they *need* to fail more. Then, maybe they will get it.  They never had the “it” factor, do not have the “it” factor and never will have the “it” factor.  Ya either got “it” or ya don’t [it’s why she was Zlist and he was tolerated only because he had royal connections - duh].


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case H&M peek in here - they have been and are solid 3’s.  Most BRF strike me as 2’s. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *I hope H&M do get their own talk show.* Let them spend zillions on creating it, producing it, and then no one will watch it, even their stans will be bored to tears.  Clearly, they *need* to fail more. Then, maybe they will get it.  They never had the “it” factor, do not have the “it” factor and never will have the “it” factor.  Ya either got “it” or ya don’t [it’s why she was Zlist and he was tolerated only because he had royal connections - duh].
> 
> 
> View attachment 5360633


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



It would be nothing but preachy.  Just give them a pulpit and they can pretend they're Jerry Swaggart and Tammy Faye Bakker, fake eyelashes, tears and all.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



They can't even create a podcast.  They would never to be able to do a talk show.  They have no spontaneity, no humor, no whit.  no brains.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They’ve proven they cannot create content.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw. They came from the oldest, richest families of Europe, it's just that Raptor went to work removing them from Harry's circle as soon as the wedding date was set.


Never understood that move. She may have cut him off from his buddies who were likely to see through her and wake him up, but she also cut herself off from a very influential sector of British aristocracy. Unless of course she planned right from the start to swoop back to her "home" Hollywood and judged them as unnecessary to her new glorified life.



Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5360492
> 
> _According to insiders, William has decided that, rather than wait for Harry and wife Meghan Markle to decline, he’s simply not going to invite them. “William still loves Harry – that will never change – but his apparent insensitivity makes him persona non grata at the moment and it will take some miracle for that to change,” says a source close to Wills, who will be turning 40 on 21 June._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry banned from Prince William’s 40th
> 
> 
> While insiders had hoped that time would heal Prince Harry and Prince William's wounds, it seems the reverse has happened. Read more on heatworld.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> heatworld.com


Methane will just make it all about her, and try to figuratively blow out the candles on his cake.



gracekelly said:


> They can't even create a podcast.  They would never to be able to do a talk show.  They have no spontaneity, no humor, no whit.  no brains.


Do you think they will go the "Church of Saint Meghan the Tragic and Invincible" route?


----------



## Happyish

gracekelly said:


> With all of these royals present, the security would be huge and tight, but not good enough for Harry.  He want to be in a bullet proof bubble on wheels.


The "Pope-mobile."


----------



## Chanbal

This is priceless…


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a silly idea youngster, nobody would have had time to give them the attention they deserve and to take a gazillion pictures because people would have been busy with a an actual crisis, a constant stream of displaced people and bombings creeping closer to the Polish border.
> 
> Speaking of lemon cake, I made a French lemon cake (it has crème fraîche!) that's a two day production (bake, baste in lemon syrup, let sit over night, glaze) for tomorrow to greet spring in style.


May I have your recipe? My lemon tree will thank you (my waist-line will not) but it sounds absolutely delicious. I lOVE creme fraiche--in fact one of my favorites in creme fraiche ice cream . . .


----------



## Happyish

xincinsin said:


> It was too good to be true that Hollywood would invite the idiots to give out an Oscar without some major pulling of strings.
> 
> 
> I read the Wiki version of Wallis' life and found it quite "funny OMG" that the person who summarized her life basically said she didn't want an abdication. Like Methane, she wanted to be Queen. And like Methane, she rewrote her life in her memoirs to put herself in a good light.
> 
> BTW, does anyone think Methane had a boob job? She wasn't very busty during the wedding, after her Deal or No Deal implants were removed. But she was bursting out of that brown shirt at NYC and her chest was prominent in the red outfit on the same trip.


It looked like baby-fat to me. Either that or too much ice cream. I can sympathize.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> I hope H&M do get their own talk show. Let them spend zillions on creating it, producing it, and then no one will watch it, even their stans will be bored to tears.  Clearly, they *need* to fail more. Then, maybe they will get it.  They never had the “it” factor, do not have the “it” factor and never will have the “it” factor.  Ya either got “it” or ya don’t [it’s why she was Zlist and he was tolerated only because he had royal connections - duh].
> 
> 
> View attachment 5360633




Well, I read today that Maury Povich is retiring. SOMEBODY has to take over announcing the results of all those paternity tests of losers that should never breed. I never had the stomach to watch that show, the people were over the top gross and unfortunately the children stood to inherit low IQ's.  But I imagine Povich got filthy rich from the show. Since the Harkles care only for money and nothing else, they'd be the perfect type to take over.  We know Maggot loves drama and breaking up families, this is up her alley.


----------



## Happyish

jelliedfeels said:


> Wallis was born into great wealth herself. She was very much the glamourous socialite and dinner party hostess in London and I think she was primarily into a social queen bee mindset rather than a career.
> 
> Apparently she wanted to be Ed the 8th’s mistress (this would give her great power and swag) not David the duke’s wife (Ed was known as David to friends) & she asked him not to abdicate for her.
> 
> This is part of the reason why I think she was a bit of a cover reason- the reality is he had fascist sympathies & later got moved from a military post in France for being too positive about their Nazi opposition.
> 
> They were sent to the Caribbean & he was made governor of Barbados and Wallis was fuming because she want to be a city socialite not stuck in some tropical paradise where no one cares about  her outfits.
> 
> They move around quite a lot- lots of dinner parties and sickening Hermes bags, platinum jewellery, severe monochromatic tea dresses and skirt suits. She had a great style and definitely made an impression but I think she never quite got to where she wanted to be.


It was a sad and pathetic life. One need only look at the auction catalog--monogrammed Hermes bags, monogrammed linens, monogrammed jewelry, monogrammed everything. The clothes, the jewelry--it was a life of such excess and emptiness that it defied the limits of credulity. And then to top it off, after the Duke's death, she was taken advantage of by her attorney--Maitre Suzanne Blum, who kept her drugged in a semi-comatose state, prevented anyone from seeing her, while judiciously (no pun intended) selling off her property which was allegedly diverted to Maitre Blum and her son. 
It's a chilling story, one which makes me think, "be careful what you wish for."


----------



## xincinsin

Happyish said:


> It was a sad and pathetic life. One need only look at the auction catalog--monogrammed Hermes bags, monogrammed linens, monogrammed jewelry, monogrammed everything. The clothes, the jewelry--it was a life of such excess and emptiness that it defied the limits of credulity. And then to top it off, after the Duke's death, she was taken advantage of by her attorney--Maitre Suzanne Blum, who kept her drugged in a semi-comatose state, prevented anyone from seeing her, while judiciously (no pun intended) selling off her property which was allegedly diverted to Maitre Blum and her son.
> It's a chilling story, one which makes me think, "be careful what you wish for."


I read that she is buried in a plot at Frogmore. I hope they do not extend the same courtesy to Methane who will probably prefer to have a hero's burial, interred under a star along Hollywood Blvd.


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> Kate, as always, looks stunning in that gown. But in a hot humid jungle climate I would die in those pants, even if I were as thin as she is. I'd have opted for some looser fitting trousers in a lighter fabric.


Does she eat? Does she work out? She is astonishingly slim and gorgeous. I am so jealous. How does she do it?


----------



## pinky7129

Happyish said:


> May I have your recipe? My lemon tree will thank you (my waist-line will not) but it sounds absolutely delicious. I lOVE creme fraiche--in fact one of my favorites in creme fraiche ice cream . . .


Oooh me too please!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Brooke Astor, Babe Paley, Gloria Guinness,  Wallis, and many others all had tragic deaths, imo. 
Yes, it is very much be careful what we wish for. Money is not everything. This is why I say let the duo have their talk show. We all know it will fail. That will be the absolute best thing for both of them. These lawsuits are absurd. 

As the ancient Greeks said, the bigger the ego [hybris], the bigger the fall.


----------



## needlv

Happyish said:


> Does she eat? Does she work out? She is astonishingly slim and gorgeous. I am so jealous. How does she do it?



I think she is blessed with a good body type (in her favour) but she also works out a lot.  I think when she was getting a Covid shot she had a sleeveless shirt on and you could clearly see her arm muscles and that she worked out.

good for her.  That’s a lot of dedication to stay that slim.


----------



## Hermes Zen

pinky7129 said:


> Oooh me too please!


Me three @QueenofWrapDress PLEASE!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Never understood that move. She may have cut him off from his buddies who were likely to see through her and wake him up, but she also cut herself off from a very influential sector of British aristocracy. Unless of course she planned right from the start to swoop back to her "home" Hollywood and judged them as unnecessary to her new glorified life.



I always thought it was part of the plot to isolate Harry, but maybe it's true that some of them, uh, knew her too...intimately.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@Happyish
@pinky7129
@Hermes Zen

Here you go...I set it too English already, let me know if that worked out. She uses an 8" loaf pan. I will say that I do think the recipe is missing something because my cake never gets a hump as glorious until I add in extra steps (either whip two of the eggwhites and fold them in, or whip the eggs over a waterbath until they reach 55 °C/130 °F, then whip until room temperature and the consistency of razor foam, then set oven to 220°C/430 °F, bake for 10 mins, make the cut and set oven to 180 °C/350 °F. This will make it brown much faster though, so you might have to cover it soonish).

French Lemon Cake


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Brooke Astor, Babe Paley, Gloria Guinness,  Wallis, and many others all had tragic deaths, imo.
> Yes, it is very much be careful what we wish for. Money is not everything. This is why I say let the duo have their talk show. We all know it will fail. That will be the absolute best thing for both of them. These lawsuits are absurd.
> 
> As the ancient Greeks said, the bigger the ego [hybris], the bigger the fall.



Having money makes you a target. Elderly people get taken advantage of a lot, often by their own children.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Happyish
> @pinky7129
> @Hermes Zen
> 
> Here you go...I set it too English already, let me know if that worked out. She uses an 8" loaf pan. I will say that I do think the recipe is missing something because my cake never gets a hump as glorious until I add in extra steps (either whip two of the eggwhites and fold them in, or whip the eggs over a waterbath until they reach 55 °C/130 °F, then whip until room temperature and the consistency of razor foam, then set oven to 220°C/430 °F, bake for 10 mins, make the cut and set oven to 180 °C/350 °F. This will make it brown much faster though, so you might have to cover it soonish).
> 
> French Lemon Cake



Looking at the picture of the finished cake, it looks similar to our Lemon Drizzle cake here in the U.K.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, he plans to send a video ???




Didn't he promise a couple of those to Netflicks - like, ages ago?

Imagine how long it'll take him to send a vid he won't get paid for


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Oh no, it only applies to the UK, where he has generational trauma.
> Every other country he can roam about as he pleases.



We all suffer from generational trauma, why the Prince of BS should he be different.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> The article glossed over quite a few major things -  including the proven lies on Oprah, the manifesto terms/demands, the “service is universal” slap back, the “I am not ok” statement was made in a country where women experience the most horrific violence and there is crushing poverty issues, the merching  of the wreath during the funeral… etc.
> 
> To be honest, their biggest and stupidest things they did was the Oprah tell all and not producing anything for Spotify or Netflix.  No one (A listers, business execs or otherwise) wants to associate with them given that whatever is discussed will either be leaked or be on the next Oprah or other interview.  And they got these big deals with Spotify and Netflix and then didn’t produce much if anything.  So who wants to go into business when It’s clear they can’t deliver?.  They markled themselves…



and "actual son"?

Since none of the usual checks were put in place, H&M can no longer prove it without a DNA test. 

Both births were sooooooo fishy (IMHO)


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I agree however, I never found him cute as he always seemed too needy and  desperate for approval and recognition.



He was a typical Hooray Henry 





__





						Urban Dictionary: hooray henry
					

In Monty Python terms, English upper class twits - public schoolboys who turn into oiks and behave rudely, noisily and foolishly in a group at public functions rather as European players of rugby football are commonly said to comport themselves at social events. The females of the species...




					www.urbandictionary.com


----------



## Happyish

carmen56 said:


> Looking at the picture of the finished cake, it looks similar to our Lemon Drizzle cake here in the U.K.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Happyish
> @pinky7129
> @Hermes Zen
> 
> Here you go...I set it too English already, let me know if that worked out. She uses an 8" loaf pan. I will say that I do think the recipe is missing something because my cake never gets a hump as glorious until I add in extra steps (either whip two of the eggwhites and fold them in, or whip the eggs over a waterbath until they reach 55 °C/130 °F, then whip until room temperature and the consistency of razor foam, then set oven to 220°C/430 °F, bake for 10 mins, make the cut and set oven to 180 °C/350 °F. This will make it brown much faster though, so you might have to cover it soonish).
> 
> French Lemon Cake


This looks amazing! Thank you.


----------



## pinky7129

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Happyish
> @pinky7129
> @Hermes Zen
> 
> Here you go...I set it too English already, let me know if that worked out. She uses an 8" loaf pan. I will say that I do think the recipe is missing something because my cake never gets a hump as glorious until I add in extra steps (either whip two of the eggwhites and fold them in, or whip the eggs over a waterbath until they reach 55 °C/130 °F, then whip until room temperature and the consistency of razor foam, then set oven to 220°C/430 °F, bake for 10 mins, make the cut and set oven to 180 °C/350 °F. This will make it brown much faster though, so you might have to cover it soonish).
> 
> French Lemon Cake


Thank you!!!!


----------



## Happyish

needlv said:


> I think she is blessed with a good body type (in her favour) but she also works out a lot.  I think when she was getting a Covid shot she had a sleeveless shirt on and you could clearly see her arm muscles and that she worked out.
> 
> good for her.  That’s a lot of dedication to stay that slim.


Discipline!


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> It would be nothing but preachy.  Just give them a pulpit and they can pretend they're Jerry Swaggart and Tammy Faye Bakker, fake eyelashes, tears and all.



They would probably be thrilled to emulate Swaggart and Tammy Faye - those two and their ilk Hoovered up piles of cash for years.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Happyish
> @pinky7129
> @Hermes Zen
> 
> Here you go...I set it too English already, let me know if that worked out. She uses an 8" loaf pan. I will say that I do think the recipe is missing something because my cake never gets a hump as glorious until I add in extra steps (either whip two of the eggwhites and fold them in, or whip the eggs over a waterbath until they reach 55 °C/130 °F, then whip until room temperature and the consistency of razor foam, then set oven to 220°C/430 °F, bake for 10 mins, make the cut and set oven to 180 °C/350 °F. This will make it brown much faster though, so you might have to cover it soonish).
> 
> French Lemon Cake



Thank you so much, I love lemon cake and will give this a try!  Looks fabulous!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> Thank you so much, I love lemon cake and will give this a try!  Looks fabulous!



Pro tip: the first and last slice are the best because they are super lemony due to the bigger surface brushed with the syrup.


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> It was a sad and pathetic life. One need only look at the auction catalog--monogrammed Hermes bags, monogrammed linens, monogrammed jewelry, monogrammed everything. The clothes, the jewelry--it was a life of such excess and emptiness that it defied the limits of credulity. And then to top it off, after the Duke's death, she was taken advantage of by her attorney--Maitre Suzanne Blum, who kept her drugged in a semi-comatose state, prevented anyone from seeing her, while judiciously (no pun intended) selling off her property which was allegedly diverted to Maitre Blum and her son.
> It's a chilling story, one which makes me think, "be careful what you wish for."


I had not heard that about the end of her life.  Is there a credible book?


----------



## Happyish

sdkitty said:


> I had not heard that about the end of her life.  Is there a credible book?


The Last of the Duchess, The Strange and Sinister Story of the Final Years of Wallis Simpson, Duchess of Windsor by Caroline Blackwood
It's quite an amazing (and chilling) read.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Happyish
> @pinky7129
> @Hermes Zen
> 
> Here you go...I set it too English already, let me know if that worked out. She uses an 8" loaf pan. I will say that I do think the recipe is missing something because my cake never gets a hump as glorious until I add in extra steps (either whip two of the eggwhites and fold them in, or whip the eggs over a waterbath until they reach 55 °C/130 °F, then whip until room temperature and the consistency of razor foam, then set oven to 220°C/430 °F, bake for 10 mins, make the cut and set oven to 180 °C/350 °F. This will make it brown much faster though, so you might have to cover it soonish).
> 
> French Lemon Cake


Thank you @QueenofWrapDress !  This looks yummy and I'm certain waaaay better than M can ever bake!!  Will give this a try.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Happyish said:


> The Last of the Duchess, The Strange and Sinister Story of the Final Years of Wallis Simpson, Duchess of Windsor by Caroline Blackwood
> It's quite an amazing (and chilling) read.


Thanks for the recommendation. Just bought it and will start it tonight. Looking forward to it.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Well, I read today that Maury Povich is retiring. SOMEBODY has to take over announcing the results of all those paternity tests of losers that should never breed. I never had the stomach to watch that show, the people were over the top gross and unfortunately the children stood to inherit low IQ's.  But I imagine Povich got filthy rich from the show. Since the Harkles care only for money and nothing else, they'd be the perfect type to take over.  We know Maggot loves drama and breaking up families, this is up her alley.


They could start the show by doing genetics testing on Arch and Lil.  

WHO'S YOUR MOMMY???


----------



## Chanbal

Would this be a nod to Ginger Guru?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I read that she is buried in a plot at Frogmore. I hope they do not extend the same courtesy to Methane who will probably prefer to have a hero's burial,* interred under a star along Hollywood Blvd*.


At least then we could walk all over her, as she so disgustingly did in the veterans cemetary!


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> At least then we could walk all over her, as she so disgustingly did in the veterans cemetary!


Remember the Queen gave H$M Frogmore? What a shade!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Would this be a nod to Ginger Guru?



He looks like a traffic cone, an orange push pop, or an orange condom with that stupid hat.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> They could start the show by doing genetics testing on Arch and Lil.



This would be Meghan on the Maury Povich Show.


----------



## Happyish

LittleStar88 said:


> no security?
> 
> View attachment 5357659


Let me see if I understand this . . .

Last year in Los Angeles (actually, Beverly Hills) a customer dining at an outdoor cafe was robbed of his Richard Mille watch at gunpoint and his wife shot. Ceconni's, a restaurant at Melrose and Robinson, where Harry dined, also_ al fresco,_ is but a few short blocks away. The "Richard Mille" incident is but one example of the opportunistic crimes that have occurred (and are continuing to occur) in high profile neighborhoods, hot spots, malls and the parking lots that service them in Southern California.

So, if I understand correctly, Harry, a member of the Royal Family, won't go back to the UK for his grandmothers' Platinum Jubilee because he's concerned he will not have adequate security, even though he will be flanked by a horde of protection officers assigned to the Royal Family, not to mention his own private protection detail, but he will dine at an outdoor cafe in Los Angeles, activity which has been _proven_ to be less than safe?

Unbelievable! Obviously, this protection detail excuse is pretextual. And he files a lawsuit about it to boot? Now that's Chutzpah!


----------



## Chanbal

Happyish said:


> So, if I understand correctly, Harry, a member of the Royal Family, won't go back to the UK for his grandmothers' Platinum Jubilee because he's concerned he will not have adequate security, even though he will be flanked by a horde of protection officers assigned to the Royal Family, not to mention his own private protection detail, but he will dine at an outdoor cafe in Los Angeles, activity which has been _proven_ to be less than safe?
> 
> Unbelievable! Obviously, this protection detail excuse is pretextual. And he files a lawsuit about it to boot? Now that's Chutzpah!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Impressive TV and film career 

Also, what a stupid reason is this...now they have beef with Kristen Stewart?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazz’s video promoting Invictus makes it seem like he wants the _orange men_ to win. 
So much for standing up for your country [ahem]


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Impressive TV and film career
> 
> Also, what a stupid reason is this...now they have beef with Kristen Stewart?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Impressive TV and film career
> 
> Also, what a stupid reason is this...now they have beef with Kristen Stewart?



The Sunshine Sucks spin on trying to excuse the fact they were never invited (I’d bet $ on it, if I remember, the original item came from MarieClaire, a Methane mouthpiece that feeds her stans) is downright dizzying.

Laughing heartily at them once again, soooo predictable.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Impressive TV and film career
> 
> Also, what a stupid reason is this...now they have beef with Kristen Stewart?



The uncomfortable moment was that they were never invited.  If they showed up, they would be gate crashers.

Read on another site the problem was that in the movie, KS is shown demonstrating bulimic behavior.  Doesn't really matter since they weren't invited.


----------



## purseinsanity

Happyish said:


> Let me see if I understand this . . .
> 
> Last year in Los Angeles (actually, Beverly Hills) a customer dining at an outdoor cafe was robbed of his Richard Mille watch at gunpoint and his wife shot. Ceconni's, a restaurant at Melrose and Robinson, where Harry dined,_ al fresco,_ is but a few short blocks away. The "Richard Mille" incident is but one example of the opportunistic crimes that have occurred (and are continuing to occur) in high profile neighborhoods, hot spots, malls and the parking lots that service them in Southern California.
> 
> So, if I understand correctly, Harry, a member of the Royal Family, won't go back to the UK for his grandmothers' Platinum Jubilee because he's concerned he will not have adequate security, even though he will be flanked by a horde of protection officers assigned to the Royal Family, not to mention his own private protection detail, but he will dine at an outdoor cafe in Los Angeles, activity which has been _proven_ to be less than safe?
> 
> Unbelievable! Obviously, this protection detail excuse is pretextual. And he files a lawsuit about it to boot? Now that's Chutzpah!


Yep.  Sounds a bit..._*hypocritical*_, eh?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> The Sunshine Sucks spin on trying to excuse the fact they were never invited (I’d bet $ on it, if I remember, the original item came from MarieClaire, a Methane mouthpiece that feeds her stans, is downright dizzying.
> 
> Laughing heartily at them once again, soooo predictable.


The similarity of all these excuses is right up there with the dog ate my homework.  They can't keep pretending that they were invited to XYZ when the world realizes that this is not true.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Remember the Queen gave H$M Frogmore? What a shade!


The Royal Burial Grounds, Frogmore House and Frogmore Cottage are situated on Frogmore Estate (33 acres of private land) that is administered by the Crown Estate. Crown Estate land/property doesn't belong to the monarch and cannot be sold or given away, however HM, during her reign, can lease out certain properties such as Frogmore Cottage which she did to H&M.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> The similarity of all these excuses is right up there with the dog ate my homework.  They can't keep pretending that they were invited to XYZ when the world realizes that this is not true.


@Maggie Muggins we need a list of their excuses!  

I'll start:

1. "They" won't give me security
2. My pregnancy test was positive
3. I'm miscarrying
4. I'm "heavily pregnant"
5. I just delivered
6. I have postpartum depression
7. My breasts leak too much milk to photograph well
8. It's too hot, so very hot that I can't even pretend to be cold by wearing a massive coat to hide all the wires and mikes
9. My big brother will be mean to me
10. I'm afraid of my own country, the one I lived in all my life except the past two years
11. My 'lil ones are too young to travel
12. The dogs ate our passports
13. I have other obligations
14. Kristen Stewart portrayed my dead mother and suddenly that's a problem but The Crown I'll put my stamp on
15. Unwarranted papparazi constantly taking pictures brings up memories of past traumas
16. The crowds greeting us are so large it's frightening
17. People will chase my beloved wife a la my mother, causing her harm

etc etc etc.


----------



## bag-mania

The whole "William has banned Harry from being at his birthday" sounds completely fabricated by the media. William isn't talking to his brother as near as we can tell. He isn't going to bring Harry to the forefront of everyone's attention by saying he isn't invited. Anybody who is actually close to William would already know.


----------



## rose60610

Another excuse why Haz and Meth aren't going to Will's party: "Meth is so gorgeous she doesn't want to outshine Kate"  . Plus, by staying home they can save money by not having to buy a gift   and airfare for 200 security guards, nannies and personal assistants. They can also save money on dry cleaning bills due to rotten tomatoes being thrown at them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The dogs ate the invites.


----------



## Happyish

This says it all . . .

"Japan’s Princess Mako has gone for it with her new life, swapping the Tokyo Imperial Palace for a one-bedroom apartment in New York, all for the chance to marry her ‘commoner’ husband Kei Komuro, who had been vilified by the Japanese public. The week after their move in November 2021, she was spotted in jeans and a green slouch coat, shopping for towels at Bed, Bath & Beyond, getting lost on her way back home. For this, she had given up her royal status, declined a £1.2m payout and Komuro took a job at an American law firm. They were labelled Japan’s Harry and Meghan - but theirs is no Montecito mansion with chicken coop."

By contrast, H & M who wanted to dedicate themselves to a life of public service and be "working royals," have done anything but. They don't seem to work but seem to live a life of luxury while doing nothing except complain, about their family, their lot in life and how they've been "hurt and misunderstood." I think we understand perfectly.

They could well take a page from Princess Mako's book . . .


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Impressive TV and film career
> 
> Also, what a stupid reason is this...now they have beef with Kristen Stewart?




Sunshine Sucks has supposedly been repping Methane since her acting days. They must have been the ones who, pre-wedding, put out the stories that described her as a "highly sought-after actress". So now they are building on that with the "impressive" career.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Sunshine Sucks has supposedly been repping Methane since her acting days. They must have been the ones who, pre-wedding, put out the stories that described her as a "highly sought-after actress". So now they are building on that with the "impressive" career.


When does "PR" become "BS"?


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> When does "PR" become "BS"?


When applied to MM and she's knee deep in it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> @Maggie Muggins we need a list of their excuses!
> 
> I'll start:
> 
> 1. "They" won't give me security
> 2. My pregnancy test was positive
> 3. I'm miscarrying
> 4. I'm "heavily pregnant"
> 5. I just delivered
> 6. I have postpartum depression
> 7. My breasts leak too much milk to photograph well
> 8. It's too hot, so very hot that I can't even pretend to be cold by wearing a massive coat to hide all the wires and mikes
> 9. My big brother will be mean to me
> 10. I'm afraid of my own country, the one I lived in all my life except the past two years
> 11. My 'lil ones are too young to travel
> 12. The dogs ate our passports
> 13. I have other obligations
> 14. Kristen Stewart portrayed my dead mother and suddenly that's a problem but The Crown I'll put my stamp on
> 15. Unwarranted papparazi constantly taking pictures brings up memories of past traumas
> 16. The crowds greeting us are so large it's frightening
> 17. People will chase my beloved wife a la my mother, causing her harm
> 
> etc etc etc.


 You seem to be doing very well on your own and it looks like it could be a book in the making and possibly a 17-volume series that could become even more popular than Pearl. If you need a title, might I suggest, "The Perils of Doofus and Doofusette."


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> You seem to be doing very well on your own and it looks like it could be a book in the making and possibly a 17-volume series that could become even more popular than Pearl. *If you need a title, might I suggest, "The Perils of Doofus and Doofusette.*"


I first read that as "The Pearls of D and D", like her TV show "Pearl".  You know, tying it all together!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I first read that as "The Pearls of D and D", like her TV show "Pearl".  You know, tying it all together!


Yes, that would definitely work, but could you call it, "The *Fake* Pearls of D and D" to describe their very own essence.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> @Maggie Muggins we need a list of their excuses!
> 
> I'll start:
> 
> 1. "They" won't give me security
> 2. My pregnancy test was positive
> 3. I'm miscarrying
> 4. I'm "heavily pregnant"
> 5. I just delivered
> 6. I have postpartum depression
> 7. My breasts leak too much milk to photograph well
> 8. It's too hot, so very hot that I can't even pretend to be cold by wearing a massive coat to hide all the wires and mikes
> 9. My big brother will be mean to me
> 10. I'm afraid of my own country, the one I lived in all my life except the past two years
> 11. My 'lil ones are too young to travel
> 12. The dogs ate our passports
> 13. I have other obligations
> 14. Kristen Stewart portrayed my dead mother and suddenly that's a problem but The Crown I'll put my stamp on
> 15. Unwarranted papparazi constantly taking pictures brings up memories of past traumas
> 16. The crowds greeting us are so large it's frightening
> 17. People will chase my beloved wife a la my mother, causing her harm
> 
> etc etc etc.



18 London is a trigger
19 The UK press are bullying my family
20 The paps will kill us
21 I have generarational trauma
22 My father hasn't sent me enough money for a private plane
23 Climate change means I can't take a private plane
24 I can't be expected to travel on a plane/boat/ship with other people
25 We can't leave the dogs
26 My wife has no money for clothes
27 My wife has nothing to wear
28 People are mean
29 There are not enough toilets in the UK
30 We can't leave our chickens

Etc etc etc


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The dogs ate the invites.



The original dogs or the body doubles?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

I think their issue with Kristen Stewart dates back to February when she was quoted as saying she hadn't known they'd moved to California. The publicity craving Narcissists are not important enough to be on Kristen's radar and that must have really upset Haz and TW. A further article said she did not follow the Windsors in spite of her role in the movie "Spencer". More shade. Might even have caused poor widdle Harry "upset and distress and injury to his feelings." Kristen is probably fortunate he isn't suing her like he is the Mail.


----------



## octopus17

purseinsanity said:


> He looks like a traffic cone, an orange push pop, or an orange condom with that stupid hat.



It's like the Manchester music scene (of the late 80's, early 90's) and the film of  'A Clockwork Orange' had a lovechild, but I think you said it better, lol....


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> 18 London is a trigger
> 19 The UK press are bullying my family
> 20 The paps will kill us
> 21 I have generarational trauma
> 22 My father hasn't sent me enough money for a private plane
> 23 Climate change means I can't take a private plane
> 24 I can't be expected to travel on a plane/boat/ship with other people
> 25 We can't leave the dogs
> 26 My wife has no money for clothes
> 27 My wife has nothing to wear
> 28 People are mean
> 29 There are not enough toilets in the UK
> 30 We can't leave our chickens
> 
> Etc etc etc


31. My Diana cosplay outfits are still at the dry cleaners
32. I'm a young mother
33. My 5 friends who leak stories for me are young mothers
34. The U.S. is safer because they don't have tabloids but they do have guns
35. I'm too busy writing emails for Omid
36. I'm too busy forgetting I wrote emails for Omid
37. I have to bake a single olive oil cake for the 4 million refugees
38. I'm too busy thriving
39. I'm too famous to be gazed upon by the unwashed masses
40. No one will ask if I'm okay


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> We missed you here @Lounorada.





gracekelly said:


> Babe, you struck gold today!









gracekelly said:


> For your amusement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KINSEY SCHOFIELD
> @kinseyschofield
> YOWZA. H&M themed Mardi Gras float from the Krewe d’Etat parade last night. H coming out of a toilet and M wearing a sash that reads, “Windsor Whiner”  #NewOrleans #MardiGras2022









CarryOn2020 said:


>





The stans of the despicable duo are a disgrace to humanity.





lallybelle said:


> Get all the popcorn!
> MEGHAN MARKLE SUED
> SISTER CLAIMS LIES TO OPRAH, OTHERS
> ... Her 'Rags to Royalty' Story is Total BS!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Sister Samantha Sues Her, Claims Lies About Growing Up Poor
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is being sued by her half sister Samantha over the Oprah Winfrey interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com









bellecate said:


> View attachment 5350346


OMG. My eyes  He is:






bellecate said:


> View attachment 5351436









xincinsin said:


> Hazard did the video in the same room that Methane did her crappy birthday video? Is that their Cringe Room?


I'm convinced that's the only room they could afford to decorate fully since 'buying' that over-sized house.





Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5353063
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> It was never a good look for the alliterate one and her husband that they took the free pace to live in the north of the border country. Now...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net










bellecate said:


> Just came across this. Creepy, also have the removed TW’s little finger?
> View attachment 5355926
> View attachment 5355927





I don't see a resemblance. Not even slightly.





Chanbal said:


> On The Telegraph today…
> View attachment 5360182
> 
> 
> *The Duke of Sussex suffered “substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress” after a Mail on Sunday report about one of his other court cases inspired a “feeding frenzy of hostile comments” online, his lawyers have claimed.*
> _The Duke is suing The Mail on Sunday over what he believes is a defamatory exclusive story which told “*how Harry tried to keep his legal fight over bodyguards secret … then minutes after MoS broke the story his PR machine tried to put positive spin on the dispute*”.
> His lawyers say the story, and subsequent “adverse and hostile” online comments, were “self-evidently exceptionally serious and damaging” and constitute an “attack on his honesty and integrity” which “undermines his fitness to be involved both in charitable and philanthropic work”.
> He has “suffered serious damage to his reputation and substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress which is continuing”, they say, in a High Court case seeking “aggravated damages” for the Duke.
> The Mail on Sunday story refers to a separate legal case brought by the Duke against the Home Office. He is seeking judicial review of the Government’s decision not to provide police protection for him and his family when they are in the UK.
> 
> The newspaper first revealed he was taking legal action in an online story on the evening of January 15, and in print on January 16.
> 
> After the paper went to print, and shortly after it was posted on MailOnline, the Duke’s team sent out a statement confirming that the Duke was seeking judicial review, believing the UK to be unsafe for his family to return to, and noting: “The Duke first offered to pay personally for UK police protection for himself and his family in January of 2020 at Sandringham…”_
> 
> *When the court case had its first hearing on February 18th, lawyers acting for the Government appeared to challenge that statement, saying the offer of payment “was notably not advanced to Ravec [the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures]” when the Duke visited the UK in June 2021 or in any of the immediate correspondence which followed…*
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph





He and his wife do a great job all on their own to create a "feeding frenzy of hostile comments", they don't need a newspaper to help in any way. The truth hurts, fool.



needlv said:


> This is stupid.  You have to show actual loss ($).  Hurt feelings doesn’t cut it.
> And really, when the world is watching Russia  invade another country and millions of people having to flee with what they can carry *- he is suing over hurt feelings?*









papertiger said:


> 29 There are not enough toilets in the UK


This one ^


----------



## bellecate

Hey H’s wife. Want to know how to wear a green dress. Not like this.



This is how it’s done.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> 30 We can't leave our chickens


They can chicken their way out of any responsibility.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> When does "PR" become "BS"?


I think it’s always been BS.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> This is how it’s done.
> View attachment 5361740


And the earrings were lent to her by the Queen…


----------



## CarryOn2020

The bracelet, too.


----------



## Happyish

bellecate said:


> Hey H’s wife. Want to know how to wear a green dress. Not like this.
> View attachment 5361739
> 
> 
> This is how it’s done.
> View attachment 5361740


Now that's a Princess!


----------



## Vintage Leather

CarryOn2020 said:


> The bracelet, too.



The Family Order of Queen Elizabeth is actually a pretty big deal. It is given to female members of the royal family in recognition of extraordinary service. Approximately 15 of them have been spotted

Catherine received it after 6 years of marriage. Sophie after 5 years of marriage, Fergie never did. Catherine is the only one of her generation to receive one.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> And the earrings were lent to her by the Queen…



She’s incredibly classy looking and carries herself regally.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> Hey H’s wife. Want to know how to wear a green dress. Not like this.
> View attachment 5361739
> 
> 
> This is how it’s done.
> View attachment 5361740


I can't even imagine Methane in something like this. She would find it not sexy enough or not expensive enough.

Awful thought ... Are her stans going to transplant her head onto Catherine's photo again?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> They can chicken their way out of any responsibility.



They probably already ate them, but a good excuse is a good excuse and any excuse will do.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> I can't even imagine Methane in something like this. She would find it not sexy enough or not expensive enough.
> 
> Awful thought ... Are her stans going to transplant her head onto Catherine's photo again?


Methane would have her hair up in a messy bun with it partially falling apart and tendrils straggling down in the front on both sides of her face, partially obscuring her face. And she’d somehow manage to ruin the lines of the dress by wearing the wrong underwear with a noticeable line cutting through her waist area and the outlines of her strapless bra clearly showing through.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

It must have been very tough for PP … 

_According to the aide, Philip, then 99, told the Monarch: "*This shows a complete lack of respect.*"

Confiding in one of his closest staff about his opinion of Meghan, he also said: *"It appears as if we were wrong about her all along."*

Mr Anderson wrote *the* *Duke of Edinburgh and his son, the Prince of Wales, had had a warm relationship with Meghan, 40.* Their view, however, changed because of Megxit.

Mr Anderson's book also claims Prince Charles's team found his reaction to the news of his son's and Meghan's planned departure "frightening".

*The heir to the throne allegedly had a phone conversation with Harry in which he told him to "try and fix this*"._









						Prince Philip 'spitting blood' at Megxit: 'We were wrong' on Meghan
					

PRINCE Philip told an aide they had been "wrong" about Meghan Markle after he found about about her and Prince Harry's plans to quit the Firm via social media, it has been claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Read on another site the problem was that in the movie, KS is shown demonstrating bulimic behavior.  Doesn't really matter since they weren't invited.



I know, but why is KS personally the bad guy here? She's an actress doing her job.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know, but why is KS personally the bad guy here? She's an actress doing her job.


Because how *DARE* she not know that they're now living in California...in Montecito...and that she didn't really follow the BRF??!!! Them is fightin' words.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> The uncomfortable moment was that they were never invited.  If they showed up, they would be gate crashers.
> 
> Read on another site the problem was that in the movie, KS is shown demonstrating bulimic behavior.  Doesn't really matter since they weren't invited.


They also showed Diana's bulimia on The Crown, but I guess since that's on Netflix, that's okay, according to Haz' warped thinking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=htt...da751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


It started as their podcast and now it's hers.  Whatever.  I hope she doesn't get good guests or a lot of listeners.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Vintage Leather said:


> The Family Order of Queen Elizabeth is actually a pretty big deal. It is given to female members of the royal family in recognition of extraordinary service. Approximately 15 of them have been spotted
> 
> Catherine received it after 6 years of marriage. Sophie after 5 years of marriage, Fergie never did. Catherine is the only one of her generation to receive one.


Let's not forget Camilla, who received the Royal Family Order of Elizabeth II in 2007, two years after she married Charles in 2005.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> It started as their podcast and now it's hers.  Whatever.  I hope she doesn't get good guests or a lot of listeners.



It sounds like a totally boring snorefest.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



From the woman who exploits a 'duchess label' to make big money in life.


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry wins fight to keep documents secret in Home Office UK security row
					

We'll be bringing you the very latest updates, pictures and video on this breaking news story.




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>










__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Here is a great article on the security lawsuit:









						Prince Harry’s lawyers rebuked by High Court judge for ‘unacceptable’ leak
					

Prince Harry’s lawyers have been given a dressing-down by a High Court judge after a judgment in his police protection claim against the government was leaked.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Here is a great article on the security lawsuit:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s lawyers rebuked by High Court judge for ‘unacceptable’ leak
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s lawyers have been given a dressing-down by a High Court judge after a judgment in his police protection claim against the government was leaked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk



Excellent article - thank you.
This quote sums up H&M’s entire public life:
_The judge then shut down the conversation, saying the exchange was “not doing you any good” and her words were “not particularly well-chosen”.

The ruling on Thursday means that parts of the Duke of Sussex’s legal challenge against a decision to change his level of police protection when in the UK will be kept confidential._


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> He looks like a traffic cone, an orange push pop, or an orange condom with that stupid hat.


My vote is for orange condom since he’s such a d- - k.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


Timing is spot on!


----------



## lanasyogamama

They are really a day late and a dollar short on this podcast. The podcast market is so oversaturated at this point, the only new podcast that are doing well have really huge celebrities or great talent.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


Oh for Pete's sake.  As a woman, I appreciate those who came before me that enabled me to have pretty much equal opportunity as many of my male counterparts.  This cling on-beeyotch has done nothing except jump on the band wagon of every socially forward issue.  Her greatest accomplishment is her title she acquired by MARRYING A MAN.  Barriers are broken daily, no thanks to this wench who constantly opens her big fat ugly mouth.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> They are really a day late and a dollar short on this podcast. The podcast market is so oversaturated at this point, the only new podcast that are doing well have really huge celebrities or great talent.


 
She may get a lot of people listening, at least at first. There will be hundreds of members of the media who will follow it just to hear what she says so they can write about it. Add to that all the YouTubers and social media folks who depend on Meghan news, both pro and con, to make a living.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Will people listen to the entire thing or rely on the media to release the most interesting snippets?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> She may get a lot of people listening, at least at first. There will be hundreds of members of the media who will follow it just to hear what she says so they can write about it. Add to that all the YouTubers and social media folks who depend on Meghan news, both pro and con, to make a living.


You’re right.  Blergh. I guess I’ll have to rely on her short attention span instead.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


We really do need this  button for comments.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will people listen to the entire thing or rely on the media to release the most interesting snippets?


I'll religiously read the DM about it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for Pete's sake.  As a woman, I appreciate those who came before me that enabled me to have pretty much equal opportunity as many of my male counterparts.  This cling on-beeyotch has done nothing except jump on the band wagon of every socially forward issue.  Her greatest accomplishment is her title she acquired by MARRYING A MAN.  Barriers are broken daily, no thanks to this wench who constantly opens her big fat ugly mouth.


The wench
On the bench
Not a mensch
Loves to create a stench.
If unchecked, on our rights she will trench,
From us our freedoms she will wrench,
And with fake news our minds she will drench.
Will she ultimately, her thirst for fame, quench?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


Evidently she just read the A level psychology  cheat sheet on Jung and thought she’d look really smart.

Definitely going to be a two episode series following this model:
Week 1 - Madonna
week 2- whore

I don’t think M ever needed to get past that with H - all boxes ticked 

As someone said there’s a bit of a ready made audience in a press people who are going to listen to react to it but I imagine it’ll experience a significant drop off when it proves a bit too dull and asinine to even get a reaction out of.

The last season of RHONY has been absolutely agonising to watch and I think this show is going to prove similar a combination of an inappropriately lofty and serious subject matter with a tone and a celeb personality ill-fitted for discussing it. She’s going to sound like she’s reading cue cards she doesn’t fully understand the entire time.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry wins fight to keep documents secret in Home Office UK security row
> 
> 
> We'll be bringing you the very latest updates, pictures and video on this breaking news story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



I think this is fair enough… if the Monday kids find out the rate the weekend kids charge they might ask for a pay raise  

Or are we not supposed to know he has to gets hair implants every six months? Or she has been known to visit the aesthetician   


Happyish said:


> This says it all . . .
> 
> "Japan’s Princess Mako has gone for it with her new life, swapping the Tokyo Imperial Palace for a one-bedroom apartment in New York, all for the chance to marry her ‘commoner’ husband Kei Komuro, who had been vilified by the Japanese public. The week after their move in November 2021, she was spotted in jeans and a green slouch coat, shopping for towels at Bed, Bath & Beyond, getting lost on her way back home. For this, she had given up her royal status, declined a £1.2m payout and Komuro took a job at an American law firm. They were labelled Japan’s Harry and Meghan - but theirs is no Montecito mansion with chicken coop."
> 
> By contrast, H & M who wanted to dedicate themselves to a life of public service and be "working royals," have done anything but. They don't seem to work but seem to live a life of luxury while doing nothing except complain, about their family, their lot in life and how they've been "hurt and misunderstood." I think we understand perfectly.
> 
> They could well take a page from Princess Mako's book . . .


I can imagine a robber holding M up for her manolos like the iconic SATC scene then seeing the sheer amount of fake tan caked in the heels and handing them back


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


I AM SOOOOO IN ... this is going to be a riveting subject   (NOT)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Vintage Leather said:


> The Family Order of Queen Elizabeth is actually a pretty big deal. It is given to female members of the royal family in recognition of extraordinary service. Approximately 15 of them have been spotted
> 
> Catherine received it after 6 years of marriage. Sophie after 5 years of marriage, Fergie never did. Catherine is the only one of her generation to receive one.


Years ago, like 100 years ago, the order seemed to be given out automatically to anyone at the HRH level, nowadays it is earned


----------



## Chanbal

Examples from Twitter!



Spoiler: Archetypes


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent article - thank you.
> This quote sums up H&M’s entire public life:
> _The judge then shut down the conversation, saying the exchange was “not doing you any good” and her words were “not particularly well-chosen”.
> 
> The ruling on Thursday means that parts of the Duke of Sussex’s legal challenge against a decision to change his level of police protection when in the UK will be kept confidential._


Maybe I missed it in this thread ... 

But did anyone else read - H is suing the DM over something like mental anguish, asking HUGE damages for their carrying the story about the kerfuffle with the government over security
The article did not suggest H is claiming the story was FAKE, INCORRECT, WRONG ... no, he is just suing because he did not liek the story 

Sorry, if I no longer have the link to that story, which seemed like a REAL story to me since H&M are so litigious, totally in their wheelhouse


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Maybe I missed it in this thread ...
> 
> But did anyone else read - H is suing the DM over something like mental anguish, asking HUGE damages for their carrying the story about the kerfuffle with the government over security
> The article did not suggest H is claiming the story was FAKE, INCORRECT, WRONG ... no, he is just suing because he did not liek the story
> 
> Sorry, if I no longer have the link to that story, which seemed like a REAL story to me since H&M are so litigious, totally in their wheelhouse


Would this be the post/link you are looking for?


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Years ago, like 100 years ago, the order seemed to be given out automatically to anyone at the HRH level, nowadays it is earned


Quite right too.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Would this be the post/link you are looking for?




yes he is suing over hurt feelings.  His lawyers are taking him for a ride.  He will genuinely have to show loss ($) he suffered from that article using the wrong adjectives and allowing the general public to comment about how much they dislike him and his wife.  

I did quite enjoy the article about H and M’s barrister getting absolutely roasted by the judge in the security court claim.  And stupidly the barrister still not apologising to the judge for their actions, just saying the equivalent of  “sorry you feel that way”.  Sounds like H and M have the right type of barrister representing them… lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure I want to believe this because it's just too awful and a bit mental. Also, are they close friends?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand...a little preview.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



She’s copying someone but I can’t think of who. Her voice is different, the cadence, everything… which podcaster is she copying?


----------



## Lounorada

bellecate said:


> Hey H’s wife. Want to know how to wear a green dress. Not like this.
> View attachment 5361739
> 
> 
> This is how it’s done.
> View attachment 5361740









Vintage Leather said:


> The Family Order of Queen Elizabeth is actually a pretty big deal. It is given to female members of the royal family in recognition of extraordinary service. Approximately 15 of them have been spotted
> Catherine received it after 6 years of marriage. Sophie after 5 years of marriage, *Fergie never did*. Catherine is the only one of her generation to receive one.


The bolded made me chuckle!







QueenofWrapDress said:


>



And they can look no further for someone to blame than the man with the melting face- O.scobie.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5362007
> 
> https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/meghan-markle-podcast-archetypes-teaser-spotify_n_623ba8e1e4b019fd8136fb98?d_id=3303454&ncid_tag=fcbklnkushpmg00000046&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=us_women&h=AT25CJkAaMW6Qg6Fwsi7ggBGQIjN1SSl9h0W9N_7NyRc-0q4YSRiOPDtU_4A1IC6GgajzKDhoLuBAW7EnJgbO7pda751h_Wp8cFOaHDOFMS8XC2WhQqUMRTG1fr4uIygRbl7


I'm guessing she won't be discussing how narcissistic women in higher-up positions in the workplace that can be guilty of bullying their staff and holding them back from being the best they can be in their roles.


----------



## bellecate

Have no idea if there’s any truth to this but here it is.


----------



## tiktok

Jayne1 said:


> She’s copying someone but I can’t think of who. Her voice is different, the cadence, everything… which podcaster is she copying?



Maybe Kara Swisher? She's trying to sound "tough" and matter of fact but it doesn't quite work.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I had not heard this before. I hope there's truth to this!  Yeah QE!!

And she just quietly took Meghan to the side and said, “Meghan, in this family we don’t speak to people like that.”


> https://www.goodto.com/royal-news/t...-over-row-about-eggs-at-windsor-castle-657476
> 
> *The Queen ‘took Meghan Markle aside’ over row about eggs at Windsor Castle*
> March 23, 2022 11:39 am


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure I want to believe this because it's just too awful and a bit mental. Also, are they close friends?




Based on the photos, I believe it. H&M could have visited these islands any time they wanted. They are about 3? hours away.   Hazzie clearly confuses politics with diplomacy.  Happily the no-drama W&K are well aware of the difference. The photos/videos prove how gracious and poised they are, especially in challenging situations.  They have mastered the ‘smile and carry on’ philosophy.


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #3
					

It doesn't appear that the conglomerate itself issued a directive. Rather, the take down of videos negative to the alliterate one and her h...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

LOVE this guy!!  BLG says Oprah could loose credibility that would damage her legacy?!

This Is Why Oprah ERASED Harry And Meghan's Interview From The Internet


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the last one… on the podcast!


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> LOVE this guy!!  BLG says Oprah could loose credibility that would damage her legacy?!
> 
> This Is Why Oprah ERASED Harry And Meghan's Interview From The Internet



It will be interesting if there is a response to this.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It will be interesting if there is a response to this.


It's a very interesting video on Oprah's interview. To the best of my knowledge, the BLG posted this video about 1 month ago and there is no response to it so far.


----------



## Chanbal

The Memoir
					

Exclusive Celebrity News




					theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> I AM SOOOOO IN ... this is going to be a riveting subject   (NOT)


The first 50,000 listeners get an auto pen signed copy of The Bench. Offer will replicate until the inventory is finally depleted, unless the podcast grinds down first.


----------



## mellibelly

Jayne1 said:


> She’s copying someone but I can’t think of who. Her voice is different, the cadence, everything… which podcaster is she copying?


I got through 20 seconds before I had to turn it off. Nails on a chalkboard voice…

The podcast should be called Stereotypes. This is the most tired and dated subject matter. It’s Womens Studies circa 1999. Caroline Myss is the expert on Jungian archetypes and I’d rather hear from an educated expert on the subject rather than a Z list briefcase ho/yacht girl/BH 90210 blowjob extra/maxim burger flipper/lingerie clad maid. She really understands female stereotypes y’all, having playing the whore in her greatest career hits LOL. But when she lowers her voice a’la Elizabeth Holmes she’s SERIOUS!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here...I honestly doubt they have the funds for NYC real estate.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure I want to believe this because it's just too awful and a bit mental. Also, are they close friends?




You and I wouldn't call it 'close friends', Harry messed around for a Royal minute secs pretending he was the ~Bolt in 2012 and was allowed to win a race all for publicity's sake. Roll out the Royal, roll out the Bolt (who is not only a huge achiever but also a very charismatic man in terms of media coverage and a people's favourite at the time)

N.B 2012 was the year of our Royal London Summer Olympics. It is now 2022


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure I want to believe this because it's just too awful and a bit mental. Also, are they close friends?



Yeah this is totally unbelievable. Usain Bolt’s not some moron who is going to wade into politics just to benefit even his bestie (which ginger isn’t)  and why would anyone make any constitutional changes just because a celeb says so?

It’s simple, the international aid budget for the commonwealth has been massively reduced; if it’s not paying to be in the club why be in it? All this talk of apologies and reparations is clearly in the hope of some sort of severance payment.

I do think this Caribbean goodwill trip is a total waste of money myself - just makes them look totally archaic and it’s not going to change anyone’s mind.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah this is totally unbelievable. Usain Bolt’s not some moron who is going to wade into politics just to benefit even his bestie (which ginger isn’t)  and why would anyone make any constitutional changes just because a celeb says so?
> 
> It’s simple, the international aid budget for the commonwealth has been massively reduced; if it’s not paying to be in the club why be in it? All this talk of apologies and reparations is clearly in the hope of some sort of severance payment.
> 
> I do think this Caribbean goodwill trip is a total waste of money myself - just makes them look totally archaic and it’s not going to change anyone’s mind.



But if there's any credit going for anything anywhere, H&M and  Sucks will take it. Putting out an anonymous 'gossip' feed would  be a good way to do it .


----------



## papertiger

Already BL Guy on the case?


----------



## Sophisticatted

jelliedfeels said:


> I do think this Caribbean goodwill trip is a total waste of money myself - just makes them look totally archaic and it’s not going to change anyone’s mind.



In my mind, it seems like a “good-bye trip”.  Similarly, the Jubilee celebrations seem like a “last hurrah” for the Queen.  Given her health issues, it is doubtful that there will be any more big events.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this covered in the podcast?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this covered in the podcast?



Me you limited?
The MLM vibes are strong with this one!


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Meghan Markle accused of copying podcast idea from Caroline Myss book – heromag


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Here is the last one… on the podcast!




Sorry abut the re-post, pics and links very slow this morning


----------



## papertiger

hollieplus2 said:


> Meghan Markle accused of copying podcast idea from Caroline Myss book – heromag



I reacted with the 'wow' emoticon but really why am I not surprised. 

My guess is MM will turn this whole thing around to be about herself "why, if YOU are calling ME 'X' you should be canceled". 

They want no comment, criticism or scrutiny at all, only praise and money. Narcissists to the core, both of them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A commenter on another site asked - since she is using the EHolmes voice, is she now wearing a black turtleneck with the red lipstick?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Apparently an interim judgement was issued in Harry's lawsuit for security. I can't digest it though as I'm not a laywer. Anyone know what he won or lost?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> A commenter on another site asked - since she is using the EHolmes voice, is she now wearing a black turtleneck with the red lipstick?



I think she just pitched it down via tech. easy enough to do.


----------



## papertiger

hollieplus2 said:


> Apparently an interim judgement was issued in Harry's lawsuit for security. I can't digest it though as I'm not a laywer. Anyone know what he won or lost?



He just wins to keep the docs secret. 

Apparently it gave to much info away of his (old) normal routes, habits and security detail. 

The judge still told his lawyers off though coz they spilled the beans he won before the judge made the decision public.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

papertiger said:


> He just wins to keep the docs secret.
> 
> Apparently it gave to much info away of his (old) normal routes, habits and security detail.
> 
> The judge still told his lawyers off though coz they spilled the beans he won before the judge made the decision public.


I saw that yesterday but this was also posted. 

The Queen on the application of the Duke of Sussex -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department | Courts and Tribunals Judiciary


----------



## papertiger

hollieplus2 said:


> I saw that yesterday but this was also posted.
> 
> The Queen on the application of the Duke of Sussex -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department | Courts and Tribunals Judiciary



 
You saw it before you were supposed to see it. That's why H's lawyers were reprimanded. 

The decision was on “Confidential Material” that will now remain confidential (unless H's lawyers leak it of course  )


----------



## Chanbal

This is good!  



_*Jack revealed the news this week at The London Palladium as part of his How To Survive The Summer Holidays tour alongside his mum Hilary, 59, and dad Michael, 81*.

Mocking the ex-royal and his wife Meghan Markle,* Michael teased: “Jack, I read a book recently and it changed my life. I put this book down and I thought I must become a writer myself. This book is called The Bench and it’s written by Meghan Markle.”*

Upon its release in June last year, the book sold just 3,212 copies with the former Suits actress claiming the book “began as a love letter to my husband and son”.

In a dig at the Prince - who insiders say is attending the Oscars in Los Angeles this weekend after being asked to present the Best Picture Award - *he added of the children’s book: “She presumably wrote it for Harry.”*_

*Putting on a mock patronising voice, Michael continued: “Yes darling just read it OK. There are only three lines per page Harry… Harry it’s all right.”…*









						My pal Prince Harry BLACKLISTED me over X-rated joke, says Jack Whitehall
					

JACK Whitehall says he is “banned” from seeing his old pal Prince Harry after making an X-rated joke about him. The comedian, 33, claims a tongue-in-cheek joke at the Royal Variety Show in 2015 whe…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> You saw it before you were supposed to see it. That's why H's lawyers were reprimanded.
> 
> The decision was on “Confidential Material” that will now remain confidential (unless H's lawyers leak it of course  )



I read a couple of articles about this and the judge, Mr. Justice Swift, was furious with Harry's lawyer, Shaheed Fatima QC.  (The "QC" stands for "Queen's Counsel" which is a senior lawyer qualified to argue cases in higher courts. Do I have that right? Not being a Brit, I had to look that up.)   I'm amazed he didn't charge her with contempt of court, or whatever the UK equivalent is.

From the Sun article:
_*The court heard she (Shaheed Fatima QC) emailed the papers, strictly for lawyers’ eyes only, to “reputation specialist” Tim Robinson - a partner at privacy-loving law firm Schillings.*_

*To make matters worse, Ms Fatima only admitted to the breach on Wednesday - nearly a week after she leaked the draft judgment - and repeatedly failed to apologise.

She initially tried to claim that Schillings, which is representing Harry in a claim against the Home Office, did not believe there had been a breach.

But red-faced Mr Justice Swift raged: “Let me disabuse of that straight away. What you’re saying isn’t making anything better.

“The rules are very clear and should be obvious to anyone practising in this court. This embargo is in standard form, what it says is what it means.

“Mr Robinson is not a solicitor, he’s not qualified as a matter of law to provide legal services or advice. It should have been obvious that this was a breach and it should have been reported to me as soon as possible.

“This is entirely unacceptable. You haven’t even offered an apology.

"Nothing you’ve said this morning approaches an apology for this clear breach of the embargo.

“You must take responsibility when things go wrong. Not everything that happens is someone else’s fault.”

Sheepish Ms Fatima reluctantly said she took full responsibility and said she would have done things differently “with the benefit of hindsight, out of an abundance of caution”.

But she still failed to say sorry.

The fuming judge ranted: “It’s not for me to require you to apologise, it should be a matter for your professional conscience.”

The lawyer replied: “My lord, I am very sorry for the fact I did not think fully before those emails were sent, and that I did not contact the court sooner.”

Refusing to let it drop, the judge asked if she accepted there had been a breach of the court’s rules, which she did - but only “in light of what your lordship has found”.

He huffed: “This isn’t doing you any good, it’s certainly not doing me any good, and your words are not very well chosen.”

The papers in question were a draft judgment in Prince Harry’s case against the Home Office.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I read a couple of articles about this and the judge, Mr. Justice Swift, was furious with Harry's lawyer, Shaheed Fatima QC.  (The "QC" stands for "Queen's Counsel" which is a senior lawyer qualified to argue cases in higher courts. Do I have that right? Not being a Brit, I had to look that up.)   I'm amazed he didn't charge her with contempt of court, or whatever the UK equivalent is.
> 
> From the Sun article:
> _*The court heard she (Shaheed Fatima QC) emailed the papers, strictly for lawyers’ eyes only, to “reputation specialist” Tim Robinson - a partner at privacy-loving law firm Schillings.*_
> 
> *To make matters worse, Ms Fatima only admitted to the breach on Wednesday - nearly a week after she leaked the draft judgment - and repeatedly failed to apologise.
> 
> She initially tried to claim that Schillings, which is representing Harry in a claim against the Home Office, did not believe there had been a breach.
> 
> But red-faced Mr Justice Swift raged: “Let me disabuse of that straight away. What you’re saying isn’t making anything better.
> 
> “The rules are very clear and should be obvious to anyone practising in this court. This embargo is in standard form, what it says is what it means.
> 
> “Mr Robinson is not a solicitor, he’s not qualified as a matter of law to provide legal services or advice. It should have been obvious that this was a breach and it should have been reported to me as soon as possible.
> 
> “This is entirely unacceptable. You haven’t even offered an apology.
> 
> "Nothing you’ve said this morning approaches an apology for this clear breach of the embargo.
> 
> “You must take responsibility when things go wrong. Not everything that happens is someone else’s fault.”
> 
> Sheepish Ms Fatima reluctantly said she took full responsibility and said she would have done things differently “with the benefit of hindsight, out of an abundance of caution”.
> 
> But she still failed to say sorry.
> 
> The fuming judge ranted: “It’s not for me to require you to apologise, it should be a matter for your professional conscience.”
> 
> The lawyer replied: “My lord, I am very sorry for the fact I did not think fully before those emails were sent, and that I did not contact the court sooner.”
> 
> Refusing to let it drop, the judge asked if she accepted there had been a breach of the court’s rules, which she did - but only “in light of what your lordship has found”.
> 
> He huffed: “This isn’t doing you any good, it’s certainly not doing me any good, and your words are not very well chosen.”
> 
> The papers in question were a draft judgment in Prince Harry’s case against the Home Office.*





*“You must take responsibility when things go wrong. Not everything that happens is someone else’s fault.”

The fuming judge ranted: “It’s not for me to require you to apologise, it should be a matter for your professional conscience.”

He huffed: “This isn’t doing you any good, it’s certainly not doing me any good, and your words are not very well chosen.”*

Yay, Mr. Justice Swift!
The judge perfectly sums up my thoughts on 99.9% H&M issues.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I read a couple of articles about this and the judge, Mr. Justice Swift, was furious with Harry's lawyer, Shaheed Fatima QC.  (The "QC" stands for "Queen's Counsel" which is a senior lawyer qualified to argue cases in higher courts. Do I have that right? Not being a Brit, I had to look that up.)   I'm amazed he didn't charge her with contempt of court, or whatever the UK equivalent is.
> 
> From the Sun article:
> _*The court heard she (Shaheed Fatima QC) emailed the papers, strictly for lawyers’ eyes only, to “reputation specialist” Tim Robinson - a partner at privacy-loving law firm Schillings.*_
> 
> *To make matters worse, Ms Fatima only admitted to the breach on Wednesday - nearly a week after she leaked the draft judgment - and repeatedly failed to apologise.
> 
> She initially tried to claim that Schillings, which is representing Harry in a claim against the Home Office, did not believe there had been a breach.
> 
> But red-faced Mr Justice Swift raged: “Let me disabuse of that straight away. What you’re saying isn’t making anything better.
> 
> “The rules are very clear and should be obvious to anyone practising in this court. This embargo is in standard form, what it says is what it means.
> 
> “Mr Robinson is not a solicitor, he’s not qualified as a matter of law to provide legal services or advice. It should have been obvious that this was a breach and it should have been reported to me as soon as possible.
> 
> “This is entirely unacceptable. You haven’t even offered an apology.
> 
> "Nothing you’ve said this morning approaches an apology for this clear breach of the embargo.
> 
> “You must take responsibility when things go wrong. Not everything that happens is someone else’s fault.”
> 
> Sheepish Ms Fatima reluctantly said she took full responsibility and said she would have done things differently “with the benefit of hindsight, out of an abundance of caution”.
> 
> But she still failed to say sorry.
> 
> The fuming judge ranted: “It’s not for me to require you to apologise, it should be a matter for your professional conscience.”
> 
> The lawyer replied: “My lord, I am very sorry for the fact I did not think fully before those emails were sent, and that I did not contact the court sooner.”
> 
> Refusing to let it drop, the judge asked if she accepted there had been a breach of the court’s rules, which she did - but only “in light of what your lordship has found”.
> 
> He huffed: “This isn’t doing you any good, it’s certainly not doing me any good, and your words are not very well chosen.”
> 
> The papers in question were a draft judgment in Prince Harry’s case against the Home Office.*



You are correct.

Man/woman gets the hep of a solicitor, who then goes to a barrister who argues the case in court and then a QC (KC is a king is on the throne) is above that.

It's a title only given after years of practice (like our system of professorship at unis).

To charge her with contempt of court there would presumably have to be a law against it. Since so much in the British court system works on honour and trust between professionals, probably no-one thought it would ever happen.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I read a couple of articles about this and the judge, Mr. Justice Swift, was furious with Harry's lawyer, Shaheed Fatima QC.  (The "QC" stands for "Queen's Counsel" which is a senior lawyer qualified to argue cases in higher courts. Do I have that right? Not being a Brit, I had to look that up.)   I'm amazed he didn't charge her with contempt of court, or whatever the UK equivalent is.
> 
> From the Sun article:
> _*The court heard she (Shaheed Fatima QC) emailed the papers, strictly for lawyers’ eyes only, to “reputation specialist” Tim Robinson - a partner at privacy-loving law firm Schillings.*_
> 
> *To make matters worse, Ms Fatima only admitted to the breach on Wednesday - nearly a week after she leaked the draft judgment - and repeatedly failed to apologise.
> 
> She initially tried to claim that Schillings, which is representing Harry in a claim against the Home Office, did not believe there had been a breach.
> 
> But red-faced Mr Justice Swift raged: “Let me disabuse of that straight away. What you’re saying isn’t making anything better.
> 
> “The rules are very clear and should be obvious to anyone practising in this court. This embargo is in standard form, what it says is what it means.
> 
> “Mr Robinson is not a solicitor, he’s not qualified as a matter of law to provide legal services or advice. It should have been obvious that this was a breach and it should have been reported to me as soon as possible.
> 
> “This is entirely unacceptable. You haven’t even offered an apology.
> 
> "Nothing you’ve said this morning approaches an apology for this clear breach of the embargo.
> 
> “You must take responsibility when things go wrong. Not everything that happens is someone else’s fault.”
> 
> Sheepish Ms Fatima reluctantly said she took full responsibility and said she would have done things differently “with the benefit of hindsight, out of an abundance of caution”.
> 
> But she still failed to say sorry.
> 
> The fuming judge ranted: “It’s not for me to require you to apologise, it should be a matter for your professional conscience.”
> 
> The lawyer replied: “My lord, I am very sorry for the fact I did not think fully before those emails were sent, and that I did not contact the court sooner.”
> 
> Refusing to let it drop, the judge asked if she accepted there had been a breach of the court’s rules, which she did - but only “in light of what your lordship has found”.
> 
> He huffed: “This isn’t doing you any good, it’s certainly not doing me any good, and your words are not very well chosen.”
> 
> The papers in question were a draft judgment in Prince Harry’s case against the Home Office.*


For the ones like me that are a bit lost on the current lawsuits, Murky Meg nicely summarizes them here:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Here is a great article on the security lawsuit:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s lawyers rebuked by High Court judge for ‘unacceptable’ leak
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s lawyers have been given a dressing-down by a High Court judge after a judgment in his police protection claim against the government was leaked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.standard.co.uk




Ooooohhhhh - I so love a good judicial bench slap!!  Just what every litigator wants to hear - “your words are not particularly well chosen.”  And then refuse to offer a simple apology (which would have cost her nothing).  Guess she forgot she will be before the same judge for the duration of the case.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I read a couple of articles about this and the judge, Mr. Justice Swift, was furious with Harry's lawyer, Shaheed Fatima QC.  (The "QC" stands for "Queen's Counsel" which is a senior lawyer qualified to argue cases in higher courts. Do I have that right? Not being a Brit, I had to look that up.)   I'm amazed he didn't charge her with contempt of court, or whatever the UK equivalent is.
> 
> From the Sun article:
> _*The court heard she (Shaheed Fatima QC) emailed the papers, strictly for lawyers’ eyes only, to “reputation specialist” Tim Robinson - a partner at privacy-loving law firm Schillings.*_
> 
> *To make matters worse, Ms Fatima only admitted to the breach on Wednesday - nearly a week after she leaked the draft judgment - and repeatedly failed to apologise.
> 
> She initially tried to claim that Schillings, which is representing Harry in a claim against the Home Office, did not believe there had been a breach.
> 
> But red-faced Mr Justice Swift raged: “Let me disabuse of that straight away. What you’re saying isn’t making anything better.
> 
> “The rules are very clear and should be obvious to anyone practising in this court. This embargo is in standard form, what it says is what it means.
> 
> “Mr Robinson is not a solicitor, he’s not qualified as a matter of law to provide legal services or advice. It should have been obvious that this was a breach and it should have been reported to me as soon as possible.
> 
> “This is entirely unacceptable. You haven’t even offered an apology.
> 
> "Nothing you’ve said this morning approaches an apology for this clear breach of the embargo.
> 
> “You must take responsibility when things go wrong. Not everything that happens is someone else’s fault.”
> 
> Sheepish Ms Fatima reluctantly said she took full responsibility and said she would have done things differently “with the benefit of hindsight, out of an abundance of caution”.
> 
> But she still failed to say sorry.
> 
> The fuming judge ranted: “It’s not for me to require you to apologise, it should be a matter for your professional conscience.”
> 
> The lawyer replied: “My lord, I am very sorry for the fact I did not think fully before those emails were sent, and that I did not contact the court sooner.”
> 
> Refusing to let it drop, the judge asked if she accepted there had been a breach of the court’s rules, which she did - but only “in light of what your lordship has found”.
> 
> He huffed: “This isn’t doing you any good, it’s certainly not doing me any good, and your words are not very well chosen.”
> 
> The papers in question were a draft judgment in Prince Harry’s case against the Home Office.*


These shysters keep finding other shysters to keep within their circle of lies!


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Luvbolide

hollieplus2 said:


> Apparently an interim judgement was issued in Harry's lawsuit for security. I can't digest it though as I'm not a laywer. Anyone know what he won or lost?



It wasn’t really a win or loss - turns out that both sides had agreed on the vast majority of documents remaining sealed.  The goal is not to have lots of documents in the public domain that nefarious types could look to to try to find ways around future security arrangements.  Pretty standard fare, really.

the judge also said that all of his reasoning is not set out in full because some of it, too, should remain confidential.


----------



## Luvbolide

papertiger said:


> You are correct.
> 
> Man/woman gets the hep of a solicitor, who then goes to a barrister who argues the case in court and then a QC (KC is a king is on the throne) is above that.
> 
> It's a title only given after years of practice (like our system of professorship at unis).
> 
> To charge her with contempt of court there would presumably have to be a law against it. Since so much in the British court system works on honour and trust between professionals, probably no-one thought it would ever happen.



In the US this would be contempt because she violated the Court’s confidentiality order - the papers/draft judgment were only to be seen by the parties and their lawyers.  She sent the doc to a non-lawyer who works in PR for her firm.  

That said, this type of behavior usually starts out with a bench slap like she got and maybe a fine.  Do it again, pretty much guaranteed a bigger fine.

She compounded her error by chatting with lawyers in her firm and deciding that the confidentiality order had not been violated.  So they just went on their merry way.  The smarter move would have been to notify the Court immediately.  That would have possibly end run the whole thing so there was no blow up at the hearing, or at least would have lessened the judge’s angry reaction.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Luvbolide said:


> It wasn’t really a win or loss - turns out that both sides had agreed on the vast majority of documents remaining sealed.  The goal is not to have lots of documents in the public domain that nefarious types could look to to try to find ways around future security arrangements.  Pretty standard fare, really.
> 
> the judge also said that all of his reasoning is not set out in full because some of it, too, should remain confidential.


From this can you give a best guess as to how you think it will go? Do you think he'll get IPP status and security back?


----------



## rose60610

Ya know, maybe some of us have been a little harsh on Meghan. I think we should try to think of something positive to say about her. 

I'll start.

Meghan is my favorite double chinned, self-pitying and ungrateful duchess who has a special talent for destroying everything in her path.


----------



## Luvbolide

hollieplus2 said:


> From this can you give a best guess as to how you think it will go? Do you think he'll get IPP status and security back?



Honestly, it would only be a guess - procedural issues like the one in this judgment are pretty similar but I am in the US and have no clue as to British law on pretty much any topic, much less stuff pertaining to royals.

that said, my suspicion is that Harry is going to lose. For one thing, if he had a good point, I think the protection as he wants it would have been granted and we would have been none the wiser. 
It sounds to me completely unreasonable for him to expect protection the same as working senior royals unless he is doing something similar.  And I think his purported offer to pay is ridiculous.  Nor do I think it is remotely okay for him to have de Becker employees shadowing the UK security group.  

I really think he is wrong in making this fuss about Prince Philip’s service.  Given that most of the royal family will be there, along with various heads of state and other dignitaries, I would expect plenty of security to go around.  If he stays at Frogmore Cottage and goes to see his grandmother, security should be a non-issue, I would think.  I can’t tell whether he wants to get security on the tarmac at Heathrow or if he thought he would have everyone over a barrel if he made it a big issue for something like PP’s service.  But since he refuses to compromise he has put the protection folks in an impossible position.  I hope they hang tough.

As I understand it, the group tasked with royal protection evaluates each situation and individual and decides what level of protection to extend.  Seems to have worked very well so far!!

Harry needs to get over this BS about throwing a fit if he perceives that William gets a tiny bit “more” or “better”.  It is so juvenile and he is waaaay too old for that.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh my gosh, TW bought 70% of the benches… Allegedly   






__





						Blind Item #1
					

You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks that followed the...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

Camilla seems to be a lot of fun, TW could learn a thing or two with her…


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Oh my gosh, TW bought 70% of the benches… Allegedly
> View attachment 5363379
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks that followed the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Definitely wouldn’t put this past her!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Camilla seems to be a lot of fun, TW could learn a thing or two with her…




How funny - I was just looking at W&K after their regatta thinking how great it is that always freely join in and look like they are having fun.  Then I thought that Charles and Camilla are probably too old.  Well, they may be too old for a regatta, but dancing is fun too!  (Sorry, C and C!)


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Timing is spot on!



so, she's still using the title


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Oh my gosh, TW bought 70% of the benches… Allegedly
> View attachment 5363379
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks that followed the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net





Luvbolide said:


> Definitely wouldn’t put this past her!



Explains the stacks of books on her desk at her birthday 'address'


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Have no idea if there’s any truth to this but here it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5362589


current New Yorkers may correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this neighborhood would be cool enough for them.  Don't most of the celebs live in lower Manhattan?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Luvbolide said:


> Honestly, it would only be a guess - procedural issues like the one in this judgment are pretty similar but I am in the US and have no clue as to British law on pretty much any topic, much less stuff pertaining to royals.
> 
> that said, my suspicion is that Harry is going to lose. For one thing, if he had a good point, I think the protection as he wants it would have been granted and we would have been none the wiser.
> It sounds to me completely unreasonable for him to expect protection the same as working senior royals unless he is doing something similar.  And I think his purported offer to pay is ridiculous.  Nor do I think it is remotely okay for him to have de Becker employees shadowing the UK security group.
> 
> I really think he is wrong in making this fuss about Prince Philip’s service.  Given that most of the royal family will be there, along with various heads of state and other dignitaries, I would expect plenty of security to go around.  If he stays at Frogmore Cottage and goes to see his grandmother, security should be a non-issue, I would think.  I can’t tell whether he wants to get security on the tarmac at Heathrow or if he thought he would have everyone over a barrel if he made it a big issue for something like PP’s service.  But since he refuses to compromise he has put the protection folks in an impossible position.  I hope they hang tough.
> 
> As I understand it, the group tasked with royal protection evaluates each situation and individual and decides what level of protection to extend.  Seems to have worked very well so far!!
> 
> Harry needs to get over this BS about throwing a fit if he perceives that William gets a tiny bit “more” or “better”.  It is so juvenile and he is waaaay too old for that.



Its a procedural review only.  Ie, did the government department follow the correct process in refusing H’s request for security.

This isn’t a review of Harry’s feelings or why others in the royal family get protection.  It’s whether the correct process was followed in saying “no” to Harry’s requests for security.  The judges final decision will either be 

1. Yes the government department followed the correct process and duly considered everything.  So go away Haz.  Or
2.  No the government department did not follow correct process and needs to reconsider  additional items.  It then Goes back to the government department to make another ruling (yes or no), which Haz can appeal again if it doesnt go in his favour (by trying to argue they didn’t follow correct process again).


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> so, she's still using the title



Oh the irony.  Taking about labels that attach to women to hold them Back whilst she is clinging on to that Duchess title and slapping it on everything to make her superior…



I am not listening to that podcast.  BLG and Daily mail will cover it so I don’t have to.

The only podcast I would listen to from her is “how I hustled my way into the Royal family”, then gives a ten step gold diggers guide.

THAT would bring her a lot of money.


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> current New Yorkers may correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this neighborhood would be cool enough for them.  Don't most of the celebs live in lower Manhattan?



Yeah, this is one of the least cool neighborhoods in Manhattan (and does not include Billionaires’ Row as I saw someone mention somewhere - Billionaires’ Row is 57th & Central Park South).


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like  & Sachs weren't able to work their magic, poor Montecitos… 
*Who are the presenters?*
So far Oscars presenters include:

Halle Bailey
Stephanie Beatriz
Josh Brolin
Ruth E. Carter
Sean “Diddy” Combs
Kevin Costner
Jamie Lee Curtis
DJ Khaled
Jacob Elordi
Jennifer Garner
Jake Gyllenhaal
Tiffany Haddish
Woody Harrelson
Tony Hawk
H.E.R.
Anthony Hopkins
Samuel L. Jackson
Lily James
Daniel Kaluuya
Zoë Kravitz
Mila Kunis
Lady Gaga
John Leguizamo
Simu Liu
Rami Malek
Shawn Mendes
Jason Momoa
Bill Murray
Lupita Nyong’o
Elliot Page
Rosie Perez
Tyler Perry
Chris Rock
Tracee Ellis Ross
Jill Scott
Naomi Scott
J.K. Simmons
Kelly Slater
Wesley Snipes
Uma Thurman
John Travolta
Shaun White
Serena Williams
Venus Williams
Yuh-Jung Youn
Rachel Zegler









						Everything you need to know about the 2022 Oscars, from hosts to nominees to drama
					

Ahead of Sunday's 94th Academy Awards, here's your guide to who's hosting, who's nominated, why there's been controversy, and when and where to tune in.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## Annawakes

Let’s see if they even show up at the Oscars.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It looks like  & Sachs weren't able to work their magic, poor Montecitos…
> *Who are the presenters?*
> So far Oscars presenters include:
> 
> Halle Bailey
> Stephanie Beatriz
> Josh Brolin
> Ruth E. Carter
> Sean “Diddy” Combs
> Kevin Costner
> Jamie Lee Curtis
> DJ Khaled
> Jacob Elordi
> Jennifer Garner
> Jake Gyllenhaal
> Tiffany Haddish
> Woody Harrelson
> Tony Hawk
> H.E.R.
> Anthony Hopkins
> Samuel L. Jackson
> Lily James
> Daniel Kaluuya
> Zoë Kravitz
> Mila Kunis
> Lady Gaga
> John Leguizamo
> Simu Liu
> Rami Malek
> Shawn Mendes
> Jason Momoa
> Bill Murray
> Lupita Nyong’o
> Elliot Page
> Rosie Perez
> Tyler Perry
> Chris Rock
> Tracee Ellis Ross
> Jill Scott
> Naomi Scott
> J.K. Simmons
> Kelly Slater
> Wesley Snipes
> Uma Thurman
> John Travolta
> Shaun White
> Serena Williams
> Venus Williams
> Yuh-Jung Youn
> Rachel Zegler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything you need to know about the 2022 Oscars, from hosts to nominees to drama
> 
> 
> Ahead of Sunday's 94th Academy Awards, here's your guide to who's hosting, who's nominated, why there's been controversy, and when and where to tune in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com



Ha! I wonder if she’ll be bitter that her good friend Serena gets to present an Oscar but she doesn’t.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Ha! I wonder if she’ll be bitter that her good friend Serena gets to present an Oscar but she doesn’t.


Not only Serena, it looks like her sister is also a presenter. Tyler Perry, who was graced by their presence in his own house for so many months, made the list. Poor duchess, she has all the reasons to feel abandoned and bitter. Something is wrong here. Unless there is a typo on the list, and the last presenter is Rachel Zane and not Rachel Zegler…


----------



## CeeJay

Well, thank God that she is NOT presenting .. I admit I've been out-of-touch lately, but last I read (somewhere), they were "trying" to get them to present .. not that I'm watching anyhow!  Given everything going on in the world as of late, personally .. I think having the Oscars is in poor taste!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like  & Sachs weren't able to work their magic, poor Montecitos…
> *Who are the presenters?*
> So far Oscars presenters include:
> 
> Halle Bailey
> Stephanie Beatriz
> Josh Brolin
> Ruth E. Carter
> Sean “Diddy” Combs
> Kevin Costner
> Jamie Lee Curtis
> DJ Khaled
> Jacob Elordi
> Jennifer Garner
> Jake Gyllenhaal
> Tiffany Haddish
> Woody Harrelson
> Tony Hawk
> H.E.R.
> Anthony Hopkins
> Samuel L. Jackson
> Lily James
> Daniel Kaluuya
> Zoë Kravitz
> Mila Kunis
> Lady Gaga
> John Leguizamo
> Simu Liu
> Rami Malek
> Shawn Mendes
> Jason Momoa
> Bill Murray
> Lupita Nyong’o
> Elliot Page
> Rosie Perez
> Tyler Perry
> Chris Rock
> Tracee Ellis Ross
> Jill Scott
> Naomi Scott
> J.K. Simmons
> Kelly Slater
> Wesley Snipes
> Uma Thurman
> John Travolta
> Shaun White
> Serena Williams
> Venus Williams
> Yuh-Jung Youn
> Rachel Zegler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything you need to know about the 2022 Oscars, from hosts to nominees to drama
> 
> 
> Ahead of Sunday's 94th Academy Awards, here's your guide to who's hosting, who's nominated, why there's been controversy, and when and where to tune in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com



As long as they pass their Covid test 




tiktok said:


> Yeah, this is one of the least cool neighborhoods in Manhattan (and does not include Billionaires’ Row as I saw someone mention somewhere - Billionaires’ Row is 57th & Central Park South).



I could be wrong but I thought the place is near the UN apartments where he has a friend or knows someone who knows someone .  Didn’t they stay there on the NYC visit? The red dress visit , iirc.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It looks like  & Sachs weren't able to work their magic, poor Montecitos…
> *Who are the presenters?*
> So far Oscars presenters include:
> 
> Halle Bailey
> Stephanie Beatriz
> Josh Brolin
> Ruth E. Carter
> Sean “Diddy” Combs
> Kevin Costner
> Jamie Lee Curtis
> DJ Khaled
> Jacob Elordi
> Jennifer Garner
> Jake Gyllenhaal
> Tiffany Haddish
> Woody Harrelson
> Tony Hawk
> H.E.R.
> Anthony Hopkins
> Samuel L. Jackson
> Lily James
> Daniel Kaluuya
> Zoë Kravitz
> Mila Kunis
> Lady Gaga
> John Leguizamo
> Simu Liu
> Rami Malek
> Shawn Mendes
> Jason Momoa
> Bill Murray
> Lupita Nyong’o
> Elliot Page
> Rosie Perez
> Tyler Perry
> Chris Rock
> Tracee Ellis Ross
> Jill Scott
> Naomi Scott
> J.K. Simmons
> Kelly Slater
> Wesley Snipes
> Uma Thurman
> John Travolta
> Shaun White
> Serena Williams
> Venus Williams
> Yuh-Jung Youn
> Rachel Zegler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everything you need to know about the 2022 Oscars, from hosts to nominees to drama
> 
> 
> Ahead of Sunday's 94th Academy Awards, here's your guide to who's hosting, who's nominated, why there's been controversy, and when and where to tune in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com


Let's hope they're not "Surprise guests!"


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Let's hope they're not "Surprise guests!"



More like surprise gatecrashers. Don’t be surprised if they attend one of the afterparties and _People_ (SS) makes a bigger deal about it than if they had been at the awards themselves.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Hermes Zen

rose60610 said:


> Ya know, maybe some of us have been a little harsh on Meghan. I think we should try to think of something positive to say about her.
> 
> I'll start.
> 
> Meghan is my favorite double triple chinned, self-pitying and ungrateful duchess who has a special talent for destroying everything in her path.


Let me help ...


----------



## rose60610

Luvbolide said:


> Honestly, it would only be a guess - procedural issues like the one in this judgment are pretty similar but I am in the US and have no clue as to British law on pretty much any topic, much less stuff pertaining to royals.
> 
> that said, my suspicion is that Harry is going to lose. For one thing, if he had a good point, I think the protection as he wants it would have been granted and we would have been none the wiser.
> It sounds to me completely unreasonable for him to expect protection the same as working senior royals unless he is doing something similar.  And I think his purported offer to pay is ridiculous.  Nor do I think it is remotely okay for him to have de Becker employees shadowing the UK security group.
> 
> I really think he is wrong in making this fuss about Prince Philip’s service.  Given that most of the royal family will be there, along with various heads of state and other dignitaries, I would expect plenty of security to go around.  If he stays at Frogmore Cottage and goes to see his grandmother, security should be a non-issue, I would think.  I can’t tell whether he wants to get security on the tarmac at Heathrow or if he thought he would have everyone over a barrel if he made it a big issue for something like PP’s service.  But since he refuses to compromise he has put the protection folks in an impossible position.  I hope they hang tough.
> 
> As I understand it, the group tasked with royal protection evaluates each situation and individual and decides what level of protection to extend.  Seems to have worked very well so far!!
> 
> Harry needs to get over this BS about throwing a fit if he perceives that William gets a tiny bit “more” or “better”.  It is so juvenile and he is waaaay too old for that.



I think here's where you hit the hole on head:

 "Given that most of the royal family will be there, along with various heads of state and other dignitaries, I would expect plenty of security to go around.  If he stays at Frogmore Cottage and goes to see his grandmother, security should be a non-issue" .

So Harry's "security issue"  is, agreed, a NONISSUE.  Harry looks desperate, ridiculous, and petty.  It's a stupid excuse to not attend. So why is he not attending?  His kids are old enough to travel. They have servants galore to attend to the kids, wait on them, wipe their noses, etc. He and Meth, IMO, aren't attending because they KNOW public response will not be kind and they can't expect to be the center of attention (not for lack of trying). If Meth can wear $10,000 horrible outfits, they can well afford to travel. Besides, they accused the BRF of being RACIST with Oprah.  So if they REALLY believe that the BRF is, indeed, RACIST, then why not just HAVE THE BALLS to say exactly THAT as being the reason to not attend?  If they spout garbage, then they should STAND BEHIND their garbage.


----------



## Chanbal

I have no idea who this gentleman is, but he seems upset.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh really...weren't they already paid but didn't deliver? And who in their right mind would think she'll be making that money back?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@QueenofWrapDress 
You were right. You said it yesterday. Yes, it is mental and sick.  Time for Chas to stop it.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> I have no idea who this gentleman is, but he seems upset.
> View attachment 5363732



He’s no gentleman
He’s a f***ing pig. I can’t believe he’s still around. I guess the incels look up to him. 
Meghan and her army of supporters will not be pleased if he comes for her.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> He’s no gentleman
> He’s a f***ing pig. I can’t believe he’s still around. I guess the incels look up to him.
> Meghan and her army of supporters will not be pleased if he comes for her.


From Wikipedia: The show's best-known feature is "Leykis 101", in which he purports to teach men how to get women while spending the least amount of time, money, and effort.
Sounds like two sides of the coin since Methane's best-proven skill is social climbing via seduction.


----------



## xincinsin

Just found out that Sue Smith's YouTube channel was cancelled, allegedly due to complaints lodged by rabid stans. She was such a voice of reason!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> current New Yorkers may correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this neighborhood would be cool enough for them.  Don't most of the celebs live in lower Manhattan?



Rumour has is the apartment is where all the Russian oligarchs want to get rid of their real estate before it is seized. I still think they don't have the cash even for a discounted Russian apartment.

ETA: Ok just read that tiktok said it's a different neighbourhood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> @QueenofWrapDress
> You were right. You said it yesterday. Yes, it is mental and sick.  Time for Chas to stop it.



This still leads to the question I always ask: how can these literal nobodies manipulate all kinds of people in influential positions?


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


>



Says it all, doesn’t it?


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> current New Yorkers may correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this neighborhood would be cool enough for them.  Don't most of the celebs live in lower Manhattan?


They are not celebrities.  They. Are. Royalty.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> He’s no gentleman
> He’s a f***ing pig. I can’t believe he’s still around. I guess the incels look up to him.
> Meghan and her army of supporters will not be pleased if he comes for her.





xincinsin said:


> From Wikipedia: The show's best-known feature is "Leykis 101", in which he purports to teach men how to get women while spending the least amount of time, money, and effort.
> Sounds like two sides of the coin since Methane's best-proven skill is social climbing via seduction.



Oh gosh, I never heard of him before. It sounds like someone may have found a match. This might lead to an 'entertaining' exchange of ideas to be followed via DM of course.


----------



## LittleStar88

My ex used to listen to Leykis. I didn’t agree with everything I heard but the guy makes good points. And it’s not the first time she has shown up on his radar…




It Would be epic if she had him on her podcast. He would destroy her.


----------



## rose60610

I never heard of Leykis until now, but that doesn't mean anything.  Until relatively recently I wasn't aware of "incels" etc either. What a bunch of losers. They've always been around under a general category I'd personally refer to as "losers" but apparently a specific label is "incel".  The internet has become a catalyst for all kinds of groups and has brought a few of them together. (PurseForum is another   ).  And that can be good or bad or indifferent.

I agree with @Chanbal "someone may have found a match" in this case.  Let's see how MM word salads her way around this one.


----------



## Chanbal

I had to overcome my share of career barriers, and some weren't easy. Though, I would be furious/ if portrayed as a victim by people like TW, so I thank you Amanda Platell for this article's title! 











						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Women are strong, not victims as portrayed by Meghan
					

PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Isn't it bewildering that one of the most privileged women in the world is digging so deep not only to provide a pity fest for women but to vilify men in the process?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF. I love the internet, I really do, but some people shouldn't have access.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This still leads to the question I always ask: how can these literal nobodies manipulate all kinds of people in influential positions?



There's still no evidence. 

What they are good at is putting something out that seems plausible and sitting back waiting for their stand to tell their 'truth' and for the rest of us


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> They are not celebrities.  They. Are. *Royalty.*



Just.


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> current New Yorkers may correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think this neighborhood would be cool enough for them.  Don't most of the celebs live in lower Manhattan?


It’s a mixed neighborhood, but it is close to the UN and a lot of government types do have pdt there. IDK, but it’s also possible that it’s more secure. I would have assumed they would have purchased an UES residence


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> It’s a mixed neighborhood, but it is close to the UN and a lot of government types do have pdt there. IDK, but it’s also possible that it’s more secure. I would have assumed they would have purchased an UES residence


I would think she'd want to be with the cool kids in lower manhattan...who knows?  it may not even be true that they're looking to move there.....or maybe they want someone to loan them a place as Tyler Perry did


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I had to overcome my share of career barriers, and some weren't easy. Though, I would be furious/ if portrayed as a victim by people like TW, so I thank you Amanda Platell for this article's title!
> 
> View attachment 5364051
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Women are strong, not victims as portrayed by Meghan
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Isn't it bewildering that one of the most privileged women in the world is digging so deep not only to provide a pity fest for women but to vilify men in the process?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Probably a concept not easily understood by a professional victim.


----------



## Aimee3

No self respecting co-op would want these despicables in their building.  They’d have to  buy in a condo building or rent.


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF. I love the internet, I really do, but some people shouldn't have access.



Oh the shade


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> My ex used to listen to Leykis. I didn’t agree with everything I heard but the guy makes good points. And it’s not the first time she has shown up on his radar…
> 
> View attachment 5364018
> 
> 
> It Would be epic if she had him on her podcast. He would destroy her.


She would use her skill at bringing forth tears to proclaim herself a victim. I don't get it. She claims to be a model for strong independent women and yet resorts to the victim excuse every time she is challenged. And the stans see no contradiction in her two-faced drama. She is going to attract the crazies at this rate, the kind who either love her to death or hate her to death.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> No self respecting co-op would want these despicables in their building.  They’d have to  buy in a condo building or rent.



What's the difference between a co-op and a condo building?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF. I love the internet, I really do, but some people shouldn't have access.



That email is so crude and disgusting.  I don’t understand why if you don’t like someone, you must be “jealous”, or “sexually frustrated”.  I have no jealously of these two worthless lumps of flesh and I certainly wouldn’t want to be intimate with either and yet I intensely dislike them!


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> That email is so crude and disgusting.  I don’t understand why if you don’t like someone, you must be “jealous”, or “sexually frustrated”.  I have no jealously of these two worthless lumps of flesh and I certainly wouldn’t want to be intimate with either and yet I intensely dislike them!


Wow it seems Sinead’s commentary has gotten a lot less profound in recent years. 

I agree, ironically it’s kind of sexist that Sinead can’t get past seeing M as an accommodating sex pot and assumes men can’t either (I mean why would she even think that )Also she’s truly burying her own lead if she thinks that’s the only reason to hate H


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's the difference between a co-op and a condo building?


For the purposes of this thread, the difference would be that a co-op has a board that has to approve you buying the unit and a condo does not.  If Harry is going to say that he needs a huge amount of security, who would want to have him in the building?  His presence would be a threat to all who lived in the building.  LOL!


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's the difference between a co-op and a condo building?


NY is mainly co-op unlike the rest of the US. Both co-op and condo require multi page application forms; complete financial records; letters of recommendation (preferably from someone in the building). Both require approval by the Board of the Building before you can purchase.

co-op: harder to get approved by the Board (they actually read and discuss the letters of recommendation);  you own shares rather than space; usually much stricter rules regarding renovations, guests, pets, owners etc. For example, renovation only allowed in summer months or for a set pre approved duration, after which you pay late fees to the building. No penetration of ceilings or floors without soffits; no guests while owner is not present; no pets. If they allow pets, they may ask to observe the pet (noise) and or restrict breed (no terriers) or size (no large dogs). Sublease is heavily regulated or not permitted. Co-ops tend to dislike famous people, movie stars etc., bc it may cause disruptions for other residents) Harry and Meghan would definitely qualify as higher maintenance famous. Also, co-ops, also have unofficial policies (dislike of current owners buying non contiguous units; dislike of parents buying for adult children; dislike of applicants who are buying PdT or secondary city homes etc) Among the established avenues, like fifth ave, park avenue etc., there are buildings that are more white glove (usually pre war by a known architect

condo: easier to get approved; it’s somewhat pro forma assuming you have substantial additional assets (the application often asks for references upon request, not actual letters needed); you own the physical space; you can sublet (with some restrictions); you can renovate subject to building approval (this can still be an enormous problem with pre war bldgs)For these benefits, an apt can be at least 25% more than a comparable co-op

In the old days, no financing allowed in prime co-ops

apologies for the long Ot


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I had to overcome my share of career barriers, and some weren't easy. Though, I would be furious/ if portrayed as a victim by people like TW, so I thank you Amanda Platell for this article's title!
> 
> View attachment 5364051
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Women are strong, not victims as portrayed by Meghan
> 
> 
> PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Isn't it bewildering that one of the most privileged women in the world is digging so deep not only to provide a pity fest for women but to vilify men in the process?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I commented on this .. because I absolutely 100% agree, Megalomaniac is only making it worse for strong women!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

880 said:


> NY is mainly co-op unlike the rest of the US. Both co-op and condo require multi page application forms; complete financial records; letters of recommendation (preferably from someone in the building). Both require approval by the Board of the Building before you can purchase.
> 
> co-op: harder to get approved by the Board (they actually read and discuss the letters of recommendation);  you own shares rather than space; usually much stricter rules regarding renovations, guests, pets, owners etc. For example, renovation only allowed in summer months or for a set pre approved duration, after which you pay late fees to the building. No penetration of ceilings or floors without soffits; no guests while owner is not present; no pets. If they allow pets, they may ask to observe the pet (noise) and or restrict breed (no terriers) or size (no large dogs). Sublease is heavily regulated or not permitted. Co-ops tend to dislike famous people, movie stars etc., bc it may cause disruptions for other residents) Harry and Meghan would definitely qualify as higher maintenance famous. Also, co-ops, also have unofficial policies (dislike of current owners buying non contiguous units; dislike of parents buying for adult children; dislike of applicants who are buying PdT or secondary city homes etc) Among the established avenues, like fifth ave, park avenue etc., there are buildings that are more white glove (usually pre war by a known architect
> 
> condo: easier to get approved; it’s somewhat pro forma assuming you have substantial additional assets (the application often asks for references upon request, not actual letters needed); you own the physical space; you can sublet (with some restrictions); you can renovate subject to building approval (this can still be an enormous problem with pre war bldgs)For these benefits, an apt can be at least 25% more than a comparable co-op
> 
> In the old days, no financing allowed in prime co-ops
> 
> apologies for the long Ot


Don't you also have to put a heck of a lot of $$$ down with a co-op???  The NYT just had an article about a couple who looked at co-ops and condos and the guy said that with all the paperwork and "investigation" (way beyond what they had anticipated) .. they easily decided that they did not want to bother with the co-op.


----------



## 880

CeeJay said:


> Don't you also have to put a heck of a lot of $$$ down with a co-op???  The NYT just had an article about a couple who looked at co-ops and condos and the guy said that with all the paperwork and "investigation" (way beyond what they had anticipated) .. they easily decided that they did not want to bother with the co-op.


Yes. Premier UES used to be 100% down, zero financing. Now that the market is heating up, many buyers offer cash, but there are many cases where the cash buyer (highest bid) is rejected by the Board. For both co-ops and condos, the Board is not required to give any reason for rejection or even any timetable upon which your application will be decided.

Before an application is submitted, even for condos, sometimes the admin fees are in excess of 10K, but I don’t remember what portion goes in escrow or credited back.

i assumed that Harry and Meghan would buy a brownstone, or possibly a floor through luxury condo (elevator opening into the unit)  I cannot imagine the media circus if it were leaked that x or y co-op board rejected them. i cannot even imagine the complaints of residents, if for example, the elevator was delayed bc of their security or dog or cars

forgot to say in every co-op and Condo we have owned, 70% of all hardwood floor must be covered by carpet or rug. brokers have told me of stories where people keep rolled up rugs in case the super knocks. The board can also require you to upgrade your windows (and there are only two companies to choose from assuming your building is landmarked). I do not see Harry or Meghan dealing well with all the regs


----------



## gracekelly

@880 I have to laugh at the co-op board having such powers.  Decades ago, my aunt and uncle bought a co-op on the upper west side by the river.  They barely scraped by on the financial side, but what they really had going for them was that their children were adults.  The board wanted the residing owners of the unit OUT!  The owners  had a small child who used to run around the hall without a diaper and pooped at will and anywhere lololol!  Nothing the board could do could make them change their parenting toilet training plan. They also didn't keep up their unit.   My aunt said that a trained monkey with a decent bank account could have bought the apartment.  

That made me wonder if having two small children would be considered a minus for the Harkles if they wanted to purchase, though I think that keeping chickens would be the real deal breaker lol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Wow it seems Sinead’s commentary has gotten a lot less profound in recent years.
> 
> I agree, ironically it’s kind of sexist that Sinead can’t get past seeing M as an accommodating sex pot and assumes men can’t either (I mean why would she even think that )Also she’s truly burying her own lead if she thinks that’s the only reason to hate H



I'm most confused she'd make up a story how Piers wanted her to come on a show he doesn't even do. Like...why. You'd think with her child recently passing away she'd have other things on her mind.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm most confused she'd make up a story how Piers wanted her to come on a show he doesn't even do. Like...why. You'd think with her child recently passing away she'd have other things on her mind.



Sinead is bipolar and has had severe mental problems for most of her life as well as recently being treated for drug addiction. I think Piers went easy on her here because he doesn’t want to be criticized for kicking her when she’s down, even if she is making up tales about him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Sinead is bipolar and has had severe mental problems for most of her life as well as recently being treated for drug addiction. I think Piers went easy on her here because he doesn’t want to be criticized for kicking her when she’s down, even if she is making up tales about him.



Oh, I didn't know that. Makes sense then.


----------



## 880

gracekelly said:


> The owners had a small child who used to run around the hall without a diaper and pooped at will and anywhere lololol




times have changed lol

the markles, I assume, would also need to be close to a good private school. . . Those tend not to have an issue with celebrities


----------



## DoggieBags

880 said:


> It’s a mixed neighborhood, but it is close to the UN and a lot of government types do have pdt there. IDK, but it’s also possible that it’s more secure. I would have assumed they would have purchased an UES residence


I doubt any of the top coop buildings on the UES would have them.


----------



## DoggieBags

880 said:


> Yes. Premier UES used to be 100% down, zero financing. Now that the market is heating up, many buyers offer cash, but there are many cases where the cash buyer (highest bid) is rejected by the Board. For both co-ops and condos, the Board is not required to give any reason for rejection or even any timetable upon which your application will be decided.
> 
> Before an application is submitted, even for condos, sometimes the admin fees are in excess of 10K, but I don’t remember what portion goes in escrow or credited back.
> 
> i assumed that Harry and Meghan would buy a brownstone, or possibly a floor through luxury condo (elevator opening into the unit)  I cannot imagine the media circus if it were leaked that x or y co-op board rejected them. i cannot even imagine the complaints of residents, if for example, the elevator was delayed bc of their security or dog or cars
> 
> forgot to say in every co-op and Condo we have owned, 70% of all hardwood floor must be covered by carpet or rug. brokers have told me of stories where people keep rolled up rugs in case the super knocks. The board can also require you to upgrade your windows (and there are only two companies to choose from assuming your building is landmarked). I do not see Harry or Meghan dealing well with all the regs


it was my understanding that for condos, provided that the prospective buyer meets the financial requirements, condo boards can only reject a potential buyer by exercising the condo association’s right of first refusal on the unit in question. Coop boards don’t have to give any reason for rejecting a prospective buyer.


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> it was my understanding that for condos, provided that the prospective buyer meets the financial requirements, condo boards can only reject a potential buyer by exercising the condo association’s right of first refusal on the unit in question. Coop boards don’t have to give any reason for rejecting a prospective buyer.


Yes, exactly. a broker told me if/how condo boards get around this. She said that a condo board has thirty days to accept or reject. If they don’t want to accept, they can ask for another piece of financial info right before the due date, thereby triggering another thirty day period. And so on, until the buyer walks away. so, i think if they didn’t want Markles, they could wait until the completed financials are submitted and then ask for something ridiculous like, didn’t you have a side hustle doing x. Can you provide documentation of y. . .


----------



## Happyish

Luvbolide said:


> Ooooohhhhh - I so love a good judicial bench slap!!  Just what every litigator wants to hear - “your words are not particularly well chosen.”  And then refuse to offer a simple apology (which would have cost her nothing).  Guess she forgot she will be before the same judge for the duration of the case.


Not to mention she will appear before him at various times for the duration of her career. IMHO This battle wasn't worth the loss of her professional reputation.


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> Oh my gosh, TW bought 70% of the benches… Allegedly
> View attachment 5363379
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks that followed the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


OMG! omg! She can donate them . . . to charity! 
Is this what they meant when they said they wanted to lead a life of service?


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> Yes, exactly. a broker told me if/how condo boards get around this. She said that a condo board has thirty days to accept or reject. If they don’t want to accept, they can ask for another piece of financial info right before the due date, thereby triggering another thirty day period. And so on, until the buyer walks away. so, i think if they didn’t want Markles, they could wait until the completed financials are submitted and then ask for something ridiculous like, didn’t you have a side hustle doing x. Can you provide documentation of y. . .


maybe NY is different.  In CA you buy a condo and as long as you have the money, that's all that is required.  the board doesn't have right of approval.  they do have rules you have to comply with and you may need approval to make improvements on your unit but no screening of buyers that I know of.  and they cannot refuse to allow people with children unless it's a senior citizens complex


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh really...weren't they already paid but didn't deliver? And who in their right mind would think she'll be making that money back?





CeeJay said:


> I commented on this .. because I absolutely 100% agree, Megalomaniac is only making it worse for strong women!


I don't think she knows what to say anymore. She doesn't have a message. She's floundering to find one. But she's stuck b/c of the Spotify contract. She can't disappear into obscurity but has to produce content, even though she has nothing to offer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> I don't think she knows what to say anymore. She doesn't have a message. She's floundering to find one. But she's stuck b/c of the Spotify contract. She can't disappear into obscurity but has to produce content, even though she has nothing to offer.


I guess her message is "I am woman; hear me roar"....I'm so impressed


----------



## CarryOn2020

Doesn’t Eug maintain an


Happyish said:


> I don't think she knows what to say anymore. She doesn't have a message. She's floundering to find one. But she's stuck b/c of the Spotify contract. She can't disappear into obscurity but has to produce content, even though she has nothing to offer.



IMO her message is clear.  *Marry a rich man. *


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh.


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> i assumed that Harry and Meghan would buy a brownstone, or possibly a floor through luxury condo (elevator opening into the unit)  I cannot imagine the media circus if it were leaked that x or y co-op board rejected them. i cannot even imagine the complaints of residents, if for example, the elevator was delayed bc of their security or dog or cars
> 
> I do not see Harry or Meghan dealing well with all the regs


Would one co-op or condo unit be sufficient for someone who is accustomed to 16 toilets, and requires space for nannies, security and a retinue of underlings?

As for the regs, Hazard would bleat "What M wants..." and Methane would probably gets plastic pal Omid to write about how the regs are rigged against women and POC, and how everyone is just jealous of her because she is hot and a successful media mogul.



Happyish said:


> Not to mention she will appear before him at various times for the duration of her career. IMHO This battle wasn't worth the loss of her professional reputation.


I used to respect QCs. Now I question why this airhead lawyer is a QC and if the title has been adulterated to the point of nonsensicality.


----------



## Chanbal

MA has been found in Los Angeles… Would he be living in Montecito?


----------



## bag-mania

It’s been awhile since we have seen Markus. Wonder what he’s been doing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> MA has been found in Los Angeles… Would he be living in Montecito?
> 
> View attachment 5364653



Love the comments on Rem’s site — exactly what does this guy have on JD? What services does he provide?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It’s been awhile since we have seen Markus. Wonder what he’s been doing.



I am still convinced he was at the restaurant with H&M&Eug.  Would not surprise me to know he has been ‘visiting’ H&M for some time.

ETA:  MA is looking very rough. Very rough.  Imo


----------



## Sharont2305

Just bringing over this quote from William from another thread... 
_"For us that’s not telling people what to do”._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Would one co-op or condo unit be sufficient for someone who is accustomed to 16 toilets, and requires space for nannies, security and a retinue of underlings?



I saw a beautiful London appartment recently that was so big and over two or three flours, it had its own servant's quarters complete with an extra kitchen (on top of the family kitchen and the professional kitchen when they were hosting). That said: I still don't believe they have the kind of money to buy what they think they deserve in NYC.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut oh.




Maybe she will favor us with a new book called *The Fence *as a sequel to The Bench?


----------



## LittleStar88

He’s such an ass. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be around Harry full-time. Must be so annoying and exhausting.









						Taylor Hawkins: Remembering the time Prince Harry slapped Foo Fighters drummer in the face
					

Fans are sharing favourite memories of the musician




					ca.news.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am still convinced he was at the restaurant with H&M&Eug.  Would not surprise me to know he has been ‘visiting’ H&M for some time.
> 
> ETA:  MA is looking very rough. Very rough.  Imo


Several people on Twitter seem to have agreed with you at the time. It's rather unbelievable that if it was Eug's husband attending that dinner, they would have missed an opportunity to display him in the photo-op. The photos were carefully taken just to allow the identification of _H&M&Eug_.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> He’s such an ass. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be around Harry full-time. Must be so annoying and exhausting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taylor Hawkins: Remembering the time Prince Harry slapped Foo Fighters drummer in the face
> 
> 
> Fans are sharing favourite memories of the musician
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.news.yahoo.com



I had forgotten that it was Taylor he slapped but I remember the story. It goes to prove that Harry was an @sshole long before he met Meghan. Wouldn’t be surprised if there are many other incidents over the years that he has been fortunate enough to hide from or get covered up by the press.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  *MA is looking very rough*. Very rough.  Imo


He does look very rough (2nd pic).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Several people on Twitter seem to have agreed with you at the time. It's rather unbelievable that if it was Eug's husband attending that dinner, they would have missed an opportunity to display him in the photo-op. The photos were carefully taken just to allow the identification of _H&M&Eug_.




I am positive it was Eugenie’s husband. He was the only one who wasn’t a “celebrity” and someone had to have his back to the photographer.

Remember it was an prearranged pap photoshoot with all their fake laughter and exaggerated expressions. Markus would not be welcome there.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Several people on Twitter seem to have agreed with you at the time. It's rather unbelievable that if it was Eug's husband attending that dinner, they would have missed an opportunity to display him in the photo-op. The photos were carefully taken just to allow the identification of _H&M&Eug_.



Harry will never make her feel the way those flash bulbs do.  Poor sap.


----------



## Chanbal

Gossip on the Oscars:













						Not Over The Oscars Slight - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] Controversy always seems to follow The Oscars in one way or another. One of this year’s controversies involved invitations going out to celebrities like Tony Hawk while ignoring actual actors who starred in nominated films. Tony Hawk? While he has been the recipient of such...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I am positive it was Eugenie’s husband. He was the only one who wasn’t a “celebrity” and someone had to have his back to the photographer.
> 
> Remember it was an prearranged pap photoshoot with all their fake laughter and exaggerated expressions. Markus would not be welcome there.


You might be right, but… 
A while ago, I read on Twitter that Eug's husband is not a big supporter of the Harkles. So, a good pic of him at that dinner would have dismissed such rumors and supported the message of a double-date that they wanted so much to convey. There's something fishy here.



1LV said:


> Harry will never make her feel the way those flash bulbs do.  Poor sap.


----------



## Chanbal

From Will's great end-of-tour statement:   












						Wills: 'I may never head the Commonwealth'
					

Prince William has admitted he might never succeed the Queen as head of the Commonwealth following his trouble-hit visit to the Caribbean.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> He’s such an ass. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be around Harry full-time. Must be so annoying and exhausting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taylor Hawkins: Remembering the time Prince Harry slapped Foo Fighters drummer in the face
> 
> 
> Fans are sharing favourite memories of the musician
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.news.yahoo.com


Ass is right


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> He’s such an ass. I can’t imagine what it’s like to be around Harry full-time. Must be so annoying and exhausting.



What's the saying...marry for money and you'll work hard for every single penny?

If I didn't dislike her so much and think he is a victim of her narcisstic abuse I'd probably say kudos to her for putting up with his childish demeanor.


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> I doubt any of the top coop buildings on the UES would have them.


Maybe she'll accuse them all of racism.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Bwahaha.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Several people on Twitter seem to have agreed with you at the time. It's rather unbelievable that if it was Eug's husband attending that dinner, they would have missed an opportunity to display him in the photo-op. The photos were carefully taken just to allow the identification of _H&M&Eug_.



Where did he sneak in from??  I assumed he got out of the other car door, but this makes it look like he waited in the crowd and was pushed back by security until she stopped for him.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> He does look very rough (2nd pic).



He looks bloated and alcoholic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> He looks bloated and alcoholic.



That's what I think each time I see Harry. Maybe she destroyed them both.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's what I think each time I see Harry. Maybe she destroyed them both.


Wouldn’t be surprised.  I think she surrounds herself with people who are easy to manipulate.


----------



## Suncatcher

From an article in the New York Times:

“You should not assume that we have announced the presenter for best picture yet,” Packer added. “We definitely want that to be part of a few unexpected surprises.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Wouldn’t be surprised.  I think she surrounds herself with people who are easy to manipulate.



That said, I always had the impression MA was a master manipulator himself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Suncatcher said:


> From an article in the New York Times:
> 
> “You should not assume that we have announced the presenter for best picture yet,” Packer added. “We definitely want that to be part of a few unexpected surprises.”



This. Scares. Me.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. Scares. Me.


I’m not watching on the small chance they’re there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not watching on the small chance they’re there.



I am never interested enough to watch as it's in the middle of the night for me, I'm happy to see the dresses and Best Picture results the next day. But I'll be so annoyed if they once again get what they want as a reward for being horrible people.

Then again, wouldn't a lot of people find ditching your grandfather's memorial for the Oscars highly distasteful? Maybe I'm being naive here.


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> From an article in the New York Times:
> 
> “You should not assume that we have announced the presenter for best picture yet,” Packer added. “We definitely want that to be part of a few unexpected surprises.”



There are so many more important and interesting people they could give that honor to that I cannot believe it will happen. If the Oscars weren’t already dead to me the possibility would be enough to be the final nail in the coffin though.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am never interested enough to watch as it's in the middle of the night for me, I'm happy to see the dresses and Best Picture results the next day. But I'll be so annoyed if they once again get what they want as a reward for being horrible people.
> 
> Then again, wouldn't a lot of people find ditching your grandfather's memorial for the Oscars highly distasteful? Maybe I'm being naive here.



Honestly, to me ditching his grandfather’s service for no good reason - as the jerk is about to do - is unforgivable.  He and William are so lucky to have had their grandparents healthy and happy well into their own adulthood.  Few of us can say that.  I never knew my grandparents and would have loved to have them as part of my life, particularly as a kid.

Because of Covid, PP did not have a funeral where he could be honored for his long life of service and many accomplishments.  I am looking forward to seeing the 500 or so people from his various causes and charities.  What a wonderful tribute.

For Harry to refuse to go because of his BS security crap or because of the BS Oscars is truly a disgrace.  He ought to be ashamed.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *Where did he sneak in from??*  I assumed he got out of the other car door, but this makes it look like he waited in the crowd and was pushed back by security until she stopped for him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Luvbolide said:


> *Honestly, to me ditching his grandfather’s service for no good reason - as the jerk is about to do - is unforgivable.*  He and William are so lucky to have had their grandparents healthy and happy well into their own adulthood.  Few of us can say that.  I never knew my grandparents and would have loved to have them as part of my life, particularly as a kid.
> 
> Because of Covid, PP did not have a funeral where he could be honored for his long life of service and many accomplishments.  I am looking forward to seeing the 500 or so people from his various causes and charities.  What a wonderful tribute.
> 
> For Harry to refuse to go because of his BS security crap or because of the BS Oscars is truly a disgrace.  He ought to be ashamed.



Right? I sat with my dying grandfather for days (like, all of us, not just me). I will never forgive what he did while Philip was dying, which he was very aware of. And he just adds and adds to his pile of sh*t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right? I sat with my dying grandfather for days (like, all of us, not just me). *I will never forgive what he did while Philip was dying*, which he was very aware of. And he just adds and adds to his pile of sh*t.



And I'm not so sure the others will. By all accounts it seems they all loved him deeply and were hit hard by his passing...what's with Charles barely holding back tears, Kate and Peter crying on the way back to the castle and Sophie welling up in an interview she gave a while later. And The Queen went from 80 to 100 in a short year.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> There are so many more important and interesting people they could give that honor to that I cannot believe it will happen. *If the Oscars weren’t already dead to me the possibility would be enough to be the final nail in the coffin though.*


Ditto.  I miss the Joan Rivers red carpet arrivals and haven't watched the Oscars since they started the #Oscarssowhite thing.  I'm tired of politics interjected into everything and if we have to hand out awards based on someone's skin color instead of their actual acting, I don't care to watch any more.  (I'm not white, BTW!)  Never occurred to me a lot of these awards are bought before, but with Time and even the NAACP so obviously doing that, none of them have my respect any more.  I'm not wasting 4+ hours of my life tonight watching woke Hollywood with their self importance preach to me about what I should believe in and be doing.  I'm not looking forward to the BS coverage of her "goddess like" appearance tomorrow either!


----------



## Chanbal

From The Times: "_The Duchess of Sussex’s claims of racism in the royal household may have exacerbated hostility in Caribbean countries._"




__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> From The Times: "_The Duchess of Sussex’s claims of racism in the royal household may have exacerbated hostility in Caribbean countries._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Yeah, I read some activist in Jamaica was foaming at the mouth because the BRF drove out a BLACK woman. Well, for starters nobody drove her out, she left because she couldn't be queen bee and didn't want to put in the effort, and even if...they wouldn't have "driven out" a "black woman", but a complete misfit.

ETA: speaking of misfit, I wonder where her complete lack of manners in company comes from. Both Thomas and Doria seem to be able to adhere to social norms in public.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I read some activist in Jamaica was foaming at the mouth because the BRF drove out a BLACK woman. Well, for starters nobody drove her out, she left because she couldn't be queen bee and didn't want to put in the effort, and even if...they wouldn't have "driven out" a "black woman", but a complete misfit.
> 
> ETA: speaking of misfit, I wonder where her complete lack of manners in company comes from. Both Thomas and Doria seem to be able to adhere to social norms in public.


Oh, how convenient.  Now she's black again.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, I always had the impression MA was a master manipulator himself.


Two peas in a pod?


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Ditto.  I miss the Joan Rivers red carpet arrivals and haven't watched the Oscars since they started the #Oscarssowhite thing.  I'm tired of politics interjected into everything and if we have to hand out awards based on someone's skin color instead of their actual acting, I don't care to watch any more.  (I'm not white, BTW!)  Never occurred to me a lot of these awards are bought before, but with Time and even the NAACP so obviously doing that, none of them have my respect any more.  I'm not wasting 4+ hours of my life tonight watching woke Hollywood with their self importance preach to me about what I should believe in and be doing.  I'm not looking forward to the BS coverage of her "goddess like" appearance tomorrow either!


The Joan Rivers part was the best .. I've stopped watching the Oscars for years now, just have ZERO interest!  Frankly, with what is going on in the world right now, to even hold it and have all these people showing their riches?!?! .. kinda in bad taste when you have people being shelled, being killed having no housing, no food, no water .. 

The NYT had an article today about how 84 abandoned orphans were finally able to get out of the Ukraine into Poland and meanwhile, we have the stupid Oscars (and I swear, if those TWO do appear - that will be the FINAL CURTAIN for me)!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> The NYT had an article today about how 84 abandoned orphans were finally able to get out of the Ukraine into Poland and meanwhile, we have the stupid Oscars (and I swear, if those TWO do appear - that will be the FINAL CURTAIN for me)!!!



I am haunted by a story about a woman who arrived with four children in Hungary. Her own kid, her sister's kid (sister left the group looking for water and never returned), her dead neighbour's kid, and while trying to find a bus out of Ukraine she saw a boy sitting on the curb next to his dead parents, so she took him too. Just...what is wrong with the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CeeJay said:


> The Joan Rivers part was the best .. I've stopped watching the Oscars for years now, just have ZERO interest!  Frankly, with what is going on in the world right now, to even hold it and have all these people showing their riches?!?! .. kinda in bad taste when you have people being shelled, being killed having no housing, no food, no water ..
> 
> The NYT had an article today about how 84 abandoned orphans were finally able to get out of the Ukraine into Poland and meanwhile, we have the stupid Oscars (and I swear, if those TWO do appear - that will be the FINAL CURTAIN for me)!!!


Bad taste doesn’t begin to cover the situation.  Insensitive and obtuse.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am haunted by a story about a woman who arrived with four children in Hungary. Her own kid, her sister's kid (sister left the group looking for water and never returned), her dead neighbour's kid, and while trying to find a bus out of Ukraine she saw a boy sitting on the curb next to his dead parents, so she took him too. Just...what is wrong with the world.


Haunting indeed.  Hopeful and reassuring that there are still those with heart and open arms.


----------



## Toby93

Do they have any idea how disliked they really are?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am haunted by a story about a woman who arrived with four children in Hungary. Her own kid, her sister's kid (sister left the group looking for water and never returned), her dead neighbour's kid, and while trying to find a bus out of Ukraine she saw a boy sitting on the curb next to his dead parents, so she took him too. Just...what is wrong with the world.


Too many sad stories. I hope @Aminamina arrived safely in Germany.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Several days ago Nancy Meyers posted a link to this article.  Imo it’s the zillions of dollars that ruined the industry. Rather than stand for quality, Hwood went for the quick buck, kinda like fast fashion.  Quality matters.









						Opinion | We Aren’t Just Watching the Decline of the Oscars. We’re Watching the End of the Movies.
					

Why big-screen entertainment is no longer the essential American popular art form.




					www.nytimes.com
				




ETA: and this stuff - $140K gift bags!!!!  









						Twitter disgusted at Oscars $140k gift bags:Cash better to help people
					

Social media users are outraged at the amount of expense being given away in 'swag bags' to Oscar nominees Some users have suggest that the money be better off given to charities.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Several days ago Nancy Meyers posted a link to this article.  Imo it’s the zillions of dollars that ruined the industry. Rather than stand for quality, Hwood went for the quick buck, kinda like fast fashion.  Quality matters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | We Aren’t Just Watching the Decline of the Oscars. We’re Watching the End of the Movies.
> 
> 
> Why big-screen entertainment is no longer the essential American popular art form.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: and this stuff - $140K gift bags!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter disgusted at Oscars $140k gift bags:Cash better to help people
> 
> 
> Social media users are outraged at the amount of expense being given away in 'swag bags' to Oscar nominees Some users have suggest that the money be better off given to charities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hollywood has gone for the quick buck for some time now. MM & Stupid fit right in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Too many sad stories. I hope @Aminamina arrived safely in Germany.



She did. I'm sure she'll drop in and update us as soon as she's settled in a bit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: and this stuff - $140K gift bags!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter disgusted at Oscars $140k gift bags:Cash better to help people
> 
> 
> Social media users are outraged at the amount of expense being given away in 'swag bags' to Oscar nominees Some users have suggest that the money be better off given to charities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



WTFFF. I like gifts as much as anyone else, but do millionaires really need a gift bag the equivalent of an apartment? Imagine they had done, say, 1000 bucks giftbags (still pretty generous if you ask me) or 10000 bucks if they absolutely must and donated the rest to a worthy cause. Like, not only war and conflict, doesn't the US have enough of their own homelessness and underprivileged children? This is gross.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. I like gifts as much as anyone else, but do millionaires really need a gift bag the equivalent of an apartment? Imagine they had done, say, 1000 bucks giftbags (still pretty generous if you ask me) or 10000 bucks if they absolutely must and donated the rest to a worthy cause. Like, not only war and conflict, doesn't the US have enough of their own homelessness and underprivileged children? This is gross.


Yes. Yes. Yes.  And so many of these people preach to us what to do and how to do it.  Sit the hell down and shut up. Better yet practice what you preach, Hollywood.


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Yes. Yes. Yes.  And so many of these people preach to us what to do and how to do it.  Sit the hell down and shut up. Better yet practice what you preach, Hollywood.



Very important words for this crazy world. Hwood should take note.
_
"Catherine and I are committed to service. *For us that's not telling people what to do.* It is about serving and supporting them in whatever way they think best, by using the platform we are lucky to have," William writes._


----------



## Happyish

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am still convinced he was at the restaurant with H&M&Eug.  Would not surprise me to know he has been ‘visiting’ H&M for some time.
> 
> ETA:  MA is looking very rough. Very rough.  Imo


I'm sure he's there for the Oscar's.


----------



## Happyish

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very important words for this crazy world. Hwood should take note.
> 
> _"Catherine and I are committed to service. *For us that's not telling people what to do.* It is about serving and supporting them in whatever way they think best, by using the platform we are lucky to have," William writes._


And may I add, "_It is about serving and supporting them in whatever way they think best, *by using the platform we are lucky to have*," William writes._
What I find curious is that M&M and Happy Harpy had exactly what they claimed to have wanted. Were there constraints? No doubt. But guess what? We all live in a world of constraints. We can't take time offf when we want to, the boss says jump, we do so, there are deadlines, standards to meet and people we have to work with we may not want to work with,  and agendas that are different from our own.
But that's life.
MM and Happy Harpy had the world at their feet. *They had an international platform*. They had a life of wealth, privilege and security (personal and financial). They could have done anything they said they wanted. They could have worked as hard or as little as they wanted and the BRF would have accommodated them. Did they have to dress up, look good and put on a smile and show up? Yes. But so what?
Instead, they trashed all the goodwill they started with, turned themselves into C-List pseudo-celebs money-grubbing for donations to charitable causes where the primary, nee, only beneficiaries are themselves.
I'm still confounded. What puerile juvenile idiots (can I say this) they've proven to be.
They gained nothing but lost everything.


----------



## Happyish

1LV said:


> Yes. Yes. Yes.  And so many of these people preach to us what to do and how to do it.  Sit the hell down and shut up. Better yet practice what you preach, Hollywood.


Hats off to Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher. They have raised *more than $35 million* for Ukraine. Now how many A-list celebrities or anyone in Hollywood for that matter can say that? Now that's a doggie-bag I can live with.


----------



## 1LV

Happyish said:


> And may I add, "_It is about serving and supporting them in whatever way they think best, *by using the platform we are lucky to have*," William writes._
> What I find curious is that M&M and Happy Harpy had exactly what they claimed to have wanted. Were there constraints? No doubt. But guess what? We all live in a world of constraints. We can't take time offf when we want to, the boss says jump, we do so, there are deadlines, standards to meet and people we have to work with we may not want to work with,  and agendas that are different from our own.
> But that's life.
> MM and Happy Harpy had the world at their feet. They had a life of wealth, privilege and security (personal and financial). They could have done anything they said they wanted. They could have worked as hard or as little as they wanted and the BRF would have accommodated them. Did they have to dress up, look good and put on a smile and show up? Yes. But so what?
> Instead, they trashed all the goodwill they started with, turned themselves into C-List pseudo-celebs money-grubbing for donations to charitable causes where the primary, nee, only beneficiaries are themselves.
> I'm still confounded. What puerile juvenile idiots (can I say this) they've proved to be.
> They gained nothing but lost everything.


Amen.  (we need an Amen! button)


----------



## Chanbal

Happyish said:


> I'm sure he's there for the Oscar's.


Didn't see Ginger Guru yet!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Ditto.  I miss the Joan Rivers red carpet arrivals and haven't watched the Oscars since they started the #Oscarssowhite thing.  I'm tired of politics interjected into everything and if we have to hand out awards based on someone's skin color instead of their actual acting, I don't care to watch any more.  (I'm not white, BTW!)  Never occurred to me a lot of these awards are bought before, but with Time and even the NAACP so obviously doing that, none of them have my respect any more.  I'm not wasting 4+ hours of my life tonight watching woke Hollywood with their self importance preach to me about what I should believe in and be doing.  I'm not looking forward to the BS coverage of her "goddess like" appearance tomorrow either!



Yes, there used to be glamour at the Oscars. These days all that is left is pretentiousness and hypocrisy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins was once slapped by Prince Harry


https://mol.im/a/10658045

Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins, who died on Friday at the age of 50, once had a bizarre encounter with Prince Harry when they met backstage in 2015.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ETA:* speaking of misfit, I wonder where her complete lack of manners in company comes from. Both Thomas and Doria seem to be able to adhere to social norms in public.*


Maybe from some of her university buddies where she also learned to superglue eyelashes on two unsuspecting girls in a hazing incident.


----------



## Chanbal

QE and Charles must be super proud of Will, he seems to be an amazing human being.   


_Sources said the Duke had done “a lot of thinking” about what kind of king he wanted to be, when the time comes, and how certain protocols and strategy would need to evolve.
While he understands that the Royal family’s long-held mantra of “never complain, never explain” had proved effective for decades, the world has changed and so the monarchy must change with it._





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I read some activist in Jamaica was foaming at the mouth because the BRF drove out a BLACK woman. Well, for starters nobody drove her out, she left because she couldn't be queen bee and didn't want to put in the effort, and even if...they wouldn't have "driven out" a "black woman", but a complete misfit.
> 
> ETA: speaking of misfit, I wonder where her complete lack of manners in company comes from. Both Thomas and Doria seem to be able to adhere to social norms in public.


Hear hear! She left because no one was buying into her self-pity fest and she couldn't merch her title the way she planned. If nothing else, that shows how little she researched beyond confirming that Hazard was a "rich white gullible man'.

Should we be looking at her mentors to find the source of her entitlement and corruption? It likely has its roots in the way her parents spoilt her, but somewhere along the way, she must have had people with similar mentality "nurturing" her.


----------



## Lodpah

Gross, insensitive, inappropriate and a crass display of wealth in this day and age of war, massive evictions, inflation, Ukraine, supply chain defect, hungry people, and much more.


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe from some of her university buddies where she also learned to superglue eyelashes on two unsuspecting girls in a hazing incident.


Definitely someone else’s fault.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Gross, insensitive, inappropriate and a crass display of wealth in this day and age of war, massive evictions, inflation, Ukraine, supply chain defect, hungry people, and much more.


How much you want to bet that these hypocrites that accept thousands of dollars for free gifts will preach to us about charity for others and mention Ukraine?


----------



## purseinsanity

They're giving away plots of land in Scotland in the goodies bag?????  WTAF?


----------



## purseinsanity

Ick.  Does this outfit remind you of anything??


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ETA: speaking of misfit, I wonder where her complete lack of manners in company comes from. Both Thomas and Doria seem to be able to adhere to social norms in public.





Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe from some of her university buddies where she also learned to superglue eyelashes on two unsuspecting girls in a hazing incident.


Or maybe it started in her youth. Watch MM being rude to her father at approx. the 1:18 mark.


----------



## purseinsanity

Wait.  Now it makes sense.  They want the goody bags so they can auction them off for funds for themselves!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am haunted by a story about a woman who arrived with four children in Hungary. Her own kid, her sister's kid (sister left the group looking for water and never returned), her dead neighbour's kid, and while trying to find a bus out of Ukraine she saw a boy sitting on the curb next to his dead parents, so she took him too. Just...what is wrong with the world.


REMARKABLE person, but yes .. I just cannot imagine and seeing some of the photos where the parents have lost their children is just heartbreaking.  Honestly, and I told a dear friend this the other day (she lives in Finland, so they are scared) .. I NEVER thought I would say the word WAR in the present tense.


----------



## csshopper

Watching the video from Archie’s shower I hadn’t previously paid attention to people yelling “good night” to Raptor, and she was very definitely waiting for Marcus. 

Is  Marcus providing tuck in service?


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> Wait.  Now it makes sense.  They want the goody bags so they can auction them off for funds for themselves!


.. and they had the GALL to ***** & moan when the IRS said that they would be taxed on those goodie bags!!!  The stories I can tell everyone here about 'certain' celebs and how they have treated various people who have 'gifted' them with expensive items!  As a matter of fact, I'm dealing with one right now that wanted me to meet up with her assistant and give him the ring she bought from me .. yet, SHE HASN'T PAID THE RESIDUAL AMOUNT!!!  Like I'm just going to give it to her when she hasn't paid?!?!?!  WTF?????


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CeeJay said:


> .. and they had the GALL to ***** & moan when the IRS said that they would be taxed on those goodie bags!!!  The stories I can tell everyone here about 'certain' celebs and how they have treated various people who have 'gifted' them with expensive items!  As a matter of fact, I'm dealing with one right now that wanted me to meet up with her assistant and give him the ring she bought from me .. yet, SHE HASN'T PAID THE RESIDUAL AMOUNT!!!  Like I'm just going to give it to her when she hasn't paid?!?!?!  WTF?????


I know a jeweler in the greater LA area that says he won't "lend" or design anything for rappers or celebrities any more unless they pay up front because he's gotten screwed several times by people claiming he "gifted" them when he did no such thing.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Wait.  Now it makes sense.  They want the goody bags so they can auction them off for funds for themselves!


Has the bidding started for this one?


----------



## Happyish

CeeJay said:


> .. and they had the GALL to ***** & moan when the IRS said that they would be taxed on those goodie bags!!!  The stories I can tell everyone here about 'certain' celebs and how they have treated various people who have 'gifted' them with expensive items!  As a matter of fact, I'm dealing with one right now that wanted me to meet up with her assistant and give him the ring she bought from me .. yet, SHE HASN'T PAID THE RESIDUAL AMOUNT!!!  Like I'm just going to give it to her when she hasn't paid?!?!?!  WTF?????


That's Chutzpah!


----------



## Happyish

purseinsanity said:


> I know a jeweler in the greater LA area that says he won't "lend" or design anything for rappers or celebrities any more unless they pay up front because he's gotten screwed several times by people claiming he "gifted" them when he did no such thing.


I believe I know exactly who you're talking about. If not, it's an all-too common plight. 
Every Oscar night I think of the Sharon Stone Van Cleef & Arpels Faerie brooch fiasco.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. I like gifts as much as anyone else, but do millionaires really need a gift bag the equivalent of an apartment? Imagine they had done, say, 1000 bucks giftbags (still pretty generous if you ask me) or 10000 bucks if they absolutely must and donated the rest to a worthy cause. Like, not only war and conflict, doesn't the US have enough of their own homelessness and underprivileged children? This is gross.



I am honestly surprised and disappointed that the nominees themselves didn’t start refusing these swag bags years ago.  It is ridiculous to provide wealthy people with such lavish things.  If they want something in the bags so much, they can go pay for it themselves.  

This year we have the obvious desperate need of millions of war refugees, but even before that there are so many in need.  The money wasted on this excess for years could have done some good in the world.


----------



## needlv

Happyish said:


> I believe I know exactly who you're talking about. If not, it's an all-too common plight.
> Every Oscar night I think of the Sharon Stone Van Cleef & Arpels Faerie brooch fiasco.



I thought it was Harry Winston jewellers vs Sharon Stone.  And yes, she didn’t want to return the jewellery but eventually did.


----------



## Chanbal

No Harkles at the Oscars!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> No Harkles at the Oscars!



Wonder if they'll go to Elton John's after party.  I'm still praying we don't get slammed by pictures of these two tomorrow!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Wonder if they'll go to Elton John's after party.  I'm still praying we don't get slammed by pictures of these two tomorrow!


Maybe not, TW may not have enough bling to compete with Lady Gaga's diamonds, unless certain earrings appear out of nowhere…  Lady Gaga is co-hosting EJ's Oscar party. 










						Lady Gaga brings the glamor at Elton John's star-studded Oscars party
					

Lady Gaga looked incredible in an ethereal tulle white gown while attending the Elton John AIDS Foundation's 30th Annual Academy Awards viewing party in West Hollywood on Sunday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

NS reminds his audience that if '_we don't download, tune in, and of course listen then they could be tricky times ahead allegedly'_ for a certain podcast.


----------



## redney

Who presented Best Picture? (Thankfully NOT the gruesome twosome!) I didn't watch and can't find it online.


----------



## csshopper

We’ll probably never know which Sunshine Sucks lackey thought it would be cool to float “those people” as presenters of the major Oscar award. The contrast between a whiny man child and his suitcase carrying z list actress wife and Lady Gaga and Liza Minelli is so stark it makes the whole concept they might have been contenders for Presenters ludicrous and as a result really makes fun of them.


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> Who presented Best Picture? (Thankfully NOT the gruesome twosome!) I didn't watch and can't find it online.













						Oscars 2022 recap: 'CODA' wins best picture, Will Smith wins best actor after Chris Rock confrontation
					

Check back for more on how to watch the show, who is on the red carpet and more.




					abcnews.go.com
				



.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Wonder if they'll go to Elton John's after party.  I'm still praying we don't get slammed by pictures of these two tomorrow!


Unless Ginger Guru and TW went incognito, they didn't make it to Elton John's after party.









						Elton John AIDS Foundation Oscar Party 2022: All the celebrity looks
					

Tinashe, Lady Gaga and Demi Lovato were among the major names who attended the big bash on Oscars night.




					pagesix.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Has the bidding started for this one?



I like how it’s apparently worth so much and front and centre are two boxes of normal chocolate biscuits, a baby doll and an inflatable whale- it looks like a stall at a school fete  

So, while I’m sure we’re all relieved they didn’t show up it is amusing to imagine a parallel world where gifs of Will Smith slapping H are circulating online because H would’ve actually deserved it. 
(though maybe W would feel kinship with H as their public images have both taken a downturn since they became their mad and talentless wife’s PR chief.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Unless Ginger Guru and TW went incognito, they didn't make it to Elton John's after party.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elton John AIDS Foundation Oscar Party 2022: All the celebrity looks
> 
> 
> Tinashe, Lady Gaga and Demi Lovato were among the major names who attended the big bash on Oscars night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Really interesting since Raptor’s collaborator on “Pearl” is the stand in host this year with Lady Gaga because Concert Tour scheduling issues for Elton prevent him from being present. Plus their two sons are helping David with hosting, cute picture on line of them dressed up for the big do.

Scribes at Sunshine Sucks are probably up late tonight working on the spin about the dog eating the invitation etc.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Scribes at Sunshine Sucks are probably up late tonight working on the spin about the dog eating the invitation etc.


I just checked yahoo, and nothing yet. It's a tough task, they may need to recycle the one used for Ob*m*' birthday party. I found the piece below, poor Ginger, how can he compete with this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> They're giving away plots of land in Scotland in the goodies bag?????  WTAF?



Better not be my back garden 

Can't actually do that in Scotland as all transactions have to be brokered by lawyers and passports of both sides of the deal are needed to verify.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Better not be my back garden
> 
> I'm not can't actually do that in Scotland as all transactions have to be brokered by lawyers and passports of both sides of the deal are needed to verify.



Maybe it was one of these silly "Here, have a square foot of land and be a laird!" type of things.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Has the bidding started for this one?




What people say something is worth and what it fetches on fleEbay are quite different. 

I wouldn't give you more that a £10 for the lot.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe it was one of these silly "Here, have a square foot of land and be a laird!" type of things.



The last people on Earth to give away their land are Lairds. Rental only unless forced by a Community Buyout


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Like this:


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5365502
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oscars 2022 recap: 'CODA' wins best picture, Will Smith wins best actor after Chris Rock confrontation
> 
> 
> Check back for more on how to watch the show, who is on the red carpet and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Thank you. I'd say Liza Minelli is a much more appropriate Oscar presenter than those bumbling losers.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if the Montecitos will enjoy the documentary…


----------



## Chanbal

I don't know who Barbara S is, but she doesn't sound happy… She makes some valid points.   



_Prince Harry and his wife announced on January 8, 2020, that they were stepping away from the Royal Family wanting to leave a ‘private life.’.._












						It Is Time Press Did Their Job And Stop Printing Propaganda Floated About Meghan Markle And Prince Harry’s PR People | Global News Ink
					






					globalnewsink.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Smith family thread:



> *I think Will and Jada have made it clear for a long time now they want all the praise, but none of the roast that comes with being a big star.* It was evident to me that *Will has no sense of humor about himself *earlier this year when he was on Graham Norton, and *he could not manage to behave* like he was just one of the guests. *He wanted everyone singing his praises and being so excited to be in his presence, and gave none of that back to the other guests.*  Sorry, but *if they want that kind of "all praise, no jokes" treatment, they both need to do better work.*   They're both entertainers but don't scratch the surface of being greatest performers of their generation.



Seems like the Netflixes would enjoy their company  Or maybe that would be too much ego in one room.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the Smith family thread:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like the Netflixes would enjoy their company  Or maybe that would be too much ego in one room.



Add Kanye to the group and they'd have 5, Haz could link them up to Butter Up and possibly get a commission. Solving the emotional issues of the group would be guaranteed fees for decades. Haz and Kanye will have a special bond with their mother issues.

Mental health is a serious issue, not denigrating it, but this group does not generate sympathy with me.


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> I know a jeweler in the greater LA area that says he won't "lend" or design anything for rappers or celebrities any more unless they pay up front because he's gotten screwed several times by people claiming he "gifted" them when he did no such thing.


YUP .. I have flat out told them "_just consider me the Hermes of the Jewelry biz .. no lends, no discounts and NO freebies_"!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I know a jeweler in the greater LA area that says he won't "lend" or design anything for rappers or celebrities any more unless they pay up front because he's gotten screwed several times by people claiming he "gifted" them when he did no such thing.


The famous Sharon Stone story about her keeping the Harry Winston diamond stud earrings, because after all, she is Sharon Stone.  HW finally got them back after they sued her, but she had them for a year before handing them over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Ditto.  I miss the Joan Rivers red carpet arrivals and haven't watched the Oscars since they started the #Oscarssowhite thing.  I'm tired of politics interjected into everything and if we have to hand out awards based on someone's skin color instead of their actual acting, I don't care to watch any more.  (I'm not white, BTW!)  Never occurred to me a lot of these awards are bought before, but with Time and even the NAACP so obviously doing that, none of them have my respect any more.  I'm not wasting 4+ hours of my life tonight watching woke Hollywood with their self importance preach to me about what I should believe in and be doing.  I'm not looking forward to the BS coverage of her "goddess like" appearance tomorrow either!



Somebody brought up this refreshing moment in history in the WSJ:

"The Oscars were politicized in 1978 when Vanessa Redgrave made a snide, uncalled for comment about about 'Zionist hoodlums'. When it was his turn up to the podium, screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky admonished her verbally:

_“I would like to say, personal opinion, of course, that I’m sick and tired of people exploiting the Academy Awards for the propagation of their own personal political propaganda. I would like to suggest to Ms. Redgrave that her winning an Academy Award is not a pivotal moment in history, does not require a proclamation, and a simple ‘thank you’ would have sufficed.”_


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Are there any humans left with whom they have *NOT *had a falling out??


----------



## lanasyogamama

Thank God we saw a wonderful moment like this instead of those two.


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Priceless


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> Add Kanye to the group and they'd have 5, Haz could link them up to Butter Up and possibly get a commission. Solving the emotional issues of the group would be guaranteed fees for decades. Haz and Kanye will have a special bond with their mother issues.
> 
> Mental health is a serious issue, not denigrating it, but this group does not generate sympathy with me.


Aw no not Kanye! I have a soft spot for Kanye as he’s actually talented and he is *somewhat* justified in that a lot of people have screwed him over and talked down to him over the years whereas the others have been given everything on a platter and still turned gold to brass.

Do you remember that charlatan therapist who was on tv telling H to do ‘the mummy’  (no pun intended) or ‘the monster mash’ for his trauma - I feel like poor old Kanye must have a whole duck pond of quacks at this point. Talk about blind leading the blind.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Excuse me, but was advanced calculus.  Also astronaut training is very tiring.


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


>



Actually, it's a good thing for the world that he abdicated. He would have opened his arms to the Nazi's.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> The famous Sharon Stone story about her keeping the Harry Winston diamond stud earrings, because after all, she is Sharon Stone.  HW finally got them back after they sued her, but she had them for a year before handing them over.



This is part of the reason I used to love seeing Elizabeth Taylor at award shows. Liz had gargantuan diamonds and other jewels that she OWNED. She didn't need anybody's loaners!


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> This part of the reason I used to love seeing Elizabeth Taylor at award shows. Liz had gargantuan diamonds and other jewels that she OWNED. She didn't need anybody's loaners!


I recall that one year Oprah Winfrey wore a Bvlgari necklace that belonged to her and not borrowed.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> I don't know who Barbara S is, but she doesn't sound happy… She makes some valid points.
> 
> View attachment 5365710
> 
> _Prince Harry and his wife announced on January 8, 2020, that they were stepping away from the Royal Family wanting to leave a ‘private life.’.._
> 
> View attachment 5365711
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It Is Time Press Did Their Job And Stop Printing Propaganda Floated About Meghan Markle And Prince Harry’s PR People | Global News Ink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> globalnewsink.com



Very interesting article, thanks for sharing it!


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> This is part of the reason I used to love seeing Elizabeth Taylor at award shows. Liz had gargantuan diamonds and other jewels that she OWNED. She didn't need anybody's loaners!



One of my earliest memories is of Liz Taylor at the Oscars wearing a giant diamond that Richard Burton had given her.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Aw no not Kanye! I have a soft spot for Kanye as he’s actually talented and he is *somewhat* justified in that a lot of people have screwed him over and talked down to him over the years whereas the others have been given everything on a platter and still turned gold to brass.
> 
> Do you remember that charlatan therapist who was on tv telling H to do ‘the mummy’  (no pun intended) or ‘the monster mash’ for his trauma - I feel like poor old Kanye must have a whole duck pond of quacks at this point. Talk about blind leading the blind.


When Kanye started posting the horrid violence filled Pete Davidson material he took a nose dive with me. He's a Dad and a role model to 4 children, who at some point in their lives, probably already with North, will see this on the Net and know their father was responsible and that it really really was upsetting to their Mother among other things. I hope he can pull himself together, change meds, schedule more therapy, whatever it takes for him to achieve some balance and hopefully harmony in his life. I wish him well, a hard working creative man with so much hurt inside.


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any bets happening on how Guru (and perhaps TW) turned down the Oscars to be in the UK tomorrow? This is going to be a major event with several photo-ops… After being turned down by Hollywood (allegedly), would they miss an opportunity to show off their ties to the several royals present at the event? 









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will not attend Prince Philip memorial
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to remain at home in Montecito, California, while the rest of the Royal Family gather in London for the poignant event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> When Kanye started posting the horrid violence filled Pete Davidson material he took a nose dive with me. He's a Dad and a role model to 4 children, who at some point in their lives, probably already with North, will see this on the Net and know their father was responsible and that it really really was upsetting to their Mother among other things. I hope he can pull himself together, change meds, schedule more therapy, whatever it takes for him to achieve some balance and hopefully harmony in his life. I wish him well, a hard working creative man with so much hurt inside.



A couple weeks ago the Grammys rescinded Kanye’s invitation to appear there to avoid having any unexpected problems next Sunday. Of all the celebrities who were at the Oscars, I doubt anyone predicted Will Smith would make a spectacle of himself.


----------



## Chanbal

Whoever made this video is expressing the opinion of many women… 


_*Meghan GETS SCOLDED MERCILESSLY in new podcast: Strong women AREN'T VICTlMS like Meg*_
_TW should speak for herself only … the antithesis of feminism 
She never achieved a thing on her own…_


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Ick.  Does this outfit remind you of anything??


Hate the Frankenstein dress/pants/gown, but at least no swathes of orange fake tan.



Chanbal said:


>



The Duke born without a soul, matched with the Duchess who sold hers.



Chanbal said:


> I don't know who Barbara S is, but she doesn't sound happy… She makes some valid points.
> 
> View attachment 5365710
> 
> _Prince Harry and his wife announced on January 8, 2020, that they were stepping away from the Royal Family wanting to leave a ‘private life.’.._
> 
> View attachment 5365711
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It Is Time Press Did Their Job And Stop Printing Propaganda Floated About Meghan Markle And Prince Harry’s PR People | Global News Ink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> globalnewsink.com


She is certainly no fan of theirs. She has written a few other articles about them and attracted some comments from the stans.

I like the description of Methane's "forgetfulness": opportunistic dementia


----------



## Hermes Zen

I’m sitting here flipping channels and up comes M as guest star on an old series titled Castle (2012).    Shes discovered unconscious in bed and sent to the hospital. She’s described as ‘exotic’. Later scene is from the hospital bed and she spoke. Her voice!!! Can’t get it out of my head!


----------



## Hermes Zen

She did it!  M lied and lied in the tv show and was busted as the killer. In acting and in real life she lies!


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Hermes Zen said:


> I’m sitting here flipping channels and up comes M as guest star on an old series titled Castle (2012).    Shes discovered unconscious in bed and sent to the hospital. She’s described as ‘exotic’. Later scene is from the hospital bed and she spoke. Her voice!!! Can’t get it out of my head!


I just watched this episode!


----------



## Hermes Zen

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I just watched this episode!



We must have been watching the same channel !!  

Did you get the chills when her face changed at the end when she was discovered to be the killer?!?  Just like in real life ... The look she gives K.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I don't know who Barbara S is, but she doesn't sound happy… She makes some valid points.
> 
> View attachment 5365710
> 
> _Prince Harry and his wife announced on January 8, 2020, that they were stepping away from the Royal Family wanting to leave a ‘private life.’.._
> 
> View attachment 5365711
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It Is Time Press Did Their Job And Stop Printing Propaganda Floated About Meghan Markle And Prince Harry’s PR People | Global News Ink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> globalnewsink.com


I do 100% agree with her. It’s definitely a vicious circle of rewarding poor behaviour. Then this thread can finally fulfil its destiny of becoming a full meme thread


Hermes Zen said:


> I’m sitting here flipping channels and up comes M as guest star on an old series titled Castle (2012).    Shes discovered unconscious in bed and sent to the hospital. She’s described as ‘exotic’. Later scene is from the hospital bed and she spoke. Her voice!!! Can’t get it out of my head!


exotic? Surely not! That’s something only the incredibly racist British media would say about her!
Cancel Castle!


rose60610 said:


> Somebody brought up this refreshing moment in history in the WSJ:
> 
> "The Oscars were politicized in 1978 when Vanessa Redgrave made a snide, uncalled for comment about about 'Zionist hoodlums'. When it was his turn up to the podium, screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky admonished her verbally:
> 
> _“I would like to say, personal opinion, of course, that I’m sick and tired of people exploiting the Academy Awards for the propagation of their own personal political propaganda. I would like to suggest to Ms. Redgrave that her winning an Academy Award is not a pivotal moment in history, does not require a proclamation, and a simple ‘thank you’ would have sufficed.”_


Oh yeah Vanessa is the definition of a champagne socialist - so grating.


purseinsanity said:


> Ick.  Does this outfit remind you of anything??


oh lord - is this Demi lovato? This outfit looks so dated- it looks like something from absolutely fabulous and not in a good way.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

Honestly, the video gives me chills.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



The Woman Who Would Be Kween


----------



## lanasyogamama

Meggy would have worn neon orange.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Meggy would have worn neon orange.




So would Harry!


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> So would Harry!


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Meggy would have worn neon orange.



Thought she would brag about her special bond with PP again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## piperdog

xincinsin said:


> Thought she would brag about her special bond with PP again.


Sadly, the day isn't over. I still think we'll hear some sort of self-serving nonsense from these two today. I hope not, but I have no faith in their ability to do the right thing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jup. Then again, it's probably for the best the drama queens refused to come.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Somebody brought up this refreshing moment in history in the WSJ:
> 
> "The Oscars were politicized in 1978 when Vanessa Redgrave made a snide, uncalled for comment about about 'Zionist hoodlums'. When it was his turn up to the podium, screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky admonished her verbally:
> 
> _“I would like to say, personal opinion, of course, that I’m sick and tired of people exploiting the Academy Awards for the propagation of their own personal political propaganda. I would like to suggest to Ms. Redgrave that her winning an Academy Award is not a pivotal moment in history, does not require a proclamation, and a simple ‘thank you’ would have sufficed.”_


It goes back further, to 1973 when Marlon Brando sent a young Native American woman to refuse his Best Actor award for The Godfather. It was unheard of and a huge shocker at the time.



>


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Meggy would have worn neon orange.



So glad the Harkles stayed away.


----------



## Chanbal

He really missed the memorial service, what a nincompoop!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. Then again, it's probably for the best the drama queens refused to come.



"....he who didn't feel safe."


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> He really missed the memorial service, what a nincompoop!



That's a more charitable description than I would give. I'm appalled. 
He knows better. He was raised better.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Whoever made this video is expressing the opinion of many women…
> 
> 
> _*Meghan GETS SCOLDED MERCILESSLY in new podcast: Strong women AREN'T VICTlMS like Meg*_
> _TW should speak for herself only … the antithesis of feminism
> She never achieved a thing on her own…_



The comments are priceless. Quite a number speculate that Meghan has never researched the history of suffragettes and therefore thinks she invented women empowerment, or that she has been hanging around men who use vulgar language to describe women or maybe just describe her.


----------



## Chanbal

Curious rumor: TW's PR machine is having her and Ginger '_this close_' to attending the Oscars since 2018 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





_The royal Oscars scoop comes to us courtesy of Lainey Lui of Lainey Gossip, who revealed on Friday that multiple sources informed her that the soon-to-be-married couple had been invited to attend the Academy Awards. Apparently, *the Oscars were quite thirsty for Markle and Prince Harry to attend in any capacity — as presenters or even just attendees — and the pair were thisclose to actually agreeing to go*._



			https://www.thecut.com/2018/03/meghan-markle-prince-harry-2018-oscars.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pathetic, indeed

*'Prince Harry should have been here to honour his grandfather': Prince Philip's ex-protection officer reveals guests at his memorial were discussing Duke's 'pathetic' absence after he stayed in LA amid row over his police escort*

*Prince Harry was the only senior member of the royal family to miss today's memorial service for Prince Philip*
*The Duke of Sussex elected to stay in Montecito with wife Meghan over a row about his security in the UK *
*However, his excuse was branded 'pathetic' by Richard Griffin, a former protection officer of Prince Philip *
*Other royal watchers also slammed Harry for being the only senior royal to miss today's poignant ceremony *









						Prince Harry is slammed for missing Prince Philip's memorial service
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remained at their $14million mansion in Montecito while the rest of the Royal Family attended the memorial for Prince Philip at Westminster Abbey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## piperdog

Happyish said:


> That's a more charitable description than I would give. I'm appalled.
> He knows better. He was raised better.


If H&M could be counted on to act appropriately, they should have come. However, given H&M's demonstrated untrustworthiness and need to make every event all about themselves, I imagine it may be a small relief to the rest of the family that they didn't come to the event. The alternative may have been for them to arrive in merched attire, mic'd up for Spotify, with a Netflix film crew in tow, and Scoobie making snide remarks about the rest of the family and mourners. Plus the risk of the event becoming fodder for 'their truth' in the next round of Oprah interviews.


----------



## Sharont2305

needlv said:


>



"I should be Queen, I should be Queen"


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Curious rumor: TW's PR machine is having her and Ginger '_this close_' to attending the Oscars since 2018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The royal Oscars scoop comes to us courtesy of Lainey Lui of Lainey Gossip, who revealed on Friday that multiple sources informed her that the soon-to-be-married couple had been invited to attend the Academy Awards. Apparently, *the Oscars were quite thirsty for Markle and Prince Harry to attend in any capacity — as presenters or even just attendees — and the pair were thisclose to actually agreeing to go*._
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thecut.com/2018/03/meghan-markle-prince-harry-2018-oscars.html


Security, blah blah blah. What b*llsh*t. They really are legends in their own mind.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


>



It's not likely she hangs out on Twitter, but I have to wonder if Kate's seen this


----------



## rose60610

On one hand we have The Queen who was a mechanic in WWII and whose family stayed in Buckingham Palace when London was being bombed.

On the other hand we have Juggling Orange Bonkers Dude who didn't attend his own grandfather's service out of "security" concerns when apparently that didn't keep away multitudes of actual Heads of State. Super Bowls and rodeos, however, are fine.  

Can we send Will Smith to Harry's house to punch him in the throat?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> It goes back further, to 1973 when Marlon Brando sent a young Native American woman to refuse his Best Actor award for The Godfather. It was unheard of and a huge shocker at the time.


Wow the spokeswoman, Sacheen Littlefeather, is absolutely stunning.
I mean, I can see how it started a slippery slope of every celeb wanting to make the biggest scene at the ceremony but I will give him the credit that he actually *refused* the award and she delivered the speech later rather than the current norm of taking the reward and THEN dragging the ceremony to a grinding halt while pontificating.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> He was raised better.


One would think so, but maybe not. I really believe she has given him an ultimatum, it's them or me. He may live to regret his choice, or he may go off into the CA sunset with her and live happily ever after like his great great uncle did. Only time will tell.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> The comments are priceless. Quite a number speculate that Meghan has never researched the history of suffragettes and therefore thinks she invented women empowerment, or that she has been hanging around men who use vulgar language to describe women or maybe just describe her.


I think it’s just a desperate race to the bottom with her tbh- the producers must’ve met with her to plan this podcast and it became increasingly  obvious she has no talents, no interests, no knowledge of wisdom and in the eleventh hour they grasped at the straws…
M- “well I’m a woman so surely I know something about women’s studies.”
Producer (lighting up cigarette and downing last of vodka) “sure, sure let’s go with that…what could go wrong!”




rose60610 said:


> On one hand we have The Queen who was a mechanic in WWII and whose family stayed in Buckingham Palace when London was being bombed.
> 
> On the other hand we have Juggling Orange Bonkers Dude who didn't attend his own grandfather's service out of "security" concerns when apparently that didn't keep away multitudes of actual Heads of State. Super Bowls and rodeos, however, are fine.
> 
> Can we send Will Smith to Harry's house to punch him in the throat?


I’ve always said they should try for one of those ‘can do spirit’ photo ops like the queen on the truck and try and get Megs to Inject her own fillers - a practical skill she can use everyday at last


personally I think Tyson Fury is the man for that job. Following the idea to its logical conclusion it is going to take some serious haymakers to slap some sense into that dense a head.


----------



## Sharont2305

All those Kings and Queens, Princes and Princesses, Dukes and Duchesses and other nobility and it all went smoothly security wise (I assume)


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> All those Kings and Queens, Princes and Princesses, Dukes and Duchesses and other nobility and it all went smoothly security wise (I assume)


I hope he's sitting alone and feeling like a sh*t right now in his tacky mansion. Is she really worth it Hazy?


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> One would think so, but maybe not. I really believe she has given him an ultimatum, it's them or me. He may live to regret his choice, or he may go off into the CA sunset with her and live happily ever after like his great great uncle did. Only time will tell.



The Duke of Windsor didn’t have a happy second in his life after he lost the throne


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> All those Kings and Queens, Princes and Princesses, Dukes and Duchesses and other nobility and it all went smoothly security wise (I assume)



Even Andrew behaved acting as much needed support to his beloved mother


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> The Duke of Windsor didn’t have a happy second in his life after he lost the throne


But he sure put on a good act.


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> But he sure put on a good act.


No doubt because he was told to, just like Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Pathetic, indeed
> 
> *'Prince Harry should have been here to honour his grandfather': Prince Philip's ex-protection officer reveals guests at his memorial were discussing Duke's 'pathetic' absence after he stayed in LA amid row over his police escort*
> 
> *Prince Harry was the only senior member of the royal family to miss today's memorial service for Prince Philip*
> *The Duke of Sussex elected to stay in Montecito with wife Meghan over a row about his security in the UK *
> *However, his excuse was branded 'pathetic' by Richard Griffin, a former protection officer of Prince Philip *
> *Other royal watchers also slammed Harry for being the only senior royal to miss today's poignant ceremony *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is slammed for missing Prince Philip's memorial service
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remained at their $14million mansion in Montecito while the rest of the Royal Family attended the memorial for Prince Philip at Westminster Abbey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Did y'all see that basically every reigning monarch of Europe arrived in a huge bus together? They apparently didn't fear for their life.


----------



## csshopper

Haz, you really really do make dumb decisions. 

1. In the past week your already sagging life has headed further south. An international audience viewed your frail grandmother quietly shedding tears for her beloved Duke. She, it has been reported, made a herculean effort to be there, with a decision made only hours in advance. Your absence and that of TW had no bearing on the service. It was as planned, a remembrance of a remarkable man, and they did not need you there to make it any better. Your irrelevance was on full display. From this day forward it will always be a footnote to what is written about you and it will not be a positive tone.

2. On the broader scale, you and TW trumpeted you were going to "modernize the Monarchy" and trotted off to eventually California to sit on a hill and begin your pronouncements from on high to the world about how to live life as you decree. You set yourself up for a dodgy Foundation that deals in word salads to "put _compassion into action_, _uplifting and uniting_ communities locally and globally."  Yakity Yakity Yak. No compassion from the leadership, today's absence in London, being the latest example. And, if rumors are true about your meddling in the recent Caribbean tour, no "uplifting and uniting."

3. Meantime, your brother, the future King accompanied by his glowing teammate, is out in the Commonwealth, sometimes feet to fire, learning and reflecting on what he is seeing and experiencing.  He has a view you will never have as long as you are stuck in the Montecito chicken coop whining and sucking your thumb because the world did not fall prostrate at your feet as "the spare." Unfortunately for you, your brother is a man who can facilitate change, has already begun the dialog, and will seek to achieve it by "not telling people what to do." Once upon a time you could have been a part of this endeavor. But you were bamboozled by a skilled narcissist who peed in the woods and cast a spell on you.

4. Maybe most immediately relevant to you and TW, your brother has made it clear that "never complain, never explain" will no longer be the automatic response to what is reported in the news. William is ready to take it on. He will surely be reading your book to see how your "truth" relates to real truths. Especially in the parts TW probably wrote for you. 

In much of the world you are even less popular today than you were yesterday. And I think, I hope, it's to the level that no "award" Sunshine Sucks buys for you will make a whit of difference. You may get a slight tick up the scale with Invictus Games, but even there, members of the military may not embrace you as they have previously, before you dissed your Grandfather, who lived his life a proud Naval Officer. 

What excuse will you and TW generate when it's your Gran's funeral?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

csshopper said:


> Haz, you really really do make dumb decisions.
> 
> 1. In the past week your already sagging life has headed further south. An international audience viewed your frail grandmother quietly shedding tears for her beloved Duke. She, it has been reported, made a herculean effort to be there, with a decision made only hours in advance. Your absence and that of TW had no bearing on the service. It was as planned, a remembrance of a remarkable man, and they did not need you there to make it any better. Your irrelevance was on full display. From this day forward it will always be a footnote to what is written about you and it will not be a positive tone.
> 
> 2. On the broader scale, you and TW trumpeted you were going to "modernize the Monarchy" and trotted off to eventually California to sit on a hill and begin your pronouncements from on high to the world about how to live life as you decree. You set yourself up for a dodgy Foundation that deals in word salads to "put _compassion into action_, _uplifting and uniting_ communities locally and globally."  Yakity Yakity Yak. No compassion from the leadership, today's absence in London, being the latest example. And, if rumors are true about your meddling in the recent Caribbean tour, no "uplifting and uniting."
> 
> 3. Meantime, your brother, the future King accompanied by his glowing teammate, is out in the Commonwealth, sometimes feet to fire, learning and reflecting on what he is seeing and experiencing.  He has a view you will never have as long as you are stuck in the Montecito chicken coop whining and sucking your thumb because the world did not fall prostrate at your feet as "the spare." Unfortunately for you, your brother is a man who can facilitate change, has already begun the dialog, and will seek to achieve it by "not telling people what to do." Once upon a time you could have been a part of this endeavor. But you were bamboozled by a skilled narcissist who peed in the woods and cast a spell on you.
> 
> 4. Maybe most immediately relevant to you and TW, your brother has made it clear that "never complain, never explain" will no longer be the automatic response to what is reported in the news. William is ready to take it on. He will surely be reading your book to see how your "truth" relates to real truths. Especially in the parts TW probably wrote for you.
> 
> In much of the world you are even less popular today than you were yesterday. And I think, I hope, it's to the level that no "award" Sunshine Sucks buys for you will make a whit of difference. You may get a slight tick up the scale with Invictus Games, but even there, members of the military may not embrace you as they have previously, before you dissed your Grandfather, who lived his life a proud Naval Officer.
> 
> What excuse will you and TW generate when it's your Gran's funeral?


Well said.  You have written a precise, rational, realistic commentary of the poor and disrespectful behavior of this shameful pair in all its manifestations.  One hopes they will forever be simply a footnote, and a short one at that.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Whoever made this video is expressing the opinion of many women…
> 
> 
> _*Meghan GETS SCOLDED MERCILESSLY in new podcast: Strong women AREN'T VICTlMS like Meg*_
> _TW should speak for herself only … the antithesis of feminism
> She never achieved a thing on her own…_



I cannot LIKE/LOVE this enough!!!!!  I'm a pretty darn strong woman who never had an issue with voicing an opinion (based on facts & figures) to the many egotistical men I had to work with in Financial Services.  I reached the Executive level because of my hard work, my knowledge, my ideas, and solutions (my best asset IMO) .. sure as hell NOT via being a victim!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> 1. In the past week your already sagging life has headed further south. An international audience viewed your frail grandmother quietly shedding tears for her beloved Duke. She, it has been reported, made a herculean effort to be there, with a decision made only hours in advance. Your absence and that of TW had no bearing on the service. It was as planned, a remembrance of a remarkable man, and they did not need you there to make it any better. Your irrelevance was on full display. From this day forward it will always be a footnote to what is written about you and it will not be a positive tone.



Every. Single. Word. Of. This.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> One would think so, but maybe not. I really believe she has given him an ultimatum, it's them or me. He may live to regret his choice, or he may go off into the CA sunset with her and live happily ever after like his great great uncle did. Only time will tell.


I think you're right. I wish he could stand up for himself. This is so destructive and he has no one to blame but himself.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Meggy would have worn neon orange.



Was Randy Andy there?  Didn't see him in the photos, just the girls.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He is in the front row on the right.  Ready to assist if need, still ostracized from his siblings. Edward is, too.   Talk about terrible optics.
ETA: I guess they seated the siblings according to birth order, so it looks ok. 















						Prince Charles and Camilla arrive for Prince Philip's memorial
					

Her Majesty became emotional in Westminster Abbey - where she married Prince Philip in November 1947 - having personally ensured her beloved husband's final wishes were fulfilled.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am not mad at Andrew being there. He is a pig, but that's his father, and his frail, 96yo mother chose him to ride the car with her and escort her in. 

Does anyone know if some of the German relatives attended?


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Haz, you really really do make dumb decisions.
> 
> 1. In the past week your already sagging life has headed further south. An international audience viewed your frail grandmother quietly shedding tears for her beloved Duke. She, it has been reported, made a herculean effort to be there, with a decision made only hours in advance. Your absence and that of TW had no bearing on the service. It was as planned, a remembrance of a remarkable man, and they did not need you there to make it any better. Your irrelevance was on full display. From this day forward it will always be a footnote to what is written about you and it will not be a positive tone.
> 
> 2. On the broader scale, you and TW trumpeted you were going to "modernize the Monarchy" and trotted off to eventually California to sit on a hill and begin your pronouncements from on high to the world about how to live life as you decree. You set yourself up for a dodgy Foundation that deals in word salads to "put _compassion into action_, _uplifting and uniting_ communities locally and globally."  Yakity Yakity Yak. No compassion from the leadership, today's absence in London, being the latest example. And, if rumors are true about your meddling in the recent Caribbean tour, no "uplifting and uniting."
> 
> 3. Meantime, your brother, the future King accompanied by his glowing teammate, is out in the Commonwealth, sometimes feet to fire, learning and reflecting on what he is seeing and experiencing.  He has a view you will never have as long as you are stuck in the Montecito chicken coop whining and sucking your thumb because the world did not fall prostrate at your feet as "the spare." Unfortunately for you, your brother is a man who can facilitate change, has already begun the dialog, and will seek to achieve it by "not telling people what to do." Once upon a time you could have been a part of this endeavor. But you were bamboozled by a skilled narcissist who peed in the woods and cast a spell on you.
> 
> 4. Maybe most immediately relevant to you and TW, your brother has made it clear that "never complain, never explain" will no longer be the automatic response to what is reported in the news. William is ready to take it on. He will surely be reading your book to see how your "truth" relates to real truths. Especially in the parts TW probably wrote for you.
> 
> In much of the world you are even less popular today than you were yesterday. And I think, I hope, it's to the level that no "award" Sunshine Sucks buys for you will make a whit of difference. You may get a slight tick up the scale with Invictus Games, but even there, members of the military may not embrace you as they have previously, before you dissed your Grandfather, who lived his life a proud Naval Officer.
> 
> What excuse will you and TW generate when it's your Gran's funeral?


You NAILED it all, but sadly .. I truly believe he is pretty much exactly like the Duke of Windsor .. a total chump who has gotten mixed up with a demanding narcissist who is just going to beat him up every day!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

I just wish the commentators would stop trying to lift Andrew up by comparison. No he doesn’t get better because Harry is getting worse. They are both contemptible on their own account.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the Nefl*xes' allegedly agent was ignored…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, it could be harmless, but it does look like Anne is snubbing her and Eugenie is well aware.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not mad at Andrew being there. He is a pig, but that's his father, and his frail, 96yo mother chose him to ride the car with her and escort her in.
> 
> Does anyone know if some of the German relatives attended?


Yes, quite a few of Phillips family from Greece and Germany attended ..


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, it could be harmless, but it does look like Anne is snubbing her and Eugenie is well aware.


It looked very intentional to me.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CeeJay said:


> You NAILED it all, but sadly .. I truly believe he is pretty much exactly like the Duke of Windsor .. a total chump who has gotten mixed up with a demanding narcissist who is just going to beat him up every day!!!



I HOPE H gets BEAT UP everyday by TW!!  He deserves it!  That IDIOT!!!


----------



## mikimoto007

charlottawill said:


> It looked very intentional to me.



I don't see it, Tim turns around to talk to Eugenie and Anne realises that the Bishop is free to shake hands with her and surges forward.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Hermes Zen said:


> We must have been watching the same channel !!
> 
> Did you get the chills when her face changed at the end when she was discovered to be the killer?!?  Just like in real life ... The look she gives K.


I think we were! The look she gives and then mad at herself because she got caught from the bows!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Interview with Prince Phillip's former protection officer, Richard Griffin, who comments on Prince Phillip's life of service and about JCMH's inappropriate conduct vis-à-vis missing the Thanksgiving Service.



PS: Vid also posted in Prince Phillip's thread.


----------



## CeeJay

I wonder how Haz-been will be "received" when he goes to the Invictus Games???  There will be a lot of vets from the UK (in general) .. and given the fact that he abandoned them for a bit and now, with not even having the decency to show up at Phillip's service?!?!  I hope they BOOOOOOOOOOOO him big-time!!!  He needs to get a piece of his own medicine!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Interview with Prince Phillip's former protection officer, Richard Griffin, who comments on Prince Phillip's life of service and about JCMH's inappropriate conduct vis-à-vis missing the Thanksgiving Service.
> 
> 
> 
> PS: Vid also posted in Prince Phillip's thread.



What a nice man and wonderful interview.  Loved the bit about the tie being designed by PP.


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> I wonder how Haz-been will be "received" when he goes to the Invictus Games???  There will be a lot of vets from the UK (in general) .. and given the fact that he abandoned them for a bit and now, with not even having the decency to show up at Phillip's service?!?!  I hope they BOOOOOOOOOOOO him big-time!!!  He needs to get a piece of his own medicine!


I hope they hiss and boo!


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is in the front row on the right.  Ready to assist if need, still ostracized from his siblings. Edward is, too.   Talk about terrible optics.
> ETA: I guess they seated the siblings according to birth order, so it looks ok.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5366820
> 
> 
> View attachment 5366823
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles and Camilla arrive for Prince Philip's memorial
> 
> 
> Her Majesty became emotional in Westminster Abbey - where she married Prince Philip in November 1947 - having personally ensured her beloved husband's final wishes were fulfilled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thanks! Interesting line up.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I think it’s just a desperate race to the bottom with her tbh- the producers must’ve met with her to plan this podcast and it became increasingly  obvious she has no talents, no interests, no knowledge of wisdom and in the eleventh hour they grasped at the straws…
> M- “well I’m a woman so surely I know something about women’s studies.”
> Producer (lighting up cigarette and downing last of vodka) “sure, sure let’s go with that…what could go wrong!”


If it's true that she sticks her hand in every project and tries to make it about herself, then hopefully no matter how many production experts they hire, her utter lack of talent is going to show. Shall we look at all the derivatives and alternatives for Rachel and Meghan to see how she will transparently name every protaganist after herself?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Around the 14:00 min mark, we see the buses/coaches arriving. Looks like they held quite a few important kings, queens, dignitaries, relatives, etc.  Love love King and Queen of Spain.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> One would think so, but maybe not. I really believe she has given him an ultimatum, it's them or me. He may live to regret his choice, or he may go off into the CA sunset with her and live happily ever after like his great great uncle did. Only time will tell.



H better not wish for a life like his great-uncle’s.  The Duke was miserable at being cut off from his family and England.  He so wanted some sort of role, but the Queen Mother (the Queen then) hated him with a passion and he was allowed back on British soil only a handful of times.  They had a lovely home in France, but it was just the 2 of them and some pugs rattling around in it.  I had the impression that they saw pretty much the same group of friends - often for cards and small parties.  This group of friends referred to them both as HRH.

Always struck me as rather pathetic, not really being in the real world anymore.


----------



## needlv

Blind gossip website is saying Megsy is going to pull another PR stunt…









						Family Stunt Is Being Planned - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] You may have noticed that for the past few years, this actress has presented excuse after excuse as to why she can’t travel. It’s not that she can’t travel. She can. And she does. A lot. She has moved several times, including between countries. She has no problem hopping on a...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any guesses? 










						Family Stunt Is Being Planned - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] You may have noticed that for the past few years, this actress has presented excuse after excuse as to why she can’t travel. It’s not that she can’t travel. She can. And she does. A lot. She has moved several times, including between countries. She has no problem hopping on a...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## kipp

needlv said:


> Blind gossip website is saying Megsy is going to pull another PR stunt…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Family Stunt Is Being Planned - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] You may have noticed that for the past few years, this actress has presented excuse after excuse as to why she can’t travel. It’s not that she can’t travel. She can. And she does. A lot. She has moved several times, including between countries. She has no problem hopping on a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



Who needed a crystal ball for this revelation?  Of course she is going to pull another PR stunt.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Around the 14:00 min mark, we see the buses/coaches arriving. Looks like they held quite a few important kings, queens, dignitaries, relatives, etc.  Love love King and Queen of Spain.



I was trying to imagine Meghan getting off that bus along with sitting Kings and Queens.  Nope.  She would never. lolololol!


----------



## Chanbal

_Samantha went on to add that it was "mind-boggling" that Harry would say security issues are preventing him from attending, given the family will have members of their own security, as well as that of the European royals.

The former actress went on to say: "Especially now for this memorial and after everything that transpired and Prince Philip seemed to have a rough time in his last days watching the Royal Family being attacked by Meghan and Harry.

"Maybe Harry feels bad about that but it seems the least he could do would be to show up, pay respect and try to if he and Meghan are humanitarians, to show up humbly and pay respects and show some remorse at a minimum.

"Not to mention the fact, Prince Philip was his grandfather but Harry has been in service, *Prince Philip served in World War Two, not only to honour him as his grandfather but also a military figure, who is noted for great service is highly disrespectful*._


----------



## CarryOn2020

7 monarchs! from far and wide - gotta love how they support each other


----------



## CarryOn2020

And all the ladies followed the rules - I believe this is called *respect. 

*


----------



## Chanbal

Scoobie-Doo, TW's minister of propaganda!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie-Doo, TW's minister of propaganda!




Is this the equivalent of a “royal slap”?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this the equivalent of a “royal slap”?



I think his race baiting during the Cambridges tour did not go unnoticed and now he will get called out by the other reporters a lot…


----------



## Chanbal

*Harry Just Put The FINAL Nail in HIS OWN Coffin*


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

H & M? Totally unmarketable to the public, as they have proved to be uninteresting, without any moral character or income AFTER YEARS OF PUSHING THEMSELVES IN OUR FACE.

Who cares, I don't, dear. 
So keep flashing those chicken cutlets in that green cape dress from 5-years ago to remind us exactly who you are, err who you or aren't. aka Kate;


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie-Doo, TW's minister of propaganda!




Scoobie Do is so ridiculous!  Trying to find just one other person who may have behaved more badly than H.  Nice try - glad to see the other fellow speak up.  All of the things I read/listened to said the same thing, the Queen insisted on having Andrew escort her.  I think it worked out perfectly.  She did need to have someone to support her when she walked and having him with her meant that he wasn’t loitering around either before or after the service.  Slip in and out virtually unnoticed.  It also meant that he took her back to Windsor Castle and did not attend the numerous receptions going on.  I find Andrew despicable, but I do think he had the right to be at his father’s service.

And now, Andrew, farewell.  No need for you to appear again in public.  Ever.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie-Doo, TW's minister of propaganda!




Minister of Propaganda!!


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> So would Harry!


Sure,y H&M have a PR firm that should have told them Harry could not miss this tribute? IMO this almost has nothing to do with his cutting ties or his marriage
the security issue seems so thin


----------



## rose60610

In the Oprah interview, M&H accused the BRF of being racist. They didn't say exactly WHO said something racist and the only person they ruled OUT was The Queen. I have to wonder if Harry was ordered to stay away since he didn't rule out his own grandfather.  Why tolerate the ginger bastard if he insinuated that Philip could have been the racist source? Maybe THAT'S why we got the idiotic "security issue" excuse and not the "stay away you lying bastard" REAL excuse....


----------



## needlv

880 said:


> Sure,y H&M have a PR firm that should have told them Harry could not miss this tribute? IMO this almost has nothing to do with his cutting ties or his marriage
> the security issue seems so thin



Agreed. Harry is going to look stupid for any time he _needs_ to go back to the UK, eg if they are invited to the jubilee (don’t know if they will be), and any future funerals or coronations.  He has said he doesn’t feel safe without security, got told no, so now he is stuck.  He will have to either backtrack from his claims about feeling unsafe or stay out of the UK.

It was a stupid move.


----------



## Chanbal

This seems to reflect public opinion… 


_Prince Harry 'INSULTS' the Queen | Sunrise Royal News_


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Agreed. Harry is going to look stupid for any time he _needs_ to go back to the UK, eg if they are invited to the jubilee (don’t know if they will be), and any future funerals or coronations.  He has said he doesn’t feel safe without security, got told no, so now he is stuck.  He will have to either backtrack from his claims about feeling unsafe or stay out of the UK.
> 
> It was a stupid move.



I closely watched the video of the *7* monarchs walking into the service, actually watched several times, diligently studied their body language. Not one king or queen showed any _fear_ or concern of something awful happening to them. Not one.  None of the royals or friends showed any concern either. None.  All had relaxed and calm body language. Ymmv.

Maybe Hazzie didn’t warn them of the dangers?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> In the Oprah interview, M&H accused the BRF of being racist. They didn't say exactly WHO said something racist and the only person they ruled OUT was The Queen. I have to wonder if Harry was ordered to stay away since he didn't rule out his own grandfather.  Why tolerate the ginger bastard if he insinuated that *Philip could have been the racist source?* Maybe THAT'S why we got the idiotic "security issue" excuse and not the "stay away you lying bastard" REAL excuse....


As far as I recall, Ginger put out a statement via GK clarifying that neither QE nor PP asked about the color of a potential baby. In any event, I do not believe on that story, and his book is likely full of falsehoods.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I’m sitting here flipping channels and up comes M as guest star on an old series titled Castle (2012).    Shes discovered unconscious in bed and sent to the hospital. She’s described as ‘exotic’. *Later scene is from the hospital bed and she spoke*. Her voice!!! Can’t get it out of my head!


She found her voice?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> The comments are priceless. Quite a number speculate that Meghan has never researched the history of suffragettes and therefore thinks she invented women empowerment, or that she has been hanging around men who use vulgar language to describe women or maybe just describe her.


My 16 year old daughter just wrote a rather long essay on the women's rights movements in the 1910s/1920s.  Megain could learn a lot from reading it.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Pathetic, indeed
> 
> *'Prince Harry should have been here to honour his grandfather': Prince Philip's ex-protection officer reveals guests at his memorial were discussing Duke's 'pathetic' absence after he stayed in LA amid row over his police escort*
> 
> *Prince Harry was the only senior member of the royal family to miss today's memorial service for Prince Philip*
> *The Duke of Sussex elected to stay in Montecito with wife Meghan over a row about his security in the UK *
> *However, his excuse was branded 'pathetic' by Richard Griffin, a former protection officer of Prince Philip *
> *Other royal watchers also slammed Harry for being the only senior royal to miss today's poignant ceremony *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is slammed for missing Prince Philip's memorial service
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remained at their $14million mansion in Montecito while the rest of the Royal Family attended the memorial for Prince Philip at Westminster Abbey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Thus, yet another reason why he shouldn't be a "senior member" of the royal family!
(Think TW is pi$$ed she's no longer even mentioned as a "senior member"?  )


----------



## Vintage Leather

rose60610 said:


> In the Oprah interview, M&H accused the BRF of being racist. They didn't say exactly WHO said something racist and the only person they ruled OUT was The Queen. I have to wonder if Harry was ordered to stay away since he didn't rule out his own grandfather.  Why tolerate the ginger bastard if he insinuated that Philip could have been the racist source? Maybe THAT'S why we got the idiotic "security issue" excuse and not the "stay away you lying bastard" REAL excuse....



Prince Philip said many deplorably racist things in the past. He might have said something to Harry or Meghan that we’d be appalled by 

Megan, who lived as a white woman for most of her life, was likely appalled at her first experience of the micro aggressions and racism that WoC face all the time.

Prince Phillip was a brave and steadfast man, with excellent taste and an ability to care about people that was remarkable. But he didn’t easily shed the affectations and “humor” that was typical of his class in his youth. He was better over the last ten years than he had been previously. But I wouldn’t rule out that he said something awful.

But expecting a 90 year old man to change his ways is like expecting the Thames to run with potable water. It might happen, but I’m not setting up a bottling plant any time soon.

All of this is a long winded way of saying, “maybe he did. But she knew it would happen going in.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Angela is not that sharp today.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 7 monarchs! from far and wide - gotta love how they support each other




And Norway would have attended as well had the king not come down with Covid only a few weeks ago and is still not fully restored.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angela is not that sharp today.



OT but Burnside is truly a legendary Twitter guy and that’s another great post.


Vintage Leather said:


> Prince Philip said many deplorably racist things in the past. He might have said something to Harry or Meghan that we’d be appalled by
> 
> Megan, who lived as a white woman for most of her life, was likely appalled at her first experience of the micro aggressions and racism that WoC face all the time.
> 
> Prince Phillip was a brave and steadfast man, with excellent taste and an ability to care about people that was remarkable. But he didn’t easily shed the affectations and “humor” that was typical of his class in his youth. He was better over the last ten years than he had been previously. But I wouldn’t rule out that he said something awful.
> 
> But expecting a 90 year old man to change his ways is like expecting the Thames to run with potable water. It might happen, but I’m not setting up a bottling plant any time soon.
> 
> All of this is a long winded way of saying, “maybe he did. But she knew it would happen going in.”


I used to think this but now I’m inclined to think the whole story, as we heard it, was a lie because the truth wouldn’t sell their interview to Oprah or the wider American zeitgeist of the time. 

The first reason is why deny it was Philip when he was the most obvious suspect given his previous? Optics wise it’s the perfect dichotomy of this racist dinosaur patriarch trying to undermine the biracial liberal girl. His death would also be a clear break for them to bury the story and move on selling themselves as ‘the future.’ They clearly didn’t lie about it over some loyalty to his memory.

second is that the royals are not normal people who speak their minds. They have a whole team of advisors and PR department working on their involvement in a self- perpetuating publicity cycle. I think this has definitely increased since the Dawn of social media. Philip had indeed made an effort to change how he was perceived and I don’t see him doing such an obvious gaffe as harpooning the big PR campaign of H&M’s ‘groundbreaking marriage’.

I think the reality is that M’s race was important in that she was the object of positive discrimination and the royals and their PR team were all patting themselves on the back for being so modern and progressive and it was clear this was going to be a big part of her PR presentation. It has been stated repeatedly at this point both that  their marriage was rushed into without the regular screening, there was enormous emphasis on making it equal to Will’s marriag. To be clear, I do feel this is cynical and exploitative and wrong, but I would add that this is not something M herself shied away from before or since or, Arguably, is it separable  from the dominance of identity politics in western culture in general.

Long story  short - I think they cooked up some vague allegations they couldn’t keep straight and certainly never backed up with a concrete name or proof because they realised _‘those in power wanted to co-opt my image as a ‘biracial feminist actress’ and sell it back to the public for their own gains’_ was not a sellable scandal in showbiz but ‘_mysterious X is racist!’_ is.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I closely watched the video of the *7* monarchs walking into the service, actually watched several times, diligently studied their body language. Not one king or queen showed any _fear_ or concern of something awful happening to them. Not one.  None of the royals or friends showed any concern either. None.  All had relaxed and calm body language. Ymmv.
> 
> Maybe Hazzie didn’t warn them of the dangers?


None of them were in direct line of succession to QE2's throne as well as married to a spectacularly beautiful and exotic woman (sarcasm....) The Ginger Brat has specific fears and paranoia.... 

He has talked his way into a hole now, and there is no rope ladder to be had that he would not look foolish using. Just imagine having to issue a press statement saying that it is not dangerous for him, he can come to the UK and he can deal with hordes of paparazzi, but it is too dangerous for him to bring his family. The hair-splitting will be


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> My 16 year old daughter just wrote a rather long essay on the women's rights movements in the 1910s/1920s.  Megain could learn a lot from reading it.


That P&G letter she wrote yonks ago is still bubbling in her brain.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angela is not that sharp today.



It's a fake, because her real message would read, "In loving memory of the Duchess of Sussex's Granddaddy in-Law 1921-2021" to tug at everyone's heartstrings.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angela is not that sharp today.



What am I missing here? This must be a joke, I need coffee.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> What am I missing here? This must be a joke, I need coffee.


I had to read it twice - and that was after a cup of coffee!  Very tongue in cheek.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What am I missing here? This must be a joke, I need coffee.



As always, it is all about her  and her word salad


----------



## Chanbal

This is so cute! It's about the TW's in laws…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> What am I missing here? This must be a joke, I need coffee.



It is a joke, but Angela thought it was real. And by the time she was told it had already gotten a bit of traction.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I was trying to imagine Meghan getting off that bus along with sitting Kings and Queens.  Nope.  She would never. lolololol!


Can't you just hear her complaining that she was told to move to the back of the bus and comparing herself to Rosa Parks?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> What a nice man and wonderful interview.  Loved the bit about the tie being designed by PP.


I think many people only know of Prince Philip's verbal gaffes. It was nice to hear someone who knew him well speak of his good qualities. He seemed to be struggling a bit to hold his emotions in check. Re the reporter's question, I would imagine that the next time he sees the RF will be at the Queen's funeral, but of course he couldn't say that. Let's hope he doesn't see them again any time soon.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Agreed. Harry is going to look stupid for any time he _needs_ to go back to the UK, eg if they are invited to the jubilee (don’t know if they will be), and any future funerals or coronations.  He has said he doesn’t feel safe without security, got told no, so now he is stuck.  He will have to either backtrack from his claims about feeling unsafe or stay out of the UK.
> 
> It was a stupid move.


He has made himself persona non grata to most of the RF and much of the public. I have a feeling it could be a very long time before he sets foot in England again.


----------



## charlottawill

This is a lovely picture of the Queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> I wonder how Haz-been will be "received" when he goes to the Invictus Games???  There will be a lot of vets from the UK (in general) .. and given the fact that he abandoned them for a bit and now, with not even having the decency to show up at Phillip's service?!?!  I hope they BOOOOOOOOOOOO him big-time!!!  He needs to get a piece of his own medicine!


The Games are in the Hague, surely King Willem Alexander & Maxima will attend ... they attended Philip's service along with King & Queen of Spain ... gonna be awkward ... but JCMH can hide behind the NETFLIX cams


----------



## csshopper

LONDON: March 29, 2020

*Busloads of Royalty and their families: Kings, Queens, Princes, Princesses, Nobility of other Ranks traveled to the Remembrance Service - None were hijacked in transit to or from the Abby. No Highwaymen accosted them as they disembarked at various destinations throughout the day. No watches or jewelry or handbags appeared to be at risk.

*An estimated 1800 people of all ages and all walks of life gathered under one roof in Westminster Abby - None were struck by sniper fire, none were evacuated due to a bomb threat, there were no incidents of arson.

*The entire Succession List for the British Monarchy, absent #6, were observed in clear view in multiple locations outside the Abby - None were threatened by violence, none were harmed or maimed.

* Grandchildren and Great Grandchildren attended the Service - None were kidnapped and whisked away to be held for ransom.

*None of the guests appeared to be "packing", no bulges in clothing indicating a concealed weapon for personal use in case of assault.

*Crowds behind barriers were not unruly, there were no mob scenes to disrupt the peace.

*There were no reports of sexual assaults.

*There may have been incidents of intoxication, but if so, they were discreet.

Begs the Question: Haz, WTF is your problem? ? ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Begs the Question: Haz, WTF is your problem? ? ?



Raptor is his problem. I don't deny the man's been troubled his whole life, but his handlers, well, handled him. With her, he's not only out of control (ETA: I correct myself. She controls him, but she has no interest in making him appear sane), he's also spiralling downwards.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Raptor is his problem. I don't deny the man's been troubled his whole life, but his handlers, well, handled him. With her, he's not only out of control (ETA: I correct myself. She controls him, but she has no interest in making him appear sane), he's also spiralling downwards.


This is all about his being treated equal to William and nothing more.  His feeling is that stepping way aka dumping your responsibilities and working,  has nothing to do with his standing/position and he should still receive the same treatment as if he was working and present.  The reality is that if he had wanted to "step back" and remain in England, it is very possible that he still would not receive the amount of security he thinks he warrants.  There is a big difference between what you NEED and  what you think you WARRANT.  It all boils down to ego.  Ego has brought down governments (hello Vlad P!) started wars (X2 Vlad P) and ruined lives.  Apparently Meghan's ego was big enough to think she could remodel the monarchy and get her way to do what she wanted to do, so she and Harry are a perfect pair and deserve each other.  Sometimes opposites attract and like minded repel, so we will see what shakes out with these two.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> That P&G letter she wrote yonks ago is still bubbling in her brain.


Mine just wrote it for her history class, not to send to Time Magazine for hopes in marrying a useless, spineless, backstabbing Ginger wuss in the future


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> In the Oprah interview, M&H accused the BRF of being racist. They didn't say exactly WHO said something racist and the only person they ruled OUT was The Queen. I have to wonder if Harry was ordered to stay away since he didn't rule out his own grandfather.  Why tolerate the ginger bastard if he insinuated that Philip could have been the racist source? Maybe THAT'S why we got the idiotic "security issue" excuse and not the "stay away you lying bastard" REAL excuse....


.. and yet, there was also a story out there about the "person" who inquired about the baby's skin color was, in fact, Harry himself!!!  Apparently, he was so chuffed about marrying a WOC .. and when Meghan became pregnant, he was the one who thought it would be 'SO COOL' if the baby was not white!!  Honestly, I kinda believe this 'tale' ..


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Raptor is his problem. I don't deny the man's been troubled his whole life, but his handlers, well, handled him. With her, he's not only out of control (ETA: I correct myself. She controls him, but she has no interest in making him appear sane), he's also spiralling downwards.


Sadly this makes me think of special needs children who can be handled at home up to a certain age and then when older, the parents can't cope with them anymore.  Harry was managed well and with the right wife.....you all know the end of this sentence as well as I do.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> This is all about his being treated equal to William and nothing more.



Which is such a silly thought. He was never going to be equal to his brother the heir apparent, and he knew that from early childhood. So what's his freaking deal?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> My 16 year old daughter just wrote a rather long essay on the women's rights movements in the 1910s/1920s.  Megain could learn a lot from reading it.


I bet Migraine never read or heard about the Pankhurst women and the suffragette movement in England.  She was hardly a trailblazer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> This is all about his being treated equal to William and nothing more.  His feeling is that stepping way aka dumping your responsibilities and working,  has nothing to do with his standing/position and he should still receive the same treatment as if he was working and present.  The reality is that if he had wanted to "step back" and remain in England, it is very possible that he still would not receive the amount of security he thinks he warrants.  There is a big difference between what you NEED and  what you think you WARRANT.  It all boils down to ego.  Ego has brought down governments (hello Vlad P!) started wars (X2 Vlad P) and ruined lives.  Apparently Meghan's ego was big enough to think she could remodel the monarchy and get her way to do what she wanted to do, so she and Harry are a perfect pair and deserve each other.  Sometimes opposites attract and like minded repel, so we will see what shakes out with these two.



This is the same ego that Andy suffers from. Supposedly the _senior_ royals thought he would not escort QE down the aisle, just ride with her in the car.  Someone needs to send a memo to these senior royals that they cannot just assume these 2nd-borns will do what is in the family’s best interest. The plan needs to be in writing, signed by one and all. If QE overruled the plan, these _senior_ royals have a much bigger problem.  Give these ego-driven twerps an inch, they will take a mile.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I bet Migraine never read or heard about the Pankhurst women and the suffragette movement in England.  She was hardly a trailblazer.


HA .. well, remember .. even though she "majored" in International Studies (along with Drama - which she has PLENTY of), she didn't know that much about England or the Royal Family!!!!!  I'm starting to wonder if she used the Peanut Butter method (spreads easily) in university since she sure as heck seems to be as sharp as a SPOON (amazingly dumb)!!!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which is such a silly thought. He was never going to be equal to his brother the heir apparent, and he knew that from early childhood. So what's his freaking deal?


That is the million dollar question in my mind.  Who ever instilled the idea that they could be equal at the end of the day?  I understand that you don't want a child to feel second best, but there has to be a way to deal with this situation with good parenting.  The Queen's father had several brothers and ironically, her father who was more than happy not to be the King, did the job when duty called.  So explain how these men The Dukes of Gloucester and Kent managed to get through life and be productive and be productive for the monarchy?


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the same ego that Andy suffers from. Supposedly the _senior_ royals thought he would not escort QE down the aisle, just ride with her in the car.  Someone needs to send a memo to these senior royals that they cannot just assume these 2nd-borns will do what is in the family’s best interest. The plan needs to be in writing, signed by one and all. If QE overruled the plan, these _senior_ royals have a much bigger problem.  Give these ego-driven twerps an inch, they will take a mile.


Don't remember where I read it, but apparently it was the Queen's choice to have Andrew escort her (he is her 'favorite') .. unfortunately.  Certainly, the optics did not look good!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the same ego that Andy suffers from. Supposedly the _senior_ royals thought he would not escort QE down the aisle, just ride with her in the car.  Someone needs to send a memo to these senior royals that they cannot just assume these 2nd-borns will do what is in the family’s best interest. The plan needs to be in writing, signed by one and all. If QE overruled the plan, these _senior_ royals have a much bigger problem.  Give these ego-driven twerps an inch, they will take a mile.


I firmly believe that this was all The Queen's decision and she did it not because she needed someone to hold her arm.  Plenty of people could have done that.  She did it as protection for Andrew.  It was so discussed as to whether he could or should be there, that when he came in with her and held her arm, there was nothing anyone could say against it.  He may be a slimeball, but it was a memorial for his father so he had every right to be there.  It really wasn't for anyone, but TQ to make the decision regarding Andrew's attendance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ya kno, QE does not need to be “the queen” in order to stay true to her vow of a lifetime of service.  The former Queen Beatrix is an excellent example of life after Queen-ship.

From Wikipedia:
Beatrix continues to undertake some royal duties and is patron of many organisations. She lives in the small moated Drakensteyn Castle near the village of Lage Vuursche, and a townhouse near Noordeinde Palace.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> HA .. well, remember .. even though she "majored" in International Studies (along with Drama - which she has PLENTY of), she didn't know that much about England or the Royal Family!!!!!  I'm starting to wonder if she used the Peanut Butter method (spreads easily) in university since she sure as heck seems to be as sharp as a SPOON (amazingly dumb)!!!


I think she bought papers (the sorority probably had a stockpile of them) and used Cliff Notes instead of reading the book.  She could have skated by with C's.  Sadly she is representative of college grads who didn't receive an education.  They attend for the allotted time, get the degree and have learned nothing of substance.  University is a parking space for four years for a certain segment of society.  It actually has made me think that not everyone should go to university.  

If Lori Laughlin had listened to her daughter she could have stayed out jail and saved a lot of money.  Her daughter is doing what she wanted to do all along and she didn't need to go to college to do it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I firmly believe that this was all The Queen's decision and she did it not because she needed someone to hold her arm.  Plenty of people could have done that.  She did it as protection for Andrew.  It was so discussed as to whether he could or should be there, that when he came in with her and held her arm, there was nothing anyone could say against it.  He may be a slimeball, but it was a memorial for his father so *he had every right to be there*.  It really wasn't for anyone, but TQ to make the decision regarding Andrew's attendance.



Absolutely agree, he did have every right to be there. He had every right to ride in the car with her too. People seem to drawing the line at walking her down the aisle. I, too, believe she made the choice to prove to the _senior royals _that she is still in charge and she will do as she pleases.  I hope her ego doesn’t get the better of her.


----------



## Katel

rose60610 said:


> In the Oprah interview, M&H accused the BRF of being racist. They didn't say exactly WHO said something racist and the only person they ruled OUT was The Queen. I have to wonder if Harry was ordered to stay away since he didn't rule out his own grandfather.  Why tolerate the ginger bastard if he insinuated that Philip could have been the racist source? Maybe THAT'S why we got the idiotic "security issue" excuse and not the "stay away you lying bastard" REAL excuse....


I have pondered this for a while … it’s the only explanation that makes sense to me (unless they’re both completely rotten to the core) - they’ve been told to stay away - they’re not wanted - and they’re given a sum of money to do so and keep their mouths shut.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ya kno, QE does not need to be “the queen” in order to stay true to her vow of a lifetime of service.  The former Queen Beatrix is an excellent example of life after Queen-ship.
> 
> From Wikipedia:
> Beatrix continues to undertake some royal duties and is patron of many organisations. She lives in the small moated Drakensteyn Castle near the village of Lage Vuursche, and a townhouse near Noordeinde Palace.


I think you are talking about women who have different mindsets regarding Queenship.  Neither of them is wrong.


----------



## gracekelly

Katel said:


> I have pondered this for a while … it’s the only explanation that makes sense to me (unless they’re both completely rotten to the core) - they’ve been told to stay away - they’re not wanted - and they’re given a sum of money to do so and keep their mouths shut.


Then he would have stayed away from the funeral as well.  He could have said he had Covid at the time and stayed put, but he didn't.  He showed up and still managed to insert himself and get next to his brother and Kate.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which is such a silly thought. He was never going to be equal to his brother the heir apparent, and he knew that from early childhood. So what's his freaking deal?


Jealously.  Resentment. Immaturity.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ya kno, QE does not need to be “the queen” in order to stay true to her vow of a lifetime of service.  The former Queen Beatrix is an excellent example of life after Queen-ship.
> 
> From Wikipedia:
> *Beatrix continues to undertake some royal duties and is patron of many organisations. She lives in the small moated Drakensteyn Castle near the village of Lage Vuursche, and a townhouse near Noordeinde Palace.*


Unlike many other monarchies, The Netherlands has a history of reigning monarchs, who abdicated in favour of the next heir. I wouldn't be surprised to see King Willem-Alexander abdicate in favour of his eldest daughter, Catharina-Amalia (Princess of Orange) after she has completed her education and possibly also married and produced an heir. I believe that King WA is already mentoring CA regarding her future role as Queen and will continue to do so until if or when he abdicates.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Unlike many other monarchies, The Netherlands has a history of reigning monarchs, who abdicated in favour of the next heir. I wouldn't be surprised to see King Willem-Alexander abdicate in favour of his eldest daughter, Catharina-Amalia (Princess of Orange) after she has completed her education and possibly also married and produced an heir. I believe that King WA is already mentoring CA regarding her future role as Queen and will continue to do so until if or when he abdicates.



Yes, King Juan Carlos did not want his son to be like Prince Charles so he abdicated [plus he had some financial and personal issues as kings do].  Prince Albert became regent to Rainier who was incapable of continuing to rule.  Queen Beatrix stepped aside for Willem.  Imo the parent should step aside gracefully so the offspring can rule while still capable. Of course, I’ve never been Queen, but I have heard a former US President say the forefathers were correct in setting a 2 term limit. He said “since power is addictive, Presidents need to know their time is over”.    Just my opinion.

ETA: just checked on Albert’s age - 64. Wonder who he is preparing in case something happens.


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> HA .. well, remember .. even though she "majored" in International Studies (along with Drama - which she has PLENTY of), she didn't know that much about England or the Royal Family!!!!!  I'm starting to wonder if she used the Peanut Butter method (spreads easily) in university since she sure as heck seems to be as sharp as a SPOON (amazingly dumb)!!!


I've been wondering what her university teaches for International Studies... If the faculty was proud that she was an alumni (IIRC they were at the time of the wedding), I wonder what they think of her now.



CeeJay said:


> Don't remember where I read it, but apparently it was the Queen's choice to have Andrew escort her (he is her 'favorite') .. unfortunately.  Certainly, the optics did not look good!


She would not be the first parent who does not abandon their child no matter what happens. Many large families I know have black sheep, and while everyone is leery of them, no one exactly shuts them out.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, King Juan Carlos did not want his son to be like Prince Charles so he abdicated [plus he had some financial and personal issues as kings do].  Prince Albert became regent to Rainier who was incapable of continuing to rule.  Queen Beatrix stepped aside for Willem.  Imo the parent should step aside gracefully so the offspring can rule while still capable. Of course, I’ve never been Queen, but I have heard a former US President say the forefathers were correct in setting a 2 term limit. He said “since power is addictive, Presidents need to know their time is over”.    Just my opinion.
> 
> ETA: just checked on Albert’s age - 64. Wonder who he is preparing in case something happens.


Have there ever been any US Presidents who attempted to overthrow the 2 term limit?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Have there ever been any US Presidents who attempted to overthrow the 2 term limit?



Just talk, I do not recall anyone in recent history trying to change the rules.
ETA: some Presidents are asked to run again by their supporters but they know 2 is the limit.


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting video on yesterday's event.


----------



## Chanbal

MD's response is good!


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #4
					

The sycophant author/reporter did the bidding of the alliterate one in his reporting on the memorial. He used the full name and titles of th...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Katel

gracekelly said:


> Then he would have stayed away from the funeral as well.  He could have said he had Covid at the time and stayed put, but he didn't.  He showed up and still managed to insert himself and get next to his brother and Kate.



Not necessarily … that wretched display Haz Been made at the funeral may have put the final nail in his coffin … after that, the BRF may have said “No more!”

If these two sad sacks need to curry favor with the higher Royals for their relevancy (translated: $$$), it doesn’t make any sense why he did not attend.

Ahhh, we’ll never really know the backstories …


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> Have there ever been any US Presidents who attempted to overthrow the 2 term limit?



The two term limit in the U.S. was not added to the Constitution until the early 1950's.  From the beginning, Washington, Adams and Jefferson all thought 2 terms was plenty and the precedent set was adhered to for 150 years.  However, in the 1930's and 40's, Franklin Roosevelt ran and won 4 times, before and during WWII.  He thought the country needed consistent leadership during the great depression and the war (and he liked being president lol).  After FDR died in office, right before the end of WWII, his VP, Harry Truman, became President. It was during Truman's presidency that the amendment to the constitution was passed, limiting presidents to 2 four year terms.  I am extremely grateful for that amendment as it would be way too easy to end up with a President for Life situation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5368169
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #4
> 
> 
> The sycophant author/reporter did the bidding of the alliterate one in his reporting on the memorial. He used the full name and titles of th...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I feel Omid is walking a thin line. I won't be sorry for him if his career will be cancelled.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel Omid is walking a thin line. I won't be sorry for him if his career will be cancelled.


I don't think he is making enough to pay his bills.  Mom and Dad had to make room in the basement for him and his stuff.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, King Juan Carlos did not want his son to be like Prince Charles so he abdicated [plus he had some financial and personal issues as kings do].  Prince Albert became regent to Rainier who was incapable of continuing to rule.  Queen Beatrix stepped aside for Willem.  Imo the parent should step aside gracefully so the offspring can rule while still capable. Of course, I’ve never been Queen, but I have heard a former US President say the forefathers were correct in setting a 2 term limit. He said “since power is addictive, Presidents need to know their time is over”.    Just my opinion.
> 
> ETA: just checked on Albert’s age - 64. Wonder who he is preparing in case something happens.


I suspect that his sister Caroline is listed as regent for Prince Jacques.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, King Juan Carlos did not want his son to be like Prince Charles so he abdicated [plus he had some financial and personal issues as kings do].  Prince Albert became regent to Rainier who was incapable of continuing to rule.  Queen Beatrix stepped aside for Willem.  Imo the parent should step aside gracefully so the offspring can rule while still capable. Of course, I’ve never been Queen, but I have heard a former US President say the forefathers were correct in setting a 2 term limit. He said “since power is addictive, Presidents need to know their time is over”.    Just my opinion.
> 
> ETA: just checked on Albert’s age - 64. Wonder who he is preparing in case something happens.


It appears that an ex-lover is making Juan Carlos's life miserable. I don't feel sorry for him, he is married to a great woman, Queen Sofia. 

I believe Jacques will succeed to Albert, probably in about 20 years.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Look look look and smile 



ETA: oh dear, wrong thread or is it?


----------



## Chanbal

The National Enquirer continues to report on the '_royal renegades_': 










						Prince Harry & Meghan Caught in a Web of Lies!
					

Royal renegades Harry and Meghan’s fairytale is over amid a vicious family feud and ugly accusations of lies and betrayal, sources tell The National ENQUIRER.




					www.nationalenquirer.com


----------



## Chanbal

I'm starting to feel sorry for Will S.   










						Will Smith compared to Meghan Markle over tearful Oscars speech
					

US broadcaster Megyn Kelly slammed out of touch Hollywood actors after the 94th Academy Awards




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## Chanbal

_“*Harry couldn’t be bothered to take a few days off from Netflix, or feeding his chickens in the US, to honour the grandfather who always supported him*.

“Whether walking with the 12-year-old Prince behind his mother’s coffin, or giving support while Harry was on active service in Afghanistan, *Philip was always there for him*.

“Sadly, he chose to stay away in his big house. You lost out, Harry, on a great occasion when the Who’s Who of Europe and beyond turned up to do honour to the man who for many years loyally served the Queen.

“*As far as I’m concerned, after yesterday’s no-show Harry has burnt his boats.*”_









						Harry 'burnt his boats' after 'lame excuse' for missing Phillip memorial
					

PRINCE Harry did not attend Prince Philip’s memorial service yesterday after using a ‘lame’ excuse and has now ‘burnt his boats’ with the royal family, according to Royal photographer. Legendary ro…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The National Enquirer continues to report on the '_royal renegades_':
> View attachment 5368310
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Caught in a Web of Lies!
> 
> 
> Royal renegades Harry and Meghan’s fairytale is over amid a vicious family feud and ugly accusations of lies and betrayal, sources tell The National ENQUIRER.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nationalenquirer.com


This is why Samantha filed the lawsuit.  More than anything Sam wants to be vindicated and show the world that the clowns have been tossing out lies


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5368327
> 
> _“*Harry couldn’t be bothered to take a few days off from Netflix, or feeding his chickens in the US, to honour the grandfather who always supported him*.
> 
> “Whether walking with the 12-year-old Prince behind his mother’s coffin, or giving support while Harry was on active service in Afghanistan, *Philip was always there for him*.
> 
> “Sadly, he chose to stay away in his big house. You lost out, Harry, on a great occasion when the Who’s Who of Europe and beyond turned up to do honour to the man who for many years loyally served the Queen.
> 
> “*As far as I’m concerned, after yesterday’s no-show Harry has burnt his boats.*”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'burnt his boats' after 'lame excuse' for missing Phillip memorial
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry did not attend Prince Philip’s memorial service yesterday after using a ‘lame’ excuse and has now ‘burnt his boats’ with the royal family, according to Royal photographer. Legendary ro…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Harry was too busy feeding his chickens.  Lololol!  i bet this guy knows even more than what he said to the reporter.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This is why Samantha filed the lawsuit.  More than anything Sam wants to be vindicated and show the world that the clowns have been tossing out lies


I hope she gets what she wants. I'm under the impression that in contrast to MM that got whatever she wanted from 'daddy', Sam went through very tough times in life.   



gracekelly said:


> Harry was too busy feeding his chickens.  Lololol!  i bet this guy knows even more than what he said to the reporter.


It's very possible that "_no-show Harry has burnt his boats_” with the BRF as well.


----------



## needlv

So any guesses on the next PR stunt by Megzy As alluded to in the blind gossip site?


I will go first (guesses only!):

1. Archewell or Travelyst announces it is a major sponsor of Earthshot 2022 prize (lol)

2.  Megzy has Eugenie turn up as a special guest on her podcast discussing labels given to women… turns it all into about how badly Megzy was treated by the press (because it is all about her!)

3. Hapless and Megzy announce the christening of Lily, with godparents as Eugenie and …. (Insert random celeb name here…)


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which is such a silly thought. He was never going to be equal to his brother the heir apparent, and he knew that from early childhood. So what's his freaking deal?


Harry has certainly been more equal than others over the years - he’s gotten a lot of press coverage, big wedding, lots of money and time for his vanity projects sorry I mean charity work.  They have been blowing smoke up his arse and covering him for decades even before cornfoot arrived. 


gracekelly said:


> I bet Migraine never read or heard about the Pankhurst women and the suffragette movement in England.  She was hardly a trailblazer.


Um sweetie feminism was invented in Canada when a certain groundbreaking tv show was filmed starring a powerhouse female played by a strong and talented woman of colour…. Gina Torres  


CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely agree, he did have every right to be there. He had every right to ride in the car with her too. People seem to drawing the line at walking her down the aisle. I, too, believe she made the choice to prove to the _senior royals _that she is still in charge and she will do as she pleases.  I hope her ego doesn’t get the better of her.


I agree it is bad optics and it really doesn’t behove her public image as a selfless public servant who defers her personal power to the popular will at all. Though I do think there’s a lot of concessions being made by the royal team against their overall family’s best interests as they don’t think the Queen has much time left. (Obviously I’m not wishing her dead or anything I’m just saying there’s lots of clues that she’s ill and she is really old.)

He’s the prior  example of the second son being rewarded for pushing himself to the front and never being called out on his bull and evidently they didn’t learn their lesson.


Chanbal said:


> MD's response is good!



I highly doubt they regret sunning themselves in the Caribbean after the strugglebus of nearly two years of not being able to travel internationally to ‘show solidarity.’
I wish they did regret it because it was in poor taste IMHO. All the royals have done since covid restrictions ended has been to organise parties for themselves. Jubilee celebrations, Caribbean cruise etc. what about their responsibilities to the commonwealth countries  suffering from the economic and health ramifications of covid like I don’t know a little known place called India or even the bloody U.K. itself.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which is such a silly thought. He was never going to be equal to his brother the heir apparent, and he knew that from early childhood. So what's his freaking deal?


But even with non-royal children there is always sibling rivalry. We don't know how or if his parents addressed with him when he was young that, barring a tragedy, he would always be in second place. There are many contributing factors to his adult state of mind, some of it nature, some of it nurture.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely agree, he did have every right to be there. He had every right to ride in the car with her too. People seem to drawing the line at walking her down the aisle. I, too, believe she made the choice to prove to the _senior royals _that she is still in charge and she will do as she pleases.  I hope her ego doesn’t get the better of her.


She is very old and increasing frail, at least physically. If it gave her comfort to have him at her side at a very difficult time, which judging from the look on her face in the car photo it did, I can't fault her. But he can now slide back into exile. If Charles and William have any say he'll be at the back of the church for her funeral.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Unlike many other monarchies, The Netherlands has a history of reigning monarchs, who abdicated in favour of the next heir. I wouldn't be surprised to see King Willem-Alexander abdicate in favour of his eldest daughter, Catharina-Amalia (Princess of Orange) after she has completed her education and possibly also married and produced an heir. I believe that King WA is already mentoring CA regarding her future role as Queen and will continue to do so until if or when he abdicates.


The Dutch are generally very practical people.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> This is why Samantha filed the lawsuit.  More than anything Sam wants to be vindicated and show the world that the clowns have been tossing out lies


I don't blame her. She may have her own issues, but no one likes to be called a liar if they're telling the truth.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5368169
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #4
> 
> 
> The sycophant author/reporter did the bidding of the alliterate one in his reporting on the memorial. He used the full name and titles of th...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Can they get any pettier?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Can they get any pettier?



It's so pointless too. Kate Middleton will be queen no matter how many tantrums Raptor and Scobie throw.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's so pointless too. Kate Middleton will be queen no matter how many tantrums Raptor and Scobie throw.


Makes you wonder if Methane really thought she could snare William (or Charles), or if she assumed she could seize the throne by becoming the Most Popular Royal.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> So any guesses on the next PR stunt by Megzy As alluded to in the blind gossip site?
> 
> 
> I will go first (guesses only!):
> 
> 1. Archewell or Travelyst announces it is a major sponsor of Earthshot 2022 prize (lol)
> 
> 2.  Megzy has Eugenie turn up as a special guest on her podcast discussing labels given to women… turns it all into about how badly Megzy was treated by the press (because it is all about her!)
> 
> 3. Hapless and Megzy announce the christening of Lily, with godparents as Eugenie and …. (Insert random celeb name here…)


My guess: H&M will extend a 'fake' olive branch to Will and Kate possibly by inviting them to be LBet's godparents. They will put out multiple news releases about it. Whatever it is, I hope W&K are prepared, because they seem to be major targets…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Migraine is 0 and 2. She not only failed at becoming #1 Royal and immersing herself with all the Hollywood A-Listers, she's become radioactive. No wonder Harry turned orange.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> My guess: H&M will extend a 'fake' olive branch to Will and Kate possibly by inviting them to be LBet's godparents. They will put out multiple news releases about it. Whatever it is, I hope W&K are prepared, because they seem to be major targets…


I think SS will just hint at it or claim that H&M *wanted* to extend an olive branch but were deterred by (insert random act). Much ado about Nothing as usual.



Chanbal said:


>



Does MeYou have any assets to be seized (apart from maybe stacks of unsold Funding Freebies)?
Will the stans stand with Methane's bleached White Knight?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



Scobie is changing the locks on the basement door and storage locker!  He’s afraid that they will take all his copies of his book and his copies of The Bench. Not to worry Scoobs, they don’t want them. If they could take the Botox and fillers out of your face, they would.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It appears that an ex-lover is making Juan Carlos's life miserable. I don't feel sorry for him, he is married to a great woman, Queen Sofia.
> 
> I believe Jacques will succeed to Albert, probably in about 20 years.


What a foolish and arrogant man. He had to work hard to get his throne restored to him and then he threw it away with bad behavior. Hmmm….sounds like another royal we know who threw away his family and ill used his title. Yes Harry, that’s you.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She is very old and increasing frail, at least physically. If it gave her comfort to have him at her side at a very difficult time, which judging from the look on her face in the car photo it did, I can't fault her. But he can now slide back into exile. If Charles and William have any say he'll be at the back of the church for her funeral.


No, I think he will sit with his brothers and sister.   They aren’t that cruel. After that  he can slide down to the bottom of the pile.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Does MeYou have any assets to be seized (apart from maybe stacks of unsold Funding Freebies)?
> Will the stans stand with Methane's bleached White Knight?



Maybe the jewelry that went missing.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> This is why Samantha filed the lawsuit.  More than anything Sam wants to be vindicated and show the world that the clowns have been tossing out lies


.. and Thomas has joined Samantha's 'club', saying he supports her claims 100%!!!  He also wants to be vindicated; heck .. he spent a LOT of money on that kid and it wasn't just education (remember .. multiple nose jobs, her teeth, her boob job, etc.)!!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> .. and Thomas has joined Samantha's 'club', saying he supports her claims 100%!!!  He also wants to be vindicated; heck .. he spent a LOT of money on that kid and it wasn't just education (remember .. multiple nose jobs, her teeth, her boob job, etc.)!!!!!


He did fund her.  Unfortunately his long ago comment that it was now her turn to fund him did not come out so well. I think that has been his problem all along. His comments are not framed properly so he doesn’t look good. He need SS to help him lol!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> He did fund her.  Unfortunately his long ago comment that it was now her turn to fund him did not come out so well. I think that has been his problem all along. His comments are not framed properly so he doesn’t look good. He need SS to help him lol!


Yes, unfortunately .. at first, both Thomas *and *Samantha made it look like "ooooh - she's going to be rich, now give us OUR share!" which was NOT great.  Not sure of Thomas's financial situation now and given Samantha's health, you know .. if you were a NICE person, it wouldn't hurt to help them out .. but NOT HER, 'cos she's not a nice person!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> .. and Thomas has joined Samantha's 'club', saying he supports her claims 100%!!!  He also wants to be vindicated; heck .. he spent a LOT of money on that kid and it wasn't just education (remember .. multiple nose jobs, her teeth, her boob job, etc.)!!!!!



Don't forget her union card, at least one car she claimed wasn't fully functional, gas to get to auditions, regular salads at Sizzler's


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> What a foolish and arrogant man. He had to work hard to get his throne restored to him and then he threw it away with bad behavior. Hmmm….sounds like another royal we know who threw away his family and ill used his title. Yes Harry, that’s you.


Despite my annoyance with JC, he is a lot smarter and more interesting than JCMH. He is considered by many to have had a key role in Spain's democracy. Also, he chose to marry an admirable woman, and used to be quite an elegant man. All things JCMH is incapable of being/doing.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Despite my annoyance with JC, he is a lot smarter and more interesting than JCMH. He is considered by many to have had a key role in Spain's democracy. Also, he chose to marry an admirable woman, and used to be quite an elegant man. All things JCMH is incapable of being/doing.


All true but he blew it with a zipper problem.


----------



## Chanbal

Buckets are provided free of charge!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Scobie is changing the locks on the basement door and storage locker!  He’s afraid that they will take all his copies of his book and his copies of The Bench. Not to worry Scoobs, they don’t want them. If they could take the Botox and fillers out of your face, they would.


Can we close down our California borders? I have a sinking feeling he may be headed our way and end up as Chief Chicken Tender in Montecito, or added to the already delusional staff at Sunshine Sucks. It's all in who you know when it comes to networking.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> You NAILED it all, but sadly .. I truly believe he is pretty much exactly like the Duke of Windsor .. a total chump who has gotten mixed up with a demanding narcissist who is just going to beat him up every day!!!


the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were not good people but at least they had style....Harry is a slob and his WIFE can't seem to get clothes that fit


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Buckets are provided free of charge!



The only ground she broke for me was in how many platforms/publications/ awards she managed to taint with her corruption. Her stans must be "over the moon". I'm sure  that this is the life Methane dreamt of as well as the job she desired, because she shows no sign of quitting. Good job buttering her up, Haz!


----------



## Chanbal

I need help with this one.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Can we close down our California borders? I have a sinking feeling he may be headed our way and end up as Chief Chicken Tender in Montecito, or added to the already delusional staff at Sunshine Sucks. It's all in who you know when it comes to networking.


While Scoobie deserves a knighthood from his Kueen, I have my doubts that she will give him 1 of the 19 toilets.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Buckets are provided free of charge!



This really slays me; she has ZERO clue of the FinTech environment (heck, she probably doesn't even know what it means), and this company that they partnered up with?? .. on their website, they LITERALLY said that the ESG Investment Advisor didn't have to have 'special' training in order to provide their services!!!!!!!!! WTF????? .. you better believe you have to have special training .. not only a CFA but oftentimes the CAIA certification!!!  More importantly, in my job with a FinTech start-up, I am the person who is responsible for vetting the ESG categories and companies and let me tell you, oftentimes I just shake my head at what some of them are identifying as "so sustainable" or "green" or "environmental" .. especially "governmental".  

Just give me 5 seconds with her and she would be balling her eyes out, but then again, she would say I was racist!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were not good people but at least they had style....Harry is a slob and his WIFE can't seem to get clothes that fit


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUE, both of them!!!  While her style in Jewelry was not like mine, boy-oh-boy, she had some pretty amazing pieces!


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I need help with this one.



HA HA HA HA .. I looked into copyrighting my Jewelry and was flat-out told "NOPE"; the area of the arts is the HARDEST area to get a copyright as you have to 100% absolutely prove that NO ONE has every done anything like that before!!! .. and the bonehead shows someone drawing a picture!  Oy vay ..


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUE, both of them!!!  While her style in Jewelry was not like mine, boy-oh-boy, she had some pretty amazing pieces!


she certainly did 
and I think he designed some of them
Also he was know for his style of dressing.....they may have been nasty people but they were original


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were not good people but at least they had style....Harry is a slob and his WIFE can't seem to get clothes that fit



Kinda like Uncle A, no?




Chanbal said:


> I need help with this one.




Oooooooh!  I can’t, I just can’t.  

*When Hairy Met Salad*
_March 31, 2022 Blind Gossip Leave a Comment






[Blind Gossip] We told you that this celebrity couple was planning some sort of of stunt involving family.

At the time, we did not know what they were planning.

We do now!

We’ll call our celebrity couple Hairy and Salad.

When they first met several years ago, it only took a couple of weeks before they began planning an entire life together. Salad would leave her acting career so they could live a life of meaning, living overseas, raising a large family and healing the world together.

It hasn’t really worked out that way.

Something that is especially irksome to Salad is the fact that her last child did not have the impact she expected.

She was unable to score the multi-million-dollar payday she wanted from the media. She even named the baby after one of Hairy’s famous relatives, hoping that would cement both the child’s legacy and fortune. It did not. If anything, the bonds of family have broken down even more.

Instead of giving up… Salad is now doubling down!

Enter Hairy’s female cousin and her husband.

Hairy and Salad recently hosted Cuz and Hubs on their home turf.

Was it a simple family reunion, full of laughter, catching up on family news and enjoying the sight of all their lookalike children running around?

Ha! Don’t you know Hairy and Salad at all?
_


> _This was a business meeting. About money and family. In that order._


_It turns out that Cuz and Hubs are in dire financial straits. Although both have jobs, her family situation and his bad business gamble have practically wiped them out. They are now worth less than $2 million. That might seem like a lot of money to most people. However, when you are part of high society, that kind of bank doesn’t get you too far!

Hairy and Salad are not nearly as wealthy as they pretend to be, but they do have a lot more money than Cuz and Hubs. They decided to use that to their advantage.

You see, Hairy and Salad want another baby. But not for the reasons that most people want a baby.
_


> _They want another baby primarily to name it after [Hairy’s father and brother]. That way [Hairy’s father and brother] can never completely cut them out as the child would be their namesake._


_Unfortunately, Salad is unable to conceive. While we don’t exactly know why, her advanced age may be a factor.

This is where Cuz and Hubs come in. Hairy and Salad know all about Cuz and Hubs’ financial woes. So they made them a proposition.

Hairy and Salad asked Cuz to act as their surrogate. For cash!

Hairy and Salad offered Cuz and Hubs the princely sum of $1.5 million upon delivery, plus an additional $1 million after the baby’s first birthday and $.5 million after the baby’s second birthday.
_


> _The plan is for the two women to be “pregnant” at the same time. Ideally, [Cuz] will conceive twins. One will go to [Hairy and Salad] and one will stay with [Cuz and Hubs]._


_





After a lot of discussion, Cuz and Hubs agreed. They will be using Hairy’s sperm and Cuz’s eggs so both babies will be related to both couples. No, Hairy and Cuz will not be sleeping together! This will all be done via IVF. We don’t know what they will do if only one child is conceived.
_


> _It is a very practical arrangement._


_Actually, it does work for both couples.

Harry and Salad will get the namesake baby… Cuz and Hubs will get $3 million, which will more than double their net worth… Cuz and Hubs can go on to have other children if they like… and all of the children will be lookalike blood relatives (just in an unusual way).

Now we just have to wait for Salad and Cuz to announce their “pregnancies”!_


----------



## bag-mania

880 said:


> Sure,y H&M have a PR firm that should have told them Harry could not miss this tribute? IMO this almost has nothing to do with his cutting ties or his marriage
> the security issue seems so thin



The security story sounds much better than the truth, his wife wouldn’t let him go.


----------



## youngster

OK, that Blind Gossip item is just crazy.  No way.  

Then again, I'm the one who said several years ago that maybe MM could make a go of royal life, that she's used to the media, that this was the best gig ever for an aging actress, and then I doubled down a couple years later and said there is no way that Harry would abandon the UK to live in L.A.  So, my track record isn't so good at predicting these two since all of their choices are so foolish.  In my defense, I originally gave the marriage 5 - 7 years so there is still time for that to happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> OK, that Blind Gossip item is just crazy.  No way.
> 
> Then again, I'm the one who said several years ago that maybe MM could make a go of royal life, that she's used to the media, that this was the best gig ever for an aging actress, and then I doubled down a couple years later and said there is no way that Harry would abandon the UK to live in L.A.  So, my track record isn't so good at predicting these two since all of their choices are so foolish.  In my defense, I originally gave the marriage 5 - 7 years so there is still time for that to happen.



Oooooh, some are saying it’s an April Fool joke.
Problem is H&M&Eug are just dim enough that is sounds real.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nooooo, BLG is on this list


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angela is not that sharp today.



Is this a joke? I'm serious--wondering if this is fabricated or is this REAL?????


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> OK, that Blind Gossip item is just crazy.  No way.
> 
> Then again, I'm the one who said several years ago that maybe MM could make a go of royal life, that she's used to the media, that this was the best gig ever for an aging actress, and then I doubled down a couple years later and said there is no way that Harry would abandon the UK to live in L.A.  So, my track record isn't so good at predicting these two since all of their choices are so foolish.  In my defense, I originally gave the marriage 5 - 7 years so there is still time for that to happen.



Be fair to yourself. None of us could’ve predicted how horribly it would go. I agree the blind gossip is absurd. Personally I think they brought Eugenie over to pump her for information to use for a Netflix show and/or Harry’s memoir.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Kinda like Uncle A, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oooooooh!  I can’t, I just can’t.
> 
> *When Hairy Met Salad*
> _March 31, 2022 Blind Gossip Leave a Comment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] We told you that this celebrity couple was planning some sort of of stunt involving family.
> 
> At the time, we did not know what they were planning.
> 
> We do now!
> 
> We’ll call our celebrity couple Hairy and Salad.
> 
> When they first met several years ago, it only took a couple of weeks before they began planning an entire life together. Salad would leave her acting career so they could live a life of meaning, living overseas, raising a large family and healing the world together.
> 
> It hasn’t really worked out that way.
> 
> Something that is especially irksome to Salad is the fact that her last child did not have the impact she expected.
> 
> She was unable to score the multi-million-dollar payday she wanted from the media. She even named the baby after one of Hairy’s famous relatives, hoping that would cement both the child’s legacy and fortune. It did not. If anything, the bonds of family have broken down even more.
> 
> Instead of giving up… Salad is now doubling down!
> 
> Enter Hairy’s female cousin and her husband.
> 
> Hairy and Salad recently hosted Cuz and Hubs on their home turf.
> 
> Was it a simple family reunion, full of laughter, catching up on family news and enjoying the sight of all their lookalike children running around?
> 
> Ha! Don’t you know Hairy and Salad at all?
> 
> 
> It turns out that Cuz and Hubs are in dire financial straits. Although both have jobs, her family situation and his bad business gamble have practically wiped them out. They are now worth less than $2 million. That might seem like a lot of money to most people. However, when you are part of high society, that kind of bank doesn’t get you too far!
> 
> Hairy and Salad are not nearly as wealthy as they pretend to be, but they do have a lot more money than Cuz and Hubs. They decided to use that to their advantage.
> 
> You see, Hairy and Salad want another baby. But not for the reasons that most people want a baby.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, Salad is unable to conceive. While we don’t exactly know why, her advanced age may be a factor.
> 
> This is where Cuz and Hubs come in. Hairy and Salad know all about Cuz and Hubs’ financial woes. So they made them a proposition.
> 
> Hairy and Salad asked Cuz to act as their surrogate. For cash!
> 
> Hairy and Salad offered Cuz and Hubs the princely sum of $1.5 million upon delivery, plus an additional $1 million after the baby’s first birthday and $.5 million after the baby’s second birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a lot of discussion, Cuz and Hubs agreed. They will be using Hairy’s sperm and Cuz’s eggs so both babies will be related to both couples. No, Hairy and Cuz will not be sleeping together! This will all be done via IVF. We don’t know what they will do if only one child is conceived.
> 
> 
> Actually, it does work for both couples.
> 
> Harry and Salad will get the namesake baby… Cuz and Hubs will get $3 million, which will more than double their net worth… Cuz and Hubs can go on to have other children if they like… and all of the children will be lookalike blood relatives (just in an unusual way).
> 
> Now we just have to wait for Salad and Cuz to announce their “pregnancies”!_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Makes you wonder if Methane really thought she could snare William (or Charles), or *if she assumed she could seize the throne by becoming the Most Popular Royal.*


Yes! Some time ago, I speculated as much. M believed the Monarch was chosen/elected by popular vote similar to being voted king/queen of the HS prom.  In her mind's eye, she imagined herself racing to the vaults and grabbing tiaras, gems, gold, etc. in her greedy little hands, after her coronation. When she discovered otherwise, she decided to get even with the 'evil and racist' BRF for thwarting her dreams of avarice and domination.

ET to change the verb 'stated' to 'speculated'


----------



## Katel

Lady C implies around 45 that the “security” dodge used for the memorial by the pathetic duo is a massive Figleaf because the breach is too wide and deep and the relationship with his family too far gone.


----------



## Chanbal

One more pearl from Twitter


----------



## Toby93




----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



How did he predict the Capital riots and know which platform was the lynchpin? He used his crystal ball?

The Newsweek article probably took word salad from some Sunshine Sucks media release. There are vague but impressive-sounding statements like: "In the digital age, Harry and Meghan are working together to engage with people on a level that bypasses the negative, and in some cases harmful, aspects of social media." What level?


----------



## redney

For the past couple of years at least, Blind Gossip has always done an outrageous April Fools post. This is this year's.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes! Some time ago, I speculated as much. M believed the Monarch was chosen/elected by popular vote similar to being voted king/queen of the HS prom.  In her mind's eye, she imagined herself racing to the vaults and grabbing tiaras, gems, gold, etc. in her greedy little hands, after her coronation. When she discovered otherwise, she decided to get even with the 'evil and racist' BRF for thwarting her dreams of avarice and domination.
> 
> ET to change the verb 'stated' to 'speculated'


And she thought after her weepy dramatics on the OW interview, public sympathy would swell, and the BRF would be forced to capitulate to her wishes.


----------



## xincinsin

redney said:


> For the past couple of years at least, Blind Gossip has always done an outrageous April Fools post. This is this year's.


It's sad that based on the idiocy of the dastardly dolts, this actually sounds plausible.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I've been wondering what her university teaches for International Studies... If the faculty was proud that she was an alumni (IIRC they were at the time of the wedding), I wonder what they think of her now.
> 
> 
> She would not be the first parent who does not abandon their child no matter what happens. Many large families I know have black sheep, and while everyone is leery of them, no one exactly shuts them out.
> 
> 
> Have there ever been any US Presidents who attempted to overthrow the 2 term limit?


FDR had 4 terms (he died during the fourth).  The 22nd Amendment was passed after his death.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> The two term limit in the U.S. was not added to the Constitution until the early 1950's.  From the beginning, Washington, Adams and Jefferson all thought 2 terms was plenty and the precedent set was adhered to for 150 years.  However, in the 1930's and 40's, Franklin Roosevelt ran and won 4 times, before and during WWII.  He thought the country needed consistent leadership during the great depression and the war (and he liked being president lol).  After FDR died in office, right before the end of WWII, his VP, Harry Truman, became President. It was during Truman's presidency that the amendment to the constitution was passed, limiting presidents to 2 four year terms.  I am extremely grateful for that amendment as it would be way too easy to end up with a President for Life situation.


Sorry just saw your reply!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> K
> 
> _You see, Hairy and Salad want another baby. But not for the reasons that most people want a baby.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, Salad is unable to conceive. While we don’t exactly know why, her advanced age may be a factor.
> 
> This is where Cuz and Hubs come in. Hairy and Salad know all about Cuz and Hubs’ financial woes. So they made them a proposition.
> 
> Hairy and Salad asked Cuz to act as their surrogate. For cash!
> 
> Hairy and Salad offered Cuz and Hubs the princely sum of $1.5 million upon delivery, plus an additional $1 million after the baby’s first birthday and $.5 million after the baby’s second birthday.
> 
> After a lot of discussion, Cuz and Hubs agreed. They will be using Hairy’s sperm and Cuz’s eggs so both babies will be related to both couples. No, Hairy and Cuz will not be sleeping together! This will all be done via IVF. We don’t know what they will do if only one child is conceived.
> 
> Actually, it does work for both couples.
> 
> Harry and Salad will get the namesake baby… Cuz and Hubs will get $3 million, which will more than double their net worth… Cuz and Hubs can go on to have other children if they like… and all of the children will be lookalike blood relatives (just in an unusual way).
> 
> Now we just have to wait for Salad and Cuz to announce their “pregnancies”!_



   

Yeah, no. I can believe most of this but not that Eugenie will be the surrogate (also not that her and Jack only have 1,5 millions to their name).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> Is this a joke? I'm serious--wondering if this is fabricated or is this REAL?????



Yeah, it's satire from a well-known satire account.


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, no. I can believe most of this but not that Eugenie will be the surrogate (also not that her and Jack only have 1,5 millions to their name).


And wouldn‘t a baby between cousins (even via surrogate) be considered incest?


----------



## papertiger

Stansy said:


> And wouldn‘t a baby between cousins (even via surrogate) be considered incest?



Not in Royal circles









						12 Royals Who Married Their Relatives
					

What might be surprising though is that members of the royal family have continued to marry their cousins, right up to the present day!




					www.rd.com
				




(past) Russian RF too 

You can forget the 12 though, in that way I am related to_ all _of you


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Stansy said:


> And wouldn‘t a baby between cousins (even via surrogate) be considered incest?



I mean, surrogacy is legally forbidden in Germany, but first cousin marriage is not.


----------



## Chanbal

Et tu,Tom? 


_Insiders reveal that Tom personally greeted the royals at the screening, held at an IMAX screen off London's Leicester Square so the royals could experience the action thriller on one of the UK's biggest screens._









						Prince William and Kate 'treated to first screening of Top Gun sequel'
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton are used to the royal treatment, and Tom Cruise made sure the couple got a VIP preview of his new movie recently.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.



That's their idea of charity? I don't know exactly why (I donate clothes to charity too) but this makes my skin crawl.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.



What a dunce.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.




This is so awkward OMG LOL.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Happyish said:


> That's their idea of charity? I don't know exactly why (I donate clothes to charity too) but this makes my skin crawl.


I think it’s plain quid pro quo not being met-  when the general public drops off clothes for charity it’s that - a 5 minute drop off whereas if an organisation invites the press around and organises a meet and greet event to celebrate the fact a celebrity/VIP is coming to visit and endorse their cause they do expect a nice cheque or a pledge. The fact is organising this cost them money. Going to all that effort to get a few vests for the camera? They must be thinking ‘Gee thanks - don’t bother to call her for the Christmas appeal.’


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I think it’s plain quid pro quo not being met-  when the general public drops off clothes for charity it’s that - a 5 minute drop off whereas if an organisation invites the press around and organises a meet and greet event to celebrate the fact a celebrity/VIP is coming to visit and endorse their cause they do expect a nice cheque or a pledge. The fact is organising this cost them money. Going to all that effort to get a few vests for the camera? They must be thinking ‘Gee thanks - don’t bother to call her for the Christmas appeal.’


reminds me of her sayonara to Zara party......arrogant


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.




So this is what compassion in action looks like. It's pulling at my heartstrings.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.



Unbelievable! Indeed, she does not deserve an award for her charitable deeds.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So helpful


----------



## CarryOn2020

Words of wisdom!




ETA: that Drone bag BagDrone will be a game changer  Brilliant, simply brilliant


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Kinda like Uncle A, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oooooooh!  I can’t, I just can’t.
> 
> *When Hairy Met Salad*
> _March 31, 2022 Blind Gossip Leave a Comment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] We told you that this celebrity couple was planning some sort of of stunt involving family.
> 
> At the time, we did not know what they were planning.
> 
> We do now!
> 
> We’ll call our celebrity couple Hairy and Salad.
> 
> When they first met several years ago, it only took a couple of weeks before they began planning an entire life together. Salad would leave her acting career so they could live a life of meaning, living overseas, raising a large family and healing the world together.
> 
> It hasn’t really worked out that way.
> 
> Something that is especially irksome to Salad is the fact that her last child did not have the impact she expected.
> 
> She was unable to score the multi-million-dollar payday she wanted from the media. She even named the baby after one of Hairy’s famous relatives, hoping that would cement both the child’s legacy and fortune. It did not. If anything, the bonds of family have broken down even more.
> 
> Instead of giving up… Salad is now doubling down!
> 
> Enter Hairy’s female cousin and her husband.
> 
> Hairy and Salad recently hosted Cuz and Hubs on their home turf.
> 
> Was it a simple family reunion, full of laughter, catching up on family news and enjoying the sight of all their lookalike children running around?
> 
> Ha! Don’t you know Hairy and Salad at all?
> 
> 
> It turns out that Cuz and Hubs are in dire financial straits. Although both have jobs, her family situation and his bad business gamble have practically wiped them out. They are now worth less than $2 million. That might seem like a lot of money to most people. However, when you are part of high society, that kind of bank doesn’t get you too far!
> 
> Hairy and Salad are not nearly as wealthy as they pretend to be, but they do have a lot more money than Cuz and Hubs. They decided to use that to their advantage.
> 
> You see, Hairy and Salad want another baby. But not for the reasons that most people want a baby.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, Salad is unable to conceive. While we don’t exactly know why, her advanced age may be a factor.
> 
> This is where Cuz and Hubs come in. Hairy and Salad know all about Cuz and Hubs’ financial woes. So they made them a proposition.
> 
> Hairy and Salad asked Cuz to act as their surrogate. For cash!
> 
> Hairy and Salad offered Cuz and Hubs the princely sum of $1.5 million upon delivery, plus an additional $1 million after the baby’s first birthday and $.5 million after the baby’s second birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After a lot of discussion, Cuz and Hubs agreed. They will be using Hairy’s sperm and Cuz’s eggs so both babies will be related to both couples. No, Hairy and Cuz will not be sleeping together! This will all be done via IVF. We don’t know what they will do if only one child is conceived.
> 
> 
> Actually, it does work for both couples.
> 
> Harry and Salad will get the namesake baby… Cuz and Hubs will get $3 million, which will more than double their net worth… Cuz and Hubs can go on to have other children if they like… and all of the children will be lookalike blood relatives (just in an unusual way).
> 
> Now we just have to wait for Salad and Cuz to announce their “pregnancies”!_


BUT WAIT .. remember when "Hairy" & "Salad" (good nicknames) .. said that they didn't want to "overpopulate" the Earth and as such, would only have 2 children?!?!?!?!?!?!  I'm not buying this story ..


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW donated Arch*e's used clothes on an official visit… Well, she didn't have time to bake a lemon cake.




Wow,  could she be any more demeaning to the ladies there and the to the country she’s in.


----------



## Chanbal

Happyish said:


> That's their idea of charity? I don't know exactly why (I donate clothes to charity too) but this makes my skin crawl.





1LV said:


> What a dunce.





LittleStar88 said:


> This is so awkward OMG LOL.


I would think that all of us in this forum that promotes shopping end up donating clothes. However, those donations are usually delivered discreetly to institutions without any publicity for either donors or recipients. It would have been a lot nicer if she had donated funds or new merchandise directly to the intuition she was visiting. It't was rather tasteless to show up with a bag of used clothes imo.


----------



## rose60610

So the couple who has 19 bathrooms and spends hundreds of thousands on security (because they're soooooo important) could donate NEW baby clothes, but instead gives them USED baby clothes from one child that were probably spit up on and worse. I hope she had them laundered first. Well, if Lilibet were a boy, Archie's clothes could have had another go round and they could brag about "sustainability"--which they'll still brag about as if they expect the recipients to actually use them.  Wanna bet they value the clothes for an astronomical sum (after all, they're VALUABLE because they're royal) for tax deduction purposes?  What's next? Migraine donating her ripped jeans to teenage girls?  She can't just make a donation, she's got to make the donation about HER.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Agree.  I'm wondering how many pieces of baby clothes were donated.  We only saw from the video what she held up.  As always she gives one cake, a handful of sandwiches, a couple bananas ...  Come on M give *MORE* or can't you because of finances?!


----------



## rose60610

What? She didn't give away a single copy of "The Bench"?  Did she at least offer these women discounted copies?   Nah, full price for them...


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> What? She didn't give away a single copy of "The Bench"?  Did she at least offer these women discounted copies?   Nah, full price for them...



To be fair, the clothing donation took place during the So Africa tour.  Since moving to Monteshito, they have not made a clothing donation that I am aware of.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, the clothing donation took place during the So Africa tour.  Since moving to Monteshito, they have not made a clothing donation that I am aware of.



There was also a huge diplomatic fail..  You can see on their faces of the other women that they do not want to sit on the floor.  They had dressed nicely, brought their babies for a play date with Archie only to be told he’s sleeping, and then she sits on the floor and obstinately stays there when no one joins her.   Those women were there to meet a representative of the Queen… not to sit in the floor in their good clothes. And then been given Archie’s used clothes?!  This was a diplomatic failure…


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, the clothing donation took place during the So Africa tour.  Since moving to Monteshito, they have not made a clothing donation that I am aware of.



Great point. Agreed!


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW's minister of propaganda continues (his work) attacking Will&Kate. Shame on Newsweek that keeps publishing articles from dubious sources.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

needlv said:


> There was also a huge diplomatic fail..  You can see on their faces of the other women that they do not want to sit on the floor.  They had dressed nicely, brought their babies for a play date with Archie only to be told he’s sleeping, and then she sits on the floor and obstinately stays there when no one joins her.   Those women were there to meet a representative of the Queen… not to sit in the floor in their good clothes. And then been given Archie’s used clothes?!  This was a diplomatic failure…


A diplomatic failure -- that's charitably put! So very demeaning and patronizing. "Megan Meets The Natives."


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair, the clothing donation took place during the So Africa tour.  Since moving to Monteshito, they have not made a clothing donation that I am aware of.





needlv said:


> There was also a huge diplomatic fail..  You can see on their faces of the other women that they do not want to sit on the floor.  They had dressed nicely, brought their babies for a play date with Archie only to be told he’s sleeping, and then she sits on the floor and obstinately stays there when no one joins her.   Those women were there to meet a representative of the Queen… not to sit in the floor in their good clothes. And then been given Archie’s used clothes?!  This was a diplomatic failure…


This was the same tour where she left a market after 5 minutes because the crowds were too overwhelming and she allegedly felt unsafe, and when she did her silly "No One asks ME if I'm okay"?



Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW's minister of propaganda continues (his work) attacking Will&Kate. Shame on Newsweek that keeps publishing articles from dubious sources.
> View attachment 5369943


Think Newsweek is very pro-Monteshitshow since all their articles about this tour are critical. H&M weren't even significant to W&C's tour but these two bozos interviewed Plastic Pal and asked him if H&M could do it better (like a verbal version of those photos where the stans paste Methane's airhead on Catherine's body). 

Their royal commentator Kristen Meinzer claims to know how the world feels about it. Based on her own website and her podcast list, she lurves Methane to death. She thinks the liar is the future of the monarchy and bigger than Super Bowl.

The guy described as Chief Royal Correspondent Jack Royston seems to be your run-of-the-mill hack for the most part (qualification in the next para). His description on Newsweek's website does indicate very clearly whose side he is on and to whom he gives priority: _Jack is a Royal Correspondent for Newsweek covering Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Prince William, Kate Middleton and Queen Elizabeth II & co. _ 

I went back through a few months' worth of what he wrote for Newsweek. He mainly reports on whatever is making the news *without any sign of critical thinking*, and likes to do anti-monarchist clickbait or topics which are skewed pro-H&M. He did do a whole article giving tips from various lawyers on how Princess Pinocchio can try to get her sister's lawsuit thrown out of court, which was really weird. It wasn't an analysis of the merits of the case or even a pro-Methane article. It was a DIY manual on how to evade responsibility, including hiding behind that first amendment about which Hazard is clueless. His twitter feed though is definitely and aggressively pro-Methane all the way.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> *There was also a huge diplomatic fail*..  You can see on their faces of the other women that they do not want to sit on the floor.  They had dressed nicely, brought their babies for a play date with Archie only to be told he’s sleeping, and then she sits on the floor and obstinately stays there when no one joins her.   Those women were there to meet a representative of the Queen… not to sit in the floor in their good clothes. And then been given Archie’s used clothes?!  This was a diplomatic failure…


Yes, it's as if she desperately wanted to embarrass the BRF with her shenanigans as I'm sure, this event occurred after she realized that she would never become Thee Queen despite the fact, that in her own mind, she was so much more popular than QEII, Charles and William. Certainly, they (QE, C or W) unlike M would have given these women the opportunity to feel good about themselves and about meeting a member of the RF. TW enjoyed all the royal trappings like being called HRH and being curtsied to, but there was nothing royal or regal about her demeanour and she was also sorely lacking in the charity, sincerity and kindness department.


----------



## Happyish

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, it's as if she desperately wanted to embarrass the BRF with her shenanigans as I'm sure, this event occurred after she realized that she would never become Thee Queen despite the fact, that in her own mind, she was so much more popular than QEII, Charles and William. Certainly, they (QE, C or W) unlike M would have given these women the opportunity to feel good about themselves and about meeting a member of the RF. TW enjoyed all the royal trappings like being called HRH and being curtsied to, but there was nothing royal or regal about her demeanour and she was also sorely lacking in the charity, sincerity and kindness department.


There was a moment, just after the wedding, where if felt that Megan had eclipsed Catherine. I know the papers were referring to her as a breath of fresh air, just what the RF needed to bring them into the 21st century. They were even calling W & C and H & W the "fab-four," and gosh, it seemed like it--they could have been formidable, but for the fact Catherine seemed to be bristling with anger--something all the papers were quick to capitalize on.
Then the gossip started about how Megan made Charlotte cry, their decision move out of the office they shared with Catherine and William, to hire their own staff, the firings, the claims of bullying.
And there were the gaffes. For one, right out of the gate there was the cookbook, designed to help immigrants who were victims of the Greenfall fire. The majority of those immigrants were Middle Eastern and North African. I can't imagine this patronage was at all popular, given the terrorist attacks perpetrated throughout the UK (the tube bombings, the bus bombings, the Ariana Grande concert) by middle easterners. I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible. However, to make this cause the focus of her first charitable effort just the day after the wedding was (IMHO) a colossal misstep and could not have been well-received. There were others, such as a meeting at a restaurant where she showed-up in torn jeans and heels. It's a great look if you're out and about in Beverly Hills (or used to be especially if you're a Pussycat-Doll-Wannabe), but this showed a contemptuous disregard for her position and job (because when she married H it came with not just a position and title but responsibilities). There were others (and don't let me get started on the wedding which seemed so out of sync with Megan's purported heritage and lifestyle), I'm sure well and better documented by other followers, but you get my drift. 
There was a decline in her popularity if for no other reason than the fact she couldn't read the room, and that it became very apparent that she didn't care to do so. As @Maggie Muggins put it, she was insincere. She's doing the same thing all over again.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> There was also a huge diplomatic fail..  You can see on their faces of the other women that they do not want to sit on the floor.  They had dressed nicely, brought their babies for a play date with Archie only to be told he’s sleeping, and then she sits on the floor and obstinately stays there when no one joins her.   Those women were there to meet a representative of the Queen… not to sit in the floor in their good clothes. And then been given Archie’s used clothes?!  This was a diplomatic failure…


100% agree extremely cringe inducing behaviour. Are we to imagine these used clothes have some sort of royal magic to them and can cure scrofula? Or perhaps they bear the outline of her face like the shroud of Turin. 

The worst of it is, you know if she heard Beyoncé was going to be there she’d have the baby out for the photo ops-  normies are not worthy of disturbing the royal nap.


Happyish said:


> There was a moment, just after the wedding, where if felt that Megan had eclipsed Catherine. I know the papers were referring to her as a breath of fresh air, just what the RF needed to bring them into the 21st century. They were even calling W & C and H & W the "fab-four," and gosh, it seemed like it--they could have been formidable, but for the fact Catherine seemed to be bristling with anger--something all the papers were quick to capitalize on.
> Then the gossip started about how Megan made Charlotte cry, their decision move out of the office they shared with Catherine and William, to hire their own staff, the firings, the claims of bullying.
> And there were the gaffes. For one, right out of the gate there was the cookbook, designed to help immigrants who were victims of the Greenfall fire. The majority of those immigrants were Middle Eastern and North African. I can't imagine this patronage was at all popular, given the terrorist attacks perpetrated throughout the UK (the tube bombings, the bus bombings, the Ariana Grande concert) by middle easterners. I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible. However, to make this cause the focus of her first charitable effort just the day after the wedding was (IMHO) a colossal misstep and could not have been well-received. There were others, such as a meeting at a restaurant where she showed-up in torn jeans and heels. It's a great look if you're out and about in Beverly Hills (or used to be especially if you're a Pussycat-Doll-Wannabe), but this showed a contemptuous disregard for her position and job (because when she married H it came with not just a position and title but responsibilities). There were others (and don't let me get started on the wedding which seemed so out of sync with Megan's purported heritage and lifestyle), I'm sure well and better documented by other followers, but you get my drift.
> There was a decline in her popularity if for no other reason than the fact she couldn't read the room, and that it became very apparent that she didn't care to do so. As @Maggie Muggins put it, she was insincere. She's doing the same thing all over again.


I must respectfully  disagree with your analysis of the Grenfell patronage. The Grenfell tragedy was an enormous cause celebre at the time and I do not think there was any malicious insinuation  that the victims had any connection with terrorism purely because there were immigrants. They were very much viewed as innocents condemned by a lazy bureaucracy.

I don’t think that the Cookbook would be an Unpopular gig- quite the opposite- I think they gave her something they knew would:-
 1) make the news because it was a big topic. 
2) show she’s on the pulse of U.K. current events and her connection with her new home (ha ha).
 3) reinforced her identity as a WOC and what a progressive marriage this was and
 4) pushed the party line that she would be expressing a special interest in projects to do with women and POCs. 

I think it was well-received at the time and it very much fit the modern royals narrative they were pushing. I think that any royals would’ve looked good doing this gig but they wanted to push the above messages with M and it worked- at first. She was enormously popular initially and it takes a while to unravel. 
I personally think the Africa tour interview was the moment she turned a lot of people against her because it so clearly highlighted the gulf between her public persona of a spokesperson against racial and gender inequality and the vacuous self-absorption that actually lies inside her.

There was later some negative press because they found out that some people involved with the mosque that put out the cookbook had some links to extremist groups but I’d say that was largely seen as very divorced from Grenfell itself.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I must respectfully  disagree with your analysis of the Grenfell patronage. The Grenfell tragedy was an enormous cause celebre at the time and I do not think there was any malicious insinuation  that the victims had any connection with terrorism purely because there were immigrants. They were very much viewed as innocents condemned by a lazy bureaucracy.
> 
> I don’t think that the Cookbook would be an Unpopular gig- quite the opposite- I think they gave her something they knew would:-
> 1) make the news because it was a big topic.
> 2) show she’s on the pulse of U.K. current events and her connection with her new home (ha ha).
> 3) reinforced her identity as a WOC and what a progressive marriage this was and
> 4) pushed the party line that she would be expressing a special interest in projects to do with women and POCs.
> 
> I think it was well-received at the time and it very much fit the modern royals narrative they were pushing. I think that any royals would’ve looked good doing this gig but they wanted to push the above messages with M and it worked- at first. She was enormously popular initially and it takes a while to unravel.
> I personally think the Africa tour interview was the moment she turned a lot of people against her because it so clearly highlighted the gulf between her public persona of a spokesperson against racial and gender inequality and the vacuous self-absorption that actually lies inside her.
> 
> There was later some negative press because they found out that some people involved with the mosque that put out the cookbook had some links to extremist groups but I’d say that was largely seen as very divorced from Grenfell itself.


She received a lot of good press from the Grenfell tragedy, but IMO, her innate selfishness came through in the end when she took all the credit for the cookbook and started to treat it like a vanity project. If you check it out, the author is The Hubb Community Kitchen with foreword by HRH the DOS. But in so many pro-Methane articles, it's described as Methane's cookbook.


----------



## xincinsin

Happyish said:


> There was a decline in her popularity if for no other reason than the fact she couldn't read the room, and that it became very apparent that she didn't care to do so. As @Maggie Muggins put it, she was insincere. She's doing the same thing all over again.


As well as her inability to read the room, she also likes surrounding herself with yes men/women. I highly suspect that when H seized upon that questionable Bouzy report and said less than a 100 Twitter accounts were responsible for 80% of the Methane hate, in his simplistic mind, it meant that everyone else in Twitterverse loved Princess Pinocchio.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Makes you wonder if Methane really thought she could snare William (or Charles), or if she assumed she could seize the throne by becoming the Most Popular Royal.


Megs, this is not Homecoming Queen.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> "M believed the Monarch was chosen/elected by popular vote similar to being voted king/queen of the HS prom."


She cannot possibly be that stupid.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> And she thought after her weepy dramatics on the OW interview, public sympathy would swell, and the BRF would be forced to capitulate to her wishes.


Like a child throwing a tantrum in hopes of getting their way. It probably worked many times with her parents, but not with the BRF.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> That's their idea of charity? I don't know exactly why (I donate clothes to charity too) but this makes my skin crawl.


Meghan, Viscountess of Virtue Signaling.


----------



## Chanbal

SW posted about insomnia, and I feel sorry for her. People are commenting on it and being sympathetic. However, there is one comment that belongs to this thread: _Why doesn't she call #6, her life coach?_ It's a valid question imo.


----------



## Chanbal

#6 can add one more piece of info to his memoir:


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW's minister of propaganda continues (his work) attacking Will&Kate. Shame on Newsweek that keeps publishing articles from dubious sources.
> View attachment 5369943



Newsweek was once credible journalism. Other than what they pay to put on Apple News today, they're pretty much irrelevant.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> SW posted about insomnia, and I feel sorry for her. People are commenting on it and being sympathetic. However, there is one comment that belongs to this thread: _Why doesn't she call #6, her life coach?_ It's a valid question imo.



Serena, welcome to perimenopause. Talk to your doctor, not Twitter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

jelliedfeels said:


> 100% agree extremely cringe inducing behaviour. Are we to imagine these used clothes have some sort of royal magic to them and can cure scrofula? Or perhaps they bear the outline of her face like the shroud of Turin.
> 
> The worst of it is, you know if she heard Beyoncé was going to be there she’d have the baby out for the photo ops-  normies are not worthy of disturbing the royal nap.
> 
> I must respectfully  disagree with your analysis of the Grenfell patronage. The Grenfell tragedy was an enormous cause celebre at the time and I do not think there was any malicious insinuation  that the victims had any connection with terrorism purely because there were immigrants. They were very much viewed as innocents condemned by a lazy bureaucracy.
> 
> I don’t think that the Cookbook would be an Unpopular gig- quite the opposite- I think they gave her something they knew would:-
> 1) make the news because it was a big topic.
> 2) show she’s on the pulse of U.K. current events and her connection with her new home (ha ha).
> 3) reinforced her identity as a WOC and what a progressive marriage this was and
> 4) pushed the party line that she would be expressing a special interest in projects to do with women and POCs.
> 
> I think it was well-received at the time and it very much fit the modern royals narrative they were pushing. I think that any royals would’ve looked good doing this gig but they wanted to push the above messages with M and it worked- at first. She was enormously popular initially and it takes a while to unravel.
> I personally think the Africa tour interview was the moment she turned a lot of people against her because it so clearly highlighted the gulf between her public persona of a spokesperson against racial and gender inequality and the vacuous self-absorption that actually lies inside her.
> 
> There was later some negative press because they found out that some people involved with the mosque that put out the cookbook had some links to extremist groups but I’d say that was largely seen as very divorced from Grenfell itself.


In your rush to judgment, you completely misread what I wrote. Indeed, I explicitly stated, "*I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible*." In fact, we're in agreement as to the narrative, and turn of events.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Serena, welcome to perimenopause. Talk to your doctor, not Twitter.


Do you mean #6?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This could very well be Hazz:


----------



## Happyish

xincinsin said:


> She received a lot of good press from the Grenfell tragedy, but IMO, her innate selfishness came through in the end when she took all the credit for the cookbook and started to treat it like a vanity project. If you check it out, the author is The Hubb Community Kitchen with foreword by HRH the DOS. But in so many pro-Methane articles, it's described as Methane's cookbook.


In 1942, Wallis Warfield Simpson, the Duchess of Windsor, wrote a cookbook entitled Some Favorite Southern Recipes of the Duchess of Windsor. The woman who may have saved the country from a Nazi-sympathising king shared her 140 recipes to raise money for the British War Relief Society.
Unlike Megan, she actually _wrote_ the cookbook.
How astounding the parallels between these two outcasts.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Do you mean #6?


Oh hell no. A real doctor not make believe.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Oh hell no. A real doctor not make believe.


But he is such a renown expert…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This could very well be Hazz:



Why does he keep using the HRH? After all his shenanigans, a more humble approach would be recommended imo. He has been described by many as arrogant, and nothing changed…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why does he keep using the HRH? After all his shenanigans, a more humble approach would be recommended imo. He has been described by many as arrogant, and nothing changed…



Humble?  Doubt he understands the meaning of the word.  IMO both Hazz and Andy are alike.  They are disrupters full of self importance.  Just as Andy will be a thorn in Charles’s reign, so too will Hazz always irritate W&K.  QE had to deal with Margaret’s jealousy, so she may not be too sympathetic toward Chas and W.  Maybe she sees these 2nd-born’s as character builders for the 1st born.


----------



## rose60610

Happyish said:


> In 1942, Wallis Warfield Simpson, the Duchess of Windsor, wrote a cookbook entitled *Some Favorite Southern Recipes of the Duchess of Windsor.* The woman who may have saved the country from a Nazi-sympathising king shared her 140 recipes to raise money for the British War Relief Society.
> Unlike Megan, she actually _wrote_ the cookbook.
> How astounding the parallels between these two outcasts.



Interesting! I have over a thousand cookbooks (disturbing, I know   ) but wasn't aware of this one. I do have Duchy Originals Cookbook which I like a lot. I guarantee I will NOT buy Methane's cookbook.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Why does he keep using the HRH? After all his shenanigans, a more humble approach would be recommended imo. He has been described by many as arrogant, and nothing changed…


At first I thought you *were* talking about Hazy. They're increasingly interchangeable. I'm sure Andrew truly believes he did nothing wrong re Virginia Giuffre. If you keep telling yourself something over and over eventually you start to believe it is the truth. And so many men see nothing wrong with sleeping with a teenager. Andrew likely believed his royal status gave him protection from something as sordid as her lawsuit, but clearly he underestimated Giuffre.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG 

From Quora:



> She had the world at her feet and instead of stepping carefully she jumped in with dog sh*t covered boots.


----------



## kemilia

LittleStar88 said:


> This is so awkward OMG LOL.


Embarrassing to even watch.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Newsweek was once credible journalism. Other than what they pay to put on Apple News today, they're pretty much irrelevant.



So true. It is completely different from the respected Newsweek magazine many of us grew up with decades ago. It’s no more than a web tabloid these days.


----------



## Chanbal

Inside info on why #6 didn't attend the memorial… Oh my gosh!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Interesting! I have over a thousand cookbooks (disturbing, I know   ) but wasn't aware of this one. I do have Duchy Originals Cookbook which I like a lot. I guarantee I will NOT buy Methane's cookbook.



You're my kind of person. And I will use your example when I'm mocked again for my mere few hundreds  

I refused to buy the Grenfell cookbook because I didn't want to look at Raptor on the cover. I did however buy the charity cookbook William advocated for (and it is stunning, with beautiful photography and interesting recipes).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> At first I thought you were talking about Hazy. They're increasingly interchangeable.* I'm sure Andrew truly believes he did nothing wrong re Virginia Giuffre.* If you keep telling yourself something over and over eventually you start to believe it is the truth. And so many men see nothing wrong with sleeping with a teenager. Andrew likely believed his royal status gave him protection from something as sordid as her lawsuit, but clearly he underestimated Giuffre



Maybe he didn't. I never felt a picture of the both of them fully clothed proved anything but that they met, and to me the case had big holes.

I do believe Guiffre was wronged horribly and I have no sympathy for Andrew who is sketchy at best (what's with the new financial scandal?), but I am also open to the theory she was looking for financial benefits and went after the person who had to lose the most re: his reputation.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> Why does he keep using the HRH? After all his shenanigans, a more humble approach would be recommended imo. He has been described by many as arrogant, and nothing changed…



Without the HRH Andrew has nothing, he is a pompous, arrogant p>£%


----------



## CarryOn2020

See, the mess  just passes from one generation to another.









						Queen Elizabeth Is Leaving Charles and William With a Big Problem: Prince Andrew
					

Prince Andrew’s closeness to the queen was clear at Prince Philip’s memorial. But when Charles assumes the throne, Andrew’s royal excommunication may be brought into sharper focus.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Chanbal

Oops!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooops, this from long ago:


----------



## Chanbal

Continuing on 'this from long ago', whoever made the little clip of the dress/bird was brilliant.


----------



## Happyish

rose60610 said:


> Interesting! I have over a thousand cookbooks (disturbing, I know   ) but wasn't aware of this one. I do have Duchy Originals Cookbook which I like a lot. I guarantee I will NOT buy Methane's cookbook.


I don't own this, but I hear it's very good . . .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oops!




When even fallen from grace Chrissy Teigen is there...

I'm sure Raptor was invited, she just had more important things to do, like save the world.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, this from long ago:




Ugh - she is a terrible actress!


----------



## mellibelly

From Pilot Hardy


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> From Pilot Hardy
> View attachment 5370725


really....we need to hear from her? about her friend the WOC?
LOL....her name is huge and there's a little tiny "Harry".....this guy had better start seeing the writing on the wall


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> From Pilot Hardy
> View attachment 5370725



What should comedy be?
First up, no one can make fun of H&M for any reason.   QE, PC&Cams, W&K do stupid stuff and should be ridiculed daily.  Leave the Yorks alone. Anything Hazz says is funny and he should win the award. Hazz is laugh out loud funny. MM is sweet sexy funny.  Sticking her tongue out is so cute - people should smile at that.   More rules later.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga




----------



## mellibelly

It mimics their preachy word salad so well I can see why some think it’s real.


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


>



I read the quote went omg then read that it is a joke - yay
Love humor and the ability to take a joke , thanks for the post


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> It mimics their preachy word salad so well I can see why some think it’s real.


Oh!  I did buy it


----------



## Happyish

mellibelly said:


> From Pilot Hardy
> View attachment 5370725


Oh pleeeeease . . .  is nothing exempt? Even comedy?
So if I understand, they're critical of comedy and want to have a "conversation," they're on the bandwagon about Alopecia for "women of color," (never mind anyone else who might be affected), and as to the Ukraine, other than than make a statement "we stand with the people of the Ukraine," it appears they've done nothing. Indeed, they've done nothing _about anything_.
A day late and a dollar short.
Maybe H & M should have a talk show, that's all they seem to do. The new Regis and Kathy Lee?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When even fallen from grace Chrissy Teigen is there...
> *I'm sure Raptor was invited*, she just had more important things to do, like save the world.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happyish said:


> Oh pleeeeease . . .  is nothing exempt? Even comedy?
> So if I understand, they're critical of comedy and want to have a "conversation," they're on the bandwagon about Alopecia for "women of color," (never mind anyone else who might be affected), and as to the Ukraine, other than than make a statement "we stand with the people of the Ukraine," it appears they've done nothing. Indeed, they've done nothing _about anything_.
> A day late and a dollar short.
> Maybe H & M should have a talk show, that's all they seem to do. The new Regis and Kathy Lee?



Nooooo, please don’t give anyone any ideas like this. We do not need them behind a microphone or camera.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Denzel ,,, a cut above:


----------



## Tootsie17

sdkitty said:


> really....we need to hear from her? about her friend the WOC?
> LOL....her name is huge and there's a little tiny "Harry".....this guy had better start seeing the writing on the wall


Agree with this 100%
What's the old saying...Birds of a feather flock together. LOL!
Just found out this is a joke, but it seems like the perfect word salad TW would write.


----------



## Chanbal

For the bored ones on a Saturday afternoon:










						Prince Harry And Toilet Deodorizer Promoter Meghan Markle Will Not Be Attending The Queen’s Jubilee | Global News Ink
					






					globalnewsink.com


----------



## Happyish

marietouchet said:


> I read the quote went omg then read that it is a joke - yay
> Love humor and the ability to take a joke , thanks for the post


Me too!!


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Denzel ,,, a cut above:




I love Denzel!


----------



## bellecate

mellibelly said:


> From Pilot Hardy
> View attachment 5370725



Was this an April Fool's joke?  Love the tiny Harry.


----------



## rose60610

mellibelly said:


> From Pilot Hardy
> View attachment 5370725



I read and thought "no way", because Meghan wouldn't back somebody who's gotten flamed as "courageous".  She isn't going to side with somebody who has become a pariah. She wants to be with the cool kids, not the newly disgraced. I don't think even Methane would put "Harry" in fine print, she controls him with her arms/hands for all the world to see, like when she tried to butt in front of the Queen at Charles' 50th anniversary of being Duke of Wales event. However, she would love to redefine "what comedy should be".


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

Luvbolide said:


> I love Denzel!



Many thanks for posting DW’s acceptance speech - I am not a crier but his words warmed my heart - which is pretty cold these days ♥️


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, almost missed this one…


----------



## LittleStar88

Harry’s Secret Trips Without Meghan! — inTouch
					

THE DUKE OF SUSSEX DITCHES HIS WIFE 6 TIMES IN 12 MONTHS — AND IS SPOTTED WITH A MYSTERY WOMAN




					apple.news


----------



## Luvbolide

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Many thanks for posting DW’s acceptance speech - I am not a crier but his words warmed my heart - which is pretty cold these days ♥



I know what you mean!  And credit for posting Denzel’s speech goes to @CarryOn2020.  I loved hearing it, too.  Sure could have used a dose of that during the Oscars!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For the bored ones on a Saturday afternoon:
> View attachment 5370792
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Toilet Deodorizer Promoter Meghan Markle Will Not Be Attending The Queen’s Jubilee | Global News Ink
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> globalnewsink.com


Toilet Deodorizer Promoter???  If anything, she’s the stinker!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oops!



Oh man that's harsh


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe he didn't. I never felt a picture of the both of them fully clothed proved anything but that they met, and to me the case had big holes.
> 
> I do believe Guiffre was wronged horribly and I have no sympathy for Andrew who is sketchy at best (what's with the new financial scandal?), but I am also open to the theory she was looking for financial benefits and went after the person who had to lose the most re: his reputation.


Agree. Giuffre was sucked into the whole mess when she was young because adults lured her in with empty promises, but I suspect that she grew up and realized, or others helped her to realize, that she had cards to play to extract money. I do wonder if she would have opened the can of worms that was her teenage life if she was not approached by the authorities who were building a case against Epstein. She had gotten herself out of that life already.  

She had a non-profit which she relaunched last Nov to help other sex trafficking victims. It will be interesting to see if it thrives. As of now, the website states that it is still in process of being set up.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> When even fallen from grace Chrissy Teigen is there...
> 
> I'm sure Raptor was invited, she just had more important things to do, like save the world.


Was Teigen there because her husband was performing?


----------



## csshopper

Elton and David Furnish, Raptor’s collaborator on her Netflix gig, do not invite them to hot ticket, annual Oscar bash.
Serena, a previously touted BFF, does not invite her to an A List Mom party.

Two possibilities: Sunshine Sucks couldn’t buy their way in.       Long time associates have had enough of the dramas, lies, narcissistic behaviors and are distancing themselves.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Elton and David Furnish, Raptor’s collaborator on her Netflix gig, do not invite them to hot ticket, annual Oscar bash.
> Serena, a previously touted BFF, does not invite her to an A List Mom party.
> 
> Two possibilities: Sunshine Sucks couldn’t buy their way in.       Long time associates have had enough of the dramas, lies, narcissistic behaviors and are distancing themselves.


M not attending the Mom Party--that's major MAJOR. Even evil Chrissy T was there. M would have made sure she was front and center in all the pics and that's probably one of the _many_ reasons her invite got "lost" in the mail. 

I thought for sure she would be at Elton's party and nope (I was looking forward to seeing what ill-fitting $$$ outfit she was wearing).

I doubt there is anything left to break in Montesheetsho.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe he didn't. I never felt a picture of the both of them fully clothed proved anything but that they met, and to me the case had big holes.
> 
> I do believe Guiffre was wronged horribly and I have no sympathy for Andrew who is sketchy at best (what's with the new financial scandal?), but I am also open to the theory she was looking for financial benefits and went after the person who had to lose the most re: his reputation.


Oh I'm confident he did. He wasn't nicknamed Randy Andy for nothing. Her account of him being so sweaty was too real to be made up, and he sure sounded guilty in that interview. She was very young and impressionable and was taken advantage of by adults. I believe the "MeToo" movement and the perspective of being an adult gave her the courage to come forward. I was involved in a situation with an adult when I was her age that I now understand was totally inappropriate, and possibly even criminal. She has said that her settlement will go toward helping other victims and I believe her, but time will tell.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is video #3 from TM and KL. While I can't say the same for KL, TM seems to have a modest and honest approach when he speaks. They don't add much this time, but it was nice of TM to praise Kate during her tour, he was very sweet imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Late to the party?! 







__





						We Can't Believe What Meghan Markle Is Saying About Her Oprah Interview Now—Is She Serious?!
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Understatement of the year!


----------



## xincinsin

kemilia said:


> M not attending the Mom Party--that's major MAJOR. Even evil Chrissy T was there. M would have made sure she was front and center in all the pics and that's probably one of the _many_ reasons her invite got "lost" in the mail.


She would not have been popular if she:
a) spread her legs in a sexy pose like she did at the tennis match when she was speaking with Serena's husband
b) batted her eyelashes and tried to look cute like she did at so many royal engagements
c) needed to bring her security troopers with her


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> At first I thought you *were* talking about Hazy. They're increasingly interchangeable. I'm sure Andrew truly believes he did nothing wrong re Virginia Giuffre. If you keep telling yourself something over and over eventually you start to believe it is the truth. And so many men see nothing wrong with sleeping with a teenager. Andrew likely believed his royal status gave him protection from something as sordid as her lawsuit, but clearly he underestimated Giuffre.


His association with Giuffre happened 18 years ago. It is doubtful that he thought of protection, or the possibility he could be sued. I agree, he probably believes he did nothing wrong, because so much of this went on at the time. However, attitudes have changed significantly since then placing a different focus on such behaviors and so have the laws, having significantly expanded the statute of limitations for statutory rape, something he and most of us never could have envisioned.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You're my kind of person. And I will use your example when I'm mocked again for my mere few hundreds
> 
> I refused to buy the Grenfell cookbook because I didn't want to look at Raptor on the cover. I did however buy the charity cookbook William advocated for (and it is stunning, with beautiful photography and interesting recipes).


What's the charity cookbook to which you refer?


----------



## Happyish

csshopper said:


> Elton and David Furnish, Raptor’s collaborator on her Netflix gig, do not invite them to hot ticket, annual Oscar bash.
> Serena, a previously touted BFF, does not invite her to an A List Mom party.
> 
> Two possibilities: Sunshine Sucks couldn’t buy their way in.       Long time associates have had enough of the dramas, lies, narcissistic behaviors and are distancing themselves.


Do you know that or are you assuming that? Just because they didn't go, doesn't mean they weren't invited.
It's very possible they were invited, but declined. After all, the optics of attending an Oscar party, and then jet setting to Miami to attend a Mom party, just after refusing to attend Phillips's memorial on security grounds, notwithstanding that they would have been surrounded by other royals from all over Europe, would have been awful.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> Do you know that or are you assuming that? Just because they didn't go, doesn't mean they weren't invited.
> It's very possible they were invited, but declined. After all, the optics of attending an Oscar party, and then jet setting to Miami to attend a Mom party, just after refusing to attend Phillips's memorial, would have been awful.



I can just imagine a fight about this: "Well if I can't go to my grandfather's memorial, you can't go to Elton's or Serena's parties". I'm sure things are just peachy in Montecito.


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> I love Denzel!


I love him too.  thanks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> What's the charity cookbook to which you refer?



This one:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> Do you know that or are you assuming that? Just because they didn't go, doesn't mean they weren't invited.
> It's very possible they were invited, but declined. After all, the optics of attending an Oscar party, and then jet setting to Miami to attend a Mom party, just after refusing to attend Phillips's memorial on security grounds, notwithstanding that they would have been surrounded by other royals from all over Europe, would have been awful.



I fully agree these are thoughts normal, decent people would have had. But these two are so far gone, not sure they would have even considered the bad optics. After all, they were on Oprah trying to take down the BRF while Philip was on his death bed.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I fully agree these are thoughts normal, decent people would have had. But these two are so far gone, not sure they would have even considered the bad optics. After all, they were on Oprah trying to take down the BRF while Philip was on his death bed.


If you didn't have chance yet, I recommend watching Lady C's last video. The interesting stuff is on the first 1/3 of the video. It's about what she learned from a royal who attended PP's memorial, one of the 100 royals at the event.  It looks like TW had a deep animosity towards PP, because of his comment about dating showgirls and not marrying them. The animosity is also towards QE for backing PP. The timing of OW's interview had also to do with making PP's last days uncomfortable. All allegedly, of course!


----------



## lallybelle

HUH? They would never have thought of the optics. H already is headed to Invictus games soon right after saying they couldn't go to PP's service without security. Miss Thing would never have turned down a prestigious invite to A list parties.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Late to the party?!
> View attachment 5371202
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We Can't Believe What Meghan Markle Is Saying About Her Oprah Interview Now—Is She Serious?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msn.com


"May Have Been Caught In a Lie"? I think anyone who wants to catch her in a lie is absolutely spoilt for choice.



Happyish said:


> Do you know that or are you assuming that? Just because they didn't go, doesn't mean they weren't invited.
> It's very possible they were invited, but declined. After all, the optics of attending an Oscar party, and then jet setting to Miami to attend a Mom party, just after refusing to attend Phillips's memorial on security grounds, notwithstanding that they would have been surrounded by other royals from all over Europe, would have been awful.


From the way their PR keeps dropping stories about how they are (allegedly) invited here, there and everywhere, (Oscars & Jubilee, anyone?), I'd bet good money that if they were invited to an Oscar party or any A-list event, they would make sure that the world knew even if they didn't go. Discreetly decline an invite? No way!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> If you didn't have chance yet, I recommend watching Lady C's last video. The interesting stuff is on the first 1/3 of the video. It's about what she learned from a royal who attended PP's memorial, one of the 100 royals at the event.  It looks like TW had a deep animosity towards PP, because of his comment about dating showgirls and not marrying them. The animosity is also towards QE for backing PP. The timing of OW's interview had also to do with making PP's last days uncomfortable. All allegedly, of course!



Oh, I bookmarked it when you posted it but never got around to watch it. Will do now. And re: the allegations - I don't think I've ever met someone who is so rotten to the core like this woman. Hurt her overinflated ego, suffer as much as she can make you suffer. Just...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> "May Have Been Caught In a Lie"? I think anyone who wants to catch her in a lie is absolutely spoilt for choice.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, I bookmarked it when you posted it but never got around to watch it. Will do now. And re: the allegations - I don't think I've ever met someone who is so rotten to the core like this woman. Hurt her overinflated ego, suffer as much as she can make you suffer. Just...


Ok, let us know what you think about it. It's interesting imo.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Oops!



I hope Chrissy Teigen goes the route of Megalomaniac .. she needs to be on that Z-list as well IMO!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Ok, let us know what you think about it. It's interesting imo.



I'm maybe easily entertained, but I'm laughing at the shade thrown at Raptor's red dress vs. Kate's golden gown 

So...it does sound like her, but I am still flabbergasted how people hold grudges like this (as I said over on the Will Smith thread, I can barely remember who annoyed me with something three months ago) and then not only seethe silently, but act on it.

I also do wonder who the royal was. It must be someone close enough to be told the conversation AND having met the nutjob more than once, but I can't exactly see Camilla calling Lady C. Maybe one of the Kents or Gloucesters? Or maybe just a family friend. Wouldn't it be funny if it was Princess Michael  (I'm just running with it here obviously)



> "She came into the family intend on using her position as a platform from which to demonstrate her superiority to everyone else. When she was prevented from doing so, she became enraged and has been vengeful ever since. [...] She also had no respect for the traditions, the royal family or the British people or the commonwealth."





> "In my view she's very, very vengeful."





> "When you meet her, she is tightly coiled like a well wound up spring. She is plainly a self-fabricated personality who aggressively asserts herself and her vision of herself at all times. Only the good Lord knows the energy it must take to maintain a facade like that. If you have any knowledge of psychology - and most of the royals do - it is truly frightening to observe this self-created fantasist in operation, spouting platitutes as if she invented the wheel. She's a know-it-all and listens to no one. Anyone who disagrees with her is banished. She's the most dictatorial person I've ever met, and I've met real dictators...you know, dictators in power. She has perfected the technique of divide and rule. The reason why she didn't attend the memorial service and why Harry didn't come as well is that this was payback time for Prince Philip questioning her suitability as a wife for Harry."



Direct quotes from the mystery royal. And it does sound EXACTLY like her, doesn't it? The one thing I am not fully in agreement with is that this was payback time for Philip. I am not doubting she thought it was, but honestly, who wanted her there anyway? And in case she didn't notice, Philip's dead, he probably didn't care if anyone came. This memorial was for the living, mostly The Queen.

Plus, Harry did come to the funeral, when he could have made the excuse of a heavily pregnant spouse.

And Lady C as we know and love her:



> "Amazing! I mean, there's this modestly successful hustler/actress who comes into the royal family and regards herself superior to all of them. Interesting."



Modestly successful  I wasn't happy with Lady C's vitriol towards Guiffre the minor but this is why I missed her haha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> I hope Chrissy Teigen goes the route of Megalomaniac .. she needs to be on that Z-list as well IMO!!!



But other than Raptor she picked a better (as in, actually talented and uber-famous) husband. So I don't see her being iced out anytime soon.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> "May Have Been Caught In a Lie"? I think anyone who wants to catch her in a lie is absolutely spoilt for choice.
> 
> 
> From the way their PR keeps dropping stories about how they are (allegedly) invited here, there and everywhere, (Oscars & Jubilee, anyone?), I'd bet good money that if they were invited to an Oscar party or any A-list event, they would make sure that the world knew even if they didn't go. Discreetly decline an invite? No way!


I perused the pictures from the various Oscar parties.  There are so many of them that people party hop.  Granted that I am not up on the latest rappers etc, but there were enough borderline and not even actors at these parties, that if they were invited to even one of them, there is no way that she would pass  up the opportunity to flaunt herself in an ill fitting gown.  Jane Seymour claimed on a news program entertainment segment that she was asked by Elton to host his party since he could not be there.  Plates were surely broken over that one.  JS is a working actress and did have her own TV series in the past, but currently she is mostly making TV movies and not a big name star.  Here is my April Fools joke for the day.  Would JS have curtsied to MM?  She would have to JCMH


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You're my kind of person. And I will use your example when I'm mocked again for my mere few hundreds
> 
> I refused to buy the Grenfell cookbook because I didn't want to look at Raptor on the cover. I did however buy the charity cookbook William advocated for (and it is stunning, with beautiful photography and interesting recipes).


Back when it came out, I looked at the reviews and they weren't good enough to warrant a purchase.  I was disappointed because I thought there would be good vegetarian recipes in it.  Most of the criticism was that the recipes were not well written and probably not tested.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Back when it came out, I looked at the reviews and they weren't good enough to warrant a purchase.  I was disappointed because I thought there would be good vegetarian recipes in it.  Most of the criticism was that the recipes were not well written and probably not tested.



Which one?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh, another good one (still quoting the unnamed royal):



> "In my view, she's not only a deeply disturbed individual, but also a truly frightening one."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which one?


The Grenfell Cookbook


----------



## jelliedfeels

Happyish said:


> In your rush to judgment, you completely misread what I wrote. Indeed, I explicitly stated, "*I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible*." In fact, we're in agreement as to the narrative, and turn of events.


I think that’s a little unfair, I don’t think I passed any judgement or made any suggestion of what you thought about refugees. 

I was merely commenting on your view (as I interpreted it and maybe this is wrong) that the Grenfell  cookbook would not be a good choice of first royal project and that it would be unpopular. I was saying, in my opinion, I felt that it was a desirable first project because it spelled out a lot of M’s royal Branding, because the tragedy was such a big news story and that it was initially popular (as she was in general.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The Grenfell Cookbook



Kind of surprising they let this slip seeing Ebury Press is a reputable publisher.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> This could very well be Hazz:



Honestly it feels like rearranging deckchairs on the titanic to me.

He can be called the ‘count of Creepy’ but not the ‘duke of dirty deeds’ or the ‘prince of perv.’ Oh well that’s him punished then and in such a clear way 


Or in H’s case I suppose it’d be he can be the ‘duke of dunces’ and the ‘honourable hen-pecked’ but not the ‘prince of political correctness.’


gracekelly said:


> I perused the pictures from the various Oscar parties.  There are so many of them that people party hop.  Granted that I am not up on the latest rappers etc, but there were enough borderline and not even actors at these parties, that if they were invited to even one of them, there is no way that she would pass  up the opportunity to flaunt herself in an ill fitting gown.  Jane Seymour claimed on a news program entertainment segment that she was asked by Elton to host his party since he could not be there.  Plates were surely broken over that one.  JS is a working actress and did have her own TV series in the past, but currently she is mostly making TV movies and not a big name star.  Here is my April Fools joke for the day.  Would JS have curtsied to MM?  She would have to JCMH


When doctor Quinn medicine woman is seen as 
trendier than you even though Elton was friends with your mum…the shade!

I imagine Elton was terrified he’d start prancing around dressed as a cheese puff on the dj decks and announce the start of his wife’s singing career cue:-


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> He can be called the ‘count of Creepy’ but not the ‘duke of dirty deeds’ or the ‘prince of perv.’ Oh well that’s him punished then and in such a clear way
> 
> 
> Or in H’s case I suppose it’d be he can be the ‘duke of dunces’ and the ‘honourable hen-pecked’ but not the ‘prince of political correctness.’



Other names may apply:
Andy = Prince of Pervie friends Or A Perv’s Best Friend
Hazzie = Prince of Never-Do-Well


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kind of surprising they let this slip seeing Ebury Press is a reputable publisher.


It could have been the rush to get it to press and the assumption was that the ladies only gave in tried and true recipes.  Even well known recipes books have their faults.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> "May Have Been Caught In a Lie"? I think anyone who wants to catch her in a lie is absolutely spoilt for choice.


It looks like someone's credibility has been shaken. Allegedly, it's possible that someone wrote on a blog about being a humanitarian about the time DH plans were in place. The link to that blog has been posted, and some people question the veracity of what was written there. I wonder if TM will confirm (or not) what was written there. 



Spoiler: The Blog









						How to Be Both | The Tig Archives
					






					thetig.meghanpedia.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

lallybelle said:


> HUH? They would never have thought of the optics. H already is headed to Invictus games soon right after saying they couldn't go to PP's service without security. Miss Thing would never have turned down a prestigious invite to A list parties.


I wouldn't be surprised M has 'Find My' app and track H especially when he's away. Of course if he leaves it in his hotel room or wherever he is staying, she wouldn't know where he's truly at.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You're my kind of person. And I will use your example when I'm mocked again for my mere few hundreds
> 
> I refused to buy the Grenfell cookbook because I didn't want to look at Raptor on the cover. I did however buy the charity cookbook William advocated for (and it is stunning, with beautiful photography and interesting recipes).


What you said, and


jelliedfeels said:


> I think that’s a little unfair, I don’t think I passed any judgement or made any suggestion of what you thought about refugees.
> 
> I was merely commenting on your view (as I interpreted it and maybe this is wrong) that the Grenfell  cookbook would not be a good choice of first royal project and that it would be unpopular. I was saying, in my opinion, I felt that it was a desirable first project because it spelled out a lot of M’s royal Branding, because the tragedy was such a big news story and that it was initially popular (as she was in general.)


Actually, you implied that I expressed the opinion that I thought the decision to focus on the Greenfell fire as Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor's initial cause celeb was imprudent because the immigrants were connected to terrorism. You stated: "I do not think there was any malicious insinuation that the victims had any connection with terrorism purely because there were immigrants." 
In fact, I explicitly said just the opposite, to wit: "*I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible*." Thus, it was you who suggested otherwise.

An obituary in the immediate aftermath of Diana's death made the observation that public opinion would have turned against her because of her relationship with Dodi Fayed, who was of Egyptian descent. One need only refer to history to understand why. 
The 1956 Suez Crisis, when Britain along with France and Israel invaded Egypt to recover control of the Suez Canal, was arguably one of the most significant episodes in post-1945 British history. Its outcome highlighted Britain's declining status and confirmed it as a 'second tier' world power. Not only was it a humiliating defeat, but thousands of British citizens lost their lives. The author made the point that had she lived, Diana's relationship to Dodi would have been seen as a betrayal.

Likewise, Great Britain has suffered horribly at the hands of muslim extremists. Under the circumstances, the cookbook which focused on immigrants effected by the Greenfall Fire, many of whom were muslims, showed a lack of sensitivity and fundamental disregard not only for the victims of terrorism, but for those members of the british armed forces fighting extremists on foreign soils. 

Are muslims unfairly persecuted? Yes. Did the people displaced by the Greenfall Fire need support. Yes. Was this a worthy charity? Yes. But there are lots of charities she could have supported that would not have been as controversial.

While *the decision to support this group *_*was a brave choice*_, I believe it was a foolish one, as Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor misgauged public sentiment. While the US press was hugely positive, her decision to support *this* group, was not so well received in the UK. 

She could have chosen another charitable endeavor as her initial public foray. She could have gradually dipped her toes into less popular causes and for fringe groups (remember Diana with AIDS patients) once she had the british public's support. Instead, as with this endeavor and everything that came after, she tried to bulldoze her way into the hearts and minds of the British People, the BRF, and the press, without taking the time to nurture those relationships and see how she could best use her power and formidable skills and intelligence to make a difference. 

Things could have been very different had she only taken baby steps. Rome wasn't built in a day. Instead, she lost a lot of goodwill right out of the box. Mrs. Mounbatten did not know and still does not know how to read a room.

That is my point.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Happyish said:


> Under the circumstances, the cookbook which focused on immigrants effected by the Greenfall Fire, many of whom were muslims, *showed a lack of sensitivity and fundamental disregard not only for the victims of terrorism, but for those members of the british armed forces fighting extremists on foreign soils.*



No. Just, no.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Happyish said:


> What you said, and
> 
> Actually, you implied that I expressed the opinion that I thought the decision to focus on the Greenfell fire as Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor's initial cause celeb was imprudent because the immigrants were connected to terrorism. You stated: "I do not think there was any malicious insinuation that the victims had any connection with terrorism purely because there were immigrants."
> In fact, I explicitly said just the opposite, to wit: "*I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible*." Thus, it was you who suggested otherwise.
> 
> An obituary in the immediate aftermath of Diana's death made the observation that public opinion would have turned against her because of her relationship with Dodi Fayed, who was of Egyptian descent. One need only refer to history to understand why.
> The 1956 Suez Crisis, when Britain along with France and Israel invaded Egypt to recover control of the Suez Canal, was arguably one of the most significant episodes in post-1945 British history. Its outcome highlighted Britain's declining status and confirmed it as a 'second tier' world power. Not only was it a humiliating defeat, but thousands of British citizens lost their lives. The author made the point that had she lived, Diana's relationship to Dodi would have been seen as a betrayal.
> 
> Likewise, Great Britain has suffered horribly at the hands of muslim extremists. Under the circumstances, the cookbook which focused on immigrants effected by the Greenfall Fire, many of whom were muslims, showed a lack of sensitivity and fundamental disregard not only for the victims of terrorism, but for those members of the british armed forces fighting extremists on foreign soils.
> 
> Are muslims unfairly persecuted? Yes. Did the people displaced by the Greenfall Fire need support. Yes. Was this a worthy charity? Yes. But there are lots of charities she could have supported that would not have been as controversial.
> 
> While *the decision to support this group *_*was a brave choice*_, I believe it was a foolish one, as Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor misgauged public sentiment. While the US press was hugely positive, her decision to support *this* group, was not so well received in the UK.
> 
> She could have chosen another charitable endeavor as her initial public foray. She could have gradually dipped her toes into less popular causes and for fringe groups (remember Diana with AIDS patients) once she had the british public's support. Instead, as with this endeavor and everything that came after, she tried to bulldoze her way into the hearts and minds of the British People, the BRF, and the press, without taking the time to nurture those relationships and see how she could best use her power and formidable skills and intelligence to make a difference.
> 
> Things could have been very different had she only taken baby steps. Rome wasn't built in a day. Instead, she lost a lot of goodwill right out of the box. Mrs. Mounbatten did not know and still does not know how to read a room.
> 
> That is my point.


I think you might be rushing to judge yourself in attributing a lot of views to the British public at large.


----------



## Chanbal

One more article with an obvious title! 











						Meghan Markle ‘never would’ve’ gotten popular without marrying Prince Harry
					

Experts slam Meghan Markle over her ‘lack of marketability’ since she ‘never could have gotten popular’ without Prince Harry.This claim has been made by US commentator Lee...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more article with an obvious title!
> 
> View attachment 5371740
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ‘never would’ve’ gotten popular without marrying Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Experts slam Meghan Markle over her ‘lack of marketability’ since she ‘never could have gotten popular’ without Prince Harry.This claim has been made by US commentator Lee...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk


You don't say??!!  
Gotta love journalists stating the obvious.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> You don't say??!!
> Gotta love journalists stating the obvious.


They don’t write anything until they come here to read the truth lol!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Overly elevated eyebrows to express shock and innocence.  Ugh, she's so annoying.


----------



## papertiger

Happyish said:


> What you said, and
> 
> Actually, you implied that I expressed the opinion that I thought the decision to focus on the Greenfell fire as Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor's initial cause celeb was imprudent because the immigrants were connected to terrorism. You stated: "I do not think there was any malicious insinuation that the victims had any connection with terrorism purely because there were immigrants."
> In fact, I explicitly said just the opposite, to wit: "*I am not saying that these refugees were at all responsible*." Thus, it was you who suggested otherwise.
> 
> An obituary in the immediate aftermath of Diana's death made the observation that public opinion would have turned against her because of her relationship with Dodi Fayed, who was of Egyptian descent. One need only refer to history to understand why.
> The 1956 Suez Crisis, when Britain along with France and Israel invaded Egypt to recover control of the Suez Canal, was arguably one of the most significant episodes in post-1945 British history. Its outcome highlighted Britain's declining status and confirmed it as a 'second tier' world power. Not only was it a humiliating defeat, but thousands of British citizens lost their lives. The author made the point that had she lived, Diana's relationship to Dodi would have been seen as a betrayal.
> 
> Likewise, Great Britain has suffered horribly at the hands of muslim extremists. Under the circumstances, the cookbook which focused on immigrants effected by the Greenfall Fire, many of whom were muslims, showed a lack of sensitivity and fundamental disregard not only for the victims of terrorism, but for those members of the british armed forces fighting extremists on foreign soils.
> 
> Are muslims unfairly persecuted? Yes. Did the people displaced by the Greenfall Fire need support. Yes. Was this a worthy charity? Yes. But there are lots of charities she could have supported that would not have been as controversial.
> 
> While *the decision to support this group *_*was a brave choice*_, I believe it was a foolish one, as Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor misgauged public sentiment. While the US press was hugely positive, her decision to support *this* group, was not so well received in the UK.
> 
> She could have chosen another charitable endeavor as her initial public foray. She could have gradually dipped her toes into less popular causes and for fringe groups (remember Diana with AIDS patients) once she had the british public's support. Instead, as with this endeavor and everything that came after, she tried to bulldoze her way into the hearts and minds of the British People, the BRF, and the press, without taking the time to nurture those relationships and see how she could best use her power and formidable skills and intelligence to make a difference.
> 
> Things could have been very different had she only taken baby steps. Rome wasn't built in a day. Instead, she lost a lot of goodwill right out of the box. Mrs. Mounbatten did not know and still does not know how to read a room.
> 
> That is my point.



I think something is lost in the translation. Choices would have been vetted by the Palace. In the UK, the cookbook was a safe choice.

Most people here don't have a problem with refugees wherever they're from, there was a complete public outpouring of grief and disbelief at the unnecessary death tole.  It's true we have had a problem with terrorists (most of ours have been 'home-grown') but this incident had nothing to do with terrorism. Anger was clearly laid at the feet of officials and commercial companies who passed/did work on a building that was an accident waiting to happen. MM and JCMH were sent to represent the BRF to express what 99% other people thought at the time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> Likewise, Great Britain has suffered horribly at the hands of muslim extremists. Under the circumstances, the cookbook which focused on immigrants effected by the Greenfall Fire, many of whom were muslims, showed a lack of sensitivity and fundamental disregard not only for the victims of terrorism, but for those members of the british armed forces fighting extremists on foreign soils.
> 
> Are muslims unfairly persecuted? Yes. Did the people displaced by the Greenfall Fire need support. Yes. Was this a worthy charity? Yes. But there are lots of charities she could have supported that would not have been as controversial.



Why would it be controversial, though? It is one thing if some of these Muslims were later proven to have questionable ties, but how is being Muslim in general somehow dishonourable and supporting them insensitive towards victims of Islamic terrorism? They were Londoners first who suffered horribly from the greed and irresponsibility of others.

During the past few years hundreds of dead children have been unearthed in Christian orphanages and boarding schools both in Canada and Ireland. In Germany, dozens and dozens of victims of both CSA by priests an victims of physical abuse by nuns during cure vacations in the countryside have come forward. So, are we all now suspicious and guilty by association? I really don't think so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Overly elevated eyebrows to express shock and innocence.  Ugh, she's so annoying.



She did this a lot when she was speaking to the people she met while still on royal duty. So freaking condescending and patronizing.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did this a lot when she was speaking to the people she met while still on royal duty. So freaking condescending and patronizing.


Did she do the raised eyebrows look on Suits? Wondering if it was part of her catalogue of expressions learnt from her acting days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Did she do the raised eyebrows look on Suits? Wondering if it was part of her catalogue of expressions learnt from her acting days.



I never watched a single episode.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ouch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Disclaimer: I didn't watch it. But I can kind of guess where this is going.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ouch.



I love Fortune Feimster!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I didn't watch it. But I can kind of guess where this is going.




I just watched it, and you'd be right


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> You don't say??!!
> Gotta love journalists stating the obvious.



It only took them five years to come to the conclusion everyone else knew at the time.


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> Did she do the raised eyebrows look on Suits? Wondering if it was part of her catalogue of expressions learnt from her acting days.


Yeees!  Standard look of hers. Esp when she wants to convey ‚vulnerability'. Fans of the show, not fans of her.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Disclaimer: I didn't watch it. But I can kind of guess where this is going.



Thanks for posting this video, I can't wait for a next one about MA's ties to TW. Is this finally coming full circle?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Overly elevated eyebrows to express shock and innocence.  Ugh, she's so annoying.


The tabloid issue is not new here, but this was the first time I heard about it in her own voice. It makes a huge difference, this is why I posted the clip here.


----------



## Chanbal

In one of his last videos, NS mentioned about the desire to have TM as a guest in an upcoming podcast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> In one of his last videos, NS mentioned about the desire to have TM as a guest in an upcoming podcast.



Here's what TW actually looked like at the memorial service mentioned above.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's what TW actually looked like at the memorial service mentioned above.
> 
> View attachment 5372092


dress looks ok...not sure about the hair


----------



## Jktgal

Chanbal said:


>





What but this was so inspiring and launched a million snorts ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's what TW actually looked like at the memorial service mentioned above.
> 
> View attachment 5372092



The freaking unkempt hair. At this point I think it was one big fat middle finger to the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The freaking unkempt hair. At this point I think it was one big fat middle finger to the BRF.


I think she just likes those tendrils


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I think she just likes those tendrils



But they are too long and always look like they haven't seen a comb in weeks.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But they are too long and always look like they haven't seen a comb in weeks.


you'd think she must use a hairdresser, not do her own.  but maybe she overrules their advice


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s a video of their late arrival. The hair strands are fine until she pushes them behind her ears, so maybe she herself doesn’t love them. Idk. The video shows no one else is baring arms.  In the plus column, the dress does seem to fit, except her bra strap did fall down.   Even back then, he looked gross imo.


----------



## lulu212121

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's what TW actually looked like at the memorial service mentioned above.
> 
> View attachment 5372092


She looks like she was coming off an all night bender. Her eyes.


----------



## LizzieBennett

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video of their late arrival. The hair strands are fine until she pushes them behind her ears, so maybe she herself doesn’t love them. Idk. The video shows no one else is baring arms.  In the plus column, the dress does seem to fit, except her bra strap did fall down.   Even back then, he looked gross imo.



I can't get past the bare arms.   It seems inappropriate.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think she just likes those tendrils



She thinks they’re cute. She’s always trying to look 15 years younger than she is.


----------



## rose60610

LizzieBennett said:


> I can't get past the bare arms.   It seems inappropriate.



Agreed. The service was in April, it's not like the temperature was 95 degrees. Seems like she took it as an "opportunity" to show everyone how she likes to eschew etiquette and stand out.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


>



I wonder if they’ve got a time share in August like a certain other couple - busy times  

Honestly she’d probably be ok with a lover… takes care of a chore like the rest of her staff. 


Chanbal said:


> In one of his last videos, NS mentioned about the desire to have TM as a guest in an upcoming podcast.



That would be a dead heat for who is more awkward in casual conversation. Honestly the content warning would have to say *may cause death by secondhand mortification and/or teeth loss through excessive grinding *


Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's what TW actually looked like at the memorial service mentioned above.
> 
> View attachment 5372092


In the words of Michael Kors - ‘slutty, slutty, slutty.’
This was essentially a funeral. One is to assume if she had attended P’s she’d have gone all out with a bustier and fishnets.

this is a bit obscure but those busted sideburns look like when teens on a budget try to recreate anime hair using a cheap wig and a lot of hair gel - bit cringe in a middle-aged woman.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That video is interesting. It seems like she won’t make eye contact with Haz afterglow they’re seated.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> dress looks ok...not sure about the hair


The dress may have not been ok. As far as I recall, one is supposed to have the shoulders covered in church, particularly when attending a memorial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But they are too long and always look like they haven't seen a comb in weeks.


Looks young and carefree, doncha know.


----------



## marietouchet

LizzieBennett said:


> I can't get past the bare arms.   It seems inappropriate.


The bare arms are an inappropriate thing for the BRF... Sam Cam  - PM wife - was widely criticized for attending a BRF memorial/church service in a sleeveless dress
It is like hats, if you are going to a BRF-event, then wear a hat, dont put up a fuss about being a liberated female , when in Rome...


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The dress may have not been ok. As far as I recall, one is supposed to have the shoulders covered in church, particularly when attending a memorial.


my bad....I was just looking at the dress, not thinking about the occasion


----------



## Chanbal

This is nice…


----------



## rose60610

I'd like to think that Elon might reply with something like "You wrote a book called "Finding Freedom". So what is it about free speech that you find upsetting? And by the way, you wanted "freedom", so isn't it bonkers that you had the expectation of your family continuing to pay for YOUR security? Welcome to adulthood!"


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> I'd like to think that Elon might reply with something like "You wrote a book called "Finding Freedom". So what is it about free speech that you find upsetting? And by the way, you wanted "freedom", so isn't it bonkers that you had the expectation of your family continuing to pay for YOUR security? Welcome to adulthood!"



It's probably hard even for Elon to understand the many contradictions of the Netefl*xes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s the same stuff with H&M. Rather than take action, they simply complain. Kinda useless, imo.  Her jubilee will be overshadowed by Andrew - will he show up, will he be in the balcony, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are these the photos Princess Anne is unhappy about?  Andy looks like he is just offering his arm and she refuses. 

This one is leaving



Search for Queen Elizabeth and Prince Andrew




__





						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com
				




Can’t tell is this is arriving or leaving


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s the same stuff with H&M. Rather than take action, they simply complain. Kinda useless, imo.  Her jubilee will be overshadowed by Andrew - will he show up, will he be in the balcony, etc.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Are these the photos Princess Anne is unhappy about?  Andy looks like he is just offering his arm and she refuses.
> 
> This one is leaving
> View attachment 5372384
> 
> 
> Search for Queen Elizabeth and Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can’t tell is this is arriving or leaving
> View attachment 5372386


It is my understanding that QE wished to have some privacy getting in and out of the church, and whoever took those pictures was disrespectful imo. She is ~96yo, for God's sake!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s the same stuff with H&M. Rather than take action, they simply complain. Kinda useless, imo.  Her jubilee will be overshadowed by Andrew - will he show up, will he be in the balcony, etc.



The photographer justifies all his actions such as dashing past people trying to stop him by repeating that since he was the only photographer allowed to capture images of the event, he had to take the photos to avoid getting lambasted by the rest of the media. Quite a slick way to evade responsibility for any disrespectful or uncouth behaviour. Reminds me of the time another news station was upset with a local reporter here because he didn't try to chase down an ambulance to get shots of a dying woman.





__





						The Challenge of Photographing Queen Elizabeth with Prince Andrew at Westminster Abbey
					

The Times photographer Richard Pohle has written for his publication about how he had to be persistent and quick-thinking to capture the front-page moment.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The photographer justifies all his actions such as dashing past people trying to stop him by repeating that since he was the only photographer allowed to capture images of the event, he had to take the photos to avoid getting lambasted by the rest of the media. Quite a slick way to evade responsibility for any disrespectful or uncouth behaviour. Reminds me of the time another news station was upset with a local reporter here because he didn't try to chase down an ambulance to get shots of a dying woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Challenge of Photographing Queen Elizabeth with Prince Andrew at Westminster Abbey
> 
> 
> The Times photographer Richard Pohle has written for his publication about how he had to be persistent and quick-thinking to capture the front-page moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



I can see both sides. People want to know how she is doing. Ideally the photographer would have honoured her wishes.  Sadly we live in the real world. Perhaps if the palace had been low key about her arrival and departure, no one would care. They made such a big deal about the ‘secrecy’ and the   thing with Margaret’s wheelchair  that, of course, people want to see. Imo she looks great, doesn’t seem to need much help.  Imo  I really do not see what is wrong with a wheelchair - it would be better than turning her appearances into fodder for the press. Is she having difficulty accepting her age?  No one expects her to be as spry as she once was.   Andy, tho,  made it all worse.  Just my opinion.

ETA: if I could I would remove the photos because I did not intend to offend anyone, especially Princess Anne


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But they are too long and always look like they haven't seen a comb in weeks.


It's going to the gym hair, not going to a memorial service hair.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> It's going to the gym hair, not going to a memorial service hair.


More like just got out of bed hair. Most celebs (which I think she sees herself as being) look quite put together when they get snapped going to the gym.


----------



## rose60610

My take on Andrew with TQ is this: he's one of her two sons, Philip was HIS FATHER ALSO.  We all know Andrew's scandal. At this time he hasn't been actually CONVICTED of anything, just stripped of bla bla bla and considered persona non grata (but yeah, we know). Charles is going to be the next KING, AND he is ALREADY there WITH his wife, Camilla.  QEII is 95, (95!!!)  at her husband's memorial service.  Charles isn't going to go side by side with his mother AND Camilla because that would just look WEIRD, especially since another male sibling SHOULD be there as it's HIS father's service also.  Past events aside, TQ is 95 and should be assisted in some way. By whom? A hired caregiver? Anne, who has a husband with whom she'd be attending? NO! Andrew is her son who is also grieving for his father. Regardless of his (friggin' weird) current relationship with Fergie, Andrew is a son who is there for his mother on that day. DONE. It'd be otherwise be MORE scandalous if Andrew weren't there. Considering.........various instances I could bring up in terms of "If we overlook 'certain people' being the spouse of 'XYZ bla bla'  or who'd done 'bla bla' then why SHOULDN'T Andrew be there, I'd get thrown into Purse Forum jail (again, cough cough).


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can see both sides. People want to know how she is doing. Ideally the photographer would have honoured her wishes.  Sadly we live in the real world. Perhaps if the palace had been low key about her arrival and departure, no one would care. They made such a big deal about the ‘secrecy’ and the   thing with Margaret’s wheelchair  that, of course, people want to see. Imo she looks great, doesn’t seem to need much help.  Imo  I really do not see what is wrong with a wheelchair - it would be better than turning her appearances into fodder for the press. Is she having difficulty accepting her age?  No one expects her to be as spry as she once was.   Andy, tho,  made it all worse.  Just my opinion.
> 
> ETA: if I could I would remove the photos because I did not intend to offend anyone, especially Princess Anne


@CarryOn2020 you didn't offend anybody, the photos are out there. I also think it's not a big deal using a wheelchair, aging is part of life. I'm sorry if I sounded upset. I was annoyed  because it must have been tough for her to attend the memorial of her husband and support Andy, a persona non grata. She dedicated most of her life serving her country, and now has to deal with an arrogant son in the public eye, is being 'attacked' by a sick grandson… The photographer could have been a little kinder imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can see both sides. People want to know how she is doing. Ideally the photographer would have honoured her wishes.  Sadly we live in the real world. Perhaps if the palace had been low key about her arrival and departure, no one would care. They made such a big deal about the ‘secrecy’ and the   thing with Margaret’s wheelchair  that, of course, people want to see. Imo she looks great, doesn’t seem to need much help.  Imo  I really do not see what is wrong with a wheelchair - it would be better than turning her appearances into fodder for the press. Is she having difficulty accepting her age?  No one expects her to be as spry as she once was.   Andy, tho,  made it all worse.  Just my opinion.
> 
> ETA: if I could I would remove the photos because I did not intend to offend anyone, especially Princess Anne


I kind of doubt the guy was after the news or didn't want to disappoint the press pool. He was definitely after the money that those shots would bring, and his editor probably told him to get the shots no matter what.
Agree about the low key entrance - the palace shd have just deflected any enquiries and kept her entry and exit hush hush.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The dress may have not been ok. As far as I recall, one is supposed to have the shoulders covered in church, particularly when attending a memorial.


This is typical of someone, who flaunts the rules because she thinks she knows best and is above the law and then manages to look a mess most times. Same thing happened at her wedding when she wore a white gown and veil, both unacceptable for divorcees in the COE and thought she would look like a pure and virginal bride in spite of a previous marriage and other liaisons. And don't get me going on that hair parted in the middle with long, ugly and unmanageable tendrils. Oh how I would love to sneak up behind her with a pair of scissors and go snip snip.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is typical of someone, who flaunts the rules because she thinks she knows best and is above the law and then manages to look a mess most times. Same thing happened at her wedding when she wore a white gown and veil, both unacceptable for divorcees in the COE and thought she would look like a pure and virginal bride in spite of a previous marriage and other liaisons. And don't get me going on that hair parted in the middle with long, ugly and unmanageable tendrils. Oh how I would love to sneak up behind her with a pair of scissors and go snip snip.


Was the tendril thing part of her "look" pre-Harry? My impression from the photos of her was that she favoured big curls and messy hairdoes to cultivate the glam trash image. 

Asking because Methane likes to do stereotypes and she is very "image only, no substance". A lot of her stories (lies) seem to be based on a Disneyesque view of royalty: Cinderella mash-up with Rapunzel, with a dose of modern liberated woman. Does she think the tendrils hark back to old style royalty? There are portraits of Queen Victoria with ringlets framing her face.


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> My take on Andrew with TQ is this: he's one of her two sons, Philip was HIS FATHER ALSO.  We all know Andrew's scandal. At this time he hasn't been actually CONVICTED of anything, just stripped of bla bla bla and considered persona non grata (but yeah, we know). Charles is going to be the next KING, AND he is ALREADY there WITH his wife, Camilla.  QEII is 95, (95!!!)  at her husband's memorial service.  Charles isn't going to go side by side with his mother AND Camilla because that would just look WEIRD, especially since another male sibling SHOULD be there as it's HIS father's service also.  Past events aside, TQ is 95 and should be assisted in some way. By whom? A hired caregiver? Anne, who has a husband with whom she'd be attending? NO! Andrew is her son who is also grieving for his father. Regardless of his (friggin' weird) current relationship with Fergie, Andrew is a son who is there for his mother on that day. DONE. It'd be otherwise be MORE scandalous if Andrew weren't there. Considering.........various instances I could bring up in terms of "If we overlook 'certain people' being the spouse of 'XYZ bla bla'  or who'd done 'bla bla' then why SHOULDN'T Andrew be there, I'd get thrown into Purse Forum jail (again, cough cough).


I agree with you. Any mother here, you know what I mean, when I say that no matter what, your child is still your child. You birthed the child, you took care of that child and a mother’s love is unconditional. You may hate what they did, what they’ve become and you will grieve over all the bad things they’ve done but at the end of the day, your child is still your child and you love them.


----------



## redney

Lodpah said:


> I agree with you. Any mother here, you know what I mean, when I say that no matter what, your child is still your child. You birthed the child, you took care of that child and a mother’s love is unconditional. You may hate what they did, what they’ve become and you will grieve over all the bad things they’ve done but at the end of the day, your child is still your child and you love them.


Agree and Andrew is her only child of the four who was not already attending with a spouse.


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video of their late arrival. The hair strands are fine until she pushes them behind her ears, so maybe she herself doesn’t love them. Idk. The video shows no one else is baring arms.  In the plus column, the dress does seem to fit, except her bra strap did fall down.   Even back then, he looked gross imo.




Sadly, she is completely out of her depth.  And always will be.

Only a certain type of person can feel comfortable in the extremely high profile roles of the BRF.  They must be well-mannered, gracious, respectful, always appropriately and well-dressed. It's a very structured and formal lifestyle, on the whole, and that cannot be changed. By anyone. Even going forward with a slimmed down Monarchy as Charles and William will form, the afore-mentioned required attributes will always remain. 

An attention seeker will never fit in.  As Prince Phillip once said "do the job and then leave, no-one's interested in you".  That sounds harsh but he's right; an appearance, a speech etc, for a certain period of time and then that task is done. There are limits set and protocols to follow which means there is no place for an individual who's in love with themself and wants to hog the spotlight.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> The photographer justifies all his actions such as dashing past people trying to stop him by repeating that since he was the only photographer allowed to capture images of the event, he had to take the photos to avoid getting lambasted by the rest of the media. Quite a slick way to evade responsibility for any disrespectful or uncouth behaviour. Reminds me of the time another news station was upset with a local reporter here because he didn't try to chase down an ambulance to get shots of a dying woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Challenge of Photographing Queen Elizabeth with Prince Andrew at Westminster Abbey
> 
> 
> The Times photographer Richard Pohle has written for his publication about how he had to be persistent and quick-thinking to capture the front-page moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I disagree, it’s his job but more importantly this is a public event of public figures and is completely reasonably considered to be newsworthy. Sorry, but it doesn’t matter if she’s 96 years old if she still wants to hold the job as both a religious and state figure which are public facing roles.

It is different from trying to take photos of an injured private individual.  To me, it’s more like coming into a a church service and finding the vicar has decided that he no longer wants to attend the service  in person or maybe he will do a sermon but always runs out before the congregation can talk to him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

MiniMabel said:


> Only a certain type of person can feel comfortable in the extremely high profile roles of the BRF.  *They must be well-mannered*, gracious, respectful, always appropriately and well-dressed.



I have been amazed on more than one occasion by her complete lack of manners. Both her parents can behave themselves in public, so where does that come from?


----------



## jelliedfeels

redney said:


> Agree and Andrew is her only child of the four who was not already attending with a spouse.


I’m sure he could’ve got a companion if he wanted to- he seems to know a thing or two about that.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have been amazed on more than one occasion by her complete lack of manners. Both her parents can behave themselves in public, so where does that come from?


She’s a diva! A star of her gravitas is allowed to make special requests or rather maybe her special requests make her feel like she’s high up the pecking order. 

Also the classic, any attention is better than no attention after all


----------



## DoggieBags

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is typical of someone, who flaunts the rules because she thinks she knows best and is above the law and then manages to look a mess most times. Same thing happened at her wedding when she wore a white gown and veil, both unacceptable for divorcees in the COE and thought she would look like a pure and virginal bride in spite of a previous marriage and other liaisons. And don't get me going on that hair parted in the middle with long, ugly and unmanageable tendrils. Oh how I would love to sneak up behind her with a pair of scissors and go snip snip.


I remember her first appearance at Wimbledon after she married JCMH. She sat in the royal box beside Kate clutching her stupid hat the entire time. Kate was impeccably attired as always and I assume either Kate or someone on the Sussex’s staff would have told TW what the appropriate attire was at Wimbledon. Whether she was told before arriving at Wimbledon or not, she was definitely told when she arrived at the Royal Box that hats were not allowed to be worn there. I thought it odd at the time that she brought the hat into the box anyway even though she couldn’t use it. I would have thought it was very inconvenient to have to clutch that hat the whole time instead of putting the hat somewhere out of sight where she could retrieve it later. Having seen how she’s behaved and dressed so inappropriately in the years since then, I now assume that her clutching that hat so publicly in the royal box was her way of demonstrating her disdain for the silly rules that shouldn’t have been applied to her. But maybe I’m giving her too much credit by assuming there was an actual thought process behind her actions that day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These two women are just nothing alike. Kate has had her mishaps, but they were honest mistakes in adjusting to a daring role. Raptor's on the other hand always reeked of defiance.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I disagree, it’s his job but more importantly this is a public event of public figures and is completely reasonably considered to be newsworthy. Sorry, but it doesn’t matter if she’s 96 years old if she still wants to hold the job as both a religious and state figure which are public facing roles.
> 
> It is different from trying to take photos of an injured private individual.  To me, it’s more like coming into a a church service and finding the vicar has decided that he no longer wants to attend the service  in person or maybe he will do a sermon but always runs out before the congregation can talk to him.


Let's agree to disagree. IMO, if he said what you said, I'd still think he went too far but at least he is honest. I didn't like the way he kept implying that he had to do it because his media peers expected it of him.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Was the tendril thing part of her "look" pre-Harry? My impression from the photos of her was that she favoured big curls and messy hairdoes to cultivate the glam trash image.
> 
> Asking because Methane likes to do stereotypes and she is very "image only, no substance". A lot of her stories (lies) seem to be based on a Disneyesque view of royalty: Cinderella mash-up with Rapunzel, with a dose of modern liberated woman. Does she think the tendrils hark back to old style royalty? There are portraits of Queen Victoria with ringlets framing her face.


I didn't know TW before she hooked up with JCMH so I googled her. She looked decent in the few 'Suit' clips I saw, probably because she couldn't overrule the make-up crew. But in a clip where she gives the HS heartthrob a BJ in his car and she comes up for air completely disheveled, I realized she was sporting her usual look as observed from most of her pictures on the net.
Here's another thought, maybe she is trying to emulate the self-sufficient, opinionated and 'modern' women of the time, Elizabeth Bennet of Pride and Prejudice, who also wore ringlets. Afterall, TW does see herself as utterly 'modern' and a great innovator, though I wish she could be as meticulous as Elizabeth Bennet.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is typical of someone, who flaunts the rules because she thinks she knows best and is above the law and then manages to look a mess most times. Same thing happened at her wedding when she wore a white gown and veil, both unacceptable for divorcees in the COE and thought she would look like a pure and virginal bride in spite of a previous marriage and other liaisons. And don't get me going on that hair parted in the middle with long, ugly and unmanageable tendrils. Oh how I would love to sneak up behind her with a pair of scissors and go snip snip.


and the veil was very long and over her face, right?  this is for virgins.  I know times have changed but not that much


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> "..where she gives the HS heartthrob a BJ in his car and she comes up for air completely disheveled.."


  Probably got that scene in one take


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> and the veil was very long and over her face, right?  this is for virgins.  I know times have change but not that much


I don't know what her previous wedding was like, but given who she was marrying she opted for the big fairytale wedding. I can't really fault her for that. The white equals virgin thing is outdated. Millions of brides wear white who are not virgins.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I remember her first appearance at Wimbledon after she married JCMH. She sat in the royal box beside Kate clutching her stupid hat the entire time. Kate was impeccably attired as always and I assume either Kate or someone on the Sussex’s staff would have told TW what the appropriate attire was at Wimbledon. Whether she was told before arriving at Wimbledon or not, she was definitely told when she arrived at the Royal Box that hats were not allowed to be worn there. I thought it odd at the time that she brought the hat into the box anyway even though she couldn’t use it. I would have thought it was very inconvenient to have to clutch that hat the whole time instead of putting the hat somewhere out of sight where she could retrieve it later. Having seen how she’s behaved and dressed so inappropriately in the years since then, I now assume that her clutching that hat so publicly in the royal box was her way of demonstrating her disdain for the silly rules that shouldn’t have been applied to her. But maybe I’m giving her too much credit by assuming there was an actual thought process behind her actions that day.


Her Wimbledon and memorial service looks illustrate her more California casual approach to dressing, but it would have been courteous to her new family to dress more in keeping with their norms. I know when I'm going to an event where I'm not sure what the dress code is, like my first Indian wedding last year, I try to find out in advance. It's just the polite thing to do imo. But it is amazing to see how poorly people dress in many situations these days. Now get off my lawn!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I don't know what her previous wedding was like, but given who she was marrying she opted for the big fairytale wedding. I can't really fault her for that. *The white equals virgin thing is outdated. Millions of brides wear white who are not virgins.*


Nevertheless, The Church of England had rules for divorcees that included no white dress and no veil, which she completely disregarded as she continues to do today with any rule or law she disagrees. Contrary to being a breath of fresh air as many claim her to be, she is just a plain sh!t disturber bent on doing as she pleases.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> Nevertheless, The Church of England had rules for divorcees that included no white dress and no veil, which she completely disregarded as she continues to do today with any rule or law she disagrees. Contrary to being a breath of fresh air as many claim her to be, she is just a plain sh!t disturber bent on doing as she pleases.


If the Prince of Wales can follow the rules regarding his wedding to Camilla, then so should M.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I don't know what her previous wedding was like, but given who she was marrying she opted for the big fairytale wedding. I can't really fault her for that. The white equals virgin thing is outdated. Millions of brides wear white who are not virgins.


white is one thing but the veil over the face on an almost-40-year-old divorcee is wrong to me
And her wanting the big fairytale wedding in light of what she did after the wedding is disgusting (again, to me)
We don't know if she planning to really try to be a proper royal but if she did, he plan was a huge fail


----------



## Hermes Zen

I am so excited to let you all know that I received my QE Plat Jubilee purchases from London!  Just the other day there were cookbooks discussed here.  When I went to the royal collection website I went to their book webpage holding my breath in hopes NOT to see M's The Bench book listed.  WHEW .... NOPE not there!    BTW, also purchased the jubilee scarf .... GORGEOUS!  NOT something M could ever ever ever create for her line ... IF she ever does that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I don't know what her previous wedding was like, but given who she was marrying she opted for the big fairytale wedding. I can't really fault her for that. The white equals virgin thing is outdated. Millions of brides wear white who are not virgins.



The wedding to Trevor was in Jamaica.








						A Look Inside Meghan Markle's First Wedding
					

Meghan Markle's marriage to Prince Harry isn't her first. The soon-to-be princess and member of the British Royal Family has been married before, to LA actor and producer Trevor Engelson.




					www.elle.com.au


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> white is one thing but the veil over the face on an almost-40-year-old divorcee is wrong to me
> And her wanting the big fairytale wedding in light of what she did after the wedding is disgusting (again, to me)
> We don't know if she planning to really try to be a proper royal but if she did, he plan was a huge fail



Many articles state they knew prior to the wedding they would leave. This is why many feel that they wasted taxpayer money on the wedding as well as the tours. Some speculate that is why D showed up alone and most of the guests were Hwood connections. 
If true, I agree it was a waste of money. Ymmv.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I don't know what her previous wedding was like, but given who she was marrying she opted for the big fairytale wedding. I can't really fault her for that. The white equals virgin thing is outdated. Millions of brides wear white who are not virgins.



Commoners, drag queens and soap stars can wear whatever their heart's desire, LBD on a cruise, full-length sequins in a hot air balloon or a bikini in Waikiki. 

_She, _ twice married and (allegedly) very much an adult, was about to marry the grandson of the Head of the CoE and well as into the BRF and going to be (reportedly) a Senior Royal FFS. Decorum and etiquette should have prevailed, but spoilt MM had to wear a white full-length French label with white co-ord candy-floss on her head. Such show of the princess virgin bride was the attire preferred by the staunch feminist role model she was/is (allegedly)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many articles state they knew prior to the wedding they would leave. This is why many feel that they wasted taxpayer money on the wedding as well as the tours. Some speculate that is why D showed up alone and most of the guests were Hwood connections.
> If true, I agree it was a waste of money. Ymmv.



Too right. I paid more money towards their wedding than either MM/JCMH did.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The wedding to Trevor was in Jamaica.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Look Inside Meghan Markle's First Wedding
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's marriage to Prince Harry isn't her first. The soon-to-be princess and member of the British Royal Family has been married before, to LA actor and producer Trevor Engelson.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com.au



Her ex resembles Harry - he's got that same deer in the headlights expression. His show about a guy whose wife leaves him for a royal has been green lighted by Fox.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Commoners, drag queens and soap stars can wear whatever their heart's desire, LBD on a cruise, full-length sequins in a hot air balloon or a bikini in Waikiki.
> 
> _She, _ twice married and (allegedly) very much an adult, was about to marry the grandson of the Head of the CoE and well as into the BRF and going to be (reportedly) a Senior Royal FFS. Decorum and etiquette should have prevailed, but spoilt MM had to wear a white full-length French label with white co-ord candy-floss on her head. Such show of the princess virgin bride was the attire preferred by the staunch feminist role model she was/is (allegedly)



The label was Givenchy, but the designer of the dress was British, Clare Wright Keller, who was named British Designer of the Year Womenswear in 2018. She left Givenchy in 2020.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many articles state they knew prior to the wedding they would leave. This is why many feel that they wasted taxpayer money on the wedding as well as the tours. Some speculate that is why D showed up alone and most of the guests were Hwood connections.
> If true, I agree it was a waste of money. Ymmv.


I have no doubt she sold him on the California dream and the idea of getting out of his brother's shadow.


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> I didn't know TW before she hooked up with JCMH so I googled her. *She looked decent in the few 'Suit' clips I saw, probably because she couldn't overrule the make-up crew.* But in a clip where she gives the HS heartthrob a BJ in his car and she comes up for air completely disheveled, I realized she was sporting her usual look as observed from most of her pictures on the net.
> Here's another thought, maybe she is trying to emulate the self-sufficient, opinionated and 'modern' women of the time, Elizabeth Bennet of Pride and Prejudice, who also wore ringlets. Afterall, TW does see herself as utterly 'modern' and a great innovator, though I wish she could be as meticulous as Elizabeth Bennet.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video of their late arrival. The hair strands are fine until she pushes them behind her ears, so maybe she herself doesn’t love them. Idk. The video shows no one else is baring arms.  In the plus column, the dress does seem to fit, except her bra strap did fall down.   Even back then, he looked gross imo.



1.  Dress is 100% (IMO) inappropriate for a funeral! 
2.  What the hell is she smiling about (and or the 'mugging' face); it's an effin' funeral! 
3.  Yet again, she knows exactly where that camera is and her comes that Cheshire Cat grin - inappropriate! 

To me, this just really shows that she has ALWAYS thought/believes that the world revolves around HER!!!  No thought to the occasion whatsoever .. truly PATHETIC 'thing' (sorry - not even referring to her as a woman anymore)!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Helventara

CeeJay said:


> 1.  Dress is 100% (IMO) inappropriate for a funeral!
> 2.  What the hell is she smiling about (and or the 'mugging' face); it's an effin' funeral!
> 3.  Yet again, she knows exactly where that camera is and her comes that Cheshire Cat grin - inappropriate!
> 
> To me, this just really shows that she has ALWAYS thought/believes that the world revolves around HER!!!  No thought to the occasion whatsoever .. truly PATHETIC 'thing' (sorry - not even referring to her as a woman anymore)!


And she was seated beside the British PM!  I don’t understand her politics but I admire her style and her 'sharp' look. I mean, Mrs. May didn’t get here by batting eyelashes and staring with doe-eyes while biting lips.

I don’t know.  This picture somehow breaks my heart, that such an accomplished woman has to be seated next to this grifter.  In a few frames, Mrs. May did look impatient


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The label was Givenchy, but the designer of the dress was British, Clare Wright Keller, who was named British Designer of the Year Womenswear in 2018. She left Givenchy in 2020.



I know, as I've already noted. However, any resulting increase of business would have gone into Givenchy (LVMH owned) slanted pockets and was not a promotion of British industry. 

Compare:

Katherine's wedding dress (British company Alexander McQueen) whose parent's company was/is Kering (also French).The company is based in the UK (Clerkenwell, London), employs almost 1000 people and has been growing at least 15% over the last 7 years seriously contributing to GB's economy. 

That's the difference. MM think's only she's going to be compared with (and the next) Audrey Hepburn, whereas Katherine chose/chooses to promote British industry


----------



## papertiger

BVBookshop said:


> And she was seated beside the British PM!  I don’t understand her politics but I admire her style and her 'sharp' look. I mean, Mrs. May didn’t get here by batting eyelashes and staring with doe-eyes while biting lips.
> 
> I don’t know.  This picture somehow breaks my heart, that such an accomplished woman has to be seated next to this grifter.  In a few frames, Mrs. May did look impatient



I 'brushed shoulders' with PM May at Hermes one Christmas whilst she was shopping for ties. Most male PMs pick-out presents online at best or get their wives/GF's/PAs do it for them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I don't know what her previous wedding was like, but given who she was marrying she opted for the big fairytale wedding. I can't really fault her for that. The white equals virgin thing is outdated. Millions of brides wear white who are not virgins.



Barefoot on the beach with lots of booze and weed. I'm not even kidding.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video of their late arrival. The hair strands are fine until she pushes them behind her ears, so maybe she herself doesn’t love them. Idk. The video shows no one else is baring arms.  In the plus column, the dress does seem to fit, *except her bra strap did fall down*.   Even back then, he looked gross imo.



When we were young, Mother taught us to pin our slip and bra traps to our clothes lining with tiny little safety pins without leaving any indentations in the material. She always wore a full slip under her dresses and never had a wardrobe malfunction à la diva M. Now, one would think that as smart as M pretends to be, she would have learnt similar little tricks to look elegant.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Nevertheless, The Church of England had rules for divorcees that included no white dress and no veil, which she completely disregarded as she continues to do today with any rule or law she disagrees. Contrary to being a breath of fresh air as many claim her to be, she is just a plain sh!t disturber bent on doing as she pleases.



Not to defend her, just a technical thought. She wasn't married in the Church of England before (she converted shortly before the engagement out of a deep desire of her heart, nothing to do with her victim's grandmother being head of the church), so would the rules apply to her? Letizia of Spain was married before, but because it was just a civil ceremony so her and Felipe could in fact have the traditional Catholic wedding it was fine. 

Not that I don't think a less over the top look would have been perfectly fine for Miss LookAtMEEE.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Barefoot on the beach with lots of booze and weed. I'm not even kidding.


Not that there's anything wrong with that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I am so excited to let you all know that I received my QE Plat Jubilee purchases from London!  Just the other day there were cookbooks discussed here.  When I went to the royal collection website I went to their book webpage holding my breath in hopes NOT to see M's The Bench book listed.  WHEW .... NOPE not there!  *BTW, also purchased the jubilee scarf* .... GORGEOUS! NOT something M could ever ever ever create for her line ... IF she ever does that.



Pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Not that there's anything wrong with that



No, but she sure has come a long way, hasn't she


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to defend her, just a technical thought. *She wasn't married in the Church of England before (she converted shortly before the engagement out of a deep desire of her heart, nothing to do with her victim's grandmother being head of the church), so would the rules apply to her? *Letizia of Spain was married before, but because it was just a civil ceremony so her and Felipe could in fact have the traditional Catholic wedding it was fine.
> 
> Not that I don't think a less over the top look would have been perfectly fine for Miss LookAtMEEE.



Yes, the rules would apply to her. She just chose not to follow them.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Now, one would think that as smart as M pretends to be, she would have learnt similar little tricks to look elegant.


Elegant is a foreign concept to her. She is Cali girl through and through, daughter of a yoga instructor/entrepreneur and a film crew member. I doubt she has ever seen a slip, and she's of the generation that thinks nothing of a visible bra strap. I don't wear sleeveless much anymore, but I like sleeveless dresses that have a little loop at the shoulders to secure your bra straps.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm of her generation and I prefer no part of my underwear to show or leave funky lines


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm of her generation and I prefer no part of my underwear to show or leave funky lines


I was recently behind a woman, 40ish, wearing cream colored wide leg linen pants with a cotton sailor type sweater. The otherwise stylish look was ruined by the fact that you could see her darker colored thong through the seat of the pants.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not to defend her, just a technical thought. She wasn't married in the Church of England before (she converted shortly before the engagement out of a deep desire of her heart, nothing to do with her victim's grandmother being head of the church), so would the rules apply to her? Letizia of Spain was married before, but because it was just a civil ceremony so her and Felipe could in fact have the traditional Catholic wedding it was fine.
> 
> Not that I don't think a less over the top look would have been perfectly fine for Miss LookAtMEEE.


I remember the controversy surrounding Letizia's wedding. The RC church didn't consider her first marriage to Alonso Guerrero Pérez canonically valid because they were married in a civil ceremony and later divorced and therefore there was no need for an annulment before she could marry Felipe in the RC Church. 
However, according to the info below, I don't believe the COE requires an annulment for anyone to remarry, and therefore M was probably considered a divorcee while Letizia was allowed to more or less forget she had been married before. 

"Marriage in church after divorce The Church of England teaches that marriage is for life. It also recognizes that some marriages sadly do fail and, if this should happen, it seeks to be available for all involved. The Church accepts that, in exceptional circumstances, a divorced person may marry again in church during the lifetime of a former spouse. If you are thinking about asking to be married in church, you should discuss this with your local parish priest. Please do this well before choosing a date for your wedding. Some priests may be willing to take such a marriage, others may not be prepared to do so, on grounds of conscience, and may not allow the use of their church either. The law of the land permits them this choice. If your parish priest is willing to discuss the possibility of conducting your marriage, he/she will want to talk to you frankly about the past, your hopes for the future and your understanding of marriage. You and your intended spouse should therefore be prepared to consider some questions. You are advised to reflect beforehand on the issues they raise – and should be prepared to answer them honestly."  

More info here: Church of England and Divorce


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it may mean!






__





						Crazy Days and Nights
					

Representing both celebs and pseudo-celebs makes for crazy days and nights..arrests, divorces, breakups and hookups, new deals and cancellations, A-D listers and everything in between..These are my stories..




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I know, as I've already noted. However, any resulting increase of business would have gone into Givenchy (LVMH owned) slanted pockets and was not a promotion of British industry.
> 
> Compare:
> 
> Katherine's wedding dress (British company Alexander McQueen) whose parent's company was/is Kering (also French).The company is based in the UK (Clerkenwell, London), employs almost 1000 people and has been growing at least 15% over the last 7 years seriously contributing to GB's economy.
> 
> That's the difference. MM think's only she's going to be compared with (and the next) Audrey Hepburn, whereas Katherine chose/chooses to promote British industry


I think I became hoarse pointing this out at the time. it made no sense to me if someone had their thinking cap on.  Perhaps she thought that because the designer was British, it was OK?  I really don't think she cared.  Knowing her, she was probably told to look at British designers and decided to do the opposite.  If she had picked someone from the US, even that would have made more sense.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it may mean!
> View attachment 5373150
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crazy Days and Nights
> 
> 
> Representing both celebs and pseudo-celebs makes for crazy days and nights..arrests, divorces, breakups and hookups, new deals and cancellations, A-D listers and everything in between..These are my stories..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


What would she sell?  The Bench?  How to make banana bread recipe book?  Oat milk?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Elegant is a foreign concept to her. She is Cali girl through and through, daughter of a yoga instructor/entrepreneur and a film crew member. I doubt she has ever seen a slip, and she's of the generation that thinks nothing of a visible bra strap. I don't wear sleeveless much anymore, but I like sleeveless dresses that have a little loop at the shoulders to secure your bra straps.


The cure is a racer back bra.  Works great and nothing shows.


----------



## Chanbal

This is crazy… 










						Now Meghan tries to trademark the word 'archetypes'
					

The Duchess of Sussex made the application at the United States Patent and Trademark Office last month which covers the use of 'archetypes', a word which derives from ancient Greek.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The label was Givenchy, but the designer of the dress was British, Clare Wright Keller, who was named British Designer of the Year Womenswear in 2018. She left Givenchy in 2020.


Hmmm...saying she left is being polite.  She was tossed out the door.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy…
> View attachment 5373158
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Meghan tries to trademark the word 'archetypes'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex made the application at the United States Patent and Trademark Office last month which covers the use of 'archetypes', a word which derives from ancient Greek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My my, how archtypical of a control freak.  What a shock!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it may mean!
> View attachment 5373150
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crazy Days and Nights
> 
> 
> Representing both celebs and pseudo-celebs makes for crazy days and nights..arrests, divorces, breakups and hookups, new deals and cancellations, A-D listers and everything in between..These are my stories..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Oh God, her voice alone would be a deterrent.  And this is coming from a shopaholic!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> My my, how archtypical of a control freak.  What a shock!


Not just a control freak.  A greedy control freak.  Are we really going to allow basic words to be copyrighted???


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy…
> View attachment 5373158
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Meghan tries to trademark the word 'archetypes'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex made the application at the United States Patent and Trademark Office last month which covers the use of 'archetypes', a word which derives from ancient Greek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The comments are very entertaining.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm...saying she left is being polite.  She was tossed out the door.


Did not know that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Insight into Diana, the mother of all mothers:

_
“Nicholas, can I ask you something? Please be truthful. Did you see the photograph of me in the Daily Mirror? The topless one.” “Um, Your Royal Highness, yes, we get all the newspapers in my office. I think I did glance at it…not that it was very clear.” “William rang me from Eton. Poor boy, he’s only 14.

He was upset. He said some of the other boys were teasing him, saying my tits are too small.” She held on to my elbow. “Nicholas, please be frank, I want to know your real view. Are my breasts too small, do you think?”

I became breathless, I needed oxygen. I went as red as a guardsman’s tunic. I stuttered, “Er, Your Royal Highness, in as much as I can see under your suit, they seem, um…perfect to me. I wouldn’t worry.”

“Thank you, Nicholas. I knew you’d tell me the truth. Thank you, I feel better now.”_








						How Princess Diana’s Dance With the Media Impacted William and Harry
					

Tina Brown examines the legacy of the Princess of Wales’s press strategy for her sons, in this exclusive excerpt from The Palace Papers.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Insight into Diana, the mother of all mothers:
> 
> 
> _“Nicholas, can I ask you something? Please be truthful. Did you see the photograph of me in the Daily Mirror? The topless one.” “Um, Your Royal Highness, yes, we get all the newspapers in my office. I think I did glance at it…not that it was very clear.” “William rang me from Eton. Poor boy, he’s only 14.
> 
> He was upset. He said some of the other boys were teasing him, saying my tits are too small.” She held on to my elbow. “Nicholas, please be frank, I want to know your real view. Are my breasts too small, do you think?”
> 
> I became breathless, I needed oxygen. I went as red as a guardsman’s tunic. I stuttered, “Er, Your Royal Highness, in as much as I can see under your suit, they seem, um…perfect to me. I wouldn’t worry.”
> 
> “Thank you, Nicholas. I knew you’d tell me the truth. Thank you, I feel better now.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Princess Diana’s Dance With the Media Impacted William and Harry
> 
> 
> Tina Brown examines the legacy of the Princess of Wales’s press strategy for her sons, in this exclusive excerpt from The Palace Papers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


I was just reading this. It is hard for me to believe some of the comments attributed to William at such a young age.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I was just reading this. It is hard for me to believe some of the comments attributed to William at such a young age.



She was 20 - 21 years old when she had him. That is very young. The young moms I know try so hard to be their kid’s best friend. Some of the older moms, too


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Barefoot on the beach with lots of booze and weed. I'm not even kidding.


And it lasted 3 days. I wonder on which day she was actually married and the other two days were just a spectacle for public consumption.


----------



## bag-mania

There is speculation that they will attend the Beckham’s son’s wedding this weekend. I guess security must be super tight in Palm Beach.   









						Will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend Beckham-Peltz Palm Beach wedding?
					

Palm Beach rumor mill is that royal runaways Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are heading to town for wedding of Brooklyn Beckham, son of David Beckham.



					amp.palmbeachpost.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> There is speculation that they will attend the Beckham’s son’s wedding this weekend. I guess security must be super tight in Palm Beach.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend Beckham-Peltz Palm Beach wedding?
> 
> 
> Palm Beach rumor mill is that royal runaways Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are heading to town for wedding of Brooklyn Beckham, son of David Beckham.
> 
> 
> 
> amp.palmbeachpost.com


"royal runaways"


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> And it lasted 3 days. I wonder on which day she was actually married and the other two days were just a spectacle for public consumption.


My daughter, who attended college and lives in LA, has attended quite a few destination weddings in recent years that are multi-day affairs. It seems like over the top is the new norm for weddings in some places.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> My daughter, who attended college and lives in LA, has attended quite a few destination weddings in recent years that are multi-day affairs. It seems like over the top is the new norm for weddings in some places.


I have been to two.  One was great the other was the wedding from hell.  Never again will I do that to myself.  Unless a person has lots of frequent flyer miles and hotel points, this can be an expensive proposition.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> My daughter, who attended college and lives in LA, has attended quite a few destination weddings in recent years that are multi-day affairs. It seems like over the top is the new norm for weddings in some places.


Same in Asia. Just before Covid, some colleagues were enthralled by pics of wedding getaway packages at island resorts in Indonesia and one of them went for it. Exchanged vows on windswept beach under a flower-decked gazebo amidst a storm of rose petals. Very small and intimate gathering as it was expensive, so only the parents and bridal party were there. Luckily her two bridesmaids could afford it.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I have been to two.  One was great the other was the wedding from hell.  Never again will I do that to myself.  Unless a person has lots of frequent flyer miles and hotel points, this can be an expensive proposition.


It certainly can, especially if you're in the wedding party. My daughter was a bridesmaid in one that took place in Hawaii. The bride also expected her friends to fly into LA for her bridal shower and to another destination for her bachelorette party. It's ridiculous.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> There is speculation that they will attend the Beckham’s son’s wedding this weekend. I guess security must be super tight in Palm Beach.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend Beckham-Peltz Palm Beach wedding?
> 
> 
> Palm Beach rumor mill is that royal runaways Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are heading to town for wedding of Brooklyn Beckham, son of David Beckham.
> 
> 
> 
> amp.palmbeachpost.com



Per the DM:
 "but speculation that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex could attend are wide of the mark." 


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...-Nicola-Peltzs-best-friend-days-tie-knot.html


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Per the DM:
> "but speculation that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex could attend are wide of the mark."



I hope so. I think the Beckhams are smart enough to not invite two people who would certainly try to upstage the bridal couple.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I hope so. I think the Beckhams are smart enough to not invite two people who would certainly try to upstage the bridal couple.



Agree, except they may be desperate to impress the Peltz family, but doubtful it will work.  Nelson Peltz has his own connections.
Becks and Posh looked old and tired on the weekend’s yacht photos.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Peltz









						Victoria and David Beckham leave £5m yacht ahead of Brooklyn wedding
					

The 47-year-old left her £5million superyacht in Miami on Monday, alongside her husband David and children Romeo and Harper.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  Wonder if they advised H&M?









						Brand Beckham is complete as Victoria and David trademark entire clan's names
					

They are protected against their names being used for beauty products, clothing and perfume, among other items.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pics or it didn't happen.


Hmmmm would you say it did happen?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> There is speculation that they will attend the Beckham’s son’s wedding this weekend. I guess security must be super tight in Palm Beach.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend Beckham-Peltz Palm Beach wedding?
> 
> 
> Palm Beach rumor mill is that royal runaways Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are heading to town for wedding of Brooklyn Beckham, son of David Beckham.
> 
> 
> 
> amp.palmbeachpost.com


Uh huh.  Methinks Sunshine Sucks is in overtime again, putting out any BS that will hopefully stick.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Hmmmm would you say it did happen?
> View attachment 5373290
> View attachment 5373291


Nice haul!
What is the other scarf?


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> Nice haul!
> What is the other scarf?


It’s Buckingham Palace Blue Rocking Horse scarf. They had it in a couple other colors in this print. I see this color is out of stock now as well as the green but they added a beautiful hot pink and orange color as far as I can tell from their website.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Many articles state they knew prior to the wedding they would leave. This is why many feel that they wasted taxpayer money on the wedding as well as the tours. Some speculate that is why D showed up alone and most of the guests were Hwood connections.
> If true, I agree it was a waste of money. Ymmv.


Which articles said they knew they’d  leave? I always thought it was meant to be a bit of a shock…do spill. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm of her generation and I prefer no part of my underwear to show or leave funky lines


I agree, young or old, I think most of people don’t like looking as lumpy as bad custard. 

I always thought the cali girl thing was about having such a toned, hot body you didn’t need to wear a bra (and maybe even knickers) not that you didn’t care if bulged out of too small underwear… but what do I know?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Insight into Diana, the mother of all mothers:
> 
> 
> _“Nicholas, can I ask you something? Please be truthful. Did you see the photograph of me in the Daily Mirror? The topless one.” “Um, Your Royal Highness, yes, we get all the newspapers in my office. I think I did glance at it…not that it was very clear.” “William rang me from Eton. Poor boy, he’s only 14.
> 
> He was upset. He said some of the other boys were teasing him, saying my tits are too small.” She held on to my elbow. “Nicholas, please be frank, I want to know your real view. Are my breasts too small, do you think?”
> 
> I became breathless, I needed oxygen. I went as red as a guardsman’s tunic. I stuttered, “Er, Your Royal Highness, in as much as I can see under your suit, they seem, um…perfect to me. I wouldn’t worry.”
> 
> “Thank you, Nicholas. I knew you’d tell me the truth. Thank you, I feel better now.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Princess Diana’s Dance With the Media Impacted William and Harry
> 
> 
> Tina Brown examines the legacy of the Princess of Wales’s press strategy for her sons, in this exclusive excerpt from The Palace Papers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Who doesn’t want to be a MILF  
I know Diana still sells but when is this W&H as sad little boys shtick going to get old? They are close to 40 for goodness’ sake.


Chanbal said:


>



She needs to go and sue that scheming and talentless white straight male Karl Jung for plagiarising  her work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Hmmmm would you say it did happen?
> View attachment 5373290
> View attachment 5373291



What a lovely haul. BTW I ordered a cookbook on afternoon tea by a former royal chef (not our beloved Darren McGrady, his book I'm interested in is out of print). Should be out in early May or something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> She needs to go and sue that scheming and talentless white straight male Karl Jung for plagiarising  her work.


She is really lucky that everyone she has plagiarised so far has been either 6 feet under or sees her as too insignificant to sue.

We could probably flip the dictionary to see what other words start with "arche" to see where she will copycat next.








						Words containing arche | Words that contain arche
					

Words containing arche, words that contain arche, words including arche, words with arche in them




					www.thefreedictionary.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Which articles said they knew they’d  leave? I always thought it was meant to be a bit of a shock…do spill.
> 
> 
> Who doesn’t want to be a MILF
> I know Diana still sells but when is this W&H as sad little boys shtick going to get old? They are close to 40 for goodness’ sake.



Google has plenty of articles and video from Hazz himself about Hazz wanting to leave long before MM came along. The big scoop from Omid’s _Freedom_ book was that H&M knew before the wedding they wanted out. During the engagement interview, MM kinda lets it slip when she tells him to save some stories for the book. The guess is she meant Omid’s book. They knew what they were doing and who would help them - Omid. Megxit really is misnomer. It should be Hexit. 









						Meghan & Harry 'discussed Megxit before they got married', book to claim
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry ‘discussed Megxit before they got married’, a new book will claim. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made headlines with their bombshell announcement in Janu…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




_Diana_ stories will always pull in the money. My guess is that there will be tons of articles around the time of Charles’s coronation - anything to make him look bad.


----------



## needlv

New tea on this blog:




__





						More on Upcoming Memoirs
					

Exclusive Celebrity News




					theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com
				




*More on Upcoming Memoirs *

Harry entered the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst May 8 2005 somewhat against his will. He was not interested in the stifling discipline and utter control the Institution continued to impart upon him, according to him.  In April 2006, Harry completed officer training and was commissioned as a Cornet (second lieutenant) in the Blues and Royals, a regiment of the Household Cavalry in the British Army.

The army stint was their last ditch effort to rehabilitate and fortify his strength and character but Harry writes that this effectively was their way of casting him out (not the first time) rather than respond to his needs with a warmer embrace. The literary work will call for a breakdown of barriers around closeness and touch.  Founding Invictus games and stepping into his career as a working Royal was certainly a time of pride as it seemed Harry finally found his philanthropic footing but he will divulge: it still wasn't roses as a Working Royal. Again this coincides with the theme we outlined for you before: Markle will be set as the catalyst and cast as his partner in crime, rather than an instigator.


----------



## needlv

Oooh.  - and confirmation that People Magazine is in the pockets of team Sussex PR.  This isnt news to all of us…









						Using People Magazine
					

Exclusive Celebrity News




					theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com
				





*Using People Magazine *

 People is gladly doing devilish business creating articles sure to make the Royal Family hot under the collars. Seems innocent enough but it's a part of a coordinated public relations campaign to create distaste for the Institution while "Rallying" and pivoting more people toward Team Sussex. We've confirmed People magazine to be directly doing business with Markle -- even before the "5 Friends" fiasco.

The tone of this article & others portrays time old tradition, honor and dignity as outdated and archaic in thinly veiled swipes without context.





Throughout our longstanding career in News Media it is always a pleasure to be well informed and dignified when meeting VIPS, Celebrities, Participants, or Royalty! Curtsying is a common courtesy in many decent places. Protocol cards are much appreciated way to maintain one's own dignity at such an important function. The above article divulges the cards in an obnoxiously tasteless way and seeks to make a mockery of the honorable and highly respectful act of curtsying and bowing -- to anyone! Not just Royalty!


 Just so you are all aware things are ramping up in June. Buckle up.


----------



## sdkitty

this article and Brooklyn Beckham's wedding says that celebs will attend - maybe EVEN the Duke and Duchess of Sussex!








						Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz Just Signed the “Mother of All Prenups”
					

Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz just signed the "mother of all" prenups ahead of their wedding—get the details!




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> My daughter, who attended college and lives in LA, has attended quite a few destination weddings in recent years that are multi-day affairs. It seems like over the top is the new norm for weddings in some places.



This is what I hear from friends too and that it has expanded to birthdays and other events.   For some, multi-day birthday celebrations have become a thing. My friends say their kids are being really careful who they accept invitations from as they know it will come with a weekend commitment plus lots of money spent treating the shakedown artist, uh, the birthday girl.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Oooh.  - and confirmation that People Magazine is in the pockets of team Sussex PR.  This isnt news to all of us…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Using People Magazine
> 
> 
> Exclusive Celebrity News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Using People Magazine *
> 
> People is gladly doing devilish business creating articles sure to make the Royal Family hot under the collars. Seems innocent enough but it's a part of a coordinated public relations campaign to create distaste for the Institution while "Rallying" and pivoting more people toward Team Sussex. We've confirmed People magazine to be directly doing business with Markle -- even before the "5 Friends" fiasco.
> 
> The tone of this article & others portrays time old tradition, honor and dignity as outdated and archaic in thinly veiled swipes without context.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Throughout our longstanding career in News Media it is always a pleasure to be well informed and dignified when meeting VIPS, Celebrities, Participants, or Royalty! Curtsying is a common courtesy in many decent places. Protocol cards are much appreciated way to maintain one's own dignity at such an important function. The above article divulges the cards in an obnoxiously tasteless way and seeks to make a mockery of the honorable and highly respectful act of curtsying and bowing -- to anyone! Not just Royalty!
> 
> 
> Just so you are all aware things are ramping up in June. Buckle up.


This mag is most likely catering to the antimonarchist mentality, you know the ones who think everyone should be free. The ones who are just too darn lazy to learn about the different customs around the world. I still remember the nasty comments on a blog directed at Prez O***a during his 2020 state visit to Japan for greeting Emperor Akihito with a bow, a simple inclination of the head, the normal Japanese greeting, which is different than the deep bow from the waist that is afforded the Imperial family members. Even after being told the difference, most people still refused to believe the Prez was just being polite.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this article and Brooklyn Beckham's wedding says that celebs will attend - maybe EVEN the Duke and Duchess of Sussex!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz Just Signed the “Mother of All Prenups”
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz just signed the "mother of all" prenups ahead of their wedding—get the details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


NS stated in one of his last videos that the Netfl*xes were invited to the wedding, but were insisting in bringing their own security, which was causing some logistic issues.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> NS stated in one of his last videos that the Netfl*xes were invited to the wedding, but were insisting in bringing their own security, which was causing some logistic issues.


They were supposed to present at the Oscars - for the last two years ....


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> This is what I hear from friends too and that it has expanded to birthdays and other events.   For some, multi-day birthday celebrations have become a thing. My friends say their kids are being really careful who they accept invitations from as they know it will come with a weekend commitment plus lots of money spent treating the shakedown artist, uh, the birthday girl.


Absolutely, one needs to be careful about those weekend commitments. My kid recently received one of those invitations, which requires flight, hotel… I'm helping with booking and it's not going to be inexpensive.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> They were supposed to present at the Oscars - for the last two years ....


4 years, since 2018 (prior to wedding, we have an article about it several posts ago).


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> NS stated in one of his last videos that the Netfl*xes were invited to the wedding, but were insisting in bringing their own security, which was causing some logistic issues.


Gawd
if they are so special, then they don't need to attend


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Gawd
> if they are so special, then they don't need to attend


We have several public figures in the gossip forum, but the Netfl*xes take the spotlight from others with the crap they constantly deliver.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> We have several public figures in the gossip forum, but the Netfl*xes take the spotlight from others with the crap they constantly deliver.


with all the celebs there and the very wealthy father of the groom, why would they be so special?  Of course, IDK if this story about them wanting to bring their own security it true or not


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> with all the celebs there and the very wealthy father of the groom, why would they be so special?  Of course, IDK if this story about them wanting to bring their own security it true or not


I’m sure there will be plenty of security at the wedding. There are going to be a lot of guests way more important than H and his wife.  I’d bet they weren’t invited.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I’m sure there will be plenty of security at the wedding. There are going to be a lot of guests way more important than H and his wife.  *I’d bet they weren’t invited.*



Let’s hope that’s the case. They sure aren’t getting any other invitations.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Didn't Raptor accuse Posh Spice of calling the paps on her while attending a spa or something? This might have taught the Beckhams a thing or two.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't Raptor accuse Posh Spice of calling the paps on her while attending a spa or something? This might have taught the Beckhams a thing or two.



I don’t remember that but that would certainly get Meghan on her sh*t list.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> "insisting in bringing their own security"


Can they be any more paranoid? Security from what? I think it's just a lame excuse to avoid attending, assuming they were even invited.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't Raptor accuse Posh Spice of calling the paps on her while attending a spa or something? This might have taught the Beckhams a thing or two.


Hopefully the Beckhams realise it's William and Catherine they need to be keeping in with.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> "the shakedown artist, uh, the birthday girl"


----------



## rose60610

So this "security" concern of theirs is really just cover for "we were never invited" or "we won't go to xyz because it's beneath us" or "we realize we burned bridges and don't want to get pelted with rotted vegetables".  However, security isn't an issue when Ellen wants you to munch chips like a squirrel and other demeaning things when you're too stupid to decline.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> So this "security" concern of theirs is really just cover for "we were never invited" or "we won't go to xyz because it's beneath us" or "we realize we burned bridges and don't want to get pelted with rotted vegetables".  However, security isn't an issue when Ellen wants you to munch chips like a squirrel and other demeaning things when you're too stupid to decline.


Yes, and this is becoming a boring and old excuse that everyone sees through. They aren’t going anywhere that requires spending money so they sit at home.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Google has plenty of articles and video from Hazz himself about Hazz wanting to leave long before MM came along. The big scoop from Omid’s _Freedom_ book was that H&M knew before the wedding they wanted out. During the engagement interview, MM kinda lets it slip when she tells him to save some stories for the book. The guess is she meant Omid’s book. They knew what they were doing and who would help them - Omid. Megxit really is misnomer. It should be Hexit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan & Harry 'discussed Megxit before they got married', book to claim
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry ‘discussed Megxit before they got married’, a new book will claim. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made headlines with their bombshell announcement in Janu…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Diana_ stories will always pull in the money. My guess is that there will be tons of articles around the time of Charles’s coronation - anything to make him look bad.


When I read the cursed book and I didn’t get that at all- i thought in that book it was definitely depicted as a process rather than a planned decision. I don’t entirely doubt they might have planned it in advance but I feel like the royal PR didn’t because they had giant egg on their face after hyping this girl as the new modern royal who was going to magically solve all the criticisms of their elitism and colonialism with a series of glorious photo ops. 


sdkitty said:


> this article and Brooklyn Beckham's wedding says that celebs will attend - maybe EVEN the Duke and Duchess of Sussex!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz Just Signed the “Mother of All Prenups”
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz just signed the "mother of all" prenups ahead of their wedding—get the details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


He seems very young, Still seems like he’s got a better prenup than H and cynical as I seem I’m a big believer in true love  


Maggie Muggins said:


> This mag is most likely catering to the antimonarchist mentality, you know the ones who think everyone should be free. The ones who are just too darn lazy to learn about the different customs around the world. I still remember the nasty comments on a blog directed at Prez O***a during his 2020 state visit to Japan for greeting Emperor Akihito with a bow, a simple inclination of the head, the normal Japanese greeting, which is different than the deep bow from the waist that is afforded the Imperial family members. Even after being told the difference, most people still refused to believe the Prez was just being polite.


Not to get too political but some people will always nitpick everything and an anti royalty stance is not necessarily an uninformed one. 


bag-mania said:


> I don’t remember that but that would certainly get Meghan on her sh*t list.


I rather think it would make M as close to gratitude as her nasty little self can get to but she would probably be plagued with angst about whether they were there to take photos of VB. 


Sharont2305 said:


> Hopefully the Beckhams realise it's William and Catherine they need to be keeping in with.


I would imagine they can see the writings on the wall - given they are canny people and it’s basically 20 ft tall at this point


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don’t remember that but that would certainly get Meghan on her sh*t list.



I couldn't find the Daily Mail article I remember reading, but this one basically says the same:

Prince Harry confronted David Beckham over leaked stories over Meghan Markle


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Not to get too political but some people will always nitpick everything and an anti royalty stance is not necessarily an uninformed one.



Man, I read Maggie's post several times and couldn't figure out what BO did wrong. I took your remark to finally grasp people accused him of giving in to royalty when he was just using the culturally appropriate greeting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


>




I just read that on Twitter and I share the sentiment of many comments: what exactly did she do? You know we'd have heard ad nauseum if she had lifted as much as a finger.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this article and Brooklyn Beckham's wedding says that celebs will attend - maybe EVEN the Duke and Duchess of Sussex!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz Just Signed the “Mother of All Prenups”
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz just signed the "mother of all" prenups ahead of their wedding—get the details!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


I am traveling to Florida for the weekend.  I just might be there as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Can they be any more paranoid? Security from what? I think it's just a lame excuse to avoid attending, assuming they were even invited.


IMO, they want a huge retinue (large security force, aides, PR teams, adoring fans, etc.) to boost their image and oversized ego.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> This is crazy…
> View attachment 5373158
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Meghan tries to trademark the word 'archetypes'
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex made the application at the United States Patent and Trademark Office last month which covers the use of 'archetypes', a word which derives from ancient Greek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


UFB, UFB, UFB .. if I was Thomas, I would ask for my money back from Northwestern .. seriously, how *STUPID* can she be really be???  (_*Well, I've answered my own question actually .. she is a FOOL, MORON, NITWIT, CRETIN, DIMWIT, DORK, DUMBBELL, DUNCE, IGNORAMUS, IMBECILE, MUTTONHEAD, NINCOMPOOP, NINNY, PINHEAD, SIMPLETON, CLODPOLL, TWIT, BLOCKHEAD, BONEHEAD .. in other words, as SHARP AS A SPOON*_)!!! 

Is her next move going to be to trademark her name - "Meghan", so that no one else can ever use it??? .. or trademark "Rachel" and then "Harry", "Archie" and "Lilibet"?!?!!?!  

To me, this 100% shows how uneducated she is and makes me pretty certain that she graduated due to her peanut-butter legs!  PATHETIC waste of a body in a good institution!


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> The comments are very entertaining.


Oh, I commented on it for sure ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Hopefully the Beckhams realise it's William and Catherine they need to be keeping in with.



My guess is they do realize W&K are the future.  Posh and Becks  want awards and invites to boost their brands and promote their kids. They themselves aren’t getting younger.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


>



There is more info about this charity…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, they want a huge retinue (large security force, aides, PR teams, adoring fans, etc.) to boost their image and oversized ego.



They are so...new money. Her, sure. Him? Just how did he turn out like this.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read that on Twitter and I share the sentiment of many comments: what exactly did she do? You know we'd have heard ad nauseum if she had lifted as much as a finger.


She lifted a finger to pet a dog once.  
I’d say patronising a dog shelter in the U.K. is the absolute definition of a cushy position. Paul O’grady and blue Peter have already laid the groundwork on a culture that is extremely pro-pet already.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Man, I read Maggie's post several times and couldn't figure out what BO did wrong. I took your remark to finally grasp people accused him of giving in to royalty when he was just using the culturally appropriate greeting.


I mean to be clear I think BO acted appropriately too. I think that one should treat people in a way respectful of their customs to the logical extent.

However, as I seem to be one of the resident British r*p*bl*c*ns of the group I do get a little defensive though I’m sure no offence is meant

To change the subject does anyone else think Lady C’s videos have really lost their lustre since the new year? I think she’s getting tired of making them but why not just make them shorter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> To change the subject does anyone else think Lady C’s videos have really lost their lustre since the new year? I think she’s getting tired of making them but why not just make them shorter



Yeah, I have not made it through a whole video in a long time. Like, I listened to what the mystery royal had told her, but once that was over with, I made it through maybe 10 more minutes.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> There is more info about this charity…



If they have a history of bullying staff and volunteers, no wonder Megain was their patron


----------



## jelliedfeels

Also did anyone see the Oscars looks Carolina Herrera put out. They are really trying to make badly fitting dresses the trademark.

The sheer gall of putting TER in this  lobster squared monstrosity:-


(To be fair to her, her tits may be falling out but she still looks better and more event appropriate than crunchy nut.)


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Also did anyone see the Oscars looks Carolina Herrera put out. She’s really trying to make badly fitting dresses her trademark.
> 
> The sheer gall of putting TER in this  lobster squared monstrosity:-
> View attachment 5373720
> 
> (To be fair to her, her tits may be falling out but she still looks better and more event appropriate than crunchy nut.)


At what point does one look at oneself in the mirror, and refuse to wear an ill fitting outfit regardless of who the designer is?  This is awful.


----------



## LizzieBennett

jelliedfeels said:


> Also did anyone see the Oscars looks Carolina Herrera put out. She’s really trying to make badly fitting dresses her trademark.
> 
> The sheer gall of putting TER in this  lobster squared monstrosity:-
> View attachment 5373720
> 
> (To be fair to her, her tits may be falling out but she still looks better and more event appropriate than crunchy nut.)


I thought Carolina Herrera had sold the company several years ago?


----------



## jelliedfeels

LizzieBennett said:


> I thought Carolina Herrera had sold the company several years ago?


Sorry I should say CH the company not Her herself.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I couldn't find the Daily Mail article I remember reading, but this one basically says the same:
> 
> Prince Harry confronted David Beckham over leaked stories over Meghan Markle


what an arrogant twerp he's turned out to be
It seems like getting a WIFE, in his mind, has turned him into a real man - or something like that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Also did anyone see the Oscars looks Carolina Herrera put out. They are really trying to make badly fitting dresses the trademark.
> 
> The sheer gall of putting TER in this  lobster squared monstrosity:-
> View attachment 5373720
> 
> (To be fair to her, her tits may be falling out but she still looks better and more event appropriate than crunchy nut.)


I hate that dress so much.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Yeah, I have no idea what award she was presenting because I spent the whole time watching her one breast trying to liberate itself. It didn’t help that they kept focusing on the envelope in her hand, right in front of it.

She is beautiful and sexy and has style. But that dress was awful.


----------



## csshopper

The Beckhams may be concerned  "those people" define "Security" as strong armed men with mini cameras recording the event for their own commercial use. Would not put it past them.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, they want a huge retinue (large security force, aides, PR teams, adoring fans, etc.) to boost their image and oversized ego.


Again, that's the LA influence. In her mind the bigger the entourage, the more important people will think you are, like she's a rapper or something. Meanwhile the Queen's nephew, Lord Snowdon, was recently seen departing an official royal engagement on his bike.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Sorry I should say CH the company not Her herself.


If I were her I would be horrified to have my name attached to that hideous dress. Somewhat related, if you haven't seen Phantom Thread with Daniel Day Lewis as an obsessive London designer in the 50s I highly recommend it. It's a few years old but I missed it when it came out.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Yes, and this is becoming a boring and old excuse that everyone sees through. They aren’t going anywhere that requires spending money so they sit at home.


Maybe they'll gift the couple with autographed copies of The Bench and Finding Freedom.


----------



## Chanbal

Has TW trademarked the word 'opportunist'? 






__





						Blind Item #8
					

It is funny that the alliterate one wants to use her new platform to build up women and make them stronger, but to do that is going to use a...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> If I were her I would be horrified to have my name attached to that hideous dress. Somewhat related, if you haven't seen Phantom Thread with Daniel Day Lewis as an obsessive London designer in the 50s I highly recommend it. It's a few years old but I missed it when it came out.



Is that the one with the weird insecure chick poisoning him several times when he doesn't give her enough attention?


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, they want a huge retinue (large security force, aides, PR teams, adoring fans, etc.) to boost their image and oversized ego.


Exactly so he appears as important as William


----------



## Chanbal

Oli Juste passed away in January, why this press release today? They should let Oli, Diana… RIP.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> If I were her I would be horrified to have my name attached to that hideous dress. Somewhat related, if you haven't seen Phantom Thread with Daniel Day Lewis as an obsessive London designer in the 50s I highly recommend it. It's a few years old but I missed it when it came out.


I loved it when they went to the hotel room of the drunken woman who had just married, and they took the dress from her! lol!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oli Juste passed away in January, why this press release today? They should let Oli, Diana… RIP.



She hand wrote it in calligraphy, so it took a long time.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> She hand wrote it in calligraphy, so it took a long time.


I don't get easily upset or shocked by what others do, but the Netfl*xes got my attention. It is so much shameless hypocrisy, opportunism, entitlement …


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that the one with the weird insecure chick poisoning him several times when he doesn't give her enough attention?


Yes, but that's a bit oversimplified. Spoiler alert, their rocky relationship ultimately thrives on her making him sick, with his knowledge, and then nursing him back to health.


----------



## papertiger

BL guy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> BL guy



The BLG suggestion to rename the podcast from ARCHETYPES to ARSEWYPES, I love it!


----------



## xincinsin

Chloe302225 said:


>



I know she was the patron, but isn't it patronising to simper to an animal rescue that they will "soon realize" that, emotionally, the dogs rescue the humans? Methane's track record with her dogs pre-marriage was suspect.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I know she was the patron, but isn't it patronising to simper to an animal rescue that they will "soon realize" that, emotionally, the dogs rescue the humans? Methane's track record with her dogs pre-marriage was suspect.


Didn't she "rehome" her two dogs, claiming that she couldn't take them to England?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> BL guy





Chanbal said:


> The BLG suggestion to rename the podcast from ARCHETYPES to ARSEWYPES, I love it!



Thanks BLG, @papertiger & @Chanbal


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks BLG, @papertiger & @Chanbal
> 
> View attachment 5373953



We should trademark the entire list of names that you so kindly assembled.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hope we get see Willem and Maxima standing next to the HazzBeens.  Very few royals are on their level. 












						Maxima and King Willem-Alexander go to a concert with Indian president
					

Queen Maxima of the Netherlands, 51, joined her husband King Willem-Alexander, 54, at the event at the Muziekgebouw in Amsterdam earlier tonight.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are so...new money. Her, sure. Him? Just how did he turn out like this.


I believe he's always been an undisciplined, immature, entitled spoilt brat unwilling to take direction from anyone.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> We should *trademark the entire list of names* that you so kindly assembled.


What would we call the list? Archenicknames?


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Didn't she "rehome" her two dogs, claiming that she couldn't take them to England?


Think she claimed that one of them was too old to make the journey.
It really contrasts with those who move to another country and ensure their pets come with them. My family adopted two adult dogs from a young couple who couldn't keep them any longer and, for the rest of the dogs' lives, that couple would come to visit them.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I know she was the patron, but isn't it patronising to simper to an animal rescue that they will "soon realize" that, emotionally, the dogs rescue the humans? Methane's track record with her dogs pre-marriage was suspect.



She is shamelessly comfortable with hypocrisy.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Think she claimed that one of them was too old to make the journey.
> It really contrasts with those who move to another country and ensure their pets come with them. My family adopted two adult dogs from a young couple who couldn't keep them any longer and, for the rest of the dogs' lives, that couple would come to visit them.



Every time this subject comes up I take it as my personal mission to remind everyone that the dog she said was too old was only 5! She’s a liar and a b*tch.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope we get see Willem and Maxima standing next to the HazzBeens.  Very few royals are on their level.
> 
> View attachment 5373957
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maxima and King Willem-Alexander go to a concert with Indian president
> 
> 
> Queen Maxima of the Netherlands, 51, joined her husband King Willem-Alexander, 54, at the event at the Muziekgebouw in Amsterdam earlier tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Willem and Maxima represent their country very well. I wonder if they will be able to attend the games without being a part of the Guru's Netfl*x for-profit show. I wish they wouldn't provide a photo-op for him.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> Didn't she "rehome" her two dogs, claiming that she couldn't take them to England?


If she did Re home them and she knew she was not going to be living there, ala planning their escape, then she’s a monster, a lying human who is incapable of any humanity.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> If she did Re home them and she knew she was not going to be living there, ala planning their escape, then she’s a monster, a lying human who is incapable of any humanity.


My 2 cents:
Allegedly, she saw the house as a property to add to her growing portfolio. She was counting with the expenses being paid by the BRF as a part-time royal and her motto was 'spare no expense'.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> Allegedly, she saw the house as a property to add to her growing portfolio. She was counting with the expenses being paid by the BRF as a part-time royal and her motto was 'spare no expense'.


Never understood how they thought their "one foot in-one foot out" model could work, esp if they expected the ATM to continue pouring out $$$$$$$$


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Vintage Leather

xincinsin said:


> Never understood how they thought their "one foot in-one foot out" model could work, esp if they expected the ATM to continue pouring out $$$$$$$$



The thing is, if you look at Edward and Sophie in the 90s, they were trying the same half-in half-out.

They were going to be Useful and self-supporting. He was a “documentary producer” (somehow, they only produced films about the history of some royal properties) and she kept her job as a ad exec. Somehow, this warranted them needing a massive estate (for the film studio!) and they didn’t keep it up long.

They found a lot of people were trying to use them for their BRF’s connections, and re-entered the royal fold.


If the Morons of Montecito had been smart about their exit strategy and hadn’t produced a ridiculous press release and all that crap, they could have been half and half.

“We’re reducing their royal duties to spend more time with baby Archie”
“We’re shining a light on causes that are important to us.” (Aka, Invictus documentary, narrating for Disney, podcast about mental health)
“We’ve bought a house in Cali so that we don’t have to keep wasting all that flight time when we’re working”

They’d have to be a little more subtle about merching - but they could still graciously accept million dollar donations to their foundation that just happens to be more of a shell game


The problem is, they never learned to keep their mouths shut until they had something to say.


----------



## xincinsin

Vintage Leather said:


> The thing is, if you look at Edward and Sophie in the 90s, they were trying the same half-in half-out.
> 
> They were going to be Useful and self-supporting. He was a “documentary producer” (somehow, they only produced films about the history of some royal properties) and she kept her job as a ad exec. Somehow, this warranted them needing a massive estate (for the film studio!) and they didn’t keep it up long.
> 
> They found a lot of people were trying to use them for their BRF’s connections, and re-entered the royal fold.
> 
> 
> If the Morons of Montecito had been smart about their exit strategy and hadn’t produced a ridiculous press release and all that crap, they could have been half and half.
> 
> “We’re reducing their royal duties to spend more time with baby Archie”
> “We’re shining a light on causes that are important to us.” (Aka, Invictus documentary, narrating for Disney, podcast about mental health)
> “We’ve bought a house in Cali so that we don’t have to keep wasting all that flight time when we’re working”
> 
> They’d have to be a little more subtle about merching - but they could still graciously accept million dollar donations to their foundation that just happens to be more of a shell game
> 
> 
> The problem is, they never learned to keep their mouths shut until they had something to say.


ITA
They could have taken a step back and done it that way, but instead they proposed some glam celeb jetsetting, turn up only for the good times model. If she wanted a lifestyle like that, she would have done better to hook a rich guy and be a socialite, not marry into the Firm. Urgh... does this prove that she floated through her International studies course and really graduated without a clue as to what the BRF does?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Never understood how they thought their "one foot in-one foot out" model could work, esp if they expected the ATM to continue pouring out $$$$$$$$


Grifters gonna grift.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "...she would have done better to hook a rich guy and be a socialite..."


Most rich guys would have been wise to her agenda, and she was a bit on the mature side for many of them. Harry was a relatively easy mark.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Every time this subject comes up I take it as my personal mission to remind everyone that the dog she said was too old was only 5! She’s a liar and a b*tch.


It wasn’t so much the dog got old as he was ‘getting old’ and didn’t suit her aesthetic anymore.





Vintage Leather said:


> The thing is, if you look at Edward and Sophie in the 90s, they were trying the same half-in half-out.
> 
> They were going to be Useful and self-supporting. He was a “documentary producer” (somehow, they only produced films about the history of some royal properties) and she kept her job as a ad exec. Somehow, this warranted them needing a massive estate (for the film studio!) and they didn’t keep it up long.
> 
> They found a lot of people were trying to use them for their BRF’s connections, and re-entered the royal fold.
> 
> 
> If the Morons of Montecito had been smart about their exit strategy and hadn’t produced a ridiculous press release and all that crap, they could have been half and half.
> 
> “We’re reducing their royal duties to spend more time with baby Archie”
> “We’re shining a light on causes that are important to us.” (Aka, Invictus documentary, narrating for Disney, podcast about mental health)
> “We’ve bought a house in Cali so that we don’t have to keep wasting all that flight time when we’re working”
> 
> They’d have to be a little more subtle about merching - but they could still graciously accept million dollar donations to their foundation that just happens to be more of a shell game
> 
> 
> The problem is, they never learned to keep their mouths shut until they had something to say.


I concur, the idea they can’t work a job isn’t quite true…. I’m sure reference has been made before to C’s food manufacturers Duchy Originals and A’s ignoble career selling ‘security advice’ (whatever that means).

I think the crucial fact is that the money stays in the family and M didn’t quite realise she’d be on an allowance not able to access the capital as readies. 
Evidently it is meant to keep the spouse from feathering their divorce nest too comfortably. 


charlottawill said:


> Most rich guys would have been wise to her agenda, and she was a bit on the mature side for many of them. Harry was a relatively easy mark.


The real thing that’s fascinating is what a set of marks the grey suits turned out to be. Tricking Harry is one thing but you’d think they’d know to avoid the hangers-on of the soho club.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> The real thing that’s fascinating is what a set of marks the grey suits turned out to be. Tricking Harry is one thing but you’d think they’d know to avoid the hangers-on of the soho club.



Seriously.


----------



## Chanbal

A generous person posted a video about Edward VIII elsewhere, and I think it is also of interest to many people here. Some of the apparent potential parallels between uncle and nephew are , despite the uncle had been a 10min-king and the nephew only a spare. The video is in the Spoiler below for the ones interested in history.



Spoiler: EDWARD VIII


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Every time this subject comes up I take it as my personal mission to remind everyone that the dog she said was too old was only 5! She’s a liar and a b*tch.


It wasn’t so much the dog got old as he was ‘getting old’ as a novelty.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> The real thing that’s fascinating is what a set of marks the grey suits turned out to be. Tricking Harry is one thing but you’d think they’d know to avoid the hangers-on of the soho club.


There were tales that Methane was one of the girls kept on call for companionship duty at Soho House. Her stans pooh-poohed that by pointing out that she earned good money from her role in Suits and her blog, and of course stress that she was a selfmade millionaire. I do wonder if the sums add up. Did she have enough left to be a millionaire after her lifestyle choices? Her preferred tipple was not cheap. She pursued Hazard (or other available rich British guy) across continents. How much was she earning from that blog? Why aren't more cable TV Z list actors calling themselves millionaires?


----------



## Chanbal

Advice from the BLG to TW:


----------



## Chanbal

One more piece of info on Arsewypes, or whatever…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Vintage Leather said:


> The thing is, if you look at Edward and Sophie in the 90s, they were trying the same half-in half-out.
> 
> They were going to be Useful and self-supporting. He was a “documentary producer” (somehow, they only produced films about the history of some royal properties) *and she kept her job as a ad exec.* Somehow, this warranted them needing a massive estate (for the film studio!) and they didn’t keep it up long.
> 
> They found a lot of people were trying to use them for their BRF’s connections, and re-entered the royal fold.
> 
> 
> If the Morons of Montecito had been smart about their exit strategy and hadn’t produced a ridiculous press release and all that crap, they could have been half and half.
> 
> “We’re reducing their royal duties to spend more time with baby Archie”
> “We’re shining a light on causes that are important to us.” (Aka, Invictus documentary, narrating for Disney, podcast about mental health)
> “We’ve bought a house in Cali so that we don’t have to keep wasting all that flight time when we’re working”
> 
> They’d have to be a little more subtle about merching - but they could still graciously accept million dollar donations to their foundation that just happens to be more of a shell game
> 
> 
> The problem is, they never learned to keep their mouths shut until they had something to say.


When first married, Sophie tried selling access to RF members, but failed badly. She also tried to con Sarah, who thankfully refused, into posing for  her ads. 

What saved Sophie was being able to ride in the same vehicle with HMTQ and and probably receive and apply her wise advice as apparently HM always chose the most recent of her sons' wives to join her.  In hindsight, can you imagine how differently life might have turned out for Diana and Sarah had they been given as equal an opportunity as Sophie to travel with HM.  

As for M, IMO, being part time royals wouldn't work because she would insist on being allowed to borrow, return and advertise merchandise for a fee, which she has already tried and was advised to cease and desist.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> There were tales that Methane was one of the girls kept on call for companionship duty at Soho House. Her stans pooh-poohed that by pointing out that she earned good money from her role in Suits and her blog, and of course stress that she was a selfmade millionaire. I do wonder if the sums add up. Did she have enough left to be a millionaire after her lifestyle choices? Her preferred tipple was not cheap. She pursued Hazard (or other available rich British guy) across continents. How much was she earning from that blog? Why aren't more cable TV Z list actors calling themselves millionaires?


I read a memoir by a woman who worked in a brothel in the Middle East and she said you wouldn’t believe the A-list actresses that showed up for  parties and what not. It’s definitely feasible that Mememe acted as an escort.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I read a memoir by a woman who worked in a brothel in the Middle East and she said you wouldn’t believe the A-list actresses that showed up for  parties and what not. It’s definitely feasible that Mememe acted as an escort.



I'm not confident her and our definition of A-list matches, but I can totally believe it for someone in Raptor's income bracket, especially when paired with her ambitions.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not confident her and our definition of A-list matches, but I can totally believe it for someone in Raptor's income bracket, especially when paired with her ambitions.


Oh I’m not calling her A list, I’m saying much bigger stars than her took money for this sort of thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh I’m not calling her A list, I’m saying much bigger stars than her took money for this sort of thing.



Yes, I understood that correctly, I just can't see Julia Roberts, Kate Blanchett or Nicole Kidman renting themselves out.


----------



## kemilia

jelliedfeels said:


> It wasn’t so much the dog got old as he was ‘getting old’ as a novelty.


I think this was the time I decided M was a lying schemer--at this time she/they were flying private as often as they could--a dog would have done fine sitting on a private plane. 

No, she was trying to dump her pups exactly like she dumps any human that is of no use to her anymore. THIS is the so-called "Markle Sparkle"


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Oh I’m not calling her A list, I’m saying much bigger stars than her took money for this sort of thing.



Middle East brothel parties. That’s how ladies can get themselves a Birkin gift without having to date Kanye.


----------



## Chanbal

kemilia said:


> I think this was the time I decided M was a lying schemer--at this time she/they were flying private as often as they could--a dog would have done fine sitting on a private plane.
> 
> No, she was trying to dump her pups exactly like she dumps any human that is of no use to her anymore. THIS is the so-called "Markle Sparkle"


It's possible that TW doesn't appreciate Dog Archetypes... 








						The Six Dog Archetypes
					

For more than 30 years, I have been professionally interacting with dogs, first as a champion American Kennel Club breeder, a recipient of the AKC Breeder of Merit award, and later as a dog behaviorist and trainer. Some of my earliest memories are of my German Shepherd, King. He was so massive...




					thinklikeyourdog.com
				




I'm  with the attempt to trademark a ~500yo word, which appears to be pure megalomania… 

_In what must be both the dumbest and most audacious attempt at ‘owning’ a word, Greek City Times can reveal that M*ghan M*rkle has filed to trademark the Greek word “Archetypes”._








						Meghan Markle Files Trademark Application To Own Greek Word ‘archetypes’ !
					

In what must be both the dumbest and most audacious attempt at 'owning' a word, Greek City Times can reveal that Meghan Markle has filed to trademark the




					greekcitytimes.com


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> There were tales that Methane was one of the girls kept on call for companionship duty at Soho House. Her stans pooh-poohed that by pointing out that she earned good money from her role in Suits and her blog, and of course stress that she was a selfmade millionaire. I do wonder if the sums add up. Did she have enough left to be a millionaire after her lifestyle choices? Her preferred tipple was not cheap. She pursued Hazard (or other available rich British guy) across continents. How much was she earning from that blog? Why aren't more cable TV Z list actors calling themselves millionaires?


Yes, and let's not forget self-made millionaire from her Yacht Girl days?!?!?!  Quite a few 'reality stars' were Yacht Girls out here in SoCal; they always deny it, but most know that that was a big part of their early-years income!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why does Prince Harry think he's safer in the Netherlands than the UK?

Judging from the picture, that's what alcohol and/or drugs will do to you. Unless you never feared for your life and were just being a brat of course.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, I understood that correctly, I just can't see Julia Roberts, Kate Blanchett or Nicole Kidman renting themselves out.


I agree. Hillary Swank and Beyoncé went to/ performed at parties, but I don’t think they prostituted themselves.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree. Hillary Swank and Beyoncé went to/ performed at parties, but I don’t think they prostituted themselves.


Lindsay Lohan, however, is a different story.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Lindsay Lohan, however, is a different story.


right
but although she was a good actress, I think she lost her A-list status (assuming she had it at one time)


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Lindsay Lohan, however, is a different story.


I’d bet my house on that.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> right
> but although she was a good actress, I think she lost her A-list status (assuming she had it at one time)


She had the potential to be A list but blew it, thanks largely to her idiot parents who were more interested in her fame and money than in actually being parents. It's unfortunate.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> One more piece of info on Arsewypes, or whatever…



I read/listened to about half of this and then my brain went numb. 

My impression is, and it may be wrong, she is seeking access to every single little bit of material available from every possible source to use as clips in her podcasts to the point she might be able to string together a whole podcast with very little original material and her trail of plagiarism will continue?


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why does Prince Harry think he's safer in the Netherlands than the UK?
> 
> Judging from the picture, that's what alcohol and/or drugs will do to you. Unless you never feared for your life and were just being a brat of course.
> 
> View attachment 5374515


I'm really kind of hoping that the folks that go to the Invictus Games venue in The Netherlands BOO HIS A$$ off!!!  Unfortunately, so many are too 'proper' to likely do that, but I'm kind of hoping that someone will take him aside and give him the business!


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> She had the potential to be A list but blew it, thanks largely to her idiot parents who were more interested in her fame and money than in actually being parents. It's unfortunate.


Not just her parents, alas .. she got into the wrong crowds out in H-Land with the endless partying, drinks and drugs.  Sadly, at a young age, she started looking way older and the later films that she did were big-time DUDS!  She lost the ingenue factor pretty early on and then, in order to keep up her income (heck - she was staying at the Chateau Marmont!) .. she starting 'showing up' at disreputable parties to 'hoe' herself out.  Kinda sad when you think about it, but she's not the only one ..


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> I'm really kind of hoping that the folks that go to the Invictus Games venue in The Netherlands BOO HIS A$$ off!!!  Unfortunately, so many are too 'proper' to likely do that, but I'm kind of hoping that someone will take him aside and give him the business!


They may not boo but they also may hold back applause. Could be very awkward silences.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Not just her parents, alas .. she got into the wrong crowds out in H-Land with the endless partying, drinks and drugs.  Sadly, at a young age, she started looking way older and the later films that she did were big-time DUDS!  She lost the ingenue factor pretty early on and then, in order to keep up her income (heck - she was staying at the Chateau Marmont!) .. she starting 'showing up' at disreputable parties to 'hoe' herself out.  Kinda sad when you think about it, but she's not the only one ..


She became the primary breadwinner for her family at a very young age, and instead of parenting her properly through the jungle of Hwood they were right out there partying with her.


----------



## pukasonqo

CeeJay said:


> Not just her parents, alas .. she got into the wrong crowds out in H-Land with the endless partying, drinks and drugs.  Sadly, at a young age, she started looking way older and the later films that she did were big-time DUDS!  She lost the ingenue factor pretty early on and then, in order to keep up her income (heck - she was staying at the Chateau Marmont!) .. she starting 'showing up' at disreputable parties to 'hoe' herself out.  Kinda sad when you think about it, but she's not the only one ..


Tara Reid comes to mind
Pity about Lilo, she had a lot of potential and I agree  that the parents were dreadful


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Not just her parents, alas .. she got into the wrong crowds out in H-Land with the endless partying, drinks and drugs.  Sadly, at a young age, she started looking way older and the later films that she did were big-time DUDS!  She lost the ingenue factor pretty early on and then, in order to keep up her income (heck - she was staying at the Chateau Marmont!) .. she starting 'showing up' at disreputable parties to 'hoe' herself out.  Kinda sad when you think about it, but she's not the only one ..


I recall a picture of her in a car with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton on a night out circa 2008 give or take, and thinking which one would be dead first.


----------



## Chanbal

Very likely imo










						I fear the Duchess of Martyr's podcast will be just another way to settle scores
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk
				




_Anyway, archetypes, stereotypes, media types — call them what you will, it’s all going to be great. I look forward to seeing which typecast females the Duchess of Martyr will consider worthy of examination, while wondering if Evil Half-Sister, Grandma Moneypot and Jealous Sister-In-Law will make the cut. Most of all, *I am hugely looking forward to the episode in which Meghan will be having an uncensored conversation with herself about stereotyped females and her own role in perpetuating so many of them.*_


----------



## rose60610

Methane trying to trademark "Archetype" reminds me of Charlie Sheen trying to trademark "Winning".  If she had any originality she wouldn't have to trademark any speech. She was never bothered by plagiarizing other people. Question is: Who would ever want to plagiarize HER?  You're in pretty dire straits if you think any of her inane ramblings are worthy of repeating. Is Methane going to try to trademark "Lilibet", too?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Is Methane going to try to trademark "Lilibet", too?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Funny thing is she’s making such a big deal out of copywriting the name of this podcast which she will literally probably do less than 10 episodes of.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Funny thing is she’s making such a big deal out of copywriting the name of this podcast which she will literally probably do less than 10 episodes of.


There will be more than 1 "episode"?!?!?!!  I'm not wasting one second of my time on this a$$wipe!


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Funny thing is she’s making such a big deal out of copywriting the name of this podcast which she will literally probably do less than 10 episodes of.


It's the frequency that is the mystery. Will Ep 2 take 3 years to create?


----------



## Lodpah

This wedding, if they go, will be all about the two grifters. 









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle to attend Beckham-Peltz wedding. Details about royal couple
					

Brooklyn Beckham & Nicola Peltz will marry at her father's estate in Palm Beach. Guests include Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Tom Brady, Gisele Bundchen



					amp.palmbeachpost.com


----------



## rose60610

Harry can't go Philip's memorial service due to "security" but he can go to a Beckham wedding? Suuuuure. I hope they won't turn it into the Haz and Maggot Show if they go. For Maggot to go, there must be some billionaires going there for her to flirt with. Or somebody who can put her in touch with one/several.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> This wedding, if they go, will be all about the two grifters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle to attend Beckham-Peltz wedding. Details about royal couple
> 
> 
> Brooklyn Beckham & Nicola Peltz will marry at her father's estate in Palm Beach. Guests include Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Tom Brady, Gisele Bundchen
> 
> 
> 
> amp.palmbeachpost.com


Oh wow! That article was filled with .... nothing. Whoever cobbled it together even put together a paragraph about how no one knows if either grifter has been to Palm Beach before. How .... interesting ... NOT.

You know, I'm sensing a Blue Ocean moment. Methane may have a future as an "attention-diverter". Say you have a wedding and your uncle, the black sheep of the family, was just released from the slammer. To reduce the level of gossip and divert attention from the family scandal, you hire the Douchess to appear at the wedding, bat her eyelashes, thrust her pelvis at random men, toss her sausage tendrils, slyly stick her tongue out to create a sexy sensation, appear as if she is going to have a wardrobe malfunction... No one will even notice your uncle! And the Netflixes can bill the service as an appearance fee.


----------



## Chanbal

Celia Walden in Los Angeles  The Nefl*xes are 'o_fficially figures of fun in the US'._


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Charter jet issues???? _  Tom&Giselle?


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> I recall a picture of her in a car with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton on a night out circa 2008 give or take, and thinking which one would be dead first.


It turns out that Paris is well-cared for and whereas Lindsay and Britney’s parents see them as meal tickets. Then they act surprised when they struggle with mental health and addiction. They  make Kristen Jenner look like mother of the year.


Chanbal said:


> Very likely imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear the Duchess of Martyr's podcast will be just another way to settle scores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Anyway, archetypes, stereotypes, media types — call them what you will, it’s all going to be great. I look forward to seeing which typecast females the Duchess of Martyr will consider worthy of examination, while wondering if Evil Half-Sister, Grandma Moneypot and Jealous Sister-In-Law will make the cut. Most of all, *I am hugely looking forward to the episode in which Meghan will be having an uncensored conversation with herself about stereotyped females and her own role in perpetuating so many of them.*_



I agree with the sentiment. In her last blog she indulged in a bit of femme shaming when she claimed she didn’t want to be a princess like Kate hahahahaha

It does strike me as a bit ironic a mail columnist is complaining about score-settling 


Chanbal said:


> Celia Walden in Los Angeles  The Nefl*xes are 'o_fficially figures of fun in the US'._



FYI  the Piers fans, Celia is his wife and is quite the posh journo in her own right,


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

jelliedfeels said:


> FYI  the Piers fans, Celia is his wife and is quite the posh journo in her own right,



interesting, I didn’t know that.  Do you think he is always so obnoxious or is it something he amps up for TV?

Must say that I frequently find him obnoxious, but at times find him hilarious!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5374724



I haven't thought about it for a while, but seeing it out in writing just drove home the point again how pathetically ridiculous that name is. Comedy gold.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I just scrolled Instagram and Vogue has one of these "My life in outfits" videos featuring Lindsay Lohan! She looks great (beautiful red hair) and healthy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Charter jet issues????



Uh oh, did the check bounce?


----------



## Aimee3

Hmm wondering with what H and wife will gift the newlyweds…a lemon cake?  A box full of “the bench” for their future offspring? 
What ill-fitting garment will the wife prance around in?
I still don’t think they were invited!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I just scrolled Instagram and Vogue has one of these "My life in outfits" videos featuring Lindsay Lohan! She looks great (beautiful red hair) and healthy.


She looks well in a commercial for Planet Fitness. Maybe someone in Hollywood will give her a second chance.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> Uh oh, did the check bounce?


If only there were commercial flights from Cali to Florida!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Celia Walden in Los Angeles  The Nefl*xes are 'o_fficially figures of fun in the US'._



This could be the reason why BP is in no hurry to remove JCMH & TW's titles because it is waiting for them to self-destruct thereby preventing another wave of sympathy for them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Luvbolide said:


> interesting, I didn’t know that.  Do you think he is always so obnoxious or is it something he amps up for TV?
> 
> Must say that I frequently find him obnoxious, but at times find him hilarious!!


I just meant they have a similar sort of public persona which is quite a common type in British media but I do think both of them play it up and he plays it up a lot.
I agree he has some very bad takes and he can be super grating but he does have some good lines now and again. I couldn’t watch him for a full half hour. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't thought about it for a while, but seeing it out in writing just drove home the point again how pathetically ridiculous that name is. Comedy gold.


It’s hard to think about someone who only exists for photo ops lol. 


charlottawill said:


> She looks well in a commercial for Planet Fitness. Maybe someone in Hollywood will give her a second chance.


That’s great to hear. I think she’s got a lot of talent and the way things are in the media atm I think if she wants to she could get the attention for a comeback.


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> Hmm wondering with what H and wife will gift the newlyweds…a lemon cake?  A box full of “the bench” for their future offspring?
> What ill-fitting garment will the wife prance around in?
> I still don’t think they were invited!


Same here .. I'm not buying it!  The 2 of them (Megalomaniac & HapHazza) had some "interactions" with both of the Beckhams and I don't think "Posh" is that unforgiving!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5374724



Hope they remember Lilibet is already TM’ed by the casino.


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> Uh oh, did the check bounce?


They didn't get that far.  They failed the credit check.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Hermes Zen

Don't believe I've seen this posted yet.  " Meghan Markle is viewed as a "figure of fun" in the U.S ..." Oh yes and internationally too if you know what I mean, Ms. Yoga Pose Yacht Girl.   Sorry, me bad.    Have a great weekend all.



> https://www.newsweek.com/americans-defensive-prince-harry-meghan-markle-celia-walden-1696261
> 
> *Americans No Longer 'Protective' of Harry and Meghan—Expert*
> By
> Author and journalist Celia Walden has told a British news channel that Meghan Markle is viewed as a "figure of fun" in the U.S. after voicing her surprise that Americans do not appear to be "protective" or "defensive" of the duchess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments...Scobie has some nerve.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I second your motion @QueenofWrapDress


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




It's true, H&M put out that ridiculous statement ages ago (when the Queen stopped them using `royal' in 'Sussex Royal') that the Queen didn't/doesn't own the word 'Royal' - but they're trying to own 'archetypes',


----------



## needlv

Hmmm…


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Hmmm…




I wish it were true but I don’t believe it. Like Will Smith, Harry exists in a cage of his own making and he locked the door himself.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I wish it were true but I don’t believe it. Like Will Smith, Harry exists in a cage of his own making and he locked the door himself.


Perfectly said.

If she does go with him to Holland with a film team in tow, not only has the bridge been burnt in England, he  (they) will never get a building permit for another one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Hmmm…




I don't believe it, the death grip is too firm...but incidentally, I've seen a few German headlines how there's trouble on the horizon and even their friends don't think the marriage will work out (couldn't be bothered to read the articles though).


----------



## DoggieBags

I find it disgusting that the classless duo plan to profit personally off the efforts of wounded vets. If they donated the proceeds of the Netflix content they generate from their presence at the Invictus games to veterans’ causes that would be one thing but I doubt the avaricious duo would do anything so charitable.


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I assume Netf*** will be supplying security?


----------



## gracekelly

Here is my question.  The duo has been filming for over a year including their last appearance with the family at Commonwealth Service.  When is this film footage going to see the light of day?  If Meghan insists on editing it, it will be going as slowly as her calligraphy.  When is NF going to put their foot down and take over?


----------



## gracekelly

I just ordered a carton of popcorn for the game appearance.  I can't wait to see the outfits!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>





QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments...Scobie has some nerve.



I'm sorry @QueenofWrapDress, I used the  emoji on your posts, but I meant


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> It's true, H&M put out that ridiculous statement ages ago (when the Queen stopped them using `royal' in 'Sussex Royal') that the Queen didn't/doesn't own the word 'Royal' - but they're trying to own 'archetypes',


I trust Angela Levin's opinion, her comments are usually balanced. The Netfl*xes suffer from an acute case of intractable grandiosity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I just ordered a carton of popcorn for the game appearance.  I can't wait to see the outfits!!!!



This:




or this:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Counting on Willem and Maxima to show H&M how to dress


----------



## lanasyogamama

She was such a smug Cheshire Cat that first year.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Per Pagesix ... *While there has been speculation about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle* — after all, David and Victoria were at their 2018 royal nuptials — *showing up*, an inside source told Page Six that *they will not*. Too bad, as they could have crashed at one of the Peltz family’s nearby properties, like the cozy 18,000-square-feet house across the street from Montsorrel.




> https://pagesix.com/2022/04/08/inside-brooklyn-beckham-nicola-peltzs-april-9-wedding/
> 
> *Brooklyn Beckham & Nicola Peltz’s wedding: Guests, fashion, food & more*


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments...Scobie has some nerve.




Fun Fact Scoobie: You make me want to vomit.


----------



## rose60610

April 1, 2012 (ten years ago), Netflix stock was at $16.40 a share. Now it's $355.  My point is, the Netflix Grand Poobah's are swimming in so much money that they can well afford to nurse along the Maggot Mavericks with the hope they'll produce SOMETHING that will attract enough eyeballs to justify their investment. My guess is that Gag & Hag realize the same and also realize that they can be as slimy as they want since they are tentatively sitting on narrative they can spin to make some scandalous royal juice regardless of proof. All they have to say is "We felt bla bla bla", "I thought ...", "I just didn't know...", "We couldn't trust..." and whatever BS they can throw together to make a program. The fact that they've burned their bridges will be spun into "Little poor us, nobody wants to talk to us because we know the truth and are making it known to line our pockets as much as we can  so our alligator tears are genuine".

And if Crash & Burn don't produce anything for Netflix, Netflix isn't going to push it for fear of being labeled "Racist!" for expecting something in return for 150 million dollars. M&H love playing the race card, and they're holding all the aces on that hand. After a Netflix Goose Egg, any other entity would be a total idiot to enter any kind of business relationship with them. And if they're treating the Invictus Games as they treated the dead soldiers in the cemetery (for an obvious photo op) to simply fulfill the Netflix contract, I'd hope the participants realize they're being used as dupes.


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> Per Pagesix ... *While there has been speculation about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle* — after all, David and Victoria were at their 2018 royal nuptials — *showing up*, an inside source told Page Six that *they will not*. Too bad, as they could have crashed at one of the Peltz family’s nearby properties, like the cozy 18,000-square-feet house across the street from Montsorrel.



They weren’t invited.  The whole “will they, won’t they” is just Markle PR attempting to get an invite AND gets everyone taking about them.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Papa is a rolling stone


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Papa is a rolling stone


Their hypocrisy is boundless: London is to dangerous to visit but New York City with a 60% increased crime rate over a year ago is safe to live in.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Their hypocrisy is boundless: London is to dangerous to visit but New York City with a 60% increased crime rate over a year ago is safe to live in.



It's not about London is dangerous, he wants his 'exceptional status' back, protection for him, but also for his Mrs. and their offspring. 

Probably would qualify him for state funded protection both sides of the 'pond'. 

As somebody already said, he would be able to do background check on their children's teachers, classmates and their parents, anyone who visits the house etc. It also further their status as all forever 'Royal'.


----------



## Annawakes

At this point I believe nothing that is written about their plans…whose party they are going to, where they might be moving.  It is all lies.

I shall await photo evidence.  I shall believe it when I see it.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It's not about London is dangerous, he wants his 'exceptional status' back, protection for him, but also for his Mrs. and their offspring.
> 
> Probably would qualify him for state funded protection both sides of the 'pond'.
> 
> As somebody already said, he would be able to do background check on their children's teachers, classmates and their parents, anyone who visits the house etc. It also further their status as all forever 'Royal'.


It security is all about getting the best parking in London … not everybody is dropped at the door …

A few humorous anecdotes on that , Kaleb - Jeremy Clarkson’s farm manager went to London to sell his produce and managed to rack up more parking tickets than the produce was worth … hilarious

I remember a BBC comedy TV show , about the workings of the BBC. The bollards - vertical posts to keep hoi polloi out - in front of the building, can be retracted to allow VIPs to park in the courtyard. In the comedy, Prince Charles was visiting the building and the bollards would not retract …
they won’t retract the bollards for just anyone, some have to walk to the studio


----------



## Chanbal

I know that some may not be MK's fans, but this video deserves one of @Maggie Muggins awards!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who else is getting uneasy when the Troublesome Two promise a "surprise"?


----------



## Chanbal

The answers seem obvious…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I know that some may not be MK's fans, but this video deserves one of @Maggie Muggins awards!



Dear @Chanbal please be so kind as to notify Megyn Kelly re her TPF award. I trust you still have your TPF Ambassador Badge, but just in case, here's a duplicate.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> They weren’t invited.  The whole “will they, won’t they” is just Markle PR attempting to get an invite AND gets everyone taking about them.


This is happening so often, which means they aren't getting invites except to events bought and paid for by Sunshine Sucks. All the fishing for invites is so embarrassing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> It's not about London is dangerous, he wants his 'exceptional status' back, protection for him, but also for his Mrs. and their offspring.
> 
> Probably would qualify him for state funded protection both sides of the 'pond'.
> 
> As somebody already said, *he would be able to do background check on their children's teachers, classmates and their parents, anyone who visits the house etc*. It also further their status as all forever 'Royal'.



I did not know that background checks were included.  Sure, most info is available online, still it feels invasive and creepy.



marietouchet said:


> It security is all about getting the best parking in London … not everybody is dropped at the door …
> 
> A few humorous anecdotes on that , Kaleb - Jeremy Clarkson’s farm manager went to London to sell his produce and managed to rack up more parking tickets than the produce was worth … hilarious
> 
> 
> *I remember a BBC comedy TV show , about the workings of the BBC.* The bollards - vertical posts to keep hoi polloi out - in front of the building, can be retracted to allow VIPs to park in the courtyard. In the comedy, Prince Charles was visiting the building and the bollards would not retract …
> they won’t retract the bollards for just anyone, some have to walk to the studio



W1A - _yeah, no,_ I loved that show and that episode was hilarious. The tension was palpable, especially for the audience.
We need a Dept. of Better. 








						W1A (TV series) - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Perfectly said.
> 
> If she does go with him to Holland with a film team in tow, not only has the bridge been burnt in England, he  (they) will never get a building permit for another one.


.. wouldn't it be just PERFECT if the Invictus athletes BOO'd the two of them, and THAT gets filmed?!?!  Yeah, I know .. it would get edited out, but .. personally, I think it's pretty darn rude to bring a film crew with them .. it should be ABOUT THE ATHLETES not these two boneheads!!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> It security is all about getting the best parking in London … not everybody is dropped at the door …
> 
> A few humorous anecdotes on that , Kaleb - Jeremy Clarkson’s farm manager went to London to sell his produce and managed to rack up more parking tickets than the produce was worth … hilarious
> 
> I remember a BBC comedy TV show , about the workings of the BBC. The bollards - vertical posts to keep hoi polloi out - in front of the building, can be retracted to allow VIPs to park in the courtyard. In the comedy, Prince Charles was visiting the building and the bollards would not retract …
> they won’t retract the bollards for just anyone, some have to walk to the studio


The head of the Risk committee was moaning about the ugly bollards in front of our new building. I suggested that we paint them in exciting colours, or invite street artists to do it, make a feature out of the eyesores without reducing their practical use. You should have seen his horrified look. Those bollards stopped a runaway car a couple of months ago, so I'm quite glad for their existence.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I know that some may not be MK's fans, but this video deserves one of @Maggie Muggins awards!



I don't know who the man is, but his comments about her family being good ordinary Americans thrust into the spotlight are very interesting, and credible. But what I want to know is, why is Megyn wearing sunglasses?


----------



## Chanbal

Where are the Neffl*xes? They could borrow the 'thrones' from Mr & Mrs Becks.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Dear @Chanbal please be so kind as to notify Megyn Kelly re her TPF award. I trust you still have your TPF Ambassador Badge, but just in case, here's a duplicate.
> View attachment 5376030
> View attachment 5376031



Haha, thank you @Maggie Muggins


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> My take on Andrew with TQ is this: he's one of her two sons, Philip was HIS FATHER ALSO.  We all know Andrew's scandal. At this time he hasn't been actually CONVICTED of anything, just stripped of bla bla bla and considered persona non grata (but yeah, we know). Charles is going to be the next KING, AND he is ALREADY there WITH his wife, Camilla.  QEII is 95, (95!!!)  at her husband's memorial service.  Charles isn't going to go side by side with his mother AND Camilla because that would just look WEIRD, especially since another male sibling SHOULD be there as it's HIS father's service also.  Past events aside, TQ is 95 and should be assisted in some way. By whom? A hired caregiver? Anne, who has a husband with whom she'd be attending? NO! Andrew is her son who is also grieving for his father. Regardless of his (friggin' weird) current relationship with Fergie, Andrew is a son who is there for his mother on that day. DONE. It'd be otherwise be MORE scandalous if Andrew weren't there. Considering.........various instances I could bring up in terms of "If we overlook 'certain people' being the spouse of 'XYZ bla bla'  or who'd done 'bla bla' then why SHOULDN'T Andrew be there, I'd get thrown into Purse Forum jail (again, cough cough).



She has 3 sons not two


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> My take on Andrew with TQ is this: he's one of her two sons, Philip was HIS FATHER ALSO.  We all know Andrew's scandal. At this time he hasn't been actually CONVICTED of anything, just stripped of bla bla bla and considered persona non grata (but yeah, we know). Charles is going to be the next KING, AND he is ALREADY there WITH his wife, Camilla.  QEII is 95, (95!!!)  at her husband's memorial service.  Charles isn't going to go side by side with his mother AND Camilla because that would just look WEIRD, especially since another male sibling SHOULD be there as it's HIS father's service also.  Past events aside, TQ is 95 and should be assisted in some way. By whom? A hired caregiver? Anne, who has a husband with whom she'd be attending? NO! Andrew is her son who is also grieving for his father. Regardless of his (friggin' weird) current relationship with Fergie, Andrew is a son who is there for his mother on that day. DONE. It'd be otherwise be MORE scandalous if Andrew weren't there. Considering.........various instances I could bring up in terms of "If we overlook 'certain people' being the spouse of 'XYZ bla bla'  or who'd done 'bla bla' then why SHOULDN'T Andrew be there, I'd get thrown into Purse Forum jail (again, cough cough).


Charles-the future king, Andrew-the most scandalous, and Edward-the silent one. Poor Edward, he is often forgotten. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







elvisfan4life said:


> She has 3 sons not two


Good catch!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Here is my question.  The duo has been filming for over a year including their last appearance with the family at Commonwealth Service.  When is this film footage going to see the light of day?  If Meghan insists on editing it, it will be going as slowly as her calligraphy.  When is NF going to put their foot down and take over?


and who will watch it?


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> .. wouldn't it be just PERFECT if the Invictus athletes BOO'd the two of them, and THAT gets filmed?!?!  Yeah, I know .. it would get edited out, but .. personally, I think it's pretty darn rude to bring a film crew with them .. it should be ABOUT THE ATHLETES not these two boneheads!!


and wouldn't it be wonderful if the Beckhams told someone (the press, or the press via "sources") they were never invited


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who else is getting uneasy when the Troublesome Two promise a "surprise"?





Chanbal said:


> The answers seem obvious…



Prince Dufus Judas Iscariot and TW have betrayed their families for fame and fortune, but that appears to have backfired on them. What kind of reward is H hoping to get by betraying the veterans? More money beyond their dreams of avarice? I'm hoping it will be no more than a traitor's reward, if he receives anything all.


----------



## Hermes Zen

sdkitty said:


> and wouldn't it be wonderful if the Beckhams told someone (the press, or the press via "sources") they were never invited



Your wish may come true if this article is valid! Here's part of the article ...

Becks and Posh had invited Kate and William to the star-studded £3 million wedding in Florida.

But the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – whose guests at THEIR wedding in 2011 included the Beckhams – declined the request.

Meanwhile *Prince Harry** and Meghan*, who also had David and Victoria as wedding guests in 2018, *were not even invited* to Brooklyn’s bash to see him get hitched to billionaire heiress Nicola Peltz, 27. 

The Beckhams were reported to have agonised over which royal couple to choose because of the alleged rift between William and Harry, who now lives in California with actress Meghan.

In the end they plumped for William and Kate because of their long history of friendship.


*William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed*








						William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton declined the invitation to Brooklyn Beckham's wedding. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not even invited to the ceremony in Florida




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and who will watch it?


Doria, Archie and Lilypad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> This is happening so often, which means they aren't getting invites except to events bought and paid for by Sunshine Sucks. All the fishing for invites is so embarrassing.



They have to create their own reason for being at an event.  Either giving an award to themselves or piggybacking on the event itself.


----------



## Annawakes

Good to hear the Beckhams made the sensible choice in inviting W&K.  If that is even true.


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Your wish may come true if this article is valid! Here's part of the article ...
> 
> Becks and Posh had invited Kate and William to the star-studded £3 million wedding in Florida.
> 
> But the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – whose guests at THEIR wedding in 2011 included the Beckhams – declined the request.
> 
> Meanwhile *Prince Harry** and Meghan*, who also had David and Victoria as wedding guests in 2018, *were not even invited* to Brooklyn’s bash to see him get hitched to billionaire heiress Nicola Peltz, 27.
> 
> The Beckhams were reported to have agonised over which royal couple to choose because of the alleged rift between William and Harry, who now lives in California with actress Meghan.
> 
> In the end they plumped for William and Kate because of their long history of friendship.
> 
> 
> *William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton declined the invitation to Brooklyn Beckham's wedding. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not even invited to the ceremony in Florida
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I don't believe for a second that Victoria wanted her at the wedding and for multiple reasons.  Meghan doesn't just show up at an event like a regular guest.  She has to do something to make herself stand out in the crowd.  Victoria is the star second to the bride at this wedding.  Period.  On top of it all is that the Beckhams are not going to risk their connection to the royals by inviting the Harkles.


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> I don't believe for a second that Victoria wanted her at the wedding and for multiple reasons.  Meghan doesn't just show up at an event like a regular guest.  She has to do something to make herself stand out in the crowd.  Victoria is the star second to the bride at this wedding.  Period.  On top of it all is that the Beckhams are not going to risk their connection to the royals by inviting the Harkles.


And that's why they invited W & K and not the Harkles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did anyone see Princess Anne holding her own bags in Australia the other day?


----------



## Katel

Hermes Zen said:


> …
> In the end they plumped for William and Kate *because of their long history of friendship.
> 
> William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton declined the invitation to Brooklyn Beckham's wedding. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not even invited to the ceremony in Florida
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


“In the end they plumped for William and Kate because they are decent and are the future” - fixed it 




lanasyogamama said:


> Did anyone see Princess Anne holding her own bags in Australia the other day?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5376398


C’mon now Anne - well done! Doesn’t she look smart in casual attire?


----------



## csshopper

W and K are sensitive enough to know that even being present and sat in the middle with no fanfare, there would still be distraction if they attended. Nice to be asked, however, and I bet they send a great gift and lovely message. 

Meanwhile the whiners are deep into the Kleenex boxes in Montecito shedding floods of angry tears at not being asked. Wonder if they will ever figure out why no one wants them? Probably not, but if asked, we could sure explain it to them, incident by incident.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Did anyone see Princess Anne holding her own bags in Australia the other day?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5376398


And presumably no security issues.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> My take on Andrew with TQ is this: he's one of her two sons, Philip was HIS FATHER ALSO.  We all know Andrew's scandal. At this time he hasn't been actually CONVICTED of anything, just stripped of bla bla bla and considered persona non grata (but yeah, we know). Charles is going to be the next KING, AND he is ALREADY there WITH his wife, Camilla.  QEII is 95, (95!!!)  at her husband's memorial service.  Charles isn't going to go side by side with his mother AND Camilla because that would just look WEIRD, especially since another male sibling SHOULD be there as it's HIS father's service also.  Past events aside, TQ is 95 and should be assisted in some way. By whom? A hired caregiver? Anne, who has a husband with whom she'd be attending? NO! Andrew is her son who is also grieving for his father. Regardless of his (friggin' weird) current relationship with Fergie, Andrew is a son who is there for his mother on that day. DONE. It'd be otherwise be MORE scandalous if Andrew weren't there. Considering.........various instances I could bring up in terms of "If we overlook 'certain people' being the spouse of 'XYZ bla bla'  or who'd done 'bla bla' then why SHOULDN'T Andrew be there, I'd get thrown into Purse Forum jail (again, cough cough).


On Andrew attending service for father … the dreaded Duke of Windsor was allowed attendance at his mother’s funeral - a precedent that QEII would be well aware of


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Their hypocrisy is boundless: London is to dangerous to visit but New York City with a 60% increased crime rate over a year ago is safe to live in.


But .. he'll purchase a security team (I believe they have one in Montecito); the issue with London was that they wouldn't allow a US Security team to come into the country with Guns.  Harry did indicate that he would pay for their security team, but (of course) wanted to know from the current BRF Security Team(s) what exactly was required, and that is where it got sticky because they are not going to tell Humpty-Dumpty what the requirements are!!!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> I did not know that background checks were included.  Sure, most info is available online, still it feels invasive and creepy.


That makes sense to me, but .. then I think "hmmmm - just what did they find out about Ms. Malicious"???


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> But .. he'll purchase a security team (I believe they have one in Montecito); the issue with London was that they wouldn't allow a US Security team to come into the country with Guns.  Harry did indicate that he would pay for their security team, but (of course) wanted to know from the current BRF Security Team(s) what exactly was required, and that is where it got sticky because they are not going to tell Humpty-Dumpty what the requirements are!!!



Plus, Hazz wanted [demanded] the access to the MI6 (or 5 or whichever MI) files.  

Imo they want to create their own  database on many many many individuals.  Not a good idea at all.


----------



## 880

CeeJay said:


> But .. he'll purchase a security team (I believe they have one in Montecito); the issue with London was that they wouldn't allow a US Security team to come into the country with Guns.  Harry did indicate that he would pay for their security team, but (of course) wanted to know from the current BRF Security Team(s) what exactly was required, and that is where it got sticky because they are not going to tell Humpty-Dumpty what the requirements are!!!


I thought he wanted to pay for UK police protection which would not be allowed? Anyway, I’m assuming that he will eventually  end up divorced and back in the UK, trying to make amends.


----------



## Katel

Hermes Zen said:


> Your wish may come true if this article is valid! Here's part of the article ...
> 
> Becks and Posh had invited Kate and William to the star-studded £3 million wedding in Florida.
> 
> But the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – whose guests at THEIR wedding in 2011 included the Beckhams – declined the request.
> 
> Meanwhile *Prince Harry** and Meghan*, who also had David and Victoria as wedding guests in 2018, *were not even invited* to Brooklyn’s bash to see him get hitched to billionaire heiress Nicola Peltz, 27.
> 
> The Beckhams were reported to have agonised over which royal couple to choose because of the alleged rift between William and Harry, who now lives in California with actress Meghan.
> 
> In the end they plumped for William and Kate because of their long history of friendship.
> 
> 
> *William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton declined the invitation to Brooklyn Beckham's wedding. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not even invited to the ceremony in Florida
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



The horror show named Harkles are going to the Netherlands to avoid the obvious Beckham non-invite diss.


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> I thought he wanted to pay for UK police protection which would not be allowed? Anyway, I’m assuming that he will eventually  end up divorced and back in the UK, trying to make amends.


The tale of The Lamebrain, the Witch and the Security Blanket is ever-changing. 

Despite his shock/horror expressed during the OW interview that his taxpayer-funded security was withdrawn, Lamebrain later claimed that during the Sandringham Summit, he offered to pay for the UK police to carry on providing security for him and his family. He also says his US security team cannot replicate the level of security they require because they lack access to UK intelligence data.

You know, when the Duke and Douchess of Drama finally leak a (fabricated) kidnapping story via Plastic Pal or other anonymous BFF, I'd wager they'll blame the BRF for their high risk life because it's the BRF's fault that Lamebrain was born a royal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prepare!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## csshopper

Beckham guests pictured include Kardashian bestie Jonathan Cheban, and Serena and more Serena. So the not invited Suckesses are neither seen as Royal or Celebrity?


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the Mirror article posted above:


_David Beckham’s eldest son Brooklyn is getting married tonight – without his dad’s royal pals. 

Becks and Posh had invited Kate and William to the star-studded £3 million wedding in Florida.


But the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – whose guests at THEIR wedding in 2011 included the Beckhams – declined the request.

Meanwhile Prince Harry and Meghan, who also had David and Victoria as wedding guests in 2018, were not even invited to Brooklyn’s bash to see him get hitched to billionaire heiress Nicola Peltz, 27. 

The Beckhams were reported to have agonised over which royal couple to choose because of the alleged rift between William and Harry, who now lives in California with actress Meghan.

In the end they plumped for William and Kate because of their long history of friendship._


----------



## pukasonqo

In all honesty whoever kidnaps and holds Hazza, MM or Randy Andy for ransom would be doing the BRF a favour
Becks has an OBE so I don’t see them risking losing it or falling into a persona non grata category w the BRF


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> and who will watch it?





gracekelly said:


> Doria, Archie and Lilypad.


And DM!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the end they plumped for William and Kate because of their long history of friendship.[/I]


Methane is going to be pissed to find out that you need a long history of amicable relationship to be invited to an event.

One of the Youtube channels mentioned that Methane's virtual commencement address at her old high school was a gatecrash event. No one invited her. I did a quick Google and it was generally described as a "surprise", but I can't tell if it was planned or gatecrash. Leaves me a bit wary about the surprise they are promising Invictus. Smile! You're on Netflix camera?


----------



## Chanbal

Their greed didn't allow them to see QE's amazing gift…   


_And she warned *the duke has been "completely and utterly taken over by Meghan and his whole personality has changed*".

"I do question how it will end," she added.

"[Maybe] he'll wake up and realise he's living in Goop and he has to get the hell out, go down the pub and see his friends…"

Elsewhere, Mrs Brown warned *the relationship between William and Harry is "very bad*" - and will likely worsen with the memoir's publication.

"*I'm told there's absolutely nothing going on between them at the moment*," she said.


The book could see Harry "go after" Charles, Camilla and his older brother, Mrs Brown added…

"Harry and Meghan would have been an amazing asset for the Commonwealth," she said.


"*They didn't understand the Queen was giving them this platform for soft power, which could have been tremendous*."_









						Harry 'addicted to drama - but will realise he's living in Goop', expert says
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan Markle are “addicted to drama” – and one day the duke will “wake up” and realise he’s living in Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop, a royal bio…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Is this a joke?


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Living in Goop???_
Haaaaaa, poor Gwyneth 









						Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop Lab: From vagina candles to steaming the 10 most outrageous wellness claims from the Netflix show
					

FROM vagina candles to group orgasms – Gwyneth Paltrow explores various wacky wellness treatments and products on her new Netflix series The Goop Lab. And some of the practices the actress, 4…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?



Keep her away from my island. If she tries to shine a light on us, I may introduce her to our local marginalized and very fearsome wild boars.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Hermes Zen

A few posts prior I had posted a photo of my Royal Collection haul that included a couple cookbooks and the Platinum Jubilee book The Queen 70 Glorious Years.  Just finished reading The Queen.  I have to share there was not one photo of M and only one with a young H with W in a crowd.  One photo of all great-grand children with the queen which I'm sure many know which photo this is.  It was taken in 2016.  Rest of course are beautiful photos of QE over the years. I finished it with a smile partially because NO M and one tiny one with H. I have to mention them since this is H&M thread.  Oh, some with W of course and some with K.   I realize this book is about QE.  Its a fabulous book if anyone is interested.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?



This better be a joke. I’m from those islands but moved to the US and we are not marginalized and we live off the lands AND have our culture. Heck, women even go topless. She better stay in her lane cause those chicken legs of hers is all we will stare at. We will cover our mouths with our hands and mutter about her under our breath. She will be freakshow.
And she can’t touch this!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> This better be a joke. I’m from those islands but moved to the US and we are not marginalized and we live off the lands AND have our culture. Heck, women even go topless. She better stay in her lane cause those chicken legs of hers is all we will stare at. We will cover our mouths with our hands and mutter about her under our breath. She will be freakshow.
> And she can’t touch this!



OH yes I remember those days when I could do this ...   Thanks for sharing.  Brought back memories.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the Mirror article posted above:
> 
> 
> _David Beckham’s eldest son Brooklyn is getting married tonight – without his dad’s royal pals.
> 
> Becks and Posh had invited Kate and William to the star-studded £3 million wedding in Florida.
> 
> 
> But the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge – whose guests at THEIR wedding in 2011 included the Beckhams – declined the request.
> 
> Meanwhile Prince Harry and Meghan, who also had David and Victoria as wedding guests in 2018, were not even invited to Brooklyn’s bash to see him get hitched to billionaire heiress Nicola Peltz, 27.
> 
> The Beckhams were reported to have agonised over which royal couple to choose because of the alleged rift between William and Harry, who now lives in California with actress Meghan.
> 
> In the end they plumped for William and Kate because of their long history of friendship._



I don't think posh and becks "agonised" at all.


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> In all honesty whoever kidnaps and holds Hazza, MM or Randy Andy for ransom would be doing the BRF a favour
> Becks has an OBE so I don’t see them risking losing it or falling into a persona non grata category w the BRF



You mean he wants that Knighthood


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> This better be a joke. I’m from those islands but moved to the US and we are not marginalized and we live off the lands AND have our culture. Heck, women even go topless. She better stay in her lane cause those chicken legs of hers is all we will stare at. We will cover our mouths with our hands and mutter about her under our breath. She will be freakshow.
> And she can’t touch this!




This made me smile on a Sunday morning, totally joyful!

It's a joke, they're basically warning that any word that contains or starts with 'arch' or 'archi' is not safe from the queen of Ms.Information


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> *William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate turn down Brooklyn Beckham wedding and Harry and Meghan snubbed
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton declined the invitation to Brooklyn Beckham's wedding. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not even invited to the ceremony in Florida
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Even if not true, the coverage hints at who's the popular couple. Kind of embarrassing.


----------



## 880

Didn’t Harry accuse the Beckhams of some kind of paparazzi mess involving meghan. So the friendship was already strained if not dead in the water

OT, but I thought it was interesting that the bride refused to consider a victoria beckham designed wedding dress. and wedding coverage seems to suggest that Victoria out dressed the bride anyway


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?



I hope not! I came from an achipelago in the SEA—- looks like anything with the word Arch is gonna be their thing—- and they will TM everything Arch—— connect whatever word.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> Didn’t Harry accuse the Beckhams of some kind of paparazzi mess involving meghan. So the friendship was already strained if not dead in the water
> 
> OT, but I thought it was interesting that the bride refused to consider a victoria beckham designed wedding dress. and wedding coverage seems to suggest that Victoria out dressed the bride anyway



It's the bride's day not her MIL, she can wear whatever she likes.

I'm not even sure VB does bridal anyway, more RTW, whereas Valentino has a Valentino des Atelier Haute Couture that will make a bride whatever she wants, including past archive.

The worst etiquette to even try to upstage the bride, I'm sure she didn't intend to (haven't seen pics yet).

H&M aren't getting about much these days. That guests at_ their_ wedding didn't get invited to Posh and Beck's eldest son's nuptials is pretty damning. Kate and Will never would have gone so it would have been safe to invite both couples, obviously they didn't.

Edited to say: looked at pics, maybe the yellow dress was a VB


----------



## xincinsin

Architecture
Archimedes
Archives 
Arc Reactors (Methane's superhero movie)

And when they run out of Arc...
Arbors of the World 
Arkansas and other US states 
Argentina and South America 

And when they run out of Ar...
Angels like Me (hosted by Methane)


----------



## Stansy

The Nebra Ark
					

Experience the time and history of the Sky Disc of Nebra on its place of discovery.




					www.himmelsscheibe-erleben.de
				




next she may want to try trademarking the Nebra Sky Disk? After all it is called „Arche Nebra“ and only 4000 years old…

Oh, and while we‘re at it: how about the bible in Luther‘s translation from the 16th century: Noah‘s Ark being Arche Noah…

She is so desperate…


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Architecture
> Archimedes
> Archives
> Arc Reactors (Methane's superhero movie)
> 
> And when they run out of Arc...
> Arbors of the World
> Arkansas and other US states
> Argentina and South America
> 
> And when they run out of Ar...
> Angels like Me (hosted by Methane)



Sorry, I already own 'Archives'  

Remind me I need to contact a whole list of museums that are appropriating my property

She can have 'ache'/'aches', I don't want them.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> The tale of The Lamebrain, the Witch and the Security Blanket is ever-changing.
> 
> Despite his shock/horror expressed during the OW interview that his taxpayer-funded security was withdrawn, Lamebrain later claimed that during the Sandringham Summit, he offered to pay for the UK police to carry on providing security for him and his family. He also says his US security team cannot replicate the level of security they require because they lack access to UK intelligence data.
> 
> You know, when the Duke and Douchess of Drama finally leak a (fabricated) kidnapping story via Plastic Pal or other anonymous BFF, I'd wager they'll blame the BRF for their high risk life because it's the BRF's fault that Lamebrain was born a royal.



"Plastic Pal"


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Beckham guests pictured include Kardashian bestie Jonathan Cheban, and Serena and more Serena. So the not invited Suckesses are neither seen as Royal or Celebrity?


Cheban îs the original hanger-on. If he got invited and not the Harkles - oof!!


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> Didn’t Harry accuse the Beckhams of some kind of paparazzi mess involving meghan. So the friendship was already strained if not dead in the water
> 
> OT, but I thought it was interesting that the bride refused to consider a victoria beckham designed wedding dress. and wedding coverage seems to suggest that Victoria out dressed the bride anyway


Mother-in-law/daughter-in-law dynamics are complicated for non-celebs. Brooklyn is only 23 and he is Victoria's "baby". It could be challenging for her new daughter-in-law.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> OT, but I thought it was interesting that the bride refused to consider a victoria beckham designed wedding dress.



Why though? IIRC (can't check because that section is completely bare at the VB website) they make simple dresses fitting for civil ceremonies or elopements. I honestly doubt they can even do an elaborate wedding gown seeing it has so many specialized tasks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though? IIRC (can't check because that section is completely bare at the VB website) they make simple dresses fitting for civil ceremonies or elopements. I honestly doubt they can even do an elaborate wedding gown seeing it has so many specialized tasks.



I read this was specifically refused in one of the wedding articles, so I assumed, possibly incorrectly, that VB offered a special accommodation (but cannot find the article now, but it was one of them that commented that VB outshone the bride


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. And I do think it is pretty hard to "outdress" someone in a Valentino custom dress with a massive embroidered veil


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. And I do think it is pretty hard to "outdress" someone in a Valentino custom dress with a massive embroidered veil


I don't think she outshone the bride at all, looked like she was ready for bed in her nightie.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think she outshone the bride at all, looked like she was ready for bed in her nightie.



I quite liked VB's dress. The yellow was muted so the intricate details weren't flashy.

You just know that if Methane was there, she would be in a ballgown, or she would expose too much skin. Anything to get the spotlight on her.


----------



## Sophisticatted

papertiger said:


> I don't think posh and becks "agonised" at all.



It’s a nice way of saying, “Severing ties with The Family, also severs ties with most social connections.”


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> I quite liked VB's dress. The yellow was muted so the intricate details weren't flashy.
> 
> You just know that if Methane was there, she would be in a ballgown, or she would expose too much skin. Anything to get the spotlight on her.


Yellow?  I didn't see any yellow, lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think she outshone the bride at all, looked like she was ready for bed in her nightie.



I was honestly surprised because I know her as a smart dresser. I wasn't a fan. Not Raptor level horrid, but she could have done so much better. Loved Mel B's dress!


----------



## 1LV

CeeJay said:


> But .. he'll purchase a security team (I believe they have one in Montecito); the issue with London was that they wouldn't allow a US Security team to come into the country with Guns.  Harry did indicate that he would pay for their security team, but (of course) wanted to know from the current BRF Security Team(s) what exactly was required, and that is where it got sticky because they are not going to tell Humpty-Dumpty what the requirements are!!!


“Humpty-Dumpty”. . . Love it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even if not true, the coverage hints at who's the popular couple. Kind of embarrassing.


one the future king.  the other is basically a self-exiled nothing


----------



## lanasyogamama

Where is everyone finding wedding pics? I haven’t seen any


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@lanasyogamama our trusty Daily Mail wouldn't leave us uninformed 

Beckham Wedding: Fashion Hits and Misses


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Where is everyone finding wedding pics? I haven’t seen any











						The Beckham wedding fashion hits (and misses!)
					

Tennis superstar Serena Williams, 40, turned heads as she arrived for the $3.5million Palm Beach nuptials in a shocking pink floor-length gown with an elegant asymmetric cutout across the bust.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @lanasyogamama our trusty Daily Mail wouldn't leave us uninformed
> 
> Beckham Wedding: Fashion Hits and Misses




Oh dear. Elegance has evaporated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles: "Harry and Meghan: Uninvited to Brooklyn Beckham's Wedding"  

Literally uninvited, not not invited. Now, do I believe that? No, but I find it interesting that the press would go there.


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German magazine titles: "Harry and Meghan: Uninvited to Brooklyn Beckham's Wedding"
> 
> Literally uninvited, not not invited. Now, do I believe that? No, but I find it interesting that the press would go there.


Very straight to the point


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

OMG, what are some of those people wearing??


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Yellow?  I didn't see any yellow, lol



Hello magazine. 

Could have been an old pic I guess but it was supposed to be.


----------



## Aimee3

Did no one tell that woman in the back lace up dress her undies were showing???? Somebody had to lace her in that dress and had to have seen it.  Then some photographer takes a photo of it?!?  Yikes


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @lanasyogamama our trusty Daily Mail wouldn't leave us uninformed
> 
> Beckham Wedding: Fashion Hits and Misses



I actually have David's step-mother's (Hilary Meredith) dress and in the cw, but mine is the shorter version. She is probably the age that my mother would be (if still alive) and looks really nice, she holds her own.

It's a '00s Roberto Cavalli (I think SS'02). I know because I was bought it to wear at my cousin's wedding (and I still have it).*

Kind of surprised VB didn't kit out more of her family, it would have made good commercial sense. Why dress Eva L (of course she is a beautiful woman) but not your own family? Perhaps I like Hilary's better though (I am totally biased).

All the women's gowns are all quite '00s Cavalli-esque.

M wouldn't have stood a chance.

**Apologies, edited to say, it was 2004 so the dress was SS04*


----------



## rose60610

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think she outshone the bride at all, looked like she was ready for bed in her nightie.



Agreed! But of course she's so thin she looks good in most things that others couldn't get away with. I perused some of the pictures of the wedding.  IMO a few of the guests looked terrible by shoehorning their overweight bodies into skimpy tight dresses. And are visible saggy boobs fashionable now?  I'm thinking: these are people with money--and dress like this?


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Agreed! But of course she's so thin she looks good in most things that others couldn't get away with. I perused some of the pictures of the wedding.  IMO a few of the guests looked terrible by shoehorning their overweight bodies into skimpy tight dresses. And are visible saggy boobs fashionable now?  I'm thinking: these are people with money--and dress like this?



I am shocked by the supposed fortune:taste ratio 

To be fair, they'e made-up for evening and it's still bright daylight, doesn't quite work. 

It was very very (Desperate) Housewives, so Eva fitted in well. 

Still, they look like they had fun. 

Just be grateful we didn't get MM in full-flow


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @lanasyogamama our trusty Daily Mail wouldn't leave us uninformed
> 
> Beckham Wedding: Fashion Hits and Misses





sdkitty said:


> The Beckham wedding fashion hits (and misses!)
> 
> 
> Tennis superstar Serena Williams, 40, turned heads as she arrived for the $3.5million Palm Beach nuptials in a shocking pink floor-length gown with an elegant asymmetric cutout across the bust.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wow, I had such high expectations.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @lanasyogamama our trusty Daily Mail wouldn't leave us uninformed
> 
> *Beckham Wedding: Fashion Hits and Misses*


It looks like more 'misses' than 'hits'…   Thanks for posting it!


----------



## Sharont2305

Aimee3 said:


> Did no one tell that woman in the back lace up dress her undies were showing???? Somebody had to lace her in that dress and had to have seen it.  Then some photographer takes a photo of it?!?  Yikes


That's David's new step mother lol


----------



## Chanbal

_Tina, who became friends with Princess Diana, said its publication could be more damaging than Harry and Meghan’s__ bombshell Oprah TV interview._








						Harry will 'go after' Camilla in memoir and 'deepen rift' with William
					

PRINCE Harry will “go after” Charles and Camilla in his explosive memoir and deepen the rift with his brother, a top royal author claimed yesterday. Ex-Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown, 68, added that…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> That's David's new step mother lol


kinda cruel of the photog to out her on her underwear problem


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> That's David's new step mother lol





sdkitty said:


> kinda cruel of the photog to out her on her underwear problem



I mean the dress was designed that way, so not a malfunction, but a really quite unnecessary beach comment about a woman who is not a public figure (and wasn't given a free dress).


----------



## bisousx

sdkitty said:


> The Beckham wedding fashion hits (and misses!)
> 
> 
> Tennis superstar Serena Williams, 40, turned heads as she arrived for the $3.5million Palm Beach nuptials in a shocking pink floor-length gown with an elegant asymmetric cutout across the bust.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Looks like everyone took the Palm Beach theme seriously  was it a race to outshine the bride? I do love a lot of the dresses and looks, but wow it’s hard to imagine people thought these gowns were appropriate to wear to someone’s kids’ wedding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Agreed! But of course she's so thin she looks good in most things that others couldn't get away with. I perused some of the pictures of the wedding.  IMO a few of the guests looked terrible by shoehorning their overweight bodies into skimpy tight dresses. And are visible saggy boobs fashionable now?  I'm thinking: these are people with money--and dress like this?



and they have stylists, hair and makeup people


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Did I miss a pic of bride's parents?  I'd love to see what her mother wore.

Here's an article.  Three sentences in made me feel he was connecting himself as much as possible to the bride's family money.  Know there's a prenup but one can leverage using the name.  Time will tell how true this is.  Wish the article didn't say it and left this as a beautiful love story wedding.  It's been hardly a day since the wedding!

*According to reports, he will adopt the name “Brooklyn Joseph Peltz Beckham”.*

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/wor...peltz-palm-beach-wedding-florida-b993530.html



> *Brooklyn Beckham marries Nicola Peltz at star-studded wedding in Palm Beach*
> Sami Quadri 4 hours ago


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prepare!



Possible FreeSpace fill in: Carrying Monogramed Portfolio as prop to look important.


----------



## DoggieBags

Hermes Zen said:


> Did I miss a pic of bride's parents?  I'd love to see what her mother wore.
> 
> Here's an article.  Three sentences in made me feel he was connecting himself as much as possible to the bride's family money.  Know there's a prenup but one can leverage using the name.  Time will tell how true this is.  Wish the article didn't say it and left this as a beautiful love story wedding.  It's been hardly a day since the wedding!
> 
> *According to reports, he will adopt the name “Brooklyn Joseph Peltz Beckham”.*
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/wor...peltz-palm-beach-wedding-florida-b993530.html


This type of name change isn’t that unusual these days. I know several couples who added their spouses last name to their own last name after getting married.


----------



## Hermes Zen

DoggieBags said:


> This type of name change isn’t that unusual these days. I know several couples who added their spouses last name to their own last name after getting married.


I must be old fashion.  Thanks for enlightening me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Did I miss a pic of bride's parents?  I'd love to see what her mother wore.
> 
> Here's an article.  Three sentences in made me feel he was connecting himself as much as possible to the bride's family money.  Know there's a prenup but one can leverage using the name.  Time will tell how true this is.  Wish the article didn't say it and left this as a beautiful love story wedding.  It's been hardly a day since the wedding!
> 
> *According to reports, he will adopt the name “Brooklyn Joseph Peltz Beckham”.*
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/wor...peltz-palm-beach-wedding-florida-b993530.html



I did read about this name-change several days ago, probably in the DM.
Imo, considering all the money these people have,  this was a most unimpressive wedding.  Although Kitty Spencer  was deeply indebted (!) to D&G for her wedding, she set the standard for these splish/splash publicly-photographed weddings.  People need to think 10-20 years from now, how will these photos look?  They won’t age well.  It makes me appreciate William and Kate’s efforts all the more.

ETA:  as usual, it’s old money vs. nouveau riche, ymmv


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I mean *the dress was designed that wa*y, so not a malfunction, b*ut a really quite unnecessary beach comment about a woman who is not a public figure (and wasn't given a free dress)*.



True on both accounts, but maybe don't wear high waist shape wear with a dress that is cut out to the tailbone. When did it go out of style to dress for the body you have? The untamed boobs aren't the greatest look either for her.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> _Tina, who became friends with Princess Diana, said its publication could be more damaging than Harry and Meghan’s__ bombshell Oprah TV interview._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry will 'go after' Camilla in memoir and 'deepen rift' with William
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry will “go after” Charles and Camilla in his explosive memoir and deepen the rift with his brother, a top royal author claimed yesterday. Ex-Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown, 68, added that…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



hopefully damaging to Harry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although Kitty Spencer  was deeply indebted (!) to D&G for her wedding, she set the standard for these splish/splash publicly-photographed weddings.



That wedding looked like a Vogue spread in the best possible sense.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True on both accounts, but maybe don't wear high waist shape wear with a dress that is cut out to the tailbone. When did it go out of style to dress for the body you have? The untamed boobs aren't the greatest look either for her.



I could say the same for nearly all of them, including most of the men. 

None of the outfits I saw were what you'd call 'cutting-edge' arty or particularly flattering (for anyone's) body-type.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hermes Zen said:


> Did I miss a pic of bride's parents?  I'd love to see what her mother wore.
> 
> Here's an article.  Three sentences in made me feel he was connecting himself as much as possible to the bride's family money.  Know there's a prenup but one can leverage using the name.  Time will tell how true this is.  Wish the article didn't say it and left this as a beautiful love story wedding.  It's been hardly a day since the wedding!
> 
> *According to reports, he will adopt the name “Brooklyn Joseph Peltz Beckham”.*
> 
> https://www.standard.co.uk/news/wor...peltz-palm-beach-wedding-florida-b993530.html



Will they both be Peltz Beckham?


----------



## gracekelly

The biggest collection of awful dresses, saggy boobs and underwear malfunctions.  Oh and bad shoe choices.  What were these women thinking?  What was up with VB's hairstyle?  Tana Ramsay looked good.  Eva L looked fine except for the SB.  Even little Harper was not dressed to make her look as nice as a 10 year old should look.

Speechless over what Serena was wearing.  Did nothing for her is an understatement.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Architecture
> Archimedes
> Archives
> Arc Reactors (Methane's superhero movie)
> 
> And when they run out of Arc...
> Arbors of the World
> Arkansas and other US states
> Argentina and South America
> 
> And when they run out of Ar...
> Angels like Me (hosted by Methane)



Don't forget Archenemy.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The biggest collection of awful dresses, saggy boobs and underwear malfunctions.  Oh and bad shoe choices.  What were these women thinking?  What was up with VB's hairstyle?  Tana Ramsay looked good.  Eva L looked fine except for the SB.  Even little Harper was not dressed to make her look as nice as a 10 year old should look.
> 
> Speechless over what Serena was wearing.  Did nothing for her is an understatement.


IDK who Coco Konig is but she looks way too self-assured for her age


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Speechless over what Serena was wearing.  Did nothing for her is an understatement.



Have you seen her wedding dress? It was at least two sizes too small on top. To be fair she had a new baby at the time, but I would not have stepped out in that.

ETA: I'm not some kind of woman hater or something, I just cannot understand - literally my brain gives out here - how multimillionaires make extremely expensive custom clothes look so illfitting and sh*tty when all it takes is a skilled seamstress and basic understanding of your body's limits. And decent underwear.


----------



## A1aGypsy

sdkitty said:


> IDK who Coco Konig is but she looks way too self-assured for her age



she looks younger than she is. She’s in her mid to late 20s


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

A1aGypsy said:


> she looks younger than she is. She’s in her mid to late 20s


hmm....still looks full of herself.  daughter of some wealthy people?


----------



## A1aGypsy

Old European money, I suspect. She had a very worldly upbringing from a young age.

Okay, I’ve seen the coverage from other places and they look less collectively homely. And Gordon Ramsey looks hot. Who would have thought?!


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget Archenemy.


Or Archnemesis and Archimedes


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I actually have David's step-mother's (Hilary Meredith) dress and in the cw, but mine is the shorter version. She is probably the age that my mother would be (if still alive) and looks really nice, she holds her own.
> 
> It's a '00s Roberto Cavalli (I think SS'02). I know because I was bought it to wear at my cousin's wedding (and I still have it).*
> 
> Kind of surprised VB didn't kit out more of her family, it would have made good commercial sense. Why dress Eva L (of course she is a beautiful woman) but not your own family? Perhaps I like Hilary's better though (I am totally biased).
> 
> All the women's gowns are all quite '00s Cavalli-esque.
> 
> M wouldn't have stood a chance.
> 
> **Apologies, edited to say, it was 2004 so the dress was SS04*


Yeah I thought it was a bit harsh the mail was ragging her given she isn’t a celebrity. Also given some of those looks it wasn’t even bad- I mean Serena looked like a bottle of peptobismol and she has got to stop copying kim k. In general I feel dread at the number of spaghetti straps on show and I cringed at a blue dress and a bright green bag - yikes.

Does Any one else see VB’s dress as grey not yellow?


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Old European money, I suspect. She had a very worldly upbringing from a young age.
> 
> Okay, I’ve seen the coverage from other places and they look less collectively homely. And *Gordon Ramsey looks hot*. Who would have thought?!



 I won't fight you for him, please have him (or fight Tana for him).

They all looked like WAGs to me, the men worse. 

My most recent wedding was in France. Not in Paris, not particularly wealthy or fashion conscious, certainly not celebs, the French know how to dress. I sound like my mother


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Does Any one else see VB’s dress as grey not yellow?



I think hers was grey but the one VB sold was yellow? At least that's what I picked up from DM.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I thought it was a bit harsh the mail was ragging her given she isn’t a celebrity. Also given some of those looks it wasn’t even bad- I mean Serena looked like a bottle of peptobismol and she has got to stop copying kim k. In general I feel dread at the number of spaghetti straps on show and I cringed at a blue dress and a bright green bag - yikes.
> 
> Does Any one else see VB’s dress as grey not yellow?



VB's dress was described as silver.

Sorry to have confused everybody. I must have seen an old pic of VB's DIL in a yellow dress (Hello Magazine) in an article _about_ the wedding, I was _guessing_ as a VB. I am not either a lover or hater of VB's label, it just looked like the kind of thing I see under her name on NAP etc.


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> I won't fight you for him, please have him (or fight Tana for him).
> 
> They all looked like WAGs to me, the men worse.
> 
> My most recent wedding was in France. Not in Paris, not particularly wealthy or fashion conscious, certainly not celebs, the French know how to dress. I sound like my mother



Oh, I’m not fighting anyone for him, I was as surprised as anything that the thought popped into my head!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The König girl...her father is an Austrian steel magnate and her mother is a Hungarian art historian. She has an undergraduate degree in Political Science, History and Human Rights and a master's and is some kind of actress (started out in theater, has done a few movies since, but nothing recent I think) so I want to say she is not as useless as lots of other rich kids. She's 26 BTW. Peter junior is her older brother.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> VB's dress was described as silver.
> 
> Sorry to have confused everybody. I must have seen an old pic of VB's DIL in a yellow dress (Hello Magazine) in an article _about_ the wedding, I was _guessing_ as a VB. I am not either a lover or hater of VB's label, it just looked like the kind of thing I see under her name on NAP etc.



I'm pretty sure DM had a photo collage of Posh in grey on the left and a similar dress in yellow on the right, but don't take my word for it, my brain is foggy lately.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I could say the same for nearly all of them, including most of the men.
> 
> None of the outfits I saw were what you'd call 'cutting-edge' arty or particularly flattering (for anyone's) body-type.


Doesn't anyone use a 3 way mirror anymore to check the angles? There is at least one side shot of Eva Longoria where her exposed boob looks like the flattened half of a hamburger bun.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Doesn't anyone use a 3 way mirror anymore to check the angles? There is at least one side shot of Eva Longoria where her exposed boob looks like the flattened half of a hamburger bun.



Perhaps Duchess Me-(a)Ghain is actually setting trends, MM cannot have seen herself in *RED* 'dress' before hitting the 'award' ceremony.  Looks like not looking in a mirror is where it's (not) at. 

Not only that. When lucky-enough people usually have stylists, the stylist takes quite a few pictures to check that a dress/hair/makeup translate well (all angles) in pictures as well as in person. I'm thinking the stylists were either on an organised strike for the Peltz Beckham wedding or were just not allowed to go.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The Beckhams can’t be too happy that their wedding is getting such bad press about the fashion.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> so I want to say she is not as useless as lots of other rich kids.



      It helps when both parents are smart, educated and have expectations of their kids.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> The Beckhams can’t be too happy that their wedding is getting such bad press about the fashion.


since she's in the fashion business....hopefully they all had a great time and the bride and groom were happy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Doesn't she work for the Nefl*xes?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Have you seen her wedding dress? It was at least two sizes too small on top. To be fair she had a new baby at the time, but I would not have stepped out in that.
> 
> ETA: I'm not some kind of woman hater or something, I just cannot understand - literally my brain gives out here - how multimillionaires make extremely expensive custom clothes look so illfitting and sh*tty when all it takes is a skilled seamstress and basic understanding of your body's limits. And decent underwear.



You are right - these people dressed terribly with many forced smiles.  It all looked fake and silly, even the young ones looked odd.  
‘Onward to Invictus



Chanbal said:


> Doesn't she work for the Nefl*xes?




‘yes, she does. Note the saggy boob.


----------



## Chanbal

The Nefl*xes will not be happy!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are right - these people dressed terribly with many forced smiles.  It all looked fake and silly, even the young ones looked odd.
> ‘*Onward to Invictus*
> 
> 
> 
> ‘yes, she does. Note the saggy boob.


Some people anticipate a big fashion show…


----------



## Chanbal

On fashion trends, I'm still   with the comment below.


----------



## needlv




----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


>



If she keeps it up, she will end up like Michael Jackson.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I definitely want to know:


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


>




The older noses will live long in the photos.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I definitely want to know:



Netflix will foot the bill I'm sure.  And...fly them there, put them up at 5* hotel and feed them and pay his bar bill which will be more than all the rest put together.  Additionally, wardrobe for Meghan and the resoling of Harry's shoes.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The older noses will live long in the photos.


Yep!  makes me think of the  Vulcan greeting "live long and prosper!"


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know the nose in the left isn’t natural, but i thought it was really pretty.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> If she keeps it up, she will end up like Michael Jackson.



If you see a photo front on (rather than side on),her nose is no longer symmetrical (nostrils are different).  The New York vaccine event, there are a few photos where she looks … not symmetrical. 

She has tweaked far too many times.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## carmen56

rose60610 said:


> Agreed! But of course she's so thin she looks good in most things that others couldn't get away with. I perused some of the pictures of the wedding.  IMO a few of the guests looked terrible by shoehorning their overweight bodies into skimpy tight dresses. And are visible saggy boobs fashionable now?  I'm thinking: these are people with money--and dress like this?



Money doesn't buy you class or taste.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

A1aGypsy said:


> Old European money, I suspect. She had a very worldly upbringing from a young age.
> 
> Okay, I’ve seen the coverage from other places and they look less collectively homely. And Gordon Ramsey looks hot. Who would have thought?!



Should have gone to Specsavers!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Millionaire victim


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> If she keeps it up, she will end up like Michael Jackson.


It's her physical refute of the Princess Pinocchio monicker: my nose is growing shorter, not longer. So there!
(Also, "to cut off her nose to spite her face" comes to mind...)


----------



## xincinsin

To add to the Tale of Three Noses, does anyone know if the nose on the left is her historical first nose, or had it already undergone renovation and alteration to the scaffolding?

Her teenage nose looks much larger.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> You are right - these people dressed terribly with many forced smiles.  It all looked fake and silly, even the young ones looked odd.
> ‘Onward to Invictus
> 
> 
> 
> ‘yes, she does. Note the saggy boob.


saggy boob and the tendrils
I like the color/fabric on the dress though


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> To add to the Tale of Three Noses, *does anyone know if the nose on the left is her historical first nose, or had it already undergone renovation and alteration to the scaffolding?*
> 
> Her teenage nose looks much larger.


Here is an article on the subject.








						Plastic Princess! Meghan Markle Nose Job Exposed By Top Docs
					

Prince Harry is engaged to U.S. actress Meghan Markle who, according to top plastic surgeons, has had a nose job and other procedures. Click to see the princess in training’s new face!




					radaronline.com


----------



## Chanbal

Oh gosh, they need the maximum dose and multiple boosters…


----------



## Chanbal

One more video from an honorary member here…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

MiniMabel said:


> Oh dear. Elegance has evaporated.


This! Every year at gala events, it seems ladies' gowns get skimpier and less attractive while the men show up in their Sunday best suits or tuxedos. I'm so waiting for the day the ladies are asked to wear their Sunday best attire while the gentlemen show up in tiny tuxedo jockstraps.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> This! Every year at gala events, it seems ladies' gowns get skimpier and less attractive while the men show up in their Sunday best suits or tuxedos. I'm so waiting for the day the ladies are asked to wear their Sunday best attire while the gentlemen show up in tiny tuxedo jockstraps.
> 
> View attachment 5377456


I am always cold, so when I see those pictures I wonder if the women wish they had something with sleeves on.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> Oh dear. Elegance has evaporated.


Wow that is a whole lot of tacky fashion. Once again, money doesn't equal taste and class. It's a blurry shot but Victoria looks okay, just a basic silk slip dress. I guess she never got the memo that the mother of the groom is supposed to wear beige, show up and shut up.  I thought the Oscar red carpet looks were pretty bad this year too. Sometimes I think I'm just getting old, but then I see the Duchess of Cambridge and breathe a sigh of relief. The Beckhams and their friends are largely nouveau riche types, so I'm not surprised by the turnout. I wonder if the Cambridges declined in part for that reason. I'm sure they sent a lovely gift along with their regrets.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> kinda cruel of the photog to out her on her underwear problem


Paps aren't known for being kind.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> This type of name change isn’t that unusual these days. I know several couples who added their spouses last name to their own last name after getting married.


My niece just had a baby and his full name is quite a mouthful. She always went by her mother's maiden name and my brother's surname, but now she has added her husband's surname to the mix. The whole thing is not going to fit on forms.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I won't fight you for him, please have him (or fight Tana for him).
> 
> They all looked like WAGs to me, the men worse.
> 
> My most recent wedding was in France. Not in Paris, not particularly wealthy or fashion conscious, certainly not celebs, the French know how to dress. I sound like my mother


I was just at a resort in Europe that had guests primarily from the UK, Germany, France and Italy, and you could generally tell where people are from by how they're dressed. The French and Italians even come to breakfast well dressed, the Brits and Germans not so much


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?



I could totally see her pulling this sh1t; many blamed Megalomaniac for the cold reception that William & Kate got during their Carribbean tour.  What really slays me, is that she sure wasn't such a WOC before meeting & marrying HapHazza!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



So Harry dislikes his father, but had no problem taking money from him or for  his wife's outrageous clothing budget?  Camilla wears new clothes all the time and has fabulous taste in expensive hats, but her costs probably don't even come close to what Meghan spent.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I am always cold, so when I see those pictures I wonder if the women wish they had something with sleeves on.


I could tell just from the pictures that it was already hot there.  I think most of the guests knew that would be the case and hence the skimpy dresses.  The problem was that some did not have the figure to wear what was chosen and they certainly did not make good undergarment choices.

On the positive side the bridal gown wasn't wearing the bride.  I think more was expected and some detail would have been nice.  At least she didn't disgrace herself and look tacky.  She obviously likes that neckline because the white dress she wore to brunch the next morning was identical.  On the whole, Valentino could have come up with something better for a girl with a perfect figure.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> So Harry dislikes his father, but had no problem taking money from him or for  his wife's outrageous clothing budget?  Camilla wears new clothes all the time and has fabulous taste in expensive hats, but her costs probably don't even come close to what Meghan spent.


and so what if he doesn't like Camilla.  It's understandable that he might not like her even though Will seems to have accepted her.  We already know about Charles's douchey letters wanting to be a tampon.  what else is there?  is he going to fabricate something?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could be a wild ride:











						Prince Harry appeared 'awkward' during public appearances with Camilla
					

Speaking to FEMAIL, body language expert Judi James said there appeared to be 'friction' between the Duchess of Cornwall and Prince Harry over the years.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't know...I still feel he needed Raptor to tell him how much he hates his close family.

Also, even if the memoir says it was all his doing and his loving wife was just being supportive...I've seen these unhealthy narc dynamics close up, it's not unusual for the victim to insist it was all their fault and the Holy Mary of the relationship did nothing wrong (they will insist neither of them did anything wrong, but deep down they know their actions were sh*tty, so they swallow the blame).


----------



## CeeJay

A1aGypsy said:


> OMG, what are some of those people wearing??


Agreed, IMO .. some of the outfits were more for a cocktail party or a night out on the town and maybe a dance club!?!?!  I just think that having your boobs hanging out and/or showing a little too much skin at a wedding is rather tacky.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and so what if he doesn't like Camilla.  It's understandable that he might not like her even though Will seems to have accepted her.  We already know about Charles's douchey letters wanting to be a tampon.  what else is there?  is he going to fabricate something?


All he can do is come up with skeevy comments about  Cam  purported to have been made by his mother.  No way to  prove or disprove that.  Is he going to complain that Cam made derogatory remarks about Diana?  I doubt that she would do that about a dead woman.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Agreed, IMO .. some of the outfits were more for a cocktail party or a night out on the town and maybe a dance club!?!?!  I just think that having your boobs hanging out and/or showing a little too much skin at a wedding is rather tacky.


I may be wrong, but I believe So FL has a skimpier dress code than many other places.  The problem is that skimpy works for the young with great figures and this bunch did not really fit into that category.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Agreed! But of course she's so thin she looks good in most things that others couldn't get away with. I perused some of the pictures of the wedding.  IMO a few of the guests looked terrible by shoehorning their overweight bodies into skimpy tight dresses. And are visible saggy boobs fashionable now?  I'm thinking: these are people with money--and dress like this?


Have you seen the pictures of Lizzo getting into a Private Plane with her saggy boobs, her back fat slabs and her HUGE cellulite a$$ (she has come up with a new line of "clothing" [using that word lightly here] that she has said is for 'everyone').  While I applaud her in some respects, OMG .. that picture was .. YUCK!!!  I would not want to be seated in that plane seat after she has her entire a$$ spread across it with that thong!  I like Lizzo and think she is a talented lady, but her dressing with her body is a BIG NO for me!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of Tourre's/Chris' tweet - it's years later and I still can't get over how beat down and on the verge of tears he looks while that a*shole he is married to sports that smug, victorious grin. I really makes me want to break something, it's so gross.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



It's true. Most people won't know that the Harkles gave out medals 3 days before the games began.  The did it privately because they didn't want to be part of that spectacle put on for the masses.  They met the King and Queen of The Netherlands that way as well, except the King and Queen don't know it.  The K&Q are putting in a phone call to Archbishop  Welby to ask him how to respond.  The Archbishop has his own  problems, however.  He is trying to deal with Meghan trying to trademark the word ARCHbishop.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I may be wrong, but I believe So FL has a skimpier dress code than many other places.  The problem is that skimpy works for the young with great figures and this bunch did not really fit into that category.


I was thinking the same. If this was in England I believe the dress would have been different. Palm Beach is hot and humid. I couldn't live there.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Have you seen the pictures of Lizzo getting into a Private Plane with her saggy boobs, her back fat slabs and her HUGE cellulite a$$ (she has come up with a new line of "clothing" [using that word lightly here] that she has said is for 'everyone').  While I applaud her in some respects, OMG .. that picture was .. YUCK!!!  I would not want to be seated in that plane seat after she has her entire a$$ spread across it with that thong!  I like Lizzo and think she is a talented lady, but her dressing with her body is a BIG NO for me!


I know we live in the era of "body positivity", but you are not wrong. My husband doesn't mince words about her appearance.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?



The comments on that are


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I could tell just from the pictures that it was already hot there.  I think most of the guests knew that would be the case and hence the skimpy dresses.  The problem was that some did not have the figure to wear what was chosen and they certainly did not make good undergarment choices.
> 
> On the positive side the bridal gown wasn't wearing the bride.  I think more was expected and some detail would have been nice.  At least she didn't disgrace herself and look tacky.  She obviously likes that neckline because the white dress she wore to brunch the next morning was identical.  On the whole, Valentino could have come up with something better for a girl with a perfect figure.


But did you catch the shoes she wore with the gown?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> But did you catch the shoes she wore with the gown?
> View attachment 5377699


Really fug.  I can't believe that this type of platform is fashionable again. Ugh!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Have you seen the pictures of Lizzo getting into a Private Plane with her saggy boobs, her back fat slabs and her HUGE cellulite a$$ (she has come up with a new line of "clothing" [using that word lightly here] that she has said is for 'everyone').  While I applaud her in some respects, OMG .. that picture was .. YUCK!!!  I would not want to be seated in that plane seat after she has her entire a$$ spread across it with that thong!  I like Lizzo and think she is a talented lady, but her dressing with her body is a BIG NO for me!



I am convinced she does it to p*ss of the "haters". I personally am a huge fan of dressing for your body instead of looking as ridiculous as possible just to make a point.


----------



## charlottawill

Better pic of the Becks


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They are still such an in-couple. Also I think that answers the question about the newlyweds' name...seems like Peltz Beckham is the new family name.


----------



## WingNut

The gleam on that dress reminds me of the liquid metal body on the Terminator in T2.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am convinced she does it to p*ss of the "haters". I personally am a huge fan of dressing for your body instead of looking as ridiculous as possible just to make a point.


agree
if you have flaws, cover them, I think
Too many now are flaunting their bodies when they shouldn't
And I'm not talking about just celebs.  we see a lot of it where we live


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> I may be wrong, but I believe So FL has a skimpier dress code than many other places.  The problem is that skimpy works for the young with great figures and this bunch did not really fit into that category.


Apologies to any Roma or Sinti but the outfits reminded me of that dreadful show My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding, although the bride kept it classy


----------



## Chanbal

Today's article by Tina Brown about Andy has so many apparent parallels to the Duke of Netfl*x. It may also explain why the Nefl*xes decided to leave the UK, allegedly of course. It's a must read imo (link to The Telegraph https://archive.ph/mHOYe#selection-1457.0-1457.700). 

Security on the grounds of a title: _Andrew had fought ferociously to keep his girls’ _*security detail, on the grounds they had HRH before their names.*

Like uncle, like nephew: *the Dunning-Kruger effect*_, the cognitive bias in which people come to believe that they are smarter and more capable than they really are.  

There was a hollowness in the Duke’s personality. That’s why he laughed louder and boasted so much. He knew that for all the palaces he lived in and the servants who Sir’d him, he was the second son…_

Dependence on a parent's money_*: An indefinite dependence *on one’s mother is both infantilising and dangerously unrealistic. Kate Waddington, a former wing woman for the Duchess of York, told me in 2006: “The ridiculous thing was that even when she was with Andrew, she paid for all the house decorations herself. She was always informed: ‘*There is no money*.’ Andrew would arrive on a skiing holiday and he’d have no stuff, and she’d have to buy it.”_

Big spenders and demanders:_* Andrew’s role from 2001 to 2011 as the UK’s Special Representative* for international trade and investment offered him multiple opportunities for dubious personal networking to enhance his income. It allowed him to swan around the world at government expense, playing golf, brokering nefarious deals on sidebar excursions and partying with big-breasted beauty queens. *He insisted on flying private, and travelled with an entourage of servants, including a valet who lugged a preposterous six-foot-long ironing board through the lobby of five-star hotels. The Daily Telegraph reported that, in 2010, the Duke of York had spent £465,000 on flights and £154,000 on food and hotels on his trade missions*. _


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> "...a valet who lugged a preposterous six-foot-long ironing board through the lobby of five-star hotels."


Well that makes a lot of sense.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> But did you catch the shoes she wore with the gown?
> View attachment 5377699



i have questions. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am convinced she does it to p*ss of the "haters". I personally am a huge fan of dressing for your body instead of looking as ridiculous as possible just to make a point.



I feel like it’s taking all the focus away from her music, which is sad.  She’s so talented.


----------



## Chanbal

More from Tina Brown and more broken dishes in Montecito:   

_A former editor of numerous worldwide publications including Newsweek and Vanity Fair,* Brown* said Harry's attitude towards the press is not all wrong in relation to the treatment of his mother, himself or his wife over time. Still, she cautions,* "Doing battle with the British media is a lost cause... and unfortunately Meghan is as combative about it as he is.*"

In comparison Brown notes that "*William and Kate calm each other down a lot; their marriage works very well in that way*.

"*In the Sussex marriage, they wind each other up and it's Us Against the World, and that's a disaster*."

She added: "Harry and Meghan would have been an amazing asset for the Commonwealth. They didn't understand that the queen was giving them this platform for soft power which could have been tremendous if they had done it in a patient and strategic way."

Brown notes: "I think Meghan felt she could get in there and change it all... *Frankly, she could have done a great deal to change things if she had stuck around, but the thing that's most baffling is such impatience. She could have spent a year away and come back with a great game plan*…"

Looking forward to the rest of the Platinum Jubilee year, Brown turned her attention to Harry's upcoming memoir—during which he is expected to detail his relationships with the family members he now so rarely sees, and of whom he and his wife were vocally critical in their Oprah interview.

"*William was disgusted about Meghan's attack on Kate because she can't answer back*," Brown said in relation to claims made to Oprah that the Duchess of Cambridge made Meghan cry before her wedding. "*But that's nothing compared to how furious he's going to be when this book comes out*."

For Brown though, the future of the monarchy is not unhopeful. She feels that the real asset in the coming years will prove not to be Charles, William or Harry but Kate. "_*The royal business is going to be slow and maddening and self-suppressing", she sums up, "but it seems we have in Kate someone very unusual, a modern woman who's willing to do those things.*"









						Meghan and Harry's 'Us Against The World' Attitude a 'Disaster'—Tina Brown
					

Royal author Tina Brown has said in an interview that Harry and Meghan "wind each other up" in regards to the media which makes for disastrous results.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> agree
> if you have flaws, cover them, I think
> Too many now are flaunting their bodies when they shouldn't
> And I'm not talking about just celebs.  we see a lot of it where we live


As Bob Dylan said, the times they are a-changin'


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> As Bob Dylan said, the times they are a-changin'
> 
> View attachment 5377761


I get what you're saying but a pregnant belly isn't the same as being morbidly obese.....not that every pregnant woman should dress like this necessarily but it's Riri


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I get what you're saying but a pregnant belly isn't the same as being morbidly obese.....not that every pregnant woman should dress like this necessarily but it's Riri


I'm not saying she has to hide her belly under voluminous dresses, but she's a beautiful woman and this does nothing for her. At the beach sure, but not out to dinner.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> On fashion trends, I'm still   with the comment below.





Chanbal said:


> On fashion trends, I'm still   with the comment below.




Especially when that someone was specifically told to wear a hat but instead showed up without bothering to run a comb through her messy hair!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I get what you're saying but a pregnant belly isn't the same as being morbidly obese.....not that every pregnant woman should dress like this necessarily but it's Riri



I still don't understand why her preggo "style" is so celebrated. She looks awful most of the time, and sheer lace nightgowns are just not a great look in public no matter who you are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> As Bob Dylan said, the times they are a-changin'
> 
> View attachment 5377761



If it is true what they say - when the older people dress like the younger ones, the awful trends will stop - so come on, we older people have our mission now  Who wants be first?

Such twerps, can’t Chas put a stop to their sh!t?


----------



## CarryOn2020

We already know this, still it’s comforting to know we are right - they are indeed using their kiddies as publicity pawns.  So predictable and sad.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> If it is true what they say - when the older people dress like the younger ones, the awful trends will stop - so come on, we older people have our mission now  Who wants be first?
> 
> Such twerps, can’t Chas put a stop to their sh!t?



I don't know this counts but I saw a woman the other day who had her entire leg tatted - thigh to ankle.  she was about 50.  I was actually a pretty nice one but still - I don't see it as tasteful.  maybe I'm old


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't know this counts but I saw a woman the other day who had her entire leg tatted - thigh to ankle.  she was about 50.  I was actually a pretty nice one but still - I don't see it as tasteful.  maybe I'm old



I understand. No way I am walking out the front door with my backside fully exposed or my menopause (?) tummy  hanging out.  No, no. They do make stick-on tats, so maybe, but doubtful.  At some point, this, too, shall pass.


----------



## octopus17

charlottawill said:


> I'm not saying she has to hide her belly under voluminous dresses, but she's a beautiful woman and this does nothing for her. At the beach sure, but not out to dinner.


Every time I see her with her bump exposed like that, I'm hoping that the baby isn't too cold. It's probably silly I know, but I'm living in a very different climate!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> So Harry dislikes his father, but had no problem taking money from him or for  his wife's outrageous clothing budget?  Camilla wears new clothes all the time and has fabulous taste in expensive hats, but her costs probably don't even come close to what Meghan spent.


He would be gushing about them if PC was still providing 95% of his income and he could be financially independent without having to earn a penny. 

Hazard is the living embodiment of what he preached: he didn't like his job, so he quit. He has no right to whine about no one paying him after he quit. What did he expect ButterCup clients who took his advice to do to put bread on the table? Is he going to recommend they get lucrative contracts with Netflix and Spotify, then use pregnancy and maternity leave to skive?


----------



## rose60610

CeeJay said:


> Have you seen the pictures of Lizzo getting into a Private Plane with her saggy boobs, her back fat slabs and her HUGE cellulite a$$ (she has come up with a new line of "clothing" [using that word lightly here] that she has said is for 'everyone').  While I applaud her in some respects, OMG .. that picture was .. YUCK!!!  I would not want to be seated in that plane seat after she has her entire a$$ spread across it with that thong!  I like Lizzo and think she is a talented lady, but her dressing with her body is a BIG NO for me!



So you just haaaad to make me look this up  ! Then  .  OMG.  Gross!  I heard of flight attendants who turned away women who wore super skimpy tops onto a plane. Well, at least their boobs weren't going to be plastered and sweat stuck all over the seat...Lizzo makes plumber's butt look tuxedo elegant. She was inviting and begging for negative attention. Don't dress like that then beaycth that people don't respond favorably.  I had a relative who was a very large lady.  Despite her size, she always dressed elegantly (and wore beautiful jewelry). It can be done!


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> So you just haaaad to make me look this up  ! Then  .  OMG.  Gross!  I heard of flight attendants who turned away women who wore super skimpy tops onto a plane. Well, at least their boobs weren't going to be plastered and sweat stuck all over the seat...Lizzo makes plumber's butt look tuxedo elegant. She was inviting and begging for negative attention. Don't dress like that then beaycth that people don't respond favorably.  I had a relative who was a very large lady.  Despite her size, she always dressed elegantly (and wore beautiful jewelry). It can be done!



It's called dressing for the body you have, not the body you want. And even if she was half her size some of the outfits are still ridiculous.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If it is true what they say - when the older people dress like the younger ones, the awful trends will stop - so come on, we older people have our mission now  Who wants be first?
> 
> Such twerps, can’t Chas put a stop to their sh!t?



She really does have the crazy eyes. Can anyone recall ever seeing a picture of Kate with a look like this? The photogs do sometimes catch her not smiling, which is only natural, but never with this look. What's the saying about eyes being the window to the soul?


----------



## Chanbal

DM wouldn't miss to advertise this…   
*President of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media company Archewell attends Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz's star-studded wedding - after rumours the royals would be attending proved false*








						Harry and Meghan's Archewell COO attends Brooklyn Beckham's wedding
					

Mandana Dayani, who reports directly to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, shared snaps on Instagram last night from Brooklyn Beckham's wedding in Florida.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

by the Invictus Foundation… If true,


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> As Bob Dylan said, the times they are a-changin'
> 
> View attachment 5377761


There will never be a question about surrogacy


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I don't know this counts but I saw a woman the other day who had her entire leg tatted - thigh to ankle.  she was about 50.  I was actually a pretty nice one but still - I don't see it as tasteful.  maybe I'm old


Sdkitty, you aren’t old, just sensible, which the world needs more of.

When I see people like that I always wonder how those tats will look in 25 years, all shriveled up and unrecognizable, or so stretched they look ready to burst. Worse yet, freckled or marred by almost inevitable age spots. 

I‘ve tried invoking the Lady McBeth  “Out, out damned spot.” command but still have them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Sdkitty, you aren’t old, just sensible, which the world needs more of.
> 
> When I see people like that I always wonder how those tats will look in 25 years, all shriveled up and unrecognizable, or so stretched they look ready to burst. Worse yet, freckled or marred by almost inevitable age spots.
> 
> I‘ve tried invoking the Lady McBeth  “Out, out damned spot.” command but still have them.


Lol, I always thing the same thing when I see tatoos on young girls.  Reminds me of this SNL sketch from years ago....


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> I may be wrong, but I believe So FL has a skimpier dress code than many other places.  The problem is that skimpy works for the young with great figures and this bunch did not really fit into that category.


Yes, totally agree with that .. although it seems NYC has a skimpy dress code around the Christmas & New Year's Eve Holidays. Boston?!?! .. HA HA HA .. this is a CITY that *still* bans certain songs (_you know, that puritan ethos still exists_)!  Heck, in certain parts of New England, you still have what was referred to as the "Blue Laws", as in .. no alcohol sold on Sundays and after a certain time of the day (I think it was at/around 7pm)!!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am convinced she does it to p*ss of the "haters". I personally am a huge fan of dressing for your body instead of looking as ridiculous as possible just to make a point.


Maybe so, but my god .. some of her outfits are very close to being obscene (IMO) and while she is a very attractive woman, that body is not!!!  I just worry that she is setting an example that being that heavy is "Okay", and it really isn't.  More importantly, I sincerely hope that some of the young woman do not "copy" her "style" (using that word very lightly here) because in some parts of the country, I think that they would get arrested!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Lol, I always thing the same thing when I see tatoos on young girls.  Reminds me of this SNL sketch from years ago....




The list of stars who have tattoos removed is getting longer. PeteD started removing his last year. 

This article is from 2014. 








						Angelina Jolie, Melanie Griffith and More Stars Who Have Removed Tattoos
					

Melanie Griffith recently scrubbed the "Antonio" on her arm, and she's not alone in erasing physical mementos of her ex




					people.com


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Sdkitty, you aren’t old, just sensible, which the world needs more of.
> 
> When I see people like that I always wonder how those tats will look in 25 years, all shriveled up and unrecognizable, or so stretched they look ready to burst. Worse yet, freckled or marred by almost inevitable age spots.
> 
> I‘ve tried invoking the Lady McBeth  “Out, out damned spot.” command but still have them.


I don't know if there's an appropriate age for tatts on women but for me a woman of 50 having something that extreme is not ok.  none of my business but not tasteful IMO
And, as you say, if a young woman does it, she is most likely going to get older and have to live with what she's done.


----------



## sdkitty

Cornflower Blue said:


> Every time I see her with her bump exposed like that, I'm hoping that the baby isn't too cold. It's probably silly I know, but I'm living in a very different climate!


looks like she's pretty far along in the pregnancy


----------



## Chanbal

The newest royal commentator, Yankee Wally is back and tomatoes are in demand…


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, boy! We will need a lot of 


_THE Queen has given her blessing to her trusted aide to reveal her Covid lockdown secrets — and go head-to-head with Prince Harry’s tell-all book.

Royal dresser Angela Kelly, who has been with Her Majesty for 28 years, will tell of HMS Bubble and Prince Philip’s death in her offering.

Prince Harry, 37, who clashed with Angela over Tiara-gate, is putting the finishing touches to his autobiography due out this autumn.

He was accused of yelling “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” at Angela over a choice of tiara ahead of their royal wedding in 2018.

A new chapter for Angela’s 2019 picture book *The Other Side of the Coin will be released next month for the **Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*, publisher HarperCollins announced.

They say: “The Queen personally gave Angela her blessing to share their unparalleled bond with the world and Angela is the first serving member of the Royal Household to be given this extraordinary permission._”









						Queen takes on Harry and Meghan by green lighting rival book
					

THE Queen has given her blessing to her trusted aide to reveal her Covid lockdown secrets — and go head-to-head with Prince Harry’s tell-all book. Royal dresser Angela Kelly, who has been with Her …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh, boy! We will need a lot of
> View attachment 5377905
> 
> _THE Queen has given her blessing to her trusted aide to reveal her Covid lockdown secrets — and go head-to-head with Prince Harry’s tell-all book.
> 
> Royal dresser Angela Kelly, who has been with Her Majesty for 28 years, will tell of HMS Bubble and Prince Philip’s death in her offering.
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, who clashed with Angela over Tiara-gate, is putting the finishing touches to his autobiography due out this autumn.
> 
> He was accused of yelling “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” at Angela over a choice of tiara ahead of their royal wedding in 2018.
> 
> A new chapter for Angela’s 2019 picture book *The Other Side of the Coin will be released next month for the **Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*, publisher HarperCollins announced.
> 
> They say: “The Queen personally gave Angela her blessing to share their unparalleled bond with the world and Angela is the first serving member of the Royal Household to be given this extraordinary permission._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen takes on Harry and Meghan by green lighting rival book
> 
> 
> THE Queen has given her blessing to her trusted aide to reveal her Covid lockdown secrets — and go head-to-head with Prince Harry’s tell-all book. Royal dresser Angela Kelly, who has been with Her …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Happy, happy, happy. These 2 lovely ladies, swoon!




From 2020,








						Meet Angela Kelly, the Queen's Personal Wardrobe Advisor
					

Kelly is responsible for maintaining, curating, and designing the Queen's wardrobe (and she also helped fit Princess Beatrice's vintage wedding dress).




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Oh, boy! We will need a lot of
> View attachment 5377905
> 
> _THE Queen has given her blessing to her trusted aide to reveal her Covid lockdown secrets — and go head-to-head with Prince Harry’s tell-all book.
> 
> Royal dresser Angela Kelly, who has been with Her Majesty for 28 years, will tell of HMS Bubble and Prince Philip’s death in her offering.
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, who clashed with Angela over Tiara-gate, is putting the finishing touches to his autobiography due out this autumn.
> 
> He was accused of yelling “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” at Angela over a choice of tiara ahead of their royal wedding in 2018.
> 
> A new chapter for Angela’s 2019 picture book *The Other Side of the Coin will be released next month for the **Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*, publisher HarperCollins announced.
> 
> They say: “The Queen personally gave Angela her blessing to share their unparalleled bond with the world and Angela is the first serving member of the Royal Household to be given this extraordinary permission._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen takes on Harry and Meghan by green lighting rival book
> 
> 
> THE Queen has given her blessing to her trusted aide to reveal her Covid lockdown secrets — and go head-to-head with Prince Harry’s tell-all book. Royal dresser Angela Kelly, who has been with Her …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Reminds me of the admonishment to be nice to people on the way up, because you will meet them on your way down. A lot of people will be watching the Sucksexes as they plummet.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> It's called dressing for the body you have, not the body you want. And even if she was half her size some of the outfits are still ridiculous.



Agreed 100%.  Some of the outfits are indeed outrageous, some are for "shock value" purposes. I'll say she reached her goal there. I see some morbidly obese people as heart attacks waiting to happen. You could also say that about lots of non-overweight people in terms of how they take care of themselves. On the flip side, people who drive crazy and/or engage in other risky behaviors are also accident fatalities waiting to happen. And it's a real shame to lose anybody with a lot of talent under any circumstances. Losing weight is very hard for most people and we all know people who go through hell and a lot of money trying to lose it. And for some it's very complicated beyond simply diet, etc and it's got to be extremely frustrating.  When I see an overweight stranger who's working out I give them a mental thumbs up. It can be damned hard.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## K.D.

Chanbal said:


> by the Invictus Foundation… If true,




So, would he not have come without the appearance fee?


----------



## carmen56

Looking forward to the Harkles Invictus appearance, will they be greeted by raucous booing and a hail of rotten tomatoes, or a deathly silence?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

carmen56 said:


> Looking forward to the Harkles Invictus appearance, will they be greeted by raucous booing and a hail of rotten tomatoes, or a deathly silence?



I think most people are still too polite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> DM wouldn't miss to advertise this…
> *President of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's media company Archewell attends Brooklyn Beckham and Nicola Peltz's star-studded wedding - after rumours the royals would be attending proved false*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Archewell COO attends Brooklyn Beckham's wedding
> 
> 
> Mandana Dayani, who reports directly to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, shared snaps on Instagram last night from Brooklyn Beckham's wedding in Florida.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wonder what the hell all of these Archewell employees do all day.  It is not as if even 5 minutes of content has been completed for either Spotify or Netflix.  They have been talking about the same 2 ideas for Netflix, neither of which should either particularly unique or particularly interesting.

I am somewhat dreading next week as I don’t feel like watching them parade around telling others what to do with their film crew in tow.  I am, however, looking forward to seeing what god awful and inappropriate outfits MM wears!


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> by the Invictus Foundation… If true,




This is a new low even for the detestable duo.  They are sickening!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I've read it elsewhere too...and apparently Invictus also pays for at least part of the security instead of Netflix. Seriously? They didn't have better causes for that money? I am grossed out by the Sucksesses, but also disappointed by Invictus.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

When the spokesperson of a fellow royal makes a public announcement like this you know you effed up.


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> So you just haaaad to make me look this up  ! Then  .  OMG.  Gross!  I heard of flight attendants who turned away women who wore super skimpy tops onto a plane. Well, at least their boobs weren't going to be plastered and sweat stuck all over the seat...Lizzo makes plumber's butt look tuxedo elegant. She was inviting and begging for negative attention. Don't dress like that then beaycth that people don't respond favorably.  I had a relative who was a very large lady.  Despite her size, she always dressed elegantly (and wore beautiful jewelry). It can be done!



Excuse my ignorance but who is Lizzo?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A singer/songwriter.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A singer/songwriter.



Thanks, never heard of her/him...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'll be honest, I first  heard of her not for her musical achievements but for her, uh, aggressive way of dressing. Which maybe should signal something to her.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be honest, I first  heard of her not for her musical achievements but for her, uh, aggressive way of dressing. Which maybe should signal something to her.


She clearly subscribes to the “I don’t care what they say, as long as it’s about me!” From the Fall Out Boy song.


----------



## bag-mania

Luvbolide said:


> I am somewhat dreading next week as I don’t feel like watching them parade around telling others what to do with their film crew in tow.  I am, however, looking forward to seeing what god awful and inappropriate outfits MM wears!



Let’s make the best of it and enjoy the train wreck. They will certainly give a pompous, sanctimonious speech that will be a source of mockery. The terrible fashion will be evident as you said. Plus there’s always something that happens that we couldn’t possibly predict. It has been months since they did one of these self-glorifying shows. They must be so thirsty!


----------



## Annawakes

Everything they do or say is a joke.  I’m looking forward to it too!


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Maybe so, but my god .. some of her outfits are very close to being obscene (IMO) and while she is a very attractive woman, that body is not!!!  I just worry that she is setting an example that being that heavy is "Okay", and it really isn't.  More importantly, I sincerely hope that some of the young woman do not "copy" her "style" (using that word very lightly here) because in some parts of the country, I think that they would get arrested!


I think it partly started with Ashley Graham.  It's one thing for larger girls to not be ashamed of their bodies.  That is fine.  Not everyone can be slender.  I know a woman who I would say is larger but she is very fit (lifts weights).  You don't see a big (bare) belly hanging out on her.  Women who go around flaunting their cellulite, baring fat bellies, etc., are maybe getting it wrong.  Although I always say there is some guy who will like that.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When the spokesperson of a fellow royal makes a public announcement like this you know you effed up.



Likely they have been going through intermediaries to hint that they were available for a jolly get-together with the King and Queen, and fishing for an invite to stay because neither Netflix nor Invictus was willing to splurge on the Presidential Suite or a chateau for them. I'm impressed by how direct the reply was, no fudging to give the lying duo a chance to twist the message.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be honest, I first  heard of her not for her musical achievements but for her, uh, aggressive way of dressing. Which maybe should signal something to her.


I've yet to hear her sing but I remember her teeny handbag


----------



## A1aGypsy

I mean, if a women is an adult, feels confident in her choices and pushes back at patriarchal views of how a women “should” dress or look or what small margin of body type is deemed “sexy” by society, I’m all for celebrating that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> Wonder what the hell all of these Archewell employees do all day.  It is not as if even 5 minutes of content has been completed for either Spotify or Netflix.  They have been talking about the same 2 ideas for Netflix, neither of which should either particularly unique or particularly interesting.
> 
> I am somewhat dreading next week as I don’t feel like watching them parade around telling others what to do with their film crew in tow.  I am, however, looking forward to seeing what god awful and inappropriate outfits MM wears!


Just check DM, they will make sure we get all the important info.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be honest, I first  heard of her not for her musical achievements but for her, uh, aggressive way of dressing. Which maybe should signal something to her.



I just googled her....I must be living under a rock, I've never seen her before! She's not self concious, that's for sure!


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> Wonder what the hell all of these Archewell employees do all day.  It is not as if even 5 minutes of content has been completed for either Spotify or Netflix.  They have been talking about the same 2 ideas for Netflix, neither of which should either particularly unique or particularly interesting.
> 
> I am somewhat dreading next week as I don’t feel like watching them parade around telling others what to do with their film crew in tow.  I am, however, looking forward to seeing what god awful and inappropriate outfits MM wears!


so according to this, Meghan and Victoria are "close friends" but the Harkles weren't invited to the wedding?  ok


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When the spokesperson of a fellow royal makes a public announcement like this you know you effed up.





Just in case, here is the message in Dutch:

_No audience for Harry and Meghan with King Willem-Alexander, nor will they spend the night at one of the palaces, the RVD confirms._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Let’s make the best of it and enjoy the train wreck. They will certainly give a pompous, sanctimonious speech that will be a source of mockery. The terrible fashion will be evident as you said. Plus there’s always something that happens that we couldn’t possibly predict. It has been months since they did one of these self-glorifying shows. They must be so thirsty!



I am still scared what the "big surprise" might be. We all now nobody will be happy about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I think it partly started with Ashley Graham.  It's one thing for larger girls to not be ashamed of their bodies.  That is fine.  Not everyone can be slender.  I know a woman who I would say is larger but she is very fit (lifts weights).  You don't see a big (bare) belly hanging out on her.  Women who go around flaunting their cellulite, baring fat bellies, etc., are maybe getting it wrong.  Although I always say there is some guy who will like that.



I can honestly say I've never seen Ashley Graham dress as such a mockery. Unapologetic, sure, but not plain distasteful. I enjoyed her pregnancy bikini shots, 50 pounds weight gain, cellulite and stretchmarks included. The one time I did raise an eyebrow was when she started posting pictures in a bra or sweater with no panties on because why.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is my favorite Lizzo song.  It’s so motivating, and the line “if I’m shining everybody’s gonna shine” makes me think about my friends.


----------



## lanasyogamama

But like I said, unfortunately Lizzo is only known for her lack of clothes lately.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can honestly say I've never seen Ashley Graham dress as such a mockery. Unapologetic, sure, but not plain distasteful. I enjoyed her pregnancy bikini shots, 50 pounds weight gain, cellulite and stretchmarks included. The one time I did raise an eyebrow was when she started posting pictures in a bra or sweater with no panties on because why.


Ashley is a larger woman but firm, not morbidly obese.  And as far as I know, she dresses appropriately.  But maybe some young girls who are large and not fit like her look at her and think it's cool to be big.  Then go and out buy a crop top.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I was going on 100 at 15, so maybe I am just too convervative in this matter. Like, I am not into tiny supermodel Kendall Jenner walking the red carpet basically naked either, and I'm not a fan of RiRi pushing her bare pregnant belly into everyone's face just because she can, so it's not even about "You're too heavy to be allowed this outfit". And I honestly don't get the RiRi hype...the times of having to wear a tent or even better just hiding at home while pregnant have been over for a while, so what's the message besides "I'm super extra"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of pregnancy, do we think they might announce a third baby (still on that "big surprise"...I'm worried!)? Or maybe they'll bring one of the props, I mean kids.


----------



## rose60610

a cut/paste comment from the web (covered here before?) about Harry wearing the orange outfit to promote Invictus Games: 

"Another Twitter user wondered if Harry was making fun of the Dutch Royal family by appropriating their national color. They wrote: “Gee, orange being the color for royalty in the Netherlands, the heir/heiress is known as prince/princess of Orange, equivalent to prince of Wales. Is it a diplomatic faux-pas? Is he making fun of the Royal Family over there?”

So I wonder if M&H are going to wear matching orange outfits regardless of the blowback Harry has already gotten. Orange clothing reminds one of prison garb, so maybe even Meghan isn't that stupid? On the other hand...

Maybe the "big surprise" will be clothing that's actually appropriate and actually fit?


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, I was going on 100 at 15, so maybe I am just too convervative in this matter. Like, I am not into tiny supermodel Kendall Jenner walking the red carpet basically naked either, and I'm not a fan of RiRi pushing her bare pregnant belly into everyone's face just because she can, so it's not even about "You're too heavy to be allowed this outfit". And I honestly don't get the RiRi hype...the times of having to wear a tent or even better just hiding at home while pregnant have been over for a while, so what's the message besides "I'm super extra"?




Agreed, it's all "look at me" attitude. Nothing feminine about any of them at all, sadly. Looks cheap, to be honest, and narcissic attention-seeking which is extremely unattractive but appeals to a certain type of individual who follow them. Really unhealthy, in my view.

As someone once said "what's wrong with wearing clothes?".  

Save the showing off of body parts for an appropriate place e.g. the bathroom.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I mean, I was going on 100 at 15*, so maybe I am just too convervative in this matter. Like, I am not into tiny supermodel Kendall Jenner walking the red carpet basically naked either, and I'm not a fan of RiRi pushing her bare pregnant belly into everyone's face just because she can, so it's not even about "You're too heavy to be allowed this outfit". And I honestly don't get the RiRi hype...the times of having to wear a tent or even better just hiding at home while pregnant have been over for a while, so what's the message besides "I'm super extra"?



 

I think you hit it: "just because she can" and "I'm super extra".  Being outrageous for attention.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of pregnancy, do we think they might announce a third baby (still on that "big surprise"...I'm worried!)? Or maybe they'll bring one of the props, I mean kids.


at her age and with her being apparently very vain, if they had another one, I'd bet it was via surrogate


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> a cut/paste comment from the web (covered here before?) about Harry wearing the orange outfit to promote Invictus Games:
> 
> "Another Twitter user wondered if Harry was making fun of the Dutch Royal family by appropriating their national color. They wrote: “Gee, orange being the color for royalty in the Netherlands, the heir/heiress is known as prince/princess of Orange, equivalent to prince of Wales. Is it a diplomatic faux-pas? Is he making fun of the Royal Family over there?”
> 
> So I wonder if M&H are going to wear matching orange outfits regardless of the blowback Harry has already gotten. Orange clothing reminds one of prison garb, so maybe even Meghan isn't that stupid? On the other hand...
> 
> Maybe the "big surprise" will be clothing that's actually appropriate and actually fit?



Not sure the Dutch would understand the blow if it was meant as one (I don't think so solely because...they can't have beef with the DRF as well, can they?) because they dress up in orange for King's Day as a measure of celebration.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> at her age and with her being apparently very vain, if they had another one, I'd bet it was via surrogate



That hasn't kept her from prancing around in a too tight dress over a weirdly fluid bump in the past, has it


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That hasn't kept her from prancing around in a too tight dress over a weirdly fluid bump in the past, has it


she was around 40 when she had the last one.....considered geriatric pregnancy.  who know what they will do next.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I think we can be pretty sure there is no point placing a bet that the surprise is the any of the following -
 - voluntary relinquishing the Dukedom & titles 
- H standing down as Councillor of State or 
- H removing himself and the kids from the line of succession

Another baby announcement is possible but my guess is they will bring both kids.

And if they do they will be evicerated by the British tabloid press. 

H&M may be perfectly pleasant and charming when they meet people but their behavior, on which ultimately they are judged is now often (IMO) just nasty and vindictive.


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments! 


_*I couldn't think of a better new partner for the Invictus Games Foundation than the mental fitness platform BetterUp*. *The mind is like a muscle: it needs to be honed, trained, rehabbed, and coached. The men and women I served with understand this, the Invictus community knows this, and now the world is beginning to see it too.'*_*I'm honoured to bring the work we do at BetterUp to Invictus and look forward to expanding the support systems that service members and veterans depend on to achieve remarkable feats*…'









						Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
					

Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just love that RiRi is showing off her big belly, it’s like the antithesis of Hilaria with her tiny bumps and then immediate weight loss.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I don't know if there's an appropriate age for *tatts on women *but for me a woman of 50 having something that extreme is not ok.  none of my business but not tasteful IMO
> And, as you say, if a young woman does it, she is most likely going to get older and have to live with what she's done.


If they are Henna Tattoos they can last a little over a month. Maybe there's a story behind all tats. MIL, who was in her 50's when I met her, had a small permanent butterfly tat on her right shoulder. She said that a bunch of girls from work got together one day and all decided to get one, however I very much doubt she would've done it on her own.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't understand why her preggo "style" is so celebrated. She looks awful most of the time, and sheer lace nightgowns are just not a great look in public no matter who you are.


Again .. SO agree with you on this!  Another beautiful woman, and I get that she's super excited to be pregnant and become a mother, but must we see her belly with the "outie" belly button and what looks like a dark line of hair going from the Belly button down to the private area?!?!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of pregnancy, do we think they might announce a third baby (still on that "big surprise"...I'm worried!)? Or maybe they'll bring one of the props, I mean kids.


The great unveiling of Lilibet? Yep.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> I just worry that she is setting an example that being that heavy is "Okay"


There is an epidemic of obesity in the US, and many COVID victims were obese with related health issues (hypertension, diabetes). I have struggled with my weight all my life and understand how difficult it is, but I just cannot understand the movement of "fat acceptance". Obesity should not be normalized.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m sure H&TW wanted to treat this trip as their version of “A Royal Tour”.  They hoped to compete with Will and Kate’s recent tour.  Good for the Dutch Royal family!

And, also, good for The Queen airing her grievances via Angela Kelly!


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> The great unveiling of Lilibet? Yep.


Wouldn't they be expecting a big payout for that? I doubt Invictus could afford appearance fees for all 4 when Methane alone is allegedly expecting more than the average A-lister for "gracing" events with her presence.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> No further comments!
> View attachment 5378256
> 
> _*I couldn't think of a better new partner for the Invictus Games Foundation than the mental fitness platform BetterUp*. *The mind is like a muscle: it needs to be honed, trained, rehabbed, and coached. The men and women I served with understand this, the Invictus community knows this, and now the world is beginning to see it too.'*_*I'm honoured to bring the work we do at BetterUp to Invictus and look forward to expanding the support systems that service members and veterans depend on to achieve remarkable feats*…'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If he is an example of the Better Up finished product,  i would say they failed and better start over.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy, happy, happy. These 2 lovely ladies, swoon!
> 
> View attachment 5377912
> 
> 
> From 2020,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet Angela Kelly, the Queen's Personal Wardrobe Advisor
> 
> 
> Kelly is responsible for maintaining, curating, and designing the Queen's wardrobe (and she also helped fit Princess Beatrice's vintage wedding dress).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I think it would be amazing to have tea with them and talk about clothes, jewelry, the royal dogs, their travels - nothing controversial, just fun stuff. I've always heard the Queen has a good sense of humor. She has surely needed it to get through trying times.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> There is an epidemic of obesity in the US, and many COVID victims were obese with related health issues (hypertension, diabetes). I have struggled with my weight all my life and understand how difficult it is, but I just cannot understand the movement of "fat acceptance". Obesity should not be normalized.


The associated health issues to obesity are the most troubling to me.  Your body type is fixed at conception. How you . deal with it later is your challenge.

In that regard, I think MM has had real issues with her post baby body vis a vis finding the right clothes. If she accepted that she needs help in this regard, she could look much better. That said, I am looking forward to the Invictous fashion show


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Are we supposed to pretend she gave birth to those babies herself? Okaaaay.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The associated health issues to obesity are the most troubling to me.  Your body type is fixed at conception. How you . deal with it later is your challenge.
> 
> In that regard, I think MM has had real issues with her post baby body vis a vis finding the right clothes. If she accepted that she needs help in this regard, she could look much better. That said, I am looking forward to the Invictous fashion show


yes, your body type is genetic.....I had a co-worker who was very much a pear shape.  She was small chested and had very large hips.  She was middle aged and single and was very concerned with her appearance.  She actually dieted and lost a bunch of weight.  also got multiple liposuctions on her thighs and hips.  she actually succeeded in changing her body type.  a bit extreme but it worked for her.  was she happier and did it help with her quest to find a man?  not that I know of but I haven't seen her for years.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Your body type is fixed at conception. How you . deal with it later is your challenge.


1000% true!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> If he is an example of the Better Up finished product,  i would say they failed and better start over.


It would be funny if someone started a new venture called Better Start Over and trademarked the word 'better' before Better Up does.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Are we supposed to pretend she gave birth to those babies herself? Okaaaay.



I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. When they presented Archie to the press at Windsor shortly after his birth Hazy said he was amazed by what women went through. It seemed genuine to me, and she very much looked postpartum. The mystery child is anyone's guess.


> https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/meghan-harry-baby-pictures


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Are we supposed to pretend she gave birth to those babies herself? Okaaaay.


Until it can be proven otherwise, we have to believe it.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> It would be funny if someone started a new venture called Better Start Over and trademarked the word 'better' before Better Up does.


That great!  Better Start Over!  Does that mean they can go back and get a wedding dress that fits?  Not act like A-holes and behave?  Be productive members of the family?  Say no to the Oprah interview?   Naaaaah. Won’t happen. Lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has Meghan set her sights on archery?
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk
				



_ARCHERY: It was a small, struggling sport before we decided to call our son Archie and our organisation Archewell. We said nothing, but, if I’m honest, yes, we were deeply hurt that the sport never thanked us for the product recognition we brought to it. Now we need to own that hurt. It’s the only way forward.

ARCHIMEDES: The next series we’re developing for Netflix is so exciting. A brilliant mathematician is relaxing in his net-zero infinity pool in his Speedos when it comes to him in a flash that the ratio of the radius of a circle to its circumference is, like, based on the number of personal assistants employed by that circle. So he shouts Eureka!, which is the name of his chief personnel officer, and Eureka negotiates a suitable development fee for worldwide rights with a prestigious streaming service.

And then we’re also hoping to take ownership of these words ending in ‘arch’:

FROGMARCH: To encourage someone to unleash the power of compassion in order to drive through cultural change by pinning their arms from behind.

STARCH: We aim to produce a new, progressive type of starch, a starch that is proud to say, ‘Hey! This collar is too stiff, too traditional, too formal. You guys want to loosen up and unwind, so try New Starchewell, the more casual, relaxed starch.’

MONARCH: When I agreed to join the Royal Family, they were hurting so bad. But — hey! — they didn’t want to admit they needed help. So I let them cry on my shoulder, and I shared their hurt. I mean, we only have one Planet. That’s why we at the Archewell Foundation are now reaching out to them to trademark the Monarch, as part of a wider non-profit drive to increase global awareness._


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> Let’s make the best of it and enjoy the train wreck. They will certainly give a pompous, sanctimonious speech that will be a source of mockery. The terrible fashion will be evident as you said. Plus there’s always something that happens that we couldn’t possibly predict. It has been months since they did one of these self-glorifying shows. They must be so thirsty!



You’re right - they have promised a big surprise, so we have that to look forward to!  I expect something pretty outrageous - and inappropriate!!  Loving the fact that they get no audience with the Dutch royal family - as it should be!


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> There is an epidemic of obesity in the US, and many COVID victims were obese with related health issues (hypertension, diabetes). I have struggled with my weight all my life and understand how difficult it is, but I just cannot understand the movement of "fat acceptance". Obesity should not be normalized.





gracekelly said:


> The associated health issues to obesity are the most troubling to me.  Your body type is fixed at conception. How you . deal with it later is your challenge.
> 
> In that regard, I think MM has had real issues with her post baby body vis a vis finding the right clothes. If she accepted that she needs help in this regard, she could look much better. That said, I am looking forward to the Invictous fashion show



Things are so crazy now that there are people suggesting that being obese has no negative impact on health! It’s simply not true.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> by the Invictus Foundation… If true,



This is DISGUSTING and I truly hope that this information gets out there!!! .. of course he's getting paid because the Megalomaniac likely said "_Harry, we need to get paid for all our 'WORK' here and the security, etc., etc_. .. _and the Netflix folks will need food, etc._!" The folks at the Invictus Games should flat out say "_GOOD-BYE - we are getting someone who really CARES about the organization and the athletes who served their countries_!"


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Things are so crazy now that there are people suggesting that being obese has no negative impact on health! It’s simply not true.


Not to mention the huge economic cost that gets passed on to us all. 


> https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-consequences/economic/


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When the spokesperson of a fellow royal makes a public announcement like this you know you effed up.



IMO, like the rest of the world, Willem-Alexander and Maxima are well aware of H's dastardly behaviour towards his family and having just attended Prince Philip's memorial service and observed HMTQ's distress, they found it easy to classify H as persona non grata.


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> Ashley is a larger woman but firm, not morbidly obese.  And as far as I know, she dresses appropriately.  But maybe some young girls who are large and not fit like her look at her and think it's cool to be big.  Then go and out buy a crop top.


.. and she DOES work out, there have been pictures of her doing so!  Yes, she has some cellulite (which is oftentimes photoshopped out), but overall, she does embrace her body but in a respectful way.  

There is another model (beautiful face) called Tess Holliday who has a tendency to wear some inappropriate "clothing"; my huge issue with her is that she is seriously obese!  She's another one who talks about "body positivity", but being that heavy cannot be good for one's health (although she always says that she's "okay").  I had a high school classmate who was also very overweight for many years and yes, her health didn't seem to be affected in her 20's and 30's.  But, it seemed like the minute she hit her 40's, everything went downhill and pretty fast.  Sadly, she didn't make it and died very early at 44 years-old (and she had a 10-year old son which was so sad).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, like the rest of the world, Willem-Alexander and Maxima are well aware of H's dastardly behaviour towards his family and having just attended Prince Philip's memorial service and observed HMTQ's distress, they found it easy to classify H as persona non grata.



Beatrix is not one to be trifled with. Neither is Willem nor Maxima. All 3 attended Philip’s memorial.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The associated health issues to obesity are the most troubling to me.  Your body type is fixed at conception. How you . deal with it later is your challenge.



I don't think anyone's body type is being 600 pounds, though. My mother is a fan of that TLC weightloss show with the Iranian doctor in Houston...some of these people eat more in a day than a family of four. I absolutely believe you can be prone to being chubby (heck, I myself gain and lose the same 20 pounds all the time because I am a huge stress eater) but being morbidly obese needs some serious maintenance.



> In that regard, I think MM has had real issues with her post baby body vis a vis finding the right clothes. If she accepted that she needs help in this regard, she could look much better. That said, I am looking forward to the Invictous fashion show



But she wore too small clothes and awful underwear before she ever fell pregnant. I remember distinctly how we all wondered why she loved that illfitting strapless bra that would show its outline under anything (mostly clothes that would also have accomodated straps just fine) so much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. When they presented Archie to the press at Windsor shortly after his birth Hazy said he was amazed by what women went through. It seemed genuine to me, and she very much looked postpartum. The mystery child is anyone's guess.



I think so too, though I also can't explain the inflating and deflating and position changing (as in, one minute it's at her waist, the next down to her knees) bump.

ETA: I am partial to the "Was pregnant, used padding to draw more attention" theory, especially as she was so swollen after Archie. Now the new baby...I wouldn't bet money on it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, like the rest of the world, Willem-Alexander and Maxima are well aware of H's dastardly behaviour towards his family and having just attended Prince Philip's memorial service and observed HMTQ's distress, they found it easy to classify H as persona non grata.



Also, Maxima couldn't have her father at her wedding due to his, uh, career choices and is said to have been very distraught about this. She might not be supportive of Harry's sh*tty behaviour for her own reasons.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> No further comments!
> View attachment 5378256
> 
> _*I couldn't think of a better new partner for the Invictus Games Foundation than the mental fitness platform BetterUp*. *The mind is like a muscle: it needs to be honed, trained, rehabbed, and coached. The men and women I served with understand this, the Invictus community knows this, and now the world is beginning to see it too.'*_*I'm honoured to bring the work we do at BetterUp to Invictus and look forward to expanding the support systems that service members and veterans depend on to achieve remarkable feats*…'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Doomed to failure when applied to Hazbeen, his “muscle” mind is atrophied.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Poor things, nothing going according to plan.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor things, nothing going according to plan.


Lawyers are standing by.


----------



## redney

I don't understand their fascination with having armed security. It's not like either one is a top kidnapping target. I mean, who would actually pay any ransom to free them? Or are they worried the opposite: people will pay for them to be snatched up and hidden away?  That's actually more plausible.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> If it is true what they say - when the older people dress like the younger ones, the awful trends will stop - so come on, we older people have our mission now  Who wants be first?
> 
> Such twerps, can’t Chas put a stop to their sh!t?



I feel we should give Megs some credit here, she’s been killing trends instantly since day one   


csshopper said:


> There will never be a question about surrogacy


That’s actually a good point. All the celebs have surrogacy rumours and it does immediately put a stop to them 


sdkitty said:


> I think it partly started with Ashley Graham.  It's one thing for larger girls to not be ashamed of their bodies.  That is fine.  Not everyone can be slender.  I know a woman who I would say is larger but she is very fit (lifts weights).  You don't see a big (bare) belly hanging out on her.  Women who go around flaunting their cellulite, baring fat bellies, etc., are maybe getting it wrong.  Although I always say there is some guy who will like that.


Oh lord let’s not base it on what men like  There is always someone for anything.

 In general I think people should just be themselves and be happy and if that means octogenarians in hot pants go for it.

I will say my little tinfoil hat caveat though which is I think this whole ‘plus size model‘ thing is 1. A knee jerk reaction against the Deserved size zero criticism which completely misses the point of actually encouraging healthy body types and a variety of sizes in models & also size 0 models are still the standard anyway and 2. They then realised that if the world is getting fatter let’s get some of these big girls’ money- ‘maybe if we show them a really fat model who is pretty in our clothes they will feel confident buying it’.

Either way you are just being sold to still. I always say if fat acceptance is so great why is their No real movement to sell us fat men are beautiful - they don’t buy clothes like we do,

I’m a tattoo fancier myself too


----------



## CarryOn2020

just fyi, surely Hazzi knows this?









						Is the Brain a Muscle, an Organ, or Fat? What You Need to Know
					

Your brain may not be a muscle, but working it and your actual muscles can keep your brain healthy and functioning at its best. Here's what you need to know.




					www.healthline.com
				




*Is the brain a muscle or organ?*
_
The brain is an organ, and a very unusual and complex one at that. It plays a role in every one of our functions, controlling many organs, our thoughts, memory, speech, and movements.

At birth, the average brain weighs 1 pound and increases to approximately 3 pounds by adulthood. The majority of that weight — 85 percent of it — is the cerebrum, which is divided in two halves.

Your brain also contains cells, nerve fibers, arteries, and arterioles. It also contains fat and is the fattiest organ in the body — nearly 60 percent fat._


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


>




Guessing there will be some cancellations very soon


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing there will be some cancellations very soon


Do you think they will cancel over this?


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> I feel we should give Megs some credit here, she’s been killing trends instantly since day one
> 
> That’s actually a good point. All the celebs have surrogacy rumours and it does immediately put a stop to them
> 
> Oh lord let’s not base it on what men like  There is always someone for anything.
> 
> In general I think people should just be themselves and be happy and if that means octogenarians in hot pants go for it.
> 
> I will say my little tinfoil hat caveat though which is I think this whole ‘plus size model‘ thing is 1. A knee jerk reaction against the Deserved size zero criticism which completely misses the point of actually encouraging healthy body types and a variety of sizes in models & also size 0 models are still the standard anyway and 2. They then realised that if the world is getting fatter let’s get some of these big girls’ money- ‘maybe if we show them a really fat model who is pretty in our clothes they will feel confident buying it’.
> 
> Either way you are just being sold to still. I always say if fat acceptance is so great why is their No real movement to sell us fat men are beautiful - they don’t buy clothes like we do,
> 
> I’m a tattoo fancier myself too


Totally agree. I think it’s great that we are finally able to see were clothing looks like a different size models. it was ridiculous that we were being told that you had to be literally under weight. 

I think it’s great that we are finally able to see what clothing looks like on different size models. And it was ridiculous that we were being told that you had to be literally under weight to be “healthy”. Seems like just like everything else, the pendulum has swung a bit far the other way, maybe things will normalize eventually.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think they will cancel over this?



I can see her cancelling.  He may cut it short, too.  Always possible with their busy (????) schedule.


----------



## Helventara

lanasyogamama said:


>



Loving the Dutch!  So sensible and straightforward.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shoulda, woulda, coulda


----------



## CarryOn2020

This HRH Duke shows us how to be royal:


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, Maxima couldn't have her father at her wedding due to his, uh, career choices and is said to have been very distraught about this. She might not be supportive of Harry's sh*tty behaviour for her own reasons.


Although you cannot compare Hazza’s behaviour to Maxima’s father who was the Agriculture Minister for the Junta in a period when thousands of argentinians (including former employees) were kidnapped, tortured and murdered by the government he worked for.
Those missing include pregnant women and children
Did he know about it? Very likely 








						30,000 People Were 'Disappeared' in Argentina's Dirty War. These Women Never Stopped Looking
					

Draped in lush trees and surrounded by stately buildings, Buenos Aires’ Plaza de Mayo might look like a place to check out monuments or stop for a relaxing




					www.google.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> No further comments!
> View attachment 5378256
> 
> _*I couldn't think of a better new partner for the Invictus Games Foundation than the mental fitness platform BetterUp*. *The mind is like a muscle: it needs to be honed, trained, rehabbed, and coached. The men and women I served with understand this, the Invictus community knows this, and now the world is beginning to see it too.'*_*I'm honoured to bring the work we do at BetterUp to Invictus and look forward to expanding the support systems that service members and veterans depend on to achieve remarkable feats*…'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Poor H, you have some serious 'muscle' atrophy and damage in your cranium probably due to lack of use, like letting others do the thinking and school work for you and also by indulging in your bad habits.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Although you cannot compare Hazza’s behaviour to Maxima’s father who was the Agriculture Minister for the Junta in a period when thousands of argentinians (including former employees) were kidnapped, tortured and murdered by the government he worked for.
> Those missing include pregnant women and children
> Did he know about it? Very likely
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30,000 People Were 'Disappeared' in Argentina's Dirty War. These Women Never Stopped Looking
> 
> 
> Draped in lush trees and surrounded by stately buildings, Buenos Aires’ Plaza de Mayo might look like a place to check out monuments or stop for a relaxing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



I'm not sure how you'd think I'd compare Harry's behaviour to her father's support of a murderous regime. I am comparing her experiencing what it felt like to have her father absent on one of the biggest days of her life to Harry shunning his family including a dying grandfather and a very elderly and frail grandmother.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What???

_At the age of 71, she is certainly a chip off the old block.

About to set off home from a whirlwind trip to mark her mother’s historic Platinum Jubilee to Australia and Papua New Guinea, the Princess Royal has travelled almost 25,000 miles on commercial airlines in less than a week, packed in more than 20 engagements over four days - without a single evening off - and even led the way staying in £185 hotels.

If that wasn’t frugal enough, she has been accompanied by just one member of office staff (in addition to her husband and their security detail), been doing her own hair and make-up - and even packed her own suitcase.








						Staff 'lost in admiration' for Princess Anne after Australia tour
					

Princess Anne, 71, was accompanied by just one member of office staff, stayed in budget hotels and even packed her own suitcase during her whirlwind trip to Australia and Papua New Guinea.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

redney said:


> *I don't understand their fascination with having armed security.* It's not like either one is a top kidnapping target. I mean, who would actually pay any ransom to free them? Or are they worried the opposite: people will pay for them to be snatched up and hidden away?  That's actually more plausible.


One has to factor in their humongous ego. They need a large escort or contingent because they want us to believe they are beloved, popular and important world leaders event though it is only a figment of their imagination.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> What???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Staff 'lost in admiration' for Princess Anne after Australia tour
> 
> 
> Princess Anne, 71, was accompanied by just one member of office staff, stayed in budget hotels and even packed her own suitcase during her whirlwind trip to Australia and Papua New Guinea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The contrast…


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think they will cancel over this?


Probably not if Netflix is involved.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Probably not if Netflix is involved.



Maybe they could ‘zoom’ in?
All of these companies and ‘charities’ [nflix, betteru, etc.] are getting dragged today. Tough questions are being asked.  Imo it is not a coincidence that Princess Anne’s tour costs are being reported today.  H&M have embarrassed themselves and the BRF, just like Andy.


----------



## wisconsin

CeeJay said:


> This is DISGUSTING and I truly hope that this information gets out there!!! .. of course he's getting paid because the Megalomaniac likely said "_Harry, we need to get paid for all our 'WORK' here and the security, etc., etc_. .. _and the Netflix folks will need food, etc._!" The folks at the Invictus Games should flat out say "_GOOD-BYE - we are getting someone who really CARES about the organization and the athletes who served their countries_!"


Let them get paid.They need to earn a living since the royal family cut them off.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure how you'd think I'd compare Harry's behaviour to her father's support of a murderous regime. I am comparing her experiencing what it felt like to have her father absent on one of the biggest days of her life to Harry shunning his family including a dying grandfather and a very elderly and frail grandmother.


Didn’t said you did, you mentioned her father wasn’t invited to her wedding, I gave you reasons why
They won’t receive the Harkles either which to me shows the Dutch have principles and stick to them


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


>




So the Netflixes promised a biG sUrPrIse for the little people at the Invictus Games and instead, King Willem had a big surprise for them - they are now little people, too  No reception, no castle accommodations and no bullets


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> So the Netflixes promised a biG sUrPrIse for the little people at the Invictus Games and instead, King Willem had a big surprise for them - they are now little people, too  No reception, no castle accommodations and no bullets


No reception at all for them is huge. I think the message is, you turned your back on your family but family comes before everything. Particularly a gold-digging, ill-mannered attention whore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Why on earth would the King and Queen of the Netherlands have an audience with two (now) commoners who are visiting their country for an event? it's not like they are officially representing the Queen and BRF (anymore).


----------



## CarryOn2020

wisconsin said:


> Let them get paid.They need to earn a living since the royal family cut them off.



Imo They do not/should not cheapen the BRF, mental health and charities by merching them. Plenty of other businesses they can get involved with. The porn industry is very lucrative, for example.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> One has to factor in their humongous ego. They need a large escort or contingent because they want us to believe they are beloved, popular and important world leaders event though it is only a figment of their imagination.


Plus not letting the masses get too close reduces the chances of rotten tomatoes scoring a hit. Only half joking. They have no intention of interacting with ordinary people, it doesn't bring in the $$.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think anyone's body type is being 600 pounds, though. My mother is a fan of that TLC weightloss show with the Iranian doctor in Houston...some of these people eat more in a day than a family of four. I absolutely believe you can be prone to being chubby (heck, I myself gain and lose the same 20 pounds all the time because I am a huge stress eater) but being morbidly obese needs some serious maintenance.
> 
> 
> 
> But she wore too small clothes and awful underwear before she ever fell pregnant. I remember distinctly how we all wondered why she loved that illfitting strapless bra that would show its outline under anything (mostly clothes that would also have accomodated straps just fine) so much.


many years ago when I was a child my cousin married a beautiful girl.  her mom was petite and her dad was HUGE.  He would eat a stack of sandwiches in the evening after dinner.  apparently mom kept the two daughters in line when they were living at home.  Once the girl married my cousin, she gained a Lot of weight - like went from maybe 130 to 200+ at a young age before having any kids.  So I guess the tendency for body type can be inherited and maybe also the tendency to overeat?


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> Why on earth would the King and Queen of the Netherlands have an audience with two (now) commoners who are visiting their country for an event? it's not like they are officially representing the Queen and BRF (anymore).


I believe if Hazy had done the right thing and attended his grandfather's memorial the Harkles would be getting an official reception even though they are no longer working royals. I'm sure all the royals who went to the trouble of traveling to London to pay their respects to the Queen and honor Philip's memory are offended that his grandson did not feel obligated to do so.


----------



## Chanbal

Is there anything that is not being monetized?   










						Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
					

Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> many years ago when I was a child my cousin married a beautiful girl.  her mom was petite and her dad was HUGE.  He would eat a stack of sandwiches in the evening after dinner.  apparently mom kept the two daughters in line when they were living at home.  Once the girl married my cousin, she gained a Lot of weight - like went from maybe 130 to 200+ at a young age before having any kids.  So I guess the tendency for body type can be inherited and maybe also the tendency to overeat?


It's definitely a combination of genetics and lifestyle. We are surrounded by infinite food options and often eat out of boredom and stress, myself included. Our ancestors worked hard to grow, raise or hunt their food, so it was harder to overeat and become overweight.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

redney said:


> Why on earth would the King and Queen of the Netherlands have an audience with two (now) commoners who are visiting their country for an event? it's not like they are officially representing the Queen and BRF (anymore).


I think the fact that the gruesome twosome are traveling around with their own film crew and have been caught in the past secretly recording meetings that they were only invited to because they played the BRF card may have closed many social doors to them. They can’t be trusted to be discreet and many prominent people don’t want these two grifters profiting off them by including them in their Netflix content or in Harry’s latest memoir.


----------



## Chanbal

Guru and TW "_have no use anymore for the queen_…"


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I believe if Hazy had done the right thing and attended his grandfather's memorial the Harkles would be getting *an official reception* even though they are no longer working royals. I'm sure all the royals who went to the trouble of traveling to London to pay their respects to the Queen and honor Philip's memory are offended that his grandson did not feel obligated to do so.


Maybe a private visit, but I don't believe H will ever get an official reception as he is no longer a working royal and doesn't represent HMTQ in any capacity anywhere.  Besides, all official functions are carefully organized and coordinated by the staff from both palaces.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't understand why her preggo "style" is so celebrated. She looks awful most of the time, and sheer lace nightgowns are just not a great look in public no matter who you are.



"Epic"...I guess we're old and out of touch.


>


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. When they presented Archie to the press at Windsor shortly after his birth Hazy said he was amazed by what women went through. It seemed genuine to me, and she very much looked postpartum. The mystery child is anyone's guess.


She looked more pregnant portpartum than she did before giving birth. I found that really weird: all that bloating AFTER the child (or doll) was born.



redney said:


> I don't understand their fascination with having armed security. It's not like either one is a top kidnapping target. I mean, who would actually pay any ransom to free them? Or are they worried the opposite: people will pay for them to be snatched up and hidden away?  That's actually more plausible.


Their stans absolutely believe Hazard's bleat of "I wuz born with risk!" and that Methane will be kidnapped for "good times" because she is so incredibly naturally beautiful.



wisconsin said:


> Let them get paid.They need to earn a living since the royal family cut them off.


If only they would earn an "honest" living. The doors opened for them. Unfortunately they were not pleasant guests.
If they behave poorly during the Games, Invictus will become Invective.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Methane will be kidnapped for "good times" because she is so incredibly naturally beautiful.


Huh?


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Is there anything that is not being monetized?
> View attachment 5378618
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So I really don’t understand how this “conflict of interest” was allowed by either Invictus or Betterup. Seriously if I tried this at my company I worked for, it would be a breach of the code of conduct. Every large organisation has a similar code… so how does this even pass at both entities?

Betterup may be doing this for free for the first 500 people, but you know it’s so they can get the Invictus games participants to sign up for more later - at a cost…. Plus all the marketing and PR.  Plus H benefits (financially) with the merching, salary and/or ownership that he may have in Betterup.  

This is awful.  Just awful.  And anyone with half a brain could see this was not going to be received well…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Unless this is a press release from SS, the people in Holland will likely be unhappy with this expense.










						Meghan and Harry to get armed protection from state police
					

THE Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be protected by armed Dutch police during their visit to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games this week, sources said.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## octopus17

CarryOn2020 said:


> This HRH Duke shows us how to be royal:



He's always been steadfast to The Queen, and seems a real trooper and an honorable man. 

A bit shaky on his pins nowadays and it's amazing to see he's still out and about doing these type of things.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Is there anything that is not being monetized?
> View attachment 5378618
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry could be 'taking advantage' of Invictus Games to plug Better Up
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Angela Levin, author of 2018 book 'Harry: Conversations with the Prince', told MailOnline today that Harry might be taking advantage of the soldiers involved in the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



One of the comments  :
"Such profound words from Haz. Stunning and brave. Stay strong our prince and greatest war hero."


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Unless this is a press release from SS, the people in Holland will likely be unhappy with this expense.
> View attachment 5378640
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to get armed protection from state police
> 
> 
> THE Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be protected by armed Dutch police during their visit to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games this week, sources said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


This is the first trip outside of US/UK/Canada and maybe the Dutch are unwilling to be the first to test the idea of his no longer being a protected diplomatic person thus not requiring any service , esp sine he is appealing (supposedly) to the UK courts

And it is a big PR a thing for the Netherlands so this may be the path of least resistance all around 
so perhaps a pragmatic approach rather than diplomatically mandated 

wonder what type of services are given to other Invictus bigwigs ???

Do the IOC VIPs get perqs?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> One of the comments  :
> "Such profound words from Haz. Stunning and brave. Stay strong our prince and greatest war hero."


I think the comment below is very good.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> This is the first trip outside of US/UK/Canada and maybe the Dutch are unwilling to be the first to test the idea of his no longer being a protected diplomatic person thus not requiring any service , esp sine he is appealing (supposedly) to the UK courts
> 
> And it is a big PR a thing for the Netherlands so this may be the path of least resistance all around
> so perhaps a pragmatic approach rather than diplomatically mandated
> 
> wonder what type of services are given to other Invictus bigwigs ???
> 
> Do the IOC VIPs get perqs?


I read somewhere that allegedly their lawyers were observing whether the Netfl*xes would get protection by the Dutch police as this would make their court case in the UK stronger. If police protection is needed in the Netherlands, it is also needed in the UK…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that allegedly their lawyers were observing whether the Netfl*xes would get protection by the Dutch police as this would make their court case in the UK stronger. If police protection is needed in the Netherlands, it is also needed in the UK…



It isn’t a true comparison. Just because security is being offered as a courtesy, it does not show it is needed. All it proves is that the Dutch are being very generous and indulgent towards them.


----------



## Chanbal

These Aussie hosts are great!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t a true comparison. Just because security is being offered as a courtesy, it does not show it is needed. All it proves is that the Dutch are being very generous and indulgent towards them.


Absolutely, but that's not how allegedly their lawyers want to see it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

An hour away????  OMG.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Absolutely, but that's not how allegedly their lawyers want to see it.



I want to tell their lawyers to suck it but unfortunately I won’t get the opportunity.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comments are interesting. One comment points out that ‘security’ can make someone’s life absolutely miserable.  The ‘protected individual’ will likely have his phone calls listened to, every movement recorded, anyone coming close should be frisked, the guards will hover all over them, smother them with protection, etc.  This could become very uncomfortable for H&M.

So be careful what you wish for.









						Meghan and Harry to get armed protection from state police
					

THE Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be protected by armed Dutch police during their visit to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games this week, sources said.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Huh?


Ah, one of the stans was arguing in a comment thread about Hazard's demand for the security review. Accordjng to this guy (his handle had a masculine name), Methane needs enhanced protection in the UK because she is so uncommonly gorgeous that she is a target for sexual predators.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t a true comparison. Just because security is being offered as a courtesy, it does not show it is needed. All it proves is that the Dutch are being very generous and indulgent towards them.


The host country for sports games is often quite liberal in want it will do to get good press for its event 
ex recent Winter Olympics host


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> It isn’t a true comparison. Just because security is being offered as a courtesy, it does not show it is needed. All it proves is that the Dutch are being very generous and indulgent towards them.


And there is security and security - a bodyguard or 6 Cadillac Escalades full of them


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> And there is security and security - a bodyguard or 6 Cadillac Escalades full of them



If there are ‘credible’ threats, they may need 100 LandRovers [one of the aponsors].  The security may even need the disgusting duo to shelter-in-place.  Since this security will be paid for by the Dutch and absolutely no one wants anything to happen on their watch, security may very well tell H&M to stay home.

This thing could backfire on H&M and, especially, Nflix.  Getting some popcorn ready.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Unless this is a press release from SS, the people in Holland will likely be unhappy with this expense.
> View attachment 5378640
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry to get armed protection from state police
> 
> 
> THE Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be protected by armed Dutch police during their visit to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games this week, sources said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I don't get it.  Why are the Dutch doing this?  I think it will strengthen his case in England, but i don't think the Brits will cave to him.


----------



## EmilyM11

jelliedfeels said:


> I feel we should give Megs some credit here, she’s been killing trends instantly since day one
> 
> That’s actually a good point. All the celebs have surrogacy rumours and it does immediately put a stop to them
> 
> Oh lord let’s not base it on what men like  There is always someone for anything.
> 
> In general I think people should just be themselves and be happy and if that means octogenarians in hot pants go for it.
> 
> I will say my little tinfoil hat caveat though which is I think this whole ‘plus size model‘ thing is 1. A knee jerk reaction against the Deserved size zero criticism which completely misses the point of actually encouraging healthy body types and a variety of sizes in models & also size 0 models are still the standard anyway and 2. They then realised that if the world is getting fatter let’s get some of these big girls’ money- ‘maybe if we show them a really fat model who is pretty in our clothes they will feel confident buying it’.
> 
> Either way you are just being sold to still. I always say if fat acceptance is so great why is their No real movement to sell us fat men are beautiful - they don’t buy clothes like we do,
> 
> I’m a tattoo fancier myself too



I'm 6ft tall and approx. 160 lbs weight, size 8-10 US and in 90s when I was a teen it was rather size XL or XXL which was super intimidating (deserved label if we understand XL as not 'fat' but larger frame/taller than average/still healthy) and really struggled to accept my body at that time. Was waiting for healthy but not super slim/tiny bodies to enter the scene. And almost 30 years later I'm still waiting. I understand and support the right of larger ladies to express themselves and dress they way they feel but why is it so 0-1, I don't understand.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

No surprise here. 
William takes over the wreath duty.









						William takes over job from Harry for poignant ceremony as Queen to miss event
					

Prince Harry had previously stepped in to lay the wreath on behalf of the Queen at the Anzac Day ceremony at the Cenotaph multiple times up until he stepped down from royal duties in 2020




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

Anyone missing posts between yesterday at 9:05pm to 9pm today?  I've been reading all day on and off and went on zoom for a meeting and came back to a big gap.  I need my H&M fix!!!  Am I being punished?!?


----------



## Katel

Hermes Zen said:


> Anyone missing posts between yesterday at 9:05pm to 9pm today?  I've been reading all day on and off and went on zoom for a meeting and came back to a big gap.  I need my H&M fix!!!  Am I being punished?!?



Haha thought the same … looks like a lot of scrubbing on aisle 15 (?)


----------



## Hermes Zen

Katel said:


> Haha thought the same … looks like a lot of scrubbing on aisle 15 (?)



Sooo happy to hear I'm not alone.  I was getting worried.


----------



## CarryOn2020

__





						All my posts today have been deleted
					

I just woke up to a note from our server techs. Last night we suffered a massive database corruption in an InnoDB table that caused a cascading effect and the host needed to roll back to a snapshot from the day before. This is the reason why your posts and PMs all disappeared.  Sorry for the...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## pukasonqo

Just leaving this here








						Former Princess of Japan Is Now Working at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City
					

Former-princess Mako Komuro gave up her title to marry her commoner college sweetheart. Now, she lives in New York and works at the Metropolitan Museum of Art!




					mymodernmet.com


----------



## duna

I think it's disgraceful that he is still patron of Invictus!


----------



## jelliedfeels

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm 6ft tall and approx. 160 lbs weight, size 8-10 US and in 90s when I was a teen it was rather size XL or XXL which was super intimidating (deserved label if we understand XL as not 'fat' but larger frame/taller than average/still healthy) and really struggled to accept my body at that time. Was waiting for healthy but not super slim/tiny bodies to enter the scene. And almost 30 years later I'm still waiting. I understand and support the right of larger ladies to express themselves and dress they way they feel but why is it so 0-1, I don't understand.


I completely agree, when I watch a runway show I see a lot of very thin girls and then occasionally a girl who looks a little too big to be healthy. Oh there are exceptions like I’d say Slick Woods and Ashley Graham are successful and are more average sizes (admittedly with more exaggerated proportions than many) but the majority of girls still look like they do especially in high fashion/couture shows. Honestly it’s just stunt casting with business as usual. Of course some people are naturally that thin but the whistleblowers and reports we hear keep telling us that’s not the case for the majority. I feel like the industry itself has a bit of a collective case of ED  and can’t quite let go of the feeling of control and reward EDs give.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Anyone missing posts between yesterday at 9:05pm to 9pm today?  I've been reading all day on and off and went on zoom for a meeting and came back to a big gap.  I need my H&M fix!!!  Am I being punished?!?



I just came on, refreshed and it jumped from 5903 to 5901, so definitely not just you


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> Anyone missing posts between yesterday at 9:05pm to 9pm today?  I've been reading all day on and off and went on zoom for a meeting and came back to a big gap.  I need my H&M fix!!!  Am I being punished?!?


I had database error for about 2 hours today. Could not access tpf at all on any device.


----------



## xincinsin

Levity for today: Hello is trying to draw parallels between Nicola Peltz's wedding gown and Methane's   Perhaps I read too much into it but I detected a soupcon of disdain for the lace on Catherine's gown.









						Nicola Peltz's wedding dress had striking similarity to Meghan Markle's – see hidden detail
					

Nicola Peltz wore a Valentino bridal gown when she married Brooklyn Beckham in Palm Beach. See the hidden detail that screams the Duchess of Sussex…




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I might be blind, but I don't see the similarity. Also, while Kate's wasn't a style I'd ever choose for myself, if fit both her and the occasion impeccably. If you think about it, that wedding dress (and the illfitting, wrinkled one as well, just completely differently) set the tone for her membership of the BRF.


----------



## carmen56

I saw Kate's wedding dress when it was displayed at Buckingham Palace, it is every bit as gorgeous in real life as it was on the TV.  The waist is tiny!


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Levity for today: Hello is trying to draw parallels between Nicola Peltz's wedding gown and Methane's   Perhaps I read too much into it but I detected a soupcon of disdain for the lace on Catherine's gown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nicola Peltz's wedding dress had striking similarity to Meghan Markle's – see hidden detail
> 
> 
> Nicola Peltz wore a Valentino bridal gown when she married Brooklyn Beckham in Palm Beach. See the hidden detail that screams the Duchess of Sussex…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


I can’t believe MM invented sleeves


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t believe MM invented sleeves


Pearl is going back in time to invent clothes, I'm sure


----------



## lanasyogamama

I got a message that they had some sort of database failure and lost a lot of yesterday’s post across the whole forum.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I got a message that they had some sort of database failure and lost a lot of yesterday’s post across the whole forum.



I saw that too. We’ll catch up in this thread quickly enough.


----------



## xincinsin

I think the lost posts were mainly about the Dutch provision of security and the conflict of interest of the Vegas Duke hooking ButterCup up with his charity.

ETA: I spent the outage watching Just Chatting's dissection of the Archie doll photos


----------



## lanasyogamama

So right now are we thinking that the government has told that Hasbeen no armed guards, but they are floating a rumor that they will in fact have armed guards?


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Anyone missing posts between yesterday at 9:05pm to 9pm today?  I've been reading all day on and off and went on zoom for a meeting and came back to a big gap.  I need my H&M fix!!!  Am I being punished?!?


problem with the site....explained by Vlad in the FB section


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> So right now are we thinking that the government has told that Hasbeen no armed guards, but they are floating a rumor that they will in fact have armed guards?



That's where I'm at right now.


----------



## Chanbal

We lost all the VVIP posts!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CBC article about Yuri Milner the Russian billionaire, who owns the Vancouver Island property to where Prince Dufus and TW escaped to recover from their terrible ordeals suffered at the hands of the wicked BRF. (Sorry, I couldn't resist the irony. )


----------



## Chanbal

Sorry for spoiling your morning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTFFF.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> *I think the lost posts were mainly about the Dutch provision of security* and the conflict of interest of the Vegas Duke hooking ButterCup up with his charity.
> 
> ETA: I spent the outage watching Just Chatting's dissection of the Archie doll photos


Yep! Here is a post to bring us up to speed:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Yep! Here is a post to bring us up to speed:



Some frustrated ministry official who was sick of Hazard's whines, Methane's love-bombs and Sunshine Sucks' P(retentious) R(ubbish) groaned and said, "Just give them a VVIP status and make them STFU!"


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Some frustrated ministry official who was sick of Hazard's whines, Methane's love-bombs and Sunshine Sucks' P(retentious) R(ubbish) groaned and said, "Just give them a VVIP status and make them STFU!"


They definitely wear people down by being a squeaky wheel.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I'll play!

VVIP - Vapid Vain Insufferable Prats


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Quote from above post: "VVIP Status. Vengeful Vindictive Imperious *Plonkers*"

Definition from Oxford Dictionary
plonker: noun  
1. a foolish or inept person (informal)
2. a man's penis (vulgar slang).

Or maybe a couple of d!cks!


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’m afraid they always will be classed as VVIP by state figures like the Dutch royalty because their status comes from his blood and therefore it’s inseparable from him unless a truly world-class kosher butcher is involved


----------



## rose60610

I'm convinced that most people who know who M&H are see them as spoiled rotten slimy conniving grifters who can't be trusted whatsoever. I'm hoping that Netflix and Spotify are regretting making deals with them. Somebody else would take over the Invictus Games. It's clear he and Methane are taking advantage of them to promote BetterUp and using these athletes to try to repair their garbage reputations.


----------



## gracekelly

VVIP  Very Vituperative  Insignificant Putz


----------



## youngster

The Daily Mail is reporting that the duo made a "secret" visit to the Queen at Windsor on their way to the Netherlands, no kids with them though, which I find shocking.  The Queen is 96 and frail and would likely want to meet her great-grandchildren.  









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make secret visit to the Queen
					

It is not known how the couple arrived - whether they took a private jet or flew in commercially - but their presence is the talk of locals on the Windsor estate, the Mail understands.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lulu212121

Unsure about this visit. I hope the Queen is ok. I hope she gave them separation papers. They have been nothing but disgraceful.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> The Daily Mail is reporting that the duo made a "secret" visit to the Queen at Windsor on their way to the Netherlands, no kids with them though, which I find shocking.  The Queen is 96 and frail and would likely want to meet her great-grandchildren.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make secret visit to the Queen
> 
> 
> It is not known how the couple arrived - whether they took a private jet or flew in commercially - but their presence is the talk of locals on the Windsor estate, the Mail understands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Of course they sneaked in. Given the recent poll results of their popularity, the Queen and his Father may be the only ones interested in seeing them.


----------



## youngster

They may have seen Prince Charles too.  I can only imagine what that conversation would have been like.  How awkward and uncomfortable.  I am not sure I'd want to see them if I were Charles or Camilla.  But, maybe Charles would use this as an opportunity to tell Harry to his face not to smear Camilla?  I wish he was strong enough to do it but likely not.


----------



## charlottawill

*"The Sussexes arrived incognito.."*


----------



## charlottawill

*"The Sussexes arrived incognito.."*


----------



## charlottawill

*"The Sussexes arrived incognito.."*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

I'll stop now 


youngster said:


> The Daily Mail is reporting that the duo made a "secret" visit to the Queen at Windsor on their way to the Netherlands, no kids with them though, which I find shocking.  The Queen is 96 and frail and would likely want to meet her great-grandchildren.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make secret visit to the Queen
> 
> 
> It is not known how the couple arrived - whether they took a private jet or flew in commercially - but their presence is the talk of locals on the Windsor estate, the Mail understands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If true I'm sure they took a private jet borrowed from one of their tech tycoon associates and used security/privacy as their excuse. Flying commercial is for the hoi polloi, which they most certainly are not


----------



## Chanbal

This video is quite informative. It's about the VVIPs in the Netherlands. Security… The Dutch royals would attend the games even if the patron was a bar of soap… Appearance fees??? Allegedly, TW organizes the Guru's diary, and therefore might be able to receive agent's commission (suspicions for legal reasons). In general, agent's fees are ~20% and manager's fees are another ~20%… Interesting comments, and of course, all allegedly.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> I'll play!
> 
> VVIP - Vapid Vain Insufferable Prats


Vacuous Vacant Ignorant Peabrains


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I'll stop now
> 
> If true I'm sure they took a private jet borrowed from one of their tech tycoon associates and used security/privacy as their excuse. Flying commercial is for the hoi polloi, which they most certainly are not



More details will emerge, I'm sure.  Did they fly commercial?  Private jet then?  Did they pay for it?  Who did it belong to? What security did they bring?   Apparently, it was good enough to insure their safety while in the UK.  This could work against that ridiculous lawsuit they brought about their security.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> They definitely wear people down by being a squeaky wheel.


Dripping tap
Venomous Vituperative Insignificant POS


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> More details will emerge, I'm sure.  Did they fly commercial?  Private jet then?  Did they pay for it?  Who did it belong to? What security did they bring?   Apparently, it was good enough to insure their safety while in the UK.  This could work against that ridiculous lawsuit they brought about their security.


Maybe they'll claim they flew private so their armed security could accompany them, unlike on a commercial flight. They're masters of spinning the narrative to suit the occasion. But if they did visit the UK and flew private, why wouldn't they bring the kids? Oh wait, I know - they're too young to be vaxxed and they don't want to expose them to COVID.


----------



## lanasyogamama

And they weren’t assassinated?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulu212121 said:


> Unsure about this visit. I hope the Queen is ok. I hope she gave them separation papers. They have been nothing but disgraceful.



I just read it was announced she won't attend Easter service, which had me a little worried.

The visit...not gonna lie, if true I'm angry they allowed that woman back at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> The Daily Mail is reporting that the duo made a "secret" visit to the Queen at Windsor on their way to the Netherlands, no kids with them though, which I find shocking.  The Queen is 96 and frail and would likely want to meet her great-grandchildren.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make secret visit to the Queen
> 
> 
> It is not known how the couple arrived - whether they took a private jet or flew in commercially - but their presence is the talk of locals on the Windsor estate, the Mail understands.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



No photo, it did not happen.
The anti-royals will say this is why she missed the Maundy  Thursday service.  

ETA:  SecretVisits R Them - so annoying









						Why Queen Elizabeth Is Missing Today's Royal Maundy Service
					

The 95-year-old Queen has been forced to significantly scale back her public appearances in recent months.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> They may have seen Prince Charles too.  I can only imagine what that conversation would have been like.  How awkward and uncomfortable.  I am not sure I'd want to see them if I were Charles or Camilla.  But, maybe Charles would use this as an opportunity to tell Harry to his face not to smear Camilla?  I wish he was strong enough to do it but likely not.


They want something.  She didn't trust him to go alone.  Maybe looking for a payoff to change things in the book?


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> More details will emerge, I'm sure.  Did they fly commercial?  Private jet then?  Did they pay for it?  Who did it belong to? What security did they bring?   Apparently, it was good enough to insure their safety while in the UK.  This could work against that ridiculous lawsuit they brought about their security.



TMZ is saying they flew First Class in commercial.









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Meet Queen and Prince Charles in London
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle lowkey visit London before Invictus Games,  first time since leaving royal family.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> No photo, it did not happen.
> The anti-royals will say this is why she missed the Maundy  Thursday service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Queen Elizabeth Is Missing Today's Royal Maundy Service
> 
> 
> The 95-year-old Queen has been forced to significantly scale back her public appearances in recent months.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Good point. It may just be a story floated by SS to deflect criticism for being in the Netherlands and not visiting the UK.  
Wouldn't they have had to quarantine in some capacity before being allowed to see the Queen due to her age?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> They want something.  She didn't trust him to go alone.  Maybe looking for a payoff to change things in the book?


Blackmail? I'm confident they would have their a**es permanently hauled off the grounds of Windsor if they tried that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

People need to realize what just happened.  This visit was planned.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> TMZ is saying they flew First Class in commercial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Meet Queen and Prince Charles in London
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle lowkey visit London before Invictus Games,  first time since leaving royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



So, did they not have to quarantine at all before seeing the Queen?  Are those restrictions no longer being observed in the UK?


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> So, did they not have to quarantine at all before seeing the Queen?  Are those restrictions no longer being observed in the UK?


do we believe this happened? is he source reliable?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Blackmail? I'm confident they would have their a**es permanently hauled off the grounds of Windsor if they tried that.


Maybe something to trade?  Did Eugenie tell them something on her trip that Harry can use?


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, did they not have to quarantine at all before seeing the Queen?  Are those restrictions no longer being observed in the UK?


Excellent point about quarantine.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> do we believe this happened? is he source reliable?



The visit was in QE’s diary.
Let’s all let that sink in.

ETA:  Maybe they got QE to call Willem and Maxima. They want those photos with royals for their show.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> do we believe this happened? is he source reliable?


Like them or not, TMZ usually is. They have paid sources everywhere.


----------



## youngster

_*Harry and Meghan saw then Queen - which was scheduled in her diary. They also saw Prince Charles and Camilla at Windsor Castle after the Royal Maundy service today.*_

Wow, this would have to be one of the most awkward visits ever, if they did actually see Camilla and Charles.  Like, _hello, how are you, I'm going to smear you both in my upcoming book.  _


----------



## youngster

There is another way of looking at this visit.  Maybe they were ordered to show up.  Maybe Charles said if you can go to the Netherlands, you can come see Granny and, while you are at it, you can explain exactly what is in this upcoming memoir of yours and it better not smear my wife.  (Of course, I doubt Charles has the strength to do that but it would be nice to imagine.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> _*Harry and Meghan saw then Queen - which was scheduled in her diary. They also saw Prince Charles and Camilla at Windsor Castle after the Royal Maundy service today.*_
> 
> Wow, this would have to be one of the most awkward visits ever, if they did actually see Camilla and Charles.  Like, _hello, how are you, I'm going to smear you both in my upcoming book.  _



Scheduled in her diary???   It was planned all along.  QE really does not care much about her reputation with her people, imo.  She with Charles’s agreement completely misled us on why she wouldn’t fulfill her Maundy Thursday duty.  Ewww.  

Kept secret??? Not ok.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> do we believe this happened? is he source reliable?


Rebecca English says it happened.


----------



## kemilia

I wonder if this is their surprise. 

When this "surprise" was mentioned a while back, I thought that maybe they would make a quick visit to QEII. At least I hoped they would--despise them but if the Queen wanted to see them, they were obligated to be decent people and do so. She won't be with us much longer (though I'm hoping for at least 5 more years--longevity reigns in that family).


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Rebecca English says it happened.
> 
> View attachment 5379434



Are H&M flying over on Easter Sunday?  Is she meeting secretly with someone else, a world leader perhaps?
Her credibility is 0, imo.

All those stories about her devotion to duty, to country = BS.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> Scheduled in her diary???   It was planned all along.  QE really does not care much about her reputation with her people, imo.  She with Charles’s agreement completely misled us on why she wouldn’t fulfill her Maundy Thursday duty.  Ewww.
> 
> Kept secret??? Not ok.



I really don't like this. The royal family has no bearing on my pocketbook since I don't have to pay taxes to support them, but if I did after the hikes from earlier this month I'd be pissed.


----------



## gracekelly

lulu212121 said:


> I really don't like this. The royal family has no bearing on my pocketbook since I don't have to pay taxes to support them, but if I did after the hikes from earlier this month I'd be pissed.


I don't like the it was kept secret from palace officials.  Of course it was because she would have been advised against the meeting.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> I don't like the it was kept secret from palace officials.  Of course it was because she would have been advised against the meeting.


They want something. They always have their greedy hands outstretched.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing Andy and the Yorkie arseholes played a role in this.
In one selfish move, they and she erase QE’s years of devoted service to her country.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I don't like the it was kept secret from palace officials.  Of course it was because she would have been advised against the meeting.



So what else is she doing behind everyone’s back?


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> *So what else is she doing behind everyone’s back?*



You mean the Queen?  She's 96, has survived a bout of covid and lost her husband in the last year, she's much more noticeably frail and not walking well.  So, I think she's likely getting through one day at a time and doing the best she can.  For the record, too, I don't think that one visit with her ridiculous grandson eliminates 70 years of devoted service to the UK. 

This could have been a visit arranged between her and Harry after they spoke on the phone or maybe Eugenie brought the request for a visit after she was in L.A.?  I could see Eugenie doing that.  We'll find out more in the next day or two.  Could also be that she summoned Harry and MM to her, had PC and Camilla present, had her lawyers present, and gave them a dressing down about this upcoming memoir.  One can hope!


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> You mean the Queen?  She's 96, has survived a bout of covid and lost her husband in the last year, she's much more noticeably frail and not walking well.  So, I think she's likely getting through one day at a time and doing the best she can.  For the record, too, I don't think that one visit with her ridiculous grandson eliminates 70 years of devoted service to the UK.
> 
> This could have been a visit arranged between her and Harry after they spoke on the phone or maybe Eugenie brought the request for a visit after she was in L.A.?  I could see Eugenie doing that.  We'll find out more in the next day or two.  Could also be that she summoned Harry and MM to her, had PC and Camilla present, had her lawyers present, and gave them a dressing down about this upcoming memoir.  One can hope!



Agree to all of that. Just remember who H&M are and how disloyal they’ve been. Compare that to the pensioners. The problem is she skipped a Maundy Thursday service. She knew a week, maybe 2 weeks ago, she would not attend and why. That is how long this ruse has been planned. Nothing to do with Covid, nothing to do with her age.

 So, yes, what else has she planned behind the Palace’s backs?  

_Every year, on Maundy Thursday, The Queen distributes special Maundy money to pensioners in a service which commemorates Jesus washing the feet of the Apostles at the Last Supper. 








						Maundy Thursday
					

Every year, on Maundy Thursday, The Queen distributes special Maundy money to pensioners in a service which commemorates Jesus washing the feet of the Apostles at the Last Supper.




					www.royal.uk
				




It is understood the Queen was unable to commit to the event and, with the order of service being printed, she was keen for the arrangements to be confirmed to avoid any misunderstanding or the day to be overshadowed._








						When Maundy Thursday falls this year and why the Queen is missing the service
					

Maundy Thursday commemorates the Last Supper, when Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, much to their discomfort




					inews.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> You mean the Queen?  She's 96, has survived a bout of covid and lost her husband in the last year, she's much more noticeably frail and not walking well.  So, I think she's likely getting through one day at a time and doing the best she can.  For the record, too, I don't think that one visit with her ridiculous grandson eliminates 70 years of devoted service to the UK.
> 
> This could have been a visit arranged between her and Harry after they spoke on the phone or maybe Eugenie brought the request for a visit after she was in L.A.?  I could see Eugenie doing that.  We'll find out more in the next day or two.  Could also be that she summoned Harry and MM to her, had PC and Camilla present, had her lawyers present, and gave them a dressing down about this upcoming memoir.  One can hope!


Yes, she has reached the age where she will do what she wants.  If she didn't want to see him, she could have say no to the request, unless it was a demand on her part and that is entirely possible too.  JSMH about Meghan being there!


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Andy and the Yorkie arseholes played a role in this.
> In one selfish move, they and she erase QE’s years of devoted service to her country.



So, I’m not a monarchist and I had many thoughts about the Queen, not all of them kind over the years. But you can hardly say this erases years of devoted service.

She put it in her diary. She is entitled to private family time. She is entitled to miss things because she doesn’t want to attend or her health is prohibiting her from attending. And who knows, this may have been a “you need to come and visit now” type of situation. She does not sound well.


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Andy and the Yorkie arseholes played a role in this.
> In one selfish move, they and she erase QE’s years of devoted service to her country.
> 
> View attachment 5379452


What are you talking about?!! No one has erased the Queen's years of service to her country!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> This video is quite informative. It's about the VVIPs in the Netherlands. Security… The Dutch royals would attend the games even if the patron was a bar of soap… Appearance fees??? Allegedly, TW organizes the Guru's diary, and therefore might be able to receive agent's commission (suspicions for legal reasons). In general, agent's fees are ~20% and manager's fees are another ~20%… Interesting comments, and of course, all allegedly.



Thanks Lady C for this truism, "It is not possible to polish a turd" and I hope Prince Dufus and TW eventually understand that it applies to them.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree to all of that. Just remember who H&M are and how disloyal they’ve been. Compare that to the pensioners. The problem is she skipped a Maundy Thursday service. She knew a week, maybe 2 weeks ago, she would not attend and why. That is how long this ruse has been planned. Nothing to do with Covid, nothing to do with her age.
> 
> So, yes, what else has she planned behind the Palace’s backs?
> 
> _Every year, on Maundy Thursday, The Queen distributes special Maundy money to pensioners in a service which commemorates Jesus washing the feet of the Apostles at the Last Supper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maundy Thursday
> 
> 
> Every year, on Maundy Thursday, The Queen distributes special Maundy money to pensioners in a service which commemorates Jesus washing the feet of the Apostles at the Last Supper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is understood the Queen was unable to commit to the event and, with the order of service being printed, she was keen for the arrangements to be confirmed to avoid any misunderstanding or the day to be overshadowed._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When Maundy Thursday falls this year and why the Queen is missing the service
> 
> 
> Maundy Thursday commemorates the Last Supper, when Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, much to their discomfort
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk


Palace officials would have known if this was a diary entry. Regarding Maundy-Thursday, and the weeks advance decision, considering her age, frailty and mobility issues, I think it would have been too much.  The problem with perception is that the optics of H and TW being there on this day is not good. Older people —even a Queen — are less inclined to argue, be inflexible or unforgiving.  In this case, unfortunately.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if this audience is because she feels that her time is short and she wants to do everything possible to make sure the transition to Charles is successful.  Thus having a summit with the terrible two.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

No photos, so …


----------



## Aimee3

They could’ve had many secret meetings with the Queen if they had wanted to.  Slip in and slip out, no one the wiser.  The way I look at it is 
1). They HAD to go to see the Queen since they were going to the Netherlands and everyone knew it’d be in poor taste not to 
2) as someone send in this thread, maybe the Queen demanded they stop by to see her and Charles. 
I like #2 the best.


----------



## Chanbal

If the rumors of a certain friendship are true, it would make sense to spare Andy…


_But there is a growing sense that Harry has decided to spare the Yorks the same sort of scathing treatment being prepared for his father and brother and their wives, at least in part due to his close relationship with cousins Princess Beatrice and Eugenie.

Courtiers point to the fact Oprah – close friends with the couple – seemingly never asked about the Andrew/Epstein scandal in the highly controlled CBS interview._










						EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry's tell-all book may spare Prince Andrew
					

DAN WOOTTON: There is a growing sense that Harry has decided to spare the Yorks the same sort of scathing treatment being prepared for his father and brother and their wives,




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

IMO, the Maundy Service was cancelled over a week ago because she didn't want to pull out at the last minute and then have Charles & Camilla's replace her without being added to the service order. Also HM would've been required to walk about to present Maundy Coins to maybe 2 dozen people which has become very difficult to accomplish due to her mobility issues.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, the Maundy Service was cancelled over a week ago because she didn't want to pull out at the last minute and then have Charles & Camilla's replace her without being added to the service order. Also HM would've been required to walk about to present Maundy Coins to maybe 2 dozen people which has become very difficult to accomplish due to her mobility issues.



And without yelling at you [??!!!], I kindly support your right to your opinion.  You have expressed it politely and logically. Thank you.




Chanbal said:


>



This lady provided a detailed map that shows why the ‘sighting’ is false.  Guessing we will hear much more soon. People are concerned.
On another site, someone pointed out that perhaps MM was returning the jewels. It may not have been the ‘loving’ visit H&M claim. Allegedly, of course.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> On another site, *someone pointed out that perhaps MM was returning the jewels.* It may not have been the ‘loving’ visit H&M claim. Allegedly, of course.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Andy and the Yorkie arseholes played a role in this.
> In one selfish move, they and she erase QE’s years of devoted service to her country.
> 
> View attachment 5379452


Not disputing that quite a number of Yorkies are unsavoury, but this alleged visit is but a blip in the Queen's years of service. I'm not going to respect her less for this visit if it happened. If the Suckies really did drop by, I'd be very suspicious as to their motives. And if the news leaked, I do believe it would have been leaked from their end as they both fail to comprehend any concept of privacy despite her shrieking that she was entitled to basic privacy, says Duchess Flash Undies.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if she is so unwell she had him come to say goodbye.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if she is so unwell she had him come to say goodbye.


It's quite possible. At her age you never know if you'll wake up in the morning. It may give her peace of mind to heal things with him before she goes, even if he and his wife were the cause of the acrimony.


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just read it was announced she won't attend Easter service, which had me a little worried.
> 
> The visit...not gonna lie, if true I'm angry they allowed that woman back at all.



Are we sure this "secret" visit really happened and that this isn't another pitiful stunt by their PR fools?


----------



## xincinsin

VickyB said:


> Are we sure this "secret" visit really happened and that this isn't another pitiful stunt by their PR fools?


Still waiting to see if it is proven to have happened. I can't believe Madam EyeF*ck Camera would willingly lowkey any visit. And the "credible sources" which leaked to TMZ? Sunshine Sucks has a really big slush fund to bribe and buy even large organisations like NAACP. Giving a courtier his retirement fund should be a pittance.


----------



## charlottawill

VickyB said:


> Are we sure this "secret" visit really happened and that this isn't another pitiful stunt by their PR fools?


I believe this is real. He said he would be visiting very soon, and it makes sense that he did it on the way to Invictus. I wouldn't be surprised if they were "asked" to stay away from the memorial because the family didn't want any drama, or perhaps TW didn't want to have to face the whole family after all her BS. He did attend his grandfather's funeral. Maybe he felt that was more important.


----------



## VickyB

charlottawill said:


> I believe this is real. He said he would be visiting very soon, and it makes sense that he did it on the way to Invictus. I wouldn't be surprised if they were "asked" to stay away from the memorial because the family didn't want any drama, or perhaps TW didn't want to have to face the whole family after all her BS. He did attend his grandfather's funeral. Maybe he felt that was more important.


Thanks!


----------



## VickyB

charlottawill said:


> I believe this is real. He said he would be visiting very soon, and it makes sense that he did it on the way to Invictus. I wouldn't be surprised if they were "asked" to stay away from the memorial because the family didn't want any drama, or perhaps TW didn't want to have to face the whole family after all her BS. He did attend his grandfather's funeral. Maybe he felt that was more important.


Thanks!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Our honorary TPF member was featured on the Sun!  


*A BODY language expert has claimed to have spotted a moment that proves that Meghan Markle “didn’t care” about royal duties.*
_
On his YouTube account, Jesus Enrique Rosas pointed out a moment during a Buckingham Palace reception when he claims Meghan deliberately flouted rules on which royal should enter the room first._









						I’m a body language pro - the moment I saw Meghan didn’t care about royal duties
					

A BODY language expert has claimed to have spotted a moment that proves that Meghan Markle “didn’t care” about royal duties. On his YouTube account, Jesus Enrique Rosas pointed out a moment during …




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Still waiting to see if it is proven to have happened. I can't believe Madam EyeF*ck Camera would willingly lowkey any visit. And the "credible sources" which leaked to TMZ? Sunshine Sucks has a really big slush fund to bribe and buy even large organisations like NAACP. Giving a courtier his retirement fund should be a pittance.



Per The Sun:

"They were spotted by a bus-load of gobsmacked well-wishers.

The couple smiled and waved back at the stunned visitors, who were at Windsor for the traditional Maundy Thursday ceremony.

One onlooker said: “I couldn’t believe it when I saw who it was. We waved and they waved back.

“They looked happy and relaxed and waved to everyone on the bus. Charles and the Queen were at Windsor Castle at the same time so they must have met them both."



> https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/5127902/harry-meghan-secretly-visit-queen-charles-meeting/


----------



## Chanbal

The BRF should listen to their people imo.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Per The Sun:
> 
> "They were spotted by a bus-load of gobsmacked well-wishers.
> 
> The couple smiled and waved back at the stunned visitors, who were at Windsor for the traditional Maundy Thursday ceremony.
> 
> One onlooker said: “I couldn’t believe it when I saw who it was. We waved and they waved back.
> 
> “They looked happy and relaxed and waved to everyone on the bus. Charles and the Queen were at Windsor Castle at the same time so they must have met them both."


Still not convinced. The whole busload - someone must have had a camera.


----------



## needlv

There are a few ways of looking at this:

1.  H and M would be trolled by the press for not visiting so they had to visit (optics).  Need to remind everyone they are still royal and the Dutch Royal family statement!

2.  The queen isn’t well…. So she allowed it on the grounds that she may not be with us for much longer…

3.  The family used it as a test.  Private visit, no cameras allowed, no statements issued.  As soon as they were on their business class BA flight, it leaks by TMZ.  That’s MM leaking it because the tourist bus is fake unless someone got a pic (can’t tell me that a bus load of tourists wouldn’t whip out their phone and take a pic).  BRF has proven again they can’t be trusted even for a private visit.

I am now worried about the Queens health.


----------



## Debbini

needlv said:


> There are a few ways of looking at this:
> 
> 1.  H and M would be trolled by the press for not visiting so they had to visit (optics).  Need to remind everyone they are still royal and the Dutch Royal family statement!
> 
> 2.  The queen isn’t well…. So she allowed it on the grounds that she may not be with us for much longer…
> 
> 3.  The family used it as a test.  Private visit, no cameras allowed, no statements issued.  As soon as they were on their business class BA flight, it leaks by TMZ.  That’s MM leaking it because the tourist bus is fake unless someone got a pic (can’t tell me that a bus load of tourists wouldn’t whip out their phone and take a pic).  BRF has proven again they can’t be trusted even for a private visit.
> 
> I am now worried about the Queens health.


I'm worried about the Queen's health too. If H/M did visit, I hope she told them that one more negative word from them against the family and they get taken out of the will.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, gosh! They are so delusional. 










						Picture of Kate & William Skiing + Harry and Meghan's Flight from LA to London for Secret Meeting with the Queen
					

We have two fun little updates tonight. The first is the promised picture of Kate skiing in the French Alps. I was hoping for some kind of confirmation that the family was indeed out on the slopes, and a few of you very generously provided that confirmation (requesting anonymity).




					fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com


----------



## carmen56

gracekelly said:


> They want something.  She didn't trust him to go alone.  Maybe looking for a payoff to change things in the book?



Them wanting something was my first thought, too.  I wouldn't put anything past these greedy graspers.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


>





CarryOn2020 said:


>



The tweets that claimed the Montecitos could not have been spotted by pensioners, and they were the ones that leaked to the press about their visit to QE, became unavailable.


----------



## Chanbal

Good question?


----------



## jelliedfeels

I assume they thought of the queen is ill a mere touch of M’s weave will revive her- it does hang like the shroud of Turin after all.

While I know it’s not uncommon for aristocrats to take little part in parenting their children this never taking them with you when you fly international seems a bit creepy - is anyone else getting a flowers in the attic vibe?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Still not convinced. The whole busload - someone must have had a camera.



Rent a mob


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The tweets that claimed the Montecitos could not have been spotted by pensioners, and they were the ones that leaked to the press about their visit to QE, became unavailable.




Windsor is surrounded by grounds. The Queen is in residence so most of the grounds won't be open to the public, let alone the castle. 

If they went in through any entrance they wound not actually have been seen by anyone, let alone a random group of tourists.


----------



## papertiger

To give go some scale, this is a picture I took INSIDE the ground (Windsor Great Park) and towards the castle and in mid-May (so leaves would already be on the trees now).  A modern helicopter, a stretch limo or an air balloon could _not_ be seen once landed castle-side.

The trees, distance would certainly _not_ allow for someone to be recognised castle-side, not even if H&M were wearing Guantanamo bay orange overalls. Nothing can be seen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Scheduled in her diary???   It was planned all along.  QE really does not care much about her reputation with her people, imo.  She with Charles’s agreement completely misled us on why she wouldn’t fulfill her Maundy Thursday duty.  Ewww.



She is not attending Easter service either. Has it ever occured to you this nearly 100 year old woman really has health issues that prevent her from still working full-time?

I honestly doubt she refused to go so she could see the troublesome two, especially as they second part of the story is they saw Charles and Camilla who did attend the service.



> Kept secret??? Not ok.



Why though? Did they come in any official capacity? I'm pretty sure the royals attend to family business all the time without alarming the press. Only because we are dying to know doesn't mean they have to keep us informed about everything.

Which brings me to, who leaked it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> I wonder if this is their surprise.
> 
> When this "surprise" was mentioned a while back, I thought that maybe they would make a quick visit to QEII. At least I hoped they would--despise them but if the Queen wanted to see them, *they were obligated to be decent people* and do so. She won't be with us much longer (though I'm hoping for at least 5 more years--longevity reigns in that family).



Sorry, but


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So what else is she doing behind everyone’s back?



For all we know she's been a fine queen, and as much as I dislike the Sussexes this is a bit of a dramatic take.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Per The Sun:
> 
> "They were spotted by a bus-load of gobsmacked well-wishers.
> 
> The couple smiled and waved back at the stunned visitors, who were at Windsor for the traditional Maundy Thursday ceremony.
> 
> One onlooker said: “I couldn’t believe it when I saw who it was. We waved and they waved back.
> 
> “They looked happy and relaxed and waved to everyone on the bus. Charles and the Queen were at Windsor Castle at the same time so they must have met them both."



The same people who told neighbours to not talk to them? And Harry hasn't looked happy and relaxed in 2+ years, he's not starting to do so now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh, gosh! They are so delusional.
> View attachment 5379649
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picture of Kate & William Skiing + Harry and Meghan's Flight from LA to London for Secret Meeting with the Queen
> 
> 
> We have two fun little updates tonight. The first is the promised picture of Kate skiing in the French Alps. I was hoping for some kind of confirmation that the family was indeed out on the slopes, and a few of you very generously provided that confirmation (requesting anonymity).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com



I'd be so p*ssed. Why do they even sell tickets if some jerk can then come along and demand my seat?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Windsor is surrounded by grounds. The Queen is in residence so most of the grounds won't be open to the public, let alone the castle.
> 
> If they went in through any entrance they wound not actually have been seen by anyone, let alone a random group of tourists.



The voice of reason! That said, remember when they took several detours leaving was it BP to bump into a group of people who were there for an award ceremony? Early on in their marriage.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The voice of reason! That said, remember when they took several detours leaving was it BP to bump into a group of people who were there for an award ceremony? Early on in their marriage.



Except that would completely scupper their court case (the one that wants him to have round-the-clock state paid for security - not the other multiple ones going on)


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I believe this is real. He said he would be visiting very soon, and it makes sense that he did it on the way to Invictus. I wouldn't be surprised if they were "asked" to stay away from the memorial because the family didn't want any drama, or perhaps TW didn't want to have to face the whole family after all her BS. He did attend his grandfather's funeral. Maybe he felt that was more important.



It may or it may not. 

No new pics, no proof, it would not hold up in court. With these 2 charlatans, I'd literally have to have original officially signed documents in my hands before I believe a single word either of them ever said.


----------



## carmen56

How is it that the Cambridges can fly under the radar to go on a family skiing trip, but the Suckarses can’t step outside their front door without a great fanfare?


----------



## lanasyogamama

There is zero chance that the busload of tourists piece of the story is true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

carmen56 said:


> How is it that the Cambridges can fly under the radar to go on a family skiing trip, but the Suckarses can’t step outside their front door without a great fanfare?



So many reasons. Kate is not so beautiful that she attracts sexual predators wherever she goes, kindnappers would naturally target #6, 7 and 8 instead of #2, 3, 4 and 5, and the Cambridges' clout and popularity is completely overshadowed by that of a mediocre TV actress.

Or it could just be that one is a family of drama queens to varying degrees (I still think she beats Harry by a country mile) and the other is not. And one also doesn't tend to call the paps on themselves.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So many reasons. Kate is not so beautiful that she attracts sexual predators wherever she goes, kindnappers would naturally target #6, 7 and 8 instead of #2, 3, 4 and 5, and the Cambridges' clout and popularity is completely overshadowed by that of a mediocre TV actress.
> 
> Or it could just be that one is a family of drama queens to varying degrees (I still think she beats Harry by a country mile) and the other is not. And one also doesn't tend to call the paps on themselves.


Or as my drunken relative was telling me yesterday about someone popular: "They got Ka...Ka ..karishma!" 

Anyone who craves attention to the point that they repeatedly ask the police to check for imaginary intruders has missed their calling as a horror movie actress (hot babe #2, victim #1).


----------



## rose60610

So this "Bus of Tourists" saw H&M but not their 500 security guards?


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> So this "Bus of Tourists" saw H&M but not their 500 security guards?


So weird, right?


----------



## rose60610

Since QEII is 95, recently widowed and had covid, I'll cut her some slack.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Still not convinced. The whole busload - someone must have had a camera.


Exactly. 

Not one photo? Not one blurry from a distance badly shot photo. Nothing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Not one photo? Not one blurry from a distance badly shot photo. Nothing?



It's sounding like a Loch Ness story.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> It's sounding like a Loch Ness story.


It’s sounding like Sunshine Sachs put it out there knowing the news media would repeat it without doing any fact checking.


----------



## youngster

I still have a hard time believing that they got on a commercial flight with hundreds of people, spent the night somewhere (Frogmore cottage if the story is true) and then went to Windsor Castle to see the Queen without spending _any time_ in quarantine.  

They probably had to take a covid test before seeing her but still, she's 96.  I'd choose to quarantine in that situation to protect her.  Since they didn't, maybe their nice, private visit ended up outside or maybe more like this . . .


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I still have a hard time believing that they got on a commercial flight with hundreds of people, spent the night somewhere (Frogmore cottage if the story is true) and then went to Windsor Castle to see the Queen without spending _any time_ in quarantine.
> 
> They probably had to take a covid test before seeing her but still, she's 96.  I'd choose to quarantine in that situation to protect her.  Since they didn't, maybe their nice, private visit ended up outside or maybe more like this . . .
> 
> View attachment 5379879


I wouldn't be too surprised if such meeting was virtual with the computer recording devices where they were staying (Frogmore? Windsor?) disabled.


----------



## Chanbal

Words of wisdom…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm with Angela here.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't be too surprised if such meeting was virtual with the computer recording devices where they were staying (Frogmore? Windsor?) disabled.


My 2 cents: I don't think QE met them in person, she is currently holding her meetings online. They were likely taken to an audience room and seated in front of a screen.


----------



## marietouchet

Hmmm not yet buying the story of the secret trip 

Yes, a blacked out SUV - with outriders on motorcycles- was seen at Windsor. No photos of those inside. Could have been Boris ??? 

What is the purpose of a SECRET meeting ?? Stay tuned, we may find, HMTQ may do a press release. But honestly, what is the benefit to H&M of a meeting - that they cannot prove happened?? 

If the meeting was to repair family ties ... hmmm. Charles would have been there 

I am skeptical for now


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> If the rumors of a certain friendship are true, it would make sense to spare Andy…
> View attachment 5379527
> 
> _But there is a growing sense that Harry has decided to spare the Yorks the same sort of scathing treatment being prepared for his father and brother and their wives, at least in part due to his close relationship with cousins Princess Beatrice and Eugenie.
> 
> Courtiers point to the fact Oprah – close friends with the couple – seemingly never asked about the Andrew/Epstein scandal in the highly controlled CBS interview._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry's tell-all book may spare Prince Andrew
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: There is a growing sense that Harry has decided to spare the Yorks the same sort of scathing treatment being prepared for his father and brother and their wives,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


this makes no sense to me....why would he bite the hand that feeds him and spare his cousins?


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> What is the purpose of a SECRET meeting ?? Stay tuned, we may find, HMTQ may do a press release. But honestly, what is the benefit to H&M of a meeting - that they cannot prove happened??
> 
> If the meeting was to repair family ties ... hmmm. Charles would have been there
> 
> I am skeptical for now


I think this visit to QE had also to do with the recent public statement released on behalf of the Dutch royals about the Netfl*xes not having an audience with them. This was likely very damaging to their VVIP brand. So, they had to have one with the Queen of England 'to save face', and release that info to the press.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this makes no sense to me....why would he bite the hand that feeds him and spare his cousins?


Yep, good question!
Rumors are that Randy Andy knows a lot…, including about activities allegedly linked to the soho h.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wouldn't be too surprised if such meeting was virtual with the computer recording devices where they were staying (Frogmore? Windsor?) disabled.


but if it was virtual, why travel to England?  you could do that from CA


----------



## sdkitty

this may seem cynical on my part (and Brits please correct me if you disagree).  But I think the queen's relationship with her family is in a large part business.  She may love them in her way but she isn't your typical granny.  She is the boss.  So I don't think she is pining away for Harry's kids.  She has many other grandchildren and great grandchildren if that was her "thing"

Not that she's not human but I think she may love her Corgis more than the grandkids


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> this may seem cynical on my part (and Brits please correct me if you disagree).  But I think the queen's relationship with her family is in a large part business.  She may love them in her way but she isn't your typical granny.  She is the boss.  So I don't think she is pining away for Harry's kids.  She has many other grandchildren and great grandchildren if that was her "thing"
> 
> Not that she's not human but I think she may love her Corgis more than the grandkids


I think today many people love their pets more than their relatives. They give unconditional love without drama.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> this may seem cynical on my part (and Brits please correct me if you disagree).  But I think the queen's relationship with her family is in a large part business.  She may love them in her way but she isn't your typical granny.  She is the boss.  So I don't think she is pining away for Harry's kids.  She has many other grandchildren and great grandchildren if that was her "thing"
> 
> Not that she's not human but I think she may love her Corgis more than the grandkids


Agree! This is also how it is in many big Chinese families that run a business empire. The patriarch and matriarch often have favourites and sometimes the favourites are the black sheep of the family. And frankly, if I had a grandson like Hazard who married an avaricious pretentious tramp like Methane, I'd love the corgis more too.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> There is zero chance that the busload of tourists piece of the story is true.


The story was reported this morning in The Washington Post, once a bastion of journalistic integrity. If some staffer just regurgitated what they read in the British tabloids without verification it would truly be a sign of how far they've fallen.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> It’s sounding like Sunshine Sachs put it out there knowing the news media would repeat it without doing any fact checking.


That may be the case, as The Washington Post regurgitated the tourist story.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> The story was reported this morning in The Washington Post, once a bastion of journalistic integrity. If some staffer just regurgitated what they read in the British tabloids without verification it would truly be a sign of how far they've fallen.


I remember when WaPo actually had investigative reporters who broke stories. A great many news publications are now tabloids: Time, Newsweek, SCMP all can't be trusted any more.

BBC reported on the visit too. But as with every other report, everything is vague. No purpose, no motive, nothing. And if something so secret is being leaked, I believe the leak is from the Sucksex side because they can spin it to their advantage. I certainly hope HM is in good health and will make the decision to sideline them further.


----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: I don't think QE met them in person, she is currently holding her meetings online. They were likely taken to an audience room and seated in front of a screen.



As many times as I have seen the photo of Meghan and the Queen my anger keeps rising. To me that look on Meghan's face is the smirk of a bully looking down on the Queen. I wonder if the top of the photo was cropped to hide her Malificent horns.


----------



## xincinsin

Corgi vs Markle? Hands down the corgis win for demeanour and decorum,


----------



## charlottawill

oldbag said:


> As many times as I have seen the photo of Meghan and the Queen my anger keeps rising. To me that look on Meghan's face is the smirk of a bully looking down on the Queen. I wonder if the top of the photo was cropped to hide her Malificent horns.


Her disdain for her new family was clear in photos with them. Did she just not care how the public was seeing her, or it is evidence of her lack of acting ability? I've never seen a photo of Kate looking like this, while MM radiates animosity.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Her disdain for her new family was clear in photos with them. Did she just not care how the public was seeing her, or it is evidence of her lack of acting ability? I've never seen a photo of Kate looking like this, while MM radiates animosity.


I think, as shown in BLG videos, her true nature kept coming to the fore, or, as Jesus says, her mask slipped. If she were a better actor, or had the patience of a crocodile, she might have bided her time till she could get her hands on what she wanted (money, jewels, houses). She struck the lottery snagging a dimwit prince and couldn't understand why she didn't get her windfall right away, and why she was expected to work for the Firm.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## K.D.

Zien: eerste beelden van Harry en Meghan in Nederland
					

Prins Harry en zijn vrouw Meghan zijn vrijdag aangekomen bij de Invictus Games in Den Haag. Ze werden opgewacht door voormalig commandant Landstrijdkrachten Mart de Kruif en Jan van Zanen, de…




					www.telegraaf.nl
				




The title translates as ‘first pictures in the Netherlands from Meghan and Harry’

The article continues that the media has to stay behind the gates and can only move in small groups. Only Netflix is allowed to follow closely


----------



## Sharont2305




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> View attachment 5380054
> View attachment 5380055
> View attachment 5380058


Jacket too big and pants too long. Tailoring is an unknown concept for her.


----------



## gracekelly

How fun!  Kate is wearing Dutch orange!


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

K.D. said:


> The article continues that the media has to stay behind the gates and can only move in small groups. Only Netflix is allowed to follow closely


Must be to alleviate the "hostile environment" vibes.


----------



## gelbergirl

Why is she wearing a GIANT jacket?
And what does that necklace translate?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

gelbergirl said:


> Why is she wearing a GIANT jacket?
> And what does that necklace translate?


More than yesterday.   Less than tomorrow.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I think today many people love their pets more than their relatives. They give unconditional love without drama.



When my furry soulmate died, I kept thinking I had actual humans in my life I could have done without easier.

That said, The Queen grew up with very close family ties with her parents and sister and is said to be close to her cousins, so I do believe the family is somewhat tightly knit. But I also don't think she's losing sleep over not seeing two of her great-grandchildren, especially as they come with a difficult mother.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Her disdain for her new family was clear in photos with them. Did she just not care how the public was seeing her, or it is evidence of her lack of acting ability? I've never seen a photo of Kate looking like this, while MM radiates animosity.



I mean, to be fair, Kate wasn't wronged like her. She never was a huge Hollywood star so just didn't deserve the pole position as Raptor did.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> View attachment 5380054
> View attachment 5380055
> View attachment 5380058


Amazing! No sign of the Markle Claw in these photos.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Amazing! No sign of the Markle Claw in these photos.



OMG now that you say it. I was looking at the pictures trying to figure out what was off (besides the illfitting outfit). No obnoxious holding hands! What happened?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> but if it was virtual, why travel to England?  you could do that from CA


They would likely be able to record a virtual meeting in California, but not in one of QE's audience rooms.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG now that you say it. I was looking at the pictures trying to figure out what was off (besides the illfitting outfit). No obnoxious holding hands! What happened?


I did find one photo of them holding hands.


----------



## Sharont2305

Here it is, plus a photo of the Nflix crew. 
Is she possibly hiding a bump?


----------



## youngster

She looks like she is about to shoot a scene for Miami Vice circa 1988.  That jacket is way too big, pants too long.


----------



## TC1

QE can be noted for the service to her country, sure. Her favoritism is questionable. Andy her fave child, Harry her fave grandchild?   Must be hard on those like Charles and Will who assume the roles with attempted grace while these two fools act out...and remain in favour


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He doesn't look happy and her eyes are locked with the camera. What's new?


----------



## redney

Her outfit totally reminds me of the SNL skit with Rich Hall playing David Byrne of Talking Heads.

You may ask yourself "Why such a big suit?" You may ask yourself "Can it be taken in a little?" You may ask yourself "Does the store have any mirrors?"


----------



## ChanelFan29

I too was wondering if she could be pregnant.

How come the kids aren’t brought to England?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulu212121

redney said:


> Her outfit totally reminds me of the SNL skit with Rich Hall playing David Byrne of Talking Heads.
> 
> You may ask yourself "Why such a big suit?" You may ask yourself "Can it be taken in a little?" You may ask yourself "Does the store have any mirrors?"
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5380159



That is perfection!!!


----------



## gracekelly

I never though she would have another.  Three?  What happened to their pledge to Jane Goodall?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mhhh.


----------



## Handbag1234

gracekelly said:


> Jacket too big and pants too long. Tailoring is an unknown concept for her.


Does nothing for her does it?


----------



## rose60610

Meghan will claim that the oversized clothes are to conceal a bulletproof vest. Security, ya' know. If I were Valentino I'd be embarrassed to see Meghan dressed in his clothes with no tailoring. Are the price tags tucked in so she can return them? Is that why they're not tailored?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


>



Not at all surprising


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure about that. That woman is not your sweet senile grandmother, and she has a whole Armada of highly competent people around her. Even Princess Pinocchio can't stretch that brief meeting into anything.


----------



## Chanbal

More opinions…


----------



## rose60610

It's making sense now. If Harry couldn't being a Netflix crew to Philip's memorial service then why even bother going? Now that the Netflix crew is along, pay Granny a visit!  It's all about the Benjamin's!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mhhh.



If the 2 grifters were given a police escort when they left Windsor castle doesn’t that bolster JCMH’s claim that he needs government provided security when he’s in the UK? After all why was he given a police escort this time if the government believes he doesn’t need taxpayer funded government provided security when he’s in the UK?


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


>



Probably orders from Ne*fli* headquarters--"Get something with the Queen for pete's sake! The masses only care about royal stuff!"

Also, does anyone officially (really) know what the deal is with the Ne*fli* filming crew? They look absolutely ridiculous and probably feel that way too. This so-called (if it is) documentary is going to be soooo bad I'm stocking up on popcorn right away.


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


>



How could the Valentino staff let her walk out with that suit looking that bad? It wasn’t great from the front but the rear view is one of the worst fitting garments she’s been seen in yet and she had already set such a high bar for ill tailored, ill fitting outfits before this disaster.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


>



OMG--even a baggy jacket fits her all wrong--pulling tight across her booty! She does not disappoint, that's for sure.

ETA: looking forward to evening wear--that's generally when she shines (not).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


>



Understatement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> It's making sense now. If Harry couldn't being a Netflix crew to Philip's memorial service then why even bother going? Now that the Netflix crew is along, pay Granny a visit!  It's all about the Benjamin's!



Yeah, but I'm positive he couldn't bring the Netflix crew to Windsor Castle either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Just...how. At this point I am seriously stunned. Is this some kind of social experiment where she has too continuously look as bad as possible? Quasimodo wears clothes better than she does.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Jacket too big and pants too long. Tailoring is an unknown concept for her.


The oversized look is a trend. Did you see Justin Bieber at the Grammys? It's fine for a twentysomething pop star, but not for a 40 year old woman who wants to be taken seriously. She looks ridiculous, but she no doubt thinks she looks fabulous.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## youngster

I don't think there is any way a Netflix crew was allowed to tag along, filming as they please, around and inside Windsor Castle.  Maybe they filmed them up to the very point of getting out of the car though.  Not exactly Trooping the Colour, is it?  If Netflix thought they were going to get all kinds of great content from the half-in/half-out pair, they are in for a shock.  Not much pomp and circumstance or glittering crown jewels or official state events or behind the scenes stuff with the Queen and Will and Kate.  It was so important to Will to see Harry and MM that he took Kate and went skiing lol.   They'll come back from the UK with a couple of minutes at Heathrow, the interior of their car, and a wide angle shot of Windsor Castle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> It was so important to Will to see Harry and MM that he took Kate and went skiing lol.



If you put it like this


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> She looks like she is about to shoot a scene for Miami Vice circa 1988.  That jacket is way too big, pants too long.


That's an insult to Sonny Crockett. His suits were much better fitted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Two things:

1. I am still not done processing what's wrong with the footage. DOES SHE WALK *BEHIND *HARRY? I didn't think she was capable of doing that.

2. Speaking of walk, what's that overdone hip sway? It's not a catwalk.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The oversized look is a trend. Did you see Justin Bieber at the Grammys? It's fine for a twentysomething pop star, but not for a 40 year old woman who wants to be taken seriously. She looks ridiculous, but she no doubt thinks she looks fabulous.


You are right about it being the trend, but sometimes, the trend is best left to others and especially the young.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



But all the cool kids are dressing like this


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Two things:
> 
> 1. I am still not done processing what's wrong with the footage. DOES SHE WALK *BEHIND *HARRY? I didn't think she was capable of doing that.
> 
> 2. Speaking of walk, what's that overdone hip sway? It's not a catwalk.


She is in the back as an afterthought.  Nobody wanted her here.  She can't walk in those heels so she is wobbling.


----------



## marietouchet

gelbergirl said:


> Why is she wearing a GIANT jacket?
> And what does that necklace translate?


I have not seen a closeup photo, but, it looks like the iconic PLUS QU'HIER MOINS QUE DEMAIN necklace. It has a plus sign in front of the word HIER(yesterday) and and minus sign in front of DEMAIN(tomorrow). 
It signifies Ï love you MORE than yesterday and LESS than TOMORROW.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think you are right.


----------



## marietouchet

ChanelFan29 said:


> I too was wondering if she could be pregnant.
> 
> How come the kids aren’t brought to England?


Heck, they are supposed to be BUSY working ... 
And it would be way too conciliatory - before the book - the show off the latest granddaughter to dad

MY latest opinion on the SECRET meeting - QEII shared some sort of bad/stern news.  We can only hope the title evaporate. But more likely, a stern warning about the book. 

I think QEII is such a class act that she would deliver BAD news in person, not let an equerry do it for her. As Ned Stark said in like the first scene of Game of Thrones - while swinging his word to execute a traitor " ïf you cant carry out the sentence, then you dont deserve to render the verdict""- or words to that effect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think you are right.



That is teh photo that I saw that made me think of the + HIER -DEMAIN necklace


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> Corgi vs Markle? Hands down the corgis win for demeanour and decorum,
> View attachment 5379961



sorry, was on a break and couldn’t resist … the quality reflects my opinion on the subject.







Chloe302225 said:


>




I never noticed her odd hands.


(Ooof! Sorry for the large picture  )



rose60610 said:


> Meghan will claim that the oversized clothes are to conceal a bulletproof vest. Security, ya' know. If I were Valentino I'd be embarrassed to see Meghan dressed in his clothes with no tailoring. Are the price tags tucked in so she can return them? Is that why they're not tailored?



wonder if she’s all miked up again?


----------



## Katel

Does she have the slope nose again? I thought it was rounded out when she did her birthday clown show?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, to be fair, Kate wasn't wronged like her. She never was a huge Hollywood star so just didn't deserve the pole position as Raptor did.


And I wouldn't be at all surprised if Raptor is quite familiar with pole positions


----------



## Aimee3

I doubt *she’s* pregnant. I don’t even believe she was pregnant with invisible Lilibet, and that moving falling bump when she was supposed to be pregnant with Archie makes me doubt that pregnancy too. Now, maybe a *surrogate* is pregnant somewhere..
In the video of them walking with other people (not sure who those people are) where princess Pinocchio was walking way behind them in the super long pants, I really expected to see her trip and fall flat on her face!


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharont2305 said:


> View attachment 5380054
> View attachment 5380055
> View attachment 5380058


Geez her teeth are so WHITE.    That's the first thing I see.


----------



## redney

Katel said:


> I never noticed her odd hands.
> View attachment 5380223
> 
> (Ooof! Sorry for the large picture  )
> 
> 
> 
> wonder if she’s all miked up again?


what is up with the string/wire around her hand and wrist? Like a wrist mic or something?


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Meghan will claim that the oversized clothes are to conceal a bulletproof vest. Security, ya' know. If I were Valentino I'd be embarrassed to see Meghan dressed in his clothes with no tailoring. Are the price tags tucked in so she can return them? Is that why they're not tailored?


Valentino Garavani has nothing to do with his label anymore. The creative director is now Pierpaolo Piccioli. He designed Nicola Peltz Beckham's wedding gown. It's not the Valentino of years gone by. 


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2020/11/16/valentino-pierpaolo-piccioli-high-fashion/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That choice of words makes my skin crawl.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oops, wrong thread, again, lol


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of walk, what's that overdone hip sway? It's not a catwalk.


You can take the girl out of LA but you can't take the LA out of the girl.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Oops, wrong thread, again, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5380224


MM made the mistake of wearing both an oversized jacket and pants. These pants look quite similar to MM's, but the difference is Kate is wearing a fitted jacket in a classic style.


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> I never noticed her odd hands.


There is definitely something wrong with that thumb. I wonder if she broke it as a child and it didn't heal properly.


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t think they really saw her. More likely in the vicinity of being around her. I would think the Queen’s handlers would not allow it. It says secret visit but didn’t really say they were in her presence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Valentino Garavani has nothing to do with his label anymore. The creative director is now Pierpaolo Piccioli. He designed Nicola Peltz Beckham's wedding gown. It's not the Valentino of years gone by.


His design partner for years was  Maria Grazia Chiuri  who now designs for Dior.  He doesn't look like he can handle it without her.  There is nothing special about a white pantsuit.  There was nothing special about the Peltz wedding dress.  All pedestrian.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The same people who told neighbours to not talk to them? And Harry hasn't looked happy and relaxed in 2+ years, he's not starting to do so now.


After I thought about, I have to agree that it would be difficult to see them as a passerby.  Windsor castle is imposing and surrounded by a huge wall and you definitely don't get anywhere close enough to see anyone coming or going. I have family who live close to Windsor and I have been there many times.


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> But all the cool kids are dressing like this
> View attachment 5380208


They made it sound like this is some custom design, but I'm sure all one of his PAs did was visit a local Big and Tall store and got the biggest suit they had. It's probably just some off the rack 48L.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


>



I don't know who she is but I like what she has to say.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Oops, wrong thread, again, lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5380224


Thanks Sharon! 
Like a breath of fresh air floating through the swamp.


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> She looks like she is about to shoot a scene for Miami Vice circa 1988.  That jacket is way too big, pants too long.


Maybe its just me, but is this not a sporting event?  A white suit and heels?  I can't think that its the most practical outfit for this place.  Looks like it's all for the Netfl*x camera crew.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> After I thought about, I have to agree that it would be difficult to see them as a passerby.  Windsor castle is imposing and surrounded by a huge wall and you definitely don't get anywhere close enough to see anyone coming or going. I have family who live close to Windsor and I have been there many times.


From what I've read, it wasn't a routine group of tourists. It was pensioners brought in for the Maundy Thursday ceremony, so they may have been inside a normally off limits area. They may also have had to check phones/cameras at the entrance, which would explain why a photo hasn't surfaced. I've had to do this on occasion at places that don't allow them. So I think it is possible they did "run into" the Harkles, but by design of course.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 2. Speaking of walk, what's that overdone hip sway? It's not a catwalk.


Haha, I just saw the video and thought the same thing!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Maybe its just me, but is this not a sporting event?  A white suit and heels?  I can't think that its the most practical outfit for this place.  Looks like it's all for the Netfl*x camera crew.


What's practical got to do with it? She's just going for maximum attention. You can tell she's eating it up.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> From what I've read, it wasn't a routine group of tourists. It was pensioners brought in for the Maundy Thursday ceremony, so they may have been inside a normally off limits area. They may also have had to check phones/cameras at the entrance, which would explain why a photo hasn't surfaced. I've had to do this on occasion at places that don't allow them. So I think it is possible they did "run into" the Harkles, but by design of course.


Ok, that makes sense I guess.  I have been inside the grounds, but they are huge, so there would have been so many points of entrance, so why choose one where there are spectators?


----------



## Toby93

Katel said:


> sorry, was on a break and couldn’t resist … the quality reflects my opinion on the subject.
> 
> View attachment 5380211
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never noticed her odd hands.
> View attachment 5380223
> 
> (Ooof! Sorry for the large picture  )
> 
> 
> 
> wonder if she’s all miked up again?


Is that a gold chain wrapped around her hand?


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Ok, that makes sense I guess.  I have been inside the grounds, but they are huge, so there would have been so many points of entrance, so why choose one where there are spectators?


Because they wanted to be seen, to send the message that all is well.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I don't know who she is but I like what she has to say.


Nana, please come and sit with us on our thread sofa.  We will scoot over and you will have plenty of room.  Love a woman who just tells it without embellishments.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mhhh.



Tourre is usually on the mark so hope he is right this time as well.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> I have not seen a closeup photo, but, it looks like the iconic PLUS QU'HIER MOINS QUE DEMAIN necklace. It has a plus sign in front of the word HIER(yesterday) and and minus sign in front of DEMAIN(tomorrow).
> It signifies Ï love you MORE than yesterday and LESS than TOMORROW.


Since TW only loves herself, money and fame, I wonder if the pendant could actually mean: today I love myself, money and fame more than I did yesterday but less than I will tomorrow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Since TW only loves herself, money and fame, I wonder if the pendant could actually mean: today I love myself, money and fame more than I did yesterday but less than I will tomorrow.


I bet she was merching all of it.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Is that a gold chain wrapped around her hand?


It does appear to be a hand chain bracelet


----------



## Chanbal

Angela's opinion!


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> I have not seen a closeup photo, but, it looks like the iconic PLUS QU'HIER MOINS QUE DEMAIN necklace. It has a plus sign in front of the word HIER(yesterday) and and minus sign in front of DEMAIN(tomorrow).
> It signifies Ï love you MORE than yesterday and LESS than TOMORROW.


Wonder if it's a gift from Harry or she bought it herself?


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> It does appear to be a hand chain bracelet
> View attachment 5380265


Again, does this not strike anyone as a ridiculous thing to wear at a sports event?  Why not wear something practical or appropriate?


----------



## Chanbal

I hope they don't!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Again, does this not strike anyone as a ridiculous thing to wear at a sports event?


I say ridiculous, period.


----------



## youngster

Angela Levin's take was very interesting.  Thanks for posting that @Chanbal!  
Angela said King WA and Queen Maxima not inviting them to stay with them and not inviting them to dinner is huge.


----------



## Chanbal

Twitter is on fire…


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, very brief meeting…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oops, very brief meeting…
> View attachment 5380271



Ugh, that idiotic expression on her face. You know she was doing it for the cameras. Such an incredibly bad actress.


----------



## charlottawill

Hmm, some of these looks are interesting to say the least, and sported by supposedly fashionable women. MM is in this list twice, both in 2018, pre-baby and wearing much trimmer styles. She's still trying to hide the baby weight I guess. In fairness, it was much harder for me to lose weight after my second child than after my first. And it's been up and down ever since. 



> https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/fashion/style-files/g37378/celebrity-trouser-suits/


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Twitter is on fire…



Is it me or does she look a bit like Michael Jackson there?


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


>



The applause and cheers . . .deafening!


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> She looks like she is about to shoot a scene for Miami Vice circa 1988.  That jacket is way too big, pants too long.



I was going to say, Hey, Megan, 1989 called. They want their jacket back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

1LV said:


> The applause and cheers . . .deafening!


I’d call that a “smattering” of applause


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



As always, she looks completely out of place.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Hmm, some of these looks are interesting to say the least, and sported by supposedly fashionable women. MM is in this list twice, both in 2018, pre-baby and wearing much trimmer styles. She's still trying to hide the baby weight I guess. In fairness, it was much harder for me to lose weight after my second child than after my first. And it's been up and down ever since.


But the difference is, you actually had the baby and legitimately had weight to lose.  The more I read, the more convinced I am that she used a surrogate for at least one of those kids.


----------



## Allisonfaye

charlottawill said:


> *The oversized look is a trend.* Did you see Justin Bieber at the Grammys? It's fine for a twentysomething pop star, but not for a 40 year old woman who wants to be taken seriously. She looks ridiculous, but she no doubt thinks she looks fabulous.



So please tell me we are done with the shrunken men's suits?


----------



## Chanbal

Will seems to be the one to be trusted. He smartly went on a sky trip to be as far away as possible from the Netfl*xes.   

_*The Duke of Cambridge has been his brother’s biggest critic, dismayed by allegations of bullying of royal staff and of claims of racism, and as a result a rift has opened up between them. *

He has not seen Harry since the two jointly unveiled a statue of their mother outside Kensington Palace last July and contact since has been sporadic. 

‘*He doesn’t like talking about Harry,’ says a friend of the duke. ‘He says it gives him a headache.*’ 

The breach between them is an open wound that has still not remotely begun to heal. William is especially uneasy about Harry’s book deal amid fears that both he and his wife Kate will be in the cross-hairs. 

‘He understands the need for reconciliation and all that, but at the same time* he worries about his father being “ambushed” by Harry*._’









						Queen insisted Harry and Meghan meet Charles, writes RICHARD KAY
					

RICHARD KAY: Ahead of Harry and Meghan were two meetings of sombre gravity that will almost certainly have determined their long-term status within the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oops, very brief meeting…
> View attachment 5380271



Yikes. Not much time to discuss problems.   That is more like telling someone this is the way it is like it or not. Camilla probably joined them to make sure that Charles didn't burst a blood vessel.  I think Charles was the carrier of bad news, bad cop, and TQ was the good cop to make it not sound so bad even though it was.  No tea and sandwiches were served.


----------



## Allisonfaye

charlottawill said:


> There is definitely something wrong with that thumb. I wonder if she broke it as a child and it didn't heal properly.



She could use a manicure, too. Looks like she might be a nail biter.


----------



## gracekelly

Allisonfaye said:


> So please tell me we are done with the shrunken men's suits?


LOLOLOL!  The opposite look from the Thom Browne teeny suits for 12 year old boys.


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> Since TW only loves herself, money and fame, I wonder if the pendant could actually mean: today I love myself, money and fame more than I did yesterday but less than I will tomorrow.


Sounds ‘bout right.


----------



## Chanbal

DM is working…   


_It is understood that only 'four or five' former members of the Sussexes' team in total have been spoken to as part of the Royal Household's official investigation into the claims. 

The couple would have had up to 25 working for them at times – many of whom could be considered potential witnesses…

One source told the Daily Mail: '*This should have been an opportunity to do the right thing. Now it looks like they're going to do nothing instead*.' 

The source added: 'It has been a very difficult situation for all involved, but the Palace is a very powerful institution and there clearly seems to be a cultural problem of not handling bullying, particularly when you consider some of the allegations about the way Prince Andrew is said to have treated his staff over the years_.'









						Palace 'trying to bury' bullying claims against Duchess of Sussex
					

Buckingham palace has been accused of 'trying to bury' its inquiry into allegations that the Duchess of Sussex bullied her staff.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Yikes. Not much time to discuss problems.   That is more like telling someone this is the way it is like it or not. Camilla probably joined them to make sure that Charles didn't burst a blood vessel.  I think Charles was the carrier of bad news, bad cop, and TQ was the good cop to make it not sound so bad even though it was.  No tea and sandwiches were served.



Or sign here, sign there. Done. 
C&C had to attend the Maundy Service that QE couldn’t attend - maybe she was getting the papers filed [sooner the better].


----------



## charlottawill

At least she didn't show up in this   



> https://www.bergdorfgoodman.com/p/v...vpath=cat000000_cat000002_cat441206_cat255908


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> DM is working…
> View attachment 5380286
> 
> _It is understood that only 'four or five' former members of the Sussexes' team in total have been spoken to as part of the Royal Household's official investigation into the claims.
> 
> The couple would have had up to 25 working for them at times – many of whom could be considered potential witnesses…
> 
> One source told the Daily Mail: '*This should have been an opportunity to do the right thing. Now it looks like they're going to do nothing instead*.'
> 
> The source added: 'It has been a very difficult situation for all involved, but the Palace is a very powerful institution and there clearly seems to be a cultural problem of not handling bullying, particularly when you consider some of the allegations about the way Prince Andrew is said to have treated his staff over the years_.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace 'trying to bury' bullying claims against Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> Buckingham palace has been accused of 'trying to bury' its inquiry into allegations that the Duchess of Sussex bullied her staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They don't want to deal with the amount of unpleasantness that this will produce.  Playing ostrich.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> At least she didn't show up in this


Give her time.  She might surprise you.


----------



## charlottawill

Allisonfaye said:


> She could use a manicure, too. Looks like she might be a nail biter.


Diana was reportedly a notorious nail biter....interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> As always, she looks completely out of place.



To be fair and *just my opinion*, this is not her worst look. She is clearly struggling with the clothing, the makeup, the hair, everything, so I give her a pass. Hazzi, no. Those shoes, gasp. His fake looks of concern are gross, clearly he wishes he had his brother’s compassion, his mother’s too. He does not.

It seems to be sinking in that she chose a nightmare for a husband. Now she has 2 small kids, weight gain, lives near a smelly bird sanctuary, clothes never fit because they are loaners so cannot be tailored, gets so much negative press. They are Wallis&Ed 2.0 - little money, little respect. Or Andi and Fergie who sold their integrity for pennies. [Credit to Wallis for staying slim and getting the jewels.  ]. Mothers need to teach their daughters what to look for in a husband. Royals need not apply. *Just my opinion.*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I think today many people love their pets more than their relatives. They give unconditional love without drama.


This! Both hubby and I would agree with you. Our first chocolate lab, who lived 14 years, loved us unconditionally and more than some of our relatives ever did (specially the narcs like TW) and we reciprocated accordingly. IMO, she lived so long because she knew/sensed that we loved her and asked us to let her go only after she was too crippled up to move anymore and in pain.


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> Give her time.  She might surprise you.



It DOES kind of look like something she would wear.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair and *just my opinion*, this is not her worst look. She is clearly struggling with the clothing, the makeup, the hair, everything, so I give her a pass. Hazzi, no. Those shoes, gasp. His fake looks of concern are gross, clearly he wishes he had his brother’s compassion, his mother’s too. He does not.
> 
> It seems to be sinking in that she chose a nightmare for a husband. Now she has 2 small kids, weight gain, lives near a smelly bird sanctuary, clothes never fit because they are loaners so cannot be tailored, gets so much negative press. They are Wallis&Ed 2.0 - little money, little respect. Or Andi and Fergie who sold their integrity for pennies. [Credit to Wallis for staying slim and getting the jewels.  ]. Mothers need to teach their daughters what to look for in a husband. Royals need not apply. *Just my opinion.*


It's just the wrong look for the occasion imo. So many better choices. I didn't like all of Kate's looks on tour, but she is better (or has better advice) at choosing what works for her and the occasion. I think this might have been a better look for MM - sportier and a "sweet nod" to the Dutch   



> https://www.neimanmarcus.com/p/akri...31_cat77190754&page=0&position=28&pdp_app=nmo


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> DM is working…
> View attachment 5380286
> 
> _It is understood that only 'four or five' former members of the Sussexes' team in total have been spoken to as part of the Royal Household's official investigation into the claims.
> 
> The couple would have had up to 25 working for them at times – many of whom could be considered potential witnesses…
> 
> One source told the Daily Mail: '*This should have been an opportunity to do the right thing. Now it looks like they're going to do nothing instead*.'
> 
> The source added: 'It has been a very difficult situation for all involved, but the Palace is a very powerful institution and there clearly seems to be a cultural problem of not handling bullying, particularly when you consider some of the allegations about the way Prince Andrew is said to have treated his staff over the years_.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace 'trying to bury' bullying claims against Duchess of Sussex
> 
> 
> Buckingham palace has been accused of 'trying to bury' its inquiry into allegations that the Duchess of Sussex bullied her staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The findings of the inquiry would be a lose-lose for the BRF.
1.if M was a bully, then why did BRF let it go one for almost two years ?
2.If M was not a bully, then why did palace not come to her rescue and get the bullying stories squashed ?

the whole subject is water under the bridge , 2 years ago. Yes, some may have had a really difficult time, but problem has been resolved.

the BRF could write some employment guidelines to better make sure nothing happens again, this would cover either case 1 or case 2. But other than that, what could/should/will be done ? Damages ?


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> This! Both hubby and I would agree with you. Our first chocolate lab, who lived 14 years, loved us unconditionally and more than some of our relatives ever did (specially the narcs like TW) and we reciprocated accordingly. IMO, she lived so long because she knew/sensed that we loved her and asked us to let her go only after she was too crippled up to move anymore and in pain.


I completely understand. We recently lost a beloved dog who was nearly 18.


----------



## octopus17

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Two things:
> 
> 1. I am still not done processing what's wrong with the footage. DOES SHE WALK *BEHIND *HARRY? I didn't think she was capable of doing that.
> 
> 2. Speaking of walk, what's that overdone hip sway? It's not a catwalk.


The way she walked looked very odd and agree she looked as if she was sashaying down a catwalk - it was bizarre.

And then there was the holding of her hand up to her chest. I thought it weird until I realized she's probably showing off that fine gold chain around her wrist and her ring finger...


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Diana was reportedly a notorious nail biter....interesting.


Diana was 20, not 40 though


----------



## Toby93

Cornflower Blue said:


> The way she walked looked very odd and agree she looked as if she was sashaying down a catwalk - it was bizarre.
> 
> And then there was the holding of her hand up to her chest. I thought it weird until I realized she's probably showing off that fine gold chain around her wrist and her ring finger...


First off, it’s a weird thing to have wrapped around your hand.  Also, why draw attention to those hands with the nails chewed off?


----------



## octopus17

charlottawill said:


> But all the cool kids are dressing like this
> View attachment 5380208


He needs to wise up and take a long, hard look at himself in a mirror...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Agree! This is also how it is in many big Chinese families that run a business empire. The patriarch and matriarch often have favourites and sometimes the favourites are the black sheep of the family. *And frankly, if I had a grandson like Hazard who married an avaricious pretentious tramp like Methane, I'd love the corgis more too.*


What I find very peculiar is that people more or less assumed that Prince Dufus was/is HM's favourite grandson, because she was seen smiling, talking and maybe even joking with him. However, she paid more attention to William during their private talks and almost daily lessons to prepare him for his future role. Besides, even though I respect HM for her 70 years of selfless devotion to her county, I can't imagine why she ever confessed to the world that Andrew was her favourite son. I'm a mere commoner and I would never divulge such private info to anyone although hubby and I frequently discuss our children together.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair and *just my opinion*, this is not her worst look. She is clearly struggling with the clothing, the makeup, the hair, everything, so I give her a pass. Hazzi, no. Those shoes, gasp. His fake looks of concern are gross, clearly he wishes he had his brother’s compassion, his mother’s too. He does not.
> 
> It seems to be sinking in that she chose a nightmare for a husband. Now she has 2 small kids, weight gain, lives near a smelly bird sanctuary, clothes never fit because they are loaners so cannot be tailored, gets so much negative press. They are Wallis&Ed 2.0 - little money, little respect. Or Andi and Fergie who sold their integrity for pennies. [Credit to Wallis for staying slim and getting the jewels.  ]. Mothers need to teach their daughters what to look for in a husband. Royals need not apply. *Just my opinion.*


I usually don't care about her choices of clothes, but in this clip the suit is wearing her …


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I never though she would have another.  Three?  What happened to their pledge to Jane Goodall?


Just another little white lie, like getting married 3 days before her wedding, that her stans will conveniently gloss over.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I usually don't care about her choices of clothes, but in this clip the suit is wearing her …



She did the backpat again to signal him to step aside and let her go in front. That's where the clip ended.


----------



## octopus17

Toby93 said:


> First off, it’s a weird thing to have wrapped around your hand.  Also, why draw attention to those hands with the nails chewed off?


Indeed. The Daily Mail are saying she was wearing Diana's Cartier watch so maybe she was mainly trying to attract attention to that, who knows....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

no further comments…


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> It's just the wrong look for the occasion imo. So many better choices. I didn't like all of Kate's looks on tour, but she is better (or has better advice) at choosing what works for her and the occasion. I think this might have been a better look for MM - sportier and a "sweet nod" to the Dutch



But remember it’s not about the Dutch, it’s all about her.


----------



## Chanbal

It's all about love!


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> It's all about love!
> View attachment 5380353


At least Colonel Sanders' suit fits him!


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> But remember it’s not about the Dutch, it’s all about her.


Oh I'm sure that factored into her choice to wear an oversized all white pantsuit that she thinks is the height of fashion. Anything to stand out instead of allowing the focus where it belongs, on the athletes.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> What I find very peculiar is that people more or less assumed that Prince Dufus was/is HM's favourite grandson, because she was seen smiling, talking and maybe even joking with him. However, she paid more attention to William during their private talks and almost daily lessons to prepare him for his future role. Besides, even though I respect HM for her 70 years of selfless devotion to her county, I can't imagine why she ever confessed to the world that Andrew was her favourite son. I'm a mere commoner and I would never divulge such private info to anyone although hubby and I frequently discuss our children together.


Did she actually say Andrew is her favorite, or did people close to her draw that conclusion? Like you, my husband and I have discussed it privately, more in terms of how well we relate to each child, but it seems very odd for a mother to publicly state who her favorite child is.


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Geez her teeth are so WHITE.    That's the first thing I see.


like chicklets


----------



## charlottawill

Cornflower Blue said:


> Indeed. The Daily Mail are saying she was wearing Diana's Cartier watch so maybe she was mainly trying to attract attention to that, who knows....


She's worn it many times. I assume he gave it to her when they married. If she really wants to show it off she shouldn't wear sleeves that are so long.


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> At least Colonel Sanders' suit fits him!


I agree with you, Colonel Sanders wears it better!


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> She's worn it many times. I assume he gave it to her when they married. If she really wants to show it off she shouldn't wear sleeves that are so long.



Other blogs are saying these are loaner clothes. If she alters them, she must pay for them, right?
I could be wrong, in the back of her jacket, lower right, it looks like there is a pinkish tag.  Still, she is covered up, she didn’t push him, so she seems to be trying to get it right. Applause for that.

*Just my opinion.*


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

- Only a few thoughts:

Harkle is wearing a bright WHITE pants  suit while the gentlemen are all wearing suits in sober colors. Hmmm, I might be wrong but…obviously she wanted attention.

Narcissist that you are, Me-Again Harkle, you have no self-control and your ego is obvious in every pic.

2. Wills & Kate? Good on you & my respect for your family for being admirable when placed in a position, prob blind-sided by a vicious and simply disgusting Prince Smirking Harry & his chicken cutlet weird green dress wearing woman, that he calls his wife.

Of course H&M, both bad actors trying to cash-in. betrayal is the name of their game imo.

Moi? I’ve moved on, totally support Wills & Kate.



But critics have accused the royal couple of 'cashing in' on the Games by allowing Netflix, with whom they have signed a $100million deal, into private meetings. And royal experts believe the VVIP status given to the couple will allow Netflix to portray the couple in a favourable light, as they deal with the fallout from their bombshell interview with Oprah last year. 

Talking about Harry and Meghan's summit with the Queen and Charles, Mr Bower said last night: 'I have no doubt it was all done for their Netflix documentary. The Queen's advisers failed to protect her from being exploited by the Royal Family's worst traducers, while the Sussexes exploited an old, unwell woman to boost their credibility and coffers.'
watching you stand your ground and ignore the obvious self-absorbed, greedy ex-royals living in an obvious un-royal country that cld care less about H&M and t


----------



## lanasyogamama

This People mag pic of TW is so awkward!


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> This People mag pic of TW is so awkward!


MM's pants would have been OK with a better fitting jacket in a different color. I don't think oversized blazers look good on anyone. Kate wore a white suit with a bright blouse in the Caribbean, and it was weather/event appropriate. A white suit with no blouse to a daytime athletic event in the Netherlands in April? Not so much. If she wore it to a dinner I'd have given her a pass.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> *Did she actually say Andrew is her favorite, or did people close to her draw that conclusion? *Like you, my husband and I have discussed it privately, more in terms of how well we relate to each child, but it seems very odd for a mother to publicly state who her favorite child is.


I recall more than one writer saying that the fair-haired and blue-eyed Andrew was her favourite. I guess it annoys me because I still remember pictures of Charles as a little boy waiting at the bottom of the boarding stairs for his mother to arrive and then TQ just shaking his hand after she deplaned even though I understand the British stiff-upper lip virtue.


----------



## redney

lanasyogamama said:


> This People mag pic of TW is so awkward!


TW's face looks overly photo shopped, especially the white Chiclets teeth


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> This People mag pic of TW is so awkward!



Seeing this side by side, I feel so sorry for her. She is so out of her league. 

The jacket with a blouse:






						Valentino | Womenswear | Shop Online at MATCHESFASHION US
					

Shop the latest Valentino womenswear collection online at MATCHESFASHION | The global luxury-shopping destination for women.




					www.matchesfashion.com
				




ETA: smh


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I usually don't care about her choices of clothes, but in this clip the suit is wearing her …



Yes, and she's the only one wearing white to be noticed first amongst the dark-clothed plebes.


----------



## purseinsanity

gelbergirl said:


> Why is she wearing a GIANT jacket?
> And what does that necklace translate?


To hide the mics.


----------



## Toby93

According to Omid, she gave her coat to a mother with a baby to keep warm


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I hope they don't!




If there is "reporting" of wanting to "bury the story", then isn't that simply pouring on the gasoline of THE STORY ?


----------



## rose60610

Toby93 said:


> According to Omid, she gave her coat to a mother with a baby to keep warm




Umm, PLANTED pathetic story???  CLEAN UP ON AISLE FOUR. LOOK HOW CARING I AM DESPITE SO MUCH PRESS DISPLAYING MY IDIOTIC MOMENTS....


----------



## Jayne1

I don't care what she wears... but what ring is this? It looks different than the older e ring.


----------



## Chanbal

VigeeLeBrun said:


> Talking about Harry and Meghan's summit with the Queen and Charles, Mr Bower said last night: *'I have no doubt it was all done for their Netflix documentary. The Queen's advisers failed to protect her from being exploited by the Royal Family's worst traducers, while the Sussexes exploited an old, unwell woman to boost their credibility and coffers*.'
> watching you stand your ground and ignore the obvious self-absorbed, greedy ex-royals living in an obvious un-royal country that cld care less about H&M and t



Thanks for sharing Mr Bower's opinion, I can feel his disappointment. He is likely right. As many of us suspected, the Nefl*xes were the ones that requested the meeting. 

*An insider said of Thursday’s UK visit: “Harry contacted his father and said he wanted to meet.”*









						Inside Harry's secret talks with Queen after Duke 'initiated' meeting
					

PRINCE Harry was behind the “clear the air” meeting at Windsor Castle with Prince Charles and the Queen, The Sun can reveal. The Duke of Sussex offered an “olive branch” to his father before he and…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Katel said:


> Does she have the slope nose again? I thought it was rounded out when she did her birthday clown show?


I too thought she got it rounded off, unless she did a post-production nose job for the 40x40 video. If it is back to the extended version, then Piers Morgan really has grounds to call her Pinocchio.



charlottawill said:


> It does appear to be a hand chain bracelet
> View attachment 5380265


As someone with 20 different hand chains, both purchased and DIY, I can tell you that they are a vanity item and a b*tch to wear because they need to be loose enough for the hand to flex and yet tight enough so they don't go all askew and tangle up. I think she is merching it.



charlottawill said:


> Wonder if it's a gift from Harry or she bought it herself?


Or she dropped a brick-like hint on his head and so he bought it for her?



charlottawill said:


> Ugh, that idiotic expression on her face. You know she was doing it for the cameras. Such an incredibly bad actress.


So many pics with that unnatural adoring expression (at both brothers). You just know she was eyeing the cameras and exaggerating the gaze for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Same white jacket? same suit?













						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Take Princess Eugenie to Dinner in Santa Barbara
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle take Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank out for dinner.




					www.tmz.com
				




ETA:  Same pants?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I usually don't care about her choices of clothes, but in this clip the suit is wearing her …



First it was the red mess suit in NY, now a white version. Also consistent: messy hair. She really needs to stop buying her extensions in the costume section of The Dollar Store.


----------



## K.D.

DoggieBags said:


> If the 2 grifters were given a police escort when they left Windsor castle doesn’t that bolster JCMH’s claim that he needs government provided security when he’s in the UK? After all why was he given a police escort this time if the government believes he doesn’t need taxpayer funded government provided security when he’s in the UK?


The police escort was just to make sure they left the premises


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’ll just leave this here.

I didn’t think the white suit was that flattering on Kate so it wasn’t going to look so good on her busted copycat either.



Maggie Muggins said:


> I recall more than one writer saying that the fair-haired and blue-eyed Andrew was her favourite. I guess it annoys me because I still remember pictures of Charles as a little boy waiting at the bottom of the boarding stairs for his mother to arrive and then TQ just shaking his hand after she deplaned even though I understand the British stiff-upper lip virtue.


His being the favourite has been said by royal reporters repeatedly and I don’t think the reporters could keep saying it without the consent of the royals. IMHO, his being a black sheep is exactly why she says he’s favourite. It’s to let us know that he isn’t going anywhere and it’s the perfect excuse for him to keep pushing himself to the front of things. (His being with her front and centre in the church even after a scandal was quickly brushed off with the queen’s wish excuse when a lot of people found it tasteless.) 
This is very similar to what Diana was criticised for doing with Harry and what they went on to do with his PR. The second son can’t be the equal in status but he can be just as talked about. 

I agree it’s tacky and cruel to announce a favourite child. 

Also it’s weird that she’d put a focus on looks because that whole family are plain at best.

The stiff Upper lip culture thing I don’t really buy it.  It’s not universally applied at all. It’s always been a bit convenient with them.

 The facts as I see it  are Charles has got an annoying personality. The poor guy grates even on his own family and they weren’t so upset about shipping him off to boarding school ASAP or posting him off to a country house as quickly as possible but at the end of the day he’s the eldest and that’s that. A, moral vacuum that he is, clearly has a bit more of the superficial charm.



csshopper said:


> First it was the red mess suit in NY, now a white version. Also consistent: messy hair. She really needs to stop buying her extensions in the costume section of The Dollar Store.


The hair is truly cursed. I think Tyra banks and team need to jump on her and give her the old ANTM extreme makeover. I don’t get why she keeps trying to reinvent herself but still has the same ratty style of wig.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What is wrong with her skin! She apparently did not start using sunscreen while young.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> She is in the back as an afterthought.  Nobody wanted her here.  She can't walk in those heels so she is wobbling.



Why the F is she there?

No wonder she looks so awkward, she obviously doesn't know either.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The oversized look is a trend. Did you see Justin Bieber at the Grammys? It's fine for a twentysomething pop star, but not for a 40 year old woman who wants to be taken seriously. She looks ridiculous, but she no doubt thinks she looks fabulous.



Oversized can be done by any age IMO, but med sized, med height like M need to follow the silhouette rule, oversized on top needs tight on the bottom or vice versa. 

If it had to be Valentino, they have tailored jacket options this season, if it had to be _white_ Valentino ( ) she could have gone for the slimmer 'crepe couture' trouser/pant option. She looks like a square sail. 

The reason this revival of the oversized-suit (re-created by Armani in the late-70s an upgrade on the Oxford-bag suit trend of Oxford undergrads in the 1920s) looks good on a man is because he can stride in flat shoes. 

I have seldom seen anyone in the public eye dress worse than her. It looks soooooooooo wrong with heels, kills the 'androgynous' stone dead.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Oversized can be done by any age IMO, but med sized, med height like M need to follow the silhouette rule, oversized on top needs tight on the bottom or vice versa.
> 
> If it had to be Valentino, they have tailored jacket options this season, if it had to be _white_ Valentino ( ) she could have gone for the slimmer 'crepe couture' trouser/pant option. She looks like a square sail.
> 
> The reason this revival of the oversized-suit (re-created by Armani in the late-70s an upgrade on the Oxford-bag suit trend of Oxford undergrads in the 1920s) looks good on a man is because he can stride in flat shoes.
> 
> I have seldom seen anyone in the public eye dress worse than her. It looks soooooooooo wrong with heels, kills the 'androgynous' stone dead.



i am wondering if this is sample sizes given for purposes of merching - which is why she doesn’t tailor the look (she has to return it).

at least that’s one theory why she always looks horrid…

the other theory is she has no mirrors in those 16 bathrooms in order to figure out what suits her….


----------



## papertiger

Katel said:


> sorry, was on a break and couldn’t resist … the quality reflects my opinion on the subject.
> 
> View attachment 5380211
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never noticed her odd hands.
> View attachment 5380223
> 
> (Ooof! Sorry for the large picture  )
> 
> 
> 
> wonder if she’s all miked up again?



When I see things like this, it makes me think 'someone' is _desperate_ to start/be credited for a trend. 

Physiologically, it's interesting that she lasso her engagement/wedding ring finger (in the same way she clings/grasps/holds JCMH) as well as the lasso POINTING - i.e. screaming, "DON"T YOU KNOW WHO I AM?". Deeply and darkly an insecure jewellery statement. 

*Over to you Body Language Guy*


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I don’t think they really saw her. More likely in the vicinity of being around her. I would think the Queen’s handlers would not allow it. It says secret visit but didn’t really say they were in her presence.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> His design partner for years was  Maria Grazia Chiuri  who now designs for Dior.  He doesn't look like he can handle it without her.  There is nothing special about a white pantsuit.  There was nothing special about the Peltz wedding dress.  All pedestrian.



PP knows who to hire to put on a good show at showtime, everything else  

Let me tell you, their profits have grown hugely lately though (around 30% per annum) so obviously some people love it all.


----------



## DoggieBags

This pic is from an Elle magazine article dated March 4, 2019 on Valentino runway looks that season. I don’t think the oversized suit looks all that great on the model who is presumably taller, thinner and longer legged than TW. If a tall model can’t carry off the look how did TW think that it would look better on her shorter, thicker body type? Every time I see a pic of her in yet another expensive il-fitting outfit I marvel at how she continues to remain so ignorant of what styles would display her figure to best advantage.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> This pic is from an Elle magazine article dated March 4, 2019 on Valentino runway looks that season. I don’t think the oversized suit looks all that great on the model who is presumably taller, thinner and longer legged than TW. If a tall model can’t carry off the look how did TW think that it would look better on her shorter, thicker body type? Every time I see a pic of her in yet another expensive il-fitting outfit I marvel at how she continues to remain so ignorant of what styles would display her figure to best advantage.



But at least the model's hair is up so there is a definition of the neck and head pus a strong vertical. Plus, the model's suit jacket was styled open to give a balance between its formal tailoring and casual wearing, and it also keeps the vertical line (gap in-between). 

I agree though, very hard outfit to do with a double-breasted and if you're average height wearing the trousers too, especially if you don't know how to wear (or don't let your stylist do their job).


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Why the F is she there?
> 
> No wonder she looks so awkward, she obviously doesn't know either.


Does she horn in on all of Hazard's ventures? The "camera facing" parts, not the "must do work" parts. Was she featured in The Me You Don't Know?


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her skin! She apparently did not start using sunscreen while young.
> 
> View attachment 5380550


Oh my her hands look old…


----------



## Coconuts40

This photo speaks volumes.
Picked it up on DailyMail.
The video just shows his head drop as soon as Meghan grabs his hand.


----------



## papertiger

Coconuts40 said:


> This photo speaks volumes.
> Picked it up on DailyMail.
> The video just shows his head drop as soon as Meghan grabs his hand.
> 
> View attachment 5380723
> View attachment 5380723



Guy needs help badly. 

Sadly, she's no help.


----------



## Debbini

Nm


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Umm, PLANTED pathetic story???  CLEAN UP ON AISLE FOUR. LOOK HOW CARING I AM DESPITE SO MUCH PRESS DISPLAYING MY IDIOTIC MOMENTS....


You nailed it! As a mother, I'm sure I've made my share of mistakes, but this one seems to be as stupid as TW or just conveniently forgot to check The Hague April temperatures before going outside or maybe has no common sense. Since mom is wearing a sweatshirt then baby should be wearing a jacket over a long-sleeve body suit and mom should be carrying an extra blanket just in case. But more importantly, it's really sad that baby had to suffer so TW could look good.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> PP knows who to hire to put on a good show at showtime, everything else
> 
> Let me tell you, their profits have grown hugely lately though (around 30% per annum) so obviously some people love it all.


Their visit to QE is printed today on major US newspapers, like LA Times. Mission accomplished on the Netfl*xes part!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Invictus Games: Meghan will carry reading of her book The Bench
					

The Duchess of Sussex last year proudly announced that she was inspired to write her £12.99 children's pictured book after writing a poem for Prince Harry's first Father's Day in June 2019.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Why would locals be excited?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be fair and *just my opinion*, this is not her worst look. She is clearly struggling with the clothing, the makeup, the hair, everything, so I give her a pass. Hazzi, no. Those shoes, gasp. His fake looks of concern are gross, clearly he wishes he had his brother’s compassion, his mother’s too. He does not.
> 
> It seems to be sinking in that she chose a nightmare for a husband. Now she has 2 small kids, weight gain, lives near a smelly bird sanctuary, clothes never fit because they are loaners so cannot be tailored, gets so much negative press. They are Wallis&Ed 2.0 - little money, little respect. Or Andi and Fergie who sold their integrity for pennies. [Credit to Wallis for staying slim and getting the jewels.  ]. Mothers need to teach their daughters what to look for in a husband. Royals need not apply. *Just my opinion.*


I agree.  I loathe her but it’s not her worst look, (until you see it from behind).  I hope it IS sinking in that she didn’t get all she bargained for when she married her prince.  Like they say, when you marry for money, you earn every penny!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Jayne1 said:


> I don't care what she wears... but what ring is this? It looks different than the older e ring.
> 
> View attachment 5380467


I wondered as well.  Thought it was my imagination.  But the center stone looks decidedly different in shape.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> According to Omid, she gave her coat to a mother with a baby to keep warm



or was it that she wanted the woman to carry her coat as it would have been awkward for her and messed up her photo op?


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Why would locals be excited?




English-speakers don't often read to Dutch children (who often speak Dutch)?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Chloe302225 said:


>




At least the jacket is the right length. 

Poor choice of necklace (torque) cuts he neck-length in half.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Wow, she wins him (the apologist) round


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


>





papertiger said:


> At least the jacket is the right length.
> 
> Poor choice of necklace (torque) cuts he neck-length in half.


The jacket is cute imo. Yep, poor choice of necklace but…


----------



## Sharont2305

Chloe302225 said:


>



For once, I like it. Looks comfy.


----------



## Chanbal

Who is paying for this?   

_Meghan Markle's make-up artist has arrived in The Hague ahead of the Duchess of Sussex's first public appearance in Europe since Megxit.

Daniel Martin, who won high praise for creating Meghan's natural make-up look at her 2018 wedding, revealed he is at the Invictus Games in an Instagram post this morning._









						Meghan Markle's make-up artist Daniel Martin arrives at Invictus Games
					

Daniel Martin, who won high praise for creating Meghan's natural make-up look at her 2018 wedding, revealed he is at the Invictus Games this morning.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

There is a lot of talent on Twitter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## K.D.

Chanbal said:


> Why would locals be excited?



Also, The Hague is the seat of parlement and the RF, though not the capital… I don’t think it makes any difference in the level of caring about this stuff though 

ETA:totally agree about your “why would they be” BTW!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5380769
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Invictus Games: Meghan will carry reading of her book The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex last year proudly announced that she was inspired to write her £12.99 children's pictured book after writing a poem for Prince Harry's first Father's Day in June 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




The DM comments are always better than the articles:

"Only Megain could go to the invictus games and turn the spotlight away from the competitors and competition and plug her book whilst filming her reality show for Netflix. Omg how crass vulgar and vile."

"Very Very Inflated Perception of their own importance."

"That will be the "Inflict-us" sequel with the syrupy voice over."

"If she feels the cold so much why didn't she choose a more appropriate outfit ......but she never does."

And last but not least:

"Oh joy I bet they're queueing already"


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Why the F is she there?
> 
> No wonder she looks so awkward, she obviously doesn't know either.


They are under the gun to produce content for Netflix. I wonder if they were checked for mics before they met with Charles and the Queen.


----------



## jehaga

A
Her life is one big faux pas.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seeing this side by side, I feel so sorry for her. She is so out of her league.
> 
> The jacket with a blouse:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Valentino | Womenswear | Shop Online at MATCHESFASHION US
> 
> 
> Shop the latest Valentino womenswear collection online at MATCHESFASHION | The global luxury-shopping destination for women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.matchesfashion.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: smh
> 
> View attachment 5380408


He really is moronic.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Why would locals be excited?




Another wildly successful tour for the disastrous duo.   

"They do not have any meaning for us here. We have our own royal family who we consider more important. They are more interested in the showbusiness life."

Harkles, the ever pragmatic Dutch people see right through you.


----------



## charlottawill

K.D. said:


> The police escort was just to make sure they left the premises


Sounds like they were given a royal bum's rush.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> At least the jacket is the right length.
> 
> Poor choice of necklace (torque) cuts he neck-length in half.


I live in jeans, but there are so many better choices for that jacket. Those are sloppy looking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG  Where is this? Raptor seems to thoroughly enjoy herself


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Does she horn in on all of Hazard's ventures? The "camera facing" parts, not the "must do work" parts. Was she featured in The Me You Don't Know?


Why is she there ? Guesses ..
she is also carrying out a business obligation to Netflix - gotta check the boxes to get the cash
H wanted her there for moral support due to his waning popularity, not that she is so popular but she reduces/deflects any negative comments issued at him
once it is known that she was summoned to Windsor , she had to put in an appearance … to make it appear like she had other reasons to go to Europe, not just to see granny
these are the people that brought Doria to help them accept an award


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


>



The boyfriend jeans just don't work for me with the nice jacket, but I think it may be a generational difference.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5380769
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Invictus Games: Meghan will carry reading of her book The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex last year proudly announced that she was inspired to write her £12.99 children's pictured book after writing a poem for Prince Harry's first Father's Day in June 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




This must be a parody - right? I know it’s not, but how bad can their judgement get? (Maybe I shouldn’t ask lol.)



charlottawill said:


> The boyfriend jeans just don't work for me with the nice jacket, but I think it may be a generational difference.



I agree with you - that’s the first thing that jumped out, and it’s not generational, imo - they look sloppy, too casual and ordinary. Lacks style (no surprise). Fine for feeding the chickens or a run to the grocery store or lounging with friends - casual - but not for an event - just no.


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> This must be a parody - right? I know it’s not, but how bad can their judgement get? (Maybe I shouldn’t ask lol.)
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you - that’s the first thing that jumped out, and it’s not generational, imo - they look sloppy, too casual and ordinary. Lacks style (no surprise). Fine for feeding the chickens or a run to the grocery store or lounging with friends - casual - but not for an event - just no.


In fairness to her, I have seen a lot of young style influencers wearing Chanel jackets with ripped jeans, another trend I don't care for.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I live in jeans, but there are so many better choices for that jacket. Those are sloppy looking.



We just have to be grateful she looked better than (her) usual.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

Icyjade said:


> Oh my her hands look old…


And what are those lines on her chest?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Also, we should be grateful that her outfit maintains nearly all the labels needed to ID everything at a glance.  So thoughtful, no?
These 2 will never be ready for the big stage.  Way too aspirational and desperate.  
Just my opinion.


----------



## mellibelly

Katel said:


> This must be a parody - right? I know it’s not, but how bad can their judgement get? (Maybe I shouldn’t ask lol.)
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you - that’s the first thing that jumped out, and it’s not generational, imo - they look sloppy, too casual and ordinary. Lacks style (no surprise). Fine for feeding the chickens or a run to the grocery store or lounging with friends - casual - but not for an event - just no.


Agreed. The top half does not go with the bottom half at all. Those cuffed boyfriend jeans don’t work for her figure. Typical Raptor, labels and $$$ yet bad styling and fit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Again, not her worst look.  Hazzi, grey suit king.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Awkward.
It makes me uncomfortable to watch these awkward vignettes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe Hazzi didn’t get the check????









						Harry and Meghan's grand entrance at Invictus Games Opening Ceremony
					

Tonight's ceremony will see speeches from Harry and Meghan as well as performances from the Kaiser Chiefs, along with a military band, Dutch music stars and others.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## TC1

I don't mind the "idea" of a boyfriend jean...but this was not it. Also I read a few headlines that said she wore the White blazer *gasp* with NOTHING underneath *gasp*   so that itself is media worthy?


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


>



Catherine looks so youthful and fresh compared to TW that I would describe as ‘matronly’ in this outfit.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> At least she didn't show up in this


Trip's not over yet.


----------



## Aimee3

No baby bump in the white top/black pant outfit!  By why does H look so rumpled and unkempt in the suit?  Don’t they have people to dress them???


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Awkward.
> It makes me uncomfortable to watch these awkward vignettes.



She really doesn't shut up, does she?


----------



## gracekelly

The jacket doesn’t work with this style jean, and this style doesn’t flatter anyone.  The white top is not appropriate for  this event. It’s for a cocktail party  How difficult is it to pick out the right style clothing?

If she was really copying Kate then she would have shown up in a simple straight leg Jean and a cotton blazer.   No brainer. Sporting events are not fashion shows. Just look neat and comfortable.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Yawn let me know when they leave for home and Europe is safe


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Hazzi didn’t get the check????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's grand entrance at Invictus Games Opening Ceremony
> 
> 
> Tonight's ceremony will see speeches from Harry and Meghan as well as performances from the Kaiser Chiefs, along with a military band, Dutch music stars and others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5381017


Why would she give a speech?  She’s there as a plus one


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> I don't mind the "idea" of a boyfriend jean...but this was not it. Also I read a few headlines that said she wore the White blazer *gasp* with NOTHING underneath *gasp*   so that itself is media worthy?


The white suit with nothing under the blazer would be fine for evening - I've seen celebrities wear similar at red carpets - but not a daytime sporting event.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

charlottawill said:


> The white suit with nothing under the blazer would be fine for evening - I've seen celebrities wear similar at red carpets - but not a daytime sporting event.


Yes, but I'm sure they're implying that had she still been representing BRF she couldn't have worn something like that...now..look at her go


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The jacket doesn’t work with this style jean, and this style doesn’t flatter anyone.  The white top is not appropriate for  this event. It’s for a cocktail party  How difficult is it to pick out the right style clothing?
> 
> If she was really copying Kate then she would have shown up in a simple straight leg Jean and a cotton blazer.   No brainer. Sporting events are not fashion shows. Just look neat and comfortable.


Apparently very difficult for her. She dresses for herself. Thinks she's on the cutting edge of fashion but usually misses the mark. Kate dresses as a senior royal and a representative of her country.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Catherine looks so youthful and fresh compared to TW that I would describe as ‘matronly’ in this outfit.


Yup, that's pretty much how I look in jeans these days, and I've got 20 years on MM.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> And what are those lines on her chest?


I did not have those until I was well into my 50s. Sunscreen is your friend.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again, not her worst look.  Hazzi, grey suit king.




The top says cocktail party, the bottom says office. Split personality, like her.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Hazzi didn’t get the check????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's grand entrance at Invictus Games Opening Ceremony
> 
> 
> Tonight's ceremony will see speeches from Harry and Meghan as well as performances from the Kaiser Chiefs, along with a military band, Dutch music stars and others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5381017


I'm not crazy about the top but it does look ok on her. But the necklace is a "nope".


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5380769
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Invictus Games: Meghan will carry reading of her book The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex last year proudly announced that she was inspired to write her £12.99 children's pictured book after writing a poem for Prince Harry's first Father's Day in June 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I laughed out loud when I read this. She has to keep cameras away from capturing the boredom and squirming.

How does this raging narcissist think her pathetic  book moldering in warehouses relates to Invictus, the one small drawing of Hazbeen in camouflage is a real  S T R E T C H.


----------



## bellecate

TC1 said:


> Yes, but I'm sure they're implying that had she still been representing BRF she couldn't have worn something like that...now..look at her go


Yes  look at her go …. go straight downhill.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan is simply a walking disaster. And she can never shut her stupid mouth. NO ONE wants to hear The Bench. Or any of her speeches full of fake emotion.


----------



## mellibelly

That’s a Cartier Juste en Clou necklace. Ugh why does she have to ruin everything I like.


----------



## Debbini

papertiger said:


> At least the jacket is the right length.
> 
> Poor choice of necklace (torque) cuts he neck-length in half.


Exactly!


----------



## mellibelly

From the Daily Mail article:

“He also referenced his son Archie in his speech, saying they often talked about what he would want to do when he grows up.

Harry told the audience that his son one day wanted to be an astronaut and another day a pilot.

'A helicopter pilot, obviously,' said Harry, in reference to his own military career.”

Um, a helicopter pilot? Like his uncle Prince William? Harry is no pilot.


----------



## csshopper

redney said:


> She really doesn't shut up, does she?


Netflix editor: “Quick hit ERASE!“  “ Damn, it’s already online.” 

Someone should do a reel of these moments, Serena’s mother, the Queen, etc


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Why would she give a speech?  She’s there as a plus one


Wrong!!! Its all about her so Harry's the plus one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Front row, with the men,



OMG











						Meghan Markle Kisses Prince Harry, Pays Tribute to Princess Diana
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a stunning appearance at the Invictus Games Opening Ceremony.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The jacket doesn’t work with this style jean, and this style doesn’t flatter anyone.  The white top is not appropriate for  this event. It’s for a cocktail party  How difficult is it to pick out the right style clothing?
> 
> If she was really copying Kate then she would have shown up in a simple straight leg Jean and a cotton blazer.   No brainer. Sporting events are not fashion shows. Just look neat and comfortable.


there is no "just" for her.....she has to constantly seek to be the top/first person ....hence her pushing in front of H all the time


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG on fire today


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chloe302225 said:


>



I thought this was cute at first, but now I think it just makes her look very square shaped.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The top may be a bit snug or is it the lighting?



ETA: Cartier called. They want their jewelry back asap.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> The DM comments are always better than the articles:
> 
> "Only Megain could go to the invictus games and turn the spotlight away from the competitors and competition and plug her book whilst filming her reality show for Netflix. Omg how crass vulgar and vile."
> 
> "Very Very Inflated Perception of their own importance."
> 
> "That will be the "Inflict-us" sequel with the syrupy voice over."
> 
> "If she feels the cold so much why didn't she choose a more appropriate outfit ......but she never does."
> 
> And last but not least:
> 
> "Oh joy I bet they're queueing already"


I read this and thought it was a joke or parody.  She is seriously still peddling this garbage?


----------



## LVLover

Serious question: Does she have a stylist? If so, who? because he/she is the ABSOLUTE worst - which leads me to believe she doses not have one…or maybe it was her BFF that was “canceled” and Me Again fired her? If this is the case, Ex-BFF (can’t remember her name, she’s from Canada) feels validated each time she sees pics of Me Again with her horrid styling.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Bingo!


----------



## Toby93

LVLover said:


> Serious question: Does she have a stylist? If so, who? because he/she is the ABSOLUTE worst - which leads me to believe she doses not have one…or maybe it was her BFF that was “canceled” and Me Again fired her? If this is the case, Ex-BFF (can’t remember her name, she’s from Canada) feels validated each time she sees pics of Me Again with her horrid styling.


Jessica Mulroney


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Jessica Mulroney



Or Netflix - anything to remind viewers of Diana.
Other sites are saying Nflix wanted the kiss :gasp:


----------



## DoggieBags

LVLover said:


> Serious question: Does she have a stylist? If so, who? because he/she is the ABSOLUTE worst - which leads me to believe she doses not have one…or maybe it was her BFF that was “canceled” and Me Again fired her? If this is the case, Ex-BFF (can’t remember her name, she’s from Canada) feels validated each time she sees pics of Me Again with her horrid styling.


Since she clearly thinks she knows best why would she need a stylist After all this is the woman who managed to go to official events wearing 1) a knit dress with a see through skirt that clearly showed her black panties and 2) a dress with the price tag still attached and very visibly dangling from her skirt while on a royal tour where she presumably had someone paid by the BRF to assist her with her hair, makeup, and clothing. She married into a family with centuries of institutional knowledge about appropriate dress for every possible occasion and still managed to often go out looking unfinished and unkempt. I can only surmise that she doesn’t listen to advice and isn’t teachable at least in terms of her personal styling choices.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG on fire today



Team MJ all the way!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bingo!



Is she wearing a Juste un clou necklace? I need glasses…


EDIT: It is Juste un Clou, I just saw the description on @Chloe302225's post.   Hazz has been good, it looks like TW has new bling additions. I hope she stays away from VCA!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like they’re using these exaggerated expressions on purpose.


----------



## rose60610

Chloe302225 said:


>




This top needs more torso, why would she purposely choose high waisted pants with this? It looks stupid! It makes her look even more chunky and stumpy. How could she look at a mirror and think this is OK?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> This top needs more torso, why would she purposely choose high waisted pants with this? It looks stupid! It makes her look even more chunky and stumpy. How could she look at a mirror and think this is OK?


she has very high self esteem?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5380769
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Invictus Games: Meghan will carry reading of her book The Bench
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex last year proudly announced that she was inspired to write her £12.99 children's pictured book after writing a poem for Prince Harry's first Father's Day in June 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Note: it's not secret if you leak it to the press beforehand.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bingo!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> English-speakers don't often read to Dutch children (who often speak Dutch)?



To be honest being read to in a language they don't yet understand might be in favour of these children  

(That said, Dutch children learn English early as they tend to subtitle English TV in Dutch instead of giving them Dutch voices.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Daniel Martin, who won high praise for creating Meghan's natural make-up look at her 2018 wedding, revealed he is at the Invictus Games in an Instagram post this morning._



He did? Because I personally felt they took the "no m/u look" a bit far.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Hazzi didn’t get the check????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's grand entrance at Invictus Games Opening Ceremony
> 
> 
> Tonight's ceremony will see speeches from Harry and Meghan as well as performances from the Kaiser Chiefs, along with a military band, Dutch music stars and others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5381017



Aaand...wrinkly pants that are also pulling AKA too small. At least the obnoxious handholding is back, I was getting worried.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest being read to in a language you don't yet understand might be in favour of these children
> 
> (That said, Dutch children learn English early as they tend to subtitle English TV in Dutch instead of giving them Dutch voices.)


----------



## Chanbal

This is the main message imo: The visit to QE was done at Netfl*x's request. Netfl*x is not happy with them being ignored by the Dutch royals. The visit was all about damage control on behalf on their boss!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bingo!



Well that isn't at all creepy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't watched so I don't know Lady C's exact reasoning, but what does Netflix gain here? I doubt they were able to secretly record anything, and if so, I would like to see the BRF'S lawyers destroy not only the Sussexes but also Netflix after airing a private conversation with The Queen.


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t know what she said in her speech and I don’t care but it couldn’t have added an iota of anything to anything.

Pretty sure K doesn’t get up and make a speech at W’s events.  It’s completely unneeded.


----------



## Chanbal

Who is paying for all of this?






__





						Blind Item #7
					

The alliterate one brought four stylists, a makeup person and a hair person, along with other staff.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Note: it's not secret if you leak it to the press beforehand.


I'm sure those kids are dying to hear her read her book


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Who is paying for all of this?
> View attachment 5381168
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> The alliterate one brought four stylists, a makeup person and a hair person, along with other staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Could as well have burned that money in a big pile, hu?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't watched so I don't know Lady C's exact reasoning, but what does Netflix gain here? I doubt they were able to secretly record anything, and if so, I would like to see the BRF'S lawyers destroy not only the Sussexes but also Netflix after airing a private conversation with The Queen.


They need to show their association to royals to stay relevant. They have little value for Netfl*x without that association, and Netfl*x needs to get the money back on its investment. (Allegedly!!!! )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They need to show their association to royals to stay relevant. They have little value for Netfl*x without that association, and Netfl*x needs to get the money back on its investment. (Allegedly!!!! )



But it's just an unconfirmed rumour at this point. I may be hard to please, but...not good enough for me


----------



## Chanbal

_*Meghan Markle*__* left Prince Harry on the brink of tears after paying a loving tribute to her "incredible husband" and sharing a sweet kiss at the Invictus Games.*

She told the crowd: "Good evening everyone. We are so grateful to the Netherlands for welcoming us and hosting the Invictus Games.

"For each team, my husband and I recognise it has taken a lot to get there both physically, emotionally, not least of which for the Ukraine team who we are all standing by - we talked about it yesterday slava ukraini…

"Now it is my distinguished honour to introduce someone that I think you’ll all be very excited to hear from.

“He has also spent many late nights and early mornings planning for these games to make them as perfect as possible for each of you.

“*I could not love and respect him more and I know that all of you feel the same because he is your fellow veteran, having served two tours of duty in Afghanistan and 10 years of military service.

“He’s the founder of the Invictus Games, and the father to our two little ones, Archie and Lili. Please welcome my incredible husband, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex*.”

The pair kissed when Harry arrived on stage, and he appeared emotional before his speech, saying: “*Thank you, my love.*”_









						Meghan's gushing tribute to Harry brings him to brink of tears - speech in full
					

Meghan Markle introduced Prince Harry to the stage at the opening ceremony of the Invictus Games and paid tribute to her "incredible husband" before they pair shared a public kiss




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5381149
> View attachment 5381148


Once you see how it looks when it fits and is properly styled it makes TW’s version look worse every time you see her in it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTFFF. They really need to stop having her introduce him, and also...who cares he's her baby daddy in this context? 

P.S. You don't pull and push someone you respect around in public like you do, Rap. Nice try.


----------



## charlottawill

Chloe302225 said:


>



As always, the comments are very interesting. They seem pretty evenly split for and against her. I will say I think it fits better than it did when she wore it in NY. She's lost more baby weight, but it's still wrong for the event. So many other things she could have chosen but she insists on what she considers "power dressing" - except when she's trying to channel her dead mother-in-law.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But *it's just an unconfirmed rumour at this point*. I may be hard to please, but...not good enough for me


Netfl*x's request is a speculation at this point, but a credible one imo. The Montecitos are useless without their royal connections.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Once you see how it looks when it fits and is properly styled it makes TW’s version look worse every time you see her in it.


I think Diana's was a dress, which makes more sense. Those pictures side be side remind me of features that show how you can get a designer look on a budget, and MM's wearing the budget version.


----------



## redney

4 stylists and her clothing is still that sloppy and ill fitting?!


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I think Diana's was a dress, which makes more sense. Those pictures side be side remind me of features that show how you can get a designer look on a budget, and MM's wearing the budget version.


Great analogy, but TW's 'budget version' was probably a lot more expensive than Diana's designer look.


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure those kids are dying to hear her read her book


Maybe if it gets them out of classes for an hour. No one said they actually have to listen to her when she reads the Stench


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> 4 stylists and her clothing is still that sloppy and ill fitting?!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Who is paying for all of this?
> View attachment 5381168
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> The alliterate one brought four stylists, a makeup person and a hair person, along with other staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Netflix.  None of them did her any good,  she still looked like a train wreck.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They need to show their association to royals to stay relevant. They have little value for Netfl*x without that association, and Netfl*x needs to get the money back on its investment. (Allegedly!!!! )


If this is really true and BP learns this, what kind of reaction will Charles and TQ have knowing that is the only reason they showed up.  I still think they were summoned. To turn it back around, it could be the reason the visits were so brief.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> "They have little value for Netfl*x without that association"


More like no value.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My opinion - this is 100% Nflix. They insisted on the QE meeting (which meant no MT), they insisted on the clothes, they insisted on the kiss, handholding, the clothes, the jewelry, etc.   It reeks of Nflix wanting its millions back.  Hazzi knows it, she knows it, they have made a mockery of themselves on the world stage.

This is what happens to people who sell themselves to a corporation. They have become corporate w$ores.



From the Urban Dictionary:
One who has sold more than their labot to the corporation; one who has forsaken personal values and constitution for corporate $$; meaning of "xxxxx" belittled when preceded by the word “corporate”; person who will sell their soul for $$

ETA:  My opinion:  yes, BP knows it. That is why they were summoned - to renounce those titles.  It’s over.  [yes, I am optimistic.]


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Netflix.*  None of them did her any good,  she still looked like a train wreck.


Or, the Inv*ctus Foundation?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Apparently very difficult for her. She dresses for herself. Thinks she's on the cutting edge of fashion but usually misses the mark. Kate dresses as a senior royal and a representative of her country.


Catherine follows her advisors' suggestions when told what type of apparel (formal or informal) to wear for any upcoming event. However, as we have already observed, TW ignored her advisors when she was a senior royal and usually came out looking like a frump. Nothing would change even if she had several advisors on hand because in her mind, she knows what suits her best.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Or, the Inv*ctus Foundation?



Horrible.  What suckers.  The Foundation will be Markled.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, I admit it, I looked this up.  How sad for H&M to mock Princess Diana - Charles, Earl Spencer, the aunts, all of them need to scream.  First, though, they will cry. 

Old info, Diana may have worn in green, too.




__





						thedianadresses
					





					www.everythingroyal.com
				





*












Designed by Catherine Walker . This gown is ivory silk crepe, with draped bodice and straight skirt. 
Diana wore this gown to a State Banquet for the King and Queen of Malaya, in 1993.
$52,900.00 Originally purchased by a woman from Florida. 
Recently resold to Muse de Moda Museum in Santiago, Chile. 
Currently on display at Kensington Palace*

Looks like the same dress in green, IDK.








						Malaysian State Visit to Britain, 1993
					

Visit the post for more.




					royalwatcherblog.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I admit it, I looked this up.  How sad for H&M to mock Princess Diana - Charles, Earl Spencer, the aunts, all of them need to scream.  First, though, they will cry.
> 
> Old info, Diana may have worn in green, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianadresses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.everythingroyal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designed by Catherine Walker . This gown is ivory silk crepe, with draped bodice and straight skirt.
> Diana wore this gown to a State Banquet for the King and Queen of Malaya, in 1993.
> $52,900.00 Originally purchased by a woman from Florida.
> Recently resold to Muse de Moda Museum in Santiago, Chile.
> Currently on display at Kensington Palace*
> 
> Looks like the same dress in green, IDK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Malaysian State Visit to Britain, 1993
> 
> 
> Visit the post for more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalwatcherblog.com


I was guilty of doing the same. I was thinking Halston, but Catherine Walker makes sense. I believe Kate wears the label. Megs could have gone all in:



> https://www.saksfifthavenue.com/product/halston-jolie-off-the-shoulder-sweater-dress-0400014879623.html?site_refer=CSE_GGLPLA:Womens_Clothing:Halston&country=US¤cy=USD&CSE_CID=G_Saks_PLA_US_Retention+Campaign:Women's+Apparel&gclid=Cj0KCQjw0umSBhDrARIsAH7FCodDsfCTVJIqCibd6E7IccTAxpUj07eStaO-gt8C1VovkUfxiK_zv24aApZPEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds


----------



## Annawakes

She always alternates between severely slicked back hair (her “serious” hair), hot mess of a bun w/ tendrils, or hot mess of straggly hair, when worn down.


----------



## Sophisticatted

In just looking at the pics, he seems to be closing himself off from her.  I also think she looks a bit desperate and worried.  I predict the beginnings of divorce proceedings starting soon.


----------



## coldbrewcoffeekate

Maggie Muggins said:


> Catherine follows her advisors' suggestions when told what type of apparel (formal or informal) to wear for any upcoming event. However, as we have already observed, TW ignored her advisors when she was a senior royal and usually came out looking like a frump. Nothing would change even if she had several advisors on hand because in her mind, she knows what suits her best.


Who is TW?


----------



## mellibelly

Guys, how much do we want to wager that coat given to the baby schtick ends up in the Netflix doc? Everyone in that group was dressed casually but TW just happens to have a long camel coat that doesn’t go with her giant WHITE suit (screams innocence, purity, saintly). It seems soo staged and meant for the cameras to capture. They’re trying hard to fix her image.


----------



## mellibelly

coldbrewcoffeekate said:


> Who is TW?



The Wife


----------



## coldbrewcoffeekate

mellibelly said:


> The Wife


Thanks


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophisticatted said:


> In just looking at the pics, he seems to be closing himself off from her.  I also think she looks a bit desperate and worried.  I predict the beginnings of divorce proceedings starting soon.


It will be their 4rth wedding anniversary in May and this inquiring mind wants to know how H could stand living with a magpie for even one year let alone four, even though he's a piece of work or POS himself.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

coldbrewcoffeekate said:


> Who is TW?


She who must not be named: The Wife 

PS: It looks like we need an acronym booklet for new posters on this wonderful thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

coldbrewcoffeekate said:


> Who is TW?


The Wife or The Witch, as you prefer.


----------



## marietouchet

anyone else indulge in guilty pleasures …. 

OOOOhhh Harry Styles is at Coachella this weekend … does anyone care about what is happening in the Netherlands …


----------



## mdcx

Goodness this whole Netflix performance is embarrassing.

The slew of PR articles in the Daily Mail all with comments moderated. The Diana cosplay. The forced meeting with Charles no doubt demanded by Netflix lawyers that probably lasted for 2 minutes.

Meghan in ecstasy at her adoring fans turning out to see her, confused that the supporters of the Invictus charity turning out are there for her…

Oh to be a fly on the wall in some of the back rooms. The comments about these two


----------



## xincinsin

Sad  my feed is filled with stan-friendly links that make Invictus look like the Methane Loves Hazard Show. The vets are ignored in favour of the clown sideshow going on. No doubt they will become a footnote in Heart of Invictus which will be a "docudrama" about the travails Hazard overcame to found the Games and how the Witch supported him in the endeavour (even though she wasn't in the picture then).
Hazard = Invictus and Methane = Heart.


----------



## xincinsin

Is she doing that butterfly tapping routine for mental health or making sure that all her jewellery is in the photo?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. They really need to stop having her introduce him, and also...who cares he's her baby daddy in this context?
> 
> P.S. You don't pull and push someone you respect around in public like you do, Rap. Nice try.


Exactly!  We know who the sperm donor is!  The ONLY reason you have any relevance today whatsoever


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> The Wife or The Witch, as you prefer.


Or The Wench (who wrote The Bench)


----------



## Chanbal

_Visibly Vain Indifferent Poseurs_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we go -  

_Meghan Markle has made a subtle dig at the royal family after telling competitors at the Invictus Games they know what 'service' is, after taking a previous potshot at the Queen over the use of the word during the Megxit row.

Speaking at the Opening Ceremony for the Games in The Hague, the Duchess of Sussex said: 'Thank you so much for your service and thank you to all the family and friends that are here who have been supporting you along the way. Because this is service, this is dedication and this is the Invictus family.'

When Meghan and Harry stepped back from royal life, the Queen said the pair would not 'continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service'.









						Charles' aides fear Sussexes will overshadow the Queen's Jubilee
					

Harry and Meghan's daughter Lilibet, named after the Queen's childhood nickname, has never met her extended family in Britain. Archie has not been to the UK since 2019.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

They are also known as Farkles 








						Meghan exclaims 'Slava Ukraini' at Invictus opening ceremony
					

Meghan, who was invited on stage to speak at the opening ceremony for the Invictus games in The Netherlands, said everyone is 'standing with' the Ukraine team.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

If I buy a book about these people, it will likely be this one…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



A new look - droopy tendril only on one side!
Expression - same as always, radiating fake sincerity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She just can't help it, hu? His eyes where the action is, hers finding the camera.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I admit it, I looked this up.  How sad for H&M to mock Princess Diana - Charles, Earl Spencer, the aunts, all of them need to scream.  First, though, they will cry.
> 
> Old info, Diana may have worn in green, too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thedianadresses
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.everythingroyal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designed by Catherine Walker . This gown is ivory silk crepe, with draped bodice and straight skirt.
> Diana wore this gown to a State Banquet for the King and Queen of Malaya, in 1993.
> $52,900.00 Originally purchased by a woman from Florida.
> Recently resold to Muse de Moda Museum in Santiago, Chile.
> Currently on display at Kensington Palace*
> 
> Looks like the same dress in green, IDK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Malaysian State Visit to Britain, 1993
> 
> 
> Visit the post for more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalwatcherblog.com


It's a different dress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

Wow. Everyone looking at the stage and she’s eye f*cking the camera.

Let’s call her The Wife or The Wench. As a practicing witch, we don’t claim her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her skin! She apparently did not start using sunscreen while young.
> 
> View attachment 5380550


Wow did she borrow yoda’s hands for the event or something? Even her nails are bad  look like she’s been in a well for three months. Are there no nail places in California?


----------



## needlv

Tea on CDAN comment section

AN INSIDER ACCOUNT ON WHAT HAPPENED WHEN H&M VISITED WINDSOR CASTLE:

A very good friend of mine from childhood, who now lives back in Manchester England with her family, told me about the visit with the Queen & then with Prince Charles… I can’t get into who my source is but, her sister works at Windsor & was working there, during the visit… Apparently, MM did not go in to see the Queen, she was not allowed to go anywhere near the Queen & only Harry was allowed to see his Grandmother… But, M had to sit in another room, with 4 Footmen watching over her but, they did bring her some hot tea & something to nibble on, while she was waiting… Harry on the other hand, was with his grandmother for just about an hour but then, he met up with Prince Charles also, for only 15 minutes… Because, allegedly, Harry & Charles had this awfully HUGE, really loud & highly charged blow out & their interaction was extremely hostile so much, where others couldn’t help from hearing it & they all heard, the extremely loud yelling coming from & in the vicinity of the room where Harry & his Father met, in Windsor Castle!!! And that Harry left & stormed out in a huge huff, as he slammed the door behind him & then, he asked where M was & then he apparently pushed his way past one of the Footmen, who was standing in the hallway & told another, to tell M to meet him in the car!!! So, the meeting didn’t go down well with his Dad I was told but, I was told that his meeting with th*e* Queen was quiet & seemed pleasant enough… So, that was the take of what went down during their Windsor visit, by one of the Queen’s staff.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The Wife or The Witch, as you prefer.



Being a witch is not only a vocation but a skilled profession. 

Please don't taint the already much maligned sisterhood.


----------



## mdcx

needlv said:


> Tea on CDAN comment section
> 
> AN INSIDER ACCOUNT ON WHAT HAPPENED WHEN H&M VISITED WINDSOR CASTLE:
> 
> A very good friend of mine from childhood, who now lives back in Manchester England with her family, told me about the visit with the Queen & then with Prince Charles… I can’t get into who my source is but, her sister works at Windsor & was working there, during the visit… Apparently, MM did not go in to see the Queen, she was not allowed to go anywhere near the Queen & only Harry was allowed to see his Grandmother… But, M had to sit in another room, with 4 Footmen watching over her but, they did bring her some hot tea & something to nibble on, while she was waiting… Harry on the other hand, was with his grandmother for just about an hour but then, he met up with Prince Charles also, for only 15 minutes… Because, allegedly, Harry & Charles had this awfully HUGE, really loud & highly charged blow out & their interaction was extremely hostile so much, where others couldn’t help from hearing it & they all heard, the extremely loud yelling coming from & in the vicinity of the room where Harry & his Father met, in Windsor Castle!!! And that Harry left & stormed out in a huge huff, as he slammed the door behind him & then, he asked where M was & then he apparently pushed his way past one of the Footmen, who was standing in the hallway & told another, to tell M to meet him in the car!!! So, the meeting didn’t go down well with his Dad I was told but, I was told that his meeting with th*e* Queen was quiet & seemed pleasant enough… So, that was the take of what went down during their Windsor visit, by one of the Queen’s staff.



Well well well. About what I expected!


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> In fairness to her, I have seen a lot of young style influencers wearing Chanel jackets with ripped jeans, another trend I don't care for.


The onus is on young! She can’t pull it off with those gollum hands of hers. 


charlottawill said:


> The white suit with nothing under the blazer would be fine for evening - I've seen celebrities wear similar at red carpets - but not a daytime sporting event.


Well at least it explains why she’s there….. to ‘entertain the troops’ 


mellibelly said:


> From the Daily Mail article:
> 
> “He also referenced his son Archie in his speech, saying they often talked about what he would want to do when he grows up.
> 
> Harry told the audience that his son one day wanted to be an astronaut and another day a pilot.
> 
> 'A helicopter pilot, obviously,' said Harry, in reference to his own military career.”
> 
> Um, a helicopter pilot? Like his uncle Prince William? Harry is no pilot.


I’m sure we can all envision the melodrama that will ensue when H busts down Archie’s bedroom door to find him wearing a Barbour, doing his Latin homework and practising his posh accent. Blood will out.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chloe302225 said:


>



Kim kardashian has been doing the monochromatic skin tone and outfit for year now- BASIC!!!


Chloe302225 said:


>



These boyfriend jeans are horrific - they are so baggy and then so tight on the tum.  The crotch whiskers are a true nightmare. her top half is giving Zara officewear then her crotch looks likes it’s from a guy from duck dynasty.


Chloe302225 said:


>



Continuing the two people cut in half and jammed together theme here we have Dorothy Lamour’s ‘road to’  bodysuit underneath a pant suit that would be too boxy for a female politician.


----------



## zinacef

Back to Zara —- looking like outfit! Remember Sayonara Zara?  No offense to Zara but YKWIM! And her whole outfit would be $15,225.26. Just for the all white!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ladies, I have the most special Easter message for all of you. @Aminamina messaged me saying how much she loves the TPF community and especially the H&M ladies and wants to say hi to everyone. She hopes to be back soon for a bit of chitchat to take her mind off things. I told her some of you had asked about her several times as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: Raptor's snarky comment about service...fair enough, it's just that their "service" is usually lip service, so why don't you just put a sock in it.


----------



## needlv

Meanwhile Catherine shows how it is done properly by turning up to the Easter Sunday service looking flawless.  









						William and Kate arrive at traditional Easter Sunday service
					

The Queen, who has been experiencing mobility issues, is not attending the service, which is a staple in the royal calendar, instead marking the occasion at a small chapel inside the castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




MM outfits at invictus just make her look worse.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I have the most special Easter message for all of you. @Aminamina messaged me saying how much she loves the TPF community and especially the H&M ladies and wants to say hi to everyone. She hopes to be back soon for a bit of chitchat to take her mind off things. I told her some of you had asked about her several times as well.



Please let us know if @Aminamina needs anything. I think we'd all be happy to help any way we can.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## lanasyogamama

Those jeans would have been better with the black jacket.
Another boxy top.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Tea on CDAN comment section
> 
> AN INSIDER ACCOUNT ON WHAT HAPPENED WHEN H&M VISITED WINDSOR CASTLE:
> 
> A very good friend of mine from childhood, who now lives back in Manchester England with her family, told me about the visit with the Queen & then with Prince Charles… I can’t get into who my source is but, her sister works at Windsor & was working there, during the visit… Apparently, MM did not go in to see the Queen, she was not allowed to go anywhere near the Queen & only Harry was allowed to see his Grandmother… But, M had to sit in another room, with 4 Footmen watching over her but, they did bring her some hot tea & something to nibble on, while she was waiting… Harry on the other hand, was with his grandmother for just about an hour but then, he met up with Prince Charles also, for only 15 minutes… Because, allegedly, Harry & Charles had this awfully HUGE, really loud & highly charged blow out & their interaction was extremely hostile so much, where others couldn’t help from hearing it & they all heard, the extremely loud yelling coming from & in the vicinity of the room where Harry & his Father met, in Windsor Castle!!! And that Harry left & stormed out in a huge huff, as he slammed the door behind him & then, he asked where M was & then he apparently pushed his way past one of the Footmen, who was standing in the hallway & told another, to tell M to meet him in the car!!! So, the meeting didn’t go down well with his Dad I was told but, I was told that his meeting with th*e* Queen was quiet & seemed pleasant enough… So, that was the take of what went down during their Windsor visit, by one of the Queen’s staff.



Hazard probably whined to his father about $$$$ and how they are being so unfair to the lily-livered liar. Wonder how they will spin it for Netflix.



mellibelly said:


> Wow. Everyone looking at the stage and she’s eye f*cking the camera.
> 
> Let’s call her The Wife or The Wench. As a practicing witch, we don’t claim her.





jelliedfeels said:


> The onus is on young! She can’t pull it off with those gollum hands of hers.
> 
> Well at least it explains why she’s there….. to ‘entertain the troops’


I can think of another 5-letter word starting with W and ending with E, but I don't want to be banned from the forum or be mentioned in the podcast as labelling her with an archetypal slur for someone loose.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I have the most special Easter message for all of you. @Aminamina messaged me saying how much she loves the TPF community and especially the H&M ladies and wants to say hi to everyone. She hopes to be back soon for a bit of chitchat to take her mind off things. I told her some of you had asked about her several times as well.


Praying for Aminamina and the Ukraine.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Raptor's snarky comment about service...fair enough, it's just that their "service" is usually lip service, so why don't you just put a sock in it.


Also, "*SELF*-service"



Chloe302225 said:


>



Another jacket top with nothing under it? Maybe no one loaned her a blouse or sheath.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Meanwhile Catherine shows how it is done properly by turning up to the Easter Sunday service looking flawless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Kate arrive at traditional Easter Sunday service
> 
> 
> The Queen, who has been experiencing mobility issues, is not attending the service, which is a staple in the royal calendar, instead marking the occasion at a small chapel inside the castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MM outfits at invictus just make her look worse.



In a 5yo outfit no less.


----------



## kemilia

mellibelly said:


> That’s a Cartier Juste en Clou necklace. Ugh why does she have to ruin everything I like.


First off--I am not putting down anyone that has this necklace or any of the Juste en Clou pieces but she just HAS to show off $$$ jewelry--"Look what I have and it costs a lot and I can afford it!" 
Kate wore VCA and now this one lobs one back with Cartier. Interesting that she rarely wears Diana's aquamarine ring--that piece is gorgeous but probably not a "name".


----------



## sdkitty

coldbrewcoffeekate said:


> Who is TW?


The Wife


----------



## kemilia

xincinsin said:


> Is she doing that butterfly tapping routine for mental health or making sure that all her jewellery is in the photo?
> View attachment 5381452


I vote for making sure the jewelry is all in the picture. Still cannot believe she wore those jeans for this trip.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I vote for making sure the jewelry is all in the picture. Still cannot believe she wore those jeans for this trip.


those jeans do seem kinda casual.  and the next day she's wearing super high heels at the sporting event?  what a waste she is.  If she hadn't nabbed H, she'd probably be an out of work actress today - since the show she "starred" in is no longer on


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I have the most special Easter message for all of you. @Aminamina messaged me saying how much she loves the TPF community and especially the H&M ladies and wants to say hi to everyone. She hopes to be back soon for a bit of chitchat to take her mind off things. I told her some of you had asked about her several times as well.





jennlt said:


> Please let us know if @Aminamina needs anything. I think we'd all be happy to help any way we can.


Peace, love, and joy are my wishes for all of the members here, in particular @Aminamina this Easter


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Raptor's snarky comment about service...fair enough, it's just that their "service" is usually lip service, so why don't you just put a sock in it.


I think the post below goes well with your comments.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She just can't help it, hu? His eyes where the action is, hers finding the camera.



Everyone calls her the claw for a good reason. In the above picture, TW shows total control of H using the dominant position with both thumbs firmly planted atop H's flaccid hand lying across her lap. H shows little resistance although he appears dejected and badly in need of deprogramming, that I hope he gets from a competent psychiatrist rather than ButterCup Mental Health.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> those jeans do seem kinda casual.  and the next day she's wearing super high heels at the sporting event?  what a waste she is.  If she hadn't nabbed H, she'd probably be an out of work actress today - since the show she "starred" in is no longer on


I think she looks great, see below!. Oops, wrong picture!


----------



## Chanbal

VVIQ! 
(very very important question(s) )


----------



## Chanbal

I need a break from checking Twitter


----------



## carmen56

“Gollum hands”.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ladies, I have the most special Easter message for all of you. @Aminamina messaged me saying how much she loves the TPF community and especially the H&M ladies and wants to say hi to everyone. She hopes to be back soon for a bit of chitchat to take her mind off things. I told her some of you had asked about her several times as well.


This is a very special Easter message.  Thank you @QueenofWrapDress!  Relieved to hear about @Aminamina. Wishing her and her family, you QueenofWrapDress and all the lovely TPF posters here a Happy Easter.


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> First off--I am not putting down anyone that has this necklace or any of the Juste en Clou pieces but she just HAS to show off $$$ jewelry--"Look what I have and it costs a lot and I can afford it!"
> Kate wore VCA and now this one lobs one back with Cartier. Interesting that she rarely wears Diana's aquamarine ring--that piece is gorgeous but probably not a "name".



Kate has plenty of Cartier too and well known for her Trilogy earrings so it's not a jewellery brand competition


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I think the post below goes well with your comments.




They already have 1.270 sigs (if anyone wants to join)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Everyone calls her the claw for a good reason. In the above picture, TW shows total control of H using the dominant position with both thumbs firmly planted atop H's flaccid hand lying across her lap. H shows little resistance although he appears dejected and badly in need of deprogramming, that I hope he gets from a competent psychiatrist rather than ButterCup Mental Health.



Uncanny knack for looking directly into the camera at the exact moment of a click. The one thing she _always_ get's right, scary.

Meghan, if you're watching (and we know you must be) please submit


----------



## gracekelly

_Interesting and what we suspected. _


----------



## youngster

Her little speech to introduce Harry = classic love bombing.


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> Her little speech to introduce Harry = classic love bombing.


It was stomach turning and OTT.  Totally unnecessary,  but she sure does love the spotlight...


----------



## Toby93




----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Her little speech to introduce Harry = classic love bombing.



Well, she's got to pretend she was there to do _something_, it was getting embarrassing .

Embarrassing enough though, introducing one's spouse is the seriously scraping the barrel of relevance, it's like introducing yourself in glowing terms.

Missing a trick though, perhaps, M should have had a friend of JCMH to introduce her first, after all, how would anyone know who she is or how significant she is to wounded military veterans?

Next time between M introducing H, JC can MC and sandwich himself in-between the 'dream couple'!


----------



## jennlt

From her perspective...


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She just can't help it, hu? His eyes where the action is, hers finding the camera.



She's such a joke. When is that fool Harry going to wake up?


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Tea on CDAN comment section
> 
> AN INSIDER ACCOUNT ON WHAT HAPPENED WHEN H&M VISITED WINDSOR CASTLE:
> 
> A very good friend of mine from childhood, who now lives back in Manchester England with her family, told me about the visit with the Queen & then with Prince Charles… I can’t get into who my source is but, her sister works at Windsor & was working there, during the visit… Apparently, MM did not go in to see the Queen, she was not allowed to go anywhere near the Queen & only Harry was allowed to see his Grandmother… But, M had to sit in another room, with 4 Footmen watching over her but, they did bring her some hot tea & something to nibble on, while she was waiting… Harry on the other hand, was with his grandmother for just about an hour but then, he met up with Prince Charles also, for only 15 minutes… Because, allegedly, Harry & Charles had this awfully HUGE, really loud & highly charged blow out & their interaction was extremely hostile so much, where others couldn’t help from hearing it & they all heard, the extremely loud yelling coming from & in the vicinity of the room where Harry & his Father met, in Windsor Castle!!! And that Harry left & stormed out in a huge huff, as he slammed the door behind him & then, he asked where M was & then he apparently pushed his way past one of the Footmen, who was standing in the hallway & told another, to tell M to meet him in the car!!! So, the meeting didn’t go down well with his Dad I was told but, I was told that his meeting with th*e* Queen was quiet & seemed pleasant enough… So, that was the take of what went down during their Windsor visit, by one of the Queen’s staff.



This I might believe.  I can understand the Queen wanting to see her grandson, and not the woman who was graciously accepted, then turned and spewed venom at her family.  I can understand her advisers wanting to spare her from the evil beeyotch and prevent any recording, although I hope Haz was patted down as well.  (I can also believe the Queen met with them both, because she’s much more diplomatic than I am!) 
I can’t imagine Charles welcoming his corrupt, sniveling son with welcome arms, and I’m imaging he can see parallels between his son and much despised brother Andy, who I don’t think Charles cares for much.  It speaks volumes to me that Will & Kate took off.  They either knew about the visit and avoided it, Haz wanted to come when he knew Will wouldn’t be there to try to connive his grandmother more easily, or both.  I think Haz wants to ultimately take down Will.  His jealousy is so palpable; the Queen is too old to bother with, and he knows his father won’t be on the throne long.  He’s gunning for his brother.


----------



## Chanbal

VickyB said:


> She's such a joke. When is that fool Harry going to wake up?


One more…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more…



Even watching this tiny snippet of her makes my stomach churn.


----------



## VickyB

She has zero sense of style and what is appropriate attire. She also has no clue as to what looks good on her. She's a mess.


----------



## purseinsanity

VickyB said:


> She has zero sense of style and what is appropriate attire. She also has no clue as to what looks good on her. She's a mess.


Excuse me, but she’s a *HOT* mess.     She’s the one who is so utterly beautiful that she is targeted to be kidnapped for her beauty and Haz needed more security for, remember?!  Kind of like Helen of Troy.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Even watching this tiny snippet of her makes my stomach churn.


She is creepy imo. In TM's last video, he said that TW has always been in charged of every boyfriend and every husband she had. She would say that someone would be her next boyfriend and it would happen… According to TM, she has always been very good in controlling her men. The video can be seen on youtube under remarkable friendship or something like that.


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> She is creepy imo. In TM's last video, he said that TW has always been in charged of every boyfriend and every husband she had. She would say that someone would be her next boyfriend and it would happen… According to TM, she has always been very good in controlling her men. The video can be seen on youtube under remarkable friendship or something like that.



Agree, she is creepy, imo 2. Actually, they both are.  Taking over an event for wounded veterans so they can promote themselves and profit enormously off of it???  Low-lifes. Yes, they are embarrassing the BRF and, like Andy, will continue to do so. Interesting Eug did not bring her family to church today, everyone else was with their family. If H&M are spoilers outside the BRF, she is definitely the inside spoiler. Ewww.

Notice how the spoilers are not aging well, must be all their angst.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interrupting this chat to say  Happy Easter  to one and all.  Best thread on the internet


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Everyone calls her the claw for a good reason. In the above picture, TW shows total control of H using the dominant position with both thumbs firmly planted atop H's flaccid hand lying across her lap. H shows little resistance although he appears dejected and badly in need of deprogramming, that I hope he gets from a competent psychiatrist rather than ButterCup Mental Health.



Seriously. I know some of us have no patience with a grown man being such a whimp, but it's almost as if he's in the clutches of a sect. A one-woman sect, but nevertheless a sect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> From her perspective...
> 
> View attachment 5381831



Honestly, these people gross me out. Who brings their f*cking spouse to a job and all but makes out in public? I'm no prude, but why would you exchange a kiss on stage??? I could deal with it at that polo match when they were newly married, it was a casual occasion (besides the more than 2000 bucks her dress cost...it was one of the maybe three times she did look good in something, I'll give her that) and it was all new and fun, but this is so freaking inappropriate.


----------



## Chanbal

4 stylists, 1 hairdresser, and 1 makeup artist on this sporting event … OK


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, she is creepy, imo 2. Actually, they both are.  Taking over an event for wounded veterans so they can promote themselves and profit enormously off of it???  Low-lifes. Yes, they are embarrassing the BRF and, like Andy, will continue to do so. Interesting Eug did not bring her family to church today, everyone else was with their family. If H&M are spoilers outside the BRF, she is definitely the inside spoiler. Ewww.
> 
> Notice how the spoilers are not aging well, must be all their angst.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5381854


I give Eugenie a pass, I have learned that we dont see photos of everyone  who went to church , only the best shots eg to show off her dress and the pants suit, her husband was at memorial service

ps I did see Daniel Chatto in one snap, but not the one showing his wife Sarah, daughter of Pss Margaret, so the families  do get separated


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020

What is MM wearing!
=================
Here’s our palate cleanser:



ETA: Lady Louise


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## redney

So he's cool with cameras following him if he brought them along.


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> So he's cool with cameras following him if he brought them along.



The size of the crowds is overwhelming, innit? 
Good thing that he has security to hold the people back.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



dress isn't flattering....would look much better on kate


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> So he's cool with cameras following him if he brought them along.


You betcha!


----------



## Chanbal

Delusions of grandeur, also called grandiose delusions… 

_"MEGHAN is being protected by ex-US President Barack Ob****’s former bodyguard. She was shielded by Christopher Sanchez over the weekend while at the…

Ex-Secret Service agent Sanchez spent a total of five years protecting presidents — half of the time George W B***, then the same period for Ob***.

He has spent 21 years in national security and shielding the rich and famous, and is now a leading light at two high-profile US firms."_









						Prince Harry & Meghan Markle hire Barack Obama’s former bodyguard after couple sue Government when security was removed
					

MEGHAN is being protected by ex-US President Barack *****’s former bodyguard.She was shielded by Christopher Sanchez over the weekend while at the..




					thecelebreport.com


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> Delusions of grandeur, also called grandiose delusions…
> 
> _"MEGHAN is being protected by ex-US President Barack Ob****’s former bodyguard. She was shielded by Christopher Sanchez over the weekend while at the…
> 
> Ex-Secret Service agent Sanchez spent a total of five years protecting presidents — half of the time George W B***, then the same period for Ob***.
> 
> He has spent 21 years in national security and shielding the rich and famous, and is now a leading light at two high-profile US firms."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle hire Barack Obama’s former bodyguard after couple sue Government when security was removed
> 
> 
> MEGHAN is being protected by ex-US President Barack *****’s former bodyguard.She was shielded by Christopher Sanchez over the weekend while at the..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecelebreport.com


"Protecting" TW is a pretty easy gig vs. others he's worked for. It's not like she's a target for anything except eye rolls.  On the flip side, probably very hard to have to listen to her ramble her word salad at him, though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is that why she looked like this?







__





						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com
				





or this?


----------



## Chanbal

This seems to be a long one, but…


----------



## CarryOn2020

This one needs no explanation -








						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com
				





Did she spy someone with an iPhone, too?  Noooooo.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m too sexy for my glasses, too sexy:
Where’s my security?? This pen could kill me.  Gosh.









__





						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com


----------



## VickyB

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that why she looked like this?
> 
> View attachment 5382031
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this?
> View attachment 5382032


That expression is scarier than the stink eye Jada gave will at the Oscars.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> One more…



TW looks awful in that clip. Disheveled and perspiring and looking like she just had a roll in the hay. Is she still merching her Soho assets ?!


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


>



Too bad TW opted out of the gladiator sandals, it would have been a major hit.


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> In fairness to her, I have seen a lot of young style influencers wearing Chanel jackets with ripped jeans, another trend I don't care for.





jelliedfeels said:


> …
> These boyfriend jeans are horrific - they are so baggy and then so tight on the tum.  The crotch whiskers are a true nightmare. her top half is giving Zara officewear then *her crotch looks likes it’s from a guy from duck dynasty.*
> 
> Continuing the two people cut in half and jammed together theme here we have Dorothy Lamour’s ‘road to’  bodysuit underneath a pant suit that would be too boxy for a female politician.





lanasyogamama said:


> Those jeans would have been better with the black jacket.
> Another boxy top.


Yes, it was the style of jeans with that jacket - plus they fit her badly! Duck dynasty hahahaha @jelliedfeels.The jacket/bag (probably gorgeous on someone else) was, on MeMeMeGain, a high street attempt at a Chanel look akin to a teenager on a budget.
And yes, @lanasyogamama, the latest jeans would have paired better with that short black jacket. 
No surprise, I think all of her looks on this trip are painful - all so odd and wrong - and HazBeen looks miserable - perhaps he finally understands what a mess he’s made of it all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

But but Kate spends more.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that why she looked like this?
> 
> View attachment 5382031



I have no idea how she looks like. There is so much work done by plastic surgeons, makeup and hair professionals...  However, the pic above goes well with the one below imo.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I have no idea how she looks like. There is so much work done by plastic surgeons, makeup and hair professionals...  However, the pic above goes well with the one below imo.



I can’t figure out how her hand is even positioned in that!  The clutching is crazy!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that why she looked like this?
> 
> View attachment 5382031
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this?
> View attachment 5382032


is that top picture for real?


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> *She’s the one who is so utterly beautiful that she is targeted to be kidnapped for her beauty*


Tell that to the guy on the left    He didn't get the memo


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> 4 stylists, 1 hairdresser, and 1 makeup artist on this sporting event … OK





What fresh hell is this??? 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that why she looked like this?
> 
> View attachment 5382031
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this?
> View attachment 5382032



Wow - not only is her look terrible, but she lost it in public - repeatedly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> is that top picture for real?



I included the link from Newscom. They are reliable as far as I know.


----------



## Katel

Hard to believe she went there repeatedly at a public event she is supposedly “co-hosting” … OK someone, spill - what angered the Dufess?
	

		
			
		

		
	





She cannot help herself … given enough rope, a prima dona always hangs herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> View attachment 5382099
> 
> What fresh hell is this???
> 
> 
> 
> Wow - not only is her look terrible, but she lost it in public - repeatedly.



Worse than that wedding she was not invited to imo.  The stress of faking it for the cams is starting to show. Hazzi  threw a restrained fit over the iPhone cameras. As more negative press appears, he will become tenser.  Just my opinion.


----------



## zinacef

So many paid stylist—- the vision of all the outfits when presented was great but questionable when she put them on but everybody is a paid yes person so here she goes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that why she looked like this?
> 
> View attachment 5382031
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this?
> View attachment 5382032





CarryOn2020 said:


> This one needs no explanation -
> 
> View attachment 5382035
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did she spy someone with an iPhone, too?  Noooooo.
> 
> View attachment 5382045


I'm so glad these pictures have surfaced for now we know why Netflix is controlling access to the despicable duo and why H and TW are behaving like a couple of lovebirds. IMO, Netflix wants to ensure that only the moments that depict a "happy-ever-after fairytale life" of the prince and his princess, who have escaped the evil BRF, are captured for their documentary. You're too late Netflix because real-life photos of the nasty couple have escaped your grip.

ETA Thanks to our Aussie friends who own Newscom for the pictures.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> The size of the crowds is overwhelming, innit?
> Good thing that he has security to hold the people back.


No one on Twitter seems impressed with them either


----------



## Toby93

Katel said:


> View attachment 5382099
> 
> What fresh hell is this???
> 
> 
> 
> Wow - not only is her look terrible, but she lost it in public - repeatedly.


Does she honestly think that this style of dress is flattering to her body shape?  This one is similar to the cut out one she wore in NYC.  If she was 5' 10 and 110lbs, then yes, but on her...that's a hard NO


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



She looks like a slab of fondant icing waiting for the baker to mould it.
What a lump of nasty she is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The lovely Lady Sarah Chatto - she exudes such a quiet poise and grace.











						Lady Sarah Chatto and sons attend Easter  service at Windsor Castle
					

Sarah, 57, the daughter of Princess Margaret and Anthony Armstrong-Jones, 1st Earl Snowdon, stepped out with her husband Daniel and their two sons at St. George's Chapel at Windsor Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## A1aGypsy

CarryOn2020 said:


> Worse than that wedding she was not invited to imo.  The stress of faking it for the cams is starting to show. Hazzi  threw a restrained fit over the iPhone cameras. As more negative press appears, he will become tenser.  Just my opinion.



What happened over iPhone cameras?


----------



## charlottawill

Whatever you celebrate, I hope everyone here is enjoying the day with loved ones.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> She looks like a slab of fondant icing waiting for the baker to mould it.
> What a lump of nasty she is.



I’ve missed whatever she has been doing over the past few days but I’ve decided your comment summarizes it perfectly.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why is she so obsessed with boxy white  tops?  I need answers!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

BLG had a great point that a Veteran should have introduced Hazz.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s hard to believe but they’re honestly getting worse.  How can anyone be buying what they’re selling?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I have no idea how she looks like. There is so much work done by plastic surgeons, makeup and hair professionals...  However, the pic above goes well with the one below imo.



Maybe this?


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypermobility_(joints)


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> BLG had a great point that a Veteran should have introduced Hazz.


Maybe no one wanted to?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m too sexy for my glasses, too sexy:
> Where’s my security?? This pen could kill me.  Gosh.
> 
> View attachment 5382051
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com


What an eejit


----------



## CarryOn2020

A1aGypsy said:


> What happened over iPhone cameras?



On page 5935 of this thread, there is a clip from Baroness Bruck’s  twitter. It shows one angle of Hazzi looking for security. Here is another angle, after he signaled for security. The problem here is that he is at a public event, people with cell phones want selfies, he acts peckish and his security is downright aggressive - although there is no harm  to him. Nflix is most likely furious. The way the security rushes up to apologise to him = gross.  Supposedly, these are the people he cares about.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that why she looked like this?
> 
> View attachment 5382031
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or this?
> View attachment 5382032


How many drinks has Hazy had? I know he wasn't raised to be the heir, but his upbringing was not all that different than William's. What an embarrassment.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. I know some of us have no patience with a grown man being such a whimp, but it's almost as if he's in the clutches of a sect. A one-woman sect, but nevertheless a sect.


It does appear to be an unhealthy relationship. But as they say, the only people who really know what goes on in a relationship are the people in it.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



But guys, Harry's in a tan suit!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, these people gross me out. Who brings their f*cking spouse to a job and all but makes out in public? I'm no prude, but why would you exchange a kiss on stage??? I could deal with it at that polo match when they were newly married, it was a casual occasion (besides the more than 2000 bucks her dress cost...it was one of the maybe three times she did look good in something, I'll give her that) and it was all new and fun, but this is so freaking inappropriate.


It's all for the public - look at how happy we are!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> But guys, Harry's in a tan suit!



Does it fit?


----------



## charlottawill

Stepford robot here. Or else a lot of Valium was consumed.


----------



## charlottawill

I have to go out to dinner now, but this is so much more entertaining


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This one needs no explanation -
> 
> View attachment 5382035
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did she spy someone with an iPhone, too?  Noooooo.
> 
> View attachment 5382045


Talk about showing her true colors


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> Hard to believe she went there repeatedly at a public event she is supposedly “co-hosting” … OK someone, spill - what angered the Dufess?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5382105
> View attachment 5382106
> View attachment 5382107
> 
> She cannot help herself … given enough rope, a prima dona always hangs herself.


Are you sure these pictures weren't taken by TPF members in the Netherlands?


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> Tell that to the guy on the left    He didn't get the memo
> View attachment 5382092


Another embarrassing video of her talking to someone who can’t even fake being interested in what she’s saying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Really?!!?  Then there’s hope Hazard and TheWaste won’t be at the Jubilee?!!?


----------



## rose60610

How much of Meghan's scowling/psycho faces will survive the Netflix edits?  If a Netflix program does come out of this, it'll be about patting themselves on their backs from beginning to finish, and the participants were probably handed pre-written glowing remarks to use in the documentary   .   The lovey-dovey exchanges are nauseating and she's using a handicapped veterans event as her own personal fashion show. They couldn't get any lower if they wallowed in a gutter. They're sick!


----------



## redney

rose60610 said:


> How much of Meghan's scowling/psycho faces will survive the Netflix edits?  If a Netflix program does come out of this, it'll be about patting themselves on their backs from beginning to finish, and the participants were probably handed pre-written glowing remarks to use in the documentary   .   The lovey-dovey exchanges are nauseating and she's using a handicapped veterans event as her own personal fashion show. They couldn't get any lower if they wallowed in a gutter. They're sick!


I'm sure they're both named as Executive Producers for the show to give them more control over the content. Her mean faces will be on the cutting room floor.


----------



## xincinsin

redney said:


> I'm sure they're both named as Executive Producers for the show to give them more control over the content. Her mean faces will be on the cutting room floor.


We'll have to provide the Criterion version with uncensored/restored footage.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> How much of Meghan's scowling/psycho faces will survive the Netflix edits?  If a Netflix program does come out of this, it'll be about patting themselves on their backs from beginning to finish, and the participants were probably handed pre-written glowing remarks to use in the documentary   .   The lovey-dovey exchanges are nauseating and she's using a handicapped veterans event as her own personal fashion show. They couldn't get any lower if they wallowed in a gutter. They're sick!


If Invictus allows itself to stay in her claws, she will get a freebie fashion show every year or two.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> If Invictus allows itself to stay in her claws, she will get a freebie fashion show every year or two.


I think the price the charity had to pay was too great and the Sussex will be cut loose.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I think the price the charity had to pay was too great and the Sussex will be cut loose.


Might turn ugly. I don't see them stepping down gracefully. This is the only big event they can claim and brag about. I wouldn't be surprised if they try to tie Archewell to Invictus using some "service is universal" excuse


----------



## Chanbal

If not the photographer, the stylist of the day must be a secret member of TPF.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> 4 stylists, 1 hairdresser, and 1 makeup artist on this sporting event … OK



6 people? Sack all of them especially the hairdresser 

also because I can’t stop posting today - I thought I should add that I think the top half of the knock off Chanel blazer is my favourite.  At least it had the potential to be a smart and appropriate look with nice cigarette pants or a plain midi dress/skirt. The rest are just so badly conceived and executed.


marietouchet said:


> I give Eugenie a pass, I have learned that we dont see photos of everyone  who went to church , only the best shots eg to show off her dress and the pants suit, her husband was at memorial service
> 
> ps I did see Daniel Chatto in one snap, but not the one showing his wife Sarah, daughter of Pss Margaret, so the families  do get separated


I agree, maybe her husband isn’t religious and the baby is too young to sit through church and m maybe they will let their kids choose anyway.
I’d rather he said I’m an atheist or whatever then lying about having a sudden conversion to Anglicanism for all of a few months so he can get to  sit in the front row in a badly fitting designer outfit.


----------



## Lodpah

So where’s the coverage of the veterans? Is this about them or the games? Two despicable and desperate humans whose tower of pride is astoundingly so high that’s it’s bound to collapse soon. Pride always goes before a fall. I hope people don’t contribute to their charity as this does not benefit the charity. I seriously wish some governmental entity investigate them for fraud, if there is one but the amount of money they spend or being spent to have these two appear at events don’t seem right.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> dress isn't flattering....would look much better on kate


I mean to be fair to M, she’s not tall and it’s not entirely fair to compare how good a tall, skinny woman looks compared to a rather stumpier, boxy woman because the tall one always looks better in anything.

*However*, she has got no style or taste whatsoever and her PR trying to force all these ‘looks’ down our throats is a little grating.

Also at this point I would post a hundred lemon cakes to a foodbank to see her try a different wig, please Meggles, for me? Get a pixie cut, full curls or try a blonde bob? Some nice braids? A sleek bun?
Anything…. ANYTHING besides those greasy tendrils.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chloe302225 said:


>





What the f it looks like she’s just wearing an old sweatshirt maybe from Costco originally and she’s meant to have some neon floral leggings to go with. Very Midwest, middle-aged mum goes to the gym vibes - not event appropriate at all. I think Valentino are making fun of her. Join the club PP




Chanbal said:


> I have no idea how she looks like. There is so much work done by plastic surgeons, makeup and hair professionals...  However, the pic above goes well with the one below imo.





Actually this makes a lot of sense. South Park already established that Kim K is a hobbit so M is perfect casting for some old creepy creature that keeps following her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> On page 5935 of this thread, there is a clip from Baroness Bruck’s  twitter. It shows one angle of Hazzi looking for security. Here is another angle, after he signaled for security. The problem here is that he is at a public event, people with cell phones want selfies, he acts peckish and his security is downright aggressive - although there is no harm  to him. Nflix is most likely furious. The way the security rushes up to apologise to him = gross.  Supposedly, these are the people he cares about.



I’m sure that skinny woman will make an incredible human shield when the squad of 250 machine gun-toting British assassins arrive from Westminster abbey, a charity dinner at a luxury hotel, the Staines summer fete, and the various primary schools and hospital wards where they’ve been lying in wait for H.   

Honestly, they should be more worried about sunburn.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> If Invictus allows itself to stay in her claws, she will get a freebie fashion show every year or two.



She's a) trying to make herself the new Diana, noted for her clothes and b) changes of dress mean more photo coverage, as _each_ costume change means another set of pics for even same media sources.

Without her sad, premature death, the whole retrospective poor little Princess Di (I'm on neither team) and the fact that she was a young, tall Amazonian model-physique type who could carry off some truly suspect outfits, Diana was criticised for her obsession with clothes and shopping - and she was the Diana, Princess of Wales, a real future Queen (which atm, neither K or M are, and M will never be). Diana was also on official duties most of the time in public, not hanging on to her husband's coattails.

IMO, M is really out of touch with public opinion and badly advised.

The 1980s lyrics point to the _media's_ preoccupation with Diana's outfits at the time as distraction for other things going on at the time, what M is doing when what she is doing is literally taking the focus off the Invictus Games, and Diana would have _never_ done that. Diana used her glamour and media spotlight to shine on those around her, especially the causes.



Sex jibe husband murders wife
Bomb blast victim fights for life
Girl thirteen attacked with knife
Princess Di is wearing a new dress
Jet airliner shot from sky
Famine horror - millions die
Earthquake terror figures rise
Princess Di is wearing a new dress
You can't change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world
In black townships fires blaze
Prospects better, premier says
Within sight are golden days
Princess Di is wearing a new dress
You can't change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world
Princess Di is wearing a new dress
Princess Di is wearing a new dress
Princess Di is wearing a new dress
Princess Di is wearing a new dress


Source: Musixmatch
Songwriters: Gore Martin Lee


----------



## duna

Chloe302225 said:


>




I can't believe she wore such a short dress  ...actually I can....she gets worst and worst as time and events go by: I'm so sad that our RF has to be connected to such a


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Toby93 said:


> *Does she honestly think that this style of dress is flattering to her body shape?  This one is similar to the cut out one she wore in NYC.  If she was 5' 10 and 110lbs*, then yes, but on her...that's a hard NO



....and 20 years younger!


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> I can't believe she wore such a short dress  ...actually I can....she gets worst and worst as time and events go by: I'm so sad that our RF has to be connected to such a


Four .... FOUR ... stylists! I don't think she listens to any of them, or the pool of potential clothing sponsors is drying up because she makes everything look bad.


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> Four .... FOUR ... stylists! I don't think she listens to any of them, or the pool of potential clothing sponsors is drying up because she makes everything look bad.



The problem is she tries to dress like a sweet young thing but she is middle aged and should aim to look dignified or elegant instead. And better fitting clothes, and stuff that doesn’t make her look like she has no waist. Fashion disaster. She makes all the branded clothes look cheap and that takes quite a bit of skill…


----------



## lanasyogamama

What do you think she thought that white dress was doing for her?


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> The problem is she tries to dress like a sweet young thing but she is middle aged and should aim to look dignified or elegant instead. And better fitting clothes, and stuff that doesn’t make her look like she has no waist. Fashion disaster. She makes all the branded clothes look cheap and that takes quite a bit of skill…


Not that I'm sympathizing with her, but I have no waist too. The difference between us is that she is dressing in styles that look tons better if you were slim and trim. It's making me believe that before marriage and pregnancy (alleged), she really was depending on either chemical aid or repeated liposuction to stay slim. And yes, the "sweet young thing" ship sailed a long time before she ever finagled that first date with Hazard.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> What do you think she thought that white dress was doing for her?


The dress did nothing for her, but she is under the impression that she could do loads for the dress, like maybe spawn follow-up stories about how after seeing her in it, the stores were stormed and every piece was snapped up, and then she is hailed as a muse, gets a contract as the face of some designer brand, and is gifted freebies for the rest of her life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles "The Good Samaritan" repeating the story of Raptor, the baby and the coat. 

The interesting thing is, the article is positive, but the title just screams snark...when you call someone a good Samaritan in German, it's usually ironic, especially when it's such a non-action as lending someone your coat.

Also, the comments are nearly all negative when they used to be more pro-Raptor.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German magazine titles "The Good Samaritan" repeating the story of Raptor, the baby and the coat.
> 
> The interesting thing is, the article is positive, but the title just screams snark...when you call someone a good Samaritan in German, it's usually ironic, especially when it's such a non-action as lending someone your coat.
> 
> Also, the comments are nearly all negative when they used to be more pro-Raptor.


I am amused that many headlines are saying she "gave" the coat, but the article may indicate that she loaned it. "Gave" and "loan" are very different kettles of fish.


----------



## LittleStar88

She is one of those women who buys the items that she likes/are expensive or designer with no regard to how those things will look on her. And then thinks she is dressing the body she wants or had, rather than the body she is living in now.

Seems like everything that is white makes her look wide and square. Even if she can't figure this out, she has a team of people who should know better. They must be all "yes" people or they just don't like her and giggle at her fashion faux pas behind her back.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Not that I'm sympathizing with her, but I have no waist too. The difference between us is that she is dressing in styles that look tons better if you were slim and trim. It's making me believe that before marriage and pregnancy (alleged), she really was depending on either chemical aid or repeated liposuction to stay slim. And yes, the "sweet young thing" ship sailed a long time before she ever finagled that first date with Hazard.


I agree, she has too much access to help with diet and exercise to not be able to get back to where she was unless there are other (chemical) factors she depended on.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I am amused that many headlines are saying she "gave" the coat, but the article may indicate that she loaned it. *"Gave" and "loan" are very different* kettles of fish.



Plus, Meghan COULDN'T have *given *the coat, because she has to return it to the store!


----------



## rose60610

duna said:


> I can't believe she wore such a short dress  ...actually I can....she gets worst and worst as time and events go by: I'm so sad that our RF has to be connected to such a



My sympathies to everyone in the British Commonwealth for Meghan becoming a member of the RF.  But she's a U.S. citizen. Harry can divorce her, but WE'LL always be stuck with her  . At least there is a smidgen of hope for the Commonwealth. There has to be some other rich dope on another continent out there we can shove her off on  .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't help but feel bad for him. You know what that reminds me of? Bunny McDougal manipulating Trey by stroking his forearm. Only Trey didn't look so completely defeated and robbed of his entire soul.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I am amused that many headlines are saying she "gave" the coat, but the article may indicate that she loaned it. "Gave" and "loan" are very different kettles of fish.



The lending came from me, the article said "give" too, but also, in German give just means you physically pass something to someone, be it for use in that very moment, as a loan or a gift. It never occured to me "giving" someone her coat meant it was a gift.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean to be fair to M, she’s not tall and it’s not entirely fair to compare how good a tall, skinny woman looks compared to a rather stumpier, boxy woman because the tall one always looks better in anything.
> 
> *However*, she has got no style or taste whatsoever and her PR trying to force all these ‘looks’ down our throats is a little grating.
> 
> Also at this point I would post a hundred lemon cakes to a foodbank to see her try a different wig, please Meggles, for me? Get a pixie cut, full curls or try a blonde bob? Some nice braids? A sleek bun?
> Anything…. ANYTHING besides those greasy tendrils.


I know it's not fair.  Kate will always look better in clothes.  But I couldn't help it.  She's such a nasty biatch.  And so full of herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I know it's not fair.  Kate will always look better in clothes.  But I couldn't help it.  She's such a nasty biatch.  And so full of herself.



To be fair none of us would be so harsh on her if she wasn't such a nasty piece of work. Also, she can't help her bodyshape, but with all that money and help she could surely find something actually flattering to wear. It's not that she has really big obstacles to work around, she has an average figure, so her stupid choices are deliberate.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair none of us would be so harsh on her if she wasn't such a nasty piece of work. Also, she can't help her bodyshape, but with all that money and help she could surely find something actually flattering to wear. It's not that she has really big obstacles to work around, she has an average figure, so her stupid choices are deliberate.


maybe more like unrealistic....she doesn't see how some clothing is unflattering on her.  but she has stylists, right?  why have them if you don't listen to their advice?


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> What do you think she thought that white dress was doing for her?


Showcasing her “sexy” chicken legs?
(I still would practically kill for skinny legs BTW!   )


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



IMHO he brought M to bolster his self confidence and ability to handle the situation/camera
After INVICTU is a big thing for him, the one marquee accomplishment and he needs to do this visit well


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> IMHO he brought M to bolster his self confidence and ability to handle the situation/camera
> After INVICTU is a big thing for him, the one marquee accomplishment and he needs to do this visit well


would she have allowed him to go without her?  and they're using it for Netflix, right?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't help but feel bad for him. You know what that reminds me of? Bunny McDougal manipulating Trey by stroking his forearm. Only Trey didn't look so completely defeated and robbed of his entire soul.


Nah, I still don’t feel sorry for him.  He’s an a$$hole, just like his wife.  I  read that he had his “security” at the games stop people from taking pictures of him.  You know, because the click of iPhone cameras trigger him?


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> would she have allowed him to go without her?  and they're using it for Netflix, right?


Agree, but he does seem to be holding on to her for dear life ...

She is beholden financially to Netflix and has produced, so, yeah this is away to get her off the hook too, even though INVICTUS is H's thing


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I know it's not fair.  Kate will always look better in clothes.  But I couldn't help it.  She's such a nasty biatch.  And so full of herself.


Kate will always look better not just for physical reasons, but because she exudes warmth and sincerity and SMILES a genuine smile.  Things Megain has proven herself to be incapable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand just for fun our daily dose of stan ridiculousness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(comments under Angela's tweet)


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aaand just for fun our daily dose of stan ridiculousness.



“The biggest audience of any Royal ever”??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## MiniMabel

I've said before that she is totally out of her depth, and nothing has changed.  A further issue is a complete lack of interest in anything where she is not the focus.  Kissing on the stage was wholly unnecessary and inappropriate, as was mentioning their children.  The faces I could see in that clip, of the audience, looked uncomfortable and bored to tears.  

The Harkles are an embarrassment to the BRF and should retire to somewhere quiet and live their privileged lives without pushing themselves forward.  It's extremely annoying that they are using the Duke and Duchess titles; they do not deserve them.  In addition, the expensive jewellery and clothes amounting to thousands of pounds was unacceptable, anyway, in these difficult times, but especially so at an event such as this.

Attention-seeking twerps are everywhere these days, unfortunately.  I would like to see appropriate and modest behaviour (and particularly dressing) make a come-back, and consideration and thoughtfulness to be part of everyone's life.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair none of us would be so harsh on her if she wasn't such a nasty piece of work. Also, she can't help her bodyshape, but with all that money and help she could surely find something actually flattering to wear. It's not that she has really big obstacles to work around, she has an average figure, so her stupid choices are deliberate.


Ditto.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

None of this is normal, not him nearly breaking down in tears because of her over the top lovebombing speech, nor her clawing into his f*cking arm like a pedophile who is taking out their kidnapping victim for a walk but wants them to be unsuspicious to onlookers and not run away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair none of us would be so harsh on her if she wasn't such a nasty piece of work. Also, she can't help her bodyshape, but with all that money and help she could surely find something actually flattering to wear. It's not that she has really big obstacles to work around, she has an average figure, so her stupid choices are deliberate.



My opinion :  Agree and will add - they both are nasty pieces of work.  They have shady business practices, they allow their ‘squad’ to attack others, they attempt to silence free speech, they swan around in expensive clothes and jewelry while claiming they are broke, they seldom give cash, they have sold themselves to Nflix, the list is endless of why they are a nasty celebrity couple.

 He brought her because Nflix is making a documentary of the couple. They need footage of the couple.  In other words, he was told to by his paymasters.

Kate is not superficial like MM. Kate has  developed depth  character, MM seems to be lacking in that area. Character and authenticity are what make people age well.  Fake will always look old.

just my opinion.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My opinion :  Agree and will add - they both are nasty pieces of work.



I agree, I'm not a fan of Harry either anymore. It's just that I dislike her disproportionally more and despite his lack of backbone and decency do feel bad for him because I truly do think he is a victim of mental abuse on top of his psychological problems.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree, I'm not a fan of Harry either anymore. It's just that I dislike her disproportionally more and despite his lack of backbone and decency do feel bad for him because I truly do think he is a victim of mental abuse on top of his psychological problems.


I think she is worse and believe she dominates him.  But he seems sorely lacking in character, weak, easily dominated by her.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't help but feel bad for him. You know what that reminds me of? Bunny McDougal manipulating Trey by stroking his forearm. Only Trey didn't look so completely defeated and robbed of his entire soul.




Don’t feel bad for him. Remember, none of it would have happened if he hadn’t been totally on board. He’s right where he wanted to be. If he’s miserable it’s all on him.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I think she is worse and believe she dominates him.  But he seems sorely lacking in character, weak, easily dominated by her.



Agreed. 

He's not a vicim. Co-dependant, but not a victim. 

Some of _his _comments in the last few years seem paranoid, vindictive against people and events that happened more than decades ago, and quite malicious against the British people, never mind the press. I wasn't at his mother's funeral procession (I think I had a music lesson) but can you imagine being a normal person, upset about any Royal dying, especially 'Queen of Hearts' in 1997 and have H tell you now 'how very dare you, she was _my_ mother'. That gives everything away to me, he literally thinks the World is just for him. RUDE and without compassion for others. *Everyone in that procession thought they were supporting Harry and felt deeply for the boys I'm sure.



*

And _all_ their virtue signalling from their multi-mega--room, oatmilk-on-cardboard-coloured Cali-pally makes me


----------



## Chanbal

Sometimes I feel sorry for Hazz, but then reality hits!


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> I think she is worse and believe she dominates him.  But he seems sorely lacking in character, weak, easily dominated by her.


After observing JCMH after Megxit for over 2 years now, I have a new appreciation for how clever and skillful the BRF pr machine was at crafting a likeable, popular persona for JCMH with basically zero to work with. I think what we’ve seen since he left the protection of the BRF is what he really is. But now there are no filters, no experienced handlers to keep him on track, no senior family members to bolster him when he’s out in public, no one to put the brakes on his worst excesses. Makes me think of the old nursery rhyme…Humpty Dumpty had a great fall and all the king‘s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again. Even if JCMH were to return to the BRF, I’m not sure that even all their prodigious pr skills would be able to turn him into an asset to the “Firm” again.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Sometimes I feel sorry for Hazz, but then reality hits!




He really does exist in his own reality, doesn't he?


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> After observing JCMH after Megxit for over 2 years now, I have a new appreciation for how clever and skillful the BRF pr machine was at crafting a likeable, popular persona for JCMH with basically zero to work with. I think what we’ve seen since he left the protection of the BRF is what he really is. But now there are no filters, no experienced handlers to keep him on track, no senior family members to bolster him when he’s out in public, no one to put the brakes on his worst excesses. Makes me think of the old nursery rhyme…Humpty Dumpty had a great fall and all the king‘s horses and all the king’s men couldn’t put Humpty together again. Even if JCMH were to return to the BRF, I’m not sure that even all their prodigious pr skills would be able to turn him into an asset to the “Firm” again.


well, apparently the Wife keeps him in line as far as drinking and smoking.  Basically she's ruined all his fun


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I wasn't at his mother's funeral procession (I think I had a music lesson) but can you imagine being a normal person, upset about any Royal dying, especially 'Queen of Hearts' in 1997 and have H tell you now 'how very dare you, she was _my_ mother'.



I don't blame the 12yo boy for feeling that way, but I do agree it is completely inapproriate for a grown man to randomly blurt that into the world and also slightly worrisome he seems so completely unable to move on from his childhood feelings and to see everyone's good intentions.

The rest of the BRF seemed to feel carried by the outpour of love after Philip's death, yet Harry's main feeling is...jealousy and possessiveness, nurtured for 25 years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Sometimes I feel sorry for Hazz, but then reality hits!



 He really doesn't get it, does he. For his class, equality means giving up a lot of privilege, which I doubt he's ready for.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> well, apparently the Wife keeps him in line as far as drinking and smoking.  Basically she's ruined all his fun



Not sure. I think he looks intoxicated with one thing or another in many of his pictures.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure. I think he looks intoxicated with one thing or another in many of his pictures.


maybe she's giving him something to help keep him under control.  Joking I guess


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Sometimes I feel sorry for Hazz, but then reality hits!





Precisely.  He is a multi-millionaire whilst the majority of people have very little and, in too many cases, nothing at all and for whom just daily life is a real struggle.  These two people, along with many others, really need to take a step back, build a bridge and get over themselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Showcasing her “sexy” chicken legs?
> (I still would practically kill for skinny legs BTW!   )


there's skinny and there's skinny....I'd like to have nice long slender legs but toothpicks like hers? maybe not


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair none of us would be so harsh on her if she wasn't such a nasty piece of work. Also, she can't help her bodyshape, but with all that money and help she could surely find something actually flattering to wear. It's not that she has really big obstacles to work around, she has an average figure, so her stupid choices are deliberate.


100%. I often look at the style of Queen Maxima of the Netherlands. She is tall and large, which can be _relatively_ difficult in terms of dressing as compared to Kate, or Queen Letizia of Spain who are both very slim. She is also not as slim as she was before. But man…. Queen Maxima always looks beautiful, appropriate and sometimes even fun in her fashion choices. 
I agree with you that with so much resources at her disposal (stylists, trainers, anything!), it must be deliberate.


----------



## sdkitty

BVBookshop said:


> 100%. I often look at the style of Queen Maxima of the Netherlands. She is tall and large, which can be difficult in terms of dressing as compared to Kate, or Queen Letizia of Spain who are both very slim. But man…. Queen Maxima always looks beautiful, appropriate and sometimes even fun in her fashion choices. I agree with you that with so much resources at her disposal (stylists, trainers, anything!), it must be deliberate.


I must respectfully disagree.  she doesn't want to look bad.  she just doesn't have a mirror


----------



## meluvs2shop

BVBookshop said:


> 100%. I often look at the style of Queen *Maxima* of the Netherlands. She *is tall and* *large*, which can be _relatively_ difficult in terms of dressing as compared to Kate, or Queen Letizia of Spain who are both very slim. She is also not as slim as she was before. But man…. Queen Maxima always looks beautiful, appropriate and sometimes even fun in her fashion choices.
> I agree with you that with so much resources at her disposal (stylists, trainers, anything!), it must be deliberate.


Queen Maxima is large? Tall, yes, but I don’t consider her large, imo.


----------



## Helventara

meluvs2shop said:


> Queen Maxima is large? Tall, yes, but I don’t consider her large, imo.


Relatively, as I was responding to Megs vs. Kate.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> well, apparently the Wife keeps him in line as far as drinking and smoking.  Basically she's ruined all his fun


The witch couldn't completely train her pet husband under the watchful eye of his UK keepers so she whisked him away to USA where she took away all his privileges. First, she retaught him her signals one at a time and when he was a good dog boy, she gave him a treat, something he really liked, maybe booze or drugs, but just in small doses to keep him salivating for more until she had full control over him. She might also have used a training collar to zap him into submission and then rewarded him with her Soho acquired moves.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> The witch couldn't completely train her pet husband under the watchful eye of his UK keepers so she whisked him away to USA where she took away all his privileges. First, she retaught him her signals one at a time and when he was a good dog boy, she gave him a treat, something he really liked, maybe booze or drugs, but just in small doses to keep him salivating for more until she had full control over him. She might also have used a training collar to zap him into submission and then rewarded him with her Soho acquired moves.


or sexual favors


----------



## marietouchet

meluvs2shop said:


> Queen Maxima is large? Tall, yes, but I don’t consider her large, imo.


Kate and Letizia practically disappear next to Maxima


----------



## Chanbal

A couple of interesting videos from the Aussies on the Harkles…   


_Royal Family 'intensely nervous' about Prince Harry's 'explosive' memoir_

This one starts on about the 2nd half @ 2:14

_'Self-pitying narcissism': UK residents 'sick and tired' of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle_


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Showcasing her “sexy” chicken legs?
> (I still would practically kill for skinny legs BTW!   )


I would kill for shapely legs, not her skinny legs. I don't know why it is, but I've observed over the years that women with her body type (no defined waist) often do have skinny legs.


----------



## meluvs2shop

Why are we comparing their bodies? They are all different women. And one is in a different decade. Bodies change constantly.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aaand just for fun our daily dose of stan ridiculousness.



I've been seeing a lot of fawning over them in various on line outlets - how beautiful she looks, how stylish, how in love they are, how selfless they are in helping others. I don't know whether to laugh or gag.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

All those people doing detective work so we don't have to


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree, I'm not a fan of Harry either anymore. It's just that I dislike her disproportionally more and despite his lack of backbone and decency do feel bad for him because I truly do think he is a victim of mental abuse on top of his psychological problems.


He was a grown man when he embarked on a relationship with her. Despite advice from his formerly close older brother to take things slowly, Harry blindly forged ahead. His situation is entirely of his own making. He needs to get himself together before he gives mental health advice to others.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I've been seeing a lot of fawning over them in various on line outlets - how beautiful she looks, how stylish, how in love they are, how selfless they are in helping others. I don't know whether to laugh or gag.


All the Invictus articles in my feed are about the tiresome twats. Their PR must be really pushing the narrative that the Games are nothing without their founder wastrel and Her Heinous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> So where’s the coverage of the veterans? Is this about them or the games? Two despicable and desperate humans whose tower of pride is astoundingly so high that’s it’s bound to collapse soon. Pride always goes before a fall. I hope people don’t contribute to their charity as this does not benefit the charity. I seriously wish some governmental entity investigate them for fraud, if there is one but the amount of money they spend or being spent to have these two appear at events don’t seem right.


Thank you.  On many sites, there are no pix of the athletes and it is just the Harkles.  It is so obvious that the PR machine was just working it for them.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> well, apparently the Wife keeps him in line as far as drinking and smoking.  Basically she's ruined all his fun



And the closest thing he can get to a polo pony is by attending a rodeo   .  She has him feeding "rescue" chickens and whoring out his mother's image for money.  He's cut off from his own living family members but if you can pimp the dead ones for a buck, (Diana AND merched wreaths full of symbolism from Philip's funeral anyone?) then hey, you can brag about how family is everything.  My, how the mighty have fallen.


----------



## gracekelly

duna said:


> I can't believe she wore such a short dress  ...actually I can....she gets worst and worst as time and events go by: I'm so sad that our RF has to be connected to such a


Don't you understand that she has legs for miles and the world needs to see them?  She has to do something so you won't look at the rest of her.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I did an internet search because I can only remember royals wearing the official shirt in Invictus games photos.  I didn’t do a deep dive and I didn’t find much info.  In one pic William and Harry are wearing the Invictus shirts and Charles is wearing a dark suit. 

I learned that in 2021 Kate made a $1million donation to the games (according to a headline), and one year she was supposed to attend the opening ceremonies but cancelled at the last minute due to pregnancy nausea. Her sister and brother attended in her place and sat with Peter and Autumn Phillips and all looked like they were having a wonderful time.

He really had a lot of family support, once upon a time.


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I can't believe she wore such a short dress  ...actually I can....she gets worst and worst as time and events go by: I'm so sad that our RF has to be connected to such a


I don't think hers was a short as the one on the model


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> A couple of interesting videos from the Aussies on the Harkles…
> 
> 
> _Royal Family 'intensely nervous' about Prince Harry's 'explosive' memoir_
> 
> This one starts on about the 2nd half @ 2:14
> 
> _'Self-pitying narcissism': UK residents 'sick and tired' of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle_



Perhaps the reason why they were summoned. I would say very concerned vs intensely nervous.


----------



## kemilia

Katel said:


> Hard to believe she went there repeatedly at a public event she is supposedly “co-hosting” … OK someone, spill - what angered the Dufess?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5382105
> View attachment 5382106
> View attachment 5382107
> 
> She cannot help herself … given enough rope, a prima dona always hangs herself.


It must be hell for her household staff. They are probably so happy she's away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

meluvs2shop said:


> Why are we comparing their bodies? They are all different women. And one is in a different decade. Bodies change constantly.



Important fact - Max and Leti are Queens, albeit married-in. They are altogether on a different level than Kate and MM. There was a time when their style was not-so-polished. Camilla’s style is improving, too - minor, but it’s there, maybe in the posture, maybe in their interactions with the crowds.

My theory - just a theory - as a person  gets closer to the top job, he/she has a different set of advisors. He/she is coached almost as an elite athlete so he/she can only improve. The royal institution invests significant Time and Training on the newbie. Not sure how Kate will improve, but it will be fun to watch.  We see it in Hwood, too. As the actress/actor becomes more famous and popular, their ‘look’ becomes much more refined, the rough edges are polished. Since H&M were never going to become the king or queen , they didn’t receive too much of the elite coaching, just the basic stuff. It showed on their tours and it shows now. Compare Andy and Fergie to Sophie and Ed. Sophie has had the time and lots of training.  Again, just my theory.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't think hers was a short as the one on the model



Same length, different height 'model'


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Important fact - Max and Leti are Queens, albeit married-in. They are altogether on a different level than Kate and MM. There was a time when their style was not-so-polished. Camilla’s style has improved, too - minor, but it’s there, maybe in the posture, maybe in their interactions with the crowds.
> 
> My theory - just a theory - as a person  gets closer to the top job, he/she has a different set of advisors. He/she is coached almost as an elite athlete so he/she can only improve. The royal institution invests Time and training on the newbie. Not sure how Kate will improve, but it will be fun to watch.  We see it in Hwood, too. As the actress/actor becomes more famous and popular, their ‘look’ becomes much more refined, the rough edges are polished. Since H&M were never going to become the king or queen , they didn’t receive too much of the elite coaching, just the basic stuff. It showed on their tours and it shows now. Compare Andy and Fergie to Sophie and Ed. Sophie has had the time and lots of training.  Again, just my theory.


Meegain, being the big hollywood star, probably wouldn't have wanted coaching from Brits


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Meegain, being the big hollywood star, probably wouldn't have wanted coaching from Brits



I respectfully disagree on the “big hollywood star” part. As @CeeJay tells us, MM was always z list. Sure, she had training, just not the high level stuff, very basic stuff.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> I don't think hers was a short as the one on the model



No probably not,  but still inappropriate in so many ways....


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Important fact - Max and Leti are Queens, albeit married-in. They are altogether on a different level than Kate and MM. There was a time when their style was not-so-polished. Camilla’s style is improving, too - minor, but it’s there, maybe in the posture, maybe in their interactions with the crowds.
> 
> My theory - just a theory - as a person  gets closer to the top job, he/she has a different set of advisors. He/she is coached almost as an elite athlete so he/she can only improve. The royal institution invests significant Time and Training on the newbie. Not sure how Kate will improve, but it will be fun to watch.  We see it in Hwood, too. As the actress/actor becomes more famous and popular, their ‘look’ becomes much more refined, the rough edges are polished. Since H&M were never going to become the king or queen , they didn’t receive too much of the elite coaching, just the basic stuff. It showed on their tours and it shows now. Compare Andy and Fergie to Sophie and Ed. Sophie has had the time and lots of training.  Again, just my theory.


Honestly, MM went to private schools, private top tier university and was a member of a sorority.  These ladies dressed well and unless, you were completely obtuse,  some taste and style had to rub off.  Learning how to dress for the job of royaling should not have been that difficult or far off from what she was used to.  Her refusal to wear a hat when told to was just bratty.  I have come around to the view that she just doesn't care about what the clothes look like on her body and just wears things to merch them.  Everything she wore at the games has already appeared with her picture on fashion websites.  She merched everything.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, MM went to private schools, private top tier university and was a member of a sorority.  These ladies dressed well and unless, you were completely obtuse,  some taste and style and to rub off.  Learning how to dress for the job of royaling should not have been that difficult or far off from what she was used to.  Her refusal to wear a hat when told to was just bratty.  I have come around to the view that she just doesn't care about what the clothes look like on her body and just wears things to merch them.  Everything she wore at the games has already appeared with her picture on fashion websites.  She merched everything.



When you consider what she wore as desperate starlet, we should consider ourselves lucky.


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> What do you think she thought that white dress was doing for her?


She looks all lumpy under that dress just like she did wearing the white mini go-go dress. Has she no shape wear?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Omid says, “Prince Harry won’t be attending anything open to the media today”.  Is it possible Hazzi is skipping over to the UK?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> When you consider what she wore as desperate starlet, we should consider ourselves lucky.


Yeah, I think she views herself as a hot young starlet.  If she could sell that mirror in Hollywood, she might make the fortune she craves.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Omid says, “Prince Harry won’t be attending anything open to the media today”.  Is it possible Hazzi is skipping over to the UK?


I thought they were going back to CA?  Just her?


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> Showcasing her “sexy” chicken legs?
> (I still would practically kill for skinny legs BTW!   )


As for me--I would kill for Catherine's legs, not the chicken legs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Yeah, I think she views herself as a hot young starlet.  If she could sell that mirror in Hollywood, she might make the fortune she craves.



All true, the starlet, the sorority girl, the private schools, etc.  Still, I cannot process why she would not care. I understand that she clearly does not care. I just don’t get why.  She is on a world stage. Surely she understands the opportunities that a successful presence on that world stage could bring. Maybe time will make it make sense. 



gracekelly said:


> I thought they were going back to CA?  Just her?



Yes, just her. If we don’t get photos, we don’t really know where she goes. Same for him.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> All true, the starlet, the sorority girl, the private schools, etc.  Still, I cannot process why she would not care. I understand that she clearly does not care. I just don’t get why.  She is on a world stage. Surely she understands the opportunities that a successful presence on that world stage could bring. Maybe time will make it make sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, just her. If we don’t get photos, we don’t really know where she goes. Same for him.


Frances McDormand is the only actress I have seen who REALLY doesn't care what she looks like, but she is FRANCES MCDORMAND and a great actress.  With MM, there has to be a huge helping of arrogance since she is not A,B.C or even D list.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The lending came from me, the article said "give" too, but also, in German give just means you physically pass something to someone, be it for use in that very moment, as a loan or a gift. It never occured to me "giving" someone her coat meant it was a gift.


In English, giving someone the shirt/coat/cloak off your back is a saying originating from the Bible and means you would do anything to help that person. So, to me, the headlines mentioning her "giving" the coat have a subtext of effusively praising her generosity. This loan ranks for me at the same level as the cross-country cake and calligraphy bananas


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't help but feel bad for him. You know what that reminds me of? Bunny McDougal manipulating Trey by stroking his forearm. Only Trey didn't look so completely defeated and robbed of his entire soul.



That is a tough pic where his head is hanging down.  He looks so hopeless.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Important fact - Max and Leti are Queens, albeit married-in. They are altogether on a different level than Kate and MM. There was a time when their style was not-so-polished. Camilla’s style is improving, too - minor, but it’s there, maybe in the posture, maybe in their interactions with the crowds.
> 
> My theory - just a theory - as a person  gets closer to the top job, he/she has a different set of advisors. He/she is coached almost as an elite athlete so he/she can only improve. The royal institution invests significant Time and Training on the newbie. Not sure how Kate will improve, but it will be fun to watch.  We see it in Hwood, too. As the actress/actor becomes more famous and popular, their ‘look’ becomes much more refined, the rough edges are polished. Since H&M were never going to become the king or queen , they didn’t receive too much of the elite coaching, just the basic stuff. It showed on their tours and it shows now. Compare Andy and Fergie to Sophie and Ed. Sophie has had the time and lots of training.  Again, just my theory.


Maxima's open smile goes well with her bold style. She has a sincere, warm, and polished image. There is nothing to compare to TW. I feel sorry for TW's stylists, because her character overwhelms any outfit imo.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Omid says, “Prince Harry won’t be attending anything open to the media today”.  Is it possible Hazzi is skipping over to the UK?


It was mentioned that she was only staying a few days at the Games. Maybe there is a Soho House nearby where she can get together with her soulmate.

I don't recall any statement that H would stay the entire duration. If his production is really featuring Invictus, it would make sense for him to stay for the closing, but if he is skewing it as the background for his love story, he might skip town or get wasted and let the camera crew finish the filming.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, MM went to private schools, private top tier university and was a member of a sorority.  These ladies dressed well and unless, you were completely obtuse,  some taste and style had to rub off.  Learning how to dress for the job of royaling should not have been that difficult or far off from what she was used to.  Her refusal to wear a hat when told to was just bratty.  *I have come around to the view that she just doesn't care about what the clothes look like on her body and just wears things to merch them.  Everything she wore at the games has already appeared with her picture on fashion websites.  She merched everything.*


I think TW has an intrinsic lack of taste, but I agree with you on the 'merch' part. I read somewhere that her stans were promoting/organizing the sales of all of her recent outfits.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Frances McDormand is the only actress I have seen who REALLY doesn't care what she looks like, but she is FRANCES MCDORMAND and a great actress.  With MM, there has to be a huge helping of arrogance since she is not A,B.C or even D list.


here's another one - amy madigan - married to ed harris.  clearly has not had any work done


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Omid says, “Prince Harry won’t be attending anything open to the media today”.  Is it possible Hazzi is skipping over to the UK?


Could they have been 'hired' for a restrict number of days/events? Isn't this the day that TW returns to LA?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> here's another one - amy madigan - married to ed harris.  clearly has not had any work done
> View attachment 5382565


Oh boy!  The two of them have smoker's wrinkles and she probably has estrogen deficiency to boot.  Too much sun as well.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Could they have been 'hired' for a restrict number of days/events? Isn't this the day that TW returns to LA?


If there are closing ceremonies, Harry really should stick around.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> It was mentioned that she was only staying a few days at the Games. *Maybe there is a Soho House nearby where she can get together with her soulmate.*
> 
> I don't recall any statement that H would stay the entire duration. If his production is really featuring Invictus, it would make sense for him to stay for the closing, but if he is skewing it as the background for his love story, he might skip town or get wasted and let the camera crew finish the filming.


There’s Soho House Amsterdam


----------



## gracekelly

BVBookshop said:


> There’s Soho House Amsterdam


They were there when she was pregnant with Archie.  Pix of her drinking alcohol, I recall.  Wonderful.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I think TW has an intrinsic lack of taste, but I agree with you on the 'merch' part. I read somewhere that her stans were promoting/organizing the sales of all of her recent outfits.







Her stans are more the Zara-copies target market


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> If there are closing ceremonies, Harry really should stick around.


Yes, he is supposed to attend the Nefl*x closing events. Oops, I meant Inv*ctus.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Her stans are more the Zara-copies target market


Agree! However, they are also loyal servants to their kueen, and those klassy outfits must sell. Allegedly, of course!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Oh boy!  The two of them have smoker's wrinkles and she probably has estrogen deficiency to boot.  Too much sun as well.


IDK how old she was when this photo was taken but she's 71 now--not that old --and I recall seeing her several years ago looking very wrinkled
I have mixed feelings about this.  better than ruining your face like kim novak or priscilla presley


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> IDK how old she was when this photo was taken but she's 71 now--not that old --and I recall seeing her several years ago looking very wrinkled
> I have mixed feelings about this.  better than ruining your face like kim novak or priscilla presley


Sometimes it is a combo of things and genetics.  My mother's mother had wrinkles like this and she was not a smoker, but she went to FL every winter and back before they ever heard of sunscreen.  My mother had beautiful skin and no wrinkles and lucky me to inherit  that gene, but I am still careful.

I have seen women who have so much filler that they look like a blowfish!


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I know it's not fair.  Kate will always look better in clothes.  But I couldn't help it.  She's such a nasty biatch.  And so full of herself.


Tbh even when I try to be positive I still come up with thrice as many negatives - they are just that kind of unlikeable.


----------



## Jayne1

meluvs2shop said:


> Queen Maxima is large? Tall, yes, but I don’t consider her large, imo.


I had to google her and I agree - she's not large at all!


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> That is a tough pic where his head is hanging down.  He looks so hopeless.


I do believe things did not go well with Charles and during his visit with TQ it was made obvious she was not going to overrule what her firstborn decrees. They have all been hurt by H&M, time to pay the piper. If my theory is correct this has got to be putting a HUGE damper on things.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Could they have been 'hired' for a restrict number of days/events? Isn't this the day that TW returns to LA?



Allegedly, of course


----------



## MiniMabel

sdkitty said:


> IDK how old she was when this photo was taken but she's 71 now--not that old --and I recall seeing her several years ago looking very wrinkled
> I have mixed feelings about this.  _*better than ruining your face like kim novak or priscilla presley*_




Agreed.  Don't have mixed feelings, it's better to be genuine than fake.  Such a shame that we live in an ageist world; it seems anyone over 50 is considered unpleasant to look at and unimportant. 

We all age and wrinkles etc are superficial; it's the character that's important. And anyone who judges solely on appearance is shallow and not worth wasting time on.


----------



## papertiger

I think it's a last chance and test for H 




*Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*

Victoria Ward
Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm







The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony during the Platinum Jubilee celebrations but can have no formal role, it is understood.
If the couple opt to travel to London to join their family in celebrating the Queen’s 70 years on the throne, they will appear at family events, which include the traditional balcony appearance, as well as a service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral.
However, as non-working members of “the Firm”, they could not take part in Trooping the Colour or play any central role in the various events taking place throughout the four-day bank holiday weekend.
While the Queen’s increasing frailty means she is unlikely to make many public appearances, it is hoped that at the very least, she will take part in the Trooping procession, either in a carriage or watching from a dais, and then appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony alongside her wider family for the traditional flypast on June 2.

The moment will be particularly poignant as it will mark the last balcony appearance of her reign.
Aides concede that while the Sussexes’ presence would mean a lot to Her Majesty, it would take a leap of faith from all sides following the bitter fallout caused by the damaging allegations the couple have made in a string of television interviews since moving abroad.




The couple will be able to join the wider on the Buckingham Palace balcony for the traditional flypast on June 2 - Victoria Jones/PA
Prince Harry would also have to swallow his pride over the ongoing legal wrangleconcerning his security after saying his family would not be safe visiting the UK following the Government’s decision not to provide them with police protection.
A spokesperson for the Sussexes said on Monday that they were not in a position to discuss future travel plans.
Meanwhile, Buckingham Palace is making contingency plans for jubilee events to take place in the absence of the Queen, with younger royals taking her place.
A series of meetings have taken place this month as palace aides seek to plot who will be where and allocate specific roles to different members of the family.
The Queen, who turns 96 on Thursday, is determined to take part in the four-day celebration and plans to attend as many events as possible.
However, her struggles with mobility mean that in reality, her participation is likely to be minimal.




The Duke and Duchess visited the Queen last week before making their way to the Hague, Netherlands for the Invictus Games - Aaron Chown/PA
One of the most important events for the Queen will be the service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral on June 3.
Palace aides are working on plans to ensure that she can attend with dignity, as she will be unable to walk up the many steps at the main entrance.
Staff are considering how she can best travel to the service in comfort and make her way into a side entrance of the cathedral without being photographed having difficulty walking.
For Her Majesty, a horse racing fanatic, the Epsom Derby on June 4 will also be a highlight of the festivities, although the logistics could prove challenging.
While she would usually be driven down the home straight before taking a short walk to the stands for a receiving line, plans are being put in place for her to be dropped off as close to the grandstand as possible, where she can then take a lift up to her box.
Despite earlier reports that the Duke of York could accompany her, the Telegraph understands that it is the Duchess of Cornwall, who is also “absolutely besotted” by racing, who has been earmarked to attend alongside her.
It is the Duchess, patron of the national stud, who is expected to take on the royal patronage of the sport in the longer term.
The Duchess is also president of the Big Jubilee Lunch and will front those celebrations.
The Prince of Wales is expected to give a speech at the Platinum Party at the Palace, when he will thank his mother for her service over the last seven decades, just as he did at the concert marking her golden jubilee in 2002 and her diamond jubilee in 2012, both times opening his remarks with the words: “Your Majesty… Mummy.”
Prince Charles will attend almost all of the jubilee events, representing the Queen where appropriate if she is unable to attend.
However, aides are keen to point out that even in the Queen’s absence, “it is her party” and that everything will very much take place in her honour.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I do believe things did not go well with Charles and during his visit with TQ it was made obvious she was not going to overrule what her firstborn decrees. They have all been hurt by H&M, time to pay the piper. If my theory is correct this has got to be putting a HUGE damper on things.



I wish this was true but it seems everyone keeps bending over backwards to please them.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I think it's a last chance and test for H
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*
> 
> Victoria Ward
> Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony during the Platinum Jubilee celebrations but can have no formal role, it is understood.
> If the couple opt to travel to London to join their family in celebrating the Queen’s 70 years on the throne, they will appear at family events, which include the traditional balcony appearance, as well as a service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral.
> However, as non-working members of “the Firm”, they could not take part in Trooping the Colour or play any central role in the various events taking place throughout the four-day bank holiday weekend.
> While the Queen’s increasing frailty means she is unlikely to make many public appearances, it is hoped that at the very least, she will take part in the Trooping procession, either in a carriage or watching from a dais, and then appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony alongside her wider family for the traditional flypast on June 2.
> 
> The moment will be particularly poignant as it will mark the last balcony appearance of her reign.
> Aides concede that while the Sussexes’ presence would mean a lot to Her Majesty, it would take a leap of faith from all sides following the bitter fallout caused by the damaging allegations the couple have made in a string of television interviews since moving abroad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The couple will be able to join the wider on the Buckingham Palace balcony for the traditional flypast on June 2 - Victoria Jones/PA
> Prince Harry would also have to swallow his pride over the ongoing legal wrangleconcerning his security after saying his family would not be safe visiting the UK following the Government’s decision not to provide them with police protection.
> A spokesperson for the Sussexes said on Monday that they were not in a position to discuss future travel plans.
> Meanwhile, Buckingham Palace is making contingency plans for jubilee events to take place in the absence of the Queen, with younger royals taking her place.
> A series of meetings have taken place this month as palace aides seek to plot who will be where and allocate specific roles to different members of the family.
> The Queen, who turns 96 on Thursday, is determined to take part in the four-day celebration and plans to attend as many events as possible.
> However, her struggles with mobility mean that in reality, her participation is likely to be minimal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess visited the Queen last week before making their way to the Hague, Netherlands for the Invictus Games - Aaron Chown/PA
> One of the most important events for the Queen will be the service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral on June 3.
> Palace aides are working on plans to ensure that she can attend with dignity, as she will be unable to walk up the many steps at the main entrance.
> Staff are considering how she can best travel to the service in comfort and make her way into a side entrance of the cathedral without being photographed having difficulty walking.
> For Her Majesty, a horse racing fanatic, the Epsom Derby on June 4 will also be a highlight of the festivities, although the logistics could prove challenging.
> While she would usually be driven down the home straight before taking a short walk to the stands for a receiving line, plans are being put in place for her to be dropped off as close to the grandstand as possible, where she can then take a lift up to her box.
> Despite earlier reports that the Duke of York could accompany her, the Telegraph understands that it is the Duchess of Cornwall, who is also “absolutely besotted” by racing, who has been earmarked to attend alongside her.
> It is the Duchess, patron of the national stud, who is expected to take on the royal patronage of the sport in the longer term.
> The Duchess is also president of the Big Jubilee Lunch and will front those celebrations.
> The Prince of Wales is expected to give a speech at the Platinum Party at the Palace, when he will thank his mother for her service over the last seven decades, just as he did at the concert marking her golden jubilee in 2002 and her diamond jubilee in 2012, both times opening his remarks with the words: “Your Majesty… Mummy.”
> Prince Charles will attend almost all of the jubilee events, representing the Queen where appropriate if she is unable to attend.
> However, aides are keen to point out that even in the Queen’s absence, “it is her party” and that everything will very much take place in her honour.


Assuming this is credible, he should go and the WIFE at home in CA


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Wow!

I see they are trying to prevent a Commonwealth Day debacle, drawing a firm line on the events Harry and TW may attend.  Your Majesty, you are THE QUEEN!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> That is a tough pic where his head is hanging down.  He looks so hopeless.



And why does she always look oh so happy when he looks a minute away from a melt-down? Reminds me of the green monstrosity occasion where he looked on the verge of tears and that freaking lunatic sported the smuggest of smug grins. She disgusts me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> In English, giving someone the shirt/coat/cloak off your back is a saying originating from the Bible and means you would do anything to help that person. So, to me, the headlines mentioning her "giving" the coat have a subtext of effusively praising her generosity. This loan ranks for me at the same level as the cross-country cake and calligraphy bananas



Sure, but hopefully nobody said she was giving the cloak off her back. She's not freaking St. Martin who cut his coat in two to keep a beggar from freezing to death.


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> However, her struggles with mobility mean that in reality, her participation is likely to be minimal.



This must be music to Meghan's ears!  SHE will take over!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Assuming this is credible, he should go and the WIFE at home in CA



Telegraph is supposed to be a serious paper (and very conservative). If you read past the headlines, I think it's the last time the Queen will stand on the balcony, but perhaps their pensioning-off too.

They will have no formal role to play anywhere within the celebration, very little chance to shine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*



I don't think they deserve that invitation, but also...can we see Raptor standing in the last row like the nobody she is?


----------



## gracekelly

The Telegraph
*The moment will be particularly poignant as it will mark the last balcony appearance of her reign.*


Really?  And Ms. Ward knows this how?  That is a rather presumptuous statement.  
Just because the woman has mobility issues, that doesn't mean she is going to die or never be on the balcony again.  My mother had mobility issues and used a walker for years before she died and she was older than TQ and not as mentally sharp.  

This convinces me that they were summoned and were told all of this. It _was a now hear this. _ Now they will go home and ruminate on it.  They are being told they are family and not royal.  If he still comes out with a book full of insulting stuff, there is no way he can show his face.  Period.  If they don't bring the children, there will be no balcony. That had to be a condition as well.  I think he will be insulted by no Trooping of the Colour and that could prevent him from showing up in general.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I remember TW’s last Trooping of the Colour.  She wasn’t supposed to be there (maternity leave) but decided at the last minute to just show up and squeeze herself into a carriage.  This way, she can’t do that and Harry has to deal with the consequences of his actions (which include marrying someone like that, and letting her run amok).

ETA: if the “inside source” tidbit about TW being stationed in a room and guarded by four footmen is true, then I bet that if she does appear on the balcony, she will have people watching over her there, too.  This brief visit was a taste of the treatment she can expect from here on out.


----------



## TC1

The narrative that Netflix is trying to pull off here is that Harry "created" the Invictus Games. They want to follow him around and shine a light on something (the only thing they could come up with I assume)
I've seen so many headlines lately about the games he CREATED. We all know this fool couldn't create a single thing. It was manufactured behind the scenes and given to him on a silver platter to manage..for appearance sake (that he's not a total loser) and to keep him busy. Now with Meghan in the picture these two have turned it into a spectacle to focus on THEM. Gross.
The reason he isn't attending events with no media....just shows that he can't be bothered unless it's documented.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> The Telegraph
> *The moment will be particularly poignant as it will mark the last balcony appearance of her reign.*
> 
> 
> Really?  And Ms. Ward knows this how?  That is a rather presumptuous statement.
> Just because the woman has mobility issues, that doesn't mean she is going to die or never be on the balcony again.  My mother had mobility issues and used a walker for years before she died and she was older than TQ and not as mentally sharp.
> 
> This convinces me that they were summoned and were told all of this. It _was a now hear this. _ Now they will go home and ruminate on it.  They are being told they are family and not royal.  If he still comes out with a book full of insulting stuff, there is no way he can show his face.  Period.  If they don't bring the children, there will be no balcony. That had to be a condition as well.  I think he will be insulted by no Trooping of the Colour and that could prevent him from showing up in general.



There will always be something, and something's been upsetting him during the Games. I think he's been told to "woke-up and smell the coffee"  and given the Royal tea treatment 





I think this is "and hear this, this is the invitation" as in *WE (the Royal we) invited them*. 

Ball's in H&M's court literally If he loses Harry v Home Office case on security and attends, he will lose face as well as status. If he refuses due to 'lack of security' or "London is a trigger" he will lose a lot more.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I think it's a last chance and test for H
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*
> 
> Victoria Ward
> Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony during the Platinum Jubilee celebrations but can have no formal role, it is understood.
> If the couple opt to travel to London to join their family in celebrating the Queen’s 70 years on the throne, they will appear at family events, which include the traditional balcony appearance, as well as a service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral.
> However, as non-working members of “the Firm”, they could not take part in Trooping the Colour or play any central role in the various events taking place throughout the four-day bank holiday weekend.
> While the Queen’s increasing frailty means she is unlikely to make many public appearances, it is hoped that at the very least, she will take part in the Trooping procession, either in a carriage or watching from a dais, and then appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony alongside her wider family for the traditional flypast on June 2.
> 
> The moment will be particularly poignant as it will mark the last balcony appearance of her reign.
> Aides concede that while the Sussexes’ presence would mean a lot to Her Majesty, it would take a leap of faith from all sides following the bitter fallout caused by the damaging allegations the couple have made in a string of television interviews since moving abroad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The couple will be able to join the wider on the Buckingham Palace balcony for the traditional flypast on June 2 - Victoria Jones/PA
> Prince Harry would also have to swallow his pride over the ongoing legal wrangleconcerning his security after saying his family would not be safe visiting the UK following the Government’s decision not to provide them with police protection.
> A spokesperson for the Sussexes said on Monday that they were not in a position to discuss future travel plans.
> Meanwhile, Buckingham Palace is making contingency plans for jubilee events to take place in the absence of the Queen, with younger royals taking her place.
> A series of meetings have taken place this month as palace aides seek to plot who will be where and allocate specific roles to different members of the family.
> The Queen, who turns 96 on Thursday, is determined to take part in the four-day celebration and plans to attend as many events as possible.
> However, her struggles with mobility mean that in reality, her participation is likely to be minimal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess visited the Queen last week before making their way to the Hague, Netherlands for the Invictus Games - Aaron Chown/PA
> One of the most important events for the Queen will be the service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral on June 3.
> Palace aides are working on plans to ensure that she can attend with dignity, as she will be unable to walk up the many steps at the main entrance.
> Staff are considering how she can best travel to the service in comfort and make her way into a side entrance of the cathedral without being photographed having difficulty walking.
> For Her Majesty, a horse racing fanatic, the Epsom Derby on June 4 will also be a highlight of the festivities, although the logistics could prove challenging.
> While she would usually be driven down the home straight before taking a short walk to the stands for a receiving line, plans are being put in place for her to be dropped off as close to the grandstand as possible, where she can then take a lift up to her box.
> Despite earlier reports that the Duke of York could accompany her, the Telegraph understands that it is the Duchess of Cornwall, who is also “absolutely besotted” by racing, who has been earmarked to attend alongside her.
> It is the Duchess, patron of the national stud, who is expected to take on the royal patronage of the sport in the longer term.
> The Duchess is also president of the Big Jubilee Lunch and will front those celebrations.
> The Prince of Wales is expected to give a speech at the Platinum Party at the Palace, when he will thank his mother for her service over the last seven decades, just as he did at the concert marking her golden jubilee in 2002 and her diamond jubilee in 2012, both times opening his remarks with the words: “Your Majesty… Mummy.”
> Prince Charles will attend almost all of the jubilee events, representing the Queen where appropriate if she is unable to attend.
> However, aides are keen to point out that even in the Queen’s absence, “it is her party” and that everything will very much take place in her honour.


I wonder if this is the BRF's way of throwing someone a bone…  I'm starting to wonder whether his position as counsellor of state is about to be gone…


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> I remember TW’s last Trooping of the Colour.  She wasn’t supposed to be there (maternity leave) but decided at the last minute to just show up and squeeze herself into a carriage.  This way, she can’t do that and Harry has to deal with the consequences of his actions (which include marrying someone like that, and letting her run amok).
> 
> ETA: if the “inside source” tidbit about TW being stationed in a room and guarded by four footmen is true, then I bet that if she does appear on the balcony, she will have people watching over her there, too.  This brief visit was a taste of the treatment she can expect from here on out.



Never mind TV crew posing as security, I'd take their phones off them too.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this is the BRF's way of throwing someone a bone…  I'm starting to wonder whether his position as *counsellor of state is about to be gone…*




For the sake of sanity, I hope so


----------



## Debbini

jelliedfeels said:


> What the f it looks like she’s just wearing an old sweatshirt maybe from Costco originally and she’s meant to have some neon floral leggings to go with. Very Midwest, middle-aged mum goes to the gym vibes - not event appropriate at all. I think Valentino are making fun of her. Join the club PP
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5382362
> 
> Actually this makes a lot of sense. South Park already established that Kim K is a hobbit so M is perfect casting for some old creepy creature that keeps following her.


Don't be trashing the Midwest! We aren't wearing that crap.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but hopefully nobody said she was giving the cloak off her back. She's not freaking St. Martin who cut his coat in two to keep a beggar from freezing to death.


 I think it was a clever way for her to unload the coat


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> I would kill for shapely legs, not her skinny legs. I don't know why it is, but I've observed over the years that women with her body type (no defined waist) often do have skinny legs.



She has the female version of the Kool Aid guy’s body. Which can look great inthe right clothing. Much of what she wears only emphasizes her waist in an unflattering way.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The Telegraph
> *The moment will be particularly poignant as it will mark the last balcony appearance of her reign.*
> 
> 
> Really?  And Ms. Ward knows this how?  That is a rather presumptuous statement.
> Just because the woman has mobility issues, that doesn't mean she is going to die or never be on the balcony again.  My mother had mobility issues and used a walker for years before she died and she was older than TQ and not as mentally sharp.
> 
> This convinces me that they were summoned and were told all of this. It _was a now hear this. _ Now they will go home and ruminate on it.  They are being told they are family and not royal.  If he still comes out with a book full of insulting stuff, there is no way he can show his face.  Period.  If they don't bring the children, there will be no balcony. That had to be a condition as well.  I think he will be insulted by no Trooping of the Colour and that could prevent him from showing up in general.


he should show his respect for his grandmother


----------



## Chanbal

TW behaves like a 'nouveau riche' and he acts like an idiot… Allegedly, of course! 


_Harry and Meghan have been able to slip into the hotel undetected as they were able to access the suite from a private lift that would take them directly from an underground car park.

The hotel also closed the Executive lounge from last Wednesday until Saturday for other guests to allow the royal couple to use for meetings and drinks with their aides…_









						Inside £2k-a-night five-star Hilton  acting as Meghan and Harry's base
					

The Sussexes are staying in a £2,000 a night Royal Suite at the five-star Hilton Hotel in the city centre.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s what we know - QE has such serious  mobility issues that her schedule is set day-by-day.

The jubilee celebrations are about 7 weeks away.  Not be brutal or indelicate, we all know how quickly an elderly person’s health can deteriorate. What happens if she passes before the ‘balcony’ scene - Will it be cancelled?

If QE did extend this _invitation_ that is loaded with _caveats/conditions, _has she also given one to Andi?  If this is her last balcony scene, when is Charles’s coronation?  With a WW3 looming, can’t they dial back the drama? please?

ETA:  All of this is sad. No one wins. Very unlike the BRF, imo.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

sdkitty said:


> Assuming this is credible, he should go and the WIFE at home in CA


I respectfully disagree.  If he cannot pay his respects to his grandfather or speak of his relatives with respect and kindness, he should not be included in jubilee related events. They both should stay under their rock.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> She has the female version of the Kool Aid guy’s body. Which can look great inthe right clothing. Much of what she wears only emphasizes her waist in an unflattering way.


----------



## Debbini

papertiger said:


> Telegraph is supposed to be a serious paper (and very conservative). If you read past the headlines, I think it's the last time the Queen will stand on the balcony, but perhaps their pensioning-off too.
> 
> They will have no formal role to play anywhere within the celebration, very little chance to shine.


This makes me sad, it did make it seem like her last time standing on the balcony. I realize she's almost 96, I'm praying she is here for her Jubilee and can enjoy all of it.


----------



## gracekelly

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I respectfully disagree.  If he cannot pay his respects to his grandfather or speak of his relatives with respect and kindness, he should not be included in jubilee related events. They both should stay under their rock.


I agree.  Don't want them to get the honor.  Let Harry come out with his horrid book now and say nasty things so he can stay home.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh look...one of these things is not like the other. One looks depressed and one can't adjust her f*cking grin accordingly. I don't even know why it ticks me off so much.

Also, they should have asked how Raptor felt being parked under supervision


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The jubilee celebrations are about 7 weeks away.  Not be brutal or indelicate, we all know how quickly an elderly person’s health can deteriorate. *What happens if she passes before the ‘balcony’ scene - Will it be cancelled?*



I'd think if the jubilarian dies before the jubilee the whole bash will be cancelled.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh look...one of these things is not like the other. One looks depressed and one can't adjust her f*cking grin accordingly. I don't even know why it ticks me off so much.
> 
> Also, they should have asked how Raptor felt being parked under supervision



He looks clinically depressed most of the time.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He looks clinically depressed most of the time.


well we could be wrong but if he's a fish out of water in CA and dominated by the Wife, he has good reason to be depressed


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> "He's cut off from his own living family members but if you can pimp the dead ones for a buck"


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Important fact - Max and Leti are Queens, albeit married-in. They are altogether on a different level than Kate and MM. There was a time when their style was not-so-polished. Camilla’s style is improving, too - minor, but it’s there, maybe in the posture, maybe in their interactions with the crowds.
> 
> My theory - just a theory - as a person  gets closer to the top job, he/she has a different set of advisors. He/she is coached almost as an elite athlete so he/she can only improve. The royal institution invests significant Time and Training on the newbie. Not sure how Kate will improve, but it will be fun to watch.  We see it in Hwood, too. As the actress/actor becomes more famous and popular, their ‘look’ becomes much more refined, the rough edges are polished. Since H&M were never going to become the king or queen , they didn’t receive too much of the elite coaching, just the basic stuff. It showed on their tours and it shows now. Compare Andy and Fergie to Sophie and Ed. Sophie has had the time and lots of training.  Again, just my theory.


I believe wanting to fit in is also a factor. The Raptor never had any intention of fitting in. She swooped down on her prey and carried him off to CA as soon as she could.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd think if the jubilarian dies before the jubilee the whole bash will be cancelled.



Of corse the actual party would be cancelled, but the official Jubilee has started.

She's already sailed past the Platinum post (6 February '22).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh look...one of these things is not like the other. One looks depressed and one can't adjust her f*cking grin accordingly. I don't even know why it ticks me off so much.
> 
> Also, they should have asked how Raptor felt being parked under supervision




Prince Harry was asked about the Queen and how she was when he and Meghan dropped into Windsor Castle to see her on Thursday.
_"She had plenty of messages for Team UK which I've already passed on...So, it was great to see her and I'm sure she would love to be here if she could."
_
*That* is his answer ? Nothing about her health? Nothing about it was lovely/emotional to see her? Nothing about how, under the circumstances, she is doing as well as can be expected and we all cherish our time with her? Godspeed?

Some comments:
Replying to 
@chrisshipitv
Wow,there’s an answer worked out by a committee. Would he have been asked such a question if he was still a working royal?
MaxieB
======
I think he would have been asked as there is concern for the Queen and her health. I think you're right about his answer though.
Kaye
=====
Replying to 
@chrisshipitv
Genuine question, as you are a Royal reporter why are you there? As H is no longer a ‘working Royal’ I mean? Not being funny I just wondered. Or would you be there even if H wasn’t?
IStandWithUkraine
@rachel_clewlow
=====


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, MM went to private schools, private top tier university and was a member of a sorority.  These ladies dressed well and unless, you were completely obtuse,  some taste and style had to rub off.  Learning how to dress for the job of royaling should not have been that difficult or far off from what she was used to.  Her refusal to wear a hat when told to was just bratty.  I have come around to the view that she just doesn't care about what the clothes look like on her body and just wears things to merch them.  Everything she wore at the games has already appeared with her picture on fashion websites.  She merched everything.


I have been staying in the LA area for the past week. It is clear to me where she got her fashion sense from. That is not an insult to anyone here from the area, just an observation that her style was acquired while growing up here. I can't imagine her wearing some of the things that Kate does, like the powder blue Easter outfit. That said, she does make some rather questionable choices.


----------



## A1aGypsy

I think that was actually a smart answer. He isn’t a working royal. He doesn’t speak for BP. It isn’t up to him to give details on her condition, especially if they betray frailty.


----------



## charlottawill

The Sussex supporters are fascinating. But why is she so orange? Is that the work of her makeup artist?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> He looks clinically depressed most of the time.


As someone with family members who are clinically depressed, you can't necessarily tell if someone is depressed just by looking at them. But he sure doesn't look too happy these days.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> The Sussex supporters are fascinating. But why is she so orange? Is that the work of her makeup artist?




Sounds like Lorraine is consuming a high volume of alcohol in that bright yellow drink she’s got. She’s delusional!


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> That is a tough pic where his head is hanging down.  He looks so hopeless.


The man next to her was also looking down, which made me wonder if there was a moment of silence or a speaker was saying something solemn, yet there she is grinning at him and right at the camera, ever the shameless attention whore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Our Wounded Warriors program does something similar to IG. It is phenomenal the difference a supportive country can make in their lives. Applause for all the athletes who participated. They are the real heroes.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If QE did extend this _invitation_ that is loaded with _caveats/conditions, _has she also given one to Andi?  If this is her last balcony scene, when is Charles’s coronation?  With a WW3 looming, can’t they dial back the drama? please?
> ETA:  All of this is sad. No one wins. Very unlike the BRF, imo.


QE wants to have Andy on the balcony, one more factor that may have contributed to the Montecitos' invite.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> QE wants to have Andy on the balcony, one more factor that may have contributed to the Montecitos' invite.



Thank you, that makes perfect sense. Hoping everyone will follow her requests and make her proud.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *QE wants to have Andy on the balcony*, one more factor that may have contributed to the Montecitos' invite.



Does she?


----------



## Chanbal

Would we get some answers here?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "...and make her proud."


Eh, for some of them that ship sailed a long time ago.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The article stressed that the balcony is a “family moment” hence why H&TW are invited, even though they are non-working royals.  Peter and Zara also fit into this category, as well as Andy.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Does she?


I'm sorry, I forgot to add imo. 
I believe she does. He may be arrogant and obnoxious, but he is also her son. Further, Andy didn't publicly attack the monarchy. (Though, some of his actions led to some attacks…)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

CarryOn2020 said:


> But but Kate spends more.



A shocking breach of taste.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Will Hazz and Andi wear their uniforms?


----------



## gracekelly

I am beginning to think that Harry was invited by them knowing that it is more than likely that he won't show up.  He isn't being invited back to be there in the same way that he appeared in prior  and he won't like that.  He has been demoted.  He considers himself on a higher level than most of the people that would be appearing, yet he will be lumped in with them.  If he is sixth in line, he not really wrong.  It is his choice to suck it up or stay home.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will Hazz and Andi wear their uniforms?


The Queen would have to give permission, would she not?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The Queen would have to give permission, would she not?



I have no idea.

ETA: the medals have been returned iirc.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Oh boy!  The two of them have smoker's wrinkles and she probably has estrogen deficiency to boot.  Too much sun as well.


For him yes re smoking and sun, but not necessarily true for her. I take good care of my skin and have never smoked, and every day I look in the mirror and see new wrinkles. Aging really accelerates after 60 as estrogen drops off. But I have no interest in taking "bio-identical hormones" and looking like this at 73:


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, Gosh! This looks like a must read! 









						Putting Items to Rest
					

Exclusive Celebrity News




					theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> The Sussex supporters are fascinating. But why is she so orange? Is that the work of her makeup artist?




Oh really. Because the royal of all royals, The Queen, loves a bright lip. But I don't expect the stans to even try to educate themselves just a little bit.

Christmas '21:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> The Sussex supporters are fascinating. But why is she so orange? Is that the work of her makeup artist?




Also, for a woman who's so glad to no longer be a royal she sure loves that title she only has because she seduced the weakest link a lot.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will Hazz and Andi wear their uniforms?


I don't think so… Uniforms are gone for those two in the near future at least…


----------



## Happyish

MiniMabel said:


> I've said before that she is totally out of her depth, and nothing has changed.  A further issue is a complete lack of interest in anything where she is not the focus.  Kissing on the stage was wholly unnecessary and inappropriate, as was mentioning their children.  The faces I could see in that clip, of the audience, looked uncomfortable and bored to tears.
> 
> The Harkles are an embarrassment to the BRF and should retire to somewhere quiet and live their privileged lives without pushing themselves forward.  It's extremely annoying that they are using the Duke and Duchess titles; they do not deserve them.  In addition, the expensive jewellery and clothes amounting to thousands of pounds was unacceptable, anyway, in these difficult times, but especially so at an event such as this.
> 
> Attention-seeking twerps are everywhere these days, unfortunately.  I would like to see appropriate and modest behaviour (and particularly dressing) make a come-back, and consideration and thoughtfulness to be part of everyone's life.


Hear, hear! That she would be parading about in designer jewelry and clothing at a charitable event is not only deplorable, but inappropriate and shows how out of step they are.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> The article stressed that the balcony is a “family moment” hence why H&TW are invited, even though they are non-working royals.  Peter and Zara also fit into this category, as well as Andy.



To be fair, Peter and Zara aren't completely worthless POS.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, for a woman who's so glad to no longer be a royal she sure loves that title she only has because she seduced the weakest link a lot.


Duchess of Sussex sounds a lot better than Mrs. Harry Windsor or Meghan Windsor. She'll cling to that title with her last dying breath.


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And why does she always look oh so happy when he looks a minute away from a melt-down? Reminds me of the green monstrosity occasion where he looked on the verge of tears and that freaking lunatic sported the smuggest of smug grins. She disgusts me.


IMO it’s classic narcissistic triangulation. I truly believe she enjoys triangulating Hazbeen against his family. They’re the persecutor, she’s the victim, Hazbeen is the rescuer. It feeds her narcissistic supply and it destabilizes Hazbeen so it’s harder for him to leave her. As long as she’s getting attention and loyalty from him, she doesn’t care that he’s miserable. 

I had a narcissist relative pull this BS on me and my siblings so I understand what a mindf*ck this kind of behavior is.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> IMO it’s classic narcissistic triangulation. I truly believe she enjoys triangulating Hazbeen against his family. They’re the persecutor, she’s the victim, Hazbeen is the rescuer. It feeds her narcissistic supply and it destabilizes Hazbeen so it’s harder for him to leave her. As long as she’s getting attention and loyalty from him, she doesn’t care that he’s miserable.
> 
> I had a narcissist relative pull this BS on me and my siblings so I understand what a mindf*ck this kind of behavior is.


I have no doubt that she is a master manipulator, but sometimes relationships like this thrive in spite of the odds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh, Gosh! This looks like a must read!
> View attachment 5382799
> 
> View attachment 5382800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putting Items to Rest
> 
> 
> Exclusive Celebrity News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com


I want to know where this info came from.  The writer certainly is sure of what is being written.


----------



## mellibelly

So these are old posts but Pilot Hardy has some IG videos that crack me up. We can see TW’s relatability with seniors


----------



## mellibelly

And children
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CU2w2-blhYi/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I am beginning to think that Harry was invited by them knowing that it is more than likely that he won't show up.  He isn't being invited back to be there in the same way that he appeared in prior  and he won't like that.  He has been demoted.  He considers himself on a higher level than most of the people that would be appearing, yet he will be lumped in with them.  If he is sixth in line, he not really wrong.  It is his choice to suck it up or stay home.


My 2 cents: It's a tough choice! If he decides to accept the invitation, how does he justify the allegedly needed attacks against the BRF to promote his book? If he doesn't accept, how ungrateful!!!  It's like being between a rock and a hard place.


----------



## mellibelly

A super early coat flick:


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> So these are old posts but Pilot Hardy has some IG videos that crack me up. We can see TW’s relatability with seniors



"It seems like if she isn’t spouting her well rehearsed , meaningless *fridge magnet philosophies *about empowerment etc, then she doesn’t know what to say".


----------



## Chanbal

On the Jubilee plans!


----------



## catlover46

Sugars/anti W&C people are sick-they are openly wishing for the Queen to die. That place is going to be awful when she dies, it was when Phillip died.




__





						Cele|bitchy | The public should now assume that Queen Elizabeth ‘will not attend public events’
					

Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.




					www.celebitchy.com


----------



## needlv

Im on the fence with the telegraph article.  I think the writer is pro Sussex.

And have they really thought they were invited to Jubilee balcony or Trooping balcony?  Trooping usually has all the royals As a family moment standing on the balcony.

At the other jubilee celebration it was just the heirs and wives on the balcony.  

I wonder if this was planted by team Sussex….


----------



## A1aGypsy

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: It's a tough choice! If he decides to accept the invitation, how does he justify the allegedly needed attacks against the BRF to promote his book? If he doesn't accept, how ungrateful!!!  It's like being between a rock and a hard place.




You’d almost think BP knew what they were doing…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> All true, the starlet, the sorority girl, the private schools, etc.  Still, I cannot process why she would not care.* I understand that she clearly does not care. *I just don’t get why.  She is on a world stage. Surely she understands the opportunities that a successful presence on that world stage could bring. Maybe time will make it make sense.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, just her. If we don’t get photos, we don’t really know where she goes. Same for him.


Because she's too lazy to care. She prefers to have clothes sent to her to model and then just reap the merching benefits. The ego is very strong with this narc. She probably believes that her 'magnetic personality' makes her so irresistible that anyone who notices her will inevitably admire her beauty and whatever other qualities she thinks she has and that it will then induce them to purchase all the merchandise she models. Look at her stans who go nuts over her and willingly buy anything and everything she wears.


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> I have no doubt that she is a master manipulator, but sometimes relationships like this thrive in spite of the odds.


They need each other.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> there's skinny and there's skinny....I'd like to have nice long slender legs but toothpicks like hers? maybe not


I'd like to have skinny legs as long as the rest of me matched  Back in my younger days, I used to be very self conscious of my height and weight. Now I would kill to be that size. I am still 5'10, but no longer skinny  and I don't try to dress like I did when I was 20.


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> They need each other.


yes, he needs her because an idea would die of loneliness in his head....she needs him because he's a prince and made her a duchess, from which she gets all of her fame, money, status


----------



## CarryOn2020

If they are happy, thriving, living their best life with their kids, then I don’t care if they stay together or not.  Not my business.
When they step out, dominate the media, lecture us, then, no. Just no. Don’t want to hear it or see it.
When they publicly spew venom at QE, PC, Cams, W&K, etc., again it’s a no, a hard no.
Most of us understand how difficult family can be. With them, it is their immaturity and naïveté that makes them tiresome.  There is no fame, no money, no status H&M can gain by disparaging their families.

ETA: imo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

I wonder if they will try to set up an "Alternative Royal Court". Her ego and spite are big enough for this to happen. Her stans are dumb and violent enough to support her. In stan-filled threads, they are still claiming that she was pregnant and suicidal, and that she is now living her best life. I'm not certain if she was pregnant, she loves herself too much to be suicidal, and can she please live her best life without all the sturm und drang?


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> And children
> https://www.instagram.com/reel/CU2w2-blhYi/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=


Kids and animals can spot rotten things (and people) a mile away.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I think it was a clever way for her to unload the coat


How else can you stand out in pictures with a coat on


----------



## mellibelly

purseinsanity said:


> Kids and animals can spot rotten things (and people) a mile away.


So true. Bogart was too old to make the private plane journey to England (lies!) but it was rumored he didn’t like Harry. Like a true animal loving, vegan feminist, she dumped her dog for a man. At least Bogart didn’t end up with a pair of broken legs like the one they kept


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> So true. Bogart was too old to make the private plane journey to England (lies!) but *it was rumored he didn’t like Harry. *Like a true animal loving, vegan feminist, she dumped her dog for a man. At least Bogart didn’t end up with a pair of broken legs like the one they kept



Probably more lies. I doubt Harry ever had a chance to meet Bogart. Harry never came to Canada to date Meghan, did he? She always went to him in England. I can see Meghan just not wanting the inconvenience of moving with a large dog while she was preparing for her glorious wedding and planning her domination of the world.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> How else can you stand out in pictures with a coat on
> View attachment 5382927


"One of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn't belong....."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Would we get some answers here?



It's a chore to listen to this video, because he doesn't seem prepared as he rambles on and repeats himself again and again. Also, is it possible that he's infatuated with Catherine because he mentions her in almost all his videos.


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> Probably more lies. I doubt Harry ever had a chance to meet Bogart. Harry never came to Canada to date Meghan, did he? She always went to him in England. I can see Meghan just not wanting the inconvenience of moving with a large dog while she was preparing for her glorious wedding and planning her domination of the world.


Dan Wooten seems to be a credible source. Maybe a mutt didn’t fit her new image so she picked the purebred beagle








						Meghan Markle leaves beloved rescue pooch Bogart behind in Canada - because he doesn't like Prince Harry
					

MEGHAN has decided not to take back one of her dogs — because the mutt does not like Prince Harry. The Duchess of Sussex left her beloved Bogart in Canada when she first moved to Britain. ⚠️Read ou…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Dan Wooten seems to be a credible source. Maybe a mutt didn’t fit her new image so she picked the purebred beagle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle leaves beloved rescue pooch Bogart behind in Canada - because he doesn't like Prince Harry
> 
> 
> MEGHAN has decided not to take back one of her dogs — because the mutt does not like Prince Harry. The Duchess of Sussex left her beloved Bogart in Canada when she first moved to Britain. ⚠️Read ou…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



The supposed source is someone close to Meghan. Safe to assume it is a lie.


----------



## Chanbal

A1aGypsy said:


> You’d almost think BP knew what they were doing…


I think they are playing the long game.


----------



## Happyish

bag-mania said:


> Probably more lies. I doubt Harry ever had a chance to meet Bogart. Harry never came to Canada to date Meghan, did he? She always went to him in England. I can see Meghan just not wanting the inconvenience of moving with a large dog while she was preparing for her glorious wedding and planning her domination of the world.


The dog she took to the UK ended up with two broken legs? How did this happen, was the dog ok?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If they are happy, thriving, living their best life with their kids, then I don’t care if they stay together or not.  Not my business.
> When they step out, dominate the media, lecture us, then, no. Just no. Don’t want to hear it or see it.
> When they publicly spew venom at QE, PC, Cams, W&K, etc., again it’s a no, a hard no.
> Most of us understand how difficult family can be. With them, it is their immaturity and naïveté that makes them tiresome.  There is no fame, no money, no status H&M can gain by disparaging their families.
> 
> ETA: imo


Oh yeah, TW is happy. Life as a king's daughter in law can have many perks.


----------



## Sophisticatted

No more audiences with kings and queens.  Details of  non-meeting leaked out quite quickly (and embarrassingly), probably so her own PR team can’t spin it.  Now the FaceTime claims are even less believable.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's a chore to listen to this video, because he doesn't seem prepared as he rambles on and repeats himself again and again. Also, is it possible that he's infatuated with Catherine because he mentions her in almost all his videos.


I didn't have a chance to watch this one yet, but noticed that he really likes Kate. He has good taste then.


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> It must be hell for her household staff. They are probably so happy she's away.


YES, plus imagine  being the four Stylists. She might be such a continuous mess because they are fed with with trying to do their jobs and end up with the nasty faced, viciously mean dispositioned beach screaming she know what looks best so they back off in self preservation and let her make an azz of herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> That is a tough pic where his head is hanging down.  He looks so hopeless.


Makes me wonder if this is a result of what might have transpired during the whirlwind stop at Windsor?


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, TW is not happy with the much anticipated Tom Bower's book, and her lawyers are watching closely the author, she wants to know who are his sources. The Mail Group will likely serialize Tom's book, the one that many people are planning to buy.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> IDK how old she was when this photo was taken but she's 71 now--not that old --and I recall seeing her several years ago looking very wrinkled
> I have mixed feelings about this.  better than ruining your face like kim novak or priscilla presley


lord Kim Novak is a rough one. I do think some of these plastic surgeons must be sadists. 


charlottawill said:


> The Sussex supporters are fascinating. But why is she so orange? Is that the work of her makeup artist?



Nothing wrong with not needing the royal family but that’s not what is happening here lol.

I hope M doesn’t find out this fan said she’s no longer a royal or her Twitter will mysteriously get suspended.

Agree M does look orange. The fake tan she uses does not photograph well.

She’s starting to remind me of another infamous Rachel. 


charlottawill said:


> As someone with family members who are clinically depressed, you can't necessarily tell if someone is depressed just by looking at them. But he sure doesn't look too happy these days.


Agreed, the other problem is because we are only seeing pictures and videos of him we can never know if that look of existential dread on his face comes from someone getting an image of him for free.
“One less book sale. One less subscription” echoes in the empty caverns of his brain.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I'm sorry, I forgot to add imo.
> I believe she does. He may be arrogant and obnoxious, but he is also her son. Further, Andy didn't publicly attack the monarchy. (Though, some of his actions led to some attacks…)



OK, but IMO, I don't think he will, not good optics and QEII does listen to advice.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Happyish said:


> A shocking breach of taste.


You mean I too can look that good for that low low price  


mellibelly said:


> And children
> https://www.instagram.com/reel/CU2w2-blhYi/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=


this one is hilarious! I’m a sucker for the bad recorder and kazoo memes. That poor little boy at the end did not want to be there at all and who can blame him?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: It's a tough choice! If he decides to accept the invitation, how does he justify the allegedly needed attacks against the BRF to promote his book? If he doesn't accept, how ungrateful!!!  It's like being between a rock and a hard place.




Exactly! 




He'd render any criticism (in his book) null and void. 





One minute he'd be 'happily' waving happily on the balcony, claw cutting into his arm and being seen eating scraps from the Royal table along with the corgis, and then the next saying he hates Royal life and his family - makes him look even more daft than he is.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I'd like to have skinny legs as long as the rest of me matched  Back in my younger days, I used to be very self conscious of my height and weight. Now I would kill to be that size. I am still 5'10, but no longer skinny  and *I don't try to dress like I did when I was 20.*



I have to, I still have the same clothes.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I wonder if they will try to set up an "Alternative Royal Court". Her ego and spite are big enough for this to happen. Her stans are dumb and violent enough to support her. In stan-filled threads, they are still claiming that she was pregnant and suicidal, and that she is now living her best life. I'm not certain if she was pregnant, she loves herself too much to be suicidal, and can she please live her best life without all the sturm und drang?



They already tried that. Unfortunately, no one else what's to attend their court.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's a chore to listen to this video, because he doesn't seem prepared as he rambles on and repeats himself again and again. Also, is it possible that he's infatuated with Catherine because he mentions her in almost all his videos.



This is a 'live'(as in unedited) one. He knows he has to get in first on YT (i.e. before Lady CC).


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, TW is not happy with the much anticipated Tom Bower's book, and her lawyers are watching closely the author, *she wants to know who are his sources*. The Mail Group will likely serialize Tom's book, the one that many people are planning to buy.



I'm looking forward to the fictionalized life that they will be pushing as Her Truth to counter the book.
The serial liar has pushed the fiction that she was practically an only child or literally an orphan, that she was a highly sought after actress and humanitarian who received a standing ovation at the UN, that she was a pitiful victim of racism and no one at the BRF helped her adjust to her life as a royal after marriage, that she was kept under lock and key despite multiple vacations abroad and a tacky baby shower with her soulmate in tow. Never a dull day with Miss Lie-a-lot Markle. And she has left a long trail of Markled people internationally who would probably be quite willing to tell Bower their truth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure if "looking forward to" accurately describes my feelings, but yeah, it will be more fantastic in the true wordsense than Harry Potter.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure if "looking forward to" accurately describes my feelings, but yeah, it will be more fantastic in the true wordsense than Harry Potter.


Like watching a train wreck in slow-mo


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Like watching a train wreck in slow-mo



Except we don't have to feel awful for any passengers


----------



## pukasonqo

Google Image Result for https://extra-images.akamaized.net/image/8d/1by1/2020/01/13/8d639a46151b53f0ba7aca2262d5646f_xl.jpg
		

Kim Novak
The Kartrashians are masters of PS with good results


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Google Image Result for https://extra-images.akamaized.net/image/8d/1by1/2020/01/13/8d639a46151b53f0ba7aca2262d5646f_xl.jpg
> 
> 
> Kim Novak
> The Kartrashians are masters of PS with good results



Though I must say, Kim for example looks great in dresses, but that huge padded behind looks awful both in pants and bikinis, and I've seen a few candid videos from her closet of her modeling her underwear line and all those fat grafts to her upper hips look seriously deformed.

But yes, her face is flawless.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Future king and queen and their children! I don't see them having an army of bodyguards. You mean no one is after them or there are no security concerns at all?  And while Kate's outfit is probably pretty expensive, she's still using her Longchamp Le Pliage tote. I'm surprised she didn't have a Longchamp burning party after becoming the wife of the heir to the throne


----------



## bag-mania

Happyish said:


> The dog she took to the UK ended up with two broken legs? How did this happen, was the dog ok?



That was Guy the beagle. The press hushed it up so details were never given. The media in the UK was still mostly supportive back then.

As I recall he may have been hit by a car but I don’t know if that was the actual cause of his injuries or if it was speculation at the time.

Guy appeared in that video they did last year as a prop by the fireplace. He looked drugged to me. Most dogs don’t calmly fall asleep while the house is full of strangers moving around trying to film his owner at her best angle.


----------



## Happyish

pukasonqo said:


> Google Image Result for https://extra-images.akamaized.net/image/8d/1by1/2020/01/13/8d639a46151b53f0ba7aca2262d5646f_xl.jpg
> 
> 
> Kim Novak
> The Kartrashians are masters of PS with good results


Demi Moore must have gone to the same plastic surgeon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is their standard modus operandi. When a big event is coming up, they announce they _may_ attend or _maybe _not. The media runs numerous stories of “will they or won’t they”. Eventually we found out they were never invited. Much ado about nothing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Angela is right again.


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> Google Image Result for https://extra-images.akamaized.net/image/8d/1by1/2020/01/13/8d639a46151b53f0ba7aca2262d5646f_xl.jpg
> 
> 
> Kim Novak
> The Kartrashians are masters of PS with good results


that kim novak picture is tragic


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone should tell Hazzi ‘words matter’.


----------



## Happyish

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone should tell Hazzi ‘words matter’.



You hit the nail on the head. Harry doesn't know that "words matter."
Harry led a charmed existence and the unfortunate thing is he didn't even know it. His life, until he left the embraces of the monarchy, was carefully and narrowly scripted. Before he said or did anything, it was written, edited, vetted and edited again. And, if there was a mishap, he had royal minders to hush things up when he went off script. I imagine he bristled at such control, but it prevented the public from seeing the real Harry. Now, in its' absence, there appears to be nothing and no one to protect him from his own ignorance and naïveté, and the evident hypocrisy between his words and deeds. Meagan is similarly floundering.
Instead of looking at their actions and analyzing how they have backfired (which any good PR firm would do), H & M have been ridiculed; the resulting scorn affords justification to allow them to fully assume their self-proclaimed role as victims.
They could have been a bright light in the monarchy. Instead, this is all so depressing, as if there isn't enough in the world to be depressed about.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Probably more lies. I doubt Harry ever had a chance to meet Bogart. Harry never came to Canada to date Meghan, did he? She always went to him in England. I can see Meghan just not wanting the inconvenience of moving with a large dog while she was preparing for her glorious wedding and planning her domination of the world.


When JCMH attended the Invictus Games Opening Ceremony at the Air Canada Centre in Toronto Ontario Canada (?? in 2017) apparently so did MM and Marcus Anderson. All I remember, there was a big kerfuffle when she made her big entrance after everyone was seated and then she was escorted out and later seated again. I don't know if she had the date, seats or what mixed up, but we all know how MM loves drama so anything is possible. Does anyone else remember this event and what actually happened? I wasn't paying that much attention to either H or M then.

TW & Marcus Anderson at the Air Canada Centre in Toronto.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> He'd render any criticism (in his book) null and void.
> One minute he'd be 'happily' waving happily on the balcony, claw cutting into his arm and being seen eating scraps from the Royal table along with the corgis, and then the next saying he hates Royal life and his family - *makes him look even more daft than he is*_._


And a bigger…


----------



## Happyish

Question: have any other notables, persons of interest other than H & M, attended the Inviticus games? Has it been well attended?

Finally, while my heart goes out to the Ukraine, Harry's repeated emphasis on the Ukrainian team is embarrassing and diminishes the huge efforts made by all the attendees to get to the Hague and compete.
Travel these days, without the added handicap of being handicapped is hard enough. The fact each and every participant has shown up is a feat unto itself. And yes, the Ukrainian team may have had bigger obstacles. But maybe not--perhaps becasue of public attention they had helping hands others didn't. 
The one thing I love about the Olympics are the public interest stories. The courage, the determination, the sacrifice, the obstacles of all the participants and their families too. We don't get those backstories here. I can't even begin to imagine what these wounded warriors have gone through, have overcome and are overcoming. But regardless of their background, each and every one are_ heroes _and equally deserving.
To mention the Ukrainian team once would be fine, but to single them out repeatedly and make them the star of the games is offensive and IMHO insulting to the other participants.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not interested in hearing the Stockholm syndrome survivor (for now) blabber on how much he adores his puppeteer.


----------



## Chanbal

This is the type of 'low key' treatment the Harkles seem to enjoy…


*While the Duke and Duchess of Sussex insist they're just like any other couple trying to live a private family life*_,…_









						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: 'Fuss' was created when Sussexes went for dinner
					

RICHARD EDEN: Jamie Shears, who was head chef at 45 Jermyn Street, owned by the Queen's grocer Fortnum & Mason, has spoken out about the reception given to the now California-based pair.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not interested in hearing the Stockholm syndrome survivor (for now) blabber on how much he adores his puppeteer.


They are advertising it well. I wonder how much he charges for this type of interviews… 












						Prince Harry to discuss secret meeting with the Queen on Today show
					

The 37-year-old Duke of Sussex sat down with Hoda, 57, in the Netherlands, where he is currently hosting the Invictus Games.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Happyish said:


> Question: have any other notables, persons of interest other than H & M, attended the Inviticus games? Has it been well attended?
> 
> Finally, while my heart goes out to the Ukraine, Harry's repeated emphasis on the Ukrainian team is embarrassing and diminishes the huge efforts made by all the attendees to get to the Hague and compete.
> Travel these days, without the added handicap of being handicapped is hard enough. The fact each and every participant has shown up is a feat unto itself. And yes, the Ukrainian team may have had bigger obstacles. But maybe not--perhaps becasue of public attention they had helping hands others didn't.
> The one thing I love about the Olympics are the public interest stories. The courage, the determination, the sacrifice, the obstacles of all the participants and their families too. We don't get those backstories here. I can't even begin to imagine what these wounded warriors have gone through, have overcome and are overcoming. But regardless of their background, each and every one are_ heroes _and equally deserving.
> To mention the Ukrainian team once would be fine, but to single them out repeatedly and make them the star of the games is offensive and IMHO insulting to the other participants.


Yes!  If JCMH keeps agreeing with the limited access by Netflix, I wouldn't be surprised if this were the beginning of the end of the Invictus Games. All disabled veterans have already proved their patriotism and heroism and deserve better than to be relegated to the background in favour of one country/team over another and to have their image controlled by Netflix and the Vainglorious Twosome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry to discuss secret meeting with the Queen on Today show
> 
> 
> The 37-year-old Duke of Sussex sat down with Hoda, 57, in the Netherlands, where he is currently hosting the Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So that is why he gave that non-answer some of us criticized and some of us - including me - thought was entirely appropriate. Had nothing to do with "Not my place to talk"  but "Someone else is paying big bucks for the info".

  

That's one of these moments we'd say in local dialect "I feel a herpes blister coming on" (from sheer disgust).


----------



## charlottawill

This is interesting, hope you can read it. Something called Heat claims the Harkles have been frozen out by the Hollywood elite - "Tom and Rita didn't return their calls"  - and are setting their sights on NY. She thinks she's the next Amal Clooney or Angelina Jolie.  

https://apple.news/AG8KzIgOAQ1a3jv8q-6XYsg


----------



## rose60610

We'd might as well expect Meghan to show up in the aftermath of a major earthquake or some other huge natural disaster, integrating herself with the Red Cross for the purpose of turning the relief efforts into her own personal fashion show.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



I normally watch Today but I am traveling and for some reason can't log on to watch on my laptop. Maybe a good thing?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> We'd might as well expect Meghan to show up in the aftermath of a major earthquake or some other huge natural disaster, integrating herself with the Red Cross for the purpose of turning the relief efforts into her own personal fashion show.



Please don't give them ideas, I beg you.


----------



## Chanbal

I can see why the journalist is questioning Hazz's intellectual ability  …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting, hope you can read it. Something called Heat claims the Harkles have been frozen out by the Hollywood elite - "Tom and Rita didn't return their calls"  - and are setting their sights on NY. She thinks she's the next Amal Clooney or Angelina Jolie.
> 
> https://apple.news/AG8KzIgOAQ1a3jv8q-6XYsg



Oh, really...if I remember correctly Amal has a JD instead of a bachelor's she barely graduated from (with?), and Angelina is an actual top notch actress.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting, hope you can read it. Something called Heat claims the Harkles have been frozen out by the Hollywood elite - "Tom and Rita didn't return their calls"  - and are setting their sights on NY. She thinks she's the next Amal Clooney or Angelina Jolie.
> 
> https://apple.news/AG8KzIgOAQ1a3jv8q-6XYsg


Can't open. Would it be possible to use one of the following features: screenshot or copy & paste.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting, hope you can read it. Something called Heat claims the Harkles have been frozen out by the Hollywood elite - "Tom and Rita didn't return their calls"  - and are setting their sights on NY. She thinks she's the next Amal Clooney or *Angelina Jolie.*
> 
> https://apple.news/AG8KzIgOAQ1a3jv8q-6XYsg



Right!  With Meghan's (failed-(so far...)) attempts at inserting herself into the United Nations, does she see herself as becoming a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador? Why not? She can go to impoverished areas to show off her designer outfits while pretending to care about starving children. Of course she'll bring vegan cakes that she bills the U.N. for.  If she doesn't get sufficient media coverage she can always revert back to her famous line: "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Right!  With Meghan's (failed-(so far...)) attempts at inserting herself into the United Nations, does she see herself as becoming a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador? Why not? *She can go to impoverished areas to show off her designer outfits while pretending to care about starving children.* Of course she'll bring vegan cakes that she bills the U.N. for.  If she doesn't get sufficient media coverage she can always revert back to her famous line: "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK".



As long as she remembers to take off her engagement ring. I still don't know if she thought she'd be considerate (words that come to my mind are silly and patronizing) or get robbed.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> We'd might as well expect Meghan to show up in the aftermath of a major earthquake or some other huge natural disaster, integrating herself with the Red Cross for the purpose of turning the relief efforts into her own personal fashion show.


Don't give her any ideas


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, really...if I remember correctly Amal has a JD instead of a bachelor's she barely graduated from (with?), and Angelina is an actual top notch actress.


Amal is an attorney


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Can't open. Would it be possible to use one of the following features: screenshot or copy & paste.


It's pretty much regurgitated gossip, that they haven't made the splash with the Hollywood elite - snubbed by Hanks, Spielbergs, etc.- that she had intended, not invited to Oscars, and are therefore considering NY where they believe they (she) will be more appreciated  Also closer to DC to launch her political career


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Amal is an attorney



Yeah, but attorney is a job description. I was under the impression US lawyers generally graduate with a JD, but apparently she earned a Masters of Law from NYU. Still better than a bachelor's that nearly didn't happen because of missing credits


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but attorney is a job description. I was under the impression US lawyers generally graduate with a JD, but apparently she earned a Masters of Law from NYU. Still better than a bachelor's that nearly didn't happen because of missing credits


I don't know but she still had to go to law school and pass the bar, which isn't easy.....JFK junior had to take it two or three times


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Can't open. Would it be possible to use one of the following features: screenshot or copy & paste.


"They’ve moved in plenty of circles during their time together: the acting world, royal cliqués, the philanthropy circuit. But there’s one group that still eludes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: the A-list inner circle.

"After failing to get an invite to the Oscars or the Beckham wedding, insiders say the couple are feeling snubbed by the local celebrities in California – and are setting their sights instead on being king and queen of New York."

“The Sussexes have been house hunting in NYC for a while now – they think they could make an impact there,” says an insider close to Meghan and Harry, who moved into their £11.2million mansion in California back in July 2020, after dramatically quitting the UK. “To be honest, they’ve failed to break in to any Hollywood circles. They had hoped to become part of the elite, with friends such as Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson [his wife], the Spielbergs, the Obamas and the Clooneys, but they can’t seem to get a foot in the door. There’s a reason you’re not seeing them front and centre at Hollywood dinners and events – and it’s not by choice. They thought the invites would come thick and fast when they moved to California, but the truth is, they’ve ended up being quite isolated. But there’s no better place on the planet to bounce back than Manhattan. Meghan’s very excited and is making a ton of ambitious plans, both professionally and socially.”

Meghan, 40, and Harry, 37 – who married in 2018, and are parents to Archie and Lilibet – last visited New York in September to attend Global Citizen Live, a charity concert at Central Park. They also spent time at the UN Headquarters in their first public appearance together since the birth of their daughter, where they met with Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed. And it’s this area of Midtown Manhattan where they’re said to be looking at properties – for good reason. “Living close to the UN will give them so many opportunities to spread their wings further into philanthropy and politics,” says our source. “They’re both keen to get more involved, as well as attending all the big conferences and doing a ton of power-schmoozing on the east coast. Meghan sees herself as the next Angelina Jolie or Amal Clooney. Amal started her legal career in New York, while Angelina was a fixture in the city as she established herself as a Goodwill Ambassador. So, this – on top of the obvious social benefits and tax breaks in New York – makes moving there a no-brainer. Plus, it’s a short hop to Washington DC, which is great for Meghan as she broadens her interest in politics.”

We’re told the couple will still keep a base in California, as it’s Meghan’s home state and her mum Doria Ragland still lives there, but New York will give them (yet another ) fresh start. Our source says, “This is their chance to start again socially. Meghan and Harry love the cut and thrust of Manhattan. They always come back from there buzzing off the energy and raving about how great the vibe is – especially Harry, who finds it a lot like London. He’s excited to be closer to Europe and hoping more of his old rugby and army friends can visit.”
The insider adds, “They’re looking at this summer as a target to start the process of moving. They’re excited.” ▪️


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> "They’ve moved in plenty of circles during their time together: the acting world, royal cliqués, the philanthropy circuit. But there’s one group that still eludes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: the A-list inner circle.
> 
> "After failing to get an invite to the Oscars or the Beckham wedding, insiders say the couple are feeling snubbed by the local celebrities in California – and are setting their sights instead on being king and queen of New York."
> 
> “The Sussexes have been house hunting in NYC for a while now – they think they could make an impact there,” says an insider close to Meghan and Harry, who moved into their £11.2million mansion in California back in July 2020, after dramatically quitting the UK. “To be honest, they’ve failed to break in to any Hollywood circles. They had hoped to become part of the elite, with friends such as Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson [his wife], the Spielbergs, the Obamas and the Clooneys, but they can’t seem to get a foot in the door. There’s a reason you’re not seeing them front and centre at Hollywood dinners and events – and it’s not by choice. They thought the invites would come thick and fast when they moved to California, but the truth is, they’ve ended up being quite isolated. But there’s no better place on the planet to bounce back than Manhattan. Meghan’s very excited and is making a ton of ambitious plans, both professionally and socially.”
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Harry, 37 – who married in 2018, and are parents to Archie and Lilibet – last visited New York in September to attend Global Citizen Live, a charity concert at Central Park. They also spent time at the UN Headquarters in their first public appearance together since the birth of their daughter, where they met with Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed. And it’s this area of Midtown Manhattan where they’re said to be looking at properties – for good reason. “Living close to the UN will give them so many opportunities to spread their wings further into philanthropy and politics,” says our source. “They’re both keen to get more involved, as well as attending all the big conferences and doing a ton of power-schmoozing on the east coast. Meghan sees herself as the next Angelina Jolie or Amal Clooney. Amal started her legal career in New York, while Angelina was a fixture in the city as she established herself as a Goodwill Ambassador. So, this – on top of the obvious social benefits and tax breaks in New York – makes moving there a no-brainer. Plus, it’s a short hop to Washington DC, which is great for Meghan as she broadens her interest in politics.”
> 
> We’re told the couple will still keep a base in California, as it’s Meghan’s home state and her mum Doria Ragland still lives there, but New York will give them (yet another ) fresh start. Our source says, “This is their chance to start again socially. Meghan and Harry love the cut and thrust of Manhattan. They always come back from there buzzing off the energy and raving about how great the vibe is – especially Harry, who finds it a lot like London. He’s excited to be closer to Europe and hoping more of his old rugby and army friends can visit.”
> The insider adds, “They’re looking at this summer as a target to start the process of moving. They’re excited.” ▪


LOL...the cut and thrust of NY
wonder who they think their circle of friends will be

as far as a role model, I did think she would like to pattern herself after Angie.  Amal, no - she can't do that


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> "They’ve moved in plenty of circles during their time together: the acting world, royal cliqués, the philanthropy circuit. But there’s one group that still eludes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: the A-list inner circle.
> 
> "After failing to get an invite to the Oscars or the Beckham wedding, insiders say the couple are feeling snubbed by the local celebrities in California – and are setting their sights instead on being king and queen of New York."
> 
> “The Sussexes have been house hunting in NYC for a while now – they think they could make an impact there,” says an insider close to Meghan and Harry, who moved into their £11.2million mansion in California back in July 2020, after dramatically quitting the UK. “To be honest, they’ve failed to break in to any Hollywood circles. They had hoped to become part of the elite, with friends such as Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson [his wife], the Spielbergs, the Obamas and the Clooneys, but they can’t seem to get a foot in the door. There’s a reason you’re not seeing them front and centre at Hollywood dinners and events – and it’s not by choice. They thought the invites would come thick and fast when they moved to California, but the truth is, they’ve ended up being quite isolated. But there’s no better place on the planet to bounce back than Manhattan. Meghan’s very excited and is making a ton of ambitious plans, both professionally and socially.”
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Harry, 37 – who married in 2018, and are parents to Archie and Lilibet – last visited New York in September to attend Global Citizen Live, a charity concert at Central Park. They also spent time at the UN Headquarters in their first public appearance together since the birth of their daughter, where they met with Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed. And it’s this area of Midtown Manhattan where they’re said to be looking at properties – for good reason. “Living close to the UN will give them so many opportunities to spread their wings further into philanthropy and politics,” says our source. “They’re both keen to get more involved, as well as attending all the big conferences and doing a ton of power-schmoozing on the east coast. Meghan sees herself as the next Angelina Jolie or Amal Clooney. Amal started her legal career in New York, while Angelina was a fixture in the city as she established herself as a Goodwill Ambassador. So, this – on top of the obvious social benefits and tax breaks in New York – makes moving there a no-brainer. Plus, it’s a short hop to Washington DC, which is great for Meghan as she broadens her interest in politics.”
> 
> We’re told the couple will still keep a base in California, as it’s Meghan’s home state and her mum Doria Ragland still lives there, but New York will give them (yet another ) fresh start. Our source says, “This is their chance to start again socially. Meghan and Harry love the cut and thrust of Manhattan. They always come back from there buzzing off the energy and raving about how great the vibe is – especially Harry, who finds it a lot like London. He’s excited to be closer to Europe and hoping more of his old rugby and army friends can visit.”
> The insider adds, “They’re looking at this summer as a target to start the process of moving. They’re excited.” ▪


What a joke!  Make an impact in NY with the movers and shakers?  That takes money that he is too cheap to spend.  Maybe they are thinking of spending the summer in the Hamptons.  His buddy Nacho could help him there and Harry could play polo with  another person's horses lol!  I understood that Meghan wanted the noblesse oblige of living in Montecito, but from a practical point of view, it was a mistake and Covid restrictions did not make it better.  In NYC you have to have an angle or a gimmick  and I don't see what his is besides being a royal.  NYC is littered with plenty of people with titles and no countries.  Harry may soon be joining them by stating that he doesn't feel safe in England.


----------



## Chanbal

A must watch!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> LOL...the cut and thrust of NY
> wonder who they think their circle of friends will be
> 
> as far as a role model, I did think she would like to pattern herself after Angie.  Amal, no - she can't do that


I'm assuming this piece was a paid placement by their PR team. As if their previous trip to NY was such a rousing success?  Of course, no mention of them being escorted out of the UN when their mics were discovered, which I totally believe happened.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> That takes money that he is too cheap to spend.


More likely they don't have.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> What a joke!  Make an impact in NY with the movers and shakers?  That takes money that he is too cheap to spend.  Maybe they are thinking of spending the summer in the Hamptons.  His buddy Nacho could help him there and Harry could play polo with  another person's horses lol!  I understood that Meghan wanted the noblesse oblige of living in Montecito, but from a practical point of view, it was a mistake and Covid restrictions did not make it better.  In NYC you have to have an angle or a gimmick  and I don't see what his is besides being a royal.  NYC is littered with plenty of people with titles and no countries.  Harry may soon be joining them by stating that he doesn't feel safe in England.


maybe the can hang with whats-her-name - Leanne? from the real housewives


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but attorney is a job description. I was under the impression US lawyers generally graduate with a JD, but apparently she earned a Masters of Law from NYU. Still better than a bachelor's that nearly didn't happen because of missing credits



From Wikipedia








						Amal Clooney - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Clooney attended Dr Challoner's High School, a girls' grammar school located in Little Chalfont, Buckinghamshire, prior to university. She then studied at St Hugh's College, Oxford, where she received an exhibition grant and the Shrigley Award.[18][19] S*he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in Jurisprudence in 2000.[citation needed] The following year she entered New York University School of Law to study for the Master of Laws (LL.M) degree. *She received the Jack J. Katz Memorial Award for excellence in entertainment law.[20][21] While at NYU she worked for one semester in the office of Sonia Sotomayor, then a judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and NYU Law faculty member.[22] 

Clooney is qualified to practice law in the United States, and England and Wales. She was admitted to the bar in New York in 2002, and called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2010.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> maybe the can hang with whats-her-name - Leanne? from the real housewives


I expect MM will end up on one of the RH franchises at some point, and will supplement that with a side hustle on Cameo.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I expect MM will end up on one of the RH franchises at some point, and will supplement that with a side hustle on Cameo.


She would have to have something to back up her being on that show and she has nothing substantial.  She can call her self and actress and humanitarian, but acting is well in the past and giving out diapers doesn't make her a humanitarian.  Would they want a royal?  The Countess had a meaningless title and Meghan's is one step better.  I don't think TQ or Prince Charles  would appreciate her going on a reality show and flogging it.


----------



## TC1

It's not really much of a "secret meeting with the Queen" when you can't wait to blab about it on national television


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> She would have to have something to back up her being on that show and she has nothing substantial.  She can call her self and actress and humanitarian, but acting is well in the past and giving out diapers doesn't make her a humanitarian.  Would they want a royal?  The Countess had a meaningless title and Meghan's is one step better.  I don't think TQ or Prince Charles  would appreciate her going on a reality show and flogging it.


Many of the RH alumni didn't have much in the way of accomplishment before being cast. Vicki Gunvalson - insurance agent. Tamra Barney - married to a car salesman. Sonja Morgan - ex wife of a Mellon heir. Teresa Giudice - married to a ? Melissa Gorga - married to a contractor. MM has the name recognition that would draw the curious, and many of her stans are likely already RH devotees. But I don't envision her joining until she and Harry split. She will always be a thorn in the side of the RF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> What a joke!  Make an impact in NY with the movers and shakers?  That takes money that he is too cheap to spend.  Maybe they are thinking of spending the summer in the Hamptons.  His buddy Nacho could help him there and Harry could play polo with  another person's horses lol!  I understood that Meghan wanted the noblesse oblige of living in Montecito, but from a practical point of view, it was a mistake and Covid restrictions did not make it better.  In NYC you have to have an angle or a gimmick  and I don't see what his is besides being a royal.  NYC is littered with plenty of people with titles and no countries.  Harry may soon be joining them by stating that he doesn't feel safe in England.



I’ve said it before and will say it again: H&M = Wallis&Ed 2.0. 
Before they settled on France as their final ‘home’, they bounced around, too. They thought NY society would fall all over them, they’d be the _toast of the town_. Once they realised they were being mocked and joked about, they crossed the pond.

Looking forward to the next Nflix docudrama: _Hazzie&MM flop_


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> From Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amal Clooney - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clooney attended Dr Challoner's High School, a girls' grammar school located in Little Chalfont, Buckinghamshire, prior to university. She then studied at St Hugh's College, Oxford, where she received an exhibition grant and the Shrigley Award.[18][19] S*he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in Jurisprudence in 2000.[citation needed] The following year she entered New York University School of Law to study for the Master of Laws (LL.M) degree. *She received the Jack J. Katz Memorial Award for excellence in entertainment law.[20][21] While at NYU she worked for one semester in the office of Sonia Sotomayor, then a judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and NYU Law faculty member.[22]
> 
> Clooney is qualified to practice law in the United States, and England and Wales. She was admitted to the bar in New York in 2002, and called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2010.



Her parents are quite accomplished, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> A must watch!




Thank you for posting. After this H&M Show, I needed that


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting, hope you can read it. Something called Heat claims the Harkles have been frozen out by the Hollywood elite - "Tom and Rita didn't return their calls"  - and are setting their sights on NY. She thinks she's the next Amal Clooney or Angelina Jolie.
> 
> https://apple.news/AG8KzIgOAQ1a3jv8q-6XYsg


Are they really moving or is this just another rumor?

Moving because there are "more tax breaks in New York"? As compared to what--France?
Moving so "Harry's rugby and army friends can visit"! If they're such close friends, why would relocating make a difference?

I think they've moved about 12 times since being together. Multiple residences in the UK before and after marriage. To name a few, an Oxfordshire farmhouse, Nottingham Cottage, Adelaide Cottage, Beaconsfield Farm in the Cotswolds, a central London home, Frogmore cottage, then across the pond to Vancouver Island, Tyler Perry's property in Los Angeles, now Montecito . . .

My mother used to say the worst four-letter world in the alphabet is "Move." This is exhausting. Some people can't stay put, but really, who lives this way? Why would anyone want to live this way, not to mention the expense.


----------



## gracekelly

Happyish said:


> Are they really moving or is this just another rumor?
> 
> Moving because there are "more tax breaks in New York"? As compared to what--France?
> Moving so "Harry's rugby and army friends can visit"! If they're such close friends, why would relocating make a difference?
> 
> I think they've moved about 12 times since being together. Multiple residences in the UK before and after marriage. To name a few, an Oxfordshire farmhouse, Nottingham Cottage, Adelaide Cottage, Beaconsfield Farm in the Cotswolds, a central London home, Frogmore cottage, then across the pond to Vancouver Island, Tyler Perry's property in Los Angeles, now Montecito . . .
> 
> My mother used to say the worst four-letter world in the alphabet is "Move." This is exhausting. Some people can't stay put, but really, who lives this way? Why would anyone want to live this way, not to mention the expense.


On the plus side, I don't think they have much furniture to move.  lol!


----------



## kipp

Back to the Today show interview---why would JCMH do that if Netflix needs all that information about the meeting with the Queen, etc.?  It doesn't make any sense to me unless he is just desperate for $$$$ NOW.


----------



## Happyish

kipp said:


> Back to the Today show interview---why would JCMH do that if Netflix needs all that information about the meeting with the Queen, etc.?  It doesn't make any sense to me unless he is just desperate for $$$$ NOW.


You're assuming he's getting paid for the interview. Maybe he's doing it to stay "relevant" and the tidbits fuel interest in the Netflix show, not to mention his book?


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> "They’ve moved in plenty of circles during their time together: the acting world, royal cliqués, the philanthropy circuit. But there’s one group that still eludes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: the A-list inner circle.
> 
> "After failing to get an invite to the Oscars or the Beckham wedding, insiders say the couple are feeling snubbed by the local celebrities in California – and are setting their sights instead on being king and queen of New York."
> 
> “The Sussexes have been house hunting in NYC for a while now – they think they could make an impact there,” says an insider close to Meghan and Harry, who moved into their £11.2million mansion in California back in July 2020, after dramatically quitting the UK. “To be honest, they’ve failed to break in to any Hollywood circles. They had hoped to become part of the elite, with friends such as Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson [his wife], the Spielbergs, the Obamas and the Clooneys, but they can’t seem to get a foot in the door. There’s a reason you’re not seeing them front and centre at Hollywood dinners and events – and it’s not by choice. They thought the invites would come thick and fast when they moved to California, but the truth is, they’ve ended up being quite isolated. But there’s no better place on the planet to bounce back than Manhattan. Meghan’s very excited and is making a ton of ambitious plans, both professionally and socially.”
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Harry, 37 – who married in 2018, and are parents to Archie and Lilibet – last visited New York in September to attend Global Citizen Live, a charity concert at Central Park. They also spent time at the UN Headquarters in their first public appearance together since the birth of their daughter, where they met with Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed. And it’s this area of Midtown Manhattan where they’re said to be looking at properties – for good reason. “Living close to the UN will give them so many opportunities to spread their wings further into philanthropy and politics,” says our source. “They’re both keen to get more involved, as well as attending all the big conferences and doing a ton of power-schmoozing on the east coast. Meghan sees herself as the next Angelina Jolie or Amal Clooney. Amal started her legal career in New York, while Angelina was a fixture in the city as she established herself as a Goodwill Ambassador. So, this – on top of the obvious social benefits and tax breaks in New York – makes moving there a no-brainer. Plus, it’s a short hop to Washington DC, which is great for Meghan as she broadens her interest in politics.”
> 
> We’re told the couple will still keep a base in California, as it’s Meghan’s home state and her mum Doria Ragland still lives there, but New York will give them (yet another ) fresh start. Our source says, “This is their chance to start again socially. Meghan and Harry love the cut and thrust of Manhattan. They always come back from there buzzing off the energy and raving about how great the vibe is – especially Harry, who finds it a lot like London. He’s excited to be closer to Europe and hoping more of his old rugby and army friends can visit.”
> The insider adds, “They’re looking at this summer as a target to start the process of moving. They’re excited.” ▪


What tax breaks in NY do they think they’re getting ?


----------



## kemilia

*Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*

Victoria Ward
Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm







The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage


[/QUOTE]

What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> LOL...the cut and thrust of NY
> wonder who they think their circle of friends will be
> 
> as far as a role model, I did think she would like to pattern herself after Angie.  Amal, no - she can't do that


“Cut and thrust of NY”  Certainly describes a portion of the surging random crime rate in NYC. Dense as bricks, ”those people” who cry out about security talking about going head long into it. Good riddance and don’t let falling lemons hit you over the head or slip on olive oil on your way out.


----------



## 1LV

Regarding the Today Show Interview with Hoda.  Why Hoda, and not MM’s bff’s (Oprah) bff Gayle King?


----------



## kipp

Happyish said:


> You're assuming he's getting paid for the interview. Maybe he's doing it to stay "relevant" and the tidbits fuel interest in the Netflix show, not to mention his book?


Understood.  But I assume he gets paid to do anything in public, given the past history.


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> Back to the Today show interview---why would JCMH do that if Netflix needs all that information about the meeting with the Queen, etc.?  It doesn't make any sense to me unless he is just desperate for $$$$ NOW.


I don't think Today pays guests very much. I would imagine more exposure for Invictus means more money coming in.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> What tax breaks in NY do they think they’re getting ?


It was clear to me whoever wrote that piece had no idea what they were talking about.


----------



## charlottawill

1LV said:


> Regarding the Today Show Interview with Hoda.  Why Hoda, and not MM’s bff’s (Oprah) bff Gayle King?


Today is fond of the BRF. They have a London based royal correspondent on at least once a week for one reason or another.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*
> 
> Victoria Ward
> Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage



What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?
[/QUOTE]
Stoned?


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*
> 
> Victoria Ward
> Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage



What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?
[/QUOTE]

At first, I thought I needed an eye exam. Then, other commenters on other sites were asking why does her face change. In the 3 days she was there, it seemed like she had 3 or 4 faces. It isn’t just the makeup [that can help], but the actual shape of her face looks different. What is going on?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> They are advertising it well. I wonder how much he charges for this type of interviews…
> 
> View attachment 5383380
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to discuss secret meeting with the Queen on Today show
> 
> 
> The 37-year-old Duke of Sussex sat down with Hoda, 57, in the Netherlands, where he is currently hosting the Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Lol. We can witness the brand slide in motion from Oprah on prime time to some nobody  on daytime.
He’s hit irrelevance faster than Von Dutch


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?



At first, I thought I needed an eye exam. Then, other commenters on other sites were asking why does her face change. In the 3 days she was there, it seemed like she had 3 or 4 faces. It isn’t just the makeup [that can help], but the actual shape of her face looks different. What is going on?
[/QUOTE]

Maybe one of those 4 stylists is just for “styling” TW’s face!


----------



## Sophisticatted

1LV said:


> Regarding the Today Show Interview with Hoda.  Why Hoda, and not MM’s bff’s (Oprah) bff Gayle King?



Considering everyone knows Gayle is Oprah’s bff, and considering Oprah took the interview off all media, I think Oprah and Gayle are “blacklisting” the duo.  The interview and the association did not go the way Oprah wanted it to.


----------



## rose60610

So Harry claims he loves the fast pace of NYC because it reminds him of London? Well, he could have stayed in London but...never mind. He loves the fast pace so much that he moved to sleepy Montecito? Nothing like showing you value your privacy by moving to Manhattan. It's often said that New Yorkers pride themselves on not being interested in or not taking notice of the many celebrities and famous people among them. Well, we all know that would kill M&H to walk among the Great Unwashed of NY and not be noticed. Isn't that what their huge security team is for? For everybody else to KNOW that they're sooooooo important and to alert everyone around that somebody of super high stature is around?  Will they need more security agents to block people's phones from taking their picture?  Meghan is better off staying in CA in the midst of other celebrities where shallow famous airheads can thrive.


----------



## 1LV

Sophisticatted said:


> Considering everyone knows Gayle is Oprah’s bff, and considering Oprah took the interview off all media, I think Oprah and Gayle are “blacklisting” the duo.  The interview and the association did not go the way Oprah wanted it to.


I wondered the same thing. Doesn’t seem to have gone the way MM intended either.


----------



## purseinsanity

Haz 


charlottawill said:


> "They’ve moved in plenty of circles during their time together: the acting world, royal cliqués, the philanthropy circuit. But there’s one group that still eludes Meghan Markle and Prince Harry: the A-list inner circle.
> 
> "After failing to get an invite to the Oscars or the Beckham wedding, insiders say the couple are feeling snubbed by the local celebrities in California – and are setting their sights instead on being king and queen of New York."
> 
> “The Sussexes have been house hunting in NYC for a while now – they think they could make an impact there,” says an insider close to Meghan and Harry, who moved into their £11.2million mansion in California back in July 2020, after dramatically quitting the UK. “To be honest, they’ve failed to break in to any Hollywood circles. They had hoped to become part of the elite, with friends such as Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson [his wife], the Spielbergs, the Obamas and the Clooneys, but they can’t seem to get a foot in the door. There’s a reason you’re not seeing them front and centre at Hollywood dinners and events – and it’s not by choice. They thought the invites would come thick and fast when they moved to California, but the truth is, they’ve ended up being quite isolated. But there’s no better place on the planet to bounce back than Manhattan. Meghan’s very excited and is making a ton of ambitious plans, both professionally and socially.”
> 
> Meghan, 40, and Harry, 37 – who married in 2018, and are parents to Archie and Lilibet – last visited New York in September to attend Global Citizen Live, a charity concert at Central Park. They also spent time at the UN Headquarters in their first public appearance together since the birth of their daughter, where they met with Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed. And it’s this area of Midtown Manhattan where they’re said to be looking at properties – for good reason. “Living close to the UN will give them so many opportunities to spread their wings further into philanthropy and politics,” says our source. “They’re both keen to get more involved, as well as attending all the big conferences and doing a ton of power-schmoozing on the east coast. Meghan sees herself as the next Angelina Jolie or Amal Clooney. Amal started her legal career in New York, while Angelina was a fixture in the city as she established herself as a Goodwill Ambassador. So, this – on top of the obvious social benefits and tax breaks in New York – makes moving there a no-brainer. Plus, it’s a short hop to Washington DC, which is great for Meghan as she broadens her interest in politics.”
> 
> We’re told the couple will still keep a base in California, as it’s Meghan’s home state and her mum Doria Ragland still lives there, but New York will give them (yet another ) fresh start. Our source says, “This is their chance to start again socially. Meghan and Harry love the cut and thrust of Manhattan. They always come back from there buzzing off the energy and raving about how great the vibe is – especially Harry, who finds it a lot like London. He’s excited to be closer to Europe and hoping more of his old rugby and army friends can visit.”
> The insider adds, “They’re looking at this summer as a target to start the process of moving. They’re excited.” ▪


Haz wants to move to NYC because it reminds him of London???  The city that triggers him???


----------



## youngster

Happyish said:


> *Moving because there are "more tax breaks in New York"? As compared to what--France?*
> Moving so "Harry's rugby and army friends can visit"! If they're such close friends, why would relocating make a difference?
> 
> I think they've moved about 12 times since being together. Multiple residences in the UK before and after marriage. To name a few, an Oxfordshire farmhouse, Nottingham Cottage, Adelaide Cottage, Beaconsfield Farm in the Cotswolds, a central London home, Frogmore cottage, then across the pond to Vancouver Island, Tyler Perry's property in Los Angeles, now Montecito . . .



This.  New York City has the highest tax burden in the U.S. for residents.  California is very high too, of course.  Living in both states means you'll pay state taxes to both states, split and pro-rated between the states based on the number of days actually spent in each state and where the income is sourced from originally.  It's complex and will only make their CPA's and attorneys happy. But, yeah, tax breaks in New York?  Come on.  LOL!


----------



## Chanbal

US backlash as Prince Harry savaged over 'equal world' plea for Archie
					

PRINCE Harry has been skewered for making comments about not resting until he's made a "more equal world" for his and Meghan Markle's two children, with some calling for the Duke to relinquish his title as part of the process.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I do wonder though...how's the billionaire lifestyle financed?


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> Regarding the Today Show Interview with Hoda.  Why Hoda, and not MM’s bff’s (Oprah) bff Gayle King?


that's CBS
but yes I'm sure gayle would have been happy to do the honors


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> Considering everyone knows Gayle is Oprah’s bff, and considering Oprah took the interview off all media, I think Oprah and Gayle are “blacklisting” the duo.  The interview and the association did not go the way Oprah wanted it to.


I'd love to believe that but I doubt it


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Kate and Letizia practically disappear next to Maxima


I should have mentioned Maxima is known for her statement attire - and she wears it WELL. Big prints, huge ruffles, lace, ponchos, feathers, giant brims on hats, BRIGHT colors, huge statement costume jewelry AND she wears the royal bling a lot, even when not in formal attire. 
The Dutch royal bling collection was purchased by people who believe in MORE IS BETTER. Giant brooches, huge stones and lots of them

Compare lovely Kate with her tiny Kiki McDonald earring bobs. Yes, she always wears THAT RING, but never flashes it.


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex invited to make balcony appearance at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee*
> 
> Victoria Ward
> Mon, 18 April 2022, 6:32 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited to take part in some of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations - Samir Hussein/WireImage



What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?
[/QUOTE]
She literally looks like the cat that swallowed the canary.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> I think they've moved about 12 times since being together. Multiple residences in the UK before and after marriage. To name a few, an Oxfordshire farmhouse, Nottingham Cottage, *Adelaide Cottage*, Beaconsfield Farm in the Cotswolds, a central London home, Frogmore cottage, then across the pond to Vancouver Island, Tyler Perry's property in Los Angeles, now Montecito . . .



I somehow missed that stopover, but I just googled it and it's super charming, way prettier than even the "good" side of Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?



Her rotten core is breaking through the skin.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I somehow missed that stopover, but I just googled it and it's super charming, way prettier than even the "good" side of Frogmore Cottage.


I know, right? A place you could set down and stay forever . . .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> At first, I thought I needed an eye exam. Then, other commenters on other sites were asking why does her face change. In the 3 days she was there, it seemed like she had 3 or 4 faces. It isn’t just the makeup [that can help], but the actual shape of her face looks different. What is going on?



Maybe her inner demon was agitated by the new environment and was harder to control.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> So Harry claims he loves the fast pace of NYC because it reminds him of London?



Wait...that same London that triggers him whenever he's forced to be there?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Her parents are quite accomplished, too.


I think George and Amal both scored on that marriage.  She got a very rich, handsome, charming movie star.  He got a smart accomplished, attractive younger woman and they have two kids together.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5383700
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US backlash as Prince Harry savaged over 'equal world' plea for Archie
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry has been skewered for making comments about not resting until he's made a "more equal world" for his and Meghan Markle's two children, with some calling for the Duke to relinquish his title as part of the process.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




Why is he always sweating? I've thought several times - usually when I said his face looked intocixated - his hair was really...damp.


----------



## coldbrewcoffeekate

She always looked cute/casual in her pre-Harry life, it’s weird that she fully shifted her style when she hit the world stage.


----------



## coldbrewcoffeekate

bag-mania said:


> Probably more lies. I doubt Harry ever had a chance to meet Bogart. Harry never came to Canada to date Meghan, did he? She always went to him in England. I can see Meghan just not wanting the inconvenience of moving with a large dog while she was preparing for her glorious wedding and planning her domination of the world.


Yes he went to Canada on at least a few occasions.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?




Yes, the lips and cheeks look odd to me.  I would have attributed it to just the last few pregnancy pounds to be shed but this looks like over-done fillers or just the worst camera angle ever.  The lipstick color and orange-y bronzer does her no favors either.  She has a lot of sun damage as well.  Really, just not a good look at all.  I would want my money back from the stylists lol, if she indeed brought a whole crew over.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?


She literally looks like the cat that swallowed the canary.
[/QUOTE]
could it be just her expression at that moment?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe they’ve worked out a deal with NYC - the city can use their name in its adverts because, ya kno, people will flock there when they hear H&M live there. We can ask the Montecito folks how that worked out 

All I want to know is who killed that Queens mother. This case is fascinating in a True Crime sort of way.









						Cops investigating murder of Queens mom hunt man she 'had affair with'
					

Gaal, 51, was murdered at around 12.41am on Saturday after returning from a night out. She was alone in the home with her 13-year-old son Leo when she was stabbed up to 60 times in the basement.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: Queens, NYC.  Not the BRF Queen’s mother.


----------



## Chanbal

QE is not a kid, this sounds rather condescending to me. 
The people on Twitter may be able to find a few articles published in the Montecito Journal that support a different opinion about his 'welcome' in Santa Barbara. 


_'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.' 

Kotb asked if he made her laugh.

'Yes I did,' he replied. 

'Both Meghan and I had tea with her so it was nice to catch up with her. 

'Home for me now is for the time being is in the States and it feels that way as well. 

'*We've been welcomed with open arms and we have such a great community up in Santa Barbara*.' _









						Prince Harry says he wants to PROTECT the Queen
					

Prince Harry, asked by NBC's Hoda Kotb about his visit to see the Queen on Thursday, said they had tea and added: 'I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> So Harry claims he loves the fast pace of NYC because it reminds him of London? Well, he could have stayed in London but...never mind. He loves the fast pace so much that he moved to sleepy Montecito? Nothing like showing you value your privacy by moving to Manhattan. It's often said that New Yorkers pride themselves on not being interested in or not taking notice of the many celebrities and famous people among them. Well, we all know that would kill M&H to walk among the Great Unwashed of NY and not be noticed. Isn't that what their huge security team is for? For everybody else to KNOW that they're sooooooo important and to alert everyone around that somebody of super high stature is around?  Will they need more security agents to block people's phones from taking their picture?  Meghan is better off staying in CA in the midst of other celebrities where shallow famous airheads can thrive.


On moving to NY …
I remember it well, big PR when Taylor Swift moved to NYC, photo going to gym, effusive words about city , full court press blah blah ….
I failed to see the big PR thing when she left NY …
well maybe she kept the apartment as a pied a terre between airplanes


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> QE is not a kid, this sounds rather condescending to me.
> View attachment 5383799
> 
> _'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.'
> 
> Kotb asked if he made her laugh.
> 
> 'Yes I did,' he replied.
> 
> 'Both Meghan and I had tea with her so it was nice to catch up with her.
> 
> 'Home for me now is for the time being is in the States and it feels that way as well.
> 
> '*We've been welcomed with open arms and we have such a great community up in Santa Barbara*.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he wants to PROTECT the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, asked by NBC's Hoda Kotb about his visit to see the Queen on Thursday, said they had tea and added: 'I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



_They had tea????  _Hmmmm_.

He’s making sure she has the right people????? _Hmmm
_
She’s on great form???? _Hmmmm 
Astonishing how different his account is from the Royal Reporters and the Palace.  
Surely, the Palace will not dignify this baloney with a comment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent work, team!  Thank you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cue BLG:


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Astonishing how different his account is from the Royal Reporters and the Palace.*
> Surely, the Palace will not dignify this baloney with a comment.


Poor Harry, he wasn't recognized in Montecito prior to OW's interview. He couldn't risk to live a private life, so this is likely why he had to give that interview…  

*Prince Harry*_,* Montecito’s latest celebrity resident, is apparently suffering an identity crisis*.

The Duke of Sussex, 36, may be known in major metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles, but when it comes to small-town America, he’s an unknown.

*Britain’s Daily Mail, for whom I used to scribe in the mid 1970s for Nigel Dempster’s Diary, asked dozens of people in small communities across the U.S. to identify Queen Elizabeth’s grandson from a recent photograph.*_

_*But he was repeatedly mistaken for a different person — if he was recognized at all.

Hopefully his network interview with fellow Montecito resident Oprah Winfrey will give him more recognition*…_









						When Harry Met America . . . - Montecito
					

Prince Harry, Montecito’s latest celebrity resident, is apparently suffering an identity crisis. The Duke of Sussex, 36, may be known in major metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles, but when it comes to small-town America, he’s an unknown. Britain’s Daily Mail, for whom I used to...




					www.montecitojournal.net


----------



## octopus17

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?


She literally looks like the cat that swallowed the canary.
[/QUOTE]
Smug and Mug


----------



## Aimee3

And H is looking like he’s getting quite bald.  Whatever treatment he was allegedly doing didn’t work.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> QE is not a kid, this sounds rather condescending to me.
> The people on Twitter may be able to find a few articles published in the Montecito Journal that support a different opinion about his 'welcome' in Santa Barbara.
> View attachment 5383799
> 
> _'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.'
> 
> Kotb asked if he made her laugh.
> 
> 'Yes I did,' he replied.
> 
> 'Both Meghan and I had tea with her so it was nice to catch up with her.
> 
> 'Home for me now is for the time being is in the States and it feels that way as well.
> 
> '*We've been welcomed with open arms and we have such a great community up in Santa Barbara*.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he wants to PROTECT the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, asked by NBC's Hoda Kotb about his visit to see the Queen on Thursday, said they had tea and added: 'I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What a joke.  She needs protection from Haz and Megain first and foremost.  Thank GOD he checked on her two years later.    He’s sofaking annoying!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> What a joke.  She needs protection from Haz and Megain first and foremost.  Thank GOD he checked on her two years later.    He’s sofaking annoying!


So much hypocrisy… Let's hope the post below is accurate and Charles does what he is supposed to do.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> What a joke.  She needs protection from Haz and Megain first and foremost.  Thank GOD he checked on her two years later.    He’s sofaking annoying!




Applause!!!  

I'd like to ask Haz: "You couldn't find help for your own wife when she claimed to be suicidal living among your own family. So how do you know your grandmother is "protected" and "got the right people behind HER"? 

Does anyone believe The Queen is sooooo relieved after learning Harry is satisfied with her security and advisors?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> QE is not a kid, this sounds rather condescending to me.
> The people on Twitter may be able to find a few articles published in the Montecito Journal that support a different opinion about his 'welcome' in Santa Barbara.
> View attachment 5383799
> 
> _'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.'
> 
> Kotb asked if he made her laugh.
> 
> 'Yes I did,' he replied.
> 
> 'Both Meghan and I had tea with her so it was nice to catch up with her.
> 
> 'Home for me now is for the time being is in the States and it feels that way as well.
> 
> '*We've been welcomed with open arms and we have such a great community up in Santa Barbara*.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he wants to PROTECT the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, asked by NBC's Hoda Kotb about his visit to see the Queen on Thursday, said they had tea and added: 'I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So he’s making sure she has the right people around her. It’s cute how he pretends he has any say in the matter.


----------



## VigeeLeBrun

From DAY ONE AFTER THE ENGAGEMENT ANNOUNCEMENT- ms muggles looked like like she ate every canary on earth… the poor birds will be prob extinct by the time the Duchess of Windsor ll is satisfied 

just an observer, and fyi have followed this saga since the engagement  of Prince Weakness Charles and it looked like a  pretty naive Diana Spencer…
It’s been a ride


Cornflower Blue said:


> She literally looks like the cat that swallowed the canary.


Smug and Mug
[/QUOTE]

.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> So he’s making sure she has the right people around her. It’s cute how he pretends he has any say in the matter.



What an arrogant and insulting thing to say about the rest of the family and her staff. You know, the ones who actually live near her and spend time with her, implying that they aren't looking out for her and he has to step in and make sure she's being cared for properly.  How would he have any idea of what she would need, given that he has spent practically no time at all with her in the past few years?  

So, how exactly did he "make sure she has the right people around her"?  Did he speak with them in depth about her care?  Speak with the Queen in depth about her care?  Talk with other family members?  Observe her at routine tasks to see whether she is struggling?  Of course not, he was probably there for all of 30 minutes with her.  He probably asked one of her ladies in waiting . . .  _"You lot are taking good care of Granny, right?  Excellent. Well done, all."  _Like the arrogant know-it-all he is.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> QE is not a kid, this sounds rather condescending to me.
> The people on Twitter may be able to find a few articles published in the Montecito Journal that support a different opinion about his 'welcome' in Santa Barbara.
> View attachment 5383799
> 
> _'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.'
> 
> Kotb asked if he made her laugh.
> 
> 'Yes I did,' he replied.
> 
> 'Both Meghan and I had tea with her so it was nice to catch up with her.
> 
> 'Home for me now is for the time being is in the States and it feels that way as well.
> 
> '*We've been welcomed with open arms and we have such a great community up in Santa Barbara*.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he wants to PROTECT the Queen
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, asked by NBC's Hoda Kotb about his visit to see the Queen on Thursday, said they had tea and added: 'I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This gave me the giggles while I was on the subway - probably ended up looked like Duchess Cat Canary as I held in the snorts 

And the four stylists of the apocalypse:
1. Hair: make sure her extensions don't drop off and his curls are airbrushed into any important photos
2. Face: for the lunchtime Botox in case she wants a new look NOW
3. Body: we don't want a repeat of the last time when the spray tan missed a few spots
4. Undercover Security: trained to protect the goddess from sexual predators using nothing more than hairspray and a really hot crimper


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why is he always sweating? I've thought several times - usually when I said his face looked intocixated - his hair was really...damp.



It's in the genes apparently. 


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/five-times-prince-andrew-appeared-26057509


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> She literally looks like the cat that swallowed the canary.


could it be just her expression at that moment?
[/QUOTE]
I too have been caught in photos with unflattering expressions. But there are plenty of others of her we've seen here over the course of their visit that really show her true nature. When people show you who they really are, believe it.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> And H is looking like he’s getting quite bald.  Whatever treatment he was allegedly doing didn’t work.


William did the smart thing and buzzed it. The funny thing is, about five years ago Hazy was mocking his brother's baldness. Karma.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Poor Harry, he wasn't recognized in Montecito prior to OW's interview. He couldn't risk to live a private life, so this is likely why he had to give that interview…
> 
> *Prince Harry*_,* Montecito’s latest celebrity resident, is apparently suffering an identity crisis*.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 36, may be known in major metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles, but when it comes to small-town America, he’s an unknown.
> 
> *Britain’s Daily Mail, for whom I used to scribe in the mid 1970s for Nigel Dempster’s Diary, asked dozens of people in small communities across the U.S. to identify Queen Elizabeth’s grandson from a recent photograph.
> 
> But he was repeatedly mistaken for a different person — if he was recognized at all.
> 
> Hopefully his network interview with fellow Montecito resident Oprah Winfrey will give him more recognition*…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When Harry Met America . . . - Montecito
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Montecito’s latest celebrity resident, is apparently suffering an identity crisis. The Duke of Sussex, 36, may be known in major metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles, but when it comes to small-town America, he’s an unknown. Britain’s Daily Mail, for whom I used to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net


Why should Montecito residents give a rat's a** who he is? We fought a war for independence from Britain nearly 250 years ago. If he wants to make the US his permanent residence, great, but he doesn't deserve nor should he expect any special treatment or recognition. He's just regular old Harry Windsor here. Something about all men being created equal, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent work, team!  Thank you



But, but....I'm watching Bridgerton.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> For him yes re smoking and sun, but not necessarily true for her. I take good care of my skin and have never smoked, and every day I look in the mirror and see new wrinkles. Aging really accelerates after 60 as estrogen drops off. But I have no interest in taking "bio-identical hormones" and looking like this at 73:
> View attachment 5382798


I saw her in a horrible closeup on Million Dollar Listing when she was trying to sell her huge estate with Josh Flagg and was shocked at the wrinkles. Her whole face was wrinkled. Why, I have no idea. You just don't see it in most of her photos.

Sorry for going off topic.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Why should Montecito residents give a rat's a** who he is? We fought a war for independence from Britain nearly 250 years ago. If he wants to make the US his permanent residence, great, but he doesn't deserve nor should he expect any special treatment or recognition. He's just regular old Harry Windsor here. Something about all men being created equal, right?


His humblebrag is really getting old. The JCMH front lasted a freaking nano-second.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but attorney is a job description. I was under the impression US lawyers generally graduate with a JD, but apparently she earned a Masters of Law from NYU. Still better than a bachelor's that nearly didn't happen because of missing credits


You're correct, US attorneys graduate with a JD, e.g., a juris doctorate or a doctorate of law. After receiving a JD, one can continue with their education and get an LLM, or masters of law in an area of specialization. It's the equivalent of a medical residency, however, few attorneys (that I know) pursue an advanced degree.
Amal Clooney obtained her undergraduate and the equivalent of a graduate degree in law (e.g., our JD), the former a BA or bachelor of arts, the later, a LLM or bachelor of laws, from Oxford University. She is a Barrister, qualified to argue cases before the British Courts, as distinguished from a solicitor who prepares cases for the Barrister to argue. In sum, the solicitor interviews witnesses, researches the issues and prepares briefs for the barrister, while the Barrister presents the case, cross examines the witnesses and argues the case in court. Amal has an LLM from Columbia in the areas of international and comparative law.
Now, a little further information. Anyone who graduates from law school, is a lawyer or an attorney. It is not a job description per se, but rather a designation that refers to educational or professional status and licensure. 
A lawyer refers to someone who graduated from law school but is not licensed. I was taught the term attorney also refers to an unlicensed lawyer. By contrast, an attorney _at law_, is an attorney _licensed_ to practice law. 
More than you wanted to know . . . !!!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *So he’s making sure she has the right people around her.* It’s cute how he pretends he has any say in the matter.


His presumption leaves me almost speechless, the only thing that comes to my mind is IDIOT!


----------



## Chanbal

This is very good!


----------



## Chanbal

Let's hope @ClarenceHouse gets the message.


----------



## Happyish

Jayne1 said:


> I saw her in a horrible closeup on Million Dollar Listing when she was trying to sell her huge estate with Josh Flagg and was shocked at the wrinkles. Her whole face was wrinkled. Why, I have no idea. You just don't see it in most of her photos.
> 
> Sorry for going off topic.


Way too much sun.


----------



## Chanbal

One more pearl…


----------



## gracekelly

I just can’t believe the  things that Harry says.   So far fetched, ridiculous and delusional. Does he really expect people to believe he is sincere? @youngster you put it perfectly at how he has insulted Prince Charles and William and all the family who closely care for TQ and all of her devoted support staff.


----------



## csshopper

Just from seeing the clip I foresee an entertaining Body Language Guy analysis ahead as he dissects the garbage Horrible Harry spewed during his Today Show interview.


----------



## xincinsin

Hazard's ensuring that the Queen is well-cared-for gives me an idea for possible job scope for him after everything else has failed. 
He can be (drumroll!) an Auditor!
No disrespect to the trade in general but I've encountered some arrogant auditors who could give H&M a run for their money. 

Auditor: Why didn't you request 3 quotes for this job?
My boss: (referring to the tsunami on 26 Dec 2004) My brief was to get the disaster footage back by satellite ASAP. Company X had their set-up in place and the timing we needed. Their rates were reasonable, so we booked an uplink slot with them.

In the auditor report, my boss was criticized for not finding quotes for 3 different satellites, and not planning the disaster coverage ahead of time because urgent last-minute requirements were a no-no.

Hazard's disconnect with the real world would be right at home there (BTW the auditor was from the Big Four, so not fly-by-night accounting firm).


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This is very good!



This was sooooo good: You promise the world, then hand them an atlas


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent work, team!  Thank you



Haha they did it to themselves. They used to have some of the best written shows now whe I think of Netflix as true crime voyeurism and cheesy romance movies hallmark would cringe at… both of those latter things fit with H&M actually


Chanbal said:


> This is very good!



They are definitely not swish worthy  



Debbini said:


> Don't be trashing the Midwest! We aren't wearing that crap.


I’m sorry I was thinking of a particular YouTuber at the time but I shouldn’t be tarring all of the Midwest with the same brush


charlottawill said:


> It's in the genes apparently.


I think that’s very charitable of you, I tend to think they are both on enormous comedowns/hungover as h*** most mornings. 

On M’s looks, I’ve always said I thought she was a plain Jane but she had the veneer of glamour from expensive clothes, staying skinny, a swishy weave and of course a good slathering of fake tan to reinforce she’s ‘too dark’ for us to handle 

In fact I’d say she  looks like the Queen herself in the face and that’s probably why H liked her. He’d been trying to date Diana for years with all those posh blondes so maybe it’s not that weird he’d marry someone who looks like granny. 




There are similarities- eyes quite close together, big front teeth, skinny but a little apple shaped, a slope on the nose, quite a big nose before the Dr was called.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He's really losing his grip on reality, is he.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.' _



No you're not. Because you left the fold and even before that you were just a tiny light in the whole scheme of things.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> You're correct, US attorneys graduate with a JD, e.g., a juris doctorate or a doctorate of law. After receiving a JD, one can continue with their education and get an LLM, or masters of law in an area of specialization. It's the equivalent of a medical residency, however, few attorneys (that I know) pursue an advanced degree.
> Amal Clooney obtained her undergraduate and the equivalent of a graduate degree in law (e.g., our JD), the former a BA or bachelor of arts, the later, a LLM or bachelor of laws, from Oxford University. She is a Barrister, qualified to argue cases before the British Courts, as distinguished from a solicitor who prepares cases for the Barrister to argue. In sum, the solicitor interviews witnesses, researches the issues and prepares briefs for the barrister, while the Barrister presents the case, cross examines the witnesses and argues the case in court. Amal has an LLM from Columbia in the areas of international and comparative law.
> Now, a little further information. Anyone who graduates from law school, is a lawyer or an attorney. It is not a job description per se, but rather a designation that refers to educational or professional status and licensure.
> A lawyer refers to someone who graduated from law school but is not licensed. I was taught the term attorney also refers to an unlicensed lawyer. By contrast, an attorney _at law_, is an attorney _licensed_ to practice law.
> More than you wanted to know . . . !!!



Thank you! It would have taken me ages to put all these little details together.


----------



## RAINDANCE

_"The Duke of Sussflix is a subscription that we can’t seem to cancel."

Comment in the Telegraph today _


----------



## RAINDANCE

_'It was just so nice to see her, you know, she's on great form, she's always got a great sense of humor with me and *I'm making sure she's protected and got the right people around her*.'_ 

Is this a side swipe at Andrew and his alleged daily contact with HMTQ ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yes and yes.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes and yes.



100,000,000%!!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, I had completely forgotten about when he blamed her and Philip's poor parenting for Charles being a bad father. I would so write that little sh*t out of my will.


----------



## reflection212

I read that the intent for Harry saying he is protecting the Queen when he doesn’t likely have any say is for making himself seem closer to her and more important for his Netflix show.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

reflection212 said:


> I read that the intent for Harry saying he is protecting the Queen when he doesn’t likely have any say is for making himself seem closer to her and more important for his Netflix show.



He's such a freaking loser.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> A must watch!




Love Mercy! 

Let common sense prevail


----------



## xincinsin

_*I'm making sure she's protected *_
 Could it possibly be a mean dig at his grandma because he isn't getting his armed escort and FOC intelligence data? I don't think there is a protective bone in either The Bald or The Botoxed.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> What happened to her face? Maybe a really bad photo?
> 
> 
> At first, I thought I needed an eye exam. Then, other commenters on other sites were asking why does her face change. In the 3 days she was there, it seemed like she had 3 or 4 faces. It isn’t just the makeup [that can help], but the actual shape of her face looks different. What is going on?



It's called filler


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Haz
> 
> Haz wants to move to NYC because it reminds him of London???  The city that triggers him???



London's too dangerous, so he moves to Manhattan


----------



## limom

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, I had completely forgotten about when he blamed her and Philip's poor parenting for Charles being a bad father. I would so write that little sh*t out if my will.



He is not wrong however some things are better left unsaid.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's such a freaking loser.


A moron, really,


----------



## limom

papertiger said:


> London's too dangerous, so he moves to Manhattan


No thank you, traffic is a beast already.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> And H is looking like he’s getting quite bald.  Whatever treatment he was allegedly doing didn’t work.



The treatment was called Photoshop


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Applause!!!
> 
> I'd like to ask Haz: "You couldn't find help for your own wife when she claimed to be suicidal living among your own family. So how do you know your grandmother is "protected" and "got the right people behind HER"?
> 
> Does anyone believe The Queen is sooooo relieved after learning Harry is satisfied with her security and advisors?



Note for my 'mate' Harry 

Your gran's the head of all the British armed forces, I think she'll be OK









						The Queen and the Armed Forces
					

The Queen has a long and close relationship with the Armed Forces, both in the United Kingdom and in the Commonwealth. [quote author="The Queen's Broadcast to the Armed Forces, 2009"]Wherever you are deployed in the world, you should be assured that I and the whole nation are deeply thankful for...




					www.royal.uk


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> But, but....I'm watching Bridgerton.



I didn't watch it but I bought the eye-shadow collab and that was over £60 for cardboard packaging. They should raking it in 









						PAT McGRATH LABS x BRIDGERTON
					

Defiantly decadent makeup created by the world's most celebrated editorial and runway makeup artist, Pat McGrath. Explore all of the Pat McGrath Labs creations on her official site.




					www.patmcgrath.com


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is very good!




They can't stop laughing  

I think we should send in the men in the white coats   Harry needs an intervention - ba-by he is_ gone _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Loose with the truth" should go on a t-shirt


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Loose with the truth" should go on a t-shirt



'Loser' would be more accurate though


----------



## kemilia

Jayne1 said:


> I saw her in a horrible closeup on Million Dollar Listing when she was trying to sell her huge estate with Josh Flagg and was shocked at the wrinkles. Her whole face was wrinkled. Why, I have no idea. You just don't see it in most of her photos.
> 
> Sorry for going off topic.


I agree--she did not look good on MDLA.  And this is the first I've heard of bio identical hormones (or whatever they are). If it sounds too good to be true, it always is.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, I had completely forgotten about when he blamed her and Philip's poor parenting for Charles being a bad father. I would so write that little sh*t out of my will.




After being the one who stabbed his grandmother in the back, he's now a self-appointed guarantor of her protection? Ah, the irony.


----------



## Chanbal

One more pearl from the Guru of Netfl*x!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe they’ve worked out a deal with NYC - the city can use their name in its adverts because, ya kno, people will flock there when they hear H&M live there. We can ask the Montecito folks how that worked out
> 
> All I want to know is who killed that Queens mother. This case is fascinating in a True Crime sort of way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cops investigating murder of Queens mom hunt man she 'had affair with'
> 
> 
> Gaal, 51, was murdered at around 12.41am on Saturday after returning from a night out. She was alone in the home with her 13-year-old son Leo when she was stabbed up to 60 times in the basement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: Queens, NYC.  Not the BRF Queen’s mother.


I'm quite sure these two wouldn't set foot in Queens


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any TPF psychiatrists online? I have my opinion, but it's not my speciality.


----------



## Katel

kipp said:


> Back to the Today show interview---why would JCMH do that if Netflix needs all that information about the meeting with the Queen, etc.?  It doesn't make any sense to me unless he is just desperate for $$$$ NOW.



He truly thinks people care.

They are living in their own bizarrely deranged bubble.


----------



## Chanbal

Twitter is full of interesting questions today. Here is one more for the inquisitive minds of TPF!


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> You're correct, US attorneys graduate with a JD, e.g., a juris doctorate or a doctorate of law. After receiving a JD, one can continue with their education and get an LLM, or masters of law in an area of specialization. It's the equivalent of a medical residency, however, few attorneys (that I know) pursue an advanced degree.
> Amal Clooney obtained her undergraduate and the equivalent of a graduate degree in law (e.g., our JD), the former a BA or bachelor of arts, the later, a LLM or bachelor of laws, from Oxford University. She is a Barrister, qualified to argue cases before the British Courts, as distinguished from a solicitor who prepares cases for the Barrister to argue. In sum, the solicitor interviews witnesses, researches the issues and prepares briefs for the barrister, while the Barrister presents the case, cross examines the witnesses and argues the case in court. Amal has an LLM from Columbia in the areas of international and comparative law.
> Now, a little further information. Anyone who graduates from law school, is a lawyer or an attorney. It is not a job description per se, but rather a designation that refers to educational or professional status and licensure.
> A lawyer refers to someone who graduated from law school but is not licensed. I was taught the term attorney also refers to an unlicensed lawyer. By contrast, an attorney _at law_, is an attorney _licensed_ to practice law.
> More than you wanted to know . . . !!!


thank you
and I believe the bar exam is more difficult in some states than others.....she is licensed to practice in NY which would mean she passed the bar there?  and NY is a hard one


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> thank you
> and I believe the bar exam is more difficult in some states than others.....she is licensed to practice in NY which would mean she passed the bar there?  and NY is a hard one


There are only a handful of US states where a UK law degree meets the eligibility requirements and even then it is quite specific and narrow for New York
The California Bar eligibility requirement for a UK candidate is a professional qualification, not a degree.

But Yes, the NY Bar is very difficult.

(When The Husband used to run a course for UK candidates, pass rate for non US candidate was historically around 30-35% - Husband is both NY and Cali bar qualified as well as Ireland and the UK)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> There are only a handful of US states where a UK law degree meets the eligibility requirements and even then it is quite specific and narrow for New York
> The California Bar eligibility requirement for a UK candidate is a professional qualification, not a degree.
> 
> But Yes, the NY Bar is very difficult.
> 
> (When The Husband used to run a course for UK candidates, pass rate for non US candidate was historically around 30-35% - Husband is both NY and Cali bar qualified as well as Ireland and the UK)


you apparently have a very smart husband


----------



## youngster

_*Prince Harry on whether he’s attending the queen’s Jubilee this year: “I don't know yet. There's lots of things: security issues and everything else. So this is what I'm trying to do, trying to make it possible that, you know, I can get my kids to meet her.”*_

Let's put aside the ridiculous claim about his "security" and what great risk he and his family face, despite him knowing that they would be well protected throughout the entire Jubilee. So, what is the _"everything else"_, that Harry is referring to, that would keep him from attending the Queen's Jubilee?

Could it possibly be this:  It would be extremely uncomfortable and embarrassing for Harry and MM to face the entire family and their distant politeness for days, along with potentially humiliating if they are heckled by average citizens, all while being relegated to a bit part in the Jubilee, constantly monitored by Palace officials to make sure there is no slipping away to film something or "accidentally" breaking protocol  or "accidentally" finding themselves in the throne room at Buckingham Palace taking selfies.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> _*Prince Harry on whether he’s attending the queen’s Jubilee this year: “I don't know yet. There's lots of things: security issues and everything else. So this is what I'm trying to do, trying to make it possible that, you know, I can get my kids to meet her.”*_
> 
> Let's put aside the ridiculous claim about his "security" and what great risk he and his family face, despite him knowing that they would be well protected throughout the entire Jubilee. So, what is the _"everything else"_, that Harry is referring to, that would keep him from attending the Queen's Jubilee?
> 
> Could it possibly be this:  It would be extremely uncomfortable and embarrassing for Harry and MM to face the entire family and their distant politeness for days, along with potentially humiliating if they are heckled by average citizens, all while being relegated to a bit part in the Jubilee, constantly monitored by Palace officials to make sure there is no slipping away to film something or "accidentally" breaking protocol  or "accidentally" finding themselves in the throne room at Buckingham Palace taking selfies.


So it would only be decent of HMTQ to skedaddle off to some other property and let them take over Windsor Castle to give them sufficient privacy and protection from hoi polloi and la famille. Surely she owes it to them since they are risking their lives to come to the UK!


----------



## jennlt

youngster said:


> _*Prince Harry on whether he’s attending the queen’s Jubilee this year: “I don't know yet. There's lots of things: security issues and everything else. So this is what I'm trying to do, trying to make it possible that, you know, I can get my kids to meet her.”*_
> 
> Let's put aside the ridiculous claim about his "security" and what great risk he and his family face, despite him knowing that they would be well protected throughout the entire Jubilee. So, what is the _"everything else"_, that Harry is referring to, that would keep him from attending the Queen's Jubilee?
> 
> Could it possibly be this:  It would be extremely uncomfortable and embarrassing for Harry and MM to face the entire family and their distant politeness for days, along with potentially humiliating if they are heckled by average citizens, all while being relegated to a bit part in the Jubilee, constantly monitored by Palace officials to make sure there is no slipping away to film something or "accidentally" breaking protocol  or "accidentally" finding themselves in the throne room at Buckingham Palace taking selfies.



Or could the _*everything else*_ be that he hasn't actually been invited? Or is only invited if he meets certain conditions set by HMTQ?


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Let's put aside the ridiculous claim about his "security" and what great risk he and his family face, despite him knowing that they would be well protected throughout the entire Jubilee. *So, what is the *_*"everything else"*_, that Harry is referring to, that would keep him from attending the Queen's Jubilee?
> 
> Could it possibly be this:  It would be extremely uncomfortable and embarrassing for Harry and MM to face the entire family and their distant politeness for days, along with potentially humiliating if they are heckled by average citizens, all while being relegated to a bit part in the Jubilee, constantly monitored by Palace officials to make sure there is no slipping away to film something or "accidentally" breaking protocol  or "accidentally" finding themselves in the throne room at Buckingham Palace taking selfies.



My 2 cents! His book is a big part of the "everything else", and his major targets are PC & Will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meanwhile, Nflix stocks [and subscribers] continue to drop, drop, drop, to the bottom.

ETA:  Waiting on BLG to analyse the tone and cadence on Hazzie’s voice.  Imo it sounds much flatter and more whiny than it was.  He sounds and acts like he lacks enthusiasm and interest - is this his depression that he is showing?


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents! His book is a big part of the "everything else", and his major targets are PC & Will.



Yes, exactly, he'd have to spend potentially several days with people that he's planning to blame for everything in his book.  His father, Will, everyone, they all know it and he doesn't want to face them.  They might make him feel uncomfortable after all, or even a bit guilty and ashamed, and he couldn't have that.


----------



## Happyish

sdkitty said:


> thank you
> and I believe the bar exam is more difficult in some states than others.....she is licensed to practice in NY which would mean she passed the bar there?  and NY is a hard one


California is supposedly the most difficult, with the bar passage rate at generally less than 50% and some years far less than that. I understand New York is a close second. California also does not give reciprocity, meaning that licensure in another state does not exempt the applicant from taking the California bar exam (it's a three-day exam) or the multi-state (a multiple-choice exam, which is one full day and part of the three in California, and which is also given in various other states; hence the designation: multi-state.) Some states allow full reciprocity, so if licensed on one state, an attorney may be admitted in another. Some states give reciprocity to just the multi-state. California does neither.


----------



## Chanbal

News has arrived to Fox News about QE's self-appointed protector. The feedback is entertaining.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Yes, exactly, he'd have to spend potentially several days with people that he's planning to blame for everything in his book.  His father, Will, everyone, they all know it and he doesn't want to face them.  They might make him feel uncomfortable after all, or even a bit guilty and ashamed, and he couldn't have that.



Not only will he spend time with the “ loathsome “ family, but he will be pushed to the back row. Unless he can push uncle Andi out of the way, he will be forced to stand *behind*  his father and brother, may even be forced to walk in near the end of the line  
:_quam horrible_:


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> _*Prince Harry on whether he’s attending the queen’s Jubilee this year: “I don't know yet. There's lots of things: security issues and everything else. So this is what I'm trying to do, trying to make it possible that, you know, I can get my kids to meet her.”*_
> 
> Let's put aside the ridiculous claim about his "security" and what great risk he and his family face, despite him knowing that they would be well protected throughout the entire Jubilee. So, what is the _"everything else"_, that Harry is referring to, that would keep him from attending the Queen's Jubilee?
> 
> Could it possibly be this:  It would be extremely uncomfortable and embarrassing for Harry and MM to face the entire family and their distant politeness for days, along with potentially humiliating if they are heckled by average citizens, all while being relegated to a bit part in the Jubilee, constantly monitored by Palace officials to make sure there is no slipping away to film something or "accidentally" breaking protocol  or "accidentally" finding themselves in the throne room at Buckingham Palace taking selfies.


Unfortunately, I don’t think they get embarrassed.
I will hate to see him on the balcony.


----------



## purseinsanity

limom said:


> He is not wrong however some things are better left unsaid.


Hmmm, wonder what it says about him as a father then?  He blames the Queen and PP’s awful parenting for Charles being an awful parent.  Haz thinks he’s setting a great example by bashing his family to everyone and anyone will listen, bit**ing & whining about anything and everything, and having very little to do with his family?  Not to mention TW who basically has no relationship with her family at all?  Be careful you two.  You reap what you sow!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Possibility??

_The possibility exists, of course, that Prince Harry simply isn’t very bright and that he has yet to learn the rudiments of engaging his brain before opening his mouth; seldom has an Eton education led to such trifling effect. But there may be another side to his latest piece of indiscretion. 
His relatives are said to be on edge about his forthcoming memoir, which is due for publication later this year. Advance gossip suggests that he might be unflattering about his father, brother and, in particular, the Duchess of Cornwall, who he is said to be on poor terms with. His continued, baleful presence in the international media is therefore a grim reminder of the reputational reckoning that is coming for The Firm in a few months._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents! His book is a big part of the "everything else", and his major targets are PC & Will.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One more pearl from the Guru of Netfl*x!



Hasn’t Archie met the Queen?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> I agree--she did not look good on MDLA.  And this is the first I've heard of bio identical hormones (or whatever they are). If it sounds too good to be true, it always is.


Bio identical hormones have been around for awhile.  My issue with Suzanne Sommers was that she promoted a way to “treat” breast cancer that has no medical basis.  She has every right to do whatever she wants with her health & her own body, but to spew things as if she’s an Oncologist or some cancer researcher is dangerous, IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

He feels the presence of his mother particularly in the last 2 years… I wonder if the post at the bottom explains part of it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent point - Diana is no longer the ‘cash cow’.  Looking for $$$$


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don’t miss this:


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Hasn’t Archie met the Queen?


That was Archie v.1  
I think someone in a Youtube comment thread mentioned that they believe in the Rent-a-child theory, and counted at least 6 children presented as Archie at different stages of his life.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Bio identical hormones have been around for awhile.  My issue with Suzanne Sommers was that she promoted a way to “treat” breast cancer that has no medical basis.  She has every right to do whatever she wants with her health & her own body, but to spew things as if she’s an Oncologist or some cancer researcher is dangerous, IMO.


I have known people like this and it always comes back to haunt them that they didn't receive the proper treatment.  I know of one case that ended in divorce because the wife forced the issue about using "natural" method" to treat the man's prostate cancer.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don’t miss this:



All I could think was: what is NorthWestern teaching in that International Relations course and is their idea of "relations" equivalent to the Biblical "know", which of course Methane excelled in.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> He feels the presence of his mother particularly in the last 2 years… I wonder if the post at the bottom explains part of it.



Diana got William "set up?"   Really?  If anyone helped William to normalcy it was the Middleton family. Frankly, with all of Diana's emotional issues, she was the last person to set anyone up  and perhaps that is why Harry is a train wreck.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Are there any TPF psychiatrists online? I have my opinion, but it's not my speciality.




I’m not a psychiatrist but it’s interesting that he talks more about Will than anything.  He needs to see a therapist about his jealousy about Will before he can truly heal himself.


----------



## Chanbal

Time for #10 to act then! 










						Number 10 hits back at Harry 'making sure the Queen is protected'
					

Prince Harry's claims he has made sure the Queen is 'protected' was ridiculed by No 10 today - who said the PM was confident about her current welfare arrangements.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## limom

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmm, wonder what it says about him as a father then?  He blames the Queen and PP’s awful parenting for Charles being an awful parent.  Haz thinks he’s setting a great example by bashing his family to everyone and anyone will listen, bit**ing & whining about anything and everything, and having very little to do with his family?  Not to mention TW who basically has no relationship with her family at all?  Be careful you two.  You reap what you sow!


This is just the way it goes.
The Queen followed the usage of the times and it produced Charles and Andrew and Ann.
In turn, they created the next generation.

Have any pictures from the so called bus waving encounter surface yet or are they saved for the upcoming documentary/book?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I’m not a psychiatrist but it’s interesting that he talks more about Will than anything.  He needs to see a therapist about his jealousy about Will before he can truly heal himself.


Harry will never be healed because he doesn't want to be.  He would lose his entire reason for being if he wasn't a resentful person.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Time for #10 to act then!
> View attachment 5384336
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Number 10 hits back at Harry 'making sure the Queen is protected'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's claims he has made sure the Queen is 'protected' was ridiculed by No 10 today - who said the PM was confident about her current welfare arrangements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If CA is his home now, why are they still clinging to their UK given Duke and Duchess titles?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Time for #10 to act then!
> View attachment 5384336
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Number 10 hits back at Harry 'making sure the Queen is protected'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's claims he has made sure the Queen is 'protected' was ridiculed by No 10 today - who said the PM was confident about her current welfare arrangements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ah ha!  This is how the palace handled that comment.  They had Number 10 answer it for them.  So not only did Harry insult his father, brother, aunts and uncles, he also  managed to insult the entire British government.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Harry will never be healed because he doesn't want to be.  He would lose his entire reason for being if he wasn't a resentful person.


What a miserable way to live.  With all that he had and has at his disposal, being bitter and resentful (of what exactly I still can’t comprehend.  It’s not as if he’s the only person in the planet to lose a parent as a child!) is his MO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

lanasyogamama said:


> Unfortunately, I don’t think they get embarrassed.
> *I will hate to see him on the balcony.*



I am hoping the Sufflixes are relegated to one of the side balconies to sabotage any attempts to photo Harry's kids with HMTQ !

Wouldn't it be fun if the Queen could chose her actual favourites for the main balcony, instead of following protocols 
My bet would be on Lady Sarah Chatto and her family making the cut before the Yorks or the Sussexes
If there is anyone whom the Queen can talk to about "things she can't talk to anyone else about" it would IMO be Sarah


_“We have a really special relationship. We talk about things that she can't talk about with anybody else, _*so that is always a nice peace to her.”  *What sort of nonsense, mangled English is that ???


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> They can't stop laughing
> 
> I think we should send in the men in the white coats   Harry needs an intervention - ba-by he is_ gone _


He does need an intervention, but the problem is that craziness makes for good PR.  People pay more attention to your sh*t show.  It is obvious that this PR bombing was all worked  out in advance.  Holda Kotb didn't just show up and get lucky enough to interview him.  Stories are appearing in People and other kneepad magazines.  It was all planned.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> What a miserable way to live.  With all that he had and has at his disposal, being bitter and resentful (of what exactly I still can’t comprehend.  It’s not as if he’s the only person in the planet to lose a parent as a child!) is his MO.


I think the older brother syndrome is really the biggest part of it.  Same issue went on in my own family.  It is hard to let go of feeling second best.  This is his identity and he is trying to fight for what he believes is his, but it is being done in a very nasty way.  Unfortunately, I think this was swept under the rug by his family and they managed him.  It took the "right" woman to bring out what was always there and magnify it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Are there any TPF psychiatrists online? I have my opinion, but it's not my speciality.



*Netflix ad during Invictus Games Documentary commercial breaks:

Great offer from Netflix:*
Your very own Prince Harry's Crystal Ball available only through Netflix.
Disclaimer: Netflix is not responsible for the results and usage may vary with each customer.


----------



## RAINDANCE

gracekelly said:


> Diana got William "set up?"   Really?  *If anyone helped William to normalcy it was the Middleton family.* Frankly, with all of Diana's emotional issues, she was the last person to set anyone up  and perhaps that is why Harry is a train wreck.



1000% agree with this.
By being embraced into an emotionally functional, normal, caring and stable family (and, whilst the Middleton's are financially much more priveledge than many ordinary British families, none the less) I truly believe that much of the emotional damage of William's childhood has been healed by this family.


----------



## gracekelly

RAINDANCE said:


> I am hoping the Sufflixes are relegated to one of the side balconies to sabotage any attempts to photo Harry's kids with HMTQ !
> 
> Wouldn't it be fun if the Queen could chose her actual favourites for the main balcony, instead of following protocols
> My bet would be on Lady Sarah Chatto and her family making the cut before the Yorks or the Sussexes
> If there is anyone whom the Queen can talk to about "things she can't talk to anyone else about" it would IMO be Sarah
> 
> 
> _“We have a really special relationship. We talk about things that she can't talk about with anybody else, _*so that is always a nice peace to her.”  *What sort of nonsense, mangled English is that ???


Princess Margaret's family should be on the balcony as symbolic representation of her.  All her grandchildren know and spend time with the family.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think the older brother syndrome is really the biggest part of it.  Same issue went on in my own family.  It is hard to let go of feeling second best.  This is his identity and he is trying to fight for what he believes is his, but it is being done in a very nasty way.  Unfortunately, I think this was swept under the rug by his family and they managed him.  It took the "right" woman to bring out what was always there and magnify it.


just think if the WIFE was a decent person how challenging it would be to put up with the resentful man-child.  but for her, maybe it's a benefit - she can use his insecurity to manage him


----------



## 880

I think the New York move is just one step closer to divorce and Harry going back to the UK alone. 
i don’t even think H&M will even really disrupt traffic, which is honestly all that I care about


----------



## sdkitty

story behind paywall.....using his dead mom still








						Prince Harry Won’t Say if He Misses Charles and William, but Mom Diana Is ‘Constant’ Presence
					

In an interview with NBC Today’s Hoda Kotb, Prince Harry talked candidly about family life, safeguarding his mental health, and feeling the presence of mom Diana watching over him.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> just think if the WIFE was a decent person how challenging it would be to put up with the resentful man-child.  but for her, maybe it's a benefit - she can use his insecurity to manage him


The decent women didn't want him.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The decent women didn't want him.


the decent women made the right decision


----------



## gracekelly

880 said:


> I think the New York move is just one step closer to divorce and Harry going back to the UK alone.
> i don’t even think H&M will even really disrupt traffic, which is honestly all that I care about


I know!  I hate it when the President comes here and disrupts traffic on the 405.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I saw her in a horrible closeup on Million Dollar Listing when she was trying to sell her huge estate with Josh Flagg and was shocked at the wrinkles. Her whole face was wrinkled. Why, I have no idea. You just don't see it in most of her photos.
> 
> Sorry for going off topic.


Lighting is everything, and natural light is very unforgiving. Goldie Hawn was on Today one morning, coming from a brightly lit white room in her home. She looked every bit her age. She was on again a few weeks later, in a different room, soft lighting, and magically looked years younger.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Ah ha!  This is how the palace handled that comment.  They had Number 10 answer it for them.  So not only did Harry insult his father, brother, aunts and uncles, he also  managed to insult the entire British government.


Do we award him points for being an overachiever? 
But his wife managed to insult an entire nation by drawing their flag upside down, so she still gets first prize.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Are there any TPF psychiatrists online? I have my opinion, but it's not my speciality.



I would bet he feels his mum’s presence a lot more these last few years given his wife keeps cosplaying as her  

This is starting to sound even creepier though does he think his Mum masterminded him and his brother meeting their wives from beyond the grave?
I know some of you don’t care for D but you’ve got to give her props that she didn’t even need Whoopi Goldberg as her conduit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> just think if the WIFE was a decent person how challenging it would be to put up with the resentful man-child.  but for her, maybe it's a benefit - she can use his insecurity to manage him



Using Hazzi-speak, should “_decent_” be replaced with “_right_”? 
So, if he had the “right” people around him, this mess he is in would not have happened?  He really doesn’t think before he unleashes his true self.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What?  Seriously, this is getting uncomfortable to watch.









						Prince Harry fears he will 'burnout' working from Californian mansion
					

In his latest interview on US television, the Duke of Sussex said he struggles to balance working from home in his £11 million California mansion with parenting.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> He’d been trying to date Diana for years with all those posh blondes so maybe it’s not that weird he’d marry someone who looks like granny.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wouldn't think that much of it usually, a lot of people feel a connection to dead family members. With Harry, I wonder if he's started to hear voices.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  Seriously, this is getting uncomfortable to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry fears he will 'burnout' working from Californian mansion
> 
> 
> In his latest interview on US television, the Duke of Sussex said he struggles to balance working from home in his £11 million California mansion with parenting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Harry STFU 


> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/04/parenting/working-mom-burnout-coronavirus.html


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> The Bald or The Botoxed.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> I agree--she did not look good on MDLA.  And this is the first I've heard of bio identical hormones (or whatever they are). If it sounds too good to be true, it always is.



It's something she has been pushing for years. 


>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents! His book is a big part of the "everything else", and his major targets are PC & Will.



 Who is she...The Queen? 

Is he on drugs?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Time for #10 to act then!
> View attachment 5384336
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Number 10 hits back at Harry 'making sure the Queen is protected'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's claims he has made sure the Queen is 'protected' was ridiculed by No 10 today - who said the PM was confident about her current welfare arrangements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What a sh*t show. When the prime minister has something to say about Harry's delusions it's bad.


----------



## charlottawill

So here's a fun little nugget I stumbled upon a few days ago and thought you'd all enjoy:


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Are there any TPF psychiatrists online? I have my opinion, but it's not my speciality.



that’s not cringy at all, nope, no. 
Yes it is! Cringy, gross, sad….. JCMH is so badly in need of some get your head out of your @$$ therapy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She really was an unfortunate looking teen.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> So here's a fun little nugget I stumbled upon a few days ago and thought you'd all enjoy:



And they both had several nose jobs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh really...because I was under the impression you were there to use the games as a platform for your wife's botched fashion show.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> If CA is his home now, why are they still clinging to their UK given Duke and Duchess titles?



So they can be Duke and Duchess of Montecito?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh really...because I was under the impression to were there to use the games as a platform for your wive's botched fashion show.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Harry STFU


Burned out from his severe depression.  When was the last time he sought real medical advice?  The herbs and berries that his wife is giving him are not doing the trick  He needs medication from a bona fide psychiatrist.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh really...because I was under the impression you were there to use the games as a platform for your wife's botched fashion show.



That was a total kiss off to that question.  I bet she was told ahead of time not to bring up the subject of William.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really feel for the BRF. Can't be easy to watch your kin publicly fall apart and you can't really do anything as kidnapping him and locking him up far away from his main trigger until he is better is sadly no option.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really feel for the BRF. Can't be easy to watch your kin publicly fall apart and you can't really do anything as kidnapping him and locking him up far away from his main trigger until he is better is sadly no option.


Prince Charles may feel that Harry is following his mother's steps into mental instability.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Prince Charles may feel that Harry is following his mother's steps into mental instability.


There is a genetic component to mental illness.


----------



## elvisfan4life

I used to quite like Harry before this awful woman brainwashed him - he was gormless and goofy dysfunctional but harmless wtf has she turned him into ? He is living in cloud cockoo land - he seriously thinks he is a star and people love him - bless his little grey cells must have left his skull completely now


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents! His book is a big part of the "everything else", and his major targets are PC & Will.



And Catherine. I have a feeling she rules the roost. And as time went by, it seemed her reception to Meagan was polite but chilly.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> So here's a fun little nugget I stumbled upon a few days ago and thought you'd all enjoy:



Eww.


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> story behind paywall.....using his dead mom still
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Won’t Say if He Misses Charles and William, but Mom Diana Is ‘Constant’ Presence
> 
> 
> In an interview with NBC Today’s Hoda Kotb, Prince Harry talked candidly about family life, safeguarding his mental health, and feeling the presence of mom Diana watching over him.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


OT, but i think less of the Daily Beast covering stuff like this

and Harry saying he faces burnout, just makes him sound over privileged and out of touch. I would think his PR people would have trained him on how to do these fluff interviews


----------



## Happyish

charlottawill said:


> There is a genetic component to mental illness.


More like victimhood.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is she...The Queen?
> 
> Is he on drugs?



he's definitely not right


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh really...because I was under the impression you were there to use the games as a platform for your wife's botched fashion show.




Life's one long game to Netflix-drifters


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> So here's a fun little nugget I stumbled upon a few days ago and thought you'd all enjoy:




Anyone who calls _themselves_ 'star' of anything is just an opportunist with an old photo


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  Seriously, this is getting uncomfortable to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry fears he will 'burnout' working from Californian mansion
> 
> 
> In his latest interview on US television, the Duke of Sussex said he struggles to balance working from home in his £11 million California mansion with parenting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yea, I mean doing absolutely nothing but preaching to others and supervising the nannies is EXHAUSTING.  Poor Haz, burning the candle at both ends…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She really was an unfortunate looking teen.


Not to defend her (slap me), but many of us were as teens.  One of my most horrifying moments was when my now DH and I were dating and he met my parents.  My mother has an annoying habit of putting up the most ugly pictures of everyone.  Hubby lingered over a pic of my siblings and I and said, “Wow, you all really got better as you aged!”.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Not to defend her (slap me), but many of us were as teens.  One of my most horrifying moments was when my now DH and I were dating and he met my parents.  My mother has an annoying habit of putting up the most ugly pictures of everyone.  Hubby lingered over a pic of my siblings and I and said, “Wow, you all really got better as you aged!”.


Many of us go through an ugly duckling phase. I have told my husband that I would have been one of the invisibles to him if we had been in high school together. He was one of the cool kids, or so he thought


----------



## Chanbal

People on Twitter are trying to help Hazz, but it's probably too late for him…


----------



## Sharont2305

880 said:


> OT, but i think less of the Daily Beast covering stuff like this
> 
> and Harry saying he faces burnout, just makes him sound over privileged and out of touch. I would think his PR people would have trained him on how to do these fluff interviews


Burnout? 
Like the millions of people who worked tirelessly to keep us safe and stocked up through the pandemic i.e medical staff and all hospital workers, care workers, supermarket staff etc?
Like the hundreds of thousands who are fleeing the Ukraine, travelling for days on end to get to safety, not knowing where they'll end up of if they will return? Ukrainians who already live elsewhere not knowing if their families are safe? Those who will not leave Ukraine and are now living in basements? 
That kind of burnout Harry? Okaaaay. 

I'm not for any reason mocking anyone on here who has genuinely suffered burnout, I'm just basically saying he has no idea.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Anyone who calls _themselves_ 'star' of anything is just an opportunist with an old photo


She's actually been pretty successful as a singer and actress, but it certainly helps that she married a prominent music composer/producer who just happens to be twice her age.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> She's actually been pretty successful as a singer and actress, but it certainly helps that she married a prominent music composer/producer who just happens to be twice her age.



It's not what she is, it's what she says she is I wasn't thrilled with.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I have known people like this and it always comes back to haunt them that they didn't receive the proper treatment.  I know of one case that ended in divorce because the wife forced the issue about using "natural" method" to treat the man's prostate cancer.


Steve Jobs supposedly had a form of pancreatic cancer that could have been treated successfully with surgery, but he declined in favor of homeopathic treatment.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> It's not what she is, it's what she says she is I wasn't thrilled with.


Definitely a self promoter. In 2018 she won the Broadway.com Audience Awards award for Favorite Replacement (Female) for Waitress. Not exactly a Tony


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are trying to help Hazz, but it's probably too late for him…




A limerick to accompany the collage:

He's a whiny man-child with generational trauma
She's a Diana wannabe who thrives by causing drama
He should have made haste to flee
When she squatted to pee
'Cause it's a bitter pill to Netflix and chill with a wife who thinks she's your mama


----------



## Chanbal

Journalists are having a blast with Hazz's words of wisdom.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I know!  I hate it when the President comes here and disrupts traffic on the 405.



That goes for the vice president too!  Either of them, both political parties, with their entourages and secret service. I once spent a ridiculous amount of time stuck in a massive traffic jam for the Vice President.  Please.  Take a helicopter and let us taxpayers get on with our lives.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Steve Jobs supposedly had a form of pancreatic cancer that could have been treated successfully with surgery, but he declined in favor of homeopathic treatment.



Why are people like this. I avoid going to the doctor like the plague and I don't even try to take painkillers most of the time because they don't work very well on me, but you bet if I had cancer I'd drink any chemical cocktail offered to me.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She really was an unfortunate looking teen.



I think she looks fine as a teen. Most teens go through awkward phases, some earlier, some later.  Lord knows I did.  I liked her natural hair more than the overly flat-ironed extensions or wig she wears now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

If Harry "suffers" burnout from anything, you'd think it'd be from his idiot wife.


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  Seriously, this is getting uncomfortable to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry fears he will 'burnout' working from Californian mansion
> 
> 
> In his latest interview on US television, the Duke of Sussex said he struggles to balance working from home in his £11 million California mansion with parenting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well, it is hard to do nothing all day


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The treatment was called Photoshop


That is digital filler lol


----------



## youngster

880 said:


> OT, but i think less of the Daily Beast covering stuff like this
> 
> and Harry saying he faces burnout, just makes him sound over privileged and out of touch. I would think his PR people would have trained him on how to do these fluff interviews



I think part of the attraction to him of leaving the royal family was that he can now do what he wants, say what he wants, ignore his PR team if he wants, has no handlers or staff that he has to listen to.  No gray suits in the Palace organizing his schedule and telling him what to do anymore.  He's freeeeeee!  So, now we see the real Harry, the one that isn't very bright and says some of the most ridiculous things.


----------



## piperdog

gracekelly said:


> I know!  I hate it when the President comes here and disrupts traffic on the 405.


I used to work in DC; in the 90's my office was a block from the White House. It felt like constant motorcades. Multiple times I hopped out of a cab and walk to my destination. On the other hand, it wasn't uncommon to see elected officials out in the wild. Can't imagine H&M would appreciate motorcades that aren't for them, or being expected to hold your own in an intelligent conversation. Word salad and Harry's gibberish on the Today show won't cut it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meanwhile, Nflix stocks [and subscribers] continue to drop, drop, drop, to the bottom.
> 
> ETA:  Waiting on BLG to analyse the tone and cadence on Hazzie’s voice.  Imo it sounds much flatter and more whiny than it was.  He sounds and acts like he lacks enthusiasm and interest - is this his depression that he is showing?


_Netflix_ increases_ its_ prices, pays multi-million-dollars to at least a couple of greedy and talentless employees, high inflation… These are difficult times for many people. Not everyone lives in 19-toilet mansions or buys entire first class cabins on planes (allegedly)…

_Netflix traded as low as $212.51 in New York, *extending its plunge this year to 64% -- *making the worst performing stock in the broad S&P 500 and the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100 indexes._









						Netflix Shares Plunge 30% After Massive Subscriber Loss
					

(Bloomberg) -- Netflix Inc. tumbled 39% on Wednesday, extending a selloff that has set it on course for a $60 billion wipeout in market value, after it reported a sharp decline in its subscriber base. Most Read from BloombergKremlin Insiders Alarmed Over Growing Toll of Putin’s War in...




					finance.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Steve Jobs supposedly had a form of pancreatic cancer that could have been treated successfully with surgery, but he declined in favor of homeopathic treatment.


Pancreatic cancer is one of the worst cancers. It's possible that surgery could have prolonged his life a little more, but it was likely too late for him to be 'cured.' Pancreatic cancer is often 'silent' until it's too late. I believe he consulted many specialists and understood his situation.


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> That goes for the vice president too!  Either of them, both political parties, with their entourages and secret service. I once spent a ridiculous amount of time stuck in a massive traffic jam for the Vice President.  Please.  Take a helicopter and let us taxpayers get on with our lives.


I wish they’d move the UN to empty fields in the middle of nowhere. It’s so irritating when the UN is in session and they block off multiple streets in midtown Manhattan snarling traffic even worse than normal. It’s particularly inconvenient for people who live in the vicinity of the UN. I’m not sure if the gruesome twosome realize that there will be times when they will not be able to drive right up to their building or maybe they think they’ll be exempt from silly things like blocked off streets because they’re soooo important


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Yea, I mean doing absolutely nothing but preaching to others and supervising the nannies is EXHAUSTING.  Poor Haz, burning the candle at both ends…


burnout?  try sitting in an office 8 hours a day you moron


----------



## LibbyRuth

Typical Harry.  He's trying to come across as in touch and being one with the people by talking about burnout.  But instead he comes across sounding like an out of touch spoiled child.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  Seriously, this is getting uncomfortable to watch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry fears he will 'burnout' working from Californian mansion
> 
> 
> In his latest interview on US television, the Duke of Sussex said he struggles to balance working from home in his £11 million California mansion with parenting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I suppose if the fear of burnout becomes too much of a burden he could always quit - ahem - work.  Wasn’t that his answer recently?  His idea of equality probably is more like everyone gets to be a prince.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> Typical Harry.  He's trying to come across as in touch and being one with the people by talking about burnout.  But instead he comes across sounding like an out of touch spoiled child.


now if he would say it's driving me crazy to be cooped up with this biatch and two little kids, that would still be complaining about nothing compared to what other people in the world are suffering but at least it might ring true


----------



## csshopper

The Today Show does have an easily accessible email for comments. I put this in their Inbox:

"For 70 years I have been a Today viewer. But today I am part of a grassroots movement to delete the Today Show from “Favorites” “Record All”  “Bookmark” sites as a result of Hoda Ktob's pandering segment with Harry Windsor this morning, remember we were admonished at one point by the Sussexes that "titles don't matter" so why use them? An adjective I have seen on line about this exchange as it progressed and felt myself, is “creepy." 

Used to admire Hoda Ktob, no longer as she let this narcissistic, hypocritical, whining, lying, vengeful, man make ludicrous statements with no accountability through follow up questioning to explain.  (Oprah redux) Just for starters HE is looking out for the Queen and making sure she is surrounded by the right people??? Reallllly from across the world, after accusing her on Oprah of being a poor parent who formed Prince Charles, being head of a racist family, completely disrespectfully not attending her husband’s memorial, sneaking out and behind her back and on and on.????? An appropriate follow up would have been the question, "How are you doing this?" His statements, his avoidance of questions he didn’t want to be accountable for, were insulting to our intelligence and disrespectful to so many people, individually, to his family collectively, and to the  Commonwealth of his birth. And it just kept getting worse. Might have had some value if, for example, Hoda had pointed out his daily obsession with his Mum seems to coincide with his marriage and asked, “Is it soothing to you when your wife duplicates your Mum’s outfits as M recently did at Invictus?”  

Hoda missed the mark and your attempted puff piece deflated. Where, BTW, is the citation for her claim the Queen has always “said” Harry makes her laugh? This conversation, I wouldn’t call it an interview, is making him a further international joke on line and Hoda and The Today Show are the hash tag that facilitated it. 

In an unexpected way it was a public service, however, as a wider audience got to experience this delusional, self indulgent, preachy, out-of-touch with the real world, petty man who used Invictus as a cash cow for his family and an attempt to placate his wife’s_ insatiable need for_ _attention_, instead of ALL the focus being on the participants where it belonged.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Get his oar in  _


----------



## rose60610

A question to ask Harry is:

 "Let's say you felt the Queen wasn't adequately protected or didn't 'have the right people around her'.  What would you actually DO about it? And who would receive the blame for the transgression? And how would you follow up?"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I think part of the attraction to him of leaving the royal family was that he can now do what he wants, say what he wants, ignore his PR team if he wants, has no handlers or staff that he has to listen to.  No gray suits in the Palace organizing his schedule and telling him what to do anymore.  He's freeeeeee!  So, now we see the real Harry, the one that isn't very bright and says some of the most ridiculous things.


Yep.  He is acting like a 17 year old going off to college and doing exactly what he feels like doing.  He saved himself from flunking out only because we had Covid for two years.  Now he is back in school and he is flunking lol!


----------



## Chanbal

no further comments…


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> A question to ask Harry is:
> 
> "Let's say you felt the Queen wasn't adequately protected or didn't 'have the right people around her'.  What would you actually DO about it? And who would receive the blame for the transgression? And how would you follow up?"


What he was implying that it is the the evil gray men, the same gray men that his mother complained about, that are giving TQ advice and running her life and making things bad for him and Meghan and family. He probably blames them for the lack of the princely titles for his children even though he really knows that it wasn't going to happen. If you took him seriously, he made it sound like he would scrub all her advisors and appoint new ones.  How absurd!  Like he could do this.  Delusions.  I think William's head must be spinning.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> no further comments…
> View attachment 5384629


Go Rebecca!


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> The Today Show does have an easily accessible email for comments. I put this in their Inbox:
> 
> "For 70 years I have been a Today viewer. But today I am part of a grassroots movement to delete the Today Show from “Favorites” “Record All”  “Bookmark” sites as a result of Hoda Ktob's pandering segment with Harry Windsor this morning, remember we were admonished at one point by the Sussexes that "titles don't matter" so why use them? An adjective I have seen on line about this exchange as it progressed and felt myself, is “creepy."
> 
> Used to admire Hoda Ktob, no longer as she let this narcissistic, hypocritical, whining, lying, vengeful, man make ludicrous statements with no accountability through follow up questioning to explain.  (Oprah redux) Just for starters HE is looking out for the Queen and making sure she is surrounded by the right people??? Reallllly from across the world, after accusing her on Oprah of being a poor parent who formed Prince Charles, being head of a racist family, completely disrespectfully not attending her husband’s memorial, sneaking out and behind her back and on and on.????? An appropriate follow up would have been the question, "How are you doing this?" His statements, his avoidance of questions he didn’t want to be accountable for, were insulting to our intelligence and disrespectful to so many people, individually, to his family collectively, and to the  Commonwealth of his birth. And it just kept getting worse. Might have had some value if, for example, Hoda had pointed out his daily obsession with his Mum seems to coincide with his marriage and asked, “Is it soothing to you when your wife duplicates your Mum’s outfits as M recently did at Invictus?”
> 
> Hoda missed the mark and your attempted puff piece deflated. Where, BTW, is the citation for her claim the Queen has always “said” Harry makes her laugh? This conversation, I wouldn’t call it an interview, is making him a further international joke on line and Hoda and The Today Show are the hash tag that facilitated it.
> 
> In an unexpected way it was a public service, however, as a wider audience got to experience this delusional, self indulgent, preachy, out-of-touch with the real world, petty man who used Invictus as a cash cow for his family and an attempt to placate his wife’s_ insatiable need for_ _attention_, instead of ALL the focus being on the participants where it belonged.



Excellent points. 
Since this was the first time he had seen QE in 2+ years, how exactly is he making sure she has the “*right*” people?  And who exactly are the “*right*” people????  I want to surround myself with the *right* people, too.  How does he identify people who are *not  right*?

NOKD?????


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent points.
> Since this was the first time he had seen QE in 2+ years, how exactly is he making sure she has the “*right*” people?  And who exactly are the “*right*” people????  I want to surround myself with the *right* people, too.  How does he identify people who are *not  right*?
> 
> NOKD?????


Answer:  People who are *not right *are all the people who recommended taking his patronages away, not allowing half in/out and cut his allowance and didn't allow princely titles for his children.  In other words, EVERYONE!


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if QE only shares with him about his need of serious treatment…


----------



## CarryOn2020

He could not have been more elitist, classist, racist.  Unreal that Hoda did not take the opportunity to follow-up.






__





						Urban Dictionary: nocd
					

"Not our class dear." Middle and upper class British put-down saying to describe those perceived to be of lesser social standing. Most popular post World War II and the fifties but stll comprehensively used today by those of that generation.




					www.urbandictionary.com
				



"Not our class dear."

Middle and upper class British put-down saying to describe those perceived to be of lesser social standing. Most popular post World War II and the fifties but stll comprehensively used today by those of that generation [_ETA and Prince Harry]._


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> The Today Show does have an easily accessible email for comments. I put this in their Inbox:
> 
> "For 70 years I have been a Today viewer. But today I am part of a grassroots movement to delete the Today Show from “Favorites” “Record All”  “Bookmark” sites as a result of Hoda Ktob's pandering segment with Harry Windsor this morning, remember we were admonished at one point by the Sussexes that "titles don't matter" so why use them? An adjective I have seen on line about this exchange as it progressed and felt myself, is “creepy."
> 
> Used to admire Hoda Ktob, no longer as she let this narcissistic, hypocritical, whining, lying, vengeful, man make ludicrous statements with no accountability through follow up questioning to explain.  (Oprah redux) Just for starters HE is looking out for the Queen and making sure she is surrounded by the right people??? Reallllly from across the world, after accusing her on Oprah of being a poor parent who formed Prince Charles, being head of a racist family, completely disrespectfully not attending her husband’s memorial, sneaking out and behind her back and on and on.????? An appropriate follow up would have been the question, "How are you doing this?" His statements, his avoidance of questions he didn’t want to be accountable for, were insulting to our intelligence and disrespectful to so many people, individually, to his family collectively, and to the  Commonwealth of his birth. And it just kept getting worse. Might have had some value if, for example, Hoda had pointed out his daily obsession with his Mum seems to coincide with his marriage and asked, “Is it soothing to you when your wife duplicates your Mum’s outfits as M recently did at Invictus?”
> 
> Hoda missed the mark and your attempted puff piece deflated. Where, BTW, is the citation for her claim the Queen has always “said” Harry makes her laugh? This conversation, I wouldn’t call it an interview, is making him a further international joke on line and Hoda and The Today Show are the hash tag that facilitated it.
> 
> In an unexpected way it was a public service, however, as a wider audience got to experience this delusional, self indulgent, preachy, out-of-touch with the real world, petty man who used Invictus as a cash cow for his family and an attempt to placate his wife’s_ insatiable need for_ _attention_, instead of ALL the focus being on the participants where it belonged.


Would you please share the place for commenting.  I want to leave one.


----------



## Silverplume

Meghan should stick to making Harry raise chickens. https://www.wonderwall.com/news/soc...apparent-ukraine-flag-faux-pas-588736.article


----------



## Chanbal

This must be embarrassing for the BRF


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> He could not have been more elitist, classist, racist.  Unreal that Hoda did not take the opportunity to follow-up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: nocd
> 
> 
> "Not our class dear." Middle and upper class British put-down saying to describe those perceived to be of lesser social standing. Most popular post World War II and the fifties but stll comprehensively used today by those of that generation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.urbandictionary.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Not our class dear."
> 
> Middle and upper class British put-down saying to describe those perceived to be of lesser social standing. Most popular post World War II and the fifties but stll comprehensively used today by those of that generation _ETA and Prince Harry._


I think it was used extensively by Harry's friends in regards to Meghan.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This must be embarrassing for the BRF



Maybe he even has a shrine to her?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Answer:  People who are *not right *are all the people who recommended taking his patronages away, not allowing half in/out and cut his allowance and didn't allow princely titles for his children.  In other words, EVERYONE!



Yes, he just told the world how he thinks.  Right people and the wrong people.  Those are code words used for discrimination.  It also sounds very much like something the Duke of York [or his offspring] would say.  Hoda, why didn’t you follow up?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This must be embarrassing for the BRF


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


>



some of these do seem very blatant....the one with the hands on hips and sunnies on neck esp


----------



## papertiger

Silverplume said:


> Meghan should stick to making Harry raise chickens. https://www.wonderwall.com/news/soc...apparent-ukraine-flag-faux-pas-588736.article



2 colours. One top one bottom. And she gets it wrong. You couldn't make it up, making stuff up is what M does best.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This must be embarrassing for the BRF




She obviously doesn't. Get some  (professional) help Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Sounds like Harry is visiting a spiritualist.  I don't know whether to laugh or cry.  What ever happened to that guy on TV John Edward?  Maybe he gives Harry private readings lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Sounds like Harry is visiting a spiritualist.  I don't know whether to laugh or cry.  What ever happened to that guy on TV John Edward?  Maybe he gives Harry private readings lol!



I do not know why Charles is not insisting that Hazzi be removed from LoS and CoS.  Clearly, the guy is unstable.


----------



## Chanbal

The Telegraph published an article by Camilla Tominey (link below), and here are a few interesting pearls from it:  
*The truth about Harry’s fixation with ‘the Queen’s protection’*

*So what is really behind Harry’s latest intervention?*_ Despite a supposedly “amicable” meeting with the Queen and Charles and Camilla last Thursday at Windsor Castle, it seems there is still unfinished business for the 37-year-old royal.

During the interview with Ms Kotb, who co-presents NBC’s flagship breakfast show, Today, with Savannah Guthrie, he said “of course” he missed his family during the pandemic, but stopped short of warm words about anyone other than the Queen. Describing how they “have a really special relationship,” he praised her “sense of humour and her ability to see the humour in so many different things” before adding: “We talk about things that we can’t talk about with anybody else”.

Asked outright whether he missed his father and brother, he avoided the question to insist he was focusing on the athletes of the Invictus Games, currently taking place at The Hague in the Netherlands.
*As on Oprah, Harry once again seems to be trying to make a distinction between the Queen – who the couple have been at pains to say is blameless – and the institution of monarchy itself.* This attempt at divide and rule in the House of Windsor is understood to have riled* royal relatives who remain suspicious of the couple praising the Queen in one breath, while trashing the rest of the family in another. According to one source: “What the visit to Windsor Castle last week demonstrates is that this was more about topping up their royal credentials (doubtless at the urging of Netflix) than checking up on Granny.”*

It is not known whether *their “private” meeting with the Queen – which lasted just half an hour *– *will feature on the streaming platform* in a forthcoming documentary about the Paralympics-style competition for wounded ex-service personnel.

The duke also said there were “lots” of issues to overcome before introducing his son Archie, two, and 10-month-old daughter Lilibet to their great-grandmother, casting doubt on the Sussexes’ presence at the Platinum Jubilee.

Amid an ongoing row over the decision to strip them of their Metropolitan Police security post Megxit, he revealed they have not yet decided whether to return to Britain for the festivities in June.
It comes after it emerged at the weekend that they have been invited to appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony during the celebrations, but can have no formal role. This means they will be able to appear at family events, which include the traditional balcony appearance, as well as a service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral. However, as non-working members of the monarchy, they cannot take part in Trooping the Colour or play any central role in the various events taking place throughout the four-day bank holiday weekend. Could this have prompted a rethink? *While the couple would be able to bask on the balcony, their lesser status compared with the likes of William and Kate – and even the Earl and Countess of Wessex – might dissuade them from taking part.*

Regardless of his concerns over whether the Queen is being adequately “protected”, Harry’s fears for his immediate family’s safety have come to dominate his relationship with the place he called home until two years ago.*The Sussexes are thought to be spending “hundreds of thousands” on private bodyguards at their £11 million mansion in Montecito, California – and claim they are not safe in Britain without armed guards, *with Harry even offering to pay for the royalty protection they once enjoyed at taxpayers’ expense.
_
*The Telegraph understands that when they first moved to the US via Canada, the couple sought quotes for their security, which appeared to overestimate their need for protection. According to one well placed insider: “They apparently asked for double what they needed.”*





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Haha… Hazz, the Guru?


----------



## marietouchet

The title echoes my sentiments completely

'Prince Harry's deluded Queen comment proves he has staggering Messiah complex'










						'Prince Harry's deluded Queen comment proves he has staggering Messiah complex'
					

Prince Harry shared private details from his secret meeting with the Queen during his latest TV interview, saying he was ensuring the Queen was "protected" and that she has the right people around her




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Haha… Hazz, the Guru?



Sadly no ,  president 45


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The Telegraph published an article by Camilla Tominey (link below), and here are a few interesting pearls from it:
> *The truth about Harry’s fixation with ‘the Queen’s protection’*
> 
> *So what is really behind Harry’s latest intervention?*_ Despite a supposedly “amicable” meeting with the Queen and Charles and Camilla last Thursday at Windsor Castle, it seems there is still unfinished business for the 37-year-old royal.
> 
> During the interview with Ms Kotb, who co-presents NBC’s flagship breakfast show, Today, with Savannah Guthrie, he said “of course” he missed his family during the pandemic, but stopped short of warm words about anyone other than the Queen. Describing how they “have a really special relationship,” he praised her “sense of humour and her ability to see the humour in so many different things” before adding: “We talk about things that we can’t talk about with anybody else”.
> 
> Asked outright whether he missed his father and brother, he avoided the question to insist he was focusing on the athletes of the Invictus Games, currently taking place at The Hague in the Netherlands.
> *As on Oprah, Harry once again seems to be trying to make a distinction between the Queen – who the couple have been at pains to say is blameless – and the institution of monarchy itself.* This attempt at divide and rule in the House of Windsor is understood to have riled* royal relatives who remain suspicious of the couple praising the Queen in one breath, while trashing the rest of the family in another. According to one source: “What the visit to Windsor Castle last week demonstrates is that this was more about topping up their royal credentials (doubtless at the urging of Netflix) than checking up on Granny.”*
> 
> It is not known whether *their “private” meeting with the Queen – which lasted just half an hour *– *will feature on the streaming platform* in a forthcoming documentary about the Paralympics-style competition for wounded ex-service personnel.
> 
> The duke also said there were “lots” of issues to overcome before introducing his son Archie, two, and 10-month-old daughter Lilibet to their great-grandmother, casting doubt on the Sussexes’ presence at the Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> Amid an ongoing row over the decision to strip them of their Metropolitan Police security post Megxit, he revealed they have not yet decided whether to return to Britain for the festivities in June.
> It comes after it emerged at the weekend that they have been invited to appear on the Buckingham Palace balcony during the celebrations, but can have no formal role. This means they will be able to appear at family events, which include the traditional balcony appearance, as well as a service of thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral. However, as non-working members of the monarchy, they cannot take part in Trooping the Colour or play any central role in the various events taking place throughout the four-day bank holiday weekend. Could this have prompted a rethink? *While the couple would be able to bask on the balcony, their lesser status compared with the likes of William and Kate – and even the Earl and Countess of Wessex – might dissuade them from taking part.*
> 
> Regardless of his concerns over whether the Queen is being adequately “protected”, Harry’s fears for his immediate family’s safety have come to dominate his relationship with the place he called home until two years ago.*The Sussexes are thought to be spending “hundreds of thousands” on private bodyguards at their £11 million mansion in Montecito, California – and claim they are not safe in Britain without armed guards, *with Harry even offering to pay for the royalty protection they once enjoyed at taxpayers’ expense.
> _
> *The Telegraph understands that when they first moved to the US via Canada, the couple sought quotes for their security, which appeared to overestimate their need for protection. According to one well placed insider: “They apparently asked for double what they needed.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


He is obsessed with security , totally - a topic on which he likely gets messages from mom


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Would you please share the place for commenting.  I want to leave one.


Happy to share! 
email address is: TodayStories@nbcuni.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Thanks for posting this, it's one of the best videos from the BLG imo. I'm just posting it below, so it's easier to watch.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a new one for Hazz!
*Prince Harry's staggering Messiah complex…*








						Prince Harry's staggering Messiah complex as he claims to be protecting Queen
					

Polly Hudson says Prince Harry's claims that he wants to protect the Wueen and make sure she has 'the right people around her' are in contrast with his behaviour over the past few years




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

If the BLG reads here, Angela's post deserves attention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This 100% 

_Meanwhile, royal author *Tom Bower* told MailOnline: '*Harry's full demands have been rebuffed and he is hitting out at those standing in the way of promoting the Sussex's self-promotion*. *To enhance his credibility in America and for Netflix he needs to pretend that he has a special relationship with the Queen.* I don't believe the British public would tolerate Harry and Meghan on the balcony. Allowing them there would be self-destructive for the monarchy. That's why I don't believe they will come.' 

He added: '*The recent speculation has been created by their Hollywood publicists to force the Palace to accept the Sussexes' demands. It's becoming an unseemly battle which the Palace needs to firmly squash*.'_









						Prince Harry says he feels very 'welcome' in America
					

Prince Harry today refused to say whether he misses  Prince Charles and William amid their ongoing feud - but insisted that he talks with the Queen 'about things she can't talk about with anybody else'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Haha… Hazz, the Guru?



I hope that Piers Morgan's guest is Thomas Markle. Ooh the possibilities! The secrets to be revealed! Ooh the sweet revenge! I'm positively salivating at the thought!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This 100%
> 
> _Meanwhile, royal author *Tom Bower* told MailOnline: '*Harry's full demands have been rebuffed and he is hitting out at those standing in the way of promoting the Sussex's self-promotion*. *To enhance his credibility in America and for Netflix he needs to pretend that he has a special relationship with the Queen.* I don't believe the British public would tolerate Harry and Meghan on the balcony. Allowing them there would be self-destructive for the monarchy. That's why I don't believe they will come.'
> 
> He added: '*The recent speculation has been created by their Hollywood publicists to force the Palace to accept the Sussexes' demands. It's becoming an unseemly battle which the Palace needs to firmly squash*.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says he feels very 'welcome' in America
> 
> 
> Prince Harry today refused to say whether he misses  Prince Charles and William amid their ongoing feud - but insisted that he talks with the Queen 'about things she can't talk about with anybody else'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



_*the Palace needs to firmly squash*_


----------



## Chanbal

It has been a busy day for journalists in the UK, more interesting headlines… 










						JAN MOIR: The person the Queen needs protection from is Prince Harry
					

JAN MOIR: America woke up to a new game of thrones this morning as Prince Harry sketched out an unlikely role for himself as Mighty Queen Protector, Defender of Her Realm.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				













						DAN WOOTTON: Why I'm convinced Harry is unhappy with his new life
					

DAN WOOTTON: Reinvented as a social justice warrior on the other side of the world, Prince Harry's previously irresistible spark has disappeared faster than his hair.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

According to NS on _Harry's Unhappy Birthday for the Queen_, QE is upset thanks to Hazz's lucrative side. He asks _WAS IT A HUGE PAY CHEQUE? NS_ thinks there was a big one and_ a_ll questions were approved by Hazz ahead of time. This is sad, Hazz shows no consideration for his grandmother imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe it’s photoshop, maybe it’s surrounding himself with the _right_ people???


Then:











						Prince Harry's Invictus Games heading to America
					

Prince Harry announces 2016 Invictus Games will be held in Orlando, Florida: video




					www.hellomagazine.com
				











__





						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

He brought this “right” people talk on himself!  Let’s watch SS and MM try to clean this up


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

NM - deleted the upside down flag post by Omid, because  ya kno 


ETA: Gotta ask - if he is going over 100% [Math teachers cringe], why stop at 120???? Hmmm.


----------



## Chanbal

According to Hazz, Santa Barbara is home for the time being… Where is he going next?


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Happy to share!
> email address is: TodayStories@nbcuni.com


Thanks just sent it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> According to Hazz, Santa Barbara is home for the time being… Where is he going next?




France, just like Wallis&Ed.


----------



## Silverplume

CarryOn2020 said:


> France, just like Wallis&Ed.



Or “Africa,” as if it’s one big country. A plus for Mrs H is that one can, _apparently_, drop and pee any old time.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> France, just like Wallis&Ed.


It's too close to the UK, Hazz & TW make a lot of noise. Wallis & Ed after their alleged attempt to take over the UK (with the help of the other H), chose to live relatively quiet lives.



Silverplume said:


> Or “Africa,” as if it’s one big country. A plus is that one can, _apparently_, drop and pee any old time.


I don't wish that to the Africans. I was thinking more like an uninhabited island…


----------



## gracekelly

Harry is getting ripped to shreds everywhere.  I bet Meghan is glad she sat that one out.  Forget the tell all book, after this interview, I don't see how he could show his face there again, but perhaps that was part of his plan anyway.  To paraphrase  the Soup Nazi, "no balcony for yooooou!"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The Firm should worry…  



_Picture the scene. The Netflix documentary about Harry and Meghan opens with the couple walking into Windsor Castle last week. Bathed in spring sunshine, hands clasped, they’re reminiscing about their wedding day in Windsor, almost exactly four years before. “The Duke and Duchess are back in England together for the first time in two years,” the voiceover might say, “and they’ve been invited to tea with the Queen.”

*Netflix is said to have paid $100 million to make various programmes with Harry and Meghan,* *including a documentary about their lives.* Netflix’s executives haven’t paid so much because they’re interested in the speech the couple gave last year in Central Park, or the humanitarian award they received in LA in February, or even the Invictus Games, which anyone can see on TV. *What they’ve paid for is a real-life version of The Crown.*

With the news that Netflix’s share price has plummeted by 25 per cent and the streaming giant is losing subscribers, content is, more than ever, king — or in this case, queen. *Netflix needs the Sussexes on the palace balcony in June, not off in California feeding the chickens with Archie.* Which brings us to the latest Sussex truth bomb to detonate at the heart of the royal family: Harry’s star turn this morning on American breakfast TV, billed as “Prince Harry: one-on-one”. In it, he boasted that he had a “very special” relationship with the Queen, who he said can talk to him about things that she can’t talk to anyone else about…

*Today, with the Sussex PR offensive in full swing in the lead up to the Jubilee, the next scheduled brickbat will be Harry’s autobiography.* *Conveniently, that won’t be published until the autumn, long after Netflix has got its money shot (or not).* It’s rumoured that the person who feels the full force of Harry’s displeasure in the memoir is Camilla. According to Tina Brown — whose new book, The Palace Papers: Inside the House of Windsor, is published later this month — while William has made his peace with his father’s relationship with Camilla, and her future role as Queen, Harry makes no secret of the fact that he can’t stand her. When the Queen released a statement in February saying that it was her “sincere wish” that Camilla would become queen consort when Charles is crowned, the Cambridges “liked” the post on Instagram. There was deafening silence from California…


*The strategy now being pursued from California, with the help of battalions of expensive publicists and lawyers, appears to be for the Sussexes to get exactly the sort of hybrid half-in, half-out relationship with the royals, which the Palace thought had been ruled out.* It was in January 2020 when the Sussexes announced that they were going to step back from their roles as “senior” members of the royal family, but also that they would “carve out a progressive new role within this institution”. They would, they said, “work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty the Queen”…


*His NBC interview ended with what could be seen as yet another warning shot across the bows of the Palace.*
“This was a life that she signed up for,” he said about Meghan, waving his arm to reference the Invictus Games, “and we’re doing it as a couple for ever. Because of the circumstances, we’ve now moved that life of service to the States and will continue to do all we did before. Nothing has changed for us. It’s just a little bit more complicated.”
_
*Harry was always acutely aware that he was the spare to the heir, that William and Kate would always be in the front row, with him and Meghan at the back. He used to get the Sunday night blues, he said in his interview: not any more. Now, the Sussexes are the stars of their very own show. Nobody ever imagined they would go quietly. Few could have predicted quite how noisy it would be.*





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph
				




https://archive.ph/o/j5WhE/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/prince-harry


----------



## Chanbal

This is good!


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> I used to quite like Harry before this awful woman brainwashed him - he was gormless and goofy dysfunctional but harmless wtf has she turned him into ? He is living in cloud cockoo land - he seriously thinks he is a star and people love him - bless his little grey cells must have left his skull completely now


Same here.  I watched him grow up and join the military and live a great life.  Sure, he had the odd miss step but the PR at Buckingham Palace always put a positive spin on it, and he never struck me as mean spirited, or vindictive guy.  What happened?  He never started using his mother death for all his problems before TW.  He seemed a LOT happier in his single days before the gold digger enlightened him as to just how UNhappy he was.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> She's actually been pretty successful as a singer and actress, but it certainly helps that she married a prominent music composer/producer who just happens to be twice her age.


And insanely rich


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> And insanely rich



And he had the “right” people around him. 
Now who does he have?  People who want to use his royal connection for money.  Eventually, they drain one’s spirit.
Thriving or draining?  He made his choice. He seems stuck on unhappiness while William has moved onward and upward.


----------



## xincinsin

Did the Wench put on an Invictus Tshirt at any time during the Invictus fashion show? I don't think I saw her in any garment that didn't proclaim how expensive and poor her taste was or how high maintenance she is.



Chanbal said:


> If the BLG reads here, Angela's post deserves attention.



_As for the 'life of service ' which was 'what we were doing before, nothing has changed'._
If you were doing nothing before and nothing now, then nothing has changed. Zero + Zero = Zero



Toby93 said:


> Same here.  I watched him grow up and join the military and live a great life.  Sure, he had the odd miss step but the PR at Buckingham Palace always put a positive spin on it, and he never struck me as mean spirited, or vindictive guy.  What happened?  He never started using his mother death for all his problems before TW.  He seemed a LOT happier in his single days before the gold digger enlightened him as to just how UNhappy he was.


I can just imagine how she gaslighted him till he became her willing accomplice. Not that I think he is innocent. Oh no, she unearthed his mean streak and he is revelling in it. Any burnout he is feeling now is because they can't scam Netflix and Spotify any longer and the big corporations with deeper pockets than they have are baying for their pound of flesh. 

He is probably also laying the groundwork for their rabid stans to voice support when they can't produce any good programmes: _We were so stressed over the Ukraine and our (prominent) role in TQ's care and support, that we couldn't concentrate on the production work. It is so unfair of Netflix and Spotify to expect us to work during this traumatic time in our lives. My mother would be ashamed of them (cue the Wench in another cosplay outfit - the revenge dress)._


----------



## Chanbal

One of the many comments:







__





						Blind Item #8
					

Can you imagine how bad the numbers must really be for the streaming service, if this is the number they are publicly releasing.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> And he had the “right” people around him.
> Now who does he have?  People who want to use his royal connection for money.  Eventually, they drain one’s spirit.
> Thriving or draining?  He made his choice. He seems stuck on unhappiness while William has moved onward and upward.


I read somewhere that if Netfl*x owns the footage recorded, the documentary could be different from the  'feel good' show the Harkles expect. Whatever increases the numbers… I don't believe this will happen, but it's a possibility.


----------



## Chanbal

I recall to have read this a few weeks ago, it's really impressive how accurate the statement is.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that if Netfl*x owns the footage recorded, the documentary could be different from the  'feel good' show the Harkles expect. Whatever increases the numbers… I don't believe this will happen, but it's a possibility.


Depends on how the contract was worded. Archewell had pretty unfair clauses in their submission t&c which gave their rights over everything submitted. So their lawyers are sharks. 

The contract with Netfl*x should have stated who has the final say in the programme, and who has the power to veto the editorial direction. Even if Netflix didn't like the way Baldy and Botox edited the programme to show only themselves in a good light, would they have enough footage to re-cut the programme to be about Invictus? The camera crew was following Baldy around and might have been directed to shoot only scenes with Baldy and Botox in the picture. Instead of *Heart of Invictus*, Netflix might have to screen *Heartless at Invictus.*


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Depends on how the contract was worded. Archewell had pretty unfair clauses in their submission t&c which gave their rights over everything submitted. So their lawyers are sharks.
> 
> The contract with Netfl*x should have stated who has the final say in the programme, and who has the power to veto the editorial direction. Even if Netflix didn't like the way Baldy and Botox edited the programme to show only themselves in a good light, would they have enough footage to re-cut the programme to be about Invictus? The camera crew was following Baldy around and might have been directed to shoot only scenes with Baldy and Botox in the picture. Instead of *Heart of Invictus*, Netflix might have to screen *Heartless at Invictus.*


I also think the Harkles have control over the final product, but there is the tiny possibility that they don't. Netfl*x needs to increase numbers, and a potential show about the decline of the Harkles would likely sell a lot more…  I like your title, Heartless at Invictus.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nflix could always declare bankruptcy, shelve the project so all contracts are null and void.
Then, they reopen under another name and release the Heartless footage.
If they have footage of his smoking mj, would that be game over?


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are trying to help Hazz, but it's probably too late for him…



Someone spent a lot of time on this.
I'm speechless. I've heard reference to the parallels but this really puts it in perspective. Thank you


----------



## Happyish

csshopper said:


> The Today Show does have an easily accessible email for comments. I put this in their Inbox:
> 
> "For 70 years I have been a Today viewer. But today I am part of a grassroots movement to delete the Today Show from “Favorites” “Record All”  “Bookmark” sites as a result of Hoda Ktob's pandering segment with Harry Windsor this morning, remember we were admonished at one point by the Sussexes that "titles don't matter" so why use them? An adjective I have seen on line about this exchange as it progressed and felt myself, is “creepy."
> 
> Used to admire Hoda Ktob, no longer as she let this narcissistic, hypocritical, whining, lying, vengeful, man make ludicrous statements with no accountability through follow up questioning to explain.  (Oprah redux) Just for starters HE is looking out for the Queen and making sure she is surrounded by the right people??? Reallllly from across the world, after accusing her on Oprah of being a poor parent who formed Prince Charles, being head of a racist family, completely disrespectfully not attending her husband’s memorial, sneaking out and behind her back and on and on.????? An appropriate follow up would have been the question, "How are you doing this?" His statements, his avoidance of questions he didn’t want to be accountable for, were insulting to our intelligence and disrespectful to so many people, individually, to his family collectively, and to the  Commonwealth of his birth. And it just kept getting worse. Might have had some value if, for example, Hoda had pointed out his daily obsession with his Mum seems to coincide with his marriage and asked, “Is it soothing to you when your wife duplicates your Mum’s outfits as M recently did at Invictus?”
> 
> Hoda missed the mark and your attempted puff piece deflated. Where, BTW, is the citation for her claim the Queen has always “said” Harry makes her laugh? This conversation, I wouldn’t call it an interview, is making him a further international joke on line and Hoda and The Today Show are the hash tag that facilitated it.
> 
> In an unexpected way it was a public service, however, as a wider audience got to experience this delusional, self indulgent, preachy, out-of-touch with the real world, petty man who used Invictus as a cash cow for his family and an attempt to placate his wife’s_ insatiable need for_ _attention_, instead of ALL the focus being on the participants where it belonged.


Well, in their defense . . . "service is universal." That includes making grandma laugh, making sure she's surrounded by the right people, communing with Diana through his Ouiji board back at home and living his life. 
Did you notice, Meagan didn't even stay for the end of the Inviticus games--she went back to California. Sheesh!


----------



## Happyish

gracekelly said:


> What he was implying that it is the the evil gray men, the same gray men that his mother complained about, that are giving TQ advice and running her life and making things bad for him and Meghan and family. He probably blames them for the lack of the princely titles for his children even though he really knows that it wasn't going to happen. If you took him seriously, he made it sound like he would scrub all her advisors and appoint new ones.  How absurd!  Like he could do this.  Delusions.  I think William's head must be spinning.


When Archie was born they announced they were not accepting a title for him. They have no one to blame but themselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nflix could always declare bankruptcy, shelve the project so all contracts are null and void.
> Then, they reopen under another name and release the Heartless footage.
> If they have footage of his smoking mj, would that be game over?


Not sure if they have footage of his smoking habits, but I bet they have enough footage to support the non-existence of 'pensioners on a bus', the ones without phones or cameras during a tour of Windsor. Footage of annoyed veterans by allegedly being used by the Harkles…  A nice collection of Newspapers headlines. One podcast in >1 year. It could be a very interesting show.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Not sure if they have footage of his smoking habits, but I bet they have enough footage to support the non-existence of 'pensioners on a bus', the ones without phones or cameras during a tour of Windsor. Footage of annoyed veterans by allegedly being used by the Harkles…  A nice collection of Newspapers headlines. It could be a very interesting show.


They could interview the vets who attended the Freedom Gala - the ones who claimed online that they told Baldy to go home. Maybe that's why he is claiming now that home is the US.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> They could interview the vets who attended the Freedom Gala - the ones who claimed online that they told Baldy to go home. Maybe that's why he is *claiming now that home is the US.*




Sooooo, is he paying USA taxes?


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> According to Hazz, Santa Barbara is home for the time being… Where is he going next?



Megs and her rise to fame and fortune very much reminds me of _The Two Mrs. Grenvilles _by Dominique Dunne. It's a good read.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> According to Hazz, Santa Barbara is home for the time being… Where is he going next?



Santa Barbara is home only until they can unload the money pit they got suckered into by the oligarch.


----------



## Happyish

Toby93 said:


> Same here.  I watched him grow up and join the military and live a great life.  Sure, he had the odd miss step but the PR at Buckingham Palace always put a positive spin on it, and he never struck me as mean spirited, or vindictive guy.  What happened?  He never started using his mother death for all his problems before TW.  He seemed a LOT happier in his single days before the gold digger enlightened him as to just how UNhappy he was.


I think that's very true. But it also may be that he was so heavily shielded and his public appearances scripted that we never saw the true Harry, only the Harry Buckingham Palace wanted us to see.
Without the Firm, we now have Harry 2.0. It's not a good version.


----------



## Icyjade

Random thought: Ex-girlfriends be looking at the clown and his antics and thinking “gosh I really dodged a bullet”.


----------



## Chanbal

Many of us that are not even British are in shock… 


_Buckingham Palace pointedly chose not to comment, as did Kensington Palace on behalf of William. 

But one well-placed royal source told the Daily Mail of the sense of shock at his 'breathtaking arrogance' and made clear that many felt Harry's delusion knew 'no bounds'.

'It is the Queen's birthday and despite a difficult year people are working full steam ahead on making her Platinum Jubilee an event to remember that properly honours such a remarkable woman. She just doesn't deserve this,' they said. 

*Taking aim at the family he owes his fortune to... the barbs that stunned the Palace *
_








						Palace shock at Harry: Royal staff slam 'breathtaking arrogance'
					

Buckingham Palace was left reeling after the prince said in the US TV appearance that his 'special' relationship with his grandmother meant she told him things she would keep from others.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *The strategy now being pursued from California, with the help of battalions of expensive publicists and lawyers, appears to be for the Sussexes to get exactly the sort of hybrid half-in, half-out relationship with the royals, which the Palace thought had been ruled out.* It was in January 2020 when the Sussexes announced that they were going to step back from their roles as “senior” members of the royal family, but also that they would “carve out a progressive new role within this institution”. They would, they said, “work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty the Queen”…



This was decided 2 years ago.  It's over.  They aren't allowed to profit obscenely off their titles while carrying out the occasional royal duty when it suits them. 

So, how do their expensive publicists and lawyers, operating in the U.S., possibly think they can force the Queen, the UK government, the family and (perhaps most importantly) the British public, to accept a half-in/half-out type arrangement at this point, more than 2 years after they left?  Occasional interviews on morning TV talk shows discussing how indispensable they are to the Queen?  Suing the Queen's own government from the comfy confines of Montecito to pay for their security when they condescend to show up in the UK?  Apparently, their expensive publicists and lawyers have failed to note that no one in the UK is demanding their return, other than Scoobie perhaps.  They aren't missed from what I can tell.


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Random thought: Ex-girlfriends be looking at the clown and his antics and thinking “gosh I really dodged a bullet”.


They must be very relieved. I recall to have read an article in which Cory Vitiello's mother made some 'praising' comments about TW (after the engagement to Hazz), but I got the impression that she was indeed relieved that her son was safe.


----------



## charlottawill

Happyish said:


> I think that's very true. But it also may be that he was so heavily shielded and his public appearances scripted that we never saw the true Harry, only the Harry Buckingham Palace wanted us to see.
> Without the Firm, we now have Harry 2.0. It's not a good version.


I believe he has long been troubled. Hooking up with someone who uses his emotional immaturity for her own gain just exposed it to the world.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who is surrounding Hazzie?  We don’t really know because there are no photos.

Here’s the line up of people surrounding QE:
all of her children + their spouses
all [but 1] of her grandchildren  + their spouses
all [but 2] of her great grandchildren
most of the UK

This is what it looked like on Sunday - 4 days ago:








						See All the Best Photos of the Royal Family at Easter Sunday Services
					

Including Prince George and Princess Charlotte!




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




ETA:  TeamQE line up - the younger members







__





						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> This was decided 2 years ago.  It's over.  They aren't allowed to profit obscenely off their titles while carrying out the occasional royal duty when it suits them.
> 
> So, how do their expensive publicists and lawyers, operating in the U.S., possibly think they can force the Queen, the UK government, the family and (perhaps most importantly) the British public, to accept a half-in/half-out type arrangement at this point, more than 2 years after they left?  Occasional interviews on morning TV talk shows discussing how indispensable they are to the Queen?  Suing the Queen's own government from the comfy confines of Montecito to pay for their security when they condescend to show up in the UK?  Apparently, their expensive publicists and lawyers have failed to note that no one in the UK is demanding their return, other than Scoobie perhaps.  They aren't missed from what I can tell.


Do you think Scoobie dreams of joining his dream girl in Cali? He could be the High Priest of her cult. I'm waiting for the emergence of the Temple of Meghan. 

Even if the Botched Bozos and their expensive lawyers and publicists create a vision of half-in/half-out, it's not going to convince the rest of the world of their importance. No way the UK will ever give them back their IPP status. And if, in the highly unlikely situation that Boris is replaced by a cretinous pest who thinks Methane is the next coming, and they actually get police protection, this is going to become a test case when the rest of the world does not want to provide freebies for them to swan around the globe. I must say this thread is a great enabler for knowledge acquisition. I found and read the Internationally Protected Persons Act for my country to see what we are bound by signed convention to provide if Baldy and Botox decide to perform some PDA here.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Botched Bozos


 Or, how about The Bozo and The Beeyotch? They really give us so much to work with.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Pancreatic cancer is one of the worst cancers. It's possible that surgery could have prolonged his life a little more, but it was likely too late for him to be 'cured.' Pancreatic cancer is often 'silent' until it's too late. I believe he consulted many specialists and understood his situation.


Oh I'm aware of how deadly it is. I have a friend who lost her 40 yr. old husband to it in 18 mos. But Jobs' was a rare and less aggressive form of the disease, and it is possible he may have survived if he had had surgery to remove the tumor sooner. This is interesting:



> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4924574/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> burnout?  try sitting in an office 8 hours a day you moron


Yeah, I rolled my eyes to his comment about how he used to get the Sunday blues.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happy Birthday and Congratulations, QE. 









						Barbie Gets a Queen Elizabeth Makeover to Mark The Platinum Jubilee
					

A doll in the likeness of the Queen comes complete with royal jewels and adornments.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is what he has become:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what he has become:



Harry, Lord Laughingstock


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Oh I'm aware of how deadly it is. I have a friend who lost her 40 yr. old husband to it in 18 mos. But Jobs' was a rare and less aggressive form of the disease, and it is possible he may have survived if he had had surgery to remove the tumor sooner. This is interesting:


I'm sorry about your friend's husband, 40yo is too young to die. Surgery is usually very effective in the early stage of SJ's type of cancer. The problem is that when people start showing symptoms of pancreatic cancer is often already too late. I suspect that SJ was told that surgery would likely not be enough for his case, and it's possible that he didn't want to participate in clinical trials. I agree with the authors of this article: "_It is unknown whether Jobs’ outcomes would have been different if he had pursued surgery at the time of his diagnosis, or if had followed a specific chemotherapy protocol." _It's a very sad story.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what he has become:



Souvenir sellers will jump in with T-shirts and banners proclaiming "Royal Protection Squad". And however will the violent faction of the Sussex Squad stomach that when it goes against their oaths to butcher the BRF and burn down the palaces in their unholy goddess's name?


----------



## xincinsin

Did her secret reading of The Bench take place or was it fake news planted to try to finagle an invite? There was a book reading at the event where she painted the Ukrainian flag upside down, but it was another book.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happy Birthday and Congratulations, QE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barbie Gets a Queen Elizabeth Makeover to Mark The Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> A doll in the likeness of the Queen comes complete with royal jewels and adornments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Still on the Happy Birthday mood…


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Did her secret reading of The Bench take place or was it fake news planted to try to finagle an invite? There was a book reading at the event where she painted the Ukrainian flag upside down, but it was another book.


I didn't find an answer to your query about the book reading, but found this post about their flag collection.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Did her secret reading of The Bench take place or was it fake news planted to try to finagle an invite? There was a book reading at the event where she painted the Ukrainian flag upside down, but it was another book.



“She cancelled” her reading so that veteran James Stride could read his book ‘Hairy Maclary’ . By all accounts, the children and adults enjoyed his reading.  Imo she was told to step aside.












						Prince Harry tells child reporters: 'We cannot steal your future'
					

Speaking with Dutch Kindercorrespondent reporters at The Hague, Harry said he wanted his two young children, Archie and Lilibet to grow up 'in a fairer world, a safer world, a more equal world'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

Just posting this, I think the children in the second picture have protected The Queen more than Harry has!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## jelliedfeels

limom said:


> This is just the way it goes.
> The Queen followed the usage of the times and it produced Charles and Andrew and Ann.
> In turn, they created the next generation.
> 
> Have any pictures from the so called bus waving encounter surface yet or are they saved for the upcoming documentary/book?


I was about to ask what bus but now I know what you mean.  I agree I think there is an awful lot of playing the same records over and over again in the royal house be it ‘stiff upper lip as it’s so hard to live in a palace’, ‘mummy likes Andy best’, ‘press don’t run the right stories’ or the all time no 1 ‘DIANA’.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is she...The Queen?
> 
> Is he on drugs


I would bet my bag collection on that being true,


Chanbal said:


> According to Hazz, Santa Barbara is home for the time being… Where is he going next?



Debtors prison with little Architt?

I love Edith Wharton- thing is her characters have much more depth than Madame basic if only he’s married someone like Lily Bart. 


Chanbal said:


> I also think the Harkles have control over the final product, but there is the tiny possibility that they don't. Netfl*x needs to increase numbers, and a potential show about the decline of the Harkles would likely sell a lot more…  I like your title, Heartless at Invictus.


I agree I feel like a boring corporate documentary isn’t going to get great numbers just look at scooby finding flopdom and that was released 2 years ago when there was still a lot more goodwill. The Oprah gig did not get the numbers they were looking for either.

They need to get an interview with the child who has seen less sun than the kids from the Others despite living in Cali…. Archibald!

A total hatchet job on them  with lots of cliff hangers, insane music and jump scares of M without her makeup - that could be the new tiger king!


CarryOn2020 said:


> Nflix could always declare bankruptcy, shelve the project so all contracts are null and void.
> Then, they reopen under another name and release the Heartless footage.
> If they have footage of his smoking mj, would that be game over?


It’s always been an open secret among the British  he’s a cocaine cowboy so weed would be a step in the right direction for most people. I feel like most Americans are pro weed legalisation/ don’t care nowadays aren’t they?
I don’t think drug use footage would be damning in short - if anything it’d play into the ‘cool young couple’ vibe they desperately want.  I feel like it’d be footage of the giant cracks in the ‘happy marriage’ and some of them mistreating people set to bad guy music that’d smoke their kippers.


Chanbal said:


> They must be very relieved. I recall to have read an article in which Cory Vitiello's mother made some 'praising' comments about TW (after the engagement to Hazz), but I got the impression that she was indeed relieved that her son was safe.


She knew old Dracula fingers would drain him dry 
She did really luck out getting H if she was thinking random Canadian chef was the best she could do for golddigging in her mature years.


Chanbal said:


> I didn't find an answer to your query about the book reading, but found this post about their flag collection.



Flags viewed from a horizontal position- the shade of it all  


CarryOn2020 said:


> “She cancelled” her reading so that veteran James Stride could read his book ‘Hairy Maclary’ . By all accounts, the children and adults enjoyed his reading.  Imo she was told to step aside.
> 
> View attachment 5384990
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry tells child reporters: 'We cannot steal your future'
> 
> 
> Speaking with Dutch Kindercorrespondent reporters at The Hague, Harry said he wanted his two young children, Archie and Lilibet to grow up 'in a fairer world, a safer world, a more equal world'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yes it’d be a bit weird for a Childrens author to just be there otherwise. Perhaps too many children were crying in fear at the suggestion and they were wondering if it’d put off the archers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Harry is getting ripped to shreds everywhere.  I bet Meghan is glad she sat that one out.  Forget the tell all book, after this interview, I don't see how he could show his face there again, but perhaps that was part of his plan anyway.  To paraphrase  the Soup Nazi, "no balcony for yooooou!"



What really concerns me: what spouse - especially one who controls every aspect of his life, even what direction he walks in - would allow this public spectacle and humiliation? That guy is probably unable to organize his clothes being drycleaned (for once not because he is an idiot, but because he's always had other people do it for him), she could easily instruct his team to please not arrange for TV interviews and the like. Is she a sadist on top of a narcissist or what exactly is wrong with her?

And "commited forever as a couple"? She just has nowhere else to go, but make a complete idiot out of yourself one more time and a huge divorce settlement might just be more interesting than staying around. She'll still have the royal pawns, sorry, great-grandchildren.

I can't decide if a complete melt-down might be his blessing in disguise or if it would make everything worse seeing his wife now can make medical decisions for him, and she has proven more than once she doesn't give a sh*t about his well-being.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What really concerns me: what spouse - especially one who controls every aspect of his life, even what direction he walks in - would allow this public spectacle and humiliation? That guy is probably unable to organize his clothes being drycleaned (for once not because he is an idiot, but because he's always had other people do it for him), she could easily instruct his team to please not arrange for TV interviews and the like. Is she a sadist on top of a narcissist or what exactly is wrong with her?
> 
> And "commited forever as a couple"? She just has nowhere else to go, but make a complete idiot out of yourself one more time and a huge divorce settlement might just be more interesting than staying around. She'll still have the royal pawns, sorry, great-grandchildren.
> 
> I can't decide if a complete melt-down might be his blessing in disguise or if it would make everything worse seeing his wife now can make medical decisions for him, and she has proven more than once she doesn't give a sh*t about his well-being.



All of this 100% - but I don't feel sorry for him at all.

It's hard to see such clear disfunction in a relationship but he seems to enjoy it. Their public displays of together are so juvenile they are embarrassing. They are fooling no-one but themselves and their stans. The guy's completely clueless, delusional and obviously doesn't know the difference between fantasy and reality. He has Diana mark II in his head whilst she has a claw tearing into his arm. He's living one kind of brand marriage and she's obviously living cos-playing another. If the divorce happens, he'll be in denial about that too. Let her keep the kids - sorry for the kids, but who cares? Certainly not me. I don't think she has plans to make an exit now,  but she may cheat to try to make something happen with another big-wig in the future, that will upset him and he may divorce her because she won't be 'mummy' anymore. Whatever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> All of this 100% - but I don't feel sorry for him at all.



I do only because I really think the predator went for a very vulnerable person who is clearly unwell. And I've seen narcissists take down accomplished, seemingly stable people in my personal environment before.



> It's hard to see such clear disfunction in a relationship but he seems to enjoy it. *Their public displays of together are so juvenile they are embarrassing. *They are fooling no-one but themselves and their stans. The guy's completely clueless, delusional and obviously doesn't know the difference between fantasy and reality. He has Diana mark II in his head whilst she has a claw tearing into his arm. He's living one kind of brand marriage and she's obviously living cos-playing another. If the divorce happens, he'll be in denial about that too. Let her keep the kids - sorry for the kids, but who cares? Certainly not me. I don't think she has plans to make an exit now,  but she may cheat to try to make something happen with another big-wig in the future, that will upset him and he may divorce her because she won't be 'mummy' anymore. Whatever.



OMG yes. Also completely inappropriate most of the time.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



one of the comments on twitter
_Something must have been set in motion in the UK or there must’ve been decisions made regarding him (by PC & PW?) that he’s not happy about seeing as he’s now obviously trying to diminish his grandmother as a helpless old lady with the wrong people around her._

It seems to me, HMTQ has delegated the "sacking" to PC but H is trying to spin this as PC/PW actions that are not in line with HMTQ desires.

H's behavior verges on bullying IMO


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> one of the comments on twitter
> _Something must have been set in motion in the UK or there must’ve been decisions made regarding him (by PC & PW?) that he’s not happy about seeing as he’s now obviously trying to diminish his grandmother as a helpless old lady with the wrong people around her._
> 
> It seems to me, HMTQ has delegated the "sacking" to PC but H is trying to spin this as PC/PW actions that are not in line with HMTQ desires.
> 
> H's behavior verges on bullying IMO



A bully and a manipulator. MM and he deserve each other.

This is why I dislike him so much. He is not loyal to his own Queen, his grandmother.  _His_ loyalty, including to _his_ wife and _his_ children is to himself. He is basically sees himself as King of his own lifetime movie, thinks of himself as a rival for the entire BRF and is looking to divide the world into loyal subjects of PC and PW v his fans/stans. It's a rival court for the _same_ territory. Dividing the world with so much hate is not making the world a better place, we have enough hate. He can escape the hate with his money and privileged position whilst others get caught-up in it. Even his in-laws are bullied by him and his wife.


----------



## xincinsin

RAINDANCE said:


> one of the comments on twitter
> _Something must have been set in motion in the UK or there must’ve been decisions made regarding him (by PC & PW?) that he’s not happy about seeing as he’s now obviously trying to diminish his grandmother as a helpless old lady with the wrong people around her._
> 
> It seems to me, HMTQ has delegated the "sacking" to PC but H is trying to spin this as PC/PW actions that are not in line with HMTQ desires.
> 
> H's behavior verges on bullying IMO


You are too kind. Let's just be direct. The pair of them are ugly a$$ bullies. They aren't even subtle about it. They are schoolyard bullies yelling insults and accusations across the sand pit, one crying crocodile tears after pushing others off the jungle gym, and the other wailing for Mummy when no one agrees to let him remain in the up position on the see-saw.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> This is why I dislike him so much. He is not loyal to his own Queen, his grandmother.



With all my sympathy that's the one point I'll hold against him forever, the treatment of his elderly, frail grandparents.

And you bring up another good point, his grandmother is also his sovereign (plus his commander-in-chief?), and his behaviour borders on traitorous. Elizabeth I would probably have asked for his head at this point.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The Firm should worry…
> View attachment 5384785
> 
> 
> _Picture the scene. The Netflix documentary about Harry and Meghan opens with the couple walking into Windsor Castle last week. Bathed in spring sunshine, hands clasped, they’re reminiscing about their wedding day in Windsor, almost exactly four years before. “The Duke and Duchess are back in England together for the first time in two years,” the voiceover might say, “and they’ve been invited to tea with the Queen.”
> 
> *Netflix is said to have paid $100 million to make various programmes with Harry and Meghan,* *including a documentary about their lives.* Netflix’s executives haven’t paid so much because they’re interested in the speech the couple gave last year in Central Park, or the humanitarian award they received in LA in February, or even the Invictus Games, which anyone can see on TV. *What they’ve paid for is a real-life version of The Crown.*
> 
> With the news that Netflix’s share price has plummeted by 25 per cent and the streaming giant is losing subscribers, content is, more than ever, king — or in this case, queen. *Netflix needs the Sussexes on the palace balcony in June, not off in California feeding the chickens with Archie.* Which brings us to the latest Sussex truth bomb to detonate at the heart of the royal family: Harry’s star turn this morning on American breakfast TV, billed as “Prince Harry: one-on-one”. In it, he boasted that he had a “very special” relationship with the Queen, who he said can talk to him about things that she can’t talk to anyone else about…
> 
> *Today, with the Sussex PR offensive in full swing in the lead up to the Jubilee, the next scheduled brickbat will be Harry’s autobiography.* *Conveniently, that won’t be published until the autumn, long after Netflix has got its money shot (or not).* It’s rumoured that the person who feels the full force of Harry’s displeasure in the memoir is Camilla. According to Tina Brown — whose new book, The Palace Papers: Inside the House of Windsor, is published later this month — while William has made his peace with his father’s relationship with Camilla, and her future role as Queen, Harry makes no secret of the fact that he can’t stand her. When the Queen released a statement in February saying that it was her “sincere wish” that Camilla would become queen consort when Charles is crowned, the Cambridges “liked” the post on Instagram. There was deafening silence from California…
> 
> 
> *The strategy now being pursued from California, with the help of battalions of expensive publicists and lawyers, appears to be for the Sussexes to get exactly the sort of hybrid half-in, half-out relationship with the royals, which the Palace thought had been ruled out.* It was in January 2020 when the Sussexes announced that they were going to step back from their roles as “senior” members of the royal family, but also that they would “carve out a progressive new role within this institution”. They would, they said, “work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty the Queen”…
> 
> 
> *His NBC interview ended with what could be seen as yet another warning shot across the bows of the Palace.*
> “This was a life that she signed up for,” he said about Meghan, waving his arm to reference the Invictus Games, “and we’re doing it as a couple for ever. Because of the circumstances, we’ve now moved that life of service to the States and will continue to do all we did before. Nothing has changed for us. It’s just a little bit more complicated.”_
> 
> *Harry was always acutely aware that he was the spare to the heir, that William and Kate would always be in the front row, with him and Meghan at the back. He used to get the Sunday night blues, he said in his interview: not any more. Now, the Sussexes are the stars of their very own show. Nobody ever imagined they would go quietly. Few could have predicted quite how noisy it would be.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.ph/o/j5WhE/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/prince-harry


a life of service to the states?  is he talking about the US?  who are they serving?  what a bunch of BS


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents! His book





CarryOn2020 said:


> Sooooo, is he paying USA taxes?


Hear hear.   ATTENTION MUST BE PAID.  Hope the IRS is stringent and effective.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sooooo, is he paying USA taxes?


he had better be paying US taxes....I think they would have to pay on income (like Netflix) and property taxes


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> With all my sympathy that's the one point I'll hold against him forever, the treatment of his elderly, frail grandparents.
> 
> And you bring up another good point, his grandmother is also his sovereign (plus his commander-in-chief?), and his behaviour borders on traitorous. Elizabeth I would probably have asked for his head at this point.



IMO it crossed the border to treacherous at the Oprah interview.

If this was QEI and not QEII, he would have been beheaded by now, relative or not.


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> Even if the Botched Bozos and their expensive lawyers and publicists create a vision of half-in/half-out, it's not going to convince the rest of the world of their importance. No way the UK will ever give them back their IPP status.



Even if they were somehow to get the UK government to give them back the security services they want when in the UK, it's not like they can force the Queen, PC or William to give them back the prestigious patronages they lost, send them out on prestigious international tours, invite them to state dinners, or anything else for that matter. What are Harry and his lawyers going to do next?  Take the Queen and Princess Anne to court to get back his position as Captain General of the Royal Marines?  Sue Camilla to get back Meghan's patronage of the National Theatre?  Yes, that would go over _really_ well with everyone in the UK.  They aren't going to be able to bully and sue their way to the half-in/half-out type arrangement they so desperately want. Harry is becoming more American everyday.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> *a life of service to the states?*  is he talking about the US?  who are they serving?  what a bunch of BS


Scary, isn't it?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> All of this 100% - but I don't feel sorry for him at all.
> 
> It's hard to see such clear disfunction in a relationship but he seems to enjoy it. Their public displays of together are so juvenile they are embarrassing. They are fooling no-one but themselves and their stans. The guy's completely clueless, delusional and obviously doesn't know the difference between fantasy and reality. He has Diana mark II in his head whilst she has a claw tearing into his arm. He's living one kind of brand marriage and she's obviously living cos-playing another. If the divorce happens, he'll be in denial about that too. Let her keep the kids - sorry for the kids, but who cares? Certainly not me. I don't think she has plans to make an exit now,  but she may cheat to try to make something happen with another big-wig in the future, that will upset him and he may divorce her because she won't be 'mummy' anymore. Whatever.


Major dysfunction - YES. Does he like it ??? Not sure I agree. 
IMHO, he is struggling A LOT and has lost contact with reality .The carefully crafted word salads have become garbled nonsense.
He cant seem to settle down and work his commitments to the publisher, NETFLIX, SPOTIFY. Those are not going away unless he pays back all the advances (that he has probably spent). And is he known for his work ethic??? 
So, yes, he is a spoiled brat, does not know how to get down to work and feels like he may be sinking, and I dont think he likes it a bit.

Must add ... gobsmacked that Boris chewed him out over HMTQ security ... go Boris !  H really goofed up if the very distracted PM has to step in


----------



## sdkitty

I finally broke down and watched the interview.  My impression - Hoda was so overly sweet to him - referring to him as cheeky?  What a compliment to a man of 40.  I laughed at his statement that he and his grandmother talk about things that she can't talk to anyone else about.  What things?  His awful marriage?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sooooo, is he paying USA taxes?


Didn't they sign the contracts under Archewell Production and Archewell Audio? Wouldn't surprise me if the money is channelled through to the so-called charity and it picks up all bills for its benevolent founders Baldy and Botox. They have a network of, IIRC, eleven companies registered in a tax haven state to fudge the accounts, and the mansion was bought in the name of an LLC registered under Methane.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


>





papertiger said:


> A bully and a manipulator. MM and he deserve each other.
> 
> This is why I dislike him so much. *He is not loyal to his own Queen, his grandmother. * _His_ loyalty, including to _his_ wife and _his_ children is to himself. He is basically sees himself as King of his own lifetime movie, thinks of himself as a rival for the entire BRF and is looking to divide the world into loyal subjects of PC and PW v his fans/stans. It's a rival court for the _same_ territory. Dividing the world with so much hate is not making the world a better place, we have enough hate. He can escape the hate with his money and privileged position whilst others get caught-up in it. Even his in-laws are bullied by him and his wife.





sdkitty said:


> I finally broke down and watched the interview.  My impression - Hoda was so overly sweet to him - referring to him as cheeky?  What a compliment to a man of 40. * I laughed at his statement that he and his grandmother talk about things that she can't talk to anyone else about.*  What things?  His awful marriage?



I wonder if the comment about QE only sharing certain things with him is in preparation of the alleged book that is supposed to be published after she passes away. This is of concern imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the comment about QE only sharing certain things with him (see below) is in preparation of the alleged book that is supposed to be published after she passes away. This is of concern imo.


I'm sure he is her main confidant - since he's so wise and trustworthy


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure he is her main confidant - since he's so wise ant trustworthy


He might not be her confidant, but he may have certain 'recollections' when she is not here to say that they 'may vary'. All allegedly, of course!


----------



## Chanbal

Published today in the Spector World (_US Edition of the World's Oldest Magazine_):


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> a life of service to the states?  is he talking about the US?  who are they serving?  what a bunch of BS



In their minds, lemon olive oil cakes can cure all. As long as they get credit.


----------



## Chanbal

Very nice!


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> He might not be her confidant, but he may have certain 'recollections' when she is not here to say that they 'may vary'. All allegedly, of course!



Yep.  I can just imagine it . . . _Granny wanted Meghan to have all her jewelry, yes, she did, she told me so right before she passed, the dear lady.  Granny also wanted me to have Windsor Castle for my home though Meghan said it needs a complete renovation and redecorating so that it looks more modern and 21st century and like the Pottery Barn catalogues. Granny also wanted me to be King. She told me so herself many, many times.  She said I was much better suited for the role than either my father or my brother who she said can't hold a candle to me.  I was always her favorite, you know._

Though if the Queen is still the savvy lady we know her to be, I'd imagine one or two of her aides/staff were in the room with her and Harry/MM when they had their tea, sitting at a discreet distance, and that those people immediately documented in writing their complete recollection of everything said.  Maybe they even had a recording device on them to make sure there were no misunderstandings down the road about what was, or wasn't, said.


----------



## Chanbal

One more pearl:


----------



## csshopper

In the lead up to Invictus there were teasers about a Big Surprise at the launching of the Event. Did I miss something?  Nothing stands out as special.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What really concerns me: *what spouse* - especially one who controls every aspect of his life, even what direction he walks in - would allow this public spectacle and humiliation? That guy is probably unable to organize his clothes being drycleaned (for once not because he is an idiot, but because he's always had other people do it for him), she could easily instruct his team to please not arrange for TV interviews and the like. Is she a sadist on top of a narcissist or what exactly is wrong with her?
> 
> And "commited forever as a couple"? She just has nowhere else to go, but make a complete idiot out of yourself one more time and a huge divorce settlement might just be more interesting than staying around. She'll still have the royal pawns, sorry, great-grandchildren.
> 
> I can't decide if a complete melt-down might be his blessing in disguise or if it would make everything worse seeing his wife now can make medical decisions for him, and she has proven more than once she doesn't give a sh*t about his well-being.


A b!tch, who has used other men although probably not as wretchedly as H, her third husband. A b!tch, who wants to appear squeaky clean while her husband publicly humiliates himself and casts aspersion on his family probably as per her instructions. A b!tch, who prefers material possessions over marital love or a combination of both with emphasis on deep pockets. A b!tch, who has contemplated the kind of settlement she could get for her meal tickets children if H were committed for mental health reasons or should they divorce in which case she might get custody due to H's mental instability and therefore sees no reason to help rehabilitate him. A b!tch who should be wearing $$$ signs for eyeshadow as a warning to other stupid men. 
Yes, @QueenofWrapDress IMO, M is a coldhearted gold digger, who hopefully meets her match someday, perhaps someone who can wipe that smug grin off her face.


----------



## Chanbal

I checked whether Lady C released a new video, which she didn't, but the video below by Tumi came up on my search. She makes some valid points on the Harkles & Netfl*x that many here might appreciate. It looks like we may have one more royal commentator…


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> In the lead up to Invictus there were teasers about a Big Surprise at the launching of the Event. Did I miss something?  Nothing stands out as special.


The surprise visit to QE at the Nefl*x request imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Yep.  I can just imagine it . . . _Granny wanted Meghan to have all her jewelry, yes, she did, she told me so right before she passed, the dear lady.  Granny also wanted me to have Windsor Castle for my home though Meghan said it needs a complete renovation and redecorating so that it looks more modern and 21st century and like the Pottery Barn catalogues. Granny also wanted me to be King. She told me so herself many, many times.  She said I was much better suited for the role than either my father or my brother who she said can't hold a candle to me.  I was always her favorite, you know._



I want to laugh because it's funnily absurd, but at this point, I wouldn't even be that surprised.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> In the lead up to Invictus there were teasers about a Big Surprise at the launching of the Event. Did I miss something?  Nothing stands out as special.



The leaked visit? That's the only thing that really made waves (besides their general embarrassing behaviour). Probably the Hoda interview, though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I want to laugh because it's funnily absurd, but at this point, I wouldn't even be that surprised.



I know.  I wouldn't actually be that surprised either.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what he has become:



Send Princess Charlotte.  I wouldn't tussle with her for anything.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Yep.  I can just imagine it . . . _Granny wanted Meghan to have all her jewelry, yes, she did, she told me so right before she passed, the dear lady.  Granny also wanted me to have Windsor Castle for my home though Meghan said it needs a complete renovation and redecorating so that it looks more modern and 21st century and like the Pottery Barn catalogues. Granny also wanted me to be King. She told me so herself many, many times.  She said I was much better suited for the role than either my father or my brother who she said can't hold a candle to me.  I was always her favorite, you know._
> 
> Though if the Queen is still the savvy lady we know her to be, I'd imagine one or two of her aides/staff were in the room with her and Harry/MM when they had their tea, sitting at a discreet distance, and that those people immediately documented in writing their complete recollection of everything said.  Maybe they even had a recording device on them to make sure there were no misunderstandings down the road about what was, or wasn't, said.


Angela Kelly has been picking out all the best jewelry for Meghan lol!  I think they may have videotaped it and the aides could have watched on closed circuit cameras.  As for the reno of Windsor...I think it would end up looking more like dorm room furnished by Bed Bath & Beyond.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I finally broke down and watched the interview.  My impression - Hoda was so overly sweet to him - referring to him as cheeky?  What a compliment to a man of 40.  I laughed at his statement that he and his grandmother talk about things that she can't talk to anyone else about.  What things?  His awful marriage?



Total vanity piece for both of them, not what anyone would call an interview


----------



## V0N1B2

LOL at Harry wanting his kids to grow up in a fairer, more equal world. 
Archie is a white male, I’m pretty sure he’s going to be just fine


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Total vanity piece for both of them, not what anyone would call an interview


sickening that US media still thinks its some sort of get or honor to interview this AH

and I'm glad a couple of the members here complained to NBC


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The surprise visit to QE at the Nefl*x request imo.


I still think they were summoned, didn't want to go, but Netfix told him that he should because they could milk some PR out of it and it would not look good for him to refuse in light of his missing the memorial service.  NF doesn't want him to look like a bad guy.   A summons may be another reason why Meghan joined him for this trip as she wasn't supposed to go with him.  Harry's PR people then used this opportunity to take the planned interview with Hoda Kotb to another level.  It probably was originally supposed to be just about the Invictus games.  After a visit to TQ. they saw the opportunity to ramp it up even more. My question is was it always the plan after the royal visit for him to make the comments he did about her security or was that thrown in by him as an added bonus?  Was it planned to throw shade at all the family, courtiers and government who care for TQ?  It certainly turned out that way and it certainly backfired.  Harry managed to insult everyone.

In the end,  all that  Netflix, SS  and the Harkles  care about is people talking about the pair of them.    It is all about creating and maintaining interest.  It's the same old, same old., i.e., there is no such thing as bad publicity.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Total vanity piece for both of them, not what anyone would call an interview


Interview surely timed to advertise H and he Invictus games maybe) since it took place in Europe, and H and Hoda are both US based.
And a brief chat, not the hours-long as with Oprah, so intended as a puff piece to promote the H brand.


----------



## rose60610

If Netflix demanded that Harry see The Queen and he requested to see her, even though QEII is QEII, it'd be a PR problem for The Crown to deny the visit IMO. And wasn't it a short visit?  Nobody at the Palace rolled out the carpet to see Harry.  Wasn't the visit like "Well, you got your face time so you can say you visited, now you can leave"? After two years of being gone-- no meals were prepared, no gaggles of children relatives greeted them, no pictures were taken of "The Visit", is this correct?


----------



## gracekelly

Is Harry's team manipulating Palace row for Netflix?
					

The couple are yet to confirm if they will attend the Platinum Jubilee in June amid rumours that the Royal Family would ban the TV crew following them around at the Invictus Games in Holland.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Who at Netflix is as delusional as Harry?  They think they are going to force TQ to put Harry on the balcony?  Ha!  That will be the day! Like BP would allow drama to take place that could be filmed?   After what he just said on the interview, he isn't getting near any of the royals or the balcony.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> In their minds, lemon olive oil cakes can cure all. As long as they get credit.



Don’t forget having just the right wreath with each flower having oh so much significance!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on the articles published over the weekend, the visit with QE was all sweetness and sugar while the visit with Charles was 15 minutes of thunderous rage [then Cams walked in].  I see, one extreme to the other with both world leaders being diminished to shameless sound bites.  Nope, sell the nonsense elsewhere. He is a jerk to try to play that game.

ETA: I have read unconfirmed rumors somewhere that BP is waiting for IG to end. Then, there will be an announcement. So, the surprise may be on the horizon.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Based on the articles published over the weekend, the visit with QE was all sweetness and sugar while the visit with Charles was 15 minutes of thunderous rage [then Cams walked in].  I see, one extreme to the other with both world leaders being diminished to shameless sound bites.  Nope, sell the nonsense elsewhere. He is a jerk to try to play that game.
> 
> ETA: I have read unconfirmed rumors somewhere that BP is waiting for IG to end. Then, there will be an announcement. So, the surprise may be on the horizon.



One of thoughts floating about is that whatever they told him instigated his shade attack on everyone.  If there was any normality in his relationship with his grandmother, he would fly back over to England for her birthday dinner and redeye it back to The Hague.  Not so difficult.


----------



## csshopper

Does anyone know his US resident status?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Don’t forget having just the right wreath with each flower having oh so much significance!



Absolutely! How could I forget! I realized how meaningless my life was after I learned about the cascades of symbolism inherent to each flower placed just so on a perfect merched wreath. In addition, when one goes to a cemetery to pay respects, it's important to have a camera crew along to document the whole thing. Service is universal, you know, and 96 year old Granny needed to be set straight on that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Total vanity piece for both of them, not what anyone would call an interview


Hoda's not good with the hard core interviews. She's too nice to ask tough questions and has probably drunk the Koolaid about what a great couple H&M are. I've never heard anything less than positive comments from any of the royal watchers on Today. This morning though they did address the tabloid firestorm over the interview.


----------



## bellecate

These whispered ties to Russian’s with them do crop up.


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C on Hazz-Hoda's interview, right on the money??? 
She provides a lot of information, and here is my understanding: Hazz's apparent paranoia (or even stupidity) is possibly a clever way to merch the Harkles' message in the US. The important thing is that we in the US believe in whatever the Netfl*xes say, including Hazz protecting the queen. The meeting was not initiated by QE. Also, PC and Will did not initiate the meeting. In other words, Hazz requested the meeting with the queen.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> One of thoughts floating about is that whatever they told him instigated his shade attack on everyone.  If there was any normality in his relationship with his grandmother, *he would fly back over to England for her birthday dinner and redeye it back to The Hague*.  Not so difficult.


The post below may explain why… Cash is the word!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Hoda's not good with the hard core interviews. She's too nice to ask tough questions and has probably drunk the Koolaid about what a great couple H&M are. I've never heard anything less than positive comments from any of the royal watchers on Today. This morning though they did address the tabloid firestorm over the interview.


Yes, Hoda is far from a hard news person....this was intended to be friendly and it was.  has she drunk the Koolaid? well most of the US media seems to have done so and she is a WOC
what did they say - just reported there was backlash on Twitter?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder if he enjoys causing embarrassing situations for everyone else or if he is simply unable to comprehend how his actions influence others.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if he enjoys causing embarrassing situations for everyone else or if he is simply unable to comprehend how is actions influence others.



he doesn't care.....only he and the WIFE matter (and maybe the kids)


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if he enjoys causing embarrassing situations for everyone else or if he is simply unable to comprehend how is actions influence others.



Disgusting!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> he doesn't care.....only he and the WIFE matter (and maybe the kids)



I have no doubt he loves the kids, but I am also positive should he ever have to choose between the narc and them he'll choose the narc.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no doubt he loves the kids, but I am also positive should he ever have to choose between the narc and them he'll choose the narc.


well, he seems to be dependent on her doesn't he?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Does H realize his kids would actually have to lose money, opportunities, and privileges to make the world more equitable?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Does H realize his kids would actually have to lose money, opportunities, and privileges to make the world more equitable?



Right? He is so ridiculous.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no doubt he loves the kids, but I am also positive should he ever have to choose between the narc and them he'll choose the narc.


wouldn't it be something if some live-in employee broke their confidentiality agreement and told us all how they really relate to each other?  I picture her talking to H like he is a child and him not even realizing it, just going along with everything she says


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be something if some live-in employee broke their confidentiality agreement and told us all how they really relate to each other?  I picture her talking to H like he is a child and him not even realizing it, just going along with everything she says



I would totally watch that interview/buy that book. 

If I should guess I'd say she's treating him in a constant narcisstic cycle: love bombing, devaluing, love bombing, devaluing, so he never feels safe and he'll always try to please her.

Remember him telling the story of how Raptor nearly broke up with him? Don't believe for a second the predator ever wanted to let go of the golden goose, it was just another way to manipulate him.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would totally watch that interview/buy that book.
> 
> If I should guess I'd say she's treating him in a constant narcisstic cycle: love bombing, devaluing, love bombing, devaluing, so he never feels safe and he'll always try to please her.
> 
> Remember him telling the story of how Raptor nearly broke up with him? Don't believe for a second the predator ever wanted to let go of the golden goose, it was just another way to manipulate him.


we may never know what goes on in that relationship.....love bombing?  maybe she withholds sex and then gives it when she decides it will be effective?
her breaking up with him?  there was a story about him trying to break up with her when he went to a wedding?  but she showed up?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

H's memoir won't really sell (IMO) everyone knows he didn't/couldn't write a word. The Netflix series will do well. People are curious, just like they wanted to tune in to see if they were "Silent or silenccedddd"


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> H's memoir won't really sell (IMO) everyone knows he didn't/couldn't write a word. The Netflix series will do well. People are curious, just like they wanted to tune in to see if they were "Silent or silenccedddd"


I doubt people are that curious the the invictis games....what else are the gonna cover on netflix?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Yes, Hoda is far from a hard news person....this was intended to be friendly and it was.  has she drunk the Koolaid? well most of the US media seems to have done so and she is a WOC
> what did they say - just reported there was backlash on Twitter?


I thought she was acting like a fangirl and gushing over *a prince*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> her breaking up with him?  there was a story about him trying to break up with her when he went to a wedding?  but she showed up?



The story I was referring to was told during the Oprah for Apple TV mess when he credited Holy Meghan for getting therapy when his story for years had been William advised him to do so, but interestingly, while I was googling to find it, I found more claims how early on in their relationship she apparently had told him several times she wanted to leave him (admittedly, these came from sources and not Harry himself), so this just cements my opinion she used is as a tool. I guess Step 2 on the scala was "I am suicidal, do something about it."


----------



## Happyish

youngster said:


> This was decided 2 years ago.  It's over.  They aren't allowed to profit obscenely off their titles while carrying out the occasional royal duty when it suits them.
> 
> So, how do their expensive publicists and lawyers, operating in the U.S., possibly think they can force the Queen, the UK government, the family and (perhaps most importantly) the British public, to accept a half-in/half-out type arrangement at this point, more than 2 years after they left?  Occasional interviews on morning TV talk shows discussing how indispensable they are to the Queen?  Suing the Queen's own government from the comfy confines of Montecito to pay for their security when they condescend to show up in the UK?  Apparently, their expensive publicists and lawyers have failed to note that no one in the UK is demanding their return, other than Scoobie perhaps.  They aren't missed from what I can tell.


I imagine Harry and Megan are missed to the extent the royal duties they otherwise would have assumed have been distributed amongst other members of the RF, with possibly the greatest burden being assumed by William and Catherine. They seem to be spread very thin.


----------



## DoggieBags

JCMH keeps referring to the trauma he suffered due to his mother’s untimely death as if no one, not even his own brother, can understand or relate to what he has gone through. But Prince Charles and older members of the BRF also suffered great trauma when Lord Mountbatten was assassinated in the 1979. Prince Charles was very close to Lord Mountbatten and by some accounts considered him like his second father. Of course Charles was a grown man (30 years old) and not a 12 year old boy at the time but the bombing of the boat was horrific and there had to have been great concern that other members of the BRF, including Charles, his parents, and siblings, could be targets as well. Lord Mountbatten’s 14 year old twin grandsons, several other family members, and a friend were also on that boat; one grandson died while the other lived. I read an interview the surviving grandson gave in 2010 where he described hearing the sound of the explosion several times a day, every day for many years after the event. He mentioned how sympathetic and caring both queen elizabeth and Prince Charles were to him and his siblings. He described how he came to terms with what happened to him. He went on to have a career, marry and have several children. So unlike JCMH, the useless parasite who’s worried about burnout while sitting home pontificating in his 16 bathroom mansion. But of course in the world according to Harry, he’s the eternal victim. No one else. Just him.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> Absolutely! How could I forget! I realized how meaningless my life was after I learned about the cascades of symbolism inherent to each flower placed just so on a perfect merched wreath.* In addition, when one goes to a cemetery to pay respects, it's important to have a camera crew along to document the whole thing.* Service is universal, you know, and 96 year old Granny needed to be set straight on that.


And we must not forget that for this cemetery visit to be truly meaningful, they must absolutely trample on walk around the veterans' graves while wearing their medals and portraying hypocritical sincere expressions of deep sorrow since they know absolutely no one in that cemetery.


----------



## marietouchet

TC1 said:


> H's memoir won't really sell (IMO) everyone knows he didn't/couldn't write a word. The Netflix series will do well. People are curious, just like they wanted to tune in to see if they were "Silent or silenccedddd"


Netflix series will do well …. If  Netflix stock does not tank in the meantime


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I doubt people are that curious the the invictis games....what else are the gonna cover on netflix?


There is the Pearl show veiled account of the life of Meghan 
I don’t remember the press release - live actors ??? Or was this going to be some cartoon show, somehow I am thinking the latter


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> There is the Pearl show veiled account of the life of Meghan
> I don’t remember the press release - live actors ??? Or was this going to be some cartoon show, somehow I am thinking the latter


Cartoon. Mary Sue storyline with Pearl meeting influential women through the ages. Online rumours say Methane instructed artists to base Pearl on photos of her as a child, and use copycat Disney as the drawing style.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## marietouchet

Just in … Spotify declined to renew Michelle and Barack deal, and they produced 18 podcasts


----------



## Chanbal

This is one of the long videos from the BLG. It's about TW's alleged plans to manipulate Will. In the Spoiler is a summary of what I understood from the video. All allegedly, of course! I hope it helps, enjoy! 



Spoiler: My understanding of the BLG's video



According to the BLG, allegedly: 
Hazz's request to use a mediator to mend his relationship with Will is part of TW's manipulation plans. The Harkles need to stay relevant, because they need to create content for Netfl*x. It was not a coincidence that Hazz talked about protecting QE, just shortly before her b-day. The use of emotions … He could have given the interview in the US.
TW is the one that needs to mend that relationship to have a better position to negotiate. The Harkles' plans include to be portrayed as the image of forgiveness. They are the magnanimous ones.

The Cambridges are the main obstacles to TW's plans. Will will be manipulated using QE and perhaps Charles. How? QE and Charles are older, more forgiving, and think that family conflicts like this are short-lived. The problem is that TW is playing the long game, which is the long game of power. They use the children as leverage. Will may concede, so QE and PC will be able to see their great-grandkids and grandkids, respectively. The Harkles use borderline blackmail tactics. 

Are they coming to the Jubilee? The answer is no. They can't risk being booed at, but they will control every inch of the media until then. For example, Hazz was asked 'what are you doing here?' during the veteran's event in the US, and they can't risk this type of situations.

Their plan is to bring the kids to meet QE in private, but synchronizing this with a Netfl*x event as Hazz did with his recent interview shortly before QE's birthday. Use of emotions to connect the family to their business events.

Memoir-PC is not that afraid of Hazz's memoir. He thinks he was a good father, and he knows that Hazz needs to make money. However, the memoir will not be finished until they get what they want from the BRF.


----------



## Happyish

DoggieBags said:


> JCMH keeps referring to the trauma he suffered due to his mother’s untimely death as if no one, not even his own brother, can understand or relate to what he has gone through. But Prince Charles and older members of the BRF also suffered great trauma when Lord Mountbatten was assassinated in the 1979. Prince Charles was very close to Lord Mountbatten and by some accounts considered him like his second father. Of course Charles was a grown man (30 years old) and not a 12 year old boy at the time but the bombing of the boat was horrific and there had to have been great concern that other members of the BRF, including Charles, his parents, and siblings, could be targets as well. Lord Mountbatten’s 14 year old twin grandsons, several other family members, and a friend were also on that boat; one grandson died while the other lived. I read an interview the surviving grandson gave in 2010 where he described hearing the sound of the explosion several times a day, every day for many years after the event. He mentioned how sympathetic and caring both queen elizabeth and Prince Charles were to him and his siblings. He described how he came to terms with what happened to him. He went on to have a career, marry and have several children. So unlike JCMH, the useless parasite who’s worried about burnout while sitting home pontificating in his 16 bathroom mansion. But of course in the world according to Harry, he’s the eternal victim. No one else. Just him.


There's an amazing (e.g., eye-opening) book about Diana that really puts things into perspective and shows the extent to which Harry's behaviors have been so greatly influenced by her. The book is Diana in Search of Herself, by Sally Bedell Smith. Even taking it with a grain of salt, I assume it's largely true.

Diana would use the boys' as her sounding board. She would drive to their boarding schools, confide in them and ask for advice. Both were cast in a parentified role.

Diana would also play off the reporters--giving one "inside information," and then use the "leaked" information as a basis to complain to another she had no privacy, and that she was being harassed by the press. She cast herself as the ultimate victim. One can imagine that Harry, who was younger and more vulnerable than William, felt flattered at being his mothers' confidant, responsible to make things better, but inadequate to fix things. It's a terrible position to place a child. William may have his own issues as a result which simply aren't on display the way Harry's are, or it didn't impact him the way it did Harry.

Now imagine a susceptible little boy being exposed to all this, only to have everything he was privy to set-in-stone upon his mother's death. There was no rewriting history, which one does when we grow up and realize our parents are people, who are less than perfect.

Instead, Harry accepted Diana's version of herself as gospel, he's never outgrown it, and worse yet, he's resentful of all the people, institutions and professions (such as the press and security personnel) who he believes wronged his mother, even if it's not accurate and was a function of her own making.  It's against this backdrop that one can see where his behaviors come from.

I have the deepest sympathy for Harry, but he lacks insight--and a good therapist. If he could get some much needed distance from himself, he might obtain a more balanced perspective. Unfortunately, Harry, cast in the role the victim, perpetually wronged, seems to suit Meagan's objectives--at least for the time being.

Others may disagree, but that's my take on things.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Yes, Hoda is far from a hard news person....this was intended to be friendly and it was.  has she drunk the Koolaid? well most of the US media seems to have done so and she is a WOC
> what did they say - just reported there was backlash on Twitter?





> https://www.today.com/video/royal-f...rry-s-comments-says-royal-expert-138212421627





> https://www.today.com/video/queen-e...885837?playlist=mmlsnnd_todayarchivesthursday


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is cool!


----------



## Chanbal

Yea! Broken dishes in Montecito…


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Netflix series will do well …. If  Netflix stock does not tank in the meantime



My guess [and I’m no Wall Street guru] is Nflix will indeed tank. People are fed up with high prices and pitiful offerings. Apparently even the former president and his wife are unhappy with Spotify and won’t be renewing their contract.  Pre-pandemic these companies had an easy ride and could toss out anything. Post pandemic, our standards are much higher.  We won’t get fooled again  imo


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Lady C on Hazz-Hoda's interview, right on the money???
> She provides a lot of information, and here is my understanding: Hazz's apparent paranoia (or even stupidity) is possibly a clever way to merch the Harkles' message in the US. The important thing is that we in the US believe in whatever the Netfl*xes say, including Hazz protecting the queen. The meeting was not initiated by QE. Also, PC and Will did not initiate the meeting. In other words, Hazz requested the meeting with the queen.



Thanks Lady C for providing us with a few more nicknames for H.
1. BBC Blustering Broadcasting Corporation
2. BSS Bull 'Something Else' Specialist
3. Self Exaggerator
4. Dumbo Harry
She also stated that they were leading a 'Life of Misconduct and Financial Service' as opposed to the 'Life of Universal Service' that they keep trying to promote.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> LOL at Harry wanting his kids to grow up in a fairer, more equal world.
> *Archie is a white male, I’m pretty sure he’s going to be just fine *


NO HE'S NOT!!!  He's black!  Even if he's 75% white and looks 125% white, he's black and he'll be black whenever it suits his parents and possibly himself in the future.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Just want to say, so very sorry for thinking YOU were the crazy one Samantha!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Yea! Broken dishes in Montecito…



Big shade!  In the picture, Andy is wearing the black dress uniform that Harry wore at his wedding. Harry will be livid at this lololol!


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> NO HE'S NOT!!!  He's black!  Even if he's 75% white and looks 125% white, he's black and he'll be black whenever it suits his parents and possibly himself in the future.


The children (the versions in the Christmas card photo) do indeed look whiter than white. Hazard will be so incensed with us for discussing the colour of his (alleged) children's skin


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh, has this been posted?


----------



## papertiger

Did we have this already?


----------



## needlv

lanasyogamama said:


> Does H realize his kids would actually have to lose money, opportunities, and privileges to make the world more equitable?



I am sure he meant that he wants his kids to be equal to the Cambridge kids… that’s what he meant by “fair”…


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, has this been posted?




They're not going to have any crookery, glass or breakables in the MacMansion when they see this


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That one comment...I don't know, I always try to appear smarter than I am, not show the whole extent of my stupidity, but that might just be me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

H saw King Willem Alexander at Invictus, I saw no pix of Maxima , who normally goes to Olympic level sports events with the king, but of course Meg had long fled The Hague, so the boys did not have their plus ones 

wow quick trip to Europe for M, hardly worth the jet lag , am very surprised that she did not stay til the end … why ? Isn’t she needed for Netflix movies of games ? She did not tour the Hague with Maxima ??

Neil Sean on YouTube posts that the pair were allegedly (his fav word talking about MandH) were summoned to Windsor about amending the council of state , makes total sense HMTQ is not well, 

NS posits that H and Andrew will be removed in favor of Anne and Edward, Charles and William , makes total sense, esp in light of Boris chewing out H about HMTQ protection

so, M had to make the Euro trip, stayed a few days for appearances then left after bad news ??


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That one comment...I don't know, I always try to appear smarter than I am, not show the whole extent of my stupidity, but that might just be me.



DuchessofCle doesn't like the Cambridges and supports the Sucksexes. Not exactly a stan. She seems to take occasional potshots at the Cambridges because she thinks people are treating Hazard and Methane unfairly. She buys into their oppressed victim image.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW was unable to read her masterpiece, but they were still able to impose a bench…  I wonder if they have plans to trademark this thing as well. They could have used an archebench instead.


----------



## Chanbal

EDIT to provide my 2 cents: SM spoke well and she was very polite. However, the video is getting many negative comments, which I believe are the TW's stans working hard as usual.


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the BLG is getting ready for another video.


----------



## sdkitty

whoever wrote this Cosmo piece is pro-Harry.  I'm team RF








						Palace Staff Are Out Here Complaining About Prince Harry's "Breathtaking Arrogance" and "Delusion"
					

Royal staff are once again out here spiraling over Prince Harry, this time accusing him of breathtaking arrogance and delusion.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW was unable to read her masterpiece, but they were still able to impose a bench…  I wonder if they have plans to trademark this thing as well. They could have used an archebench instead.




Coz you know, no one ever though people would connect on a natural wooden bench  .

People have always connected on benches without the Harkle's help. 

I'm absolutely PO by the painting of what would look appropriate in a natural environment. 

Why does everything have to look as though it belongs in a children's playground? I wish these sanctimonious marketing do-gooders would let people live the way they want to and stop telling what they can/can't do. It's just so they can say they thought of this. 

Next they will trademark the 'yellow-bench concept and of course the word 'bench'


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> EDIT to provide my 2 cents: SM spoke well and she was very polite. However, the video is getting many negative comments, which I believe are the TW's stans working hard as usual.






Footnote and FYI Nick:

70 years of a single ruling monarch has been achieved before. Louis XIV ruled more than 72 years 110 days - and that's only Europe. If you mean British, say British.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> This is cool!




I LOVE THIS! Thanks for posting! Whoever at United Airlines thought of that is great!


----------



## duna

n/m


----------



## Kaka_bobo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That one comment...I don't know, I always try to appear smarter than I am, not show the whole extent of my stupidity, but that might just be me.




LOL some people just wants to yell to the world that they're stupid...

And in a few years, Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis will be wondering Archie and Lili WHO???


----------



## charlottawill

Kaka_bobo said:


> LOL some people just wants to yell to the world that they're stupid...
> 
> And in a few years, Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis will be wondering Archie and Lili WHO???


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> NO HE'S NOT!!!  He's black!  Even if he's 75% white and looks 125% white, he's black and he'll be black whenever it suits his parents and possibly himself in the future.


Yep, just like his mother, they will milk it when beneficial


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> NO HE'S NOT!!!  He's black!  Even if he's 75% white and looks 125% white, he's black and he'll be black whenever it suits his parents and possibly himself in the future.


that would be a stretch...more likely it will be his mother is black (or a WOC)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the BLG is getting ready for another video.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Yep, just like his mother, they will milk it when beneficial



Who knows. I feel we need to give these kids a chance even if the odds are against them with this disfunctional set of parents.


----------



## rose60610

If you accuse the BRF of being racist, then why name your child after one of them? All that racist colonialism and everything. That Meghan voluntarily married into. Oh wait, it's all about merching your own children along with dead Diana. They ain't called "meal tickets" for nuthin'. And if Archie or Lilibet get turned down in the future for anything, are they going to blame it on racism?


----------



## LittleStar88

Why is there another Harry & Meghan thread??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Why is there another Harry & Meghan thread??



Is it the one we told the angry visitors to create? (where they can gush in peace)


----------



## V0N1B2

Oh. Great. No thanks.


			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/invictus-games-vancouver-whistler-2025-1.6427369


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it the one we told the angry visitors to create? (where they can gush in peace)



Looks like it, I'm just surprised they only created it today


----------



## Toby93

rose60610 said:


> If you accuse the BRF of being racist, then why name your child after one of them? All that racist colonialism and everything. That Meghan voluntarily married into. Oh wait, it's all about merching your own children along with dead Diana. They ain't called "meal tickets" for nuthin'. And if Archie or Lilibet get turned down in the future for anything, are they going to blame it on racism?


When you think of the Queens own children, her sisters children, her childrens kids and grandkids, I don't know exactly how many there are in total.  But not one had the audacity to use the Queens own *private* nickname, the link between her and her father.  Everytime I see that name now, it turns my stomach and the fact the TW had the nerve to apply to copyright it, she has no boundries whatsoever.  Meal tickets indeed.....


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who knows. I feel we need to give these kids a chance even if the odds are against them with this disfunctional set of parents.


The odds are really against them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> When you think of the Queens own children, her sisters children, her childrens kids and grandkids, I don't know exactly how many there are in total.  But not one had the audacity to use the Queens own *private* nickname, the link between her and her father.  Everytime I see that name now, it turns my stomach and the fact the TW had the nerve to apply to copyright it, she has no boundries whatsoever.  Meal tickets indeed.....



When the name was released, a female journalist (I'm so bad with names!) wrote a very convincing piece explaining in detail why this was everything but a "sweet nod" but instead a gross powerflex meant to wound and to humiliate. One more trick from their repertoire of emotional abuse.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I thought she was acting like a fangirl and gushing over *a prince*


Agree - she was almost giddy.

I thought I liked Hoda, maybe I still do, but she belongs on a morning show giggling and being cute.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> This is one of the long videos from the BLG. It's about TW's alleged plans to manipulate Will. In the Spoiler is a summary of what I understood from the video. All allegedly, of course! I hope it helps, enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: My understanding of the BLG's video
> 
> 
> 
> According to the BLG, allegedly:
> Hazz's request to use a mediator to mend his relationship with Will is part of TW's manipulation plans. The Harkles need to stay relevant, because they need to create content for Netfl*x. It was not a coincidence that Hazz talked about protecting QE, just shortly before her b-day. The use of emotions … He could have given the interview in the US.
> TW is the one that needs to mend that relationship to have a better position to negotiate. The Harkles' plans include to be portrayed as the image of forgiveness. They are the magnanimous ones.
> 
> The Cambridges are the main obstacles to TW's plans. Will will be manipulated using QE and perhaps Charles. How? QE and Charles are older, more forgiving, and think that family conflicts like this are short-lived. The problem is that TW is playing the long game, which is the long game of power. They use the children as leverage. Will may concede, so QE and PC will be able to see their great-grandkids and grandkids, respectively. The Harkles use borderline blackmail tactics.
> 
> Are they coming to the Jubilee? The answer is no. They can't risk being booed at, but they will control every inch of the media until then. For example, Hazz was asked 'what are you doing here?' during the veteran's event in the US, and they can't risk this type of situations.
> 
> Their plan is to bring the kids to meet QE in private, but synchronizing this with a Netfl*x event as Hazz did with his recent interview shortly before QE's birthday. Use of emotions to connect the family to their business events.
> 
> Memoir-PC is not that afraid of Hazz's memoir. He thinks he was a good father, and he knows that Hazz needs to make money. However, the memoir will not be finished until they get what they want from the BRF.



Thank you - the 'lives' are never my favourite.  Too wordy, too rambling, too much responding to comments.  I do love his concise videos though.

Thanks for the summary!


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> Is Harry's team manipulating Palace row for Netflix?
> 
> 
> The couple are yet to confirm if they will attend the Platinum Jubilee in June amid rumours that the Royal Family would ban the TV crew following them around at the Invictus Games in Holland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who at Netflix is as delusional as Harry?  They think they are going to force TQ to put Harry on the balcony?  Ha!  That will be the day! Like BP would allow drama to take place that could be filmed?   *After what he just said on the interview, he isn't getting near any of the royals or the balcony.*


Could this be the security issue that he’s worried about, that keeps him & his family away?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> When you think of the Queens own children, her sisters children, her childrens kids and grandkids, I don't know exactly how many there are in total.  But not one had the audacity to use the Queens own *private* nickname, the link between her and her father.  Everytime I see that name now, it turns my stomach and the fact the TW had the nerve to apply to copyright it, she has no boundries whatsoever.  Meal tickets indeed.....


How about we call her Child #2 or something else besides that special nickname. In effect we could use Child#1 and Child#2.  Or, Sprout#1 Sprout#2??


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> When you think of the Queens own children, her sisters children, her childrens kids and grandkids, I don't know exactly how many there are in total.  But not one had the audacity to use the Queens own *private* nickname, the link between her and her father.  Everytime I see that name now, it turns my stomach and the fact the TW had the nerve to apply to copyright it, she has no boundries whatsoever.  Meal tickets indeed.....



It was certainly very poor taste.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

I think there is more than enough room for an appreciation thread if posters want one.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Disgusting!



Compliment (open) sandwich time.
M’s hair looks much better up.
Her lip fillers look bad by porn star standards.


purseinsanity said:


> NO HE'S NOT!!!  He's black!  Even if he's 75% white and looks 125% white, he's black and he'll be black whenever it suits his parents and possibly himself in the future.


I think both kids skin tone is _invisible or possibly casting dependent   _


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Coz you know, no one ever though people would connect on a natural wooden bench  .
> 
> People have always connected on benches without the Harkle's help.
> 
> I'm absolutely PO by the painting of what would look appropriate in a natural environment.
> 
> Why does everything have to look as though it belongs in a children's playground? I wish these sanctimonious marketing do-gooders would let people live the way they want to and stop telling what they can/can't do. It's just so they can say they thought of this.
> 
> Next they will trademark the 'yellow-bench concept and of course the word 'bench'


Maybe they thought painting it half the color of the Ukrainian flag was brilliant??


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they thought painting it half the color of the Ukrainian flag was brilliant??


That way they couldn't get the colors upside down


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> That way they couldn't get the colors upside down



  !


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think there is more than enough room for an appreciation thread if posters want one.



Sure, in fact I'm completely fine with not being yelled at periodically because we can't give them what they want.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> That way they couldn't get the colors upside down



It is so easy to remember, too (this coming from someone who sometimes has to think for a second which colour comes first in our own flag) - blue for the sky and yellow for either wheat or sunflowers.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it the one we told the angry visitors to create? (where they can gush in peace)



nm


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW was unable to read her masterpiece, but they were still able to impose a bench…  I wonder if they have plans to trademark this thing as well. They could have used an archebench instead.



A porta potty with her name on it,  “Meghan’s Pee Pot“ would be an appropriate accessory.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> It was certainly very poor taste.


She wouldn't know good taste if it came up and slapped her in the face.


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> How about we call her Child #2 or something else besides that special nickname. In effect we could use Child#1 and Child#2.  Or, Sprout#1 Sprout#2??


Phantom #1 and Phantom #2?
Doll #1 and Doll #2?


----------



## 1LV

Toby93 said:


> When you think of the Queens own children, her sisters children, her childrens kids and grandkids, I don't know exactly how many there are in total.  But not one had the audacity to use the Queens own *private* nickname, the link between her and her father.  Everytime I see that name now, it turns my stomach and the fact the TW had the nerve to apply to copyright it, she has no boundries whatsoever.  Meal tickets indeed.....


.


----------



## 1LV

Aimee3 said:


> Phantom #1 and Phantom #2?
> Doll #1 and Doll #2?


Rent and Utilities?


----------



## csshopper

The DM has pointed out Hasbeen’s hat worn on his pub night out bears the Archwell logo and it and other merchandise is now for sale.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Agree - she was almost giddy.
> 
> I thought I liked Hoda, maybe I still do, but she belongs on a morning show giggling and being cute.


That's on the fourth hour of Today that she does with Jenna Bush Hager.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

The Daily Mail had an article on TW’s hairdresser and he explains how he did her hair for Invictus and how you too can get the look.   I didn’t read the article and skipped right to the comments which were of course the highlight of the piece.  If you want to laugh, I do recommend reading the comments.  Especially one that said something like “you open a box, take the wig out, give it a shake and plop it on her head!”


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Thank you - the 'lives' are never my favourite.  Too wordy, too rambling, too much responding to comments.  I do love his concise videos though.
> 
> Thanks for the summary!


You are welcome, happy to know that it was helpful. The 'lives' are too long, and I usually don't watch them.


----------



## Lodpah

MM must be foaming at the mouth. Queen Elizabeth’s doll sold out worldwide and going up in prices. So much for tearing the REAL QUEEN down.


----------



## Chanbal

This shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anyone… Just follow the money…
*Just when you thought Harry had done the right thing – in stepped Meghan*

_She immediately undid any goodwill their flying visit to Britain may have earned with a cheap jibe about their “service” during the Invictus Games.

It was an obvious shot at the expense of the Royal Family’s post-Megxit comment about dedication and duty.

*For all the talk of olive branches, it is clear Meghan, at least, cannot let it go. Conflict, of course, is grist to the Sussexes’ PR mill. Netflix is not paying over £100million for scenes of happy families.

The more Meghan and Harry prick palace egos — even as they appear to be seeking to build bridges — the greater the drama for its documentary.*_

_*Harry, too, has a juicy autobiography to sell.*_









						Just when you thought Harry had done the right thing - in stepped Meghan
					

Service game JUST when you thought Harry had done the right thing by flying in to see the Queen and his father, in stepped Meghan. She immediately undid any goodwill their flying visit to Britain m…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


>




This was priceless @charlottawill.  Thank you!


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## charlottawill

Chloe302225 said:


>



So cute! I think he looks like her father.


----------



## Chanbal

Are we going to be spared from Arch*types? 






__





						Blind Item #6
					

The alliterate one and her husband were blindsided by an announcement that their role models were leaving a podcast host. Now, they want out...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## charlottawill

The only thing I need to know is that the Harkles aren't invited. I'm sure the Duchess of Delusion believes this is the kind of thing she'll be invited to if they move to NY, but that's not how it works. It would kill her to be right there and still be snubbed. 


> https://www.vogue.com/article/every...0_COCKTAIL_HOUR_ZZ&utm_term=VYF_Cocktail_Hour


----------



## Chanbal

This is so cute…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Are we going to be spared from Arch*types?
> View attachment 5386432
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband were blindsided by an announcement that their role models were leaving a podcast host. Now, they want out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Spotify really got themselves in between a rock and a hard place with these grifters.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Are we going to be spared from Arch*types?
> View attachment 5386432
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband were blindsided by an announcement that their role models were leaving a podcast host. Now, they want out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


LOLOLOLOLOL "They want out"???  
You can't make this $hit up.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Are we going to be spared from Arch*types?
> View attachment 5386432
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband were blindsided by an announcement that their role models were leaving a podcast host. Now, they want out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



But, but, but  . .  what happened to producing a podcast to rival Joe Rogan's with a listening audience of millions?


----------



## lulu212121

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is it the one we told the angry visitors to create? (where they can gush in peace)





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Looks like it, I'm just surprised they only created it today


I was wondering what that thread was about. Appreciation? Will be interesting to see how long it stays active.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like they may not be able to use footage of the king on their Netfl*x show, this is interesting!


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I think there is more than enough room for an appreciation thread if posters want one.


LOL does that mean this one is the non appreciation thread?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Spotify really got themselves in between a rock and a hard place with these grifters.





purseinsanlity said:


> LOLOLOLOLOL "They want out"???
> You can't make this $hit up.



To me, it's Spotify trying to get rid of Arch*types. Spotify is apparently not renewing with the Ob****s, because they "_have only published 18 interviews on the streaming platform over two years_." The Ob***s are famous and liked by many. Also, 18 is a big number compared to a single podcast produced by the Harkles. 









						Spotify will not renew podcast deal with the Obamas
					

Photo: Alamy Spotify executives have decided against renewing multi-year contracts with Barack and Michelle *****. The streaming platform was home to “The Michelle ***** Podcast” and “Renegades: Born in the USA” podcast with ***** and Bruce Springsteen. However, the lack of appearances on their...




					www.rsbnetwork.com


----------



## charlottawill

lulu212121 said:


> I was wondering what that thread was about. Appreciation? Will be interesting to see how long it stays active.


I doubt it will get to 5900+ pages.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I doubt it will get to 5900+ pages.


We're almost at 6000!!!!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> LOL does that mean this one is the non appreciation thread?


Maybe we should rename it The Harkle Haters to avoid confusion


----------



## Chanbal

lulu212121 said:


> I was wondering what that thread was about. Appreciation? Will be interesting to see how long it stays active.





purseinsanity said:


> LOL does that mean this one is the non appreciation thread?


Am I missing something? Is there another thread on the Netfl*xes?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Am I missing something? Is there another thread on the Netfl*xes?




Yep, brand new today.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Maybe we should rename it The Harkle Haters to avoid confusion


We don't love them, but not 'Haters.' I'm not very inspired today, but here are a few suggestions:
The Harkles of Montecito
The Greedy Netfl*xes
The Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy.

I'm sure the very talented TPF members here will come up with much better options.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Are we going to be spared from Arch*types?
> View attachment 5386432
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband were blindsided by an announcement that their role models were leaving a podcast host. Now, they want out...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


The comments are hilarious!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> We don't love them, but not 'Haters.' I'm not very inspired today, but here are a few suggestions:
> The Harkles of Montecito
> The Greedy Netfl*xes
> The Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy.
> 
> I'm sure the very talented TPF members here will come up with much better options.


Calling @Maggie Muggins!  Pick a nickname we came up with!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> We don't love them, but not 'Haters.' I'm not very inspired today, but here are a few suggestions:
> The Harkles of Montecito
> The Greedy Netfl*xes
> The Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy.
> 
> I'm sure the very talented TPF members here will come up with much better options.


The Real Royals of Montecito/NY/Parts Unknown


----------



## xincinsin

lulu212121 said:


> I was wondering what that thread was about. Appreciation? Will be interesting to see how long it stays active.


Awful thought, but would it attract the stans? Would we be restricted from going in for a chortle?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> To me, it's Spotify trying to get rid of Arch*types. Spotify is apparently not renewing with the Ob****s, because they "_have only published 18 interviews on the streaming platform over two years_." The Ob***s are famous and liked by many. Also, 18 is a big number compared to a single podcast produced by the Harkles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify will not renew podcast deal with the Obamas
> 
> 
> Photo: Alamy Spotify executives have decided against renewing multi-year contracts with Barack and Michelle *****. The streaming platform was home to “The Michelle ***** Podcast” and “Renegades: Born in the USA” podcast with ***** and Bruce Springsteen. However, the lack of appearances on their...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rsbnetwork.com


I read somewhere that despite the enormous popularity of the Obamas, the podcast Barak did with Springsteen (also popular) had very few listeners.  So if they can’t pull people in, the Harkles don’t stand a chance.

Clearly, actual entertainers and news people are what people want to listen to.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> To me, it's Spotify trying to get rid of Arch*types. Spotify is apparently not renewing with the Ob****s, because they "_have only published 18 interviews on the streaming platform over two years_." The Ob***s are famous and liked by many. Also, 18 is a big number compared to a single podcast produced by the Harkles.



Joe Rogan is the #1 podcast on Spotify and he apparently produces *3 - 4 episodes per week *and each episode is 2 - 3 hours long. I've never listened to his show but I know he is a comedian, actor and TV host/commentator. He's built that huge audience because he is a performer, he knows how to connect with an audience, he works at it full time, and he provides a massive amount of content that is regular and reliable.  The former first couple producing 18 episodes over 2 years is a laugh in comparison.  Same would go for Harry and TW.  Even a once a week podcast, isn't going to build that kind of loyalty and audience.  They all love the idea of having their own podcast but none of them are willing to devote themselves to it full time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

I looked at the other thread, saw all the pictures and thought “ if Baldie and Botox showed even half as much love and enthusiasm for their families as they do for the people they use to line their pockets there might be some hope of redemption”. Decided they are incapable and nothing for me to appreciate so clicked off and came back “home” to the reality thread. 

It‘s another positive IMO of the quality Vlad and Megs have established and maintained with tpf so there is place for multiple views. This feels like one of the safest places on the Net, enlightening, entertaining, educational at times and fun.  Started my education in H, for example, here years ago,  But, dang,  never found any scholarships and had to fund my own way.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I read somewhere that despite the enormous popularity of the Obamas, the podcast Barak did with Springsteen (also popular) had very few listeners.  So if they can’t pull people in, the Harkles don’t stand a chance.
> 
> Clearly, actual entertainers and news people are what people want to listen to.


I can understand why people prefer to listen to entertainers despite B. Ob*** being a brilliant speaker. Entertainment helps people through difficult times. 

Arch*Types could become a comic podcast. According to Celia Walden, TW is already viewed as a "_figure of fun._"


----------



## youngster

Harry and MM will likely try and get out of their Spotify deal because failure, bad reviews and few listeners would be a massive PR blow to them.  They might look at the ex-president and first lady and realize that if those two can't do it, there is almost no way for the two of them to be successful at it.  Neither of them are performers, neither of them are writers, neither of them are quick and funny and entertaining, and neither of them have the desire to spend full time working on a podcast in order to build an audience over time. They like easy and nothing about doing a regular podcast is easy.


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> Would we be restricted from going in for a chortle?



Been there. Done that.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> We don't love them, but not 'Haters.' I'm not very inspired today, but here are a few suggestions:
> The Harkles of Montecito
> The Greedy Netfl*xes
> The Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy.
> 
> I'm sure the very talented TPF members here will come up with much better options.


And I'm sure they will be reduced to doing a reality show at some point as revenue sources start to vanish. It would probably get huge ratings because people love to watch train wrecks.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Totally!


Chanbal said:


> I can understand why people prefer to listen to entertainers despite B. Ob*** being a brilliant speaker. Entertainment helps people through difficult times.
> 
> Arch*Types could become a comic podcast. According to Celia Walden, TW is already viewed as a "_figure of fun._"



 Totally! Every time I have tried an educational pod, I almost always bail for someone that makes me laugh!


----------



## Silverplume

I listened to the former President and First Lady for eight years. I’m hardly giving either of them _more_ of my time and attention. I wouldn’t listen to _any_ politician as entertainment: what a waste of my time.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Harry and MM will likely try and get out of their Spotify deal because failure, bad reviews and few listeners would be a massive PR blow to them.  They might look at the ex-president and first lady and realize that if those two can't do it, there is almost no way for the two of them to be successful at it.  Neither of them are performers, neither of them are writers, neither of them are quick and funny and entertaining, and neither of them have the desire to spend full time working on a podcast in order to build an audience over time. They like easy and nothing about doing a regular podcast is easy.



The thing is they never even tried! 
If they had made any effort at all and come up with a single podcast on their own, even if it failed, they would deserve respect for fulfilling their promise.

Instead they made empty promises and took Spotify’s money without fulfilling their end of the contract. I wish Spotify would sue them.


----------



## gracekelly

My understanding was that the O’s have decided not to sign a new deal with Spotify and are looking at other outlets.  Is this their spin and/or did Spotify decided they didn’t want them anymore?  If the  Harkles  want to leave and are putting out the word, then it is to big themselves up and put themselves on the same level as the O’s.  We all know the real reason is that they aren’t good enough to do the work.


----------



## Katel

youngster said:


> …They might look at the ex-president and first lady and realize that if those two can't do it, there is almost no way for the two of them to be successful at it.  *Neither of them are performers, neither of them are writers, neither of them are quick and funny and entertaining, neither have an ounce of substantial content to contribute and neither of them have the desire to spend full time working on a podcast in order to build an audience over time. *They like easy and nothing about doing a regular podcast is easy.


…”Neither of them are performers, neither of them are writers, neither of them are quick and funny and entertaining, _neither have one original thought or an ounce of substantial content to contribute _and neither of them have the desire to spend full time working on a podcast in order to build an audience over time.” (Italics are mine.  )


----------



## Maggie Muggins

youngster said:


> Harry and MM will likely try and get out of their Spotify deal because failure, bad reviews and few listeners would be a massive PR blow to them.  *They might look at the ex-president and first lady and realize that if those two can't do it, there is almost no way for the two of them to be successful at it. * Neither of them are performers, neither of them are writers, neither of them are quick and funny and entertaining, and neither of them have the desire to spend full time working on a podcast in order to build an audience over time. They like easy and nothing about doing a regular podcast is easy.


True, but we must never never forget that they, especially TW, are more intelligent, important and popular than Pres Ob**a and that was their reasons for declining an invitation to his birthday bash last summer.


----------



## Chanbal

The UK must be very thankful to have Will as first born instead of angry Hazz! 
Why would Hazz walk four paces ahead of Cressida?   



_Brown claims that Harry wanted the prestigious rhino and elephant charity the Tusk Trust, of which William had been patron since 2005.

‘*Harry was a very, very angry man*. I think those were absolutely Olympic rows,’ she quotes a friend of the brothers as saying.

It didn’t help that Harry had a more natural, less formal way with the public. 

‘If William makes a speech, everything from “Good evening” onwards has to be typed out and handed to him,’ a charity official tells her. 

‘When he came to our dining club one evening, as soon as he got up to speak he froze.’

*Harry knew how to work a room like his grandfather Prince Philip, starting with a joke to break the ice.

But if Harry was discontented over his royal duties, he was even more unhappy about the state of his love life. *

After Harry’s split from aristocratic actress Cressida Bonas in 2014, Brown quotes Prince Charles telling a party guest: ‘I don’t know what to do about Harry. We so miss Cressida.’

*Cressie, as she is known by family — *the willowy blonde daughter of Lady Mary-Gaye Curzon* — found her royal boyfriend both sweet and tiresome. 

His mood was often confrontational. *

‘*When he wasn’t venting about William, he was pouring out resentments about Charles,’ *Brown writes…

Meanwhile, *Cressida, a normal 25-year-old, found Harry’s resentment towards the media trying*.

She ‘wanted to go out to dinner and touch knees under the table,’ a friend tells Brown.

‘*Harry would walk four paces ahead of h**er, instead of holding her hand.* *When they went to the theatre, he left at the interval to get out without a hassle.*

‘She was either being dragged through the streets being yelled at or ignored while he threw a hissy fit.’

While media reports talked of her romantic love affair with the prince, the ‘bizarre reality of date nights was glumly eating takeaway and watching Netflix at Nottingham Cottage, Harry’s none-too-tidy two-bedroom grace-and-favour bachelor pad in the grounds of Kensington Palace’.

*Cressida became increasingly concerned about Harry’s mental health.* 

According to Brown, *it was Cressie who first persuaded him to see a therapist.* *To find the right person, he took advice from MI6.*

‘*There was a need for someone who would be incredibly discreet and who understood what it’s like to have a public version of your life and a private version of your life,’* Brown quotes a contact. 

‘Therapists at MI6, that’s what they do.’

His relationship with Bonas did not survive, however. 

Brown reveals that after they parted Harry wrote Cressida ‘a sweet letter saying “I admire you, I wish you well and above all thank you for helping me to address my demons and seek help” ’.

*Meghan wanted leading lady status

Meghan Markle’s arrival in Harry’s life changed everything almost overnight.
She and the prince became ‘drunk on a shared fantasy of being the instruments of global transformation who, once married, would operate in the celebrity stratosphere once inhabited by Princess Diana’.*

The world caught a glimpse of this power grab at the unveiling of the so-called ‘Fab Four’, when Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity.

‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation,’ Brown writes. 

‘When it was Kate’s moment to speak, she was strikingly less articulate, as well as brief.’

*Yet, Brown says, few knew that it was the Duchess of Cambridge who had been the prime mover in the mental health campaign, after years of providing emotional support for her brother, James Middleton, as he struggled with clinical depression.*

So far so glamorous, but what Palace insiders saw as Meghan’s ‘wilful blindness to institutional culture’ was a clash with the actress’s world view. 

‘In the ranking system of the entertainment world, star power — wattage — equals leverage . . . Alas, she seemed oblivious to the one critical factor that would determine the outcome of her plans for the future: primogeniture.’

*For all his easy-going charm and huge popularity, Harry was not heir in line to the throne; he had slipped to sixth and, as Brown notes ‘when Kate became Queen, Meghan would have to curtsy to her’.*

In the book, *Brown shines a fascinating and waspish light on Meghan’s life just as she was meeting Harry and how her then blog, The Tig, was a dragnet for luxury freebies.

‘She won a reputation among the marketers of luxury brands of being warmly interested in receiving bags of designer swag*.’

A publicist is quoted as saying she had been copied in to a message from a member of Meghan’s team after she became Duchess of Sussex.

‘Make sure [the publicist] knows that she can still send me anything. She’s always been one of the good ones…’

Brown is warm on the relationship between Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, the ‘horse whisperer of his emotional needs’, and the difficulties Camilla encountered from his sons…

*For a long time, despite the overtures, William remained ‘guarded’ and his brother ‘outright sullen’.
These days, William at least is pragmatic about the relationship, accepting Camilla for what she means to his father. 
Harry almost certainly has not.*
For her part, the duchess has tried to remain gracious and above the fray. 
If she had a family motto, Brown says, it would be ‘Thou shalt not whine’.
Bad blood was kept firmly behind doors… 

*William and Kate’s secret lives*

Brown relates how at a glitzy fundraiser for East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices, where Kate serves as royal patron, William transformed from star guest to ministering waiter.

Told that the evening’s ‘highest roller’ was too ill to join the dinner, the prince asked for a pot of tea on a tray and went and knocked on her door. 

‘She was so over the moon,’ said investment banker Euan Rellie. 

‘Hard not to be,’ writes Brown. 

‘*It was a gesture that showed the imagination and empathy of his mother*.’

For history of art graduate *Kate, secret visits to museums and art galleries are said to ‘nourish her inner life’. *

Brown relates how the late QC Jeremy Hutchinson, viewing a Hockney exhibition at the Royal Academy at 8am one morning, was taken aback when the duchess took a seat beside him.

*‘I miss my history of art,’ she told him. ‘It’s what I do to get my fix*.’ _









						RICHARD KAY on new book that reveals Prince Harry's state of mind
					

Tina Brown's new book, The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil looks into the lives of the monarchy, including Prince Harry's mindset and relationship with William.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Calling @Maggie Muggins!  Pick a nickname we came up with!


And be blamed by the H&M lovers for choosing it? Not a chance in hell!


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> My understanding was that the O’s have decided not to sign a new deal with Spotify and are looking at other outlets.  Is this their spin and/or did Spotify decided they didn’t want them anymore?  If the  Harkles  want to leave and are putting out the word, then it is to big themselves up and put themselves on the same level as the O’s.  We all know the real reason is that they aren’t good enough to do the work.



I read they had various disagreements with Spotify and Spotify declined to offer them a new deal. They are now looking elsewhere like Amazon Audible. So, they appear to want to continue doing podcasts but with their conditions met. One of their conditions is to limit the number of podcasts to 8 each, which seems ridiculous given the millions they want to be paid. Doesn't hurt to ask, I guess.  Can't imagine it would be profitable which was probably why Spotify declined.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> My understanding was that the O’s have decided not to sign a new deal with Spotify and are looking at other outlets.  Is this their spin and/or did Spotify decided they didn’t want them anymore?  If the  Harkles  want to leave and are putting out the word, then it is to big themselves up and put themselves on the same level as the O’s.  We all know the real reason is that they aren’t good enough to do the work.


According to the article I posted, it was Spotify that decided not to renew.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Spotify really got themselves in between a rock and a hard place with these grifters.


But will anyone be fired for such a blunder...


----------



## Chanbal

Is this a joke?


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> They like easy and nothing about doing a regular podcast is easy.


Their dream job would be to be a full-time VVIP, feted everywhere for doing nothing ... excuse me, I mean, feted everywhere for shining a light to lead the great unwashed who will submit daily tribute in the form of pageviews, clicks and likes.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> The Real Royals of Montecito/NY/Parts Unknown


Don't you mean "The FORMERLY Real Royals of Montecito/NY/Parts Unknown"?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they may not be able to use footage of the king on their Netfl*x show, this is interesting!




Wow, such a difference between these two royals. Sure, one is a king and other is a non-worker, but, my goodness, Willen = wow!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, such a difference between these two royals. Sure, one is a king and other is a non-worker, but, my goodness, Willen = wow!


The Dutch love Willen and Maxima. I believe Maxima would have liked to attend the games, but they had to keep a distance from the Harkles. The fact that she didn't attend speaks volumes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they may not be able to use footage of the king on their Netfl*x show, this is interesting!



Excellent choice for King Willem-Alexander! Any royal worth his/her salt would stay away from the Despicable Duo for fear of being caught up in one their schemes or iffy documentaries.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The UK must be very thankful to have Will as first born instead of angry Hazz!
> Why would Hazz walk four paces ahead of Cressida?
> View attachment 5386534
> 
> 
> _Brown claims that Harry wanted the prestigious rhino and elephant charity the Tusk Trust, of which William had been patron since 2005.
> 
> ‘*Harry was a very, very angry man*. I think those were absolutely Olympic rows,’ she quotes a friend of the brothers as saying.
> 
> It didn’t help that Harry had a more natural, less formal way with the public.
> 
> ‘If William makes a speech, everything from “Good evening” onwards has to be typed out and handed to him,’ a charity official tells her.
> 
> ‘When he came to our dining club one evening, as soon as he got up to speak he froze.’
> 
> *Harry knew how to work a room like his grandfather Prince Philip, starting with a joke to break the ice.
> 
> But if Harry was discontented over his royal duties, he was even more unhappy about the state of his love life. *
> 
> After Harry’s split from aristocratic actress Cressida Bonas in 2014, Brown quotes Prince Charles telling a party guest: ‘I don’t know what to do about Harry. We so miss Cressida.’
> 
> *Cressie, as she is known by family — *the willowy blonde daughter of Lady Mary-Gaye Curzon* — found her royal boyfriend both sweet and tiresome.
> 
> His mood was often confrontational. *
> 
> ‘*When he wasn’t venting about William, he was pouring out resentments about Charles,’ *Brown writes…
> 
> Meanwhile, *Cressida, a normal 25-year-old, found Harry’s resentment towards the media trying*.
> 
> She ‘wanted to go out to dinner and touch knees under the table,’ a friend tells Brown.
> 
> ‘*Harry would walk four paces ahead of h**er, instead of holding her hand.* *When they went to the theatre, he left at the interval to get out without a hassle.*
> 
> ‘She was either being dragged through the streets being yelled at or ignored while he threw a hissy fit.’
> 
> While media reports talked of her romantic love affair with the prince, the ‘bizarre reality of date nights was glumly eating takeaway and watching Netflix at Nottingham Cottage, Harry’s none-too-tidy two-bedroom grace-and-favour bachelor pad in the grounds of Kensington Palace’.
> 
> *Cressida became increasingly concerned about Harry’s mental health.*
> 
> According to Brown, *it was Cressie who first persuaded him to see a therapist.* *To find the right person, he took advice from MI6.*
> 
> ‘*There was a need for someone who would be incredibly discreet and who understood what it’s like to have a public version of your life and a private version of your life,’* Brown quotes a contact.
> 
> ‘Therapists at MI6, that’s what they do.’
> 
> His relationship with Bonas did not survive, however.
> 
> Brown reveals that after they parted Harry wrote Cressida ‘a sweet letter saying “I admire you, I wish you well and above all thank you for helping me to address my demons and seek help” ’.
> 
> *Meghan wanted leading lady status
> 
> Meghan Markle’s arrival in Harry’s life changed everything almost overnight.
> She and the prince became ‘drunk on a shared fantasy of being the instruments of global transformation who, once married, would operate in the celebrity stratosphere once inhabited by Princess Diana’.*
> 
> The world caught a glimpse of this power grab at the unveiling of the so-called ‘Fab Four’, when Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity.
> 
> ‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation,’ Brown writes.
> 
> ‘When it was Kate’s moment to speak, she was strikingly less articulate, as well as brief.’
> 
> *Yet, Brown says, few knew that it was the Duchess of Cambridge who had been the prime mover in the mental health campaign, after years of providing emotional support for her brother, James Middleton, as he struggled with clinical depression.*
> 
> So far so glamorous, but what Palace insiders saw as Meghan’s ‘wilful blindness to institutional culture’ was a clash with the actress’s world view.
> 
> ‘In the ranking system of the entertainment world, star power — wattage — equals leverage . . . Alas, she seemed oblivious to the one critical factor that would determine the outcome of her plans for the future: primogeniture.’
> 
> *For all his easy-going charm and huge popularity, Harry was not heir in line to the throne; he had slipped to sixth and, as Brown notes ‘when Kate became Queen, Meghan would have to curtsy to her’.*
> 
> In the book, *Brown shines a fascinating and waspish light on Meghan’s life just as she was meeting Harry and how her then blog, The Tig, was a dragnet for luxury freebies.
> 
> ‘She won a reputation among the marketers of luxury brands of being warmly interested in receiving bags of designer swag*.’
> 
> A publicist is quoted as saying she had been copied in to a message from a member of Meghan’s team after she became Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> ‘Make sure [the publicist] knows that she can still send me anything. She’s always been one of the good ones…’
> 
> Brown is warm on the relationship between Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, the ‘horse whisperer of his emotional needs’, and the difficulties Camilla encountered from his sons…
> 
> *For a long time, despite the overtures, William remained ‘guarded’ and his brother ‘outright sullen’.
> These days, William at least is pragmatic about the relationship, accepting Camilla for what she means to his father.
> Harry almost certainly has not.*
> For her part, the duchess has tried to remain gracious and above the fray.
> If she had a family motto, Brown says, it would be ‘Thou shalt not whine’.
> Bad blood was kept firmly behind doors…
> 
> *William and Kate’s secret lives*
> 
> Brown relates how at a glitzy fundraiser for East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices, where Kate serves as royal patron, William transformed from star guest to ministering waiter.
> 
> Told that the evening’s ‘highest roller’ was too ill to join the dinner, the prince asked for a pot of tea on a tray and went and knocked on her door.
> 
> ‘She was so over the moon,’ said investment banker Euan Rellie.
> 
> ‘Hard not to be,’ writes Brown.
> 
> ‘*It was a gesture that showed the imagination and empathy of his mother*.’
> 
> For history of art graduate *Kate, secret visits to museums and art galleries are said to ‘nourish her inner life’. *
> 
> Brown relates how the late QC Jeremy Hutchinson, viewing a Hockney exhibition at the Royal Academy at 8am one morning, was taken aback when the duchess took a seat beside him.
> 
> *‘I miss my history of art,’ she told him. ‘It’s what I do to get my fix*.’ _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY on new book that reveals Prince Harry's state of mind
> 
> 
> Tina Brown's new book, The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil looks into the lives of the monarchy, including Prince Harry's mindset and relationship with William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This is a giant sized dump on Harry.  I don't think they have ever printed anything this damaging before.  They can get away with it because the pictures are in the public domain and have been out there for a while and they can claim they are reporting on a book.  To put it on the front page is about as in your face as they can get.  He looks ridiculous, and pathetic.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> According to the article I posted, it was Spotify that decided not to renew.


I wonder who is telling the truth.  Pres. O has a lot of pull and a big name.  I tend to believe the  press from the O's and that the O's thought that they were not getting the right exposure with Spotify or enough of it.  If they are talking to Amazon, they are going for a bigger audience.  They could have a show on Amazon Prime and a podcast.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The Dutch love Willen and Maxima. I believe Maxima would have liked to attend the games, but they had to keep a distance from the Harkles. The fact that she didn't attend speaks volumes.


I don't see why they couldn't have had her attend different events and stay away from the Harkles.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Harry and MM will likely try and get out of their Spotify deal because failure, bad reviews and few listeners would be a massive PR blow to them.  They might look at the ex-president and first lady and realize that if those two can't do it, there is almost no way for the two of them to be successful at it.  Neither of them are performers, neither of them are writers, neither of them are quick and funny and entertaining, and neither of them have the desire to spend full time working on a podcast in order to build an audience over time. They like easy and nothing about doing a regular podcast is easy.


How will they give back money that they don't have?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?



She did Ellen and demeaned herself, so why not SNL?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't see why they couldn't have had her attend different events and stay away from the Harkles.


It would have been difficult for Maxima to attend and avoid a photo-op with TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We are on to you, H&M






gracekelly said:


> I wonder who is telling the truth.  Pres. O has a lot of pull and a big name.  I tend to believe the  press from the O's and that the O's thought that they were not getting the right exposure with Spotify or enough of it.  If they are talking to Amazon, they are going for a bigger audience.  They could have a show on Amazon Prime and a podcast.



My 2 cents: they wanted more $$$ than Spotify could give them. Post pandemic, the old business models are losing money money money. The companies are not getting their money back. Weren’t they part of Nflix or are they still? We are in a much different world now. If you haven’t seen it yet, watch the latest Bryant Gumbel’s Real World (hbo). They discuss how Jake Paul (!) [yes, that guy] has been successful at boxing. He claims to have made about 40 million last year. Different times, to be sure.  As I watched it, I thought maybe Hazz could do this.  

To be clear, I am not a regular watcher of the Real Sports show, I just seem to stumble upon it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She would be a tough host to write for. I listen to the podcast that Dana Carvey and David Spade host (It’s great) and they said the hosts that can’t laugh at themselves and want to control their image are no bueno.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think no matter who made the decision, it’s very much In Spotify’s best interest to make the split amicable.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> She did Ellen and demeaned herself, so why not SNL?


Well, she is already the subject of jokes on SNL…   From last Saturday:

_"Come on, Elon built electric cars," Jost said. "He's going to Mars. Why is he even involving himself with Twitter? It would be like if the Prince of England gave it all up just to marry an actor from Suits_."









						SNL rips Elon Musk's Twitter bid with Prince Harry and Meghan joke
					

Michael Che also joked that Musk is buying the platform so that "white guys [can] use the N-word" during "Weekend Update."




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> She would be a tough host to write for. I listen to the podcast that Dana Carvey and David Spade host (It’s great) and they said the hosts that can’t laugh at themselves and want to control their image are no bueno.



KimK rejected several of Amy Schumer’s ideas as well as other suggestions from the writers. Tbf, it is her brand so she must protect it. On the other hand, it is _their_ show, so the writers must protect it.  Still, snl has not been as funny as it once was for awhile. Imo.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I think no matter who made the decision, it’s very much In Spotify’s best interest to make the split amicable.


That true!  They don't want to insult the O's.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> We're almost at 6000!!!!



You can't get to 6,000 pages unless the topic is a font of a gift that keeps on giving. In this case, you can't fit that much STUPID on a mere 5,000 pages....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apprehensive?? Imo he looks scared/frightened/puzzled until Willem greets him. Then, he knew exactly what to do - bow that head and walk behind Willem.  Hazzie well understands royal protocol.



ETA:  BLG, this clip is for you.


----------



## Silverplume

gracekelly said:


> That true!  They don't want to insult the O's.


*I* do. 
Sometimes an opportunity simply arises.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I don't see why they couldn't have had her attend different events and stay away from the Harkles.


IMO, Maxima wouldn't be safe with this brazen, devious, dishonest couple who do as they please. We're talking about H&TW, who barged in uninvited on the Prince of Wales 50th anniversary celebration when HM and #1 and #2 and their wives were viewing the PofW regalia. TW who walked ahead of HM, turned her back on HM, tried to get into a vehicle before HM and refused to wear a hat for an engagement with HM.  I wouldn't put anything past these two.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, Maxima wouldn't be safe with this brazen, devious, dishonest couple who do as they please. We're talking about H&TW, who barged in uninvited on the Prince of Wales 50th anniversary celebration when HM and #1 and #2 and their wives were viewing the PofW regalia. TW who walked ahead of HM, turned her back on HM, tried to get into a vehicle before HM and refused to wear a hat for an engagement with HM.  I wouldn't put anything past these two.



I wonder what the protocol is. Who would bow/curtsy to whom? Seems to me Maxima outranks Hazz, so he and the tw would have to bow to Max. Perhaps Max did not want to risk an incident. Would tw bow curtsy???? Fairly certain the former Queen Beatrix would have strong words if Hazz showed out.


ETA: curtsy, yes yes, men bow, women curtsy.  I’m learning


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> My understanding was that the O’s have decided not to sign a new deal with Spotify and are looking at other outlets.  Is this their spin and/or did Spotify decided they didn’t want them anymore?  If the  Harkles  want to leave and are putting out the word, then it is to big themselves up and put themselves on the same level as the O’s.  We all know the real reason is that they aren’t good enough to do the work.



I saw that too. My guess is that the O's decided not to re-up with Spotify. Because if Spotify can pay Haz/Maggot, what, 35 million or whatever, then why wouldn't they pay a former popular ***** a great deal more? Or maybe the REAL question is: How much do the O's believe they can get from another source? And then I'm thinking...come ON, you were effing *****, and not only that, the MEDIA basically kiss your butts, billionaires invite you on their yachts and palatial homes, heads of state claim to love you, you have international influence, what personal expenses do you actually have?  Isn't your life already made? Or are you worried that the book royalties, ***** pension, personal savings and perks for life aren't actually ENOUGH???


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Well, she is already the subject of jokes on SNL…   From last Saturday:
> 
> _"Come on, Elon built electric cars," Jost said. "He's going to Mars. Why is he even involving himself with Twitter? It would be like if the Prince of England gave it all up just to marry an actor from Suits_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SNL rips Elon Musk's Twitter bid with Prince Harry and Meghan joke
> 
> 
> Michael Che also joked that Musk is buying the platform so that "white guys [can] use the N-word" during "Weekend Update."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I watched Musk when he did SNL.  He doesn't mind people poking fun at him or poking himself.  When you have his success and money, you can relax more.  Harry like to think of himself as "cheeky," but he could never stand the heat of that show and neither could MM.


----------



## gracekelly

Re the Dutch Royals:  Harry realized that they were being put down a peg over their not being senior royals, but also because he did not go to PP's memorial.  He wasn't going to fight it and knew enough to keep it respectful.  Good thing his wife wasn't around, because she wouldn't understand any of it and how to act.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



All good points.  The business model for many of these companies is going to change.  They won't be throwing around money the way they used to.


----------



## Chanbal

The Body Language Girl: TW "_has all the affection of an alley cat - not much_"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like the _fall_ is happening:
[I chose Reader View to get around the paywall/subscriber notice]









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: What Every Major Deal Is Worth
					

It has been about two years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to go it on their own financially




					www.thewrap.com
				



*Prince Harry and Meghan Inc.: What Every Major Deal Since Quitting the Royal Family Is Worth*
by Katie Campione | April 22, 2022 @ 6:30 AM

*It has been about two years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to go it on their own financially*

How have Prince Harry and Meghan Markle been paying the bills since leaving the British royal family nearly two years ago? We broke down every major deal they’ve made since and their estimated worth.
The couple were back in the spotlight this week for the launch of the 5th annual Invictus Games, the adaptive sports competition for veterans founded by Harry in 2014. This year’s competition is expected to be featured in the upcoming Netflix docuseries about the organization behind the games, titled “Heart of Invictus.”


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The Body Language Girl: TW "_has all the affection of an alley cat - not much_"



Haha I love how she says I want to cut off that piece of hair that's always hanging down her face


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I watched Musk when he did SNL.  He doesn't mind people poking fun at him or poking himself.  When you have his success and money, you can relax more.  Harry like to think of himself as "cheeky," but he could never stand the heat of that show and neither could MM.


Elon is a bright man, and Hazz is a nincompoop. "Cheeky" can also mean "presumptuous" or "arrogant," "egotistical," "self-centered"… I'm ok with that.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like the _fall_ is happening:
> [I chose Reader View to get around the paywall/subscriber notice]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: What Every Major Deal Is Worth
> 
> 
> It has been about two years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to go it on their own financially
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thewrap.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Inc.: What Every Major Deal Since Quitting the Royal Family Is Worth*
> by Katie Campione | April 22, 2022 @ 6:30 AM
> 
> *It has been about two years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex decided to go it on their own financially*
> 
> How have Prince Harry and Meghan Markle been paying the bills since leaving the British royal family nearly two years ago? We broke down every major deal they’ve made since and their estimated worth.
> The couple were back in the spotlight this week for the launch of the 5th annual Invictus Games, the adaptive sports competition for veterans founded by Harry in 2014. This year’s competition is expected to be featured in the upcoming Netflix docuseries about the organization behind the games, titled “Heart of Invictus.”
> 
> 
> View attachment 5386595


What did the Harkles do to deserve all these millions of dollars? Why the need for 7 outfits to attend a charity event during one weekend? These people make no sense to me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The UK must be very thankful to have Will as first born instead of angry Hazz!
> Why would Hazz walk four paces ahead of Cressida?
> View attachment 5386534
> 
> 
> _Brown claims that Harry wanted the prestigious rhino and elephant charity the Tusk Trust, of which William had been patron since 2005.
> 
> ‘*Harry was a very, very angry man*. I think those were absolutely Olympic rows,’ she quotes a friend of the brothers as saying.
> 
> It didn’t help that Harry had a more natural, less formal way with the public.
> 
> ‘If William makes a speech, everything from “Good evening” onwards has to be typed out and handed to him,’ a charity official tells her.
> 
> ‘When he came to our dining club one evening, as soon as he got up to speak he froze.’
> 
> *Harry knew how to work a room like his grandfather Prince Philip, starting with a joke to break the ice.
> 
> But if Harry was discontented over his royal duties, he was even more unhappy about the state of his love life. *
> 
> After Harry’s split from aristocratic actress Cressida Bonas in 2014, Brown quotes Prince Charles telling a party guest: ‘I don’t know what to do about Harry. We so miss Cressida.’
> 
> *Cressie, as she is known by family — *the willowy blonde daughter of Lady Mary-Gaye Curzon* — found her royal boyfriend both sweet and tiresome.
> 
> His mood was often confrontational. *
> 
> ‘*When he wasn’t venting about William, he was pouring out resentments about Charles,’ *Brown writes…
> 
> Meanwhile, *Cressida, a normal 25-year-old, found Harry’s resentment towards the media trying*.
> 
> She ‘wanted to go out to dinner and touch knees under the table,’ a friend tells Brown.
> 
> ‘*Harry would walk four paces ahead of h**er, instead of holding her hand.* *When they went to the theatre, he left at the interval to get out without a hassle.*
> 
> ‘She was either being dragged through the streets being yelled at or ignored while he threw a hissy fit.’
> 
> While media reports talked of her romantic love affair with the prince, the ‘bizarre reality of date nights was glumly eating takeaway and watching Netflix at Nottingham Cottage, Harry’s none-too-tidy two-bedroom grace-and-favour bachelor pad in the grounds of Kensington Palace’.
> 
> *Cressida became increasingly concerned about Harry’s mental health.*
> 
> According to Brown, *it was Cressie who first persuaded him to see a therapist.* *To find the right person, he took advice from MI6.*
> 
> ‘*There was a need for someone who would be incredibly discreet and who understood what it’s like to have a public version of your life and a private version of your life,’* Brown quotes a contact.
> 
> ‘Therapists at MI6, that’s what they do.’
> 
> His relationship with Bonas did not survive, however.
> 
> Brown reveals that after they parted Harry wrote Cressida ‘a sweet letter saying “I admire you, I wish you well and above all thank you for helping me to address my demons and seek help” ’.
> 
> *Meghan wanted leading lady status
> 
> Meghan Markle’s arrival in Harry’s life changed everything almost overnight.
> She and the prince became ‘drunk on a shared fantasy of being the instruments of global transformation who, once married, would operate in the celebrity stratosphere once inhabited by Princess Diana’.*
> 
> The world caught a glimpse of this power grab at the unveiling of the so-called ‘Fab Four’, when Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity.
> 
> ‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation,’ Brown writes.
> 
> ‘When it was Kate’s moment to speak, she was strikingly less articulate, as well as brief.’
> 
> *Yet, Brown says, few knew that it was the Duchess of Cambridge who had been the prime mover in the mental health campaign, after years of providing emotional support for her brother, James Middleton, as he struggled with clinical depression.*
> 
> So far so glamorous, but what Palace insiders saw as Meghan’s ‘wilful blindness to institutional culture’ was a clash with the actress’s world view.
> 
> ‘In the ranking system of the entertainment world, star power — wattage — equals leverage . . . Alas, she seemed oblivious to the one critical factor that would determine the outcome of her plans for the future: primogeniture.’
> 
> *For all his easy-going charm and huge popularity, Harry was not heir in line to the throne; he had slipped to sixth and, as Brown notes ‘when Kate became Queen, Meghan would have to curtsy to her’.*
> 
> In the book, *Brown shines a fascinating and waspish light on Meghan’s life just as she was meeting Harry and how her then blog, The Tig, was a dragnet for luxury freebies.
> 
> ‘She won a reputation among the marketers of luxury brands of being warmly interested in receiving bags of designer swag*.’
> 
> A publicist is quoted as saying she had been copied in to a message from a member of Meghan’s team after she became Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> ‘Make sure [the publicist] knows that she can still send me anything. She’s always been one of the good ones…’
> 
> Brown is warm on the relationship between Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, the ‘horse whisperer of his emotional needs’, and the difficulties Camilla encountered from his sons…
> 
> *For a long time, despite the overtures, William remained ‘guarded’ and his brother ‘outright sullen’.
> These days, William at least is pragmatic about the relationship, accepting Camilla for what she means to his father.
> Harry almost certainly has not.*
> For her part, the duchess has tried to remain gracious and above the fray.
> If she had a family motto, Brown says, it would be ‘Thou shalt not whine’.
> Bad blood was kept firmly behind doors…
> 
> *William and Kate’s secret lives*
> 
> Brown relates how at a glitzy fundraiser for East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices, where Kate serves as royal patron, William transformed from star guest to ministering waiter.
> 
> Told that the evening’s ‘highest roller’ was too ill to join the dinner, the prince asked for a pot of tea on a tray and went and knocked on her door.
> 
> ‘She was so over the moon,’ said investment banker Euan Rellie.
> 
> ‘Hard not to be,’ writes Brown.
> 
> ‘*It was a gesture that showed the imagination and empathy of his mother*.’
> 
> For history of art graduate *Kate, secret visits to museums and art galleries are said to ‘nourish her inner life’. *
> 
> Brown relates how the late QC Jeremy Hutchinson, viewing a Hockney exhibition at the Royal Academy at 8am one morning, was taken aback when the duchess took a seat beside him.
> 
> *‘I miss my history of art,’ she told him. ‘It’s what I do to get my fix*.’ _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY on new book that reveals Prince Harry's state of mind
> 
> 
> Tina Brown's new book, The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil looks into the lives of the monarchy, including Prince Harry's mindset and relationship with William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Im not a big royal watcher but I feel all that stuff about treating Cressida badly is a rehash from a few years ago for us Brits but I suppose it didn’t make international news then. I feel like there’s been reported signs he was a bad lot since at least his break up with CB. 

I do find the idea of early morning gallery visits new and likeable but this is all old news isn’t it?
I suppose it sells but I’m getting a bit tired of all these biographies predicting the obvious truth years after the fact.
None of it’s getting to the heart of the matter which is why did the royals rush into this absolute botch of a marriage when there were apparently giant red flags everywhere. 


Chanbal said:


> Is this a joke?





Chanbal said:


> Well, she is already the subject of jokes on SNL…   From last Saturday:
> 
> _"Come on, Elon built electric cars," Jost said. "He's going to Mars. Why is he even involving himself with Twitter? It would be like if the Prince of England gave it all up just to marry an actor from Suits_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SNL rips Elon Musk's Twitter bid with Prince Harry and Meghan joke
> 
> 
> Michael Che also joked that Musk is buying the platform so that "white guys [can] use the N-word" during "Weekend Update."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



WTF that joke doesn’t even work lol. Are they saying him buying Twitter is a bad choice just like marrying some nobody was a bad choice?  

Elon Musk in interview is 100% funnier than anything in the last 5 years of SNL. To me, it’s an old dog that needs putting to sleep and I feel like M completely bombing with some stolen material  would be the lethal injection it needs.

The final sketch should be Rachel dolezal calling into Meghan and complaining she stole her gimmick.


Chanbal said:


> The Body Language Girl: TW "_has all the affection of an alley cat - not much_"



Does she mark her territory like one too?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I wonder what the protocol is. Who would bow/curtsy to whom? Seems to me Maxima outranks Hazz, so he and the tw would have to bow to Max. Perhaps Max did not want to risk an incident. Would tw bow curtsy???? Fairly certain the former Queen Beatrix would have strong words if Hazz showed out.
> 
> 
> ETA: curtsy, yes yes, men bow, women curtsy.  I’m learning



So maybe that's why Raptor beelined it back to the US before Willem showed up: she didn't want to curtsy ever again.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The UK must be very thankful to have Will as first born instead of angry Hazz!
> Why would Hazz walk four paces ahead of Cressida?
> View attachment 5386534
> 
> 
> _Brown claims that Harry wanted the prestigious rhino and elephant charity the Tusk Trust, of which William had been patron since 2005.
> 
> ‘*Harry was a very, very angry man*. I think those were absolutely Olympic rows,’ she quotes a friend of the brothers as saying.
> 
> It didn’t help that Harry had a more natural, less formal way with the public.
> 
> ‘If William makes a speech, everything from “Good evening” onwards has to be typed out and handed to him,’ a charity official tells her.
> 
> ‘When he came to our dining club one evening, as soon as he got up to speak he froze.’
> 
> *Harry knew how to work a room like his grandfather Prince Philip, starting with a joke to break the ice.
> 
> But if Harry was discontented over his royal duties, he was even more unhappy about the state of his love life. *
> 
> After Harry’s split from aristocratic actress Cressida Bonas in 2014, Brown quotes Prince Charles telling a party guest: ‘I don’t know what to do about Harry. We so miss Cressida.’
> 
> *Cressie, as she is known by family — *the willowy blonde daughter of Lady Mary-Gaye Curzon* — found her royal boyfriend both sweet and tiresome.
> 
> His mood was often confrontational. *
> 
> ‘*When he wasn’t venting about William, he was pouring out resentments about Charles,’ *Brown writes…
> 
> Meanwhile, *Cressida, a normal 25-year-old, found Harry’s resentment towards the media trying*.
> 
> She ‘wanted to go out to dinner and touch knees under the table,’ a friend tells Brown.
> 
> ‘*Harry would walk four paces ahead of h**er, instead of holding her hand.* *When they went to the theatre, he left at the interval to get out without a hassle.*
> 
> ‘She was either being dragged through the streets being yelled at or ignored while he threw a hissy fit.’
> 
> While media reports talked of her romantic love affair with the prince, the ‘bizarre reality of date nights was glumly eating takeaway and watching Netflix at Nottingham Cottage, Harry’s none-too-tidy two-bedroom grace-and-favour bachelor pad in the grounds of Kensington Palace’.
> 
> *Cressida became increasingly concerned about Harry’s mental health.*
> 
> According to Brown, *it was Cressie who first persuaded him to see a therapist.* *To find the right person, he took advice from MI6.*
> 
> ‘*There was a need for someone who would be incredibly discreet and who understood what it’s like to have a public version of your life and a private version of your life,’* Brown quotes a contact.
> 
> ‘Therapists at MI6, that’s what they do.’
> 
> His relationship with Bonas did not survive, however.
> 
> Brown reveals that after they parted Harry wrote Cressida ‘a sweet letter saying “I admire you, I wish you well and above all thank you for helping me to address my demons and seek help” ’.
> 
> *Meghan wanted leading lady status
> 
> Meghan Markle’s arrival in Harry’s life changed everything almost overnight.
> She and the prince became ‘drunk on a shared fantasy of being the instruments of global transformation who, once married, would operate in the celebrity stratosphere once inhabited by Princess Diana’.*
> 
> The world caught a glimpse of this power grab at the unveiling of the so-called ‘Fab Four’, when Meghan articulately spoke with all her actressy skill at a meeting of their Royal Foundation, which had set up the Heads Together mental health charity.
> 
> ‘Harry looked on with awe and his brother and Kate stood by with expressionless irritation,’ Brown writes.
> 
> ‘When it was Kate’s moment to speak, she was strikingly less articulate, as well as brief.’
> 
> *Yet, Brown says, few knew that it was the Duchess of Cambridge who had been the prime mover in the mental health campaign, after years of providing emotional support for her brother, James Middleton, as he struggled with clinical depression.*
> 
> So far so glamorous, but what Palace insiders saw as Meghan’s ‘wilful blindness to institutional culture’ was a clash with the actress’s world view.
> 
> ‘In the ranking system of the entertainment world, star power — wattage — equals leverage . . . Alas, she seemed oblivious to the one critical factor that would determine the outcome of her plans for the future: primogeniture.’
> 
> *For all his easy-going charm and huge popularity, Harry was not heir in line to the throne; he had slipped to sixth and, as Brown notes ‘when Kate became Queen, Meghan would have to curtsy to her’.*
> 
> In the book, *Brown shines a fascinating and waspish light on Meghan’s life just as she was meeting Harry and how her then blog, The Tig, was a dragnet for luxury freebies.
> 
> ‘She won a reputation among the marketers of luxury brands of being warmly interested in receiving bags of designer swag*.’
> 
> A publicist is quoted as saying she had been copied in to a message from a member of Meghan’s team after she became Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> ‘Make sure [the publicist] knows that she can still send me anything. She’s always been one of the good ones…’
> 
> Brown is warm on the relationship between Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, the ‘horse whisperer of his emotional needs’, and the difficulties Camilla encountered from his sons…
> 
> *For a long time, despite the overtures, William remained ‘guarded’ and his brother ‘outright sullen’.
> These days, William at least is pragmatic about the relationship, accepting Camilla for what she means to his father.
> Harry almost certainly has not.*
> For her part, the duchess has tried to remain gracious and above the fray.
> If she had a family motto, Brown says, it would be ‘Thou shalt not whine’.
> Bad blood was kept firmly behind doors…
> 
> *William and Kate’s secret lives*
> 
> Brown relates how at a glitzy fundraiser for East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices, where Kate serves as royal patron, William transformed from star guest to ministering waiter.
> 
> Told that the evening’s ‘highest roller’ was too ill to join the dinner, the prince asked for a pot of tea on a tray and went and knocked on her door.
> 
> ‘She was so over the moon,’ said investment banker Euan Rellie.
> 
> ‘Hard not to be,’ writes Brown.
> 
> ‘*It was a gesture that showed the imagination and empathy of his mother*.’
> 
> For history of art graduate *Kate, secret visits to museums and art galleries are said to ‘nourish her inner life’. *
> 
> Brown relates how the late QC Jeremy Hutchinson, viewing a Hockney exhibition at the Royal Academy at 8am one morning, was taken aback when the duchess took a seat beside him.
> 
> *‘I miss my history of art,’ she told him. ‘It’s what I do to get my fix*.’ _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY on new book that reveals Prince Harry's state of mind
> 
> 
> Tina Brown's new book, The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil looks into the lives of the monarchy, including Prince Harry's mindset and relationship with William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm not going to fault W&K for being less adequate than H&M as public speakers. Speaking off the cuff is a gift and, when you don't have that gift, it takes effort to overcome natural reticence. 

My ex-boss used to "volunteer" me to speak on camera when we ran a big project and someone had to be interviewed about it for the night news. I could do it in one take because all I had to do was speak enthusiastically and intelligently for a minute or two, while looking at the journalist and ignoring the camera. It helped that I was usually part of the project team, not too shy, and could find ways to spin the topic to make it interesting. 

But the other "volunteered" colleagues had a hard time and usually needed three takes because they forgot what they wanted to say, stuttered or just suddenly froze. 

Even my CEO, who appeared regularly to speak at events, and had hosted his own TV show before, needed to get in the right mindframe before a speech. Often, my boss would do a skeleton for him so that he had a basis for his "off the cuff" sounding speech and would not miss out any points.



gracekelly said:


> I don't see why they couldn't have had her attend different events and stay away from the Harkles.


Methane does have a history of party-crashing, and how would you hold her back when she and her minions were pushing their way in? What Methane wants... Besides, she does have a serious hearing and listening problem since she is allergic to the word "No".


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apprehensive?? Imo he looks scared/frightened/puzzled until Willem greets him. Then, he knew exactly what to do - bow that head and walk behind Willem.  Hazzie well understands royal protocol.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  BLG, this clip is for you.



Shame he didn't teach his wife to understand Royal protocol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I'm not going to fault W&K for being less adequate than H&M as public speakers. Speaking off the cuff is a gift and, when you don't have that gift, it takes effort to overcome natural reticence.



This. I am quite eloquent in writing if I may say so myself, but public speaking literally scares me.


----------



## Sharont2305

So, let me get this straight, when he was with Cressida he was able to ask MI6 for help with his mental health, which is highly plausible, yet he didn't know where to ask for help for his suicidal wife? Yet more proof TW lied.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder if they don't keep track of what they're saying (sure, this one came from a source, not them, but particularly Raptor seems to live by "What do I care about my statement from yesterday") or if they trust we don't (which is probably true for most people because they can't be bothered).


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if they don't keep track of what they're saying (sure, this one came from a source, not them, but particularly Raptor seems to live by "What do I care about my statement from yesterday") or if they trust we don't (which is probably true for most people because they can't be bothered).


Liars have to have iron clad memories to be *good *liars.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Shame he didn't teach his wife to understand Royal protocol.


If their plan was to be the alternative woke better choice Royal court, then they likely pooh poohed existing protocol because they were going to do it differently. Methane for instance would have equal standing with TQ and equal access to the vault.


----------



## Chanbal

Today is Louis's b-day, and several photos of him are being shared on the internet. I particularly like the ones with Charles, he is delighted with his grandkid. I wonder if Hazz will ever realize his mistake.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Looks like it, I'm just surprised they only created it today


wonder how active it will be


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Liars have to have iron clad memories to be *good *liars.


Yes, if someone repeats a lie often enough, it can be substituted for the truth and become the reality in their mind. I've seen people doing this to the point they will swear that the lie is the truth and if you challenge them with the real truth, they will call you a liar. 

*Brain scans show that actors lose their ‘sense of self’ when taking on a role*








						Brain scans show that actors lose their 'sense of self' when taking on a role
					

Sometimes, the character can take over the brain.




					www.zmescience.com


----------



## Chanbal

Wishing you all a wonderful Saturday with this gem!


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Shame he didn't teach his wife to understand Royal protocol.


He and other royals may have tried, but she apparently does what she wants. Wasn't there a balcony scene at BP early on where he appears to shush her and she got upset?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> If their plan was to be the alternative woke better choice Royal court, then they likely pooh poohed existing protocol because they were going to do it differently. Methane for instance would have equal standing with TQ and equal access to the vault.


Only in her dreams....


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> I suppose it sells but I’m getting a bit tired of all these biographies predicting the obvious truth years after the fact.
> None of it’s getting to the heart of the matter which is *why did the royals rush into this absolute botch of a marriage when there were apparently giant red flags everywhere.*



I wonder this too. Maybe because both the Queen and PC knew if they refused permission for the two of them to marry, no matter how many doubts they had about her suitability to do the job, or how many troubling things they found in a background investigation on her and her family, they'd be accused of racism.  So, he's only #6, let him choose and be happy hopefully and, if it doesn't work out, they can divorce.  

They couldn't really anticipate how the two of them would bring out the worst in each other and exacerbate their mutual need for endless drama. Well, except for all those troubling incidents and childishness prior to the marriage of course.  But, maybe they attributed that to nerves and the big public spectacle of the royal wedding and thought they'd settle down. They absolutely underestimated Harry's resentment, anger and immaturity but he may have been doing a better job of covering it up prior to marrying her. It's not like PC and the Queen were privy to his therapy sessions where that might be revealed.  I think they also could not imagine that Harry would turn against his own family, the Queen, and the UK to such an extent, at times with viciousness and at times with rank stupidity.  Probably, like Prince Philip, they thought the two of them had a sweet deal, an amazing life ahead of them, without the pressure that comes with being the heir. Who wouldn't be happy and grateful for that?  Who could imagine that he was actually plotting to leave the UK and build some kind of philanthropic/charitable/political/media empire in America? It sounds ridiculous even now when he's actually been attempting to do that for more than 2 years lol!


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Who could imagine that he was actually plotting to leave the UK and build some kind of philanthropic/charitable/political/media empire in America?


Raptor was the catalyst for this. I can't imagine he would have done this on his own. If not for her he most likely would have followed in the party boy spare prince footsteps of Uncle Andy and maybe found his own Fergie at some point.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> What did the Harkles do to deserve all these millions of dollars?


Nothing. That's exactly the point.


----------



## MiniMabel

sdkitty said:


> wonder how active it will be




I can't find the thread, it's not in the "celebrity" section?! 

No worries, found it now......after scrolling down!


----------



## youngster

Also, even if the Queen and PC refused to give permission to Harry and MM to marry, Harry probably would have run off and married her anyway.  I think he was almost hoping to do that. Then he could have spent the last few years complaining constantly about how his family did not accept his wife and what awful people they are so, of course, he had to leave.  Instead, they welcomed her, through them a huge, massively expensive public wedding, PC walking her down the aisle, and bent over backwards to accommodate them. The more they did for the two of them, the more they demanded. They were looking for reasons and justification to leave.


----------



## elvisfan4life

How low can Harry get the insulting comments about Diana moving on and now looking after his family !!! How can you claim exclusive ownership of your dead mother !!! And the “he had his kids I have my kids “ - is that the only reason you wanted children? Did you pick them out of a catalogue too ? Thank god for William Catherine and their adorable three children - the only royal heirs we need


----------



## elvisfan4life

I see there is a new appreciation thread - have we got bots on here now then or paid staffers lol


----------



## elvisfan4life

youngster said:


> Also, even if the Queen and PC refused to give permission to Harry and MM to marry, Harry probably would have run off and married her anyway.  I think he was almost hoping to do that. Then he could have spent the last few years complaining constantly about how his family did not accept his wife and what awful people they are so, of course, he had to leave.  Instead, they welcomed her, through them a huge, massively expensive public wedding, PC walking her down the aisle, and bent over backwards to accommodate them. The more they did for the two of them, the more they demanded. They were looking for reasons and justification to leave.


 What chills me is the comment “we are only one plane crash from the throne “


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> What chills me is the comment “we are only one plane crash from the throne “


Spoken like the true sociopathic narcissist that she is.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Today is Louis's b-day, and several photos of him are being shared on the internet. I particularly like the ones with Charles, he is delighted with his grandkid. I wonder if Hazz will ever realize his mistake.



Doubt it.  They feel they are punishing Charles by prohibiting him from seeing his grandchildren (Thomas Markle too!), but in reality, it's their kids that are missing out.  There's nothing like a grandparent's love.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I wonder what the protocol is. Who would bow/curtsy to whom? Seems to me Maxima outranks Hazz, so he and the tw would have to bow to Max. Perhaps Max did not want to risk an incident. Would tw bow curtsy???? Fairly certain the former Queen Beatrix would have strong words if Hazz showed out.
> 
> 
> ETA:* curtsy, yes yes, men bow, women curtsy.  I’m learnin*g


Yes, all royals usually follow the order of precedence. 
1. Kings/Queens, Emperors/Empresses bow to no one, except RC royals to the Pope.
2. Crown Princes/Princesses, Prince/Princess of Wales, Prince/Princess of Asturias, bow/curtsy only to Monarchs/Emperors 
3. Usually all other royals bow/curtsy to #1 and #2 however there are exceptions. In the UK, a blood princess (e.g. Princess Anne) only curtsies to Camilla and Catherine when they are accompanied by their husbands. I can't vouch for exceptions in other countries.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

elvisfan4life said:


> What chills me is the comment “we are only one plane crash from the throne “


Don't forget that someone added the following comment, "Keep your fingers cross" or something similar followed by laughter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This kinda says it all.









						Harry had 'Olympic rows' with William, bombshell new book claims
					

Tina Brown, the author of The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil, says the Duke of Sussex grew 'angry' at William and the pair had 'Olympic rows'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Was this the last jubilee?   Diamond Jubilee Flotilla in 2012


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was this the last jubilee?



Talking away and getting ignored - just like TW!


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of the commenters


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was this the last jubilee?   Diamond Jubilee Flotilla in 2012



Well, guess Hazhole and Megain have that in common.  Yammering away to non present beings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Emily Sheffield: Prince Harry’s big achievement is the Invictus Games: now he’s spoiling it*
Emily Sheffield11 hours ago
Prince Harry just blew the best chance he had at repairing his reputation. It doesn’t matter that he believes it’s not his responsibility to fix the damage he sees foisted upon him — by the media, by dark forces among royal courtiers, and character clashes in his close family. This was his moment to lay claim to the crowning achievement of his working life to date, the Invictus Games.
Instead in a cringe-making interview with NBC, he threw any hint of newly found mature discipline to the wind and allowed the old demons to run riot. The possibility of headlines praising his resilience and the powerful message of Invictus were swiftly buried in the wreckage of the emotional car crash that is the royal family.

I’m no Harry and Meghan basher. Without doubt the media is vicious when it sets its sights on a quarry, especially when that quarry has fightback. And as a mother of two sons, I have never forgotten the image of that young boy, in his oversized suit, walking behind Diana’s coffin. And I don’t doubt the “grey suits” in the palace have done their fair share of divisive meddling as well as aiding the Queen. But _in that interview, Harry was only harming himself_.









						Emily Sheffield: Harry’s big achievement is the Invictus Games: now he’s spoiling it
					

Prince Harry just blew the best chance he had at repairing his reputation. It doesn’t matter that he believes it’s not his responsibility to fix the damage he sees foisted upon him — by the media, by dark forces among royal courtiers, and character clashes in his close family. This was his...




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Hazhole


That's a good one


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This kinda says it all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry had 'Olympic rows' with William, bombshell new book claims
> 
> 
> Tina Brown, the author of The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil, says the Duke of Sussex grew 'angry' at William and the pair had 'Olympic rows'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


so he's always been angry and jealous and the narc saw it as an opportunity.....what a mess


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Today is Louis's b-day, and several photos of him are being shared on the internet. I particularly like the ones with Charles, he is delighted with his grandkid. *I wonder if Hazz will ever realize his mistake.*




You're missing the crucial bit here...HIS mistake? Raptor and Harry are the eternal victims of the mean BRF and completely blameless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Doubt it.  They feel they are punishing Charles by prohibiting him from seeing his grandchildren (Thomas Markle too!), but in reality, it's their kids that are missing out.  *There's nothing like a grandparent's love.*



And in Charles' case, the money and influence and name.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Don't forget that someone added the following comment, "Keep your fingers cross" or something similar followed by laughter.



That someone was Raptor. The whole quote was "We're only one plane crash away from the throne...fingers crossed."


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, if someone repeats a lie often enough, it can be substituted for the truth and become the reality in their mind. I've seen people doing this to the point they will swear that the lie is the truth and if you challenge them with the real truth, they will call you a liar.
> 
> *Brain scans show that actors lose their ‘sense of self’ when taking on a role*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brain scans show that actors lose their 'sense of self' when taking on a role
> 
> 
> Sometimes, the character can take over the brain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zmescience.com


I can’t believe this has happened to M she has never acted competently a day in her life. 


youngster said:


> I wonder this too. Maybe because both the Queen and PC knew if they refused permission for the two of them to marry, no matter how many doubts they had about her suitability to do the job, or how many troubling things they found in a background investigation on her and her family, they'd be accused of racism.  So, he's only #6, let him choose and be happy hopefully and, if it doesn't work out, they can divorce.
> 
> They couldn't really anticipate how the two of them would bring out the worst in each other and exacerbate their mutual need for endless drama. Well, except for all those troubling incidents and childishness prior to the marriage of course.  But, maybe they attributed that to nerves and the big public spectacle of the royal wedding and thought they'd settle down. They absolutely underestimated Harry's resentment, anger and immaturity but he may have been doing a better job of covering it up prior to marrying her. It's not like PC and the Queen were privy to his therapy sessions where that might be revealed.  I think they also could not imagine that Harry would turn against his own family, the Queen, and the UK to such an extent, at times with viciousness and at times with rank stupidity.  Probably, like Prince Philip, they thought the two of them had a sweet deal, an amazing life ahead of them, without the pressure that comes with being the heir. Who wouldn't be happy and grateful for that?  Who could imagine that he was actually plotting to leave the UK and build some kind of philanthropic/charitable/political/media empire in America? It sounds ridiculous even now when he's actually been attempting to do that for more than 2 years lol!





youngster said:


> Also, even if the Queen and PC refused to give permission to Harry and MM to marry, Harry probably would have run off and married her anyway.  I think he was almost hoping to do that. Then he could have spent the last few years complaining constantly about how his family did not accept his wife and what awful people they are so, of course, he had to leave.  Instead, they welcomed her, through them a huge, massively expensive public wedding, PC walking her down the aisle, and bent over backwards to accommodate them. The more they did for the two of them, the more they demanded. They were looking for reasons and justification to leave.


Yeah the accusations of racism  dont  Seem that just that good of a justification  to me. We have been accused of being racist just for expressing an opinion on this thread and it just doesn’t mean that much if you know it is groundless. Besides the fact that a their position is basically indisputable  and B Phillip and Harry have been accused of exactly that before to little outcome, I feel like the threat must have been something stronger or the benefit perceived to be greater.
Also I don’t believe for a single second H would have eloped with her with no guarantee of money or expensive marriage equal to his brother’s that’s just not his character… or hers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Also I don’t believe for a single second H would have eloped with her with no guarantee of money or expensive marriage equal to his brother’s that’s just not his character…* or hers*.



I can just see his stupid a*s doing it completely, uh, LOVE struck while at the same time kicking his family like the spiteful little sh*t he's turned out to be, but you are right...she would never have agreed to that. She wasn't looking for a broke nobody and the less than grand affair.


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting bits about Invictus. Held 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2022.  To be held 2023 & 2025.  Held yearly prior to COVID. 
And will be held next year in Germany , a year after the Hague.  Is there that much audience for ANNUAL games? 
There are also para-Olympics and special Olympics. Dh was confused about the differences. Again, this goes to the size of the audience...
And given the issues about political and doping-related boycotts of recent Olympics, it seems that the paradigm (participation by country) is wobbly...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my, that's only an hour away from me and even closer to my workplace. I might just go on vacation if Raptor shows up to be a VVIP. But there's always hope they'll have imploded and be divorced by next year.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, all royals usually follow the order of precedence.
> 1. Kings/Queens, Emperors/Empresses bow to no one, except RC royals to the Pope.
> 2. Crown Princes/Princesses, Prince/Princess of Wales, Prince/Princess of Asturias, bow/curtsy only to Monarchs/Emperors
> 3. Usually all other royals bow/curtsy to #1 and #2 however there are exceptions. In the UK, a blood princess (e.g. Princess Anne) only curtsies to Camilla and Catherine when they are accompanied by their husbands. I can't vouch for exceptions in other countries.



If I was Anne, I would be PO to have to curtesy to my brother (with or without C)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just reading that article on the royal row...so Harry was angry William was "hogging the best briefs". Did that somehow come as a surprise to him or did he in fact hear once or twice before his brother will be king one day and he won't?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If I was Anne, I would be PO to have to curtesy to my brother (with or without C)



I feel it's worse with Andrew and Edward seeing she's older but unfairly ended up being outranked by them. I'm glad The Queen changed that for the Cambridge kids.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my, that's only an hour away from me and even closer to my workplace. I might just go on vacation if Raptor shows up to be a VVIP. But there's always hope they'll have imploded and be divorced by next year.



Yes, please go and give her some major side eye.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel it's worse with Andrew and Edward seeing she's older but unfairly ended up being outranked by them. I'm glad The Queen changed that for the Cambridge kids.


I wish it was changed so Anne would be next in line. She'd be a better sovereign than Charles. However, I'd like to see Will ascend the throne after, and that wouldn't work with Anne.


----------



## A1aGypsy

marietouchet said:


> Interesting bits about Invictus. Held 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2022.  To be held 2023 & 2025.  Held yearly prior to COVID.
> And will be held next year in Germany , a year after the Hague.  Is there that much audience for ANNUAL games?
> There are also para-Olympics and special Olympics. Dh was confused about the differences. Again, this goes to the size of the audience...
> And given the issues about political and doping-related boycotts of recent Olympics, it seems that the paradigm (participation by country) is wobbly...



The Invictus Games are for wounded Service people, not the audience. They raise spirits, awareness, funding and support for those who require it. Veteran’s often struggle to get support and funding for their needs.

To represent one’s country has a particular pride for veterans. I don’t think doping nor even winning is a focus in these games.  Many of the participants have struggled with addictions.

There are many things that can be said about this duo but I can tell you from first hand experience with participants, the Invictus Games does a great deal of good. It not only gives people assistance who desperately need it, it provides them with camaraderie, connection, pride and a goal. Things that can pull veterans from very dark places.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> I wish it was changed so Anne would be next in line. She'd be a better sovereign than Charles. However, I'd like to see Will ascend the throne after, and that wouldn't work with Anne.



It would...because the minute William was born he became #2, so Anne would only be queen if something happend to Charles AND William.

ETA: or do you mean Anne instead of Charles? How would that work however laws are changed when she's the 2nd born?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel it's worse with Andrew and Edward seeing she's older but unfairly ended up being outranked by them. I'm glad The Queen changed that for the Cambridge kids.


I was extremely disappointed and annoyed when HM changed the line of succession to equal primogeniture without moving Anne ahead of Andrew and Edward, but not surprised seeing as Andrew is her favourite. Anne has had to work twice as hard as A & E to earn the title of Princess Royal.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would...because the minute William was born he became #2, so Anne would only be queen if something happend to Charles AND William.


Before William was born, Anne was 4th in line, then went down to 5th once he was born.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would...because the minute William was born he became #2, so Anne would only be queen if something happend to Charles AND William.
> 
> ETA: or do you mean Anne instead of Charles? How would that work however laws are changed when she's the 2nd born?


Oops my bad. I was thinking Anne was the eldest. Oh well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, please go and give her some major side eye.



I have a relative who for years worked for a big German association for athletes with physical disabilities to keep it vague. If I absolutely wanted to go and be close enough to give her side eye I'm sure that could be arranged. But it might take me days to recover from whatever she transpires


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Before William was born, Anne was 4th in line, then went down to 5th once he was born.



I know, but we were daydreaming of Anne being treated as equal to her brothers, in which case she'd been the spare.


----------



## Sharont2305

redney said:


> Oops my bad. I was thinking Anne was the eldest. Oh well.


She's the second eldest

ETA, just saw your second reply.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> The Invictus Games are for wounded Service people, not the audience. They raise spirits, awareness, funding and support for those who require it. *Veteran’s often struggle to get support and funding for their needs.*



Which is such a shame. These people gave their physical and mental integrity and then they come home badly injured and are all but forgotten.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> I was extremely disappointed and annoyed when HM changed the line of succession to equal primogeniture without moving Anne ahead of Andrew and Edward, but not surprised seeing as Andrew is her favourite. Anne has had to work twice as hard as A & E to earn the title of Princess Royal.



I'm not sure how I feel about it. I am a big Anne fan and think she would make a stellar queen, probably moreso than Charles (sorry Charles!), and there's obviously no question she's way above Andrew in morals, conduct, judgement and work ethics. But also, I found it extremely harsh that the Swedish parliament changed the line of succession in favour of Victoria only AFTER her brother was born and had been heir apparent for a bit. Like, how about you make up your mind before stripping an actual person (and keep that stupid king from whining publicly at every occasion how he still wanted his son to become king)? And in the British case, it would have not only influenced Anne, Andrew and Edward, but also six grandchildren (two of those positively, though). Seeing it would have just been a gesture as none of these people will ever sit on that throne, maybe the bad blood wouldn't have been worth it. Dunno.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

A1aGypsy said:


> *The Invictus Games are for wounded Service people, not the audience. They raise spirits, awareness, funding and support for those who require it. Veteran’s often struggle to get support and funding for their needs.*
> 
> To represent one’s country has a particular pride for veterans. I don’t think doping nor even winning is a focus in these games.  Many of the participants have struggled with addictions.
> 
> There are many things that can be said about this duo but I can tell you from first hand experience with participants, the Invictus Games does a great deal of good. It not only gives people assistance who desperately need it, it provides them with camaraderie, connection, pride and a goal. Things that can pull veterans from very dark places.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Which is such a shame. These people gave their physical and mental integrity and then the come home badly injured and are all but forgotten.*


It would be a shame if the Dreadful Duo dipped into the moneys to collect huge appearance fees and to pay for their travel and hotel accommodations as they surely didn't attend just out of kindness and they seem to require the most expensive of anything and everything they choose. Also, bringing ButterCup Mental Health on board probably wasn't a money-free deal. Makes me wonder who paid for their trip to BP prior to the games.


----------



## kemilia

Just a thought that's been rolling around in my head--what is the reason H&M didn't bring their 2 kids? 

H said he wants TQ to meet his offspring in person YET they don't come with for what was a quick trip (especially since M left early and they would have left with her). Having TQ & Charles meet his kids could have really smoothed things.

Does M have worries that the meal tickets wouldn't be allowed to leave? Is this even possible or legal? 

Or is she holding out for big People/Vanity Fair magazine cover story and keeps the tickets hidden away except for a couple of bad photos so they are worth more? 

Or are H&M just being mean and controlling (the meal tickets are just about the only chess pieces they have left worth anything--and the older they get, the less anyone will care). I thought that maybe the tickets could have been the "surprise" but it didn't seem that there was much of a surprise at all.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Just a thought that's been rolling around in my head--what is the reason H&M didn't bring their 2 kids?
> 
> H said he wants TQ to meet his offspring in person YET they don't come with for what was a quick trip (especially since M left early and they would have left with her). Having TQ & Charles meet his kids could have really smoothed things.
> 
> Does M have worries that the meal tickets wouldn't be allowed to leave? Is this even possible or legal?
> 
> Or is she holding out for big People/Vanity Fair magazine cover story and keeps the tickets hidden away except for a couple of bad photos so they are worth more?
> 
> Or are H&M just being mean and controlling (the meal tickets are just about the only chess pieces they have left worth anything--and the older they get, the less anyone will care). I thought that maybe the tickets could have been the "surprise" but it didn't seem that there was much of a surprise at all.


If I wanted to think the best of them I'd say they're protecting the kids.  Other than that, I'd go with your magazine cover theory.  but that could be a mistake if as time goes by H&M become less interesting and therefore, the kids pics less valuable.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> Just a thought that's been rolling around in my head--what is the reason H&M didn't bring their 2 kids?
> 
> H said he wants TQ to meet his offspring in person YET they don't come with for what was a quick trip (especially since M left early and they would have left with her). Having TQ & Charles meet his kids could have really smoothed things.
> 
> Does M have worries that the meal tickets wouldn't be allowed to leave? Is this even possible or legal?
> 
> Or is she holding out for big People/Vanity Fair magazine cover story and keeps the tickets hidden away except for a couple of bad photos so they are worth more?
> 
> Or are H&M just being mean and controlling (the meal tickets are just about the only chess pieces they have left worth anything--and the older they get, the less anyone will care). I thought that maybe the tickets could have been the "surprise" but it didn't seem that there was much of a surprise at all.


Just being mean.  I also think that these children are not well socialized because they don't get out that much and with adults.  They might end up screaming their heads off during the visit.  I am going to make a generalization.  My observation on trips to the UK and EU is that children are brought up to behave better in social circumstances.  Remember right before Covid when Charlotte was taken by her mother to meet people who were waiting outside the church on Christmas Day?  The child was a little scared, but managed to get through it nicely because she had been coached ahead of time and had spent time with adults other than her family.  I don't see the Harkles doing any of he above for their children. They are treating them like exotics who are only brought out on rare occasions.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Just being mean.  I also think that these children are not well socialized because they don't get out that much and with adults.  They might end up screaming their heads off during the visit.  I am going to make a generalization.  My observation on trips to the UK and EU is that children are brought up to behave better in social circumstances.  Remember right before Covid when Charlotte was taken by her mother to meet people who were waiting outside the church on Christmas Day?  The child was a little scared, but managed to get through it nicely because she had been coached ahead of time and had spent time with adults other than her family.  I don't see the Harkles doing any of he above for their children. They are treating them like exotics who are only brought out on rare occasions.


Lily is still a baby, right?  It would be archie who may or may not be well socialized


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This kinda says it all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry had 'Olympic rows' with William, bombshell new book claims
> 
> 
> Tina Brown, the author of The Palace Papers: Inside The House Of Windsor - The Truth And The Turmoil, says the Duke of Sussex grew 'angry' at William and the pair had 'Olympic rows'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I guess we were all fooled thinking he was cute or likable when he was just angry and nasty all along


----------



## csshopper

Hopefully some day there will be an interviewer who not only asks a question but. then follows through, as necessary, to get real answers. Obviously not Oprah or Hoda.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Hopefully some day there will be an interviewer who not only asks a question but. then follows through, as necessary, to get real answers. Obviously not Oprah or Hoda.


I doubt they would ever expose themselves to a hard hitting interviewer...their appearances are all PR
The would have to be ambushed


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> Lily is still a baby, right?  It would be archie who may or may not be well socialized


Lilypad might not react well to a bunch of strangers if she is never out and exposed to people.  She is going to be a year old by the time of the Jubilee.  She should be engaging with her surroundings.  

Here is Princess Charlotte at one year.  She knows what she's doing lol!


----------



## gracekelly

As for Archie...here is Prince Louis at three


----------



## CarryOn2020

Get ready - fun times ahead!


From the official Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June to the multitude of events planned to mark the moment unofficially, Queen Elizabeth's 70 years on the throne are being honored in many ways this year. But for art and jewelry lovers in particular, auction house Sotheby’s could prove to be the biggest draw this summer with its series of exhibitions which includes a display of 50 rarely-seen aristocratic tiaras. 






A turquoise tiara crafted by jewelers Van Cleef & Arpels in the 1960s which will form part of Sotheby’s Platinum Jubilee exhibitions








						Rare Aristocratic Tiaras to be Displayed in Unique Platinum Jubilee Exhibition
					

Auction house Sotheby’s announced a month-long series of exhibitions, events, and auctions showcasing British creativity for Queen Elizabeth's jubilee—and 50 rarely-seen spectacular aristocratic tiaras.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Chanbal

This post is making me question whether the Invictus Games were created by the Palace for Hazz. Would that be possible?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

The Telegraph published a little more info from Brown's book. The several people the Netfl*xes have been hurting in the name of money. Allegedly, of course!

*"Brown is refreshingly unafraid to point out the financial imperative behind the Sussexes’ move to America. “The grating problem was money,” *_she insists. “Meghan wanted a paying job.*”

Contrary to his media caricature as borderline-alcoholic trailer trash, Thomas Markle snr, *who Brown has interviewed for the book and refers to as “Tom”,* cannot fail to elicit sympathy, ghosted by the daughter he says he bankrupted himself to send to private school.* Described by colleagues as “*professional”, “kind”, “totally dependable”, “trustworthy” and with “a big heart”*, the former Hollywood lighting director calls Harry “the snottiest man I’ve ever heard in my life”, having been berated by the prince over the phone while he was in his hospital bed, recovering from a heart attack.
With two of *the three Ms that made up Megxit* – *Meghan* and *money* – covered, the most revelatory part of The Palace Papers concerns that less well-understood factor: *mental health*. *All credit to Brown for discovering that it was Harry’s former girlfriend Cressida Bonas who first encouraged the “angry” prince to see a therapist* – and that he was even advised to turn to MI6 for advice. As a person close to Harry told Brown at the time: “There was a need for someone who would be incredibly discreet and who understood what it’s like to have a public version of your life and a private version of your life. Therapists at MI6, that’s what they do.” 
He did find a therapist elsewhere, and later wrote to Bonas, Brown claims, thanking her.
*But perhaps the saddest part of Brown’s story is that Harry remains at loggerheads with the two people who cared deeply about his mental wellbeing: William and Kate. *It may be a coincidence that Brown lost her husband of 40 years, the celebrated Sunday Times editor Harold Evans, in 2020 as she was finishing the book – but grief features prominently in her analysis of what went wrong between the royal brothers.
*When William cautioned Harry about rushing into a relationship with Meghan, Brown claims it was out of concern for his “mental fragility*”, fearing he would not be able to handle the scrutiny she was about to face as the first woman of colour to marry into the Royal family. Harry apparently responded by saying: “*The best way I can protect her is to marry her as quickly as possible because… she will then get police protection*”, only seeming to confirm William’s worries that his brother still hadn’t processed their mother’s untimely death.
Brown’s conclusion that *William has “found a way to accept both his destiny and his own complexity*” arguably puts the monarchy in a better place than when Diana left it – _*but with an unmistakeable Harry-sized hole at its heart."*





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Interesting bits about Invictus. Held 2014, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2022.  To be held 2023 & 2025.  Held yearly prior to COVID.
> And will be held next year in Germany , a year after the Hague.  Is there that much audience for ANNUAL games?
> There are also para-Olympics and special Olympics. Dh was confused about the differences. Again, this goes to the size of the audience...
> And given the issues about political and doping-related boycotts of recent Olympics, it seems that the paradigm (participation by country) is wobbly...


Invictus was based on US Warrior Games which are held annually. WG competition is by the branch of service (e.g. army vs navy) and for the US with some invited teams while Invictus is international.

It's a pity that H seems to be now monetizing a worthwhile effort for his own profit. I would be very interested to know if Invictus had to pick up the tab for the flights, accommodation and security for H&M and their retinue, and if the rumours of an appearance fee are true. Maybe the ButterCup partnership was part of the appearance fee conditions, and so H earned a bundle from both Invictus and ButterCup.


----------



## Chanbal

Page Six on Brown's book   










						Book reveals Harry and Meghan’s ‘mutual addiction to drama’
					

A new book by Tina Brown claims Prince Harry has a history of temperamental outbursts — and that he and Meghan Markle have stoked each other’s “addiction to drama.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

If the rumors are true, I am talking about _all_ of the rumors - _good and bad_ - if true, then why would KP/BP/QE/Charles/William, why would they “give” Hazzi Invictus?  Surely they knew a program dedicated to wounded warriors would require a very public role which is the one thing Hazzie dislikes. Plus, it gives a microphone to spew his venom.  Of course, the ego-maniac stuck in jr high would jump at the chance for this much attention. He craves it.  Surely, they know that. Really, they should explain themselves. Imo.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That someone was Raptor. The whole quote was "We're only one plane crash away from the throne...fingers crossed."


i never saw this quote.  Did she say it before or after she married him?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Definitely, _super-crass_


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Get ready - fun times ahead!
> 
> 
> From the official Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June to the multitude of events planned to mark the moment unofficially, Queen Elizabeth's 70 years on the throne are being honored in many ways this year. But for art and jewelry lovers in particular, auction house Sotheby’s could prove to be the biggest draw this summer with its series of exhibitions which includes a display of 50 rarely-seen aristocratic tiaras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A turquoise tiara crafted by jewelers Van Cleef & Arpels in the 1960s which will form part of Sotheby’s Platinum Jubilee exhibitions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rare Aristocratic Tiaras to be Displayed in Unique Platinum Jubilee Exhibition
> 
> 
> Auction house Sotheby’s announced a month-long series of exhibitions, events, and auctions showcasing British creativity for Queen Elizabeth's jubilee—and 50 rarely-seen spectacular aristocratic tiaras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


VCA turquoise!!!  And in YG too!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Congratulations to Princess Anne


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Page Six on Brown's book
> View attachment 5387425
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book reveals Harry and Meghan’s ‘mutual addiction to drama’
> 
> 
> A new book by Tina Brown claims Prince Harry has a history of temperamental outbursts — and that he and Meghan Markle have stoked each other’s “addiction to drama.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


The last para was quite funny. They were stunned when the palace didn't give way to their demands. My office narc tried the same tactic during staff appraisal when he couldn't accept that he wasn't performing up to par. He told our boss, "I don't know what more you expect of me! I don't understand what you want. Maybe this job isn't right for me!" He expected her to back down and rescope the job to his preferences.  Boss wished him well in his future endeavours.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely, _super-crass_



What a F'ing Hazhole!  How presumptuous of him.  Thank GOD HE created the Invictus Games, thereby personally saving all these suicidal veterans.  This is seriously beyond belief.  He needs mental therapy quickly...like straight jacket, hospitalized mental therapy.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely, _super-crass_



Luckily he didn't try to add in personal relevancy by spouting the nonsense about how he and TW saved each other.



CarryOn2020 said:


> If the rumors are true, I am talking about _all_ of the rumors - _good and bad_ - if true, then why would KP/BP/QE/Charles/William, why would they “give” Hazzi Invictus?  Surely they knew a program dedicated to wounded warriors would require a very public role which is the one thing Hazzie dislikes. Plus, it gives a microphone to spew his venom.  Of course, the ego-maniac stuck in jr high would jump at the chance for this much attention. He craves it.  Surely, they know that. Really, they should explain themselves. Imo.


Wasn't it counted as a "personal" patronage? Just like TW retained patronage of SmartWorks and Mayhew? What makes something a personal patronage?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This post is making me question whether the Invictus Games were created by the Palace for Hazz. Would that be possible?



See Wikipedia … invictus got started with a 1 million pound grant from one of the royal foundations

Sorry … on my phone it is hard for me to give the exact url , my phone is tiny and I rarely use it to browse tpf , I really use it only as a phone … lol


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> If I wanted to think the best of them I'd say they're protecting the kids


You're more charitable than I am. I think she just wanted the spotlight on herself and her fashion parade. Oh, and Whatsizname.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Page Six on Brown's book
> View attachment 5387425
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Book reveals Harry and Meghan’s ‘mutual addiction to drama’
> 
> 
> A new book by Tina Brown claims Prince Harry has a history of temperamental outbursts — and that he and Meghan Markle have stoked each other’s “addiction to drama.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


----------



## Annawakes

from the silly closing speech. 

More like…._I can’t explain how much (*the money) *means to me…and to Us (*who is Us???*)….so…thank you._


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely, _super-crass_



Eloquence is not his strong suit is it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> As for Archie...here is Prince Louis at three
> 
> View attachment 5387362


Happy parents, happy children.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Lilypad might not react well to a bunch of strangers if she is never out and exposed to people.  She is going to be a year old by the time of the Jubilee.  She should be engaging with her surroundings.
> 
> Here is Princess Charlotte at one year.  She knows what she's doing lol!
> 
> View attachment 5387358
> 
> 
> View attachment 5387359


OMG those cheeks!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the rumors are true, I am talking about _all_ of the rumors - _good and bad_ - if true, then why would KP/BP/QE/Charles/William, why would they “give” Hazzi Invictus?  Surely they knew a program dedicated to wounded warriors would require a very public role which is the one thing Hazzie dislikes. Plus, it gives a microphone to spew his venom.  Of course, the ego-maniac stuck in jr high would jump at the chance for this much attention. He craves it.  Surely, they know that. Really, they should explain themselves. Imo.


My 2 cents: The family did whatever they could to help Hazz and protect his reputation. Megxit was a big surprise for them, they never expected that Hazz would be going after his own family the way he is doing.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones on the way to the supermarket, don't be surprised by the headlines.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> For the ones on the way to the supermarket, don't be surprised by the headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5387458


Is it just me, or does that pic of TW look doctored??


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Is it just me, or does that pic of TW look doctored??



so does Hazzie’s hair - redder and fuller :


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Eloquence is not his strong suit is it?


Not sure what his strong suit even is, TBH!


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Is it just me, or does that pic of TW look doctored??


Her face looks totally different.  More manly.  Or witch-like.  Take your pick.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For the ones on the way to the supermarket, don't be surprised by the headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5387458


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean, based on his contacts, reported the meeting was actually 13 1/2 minutes and was with Hazbeen only.  TW was relegated to seating outside  and kept in place with tea and snacks (he used a more elegant word). Allegedly they were late to arrive and it cut into the time with Charles as well. He was due to represent the Queen and he and Camilla had to leave to be on time.

As Neil pointed out that short amount of time hardly seems long enough for all Harry claimed transpired.

Edited to add: looks like a US tabloid is changing its tune about Baldie and Botox.


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, the meeting with QE lasted 13.5min and there was no tea with Hazz & TW.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean, based on his contacts, reported the meeting was actually 13 1/2 minutes and was with Hazbeen only.  TW was relegated to seating outside  and kept in place with tea and snacks (he used a more elegant word). Allegedly they were late to arrive and it cut into the time with Charles as well. He was due to represent the Queen and he and Camilla had to leave to be on time.
> 
> As Neil pointed out that short amount of time hardly seems long enough for all Harry claimed transpired.
> 
> Edited to add: looks like a US tabloid is changing its tune about Baldie and Botox.


I did'n see your post on NS, and posted the video. It's unbelievable how they (allegedly) lie and use others to get whatever they want. I feel particularly sorry for Charles and TM.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the rumors are true, I am talking about _all_ of the rumors - _good and bad_ - if true, then why would KP/BP/QE/Charles/William, why would they “give” Hazzi Invictus?  Surely they knew a program dedicated to wounded warriors would require a very public role which is the one thing Hazzie dislikes. Plus, it gives a microphone to spew his venom.  Of course, the ego-maniac stuck in jr high would jump at the chance for this much attention. He craves it.  Surely, they know that. Really, they should explain themselves. Imo.


I think they don’t want to take it off him given it’s well-publicised it was his idea. Statistically it’ll just fall into irrelevance in time anyway as fewer and fewer people are being recruited into the British military as fighting a war is becoming far less dependent on foot soldiers.
My more controversial opinion is that all these military appointments the royals give themselves are a complete joke anyway as none of them have spent any significant amount of time in service. I like Anne but when was she (or Harry before her) in the navy? Surely it’s more to be celebrated when these jobs should go to vaguely qualified people not just people with special blood. 


Chanbal said:


> For the ones on the way to the supermarket, don't be surprised by the headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5387458


Lord this photoshopping is hilarious. The grin on the queen is the most ridiculous though.  Doctored? More like an entire hospital


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I guess we were all fooled thinking he was cute or likable when he was just angry and nasty all along


Almost from the beginning I could see an undisciplined spoiled brat, who was left to do pretty much as he pleased because he was just the spare.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Is it just me, or does that pic of TW look doctored??


Not actually that far off from the original, but yeah, the "enhancement" was not done by a fan.




__





						Redirect Notice
					





					www.google.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I saw another definition of TW - The Woman.


----------



## gracekelly

If Meghan was made to wait elsewhere, with a minder I’m sure, whilst  Harry saw The Queen, I wonder why she tagged along in the first place.  Clearly  this was not expected. It was also insulting to her. Wonder if we will hear whining and complaining about it. Surprised she didn’t throw tea cups and smear cake on the walls.

With the meeting being so short I am inclined to believe that the one with Charles was for him to deliver bad news to Harry and the subsequent meeting with TQ was to confirm whatever  Charles told him.  If not it had to be the most cursory hello and goodbye on record.


----------



## K.D.

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my, that's only an hour away from me and even closer to my workplace. I might just go on vacation if Raptor shows up to be a VVIP. But there's always hope they'll have imploded and be divorced by next year.


You can pull through, they were staying in a hotel on my way to work and I'm fairly certain I was stopped for their motorcade last Tuesday when cycling back home hahaha


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> i never saw this quote.  Did she say it before or after she married him?


After, IIRC. And I think it was recounted in a Lady C video as told to her by those who overheard TW saying it.


----------



## jaztee

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw another definition of TW - The Woman.



I’m a massive lurker in this thread and I always read TW as trigger warning


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*When William cautioned Harry about rushing into a relationship with Meghan, Brown claims it was out of concern for his “mental fragility*”, fearing he would not be able to handle the scrutiny she was about to face as the first woman of colour to marry into the Royal family. Harry apparently responded by saying: “*The best way I can protect her is to marry her as quickly as possible because… she will then get police protection*”, only seeming to confirm William’s worries that his brother still hadn’t processed their mother’s untimely death._



WTF!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> i never saw this quote.  Did she say it before or after she married him?



After.


----------



## csshopper

I accidentally hit page 1, September 2006, and the first post is accompanied by a photo of a hairy petulant looking #6, by page 2 we are into a photo series of a falling in the gutter completely smashed Haz and comment he had taken a swing at a paparazzi just before the photos were taken.

And here we are 16 years later, less hair, petulance that has deepened into mean and nasty, and making more of an azz of himself than ever.

Emotionally stunted to an alarming degree.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the rumors are true, I am talking about _all_ of the rumors - _good and bad_ - if true, then why would KP/BP/QE/Charles/William, why would they “give” Hazzi Invictus?  Surely they knew a program dedicated to wounded warriors would require a very public role which is the one thing Hazzie dislikes. Plus, it gives a microphone to spew his venom.  Of course, the ego-maniac stuck in jr high would jump at the chance for this much attention. He craves it.  Surely, they know that. Really, they should explain themselves. Imo.



I don't find it all that hard to comprehend. It kept him busy and it was a gain for the public persona they had crafted for him. What were they going to do, lock him away? Obviously not, and for years they were quite successful in making him shine despite his shortcomings.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lori is not wrong. Though I still think the turning point was Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What a F'ing Hazhole!  How presumptuous of him.  Thank GOD HE created the Invictus Games, thereby personally saving all these suicidal veterans.  This is seriously beyond belief.  *He needs mental therapy quickly...like straight jacket, hospitalized mental therapy.*



I tend to agree, and despite all that offensive sh*t coming out of his mouth I find it sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For the ones on the way to the supermarket, don't be surprised by the headlines.
> 
> View attachment 5387458



What...I thought they didn't have these in the US.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> If Meghan was made to wait elsewhere, with a minder I’m sure, whilst  Harry saw The Queen, I wonder why she tagged along in the first place.  Clearly  this was not expected. It was also insulting to her. *Wonder if we will hear whining and complaining about it. *Surprised she didn’t throw tea cups and smear cake on the walls.



As for now they have chosen the elaborate tea party story with Raptor being oh so welcome I think we're safe.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jaztee said:


> I’m a massive lurker in this thread and I always read TW as trigger warning



That's perfect!


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's perfect!



I always thought it was “that Woman“ - which was a quote from William about her bullying (reference below)









						Prince William called Meghan Markle her 'that bloody woman'
					

For nearly three years, friends of Prince William and Prince Harry have been despairing over the animosity between the brothers (pictured at Westminster Abbey) writes ROBERT LACEY.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> I always thought it was “that Woman“ - which was a quote from William about her bullying (reference below)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William called Meghan Markle her 'that bloody woman'
> 
> 
> For nearly three years, friends of Prince William and Prince Harry have been despairing over the animosity between the brothers (pictured at Westminster Abbey) writes ROBERT LACEY.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk









There she is again, the Miserable Ms. Markle, with her "I just swallowed a canary" look, probably debating whether or not to grab William's hand, as her lopsided nipples stand front and center.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Is it just me, or does that pic of TW look doctored??



It's strange, she's not that tall next to Harry, not even in 120 evening heels. Normally she comes up to the top of H's ear. They've made her look bigger overall - probably to catch people's eyes more easily


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> There she is again, the Miserable Ms. Markle, with her "I just swallowed a canary" look, probably debating whether or not to grab William's hand, as her lopsided nipples stand front and center.



Credit to her here though, it's very tricky to walk on cobble stones in heels, especially if you're determined not to look down.


----------



## MiniMabel

purseinsanity said:


> There she is again, the Miserable Ms. Markle, with her "I just swallowed a canary" look, probably debating whether or not to grab William's hand, as her lopsided nipples stand front and center.



Which occasion was this?  She looks, sadly, completely out of place.  The dress seems inappropriate and unflattering in it's style, a real oddity.  And why is she with JCMH when it seems that Catherine is not with William (unless the photo has been cropped or she is perhaps already in place?).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

MiniMabel said:


> Which occasion was this?  She looks, sadly, completely out of place.  The dress seems inappropriate and unflattering in it's style, a real oddity.  And why is she with JCMH when it seems that Catherine is not with William (unless the photo has been cropped or she is perhaps already in place?).



I think Kate was on maternity leave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think Kate was on maternity leave.



I'll take that back, the picture was cropped (and Kate is entirely capable of walking without hanging onto her husband for dear life). The occasion was the 100th Anniversary Service RAF in Westminster Abbey on July 10th in 2018.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I always thought that TW would go to Invictus in order to be photographed.  Some are saying she wasn’t supposed to be there.  It makes me wonder if she accompanied H to his meeting with his family, thinking that if H got face time, she would too, sitting beside him.  She expected to negotiate with them being the spokesperson for Harry. Also being able to “interpret” the RF for Harry (basically telling Harry what to think, how to receive the information). 

instead, she got left outside, guarded, no agency.

and then no meetings with Dutch royalty, and the humiliation of that being declared in a public statement so there can’t even be the illusion via PR.

Meanwhile, thanks to the Jubilee, the RF is putting outs TONS of PR.  Sunny Sucks can’t possibly keep up.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Not sure what his strong suit even is, TBH!


Playing a victim.


----------



## sdkitty

another pro-harry article....says he'd like to have a mediator to help with the family rift 








						William Just Reacted to Harry Hinting the Queen Needs to Be ‘Protected’ From ‘People Around Her’
					

Prince Harry revealed his feelings about his visit with the Queen.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll take that back, the picture was cropped (and Kate is entirely capable of walking without hanging onto her husband for dear life). The occasion was the 100th Anniversary Service RAF in Westminster Abbey on July 10th in 2018.
> 
> View attachment 5387681


She really does have toothpick legs.


----------



## Icyjade

purseinsanity said:


> There she is again, the Miserable Ms. Markle, with her "I just swallowed a canary" look, probably debating whether or not to grab William's hand, as her lopsided nipples stand front and center.


ok I googled n she seems to have a high number of boobs/ bra related wardrobe malfunction… deliberate? Or she just likes her boobs to be free? 

Here is another


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> I always thought that TW would go to Invictus in order to be photographed.  Some are saying she wasn’t supposed to be there.  It makes me wonder if she accompanied H to his meeting with his family, thinking that if H got face time, she would too, sitting beside him.  She expected to negotiate with them being the spokesperson for Harry. Also being able to “interpret” the RF for Harry (basically telling Harry what to think, how to receive the information).
> 
> instead, she got left outside, guarded, no agency.
> 
> and then no meetings with Dutch royalty, and the humiliation of that being declared in a public statement so there can’t even be the illusion via PR.
> 
> Meanwhile, thanks to the Jubilee, the RF is putting outs TONS of PR.  Sunny Sucks can’t possibly keep up.


I have this little fantasy scene based on H&M's allegedly jolly tea time with HMTQ. M is stewing outside, blocked from entering. But, ha! She has stuck a tiny receiver in H's ear and she has a tiny mic in her +- pendant. HMTQ is on a viewing screen in front of H, sipping her cup of tea.

Under the guise of drinking tea, M mutters, "H, tell her that we want money and co-operation with our Netflix deal."

The Dolt of Sussex: "We want..."

HMTQ cuts him off: "Harry, you know why you are here, don't you?"

The Dolt: "Errrr... we want... "

HMTQ: "Has your father spoken with you?"

The Dolt: "Errrr... " (laughs nervously)

The Decepticon of Sussex: (drinking more tea) "Well? What did she say? If she won't give us what we want, we won't let her see Archificial and Invisibet! That'll show her we mean business!" (cackles and almost chokes on her Earl Grey)

So 2 out of 3 drank tea, 2 out of 3 laughed, 2 out of 3 met. Two out of three ain't bad


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> another pro-harry article....says he'd like to have a mediator to help with the family rift
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William Just Reacted to Harry Hinting the Queen Needs to Be ‘Protected’ From ‘People Around Her’
> 
> 
> Prince Harry revealed his feelings about his visit with the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



TBLG put out a vid which said that his inside sources claimed it was the Netflixes' propaganda PR-machine just 'putting it out there'. We have mediators in the UK but it's not usual for a family squabble. MM needs it (she needs the RBF to stay relevant) but otherwise it's nonsense.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> TBLG put out a vid which said that his inside sources claimed it was the Netflixes' propaganda PR-machine just 'putting it out there'. We have mediators in the UK but it's not usual for a family squabble. MM needs it (she needs the RBF to stay relevant) but otherwise it's nonsense.


William and Kate are looking better and better


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> ok I googled n she seems to have a high number of boobs/ bra related wardrobe malfunction… deliberate? Or she just likes her boobs to be free?
> 
> Here is another
> View attachment 5387744


Maybe it's generational trauma. Doria also had boob-related wardrobe malfunctions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TBLG now has inside sources? And there I was thinking he'd, uh, read body language


----------



## xincinsin

We've reached 6000 pages!


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I have this little fantasy scene based on H&M's allegedly jolly tea time with HMTQ. M is stewing outside, blocked from entering. But, ha! She has stuck a tiny receiver in H's ear and she has a tiny mic in her +- pendant. HMTQ is on a viewing screen in front of H, sipping her cup of tea.
> 
> Under the guise of drinking tea, M mutters, "H, tell her that we want money and co-operation with our Netflix deal."
> 
> The Dolt of Sussex: "We want..."
> 
> HMTQ cuts him off: "Harry, you know why you are here, don't you?"
> 
> The Dolt: "Errrr... we want... "
> 
> HMTQ: "Has your father spoken with you?"
> 
> The Dolt: "Errrr... " (laughs nervously)
> 
> The Decepticon of Sussex: (drinking more tea) "Well? What did she say? If she won't give us what we want, we won't let her see Archificial and Invisibet! That'll show her we mean business!" (cackles and almost chokes on her Earl Grey)
> 
> So 2 out of 3 drank tea, 2 out of 3 laughed, 2 out of 3 met. Two out of three ain't bad



Basically, I just see it as H stretching the truth. Knowing it got out M was left outside the door and guarded, but given a cup of tea. He obviously had a cup of tea inside the room (PC or QEII - who knows  ) and it turned into we both had tea with grandma.

All this talk of the kids too. 'Granny' really doesn't care whether she sees them or not. It would be nice for the kids, but I doubt she's going sleep over seeing her (allegedly) GG-children. The Queen has better things to do.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> We've reached 6000 pages!


wonder if the new positive H&M thread will do that


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> TBLG now has inside sources? And there I was thinking he'd, uh, read body language





That's what _he_ said.


----------



## papertiger

MiniMabel said:


> Which occasion was this?  She looks, sadly, completely out of place.  The dress seems inappropriate and unflattering in it's style, a real oddity.  And why is she with JCMH when it seems that Catherine is not with William (unless the photo has been cropped or she is perhaps already in place?).



Really? I think this is one of her best outfits. All-black is strange (against protocol) but she looks good to me.


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments! 











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle hire aide behind Obama's second term triumph
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have hired PR whizz Miranda Barbot, who was part of the team behind US President *****’s second term triumph. An insider said the Sussexes may try to emulate the Obamas




					mirror.co.uk.trem.media


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Let's face it: even the most genius PR person can't spin that kind of straw into gold. The Sussexes completely lack any starter material to work with - I just wonder why anyone worth their salt would want to get involved with their mess.

But I'd still like to know who pays for all their extravaganzas.


----------



## Annawakes

Eye roll……their delusions of being on par with the O’s.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Really? I think this is one of her best outfits. All-black is strange (against protocol) but she looks good to me.


I like that dress also, but the undergarments could  be better.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Let's face it: even the most genius PR person can't spin that kind of straw into gold. The Sussexes completely lack any starter material to work with - I just wonder why anyone worth their salt would want to get involved with their mess.
> 
> But I'd still like to know who pays for all their extravaganzas.


Who pays for all these staffers , they don’t come cheap …


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Who pays for all these staffers , they don’t come cheap …



They obviously pay with future/potencial earnings.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I have this little fantasy scene based on H&M's allegedly jolly tea time with HMTQ. M is stewing outside, blocked from entering. But, ha! She has stuck a tiny receiver in H's ear and she has a tiny mic in her +- pendant. HMTQ is on a viewing screen in front of H, sipping her cup of tea.
> 
> Under the guise of drinking tea, M mutters, "H, tell her that we want money and co-operation with our Netflix deal."
> 
> The Dolt of Sussex: "We want..."
> 
> HMTQ cuts him off: "Harry, you know why you are here, don't you?"
> 
> The Dolt: "Errrr... we want... "
> 
> HMTQ: "Has your father spoken with you?"
> 
> The Dolt: "Errrr... " (laughs nervously)
> 
> The Decepticon of Sussex: (drinking more tea) "Well? What did she say? If she won't give us what we want, we won't let her see Archificial and Invisibet! That'll show her we mean business!" (cackles and almost chokes on her Earl Grey)
> 
> So 2 out of 3 drank tea, 2 out of 3 laughed, 2 out of 3 met. Two out of three ain't bad


I believe TW had tea and biscuits (alone) during the Netfl*xes' visit to QE. Hazz was likely offered tea while briefly meeting QE. This would explain Hazz's comment that 'he and his wife' had tea with QE at Windsor.

Though, I'm still trying to find a justification for Hazz's apparent claims of being QE's M and confident.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> They obviously pay with future/potencial earnings.


LOL....unless they recruit her stans to do the work for them, people have to be paid


----------



## A1aGypsy

I wonder if BP got wind of whatever the “surprise” was and killed it during that meeting. It’s just weird that they drummed it up and then… nothing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> No further comments!
> 
> View attachment 5387780
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle hire aide behind Obama's second term triumph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have hired PR whizz Miranda Barbot, who was part of the team behind US President *****’s second term triumph. An insider said the Sussexes may try to emulate the Obamas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mirror.co.uk.trem.media



So sad - Hazz is always the follower. Maybe it will take an election where they lose and lose big, then they will go off into the sunset. Imo it was not a _PR whizz_ that caused the former president to be re-elected. He did that based on his own skills, talent and knowledge.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So sad - Hazz is always the follower. Maybe it will take an election where they lose and lose big, then they will go off into the sunset. Imo it was not a _PR whizz_ that caused the former president to be re-elected. He did that based on his own skills, talent and knowledge.


oh please.  as I've said before, these two grifters aren't worthy to shine the shoes of the former pres and FL
That woman must need the money to go work for them


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> oh please.  as I've said before, these two grifters aren't worthy to shine the shoes of the former pres and FL
> That woman must need the money to go work for them


Maybe the offer is so ludicrously high that professionals find it worth their while to bear with the stupidity and the certainty of being doomed to fail.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Maybe the offer is so ludicrously high that professionals find it worth their while to bear with the stupidity and the certainty of being doomed to fail.


hopefully you can't buy credibility


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: The family did whatever they could to help Hazz and protect his reputation. Megxit was a big surprise for them, they never expected that Hazz would be going after his own family the way he is doing.



IMO this is what they did with Andi - created a false narrative to cover up all the mistakes. It didn’t work with him and it didn’t work with Hazzi. It may be time for a new playbook.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> TBLG now has inside sources? *And there I was thinking he'd, uh, read body language *


Yes, I have to admit that sometimes he does it as well as we all do here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooops, another lie?

_British gossip columnist Richard Mineards, who writes for the Montecito Journal, said the Sussexes have "been a no-show" since covertly arriving in July 2020, months after stepping down as working royals in the UK.

He told the Times : "Harry and Meghan haven’t become part of the community, and I think a lot of people are bristling about that really.

"It’s such a lovely place to go out and they’ve been a no-show.”
"There is this big question of, ‘Where are they?”









						Harry and Meghan’s neighbours say 'they're not part of community’, despite claim
					

Prince Harry told an interviewer at the Invictus Games he and Meghan have been "welcomed with open arms" in Montecito but locals reportedly say they have been a "no show" since moving in




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_eta: fixed the link


----------



## jelliedfeels

MiniMabel said:


> Which occasion was this?  She looks, sadly, completely out of place.  The dress seems inappropriate and unflattering in it's style, a real oddity.  And why is she with JCMH when it seems that Catherine is not with William (unless the photo has been cropped or she is perhaps already in place?).





papertiger said:


> Really? I think this is one of her best outfits. All-black is strange (against protocol) but she looks good to me.


Yeah I agree I think this is easily one of her best outfits- it’s a riff on a classic Dior shape and she’s not covered in tacky jewellery or bulging at the seams. Also her hair is tied up! Praise be!

I know that in principle it’s meant to be bad form to wear black all the time  but I feel like exceptions can be made when its obvious the person has no style or taste whatsoever. Keep it foolproof and black is just automatically easy and stylish.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> They obviously pay with future/potencial earnings.


It's called the Wimpy effect, after a character from the old Popeye cartoon:


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> ok I googled n she seems to have a high number of boobs/ bra related wardrobe malfunction… deliberate? Or she just likes her boobs to be free?
> 
> Here is another
> View attachment 5387744


I think it's deliberate.  Likely left over from her days and a yacht girl and a "TV Star".
Jennifer Aniston would also wear tops that showed her nipples too.  I'm not a prude, but I find that distasteful, especially for MMM representing the BRF.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I think it's deliberate.  Likely left over from her days and a yacht girl and a "TV Star".
> Jennifer Aniston would also wear tops that showed her nipples too.  I'm not a prude, but I find that distasteful, especially for MMM representing the BRF.


I was about to say it's just another difference between LA/British norms. I have nothing against nipples, but it's a distraction, unless of course it is your intention to create one.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> wonder if the new positive H&M thread will do that



The power of word salad might see this as a challenge. Let's send over a wreath and an olive oil lemon cake to wish them well.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Basically, I just see it as H stretching the truth. Knowing it got out M was left outside the door and guarded, but given a cup of tea. He obviously had a cup of tea inside the room (PC or QEII - who knows  ) and it turned into we both had tea with grandma.
> 
> All this talk of the kids too. 'Granny' really doesn't care whether she sees them or not. It would be nice for the kids, but I doubt she's going sleep over seeing her (allegedly) GG-children. The Queen has better things to do.


Maybe I'm wrong here, but I almost think that most people love getting to know their grandchildren, but as they get older and older, it's more difficult to keep up with great grandchildren.  It's lovely if they're around, but they're not exactly a priority.
My MIL's mother was almost 100 when we had a family reunion.  She'd met my children before, but couldn't bother to remember any of her great grandchildren, as it was just too much to deal with.  She had been very superficial and very into looks when she was younger, and as she got older and had more memory loss, the layers of decorum and filter faded away quickly.  As she gazed at my 2 and 5 year old children who both have gorgeous green eyes (if I do say so myself), she practically yelled to MIL, "SUSAN!  Where did you find these gorgeous children???"  I wasn't sure whether I should be flattered that she thought they were beautiful, or insulted that she'd forgotten them and actually thought my MIL picked them up off the street.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> They obviously pay with future/potencial earnings.


I imagine them like used car salesman...making all kinds of empty promises to employees that don't really pan out.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooops, another lie?
> 
> _British gossip columnist Richard Mineards, who writes for the Montecito Journal, said the Sussexes have "been a no-show" since covertly arriving in July 2020, months after stepping down as working royals in the UK.
> 
> He told the Times : "Harry and Meghan haven’t become part of the community, and I think a lot of people are bristling about that really.
> 
> "It’s such a lovely place to go out and they’ve been a no-show.”
> "There is this big question of, ‘Where are they?”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
> 
> 
> Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


I've spent time in Santa Barbara, but I haven't met a single person lamenting about not seeing the Duplicitous Duo.  The ones that have seen them were told to look away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

sdkitty said:


> wonder if the new positive H&M thread will do that





rose60610 said:


> The power of word salad might see this as a challenge. Let's send over a wreath and an olive oil lemon cake to wish them well.


Has anyone asked if they're okay?


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe I'm wrong here, but I almost think that most people love getting to know their grandchildren, but as they get older and older, it's more difficult to keep up with great grandchildren.  It's lovely if they're around, but they're not exactly a priority.
> My MIL's mother was almost 100 when we had a family reunion.  She'd met my children before, but couldn't bother to remember any of her great grandchildren, as it was just too much to deal with.  She had been very superficial and very into looks when she was younger, and as she got older and had more memory loss, the layers of decorum and filter faded away quickly.  As she gazed at my 2 and 5 year old children who both have gorgeous green eyes (if I do say so myself), she practically yelled to MIL, "SUSAN!  Where did you find these gorgeous children???"  I wasn't sure whether I should be flattered that she thought they were beautiful, or insulted that she'd forgotten them.



Don't take it personally, my GG-grandmother sent me birthday cards with things like 'Now You're 3" or "Wow! 4 Years Old" on the front until I was at least 8. And she only had 2 daughters, 3 grandchildren and 4 great-grandchildren. At the time I just thought she couldn't count properly in English (she was Polish) now I realise it's quite hard to keep track of off-spring and years. DH has to ask me what his nephews and nieces are called_ every_ time he writes, telephones or goes to Germany and he's not almost 100.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I've spent time in Santa Barbara, but I haven't met a single person lamenting about not seeing the Duplicitous Duo.  The ones that have seen them were told to look away.



If no one would deliberately tell them not to look, no one would know who they were.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> No further comments!
> 
> View attachment 5387780
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle hire aide behind Obama's second term triumph
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have hired PR whizz Miranda Barbot, who was part of the team behind US President *****’s second term triumph. An insider said the Sussexes may try to emulate the Obamas
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mirror.co.uk.trem.media



Nice laugh. If Meghan dares run for any office, all her opposition has to bring up is "If Markle is the Duchess of Sussex, then why isn't she representing Sussex? Is it because Sussex doesn't shell out a hundred fifty million for a no-show job? Typically a politician at least shows up for their job. Markle has a history of running away from hers. Unless her campaign is about fulfilling a Netflix contract with no intentions of representing the office she's running for. We know she enjoys traveling with camera crews to cemeteries, the U.N., and Invictus Games. There are enough cameras in Congress but does intend to bring her crew there, too?"


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Nice laugh. If Meghan dares run for any office, all her opposition has to bring up is "If Markle is the Duchess of Sussex, then why isn't she representing Sussex? Is it because Sussex doesn't shell out a hundred fifty million for a no-show job? Typically a politician at least shows up for their job. Markle has a history of running away from hers. Unless her campaign is about fulfilling a Netflix contract with no intentions of representing the office she's running for. We know she enjoys traveling with camera crews to cemeteries, the U.N., and Invictus Games. There are enough cameras in Congress but does intend to bring her crew there, too?"


I doubt there are enough stans in CA (or NY) to elect her to office


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Really? I think this is one of her best outfits. All-black is strange *(against protocol)* but she looks good to me.


No surprise there. Breaking protocol is her middle name and she's cosplaying Diana. Remember the kerfuffle on Diana's first foreign visit with the RF to Monaco, when she wore the black strapless dress. Since black was considered a mourning colour, there were several complaints that the RF hadn't properly briefed Diana re protocols.

ET to correct stupid typo "breaking"


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> I doubt there are enough stans in CA (or NY) to elect her to office



Everyone who doesn't vote for her will be accused of racism and misogyny.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It isn’t just her past - his has lots of issues.
Old article from 2011 in spoiler, it exposes some of Hazz’s issues



Spoiler: Jekyll and Hyde prince



_The pictures and videos that emerged have again raised the spectre of Harry’s past as a party animal, with rather too much of a fondness for drinking and dancing. 

So why is it that he so often allows himself to lose all sense of royal decorum in a way that his older brother William never seems to? 

‘Harry cannot handle his drink, but commits himself to being a leader when it comes to alcohol. “First one in, last one out” is his toast,’ one friend of his told me this week. 

‘He once burnt his face, nose and lip when he tried to down a flaming sambuca shot. It took four weeks to heal and he had to make sure he wasn’t seen in public so no one started asking questions. 

‘He is immature in many ways and can’t resist a drinking challenge, even though he’ll always come off worse. A couple of years ago, some photos were published of him snorting vodka up his nose on holiday. But I have seen him “drinking” it though his eyeball. He ruptured a blood vessel doing it.’ 

Vodka-eyeballing, as it is known, has become something of a craze among students, who claim it makes them drunk much faster and provides an instant high. 

However, the practice can cause devastating long-term damage to eyesight — something the Prince, as a military helicopter pilot, might like to bear in mind. 

Yet for all that, Harry, I am told, is relaxed about the exposure of his antics this week. In fact, he is more irritated at the ribbing he’s received from his friends over his cringe-worthy, dad-style dancing._








						Jekyll and Hyde prince: Guzzling tequila with glamour models then comforting sick children... which is the REAL Prince Harry?
					

Harry's genuine empathy and natural way with youngsters trumps the other royals, which makes his decision to live it up in Croatia so frustrating.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> No surprise there. Braking protocol is her middle name and she's cosplaying Diana. Remember the kerfuffle on Diana's first foreign visit with the RF to Monaco, when she wore the black strapless dress. Since black was considered a mourning colour, there were several complaints that the RF hadn't properly briefed Diana re protocols.



Evening just about OK, but day-time visits and on official engagements, never.

Princess Grace was there as an honoured guest, but it was in the UK. PC and Di were only engaged at that point.

The problem was not only Diana was wearing black a   but the dress was also cut daringly low.

At least Diana made her faux-pas at night, IMO, it looks a lot stranger and 'funeral' to be in all-black in the bright sunshine attending an event.


----------



## Helventara

jennlt said:


> Has anyone asked if they're okay?


Not only I haven’t, I pettily looked in the celebrity forum to see if we still need to scroll down to find it.   Like I said, I am being petty


----------



## marietouchet

Finally on big computer so here is link to Invictus founding. JCMH gets full credit for the founding per Wiki, although the money to do so was half from the government, and the other half from the JCMH/Cambridges foundation.

It takes a lot of money to be philanthropic. I think JCMH forgot that when setting out to California - he did not have a big pot to draw upon (nor does he have one now) to finance the largesse.

----------------

The Games were launched on 6 March 2014 by Prince Harry at London's Copper Box arena, used as a venue during the 2012 Olympics. Having seen a British team competing at the US Warrior Games held in Colorado in 2013, the prince wished to bring the concept of a similar international sporting event to the United Kingdom.[3][4][5][6] With the backing of Mayor of London Boris Johnson, the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games and the Ministry of Defence, the event was put together over ten months.[7][8] £1m of funding for the project was provided by the Royal Foundation, a charity established by Prince Harry along with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, with an equal amount being pledged by Chancellor George Osborne from Treasury funds generated by fines imposed on banks as a result of the Libor scandal.









						Invictus Games - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I've spent time in Santa Barbara, but I haven't met a single person lamenting about not seeing the Duplicitous Duo.  *The ones that have seen them were told to look away.*


This must be a bible thing, "Look away before you're turned to stone."


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> No surprise there. Breaking protocol is her middle name and she's cosplaying Diana. Remember the kerfuffle on Diana's first foreign visit with the RF to Monaco, when she wore the black strapless dress. Since black was considered a mourning colour, there were several complaints that the RF hadn't properly briefed Diana re protocols.
> 
> ET to correct stupid typo "breaking"


Is this what you were referring to? This was in London


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Is this what you were referring to? This was in London
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5387863


Yes, thanks to you and @papertiger for the info.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> At least Diana made her faux-pas at night, IMO, it looks a lot stranger and 'funeral' to be in all-black in the bright sunshine attending an event.



Especially when everyone else is in pastels or brights.

Funnily enough she can wear red when it's the military peoples' colour for the night or white when it's the Invictus games, so one might think there was some...intention in her fashion choices. Also known as defiance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Especially when everyone else is in pastels or brights.
> 
> Funnily enough she can wear red when it's the military peoples' colour for the night or white when it's the Invictus games, so one might think there was some...intention in her fashion choices. Also known as defiance.



It takes a special kind of special to break rules so consistently


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It takes a special kind of special to break rules so consistently



Like Louis' christening. She stuck out like a sore thumb insisting to wear that dirt coloured dress that didn't even look that good with her complexion amongst the rest of the family who was in creams and light blues. Why would you just deliberately not do what you are kindly asked to do...did she get a kick out of ruining the pictures or what?


----------



## sdkitty

MiniMabel said:


> Which occasion was this?  She looks, sadly, completely out of place.  The dress seems inappropriate and unflattering in it's style, a real oddity.  And why is she with JCMH when it seems that Catherine is not with William (unless the photo has been cropped or she is perhaps already in place?).


the hat (which I don't care for) strikes me as very British.....for someone who wanted to be a rebel and not follow the rules, she didn't mind wearing this thing that would never been seen in the US (no offense to Brits)


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would you just deliberately not do what you are kindly asked to do...did she get a kick out of ruining the pictures or what?


Asked and answered, your honour.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Finally on big computer so here is link to Invictus founding. JCMH gets full credit for the founding per Wiki, although the money to do so was half from the government, and the other half from the JCMH/Cambridges foundation.
> 
> It takes a lot of money to be philanthropic. I think JCMH forgot that when setting out to California - he did not have a big pot to draw upon (nor does he have one now) to finance the largesse.
> 
> ----------------
> 
> The Games were launched on 6 March 2014 by Prince Harry at London's Copper Box arena, used as a venue during the 2012 Olympics. Having seen a British team competing at the US Warrior Games held in Colorado in 2013, the prince wished to bring the concept of a similar international sporting event to the United Kingdom.[3][4][5][6] With the backing of Mayor of London Boris Johnson, the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games and the Ministry of Defence, the event was put together over ten months.[7][8] £1m of funding for the project was provided by the Royal Foundation, a charity established by Prince Harry along with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, with an equal amount being pledged by Chancellor George Osborne from Treasury funds generated by fines imposed on banks as a result of the Libor scandal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Invictus Games - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


We all know Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, so I'm sure their stans are hard at work on a daily basis.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like Louis' christening. She stuck out like a sore thumb insisting to wear that dirt coloured dress that didn't even look that good with her complexion amongst the rest of the family who was in creams and light blues. Why would you just deliberately not do what you are kindly asked to do...did she get a kick out of ruining the pictures or what?



I just looked up the photo you referenced. Ugh! What was she thinking? She wanted to make a statement, like she's soooo independent she's above following protocol. Complete with matching hat, I guess she agreed to wear a hat THAT day. She's soooo independent and strong that she couldn't seek help for her suicidal thoughts.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> This must be a bible thing, "Look away before you're turned to stone."


I always think of Medusa.     She had "tendrils" too.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Is this what you were referring to? This was in London
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5387863


As I recall she also had a nip slip while getting out of the car. But she was 19, MM was late 30's when she hooked up with Hazy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> As I recall she also had a nip slip while getting out of the car. But she was 19, MM was late 30's when she hooked up with Hazy.


NO NO NO!! Diana and TW were both YOUNG and NAIVE!


----------



## 880

purseinsanity said:


> There she is again, the Miserable Ms. Markle, with her "I just swallowed a canary" look, probably debating whether or not to grab William's hand, as her lopsided nipples stand front and center.



OT. I like the dress and thought it was navy. Does anyone know the details. also, I googled what she wore to the Prince Louis christening, and it seemed lauded by many media sources at the time for being appropriate and becoming; a modern rendition of spring color that enhanced and acted as a foil to what KM was wearing.

i do agree that a PR whiz will not help them bc there is very little substance to spin. also agree that the Queen is probably not losing sleep over not meeting her great grandchildren


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> wonder if the new positive H&M thread will do that


I don’t think they have as much to work with!


----------



## Sophisticatted

I once read Princess Grace found Diana sobbing in the bathroom (perhaps at this event?), and said, “Don’t cry, it gets worse.”


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> VVIP  Very Vituperative  Insignificant Putz


FANTASTIC!! .. love it!!!


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I once read Princess Grace found Diana sobbing in the bathroom (perhaps at this event?), and said, “Don’t cry, it gets worse.”


Grace Kelly was a famous and worldly-wise Hollywood actress when she married Prince Rainier. I cannot imagine being thrust onto the world stage at the age of 19. Diana chose it, but I don't think she had any idea what she was getting herself into.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> We all know Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, so I'm sure their stans are hard at work on a daily basis.


I know of a very successful person who wrote, or had an assistant write, their Wikipedia page and it is comically self-congratulatory. The difference is, this person is actually very accomplished in his field.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Oh, gosh! They are so delusional.
> View attachment 5379649
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picture of Kate & William Skiing + Harry and Meghan's Flight from LA to London for Secret Meeting with the Queen
> 
> 
> We have two fun little updates tonight. The first is the promised picture of Kate skiing in the French Alps. I was hoping for some kind of confirmation that the family was indeed out on the slopes, and a few of you very generously provided that confirmation (requesting anonymity).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com


It would have to have been a British Airways plane as I cannot see any other airline doing that!!!  Did they have to pay for all those first-class seats; that’s a sh1t load of £££££!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like Louis' christening. *She stuck out like a sore thumb *insisting to wear that dirt coloured dress that didn't even look that good with her complexion amongst the rest of the family who was in creams and light blues. Why would you just deliberately not do what you are kindly asked to do...did she get a kick out of ruining the pictures or what?


This is precisely why she is doing it. The attention seeker wants to be noticed first even if it means wearing a fugly dress. She knows that our eyes will automatically focus on her standing in an otherwise uniform group (men in blue suits and ladies and baby in light coloured outfits). She is an aberration.


----------



## Annawakes

They don’t want people looking them in the eye….they don’t want people sitting next to them.  If things continue going as they have been, they’ll get their wish and no one will ever pay any attention to them at all, ever.


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> They don’t want people looking them in the eye….they don’t want people sitting next to them.  If things continue going as they have been, they’ll get their wish and no one will ever pay any attention to them at all, ever.


Promise?


----------



## CeeJay

redney said:


> Her outfit totally reminds me of the SNL skit with Rich Hall playing David Byrne of Talking Heads.
> 
> You may ask yourself "Why such a big suit?" You may ask yourself "Can it be taken in a little?" You may ask yourself "Does the store have any mirrors?"
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5380159



OMG .. love this!!!  I was a HUGE FAN of the Talking Heads and saw them in various venues in New England before they became so famous!!


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> Probably orders from Ne*fli* headquarters--"Get something with the Queen for pete's sake! The masses only care about royal stuff!"
> 
> Also, does anyone officially (really) know what the deal is with the Ne*fli* filming crew? They look absolutely ridiculous and probably feel that way too. This so-called (if it is) documentary is going to be soooo bad I'm stocking up on popcorn right away.


Really?!?! .. I REFUSE to watch anything with these two Grifters-supremous!!  Netflix has lost over 200k subscribers and lots of $$$.  I canceled mine the minute I heard that they signed these two a$$holes!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 2. Speaking of walk, what's that overdone hip sway? It's not a catwalk.


.. AH, so I’m not the only one who saw that?!?!  WTF?!?!


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> another pro-harry article....says he'd like to have a mediator to help with the family rift
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William Just Reacted to Harry Hinting the Queen Needs to Be ‘Protected’ From ‘People Around Her’
> 
> 
> Prince Harry revealed his feelings about his visit with the Queen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Mediators are more useful when each side needs to give a bit ie be willing to settle a bit and do so in a relatively public manner


----------



## marietouchet

Just thinking of Depp Heard trial … he is suing because she (alledgedly] claimed domestic abuse, and her claims torpedoed his career

JD knows he is a creep  …rampages,  tear the house apart, yell, scream, that is not domestic abuse, by HIS definition of abuse

And he seems to not see that all the creepy details from the two trials ensure his career will never get back on track 

Paralels to JCMH … JCMH does not see , by his definition, that he ever misbehaved.  Nor does he consider, that all the current vitriol will prevent his ever rising like a phoenix


----------



## pukasonqo

Annawakes said:


> They don’t want people looking them in the eye….they don’t want people sitting next to them.  If things continue going as they have been, they’ll get their wish and no one will ever pay any attention to them at all, ever.


Pity there is no time machines then we could ship them to the an earlier century (XV onwards) where royals considered themselves as directly chosen by God, cure scrofula by laying hands on the infirm and cannot be looked in the eye
Unfortunately there was no penicillin, anaesthetics, childbirth was risky and MM would not be described as young
But she would be in her element: intrigue, plots, slander and even murder most royal 
Catherine de Medici could become her role model then


----------



## CeeJay

VigeeLeBrun said:


> - Only a few thoughts:
> 
> Harkle is wearing a bright WHITE pants  suit while the gentlemen are all wearing suits in sober colors. Hmmm, I might be wrong but…obviously she wanted attention.
> 
> Narcissist that you are, Me-Again Harkle, you have no self-control and your ego is obvious in every pic.
> 
> 2. Wills & Kate? Good on you & my respect for your family for being admirable when placed in a position, prob blind-sided by a vicious and simply disgusting Prince Smirking Harry & his chicken cutlet weird green dress wearing woman, that he calls his wife.
> 
> Of course H&M, both bad actors trying to cash-in. betrayal is the name of their game imo.
> 
> Moi? I’ve moved on, totally support Wills & Kate.
> 
> 
> 
> But critics have accused the royal couple of 'cashing in' on the Games by allowing Netflix, with whom they have signed a $100million deal, into private meetings. And royal experts believe the VVIP status given to the couple will allow Netflix to portray the couple in a favourable light, as they deal with the fallout from their bombshell interview with Oprah last year.
> 
> Talking about Harry and Meghan's summit with the Queen and Charles, Mr Bower said last night: 'I have no doubt it was all done for their Netflix documentary. The Queen's advisers failed to protect her from being exploited by the Royal Family's worst traducers, while the Sussexes exploited an old, unwell woman to boost their credibility and coffers.'
> watching you stand your ground and ignore the obvious self-absorbed, greedy ex-royals living in an obvious un-royal country that cld care less about H&M and t


NO!! .. please tell me that the Netflix crew WAS NOT filming the meeting with TQ!!  Wasn’t Charles there as well (and then Camilla)?!?! .. I cannot see Charles or Camilla allowing filming!!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> I don't care what she wears... but what ring is this? It looks different than the older e ring.
> 
> View attachment 5380467


WAIT, WHAT?!?!?!  So, next to a Cartier Gold Tank watch ($$$$$) and her (much “revised” nose - oooops, meant wedding ring), she’s wearing (possibly by Jacquie Aiche) “Slave” Bracelet?!?!?!  A SLAVE bracelet for a WOC?!?!  Wow!


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Why would she give a speech?  She’s there as a plus one


Because IN HER MIND .. she is the MOST IMPORTANT PERSON there so the crowd MUST HEAR what she has to say!!  = TYPICAL NARCISSIST!!!


----------



## Sharont2305

CeeJay said:


> .. AH, so I’m not the only one who saw that?!?!  WTF?!?!


I've always hated her walk. On seeing this footage last week, my husband said "why the hell does she walk like that?"


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Just thinking of Depp Heard trial … he is suing because she (alledgedly] claimed domestic abuse, and her claims torpedoed his career
> 
> JD knows he is a creep  …rampages,  tear the house apart, yell, scream, that is not domestic abuse, by HIS definition of abuse
> 
> And he seems to not see that all the creepy details from the two trials ensure his career will never get back on track
> 
> Paralels to JCMH … JCMH does not see , by his definition, that he ever misbehaved.  Nor does he consider, that all the current vitriol will prevent his ever rising like a phoenix



So true.  Here is what he said in 2011:
_He is refreshingly — some may say, worryingly — unrepentant about the way he is viewed by members of the public. 

‘I am who I am — and I’m not going to change because I’m being criticised in the Press. I’m always going to have that childish streak,’ he once said.

‘What does everyone expect me to be? Just the caring person and not have a cigarette, not have a beer?’ Indeed, despite trying to quit tobacco a number of times, the Prince still smokes heavily and continues to drink to excess on occasion — but makes sure he (normally) doesn’t do it in public. _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Pity there is no time machines then we could ship them to the an earlier century (XV onwards) where royals considered themselves as directly chosen by God, cure scrofula by laying hands on the infirm and cannot be looked in the eye
> Unfortunately there was no penicillin, anaesthetics, childbirth was risky and MM would not be described as young
> But she would be in her element: intrigue, plots, slander and even murder most royal
> Catherine de Medici could become her role model then



She wouldn't even have had to wait for a plane crash, she could just have poisoned them all or conveniently sent her stans to murder them.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I've always hated her walk. On seeing this footage last week, my husband said "why the hell does she walk like that?"


She knows she is being filmed so this is her version of walking the catwalk plus I'm so sexy you can't take your eyes off of me.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> She knows she is being filmed so this is her version of walking the catwalk plus I'm so sexy you can't take your eyes off of me.


My husband called her a twat!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Evening just about OK, but day-time visits and on official engagements, never.
> 
> Princess Grace was there as an honoured guest, but it was in the UK. PC and Di were only engaged at that point.
> 
> *The problem was not only Diana was wearing black a   but the dress was also cut daringly low.*
> 
> At least Diana made her faux-pas at night, IMO, it looks a lot stranger and 'funeral' to be in all-black in the bright sunshine attending an event.


I remember watching the news clip on TV of D exiting the car and few quips came to mind. "Careful or you'll lose those little puppies." "Tut tut tut, how dare you expose the soon-to-be royal boobies."  
I can't find the clip, but here's a picture.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I remember watching the news clip on TV of D exiting the car and few quips came to mind. "Careful or you'll lose those little puppies." "Tut tut tut, how dare you expose the soon-to-be royal boobies."
> I can't find the clip, but here's a picture.
> View attachment 5388079



I was thinking, Diana was a 19 y o girl, uncharted territory. MM is a grown-up mid-age woman and knew the score and the rules, not cute, no excuses.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> This must be a bible thing, "Look away before you're turned to stone."


They don't live in Santa Barbara, so was this throwing shade on Montecito, where they do live, for Montecito not rolling out the red carpet, pealing church bells, and trumpeting fanfares each time they descend from their Mount to mix among the plebes?


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> My husband called her a twat!


Very succinctly put!  Kudos to the DH!


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I remember watching the news clip on TV of D exiting the car and few quips came to mind. "Careful or you'll lose those little puppies." "Tut tut tut, how dare you expose the soon-to-be royal boobies."
> I can't find the clip, but here's a picture.
> View attachment 5388079


The Morton book has a bit on the dress. Remember a lot of these anecdotes come from the Diana tapes. 

Her first outing with Charles. She had not learned all the ins and outs of what to wear.

BUT Charles made a comment about black being for mourning and the 19 year-old was crushed by the comments of her brand-new  fiance. 

He was older and should have sent her a wardrobe coach and not made the nasty comment when it was too late to change.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I was thinking, Diana was a 19 y o girl, uncharted territory. MM is a grown-up mid-age woman and knew the score and the rules, not cute, no excuses.


And MM had been on several red carpets before meeting Harry. She knew about photogs, who hope for an embarrassing shot - they want a shot that se\lls, not necessarily one that makes the celeb look good.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> I was thinking, Diana was a 19 y o girl, uncharted territory. MM is a grown-up mid-age woman and knew the score and the rules, not cute, no excuses.


Yes, Diana didn't copy anyone and had her own unique style, however, it's a different story with TW, who should know better, but still cosplays her dead MIL only to look ridiculous or rebellious when she does it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s a video of that evening - it doesn’t show Diana exiting the car, but it gives a good idea of how low the dress was. Imo she looked stunning and beautiful


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> My husband called her a twat!


Your husband is a very perceptive man!


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video of that evening - it doesn’t show Diana exiting the car, but it gives a good idea of how low the dress was. Imo she looked stunning and beautiful




Luckily for William he resembles Diana more than Charles


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The Morton book has a bit on the dress. Remember a lot of these anecdotes come from the Diana tapes.
> 
> Her first outing with Charles. She had not learned all the ins and outs of what to wear.
> 
> BUT Charles made a comment about black being for mourning and the 19 year-old was crushed by the comments of her brand-new  fiance.
> 
> He was older and should have sent her a wardrobe coach and not made the nasty comment when it was too late to change.



He seems to have picked on her quite a bit early on, what with the stupid response to the TV host asking if he was in love and telling her she was chubby around the waist. I have no beef with Charles generally, but all I can think is he shouldn't have made her suffer because his grandmother talked him into marrying her and he really didn't want to.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video of that evening - it doesn’t show Diana exiting the car, but it gives a good idea of how low the dress was. Imo she looked stunning and beautiful



Agreed, but that dress was a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen, and she didn't seem comfortable in it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I remember watching the news clip on TV of D exiting the car and few quips came to mind. "Careful or you'll lose those little puppies." "Tut tut tut, how dare you expose the soon-to-be royal boobies."
> I can't find the clip, but here's a picture.
> View attachment 5388079


Those puppies weren't so little


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> My husband called her a twat!


some women have a natural sway of their hips but I think they are usually women with larger hips....Meghan doesn't fit that profile


----------



## Chloe302225

Is This the Queen's Gambit?
					

If the Sussexes have received an invitation to Platinum Jubilee events, this could be the Queen's strategy.




					fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

How to wear _that_ style


----------



## catlover46

Am I the only one who thinks when the Queen dies, The British press is going to put all the dirt about MM out there?


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I agree I think this is easily one of her best outfits- it’s a riff on a classic Dior shape and she’s not covered in tacky jewellery or bulging at the seams. Also her hair is tied up! Praise be!
> 
> I know that in principle it’s meant to be bad form to wear black all the time  but I feel like exceptions can be made when its obvious the person has no style or taste whatsoever. Keep it foolproof and black is just automatically easy and stylish.


Petty strategy. If they object to a black dress, it must be due to underlying racism because she is an underlying (and lying) black person.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> NO NO NO!! Diana and TW were both YOUNG and NAIVE!


TW was naff more than naive.


----------



## CarryOn2020

catlover46 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks when the Queen dies, The British press is going to put all the dirt about MM out there?



Yes to that and adding that the attacks on Charles and William will be louder and meaner. IMO


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, but that dress was a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen, and she didn't seem comfortable in it.


I’m a monster and don’t understand why people found Diana so stunning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Just thinking of Depp Heard trial … he is suing because she (alledgedly] claimed domestic abuse, and her claims torpedoed his career
> 
> JD knows he is a creep  …rampages,  tear the house apart, yell, scream, that is not domestic abuse, by HIS definition of abuse
> 
> And he seems to not see that all the creepy details from the two trials ensure his career will never get back on track
> 
> Paralels to JCMH … JCMH does not see , by his definition, that he ever misbehaved.  Nor does he consider, that all the current vitriol will prevent his ever rising like a phoenix



I just saw a short on Youtube of Amber's face slipping in court. It was maybe even scarier than when Raptor does it (and like Raptor, she quickly caught herself but couldn't help the initial impulse).

I think that was the moment I picked sides.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m a monster and don’t understand why people found Diana so stunning.



Everything about her was a 10+. She had the JackieO and AudreyH mystique. That undefinable ‘it’ factor.
Does anyone today have “it”?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Those puppies weren't so little


 Yes, I agree. That's what I like, a great sense of humour to help us see the funny side of royals with their little mistakes, foibles and idiosyncrasies and still be serious enough to critically assess their actions.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just saw a short on Youtube of Amber's face slipping in court. It was maybe even scarier than when Raptor does it (and like Raptor, she quickly caught herself but couldn't help the initial impulse).
> 
> I think that was the moment I picked sides.


I don’t have sides in the trial but am stunned by the similarity to JCMH

neither JCMH nor Depp seems to have a good foothold on reality


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> How to wear _that_ style



Same as for Anne and Cambrideg recent tours, no tiaras in sight … 
Bling of the past


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m a monster and don’t understand why people found Diana so stunning.


Not a Di fan or unfan, but she was something different, and when she acted off norm, it was usually something which made me smile, like dancing with Travolta. Methane makes my hackles rise because she is so overtly narc, the eternal victim and crass. I would frown but I prefer to save my pennies to buy something other than fillers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

catlover46 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks when the Queen dies, The British press is going to put all the dirt about MM out there?


One lives in hope.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m a monster and don’t understand why people found Diana so stunning.


I don't think stunning is the right word. She was very pretty and had a beautiful complexion - the "English rose".


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> How to wear _that_ style



She looks lovely. I love the color on her. It's a classic style and I've seen quite a few mother of the bride dresses like it. It's flattering on a lot of figures, but of course MM somehow still got it wrong.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Everything about her was a 10+. She had the JackieO and AudreyH mystique. That undefinable ‘it’ factor.
> Does anyone today have “it”?


I don't about 10+, but she definitely had the "it" factor. I certainly think Kate has it, and I'm sure she's more emotionally stable.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> My husband called her a twat!


Add it to the list: TW= Twat Waffle


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Not a Di fan or unfan, but she was something different, and when she acted off norm, it was usually something which made me smile, like dancing with Travolta. Methane makes my hackles rise because she is so overtly narc, the eternal victim and crass. I would frown but I prefer to save my pennies to buy something other than fillers.



Well said
She was _something different_ in an ocean of sameness. For almost every function, she showed up looking like a lady, hair neatly styled, makeup properly applied, clothes neatly pressed, shoes polished, etc. H&M often look like they slept in those clothes [their nails look awful]. W&K haven’t always looked as polished as they are now, so it’s possible to improve. Kate proved at the Bond premiere that she has been holding back on us    Charles, no to ‘it’ factor. Anne, yes.

To me, _stunning_ is extremely impressive or attractive. It’s the “wow” we hear or say when someone steps out of the car.  Diana almost always got a “wow”.  As the stress of the divorce intensified, she lost a little bit of the glow but was still a ’ wow’ imo

ETA:  in this hyped-up VVIP world, Diana would be getting double wow’s.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> She looks lovely. I love the color on her. It's a classic style and I've seen quite a few mother of the bride dresses like it. It's flattering on a lot of figures, but of course MM somehow still got it wrong.


IMO Methane gets it wrong primarily because she is rarely in the right size. She doesn't have a model figure, but obviously thinks she does and dresses like she does. It's usually too tight or too loose or tight in the wrong places. When it's tight, I wonder if she is trying to follow in Marilyn Monroe's footsteps and getting things 2 sizes too small. And the fabric choices - why choose fabrics which reveal underwear? If she is so keen to look like borderline p*rn, at least get better underwear.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said
> She was _something different_ in an ocean of sameness. For almost every function, she showed up looking like a lady, hair neatly styled, makeup properly applied, clothes neatly pressed, shoes polished, etc. H&M often look like they slept in those clothes [their nails look awful]. W&K haven’t always looked as polished as they are now, so it’s possible to improve. Kate proved at the Bond premiere that she has been holding back on us    Charles, no to ‘it’ factor. Anne, yes.
> 
> To me, _stunning_ is extremely impressive or attractive. It’s the “wow” we hear or say when someone steps out of the car.  Diana almost always got a “wow”.  As the stress of the divorce intensified, she lost a little bit of the glow but was still a ’ wow’ imo
> 
> ETA:  in this hyped-up VVIP world, Diana would be getting double wow’s.


Remember when her assistant forgot the matching tiara, so Diana used the choker as a headpiece instead (and started a trend!)? 
Just imagine how Methane would have reacted instead.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> IMO Methane gets it wrong primarily because she is rarely in the right size. She doesn't have a model figure, but obviously thinks she does and dresses like she does. It's usually too tight or too loose or tight in the wrong places. When it's tight, I wonder if she is trying to follow in Marilyn Monroe's footsteps and getting things 2 sizes too small. And the fabric choices - why choose fabrics which reveal underwear? If she is so keen to look like borderline p*rn, at least get better underwear.



CDAN states that she took 4 stylists!  What!!!  And still nothing fit or looked right.  Same with the makeup and the hair. What is the point of hiring these people?


----------



## Norm.Core

charlottawill said:


> Add it to the list: TW= Twat Waffle


TW = The Whine


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> CDAN states that she took 4 stylists!  What!!!  And still nothing fit or looked right.  Same with the makeup and the hair. What is the point of hiring these people?



To paraphrase Dolly Parton, “it costs a lot of money [and stylists] to look this cheap.”


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the Neflixes will try to sue Piers M.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_B list celebrity life_??? Piers surely meant D list.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Methane would have saved herself a lot of trouble if she didn't Markle so many people on her way up. Someone once compared her to a snake shedding her skin as she slithered upwards. It's as if she thought no one would notice or remember how she ill-treats and tramples on others.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Trumpet hasn’t forgotten about Meghan 

https://nypost.com/2022/04/24/*****...rrys-marriage-will-end/?utm_source=reddit.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Everything about her was a 10+. She had the JackieO and AudreyH mystique. That undefinable ‘it’ factor.
> Does anyone today have “it”?


Nope.  Part of the "It" factor was having some mystery about you.  Today's stars overshare everything.  TMI.  No mystery left, no mystique.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Nope.  Part of the "It" factor was having some mystery about you.  Today's stars overshare everything.  TMI.  No mystery left, no mystique.


Right about the lack of mystery. Sex tapes, revealing photographs public brawls. Yep, real mysterious.


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Nope.  Part of the "It" factor was having some mystery about you.  Today's stars *overshare everything.  TMI.*  No mystery left, no mystique.



Well said. They overshare. Sex tapes are put online. They brag about drugs and how messed up they get. They preach from their gated mansions how important the environment is and how we plebes should clean up our act. Today's stars make Hollywood look like a big episode of The Jerry Springer Show.


----------



## Norm.Core

Dunno how long it’s gonna take for the JCMH+TW appreciation thread to hit 100 pages but I’ll check in again next year.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Norm.Core said:


> Dunno how long it’s gonna take for the JCMH+TW appreciation thread to hit 100 pages but I’ll check in again next year.



What is there to appreciate with this disaster duo?  Imo there is nothing.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is there to appreciate with this disaster duo?  Imo there is nothing.


Entertainment value?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Entertainment value?



Haaaa, indeed. Looks like gloves are coming off - certainly explains many of Hazzie’s issues. Here’s another book excerpt:

_*Their mother, however, seemed to think much of Harry’s behaviour was hilarious.* On one occasion, while at kindergarten, Harry was frog-marched to the headmistress by the distraught and furious music teacher, Mr Prichard. All through morning assembly, Harry, who’d been sitting next to the piano, had kept tugging at the teacher’s trousers as he was trying to play. Eventually, the teacher had had enough.

‘What on earth is it, Harry? Stop pulling my trousers,’ he said. ‘But Mr Prichard,’ Harry piped up, ‘*I can see your willy.’*

The headmistress gave Harry a telling-off, and because this had been just the latest in a series of disruptive antics, she asked Diana to come in to see her. When the incident was recounted to Diana, however, she simply burst into a fit of giggles. *The truth is that the princess actively encouraged Harry’s mischievous nature, which was in some ways akin to her own.*

On the school run one morning, she started telling a risqué joke, apparently unconcerned that Harry was drinking in every salacious word. Her police protection officer — aware that the language was inappropriate for young ears — tried to stop her mid-flow, but she was having none of it.

On arrival at Wetherby School in West London, William ran off to his classroom, while Harry immediately started telling the new joke to the headmistress. Belatedly, Diana — who’d gone red with embarrassment — managed to stop him reaching the punchline.

It was also the princess who — without consulting Charles, who was away at the time — encouraged both boys to have a go-kart race in the immaculate grounds of Highgrove. Within minutes, they were speeding at full tilt, tearing up their father’s beloved garden as *Diana cheered them on.*

She adored her sons and was always hugging and kissing them — but care of the boys, when they were home from school, was often left to the staff. *Fully aware that her younger son was especially wilful and stubborn, Diana also tended to leave discipline to his nannies and protection officers.*

One of the nannies, Jessie Webb, would resort to asking Ken Wharfe to intervene when they played up — which, in Harry’s case, was often. *His cheekiness could also descend into outright rudeness — such as when he told Jessie to her face that she needed to lose weight.

In desperation, she devised her own method of dealing with his bad behaviour: using her body, she’d wedge him hard against a wall. It was, she said, the only way she could catch him and ‘gain control’. The boys’ nanny Olga Powell went a step further by delivering the odd smack.*

Inspector Wharfe recalled: ‘*When Harry was a little older, I remember one of her classic phrases to him was, “Harry, I love you, but I don’t like you” — because he was a nuisance.* But she was strong with him, and I think children like that because they know where they stand.’









						ROBERT JOBSON on pressures that shaped Prince William
					

ROBERT JOBSON: William's relationship, as a child and teenager, with his mother Diana and brother Harry was one that had the younger brother feeling left out in favour of his brother and future King




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Annawakes

No wonder he worshiped his mother.  She never disciplined him or gave him any boundaries.  That’s why he pouts and sulks when he doesn’t get what he wants.

He and TW are two peas in a pod.  What were the chances they’d find each other?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaa, indeed. Looks like gloves are coming off - certainly explains many of Hazzie’s issues. Here’s another book excerpt:
> 
> _*Their mother, however, seemed to think much of Harry’s behaviour was hilarious.* On one occasion, while at kindergarten, Harry was frog-marched to the headmistress by the distraught and furious music teacher, Mr Prichard. All through morning assembly, Harry, who’d been sitting next to the piano, had kept tugging at the teacher’s trousers as he was trying to play. Eventually, the teacher had had enough.
> 
> ‘What on earth is it, Harry? Stop pulling my trousers,’ he said. ‘But Mr Prichard,’ Harry piped up, ‘*I can see your willy.’*
> 
> The headmistress gave Harry a telling-off, and because this had been just the latest in a series of disruptive antics, she asked Diana to come in to see her. When the incident was recounted to Diana, however, she simply burst into a fit of giggles. *The truth is that the princess actively encouraged Harry’s mischievous nature, which was in some ways akin to her own.*
> 
> On the school run one morning, she started telling a risqué joke, apparently unconcerned that Harry was drinking in every salacious word. Her police protection officer — aware that the language was inappropriate for young ears — tried to stop her mid-flow, but she was having none of it.
> 
> On arrival at Wetherby School in West London, William ran off to his classroom, while Harry immediately started telling the new joke to the headmistress. Belatedly, Diana — who’d gone red with embarrassment — managed to stop him reaching the punchline.
> 
> It was also the princess who — without consulting Charles, who was away at the time — encouraged both boys to have a go-kart race in the immaculate grounds of Highgrove. Within minutes, they were speeding at full tilt, tearing up their father’s beloved garden as *Diana cheered them on.*
> 
> She adored her sons and was always hugging and kissing them — but care of the boys, when they were home from school, was often left to the staff. *Fully aware that her younger son was especially wilful and stubborn, Diana also tended to leave discipline to his nannies and protection officers.*
> 
> One of the nannies, Jessie Webb, would resort to asking Ken Wharfe to intervene when they played up — which, in Harry’s case, was often. *His cheekiness could also descend into outright rudeness — such as when he told Jessie to her face that she needed to lose weight.
> 
> In desperation, she devised her own method of dealing with his bad behaviour: using her body, she’d wedge him hard against a wall. It was, she said, the only way she could catch him and ‘gain control’. The boys’ nanny Olga Powell went a step further by delivering the odd smack.*
> 
> Inspector Wharfe recalled: ‘*When Harry was a little older, I remember one of her classic phrases to him was, “Harry, I love you, but I don’t like you” — because he was a nuisance.* But she was strong with him, and I think children like that because they know where they stand.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROBERT JOBSON on pressures that shaped Prince William
> 
> 
> ROBERT JOBSON: William's relationship, as a child and teenager, with his mother Diana and brother Harry was one that had the younger brother feeling left out in favour of his brother and future King
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Hardly anyone believed me when I said that H was an a$$hole right from the get-go due to lack of discipline and left to his own device.  Mommy giggling like a schoolgirl while little H was sticking his tongue out at people was only the beginning.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*In desperation, she devised her own method of dealing with his bad behaviour: using her body, she’d wedge him hard against a wall. It was, she said, the only way she could catch him and ‘gain control’. The boys’ nanny Olga Powell went a step further by delivering the odd smack.*
> 
> Inspector Wharfe recalled: ‘*When Harry was a little older, I remember one of her classic phrases to him was, “Harry, I love you, but I don’t like you” — because he was a nuisance.* But she was strong with him, and I think children like that because they know where they stand.’_



Harry sounds like a child that would drive everyone nuts, but I wouldn't be happy if my nanny hit my kid. Like, at all.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaa, indeed. Looks like gloves are coming off - certainly explains many of Hazzie’s issues. Here’s another book excerpt:
> 
> _*Their mother, however, seemed to think much of Harry’s behaviour was hilarious.* On one occasion, while at kindergarten, Harry was frog-marched to the headmistress by the distraught and furious music teacher, Mr Prichard. All through morning assembly, Harry, who’d been sitting next to the piano, had kept tugging at the teacher’s trousers as he was trying to play. Eventually, the teacher had had enough.
> 
> ‘What on earth is it, Harry? Stop pulling my trousers,’ he said. ‘But Mr Prichard,’ Harry piped up, ‘*I can see your willy.’*
> 
> The headmistress gave Harry a telling-off, and because this had been just the latest in a series of disruptive antics, she asked Diana to come in to see her. When the incident was recounted to Diana, however, she simply burst into a fit of giggles. *The truth is that the princess actively encouraged Harry’s mischievous nature, which was in some ways akin to her own.*
> 
> On the school run one morning, she started telling a risqué joke, apparently unconcerned that Harry was drinking in every salacious word. Her police protection officer — aware that the language was inappropriate for young ears — tried to stop her mid-flow, but she was having none of it.
> 
> On arrival at Wetherby School in West London, William ran off to his classroom, while Harry immediately started telling the new joke to the headmistress. Belatedly, Diana — who’d gone red with embarrassment — managed to stop him reaching the punchline.
> 
> It was also the princess who — without consulting Charles, who was away at the time — encouraged both boys to have a go-kart race in the immaculate grounds of Highgrove. Within minutes, they were speeding at full tilt, tearing up their father’s beloved garden as *Diana cheered them on.*
> 
> She adored her sons and was always hugging and kissing them — but care of the boys, when they were home from school, was often left to the staff. *Fully aware that her younger son was especially wilful and stubborn, Diana also tended to leave discipline to his nannies and protection officers.*
> 
> One of the nannies, Jessie Webb, would resort to asking Ken Wharfe to intervene when they played up — which, in Harry’s case, was often. *His cheekiness could also descend into outright rudeness — such as when he told Jessie to her face that she needed to lose weight.
> 
> In desperation, she devised her own method of dealing with his bad behaviour: using her body, she’d wedge him hard against a wall. It was, she said, the only way she could catch him and ‘gain control’. The boys’ nanny Olga Powell went a step further by delivering the odd smack.*
> 
> Inspector Wharfe recalled: ‘*When Harry was a little older, I remember one of her classic phrases to him was, “Harry, I love you, but I don’t like you” — because he was a nuisance.* But she was strong with him, and I think children like that because they know where they stand.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROBERT JOBSON on pressures that shaped Prince William
> 
> 
> ROBERT JOBSON: William's relationship, as a child and teenager, with his mother Diana and brother Harry was one that had the younger brother feeling left out in favour of his brother and future King
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Wow Tina brown book , this one and the JCMH autobiography - three important books for the Jubilee year


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry sounds like a child that would drive everyone nuts, but I wouldn't be happy if my nanny hit my kid. Like, at all.


True, but I guess the nanny was driven to her wit's end. 

I have a 5-year-old grand nephew who is like Harry. His mother is always on her phone. His grandma is busy with his baby sister. His dad is busy with his older brother. The rest of the family takes turns to deal with the demon child. The last time they visited, I drew the short straw. I held on to his arm as he squirmed and kicked and tried to drag me down. He stopped only when I pleasantly suggested that if he carried on that way, I would twist off his arm. Well, he stopped for 5 mins before he went wild again. When the visit ended, he had managed to elude his father, turned on the garden tap, got himself soaking wet, and went home naked except for a towel we gave them. His parents don't believe in corporal punishment, but I don't think this child was listening when they briefly scolded him after he tried to push his older brother into a construction site.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> True, but I guess the nanny was driven to her wit's end.



I don't really care. I expect the one with the fully developed brain to keep the upper hand without violence.



> I have a 5-year-old grand nephew who is like Harry. *His mother is always on her phone. His grandma is busy with his baby sister. His dad is busy with his older brother. The rest of the family takes turns to deal with the demon child. *The last time they visited, I drew the short straw. I held on to his arm as he squirmed and kicked and tried to drag me down. He stopped only when I pleasantly suggested that if he carried on that way, I would twist off his arm. Well, he stopped for 5 mins before he went wild again. When the visit ended, he had managed to elude his father, turned on the garden tap, got himself soaking wet, and went home naked except for a towel we gave them. His parents don't believe in corporal punishment, but I don't think this child was listening when they briefly scolded him after he tried to push his older brother into a construction site.



Ugh, this breaks me heart. I don't doubt the child is horrible to be around (and mind you, I am not a kids' person, I completely lack the "OMG so cute" reaction to most things they do, and I have no patience for their antics) but it also sounds like he got the short stick somehow. Also I truly believe - childless here, so take with a grain of salt - children and pets should not be labelled as demon spawn, problem dog etc. More often than not it's problem parents and pet owners, but say it often enough even under your breath and it will not only influence your attitude towards them but also get into their head.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones in the UK…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I hope so Tourre.


----------



## csshopper

During her conversation with the Whiner on the Today show Hoda, with a “ha-ha” tone, asked him if Archie has any of his cheekiness. He replied yes and he would try to keep it because “the cheekiness is something that helps keep you alive”. This from the emotionally stunted man who smeared his family in the Oprah interview about “generational” trauma.

This man will continue to rot and now the world can look forward to another one like him. He related as if it was funny how Archie often interrupted their Zoom calls, for example, so they would just end them. Wonder how their business partners view incidents like this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For the ones in the UK…




Honestly, I could do with him shutting up as well. I understand he was wronged by his rotten daughter, but what exactly does he have to say about The Queen, Charles and William - people he's never met - that could bear any significance?


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.



3 out of 4 look strong and knowing.  The last one looks dumb (blank look in the eyes) but stubborn and insolent (tension in the lip and chin area).


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't really care. I expect the one with the fully developed brain to keep the upper hand without violence.
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, this breaks me heart. I don't doubt the child is horrible to be around (and mind you, I am not a kids' person, I completely lack the "OMG so cute" reaction to most things they do, and I have no patience for their antics) but it also sounds like he got the short stick somehow. Also I truly believe - childless here, so take with a grain of salt - children and pets should not be labelled as demon spawn, problem dog etc. More often than not it's problem parents and pet owners, but say it often enough even under your breath and it will not only influence your attitude towards them but also get into their head.


I'm hoping when he starts school, he might learn some self-control through peer pressure. Like Diana with Harry, none of his family seems to be imposing discipline or even teaching him right from wrong. They just sigh. No consequences, no change in attitude. I also suspect ADHD, but I'm keeping that opinion to myself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> 3 out of 4 look strong and knowing.  The last one looks dumb (blank look in the eyes) but stubborn and insolent (tension in the lip and chin area).



I will say that was the year she had finally understood you don't attend somber occasions grinning like a lunatic and in the crop you can't see her coat was way too tight around the upper arms, so it could be worse....but I could have done without having to look at her at all.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said
> She was _something different_ in an ocean of sameness. For almost every function, she showed up looking like a lady, hair neatly styled, makeup properly applied, clothes neatly pressed, shoes polished, etc. H&M often look like they slept in those clothes [their nails look awful]. W&K haven’t always looked as polished as they are now, so it’s possible to improve. Kate proved at the Bond premiere that she has been holding back on us    Charles, no to ‘it’ factor. Anne, yes.
> 
> To me, _stunning_ is extremely impressive or attractive. It’s the “wow” we hear or say when someone steps out of the car.  Diana almost always got a “wow”.  As the stress of the divorce intensified, she lost a little bit of the glow but was still a ’ wow’ imo
> 
> ETA:  in this hyped-up VVIP world, Diana would be getting double wow’s.


to start with, she was tall and slender (like Kate).  I don't think she was extremely beautiful but in her later years she was very sophisticated.  and she had that thing called charisma.  maybe she was neurotic but she still came across as sincere in her love for her kids and her humanitarian work.
add her early death and that made her iconic


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457


I'm with you. I feel like it’s a book about cat fights among catty women. I am sure it’s not stories about only these four women.


----------



## Chanbal

Are the Netfl*xes attending the Jubilee? 'No' seems to be winning so far. 



*Buckingham Palace said to have promised Sussexes full armed security at events*
_*But Harry is still said to be undecided on whether to jet in with his family in June*_
_*Duke of Sussex launched High Court battle with UK police over security in 2022*_
_*Meeting with the Queen in secret before Invictus may have led to breakthrough*_
_Despite the reassurances from his British family, when asked about whether he would attend he said last week: '*I don't know*'…

The SEG provides mobile armed protection to both royals and government ministers. This 'hybrid' model is now likely to be offered to Harry, Meghan and children, Archie, two, and, Lilibet, ten months, when visiting.

It would be funded by taxpayers as the Home Office have made clear that they cannot agree private financial arrangements with anyone receiving Met Police security.

Harry, 37, is taking legal action against the Home Office after being stripped of armed police protection. He says he does not feel safe under current security arrangements bringing his family to the UK and has offered to pay for British police bodyguards himself.

It came as D****d Tr**p urged the Queen to strip Prince Harry and Meghan Markle of all their royal titles as he described the Duke of Sussex as being 'whipped like no person I think I've ever seen' and 'led around by his nose'…

But Mr Tr**p told Mr Morgan: 'Harry is whipped - do you know the expression, whipped? I won't use the full expression. But Harry is whipped like no person I think I've ever seen. I'm not a fan of Meghan, I'm not a fan, and I wasn't right from the beginning. I think poor Harry is being led around by his nose.'_









						The Queen and Charles 'keen' to welcome Harry and Meghan to Jubilee
					

Wearing sunglasses and a trademark headscarf, Her Majesty grinned and chatted as she headed out into the Spring sunshine on her Norfolk estate.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

BVBookshop said:


> I'm with you. I feel like it’s a book about catty cat fights among women. I am sure it’s not stories about only these four women.


she was on the CBS Sunday morning show yesterday.  Nothing new, basically talked about the queen who won't live forever, Charles being next.  Said Harry walked away with nothing and she thinks William is sad he lost his brother, who was the only one who could tease him/take him down a peg.


----------



## Chanbal

This is sick, and totally unfair to veterans.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457


I also don't like the cover, but TW might like it.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> During her conversation with the Whiner on the Today show Hoda, with a “ha-ha” tone, asked him if Archie has any of his cheekiness. He replied yes and he would try to keep it because “the cheekiness is something that helps keep you alive”. This from the emotionally stunted man who smeared his family in the Oprah interview about “generational” trauma.
> 
> This man will continue to rot and now the world can look forward to another one like him. He related as if it was funny how Archie often interrupted their Zoom calls, for example, so they would just end them. Wonder how their business partners view incidents like this?


and I wonder if that's true about archie interrupting calls....I would think the WIFE would have the help keep him under control when she is "working"


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I also don't like the cover, but TW might like it.


yes, M might like that cover.  she came out looking younger than Kate....too bad they didn't use full body pics


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

More opinions…


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> I also don't like the cover, but TW might like it.


One wonders if these choices were deliberate and chosen with bias. There are certainly many options available which would have been more flattering.  Even the Queen’s is a poor picture. She has taken, even in her twilight years, some gorgeous and elegant pictures.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m a monster and don’t understand why people found Diana so stunning.



Besides all the other reasons people have posted, Diana was incredibly photogenic and that's the way most of us saw her.  Photos in magazines or on the covers.  I don't know if I've ever seen a bad photo of her.  Even in her casual moments, the camera just seemed to love her.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't really care. I expect the one with the fully developed brain to keep the upper hand without violence.
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, this breaks me heart. I don't doubt the child is horrible to be around (and mind you, I am not a kids' person, I completely lack the "OMG so cute" reaction to most things they do, and I have no patience for their antics) but it also sounds like he got the short stick somehow. Also I truly believe - childless here, so take with a grain of salt - children and pets should not be labelled as demon spawn, problem dog etc. More often than not it's problem parents and pet owners, but say it often enough even under your breath and it will not only influence your attitude towards them but also get into their head.


Years ago I heard someone say that children will live up or down to our expectations. I think there is a great deal of truth to this.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This is sick, and totally unfair to veterans.



Damage to Harry's reputation could lead to an increase in suicides among army personnel and veterans? Did he really say something as grandiose as this?


----------



## youngster

Chloe302225 said:


> Is This the Queen's Gambit?
> 
> 
> If the Sussexes have received an invitation to Platinum Jubilee events, this could be the Queen's strategy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com



This is really well written and spot on.  The writer's view is that Harry comes for the Jubilee but TW does not.  Well worth the time to read.
Thanks to @Chloe302225 for posting it!

_* . . . they like the status; they like the platform; they like the privilege. As I have argued before, they never wanted to stop being royal. Now they want their cake and to eat it, too. So they pretend that the Queen is a sweet doddering old grandmother—completely divorced from her past and, indeed, her present—while the rest of the family are out of touch with the modern, ********ic world, benefiting from unearned advantages and suffering from institutionally-instilled bigotry.  *_

*At some point, though, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t say all the family members are ingrained with bigotry by a warped family culture when the Queen herself formed that family with Philip. You can’t say the institution is corrupt to its core and revere the Queen who heads it.   

There has been an assumption, though, that Meghan and Harry will leap at this invitation. But I am not so sure the two will attend. It sounds like Harry very much wants to, but I suspect that secretly Meghan wants no part of it. The couple got what they needed last week with their private meeting with the Queen. They recharged their royal credentials with a cozy meeting. Now they can make reference to this special intimacy—as Harry has already done in his TODAY interview—and remind the world they are still royal. But I don’t think Meghan has the fortitude to come back to a gathering of senior royals and be outranked. I don’t think she wants to mix with William or Kate ever again, unless it is on her turf, and she is the star.

Maybe the Queen knows that. Maybe at the end of the day, Her Majesty is calling Meghan’s bluff with this invitation. If Meghan and Harry accept and attend, it defangs them a little—it could limit the damage they try to do down the road. But, if Meghan’s real issue is not that she wasn’t accepted or supported enough by the BRF, but that she wants to be the brightest star in a galaxy where William and Kate are the rising sun and moon, then she will likely decline—and the royals will get the credit for extending a welcoming hand. Perhaps this invitation is nothing more than a tidy check-mate from the monarchy.  *

_*Time will tell. But if I had to put money on it, I’d say Harry returns alone or they don’t show up at all.*_


----------



## lanasyogamama

I still don’t think Spotify or Netflix paid before content was produced.


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> I still don’t think Spotify or Netflix paid before contract was produced.



I agree.  They might have gotten some money up front, to set up a production office, hire people, a fee for locking up their services, etc.  But, Netflix and Spotify didn't fork over $100 million or $75 million just like that.  More likely that is the value of what they could earn or might earn, if they meet certain production and performance objectives over a period.  We'll see.  One 25 minute podcast is not gonna get them $75 million from Spotify.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Lilypad might not react well to a bunch of strangers if she is never out and exposed to people.  She is going to be a year old by the time of the Jubilee.  She should be engaging with her surroundings.
> 
> Here is Princess Charlotte at one year.  She knows what she's doing lol!
> 
> View attachment 5387358
> 
> 
> View attachment 5387359


this one is a star


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, I could do with him shutting up as well. I understand he was wronged by his rotten daughter, but what exactly does he have to say about The Queen, Charles and William - people he's never met - that could bear any significance?



I don't know but I am 100% here for it!   *_insert popcorn emoji here_*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I also don't like the cover, but TW might like it.


OK, I tried to fix the cover to portray TW's most prominent personality trait: a contemptuous b!tch, always looking down on the royals.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan did not actually meet with The Queen. She had to wait in another room. That a big FU to her right there. This could be translated to telling Harry he could show, but don’t bring her or deliberately insulting her so that she won’t want to come.   TQ issues the invite, but puts conditions on it.  That way it becomes Harry’s choice, but knowing him he will still try to spin it into a personal insult and that’s what kept him away. They will whine one way or the other. Even if he shows, it won’t be with the children.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't know but I am 100% here for it!   *_insert popcorn emoji here_*


Bring the popcorn for sure, I figure I should know what he said around 4 PM local time for me!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457


The symbolism is right in your face. Camilla and Kate are facing towards The Queen and Meghan is facing away.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I don't know but I am 100% here for it!   *_insert popcorn emoji here_*


He could say that he was disappointed that they didn’t reach out to him directly. Perhaps his only communication, if any, was with courtiers.  He doesn’t  understand that’s the way it works.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> What is there to appreciate with this disaster duo?  Imo there is nothing.



Well, I appreciate it when they shut up. Sadly, it seldom happens.


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder if TWs olive cake (or whatever it was) is in it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Touree is my hero today


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Entertainment value?


More like irritation value.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I still don’t think Spotify or Netflix paid before content was produced.



They might have paid a portion, but not 100 millions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Stopped by the Johnny Depp thread...remember how we were saying Elon Musk is too smart to fall for Raptor's shenanigans when we were discussing who could be her next victim? Now what did I learn over there, he dated Amber around her break-up with JD (there are even rumours about an affair) and froze embryos with her? I don't ever want to see anyone type he's too smart again


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457






This cover communicates to me two things:
1)Three Royal women on the left, who have been (and are being) sorely tried by the commoner on the right. They appear to be intelligent, thinkers who care and are unified, compared to the one on the right, who looks blank and insipid.
2) They couldn’t risk putting a snarly (more accurate) picture of her on the cover, because they would be charged with bias and racism.


----------



## gracekelly

Tina Brown says that H&M have star power sorely needed by the family since The Queen is failing.  I definitely do not agree with the first part of the sentence.  They do not have real star power.  If they did, they wouldn't be in the shape that they are in now.  A few screaming fans at a Central Park appearance do not make for star power.  They had no star power at Invictus.  The games were not about them.  I think TB is getting delusional herself with overstatements.

Meeting with TQ was not cautious rapprochement.   It was dealing with the problem of Harry attending the Jubilee.  It was damage control which is not the same as rapprochement.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, I tried to fix the cover to portray TW's most prominent personality trait: a contemptuous b!tch, always looking down on the royals.
> 
> View attachment 5388556



Well done better, This is still quite rare, I think M would have been looking straight in to the camera


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Even if they had said star power, they are volatile, unreliable and not willing to a) work as a team, b) put in much work at all and c) work for the greater good instead of just looking for their own benefit. How are these people assets?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Tina Brown says that H&M have *star power* sorely needed by the family since The Queen is failing.  I definitely do not agree with the first part of the sentence.  They do not have real star power.  If they did, they wouldn't be in the shape that they are in now.  A few screaming fans at a Central Park appearance do not make for star power.  They had no star power at Invictus.  The games were not about them.  I think TB is getting delusional herself with overstatements.
> 
> Meeting with TQ was not cautious rapprochement.   It was dealing with the problem of Harry attending the Jubilee.  It was damage control which is not the same as rapprochement.


It's possible that Tina B. meant jester power.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even if they had said star power, they are volatile, unreliable and not willing to a) work as a team and b) put in much work at all c) work for the greater good instead of just looking for their own benefit. How are these people assets?



Liability more like


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaa, indeed. Looks like gloves are coming off - certainly explains many of Hazzie’s issues. Here’s another book excerpt:
> 
> _*Their mother, however, seemed to think much of Harry’s behaviour was hilarious.* On one occasion, while at kindergarten, Harry was frog-marched to the headmistress by the distraught and furious music teacher, Mr Prichard. All through morning assembly, Harry, who’d been sitting next to the piano, had kept tugging at the teacher’s trousers as he was trying to play. Eventually, the teacher had had enough.
> 
> ‘What on earth is it, Harry? Stop pulling my trousers,’ he said. ‘But Mr Prichard,’ Harry piped up, ‘*I can see your willy.’*
> 
> The headmistress gave Harry a telling-off, and because this had been just the latest in a series of disruptive antics, she asked Diana to come in to see her. When the incident was recounted to Diana, however, she simply burst into a fit of giggles. *The truth is that the princess actively encouraged Harry’s mischievous nature, which was in some ways akin to her own.*
> 
> On the school run one morning, she started telling a risqué joke, apparently unconcerned that Harry was drinking in every salacious word. Her police protection officer — aware that the language was inappropriate for young ears — tried to stop her mid-flow, but she was having none of it.
> 
> On arrival at Wetherby School in West London, William ran off to his classroom, while Harry immediately started telling the new joke to the headmistress. Belatedly, Diana — who’d gone red with embarrassment — managed to stop him reaching the punchline.
> 
> It was also the princess who — without consulting Charles, who was away at the time — encouraged both boys to have a go-kart race in the immaculate grounds of Highgrove. Within minutes, they were speeding at full tilt, tearing up their father’s beloved garden as *Diana cheered them on.*
> 
> She adored her sons and was always hugging and kissing them — but care of the boys, when they were home from school, was often left to the staff. *Fully aware that her younger son was especially wilful and stubborn, Diana also tended to leave discipline to his nannies and protection officers.*
> 
> One of the nannies, Jessie Webb, would resort to asking Ken Wharfe to intervene when they played up — which, in Harry’s case, was often. *His cheekiness could also descend into outright rudeness — such as when he told Jessie to her face that she needed to lose weight.
> 
> In desperation, she devised her own method of dealing with his bad behaviour: using her body, she’d wedge him hard against a wall. It was, she said, the only way she could catch him and ‘gain control’. The boys’ nanny Olga Powell went a step further by delivering the odd smack.*
> 
> Inspector Wharfe recalled: ‘*When Harry was a little older, I remember one of her classic phrases to him was, “Harry, I love you, but I don’t like you” — because he was a nuisance.* But she was strong with him, and I think children like that because they know where they stand.’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROBERT JOBSON on pressures that shaped Prince William
> 
> 
> ROBERT JOBSON: William's relationship, as a child and teenager, with his mother Diana and brother Harry was one that had the younger brother feeling left out in favour of his brother and future King
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So he literally has not grown up one bit.  Now he's got MMM to cheer him on, just like mommy.


----------



## marietouchet

A distinguished legal scholar Jonathan Turkey on the Heard -  Depp trial. Now replace the words “to each other” with “to others” and the words might describe ANY of the innumerable suits instigated by our favorite pair 

“The trial appears to show a couple consumed by overindulgence and self-absorption. This case appears just another indulgence — more recreational than legal — for two celebrities who seem to enjoy having their hired legal hands take hatchets to each other.”









						It’s 5 O’clock Somewhere: Johnny Depp and the ‘Happy Hour’ of Self-Indulgent Litigation
					

Below is my column in the Hill on the trial of Depp v. Heard, which seems to get more bizarre by the day. The trial proves Oscar Wilde’s rule that “nothing succeeds like excess.” …




					jonathanturley.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stopped by the Johnny Depp thread...remember how we were saying Elon Musk is too smart to fall for Raptor's shenanigans when we were discussing who could be her next victim? Now what did I learn over there, he dated Amber around her break-up with JD (there are even rumours about an affair) and froze embryos with her? I don't ever want to see anyone type he's too smart again


Yeah Elon dated Amber for sure … 
And during the London Depp trial Elon tweeted out words along the lines of “this self destructive behavior (of Depp and Heard) has to stop”, Elon was being sought as a witness back then


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> the hat (which I don't care for) strikes me as very British.....for someone who wanted to be a rebel and not follow the rules, she didn't mind wearing this thing that would never been seen in the US (no offense to Brits)


Yes there’s this rule about wearing hats to day time engagements but fascinators count so half the time they wear them over hats. The queen is basically always in a hat. I do agree that us Brits seem to like hats (I recommend our hatters too). I think Europeans in general are more into them than Americans.

I was about to say it strikes me that what K is wearing in the picture is basically a slightly younger version of what the queen wears during the day- the long dress jacket and skirt suit with a co ordinating Hat. It definitely looks old on her even if it’s the most appropriate thing to wear 

What I mean to say is I can sort of see why M wasn’t racing to get fitted for some of these protocol-fitting looks when she is already shorter, fatter and arguably less pretty than K and they aren’t doing anything for her either.


----------



## rose60610

On the TB book cover, I like how TQ is wearing, if not a crown, then a massive tiara, and serious jewels, Camilla and Kate wearing some jewels, and Maggot none visible. The main three look serious, take duty seriously; Maggot's expression is somewhat smug IMO. 

Here's an excerpt from the L.A. Times review of The Palace Papers: 

"Brown is not on Team Meghan. In her portrayal, Markle is a ruthless social climber, a maker of “strategic besties” whose wedding guest list was “a portrait not of Meghan’s intimate circle but of the friends she most wanted to recruit.” Brown is sharply, unfairly skeptical of Meghan’s complaints to Oprah about the prison of royal life: “Even in London, it’s possible to disappear. Isn’t that what the private dining rooms at Soho House are for?” In one of the book’s harsher analogies, she compares the Sussexes’ decision to step back as senior working royals to the military withdrawal from Afghanistan — “a necessary end executed with maximum chaos.”
The message for Meghan is clear: “Celebrities flare and burn out. The monarchy plays the long game.” So too, it seems, does the establishment commentariat."


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> The Morton book has a bit on the dress. Remember a lot of these anecdotes come from the Diana tapes.
> 
> Her first outing with Charles. She had not learned all the ins and outs of what to wear.
> 
> BUT Charles made a comment about black being for mourning and the 19 year-old was crushed by the comments of her brand-new  fiance.
> 
> He was older and should have sent her a wardrobe coach and not made the nasty comment when it was too late to change.


I was older than Diana and had watched her since the beginning and I remember that dress.

I was really surprised she would pick it.  Shiny black for the BRF? and so low cut I kept thinking she would expose something. It was all wrong and so awkward but why not ask for her sister's or anyone else's opinion first?

That spoke volumes about what was to come.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes there’s this rule about wearing hats to day time engagements but fascinators count so half the time they wear them over hats. The queen is basically always in a hat. I do agree that us Brits seem to like hats (I recommend our hatters too). I think Europeans in general are more into them than Americans.



Pay attention people because this might just be the one time I have something positive to say: I did like the beret type hats she used to wear for a bit.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> I remember watching the news clip on TV of D exiting the car and few quips came to mind. "Careful or you'll lose those little puppies." "Tut tut tut, how dare you expose the soon-to-be royal boobies."
> I can't find the clip, but here's a picture.
> View attachment 5388079


I mean to be fair, they waited and purposefully took a picture when she’s leaning forward and gravity is gravity. I do think the paparazzi were being a bit sleazy here, the outfit was ‘daring’ enough to get people talking without trying to catch her out. She’s not going to be at a near 90 degree angle at dinner. Well…. not unless James Hewitt was there.



880 said:


> OT. I like the dress and thought it was navy. Does anyone know the details. also, I googled what she wore to the Prince Louis christening, and it seemed lauded by many media sources at the time for being appropriate and becoming; a modern rendition of spring color that enhanced and acted as a foil to what KM was wearing.
> 
> i do agree that a PR whiz will not help them bc there is very little substance to spin. also agree that the Queen is probably not losing sleep over not meeting her great grandchildren


It’s this one isn’t it? I didn’t remember any of this lol.



It was lauded by the media at the time?.. and she said they never gave her unearned positive press!

It looks like it was made out of old combat pants and like an elephant sat on her hat just before she put it on.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He seems to have picked on her quite a bit early on, what with the stupid response to the TV host asking if he was in love and telling her she was chubby around the waist. I have no beef with Charles generally, but all I can think is he shouldn't have made her suffer because his grandmother talked him into marrying her and he really didn't want to.


I mean *imagine* the sheer force of will not to comment on his appearance in return because let’s be honest he definitely looks like his parents are related.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pay attention people because this might just be the one time I have something positive to say: I did like the beret type hats she used to wear for a bit.


Yes give into your innate love of hats! 
I like a beret too and I think she was better suited to a hat than a fascinator - they always looked like they wanted to jump off her head in sheer despair.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> Nope.  Part of the "It" factor was having some mystery about you.  Today's stars overshare everything.  TMI.  No mystery left, no mystique.


Are we talking about Diana because she shared everything. 

I didn't want to know about her lovers, her cold, uncaring husband, her sticking her finger down her throat, her daily visits to the astrologer and new age doctors. I just wanted her to be quiet and appreciate all the gifts she had been given.


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> It looks like it was made out of old combat pants and like an elephant sat on her hat just before she put it on.



At least it wasn't red showing six inches of cleavage. Luckily somebody talked her out of that. But of course she HAD to wear an unsuitable color when the event called for pastels.  Like somebody here said earlier, "she has to stand out and make the event about HER".


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457


Meg does look beautiful, but then again, she is extremely photogenic.

Kate looks mean and not as pretty as she really is.  I don't understand using that picture.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I like a beret too and I think she was better suited to a hat than a fascinator - they always looked like they wanted to jump off her head in sheer despair.



I often thought when she tried to be "regal" and once again failed miserably she looked like she was playing dress up.

Kate's style is mostly too conservative for my personal liking but she wears is extremely well (not to mention, everything fits).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> At least it wasn't red showing six inches of cleavage. Luckily somebody talked her out of that. But of course she HAD to wear an unsuitable color when the event called for pastels.  Like somebody here said earlier, "she has to stand out and make the event about HER".



The thing is, if she didn't want pastels, she could have worn a darker shade of blue (maybe matching Harry's suit?) as she'd done plenty before. But of course, that would not have been as much of a middle finger to the BRF, so...


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry sounds like a child that would drive everyone nuts, but I wouldn't be happy if my nanny hit my kid. Like, at all.


How many nannies did these kids have? It seems like a different name every time. Makes you wonder whether that was part of the issue.
Im trying to understand what this wedging business is - that sounds a bit odd. 


xincinsin said:


> True, but I guess the nanny was driven to her wit's end.
> 
> I have a 5-year-old grand nephew who is like Harry. His mother is always on her phone. His grandma is busy with his baby sister. His dad is busy with his older brother. The rest of the family takes turns to deal with the demon child. The last time they visited, I drew the short straw. I held on to his arm as he squirmed and kicked and tried to drag me down. He stopped only when I pleasantly suggested that if he carried on that way, I would twist off his arm. Well, he stopped for 5 mins before he went wild again. When the visit ended, he had managed to elude his father, turned on the garden tap, got himself soaking wet, and went home naked except for a towel we gave them. His parents don't believe in corporal punishment, but I don't think this child was listening when they briefly scolded him after he tried to push his older brother into a construction site.


Not to offer unsolicited advice but I’m inclined to agree with the idea that if a child knows he’s considered the demon child he’s unlikely to deviate from the expectation. 


Sophisticatted said:


> 3 out of 4 look strong and knowing.  The last one looks dumb (blank look in the eyes) but stubborn and insolent (tension in the lip and chin area).


I was about to say did they only have the budget to retouch one of the photos   

To me it seems weird this book seems to mainly be about Diana and her relationship with her sons and Charles but she’s not in the group? Especially given she’s the proven money spinner.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stopped by the Johnny Depp thread...remember how we were saying Elon Musk is too smart to fall for Raptor's shenanigans when we were discussing who could be her next victim? Now what did I learn over there, he dated Amber around her break-up with JD (there are even rumours about an affair) and froze embryos with her? I don't ever want to see anyone type he's too smart again


He maintains that she had already filed for divorce from Depp when they started dating. That's what they all say.


----------



## Chanbal

This might explain a few things… 






__





						Blind Item #1
					

Instead of hiring the very best people, it seems more and more that the alliterate one simply hires people so they can name drop them to oth...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I was older than Diana and had watched her since the beginning and I remember that dress.
> 
> I was really surprised she would pick it.  Shiny black for the BRF? and so low cut I kept thinking she would expose something. It was all wrong and so awkward but why not ask for her sister's or anyone else's opinion first?
> 
> That spoke volumes about what was to come.


Once I saw the dress in the picture, I remembered it.  It also indicated how socially inept she was to even consider wearing it.  Her mother took off years earlier and at moments like this, the lack of one shows.  There should have been some type of "training" for her and just goes to show, how much the palace took for granted with her. She was 19 and unsophisticated.  What did they expect from a teenager?  If she had been a princess from a royal family, it wouldn't have happened.   It was sloppy on their part.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> He maintains that she had already filed for divorce from Depp when they started dating. That's what they all say.



I was more thinking about her being batsh*t crazy and a skilled liar.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Once I saw the dress in the picture, I remembered it.  It also indicated how socially inept she was to even consider wearing it.  Her mother took off years earlier and at moments like this, the lack of one shows.  There should have been some type of "training" for her and just goes to show, how much the palace took for granted with her. She was 19 and unsophisticated.  What did they expect from a teenager?  If she had been a princess from a royal family, it wouldn't have happened.   It was sloppy on their part.


I recall reading that prior to the wedding the Queen Mother was teaching her the ways of the RF, but Diana later denied that, saying she was pretty much thrown into the deep end of the pool.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh I totally forgot to tell...I saw my grandmother today and she reads these awful rags that have the lowest of the low gossip, written in a very dramatic manner (so! Many! Exclamation! Marks!), mostly completely fictional (I wonder how they don't get sued weekly), mainly German B-list celebs and a few international names.

So she had one around that had the troublesome two on the cover claiming Raptor is pregnant with her lover's baby  I did NOT open that thing to find out details (e.g. who that mysterious lover is), sorry!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I even took a picture!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This might explain a few things…
> View attachment 5388767
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> Instead of hiring the very best people, it seems more and more that the alliterate one simply hires people so they can name drop them to oth...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Supposedly the person they hired from the ***** re-election team was merely a graduate student intern, not someone higher level. Totally believable.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles have one more reason for not attending the Jubilee…


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that prior to the wedding the Queen Mother was teaching her the ways of the RF, but Diana later denied that, saying she was pretty much thrown into the deep end of the pool.


She probably taught her to pour tea.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles have one more reason for not attending the Jubilee…




Is that the shocking news?

I mean, I can go to the jubilee, it's not like The Queen asked him to stand on that balcony.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I often thought when she tried to be "regal" and once again failed miserably she looked like she was playing dress up.
> 
> Kate's style is mostly too conservative for my personal liking but she wears is extremely well (not to mention, everything fits).


I love Kate in a coat....fitted so perfectly


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, I tried to fix the cover to portray TW's most prominent personality trait: a contemptuous b!tch, always looking down on the royals.
> 
> View attachment 5388556



could this one work?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Supposedly the person they hired from the ***** re-election team was merely a graduate student intern, not someone higher level. Totally believable.


Grad student? Nah, she was an undergrad…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Prince Louis Christening dress — always knew RL had a sense of humor  

_Meghan chose a fitted dress by a US heavyweight brand

The Duchess of Sussex wore a *khaki green dress by Custom Ralph Lauren* for Prince Louis' christening at the Chapel Royal inside St James' Palace today, 9 July. _









						The Duchess of Sussex wore khaki green to Prince Louis' christening
					

Meghan chose a fitted dress by a US heavyweight brand




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree with the commenters - this is another Markle distraction the BRF does not need nor want


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree with the commenters - this is another Markle distraction the BRF does not need nor want




I wouldn't blame Charles for being...busy. It's just too much drama.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I even took a picture!
> 
> View attachment 5388810


I had to use Google Translate for this one: Hazz_ "is completely drained … A baby from her lover_" 
It looks like the Germans are having some fun…


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean to be fair, they waited and purposefully took a picture when she’s leaning forward and gravity is gravity. I do think the paparazzi were being a bit sleazy here, the outfit was ‘daring’ enough to get people talking without trying to catch her out. She’s not going to be at a near 90 degree angle at dinner. Well…. not unless James Hewitt was there.
> 
> 
> It’s this one isn’t it? I didn’t remember any of this lol.
> 
> View attachment 5388721
> 
> It was lauded by the media at the time?.. and she said they never gave her unearned positive press!
> 
> It looks like it was made out of old combat pants and like an elephant sat on her hat just before she put it on.


I don't think it would have mattered what she wore that day - there was no way in h*ll she could compete with Catherine!  That outfit was perfection


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> It looks like it was made out of old combat pants and like an elephant sat on her hat just before she put it on.



Hold up, *that *is a_ c.u.s.t.o.m. Ralph Lauren_, a _custom Ralph Lauren_. We are supposed to lust over it, speak about it in hushed tones, and sacrifice all of our jewels to buy it.

Combat pants??? Not just any combat pants - from a small bolt of cloth found in a basement in an abandoned WW1 factory in Italy, woven in ancient Roman times.  It is a custom Ralph Lauren, our American designer.  

[yes, it is f-ugly, but everyone has a bad day]


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Louis Christening dress — always knew RL had a sense of humor


What did I miss? Green with envy?


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I don't think it would have mattered what she wore that day - there was no was in h*ll she could compete with Catherine!  That outfit was perfection


Plus you can't fake the glow of a happy new mother.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree with the commenters - this is another Markle distraction the BRF does not need nor want



In defense of MM (can't believe I just typed that) the drama seeking gene seems to run in the family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> What did I miss? Green with envy?



It’s - not sure I know how to say this politely - it is f-ugly.  Even after all these years (3?), it is still f-ugly.  It will not age well in the future. Happily, Kate and the rest outshine the ugliness of that dress.  Imo it is f-ugly. Of course, I am not Ralph, so my knowledge of fashion is limited. Still, to my eye, it is f-ugly.  Why she wore it is anyone’s guess - perhaps to stick out from the others, gain maximum attention, etc.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> In defense of MM (can't believe I just typed that) the drama seeking gene seems to run in the family.



Game recognize game.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s - not sure I know how to say this politely - it is f-ugly.  Even after all these years (3?), it is still f-ugly.  It will not age well in the future. Happily, Kate and the rest outshine the ugliness of that dress.  Imo it is f-ugly.


It's the color of an infant's bowel movements. Hardly a flattering color. I guess she was prepared if she was holding Louis and he had a blowout.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> True, but I guess the nanny was driven to her wit's end.
> 
> I have a 5-year-old grand nephew who is like Harry. His mother is always on her phone. His grandma is busy with his baby sister. His dad is busy with his older brother. The rest of the family takes turns to deal with the demon child. The last time they visited, I drew the short straw. I held on to his arm as he squirmed and kicked and tried to drag me down. He stopped only when I pleasantly suggested that if he carried on that way, I would twist off his arm. Well, he stopped for 5 mins before he went wild again. When the visit ended, he had managed to elude his father, turned on the garden tap, got himself soaking wet, and went home naked except for a towel we gave them. His parents don't believe in corporal punishment, but I don't think this child was listening when they briefly scolded him after he tried to push his older brother into a construction site.


I know this is totally Un PC now, but "Spare the rod, spoil the child" is kind of true.  I'm not talking corporal abuse, but in my culture (as one comedian put it, most things there are probably illegal in the US) spanking is not unusual, and people are a helluva lot more respectful towards others and less entitled.  Time outs literally do not work on quite a lot of children.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This is sick, and totally unfair to veterans.



Well, he basically said if it weren't for the Invictus Games, many attending would've committed suicide!  Hazhole.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Well, he basically said if it weren't for the Invictus Games, many attending would've committed suicide!  Hazhole.


Well gosh, Harry is an expert in the mental health field.  Right?  That retired clergyman had it just right about Harry.  He is an idiot.  Harry, think twice and speak once.  Better yet, don't speak at all.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Well, he basically said if it weren't for the Invictus Games, many attending would've committed suicide!  Hazhole.


I think he was trying to say that the games provide camaraderie with other disabled vets that is beneficial to their mental health. It's just that the way he said it left a lot to be desired.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> could this one work?
> 
> View attachment 5388813


Just for you @CarryOn2020


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that prior to the wedding the Queen Mother was teaching her the ways of the RF, but Diana later denied that, saying she was pretty much thrown into the deep end of the pool.


Diana wasn't always truthful when telling her side of the story. She was manipulative and bossy and liked to embellish the truth same as TW. JCMH reminds me of Oedipus because he 'married his mother' when he chose TW.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for you @CarryOn2020
> 
> View attachment 5388893





My guess is MM is vicious when speaking to QE. Kate and QE give her ‘the hard stare’ while Cams looks ahead [she’s seen worse].


----------



## Chanbal

Here is what NS allegedly learned from a source at Penguin Random House: 
- Penguin Random House wants Hazz to shut up, because the public may lose interest on his story and his book will not sell. 
- TW is open to author a book on her version of events. This is raising questions whether money is running tight in Montecito.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is what NS allegedly learned from a source at Penguin Random House:
> - Penguin Random House wants Hazz to shut up, because the public may lose interest on his story and his book will not sell.
> - TW is open to author a book on her version of events. This is raising questions whether money is running tight in Montecito.


what a mess


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pay attention people because this might just be the one time I have something positive to say: I did like the beret type hats she used to wear for a bit.


I’ll join your wagon.   Many times, when she did wear a hat, they were lovely and looked good on her.  And—they fit!!


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I’ll join your wagon.   Many times, when she did wear a hat, they were lovely and looked good on her.  And—they fit!!


This one did her no favors.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Touree is my hero today



Not sure that's true unfortunately.  The current VP is not very well liked by many, and she is in the position she's in.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Love that people close to the BRF are speaking out!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> This one did her no favors.
> View attachment 5388956


True.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s - not sure I know how to say this politely - *it is f-ugly*.  Even after all these years (3?), it is still *f-ugly*.  It will not age well in the future. Happily, Kate and the rest outshine the *ugliness* of that dress.  Imo it is f-ugly. Of course, I am not Ralph, so my knowledge of fashion is limited. Still, to my eye, it is *f-ugly*.  Why she wore it is anyone’s guess - perhaps to stick out from the others, gain maximum attention, etc.


Don't hold back.  How do you really feel?   
(You know I love you.  I'm just teasing!)


----------



## charlottawill

This is a flattering piece on the Duchess of Cornwall. It closes with this, imo a dig at MM:

"Perhaps Camilla’s greatest success is that she has never tried to upstage Charles, nor has she tried to shape the role to her advantage. “I think that she proves the power of silence,” says Clare. “She’s found her place, and I think that’s partly down to knowing she has been accepted. It’s like a ship sailing across the ocean, she’s finally got to her destination.”



> https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2022/04/how-camilla-became-a-queen-consort-for-the-modern-era


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I agree I think this is easily one of her best outfits- it’s a riff on a classic Dior shape and she’s not covered in tacky jewellery or bulging at the seams. Also her hair is tied up! Praise be!
> 
> I know that in principle it’s meant to be bad form to wear black all the time  but I feel like exceptions can be made when its obvious the person has no style or taste whatsoever. Keep it foolproof and black is just automatically easy and stylish.


Foolproof and black is what we would think. IMO she went against the rules because she thinks she is above them. She is still dressing inappropriately after Megxit so it's just her nature to be contrary to snatch the spotlight.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pay attention people because this might just be the one time I have something positive to say: I did like the beret type hats she used to wear for a bit.


That giant brown beret she wore for Christmas and the white nurse hat were awful to me. Wondering if it's a cultural thing. I googled the brown beret and US media were fawning on her for her fashionable choice while UK media called it a faux pas.



charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that prior to the wedding the Queen Mother was teaching her the ways of the RF, but Diana later denied that, saying she was pretty much thrown into the deep end of the pool.


Probably didn't teach her about things which they simply assumed she would know since she was part of the aristocracy. I can't imagine that they made the same mistake with Methane. Even if they didn't do the lessons as thoroughly and repeatedly as she may have required, I don't believe that they left TW floundering.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I even took a picture!
> 
> View attachment 5388810


Did the artist give her new earrings? 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Louis Christening dress — always knew RL had a sense of humor
> 
> _Meghan chose a fitted dress by a US heavyweight brand
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex wore a *khaki green dress by Custom Ralph Lauren* for Prince Louis' christening at the Chapel Royal inside St James' Palace today, 9 July. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex wore khaki green to Prince Louis' christening
> 
> 
> Meghan chose a fitted dress by a US heavyweight brand
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I was wondering if the choice was based on the price. Would "Custom" mean RL just made for her whatever she wanted?



charlottawill said:


> I think he was trying to say that the games provide camaraderie with other disabled vets that is beneficial to their mental health. It's just that *the way he said it left a lot to be desired.*


Wasn't there a quote earlier from some publication that said Hazard had the gift of the gab and could work the room just like Prince Philip while Prince William freezes when he has to talk publicly? Hazard can't be both eloquent as well as suffering from foot-in-mouth disease. Or can he?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Foolproof and black is what we would think. IMO she went against the rules because she thinks she is above them. She is still dressing inappropriately after Megxit so it's just her nature to be contrary to snatch the spotlight.
> 
> 
> That giant brown beret she wore for Christmas and the white nurse hat were awful to me. Wondering if it's a cultural thing. I googled the brown beret and US media were fawning on her for her fashionable choice while UK media called it a faux pas.
> 
> 
> Probably didn't teach her about things which they simply assumed she would know since she was part of the aristocracy. I can't imagine that they made the same mistake with Methane. Even if they didn't do the lessons as thoroughly and repeatedly as she may have required, I don't believe that they left TW floundering.
> 
> 
> Did the artist give her new earrings?
> 
> 
> I was wondering if the choice was based on the price. Would "Custom" mean RL just made for her whatever she wanted?
> 
> 
> Wasn't there a quote earlier from some publication that said Hazard had the gift of the gab and could work the room just like Prince Philip while Prince William freezes when he has to talk publicly? Hazard can't be both eloquent as well as suffering from foot-in-mouth disease. Or can he?


I recall over the years instances of Prince Philip suffering from foot-in-mouth that seemed to overshadow his better qualities, but my impression in the past few years is that the press coverage became more deferential toward him as he was in decline. Harry's got a long way to go before the press and public will give him a pass for his verbal gaffes.


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> This one did her no favors.
> View attachment 5388956


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> View attachment 5388992
> 
> 
> View attachment 5388991


Someone compared TW to Jacqueline Kennedy who always looked beautiful. As if!! So I enhanced TW's hat and she still can't compare to Jackie.


----------



## xincinsin

This one looked stupid on her. The press called it a pillbox. That was no pill, it was an enema for a cow!
I suppose she was trying to cosplay Jackie O.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

The press did her no favours by saying that some of these hats looked good. They did not - the white pillbox looks silly.  True, British ladies wear hats with the proper attitude, MM did look good in some of these photos.  Sadly, she had more misses than hits. 

My faves: Oct 23, May 22, June 9, June 19









						Meghan Markle's Best Hats of All Time
					

These are the top styles that have graced the Duchess's head.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> This one looked stupid on her. The press called it a pillbox. That was no pill, it was an enema for a cow!
> *I suppose she was trying to cosplay Jackie O*.
> View attachment 5389015


Of course, it was Jackie O. I thought she was trying to cosplay a nurse or a flight attendant.


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> View attachment 5388992
> 
> 
> View attachment 5388991


Exactly


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> This one looked stupid on her. The press called it a pillbox. That was no pill, it was an enema for a cow!
> I suppose she was trying to cosplay Jackie O.
> View attachment 5389015


Looks like a nurse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Inspired or cosplay? 









						Royal women who've been inspired by Jackie Kennedy's iconic fashion
					






					honey.nine.com.au
				












						9 times celebrities took fashion inspiration from former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
					

Meghan Markle and Amal Clooney are among the numerous celebrities who have channeled former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis' chic yet simple style. Onassis was an international fashion icon who popularized some of the biggest trends of the '60s and '70s.




					www.insider.com


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> She was 19 and unsophisticated.  What did they expect from a teenager?  If she had been a princess from a royal family, it wouldn't have happened.   It was sloppy on their part.


Diana was an aristocrat born into a noble family which goes back farther than that of Charles. I kinda think she should have known better.

If she didn't want to ask anyone, including her sisters who knew the deal, that's on her.

Would you go to a posh party with the future king knowing there would be photographers everywhere and not ask someone for advise, or their opinion, on the dress you want to wear?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Diana was an aristocrat born into a noble family which goes back farther than that of Charles. I kinda think she should have known better.
> 
> If she didn't want to ask anyone, including her sisters who knew the deal, that's on her.
> 
> Would you go to a posh party with the future king knowing there would be photographers everywhere and not ask someone for advise, or their opinion, on the dress you want to wear?



Well said
She herself should have known better - she did go to finishing school. 
Her mother chose her blue engagement outfit, so surely her mother would offer advice. One of her sisters worked at KP.
Her designers most definitely should have known better.
Blunders on many levels, unless she was seeking that sort of attention.


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I often thought when she tried to be "regal" and once again failed miserably she looked like she was playing dress up.
> 
> Kate's style is mostly too conservative for my personal liking but she wears is extremely well (not to mention, everything fits).



Actually I’m guessing it is too conservative for Catherine’s tastes too but she knows what is expected of her and makes what she is allowed/encouraged to wear look wonderful every time she is not a glitzy media “star” ( trash which every way you consider it ) she is a royal and accepted her role unlike the trashy media star who wants to change the world to her awful taste and beliefs


----------



## xincinsin

Insider wrote a whole article about how Methane's dressing style at Invictus was just like her pre-marriage style. Riiiight, because before she struck the royal jackpot, she could afford to wear high end designer. Or were they implying that she reverted to looking low-end in those high-end outfits? .... Nah, they don't do sarcasm. It was a merching article with shopping links galore.









						5 looks Meghan Markle wore at the Invictus Games that show she's returned to the style of her pre-duchess days
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made their first public appearance together at the Invictus Games 2017 in Toronto, Canada.




					www.insider.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> That giant brown beret she wore for Christmas and the white nurse hat were awful to me. Wondering if it's a cultural thing. I googled the brown beret and US media were fawning on her for her fashionable choice while UK media called it a faux pas.



That's not what I'd consider a beret, though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just as Hazzie has mental health issues plus lacks the royal mystique [hello, Vegas],   MM has fashion blunders and also lacks mystique. I doubt if she is making a statement about expensive clothes looking as cheap as fast fashion, but she did have a stylist.  While we all can agree MM does not listen to advice, she _did_ have _someone_ to consult [probably lots of someone’s].  If [big if] the marriage ends, imo Hazzie should carry the burden. For all of MM’s worldly (?) knowledge, Hazz had the higher perspective. He knew he had issues, he knew the workings of the royal family, he knew what he wanted. 

Old article:
_Now, it has been revealed that the royal's memorable wardrobe choices were masterminded by one particular person – her secret stylist. Meghan reportedly enlisted the help of Maria Means Cote, former PR and celebrity relations manager for Prada, to help put together her stunning ensembles.








						Meghan Markle's secret stylist: Meet the mastermind behind the Duchess' iconic farewell tour wardrobe
					

Meghan Markle's secret stylist: The Duchess of Sussex's farewell UK tour wardrobe was carefully put together by Maria Means Cote.




					www.hellomagazine.com
				



_


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> This one did her no favors.
> View attachment 5388956



There's nothing wrong with the hat, it's just not supposed to be worn like a tin helmet


----------



## needlv

Gossip on reddit as to why MM left early.  Another tantrum apparently.  And it’s possible this was their “surprise” they were planning (ie to show off the kids at Invictus).

_Allegedly Netflix wanted Just Harry to go [to Invictus games]. But of course Meghan cannot abide that and demanded to go too. However, she also insisted on being fully financed while there, which is fair if she's wearing ugly clothes on Netflix's behalf. So then Netflix wanted her and Harry to come and go at the same time. BUT suddenly she can't be without the kids that long, even though she can leave a three month old home and fly overseas to watch a goddamned tennis game. Anyway, she allegedly then wanted to ship the kids, their nannies Sophie the Giraffe, children's Benedry and and all their other entourage with them on the Netflix dime, just like Will and Kate did with George and Charlotte except she can't quite grasp that she's not a Royal on the Royal dime. Allegedly, Netflixed nixed the kids and their staff so Meghan had to leave early because she's such an incredible mother._


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said
> She herself should have known better - she did go to finishing school.
> Her mother chose her blue engagement outfit, so surely her mother would offer advice. One of her sisters worked at KP.
> Her designers most definitely should have known better.
> Blunders on many levels, unless she was seeking that sort of attention.



I don't think she was seeking attention (of the wrong sort). Probably, standing face on in front of a mirror it looked fine and decent (which you can see when she was talking to Princess Grace). These ballgowns were very fashionable.

You can see she is literally fighting (with) the dress nearly all the time, she was angry with herself, she knew she's made a mistake. I don't think she knew the cameras were going to be upstairs when she walked into Goldsmiths Hall. I've been there myself, it was a good decision for them to get the birds-eye-view or they wouldn't have got any clear shots. I think _both_ parties got more than they bargained for.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Gossip on reddit as to why MM left early.  Another tantrum apparently.  And it’s possible this was their “surprise” they were planning (ie to show off the kids at Invictus).
> 
> _Allegedly Netflix wanted Just Harry to go [to Invictus games]. But of course Meghan cannot abide that and demanded to go too. However, she also insisted on being fully financed while there, which is fair if she's wearing ugly clothes on Netflix's behalf. So then Netflix wanted her and Harry to come and go at the same time. BUT suddenly she can't be without the kids that long, even though she can leave a three month old home and fly overseas to watch a goddamned tennis game. Anyway, she allegedly then wanted to ship the kids, their nannies Sophie the Giraffe, children's Benedry and and all their other entourage with them on the Netflix dime, just like Will and Kate did with George and Charlotte except she can't quite grasp that she's not a Royal on the Royal dime. Allegedly, Netflixed nixed the kids and their staff so Meghan had to leave early because she's such an incredible mother._



I think she left early because she was bored. She always wants to leave early. What else is there to do after all the pics have been taken?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not what I'd consider a beret, though.


Me neither, but plenty of the media called both the brown and white monstrosities "berets".


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I think she left early because she was bored. She always wants to leave early. What else is there to do after all the pics have been taken?


Can we hope that she ran out of merched garments and jewellery, so there was no point staying on? Maybe H was lucky that the Claw did not snap out and snare him back before the closing ceremony.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I know this is totally Un PC now, but "Spare the rod, spoil the child" is kind of true.  I'm not talking corporal abuse, but in my culture (as one comedian put it, most things there are probably illegal in the US) spanking is not unusual, and people are a helluva lot more respectful towards others and less entitled.  Time outs literally do not work on quite a lot of children.


I’m not against spanking in of itself.  I do think at times ‘culture’ is used as an excuse for being controlling  at the expense of the child. I am not speaking about anyone or anything in particular here to be clear just speaking in a generalised way and from my own experience. 

I also think, again from my own experience, the idea one child knows their sibling is preferred is always harmful to the whole family but especially the ‘black sheep.’ (You can see this with M’s family.)

I do wonder if this happened a bit with Charles and Edward (A hole being the favourite) and it has left them a bit infantilised and keen for approval. I think to some extent they tried to overcompensate with H but I’m never that clear on how much time any of these royal kids were with their parents and how much time they were at boarding school or with nanny.

 Not to hate on people who use boarding school or nannies I’m just saying the full picture of the influences involved is unclear.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for you @CarryOn2020
> 
> View attachment 5388893


You ladies are seriously better at photoshop than whoever did their time cover 


charlottawill said:


> This one did her no favors.
> View attachment 5388956
> 
> see I think this isn’t a bad hat ( it does look a bit like something from a patisserie but they are meant to be a bit ornate.) However, it just looked busted with her raggedy weave hanging out of it and *again* it’s not the right size or shape for her. I take it back - this one can’t even get a hat to fit her.


----------



## Annawakes

Ugh.  I can see her wanting a photo of getting off a private plane with her “kids” a la Kate and George and Charlotte.

too bad she had to settle for buying out first class on a regular plane.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I don't think she was seeking attention (of the wrong sort). Probably, standing face on in front of a mirror it looked fine and decent (which you can see when she was talking to Princess Grace). These ballgowns were very fashionable.
> 
> You can see she is literally fighting (with) the dress nearly all the time, she was angry with herself, she knew she's made a mistake. I don't think she knew the cameras were going to be upstairs when she walked into Goldsmiths Hall. I've been there myself, it was a good decision for them to get the birds-eye-view or they wouldn't have got any clear shots. I think _both_ parties got more than they bargained for.


Well said. It reminds me of all the teenage girls I've seen in prom dresses that they think are sexy, but they are constantly tugging at them and adjusting to avoid a wardrobe malfunction.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Well said. It reminds me of all the teenage girls I've seen in prom dresses that they think are sexy, but they are constantly tugging at them and adjusting to avoid a wardrobe malfunction.


Reminds me of Kyle Richards from Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (slithering away now for admitting I watch that).  She’s constantly tugging at her clothes.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Reminds me of Kyle Richards from Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (slithering away now for admitting I watch that).  She’s constantly tugging at her clothes.


It's Ok, I used to watch it too.


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> Gossip on reddit as to why MM left early.  Another tantrum apparently.  And it’s possible this was their “surprise” they were planning (ie to show off the kids at Invictus).
> 
> _Allegedly Netflix wanted Just Harry to go [to Invictus games]. But of course Meghan cannot abide that and demanded to go too. However, she also insisted on being fully financed while there, which is fair if she's wearing ugly clothes on Netflix's behalf. So then Netflix wanted her and Harry to come and go at the same time. BUT suddenly she can't be without the kids that long, even though she can leave a three month old home and fly overseas to watch a goddamned tennis game. Anyway, she allegedly then wanted to ship the kids, their nannies Sophie the Giraffe, children's Benedry and and all their other entourage with them on the Netflix dime, just like Will and Kate did with George and Charlotte except she can't quite grasp that she's not a Royal on the Royal dime. Allegedly, Netflixed nixed the kids and their staff so Meghan had to leave early because she's such an incredible mother._


Netflix is an International business so surely realizes how her unpopularity could be a drag, especially since the focus is supposed to be the athletes. They gave her some footage then told her to get out of town. She’s probably still sulking, but Netflix holds the $$$.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Netflix is an International business so surely realizes how her unpopularity could be a drag, especially since the focus is supposed to be the athletes. They gave her some footage then told her to get out of town. She’s probably still sulking, but Netflix holds the $$$.


I don't see how her presence added to the event. More like she was basking in reflected glory and stealing the spotlight at every opportunity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Omid got what, a reverse career "boost"?


----------



## Chanbal

With the help from his master?


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Omid got what, a reverse career "boost"?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Well said. It reminds me of all the teenage girls I've seen in prom dresses that they think are sexy, but they are constantly tugging at them and adjusting to avoid a wardrobe malfunction.


Dressing as part of the BRF is  a skill that is learned over the course of years. It is different to dressing to go out to any of the London high society hot spots eg Annabel's or Chiltern Firehouse.  Those spots are known for helping patrons make quick exits and entrances, and no snaps inside. 

Whereas the BRF events are photographed from every side and the photos that make money are the embarrassing ones.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Anyone listening to the psychologist describing what Amber Herd my have? Sounds a lot like MM to me.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Allisonfaye said:


> Anyone listening to the psychologist describing what Amber Herd my have? Sounds a lot like MM to me.


Yes! I would be so embarassed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Reminds me of Kyle Richards from Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (slithering away now for admitting I watch that).  She’s constantly tugging at her clothes.


Yes but that’s in the hope one pops out - anything for screen time baby!  


I think there’s nothing wrong with admitting you like renaissance art, Mozart, and glorious reality tv - if something is done well it’s done well. 





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Omid got what, a reverse career "boost"?



I am wondering  what  he got fired from harpers for & decided to burn all the bridges. My bet is taking too much time off for cosmetic surgery. No danger on getting that critique from H&M as they just email the copy to him to post outs


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

As H&M’s popularity dwindles, so will their sycophants, mainly because the money just is not there.

RE: Depp and Heard. I tried to watch it the first day, but it just too much negativity. Why make this stuff public?  Must be writing a book? Movie? Odd, imo, just odd.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> With the help from his master?



Scobie is now the official attack dog.  He will spend all his time dumping on the Windsors and making the Sussex sound like the second coming.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> As H&M’s popularity dwindles, so will their sycophants, mainly because the money just is not there.
> 
> RE: Depp and Heard. I tried to watch it the first day, but it just too much negativity. Why make this stuff public?  Must be writing a book? Movie? Odd, imo, just odd.


Two horrible people with really sick issues with oneanother.  They make the Sussex look uber normal.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> As H&M’s popularity dwindles, so will their sycophants, mainly because the money just is not there.
> 
> RE: Depp and Heard. I tried to watch it the first day, but it just too much negativity. Why make this stuff public?  Must be writing a book? Movie? Odd, imo, just odd.


Amanda hinted that Depp abused her. IMHO, the Depp definition of abuse requires battery, so as long as he did not strike her then he did not abuse her.   I reason that since he keeps coming back to the leitmotif of I DID NOT HIT HER …Thus, he sued her for libel

in his eyes, using HIS definition, he is innocent … all the mayhem, drugs, verbal insults don’t count AS HE sees it, battery is the only issue 

Now, many may not agree with his definition


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Omid got what, a reverse career "boost"?



Career boost ? yahoo is pretty far down on the totem Pole


----------



## Chanbal

Mental health therapy: Do Not Communicate, just pay WorseUp and have the therapists talk between themselves.  Did I get this right? 



_The Duke of Sussex__ has criticised the British reluctance to talk about needing counselling, instead *praising* *California’s “I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist” mentality*.

The Duke, speaking on a podcast about mental health, said the cultural differences between the UK and US are “immense”, as he urged the public to get on the “front foot” to prevent burnout.

Saying “99.9 per cent of people on planet Earth are suffering from some form of loss, trauma, or grief”, he warned the body “doesn’t forget” emotional damage of childhood and argued: “The more we understand it, the more we understand each other.”

The Duke made a “cameo” appearance on the Masters of Scale podcast_* to talk about BetterUp, the mental health app he works for as its chief impact officer.*





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Career boost ? yahoo is pretty far down on the totem Pole





gracekelly said:


> Scobie is now the official attack dog.  He will spend all his time dumping on the Windsors and making the Sussex sound like the second coming.


Oh yes! Yahoo might be low on the totem pole, but it still reaches many people. It must be frustrating for Will and Kate to have their names associated to the Neflixes' mess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Career boost ? yahoo is pretty far down on the totem Pole



That's why I wrote reverse and put the boost in quotation marks


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Career boost ? yahoo is pretty far down on the totem Pole


Yahoo who?


----------



## csshopper

Scoobie lives in the same fantasyland as his handlers, so delusional he expects his latest diatribe against long time Palace officials, to be accepted. People, besides being angry, must be laughing at his ignorance. There is no way Haz and TW would have slipped in to visit the Queen without her aides being involved in setting up a meeting. 

They just keep piling on and making things worse for themselves since it's obvious Baldie and Botox had to have been his source for this imaginary scenario.

He's a creepy bottom feeder.


----------



## Allisonfaye

csshopper said:


> Netflix is an International business so surely realizes how her unpopularity could be a drag, especially since the focus is supposed to be the athletes. They gave her some footage then told her to get out of town. She’s probably still sulking, but Netflix holds the $$$.



Speaking of Netflix, they are hurting. Their stock is down a lot (14% just today in regular and after hours) and they are going to have to let go of any dead weight. I wonder if these two are delivering to the bottom line? I kind of doubt it. If they can't get a huge paycheck from Netflix, I would say their stock is way down.


----------



## Chanbal

More from Tina B. on DM  


_'*Meghan doesn't really have a brand* – you feel that *she is grasping at the 'Twitter caring' of the moment. Vaccinations, Ukraine, Women's rights, my 40th birthday, let's have a mentoring scheme. Nothing is really going anywhere for Meghan.*

'And the whole problem, with entertainment deal is you have to produce. They've signed with Netflix but what have we seen? Nothing.

'Creating entertainment that works is very hard to do. Their Spotify podcast is going nowhere. Netflix is not doing so well are they going to renew that contract?'_









						Tina Brown: 'Meghan saw there were deals to be made'
					

Ex-Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown said the Duchess of Sussex has 'no purpose' and wanted to 'cash in' on the commercial arm of being a royal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Hmmm.....

"As Harry travels the United States in the 2020s, commemorating 9/11 with Bill de Blasio, riding a double-decker bus with James Corden, or popping up in unexpected places like the Stockyards Championship Rodeo in Fort Worth, it's easy enough to see him as a new type of goodwill ambassador for the motherland—at no cost to the taxpayer."


> https://archive.vanityfair.com/article/2022/5/the-incredible-shrinking-house-of-windsor


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> This one did her no favors.
> View attachment 5388956


I would have to agree.  I am not a fan of berets, and I don't think they looked good on her at all.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Mental health therapy: Do Not Communicate, just pay WorseUp and have the therapists talk between themselves.  Did I get this right?
> 
> View attachment 5389581
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex__ has criticised the British reluctance to talk about needing counselling, instead *praising* *California’s “I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist” mentality*.
> 
> The Duke, speaking on a podcast about mental health, said the cultural differences between the UK and US are “immense”, as he urged the public to get on the “front foot” to prevent burnout.
> 
> Saying “99.9 per cent of people on planet Earth are suffering from some form of loss, trauma, or grief”, he warned the body “doesn’t forget” emotional damage of childhood and argued: “The more we understand it, the more we understand each other.”
> 
> The Duke made a “cameo” appearance on the Masters of Scale podcast_* to talk about BetterUp, the mental health app he works for as its chief impact officer.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


The fact he’s holding CA up as a gold standard is laughable.  Mental health is 100% important, but it’s become the new catch phrase for opportunistic businesses (ahem BetterUp?) as well as opportunistic people who use anxiety and depression as an excuse for everything.  I live in CA, and the sheer  number of people that are on antidepressants without any kind of assistance in learning how to cope with LIFE is unreal.  The number of children on “medical marijuana” and antidepressants is beyond mind boggling to me.  Parents often seem to want to fix their children by medicating them, and not teaching them that life has its ups & downs.  There are many people with real mental illnesses that definitely need help including medication & therapy, then there are the many that choose to self medicate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> The fact he’s holding CA up as a gold standard is laughable.  Mental health is 100% important, but it’s become the new catch phrase for opportunistic businesses (ahem BetterUp?) as well as opportunistic people who use anxiety and depression as an excuse for everything.  I live in CA, and the sheer  number of people that are on antidepressants without any kind of assistance in learning how to cope with LIFE is unreal.  The number of children on “medical marijuana” and antidepressants is beyond mind boggling to me.  Parents often seem to want to fix their children by medicating them, and not teaching them that life has its ups & downs.  There are many people with real mental illnesses that definitely need help including medication & therapy, then there are the many that choose to self medicate.


This resonates with me. I have an adult child who lives in CA, and both they and their partner have been diagnosed with depression and take antidepressants/anti-anxiety drugs. These are people who lacked for nothing growing up, are from loving and supportive families, went to a top university on their parents, and in theory should be very happy. To meet them you'd say what a lovely, intelligent and attractive young couple, but inwardly they struggle. It is difficult as a parent to understand how to help them, other than to remind them that you are always there for them. I have a friend in CA whose three young grandchildren, ranging from 6 to 14 in what would be considered a very typical two parent family, are all receiving some kind of mental health treatment for different reasons. We are clearly doing something wrong with our children. But I guess this is better discussed elsewhere...


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> The fact he’s holding CA up as a gold standard is laughable.  Mental health is 100% important, but it’s become the new catch phrase for opportunistic businesses (ahem BetterUp?) as well as opportunistic people who use anxiety and depression as an excuse for everything.  I live in CA, and the sheer  number of people that are on antidepressants without any kind of assistance in learning how to cope with LIFE is unreal.  The number of children on “medical marijuana” and antidepressants is beyond mind boggling to me.  Parents often seem to want to fix their children by medicating them, and not teaching them that life has its ups & downs.  There are many people with real mental illnesses that definitely need help including medication & therapy, then there are the many that choose to self medicate.


A large number of people in CA suffering from mental disorders are homeless, including many veterans. I can't see them having the resources or capabilities to use Hazz's approach "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist_." Mental health is a very serious problem, and it's dangerous to have unqualified people trying to profit from it imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> More from Tina B. on DM
> View attachment 5389718
> 
> _'*Meghan doesn't really have a brand* – you feel that *she is grasping at the 'Twitter caring' of the moment. Vaccinations, Ukraine, Women's rights, my 40th birthday, let's have a mentoring scheme. Nothing is really going anywhere for Meghan.*
> 
> 'And the whole problem, with entertainment deal is you have to produce. They've signed with Netflix but what have we seen? Nothing.
> 
> 'Creating entertainment that works is very hard to do. Their Spotify podcast is going nowhere. Netflix is not doing so well are they going to renew that contract?'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tina Brown: 'Meghan saw there were deals to be made'
> 
> 
> Ex-Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown said the Duchess of Sussex has 'no purpose' and wanted to 'cash in' on the commercial arm of being a royal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


hate to say it but even though I'm still here, they're getting kinda boring


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> hate to say it but even though I'm still here, they're getting kinda boring


I suspect they realize it too and are panicking that income possibilities have not materialized according to her plan.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> This resonates with me. I have an adult child who lives in CA, and both they and their partner have been diagnosed with depression and take antidepressants/anti-anxiety drugs. These are people who lacked for nothing growing up, are from loving and supportive families, went to a top university on their parents, and in theory should be very happy. To meet them you'd say what a lovely, intelligent and attractive young couple, but inwardly they struggle. It is difficult as a parent to understand how to help them, other than to remind them that you are always there for them. I have a friend in CA whose three young grandchildren, ranging from 6 to 14 in what would be considered a very typical two parent family, are all receiving some kind of mental health treatment for different reasons. We are clearly doing something wrong with our children. But I guess this is better discussed elsewhere...


Mental health therapy must be performed by highly qualified and ethical professionals. Unfortunately, it's not always the case and people can suffer from the treatment. I have no words to express what I feel about having people like Hazz involved in mental coaching. I can't get over of his comments about "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist,_" and arrange a playdate???


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> The fact he’s holding CA up as a gold standard is laughable.  Mental health is 100% important, but it’s become the new catch phrase for opportunistic businesses (ahem BetterUp?) as well as opportunistic people who use anxiety and depression as an excuse for everything.  I live in CA, and the sheer  number of people that are on antidepressants without any kind of assistance in learning how to cope with LIFE is unreal.  The number of children on “medical marijuana” and antidepressants is beyond mind boggling to me.  Parents often seem to want to fix their children by medicating them, and not teaching them that life has its ups & downs.  There are many people with real mental illnesses that definitely need help including medication & therapy, then there are the many that choose to self medicate.


Yes to all you said. We are not exemplary in CA, and he’s not only laughable, it demonstrates once again his ignorance. He’s a paid shill trying to drum up business.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Mental health therapy must be performed by highly qualified and ethical professionals. Unfortunately, it's not always the case and people can suffer from the treatment. I have no words to express what I feel about having people like Hazz involved in mental coaching. I can't get over of his comments about "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist,_" and arrange a playdate???


Chanbal , I gagged on reading his flippant comment. He is loathsome.

edited to give Chanbal back her real name, not the auto fill version.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> A large number of people in CA suffering from mental disorders are homeless, including many veterans. I can't see them having the resources or capabilities to use Hazz's approach "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist_." Mental health is a very serious problem, and it's dangerous to have unqualified people trying to profit from it imo.



I have no other excuse than the devil made me do it! 


ET correct stupid error.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Mental health therapy must be performed by highly qualified and ethical professionals. Unfortunately, it's not always the case and people can suffer from the treatment. I have no words to express what I feel about having people like Hazz involved in mental coaching. I can't get over of his comments about "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist,_" and arrange a playdate???



IMO he was trying to be funny. When a legitimate comedian, say a Larry David or Seinfeld, says this in his routine, we all chuckle for numerous reasons. When an unqualified bozo pops off with it, it isn’t funny, it isn’t endearing, it isn’t cute. Heck, it wasn’t even original. _What_ is his problem? NM, I already know. Maybe this will be a quiet week - hope I did not jinx us 

It feels like a Steve Martin or Martin Short line.  It has been around for *years, literally.*




__





						Google Answers: Movie quotes
					





					answers.google.com
				




ETA:  imo he was trying to use an American joke in order to seem cool, fit in.  Huge failure.


----------



## A1aGypsy

charlottawill said:


> This resonates with me. I have an adult child who lives in CA, and both they and their partner have been diagnosed with depression and take antidepressants/anti-anxiety drugs. These are people who lacked for nothing growing up, are from loving and supportive families, went to a top university on their parents, and in theory should be very happy. To meet them you'd say what a lovely, intelligent and attractive young couple, but inwardly they struggle. It is difficult as a parent to understand how to help them, other than to remind them that you are always there for them. I have a friend in CA whose three young grandchildren, ranging from 6 to 14 in what would be considered a very typical two parent family, are all receiving some kind of mental health treatment for different reasons. We are clearly doing something wrong with our children. But I guess this is better discussed elsewhere...



Often mental health issues have nothing to do with how people are raised and everything to do with chemistry.

And life is tough right now. Especially for youth. You can be from the most traditional and supportive backgrounds but you can still struggle with self esteem, bullying or any number of other external forces.

Family can neither blame themselves nor feel like their support should be a panacea.


----------



## Chanbal

Tina Brown's interview on her new book. I don't agree with everything TB says, but I believe she is right about the queen setting up the Harkles for success. However, TW wanted to make lucrative deals, she couldn't resist the celebrity buffet. TB was told that Hazz's memoir is going to be very harsh. She makes a joke about the BRF giving Hazz a big check to have it postponed indefinitely.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Tina Brown's interview on her new book. I don't agree with everything TB says, but I believe she is right about the queen setting up the Harkles for success. However, TW wanted to make lucrative deals, she couldn't resist the celebrity buffet. TB was told that Hazz's memoir is going to be very harsh. She mentions the BRF should perhaps give Hazz a big check and have it postponed indefinitely.



Just what the Harkles need---more $$$$ to keep them quiet for a while.  UGH!  The situation is so classic.  
We all expected the memoir to be "harsh"---and it's not like the Harkles have a lot of love or credibility in the UK.  Would the "big check" TB recommends only be to spare the Queen from dealing with any fall-out or controversy?


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> Just what the Harkles need---more $$$$ to keep them quiet for a while.  UGH!  The situation is so classic.
> We all expected the memoir to be "harsh"---and it's not like the Harkles have a lot of love or credibility in the UK.  Would the "big check" TB recommends only be to spare the Queen from dealing with any fall-out or controversy?


TB was likely joking. It would be a huge mistake to give Hazz money to keep him quiet. He has no credibility.


----------



## needlv

Scoobie is using his first Yahoo article to attack two of the Queens staff members.  For those that don’t want to click:

*Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about people around the Queen*
….._

The reality is, since the passing of Prince Philip one year ago, the Queen is living by herself. While Prince Charles, the Cambridges and others stop by for visits, the people surrounding the monarch on a daily basis—aides, courtiers and household staff responsible for every aspect of her life—are all employees of the royal institution. *And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*.


When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple* _([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free.


It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.

Days before permanently leaving the UK in March 2020, Harry told a close aide, “These people have their own agendas, they work for the institution and certainly don’t care about us as family.” Princess Diana echoed similar sentiments in the years following her divorce from Charles.

Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood.

*So, while the Sussexes and the Queen have been in regular contact over the phone or virtually, their recent in-person meeting (which was purposefully kept a secret from all palace aides)* was Harry’s first chance in a year to truly speak privately with his grandmother without fear of anyone overhearing or wandering in the background of a video call.

Having bravely faced a series of health and mobility issues, we often hear how the 96-year-old monarch is impressively “getting on” with her duties. But, as a grandson and sixth-in-line to the throne, it would only be natural for Harry to question whether every person in her daily orbit has her best interests at heart. Is she being pushed to do too much? Is anyone telling her to slow down? Is there too much pressure to be at Platinum Jubilee events this June? Is she being properly taken care of? These are the kinds of questions any caring person would ask an elderly family member living alone or in a facility run by staff. And when you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry.

Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*_


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Scoobie is using his first Yahoo article to attack two of the Queens staff members.  For those that don’t want to click:
> 
> *Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about people around the Queen*
> …..
> 
> _The reality is, since the passing of Prince Philip one year ago, the Queen is living by herself. While Prince Charles, the Cambridges and others stop by for visits, the people surrounding the monarch on a daily basis—aides, courtiers and household staff responsible for every aspect of her life—are all employees of the royal institution. *And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*.
> 
> 
> When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple* _([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free.
> 
> 
> It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.
> 
> Days before permanently leaving the UK in March 2020, Harry told a close aide, “These people have their own agendas, they work for the institution and certainly don’t care about us as family.” Princess Diana echoed similar sentiments in the years following her divorce from Charles.
> 
> Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood.
> 
> *So, while the Sussexes and the Queen have been in regular contact over the phone or virtually, their recent in-person meeting (which was purposefully kept a secret from all palace aides)* was Harry’s first chance in a year to truly speak privately with his grandmother without fear of anyone overhearing or wandering in the background of a video call.
> 
> Having bravely faced a series of health and mobility issues, we often hear how the 96-year-old monarch is impressively “getting on” with her duties. But, as a grandson and sixth-in-line to the throne, it would only be natural for Harry to question whether every person in her daily orbit has her best interests at heart. Is she being pushed to do too much? Is anyone telling her to slow down? Is there too much pressure to be at Platinum Jubilee events this June? Is she being properly taken care of? These are the kinds of questions any caring person would ask an elderly family member living alone or in a facility run by staff. And when you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*_


Can someone assure TW's minister of propaganda, Scoobie that the Cambridges are relocating to Windsor? Poor guy, he sounds so concerned. It would be nice if someone could also let him know that QE didn't want the Harkles moving in with her. We all know that they graciously offered to live in Windsor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> Tina Brown's interview on her new book. I don't agree with everything TB says, but I believe she is right about the queen setting up the Harkles for success. However, TW wanted to make lucrative deals, she couldn't resist the celebrity buffet. TB was told that Hazz's memoir is going to be very harsh. She makes a joke about the BRF giving Hazz a big check to have it postponed indefinitely.



Thanks so very much for sharing this interview!!!!


----------



## chowlover2

purseinsanity said:


> Reminds me of Kyle Richards from Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (slithering away now for admitting I watch that).  She’s constantly tugging at her clothes.


I'm slithering with you!


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Tina Brown's interview on her new book. I don't agree with everything TB says, but I believe she is right about the queen setting up the Harkles for success. However, TW wanted to make lucrative deals, she couldn't resist the celebrity buffet. TB was told that Hazz's memoir is going to be very harsh. She makes a joke about the BRF giving Hazz a big check to have it postponed indefinitely.




Thank you for posting this interview. Many of Tina’s comments were spot on.  For example, who you marry and their family are the keys to success. She’s right. The less controversy from the bride’s family, the better the fit. We know Diana did not have a happy childhood. I wonder if MM really did - maybe with her parents but not so much with her siblings [btw, where is D?]. Interesting interview.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> hate to say it but even though I'm still here, they're getting kinda boring


They’ve bored me to tears for many months now.  I keep coming back primarily for our little community here and your witty comments and insights!


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Scoobie is using his first Yahoo article to attack two of the Queens staff members.  For those that don’t want to click:
> 
> *Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about people around the Queen*
> …..
> 
> _The reality is, since the passing of Prince Philip one year ago, the Queen is living by herself. While Prince Charles, the Cambridges and others stop by for visits, the people surrounding the monarch on a daily basis—aides, courtiers and household staff responsible for every aspect of her life—are all employees of the royal institution. *And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*.
> 
> 
> When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple* _([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free.
> 
> 
> It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.
> 
> Days before permanently leaving the UK in March 2020, Harry told a close aide, “These people have their own agendas, they work for the institution and certainly don’t care about us as family.” Princess Diana echoed similar sentiments in the years following her divorce from Charles.
> 
> Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood.
> 
> *So, while the Sussexes and the Queen have been in regular contact over the phone or virtually, their recent in-person meeting (which was purposefully kept a secret from all palace aides)* was Harry’s first chance in a year to truly speak privately with his grandmother without fear of anyone overhearing or wandering in the background of a video call.
> 
> Having bravely faced a series of health and mobility issues, we often hear how the 96-year-old monarch is impressively “getting on” with her duties. But, as a grandson and sixth-in-line to the throne, it would only be natural for Harry to question whether every person in her daily orbit has her best interests at heart. Is she being pushed to do too much? Is anyone telling her to slow down? Is there too much pressure to be at Platinum Jubilee events this June? Is she being properly taken care of? These are the kinds of questions any caring person would ask an elderly family member living alone or in a facility run by staff. And when you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*_


No disrespect to you at all and thank you for copying & pasting so we don’t give Scabies any clicks, but I couldn’t even read the first paragraph of his drivel!


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> View attachment 5390017


I call that the “Poke your own eye to cause a tear” gesture


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Mental health therapy: Do Not Communicate, just pay WorseUp and have the therapists talk between themselves.  Did I get this right?
> 
> View attachment 5389581
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex__ has criticised the British reluctance to talk about needing counselling, instead *praising* *California’s “I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist” mentality*.
> 
> The Duke, speaking on a podcast about mental health, said the cultural differences between the UK and US are “immense”, as he urged the public to get on the “front foot” to prevent burnout.
> 
> Saying “99.9 per cent of people on planet Earth are suffering from some form of loss, trauma, or grief”, he warned the body “doesn’t forget” emotional damage of childhood and argued: “The more we understand it, the more we understand each other.”
> 
> The Duke made a “cameo” appearance on the Masters of Scale podcast_* to talk about BetterUp, the mental health app he works for as its chief impact officer.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


 I want to meet this 0.01% of people who have apparently discovered immortality  

just putting my two cents in that H’s representation of the British approach to depression is grossly inaccurate not only in the general approach but also, given he’s referred to seeing multiple therapists and using medication pre-marriage , his own experience.

I would also add that I don’t think this vague term ‘mental health issues/problems ’ is that useful. The treatment and prevalence of depression is very different from PTSD, addiction or anxiety yet he (abs others like him) seems to use them all interchangeably. It’s a general trend of vagueness that’s adding to the confusion.

The reality is there is a bit of a trend in what medical conditions get the funding for research and treatment at any point in time and this is what gets reflected in the media especially by opportunistic celebrities. Currently this vague banner ‘mental health’ is fashionable though it could be more accurately termed ‘general behaviours for the avoidance and treatment of mild depression and some methods for coping with mild non-specific anxiety.’ If it was ten years ago H would be complaining about being dyslexic and M would be talking about eating disorders because they were ‘in the news’ then. NB I’m not saying most people are faking having any of these issues I am saying that if these two (and those like him) have anything it’s chronic extreme opportunism.


needlv said:


> Scoobie is using his first Yahoo article to attack two of the Queens staff members.  For those that don’t want to click:
> 
> *Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about people around the Queen*
> …..
> 
> _The reality is, since the passing of Prince Philip one year ago, the Queen is living by herself. While Prince Charles, the Cambridges and others stop by for visits, the people surrounding the monarch on a daily basis—aides, courtiers and household staff responsible for every aspect of her life—are all employees of the royal institution. *And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*.
> 
> 
> When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple* _([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free.
> 
> 
> It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.
> 
> Days before permanently leaving the UK in March 2020, Harry told a close aide, “These people have their own agendas, they work for the institution and certainly don’t care about us as family.” Princess Diana echoed similar sentiments in the years following her divorce from Charles.
> 
> Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood.
> 
> *So, while the Sussexes and the Queen have been in regular contact over the phone or virtually, their recent in-person meeting (which was purposefully kept a secret from all palace aides)* was Harry’s first chance in a year to truly speak privately with his grandmother without fear of anyone overhearing or wandering in the background of a video call.
> 
> Having bravely faced a series of health and mobility issues, we often hear how the 96-year-old monarch is impressively “getting on” with her duties. But, as a grandson and sixth-in-line to the throne, it would only be natural for Harry to question whether every person in her daily orbit has her best interests at heart. Is she being pushed to do too much? Is anyone telling her to slow down? Is there too much pressure to be at Platinum Jubilee events this June? Is she being properly taken care of? These are the kinds of questions any caring person would ask an elderly family member living alone or in a facility run by staff. And when you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*_


I was about to write I can’t wait to read ‘Angela Kelly put H in a headlock and called him a flop’ and then she came up in the article!

That hairstylist story is a bit unbelievable…  all Megs would have to do is stick her wig in a Jiffy bag and mail it to the palace. It’d be about as dishevelled as it was on the big day anyways. Also her hairdresser ‘flies in especially’ that’s not very environmentally friendly is it? I’m pretty sure there’s someone in London qualified to do a bloody messy bun! Yet another example of the environmental hypocrisy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*._



_Poor torture victim.




			When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple *

Click to expand...

_


> ([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free._



I understand it's hard to admit The Queen just wanted to enjoy her vacation instead of dealing with two adult-sized toddlers. And saying spots in a busy schedule are taken is hardly an elaborate plan for world domination.

_



			It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.
		
Click to expand...

_
Recollections may vary. As I remember it, Angela was not informed beforehand and was actually out of town when Raptor and her celebrity stylist waltzed into the palace. Plus, I never heard of Kate having hair trials with the Cartier Scroll.

Plus, to put it simple: Angela is The Queen's employée, not Raptor's.

_



			Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*

Click to expand...

_
I wonder why that is, Scobie!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure why the 2nd quote is broken up in two and no matter how many times I try to edit it won't fix itself.


----------



## needlv

Plus, Kate practiced with a $5 plastic tiara.  I note scobie glossed over that fact… and tried to suggest Angela wanted to put MM in her place, rather than MM causing massive inconvenience with her last minute demands


----------



## RAINDANCE

It was also my recollection that the palace had to ask Harry 3 times whether he would be joining the family that Christmas. I wouldn't bother rearranging my schedule for a short notice drop in a week later either and I'm not in my 90's and just had 30+ people over Xmas.


----------



## RAINDANCE

_Super irritated by this

"Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, *the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. *It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood."_

Of course it does ! I am not surprised M can't separate the Monarchy from the family BUT in the UK we have a constitutional monarchy and Harry should have grasped what that actually means a long time ago. That he doesn't ought to be another reason why CoS position is removed ASAP.

Do we think "Meghan's friend" as the Daily Mail now calls him has gone completely independent or is still Meghan's spokesperson ?
He does them, H+M, no favours at all with his spite.


*From Britannica*
_*constitutional monarchy*, system of government in which a monarch shares power with a constitutionally organized government. The monarch may be the de facto head of state or a purely ceremonial leader. The constitution allocates the rest of the government’s power to the legislature and judiciary. Britain became a constitutional monarchy under the Whigs. Other constitutional monarchies include Belgium, Cambodia, Jordan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Thailand.
A monarchy consists of distinct but interdependent institutions—a government and a state administration on the one hand, and a court and a variety of ceremonies on the other _

Betchya only the regulars on the royal ladies thread can identify all the spares/#2 and their spouses in the above countries.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happy to see it's not just my foggy memory!


----------



## duna

gracekelly said:


> Two horrible people with really sick issues with oneanother.  *They make the Sussex look uber normal.*



WOW, that's a difficult task, lol!

I have no idea what's going on between Depp and Heard, but since I cannot stand him I'm not interested!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Two horrible people with really sick issues with oneanother.  They make the Sussex look uber normal.



This is what I originally typed: I didn't think I would agree, but at least the Sussexes aren't physically violent like this as far as we know.

Then I remembered the several rumours of throwing hot tea at staff, shutting doors into other peoples' faces and footage like the handslapping incident before the wedding. Oh, and footage of clawing Baby Archie in the chest when he didn't repond to her the way she wanted in front of Desmond Tutu.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Mental health therapy must be performed by highly qualified and ethical professionals. Unfortunately, it's not always the case and people can suffer from the treatment. I have no words to express what I feel about having people like Hazz involved in mental coaching. I can't get over of his comments about "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist,_" and arrange a playdate???



How can Harry offer advice or relate to anyone else's life? He is the very last person I would want to take advice from. 

I saw someone who called himself a "life coach" aged 26 yesterday. WTF does anyone know about struggles with life aged 26? Anyone thinking they are ready to be a life coach in their mid-20 has issues. Get a life, then perhaps you coach others. Harry is just the same, his been 'out' for 5 minutes and preaches to others about equality. 

This world is crazy that we don' just laugh these people out the water. It's cult-ish.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I call that the “Poke your own eye to cause a tear” gesture



I call it bad acting. 

Tears are liquid, not something stuck in your eye


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> *Scoobie is using his first Yahoo article to attack two of the Queens staff members.  *For those that don’t want to click:
> 
> *Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about people around the Queen*
> …..
> 
> _The reality is, since the passing of Prince Philip one year ago, the Queen is living by herself. While Prince Charles, the Cambridges and others stop by for visits, the people surrounding the monarch on a daily basis—aides, courtiers and household staff responsible for every aspect of her life—are all employees of the royal institution. *And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*.
> 
> 
> When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple* _([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free.
> 
> 
> It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.
> 
> Days before permanently leaving the UK in March 2020, Harry told a close aide, “These people have their own agendas, they work for the institution and certainly don’t care about us as family.” Princess Diana echoed similar sentiments in the years following her divorce from Charles.
> 
> Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood.
> 
> *So, while the Sussexes and the Queen have been in regular contact over the phone or virtually, their recent in-person meeting (which was purposefully kept a secret from all palace aides)* was Harry’s first chance in a year to truly speak privately with his grandmother without fear of anyone overhearing or wandering in the background of a video call.
> 
> Having bravely faced a series of health and mobility issues, we often hear how the 96-year-old monarch is impressively “getting on” with her duties. But, as a grandson and sixth-in-line to the throne, it would only be natural for Harry to question whether every person in her daily orbit has her best interests at heart. Is she being pushed to do too much? Is anyone telling her to slow down? Is there too much pressure to be at Platinum Jubilee events this June? Is she being properly taken care of? These are the kinds of questions any caring person would ask an elderly family member living alone or in a facility run by staff. And when you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*_


 Nickname for Scoobie Doo = The Yahoo working for Yahoo.
Yahoo:  An unrefined and often loud or disruptive person.


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> Yes to all you said. We are not exemplary in CA, and he’s not only laughable, it demonstrates once again his ignorance.* He’s a paid shill *trying to drum up business.



Too bad he doesn’t realize this


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> Yes to all you said. We are not exemplary in CA, and he’s not only laughable, it demonstrates once again his ignorance. He’s a paid shill trying to drum up business.



Part ignorance and part greed. I feel he will do/say most anything as the desperation for a paycheck increases.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe he should try honest work like the Italian prince manning a pasta food truck. But I agree raking in big bucks for being ricidulous is probably easier.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> The fact he’s holding CA up as a gold standard is laughable.  Mental health is 100% important, but it’s become the new catch phrase for opportunistic businesses (ahem BetterUp?) as well as opportunistic people who use anxiety and depression as an excuse for everything.  I live in CA, and the sheer  number of people that are on antidepressants without any kind of assistance in learning how to cope with LIFE is unreal.  The number of children on “medical marijuana” and antidepressants is beyond mind boggling to me.  Parents often seem to want to fix their children by medicating them, and not teaching them that life has its ups & downs.  There are many people with real mental illnesses that definitely need help including medication & therapy, then there are the many that choose to self medicate.



Personally, I think 99% of all the anxiety and depression is attributable to internet/phone/social media addiction. They should start by getting technology out of the hands of kids and schools.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> A large number of people in CA suffering from mental disorders are homeless, including many veterans. I can't see them having the resources or capabilities to use Hazz's approach "_I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist_." Mental health is a very serious problem, and it's dangerous to have unqualified people trying to profit from it imo.




Hit the nail on the head. It's a profit industry. When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail, I believe the saying goes.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe he should try honest work like the Italian prince manning a pasta food truck. But I agree raking in big bucks for being ricidulous is probably easier.



That‘s a Netflix show I would watch


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> Scoobie is using his first Yahoo article to attack two of the Queens staff members.  For those that don’t want to click:
> 
> *Why Prince Harry has every reason to ask questions about people around the Queen*
> …..
> 
> _The reality is, since the passing of Prince Philip one year ago, the Queen is living by herself. While Prince Charles, the Cambridges and others stop by for visits, the people surrounding the monarch on a daily basis—aides, courtiers and household staff responsible for every aspect of her life—are all employees of the royal institution. *And it’s at the hands of some of these same people that Harry experienced some of his darkest and most distressing moments as a working member of the Firm*.
> 
> 
> When I was interviewing sources for Finding Freedom in 2020, I remember how *my jaw dropped when a friend of the couple* _([MM….?????])_ gave me a play-by-play account of how the Queen’s private secretary, Edward Young, went out of his way to prevent the couple from visiting the monarch in Sandringham (one of the only family members the Sussexes felt comfortable talking to at the time) ahead of their announcement to step away from royal life. It appears that, as hard as Harry tried to arrange a time, his team was informed that the monarch was "busy all week". The Queen, despite having been the one to invite her grandson, was told by Young that the once-available diary dates were no longer free.
> 
> 
> It was also the Queen’s right-hand woman and dresser, Angela Kelly, who multiple sources told me made it almost impossible for Meghan to have a necessary “hair trial” with her chosen wedding tiara—even standing up the duchess-to-be and her hairstylist, who had flown in especially, at a pre-scheduled fitting. Harry, sources said, felt it was a cruel attempt to put his partner “in her place”.
> 
> Days before permanently leaving the UK in March 2020, Harry told a close aide, “These people have their own agendas, they work for the institution and certainly don’t care about us as family.” Princess Diana echoed similar sentiments in the years following her divorce from Charles.
> 
> Time and time again we hear how inside the institution of the monarchy is an environment where mental health and wellbeing is not prioritised. A place where, regardless of your status, the needs of the crown will always come ahead of the personal needs of individual family members. It’s an institution Harry feels failed in its duty to protect him and his own brood.
> 
> *So, while the Sussexes and the Queen have been in regular contact over the phone or virtually, their recent in-person meeting (which was purposefully kept a secret from all palace aides)* was Harry’s first chance in a year to truly speak privately with his grandmother without fear of anyone overhearing or wandering in the background of a video call.
> 
> Having bravely faced a series of health and mobility issues, we often hear how the 96-year-old monarch is impressively “getting on” with her duties. But, as a grandson and sixth-in-line to the throne, it would only be natural for Harry to question whether every person in her daily orbit has her best interests at heart. Is she being pushed to do too much? Is anyone telling her to slow down? Is there too much pressure to be at Platinum Jubilee events this June? Is she being properly taken care of? These are the kinds of questions any caring person would ask an elderly family member living alone or in a facility run by staff. And when you look at the famously unsympathetic institution the Queen lives within, Harry has every reason to worry.
> 
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment to Yahoo News UK*.*_



This reeks of lies. If The Queen wanted someone to visit and her staff gave her the runaround, couldn't she, um, FIRE THEM???  Or is The Queen held hostage by her own employees??  I DON'T THINK SO.  And if Harry was soooooo concerned, do you think he'd give up some of his own bodyguards and ship them off to his grandmother? It'd be a relief for them as they'd then be protecting somebody who wasn't a whack job.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is what I originally typed: I didn't think I would agree, but at least the Sussexes aren't physically violent like this as far as we know.
> 
> Then I remembered the several rumours of throwing hot tea at staff, shutting doors into other peoples' faces and footage like the handslapping incident before the wedding. Oh, and footage of clawing Baby Archie in the chest when he didn't repond to her the way she wanted in front of Desmond Tutu.


We saw the veil drop with that recent photo at Invictus. I'm sure she can be very nasty in private.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> This reeks of lies. If The Queen wanted someone to visit and her staff gave her the runaround, couldn't she, um, FIRE THEM???  Or is The Queen held hostage by her own employees??  I DON'T THINK SO.  And if Harry was soooooo concerned, do you think he'd give up some of his own bodyguards and ship them off to his grandmother? It'd be a relief for them as they'd then be protecting somebody who wasn't a whack job.


And his and her stans are probably fawning on them because the liars care sooooo much for TQ. The self-righteousness is overwhelming


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> This reeks of lies. If The Queen wanted someone to visit and her staff gave her the runaround, couldn't she, um, FIRE THEM???  Or is The Queen held hostage by her own employees??  I DON'T THINK SO.  And if Harry was soooooo concerned, do you think he'd give up some of his own bodyguards and ship them off to his grandmother? It'd be a relief for them as they'd then be protecting somebody who wasn't a whack job.



How is it that a British Prince a British Duchess both supposedly involved in media, and a roving royal reporter know so little about the British Real family and royal protocol?


----------



## charlottawill

Allisonfaye said:


> Personally, I think 99% of all the anxiety and depression is attributable to internet/phone/social media addiction. They should start by getting technology out of the hands of kids and schools.


Could not agree more re kids, but in my experience and that of many of my friends, if you suggest that to younger people they think you are an out of touch dinosaur.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> How is it that a British Prince a British Duchess both supposedly involved in media, and a roving royal reporter know so little about the British Real family and royal protocol?
> 
> View attachment 5390207
> View attachment 5390206


I truly appreciate the morning laughs here to offset depressing news


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> And his and her stans are probably fawning on them because the liars care sooooo much for TQ. The self-righteousness is overwhelming


The same stans that blatantly wish for the deaths of the BRF


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaa??????

*Trouble in paradise: Turmoil at Prince Harry's billionaire dollar startup Better Up as staff accuse bosses of 'sneaky pay cuts' - after he spoke out about the firm's 'mental fitness' mission*

*BetterUp staff said to be up in arms over pay and changes to their contracts*
*Counsellors said to be quitting and have even considered suing the tech firm*
*Silicon Valley business worth $5bn uses a Tinder-style app for life coaches *
*Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US*
*He said: 'You talk about it here in California, 'I'll get my therapist to call your therapist'. Whereas in the UK it's like, 'Therapist? What therapist?'*
*Duke of Sussex also described meeting soldiers with PTSD in Britain*
*He said: 'I started to realise parts of my own story were being reflected in that'*










						Prince Harry criticises Britain's approach to mental health
					

Speaking on a podcast, Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US as he promoted BetterUp, the mental health app he works for.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaa??????
> 
> *Trouble in paradise: Turmoil at Prince Harry's billionaire dollar startup Better Up as staff accuse bosses of 'sneaky pay cuts' - after he spoke out about the firm's 'mental fitness' mission*
> 
> *BetterUp staff said to be up in arms over pay and changes to their contracts*
> *Counsellors said to be quitting and have even considered suing the tech firm*
> *Silicon Valley business worth $5bn uses a Tinder-style app for life coaches *
> *Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US*
> *He said: 'You talk about it here in California, 'I'll get my therapist to call your therapist'. Whereas in the UK it's like, 'Therapist? What therapist?'*
> *Duke of Sussex also described meeting soldiers with PTSD in Britain*
> *He said: 'I started to realise parts of my own story were being reflected in that'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry criticises Britain's approach to mental health
> 
> 
> Speaking on a podcast, Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US as he promoted BetterUp, the mental health app he works for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The Brits aren't buying what he's selling -  some comments from that article:

_"Those Britons who have the mental ability to think and control their own minds, have no need of a therapist and thus do not have one! This woke and immature man, who undoubtedly suffered shock and pain as a result of his mother's death, seems to insist on ascribing his own mental anguish, which he has been unable to overcome through his own weak-mindedness, to all British people - and no doubt in truth to the entire world, where everybody - in his fevered imagination suffers dreadfully from all manner of mental disturbances! It just ain't so Hapless."_

"_Maybe not everyone is solely reliant on therapists to tell them how they feel and what to think and say. He does speak in therapy buzz words but says very little. The majority of people know there is a level of self responsibility too. Its wrong to say the whole of the UK is completely closed off about having therapists. Its just not something that is thrown around like an accessory."_

BetterUp strikes me as a pyramid scheme. Virtually anyone can apply to be a coach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> The Brits aren't buying what he's selling -  some comments from that article:
> 
> _"Those Britons who have the mental ability to think and control their own minds, have no need of a therapist and thus do not have one! This woke and immature man, who undoubtedly suffered shock and pain as a result of his mother's death, seems to insist on ascribing his own mental anguish, which he has been unable to overcome through his own weak-mindedness, to all British people - and no doubt in truth to the entire world, where everybody - in his fevered imagination suffers dreadfully from all manner of mental disturbances! It just ain't so Hapless."_
> 
> "_Maybe not everyone is solely reliant on therapists to tell them how they feel and what to think and say. He does speak in therapy buzz words but says very little. The majority of people know there is a level of self responsibility too. Its wrong to say the whole of the UK is completely closed off about having therapists. Its just not something that is thrown around like an accessory."_
> 
> BetterUp strikes me as a pyramid scheme. Virtually anyone can apply to be a coach.



Saw this on Twitter -
BetterUp = non-professional coaches at professional prices


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaa??????
> 
> *Trouble in paradise: Turmoil at Prince Harry's billionaire dollar startup Better Up as staff accuse bosses of 'sneaky pay cuts' - after he spoke out about the firm's 'mental fitness' mission*
> 
> *BetterUp staff said to be up in arms over pay and changes to their contracts*
> *Counsellors said to be quitting and have even considered suing the tech firm*
> *Silicon Valley business worth $5bn uses a Tinder-style app for life coaches *
> *Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US*
> *He said: 'You talk about it here in California, 'I'll get my therapist to call your therapist'. Whereas in the UK it's like, 'Therapist? What therapist?'*
> *Duke of Sussex also described meeting soldiers with PTSD in Britain*
> *He said: 'I started to realise parts of my own story were being reflected in that'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry criticises Britain's approach to mental health
> 
> 
> Speaking on a podcast, Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US as he promoted BetterUp, the mental health app he works for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I've never known any therapist to ring someone else's therapist as part of therapy, even in the States. If they're licenced, a therapist will have something called 'confidentiality' clause. 

I think Harry doesn't know the difference between a therapist and a lawyer. Which is understandable since he keeps suing everyone instead of getting help.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Too bad he doesn’t realize this


My 2 cents:
I believe he does, but as long as he gets well paid, he sees no problem with it. Allegedly, TW wrote letters to Hazz's family saying "_I'm here for you, use me as you'd like." _My interpretation is that it's OK to use titles, race, connections … for profit.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe he should try honest work like the Italian prince manning a pasta food truck. But I agree raking in big bucks for being ricidulous is probably easier.


Food truck!!!! It would be too much work and too little money for the Netflixes' standards.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> I believe he does, but as long as he gets well paid, he sees no problem with it. Allegedly, TW wrote letters to Hazz's family saying "_I'm here for you, use me as you'd like." _My interpretation is that it's OK to use titles, race, connections … for profit.
> 
> 
> 
> Food truck!!!! *It would be too much work and too little money for the Netflixes' standards.*




Hazzie’s entitlement is such a turn off.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaa??????
> 
> *Trouble in paradise: Turmoil at Prince Harry's billionaire dollar startup Better Up as staff accuse bosses of 'sneaky pay cuts' - after he spoke out about the firm's 'mental fitness' mission*
> 
> *BetterUp staff said to be up in arms over pay and changes to their contracts*
> *Counsellors said to be quitting and have even considered suing the tech firm*
> *Silicon Valley business worth $5bn uses a Tinder-style app for life coaches *
> *Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US*
> *He said: 'You talk about it here in California, 'I'll get my therapist to call your therapist'. Whereas in the UK it's like, 'Therapist? What therapist?'*
> *Duke of Sussex also described meeting soldiers with PTSD in Britain*
> *He said: 'I started to realise parts of my own story were being reflected in that'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry criticises Britain's approach to mental health
> 
> 
> Speaking on a podcast, Prince Harry spoke of the 'immense' cultural differences between the UK and US as he promoted BetterUp, the mental health app he works for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oops! WorseUp should have known that by hiring Hazz, DM would come in the package in addition to the desired Sunshine S PR releases.


----------



## Chanbal

They fixed the security issue, but…


----------



## Chanbal

The Daily Beast article:


_As those issues continue to play out, multiple coaches said *the company lacks transparency* in other areas, too. “They hired and hired and hired…over the past couple of years. *They have so many VPs. Now, I don’t even know what these VPs do*,” one coach said.

*None of the coaches was clear about Prince Harry’s role at the company either, raising questions in their minds about how meaningful his role is or whether it is simply marketing “smoke and mirrors*…”

Still, *no matter what changes BetterUp makes, many of its coaches will stick with the platform*. Said one frustrated contractor, “*I think that for some people it’s their primary income, and they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place*.”_









						A Revolt Is Brewing at Prince Harry’s Silicon Valley Gig
					

Valued at nearly $5 billion, the “mental fitness” startup BetterUp has faced weeks of turmoil after it abruptly changed the pay structure for its career coaches.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EmilyM11

Maggie Muggins said:


> Nickname for Scoobie Doo = The Yahoo working for Yahoo.
> Yahoo:  An unrefined and often loud or disruptive person.


I recall visiting yahoo as an advertising client in 2018…omg this building was so empty and I left me with a feeling of such a failure and desperation (no offence yahoo, it’s only my feeling) that I sworn never join a company like that. Just my 2 cents, sorry Omid


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The Daily Beast article:
> View attachment 5390301
> 
> _As those issues continue to play out, multiple coaches said *the company lacks transparency* in other areas, too. “They hired and hired and hired…over the past couple of years. *They have so many VPs. Now, I don’t even know what these VPs do*,” one coach said.
> 
> *None of the coaches was clear about Prince Harry’s role at the company either, raising questions in their minds about how meaningful his role is or whether it is simply marketing “smoke and mirrors*…”
> 
> Still, *no matter what changes BetterUp makes, many of its coaches will stick with the platform*. Said one frustrated contractor, “*I think that for some people it’s their primary income, and they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Revolt Is Brewing at Prince Harry’s Silicon Valley Gig
> 
> 
> Valued at nearly $5 billion, the “mental fitness” startup BetterUp has faced weeks of turmoil after it abruptly changed the pay structure for its career coaches.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



I am not surprised by any of this. The idea of affordability and accessibility of mental health care for the masses is great on paper, but it sounds like there are a lot of bugs to be worked out in their business model.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

One of the bests comments in the DM comment section was this one and it's absolutely spot on:
_*Meghan acts like she's a beloved world leader now in gracious retirement after a lifetime of public service and achievement. She's barely out of her 30s but she wants the accolades and lifestyle of people like Oprah or the Obamas. Without putting in the long hard work to get there!*_

No matter how you feel about Oprah or the Obamas, they are 20 - 30 years older than Harry and TW and have accomplishments to back up their Netflix, Spotify, etc., type deals.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I am not surprised by any of this. The idea of affordability and accessibility of mental health care for the masses is great on paper, but it sounds like there are a lot of bugs to be worked out in their business model.



What I would be concerned about is who is vetting these "coaches"?  Are they actually qualified?  Are they any good at all?  A bad or incompetent one could make someone's life worse, not better.  Just wait for some of the lawsuits that BetterUp gets hit with down the road.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I am not surprised by any of this. The idea of affordability and accessibility of mental health care for the masses is great on paper, but it sounds like there are a lot of bugs to be worked out in their business model.



All of things just make people with real mental health problems feel worse. If someone is having a total mental breakdown, severely agoraphobic or experiencing longterm clinical depression, do you really want people who think they're hard done by and suffer because they're not #3 in-line to the Throne, rather than #6?


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> This reeks of lies. If The Queen wanted someone to visit and her staff gave her the runaround, couldn't she, um, FIRE THEM???  Or is The Queen held hostage by her own employees??  I DON'T THINK SO.  And if Harry was soooooo concerned, do you think he'd give up some of his own bodyguards and ship them off to his grandmother? It'd be a relief for them as they'd then be protecting somebody who wasn't a whack job.



The Queen is no dummy, and has been doing this for 70 years. I am sure she has way more control over who she sees than the Sussex squad is implying ... 

If Harry was so concerned, he would BE THERE. Not thousands of miles away barefoot and goofing off in California.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It certainly does seem like Hazzie is continuing this battle with his father.  Does he really think he can win?  I do agree Hazz would have left without MM. The exit [Hexit] was his plan for many years.


*Diana's son is continuing the campaign to disrupt Charles' future reign': Ex-Vanity Fair editor Tina Brown accuses Harry of being a 'disruptive force' and says the royal are 'still reeling' from Megxit*

*Tina Brown said she believed there was a continuation of the 'War of the Wales'*
*The former Vanity Fair editor also claimed Meghan wanted to 'cash in' on royalty*
*However, she said Prince Harry would have left the royals even without Meghan *










						Diana's son is continuing campaign to disrupt Charles' future reign'
					

Tina Brown, Princess Diana's former diarist, said Harry's actions were a continuation of the 'War of the Wales'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They fixed the security issue, but…




I'm sure he won't be missed all that much.


----------



## youngster

Ironic, isn't it, that Harry professes to care so much about his grandmother that he wants to make sure "she has the right people around her" when he is the one who has caused massive stress and heartache for both the Queen, who is 96, and Charles who is 73, both of whom have had Covid. Charles also does not appear to be as robustly healthy as his parents, QEII and PP, were at the same age either.   

Harry is the one who seems like an abuser at this point. The verbal attacks, constant blaming, thinly and not-so-thinly veiled insults and now this upcoming book; this has all been going on now for more than 2 years.  It's the outside of enough. It's the only way he can make money now but it's damn cold and unfeeling of him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I didn't want to get the TB book after that stupid remark of how the BRF needs the troublesome two's "star power", but maybe I'll cave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Is the guy on the right from Say yes to the dress UK? What would he have to say on Raptor and Harry...that her dress was ill-fitting?

And yes, that's my guilty pleasure TV show


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It certainly does seem like Hazzie is continuing this battle with his father.  Does he really think he can win?  I do agree Hazz would have left without MM. The exit [Hexit] was his plan for many years.



I'm undecided on him leaving on his own (leaning to no, though, for various reasons), but: leaving is not the worst thing they have done. Their impertinent and vulgar conduct, their blackmail attempts, their public slandering is the problem. If they had just quietly gone away herding elephants in Africa or breeding polo ponies nobody would have batted an eyelash. Both The Queen and Philip and William and Kate had a quiet start to their respective marriages, so why not the Sussexes...it wouldn't even have had to be this huge, final announcement.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm undecided on him leaving on his own (leaning to no, though, for various reasons), but: leaving is not the worst thing they have done. Their impertinent and vulgar conduct, their blackmail attempts, their public slandering is the problem. If they had just quietly gone away herding elephants in Africa or breeding polo ponies nobody would have batted an eyelash. Both The Queen and Philip and William and Kate had a quiet start to their respective marriages, so why not the Sussexes...it wouldn't even have had to be this huge, final announcement.


Because attention is as vital to MM as oxygen.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> This one did her no favors.
> View attachment 5388956


The infamous poop hat. What was she thinking?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> The infamous poop hat. What was she thinking?



Probably the same as when she decided to stick out her tongue to onlookers.


----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


> The Daily Beast article:
> View attachment 5390301
> 
> _As those issues continue to play out, multiple coaches said *the company lacks transparency* in other areas, too. “They hired and hired and hired…over the past couple of years. *They have so many VPs. Now, I don’t even know what these VPs do*,” one coach said.
> 
> *None of the coaches was clear about Prince Harry’s role at the company either, raising questions in their minds about how meaningful his role is or whether it is simply marketing “smoke and mirrors*…”
> 
> Still, *no matter what changes BetterUp makes, many of its coaches will stick with the platform*. Said one frustrated contractor, “*I think that for some people it’s their primary income, and they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Revolt Is Brewing at Prince Harry’s Silicon Valley Gig
> 
> 
> Valued at nearly $5 billion, the “mental fitness” startup BetterUp has faced weeks of turmoil after it abruptly changed the pay structure for its career coaches.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


I'm glad this is all being said publicly, but it also makes me wonder, what did they (BlunderUp? the stans? Harry himself?) think he was going to actually do? The MOST he'd be capable of is marketing smoke and mirrors, and frankly, even that is doubtful. It's not like he has any substance, any relevant experience, or that he's spent the time to put in the behind-the-scenes work to become passingly conversant in any of these topics. 

Old-school royaling was the best he'd ever have been able to do - look the part, make the speech someone else wrote, cut the ribbon, shine the light, then get out of the way so the focus can be on the work. But I'm not sure that would even be an option any more. Charles truly modernized the monarchy by (reportedly) becoming an actual expert in some of the conservation and sustainability topics he works on back in the 80s and 90s before it became popular. Catherine, Sophie, and Camilla have all done the same by putting in time with the experts to develop their own area of knowledge within their chosen fields. I'll be generous and admit that Harry could have done the same with Invictus. (Though that's also doubtful given his round of interviews at the recent games - where he no longer had assistance from the Firm in writing the scripts) 

But, serious question, what did any of them think he was going to do?


----------



## Lodpah

Harry saying he won’t attend is akin to a slap in the face to the Queen as the Queen issued a statement of her wish for Camilla to be Queen Consort. These two need to be locked up and throw away the keys. They are too much and like that forensic psychologist said about Amber Heard, borderline personality with the need for drama and histrionics. They’re very unsafe people. I worry about their children.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Harry was basically a way for ButterUP to advertise.  His name + theirs = press = recognition.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


>



So much for his anxiety re: cameras & the media .. right?!?!  HYPOCRITE!!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz may not like the title of this article from NYP:  


_Another fumed: “This is the way capitalism I suppose works. *But for a company [whose] mission is to help empower people throughout the world … they’re not walking the walk*.”

*Prince Harry, meanwhile, was mocked in February when he said he was suffering from “burnout” *while telling others to set aside time for themselves to focus on “inner work…”

*None of the BetterUp coaches contacted by the Daily Beast had details on Prince Harry’s role at the startup* – with one questioning whether it was merely marketing “smoke and mirrors,” according to the report._









						Career coaches at Prince Harry’s startup blast looming pay changes: ‘I would say my heart is broken’
					

San Francisco-based BetterUp wellness coaches are blasting plans to change how they’re compensated at the startup, where Prince Harry serves as chief impact officer.




					nypost.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



I thought they were not allowed to use "Sussex Royal"?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I am not surprised by any of this. The idea of affordability and accessibility of mental health care for the masses is great on paper, but it sounds like there are a lot of bugs to be worked out in their business model.


100%.  Real therapists who know what they're doing have training (and don't just sign up to be a Buttercup coach) and are getting very hard to come by, especially today when everyone and their dog wants to see one.  Accessibility is not easy, even in the CA of Haz' word salad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I thought they were not allowed to use "Sussex Royal"?



I thiiink that was from Megxit when they were fantasizing about their new roles, it's just confusing The Sun used a pic from the recent Invictus games.


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> The infamous poop hat. What was she thinking?


"Any attention is good attention"??


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> So much for his anxiety re: cameras & the media .. right?!?!  HYPOCRITE!!!!!



I think she means the cameras that are paying to support him and his family?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I thought they were not allowed to use "Sussex Royal"?


It is from Tina B's book on the days prior to megxit: 

*Their decision to press ahead with Megxit was made, Brown claims, when they saw the Queen’s 2019 Christmas speech — with their photograph pointedly removed from Her Majesty’s desk*_. It was no accident the picture had gone.

“That one,” Brown reports the Queen saying to the director preparing to film her. “I don’t suppose we need that one.”

*William was appalled when he saw the Sussexes had been edited out, knowing it would cause a “category-five tantrum” from Harry*.

Sure enough, the Sussexes accelerated their decision to leave.

*And after The Sun revealed the plan, the couple used their newly minted Sussex Royal website to announce their ambitions for a “new working model” to “collaborate” with the Queen as if, Brown writes, “the monarch were the co-executive producer of a TV series*”._









						Meghan Markle 'desperate for prestige' when snaring 'mentally fragile' Harry
					

IT is the most explosive royal book of the year. Tina Brown, the well-connected former editor of Vanity Fair, Tatler and The New Yorker, spoke to 120 sources for her account of The Firm’s past 25 y…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

piperdog said:


> *I'm glad this is all being said publicly, but it also makes me wonder, what did they (BlunderUp? the stans? Harry himself?) think he was going to actually do? The MOST he'd be capable of is marketing smoke and mirrors, and frankly, even that is doubtful. It's not like he has any substance, any relevant experience, or that he's spent the time to put in the behind-the-scenes work to become passingly conversant in any of these topics.*
> 
> Old-school royaling was the best he'd ever have been able to do - look the part, make the speech someone else wrote, cut the ribbon, shine the light, then get out of the way so the focus can be on the work. But I'm not sure that would even be an option any more. Charles truly modernized the monarchy by (reportedly) becoming an actual expert in some of the conservation and sustainability topics he works on back in the 80s and 90s before it became popular. Catherine, Sophie, and Camilla have all done the same by putting in time with the experts to develop their own area of knowledge within their chosen fields. I'll be generous and admit that Harry could have done the same with Invictus. (Though that's also doubtful given his round of interviews at the recent games - where he no longer had assistance from the Firm in writing the scripts)
> 
> But, serious question, what did any of them think he was going to do?


JCMH couldn't even pass an Art course without help so how could he have managed anything remotely connected to basic psychology or psychiatry. Even upon reflection, he wouldn't see how stupidly, irresponsibly, unreliably and disrespectfully (_add any adverb_) he has behaved and is behaving.


----------



## Aimee3

Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.  
So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.




So sorry you've been ill


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is the guy on the right from Say yes to the dress UK? What would he have to say on Raptor and Harry...that her dress was ill-fitting?
> 
> And yes, that's my guilty pleasure TV show


Yes, that's him, David Emanuel, one half of the designers of Diana's wedding dress. And he's Welsh.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.


Get well soon!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

From:





*Silicon Valley start-up 'facing staff mutiny' over Prince Harry's role*

Rozina Sabur
Wed, 27 April 2022, 6:54 pm







Prince Harry leadership role at BetterUp
The Silicon Valley life coaching startup employing Prince Harry is facing a mutiny from staff who have accused the company of questionable ethics while questioning the value of the royal's role.
The Duke of Sussex was appointed "chief impact officer" at BetterUp, a life coaching and mental health firm, last March.
The roughly $5bn company says it focuses on "inner work" and self-reflection and helps employees flourish by taking a "whole person approach" to development.
*But it is now facing an uprising from angry coaches who claim the company's proposed payment restructure is in effect a "sneaky pay cut".*

The new proposed pay structure could also include a new rating system that would factor into coaches' fees.
According to the Daily Beast, the firm’s new metrics would retroactively evaluate coaches in part based on how “life-




The Duke of Sussex taking part in a Q&A with the San Francisco-based company BetterUp - Lee Martin /PA

changing” a client found their guidance and how frequently they met for sessions.
*But coaches have argued that such a system would violate industry norms and is an ethically questionable approach.*
“From an ethical perspective… we are there to coach the client, not to have them press the ‘like’ button,” one told the Daily Beast.
Another said: “For a company [whose] mission is to help empower people throughout the world… They're not walking the walk".
*None of the coaches were clear about Prince Harry's role at the company,* according to the website, *raising questions over the impact he has had at the startup.
One furious coach said: "They hired and hired and hired…over the past couple of years. They have so many VPs. Now, I don't even know what these VPs do."
BetterUp has declined to say whether the Duke is being paid, but said he was joining the company's leadership team as an "officer of the corporation", which suggests it is a salaried position.*
The company said it was working to modify its payment plans, according to the Daily Beast.
The website said BetterUp wrote to coaches to assure them they would not see “any sort of decrease in their effective session rate compared to their 2021 effective session rate” after they contacted the Silicon Valley firm.
The email appeared to leave open the possibility that their contracts will be changed in 2023.

(my bolding)


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.


Feel better!  We will try to keep you amused.


----------



## gracekelly

I don't know about anyone else, but I am totally bored at looking at the same old picture of them.  One of the mags pretended to take readers on a tour of the casa and it is nothing but old pictures.  BORING!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.



Get well soon!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, that's him, David Emanuel, one half of the designers of Diana's wedding dress. And he's Welsh.



Oh wow, I didn't know that!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but I am totally bored at looking at the same old picture of them.  One of the mags pretended to take readers on a tour of the casa and it is nothing but old pictures.  *BORING*!!


For you @gracekelly, Scoobie to the rescue!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, I'll cut someone if I have to read once again "They need to do it, they need to make money!" B*tch please, 40 million bucks would have been enough for most people to never work again a day in their life but of course not when you think you deserve to live more extravagantly than an actual queen. Nothing justifies being self-important a*sholes for the sake of making money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For you @gracekelly, Scoobie to the rescue!




Gosh, I was shocked to see how grown-up the girls are! But also, I'd appreciate if Scobie of all people could refrain from speaking about "our" Jubilee. Haters must not apply to attend.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> For you @gracekelly, Scoobie to the rescue!



Thank you!  How fun!  They are certainly loved and love in return!


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, that's him, David Emanuel, one half of the designers of Diana's wedding dress. And he's Welsh.


David Emanuel, I didn’t realize he had input with Diana’s dress. I’ve enjoyed his show watching it with my granddaughter.


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> Hit the nail on the head. It's a profit industry. When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail, I believe the saying goes.


Ì read an online rant about the nail - the (merely  ) 16k Juste un Clou that Methane wore. For once, I think the rant was unjustified. The ranter was upset that she wore a nail on Easter Weekend and alleged that she thought of herself as The Second Coming. I think Methane was just showing off her expensive jewellery. Symbolism, like for the wreath, needs to be written for her by SS or the florist.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't want to get the TB book after that stupid remark of how the BRF needs the troublesome two's "star power", but maybe I'll cave.


I'm going to check my local library.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Probably the same as when she decided to stick out her tongue to onlookers.


Did we miss a cosplay moment? Maybe she was sticking our her tongue to show solidarity with Hazard who has childhood photos with prominent tongue?



Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.


Feel better soon, Aimee3!
I suspect the big surprise fell through. They were probably plotting to squeeze concessions out of "doddering grandma".



papertiger said:


> *BetterUp has declined to say whether the Duke is being paid, but said he was joining the company's leadership team as an "officer of the corporation", which suggests it is a salaried position.*


As if Hazard would do anything for free... He has now totally subscribed to Mother Doria's No Free Milk philosophy.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> David Emanuel, I didn’t realize he had input with Diana’s dress. I’ve enjoyed his show watching it with my granddaughter.


He and his now ex-wife did the dress.  It was very publicized at the time.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower's comments on some of his subjects/books, it's quite an interesting interview. It appears his last and much anticipated book is finished.


----------



## Chanbal

Well said! 











						'Stop treating all us older ladies like we need protecting!'
					

Last week that Prince Harry took it upon himself to 'protect' his grandmother. Elisabeth Luard says just because HM is 96 it doesn't mean she's not in charge




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> He and his now ex-wife did the dress.  It was very publicized at the time.


And then the business went belly-up and Elizabeth Emanuel (ex-wife and ex-partner) claimed he took the credit for the dress but only she designed it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> And then the business went belly-up and Elizabeth Emanuel (ex-wife and ex-partner) claimed he took the credit for the dress but only she designed it.



It became very ugly imo.

*Explosive testimony from Elizabeth Emanuel in bitter court battle with former husband*

*Husband and wife David and Elizabeth Emanuel created Diana's wedding dress *
*Now divorced, they have fallen out over the creation of her ivory silk garment*
*David accused of falsely claiming to make dresses for Diana 'when he did not' *
From 2021:








						'I designed Diana's dress - and my ex has claimed credit for 40 years'
					

As a husband-and-wife team, they became the toast of fashion after creating Princess Diana's wedding dress. Now divorced, David and Elizabeth Emanuel are at war over the gown.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could this impact H&M?


*Prince Andrew should give up his Duke of York title or be stripped of it by the Queen say councillors as they vote unanimously to remove disgraced royal's Freedom of the City of York*

*Councillors in the city of York have voted to strip Prince Andrew of the Freedom of the City in light of case *
*There was unanimous agreement as they stripped him of the honorary award after discussing for half an hour*
*Councillors and members of the public have now called on the Queen to remove Andrew's Duke of York title *
*Dozens of bodies have distanced themselves from Andrew since sex abuse case against Virginia Roberts*
*








						Prince Andrew is STRIPPED of the Freedom of the City of York
					

The prince was branded 'an utter disgrace' during the extraordinary meeting to debate his Freedom of the City honour, which was awarded to him in 1987.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Ì read an online rant about the nail - the (merely  ) 16k Juste un Clou that Methane wore. For once, I think the rant was unjustified. The ranter was upset that she wore a nail on Easter Weekend and alleged that she thought of herself as The Second Coming. I think Methane was just showing off her expensive jewellery. Symbolism, like for the wreath, needs to be written for her by SS or the florist.



I thought that was a stretch as well.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I thought that was a stretch as well.


Yep. TW may behave like she is the Second Coming sometimes, but the expensive necklace was only a display of opulence and not religious pretensions. I wish Cartier all the best for an increase in business. The JeC ring should be affordable for TW's stans, and they can all take photos fluttering their hands at chest level to cosplay TW.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't want to get the TB book after that stupid remark of how the BRF needs the troublesome two's "star power", but maybe I'll cave.



I would save your money.  Someone on another forum bought it on kindle and said it was very MM friendly, glossed over some of her more fractious incidents, and kept talking about her star power and how the RF would miss her.

i Am waiting for Tom Bowers book.  That looks like more … fun!


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is the guy on the right from Say yes to the dress UK? What would he have to say on Raptor and Harry...that her dress was ill-fitting?
> 
> And yes, that's my guilty pleasure TV show



Yes, it's David Emanuel, who co-designed Diana's wedding dress.  I prefer the US version of SYTTD, I'm amazed at the horrendous parents and 'posses' that come along with the brides!


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Yep. TW may behave like she is the Second Coming sometimes, but the expensive necklace was only a display of opulence and not religious pretensions. I wish Cartier all the best for an increase in business. The JeC ring should be affordable for TW's stans, and they can all take photos fluttering their hands at chest level to cosplay TW.


I read that the JeC necklace was a nod to Bea who has the bracelet... as if!  It's a very popular item at the moment, like wearing red soles if they can afford it.


----------



## zen1965

Jayne1 said:


> And then the business went belly-up and Elizabeth Emanuel (ex-wife and ex-partner) claimed he took the credit for the dress but only she designed it.



At the time everyone gave credit to the „Emanuels“ if I recall correctly.
Fun fact: In 1984/85 they marketed and wholesaled their ready-to-wear collections through another fashion house for which I worked. Hence I visited their couture showroom and met them both.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I read that the JeC necklace was a nod to Bea who has the bracelet... as if!  It's a very popular item at the moment, like wearing red soles if they can afford it.



She’s gotta be in the younger crowd. Haaaaa. 

_The bracelet is the Cartier Love bracelet's younger and easier-to-remove sister and was inspired by the humble nail. Its name is the French translation for "just a nail." Released in 1971, the Juste un Clou bangle was designed by Aldo Cipullo, the luxury brand's jewellery designer, who had a distinct minimalist, androgynous style and love of all things nuts, bolts and screws. The Juste un Clou, along with the Love bracelet, made Cartier relevant to a younger, more fashionable audience, with the pieces commanding a cult following.


In 2012, Cartier relaunched the Juste un Clou bangle and released an entirely new collection based around it. The new Juste un Clou offering included rings as well as bangles, all shaped like gracefully bent nails, like the original but with a modern twist. Each was made in rose, white and yellow gold, and some were outfitted with pavé diamonds set into the "head" of the nail.

In 2017, the Juste un Clou collection grew to encapsulate earrings, cufflinks, tie pins and an achingly cool torque necklace. However, it's safe to say that the piece that started it all, the Juste un Clou bangle, is still the most coveted. _[not by all of us!]

_








						50 Years on, This Bangle Is Still the Ultimate Status Symbol
					

Born in 1971, Cartier's Juste un Clou bangle has become something of a status symbol. Here's everything you need to know before buying one.




					www.whowhatwear.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

The confirmation!


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## CarryOn2020

The internet celebrates goes crazy!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently this Teresa person knows for a fact they were invited (she speaks about travel/accomodation/security arrangements already in place down in the comments), buuut...


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The confirmation!



How does she know this exactly?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> How does she know this exactly?



Looks like someone is a leaker 

eta: stay tuned - I am certain we will hear more about this

eta2:  just saw this from 2 days ago - too bizarre! Imo much worse than Diana’s accusations.









						'Harry's meeting with the Queen was kept a secret from palace aides'
					

Royal aides have accused the Duke of Sussex of 'breathtaking arrogance' after he claimed he wanted to 'protect' the Queen, despite moving 5,000 miles away to California.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you all for the previous entertaining 25-30 ish pages.  Been battling Covid since Saturday but I am feeling bright enough to indulge and pick up today and start reading from where I left off.
> So I’m left wondering what their big surprise was going to be because as far as we know, there wasn’t one.


Hope you get well soon and we will try to keep the laughs going 


Chanbal said:


> For you @gracekelly, Scoobie to the rescue!



So scooby wants the streets of London to be filled with hundreds of people jumping around to Eurodance…. Has he never been to Pride? 

I hope kings day was rounded of by a surprise guest appearance by the real Dutch royalty - the Vengaboys. 
Good to see him finally being a fan of something though- he complains more than me and me!me!me!



xincinsin said:


> Yep. TW may behave like she is the Second Coming sometimes, but the expensive necklace was only a display of opulence and not religious pretensions. I wish Cartier all the best for an increase in business. The JeC ring should be affordable for TW's stans, and they can all take photos fluttering their hands at chest level to cosplay TW.


The thing about the JUC and Easter sounds wildly far fetched to me too. I mean maybe if it was a custom design but a quick glance at this forum will tell anyone that Cartier has pumped out thousands of those things and I hope this forum isn’t filled with people who think they are bigger than Jesus 


needlv said:


> I would save your money.  Someone on another forum bought it on kindle and said it was very MM friendly, glossed over some of her more fractious incidents, and kept talking about her star power and how the RF would miss her.
> 
> i Am waiting for Tom Bowers book.  That looks like more … fun!


As papertiger once wisely said you don’t get to be a top editor without knowing how to be friendly with everyone. I think TB will do her best to play all sides and if anyone is going to get the hatchet job it’ll be Diana and maybe the queen mother because they can’t give any more interviews and there’s a lot of hagiographies about them on the market anyway. I would be surprised if she gives any significant blame to Philip as I don’t think he’s been dead long enough.

IMHO Once Charles is king and if he’s doing a bad job suddenly the prince Philip was a bad dad books will appear.

We will see about the bowers book, I think they like to talk the talk as it generates interest but will probably pull their punches to avoid getting sued. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s gotta be in the younger crowd. Haaaaa.
> 
> _The bracelet is the Cartier Love bracelet's younger and easier-to-remove sister and was inspired by the humble nail. Its name is the French translation for "just a nail." Released in 1971, the Juste un Clou bangle was designed by Aldo Cipullo, the luxury brand's jewellery designer, who had a distinct minimalist, androgynous style and love of all things nuts, bolts and screws. The Juste un Clou, along with the Love bracelet, made Cartier relevant to a younger, more fashionable audience, with the pieces commanding a cult following.
> 
> 
> In 2012, Cartier relaunched the Juste un Clou bangle and released an entirely new collection based around it. The new Juste un Clou offering included rings as well as bangles, all shaped like gracefully bent nails, like the original but with a modern twist. Each was made in rose, white and yellow gold, and some were outfitted with pavé diamonds set into the "head" of the nail.
> 
> In 2017, the Juste un Clou collection grew to encapsulate earrings, cufflinks, tie pins and an achingly cool torque necklace. However, it's safe to say that the piece that started it all, the Juste un Clou bangle, is still the most coveted. _[not by all of us!]
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 50 Years on, This Bangle Is Still the Ultimate Status Symbol
> 
> 
> Born in 1971, Cartier's Juste un Clou bangle has become something of a status symbol. Here's everything you need to know before buying one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.whowhatwear.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Younger in the 70s so hardly cutting edge now. It’s ‘I like popular luxury’ starter pack stuff there’s nothing wrong with that but it’s a bit like saying Chanel classic flaps are some hip, cult thing.

Does anyone else think the pendant necklace of JUC looks like an @ ? The torc necklace is called ‘achingly cool’ (one of my least fave journalistic cliches that expression) because it jabs you in the neck while you wear it


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like someone is a leaker
> 
> eta: stay tuned - I am certain we will hear more about this
> 
> eta2:  just saw this from 2 days ago - too bizarre! Imo much worse than Diana’s accusations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Harry's meeting with the Queen was kept a secret from palace aides'
> 
> 
> Royal aides have accused the Duke of Sussex of 'breathtaking arrogance' after he claimed he wanted to 'protect' the Queen, despite moving 5,000 miles away to California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Neil Sean debunked this today. He made it clear it came from Scoobie but refused to give him any publicity and did not use his name. Said he doesn’t know what he’s talking about and then explained how things REALLY work with the Queen’s calendar. Criticized the Markles for more needless drama.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> It became very ugly imo.
> 
> *Explosive testimony from Elizabeth Emanuel in bitter court battle with former husband*
> 
> *Husband and wife David and Elizabeth Emanuel created Diana's wedding dress *
> *Now divorced, they have fallen out over the creation of her ivory silk garment*
> *David accused of falsely claiming to make dresses for Diana 'when he did not' *
> From 2021:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I designed Diana's dress - and my ex has claimed credit for 40 years'
> 
> 
> As a husband-and-wife team, they became the toast of fashion after creating Princess Diana's wedding dress. Now divorced, David and Elizabeth Emanuel are at war over the gown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It was so hideous, you'd think she'd be pleased


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Yep. TW may behave like she is the Second Coming sometimes, but the expensive necklace was only a display of opulence and not religious pretensions. I wish Cartier all the best for an increase in business. The JeC ring should be affordable for TW's stans, and they can all take photos fluttering their hands at chest level to cosplay TW.



I doubt her stans could afford even the ring.  For most people in general, just buying a train ticket to work everyday or paying electricity bills is a stretch. Partly, that's why her choices are backfiring. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s gotta be in the younger crowd. Haaaaa.
> 
> _The bracelet is the Cartier Love bracelet's younger and easier-to-remove sister and was inspired by the humble nail. Its name is the French translation for "just a nail." Released in 1971, the Juste un Clou bangle was designed by Aldo Cipullo, the luxury brand's jewellery designer, who had a distinct minimalist, androgynous style and love of all things nuts, bolts and screws. The Juste un Clou, along with the Love bracelet, made Cartier relevant to a younger, more fashionable audience, with the pieces commanding a cult following.
> 
> 
> In 2012, Cartier relaunched the Juste un Clou bangle and released an entirely new collection based around it. The new Juste un Clou offering included rings as well as bangles, all shaped like gracefully bent nails, like the original but with a modern twist. Each was made in rose, white and yellow gold, and some were outfitted with pavé diamonds set into the "head" of the nail.
> 
> In 2017, the Juste un Clou collection grew to encapsulate earrings, cufflinks, tie pins and an achingly cool torque necklace. However, it's safe to say that the piece that started it all, the Juste un Clou bangle, is still the most coveted. _[not by all of us!]
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 50 Years on, This Bangle Is Still the Ultimate Status Symbol
> 
> 
> Born in 1971, Cartier's Juste un Clou bangle has become something of a status symbol. Here's everything you need to know before buying one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.whowhatwear.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _




JdC is an innovative line (or was in 1971) the design appealed to ne, but it's not that comfortable to wear - and now I am so pleased I don't own any. I cannot wear anything she peddles, plus, it didn't suit her or with what she was wearing. 



jelliedfeels said:


> Hope you get well soon and we will try to keep the laughs going
> 
> So scooby wants the streets of London to be filled with hundreds of people jumping around to Eurodance…. Has he never been to Pride?
> 
> I hope kings day was rounded of by a surprise guest appearance by the real Dutch royalty - the Vengaboys.
> Good to see him finally being a fan of something though- he complains more than me and me!me!me!
> 
> 
> The thing about the JUC and Easter sounds wildly far fetched to me too. I mean maybe if it was a custom design but a quick glance at this forum will tell anyone that Cartier has pumped out thousands of those things and I hope this forum isn’t filled with people who think they are bigger than Jesus
> 
> As papertiger once wisely said you don’t get to be a top editor without knowing how to be friendly with everyone. I think TB will do her best to play all sides and if anyone is going to get the hatchet job it’ll be Diana and maybe the queen mother because they can’t give any more interviews and there’s a lot of hagiographies about them on the market anyway. I would be surprised if she gives any significant blame to Philip as I don’t think he’s been dead long enough.
> 
> IMHO Once Charles is king and if he’s doing a bad job suddenly the prince Philip was a bad dad books will appear.
> 
> We will see about the bowers book, I think they like to talk the talk as it generates interest but will probably pull their punches to avoid getting sued.
> 
> Younger in the 70s so hardly cutting edge now. It’s ‘I like popular luxury’ starter pack stuff there’s nothing wrong with that but it’s a bit like saying Chanel classic flaps are some hip, cult thing.
> 
> Does anyone else think the pendant necklace of JUC looks like an @ ? The torc necklace is called ‘achingly cool’ (one of my least fave journalistic cliches that expression) because it jabs you in the neck while you wear it



Basically, we know exactly what she's doing.

Cartier's LOVE is already 'everywhere', Trilogy is on Kate (but you'd have to look hard) so Madam has to take the credit for popularising the JdC.

She _lives_ to be,_ longs_ to be a fashion leader.

In a way she's right, we remember Grace Kelly, Jackie O (Kennedy) (and of course) Diana, and many other women because of their fashion sense long after their passing.

However, M is very forgettable unless she's looking a jolly green giant or red silk tomato. Someone has told her white is stand-out  *bright* and that neutrals suit her, so we are stuck with the lady in white and the JdC. When white becomes a 'thing' like it does every Summer, and the fashion-uneducated media (including fashion magazines) start noticing that every other Cartier wearer is already wearing 'nails' round their wrists, TW will be there to take full credit.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> She _lives_ to be,_ longs_ to be a fashion leader.
> 
> In a way she's right, we remember Grace Kelly, Jackie O (Kennedy) (and of course) Diana, and many other women because of their fashion sense long after their passing.
> 
> However, M is very forgettable unless she's looking a jolly green giant or red silk tomato. Someone has told her white is stand-out  *bright* and that neutrals suit her, so we are stuck with the lady in white and the JdC. When white becomes a 'thing' like it does every Summer, and the fashion-uneducated media (including fashion magazines) start noticing that every other Cartier wearer is already wearing 'nails' round their wrists, TW will be there to take full credit.


Another Blue Ocean moment: maybe corporations launching a new product will pay TW to NOT wear/use it. 

I count myself fortunate that I don't go for the "delicate" gold jewellery that she is fond of merching. Her moth-ridden canvas is so good at spoiling the beauty of everything.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> The Daily Beast article:
> View attachment 5390301
> 
> _As those issues continue to play out, multiple coaches said *the company lacks transparency* in other areas, too. “They hired and hired and hired…over the past couple of years. *They have so many VPs. Now, I don’t even know what these VPs do*,” one coach said.
> 
> *None of the coaches was clear about Prince Harry’s role at the company either, raising questions in their minds about how meaningful his role is or whether it is simply marketing “smoke and mirrors*…”
> 
> Still, *no matter what changes BetterUp makes, many of its coaches will stick with the platform*. Said one frustrated contractor, “*I think that for some people it’s their primary income, and they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Revolt Is Brewing at Prince Harry’s Silicon Valley Gig
> 
> 
> Valued at nearly $5 billion, the “mental fitness” startup BetterUp has faced weeks of turmoil after it abruptly changed the pay structure for its career coaches.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Sounds like the employees don't want to be held accountable...


----------



## Allisonfaye

youngster said:


> One of the bests comments in the DM comment section was this one and it's absolutely spot on:
> _*Meghan acts like she's a beloved world leader now in gracious retirement after a lifetime of public service and achievement. She's barely out of her 30s but she wants the accolades and lifestyle of people like Oprah or the Obamas. Without putting in the long hard work to get there!*_
> 
> No matter how you feel about Oprah or the Obamas, they are 20 - 30 years older than Harry and TW and have accomplishments to back up their Netflix, Spotify, etc., type deals.



Maybe, but even the Obamas just got let go from Spotify. It seems like maybe the days of throwing huge paychecks at celebrities are over. I heard on the business channel this am that people are cancelling their subscription services by about 1/3. Most people will choose eating.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So someone earlier said the verdict on the TB book was that it was Raptor friendly...but a German magazine had an excerpt that calls her fame-hungry (spot on) and says "Harry was the solution to all of her problems". Which is not very flattering if you ask me.

Oh, and German InTouch titles "Divorce victory! Harry gets the children"


----------



## lanasyogamama

needlv said:


> I would save your money.  Someone on another forum bought it on kindle and said it was very MM friendly, glossed over some of her more fractious incidents, and kept talking about her star power and how the RF would miss her.
> 
> i Am waiting for Tom Bowers book.  That looks like more … fun!



I’m planning on buying this one. 




CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s gotta be in the younger crowd. Haaaaa.
> 
> _The bracelet is the Cartier Love bracelet's younger and easier-to-remove sister and was inspired by the humble nail. Its name is the French translation for "just a nail." Released in 1971, the Juste un Clou bangle was designed by Aldo Cipullo, the luxury brand's jewellery designer, who had a distinct minimalist, androgynous style and love of all things nuts, bolts and screws. The Juste un Clou, along with the Love bracelet, made Cartier relevant to a younger, more fashionable audience, with the pieces commanding a cult following.
> 
> 
> In 2012, Cartier relaunched the Juste un Clou bangle and released an entirely new collection based around it. The new Juste un Clou offering included rings as well as bangles, all shaped like gracefully bent nails, like the original but with a modern twist. Each was made in rose, white and yellow gold, and some were outfitted with pavé diamonds set into the "head" of the nail.
> 
> In 2017, the Juste un Clou collection grew to encapsulate earrings, cufflinks, tie pins and an achingly cool torque necklace. However, it's safe to say that the piece that started it all, the Juste un Clou bangle, is still the most coveted. _[not by all of us!]
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 50 Years on, This Bangle Is Still the Ultimate Status Symbol
> 
> 
> Born in 1971, Cartier's Juste un Clou bangle has become something of a status symbol. Here's everything you need to know before buying one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.whowhatwear.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _




I got the JuC bracelet right when it was rereleased in 2012. I still love it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m so happy they won’t be there.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think the “big surprise” that didn’t end up happening with her reading the bench book to some kids


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> I would save your money. Someone on another forum bought it on kindle and said it was very MM friendly, glossed over some of her more fractious incidents, and kept talking about her star power and how the RF would miss her.



Brown's publisher may have wanted her to take a middle of the road rather than a scorched earth approach to MM, to come off as a fair and balanced account of the RF rather than a hatchet job on MM, in the belief that it would sell better than a seemingly one sided account.


----------



## Aimee3

Thank you so much for everyone’s kind wishes!  I’m overwhelmed at the love on this thread (and some say we are the mean girls?)  I am on the mend.  Everyone please continue to be safe out there.  I was still wearing a mask, being vigilant, hand sanitizing, vaccinated and boostered, and I somehow got it anyway.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you so much for everyone’s kind wishes!  I’m overwhelmed at the love on this thread (and some say we are the mean girls?)  I am on the mend.  Everyone please continue to be safe out there.  I was still wearing a mask, being vigilant, hand sanitizing, vaccinated and boostered, and I somehow got it anyway.


So did my husband and I, even with second boosters, but we only had cold symptoms and fatigue. So many people are getting breakthrough infections but at least avoiding hospitalization. My doctor said the latest variant is very good at evading the vaccine but we should be well protected now against future infection. I hope that's true. Glad you're doing well!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Behind a paywall but the quote is intriguing.








						Prince Charles will probably be fine, Harry and Meghan maybe not, says ‘The Palace Papers’ author Tina Brown
					

Brown tells Rosie DiManno that Britons will likely rally to King Charles, but Prince Harry would have to show a desire to return to England to be embraced again.




					www.thestar.com


----------



## jennlt

Found the article so you don't have to click.









						Prince Charles will probably be fine, Harry and Meghan maybe not, says ‘The Palace Papers’ author Tina Brown
					

Brown tells Rosie DiManno that Britons will likely rally to King Charles, but Prince Harry would have to show a desire to return to England to be embraced again.




					www.thestar.com
				




Prince Charles asks for his shoelaces to be ironed. He travels with his own orthopedic bed, a toilet seat and a particular brand of toilet paper.

The Duchess of Cambridge – Kate Middleton as she was – slips away incognito for secret visits to art galleries and photo exhibitions.


Harry and Meghan, well maybe it was written in numerology if not the stars: she was sixth on the call sheet for his lewd cable TV show “Suits” and he was sixth in line to the throne at the time they got married. Simpatico.

Insider details – and there are a ton of them – bring to life what could have been just another entry into the royal bibliotheca oeuvre. But Tina Brown’s “The Palace Papers: Inside the House of Windsor – the Truth and the Turmoil” is a good read, distinguished by its hard research and the polish you’d expect from a writer who was previously an editor. chief of Tatler, Vanity Fair, the New Yorker and founder of the Daily Beast.

A ‘Lady’ in her own right too, via her marriage to Sir Harold Evans, the late eminent editor of the Sunday Times.

“I only use the title when I want a good table in a restaurant,” Brown told the Star in a phone interview, his just-released tome – a forensic autopsy that spares no one in the world. Windsor senior clan – already in the race for No. 1 on bestseller lists.



It’s not a hack job, however, in the gutter press sense. Too stylish for that. (And hack is actually a wry term of respect in British journalism.) Instead, a deft chronicler of royal melodrama and minutia, drawing from archived sources and more than 120 new interviews with those behind the palace walls know it.

Queen Elizabeth II is five weeks away from celebrating her Platinum Jubilee, 70 years on the throne. Which seems like the best time to put the monarchy and the defenestration of the royal family under the microscope. Can this permanent institution, though archaic and supposedly anachronistic, survive the death of a beloved ruler? Code name: London Bridge is down.



Because it could well be a difficult transition to King Charles.


“I actually think the British nation will rally around Charles,” said Brown, who has had a front-row seat to the trials and tribulations of a family that is not at all like us but also more like us in its domestic mess, ‘lo in recent decades. “I think they are very attached to the monarchy even if for the younger generation it means much less. There is still a strong sense of national identity and pride tied to the endurance of the monarchy.

Brits may not even know how _be_ Briton without the scepter and orb, Brown suggested.

“So there’s no choice but to embrace that in Charles and right now is his best time, if you will, with the British people. He’s had long periods of unpopularity. He’ll never be liked – we know too much about him and what people know they don’t like much because of the whole Diana debacle.

“Having said that, in the last 20 years of being married to Camilla, he’s changed so much as a person, he’s so shamelessly happy, that people are embracing him more like a grandfather figure.”

Reorganizing the monarchy was a priority for Charles, waiting in the wings for 73 years as heir to the Crown. He cut the ship, cutting the younger royals off the cash cow and essentially sending his own brother, Prince Andrew – Duke of Hazard to Coventry as Brown marks the Queen’s favorite spawn, a “machine to crowned sleaze” – and even, to a surprising extent, his youngest son; bolting, ominously detached Prince Harry.

“The modernization of the monarchy has been somewhat put on hold with the Queen 70 years on the throne,” Brown said. “Charles is going to do a lot of cutting back on pomp and ceremony, to really focus on improving the monarchy rather than just carrying on with things as they are. Obviously he comes to the throne very late in his own life and I think he’s going to do everything he can to set things up for William, who will be a much longer reign.


In “The Palace Papers,” Brown, who once wrote the best-selling “The Diana Chronicles,” is quite generous with Charles. His passions – environmentalism, the ugliness of modern architecture, sustainability – were previously seen as eccentricities but actually put him on the right side of history.

A source tells Brown that Charles is ‘desperate’ for his mother’s approval while noting that they are inherently different types of people – ‘the wrong type’ for Her Maj, who thinks Charles is too needy, emotional and vulnerable. He misses his stiff upper lip and his stoicism.

Brown is also extremely kind to Camilla, who resisted for so long, just “kept calm and carried on” despite being slurred in the press as a witch, an old bag, a wrecker and the Rottweiler (according to Diana) . She is also a fan of Kate, for a temperament perfectly suited to her position as future queen, built on the foundation of a solidly middle-class upbringing and a perfectly harmonious family.

Former Meghan Markle isn’t faring so well, however, and neither is Harry, fumbling as a California celebrity, conjuring up uncomfortable memories of his abdicating shambolic great-great-uncle, the Duke of Windsor.

“Harry was much more beloved than anyone but the Queen,” Brown pointed out. “I believe Harry will be embraced again if he shows any desire or interest in returning to England.”



The Invictus Games, which Harry created for injured war veterans – and he was never happier than during his years in the army, piloting an Apache helicopter, on the front line in Afghanistan until exposed by the Drudge Report and then sent home for security reasons – was a fabulous success. Yet he doesn’t seem like much more into his existence since the prince decamped as a working royal, his wish to be semi-royal now and then firmly rejected by the Queen, Charles and William.

“There is a path back to monarchy,” Brown said. “But I don’t know if he wants it. Right now, he absolutely embraces California, not just as a place to live but as a way of thinking. If that happens, it will probably be after the death of the queen.

Harry surprised royal watchers last week when he paid a surprise visit to his grandmother and then went on US TV to claim he wanted to make sure the Queen was ‘protected’. What does that mean ?

“It goes off as a complete kind of IED at all times. I asked someone what they were thinking when they made those comments and they said, ‘He doesn’t think, he rings true. “

Brown draws an analogy by comparing the once very close Windsor Brothers: Harry the Apache gunship, William the search and rescue helicopter.

The schism between the siblings won’t be mended anytime soon, Brown continued. “It’s a very hurt relationship right now.” Fixing it would take more than going to the pub for a few pints. “William has basically had his confidence undermined by the Oprah interview and the news that Harry is writing a book. Harry feels hurt and rejected by William, believing William has not kissed Meghan as he thought he would have of.

Which brings us back to Meghan, the biracial, divorced ex-actress of America who knocked Harry’s socks off, even as William urged his brother to slow court, not rush into marriage to a woman. who had no idea what royal life would entail. Meghan couldn’t hack it, it turned out, and Harry was apparently just as relieved to flee the fishbowl, though he never expected to be relieved of his HRH status, stripped of his military titles and of most of his charitable sponsorships.

They are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex but cannot use the “Royal Sussex” brand for commercial purposes.

“Meghan was very successful in the first six months,” Brown recalled. “She mastered her role beautifully. The problem is, she hated it. It wasn’t so much that she was wrong, it was just that she didn’t like it at all. She never felt accepted. She didn’t like the British sensibility, which is much more sarcastic and iconoclastic. This is played out every day in the press.

“As an actress, Meghan was totally unused to not having a uniformly approving press. The British press can be brutal. No doubt there was some racist tabloid stuff about her that was hugely hurtful. She was having a hard time getting over the pain she had been in. And Harry exacerbated that feeling for her because he hated the press so much for what it had done to his mother, for what it had done to him. fact – tormenting his girlfriends, stalking, hacking, buying, it was unbearable.The only escape he had was when he joined the army because he was protected there from glare.

The Sussexes, who must now strike it rich – financially and otherwise – did not have a particularly soft landing in California, despite being greeted with joy by the American public. What has really happened to their much-hyped deal with Netflix so far? Meghan, writes Brown, saw herself as a kind of Angelina Jolie, an ambassador for her favorite causes, bringing royal accolade to favorite projects. It didn’t quite take off and his attention was scattered.

“It’s hard to build a platform from scratch,” Brown said. “It doesn’t matter how famous you are. You still have to have a successful strategic career. Entertainment deals, OK. But you make a deal and then you have to fulfill it, you have to deliver it. I don’t think any d Didn’t realize how difficult it was going to be.

When asked if she thought the royal family would read “The Palace Papers,” Brown sniffled delicately. “They are so inundated with documents about them that they will probably delegate other people to read them for them. But who knows?



“I wouldn’t if I was them.”


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So someone earlier said the verdict on the TB book was that it was Raptor friendly...





lanasyogamama said:


> I’m planning on buying this one.





charlottawill said:


> Brown's publisher may have wanted her to take a middle of the road rather than a scorched earth approach to MM, to come off as a fair and balanced account of the RF rather than a hatchet job on MM, in the belief that it would sell better than a seemingly one sided account.



I'll pass on TB's book for the time being. I believe DM will publish or comment about the most interesting parts. Also, Lady C might review the book on her videos. At the present time, I'm only planning to get Tom Bower's book.

@needlv I can see why people might think the book is Netflixes' friendly. Describing Hazz as 'sexy' and comparing him to Brad Pitt sounds very bizarre…  



_The book is terribly written and gloriously meaningless: ‘The Queen’s frail liege man found heavenly release from his life of service. Gently, and with love, she let him go.’ I quickly found a kind of joy in mapping Brown’s devotion to that heinous crime of prose, elegant variation: *the Duchess of Sussex is ‘the family fledgling’ and, earlier on, ‘the earnest, freckle-faced tween’; the Duke is ‘the sexy royal wild card with the Brad Pitt stubble’. *The Duke of York is ‘a now divorced horndog eternally on the hunt, with a guffawing, boob-ogling pickup style’ and, more concisely, ‘a coroneted sleaze machine’. A journalist is a ‘limpet-like royal scoop-monger’. The Michael Kents are ‘a low-boil money-grubbing embarrassment’…

*Some of this may be meant to appeal to Brown’s primarily American audience*…_









						You can make anything up about the royal family and it will be printed as fact
					

There are quite a few things that Tina Brown doesn’t know: what ‘jejune’ means; when Louis XIV came to the throne; what the passive voice in prose is (not ‘recollections may vary’); what members of the aristocracy are called (Lady Romsey becomes Lady Penelope Romsey) or what members of the royal...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you so much for everyone’s kind wishes!  I’m overwhelmed at the love on this thread (and some say we are the mean girls?)  I am on the mend.  Everyone please continue to be safe out there.  I was still wearing a mask, being vigilant, hand sanitizing, vaccinated and boostered, and I somehow got it anyway.


How are you feeling? Hopefully, the vaccine helped to minimize the symptoms. We will try to keep you entertained. Have a speedy recovery.


----------



## youngster

jennlt said:


> “It’s hard to build a platform from scratch,” Brown said. “It doesn’t matter how famous you are. You still have to have a successful strategic career. Entertainment deals, OK. But you make a deal and then you have to fulfill it, you have to deliver it. I don’t think they realized how difficult it was going to be.



How could they have not realized "how difficult it was going to be"?  Well, how about because Harry has had everything done for him since birth.  Even the Invictus Games has a staff that actually puts the games together.  He may have some input but his main job is showing up and doing goofy promo commercials and interviews to bring publicity to the games.  MM likely believes she's an amazing writer and producer even though she's never done either in any way successfully (not counting her semi-literate children's book). Then, initially, Netflix and Spotify showered them with huge contracts, further inflating their egos for a time.  

So, as we've all said, since the beginning of Megexit, let's see what they can do, what can they produce, what their original content will be. It's been more than 2 years. Tick tock.


----------



## Helventara

jennlt said:


> she was sixth on the call sheet for his *lewd* cable TV show “Suits”


Hahahha. I wasn’t imagining things when I recall watching 'suits'


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> Found the article so you don't have to click.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles will probably be fine, Harry and Meghan maybe not, says ‘The Palace Papers’ author Tina Brown
> 
> 
> Brown tells Rosie DiManno that Britons will likely rally to King Charles, but Prince Harry would have to show a desire to return to England to be embraced again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thestar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles asks for his shoelaces to be ironed. He travels with his own orthopedic bed, a toilet seat and a particular brand of toilet paper.
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge – Kate Middleton as she was – slips away incognito for secret visits to art galleries and photo exhibitions.
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, well maybe it was written in numerology if not the stars: she was sixth on the call sheet for his lewd cable TV show “Suits” and he was sixth in line to the throne at the time they got married. Simpatico.
> 
> Insider details – and there are a ton of them – bring to life what could have been just another entry into the royal bibliotheca oeuvre. But Tina Brown’s “The Palace Papers: Inside the House of Windsor – the Truth and the Turmoil” is a good read, distinguished by its hard research and the polish you’d expect from a writer who was previously an editor. chief of Tatler, Vanity Fair, the New Yorker and founder of the Daily Beast.
> 
> A ‘Lady’ in her own right too, via her marriage to Sir Harold Evans, the late eminent editor of the Sunday Times.
> 
> “I only use the title when I want a good table in a restaurant,” Brown told the Star in a phone interview, his just-released tome – a forensic autopsy that spares no one in the world. Windsor senior clan – already in the race for No. 1 on bestseller lists.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s not a hack job, however, in the gutter press sense. Too stylish for that. (And hack is actually a wry term of respect in British journalism.) Instead, a deft chronicler of royal melodrama and minutia, drawing from archived sources and more than 120 new interviews with those behind the palace walls know it.
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II is five weeks away from celebrating her Platinum Jubilee, 70 years on the throne. Which seems like the best time to put the monarchy and the defenestration of the royal family under the microscope. Can this permanent institution, though archaic and supposedly anachronistic, survive the death of a beloved ruler? Code name: London Bridge is down.
> 
> 
> 
> Because it could well be a difficult transition to King Charles.
> 
> 
> “I actually think the British nation will rally around Charles,” said Brown, who has had a front-row seat to the trials and tribulations of a family that is not at all like us but also more like us in its domestic mess, ‘lo in recent decades. “I think they are very attached to the monarchy even if for the younger generation it means much less. There is still a strong sense of national identity and pride tied to the endurance of the monarchy.
> 
> Brits may not even know how _be_ Briton without the scepter and orb, Brown suggested.
> 
> “So there’s no choice but to embrace that in Charles and right now is his best time, if you will, with the British people. He’s had long periods of unpopularity. He’ll never be liked – we know too much about him and what people know they don’t like much because of the whole Diana debacle.
> 
> “Having said that, in the last 20 years of being married to Camilla, he’s changed so much as a person, he’s so shamelessly happy, that people are embracing him more like a grandfather figure.”
> 
> Reorganizing the monarchy was a priority for Charles, waiting in the wings for 73 years as heir to the Crown. He cut the ship, cutting the younger royals off the cash cow and essentially sending his own brother, Prince Andrew – Duke of Hazard to Coventry as Brown marks the Queen’s favorite spawn, a “machine to crowned sleaze” – and even, to a surprising extent, his youngest son; bolting, ominously detached Prince Harry.
> 
> “The modernization of the monarchy has been somewhat put on hold with the Queen 70 years on the throne,” Brown said. “Charles is going to do a lot of cutting back on pomp and ceremony, to really focus on improving the monarchy rather than just carrying on with things as they are. Obviously he comes to the throne very late in his own life and I think he’s going to do everything he can to set things up for William, who will be a much longer reign.
> 
> 
> In “The Palace Papers,” Brown, who once wrote the best-selling “The Diana Chronicles,” is quite generous with Charles. His passions – environmentalism, the ugliness of modern architecture, sustainability – were previously seen as eccentricities but actually put him on the right side of history.
> 
> A source tells Brown that Charles is ‘desperate’ for his mother’s approval while noting that they are inherently different types of people – ‘the wrong type’ for Her Maj, who thinks Charles is too needy, emotional and vulnerable. He misses his stiff upper lip and his stoicism.
> 
> Brown is also extremely kind to Camilla, who resisted for so long, just “kept calm and carried on” despite being slurred in the press as a witch, an old bag, a wrecker and the Rottweiler (according to Diana) . She is also a fan of Kate, for a temperament perfectly suited to her position as future queen, built on the foundation of a solidly middle-class upbringing and a perfectly harmonious family.
> 
> Former Meghan Markle isn’t faring so well, however, and neither is Harry, fumbling as a California celebrity, conjuring up uncomfortable memories of his abdicating shambolic great-great-uncle, the Duke of Windsor.
> 
> “Harry was much more beloved than anyone but the Queen,” Brown pointed out. “I believe Harry will be embraced again if he shows any desire or interest in returning to England.”
> 
> 
> 
> The Invictus Games, which Harry created for injured war veterans – and he was never happier than during his years in the army, piloting an Apache helicopter, on the front line in Afghanistan until exposed by the Drudge Report and then sent home for security reasons – was a fabulous success. Yet he doesn’t seem like much more into his existence since the prince decamped as a working royal, his wish to be semi-royal now and then firmly rejected by the Queen, Charles and William.
> 
> “There is a path back to monarchy,” Brown said. “But I don’t know if he wants it. Right now, he absolutely embraces California, not just as a place to live but as a way of thinking. If that happens, it will probably be after the death of the queen.
> 
> Harry surprised royal watchers last week when he paid a surprise visit to his grandmother and then went on US TV to claim he wanted to make sure the Queen was ‘protected’. What does that mean ?
> 
> “It goes off as a complete kind of IED at all times. I asked someone what they were thinking when they made those comments and they said, ‘He doesn’t think, he rings true. “
> 
> Brown draws an analogy by comparing the once very close Windsor Brothers: Harry the Apache gunship, William the search and rescue helicopter.
> 
> The schism between the siblings won’t be mended anytime soon, Brown continued. “It’s a very hurt relationship right now.” Fixing it would take more than going to the pub for a few pints. “William has basically had his confidence undermined by the Oprah interview and the news that Harry is writing a book. Harry feels hurt and rejected by William, believing William has not kissed Meghan as he thought he would have of.
> 
> Which brings us back to Meghan, the biracial, divorced ex-actress of America who knocked Harry’s socks off, even as William urged his brother to slow court, not rush into marriage to a woman. who had no idea what royal life would entail. Meghan couldn’t hack it, it turned out, and Harry was apparently just as relieved to flee the fishbowl, though he never expected to be relieved of his HRH status, stripped of his military titles and of most of his charitable sponsorships.
> 
> They are still the Duke and Duchess of Sussex but cannot use the “Royal Sussex” brand for commercial purposes.
> 
> “Meghan was very successful in the first six months,” Brown recalled. “She mastered her role beautifully. The problem is, she hated it. It wasn’t so much that she was wrong, it was just that she didn’t like it at all. She never felt accepted. She didn’t like the British sensibility, which is much more sarcastic and iconoclastic. This is played out every day in the press.
> 
> “As an actress, Meghan was totally unused to not having a uniformly approving press. The British press can be brutal. No doubt there was some racist tabloid stuff about her that was hugely hurtful. She was having a hard time getting over the pain she had been in. And Harry exacerbated that feeling for her because he hated the press so much for what it had done to his mother, for what it had done to him. fact – tormenting his girlfriends, stalking, hacking, buying, it was unbearable.The only escape he had was when he joined the army because he was protected there from glare.
> 
> The Sussexes, who must now strike it rich – financially and otherwise – did not have a particularly soft landing in California, despite being greeted with joy by the American public. What has really happened to their much-hyped deal with Netflix so far? Meghan, writes Brown, saw herself as a kind of Angelina Jolie, an ambassador for her favorite causes, bringing royal accolade to favorite projects. It didn’t quite take off and his attention was scattered.
> 
> “It’s hard to build a platform from scratch,” Brown said. “It doesn’t matter how famous you are. You still have to have a successful strategic career. Entertainment deals, OK. But you make a deal and then you have to fulfill it, you have to deliver it. I don’t think any d Didn’t realize how difficult it was going to be.
> 
> When asked if she thought the royal family would read “The Palace Papers,” Brown sniffled delicately. “They are so inundated with documents about them that they will probably delegate other people to read them for them. But who knows?
> 
> 
> 
> “I wouldn’t if I was them.”


"As an actress, Meghan was totally unused to not having a uniformly approving press."
This sounds weird. All the entertainment media in the US and Canada is geared towards boosting actor ego? No one ever criticizes actors or their acting ability? Methane must have lived in a bubble where the paps she called all loved her.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> It was so hideous, you'd think she'd be pleased


That's what I say, but you're the first to agree with me! The hair was kinda bad too.


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> It's been more than 2 years. *Tick tock.*



  

And Methane tries to find a way to "fit in" with anybody who'll worship her. I'm sure she has tried the focus group studies to see who she can pander to most successfully. She tried appealing to the teenage crowd, the 20's crowd, the 70 + year crowd, and has tried the veterans' crowd with the failed cemetery photo op, the NYC Salute to Freedom Gala, and Invictus Games, figuring everyone admires and respects vets so why not try to sponge off and use their earned admiration for herself?  Nobody but her own PR people tell us how great she is. It's going to take a lot more than olive oil cakes and wreaths to repair her image.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I say, but you're the first to agree with me! The hair was kinda bad too.





I can only comment in retrospect, too young to remember, but I can't imagine liking the dress_ even _if I was into fashion then. It just looks like more is more puffy silk duvet, but there's nothing designed, just more and more. People describe it as fairytale, more like mountain of whipped-cram. I guess her hair was non-negotiable, she always had that long-is helmet hair.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> And Methane tries to find a way to "fit in" with anybody who'll worship her. I'm sure she has tried the focus group studies to see who she can pander to most successfully. She tried appealing to the teenage crowd, the 20's crowd, the 70 + year crowd, and has tried the veterans' crowd with the failed cemetery photo op, the NYC Salute to Freedom Gala, and Invictus Games, figuring everyone admires and respects vets so why not try to sponge off and use their earned admiration for herself?  Nobody but her own PR people tell us how great she is. It's going to take a lot more than olive oil cakes and wreaths to repair her image.


She tries appealing to the POC and WOC crowd too. I believe her NAACP award was bought for her, but whether it was corruptly secured or not, did it earn her any adulation from the POC crowd in the US?


----------



## 880

MM simply saw this marriage as her best bet (as her professional career had peaked); she clearly didn’t think things through; and she is the catalyst for H‘s poor decisions while making terrible ones on her own. She wanted the fairy tale and didn’t do her due diligence, but it also seems like H never accepted or understood the reality of his own position. How that is possible, IDK.  I did expect to feel sorry for H being married to her, but the more I read about H, the more I think they deserve each other. I pity anyone who is married to either of them. I do think their former partners dodged a bullet.


----------



## xincinsin

I think the media was pretty forgiving to Methane. She turned up for royal engagements looking like this, and some of the reporters compared her to Jackie O  . This is not "signature messy bun". This is just-rolled-out-of-bed what's-a-comb messy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> MM simply saw this marriage as her best bet (as her professional career had peaked); she clearly didn’t think things through; and she is the catalyst for H‘s poor decisions while making terrible ones on her own. She wanted the fairy tale and didn’t do her due diligence, but it also seems like H never accepted or understood the reality of his own position. How that is possible, IDK.  I did expect to feel sorry for H being married to her, but the more I read about H, the more I think they deserve each other. I pity anyone who is married to either of them. I do think their former partners dodged a bullet.



I don't feel sorry for her at all. I agree being married to Harry would have its challenges, but she knew that going in and in fact probably only could secure the prey because of his shortcomings. On the other hand, I have no doubt she only showed her ugly side to him once she'd acquired that ring.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> And Methane tries to find a way to "fit in" with anybody who'll worship her. I'm sure she has tried the focus group studies to see who she can pander to most successfully. She tried appealing to the teenage crowd, the 20's crowd, the 70 + year crowd, and has tried the veterans' crowd with the failed cemetery photo op, the NYC Salute to Freedom Gala, and Invictus Games, figuring everyone admires and respects vets so why not try to sponge off and use their earned admiration for herself?  Nobody but her own PR people tell us how great she is. It's going to take a lot more than olive oil cakes and wreaths to repair her image.


Losing your reputation is easy, regaining it is hard. It has taken Camilla decades of hard work and keeping her head down to overcome the negative image the public has had of her. MM would never be able to do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I'll pass on TB's book for the time being. I believe DM will publish or comment about the most interesting parts. Also, Lady C might review the book on her videos. At the present time, I'm only planning to get Tom Bower's book.
> 
> @needlv I can see why people might think the book is Netflixes' friendly. Describing Hazz as 'sexy' and comparing him to Brad Pitt sounds very bizarre…
> 
> View attachment 5391016
> 
> _The book is terribly written and gloriously meaningless: ‘The Queen’s frail liege man found heavenly release from his life of service. Gently, and with love, she let him go.’ I quickly found a kind of joy in mapping Brown’s devotion to that heinous crime of prose, elegant variation: *the Duchess of Sussex is ‘the family fledgling’ and, earlier on, ‘the earnest, freckle-faced tween’; the Duke is ‘the sexy royal wild card with the Brad Pitt stubble’. *The Duke of York is ‘a now divorced horndog eternally on the hunt, with a guffawing, boob-ogling pickup style’ and, more concisely, ‘a coroneted sleaze machine’. A journalist is a ‘limpet-like royal scoop-monger’. The Michael Kents are ‘a low-boil money-grubbing embarrassment’…
> 
> *Some of this may be meant to appeal to Brown’s primarily American audience*…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can make anything up about the royal family and it will be printed as fact
> 
> 
> There are quite a few things that Tina Brown doesn’t know: what ‘jejune’ means; when Louis XIV came to the throne; what the passive voice in prose is (not ‘recollections may vary’); what members of the aristocracy are called (Lady Romsey becomes Lady Penelope Romsey) or what members of the royal...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


I find her epithets funny so I think the Spectator is a bit unfair to call it poorly written. I do question how you could call M a tween. Unless it’s ‘tween jobs or ‘tween sugar daddies or ‘tween identities.


xincinsin said:


> I think the media was pretty forgiving to Methane. She turned up for royal engagements looking like this, and some of the reporters compared her to Jackie O  . This is not "signature messy bun". This is just-rolled-out-of-bed what's-a-comb messy.
> View attachment 5391130


Jesus when you see it up close you see how much she’s changed her face now she’s got the Windsor bucks it’s uncanny isn’t it? 


xincinsin said:


> "As an actress, Meghan was totally unused to not having a uniformly approving press."
> This sounds weird. All the entertainment media in the US and Canada is geared towards boosting actor ego? No one ever criticizes actors or their acting ability? Methane must have lived in a bubble where the paps she called all loved her.


I don’t think anyone who has ever seen her act could offer anything like uniform approval.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> *"As an actress, Meghan was totally unused to not having a uniformly approving press."*
> This sounds weird. All the entertainment media in the US and Canada is geared towards boosting actor ego? No one ever criticizes actors or their acting ability? Methane must have lived in a bubble where the paps she called all loved her.



No one really knew who she was so whatever press received was probably drummed up from somewhere on her end - and the rest of the world just scrolled on by (_Meghan who??_)


----------



## duna

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you so much for everyone’s kind wishes!  I’m overwhelmed at the love on this thread (and some say we are the mean girls?)  I am on the mend.  Everyone please continue to be safe out there.  *I was still wearing a mask, being vigilant, hand sanitizing, vaccinated and boostered, and I somehow got it anyway.*



Me too and my DH, we tested negative about 3 weeks ago, but we're are still feeling very tired.


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> "As an actress, Meghan was totally unused to not having a uniformly approving press."
> This sounds weird. All the entertainment media in the US and Canada is geared towards boosting actor ego? No one ever criticizes actors or their acting ability? Methane must have lived in a bubble where the paps she called all loved her.



Imho, she was completely beneath the notice of the press. I'm sure that occasionally, the showrunners would send her out to promote the show but I doubt she was ever sought out by the press during her _Suits_ tenure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> Imho, she was completely beneath the notice of the press. I'm sure that occasionally, the showrunners would send her out to promote the show but I doubt she was ever sought out by the press during her _Suits_ tenure.



That's why she had to call the cops to look for invisible intruders in her Toronto home...to get at least a tiny bit of attention.


----------



## zen1965

papertiger said:


> I can only comment in retrospect, too young to remember, but I can't imagine liking the dress_ even _if I was into fashion then. It just looks like more is more puffy silk duvet, but there's nothing designed, just more and more. People describe it as fairytale, more like mountain of whipped-cram. I guess her hair was non-negotiable, she always had that long-is helmet hair.


I always thought that dress was an utter nightmare.


----------



## Aimee3

charlottawill said:


> So did my husband and I, even with second boosters, but we only had cold symptoms and fatigue. So many people are getting breakthrough infections but at least avoiding hospitalization. My doctor said the latest variant is very good at evading the vaccine but we should be well protected now against future infection. I hope that's true. Glad you're doing well!


I’m glad your symptoms weren’t too painful.  I want to get the second booster but I think you have to wait 90 days after you’ve had Covid.  I’m going to ask my dr what he thinks.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> JdC is an innovative line (or was in 1971) the design appealed to ne, but it's not that comfortable to wear - and now I am so pleased I don't own any. I cannot wear anything she peddles, plus, it didn't suit her or with what she was wearing.
> 
> 
> 
> Basically, we know exactly what she's doing.
> 
> Cartier's LOVE is already 'everywhere', Trilogy is on Kate (but you'd have to look hard) so *Madam has to take the credit for popularising the JdC.*
> 
> She _lives_ to be,_ longs_ to be a fashion leader.
> 
> In a way she's right, we remember Grace Kelly, Jackie O (Kennedy) (and of course) Diana, and many other women because of their fashion sense long after their passing.
> 
> However, M is very forgettable unless she's looking a jolly green giant or red silk tomato. Someone has told her white is stand-out  *bright* and that neutrals suit her, so we are stuck with the lady in white and the JdC. When white becomes a 'thing' like it does every Summer, and the fashion-uneducated media (including fashion magazines) start noticing that every other Cartier wearer is already wearing 'nails' round their wrists, TW will be there to take full credit.


She isn't popularizing $hit when it comes to Cartier.  One look at the Cartier forum would tell her that, although she thinks she knows everything.  I think the JUC was re-introduced about 10 years ago.  You're a little late to jump on this band wagon MMM.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> *Harry and Meghan, well maybe it was written in numerology if not the stars: she was sixth on the call sheet for his lewd cable TV show “Suits” and he was sixth in line to the throne at the time they got married. Simpatico*.


Interesting.  6 and 6.  Add a third and you know what that 666 symbolizes


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> She isn't popularizing $hit when it comes to Cartier.  One look at the Cartier forum would tell her that, although she thinks she knows everything.  I think the JUC was re-introduced about 10 years ago.  You're a little late to jump on this band wagon MMM.


TW strikes me more for Cartier’s Clash bracelet.  Not so much for the style, but rather for the name “clash” since she seems to clash with everything and everyone!


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> I’m glad your symptoms weren’t too painful.  I want to get the second booster but I think you have to wait 90 days after you’ve had Covid.  I’m going to ask my dr what he thinks.


My husband got the fourth shot on a Saturday and started feeling bad on Sunday. I thought it was just a reaction, as he has had some with previous doses, and they insist you cannot get COVID from the vaccine. Just odd timing I guess. He tested negative Tuesday, positive Wednesday, then confirmed the next day with PCR test. I had two negative tests before I tested positive. I had gotten my fourth dose three weeks earlier. It's a very sneaky disease and we need to stay vigilant. I know people who have had it twice.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> She isn't popularizing $hit when it comes to Cartier.  One look at the Cartier forum would tell her that, although she thinks she knows everything.  I think the JUC was re-introduced about 10 years ago.  You're a little late to jump on this band wagon MMM.


She didn't have the money before.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> Imho, she was completely beneath the notice of the press. I'm sure that occasionally, the showrunners would send her out to promote the show but I doubt she was ever sought out by the press during her _Suits_ tenure.




I just wanted to take a minute to mention that I also have had uniformly positive press about me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> She isn't popularizing $hit when it comes to Cartier.  One look at the Cartier forum would tell her that, although she thinks she knows everything.  I think the JUC was re-introduced about 10 years ago.  You're a little late to jump on this band wagon MMM.



As usual, just that tiny bit off.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As usual, just that tiny bit off.


Or. for the Major League fans:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I just wanted to take a minute to mention that I also have had uniformly positive press about me.



Me too, but then, I try to stay out of the press as much as possible these days


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

These people are sick! Hazz shouldn't entertain these people. This is disrespectful and it should be very painful for Will. Diana didn't deserve this, her memory should rest in peace.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> My husband got the fourth shot on a Saturday and started feeling bad on Sunday. I thought it was just a reaction, as he has had some with previous doses, and they insist you cannot get COVID from the vaccine. Just odd timing I guess. He tested negative Tuesday, positive Wednesday, then confirmed the next day with PCR test. I had two negative tests before I tested positive. I had gotten my fourth dose three weeks earlier. It's a very sneaky disease and we need to stay vigilant. I know people who have had it twice.


I'm sorry to hear that you and your husband tested positive for covid. I hope you are both feeling better now.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I'm sorry to hear that you and your husband tested positive for covid. I hope you are both feeling better now.



We are, thank you 



CarryOn2020 said:


>




This comment is gold  God willing! 





xincinsin said:


> I think the media was pretty forgiving to Methane. She turned up for royal engagements looking like this, and some of the reporters compared her to Jackie O  . This is not "signature messy bun". This is just-rolled-out-of-bed what's-a-comb messy.
> View attachment 5391130


H&M = Hot Mess

Whatever transpired during H's visit must have lifted a huge weight off of her. Maybe she wished him and his family all the best and said don't let the door hit you on the way out.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Me too, but then, I try to stay out of the press as much as possible these days


Privacy has such terrible drawbacks when you are posing as a world leader


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Whatever transpired during H's visit must have lifted a huge weight off of her. Maybe she wished him and his family all the best and said don't let the door hit you on the way out.



She looks great!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I just wonder if MM and Hazzie thought she looked good when she went out to meet-and-greet the taxpayers. Does she look at these same photos today and gasp?  Was she deliberately trying to provoke nasty comments, maybe something Fergie suggested in order to spur MM vs Kate comments?  Is it ignorance or is it deliberate?  To my eye, some of her mistakes [?] are so obvious that she had to have known better. She was not new to the world of photographers.

ETA: Also, maybe H&M saw what happened to the re-elected French President and decided the same could happen to them. So, it’s a no for the balcony.  Interesting there has been “no comment” from them.


----------



## charlottawill

Oh please


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The good people of York have had enough   Time to the call the good people of Sussex:


_Prince Andrew was stripped of his Freedom of the City of York honor following a vote by councilors in the wake of his sexual abuse case settlement.

The motion to remove the title — given to the Duke of York back in 1987 — received 8 out of 10 votes during a full council meeting. This constituted a unanimous decision, BBC reported.

Councilors also called for the troubled royal to give up his Duke of York title in the wake of his out-of-court settlementwith Andrew’s accuser Virginia Giuffre.

Councilor Darryl Smalley, who proposed the motion, told The Post, “Having been stripped of his military roles and royal patronages by the Queen, we believe that it is right to remove all links that Prince Andrew still has with our great city.”

“The removal of this honorary title sends the right message that we as a city stand with victims of abuse,” Smalley added.

Councilors said if the duke failed to act, the Queen or the government should step in and remove the title.

Councilor Aisling Musson said she looks “forward to the day ‘York’ is never associated with this man again,” referring to Andrew.

“We want to end all of York’s association with Andrew Windsor so that the people of York, particularly survivors of sexual abuse, do not have to live with the pain of being associated with this man,” Musson told The Post.

Musson said the Duke of York “has *brought shame and disturbance to our city and its residents*.”









						Prince Andrew loses Freedom of York honor after sex abuse case settlement
					

The Duke of York was stripped of his Freedom of the City of York honor following a vote by councilors.




					nypost.com
				



_


----------



## altigirl88

CarryOn2020 said:


> It became very ugly imo.
> 
> *Explosive testimony from Elizabeth Emanuel in bitter court battle with former husband*
> 
> *Husband and wife David and Elizabeth Emanuel created Diana's wedding dress *
> *Now divorced, they have fallen out over the creation of her ivory silk garment*
> *David accused of falsely claiming to make dresses for Diana 'when he did not' *
> From 2021:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I designed Diana's dress - and my ex has claimed credit for 40 years'
> 
> 
> As a husband-and-wife team, they became the toast of fashion after creating Princess Diana's wedding dress. Now divorced, David and Elizabeth Emanuel are at war over the gown.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



The dress was a portent of what her marriage ended up being. Ill-fitting. Overwhelming. Not at all what it should have been


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Oh please



She looked great because she had days at Wood Farm filled with memories of time spent with her husband there. 

And multiple days where she was driven to the stables to spend time with her beloved horses, all of whom are more intelligent than her Ginger Grandson.

In contrast to those loathsome people in CA, her daughter, The Princess Royal, and the Duchess of Cambridge were on a joint visit, obviously very much at ease with each other, enjoying themselves and, through their interactions, contributing to life long memories for those with whom they were visiting.

Son Edward and his wife Sophie are demonstrating why they are valuable ambassadors for the Monarch and deserve the enhanced role they seem to be stepping into.

The gracious future Consort, Camilla, is proving she is a finer Patron to support theater than the 3rd rate actress with no class who briefly held the patronage she didn’t deserve, but had been generously given by the Queen.

William and Charles are stalwart support, working hard.

The great grandchildren appeared to be gathering at Windsor for a fun photo shoot. And a lively, healthy Louis, turned 4, giving further promise through the line of succession for the future of Monarchy, a child raised in a loving family.

Yes, Baldie and Botox are an irritant, are sneaky and unscrupulous and loathsome, but they are out numbered and outshone. For now, Life goes on in spite of them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> These people are sick! Hazz shouldn't entertain these people. This is disrespectful and it should be very painful for Will. Diana didn't deserve this, her memory should rest in peace.



Now these are kitsch!
My artistic feedback is it’s not a bad start but it really needs Marilyn Monroe and Elvis and could they be playing poker?

In all seriousness, Diana is never really out of the public eye even now as  there’s at least one tv show or  movie and at least 2 books about her a year and I would hope W has got better things to do than search his mum on Twitter. H on the other hand…..


charlottawill said:


> Oh please



My Nan would hated this post her number one pet peeve is people calling grown women (especially elderly women) cute.

Am I the only one getting a deepfake vibe from this photo? It looks so photoshopped it’s like de-aged Luke Skywalker.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Interesting!



He calls him, "The Duke of Hypocrisy" and I'll call her Lady Pointy Chest because she pulls her shoulders back and sticks her chest almost in that man's face although I'm sure he's not complaining. She's just advertising her wares.     Here's a screenshot.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh, that infamous strapless bra - worn under clothes with a high neckline - again! Also, how does she make it so that the darts always give her fake nipples?


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> He calls him, "The Duke of Hypocrisy" and I'll call her Lady Pointy Chest because she pulls her shoulders back and sticks her chest almost in that man's face although I'm sure he's not complaining. She's just advertising her wares.     Here's a screenshot.
> View attachment 5391787


Did she go bra-free again?


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Thank you for posting this! 

I scrolled through all the pics and one thing that stood out is how HAPPY the Queen looked on W&K's wedding day compared to the gloomy, almost scowling looks from the wedding day of H&M. She knew and was probably hoping for the best, which did not happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Did she go bra-free again?



No, you can see the outline of her favourite ill-fitting strapless bra!


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> He calls him, "The Duke of Hypocrisy" and I'll call her Lady Pointy Chest because she pulls her shoulders back and sticks her chest almost in that man's face although I'm sure he's not complaining. She's just advertising her wares.     Here's a screenshot.
> View attachment 5391787


The Viscountess of Vulgarity strikes again.


----------



## rose60610

The SS are saying the Queen looks well due to Harry's visit last week.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Did she go bra-free again?


If she did, she had implants put in again.


----------



## Chanbal

Fergie got new shoes. 










						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sarah Ferguson's footnote on the House of York
					

RICHARD EDEN: But his beloved ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York is determined to make it clear that her family are not feeling sorry for themselves.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Fergie got new shoes.
> View attachment 5392042
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sarah Ferguson's footnote on the House of York
> 
> 
> RICHARD EDEN: But his beloved ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York is determined to make it clear that her family are not feeling sorry for themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What does she do for income? Just curious....


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> What does she do for income? Just curious....


Lives off Andrew who lives off the Queen?


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


> Mental health therapy: Do Not Communicate, just pay WorseUp and have the therapists talk between themselves.  Did I get this right?
> 
> View attachment 5389581
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex__ has criticised the British reluctance to talk about needing counselling, instead *praising* *California’s “I’ll get my therapist to call your therapist” mentality*.
> 
> The Duke, speaking on a podcast about mental health, said the cultural differences between the UK and US are “immense”, as he urged the public to get on the “front foot” to prevent burnout.
> 
> Saying “99.9 per cent of people on planet Earth are suffering from some form of loss, trauma, or grief”, he warned the body “doesn’t forget” emotional damage of childhood and argued: “The more we understand it, the more we understand each other.”
> 
> The Duke made a “cameo” appearance on the Masters of Scale podcast_* to talk about BetterUp, the mental health app he works for as its chief impact officer.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


I honestly believe that Harry mixed up burn-out and bore-out… both need to be taken seriously though!


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Lives off Andrew who lives off the Queen?


Thanks, I forgot that she and Andrew reportedly still live together, to some extent.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Fergie got new shoes.
> View attachment 5392042
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Sarah Ferguson's footnote on the House of York
> 
> 
> RICHARD EDEN: But his beloved ex-wife, Sarah, Duchess of York is determined to make it clear that her family are not feeling sorry for themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Especially in court


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> What does she do for income? Just curious....


Great question! I bet Fergie can't explain nor complain about her source of income.  @Jayne1 put it nicely.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I know it was a little while ago now but I feel like I might as well offer my two cents that I think that there are other factors that are a far greater influence in the increase reports of depression among younger generations than their love of phones and use of the internet.

In fact I’d say that they’ve sort of been forced to be reliant on the internet for the news and content. I mean (at least here in the U.K but I get the impression this is pretty common) try buying any newspaper or turning on your tv or radio and try and find something designed to appeal or even
relevant to the interests of someone under 30. All of these platforms skew predominantly middle aged with gen x aka H&M being the young side. 

Occasionally there’s a show that’s capable of resonating with a lot of different ages but I would say the vast majority of stuff for the younger generations is only really available on the internet.  Of course some people find dangerous content that does harm them but that’s not unique to the internet - there have been dangerous books and other forms of media.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean...they wanted to be private and independent, so...

Maybe the BRF has finally had it, after being very kind, patient and indulgent with their antics.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...they wanted to be private and independent, so...
> 
> *Maybe the BRF has finally had it, after being very kind, patient and induldent with their antics.*


Oh yes!


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## youngster

Ah, leave it to Princess Anne, she suffers no fools!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> What does she do for income? Just curious....


She has written books, most recently.  Doesn't she also do videos of her reading the children' s books?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


>




Yes, love Princess Anne.  
I looked up the photo Zanna Merryn posted. It seems they had been at the horse races, several younger royals were around. As much as I would like to believe she is correcting some bad behavior, I’m not sure she really is fussing at him. She may be mocking something else.


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> I know it was a little while ago now but I feel like I might as well offer my two cents that I think that there are other factors that are a far greater influence in the increase reports of depression among younger generations than their love of phones and use of the internet.
> 
> In fact I’d say that they’ve sort of been forced to be reliant on the internet for the news and content. I mean (at least here in the U.K but I get the impression this is pretty common) try buying any newspaper or turning on your tv or radio and try and find something designed to appeal or even
> relevant to the interests of someone under 30. All of these platforms skew predominantly middle aged with gen x aka H&M being the young side.
> 
> Occasionally there’s a show that’s capable of resonating with a lot of different ages but I would say the vast majority of stuff for the younger generations is only really available on the internet.  Of course some people find dangerous content that does harm them but that’s not unique to the internet - there have been dangerous books and other forms of media.


IMO .. the internet and especially social media has had a huge impact on the young folk, a heck of a lot more than us "oldies" (HA!).  Look, I would say that a fair amount of us had to deal with some razzing and/or not the most pleasant comments in our youth, but at least it would be heard by .. what??, your classroom or maybe classmates (same grade) and .. okay, possibly the school??  Not that it made it feel any better, but MY GOD .. nowadays, people getting filmed and then it "going viral" (as the media loves to say) .. well, that can reach a HECK of a lot more folks than in the past!  Can't even say how many times (especially as of late), I've seen some young Tik-Toker ending their life because of some 'incident' that occurred -or- worse, some young person becomes followed by an obsessed fan/stalker such that the parents have to call in the police (or they take it upon themselves - as in the case where the Cop Father shot the stalker to death)!  Personally, if I had kids growing up during these times, I would NOT allow them to put themselves out there on some of these social media sites because there are just too many "nutso's" out there nowadays (not that they weren't there before, but it's easier to for them to find YOU!).  

As far as mental illness in the workplace? .. kind of a different story IMO, and isn't that what Hap-Hazzard is supposed to be working on?? .. the mental illness caused by the workplace or in/after University?  Still kind of slays me though, really? .. how is Harry supposed to know how the "normal" world lives & works?????


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, love Princess Anne.
> I looked up the photo Zanna Merryn posted. It seems they had been at the horse races, several younger royals were around. As much as I would like to believe she is correcting some bad behavior, I’m not sure she really is fussing at him. She may be mocking something else.


Someone commented on the original that it looks like he is protecting his genitals.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Oh yes!



One of my 3 favourite royals.
Princess Anne + HMTQ + Camilla, DofC = resilience 



Their message to JCMH & TW:


----------



## octopus17

If he'd just focused on the Invictus Games and South Africa under The Royal Family umbrella, he and Meghan could have been riding high and have most of the freedom and privacy which he, at least, craved. DH is more direct and says that he had to be managed because he hadn't/hasn't got the capacity to conduct himself and now all that's gone and Meghan is his manager, the results of which we're seeing now...


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG's last video. It's short and amusing.


----------



## xincinsin

Cornflower Blue said:


> If he'd just focused on the Invictus Games and South Africa under The Royal Family umbrella, he and Meghan could have been riding high and have most of the freedom and privacy which he, at least, craved. DH is more direct and says that he had to be managed because he hadn't/hasn't got the capacity to conduct himself and now all that's gone and Meghan is his manager, the results of which we're seeing now...


IMO, to put it simply: GREED


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> The BLG's last video. It's short and amusing.



As always, an interesting video, but about the shaking hands as a greeting part... are we supposed to do that again? Because I liked when it was considered too risky and germ-y. lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the DM article that says Hazz is “stupid”

Throughout this reign of terror, I have not and cannot give credit to Hazz or MM as the masterminds behind all of this.  I strongly believe someone else is pulling the strings, just as Andi had JeffE, H&M _must_ have a 3rd party running the show.  I keep waiting for that person or persons to surface.

ETA: also I believe that person(s) has taken advantage of the duo. In that sense, it is all so sad, so tragic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the DM article that says Hazz is “stupid”
> 
> Throughout this reign of terror, I have not and cannot give credit to Hazz or MM as the masterminds behind all of this.  I strongly believe someone else is pulling the strings, just as Andi had JeffE, H&M _must_ have a 3rd party running the show.  I keep waiting for that person or persons to surface.
> 
> ETA: also I believe that person(s) has taken advantage of the duo. In that sense, it is all so sad, so tragic.


I keep thinking that they are not making headway because they Markled the "mastermind". When I am in conspiracy-theory mode, I speculate that Methane had someone giving her instructions on how to hook herself a rich British guy with influence and pulling strings behind the scene to give her opportunities. She was supposed to get a foothold in the British aristocracy and influence them the way her backer wanted. But she struck the jackpot, reeled in a prince and got too big for her boots.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I keep thinking that they are not making headway because they Markled the "mastermind". When I am in conspiracy-theory mode, I speculate that Methane had someone giving her instructions on how to hook herself a rich British guy with influence and pulling strings behind the scene to give her opportunities. She was supposed to get a foothold in the British aristocracy and influence them the way her backer wanted. But she struck the jackpot, reeled in a prince and got too big for her boots.



MarkusA is an easy guess. He has the business knowledge plus connections. Some have suggested it was a ‘honey trap’. I have no idea, waiting on more info 

[I’m not into conspiracies either - I just don’t believe H&M are that clever or capable to pull off a successful departure. Dressing seems to be a huge challenge for them. Although Wallis&Ed succeeded in dressing and partying, they didn’t have successful businesses that I know of]. Only my opinion.


----------



## EmilyM11

charlottawill said:


> What does she do for income? Just curious....


Unrelated but I flew with her from Warsaw to London in the same flight


----------



## xincinsin

EmilyM111 said:


> Unrelated but I flew with her from Warsaw to London in the same flight


Unrelated, but this scene popped into my mind.
Methane talking to British Airways: Yes, I'll need the entire first class cabin. What? How can you charge me for all the seats! I'm only taking up one seat. The rest of the space is for my financial support prince, security support guards and emotional support dolls!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the DM article that says Hazz is “stupid”
> 
> Throughout this reign of terror, I have not and cannot give credit to Hazz or MM as the masterminds behind all of this.  I strongly believe someone else is pulling the strings, just as Andi had JeffE, H&M _must_ have a 3rd party running the show.  I keep waiting for that person or persons to surface.
> 
> ETA: also I believe that person(s) has taken advantage of the duo. In that sense, it is all so sad, so tragic.



I have said it for a while as well. Door opened too easily at the beginning, the alleged deals were far beyond their worth, and what about the whole social media landscape bowing to their every wish (this might be the most confusing part...why would Twitter or Youtube shut down successful accounts because the troublesome two asked?). I find it suspicious too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> MarkusA is an easy guess. He has the business knowledge plus connections. Some have suggested it was a ‘honey trap’. I have no idea, waiting on more info



But is MA big enough to have Youtube in his pocket?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EmilyM111 said:


> Unrelated but I flew with her from Warsaw to London in the same flight



Ohhh, any tea?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Unrelated, but this scene popped into my mind.
> Methane talking to British Airways: Yes, I'll need the entire first class cabin. What? How can you charge me for all the seats! I'm only taking up one seat. The rest of the space is for my *financial support prince*, security support guards and emotional support dolls!



OMG!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have said it for a while as well. Door opened too easily at the beginning, the alleged deals were far beyond their worth, and what about the whole social media landscape bowing to their every wish (this might be the most confusing part...why would Twitter or Youtube shut down successful accounts because the troublesome two asked?). I find it suspicious too.


One of the Youtube accounts which is not-H&M-friendly mentioned that Youtube account shutdown is managed by an algorithm. If there are enough complaints, the account is auto shut down, and it takes appeals and human intervention to restore accounts. The account speculated that that's how the Sussex Squad and Sunshine Sucks target accounts to close them down.


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ohhh, any tea?



Well first they pushed me out of the queue to business class to announce a royal VIP, but she didn’t show (we have a separate VIP lounge in Warsaw so assume she was there). On plane she had one row for herself, next to me and think she’s used to ppl staring (I tried not to but you know lol). She was very polite to the staff that escorted her in Poland and at Heathrow left the same exit as normal ppl. Nothing major I guess but still exciting.
My husband met once (and even spoke with) Princess Anne at a business dinner and is still totally enchanted with her (but he’s British so has to by birth lol). She was apparently extremely professional in her role and knew exactly to who to talk at which point etc.


----------



## EmilyM11

xincinsin said:


> Unrelated, but this scene popped into my mind.
> Methane talking to British Airways: Yes, I'll need the entire first class cabin. What? How can you charge me for all the seats! I'm only taking up one seat. The rest of the space is for my financial support prince, security support guards and emotional support dolls!


Sarah was seated on her own but that’s not unusual on this route. Overall she acted normal and very polite. As the Meghan, doubt she’d use something that actually is a premium economy, not business and no first (I believe BA has only premium economy labelled club Europe on European routes).


----------



## Aimee3

Wonder what TW was doing in Poland?  How long ago was this?


----------



## EmilyM11

Aimee3 said:


> Wonder what TW was doing in Poland?  How long ago was this?


Sorry for confusion, it was Sarah Ferguson visiting charity she’s the head of.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> As far as mental illness in the workplace? .. kind of a different story IMO, and isn't that what Hap-Hazzard is supposed to be working on?? .. the mental illness caused by the workplace or in/after University?  Still kind of slays me though, really? .. *how is Harry supposed to know how the "normal" world lives & works?????*



This, thank you.  When he's held down a regular 40 - 60 hour per week job including a commute, cooked, cleaned, shopped for groceries, paid his own bills, did his own taxes, did his own laundry, maintained his car, maintained his home, and arranged every other detail of his life personally then he can weigh in with words of wisdom on this subject.


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> IMO .. the internet and especially social media has had a huge impact on the young folk, a heck of a lot more than us "oldies" (HA!).  Look, I would say that a fair amount of us had to deal with some razzing and/or not the most pleasant comments in our youth, but at least it would be heard by .. what??, your classroom or maybe classmates (same grade) and .. okay, possibly the school??  Not that it made it feel any better, but MY GOD .. nowadays, people getting filmed and then it "going viral" (as the media loves to say) .. well, that can reach a HECK of a lot more folks than in the past!



I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.   

So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.

OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> This, thank you.  When he's held down a regular 40 - 60 hour per week job including a commute, cooked, cleaned, shopped for groceries, paid his own bills, did his own taxes, did his own laundry, maintained his car, maintained his home, and arranged every other detail of his life personally then he can weigh in with words of wisdom on this subject.


----------



## MiniMabel

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.




This is absolutely how it should be.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Unrelated, but this scene popped into my mind.
> Methane talking to British Airways: Yes, I'll need the entire first class cabin. What? How can you charge me for all the seats! I'm only taking up one seat. The rest of the space is for my financial support prince, security support guards and emotional support dolls!


Inquiring mind that I am, I looked up the price for LAX-LHR first class on BA. It's roughly 30-35K to buy the whole cabin. There are only eight seats at a little under 5K each. So I can see a prominent person doing it instead of taking a private jet. I'm sure they're not the first to do it. We fly to Europe on Delta, and business/first class cabin is more like 30 seats, similar price per seat. That would be a much bigger cash outlay.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


+10000 for your post. We could escape to the safety of our homes/rooms. Kids can't escape anything today.


----------



## Mapia57

MiniMabel said:


> This is absolutely how it should be.


The good old days I sure do miss them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Inquiring mind that I am, I looked up the price for LAX-LHR first class on BA. It's roughly 30-35K to buy the whole cabin. There are only eight seats at a little under 5K each. So I can see a prominent person doing it instead of taking a private jet. I'm sure they're not the first to do it. We fly to Europe on Delta, and business/first class cabin is more like 30 seats, similar price per seat. That would be a much bigger cash outlay.



I mean, buy all the seats you want, I just don't understand how it's ok to let someone buy a seat someone else already paid for.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


Totally forgot about the after 9pm rule. lol


----------



## CeeJay

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


OMG .. when reading your post I thought .. "wow - was she living in our house?" .. because it was pretty much the same!  NO PHONE calls after 9pm (if we got a call after 9pm, we knew it was an emergency or death in the family) and NO PHONE calls before 9am!!! My parents were very strict about "the day":  
1.  Get up at 6am, quick shower and then down for breakfast 
2.  Go back upstairs and get ready for school 
3.  Walk up to bus stop .. get bus at 7:30am SHARP
4.  School from 8am - 4pm (unless I had afterschool activities) 
5.  Home from school - have snack and then upstairs to start homework
6.  Dinner promptly at 7pm (European family - my mother was Italian) 
7.  Back upstairs at 8pm, more homework (if required) or book reading and/or some TV (volume turned DOWN) 
8.  Bed - no later than 11pm 

.. and start the day again.  In some respects, a much easier life not having to deal with the constant news, social media, phone calls, etc. -- I've said this time & time again, while the Internet has provided all of us with some good things (this thread!!!), it has also provided a lot of CRAP (dark web, porn sites, etc.).


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, buy all the seats you want, I just don't understand how it's ok to let someone buy a seat someone else already paid for.


Agreed, but do we know for a fact that BA did that? I have a hard time believing they would contact first class customers and say sorry we're moving you back to business/comfort plus or whatever they call the next level down, or else pick a different flight. And if they did, they probably had to offer some decent compensation. My husband is million mile plus on Delta, and he would demand something in return if he was told he was being reassigned from his preferred seat location.


----------



## Aimee3

EmilyM111 said:


> Sorry for confusion, it was Sarah Ferguson visiting charity she’s the head of.


Ah thank you. I went back and re-read and don’t know how I misunderstood but thank you for clearing that up.  If it had been TW, we would probably still be hearing about it!


----------



## EmilyM11

Aimee3 said:


> Ah thank you. I went back and re-read and don’t know how I misunderstood but thank you for clearing that up.  If it had been TW, we would probably still be hearing about it!


I'm too poor and too unimportant for TW to be in the next row to


----------



## youngster

CeeJay said:


> OMG .. when reading your post I thought .. "wow - was she living in our house?" .. because it was pretty much the same! NO PHONE calls after 9pm (if we got a call after 9pm, we knew it was an emergency or death in the family) and NO PHONE calls before 9am!!! My parents were very strict about "the day":



Haha!   I think my house was just like yours except we had dinner at 6 promptly, mostly because both my parents work schedules got them home between 4 - 5 PM.  You are so right though, if the phone rang after 9 PM, it made everyone nervous that it was bad news!


----------



## Sferics

Mapia57 said:


> The good old days I sure do miss them


In this context: YES!!!


----------



## sdkitty

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/benedict-cumberbatch-ukraine-refugees_n_626d0990e4b029505df2a8ed 

Why can’t these two great humanitarians do this


----------



## Lake Effect

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


Can’t help but respond. Omg the memories, and I am beginning to think our parents were in a union they didn’t tell us about. Only difference in our house was dad wasn’t always polite to after nine pm callers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm too poor and too unimportant for TW to be in the next row to


Maybe after her divorce


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/benedict-cumberbatch-ukraine-refugees_n_626d0990e4b029505df2a8ed
> 
> Why can’t these two great humanitarians do this


Security concerns I'm sure


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, but do we know for a fact that BA did that? I have a hard time believing they would contact first class customers and say sorry we're moving you back to business/comfort plus or whatever they call the next level down, or else pick a different flight. And if they did, they probably had to offer some decent compensation. My husband is million mile plus on Delta, and he would demand something in return if he was told he was being reassigned from his preferred seat location.



Didn't someone on here post they or an acquaintance were bumped from first class for that flight? I thought I read it here but I doubt I can find it now with the rate of new posts we're going at. Or I might be imagining things, it's entirely possible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm too poor and too unimportant for TW to be in the next row to



I'll admit I had misread the first time too, but when you said "She was super polite to staff" I knew something was up!  That's when I went back and saw you'd quoted the question over Sarah's current job.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/benedict-cumberbatch-ukraine-refugees_n_626d0990e4b029505df2a8ed
> 
> Why can’t these two great humanitarians do this



Oh wow, that's awsome.


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll admit I had misread the first time too, but when you said "She was super polite to staff" I knew something was up!  That's when I went back and saw you'd quoted the question over Sarah's current job.


OMG I hope i didn't disappoint anyone! Not a chance I'd keep something SO IMPORTANT to myself for so long


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't someone on here post they or an acquaintance were bumped from first class for that flight? I thought I read it here but I doubt I can find it now with the rate of new posts we're going at. Or I might be imagining things, it's entirely possible.


I saw that too. My extensive experience with BA (though on UK-Poland route) is that they are RUDE, RUDE, RUDE, RUDE (and did I mention RUDE?) and don't care about their passengers, even business so I can imagine people being impolitely asked to move to business class or take another flight.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't someone on here post they or an acquaintance were bumped from first class for that flight? I thought I read it here but I doubt I can find it now with the rate of new posts we're going at. Or I might be imagining things, it's entirely possible.


Quite possible, I don't recall either. In the US, if you're bumped down to a lesser cabin all the airline is required to give you is a refund for the price differential, or I'm sure you can request another flight. But I can see someone who had to be on that flight and got bumped down being unhappy. We certainly would be. I have to be able to put my feet up on long flights, so we would have to reschedule, and that can be difficult at the last minute. My thinking was that since Invictus was scheduled well in advance they also booked the whole cabin well in advance. I think if someone got bumped by them and they weren't happy they would have taken it to Twitter, unless they like them and just suffered in silence.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I've read and commented a bit in the Johnny Depp thread and there's a very enlightening post from today drawing parallels. I especially enjoyed this part:



> I'm just a self credited armchair psychologist but to me it's obvious that just like with Duchess Pump Pump, something is really and seriously off with Amber. It's like you can sense it, even through a screen. It's their mannerisms, facial expressions and now that we've seen them in action over time, just that, their actions and general behaviour.
> 
> Both of these women obviously can keep it together behaviour wise long enough to stake out and capture a main objective but the pretense mask eventually has to slip. *They'll literally emotionally implode from the exertion to seem and act normal.* Both also ready to go scorched earth no matter the collateral damage when someone doesn't bend to their will.


----------



## charlottawill

EmilyM111 said:


> I saw that too. My extensive experience with BA (though on UK-Poland route) is that they are RUDE, RUDE, RUDE, RUDE (and did I mention RUDE?) and don't care about their passengers, even business so I can imagine people being impolitely asked to move to business class or take another flight.


I'll remember that going forward. We fly Delta almost exclusively, rarely have a problem, even when I'm flying by myself and sitting in coach. I observe how hard the flight attendants work and what they have to put up with. I couldn't do it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/benedict-cumberbatch-ukraine-refugees_n_626d0990e4b029505df2a8ed
> 
> Why can’t these two great humanitarians do this



One more thing those great humanitarians don't do: Angelina Jolie just arrived in Ukraine.


----------



## EmilyM11

charlottawill said:


> I'll remember that going forward. We fly Delta almost exclusively, rarely have a problem, even when I'm flying by myself and sitting in coach. I observe how hard the flight attendants work and what they have to put up with. I couldn't do it.


Many of my issues come from the fact that I have a back condition that doesn't always demonstrate (therefore I wouldn't be wheelchaired around the airport + there are ppl who really need that service more than me) but BA likes to put my back in distress by having to stand for long eg. closing priority lanes, not paying for them at WAW, not managing the boarding properly. To cut story short, I realise it's their ground staff, airport etc. but try to deal with their customers service...Just awful experience, rude and indifferent are the only words I have for them + the post covid coupons redemption is a joke and scam (mine are redeemable only through call centre where you get cut out as they're experiencing long queues).
I flew first and business on BA to the US and Canada and while can't complain about politeness of the staff, the experience was undewhelming (but guess quoted $5k price LAX-LHR justifies it vs eg. Emirates). To summarise: I don't recommend!

edit: I do realise this sounds a bit intense, probably as I had to fly this route at least once per month there and back over 10 years so accumulated a lot of grief against BA.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Quite possible, I don't recall either. In the US, if you're bumped down to a lesser cabin all the airline is required to give you is a refund for the price differential, or I'm sure you can request another flight. But I can see someone who had to be on that flight and got bumped down being unhappy. We certainly would be. I have to be able to put my feet up on long flights, so we would have to reschedule, and that can be difficult at the last minute. My thinking was that since Invictus was scheduled well in advance they also booked the whole cabin well in advance. *I think if someone got bumped by them and they weren't happy they would have taken it to Twitter, unless they like them and just suffered in silence.*



Not in a million years would I accept being bumped from business class (or first class) down to even premium or premium economy on a transcontinental flight. Those business/first seats from the west coast to the UK are lie-down flat seats and you can actually get some good rest on a 10+ hour flight.  Like a lot of people, I make my flight and hotel arrangements weeks, if not months, in advance so I wouldn't accept being moved even to the next day's flight as it would throw my whole trip off.  They'd have to compensate me big time for it.  So, I bet you are right and they made the arrangements way in advance and just bought out the whole cabin.  Still, what a waste of money for TW, the bodyguard, and a couple of others.  Seriously, they both need to get a grip.  They aren't billionaires, not even close.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Not in a million years would I accept being bumped from business class (or first class) down to even premium or premium economy on a transcontinental flight. Those business/first seats from the west coast to the UK are lie-down flat seats and you can actually get some good rest on a 10+ hour flight.  Like a lot of people, I make my flight and hotel arrangements weeks, if not months, in advance so I wouldn't accept being moved even to the next day's flight as it would throw my whole trip off.  They'd have to compensate me big time for it.  So, I bet you are right and they made the arrangements way in advance and just bought out the whole cabin.  Still, what a waste of money for TW, the bodyguard, and a couple of others.  Seriously, they both need to get a grip.  They aren't billionaires, not even close.


You're like my husband. He books our vacation trips as far a year in advance. If he was told he had to sit in a lesser cabin or change his flight he'd raise hell.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't someone on here post they or an acquaintance were bumped from first class for that flight? I thought I read it here but I doubt I can find it now with the rate of new posts we're going at. Or I might be imagining things, it's entirely possible.


Page 5908
@Chanbal posted it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> Not in a million years would I accept being bumped from business class (or first class) down to even premium or premium economy on a transcontinental flight. Those business/first seats from the west coast to the UK are lie-down flat seats and you can actually get some good rest on a 10+ hour flight.  Like a lot of people, I make my flight and hotel arrangements weeks, if not months, in advance so I wouldn't accept being moved even to the next day's flight as it would throw my whole trip off.  They'd have to compensate me big time for it.  So, I bet you are right and they made the arrangements way in advance and just bought out the whole cabin.  Still, what a waste of money for TW, the bodyguard, and a couple of others.  Seriously, they both need to get a grip.  They aren't billionaires, not even close.


Right! If I was bumped especially for a poser like TW I’d go full Karen. Full stop.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One more thing those great humanitarians don't do: Angelina Jolie just arrived in Ukraine.


It galls me.  these two have no claim to fame except for supposedly being do-gooders.  they have a huge estate.  why can't they put up some refugees?  or go to Ukraine?  what are they doing? posing
But they want credit for being humanitarians


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, that's awsome.


I'm not a huge fan of his but I won't forget this


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> It galls me.  these two have no claim to fame except for supposedly being do-gooders.  they have a huge estate.  why can't they put up some refugees?  or go to Ukraine?  what are they doing? posing
> But they want credit for being humanitarians



Seriously. Ordinary middle class people who did not have a pool house to spare have opened up their homes to Ukrainians.

ETA: it's probably best they won't go, their stupid Netflix crew would probably be a security risk for everyone doing actual work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm not a huge fan of his but I won't forget this



We have neighbours I don't particularly like because they are self-absorbed and slightly dramatic, but they offered their spare apartment they use when their mother/MIL visits without thinking twice and it made me slightly fonder of them.

(And just because I'm slightly tired of the racism accusations because apparently Ukrainians are treated too well, they also did so in 2015 when that big wave of Syrians arrived...just as our whole village, the smallest in the whole county, rallied together back then and rallies together now. Obviously we couldn't send a truck with goods to Syria, but that's not racism, that's logistics.)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


 This! I can totally relate to this era and you had to follow the same rules if you were lucky enough to live at home after graduation and it was a must that you chose only a reputable employer. The rules applied until you could prove that you were the mature adult you professed to be. We survived and I don't regret any part of it. I'm afraid Prince Dufus and TW would have suffocated and lost their voice under such 'dreadful' circumstances.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@youngster   this is one of the 5 best statements on TPF.  Thank you
_I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones._

Maybe this is why Hazzie fussed at his dad - no invite.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> @youngster   this is one of the 5 best statements on TPF.  Thank you
> _I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones._
> 
> Maybe this is why Hazzie fussed at his dad - no invite.




Haha this is a big slap - no invite! 

My guess about the fight with Charles (when they visited Dad and the Queen during Invictus) was they were told they would not be on the balcony. I can see Hazbeen saying, “We’ll bring the kiddies if we get the balcony” and Charles saying “ahhh … nope!”


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> Haha this is a big slap - no invite!
> 
> My guess about the fight with Charles (when they visited Dad and the Queen during Invictus) was they were told they would not be on the balcony. I can see Hazbeen saying, “We’ll bring the kiddies if we get the balcony” and Charles saying “ahhh … nope!”


I do believe they've been holding the kids back as their last best bargaining chip, not out of privacy/security concerns.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> This! I can totally relate to this era and you had to follow the same rules if you were lucky enough to live at home after graduation and it was a must that you chose only a reputable employer. The rules applied until you could prove that you were the mature adult you professed to be. We survived and I don't regret any part of it. I'm afraid Prince Dufus and TW would have suffocated and lost their voice under such 'dreadful' circumstances.


Not only was the phone in the kitchen, with a cord too short to drag it under the table to at least pretend there was some privacy ( I tried ), it was a 3 Party line. Sometimes we would lift the receiver and it would be in use and we’d have to wait. The flip side of that was someone picking up while we were using it and silently staying to listen in. Other than hanging up there was no way to block them.


----------



## needlv

EmilyM111 said:


> Many of my issues come from the fact that I have a back condition that doesn't always demonstrate (therefore I wouldn't be wheelchaired around the airport + there are ppl who really need that service more than me) but BA likes to put my back in distress by having to stand for long eg. closing priority lanes, not paying for them at WAW, not managing the boarding properly. To cut story short, I realise it's their ground staff, airport etc. but try to deal with their customers service...Just awful experience, rude and indifferent are the only words I have for them + the post covid coupons redemption is a joke and scam (mine are redeemable only through call centre where you get cut out as they're experiencing long queues).
> I flew first and business on BA to the US and Canada and while can't complain about politeness of the staff, the experience was undewhelming (but guess quoted $5k price LAX-LHR justifies it vs eg. Emirates). To summarise: I don't recommend!
> 
> edit: I do realise this sounds a bit intense, probably as I had to fly this route at least once per month there and back over 10 years so accumulated a lot of grief against BA.



Agree 100%.  BA is infamous for overselling flights and bumping passengers either down a class or onto another flight.  My experience is that they are ok for very short (under 1-2 hr) flights, but any longer and you should look for alternatives.  Never fly longhaul with them…

Back to topic, the Theresa Longo fan blog says that the Harkles bought a story on Twitter about H.  Link here:









						Look Carefully on Twitter for THIS...
					

Exclusive Celebrity News




					theresalongofanpagerome.blogspot.com
				




It doesn’t matter how much they spend on PR - they just are not liked.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I do believe they've been holding the kids back as their last best bargaining chip, not out of privacy/security concerns.



So do I.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> @youngster   this is one of the 5 best statements on TPF.  Thank you
> _I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones._
> 
> Maybe this is why Hazzie fussed at his dad - no invite.



Can you imagine, the two losers arriving at the event with a Netflix crew and body guards in tow. TW could be wearing some ill-fitting gown with the price tag still attached and her undergarment and nipples bulging through the material and with a smug expression plastered on her face.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We have neighbours I don't particularly like because they are self-absorbed and slightly dramatic, but they offered their spare apartment they use when their mother/MIL visits without thinking twice and it made me slightly fonder of them.
> 
> (And just because I'm slightly tired of the racism accusations because apparently Ukrainians are treated too well, they also did so in 2015 when that big wave of Syrians arrived...just as our whole village, the smallest in the whole county, rallied together back then and rallies together now. Obviously we couldn't send a truck with goods to Syria, but that's not racism, that's logistics.)


guess it goes to show one can have a less than stellar personality but a good heart


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Can you imagine, the two losers arriving at the event with a Netflix crew and body guards in tow. TW could be wearing some ill-fitting gown with the price tag still attached and her undergarment and nipples bulging through the material and with a smug expression plastered on her face.


Plus miles of fake tan and an avalanche of jewellery to keep up with the other guests.
The cringe part would be when Hazard tries to pimp her out as a model/voice actress/host/brand celebrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## altigirl88

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.



if we’re ever blessed with accidental children, I’ll keep these guidelines in mind. They sound pretty good and reasonable, lol


----------



## Chanbal

One more?


----------



## Chanbal

Fake news?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Fake news?
> View attachment 5393129


If true: 
1. Do they have to give back that whatever award they were given for having only 2 kids?
2. If Invisibet completed their family, does this #3 mean their family is over-populated?
3. Does this alleged pregnancy give them the perfect excuse again to not go to the UK? "Oh, we would have gone to the jubilee but Methane was heavily pregnant for 9 months."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Fake news?
> View attachment 5393129



Show us the bump.




Ewwww.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Show us the bump.
> View attachment 5393141
> 
> 
> 
> Ewwww.



Hah! I was wondering about Durand - the other half of the Sussex Suck-ups who wrote Finding Freebies.


----------



## jelliedfeels

On the phone thing again, of course it’s good to impose limits and have some routine. That’s true whether your kids only has wooden toys or the newest tech.
I do think a lot of the social media criticism is blaming the tool not the perpetrator. The other two factors are the world is smaller now with our 24/7 news cycle so we chear about more tragedies not that they are necessarily more common than they were when we relied on print media.  The other thing is social media is always brought up when discussing a tragedy involving youth whereas the suicide of say a middle aged man will rarely mention if he spent every spare minute on Facebook or Twitter because that doesn’t sell (even if he did.)

Also  I feel like the internet is a better place for many people to find like minded friends than real life especially if you are isolated from your home community or there basically isn’t one. It’s quite common to be the only out gay youth in your town or school and for many that left them a target for attack and isolation however with the internet and social media it’s easy to find sympathetic friends.

TLDR- I think it’s part of the age old trend of media blaming things youth like (and many older people love too of course) on things going wrong whether that be Rock and roll, Liszt, movies, video games, mini skirts, make up or now Tik tok.


Chanbal said:


> One more?



You know I have never thought that the problems in their lives or the world in general were caused by H&M’s lack of due regard for themselves- how naive I am   
Hahaha imagine if Megz treated herself the way she treats her friends-  how do you ghost yourself? She’d constantly be ringing up scooby to seed stories about what a jealous, untrustworthy loser M is or stories about how Meghan told Meghan she’s very upset about how Meghan is treating Meghan.

Fight club Meghan’s head edition.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Show us the bump.
> View attachment 5393141
> 
> 
> 
> Ewwww.



Nothing says relatable like playing polo  
I genuinely wonder what kind of public image they are going for. One minute it’s all ‘ I wear ripped jeans like a normie’ then it’s ‘I’m a damaged man and I need help’ next it’s ‘I’m the carefree gentry look at my polo pony’ what a shambles


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Nothing says relatable like playing polo
> I genuinely wonder what kind of public image they are going for. One minute it’s all ‘ I wear ripped jeans like a normie’ then it’s ‘I’m a damaged man and I need help’ next it’s ‘*I’m the carefree gentry look at my polo pony*’ what a shambles
> [/QUOTE
> 
> _Never forget I play the sport of Kings!  _Could he be advising ‘or scouting for] QE/PC’s horse buyers on possible American deals ? Or did PC tell him to stay out of it ? Part of the Kentucky Derby are the auctions. Maybe he fancies himself to be a ‘horseman’.


----------



## Stansy

And once again Harry looks much happier in the company of his Polo buddies than in the company of his wife… just my personal observation of course


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww.




Or he's just playing polo because, ya know, he enjoys it. Plus, so all the other players are not raising money for whatever cause? The people who organized the tournament should be the ones being praised, no?


----------



## kemilia

youngster said:


> I'm older than you and I completed my education even before there were cell phones.  We only had one land line in my house growing up, in the kitchen.  My parents strictly adhered to the 9:00 o'clock rule and the vast majority of our friends and their parents observed this rule too.  You don't call people before 9 AM or after 9 PM.  The End.  Anybody calling before or after those hours, which was not often, one of the parents would answer and politely inform the caller that so-and-so kid wasn't available and would call back in the morning.  More likely, you'd see the person at school before you even had a chance to call back.  Phone numbers also had to be either memorized or written down somewhere and  weren't easily available.
> 
> So, we got a daily respite from interaction with classmates and friends. We weren't available 24/7. Sleep was never interrupted by phone or text. Phone in the kitchen meant all calls were casually public so whoever was hanging about in the kitchen could judge the vibe generated by the call.  That, along with no internet, meant no online or texting harassment. No stupid pictures or videos taken late at night and shared with the world.  The 2 boys who harassed me on/off around ages 10 - 12 didn't know where I lived or my phone number so it was annoying but not 24/7 horrible. Really, I look back and think I was lucky.
> 
> OK, sorry for the OT post but I wish more people knew how nice life could be when you aren't 24/7 available.


OMG, I think you could have lived on my block! Same rules--one phone in the kitchen and a 10 minute limit on calls, etc. All the moms decided that the kids could not go outside to play until 9 AM and I truly thought this was some sort of official rule/law. The mornings in the summer were so quiet until 9 and that was pretty nice. Sorry for the OT but we _were_ pretty lucky.


----------



## youngster

altigirl88 said:


> if we’re ever blessed with accidental children, I’ll keep these guidelines in mind. They sound pretty good and reasonable, lol



Haha!  Yes, they work, I can attest to it. My own kids lived under these rules but cell phones and texting didn't become common until they were young teens so they were spared a lot of what goes on now, some of which is the peer pressure to be connected 24/7.  I feel for parents of kids today. I think it is more complex to raise them.  ETA:  Earlier generations never had to deal with the internet and cell phones and all the ramifications of putting this technology in the hands of young children and, while I love the internet and cell phones because it does allow like minded people to get together in ways we never could have imagined (like tPF), it also creates the problem of allowing like minded _crazy_ people to get together in ways we never could have imagined either.  



kemilia said:


> All the moms decided that the kids could not go outside to play until 9 AM *and I truly thought this was some sort of official rule/law*. The mornings in the summer were so quiet until 9 and that was pretty nice



LOL!  That's adorable, I would have thought that too, 'cause Mom is always right (until you are about 12 or 13).


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> One more?



Don't you just want to smack her in the face?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> ETA:  Earlier generations never had to deal with the internet and cell phones and all the ramifications of putting this technology in the hands of young children and, *while I love the internet and cell phones because it does allow like minded people to get together in ways we never could have imagined (like tPF), it also creates the problem of allowing like minded crazy people to get together in ways we never could have imagined either.*



This!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Don't you just want to smack her in the face?



I can honestly say that never in my whole life have I had such a strong reaction to a random celeb (just as I never had a huge celeb crush. I did not shed a single tear about Take That breaking up ). I find her completely repulsive.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

_Meghan Markle lucrative deal with Spotify would have strings attached, notes media lawyer…

Mr Penman said that Spotify may also be able to terminate Meghan's contract if "people are not really interested in what she has to say"._









						Spotify to 'edit' Meghan Markle words in podcast to what makes them 'happy': expert
					

Spotify 'fingers' burnt because of past failures with collaborations




					www.geo.tv


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Mr Penman said that Spotify may also be able to terminate Meghan's contract if "people are not really interested in what she has to say"._



Well...


----------



## Chanbal

Isn't Marie Claire usually pro-Netfl*xes?  This 'led by the nose' association is catching on. 














						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle branded 'insignificant' by royal expert
					

The couple have come under fire once again




					www.marieclaire.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Fake news?
> View attachment 5393129


More kids, more child support.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> If true:
> 1. Do they have to give back that whatever award they were given for having only 2 kids?
> 2. If Invisibet completed their family, does this #3 mean their family is over-populated?
> 3. Does this alleged pregnancy give them the perfect excuse again to not go to the UK? "Oh, we would have gone to the jubilee but Methane was heavily pregnant for 9 months."


The phrase "heavily pregnant" grates on me  As opposed to someone being "lightly pregnant"?


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> More kids, more child support.
> 
> ETA, unless it's just more of her sick attempt at keeping up with the Cambridges.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> _Spotify may also be able to terminate Meghan's contract if "*people are not really interested in what she has to say".*_



You mean people aren't riveted by profound word salad utterances such as "creative activations"?  Who knew?


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> I do believe they've been holding the kids back as their last best bargaining chip, not out of privacy/security concerns.


I think this will simply backfire. The queen and Prince Charles have plenty of other grandchildren


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> The phrase "heavily pregnant" grates on me  As opposed to someone being "lightly pregnant"?


Maybe she only wanted to buy one size of moon bump. It's probably a sweet nod to elephants...

My office narc once had to write a letter on behalf of a TV presenter. She wanted to decline an invitation to a fairly active event. In the letter, he wrote that she was "with child". Our boss read the draft and explained that "with child" was rather archaic terminology. She suggested that he use the term "expecting". Everyone in the office tossed out alternative terms for "pregnant" just for fun. I contributed the extremely archaic "gravid" which caused Mr Office Narc to goggle at me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




How was that measly 1 million budget for clothes per year getting her anywhere? Poor Cinderella had to beg for handouts. Luckily, Kate can dress herself appropriately for a fracture of that money.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m not 100% convinced that Brooke Shields was the originator of that sentiment either.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



Haha, I love that they won’t even give her credit for formerly being part of Hollywood.


----------



## scarlet555

Heard Netflix dropped her pearl netflix series


----------



## kemilia

scarlet555 said:


> Heard Netflix dropped her pearl netflix series


"Dropped" like they dumped it, not doing it anymore or "dropped" like the cool kids say when an album comes out and it will be playing on Netfl**?

NM--it's been cancelled! Wowee! How are they gonna spin this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Meghan Markle-Created Animated Series ‘Pearl’ Gets An Undesirable Royal Flush In Netflix Cutbacks; Streamer Nixes Meghan & Prince Harry’s Archewell Productions Project
					

EXCLUSIVE: Even Netflix’s in-house members of the Royal Family are not immune to a wave of cutbacks going on as the streamer recalibrates after a precipitous stock drop incurred after a drop …




					deadline.com
				




Bye bye, Pearl!  

I like it that the article said "Markle has spent enough time in Hollywood as an actress to have heard the word “no” in the past."


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Meghan Markle-Created Animated Series ‘Pearl’ Gets An Undesirable Royal Flush In Netflix Cutbacks; Streamer Nixes Meghan & Prince Harry’s Archewell Productions Project
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Even Netflix’s in-house members of the Royal Family are not immune to a wave of cutbacks going on as the streamer recalibrates after a precipitous stock drop incurred after a drop …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bye bye, Pearl!
> 
> I like it that the article said "Markle has spent enough time in Hollywood as an actress to have heard the word “no” in the past."


I read that as a comment in support of her, i.e. it won't faze her, they've got the Invictus doc in the works, yada yada. I doubt that's the truth, there is likely growing panic in Montecito. None of their ventures are going well, so they would hardly be attractive to any other prospective partners.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I read that as a comment in support of her, i.e. it won't faze her, they've got the Invictus doc in the works, yada yada. I doubt that's the truth, there is likely growing panic in Montecito. None of their ventures are going well, so they would hardly be attractive to any other prospective partners.


I read it as just fact: the doors didn't open for her pre-Harry, and the doors are closing now.


----------



## Hermes Zen

youngster said:


> Haha!  Yes, they work, I can attest to it. My own kids lived under these rules but cell phones and texting didn't become common until they were young teens so they were spared a lot of what goes on now, some of which is the peer pressure to be connected 24/7.  I feel for parents of kids today. I think it is more complex to raise them.  ETA:  Earlier generations never had to deal with the internet and cell phones and all the ramifications of putting this technology in the hands of young children and, while I love the internet and cell phones because it does allow like minded people to get together in ways we never could have imagined (like tPF), it also creates the problem of allowing like minded _crazy_ people to get together in ways we never could have imagined either.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL!  That's adorable, I would have thought that too, 'cause Mom is always right (*until you are about 12 or 13*).


For me, Mom was always right until my 50's when she passed.  Now I'm always right.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she only wanted to buy one size of moon bump. It's probably a sweet nod to elephants...
> 
> My office narc once had to write a letter on behalf of a TV presenter. She wanted to decline an invitation to a fairly active event. In the letter, he wrote that she was "with child". Our boss read the draft and explained that "with child" was rather archaic terminology. She suggested that he use the term "expecting". Everyone in the office tossed out alternative terms for "pregnant" just for fun. I contributed the extremely archaic "gravid" which caused Mr Office Narc to goggle at me.



At least you didn't say 'bun in the oven' as a co-worker described her own predicament


----------



## bag-mania

I have to be the first to bring this to you. The Prince and the Duchess were at a Santa Barbara polo match last week. I don’t know which is funnier, his pose or his missing hair.












						Prince Harry Gets His Stretch On to Play Polo with Meghan Watching
					

The Duke of Sussex is quite the athletic type, which he proved Friday during a polo match in Santa Barbara ... with his princess looking on while he played.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## bag-mania

Geez, his hair.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> I have to be the first to bring this to you. The Prince and the Duchess were at a Santa Barbara polo match today. I don’t know which is funnier, his pose or his missing hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393591
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets His Stretch On to Play Polo with Meghan Watching
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is quite the athletic type, which he proved Friday during a polo match in Santa Barbara ... with his princess looking on while he played.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Seeing the difference between being under the protective umbrella of the BRF apparatus vs out on his own. I can’t say I paid much attention to pics of William or Harry playing polo in the past but I doubt anything this unflattering was published while Harry was still a working senior royal.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


>





If the Troublesome Two weren't such egotistical fools, their kids could have joined in the fun with their cousins and have a close relationship. Not sure why they think their kids are more precious and important than the rest of the Queen's great grandchildren. If it's safe enough for all the Cambridge kids to be there, then why not for Harry's when they are far below in the succession line. At this point, the Troublesome Two must know that they do not have the upper hand against the Queen and the BRF because nobody is giving in to their ridiculous demands, just so that they would act like decent human beings or show up for the Queen. 

Just look at Swedish Princess Madeleine. She married a commoner. Lives a fairly regular life with her husband and 3 kids, first in NYC then now in Florida. Shows up to represent the Swedish Royal Family whenever she's needed. Her kids have a relationship with their cousins. Is it that hard for Harry to do the same?


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Geez, his hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393594
> View attachment 5393595



Comment on the first picture...

Did the famous Ducka$s have way too much bronzer or self tanning lotion on her cheek?


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> Seeing the difference between being under the protective umbrella of the BRF apparatus vs out on his own. I can’t say I paid much attention to pics of William or Harry playing polo in the past but I doubt anything this unflattering was published while Harry was still a working senior royal.



Since these photos come from the notorious pap-for-hire company Backgrid, we know they were called for this photo shoot. Meghan must have paid them to take decent pictures of her and less than flattering ones of Harry. His photos, off of a horse anyway, are embarrassing.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I read it as just fact: the doors didn't open for her pre-Harry, and the doors are closing now.


I’m guessing Invictus was save them from total release for now. It’s in production and will probably get decent viewing numbers in spite of Hairless and TW. Being an International company the program will stream in countries where many potential viewers don’t have enough knowledge of, or interest in, the Harkles to be turned off by them. Viewers will tune in to see their country’s athletes and applaud their efforts.

But I bet the current situation of declining interest in the Toxic Two, will factor in to how the Documentary is skewed and marketed. Maybe Meghan will be a reduced to a walk on cameo, even if supposedly she’s a co producer. They can’t afford to pizz Netflix off with tantrums and demands. Seems checkbooks are slamming shut.


----------



## Allisonfaye

csshopper said:


> I’m guessing Invictus was save them from total release for now. It’s in production and will probably get decent viewing numbers in spite of Hairless and TW. Being an International company the program will stream in countries where many potential viewers don’t have enough knowledge of, or interest in, the Harkles to be turned off by them. Viewers will tune in to see their country’s athletes and applaud their efforts.
> 
> But I bet the current situation of declining interest in the Toxic Two, will factor in to how the Documentary is skewed and marketed. Maybe Meghan will be a reduced to a walk on cameo, even if supposedly she’s a co producer. They can’t afford to pizz Netflix off with tantrums and demands. Seems checkbooks are slamming shut.



As one could have predicted.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Geez, his hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393594
> View attachment 5393595


He is not aging well. Looks more like 48 than 38.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I have to be the first to bring this to you. The Prince and the Duchess were at a Santa Barbara polo match last week. I don’t know which is funnier, his pose or his missing hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393591
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets His Stretch On to Play Polo with Meghan Watching
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is quite the athletic type, which he proved Friday during a polo match in Santa Barbara ... with his princess looking on while he played.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com




How did these photos escape censorship? I wonder how DM is going to use them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder what the truth is -


----------



## Chanbal

Someone at Neflix may have realized that 'the bench' masterpiece is already enough torture… 











						Meghan Markle's Netflix series gets dumped amid wave of cutbacks
					

Netflix has dropped Meghan Markle's Pearl as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by a drop in subscribers. The show was supposed to be the couple's first animated series.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sophisticatted

It has become clear that H&TW cannot be used for “access”.  The leak of TW being served tea ALONE, except for four footman standing guard, and H’s meeting being extremely short, and the king and queen of the Netherlands making it well known in advance that the duo would not be receiving an audience or hospitality during Invictus, H&TW not being invited to Prince Charles’ recent charity gala in NYC.  No access = no use for Netflix.  

The Queen, she walks softly and carries Philip’s big stick.  Checkmate!


----------



## MiniMabel

Never a dull moment on this thread! 

Can't say the same for the Harkles' "Appreciation Thread"!


----------



## Sophisticatted

And the polo stuff is the duo’s way of reminding the world that H was/is part of a rarefied social circle.  The embarrassing pics are her way of getting revenge (making him look awful).


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder what the truth is -



Presumably from a stan: "Amazon, Apple TV, Disney, and other studios are willing to bid on the series". I wouldn't hold your breath.


----------



## csshopper

Good Grief, his hypocrisy extends to his hair!  What a Bozo, he too had a ring of red hair. At Christmas the mat on Haz's head looked like a comb would get stuck in it and now we see what was underneath that hairpiece.

He who once took a mean spirited jab at his brother for his hair loss is now the subject of derision, not so much for the hair loss as for the continuing examples of him trying to dodge truths:  He is a bald headed bald faced liar.

Do they get a family discount on hairpieces or are they hoping for a product endorsement deal?


----------



## Chanbal

Wishing our Aussie friends all the best! 
If the Nefl*xes are looking for a b-day gift for Big Will, this pic may give them ideas.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> The phrase "heavily pregnant" grates on me  As opposed to someone being "lightly pregnant"?


She was too "heavily pregnant" (7ms) to make it to Prince Philips funeral, but not too "heavily pregnant" at 7 months to fly to the US from the UK for a celebrity baby shower


----------



## Chanbal

To discover what TW carries in her purse move the cursor to about 14:55.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> "Dropped" like they dumped it, not doing it anymore or "dropped" like the cool kids say when an album comes out and it will be playing on Netfl**?
> 
> NM--it's been cancelled! Wowee! How are they gonna spin this?



I have worked on launching two...formats to be vague and I can't imagine sinking all that time and money into something that is then deemed too sh*tty to launch. What confuses me slightly, though: lots of work went into the pitches already. When they sold, we went to work precisely as lined out in said pitches with only minor touch ups. Seems Netflix didn't fully do their homework either.


----------



## rose60610

Why do I get the feeling they're eventually going to appear on "Dancing with the Stars"?  If you've already humiliated yourself imitating a squirrel eating chips, why not dance?  Maybe Archie and Lilibet will be forced to be child actors. Privacy, you know.


----------



## Allisonfaye

I get the feeling that if they aren't ranking in big bucks banking on his name anymore, she will get a divorce. Then would anyone be surprised if she starting crying abuse?


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> I think this will simply backfire. The queen and Prince Charles have plenty of other grandchildren


Readable a story today .. Zara is being mooted to do some royal duties , no mention of what 
there’s 11 senior royals, the two Kents and two Gloucesters are older, basically W and K, Edward and Sophie are the only ones of the 11 blow 70 years old


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have worked on launching two...formats to be vague and I can't imagine sinking all that time and money into something that is then deemed too sh*tty to launch. What confuses me slightly, though: lots of work went into the pitches already. When they sold, we went to work precisely as lined out in said pitches with only minor touch ups. Seems Netflix didn't fully do their homework either.



Seems there is _something_ about royals, especially British Royals, that makes non-British people reluctant to challenge them. It’s almost like a star-struck effect. Imo this is what happened with H&M. Hazz was well aware of that effect and used it to make those too-good-to-be- deals. MM is definitely aware of it. The thing is - the glow only lasts as long as one is actually part of the BRF. Losing titles, patronages, etc. removes the glow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

article from 2015:










						Harry's the polo Prince with all the right moves
					

Despite his diligent stretching, kicking and twisting, Harry still came down with a bad back while playing on the first day of the charity event at Cowdray Park in West Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looking for a bump


----------



## needlv

…ouch


----------



## CarryOn2020

7??
This beauty is 7? How did that happen?













						Princess Charlotte's seventh birthday marked with photos
					

They have been taken by the Duchess of Cambridge and released ahead of Charlotte's seventh birthday.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> …ouch




Seems like more people are speaking up.  Guessing freebie rides on EJ’s plane are over


----------



## altigirl88

papertiger said:


> At least you didn't say 'bun in the oven' as a co-worker described her own predicament



I detest “bump”


----------



## altigirl88

Allisonfaye said:


> I get the feeling that if they aren't ranking in big bucks banking on his name anymore, she will get a divorce. Then would anyone be surprised if she starting crying abuse?



My sister has said, and I agree, that he has now put all of his substance abuse, mental health experiences, anger issues, etc. out there, and it’s now recorded. People have seen it, and she has plenty of his own testimony regarding his behavior to support allegations of mistreatment


----------



## bag-mania

I take a certain pleasure in knowing that had they buckled down and actually worked on their Pearl animated series back when they originally signed with Netflix, they would have had a product already produced and paid for to show. Their laziness, procrastination, and ineptitude made the constantly “in development” show an easy cut to make for Netflix.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Geez, his hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393594
> View attachment 5393595


No one is looking at Methane.


----------



## charlottawill

Allisonfaye said:


> I get the feeling that if they aren't ranking in big bucks banking on his name anymore, she will get a divorce. Then would anyone be surprised if she starting crying abuse?


I sure hope not. More likely she's the abuser, emotionally. And we don't need another Depp/Heard trial.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> …ouch




He's not wrong.


----------



## charlottawill

altigirl88 said:


> My sister has said, and I agree, that he has now put all of his substance abuse, mental health experiences, anger issues, etc. out there, and it’s now recorded. People have seen it, and she has plenty of his own testimony regarding his behavior to support allegations of mistreatment


Eh, I don't know, my gut tells me if anyone is an abuser it's her. Because of his many issues and being a dim bulb to begin with he was an easy target for a slick manipulator like her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What if they both are ?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Eh, I don't know, my gut tells me if anyone is an abuser it's her. Because of his many issues and being a dim bulb to begin with he was an easy target for a slick manipulator like her.


The trial I scheduled for 5-6 weeks, and she has not yet been on the stand 
my popcorn is ready


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking for a bump




Love Remi   
She really thinks she has fab legs but they are thin and bony to me. In fairness, one of her role models, Amal Clooney, is the same.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The trial I scheduled for 5-6 weeks, and she has not yet been on the stand
> my popcorn is ready


Should be another good week for watching train wrecks.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's not wrong.


"...ham actor known for cheesy support roles..."  

Ouch. But like they say, the truth hurts


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I hope TW will be green with envy when she reads this! Maybe she will finally realize that one can look great at any age when wearing well-fitting clothes.


----------



## 1LV

altigirl88 said:


> My sister has said, and I agree, that he has now put all of his substance abuse, mental health experiences, anger issues, etc. out there, and it’s now recorded. People have seen it, and she has plenty of his own testimony regarding his behavior to support allegations of mistreatment


As well as reason for only supervised visitation with the kids a few hours each month.


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> Isn't Marie Claire usually pro-Netfl*xes?  This 'led by the nose' association is catching on.
> View attachment 5393401
> 
> 
> View attachment 5393399
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle branded 'insignificant' by royal expert
> 
> 
> The couple have come under fire once again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.co.uk


“_Not the brightest in the world, but…”_

Hilarious.  It’s common knowledge and people aren’t afraid to say so!


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I hope TW will be green with envy when she reads this! Maybe she will finally realize that one can look great at any age when wearing well-fitting clothes.



Notice how many replies there are to that? Camilla is still controversial, but the Queen has spoken.


----------



## gracekelly

I'm surprised that picture of A&L didn't pop up at polo.  The paps were obviously called and she wore enough makeup to sink a camera.  They were trying to counteract the Charlotte birthday picture.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Notice how many replies there are to that? Camilla is still controversial, but the Queen has spoken.


They are insignificant.  As insignificant as the 100's of titled folks without thrones and/or countries floating around NY, London and the continent.  Their only significance exists within their own groups.  Harry is quickly turning into a prince without a country.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looking for a bump



It's all about her legs because she knows that rest of her figure isn't great.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> I hope TW will be green with envy when she reads this! Maybe she will finally realize that one can look great at any age when wearing well-fitting clothes.



Lots of  photo retouching, but she looks really great here.


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #2
					

I told you when the ginger haired one signed up to be the ambassador for this company, the whole thing would go up in flames. The company, ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

It made Page Six


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> It made Page Six



“Kiddie cartoon”?  Not exactly how it was originally being touted.

ETA Remember when she supposedly woke him up crying into her pillow??  Wonder if he’s crying into his now.


----------



## Norm.Core

Chanbal said:


> It made Page Six



Whoopsie! Pearl turned into Pfft.


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> Love Remi
> She really thinks she has fab legs but they are thin and bony to me. In fairness, one of her role models, Amal Clooney, is the same.



Actually, I think she looks nice here; she has good legs and her hair is combed  (scurries away 
i don’t think the train wreck of their marriage and choices is all her fault. A lot of blame can be dumped on H


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is the blue shirt guy Markus?  Who is the blonde?  Photos are interesting. 









						Prince Harry Gets His Stretch On to Play Polo with Meghan Watching
					

The Duke of Sussex is quite the athletic type, which he proved Friday during a polo match in Santa Barbara ... with his princess looking on while he played.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I have to be the first to bring this to you. The Prince and the Duchess were at a Santa Barbara polo match last week. I don’t know which is funnier, his pose or his missing hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393591
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Gets His Stretch On to Play Polo with Meghan Watching
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is quite the athletic type, which he proved Friday during a polo match in Santa Barbara ... with his princess looking on while he played.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Ummmm…. He’s actually doing one of his very serious and scientifically proven mental health support poses here as recommended by his California therapist team. This is the one you’re supposed to do right before you get the bill…



bag-mania said:


> Geez, his hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393594
> View attachment 5393595


Is she trying to get a risky business remake going? 

I’m trying to work out whether this place has a dress code as they all look dressed for different things. 

It’s very ‘I thought this was sophisticated in 2008’ from her. 


gracekelly said:


> I'm surprised that picture of A&L didn't pop up at polo.  The paps were obviously called and she wore enough makeup to sink a camera.  They were trying to counteract the Charlotte birthday picture.


The children aren’t allowed to come to serious events or adult events or sport events or charity events or fun events or….
It is extremely weird. Even the ‘stiff’ and emotionally stunted British spend more time with their own children than this. I’m still hoping the kids aren’t real.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> she wore enough makeup to sink a camera.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Cannot look at polo photos of Hazz without recalling this - his animal abuse that was covered up.  Let’s hope Cali or this private club has laws against spurs.  Btw, is this club free? Are the ponies free? Or is the ‘poor me’ another lie?  Club members should pick up their phones and have a ‘quiet word’.


----------



## Chanbal

This has not been a good week for TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, he was a TBA - interesting





__





						Roster - Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club
					





					sbpolo.com


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> Actually, I think she looks nice here; she has good legs and her hair is combed  (scurries away
> i don’t think the train wreck of their marriage and choices is all her fault. A lot of blame can be dumped on H


I think we can agree that it was a joint effort and they egged each other on to do despicable things which they might not have done on their own.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Cannot look at polo photos of Hazz without recalling this - his animal abuse that was covered up.  Let’s hope Cali or this private club has laws against spurs.  Btw, is this club free? Are the ponies free? Or is the ‘poor me’ another lie?  Club members should pick up their phones and have a ‘quiet word’.




Polo is an expensive sport as you would imagine. For a celebrity guest like Harry we can assume he was riding horses borrowed from members of the club. We know Harry’s polo ponies were left behind in England, abandoned like so many other parts of his former life.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Someone at Neflix may have realized that 'the bench' masterpiece is already enough torture…
> View attachment 5393673
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Netflix series gets dumped amid wave of cutbacks
> 
> 
> Netflix has dropped Meghan Markle's Pearl as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by a drop in subscribers. The show was supposed to be the couple's first animated series.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Pearl was "believed to be about her own childhood"? I thought it was bad when it was said TW told artists to base Pearl on her childhood photos. But base the storylines on her childhood? Wouldn't that undermine her story of how deprived she was eating cheap salad? (Still feeling sore about that - I liked Sizzler salad!)


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he was a TBA - interesting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roster - Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sbpolo.com


Was it really a charity event? I'm still waiting for him to start honouring his charity pledge from his last polo match


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Was it really a charity event? I'm still waiting for him to start honouring his charity pledge from his last polo match



Guessing he only does this if it is freeeeee. I’m not knowledgeable of polo and how clubs handle the ponies, so maybe loaning ponies is not done. Certainly, the callous disregard for a pony applies to how someone handles people imo. The club’s calendar does not list today as a charity event, but that calendar could be wrong. Maybe it was a practice. Personally, I would never loan Hazz one of my ponies or any of my equipment. From what I have read, his sense of entitlement means he doesn’t really care if the animal is hurt or the equipment is broken.

ETA: unless he knows the blonde woman really well, hugging her when he is sweaty is really gross imo.


----------



## Chanbal

NS on the Harkles:

Allegedly, the Netfl*x documentary will show the recent return of the Netfl*xes to the UK. Thoughts, interviews, in which the visit to the grandmother will be featured… information that has not been disclosed during Hoda's interview. It looks like the <15min visit to QE will provide many hours of entertainment.  


Allegedly, Hazz wouldn't mind to sit down with Piers Morgan for an interview, so he could address some of the comments going around. However, his team is trying to dissuade him!


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> The children aren’t allowed to come to serious events or adult events or sport events or charity events or fun events or….
> It is extremely weird. Even the ‘stiff’ and emotionally stunted British spend more time with their own children than this. I’m still hoping the kids aren’t real.


It is odd that the children haven't been seen in public at all. I recall reading that other parents were annoyed that the Harkle's presence was causing problems at Archie's preschool drop-off and pickup, so people have seen him. Are H&M really that paranoid about the children's safety that they don't bring them out in public? Didn't CA pass a law, thanks to the efforts of Jennifer Garner and Jessica Alba, that required paps to stay a certain distance away from celeb kids? The mystery continues....


----------



## Chanbal

The whole US is getting there, eventually!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> It is odd that the children haven't been seen in public at all. I recall reading that other parents were annoyed that the Harkle's presence was causing problems at Archie's preschool drop-off and pickup, so people have seen him. Are H&M really that paranoid about the children's safety that they don't bring them out in public? Didn't CA pass a law, thanks to the efforts of Jennifer Garner and Jessica Alba, that required paps to stay a certain distance away from celeb kids? The mystery continues....


I don’t believe this it sounds like another Harkle story. Many famous people have shown up at their children‘s schools or sporting events and no one bothers them.  If madam is going to insist on special treatment in the school drop off lane then yes, she is bringing attention to herself and the other parents could be annoyed. Rampant self importance where none is required.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this the beginning of the end?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I think we can agree that it was a joint effort and they egged each other on to do despicable things which they might not have done on their own.



The difference: he would not have done them because they never crossed his mind, she would not have done them because she didn't have the chance prior to snagging Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_More windows breaking:_

*William and Kate 'want to move into refurbished grace and favour Adelaide Cottage' which is just 10 minutes away from the Queen at Windsor*

*The Cambridges are eyeing up a move to Adelaide Cottage in Windsor*
*The cottage was recently renovated and is close to the Queen's residence *
*Will and Kate currently split time between Anmer Hall and Kensington Palace*
*But now they are said to be on the hunt for a permanent family home *
*It comes as their daughter Charlotte celebrates her seventh birthday today*









						Duke and Duchess of Cambridge want to move just 10 minutes from Queen
					

Adelaide Cottage (pictured) is said to be the pair's first choice as it has recently been refurbished and would be well-suited to a family of five aiming to move sooner rather than later.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I don’t believe this it sounds like another Harkle story. Many famous people have shown up at their children‘s schools or sporting events and no one bothers them.  If madam is going to insist on special treatment in the school drop off lane then yes, she is bringing attention to herself and the other parents could be annoyed. Rampant self importance where none is required.



They were not bothered. Other parents were suddenly forced to park a block away and walk their kids which bothered them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Is this the beginning of the end?




One can only hope.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _More windows breaking:_
> 
> *William and Kate 'want to move into refurbished grace and favour Adelaide Cottage' which is just 10 minutes away from the Queen at Windsor*
> 
> *The Cambridges are eyeing up a move to Adelaide Cottage in Windsor*
> *The cottage was recently renovated and is close to the Queen's residence *
> *Will and Kate currently split time between Anmer Hall and Kensington Palace*
> *But now they are said to be on the hunt for a permanent family home *
> *It comes as their daughter Charlotte celebrates her seventh birthday today*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Cambridge want to move just 10 minutes from Queen
> 
> 
> Adelaide Cottage (pictured) is said to be the pair's first choice as it has recently been refurbished and would be well-suited to a family of five aiming to move sooner rather than later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I don't know. It sounds really small.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. It sounds really small.



Also it seems to have some gossip connected to it.  Seems the Queen gave it to H&M as a wedding present, but they did not like the lack of — privacy — so they took Frogmore.  I don’t really understand all the details and don’t want to take the time to research it - it is one more example of how ungrateful these two were from day 1.









						Harry and Meghan Were Forced to Move Out of Their Home Because of Intrusive Pics
					

The couple had quietly moved in to the house last year.




					www.marieclaire.com
				




ETA: some more info:









						What Is Adelaide Cottage? Everything You Need to Know About Harry and Meghan's New Home
					

The Windsor estate is fit for royalty.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



Adelaide Cottage is a Grade II listed property, which means it has special architectural or historic interest, and is considered to be of national importance. Therefore, it cannot be demolished and is protected by law.






MATRIX / MEDIAPUNCH
However, in 2015, the 19th-century home underwent renovation, according to multiple outlets. One of its most lavish rooms is the master bedroom, which boasts a coved ceiling with gilded dolphins and rope ornament from the yacht Royal George.

According to The Daily Mail, the home also has a marble Graeco-Egyptian fireplace, and seven gated entrances and exits to Windsor Castle so that "the newlyweds could come and go without worrying about being photographed." Official photos have not been released.


----------



## Icyjade

880 said:


> Actually, I think she looks nice here; she has good legs and her hair is combed  (scurries away
> i don’t think the train wreck of their marriage and choices is all her fault. A lot of blame can be dumped on H



N flashing her bra and legs. Ugh. No class.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> Since these photos come from the notorious pap-for-hire company Backgrid, we know they were called for this photo shoot. Meghan must have paid them to take decent pictures of her and less than flattering ones of Harry. His photos, off of a horse anyway, are embarrassing.
> 
> View attachment 5393620



A REAL duchess would never wear such a short dress in public, even if it's a private event.....she really has NO clue!


----------



## needlv

All polo photos by backgrid so she paid the paps to turn up and she gets a cut of profits from publishing.

all to distract from pearl news and charlottes birthday.  Pathetic.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Pearl was "believed to be about her own childhood"? I thought it was bad when it was said TW told artists to base Pearl on her childhood photos. But base the storylines on her childhood? Wouldn't that undermine her story of how deprived she was eating cheap salad? (Still feeling sore about that - I liked Sizzler salad!)



It would have been her version of her childhood. 

Nothing wrong with that, we all have our perspectives on our childhoods, except passing it off as the factual truth and then creating morality tales from it would have been tiresome for us and probably nauseating for her family.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Is this the beginning of the end?




Only in our dreams, unfortunately I think we'll have plenty more to write about in the future.


----------



## csshopper

Just read on the DM that all the Kardashian and Jenner families were invited to the Met Gala.

Haven't seen any mention of the Harkles, let alone the usual Sunshine Sucks trail of breadcrumb "hints" they usually sprinkle in the press hinting they "might attend" an important function, even though it's obvious they were never invited in the first place. MAYBE, someone has finally figured out that strategy is a bust. What next?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh, so apparently MA was with them at the polo tournament?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Looks like they were not invited to the White House correspondents dinner either


----------



## Allisonfaye

papertiger said:


> It would have been her version of her childhood.
> 
> Nothing wrong with that, we all have our perspectives on our childhoods, except passing it off as the factual truth and then creating morality tales from it would have been tiresome for us and probably nauseating for her family.



It think, in general, people have had enough of the woke preaching to them.


----------



## Aimee3

duna said:


> A REAL duchess would never wear such a short dress in public, even if it's a private event.....she really has NO clue!


Is it a dress???  I thought it was a pair of shorts.


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> A REAL duchess would never wear such a short dress in public, even if it's a private event.....she really has NO clue!





Aimee3 said:


> Is it a dress???  I thought it was a pair of shorts.


Hello claims that she was "rocking" summer shorts with the Invictus Valentino white blazer. And that the event was not for charity but the Harry East Memorial Tournament.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It is odd that the children haven't been seen in public at all. I recall reading that other parents were annoyed that the Harkle's presence was causing problems at Archie's preschool drop-off and pickup, so people have seen him. Are H&M really that paranoid about the children's safety that they don't bring them out in public? Didn't CA pass a law, thanks to the efforts of Jennifer Garner and Jessica Alba, that required paps to stay a certain distance away from celeb kids? The mystery continues....



We won’t see much of the kids, even in photos. The last thing narcissists want is competition for attention from someone younger and cuter than they are, even if it is their own children.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were not invited to the White House correspondents dinner either


It's pretty bad when you don't get invited to two high profile events but Pete Davidson does.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Hello claims that she was "rocking" summer shorts with the Invictus Valentino white blazer. And that the event was not for charity but the Harry East Memorial Tournament.


It was not a hot day, as evidenced by the dress of those around her. She just wanted to show off her great legs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> We won’t see much of the kids, even in photos. The last thing narcissists want is competition for attention from someone younger and cuter than they are, even if it is their own children.



The thing with those kids is: I can't blame any parent for wanting to keep their small children out of the limelight (and I truly admire how the Cambridges walk the line because obviously hiding their children won't fly with the public). But like everything with these too, it seems so insincere and dramatic. I can somewhat believe traumatized Harry really wanting to shield them even if it is completely paranoid, but Raptor? She has ulterior motives for sure, be it financial benefits (though apparently nobody wanted to pay premium for that Vogue newborn spread), as you said hogging the attention or just in her usual bratty manner gaining satisfaction from giving everyone the middlefinger.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Hello claims that she was "rocking" summer shorts with the Invictus Valentino white blazer. And that the event was not for charity but the Harry East Memorial Tournament.



And it didn't even look good. Do y'all know Andreea Ali, Romanian make-up artist based in Paris? She recently wore a shorts and blazer combo in the brightest grassy green and it looked stunning, so fresh and fashionable and fun. She just gave birth too and still manages to find clothes that fit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm interested.




Someone suggested "Not the crown" as a title


----------



## A1aGypsy

Are there any shots of her outfit from the front?


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower' analysis seems accurate.   


_And royal author Tom Bower told MailOnline today that the Duke and Duchess could now come under more pressure to produce further original content related to the Royal Family in an effort to rebuild Netflix's subscriber numbers, with the firm already predicting that it will lose another two million accounts between now and June.

He said: 'Brand Markle is struggling after Netflix's decision. *The celebrity Duchess has shown limited talent for original entertainment*. Her children's book On the Bench flopped and her voiceover for a Disney film was mocked.

'It was hard to imagine what she offered Netflix in the Pearl film. All she can offer is her 'fame' but her critics would say it's her notoriety. Now, *to meet her financial needs, she'll be under pressure from Netflix to deliver more original damnation of the Royal Family*. 

'*Victimhood is still lucrative but it's a short term fix* for her and Harry. They'll both run out of steam and credibility soon and further cancellations by Netflix and others will follow.'_









						Could Netflix now put more pressure Prince Harry and Meghan Markle?
					

Meghan had teamed up with Sir Elton John's husband David Furnish to create the show, titled Pearl, about a '12-year-old heroine who finds inspiration in influential women from history'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And it didn't even look good. Do y'all know Andreea Ali, Romanian make-up artist based in Paris? She recently wore a shorts and blazer combo in the brightest grassy green and it looked stunning, so fresh and fashionable and fun. She just gave birth too and still manages to find clothes that fit.


I had to check it out. It is a pretty shade of green. Her blazer is as baggy as MM's, but the difference is she looks pulled together. MM doesn't seem to accomplish this very often.


----------



## Chanbal

Richard is right. I wonder if the photos were ordered by TW.


----------



## marietouchet

A1aGypsy said:


> Are there any shots of her outfit from the front?


I think the skort/short outfit is emblematic of why MM does not fit in the BRF
At polo matches/horse shows, the BRF ladies wear mid calf loose dresses eg Kate - do they can pick up their child without bad snaps, wear equestrian wear - Zara at horse trials- since they compete, or are in dress coat/feathered hat - Zara at Cheltenham- if there as a visiting dignitary, or tweed - QEII - if undercover merely as one of the guests
Shorts/skort are like Diana's black evening dress - wear at your own peril of the paps having a field day


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Richard is right. I wonder if the photos were ordered by TW.




That's what many are thinking:


----------



## bag-mania

What does it mean that Markus Anderson was there keeping Meghan company while Harry played polo? Is he still working behind the scenes?









						Prince Harry beams after playing polo with close friend Nacho Figueras
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was joined by Nacho Figueras' wife Delphine and Markus Anderson as they watched Prince Harry play polo in California over the weekend.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I had to check it out. It is a pretty shade of green. Her blazer is as baggy as MM's, but the difference is she looks pulled together. MM doesn't seem to accomplish this very often.



She always looks so effortlessly chic. I on the other hand live in yoga pants and plan my outfit for a meeting I have 10 days in advance because I forgot how smart dressing works.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> I think the skort/short outfit is emblematic of why MM does not fit in the BRF
> At polo matches/horse shows, the BRF ladies wear mid calf loose dresses eg Kate - do they can pick up their child without bad snaps, wear equestrian wear - Zara at horse trials- since they compete, or are in dress coat/feathered hat - Zara at Cheltenham- if there as a visiting dignitary, or tweed - QEII - if undercover merely as one of the guests
> Shorts/skort are like Diana's black evening dress - wear at your own peril of the paps having a field day


The wife of H's polo buddy was pretty sloppily dressed too, and I believe she's a former model. Santa Barbara dress standards for polo matches may be more relaxed than other areas. This article from People in 2019 shows MM and Kate's very different polo styles:



> https://people.com/royals/meghan-ma...-out-polo-match-photos/?slide=7148111#7148111


----------



## duna

Aimee3 said:


> Is it a dress???  I thought it was a pair of shorts.



Dress or shorts it makes no difference: it's too short, period.


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> The wife of H's polo buddy was pretty sloppily dressed too, and I believe she's a former model. Santa Barbara dress standards for polo matches may be more relaxed than other areas. This article from People in 2019 shows MM and Kate's very different polo styles:



The wife of H's polo buddy isn't a duchess member of the BRF. The problem with TW is that she wants all the royal perks without the duties. The usual thing of wanting her cake and eating it.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And it didn't even look good. Do y'all know Andreea Ali, Romanian make-up artist based in Paris? She recently wore a shorts and blazer combo in the brightest grassy green and it looked stunning, so fresh and fashionable and fun. She just gave birth too and still manages to find clothes that fit.


I watched the video and had to subscribe!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> What does it mean that Markus Anderson was there keeping Meghan company while Harry played polo? Is he still working behind the scenes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry beams after playing polo with close friend Nacho Figueras
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was joined by Nacho Figueras' wife Delphine and Markus Anderson as they watched Prince Harry play polo in California over the weekend.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wonder if the rumors about MA living in the Montecito compound and that he was the one at the dinner with Eugenie are true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I watched the video and had to subscribe!



I love her, she has such a sweet personality. If you're on Instagram, she posts tons of fabulous Paris vlogs on there as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the rumors about MA living in the Montecito compound and that he was the one at the dinner with Eugenie are true.



Does he not work anymore?


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Looks like they were not invited to the White House correspondents dinner either


They have no name value. The fact that Kim, Pete and Martha Stewart were invited shoes this. They aren’t on the radar.

I don’t  think that there was any doubt that she called the paps. Harry must have been just fine with it too and the reason why you didn’t see the children.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I also think she dragged out the white blazer from a previous trip as well as the Chanel ballet flats hoping to get some credit for reusing wardrobe items


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The wife of H's polo buddy was pretty sloppily dressed too, and I believe she's a former model. Santa Barbara dress standards for polo matches may be more relaxed than other areas. This article from People in 2019 shows MM and Kate's very different polo styles:


She looked as if she was helping with the horses. She grew up on a horse ranch


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> Isn't Marie Claire usually pro-Netfl*xes?  This 'led by the nose' association is catching on.
> View attachment 5393401
> 
> 
> View attachment 5393399
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle branded 'insignificant' by royal expert
> 
> 
> The couple have come under fire once again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.co.uk



…”whipped … you know the expression? …  I think Harry is whipped like no person I’ve ever seen.”


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> That's what many are thinking:



Pretty much shows that there is zero respect for Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Katel said:


> …”whipped … you know the expression? …  I think Harry is whipped like no person I’ve ever seen.”



Don should  stick to commenting on US policy and leave these two clowns out of it. They do plenty enough damage to themselves on their own.


----------



## MiniMabel

gracekelly said:


> Don should  stick to commenting on US policy and leave these two clowns out of it. They do plenty enough damage to themselves on their own.



Donald should also leave himself out of it!


----------



## rose60610

If M&H lose scads of $$ from the Netflix deal, they can become regulars at Sizzler and hang with all the other "poor people". I hope Meghan didn't lose her punch card. Is the salad bar all you can eat? Word salad doesn't count.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

More photos, more comments, happy Monday


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, it was all for Nflix


----------



## rose60610

Nothing is ever Meghan's fault, so I'm waiting for her to blame the BRF, racism, or something else for cancelling Pearl. You know, maybe "they just can't handle" a story about a strong and determined underprivileged woman who came from nothing, never had ANY  breaks, and ended up marrying a prince. Who she had to SAVE!


----------



## CarryOn2020

MA does not look happy or is that his beer face?


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> MA does not look happy or is that his beer face?
> 
> *"I guess the hat did make an appearance"*




Meghan likes to wear hats on HER terms, not when asked to do so out of respect for The Queen. She can't be bothered with respect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Preach, Tourre, preach


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Nothing is ever Meghan's fault, so I'm waiting for her to blame the BRF, racism, or something else for cancelling Pearl. You know, maybe "they just can't handle" a story about a strong and determined underprivileged woman who came from nothing, never had ANY  breaks, and ended up marrying a prince. Who she had to SAVE!



I saw a comment quoted on Twitter where one of the sugars with foam at the mouth declared that Raptor wouldn't "let Charles get away with this". I personally would be embarrassed by a fan base that stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> MA does not look happy or is that his beer face?




So she wore black shorts, a blue striped shirt and a white blazer. Just...why. Was nothing else clean?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, when did he realize this?  Many of us figured it out around page 2000(?) and cancelled the service


_DAN WOOTTON: Breaking the bank to sign the King and Queen of Woke Harry and Meghan is the biggest mistake in Netflix history – viewers have zero interest in paying to hear the Sussexes preach_









						DAN WOOTTON: Signing Harry and Meghan was Netflix's biggest mistake
					

DAN WOOTTON: I won't be surprised if Harry and Meghan are soon faced with a stark choice: Provide us with a juicy show about your lives and the Royal Family or we won't renew your deal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she wore black shorts, a blue striped shirt and a white blazer. Just...why. Was nothing else clean?



Wait, don’t forget her Chanel flats. Guessing she had her usual jewelry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think that there was any doubt that she called the paps. Harry must have been just fine with it too and the reason why you didn’t see the children.


Excellent point.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she wore black shorts, a blue striped shirt and a white blazer. Just...why. Was nothing else clean?


Didn't she wear that shirt to Wimbledon?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMFG. What does that even mean.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Mental Health Apps Like BetterHelp Are a Privacy Nightmare, Mozilla Says
					

New data from Mozilla indicates that some common mental health apps have concerning user data practices.




					gizmodo.com
				




I don’t know about Harry’s company, but betterhelp seems really similar, and I’ve read a lot of concerns about how people’s mental health data is being collected in mined for profit


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she wore black shorts, a blue striped shirt and a white blazer. Just...why. Was nothing else clean?



Her ensemble looks like something from Ralph Lauren. I think she took the Polo part too literally.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she wore black shorts, a blue striped shirt and a white blazer. Just...why. Was nothing else clean?


Maybe this is her sporting events outfit? She wore a striped shirt with sleeves rolled up when she sat with Kate in the royal box at Wimbledon several years ago. That shirt was very similar to this one at the polo match which she also wore with sleeves rolled up. She also brought what looks like this same hat to Wimbledon and sat there clutching it the whole time after she was told no one was allowed to wear a hat in the royal box.








						Breaking Down Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle’s Wimbledon Outing
					

Also on this week’s In the Limelight: Thomas Markle has more to say, and analyzing Prince Louis’s christening portraits.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Maybe this is her sporting events outfit? She wore a striped shirt with sleeves rolled up when she sat with Kate in the royal box at Wimbledon several years ago. That shirt was very similar to this one at the polo match which she also wore with sleeves rolled up. She also brought what looks like this same hat to Wimbledon and sat there clutching it the whole time after she was told no one was allowed to wear a hat in the royal box.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breaking Down Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle’s Wimbledon Outing
> 
> 
> Also on this week’s In the Limelight: Thomas Markle has more to say, and analyzing Prince Louis’s christening portraits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



I think she went on RalphLauren.com and input "sports" into their "find your style" tool. Not kidding, check it out.


----------



## Chanbal

Taking a 5 min break, and…


----------



## Chanbal

It's official!  











						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle make it to ‘Most Annoying Celebs of 2022’ list
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have managed to land themselves on the Most Annoying Celebs of 2022 list after a whirlwind year of many controversies, reported The Cheat Sheet. According to a Ranker...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. What does that even mean.




It's a load of old tosh.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Her ensemble looks like something from Ralph Lauren. I think she took the Polo part too literally.


If she was doing a full on RL, she would have been wearing a long flowy dress and a pretty straw wide brimmed hat and espadrilles.  Too classy for her.  Even Vivian got it right, and she came from the other side of the tracks.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. What does that even mean.



They seem to think that Harry lives vicariously through Meghan. I think they got that backwards since she uses his title as often as she can and the perks that go with it.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> Don should  stick to commenting on US policy and leave these two clowns out of it.



Actually I think we are all better off if he sticks to H & M.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's official!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle make it to ‘Most Annoying Celebs of 2022’ list
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have managed to land themselves on the Most Annoying Celebs of 2022 list after a whirlwind year of many controversies, reported The Cheat Sheet. According to a Ranker...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk




We are only 4 months into the year.  What will they do to upstage QE’s jubilee?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> We are only 4 months into the year.  What will they do to upstage QE’s jubilee?



Take the kids out for a walk? They need to bring out the big guns for this one.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One can only hope.


I wonder if its starting to sink in that she was basically almost a nobody before she nailed Harry....and she's not showing anything to anyone to make her worthy of adulation now


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Take the kids out for a walk? They need to bring out the big guns for this one.


Doesn't Invisibet's birthday coincide with the Jubilee? Maybe they'll finally make their People cover debut.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Doesn't Invisibet's birthday coincide with the Jubilee? Maybe they'll finally make their People cover debut.


You could be right, the "gift" to the Queen? They are nasty enough to do it and I have come to the conclusion are so shameless they really don't care about their behavior as long as they are in the news.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> We are only 4 months into the year.  What will they do to upstage QE’s jubilee?


Put out a sex tape.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Put out a sex tape.


For the love of God, don't give her any ideas!


----------



## charlottawill

I wonder if she's watching and weeping? Just saw her bestie Serena. 



> https://www.vogue.com/article/watch-met-gala-live-stream-2022


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if its starting to sink in that she was basically almost a nobody before she nailed Harry....and she's not showing anything to anyone to make her worthy of adulation now



Looks like Markus has lost his glow as well  




gracekelly said:


> Put out a sex tape.


----------



## redney

I would love to be a fly on the wall of the Montecito Mansion as TW seethes with rage over not being invited to the Met Gala.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Valentine included TW' bullying allegations in his book. 








						Headline lifts lid on monarchy with Low's royal insight
					

Headline has acquired Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown by the Times’ royal correspondent Valentine Low.




					www.thebookseller.com


----------



## Chanbal

One more video about 'a sign that the Harkles' brand is beginning to fail'…


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Harry’s polo match was actually on Friday and TMZ didn’t post the photos until Sunday. Nothing strange about that other than it took two days for TMZ to secure the photos. Maybe I’m missing something HarrysGreySuit sees.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry’s polo match was actually on Friday and TMZ didn’t post the photos until Sunday. Nothing strange about that other than it took two days for TMZ to secure the photos. Maybe I’m missing something HarrysGreySuit sees.



I don’t know, the _shady_ part may be because photos were released so close to Princess Charlotte’s birthday. Not sure who held up the release - TMZ [seems unlikely imo]? Backgrid [thru TW] ? Nflix?

Once again, with the ___[insert your favenickname] duo, nothing is straightforward and clear. Doesn’t matter what it is about, it’s always messy and sloppy, every single time.  Full of drama


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t know, the _shady_ part may be because photos were released so close to Princess Charlotte’s birthday. Not sure who held up the release - TMZ [seems unlikely imo]? Backgrid [thru TW] ? Nflix?
> 
> Once again, with the ___[insert your favenickname] duo, nothing is straightforward and clear. Doesn’t matter what it is about, it’s always messy and sloppy, every single time.  Full of drama



Well, we know Backgrid didn’t spend those two days Photoshopping hair onto Harry’s head. Maybe they were negotiating their price with TMZ. That photo of Harry holding his @ss was worth extra!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> He calls him, "The Duke of Hypocrisy" and I'll call her Lady Pointy Chest because she pulls her shoulders back and sticks her chest almost in that man's face although I'm sure he's not complaining. She's just advertising her wares.     Here's a screenshot.
> View attachment 5391787


She must be cold often.  Her nips are often at full attention.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Well, we know Backgrid didn’t spend those two days Photoshopping hair onto Harry’s head. Maybe they were negotiating their price with TMZ. That photo of Harry holding his @ss was worth extra!


They embargoed it so it would come out on Charlotte’s birthday


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Meghan Markle-Created Animated Series ‘Pearl’ Gets An Undesirable Royal Flush In Netflix Cutbacks; Streamer Nixes Meghan & Prince Harry’s Archewell Productions Project
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Even Netflix’s in-house members of the Royal Family are not immune to a wave of cutbacks going on as the streamer recalibrates after a precipitous stock drop incurred after a drop …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bye bye, Pearl!
> 
> I like it that the article said "Markle has spent enough time in Hollywood as an actress to have heard the word “no” in the past."


What happened to, "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets"??


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Geez, his hair.
> 
> View attachment 5393594
> View attachment 5393595


I hope he puts sunscreen on that.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if its starting to sink in that she was basically almost a nobody before she nailed Harry....and she's not showing anything to anyone to make her worthy of adulation now


I don't think her stans will let the fiction die. According to the recon history that Methane pushed even before the wedding, she had a deprived childhood, started working young selling yoghurt, was a child activist, never really had a family, supported herself through higher education, became a highly-sought-after actress, had world renown as a philanthropist/feminist, received a standing ovation at the UN, was a self-made millionaire. I believe the aim was to cast her as a social equal to the BRF. As that biography of hers put it, she was an "American princess".


----------



## Chanbal

I'm going to end with some sad news for Ginger and Whinger…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Richard is right. I wonder if the photos were ordered by TW.



He's showing us how he uses his 16 toilets??


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



I disagree.  She sucks at talking the talk as well.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Put out a sex tape.


Oh God, PLEASE don't give them any ideas!!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> For the love of God, don't give her any ideas!


Sorry just saw your post!!  Great minds LOL!


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Put out a sex tape.


Maybe this will be included in the script for their next Lifetime movie 
You know, if Methane dreams of being Diana v.2 in a car crash, maybe Hazard dreams of being a tampon. I mean the Lifetime version of them, of course ....

Btw, did David Furnish ever say anything about "Pearl"?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Is it just me or does this doll look like  Ginger with Ducka$s' face?


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Is it just me or does this doll look like  Ginger with Ducka$s' face?
> 
> View attachment 5394701



Imo  So many different faces - how does she do that? Fillers? Makeup?




	

		
			
		

		
	
[/QUOTE]


----------



## Toby93




----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Is it just me or does this doll look like  Ginger with Ducka$s' face?
> 
> View attachment 5394701


I see she’s been practicing her innocent, doe eyed look for a loooong time!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> I would love to be a fly on the wall of the Montecito Mansion as TW seethes with rage over not being invited to the Met Gala.



Did I miss the announcement they couldn't attend although being begged to because they had to save the world?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to, "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets"??



I guess someone didn't get that memo!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




Did he spend it all on that face of his?


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



Ken doll looks more natural than Omid in this photo.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> Ken doll looks more natural than Omid in this photo.



what happened to his nose?  Does he use the same plastic surgeon as MM - as her nose isn’t symmetrical either…


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> I also think she dragged out the white blazer from a previous trip as well as the Chanel ballet flats hoping to get some credit for reusing wardrobe items


I hate this spin too, ‘look I’m entitled to lecture you about the environment because I wear my shoes a few times’ 





CarryOn2020 said:


> Preach, Tourre, preach



I will say is I am a little sad about Pearl getting cancelled as 1) I feel like it was the one project where there could be some artistic merit as they would have to hire animators rather than just mugging for the screen themselves and 2) I feel like animators, especially 2d animators, do not get the respect in the industry they deserve for their creativity and they always seem to be first to go.
Id rather see several cartoons on my Home Screen over a ‘star-studded cast’ or a celeb biography 9 times out of 10.


charlottawill said:


>





EverSoElusive said:


> Is it just me or does this doll look like  Ginger with Ducka$s' face?
> 
> View attachment 5394701


The real-doll and the real dolt- deadeyed expressions on both.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo  So many different faces - how does she do that? Fillers? Makeup?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5394734


Yes.
Not to mention frequent dates with the scalpel. I will say she’s not alone in this.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he spend it all on that face of his?


Speaking of dates with the scalpel lol. He is the uncanny valley in human form. I wonder if he says he’s Scottish/Irani because that was the nationalities of the two head scientists.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo  So many different faces - how does she do that? Fillers? Makeup?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5394734



Pretty sure our favorite Ducka$s wants us to think it is au naturel


----------



## Chanbal

We know now why the Aussies 'love' TW… Who can blame them? Very interesting article. 


_In the new must-read royal pageturner The Palace Papers by Tina Brown, out today, the former Vanity Fair editor has revealed that *when Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex followed in his parents’ footsteps and toured Australia in 2018, the duchess had “hated every second of it.*”

Let that sink in for a minute.

At the time, the reception which Harry, and more to the point, Meghan received in October 2018 when they landed in Sydney was nothing short of rhapsodic. The public and the press were overtaken by Megmania and we, as a nation, felt intimately part of Windsor history when the couple announced they were expecting their first child while here…

She writes: “So, Meghan must have been thrilled with it all … right? No. She apparently hated every second of it…"

*Brown’s claims are similar to a report published by the Times last year* which alleged that Meghan commented to her team of the Sydneysiders who had thronged to see the couple at the opera house, “What are they all doing here? It’s silly.”

A source told the Times that the Sussexes’ team explained that “they’re here because they admire and support a monarch and an institution that you’re representing” however “*she didn’t get it*.”

*One thing the former Suits star did reportedly take away from their Australian tour was the idea that she and Harry deserved something of a boost in the royal pecking order*.

Brown writes: “It was head-turning for Meghan to experience the full-throttle motorcade-purring, outrider-vrooming, crowd-roaring adulation of a popular young royal on a tour planned to the last teacup by the Palace machine.

“*Meghan seemed to interpret the success as a call for Brand Sussex to be elevated in the Palace hierarchy*.”

However, instead of getting the kudos that she reportedly felt they deserved, Meghan instead “felt snubbed that there was no particular display of Palace appreciation.”

As a former aide told Brown, there is often a “massive anti-climax when you get back from a royal tour … You’re just back into your noram life. The Queen would send the principals a note after a trip but you don’t come back to a ticker-tape welcome.”

In hindsight, it was the Sussexes’ trip to Australia and South Pacific that marked the very clear turning point between the fawning adoration of the couple that led up to and followed their wedding and then the much more toxic chapter which followed, during which their relationship with his family and the media irretrievably broke down._




			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-hated-pointless-australia-tour/news-story/152fa9df1584601d7e1c1fbc57441767


----------



## Chanbal

Who cares about details? 


_They report just £4,000 in assets and bills of £20,000 due to be paid within the year. The deficit in his capital and reserves is an increase in the £15,840 reported for 2020. While in 2019 accounts it was £2,607 in the black.

Failure to have provided financial details would have resulted in a fine of £1,500 for accounts that are more than six months overdue, according to Companies House. If a firm is struck off compulsorily, all its assets can be seized by the Government.

A former writer on the celebrity gossip magazine Heat, *Scobie is not a details man*. In August 2020, he told The Times he had 'just turned 33'. Then, he said he was 38. Companies House stated that he was born in July 1981, making him 39, at that time._









						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Royal biographer's firm slides £17k into the red
					

RICHARD EDEN: Facing action to close his publishing business, royal biographer Omid Scobie has filed financial details for three consecutive years - and they don't make happy reading.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did I miss the announcement they couldn't attend although being begged to because they had to save the world?


Haha! I didn't click on it, but your question has been answered.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> *I will say is I am a little sad about Pearl getting cancelled as* 1) I feel like it was the one project where there could be some artistic merit as they would have to hire animators rather than just mugging for the screen themselves and 2) I feel like animators, especially 2d animators, do not get the respect in the industry they deserve for their creativity and they always seem to be first to go.
> Id rather see several cartoons on my Home Screen over a ‘star-studded cast’ or a celeb biography 9 times out of 10.


@jelliedfeels no need to be sad. I've *great* news *only* for you: Allegedly, ITV, the one that fired Piers Morgan at the request of TW, might be interested in acquiring Pearl (source: one of NS's last videos).


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


>




They try to fake living a humble and private life whenever they don't get invited      Man if that's not pathetic, I don't know what is. They could live a private and quiet life after stepping back as senior working royals but of course they keep embarrassing themselves every chance they get.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> They try to fake living a humble and private life whenever they don't get invited      Man if that's not pathetic, I don't know what is. *They could live a private and quiet life after stepping back as senior working royals but of course they keep embarrassing themselves every chance they get*.


Yes!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*Brown’s claims are similar to a report published by the Times last year* which alleged that Meghan commented to her team of the Sydneysiders who had thronged to see the couple at the opera house, “What are they all doing here? It’s silly.”_



As if. Can any of you imagine Raptor wondering why anyone wanted to see her, the big Hollywood star and most important member of the BRF? She was basking in the attention and completely positive she deserved it.

_*



			One thing the former Suits star did reportedly take away from their Australian tour was the idea that she and Harry deserved something of a boost in the royal pecking order
		
Click to expand...

*



			.
		
Click to expand...

_
Now that sounds more like her.

_



			“*Meghan seemed to interpret the success as a call for Brand Sussex to be elevated in the Palace hierarchy*.”

However, instead of getting the kudos that she reportedly felt they deserved, Meghan instead “felt snubbed that there was no particular display of Palace appreciation.”
		
Click to expand...

_
Poor thing, nobody remembered to give her a sticker for doing her completely overpaid job? How rude of them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> Ken doll looks more natural than Omid in this photo.


I went to check how Ken doll is doing now. 
Yep, definitely aging well and miles better than Omid who needs more plastique to catch up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is he wearing contacts?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wearing contacts?


I have no idea what is going on with any of THAT *gestures wildly*


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Haha! I didn't click on it, but your question has been answered.
> View attachment 5394822


I looked it up. Elle has a whole series on who didn't turn up. Mostly clickbait as they have no clue why Beyonce or Adele or Lady Gaga wasn't there. Methane and Hazard weren't there because Elle thinks maybe they weren't invited (duh...) and hints that they would need more security than the average celeb. Right, because Methane is much more beautiful than all the other celebs and may attract sexual predators...  

Elle carries on to speculate that the tiresome twosome spent the night at home  and even lauds them for being selective about what events they attend, claiming that since moving to California, they have not attended any awards shows together (clearly Elle considers NAACP to be chopped liver). Story was written by Alyssa Bailey who churned out 14 stories on Why XXX skipped the gala, so I'd give her a pass, and even kudos for creating stories out of thin air.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I don't think her stans will let the fiction die. According to the recon history that Methane pushed even before the wedding, she had a deprived childhood, started working young selling yoghurt, was a child activist, never really had a family, supported herself through higher education, became a highly-sought-after actress, had world renown as a philanthropist/feminist, received a standing ovation at the UN, was a self-made millionaire. I believe the aim was to cast her as a social equal to the BRF. As that biography of hers put it, she was an "American princess".


yeah, right


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I don't think her stans will let the fiction die. According to the recon history that Methane pushed even before the wedding, she had a deprived childhood, started working young selling yoghurt, was a child activist, never really had a family, supported herself through higher education, became a highly-sought-after actress, had world renown as a philanthropist/feminist, received a standing ovation at the UN, was a self-made millionaire. I believe the aim was to cast her as a social equal to the BRF. As that biography of hers put it, she was an "American princess".



Disturbingly, the fact that Methane was able to reel in Prince Harry and live the dream (that she totally destroyed) likely gave other narcs even more assurance that their narc ways are justified. All Methane had to do was shut up and continue to pretend she fit in with the BRF and she could continue living a life of bottomless riches and perks. But no! She felt she was a genius who could make a thousand year old institution concede to her wishes, or at the very least making the BRF allow her to merch her position in addition to raking in their perks. Seeing it didn't, we get the Megsit debacle which didn't go to plan either. How DARE she be nothing without Harry's family! How DARE the BRF isn't begging to bring her back after all the accusations!  Her narc personality is that sick. Smarter narcs are learning from her failures, but you have to admit, despite how vile you might be, Methane proved one can slither up to a position of fame and fortune by through toxic narc means. She could offer a Master Class: "How to Successfully Social Climb Even When You're Stupid", Lesson One: Find a mark who you can manipulate and brainwash. The more sheltered, dumber and richer the better. Lesson Two: Pretend you love everything about that person. Lesson Three: Make sure he listens only to you and dismisses his own family. Lesson Four: Get the ring and make him legally binding. After that, he's basically caught in an animal trap controlled only by you. He can only be let out if he agrees to obey you, even if that means throwing his own family under the bus. Mission accomplished!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did I miss the announcement they couldn't attend although being begged to because they had to save the world?


if they didn't get invited, that's interesting as a lot of people there weren't that famous (or maybe some of them were but I didn't know them)


----------



## Sophisticatted

Met Gala: Anna Wintour is English and has sat next to the Queen at a fashion show before.  She has no need or reason to cater to the likes of H&M.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> if they didn't get invited, that's interesting as a lot of people there weren't that famous (or maybe some of them were but I didn't know them)


I think they did her a favor by not inviting her: The Duchess of Dumpiness would have looked like a chambermaid, no matter what designer she chose to wear, in comparison to what walked down that red carpet.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I went to check how Ken doll is doing now.
> Yep, definitely aging well and miles better than Omid who needs more plastique to catch up.
> 
> View attachment 5394910


He could not pay his bills because he needed the money to fill his face and remodel.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I looked it up. Elle has a whole series on who didn't turn up. Mostly clickbait as they have no clue why Beyonce or Adele or Lady Gaga wasn't there. Methane and Hazard weren't there because Elle thinks maybe they weren't invited (duh...) and hints that they would need more security than the average celeb. Right, because Methane is much more beautiful than all the other celebs and may attract sexual predators...
> 
> Elle carries on to speculate that the tiresome twosome spent the night at home  and even lauds them for being selective about what events they attend, claiming that since moving to California, they have not attended any awards shows together (clearly Elle considers NAACP to be chopped liver). Story was written by Alyssa Bailey who churned out 14 stories on Why XXX skipped the gala, so I'd give her a pass, and even kudos for creating stories out of thin air.


Bingo!  The new excuse is that they are being selective about which events they will attend!  Brilliant!


----------



## Sharont2305

See, real Princesses can fly lower than first class


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> if they didn't get invited, that's interesting as a lot of people there weren't that famous (or maybe some of them were but I didn't know them)


Famous alone doesn't get you invited. You have to be viewed as interesting by Anna Wintour. The Harkles are not interesting.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he spend it all on that face of his?


Talk about throwing money away!


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I went to check how Ken doll is doing now.
> Yep, definitely aging well and miles better than Omid who needs more plastique to catch up.
> 
> View attachment 5394910


He has Archie's eyes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Bingo!  The new excuse is that they are being selective about which events they will attend!  Brilliant!


And the world will quickly see through that BS.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> See, real Princesses can fly lower than first class



Are they back in CA? Another visit with the Harkles?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Are they back in CA? Another visit with the Harkles?


Maybe they are moving.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they are moving.


That crossed my mind too. Maybe so the Harkles have some friends, and the invisible children have some cousins to play with.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Are they back in CA? Another visit with the Harkles?


My first thought too, with the palm trees.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they are moving.


Eugenie did an internship in NYC after university , her DH is a tequila salesman for Casamigos , once owned by Clooney and Gerber - US headquartered ?


----------



## airkay

charlottawill said:


> That crossed my mind too. Maybe so the Harkles have some friends, and the invisible children have some cousins to play with.


I mean, if it were my father I would want to be an ocean away.


----------



## gracekelly

airkay said:


> I mean, if it were my father I would want to be an ocean away.


Jack may have a career opportunity in the liquor industry in the US.  You never know.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A picture is worth 1,000 words -  wow. 



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghans-secret-blowup-during-fiji-tour-revealed/news-story/f0b523293aa8566c93676acd9b4d333c


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> A picture is worth 1,000 words -  wow.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghans-secret-blowup-during-fiji-tour-revealed/news-story/f0b523293aa8566c93676acd9b4d333c
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5395470


If you look very closely, it looks to me like the woman is looking right at the camera, not at MM, probably part of her official entourage?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> If you look very closely, it looks to me like the woman is looking right at the camera, not at MM, probably part of her official entourage?



The woman in green seems very unhappy.
The tall woman in the black tee who is leading the way was the head of MM’s security. I believe she has since quit. 
Then, there is MM’s _freakish_ grin, kinda like a Batman villain. All around her are frowning while she smiles. 
Hmmm, I know a word for that.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> A picture is worth 1,000 words -  wow.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghans-secret-blowup-during-fiji-tour-revealed/news-story/f0b523293aa8566c93676acd9b4d333c
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5395470


She "turned and hissed"?  I knew she was a snake, but didn't realize she was going all out!


----------



## Annawakes

According to the article, the palace was covering for her when they insisted that she had to leave because of crowd control.

So the palace never stood up for her eh?


----------



## Chanbal

One more book for our book club…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Is one more of Hazz's many jobs being questioned?  Go for it Elon!


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG's interpretation of the Polo pictures. 


Courtesy of the BLG:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I had completely forgotten Charlotte's full name is Charlotte Elizabeth Diana until I saw a birthday announcement. Once again, one name shows how doing "sweet nods" is done properly and one name that copies the idea but in a completely inappropriate and offensive way. Also the Cambridges let the child have her own name, too.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had completely forgotten Charlotte's full name is Charlotte Elizabeth Diana until I saw a birthday announcement. Once again, one name shows how doing "sweet nods" is done properly and one name that copies the idea but in a completely inappropriate and offensive way. Also the Cambridges let the child have her own name, too.


Charlotte is also Pippas middle name so it's a sweet nod to both sides of the family, as well as Elizabeth being Catherine and her mother's middle name.


----------



## jelliedfeels

airkay said:


> I mean, if it were my father I would want to be an ocean away.


Great point! We shouldn’t be too harsh on her- after all I feel like the US _might_ be big enough for them both to live separate lives too. We won’t find out unless they tell us I guess.


Chanbal said:


> @jelliedfeels no need to be sad. I've *great* news *only* for you: Allegedly, ITV, the one that fired Piers Morgan at the request of TW, might be interested in acquiring Pearl (source: one of NS's last videos).


Thank you but now I’ve swung back to  the schadenfreude of wanting H&M taken down a peg or two- decisions decisions!   



CarryOn2020 said:


> A picture is worth 1,000 words -  wow.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghans-secret-blowup-during-fiji-tour-revealed/news-story/f0b523293aa8566c93676acd9b4d333c
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5395470


As per usual her simpering expression looks poisonous but it is so refreshing to see her dressed in just a simple floral dress with some less tacky than usual jewellery. It really does a lot to make her look like she’s here in the 2020s rather than back in 2008 flicking her tendrils around and wearing badly tone-matched nude, streaky fake tan,  bodycons and short suits. I assume the stylist for this wanted to stay where her bread is buttered.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> See, real Princesses can fly lower than first class



M’s none-matching short suit at the polo just reinforced for me that she’s still trapped in late 00s playing ‘sexy’. I remember the short suit trend well as it led me to make the heinous decision to have my seafoam green Jil sander suit tailored to shorts which is yet another of my personal fashion crimes of that period. 

On the topic of royal stylists, if E has one she should consider shopping around. The things she wears either completely age her but not in a hipster way (lots of dowdy beige and drab prints) or are so ‘I’m kooky’ she looks like she’s presenting Children’s tv (that bloody yellow hairband and these wacky sunglasses)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> M’s none-matching short suit at the polo just reinforced for me that she’s still trapped in late 00s playing ‘sexy’. I remember the short suit trend well as it led me to make the heinous decision to have my seafoam green Jil sander suit tailored to shorts which is yet another of my personal fashion crimes of that period.



Good thing my thighs have always been less than desirable


----------



## needlv

Still trying to distract from Pearl being dropped?


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Still trying to distract from Pearl being dropped?




If she ran, wouldn’t she need to renounce the title?


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> As per usual her simpering expression looks poisonous but it is so refreshing to see her dressed in just a simple floral dress with some less tacky than usual jewellery. It really does a lot to make her look like she’s here in the 2020s rather than back in 2008 flicking her tendrils around and wearing badly tone-matched nude, streaky fake tan,  bodycons and short suits. I assume the stylist for this wanted to stay where her bread is buttered.



She was still an "active" royal and pregnant at that point, so that likely had something to do with the dress choice. I'm sure she now feels she's not a working royal so she can dress however she wants.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The woman in green seems very unhappy.
> The tall woman in the black tee who is leading the way was the head of MM’s security. I believe she has since quit.
> Then, there is MM’s _freakish_ grin, kinda like a Batman villain. All around her are frowning while she smiles.
> Hmmm, I know a word for that.


I believe the woman in front of MM in black and white was the victim of her wrath. The article in the link does seem to defend MM saying that given the hot, humid conditions and the crowd, it probably wasn't an optimal situation for a pregnant woman. I imagine in spite of the smile plastered on her face, in true actor form, she is thinking get me the hell of out here and then snapped at the staffer.  Pictures are often worth a thousand words, but on the other hand sometimes they don't tell the whole story.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If she ran, wouldn’t she need to renounce the title?


She can't run. The former president ran on the claim of being a successful businessman. She doesn't even have that leg to stand on.


----------



## Allisonfaye

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to, "What Meghan wants, Meghan gets"??



These days, I think that only applies to from Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I remember the short suit trend well as it led me to make the heinous decision to have my seafoam green Jil sander suit tailored to shorts which is yet another of my personal fashion crimes of that period.



We all have had our share of fashion crimes. But here is American actress Nina Dobrev, posting this on IG from a recent trip to Santorini. Note the second and last photos. Make of it what you will....


----------



## Allisonfaye

CarryOn2020 said:


> If she ran, wouldn’t she need to renounce the title?



I hope she DOES run. It will be hugely entertaining.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Picture courtesy of @Chanbal and BLG

I can't see this picture without thinking of the Southern US saying, "Showing your a$$".








						What does the southern phrase "showing your ass" mean?
					

Answer (1 of 8): According to Farlex Dictionary of Idioms:  show (one's) butt  (chiefly Southern United States slang) To act in a rude, obnoxious, or aberrant manner; to misbehave or act foolishly; to make a scene.  Mamma says that we can go down to the mall on our own, but she said not to show o...




					www.quora.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Still trying to distract from Pearl being dropped?




Are those people aware that the US is not just inhabited by Sugars and Stans? I will go out on a limb and say even people sympathetic to our pour racism and loveless childhood victims would expect a little more from their president.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Then, there is MM’s _freakish_ grin, kinda like a Batman villain. All around her are frowning while she smiles.
> Hmmm, I know a word for that.


OMG!   Now I know why she looked so familiar.


----------



## littlemisskeira

Not sure if this has been posted, as this thread moves faster than I could catch up.
Sharing this as I do feel the same way about Meghan and her actions - entitled and wants instant gratification.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-representing-monarchy-claims-Tina-Brown.html

'I think that was her fundamental sense of misunderstanding of what was going to happen when she joined the Royal Family - she saw the palaces and Diana as this global humanitarian super star, but forgot that for 16 or 17 years Diana worked like a dog within the Royal Family doing a great deal of very humdrum assignments. 

'It was her charisma she brought to the job that made her so extraordinarily special.'

While Diana is not 100% angelic, I do see her as kind and having a human touch. It would be an insult to compare Meghan with her.


----------



## xincinsin

littlemisskeira said:


> Not sure if this has been posted, as this thread moves faster than I could catch up.
> Sharing this as I do feel the same way about Meghan and her actions - entitled and wants instant gratification.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-representing-monarchy-claims-Tina-Brown.html
> 
> 'I think that was her fundamental sense of misunderstanding of what was going to happen when she joined the Royal Family - she saw the palaces and Diana as this global humanitarian super star, but forgot that for 16 or 17 years Diana worked like a dog within the Royal Family doing a great deal of very humdrum assignments.
> 
> 'It was her charisma she brought to the job that made her so extraordinarily special.'
> 
> While Diana is not 100% angelic, I do see her as kind and having a human touch. It would be an insult to compare Meghan with her.


I think she planned to leave the moment she realized:
a) it wasn't a free lunch
b) she couldn't merch her position or demand freebies
c) she was never going to be Kween or the power behind the throne
d) the British people aren't stupid


----------



## Aimee3

Allisonfaye said:


> I hope she DOES run. It will be hugely entertaining.



She could run on the Pity Party!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Who cares about details?
> View attachment 5394821
> 
> _They report just £4,000 in assets and bills of £20,000 due to be paid within the year. The deficit in his capital and reserves is an increase in the £15,840 reported for 2020. While in 2019 accounts it was £2,607 in the black.
> 
> Failure to have provided financial details would have resulted in a fine of £1,500 for accounts that are more than six months overdue, according to Companies House. If a firm is struck off compulsorily, all its assets can be seized by the Government.
> 
> A former writer on the celebrity gossip magazine Heat, *Scobie is not a details man*. In August 2020, he told The Times he had 'just turned 33'. Then, he said he was 38. Companies House stated that he was born in July 1981, making him 39, at that time._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Royal biographer's firm slides £17k into the red
> 
> 
> RICHARD EDEN: Facing action to close his publishing business, royal biographer Omid Scobie has filed financial details for three consecutive years - and they don't make happy reading.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> She could run on the Pity Party!



Unfortunately, that's been cancelled too


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wearing contacts?



Is he 3D?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Is he 3D?


Maybe Omid came out of a 3D printer - there is a certain synthetic je-ne-sais-quoi ...


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> She was still an "active" royal and pregnant at that point, so that likely had something to do with the dress choice. I'm sure she now feels she's not a working royal so she can dress however she wants.


It does look much better on her - it’s amazing how much less bulky she looks wearing this while preggers than she did the other week in that ugly sweater dress or the adult baby one. These floaty romantic florals are so much more current than t shirt dresses and heels too which looks totally dated to me. 


charlottawill said:


> We all have had our share of fashion crimes. But here is American actress Nina Dobrev, posting this on IG from a recent trip to Santorini. Note the second and last photos. Make of it what you will....



who? I’d say this girl has bad style too personally - she looks a bit desperate. I will say that at least her suit actually matches and a slightly loose fit and maybe linen(?) is better than the very tight and suit serge of the 00s shorts suits (which is what M is still wearing.)


----------



## altigirl88

Sharont2305 said:


> Charlotte is also Pippas middle name so it's a sweet nod to both sides of the family, as well as Elizabeth being Catherine and her mother's middle name.


I had a doll I named Charlotte about 25 years ago. I’ve always loved that name. I wish it would catch on more. It still doesn’t seem to be that popular, at least here in the States. I thought with there being a Princess named Charlotte it might catch on. I think it’s had a modest increase in popularity, here


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> I think she planned to leave the moment she realized:
> a) it wasn't a free lunch
> b) she couldn't merch her position or demand freebies
> c) she was never going to be Kween or the power behind the throne
> d) the British people aren't stupid


All of the above.   I still have difficulty understanding the need to merch or get freebies when you have an unlimited budget for clothing and the ability to borrow fine jewels. One would think she would sit back and enjoy the ride and the percs.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> It does look much better on her - it’s amazing how much less bulky she looks wearing this while preggers than she did the other week in that ugly sweater dress or the adult baby one. These floaty romantic florals are so much more current than t shirt dresses and heels too which looks totally dated to me.
> 
> who? I’d say this girl has bad style too personally - she looks a bit desperate. I will say that at least her suit actually matches and a slightly loose fit and maybe linen(?) is better than the very tight and suit serge of the 00s shorts suits (which is what M is still wearing.)


She's just another minor celebrity. I think she resembles MM in some of the pics.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> "..t shirt dresses and heels too which looks totally dated to me."



Hang onto your hat, I got an email from Poshmark this morning saying Herve Leger bandage dresses are making a comeback. Doubtful, probably just helping their sellers unload them. But I'll bet MM's got at least one in the back of her closet. Let's hope it never sees the light of day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Hang onto your hat, I got an email from Poshmark this morning saying Herve Leger bandage dresses are making a comeback. Doubtful, probably just helping their sellers unload them. But I'll bet MM's got at least one in the back of her closet. Let's hope it never sees the light of day.


you don't want to see the boxy waist in one of those?


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Hang onto your hat, I got an email from Poshmark this morning saying Herve Leger bandage dresses are making a comeback. Doubtful, probably just helping their sellers unload them. But I'll bet MM's got at least one in the back of her closet. Let's hope it never sees the light of day.




I’m not sure people will ever accept  super tight clothes or super uncomfortable shoes again after the pandemic.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not sure people will ever accept  super tight clothes or super uncomfortable shoes again after the pandemic.


I won't but I think there will always be some who will


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I won't but I think there will always be some who will


The youngsters!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> The youngsters!


right.  and there are some people who are more comfortable than others with something like high heels.  I had a young woman I worked with years ago who wore very cheap shoes - like $10-20 cheap.  Guess she had good feet; they were comfortable on her.  I couldn't wear them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lilliesdaughter said:


> All of the above.   I still have difficulty understanding the need to merch or get freebies when you have an unlimited budget for clothing and the ability to borrow fine jewels. One would think she would sit back and enjoy the ride and the percs.


But she couldn't borrow all those fabulous jewels on command and I think she got royally ticked off when she was not allowed to bring a tiara for the Australia and South Pacific tour.


----------



## xincinsin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> All of the above.   I still have difficulty understanding the need to merch or get freebies when you have an unlimited budget for clothing and the ability to borrow fine jewels. One would think she would sit back and enjoy the ride and the percs.


I was appalled that despite the unlimited budget, she still managed to look unkempt or frumpy. What happened to her most expensive garments like the Dior bedsheet caftan? If the rumours were true, the palace limited her access to the fine jewels after she displayed too much avaricious interest.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She's just another minor celebrity. I think she resembles MM in some of the pics.


Yep.  And she's wearing Eugenie's sunglasses.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> She's just another minor celebrity. I think she resembles MM in some of the pics.


Maybe she will be his second  no-name actress wife  - she should get on poshmark and buy all the bandage dresses in nude and g-hornet green  

I think the bandage dress isn’t a bad idea in of itself if it’s fitted tight and cinches the body but I do recall they had a terrible riding up problem and could make you look boxier- so pretty much ideal for M.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> We all have had our share of fashion crimes. But here is American actress Nina Dobrev, posting this on IG from a recent trip to Santorini. Note the second and last photos. Make of it what you will....




No idea who this couple(?) is. They look like so many other wanna-be’s. Still, those photos of Santorini are beautiful.




charlottawill said:


> She can't run. The former president ran on the claim of being a successful businessman. She doesn't even have that leg to stand on.



She can run, doubtful she would win.
I think but could be wrong, she does meet the qualifications to run - usually it’s just age and citizenship, right?  Imo the media [or Nflix] is hyping her as a candidate just to see her fail.

Article from 2021 - if she is counting on the O interview,  









						Meghan Markle reportedly networking with Democrats, eyes bid for US president
					

The Duchess of Sussex previously told friends about her political ambitions.




					pagesix.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> right.  and there are some people who are more comfortable than others with something like high heels.  I had a young woman I worked with years ago who wore very cheap shoes - like $10-20 cheap.  Guess she had good feet; they were comfortable on her.  I couldn't wear them.



I feel like in my twenties I could wear almost any shoe without a thought. Things changed after that!


----------



## bisousx

lanasyogamama said:


> I feel like in my twenties I could wear almost any shoe without a thought. Things changed after that!



Off topic celebs in this meme, but it’s quite true…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Hang onto your hat, I got an email from Poshmark this morning saying Herve Leger bandage dresses are making a comeback. Doubtful, probably just helping their sellers unload them. But I'll bet MM's got at least one in the back of her closet. Let's hope it never sees the light of day.



Pretty sure I saw a picture or her in one. Pre Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

bisousx said:


> Off topic celebs in this meme, but it’s quite true…
> 
> View attachment 5395987


Holy smokes!  I have never seen this picture before.  That was quite a pair!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Hang onto your hat, I got an email from Poshmark this morning saying Herve Leger bandage dresses are making a comeback. Doubtful, probably just helping their sellers unload them. But I'll bet MM's got at least one in the back of her closet. Let's hope it never sees the light of day.



Excuse me!  

I've been hanging on to mine, please don't confuse women's body-con for a con-woman


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll leave quietly now. 










						Herve Leger Vivane Dress - Meghan's Mirror
					

Meghan Markle wore the Herve Leger Viviane dress to a fashion show during Mercedes-Benz Fashion Week Fall 2014 at The Theatre at Lincoln Center in New York City.




					www.meghansmirror.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's not THE HL though, is it? It's A line-ish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not THE HL though, is it? It's A line-ish.



Isn’t it the HL Viviane?  That is what the photo says.  Whatever it is, she does not have the figure for it.  And this was in 2014.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not sure people will ever accept  super tight clothes or super uncomfortable shoes again after the pandemic.



Seriously. I feel I will never go back to tailored clothes and heels. And I am so used to lounge clothes and not leaving the house by now, I am slightly scrambling when I HAVE to dress the part Doesn't help that my new skincare regimen did something to my undereyes that makes them reject each and all concealer or even foundation. It looks fine naked (besides the darkness I want to conceal, duh), as soon as product hits it is slides off, seperates and looks patchy and gross. I think it is dryness and nothing seems to completely help. I'm currently experimenting with a drop of pure squalane.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t it the HL Viviane?  That is what the photo says.  Whatever it is, she does not have the figure for it.  And this was in 2014.



Sorry for being confusing, I meant it is not the famous bandage dress, not that it's not HL.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. I feel I will never go back to tailored clothes and heels. And I am so used to lounge clothes and not leaving the house by now, I am slightly scrambling when I HAVE to dress the part Doesn't help that my new skincare regimen did something to my undereyes that makes them reject each and all concealer or even foundation. It looks fine naked (besides the darkness I want to conceal, duh), as soon as product hits it is slides off, seperates and looks patchy and gross. I think it is dryness and nothing seems to completely help. I'm currently experimenting with a drop of pure squalane.



I agree. The thought of tailored clothes, hair, makeup - ugh.  Hope the squalane works. Supposedly it is good stuff.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not THE HL though, is it? It's A line-ish.



Trust MM to wear a Léger that wants to be an Alaïa


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. I feel I will never go back to tailored clothes and heels. And I am so used to lounge clothes and not leaving the house by now, I am slightly scrambling when I HAVE to dress the part Doesn't help that my new skincare regimen did something to my undereyes that makes them reject each and all concealer or even foundation. It looks fine naked (besides the darkness I want to conceal, duh), as soon as product hits it is slides off, seperates and looks patchy and gross. I think it is dryness and nothing seems to completely help. I'm currently experimenting with a drop of pure squalane.


The most moisturizing eye cream I’ve found is the Kiehls avocado eye cream.  

Did you start a new retinol?


----------



## charlottawill

bisousx said:


> Off topic celebs in this meme, but it’s quite true…
> 
> View attachment 5395987


Is that real Kim or Madame Tussaud's Kim? Hard to tell the difference.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pretty sure I saw a picture or her in one. Pre Harry.


Oh for sure she was wearing them back in the day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just picked up elsewhere (apparently Scobie confirmed?) that Harry will be playing a string of polo tournaments every Sunday until June 19th.

Which means a) no Jubilee attendance as he's playing polo on June 5th and b) he knew that very well when he told The Queen "maybe".

Or maybe The Queen only issued the invite after she knew he couldn't make it


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. I feel I will never go back to tailored clothes and heels. And I am so used to lounge clothes and not leaving the house by now, I am slightly scrambling when I HAVE to dress the part Doesn't help that my new skincare regimen did something to my undereyes that makes them reject each and all concealer or even foundation. It looks fine naked (besides the darkness I want to conceal, duh), as soon as product hits it is slides off, seperates and looks patchy and gross. I think it is dryness and nothing seems to completely help. I'm currently experimenting with a drop of pure squalane.


I have super sensitive eyes but I've had good luck for about ten years with Bobbi Brown Hydrating Eye Cream. YSL Touch Eclat goes over it very nicely for me, no balling or creasing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> The most moisturizing eye cream I’ve found is the Kiehls avocado eye cream.
> 
> Did you start a new retinol?



I started tretinoin (I think the best known cream in the US is Retin-A) back in late 2020 for anti-aging purposes. No issues after the initial peeling went away but my skin is dry at the best of days even without. I literally slather my face in Vaseline during winter or I'll start peeling again.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Maggie Muggins said:


> But she couldn't borrow all those fabulous jewels on command and I think she got royally ticked off when she was not allowed to bring a tiara for the Australia and South Pacific tour.


You are correct.  Obviously it would be inconvenient and insulting to need permission for some items and be refused others due to her place in the hierarchy. The very need to place a request through channels would be offensive.  Oh dear, the emeralds are unavailable.  One must make do with the rubies


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just picked up elsewhere (apparently Scobie confirmed?) that Harry will be playing a string of polo tournaments every Sunday until June 19th.
> 
> Which means a) no Jubilee attendance as he's playing polo on June 5th and b) he knew that very well when he told The Queen "maybe".
> 
> Or maybe The Queen only issued the invite after she knew he couldn't make it


Is this renewed interest in polo to get away from TW, or are they angling for a role as Veuve Clicquot brand ambassadors? We know they want gigs where they just have to show up to get paid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Lilliesdaughter said:


> You are correct.  Obviously it would be inconvenient and insulting to need permission for some items and be refused others due to her place in the hierarchy. The very need to place a request through channels would be offensive.  Oh dear, the emeralds are unavailable.  One must make do with the rubies


I don't think you put in a request, they offer them to you, on loan obviously.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> No idea who this couple(?) is. They look like so many other wanna-be’s. Still, those photos of Santorini are beautiful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She can run, doubtful she would win.
> I think but could be wrong, she does meet the qualifications to run - usually it’s just age and citizenship, right?  Imo the media [or Nflix] is hyping her as a candidate just to see her fail.
> 
> Article from 2021 - if she is counting on the O interview,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly networking with Democrats, eyes bid for US president
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex previously told friends about her political ambitions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Nina Dobrev (actress) and Shaun White (5 time Olympian) pretty far from wanna-be's. More people would recognize these two than Harry or Meghan.
ETA I have no idea why her IG posts are in this thread.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ah, here it is:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave quietly now.
> 
> View attachment 5396043
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Herve Leger Vivane Dress - Meghan's Mirror
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore the Herve Leger Viviane dress to a fashion show during Mercedes-Benz Fashion Week Fall 2014 at The Theatre at Lincoln Center in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansmirror.com



And of course she wore it badly. 


> https://www.herworld.com/gallery/fa...eger-dresses-best-famous-celebrities-bandage/


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> Nina Dobrev (actress) and Shaun White (5 time Olympian) pretty far from wanna-be's. More people would recognize these two than Harry or Meghan.
> ETA I have no idea why her IG posts are in this thread.


I forgot she is dating him. I saw him in several interviews recently and he seems very happy.


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> Nina Dobrev (actress) and Shaun White (5 time Olympian) pretty far from wanna-be's. More people would recognize these two than Harry or Meghan.
> ETA I have no idea why her IG posts are in this thread.


I am the guilty party, I just posted it because there is a picture of her in a shorts suit that looks a lot like MM. Sorry to go off topic.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> No idea who this couple(?) is. They look like so many other wanna-be’s. Still, those photos of Santorini are beautiful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She can run, doubtful she would win.
> I think but could be wrong, she does meet the qualifications to run - usually it’s just age and citizenship, right?  Imo the media [or Nflix] is hyping her as a candidate just to see her fail.
> 
> Article from 2021 - if she is counting on the O interview,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reportedly networking with Democrats, eyes bid for US president
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex previously told friends about her political ambitions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


this Page Six thing is ridiculous IMO
I couldn't even finish reading it
Who in their right mind would support her running for President?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I appreciate the person who took it upon themselves to change up Scobie's profile picture to a more appropriate one


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> Nina Dobrev (actress) and Shaun White (5 time Olympian) pretty far from wanna-be's. More people would recognize these two than Harry or Meghan.
> ETA I have no idea why her IG posts are in this thread.



The Shaun White? I do know of him and thought he had red hair. Wow, that one went right over my head. 
Still, Santorini, swoon.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Is this renewed interest in polo to get away from TW, or are they angling for a role as Veuve Clicquot brand ambassadors? We know they want gigs where they just have to show up to get paid.


The only friends he has?

And if she gets bored, he could leave her home. The people in the group photo posted the other day were visual confirmation she’s not the draw, they were apparently ignoring her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> this Page Six thing is ridiculous IMO
> I couldn't even finish reading it
> Who in their right mind would support her running for President?



Strange things happen all the time (ahem). In a world where everyone has mega-money and can buy anything, people need status. In the old days [pre-pandemic], knowing royals brought status. Now, not so much. Not everyone has received that memo yet. Soon, more people will figure out H&M are Wallis&Ed 2.0.

In this case, I believe whatever _support_ H&M get is due to his royal connections. Who wouldn’t want to be [almost] besties with the next King of England’s son?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> We all have had our share of fashion crimes. But here is American actress Nina Dobrev, posting this on IG from a recent trip to Santorini. Note the second and last photos. Make of it what you will....




On Nina, the shorts paired with a matching jacket look perfect. Really polished, easy-going but still elegant. We used to call it ‘snappy casual’.  MM loses the polished effect by creating a mismatched look.  Coordinating the jacket with the shorts is the key.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not THE HL though, is it? It's A line-ish.


If I recall those dresses were popular early 1980’s which probably would make TW too young for that fad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh yeah, now he is on the roster.  Guessing his member dues is comp’ed.





__





						Roster - Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club
					





					sbpolo.com
				




In other news:


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Strange things happen all the time (ahem). In a world where everyone has mega-money and can buy anything, people need status. In the old days [pre-pandemic], knowing royals brought status. Now, not so much. Not everyone has received that memo yet. Soon, more people will figure out H&M are Wallis&Ed 2.0.
> 
> In this case, I believe whatever _support_ H&M get is due to his royal connections. Who wouldn’t want to be [almost] besties with the next King of England’s son?


the King who he has trashed and embarrassed?  OK


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> the King who he has trashed and embarrassed?  OK



Let’s see - how will the spinners spin this? Iirc   Hazz said negative things about Charles, his father.  Never about Charles, the future King.  It’s shallow, I know, but it could work. IDK my guess is that once the coronation happens Hazz gets welcomed back. Probably why he is playing polo this summer.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> In other news:



There's THE HAT again. And "For The Love Of Dogs?" Giving up your pets when they become inconvenient to your lifestyle is love?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I started tretinoin (I think the best known cream in the US is Retin-A) back in late 2020 for anti-aging purposes. No issues after the initial peeling went away but my skin is dry at the best of days even without. I literally slather my face in Vaseline during winter or I'll start peeling again.



I use tretinoin as well. I stopped using it under my eyes because I read some things saying that it was too strong for that delicate skin. I’m using a Sunday Riley eye cream with retinol instead, no dryness.  We’re all doing our dang best!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> If I recall those dresses were popular early 1980’s which probably would make TW too young for that fad.



I am pretty sure they were a thing in the 2000s maybe? Kim Kardashian wore them.


----------



## Chanbal

According to NS, allegedly, Netflix didn't like the demo of Pearl and that is the reason behind the nay. Also, Hazz begged Netflix not to drop the TW's show, but it didn't work.


----------



## Chanbal

On the Australia tour:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From an article following the designer's death:



> With his label Herve Leger , Leroux was the man behind one of the most famous dresses of the 90s and 00s, worn by the likes of Kim Kardashian (many, many times, obviously before Kanye West had his way with her wardrobe), models Gisele Bündchen and Miranda Kerr , Blake Lively , Beyonce , Rihanna , Sofia Vergara , Taylor Swift , Mariah Carey , Victoria Beckham, and Megan Fox .


----------



## 1LV

bisousx said:


> Off topic celebs in this meme, but it’s quite true…
> 
> View attachment 5395987


Has he ever not looked good???


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I use tretinoin as well. I stopped using it under my eyes because I read some things saying that it was too strong for that delicate skin. I’m using a Sunday Riley eye cream with retinol instead, no dryness.  We’re all doing our dang best!



Yes, indeed, we are doing our best. It is not easy.  Since it is OT, I put my recommendation in the spoiler. Apologies if that is the wrong thing to do.



Spoiler: skin care



Yes, indeed, we are doing our best. It is not easy. In February, I tried samples of VB’s Healthy Skin set. So far, so good. Skin is softer, less irritated, bit of a glow. Still have wrinkles but skin feels less dry, if that makes sense.  

Disclaimer:  I am not an influencer, not a paid spokesperson, not connected in any way to VB or anyone who knows her. Just a human who was given some samples and tried it, liked it, will continue using it.  Ymmv, hope it helps.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am pretty sure they were a thing in the 2000s maybe? Kim Kardashian wore them.


Yep.  Everyone and their mother seemed to wear them!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, allegedly, Netflix didn't like the demo of Pearl and that is the reason behind the nay. Also, Hazz begged Netflix not to drop the TW's show, but it didn't work.


I can believe Hazy did that. And now the stans think someone like Disney will pick it up. Sure. Remember when he awkwardly pitched TW for voice work to Disney's former CEO Bob Iger at some social function? Disney wasn't leaping at the chance to work with her then, they're certainly not going to now after the world has seen how little they have to offer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ah yes, the Lion King's premiere he ditched his veterans for so Raptor in her bursting at the seams dress could hug Beyoncé.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5396217


I can’t believe I’m saying this, but Meg could never!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

While searching for MM in other Herve Leger outfits, I stumbled upon these:








						Meghan Markle Photostream
					

Meghan Markle Photos Photos - Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends the 2021 Salute To Freedom Gala at Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum on November 10, 2021 in New York City. 2021 Salute To Freedom Gala




					www.zimbio.com
				




Clearly, as far back as 2013, she had the same issues she has now. Definitely not ready for prime time.  Says a lot about Hazz that he chose her.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Polo: MAs presence makes me think he’s helping the duo “strategize” their next moves.  Or, that’s what Harry has been led to believe.  While Harry plays, TW&MA are probably trolling the grounds for the next mark.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> While searching for MM in other Herve Leger outfits, I stumbled upon these:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Photostream
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Photos Photos - Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends the 2021 Salute To Freedom Gala at Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum on November 10, 2021 in New York City. 2021 Salute To Freedom Gala
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zimbio.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly, as far back as 2013, she had the same issues she has now. Definitely not ready for prime time.  Says a lot about Hazz that he chose her.


She really looks the run-of-the-mill starlet in these photos, no X-factor. I must say the mystery matchmaker who recommended her to Hazard was a marketing wizard.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> She really looks the run-of-the-mill starlet in these photos, no X-factor. I must say the mystery matchmaker who recommended her to Hazard was a marketing wizard.


She didn’t know how to dress then either.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> She didn’t know how to dress then either.


We find it more unforgivable now when she has the money and means to dress well. I'm afraid that means the common denominator is a lack of good taste.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Strange things happen all the time (ahem). In a world where everyone has mega-money and can buy anything, people need status. In the old days [pre-pandemic], knowing royals brought status. Now, not so much. Not everyone has received that memo yet. Soon, more people will figure out H&M are Wallis&Ed 2.0.
> 
> In this case, I believe whatever _support_ H&M get is due to his royal connections. Who wouldn’t want to be [almost] besties with the next King of England’s son?


King of the UK etc   

I'll get my coat, lol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please swipe for the second slide.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> While searching for MM in other Herve Leger outfits, I stumbled upon these:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Photostream
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Photos Photos - Meghan, Duchess of Sussex attends the 2021 Salute To Freedom Gala at Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum on November 10, 2021 in New York City. 2021 Salute To Freedom Gala
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.zimbio.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly, as far back as 2013, she had the same issues she has now. Definitely not ready for prime time.  Says a lot about Hazz that he chose her.



Forgot one!


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah, here it is:




Random thought when I saw the pic: 
His hair is glowing!
Oh wait that’s the reflection on his scalp.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder how his polo skills are in comparison to the rest of the team. This is probably the first thing he’s done that makes sense and he has some actual experience with.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> We find it more unforgivable now when she has the money and means to dress well. I'm afraid that means the common denominator is a lack of good taste.


You can add common sense to that.


----------



## gracekelly

He knew he wasn’t going when he saw The Queen


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am pretty sure they were a thing in the 2000s maybe? Kim Kardashian wore them.


+1. I think Fit and flare Alaia were still popular in the 2000s. I don’t remember re HL since they weren’t my thing
i dont mind the mismatched shorts but don’t think it worked with the jacket or the event. (I’m a late adapter to polishing up shorts though. As per MMs 2014 HL dress, she’s attempting to hide some figure flaws around her middle with the strategically draped jacket. I know this bc I did it too.  I honestly think they could do a lot to regild the image with a sincere mea culpa, followed by H’s return to the UK with or without MM. Prodigal son returns older and wiser Kind of thing. MM could then go on to marry an extremely wealthy private person who would be happy to be associated with H‘s ex, former Princess, etc.


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> *As per MMs 2014 HL dress, she’s attempting to hide some figure flaws around her middle with the strategically draped jacket.* I know this bc I did it too.  I honestly think they could do a lot to regild the image with a sincere mea culpa, followed by H’s return to the UK with or without MM. Prodigal son returns older and wiser Kind of thing


It didn't work   She probably spent the evening holding her elbows close to that flawed midriff so that she didn't dislodge the jacket from her shoulders.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am pretty sure they were a thing in the 2000s maybe? Kim Kardashian wore them.





bellecate said:


> If I recall those dresses were popular early 1980’s which probably would make TW too young for that fad.



Hervé Léger was founded 1985. The designer Hervé Peugnet (changed to Léger) designed all sorts, but his signature was the 'bandage dress'. The company was acquired by Max Azaria (BCBG) 1998 and relaunched to much fanfare 2007 basically reducing the company to only one sort of dress done thousands of ways. Originally Hervé Léger's ideal woman was hourglass and Amazonian but the HL (Max Azaria era) woman in the '00s became very slim indeed.

The Hervé Léger dress was often worn appropriately (or inappropriately) with bare legs and CLs (Christian Louboutin) 'everywhere' late '00s for a few years. There are whole threads dedicated to HL on the Wardrobe forum, and if you go back far enough, almost every woman in the CL forum is wearing an HL dress too.

Body-con is totally back for a new gen. I think it's the post-covid party fever.

Whether the original 'Jessica Rabbit' shape or the ultra-slim HL 00-size, '00s ideal, a bandage dress is not going to be a friend to someone who has a tummy (like MM's) or 'apple-shape'.

The Alia, fit 'n' flare silhouette (all the rage in the late-'80-early '90s too) will also work on an hourglass, and also more on a so-called pear-shape too. Still hard to hide any tummy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please swipe for the second slide.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Here's Lady C's newest. I haven't watched yet, but also...did the person writing the caption have a stroke? I feel a migraine coming just looking at it.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please swipe for the second slide.



To me, what makes it worse is Harry just going along with all the lies and nonsense on the Oprah "interview".  It's one thing for AH to lie and be ridiculed on the stand, but for TW to keep going with all that garbage and H to sit quietly by?


----------



## xincinsin

"Archetypes" rubs me the wrong way. Methane and Hazard are so bent on using the "Arche" prefix to relate to Archewell that they are confusing archetypes with stereotypes. Archetypes are never labels holding women (or anyone) back. Isn't it misinformation to mislead in this manner?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> "Archetypes" rubs me the wrong way. Methane and Hazard are so bent on using the "Arche" prefix to relate to Archewell that they are confusing archetypes with stereotypes. Archetypes are never labels holding women (or anyone) back. Isn't it misinformation to mislead in this manner?


Yes, they want the Archewell connection, but it is also that Meghan considers herself to be an archetype. In her mind she is the epitome of the strong, fierce, woke successful woman. Too bad that this is just a delusion. She is now suing Webster’s because she wants her name and image next to the definition. She is also suing over copyright infringement


----------



## gracekelly

The Harkles are just continuing with their daily PR by having the waffling about Jubilee attendance discussed everyday up to the event itself. They are going to use up their 15 min about this pretty soon.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> The Harkles are just continuing with their daily PR by having the waffling about Jubilee attendance discussed everyday up to the event itself. They are going to use up their 15 min about this pretty soon.


And after the jubilee, what are they going to dramatize? The Queen’s decline? I wouldn’t put it past them.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Inquiring minds :


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> And after the jubilee, what are they going to dramatize? The Queen’s decline? I wouldn’t put it past them.



Next up
will they or won’t they go to the funeral
will they or won’t they go to the coronation
will they or won’t they shut the h*ll up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMFG. Over on the JD and AH thread people are posting Twitter threads how AH used book quotes and movie dialogues and scenes for her testimony. Sounds familiar?

What IS this f*ckery?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. Over on the JD and AH thread people are posting Twitter threads how AH used book quotes and movie dialogues and scenes for her testimony. Sounds familiar?
> 
> What IS this f*ckery?



But also debunked too


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> But also debunked too



Well, at least Raptor's are put in writing


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> To me, what makes it worse is Harry just going along with all the lies and nonsense on the Oprah "interview".  It's one thing for AH to lie and be ridiculed on the stand, but for TW to keep going with all that garbage and H to sit quietly by?


She may have convinced him that they are victims of oppression.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> this Page Six thing is ridiculous IMO
> I couldn't even finish reading it
> Who in their right mind would support her running for President?



Because she doesn't embarrass herself enough...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> Next up
> will they or won’t they go to the funeral
> will they or won’t they go to the coronation
> will they or won’t they shut the h*ll up



God, the thought of her hijacking when the Queen dies...


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> Yes, they want the Archewell connection, but it is also that Meghan considers herself to be an archetype. In her mind she is the epitome of the strong, fierce, woke successful woman. Too bad that this is just a delusion. She is now suing Webster’s because she wants her name and image next to the definition. She is also suing over copyright infringement


Responding to myself because I though I better clarify that I was making a joke about her suing Webster's lololol.!


----------



## gracekelly

Allisonfaye said:


> God, the thought of her hijacking when the Queen dies...


You know they will in some form.  Lots of crocodile tears from these two.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> this Page Six thing is ridiculous IMO
> I couldn't even finish reading it
> Who in their right mind would support her running for President?


They are trolling her.  No one in their right mind believes any of this.  The closest she will ever get is handing out pamphlets for a candidate for dog catcher.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan's Netflix dramas signal fall from grace
					

Andrew Pierce, consultant editor of the Daily Mail, tells Palace Confidential that the streaming giant is working out that the royal pair 'are not the investment they thought they were'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Ya think?


----------



## lanasyogamama

When is the podcast supposed to drop?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Meghan's Netflix dramas signal fall from grace
> 
> 
> Andrew Pierce, consultant editor of the Daily Mail, tells Palace Confidential that the streaming giant is working out that the royal pair 'are not the investment they thought they were'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya think?



They should have asked us before shelling out that money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> When is the podcast supposed to drop?



To drop or to be dropped?


----------



## sdkitty

How Meghan and Harry Are Described by Palace Staff in Bombshell New Book (msn.com)


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> Who in their right mind would support her running for President?



Her opposition. No, seriously. There was a very weak candidate who ran in this state (Illinois), weak for many reasons, when she spoke she sounded truly deranged.  Her "ideas" were so incoherent and had nothing to do with either party. The rumor from reputable people has it her opposition financed her whole campaign and dug up supposed dirt on her party competitors so she'd win the primary.  Honestly I don't know how she even had a driver's license because she was downright bizarre. Anybody would love to run against Meghan.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To drop or to be dropped?


From your fingers to Spotify’s ears.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Her opposition. No, seriously. There was a very weak candidate who ran in this state (Illinois), weak for many reasons, when she spoke she sounded truly deranged.  Her "ideas" were so incoherent and had nothing to do with either party. The rumor from reputable people has it her opposition financed her whole campaign and dug up supposed dirt on her party competitors so she'd win the primary.  Honestly I don't know how she even had a driver's license because she was downright bizarre. Anybody would love to run against Meghan.


it's possible I might vote for her if the other candidate was someone totally unacceptable....but I'd have to hold my nose
And I don't think its gonna happen


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Yes, they want the Archewell connection, but it is also that Meghan considers herself to be an archetype. In her mind she is the epitome of the strong, fierce, woke successful woman. Too bad that this is just a delusion.



One of the articles recently linked, can't recall which it was, discussed how difficult it is to build a brand from scratch when you basically have nothing but Harry's status as an ex-royal.  So, "arch" this and "arch" that is all part of that brand building effort.  You see "arch" and you're supposed to think Harry and MM.  Unfortunately for them, most people will probably think . . .


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> One of the articles recently linked, can't recall which it was, discussed how difficult it is to build a brand from scratch when you basically have nothing but Harry's status as an ex-royal.  So, "arch" this and "arch" that is all part of that brand building effort.  You see "arch" and you're supposed to think Harry and MM.  Unfortunately for them, most people will probably think . . .
> 
> View attachment 5396924



I think of the cookies but now will also think of McD's


----------



## Sophisticatted

rose60610 said:


> Her opposition. No, seriously. There was a very weak candidate who ran in this state (Illinois), weak for many reasons, when she spoke she sounded truly deranged.  Her "ideas" were so incoherent and had nothing to do with either party. The rumor from reputable people has it her opposition financed her whole campaign and dug up supposed dirt on her party competitors so she'd win the primary.  Honestly I don't know how she even had a driver's license because she was downright bizarre. Anybody would love to run against Meghan.



There are rumors that a former president was encouraged to run for office by another former president whose spouse was running for office.  They thought they couldn’t lose against this person.  They were wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Her opposition. No, seriously. There was a very weak candidate who ran in this state (Illinois), weak for many reasons, when she spoke she sounded truly deranged.  Her "ideas" were so incoherent and had nothing to do with either party. The rumor from reputable people has it her opposition financed her whole campaign and dug up supposed dirt on her party competitors so she'd win the primary.  Honestly I don't know how she even had a driver's license because she was downright bizarre. Anybody would love to run against Meghan.


Many times there are sacrificial lambs.  Sometimes they don't even campaign.  That happened in a NYC House Representative race.  The opposition was a name on a piece of paper. Period.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Yes, they want the Archewell connection, but it is also that Meghan considers herself to be an archetype. In her mind she is the epitome of the strong, fierce, woke successful woman. Too bad that this is just a delusion. She is now suing Webster’s because she wants her name and image next to the definition. She is also suing over copyright infringement


She already has many unflattering definitions in the Urban Dictionary, but her stans managed to squeeze in a few that pander to Methane's ego, where "Meghan Markle" = heroically departing a toxic environment that does not appreciate one's authentic self.


----------



## needlv

Ahhh… the infamous Wimbledon visits…


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> Many times there are sacrificial lambs.  Sometimes they don't even campaign.  That happened in a NYC House Representative race.  The opposition was a name on a piece of paper. Period.



You're right. When the sacrificial lamb party runs (even when it doesn't campaign or spend any money), it forces the opposition umbrella party powers-that-be to spend ITS money on that respective race, denting their pot of money that it can throw at other races.    In certain states it doesn't matter much initially, it's a method of chipping, chipping, chipping away to move the needle eventually, years and years down the road.  Narcissists like Meghan know it's all about the power, and when you lose it, you find yourself going from 50 million dollar weddings to eating chips like a squirrel for the money  .


----------



## mellibelly

__





						Blind Item #3
					

An offspring of the royal pedophile had naked photos texted to her of her husband in bed with another woman.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				



If this is true my guess is Eugenie & Jack.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> An offspring of the royal pedophile had naked photos texted to her of her husband in bed with another woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this is true my guess is Eugenie & Jack.


There are comments from an account named MyOpinionOnly who keeps asking why there aren't any blinds about Catherine. Ruffled a few feathers. Don't think s/he is a stan. I checked his/her previous comments made using Disqus. The person identified as POC, doesn't like Sam Markle, made some mild criticism of Methane, and is a big fan of series called Ready to Love. The fixation on Catherine is quite weird.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> When is the podcast supposed to drop?



It was _supposed_ to drop 16 months ago. Spotify has probably given up asking them about it.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> When is the podcast supposed to drop?


Archetypes is supposed to drop in summer, but based on their past history, deadlines for the Harkles are a slippery term.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

They're plotting? Again? As usual? What'll it be this time?  Announcement of Child #3?  Another kind of cake besides Lemon Olive Oil? A special Jubilee Wreath?  We're all waiting with bated breath


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> They're plotting? Again? As usual? What'll it be this time?  Announcement of Child #3?  Another kind of cake besides Lemon Olive Oil? A special Jubilee Wreath?  We're all waiting with bated breath



I am betting it will be a Family pic release plus her… podcast is due that week (remember the trailer they released)?  I bet her podcast will mention something juicy about the BRF and/or throw shade at Catherine’s choices…. Because that gets her global headlines and Catherine cannot respond.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5396217


As influential as her and her sisters are Kim always looks kinda  the same tbh all her outfits are variations on a theme. If it ain’t broke…


papertiger said:


> Hervé Léger was founded 1985. The designer Hervé Peugnet (changed to Léger) designed all sorts, but his signature was the 'bandage dress'. The company was acquired by Max Azaria (BCBG) 1998 and relaunched to much fanfare 2007 basically reducing the company to only one sort of dress done thousands of ways. Originally Hervé Léger's ideal woman was hourglass and Amazonian but the HL (Max Azaria era) woman in the '00s became very slim indeed.
> 
> The Hervé Léger dress was often worn appropriately (or inappropriately) with bare legs and CLs (Christian Louboutin) 'everywhere' late '00s for a few years. There are whole threads dedicated to HL on the Wardrobe forum, and if you go back far enough, almost every woman in the CL forum is wearing an HL dress too.
> 
> Body-con is totally back for a new gen. I think it's the post-covid party fever.
> 
> Whether the original 'Jessica Rabbit' shape or the ultra-slim HL 00-size, '00s ideal, a bandage dress is not going to be a friend to someone who has a tummy (like MM's) or 'apple-shape'.
> 
> The Alia, fit 'n' flare silhouette (all the rage in the late-'80-early '90s too) will also work on an hourglass, and also more on a so-called pear-shape too. Still hard to hide any tummy.


I am listening to a wardrobe organising podcast and even though she talks very nicely about all Bodytypes being equal and although I do agree with her - I can’t help but hear ‘wamp-wamp’ whenever being an apple is mentioned.

I do think they only look good on hourglass or pear because they are basically hip huggers.



CarryOn2020 said:


>



That is an extremely flattering depiction of Harry’s body -I don’t get that impression at all. Something tells me this cartoonist has a soft spot.


mellibelly said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> An offspring of the royal pedophile had naked photos texted to her of her husband in bed with another woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this is true my guess is Eugenie & Jack.


This girl just cannot get good press lol it’s L after L
If anyone has the right to marry an egomaniac and go on Oprah to denounce the system it’s her.

I blame the association with M and A and that cursed headband.


xincinsin said:


> There are comments from an account named MyOpinionOnly who keeps asking why there aren't any blinds about Catherine. Ruffled a few feathers. Don't think s/he is a stan. I checked his/her previous comments made using Disqus. The person identified as POC, doesn't like Sam Markle, made some mild criticism of Methane, and is a big fan of series called Ready to Love. The fixation on Catherine is quite weird.


I’d say to the poster it’s because everyone knows about Rose Hanbury and no one cares including Kate.  I honestly feel that affairs are just accepted among royalty and the gentry. A royal is gonna have a mistress or a mister on the side because they’ve got the power. The only exception is C and D but let’s be honest they just wanted to mudsling.


Chanbal said:


>



Dismantle the monarchy?
Don’t threaten me with a good time Angela


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> This girl just cannot get good press lol it’s L after L
> If anyone has the right to marry an egomaniac and go on Oprah to denounce the system it’s her.



Oh, these Yorkies. She may have the right to denounce the system, rest assured she never will. She loves her title way too much. Allegedly she and B gave K lots of hell about the _curtsy_ stuff.  She is into power and attention while B seems to have found her own peace.  Imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> An offspring of the royal pedophile had naked photos texted to her of her husband in bed with another woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this is true my guess is Eugenie & Jack.



I mean, I'm not a fan of Edo, but at least he doesn't have pap photos out of "work occasions" being touchy-feely with bikini models while his wife is at home recovering from a c-section.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Clicked on the article posted above, more about Tiaragate:



> The prince spoke to the queen over the dispute after the couple felt Kelly was dragging her heels over their request for access to the headpiece.
> 
> However, a source told Brown that staff were fed up with Meghan making demands of them in the run up to the May 2018 ceremony, at St. George's Chapel in Windsor.
> 
> *The insider said: "Meghan would say, 'I'll just do whatever you want me to do,' while meanwhile, she eventually got the chapel she wanted, the preacher she wanted, the choir she wanted, the dress she wanted, the tiara she wanted, the candles she wanted, the location for the after-party, the chef, the entertainment, the guest list. No one said no to anything."*
> 
> A source told Brown that Harry had shouted at staff, which led to the story coming out in the media months later in November 2018.
> 
> The "palace source" said there was "in-person shouting in front of other members of staff, basically in front of too many people, which is why it all started to come out and became the first-ever negative piece of coverage about the behaviour of the couple."



Interesting that she specifically requested Frogmore House for the reception, then it was rumoured they wanted Frogmore House, not Cottage as a residence. Guess that one didn't go according to plan...maybe because they never got the court they wanted to accomodate in the bigger space.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Clicked on the article posted above, more about Tiaragate:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that she specifically requested Frogmore House for the reception, then it was rumoured they wanted Frogmore House, not Cottage as a residence. Guess that one didn't go according to plan...maybe because they never got the court they wanted to accomodate in the bigger space.


I always thought her professed reaction to the BRF, entreating them to "use me as much as you like" was OTT cheap drama.
And if they allegedly wanted and didn't get Frogmore House, would they have been (allegedly) greedy enough to request Windsor Castle next?


----------



## xincinsin

A nice round-up of all the versions of Tiara-gate on one of my fave websites:









						Tackling Tiaragate: Meghan, Harry, and Those Wedding Tiara Rumors
					

All right, everybody. I think it's finally time to delve into a topic that has been requested consistently for almost two years: the reported conflict that cropped up between the Duke and Duchess of Sussex




					www.thecourtjeweller.com


----------



## s67rd

Tiara-gate haha


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh, I had completely forgotten the many stages of Tiaragate. This gem from _Finding Freebees_:



> _Finding Freedom_ also suggests that Meghan may have explored specific tiara possibilities before her appointment with the Queen at Buckingham Palace, noting that Meghan and Clare Waight Keller “looked through archival images of different tiaras” while developing their concept for her bridal look.



So everyone else goes in and is shown a selection someone else picked (as in, Angely Kelly and the owner of said tiaras, The Queen), but that 3rd class actress and her silly dress designer thought they would pick and choose like from a catalogue? WTFFF.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, I had completely forgotten the many stages of Tiaragate. This gem from _Finding Freebees_:
> 
> 
> 
> So everyone else goes in and is shown a selection someone else picked (as in, Angely Kelly and the owner of said tiaras, The Queen), but that 3rd class actress and her silly dress designer thought they would pick and choose like from a catalogue? WTFFF.


The modern evil of online shopping ...


----------



## Sharont2305

From the Clarence House, Cambridge and Royal family accounts.


----------



## xincinsin

Is the Clarence House photo the same one used last year? The one which offended the stans because it didn't glorify the sainted mother of the baby?


----------



## Chanbal

If true, it sounds like the name of a university is being used to give 'paid' credibility to the Harkles…


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Is the Clarence House photo the same one used last year? The one which offended the stans because it didn't glorify the sainted mother of the baby?



To be fair they only have a few photos to choose from. For being three-years-old this kid doesn’t have many photos, and even fewer with his extended family. I give them credit for getting their birthday messages out ahead of the doting parents who haven’t posted one yet.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> it's possible I might vote for her if the other candidate was someone totally unacceptable....but I'd have to hold my nose
> And I don't think its gonna happen



So you think there could be a worse candidate?


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Is the Clarence House photo the same one used last year? The one which offended the stans because it didn't glorify the sainted mother of the baby?


Probably, but to me it's a lovely picture of a grandfather who's publicly withing his grandson a happy birthday. No need for M to be seen, it's 3 generations together.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> From the Clarence House, Cambridge and Royal family accounts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5397241
> View attachment 5397239
> View attachment 5397240



Are they going to use his newborn pics until he graduates high school? Not blaming the BRF, but don't the troublesome two see the embarrassing optics of this?

ETA: what will they do with the girl? There's not even one occasion to choose from.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they going to use his newborn pics until he graduates high school? Not blaming the BRF, but don't the troublesome two see the embarrassing optics of this?
> 
> ETA: what will they do with the girl? There's not even one occasion to choose from.


Exactly, even if any of them have personal photos of Archie, they'll never be used by the above. It's always public photos so not many to choose from. It will be interesting to see what these will use for Lily.


----------



## sdkitty

Allisonfaye said:


> So you think there could be a worse candidate?


unfortunately, yes


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they going to use his newborn pics until he graduates high school? Not blaming the BRF, but don't the troublesome two see the embarrassing optics of this?
> 
> ETA: what will they do with the girl? There's not even one occasion to choose from.


The Troublesome Two probably think their hostage tactics are working and the BRF will cave in to their demands to get fresh pics. 

For Invisibet's birthday, a lovely calligraphic message which Methane should be able to appreciate!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seeing how quickly a mod spotted off topic comments in the Johnny Depp thread I think we wore them out and have been abandoned. This is a legal vacuum now!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, I had completely forgotten the many stages of Tiaragate. This gem from _Finding Freebees_:
> 
> 
> 
> So everyone else goes in and is shown a selection someone else picked (as in, Angely Kelly and the owner of said tiaras, The Queen), but that 3rd class actress and her silly dress designer thought they would pick and choose like from a catalogue? WTFFF.


the delusions of grandeur started early


----------



## Toby93




----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


>



is this accurate?  what does he mean about "her shamed son"?


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> is this accurate?  what does he mean about "her shamed son"?
> 
> seems to be in the UK papers this morning











						Queen BANS Harry and Meghan and Andrew from Buckingham Palace balcony
					

The monarch's decision to only include royals carrying out official public duties such as Harry's father and brother was taken 'after careful consideration', Buckingham Palace said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> is this accurate?  what does he mean about "her shamed son"?


I am guessing it is referring to Andrew.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I am guessing it is referring to Andrew.


oh, duh


----------



## zinacef

I hope they will have an official birthday picture of Archie as a 3 yo little boy like his cousins, I’m sure he’s an adorable little boy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently, a minute after these news broke the Sucksexes put out they'll be attending. I haven't gone digging for the news, I just saw a tweet that Angela Levin isn't happy.


----------



## youngster

Queen BANS Harry and Meghan and Andrew from Buckingham Palace balcony
					

The monarch's decision to only include royals carrying out official public duties such as Harry's father and brother was taken 'after careful consideration', Buckingham Palace said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Apparently though, Harry and MM have just announced that they _are _attending the Jubilee and bringing the children, probably to counter how the story that they have been banned from the balcony.  They also need to try and shine up their royal credentials which are looking rather dingy and frayed at the moment before they trash the family yet again in Harry's upcoming book.   

I think they'll try to weasel their way on to the balcony somehow.  Plead, threaten, weep, whatever.   It'll be interesting to see how people and crowds react to them but there may not be much reaction if they are not part of the major public events.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently, a minute after these news broke the Sucksexes put out they'll be attending. I haven't gone digging for the news, I just saw a tweet that Angela Levin isn't happy.



Yep, not a shock that they'll go and try and get as many photos as possible of themselves with the family and so they can create as much drama as possible.  It's shameful, when the attention should be on the queen.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Queen BANS Harry and Meghan and Andrew from Buckingham Palace balcony
> 
> 
> The monarch's decision to only include royals carrying out official public duties such as Harry's father and brother was taken 'after careful consideration', Buckingham Palace said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently though, Harry and MM have just announced that they _are _attending the Jubilee and bringing the children, probably to counter how the story that they have been banned from the balcony.  They also need to try and shine up their royal credentials which are looking rather dingy and frayed at the moment before they trash the family yet again in Harry's upcoming book.
> 
> I think they'll try to weasel their way on to the balcony somehow.  Plead, threaten, weep, whatever.   It'll be interesting to see how people and crowds react to them but there may not be much reaction if they are not part of the major public events.


hopefully the Queen will listen to good advice and not be swayed by tears or tantrums


----------



## papertiger

QE2 bans the terrible twosome from Plat Jubilee plans 

Apologies for no C&P of the article, I'm travelling. 









						Queen bans Harry, Meghan & Andrew from main Jubilee event after 'consideration'
					

The Queen is limiting the Platinum Jubilee Trooping the Colour balcony appearance next month to working royals only meaning there will be no place on it for Prince Harry, Meghan Markle or Prince Andrew




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Yep, not a shock that they'll go and try and get as many photos as possible of themselves with the family and so they can create as much drama as possible.  It's shameful, when the attention should be on the queen.



Yeah. I really thought they'd take the invitation - which would allow them to save face - and politely decline (at least that vulgar gold digger). Nobody wants them there, and The Queen deserves an unspoilt Jubilee.

I wish the press would do the right thing, completely ignore their shenanigans and just report about the Jubilee and jubilant.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Queen BANS Harry and Meghan and Andrew from Buckingham Palace balcony
> 
> 
> The monarch's decision to only include royals carrying out official public duties such as Harry's father and brother was taken 'after careful consideration', Buckingham Palace said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently though, Harry and MM have just announced that they _are _attending the Jubilee and bringing the children, probably to counter how the story that they have been banned from the balcony.  They also need to try and shine up their royal credentials which are looking rather dingy and frayed at the moment before they trash the family yet again in Harry's upcoming book.
> 
> I think they'll try to weasel their way on to the balcony somehow.  Plead, threaten, weep, whatever.   It'll be interesting to see how people and crowds react to them but there may not be much reaction if they are not part of the major public events.



Sorry, I'm behind


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, if this horrible woman is really planning to attend you know how bad things really are for them. They are probably on the verge of broke and being social outcasts over there. They need to at least make sure there are new pictures with the children to fabricate any closeness.


----------



## MiniMabel

I really, really hope that the Harkles do the decent thing and stay away completely.  If they do not, that would be a stratospheric level of crassness that would ensure that they are even more despised than they currently are........if that's possible!  They may be members of the BRF, but they themselves are not Royal; they are a million miles from it.

I don't want to see them anywhere, especially not on the balcony, so let's hope with all our hearts that the report that only working Royals will take their place there is true.  

The Platinum Jubilee is about Queen Elizabeth II, her achievements (personal and duty) during her 70 year reign and the lovely lady she is, and no-one else.  Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine and all the others would never try and hog the limelight and diminish Elizabeth's place in the sun which she has more than earned. Imagine, she still works at age 96! Her conscientiousness, grace and dignity are the qualities we are all celebrating with her. (Qualities, I might add, that the Harkles are strangers with).

I did read that JCMH is playing polo that weekend??!!


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I think they'll try to weasel their way on to the balcony somehow. Plead, threaten, weep, whatever. It'll be interesting to see how people and crowds react to them but there may not be much reaction if they are not part of the major public events.


Not gonna happen imo. The Queen has made her decision, no doubt with input from C and W, and will not back down. The Harkles will be offered front row seats in the VIP section right below the balcony where they'll have a great view looking up at the royals who matter.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh, I’m disappointed they’ll be there.


----------



## sdkitty

MiniMabel said:


> I really, really hope that the Harkles do the decent thing and stay away completely.  If they do not, that would be a stratospheric level of crassness that would ensure that they are even more despised than they currently are........if that's possible!  They may be members of the BRF, but they themselves are not Royal; they are a million miles from it.
> 
> I don't want to see them anywhere, especially not on the balcony, so let's hope with all our hearts that the report that only working Royals will take their place there is true.
> 
> The Platinum Jubilee is about Queen Elizabeth II, her achievements (personal and duty) during her 70 year reign and the lovely lady she is, and no-one else.  Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine and all the others would never try and hog the limelight and diminish Elizabeth's place in the sun which she has more than earned. Imagine, she still works at age 96! Her conscientiousness, grace and dignity are the qualities we are all celebrating with her. (Qualities, I might add, that the Harkles are strangers with).
> 
> I did read that JCMH is playing polo that weekend??!!


decent?  I don't think that's in their playbook.  Just what is best for them.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


>




@charlottawill, I LOVE this so much!!!!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She's right...at the end it might not even matter if they do or don't attend. Their stupid spectacle is stressing everyone out and diverting attention from the actual focus.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## kemilia

The dumb duo probably thought no way would they not get an invite--HAHA--the Q plays the long game!

Latest I read is that they will be in attendance somewhere (hopefully looking up at the balcony).

M is probably shopping right now for some ill-fitting expensive outfit, polishing up all her trendy jewelry, and getting those choppers whitened for all the "look at me" camera shots.

ETA--and ordering fresh extensions.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> ETA--and ordering fresh extensions.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Kind of ironic that she was on the balcony, she was super annoyed and looked like she wanted to be anywhere else, and now she would die to get back on there.


----------



## csshopper

Production of the Suckess S*** Show has begun.
How they fly.
Where they will stay. With another Balcony displaced relative in Frogmore?
Can Haz parade around in his uniform.
How many outfits can Methane cram in the luggage.
They attend.
They gate crash using the children.
They strategize every photo op they can with help from Netfix.
Not being in the ”money shot” on the Balcony, they will claim the RF is “racist”.
Publicity ad nauseum and then Haz’s book is launched with the attitude from them,  this confirms the Royals are horrible and Haz is doing a public service by exposing them.

They retreat to their sewer.


----------



## Aimee3

TW will have a last minute pregnancy or miscarriage or Covid…take your pick.  I don’t think she’ll go if she can’t be with the “in” crowd i.e. the real royals.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> "last minute pregnancy"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

This is a beauty!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like it is going to be a _long_ weekend of back-and-forth.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I feel like this is a checkers vs chess move.  H&TW liked the ego boost of thinking they held the power/the choice was theirs, the idea that they could publicly humiliate the RF by not showing up.  THEN the RF publicly humiliated THEM by announcing that they weren’t invited (at least not on the prime spot of the balcony).

OH, HO!  THAT won’t do!  The narcs need to feel like they are in control and have the upper hand at all times.  So, YES, they ARE coming.  Ha!

Meanwhile, I feel that the RF actually wants them there.  If only to control them and/or see the grandkids.  Checkmate!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like it is going to be a _long_ weekend of back-and-forth.




You can see the stupid grin dying on her face while Anne pushes her out of the frame.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I think they'll try to weasel their way on to the balcony somehow.  Plead, threaten, weep, whatever.   It'll be interesting to see how people and crowds react to them but there may not be much reaction if they are not part of the major public events.



Maybe something like this?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

I don’t trust them. Something is planned.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does this mean Thomas is going, too?  Nflix would love that - a grandparent group photo during QE’s jubilee paired with a christening. Wowzee!$$$$


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did someone see the original announcement? I can't seem to find it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The best thing the press could do is pay them no attention and take zero pictures.


----------



## Zen101

gracekelly said:


> I don’t trust them. Something is planned.


At this point, the shameless duo might even squeeze in Lilibet’s christening. I’m opening my mind to all kinds of possibilities. H may throw a hissy fit and get his way.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did someone see the original announcement? I can't seem to find it.







*Prince Harry and Meghan to join Queen's Jubilee celebrations with both their children*






Fri, 6 May 2022, 4:21 pm


Prince Harry and his wife Meghan will attend next month's Platinum Jubilee celebrations with both their children.
It will be the first time the *Queen* will meet her 11-month-old great-granddaughter Lilibet, who is *named after her*.
She has also not seen the couple's firstborn, *Archie Harrison* - who turns three today - in two years.
A spokesperson for the couple said: "*Prince Harry* and *Meghan*, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, are excited and honoured to attend The Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations this June with their children."

It comes as Buckingham Palace announced *the couple will not be invited onto the royal balcony* for the Trooping the Colour.
The confirmation ends speculation about which members will be present for that jubilee moment, with just working royals to stand alongside the monarch.
However, a palace source said that - despite the snub - the Sussexes are "much-loved members of the family" and have been invited to other jubilee events.
Prince Andrew, who was stripped of his military titles due to *sex abuse allegations against him* will also not be present on the balcony.
Prince Harry and Meghan saw the Queen last month for the *first time in two years*, on their way to the Invictus Games in the Netherlands.
Prior to that, the couple had not been back to the UK since they *quit as senior working royals in January 2020*.
Back in March, the duke and duchess were notably absent from a memorial service held for his grandfather, Prince Philip.
Their daughter, *Lilibet Diana*, is named after the nickname given to the Queen when she was a child.

Not my bold


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like it is going to be a _long_ weekend of back-and-forth.



How desperate are these two to want to show up as members of the royal family?  Why now?  How hard is Netflix pushing for these two irrelevant people to be seen at the jubilee in order to keep their contracts?  The Queen has said they will not be on the balcony so that is such a humiliation, but they are going anyway because Netflix is running the show?


----------



## bag-mania

I figure Meghan will find her way onto that balcony even if she has to scale it with a vaulting pole. Harry and the babies are on their own!


----------



## 880

William Did Not Want Harry at Platinum Jubilee: Source
					

He has finally confirmed he is coming, but Harry’s “presence on British soil is not welcomed” by William, one royal source told The Daily Beast before the announcement.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




i wonder if Netfix access is somehow limited, whether MH would change their minds about attending


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> TW will have a last minute pregnancy or miscarriage or Covid…take your pick.  I don’t think she’ll go if she can’t be with the “in” crowd i.e. the real royals.


As I have said before, TW must have nerves of steel to show her face after all that has been said on national TV. Can you imagine spouting all those lies and then having to be in the same room with the people you lied about?  No normal person would ever want to be in that self-inflicted situation


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> As I have said before, TW must have nerves of steel to show her face after all that has been said on national TV. Can you imagine spouting all those lies and then having to be in the same room with the people you lied about?  No normal person would ever want to be in that self-inflicted situation



She lives her life from the outside looking in, he's an overgrown toddler. Never mind privacy and a private life, the only life H&M are interested in are their public lives.


----------



## youngster

I'd guess that William will make it clear that he will not attend any public events alongside Harry. He will not allow his picture, Kate's picture or his children's picture to be taken with MM or Harry either.  They won't be allowed to use Will and Kate to try and polish up their tarnished royal credentials.  I could see other royals, like Princess Anne and Prince Edward, saying the same.  Heck, at this point, I could see Prince Charles saying the same as well. 

So, I could see Harry/MM being invited to all the private "family events" (and talk about _awkward_) and keeping them at a distance in public via limiting public appearances to just the working royals. No photos, no cameras, no video allowed for anyone at these private family events either. This is family time, after all. Maybe a picture of the Queen and PC with the children will be allowed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am starting to wonder if "much-loved members of the family" is code for something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> So, I could see Harry/MM being invited to all the private "family events" (and talk about _awkward_) and keeping them at a distance in public via limiting public appearances to just the working royals. No photos, no cameras, no video allowed for anyone at these private family events either.



They will have to body-search them (is this a word?).


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does this mean Thomas is going, too?  Nflix would love that - a grandparent group photo during QE’s jubilee paired with a christening. Wowzee!$$$$


Never happen.  There will be no photos of the kids together or the Sussex with the Cambridge children.  If there is a christening, it will be very private.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am starting to wonder if "much-loved members of the family" is code for something.


Right! lol!  It is code for those sneaky %^*&)*_)(*^$!


----------



## gracekelly

VintageBagsAddict said:


> At this point, the shameless duo might even squeeze in Lilibet’s christening. I’m opening my mind to all kinds of possibilities. H may throw a hissy fit and get his way.


I would hope that by this point in time, Harry could throw a thousand hissy fits and none of them would be taken seriously.  William and Anne will be unmoved.  He has shown his colors and the colors are not friendly.  He is one step away from being seditious.


----------



## gracekelly

880 said:


> William Did Not Want Harry at Platinum Jubilee: Source
> 
> 
> He has finally confirmed he is coming, but Harry’s “presence on British soil is not welcomed” by William, one royal source told The Daily Beast before the announcement.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i wonder if Netfix access is somehow limited, whether MH would change their minds about attending


The best Netflix can do is have a really good film editor intercut scenes of Harry and Meghan dressed up and inserting them into a bunch of people in the crowd watching, or  taking pix of them in the seated stands if they have tickets.  The family usually watches from windows above the parade ground.  Basically they won't be seen by the public unless NF films them and makes something up.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I imagine that there will be photos taken in a private environment of the queen and all the great grandchildren.  I’m guessing the invitation to the duo specified that the *entire* family must be there.  The photo might not be released now, but may make a desk/background appearance and might possibly be published after the queen passes away.  Just speculation on my part.  It looks bad that Archie and Lilli aren’t in any photos with their relatives, and this could be psychologically damaging to them in later years.


----------



## csshopper

Daydreaming:

Baldie and Botox are made to stand adjacent to Princess Pushy, aka Princess Michael of Kent in the back row of family pictures.

Methane is invited to a studio for a “set the record straight” opportunity.  Expecting to be alone, with cameras rolling, she enters the studio to find Thomas Markle waiting to greet her, with sister Samantha at his side.

Archie throws a massive, melt down fit, on camera, digging his heels in and screeching “I DON‘T WANT TO GO HOME! I want to stay here with Uncle William and Aunt Catherine and George and Charlotte and Louis.”

if, only!


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a beauty!



Holy Moly--Never saw this before!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

This is the RF--I just don't see Nfl*x being able to film anywhere on private grounds/buildings/residences.

If nothing else, this means I have to stock up on Skinny Pop for the show.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh, I don't want them there. I can somewhat tolerate Harry - blood is thicker than water -, but Raptor simply doesn't deserve to ever be in polite company again.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> Holy Moly--Never saw this before!!


I would just love it if she had Charlotte with her in there.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, I don't want them there. I can somewhat tolerate Harry - blood is thicker than water -, but Raptor simply doesn't deserve ever be in polite company again.


This is really true.  She doesn't deserve to be there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And at this point I'm not sure why the BRF would even pretend to consider that demon spawn a family member, let alone a much loved one. That needs to be isolated with guards when visiting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Daydreaming:
> 
> Baldie and Botox are made to stand adjacent to Princess Pushy, aka Princess Michael of Kent in the back row of family pictures.
> 
> Methane is invited to a studio for a “set the record straight” opportunity.  Expecting to be alone, with cameras rolling, she enters the studio to find Thomas Markle waiting to greet her, with sister Samantha at his side.
> 
> Archie throws a massive, melt down fit, on camera, digging his heels in and screeching “I DON‘T WANT TO GO HOME! I want to stay here with Uncle William and Aunt Catherine and George and Charlotte and Louis.”
> 
> if, only!



Guessing they will want Aunt Cath to take their photos, too.  She should say, “No!”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing they will want Aunt Cath to take their photos, too.  She should say, “No!”



Naw. It would cause Raptor physical pain to have Kate's talent praised in the press and on social media.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Right! lol!  It is code for those sneaky %^*&)*_)(*^$!



Time for the decoder:


----------



## CarryOn2020

And here it begins - make a statement, walk it back.  This will go on and on. Snore, JubileeJoke. 









						Harry & Meghan may STILL appear on Palace balcony despite Queen's ban
					

A dramatic statement at 3pm said the couple - as well as the Duke of York - would not be invited onto the balcony for Trooping the Colour, the spectacular start of her long weekend of commemorations.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_But palace sources suggest the outcast couple could make a starring appearance at the pageant finale alongside other senior royals, possibly even as part of a second balcony appearance.

The Queen's decision is unlikely to fall comfortably with all Royal Family members – particularly Prince William – who have been left deeply hurt and angered by Harry's behaviour. But sources said there was little doubt that all would put their feelings to one side for the sake of the monarch.

'At the end of the day it is about celebrating the historic achievement of a truly remarkable woman. No one would want to disrespect the Queen by continuing hostilities in public,' said one._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _'At the end of the day it is about celebrating the historic achievement of a truly remarkable woman. *No one would want to disrespect the Queen *by continuing hostilities in public,' said one._



Pretty sure two of the invitees have no problems to disrespect The Queen whatsoever.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Pretty sure two of the invitees have no problems to disrespect The Queen whatsoever.



Well said.  I’m thinking Angela Levin is correct - H&M really do want to destroy the monarchy or, at least, undermine QE.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> And here it begins - make a statement, walk it back.  This will go on and on. Snore, JubileeJoke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan may STILL appear on Palace balcony despite Queen's ban
> 
> 
> A dramatic statement at 3pm said the couple - as well as the Duke of York - would not be invited onto the balcony for Trooping the Colour, the spectacular start of her long weekend of commemorations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _But palace sources suggest the outcast couple could make a starring appearance at the pageant finale alongside other senior royals, possibly even as part of a second balcony appearance.
> 
> The Queen's decision is unlikely to fall comfortably with all Royal Family members – particularly Prince William – who have been left deeply hurt and angered by Harry's behaviour. But sources said there was little doubt that all would put their feelings to one side for the sake of the monarch.
> 
> 'At the end of the day it is about celebrating the historic achievement of a truly remarkable woman. No one would want to disrespect the Queen by continuing hostilities in public,' said one._


The Harkles PR machine is manifesting.  They were on a second balcony at some event in the past, and they didn't like it then and won't like it now.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said.  I’m thinking Angela Levin is correct - H&M really do want to destroy the monarchy or, at least, undermine QE.


Harry hates his father IMO.  He is trying to make thing bad for him and make him look weak.  His jealousy of his brother is the same. Harry is barking up the wrong tree as far as William is concerned.  In another age, William would send him to the Tower or do what George Vl did with David, keep him out of the country.

But seriously  Meghan spent 5 minutes in England.  Why is she so invested in trashing the monarchy?  Her skin is so thin?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a beauty!



I'd be surprised if Megsy didn't demand this one for the wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'd be surprised if Megsy didn't demand this one for the wedding.


If she had known about it she would have. It hasn't been used in 20 years so she didn't know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You can see the stupid grin dying on her face while Anne pushes her out of the frame.


It never gets old  Gotta love Anne. She's always looking out for Mum in spite of Hazy's BS.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> If she had known about it she would have. It hasn't been used in 20 years so she didn't know.



You mean she didn't ask to see the carriage catalog? Like she was ordering a limo in LA for prom?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> The best thing the press could do is pay them no attention and take zero pictures.


If only...it will be like the Super Bowl of paparazzi.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> As I have said before, TW must have nerves of steel to show her face after all that has been said on national TV. Can you imagine spouting all those lies and then having to be in the same room with the people you lied about?  No normal person would ever want to be in that self-inflicted situation


#1, they are not normal. #2, they are desperate for cash.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "...the outcast couple could make a starring appearance at the pageant finale..."


What the hell? Are they going to twirl flaming batons to "God Save the Queen"? Unless it comes directly from the palace all this press speculation is questionable.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think they couldn’t be fully “banned” because they would claim it was due to RaCiSm?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The Harkles PR machine is manifesting.  They were on a second balcony at some event in the past, and they didn't like it then and won't like it now.


So will they now play the "Put us on the balcony or we don't come" card?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> So will they now play the "Put us on the balcony or we don't come" card?


They can try.  It won't work.  I think he was told that at the meeting.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> You mean she didn't ask to see the carriage catalog? Like she was ordering a limo in LA for prom?



Fortunately, the type of carriage was probably not on her radar or there would have been carriagegate in addition to tiaragate.  She wanted a red carpet and was told no.  I think they offered blue, but that wasn't good enough.


----------



## Sophisticatted

charlottawill said:


> What the hell? Are they going to twirl flaming batons to "God Save the Queen"? Unless it comes directly from the palace all this press speculation is questionable.



They can’t make a “starring appearance “ because they aren’t stars and never will be.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Starring appearance?  _Of course, H&M will try. Doubt Nflix wants footage of Hazz with the PedoPrince [even tho he wasn’t convicted, he did pay $12million to one of JeffE’s sex slaves, allegedly]. Even Eug and Bea pose a problem because someone will need to explain why they are not on the balcony. We did see Bea and her children practicing with the carriage, so maybe that is how they will be included.

Imo all Nflix wants is footage of them standing with QE, Charles, etc. Nflix can and will dub in the adoring crowd shots. The Invictus photos show H&M waving and smiling to only a few people. Those gaps will be filled in. The key is H&M need to be _there_, be _seen, _so the footage will seem somewhat authentic. Guessing Nflix is trying to make a syrupy, sweet docudrama that shows H&M as all sugary niceness, not the embittered, entitled, spoiled losers they really are.  If the Nflix audience knows pampered prince did not attend, then it’s more difficult to doctor the footage and much more difficult to sell the bs.  

Clearly, this latest dust-up is about Nflix, not QE’s accomplishment.
 My opinion.


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> I was appalled that despite the unlimited budget, she still managed to look unkempt or frumpy. What happened to her most expensive garments like the Dior bedsheet caftan? If the rumours were true, the palace limited her access to the fine jewels after she displayed too much avaricious interest.


Well, didn't she still get her hands on some of the jewelry and won't return it?!?!?!


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> Well, didn't she still get her hands on some of the jewelry and won't return it?!?!?!


Allegedly.
I don't think HMTQ gave her anything on lifetime loan, so if she filched anything to Canada with her, it might be Diana's jewellery which I think Di's sisters keep an eye on. Harder to get those back as Hazard would see it as part of his inheritance.

I'm more interested to know why the Saudi prince gave Hazard a pile of diamonds. And since he could then give them to Methane to do with as she wished, it was a personal gift and not a gift to the Crown or a gift given while on official duties. Did Hazard do favours for the prince back then? They don't seem to be close friends who would say, "Here you go, some diamonds I had lying around."


----------



## altigirl88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for the decoder:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5397524


That’s not bad


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Allegedly.
> I don't think HMTQ gave her anything on lifetime loan, so if she filched anything to Canada with her, it might be Diana's jewellery which I think Di's sisters keep an eye on. Harder to get those back as Hazard would see it as part of his inheritance.
> 
> I'm more interested to know why the Saudi prince gave Hazard a pile of diamonds. And since he could then give them to Methane to do with as she wished, it was a personal gift and not a gift to the Crown or a gift given while on official duties. Did Hazard do favours for the prince back then? They don't seem to be close friends who would say, "Here you go, some diamonds I had lying around."



And wouldn't you think that somebody who'd give you major diamond bling be included on the guest list for their wedding?  I agree, the whole thing reeks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> But seriously  Meghan spent 5 minutes in England.  Why is she so invested in trashing the monarchy?  Her skin is so thin?


The Disney Princess syndrome? Most Disney princes seem to be in line to be king. Diana was in line to be the Queen before the divorce.

IMHO, Methane isn't intelligent enough to understand that despite marrying a prince, she will never be Queen of anything more than 16 or 19 toilets. She is plenty sneaky and crafty but not a lot of IQ. Her resentment stems from not achieving the goal she envisioned: marry prince -> hailed as Diana v.2 -> non-stop partying with endless stream of $$$$ -> lord it over the royal family because she will be the star of the BRF -> inherit the throne after QE2 because she is naturally the best choice.

Anything less must be because of racism, sexism and other -isms.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Exactly, even if any of them have personal photos of Archie, they'll never be used by the above. It's always public photos so not many to choose from. *It will be interesting to see what these will use for Lily.*


They can always improvise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If they try to pull off a ‘surprise’ christening, will they have the little one walk in?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> If true, it sounds like the name of a university is being used to give 'paid' credibility to the Harkles…



I’m sure this professor must realise the irony of her position everyday and it truly is funny. 


zinacef said:


> I hope they will have an official birthday picture of Archie as a 3 yo little boy like his cousins, I’m sure he’s an adorable little boy.


He’s the cutest ginger mixed race kid they can hire on the day guaranteed   
I dunno if he is real I feel he must be looking a bit wan after being locked in the McMansion for so long.


kemilia said:


> The dumb duo probably thought no way would they not get an invite--HAHA--the Q plays the long game!
> 
> Latest I read is that they will be in attendance somewhere (hopefully looking up at the balcony).
> 
> M is probably shopping right now for some ill-fitting expensive outfit, polishing up all her trendy jewelry, and getting those choppers whitened for all the "look at me" camera shots.
> 
> ETA--and ordering fresh extensions.


Fresh hair? We can only hope!


CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a beauty!



As much as I hate the ostentatious and totally pointless over-consumption of the royals I do usually think they have style.

This carriage, on the other hand, looks like something Liberace wouldn’t have in his Vegas show for fear of looking too tacky.


gracekelly said:


> The best Netflix can do is have a really good film editor intercut scenes of Harry and Meghan dressed up and inserting them into a bunch of people in the crowd watching, or  taking pix of them in the seated stands if they have tickets.  The family usually watches from windows above the parade ground.  Basically they won't be seen by the public unless NF films them and makes something up.


This is basically going to be the Bruno of pageants. 





xincinsin said:


> Allegedly.
> I don't think HMTQ gave her anything on lifetime loan, so if she filched anything to Canada with her, it might be Diana's jewellery which I think Di's sisters keep an eye on. Harder to get those back as Hazard would see it as part of his inheritance.
> 
> I'm more interested to know why the Saudi prince gave Hazard a pile of diamonds. And since he could then give them to Methane to do with as she wished, it was a personal gift and not a gift to the Crown or a gift given while on official duties. Did Hazard do favours for the prince back then? They don't seem to be close friends who would say, "Here you go, some diamonds I had lying around."


The Saudis are always giving the BRF gifts including diamonds and they  reciprocate with gifts of their own _extremely morally questionable_ kind aka ‘security advice’ and our country consenting to sell arms that have been used on Yemen - which is why I laugh at the hypocrisy of the BRF saying they stand with the Ukraine.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Starring appearance?  _Of course, H&M will try. Doubt Nflix wants footage of Hazz with the PedoPrince [even tho he wasn’t convicted, he did pay $12million to one of JeffE’s sex slaves, allegedly]. Even Eug and Bea pose a problem because someone will need to explain why they are not on the balcony. We did see Bea and her children practicing with the carriage, so maybe that is how they will be included.
> 
> Imo all Nflix wants is footage of them standing with QE, Charles, etc. Nflix can and will dub in the adoring crowd shots. The Invictus photos show H&M waving and smiling to only a few people. Those gaps will be filled in. The key is H&M need to be _there_, be _seen, _so the footage will seem somewhat authentic. Guessing Nflix is trying to make a syrupy, sweet docudrama that shows H&M as all sugary niceness, not the embittered, entitled, spoiled losers they really are.  If the Nflix audience knows pampered prince did not attend, then it’s more difficult to doctor the footage and much more difficult to sell the bs.
> 
> Clearly, this latest dust-up is about Nflix, not QE’s accomplishment.
> My opinion.


The scary part is that all thsee images can be manipulated with computers. Their images can be inserted into anything and it will look totally real. Netflix has an agenda with Harry whether he realizes it or not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> This carriage, on the other hand, looks like something Liberace wouldn’t have in his Vegas show for fear of looking too tacky.



Guessing we will soon see many jewels, tiaras, coaches, gowns, medals, etc. that have not been seen in years.
The BRF has _huge_ closets.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing we will soon see many jewels, tiaras, coaches, gowns, medals, etc. that have not been seen in years.
> The BRF has _huge_ closets.



Not gonna lie, the jewels and tiaras will be my favourite part


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They will have to body-search them (is this a word?).


Do you mean a body cavity search to ensure H&M don't have concealed  recording devices on/in themselves? That's not a job for which I'd gladly volunteer.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> The Saudis are always giving the BRF gifts including diamonds and they  reciprocate with gifts of their own _extremely morally questionable_ kind aka ‘security advice’ and our country consenting to sell arms that have been used on Yemen - which is why I laugh at the hypocrisy of the BRF saying they stand with the Ukraine.


Did Hazard even have any morally questionable info or influence to offer then? Maybe that's why he needs the Intel that comes with being a IPP. If someone gives you diamonds for no reason, there will be a reason in the future.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Allisonfaye said:


> God, the thought of her hijacking when the Queen dies...



She could lead to the end of the monarchy - we don’t want her here


----------



## elvisfan4life

mellibelly said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> An offspring of the royal pedophile had naked photos texted to her of her husband in bed with another woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If this is true my guess is Eugenie & Jack.



To be fair bedding Eug must be an effort she is a dead ringer for Andrew yuk


----------



## elvisfan4life

needlv said:


> I am betting it will be a Family pic release plus her… podcast is due that week (remember the trailer they released)?  I bet her podcast will mention something juicy about the BRF and/or throw shade at Catherine’s choices…. Because that gets her global headlines and Catherine cannot respond.



But no one here gives a damn - stay over there love where there appear to be village idiots who can tolerate you


----------



## elvisfan4life

s67rd said:


> Tiara-gate haha



Princess Margaret did it first and a million times better - she bought her own tiara at auction ( reputedly worth £1.4m now ) so she wouldn’t have to borrow one from her sis or mum for her wedding and so could do whatever the hell she wanted - she was then snapped naked in the bath ( tastefully with lots of bubbles ) wearing only it - photographed by her husband Lord Snowdon - in those days that was unheard of for such a prominent royal - daughter of the King- nothing this pathetic attention seeking American “actress” can do in this day and age would come anywhere near - do what you want love - no one cares


----------



## elvisfan4life

MiniMabel said:


> I really, really hope that the Harkles do the decent thing and stay away completely.  If they do not, that would be a stratospheric level of crassness that would ensure that they are even more despised than they currently are........if that's possible!  They may be members of the BRF, but they themselves are not Royal; they are a million miles from it.
> 
> I don't want to see them anywhere, especially not on the balcony, so let's hope with all our hearts that the report that only working Royals will take their place there is true.
> 
> The Platinum Jubilee is about Queen Elizabeth II, her achievements (personal and duty) during her 70 year reign and the lovely lady she is, and no-one else.  Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine and all the others would never try and hog the limelight and diminish Elizabeth's place in the sun which she has more than earned. Imagine, she still works at age 96! Her conscientiousness, grace and dignity are the qualities we are all celebrating with her. (Qualities, I might add, that the Harkles are strangers with).
> 
> I did read that JCMH is playing polo that weekend??!!



They are so well matched -such dense stupid people 
they think people love them!!! Not here -she is universally despised and he isnt far behind now - even the old granny brigade who cried at the little 12 yr old following his mummy’s coffin have been turned off him by this horrendous woman in the last few years he is a disgrace


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> Not gonna happen imo. The Queen has made her decision, no doubt with input from C and W, and will not back down. The Harkles will be offered front row seats in the VIP section right below the balcony where they'll have a great view looking up at the royals who matter.



At the back by the bins and smelly bogs


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

kemilia said:


> The dumb duo probably thought no way would they not get an invite--HAHA--the Q plays the long game!
> 
> Latest I read is that they will be in attendance somewhere (hopefully looking up at the balcony).
> 
> M is probably shopping right now for some ill-fitting expensive outfit, polishing up all her trendy jewelry, and getting those choppers whitened for all the "look at me" camera shots.
> 
> ETA--and ordering fresh extensions.



A tight fitting balaclava with no holes would finish it off perfectly


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> I figure Meghan will find her way onto that balcony even if she has to scale it with a vaulting pole. Harry and the babies are on their own!



Philip would have sorted Snipers on the roof


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> So will they now play the "Put us on the balcony or we don't come" card?



I wish


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Philip would have sorted Snipers on the roof



Please. That's slightly over the top even as a joke, isn't it.


----------



## duna

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And why would the BRF make a peace offering at all? I feel it's more than they deserve that they are even allowed back anywhere near the family.



Tourre agrees.


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And why would the BRF make a peace offering at all? I feel it's more than they deserve that they are even allowed back anywhere near the family.
> 
> 
> 
> Tourre agrees.





Tourre is right. 

Peter Hunt's a twerp!


----------



## lallybelle

They have done it the right way, as much as I'd rather not see them mugging for the camera and thirsty to get onto every shot. They are family, it would have looked bad to tell them they were completely unwelcome. But the only "working royals" is the perfect excuse not to have the disastrous duo and Andy for that matter, have the honor of standing with HM on the balcony.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And why would the BRF make a peace offering at all? I feel it's more than they deserve that they are even allowed back anywhere near the family.
> 
> 
> 
> Tourre agrees.



Who is this Peter Hunt? I looked him up. He is an ex-reporter, anti-BRF, pro-Harkles. Thinks the Harkles are in great danger and deserve to be given lots of police protection. Peter, you nitwit, if the Harkles were the decent sort, no one would be hurling vitriol at them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I'm more interested to know why the Saudi prince gave Hazard a pile of diamonds. And since he could then give them to Methane to do with as she wished, it was a personal gift and not a gift to the Crown or a gift given while on official duties. Did Hazard do favours for the prince back then? They don't seem to be close friends who would say, "Here you go, some diamonds I had lying around."


Was it just a rumour that H&M broke up the Saudi earrings once their provenance became public knowledge and then reused the diamonds to enhance her other jewelry?


----------



## papertiger

*Timing of Sussexes’ Jubilee announcement was pure theatrics*

Hannah Furness
Fri, 6 May 2022, 9:01 pm






the Sussexes - Mischa Schoemaker
The Sussexes are coming to town. With their two children in tow, they will return to their royal roots to light up the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee with a touch of LA celebrity sparkle.
For Meghan, it will be her first public appearance in Britain since the Sussexes sped away from official duties in January 2020, leaving scorched earth behind them.
For Archie, it will be the first time he has seen the British half of his family since he was a small baby, with little sister Lilibet meeting her great-granny the Queen and grandpa Prince Charles for the first time.
Once, it would have been unthinkable that Prince Harry would miss such a milestone moment for the Queen. But those simpler days are long gone, and for months the Platinum Jubilee speculation has been spinning out of control.

His most recent pronouncement was that he merely “wanted” to come, with security issues to be ironed out before he dared bring his young family to Britain. Then he was booked into a Santa Barbara polo match - the perfect get-out clause, in the eyes of his fans.
On Friday afternoon, through his PR team, he finally confirmed he would be flying with his wife and children back into the Royal family fold.
Just as night follows day, that announcement was pure theatrics.





Fans and critics alike had only just started digesting the news the Sussexes would not be on the Trooping the Colour balcony. Was it a snub? A masterstroke from the still-authoritative Queen?
Moments later, in the words of their tormentor-in-chief Piers Morgan: “Oh God, they’re coming anyway… wait for the Sussex circus to steal all the focus from the Queen.”
Fairer heads would say they were damned if they did and damned if they didn’t: how rude to decline an invitation from the Queen, and how shameless to accept it after everything they have said about the Royal Family.
Cynics will fear their trip will prove yet more fodder for the Sussex publicity machine - new photographs with Granny ahead of Prince Harry’s autobiography in the autumn, and footage for any Netflix documentaries one day coming down the track.
Admirable though their professional talents are, their global brand is inseparable from their Royal status and a trip back to Blighty will burnish those credentials no end.
The novelty of the renegade royals matched with their magnetic capacity for drama will make following every move of their return irresistible.
When Harry and Meghan left the Royal Family, the Queen had one red line, that no one cannot be “half in, half out” royal. The decision to welcome the Sussexes with (mostly) open arms to the family side of the Jubilee will, for the sake of harmony, test that rule to breaking point.
But the British public has one red line of their own: do not overshadow the Queen in the celebration of her record-breaking reign. The people will forgive much, but not the Queen’s own weekend being ruined.
In the event, the Sussexes will no doubt be on their very best behaviour. No one can question Prince Harry’s love for his grandmother, masked though it is by confessional potshots at the rest of his family, and no one should doubt Meghan’s ability to keep the smiling show on the road when it counts.
With face time, charming American children, and cups of tea, there may even be a thawing of relations.
How wonderful if the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, likely the last major public event of its kind she will ever take part in, could be the start of a new, happier, peaceful royal era. In no small way, the future of the monarchy depends on it.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> As I have said before, TW must have nerves of steel to show her face after all that has been said on national TV. Can you imagine spouting all those lies and then having to be in the same room with the people you lied about?  No normal person would ever want to be in that self-inflicted situation


Harry did it too.  she may have been the first one to say stuff but he backed her up


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Who is this Peter Hunt? I looked him up. He is an ex-reporter, anti-BRF, pro-Harkles. Thinks the Harkles are in great danger and deserve to be given lots of police protection. Peter, you nitwit, if the Harkles were the decent sort, no one would be hurling vitriol at them.



Another Harkle stan with an incomprehensible word salad


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They can try.  It won't work.  I think he was told that at the meeting.


I think the queen takes her duty seriously.  so I don't think she would let her personal feelings dictate her actions.  I think and hope she will do the right thing and keep the two grifters at a distance.


----------



## Katel

elvisfan4life said:


> Princess Margaret did it first and a million times better - she bought her own tiara at auction ( reputedly worth £1.4m now ) so she wouldn’t have to borrow one from her sis or mum for her wedding and so could do whatever the hell she wanted - she was then snapped naked in the bath ( tastefully with lots of bubbles ) wearing only it - photographed by her husband Lord Snowdon - in those days that was unheard of for such a prominent royal - daughter of the King- nothing this pathetic attention seeking American “actress” can do in this day and age would come anywhere near - do what you want love - no one cares



I cannot like this enough 



Maggie Muggins said:


> They can always improvise.
> View attachment 5397797


Oh no - her birthday is over the Jubilee week?  Just what sort of horror will the idiotic duo roll out?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> The Disney Princess syndrome? Most Disney princes seem to be in line to be king. Diana was in line to be the Queen before the divorce.
> 
> IMHO, Methane isn't intelligent enough to understand that despite marrying a prince, she will never be Queen of anything more than 16 or 19 toilets. She is plenty sneaky and crafty but not a lot of IQ. Her resentment stems from not achieving the goal she envisioned: marry prince -> hailed as Diana v.2 -> non-stop partying with endless stream of $$$$ -> lord it over the royal family because she will be the star of the BRF -> inherit the throne after QE2 because she is naturally the best choice.
> 
> Anything less must be because of racism, sexism and other -isms.


ISMs might have been a better name for her pod.  She could bang on about how she’s been wronged.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> *Timing of Sussexes’ Jubilee announcement was pure theatrics*



Meh. I'm completely over these appeasement strategies to soothe the troublemakers (and that goes not only for the Sussexes). You don't buy the little sh*t that's throwing sand and hitting with his plastic shovel icecream to keep him quiet, you put him in his place firmly and make sure the other kids are not harmed. But nobody wants to parent anymore it seems.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> ISMs might have been a better name for her pod.  She could bang on about how she’s been wronged.


I was reading an article about a fossil in the San Diego Natural History Museum, and I thought: "Oh no! Methane might try to trademark it!"  

The fossil is a dog-like animal called an Archecyon.








						Rare fossil of ancient dog species discovered by paleontologists
					

Sometime around 14,000 years ago, the first humans crossed the Bering Strait to North America with canines, domesticated dogs they used for hunting, by their side.




					phys.org


----------



## charlottawill

The delusion runs deep with the stans


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did I just say you don't reward the antisocial kid?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazines titles: "Harry and Meghan: Expert Claims Contracting Them was Netflix's Biggest Mistake".

I took one for the team and checked who that expert is...Dan Wootton. I wasn't aware he's an entertainment mogul now, but also, that expert opinion could have come from any of us.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> German magazines titles: "Harry and Meghan: Expert Claims Contracting Them was Netflix's Biggest Mistake".
> 
> I took one for the team and checked who that expert is...Dan Wootton. I wasn't aware he's an entertainment mogul now, but also, that expert opinion could have come from any of us.


Well for some time now, most of us have been thinking that most of the so-called experts get their opinions from reading this thread.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s see - how will the spinners spin this? Iirc   Hazz said negative things about Charles, his father.  Never about Charles, the future King.  It’s shallow, I know, but it could work. IDK my guess is that once the coronation happens Hazz gets welcomed back. Probably why he is playing polo this summer.


Hmmmmm - I disagree, I think Charles (with help from William) will make very sure that H&M are pushed back and ignored even more than now.


----------



## MiniMabel

papertiger said:


> *Timing of Sussexes’ Jubilee announcement was pure theatrics*
> 
> Hannah Furness
> Fri, 6 May 2022, 9:01 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the Sussexes - Mischa Schoemaker
> *The Sussexes are coming to town. With their two children in tow, they will return to their royal roots to light up the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee with a touch of LA celebrity sparkle.*
> For Meghan, it will be her first public appearance in Britain since the Sussexes sped away from official duties in January 2020, leaving scorched earth behind them.
> For Archie, it will be the first time he has seen the British half of his family since he was a small baby, with little sister Lilibet meeting her great-granny the Queen and grandpa Prince Charles for the first time.
> Once, it would have been unthinkable that Prince Harry would miss such a milestone moment for the Queen. But those simpler days are long gone, and for months the Platinum Jubilee speculation has been spinning out of control.
> 
> His most recent pronouncement was that he merely “wanted” to come, with security issues to be ironed out before he dared bring his young family to Britain. Then he was booked into a Santa Barbara polo match - the perfect get-out clause, in the eyes of his fans.
> On Friday afternoon, through his PR team, he finally confirmed he would be flying with his wife and children back into the Royal family fold.
> Just as night follows day, that announcement was pure theatrics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fans and critics alike had only just started digesting the news the Sussexes would not be on the Trooping the Colour balcony. Was it a snub? A masterstroke from the still-authoritative Queen?
> Moments later, in the words of their tormentor-in-chief Piers Morgan: “Oh God, they’re coming anyway… wait for the Sussex circus to steal all the focus from the Queen.”
> Fairer heads would say they were damned if they did and damned if they didn’t: how rude to decline an invitation from the Queen, and how shameless to accept it after everything they have said about the Royal Family.
> Cynics will fear their trip will prove yet more fodder for the Sussex publicity machine - new photographs with Granny ahead of Prince Harry’s autobiography in the autumn, and footage for any Netflix documentaries one day coming down the track.
> *Admirable though their professional talents are, their global brand is inseparable from their Royal status and a trip back to Blighty will burnish those credentials no end.
> The novelty of the renegade royals matched with their magnetic capacity for drama will make following every move of their return irresistible.*
> When Harry and Meghan left the Royal Family, the Queen had one red line, that no one cannot be “half in, half out” royal. The decision to welcome the Sussexes with (mostly) open arms to the family side of the Jubilee will, for the sake of harmony, test that rule to breaking point.
> But the British public has one red line of their own: do not overshadow the Queen in the celebration of her record-breaking reign. The people will forgive much, but not the Queen’s own weekend being ruined.
> In the event, the Sussexes will no doubt be on their very best behaviour. No one can question Prince Harry’s love for his grandmother, masked though it is by confessional potshots at the rest of his family, and no one should doubt Meghan’s ability to keep the smiling show on the road when it counts.
> With face time, charming American children, and cups of tea, there may even be a thawing of relations.
> How wonderful if the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, likely the last major public event of its kind she will ever take part in, could be the start of a new, happier, peaceful royal era. In no small way, the future of the monarchy depends on it.





I have highlighted and bolded the (main) sections that are pure drivel. 

Also, "charming American children"?  What does that mean?  Who knows what they are like?   

Oh dear, oh dear, Hannah Furness, you've kissed the Blarney Stone! And not in a good way. 

Ref: why-do-people-kiss-the-blarney-stone


----------



## papertiger

MiniMabel said:


> I have highlighted and bolded the (main) sections that are pure drivel.
> 
> Also, "charming American children"?  What does that mean?  Who knows what they are like?
> 
> Oh dear, oh dear, Hannah Furness, you've kissed the Blarney Stone! And not in a good way.
> 
> Ref: why-do-people-kiss-the-blarney-stone



Drivel is the correct term. 

Probably written for her. They are very, Sunshine


----------



## lanasyogamama

This lady is ready to fight back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't like this enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I guess.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh my, maybe it’s just the lighting, the angle, the IDK  









						Harry flashes chest as he's spotted for first time since Queen's balcony ban
					

PRINCE Harry was seen baring his chest on the polo field for the first time since the Queen banned him from the Jubilee balcony celebrations. The Duke of Sussex flashed his torso as he played the s…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh my.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry flashes chest as he's spotted for first time since Queen's balcony ban
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry was seen baring his chest on the polo field for the first time since the Queen banned him from the Jubilee balcony celebrations. The Duke of Sussex flashed his torso as he played the s…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Sorry for body shaming but there were no pecs in sight more like man boobs and a rounded belly
No danger of H becoming a rival to Jason Momoa


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> Sorry for body shaming but there were no pecs in sight more like man boobs and a rounded belly
> No danger of H becoming a rival to Jason Momoa



It’s much worse than I thought.  He needs serious help. Imo.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s much worse than I thought.  He needs serious help. Imo.


Oh dear. I think H got TW’s old implants!!!


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> I have highlighted and bolded the (main) sections that are pure drivel.
> 
> Also, "charming American children"?  What does that mean?  Who knows what they are like?
> 
> Oh dear, oh dear, Hannah Furness, you've kissed the Blarney Stone! And not in a good way.
> 
> Ref: why-do-people-kiss-the-blarney-stone


I wonder how much the Harkle PR machine paid her to write that garbage?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

Traveling and trying to catch up on the fun events here. 
It looks like the Palace is getting ready for the Harkles in case they decide to attend the Jubilee. 










						Netflix anger at the Sussexes' interviews with its TV rivals
					

The MoS understands there was 'a real sense of annoyance' when Prince Harry last month revealed details of his meeting with the Queen at Windsor Castle during an interview with NBC.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

1988 - 6 people on the balcony and no one is making eye contact - not one  









						Platinum Jubilee Countdown: 28
					

For Trooping the Colour on June 11, 1988, Queen Elizabeth wore this saturated blue hat with sidesweeping brim, a foreshadow of millinery shape she’d often wear decades later. Image from Getty…




					royalhats.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Traveling and trying to catch up on the fun events here.
> It looks like the Palace is getting ready for the Harkles in case they decide to attend the Jubilee.
> View attachment 5398511
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix anger at the Sussexes' interviews with its TV rivals
> 
> 
> The MoS understands there was 'a real sense of annoyance' when Prince Harry last month revealed details of his meeting with the Queen at Windsor Castle during an interview with NBC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Okaaay, sounds like it’ll be a bag slap  
[what a mess]


----------



## csshopper

pukasonqo said:


> Sorry for body shaming but there were no pecs in sight more like man boobs and a rounded belly
> 
> 
> 
> CarryOn2020 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s much worse than I thought.  He needs serious help. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Needs a Training Bra and midriff support. As dumpy as his wife.
> 
> Seems like maybe there are frenemies behind these photo releases, azz to the camera, legs spread wide and now droopy moobs.
Click to expand...


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaay, sounds like it’ll be a bag slap
> [what a mess]




PO the Palace_ and_ PO Netflix bosses, Markels are definitely in danger of being Markeled






						Urban Dictionary: Markled
					

To abandon someone or something after they’ve contributed to your life in a meaningful way




					www.urbandictionary.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The secret's out.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Did Hazard even have any morally questionable info or influence to offer then? Maybe that's why he needs the Intel that comes with being a IPP. If someone gives you diamonds for no reason, there will be a reason in the future.


H himself is probably not who any diamond gifts are for directly although he probably knows a fair few arms manufacturers since they sponsor Invictus and he loves playing soldier. The crown is who the treasures were given to really. Several years later, after a brief suspension, our ongoing supply of weapons to the Saudi military has subsequently been agreed upon.


			https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8425/
		

The BRF are enormously involved with the military and the armament industry and Andrew, another toy soldier, has made no secret of ‘security’ trading being his career.

and lest we think this is something only the black sheep dabble in, there’s plenty of evidence the preachy future king gets up to it too:




__





						The future British king, Saudi princes, and a secret arms deal | King Charles III | The Guardian
					

<p>• Multi-billion pound Typhoon jet deal announced day after Charles visits Saudi Arabia<br />• Deal not discussed, say Charles' aides<br />• Public 'never going to know' cost of deal, says company</p>




					amp.theguardian.com
				







__





						British royal plays ‘high-level salesman for British arms exports’ – Middle East Monitor
					





					www.middleeastmonitor.com
				




They aren’t political figures :
I’m afraid you are right if someone gives you a diamond they want something back and my country’s heads seem happy to oblige. 


MaggieMuggins said:


> Was it just a rumour that H&M broke up the Saudi earrings once their provenance became public knowledge and then reused the diamonds to enhance her other jewelry?


I’m pretty sure the palace probably has them as these things tend to be property of the crown for tax reasons. If M did get given them they will be residing in the pawnbrokers of LA but I find the royals don’t tend to give up the goods. 


papertiger said:


> *Timing of Sussexes’ Jubilee announcement was pure theatrics*
> 
> Hannah Furness
> Fri, 6 May 2022, 9:01 pm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the Sussexes - Mischa Schoemaker
> The Sussexes are coming to town. With their two children in tow, they will return to their royal roots to light up the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee with a touch of LA celebrity sparkle.
> For Meghan, it will be her first public appearance in Britain since the Sussexes sped away from official duties in January 2020, leaving scorched earth behind them.
> For Archie, it will be the first time he has seen the British half of his family since he was a small baby, with little sister Lilibet meeting her great-granny the Queen and grandpa Prince Charles for the first time.
> Once, it would have been unthinkable that Prince Harry would miss such a milestone moment for the Queen. But those simpler days are long gone, and for months the Platinum Jubilee speculation has been spinning out of control.
> 
> His most recent pronouncement was that he merely “wanted” to come, with security issues to be ironed out before he dared bring his young family to Britain. Then he was booked into a Santa Barbara polo match - the perfect get-out clause, in the eyes of his fans.
> On Friday afternoon, through his PR team, he finally confirmed he would be flying with his wife and children back into the Royal family fold.
> Just as night follows day, that announcement was pure theatrics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fans and critics alike had only just started digesting the news the Sussexes would not be on the Trooping the Colour balcony. Was it a snub? A masterstroke from the still-authoritative Queen?
> Moments later, in the words of their tormentor-in-chief Piers Morgan: “Oh God, they’re coming anyway… wait for the Sussex circus to steal all the focus from the Queen.”
> Fairer heads would say they were damned if they did and damned if they didn’t: how rude to decline an invitation from the Queen, and how shameless to accept it after everything they have said about the Royal Family.
> Cynics will fear their trip will prove yet more fodder for the Sussex publicity machine - new photographs with Granny ahead of Prince Harry’s autobiography in the autumn, and footage for any Netflix documentaries one day coming down the track.
> Admirable though their professional talents are, their global brand is inseparable from their Royal status and a trip back to Blighty will burnish those credentials no end.
> The novelty of the renegade royals matched with their magnetic capacity for drama will make following every move of their return irresistible.
> When Harry and Meghan left the Royal Family, the Queen had one red line, that no one cannot be “half in, half out” royal. The decision to welcome the Sussexes with (mostly) open arms to the family side of the Jubilee will, for the sake of harmony, test that rule to breaking point.
> But the British public has one red line of their own: do not overshadow the Queen in the celebration of her record-breaking reign. The people will forgive much, but not the Queen’s own weekend being ruined.
> In the event, the Sussexes will no doubt be on their very best behaviour. No one can question Prince Harry’s love for his grandmother, masked though it is by confessional potshots at the rest of his family, and no one should doubt Meghan’s ability to keep the smiling show on the road when it counts.
> With face time, charming American children, and cups of tea, there may even be a thawing of relations.
> How wonderful if the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, likely the last major public event of its kind she will ever take part in, could be the start of a new, happier, peaceful royal era. In no small way, the future of the monarchy depends on it.


I’m glad I’m getting this breathless preamble now because I am going to be far too busy having fun  during the actual weekend to worry if the queen is enjoying her million pound party 


charlottawill said:


> Another Harkle stan with an incomprehensible word salad



I’m fairly sure this is sarcastic she calls her me again which is one from the Muggins’ vault for sure.


----------



## needlv

Please make it so….  Maybe the adults will also need babysitters who manage them the entire time…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The thing is...so what if they don't behave? The BRF is not having them arrested or even escorted out with all eyes on them unless their behaviour is the worse optics. So there's plenty of room to misbehave or make themselves center of attention once again.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think Harry’s been cut off long enough to know he doesn’t have as much spoiled brat power over his family as he thought he did, and the real world isn’t the way he thought it would be either.  He probably knows by now that he might NEED to return in the future, there will be conditions on him for that to happen.  He needs to follow their orders now in order to gain some goodwill.

As for TW, she will likely have more than 4 footman assigned to her at all times.  They will probably keep her guarded and busy behind the scenes, her in front of the scenes invites will be limited.  Charles had no problem kicking her out of the garden party shortly after the wedding, and that was when times were good.  I’ve no doubt that if she doesn’t behave the RF will have no problems “sending her to her room”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...so what if they don't behave? The BRF is not having them arrested or even escorted out with all eyes on them unless their behaviour is the worse optics. So there's plenty of room to misbehave or make themselves center of attention once again.



One misstep or even a half-misstep, they will be isolated, perhaps put on a plane and flown back to Cali [ya kno, one of the kids took ill *wink wink*]. QE and her team are very skilled at managing these sort of events.

Remember at Invictus, TW was ‘removed’ from her book-reading. There was no farewell scene for her at the airport or a ‘welcome back’ fanfare in Cali.  Hazz showing up at polo looking very rough, none of that is coincidence.  _If_ they go, they will do as they are told.

ETA:  Happy Mother’s Day to all the wonderful TPFer’s, especially this thread.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> PO the Palace_ and_ PO Netflix bosses, Markels are definitely in danger of being Markeled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: Markled
> 
> 
> To abandon someone or something after they’ve contributed to your life in a meaningful way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.urbandictionary.com


It’s actually a definition in Urban Dictionary now?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The secret's out.



Hmmm will that be Archie & Invisibet’s debut, so they can get all the attention??


----------



## purseinsanity

Happy Mother’s Day to all of you!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

Sophisticatted said:


> I think Harry’s been cut off long enough to know he doesn’t have as much spoiled brat power over his family as he thought he did, and the real world isn’t the way he thought it would be either.  He probably knows by now that he might NEED to return in the future, there will be conditions on him for that to happen.  He needs to follow their orders now in order to gain some goodwill.
> 
> As for TW, she will likely have more than 4 footman assigned to her at all times.  They will probably keep her guarded and busy behind the scenes, her in front of the scenes invites will be limited.  Charles had no problem kicking her out of the garden party shortly after the wedding, and that was when times were good.  I’ve no doubt that if she doesn’t behave the RF will have no problems “sending her to her room”.


Well, she’s finally getting that huge security team that she wanted! Too bad their job is to keep her in line, not protect her from others.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Well, she’s finally getting that huge security team that she wanted! Too bad their job is to keep her in line, not protect her from others.


I hope she wears bright white again. Tomato red and egg yolk yellow show up very well on white


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE:  Nflix requiring ‘minders’ 

When _Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith _demands that your failing production company is followed by Palace security out of a concern that your failing production company will attempt to film in places they should not,  *perhaps the smart move would be to stay home. * Nflix is looking like really incompetent amateurs now. Surely Nflix investors are embarrassed.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE:  Nflix requiring ‘minders’
> 
> When _Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith _demands that your failing production company is followed by Palace security out of a concern that your failing production company will attempt to film in places they should not,  *perhaps the smart move would be to stay home. * Nflix is looking like really incompetent amateurs now. Surely Nflix investors are embarrassed.


I wonder if they will go.  Can Harry stomach being put in a lower status position?  He was angry and being the "spare".....now - while still being technically in the line of succession - he's less than a spare.  
As I've said before, I think they made a mistake with the whole mexit thing.  They basically gave up being royals and they don't really have much else to offer.  She is far from a great actress (and past her prime).  The type of "inspirational" product they are supposedly coming up with isn't of much interest to the public.  They can only do so much sensational snitching on the RF.  It's a fail IMO.  How many copies of his book will sell?  Hopefully not very many.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> One misstep or even a half-misstep, they will be isolated, perhaps put on a plane and flown back to Cali [ya kno, one of the kids took ill *wink wink*]. QE and her team are very skilled at managing these sort of events.
> 
> *Remember at Invictus, TW was ‘removed’ from her book-reading. *There was no farewell scene for her at the airport or a ‘welcome back’ fanfare in Cali.  Hazz showing up at polo looking very rough, none of that is coincidence.  _If_ they go, they will do as they are told.
> 
> ETA:  Happy Mothers’ Day to all the wonderful TPFer’s, especially this thread.



Why was she removed from her book reading?


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Why was she removed from her book reading?



The Invictus organisers wanted one of the soldiers to read his book, ‘Hairy Maclary’. She may have had a private reading of The Bench for the Nflix crew, but her reading was removed from the schedule. The entire ordeal turned into a mess(!). The media announced she would do a reading, then walked it back. One more example of their drama, snore.









						Duchess Meghan 'missing her children' while at the Invictus Games
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex left their children Archie, two and 10-month-old Lilibet in California while they made a brief trip to the Netherlands for Harry's Invictus Games but




					www.gladstonedispatch.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Invictus organisers wanted one of the soldiers to read his book, ‘Hairy Maclary’. She may have had a private reading of The Bench for the Nflix crew, but her reading was removed from the schedule. The entire ordeal turned into a mess(!). The media announced she would do a reading, then walked it back. One more example of their drama, snore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan 'missing her children' while at the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex left their children Archie, two and 10-month-old Lilibet in California while they made a brief trip to the Netherlands for Harry's Invictus Games but
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gladstonedispatch.com




Thanks for sharing. I must have missed this when I powered through the previous posts 

The Invictus Games is for wounded service personnel. Her book The Bench has no importance there therefore a reading is 100% unnecessary. Kudos to the people who removed it from the schedule


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Invictus organisers wanted one of the soldiers to read his book, ‘Hairy Maclary’. She may have had a private reading of The Bench for the Nflix crew, but her reading was removed from the schedule. The entire ordeal turned into a mess(!). The media announced she would do a reading, then walked it back. One more example of their drama, snore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan 'missing her children' while at the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex left their children Archie, two and 10-month-old Lilibet in California while they made a brief trip to the Netherlands for Harry's Invictus Games but
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gladstonedispatch.com


The article called her a "star"  
I suspect her PR people muscled their way into the programme. It's very difficult to say "No" when a "star" declares that she will do you a favour: "The Duchess of course will be pleased to do a reading of her bestseller "The Bench" for the children. You will set it up, won't you?"

Likely someone with more backbone found out and sent back a message: "We thank the Duchess for her offer but must decline. One of the vets who will be at Invictus has written a children's book and we believe he should be given the opportunity to do the reading. We are certain that the Duchess will understand that Invictus is held for the vets and thus would concur with us on this."


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Invictus organisers wanted one of the soldiers to read his book, ‘Hairy Maclary’. She may have had a private reading of The Bench for the Nflix crew, but her reading was removed from the schedule. The entire ordeal turned into a mess(!). The media announced she would do a reading, then walked it back. One more example of their drama, snore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess Meghan 'missing her children' while at the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex left their children Archie, two and 10-month-old Lilibet in California while they made a brief trip to the Netherlands for Harry's Invictus Games but
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gladstonedispatch.com





xincinsin said:


> The article called her a "star"
> I suspect her PR people muscled their way into the programme. It's very difficult to say "No" when a "star" declares that she will do you a favour: "The Duchess of course will be pleased to do a reading of her bestseller "The Bench" for the children. You will set it up, won't you?"
> 
> Likely someone with more backbone found out and sent back a message: "We thank the Duchess for her offer but must decline. One of the vets who will be at Invictus has written a children's book and we believe he should be given the opportunity to do the reading. We are certain that the Duchess will understand that Invictus is held for the vets and thus would concur with us on this."



Isn't it funny how she tried to make people think that she wanted to do the reading because she missed her kids, which made her wanted to be around kids during the trip?

Having known their antics, pretty sure below were the actual intentions:


Making sure she got face time with paparazzi so she'll be all over the tabloids to stay relevant.
Acting like she is all about life of service when she doesn't have real skills or anything else to peddle.
Still trying hard to promote and sell The Bench, which has been sold at Walmart under MSRP by now. I personally saw it some time last year.
Wanting people to think that she's a loving and very involved mother in her kids' lives. If she can bring 4 stylists, I'm pretty sure they could have brought their nannies and kids and lock them in the hotel (you know, security threats - cannot be out!), where she could still see the kids.


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> One misstep or even a half-misstep, they will be isolated, perhaps put on a plane and flown back to Cali [ya kno, one of the kids took ill *wink wink*]. QE and her team are very skilled at managing these sort of events.



100% this. TW will think she's coming in with an upper hand but how fast she will see she is not and they will be under complete control the entire time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Isn't it funny how she tried to make people think that she wanted to do the reading because she missed her kids, which made her wanted to be around kids during the trip?
> 
> Having known their antics, pretty sure below were the actual intentions:
> 
> 
> Making sure she got face time with paparazzi so she'll be all over the tabloids to stay relevant.
> Acting like she is all about life of service when she doesn't have real skills or anything else to peddle.
> Still trying hard to promote and sell The Bench, which has been sold at Walmart under MSRP by now. I personally saw it some time last year.
> Wanting people to think that she's a loving and very involved mother in her kids' lives. If she can bring 4 stylists, I'm pretty sure they could have brought their nannies and kids and lock them in the hotel (you know, security threats - cannot be out!), where she could still see the kids.


Someone posted earlier that they wanted Netflix to pick up the cost of bringing the kids, nannies, and all their kiddy stuff, but Netflix refused.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would kill to be a fly on the wall for a Nflix meeting about them.


----------



## duna

I wouldn't be at all surprised if she backs out, with the kids,  at the last minute and sends H by himself. They'll make up some excuse, which is one of the few things they're good at.....Since she won't be able to be on the Buckhouse balcony nor at other major Jubilee events, what's the point of going???


----------



## redney

duna said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised if she backs out, with the kids,  at the last minute and sends H by himself. They'll make up some excuse, which is one of the few things they're good at.....Since she won't be able to be on the Buckhouse balcony nor at other major Jubilee events, what's the point of going???


This. She won't stand the humiliation of being anywhere but the balcony. If she's absent altogether, especially if she has the kids to use as a scapegoat, no humiliation from the press. After all, she was willing to be there to support the Queen. It's just that Archie got the sniffles so she, as a perfect mother, has to stay home with him and Invisibet.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Someone posted earlier that they wanted Netflix to pick up the cost of bringing the kids, nannies, and all their kiddy stuff, but Netflix refused.



If that's true, then they are so, so predictable. They want everything on other people's dime yet they can't deliver what they promised, or rather over-promised.

Even with their dwindling wealth and alleged Nxtflix's refusal, they can afford footing the bill to bring their nannies and kids. They are just too cheap


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised if she backs out, with the kids,  at the last minute and sends H by himself. They'll make up some excuse, which is one of the few things they're good at.....Since she won't be able to be on the Buckhouse balcony nor at other major Jubilee events, what's the point of going???





EverSoElusive said:


> If that's true, then they are so, so predictable. They want everything on other people's dime yet they can't deliver what they promised, or rather over-promised.
> 
> Even with their dwindling wealth and alleged Nxtflix's refusal, they can afford footing the bill to bring their nannies and kids. They are just too cheap





redney said:


> This. She won't stand the humiliation of being anywhere but the balcony. If she's absent altogether, especially if she has the kids to use as a scapegoat, no humiliation from the press. After all, she was willing to be there to support the Queen. It's just that Archie got the sniffles so she, as a perfect mother, has to stay home with him and Invisibet.



They only have one motivation: 

They'll go if they don't have to pay. They can always make some excuse of why they _had _to fly back early or do their own thing at some virtue signalling event. If Netflix or BRF are expensing it, they'll go and squeeze every drop of Sunshine PR juice from it. 
They won't go if they have to use their own money that's for sure.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> If that's true, then they are so, so predictable. They want everything on other people's dime yet they can't deliver what they promised, or rather over-promised.
> 
> Even with their dwindling wealth and alleged Nxtflix's refusal, they can afford footing the bill to bring their nannies and kids. They are just too cheap


Also, the kids would be the centre of attraction, depriving poor Madame Victim of her limelight.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Also, the kids would be the centre of attraction, depriving poor Madame Victim of her limelight.



You nailed it right on the head. For someone in her 40s, that's really sad that it drives her crazy if the limelight is on anyone but her. She's so insecure. If she's a woman of substance and with skills, people will remember her even if her kids were the center of the attention during an event.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m inclined to believe the kids were a requirement for their participation in the Jubilee and any other bts “favors” the family might do for them ($).


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> They only have one motivation:
> 
> They'll go if they don't have to pay. They can always make some excuse of why they _had _to fly back early or do their own thing at some virtue signalling event. If Netflix or BRF are expensing it, they'll go and squeeze every drop of Sunshine PR juice from it.
> They won't go if they have to use their own money that's for sure.



And yet I vaguely recall them saying that they want to be (financially) independent. From the start of Megxit till present time, they are making people pay for their expenses, of course under the guise of "it's work". 

Truly, they will falter into oblivion if the BRF doesn't continue to prop them up quietly in the background. Once the Queen is gone, probably no one else is going to try to protect Toddler Harry given how he's already pissed off his dad who will be King and his brother William who is next in line to be King.

Somebody please deprogram Harry stat!


----------



## charlottawill

Hope you all have a lovely day! And a nicer gift than mom jeans


----------



## lanasyogamama

From Lady C’s book.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...so what if they don't behave? The BRF is not having them arrested or even escorted out with all eyes on them unless their behaviour is the worse optics. So there's plenty of room to misbehave or make themselves center of attention once again.


The men at the door of the Prince of Wales Investiture viewing stopped them well enough from entering the viewing room. There will be men shadowing their every move. As long as they are on royal property and/or with the family, they will be unable to do anything. If they attempt to make a scene, it will be quickly handled.

In retrospect, their trying to push their way into the Investiture viewing was a portent of things to come from them. Forcing Will and Kate from the Commonwealth Service Procession was next.  They should be called the D/D of Pushy.


----------



## gracekelly

Just wan’t to add that I would love for the ”minders” to be former Royal Marines. That would be such an insult to Harry! Lololol!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaay, sounds like it’ll be a bag slap
> [what a mess]


Please spare the lady Dior lol.


lanasyogamama said:


> From Lady C’s book.
> View attachment 5398969
> View attachment 5398969


I remember reading this and feeling very naive because even I (and I am pretty filthy-minded) didn’t think this expression had a sexual origin just goes to show you never can tell.

This book was alright but she does fudge a couple of details. Her minor forays into politics are very off too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The men at the door of the Prince of Wales Investiture viewing stopped them well enough from entering the viewing room. There will be men shadowing their every move. As long as they are on royal property and/or with the family, they will be unable to do anything. If they attempt to make a scene, it will be quickly handled.
> 
> In retrospect, their trying to push their way into the Investiture viewing was a portent of things to come from them. Forcing Will and Kate from the Commonwealth Service Procession was next.  They should be called the D/D of Pushy.


Samantha Markle has been calling her Princess Pushy for a long time and wrote a book about life with her, "The Diary of Princess Pushy's Sister".


----------



## csshopper

Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?

Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.


----------



## charlottawill

duna said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised if she backs out, with the kids,  at the last minute and sends H by himself. They'll make up some excuse, which is one of the few things they're good at.....Since she won't be able to be on the Buckhouse balcony nor at other major Jubilee events, what's the point of going???


She may not have a choice. I think they're between a rock and a hard place with Netflix. Netflix is trying to salvage their investment and I'm sure is pressuring them to provide Jubilee coverage or else cancel the contract.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?
> 
> Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.
> 
> View attachment 5399055



She looked awfully constipated. Perfect marketing material when she's a laxative brand ambassador


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?
> 
> Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.
> 
> View attachment 5399055


Looks like a Botox advisory warning that this is what happens to your face if you have too much injected.


----------



## youngster

EverSoElusive said:


> Having known their antics, pretty sure below were the actual intentions:
> 
> Making sure she got face time with paparazzi so she'll be all over the tabloids to stay relevant.
> Acting like she is all about life of service when she doesn't have real skills or anything else to peddle.
> *Still trying hard to promote and sell The Bench, which has been sold at Walmart under MSRP by now. I personally saw it some time last year.*
> Wanting people to think that she's a loving and very involved mother in her kids' lives. If she can bring 4 stylists, I'm pretty sure they could have brought their nannies and kids and lock them in the hotel (you know, security threats - cannot be out!), where she could still see the kids.



I think it's pretty common for picture books to hit the bargain bin and get way, way marked down.  What is more interesting to me is that there has been no announced sequel to The Bench.  (The Swing? The Slide? The Drinking Fountain?)  If the book was considered a success, there would be another children's book in the pipeline, but there is not.  Gives credibility to the report that it was a one book deal that Harry/MM demanded as part of the negotiation for Harry's book.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m inclined to believe the kids were a requirement for their participation in the Jubilee and any other bts “favors” the family might do for them ($).


How sad when one has to pay a child to be part of a family event or celebration. I cannot imagine asking for money.  I cannot imagine giving it in those circumstances.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Please spare the lady Dior lol.
> 
> I remember reading this and feeling very naive because even I (and I am pretty filthy-minded) didn’t think this expression had a sexual origin just goes to show you never can tell.
> 
> This book was alright but she does fudge a couple of details. Her minor forays into politics are very off too.


not sure whether I believe Harry would have the nerve to basically threaten the Queen....but maybe he's that bad


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?
> 
> Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.
> 
> View attachment 5399055



Looks like she was having a very bad day - here’s another one from that day:









__





						Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
					






					classic.newscom.com
				












						Meghan REMOVES all references to her doomed Netflix animation series
					

Pearl, the working title for the Markle-created show, was officially canceled last week as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by Netflix's drop in subscribers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like she was having a very bad day - here’s another one from that day:
> 
> View attachment 5399085
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com


much as I dislike her, anyone could be caught frowning for a moment


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, anyone could be caught frowning for a moment



Absolutely true. Most royals and A lister celebs have been trained to maintain their public face at all times, mainly because the angry-face photo is the one photo that gets the big bucks. Odd that she, at 40 years of age, has not learned that.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely true. Most royals and A lister celebs have been trained to maintain their public face at all times, mainly because the angry-face photo is the one photo that gets the big bucks. Odd that she, at 40 years of age, has not learned that.


again, I can't stand her but to be fair, I can't even tell for sure that's an angry face


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh, curses, foiled again.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like she was having a very bad day - here’s another one from that day:
> 
> View attachment 5399085
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Newscom - Multimedia for Websites and Publishers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> classic.newscom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan REMOVES all references to her doomed Netflix animation series
> 
> 
> Pearl, the working title for the Markle-created show, was officially canceled last week as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by Netflix's drop in subscribers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Maybe she'll write a new children's classic, "Meghan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day". We know how much she is 'inspired" by the work of others.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, anyone could be caught frowning for a moment


Of course, but to me that's more than frowning, she looks like she's ready to take someone's head off.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Of course, but to me that's more than frowning, she looks like she's ready to take someone's head off.


LOL
I just don't get that much from it but you may be right
Maybe some racist Paps were bothering her
Oh wait, Harry would be suing them if that were the case


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I don't know the circumstances of the photo but it seems like this is an invasion of Charles' privacy. On the other hand, Hazy looked like he was posing as per TW's instructions for their hired paps - "When I give the signal, legs spread, shirt hiked up with just a hint of the pecs dear".


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> I think it's pretty common for picture books to hit the bargain bin and get way, way marked down.  What is more interesting to me is that there has been no announced sequel to The Bench.  (The Swing? The Slide? The Drinking Fountain?)  If the book was considered a success, there would be another children's book in the pipeline, but there is not.  Gives credibility to the report that it was a one book deal that Harry/MM demanded as part of the negotiation for Harry's book.



Despite being the queen of word salad, she shouldn't be an author. She thinks too highly of herself and always wants a piece of the pie if something is offered to Harry. If she's not included in a deal, then she'll just bulldoze it and ruin it for Harry. She's pure evil.

I am honestly glad that she wasn't "offered" another book deal  I mean she can always produce one herself but it would likely not sell and she can use them to prop her feet up while using one of their many toilets in the mansion


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I don't know the circumstances of the photo but it seems like this is an invasion of Charles' privacy. On the other hand, Hazy looked like he was posing as per TW's instructions for their hired paps - "When I give the signal, legs spread, shirt hiked up with just a hint of the pecs dear".


I think we can generally assume that most of what he does is at the direction of the WIFE.  However since his pecs don't look so great, why would she want him to do that?


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Despite being the queen of word salad, she shouldn't be an author. She thinks too highly of herself and always wants a piece of the pie if something is offered to Harry. If she's not included in a deal, then she'll just bulldoze it and ruin it for Harry. She's pure evil.
> 
> I am honestly glad that she wasn't "offered" another book deal  I mean she can always produce one herself but it would likely not sell and she can use them to prop her feet up while using one of their many toilets in the mansion


I think she looked at other black celebs who have very successful children's books, like Michelle O, Kevin Hart, Gabrielle Union, Colin Kaepernick to name a few, and per her usual self arrogantly thought she could crank out a bestseller herself. At the time she may have had some clout with prospective publishers, but that has evaporated.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I think we can generally assume that most of what he does is at the direction of the WIFE.  However since his pecs don't look so great, why would she want him to do that?


Well we know she thinks she has great legs, so maybe she also thinks he has great pecs. Who knows?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Well we know she thinks she has great legs, so maybe she also thinks he has great pecs. Who knows?


ha
she thinks the toothpick legs are great?  I had a friend who had legs like that and she wasn't proud of them.
and does he have pretty feet too?


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Traveling and trying to catch up on the fun events here.
> It looks like the Palace is getting ready for the Harkles in case they decide to attend the Jubilee.
> View attachment 5398511
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix anger at the Sussexes' interviews with its TV rivals
> 
> 
> The MoS understands there was 'a real sense of annoyance' when Prince Harry last month revealed details of his meeting with the Queen at Windsor Castle during an interview with NBC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So glad that someone posted this because I had seen this and was going to mention it.  I think that the Palace staff WILL BE monitoring H&M very closely, especially if William has something to say about it.  They can try all they want to bring in secret cameras, etc. -- but don't think that they are going to get away with it.  

Yes, as one poster indicated, given the days of Photoshop and other products nowadays, H&M can "try" to insert their pictures into various photos, but there are folks who can decipher that crap pretty closely and besides, it can be disputed.  I had really hoped that these two would just stay away, but NO .. in their STUPID minds, I'm sure they think that they are smarter than everyone else and will be able to "somehow" get that material for Netflix.  Netflix just needs to Drop-kick these 2 over the gates of Hell and hope that they fall in!


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think she wants to passive-aggressively humiliate him, especially when things aren’t going her way.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I think she looked at other black celebs who have very successful children's books, like Michelle O, Kevin Hart, Gabrielle Union, Colin Kaepernick to name a few, and per her usual self arrogantly thought she could crank out a bestseller herself. At the time she may have had some clout with prospective publishers, but that has evaporated.



Of all the people that you had listed, my big guess is that she mainly thought that she's in same league as Michelle O


----------



## Sophisticatted

Regarding Netflix, it wouldn’t surprise me if they do some sort of salacious “rise and fall” of the despicable duo.  They might have wanted RF stuff, but they’ll take what they can get to make that contract and money spent on film crews worth it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rest assured, Prince Charles was well aware of the photographers. His beach body has been well documented through the years. He has received much praise for his floral suit as well as his healthy body. Kudos to him.









						That’s Hot, Your Highness! Prince Charles, 70, Photographed in Swimming Trunks in Barbados
					

He may be embarking on his eighth decade, but Prince Charles showed he had the hot body of a much younger man on a Barbados beach.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised if she backs out, with the kids,  at the last minute and sends H by himself. They'll make up some excuse, which is one of the few things they're good at.....Since she won't be able to be on the Buckhouse balcony nor at other major Jubilee events, what's the point of going???


Totally agree with this; something like "Oh - one of the kids is sick and I don't want to risk the Royal Family to be sick in such an important event" .. some crap-oh-la like that!


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> not sure whether I believe Harry would have the nerve to basically threaten the Queen....but maybe he's that bad


Oh I do; he was supposedly Prince Philip's favorite grandson (and also had the reputation of being very cheeky), so I don't doubt that he thought he could say/do something like this.  Heck, look at what has happened since .. not even showing up for Philip's service, talking badly about the Royal Family to Oprah, etc.?? .. that (IMO) was just the beginning of his showing his true colors!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Toby93 said:


> As I have said before, *TW must have nerves of steel *to show her face after all that has been said on national TV. Can you imagine spouting all those lies and then having to be in the same room with the people you lied about?  No normal person would ever want to be in that self-inflicted situation


What TW has is bills to pay.


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> much as I dislike her, anyone could be caught frowning for a moment



I agree with this. All you have to do is hit pause on your DVR to see many crazy faces like this.


----------



## Allisonfaye

EverSoElusive said:


> Despite being the queen of word salad, she shouldn't be an author. She thinks too highly of herself and always wants a piece of the pie if something is offered to Harry. If she's not included in a deal, then she'll just bulldoze it and ruin it for Harry. She's pure evil.
> 
> I am honestly glad that she wasn't "offered" another book deal  I mean she can always produce one herself but it would likely not sell and she can use them to prop her feet up while using one of their many toilets in the mansion



She's only the Princess. The Queen holds another high level position in our country.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m not crying  





_The grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II will play a special role in the upcoming Royal Windsor Horse Show, paying tribute to their grandparents and The Queen’s historic reign.

New details about the Royal Windsor Horse Show have just been announced. *Lady Louise, daughter of the Earl and Countess of Wessex, will drive her late grandfather’s carriage during the show in recognition of her grandparents’ contributions to the world of equestrianism.








						Special roles for Lady Louise and The Queen’s great-grandchilden revealed at Jubilee horse show
					

The grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Queen Elizabeth II will play a special role in the upcoming Royal Windsor Horse Show, paying tribute to their grandparents and The Queen’s historic reig…




					royalcentral.co.uk
				



*_


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?
> 
> Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.
> 
> View attachment 5399055


Not a clue as to why she looked like that, but I saved the photo as a glimpse of her true nature. I believe a lot of people have resting b*tch face, but this goes beyond b*tch.


----------



## Milosmum0307

csshopper said:


> Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?
> 
> Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.
> 
> View attachment 5399055


She caught sight of her makeup on the Jumbotron and can’t believe a four-year-old didn’t apply that bronzer?  Yikes.  High res photography is a scourge upon us all.  To be honest, I think anyone can take a bad photo, so I can’t criticize Princess Perjury for the fact that some evil elf took a screenshot of her in the middle of an allergy attack as she desperately snorted to force the mucous back up her nostrils.


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> Anybody know the background to this picture? Currently used in an article about her Netfix failure, but taken at Invictus Games. Had she just been told to go home?
> 
> Probably one of the most indicative of her nasty nature ever being captured on film and published. Dead shark eyes and clenched jaw looking  poised to s n a r l. Add the viper tongue, the Markle Claw, the lack of conscience  and it helps explain why Harry has no balls. Ironically Archewell is tagged on the photo. Evidently Raptor doesn’t control the world like she thinks she does.
> 
> View attachment 5399055



Four pictures of this moment were released (that I saw) - I read here it was something about someone trying to take “unapproved iphone pictures”  but she went home soon thereafter, so I would like to know what happened. I was shocked that she had apparently lost her $h!t in public like this.





						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> Four pictures of this moment were released (that I saw) - I read here it was something about someone trying to take “unapproved iphone pictures”  but she went home soon thereafter, so I would like to know what happened. I was shocked that she had apparently lost her $h!t in public like this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
> 
> 
> Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com



I have not seen any reporting on the photos. I doubt we will. 
What I can surmise, based on photos of her on those tours, etc., she does not know how to maintain a straight face with a pleasant expression. If she sees something she does not like, she makes an unpleasant face.  She does not strike me as a sportswoman, so she may have seen the athletes do something she didn’t approve of.  What is odd is she is a seasoned actress. She is also 40 yrs old. By now, she ought to know how to maintain a neutral expression while on the world stage.  If not, best to stay home.  Imo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> PO the Palace_ and_ PO Netflix bosses, Markels are definitely in danger of being Markeled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Urban Dictionary: Markled
> 
> 
> To abandon someone or something after they’ve contributed to your life in a meaningful way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.urbandictionary.com





purseinsanity said:


> It’s actually a definition in *Urban Dictionary *now?


So TW's claim to fame will always be the definition for abandoning one's family and friends once they are no longer of any use to her. It's not exactly what I would like to be recongnized for, but as the saying goes, "There is no such thing as bad press." 
Here's the link to Urban Dictionary definition.
Verb: To Markle


----------



## EverSoElusive

If this happened to TW(itch), she would have had a fit and had the other person booted from the scene. Just sayin' 

Queen Letizia is such a good sport


----------



## elvisfan4life

Allisonfaye said:


> She's only the Princess. The Queen holds another high level position in our country.



She isn’t and never will be a princess


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I think we can generally assume that most of what he does is at the direction of the WIFE.  However since his pecs don't look so great, why would she want him to do that?


I think she's too selfish to really love or have loved H, but he was/is her access to money and prestige, which seems to be fading quickly through mismanagement and so in her mind, she would be getting even with both H & BRF by publicly embarrassing him. If she knows about H's previous bad conduct when left to his own devices, she might also say, "Dear H, just be yourself."

ET correct typo


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## elvisfan4life

The “Royals “ - the Queens 4 children - Andrew excluded as a disgrace 

And the next King after Charles - William and his children 

That’s all folks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I think we can generally assume that most of what he does is at the direction of the WIFE.  However since his pecs don't look so great, why would she want him to do that?


Well if she really is a narc then showing him that he’s ugly and that he’s lucky to have her as no one else would fancy him would be textbook abusive behaviour.


----------



## Lodpah

jelliedfeels said:


> Well if she really is a narc then showing him that he’s ugly and that he’s lucky to have her as no one else would fancy him would be textbook abusive behaviour.


After reading and watching so many psychological crime dramas and interviews with profilers I don't think TW is a narcissist but rather a psychopath. Charming, manipulative, etc. Amber Heard 2.0.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Well if she really is a narc then showing him that he’s ugly and that he’s lucky to have her as no one else would fancy him would be textbook abusive behaviour.



Indeed. I know a couple where the narc would regularly mention casually how they liked [insert body qualities the spouse did not possess] in the opposite gender. So gross and cruel.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't tell if Colin is Team Harry or Team William here.


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't tell if Colin is Team Harry or Team William here.




I don't know, either, but I'm really upset that the Harkles will be attending.  Nothing against the children, of course, but their parents really should have the good grace to stay away. I can't even begin to imagine the tension that is already arising for William (and, I am sure, for everyone else, including us TPFrs), and we're still got three and a half weeks to go until the Platinum Jubilee.  Of course, being excluded from the balcony is a poke in the eye for them (well done, Your Majesty, with the subtle way you achieved that)  but they no longer fit in, anyway, and it would be completely unfair for the Queen and her celebrations to be overshadowed by such dross.  I dread to think what TW will wear; I hope that she has been given protocols to follow and that she does follow them.  If she arrives gussied up inappropriately, I hope that she will not be allowed to attend. This is an extremely high profile event and Queen Elizabeth II deserves the highest respect to be afforded to her. 

I cannot understand how TW and JCMH feel no shame after their Oprah interview? And they must have stone hearts to face the very people they abused. If Phiip was still alive, I wonder whether he would have outright banned them? Just because someone is family, it does not mean that they are worthy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Couldn't agree more @MiniMabel.


----------



## DoggieBags

Other than just another photo op that she will not be allowed to participate in,  I wonder if TW actually understands how big an honor it is to be with the Queen on the balcony. She’s proved to be astonishingly oblivious to all social cues in whatever countries she happens to be in and whatever social circles she tries to be included in.


----------



## Sophisticatted

MiniMabel said:


> I hope that she has been given protocols to follow and that she does follow them.  If she arrives gussied up inappropriately, I hope that she will not be allowed to attend.



I agree.  They probably have access to her measurements (thanks to the wedding).  I think it would be funny if they had a dull, tasteful wardrobe made up for her and told her to wear it.


----------



## DoggieBags

Sophisticatted said:


> I agree.  They probably have access to her measurements (thanks to the wedding).  I think it would be funny if they had a dull, tasteful wardrobe made up for her and told her to wear it.


They couldn’t even control her wardrobe malfunctions/choices when she was a working member of the BRF so I would be really surprised if she manages to show up suitably attired for every public outing for this trip. I can’t forget the see through skirt dress and the price tag hanging from the skirt of another dress during official BRF scheduled events.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sophisticatted said:


> I agree.  *They probably have access to her measurements* (thanks to the wedding).  I think it would be funny if they had a dull, tasteful wardrobe made up for her and told her to wear it.



She's hardly the same size anymore     Highly doubt that the BRF would get stuff made for her. If they did, that means she'd end up looking like an overstuffed sausage. The horror!


----------



## needlv

So Williams earthshot prize wins a BAFTA and that same day, Harry decides to bother us with his “I make money off little people“ scheme whilst he continues to fly first class or use private jets? .  Your wife‘s hatred of the Australia and NZ tour was just leaked and now you want to make money off the same people?…

 Go away and leave this half of the world alone

/*rant over…










						Harry tries his hand at acting in bizarre skit
					

In a video promoting his  new eco-travel project, the Duke of Sussex goes for a jog through New Zealand woodland before running into  Kiwi actors Rhys Darby, David Fane and Rena Owen.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

And I may just have to order this book…









						Meghan Markle 'came from nothing' and 'trampled on others'
					

'Victims' of the Duchess of Sussex, 40, will tell all in a new book by UK-based investigative journalist Tom Bower, he has claimed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I agree.  They probably have access to her measurements (thanks to the wedding).  I think it would be funny if they had a dull, tasteful wardrobe made up for her and told her to wear it.



She hasn't been her wedding weight for a while, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the DM article on Bower's book (if he's written it and it's coming out soon, can he maybe reveal the stupid title already?):



> The Duke and Duchess have often flaunted their union as that of a wealthy prince meeting a woman from humble beginnings, despite the fact that Meghan often enjoyed luxuries as a kid with her estranged father, Thomas Markle.
> 
> Her father is an Emmy award-winning lighting director and she was educated at private school from kindergarten including the $16,000-a-year private Immaculate Heart High School - all paid for by Mr Markle's salary and his state lottery win.



Good thing some outlets like to remind people of the facts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Midori commented on the article:



> She didnt come from nothing, Meghan had a middle class upbringing - they all behave like b0gans but she even went to a private school and her father paid for her university fees.



Hugo then answered:



> Same as Kate then. But she is ok, because she is white.



Besides completely missing the point as in I doubt the OP was dissing her background: Kate, dear Hugo, is "ok" because she manages to behave in public, doesn't badmouth her in-laws and wears clothes that fit. HTH.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

I'm just wondering about all the headlines/emphasis on the *great-grandchildren* taking part in the Plat Job celebrations  (Telegraph, Bang Showbiz etc) Is big time shade being thrown at the Harkels and the lack of status/legitimacy of the children?

The baby or 'baby' couldn't do anything, barely be seen, but it seems this is very much a family celebration with the PR emphasis spinning (of gold coach wheels) on the continuing line of monarchy and the future.

To me it says:
We (the Crown) haven't met your children (and therefore cannot actually be sure they exist)
We have plenty of (other) GGchildren
We (the Crown) are a family that represent the United Kingdom at home and abroad, if that's not applicable, you needn't apply

King George I was granted authority over his grandchildren 1717. Judges ruled “king’s right of supervision extended to his grandchildren and this right of right belongs to His Majesty, King of the Realm, even during their father’s lifetime.”

That does not extend to GGchildren. My guess is the Palace is tired of all the tantrums (of H&M)


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She hasn't been her wedding weight for a while, though.



ok.  Stretchy clothes.  An entire wardrobe from someplace like Boden in different sizes.  I dunno.  I just think t would be funny because if her machinations for attention were thwarted, somehow.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Regarding great grandchildren, I think the emphasis placed on listing the names of all the greats except Archie and Lillibet, is the RF way of using reverse psychology to get them there.


----------



## xincinsin

I for one hope that the Harkles pull out. They are a nuisance and will deliberately act out. I wouldn't put it past them to try to get included in front page events by giving phone or zoom interviews to "friendly" US media, in an attempt to strong-arm the BRF. And it's a given that Her Heinous will tell "her truth" after the Jubilee: we extended an olive branch and those racists abused us again!


----------



## bag-mania

I was flipping channels this morning and stopped on CBS when I saw Gayle King interviewing someone from the UK about Meghan and Harry attending the jubilee. The guest mentioned how many in the UK see them as being “me me me” and the suspicion that they would use the event for their Netflix show.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> An entire wardrobe from someplace like Boden in different sizes.


Can you imagine her reaction to that? Oh the horror!


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Well if she really is a narc then showing him that he’s ugly and that he’s lucky to have her as no one else would fancy him would be textbook abusive behaviour.


who knows with these two?
Unlike some stans, I don't think this was a love match for her.  Not sure about him.


----------



## Sophisticatted

xincinsin said:


> I for one hope that the Harkles pull out. They are a nuisance and will deliberately act out. I wouldn't put it past them to try to get included in front page events *by giving phone or zoom interviews to "friendly" US media*, in an attempt to strong-arm the BRF. And it's a given that Her Heinous will tell "her truth" after the Jubilee: we extended an olive branch and those racists abused us again!


According to rumors, Netflix is really angry with Harry’s Hoda interview.  If true, they may not be able to do that.


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> the price tag hanging from the skirt of another dress


 WHHHAAAATT? I know this is a small thing, but still.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t blame Netflix for being upset about the Hoda interview.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> WHHHAAAATT? I know this is a small thing, but still.



It was actually a thing' a few years ago. Unfortunately for her she blinked and missed the trend and it just looked careless/classless/tasteless (strike though any that may not apply)


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t blame Netflix for being upset about the Hoda interview.



So they didn't appease their paymasters and the PO the BRF.

How stupid/bad at your job do you have to be?

I'm sure JCMH will blame Miss Information or the hate-filled media


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> who knows with these two?
> Unlike some stans, I don't think this was a love match for her.  Not sure about him.



She is in love with herself and since she’s certain she’s incapable of making a mistake, Harry must be the best possible choice.

Being the control freak Meghan is, picking out a famous man and getting him to fall in love and and marry her is a testament to her skills.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I was flipping channels this morning and stopped on CBS when I saw Gayle King interviewing someone from the UK about Meghan and Harry attending the jubilee. The guest mentioned how many in the UK see them as being “me me me” and the suspicion that they would use the event for their Netflix show.


What was Gayle King's reaction? She and Oprah were the Harkles' cheerleaders this time last year.



Sophisticatted said:


> According to rumors, Netflix is really angry with Harry’s Hoda interview.  If true, they may not be able to do that.


If I were Netflix, I would be mad about them giving interviews and tell-alls to Harpo, Apple and others while bragging about their multimillion dollar deal with Netflix who gets leftovers.


----------



## DoggieBags

880 said:


> WHHHAAAATT? I know this is a small thing, but still.


pics of this dress have been posted on this thread before. She wore the price tag dress for their arrival on an official BRF visit to Tonga.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> pics of this dress have been posted on this thread before. She wore the price tag dress for their arrival on an official BRF visit to Tonga.
> View attachment 5399418


Wow. Thank you for posting.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> What was Gayle King's reaction? She and Oprah were the Harkles' cheerleaders this time last year



I missed the first part of the interview but from what I saw she let the guest answer without interruption or opinion. She did not offer anything in their defense.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I missed the first part of the interview but from what I saw she let the guest answer without interruption or opinion. She did not offer anything in their defense.


Maybe O told G if there are negative comments regarding H&M, just let it go, don't comment (O must realize by now how badly her big interview with them (chock full of lies) turned out).


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> pics of this dress have been posted on this thread before. She wore the price tag dress for their arrival on an official BRF visit to Tonga.
> View attachment 5399418


Other royals have assistants to make sure they are well-turned-out. The BRF would not have stinted on assigning her an assistant. Did she treat the person like dirt and so never got alerted to her boo-boos? Or was she doing the strong independent woman act and declined all help? No, thanks, I can get out of the car myself, close the car door myself, style myself, find my own freebies, dig myself a hole ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> According to rumors, Netflix is really angry with Harry’s Hoda interview.  If true, they may not be able to do that.



If I were Netflix, the once great and powerful cool streaming service, I would be furious that my crew cannot film inside the Palace and that _minders_ will shadow my crew. I would be furious enough that I would consider seriously dropping this disaster.  How the mighty have fallen.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Maybe O told G if there are negative comments regarding H&M, just let it go, don't comment (O must realize by now how badly her big interview with them (chock full of lies) turned out).



I honestly think she was doing her job and letting her guest speak. The fact that CBS is still devoting time to them is ludicrous to me. The interest must be there whether the reporting is positive or negative.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I were Netflix, the once great and powerful cool streaming service, I would be furious that my crew cannot film inside the Palace and that _minders_ will shadow my crew. I would be furious enough that I would consider seriously dropping this disaster.  How the mighty have fallen.


Just a thought: would any media company assume that they can film willy-nilly inside any royal family's palaces? Unless somebody made them promises, empty promises, in exchange for $$$$?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Just a thought: would any media company assume that they can film willy-nilly inside any royal family's palaces? Unless somebody made them promises, empty promises, in exchange for $$$$?



The next King’s son.
Perhaps he overstepped.

ETA: his polo team lost yesterday








						Harry tries his hand at acting in bizarre skit
					

In a video promoting his  new eco-travel project, the Duke of Sussex goes for a jog through New Zealand woodland before running into  Kiwi actors Rhys Darby, David Fane and Rena Owen.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## MiniMabel

xincinsin said:


> Just a thought: would any media company assume that they can film willy-nilly inside any royal family's palaces? Unless somebody made them promises, empty promises, in exchange for $$$$?




Filming inside any Royal residence would be a hard no for a "show" of any kind.  Something serious, good quality, and relevant, perhaps. The Harkles don't have (any) standards but others do.

None of the Royals could approve it without running it past the Queen and she would not allow it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> Filming inside any Royal residence would be a hard no for a "show" of any kind.  Something serious, good quality, and relevant, perhaps. The Harkles don't have (any) standards but others do.
> 
> None of the Royals could approve it without running it past the Queen and she would not allow it.



So, Nflix should explain to us why they thought they could film inside the Palace. Are they really that dim? I agree with @xincinsin - (empty) promises were made in exchange for $$$$. Now the whole world knows Netflix requires _minders_ -  how embarrassing.  Imo.


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't tell if Colin is Team Harry or Team William here.




I think Team William


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I were Netflix, the once great and powerful cool streaming service, I would be furious that my crew cannot film inside the Palace and that _minders_ will shadow my crew. I would be furious enough that I would consider seriously dropping this disaster.  How the mighty have fallen.



I mean, did they really think they could waltz in and harrass the BRF?

BTW I just checked out Apple TV because I wanted to watch Tehran and I found a bunch of stuff I'd like to watch unlike with Netflix with their 10+ yo movies. It's cheaper, too. I did watch the first season for free and plan to use the free week for watching season 2 as soon as it's complete, but I'm really considering signing up. And if I wasn't on a family plan and had to actually pay for Netflix I'd have cancelled a long time ago.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> who knows with these two?
> Unlike some stans, I don't think this was a love match for her.  Not sure about him.


Of course it was a love match for her. She loved his title and wealth and the lavish lifestyle she envisioned.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Nflix should explain to us why they thought they could film inside the Palace. Are they really that dim? I agree with @xincinsin - (empty) promises were made in exchange for $$$$. Now the whole world knows Netflix requires _minders_ -  how embarrassing.  Imo.


Netflix has made a lot of bad decisions over the past year or two. I expect to hear that they are undergoing a major restructuring very soon. Heads will be rolling.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

papertiger said:


> It was actually a thing' a few years ago. Unfortunately for her she blinked and missed the trend and it just looked careless/classless/tasteless (strike though any that may not apply)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> The next King’s son.
> Perhaps he overstepped.
> 
> ETA: his polo team lost yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry tries his hand at acting in bizarre skit
> 
> 
> In a video promoting his  new eco-travel project, the Duke of Sussex goes for a jog through New Zealand woodland before running into  Kiwi actors Rhys Darby, David Fane and Rena Owen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I followed a link in the Hazard Travelyst article to read about all traces of Pearl being removed from the Archewell site. DM calls Heart of Invictus the Douchess's sole remaining project. I thought it was Hazard's project. Is she going to be an executive producer for it since Pearl fell through? And isn't she busy with Archetypes?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

I am not sure which circles you are referring to.  Poor grooming, unkempt hair, ill fitting clothing, inappropriate clothing, hanging price tags have never been a “thing” and have never been stylish or elegant. Unless you are in a specific hood wearing your boxer shorts visible from your pants hanging near your knees.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I followed a link in the Hazard Travelyst article to read about all traces of Pearl being removed from the Archewell site. DM calls Heart of Invictus the Douchess's sole remaining project. I thought it was Hazard's project. Is she going to be an executive producer for it since Pearl fell through? And isn't she busy with Archetypes?



She’s hawking it to Apple and Amazon. 









						Meghan Markle to approach 'Apple and Amazon' to find backer for Pearl
					

Pearl, the working title for the Duchess of Sussex's TV show, was officially scrapped last week as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by the streaming juggernaut's drop in subscribers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sophisticatted

The RF was very clear during Megxit that either you’re in or you’re out.  H&TW chose to be out.  The Netflix contract is with H&TW, NOT the RF.  If they are mad about not being able to film the RF, or anywhere on RF properties/grounds, they have only themselves to blame.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s hawking it to Apple and Amazon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to approach 'Apple and Amazon' to find backer for Pearl
> 
> 
> Pearl, the working title for the Duchess of Sussex's TV show, was officially scrapped last week as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by the streaming juggernaut's drop in subscribers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Considering that Harry  gave Amazon the finger back in 2020 and the Invictus fund raiser was cancelled because they signed with Netflix, I don't see her getting anywhere with Amazon.  Doubt that Apple would be interested.


----------



## gracekelly

Sophisticatted said:


> The RF was very clear during Megxit that either you’re in or you’re out.  H&TW chose to be out.  The Netflix contract is with H&TW, NOT the RF.  If they are mad about not being able to film the RF, or anywhere on RF properties/grounds, they have only themselves to blame.


Hoping this is reason enough for them to pout and stay home.


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> Well if she really is a narc then showing him that he’s ugly and that he’s lucky to have her as no one else would fancy him would be textbook abusive behaviour.


I should have put the ‘showing’ in speak marks there - as much as I make fun of their appearance I hope it’s obvious there’s a limit.


Lilliesdaughter said:


> I am not sure which circles you are referring to.  Poor grooming, unkempt hair, ill fitting clothing, inappropriate clothing, hanging price tags have never been a “thing” and have never been stylish or elegant. Unless you are in a specific hood wearing your boxer shorts visible from your pants hanging near your knees.


There was a brand of cap where teens would keep the sticker on them a few years ago and that makes sense as they like to be edgy but with grown women I only ever heard of it when cheapskates want to wear an occasion dress once and then get a refund on it and I think that might be what’s going on here.

Id hate to be that poor PA in Dior or whatever going up with a receipt and saying ‘she tried it for five minutes and didn’t like it’ and then the clerk pulls out a newspaper and points to the incriminating photo of M the day before - so embarassing


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Hoping this is reason enough for them to pout and stay home.


I wonder though if during the reportedly tense meeting with his father, Hazy was given the ultimatum to show up, shut up and honor his grandmother's milestone or else be permanently stripped of all titles and privileges.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> According to rumors, Netflix is really angry with Harry’s Hoda interview.  If true, they may not be able to do that.


I hope Netflix sues them or cancels their contract


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Considering that Harry  gave Amazon the finger back in 2020 and the Invictus fund raiser was cancelled because they signed with Netflix, I don't see her getting anywhere with Amazon.  Doubt that Apple would be interested.


Could Amazon & Apple be that dumb? 
They've seen how these 2 don't do anything except advertise the $$$$ they have allegedly received while doing nothing, for, what, a year? Me thinks this is just Sunshine Sucks trying to do what they do to keep the fabulous couple happy.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Of course it was a love match for her. She loved his title and wealth and the lavish lifestyle she envisioned.


come on.  doncha know she fell in love with a guy who just happed to be a prince?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> come on.  doncha know she fell in love with a guy who just happed to be a prince?


A nice and kind guy, because that's all that mattered to her, you know ...


----------



## rose60610

Any company would be stupid to take on project Pearl. Meghan and Harry stiffed Netflix, so they've established a horrible track record. And I thought they were sooooo desirable, why are THEY the ones begging for a taker?  Nobody is knocking at THEIR door.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> I wonder though if during the reportedly tense meeting with his father, Hazy was given the ultimatum to show up, shut up and honor his grandmother's milestone or else be permanently stripped of all titles and privileges.



One could always hope.


----------



## Allisonfaye

DoggieBags said:


> pics of this dress have been posted on this thread before. She wore the price tag dress for their arrival on an official BRF visit to Tonga.
> View attachment 5399418



I have been buying my own clothes since I was 12. (shopping, not paying). I have NEVER, EVER in my entire life of approaching 60 years, seen a price tag hanging on the bottom of a dress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Any company would be stupid to take on project Pearl. Meghan and Harry stiffed Netflix, so they've established a horrible track record. And I thought they were sooooo desirable, why are THEY the ones begging for a taker?  Nobody is knocking at THEIR door.


the are arrogant and have very little if any talent


----------



## gracekelly

Allisonfaye said:


> I have been buying my own clothes since I was 12. (shopping, not paying). I have NEVER, EVER in my entire life of approaching 60 years, seen a price tag hanging on the bottom of a dress.


Maybe it was like that scene in Now Voyager.  Bette Davis has tags on all of her clothes to tell her when to wear them and she forgets to remove the tag   and her male friend finds it hanging from her dress.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Maybe it was like that scene in Now Voyager.  Bette Davis has tags on all of her clothes to tell her when to wear them and she forgets to remove the tag   and her male friend finds it hanging from her dress.


it's hard to believe that neither she nor anyone on her staff noticed this...maybe staff hated her and wanted to her look the fool


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> She’s hawking it to Apple and Amazon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to approach 'Apple and Amazon' to find backer for Pearl
> 
> 
> Pearl, the working title for the Duchess of Sussex's TV show, was officially scrapped last week as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by the streaming juggernaut's drop in subscribers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It reeks of desperation. I expect doors to slam in her face, deservedly so. They have nothing of value to offer, just vague promises that they don't deliver on. Their plan for financial independence has been a spectacular failure so far. Hazy better tread carefully with his father, he may need a financial lifeline pretty soon.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It reeks of desperation. I expect doors to slam in her face, deservedly so. They have nothing of value to offer, just vague promises that they don't deliver on. Their plan for financial independence has been a spectacular failure so far. Hazy better tread carefully with his father, he may need a financial lifeline pretty soon.


can you imagine if charles really cut him off?  and all their "projects" failed?  what would they do?  move out of the mansion into a 
"regular" house or apartment?


----------



## Toby93

MiniMabel said:


> I don't know, either, but I'm really upset that the Harkles will be attending.  Nothing against the children, of course, but their parents really should have the good grace to stay away. I can't even begin to imagine the tension that is already arising for William (and, I am sure, for everyone else, including us TPFrs), and we're still got three and a half weeks to go until the Platinum Jubilee.  Of course, being excluded from the balcony is a poke in the eye for them (well done, Your Majesty, with the subtle way you achieved that)  but they no longer fit in, anyway, and it would be completely unfair for the Queen and her celebrations to be overshadowed by such dross.  I dread to think what TW will wear; I hope that she has been given protocols to follow and that she does follow them.  If she arrives gussied up inappropriately, I hope that she will not be allowed to attend. This is an extremely high profile event and Queen Elizabeth II deserves the highest respect to be afforded to her.
> 
> *I cannot understand how TW and JCMH feel no shame after their Oprah interview? And they must have stone hearts to face the very people they abused.* If Phiip was still alive, I wonder whether he would have outright banned them? Just because someone is family, it does not mean that they are worthy.


I have thought this all along, but it looks like the whole show is being orchestrated by their new owners - Netflix.  I don't think they have a choice in this, so I hope they are squirming at the mere thought of having to come face to face with the family they told such outrageous lies about.  My money is on one of the invisible kids coming down with a cold and TW will have to bow out, leaving Harry once again to do her dirty work


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine if charles really cut him off?  and all their "projects" failed?  what would they do?  move out of the mansion into a
> "regular" house or apartment?


They still own the lease on Frog Cot.  Maybe that's why as a just in case bolt hole.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The latest Harry Markle:

_The word on the street is that Harry’s agents are seeking television deals to coincide with the book release, but while many think Camilla is the target, *the actual target is Charles*. Harry is in full ‘blame’ mode, as it is Charles and Camilla who destroyed and killed Diana in his petit pois sized brain.








						Netflix ‘Markled’ And A Polo Dial-A-Pap Gig
					

Dumped, axed, and cancelled—those were the headlines associated with TW’s Netflix project that was little more than an idea thrown at Netflix to stop them asking for the return of their advan…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com
				



_


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine if charles really cut him off?  and all their "projects" failed?  what would they do?  move out of the mansion into a
> "regular" house or apartment?



Harry likely has many millions remaining from his Diana inheritance as he probably didn't touch any of it for a couple decades and benefited from professional management and a huge bull market.  He probably got some up front money, or signing bonus, for his deals with Netflix and Spotify.  Supposedly he was paid in the neighborhood of $25 million for his upcoming smear job, I mean, book, so that is a pretty significant sum.  Taxes will likely eat up about half of that though. He's also notoriously tight with his money, getting other people to pay for everything.  Still, he'll find that more and more difficult as he ages. Who wants to pick up the tab for an aging #6 who is on the outs with his father and his brother, the future Kings? 

He may have blown through some of that Diana money with the Montecito Monstrosity, not only the $14 million purchase price, but the serious dollars to maintain the place, pay the property taxes, pay the staff, pay the water bills, the gardening crew, etc.   Hefty security bills for round the clock security to stroke their egos and reinforce that they are still special and important.  First class travel always, buying out the entire cabin.  Probably a team of 3 or so nannies so there is someone around 24/7 for the children. Still, he's got many millions so he likely can pay for everything for a period, unless they have to repay Netflix or Spotify for failure to perform, breach of contract, etc.   At that point, then it might really be back to Frogmore Cottage and we'll see the Montecito place go up for sale as they state they "really should be on the east coast to be closer to friends and the UK so Harry can continue to monitor the Queen's health".


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They still own the lease on Frog Cot.  Maybe that's why as a just in case bolt hole.


I can't see her living there.  unless she has a sudden realization that she has no talent and isn't likely to attract an uber rich guy.
Who knows what the future holds for these two idiots


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Harry likely has many millions remaining from his Diana inheritance as he probably didn't touch any of it for a couple decades and benefited from professional management and a huge bull market.  He probably got some up front money, or signing bonus, for his deals with Netflix and Spotify.  Supposedly he was paid in the neighborhood of $25 million for his upcoming smear job, I mean, book, so that is a pretty significant sum.  Taxes will likely eat up about half of that though. He's also notoriously tight with his money, getting other people to pay for everything.  Still, he'll find that more and more difficult as he ages. Who wants to pick up the tab for an aging #6 who is on the outs with his father and his brother, the future Kings?
> 
> He may have blown through some of that Diana money with the Montecito Monstrosity, not only the $14 million purchase price, but the serious dollars to maintain the place, pay the property taxes, pay the staff, pay the water bills, the gardening crew, etc.   Hefty security bills for round the clock security to stroke their egos and reinforce that they are still special and important.  First class travel always, buying out the entire cabin.  Probably a team of 3 or so nannies so there is someone around 24/7 for the children. Still, he's got many millions so he likely can pay for everything for a period, unless they have to repay Netflix or Spotify for failure to perform, breach of contract, etc.   At that point, then it might really be back to Frogmore Cottage and we'll see the Montecito place go up for sale as they state they "really should be on the east coast to be closer to friends and the UK so Harry can continue to monitor the Queen's health".



As many here have speculated, HarryMarkle says Charles has, in fact, been supporting H&M this entire time. He either gives cash directly or uses wealthy friends to dispense favors, etc. allegedly. Based on their clothes, etc., it does appear money is not a serious issue. Imo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Allisonfaye said:


> I have been buying my own clothes since I was 12. (shopping, not paying). I have NEVER, EVER in my entire life of approaching 60 years, seen a price tag hanging on the bottom of a dress.


I was thinking the same!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine if charles really cut him off?  and all their "projects" failed?  what would they do?  move out of the mansion into a
> "regular" house or apartment?



It's an appealing thought, but not likely. I think if it got that bad Charles would bail them out because of the kids, and not wanting to look like the bad guy by cutting him off without a penny. I've heard that financial issues are the number one reason for divorce, so if things get that bad she may divorce Hazy and seek greener pastures. There's probably some shady old rich guy out there who would think she's a catch because of her royal connection.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> They still own the lease on Frog Cot.  Maybe that's why as a just in case bolt hole.


I think she'd sooner die than move back there.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I think she'd sooner die than move back there.


she could have an epiphany and realize becoming part of the RF is the biggest break she's ever had


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Harry likely has many millions remaining from his Diana inheritance as he probably didn't touch any of it for a couple decades and benefited from professional management and a huge bull market.  He probably got some up front money, or signing bonus, for his deals with Netflix and Spotify.  Supposedly he was paid in the neighborhood of $25 million for his upcoming smear job, I mean, book, so that is a pretty significant sum.  Taxes will likely eat up about half of that though. He's also notoriously tight with his money, getting other people to pay for everything.  Still, he'll find that more and more difficult as he ages. Who wants to pick up the tab for an aging #6 who is on the outs with his father and his brother, the future Kings?
> 
> He may have blown through some of that Diana money with the Montecito Monstrosity, not only the $14 million purchase price, but the serious dollars to maintain the place, pay the property taxes, pay the staff, pay the water bills, the gardening crew, etc.   Hefty security bills for round the clock security to stroke their egos and reinforce that they are still special and important.  First class travel always, buying out the entire cabin.  Probably a team of 3 or so nannies so there is someone around 24/7 for the children. Still, he's got many millions so he likely can pay for everything for a period, unless they have to repay Netflix or Spotify for failure to perform, breach of contract, etc.   At that point, then it might really be back to Frogmore Cottage and we'll see the Montecito place go up for sale as they state they "really should be on the east coast to be closer to friends and the UK so Harry can continue to monitor the Queen's health".


While he certainly isn't poor I don't believe he has the kind of money to support her in the manner to which she thinks she is entitled, or that he is accustomed to, for the long term. And hell would freeze over before she'd move back to Frogmore Cottage. I firmly believe it was in her plan from the start to persuade him to move to CA. And now maybe they're working on Eugenie to join them? I think they view his book as their last chance at making any significant amount of money, so he will burn his family to the ground in it to drive sales. It's not going to be pretty.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she could have an epiphany and realize becoming part of the RF is the biggest break she's ever had


I suppose anything's possible but I doubt it.


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> Harry likely has many millions remaining from his Diana inheritance as he probably didn't touch any of it for a couple decades and benefited from professional management and a huge bull market.  He probably got some up front money, or signing bonus, for his deals with Netflix and Spotify.  Supposedly he was paid in the neighborhood of $25 million for his upcoming smear job, I mean, book, so that is a pretty significant sum.  Taxes will likely eat up about half of that though. He's also notoriously tight with his money, getting other people to pay for everything.  Still, he'll find that more and more difficult as he ages. Who wants to pick up the tab for an aging #6 who is on the outs with his father and his brother, the future Kings?
> 
> He may have blown through some of that Diana money with the Montecito Monstrosity, not only the $14 million purchase price, but the serious dollars to maintain the place, pay the property taxes, pay the staff, pay the water bills, the gardening crew, etc.   Hefty security bills for round the clock security to stroke their egos and reinforce that they are still special and important.  First class travel always, buying out the entire cabin.  Probably a team of 3 or so nannies so there is someone around 24/7 for the children. Still, he's got many millions so he likely can pay for everything for a period, unless they have to repay Netflix or Spotify for failure to perform, breach of contract, etc.   At that point, then it might really be back to Frogmore Cottage and we'll see the Montecito place go up for sale as they state they "really should be on the east coast to be closer to friends and the UK so Harry can continue to monitor the Queen's health".


You forgot their massive PR bills. That’s probably more important to them than food.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> *While he certainly isn't poor I don't believe he has the kind of money to support her in the manner to which she thinks she is entitled, or* *that he is accustomed to, for the long term.* And hell would freeze over before she'd move back to Frogmore Cottage. I firmly believe it was in her plan from the start to persuade him to move to CA. And now maybe they're working on Eugenie to join them? I think they view his book as their last chance at making any significant amount of money, so he will burn his family to the ground in it to drive sales. It's not going to be pretty.



Oh yeah, the teams of servants, the 24/7 security, the drivers, the nannies, etc.  They cost a fortune and these two don't have billionaire type money.  They just wish they did.  

I agree too, that MM thought she would have a billionaire lifestyle and was shocked, _shocked,_ to find out that Harry was dependent on his father for money, couldn't earn his own, couldn't monetize his title, couldn't accept lavish freebies, and would later be dependent on his brother for financial support.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> As many here have speculated, HarryMarkle says Charles has, in fact, been supporting H&M this entire time. He either gives cash directly or uses wealthy friends to dispense favors, etc. allegedly. Based on their clothes, etc., it does appear money is not a serious issue. Imo.


I’d be really surprised if Charles was giving the gruesome twosome sufficient money to support their current profligate lifestyle. They must be blowing through several million dollars a year since Megxit. Charles receives approximately $25 million a year from the Duchy of Cornwall. That is supposed to fund his lifestyle plus that of his children and grandchildren. Approximately $7 million of that went to William and Harry each year to fund their life styles while Harry was still a working Royal. This money is separate from taxpayer funds that go towards paying for security, maintenance of the royal properties, staff salaries, and work related travel expenses. If Harry needed $3 million a year to fund his lifestyle while he was still a bachelor, how much more does he need now that he has a wife and 2 children to support as well. Then add in the expenses that used to be funded with taxpayer money but is no longer - security, housing, staff salaries, work related travel. This is a man who never had to worry his head about budgeting or administration. That was all taken care of by the BRF bureaucracy with government oversight. Can you see him interviewing staff, reviewing employee contracts, reviewing bills to make sure he’s not getting overcharged or double charged or billed for something he did not receive? So there’s got to be considerable wastage in his current spending just because he has no idea how to be economical or efficient in his spending. Yes he’s been able to get some of his expenses picked up by others (I.e. loan of private planes for a few trips, living rent free in Canada for a few months, possibly loaned designer clothes for TW) but he has to declare and pay taxes on those “freebies” so they’re not totally free either. After deducting the $7 million mentioned above, Charles has $18 million left to fund his lifestyle. I could see him continuing to give Harry the $3 million he’s been giving him for years but I don’t see him doubling or tripling that amount to fund the stuff that used to be covered by taxpayers when Harry was still a working royal. The Harkles legal bills alone must be running them several million $ a year between the lawsuits they love to file and the endless stream of LLCs and special purpose vehicles Megalomaniac seems determined to create. Then there’s their PR firm, etc.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Harry likely has many millions remaining from his Diana inheritance as he probably didn't touch any of it for a couple decades and benefited from professional management and a huge bull market.  He probably got some up front money, or signing bonus, for his deals with Netflix and Spotify.  Supposedly he was paid in the neighborhood of $25 million for his upcoming smear job, I mean, book, so that is a pretty significant sum.  Taxes will likely eat up about half of that though. He's also notoriously tight with his money, getting other people to pay for everything.  Still, he'll find that more and more difficult as he ages. Who wants to pick up the tab for an aging #6 who is on the outs with his father and his brother, the future Kings?
> 
> He may have blown through some of that Diana money with the Montecito Monstrosity, not only the $14 million purchase price, but the serious dollars to maintain the place, pay the property taxes, pay the staff, pay the water bills, the gardening crew, etc.   Hefty security bills for round the clock security to stroke their egos and reinforce that they are still special and important.  First class travel always, buying out the entire cabin.  Probably a team of 3 or so nannies so there is someone around 24/7 for the children. Still, he's got many millions so he likely can pay for everything for a period, unless they have to repay Netflix or Spotify for failure to perform, breach of contract, etc.   At that point, then it might really be back to Frogmore Cottage and we'll see the Montecito place go up for sale as they state they "really should be on the east coast to be closer to friends and the UK so Harry can continue to monitor the Queen's health".


I forgot about his inheritance


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I forgot about his inheritance


He spent that on the house, he’s said so in an interview 
he has probably blown through the advances from Netflix, Spotify and book - the burn rate for the staff is millions a year …
which is why he is reduced to doing Travelyst skits 

He needs for the book to be a success, but even then that income  won’t last forever


----------



## marietouchet

Been thinking, I am starting to feel uneasy for the Jubilee 
it could become a travesty due to H  and M
HMTQ a deserves an angst free jubilee, and it will be over soon , I hope her staff can control the kids antics


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> You forgot their massive PR bills. That’s probably more important to them than food.



Yep. Their relationship with People magazine isn’t free. SS has done a lot for them.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she could have an epiphany and realize becoming part of the RF is the biggest break she's ever had


It is, but she's too much of a narcissistic sociopath to ever realize it. She would never accept living in a lesser place than Kate, having to curtsy to her, not get the best jewels, etc. If she was OK with royal protocols from the start we'd have nothing to discuss here.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I forgot about his inheritance


I am reading The Palace Papers, and it says that the Queen Mother left money in her will for her grandchildren, so he got that money too.


----------



## charlottawill

This is interesting. I believe Forbes' figures are reliable. The Harkles' longterm financial security hinged on the Netflix deal. What a difference a year makes. 


> https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawnch...h-surprisingly-not-that-much/?sh=593c7004c417


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I am reading The Palace Papers, and it says that the Queen Mother left money in her will for her grandchildren, so he got that money too.



Apparently not as much as has been reported, according to Forbes. She wanted a billionaire but only got a multimillionaire. Boo hoo. 



> https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawnch...h-surprisingly-not-that-much/?sh=593c7004c417


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting. I believe Forbes' figures are reliable. The Harkles' longterm financial security hinged on the Netflix deal. What a difference a year makes.


Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.


I suspect his title got him a little leeway with the underwriters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> I suspect his title got him a little leeway with the underwriters.


Not unless there was a 3rd party guarantor. The title alone especially since he was no longer a working royal would not have been given any weight in the credit evaluation.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Not unless there was a 3rd party guarantor.


I think that possibility was mentioned elsewhere. Maybe Charles? Others have questioned where H came up with the money.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> I think that possibility was mentioned elsewhere. Maybe Charles? Others have questioned where H came up with the money.


Maybe Charles though I’m not sure why he’d be willing to be the guarantor. Maybe the Saudis?


----------



## youngster

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.



Prince Charles would be my guess.  He guaranteed it perhaps because, you're right, it would be a tough sell to the underwriters otherwise.  They want to know you've got the income to maintain the property and pay the property taxes and insurance every year.


----------



## Chanbal

I've so many posts to catch up on, I'm kind of lost.


----------



## Chanbal

This must be an interesting one


----------



## lanasyogamama

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.





charlottawill said:


> I suspect his title got him a little leeway with the underwriters.





DoggieBags said:


> Not unless there was a 3rd party guarantor. The title alone especially since he was no longer a working royal would not have been given any weight in the credit evaluation.


Aren’t there some people saying a Russian Oligarch may be an owner/underwriter?


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.


An older article discussed some of this: 








						How did Meghan Markle and Prince Harry afford their "starter home"? – Film Daily
					

Will Meghan Markle and Prince Harry be able to afford their new lifestyle stateside? Discover why finance experts are worried.




					filmdaily.co


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.


It was reported that Methane used a LLC under her name to purchase the mansion. Does that make a difference in how the banks would treat the mortgage?


----------



## csshopper

If they sold their Montecito home they could possibly gain some millions in the current market, BUT when they purchased it in June 2020 it had been bouncing on and off the market for 5 years since May 2015 ( listing history is on line).  Doubt they have made improvements and there’s the adjacent stinky swamp odor that’s been widely reported so actually selling might be difficult. Current estimated value on Zillow.com is $26,913,200.00

As for decor we’ve seen in photos, not going to attract buyers IMO. They really have no taste.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> pics of this dress have been posted on this thread before. She wore the price tag dress for their arrival on an official BRF visit to Tonga.
> View attachment 5399418


I've read that HMTQ's dresser labels each garment TQ wears with the date and event last attended so the clothes weren't recycled too soon and never for a similar event. Also, prior to an event, the dresser relabels HM's complete outfit to be worn with date and occasion. Other royals have also stated as much. I wonder if TW's dresser used a similar practice and just forgot 'accidentally on purpose' to remove the tag in response to TW bad behaviour during this tour.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> It was reported that Methane used a LLC under her name to purchase the mansion. Does that make a difference in how the banks would treat the mortgage?


No. Either the LLC, or if the LLC was created solely to hold the property and has no income, then the owner of the LLC have to show a visible and steady source of unencumbered income that provides sufficient coverage of the mortgage payments plus costs to maintain the property including expenses like annual property tax. And the income cannot be 1:1 coverage meaning if you make $100 a month, your mortgage payments plus other property related expenses cannot amount to $100 a month also since realistically you will also have to spend on necessities like food, health care and other normal living expenses. The bank may also want recourse to assets outside of the LLC in the form of a personal guarantee either from the owner of the LLC or a qualified third party.


----------



## xincinsin

I cannot think of any way either of them could prove that they have a "visible and steady source of unencumbered income". Hazard might be drawing an income from the interest generated by the trusts created for him, but if he was foolish enough to spend the principal, he would be sabotaging his future income. Could the money in the trusts be used as collateral to guarantee the mortagage loan?


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> I cannot think of any way either of them could prove that they have a "visible and steady source of unencumbered income". Hazard might be drawing an income from the interest generated by the trusts created for him, but if he was foolish enough to spend the principal, he would be sabotaging his future income. Could the money in the trusts be used as collateral to guarantee the mortagage loan?


Yes but if the Forbes article was close to accurate, harry had about $5 million left in his Trust which wouldn’t be nearly enough because you’d have to assume he’d be drawing down his capital in the trust to cover mortgage payments plus living expenses too If he didn’t have enough income.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It's an appealing thought, but not likely. I think if it got that bad Charles would bail them out because of the kids, and not wanting to look like the bad guy by cutting him off *without a penny*. I've heard that financial issues are the number one reason for divorce, so if things get that bad she may divorce Hazy and seek greener pastures. There's probably some shady old rich guy out there who would think she's a catch because of her royal connection.



True, 40 millions don't go far *irony off* Not Charles' fault they can't live within their means.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

sdkitty said:


> can you imagine if charles really cut him off?  and all their "projects" failed?  what would they do?  move out of the mansion into a
> "regular" house or apartment?



I suspect they would leech off some of their wealthy, woke 'friends'. Maybe Oprah has a guest house they can stay in?


----------



## Allisonfaye

gracekelly said:


> They still own the lease on Frog Cot.  Maybe that's why as a just in case bolt hole.



I am sure they would be welcomed with open arms back in the Uk.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Lodpah said:


> You forgot their massive PR bills. That’s probably more important to them than food.



They should fired their PR team anyway. It's not like they are doing a great job.


----------



## Allisonfaye

DoggieBags said:


> I’d be really surprised if Charles was giving the gruesome twosome sufficient money to support their current profligate lifestyle. They must be blowing through several million dollars a year since Megxit. Charles receives approximately $25 million a year from the Duchy of Cornwall. That is supposed to fund his lifestyle plus that of his children and grandchildren. Approximately $7 million of that went to William and Harry each year to fund their life styles while Harry was still a working Royal. This money is separate from taxpayer funds that go towards paying for security, maintenance of the royal properties, staff salaries, and work related travel expenses. If Harry needed $3 million a year to fund his lifestyle while he was still a bachelor, how much more does he need now that he has a wife and 2 children to support as well. Then add in the expenses that used to be funded with taxpayer money but is no longer - security, housing, staff salaries, work related travel. This is a man who never had to worry his head about budgeting or administration. That was all taken care of by the BRF bureaucracy with government oversight. Can you see him interviewing staff, reviewing employee contracts, reviewing bills to make sure he’s not getting overcharged or double charged or billed for something he did not receive? So there’s got to be considerable wastage in his current spending just because he has no idea how to be economical or efficient in his spending. Yes he’s been able to get some of his expenses picked up by others (I.e. loan of private planes for a few trips, living rent free in Canada for a few months, possibly loaned designer clothes for TW) but he has to declare and pay taxes on those “freebies” so they’re not totally free either. After deducting the $7 million mentioned above, Charles has $18 million left to fund his lifestyle. I could see him continuing to give Harry the $3 million he’s been giving him for years but I don’t see him doubling or tripling that amount to fund the stuff that used to be covered by taxpayers when Harry was still a working royal. The Harkles legal bills alone must be running them several million $ a year between the lawsuits they love to file and the endless stream of LLCs and special purpose vehicles Megalomaniac seems determined to create. Then there’s their PR firm, etc.



I wonder how taxation works if they are dual citizens? I remember a friend from Canada who worked in my company told me he had to pay US and Canadian taxes. But regardless, with the top California state tax being 13% for people who make over $1m and the federal rate, they would probably clock in close to 50% tax rate just on the US alone.


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> As for decor we’ve seen in photos, not going to attract buyers IMO. They really have no taste.




it’s honestly shocking how ugly it is.


----------



## Allisonfaye

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting. I believe Forbes' figures are reliable. The Harkles' longterm financial security hinged on the Netflix deal. What a difference a year makes.



I would LOVE to see an update to this article.


----------



## Allisonfaye

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.



Or maybe when you are a member of the BRF, you have connections and the standards are...cough...waived a bit?


----------



## Allisonfaye

csshopper said:


> If they sold their Montecito home they could possibly gain some millions in the current market, BUT when they purchased it in June 2020 it had been bouncing on and off the market for 5 years since May 2015 ( listing history is on line).  Doubt they have made improvements and there’s the adjacent stinky swamp odor that’s been widely reported so actually selling might be difficult. Current estimated value on Zillow.com is $26,913,200.00
> 
> As for decor we’ve seen in photos, not going to attract buyers IMO. They really have no taste.



I have no doubt it was the location that sold them...near Ellen and Oprah...


----------



## xincinsin

Allisonfaye said:


> They should fired their PR team anyway. It's not like they are doing a great job.


I beg to differ. They are doing a pretty good job considering how little they have to work with, and how their clients constantly sabotage themselves  Their brief was probably to keep the Harkles in the news, good or bad news was irrelevant.


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Yes but if the Forbes article was close to accurate, harry had about $5 million left in his Trust which wouldn’t be nearly enough because you’d have to assume he’d be drawing down his capital in the trust to cover mortgage payments plus living expenses too If he didn’t have enough income.


Did I miss any recent article on Forbes about Hazz's leftover funds? Wow, I've been missing several developments in the Harkles's saga.

According to NS, their case against the Mail on Sunday is supposed to go to court in June. Also, TM is likely not going to be received by the BRF during his upcoming trip to the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

The Telegraph is graciously offering advice to Harry about his hair: the time to shave has arrived!  






__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.


I'm not a mortgage expert, so I'll go with conspiracy theory instead because it's more fun. Both houses the Despicable Duo have occupied in North America were owned by Russian billionaires with the Vancouver BC house apparently rent free for about a year while The Montsh!tshow house was 'purchased' from Russian oligarch, Sergey Grishin. Could he be guaranteeing the mortgage and/or could the duo's ownership be all smoke and mirrors. Could the Dastardly Duo or at least TW have agreed to try to destabilize the monarchy in exchange for freebies from these Russian billionaires?


----------



## Chanbal

I'm speechless…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Speechless, again! 


_However, he has come under fire from royal fans who have accused him of appropriating Maori culture to plug his eco-firm. 

Taking to Twitter, one wrote: 'Usually a white man launching a global brand would be accused of appropriating Maori culture. Not sure Prince Harry will get the same treatment.'

Another said: 'So Prince Harry is now appropriating Māori culture to cash in on mental health.'

While a third added: 'How does it feel for Maori to be used by Harry to market his business. Did he ask first?'

In another potential embarrassment for the duke, his video comes just weeks after the Māori party called for the Queen to be removed as New Zealand's head of state._









						Prince Harry accused of using Maori culture 'to push his own agenda'
					

The Duke of Sussex appeared in the five-minute video and delivered several phrases in Te Reo Maori to plug his eco-travel firm.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sorry if this has already been posted here, but the chosen photo is perfect… 










						Meghan REMOVES all references to her doomed Netflix animation series
					

Pearl, the working title for the Markle-created show, was officially canceled last week as part of a wave of cutbacks prompted by Netflix's drop in subscribers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bet she calls the paps to take pics of her pushing a stroller or something so that isn’t he latest pic.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm trying to update myself on the Harkles' new developments and found this interesting video from the Aussies. I'm sorry if it has already been posted here, but if not, enjoy…


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Speechless, again!
> View attachment 5400037
> 
> _However, he has come under fire from royal fans who have accused him of appropriating Maori culture to plug his eco-firm.
> 
> Taking to Twitter, one wrote: 'Usually a white man launching a global brand would be accused of appropriating Maori culture. Not sure Prince Harry will get the same treatment.'
> 
> Another said: 'So Prince Harry is now appropriating Māori culture to cash in on mental health.'
> 
> While a third added: 'How does it feel for Maori to be used by Harry to market his business. Did he ask first?'
> 
> In another potential embarrassment for the duke, his video comes just weeks after the Māori party called for the Queen to be removed as New Zealand's head of state._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of using Maori culture 'to push his own agenda'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex appeared in the five-minute video and delivered several phrases in Te Reo Maori to plug his eco-travel firm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





No sense, no feeling.  As the old saying goes!


----------



## charlottawill

Allisonfaye said:


> I suspect they would leech off some of their wealthy, woke 'friends'.


But do they have any at this point?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> it’s honestly shocking how ugly it is.


California nouveau riche


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to update myself on the Harkles' new developments and found this interesting video from the Aussies. I'm sorry if it has already been posted here, but if not, enjoy…




The BRF terrified??!!   Very much the opposite, I am sure.  I am also sure that they are many steps ahead of the Harkles and that the Harkles' movements/options will be tightly controlled. It's truly sickening that they are attending the Jubilee, but perhaps they won't?  Three weeks yet for them to bail out......fingers crossed!


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> Yes but if the Forbes article was close to accurate, harry had about $5 million left in his Trust which wouldn’t be nearly enough because you’d have to assume he’d be drawing down his capital in the trust to cover mortgage payments plus living expenses too If he didn’t have enough income.


$5 million isn't much when you live the way they do.  Just the mortgage and maintenance on that palace must be how much? $500K a year? more?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Speechless, again!
> View attachment 5400037
> 
> _However, he has come under fire from royal fans who have accused him of appropriating Maori culture to plug his eco-firm.
> 
> Taking to Twitter, one wrote: 'Usually a white man launching a global brand would be accused of appropriating Maori culture. Not sure Prince Harry will get the same treatment.'
> 
> Another said: 'So Prince Harry is now appropriating Māori culture to cash in on mental health.'
> 
> While a third added: 'How does it feel for Maori to be used by Harry to market his business. Did he ask first?'
> 
> In another potential embarrassment for the duke, his video comes just weeks after the Māori party called for the Queen to be removed as New Zealand's head of state._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of using Maori culture 'to push his own agenda'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex appeared in the five-minute video and delivered several phrases in Te Reo Maori to plug his eco-travel firm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Another well thought out philanthropic endeavor


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Allisonfaye said:


> They should fired their PR team anyway. It's not like they are doing a great job.


Lipstick on a pig can only go so far.  SS cannot create something out of dung.  SS is riding a gravy train.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers: today's video


----------



## LittleStar88

DoggieBags said:


> Something’s not adding up here. I’m having a hard time believing that any financial institution would underwrite a $10 million mortgage on a $14.6 million property for a borrower with $5 million net worth and no guaranteed source of income. At the time they bought the Montecito mansion I think he’d had only the one paid speaking engagement with JPM and I don’t think either the Netflix or Spotify deals had been signed then. Maybe his book deal was signed by then but that still doesn’t seem like enough guaranteed income to satisfy a mortgage lender.



My guess is that daddy co-signed for the mortgage, whether he personally or in some other way (business entity).

I thought that Harry had more than $5 million (at least enough to pay for the house in full)?? I don't recall seeing something that said there is a mortgage on the house versus it is paid for (but entirely possible that I missed that bit of info).


----------



## mia55

This article is worth posting here, totally loved it  









						Stick a fork in Meghan and Harry – these royal Kardashians are done
					

Every time I think Prince Harry couldn’t possibly make himself look more cringe-worthy, up he pops to prove me spectacularly, eye-rollingly wrong.




					nypost.com


----------



## LittleStar88

mia55 said:


> This article is worth posting here, totally loved it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stick a fork in Meghan and Harry – these royal Kardashians are done
> 
> 
> Every time I think Prince Harry couldn’t possibly make himself look more cringe-worthy, up he pops to prove me spectacularly, eye-rollingly wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



This article was delicious! 

A good one to keep handy for when folks don't understand why she is so disliked here... Just give them the link to this article - sums up about 85%+ of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's Rose Hanbury's husband William is walking with. I don't know, they seem genuinely friendly with each other. Just sayin'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> My guess is that daddy co-signed for the mortgage, whether he personally or in some other way (business entity).
> 
> I thought that Harry had more than $5 million (at least enough to pay for the house in full)?? I don't recall seeing something that said there is a mortgage on the house versus it is paid for (but entirely possible that I missed that bit of info).


I'm not sure but I doubt they paid cash for the house


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I'm not sure but I doubt they paid cash for the house


Hazy said that he is now just a regular guy with a mortgage to pay.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> Hazy said that he is now just a regular guy with a mortgage to pay.



Maybe he thinks that's what the plebs say, so he is saying it to sound "relatable" to the common folk?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe he thinks that's what the plebs say, so he is saying it to sound "relatable" to the common folk?


yeah right
The WIFE has actually lived in a regular house.  I'm sure she doesn't want to go back to that but it is something she's done.  Harry has never lived as a "regular person".  Unless you count the military and I'm sure he was so excited to be a big boy soldier that it made up for the less than optimal living conditions.


----------



## rose60610

Since Meghan believes she and Harry walk on water and can do no wrong, why don't they just turn their mansion into a church of some kind? No more property taxes to pay! Surely their stans worship them and a few of them might even stop screeching long enough to attend a service. Of course the sermons will be piped in voiceovers from Meghan telling the flock to donate to Archwell. Cults abound in California, why not start a Duke and Duchess Disciples Denomination? Leaders of huge congregations live in lavish surroundings and get private jets, too. Of course M&H would then insist on security from the Swiss Guard and try to figure out ways to sponge off the Vatican.


----------



## jennlt

rose60610 said:


> *Since Meghan believes she and Harry walk on water and can do no wrong, why don't they just turn their mansion into a church of some kind? *No more property taxes to pay! Surely their stans worship them and a few of them might even stop screeching long enough to attend a service. Of course the sermons will be piped in voiceovers from Meghan telling the flock to donate to Archwell. Cults abound in California, why not start a Duke and Duchess Disciples Denomination? Leaders of huge congregations live in lavish surroundings and get private jets, too. Of course M&H would then insist on security from the Swiss Guard and try to figure out ways to sponge off the Vatican.



They could call it _*Our Lady of Perpetual Victimhood   *_


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> I'm speechless…




like endorsement by Joe’s sister is a great pr statement   

said nobody


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Since Meghan believes she and Harry walk on water and can do no wrong, why don't they just turn their mansion into a church of some kind? No more property taxes to pay! Surely their stans worship them and a few of them might even stop screeching long enough to attend a service. Of course the sermons will be piped in voiceovers from Meghan telling the flock to donate to Archwell. Cults abound in California, why not start a Duke and Duchess Disciples Denomination? Leaders of huge congregations live in lavish surroundings and get private jets, too. Of course M&H would then insist on security from the Swiss Guard and try to figure out ways to sponge off the Vatican.


Don't give her ideas. But she'd have stiff competition, as there are already more megachurches in CA than in any other state.


----------



## DoggieBags

LittleStar88 said:


> My guess is that daddy co-signed for the mortgage, whether he personally or in some other way (business entity).
> 
> I thought that Harry had more than $5 million (at least enough to pay for the house in full)?? I don't recall seeing something that said there is a mortgage on the house versus it is paid for (but entirely possible that I missed that bit of info).


Post 91,272, @charlottawill posted a link to a Forbes article that mentions a nearly $10 million dollar mortgage Hazbeen put on the Montecito mansion
Post 91,283 @880 posted a link to another article that also mentions a sizeable mortgage and so,e how calculated that the they need to bring in 105,000 Brit. Pounds per month after tax to cover the carrying costs on that house.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Since Meghan believes she and Harry walk on water and can do no wrong, why don't they just turn their mansion into a church of some kind? No more property taxes to pay! Surely their stans worship them and a few of them might even stop screeching long enough to attend a service. Of course the sermons will be piped in voiceovers from Meghan telling the flock to donate to Archwell. Cults abound in California, why not start a Duke and Duchess Disciples Denomination? Leaders of huge congregations live in lavish surroundings and get private jets, too. Of course M&H would then insist on security from the Swiss Guard and try to figure out ways to sponge off the Vatican.


maybe marianne williamson could advise them


----------



## rose60610

I still find it incredible that Meghan thought she could do so much better on her own than work for the BRF. She really must have thought that studio heads and A-Listers would be beating down her door and merching opportunities would be endless. For somebody who loved Hollywood and the limelight in London, is Montecito really better than having all the perks of the BRF? Her prince has turned out to be more of a frog than a financier. I wouldn't be surprised that they may be getting desperate enough to audition Lilibet for diaper commercials and use their dogs for pet food commercials. How huge must your ego be to think you can outdo what she threw under the bus?


----------



## LittleStar88

DoggieBags said:


> Post 91,272, @charlottawill posted a link to a Forbes article that mentions a nearly $10 million dollar mortgage Hazbeen put on the Montecito mansion
> Post 91,283 @880 posted a link to another article that also mentions a sizeable mortgage and so,e how calculated that the they need to bring in 105,000 Brit. Pounds per month after tax to cover the carrying costs on that house.



Thank you!

So that leaves me to guess that someone or some entity has cosigned their mortgage if it is simply not possible for them to qualify based on their unpredictable/unreliable income


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> For somebody who loved Hollywood and the limelight in London, is Montecito really better than having all the perks of the BRF?



Seriously. She must HATE the quiet life forced on her. No red carpets, no glitzy occasions, just two toddlers and a man-child. All while Kate travels the world, goes to movie premieres and wears The Queen's diamonds.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I still find it incredible that Meghan thought she could do so much better on her own than work for the BRF. She really must have thought that studio heads and A-Listers would be beating down her door and merching opportunities would be endless. For somebody who loved Hollywood and the limelight in London, is Montecito really better than having all the perks of the BRF? Her prince has turned out to be more of a frog than a financier. I wouldn't be surprised that they may be getting desperate enough to audition Lilibet for diaper commercials and use their dogs for pet food commercials. How huge must your ego be to think you can outdo what she threw under the bus?



There are lots of high-powered entertainment industry people living in the Montecito area, and it probably felt more familiar to Hazy with its polo fields and large estates with manicured gardens than LA would have. I'm surprised MM hasn't tried to cozy up to Goop queen Gwyneth Paltrow, whose new Montecito mansion was recently in AD. Or maybe she has and was shot down.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. She must HATE the quiet life forced on her. No red carpets, no glitzy occasions, just two toddlers and a man-child. All while Kate travels the world, goes to movie premieres and wears The Queen's diamonds.



Although it has been established that what MM wants MM gets, I think Montecito was a compromise for Hazy. It was more familiar to him with polo fields and large estates with manicured gardens, and still lots of entertainment people living there for her to rub elbows with. Or so that was probably their thinking.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I've so many posts to catch up on, I'm kind of lost.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> But do they have any at this point?



Sounds like Joe’s sister is a fan


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very impressive, QE should be proud. Sure, people will talk, but Prince Charles looks every bit the King with Prince William right behind him.  Once again the BRF rules.  ETA: Kudos and applause to Cams, too.  Total respect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaaa?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Since Meghan believes she and Harry walk on water and can do no wrong, why don't they just turn their mansion into a church of some kind? No more property taxes to pay! Surely their stans worship them and a few of them might even stop screeching long enough to attend a service. Of course the sermons will be piped in voiceovers from Meghan telling the flock to donate to Archwell. Cults abound in California, why not start a Duke and Duchess Disciples Denomination? Leaders of huge congregations live in lavish surroundings and get private jets, too. Of course M&H would then insist on security from the Swiss Guard and try to figure out ways to sponge off the Vatican.


PLEASE .. don’t give them any ideas!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oprah????


----------



## lanasyogamama

She just doesn’t get it….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

The Aussies are having a blast…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Aussies are having a blast…




Gotta milk him.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah????




What haven't they spilled at this point? What is there to say?  No one in the family has likely spoken to them in 2+ years, other than Eugenie, and other than the very brief meetings at Windsor with PC and the Queen a couple weeks ago, which seems more like they were summoned to hear bad news.  As in, you are cordially invited to the Jubilee but will not be on the balcony or featured at any of the major public events.  There have been no leaks about what was said at those meetings, which is revealing, except for Harry of course and his ridiculous statement that he was making sure the Queen had the right people around her lolol.  Oh, and that he's the only one she can really talk to.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Oprah wiped that interview from the internet for a reason.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like Joe’s sister is a fan


”blundering” is evidently genetic.

”blundering” adj. “making or characterized by stupid  or careless mistakes, clumsy”
                          “ to act or speak clumsily”

 Sensitive to not being political, so to stay on topic will use it applied to Raptor: “She will be a blundering idiot if she attempts an Oprah Part II conversation.”. Especially if Oprah turned it down.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very impressive, QE should be proud. Sure, people will talk, but Prince Charles looks every bit the King with Prince William right behind him.  Once again the BRF rules.  ETA: Kudos and applause to Cams, too.  Total respect.



In spite of Hazy's delusional ramblings about looking out for Gran, the Queen knows who really has her back and we're looking at them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I still find it incredible that Meghan thought she could do so much better on her own than work for the BRF. She really must have thought that studio heads and A-Listers would be beating down her door and merching opportunities would be endless. For somebody who loved Hollywood and the limelight in London, is Montecito really better than having all the perks of the BRF? Her prince has turned out to be more of a frog than a financier. I wouldn't be surprised that they may be getting desperate enough to audition Lilibet for diaper commercials and use their dogs for pet food commercials. How huge must your ego be to think you can outdo what she threw under the bus?


I think when their engagement was announced and everyone went gaga over him marrying an American actress, WOC, it went to her head.
I still find it kind of amazing that with her being almost 40, twice (or three times) married before, she got that huge wedding.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> She just doesn’t get it….


Is that ever an understatement  I hope when her people reach out to Oprah's people the calls go unanswered. If Oprah distanced herself from the first interview what makes the Tiresome Twosome think she'd want to do another? They are drowning in desperation.

As I type this ET is on in the background, and they're showing Hazy making a fool of himself in that new ad. The two hosts are being kind, the woman said "We love Harry in any situation".


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I think when their engagement was announced and everyone went gaga over him marrying an American actress, WOC, it went to her head.
> I still find it kind of amazing that with her being almost 40, twice (or three times) married before, she got that huge wedding.



I liked the idea of them as a couple at first, but the more I heard about her self-centered shenanigans the more I disliked her.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Is that ever an understatement  I hope when her people reach out to Oprah's people the calls go unanswered. If Oprah distanced herself from the first interview what makes the Tiresome Twosome think she'd want to do another? They are drowning in desperation.
> 
> As I type this ET is on in the background, and they're showing Hazy making a fool of himself in that new ad. The two hosts are being kind, the woman said "We love Harry in any situation".


”New Zealand” is actually California. Not a Māori in sight.

I guess the Girl Dad shirt is to remind us that Archie made them parents, but Lilibuck$ made them a family. Merching, merching, merching . Gag.

Can you imagine William or Edward, or Mike Tindall wearing one and dissing their sons?


----------



## Allisonfaye

Piers Morgan was on Megyn Kelly's podcast from yesterday and he reamed MM. Worth a listen.


----------



## Chanbal

One must be very stupid to fall for Hazz's eco and other ventures… 










						Why I'm not falling for Prince Harry's latest eco-venture
					

Just when you thought Prince Harry’s post-royal career couldn’t get any more absurd, he manages to make it so. His latest venture is a service which supposedly tells you how many carbon emissions will be emitted as a result of an airline passenger’s journey by various airlines and routes –...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> ”New Zealand” is actually California. Not a Māori in sight.
> 
> I guess the Girl Dad shirt is to remind us that Archie made them parents, but Lilibuck$ made them a family. Merching, merching, merching . Gag.
> 
> Can you imagine William or Edward, or Mike Tindall wearing one and dissing their sons?



I'm almost to the point of feeling sorry for him. Almost.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> One must be very stupid to fall for Hazz's eco and other ventures…
> View attachment 5400369
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I'm not falling for Prince Harry's latest eco-venture
> 
> 
> Just when you thought Prince Harry’s post-royal career couldn’t get any more absurd, he manages to make it so. His latest venture is a service which supposedly tells you how many carbon emissions will be emitted as a result of an airline passenger’s journey by various airlines and routes –...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


gawd
what nerve when he flies on private jets
And, as I've said before, I reserve a special kind of disdain for him and his WIFE since their whole life is supposedly service.  They aren't actors, musicians, business people.  He was born into his privilege and she married into it.


----------



## 880

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah????




Oprah may decide not to do another one. There were rumors that she cut ties when she found out M lied to her the first time. But, even if that were not the case, there is nothing new to discuss.









						Oprah Winfrey Allegedly Cut Ties With Meghan Markle After Realizing Duchess Lied To Her
					

Oprah Winfrey allegedly distanced herself from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle after realizing that they lied to her during their March interview.




					www.entertaintimes.com
				




H was always an idiot. He got away with a lot bc everyone thought he was charming and there were no expectations of the spare. Neither of them understood that outside the RF bubble, they don’t have anything to offer in the real world.

ETA: I just saw that @charlottawill made this point already a few posts above


----------



## xincinsin

I remember when a stan set up a GoFundMe to collect funds to help pay off the Harkles' mortgage. It collected very little, even though that was when other stans made a substantial collection for charity in honour of Archie's birthday. Maybe even for rabid fans, their common sense kicks in when distinguishing between noble service like supporting charity and something relatable to the common man like a mortgage.


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> I guess the Girl Dad shirt is to remind us that Archie made them parents, but Lilibuck$ made them a family. Merching, merching, merching . Gag.
> 
> Can you imagine William or Edward, or Mike Tindall wearing one and dissing their sons?


Wouldn’t that shirt normally be for a dad of just girls? My friend’s who call themselves “boy moms” have multiple boys and no girls.


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean has an interesting  segment about the larger ramifications of Raptor’s Pearl project being axed. Evidently, and probably not surprising given her narcissism, she expected Pearl to become a franchise, sounds like what Disney did with Frozen. Trinkets and totzkes and spin offs and on and on, an everlasting stream of cash. Poof!
Maybe they need to up the egg production and set up a stand?


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean has an interesting  segment about the larger ramifications of Raptor’s Pearl project being axed. Evidently, and probably not surprising given her narcissism, she expected Pearl to become a franchise, sounds like what Disney did with Frozen. Trinkets and totzkes and spin offs and on and on, an everlasting stream of cash. Poof!
> Maybe they need to up the egg production and set up a stand?


Good god the delusions of grandeur!


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean has an interesting  segment about the larger ramifications of Raptor’s Pearl project being axed. Evidently, and probably not surprising given her narcissism, she expected Pearl to become a franchise, sounds like what Disney did with Frozen. Trinkets and totzkes and spin offs and on and on, an everlasting stream of cash. Poof!
> Maybe they need to up the egg production and set up a stand?


How did he find out? Did Methane try to trademark the word "pearl"?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is a book that I plan to buy. I want to find out who are the victims TW tried to keep silent. 

*MEGHAN Markle has “trampled” on others on her way to the top and her “victims” will tell all*_ in a new book by famed investigative journalist Tom Bower…

Asked by GB News host Mark Dolan about the status of his book, Mr Bower said: “Well, in fact, I’ve finished it and it will be out very soon.

“It is a story, an untold story. I have found out things which are really quite extraordinary about her.

“And I think that the public perception of her will be either confirmed or outraged, or in any case, it’ll be a great surprise.”

He said: “*It has turned out to be…a very, very hard slog because people were pretty reluctant to speak and she and her lawyers had done very well to keep people silent, *but I got through [to] enough._



			https://london-post.co.uk/meghan-markles-victims-to-speak-out-in-new-book-by-tom-bower/


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I think when their engagement was announced and everyone went gaga over him marrying an American actress, WOC, it went to her head.
> I still find it kind of amazing that with her being almost 40, twice (or three times) married before, *she got that huge wedding.*


If it hadn't happened, TW would've been telling OW that the BRF was too bigoted to give her the pure and virginal wedding that she deserved. At the time, I laughed at the thought that she was possibly marrying the "12-year-old child" caught in a time warp and constantly reliving the insurmountable trauma caused by his beloved mother's untimely death. However, now that I consider all his romantic attachments and misadventures, I think that H had finally arrived at the "rebellious teenager" stage of his life and marrying TW was a sheer act of defiance against his grandfather, who apparently told him, "One should only step out with actresses, not marry them."  In any case as we now know, TW was really marrying a bad tempered and immature 30-something man-child, whom she could somehow manipulate to do her bidding against his own family.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> This is a book that I plan to buy. I want to find out who are the victims TW tried to keep silent.
> 
> *MEGHAN Markle has “trampled” on others on her way to the top and her “victims” will tell all*_ in a new book by famed investigative journalist Tom Bower…
> 
> Asked by GB News host Mark Dolan about the status of his book, Mr Bower said: “Well, in fact, I’ve finished it and it will be out very soon.
> 
> “It is a story, an untold story. I have found out things which are really quite extraordinary about her.
> 
> “And I think that the public perception of her will be either confirmed or outraged, or in any case, it’ll be a great surprise.”
> 
> He said: “*It has turned out to be…a very, very hard slog because people were pretty reluctant to speak and she and her lawyers had done very well to keep people silent, *but I got through [to] enough._
> 
> 
> 
> https://london-post.co.uk/meghan-markles-victims-to-speak-out-in-new-book-by-tom-bower/




If Meghan can spew crap about "S_omebody_ in the BRF said bla bla bla and it's SO RACIST" but won't say who it actually was and claim she felt suicidal as a result of being given millions upon millions of riches, etc, then it's poetic justice that Bower is writing a book about what others have said about HER. Of course some of the people Bower interviewed probably won't be identified by name. And of course Duchess Dimwit is going to be furious and cry "it's all made up because he didn't say any names!"  Golly, Maggot, Oprah got all giddy when you fed her a bunch of crap without naming names, but when the blowback came your reputation fell further into the gutter. Watch it fall even further. Let's go Bower!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hey Harry, since you weren't invited, thought I'd share this with you and TW(itch)


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey Harry, since you weren't invited, thought I'd share this with you and TW(itch)




I'm looking for a wreath accompanied by six pages of explanations for all the symbolism but I can't seem to find it. Surely Charles forgot to display it on the throne. It would have outshone all the grandeur of the occasion and made all the magazine covers.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I'm almost to the point of feeling sorry for him. Almost.


I might agree with you if he was willing to accept a badly needed mental health intervention with a competent psychiatrist as opposed to ButterCup in the hope it would eventually lead to deprogramming from the TW's mental and emotional hold on him.


----------



## 880

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean has an interesting  segment about the larger ramifications of Raptor’s Pearl project being axed. Evidently, and probably not surprising given her narcissism, she expected Pearl to become a franchise, sounds like what Disney did with Frozen. Trinkets and totzkes and spin offs and on and on, an everlasting stream of cash. Poof!
> Maybe they need to up the egg production and set up a stand?


It sounded like both H and M somehow believed they would be these successful producers and others would be responsible for content. . . I read somewhere that M had approached Kate to collaborate/provide content on her life and Royal role  as the subject of a Netflix project (Palace sources of course denied that this would ever happen with any member of the RF)


----------



## Grande Latte

Chanbal said:


>




I bet she already has a dress and hat picked out.


----------



## Lodpah

Love this woman. TW can't claim she's racist, cause she's black. Also, she's "using" her voice. A new favorite commentator for me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just now learned that Thomas Markle Jr has an instagram. He has been posting photos of his recent visit to Cali.
One photo shows he was watching polo in Santa Barbara.


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> It sounded like both H and M somehow believed they would be these successful producers and others would be responsible for content. . . I read somewhere that M had approached Kate to collaborate/provide content on her life and Royal role  as the subject of a Netflix project (Palace sources of course denied that this would ever happen with any member of the RF)


Reminds me of the stories during their brief royal existence. It was alleged that they would come up with grand ideas over dinner, then scream at their staff members at breakfast the next morning for not getting everything up and running.

But seriously speaking, they hired all these people to run Archewell. Did none of these people get anything done? Or was the action bottleneck at H&M?


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Prince Charles was sitting on the Consorts Throne as obviously he wasn't allowed to sit on the bigger Monarchs throne yet so they removed that one for it to be replaced by THE Crown.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Prince Charles was sitting on the Consorts Throne as obviously he wasn't allowed to sit on the bigger Monarchs throne yet so they removed that one for it to be replaced by THE Crown.



The Queen has missed this occasion only twice before...both times she was very pregnant the commentator said (yes, it made German news yesterday!).


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of the stories during their brief royal existence. It was alleged that they would come up with grand ideas over dinner, then scream at their staff members at breakfast the next morning for not getting everything up and running.
> 
> But seriously speaking, they hired all these people to run Archewell. Did none of these people get anything done? Or was the action bottleneck at H&M?


My guess is that they switched gears so often the staffers could never fully complete anything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Allisonfaye

Chanbal said:


> One must be very stupid to fall for Hazz's eco and other ventures…
> View attachment 5400369
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why I'm not falling for Prince Harry's latest eco-venture
> 
> 
> Just when you thought Prince Harry’s post-royal career couldn’t get any more absurd, he manages to make it so. His latest venture is a service which supposedly tells you how many carbon emissions will be emitted as a result of an airline passenger’s journey by various airlines and routes –...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk



Yeah and with air fares skyrocketing due to the high cost of fuel, people are going to choose their flight based on the carbon footprint.


----------



## MiniMabel

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey Harry, since you weren't invited, thought I'd share this with you and TW(itch)





Fantastic!  Nobody does occasions like this better than the British!


----------



## Allisonfaye

xincinsin said:


> I remember when a stan set up a GoFundMe to collect funds to help pay off the Harkles' mortgage. It collected very little, even though that was when other stans made a substantial collection for charity in honour of Archie's birthday. Maybe even for rabid fans, their common sense kicks in when distinguishing between noble service like supporting charity and something relatable to the common man like a mortgage.



And with the price of gas and food, maybe people don't have so much money to throw around at ridiculous 'causes' anymore.


----------



## Allisonfaye

Have we talked about what TW is wearing in the Archewell photo? https://archewell.com

In that documentary about that Holmes whack job, they said she wanted to be Steve Jobs so she wore the black turtleneck all the time to seem more credible. I see the similarities between Holmes and TW.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just now learned that Thomas Markle Jr has an instagram. He has been posting photos of his recent visit to Cali.
> One photo shows he was watching polo in Santa Barbara.


Lol kind of stalkerish.  MMM’s family is just as desperate as her!


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Love this woman. TW can't claim she's racist, cause she's black. Also, she's "using" her voice. A new favorite commentator for me.



Thanks for posting this video. I also love Nana A, her video clips are usually great. However, racism is not an exclusive feature of white people, so TW may still have a chance…


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> Yeah and with *air fares skyrocketing* due to the high cost of fuel, people are going to choose their flight based on the carbon footprint.


I know…


----------



## jennlt

Grande Latte said:


> I bet she already has a dress and hat picked out.



 A copycat/cosplay outfit like this perhaps?


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the journalists at The Spectator are having their fun! 


_President Meghan. *The words will send a chill down the spine of those like me who are sceptical of Markle's ladder climbing. *The bland press release-led initiatives detailing her and Prince Harry’s Archewell foundation are a worrying indication of the missives a Meghan-led White House would fire out. Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?_








						Meghan Markle's presidential run appears inevitable | The Spectator
					

Meghan Markle has starred in a Netflix show and married into the Royal Family, but has she got her eyes on even loftier ambitions? Since quitting the UK and moving to the United States, the Duchess of Sussex has involved herself in various soft-political campaigns. She's asked Congress to...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the journalists at The Spectator are having their fun!
> View attachment 5400654
> 
> _President Meghan. *The words will send a chill down the spine of those like me who are sceptical of Markle's ladder climbing. *The bland press release-led initiatives detailing her and Prince Harry’s Archewell foundation are a worrying indication of the missives a Meghan-led White House would fire out. Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's presidential run appears inevitable | The Spectator
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has starred in a Netflix show and married into the Royal Family, but has she got her eyes on even loftier ambitions? Since quitting the UK and moving to the United States, the Duchess of Sussex has involved herself in various soft-political campaigns. She's asked Congress to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


“_*Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?*”   _Do we really think she would stand a snowball’s chance in hell?


----------



## Chanbal

Meg K (and Piers ) on Meg M


----------



## Chanbal

QE has no intentions of giving up… no self pity. It's an interesting video imo.


----------



## Annawakes

She would never be able to endure the White House.

She will blink back tears and say, “No one has asked me if I’m ok.”


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the journalists at The Spectator are having their fun!
> View attachment 5400654
> 
> _President Meghan. *The words will send a chill down the spine of those like me who are sceptical of Markle's ladder climbing. *The bland press release-led initiatives detailing her and Prince Harry’s Archewell foundation are a worrying indication of the missives a Meghan-led White House would fire out. Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's presidential run appears inevitable | The Spectator
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has starred in a Netflix show and married into the Royal Family, but has she got her eyes on even loftier ambitions? Since quitting the UK and moving to the United States, the Duchess of Sussex has involved herself in various soft-political campaigns. She's asked Congress to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


Oh come on.  the woman didn't bring the subject up.  what was she supposed to say?  no, we not want her in the party?  She'd be racist if she said that.
I refuse to give this idea any credence


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Oh come on.  the woman didn't bring the subject up.  what was she supposed to say?  no, we not want her in the party?  She'd be racist if she said that.
> I refuse to give this idea any credence


Yep, she was put in a tough position. I wonder if she regrets the '_perhaps, yes, of course she will_…'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the journalists at The Spectator are having their fun!
> View attachment 5400654
> 
> _President Meghan. *The words will send a chill down the spine of those like me who are sceptical of Markle's ladder climbing. *The bland press release-led initiatives detailing her and Prince Harry’s Archewell foundation are a worrying indication of the missives a Meghan-led White House would fire out. Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's presidential run appears inevitable | The Spectator
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has starred in a Netflix show and married into the Royal Family, but has she got her eyes on even loftier ambitions? Since quitting the UK and moving to the United States, the Duchess of Sussex has involved herself in various soft-political campaigns. She's asked Congress to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


So many titles come to mind. She could change her name to Joan of Arc Markle and be known as The Madame Maid of Washington or she could lead the Holy Crusades of Washington DC to eradicate anything she didn't like racism and misogyny. She would look great in a suit of armour covered from head to toe and especially hiding that smug face. TW would be too narrowminded fair and equitable as leader of the free world and under her watch as Dictator Commander in Chief, freedom of choice would certainly disappear flourish.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yep, she was put in a tough position. I wonder if she regrets the '_perhaps, yes, of course she will_…'



Piers is giving her juice


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this video. I also love Nana A, her video clips are usually great. However, racism is not an exclusive feature of white people, so TW may still have a chance…



POC, especially WOC, who are not pro-Markle are labelled as jealous of her success.


----------



## Chanbal

TW and Hazz are looking for a new home for Pear. My mind is playing tricks on me, I read on the description that Pearl is on a journey of 'self-pity' instead of 'self-discovery'…  


_Now a source has explained how the pair may not have fully grasped 'how the process of landing a show worked'. telling The Sun: 'Executives feel that in some aspects Harry and Meghan appeared to be naive about how their deal would work.

Certainly there was a belief that they thought that Pearl would simply be presented and released. The word was that they were saddened the show was not picked up.'

They continued to say 'people forget' that projects 'face vetting' and Netflix would have 'the right' to 'oversee editorial direction' in their work.

The source said Netflix would have 'the best interests of the brand' as a steaming giant, adding: 'Just because they are royalty, they are not treated any different to others in the arena of programme commissioning.'

While the insider said Prince Harry and Meghan may have found it easier to 'get in the door' than others, Netflix would hold their projects to the same standard to ensure they are 'good value…'

A source told the paper: *'Meghan and Harry will not give up on taking Pearl to the screen.*

'They are determined to not let all the work and creative endeavours put into the idea simply fall away._










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'too out of touch' for Netflix
					

An insider told The Sun the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, were 'saddened' that Meghan Markle's show Pearl 'was not picked up' by Netflix.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My humble opinion: unless it's completely overhauled, this sh*t ain't gonna sell.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Lotsa talk, but NetFlix was also naive.  They thought access to Harry meant access to the BRF.  Now that they know that’s not the case, they’re not going to coddle the duo anymore. I’m sure the show would have been awful, but I feel the duo and NetFlix have both been stringing each other along.  It ended when the BRF said, “NO WAY!”

“Strict standards” Hah!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Their complete lack of humility hurt them. They thought they could just start at the executive level of development without any experience at all in what makes some shows successful over others through EXPERIENCE. Frankly they set themselves up for this failure


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Their complete lack of humility hurt them. They thought they could just start at the executive level of development without any experience at all in what makes some shows successful over others through EXPERIENCE. Frankly they set themselves up for this failure


TW believes her own PR  
Frankly I think Pearl would have been preachy and full of unsubtle self-aggrandizing. They would have to set up their own channel to shove it out for public consumption. It would be the animated equivalent of The Bench whom some critics commented was a how-to-parent manual for Hazard. Pearl would be how-to-lead-your-best-life-the-MeAgain-way.


----------



## bag-mania

Netflix gambled on them being popular and having charisma. They lost that bet.

The only reason anyone is interested is to see how they are going to stir the pot with the BRF.

There are many clever, well-written animated series these days, even for the young kids. There isn’t room for something that is dull and directionless.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> TW believes her own PR
> Frankly I think Pearl would have been preachy and full of unsubtle self-aggrandizing. They would have to set up their own channel to shove it out for public consumption. It would be the animated equivalent of The Bench whom some critics commented was a how-to-parent manual for Hazard. Pearl would be how-to-lead-your-best-life-the-MeAgain-way.





bag-mania said:


> Netflix gambled on them being popular and having charisma. They lost that bet.
> 
> The only reason anyone is interested is to see how they are going to stir the pot with the BRF.
> 
> There are many clever, well-written animated series these days, even for the young kids. There isn’t room for something that is dull and directionless.



Totally agree. They have no clue how well written and legitimately entertaining lots of kids shows are. There are so many that I look back fondly on from when my now teenage daughter was young.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just now learned that Thomas Markle Jr has an instagram. He has been posting photos of his recent visit to Cali.
> One photo shows he was watching polo in Santa Barbara.


I figured it was only a matter of time before he would try to see them. Let's see if she takes out a restraining order.



purseinsanity said:


> Lol kind of stalkerish.  MMM’s family is just as desperate as her!


I wonder if he shows up at BP next month like Sam Markle did for the wedding and gets turned away. They really do know how to stir the pot.



sdkitty said:


> Piers is giving her juice


You know what they say, revenge is a dish best served cold. And he will continue to dish it out. Never thought I'd be a fan of his


----------



## Milosmum0307

EverSoElusive said:


> She's hardly the same size anymore     Highly doubt that the BRF would get stuff made for her. If they did, that means she'd end up looking like an overstuffed sausage. The horror!


Yeah, I was going to point out that she’s not the same size she was on her wedding day, which is fine.  She had dieted her way to quite skeletal proportions before her wedding, as many brides do.  I’ll diplomatically leave that right there and say nothing more.  I gained 70 lbs during my pregnancy.  I judge no one.  As for what our favorite Deceitful Duchess will wear for the Jubilee festivities, I shall put on my Nostradamus cap and prophesy that she will wear extremely tight, poorly fitted couture dresses and/or ensembles in bright crimson or drab army green, dirty shoes that are too large for her feet, and unsupportive undergarments.  Her “signature” boat neckline might make a cameo.  She will not wear hosiery because modern-monarchy-such-a-rebel, etc.  Her hair will either be slicked back very tightly, or it will be a complete mess.  She will wear too much bronzer and heavy eye makeup, and there will be noticeable gobs of over-zealously applied eyelash glue.  She will have no detectable nasolabial folds due to recently topped-up dermal filler.  Sadly I’ve observed her more closely than I usually care to admit, but this is a safe space, so I know you won’t judge me for it.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if this is true.   










						Mother Of God! Omid Scobie’s Headed Down The Nick 2022
					

Mother of God! Law firm give notice that Duchess of Sussex’s PR peddler Omid Scobie has been reported to Met Police regarding “harassment” of Sadie Quinlan.




					www.thesteepletimes.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He is really willing to go down for her (as she won't go down as long as she parasitically attaches to Harry, which his family won't let sink completely). He might be more stupid - or disturbed - than we thought.


----------



## 1LV

Just had a post deleted that was (rightfully) deemed political.  I apologize.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this is true.
> View attachment 5400908
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother Of God! Omid Scobie’s Headed Down The Nick 2022
> 
> 
> Mother of God! Law firm give notice that Duchess of Sussex’s PR peddler Omid Scobie has been reported to Met Police regarding “harassment” of Sadie Quinlan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesteepletimes.com



He is the male version of Jocelyn Wildenstein. I think he wants to be MM.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He is really willing to go down for her (as she won't go down as long as she parasitically attaches to Harry, which his family won't let sink completely). He might be more stupid - or disturbed - than we thought.


I'm going with disturbed, based on his appearance.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Milosmum0307 said:


> Yeah, I was going to point out that she’s not the same size she was on her wedding day, which is fine.  She had dieted her way to quite skeletal proportions before her wedding, as many brides do.  I’ll diplomatically leave that right there and say nothing more.  I gained 70 lbs during my pregnancy.  I judge no one.  As for what our favorite Deceitful Duchess will wear for the Jubilee festivities, I shall put on my Nostradamus cap and prophesy that she will wear extremely tight, poorly fitted couture dresses and/or ensembles in bright crimson or drab army green, dirty shoes that are too large for her feet, and unsupportive undergarments.  Her “signature” boat neckline might make a cameo.  She will not wear hosiery because modern-monarchy-such-a-rebel, etc.  Her hair will either be slicked back very tightly, or it will be a complete mess.  She will wear too much bronzer and heavy eye makeup, and there will be noticeable gobs of over-zealously applied eyelash glue.  She will have no detectable nasolabial folds due to recently topped-up dermal filler.  Sadly I’ve observed her more closely than I usually care to admit, but this is a safe space, so I know you won’t judge me for it.




Your observations are very accurate. Just don't post it in the appreciation thread because the stans and fans will get their knickers in a bunch   

Oddly enough I like the boat neckline on her but she has just gotta stop wearing somebody else's size. The sausage look is not cute on anyone.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this is true.
> View attachment 5400908
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mother Of God! Omid Scobie’s Headed Down The Nick 2022
> 
> 
> Mother of God! Law firm give notice that Duchess of Sussex’s PR peddler Omid Scobie has been reported to Met Police regarding “harassment” of Sadie Quinlan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesteepletimes.com


Both Scabies and The Claw appear to suffer from self-aggrandizement.

self-ag·gran·dize·ment (from the Oxford Dictionaries)
/ˌselfəˈɡranˌdīzmənt/
noun

1.the action or process of promoting oneself as being powerful or important.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> Piers is giving her juice





charlottawill said:


> You know what they say, revenge is a dish best served cold. And he will continue to dish it out. Never thought I'd be a fan of his


Hip hip hooray for Piers Morgan!


----------



## catlover46

I bet if it’s announced that the Queen won’t be attending any public Jubilee appearances, H&M won’t even attend.


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, the very fact that people even discuss her running for the WH is all she and her PR people want.   They are laughing themselves silly that anyone is taking this seriously.  It's just the old trick of putting something out there that is so outlandish, people will talk about it. Talking about her is all that they want.   So far, their mission is accomplished.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## octopus17

lanasyogamama said:


> Totally agree. They have no clue how well written and legitimately entertaining lots of kids shows are. There are so many that I look back fondly on from when my now teenage daughter was young.


That's one of the best perks of being a parent imo - there are so many shows out there that I really enjoyed and could watch with impunity...


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, the very fact that people even discuss her running for the WH is all she and her PR people want.   They are laughing themselves silly that anyone is taking this seriously.  It's just the old trick of putting something out there that is so outlandish, people will talk about it. Talking about her is all that they want.   So far, their mission is accomplished.



The crazy thing is, sane people didn't think DT would be president but somehow he ended up being one. So I wouldn't discount this ridiculous idea or rumor about TW(itch) just yet. I'm not supportive of it but anything is possible if she had enough support and backers.


----------



## octopus17

1LV said:


> Just had a post deleted that was (rightfully) deemed political.  I apologize.


I didn't see it but you shouldn't feel you have have apologise for your view on things other than the fact that political discussions might lead to a hell in a handbag for sure...


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Just had a post deleted that was (rightfully) deemed political.  I apologize.



Although I did not see what you wrote, I agree with those who say no apology is necessary. 
Everyone else here is expressing their opinion, too.  Carry on.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Follow the money,_ if you can.  _


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I bet the Harkles will not go. What's the point if Netfl*x is banned?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I bet the Harkles will not go. What's the point if Netfl*x is banned?




I vote they are no shows, too.  They’ll get boo’ed, flipped off, etc.  The hypocrisy will definitely ruin her political career


----------



## xincinsin

Milosmum0307 said:


> Yeah, I was going to point out that she’s not the same size she was on her wedding day, which is fine.  She had dieted her way to quite skeletal proportions before her wedding, as many brides do.  I’ll diplomatically leave that right there and say nothing more.  I gained 70 lbs during my pregnancy.  I judge no one.  As for what our favorite Deceitful Duchess will wear for the Jubilee festivities, I shall put on my Nostradamus cap and prophesy that she will wear extremely tight, poorly fitted couture dresses and/or ensembles in bright crimson or drab army green, dirty shoes that are too large for her feet, and unsupportive undergarments.  Her “signature” boat neckline might make a cameo.  She will not wear hosiery because modern-monarchy-such-a-rebel, etc.  Her hair will either be slicked back very tightly, or it will be a complete mess.  She will wear too much bronzer and heavy eye makeup, and there will be noticeable gobs of over-zealously applied eyelash glue.  She will have no detectable nasolabial folds due to recently topped-up dermal filler.  Sadly I’ve observed her more closely than I usually care to admit, but this is a safe space, so I know you won’t judge me for it.


And what will perch on her head? Will she wear hats/fascinators or carry on her so-called defiance by exposing her scalp? How many stylists will she bring and will they be undercover Netfl*x camera crew?



EverSoElusive said:


> The crazy thing is, sane people didn't think DT would be president but somehow he ended up being one. So I wouldn't discount this ridiculous idea or rumor about TW(itch) just yet. I'm not supportive of it but anything is possible if she had enough support and backers.


Twitch is a really good name for her, covering all the slips of the mask and involuntary glares and sneers.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Follow the money,_ if you can.  _



Why am I not surprised?  Are Travelyst's bank accounts in Delaware too? How much did it pay Hawwy for making an apppearance in the mock NZ ad?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> How much did it pay Hawwy for making an apppearance in the mock NZ ad?



213K pounds is my guess.


----------



## charlottawill

So how many more days of suspense until we find out if they actually show? We need a countdown clock.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> So how many more days of suspense until we find out if they actually show? We need a countdown clock.



20days
22hours
43minutes
and counting


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> The crazy thing is, sane people didn't think DT would be president but somehow he ended up being one. So I wouldn't discount this ridiculous idea or rumor about TW(itch) just yet. I'm not supportive of it but anything is possible if she had enough support and backers.


DT talked for years about running.  The public got used to the idea.  They saw him as a successful businessman and figured that if he could run his empire, he could run the country, which to some minds, is just a bigger business.  Of course it turned out that running the country and making foreign policy is another ball of wax.  MM has nothing.  No background, no successes. Having a sugar squad isn't quite enough support.   There is nothing.  Period.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> So how many more days of suspense until we find out if they actually show? We need a countdown clock.


I want a watch on the local pharmacies to check if any prescriptions are being delivered to the Casa.  They have to back up the kids with ear infections story  (no flying) with some real medicine.  Of course, we could watch for paxlovid   RX's as well as proof that someone there has Covid.  The dog ate my plane ticket story won't cut it.  We need illness as the reason for staying home.


----------



## 1LV

Cornflower Blue said:


> I didn't see it but you shouldn't feel you have have apologise for your view on things other than the fact that political discussions might lead to a hell in a handbag for sure...


Lol.  Thanks.  It was all in fun but…


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> 20days
> 22hours
> 43minutes
> and counting
> 
> 
> View attachment 5400995


This is perfect!  The Wonka elevator went up, down, crossways  and sideways and that pretty much describes the directions that the Harkles have been taking everyone vis a vis the will they or won't they go.


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


>



She might and do a Michael Jackson and display the kids wearing wrestling masks


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> DT talked for years about running.  The public got used to the idea.  They saw him as a successful businessman and figured that if he could run his empire, he could run the country, which to some minds, is just a bigger business.  Of course it turned out that running the country and making foreign policy is another ball of wax.  MM has nothing.  No background, no successes. Having a sugar squad isn't quite enough support.   There is nothing.  Period.



She probably read The Secret in O's book club and believe in speaking things into existence. It might just happen    

TW(itch) may not have anything but she'd lie and cheat all day, and there will be people that believe the snake oil she's peddling.

Fingers crossed that she doesn't end up on the ballot. The US doesn't need another train wreck


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although I did not see what you wrote, I agree with those who say no apology is necessary.
> Everyone else here is expressing their opinion, too.  Carry on.


Thanks.


----------



## Chanbal

There is hope, Americans can smell a phony!


----------



## needlv

Did someone already post this article from the Sun?  









						Meghan & Harry are 'too out of touch & naive for Netflix after TV show snub'
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry were “naive” and “out of touch” to believe that their programme ideas would be “simply signed off” by Netflix, a TV source reveale…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




The best part in the entire article:

A Netflix tv consultant said

*They may have a couple of million in an advanced development deal ...but they have not been handed one hundred million*
_
In reality those sums would be handed over to cover the entire production cost of the project, with Archewell providing a breakdown on fees for all aspects of the making of the show. Included in that would be a broad understanding of the profits too for the company.

"*Some deals see companies achieve as much as 20 percent of that total, while others can earn half that figure. ..every deal is different*.

"But fees for writers or executive producers, like the Duke and Duchess are often specific amounts in production budgets._

………………
This is what I thought.  Netflix didn’t hand over $100m but they give out the $ each step of the way, and subject to their approval_.  Eg_, a small amount of approval of deal, another amount paid on script or pilot etc.

So in other words, their deal value was grossly overinflated in their PR.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Imo, it’s the media pushing the narrative that QE wants all family to re-unite for this jubilee event. She has lived through Wallis&Ed, Margaret, and others we may not know about.  We know that they were not always invited to big events, so, imo, she has no problem with family that does not show.  _She does have a problem with family that shows up and spoils the show. _ H&M are not working royals so let them stay home. No biggie. William’s worried face may be because he realises how truly difficult being king will be. The pressure is enormous. Plus, he may now be aware that it is not as easy as QE, and Charles to some extent, make it look.  It is not  just the H&M drama that is worrisome.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Yep, she was put in a tough position. I wonder if she regrets the '_perhaps, yes, of course she will_…'



"Next rung"???  
What rungs has she actually climbed up so far???


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5400727
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are 'too out of touch' for Netflix
> 
> 
> An insider told The Sun the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, were 'saddened' that Meghan Markle's show Pearl 'was not picked up' by Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They are too "*out of touch"*, period.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Your observations are very accurate. Just don't post it in *the appreciation thread* because the stans and fans will get their knickers in a bunch
> 
> Oddly enough I like the boat neckline on her but she has just gotta stop wearing somebody else's size. The sausage look is not cute on anyone.


You mean the thread that is all of two pages?


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> You mean the thread that is all of two pages?



Yes!!!! I think their bots are not familiar with TPF  Joking.


----------



## 880

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo, it’s the media pushing the narrative that QE wants all family to re-unite for this jubilee event. She has lived through Wallis&Ed, Margaret, and others we may not know about.  We know that they were not always invited to big events, so, imo, she has no problem with family that does not show.  _She does have a problem with family that shows up and spoils the show. _ H&M are not working royals so let them stay home. No biggie. William’s worried face may be because he realises how truly difficult being king will be. The pressure is enormous. Plus, he may now be aware that it is not as easy as QE, and Charles to some extent, make it look.  It is not  just the H&M drama that is worrisome.



do they need to attend to save the Netflix deal as per this article below 








						Harry and Meghan using Jubilee to save Netflix deal is a disgrace, says expert
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have a £135m problem – and so do Netflix. When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex signed their blockbuster deal with the streaming giant last February, bosses would…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> "Next rung"???
> What rungs has she actually climbed up so far???


Other than up the ladder of a yacht?


----------



## CarryOn2020

880 said:


> do they need to attend to save the Netflix deal as per this article below
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan using Jubilee to save Netflix deal is a disgrace, says expert
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have a £135m problem – and so do Netflix. When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex signed their blockbuster deal with the streaming giant last February, bosses would…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Pretty sure QE does not give two hoots about Nflix and that she is not interested in their drama. 
The media hype is kinda funny, tiresome and desperate.  Nflix’s failure will be someone else’s gain.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers, TW's worst nightmare, at least until Tom Bower's book comes out. 

_Greg Gutfeld Mocks Harry and Meghan-n_eed to move the cursor to about 4:40


----------



## mellibelly

The Ginger Muppet as posted by Taz I may need to change my avatar, I can’t unsee this LOL


----------



## Katel

mellibelly said:


> The Ginger Muppet as posted by Taz I may need to change my avatar, I can’t unsee this LOL
> View attachment 5401168


Hahahahaha your avatar!


----------



## Katel

so apt!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah

Found a new name for the TW: Apex Predator. I can't take credit for it tho. Sounds wordy salad I think.

She's the Apex of all Apex predators.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Found a new name for the TW: Apex Predator. I can't take credit for it tho. Sounds wordy salad I think.
> 
> She's the Apex of all Apex predators.


Nah, she thinks she is an apex predator, but no apex predator worth its salt would be blubbering on national TV about how she was bullied and silenced. 

She is a carrion feeder.


----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> Nah, she thinks she is an apex predator, but no apex predator worth its salt would be blubbering on national TV about how she was bullied and silenced.
> 
> She is a carrion feeder.


True but I was liking it to a salt crocodile who feeds on its prey. They literally are so smart they wait in lie for their meal and know exactly when to strike.


----------



## needlv

Lodpah said:


> True but I was liking it to a salt crocodile who feeds on its prey. They literally are so smart they wait in lie for their meal and know exactly when to strike.



Huh, I likened her to one of those plants which slowly takes over and kills the original host plant.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> True but I was liking it to a salt crocodile who feeds on its prey. They literally are so smart they wait in lie for their meal and know exactly when to strike.


If her meals are men who fall for her wiles, then yes. Her smile does show a lot of teeth like a croc. And she wallows in dark murky waters ...


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Agreeing with @CarryOn2020 . I think he's wrong about the Queen. Too many people really cannot fathom that she's _not_ the little ol' lady stereotype even though she could be wearing twinset and pearls.  Very few elder women of her class were/are. Children were bright down to tea after being with nanny and taken back to the nursery before dinner.

She's not a typical 'little' gran, she's the matriarch inside the family and outside to the nation, not the most maternal woman. If she's thinking of Harry now it will still be strategically. Diana didn't call them 'the firm' for nothing (not that _her_ family were all that loving, sweetness and light). QEII has prioritised her work and role above all else  for 70 years. That doesn't just disappear.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>




The PoW Trust has a very strong legacy, more popular Charles is the more H will not be. In private, Charles may be a pedantic fuss-pot, but he's showed year in, year out, he can deliver not just some vague notion of 'charity' and word salad, but  practical help and business acumen that's touched real people's lives.
In a way I think British people are showing which 'side' they're on - regardless of  -sucks constant dripping of the thrice-taken-daily rancid honey mock news items they put out.

We don't live in a world where people look at reruns of _Dallas_ or _Dynasty_ and think WOW anymore, we just think soap opera. We don't aspire to live in a sit com or drama series set anymore, although I think it's the aspiration of these two. They believe their own hype. H&M are pitching Netfl*x conservative, 1950s morality tales, when the rest of the world is watching 'who knows what' on the dark web and picking apart the naffness that is the Met Gala. The mystique has gone from so much, basically there's only the BRF left. Interesting how H wants to cash -in his family for a lump sum when they've been raking in the gratuities by instalments. Just a case of Harry wanting to take away everything from his father and brother because he knows 'it' will never be his. That's divine right for you Harry, should have been born first  .

I don't know if anyone got the memo in the Me-again Mansion, but no one cares about you or your precious accessories meal-tickets  children. We care about our children, their future, and also children in danger, orphaned and/or homeless in war-torn areas of the world and the girls officially banned from going to school.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5400995



This. Those people aren't rational or logical, and they are also not reliable, so who knows what goes on in their messed up little heads.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Found a new name for the TW: Apex Predator. I can't take credit for it tho. Sounds wordy salad I think.
> 
> She's the Apex of all Apex predators.



The thing is, an apex predator is a predator that's on top of the food chain. She might have the ego and attitude of one, but she's not all that. I even will go so far as saying she has the slyness of the Jurassic Park raptor she was lovingly named after, but not its intelligence and patience for the long game.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Nah, she thinks she is an apex predator, but no apex predator worth its salt would be blubbering on national TV about how she was bullied and silenced.
> 
> *She is a carrion feeder.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Huh, I likened her to one of those plants which slowly takes over and kills the original host plant.



This! That's perfect. Parasites that either suck their host dry or smother them.

There's also a fungus that takes over ants' brains and makes them do things. At some point, it's growing out of the top of their head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Agreeing with @CarryOn2020 . I think he's wrong about the Queen. Too many people really cannot fathom that she's _not_ the little ol' lady stereotype even though she could be wearing twinset and pearls.  Very few elder women of her class were/are. Children were bright down to tea after being with nanny and taken back to the nursery before dinner.
> 
> She's not a typical 'little' gran, she's the matriarch inside the family and outside to the nation, not the most maternal woman. If she's thinking of Harry now it will still be strategically. Diana didn't call them 'the firm' for nothing (not that _her_ family were all that loving, sweetness and light). QEII has prioritised her work and role above all else  for 70 years. That doesn't just disappear.



We are talking about a woman who retreated to her office for several days after three months of work travel instead of rushing to see her toddler son. Unless old age crushed her I really do think she can survive being separated from #6, 7 and 8 without losing any sleep.


----------



## duna

.


----------



## Allisonfaye

1LV said:


> “_*Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?*”   _Do we really think she would stand a snowball’s chance in hell?



Well, I would say someone that empty and talentless could never get elected but...


----------



## Allisonfaye

Milosmum0307 said:


> Yeah, I was going to point out that she’s not the same size she was on her wedding day, which is fine.  She had dieted her way to quite skeletal proportions before her wedding, as many brides do.  I’ll diplomatically leave that right there and say nothing more.  I gained 70 lbs during my pregnancy.  I judge no one.  As for what our favorite Deceitful Duchess will wear for the Jubilee festivities, I shall put on my Nostradamus cap and prophesy that she will wear extremely tight, poorly fitted couture dresses and/or ensembles in bright crimson or drab army green, dirty shoes that are too large for her feet, and unsupportive undergarments.  Her “signature” boat neckline might make a cameo.  She will not wear hosiery because modern-monarchy-such-a-rebel, etc.  Her hair will either be slicked back very tightly, or it will be a complete mess.  She will wear too much bronzer and heavy eye makeup, and there will be noticeable gobs of over-zealously applied eyelash glue.  She will have no detectable nasolabial folds due to recently topped-up dermal filler.  Sadly I’ve observed her more closely than I usually care to admit, but this is a safe space, so I know you won’t judge me for it.



I agree with on the weight thing. It's a rare birthing person who can squeeze out three (ala Kate) and be that thin.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mellibelly said:


> The Ginger Muppet as posted by Taz I may need to change my avatar, I can’t unsee this LOL
> View attachment 5401168


The similarity in the frown is killing me!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> The Ginger Muppet as posted by Taz I may need to change my avatar, I can’t unsee this LOL
> View attachment 5401168



Now I imagine Harry sounding like Beaker “mee mee mee meee.”


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Nah, she thinks she is an apex predator, but no apex predator worth its salt would be blubbering on national TV about how she was bullied and silenced.
> 
> *She is a carrion feeder.*



She prefers the term scavenger, it’s more empowering.


----------



## Chanbal

No!   Well, the answer for TW's hair is tons of extensions and lots of wasted money imo. 
I wonder if Serbia would welcome the Harkles, time for them to pack! 


_The song opens with the lines: “*What could be the secret of Meghan Markle's healthy hair?*”

The artist, whose real name is Ana Đurić, goes on to sing: “What could it be? I think it's all about deep hydration.”

The lyrics are certainly likely to catch the attention of listeners who may be wondering why the royal is featured in the song.

Konstrakta said: “*Meghan Markle isn’t that important here, but she’s representative of all those people in the media that we’re focused on*.”_









						Serbia Eurovision song lyrics: What does Konstrakta sing about Meghan Markle?
					

SERBIA has made it through to the Eurovision 2022 grand final. Singer Konstrakta will be performing her track In Corpore Sano but some Eurovision fans are curious to know more about the song which makes reference to Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The wise words of @TourreBakahai. I believe these rumors are in part due to their need to draw attention from Poor Pearl.


----------



## Chanbal

Can't wait! 



_In an interview with website Write Royalty, Mr Hardman said: "I think their brand depends entirely on their royal status and their royal connections, and therefore that’s what they are going to have to trade on, however much they say otherwise.

"It will be the royal stuff in Harry’s book, when it comes out, that people want to know about, not the worthy charitable activity.

"And I think as time goes on, like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, they will inevitably slowly recede from top billing on the news agenda._ 









						Meghan and Harry set to 'slowly recede from top billing news agenda'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are destined to "slowly recede from top billing on the news agenda" much like two of the Duke of Sussex's distant royal relatives, according to a royal author.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## juju2016

Thank God!!!  They are Grotesque!


----------



## Milosmum0307

gracekelly said:


> DT talked for years about running.  The public got used to the idea.  They saw him as a successful businessman and figured that if he could run his empire, he could run the country, which to some minds, is just a bigger business.  Of course it turned out that running the country and making foreign policy is another ball of wax.  MM has nothing.  No background, no successes. Having a sugar squad isn't quite enough support.   There is nothing.  Period.


Look.  You’re just a bad feminist for suggesting that a woman who has derived every ounce of her relevance as a public figure from marrying a low-IQ aging frat boy from an important family isn’t supremely qualified to serve as the chief executive of this great nation.  She majored in theater and international relations at a VERY good midwestern university (Oxford who?  Cambridge what?); plus, she fetched coffee at some American embassy for a few weeks because the uncle she later ignored had some good connections or whatever.  Credentials!  (Shh.  We won’t mention that she didn’t score well enough on the civil service exam to become an actual diplomat.  She’s still the most smartest princess ever!)  I mean.  Yeah, she arguably committed perjury in a court of law through dishonest filings, but, like, that was outside the United States, where things don’t count, and she had PREGNANCY BRAIN, YOU GUYS.  Women can’t be expected to function like normal humans while gestating a large parasitic creature in their uteri!  In fact, they shouldn’t even be allowed to drive a car or have an important job while so hormonal and, most of all, forgetful.  Wait … Right, feminism.  Megs can totally be president.  Imagine her amazing calligraphic signature scrawling the words, Princess Pearl HRH President Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, Lady of the Tig.  The country’s presidential seal will be artfully combined with her coat of arms by HRH President Megs herself because she’s good at literally everything.  Perhaps the invitations to the inaugural ball can feature her First Husband in his Nazi uniform!  She’ll throw boiling tea at the WH staff during cabinet meetings. She’ll be surrounded by massive security everywhere she goes, meaning she’ll be super duper important, and she won’t have to sue anyone or pay out of pocket for all that photogenic security.  She’ll have the BEST weave since our presidents wore powdered wigs … Yeah, anyone earnestly suggesting she should be president is not sober.


----------



## bag-mania

Slowly recede. Not willingly.

They won’t go down without a fight. If they truly wanted a quiet, private life they could have had it.


----------



## Jktgal

Welcome back @Milosmum0307 - good to have you back


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hip hip hooray for Piers Morgan!


what I was trying to say was that he's giving her attention.  and in her world any attention is "good" attention.  Plus, let's face it, he's using her to get attention for himself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> Look.  You’re just a bad feminist for suggesting that a woman who has derived every ounce of her relevance as a public figure from marrying a low-IQ aging frat boy from an important family isn’t supremely qualified to serve as the chief executive of this great nation.  She majored in theater and international relations at a VERY good midwestern university (Oxford who?  Cambridge what?); plus, she fetched coffee at some American embassy for a few weeks because the uncle she later ignored had some good connections or whatever.  Credentials!  (Shh.  We won’t mention that she didn’t score well enough on the civil service exam to become an actual diplomat.  She’s still the most smartest princess ever!)  I mean.  Yeah, she arguably committed perjury in a court of law through dishonest filings, but, like, that was outside the United States, where things don’t count, and she had PREGNANCY BRAIN, YOU GUYS.  Women can’t be expected to function like normal humans while gestating a large parasitic creature in their uteri!  In fact, they shouldn’t even be allowed to drive a car or have an important job while so hormonal and, most of all, forgetful.  Wait … Right, feminism.  Megs can totally be president.  Imagine her amazing calligraphic signature scrawling the words, Princess Pearl HRH President Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, Lady of the Tig.  The country’s presidential seal will be artfully combined with her coat of arms by HRH President Megs herself because she’s good at literally everything.  Perhaps the invitations to the inaugural ball can feature her First Husband in his Nazi uniform!  She’ll throw boiling tea at the WH staff during cabinet meetings. She’ll be surrounded by massive security everywhere she goes, meaning she’ll be super duper important, and she won’t have to sue anyone or pay out of pocket for all that photogenic security.  She’ll have the BEST weave since our presidents wore powdered wigs … Yeah, anyone earnestly suggesting she should be president is not sober.



I really missed your sarcastic posts! Happy you're back.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Agreeing with @CarryOn2020 . I think he's wrong about the Queen. Too many people really cannot fathom that she's _not_ the little ol' lady stereotype even though she could be wearing twinset and pearls.  Very few elder women of her class were/are. Children were bright down to tea after being with nanny and taken back to the nursery before dinner.
> 
> She's not a typical 'little' gran, she's the matriarch inside the family and outside to the nation, not the most maternal woman. If she's thinking of Harry now it will still be strategically. Diana didn't call them 'the firm' for nothing (not that _her_ family were all that loving, sweetness and light). QEII has prioritised her work and role above all else  for 70 years. That doesn't just disappear.


I agree
She has a higher duty than being a granny.  In one way though I do think she may be like other elderly women.  I think the loss of her husband is very significant and is a big part of the reason her health is deteriorating.


----------



## Chanbal

Does he expect to have an audience in Doha?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Slowly recede. Not willingly.
> 
> They won’t go down without a fight. If they truly wanted a quiet, private life they could have had it.


I have to admit they have kept the children pretty private for whatever reason


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I agree
> She has a higher duty than being a granny.  In one way though I do think she may be like other elderly women.  I think the loss of her husband is very significant and is a big part of the reason her health is deteriorating.



Absolutely. The day of his funeral was the first time I perceived her as old and frail.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I have to admit they have kept the children pretty private for whatever reason



But even this seems so...disingenuous.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Does he expect to have an audience in Doha?



The misuse of the word “bandwagon” is ironic and hilarious.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> The misuse of the word “bandwagon” is ironic and hilarious.


Well…


----------



## Chanbal

Allisonfaye said:


> Well, I would say someone that empty and talentless could never get elected but...


Yep!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely. The day of his funeral was the first time I perceived her as old and frail.


he was her rock....now who does she have?  I'm sure Charles is a decent man but not the same relationship and not sure he is that strong


----------



## lanasyogamama

My apologies, I miss read that tweet. I thought they were advertising that event as a bandwagon!


----------



## LittleStar88

1LV said:


> “_*Do we really want Meghan leading the Free World?*”   _Do we really think she would stand a snowball’s chance in hell?



All of those skeletons in her closet would get pulled out. We would probably hear from family we wouldn't otherwise ever hear from. Lots of juicy stuff would be paraded out for the world to dissect and scrutinize... She would completely and gloriously implode. Because you can't cry racism or sue to silence people when you run for public office.

And a snowball has a better chance in hell than she would have winning a presidential election. But I'm here for it if she wants to give it a go!


----------



## bag-mania

Ladies, there isn't a chance in hell of her running for president. She doesn't want to work that hard (or at all). She couldn't come up with a single episode for her podcast in a year and a half!


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Agreeing with @CarryOn2020 . I think he's wrong about the Queen. Too many people really cannot fathom that she's _not_ the little ol' lady stereotype even though she could be wearing twinset and pearls.  Very few elder women of her class were/are. Children were bright down to tea after being with nanny and taken back to the nursery before dinner.
> 
> She's not a typical 'little' gran, she's the matriarch inside the family and outside to the nation, not the most maternal woman. If she's thinking of Harry now it will still be strategically. Diana didn't call them 'the firm' for nothing (not that _her_ family were all that loving, sweetness and light). QEII has prioritised her work and role above all else  for 70 years. That doesn't just disappear.


I liked his comment “professional levels of imbecility.”   Very funny  and seems to be true. I agree with you both. TQ is a savvy woman.


----------



## Milosmum0307

sdkitty said:


> he was her rock....now who does she have?  I'm sure Charles is a decent man but not the same relationship and not sure he is that strong


Harry.  She has White Savior Harry.  He publicly and gallantly informed the world that he is “protecting” her and making sure she has “the right people” around her, remember?  I’m sure that was totally accurate coming from a guy who publicly smeared her family while her husband was on his death bed. And if not … well … recollections may vary.


----------



## sdkitty

Milosmum0307 said:


> Harry.  She has White Savior Harry.  He publicly and gallantly informed the world that he is “protecting” her and making sure she has “the right people” around her, remember?  I’m sure that was totally accurate coming from a guy who publicly smeared her family while her husband was on his death bed. And if not … well … recollections may vary.


he's a POS in my opinion....and like others, I used to like him


----------



## piperdog

bag-mania said:


> Now I imagine Harry sounding like Beaker “mee mee mee meee.”


Beaker has better hair and is more intelligible than both of them. I'd also vote for Beaker for President before I'd vote for MM.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Can't wait!
> View attachment 5401377
> 
> 
> _In an interview with website Write Royalty, Mr Hardman said: "I think their brand depends entirely on their royal status and their royal connections, and therefore that’s what they are going to have to trade on, however much they say otherwise.
> 
> "It will be the royal stuff in Harry’s book, when it comes out, that people want to know about, not the worthy charitable activity.
> 
> "And I think as time goes on, like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, they will inevitably slowly recede from top billing on the news agenda._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry set to 'slowly recede from top billing news agenda'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are destined to "slowly recede from top billing on the news agenda" much like two of the Duke of Sussex's distant royal relatives, according to a royal author.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


if they recede from the spotlight I don't think it will be voluntary.....it will be because no one is interested in the two grifters

and when that day comes, it will be so ironic...she killed her own golden goose


----------



## WingNut

Lodpah said:


> Found a new name for the TW: Apex Predator. I can't take credit for it tho. Sounds wordy salad I think.
> 
> She's the Apex of all Apex predators.


Apex Predator implies success in the role. The Great White Shark is an Apex Predator. Nothing in the ocean's food chain can top it. Everything TW does or touches is a failure. TW is nothing more than a social climbing, victim-claiming, back-stabbing, publicity seeking marginally-capable-former-actress who struggles to climb the ladder  stomp on the backs of the people above which she seeks to elevate herself. She is everything that, by gender association only, ruins it for many other women.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

xincinsin said:


> Nah, she thinks she is an apex predator, but no apex predator worth its salt would be blubbering on national TV about how she was bullied and silenced.
> 
> She is a carrion feeder.


Bingo.


----------



## xincinsin

WingNut said:


> Apex Predator implies success in the role. The Great White Shark is an Apex Predator. Nothing in the ocean's food chain can top it. Everything TW does or touches is a failure. TW is nothing more than a social climbing, victim-claiming, back-stabbing, publicity seeking marginally-capable-former-actress who struggles to climb the ladder  stomp on the backs of the people above which she seeks to elevate herself. She is everything that, by gender association only, ruins it for many other women.


Some commentator described her as having the reverse Midas touch.


----------



## sdkitty

what she says is good but why the public needs her to say it is a mystery to me








						Meghan Markle On New Child Care Initiative: Families 'Are Asked To Shoulder So Much'
					

"Today, we’re sending a message that childcare isn’t just a community imperative—it’s a business imperative," the Duchess of Sussex wrote.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Aimee3

TW would make an excellent president ……but I mean president of the Liars Club!


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Ladies, there isn't a chance in hell of her running for president. She doesn't want to work that hard (or at all). She couldn't come up with a single episode for her podcast in a year and a half!


Can you imagine her in a Presidential Debate spouting her endless supply of word salad ?


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> Can you imagine her in a Presidential Debate spouting her endless supply of word salad ?



In that sense she is like a politician. She has the concept of saying one thing while doing another down pat.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Can you imagine her in a Presidential Debate spouting her endless supply of word salad ?


Well, to be fair, plenty of candidates these days spout word salads.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> what she says is good but why the public needs her to say it is a mystery to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle On New Child Care Initiative: Families 'Are Asked To Shoulder So Much'
> 
> 
> "Today, we’re sending a message that childcare isn’t just a community imperative—it’s a business imperative," the Duchess of Sussex wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



She believes her words carry weight with a lot of people. That, of course, is open to debate.


----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> She believes her words carry weight with a lot of people. That, of course, is open to debate.


Poor thing, she keeps trying. Oblivious to being a laughingstock.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> what she says is good but why the public needs her to say it is a mystery to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle On New Child Care Initiative: Families 'Are Asked To Shoulder So Much'
> 
> 
> "Today, we’re sending a message that childcare isn’t just a community imperative—it’s a business imperative," the Duchess of Sussex wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


She preaches from her mansion, meanwhile the Cambridges are out, interacting with people, visiting programs and working.

She probably authorized a check for a hundred bucks and threw in a stack of her worthless book as a “bonus”, of course expecting heaps of praise for her effort.


----------



## 1LV

Allisonfaye said:


> Well, I would say someone that empty and talentless could never get elected but...


But there’s a list of them.  Scary.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> She preaches from her mansion, meanwhile the Cambridges are out, interacting with people, visiting programs and working.
> 
> She probably authorized a check for a hundred bucks and threw in a stack of her worthless book as a “bonus”, of course expecting heaps of praise for her effort.



The Harkles have made the Cambridges stand out in such a good way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles have made the Cambridges stand out in such a good way.




Seriously. I sometimes just for fun entertain the thought it's all a big ruse to make the Cambridges - the people that actually matter - shine.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Ladies, there isn't a chance in hell of her running for president. She doesn't want to work that hard (or at all). She couldn't come up with a single episode for her podcast in a year and a half!


Elections, even little ones, are expensive. 

I ran for a small, elected position in my town (and I won to my amazement!) and the signs alone cost me a tad over $750, and this was with a discount from a relative. And there were the doorhangers and the "thank you" postcards and postage. A presidential bid is TONS of money, jillions even. And the Harkles don't spend any of their own $$$$ on anything. And does anyone think the sugars would donate all the funds for this crackpot scheme?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> She believes her words carry weight with a lot of people. That, of course, is open to debate.


she has her stans for sure but as far as the general population, not so sure anyone cares what she says


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I have to admit they have kept the children pretty private for whatever reason


Well, I think the Rent-a-pretend-Royal Company is running a little low in ginger haired 1/4 black 3/4 white 4 year old boys right now


----------



## Allisonfaye

DoggieBags said:


> Can you imagine her in a Presidential Debate spouting her endless supply of word salad ?



We've already been there....


----------



## Allisonfaye

bag-mania said:


> In that sense she is like a politician. She has the concept of saying one thing while doing another down pat.



Using a LOT of words and saying nothing....


----------



## DoggieBags

Allisonfaye said:


> We've already been there....


Not quite. He who shall not be named liked catchy little 2 or 3 word phrases. And the words were 1 syllable words too! Easy to pronounce and easy to remember.  TW likes words of many syllables and long long run on sentences.


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> Can't wait!
> View attachment 5401377
> 
> 
> _In an interview with website Write Royalty, Mr Hardman said: "I think their brand depends entirely on their royal status and their royal connections, and therefore that’s what they are going to have to trade on, however much they say otherwise.
> 
> "It will be the royal stuff in Harry’s book, when it comes out, that people want to know about, not the worthy charitable activity.
> 
> "And I think as time goes on, like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, they will inevitably slowly recede from top billing on the news agenda._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry set to 'slowly recede from top billing news agenda'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are destined to "slowly recede from top billing on the news agenda" much like two of the Duke of Sussex's distant royal relatives, according to a royal author.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The only thing I see receding is H's hairline. They will do anything to stay relevant.


----------



## kemilia

DoggieBags said:


> Not quite. He who shall not be named liked catchy little 2 or 3 word phrases. And the words were 1 syllable words too! Easy to pronounce and easy to remember.  TW likes words of many syllables and long long run on sentences.


Excellent point!


----------



## kemilia

Aimee3 said:


> TW would make an excellent president ……but I mean president of the Liars Club!


And H could rule over the Hair-Club-For-Men. (this was too easy but I HAD to )


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Huh, I likened her to one of those plants which slowly takes over and kills the original host plant.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> This! That's perfect. Parasites that either suck their host dry or smother them.
> 
> There's also a fungus that takes over ants' brains and makes them do things. At some point, it's growing out of the top of their head.


The Naegleria Fowleri a brain-eating amoeba discovered in unchlorinated Texas water when a young child went swimming in contaminated water. The amoeba enters the body through the nose and follows the optic nerve to the brain.


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> if they recede from the spotlight I don't think it will be voluntary.....it will be because no one is interested in the two grifters
> 
> and when that day comes, it will be so ironic...she killed her own golden goose



She has already killed the golden goose, but doesn’t want to admit it. The day they gave that Oprah interview, MM and H told family secrets, lies, whined about how hard it is to be a duchess/prince in luxury surroundings without ever having to worry about bills being paid, complained that at 37 years old they were cut off from the bank of Dad.

Their indiscretion would put off any smart business person and anyone A-list getting close to them -  because they can do the same to you! 

She had a golden opportunity as a royal to make/effect/influence real change and fumbled… because of her own ego.

Not following through on Spotify, failing at Disney and floundering/delaying Netflix projects means no business person will give them any money for Any project.

The only thing they have left to sell is more family secrets.

The golden goose is dead and buried.

The BRF should continue to ignore them.


----------



## 1LV

One.More.Time. You can’t fix stupid. 
.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> what she says is good but why the public needs her to say it is a mystery to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle On New Child Care Initiative: Families 'Are Asked To Shoulder So Much'
> 
> 
> "Today, we’re sending a message that childcare isn’t just a community imperative—it’s a business imperative," the Duchess of Sussex wrote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


She keeps trying to "relate" to others by saying she is a woman, or a mum, or a working mum. It's her version of #MeToo.
She wants to be the poster child for every bandwagon.

_“As it’s been said many times, it takes a village to raise a child,” the duchess added.  _
At least she didn't try to claim that she invented this phrase. But it is hypocritical since this is the person who basically bombed her village(s) out of existence.

_The business coalition already includes Athletes Unlimited, Care.com, Fast Retailing, Gibson Dunn, Patagonia, Synchrony and Meghan and Harry’s Archewell. To join, a company must help provide child care ― or a child care benefit ― to its employees_
I wonder, does Archewell provide 5 months' paid maternity leave to its employees? That's what the founders gave themselves, right?


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz, it's time to flip burgers!


----------



## Chanbal

Some promised donations apparently didn't reach the recipients yet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> She keeps trying to "relate" to others by saying she is a woman, or a mum, or a working mum. It's her version of #MeToo.
> She wants to be the poster child for every bandwagon.
> 
> _“As it’s been said many times, it takes a village to raise a child,” the duchess added.  _
> At least she didn't try to claim that she invented this phrase. But it is hypocritical since this is the person who basically bombed her village(s) out of existence.
> 
> _The business coalition already includes Athletes Unlimited, Care.com, Fast Retailing, Gibson Dunn, Patagonia, Synchrony and Meghan and Harry’s Archewell. To join, a company must help provide child care ― or a child care benefit ― to its employees_
> I wonder, does Archewell provide 5 months' paid maternity leave to its employees? That's what the founders gave themselves, right?



Their biggest issue is _their *hypocrisy*_ [private jets, McMansion, pricey clothing, polo, etc.]. 
Once the credibility is gone, the rest just crumbles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll have whatever Edo’s magic is.  Clearly, a happy marriage makes a difference 












						Queen made trip to see her horses on first day of Royal Windsor show
					

The Royal Windsor Horse Show is the Queen's favourite event of the year but it was announced the 96-year-old monarch would not attend owing to mobility issues




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Some promised donations apparently didn't reach the recipients yet.



I thought they promised a large sum to some restaurant in NY and Harry promised a huge sum to Sentabale at an earlier Polo match? Neither made the list.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Agreeing with @CarryOn2020 . I think he's wrong about the Queen. Too many people really cannot fathom that she's _not_ the little ol' lady stereotype even though she could be wearing twinset and pearls.  Very few elder women of her class were/are. Children were bright down to tea after being with nanny and taken back to the nursery before dinner.
> 
> She's not a typical 'little' gran, she's the matriarch inside the family and outside to the nation, not the most maternal woman. If she's thinking of Harry now it will still be strategically. Diana didn't call them 'the firm' for nothing (not that _her_ family were all that loving, sweetness and light). QEII has prioritised her work and role above all else  for 70 years. That doesn't just disappear.


Indeed, the probable reality is she would make the merciless Miss Marple herself look like a fluffy bunny.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> This! That's perfect. Parasites that either suck their host dry or smother them.
> 
> There's also a fungus that takes over ants' brains and makes them do things. At some point, it's growing out of the top of their head.


Lots of great ideas with the animals.

The one I would suggest is the wasp- garish colour scheme, gives you hives and seems to only exist to annoy.



Chanbal said:


> No!   Well, the answer for TW's hair is tons of extensions and lots of wasted money imo.
> I wonder if Serbia would welcome the Harkles, time for them to pack!
> View attachment 5401349
> 
> _The song opens with the lines: “*What could be the secret of Meghan Markle's healthy hair?*”
> 
> The artist, whose real name is Ana Đurić, goes on to sing: “What could it be? I think it's all about deep hydration.”
> 
> The lyrics are certainly likely to catch the attention of listeners who may be wondering why the royal is featured in the song.
> 
> Konstrakta said: “*Meghan Markle isn’t that important here, but she’s representative of all those people in the media that we’re focused on*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serbia Eurovision song lyrics: What does Konstrakta sing about Meghan Markle?
> 
> 
> SERBIA has made it through to the Eurovision 2022 grand final. Singer Konstrakta will be performing her track In Corpore Sano but some Eurovision fans are curious to know more about the song which makes reference to Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I think this another example of irony getting lost on the internet. She’s joking about inane media PR whether it’s MM or Madonna or whoever. Also the fact M obviously wears a weave (and a bad one at that)  adds to the gag.


Chanbal said:


> Does he expect to have an audience in Doha?



Who knows?  Being dodgy in the Middle East seems to come naturally to him so maybe they will accept their destiny and finally become tacky expat grifters in Dubai - perhaps she’d finally get some nice hair and an abaya that fits.

I would imagine his lecture would go like this:-
1. Terrify your kids with (ludicrous) threats of mortal danger if they ever try see the outside world
2. Get your servants to fit some deadbolts to the attic
3. How to identify a poisoned doughnut.

But in all seriousness, I think it’s a very poor idea to take advice from this couple who seem to have massively overstepped from being protective of a child to isolating and ignoring them just for the thrill of exerting control- at least in my opinion. I still find them leaving to go on tour when their ‘baby’ was so young and then only meeting some employees at an air field for ‘heartfelt greetings’ to be very odd.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> But in all seriousness, I think it’s a very poor idea to take advice from this couple who seem to have massively overstepped from being protective of a child to isolating and ignoring them just for the thrill of exerting control- at least in my opinion.



This!



> I still find them leaving to go on tour when their ‘baby’ was so young and then only meeting some employees at an air field for ‘heartfelt greetings’ to be very odd.



Which tour was this?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This!
> 
> 
> 
> Which tour was this?


When they went to NY just after the phantom menace #2 was born.


----------



## Allisonfaye

DoggieBags said:


> Not quite. He who shall not be named liked catchy little 2 or 3 word phrases. And the words were 1 syllable words too! Easy to pronounce and easy to remember.  TW likes words of many syllables and long long run on sentences.



I was referring to another high level woman....


----------



## Allisonfaye

needlv said:


> She has already killed the golden goose, but doesn’t want to admit it. The day they gave that Oprah interview, MM and H told family secrets, lies, whined about how hard it is to be a duchess/prince in luxury surroundings without ever having to worry about bills being paid, complained that at 37 years old they were cut off from the bank of Dad.
> 
> Their indiscretion would put off any smart business person and anyone A-list getting close to them -  because they can do the same to you!
> 
> She had a golden opportunity as a royal to make/effect/influence real change and fumbled… because of her own ego.
> 
> Not following through on Spotify, failing at Disney and floundering/delaying Netflix projects means no business person will give them any money for Any project.
> 
> The only thing they have left to sell is more family secrets.
> 
> The golden goose is dead and buried.
> 
> The BRF should continue to ignore them.



I just can't figure out what they thought they would gain by calling the BRF racist. Talk about biting the hand...


----------



## Annawakes

They thought the BRF would bend over backwards to show that they *aren’t* racist, by giving TW whatever she wants.  Letting her walk before Kate, before Charles, before TQ.

She really thought she was going to be the new face of the monarchy.  When the BRF didn’t bend, she went off the deep end with the Oprah/Ellen stuff.


----------



## mia55

Allisonfaye said:


> I just can't figure out what they thought they would gain by calling the BRF racist. Talk about biting the hand...



She thought she’ll make the same kind of waves as Diana did with her infamous Panorama series and will become “People’s Princess”. What she didn’t realize Diana had years of public service and credibility before she went rouge whereas TW’s true motives were already clear before her opera interview. She just wanted to be Diana-2.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she ends up staging few pics against JCMH to speculate that he’s having an affair just to have some similarities with Diana.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> The Naegleria Fowleri a brain-eating amoeba discovered in unchlorinated Texas water when a young child went swimming in contaminated water. The amoeba enters the body through the nose and follows the optic nerve to the brain.



That little brain-eating amoeba would starve to death if it ever made it's way to the empty space between HazBeen's ears.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> They thought the BRF would bend over backwards to show that they *aren’t* racist, by giving TW whatever she wants.  Letting her walk before Kate, before Charles, before TQ.
> 
> She really thought she was going to be the new face of the monarchy.  When the BRF didn’t bend, she went off the deep end with the Oprah/Ellen stuff.


Do you wonder if that was a modus operandi that worked for her in the past? Throw a tantrum and accuse her father of neglecting her. Act weepy and pitiful till hubby #1 and chef lover gave in to stop the reproachful looks. If tactics like these were successful in the past, she might have tried them on the BRF.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> That little brain-eating amoeba would starve to death if it ever made it's way to the empty space between HazBeen's ears.


So true, but I was comparing the Despicable Duo to the amoeba when they 'Markle' people they no longer need and 'obliterate' them from their lives.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> So true, but I was comparing the Despicable Duo to the amoeba when they 'Markle' people they no longer need and 'obliterate' them from their lives.


Oops, I guess I hopped from one bandwagon to the next just like the Arsewypes


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz can rest assured that QE looks good and well taken care of.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Hazz can rest assured that QE looks good and well taken care of.



She looks amazing in those pics. Ten years younger. I think C&W stepping up to help her deal with the troublemakers has lifted a huge weight off her shoulders.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Hazz can rest assured that QE looks good and well taken care of.



She loves animals....I like that about her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> She love animals....I like that about her


----------



## lanasyogamama

As if James Corden’s opinion is respected! He’s supposed to be the biggest jerk in town. Plus, his meds are 10 years older than the Markles. 

James Corden reveals he and Prince Harry's children have play dates


https://mol.im/a/10811435


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry I don’t know how to copy the article on my phone.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> As if James Corden’s opinion is respected! He’s supposed to be the biggest jerk in town. Plus, his meds are 10 years older than the Markles.
> 
> James Corden reveals he and Prince Harry's children have play dates
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/10811435



It's what he doesn't say that stands out to me. He says what a great guy Harry is, but he doesn't say anything specifically about MM, like she is warm and charming, great with the kids, etc. I'm neutral on him, have only watched his show occasionally over the years. I know he is viewed with disdain by many, but I don't understand why. Care to enlighten me?


----------



## Icyjade

Even the titles are funny. Pics are great too. Click if u have some time to spare





__





						Harry And Meghan Gossip Forum
					





					tattle.life


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hazz can rest assured that QE looks good and well taken care of.




I love Sophie's blazer (not the way she combined it, though).


----------



## TC1

xincinsin said:


> She keeps trying to "relate" to others by saying she is a woman, or a mum, or a working mum. It's her version of #MeToo.
> She wants to be the poster child for every bandwagon.
> 
> _“As it’s been said many times, it takes a village to raise a child,” the duchess added.  _
> At least she didn't try to claim that she invented this phrase. But it is hypocritical since this is the person who basically bombed her village(s) out of existence.
> 
> _The business coalition already includes Athletes Unlimited, Care.com, Fast Retailing, Gibson Dunn, Patagonia, Synchrony and Meghan and Harry’s Archewell. To join, a company must help provide child care ― or a child care benefit ― to its employees_
> I wonder, does Archewell provide 5 months' paid maternity leave to its employees? That's what the founders gave themselves, right?


But..she did have the help of  "a village to raise a child" a well paid, well respected BRF village in fact. She snubbed them to pretend to go it alone. Having no job living in a mansion is also the means not to speak for those of us who have gone it alone   FTLOG find a different coalition to support.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I thought they promised a large sum to some restaurant in NY and Harry promised a huge sum to Sentabale at an earlier Polo match? Neither made the list.


Don't forget the roofs in New Orleans and a woman's shelter in India.  They are FOS.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> But..she did have the help of  "a village to raise a child" a well paid, well respected BRF village in fact. She snubbed them to pretend to go it alone. Having no job living in a mansion is also the means not to speak for those of us who have gone it alone   FTLOG find a different coalition to support.


I don't know what credentials she has to be teaching or preaching to anyone.  Oh wait, she was a child activist and she married royalty.  So that qualifies her?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> She loves animals....I like that about her


Many animals (especially dogs) give unconditional love back.  I can't blame her for trusting them for than certain family members of hers!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Many animals (especially dogs) give unconditional love back.  I can't blame her for trusting them for than certain family members of hers!


dogs are very loyal


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of the balcony again...I'm happy to not being forced to look into Raptor's smug face, but...tons of family members have to be excluded just so the a*sholes don't throw another tantrum. Just like when the Cambridges gave up their spot in the Westminster Abbey procession just so the jerks would stop fussing. It's starting to get on my nerves big time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, now I want to go to the Windsor Horse Show haha. Maybe next year.


----------



## gracekelly

The Queen did the smart thing to conserve her energy for what she enjoys, and attend the horse show.  I believe she liked seeing Charles give the speech at Parliament.  It’s not like she hasn’t done it for decades. She has reached the point in life where she *should* do what pleases her. One thing she doesn’t need is aggravation from a certain grandson. I have the feeling that her “protectors” will keep the Harkles at arm’s length if they do make an appearance. Harry won’t be allowed to say anything,  but hello, and nice weather we’re having.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of the balcony again...I'm happy to not being forced to look into Raptor's smug face, but...tons of family members have to be excluded just so the a*sholes don't throw another tantrum. Just like when the Cambridges gave up their spot in the Westminster Abbey procession just so the jerks would stop fussing. It's starting to get on my nerves big time.


I expect a snide remark about the Wessex  children being there instead of them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MiniMabel

xincinsin said:


> She keeps trying to "relate" to others by saying she is a woman, or a mum, or a working mum. It's her version of #MeToo.
> She wants to be the poster child for every bandwagon.
> 
> _“As it’s been said many times, *it takes a village to raise a child*,” the duchess added.  _
> At least she didn't try to claim that she invented this phrase. But it is hypocritical since this is the person who basically bombed her village(s) out of existence.
> 
> _The business coalition already includes Athletes Unlimited, Care.com, Fast Retailing, Gibson Dunn, Patagonia, Synchrony and Meghan and Harry’s Archewell. To join, a company must help provide child care ― or a child care benefit ― to its employees_
> I wonder, does Archewell provide 5 months' paid maternity leave to its employees? That's what the founders gave themselves, right?




What, actually, does that mean?  It sounds so pretentious!  Usually, there are two parents who manage together.  It seems to suggest that the parents can't/won't take responsibility for raising their child/children and expect others to help?  

I don't know, just seems a load of old word salad to me!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I expect a snide remark about the Wessex  children being there instead of them.



They were also there when their grandfather was dying, so the Sucksexes can stuff it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> It's what he doesn't say that stands out to me. He says what a great guy Harry is, but he doesn't say anything specifically about MM, like she is warm and charming, great with the kids, etc. I'm neutral on him, have only watched his show occasionally over the years. I know he is viewed with disdain by many, but I don't understand why. Care to enlighten me?



Basically he has a big reputation for being a total jerk as soon as cameras are not rolling. This is a lot to slog through, but he did a Reddit ask me anything, and a ton of people brought up specific examples of him being rude and awful.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what credentials she has to be teaching or preaching to anyone.  Oh wait, she was a child activist and she married royalty.  So that qualifies her?



A child activist in her mind only it turns out.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't know what credentials she has to be teaching or preaching to anyone.  Oh wait, she was a child activist and she married royalty.  So that qualifies her?


Fake it till you make it I guess.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> What, actually, does that mean?  It sounds so pretentious!  Usually, there are two parents who manage together.  It seems to suggest that the parents can't/won't take responsibility for raising their child/children and expect others to help?
> 
> I don't know, just seems a load of old word salad to me!


It originally meant extended family, friends, educators, clergy, etc., which in theory is great but not always applicable in the real world. I think when HRC first used it she was using African villagers as an example.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It originally meant extended family, friends, educators, clergy, etc., which in theory is great but not always applicable in the real world. I think when HRC first used it she was using African villagers as an example.


When my son had freshman orientation at his high school, the headmaster gave a speech telling parents that they were not the primary educators, but the parents are.  I remember thinking then WTF am I paying all this tuition for??  I can't teach Calculus, Physics, Religion, etc., etc., etc.!  Yes parents should be primary educators in life, but at some point, to tell us we are ultimately responsible for our children's higher education (while grabbing our money then constantly asking for donations) is a crock of $hit.  Village my a$$


----------



## Milosmum0307

csshopper said:


> She preaches from her mansion, meanwhile the Cambridges are out, interacting with people, visiting programs and working.
> 
> She probably authorized a check for a hundred bucks and threw in a stack of her worthless book as a “bonus”, of course expecting heaps of praise for her effort.


Stop.  I won’t tolerate the suggestion that she doesn’t put her money where her mouth is.  Princess Pearl HRH Megs of the Tig is changing the world one Starbucks gift card at a time.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Basically he has a big reputation for being a total jerk as soon as cameras are not rolling. This is a lot to slog through, but he did a Reddit ask me anything, and a ton of people brought up specific examples of him being rude and awful.



Well, he has been advise!   










						James Corden told to 'stay in the USA' after backing Harry and Meghan
					

JAMES CORDEN has been told to stay in the USA after the star publicly backed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## altigirl88

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll have whatever Edo’s magic is.  Clearly, a happy marriage makes a difference
> 
> View attachment 5402076
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen made trip to see her horses on first day of Royal Windsor show
> 
> 
> The Royal Windsor Horse Show is the Queen's favourite event of the year but it was announced the 96-year-old monarch would not attend owing to mobility issues
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She looks FANTASTIC in that dress


----------



## altigirl88

Chanbal said:


>



She, too, looks fantastic. I was thinking she must’ve been glad to get out and see what she enjoys without the mobility issues being seen. This was a good idea. She’s having fun; she’s being seen; and she’s sitting down, no having to get out and walk, or anything. Her lipcolor looks good, too, I might add!


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Basically he has a big reputation for being a total jerk as soon as cameras are not rolling. This is a lot to slog through, but he did a Reddit ask me anything, and a ton of people brought up specific examples of him being rude and awful.



Ok a TV show with a top level staff of 6 not including host
that is about the size of staff required for a regular podcast, Archewell for Spotify does not come cheap, it takes a village


----------



## Chanbal

My 2 cents:
It looks like TM knows a lot more than what he is willing to share. He loves his daughter and still has hope they will heal. The comment about TW would have the family she never had was apparently a repeat. It happened also during her marriage to Trevor. Using the pity card was likely a habit of her. TM refuses to talk about the Soho h/yacht girl subject, but in contrast with other things he denied, he just refused to talk about it. Also, he doesn't share all parts of the infamous letter because they are allegedly so hateful. He makes also a reference to SS…


----------



## Chanbal

This is truly unbelievable…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


> As if James Corden’s opinion is respected! He’s supposed to be the biggest jerk in town. Plus, his meds are 10 years older than the Markles.
> 
> James Corden reveals he and Prince Harry's children have play dates
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/10811435


"He only lives an hour and a half away"    That's a 3 hour round trip for play date.  Probably just happened one time.
His kids are 11 & 7 & 4.  No 11 year old would want to hang out with a baby and 3 year old.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if this should be posted on the appreciation thread instead, it's about the Eurovision song on TW's lush hair.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> It looks like TM knows a lot more than what he is willing to share. He loves his daughter and still has hope they will heal. The comment about TW would have the family she never had was apparently a repeat. It happened also during her marriage to Trevor. Using the pity card was likely a habit of her. TM refuses to talk about the Soho h/yacht girl subject, but in contrast with other things he denied, he just refused to talk about it. Also, he doesn't share all parts of the infamous letter because they are allegedly so hateful. He makes also a reference to SS…




Excellent interview. Agree, he knows lots more than he has shared.
TM says yes to a divorce. Also, he reveals that MM wrote another book about having 2 of everything [since her parents were divorced]. So, brace yourselves - 2 on 2 may be in the works. 

RE: her hair -  watch this story. My guess it is about to get much uglier with some very loaded accusations.  Just my opinion.

ETA: wonder if he has been advising MM. Ya know, through unnamed sources, etc. The public spats could be just for show.
Guessing the BRF knows the truth.


----------



## Chanbal

Compassion in action!


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> Compassion in action!




think §768.295 is the statute number … she will probably ask for a lot more, knowing her


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent interview. Agree, he knows lots more than he has shared.
> TM says yes to a divorce. Also, he reveals that MM wrote another book about having 2 of everything [since her parents were divorced]. So, brace yourselves - 2 on 2 may be in the works.
> 
> RE: her hair -  watch this story. My guess it is about to get much uglier with some very loaded accusations.  Just my opinion.
> 
> ETA: wonder if he has been advising MM. Ya know, through unnamed sources, etc. The public spats could be just for show.
> Guessing the BRF knows the truth.


Everything is possible at this point.


Katel said:


> think §768.295 is the statute number … she will probably ask for a lot more, knowing her



Oh yes! In this case, they are not calling the First Amendment 'bonkers'… It's disgusting.  

It's possible that SM is being helped, her new team of lawyers is fit for a (ex) President. 

_"In the motion to dismiss filed Friday, *Meghan’s lawyers denied all of Markle’s allegations — and stated that even if they were true, the duchess's half-sister would still have no case: *first, because the statements that Meghan made about Markle in her 2018 briefing email to Knauf were made outside of Florida’s two-year statute of limitations for defamation; second, because Meghan didn’t write Finding Freedom*; and finally, because Meghan’s statements about her half-sister in the email and in the Oprah interview are substantially true — and protected by the First Amendment*. The filing included an itemized list of responses to all 17 of the statements that Samantha Markle claimed were defamatory.

The motion’s request that Markle be compelled to pay Meghan’s legal fees is based on a Florida law that prohibits lawsuits filed against individuals who are exercising their *right to free speech *in connection with public issues."



_









						Meghan Markle Has Filed A Motion To Dismiss Her Half-Sister's Defamation Lawsuit
					

The duchess has asked a Florida court to compel Samantha Markle to pay Meghan’s attorneys’ fees.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> It's what he doesn't say that stands out to me. He says what a great guy Harry is, but he doesn't say anything specifically about MM, like she is warm and charming, great with the kids, etc. I'm neutral on him, have only watched his show occasionally over the years. I know he is viewed with disdain by many, but I don't understand why. Care to enlighten me?


 I feel it’s an open secret at this point that most of these hosts are awful people - the only safe bets are Graham Norton and maybe Conan. 
JC’s sense of humour is grating for me personally and he can be rude even to his guests but a lot of Brits don’t like him because he was in a comedy duo and they think he abandoned his partner and even sabotaged their projects so he could go to LA ASAP so there’s certainly some bad blood there.


Chanbal said:


> This is truly unbelievable…



it’s offensive to freedom of speech and it’s offensively hammy too. Apparently chilling is now defined as ‘my bitter b*tch sister called me a bitter b*tch’ when will the horrors end  




Chanbal said:


> Compassion in action!



What’s the tweet? it’s been deleted


Chanbal said:


> Everything is possible at this point.
> 
> 
> Oh yes! In this case, they are not calling the First Amendment 'bonkers'… It's disgusting.
> 
> It's possible that SM is being helped, her new team of lawyers is fit for a (ex) President.
> 
> _"In the motion to dismiss filed Friday, *Meghan’s lawyers denied all of Markle’s allegations — and stated that even if they were true, the duchess's half-sister would still have no case: *first, because the statements that Meghan made about Markle in her 2018 briefing email to Knauf were made outside of Florida’s two-year statute of limitations for defamation; second, because Meghan didn’t write Finding Freedom*; and finally, because Meghan’s statements about her half-sister in the email and in the Oprah interview are substantially true — and protected by the First Amendment*. The filing included an itemized list of responses to all 17 of the statements that Samantha Markle claimed were defamatory.
> 
> The motion’s request that Markle be compelled to pay Meghan’s legal fees is based on a Florida law that prohibits lawsuits filed against individuals who are exercising their *right to free speech *in connection with public issues."
> 
> 
> View attachment 5403004
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Filed A Motion To Dismiss Her Half-Sister's Defamation Lawsuit
> 
> 
> The duchess has asked a Florida court to compel Samantha Markle to pay Meghan’s attorneys’ fees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


I hope Samantha is getting bankrolled as M has had the full power of the BRF for her nuisance suits. It’s all so incredibly spurious. What’s good for the goose…
Fingers crossed S gets a nice wad of notes out of it. She could even buy a Valentino dress that actually fits her!


----------



## Lodpah

This is not a coincidence. Princess Diana's jewelry on TW. I think she spends a lot of time practicing her acting chops. Sick.


----------



## duna

I SOOOO hope they stay in Cali and don't turn up at the Jubilee: their presence would definately spoil it for everyone else, especially for the Queen!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmm, this is disappointing


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> What, actually, does that mean?  It sounds so pretentious!  Usually, there are two parents who manage together.  It seems to suggest that the parents can't/won't take responsibility for raising their child/children and expect others to help?
> 
> I don't know, just seems a load of old word salad to me!


It is derived from African proverbs. When I was doing ethnography courses, I read about how in some African villages/tribes, raising children was a communal task. All adults looked out for and helped take care of the children. What particularly stuck in my mind was how the nursing mothers would allow any infant or toddler to suckle, not only their own offspring. Orphaned children were taken care of by the entire village. 

This is definitely not an attitude I'd associate with Methane and her No Free Milk motto in life, apart from the expectation she has that the "village" should pay for her to lead a life of luxury.


----------



## Chanbal

Even with little time to spare, many of us will come to this thread. So I'm sharing this beautiful story here; its relation to this thread has to do with Big Will, a main target of the Harkles.









						Prince William presents damehood to Deborah James as cancer fundraiser raises £5m
					

Duke of Cambridge makes personal visit after ‘Bowelbabe’ told supporters she was receiving end-of-life care for her condition




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Chanbal

Another type of 'charity'…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Even with little time to spare, many of us will come to this thread. So I'm sharing this beautiful story here; its relation to this thread has to do with Big Will, a main target of the Harkles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William presents damehood to Deborah James as cancer fundraiser raises £5m
> 
> 
> Duke of Cambridge makes personal visit after ‘Bowelbabe’ told supporters she was receiving end-of-life care for her condition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



I read about Bowelbabe. I really respect her. She was one of 3 women hosting a programme called You, Me and the Big C. One of her co-hosts has already passed away from cancer. No fake compassion here. They are the real deal.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> they think he abandoned his partner and even sabotaged their projects so he could go to LA ASAP so there’s certainly some bad blood there.


Did not know that, thanks. Pretty sh*tty if he did.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Even with little time to spare, many of us will come to this thread. So I'm sharing this beautiful story here; its relation to this thread has to do with Big Will, a main target of the Harkles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William presents damehood to Deborah James as cancer fundraiser raises £5m
> 
> 
> Duke of Cambridge makes personal visit after ‘Bowelbabe’ told supporters she was receiving end-of-life care for her condition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



I've been reading her story in several places in recent days. It is heartbreaking. What a lovely and kind thing for William to do, and I doubt it was just for a photo op. I wish her and her family peace in the days ahead.


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> Even the titles are funny. Pics are great too. Click if u have some time to spare
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry And Meghan Gossip Forum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tattle.life


Love the balcony cartoons. Thanks for sharing....another internet rabbit hole for me to fall down


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> I've been reading her story in several places in recent days. It is heartbreaking. What a lovely and kind thing for William to do, and I doubt it was just for a photo op. I wish her and her family peace in the days ahead.



SOOOO sad, reading about her left my stomach in knots My DH has been battling lung cancer for the past 11 years: it's VERY tough!!


----------



## charlottawill

duna said:


> SOOOO sad, reading about her left my stomach in knots My DH has been battling lung cancer for the past 11 years: it's VERY tough!!


I am sorry to hear that. I can't imagine how difficult that must be. I wish you both well.


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> I am sorry to hear that. I can't imagine how difficult that must be. I wish you both well.



Thanks my dear  

Thanks to you all for making this forum such a pleasant and fun distraction


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmm, this is disappointing



Whatever the purpose of the gathering/photo, it was made abundantly clear no one is waiting around for Archie and Lilibucks to be included in a very memorable family activity. Of course we know the crap their parents will claim caused their exclusion, but how will they see things in the years ahead?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Whatever the purpose of the gathering/photo, it was made abundantly clear no one is waiting around for Archie and Lilibucks to be included in a very memorable family activity. Of course we know the crap their parents will claim caused their exclusion, but how will they see things in the years ahead?



Give it time. I had to be in my early 20s to see right through my parents' manipulative bs. Once your eyes are opened you'll look back and understand.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Give it time. I had to be in my early 20s to see right through my parents' manipulative bs. Once your eyes are opened you'll look back and understand.


This is so true. Age has given me a much different perspective on events in my youth, both good and bad, involving the adults in my life.


----------



## Hermes Zen

duna said:


> Thanks my dear
> 
> Thanks to you all for making this forum such a pleasant and fun distraction


I send you many many hugs. I feel the same. This forum has been my distraction also. My DH was diagnosed with C in 2020. Treatments on going. Enjoy your weekend with your DH.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> This is not a coincidence. Princess Diana's jewelry on TW. I think she spends a lot of time practicing her acting chops. Sick.
> 
> View attachment 5403161



She needs a few lifetimes more practise then


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I've been reading her story in several places in recent days. It is heartbreaking. What a lovely and kind thing for William to do, and I doubt it was just for a photo op. I wish her and her family peace in the days ahead.


Article says the Duke and Duchess also donated towards the 5 million pounds collected.  I don't think they donated a $5 Starbucks card and lemon olive oil cake!


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> SOOOO sad, reading about her left my stomach in knots My DH has been battling lung cancer for the past 11 years: it's VERY tough!!


I'm so sorry to hear that.  I hope he beats it and gets well soon.  F Cancer!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Give it time. I had to be in my early 20s to see right through my parents' manipulative bs. Once your eyes are opened you'll look back and understand.


So true.  Age brings maturity and wisdom and is eye opening.  I almost fell over when my son, who is now 20, called me out of the blue recently to say thank you!  I asked him for what?  He actually said, "Everything!  You and Dad have always loved me unconditionally, taught me so much, have always protected me and have given me so much of your time and energy.  I know I wasn't an easy kid.  Meeting friends' parents made me realize even more how fortunate I am.  I figured you yelling at me sometimes was really not so bad."   I literally cried when he said that.


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> I send you many many hugs. I feel the same. This forum has been my distraction also. My DH was diagnosed with C in 2020. Treatments on going. Enjoy your weekend with your DH.


Sending you and DH lots of hugs and prayers for a speedy recovery!


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Sending you and DH lots of hugs and prayers for a speedy recovery!


Thank you so very much @purseinsanity. Appreciate the prayers.  We are trying our best to keep our chins up and being hopeful. DH appreciates the forum because he knows it keeps me occupied and makes me smile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> So true.  Age brings maturity and wisdom and is eye opening.  I almost fell over when my son, who is now 20, called me out of the blue recently to say thank you!  I asked him for what?  He actually said, "Everything!  You and Dad have always loved me unconditionally, taught me so much, have always protected me and have given me so much of your time and energy.  I know I wasn't an easy kid.  Meeting friends' parents made me realize even more how fortunate I am.  I figured you yelling at me sometimes was really not so bad."   I literally cried when he said that.


You raised an outstanding young man, 
Kudos and extra special as a spontaneous gesture of love from him.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> You raised an outstanding young man,
> Kudos and extra special as a spontaneous gesture of love from him.


Thank you!    That completely melted me.


----------



## Chanbal

TW's minister of propaganda is tireless…


----------



## Chanbal

TW had to make sure the Cambridges' names are listed on her dirty affairs.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> TW had to make sure the Cambridges' names are listed on her dirty affairs.



Her pettiness knows no bounds.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oprah????



Hmmmmmm - I wonder if Oprah would be willing to sit with her (then) again?!!!


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if in addition to the hair there is also a reference to pump pump…


----------



## Chloe302225

When you didn't get invited so now your trying to change the narrative to state that you didn't want to go








						Harry and Meghan 'never wanted to be on Buckingham Palace balcony'
					

Despite not wanting to appear on the balcony, the couple's biographer Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan do want to attend the National Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chloe302225 said:


> When you didn't get invited so now your trying to change the narrative to state that you didn't want to go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'never wanted to be on Buckingham Palace balcony'
> 
> 
> Despite not wanting to appear on the balcony, the couple's biographer Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan do want to attend the National Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Just read this and still snickering. Plastic Pal says the Harkles "deemed it inappropriate" to appear on the balcony. He neatly skirts the issue of why it would be inappropriate. As if the Harkles ever considered appropriateness in any of their sleazy doings


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like the world has caught on to the shady H&M tactics - W&K will glow like the royals they are


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmmm - I wonder if Oprah would be willing to sit with her (then) again?!!!


Oprah, no. Maybe Wendy Williams, a paragon of journalistic integrity.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like the world has caught on to the shady H&M tactics - W&K will glow like the royals they are



Kste lives in TW's head rent free.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if in addition to the hair there is also a reference to pump pump…



I don't know why the video doesn't show subtitles here… For the ones that are curious about why the lush hair need to search for it on youtube "eurovision 2022 serbia." Whoever had the idea of writing this song is likely not a fan of TW.


----------



## Chanbal

Alarming… Tom Bower Help, Please!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

My take on this - TM, Doria, MA, MM have a plan to profit from the BRF.  They seem like 21st century grifters. IMO.
I do wish the intelligence services would ‘leak’ some details - soon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> TW's minister of propaganda is tireless…



Jeez god forbid Omid be accused of milking a tragedy for petty gains  

It’s also prett childish to just reply with a photo of Will doing something nice though. People are well within their rights to be angry at the establishment about the legal and personal hell they were put through and no photo op is going to console for that. 


Chanbal said:


> TW had to make sure the Cambridges' names are listed on her dirty affairs.



Harry isn’t his legal name either..is this real? 


Chanbal said:


> I wonder if in addition to the hair there is also a reference to pump pump…



I never watch Eurovision but this is a great performance and a clever song. I hope she wins and at least it’s getting a lot of attention.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, ladies and gentlemen, prior to W&K’s wedding day in 2011, you may recall QE held a dinner for distinguished guests. Here is what Sophie wore    Not the same dress as MM, but suspiciously close, imo.  Sophie styled it beautifully imo.


Sophie, Countess of Wessex (L) and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex attend the pre-wedding dinner at Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park on April 28, 2011 in London, England.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TW had to make sure the Cambridges' names are listed on her dirty affairs.




That is so extremely rude to refer to her as Kate in a legal document. I feel it's very unprofessional for a lawyer so have to wonder if Raptor specifically requested it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


> When you didn't get invited so now your trying to change the narrative to state that you didn't want to go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'never wanted to be on Buckingham Palace balcony'
> 
> 
> Despite not wanting to appear on the balcony, the couple's biographer Omid Scobie says Harry and Meghan do want to attend the National Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They are so transparent in their toddler-like defiance.

Reminds me of one of my guilty pleasures, a dating show for farmers (don't laugh). Girl 1 was very sure of her victory, saying so in front of the cameras and dissing her opponent. The second the farmer told her he'd like to proceed with Girl 2 (which was nicer than #1 for sure, but I personally liked a third one that never made it to round 2  ) she totally switched gears and was like "Yeah, I didn't like you all that much anyway, you didn't put in any effort and better step up your game if you want to get anywhere. And you're too shy for my liking." Like, you really think anyone watching is going to believe you instead of knowing you're just a very sore loser? Please b*tch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Jeez god forbid Omid be accused of milking a tragedy for petty gains
> 
> It’s also prett childish to just reply with a photo of Will doing something nice though. People are well within their rights to be angry at the establishment about the legal and personal hell they were put through and no photo op is going to console for that.



I had to google and in the process learned the Hillsborough disaster was in 1989. William was 7 at the time (plus, I didn't read more than a few sentences, but wouldn't one have to blame the actual government for trying to cover anything up?).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I read the article about the Terrible Two not wanting to be on the balcony. 

1. If they didn't want to be there, why would The Queen feel it necessary to uninvite 2/3 of the family members who've stood on that balcony for decades? They could have just said so and everyone else could have attended as usual, minus Andrew.

2. Give me a break with this "much loved members of the family" shtick. They might still have a soft spot for Harry (blood is thicker than water after all), but after the ongoing impertinences from Team Sussex I can't find even one reason for still having even neutral feelings towards Raptor. 

3.  





> He added that despite not wanting to appear on the balcony, Harry and Meghan did want to attend the National Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral.



I wonder if her inner demon causes her physical discomfort being forced being inside a church.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had to google and in the process learned the Hillsborough disaster was in 1989. William was 7 at the time (plus, I didn't read more than a few sentences, but wouldn't one have to blame the actual government for trying to cover anything up?).


While the disaster occurred then, the legal fallout is still very much ongoing and there was a significant cover up for decades with significant inroads only being made with the second inquest in 2014-2016. Multiple organisations and governments are responsible for this very complicated case. William may have been young when it happened he is now an adult and a clear representative of  our state establishment. He’s a ‘figurehead’ for the British state after all, so IMHO, he can be booed as well as cheered. They can’t just be symbolic only when they want to share the credit for something good.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I read the article about the Terrible Two not wanting to be on the balcony.
> 
> 1. If they didn't want to be there, why would The Queen feel it necessary to uninvite 2/3 of the family members who've stood on that balcony for decades? They could have just said so and everyone else could have attended as usual, minus Andrew.
> 
> 2. Give me a break with this "much loved members of the family" shtick. They might still have a soft spot for Harry (blood is thicker than water after all), but after the ongoing impertinences from Team Sussex I can't find even one reason for still having even neutral feelings towards Raptor.
> 
> 3.
> 
> I wonder if her inner demon causes her physical discomfort being forced being inside a church.


If not her inner demon certainly the stilettos on her bunions and the fit of her dress


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> SOOOO sad, reading about her left my stomach in knots My DH has been battling lung cancer for the past 11 years: it's VERY tough!!



I'm so very sorry. I know words are not enough but


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I read the article about the Terrible Two not wanting to be on the balcony.
> 
> 1. If they didn't want to be there, why would The Queen feel it necessary to uninvite 2/3 of the family members who've stood on that balcony for decades? They could have just said so and everyone else could have attended as usual, minus Andrew.
> 
> 2. Give me a break with this "much loved members of the family" shtick. They might still have a soft spot for Harry (blood is thicker than water after all), but after the ongoing impertinences from Team Sussex I can't find even one reason for still having even neutral feelings towards Raptor.
> 
> 3. I wonder if her inner demon causes her physical discomfort being forced being inside a church.



The thing I realized is that they were planning on coming all along because of NetFlix. The legal battles and “will they/won’t they” was just more of their games. Once the BRF said NetFlix was NOT allowed, the deals started dropping.

I also believed the great-grand children in carriages at an event rumor because I thought it was a clever way of including family, but excluding spouses.  Ex: Lucas, August, Sienna, and Lillibet are all too young to sit in a carriage by themselves, so I thought they would be on the laps of Zara, Eugenie, Beatrice, and Harry.  That way, while Andrew is excluded, his girls aren’t.  While TW and other spouses are excluded, Harry isn’t.  However, that rumor is now being refuted.

Regarding a church appearance, I think TW likes it because of assigned seating. Photographers will know where to find her. She’ll be in a crowd, but she won’t be “lost” in it. I’m sure she and Harry think they can change their assigned seating. They’ve both done it before.  I hope that their “handlers” keep them in their place.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, ladies and gentlemen, prior to W&K’s wedding day in 2011, you may recall QE held a dinner for distinguished guests. Here is what Sophie wore    Not the same dress as MM, but suspiciously close, imo.  Sophie styled it beautifully imo.
> 
> 
> Sophie, Countess of Wessex (L) and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex attend the pre-wedding dinner at Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park on April 28, 2011 in London, England.



Sophie looks fabulous!  Isn’t that the Bulgari diamond serpenti necklace?!?!  Gorgeous!


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had to google and in the process learned the Hillsborough disaster was in 1989. William was 7 at the time (plus, I didn't read more than a few sentences, but wouldn't one have to blame the actual government for trying to cover anything up?).


They did, nothing to do with the RF.


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That is so extremely rude to refer to her as Kate in a legal document. I feel it's very unprofessional for a lawyer so have to wonder if Raptor specifically requested it.



You can refer to someone as anything in the body of a pleading once you put it in quotes (we say: hereinafter “Kate”). They refer to Markle as Megan as well.

It’s weird to me that they are choosing first names but that may be a consequence of the societal move away from the gendered Mr / Ms / Mrs.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> While the disaster occurred then, the legal fallout is still very much ongoing and there was a significant cover up for decades with significant inroads only being made with the second inquest in 2014-2016. Multiple organisations and governments are responsible for this very complicated case. William may have been young when it happened he is now an adult and a clear representative of  our state establishment. He’s a ‘figurehead’ for the British state after all, so IMHO, he can be booed as well as cheered. They can’t just be symbolic only when they want to share the credit for something good.


Agreed. There is always going to be inherited blame as well as inherited credit. Which is why I don't believe Methane will make it to the White House. She loves to claim credit but the moment there is blame, she goes into her toddler tantrums. And the American media is infamous for digging up everything. What's she going to do when her skeletons fall out of the closet? Claim racism and sexism again? Go on Oprah? Rescue a few more chickens?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have not watched yet, but I liked the new name for them and know Australia is always entertaining.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> You can refer to someone as anything in the body of a pleading once you put it in quotes (we say: hereinafter “Kate”). They refer to Markle as Megan as well.
> 
> It’s weird to me that they are choosing first names but that may be a consequence of the societal move away from the gendered Mr / Ms / Mrs.



Well, Meghan is her name. Kate is a nickname. It is kind of diminishing in that context, but that might just be me because I'm pretty sensitive to untertones.


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, Meghan is her name. Kate is a nickname. It is kind of diminishing in that context, but that might just be me because I'm pretty sensitive to untertones.



I hear you.

It is a very sloppily written pleading. I mean, Megan isn’t her name either, isn’t her legal name Rachel?

And Kate is what KM goes by commonly. Even when her husband announced her name change it seems everyone has ignored it.  And regardless of who she is, it feels too familiar.

So few people respect the rules in relation to pleadings anymore. It’s sad.


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> I hear you.
> 
> It is a very sloppily written pleading. I mean, Megan isn’t her name either, isn’t her legal name Rachel?
> 
> And Kate is what KM goes by commonly. Even when her husband announced her name change it seems everyone has ignored it.  And regardless of who she is, it feels too familiar.
> 
> So few people respect the rules in relation to pleadings anymore. It’s sad.


It annoys me that Catherine is still referred to as KM. Kate is fine, her maiden name ceased on April 29th 2011.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> It annoys me that Catherine is still referred to as KM. Kate is fine, her maiden name ceased on April 29th 2011.



My apologies. I did that just for convenience. If I said KC or KMW no one would know who I was talking about.

Although your maiden name doesn’t cease. Not in my country anyway. Your married name is an alias here.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmmmm - I wonder if Oprah would be willing to sit with her (then) again?!!!


hope not


----------



## A1aGypsy

Ugh. I have no idea what I’m doing. DP


----------



## Sharont2305

A1aGypsy said:


> My apologies. I did that just for convenience. Although your maiden name doesn’t cease. Not in my country anyway. Your married name is an alias here.


No no, not getting at you, the press in general.


----------



## Chanbal

People at Twitter that keep denouncing shenanigans are doing a great SERVICE imo. 
I can't blame people in the UK if they are against paying for the Harkles' security. Why would they do that?


----------



## mia55

A1aGypsy said:


> Although your maiden name doesn’t cease. Not in my country anyway. Your married name is an alias here.




Which country is it? Seems like a great place.


----------



## juju2016

Milosmum0307 said:


> Look.  You’re just a bad feminist for suggesting that a woman who has derived every ounce of her relevance as a public figure from marrying a low-IQ aging frat boy from an important family isn’t supremely qualified to serve as the chief executive of this great nation.  She majored in theater and international relations at a VERY good midwestern university (Oxford who?  Cambridge what?); plus, she fetched coffee at some American embassy for a few weeks because the uncle she later ignored had some good connections or whatever.  Credentials!  (Shh.  We won’t mention that she didn’t score well enough on the civil service exam to become an actual diplomat.  She’s still the most smartest princess ever!)  I mean.  Yeah, she arguably committed perjury in a court of law through dishonest filings, but, like, that was outside the United States, where things don’t count, and she had PREGNANCY BRAIN, YOU GUYS.  Women can’t be expected to function like normal humans while gestating a large parasitic creature in their uteri!  In fact, they shouldn’t even be allowed to drive a car or have an important job while so hormonal and, most of all, forgetful.  Wait … Right, feminism.  Megs can totally be president.  Imagine her amazing calligraphic signature scrawling the words, Princess Pearl HRH President Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, Lady of the Tig.  The country’s presidential seal will be artfully combined with her coat of arms by HRH President Megs herself because she’s good at literally everything.  Perhaps the invitations to the inaugural ball can feature her First Husband in his Nazi uniform!  She’ll throw boiling tea at the WH staff during cabinet meetings. She’ll be surrounded by massive security everywhere she goes, meaning she’ll be super duper important, and she won’t have to sue anyone or pay out of pocket for all that photogenic security.  She’ll have the BEST weave since our presidents wore powdered wigs … Yeah, anyone earnestly suggesting she should be president is not sober.


Brilliant. Wish I could think of a place to repost this.


----------



## Chanbal

Is Hazz going to buy this one for TW? It would make a great souvenir from the Jubilee.


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> Kste lives in TW's head rent free.


Sorry for the typo. Guess my old eyes don't do well in low light


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Sophie looks fabulous!  Isn’t that the Bulgari diamond serpenti necklace?!?!  Gorgeous!


The necklace caught my eye immediately. I'd love to see a closeup. I'm sure MM dreamed of having dozens like it when she got her hooks into Hazy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

A1aGypsy said:


> It is a very sloppily written pleading. I mean, Megan isn’t her name either, isn’t her legal name Rachel?
> 
> And Kate is what KM goes by commonly. Even when her husband announced her name change it seems everyone has ignored it.  And regardless of who she is, it feels too familiar.
> 
> So few people respect the rules in relation to pleadings anymore. It’s sad.



That was my thought too, isn't "Rachel" MM's legal name or did she legally change it to Meghan? 
It does look like the second or third string legal team got handed the job of responding to Samantha's case.  Not taking it seriously apparently and not doing the fact checking. Referring to the Duchess of Cambridge as "Kate" is maybe an indication.  Should have been something like Catherine, hereinafter referred to as "Kate", though why the Cambridges had to be named in this response at all is beyond me.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> No no, not getting at you, the press in general.


I think it is done more out of convenience, not disrespect. Easier (lazier) to write Kate than the Duchess of Cambridge.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz going to buy this one for TW? It would make a great souvenir from the Jubilee.




I doubt he can afford it. And where would she wear it? His polo matches? Next playdate with the Cordens? Feeding the chickens?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have not watched yet, but I liked the new name for them and know Australia is always entertaining.




I don't watch US 60 Minutes, but I doubt they are doing anything like this. While People magazine and the Today show treat the Harkles with kid gloves, the Aussies see through their BS.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz going to buy this one for TW? It would make a great souvenir from the Jubilee.



She’ll wear it whilst hosting her next Oscars viewing party at her super fancy, pungent Cheateau de Montecito. It would be the PERFECT revenge for not being allowed to wear a tiara during her royal tours.  The BRF can suck on that with their silly state dinners or whatever.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz going to buy this one for TW? It would make a great souvenir from the Jubilee.



He might try to convince Bulgari that Methane would be a great muse and "face" for the house.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The necklace caught my eye immediately. I'd love to see a closeup. I'm sure MM dreamed of having dozens like it when she got her hooks into Hazy.


TBH, I don’t like it. Too busy


----------



## Aimee3

I’m attempting to post a picture from Bulgaria’s website of the necklace. Retail now in USA is $139,000 and they are out of stock!!!


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> He might try to convince Bulgari that Methane would be a great muse and "face" for the house.



Doubtful, they already have a beautiful young WOC who is actually accomplished modeling for them.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> I’m attempting to post a picture from Bulgaria’s website of the necklace. Retail now in USA is $139,000 and they are out of stock!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5404236


I think I'll put in a request with DH for my birthday


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> TBH, I don’t like it. Too busy



It's not something that I'd ever wear, but I think it looks good on her.


----------



## Chanbal

As someone else mentioned, TC spoke with more love and respect about QE than Hazz.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> As someone else mentioned, TC spoke with more love and respect about QE than Hazz.



I think he's better qualified to protect the Queen than Haz.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I think he's better qualified to protect the Queen than Haz.


Absolutely! QE is well protected without Hazz's condescending attitude.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, ladies and gentlemen, prior to W&K’s wedding day in 2011, you may recall QE held a dinner for distinguished guests. Here is what Sophie wore    Not the same dress as MM, but suspiciously close, imo.  Sophie styled it beautifully imo.
> 
> 
> Sophie, Countess of Wessex (L) and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex attend the pre-wedding dinner at Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park on April 28, 2011 in London, England.



2011 photo when Sophie had shorter hair - an older model of the necklace that has been produced for eons, Camilla even has one


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> TBH, I don’t like it. Too busy


I agree with you. I wouldn't buy it, but I would gladly accept it as a gift.


----------



## Chanbal

One more picture of the sequence! Is all this for Nefl*x?


----------



## A1aGypsy

youngster said:


> That was my thought too, isn't "Rachel" MM's legal name or did she legally change it to Meghan?
> It does look like the second or third string legal team got handed the job of responding to Samantha's case.  Not taking it seriously apparently and not doing the fact checking. Referring to the Duchess of Cambridge as "Kate" is maybe an indication.  Should have been something like Catherine, hereinafter referred to as "Kate", though why the Cambridges had to be named in this response at all is beyond me.



They did do this. “Duchess of Cambridge (ie. Prince William and Kate)” is how I think they wrote it.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


>



Isn’t that M’s squatting pose?


----------



## CeeJay

WingNut said:


> Apex Predator implies success in the role. The Great White Shark is an Apex Predator. Nothing in the ocean's food chain can top it. Everything TW does or touches is a failure. TW is nothing more than a social climbing, victim-claiming, back-stabbing, publicity seeking marginally-capable-former-actress who struggles to climb the ladder  stomp on the backs of the people above which she seeks to elevate herself. She is everything that, by gender association only, ruins it for many other women.


Marginally-capable actress?!?! .. NO, NO and NO .. she’s the Queen of Z-LIST (and that’s the closest she will ever be to being Queen)!!!


----------



## CeeJay

duna said:


> SOOOO sad, reading about her left my stomach in knots My DH has been battling lung cancer for the past 11 years: it's VERY tough!!


So sorry to hear this!  Wishing you both all the best!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sure, Hazzie can twerk, point, and snarl.  MM can strip if she wants, none of it matters - they will always look like _cheap grifters_.

This celebration is about this great lady. All she has to do is walk in, smile, wave and it is game over.  She brings what we all need right now. Grace, joy, strength of purpose. Cheers to QE  









*The Queen, 96, walked to her seat at Platinum Jubilee celebration and smiled through the much-anticipated production*


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> As someone else mentioned, TC spoke with more love and respect about QE than Hazz.



Those pictures of Tom Cruise walking down the street and being surrounded!  He didn't look frightened.  Harry would have been soiling his shorts.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Bet should took some souvenirs home with her.  Those mosquitos are really biting.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Straining at stool again.  He is copying that picture of Meg squatting on the Ellen Show.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, ladies and gentlemen, prior to W&K’s wedding day in 2011, you may recall QE held a dinner for distinguished guests. Here is what Sophie wore    Not the same dress as MM, but suspiciously close, imo.  Sophie styled it beautifully imo.
> 
> 
> Sophie, Countess of Wessex (L) and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex attend the pre-wedding dinner at Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park on April 28, 2011 in London, England.



Wow!  She looks stunning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you. I wouldn't buy it, but I would gladly accept it as a gift.
> View attachment 5404285


It would be impolite not to accept.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Straining at stool again.  He is copying that picture of Meg squatting on the Ellen Show.
> 
> View attachment 5404400
> 
> 
> View attachment 5404399



16 toilets and they still don't have enough not to go in public


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



"This is how I popped a squat in Africa"


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I doubt he can afford it.* And where would she wear it?* His polo matches? Next playdate with the Cordens? Feeding the chickens?


TW would be simply thrilled to wear that Bulgari emerald and diamond tiara on one of her 16 thrones, one throne day.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> TW would be simply thrilled to wear that Bulgari emerald and diamond tiara on one of her 16 thrones, one throne day.


The only throne she'll ever get close to.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you. I wouldn't buy it, but I would gladly accept it as a gift.
> View attachment 5404285


One could justify the cost since you can wear it two ways!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The queenly brush-off.  Old school wins every time.  Nouveau should stay away.


----------



## Chanbal

One of the tiara-gate main protagonists is moving in permanently with QE. TW is not going to like this.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Hazz's connections played a role here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like one of the horses got a bit frazzled. No need to worry, we all understand how emotional this is


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> One of the tiara-gate main protagonists is moving in permanently with QE. TW is not going to like this.



This makes me so happy. I loved her book and her loyalty to HMTQ came through on every page.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Hazz's connections played a role here.



The Air Force deal is a trial balloon for only 1500 air force members


----------



## Milosmum0307

gracekelly said:


> Those pictures of Tom Cruise walking down the street and being surrounded!  He didn't look frightened.  Harry would have been soiling his shorts.


Well, Harry is such a delicate flower.  But he’s also strong, you see.  Damaged, vulnerable but also mighty, like the hero in a period romance novel that I liked to read when I was a thirteen-year-old girl.  Of course in his fevered mind there are multiple mustache-twirling baddies conspiring to attack his family, and he’s determined to protect them in a way that no one had protected his Mummy.  Hero Harry!, you know? (That’s the character the BRF’s PR machine invented after he got caught cheating at Eton, wearing a Nazi uniform, using racist slurs to describe Asian soldiers, etc.)  And by “protect,” I mean through litigation, of course. His current public persona as the White Litigious Knight gallantly protecting his vulnerable young family (and yet also having seizures of panic at the mere click of a flashbulb) was apparently scripted by the author of a very bad, very formulaic, cliche-riddled Harlequin Romance novel, and I feel some perplexity at knowing that actual adult humans who are competent enough to hold down jobs and raise offspring buy into such a poorly conceived fictional character.  Every time he appears in public, he reinforces how mediocre a person he really is.  Deep down he must feel a sense of inadequacy because he has to trade on his connections to the family he appears to resent in order to cling to the trivial celebrity he and his wife have repeatedly debased themselves to achieve.  And honestly, as funny as this thread can be, I find the unrelenting nature of Harry’s stupidity to be exhausting.  I understand that the Dim Duke is the one tasked with generating interest in them because no one is exactly melting with anticipation to hear a washed-up former actress vomit a torrent of verbose, grammatically dubious diatribes about whatever trendy crisis du hour happens to be holding her ephemeral interest, but it is very unfortunate that he’s allowed to speak in public.  (And yes, after Prevaricating Pearl got caught lying to a British court, it’s wise to keep her public proclamations to a minimum.  I get that.  Even still, if there’s any compliment I can earnestly give Princess Perjury, it is that she can occasionally eject a few syllables from her face without embarrassing herself.  Harry doesn’t quite have that gift.) In a world awash with Kardashians and Markles, this elevating of untalented, sleazy grifters to stratospheric heights of synthetic celebrity is exasperating.  If anything, the esteem in which some hold this pair is a bit depressing.  Here we are about to see Roe v. Wade overturned, and yet some would hold up Meghan Marry-Well-to-Achieve-Relevance-and-Play-the-Helpless-Victim-Dependent-on-Your-Husband’s-Protection-While-Blaming-Your-Convenient-Lies-on-Pregnancy-Brain Markle as a feminist icon.  We’re a silly species.  This planet deserves to be overrun by hostile aliens.


----------



## Chanbal

According to NS, TW wants to vent and is looking for an interviewer. I thought that Piers M had volunteered for the job.   In any event, Oprah, allegedly didn't appreciate the backlash of the first interview and she may not be available for a second one. Indeed, the interview was eliminated from the internet, but we can still find its transcript.


----------



## gracekelly

Milosmum0307 said:


> Well, Harry is such a delicate flower.  But he’s also strong, you see.  Damaged, vulnerable but also mighty, like the hero in a period romance novel that I liked to read when I was a thirteen-year-old girl.  Of course in his fevered mind there are multiple mustache-twirling baddies conspiring to attack his family, and he’s determined to protect them in a way that no one had protected his Mummy.  Hero Harry!, you know? (That’s the character the BRF’s PR machine invented after he got caught cheating at Eton, wearing a Nazi uniform, using racist slurs to describe Asian soldiers, etc.)  And by “protect,” I mean through litigation, of course. His current public persona as the White Litigious Knight gallantly protecting his vulnerable young family (and yet also having seizures of panic at the mere click of a flashbulb) was apparently scripted by the author of a very bad, very formulaic, cliche-riddled Harlequin Romance novel, and I feel some perplexity at knowing that actual adult humans who are competent enough to hold down jobs and raise offspring buy into such a poorly conceived fictional character.  Every time he appears in public, he reinforces how mediocre a person he really is.  Deep down he must feel a sense of inadequacy because he has to trade on his connections to the family he appears to resent in order to cling to the trivial celebrity he and his wife have repeatedly debased themselves to achieve.  And honestly, as funny as this thread can be, I find the unrelenting nature of Harry’s stupidity to be exhausting.  I understand that the Dim Duke is the one tasked with generating interest in them because no one is exactly melting with anticipation to hear a washed-up former actress vomit a torrent of verbose, grammatically dubious diatribes about whatever trendy crisis du hour happens to be holding her ephemeral interest, but it is very unfortunate that he’s allowed to speak in public.  (And yes, after Prevaricating Pearl got caught lying to a British court, it’s wise to keep her public proclamations to a minimum.  I get that.  Even still, if there’s any compliment I can earnestly give Princess Perjury, it is that she can occasionally eject a few syllables from her face without embarrassing herself.  Harry doesn’t quite have that gift.) In a world awash with Kardashians and Markles, this elevating of untalented, sleazy grifters to stratospheric heights of synthetic celebrity is exasperating.  If anything, the esteem in which some hold this pair is a bit depressing.  Here we are about to see Roe v. Wade overturned, and yet some would hold up Meghan Marry-Well-to-Achieve-Relevance-and-Play-the-Helpless-Victim-Dependent-on-Your-Husband’s-Protection-While-Blaming-Your-Convenient-Lies-on-Pregnancy-Brain Markle as a feminist icon.  We’re a silly species.  This planet deserves to be overrun by hostile aliens.


Milo is a very lucky fellow to have a mommy who can tell the truthful tale so well . He must love your bedtime stories!  Kudos to you for telling it as it really is. Truth is stranger than fiction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> One of the tiara-gate main protagonists is moving in permanently with QE. TW is not going to like this.



Plates are flying and the ground is rumbling!  Harry must be seething.


----------



## charlottawill

Milosmum0307 said:


> "This planet deserves to be overrun by hostile aliens."


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like one of the horses got a bit frazzled. No need to worry, we all understand how emotional this is



My heart filled with joy to see QE arrive … AND to see Hermes Paris banner!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, TW wants to vent and is looking for an interviewer. I thought that Piers M had volunteered for the job.  In any event, Oprah, allegedly didn't appreciate the backlash of the first interview and she may not be available for a second one. Indeed, the interview was eliminated from the internet, but we can still find its transcript.




We have questions for H&M. I dare them  to come on here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps this is the first wave of hostile aliens.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I hope not. That helmet is very heavy and shouldn’t be on any child much less an almost one year old.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Gosh I love her. And it's true! I'm not even British, we don't have a monarchy, and yet this woman was always there throughout my whole life somehow. I'm still shocked how battered I was when Philip died.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh I love her. And it's true! I'm not even British, we don't have a monarchy, and yet this woman was always there throughout my whole life somehow. I'm still shocked how battered I was when Philip died.



I'm half British and love her to bits. I'm much older than you and I have "known" her all my live. I don't want to think how I will feel when she won't be here any more....If I shed bitter tears for Philip's passing, I don't want to know....


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> One of the tiara-gate main protagonists is moving in permanently with QE. TW is not going to like this.



The Queen, making sure she has THE RIGHT people around her!


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> View attachment 5404507



Based on the last 2+ years, it wouldn't be all that surprising.  
But, I'm also an eternal optimist.  I still wouldn't want to be alive during any other point in history because if you think it is bad now, it was worse then for a whole host of reasons.


----------



## Chanbal

Sophisticatted said:


> The Queen, making sure she has THE RIGHT people around her!


The ones that guard the tiaras…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not so sure. What is he going to tell, the story of his overindulged childhood or how the mean Angela Kelly wouldn't let his fiancée play with priceless pieces of jewelry? Who still wants to hear the constant whining?

ETA: does anyone remember the Yahoo messenger from a million years ago? They had little emoticons that spoke if you inserted them into the message, and my favourite was a butler that looked a bit like a vampire and said in the most bored voice "Would you like some cheese to go with that whine???"

Don't quote me on the details (was it even Yahoo and did the butler look like a vampire? Who cares ).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Milosmum0307

gracekelly said:


> Milo is a very lucky fellow to have a mommy who can tell the truthful tale so well . He must love your bedtime stories!  Kudos to you for telling it as it really is. Truth is stranger than fiction.


Thanks.  Now that I’m in a less salty mood, I feel I was a bit too … descriptive? in my dislike of White Saviour Harry.  I think it was an overreaction to the oft-repeated claim that he was once a good, affable, decent guy who was somehow conned by a conniving femme fatale and has changed as a result.  Harry the public figure was always a fictional character invented by the palace PR machine.  When left to his own devices, he repeatedly showed the world what he actually was.  People just weren’t listening because they wanted to believe the fiction.  And that’s not to say he had no redeeming features.  He did serve his country.  He did do good things on behalf of military veterans in the U.K. He was well loved by his family, presumably for good reasons. And maybe he really is reformed.  It’s entirely possible that he’s no longer the lazy, reckless, casual racist he used to be, and now he’s just a talentless, dim-witted guy who’s earnestly trying to provide a spectacular lifestyle for his kids and his expensive wife, and who under normal circumstances would be relatively harmless.  Yet, given how quickly and how frequently he’ll jettison the family that provided him so much privilege under the nearest bus in order to line his own pockets and drum up publicity, I fail to see why any thinking person would value his opinion on anything.  He keeps showing himself to be a shameless, self-promoting opportunist. At the end of the day, though, they’re both a momentary curiosity that will likely overstay the public’s mercurial welcome.  (I would enjoy being wrong and witnessing their sudden lurch into substance, btw; if they do start making a meaningful difference in this world, huzzah.  Who wouldn’t welcome that?). So far, it just looks like Megs married the dynastic equivalent of Andrew and thought she was going to be the next Diana.  Truth truly is stranger than fiction.
[Edited because typing on a tiny phone keyboard is hard, and autocorrect hates me]


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I hope not. That helmet is very heavy and shouldn’t be on any child much less an almost one year old.


I could be wrong, but to my eye that toddler is more than a year old.


----------



## charlottawill

Here she is again. Note that in both sets of pics, no one is else is wearing short shorts. The shorts would be fine if she was walking on the beach, but they do not seem appropriate for the pitch. Of course her fan club thinks she looks great.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, TW wants to vent and is looking for an interviewer. I thought that Piers M had volunteered for the job.   In any event, Oprah, allegedly didn't appreciate the backlash of the first interview and she may not be available for a second one. Indeed, the interview was eliminated from the internet, but we can still find its transcript.



as far as I can tell, Oprah hasn't expressed any regrets - only admiration.  but I suppose actions speak louder than words so we will see whether she has anything to do with these two in the future.  Really if she was honest, she should not be a fan (or a friend) of these entitled brats.  She worked for what she has.  Elevated herself literally from the bottom to the top of society.  Whether you like her or not, she is truly self-made.  Does she treat her staff well?  I don't know.  If she doesn't, that's a negative but you still can't deny her success.


----------



## lanasyogamama

A sundress would have been so much prettier.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> as far as I can tell, Oprah hasn't expressed any regrets - only admiration.  but I suppose actions speak louder than words so we will see whether she has anything to do with these two in the future.  Really if she was honest, she should not be a fan (or a friend) of these entitled brats.  She worked for what she has.  Elevated herself literally from the bottom to the top of society.  Whether you like her or not, she is truly self-made.  Does she treat her staff well?  I don't know.  If she doesn't, that's a negative but you still can't deny her success.



My only issue with Oprah is that she foisted Dr. Oz and Dr. Phil upon us


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> My only issue with Oprah is that she foisted Dr. Oz and Dr. Phil upon us


ha
I imagine she is embarrassed by Dr Oz right now


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> A sundress would have been so much prettier.


The shorts just scream "Look at my great legs". On a related note, Friday my husband and I were having dinner at a popular local restaurant, a casual place. There was a group of women at the bar, I guessed in their early 40s. A number of them were wearing nice tops with short shorts like MM's and wedge sandals. Several were wearing skinny jeans, which looked better imo. I recall in the early 2000's watching the British version of "What Not to Wear", and the two women hosts were of them opinion that women over 40 should not wear shorts. I think in some situations it's fine, but I generally agree with them. Certainly not to dinner at a restaurant.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The shorts just scream "Look at my great legs". On a related note, Friday my husband and I were having dinner at a popular local restaurant, a casual place. There was a group of women at the bar, I guessed in their early 40s. A number of them were wearing nice tops with short shorts like MM's and wedge sandals. Several were wearing skinny jeans, which looked better imo. I recall in the early 2000's watching the British version of "What Not to Wear", and the two women hosts were of them opinion that women over 40 should not wear shorts. I think in some situations it's fine, but I generally agree with them. Certainly not to dinner at a restaurant.


agree, short shorts aren't for wearing out to dinner
As far as age, IMO if you're 40 and have nice toned or slender legs, to wear them out grocery shopping or somewhere like that is fine.  If you're 70 and have slender legs that have lost their tone and are wrinkly, I think save them for gardening or hanging around the house.
If you're overweight, same - save them for home.

As far as Meghan thinking she has great legs - really?  she has toothpick legs


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> The Air Force deal is a trial balloon for only 1500 air force members


Also, the text does not say whether the Air Force paid for the trial. It could be a free trial or a full-paid membership for 1500.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> as far as I can tell, Oprah hasn't expressed any regrets - only admiration.  but I suppose actions speak louder than words so we will see whether she has anything to do with these two in the future.  Really if she was honest, she should not be a fan (or a friend) of these entitled brats.  She worked for what she has.  Elevated herself literally from the bottom to the top of society.  Whether you like her or not, she is truly self-made.  Does she treat her staff well?  I don't know.  If she doesn't, that's a negative but you still can't deny her success.


Used to admire OW, but TW's interview was a big disappointment. I don't know how OW treats her staff, but that's certainly a very important point. The rumor that she doesn't want to interview TW again makes perfect sense to me, why would she do that? It's only going to attract a negative light towards herself even if she decides to do a professional journalistic job asking the right questions. My 2 cents, obviously!


----------



## sdkitty

so we don't know yet whether "H" will appear at the platinum jubilee?


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW's PR is working hard. We are supposed to know that they are organizing a b-day party for LiliB* with the cousins…


----------



## Chanbal

Be prepared, more PR on the way…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW's PR is working hard. We are supposed to know that they are organizing a b-day party for LiliB* with the cousins…



really?  they will be at the jubilee?
as far as their move to CA being permanent, I wonder.  I know there are Brits who relocate permanently to the US but H seems like a fish out of water here to me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Milosmum0307 said:


> Thanks.  Now that I’m in a less salty mood, I feel I was a bit too … descriptive? in my dislike of White Saviour Harry.  I think it was an overreaction to the oft-repeated claim that he was once a good, affable, decent guy who was somehow conned by a conniving femme fatale and has changed as a result.  Harry the public figure was always a fictional character invented by the palace PR machine.  When left to his own devices, he repeatedly showed the world what he actually was.  People just weren’t listening because they wanted to believe the fiction.  And that’s not to say he had no redeeming features.  He did serve his country.  He did do good things on behalf of military veterans in the U.K. He was well loved by his family, presumably for good reasons. And maybe he really is reformed.  It’s entirely possible that he’s no longer the lazy, reckless, casual racist he used to be, and now he’s just a talentless, dim-witted guy who’s earnestly trying to provide a spectacular lifestyle for his kids and his expensive wife, and who under normal circumstances would be relatively harmless.  Yet, given how quickly and how frequently he’ll jettison the family that provided him so much privilege under the nearest bus in order to line his own pockets and drum up publicity, I fail to see why any thinking person would value his opinion on anything.  He keeps showing himself to be a shameless, self-promoting opportunist. At the end of the day, though, they’re both a momentary curiosity that will likely overstay the public’s mercurial welcome.  (I would enjoy being wrong and witnessing their sudden lurch into substance, btw; if they do start making a meaningful difference in this world, huzzah.  Who wouldn’t welcome that?). So far, it just looks like Megs married the dynastic equivalent of Andrew and thought she was going to be the next Diana.  Truth truly is stranger than fiction.
> [Edited because typing on a tiny phone keyboard is hard, and autocorrect hates me]


You are good!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One of the tiara-gate main protagonists is moving in permanently with QE. TW is not going to like this.



Step aside Haz, the Queen knows exactly who she needs around her and ensures it!


----------



## gracekelly

Milosmum0307 said:


> Thanks.  Now that I’m in a less salty mood, I feel I was a bit too … descriptive? in my dislike of White Saviour Harry.  I think it was an overreaction to the oft-repeated claim that he was once a good, affable, decent guy who was somehow conned by a conniving femme fatale and has changed as a result.  Harry the public figure was always a fictional character invented by the palace PR machine.  When left to his own devices, he repeatedly showed the world what he actually was.  People just weren’t listening because they wanted to believe the fiction.  And that’s not to say he had no redeeming features.  He did serve his country.  He did do good things on behalf of military veterans in the U.K. He was well loved by his family, presumably for good reasons. And maybe he really is reformed.  It’s entirely possible that he’s no longer the lazy, reckless, casual racist he used to be, and now he’s just a talentless, dim-witted guy who’s earnestly trying to provide a spectacular lifestyle for his kids and his expensive wife, and who under normal circumstances would be relatively harmless.  Yet, given how quickly and how frequently he’ll jettison the family that provided him so much privilege under the nearest bus in order to line his own pockets and drum up publicity, I fail to see why any thinking person would value his opinion on anything.  He keeps showing himself to be a shameless, self-promoting opportunist. At the end of the day, though, they’re both a momentary curiosity that will likely overstay the public’s mercurial welcome.  (I would enjoy being wrong and witnessing their sudden lurch into substance, btw; if they do start making a meaningful difference in this world, huzzah.  Who wouldn’t welcome that?). So far, it just looks like Megs married the dynastic equivalent of Andrew and thought she was going to be the next Diana.  Truth truly is stranger than fiction.
> [Edited because typing on a tiny phone keyboard is hard, and autocorrect hates me]


There is a poster on another site that writes posts about Harry as being the spawn of the Devil. lol!  She says the same that he was never never good and still isn't.  The two of them are a match made in heaven or hell, take your pick.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Step aside Haz, the Queen knows exactly who she needs around her and ensures it!


I think that Angela and TQ probably can sit in a room together and not say a word and perfectly understand each other.  Children are one thing, but a comforting friend with you is another.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think that Angela and TQ probably can sit in a room together and not say a word and perfectly understand each other.  Children are one thing, but a comforting friend with you is another.


I love that the queen is paying back loyalty


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I love that the queen is paying back loyalty


Angela will have her grace and favor home for the rest of her life.  The staff at Windsor will also be there to help her in her old age.  When i look at old pictures of TQ, her fashion sense is off many times, but that has not been the case since AK took over.  No stupid looking hats as well lol!  She redid the dress that Bea wore to her wedding and re-created the christening gown for the babies.  This woman is a member of the family as anyone if not more so.  Yes, Harry, I am referring to you and your sorry wife.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW's PR is working hard. We are supposed to know that they are organizing a b-day party for LiliB* with the cousins…




Yeah, I'd have to RSVP with "So sorry, we made plans a year ago and will be out in the countryside."


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW's PR is working hard. We are supposed to know that they are organizing a b-day party for LiliB* with the cousins…



It's probably just the angle and the lighting, but her face and nose just seem to be widening by the day to me.


----------



## xincinsin

Will any of the cousins be allowed to attend Invisibet's birthday bash, considering N*tflix camera crews will be out in full force?

Maybe they will send a singing telegram.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> It's probably just the angle and the lighting, but her face and nose just seem to be widening by the day to me.
> 
> View attachment 5404885


probably the angle....I'd think if anything she'd be narrowing the nose


----------



## Chanbal

These people have been posting accurate information for a long time, so I wouldn't discard…


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Will any of the cousins be allowed to attend Invisibet's birthday bash, considering N*tflix camera crews will be out in full force?
> 
> Maybe they will send a singing telegram.


I bet the Harkles say that they are having a Zoom BD party for her.  They might try, but no one will be there.  They are all washing their hair.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


>




I doubt he can write


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> I doubt he can write


It was all dictated in a rambling fashion and some poor sod will have to transcribe it.  I am also willing to bet that TW will do the editing on it. Then the lawyers will chop it up.   He won't even know what is in the book until it is published.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> I doubt he can write





gracekelly said:


> It was all dictated in a rambling fashion and some poor sod will have to transcribe it.  I am also willing to bet that TW will do the editing on it. Then the lawyers will chop it up.   He won't even know what is in the book until it is published.


The post below clarifies it all!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> agree, short shorts aren't for wearing out to dinner
> As far as age, IMO if you're 40 and have nice toned or slender legs, to wear them out grocery shopping or somewhere like that is fine.  If you're 70 and have slender legs that have lost their tone and are wrinkly, I think save them for gardening or hanging around the house.
> If you're overweight, same - save them for home.
> 
> As far as Meghan thinking she has great legs - really?  she has toothpick legs



We are on the same page. I was just at a nursery buying some plants and saw a 40ish woman wearing shorts and a T shirt. Perfectly fine for the situation. In fact, I am envious of older women who have nice legs. My shorts wearing days are sadly a thing of the past.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I love that the queen is paying back loyalty


And I'm sure TW is furious that the woman who shot down her tiara request now lives across the hall from the Queen. Lacking self-awareness as she does, I imagine her saying to Hazy "Who does this trashy woman from Liverpool think she is?.


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> I doubt he can write


He can't, that's why the heavy lifting has been done by Pulitzer Prize winning writer J.R. Moehringer.



> https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/...-harry-book-autobiography-memoir-b946683.html


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> He can't, that's why the heavy lifting has been done by Pulitzer Prize winning writer J.R. Moehringer.


I had forgotten about him.  Wonder what he is thinking about having gotten into bed with Harry.  I guess a $ is a $


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I had forgotten about him.  Wonder what he is thinking about having gotten into bed with Harry.  I guess a $ is a $



That's what confuses me. I like money as much as the next person, but I also like to keep my professional reputation and my mental health intact.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> It's probably just the angle and the lighting, but her face and nose just seem to be widening by the day to me.
> 
> View attachment 5404885




Her team forgot the contour kit


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I had forgotten about him.  Wonder what he is thinking about having gotten into bed with Harry.  I guess a $ is a $



Maybe in addition to the money he considered it a challenge to his writing skills. He has to take an unsympathetic character and make him the hero of his book. It will be a spectacular work of fiction.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's what confuses me. I like money as much as the next person, but I also like to keep my professional reputation and my mental health intact.


I think writers like this will just fall back on "what do you want from me, it's not my life, and i am just writing what he tells me."


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> as far as I can tell, Oprah hasn't expressed any regrets - only admiration.  but I suppose actions speak louder than words so we will see whether she has anything to do with these two in the future.  Really if she was honest, she should not be a fan (or a friend) of these entitled brats.  She worked for what she has.  Elevated herself literally from the bottom to the top of society.  Whether you like her or not, she is truly self-made.  Does she treat her staff well?  I don't know.  If she doesn't, that's a negative but you still can't deny her success.


I think I've noted here before that, no .. Oprah has not treated her staff well, but .. I do 100% agree with you on the fact that she is self-made (even her friend Gayle had to rely on Oprah to "up" her position in the work world)!  I'm not sure Oprah would be so 'thrilled' to engage with these two again; HOWEVER .. maybe Gayle might want to (since she seems to fawn over them)!


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> I think I've noted here before that, no .. Oprah has not treated her staff well, but .. I do 100% agree with you on the fact that she is self-made (even her friend Gayle had to rely on Oprah to "up" her position in the work world)!  I'm not sure Oprah would be so 'thrilled' to engage with these two again; HOWEVER .. maybe Gayle might want to (since she seems to fawn over them)!



I have nothing against her, but I recall thinking when Gayle started rising in the TV journalism world that it pays to Oprah's BFF.


----------



## Chloe302225

All of these pap photos on the sidelines of the polo is Kate in the mid 2000's. She really just can't help herself. Kate stays on her mind rent free.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure. What is he going to tell, the story of his overindulged childhood or how the mean Angela Kelly wouldn't let his fiancée play with priceless pieces of jewelry? Who still wants to hear the constant whining?
> 
> ETA: does anyone remember the Yahoo messenger from a million years ago? They had little emoticons that spoke if you inserted them into the message, and my favourite was a butler that looked a bit like a vampire and said in the most bored voice *"Would you like some cheese to go with that whine???"*
> 
> Don't quote me on the details (was it even Yahoo and did the butler look like a vampire? Who cares ).


I don't recall where the quote comes from, but I remember that when any coworker complained a lot, we'd asked them that very question and that was a long time ago.


----------



## charlottawill

Chloe302225 said:


> All of these pap photos on the sidelines of the polo is Kate in the mid 2000's. She really just can't help herself. Kate stays on her mind rent free.



We often refer to her here as a narcissist, but she also has psychopathic traits. Kate is probably glad she no longer has to deal with her. 

"While only 1% of the population meets criteria for psychopathy, many people have traits of the condition. People often think of psychopaths as being murderers and hardened criminals, which is the case for about 20% to 30% of U.S. prisoners. *However, others with psychopathy may stay under the radar and rise to positions of power due to their manipulation, charm and lack of empathy."*


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting interpretation of this picture is provided below…


----------



## Chanbal

Only Hazz is entitled make 'unimaginable money'…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Only Hazz is entitled make 'unimaginable money'…



The Harkles' lack of a coherent message and their phenomenonal hypocrisy is truly amazing. Maybe they change PR strategy the way he changes underwear (I believe it's quite established that she loves her tatty underwear).


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's what confuses me. I like money as much as the next person, but I also like to keep my professional reputation and my mental health intact.


They must have offered A LOT of money, and are counting on riding on his professional reputation to boost sales.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Only Hazz is entitled make 'unimaginable money'…



The hypocrite has apparently forgotten that if a person posted something of any nature on Archewell, it became the property of the site to use as they wish.  That meant you were being sold, your information mined, and your original idea taken from you and then you were thrown away.  Such nice people.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> They must have offered A LOT of money, and are counting on riding on his professional reputation to boost sales.


I wonder if it was the opposite.  The writer negotiated for a percentage of the sales in lieu of a big salary.  He was promised that this would be a blockbuster and people would want to read it.


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s a article about Harry’s ghostwriter. He has experience making famous men sound intelligent and coherent. He’ll have to work very hard to achieve that goal with Harry.



			https://www.lamag.com/culturefiles/prince-harry-ghostwriter/


----------



## CarryOn2020

The movie was *The Tender Bar*. Affleck was the star and Clooney, the director.

The Tender Bar scored 6.7 out of 10 on IMDb.

The Tender Bar scored 51 percent on Rotten Tomatoes.

The Tender Bar scored 53 percent on Metacritic.


74% liked this movie
Google users

*Description*
In 1972, 9-year-old J.R. Maguire moves into his grandfather's dilapidated house in Long Island, N.Y. Searching for a father figure, he falls under the unconventional tutelage of his uncle Charlie, a charismatic, self-educated bartender who introduces him to a handful of the bar's colorful regulars. …
Initial release: October 10, 2021
Director: George Clooney
Starring: Ben Affleck; Tye Sheridan; Lily Rabe; Christopher Lloyd; Daniel Ranieri


----------



## CarryOn2020

Congrats and best wishes to Chels:










						Prince Harry's ex Chelsy Davy and Sam Cutmore-Scott tie the knot
					

EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Chelsy Davy split up with Prince Harry because she didn't want to be a royal bride. But the former City lawyer has not been scared off marriage altogether.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, they want a play date


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The movie was *The Tender Bar*. Affleck was the star and Clooney, the director.
> 
> The Tender Bar scored 6.7 out of 10 on IMDb.
> 
> The Tender Bar scored 51 percent on Rotten Tomatoes.
> 
> The Tender Bar scored 53 percent on Metacritic.
> 
> 
> 74% liked this movie
> Google users
> 
> *Description*
> In 1972, 9-year-old J.R. Maguire moves into his grandfather's dilapidated house in Long Island, N.Y. Searching for a father figure, he falls under the unconventional tutelage of his uncle Charlie, a charismatic, self-educated bartender who introduces him to a handful of the bar's colorful regulars. …
> Initial release: October 10, 2021
> Director: George Clooney
> Starring: Ben Affleck; Tye Sheridan; Lily Rabe; Christopher Lloyd; Daniel Ranieri



I watched it, it was OK.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, they want a play date




I like to think that Charlotte's expression is due to TW's bad acting.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Sure seems like there are plenty of non-fans on Twitter


----------



## CarryOn2020

Must there be a law for every.single.thing?  Seems like someone does not understand parental *responsibility*. 
Don’t we already have laws against violence to children?


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> The hypocrite has apparently forgotten that if a person posted something of any nature on Archewell, it became the property of the site to use as they wish.  That meant you were being sold, your information mined, and your original idea taken from you and then you were thrown away.  Such nice people.


They are counting on their fans not reading the fine print. By the time you realize you've sold your soul, it would be too late. The t&c state clearly that they own you - including your name. Reminds me of the bridal gown designer Hailey Paige. She signed up with a big company and became known for her designs. Only later did she realize that her contract meant the big company owned even her name, and they claimed her personal social media accounts too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Must there be a law for every.single.thing?  Seems like someone does not understand parental *responsibility*.
> Don’t we already have laws against violence to children?



He probably thinks people are looking at him to provide the "strong leadership". I see a wimp who wails when there is public pressure, and who tries to manipulate the laws to line his own pockets.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> They are counting on their fans not reading the fine print. By the time you realize you've sold your soul, it would be too late. The t&c state clearly that they own you - including your name. Reminds me of the bridal gown designer Hailey Paige. She signed up with a big company and became known for her designs. Only later did she realize that her contract meant the big company owned even her name, and they claimed her personal social media accounts too.


You can add Halson, Jill Sander, Thierry Mugler, and John Galliano to that list. Bigger names and it happened to them too.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Strong leadership, TW’s future political career.  Or so they think.

ETA: while I think TW as the Prez is totally delusional, I’m having fun imagining Harry as the First Man (or whatever moniker he would be given).  LOL


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> You can add Halson, Jill Sander, Thierry Mugler, and John Galliano to that list. Bigger names and it happened to them too.


I recall reading somewhere at the time of her death that part of Kate Spade's depression may have been related to the loss of control of her name when she sold her brand.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading somewhere at the time of her death that part of Kate Spade's depression may have been related to the loss of control of her name when she sold her brand.


Maybe the Douchess will jump on that bandwagon - didn't she claim depression and some loss of name whinery? I never understood that since her stans are always shrieking that people disrespect her when they call her Meghan Markle because that is no longer her name. So what exactly is her name now? The Divorcee of SucksSex?


----------



## Chanbal

I hope someone will be able to confirm or deny this. 



Spoiler: Shocking Video


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> I hope someone will be able to confirm or deny this.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Shocking Video




I wouldn't be at all surprised if this were true: those two are capable of anything....


----------



## bag-mania

Love the description in the video, “Harry, a less than intelligent man…”


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised if this were true: those two are capable of anything....





bag-mania said:


> Love the description in the video, “Harry, a less than intelligent man…”


I feel like quoting Prince Philip, "_what the hell are they playing at_?"


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> We are on the same page. I was just at a nursery buying some plants and saw a 40ish woman wearing shorts and a T shirt. Perfectly fine for the situation. In fact, I am envious of older women who have nice legs. My shorts wearing days are sadly a thing of the past.


yes, my days of wearing shorts out and about are done.  I do have to wear them around the house and the property here in summer when it gets hot but that's all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, they want a play date




Charlotte is all of us.



LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5405352



Walkers is my new hero. What a masterpiece of pettiness.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Must there be a law for every.single.thing?  Seems like someone does not understand parental *responsibility*.
> Don’t we already have laws against violence to children?




He is inside in an American house, so probably A/C. WHY IS HE SO RED AND SWEATY.



xincinsin said:


> They are counting on their fans not reading the fine print. By the time you realize you've sold your soul, it would be too late. The t&c state clearly that they own you - including your name. Reminds me of the bridal gown designer Hailey Paige. She signed up with a big company and became known for her designs. Only later did she realize that her contract meant the big company owned even her name, and they claimed her personal social media accounts too.



I so hope she wins that lawsuit or at least part of it. I've followed the saga a bit and I don't understand how some of the stuff - like blocking her from accessing her own Instagram account - is even legal. Also I love her sparkly personality and her Ken doll bf


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He is inside in an American house, so probably A/C. *WHY IS HE SO RED AND SWEATY*.




Embarrassed?!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He is inside in an American house, so probably A/C. WHY IS HE SO RED AND SWEATY.



A ruddy complexion can be a red-headed man’s curse. However, in Harry’s case I think he’s inherited whatever issue makes his father’s face all red.


----------



## Chanbal

Valentine Low has been getting it right for sometime. 














						Queen making unplanned trip to Paddington Station for Elizabeth Line opening
					

This comes weeks before the Queen's Jubilee celebrations




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> A ruddy complexion can be a red-headed man’s curse. However, in Harry’s case I think he’s inherited whatever issue makes his father’s face all red.



But I don't recall him being always red and damp before moving. He looks constantly drunk or something.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

From Daily Express…


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I feel like quoting Prince Philip, "_what the hell are they playing at_?"



Slightly pregnant?  
Now we know why the dolt and his doll keep emphasizing that she is heavily pregnant 8 months out of 9.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Sure seems like there are plenty of non-fans on Twitter



Quote:  "Her favourite pose, *legs apart*!"

It's probably a learned habit from her SoHo House and Yacht Girl days.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But I don't recall him being always red and damp before moving. He looks constantly drunk or something.



Maybe it occurs with age. I don’t remember Charles having a red face when he was younger but he sure has had one for the past several years. I don’t think he drinks too much, although I have no way of knowing for sure.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Maybe it occurs with age. I don’t remember Charles having a red face when he was younger but he sure has had one for the past several years. I don’t think he drinks too much, although I have no way of knowing for sure.


I would think Hazz has been contributing big time to Charles's red face. He suffers from rosacea and stress makes it a lot worse.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> From Daily Express…
> View attachment 5405739



F*ck the Harkles. F*ck Netflix.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I would think Hazz has been contributing big time to Charles's red face. He suffers from rosacea and stress makes it a lot worse.


hard to imagine the position Charles and the queen are in.  Their family problems are also business problems and very public.
Harry has put them in a difficult position.  I see him now as a very spiteful individual with a scheming, super-attention-seeking WIFE.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> From Daily Express…
> View attachment 5405739



I doubt Netflix is going to get anything "behind the scenes" or "exclusive" other than perhaps film of inside Frogmore Cottage.  I say let them film all they want inside Frogmore Cottage. It will likely backfire on them. They whine about everything, yet spent millions on renovations and then spent all of 10 minutes living there. Few people are in the mood for a Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous type tour of that place with its £5,000 copper bath tub. 

As far as them bringing a camera crew to private family events or inside any private living spaces, the Queen isn't going to allow that.  Neither are Charles or William inside their homes. I don't think William will ever allow himself or Kate or his children to be photographed and exploited in any way. I can't imagine any family member would agree to that, other than perhaps Eugenie?  So, no, I don't think there will be much in the way of exclusive, behind-the-scenes footage.  

When they do encounter them, I imagine the family will be extremely polite and speak of absolutely nothing consequential, perhaps an in depth discussion of the weather will occur.


----------



## KellyObsessed

Maggie Muggins said:


> Quote:  "Her favourite pose, *legs apart*!"
> 
> It's probably a learned habit from her SoHo House and Yacht Girl days.


One of my friends is a member of (Toronto) Soho House, and I was there on Sunday for brunch.     There is nothing shady going on, and it's actually a very laid back atmosphere.
Members are encouraged to keep it casual and not dress up, and no cell phones are allowed to be used or photos taken anywhere inside the clubs bar or dining room.
I think all of the "winks and nods" of Soho House as some sort of sex club are very misinformed.
It's a popular club for people who work in the film and music industries, and a place where they can hang out without being hounded or photographed.
It's perfectly reasonable and natural that Meghan would have frequented the club, as either a member or as a guest of a member.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I doubt Netflix is going to get anything "behind the scenes" or "exclusive" other than perhaps film of inside Frogmore Cottage.  I say let them film all they want inside Frogmore Cottage. It will likely backfire on them. They whine about everything, yet spent millions on renovations and then spent all of 10 minutes living there. Few people are in the mood for a Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous type tour of that place with its £5,000 copper bath tub.
> 
> As far as them bringing a camera crew to private family events or inside any private living spaces, the Queen isn't going to allow that.  Neither are Charles or William inside their homes. I don't think William will ever allow himself or Kate or his children to be photographed and exploited in any way. I can't imagine any family member would agree to that, other than perhaps Eugenie?  So, no, I don't think there will be much in the way of exclusive, behind-the-scenes footage.
> 
> When they do encounter them, I imagine the family will be extremely polite and speak of absolutely nothing consequential, perhaps an in depth discussion of the weather will occur.



I’m guessing that the furnishings at Frog Cot belong to Eugenie since she lives there so what are they going to film?  Another person’s belongings?  She has to give permission for that in a perfect world


----------



## gracekelly

KellyObsessed said:


> One of my friends is a member of (Toronto) Soho House, and I was there on Sunday for brunch.     There is nothing shady going on, and it's actually a very laid back atmosphere.
> Members are encouraged to keep it casual and not dress up, and no cell phones are allowed to be used or photos taken anywhere inside the clubs bar or dining room.
> I think all of the "winks and nods" of Soho House as some sort of sex club are very misinformed.
> It's a popular club for people who work in the film and music industries, and a place where they can hang out without being hounded or photographed.
> It's perfectly reasonable and natural that Meghan would have frequented the club, as either a member or as a guest of a member.


I don’t see her wanting to go at all if there are no cell phones and pictures allowed. That would be early death for her. She lives for the camera.


----------



## gracekelly

If there is an absolute ban on Netflix filming,  I see them not going. Netflix is paying for them and their entourage so if they can’t film,  why shoukd NF pick up the tab?


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> If there is an absolute ban on Netflix filming,  I see them not going. Netflix is paying for them and their entourage so if they can’t film,  why shoukd NF pick up the tab?



I guess Netflix can film them moving around, going from one event to another, inside cars, getting in and out of cars, etc.  Seriously though, what a bore, and not exactly what Netflix was expecting when they signed the deal.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Walkers is my new hero. What a masterpiece of pettiness.


It'd be even better if they'd left Haz off too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He is inside in an American house, so probably A/C. WHY IS HE SO RED AND SWEATY.


Maybe he's withdrawing from whatever drugs he's been taking?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I don’t see her wanting to go at all if there are no cell phones and pictures allowed. That would be early death for her. She lives for the camera.



Not now, but when she was single and trying to make it, it was probably the perfect spot to network and look for a guy she could use to advance herself. 

The Marchioness of Bath met her husband at London Soho House (ok, they met when she was a child and he was in his 20s, but they started dating after running into each other there).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> It'd be even better if they'd left Haz off too!



But the burn for Raptor wouldn't be as severe


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I feel like quoting Prince Philip, "_what the hell are they playing at_?"



It's also akin to being "Like a Virgin".


----------



## piperdog

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But I don't recall him being always red and damp before moving. He looks constantly drunk or something.


Maybe he's nervous because he doesn't have all the preparation and support I imagine he had from the Firm before any event or public speaking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> From Daily Express…
> 
> “Away from the public presentation of unity between the brands, *the chiefs want exclusive footage and their dream is to have insights in that royal world never seen before.”*


----------



## Chanbal

One more vote on yes!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> It'd be even better if they'd left Haz off too!


I agree with you, there is no need for Hazz to be there. Though, it's interesting how he is restrained between Will and Camilla, the ones that don't buy into his drama.  





			https://www.selfridges.com/US/en/cat/walkers-royal-family-pure-butter-shortbread-tin-250g_554-84003332-600939/?cm_mmc=PLA-_-GoogleUS-_-FOODHALL-_-WALKERS&POR=Y


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I doubt Netflix is going to get anything "behind the scenes" or "exclusive" other than perhaps film of inside Frogmore Cottage.  I say let them film all they want inside Frogmore Cottage. It will likely backfire on them. They whine about everything, yet spent millions on renovations and then spent all of 10 minutes living there. Few people are in the mood for a Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous type tour of that place with its £5,000 copper bath tub.
> 
> As far as them bringing a camera crew to private family events or inside any private living spaces, the Queen isn't going to allow that.  Neither are Charles or William inside their homes. I don't think William will ever allow himself or Kate or his children to be photographed and exploited in any way. I can't imagine any family member would agree to that, other than perhaps Eugenie?  So, no, I don't think there will be much in the way of exclusive, behind-the-scenes footage.
> 
> When they do encounter them, I imagine the family will be extremely polite and speak of absolutely nothing consequential, perhaps an in depth discussion of the weather will occur.


Awfully chilly this June. Wish I had worn my ski parka and mukluks.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I have nothing against her, but I recall thinking when Gayle started rising in the TV journalism world that it pays to Oprah's BFF.


TOTALLY!!!!  I still remember when she was working in the Hartford, CT News junket .. so she’s come a LONG way from that!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be sure to stop by the BlowDryBar


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5405352



Is that the actual tin? The countdown has begun for people to scream that the cookie company is racist.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> I hope someone will be able to confirm or deny this.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Shocking Video



Alas, both Harry AND Meghan were PAID for their Invictus Games “appearances” .. in addition to the fact that all their expenses were also funded by the Invictus Games foundation (?!?! - not quite sure how to refer to them in this regard).  Hence the reason why the current Invictus Games “head guy” thinks that Harry needs to remove himself.  Amazing that Harry was never “paid” before TW was around!


----------



## charlottawill

KellyObsessed said:


> One of my friends is a member of (Toronto) Soho House, and I was there on Sunday for brunch.     There is nothing shady going on, and it's actually a very laid back atmosphere.
> Members are encouraged to keep it casual and not dress up, and no cell phones are allowed to be used or photos taken anywhere inside the clubs bar or dining room.
> I think all of the "winks and nods" of Soho House as some sort of sex club are very misinformed.
> It's a popular club for people who work in the film and music industries, and a place where they can hang out without being hounded or photographed.
> It's perfectly reasonable and natural that Meghan would have frequented the club, as either a member or as a guest of a member.



I appreciate your insight having actually been there, but I don't think it has been viewed as a sex club here. Rather, that MM used it to make connections with people (men) who could help further her ambitions. Whatever she did or did not do in private is purely speculation. My understanding of the chain is that they appeal to ambitious people looking to network for personal, social and professional reasons.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> One more vote on yes!




Booing is rude, I'd turn my back on them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you, there is no need for Hazz to be there. Though, it's interesting how he is restrained between Will and Camilla, the ones that don't buy into his drama.
> 
> View attachment 5405905
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.selfridges.com/US/en/cat/walkers-royal-family-pure-butter-shortbread-tin-250g_554-84003332-600939/?cm_mmc=PLA-_-GoogleUS-_-FOODHALL-_-WALKERS&POR=Y



They could have put George in the middle and simply said it represents the line of succession. Maybe this really was a subtle dig at MM and they don't give a fig if anyone thinks it is racist. I'd buy it if I saw it in the US. My late mother loved them.


----------



## CeeJay

KellyObsessed said:


> One of my friends is a member of (Toronto) Soho House, and I was there on Sunday for brunch.     There is nothing shady going on, and it's actually a very laid back atmosphere.
> Members are encouraged to keep it casual and not dress up, and no cell phones are allowed to be used or photos taken anywhere inside the clubs bar or dining room.
> I think all of the "winks and nods" of Soho House as some sort of sex club are very misinformed.
> It's a popular club for people who work in the film and music industries, and a place where they can hang out without being hounded or photographed.
> It's perfectly reasonable and natural that Meghan would have frequented the club, as either a member or as a guest of a member.


Well, what you may have seen, was what they (Soho House Toronto) wanted you to see.  When I was living/working in Washington DC, there was a well-known Irish Bar in Georgetown that so many would rave about.  So, one Friday after work, I and some work colleagues decided to go there.  When  I chatted with my Apartment roommate and told her that we were there, she said “why? .. the food isn’t great and the service is spotty at best, there’s really only a few reasons why one would go there ..”.  She was a native (born/raised there), so when I inquired about what she was talking about, she said “oh - I’ll see you there in 15 minutes”. 

When she got there, she said “follow me, and I will show you what I was referring to”. Imagine my HUGE surprise when I follow her to the “back rooms” and upstairs where I then saw (and to this day, wish I could un-see) a VERY SENIOR Senator from New England engaged in various sex acts with multiple women!!!

My point is, that you may not always SEE all that goes on “behind the closed doors” .. and the rumors about the various Soho Clubs have been around for quite a few years.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I’m guessing that the furnishings at Frog Cot belong to Eugenie since she lives there so what are they going to film?  Another person’s belongings?  She has to give permission for that in a perfect world



We know she's close with the Harkles, and if that's where they'll be staying I would not be at all surprised to see Netflix footage from there. But MM would probably want it staged to her liking. You know, like she did with her hugely successful 40 for 40 video. Probably shipping over cases of The Bench. Maybe we'll be treated to more of Harry's juggling.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Well, what you may have seen, was what they (Soho House Toronto) wanted you to see.  When I was living/working in Washington DC, there was a well-known Irish Bar in Georgetown that so many would rave about.  So, one Friday after work, I and some work colleagues decided to go there.  When  I chatted with my Apartment roommate and told her that we were there, she said “why? .. the food isn’t great and the service is spotty at best, there’s really only a few reasons why one would go there ..”.  She was a native (born/raised there), so when I inquired about what she was talking about, she said “oh - I’ll see you there in 15 minutes”.
> 
> When she got there, she said “follow me, and I will show you what I was referring to”. Imagine my HUGE surprise when I follow her to the “back rooms” and upstairs where I then saw (and to this day, wish I could un-see) a VERY SENIOR Senator from New England engaged in various sex acts with multiple women!!!
> 
> My point is, that you may not always SEE all that goes on “behind the closed doors” .. and the rumors about the various Soho Clubs have been around for quite a few years.



Bernie Sanders???


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> It'd be even better if they'd left Haz off too!


Cookie Monster agrees with you and says, " Me love poetry… and cookies!"


----------



## RAINDANCE

Re. the shortbread tin. Are we sure these tins are not from the 60th diamond jubilee in 2012, pre Megan ? Seems odd to me to have Haz on there at all.


----------



## KellyObsessed

Lol, the brunch was very good, although I couldn't order the endless mimosas, because I was driving.
They do encourage young creatives to join, and there were many there.
It's so nice to see young people actually talk and have fun, not with their eyes glued to their phones.
I spotted many LV, and Chanel bags, mainly BB and mini.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Re. the shortbread tin. Are we sure these tins are not from the 60th diamond jubilee in 2012, pre Megan ? Seems odd to me to have Haz on there at all.



Not as fun but makes totally sense. I did think he looked young in the chosen picture.


----------



## Jayne1

duna said:


> I'm half British and love her to bits. I'm much older than you and I have "known" her all my live. I don't want to think how I will feel when she won't be here any more....If I shed bitter tears for Philip's passing, I don't want to know....


I'm like you (much older) in that I've "known" her all my life. 

I'm in Canada and we used to sing God Save The Queen every morning at the start of school.  Her portrait (and Philip's) adorn the walls and her face is on our currency.

Will they change to Charles at some point.  How odd it will look.


----------



## Chanbal

RAINDANCE said:


> Re. the shortbread tin. Are we sure these tins are not from the 60th diamond jubilee in 2012, pre Megan ? Seems odd to me to have Haz on there at all.


The cookies are currently for sale @Selfridges, so they are likely not expired.  



			https://www.selfridges.com/US/en/cat/walkers-royal-family-pure-butter-shortbread-tin-250g_554-84003332-600939/?cm_mmc=PLA-_-GoogleUS-_-FOODHALL-_-WALKERS&POR=Y


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> They could have put George in the middle and simply said it represents the line of succession. Maybe this really was a subtle dig at MM and they don't give a fig if anyone thinks it is racist. I'd buy it if I saw it in the US. My late mother loved them.


I ordered the tin off amazon last night.


----------



## Chanbal

oldbag said:


> I ordered the tin off amazon last night.


Would you provide a link for it? The one I see at Amazon is different (see below). @charlottawill, see if you would prefer this one. 




			https://www.amazon.com/Walkers-Shortbread-Platinum-Jubilee-Limited/dp/B09XXZ8SBX/ref=sr_1_1?crid=33W8X6BPWT6OM&keywords=Jubilee+shortbread+tin+walkers&qid=1652823758&sprefix=jubilee%2Caps%2C112&sr=8-1


----------



## Vintage Leather

Chanbal said:


> Would you provide a link for it? The one I see at Amazon is different (see below). @charlottawill, see if you would prefer this one.
> View attachment 5406036
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Walkers-Shortbread-Platinum-Jubilee-Limited/dp/B09XXZ8SBX/ref=sr_1_1?crid=33W8X6BPWT6OM&keywords=Jubilee+shortbread+tin+walkers&qid=1652823758&sprefix=jubilee%2Caps%2C112&sr=8-1



They have three commemorative boxes this year - and I really do wish that they had George rather than Harry. But I wonder if they couldn’t get licensing rights of the photo because George is not exactly old enough to do official engagements.

In 2012, they also had three tins, but most had a dark colored background, with the Queen in blue holding flowers.

2002 was purple, with a world map and the Queen wearing the Vladimir.

You know, if an economic historian is looking for an idea for a paper, royalty souvenirs and the appearance of opulence would be an interesting topic…


----------



## Chanbal

While I'm not particularly happy by Netfl*x's choice of paying millions of dollars to the entitled Harkles, this is very sad news. 











						Netflix Hit By Layoffs; About 150 Mostly U.S.-Based Employees Affected
					

EXCLUSIVE: Layoffs are underway at Netflix today. About 150 positions out of the streamer’s workforce of 11,000 are being eliminated amid a slowdown in the company’s revenue growth. The…




					deadline.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

oldbag said:


> I ordered the tin off amazon last night.


I think I will get some to have at my Jubilee Tea.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> While I'm not particularly happy by Netfl*x's choice of paying millions of dollars to the entitled Harkles, this is very sad news.
> 
> View attachment 5406071
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Hit By Layoffs; About 150 Mostly U.S.-Based Employees Affected
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Layoffs are underway at Netflix today. About 150 positions out of the streamer’s workforce of 11,000 are being eliminated amid a slowdown in the company’s revenue growth. The…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com


They'd save a lot of money axing the Harkles.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> While I'm not particularly happy by Netfl*x's choice of paying millions of dollars to the entitled Harkles, this is very sad news.
> 
> View attachment 5406071
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Hit By Layoffs; About 150 Mostly U.S.-Based Employees Affected
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Layoffs are underway at Netflix today. About 150 positions out of the streamer’s workforce of 11,000 are being eliminated amid a slowdown in the company’s revenue growth. The…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com


My daughter has a friend who is a lawyer for Netflix, wonder if she's impacted. Relatively recent hire, could be one of the first to go.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> We know she's close with the Harkles, and if that's where they'll be staying I would not be at all surprised to see Netflix footage from there. But MM would probably want it staged to her liking. You know, like she did with her hugely successful 40 for 40 video. Probably shipping over cases of The Bench. Maybe we'll be treated to more of Harry's juggling.



Her fiddle leaf fig and enormous white table is gonna look really bad in the English cottage!




charlottawill said:


> Bernie Sanders???



The Ketchup heirs husband?!


----------



## Chanbal

Oh! Oops, wrong thread!


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> The Ketchup heirs husband?!



isn’t that John Kerry?  He is married to Teresa Heinz who married into the Heinz family.

Sanders’ wife is a college president, I believe.

‘Back to topic - Nflix is only laying off less than 1% of its executives, according to DM.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Her fiddle leaf fig and enormous white table is gonna look really bad in the English cottage!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Ketchup heirs husband?!



 I completely forgot John Kerry. He was in the Senate from 1985-2013 and then Sec of State 2013-2017. He married Teresa Heinz in 1995. It's a good guess but I would think he'd be more circumspect. You never know. My first thought was Ted Kennedy. That story including him wouldn't surprise me at all, but I don't know if the DC Soho House goes back that far.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rrrright. We need more laws. Perhaps something for common sense?



One of the comments - yes, more laws to protect 2 seldom seen children of multimillionaires   

Replying to 
@hrrysgreysuit
Why do something so simple when Harry needs the entire internet put under his control? Please world, his kids need protecting & it's up to us to ask the government to enact laws to see to it even if we have to surrender our rights as parents.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Bernie Sanders???


Ted, the dirty dog. RIP.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Ted, the dirty dog. RIP.


My first thought, but that would have been quite some time ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ewwww.


----------



## octopus17

Jayne1 said:


> I'm like you (much older) in that I've "known" her all my life.
> 
> I'm in Canada and we used to sing God Save The Queen every morning at the start of school.  Her portrait (and Philip's) adorn the walls and her face is on our currency.
> 
> Will they change to Charles at some point.  How odd it will look.


Apparently, with each UK monarch, traditionally they alternate the way they face on coinage, something I've never heard before until recently. Who knew, because I certainly didn't...!?


----------



## xincinsin

Giggle of the day. It appears the gracious grifters will try not to take the spotlight from the Queen.
(They could stay at home and STFU)








						Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Are Working Behind-the-Scenes to Not Draw Focus From Queen Next Month
					

The couple will likely "take part in private celebrations" during the Platinum Jubilee, according to new reports.




					www.sheknows.com


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Giggle of the day. It appears the gracious grifters will try not to take the spotlight from the Queen.
> (They could stay at home and STFU)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Are Working Behind-the-Scenes to Not Draw Focus From Queen Next Month
> 
> 
> The couple will likely "take part in private celebrations" during the Platinum Jubilee, according to new reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sheknows.com



Um, sure, whatever you say 

*As Scobie further explained, the couple was not “cut” from the balcony appearance. Instead, Harry and Meghan felt it would be “inappropriate” for them to be there, as they’re no longer working royals and they want to keep the focus on the queen.*


----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> Would you provide a link for it? The one I see at Amazon is different (see below). @charlottawill, see if you would prefer this one.
> View attachment 5406036
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Walkers-Shortbread-Platinum-Jubilee-Limited/dp/B09XXZ8SBX/ref=sr_1_1?crid=33W8X6BPWT6OM&keywords=Jubilee+shortbread+tin+walkers&qid=1652823758&sprefix=jubilee%2Caps%2C112&sr=8-1


Actually, late at night when I ordered it, this was the tin I saw. I guess I win the doufus award. At least it is mostly the queen. I am sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

According to NS (allegedly), Hazz's visit to QE had the purpose of offering his and his wife's services.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> Um, sure, whatever you say
> 
> *As Scobie further explained, the couple was not “cut” from the balcony appearance. Instead, Harry and Meghan felt it would be “inappropriate” for them to be there, as they’re no longer working royals and they want to keep the focus on the queen.*



Scobie, a source of never ending entertainment and spin.  It was clear from the official press announcement from the BRF that everyone who wasn’t a working royal was cut from the balcony at the Queens request.

What H and M thought of that decision is irrelevant, as the Queen has spoken.


----------



## Sophisticatted

purseinsanity said:


> It'd be even better if they'd left Haz off too!



I prefer a picture of Philip.  If his being deceased prohibits that, then a pic of his walking stick the Queen now carries everywhere.  God know it supports her more than H.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more? 



_Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
_Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._









						Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
					

PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
> 
> 
> PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

So I was checking in over at Purseblog and there is a post about the enduring popularity of the Prada Galleria bag, and I quote:

*"The Prada website describes the Galleria as an “archetype, a neo-classic.”*

Uh oh, Prada is gonna get sued....


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> So I was checking in over at Purseblog and there is a post about the enduring popularity of the Prada Galleria bag, and I quote:
> 
> *"The Prada website describes the Galleria as an “archetype, a neo-classic.”*
> 
> Uh oh, Prada is gonna get sued....


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Maggie Muggins said:


> Cookie Monster agrees with you and says, " Me love poetry… and cookies!"
> View attachment 5406014


I forgot to add that as he toddled off, he merrily sang, "Me sing C for Cookie Monster...Me love milk... Me love cookies...Me love, love, love this blog!"


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
> 
> 
> PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I had to google Aliss Higham, the writer of this hogwash. There was a Twitter comment that she is a very irresponsible writer - this was with regards to another of her articles. She seems to mainly write about finance and economics. Hack for Hire?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
> 
> 
> PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




Believable: Charlotte is a thoughtful child (thanks to her upbringing and having sensible parents).

Unbelievable: Charlotte views Harry as a role model. 

The stories that the Troublesome Duo make up are insane!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Believable: Charlotte is a thoughtful child (thanks to her upbringing and having sensible parents).
> 
> Unbelievable: Charlotte views Harry as a role model.
> 
> The stories that the Troublesome Duo make up are insane!


The next article will be about how Louis learned calligraphy via zoom with auntie TW, and the long letters he writes daily to uncle Hazz…  Rubbish as described below.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Giggle of the day. It appears the gracious grifters will try not to take the spotlight from the Queen.
> (They could stay at home and STFU)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Are Working Behind-the-Scenes to Not Draw Focus From Queen Next Month
> 
> 
> The couple will likely "take part in private celebrations" during the Platinum Jubilee, according to new reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sheknows.com


God, the sheer pompousness and ego of these two!



Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
> 
> 
> PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Oh, yes, sure.  Louis, who was barely 2 when these Haz beens flew the coop.  He's "extremely fond of"...what's his name again...oh yes, Uncle No Hairy.



Maggie Muggins said:


> I forgot to add that as he toddled off, he merrily sang, "Me sing C for Cookie Monster...Me love milk... Me love cookies...Me love, love, love this blog!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

No, it is not the Hermes scarf, but it is available in the USA.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> We know she's close with the Harkles, and if that's where they'll be staying *I would not be at all surprised to see Netflix footage from there.* But MM would probably want it staged to her liking. You know, like she did with her hugely successful 40 for 40 video. Probably shipping over cases of The Bench. Maybe we'll be treated to more of Harry's juggling.


I hope the Suckasses will be too closely watched to sneak Netflix crews into Frogmore Cottage that sits on the private Frogmore Estate and possibly has limited access.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I hope the Suckasses will be too closely watched to sneak Netflix crews into Frogmore Cottage that sits on the private Frogmore Estate and possibly has limited access.



Will all the people fit?  4 for H&M, 3 for Eug, nannies, Nflix crew, minders, etc. It could get tense :stress:


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
> 
> 
> PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


If they included gifts for Auntie, Auntie wouldn't be able to weep on national telly to let the world know how she is being bullied by a 7-year-old girl. "She *_sob_* still bears a grudge over the bridesmaid dress *_pokes eye to produce croc tear_*"

If Oprah doesn't jump at Interview Round 2, maybe Methane will offer that to N*tflix? The way she lies with every breath, controversy is guaranteed.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
> 
> 
> PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I'd say Charlotte's more realistic role model (apart from her parents) is her other, probably more present uncle, James.
As for Louis, I'd say he hardly knows his Uncle Harry given that he wasn't even two when they buggered off to Canada!


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Oh, yes, sure.  Louis, who was barely 2 when these Haz beens flew the coop.  He's "extremely fond of"...what's his name again...oh yes, Uncle No Hairy.


Sorry, didn't read this before I posted similar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I prefer a picture of Philip.  If his being deceased prohibits that, then a pic of his walking stick the Queen now carries everywhere.  God know it supports her more than H.



Oh...I didn't know it was his. That hit me right in the stomach.


----------



## RAINDANCE

oldbag said:


> Actually, late at night when I ordered it, this was the tin I saw. I guess I win the doufus award. At least it is mostly the queen. I am sorry for the confusion.



Yes, makes sense now that it was the diamond (60th) jubilee tin because that was before George was born, so single Haz was #2 in 2012.

I am off to get myself a jubilee mug - bit late so wish me luck ! (or maybe a tea towel ?) I'll report back ...

Back in 2011 for W+K's wedding my daughter's junior school arranged commemorative mugs for all the kids inscribed with the school and date. I usually hate that kind of thing so it lived in the sideboard for a few years and I pulled it out about 6 years ago as we'd had a couple of breakages. I am pleased to report that the W+K mug is going strong despite daily use & dishwasher.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, it is not the Hermes scarf, but it is available in the USA.




I have it, it's adorable and the Queen's dress changes colour every day!

I also got 2 Jubilee mugs from amazon a few months ago.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I hope someone will be able to confirm or deny this.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Shocking Video



Without wishing to get too political for the thread- yes it is true the SA royal family are guilty of ordering torture and execution of dissenters. Yes it is true SA is massacring the Yemenis and yes it is true the SA royal family have strong connections with both Harry himself and the BRF as a whole. I’ve posted before about their efforts in selling weapons to this very country.
.


----------



## Chanbal

Todays's news seems not very favorable to the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

One more parallel has been made to AH.


----------



## jelliedfeels

On a jollier note…

I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more? 
View attachment 5406154


_Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
_Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._









						Adorable way Princess Charlotte keeps in touch with cousins in USA
					

PRINCESS CHARLOTTE has an adorable way of keeping in touch with her uncle Prince Harry and his two children Archie and Lilibet.




					www.express.co.uk
				



[/QUOTE]
Getting over how ridiculous the idea of a little girl picking out gifts for grown men is I’m sure we can all enjoy speculating what the gifts are:-
To uncle Hazzles
1. Rogaine
2. Fountain pen loaded with arsenic 
3. Hobbit-proof socks 
4. denim patches 

To dear cousins….
1. Lemon Cakes with Steel files baked inside 
2. Ladder 

To niece Megs:
1. rhyming dictionary 
2. False tan
3. Bunion plasters 
4. Vladimir tiara (just kidding)


----------



## lanasyogamama

What six year old uses the word “my role model”???? They aren’t even making an effort to make things reasonable or believable at this point.


----------



## Chanbal

Isn't People magazine one of the Harkles' vehicles of communication? It's facing a possible closure. I feel sorry for the employees that may lose their jobs. Hopefully, this will be fixed and the magazine will improve its quality.  

“_The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” the source added…

Sources told The Post that under Wakeford, People had been selling more than 200,000 copies at the newsstand a week. Since then, newsstand sales have been uneven, with a May 2 *Prince Harry cover dipping to about 160,000 copies sold*_*…*









						People’s print magazine faces possible closure amid newsroom chaos: sources
					

“The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” a source said.




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> On a jollier note…
> 
> I wonder how much the Harkles paid for this article!  Apparently, Charlotte sends gifts to uncle and cousins. Do you think if they had included 'gifts for auntie' the article would have cost more?
> View attachment 5406154
> 
> 
> _Prince George, 8, Princess Charlotte, 7, and Prince Louis, 4, are said to be "extremely fond" of their uncle Harry, *one insider told US Weekly*._
> _Princess Charlotte is reportedly particularly thoughtful, and enjoys sending gifts to her uncle and his family.
> The royal insider said: “Charlotte will send everyone in the family thoughtful gifts and cards, and at the very least they’ll call as a family to sing happy birthdays and so on.”
> The middle child of Prince William and Kate Middleton, *Princess Charlotte, “very much” views Prince Harry as one of “her role models", the insider said*._
> 
> Getting over how ridiculous the idea of a little girl picking out gifts for grown men is I’m sure we can all enjoy speculating what the gifts are:-
> To uncle Hazzles
> 1. Rogaine
> 2. Fountain pen loaded with arsenic
> 3. Hobbit-proof socks
> 4. denim patches
> 
> To dear cousins….
> 1. Lemon Cakes with Steel files baked inside
> 2. Ladder
> 
> To niece Megs:
> 1. rhyming dictionary
> 2. False tan
> 3. Bunion plasters
> 4. Vladimir tiara (just kidding)



I think kids should be left out of the Harkles' propaganda. If I were Kate, I would make sure my kids would be under the care of grandmother (mother's side) immediately after attending any official Jubilee celebration. I would pick them up after the Harkles's plane landed at LAX, just in case…


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Isn't People magazine one of the Harkles' vehicles of communication? It's facing a possible closure. I feel sorry for the employees that may lose their jobs. Hopefully, this will be fixed and the magazine will improve its quality.
> 
> “_The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” the source added…
> 
> Sources told The Post that under Wakeford, People had been selling more than 200,000 copies at the newsstand a week. Since then, newsstand sales have been uneven, with a May 2 *Prince Harry cover dipping to about 160,000 copies sold*_*…*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People’s print magazine faces possible closure amid newsroom chaos: sources
> 
> 
> “The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” a source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Reading this article is fascinating. I do agree that we may have been robbed of a brill car crash of an interview with Jada (can you imagine?) but perhaps it’s not really the Ed’s fault as the boss might not be willing to pay for Jada or the big stories. I mean let’s be honest I’m sure it’s not that expensive to interview Steve irwin’s daughter and you get a cute baby thrown in!  
I would also add Jada tells everyone everything anyway the real killer interview would be with Chris Rock then double down with Johnny Depo and a campaign on male victims of violence

Add on- the shade to poor Lizzo- it seems she has definitely had her 15 mins. No one cares about this corporate love-yourself stuff. Now if they were interviewing her during deliveroo-gate that’d be funny. I feel like they need to go full on hatchet job on these celebs, especially the Harkles because that seems to be what we all want especially judging the 2 best selling covers are two big time guys in career free fall


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will all the people fit?  4 for H&M, 3 for Eug, nannies, Nflix crew, minders, etc. It could get tense :stress:



But that's what they want. Reality TV a la The Bachelorette or RH.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Isn't People magazine one of the Harkles' vehicles of communication? It's facing a possible closure. I feel sorry for the employees that may lose their jobs. Hopefully, this will be fixed and the magazine will improve its quality.
> 
> “_The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” the source added…
> 
> Sources told The Post that under Wakeford, People had been selling more than 200,000 copies at the newsstand a week. Since then, newsstand sales have been uneven, with a May 2 *Prince Harry cover dipping to about 160,000 copies sold*_*…*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People’s print magazine faces possible closure amid newsroom chaos: sources
> 
> 
> “The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” a source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Like many magazines, it's also becoming obsolete due to the internet. We had a subscription when my daughter was at home, or I'd buy it at the airport, but I can't remember the last time I bought one. They are Harkle friendly, but they have always tended toward non-controversial coverage.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Isn't People magazine one of the Harkles' vehicles of communication? It's facing a possible closure. I feel sorry for the employees that may lose their jobs. Hopefully, this will be fixed and the magazine will improve its quality.
> 
> “_The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” the source added…
> 
> Sources told The Post that under Wakeford, People had been selling more than 200,000 copies at the newsstand a week. Since then, newsstand sales have been uneven, with a May 2 *Prince Harry cover dipping to about 160,000 copies sold*_*…*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People’s print magazine faces possible closure amid newsroom chaos: sources
> 
> 
> “The new editor doesn’t know what she’s doing. Staff in the editorial meetings are texting each other and rolling their eyes when she talks,” a source said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Hopefully, it means fewer future covers featuring Hazbeen. Hate getting stuck in check out lines at the supermarket when his nasty mug is in the magazine rack near the cash register and unavoidable.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder who is behind this!



_A spokesperson for Groupe Cerise, which owns Oh My Mag, told Newsweek: "*This story is indeed false and has been published by accident.* We are taking it down momentarily."_









						Prince William and Kate Middleton false break-up story spreads
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton show no signs of separating and the unfounded gossip was originally published by mistake, Newsweek has been told.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How do you write and publish a whole page by accident?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> One more parallel has been made to AH.




At least MM was open about it, unlike the FL bride who with her caterer's help put it in the food without the guests' knowledge.



> https://nypost.com/2022/04/20/florida-bride-caterer-arrested-for-lacing-food-with-weed/


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> One more parallel has been made to AH.





Hahaha! Those are some wedding favors that guests would actually take and enjoy   But I thought this was not a big secret that Meghan had weed at that wedding? 

I know opinions on this will vary, but there are drugs and there's marijuana. I have never in my entire life seen marijuana make anyone crazy or aggressive. Unless you define getting aggressive with snacking or crazy as ordering door dash Taco Bell and paying too much for fast food.

I'm a cancer patient and use it, so I speak from experience. 

I wonder what Amber's drug menu consisted of?


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Hahaha! Those are some wedding favors that guests would actually take and enjoy   But I thought this was not a big secret that Meghan had weed at that wedding?
> 
> I know opinions on this will vary, but there are drugs and there's marijuana. I have never in my entire life seen marijuana make anyone crazy or aggressive. Unless you define getting aggressive with snacking or crazy as ordering door dash Taco Bell and paying too much for fast food.
> 
> I'm a cancer patient and use it, so I speak from experience.
> 
> I wonder what Amber's drug menu consisted of?



The likely candidates would be the party drugs Ecstasy, Molly, and Special K.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, it is not the Hermes scarf, but it is available in the USA.



THANK YOU without your post I probably would have missed this,
instead, mine is on it’s way.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, it is not the Hermes scarf, but it is available in the USA.





csshopper said:


> THANK YOU without your post I probably would have missed this,
> instead, mine is on it’s way.


The watch is so cute, thanks for posting it @CarryOn2020. Congrats @csshopper for getting one, please share a pic with us when you will have a chance.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> The likely candidates would be the party drugs Ecstasy, Molly, and Special K.



I've never seen X and K make people aggressive. Molly came on the scene well after my party days. But those are some heavy party favors!


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Hahaha! Those are some wedding favors that guests would actually take and enjoy   But I thought this was not a big secret that Meghan had weed at that wedding?
> 
> I know opinions on this will vary, but there are drugs and there's marijuana. I have never in my entire life seen marijuana make anyone crazy or aggressive. Unless you define getting aggressive with snacking or crazy as ordering door dash Taco Bell and paying too much for fast food.
> 
> I'm a cancer patient and use it, so I speak from experience.
> 
> I wonder what Amber's drug menu consisted of?



Old story from 2018 - MM’s pot use is well known, so it makes sense she ‘served’ at her wedding. TM has spoken about his use, too. 









						Meghan Markle's nephew is a cannabis farmer
					

Meghan Markle's nephew Tyler Dooley is focused on the millions of dollars’ worth of marijuana he is helping to grow. The 25-year-old boasts of his pride at being a ‘pioneer’ in an industry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Old story from 2018 - MM’s pot use is well known
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's nephew is a cannabis farmer
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's nephew Tyler Dooley is focused on the millions of dollars’ worth of marijuana he is helping to grow. The 25-year-old boasts of his pride at being a ‘pioneer’ in an industry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I was looking for the Markle Sparkle strain but couldn't find it. Good for him for finding a way to make a little cash off of her name


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kate with Sophie and Ed - gorgeous


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> I completely forgot John Kerry. He was in the Senate from 1985-2013 and then Sec of State 2013-2017. He married Teresa Heinz in 1995. It's a good guess but I would think he'd be more circumspect. You never know. My first thought was Ted Kennedy. That story including him wouldn't surprise me at all, but I don't know if the DC Soho House goes back that far.


Ooooooh - are you referring to what I had written about the Irish Bar in Georgetown?


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> Um, sure, whatever you say
> 
> *As Scobie further explained, the couple was not “cut” from the balcony appearance. Instead, Harry and Meghan felt it would be “inappropriate” for them to be there, as they’re no longer working royals and they want to keep the focus on the queen.*


Oh for cripes sake, this man will need even more nose jobs than Meghan with his CONSTANT Pinocchio lying!


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooh - are you referring to what I had written about the Irish Bar in Georgetown?


Yes ma’am! Am I possibly correct?


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes ma’am! Am I possibly correct?


Yup - 100%!!!


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> Yup - 100%!!!


Ted or JK???????


----------



## csshopper

Not trying to highjack this thread, but it is wonderful to see Prince Edward have a more prominent role in the RF. Love seeing him with the Queen in their recent outings. He seems more relaxed and assured as time goes on, a real asset to the Royals especially with his gracious and beautiful wife at his side. They and Kate made a powerful trio as Garden Party hosts, the Queen must be proud.

HUGE contrast to cranky Hazbeen and his dumpy Duchess, who show none of that kind of class.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay said:


> Yup - 100%!!!



Well that sure beats my story of him sitting across from me at Logan once!



Aimee3 said:


> Ted or JK???????


JK


----------



## csshopper

Found this on line while searching for something else, I had forgotten this disrespectfully tacky appearance of Raptor. She really is disgusting compared to Kate, Anne, Camilla, and Sophie. Even the lesser members of the RF, Zara, Beatrice Lady Louise understand protocol and being respectfully dressed.

Raptor looked like she found a rag on the doorstop and threw it on prior to entering the Auwal Mosque in Cape Town, where she and Haz visited during a Tour in 2019. Which of course, makes this even more insulting as she would have known it was on the schedule and would have been briefed about appropriate head covering. Edited to say: sorry for the large picture, tried to post the thumbnail version, but too late. Makes it even worse to have her this big in our faces. 
Sorr


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Ooooooh - are you referring to what I had written about the Irish Bar in Georgetown?


My first thought was Ted K but I thought that would have been too long ago. I didn't know how old the DC club is. Kerry?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Found this on line while searching for something else, I had forgotten this disrespectfully tacky appearance of Raptor. She really is disgusting compared to Kate, Anne, Camilla, and Sophie. Even the lesser members of the RF, Zara, Beatrice Lady Louise understand protocol and being respectfully dressed.
> 
> Raptor looked like she found a rag on the doorstop and threw it on prior to entering the Auwal Mosque in Cape Town, where she and Haz visited during a Tour in 2019. Which of course, makes this even more insulting as she would have known it was on the schedule and would have been briefed about appropriate head covering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5406671


I would not be surprised if she thinks her appearance makes her more relatable or approachable to the masses, when in fact she is generally just a hot mess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Found this on line while searching for something else, I had forgotten this disrespectfully tacky appearance of Raptor. She really is disgusting compared to Kate, Anne, Camilla, and Sophie. Even the lesser members of the RF, Zara, Beatrice Lady Louise understand protocol and being respectfully dressed.
> 
> Raptor looked like she found a rag on the doorstop and threw it on prior to entering the Auwal Mosque in Cape Town, where she and Haz visited during a Tour in 2019. Which of course, makes this even more insulting as she would have known it was on the schedule and would have been briefed about appropriate head covering.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5406671



I usually roll my eyes at her poor style, but this blatantly sloppy, disrespectful look seriously offended me and does to this day (and no, I'm not Muslim). I feel it completely sums up why she couldn't make it in the BRF, besides her obvious jealousy of Kate and her position: the arrogance, the disregard for others, the defiance.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Yup - 100%!!!


Genuinely shocked, and that doesn't happen much these days. We know Ted was a horn dog but I've never heard a whiff of scandal about Kerry. Have we opened a can of worms here? Time for a new thread?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I would not be surprised if she thinks her appearance makes her more relatable or approachable to the masses, when in fact she is generally just a hot mess.



It's ok to take 2 mins to brush your hair!


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not as fun but makes totally sense. I did think he looked young in the chosen picture.


It's the actual tin - I just got one


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's ok to take 2 mins to brush your hair!



I don't want to judge others' hair too harshly as I have pretty unruly hair. If I were in a hot humid climate it would be a mess pretty quickly. I'd let her hair slide if she had picked a better outfit. For all her attempts at Diana cosplay she dropped the ball on this one. She looks like a street urchin.



> https://www.today.com/style/meghan-...a-headscarf-during-south-africa-visit-t163257


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I don't want to judge others' hair too harshly as I have pretty unruly hair. If I were in a hot humid climate it would be a mess pretty quickly. I'd let her hair slide if she had picked a better outfit. For all her attempts at Diana cosplay she dropped the ball on this one. She looks like a street urchin.



Fair enough, but also...who in their right mind would wear near waistlength hair flowing under their poor attempt at hijab? Normal people would put it up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> It's the actual tin - I just got one
> View attachment 5406704



The Walkers website has this one (which would make much more sense, but it would make me very happy if yours was indeed the real deal):


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's ok to take 2 mins to brush your hair!


Or whoever’s hair it is on your head!!!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fair enough, but also...who in their right mind would wear near waistlength hair flowing under their poor attempt at hijab? Normal people would put it up.


Well we know she's not normal so....but we also know she's mastered the messy bun with wings.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Walkers website has this one (which would make much more sense, but it would make me very happy if yours was indeed the real deal):
> 
> View attachment 5406706


My aunt in the UK sent it last week to my Mom.  I'm sure they have different versions, and to be honest, my Mom never noticed that TW was missing until I pointed it out to her (I love this site!)


----------



## xeyes

Cornflower Blue said:


> Apparently, with each UK monarch, traditionally they alternate the way they face on coinage, something I've never heard before until recently. Who knew, because I certainly didn't...!?



This tradition led to one of the many instances of Edward VIII annoying the Establishment during his brief reign. George V faced left on his coin, so, it was expected that his son would face right on his coin. However, Edward VIII insisted on facing left, too - he thought his left profile looked better than his right. So, his coin was designed with him facing left. (Reference here .)


----------



## charlottawill

xeyes said:


> This tradition led to one of the many instances of Edward VIII annoying the Establishment during his brief reign. George V faced left on his coin, so, it was expected that his son would face right on his coin. However, Edward VIII insisted on facing left, too - he thought his left profile looked better than his right. So, his coin was designed with him facing left. (Reference here .)


It seems that Hazy shares the egotistical tendency to break with long standing royal protocol just like his great great uncle.


----------



## xeyes

charlottawill said:


> It seems that Hazy shares the egotistical tendency to break with long standing royal protocol just like his great great uncle.



As folks here have observed, they do seem to have a lot in common (as do their wives)...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems to be no end to their desperation -
*Prince Harry and Meghan are filming an 'at-home with the Sussexes-style' docuseries for struggling Netflix as part of their $100 million streaming deal, sources claim - so will it see them drop even more royal bombshells?*

*Page Six reports that the Sussexes are filming a docuseries and have let cameras into their $14m Montecito home; it is unclear if Archie and Lilibet were filmed*
*The publication quoted a 'producer in the know' who said that 'the timing is still being discussed' but that Netflix chiefs want it to be ready for the end of 2022 *
*According to the insiders, executives at the streaming site want the series to be released around the same time as 37-year-old Harry's upcoming memoir *
*The docuseries claims will no doubt prompt serious concern at Buckingham Palace over what further allegations they could air against royal family*
*It comes shortly after Netflix axed 40-year-old Meghan's animated series Pearl amid major cutbacks as a result of plummeting revenue and loss of subscribers*
*Prince Harry has already sparked fears about what details he could include in his memoir, with experts suggesting it will 'shake the monarchy to its core' *









						Are Harry and Meghan filming 'at-home docuseries' for Netflix?
					

Page Six reports that Meghan and Harry are filming docuseries for Netflix, for which cameras into their $14m Montecito home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to be no end to their desperation -
> *Prince Harry and Meghan are filming an 'at-home with the Sussexes-style' docuseries for struggling Netflix as part of their $100 million streaming deal, sources claim - so will it see them drop even more royal bombshells?*
> 
> *Page Six reports that the Sussexes are filming a docuseries and have let cameras into their $14m Montecito home; it is unclear if Archie and Lilibet were filmed*
> *The publication quoted a 'producer in the know' who said that 'the timing is still being discussed' but that Netflix chiefs want it to be ready for the end of 2022 *
> *According to the insiders, executives at the streaming site want the series to be released around the same time as 37-year-old Harry's upcoming memoir *
> *The docuseries claims will no doubt prompt serious concern at Buckingham Palace over what further allegations they could air against royal family*
> *It comes shortly after Netflix axed 40-year-old Meghan's animated series Pearl amid major cutbacks as a result of plummeting revenue and loss of subscribers*
> *Prince Harry has already sparked fears about what details he could include in his memoir, with experts suggesting it will 'shake the monarchy to its core' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan filming 'at-home docuseries' for Netflix?
> 
> 
> Page Six reports that Meghan and Harry are filming docuseries for Netflix, for which cameras into their $14m Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ooh..... As much as I hate to admit this - I would actually consider watching this train wreck. I bet the kids are in it - that's why we haven't seen them: They need that paycheck from Netflix and Netflix will want an exclusive.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> Here she is again. Note that in both sets of pics, no one is else is wearing short shorts. The shorts would be fine if she was walking on the beach, but they do not seem appropriate for the pitch. Of course her fan club thinks she looks great.



They work so hard.   Hah.   Every working parent /professional I know works after normal hours and on weekends often—particularly with young children whose school runs, activities and needs take up hours. JCMH and his parasite


xincinsin said:


> Giggle of the day. It appears the gracious grifters will try not to take the spotlight from the Queen.
> (They could stay at home and STFU)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Are Working Behind-the-Scenes to Not Draw Focus From Queen Next Month
> 
> 
> The couple will likely "take part in private celebrations" during the Platinum Jubilee, according to new reports.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sheknows.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/he





LittleStar88 said:


> Ooh..... As much as I hate to admit this - I would actually consider watching this train wreck. I bet the kids are in it - that's why we haven't seen them: They need that paycheck from Netflix and Netflix will want an exclusive.
> 
> View attachment 5406853


Not I, count me out.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Ooh..... As much as I hate to admit this - I would actually consider watching this train wreck. I bet the kids are in it - that's why we haven't seen them: They need that paycheck from Netflix and Netflix will want an exclusive.
> 
> View attachment 5406853


But if it gets good ratings we may be stuck with them indefinitely. Do you want them to become the new Kardashians?


----------



## CarryOn2020

They are too old, too cranky, too un-original to be the ‘new Kardashian’s’ imo

When I saw her white shorts, it never occurred to me that she was cosplaying Diana.  Not even close.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Too hypocritical to play in the big leagues, imo


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to be no end to their desperation -
> *Prince Harry and Meghan are filming an 'at-home with the Sussexes-style' docuseries for struggling Netflix as part of their $100 million streaming deal, sources claim - so will it see them drop even more royal bombshells?*
> 
> *Page Six reports that the Sussexes are filming a docuseries and have let cameras into their $14m Montecito home; it is unclear if Archie and Lilibet were filmed*
> *The publication quoted a 'producer in the know' who said that 'the timing is still being discussed' but that Netflix chiefs want it to be ready for the end of 2022 *
> *According to the insiders, executives at the streaming site want the series to be released around the same time as 37-year-old Harry's upcoming memoir *
> *The docuseries claims will no doubt prompt serious concern at Buckingham Palace over what further allegations they could air against royal family*
> *It comes shortly after Netflix axed 40-year-old Meghan's animated series Pearl amid major cutbacks as a result of plummeting revenue and loss of subscribers*
> *Prince Harry has already sparked fears about what details he could include in his memoir, with experts suggesting it will 'shake the monarchy to its core' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan filming 'at-home docuseries' for Netflix?
> 
> 
> Page Six reports that Meghan and Harry are filming docuseries for Netflix, for which cameras into their $14m Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Just a few of the comments on there :

"A reality show is what it is. How downmarket. Will we see fights with the neighbors? Vodka-fueled house parties? Meghan dirty dancing with her bodyguards?"

"I would rather watch paint dry than see anything those entitled grifters are involved in. They are shameful."

"At home" doing what? Feeding the chickens? Learning calligraphy? Posing for black and white pictures? Stalking the Royals and telling Omid what to say? Why would anyone want to watch them at home?"

"A Counsellor of State is now a reality star."

*"Selling Our Souls with the Sussexes" *

I'm sure Andy Cohen is kicking himself that Netflix beat him to the punch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Three-year-old tours care homes as 'mini Queen' in run-up to Jubilee
					

She's perfected her royal wave.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Too hypocritical to play in the big leagues, imo




 

*"Essentially they are splitting hairs. There will be a fly-on-the-wall series but obviously it won't be warts and all, or about their personal life.

"They are very keen to highlight their worthy charity work and cameras will film them going from one good cause to another. For example, when they drop food off at food banks - a camera will be there to capture it.*

Sounds like another Netflix flop


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> *"Essentially they are splitting hairs. There will be a fly-on-the-wall series but obviously it won't be warts and all, or about their personal life.
> 
> "They are very keen to highlight their worthy charity work and cameras will film them going from one good cause to another. For example, when they drop food off at food banks - a camera will be there to capture it.*
> 
> Sounds like another Netflix flop



Sounds like a vanity project for their egos.  No one is going to watch if she is just going to act like they have a perfect life…


----------



## needlv

Yes.  Spot on.  We all predicted eventually this would have to be what they “sell” ( besides MM reopening her blog and possibly a line of cosmetics or cheap jewellery on the shopping channels).  And they must be desperate for money…



From Royalty to Kardashians. How classless and trashy they have become.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Sounds like a vanity project for their egos.  No one is going to watch if she is just going to act like they have a perfect life…



People will only tune in to see the house and the kids, and after that if there's no dirt they'll lose interest.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> People will only tune in to see the house and the kids, and after that if there's no dirt they'll lose interest.



Even if it was a little dirt I am not sure I will tune in because of her word salads and/or monologues / preaching where she thinks she can lecture everyone from her superior point of view.  Actually that applies for both H and M.

I will just wait for the Daily mail to review…And their comments section is always a source of comedic relief.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> But if it gets good ratings we may be stuck with them indefinitely. Do you want them to become the new Kardashians?



I’ll watch for the ugly cry!


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ll watch for the ugly cry!
> 
> View attachment 5406925



By Hazy?


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> *"Selling Our Souls with the Sussexes" *


I vote for this!

Maybe we will find out that Methane reads The Stench to her (alleged) children every night while her soulmate MA dandles them on his knee. Perhaps they will gatecrash parties. Methane will bake! Or the Netflix cam will catch footage of her weeping in bed and waking Hazard up!


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Ooh..... As much as I hate to admit this - I would actually consider watching this train wreck. I bet the kids are in it - that's why we haven't seen them: They need that paycheck from Netflix and Netflix will want an exclusive.
> 
> View attachment 5406853


Nothing could make me watch this or listen to her irritating voice.


----------



## altigirl88

Will they be called Mardashians?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> "Or the Netflix cam will catch footage of her weeping in bed and waking Hazard up!"


My money is on it being the other way around


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Ooh..... As much as I hate to admit this - I would actually consider watching this train wreck. I bet the kids are in it - that's why we haven't seen them: They need that paycheck from Netflix and Netflix will want an exclusive.





charlottawill said:


> But if it gets good ratings we may be stuck with them indefinitely. Do you want them to become the new Kardashians?





charlottawill said:


> People will only tune in to see the house and the kids, and after that if there's no dirt they'll lose interest.


Wow, we have big news today! I don't want to be stuck with them indefinitely, so I'll not give them views. I'll read DM instead.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

_It’s Keeping Up with the Sussexes_! It's almost an impossible task.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xeyes said:


> As folks here have observed, they do seem to have a lot in common (as do their wives)...



At least Wallis could dress an had manners.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to be no end to their desperation -
> *Prince Harry and Meghan are filming an 'at-home with the Sussexes-style' docuseries for struggling Netflix as part of their $100 million streaming deal, sources claim - so will it see them drop even more royal bombshells?*
> 
> *Page Six reports that the Sussexes are filming a docuseries and have let cameras into their $14m Montecito home; it is unclear if Archie and Lilibet were filmed*
> *The publication quoted a 'producer in the know' who said that 'the timing is still being discussed' but that Netflix chiefs want it to be ready for the end of 2022 *
> *According to the insiders, executives at the streaming site want the series to be released around the same time as 37-year-old Harry's upcoming memoir *
> *The docuseries claims will no doubt prompt serious concern at Buckingham Palace over what further allegations they could air against royal family*
> *It comes shortly after Netflix axed 40-year-old Meghan's animated series Pearl amid major cutbacks as a result of plummeting revenue and loss of subscribers*
> *Prince Harry has already sparked fears about what details he could include in his memoir, with experts suggesting it will 'shake the monarchy to its core' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan filming 'at-home docuseries' for Netflix?
> 
> 
> Page Six reports that Meghan and Harry are filming docuseries for Netflix, for which cameras into their $14m Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



   So...private. The Real Royals of Montecito!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> "A Counsellor of State is now a reality star."



OMG. They really need to remove him and forget he ever existed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's ok to take 2 mins to brush your hair!


Especially when you apparently fly people in from America TO DO your hair and you are surrounded by servants all day long.  


CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to be no end to their desperation -
> *Prince Harry and Meghan are filming an 'at-home with the Sussexes-style' docuseries for struggling Netflix as part of their $100 million streaming deal, sources claim - so will it see them drop even more royal bombshells?*
> 
> *Page Six reports that the Sussexes are filming a docuseries and have let cameras into their $14m Montecito home; it is unclear if Archie and Lilibet were filmed*
> *The publication quoted a 'producer in the know' who said that 'the timing is still being discussed' but that Netflix chiefs want it to be ready for the end of 2022 *
> *According to the insiders, executives at the streaming site want the series to be released around the same time as 37-year-old Harry's upcoming memoir *
> *The docuseries claims will no doubt prompt serious concern at Buckingham Palace over what further allegations they could air against royal family*
> *It comes shortly after Netflix axed 40-year-old Meghan's animated series Pearl amid major cutbacks as a result of plummeting revenue and loss of subscribers*
> *Prince Harry has already sparked fears about what details he could include in his memoir, with experts suggesting it will 'shake the monarchy to its core' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan filming 'at-home docuseries' for Netflix?
> 
> 
> Page Six reports that Meghan and Harry are filming docuseries for Netflix, for which cameras into their $14m Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Finally, the real housewife of Versailles is upon us!
it’s been 2 years they must’ve thought to film some of this footage already.

We will see if anything turns up, it’s been a whole lot of announcements and ‘production hell’ and very little content so far.

I feel a bit like the resident Scrooge of the thread but I am just irritated by all this jubilee excess. I don’t see why a simple church ceremony and a bank holiday can’t be enough. It just seems tacky and immoral the sheer amounts they are spending on pointless pageantry after Covid and with the vast majority of Brits hit by the rising cost of living. Just seems out of touch and fake to me - they can write about how frugal Will is in his Zara suit but I’m going to remember the millions spent on restoring the gilded carriage they drove for 3 hours.

I’m sure they’d love to use the tourism line but with fewer people travelling in the covid aftermath that old excuse just seems even lamer. Not to mention, in my experience the average tourist makes Macdonald’s and Starbucks lots of money and doesn’t really give a lot to British business.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So...private. The Real Royals of Montecito!





QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. They really need to remove him and forget he ever existed.


----------



## xincinsin

Whoop dee do... They are still hiring at Archewell.




__





						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Just Landed a Major New Archewell Hire
					

Ashley Momtaheni is set to lead global communications at the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable foundation.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				




If she is in charge of global comms, does that equate to global spin?
Her father seems to be a maxillofacial surgeon. Maybe Methane can get a discount.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m still baffled how any one with real credentials is willing to take a job with them.  Money?  It pays well?  

Are these new hires even real people or just actors with made up internet histories?


----------



## GilaBag

Actually went to Selfridges yesterday and this is the tin currently on sale.





oops.. how do i make it the correct way around?


----------



## 1LV

I know, I know. Juvenile.


----------



## lanasyogamama

GilaBag said:


> Actually went to Selfridges yesterday and this is the tin currently on sale.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5407234
> 
> 
> oops.. how do i make it the correct way around?


I’m annoyed she’s included


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

1LV said:


> I know, I know. Juvenile.
> 
> View attachment 5407239


Walkers has not been reading the room.  Wonder how many months/years in advance this was designed?


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m annoyed she’s included



I'm annoyed that they're both included. Walker's should have put the black bars over their eyes since they are "publicity shy".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Here we go   The Daily Star knows how to do it right.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, why would they include the non-working royals?  
Or maybe he is a working royal after all.


----------



## Chanbal

GilaBag said:


> Actually went to Selfridges yesterday and this is the tin currently on sale.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5407234
> 
> 
> oops.. how do i make it the correct way around?


They will likely end up on sale at the right store.


----------



## Chanbal

Warning: messages of belated congratulations are anticipated…


----------



## 1LV

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Walkers has not been reading the room.  Wonder how many months/years in advance this was designed?


Hmmm… Good question. The hat is from 2018.  Surely it didn’t take four years to design and produce the tin.


----------



## Chanbal

This is likely Richard Eden's thoughtful wedding anniversary gift.


----------



## Chanbal

The Telegraph is also in celebration mode. 


*Timing of broadcast 'up in the air'*
_Netflix is said to want to release the docuseries in the autumn to coincide with the book release but the Sussexes reportedly want to hold it until next year.
A producer told Page Six: “The timing is still being discussed, things are up in the air.”
A well-placed Hollywood insider added: “*I think it’s fair to say that Netflix is getting its pound of flesh*.”_





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I have nothing against her, but I recall thinking when Gayle started rising in the TV journalism world that it pays to Oprah's BFF.


she was mainly O's BFF for many years before she got the CBS job.  So, while I don't like the fawning over H&M, I'm willing to give her credit for working to get where she is.  Not saying being O's friend didn't factor in at all but O didn't work for CBS.


----------



## Chanbal

*Not my idea*, it was borrowed from some other site. 

A Markle's reunion with TM finally hugging his grandkids and dear son in law would provide a great show for Netfl*x and $$$$.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> They will likely end up on sale at the right store.




A package deal along with a copy of The Bench.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> A package deal along with a copy of The Bench.


----------



## Chanbal

Yummy, the Walkers can complement the banquet.


----------



## gracekelly

People who want a private life ALWAYS invite cameras into their home. I don’t think you will see more than the chicken coop and two rooms. The rest of the house is unfurnished.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

None of these slides are friendly or even benevolent.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> The watch is so cute, thanks for posting it @CarryOn2020. Congrats @csshopper for getting one, please share a pic with us when you will have a chance.



I posted many pictures of the watch in this thread, but I have no idea where they are, I try and look for them....

Oops sorry, not in this thread, in the Queen's Jubilee thread.





__





						The Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II
					

The other side of the coin.  I got it through our library - it is next up after I finish Andre Leon Talley’s book, which I am really enjoying.   Thanks my dear:heart: Actually I'd love to read ALT's book aswell, could you give me the title of that aswell please? Thanks Hon:hugs:




					forum.purseblog.com
				




Posts 157, 158, 159.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that like audio versions!


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> But if it gets good ratings we may be stuck with them indefinitely. *Do you want them to become the new Kardashians? *



Yes!! That is exactly what I want. I need to see them as a cheap knockoff wannabe Kardashian copy.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she was mainly O's BFF for many years before she got the CBS job.  So, while I don't like the fawning over H&M, I'm willing to give her credit for working to get where she is.  Not saying being O's friend didn't factor in at all but O didn't work for CBS.


I know O didn't work for CBS and Gayle is certainly accomplished in her own right, but I believe her profile got a big boost by association with O. I thought her professionalism and composure in her interview with R. Kelly was remarkable.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I know O didn't work for CBS and Gayle is certainly accomplished in her own right, but I believe her profile got a big boost by association with O. I thought her professionalism and composure in her interview with R. Kelly was remarkable.


I agree she got exposure from being O's friend.  But not sure it was that beneficial.  It did give her recognition but in a way, it made her seem like some sort of hanger-on.  and there were quite a few snide remarks about Gayle going places rather than Stedman.  That R Kelly interview was huge for her.  After that she was referred to as the crown jewel of CBS news (or CBS morning) - by the head of news I think it was.
The association with H&M not so much for me but guess it didn't really hurt her.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> People who want a private life ALWAYS invite cameras into their home. I don’t think you will see more than the chicken coop and two rooms. The rest of the house is unfurnished.


Agree. Plus, to a certain extent, Netflix is already late to the game, this was published a year ago. The furnishing source list is interesting. I have purchased items from several of these vendors so am not knocking them, but not what one might expect in a Royal abode. The monotone look, seen again recently in one of 6's videos, will not make for interesting viewing. If I recall the original real estate listing had pictures of the interior as it existed when purchased and there were some hideous, IMO, rooms including one of the bathrooms. Wonder if they will shoot in the entire house and will include any "left-overs" that remain?

*Shop the Look of Meghan Markle's Clean and Cozy Workspace*
https://www.architecturaldigest.com/gallery/shop-look-meghan-markles-clean-cozy-workspace - 755k - Cached - Similar pages 
Aug 4, 2021 *...* Jute Boucle Rug, 6' x 9' · Couture Chair · Faux Fiddle Leaf Fig Tree · 55-inch Brass Harbormaster Telescope · 17th C. Priory Rectangular Dining ...


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> "but not what one might expect in a Royal abode."


They're faux royals anyway. I expected her to go the RH/PB/Ballard/WE/C&B route. To be clear, I have nothing against any of them, I shop all of them. But I doubt any interior designer who values their reputation and sanity would want to work with her. They're also pricey, so Megs probably thumbed through lots of issues of AD and cobbled together her own look, just as she does with her wardrobe.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG is this true? I was already unsettled from the face malfunction and didn't pay attention.


----------



## mellibelly

oops wrong thread. Sorry not sorry! I hear the last of the dishes breaking at the Olive Garden mansion


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG is this true? I was already unsettled from the face malfunction and didn't pay attention.



She did.  And she shoved herself in front of him at events, butted into his conversations and pushed him on his back to move like a puppet. All of it very rude.   I think he must love playing polo because it is the only time he control something even if it is only a horse.


----------



## mellibelly

I love William’s velvet jacket and slippers. Meanwhile Harry looks stinky and sloppy at every event he attends.


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> oops wrong thread. Sorry not sorry! I hear the last of the dishes breaking at the Olive Garden mansion



There is something Lady Diana like about this gown.  Very minimalist and stunning.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## LittleStar88

mellibelly said:


> View attachment 5407806



BOOM!

She looks AMAZING in this dress. Her figure is on fire!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> *She did.*  And she shoved herself in front of him at events, butted into his conversations and pushed him on his back to move like a puppet. All of it very rude.   I think he must love playing polo because it is the only time he control something even if it is only a horse.



Who does this. She must have been really desperate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> View attachment 5407806



WOW.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

And Tina Brown thinks the royal family needs the “star power” of the Harkles to survive


----------



## MiniMabel

LittleStar88 said:


> BOOM!
> 
> She looks AMAZING in this dress. Her figure is on fire!




Agreed!  It's a little long because I'd like to see some pretty shoes but she has a phenomenal figure; kudos to her for keeping so healthy and in shape....it's not easy! They really are a lovely couple.


----------



## csshopper

The Sussex one: Dumb, Dumber, Dumbest Duke on earth. A Netflix home invasion is not the an$wer to their problems.

Re: them becoming Kardashianistic, It will be completely oblivious to him, because he is dense as a brick, but the the Dumb one should pay close attention to the K family femaie/male dynamic on display. Kris is always in charge, Corey trailing in her wake, maybe at her side, but never appearing to lead; Scott reduced to begging to be included in family gatherings, throwing tantrums when thwarted, and the only male blood member of the group, Rob, admitting to abuse by his girlfriend and appearing to suffer from low self esteem. 

(I may have missed something, I have only ever watched one episode so have "kept up" with the Kardashians via voluminous headlines, unavoidable pictures, video clips, and show promos over the years.)

Likely it's only going to take one, maybe two episodes of any Netflix SuckUp series until, any audience other than their stans, figures out this script has already been played for years by a larger cast with a lot more going on than what's being recorded in Montecito and will tune out. 

There could be an up side to this, maybe the Titles and the Counselor of State designation will FINALLY be removed, it is l o n g 
o v e r d u e.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

At this point I think the BRF should have cut them out cold turkey after the Oprah interview. Who cares about a few stans crying wolf...never complain, never explain.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> View attachment 5407806



Kate slays once again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh I adore that man


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> Agreed!  It's a little long because I'd like to see some pretty shoes but she has a phenomenal figure; kudos to her for keeping so healthy and in shape....it's not easy! They really are a lovely couple.



I'd trip for sure in that. She is always so graceful.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> The Sussex one: Dumb, Dumber, Dumbest Duke on earth. A Netflix home invasion is not the an$wer to their problems.
> 
> Re: them becoming Kardashianistic, It will be completely oblivious to him, because he is dense as a brick, but the the Dumb one should pay close attention to the K family femaie/male dynamic on display. Kris is always in charge, Corey trailing in her wake, maybe at her side, but never appearing to lead; Scott reduced to begging to be included in family gatherings, throwing tantrums when thwarted, and the only male blood member of the group, Rob, admitting to abuse by his girlfriend and appearing to suffer from low self esteem.
> 
> (I may have missed something, I have only ever watched one episode so have "kept up" with the Kardashians via voluminous headlines, unavoidable pictures, video clips, and show promos over the years.)
> 
> Likely it's only going to take one, maybe two episodes of any Netflix SuckUp series until, any audience other than their stans, figures out this script has already been played for years by a larger cast with a lot more going on than what's being recorded in Montecito and will tune out.
> 
> There could be an up side to this, maybe the Titles and the Counselor of State designation will FINALLY be removed, it is l o n g
> o v e r d u e.


The best part is that Harry said being part of the Royal Family was like being in The Truman Show.  What does he think this is going to be like?


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Too hypocritical to play in the big leagues, imo



For a couple who fled the UK for privacy, you have to ask *why* would you want to show the world "the real me"?  I mean, who cares?  If you want privacy, then stay away from cameras.  It's amusing to me that they ran from the supposedly racist UK, to the non-racist, non-tabloid USA


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least Wallis could dress an had manners.


And she never went before cameras to badmouth the BRF.  Give her credit, she was dignified for the rest of her life.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

gracekelly said:


> The best part is that Harry said being part of the Royal Family was like being in The Truman Show.  What does he think this is going to be like?


He doesn’t think. Combined with dumb, he not only needs a minder, he needs a leash and a muzzle.


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> He doesn’t think. Combined with dumb, he not only needs a minder, he needs a leash and a muzzle.



You never know what goes on behind closed doors in Montecito. That's the kind of stuff Netflix bosses dream of.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> The best part is that Harry said being part of the Royal Family was like being in The Truman Show.  What does he think this is going to be like?


He’s the Truman show! I wonder if he even has an IQ.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, Kate did it again!!! 


mellibelly said:


> I love William’s velvet jacket and slippers. Meanwhile Harry looks stinky and sloppy at every event he attends.
> View attachment 5407791


----------



## csshopper

The former* Z* list actress with roles including acting out oral sex in the front seat of a car, must be incandescent with RAGE to see her stunning sister-in-law, the ever elegant and gracious Duchess of Cambridge, being escorted by her handsome husband, the future King AND being gallantly assisted by *A* List Super Star Tom Cruise taking her hand as she ascends the stairs on their way to the Gala Premier. 

Bet Tom's is one hand Raptor would not shove aside.  Not that she's likely to ever have the opportunity. Given his glowing  tribute to the Queen during his Jubilee performance and his very cordial interactions with the Cambridge's, it does not seem likely he would voluntarily give the Suckesses any notice given their treatment of the RF. 

Horribly ironic Raptor maneuvered an exit to CA hoping to hob nob with A listers, and instead two of them came to London paying court to her nemesis. Raptor probably hasn't forgotten, as much as she'd like to, the previous Premiere where Daniel Craig, definitely* A *List also, took one look at The Duchess of Cambridge and remarked "You look jolly lovely."

Having seen examples of the ugly face when the mask slips, mirrors may be breaking under the strain of reflection in Montecito today.

*Meghan Markle is seen performing sex act in a CAR on 90210*
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowb...Markle-seen-performing-sex-act-CAR-90210.html - Cached - Similar pages 
Mar 13, 2017 *...* But her latest *role* revelation might make the Royal family cringe, as it's been discovered that she once appeared in a very raunchy scene that ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that like audio versions!



Sheesh .. I guess I will have to contact this guy (via Twitter, which I don't really use and don't really like), that 'B'-List is super-duper generous of him as she is a Z-LIST (even lower than that, but what's after 'Z')?!?!?


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> The Sussex one: Dumb, Dumber, Dumbest Duke on earth. A Netflix home invasion is not the an$wer to their problems.
> 
> Re: them becoming Kardashianistic, It will be completely oblivious to him, because he is dense as a brick, but the the Dumb one should pay close attention to the K family femaie/male dynamic on display. Kris is always in charge, Corey trailing in her wake, maybe at her side, but never appearing to lead; Scott reduced to begging to be included in family gatherings, throwing tantrums when thwarted, and the only male blood member of the group, Rob, admitting to abuse by his girlfriend and appearing to suffer from low self esteem.
> 
> (I may have missed something, I have only ever watched one episode so have "kept up" with the Kardashians via voluminous headlines, unavoidable pictures, video clips, and show promos over the years.)
> 
> Likely it's only going to take one, maybe two episodes of any Netflix SuckUp series until, any audience other than their stans, figures out this script has already been played for years by a larger cast with a lot more going on than what's being recorded in Montecito and will tune out.
> 
> There could be an up side to this, maybe the Titles and the Counselor of State designation will FINALLY be removed, it is l o n g
> o v e r d u e.


When I saw this 'blurb' on the Daily Fail, I thought "well, well, well .. talk about *DESPERATION*"!!!!!!!  Obviously, Netflix is pressuring them to get their pound of flesh .. but, boy-oh-boy .. they are now going to be CONSTANTLY reminded of their *INCREDIBLE NEED FOR SECURITY* .. what happened to that???  What happened to Hazza's anxiety re: flashing cameras (oh wait - this will be a FILM device, not the click-click-click of a photographer's camera); and then what about the children?? .. are they going to be on the show or is Megalomaniac going to continue (like hell) to get top-dollar $$$$$$ for any pictures of them?????  

Not that I have any plans whatsoever in watching this (heck - I canceled Netflix the minute I heard that they had signed up these two jackasses), but this should be V-E-R-Y interesting and I'm sure that Meghan is going to continue to bash the BRF which will then be more opportunity for everyone to see each LIE dealt with!  

Also - so, her Father (who funded her since she was born) .. he doesn't get an invite to her house or even to meet the children; what is he going to do?? .. watch the show?!?!?!  

Get that popcorn ready!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Have Will's shoes been shared here? It must have been a very special wedding anniversary celebration today in Montecito!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Have Will's shoes been shared here? It must have been a very special wedding anniversary celebration today in Montecito!




But IIRC TW doesn't look at social media.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## mellibelly

Has anyone ever seen this old pic of Nutmeg on a BENCH with her legs spread the width of said bench!? 
Guys, she wants to be our next president LMFAO


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> But IIRC TW doesn't look at social media.


I bet the Harkles don't miss a single article from DM.   



_*The Duchess of Cambridge channelled her inner Hollywood A-lister *as she joined Prince William at the Top Gun: Maverick premiere in London on Thursday night.

Kate, 40, looked radiant in an off-the-shoulder Roland Mouret column gown, £2,300 Alexander McQueen clutch and £10,500 Robinson Pelham diamond star earrings as she made her glamorous entrance on the red carpet.

Meanwhile Prince William, 39, demonstrated his sartorial flair in a midnight blue Alexander McQueen velvet dinner jacket, tuxedo trousers and velvet slippers embroidered with miniature fighter jets in a nod to the film._









						Dazzling Kate Middleton joins William at Top Gun: Maverick premiere
					

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge joined leading man Tom Cruise and his co-star Jennifer Connelly at the glitzy gala showing in London's Leicester Square.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Have Will's shoes been shared here? It must have been a very special wedding anniversary celebration today in Montecito!




Hold up, didn’t they get married 3 days before the ‘spectacle’?  Ya know, they wanted their private ceremony.  Hazzie just sat there and went along with the entire lie. Shameful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tonight’s gown stands out from the rest, and I thought the Oscar gown was a stand-out.  She consistently delights us


----------



## CarryOn2020

The future King and Queen:


The continual Disaster Duo:


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, this is good!


----------



## Chanbal

Some valid points here!


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


>



I know it's kind of mean, but I LOL'ed for real!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The future King and Queen:
> 
> 
> The continual Disaster Duo:
> View attachment 5408091



This gown certainly hugged her in all the right places.  Pippa who??


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *I know it's kind of mean*, but I LOL'ed for real!



Kind of mean? See this…I've no further comments.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Kind of mean? See this…I've no further comments.
> View attachment 5408154


Ok, which one of you is calling yourselves methanemarkle on IG???


----------



## jelliedfeels

1LV said:


> Hmmm… Good question. The hat is from 2018.  Surely it didn’t take four years to design and produce the tin.


I don’t know this for sure but given there’s so many designs could they just be printing the new jubilee lettering on unused tins they had made for the last royal commemoration? I mean this company makes a lot of Queen themed tins - I wouldn’t be surprised if they had a few left over. Or it could be they released different designs in US/U.K./Canada. 


mellibelly said:


> oops wrong thread. Sorry not sorry! I hear the last of the dishes breaking at the Olive Garden mansion



Not the Olive Garden mansion! Soup of the day CD is Pasta Hazfool. 
Her make up is the best yet. She looks much much better than I think a top gun sequel is going to be   


gracekelly said:


> The best part is that Harry said being part of the Royal Family was like being in The Truman Show.  What does he think this is going to be like?


The really funny thing is I think the real problem was royal life wasn’t *enough* like the Truman show. In that he wasn’t the beloved protagonist of a world built around him. I think H&M would love that. 


mellibelly said:


>



I must say the much maligned 00s bubble hem look actually looks better on M’s frame than a lot of her later dresses where she’s trying to put an apple in an hourglass. The innate tackiness of most 00s trends are also a natural match for her- she just needs to get some long, square, nude acrylic tips, very sticky clear lipgloss  and a Von Dutch hat.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Have Will's shoes been shared here? It must have been a very special wedding anniversary celebration today in Montecito!



Just reminding 'everyone' who really is the Top Gun, lol


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hold up, didn’t they get married 3 days before the ‘spectacle’?  Ya know, they wanted their private ceremony.  Hazzie just sat there and went along with the entire lie. Shameful.




Rewatching this portion of the O interview really pisses me off. The nerve for her to say that the church wedding (I refuse to call it a royal wedding because there's nothing royal about these parasites) was a spectacle for the world when it cost the taxpayers and BRF a lot of money. 

Given that Harry is just #6, they could have just gone with a close friends and family only wedding but of course as much a spectacle as the Leech claimed it to be, she still wanted their wedding to rival Will and Kate's wedding, or more like the Leech was hoping it would be leaps and bounds better. 

On hindsight, I personally wish that the Queen and Charles would have put their foot down and limit the size of the budget and wedding unless Harry and the Leech want to pay for all the extras themselves.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m not sure if this will load, but Michael Rappaport skewered the two of them on the Wendy Williams show. He goes between calling them Megan and Harry Markle and calling him Harry Ballgame. Finally he ends by saying that H went from being a real prince to a real housewife


----------



## Chanbal

LA Times reporting on the upcoming "_juicier_" reality show.  


_Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, are reportedly working on a “juicier” docuseries for Netflix about their life at home in Montecito, Calif._









						So, a Harry and Meghan reality series on Netflix could be happening after all?
					

After initially denying it, Prince Harry and wife Meghan are reportedly working on a Netflix docuseries that would show them in Montecito, Calif.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who does this. She must have been really desperate.


I think she is just really bossy and wants to be first in line for everything


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Logistical difficulties_???  


*Sadiq Khan snubs Harry and Meghan to avoid getting drawn into royal 'civil war': London Mayor turns down invite to couple's £11m Montecito mansion while on US tour days before he was due to see William and the Queen*

*Sussexes made offer after they had to turn down Mayor's invitation to be the star guests at his glitzy LA party *
*However, Mr Khan turned the offer down due to 'logistical difficulties' - apparently including a busy schedule*
*Likely the Mayor - a friend of Prince William - would want to avoid being drawn into Royal Family's 'civil war' *
*Meghan and Harry sent three aides to party, held on Tuesday last week, including Archewell boss James Holt*









						Harry and Meghan secretly invited Sadiq Khan to their £11m mansion
					

The Sussexes made the offer after they had to turn down his invitation to be the star guests at a glitzy party hosted by the Mayor of London in Los Angeles during his 'vanity' trip to the US last week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

One of the articles of the day by Alexander Larman, cheers!



_Picture the convivial scene. You have been invited into the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s palatial £11 million mansion in Montecito, California as an honoured guest.

Once you have removed your shoes, been frisked for weapons or recording devices and been offered a kombucha smoothie, you are ushered into the inner sanctum of the world’s most talked-about satellite branch of the royal family. What would you expect to find? A dartboard with Prince Charles’s face on it? Endless piles of obscure genealogical books that explain why Prince Harry is, in fact, the rightful heir to the throne? Or endless expensive, studiedly tasteful rooms that lack any heart and soul whatsoever?

Harry and Meghan’s day-to-day lives may only be of marginal interest to most people, but Netflix remains convinced that their multi-million dollar investment in the couple has to be repaid somehow. It has therefore not come as a complete surprise that the usually well-sourced American gossip website Page Six has broken the story that Netflix will be getting – in their words – their ‘pound of flesh’ by filming the lives of the duo for an ‘at home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style docuseries’.

Netflix have already sent their cameras to the Netherlands to film Harry’s antics there, but it has now been suggested that they have been filming both at the couple’s home and on a visit to New York last September, during which Meghan addressed the Global Citizen Live event: something that did nothing to dispel growing rumours that she is interested in getting more involved in American politics.

If the story is correct, then there is some tension as to when the show will be broadcast. Given that Harry is publishing his much-anticipated, ghost-written memoir in September, Page Six has suggested that Netflix would want the programme to air then, but that the *Sussexes would prefer the show to appear on the service in 2023*. A kind interpretation of this is that they would not wish the Netflix series to overshadow the book; *a more cynical one is that this delay ensures their continued presence in the news cycle for at least the next year, and probably beyond.

Whenever it does air, it is hard to know what to expect. Netflix’s commercial relationship with the dynamic duo means that any programme is likely to portray them in the best possible light – they would almost certainly be offered full editorial approval – and it could end up being as tiresome and hagiographic as last year’s notorious Oprah Winfrey interview.*

Yet it is also likely, given their willingness to pick fights with virtually anyone in sight, that the show will contain their unfiltered thoughts on the various ructions in the royal family, whether it’s Prince Andrew settling his case with Virginia Giuffre, the persistent rumours about the Queen’s ill-health and what Charles’s ambitions for his reign – and potential regency – really are. And if this appears, further damaging headlines are inevitable.

*It has been suggested that Netflix has tired of the Sussexes, like many of the other big corporations that were desperate to court them when they first moved to California in 2020. *The recent cancellation of Meghan’s animated series Pearl, about a 12-year old girl who was inspired by strong historical women, for ‘cost-cutting purposes’, seemed a polite way of severing a relationship that has so far produced little of lasting value for either party. But *if this story is correct, and Netflix’s steadily declining subscriber base is to be treated to an intimate account of life with the world’s most committed attention seekers*, *then viewers can sit back, pour ourselves a collective glass of Sauvignon Blanc *and await the latest instalment in a soap opera that continues to overshadow virtually everything else monarchical in this Jubilee year._



			https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/will-anyone-watch-harry-and-meghan-s-netflix-docuseries-:lol
		

:


----------



## Chanbal

The "_juicier_" reality show was written in the stars a while ago…


----------



## lanasyogamama

I won’t give them views on Nflix, I’m sure I’ll get everything from DM and TikTok.


----------



## Aimee3

I can’t imagine a more boring show.  Neither of them lead exciting lives…they only wish they did.  
Now if that were a show about the Cambridge’s lives, it would be a must see.   Imagine Catherine meeting with dress designers and seamstresses to see how they choose and expertly tailor her clothes!


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Has anyone ever seen this old pic of Nutmeg on a BENCH with her legs spread the width of said bench!?
> Guys, she wants to be our next president LMFAO
> View attachment 5408059



She's really proud of those toothpicks isn't she?


----------



## LittleStar88

I would be all-in if it were Real Housewives-like with drunken table-flipping and hot, salty tears of regret.

But it is sounding about as exciting as a lumpy old bowl of tapioca.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The way I think it will go is this: NetFlix will flatter them and pretend to be filming them in their finest moments. Meanwhile, they will keep the cameras rolling and the public will be shown the “excess” footage/“b side” stuff.  Highly edited for the nastiest, most salacious moments.  It will be “maskless Meghan” viciously ranting and raving, and dumb Harry looking really, really stupid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The "_juicier_" reality show was written in the stars a while ago…
> 
> View attachment 5408358



I hate to say I told you so, but....MM looks at the Kardashian/Jenner empire and visions of riches dance in her head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Logistical difficulties_???
> 
> 
> *Sadiq Khan snubs Harry and Meghan to avoid getting drawn into royal 'civil war': London Mayor turns down invite to couple's £11m Montecito mansion while on US tour days before he was due to see William and the Queen*
> 
> *Sussexes made offer after they had to turn down Mayor's invitation to be the star guests at his glitzy LA party *
> *However, Mr Khan turned the offer down due to 'logistical difficulties' - apparently including a busy schedule*
> *Likely the Mayor - a friend of Prince William - would want to avoid being drawn into Royal Family's 'civil war' *
> *Meghan and Harry sent three aides to party, held on Tuesday last week, including Archewell boss James Holt*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan secretly invited Sadiq Khan to their £11m mansion
> 
> 
> The Sussexes made the offer after they had to turn down his invitation to be the star guests at a glitzy party hosted by the Mayor of London in Los Angeles during his 'vanity' trip to the US last week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If he was to pick sides, why did he invite them, though?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If he was to pick sides, why did he invite them, though?


I wondered the same


----------



## redney

They turned down being star guests at a ritzy LA party? Yeah, right.


----------



## V0N1B2

redney said:


> They turned down being star guests at a ritzy LA party? Yeah, right.


Right? Harry’s good friend James Corden was there. I’m pretty sure there were MUCH bigger stars in attendance than these two phonies. 
Besides, wasn’t the mayor’s trip to California focused on learning about California cannabis laws &  legalization? I wonder if the pot factory he toured had any Markle Sparkle.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> One of the articles of the day by Alexander Larman, cheers!
> View attachment 5408341
> 
> 
> _Picture the convivial scene. You have been invited into the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s palatial £11 million mansion in Montecito, California as an honoured guest.
> 
> Once you have removed your shoes, been frisked for weapons or recording devices and been offered a kombucha smoothie, you are ushered into the inner sanctum of the world’s most talked-about satellite branch of the royal family. What would you expect to find? A dartboard with Prince Charles’s face on it? Endless piles of obscure genealogical books that explain why Prince Harry is, in fact, the rightful heir to the throne? Or endless expensive, studiedly tasteful rooms that lack any heart and soul whatsoever?
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s day-to-day lives may only be of marginal interest to most people, but Netflix remains convinced that their multi-million dollar investment in the couple has to be repaid somehow. It has therefore not come as a complete surprise that the usually well-sourced American gossip website Page Six has broken the story that Netflix will be getting – in their words – their ‘pound of flesh’ by filming the lives of the duo for an ‘at home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style docuseries’.
> 
> Netflix have already sent their cameras to the Netherlands to film Harry’s antics there, but it has now been suggested that they have been filming both at the couple’s home and on a visit to New York last September, during which Meghan addressed the Global Citizen Live event: something that did nothing to dispel growing rumours that she is interested in getting more involved in American politics.
> 
> If the story is correct, then there is some tension as to when the show will be broadcast. Given that Harry is publishing his much-anticipated, ghost-written memoir in September, Page Six has suggested that Netflix would want the programme to air then, but that the *Sussexes would prefer the show to appear on the service in 2023*. A kind interpretation of this is that they would not wish the Netflix series to overshadow the book; *a more cynical one is that this delay ensures their continued presence in the news cycle for at least the next year, and probably beyond.
> 
> Whenever it does air, it is hard to know what to expect. Netflix’s commercial relationship with the dynamic duo means that any programme is likely to portray them in the best possible light – they would almost certainly be offered full editorial approval – and it could end up being as tiresome and hagiographic as last year’s notorious Oprah Winfrey interview.*
> 
> Yet it is also likely, given their willingness to pick fights with virtually anyone in sight, that the show will contain their unfiltered thoughts on the various ructions in the royal family, whether it’s Prince Andrew settling his case with Virginia Giuffre, the persistent rumours about the Queen’s ill-health and what Charles’s ambitions for his reign – and potential regency – really are. And if this appears, further damaging headlines are inevitable.
> 
> *It has been suggested that Netflix has tired of the Sussexes, like many of the other big corporations that were desperate to court them when they first moved to California in 2020. *The recent cancellation of Meghan’s animated series Pearl, about a 12-year old girl who was inspired by strong historical women, for ‘cost-cutting purposes’, seemed a polite way of severing a relationship that has so far produced little of lasting value for either party. But *if this story is correct, and Netflix’s steadily declining subscriber base is to be treated to an intimate account of life with the world’s most committed attention seekers*, *then viewers can sit back, pour ourselves a collective glass of Sauvignon Blanc *and await the latest instalment in a soap opera that continues to overshadow virtually everything else monarchical in this Jubilee year._
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/will-anyone-watch-harry-and-meghan-s-netflix-docuseries-:lol
> 
> 
> :




See underlined.  I had to read this description twice....and then thrice; surely nothing could be further from the truth!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Umm even Channing Tatum's Sparkella is better than Pearl


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Rewatching this portion of the O interview really pisses me off. The nerve for her to say that the church wedding (I refuse to call it a royal wedding because there's nothing royal about these parasites) was a spectacle for the world when it cost the taxpayers and BRF a lot of money.
> 
> Given that Harry is just #6, they could have just gone with a close friends and family only wedding but of course as much a spectacle as the Leech claimed it to be, she still wanted their wedding to rival Will and Kate's wedding, or more like the Leech was hoping it would be leaps and bounds better.
> 
> On hindsight, I personally wish that the Queen and Charles would have put their foot down and limit the size of the budget and wedding unless Harry and the Leech want to pay for all the extras themselves.


Beatrice had the right idea - beautiful intimate wedding, very low key.  Eugenie on the other hand went for the spectacle, but she and Harry seem to be cut from the same cloth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Beatrice had the right idea - beautiful intimate wedding, very low key.  Eugenie on the other hand went for the spectacle, but she and Harry seem to be cut from the same cloth.



I personally would have loved a pandemic wedding as an excuse to keep the guest list really small...I hate being the center of attention.


----------



## Lodpah

Daniela Elser: Meghan and Harry's Netflix show sees them pass the point of no return - NZ Herald
					

OPINION: Let's call a spade a spade - the Duke and Duchess are doing a reality TV show.




					www.nzherald.co.nz


----------



## jennlt

Sophisticatted said:


> The way I think it will go is this: NetFlix will flatter them and pretend to be filming them in their finest moments. Meanwhile, they will keep the cameras rolling and the public will be shown the “excess” footage/“b side” stuff.  Highly edited for the nastiest, most salacious moments.  It will be “maskless Meghan” viciously ranting and raving, and dumb Harry looking really, really stupid.



I hope Netflix does something super shady like playing the sound of a toilet flushing 19 times each episode to represent the manifold hypocrisy of the fauxmanitarian eco-warriors and their enormous carbon footprint of a house.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> See underlined.  I had to read this description twice....and then thrice; surely nothing could be further from the truth!



It had a sarcastic tone to me.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm even Channing Tatum's Sparkella is better than Pearl




He has a young daughter and may have gotten her input when writing the book, a NYT bestseller, unlike MM who just wrote some preachy nonsense without benefit of any parental experience.


----------



## CeeJay

charlottawill said:


> He has a young daughter and may have gotten her input when writing the book, a NYT bestseller, unlike MM who just wrote some preachy nonsense without benefit of any parental experience.


.. but, but, but .. you have to remember *WHO THE BOOK WAS ABOUT*!!!!!!!  It was about *HER *(_apparently, her nickname when she was a lot younger_) and the just *AMAZING*, *WONDERFUL*, *INCREDIBLE *(_blah, blah, blah - puke_ ) child she was and what a marvelous (= *INSIGNIFICANT 'IT'*) became!


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> It had a sarcastic tone to me.


That’s what I thought as well. Tongue in cheek?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> *I hate to say I told you so*, but....MM looks at the Kardashian/Jenner empire and visions of riches dance in her head.


You and @harrysgreysuit


----------



## Chanbal

SM's team on this one!


----------



## Chanbal

Oh! It looks like they are indeed (allegedly) selling the kid's pictures.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh! It looks like they are indeed (allegedly) selling the kid's pictures.




This makes me wonder if it was in the contract all along that they couldn't sell pictures of the kids to other outlets. It would explain their being kept under wraps for so long.


----------



## LittleStar88

One of the wealthiest enclaves in California is uninsurable against wildfires
					

Here's how the celebrity-studded enclave of Montecito braces for wildfire season.




					www.sfgate.com
				




As for how much it actually costs the luminaries who call Montecito home, McDermut says that can “change day-to-day.” *Meghan and Harry’s house, for example, cost $14.7 million when the Sussexes bought it in June 2020 from Russian oligarch Sergey Grishin. McDermut says it’s “impossible to speculate” what the Sussexes or any individual property owner pays for insurance — and a particular rate, if one can be had at all, depends on the timing and where, specifically, the property is on the map.*

Real estate agent Guehr says he just sold a $12 million house, and the buyers secured a $160,000 per year insurance plan. McDermut says she has a client who found out this week they will pay $45,000 per year on a “modest” home that was insured previously for $8,000. Both say that if the individual pays cash, as high-profile, high-net worth buyers usually do, policy details are rarely revealed. “Many take on the risk themselves,” Guehr says. “Literally every case is its own unique thing.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This makes me wonder if it was in the contract all along that they couldn't sell pictures of the kids to other outlets. It would explain their being kept under wraps for so long.



Indeed, and it is just gross. Then to mask it as guarding their privacy!

Give me William's and Kate's approach with a few pictures each year that buy the kids a normal life for the rest of the time any day.


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> *Netflix have played them like a Stradivarius voilin*.


Oh puhleeze .. Netflix have "played" them?!!??!!?!, but wait .. they are FAR TOO INTELLIGENT to have that happen to them (_mega-sarcasm here_)!!!  

Nope, H&M "thought" that *they* had played Netflix and that they could simply get by with their "names" and merching their crap with their "half-in/half-out" theory!  I'm having a very hearty laughing session (_with myself_) right now because they deserve every ounce of the "back-at-'ya" that Netflix is paying them!  

Meanwhile, in a discussion with a good friend (who is in the Entertainment biz and knows quite a few folks at NF), as most of you have likely heard, NF just laid off a fair amount of staff (many of who NF have said were at the Executive level).  Well, according to my friends, they have laid off a LOT of their "woke" staff, so things are going to get REALLY interesting because they are NOT going to put up with any word salad BS from Meghan and that they have pretty much told H&M that if they think that they are going to be allowed to "Edit" with impunity, think again!!!  Ooooooh-oooooooh-oooooooh, so it's entirely possible that we are going to see the two of them truly un-masked al 'a the Duke & Duchess of Windsor Part II!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm even Channing Tatum's Sparkella is better than Pearl



Nice idea but what have they done to that handsome man? He looks like a sad turtle.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally would have loved a pandemic wedding as an excuse to keep the guest list really small...I hate being the center of attention.


You can have whatever type of wedding you want whenever. Most People really do forget the wedding the day after it’s happened and if they are a bit upset at no invite they will get over it. Why make yourself miserable and spend all that money if it’s not what you want?


jennlt said:


> I hope Netflix does something super shady like playing the sound of a toilet flushing 19 times each episode to represent the manifold hypocrisy of the fauxmanitarian eco-warriors and their enormous carbon footprint of a house.


I expect the full foley board of funny sound effects to be out in force- disappointment trumpet will be MVP


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> This makes me wonder if it was in the contract all along that they couldn't sell pictures of the kids to other outlets. It would explain their being kept under wraps for so long.


To my understanding, they have a multi-million dollar deal with Nefl*x and have delivered nothing of importance so far. So Netfl*x has the right to demand 'material' and those kids' pictures are part of it. Allegedly, of course!


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Oh! It looks like they are indeed (allegedly) selling the kid's pictures.




Does Harry wonder at all how he got himself into this mess?  Isn't his children's privacy one of his supposed highest priorities?  How does he justify selling photos and video of them to Netflix?  Gotta keep the Duchess in her Dior caftans, I guess.  What a blazing hypocrite.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t imagine a more boring show.  Neither of them lead exciting lives…they only wish they did.
> Now if that were a show about the Cambridge’s lives, it would be a must see.   Imagine Catherine meeting with dress designers and seamstresses to see how they choose and expertly tailor her clothes!


You mean the prospect of getting preached about every possible topic (mostly ones they know nothing about) doesn't interest you at all?????


----------



## purseinsanity

Sophisticatted said:


> The way I think it will go is this: NetFlix will flatter them and pretend to be filming them in their finest moments. Meanwhile, they will keep the cameras rolling and the public will be shown the “excess” footage/“b side” stuff.  Highly edited for the nastiest, most salacious moments.  It will be “maskless Meghan” viciously ranting and raving, and dumb Harry looking really, really stupid.


I'd rather watch the "Never Before Scenes" that comes after 

Actually, I take that back.  As I've said before, listening to MMM's annoying voice is equivalent to noise torture for me.  I haven't done anything bad enough to deserve that!


----------



## purseinsanity

MiniMabel said:


> See underlined.  I had to read this description twice....and then thrice; surely nothing could be further from the truth!


LOLOL the Dynamic Duo.  I thought that was Batman and Robin.  Haz is kind of like Robin...takes orders and is Batman's beeyotch.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Does Harry wonder at all how he got himself into this mess?  Isn't his children's privacy one of his supposed highest priorities?  How does he justify selling photos and video of them to Netflix?  Gotta keep the Duchess in her Dior caftans, I guess.  What a blazing hypocrite.


He justifies it the same way he justifies being on a reality show after claiming every click, every flash bulb is triggering.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ahem!

We had a deal, too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

In 2020, a certain PR release the news that Tom C was "_keen to sign Meghan Markle up to his next film_", he 
"_had seen what she can do and the camera loves her._" So people are having fun @twitter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ve said it before, knowing they were leaving the BRF,  the W&K copycat wedding was in the poorest of tastes.  Most likely, Hazzie wanted it to prove he was more popular [as if] and she wanted to prove how important she was. So, she invited all the heavy hitters who never knew her. O & Gayle may have been advising her - I am still undecided on that issue.

Something to consider - Nflix is _leaking_ this docu-drama-series in order to build interest. No doubt they pushed Hazz to join the summer polo team. Anything to keep him in the news [since the balcony did not work out ].

Just my opinion, of course.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Red flag, red flag, warning. This could certainly happen to the BRF.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> To my understanding, they have a multi-million dollar deal with Nefl*x and have delivered nothing of importance so far. So Netfl*x has the right to demand 'material' and those kids' pictures are part of it. Allegedly, of course!



I doubt Netflix could legally demand access to the kids, unless the Harkles agreed to it in their contract. If they did, that takes their privacy hypocrisy to a new level.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Red flag, red flag, warning. This could certainly happen to the BRF.




So what's the beef between these two?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> To my understanding, they have a multi-million dollar deal with Nefl*x and have delivered nothing of importance so far. So Netfl*x has the right to demand 'material' and those kids' pictures are part of it. Allegedly, of course!



The contract is between them and Netflix. Unless it was explicitly spelled out in the contract that the kids would be included I can't see how Netflix could demand it. If the Harkles agreed to it they are bigger hypocrites than we already knew.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> So what's the beef between these two?



My short version: 
JuanC was exiled due to financial scandal (plus his extra-marital affairs).  He made the Spanish monarchy very unpopular which did make his son, Felipe, happy.  So, Felipe has been distancing himself from his dad for years.  All my opinion


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: this is our world now - every detail is *scripted*.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> My short version:
> JuanC was exiled due to financial scandal (plus his extra-marital affairs).  He made the Spanish monarchy very unpopular which did make his son, Felipe, happy.  So, Felipe has been distancing himself from his dad for years.  All my opinion



Aren't Juan C and Charles close? Or were? Or am I thinking of another minor royal?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Aren't Juan C and Charles close? Or were? Or am I thinking of another minor royal?



Charles and Diana vacationed in Spain with JC and his family.  Once the scandals hit [JC’s daughter’s husband was involved in a scandal, too], everyone turned away. Publicly, anyway.  This is my short version, the full story is readily available online.

ETA: my point in posting the “warning” is that this could happen with H&M.  If they are denied or shunned, they will make a huge fuss. Seems like no one exits quietly.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Aren't Juan C and Charles close? Or were? Or am I thinking of another minor royal?


Princess Diana and Juan Carlos were close


----------



## Vintage Leather

charlottawill said:


> So what's the beef between these two?


The Scene: Spain is enduring a financial recession. The Infantas (daughters of the king) and their husbands are making headlines every day for financial shenanigans. All of Spain is asking … is the royal family worth the taxes?

And in the midst of this crisis, what is King Juan-Carlos doing?  

Is he emulating Queen Sophia, tucking away the jewels and quietly doing his job?

No! Why would he do that?

He was Royal and could do what he wanted. So, he made international headlines for breaking his hip while elephant hunting in Botswana with his mistress.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I doubt Netflix could legally demand access to the kids, unless the Harkles agreed to it in their contract. If they did, that takes their privacy hypocrisy to a new level.


I don't think Nefl*x would demand access to kids. However, they may be able to put a lot of pressure on the Harkles to deliver interesting content and provide some 'suggestions'. The way the Harkles spend money, they desperately need those million dollars.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> So what's the beef between these two?





CarryOn2020 said:


> My short version:
> JuanC was exiled due to financial scandal (plus his extra-marital affairs).  He made the Spanish monarchy very unpopular which did make his son, Felipe, happy.  So, Felipe has been distancing himself from his dad for years.  All my opinion


Juan Carlos had an important role in the transition of Spain to democracy, but unfortunately his love for women has been an expensive one and got him in trouble. As @CarryOn2020 said, financial scandals and lovers ruined his reputation. There is another financial scandal linked to his daughter and ex-husband, so Felipe is likely trying to distance himself from this mess. I believe he loves his father and sister, but he also needs to survive as a king.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Aren't Juan C and Charles close? Or were? Or am I thinking of another minor royal?


They were relatively close. There are several pictures of them together on the internet. Though, I wouldn't consider Juan C a minor royal, he was the King of Spain at some point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

What one does for publicity…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Leader or follower?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They were relatively close. There are several pictures of them together on the internet. Though, I wouldn't consider Juan C a minor royal, he was the King of Spain at some point.
> View attachment 5408885



And_ Queen Sofia's grandmother, Sophia of Prussia, was the daughter of Princess Victoria, Queen Victoria's eldest child. Therefore, through several ancestral connections, *King Juan Carlos I and King Felipe VI of Spain are distantly related to Queen Elizabeth II and the British Royal Family*. 








						The surprising royals Queen Elizabeth II is related to - Royal Family tree explained
					

QUEEN ELIZABETH II will this year commemorate her 70th year on the throne, but did you know the monarch is related to a surprising number of European royals?




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They were relatively close. There are several pictures of them together on the internet. Though, I wouldn't consider Juan C a minor royal, he was the King of Spain at some point.
> View attachment 5408885



They are also related from Philip's side IIRC. Sophia is a cousin or something?


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are also related from Philip's side IIRC. Sophia is a cousin or something?



Yes. Both Phillip and Sophia were born into the House of Greece and Denmark and I believe are both descended from King Christian of Denmark, hence the extremely warm, familial tone of Felipe and Letizia's message of condolence to Elizabeth on the passing of Philip, in which F and L referred to E and P as Aunt Lilibet and Uncle Phillip.  I get the impression that they are more then just distantly related--they are family. I think F an L were the first to publicly confer condolences to E.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Leader or follower?
> 
> View attachment 5408901


Wide receiver?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5408789
> 
> 
> ETA: this is our world now - every detail is *scripted*.



I think Tom is past his prime and all the awful scientology stuff that's come out about him has to have done some damage.  Wonder how Top Gun will do at the box office


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Does Harry wonder at all how he got himself into this mess?  Isn't his children's privacy one of his supposed highest priorities?  How does he justify selling photos and video of them to Netflix?  Gotta keep the Duchess in her Dior caftans, I guess.  What a blazing hypocrite.


I expect his WIFE explains to him (as you would to a child) how everything needs to work


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



Michael Rappaport is some sort of real housewives superfan so this is ironic coming from him.  I've seen him on WWHL with Andy Cohen going on and on about the various housewives and his opinions of them.  If I see him now, I turn it off.
Talk about get a life?  How about get an acting job, Michael?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Leader or follower?
> 
> View attachment 5408901


He needs to attract public attention to sell his upcoming book and Netfl*x show, but he is also delighting DM and a few other outlets out there. 









						Prince Harry plays polo after claims over Netflix docuseries
					

The 37-year-old Duke of Sussex was pictured preparing for a polo match in Santa Barbara, where he is expected to play the entire 12-goal season, according to Meghan's pal Omid Scobie.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> Michael Rappaport is some sort of real housewives superfan so this is ironic coming from him.  I've seen him on WWHL with Andy Cohen going on and on about the various housewives and his opinions of them.  If I see him now, I turn it off.
> Talk about get a life?  How about get an acting job, Michael?


He played the father on Atypical for 4 years (a really great show--I learned a lot about autism) and he will be in Only Murders In the Building, another show I like, so he does work.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> He played the father on Atypical for 4 years (a really great show--I learned a lot about autism) and he will be in Only Murders In the Building, another show I like, so he does work.


good....he should stick to acting IMO


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Michael Rappaport is some sort of real housewives superfan so this is ironic coming from him.  I've seen him on WWHL with Andy Cohen going on and on about the various housewives and his opinions of them.  If I see him now, I turn it off.
> Talk about get a life?  How about get an acting job, Michael?


He isn’t the most eloquent when speaking, and something about him just irritates me.


----------



## csshopper

I usually check the DM at some point during the day, scrolling today’s main page I was taken aback by all the Kardashian articles so started counting: 28 posted during the time I was doing this, assume it varies as new stories are added etc.
My immediate thought was MEMEMEGAN will be orgasmic with joy if she and her Handbag can achieve anywhere near those publicity #’s with their Netflix wannabe rip off. 

Some of it is gagable. One article is headed by a picture of Travis tongue full out, slurping Kourtney’s face. Hard to fathom a Prince of the Realm wanting to compete with this s***, but then remembering TW at his side, it’s explainable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> He isn’t the most eloquent when speaking, and something about him just irritates me.


agree...and there is something about a grown man (other than maybe Andy who profits from it) going on and on about TR housewives that just grates on my nerves


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Some of it is gagable. One article is headed by a picture of Travis tongue full out, slurping Kourtney’s face. Hard to fathom a Prince of the Realm wanting to compete with this s***, but then remembering TW at his side, it’s explainable.



These two gross me out so much. I don't begrudge her being happy, but this slurpy, wet PDA they have going on at all times is so inappropriate and really not something I want to watch.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These two gross me out so much. I don't begrudge her being happy, but this slurpy, wet PDA they have going on at all times is so inappropriate and really not something I want to watch.


according to something I saw on TV yesterday her kids agree with you


----------



## marietouchet

jennlt said:


> I hope Netflix does something super shady like playing the sound of a toilet flushing 19 times each episode to represent the manifold hypocrisy of the fauxmanitarian eco-warriors and their enormous carbon footprint of a house.


Hmmm have they done additions to the house ??? Cannot remember how many baths they started with , but they must have done Reno if they are up to 19? Go H&M !


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Leader or follower?
> 
> View attachment 5408901


Well , he must be a padre cf tent logo 

Hmmm nothing wrong with warming up but honestly the shot is soooooo awkward esp when cropped 

A perfect example of a photo that would not be published were he still a senior member … which goes to show much much the BRF does benefit from a favorable press system in the UK


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Red flag, red flag, warning. This could certainly happen to the BRF.



JC attended a recent regatta in Spain, his daughter Elena was also there
the whole family is devoted to sailing, Queen Sofia was of Olympic caliber and would have participated but got cut from the Greek team in favor of her brother Constantine who won gold , she was born a Greek princess and only so many spots on the team were given to the royals


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So this is going on on Twitter...I read through the comments (98% saying "Pippa's wedding, Pippa's rules" and "No ring, no bring", especially seeing The Thing was invited to the evening reception), but a bit down someone brings up the Rose rumour again, plus its debunking...which I still find very believable even the 20th time I read it.

But also...that article is new. That wedding was 5 years ago. Just why?


----------



## jennlt

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm have they done additions to the house ??? Cannot remember how many baths they started with , but they must have done Reno if they are up to 19? Go H&M !



I saw the bathroom count in this article and figured it had to be accurate based on the amount of $h!t they spew


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This and the next 5 tweets mention the rumours.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So this is going on on Twitter...I read through the comments (98% saying "Pippa's wedding, Pippa's rules" and "No ring, no bring", especially seeing The Thing was invited to the evening reception), but a bit down someone brings up the Rose rumour again, plus its debunking...which I still find very believable even the 20th time I read it.
> 
> But also...that article is new. That wedding was 5 years ago. Just why?



love her gown but she looks kinda like the duchess of windsor in the face in this pic


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW took over the event…


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

marietouchet said:


> Well , he must be a padre cf tent logo
> 
> Hmmm nothing wrong with warming up but honestly the shot is soooooo awkward esp when cropped
> 
> A perfect example of a photo that would not be published were he still a senior member … which goes to show much much the BRF does benefit from a favorable press system in the UK


Truth in reporting does not mean that respected heads of state etc or royalty should be shown in any photo which mocks them or is unflattering to the point of ridicule. I think we all, in any country, need to remember to respect the office, the symbol, the royal in some cases.  Why should photos resemble a teenagers “gotcha?”  Let’s stick to facts and issues of merit.   I am generalizing and referring to the concept of the royal family being treated differently than most.  It is certain however H no longer warrants such consideration.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW took over the event…



When one has no friends, one attempts to use others. “Clawing”  her way in, yet again.

Will she serve olive oil lemon cake under a tent and have a Donation jar on the table?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> When one has no friends, one attempts to use others. “Clawing”  her way in, yet again.
> 
> Will she serve olive oil lemon cake under a tent and have a Donation jar on the table?


I don't know about the lemon cake, but please wear a hat if you are planning to attend.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> love her gown but she looks kinda like the duchess of windsor in the face in this pic


I don’t particularly see what’s so great about Pippa.  She’s in great shape but she’s a “Butter Face”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I don’t particularly see what’s so great about Pippa.  She’s in great shape but she’s a “Butter Face”.



Yes, applause for her great shape - those Middleton ladies know how to eat properly so that the weight stays off.  I respect that.
As for her face, imo, she is pretty with a beautiful smile.

I had to look up “butter face” -https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/butterface/
_Butterface is a mashup of the pronunciation of the phrase “but her face.” The term is based on a sexist joke about women’s appearances. For example, a man might remark after a blind date that “everything about her was attractive but her face.”_

ETA:

__


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW took over the event…




Isn’t Harry playing every Friday for the next couple of months? We can look forward to a Meghan attention grab once a week.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Well , he must be a padre cf tent logo
> 
> Hmmm nothing wrong with warming up but honestly the shot is soooooo awkward esp when cropped
> 
> A perfect example of a photo that would not be published were he still a senior member … which goes to show much much the BRF does benefit from a favorable press system in the UK



There have been questions about his use of _Wales_ as his last name.
Article from 2021:








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Used Different Names on Lilibet's Birth Certificate
					

The Duke and Duchess switched their names from those they wrote on Archie's certificate.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				




https://sbpolo.com/web/pages/roster2022 SBPRC 12 Goal Roster 


*Antelope Junior* *Mokarow Farms*Grant Palmer1 Kevin Mokarow0Santi Trotz3 Rob Stenzel4Santi Llavalol4 Facundo Obregon6Jimmy Wright4 Brendon Stenzel3 *12*  *12**Dundas* *Dundas II*Sarah Magness0 Cable Magness0Cacu Marcos3 Santi von Wernich5Geronimo Obregon5 Mariano Fassetta4Roberto Zedda4 Wes Bryan3 *12*  *12**Farmers & Merchants Bank*  *Folded Hills/FMB Too!* Danny Walker2 Henry Walker1Lucas Criado6 Will Busch1Matt Walker3 Juan Curbelo5Ryan Kerley1 Santi Wulff5  *12*  *12* *Klentner Ranch*  *Los Padres/Citi*  Jesse Bray7 *Harry Wales*1 Luke Klentner1 Keko Magrini4 Jake Klentner2 Nacho Figueras5 Justin Klentner1 Juan Guerrero2  *11*  *12*


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t Harry playing every Friday for the next couple of months? We can look forward to a Meghan attention grab once a week.



Yes, he is in the 12 goal series.


			https://indd.adobe.com/view/06528fe9-2f24-4451-a902-7809d71d2157


----------



## Gal4Dior

So if anyone actually watches Southern Charm, Thomas Ravenel’s ex was rumored to be a “polo girl” in Santa Barbara. Bunch of ladies wanting to snag a rich man…

Wonder if any polo girls will try to replace Megnut. If she’s truly that awful, I’m sure he might of thinking of a side piece.


----------



## EverSoElusive

LVSistinaMM said:


> So if anyone actually watches Southern Charm, Thomas Ravenel’s ex was rumored to be a “polo girl” in Santa Barbara. Bunch of ladies wanting to snag a rich man…
> 
> Wonder if any polo girls will try to replace Megnut. If she’s truly that awful, I’m sure he might of thinking of a side piece.



Harry can think about having a side piece all day everyday but with Nutmeg keeping an eye on him like a hawk, it's going to be pretty impossible for him to be able to spend time or s#x up a side piece


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW took over the event…



The comments on that Tweet


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I don’t particularly see what’s so great about Pippa.  She’s in great shape but she’s a “Butter Face”.



I have had to explain that one to my husband in the past. She's not gorgeous but I think she's attractive.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, applause for her great shape - those Middleton ladies know how to eat properly so that the weight stays off.  I respect that.
> As for her face, imo, she is pretty with a beautiful smile.
> 
> I had to look up “butter face” -https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/butterface/
> _Butterface is a mashup of the pronunciation of the phrase “but her face.” The term is based on a sexist joke about women’s appearances. For example, a man might remark after a blind date that “everything about her was attractive but her face.”_
> 
> ETA:
> 
> __



I'm still having a hard time looking at this one.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, applause for her great shape - those Middleton ladies know how to eat properly so that the weight stays off.  I respect that.
> As for her face, imo, she is pretty with a beautiful smile.
> 
> I had to look up “butter face” -https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/butterface/
> _Butterface is a mashup of the pronunciation of the phrase “but her face.” The term is based on a sexist joke about women’s appearances. For example, a man might remark after a blind date that “everything about her was attractive but her face.”_
> 
> ETA:
> 
> __




"She's hot, but her face is not" is the explanation I heard.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I'm still having a hard time looking at this one.




I thought she actually looked nice in that outfit, but the strut and her hand on his back ruined it. Markle-ing her territory. And it strikes me as odd that he isn't offering his hand to her going up the stairs. Where's the body language guy? I need answers!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t Harry playing every Friday for the next couple of months? We can look forward to a Meghan attention grab once a week.


Well on the bright side, it gives us something to talk about.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> There have been questions about his use of _Wales_ as his last name.
> Article from 2021:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Used Different Names on Lilibet's Birth Certificate
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess switched their names from those they wrote on Archie's certificate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://sbpolo.com/web/pages/roster2022 SBPRC 12 Goal Roster
> 
> 
> 
> *Antelope Junior**Mokarow Farms*Grant Palmer1Kevin Mokarow0Santi Trotz3Rob Stenzel4Santi Llavalol4Facundo Obregon6Jimmy Wright4 Brendon Stenzel3*12**12**Dundas**Dundas II*Sarah Magness0Cable Magness0Cacu Marcos3Santi von Wernich5Geronimo Obregon5Mariano Fassetta4Roberto Zedda4Wes Bryan3*12**12**Farmers & Merchants Bank**Folded Hills/FMB Too!*Danny Walker2Henry Walker1Lucas Criado6Will Busch1Matt Walker3Juan Curbelo5Ryan Kerley1Santi Wulff5*12**12**Klentner Ranch**Los Padres/Citi*Jesse Bray7*Harry Wales*1Luke Klentner1Keko Magrini4Jake Klentner2Nacho Figueras5Justin Klentner1Juan Guerrero2*11**12*


 
He can call himself whatever he likes, but this is what stuck out to me in that link 

"The pair live in a house, not a castle..."  Please....they most certainly do not live in a "house". It's a mansion, the US version of a castle.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This and the next 5 tweets mention the rumours.



My first thought was either 1.  She was only one of many, many numbers in H’s phone at this point or 2. They they thought she’d scare the children.


Chanbal said:


> I don't know about the lemon cake, but please wear a hat if you are planning to attend.
> 
> View attachment 5409481


I would imagine M thinks if the club has a formal code it’ll look even sexier and more daring when she swaggers out looking like daisy duke after she got dragged through a canyon.

I just can’t get over how funny it is they are playing polo after complaining about the arcane and elitist rules and routines of royal life.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, applause for her great shape - those Middleton ladies know how to eat properly so that the weight stays off.  I respect that.
> As for her face, imo, she is pretty with a beautiful smile.
> 
> I had to look up “butter face” -https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/butterface/
> _Butterface is a mashup of the pronunciation of the phrase “but her face.” The term is based on a sexist joke about women’s appearances. For example, a man might remark after a blind date that “everything about her was attractive but her face.”_
> 
> ETA:
> 
> __



TBF to Pippa she was thrust into  royal protocol and sudden celebrity out of nowhere far more than the old grumps was.

She’s got that strict but fun school teacher vibe a lot of people go crazy for.
That’s very much the type of woman the family were always trying to match H with.  Clearly that’s not his type so after years of going to evensong and eating his broccoli he decided to hitch up with the trashiest ‘bad girl’ he could find. ( of course he still needed someone completely divorced from the common man lol let’s not get silly)


----------



## Chanbal

Having a grandiose lifestyle while talking about equality, so much hypocrisy. They are in the hands of Netfl*x!   


*In 2020 it was revealed that they had signed on the dotted line with the streaming behemoth, in return for a reported payout of up to $140 million.*
_
The line the Sussexes have stuck to since then was that they were essentially forced into this commercial merger after his family promptly turned off the money spigot post-Megxit…

The focus on the Sussexes’ ties to Netflix were back in the news this week after entertainment website Page Six reports that the ducal duo had been covertly shooting an “‘at-home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style’ docuseries” for Netflix aka something that sounds suspiciously like a reality show…

*This then seemed to be the tragicomic end point of Charles’ tight-fisted parsimony: Poor Harry and Meghan left with no choice but to succumb to Netflix’s come hither glances so they could pay for their retinue of beefy bodyguards.*

But with Harry and Meghan looking an awful lot like they are going down the Keeping with the Sussexes route, *it’s worth asking the question, was their money situation truly so baleful that their only option was to sell themselves to the highest TV bidder? *Just how dire was their financial situation when they left the royal family?

The obvious starting point here is the money that was left to Harry by both the Queen Mother and Diana, Princess of Wales.

While there has never been an exact figure confirmed, *The Times has reported that his total inheritance, assuming it had been invested wisely, would be worth about $40.7 million as of early 2021…

The other part of this equation then, is obviously, their ongoing costs*, the biggest of which was their security. (Harry is currently embodied in legal action back in the UK over the decision by the specialist unit that looks after the Prime Minister and the royal family to have the family’s official protection removed.)

Which leaves us with the obvious conclusion: *they can’t – or won’t – live within their means*.

*If there is one thing that has characterised the Sussexes post-royal lives it is that it is a far more luxurious lifestyle than their former existence*…

None of it had to be this way. *They did not have to buy so grandiose (and gauche) of a mansion; they did not have to start wearing $1830 jumpers from uber-luxe brand The Row; and they did not have to hire a staff for their charitable arm Archewell Foundation, an outfit that has yet to do anything of any meaningful note nearly two years in.*

With the benefit of hindsight, one way to look at the “docuseries” position the Sussexes are now in is that when they started their US lives*, their eyes were bigger than their bank accounts, thus now leaving themselves in a position where they have no choice but to capitulate to the whims and desires of their corporate bosses.* (A case of the greenback-eyed monster?) They wanted a monstrous house fit for a Kim or a Kendall; now they have no choice but to do what is necessary to pay for it.

*More Coverage*
I don’t subscribe to the idea that *money* is the root of all evil, but it *certainly is the root of all reality TV* and perhaps even the occasional docuseries, whatever the dickens that is._



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-and-prince-harrys-expensive-lifestyle-exposes-money-problem/news-story/c0a859700a337d64c24edcd1fb6ab050


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How is this nobody the hostess and the actual polo team an afterthought? I just can't with her.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I thought she actually looked nice in that outfit, but the strut and her hand on his back ruined it. Markle-ing her territory. And it strikes me as odd that he isn't offering his hand to her going up the stairs. Where's the body language guy? I need answers!


It's the way she walks. Lady C often jokes, "Mr. DeMille, I m Ready for My Close Up".


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How is this nobody the hostess and the actual polo team an afterthought? I just can't with her.



I think this post is a reply to the above.



It seems this is the person who posted about the hats.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The funny thing to me is she pitches this as dressing for a “Kentucky Derby” event. 
Um, no, polo is most definitely *not* a “Kentucky Derby” event.  What a dumba$$. They are so desperate to turn the USA into the UK.

ETA: Apologies for the crass language. H&M bring out my worst side. This _Kentucky Derby_ comment is a too much, just too much. He really does need to go back to the UK, along with some of the other Brits we have sent back. She can go, too.

Plouc, Beauf, Ringard(e) - they all apply to H&M

_In the first episode of the show, Emily’s boss and her coworker make fun of her by calling her “la plouc.” Emily is confused and later finds out that the English translation is “the hick”.

Plouc is a harsh way of describing someone whose style and lifestyle you consider boorish, and/or lacking in taste. It has strong classist connotations. A plouc would be more or less the equivalent of a hick in english, and it’s a common stereotype applied both to Americans by the French, as well as to French people from smaller towns and the countryside by Parisians.

Exemple : Quelle idée de boire du champagne dans un verre en plastique, c’est tellement plouc ! What a dumb idea to drink champagne out of a plastic glass, who does that?
> You can also use “beauf” (more informal)_
*4. RINGARD(E): MORE THAN JUST “BASIC”*
_





In Episode 6, fashion designer Pierre Cadault yells at Emily “ringarde!” because she’s wearing an Eiffel Tower bag charm. The rest of the team is mortified and Emily is confused.

Like plouc, ringard(e) has the same intensity of negative judgment and sounds more strident, like a slap in the face. It can also indicate that someone or something is out-dated, old school, or out of fashion.

*Exemple :* Tu te souviens du taille-basse dans les années 2000 ? C’est tellement ringard ! Do you remember 2000 low-rise jeans? That’s so has-been!








						Emily in Paris: 9 Lessons for French Students & Fans - Coucou French Classes
					

Coucou French teachers give insights, tips and their perspectives on French language used in Emily in Paris starring Lily Collins on Netflix




					coucoufrenchclasses.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Having a grandiose lifestyle while talking about equality, so much hypocrisy. They are in the hands of Netfl*x!
> View attachment 5409579
> 
> *In 2020 it was revealed that they had signed on the dotted line with the streaming behemoth, in return for a reported payout of up to $140 million.*
> 
> _The line the Sussexes have stuck to since then was that they were essentially forced into this commercial merger after his family promptly turned off the money spigot post-Megxit…
> 
> The focus on the Sussexes’ ties to Netflix were back in the news this week after entertainment website Page Six reports that the ducal duo had been covertly shooting an “‘at-home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style’ docuseries” for Netflix aka something that sounds suspiciously like a reality show…
> 
> *This then seemed to be the tragicomic end point of Charles’ tight-fisted parsimony: Poor Harry and Meghan left with no choice but to succumb to Netflix’s come hither glances so they could pay for their retinue of beefy bodyguards.*
> 
> But with Harry and Meghan looking an awful lot like they are going down the Keeping with the Sussexes route, *it’s worth asking the question, was their money situation truly so baleful that their only option was to sell themselves to the highest TV bidder? *Just how dire was their financial situation when they left the royal family?
> 
> The obvious starting point here is the money that was left to Harry by both the Queen Mother and Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> While there has never been an exact figure confirmed, *The Times has reported that his total inheritance, assuming it had been invested wisely, would be worth about $40.7 million as of early 2021…
> 
> The other part of this equation then, is obviously, their ongoing costs*, the biggest of which was their security. (Harry is currently embodied in legal action back in the UK over the decision by the specialist unit that looks after the Prime Minister and the royal family to have the family’s official protection removed.)
> 
> Which leaves us with the obvious conclusion: *they can’t – or won’t – live within their means*.
> 
> *If there is one thing that has characterised the Sussexes post-royal lives it is that it is a far more luxurious lifestyle than their former existence*…
> 
> None of it had to be this way. *They did not have to buy so grandiose (and gauche) of a mansion; they did not have to start wearing $1830 jumpers from uber-luxe brand The Row; and they did not have to hire a staff for their charitable arm Archewell Foundation, an outfit that has yet to do anything of any meaningful note nearly two years in.*
> 
> With the benefit of hindsight, one way to look at the “docuseries” position the Sussexes are now in is that when they started their US lives*, their eyes were bigger than their bank accounts, thus now leaving themselves in a position where they have no choice but to capitulate to the whims and desires of their corporate bosses.* (A case of the greenback-eyed monster?) They wanted a monstrous house fit for a Kim or a Kendall; now they have no choice but to do what is necessary to pay for it.
> 
> *More Coverage*
> I don’t subscribe to the idea that *money* is the root of all evil, but it *certainly is the root of all reality TV* and perhaps even the occasional docuseries, whatever the dickens that is._
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-and-prince-harrys-expensive-lifestyle-exposes-money-problem/news-story/c0a859700a337d64c24edcd1fb6ab050





We’ve all said it many times over these past 2 years, too.  I read recently that in the early days KimK moved out of her mom’s house and into a nice apartment. Kris, too, stayed in the family home for years. Sure, eventually they ended up in these McMansions, but they wisely got the money first.  Reporters need to start calling H&M’s house a McMansion.









						About That McMansion in Your Neighborhood
					

What is a McMansion? Here's info about the house, the trends, the critics, and what it means for you and your neighborhood as you build your own home.




					www.thoughtco.com


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Having a grandiose lifestyle while talking about equality, so much hypocrisy. They are in the hands of Netfl*x!
> View attachment 5409579
> 
> *In 2020 it was revealed that they had signed on the dotted line with the streaming behemoth, in return for a reported payout of up to $140 million.*
> 
> _The line the Sussexes have stuck to since then was that they were essentially forced into this commercial merger after his family promptly turned off the money spigot post-Megxit…
> 
> The focus on the Sussexes’ ties to Netflix were back in the news this week after entertainment website Page Six reports that the ducal duo had been covertly shooting an “‘at-home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style’ docuseries” for Netflix aka something that sounds suspiciously like a reality show…
> 
> *This then seemed to be the tragicomic end point of Charles’ tight-fisted parsimony: Poor Harry and Meghan left with no choice but to succumb to Netflix’s come hither glances so they could pay for their retinue of beefy bodyguards.*
> 
> But with Harry and Meghan looking an awful lot like they are going down the Keeping with the Sussexes route, *it’s worth asking the question, was their money situation truly so baleful that their only option was to sell themselves to the highest TV bidder? *Just how dire was their financial situation when they left the royal family?
> 
> The obvious starting point here is the money that was left to Harry by both the Queen Mother and Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> While there has never been an exact figure confirmed, *The Times has reported that his total inheritance, assuming it had been invested wisely, would be worth about $40.7 million as of early 2021…
> 
> The other part of this equation then, is obviously, their ongoing costs*, the biggest of which was their security. (Harry is currently embodied in legal action back in the UK over the decision by the specialist unit that looks after the Prime Minister and the royal family to have the family’s official protection removed.)
> 
> Which leaves us with the obvious conclusion: *they can’t – or won’t – live within their means*.
> 
> *If there is one thing that has characterised the Sussexes post-royal lives it is that it is a far more luxurious lifestyle than their former existence*…
> 
> None of it had to be this way. *They did not have to buy so grandiose (and gauche) of a mansion; they did not have to start wearing $1830 jumpers from uber-luxe brand The Row; and they did not have to hire a staff for their charitable arm Archewell Foundation, an outfit that has yet to do anything of any meaningful note nearly two years in.*
> 
> With the benefit of hindsight, one way to look at the “docuseries” position the Sussexes are now in is that when they started their US lives*, their eyes were bigger than their bank accounts, thus now leaving themselves in a position where they have no choice but to capitulate to the whims and desires of their corporate bosses.* (A case of the greenback-eyed monster?) They wanted a monstrous house fit for a Kim or a Kendall; now they have no choice but to do what is necessary to pay for it.
> 
> *More Coverage*
> I don’t subscribe to the idea that *money* is the root of all evil, but it *certainly is the root of all reality TV* and perhaps even the occasional docuseries, whatever the dickens that is._
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-and-prince-harrys-expensive-lifestyle-exposes-money-problem/news-story/c0a859700a337d64c24edcd1fb6ab050


_More Coverage
I don’t subscribe to the idea that money is the root of all evil, but it certainly is the root of all reality TV and perhaps even the occasional docuseries, whatever the dickens that is._

*Money is not the root of all evil, the LOVE of money is. (From the Bible).*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I don’t particularly see what’s so great about Pippa.  She’s in great shape but she’s a “Butter Face”.



She looks so much better now than at the time of Kate's wedding, though. Don't know what it is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think this post is a reply to the above.
> 
> 
> 
> It seems this is the person who posted about the hats.




These people are such losers. Or rather, she is, Harry could at least be someone thanks to his family, not his own talent or personality.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Well on the bright side, it gives us something to talk about.


And more pairs of hot pants showing off the toothpicks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> And more pairs of hot pants showing off the toothpicks.



Not hating on her this time but am I the only one  finding it slightly curious that she seems to have no hurry to lose the baby weight? Seeing her competitive personality and how she got into that revenge body (I mean, she can't help her slightly unfortunate shape but lost a lot of weight pretty quickly back then) for their last few UK appointments after Archie it's slightly odd to me.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She looks so much better now than at the time of Kate's wedding, though. Don't know what it is.



They both had a bad eyeliner game in those days.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not hating on her this time but am I the only one  finding it slightly curious that she seems to have no hurry to lose the baby weight? Seeing her competitive personality and how she got into that revenge body (I mean, she can't help her slightly unfortunate shape but lost a lot of weight pretty quickly back then) for their last few UK appointments after Archie it's slightly odd to me.



I believe the rumors that she used some type of drug to keep the weight off before.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> They both had a bad eyeliner game in those days.



True! Kate's wedding make-up was a little harsh too.



> I believe the rumors that she used some type of drug to keep the weight off before.



Even after Archie?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> *Michael Rappaport* is some sort of real housewives superfan so this is ironic coming from him.  I've seen him on WWHL with Andy Cohen going on and on about the various housewives and his opinions of them.  If I see him now, I turn it off.
> Talk about get a life?  How about get an acting job, Michael?


I didn't know who Michael Rapport was, I had a very busy past life. I've been learning a lot since I joined this thread. I just learned that he worked with TW on a TV show (thanks to browsing another educational site).


----------



## Chanbal

Is anyone here interested in buying this? 

*EMILY PRESCOTT: Is Prince Harry so toxic that punk artist Mark Sloper is going to lose a small fortune by featuring him in a Jubilee-themed neon portrait*

_He spent a small fortune creating the likeness of the Duke of Sussex with ‘potential H-bomb’ written across it in neon – a phrase that features in the Sex Pistols’ controversial 1977 hit God Save The Queen – but now fears he will have to scrap it.

‘No one wants to buy it,’ he tells me. ‘There is absolutely zero interest. It is currently sitting in the studio and is worth about ten grand, but I think I will have to take it to bits.’

He believes his subject has become too ‘toxic’, adding: ‘All my works of the Queen sell out immediately, so it appears that the British public dislike him.*’*_









						EMILY PRESCOTT: Mark Sloper loses fortune on Prince Harry artwork
					

EMILY PRESCOTT: Mark Sloper fears he will lose a small fortune on an artwork he created featuring Prince Harry, claiming there is 'absolutely no interest in it.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She looks so much better now than at the time of Kate's wedding, though. Don't know what it is.



I suspect it's being happily married.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not hating on her this time but am I the only one  finding it slightly curious that she seems to have no hurry to lose the baby weight? Seeing her competitive personality and how she got into that revenge body (I mean, she can't help her slightly unfortunate shape but lost a lot of weight pretty quickly back then) for their last few UK appointments after Archie it's slightly odd to me.



As loathsome as I find her I am reluctant to judge her on that. It was definitely harder for me to lose weight after my second child.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

*"It must be embarrassing to know that the company you work for has achieved nothing since being founded and it doesn’t worth a penny but your employer still thinks she’s a worldclass actress-princess hybrid."  *


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It's the way she walks. Lady C often jokes, "Mr. DeMille, I m Ready for My Close Up".





My take on that video - Camilla's little hand wave before she turns and walks away is being dismissive of them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Even after Archie?


I agree with the pp, she probably just got lucky after the first baby.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She looks so much better now than at the time of Kate's wedding, though. Don't know what it is.



She's now basking in the glow of being married to a billionaire.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> She's now basking in the glow of being married to a billionaire.



The Middleton women have certainly married well. Mrs. Bennet would approve.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> The Middleton women have certainly married well. Mrs. Bennet would approve.



She would indeed!


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> As loathsome as I find her I am reluctant to judge her on that. It was definitely harder for me to lose weight after my second child.


There may be some genetics involved, she is half Markle and neither her father or step siblings have fit, trim body types.

Over the past few years multiple publications, including “womens’ magazines,” have been publishing articles with medical documentation about the cumulative negative affects on the body from the stress hormone, cortisol. People like Raptor, who appears to be in a constant state of agitation, think of her body language and the mask slips that reveal the underlying nastiness, suffer wide ranging effects on the body from the continual stimulation of the adrenal gland that produces the cortisol. “Long term elevation of cortisol can cause weight gain” is one of those consequences. Another, “Chronic cortisol inflammation also impacts skin and is aging.”

These articles usually go on to describe life style changes that would help, none seem they would be something she would do.

So perhaps she is her own worst enemy, but as a raging narcissist would never recognize nor admit it. 

With the vitriol she spews, her malicious conniving, and hateful treatment of others it’s Karma she may end up a dumpy wrinkled old woman.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The Middleton women have certainly married well. Mrs. Bennet would approve.


looked at some other pics of pippa...she's attractive.  Kate has softer features.  she probably has a much easier life


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

This is a harsh crowd. I think Pippa is quite attractive. I'd be thrilled to look like her. And honestly "Butter Face" is such a misogynist term. If I heard my kids or students saying that about a woman I would be horrified.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> This is a harsh crowd. I think Pippa is quite attractive. I'd be thrilled to look like her. And honestly "Butter Face" is such a misogynist term. If I heard my kids or students saying that about a woman I would be horrified.


I agree she's attractive.  I did say she looks like the duchess of windsor.  she has sharper features than Kate but still attractive
Yes butter face is misogynist


----------



## charlottawill

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> This is a harsh crowd. I think Pippa is quite attractive. I'd be thrilled to look like her. And honestly "Butter Face" is such a misogynist term. If I heard my kids or students saying that about a woman I would be horrified.



I first read it on www.barstoolsports.com some years ago. It is a sports site geared toward young men and has been controversial.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I first read it on www.barstoolsports.com some years ago. It is a sports site geared toward young men and has been controversial.


men can be such pigs
I'm sure some of the men saying this don't have great faces themselves
Just sayin


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'lose ANOTHER key aide'
					

PR guru Toya Holness joined the Sussexes in October 2020 and was promoted to oversee their PR on both sides of the Atlantic in March last year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Buhbye  Toya!  

Folks, the ship be sinkin'   The rats are fleeing!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'lose ANOTHER key aide'
> 
> 
> PR guru Toya Holness joined the Sussexes in October 2020 and was promoted to oversee their PR on both sides of the Atlantic in March last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buhbye  Toya!
> 
> Folks, the ship be sinkin'   The rats are fleeing!



It says she has a degree in Strategic PR - that seems redundant. Is there another kind of PR? 

A comment re former Archewell Chief of Staff Catherine St. Laurent's earlier departure: 

*She left because "she was asked to perform a great many functions for the couple".. what do you bet they wanted her to pick up dry cleaning and take out their garbage?*

I would not be at all surprised. I'm sure she regrets leaving the Gates Foundation.


----------



## CeeJay

LVSistinaMM said:


> So if anyone actually watches Southern Charm, Thomas Ravenel’s ex was rumored to be a “polo girl” in Santa Barbara. Bunch of ladies wanting to snag a rich man…
> 
> Wonder if any polo girls will try to replace Megnut. If she’s truly that awful, I’m sure he might of thinking of a side piece.


Oh I know exactly who you are referring to, a total nut-job!!!   When I lived in Connecticut and we would go to the Polo matches in Farmington/Avon, you would ALWAYS see those “types” of gals at the ymatch. Then, funny enough, the movie “The Thomas Crown Affair” was in TV (the original with Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway) .. and there’s the segment of when she attends his match, in her nice sports car .. snapping pictures of him (I just loved her clothing in that movie) .. and that was when I realized what my Father was referring to - “polo girl”!!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know who Michael Rapport was, I had a very busy past life. I've been learning a lot since I joined this thread. I just learned that he worked with TW on a TV show (thanks to browsing another educational site).




 putz-prince Harry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Is anyone here interested in buying this?
> 
> *EMILY PRESCOTT: Is Prince Harry so toxic that punk artist Mark Sloper is going to lose a small fortune by featuring him in a Jubilee-themed neon portrait*
> 
> _He spent a small fortune creating the likeness of the Duke of Sussex with ‘potential H-bomb’ written across it in neon – a phrase that features in the Sex Pistols’ controversial 1977 hit God Save The Queen – but now fears he will have to scrap it.
> 
> ‘No one wants to buy it,’ he tells me. ‘There is absolutely zero interest. It is currently sitting in the studio and is worth about ten grand, but I think I will have to take it to bits.’
> 
> He believes his subject has become too ‘toxic’, adding: ‘All my works of the Queen sell out immediately, so it appears that the British public dislike him.*’*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EMILY PRESCOTT: Mark Sloper loses fortune on Prince Harry artwork
> 
> 
> EMILY PRESCOTT: Mark Sloper fears he will lose a small fortune on an artwork he created featuring Prince Harry, claiming there is 'absolutely no interest in it.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What, is none of the sugars liquid right now?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> As loathsome as I find her I am reluctant to judge her on that. It was definitely harder for me to lose weight after my second child.



I'm not judging - as the person who gains and looses the same 20 pounds regularly who am I to talk -, I just found it...out of character if you will.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> They both had a bad eyeliner game in those days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the rumors that she used some type of drug to keep the weight off before.


Yes, Coke .. and smoking like a fiend, not eating and then going to the gym for hours and hours .. those were the rumors during her suitcase and Suits days.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> The funny thing to me is she pitches this as dressing for a “Kentucky Derby” event.
> Um, no, polo is most definitely *not* a “Kentucky Derby” event.  What a dumba$$. They are so desperate to turn the USA into the UK.
> 
> ETA: Apologies for the crass language. H&M bring out my worst side. This _Kentucky Derby_ comment is a too much, just too much. He really does need to go back to the UK, along with some of the other Brits we have sent back. She can go, too.
> 
> Plouc, Beauf, Ringard(e) - they all apply to H&M
> 
> _In the first episode of the show, Emily’s boss and her coworker make fun of her by calling her “la plouc.” Emily is confused and later finds out that the English translation is “the hick”.
> 
> Plouc is a harsh way of describing someone whose style and lifestyle you consider boorish, and/or lacking in taste. It has strong classist connotations. A plouc would be more or less the equivalent of a hick in english, and it’s a common stereotype applied both to Americans by the French, as well as to French people from smaller towns and the countryside by Parisians.
> 
> Exemple : Quelle idée de boire du champagne dans un verre en plastique, c’est tellement plouc ! What a dumb idea to drink champagne out of a plastic glass, who does that?
> > You can also use “beauf” (more informal)_
> *4. RINGARD(E): MORE THAN JUST “BASIC”*
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Episode 6, fashion designer Pierre Cadault yells at Emily “ringarde!” because she’s wearing an Eiffel Tower bag charm. The rest of the team is mortified and Emily is confused.
> 
> Like plouc, ringard(e) has the same intensity of negative judgment and sounds more strident, like a slap in the face. It can also indicate that someone or something is out-dated, old school, or out of fashion.
> 
> *Exemple :* Tu te souviens du taille-basse dans les années 2000 ? C’est tellement ringard ! Do you remember 2000 low-rise jeans? That’s so has-been!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Emily in Paris: 9 Lessons for French Students & Fans - Coucou French Classes
> 
> 
> Coucou French teachers give insights, tips and their perspectives on French language used in Emily in Paris starring Lily Collins on Netflix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> coucoufrenchclasses.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I just LOVE this!!!  I was so lucky to be working in Paris from 2004 - 2006 and, as such, heard a LOT of the slang regarding certain “types” of people (alas, oftentimes referring to us ‘Ugly Americans’)!!


----------



## marietouchet

CeeJay said:


> I just LOVE this!!!  I was so lucky to be working in Paris from 2004 - 2006 and, as such, heard a LOT of the slang regarding certain “types” of people (alas, oftentimes referring to us ‘Ugly Americans’)!!


American ladies are often called RICAINES, not a complement.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG is having fun: it was such a missed opportunity that William didn't pitch a role for Kate in Hollywood.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't especially like the Markles...they are loud and like to talk an awful lot, especially about themselves. But I'd love to see a court not bowing to Raptor's ridiculous demands for once so I am rooting for Samantha.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'lose ANOTHER key aide'
> 
> 
> PR guru Toya Holness joined the Sussexes in October 2020 and was promoted to oversee their PR on both sides of the Atlantic in March last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buhbye  Toya!
> 
> Folks, the ship be sinkin'   The rats are fleeing!


Tourre puts it so nicely…


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not judging - as the person who gains and looses the same 20 pounds regularly who am I to talk -, I just found it...out of character if you will.



Fellow human yo yo here


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Tourre puts it so nicely…



apparently they don't treat staff well. what a surprise.
You would think that having been a working person herself, she would show some respect to employees. but I guess she is so full of her "royal duchess" self she's insufferable.  and H has been waited on and spoiled his whole life so here we are.


----------



## Lodpah

CeeJay said:


> Oh I know exactly who you are referring to, a total nut-job!!!   When I lived in Connecticut and we would go to the Polo matches in Farmington/Avon, you would ALWAYS see those “types” of gals at the ymatch. Then, funny enough, the movie “The Thomas Crown Affair” was in TV (the original with Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway) .. and there’s the segment of when she attends his match, in her nice sports car .. snapping pictures of him (I just loved her clothing in that movie) .. and that was when I realized what my Father was referring to - “polo girl”!!


Reminds me when they use to hire the band my husband was in for the Polo matches. They would perform during the event and then afterwards the party at someone's house. Things I saw there, I cannot unsee. Cocaine, alcohol fueled parties, one guy having sex with 3 or four girls, total bacchanalia mode. It had a DARK aura that I could not stand.  The band ended up not wanting to play at their events due to the fact that it was like straight out of a hard porn movie. Made Hugh Hefner's parties kiddie play.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> apparently they don't treat staff well. what a surprise.
> You would think that having been a working person herself, she would show some respect to employees. but I guess she is so full of her "royal duchess" self she's insufferable.  and H has been waited on and spoiled his whole life so here we are.



I can't remember who said it, but it was said that she never got how to treat "the servants" because she saw them as bondsmen who were supposed to answer to her every whim.

And then there's Philip who was born in a castle, had nannies and servants all his life even when he was basically a broke orphan, who treated his staff with nothing but respect and kindness.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The BLG is having fun: it was such a missed opportunity that William didn't pitch a role for Kate in Hollywood.




I question some of his analyses but I think this one was spot on. I didn't buy the story that it was pre-arranged, and now I understand why when I saw that still photo Kate wasn't smiling. Tom is very outgoing and he was just being a gentleman. William is more reserved, looked momentarily taken aback, but then the hand on her back was a subtle signal that Kate is "his".

And don't forget, Daniel Craig did jokingly say Kate should be a Bond girl.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't remember who said it, but it was said that she never got how to treat "the servants" because she saw them as bondsmen who were supposed to answer to her every whim.
> 
> And then there's Philip who was born in a castle, had nannies and servants all his life even when he was basically a broke orphan, who treated his staff with nothing but respect and kindness.



For years I had the misinformed idea that Philip was just the royal consort who regularly put his foot in his mouth. I have come to learn that there was much more to him than that. I don't imagine the Queen would have put up with him for 70 plus years if he was really a buffoon.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Oh I know exactly who you are referring to, a total nut-job!!!   When I lived in Connecticut and we would go to the Polo matches in Farmington/Avon, you would ALWAYS see those “types” of gals at the ymatch. Then, funny enough, the movie “The Thomas Crown Affair” was in TV (the original with Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway) .. and there’s the segment of when she attends his match, in her nice sports car .. snapping pictures of him (I just loved her clothing in that movie) .. and that was when I realized what my Father was referring to - “polo girl”!!



They just don't make movies like that anymore *sigh*


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't remember who said it, but it was said that she never got how to treat "the servants" because she saw them as bondsmen who were supposed to answer to her every whim.
> 
> And then there's Philip who was born in a castle, had nannies and servants all his life even when he was basically a broke orphan, who treated his staff with nothing but respect and kindness.


there is a definite lack of breeding with Meghan
and H is apparently a spoiled brat


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> there is a definite lack of breeding with Meghan
> and H is apparently a spoiled brat



Yes to both of this. Though I will say her complete lack of manners has astounded me many times (e.g. ripping stuff he'd been given from Harry's hands or ellbowing him in the ribs) while once upon a time he was at least able to function in public and display politeness.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes to both of this. Though I will say her complete lack of manners has astounded me many times (e.g. ripping stuff he'd been given from Harry's hands) while once upon a time he was at least able to function in public and display politeness.


yes, her behavior with him - shoving herself in front of him, pulling and pushing him, is just awful


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> there is a definite lack of breeding with Meghan
> and H is apparently a spoiled brat



I would hesitate to say "breeding" as it has a socioeconomic connotation. Plenty of people from humble beginnings have good manners and know how to conduct themselves. She was apparently spoiled as a child, filled with the notion that she was a special snowflake,  and we are seeing the end result.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I would hesitate to say "breeding" as it has a socioeconomic connotation. Plenty of people from humble beginnings have good manners and know how to conduct themselves. She was apparently spoiled as a child, filled with the notion that she was a special snowflake,  and we are seeing the end result.


Some people refer to it as "home training."  In simple words, mom and dad taught you good manners, how to treat people and how to behave in general.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I would hesitate to say "breeding" as it has a socioeconomic connotation. Plenty of people from humble beginnings have good manners and know how to conduct themselves. She was apparently spoiled as a child, filled with the notion th at she was a special snowflake,  and we are seeing the end result.


maybe so but you can come from a family with little money and still be raised right (as you say).  Meghan didn't come from a poor background but she lacks decency and good manners
Apparently she was either spoiled or is a born narcissist....did you ever see the very old movie The Bad Seed?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Plenty of evidence Hazzie missed those lessons as well.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'lose ANOTHER key aide'
> 
> 
> PR guru Toya Holness joined the Sussexes in October 2020 and was promoted to oversee their PR on both sides of the Atlantic in March last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buhbye  Toya!
> 
> Folks, the ship be sinkin'   The rats are fleeing!


The Suckesses have by this point an established reputation as toxic employers.

Yet there seems to be a repeating sequence in hired staff: educated, attractive, strong vitae candidates, with an over abundance of self confidence or just plain chutzpah. They may be lured by the possibility of access to real royalty and Hollywood celebrities.  They think they will be “the one” to become the perfect, indispensable employee who gains fame. The months go on and they experience the toxic twosome as predecessors have, plus, increasingly, find themselves slogging. The longer time goes on, the more exposed to the world their employers’  true nasty selves have become, their salability is diminishing. With the exception of $unshine $ucks which seems to thrive on down and dirty, the local Suckess staff hires begin to see the gloom ahead, figure out no one else is looking out for them, and bail while they can. Any with morals or conscience may struggle with post employment guilt for ever having been part of the toxic team.

Maybe they could negotiate a severance pkg to include ButterUp mental health support?


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree with the pp, she probably just got lucky after the first baby.


Wasn't the green dress worn after the birth of Archie?  I don't see any big weight loss there?   She was certainly much slimmer at her wedding.  If I had a team of chefs cooking for me and access to a gym and trainer in my home, I'd like to think I would be back to fighting weight in no time


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't remember who said it, but it was said that she never got how to treat "the servants" because she saw them as bondsmen who were supposed to answer to her every whim.
> 
> And then there's Philip who was born in a castle, had nannies and servants all his life even when he was basically a broke orphan, who treated his staff with nothing but respect and kindness.



I never cared if one is old rich, nouveau riche, or not rich at all. Though, I can't stand pretentious and vulgar, and TW is both imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz and TW are not going to like this…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Wasn't the green dress worn after the birth of Archie?  I don't see any big weight loss there?   She was certainly much slimmer at her wedding.  If I had a team of chefs cooking for me and access to a gym and trainer in my home, I'd like to think I would be back to fighting weight in no time



I was thinking about the occasion in the blue VB dress complete with super long extensions and a ton of make-up to really rub it in...the one where he wanted to greet someone and that stupid cow wouldn't let go of his hand but also not walk with him, so she was just stubbornly standing there while their arms got longer and longer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I went to look for the footage and it is referenced in several articles but nowhere to be found. Interesting, hu? (It was the Endeavor Awards where Raptor gave a speech...they also attended another year when she was pregnant and she was seen yanking his hand when he wanted to let go of hers...shall I see if that video has been scrubbed too?)

But also, @Toby93 you are completely right, she is not super slim on that occasion either, it's just that she was still pretty chubby when they left and totally lost weight while gone.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I went to look for the footage and it is referenced in several articles but nowhere to be found. Interesting, hu? (It was the Endeavor Awards where Raptor gave a speech...they also attended another year when she was pregnant and she was seen yanking his hand when he wanted to let go of hers...shall I see if that video has been scrubbed too?)
> 
> But also, @Toby93 you are completely right, she is not super slim on that occasion either, it's just that she was still pretty chubby when they left and totally lost weight while gone.



Is this it?









						Meghan Markle dazzles in £980 Victoria Beckham dress for Endeavour Fund Awards
					

MEGHAN Markle dazzled in a beautiful blue Victoria Beckham dress as she arrived at the Endeavour Fund Awards in London this evening. The Duchess of Sussex looked sensational in the fitted blue dres…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The dress and the occasion, yes, but not the incident. Also, I now want to poke out my ears because I watched it to see if it was in there and had to listen to her stupid opener...aaaall the waaaay from Canada


----------



## CarryOn2020

This one happened pre-wedding. Plenty of red flags here:


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> The Suckesses have by this point an established reputation as toxic employers.
> 
> Yet there seems to be a repeating sequence in hired staff: educated, attractive, strong vitae candidates, with an over abundance of self confidence or just plain chutzpah. They may be lured by the possibility of access to real royalty and Hollywood celebrities.  They think they will be “the one” to become the perfect, indispensable employee who gains fame. The months go on and they experience the toxic twosome as predecessors have, plus, increasingly, find themselves slogging. The longer time goes on, the more exposed to the world their employers’  true nasty selves have become, their salability is diminishing. With the exception of $unshine $ucks which seems to thrive on down and dirty, the local Suckess staff hires begin to see the gloom ahead, figure out no one else is looking out for them, and bail while they can. Any with morals or conscience may struggle with post employment guilt for ever having been part of the toxic team.
> 
> Maybe they could negotiate a severance pkg to include ButterUp mental health support?


They think they’ll be the Huma Abedin to Markle’s Hilary *******. As if!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This one happened pre-wedding. Plenty of red flags here:




So rude. 

Also, in the light of the Amber&Johnny lawsuit I said somewhere "At least she's not violent" about in my opinion psychologically abusive Raptor...but seeing she has no problems elbowing him in the ribs, yanking his hand, slapping the hand of staff or digging her nails into her baby in front of cameras I am just not so sure anymore what she does behind closed doors.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Opinion: New Kate photo highlights Harry's nightmare
					

Kate and William dazzling Hollywood couldn't come at a worse time for Harry and Meghan.




					www.nzherald.co.nz
				





9 minutes to read





Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William, Duke of Cambridge greet Tom Cruise. Photo / Getty Images
news.com.au
By Daniela Elser
OPINION
It's a strange day when the Court Circular collides with the world's most famous Scientologist.
Yet, there on Thursday night in London's famous Leicester Square, was not only the assembled cast of the new Top Gun movie, including Operating Thetan Level Eight Tom Cruise, but also William and Kate, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Don't worry: this was not them off on some school night jolly, royal duty be damned! The unveiling of the long-awaited sequel was a Royal Film Performance, held in aid of The Film and TV Charity, an organisation that supports those working behind the scenes in the industry.
*ADVERTISEMENT*

Advertise with NZME.
After making their way inside the Odeon Luxe theatre, there was one collective low moan of pleasure from the British press: the Cambridges look gooooooood. Not nicely turned out. Not pretty in the duchess' case. Not cheerily doing their bit.





Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge is accompanied by star actor Tom Cruise as she arrives for the Top Gun: Maverick Royal Film Performance. Photo / Getty Images
Somehow the very same two people who for so long were the human embodiment of a beige mid-range wool sweater have become a sleek and sophisticated double act.
What we have seen emerge over the course of the last year especially is William and Kate 2.0, something that goes far beyond the duchess' new and improved wardrobes (thank the lord those blasted cork wedges have bitten the dust) and instead reflects the covert but considered campaign that has been going on as the couple transition to king and queen-in-waiting.
*Keep up with the latest in lifestyle and entertainment*
Get the latest lifestyle & entertainment headlines straight to your inbox.
Please email me competitions, offers and other updates. You can stop these at any time.

SIGN UP
By signing up for this newsletter, you agree to NZME’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
For Camp Cambridge, this repositioning of the couple from stale Middle England to dynamic activist duo is the product of years of hard work.
And for Camp Sussex, could this transformation have come at a worse time?
Two weeks from today, Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be back in the UK, along with their son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet, to help celebrate the Queen's Platinum Jubilee. The stakes have not been so high for someone stepping foot on British soil since William, Duke of Normandy landed in East Sussex.
It will of course be their first proper visit as a family since Harry and Meghan quit royal life in high dudgeon in January 2020 and having spent the intervening years telling the world that the Palace is a cruel and racist institution. (In April the couple made a flying overnight visit to see Her Majesty which Harry later claimed was so he could make sure that the 96-year-old has "right people around her" and is "protected


----------



## lanasyogamama

I couldn’t get the whole article to copy.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't remember who said it, but it was said that she never got how to treat "the servants" because she saw them as bondsmen who were supposed to answer to her every whim.
> 
> And then there's Philip who was born in a castle, had nannies and servants all his life even when he was basically a broke orphan, who treated his staff with nothing but respect and kindness.


That is the sign of a gentleman. Always has been.  Always will be.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Opinion: New Kate photo highlights Harry's nightmare
> 
> 
> Kate and William dazzling Hollywood couldn't come at a worse time for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nzherald.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 minutes to read
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William, Duke of Cambridge greet Tom Cruise. Photo / Getty Images
> news.com.au
> By Daniela Elser
> OPINION
> It's a strange day when the Court Circular collides with the world's most famous Scientologist.
> Yet, there on Thursday night in London's famous Leicester Square, was not only the assembled cast of the new Top Gun movie, including Operating Thetan Level Eight Tom Cruise, but also William and Kate, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
> Don't worry: this was not them off on some school night jolly, royal duty be damned! The unveiling of the long-awaited sequel was a Royal Film Performance, held in aid of The Film and TV Charity, an organisation that supports those working behind the scenes in the industry.
> *ADVERTISEMENT*
> Advertise with NZME.
> After making their way inside the Odeon Luxe theatre, there was one collective low moan of pleasure from the British press: the Cambridges look gooooooood. Not nicely turned out. Not pretty in the duchess' case. Not cheerily doing their bit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge is accompanied by star actor Tom Cruise as she arrives for the Top Gun: Maverick Royal Film Performance. Photo / Getty Images
> Somehow the very same two people who for so long were the human embodiment of a beige mid-range wool sweater have become a sleek and sophisticated double act.
> What we have seen emerge over the course of the last year especially is William and Kate 2.0, something that goes far beyond the duchess' new and improved wardrobes (thank the lord those blasted cork wedges have bitten the dust) and instead reflects the covert but considered campaign that has been going on as the couple transition to king and queen-in-waiting.
> *Keep up with the latest in lifestyle and entertainment*
> Get the latest lifestyle & entertainment headlines straight to your inbox.
> Please email me competitions, offers and other updates. You can stop these at any time.
> 
> SIGN UP
> By signing up for this newsletter, you agree to NZME’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
> For Camp Cambridge, this repositioning of the couple from stale Middle England to dynamic activist duo is the product of years of hard work.
> And for Camp Sussex, could this transformation have come at a worse time?
> Two weeks from today, Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be back in the UK, along with their son Archie and baby daughter Lilibet, to help celebrate the Queen's Platinum Jubilee. The stakes have not been so high for someone stepping foot on British soil since William, Duke of Normandy landed in East Sussex.
> It will of course be their first proper visit as a family since Harry and Meghan quit royal life in high dudgeon in January 2020 and having spent the intervening years telling the world that the Palace is a cruel and racist institution. (In April the couple made a flying overnight visit to see Her Majesty which Harry later claimed was so he could make sure that the 96-year-old has "right people around her" and is "protected



Even in New Zealand, they see what we see. Excellent article, thank you for posting.
I must say Catherine seems to be giving him the “eye” in this photo while he is studying the ground. Maybe she is displeased that he is touching ‘the ring’.  Perhaps she is giving him the ‘tsk’ sound.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Wasn't the green dress worn after the birth of Archie?  I don't see any big weight loss there?   She was certainly much slimmer at her wedding.  If I had a team of chefs cooking for me and access to a gym and trainer in my home, I'd like to think I would be back to fighting weight in no time



I think many brides are at their slimmest adult weights on their wedding day. And once she hooked Hazy she probably no longer felt the need to continue the starvation diet that is common to female actors.


----------



## EverSoElusive

TW(itch)'s stans can't be anymore delusional than this. Amal Clooney era? First, she doesn't come close to Amal's brains nor grace. Second, she's nothing but a fashion copycat, or rather cosplay. 

Why is she inserting herself front and center in the picture when she's not one of the players? What's her role? Is she a patron? Is she part owner of the team? Just WTF????


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> TW(itch)'s stans can't be anymore delusional than this. Amal Clooney era? First, she doesn't come close to Amal's brains nor grace. Second, she's nothing but a fashion copycat, or rather cosplay.
> 
> Why is she inserting herself front and center in the picture when she's not one of the players? What's her role? Is she a patron? Is she part owner of the team? Just WTF????




She is ridiculous. If they disappeared tomorrow it would not be soon enough.


----------



## Jayne1

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t imagine a more boring show.  Neither of them lead exciting lives…they only wish they did.
> Now if that were a show about the Cambridge’s lives, it would be a must see.   Imagine Catherine meeting with dress designers and seamstresses to see how they choose and expertly tailor her clothes!


Boring, yes, but she will control the narrative like she did with Oprah and and rewrite history.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


>




She is uncouth. I'm mortified


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I went to look for the footage and it is referenced in several articles but nowhere to be found. Interesting, hu? (It was the Endeavor Awards where Raptor gave a speech...they also attended another year when she was pregnant and she was seen yanking his hand when he wanted to let go of hers...shall I see if that video has been scrubbed too?)
> 
> But also, @Toby93 you are completely right, she is not super slim on that occasion either, it's just that she was still pretty chubby when they left and totally lost weight while gone.





			https://www-dailystar-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/
		

Hopefully this link works. It’s a 19 second video of TW not letting go of his hand. Here’s a screen shot, not good but gives you the idea. I’m out in the woods so just using my phone and not so adept with it.


----------



## Chanbal

Can't blame Hollywood… 



To make matters even more worrying, a recent *poll* had suggested that as much as 80% of people supported Queen Elizabeth’s decision to ban the couple from the palace balcony, when they attend her Platinum Jubilee. 

And with so much negative scrutiny surrounding the couple, they will have to produce some stellar content in order to keep people interested.

In a statement, the executive is quoted as *saying* the following: *“As we enter a recession…they are highly unlikely to find other buyers for their projects.

“They have to do something to grab a huge audience and prove to Netflix they were worth the investment – otherwise they are likely to find themselves being quickly frozen out.”*









						Hollywood Wants Harry And Meghan GONE-‘They Are Highly Unlikely To Find Other Buyers For Their Projects’
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could end up being canceled by Hollywood if they continue to speak out negatively against the Royal family.   Hollywood Wants Harry And Meghan GONE-'They Are Highly Unlikely To Find Other Buyers




					theovertimer.com


----------



## Chanbal

This is surreal…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is surreal…




Not to sound shallow, he looks dirty and smelly while she looks lighter(?).  Notice W after a polo game has washed his face.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Can't blame Hollywood…
> View attachment 5410120
> 
> 
> To make matters even more worrying, a recent *poll* had suggested that as much as 80% of people supported Queen Elizabeth’s decision to ban the couple from the palace balcony, when they attend her Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> And with so much negative scrutiny surrounding the couple, they will have to produce some stellar content in order to keep people interested.
> 
> In a statement, the executive is quoted as *saying* the following: *“As we enter a recession…they are highly unlikely to find other buyers for their projects.
> 
> “They have to do something to grab a huge audience and prove to Netflix they were worth the investment – otherwise they are likely to find themselves being quickly frozen out.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood Wants Harry And Meghan GONE-‘They Are Highly Unlikely To Find Other Buyers For Their Projects’
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could end up being canceled by Hollywood if they continue to speak out negatively against the Royal family.   Hollywood Wants Harry And Meghan GONE-'They Are Highly Unlikely To Find Other Buyers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theovertimer.com



*Recession *and* frozen out * are words that certainly give us pause. Times are going to get tougher, so let’s buy a booth at the polo club.  Brilliant.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: Posters are saying the baby is not theirs, even though ManipulatorMM wants us to think that. Another mind screw.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Note the white skirt is short


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I went to look for the footage and it is referenced in several articles but nowhere to be found. Interesting, hu? (It was the Endeavor Awards where Raptor gave a speech...they also attended another year when she was pregnant and she was seen yanking his hand when he wanted to let go of hers...shall I see if that video has been scrubbed too?)
> 
> But also, @Toby93 you are completely right, she is not super slim on that occasion either, it's just that she was still pretty chubby when they left and totally lost weight while gone.


I found the video you are looking for, but can’t get it posted with my iPad. The site is express.co.uk. Article from March 6, 2020 headline “Meghan Markle sends Twitter into meltdown as viewers think she pushed Harry out of the way”. 

And did she ever, no doubt about it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Always so akward and out of place.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Always so akward and out of place.



Anyone else wished they'd dropped the trophy?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Is anyone here interested in buying this?
> 
> *EMILY PRESCOTT: Is Prince Harry so toxic that punk artist Mark Sloper is going to lose a small fortune by featuring him in a Jubilee-themed neon portrait*
> 
> _He spent a small fortune creating the likeness of the Duke of Sussex with ‘potential H-bomb’ written across it in neon – a phrase that features in the Sex Pistols’ controversial 1977 hit God Save The Queen – but now fears he will have to scrap it.
> 
> ‘No one wants to buy it,’ he tells me. ‘There is absolutely zero interest. It is currently sitting in the studio and is worth about ten grand, but I think I will have to take it to bits.’
> 
> He believes his subject has become too ‘toxic’, adding: ‘All my works of the Queen sell out immediately, so it appears that the British public dislike him.*’*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EMILY PRESCOTT: Mark Sloper loses fortune on Prince Harry artwork
> 
> 
> EMILY PRESCOTT: Mark Sloper fears he will lose a small fortune on an artwork he created featuring Prince Harry, claiming there is 'absolutely no interest in it.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Did this guy listen to the Sex Pistols at all before he decided to steal the image?   
I mean I’d question whether the idea of punk commemorative royal portraiture might be a bit of a *confused* message (being generous) and that’s why it’s got no takers. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not judging - as the person who gains and looses the same 20 pounds regularly who am I to talk -, I just found it...out of character if you will.


Well I think there’s 2 contextual things going on in the background here. I don’t think there’s any doubt she would struggle to get weight loss surgery if that’s what she wanted as she’s in Cali and she has no problem plugging her face.
1. I would say from her ‘acting’ days to her marriage were the heyday of the size 0 in general whereas now being a bit thicker is fashionable (not that I’m complaining) 
2. He’s always gone for blonde and skinny before so If they got divorced she could definitely say he was ignoring her since she gained the ‘baby weight’ and if he started dating another skinny blonde girl after her it’d definitely count against him. Not that you should feel you have to change your body for a lover of course but you get what I mean, it’d make a lot of people sympathetic because we ‘share the pressure’. 


charlottawill said:


> For years I had the misinformed idea that Philip was just the royal consort who regularly put his foot in his mouth. I have come to learn that there was much more to him than that. I don't imagine the Queen would have put up with him for 70 plus years if he was really a buffoon.


TBH I think he was strident/loud earlier in his marriage but we only really remember him in his mellowed out old age. Also he apparently competed with his MIL a lot  so I think he cooled off once she passed. 


EverSoElusive said:


> TW(itch)'s stans can't be anymore delusional than this. Amal Clooney era? First, she doesn't come close to Amal's brains nor grace. Second, she's nothing but a fashion copycat, or rather cosplay.
> 
> Why is she inserting herself front and center in the picture when she's not one of the players? What's her role? Is she a patron? Is she part owner of the team? Just WTF????





CarryOn2020 said:


>



Yuck yuck that PDA is truly cursed. She’s playing the giggling 40 year old ingenue again with her jock bully boyfriend.

He can’t wash his face because he’s a MAAAANNN Ugg Ugg. He’s Bert Reynolds, Arnie, Chuck, Sly, Mike Tyson, Tyson Fury and the entire roster of MMA fighters combined. 

Ladies, let’s focus on the positive - she has FINALLY got a new weave…

The shorter waves are such a break from the greasy straight tendrils I’m almost ready to give her a free pass on this.
And the hat is nice. It’s a classy hat with wayfarers- classic. I dunno why she decided to wear a sheer black blouse with a canvas sail and that criminal wide black belt against white fabric with no cinch to her widest part and it’s short which is tacky and combined together it’s very confused older lady on a cruise who has used up most of her good outfits  but the hair is at least going in the right direction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo she is trying to match her friend’s hair.  Since they are both wearing polka dots, is Nflix planning on swapping them?  Hmm, we may be seeing something we shouldn’t    TBH she acts way too hyper for this event - nerves or something else?


----------



## elvisfan4life

jelliedfeels said:


> Did this guy listen to the Sex Pistols at all before he decided to steal the image?
> I mean I’d question whether the idea of punk commemorative royal portraiture might be a bit of a *confused* message (being generous) and that’s why it’s got no takers.
> 
> Well I think there’s 2 contextual things going on in the background here. I don’t think there’s any doubt she would struggle to get weight loss surgery if that’s what she wanted as she’s in Cali and she has no problem plugging her face.
> 1. I would say from her ‘acting’ days to her marriage were the heyday of the size 0 in general whereas now being a bit thicker is fashionable (not that I’m complaining)
> 2. He’s always gone for blonde and skinny before so If they got divorced she could definitely say he was ignoring her since she gained the ‘baby weight’ and if he started dating another skinny blonde girl after her it’d definitely count against him. Not that you should feel you have to change your body for a lover of course but you get what I mean, it’d make a lot of people sympathetic because we ‘share the pressure’.
> 
> TBH I think he was strident/loud earlier in his marriage but we only really remember him in his mellowed out old age. Also he apparently competed with his MIL a lot  so I think he cooled off once she passed.
> 
> 
> Yuck yuck that PDA is truly cursed. She’s playing the giggling 40 year old ingenue again with her jock bully boyfriend.
> 
> He can’t wash his face because he’s a MAAAANNN Ugg Ugg. He’s Bert Reynolds, Arnie, Chuck, Sly, Mike Tyson, Tyson Fury and the entire roster of MMA fighters combined.
> 
> Ladies, let’s focus on the positive - she has FINALLY got a new weave…
> 
> The shorter waves are such a break from the greasy straight tendrils I’m almost ready to give her a free pass on this.
> And the hat is nice. It’s a classy hat with wayfarers- classic. I dunno why she decided to wear a sheer black blouse with a canvas sail and that criminal wide black belt against white fabric with no cinch to her widest part and it’s short which is tacky and combined together it’s very confused older lady on a cruise who has used up most of her good outfits  but the hair is at least going in the right direction.




All that money no style no taste - pure tacky


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is she wearing a skirt or skort?  









						Meghan Markle kisses Prince Harry at polo event in Santa Barbara
					

The Duchess of Sussex stepped out in a polka dot blouse, black wide brim hat and wide-leg shorts for the star-studded event in Santa Barbara yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is she wearing a skirt or skort?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle kisses Prince Harry at polo event in Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex stepped out in a polka dot blouse, black wide brim hat and wide-leg shorts for the star-studded event in Santa Barbara yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





you mean this one?
My first thought was she’s saving people time on the ‘what you ordered…what you got’ memes.
Then I thought of Palme the ‘decoy’ in episode 1 but those women look nowhere near enough alike- I mean the other one looks good in that outfit  

A skort?  
she really is the 40 year old school girl isn’t she?

I did think about posting ‘big fish little fish she’s a box!’ On the style thread but decided it might seem unnecessarily mean, I feel no such compunction here though


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5410190
> 
> you mean this one?
> My first thought was she’s saving people time on the ‘what you ordered…what you got’ memes.
> Then I thought of Palme the ‘decoy’ in episode 1 but those women look nowhere near enough alike- I mean the other one looks good in that outfit
> 
> A skort?
> she really is the 40 year old school girl isn’t she?
> 
> I did think about posting ‘big fish little fish she’s a box!’ On the style thread but decided it might seem unnecessarily mean, I feel no such compunction here though



Agree, the ‘friend’ looks perfect. MM misses the mark imo. A skort?   on a 40 yr old? At a polo club?  Oh my.
Somebody, please, call her stylist.

ETA: technically, she may be wearing baggy shorts.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Note the white skirt is short



Can only imagine comments in the stands among other wives and girlfriends. There she is pushing herself and her oversized hat into the middle of all those sweaty men  like a ***** in heat. Almost as demeaning as the Ellen Show.


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5410190
> 
> you mean this one?
> My first thought was she’s saving people time on the ‘what you ordered…what you got’ memes.
> Then I thought of Palme the ‘decoy’ in episode 1 but those women look nowhere near enough alike- I mean the other one looks good in that outfit
> 
> A skort?
> she really is the 40 year old school girl isn’t she?
> 
> I did think about posting ‘big fish little fish she’s a box!’ On the style thread but decided it might seem unnecessarily mean, I feel no such compunction here though


The other lady looks more like a Duchess than M. Looks classy an elegant, effortlessly while M looks cheap and nasty. She looks like she's wandering around a mid priced department store trying on the hats for no reason whatsoever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> The other lady looks more like a Duchess than M. Looks classy an elegant, effortlessly while M looks cheap and nasty. She looks like she's wandering around a mid priced department store trying on the hats for no reason whatsoever.



Playing dress-up but missing the mark once again.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> TW(itch)'s stans can't be anymore delusional than this. Amal Clooney era? First, she doesn't come close to Amal's brains nor grace. Second, she's nothing but a fashion copycat, or rather cosplay.
> 
> Why is she inserting herself front and center in the picture when she's not one of the players? What's her role? Is she a patron? Is she part owner of the team? Just WTF????




We have a saying in the country where Harry used to live: 

*There's no show without punch.* From the Punch and Judy show, punch couldn't bear even sharing the stage and would kill everyone so he could have it all to himself again and again.  

Wherever's the camera op, wherever's front-centre-stage. There you will find Me-again.


----------



## duna

EverSoElusive said:


> TW(itch)'s stans can't be anymore delusional than this. Amal Clooney era? First, she doesn't come close to Amal's brains nor grace. Second, she's nothing but a fashion copycat, or rather cosplay.
> 
> Why is she inserting herself front and center in the picture when she's not one of the players? What's her role? Is she a patron? Is she part owner of the team? Just WTF????




Notice how she wears the hat pushed right back so that the rim doesn't cover her face....what a piece of work she is


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> The other lady looks more like a Duchess than M. Looks classy an elegant, effortlessly while M looks cheap and nasty. She looks like she's wandering around a mid priced department store trying on the hats for no reason whatsoever.



I kept quiet because I didn't mind her in the trying to do preppy shorts/shirt sets (OK, trying to do Diana doing smart-casual). She loves her legs, good for her. 

But, yeh, _now_ she wears a hat. 

And it's cheap-looking 'almost' picture hat with cheap-looking shorts posing as culottes, and with heels  

Everything _could_ have been OK (for a provincial tea-party) if the culottes were longer or were a midi-skirt. All I can think of is she's literally looking at 'inspirational' pictures of women and trying to recreate the look with the help of Amazon. She must be doing Amal on a budget. 

The woman needs help - or a mirror. 

But hey, M knows best.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5410190
> 
> you mean this one?
> My first thought was she’s saving people time on the ‘what you ordered…what you got’ memes.
> Then I thought of Palme the ‘decoy’ in episode 1 but those women look nowhere near enough alike- I mean the other one looks good in that outfit
> 
> A skort?
> she really is the 40 year old school girl isn’t she?
> 
> I did think about posting ‘big fish little fish she’s a box!’ On the style thread but decided it might seem unnecessarily mean, I feel no such compunction here though



Not sure who's the "friend" in the picture but I agree that she looked better than Nutmeg. The "friend's" dress looked very much like something Kate would wear and looking damn good in it


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo she is trying to match her friend’s hair.  Since they are both wearing polka dots, is Nflix planning on swapping them?  Hmm, we may be seeing something we shouldn’t    TBH she acts way too hyper for this event - nerves or something else?



Of course she's hyper at events because she gets to be on camera


----------



## EverSoElusive

I absolutely do not understand her over exaggerated facial expression in front of the baby.

Also, am I the only one who feels that she held Harry's face in a really odd way when they kissed? It seemed forced and almost like they want people to think that they were kissing but probably didn't and the "kiss" was shielded by her hand.


----------



## lanasyogamama

You can feel her internally screaming when she isn’t front and center in that picture!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> I kept quiet because I didn't mind her in the trying to do preppy shorts/shirt sets (OK, trying to do Diana doing smart-casual). She loves her legs, good for her.
> 
> But, yeh, _now_ she wears a hat.
> 
> And it's cheap-looking 'almost' picture hat with cheap-looking shorts posing as culottes, and with heels
> 
> Everything _could_ have been OK (for a provincial tea-party) if the culottes were longer or were a midi-skirt. All I can think of is she's literally looking at 'inspirational' pictures of women and trying to recreate the look with the help of Amazon. She must be doing Amal on a budget.
> 
> The woman needs help - or a mirror.
> 
> But hey, M knows best.




RE: About her wearing a hat now.

I'll give it to her, this hat is nice but remember the time when she had her first solo engagement with the Queen (which was such a huge honor), refused to wear one showing off her greasy roots and hair flying all over the place? Yet now when she's a "celebrity", she's willing to wear a hat, trying to look all royal.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> RE: About her wearing a hat now.
> 
> I'll give it to her, this hat is nice but remember the time when she had her first solo engagement with the Queen (which was such a huge honor), refused to wear one showing off her greasy roots and hair flying all over the place? Yet now when she's a "celebrity", she's willing to wear a hat, trying to look all royal.



I think she (and he) have a screw loose. 

Feel like singing "you never know what you've got till it's gone" to the stupid pair. 

Here's another Harkle song


----------



## Annawakes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Always so akward and out of place.



“_Clap clap clap my hands like a little girl, I’m so cute, I’m so delighted!  Oh wait, their sweaty arms are blocking my face, I’m gonna keep clapping like I’m still delighted but I’m seething inside…..how DARE they?!!!?!  That’s right move your arms back I’m gonna step up get out of the way of my huge hat, people gotta see meeeeeee!”_


----------



## Sharont2305

I mean, even a fictional prostitute from decades ago looks classier than TW.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think she (and he) have a screw loose.



Yeah, her brain is absolutely not wired correctly, that's the only explanation for many of her actions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> “_Clap clap clap my hands like a little girl, I’m so cute, I’m so delighted!  Oh wait, their sweaty arms are blocking my face, I’m gonna keep clapping like I’m still delighted but I’m seething inside…..how DARE they?!!!?!  That’s right move your arms back I’m gonna step up get out of the way of my huge hat, people gotta see meeeeeee!”_



Did she make them lift the trophy over her head so she could be part of the picture? I refuse to watch the video again to know for sure.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, her brain is absolutely not wired correctly, that's the only explanation for many of her actions.


You are kind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I mean, even a fictional prostitute from decades ago looks classier than TW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410272
> View attachment 5410273
> View attachment 5410274
> View attachment 5410292



So, is this confirmation that she was a ‘hooker’ before Hazzie?  The yacht girl rumors are true?  Hmmm.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did she make them lift the trophy over her head so she could be part of the picture? I refuse to watch the video again to know for sure.



Yes, she did wiggle her way in there. Hazz did push her toward the middle because she seemed befuddled by all the people (men). 
I spy Nflix all over this nonsense.  They seem to be a very demanding boss. Nflix gets what Nflix wants.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Not sure who's the "friend" in the picture but I agree that she looked better than Nutmeg. The "friend's" dress looked very much like something Kate would wear and looking damn good in it



She used to be on Suits. Her name escapes me at the moment.
Abigail Spencer - 




__





						6 Things to Know About Abigail Spencer, Meghan Markle's Close Friend and Former <i>Suits</i> Costar
					

The actress was recently seen hiking with Meghan and Prince Harry, during the royals' Canadian vacation.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> She must be doing Amal on a budget.



Harsh but true


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## CarryOn2020

updated post: very popular dress worn by many celebs 








						Kate Middleton Just Wore the Polka-Dot Dress Celebs Are Obsessed With
					

Stylish stars are obsessed with the dotted Alessandra Rich frock. It's been everywhere from the red carpet to the royal wedding.




					www.etonline.com
				



Rrrrright. MM and friend do not copyKate??


----------



## charlottawill

Chloe302225 said:


>



The proportions are just all wrong with her boxy figure and toothpicks. I'm sure she thinks the hat is Kentucky Derby but it screams 70's bridesmaid to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

TW looks like she’s playing dress up. Esp bc the hat isn’t at the right angle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rrrrright. MM and friend do not copyKate??
> 
> View attachment 5410398
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410400



To be fair, if it's a ready-to-wear piece chances are someone else will have it. Entirely not the same as stalking your dead MIL's outfits from 25 years ago and copying them


----------



## V0N1B2

I know I sound like a broken record, but is she ever NOT hanging onto Harry?
Also, perhaps it’s because I’m not a narcissistic egomaniac, but I would feel like tool being the only wife/spouse/girlfriend up there on the stage with the players. Like, why, just why?
Harry can’t have anything of his own, it’s similar to how she tried to take over Invictus. I’m embarrassed for her, really.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> The Suckesses have by this point an established reputation as toxic employers.
> 
> Yet there seems to be a repeating sequence in hired staff: educated, attractive, strong vitae candidates, with an over abundance of self confidence or just plain chutzpah. They may be lured by the possibility of access to real royalty and Hollywood celebrities.  They think they will be “the one” to become the perfect, indispensable employee who gains fame. The months go on and they experience the toxic twosome as predecessors have, plus, increasingly, find themselves slogging. The longer time goes on, the more exposed to the world their employers’  true nasty selves have become, their salability is diminishing. With the exception of $unshine $ucks which seems to thrive on down and dirty, the local Suckess staff hires begin to see the gloom ahead, figure out no one else is looking out for them, and bail while they can. Any with morals or conscience may struggle with post employment guilt for ever having been part of the toxic team.
> 
> Maybe they could negotiate a severance pkg to include ButterUp mental health support?


They probably turn on the charm when interviewing and offer big money.  Then after they've entrapped the person, reality sets in.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5410190
> 
> you mean this one?
> My first thought was she’s saving people time on the ‘what you ordered…what you got’ memes.
> Then I thought of Palme the ‘decoy’ in episode 1 but those women look nowhere near enough alike- I mean the other one looks good in that outfit
> 
> A skort?
> she really is the 40 year old school girl isn’t she?
> 
> I did think about posting ‘big fish little fish she’s a box!’ On the style thread but decided it might seem unnecessarily mean, I feel no such compunction here though





CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, the ‘friend’ looks perfect. MM misses the mark imo. A skort?   on a 40 yr old? At a polo club?  Oh my.
> Somebody, please, call her stylist.
> 
> ETA: technically, she may be wearing baggy shorts.



My 2 cents:
TW looks OK to me. The expensive hair extensions look good, and the clothes hide extra fat and give her some shape that she doesn't have. It looks like she heard her stylists this time. 

I agree with @CarryOn2020, the friend looks perfect. However, the wife would look terrible in a dress like the one the friend is wearing. Does TW have friends? The friend or acquaintance is slim and has a waist.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, if it's a ready-to-wear piece chances are someone else will have it. Entirely not the same as stalking your dead MIL's outfits from 25 years ago and copying them


Plus, I think, in all fairness, the guest at Ms wedding wore it first.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Always so akward and out of place.



She really is clueless, isn't she?  That was hard to watch One of my DHs' colleague's wife was always showing up at events where wives were clearly not invited....bachelor parties, retirement parties, golf tournaments.  It was annoying to the other wives and GFs and I thought all she did was embarrass herself.  Clearly TW has no shame as she is doing this for public exposure.


----------



## A1aGypsy

EverSoElusive said:


> I absolutely do not understand her over exaggerated facial expression in front of the baby.
> 
> Also, am I the only one who feels that she held Harry's face in a really odd way when they kissed? It seemed forced and almost like they want people to think that they were kissing but probably didn't and the "kiss" was shielded by her hand.





I think she was merching the rings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Plus, I think, in all fairness, the guest at Ms wedding wore it first.



TBF it _is_ a popular dress, as seen here:








						Kate Middleton Just Wore the Polka-Dot Dress Celebs Are Obsessed With
					

Stylish stars are obsessed with the dotted Alessandra Rich frock. It's been everywhere from the red carpet to the royal wedding.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: Posters are saying the baby is not theirs, even though ManipulatorMM wants us to think that. Another mind screw.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo she is trying to match her friend’s hair.  Since they are both wearing polka dots, is Nflix planning on swapping them?  Hmm, we may be seeing something we shouldn’t    TBH she acts way too hyper for this event - nerves or something else?



"_Mr. DeMille, I m Ready for My Close Up_" 

This has been posted as a source of inspiration for the polka dots.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Plus, I think, in all fairness, the guest at Ms wedding wore it first.



Thank you. I have updated the original post.

RE: Pretty Woman - IMO it seems she is confirming those ‘yacht girl’ rumors.


----------



## Chanbal

Is she trying to imitate Kate, the children's princess?  She must be scaring the kid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very good catch, MeghansMole - we’re all being played, including the BRF


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

I can’t with the high waist shorts and an old man belt! and why is she in the middle of the team photos, did she ride with them or something? Maybe overly dressed for the occasion? Or maybe she’s like the host or special guest.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> We have a saying in the country where Harry used to live:
> 
> *There's no show without punch.* From the Punch and Judy show, punch couldn't bear even sharing the stage and would kill everyone so he could have it all to himself again and again.
> 
> Wherever's the camera op, wherever's front-centre-stage. There you will find Me-again.


100% - that is exactly what she is doing.  Too bad it is embarrassingly awkward and uncomfortable for everyone around her.  She tries to take the item out of the hands of the other player, he doesn't let it go, so she turns and starts clapping?    It also appears as though she went to kiss the first guy on the lips but then at the last minute, kisses him on the cheek.


----------



## Helventara

I thought I've seen the scene before    I also thought the hand action was weird: it’s like she was trying to guide his head/lips to hers by force. Think when a Mafia says 'look at me when I am talking to YOU!'  Maybe it was the angle…


----------



## Gal4Dior

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Always so akward and out of place.



This is the closest she’ll get to a step and repeat.  I love how she’s milking all the camera time.
That outfit is a travesty. Those white shorts with giant pleats and black stillettos (at a polo field??? ) do nothing for her.
Also, red lipstick and the polka dots? Reminds me of Pretty Woman. All because you dress like someone in a movie, doesn’t mean you get to be in one, Nutmeg…


----------



## lanasyogamama

She lacks eloquence and grace.  And she doesn’t realize it.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> She really is clueless, isn't she?  That was hard to watch One of my DHs' colleague's was always showing up at events where wives were clearly not invited....bachelor parties, retirement parties, golf tournaments.  It was annoying to the other wives and GFs and I thought all she did was embarrass herself.  Clearly TW has no shame as she is doing this for public exposure.


----------



## Toby93

Did she have another plastic surgery on her nose?


----------



## Chanbal

This picture posted by @MeghansMole is interesting. It seems the photographer is TM's partner on youtube and the smile of the gentleman on the left is intriguing. It looks like he is having some fun at the TW's expense…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Today NASA tells us a ‘sharkCanó’ is rumbling in the ocean and that the Hubble shows ‘something weird happening in the universe’.

As if anyone here needs to be told _that_ 









						'SHARKCANO' where sharks live in an acidic undersea crater is erupting
					

Satellite images show a plume of discoloured water being emitted from the Kavachi Volcano, which lies about 15 miles south of Vangunu Island, on May 14.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I feel like I’m saying too many negative things. I like the red lipstick on her.


----------



## Chanbal

zinacef said:


> I can’t with the high waist shorts and an old man belt! and why is she in the middle of the team photos, did she ride with them or something? Maybe overly dressed for the occasion? Or maybe she’s like the host or special guest.


Another picture by Larsen that seems to fit your description. TW might not be happy with this one.


----------



## Sophisticatted

It seems like she keeps trying to grab those boxes out of the other players’ hands.


----------



## Chanbal

Yeah, I can see DE's point! 












						Opinion: New Kate photo highlights Harry's nightmare
					

Kate and William dazzling Hollywood couldn't come at a worse time for Harry and Meghan.




					www.nzherald.co.nz


----------



## Chanbal

Let's post this here in case QE (or one of her assistants) is a member! 












						Royal fans ask Queen to keep Meghan and Harry 'out of UK' in 'sideshow' warning
					

Royal fans have echoed a royal expert's warning after said that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could become a distracting 'side show' at the Queen's Platinum Jubilee




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

Toby93 said:


> 100% - that is exactly what she is doing.  Too bad it is embarrassingly awkward and uncomfortable for everyone around her.  She tries to take the item out of the hands of the other player, he doesn't let it go, so she turns and starts clapping?    It also appears as though she went to kiss the first guy on the lips but then at the last minute, kisses him on the cheek.


Yeah, there was a lot to unpack there. Even though the video was classic Meghan, it’s still a shock to see someone, anyone behaving like that.  Did she curtesy to that guy after she gave him the double cheek kiss? The little dos-à-dos dance around the stage to find her place... awkward.  Gesturing to Harry like he needs direction to pick up the trophy (it’s your turn, honey-boo). Then the pièce de résistance... wiping the dirt off his face. I’m surprised she didn’t spit on a Kleenex and wipe his cheek.
The video reminded me of that UN thing she did where she also looked incredibly out of place. She really seems to have zero self awareness and doesn't know how to act in public. I can’t imagine how exhausting she must be in real life.
Who? Me? Where? What? Oh, over there. Did somebody say something to me? Where’s the camera?Should I smile? Not smile? Stand? Sit? Walk? What? Who’s that? Oh I should clap. Should I? Yes yes I’ll clap. Wait, no maybe I shouldn’t. Okay, yeah I will clap. Look, a baby! Ohmagerd sooo cute. Oh hi, it’s you lol, Umm what? What’s happening now? Where do I go? Stand where? What time is it? Hahaha. OMG was that a raindrop? Oh hai....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah, there was a lot to unpack there. Even though the video was classic Meghan, it’s still a shock to see someone, anyone behaving like that.  Did she curtesy to that guy after she gave him the double cheek kiss? The little dos-à-dos dance around the stage to find her place... awkward.  Gesturing to Harry like he needs direction to pick up the trophy (it’s your turn, honey-boo). Then the pièce de résistance... wiping the dirt off his face. I’m surprised she didn’t spit on a Kleenex and wipe his cheek.
> The video reminded me of that UN thing she did where she also looked incredibly out of place. She really seems to have zero self awareness and doesn't know how to act in public. I can’t imagine how exhausting she must be in real life.
> Who? Me? Where? What? Oh, over there. Did somebody say something to me? Where’s the camera?Should I smile? Not smile? Stand? Sit? Walk? What? Who’s that? Oh I should clap. Okay. Look, a baby! Ohmagerd sooo cute. Oh hi, it’s you lol, Umm what? What’s happening now? Where do I go? Stand where? What time is it? Hahaha. OMG was that a raindrop? Oh hai....


and holding that guy's face in her hands....did she even know him?


----------



## 1LV

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah, there was a lot to unpack there. Even though the video was classic Meghan, it’s still a shock to see someone, anyone behaving like that.  Did she curtesy to that guy after she gave him the double cheek kiss? The little dos-à-dos dance around the stage to find her place... awkward.  Gesturing to Harry like he needs direction to pick up the trophy (it’s your turn, honey-boo). Then the pièce de résistance... wiping the dirt off his face. I’m surprised she didn’t spit on a Kleenex and wipe his cheek.
> The video reminded me of that UN thing she did where she also looked incredibly out of place. She really seems to have zero self awareness and doesn't know how to act in public. I can’t imagine how exhausting she must be in real life.
> Who? Me? Where? What? Oh, over there. Did somebody say something to me? Where’s the camera?Should I smile? Not smile? Stand? Sit? Walk? What? Who’s that? Oh I should clap. Should I? Yes yes I’ll clap. Wait, no maybe I shouldn’t. Okay, yeah I will clap. Look, a baby! Ohmagerd sooo cute. Oh hi, it’s you lol, Umm what? What’s happening now? Where do I go? Stand where? What time is it? Hahaha. OMG was that a raindrop? Oh hai....


Lol!! Nailed it!


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> This picture posted by @MeghansMole is interesting. It seems the photographer is TM's partner on youtube and the smile of the gentleman on the left is intriguing. It looks like he is having some fun at the TW's expense…
> View attachment 5410462



Btw what’s with grabbing the man's head to kiss his cheeks?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and holding that guy's face in her hands....did she even know him?



Who grabs another adult’s face? It’s bad enough she kept touching Harry as if she was about to do a Hallmark Channel love scene. It’s like she has to take possession of everyone around her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Who grabs another adult’s face? It’s bad enough she kept touching Harry as if she was about to do a Hallmark Channel love scene. It’s like she has to take possession of everyone around her.


maybe she was talking into his ear.  but regardless, it's a guy she presumably doesn't know well?  and in public?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe she was talking into his ear.  but regardless, it's a guy she presumably doesn't know well?  and in public?



Touching someone’s face is an intimate act. For most of us, our faces are part of our personal boundaries. Meghan blows through those boundaries and starts petting men like they’re dogs.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Touching someone’s face is an intimate act. For most of us, our faces are part of our personal boundaries. Meghan blows through those boundaries and starts petting men like they’re dogs.


wonder what the guy's wife or GF thought of that?


----------



## csshopper

She is so frantic for attention she looks pumped on amphetamines.


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Lol!! Nailed it!


No social graces. She would benefit greatly from old fashion deportment lessons.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> She is so frantic for attention she looks pumped on amphetamines.


Yep. This is when she does her pushy routine and knocks people over and shoves them out of the way. Yes, Harry, you know what I am referring to.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> The proportions are just all wrong with her boxy figure and toothpicks. I'm sure she thinks the hat is Kentucky Derby but it screams 70's bridesmaid to me.


The wide floppy brimmed black hat with the long black hair kinda reminds me of a witch


----------



## CeeJay

marietouchet said:


> American ladies are often called RICAINES, not a complement.


.. yes, BUT thankfully, I was always told that it didn’t apply to me because I always respected their culture and when in a different country, YOU need to adjust YOUR ways .. NOT expect them to change to YOUR way of things!!!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Everyone is begging body language guy for an analysis!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I'm still having a hard time looking at this one.



Poor horse.  What did it to do be compared to MMM???


----------



## zen1965

papertiger said:


> I think she (and he) have a screw loose.
> 
> Feel like singing "you never know what you've got till it's gone" to the stupid pair.
> 
> Here's another Harkle song



Thank you for this - I love The Who. #MoontheLoon


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We agree Jesus, we really do.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Now there are rumors that Harry’s book isn’t going to come out? Apparently there should be a publish date by now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Did she have another plastic surgery on her nose?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410464



Always so pleased with herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Poor horse.  What did it to do be compared to MMM???



I am pretty sure that is a pig. Your question still applies, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Now there are rumors that Harry’s book isn’t going to come out? Apparently there should be a publish date by now.



I will never stop laughing if that one didn't work out either. OMG.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> The other lady looks more like a Duchess than M. Looks classy an elegant, effortlessly while M looks cheap and nasty. She looks like she's wandering around a mid priced department store trying on the hats for no reason whatsoever.


Next thing you know, she'll whip out perfume and spray unsuspecting spectators.


----------



## papertiger

V0N1B2 said:


> I know I sound like a broken record, but is she ever NOT hanging onto Harry?
> *Also, perhaps it’s because I’m not a narcissistic egomaniac, but I would feel like tool being the only wife/spouse/girlfriend up there on the stage with the players. Like, why, just why?*
> Harry can’t have anything of his own, it’s similar to how she tried to take over Invictus. I’m embarrassed for her, really.



Because you don't consider any other woman competition or the enemy. She actually thinks she's the only person up there.

Literally, no show without Punch (refers to Punch (and Judy) show). I don't know if you're familiar? The character Punch literally killed anyone who would dare share the stage with him including his wife Judy, his baby, and and the Policemen who tried to investigate Punch's thievery (sausages) and murder 




Edited. Repeating myself now. I better get off the stage now before I embarrass myself


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We agree Jesus, we really do.




What a mess, what a farce!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We agree Jesus, we really do.



This video is priceless. 



papertiger said:


> What a mess, what a farce!


Are you referring to this?


----------



## Gal4Dior

V0N1B2 said:


> Yeah, there was a lot to unpack there. Even though the video was classic Meghan, it’s still a shock to see someone, anyone behaving like that.  Did she curtesy to that guy after she gave him the double cheek kiss? The little dos-à-dos dance around the stage to find her place... awkward.  Gesturing to Harry like he needs direction to pick up the trophy (it’s your turn, honey-boo). Then the pièce de résistance... wiping the dirt off his face. I’m surprised she didn’t spit on a Kleenex and wipe his cheek.
> The video reminded me of that UN thing she did where she also looked incredibly out of place. She really seems to have zero self awareness and doesn't know how to act in public. I can’t imagine how exhausting she must be in real life.
> Who? Me? Where? What? Oh, over there. Did somebody say something to me? Where’s the camera?Should I smile? Not smile? Stand? Sit? Walk? What? Who’s that? Oh I should clap. Should I? Yes yes I’ll clap. Wait, no maybe I shouldn’t. Okay, yeah I will clap. Look, a baby! Ohmagerd sooo cute. Oh hi, it’s you lol, Umm what? What’s happening now? Where do I go? Stand where? What time is it? Hahaha. OMG was that a raindrop? Oh hai....



Basically, it's the difference of a real Duchess doing her job, versus just Cosplaying a Duchess. Much like her subpar acting career, her stint as a Duchess is equally as disappointing and mediocre at best.

What bugs me the most is wearing 4-inch stilettos on the polo field. Her job wasn't single handedly aerating the whole field!! Somebody get her a stylist, and STAT!


----------



## redney

The way TW was pawing at Harry, ick!


----------



## Chanbal

Important question!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very good catch, MeghansMole - we’re all being played, including the BRF



So who is playing who???


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> This video is priceless.
> 
> 
> Are you referring to this?



H didn't seem to like Mummy wiping his face--seriously--does she know nothing? That was humiliating--add that to his squatting and grabbing his own butt--says alot about that ginger dope.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Did she have another plastic surgery on her nose?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410464


Her chin is pointier too.  Maybe it's a doppleganger.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

BVBookshop said:


> Btw what’s with grabbing the man's head to kiss his cheeks?


Seemed a little too intimate to me!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The way she usually treats him in public, with all the shoving, pulling, touching to make him do or not do things and now wiping his face she could as well just castrate him in front of everyone and shove his body parts into her purse. I can't help but wonder why she hates him so much to do this to him.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Important question!




Another source of fashion "inspiration" for her?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The way she usually treats him in public, with all the shoving, pulling, touching to make him do or not do things and now wiping his face she could as well just castrate him in front of everyone and shove his body parts into her purse. I can't help but wonder why she hates him so much to do this to him.



She's acting as if he were Archie and she's wiping his face.  Although I'm sure the nannies, not MMM, wipe Archie's face.


----------



## bellecate

lanasyogamama said:


> Now there are rumors that Harry’s book isn’t going to come out? Apparently there should be a publish date by now.



I was reading on some other *GOSSIP *sites that the reason H went to talk to his Grandmother HRH, was to see if they was a way they could come back and represent her again. Also that the reason he’s not having his book ready is that they are realizing they can’t slag the family any more as they are running out of money and opportunities. Gossip sites.


----------



## redney

TW's necklace is an A for Archie. No L for Lilibet?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chloe302225 said:


>



TW looks like she has reverted back to her childhood days to play dress-up and pretend she's a royal.


----------



## Annawakes

Pretty sure the A in her necklace is for Archewell, not Archie.  You know, her real baby.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Important question!




Megs wishes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

redney said:


> TW's necklace is an A for Archie. No L for Lilibet?


She’s waiting for a free L to be sent over!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> TW's necklace is an A for Archie. No L for Lilibet?



Maybe it's A for Anderson. Who knows with that weirdo.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> H didn't seem to like Mummy wiping his face--seriously--does she know nothing? That was humiliating--add that to his squatting and grabbing his own butt--says alot about that ginger dope.



I hope William's advice to go slowly with the relationship echoes in his head round the clock.


----------



## V0N1B2

bellecate said:


> I was reading on some other *GOSSIP *sites that the reason H went to talk to his Grandmother HRH, was to see if they was a way they could come back and represent her again. Also that the reason he’s not having his book ready is that they are realizing they can’t slag the family any more as they are running out of money and opportunities. Gossip sites.


This (although is gossip) wouldn’t surprise me one bit. I think someone in Harry’s upper/inner circle can read the room - obvs not his wife - and told him people just aren’t that interested in hearing from the disgruntled grandson of one of the most popular women in modern history. 
It’s not like Meghan has much to add either since at this point, she’s lived in Montecito longer than she lived in the UK.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Seemed a little too intimate to me!



A little too possessive to me. A simple kiss on the cheek would have been more appropriate in the situation. I doubt you'd ever see Kate and William acting like this. Her clinginess is embarrassing for someone her age.


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> Her chin is pointier too.  Maybe it's a doppleganger.



You are right!  Very pointy and I don’t think it’s the camera angle either.  A chin implant?
I noticed in some of the kardashian photos  that Kim’s chin is pointier too.  A new plastic surgery trend?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #2
					

To say that the alliterate one had to work for it to be seen in a photo this past weekend, is an understatement. First, she had to tell the ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5410723
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> To say that the alliterate one had to work for it to be seen in a photo this past weekend, is an understatement. First, she had to tell the ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



We don't need a blind item to know that's what went on. We can see it with our own eyes. 'Thirsty' doesn't cover it, the aliterate one could drink a lake and still be parched


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5410723
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> To say that the alliterate one had to work for it to be seen in a photo this past weekend, is an understatement. First, she had to tell the ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


WOW!  The comments!  Pushy Pushy Pushy

More for the Netflix docudrama


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> men can be such pigs
> I'm sure some of the men saying this don't have great faces themselves
> Just sayin


Of course, you're right, but out of politeness, no one would call them ugly. Instead, they would say so-and-so with the ruddy or rugged or bronzed or healthy face and yet they wouldn't hesitate to use butterface for  females .


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> We don't need a blind item to know that's what went on. We can see it with our own eyes. 'Thirsty' doesn't cover it, the aliterate one could drink a lake and still be parched


There was, and still may be a shoe designer named Beverly Feldman.  On the bottom of her shoes she wrote her motto.._.Too  much is never enough  _That pretty much describes Meg.


----------



## charlottawill

MM is sick. Of course Diana did it better.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> The proportions are just all wrong with her boxy figure and toothpicks. I'm sure she thinks the hat is Kentucky Derby but it screams 70's bridesmaid to me.


The outfit might have worked with ballet flats.  The hat —though not as appropriate  as a fedora with those shorts— is not being worn properly— whether or not it is right for the “look.”


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Hear hear!!!!!


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> MM is sick. Of course Diana did it better.
> 
> View attachment 5410742
> View attachment 5410743


Granted Diana was a lot taller than the beer barrel on sticks aka TW, but her lower, thicker heeled shoes are so much more appropriate footgear for a polo field. I don’t understand how anyone walks on stiletto heels on grass.


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> The outfit might have worked with ballet flats.  The hat —though not as appropriate  as a fedora with those shorts— is not being worn properly— whether or not it is right for the “look.”



She seems to have confused the dress code of the Kentucky Derby with that of polo. "The bigger the hat the better" for ladies is customary at the Derby, not at a polo match.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Important question!



Is this a real photo of E&W? They look a mess! I can't stop laughing at it and by the looks of it, everyone in the background of the photo felt the same way  His coat


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Did she have another plastic surgery on her nose?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410464


it looks straighter but may be just the angle


----------



## charlottawill

Once again, recollections may vary


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> MM is sick. Of course Diana did it better.
> 
> View attachment 5410742
> View attachment 5410743



She's definitely cos-plying. I find all of this really freaky


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> The outfit might have worked with ballet flats.  The hat —though not as appropriate  as a fedora with those shorts— is not being worn properly— whether or not it is right for the “look.”



Yes, tightly woven straw fedora, I think she may have made that hat herself


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> Is this a real photo of E&W? They look a mess! I can't stop laughing at it and by the looks of it, everyone in the background of the photo felt the same way  His coat
> 
> View attachment 5410766



I don't know, they look very Gucci catwalk to me    

M just looks ASOS clearance sale X last chance to buy


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> The way TW was pawing at Harry, ick!



Dirty Harry



purseinsanity said:


> She's acting as if he were Archie and she's wiping his face.  Although I'm sure the nannies, not MMM, wipe Archie's face.



Nflix$$$, every single thing she does is for the almighty Nflix $$$$.




bellecate said:


> I was reading on some other *GOSSIP *sites that the reason H went to talk to his Grandmother HRH, was to see if they was a way they could come back and represent her again. Also that the reason he’s not having his book ready is that they are realizing they can’t slag the family any more as they are running out of money and opportunities. Gossip sites.



He looks and behaves as if he indeed is desperate for the entitled Royal life. We saw it at the UN, we saw it at Invictus and we are seeing it now at polo. Just wait for the Jubilee. Will he wear a military uniform? The medals?   Oh, he longs for the obsequiousness that came with the royal life.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> She's definitely cos-plying. I find all of this really freaky



Anyone here have training in psychology? Is she trying consciously or subconsciously to fill the "lost my Mommy" void? This is not what a healthy adult relationship looks like.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> The outfit might have worked with ballet flats.  The hat —though not as appropriate  as a fedora with those shorts— is not being worn properly— whether or not it is right for the “look.”



White palazzo pants. That is what everyone wears now. She already owns several pairs.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> White palazzo pants. That is what everyone wears now. She already owns several pairs.



But then no one could see her amazing legs.


----------



## bellecate

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Hear hear!!!!!


Is the fellow next to H ‘face palming’ his face watching TW clean H’s face.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plenty of evidence Hazzie missed those lessons as well.


Mommie was too busy crying on her little boys' shoulders to teach them a lot. In a sense, William was lucky to have regular meetings with HMTQ early on and was probably able to learn many life lessons during this time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Anyone here have training in psychology? Is she trying consciously or subconsciously to fill the "lost my Mommy" void? This is not what a healthy adult relationship looks like.



No training needed with this one imo.  Either her Nflix masters are telling [not asking] her to do this, do that, wear this, etc., or she and her ‘friend’ Abigail have come up with this script. Abigail in the T&C article boasted about writing a screenplay, so I can see the two of them texting and emailing this script. Undoubtedly they watched Pretty Woman numerous times.  The way she flits around on the stage proves they really are pretending.  Ick



bellecate said:


> Is the fellow next to H ‘face palming’ his face watching TW clean H’s face.



He is wiping her lipstick off his face. He is Nacho Figueras, the Ralph Lauren model as well as the Beckham of polo. He knows photos will be taken and cares how he looks. He also moves his child away from her. His wife is there, too.  How disrespectful can MM be.

ETA:  I would be surprised if we see another one of these polo disasters. The real polo players did not look pleased.  Oh, sure, she will show up, stand on the sidelines and grin for Nflix$$$, but I doubt they would agree to have her hand out awards.


----------



## V0N1B2

charlottawill said:


> MM is sick. Of course Diana did it better.
> 
> View attachment 5410742
> View attachment 5410743


Is that Harry’s dad?

I’ll see myself out


----------



## bellecate

bellecate said:


> Is the fellow next to H ‘face palming’ his face watching TW clean H’s face.


Forgot the picture.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sharont2305 said:


> I mean, even a fictional prostitute from decades ago looks classier than TW.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410272
> View attachment 5410273
> View attachment 5410274
> View attachment 5410292



Don't give her more cosplay idea to play a movie prostitute. That would do a disservice to A-list Julia    TW(itch) is just as @CeeJay would say a Z-list 




CarryOn2020 said:


> She used to be on Suits. Her name escapes me at the moment.
> Abigail Spencer -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6 Things to Know About Abigail Spencer, Meghan Markle's Close Friend and Former <i>Suits</i> Costar
> 
> 
> The actress was recently seen hiking with Meghan and Prince Harry, during the royals' Canadian vacation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Ahh I see. I know her. Couldn't see her face clearly so didn't know instantly 




CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5410435



Whaddafark??? Why is she pulling the box? She's not one of the players! Seeing the pictures of her at this event was bad enough but this gif sure takes the cake. I can't with her. She is so RUDE


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Don't give her more cosplay idea to play a movie prostitute. That would do a disservice to A-list Julia    TW(itch) is just as @CeeJay would say a Z-list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh I see. I know her. Couldn't see her face clearly so didn't know instantly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whaddafark??? Why is she pulling the box? She's not one of the players! Seeing the pictures of her at this event was bad enough but this gif sure takes the cake. I can't with her. She is so RUDE



I think but don’t know she is trying to be playful and flirty, ya kno, just like Julia Roberts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Forgot the picture.



Here’s a video:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Poor Hazzie.  No way he can compete with a Ralph Lauren model and 2 very fit teens.    
Best to avoid having his photo taken with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The photo speaks for itself


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

From @QueenofWrapDress "I was thinking about the occasion in the blue VB dress complete with super long extensions and a ton of make-up to really rub it in...the one where he wanted to greet someone and that stupid cow wouldn't let go of his hand but also not walk with him, so she was just stubbornly standing there while their arms got longer and longer."

TW not letting go of H's hand at about 0:05
Holding Hands

ET fix video


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think but don’t know she is trying to be playful and flirty, ya kno, just like Julia Roberts.



She has no skills whatsoever to be playful. She's just a distasteful fool 

But poor her, I better be nice or she might throw herself in front of a horse next time just to stop a polo match.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Poor Hazzie.  No way he can compete with a Ralph Lauren model and 2 very fit teens.
> Best to avoid having his photo taken with them.




Harry actually looked quite annoyed in multiple pictures in just this one event. That's a first 




Maggie Muggins said:


> Here's a video where TW just won't let go of H's hand. Starting at 0:10
> 
> Holding Hands



Wow if this is not inappropriate and clingy, I don't know what is! And this was while they were representing the Queen? They are better off going back for some etiquette lessons. I don't even act this way in front of my mother-in-law, what more in a social or work setting. This is sheer insanity.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Don't give her more cosplay idea to play a movie prostitute. That would do a disservice to A-list Julia    TW(itch) is just as @CeeJay would say a Z-list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh I see. I know her. Couldn't see her face clearly so didn't know instantly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whaddafark??? Why is she pulling the box? She's not one of the players! Seeing the pictures of her at this event was bad enough but this gif sure takes the cake. I can't with her. She is so RUDE



I think she thinks she's flirting, She looks like she's bumping and teasing.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan be like Yoko Ono. Watch Chuck Berry’s face and the sound man taking her down. Starts at 3:19 but her stupid presence is exact like TW.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video:



funny when she tries to take the box and the guy holds onto it....maybe he should coach "H"


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> Is this a real photo of E&W? They look a mess! I can't stop laughing at it and by the looks of it, everyone in the background of the photo felt the same way  His coat
> 
> View attachment 5410766


Is that a coat?  I thought Edward was wearing a muumuu with Wallis' short shorts


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> I think she thinks she's flirting, She looks like she's bumping and teasing.



Whether she's flirting or bumping and teasing, neither of those things were appropriate at a public event (behind closed doors, she can act as [insert negative word] as she wants if Harry doesn't care or have shame), especially when she's actually part of the BRF even though she's no longer a working royal. She has proven to us time and time again that she does not have a sense of decorum. A woman of her status really should have more self respect. She can and should be pleasant and friendly but she just doesn't know how to do things right. During this polo event, she kinda acted like a (umm... fill in the blank with your own choice of bad name)


----------



## mikimoto007

I'm very confused by the dress code for the polo.....usually in the UK a summer dress or a shirt and jeans......but she looks really dressed up.


----------



## Helventara

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is wiping her lipstick off his face. He is Nacho Figueras, the Ralph Lauren model as well as the Beckham of polo. He knows photos will be taken and cares how he looks. He also moves his child away from her. His wife is there, too. How disrespectful can MM be.


Yes! I can’t get over the scene that she grabbed his face, about to french kiss him when suddenly she kissed his cheek instead. All while his daughter (and maybe wife somewhere) was there!  Ewww!  How is the face grabbing appropriate?!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5410190
> 
> you mean this one?
> My first thought was she’s saving people time on the ‘what you ordered…what you got’ memes.
> Then I thought of Palme the ‘decoy’ in episode 1 but those women look nowhere near enough alike- I mean the other one looks good in that outfit
> 
> A skort?
> she really is the 40 year old school girl isn’t she?
> 
> I did think about posting ‘big fish little fish she’s a box!’ On the style thread but decided it might seem unnecessarily mean, I feel no such compunction here though


Yes, the other woman looks better than TW, who looks like she's on the prowl.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, the other woman looks better than TW, who looks like she's on the prowl.




You mean on heat?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The photo speaks for itself




Not even close.


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> Whether she's flirting or bumping and teasing, neither of those things were appropriate at a public event (behind closed doors, she can act as [insert negative word] as she wants if Harry doesn't care or have shame), especially when she's actually part of the BRF even though she's no longer a working royal. She has proven to us time and time again that she does not have a sense of decorum. A woman of her status really should have more self respect. She can and should be pleasant and friendly but she just doesn't know how to do things right. During this polo event, she kinda acted like a (umm... fill in the blank with your own choice of bad name)


To be honest, she’s acting like a desperate bish trying to get Harry’s attention. Like she’s trying to stand out from all the other women trying to hook up with Harry. Chile, you’re married to him. You don’t have to flirt with him in the hopes he might notice you. 
#embarrassing


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> funny when she tries to take the box and the guy holds onto it....maybe he should coach "H"


They held the trophy upright if front of her …. She was hidden .. how fitting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Harry actually looked quite annoyed in multiple pictures in just this one event. That's a first
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow if this is not inappropriate and clingy, I don't know what is! And this was while they were representing the Queen? They are better off going back for some etiquette lessons. I don't even act this way in front of my mother-in-law, what more in a social or work setting. This is sheer insanity.



Her opportunities for media attention are drying up so she has to exploit every chance she has these days. I hope Hazy can leave her home next time, but I'm sure we'll see her at every match going forward. His leash is getting shorter by the day.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> You mean on heat?


In or on heat depending where one lives.  
It's almost like the song, Potato and Tomato but not quite.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> funny when she tries to take the box and the guy holds onto it....maybe he should coach "H"



I think she was trying to have it facing the camera, but let the photographer do his job. She is a control freak.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Poor Hazzie.  No way he can compete with a Ralph Lauren model and 2 very fit teens.
> Best to avoid having his photo taken with them.




She really does look like *T*he *W*itch there.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> In or on heat depending where one lives.
> It's almost like the song, Potato and Tomato but not quite.



Oopsie    In heat but no one is interested


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Her opportunities for media attention are drying up so she has to exploit every chance she has these days. I hope Hazy can leave her home next time, but I'm sure we'll see her at every match going forward. His leash is getting shorter by the day.



I wonder if she has started threatening him and using the Invisikids against him i.e. Harry no behave, Harry no see kids 

Edit: Or Harry no deal Nutmeg in or bring Nutmeg along everywhere, Harry no see kids.


----------



## LittleStar88

Teehee!


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> I wonder if she has started threatening him and using the Invisikids against him i.e. Harry no behave, Harry no see kids
> 
> Edit: Or Harry no deal Nutmeg in or bring Nutmeg along everywhere, Harry no see kids.


If you really think about she has been relegated to doing small time Polo game attendances. Not exactly a big thing. Kate, meanwhile attends and watches but TW makes it an event lol.


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> From @QueenofWrapDress "I was thinking about the occasion in the blue VB dress complete with super long extensions and a ton of make-up to really rub it in...the one where he wanted to greet someone and that stupid cow wouldn't let go of his hand but also not walk with him, so she was just stubbornly standing there while their arms got longer and longer."
> 
> TW not letting go of H's hand at about 0:05
> Holding Hands
> 
> ET fix video



TU! I posted several tweet links in the past on this thread where she dragged him around (at formal events no less), and went back to find them - they’ve all been deleted.

I did find this though


----------



## EverSoElusive

LittleStar88 said:


> Teehee!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410841




Wouldn't it be funny had the trophy fell on Nutmeg's head? Then maybe she'll have an amnesia, allowing her to get recalibrated to be a well mannered person


----------



## Chanbal

This is so ridiculous… The conversations of Hazz's polo mates about TW must be hilarious…








__





						Here's Meghan Markle Dressed Up and French Kissing Prince Harry at His California Polo Match
					

Meghan wore red lipstick again, something she rarely did as a working royal as light, neutral colors were favored in the palace.




					www.elle.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a video:



I agree with Angela Levin…


----------



## Chanbal

Food for thought!


----------



## Chanbal

Is Page Six alluding to Pretty Woman's career?  











						Meghan Markle has ‘Pretty Woman’ moment at Prince Harry’s polo match
					

The duchess cheered Prince Harry on at a charity match in Santa Monica looking glamorous in a polka-dotted blouse, white shorts and oversized hat.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

There is so much good material circulating from this polo event, but the BLG is still stuck with AH. We will have to wait…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

The more I look at that hat…@chanbal posted the pic of TW.…the more I think Halloween came a bit early this year in CA  The second witch is courtesy of Halloweencostumes.Com. Now I can’t decide if TW is wearing a witchy hat or a mushroomy hat


----------



## Vintage Leather

Hey. To be fair, the most recent polo look was one of the nicest we’ve seen from her. Her makeup is on point. There’s no weird wardrobe malfunctions going on. Her hair is clean. It is almost appropriate for the venue.

Sadly, her behavior was far worse than her sartorial choices.


----------



## Chanbal

Vintage Leather said:


> Hey. To be fair, the most recent polo look was one of the nicest we’ve seen from her. Her makeup is on point. There’s no weird wardrobe malfunctions going on. Her hair is clean. It is almost appropriate for the venue.
> 
> *Sadly, her behavior was far worse than her sartorial choices.*


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



Is polo like golf ? One does not wear heels on a golf field …


----------



## 880

i don’t particularly like either of them, but I cannot seem to stop from reading or watching the train wreck. Perhaps it might not matter to Netflix if they are popular so long as they are clickbait ?


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> From @QueenofWrapDress "I was thinking about the occasion in the blue VB dress complete with super long extensions and a ton of make-up to really rub it in...the one where he wanted to greet someone and that stupid cow wouldn't let go of his hand but also not walk with him, so she was just stubbornly standing there while their arms got longer and longer."
> 
> TW not letting go of H's hand at about 0:05
> Holding Hands
> 
> ET fix video


that's the one where he was trying to go talk to someone and she dragged him back


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She really does look like *T*he *W*itch there.


I loved the book Miss Nelson is Missing as a child.  Unfortunately TW has now ruined the imagery for me, pointy chin and all.


----------



## DoggieBags

880 said:


> i don’t particularly like either of them, but I cannot seem to stop from reading or watching the train wreck. Perhaps it might not matter to Netflix if they are popular so long as people keep watching or reading?


But would you pay to watch them? Reading this thread can be strangely addictive but it’s free entertainment


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> But would you pay to watch them? Reading this thread can be strangely addictive but it’s free entertainment



if someone here posted a link and I eventually hit a paywall somewhere . . . . maybe lol


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

purseinsanity said:


> Is that a coat?  I thought Edward was wearing a muumuu with Wallis' short shorts


Guessing it is a beach robe.  They may have  been in Palm Beach or on the Riviera.


----------



## kemilia

Aimee3 said:


> You are right!  Very pointy and I don’t think it’s the camera angle either.  A chin implant?
> I noticed in some of the kardashian photos  that Kim’s chin is pointier too.  A new plastic surgery trend?


If she's mucking around with her face this much now--the future holds a lot of potential (for us). 

I vote she does her lips next.


----------



## mellibelly

This comment thread about her outfit


----------



## mellibelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Teehee!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5410841



hahahahaha!! Green shirts against a green background and her in black. Amateur hour!!


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> There is so much good material circulating from this polo event, but the BLG is still stuck with AH. We will have to wait…



She doesn't drop that manic grin for a second!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




This looks fine. She wore it in 2018. This video proves she *does* know-how to distribute awards.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What has happened to Vogue UK?  Gushing does not begin to describe this article.









						Meghan Revived ‘Pretty Woman’ Style At The Polo
					

Her retro look was very Rodeo Drive.




					www.vogue.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This looks fine. She wore it in 2018. This video proves she *does* know-how to distribute awards.
> View attachment 5410946




Thie was when she was still playing a royal. I guess she's a better actress than we give her credit for.


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> I wonder if she has started threatening him and using the Invisikids against him i.e. Harry no behave, Harry no see kids
> 
> Edit: Or Harry no deal Nutmeg in or bring Nutmeg along everywhere, Harry no see kids.


I’d replace words see kids with sex.  That would get him to do what she wants. That’s how she got him
in the first place.  Oopsie.


----------



## Vintage Leather

DoggieBags said:


> But would you pay to watch them? Reading this thread can be strangely addictive but it’s free entertainment



Social Learning Theory is one potential explanation as to why we as humans are fascinated by train wrecks. 

We learn from other people’s mistakes. The theory is that our lizard brains see Harry and Megan, and they see Depp and Heard, and they don’t let us look away. Because it’s awful and we don’t want awful things to happen to us. So we’re constantly analyzing to see where they went off the rails and how we can avoid it. In both cases, it seems like the key is that you don’t rip away your social network but you let it tie you to other people. 

If we accept the theory as a reason we keep coming back here, then I suspect the Netflix-Sussex KUWTS show will be a flop. It is a controlled environment. We know it’s a scripted story with bad actors. What can we learn from that?


----------



## mellibelly

Video of Will & Kate on the Santa Barbara polo stage: natural and dignified royals. Contrasted with the obvious discomfort of Hazbeen’s teammates, Neverwas fidgeting with her hat, hair, top, wiping her child’s face!, grabbing that man’s box, not knowing where to stand, clapping in front of her face like a toddler. It’s so cringe!


Edited to add: is she on drugs??!


----------



## Chanbal

NM


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Another potential source of inspiration…


----------



## jelliedfeels

QUOTE="CarryOn2020, post: 35172777, member: 706895"]
What has happened to Vogue UK?  Gushing does not begin to describe this article.









						Meghan Revived ‘Pretty Woman’ Style At The Polo
					

Her retro look was very Rodeo Drive.




					www.vogue.co.uk
				



[/QUOTE]
Oh god vogue U.K. has been an embarrassment for a good few years now. It’s so bad I get it for free and I don’t read it anymore. The fashion photography is so bad (I think I’ve complained about this before) and the styling is so basic it’s behind the trends- I opened this month and it’s first fashion article is suggesting we try leggings, wide jeans and stripe tops  
For some weird reason as well they still get interviews with pretty big celebs but rarely put them on the cover.
Unfortunately the current editor isn’t the strident fashion obsessed type the magazine needs to stay relevant I appreciate its good to stay friends with everyone but I would describe his editorial style as breathlessly sycophantic and occasionally incoherent. 


charlottawill said:


> Thie was when she was still playing a royal. I guess she's a better actress than we give her credit for.


She was also being prompted left right and centre.
weird she isn’t wearing a hat here no?


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, here's the future Queen Consort, and future King at Polo over the years.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Touching someone’s face is an intimate act. For most of us, our faces are part of our personal boundaries. Meghan blows through those boundaries and starts petting men like they’re dogs.



I am a staunch feminist but I'm sure if she was a man going around doing all the touching, wiping, bumping and teasing to a line-up of women people would shout the word 'predator.' More than flirting. It's totally inappropriate in any setting, let alone a formal one with cameras turning. If I did this at work I could expect to be more than disciplined, I think I'd be sent home.

For the so called 'Duchess of woke', she acts like a very unwoke pervy relative no-one wants to invite anywhere or leave their friends/children/spouse with. I thought 'case girl' was just a job, not a vocation.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> hahahahaha!! Green shirts against a green background and her in black. Amateur hour!!



Good thing it wasn't green-screen or she'd be the only one left in the pic with floating heads.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> What has happened to Vogue UK?  Gushing does not begin to describe this article.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Revived ‘Pretty Woman’ Style At The Polo
> 
> 
> Her retro look was very Rodeo Drive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.co.uk



Vogue UK is a fashion joke


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> QUOTE="CarryOn2020, post: 35172777, member: 706895"]
> What has happened to Vogue UK?  Gushing does not begin to describe this article.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Revived ‘Pretty Woman’ Style At The Polo
> 
> 
> Her retro look was very Rodeo Drive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.co.uk


Oh god vogue U.K. has been an embarrassment for a good few years now. It’s so bad I get it for free and I don’t read it anymore. The fashion photography is so bad (I think I’ve complained about this before) and the styling is so basic it’s behind the trends- I opened this month and it’s first fashion article is suggesting we try leggings, wide jeans and stripe tops  
For some weird reason as well they still get interviews with pretty big celebs but rarely put them on the cover.
Unfortunately the current editor isn’t the strident fashion obsessed type the magazine needs to stay relevant I appreciate its good to stay friends with everyone but I would describe his editorial style as breathlessly sycophantic and occasionally incoherent.

She was also being prompted left right and centre.
weird she isn’t wearing a hat here no?
[/QUOTE]

You said it first   and better than me. 

She's not wearing a hat prob because she was probably told to (Her majesty will be wearing a hat today = wear a a hat). M only wears a hat when it goes against the dress-code


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

She’s made a fool of herself swanning around as if this were some International event she enhanced by her presence. It’s a local club polo match to benefit local charities, all worthy causes. But, frankly these are pretty common in communities with active polo clubs. Her desperate for attention antics cheapened theirs and locals with class will not be pleased.


----------



## DoggieBags

csshopper said:


> She’s made a fool of herself swanning around as if this were some International event she enhanced by her presence. It’s a local club polo match to benefit local charities, all worthy causes. But, frankly these are pretty common in communities with active polo clubs. Her desperate for attention antics cheapened theirs and locals with class will not be pleased.


I’ve said it before, TW appears to be oblivious to social cues so I doubt she realizes that her actions are poorly received. How others perceive her and how she perceives herself seem to exist in 2 completely different and separate realities. I wonder how she explains to herself why she doesn’t get invited back or never gets invited at all to various social events. If they’re still in Montecito next year, I wonder if Harry gets invited to compete in that charity polo series again? I guess it will depend on how much money they bring in for the charity with their fundraiser polo party.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> There is so much good material circulating from this polo event, but the BLG is still stuck with AH. We will have to wait…




She is the definition of pathetic, amongst other things.


----------



## Jktgal

I was having a really bad day. A trip to this thread always perks me up, now I'm giggling like a banshee.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This looks fine. She wore it in 2018. This video proves she *does* know-how to distribute awards.
> View attachment 5410946




This dress might be the one outfit of hers I truly liked. Until I found out how much she spent on a dress she wore for one afternoon that is.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This dress might be the one outfit of hers I truly liked. Until I found out how much she spent on a dress she wore for one afternoon that is.



Gosh that outfit was beautiful. Again, I thought the stilettos were out of place, but the dress and the clutch were gorgeous.

I actually like all the individual elements of the polo outfit.....but I'm perplexed by the formality of it. I actually think she looks great, the Hollywood curls and the red lip - just maybe a little overdone? But perhaps I don't understand the formality of this event.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> I’d replace words see kids with sex.  That would get him to do what she wants. That’s how she got him
> in the first place.  Oopsie.



And here I thought it was all about the urologia that they had going on is what got him hooked


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mikimoto007 said:


> Gosh that outfit was beautiful. Again, I thought the stilettos were out of place, but the dress and the clutch were gorgeous.



And it fit really well for a change.


----------



## Chanbal

How lucky Howie Mandel is for having such (no) memory. It likely protects him from being markled. See, it's not only Randy Andy that suffers from selective memory.


----------



## Chanbal

DM never fails to highlight a glorious moment of 'our heroine'. This celebration picture has apparently been selected to represent one of the high points of the polo event. It's a winner! 











						Meghan Markle is stuck in the middle in awkward polo moment
					

Meghan Markle, 40, was on hand to present Prince Harry, 37, and his team, Los Padres, with a trophy after they won an event at the Santa Barbara Polo & Racquet Club, but was squashed on stage.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And it fit really well for a change.



Yes, it did _fit_. And she behaved appropriately, too.  Proves she _can_ do it.








						Meghan Markle Wore Stilettos on Grass and a Denim Carolina Herrera Dress at Sentebale Polo 2018
					

A real wonder woman.




					www.elle.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, it did _fit_. And she behaved appropriately, too.  Proves she _can_ do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wore Stilettos on Grass and a Denim Carolina Herrera Dress at Sentebale Polo 2018
> 
> 
> A real wonder woman.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



The other two women in the group photo are wearing more grass friendly shoes - lower and thicker heels. I assume MM wears stilettos all the time because she thinks they are sexy, but it probably has contributed to the odd shape of her already thin calves. I knew someone else with calves like hers and she lived in stilettos. Podiatrists recommend wearing differing heel heights for the health of your feet, legs and back. We've seen the damage to her feet. I wonder when she started wearing them.


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> The other two women in the group photo are wearing more grass friendly shoes - lower and thicker heels. I assume MM wears stilettos all the time because she thinks they are sexy, but it probably has contributed to the odd shape of her already thin calves. I knew someone else with calves like hers and she lived in stilettos. Podiatrists recommend wearing differing heel heights for the health of your feet, legs and back. We've seen the damage to her feet. I wonder when she started wearing them. I wore them on occasion when I was young and it was torture.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The other two women in the group photo are wearing more grass friendly shoes - lower and thicker heels. I assume MM wears stilettos all the time because she thinks they are sexy, but it probably has contributed to the odd shape of her already thin calves. I knew someone else with calves like hers and she lived in stilettos. Podiatrists recommend wearing differing heel heights for the health of your feet, legs and back. We've seen the damage to her feet. I wonder when she started wearing them.


I think the legs are genetic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

Vintage Leather said:


> Social Learning Theory is one potential explanation as to why we as humans are fascinated by train wrecks.
> 
> We learn from other people’s mistakes. The theory is that our lizard brains see Harry and Megan, and they see Depp and Heard, and they don’t let us look away. Because it’s awful and we don’t want awful things to happen to us. So we’re constantly analyzing to see where they went off the rails and how we can avoid it. In both cases, it seems like the key is that you don’t rip away your social network but you let it tie you to other people.
> 
> If we accept the theory as a reason we keep coming back here, then I suspect the Netflix-Sussex KUWTS show will be a flop. It is a controlled environment. We know it’s a scripted story with bad actors. What can we learn from that?


+1, but I fear that I’m sadly less honorable and more petty than that. I’m afraid it’s shadenfreude, plus need for entertainment and distraction thrown in for good measure.


----------



## Chanbal

PR release possibly from the Harkles' team: a potential bumpy road ahead…  



_We likely won’t see another event like the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee – honouring Lizzie’s 70-year reign – in our lifetimes. But if you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. It’s confirmed by multiple palace insiders that the pair will be “keeping a low profile” at the extravaganza, and sources tell heat that, behind the scenes, Meghan is preparing herself for a difficult time – and has even *warned Harry that she’ll leave the event if anyone crosses her*.

“*Meghan has told Harry he has to put her first and take no nonsense on the trip*,” says an insider close to the former Suits star, who was last week pictured cheering on her husband as he played in a polo tournament near their California home.

“*She’s fully aware that they’ll be walking into the lion’s den* when they arrive in the UK. She knows how important it is to Harry that she’s there at his side, but coming face-to-face with certain members of The Firm – who she claimed made their lives a misery – is a horrible prospect. *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.* She wants to know, if it came to it, that Harry’s prepared to step up and be that same protective partner he was during their time in England. *She wants him to promise he’ll pack up and leave if they’re disrespected*._”









						Jubilee bust-up: Meghan Markle’s threat to walk out
					

If you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. Read more on heatworld.




					heatworld.com


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> PR release possibly from the Harkles' team: a potential bumpy road ahead…
> View attachment 5411282
> 
> 
> _We likely won’t see another event like the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee – honouring Lizzie’s 70-year reign – in our lifetimes. But if you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. It’s confirmed by multiple palace insiders that the pair will be “keeping a low profile” at the extravaganza, and sources tell heat that, behind the scenes, Meghan is preparing herself for a difficult time – and has even *warned Harry that she’ll leave the event if anyone crosses her*.
> 
> “*Meghan has told Harry he has to put her first and take no nonsense on the trip*,” says an insider close to the former Suits star, who was last week pictured cheering on her husband as he played in a polo tournament near their California home.
> 
> “*She’s fully aware that they’ll be walking into the lion’s den* when they arrive in the UK. She knows how important it is to Harry that she’s there at his side, but coming face-to-face with certain members of The Firm – who she claimed made their lives a misery – is a horrible prospect. *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.* She wants to know, if it came to it, that Harry’s prepared to step up and be that same protective partner he was during their time in England. *She wants him to promise he’ll pack up and leave if they’re disrespected*._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jubilee bust-up: Meghan Markle’s threat to walk out
> 
> 
> If you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. Read more on heatworld.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> heatworld.com



So now she thinks it's everyone else's job to coddle her?


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> There was, and still may be a shoe designer named Beverly Feldman.  On the bottom of her shoes she wrote her motto.._.Too  much is never enough  _That pretty much describes Meg.


I still have 2 pairs of her slides. I was so upset when she closed her shop.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I think the legs are genetic



To a large extent yes, but the way the muscle at the back of her upper calf is so defined is related to wearing stilettos all the time.


----------



## 1LV

Just read that Thomas Markle has suffered a stroke.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> So now she thinks it's everyone else's job to coddle her?



*She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*

Oh please you insufferable twat, you made your bed now you can lay in it. The BRF have far more class than to do anything like that. Stop projecting your own behavior onto them. You might want to pack some warm clothes though, there will be a chill in the air wherever you go.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*
> 
> Oh please you insufferable twat, you made your bed now you can lay in it. The BRF have far more class than to do anything like that. Stop projecting your own behavior onto them. You might want to pack some warm clothes though, there will be a chill in the air wherever you go.



Then, maybe, leave the grandstanding and word salad in Cali. *puff puff*

ETA: Interesting that as we get closer to Monday, the tension in Cali escalates.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Hmm...Meghan could fly to his bedside, have tearful reunion photos taken and it could help salvage her image. Not to mention giving her the perfect excuse to avoid the Jubilee.


----------



## charlottawill

Note to the Harkles, looks like there are big bucks in podcasting if you know what you're doing - like actually producing content that people want to listen to:



> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/b...-sells-team-coco-podcast-siriusxm-1235152377/


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Hmm...Meghan could fly to his bedside, have tearful reunion photos taken and it could help salvage her image. Not to mention giving her the perfect excuse to avoid the Jubilee.



This is a tricky situation, not sure of the proper protocol  . Since she has not seen TM in years [allegedly] and had that ugly lawsuit against him and has not allowed him to meet his grandkids, is it appropriate to tell her that  we all wish him a speedy recovery?  Very tricky situations with this Markle family.


----------



## csshopper

.


CarryOn2020 said:


> This is a tricky situation, not sure of the proper protocol  . Since she has not seen TM in years [allegedly] and had that ugly lawsuit against him and has not allowed him to meet his grandkids, is it appropriate to tell her that  we all wish him a speedy recovery?  Very tricky situations with this Markle family.


From Dan Wooten quoted in the DM:
Samantha Markle told me: 'My father is recovering in hospital. We ask for privacy for the family, for his health and wellbeing. He just needs peace and rest. Godspeed. We are praying. He just needs some rest. It's a travesty how much he's been tortured and how much he's had to go through thanks to my sister's disregard the past few years. That is unforgivable.'


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> .
> 
> From Dan Wooten quoted in the DM:
> Samantha Markle told me: 'My father is recovering in hospital. We ask for privacy for the family, for his health and wellbeing. He just needs peace and rest. Godspeed. We are praying. He just needs some rest. It's a travesty how much he's been tortured and how much he's had to go through thanks to my sister's disregard the past few years. That is unforgivable.'



*She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*

After the warning from MM about ‘mean-spirited behavior’, if you were the BRF, would you express your concern over his health?  Perhaps it is better to say nothing or is that mean-spirited?  Every single thing with H&M is so awkward.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did he win?
So, did he get a participation award? 

_Prince *Harry* may not be appearing on the balcony of Buckingham Palace with his actress wife *Meghan Markle* after the Trooping of the Color ceremony next month, but he was definitely front and center at the Santa Barbara Polo Club playing in the final of the Folded Hills Pope Challenge final on Sunday.

The closely fought match between Argentinian Ralph Lauren Polo model *Nacho Figueras*’ Los Padres team, with the Duke of Sussex playing as Harry Wales, and Beverly Hills-based movie producer *Sarah Magness*’ Dundas team was all square at 13-13 when Queen *Elizabeth*’s grandson scored three minutes before the final horn of the six chukker game. But Dundas fought back with a vengeance in the final 180 seconds lifting the trophy 15-13 in front of a sold-out crowd.








						Latest Match at the Field - Montecito
					

Prince Harry may not be appearing on the balcony of Buckingham Palace with his actress wife Meghan Markle after the Trooping of the Color ceremony next month, but he was definitely front and center at the Santa Barbara Polo Club playing in the final of the Folded Hills Pope Challenge final on...




					www.montecitojournal.net
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

If he thinks a bike ride will shift that weight, nope, weight loss at 40-ish is much more difficult.









						Prince Harry cycles his bike near his $14m California home
					

Prince Harry appeared relaxed today as he cycled with his security near his California home - days before he is due to travel to the UK to celebrate the Queen's Jubilee with his family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

DoggieBags said:


> I’ve said it before, TW appears to be oblivious to social cues so I doubt she realizes that her actions are poorly received. How others perceive her and how she perceives herself seem to exist in 2 completely different and separate realities. I wonder how she explains to herself why she doesn’t get invited back or never gets invited at all to various social events. If they’re still in Montecito next year, I wonder if Harry gets invited to compete in that charity polo series again? I guess it will depend on how much money they bring in for the charity with their fundraiser polo party.



I was also thinking about whether the Polo club might not have enjoyed all the scrutiny and press it put on them.



charlottawill said:


> Hmm...Meghan could fly to his bedside, have tearful reunion photos taken and it could help salvage her image. Not to mention giving her the perfect excuse to avoid the Jubilee.



One of the guys on Twitter thinks that MM and TM are in cahoots on their feud.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



This means they are still deciding whether or not to show up or they are just sending out messages like this to gain attention.  I think it is both.  I would say it is 50/50 at this point as to whether they will go.  It becomes more and more obvious that they are going to be ignored and very restricted in their movements around royals and royal property.    It is pretty foolish of them to think they can control the behavior of people around them or the crowd reaction if they appear.  They are so childish.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Hmm...Meghan could fly to his bedside, have tearful reunion photos taken and it could help salvage her image. Not to mention giving her the perfect excuse to avoid the Jubilee.



Interesting that he had a medical episode the last time he was supposed to go to England.  The stress is just too much for him.  He must have had massive anxiety about going.  I thought that was what happened at the time of the wedding.  I wonder who was talking him into going to the Jubilee.  Never thought it was going to happen anyway.


----------



## gracekelly

I just remembered that Zara is really good at eye rolling lol!  Considering Meghan's ability to hold grudges, she must be thinking of her.


----------



## duna

Gosh, I REALLY hope they don't go!!!! They will spoil it for everyone if they go!!!


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> One of the guys on Twitter thinks that MM and TM are in cahoots on their feud.



I'm not generally such a cynical and suspicious person, but the timing is perfect to give MM an excuse not to go.
I wish TM a complete and speedy recovery though and hope he is OK.


----------



## gracekelly

If Meghan is looking for spotlight and drama, then a visit to her father is on the menu.  I wonder if Sam would allow her in the room.  I put nothing past any of them.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I'm not generally such a cynical and suspicious person, but the timing is perfect to give MM an excuse not to go.
> I wish TM a complete and speedy recovery though and hope he is OK.


I feel the same.  There have been a lot of rumblings about this being in cahoots and it does make you wonder.


----------



## lanasyogamama

yes, dad having a stroke does “pull at the heartstrings”


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> I feel the same.  There have been a lot of rumblings about this being in cahoots and it does make you wonder.


Not putting anything past either of them but if they were not allegedly even speaking to each other, how and why would they be in cahoots together on anything.  Maybe my mind just can’t grasp it.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Harry cycles his bike near his $14m California home
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared relaxed today as he cycled with his security near his California home - days before he is due to travel to the UK to celebrate the Queen's Jubilee with his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Clearly staged pap walk. Or pap cycling lol. The brand new bikes? The California hat? The photo with the huge Montecito sign? I’ve lived my entire life in California and never owned or wore a California emblazoned anything. Is he being paid by the tourist board?


----------



## mellibelly

I hope TM recovers. But I agree that this timing is suspiciously familiar to the wedding timeline. Less than a week before either event and he’s in the hospital. Now this could have been brought on by the stress and anxiety of the trip. But the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree with the Markles. He did help create the monster we’re here gossiping about.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mellibelly said:


> Clearly staged pap walk. Or pap cycling lol. The brand new bikes? The California hat? The photo with the huge Montecito sign? I’ve lived my entire life in California and never owned or wore a California emblazoned anything. Is he being paid by the tourist board?



I'm absolutely astonished that he is SUCH a commodity, he needs three security guys around him riding around in MONTECITO. For god sakes, it's not Hollywood, and the dude isn't even a movie star. When he left UK, he became a Haz been. These people are DELUSIONAL. No one in Montecito gives AF about them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*
> 
> Oh please you insufferable twat, you made your bed now you can lay in it. The BRF have far more class than to do anything like that. Stop projecting your own behavior onto them. You might want to pack some warm clothes though, there will be a chill in the air wherever you go.



Bring back the stocks


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> .
> 
> From Dan Wooten quoted in the DM:
> Samantha Markle told me: 'My father is recovering in hospital. We ask for privacy for the family, for his health and wellbeing. He just needs peace and rest. Godspeed. We are praying. He just needs some rest. It's a travesty how much he's been tortured and how much he's had to go through thanks to my sister's disregard the past few years. That is unforgivable.'



I have to agree with Samantha. Whatever his flaws are I believe it's been demonstrated that he was a devoted and loving father to MM until she decided her family was too much of an embarrassment for her aspirations. If he dies without her reconciling with him and seeing his grandchilden her image will never recover in the minds of many people. Unless he was abusive, which has never been mentioned, she has no real justification for her actions. My parents divorced when I was young and I wasn't close to my father, but he regularly saw my children when they were growing up. He could be embarrassing at times but I didn't ghost him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LVSistinaMM said:


> I'm absolutely astonished that he is SUCH a commodity, he needs three security guys around him riding around in MONTECITO. For god sakes, it's not Hollywood, and the dude isn't even a movie star. When he left UK, he became a Haz been. These people are DELUSIONAL. No one in Montecito gives AF about them.



Perhaps he needs the security to make sure he follows the USA’s bike riding laws which he most likely is not aware of. In other words, they will help him avoid an accident, such as going the wrong way on the street.  More like babysitters than security. Imo.




Aimee3 said:


> Not putting anything past either of them but if they were not allegedly even speaking to each other, how and why would they be in cahoots together on anything.  Maybe my mind just can’t grasp it.



Not to be too critical or cynical, we know H&M distort the truth. Perhaps TM does, too. He worked on soap operas, so he is well familiar with melodrama and with the ways to sell it. In his interviews with this photographer, his stories seemed too carefully rehearsed.  Sure, maybe he wanted to make sure he had the details right, etc., maybe so, imo, it felt fake. It is entirely possible they chat regularly, either directly or thru Doria or someone else.  Just my opinion, I could be wrong. I do not trust grifters.  To me, it’s worth noting that MM’s warnings have popped up after the polo show where we have seen Hazzie’s out-of-shape body and MM wiping H’s face.  I would roll my eyes if I had to sit through that icky stuff.  My guess is they stay home.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he thinks a bike ride will shift that weight, nope, weight loss at 40-ish is much more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry cycles his bike near his $14m California home
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared relaxed today as he cycled with his security near his California home - days before he is due to travel to the UK to celebrate the Queen's Jubilee with his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Men under 60 don't ride electric bikes. And they wear helmets. My husband is going on 65 and regularly does 30-40 mile rides the old fashioned way. This looks like another pre-arranged photo op.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps he needs the security to make sure he follows the USA’s bike riding laws which he most likely is not aware of. In other words, they will help him avoid an accident, such as going the wrong way on the street.  More like babysitters than security. Imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to be too critical or cynical, we know H&M distort the truth. Perhaps TM does, too. He worked on soap operas, so he is well familiar with melodrama and with the ways to sell it. In his interviews with this photographer, his stories seemed too carefully rehearsed.  Sure, maybe he wanted to make sure he had the details right, etc., maybe so, imo, it felt fake. It is entirely possible they chat regularly, either directly or thru Doria or someone else.  Just my opinion, I could be wrong. I do not trust grifters.  To me, it’s worth noting that MM’s warnings have popped up after the polo show where we have seen Hazzie’s out-of-shape body and MM wiping H’s face.  I would roll my eyes if I had to sit through that icky stuff.  My guess is they stay home.



It has occurred to me that this could all be a long con.


----------



## redney

If he's soooooooooo into privacy, why ride with a squad through Coast Village Road (Montecito's main street)? The Montecito sign is for the Montecito Inn on that road.

There are plenty of winding roads up through Montecito on which he could be away from people and pap cameras. His electric bike will handle the hills and climbs, no problem!


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Not putting anything past either of them but if they were not allegedly even speaking to each other, how and why would they be in cahoots together on anything.  Maybe my mind just can’t grasp it.


There is no way of knowing what communication channels are being used if any.  The world only knows what they tell us.


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*
> 
> Oh please you insufferable twat, you made your bed now you can lay in it. The BRF have far more class than to do anything like that. Stop projecting your own behavior onto them. You might want to pack some warm clothes though, there will be a chill in the air wherever you go.



*MM*: If anyone makes a snide remark, I will leave!!

*Royal Family*: Promise?


----------



## gracekelly

William took Louis to the park so Louis could use his scooter.  I saw one RPM in the background.  Maybe there was one more lurking about.  Nobody was bothering them.  William is a lot closer to the throne than JCMH.  William took Charlotte to a birthday party and they had one RPM stay with her.  Even Charlotte is closer to the throne than JCMH.

The Montecito Morons are clowns.


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> *MM*: If anyone makes a snide remark, I will leave!!
> 
> *Royal Family*: Promise?


Really!  This has the makings of a great SNL sketch.  Gathering of royals and each one is eyerolling and making faces at Meg in attempts at getting her to leave, which of course she really doesn't want to do.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*
> 
> After the warning from MM about ‘mean-spirited behavior’, if you were the BRF, would you express your concern over his health?  Perhaps it is better to say nothing or is that mean-spirited?  Every single thing with H&M is so awkward.



I have to believe that C&C and W&K will reach out privately to MM. I wouldn't expect them to say something on social media, nor do I think that it would be appropriate. But a simple private message along the lines of  "We're sorry to hear your father is ill and wish him a speedy recovery" is the decent thing to do. I can't imagine them not acknowledging it at all. If they did, she would complain that they're uncaring. How ironic that would be.


----------



## bag-mania

I didn’t think anyone believed Meghan and Harry were seriously considering attending the jubilee. Harry maybe, but Meghan isn’t about to put herself out there when she knows she isn’t going to be cheered on. The Brits are probably too polite to boo her but she wants adulation.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t think anyone believed Meghan and Harry were seriously considering attending the jubilee. Harry maybe, but Meghan isn’t about to put herself out there when she knows she isn’t going to be cheered on. The Brits are probably too polite to boo her but she wants adulation.



Makes you wonder if she texted him and said "Daddy I need you to pretend to have a stroke. Just made a transfer to your account". Cynical, I know. I hope he is OK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did they send Charlie on a rescue mission?


----------



## Gal4Dior

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did they send Charlie on a rescue mission?



Two white dudes riding electric bikes in Montecito...wow...gosh, that's a really weird in that area...a security issue for sure. <rolls eyes>


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Makes you wonder if she texted him and said "Daddy I need you to pretend to have a stroke. Just made a transfer to your account". Cynical, I know. I hope he is OK.



I do wish TM a speedy and stress-less recovery.
We aren’t the only ones who believe there is something strange with the story - some of the comments = wow, H&M are not popular.


----------



## charlottawill

LVSistinaMM said:


> Two white dudes riding electric bikes in Montecito...wow...gosh, that's a really weird in that area...a security issue for sure. <rolls eyes>



He should feel embarrassed. I only see older people riding them where I live. He's 37, not 67, and plays polo. He can't handle some hills on a regular bike? Or was this another merching opportunity? Free bikes in return for publicity for the maker?


----------



## charlottawill

A palate cleanser...



> https://people.com/royals/queen-elizabeth-chelsea-flower-show-golf-cart-pink/


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> The photo speaks for itself




Catherine is the cat's whiskers!


----------



## Sophisticatted

My guess is TW is mad about the fact that she was put in a room with four footmen guarding her and given some tea while Harry met with his grandmother and father.  In her mind, Harry should not have let that happen.  

She’s basically threatening the RF not to do anything like that again, or she will take her toy (Harry) and go home.  She’s rattling her cage, but she has no power.  Based on Harry’s facial expressions, I’d say the bloom is off the rose of their marriage.

With a return to polo and hanging out with old friends, I wonder if Harry is being reeled back in?

The tea with 4 footmen incident is a message that, as Harry’s wife, she will only get so far.  Based on past behavior, she is being iced out.   If they BOTH return, she will be made to be invisible.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did they send Charlie on a rescue mission?




Certainly staged.  Harry looks unhappy, as usual, probably because this was a pap run and he was told he had to do it and put on a bit of a show with one of the very few friends of his who has shown up to visit him, if that is Charles van Straubenzee.  No helmets for any of them either.  Dumb, dumb and dumber.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I had no idea. Interesting Charlie is over here. No wonder Hazz is missing the UK.
This is the family that has an annual memorial service. H&M showed up late. MM read a Marianne Williamson poem 
Hazz gave this speech:
_Harry used his address to the congregation to highlight the work the charity does for young girls and getting them into education.

“As my wife said many years ago when working on menstrual health and health education, this is not about periods but potential,” he said, referencing Meghan’s visit to India with World Vision in January 2017 to highlight the importance of breaking the stigma surrounding menstruation.
_


from Wikipedia:
_Charlie van Straubenzee is the son of Alexander van Straubenzee, circulation manager for The Spectator, and Claire Fenwick, daughter of Anthony Fenwick, of Eaton Grange, Grantham, Lincolnshire. He is a grandson of Lieutenant-Colonel Henry van Straubenzee. His elder brother is Thomas van Straubenzee.

Van Straubenzee attended Ludgrove School, where he became a close friend of Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. He graduated from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne in 2010. He is a younger brother of Thomas van Straubenzee. In 2002 another younger brother, Henry, was killed in a car accident._


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do wish TM a speedy and stress-less recovery.
> We aren’t the only ones who believe there is something strange with the story - some of the comments = wow, H&M are not popular.




My thoughts exactly:


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he thinks a bike ride will shift that weight, nope, weight loss at 40-ish is much more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry cycles his bike near his $14m California home
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared relaxed today as he cycled with his security near his California home - days before he is due to travel to the UK to celebrate the Queen's Jubilee with his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM:
At another stage, the Duke appeared frustrated, and put his hand up into the air as he waited at a stop sign on the road


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> At another stage, the Duke appeared frustrated, and put his hand up into the air as he waited at a stop sign on the road
> View attachment 5411402



Caption: What's this stop nonsense? Stop signs are for peasants!


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> My guess is TW is mad about the fact that she was put in a room with four footmen guarding her and given some tea while Harry met with his grandmother and father.  In her mind, Harry should not have let that happen.
> 
> She’s basically threatening the RF not to do anything like that again, or she will take her toy (Harry) and go home.  She’s rattling her cage, but she has no power.  Based on Harry’s facial expressions, I’d say the bloom is off the rose of their marriage.
> 
> With a return to polo and hanging out with old friends, I wonder if Harry is being reeled back in?
> 
> The tea with 4 footmen incident is a message that, as Harry’s wife, she will only get so far.  Based on past behavior, she is being iced out.   If they BOTH return, she will be made to be invisible.


we can hope


----------



## CarryOn2020

Smoke and mirrors, sound and fury, signifying nothing


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seems like everyone else is having tons of fun.


----------



## csshopper

*She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.*

The bottom feeders at $unshine $ucks have lobbed the latest insidious bomb. Unless the Montecito Mausoleum is bugged, this had to have been presented to them by the Maggot. 

It's a tactic to plant the suggestion this "could" happen, put people on alert to see if it does happen, to interpret the most innocent gesture as toxic to them, at which point with Hazbeen already being reduced to a Eunuch, she threatens mental breakdown, storms off in the midst of the Jubilee, thus garnering headlines that she has showed them who is really #! in the world. 

The Polo match was just the warm up. With rabid determination and, ignoring the danger of a concussion (at the very least) from a dropped trophy, she clawed her way to center stage and got away with publicly emasculating her husband. Demanding he leave his Grandmother's Jubilee? No big deal to her. Looking at her gargoyle face on Sunday leering at the world, she thinks she is IT.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Smoke and mirrors, sound and fury, signifying nothing




There's maybe 50 people there lol?  Plus a tractor to haul away the stage.     Nice new life Harry lol.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> There's maybe 50 people there lol?  Plus a tractor to haul away the stage.     Nice new life Harry lol.


Explains why they bring their own paps, certainly not Network news worthy. The Netflix crew assigned to them must be the 'got stuck with the luck of the draw" group. YAWN


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tourre


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourre



he needs security to ride with as he has no friends and The Wife apparently doesn't want to ride


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> he needs security to ride with as he has not friends and The Wife apparently doesn't want to ride



Guy on the right is his childhood friend.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> William took Louis to the park so Louis could use his scooter.  I saw one RPM in the background.  Maybe there was one more lurking about.  Nobody was bothering them.  William is a lot closer to the throne than JCMH.  William took Charlotte to a birthday party and they had one RPM stay with her.  Even Charlotte is closer to the throne than JCMH.
> 
> The Montecito Morons are clowns.


 But they had to leave the horrible, racist UK because of the threat to his family's safety.  The US has to be MUCH safer, because TW said so


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> At another stage, the Duke appeared frustrated, and put his hand up into the air as he waited at a stop sign on the road
> View attachment 5411402


Perhaps TW forgot to tell him she’d arranged a pap shoot.


----------



## Chanbal

Stress kills! Wishing TM a speedy recovery.


----------



## bag-mania

Don’t know whether Thomas Markle‘s illness is a stroke but there’s something wrong with him. Somebody took this phone video of him as he was lying on a gurney at a Mexican medical facility/hospital. I assume Backgrid bought the footage from the owner for resale to TMZ.









						Thomas Markle Rushed to Hospital with Stroke Symptoms
					

Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle, was rushed to the hospital after possibly suffering a stroke.




					amp.tmz.com


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> Don’t know whether Thomas Markle‘s illness is a stroke but there’s something wrong with him. Somebody took this phone video of him as he was lying on a gurney at a Mexican medical facility/hospital. I assume Backgrid bought the footage from the owner for resale to TMZ.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle Rushed to Hospital with Stroke Symptoms
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father, Thomas Markle, was rushed to the hospital after possibly suffering a stroke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.tmz.com


No matter who he is, it's horrible someone in the room (a medical professional?) filmed him in this situation and sold it.  WTF is wrong with people.


----------



## marietouchet

Omg … Thomas Markle is Ill but had intended to go to the jubilee hoping to see M et al 
You can’t make this up …

Like it would be easier to seem them in London than in Montecito ???


----------



## CeeJay

Oooop- hit the wrong option!!


----------



## CeeJay

I don’t know, but my gut says that she’ll use this time to “stay home” to “reflect” on what’s happened to her Dad .. not that she will contact him (nah - nothing like that)!! .. but will say she just can’t go to the Jubilee and needs to stay home with the children.  The bigger question then becomes - “what will Harry do?”


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> PR release possibly from the Harkles' team: a potential bumpy road ahead…
> View attachment 5411282
> 
> 
> _We likely won’t see another event like the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee – honouring Lizzie’s 70-year reign – in our lifetimes. But if you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. It’s confirmed by multiple palace insiders that the pair will be “keeping a low profile” at the extravaganza, and sources tell heat that, behind the scenes, Meghan is preparing herself for a difficult time – and has even *warned Harry that she’ll leave the event if anyone crosses her*.
> 
> “*Meghan has told Harry he has to put her first and take no nonsense on the trip*,” says an insider close to the former Suits star, who was last week pictured cheering on her husband as he played in a polo tournament near their California home.
> 
> “*She’s fully aware that they’ll be walking into the lion’s den* when they arrive in the UK. She knows how important it is to Harry that she’s there at his side, but coming face-to-face with certain members of The Firm – who she claimed made their lives a misery – is a horrible prospect. *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.* She wants to know, if it came to it, that Harry’s prepared to step up and be that same protective partner he was during their time in England. *She wants him to promise he’ll pack up and leave if they’re disrespected*._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jubilee bust-up: Meghan Markle’s threat to walk out
> 
> 
> If you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. Read more on heatworld.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> heatworld.com


Don't let the door hit you on the way out!!


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Oooop- hit the wrong option!!


Edit to add: meant to post this as a reply to CeeJay's 2nd post above.

$unshine $ucks staff may be working overtime tonight trying to figure how to manage this.

1. Ignore it, they are estranged?
2. Use Doria as the ex wife to issue a statement of support for him?
3. Strong arm Raptor to reaching out as a strategy for improving her image? Would probably backfire, she's not a good enough actress  to feign love and caring. The Body Language Guy would have enough material for a month of videos.
4. Get Harry involved? Also, a bad move IMO. He's never made any kind of positive reference to Thomas, having embraced TW's fictional version of her life.
5. How to handle Samantha, supposedly on her way from Florida.
6. Ditto Michael, another family member.
7. Issue a generic statement of concern from Archewell?

Does Netflix have a crew standing by?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he thinks a bike ride will shift that weight, nope, weight loss at 40-ish is much more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry cycles his bike near his $14m California home
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared relaxed today as he cycled with his security near his California home - days before he is due to travel to the UK to celebrate the Queen's Jubilee with his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Not sure how much an electric bike helps weight loss!


----------



## bellecate

They really are pathetic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> They really are pathetic.
> View attachment 5411590
> View attachment 5411591


Really bad form when your team did not win!
Poor sports, so many lies, so much disrespect.



Spoiler: personal opinion



Now, it is exactly this kind of stuff that explains why I believe it is very likely she and TM are in cahoots.


----------



## Lodpah

She’s so lusty for fame, money and so greedy that she does not seem to care for her father. There’s a sage saying that children should honor their parents so that they may live a long life. You can choose to ignore your parents especially if they have been abusive and toxic for your safety and mental health but I’ve never read anything about how bad TW’s father was to her. He just was not ‘monied” and “elegant” looking enough for her.

So sad that she would throw him away like garbage to feed her ego. She’s like the incarnation of that Bathory woman but in modern times.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Apart from Doria has H even met any of Ms family ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I did not watch her painful appearance again because painful (really, if I didn't dislike her that much I'd probably feel bad for her because she looks borderline mentally disturbed with the manic grin, the silly seal clap, the curtsies - she does it at least twice -, the almost assault of Figueras), but I scrolled through Insta this morning and several comments mentioned how she "spoke with her hips" again, like greeting Charles with a hip thrust. What is WRONG with her. She really is not fit for polite company.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This is how to cosplay without looking like a trainwreck


----------



## Annawakes

They hadn’t won the trophy ?  And they took a picture hoisting it up like they won ?

_*Who does that!?!?!?!?

*_


----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


> PR release possibly from the Harkles' team: a potential bumpy road ahead…
> View attachment 5411282
> 
> 
> _We likely won’t see another event like the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee – honouring Lizzie’s 70-year reign – in our lifetimes. But if you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. It’s confirmed by multiple palace insiders that the pair will be “keeping a low profile” at the extravaganza, and sources tell heat that, behind the scenes, Meghan is preparing herself for a difficult time – and has even *warned Harry that she’ll leave the event if anyone crosses her*.
> 
> “*Meghan has told Harry he has to put her first and take no nonsense on the trip*,” says an insider close to the former Suits star, who was last week pictured cheering on her husband as he played in a polo tournament near their California home.
> 
> “*She’s fully aware that they’ll be walking into the lion’s den* when they arrive in the UK. She knows how important it is to Harry that she’s there at his side, but coming face-to-face with certain members of The Firm – who she claimed made their lives a misery – is a horrible prospect. *She will not tolerate any eye-rolling, snide put-downs or mean-spirited behaviour towards her or Harry.* She wants to know, if it came to it, that Harry’s prepared to step up and be that same protective partner he was during their time in England. *She wants him to promise he’ll pack up and leave if they’re disrespected*._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jubilee bust-up: Meghan Markle’s threat to walk out
> 
> 
> If you’re hoping to see Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrating with the monarch this June, you may be disappointed. Read more on heatworld.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> heatworld.com


All right UK TPF-ers, now you know what you have to do. Can we arrange shifts for coverage at the airport (terminal for private planes, of course) so she'll get the 'welcome' she deserves? Maybe if enough of us show up with eye-rolling, snide put-downs, or other mean-spirited behavior, she'll never even leave the airport and just catch the next private charter home. That way HMTQ and the rest of the family can truly enjoy the festivities without the Harkles around.


----------



## papertiger

piperdog said:


> All right UK TPF-ers, now you know what you have to do. Can we arrange shifts for coverage at the airport (terminal for private planes, of course) so she'll get the 'welcome' she deserves? Maybe if enough of us show up with eye-rolling, snide put-downs, or other mean-spirited behavior, she'll never even leave the airport and just catch the next private charter home. That way HMTQ and the rest of the family can truly enjoy the festivities without the Harkles around.



Sorry, but alas, I'll be busy enjoying the Queen's Jubilee celebration and washing my hair at all other times


----------



## duna

N/m


----------



## elvisfan4life

piperdog said:


> All right UK TPF-ers, now you know what you have to do. Can we arrange shifts for coverage at the airport (terminal for private planes, of course) so she'll get the 'welcome' she deserves? Maybe if enough of us show up with eye-rolling, snide put-downs, or other mean-spirited behavior, she'll never even leave the airport and just catch the next private charter home. That way HMTQ and the rest of the family can truly enjoy the festivities without the Harkles around.



Stockpile of rotten eggs rotten tomatoes fish heads


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really bad form when your team did not win!
> Poor sports, so many lies, so much disrespect.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: personal opinion
> 
> 
> 
> Now, it is exactly this kind of stuff that explains why I believe it is very likely she and TM are in cahoots.


These people are sick and shameless imo. 





Spoiler: Re-Personal Opinion



Many people consider TM a decent man that had his life turned upside down by TW, but I see your point. We will have to wait and see….


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> She’s so lusty for fame, money and so greedy that she does not seem to care for her father. There’s a sage saying that children should honor their parents so that they may live a long life. You can choose to ignore your parents especially if they have been abusive and toxic for your safety and mental health but I’ve never read anything about how bad TW’s father was to her. He just was not ‘monied” and “elegant” looking enough for her.
> 
> So sad that she would throw him away like garbage to feed her ego. She’s like the incarnation of that Bathory woman but in modern times.


so was Doria elegant?  or just the lesser of two "evils"?
why did she include Doria at her wedding and none of the other black relatives?  I think she had an uncle on her father's side who got her an embassy job.  so that guy must have been a professional; why was he excluded?
She's a strange one.


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> She’s so lusty for fame, money and so greedy that she does not seem to care for her father. There’s a sage saying that children should honor their parents so that they may live a long life. You can choose to ignore your parents especially if they have been abusive and toxic for your safety and mental health but I’ve never read anything about how bad TW’s father was to her. He just was not ‘monied” and “elegant” looking enough for her.
> 
> So sad that she would throw him away like garbage to feed her ego. She’s like the incarnation of that Bathory woman but in modern times.


I’m curious to see how she “justifies” her treatment to her dad when he’s no longer alive to dispute or defend.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This sounds interesting.


----------



## lallybelle

An Aunt on Doria's side said there has been no contact. no invite to the wedding etc and no condolences when her Aunt lost her husband. They still talk nicely about her or are quiet, so why were they "Markled"? Tacky AF that one is....


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This dress might be the one outfit of hers I truly liked. Until I found out how much she spent on a dress she wore for one afternoon that is.


How much was it?
Weird it’s not in the re-wear pile given they make such a virtue out of that. Oh I know why that might be   


charlottawill said:


> The other two women in the group photo are wearing more grass friendly shoes - lower and thicker heels. I assume MM wears stilettos all the time because she thinks they are sexy, but it probably has contributed to the odd shape of her already thin calves. I knew someone else with calves like hers and she lived in stilettos. Podiatrists recommend wearing differing heel heights for the health of your feet, legs and back. We've seen the damage to her feet. I wonder when she started wearing them.


I love stilettos and heels but I would never wear them to a garden party or anything held on a lawn. Aside from messing up your shoes I feel it’s disrespectful to the gardener who has to tend that lawn and the host/hostess. I feel like it’s just yet another social nicety she doesn’t feel she need to do, 


gracekelly said:


> I feel the same.  There have been a lot of rumblings about this being in cahoots and it does make you wonder.





lanasyogamama said:


> yes, dad having a stroke does “pull at the heartstrings”


I mean maybe but how would you fake a stroke and the getting wheeled away by medics? They surely wouldn’t go along with it? It’d be easier to just say you’ve got covid and stay at home surely? 


sdkitty said:


> so was Doria elegant?  or just the lesser of two "evils"?
> why did she include Doria at her wedding and none of the other black relatives?  I think she had an uncle on her father's side who got her an embassy job.  so that guy must have been a professional; why was he excluded?
> She's a strange one.


I think D looked elegant at all her public appearances- that mint outfit was very summer wedding- certainly better than the virginal tablecloth.


----------



## Chanbal

1LV said:


> I’m curious to see how she “*justifies*” her treatment to her dad when he’s no longer alive to dispute or defend.


She will have carte blanche…


----------



## marietouchet

On Thomas illness … I can predict what MM will think ie this is the second inconvenient illness, this one has to do with triumphant return for jubilee, the previous one was prior to wedding

don’t know what will happen but
if she goes to London it will look bad (insensitive lady who has green of not attending family in crisis ) - no matter whether she is well behaved at festivities, 
if she stays home … hmmm he is nearby in Chula Vista … she cannot use that excuse without visiting dad

Much hubbub about Andrew role - he may be slated to appear at Garter ceremony and that suggestion is getting a lot of bad press …

So the Firm will carefully monitor MM actions


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really bad form when your team did not win!
> Poor sports, so many lies, so much disrespect.
> 
> Harry should know from his decades of playing polo this was a huge breach of etiquette, yet the thoroughly emasculated sod let her run amok, not having the balls to say “no”. if It weren’t for his buddy Nacho Figueres he might have trouble finding someone to play with in the future. No wonder their other teammates were so uncomfortable.
> 
> Read a theory by a blogger yesterday that Raptor’s performance Sunday was a deliberate mockery of the Royal’s sport and meant to demean it. Like the sly dig about hats and tea cups in her 40x40 video with Melissa McCarthy. At first I thought it seemed exaggerated, but maybe the poster was right. TW is diabolical so she did a twofer, demeaned protocol and her Hazbeen handbag all at the same time, perhaps explaining her glee?


----------



## kemilia

LVSistinaMM said:


> I'm absolutely astonished that he is SUCH a commodity, he needs three security guys around him riding around in MONTECITO. For god sakes, it's not Hollywood, and the dude isn't even a movie star. When he left UK, he became a Haz been. These people are DELUSIONAL. No one in Montecito gives AF about them.


Why isn't he wearing a helmet if he is so darned worried about harm?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> so was Doria elegant?  or just the lesser of two "evils"?
> why did she include Doria at her wedding and none of the other black relatives?  I think she had an uncle on her father's side who got her an embassy job.  so that guy must have been a professional; why was he excluded?
> She's a strange one.



Besides being embarrassed by them for whatever reason - seeing she herself can't behave herself to save her life - she couldn't have family around to bust the lies she'd had fed Harry from the beginning. Doria was easy to control...but try that with a crowd.


----------



## Chanbal

Would the museum visitors use wax tomatoes in this case? 












						Harry and Meghan are restored to royal line up at Madame Tussauds
					

Figures of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were separated from their family at Madame Tussauds in January 2020 after they decided to step back from their royal duties. Above: The royals together again.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> How much was it?



More than 2000 bucks.



> Weird it’s not in the re-wear pile given they make such a virtue out of that. Oh I know why that might be


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She couldn't have family around to bust the lies she'd had fed Harry from the beginning. Doria was easy to control...but try that with a crowd.


maybe you're right but to me (as I've said before), it seemed very odd that she had basically no relatives at her huge wedding, but had a bunch of celebs that she didn't even know
Has she seen or had communication with Amal and George since the wedding?  probably not


----------



## Chanbal

They are ready for their reality/comedy show!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> maybe you're right but to me (as I've said before), it seemed very odd that she had basically no relatives at her huge wedding, but had a bunch of celebs that she didn't even know



I'm sure everyone who is not completely effed up found that odd...because it is. I do think those two things are not related, though. She wanted to get rid of her family, and she wanted to rub shoulders with celebrities who wouldn't have given her the time of the day before she snagged Harry, but I do not think the family was cut out because the church was ten seats short or something.



> Has she seen or had communication with Amal and George since the wedding?  probably not



Amal organized her baby shower and lent their private jet to get there. But I think she quickly saw the light after that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> They are ready for their reality/comedy show!




I just don't understand why the polo club or whoever organized the tournament would go along with this. Do you see the Olypmics handing out gold medals to the wrong athletes because it looks cute?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure everyone who is not completely effed up found that odd...because it is. I do think those two things are not related, though. She wanted to get rid of her family, and she wanted to rub shoulders with celebrities who wouldn't have given her the time of the day before she snagged Harry, but I do not think the family was cut out because the church was ten seats short or something.
> 
> 
> 
> Amal organized her baby shower and lent their private jet to get there. But I think she quickly saw the light after that.


no, obviously family was cut out for other reasons.....but I'm sure the RF thought it odd (as any family would)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They are ready for their reality/comedy show!



It’s a silver trophy for second place.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Would the museum visitors use wax tomatoes in this case?
> View attachment 5411822
> 
> View attachment 5411823
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are restored to royal line up at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> Figures of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were separated from their family at Madame Tussauds in January 2020 after they decided to step back from their royal duties. Above: The royals together again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What is wrong with this picture?  The dress fits!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Not sure how much an electric bike helps weight loss!


I think he was merching the bike. The name is clearly visible.


----------



## 1LV

I wonder if the person who convinced the powers-that-be at Netflix to sign MM & JCMH is still on the Netflix payroll.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think he was merching the bike. The name is clearly visible.


how far he has fallen


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> I’m curious to see how she “justifies” her treatment to her dad when he’s no longer alive to dispute or defend.


she may stay silent on the subject....apparently she hasn't "said" anything about this current situation


----------



## duna

gracekelly said:


> What is wrong with this picture?  The dress fits!



LOL, notice how the two Dumbartons have been placed slightly behind all the others and Charles is actually turning his back on her/them


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh! While I would have enjoyed the show, QE might not have been pleased…


----------



## Aimee3

kemilia said:


> Why isn't he wearing a helmet if he is so darned worried about harm?



but, but, if he wore a helmet, nobody (gasp!) would know it was him!


----------



## csshopper

A brief interjection, lovely to see Princess Beatrice at the Garden Party with the Cambridges and Essexes.  Clearly aligned  with the Queen Team as she has been seen recently in other activities supporting her grandmother and the working Royals.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> A brief interjection, lovely to see Princess Beatrice at the Garden Party with the Cambridges and Essexes.  Clearly aligned  with the Queen Team as she has been seen recently in other activities supporting her grandmother and the working Royals.



Shame about her father


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! While I would have enjoyed the show, QE might not have been pleased…



This sounds like Samantha planned this.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> A brief interjection, lovely to see Princess Beatrice at the Garden Party with the Cambridges and Essexes.  Clearly aligned  with the Queen Team as she has been seen recently in other activities supporting her grandmother and the working Royals.


I think Edo wised her up.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides being embarrassed by them for whatever reason - seeing she herself can't behave herself to save her life - she couldn't have family around to bust the lies she'd had fed Harry from the beginning. Doria was easy to control...but try that with a crowd.


in addition to doria being her mom and loving her, doria seems to have also profited from her daughter's new found wealth...she is now CEO of some sort of senior facility?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> What is wrong with this picture?  *The dress fits*!


True, but the picture looks fake because in reality, the royal lineup would start with HMTQ followed by Prince Charles either on her left or right (depending where the receiving line starts) followed by Camilla, William, Catherine, Doofus and The Witch of Montecito in last place. After all her lies and BS, TW would never be allowed to stand near HM even though she desperately needs such pictures and videos for Netflix.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> Would the museum visitors use wax tomatoes in this case?
> View attachment 5411822
> 
> View attachment 5411823
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are restored to royal line up at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> Figures of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were separated from their family at Madame Tussauds in January 2020 after they decided to step back from their royal duties. Above: The royals together again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





duna said:


> LOL, notice how the two Dumbartons have been placed slightly behind all the others and Charles is actually turning his back on her/them



hahahaha what shade - M.Tussaud’s team included her psycho eyeballs! Hazben looks like an inane doofus - and was that the red dress she wore (the all-red outfit) when it was strictly against the rules to wear red (a military formal occasion)?


----------



## bag-mania

This article says Thomas has been moved to a hospital in San Diego for treatment. She could visit him easily enough if she cared or desired. I’m guessing she doesn’t.









						Meghan Markle's Dad Rushed to San Diego County Hospital for Medical Emergency
					

Markle is the father of the duchess of Sussex, who is married to Prince Harry, and has lived in Baja California for several years




					www.nbcsandiego.com


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> This article says Thomas has been moved to a hospital in San Diego for treatment. She could visit him easily enough if she cared or desired. I’m guessing she doesn’t.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Dad Rushed to San Diego County Hospital for Medical Emergency
> 
> 
> Markle is the father of the duchess of Sussex, who is married to Prince Harry, and has lived in Baja California for several years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcsandiego.com



How heartbreaking that she can't be bothered. This won't be a good look for her on top of everything else.


----------



## lallybelle

Wrong Thread


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I did not watch her painful appearance again because painful (really, if I didn't dislike her that much I'd probably feel bad for her because she looks borderline mentally disturbed with the manic grin, the silly seal clap, the curtsies - she does it at least twice -, the almost assault of Figueras), but I scrolled through Insta this morning and several comments mentioned how she "spoke with her hips" again, like greeting Charles with a hip thrust. What is WRONG with her. She really is not fit for polite company.


I think her only "skill" is using sexual cues, so that's what she resorts to, even when inappropriate. (ie, all the time!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! While I would have enjoyed the show, QE might not have been pleased…




Geez. I do not condone her treatment of her father at all, but honestly, this is embarrassing and will just prove to a lot of people she was right all along. Why is this family so short on dignity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> A brief interjection, lovely to see Princess Beatrice at the Garden Party with the Cambridges and Essexes.  Clearly aligned  with the Queen Team as she has been seen recently in other activities supporting her grandmother and the working Royals.



Side note, she looks radiant. Marriage and motherhood clearly suit her.


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> hahahaha what shade - M.Tussaud’s team included her psycho eyeballs! Hazben looks like an inane doofus - and was that the red dress she wore (the all-red outfit) when it was strictly against the rules to wear red (a military formal occasion)?
> 
> View attachment 5411964


They even put his hand in his jacket like he often poses.  I found that so odd.  Is he trying to be like Napoleon??  Does he have a rash on his chest?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Would the museum visitors use wax tomatoes in this case?
> View attachment 5411822
> 
> View attachment 5411823
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are restored to royal line up at Madame Tussauds
> 
> 
> Figures of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were separated from their family at Madame Tussauds in January 2020 after they decided to step back from their royal duties. Above: The royals together again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Camilla lost weight     




Katel said:


> hahahaha what shade - M.Tussaud’s team included her psycho eyeballs! Hazben looks like an inane doofus - and was that the red dress she wore (the all-red outfit) when it was strictly against the rules to wear red (a military formal occasion)?
> 
> View attachment 5411964



I am shocked they didn't make the wax figures hold hands


----------



## mikimoto007

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t think anyone believed Meghan and Harry were seriously considering attending the jubilee. Harry maybe, but Meghan isn’t about to put herself out there when she knows she isn’t going to be cheered on. The Brits are probably too polite to boo her but she wants adulation.



Nah I definitely think they'll still attend. Being royal is their usp. If they don't go to stuff like this.....are they even royal any more? They need to keep attending these events to remind people about that. Without the royal family they're just some guy who used to be in the army and a moderately successful actress.


----------



## Chanbal

It's about compassion, a favorite of TW… 



*It is not yet known whether Meghan, 40*_, who is estranged from him, *will go to his bedside at a clinic in Chula Vista, California – only a few hours' drive from the home she shares with Prince Harry in Montecito.*

And royal author *Tom Bower* revealed on ITV's Good Morning Britain today that he had spoken to Mr Markle over the weekend about his upcoming book about Meghan, and that he had fallen over - before the stroke happened. 

Mr Bower said: 'He was alright, but he'd just fallen over in Rosarito, he'd been shopping and he told me that some other people had helped him stand up. But he is a man who's already had heart problems and he wasn't feeling too good. On the other hand, he was very excited about coming to London for the Jubilee.'

Mr Markle was taken by ambulance to the clinic in Chula Vista, but had earlier been admitted to hospital in Tijuana, Mexico, where he was seen arriving with an oxygen mask on his face and flanked by paramedics.

*Mr Bower said he did not know whether Meghan would go and see her father, but added: 'What we do know is that Meghan has always said that she's a very compassionate person.

'And if compassion was at all necessary right now, it would mean that she would go to her father's bedside, about two and a half hours' drive south of where she lives, and give him some comfort and reassurance.* And we wait to see what happens.'

*Mr Bower also confirmed that Meghan has not made any contact with Mr Markle 'since just before the wedding - other than the famous letter'*.

He continued: 'I've been in touch with him for my book, which comes out very soon now, for some time.

'And he is very upset, he's very unhappy because of course he was a very loving father to Meghan and supported her throughout her childhood when her mother wasn't there. And paid for her student fees too.

*'He was very upset that he hasn't been able to see his grandchildren.* *So I do think to an extent he was going to come to London, although he told me that he was coming to see the Queen, I think in reality he was also hoping to see Meghan and to see his grandchildren.*

'And we do know of course that if all Meghan Markle's family had been here in London, it would have somewhat dominated the news outlets, not just the Jubilee itself. So to that extent I suppose we've been relieved of that saga._'









						Thomas Markle fell over while shopping days before suffering stroke
					

Retired lighting director Thomas Markle, who lives in Rosarito, Mexico, was struck down and lost his speech only a week before he had been due to fly to London for the Queen's Jubilee celebrations.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## mikimoto007

purseinsanity said:


> They even put his hand in his jacket like he often poses.  I found that so odd.  Is he trying to be like Napoleon??  Does he have a rash on his chest?



I think I've heard it called the paperclip. Prince Charles and William do it too.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I thought it was the thunder. Turns out, it was plates breaking in Uncouth Duchess' mansion


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Geez. I do not condone her treatment of her father at all, but honestly, this is embarrassing and will just prove to a lot of people she was right all along. *Why is this family so short on dignity.*



They love *drama*. Not just any drama but the low-level soap opera kind.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I am shocked they didn't make the wax figures hold hands


Or have wax Megain pushing wax Haz


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It's about compassion, a favorite of TW…
> View attachment 5412083
> 
> 
> *It is not yet known whether Meghan, 40*_, who is estranged from him, *will go to his bedside at a clinic in Chula Vista, California – only a few hours' drive from the home she shares with Prince Harry in Montecito.*
> 
> And royal author *Tom Bower* revealed on ITV's Good Morning Britain today that he had spoken to Mr Markle over the weekend about his upcoming book about Meghan, and that he had fallen over - before the stroke happened.
> 
> Mr Bower said: 'He was alright, but he'd just fallen over in Rosarito, he'd been shopping and he told me that some other people had helped him stand up. But he is a man who's already had heart problems and he wasn't feeling too good. On the other hand, he was very excited about coming to London for the Jubilee.'
> 
> Mr Markle was taken by ambulance to the clinic in Chula Vista, but had earlier been admitted to hospital in Tijuana, Mexico, where he was seen arriving with an oxygen mask on his face and flanked by paramedics.
> 
> *Mr Bower said he did not know whether Meghan would go and see her father, but added: 'What we do know is that Meghan has always said that she's a very compassionate person.
> 
> 'And if compassion was at all necessary right now, it would mean that she would go to her father's bedside, about two and a half hours' drive south of where she lives, and give him some comfort and reassurance.* And we wait to see what happens.'
> 
> *Mr Bower also confirmed that Meghan has not made any contact with Mr Markle 'since just before the wedding - other than the famous letter'*.
> 
> He continued: 'I've been in touch with him for my book, which comes out very soon now, for some time.
> 
> 'And he is very upset, he's very unhappy because of course he was a very loving father to Meghan and supported her throughout her childhood when her mother wasn't there. And paid for her student fees too.
> 
> *'He was very upset that he hasn't been able to see his grandchildren.* *So I do think to an extent he was going to come to London, although he told me that he was coming to see the Queen, I think in reality he was also hoping to see Meghan and to see his grandchildren.*
> 
> 'And we do know of course that if all Meghan Markle's family had been here in London, it would have somewhat dominated the news outlets, not just the Jubilee itself. So to that extent I suppose we've been relieved of that saga._'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle fell over while shopping days before suffering stroke
> 
> 
> Retired lighting director Thomas Markle, who lives in Rosarito, Mexico, was struck down and lost his speech only a week before he had been due to fly to London for the Queen's Jubilee celebrations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hmmmm, where's that "Compassion in Action" MMM?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> They love *drama*. Not just any drama but the low-level soap opera kind.


Drama? TW? No...


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Hmmmm, where's that "Compassion in Action" MMM?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Rolling my eyes so hard.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rolling my eyes so hard.



Poor Hazz! I bet he went to bed without dinner after TW saw this photo.


----------



## marietouchet

You can’t make this up … 
The one who was with him … 
Prince Harry and Meghan 'hire Michael Jackson's former bodyguard'
https://mol.im/a/10854963


----------



## Chanbal

Someone at another educational thread posted this old, but interesting article from the Montecito Journal. It's about the fundraising event to pay off the Harkle's mortgage.  

The interesting points from the article are *1*) OW, TP and several other sources were contacted by the lady in charge of the fundraising event, *2*) she had allegedly approval from the Harkles' foundation to raise money to pay off their mortgage, and *3*) their local journal seems to be having fun with the situation.

*"Mortgage Mercy*
_After *Prince Harry*, 36, revealed he used a mortgage to pay for his $14.5 million Riven Rock estate during his now infamous *Oprah Winfrey* interview, Ventura-based caregiver *Anastasia Hanson* set up a GoFundMe page to raise $10 million to help pay off the multi-million debt for the six-acre, nine-bedroom property, which, given the red hot market, is estimated to have more doubled in value since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex bought it in July.

“When they came to the U.S.A. they were without jobs and with limited funds,” Anastasia, 56, tells me. “They’ve stated that they’ve had a very rough time, so this fundraiser is a way to give help, compassion, and love by paying their home loan in full.”

*She says she has already reached out to Oprah, estimated worth $3 billion, TV billionaire Tyler Perry – where Harry and Meghan initially stayed in Beverly Hills –, CNN, the BBC, and the L.A. Times in her fundraising efforts.*

“I want the public to know this is legitimate and safe,” she assures me. “My heart was moved and touched to do something, and I followed my intuition to do this fundraiser. If two million people all around the world just donated $5 each the goal will be reached. They deserve it.”

Given Harry’s worth is estimated at $50 million, including major bequests from his late mother Princess Diana and *Queen Elizabeth*, the Queen Mother, who died in 2002, and Meghan’s fortune at $7 million given her seven seasons on the TV series Suits, one might wonder if they really need the funding, particularly given the lucrative contracts they have signed with Netflix, reportedly over $100 million, and Spotify, reportedly $30 million.

But over the weekend Anastasia, whose parents were married at the Santa Barbara Mission, tells me her GoFundMe page was deleted by the website because she had not set up a bank account for the funds to go into. All monies she had already raised, a paltry $79, have now been returned to the donors.

*She has also contacted Archewell, the royal couple’s foundation, who she had asked for approval of the fundraiser*, to let them know they’ll have to continue paying their own mortgage.

I trust they can cope…"_









						Magic at Marymount - Montecito
					

One year to the day they had to close their doors due to the pandemic, Marymount of Santa Barbara celebrated the resilience of their community with their annual auction gala. The school opened back up for in-person learning in September and the auction’s theme “Magic of the Night” acknowledged...




					www.montecitojournal.net


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Someone at another educational thread posted this old, but interesting article from the Montecito Journal. It's about the fundraising event to pay off the Harkle's mortgage.
> 
> The interesting points from the article are *1*) OW, TP and several other sources were contacted by the lady in charge of the fundraising event, *2*) she had allegedly approval from the Harkles' foundation to raise money to pay off their mortgage, and *3*) their local journal seems to be having fun with the situation.
> 
> *"Mortgage Mercy*
> _After *Prince Harry*, 36, revealed he used a mortgage to pay for his $14.5 million Riven Rock estate during his now infamous *Oprah Winfrey* interview, Ventura-based caregiver *Anastasia Hanson* set up a GoFundMe page to raise $10 million to help pay off the multi-million debt for the six-acre, nine-bedroom property, which, given the red hot market, is estimated to have more doubled in value since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex bought it in July.
> 
> “When they came to the U.S.A. they were without jobs and with limited funds,” Anastasia, 56, tells me. “They’ve stated that they’ve had a very rough time, so this fundraiser is a way to give help, compassion, and love by paying their home loan in full.”
> 
> *She says she has already reached out to Oprah, estimated worth $3 billion, TV billionaire Tyler Perry – where Harry and Meghan initially stayed in Beverly Hills –, CNN, the BBC, and the L.A. Times in her fundraising efforts.*
> 
> “I want the public to know this is legitimate and safe,” she assures me. “My heart was moved and touched to do something, and I followed my intuition to do this fundraiser. If two million people all around the world just donated $5 each the goal will be reached. They deserve it.”
> 
> Given Harry’s worth is estimated at $50 million, including major bequests from his late mother Princess Diana and *Queen Elizabeth*, the Queen Mother, who died in 2002, and Meghan’s fortune at $7 million given her seven seasons on the TV series Suits, one might wonder if they really need the funding, particularly given the lucrative contracts they have signed with Netflix, reportedly over $100 million, and Spotify, reportedly $30 million.
> 
> But over the weekend Anastasia, whose parents were married at the Santa Barbara Mission, tells me her GoFundMe page was deleted by the website because she had not set up a bank account for the funds to go into. All monies she had already raised, a paltry $79, have now been returned to the donors.
> 
> *She has also contacted Archewell, the royal couple’s foundation, who she had asked for approval of the fundraiser*, to let them know they’ll have to continue paying their own mortgage.
> 
> I trust they can cope…"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Magic at Marymount - Montecito
> 
> 
> One year to the day they had to close their doors due to the pandemic, Marymount of Santa Barbara celebrated the resilience of their community with their annual auction gala. The school opened back up for in-person learning in September and the auction’s theme “Magic of the Night” acknowledged...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net


Are you kidding me???  These two dead beats, entitled and hypocritical at their core, need everyone else to help them and show them love compassion?  Anastasia, with all due respect, go F off.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like it may take a long time for TM to get his speech back. 



_“I feel really blessed that he is getting some of his strength back and it’s going to take several, *maybe six months, maybe a year to get his speech back.*

“The stroke was in the right side of the brain so the damage was on the left and he’s left-handed but it also impaired his speech and his ability to swallow.”_


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M need to stay in Cali. Hazzi needs to meet his F-in-law, take his kids to meet this grandad and wish him a speedy recovery.  It is long past time for this narrative to change. Nflix should insist on it.  Shameful if they do anything else.  Imo.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> It’s a silver trophy for second place.


How many teams were playing?  Was there only a first and second place


----------



## Toby93

_*She has also contacted Archewell, the royal couple’s foundation, who she had asked for approval of the fundraiser*, to let them know they’ll have to continue paying their own mortgage.

I trust they can cope…"_









						Magic at Marymount - Montecito
					

One year to the day they had to close their doors due to the pandemic, Marymount of Santa Barbara celebrated the resilience of their community with their annual auction gala. The school opened back up for in-person learning in September and the auction’s theme “Magic of the Night” acknowledged...




					www.montecitojournal.net
				




So does that mean that they actually approved and gave their permission to go ahead and fundraise?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M need to stay in Cali. Hazzi needs to meet his F-in-law, take his kids to meet this grandad and wish him a speedy recovery.  It is long past time for this narrative to change. Nflix should insist on it.  Shameful if they do anything else.  Imo.


The longer time goes on with no response from them the worse they look.

Maybe she’s in hiding having read the response to her abysmal behavior when she made an azz of herself at the Polo match. But there is no excuse for not at least issuing a written statement.


----------



## csshopper

LVSistinaMM said:


> I'm absolutely astonished that he is SUCH a commodity, he needs three security guys around him riding around in MONTECITO. For god sakes, it's not Hollywood, and the dude isn't even a movie star. When he left UK, he became a Haz been. These people are DELUSIONAL. No one in Montecito gives AF about them.


Totally agree, they are overly impressed with themselves.

I think “security” is a cover for hiring staff  who will protect them from having to interact with common people. Intimidating security people serve that function as a buffer.

We’ve see multiple incidents where Meghan has rudely treated “regular people” who could not benefit her, and has clawed her way forward to get to the ones she thinks important/useful.

Harry grew up in an environment where access to him was managed, even in crowds. He’s spoiled. Like TW he is only interested in people who can do something for him. Thus, security is supposed to keep the ordinary folk from bothering him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Raptor, always the popular center of attention. Not.

Really, if she wasn't such an extremely unlikeable POS I'd feel bad for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Let's see for how long his employment will last.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rolling my eyes so hard.



Here is an article on a commercialization aspect of the event. TW may have had her stans in mind with such 'tiny trinket,' not everyone can buy Cartier…

_While planting a congratulatory kiss on Harry after his Los Padres team took home the Lisle Nixon Memorial cup by a score of 14 to 10, eagle-eyed fans noticed the addition of a small gold “L” ring on Markle’s finger, a nod to 11-month-old Lilibet Diana.

*The tiny trinket *perfectly matched Markle’s “A” necklace from Verse, which she’s been sporting since she welcomed son Archie in 2019._









						Meghan Markle honors daughter Lilibet with new ring at polo match
					

While supporting Prince Harry as he played polo, Markle paid tribute to her daughter with a special trinket.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Aimee3

csshopper said:


> The longer time goes on with no response from them the worse they look.
> 
> Maybe she’s in hiding having read the response to her abysmal behavior when she made an azz of herself at the Polo match. But there is no excuse for not at least issuing a written statement.


They’ll probably say they responded in private.  Remember how they claimed they wanted a private life?  So maybe now, they’ll claim it’s a private matter and they reacted privately.  I don’t believe it but it’s an option.


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry accused of deceiving people by hoisting polo cup
					

Prince Harry accused of deceiving people by hoisting polo cup




					www.geo.tv


----------



## lanasyogamama

BLG has been so busy with the Amber Heard trial that he hasn’t analyzed the polo video! I need his thoughts!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> BLG has been so busy with the Amber Heard trial that he hasn’t analyzed the polo video! I need his thoughts!



Yeah Jesus, we can't be neglected like this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah Jesus, we can't be neglected like this.



Seriously, D&H and H&M have made so much hateful noise at a time when we need elegance and tranquility.  One positive - Kate Moss showed how us how to speak properly.  Hoping TW and Nflix were paying attention - shrill and tinny simply won’t do now.









						Kate Moss mesmerises fans with 'pixie' voice during Depp v Heard trial
					

The British model was called to answer questions this week as the ugly court battle between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard rages on – but those tuning in to proceedings were captivated by her 'heavenly' and 'soothing' voice




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> BLG has been so busy with the Amber Heard trial that he hasn’t analyzed the polo video! I need his thoughts!





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah Jesus, we can't be neglected like this.



I know, he has almost abandoned Hazz & TW…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It is super odd especially seeing the big Raptor-directed fallout was not until days before the wedding, so what kind of sh*t did she feed the poor idiot?


----------



## rose60610

Can Meghan at least be bothered to send a wreath to her father? Or isn't he famous enough? Or hasn't he done enough for her? Were it not for him, she would never have been in a position to get a role in anything or attend the schools she had. Let alone attract attention from a world famous prince. But please, Meghan, continue to lie about how hard you had it and were forced to stoop so low you had to eat at Sizzler's. Oh the HORROR!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. I have also no doubt she never intended to have him walk her down the isle. I do wonder if the BRF just assumed because that's what normal people do and she didn't have an excuse ready, so went along with it while getting to work setting him up as the a*shole to elegantly get rid of him.


----------



## Chrysalids

The arrogance of inserting yourselves into other people's family drama. RME.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chrysalids said:


> The arrogance of inserting yourselves into other people's family drama. RME.



You may want to go find the appreciation thread...they sure could use one or two postings


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Raptor, always the popular center of attention. Not.
> 
> Really, if she wasn't such an extremely unlikeable POS I'd feel bad for her.



I think she still thinks she's a suitcase girl here, with those hand gestures.  
Another video where she's "talking to" someone who has zero interest in even pretending to care.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Someone at another educational thread posted this old, but interesting article from the Montecito Journal. It's about the fundraising event to pay off the Harkle's mortgage.
> 
> The interesting points from the article are *1*) OW, TP and several other sources were contacted by the lady in charge of the fundraising event, *2*) she had allegedly approval from the Harkles' foundation to raise money to pay off their mortgage, and *3*) their local journal seems to be having fun with the situation.
> 
> *"Mortgage Mercy*
> _After *Prince Harry*, 36, revealed he used a mortgage to pay for his $14.5 million Riven Rock estate during his now infamous *Oprah Winfrey* interview, Ventura-based caregiver *Anastasia Hanson* set up a GoFundMe page to raise $10 million to help pay off the multi-million debt for the six-acre, nine-bedroom property, which, given the red hot market, is estimated to have more doubled in value since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex bought it in July.
> 
> “When they came to the U.S.A. they were without jobs and with limited funds,” Anastasia, 56, tells me. “They’ve stated that they’ve had a very rough time, so this fundraiser is a way to give help, compassion, and love by paying their home loan in full.”
> 
> *She says she has already reached out to Oprah, estimated worth $3 billion, TV billionaire Tyler Perry – where Harry and Meghan initially stayed in Beverly Hills –, CNN, the BBC, and the L.A. Times in her fundraising efforts.*
> 
> “I want the public to know this is legitimate and safe,” she assures me. “My heart was moved and touched to do something, and I followed my intuition to do this fundraiser. If two million people all around the world just donated $5 each the goal will be reached. They deserve it.”
> 
> Given Harry’s worth is estimated at $50 million, including major bequests from his late mother Princess Diana and *Queen Elizabeth*, the Queen Mother, who died in 2002, and Meghan’s fortune at $7 million given her seven seasons on the TV series Suits, one might wonder if they really need the funding, particularly given the lucrative contracts they have signed with Netflix, reportedly over $100 million, and Spotify, reportedly $30 million.
> 
> But over the weekend Anastasia, whose parents were married at the Santa Barbara Mission, tells me her GoFundMe page was deleted by the website because she had not set up a bank account for the funds to go into. All monies she had already raised, a paltry $79, have now been returned to the donors.
> 
> *She has also contacted Archewell, the royal couple’s foundation, who she had asked for approval of the fundraiser*, to let them know they’ll have to continue paying their own mortgage.
> 
> I trust they can cope…"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Magic at Marymount - Montecito
> 
> 
> One year to the day they had to close their doors due to the pandemic, Marymount of Santa Barbara celebrated the resilience of their community with their annual auction gala. The school opened back up for in-person learning in September and the auction’s theme “Magic of the Night” acknowledged...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net


$79!  love it.  this woman must be very low IQ


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Amber and Meghan= sisters from another mother.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chrysalids said:


> The arrogance of inserting yourselves into other people's family drama. RME.


Actually I believe we are like sociologists.  We observe the species and their behavior and report on it, often attempting to understand or explain possible motivations.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

I am disgusted. Using murdered kids for PR. Wow. 

Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde  | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Mendocino

I'm so angry right now my hand is shaking as I type this.  I've just seen a photo of MM in Uvalde laying flowers and kneeling at the memorial.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

hollieplus2 said:


> I am disgusted. Using murdered kids for PR. Wow.
> 
> Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde  | Daily Mail Online



I see she once again has paid close attention to Kate being dressed very casually while paying tribute to the murdered Londoner (only that Kate brushes her hair in the morning). But she apparently missed one little detail: Kate didn't bring her own paps because she really didn't want to be seen.

Seriously, have even all kids been identified by now? This disgusting scavenger.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Oh gross, and if that ends up on some Netflix special she is just an awful person.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I see she once again has paid close attention to Kate being dressed very casually while paying tribute to the murdered Londoner (only that Kate brushes her hair in the morning). But she apparently missed one little detail: Kate didn't bring her own paps because she really didn't want to be seen.
> 
> Seriously, have even all kids been identified by now? This disgusting scavenger.


Kate was mourning the loss with her community, someone who was murdered in her community. Meghan has zero connection to the people in this town. It was purely for PR and probably Netflix. Absolutely disgusting.


----------



## piperdog

So she flew to Texas just for this little performance? Assuming with paps and Nflix crew in tow? Wow. Just when you thought they couldn't sink any lower...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I made it through the reporting of the massacre ok I thought. That was until I read the relatives of the victims had to give DNA samples because of what assault ammunition did to those tiny bodies. And this f*cking bottom feeder with her 30000 bucks in jewelry chooses this occasion to play Holy Mary or something.


----------



## Chanbal

hollieplus2 said:


> I am disgusted. Using murdered kids for PR. Wow.
> 
> Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde  | Daily Mail Online





Mendocino said:


> I'm so angry right now my hand is shaking as I type this.  I've just seen a photo of MM in Uvalde laying flowers and kneeling at the memorial.


I have no words to comment on the cruel opportunism apart of it makes me feel sick.


----------



## Chanbal

hollieplus2 said:


> Kate was mourning the loss with her community, someone who was murdered in her community. Meghan has zero connection to the people in this town. It was purely for PR and probably Netflix. Absolutely disgusting.


This ^^^^. Also, QE is the UK's head of state and Kate represents the monarchy.


----------



## Chanbal

I only watched 1/2. Lady C confirms that TM is seriously sick and he doesn't get monetary compensation for his interviews.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope someone got a pic of her with her camera crew in the background.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope someone got a pic of her with her camera crew in the background.


Not yet, but the comments are coming…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

If she can fly at this short notice from California to Texas, then surely she can travel the much shorter distance to visit her father. 
I am absolutely disgusted.


----------



## Gal4Dior

hollieplus2 said:


> I am disgusted. Using murdered kids for PR. Wow.
> 
> Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde  | Daily Mail Online


Yeah, no news cameras went to her because she is a NOBODY here. Unfortunately, she still thinks she is a SOMEBODY here when she needs to hop on a PJ to Uvalde to deliver flowers herself. 

Maybe she could have taken the money spent for this publicity stunt and given it to the families who lost their children??? Wouldn't that be a way to honor those poor kids?

She is such a NARCISSIST!


----------



## tiktok

Chrysalids said:


> The arrogance of inserting yourselves into other people's family drama. RME.



You mean the family drama Harry and Megan discussed with Oprah and millions of viewers? Or the drama they’re filming for Netflix? Or the drama they’re writing $20M memoirs about? I just want to clarify. Because we certainly wouldn’t want to discuss any drama they’re uncomfortable making public. Oh wait…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This ^^^^. Also, QE is the UK's head of state and Kate represents the monarchy.



She did not in this case, she was in jeans and a parka and her security person walked way behind her. She was seen by an Instagrammer who filmed when he approached her and that's how we know she went.

But also, I'm not sure how not one, but two people now took my post and somehow made it into a criticism of Kate?


----------



## K.D.

I'm being snarky but those roses are looking decidedly not fresh...


----------



## Debbini

Chrysalids said:


> The arrogance of inserting yourselves into other people's family drama. RME.


It's not like we're all gathered in one of their bathrooms!


----------



## mellibelly

Just when you think this harpy couldn’t sink lower. There are funds being collected for the victim’s families. They could have paid respect by sending a donation(without publicizing it). This is a self serving PR stunt piggybacking on a tragedy of murdered children and teachers. Me-Me-Me Again! And it’s not like what Kate did. Monster bish MeAgain took an airplane for this stunt. This is not her community. I truly hate this woman.


----------



## mellibelly

Debbini said:


> It's not like we're all gathered in one of their bathrooms!


Ok this made me laugh imagining us in one of the 19 bathrooms hearing the plates smashing


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did not in this case, she was in jeans and a parka and her security person walked way behind her. She was seen by an Instagrammer who filmed when he approached her and that's how we know she went.
> 
> But also, I'm not sure how not one, but two people now took my post and somehow made it into a criticism of Kate?


I pu sad and angry on your posts not to you, but about the situations. I totally agree with you.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I see she once again has paid close attention to Kate being dressed very casually while paying tribute to the murdered Londoner (only that Kate brushes her hair in the morning). But she apparently missed one little detail: Kate didn't bring her own paps because she really didn't want to be seen.
> 
> Seriously, have even all kids been identified by now? This disgusting scavenger.



Did you note the camera set up in the picture for her ‘incognito’ trip.


----------



## youngster

So, she literally flew from California to Texas to bring flowers?   Flying from California to that part of Texas takes about 3 hours of flight time, not including the trip to the airport in L.A. from the mansion in Montecito. Plus the bodyguards tagging along and the personal assistant likely tagging along.  Did she fly private or commercial?  What about the impact on the environment from this frivolousness?  

Probably all filmed for Netflix which is utterly revolting if true.  If she didn't film it for Netflix, I'd say it's another desperate attempt to start carving out a role in public life here in the U.S., a bit like the cemetery walk on Veteran's Day a couple years ago (which backfired badly).


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> So, she literally flew from California to Texas to bring flowers?   Flying from California to that part of Texas takes about 3 hours of flight time, not including the trip to the airport in L.A. from the mansion in Montecito. Plus the bodyguards tagging along and the personal assistant likely tagging along.  Did she fly private or commercial?  What about the impact on the environment from this frivolousness?
> 
> Probably all filmed for Netflix which is utterly revolting if true.  If she didn't film it for Netflix, I'd say it's another desperate attempt to start carving out a role in public life here in the U.S., a bit like the cemetery walk on Veteran's Day a couple years ago (which backfired badly).


Yup, I know someone already said this, but just the cost of the trip could’ve been used to really good used across many of the families.


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> You mean the family drama Harry and Megan discussed with Oprah and millions of viewers? Or the drama they’re filming for Netflix? Or the drama they’re writing $20M memoirs about? I just want to clarify. Because we certainly wouldn’t want to discuss any drama they’re uncomfortable making public. Oh wait…


What is shocking is the arrogance of TW inserting herself into the drama of the families in Texas. These are private people undergoing an enormous pain and must be respected.


----------



## Lodpah

The community is mourning and not in a state to be “flattered” by her presence. She’s so sick and so utterly disgusting. She can’t see her father but has the nerve to act like she cares? Spare me MM. You’re such a disgrace. The fact that you can’t even extend an olive branch to your family makes you such a hypocrite. Wash the inside first.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourre



Here in the Midwest they're called training wheels.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

hollieplus2 said:


> I am disgusted. Using murdered kids for PR. Wow.
> 
> Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde  | Daily Mail Online


And so far she has not had he compassion to visit dad ?


----------



## redney

marietouchet said:


> And so far she has not had he compassion to visit dad ?


Doesn't figure in with their Netflix narrative.


----------



## LVLover

Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde
					

Meghan Markle, the British Duchess of Sussex who now lives in California, has paid tribute to the victims of a school shooting in Texas by visiting a memorial near the site of the massacre.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




WTF! She is such a piece of sh!t! So disgusting that she will take advantage of such a horrific tragedy. She should be visiting her dad, but there is not much PR in that…


----------



## csshopper

The actor Michael McConaughey is from Uvalde. Being a narcissistic b****, she heard there were pleas from some in the town for an MM to come, and assumed of course she would be that MM. 

THIS is arrogance and are we going to call it out, you betcha!


----------



## redney

LVLover said:


> Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the British Duchess of Sussex who now lives in California, has paid tribute to the victims of a school shooting in Texas by visiting a memorial near the site of the massacre.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF! She is such a piece of sh!t! So disgusting that she will take advantage of such a horrific tragedy. She should be visiting her dad, but there is not much PR in that…


Oh, and she dropped off sandwiches, beverages, and desserts at a blood donation drive. :eyeroll: Was the dessert a homemade lemon olive oil cake? From the DM article:

"In another stop on her tour of mercy, Markle also swung by a community center hosting a blood drive in Uvalde, and dropped off bags of food, according to BuzzFeed News.

The quiet donation consisted of two 'large' bags filled with sandwiches, beverages, and desserts for blood donors, the outlet said."

From the BuzzFeed article:


----------



## purseinsanity

hollieplus2 said:


> I am disgusted. Using murdered kids for PR. Wow.
> 
> Meghan Markle lays bouquet of white roses at memorial in Uvalde  | Daily Mail Online


Nothing this evil witch does shocks me any more.  It's almost like guessing how much lower can she go:

"She arrived incognito" while:

*Markle did not address the press as she visited the memorial surrounded by news crews and cameras*

In another stop on her tour of mercy, Markle also swung by a community center hosting a blood drive in Uvalde, and dropped off bags of food, according to BuzzFeed News.

The quiet donation consisted of two 'large' bags filled with sandwiches, beverages, and desserts for blood donors, the outlet said."

I believe in karma and I really hope it exists, because I would love to see it kick this a$$hole in the face.  All while her father is in the hospital.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I made it through the reporting of the massacre ok I thought. That was until I read the relatives of the victims had to give DNA samples because of what assault ammunition did to those tiny bodies. And this f*cking bottom feeder with her 30000 bucks in jewelry chooses this occasion to play Holy Mary or something.


I literally could not make it through any article about this massacre without crying.  Except the one with MMM in it.  It pi$$es me off.  This woman is completely devoid of any human decency.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> Oh, and she dropped off sandwiches, beverages, and desserts at a blood donation drive. :eyeroll: Was the dessert a homemade lemon olive oil cake? From the DM article:
> 
> "In another stop on her tour of mercy, Markle also swung by a community center hosting a blood drive in Uvalde, and dropped off bags of food, according to BuzzFeed News.
> 
> The quiet donation consisted of two 'large' bags filled with sandwiches, beverages, and desserts for blood donors, the outlet said."
> 
> From the BuzzFeed article:
> View attachment 5412702



Because a couple of bags of Fritos and cookies is just what a community of volunteers needs in a crisis. Looks like her "donation" was worth less than $30.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Because a couple of bags of Fritos and cookies is just what a community of volunteers needs in a crisis. Looks like her "donation" was worth less than $30.


How much you want to bet the bodyguard paid for it?  Them "Royals" don't carry cash.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> How much you want to bet the bodyguard paid for it?  Them "Royals" don't carry cash.



Her limo driver probably stopped at the gas station along the way to pick up those roses.


----------



## Lodpah

She could have waited until a memorial service was done.
I think she headed there cause all the paparazzi and camera crews are there as it’s still relatively recent. I can’t wrap my head about how lustful she is for attention. She’s insane and so fckin hungry for fame.


----------



## Lodpah

redney said:


> Oh, and she dropped off sandwiches, beverages, and desserts at a blood donation drive. :eyeroll: Was the dessert a homemade lemon olive oil cake? From the DM article:
> 
> "In another stop on her tour of mercy, Markle also swung by a community center hosting a blood drive in Uvalde, and dropped off bags of food, according to BuzzFeed News.
> 
> The quiet donation consisted of two 'large' bags filled with sandwiches, beverages, and desserts for blood donors, the outlet said."
> 
> From the BuzzFeed article:
> View attachment 5412702


Looks like she stopped off at a 7-11 and had her bodyguard grab a bunch of snacks. No thought into it. Like maybe ordering some sandwiches from a deli or something?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

K.D. said:


> I'm being snarky but those roses are looking decidedly not fresh...



They look like picked up from a gas station or supermarket. Or do expensive flower shops use cellophane?


----------



## carmen56

K.D. said:


> I'm being snarky but those roses are looking decidedly not fresh...



She probably picked them up at the gas station on the way in from the airport.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Did you note the camera set up in the picture for her ‘incognito’ trip.
> View attachment 5412671



Is that hers? I guess it could be media covering the tragic event. But if they were hers...at this point I'd think it ok if karma struck and something heavy dropped on her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> The community is mourning and not in a state to be “flattered” by her presence. She’s so sick and so utterly disgusting. She can’t see her father but has the nerve to act like she cares? Spare me MM. You’re such a disgrace. The fact that you can’t even extend an olive branch to your family makes you such a hypocrite. *Wash the inside first.*



Wow, this really resonates with me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> Oh, and she dropped off sandwiches, beverages, and desserts at a blood donation drive. :eyeroll: Was the dessert a homemade lemon olive oil cake? From the DM article:
> 
> "In another stop on her tour of mercy, Markle also swung by a community center hosting a blood drive in Uvalde, and dropped off bags of food, according to BuzzFeed News.
> 
> The quiet donation consisted of two 'large' bags filled with sandwiches, beverages, and desserts for blood donors, the outlet said."
> 
> From the BuzzFeed article:
> View attachment 5412702



         

Tour of mercy my a*s.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> The quiet donation consisted of two 'large' bags filled with sandwiches, beverages, and desserts for blood donors, the outlet said."
> 
> I believe in karma and I really hope it exists, because I would love to see it kick this a$$hole in the face.  All while her father is in the hospital.



Did she pay for it or did she beg for it like she did with the diapers they donated a while back, then took all the credit?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I literally could not make it through any article about this massacre without crying.  Except the one with MMM in it.  It pi$$es me off.  This woman is completely devoid of any human decency.



I'm always so knee-deep in human tragedy as I closely follow several conflicts at all times, I try my best to guard myself. But there's always that extra piece of information that hits you right in the gut and knocks all the air out of you.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> The actor Michael McConaughey is from Uvalde. Being a narcissistic b****, she heard there were pleas from some in the town for an MM to come, and assumed of course she would be that MM.
> 
> THIS is arrogance and are we going to call it out, you betcha!


Matthew McConaughey ..


----------



## CeeJay

When I first saw this “story”, all I could think was .. wow, because if she honestly thinks that this puts her into a good & caring light?!?! .. then she is REALLY STUPID!!!  Was it her idea or their PR Agency; either way, it is a HUGE FAILURE as it clearly shows how hypocritical she is .. an EPIC FAIL just like their Veterans Day failure.


----------



## csshopper

Siri says it’s 1772 miles from Montecito to Uvalde, 225 miles from Montecito to Chula Vista CA where her dad is hospitalized. 

So Thomas Markle, who can’t speak and has suffered other consequences from his stroke, possibly the inability to swallow according to one report, gets to lie in his hospital bed and watch his ingrate daughter on TV leave him in the dust yet again. Nothing like stomping on someone’s heart when they’re down.

WHY, because he once used paparazzi. OMG the irony.

There are not enough words to describe this loathsome woman.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Siri says it’s 1772 miles from Montecito to Uvalde, 225 miles from Montecito to Chula Vista CA where her dad is hospitalized.
> 
> So Thomas Markle, who can’t speak and has suffered other consequences from his stroke, possibly the inability to swallow according to one report, gets to lie in his hospital bed and watch his ingrate daughter on TV leave him in the dust yet again. Nothing like stomping on someone’s heart when they’re down.
> 
> WHY, because he once used paparazzi. OMG the irony.
> 
> There are not enough words to describe this loathsome woman.



Maybe she will write another letter in calligraphy to her dad wishing him well and then sue the press for publishing the letter because it's a violation of "privacy". Meanwhile, she has her people leak stuff daily and she does deliberate and planned pap walk


----------



## csshopper

CeeJay said:


> Matthew McConaughey ..


Thanks CeeJay, seeing red as I typed and missed it.


----------



## gracekelly

She is a ghoul. This is by far the most despicable thing she has done. I can't even........She is disgusting.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh gross, and if that ends up on some Netflix special she is just an awful person.


There is no IF.


----------



## csshopper

The husband of one of the teachers who was killed, died of a heart attack last night. 

No one, except her stupid stans, care about this bottom feeding narcissist. Her wilted flowers and bag of sandwiches are so insulting to the scope of this tragedy it is hard to comprehend her thinking.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## Goodfrtune

She is beyond disgusting! The act of her jetting into TX just reeks of her entitlement and shoves her wealth and privilege into the faces of a nation. The people of Ulvada are people who are mourning their children, siblings, wives, daughters, sons, relatives, friends and neighbors. She has no more connection to the victims than I do but because she caught herself a prince and apparently $hits money she believes that she is now some sort of representative to our country’s collective grief over this tragedy. Stay at home with your bathrooms and your chicken coop and hug the children you have instead of using Ulvada as a photo op for your delusions of grandeur. Your roses and bags of chips will do nothing to promote healing it has just sadly taken the attention off of the victims and on to you.


----------



## rose60610

In what universe did she think her visit to the memorial would be welcomed? And what's with the Texas visits? Harry at the rodeo and now this?  She wormed her way into the United Nations wearing various coats and ugly outfits and spoke to some people. Did she think she was going to strong arm her way into speaking with the TX Gov? Or with some of the parents? She's nothing but an attention whore with zero brains. Just when we thought she couldn't sink lower...  And her clothes, the hair, the baseball cap, it all looks stupid. In the other disastrous photo op in the cemetery, she was dressed to the nine's. Did she think she'd repair her image by dressing like a casual cool kid here?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


>




And there I was, giving her the benefit of the doubt. If I type out how I really feel right now I'll be blocked from TPF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"She just walked in with her crew."


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> In what universe did she think her visit to the memorial would be welcomed? And what's with the Texas visits? Harry at the rodeo and now this?  She wormed her way into the United Nations wearing various coats and ugly outfits and spoke to some people. Did she think she was going to strong arm her way into speaking with the TX Gov? Or with some of the parents? She's nothing but an attention whore with zero brains. Just when we thought she couldn't sink lower...  And her clothes, the hair, the baseball cap, it all looks stupid. In the other disastrous photo op in the cemetery, she was dressed to the nine's. Did she think she'd repair her image by dressing like a casual cool kid here?


In what universe?  The universe of Meghan where all she does is wonderful and right.  If this doesn't give the world a wake up call about her, then I don't know what will.  Using dead teachers and children to gain attention.  The respectful thing to do was to stay home.  Issue a statement if necessary, not that it is by any stretch. but stay home.  There is nothing that she can do that is worthwhile.  She is inserting herself where she doesn't belong, but that is right on par for her.


----------



## kemilia

There are no words to describe how disgusting this woman is.  

Interesting that she didn't jet up to Buffalo when their horrible tragedy occurred. Not her type of optics perhaps?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "She just walked in with her crew."



Netflix flew her there with a crew.  She wouldn't be there otherwise. They will fly them to London too.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> There are no words to describe how disgusting this woman is.
> 
> Interesting that she didn't jet up to Buffalo when their horrible tragedy occurred. Not her type of optics perhaps?


Exactly.  If I wrote what I really think about that, I would find myself sitting on Vlad's sofa.  What happened there happened to black people and we all know that she isn't .......


----------



## Mrs.Z

Also, I know this is a silly comment, because the Daily Mail is a rag ….but…..why is Meghan Markle visiting the Memorial the top story for the past several hours over the actual story, all the real stories about the event, the victims etc.  Is she paying for that?


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Also, I know this is a silly comment, because the Daily Mail is a rag ….but…..why is Meghan Markle visiting the Memorial the top story for the past several hours over the actual story, all the real stories about the event, the victims etc.  Is she paying for that?


They are doing it to shade her.  They know that a goodly number of their readers will see this trip to Uvalde as self serving.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The people she’s posing with in the snack shack don’t really seem that thrilled she’s there.  Her outfit is her “faux incognito” look.  So “humble” she is.  Rolleyes.


----------



## altigirl88

Were there any bananas to write on? Perhaps she wrote on chip bags?


----------



## 1LV

Trashy AF.


----------



## Sophisticatted

NetFlix should also be ashamed of themselves!


----------



## 1LV

Sophisticatted said:


> NetFlix should also be ashamed of themselves!


I don’t watch Netflix, but my husband does. If this shows up on Netflix the poor guy is going to miss his shows.  Promise.


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  If I wrote what I really think about that, *I would find myself sitting on Vlad's sofa.*  What happened there happened to black people and we all know that she isn't .......


I have to say Gracekelly, you do have a way with words.  Despite the tragedy, this made me laugh.


----------



## Gal4Dior

ANDDD...Vogue just posted a photo of her with her cheap white roses. She got what she wanted! Attention W*ore


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kiradris

Sophisticatted said:


> Her outfit is her “faux incognito” look.  So “humble” she is.  Rolleyes.



Does anyone remember when beauty YouTubers would get into trouble, they would all wear grey hoodies in their apology videos to the point where it became a running joke in the beauty community?  The grey t shirt is her version of that.  All narcs must have a default “I’m humble” item of grey casual wear in their closet.


----------



## CeeJay

csshopper said:


> Thanks CeeJay, seeing red as I typed and missed it.


No worries!!!


----------



## Annawakes

Just can’t resist inserting herself into every developing news story.


----------



## CeeJay

I think this might just be the nail in her coffin. Think about the media people (Oprah, Gayle, etc.) who thought so highly of her .. what do you think they are thinking now?!?!  Likely the same as us as in?!? .. “WTF is she doing there when her father is in the hospital?”  I have to think that they are all thinking about the HUGE HYPOCRISY of this ..


----------



## Gal4Dior

I'm just curious. Where was she when the shooting happened in Buffalo? She always talks about how she was mistreated and discriminated against because she was half black, so why not represent there? Guess it wasn't as big of a PR moment that would tug at heartstrings like the the innocent deaths of children?

Disgusting opportunist!

So incredibly SHAMEFUL. Just SHAMEFUL.


----------



## Lodpah

I wish I had an active Twitter that says:

cancelMeghanMarkle for tailgating a tragedy.
I read that comment, not mine.


----------



## Lodpah

So I just sort of went online. She has succeeded in making this tragedy about her. She successfully has all the rags gushing about her trip to Texas and as far as the media is concerned, not all, it’s a Meghan trip and her white roses. I’m outraged at her taking the focus off the victims. It’s all about her trip.


----------



## mellibelly

Oh look it’s MJ’s former bodyguard, the president of Archewell (Dayani) and Netflix cameramen.


----------



## mellibelly

Scroll through this…it just gets worse and worse


----------



## bag-mania

I don’t know, you have to believe there will be some backlash from it. On the surface TMZ sounds like they are being typically supportive of her here. But when you read between the lines, their compliments certainly sound a little backhanded.

The Duchess of Sussex wore jeans, a white shirt and a faded navy baseball cap ... but didn't exactly keep a super low profile.

As far as we know, Meghan has no direct connection to Robb Elementary or the small town of Uvalde, which is about 80 miles west of San Antonio.

While she's getting criticized on social media for inserting herself into the tragedy ... Meghan does have the same connection to the shooting as every American who is distraught over the mass shooting. The only obvious difference is she has the time and means to go there.









						Meghan Markle Leaves Flowers at Memorial for Texas School Shooting Victims
					

Meghan Markle visits memorial for the students and teachers killed in the Texas elementary school shooting, and leaves flowers.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## mellibelly

She took the trip “in her personal capacity as a mother” ugh I want to vomit. Her and the entourage’s airfare cost would have been a better donation than 2 measly plastic crates of food.

Also those are bread crates. So she brought like a dozen loaves of bread to a town going through an intense tragedy. What in the actual *#%!


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


>




So much hypocrisy, I'm glad this picture is being shared . 



1LV said:


> I don’t watch Netflix, but my husband does. If this shows up on Netflix the poor guy is going to miss his shows.  Promise.



I recommend downgrading to the Nefl*x's cheapest plan. I did that and my husband didn't notice yet.


----------



## Chanbal

Can someone inform The Morning Show that she had indeed a crew with her?


----------



## Chanbal

I've no words…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I've the same question Piers!


----------



## mellibelly

the Meghan’s Mole tweet


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> There are no words to describe how disgusting this woman is.
> 
> Interesting that she didn't jet up to Buffalo when their horrible tragedy occurred. Not her type of optics perhaps?


that's pretty much what I was gonna say...I have no words...she is a POS
and while her father lies ill in a hospital


----------



## mellibelly

If you haven’t canceled your Netflix membership now is a good time. The content has been garbage anyways.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mercy, I stepped away from all media for an afternoon and come back to this  
After yesterday’s Beto stunt and now this, wtf?  WTF?  Mathew McConaughey, who was born in Uvalde, has the intelligence to stay away.
F-ing *rubberneckers. * [if you are from TX, you know what I mean].









						rubbernecker
					

1. a person who looks at something in a stupid way, especially a driver who…




					dictionary.cambridge.org


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Also those are bread crates. So she brought like a dozen loaves of bread to a town going through an intense tragedy. What in the actual *#%!



It wouldn’t surprise me if she asked a local store to donate the food and she took credit for it when she delivered it. She always does the absolute bare minimum to get press coverage.


----------



## 1LV

I don’t know about the rest of you, but this latest “look at me” stunt is the straw that broke the camel‘s back for me.  Vile. Disgusting. Repulsive.  I can’t believe how naive I was to have ever, ever rooted for this woman.


----------



## CeeJay

mellibelly said:


> the Meghan’s Mole tweet



They tried to get access to the school?!?!?!  OH-MY-F#CKING-GOD!  That is just beyond DISGUSTING and THAT information should be put out there because I truly believe that this is going to be what really turns the tide on her .. JUST BEYOND VILE!!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Unbelievable the stupid people who applaud what she did.
caution - graphic language in the spoiler


Spoiler: Disgusting


----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> There are no words to describe how disgusting this woman is.
> 
> Interesting that she didn't jet up to Buffalo when their horrible tragedy occurred. Not her type of optics perhaps?


That's such a good point! Netflix wasn't thinking or thought Buffalo wasn't as noticeable a PR move as Texas? 

Or does this all come down to Meg who thought it would make great PR and told them since they don't have much content, she would like to fly to Texas for some added footage... ?


----------



## Mendocino

Lodpah said:


> I wish I had an active Twitter that says:
> 
> cancelMeghanMarkle for tailgating a tragedy.
> I read that comment, not mine.



On Twitter someone has tagged Clarence House (Charles/Camilla) and KensingtonRoyal (Will/Kate). I hope someone tags Buckingham Palace. I'm still seeing red. Edit. KensingtonRoyal is now thedukeandduchessofcambridge.


----------



## redney

mellibelly said:


>



Hope her Netflix cameras got footage of the TX Ranger's words to her team. That Ranger is 100% right.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s publize the good that real people did and do. NFlix can rot. 









						Hero CBP cop rushed to Texas massacre school with shotgun
					

Jacob Albarado had just sat down in the barber's chair for a haircut on his day off when his wife Trisha, a teacher at Robb Elementary, texted him to say there was an active shooter.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

I'd like to know who TF she thinks she is...does she think she is the Queen of the US?  what business does she have in Texas?  why would those bereaved people care about her showing up?
I believe Kate went quietly to a memorial for a murdered woman.  she didn't bring a camera crew.  and she is the future queen. and the event was in the same city where she lived.

This Meghan woman is delusional and if anyone on her staff thought this was a good idea, they are idiots.

I hope this backfires on her big time.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is right, “_If they had an ounce of actual compassion, they’d cancel their trip to the Jubilee and go and see Thomas Markle in hospital_.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Since they haven't produced anything for Netflix and are probably begging in embarrassing fashion to access the contract $$$, my bet is that Meghan is doing the unspeakable to suck that money before Netflix fires her and Harry. Trying to get into the school? Why? To try to recreate the hell that took place for a TV show to collect a paycheck?  That sick b*tch. SICK!


----------



## Sophisticatted

She probably wanted to get her faux humanitarian narcissistic supply by reading “The Bench” to a grieving audience.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I was browsing Prime Video only to see a familiar face. Clicked to see if she's listed as the actress and I facepalmed so hard when I read the synopsis of the movie. That sounds like what she does in real life to bag the Unsavory Prince and in all her endeavors i.e. always faking and trying to be somebody she's not


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> They tried to get access to the school?!?!?!  OH-MY-F#CKING-GOD!  That is just beyond DISGUSTING and THAT information should be put out there because I truly believe that this is going to be what really turns the tide on her .. JUST BEYOND VILE!!!!!


The school is a crime scene. Going in would be tampering With evidence.  Throw them in jail.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A listers know better than to do this stuff.  
So this confirms @CeeJay previous, spot-on posts.


----------



## DS2006

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5412882


Who on earth does she think is impressed by this??? I couldn’t believe it when I saw it earlier today.


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5412882


In addition to Netflix cameras, she's also doing her Ellen squat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Good.
Just so you know, Beto was also at the same blood bank. Coinkydink?  Time to drop the titles?









						Meghan Markle slammed for appearance at site of Texas massacre
					

Markle was spotted on Thursday laying a bouquet of white roses at a makeshift memorial outside the Uvalde County Courthouse, not far from the scene of the senseless slayings at the school.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’ve sort of been avoiding the forum these last couple of days as this tragedy is just too upsetting. Jesus Christ the way M is acting makes me sick. I can’t help notice she’s avoided making one of her hamfisted obvious political statements - I would guess because that pathetic toy soldier of hers loves guns and doesn’t want to alienate the other ‘real men’. Well that and it would actually be a political statement - whereas ‘wacism are bad’ is nuanced for her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> I thought it was the thunder. Turns out, it was plates breaking in Uncouth Duchess' mansion



Funny Kate seems to be wearing heels on the grass - so shows how much I know   


Toby93 said:


> _*She has also contacted Archewell, the royal couple’s foundation, who she had asked for approval of the fundraiser*, to let them know they’ll have to continue paying their own mortgage.
> 
> I trust they can cope…"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Magic at Marymount - Montecito
> 
> 
> One year to the day they had to close their doors due to the pandemic, Marymount of Santa Barbara celebrated the resilience of their community with their annual auction gala. The school opened back up for in-person learning in September and the auction’s theme “Magic of the Night” acknowledged...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So does that mean that they actually approved and gave their permission to go ahead and fundraise?


I wonder how the suckers who donated to these cash strapped paupers feel when they see them parading around in Poorly fit couture and hosting boxes at  polo matches? Even Walter White didn’t want his son fundraising for his cancer treatment. 


Chanbal said:


> Let's see for how long his employment will last.



If I were Haz I’d get a food taster and look into the conditions of my life insurance policies at this point. That  looks like a black widow.


Chanbal said:


> Here is an article on a commercialization aspect of the event. TW may have had her stans in mind with such 'tiny trinket,' not everyone can buy Cartier…
> 
> _While planting a congratulatory kiss on Harry after his Los Padres team took home the Lisle Nixon Memorial cup by a score of 14 to 10, eagle-eyed fans noticed the addition of a small gold “L” ring on Markle’s finger, a nod to 11-month-old Lilibet Diana.
> 
> *The tiny trinket *perfectly matched Markle’s “A” necklace from Verse, which she’s been sporting since she welcomed son Archie in 2019._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle honors daughter Lilibet with new ring at polo match
> 
> 
> While supporting Prince Harry as he played polo, Markle paid tribute to her daughter with a special trinket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


 Convenient how all these ‘gifts’ for her kids can be used by her. I actually just honoured my own son by buying a box of pink champagne truffles with his name on it and scoffing them all myself.


----------



## Sharont2305

She managed to get white flowers though. Unlike their wreath for Prince Philip. 

*Its always white flowers for Royal funerals.


----------



## elvisfan4life

mellibelly said:


>




That Texas Ranger deserves a medal and a knighthood !!!! His words need reposting a zillion times everywhere on the planet


----------



## CarryOn2020

No one, not one person, would criticise H&M if they gave their donations ‘*privately*’. I strongly detest their sick PR and Nflix for involving themselves in a tragedy and any other charitable giving. There are quite a few celebs who do their donating privately and no one knows about it - which is how it should be. Total respect for that.

Zero integrity.  Zero compassion. Zero votes.


----------



## mellibelly

elvisfan4life said:


> Hilarious found it and they are calling us all racist haters !!!! Unbelievable not a brain cell between them


I regret peeking in to that echo chamber of 3 sugars. Let’s not post there and let it fall back into obscurity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ellie Hall works for Buzzfeed, and a scoop means POS's PR informed her. I haven't had breakfast yet and want to throw up.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, not one person, would criticise H&M if they gave their donations ‘*privately*’. I strongly detest their sick PR and Nflix for involving themselves in a tragedy and any other charitable giving. There are quite a few celebs who do their donating privately and no one knows about it - which is how it should be. Total respect for that.
> 
> Zero integrity.  Zero compassion. Zero votes.


Like I said on the other thread look at the stories that came out after George Michael passed away. 
It can be done.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

HuffPost's article on FB, lots of heart emoticons but no comments yet.




My comment:



> Are you for real? This was a PR tour, she brought a photographer and possibly a camera team (oh hi there, Netflix) and tipped off celebrity reporters. I repeat, this was a PR tour on the back of dead children to advance herself. What else does she have to do so the US press stops the undeserved adulation, gnaw off their bones?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ellie Hall works for Buzzfeed, and a scoop means POS's PR informed her. I haven't had breakfast yet and want to throw up.




I feel the same way. The corporate ho’es are shameful, worse than local news media who chase ambulances.  The more I read about the timeline, the angrier I get.  I cannot stop tearing up, sobbing at times. It’s awful. 

As for MM, the World Central Kitchen was there. They posted a video on their Facebook page. _Surely they would not have flown her in._ If so, I’ll scream.

@jelliedfeels you’re right. I know it is best not to poke the bear. Still, I despise their misinformation and deception.


----------



## Helventara

I was curious to see if anyone appreciate MM enough to share her latest stunt but Yeah.. let’s not add more pages to the other thread. It was their trick to bait us there so they can increase their pages


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I'd like to know who TF she thinks she is...does she think she is the Queen of the US?  what business does she have in Texas?  why would those bereaved people care about her showing up?
> I believe Kate went quietly to a memorial for a murdered woman.  she didn't bring a camera crew.  and she is the future queen. and the event was in the same city where she lived.
> 
> This Meghan woman is delusional and if anyone on her staff thought this was a good idea, they are idiots.
> 
> I hope this backfires on her big time.



I have no words, it's beyond sick to capitalise on such tragedy. She is literally _beyond_ words at this point. 

Sorry to butt-in myself, work has been 24/7. I saw I had 20 pages to catch-up with and realised H&M are still just pulling the same ol' stunts and moved to the last page. I hope to catch-up when I have the stomach to see all the shenanigans these two losers have been non-doing while I've been away.


----------



## 880

Wouldn’t some PR guru in her employ or at Netflix tell her that going to the school scene of a tragedy is not appropriate



Toby93 said:


> _*She has also contacted Archewell, the royal couple’s foundation, who she had asked for approval of the fundraiser*, to let them know they’ll have to continue paying their own mortgage.
> 
> I trust they can cope…"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Magic at Marymount - Montecito
> 
> 
> One year to the day they had to close their doors due to the pandemic, Marymount of Santa Barbara celebrated the resilience of their community with their annual auction gala. The school opened back up for in-person learning in September and the auction’s theme “Magic of the Night” acknowledged...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.montecitojournal.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So does that mean that they actually approved and gave their permission to go ahead and fundraise?



if you are without funds and no jobs, perhaps a cosseted prince buys a 14.5 million usd mansion, but MM, a former working actress, supposedly raised in poverty,  didn’t think about the ramifications of this action or projection of self entitlement

I’m assuming they gave the go ahead to fundraise, but I wonder how they received the decision to shut down and return the small amounts received

ETA: If they followed the comments of Piers and many others and they put out that they are cancelling their trip to the jubilee ans going to see her father in the hospital, it would be much better PR


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> Amber and Meghan= sisters from another mother.



Funny - looks to me like their acting skills are about on par with each other.


----------



## carmen56

I'm hoping the Harry Markle blog will have something to say about Raptor's latest shenanigans.


----------



## 1LV

elvisfan4life said:


> Really it took you this long? I was just wondering where the other Meghan thread has got to has it been deleted? I can’t see it I was wondering if it was showing these pics and saying what a wonderful kind thoughtful human being she is ????


Nothing she’s done prior to this brought up the feelings this stunt did.  I instantly went from disliking to loathing.


----------



## lallybelle

So I waded into some of the twitter stuff. Most I saw was sharing (re-tweeting) one of the articles, Absolute disgust for the PR show, Some fans arguing with said disgust and some fawning. The way I look at is there are tons of people who are seeing through this, so don't let the PR sending out syrupy articles get you down. People aren't as dumb as SS thinks.


----------



## LittleStar88

I know I’m preaching to the choir here but this spectacle in TX is so gross. I almost think I can’t believe she did this but feeling not surprised by it.  Really have no words that haven’t already been said but this is a new low.

Her father is suffering in a hospital and she refuses to see him? Because he did the pap stroll before her wedding? That’s enough for her to cut him out indefinitely and not have any feelings to go see him in case it’s her last chance to make it right? If all he’s guilty of is being an ass, well we all have those in our family and the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree here.

Shame on her. And if this ends up on their Netflix sideshow shame on Netflix,too.


----------



## marietouchet

I see a strong correlation here …
Texas photo op , to counter negative publicity of not visiting dad and get her some “good” PR before the jubilee ( will she go ? Will she behave ?)

and I assume she hopped on Southwest, got stuck in group C, had to sit in the middle seat because she is too green to have flown private …

fyi Southwest Airlines , once considered a line with fewer perks, , you get triaged into groups A B and C, seating is first come first serve, the C group gets on last when there is no overhead room for bags, and only middle seats are left , very proletarian


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ellie Hall works for Buzzfeed, and a scoop means POS's PR informed her. I haven't had breakfast yet and want to throw up.



Perez says it better, FILL IN THE BLANKS!


----------



## Aimee3

If TW wanted to do something, wouldn’t a donation for funeral costs been appreciated?   I highly doubt the victims relatives were sitting around at the school waiting for her stupid sandwiches if that’s what she brought.  They’re busy grieving and trying to arrange funerals.
TW is beyond disgraceful.  If SS was behind this latest stunt, their other clients ought to run far far away and hire people with brains.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

EDIT: 


Spoiler: More info from the same source


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

She doesn’t realize that she does not have the legitimacy of someone that would be welcome as a compassionate leader. She’s not Michelle *****.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> She doesn’t realize that she does not have the legitimacy of someone that would be welcome as a compassionate leader. She’s not Michelle *****.


right
the arrogance and self-aggrandizing is just ridiculous.  how dare she use these people?  bad kharma


----------



## lanasyogamama

Netflix can’t use any of these pictures or videos after this back lash can they?


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> She doesn’t realize that she does not have the legitimacy of someone that would be welcome as a compassionate leader. She’s not Michelle *****.


I didn't want to make a new post, and I just added a Spoiler to post #92,716 (Theresa Longo FANS). I recommend you to check it… It's unbelievable how people have no problem in profiting from others' pain.



lanasyogamama said:


> Netflix can’t use any of these pictures or videos after this back lash can they?


Probably not, but people seem to be already profiting from this (see above).


----------



## Luvbolide

Aimee3 said:


> If TW wanted to do something, wouldn’t a donation for funeral costs been appreciated?   I highly doubt the victims relatives were sitting around at the school waiting for her stupid sandwiches if that’s what she brought.  They’re busy grieving and trying to arrange funerals.
> TW is beyond disgraceful.  If SS was behind this latest stunt, their other clients ought to run far far away and hire people with brains.



Turns out that there are two funeral homes in Uvalde and they have both offered to provide funeral services for all of the victims without charge to their families.  And after all, MM wants to make gestures, not do anything useful, particularly if is something that would involve her spending her own money.  

I agree with you, she is beyond despicable.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Netflix can’t use any of these pictures or videos after this back lash can they?


IDK
there are still people who like her and see nothing wrong with this (see the H&M appreciation thread)


----------



## Luvbolide

redney said:


> In addition to Netflix cameras, she's also doing her Ellen squat.



A two-fer!  Wonder if she will ask Netflix to pay for the cost of her, her security and the camera crew because she is providing such value.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Info about the funerals:









						Uvalde funeral services, GoFundMe pages: how to support the families
					

Information on the funeral services and how to donate to victims’ loved ones is...




					www.expressnews.com


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> There are no words to describe how disgusting this woman is.
> 
> Interesting that she didn't jet up to Buffalo when their horrible tragedy occurred. Not her type of optics perhaps?


Well those victims were mostly Black.  She only identifies as half black when it suits her!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  If I wrote what I really think about that, I would find myself sitting on Vlad's sofa.  What happened there happened to black people and we all know that she isn't .......


Sorry just saw this after I posted!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I understand their NF show is supposed to be about their charity work. They haven’t seemed to have done much lately (Invictus aside). So I wonder if this was a desperate and poorly calculated attempt at obtaining footage to fill out the documentary.

I’ve given them a long leash but this is truly beyond the pale.


----------



## elvisfan4life

mellibelly said:


> I regret peeking in to that echo chamber of 3 sugars. Let’s not post there and let it fall back into obscurity.



I have had posts deleted


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> She took the trip “in her personal capacity as a mother” ugh I want to vomit. Her and the entourage’s airfare cost would have been a better donation than 2 measly plastic crates of food.
> 
> Also those are bread crates. So she brought like a dozen loaves of bread to a town going through an intense tragedy. What in the actual *#%!


In her pea brain bread = bread (the money kind)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

The royal family need to ban her from flying in for the jubilee now she can’t be trusted not to film that too - “behind the scenes exclusive” and flog it to the highest bidder bad and all as Andrew is he is above her


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> I think this might just be the nail in her coffin. Think about the media people (Oprah, Gayle, etc.) who thought so highly of her .. what do you think they are thinking now?!?!  Likely the same as us as in?!? .. “WTF is she doing there when her father is in the hospital?”  I have to think that they are all thinking about the HUGE HYPOCRISY of this ..


we can only hope this backfires on her
as someone said, Matthew McConauhey, who is from this community and who I believe is considering a run for office, had the sense not to show up.
This is so tasteless.  Interesting she didn't bring "H"


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Mercy, I stepped away from all media for an afternoon and come back to this
> After yesterday’s Beto stunt and now this, wtf?  WTF?  Mathew McConaughey, who was born in Uvalde, has the intelligence to stay away.
> F-ing *rubberneckers. * [if you are from TX, you know what I mean].
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rubbernecker
> 
> 
> 1. a person who looks at something in a stupid way, especially a driver who…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org


She’d be a great politician, at least in the sense she does photo ops depicting her in a certain way, until you see all the angles and see it is nothing but a set up.


----------



## purseinsanity

BVBookshop said:


> I was curious to see if anyone appreciate MM enough to share her latest stunt but Yeah.. let’s not add more pages to the other thread. It was their trick to bait us there so they can increase their pages


Of course they did!  The stans have no boundaries.


----------



## youngster

Such a transparent move for publicity, for the Netflix cameras, to try and initiate some kind of public role for herself as if she were Queen of America.  She is the only celebrity to do this, as the rest have the common sense and compassion to stay away and let the focus remain on the victims and their families. 

If she and Harry truly wanted to do something good for the community there, they could contribute to the Go Fund Me page set up for the victims families which, of course, wouldn't give Netflix any good film.  Seeing Meghan Markle click a button and donate some amount isn't going to get anybody to watch their reality show but this creates news, masquerading as compassion, while her father is concurrently in the hospital recovering from a stroke while she ignores him.  You couldn't make this up, it's such madness.  The bonus for her and Harry is that Netflix likely paid for the entire trip and she didn't have to donate any real money to anyone.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> IDK
> there are still people who like her and see nothing wrong with this (see the H&M appreciation thread)


I can’t be bothered scrolling down that far!


----------



## Helventara

sdkitty said:


> IDK
> there are still people who like her and see nothing wrong with this (see the H&M appreciation thread)


This puzzles me a lot. I know all about differences of opinion, respecting different viewpoints, democracies, etc but how can anyone justify or even defend MM in this case?  Like her actions, I have no words for her sugars too.


----------



## sdkitty

BVBookshop said:


> This puzzles me a lot. I know all about differences of opinion, respecting different viewpoints, democracies, etc but how can anyone justify or even defend MM in this case?  Like her actions, I have no words for her sugars too.


they see her through a different lens....they want to believe she is just a caring mom....just another example of the polarization in our society today I guess


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t be bothered scrolling down that far!


I'll condense for you.  they like her and think she was being a compassionate mom by visiting TX


----------



## elvisfan4life

Private eye had it right - no Harry and She doesn’t even get mentioned


----------



## elvisfan4life

Only joking of course she does - the party pooper Horror herself


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t be bothered scrolling down that far!



It’s a paltry 3 pages lol


----------



## rose60610

A1aGypsy said:


> *I understand their NF show is supposed to be about their charity work.* They haven’t seemed to have done much lately (Invictus aside). So I wonder if this was a desperate and poorly calculated attempt at obtaining footage to fill out the documentary.
> 
> I’ve given them a long leash but this is truly beyond the pale.



So THAT'S why she brought Fritos and sandwiches! Such a grand gesture for charity work! She's desperately trying (and failing MISERABLY) to be called Diana 2.0    Diana had authentic compassion for the suffering. Meghan has nothing but conniving plans to make tragedies all about HER. I'm surprised that in Texas she didn't say "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK".


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> So THAT'S why she brought Fritos and sandwiches! Such a grand gesture for charity work! She's desperately trying (and failing MISERABLY) to be called Diana 2.0    Diana had authentic compassion for the suffering. Meghan has nothing but conniving plans to make tragedies all about HER. I'm surprised that in Texas she didn't say "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK".


Did someone say Fritos sponsorship?!


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> It’s a paltry 3 pages lol


It’s up to 3 now?!!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> Did someone say Fritos sponsorship?!



I'd say maybe but I think Fritos does pretty well without having to attach themselves to her for promotion.


----------



## A1aGypsy

For what it’s worth, and to separate myself, I have to say, I am uncomfortable with the judging and bashing of other members of this board in this thread. We are all part of a community.

They have a particular viewpoint and it is not hateful or exclusionary in any way. They have started their own thread and it doesn’t attack those who disagree with the Sussex’s actions.

Seems to me, we can let them be. Let the camps divide and the topics remained focused on the couple at hand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> They have a particular viewpoint and it is not hateful or exclusionary in any way. They have started their own thread and it doesn’t attack those who disagree with the Sussex’s actions.



I have no special motivation to follow that thread or talk about those members, but calling the posters of this thread hateful, racist, bitter, jealous and heartbroken to not be Harry's...what is it, puppeteer? Nanny? Nurse? Downfall? is not hateful or exclusionary? That's an interesting viewpoint.

In fact I feel we've been pretty good responding lightheartedly to the countless attacks from that particular crowd stopping by here and becoming very personal within seconds. From the top of my head I can't recall many times where someone gave them a taste of their own medicine in return.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> I'd say maybe but I think Fritos does pretty well without having to attach themselves to her for promotion.


Yes, but instead of the hot Cheetos girl, she could be the hot Fritos Duchess!


----------



## csshopper

The "went as a Mom" validation for her intrusion is the worst of all to me and shows her utter total..not enough words...callousness.

I'm a mom. 

If I heard there was an active shooter at my children's school, rushed there in heart pounding terror, was made to stand impotent as the minutes dragged on, watching police milling around doing nothing, in some cases handcuffing hysterical parents trying to get to their children since it didn't seem anyone else was doing, having tasers aimed at me while being on the brink of emotional collapse, then had to learn my child hadn't been saved. That I could not hold my babies for the last time to at least kiss them into their next lives and tell them I love them because only pieces were available for identity and could I please give a DNA sample? 

In the on going hell that is post apocalypse in Uvalde some white woman (if she can ignore being black 99.9% of the time so can I) I don't know flies in on her private plane, grabs some gas station flowers and some sandwiches and shows up with bodyguard and photographers to take pictures of my child's marker in the memorial and to compound it arranges to sell pictures including my child's marker (the name has been identified in some articles) to make money for herself and get herself in the paper. I would have to be restrained from doing her bodily harm. HOW DARE SHE merchandise a child? She has absolutely no idea, not one iota of what the anguish of this situation is. She doesn't have the capacity to comprehend it. 

And for those who cannot comprehend how ghoulish this is and how she should be held in contempt, they aren't worth the time for reading their justifications.


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no special motivation to follow that thread or talk about those members, but calling the posters of this thread hateful, racist, bitter, jealous and heartbroken to not be Harry's...what is it, puppeteer? Nanny? Nurse? Downfall? is not hateful or exclusionary? That's an interesting viewpoint.
> 
> In fact I feel we've been pretty good responding lightheartedly to the countless attacks from that particular crowd stopping by here and becoming very personal within seconds. From the top of my head I can't recall many times where someone gave them a taste of their own medicine in return.



Well, I’m nothing if not interesting.


----------



## Norm.Core

This latest stunt is the lowest of the low.

Pond scum.


----------



## V0N1B2

A1aGypsy said:


> For what it’s worth, and to separate myself, I have to say, I am uncomfortable with the judging and bashing of other members of this board in this thread. We are all part of a community.
> 
> They have a particular viewpoint and it is not hateful or exclusionary in any way. They have started their own thread and it doesn’t attack those who disagree with the Sussex’s actions.
> 
> Seems to me, we can let them be. Let the camps divide and the topics remained focused on the couple at hand.


I would agree, but in a now deleted post, one member called every poster in this thread a racist, and accused everyone in this thread of spreading hate. Not just once, but IIRC, twice in the same post.  So.... meh.


----------



## A1aGypsy

V0N1B2 said:


> I would agree, but in a now deleted post, one member called every poster in this thread a racist, and accused everyone in this thread of spreading hate. Not just once, but IIRC, twice in the same post.  So.... meh.



Ah. I didn’t see that post. So, let me alter my perspective a bit - is there any point to having a back and forth and getting personal and heated over celebrities?


----------



## V0N1B2

csshopper said:


> ....HOW DARE SHE merchandise a child? She has absolutely no idea, not one iota of what the anguish of this situation is. She doesn't have the capacity to comprehend it.


Umm, hello? She had a miscarriage, remember?


----------



## CeeJay

purseinsanity said:


> It’s up to 3 now?!!?


HA! .. I didn’t even know one existed (and DON’T freaking care!).


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Oh god vogue U.K. has been an embarrassment for a good few years now. It’s so bad I get it for free and I don’t read it anymore. The fashion photography is so bad (I think I’ve complained about this before) and the styling is so basic it’s behind the trends- I opened this month and it’s first fashion article is suggesting we try leggings, wide jeans and stripe tops
> For some weird reason as well they still get interviews with pretty big celebs but rarely put them on the cover.
> Unfortunately the current editor isn’t the strident fashion obsessed type the magazine needs to stay relevant I appreciate its good to stay friends with everyone but I would describe his editorial style as breathlessly sycophantic and occasionally incoherent.
> 
> She was also being prompted left right and centre.
> weird she isn’t wearing a hat here no?



You said it first   and better than me.

She's not wearing a hat prob because she was probably told to (Her majesty will be wearing a hat today = wear a a hat). M only wears a hat when it goes against the dress-code
[/QUOTE]
On hat wearing in general and the ginormous black hat for polo in the US

No one in the US wears hats in good weather with two exceptions
1. Anything goes, the bigger the better , for the Kentucky Derby, and COLOR COLOR COLOR
2. To protect against sun at polo match, one either wears a baseball hat - with Polo team logo - or beige Panama/straw
One does not wear a Kentucky Derby extravaganza hat to polo

https://www.google.com/search?q=pol...WEcs0KHZcaCBAQ4lYoAHoECAEQHQ&biw=1785&bih=780
PS Another key fashion hint - black is for mourning - it is worn at polo only to stick out like a sore thumb


----------



## sdkitty

V0N1B2 said:


> Umm, hello? She had a miscarriage, remember?


a miscarriage is very sad but I don't think it compares to losing a ten-year-old child....


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> The "went as a Mom" validation for her intrusion is the worst of all to me and shows her utter total..not enough words...callousness.
> 
> I'm a mom.
> 
> If I heard there was an active shooter at my children's school, rushed there in heart pounding terror, was made to stand impotent as the minutes dragged on, watching police milling around doing nothing, in some cases handcuffing hysterical parents trying to get to their children since it didn't seem anyone else was doing, having tasers aimed at me while being on the brink of emotional collapse, then had to learn my child hadn't been saved. That I could not hold my babies for the last time to at least kiss them into their next lives and tell them I love them because only pieces were available for identity and could I please give a DNA sample?
> 
> In the on going hell that is post apocalypse in Uvalde some white woman (if she can ignore being black 99.9% of the time so can I) I don't know flies in on her private plane, grabs some gas station flowers and some sandwiches and shows up with bodyguard and photographers to take pictures of my child's marker in the memorial and to compound it arranges to sell pictures including my child's marker (the name has been identified in some articles) to make money for herself and get herself in the paper. I would have to be restrained from doing her bodily harm. HOW DARE SHE merchandise a child? She has absolutely no idea, not one iota of what the anguish of this situation is. She doesn't have the capacity to comprehend it.
> 
> And for those who cannot comprehend how ghoulish this is and how she should be held in contempt, they aren't worth the time for reading their justifications.


This. 1,000,000%.


----------



## Tootsie17

kemilia said:


> There are no words to describe how disgusting this woman is.
> 
> Interesting that she didn't jet up to Buffalo when their horrible tragedy occurred. Not her type of optics perhaps?


This!!!100%  I thought the exact same thing!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

V0N1B2 said:


> Umm, hello? She had a miscarriage, remember?


That’s what she says.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The "went as a Mom" validation for her intrusion is the worst of all to me and shows her utter total..not enough words...callousness.
> 
> I'm a mom.
> 
> If I heard there was an active shooter at my children's school, rushed there in heart pounding terror, was made to stand impotent as the minutes dragged on, watching police milling around doing nothing, in some cases handcuffing hysterical parents trying to get to their children since it didn't seem anyone else was doing, having tasers aimed at me while being on the brink of emotional collapse, then had to learn my child hadn't been saved. That I could not hold my babies for the last time to at least kiss them into their next lives and tell them I love them because only pieces were available for identity and could I please give a DNA sample?
> 
> In the on going hell that is post apocalypse in Uvalde some white woman (if she can ignore being black 99.9% of the time so can I) I don't know flies in on her private plane, grabs some gas station flowers and some sandwiches and shows up with bodyguard and photographers to take pictures of my child's marker in the memorial and to compound it arranges to sell pictures including my child's marker (the name has been identified in some articles) to make money for herself and get herself in the paper. I would have to be restrained from doing her bodily harm. HOW DARE SHE merchandise a child? She has absolutely no idea, not one iota of what the anguish of this situation is. She doesn't have the capacity to comprehend it.
> 
> And for those who cannot comprehend how ghoulish this is and how she should be held in contempt, they aren't worth the time for reading their justifications.



This was so hard to read but you are so right.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> Ah. I didn’t see that post. So, let me alter my perspective a bit - is there any point to having a back and forth and getting personal and heated over celebrities?



With this I can completely agree.


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> a miscarriage is very sad but I don't think it compares to losing a ten-year-old child....


I think Meghan would disagree with you.
She was so devastated she wrote an op-ed about it.
Remember? She fell to her knees? Clutching her firstborn?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> *a miscarriage is very sad* but I don't think it compares to losing a ten-year-old child....



If it actually happened.

(But I also think OP was being sarcastic)


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> I understand their NF show is supposed to be about their charity work. They haven’t seemed to have done much lately (Invictus aside). So I wonder if this was a desperate and poorly calculated attempt at obtaining footage to fill out the documentary.
> 
> I’ve given them a long leash but this is truly beyond the pale.


I think this is exactly how this will be used and in the end may not even account for more than 90 seconds. She will have her tearful narration to go with the pictures. A mini speech of how awful it was to see the memorial. The series will be about humanitarianism in all its facets.  Yawn. 

Yes, so glad she needed to go as a mom *cough cough* but what does she intend to do as a daughter?  Nada, of course.


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If it actually happened.
> 
> (But I also think OP was being sarcastic)


I’m guessing I’m gonna have to start ending all posts with /sarcasm.  Quelle horreur


----------



## CeeJay

V0N1B2 said:


> I would agree, but in a now deleted post, one member called every poster in this thread a racist, and accused everyone in this thread of spreading hate. Not just once, but IIRC, twice in the same post.  So.... meh.


I remember that .. in addition to the one who called me a liar; glad that they created their own thread so we don't have to deal with their accusations, etc.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, not one person, would criticise H&M if they gave their donations ‘*privately*’. I strongly detest their sick PR and Nflix for involving themselves in a tragedy and any other charitable giving. There are quite a few celebs who do their donating privately and no one knows about it - which is how it should be. Total respect for that.
> 
> Zero integrity.  Zero compassion. Zero votes.


This is the greatest irony. People who desperately want to be private do everything not to be private. There are many people who are incapable of making a charitable donation without announcing it. Meghan is one of them, and she has taught Harry to be the same. They wants glory and thanks. Their egos require it.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> I would agree, but in a now deleted post, one member called every poster in this thread a racist, and accused everyone in this thread of spreading hate. Not just once, but IIRC, twice in the same post.  So.... meh.


Thanks for sharing this. One should be cautious with fanatics. A couple more of interesting posts from people that are rightfully shocked by the duchess PR-charity.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> She’d be a great politician, at least in the sense she does photo ops depicting her in a certain way, until you see all the angles and see it is nothing but a set up.



She would be a horrible politician in the sense that her instincts are abysmal. She cannot read a room and recognize what is appropriate behavior. The media keeps covering for her for reasons I cannot understand. She can’t be paying them all, can she?


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, but instead of the hot Cheetos girl, she could be the hot Fritos Duchess!



You mean FREEtos Duchess?    Because she wants everything for free including publicity?

She's cheap!


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> *The "went as a Mom" validation for her intrusion is the worst of all to me and shows her utter total..not enough words...callousness.
> 
> I'm a mom.*
> 
> If I heard there was an active shooter at my children's school, rushed there in heart pounding terror, was made to stand impotent as the minutes dragged on, watching police milling around doing nothing, in some cases handcuffing hysterical parents trying to get to their children since it didn't seem anyone else was doing, having tasers aimed at me while being on the brink of emotional collapse, then had to learn my child hadn't been saved. That I could not hold my babies for the last time to at least kiss them into their next lives and tell them I love them because only pieces were available for identity and could I please give a DNA sample?
> 
> In the on going hell that is post apocalypse in Uvalde some white woman (if she can ignore being black 99.9% of the time so can I) I don't know flies in on her private plane, grabs some gas station flowers and some sandwiches and shows up with bodyguard and photographers to take pictures of my child's marker in the memorial and to compound it arranges to sell pictures including my child's marker (the name has been identified in some articles) to make money for herself and get herself in the paper. I would have to be restrained from doing her bodily harm. HOW DARE SHE merchandise a child? She has absolutely no idea, not one iota of what the anguish of this situation is. She doesn't have the capacity to comprehend it.
> 
> And for those who cannot comprehend how ghoulish this is and how she should be held in contempt, they aren't worth the time for reading their justifications.


She is also a daughter and, to the best of my knowledge, she doesn't rush to the hospital to check on her sick father.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> Umm, hello? She had a miscarriage, remember?


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I think this is exactly how this will be used and in the end may not even account for more than 90 seconds. She will have her tearful narration to go with the pictures. A mini speech of how awful it was to see the memorial. The series will be about humanitarianism in all its facets.  Yawn.
> 
> *Yes, so glad she needed to go as a mom *cough cough* but what does she intend to do as a daughter?*  Nada, of course.



This, this is an excellent point.  The person she should be showing compassion for at this time is her own father, lying in a hospital bed, recovering from a stroke.  He would probably like nothing more than to reconcile with her, or at least, see her once more.   Yes, he's done some things I would not be happy about either but he was a good, decent father who she lived with, who paid for her private schooling and college, and was there for her when her mother took off.  She could easily have slipped into his hospital room and visited with him for a short period, avoiding her sister and other relatives if it would cause too much drama, and slipped out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

_The *Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signalled they are to stick to the official script* during their flying visit to Britain for the Platinum Jubilee, avoiding “surprise” private events that might overshadow the Queen’s celebration.

Their habit of making “surprise” unpublicised appearances, most recently from Meghan at the memorial to murdered primary school children in Uvalde, Texas, has led to concerns of a “circus” following their every move during the visit.

Of the prospect of the couple only doing official engagements, one source said: “*We’ll see*.”

*It is not clear whether the Duke and Duchess will be accompanied on the visit **by a camera crew from Netflix*, who would need to apply for official media accreditation to film the public Jubilee events. _




__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

All I hear is bla bla bla.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5413329
> 
> _The *Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signalled they are to stick to the official script* during their flying visit to Britain for the Platinum Jubilee, avoiding “surprise” private events that might overshadow the Queen’s celebration.
> 
> Their habit of making “surprise” unpublicised appearances, most recently from Meghan at the memorial to murdered primary school children in Uvalde, Texas, has led to concerns of a “circus” following their every move during the visit.
> 
> Of the prospect of the couple only doing official engagements, one source said: “*We’ll see*.”
> 
> *It is not clear whether the Duke and Duchess will be accompanied on the visit **by a camera crew from Netflix*, who would need to apply for official media accreditation to film the public Jubilee events. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph





Enlarged font by me.   What right have they to take charge like this??!!   It's not up to them!!     They are merely (unwanted by 99.99% of the UK population) guests who must do as they are told.  Honestly, their attitude is deplorable.  Some (a lot) humility would not go amiss.  I am still hoping that they behave appropriately and stay away.  It's a HUGE ask, I know!


----------



## elvisfan4life

MiniMabel said:


> Enlarged font by me.   What right have they to take charge like this??!!   It's not up to them!!     They are merely (unwanted by 99.99% of the UK population) guests who must do as they are told.  Honestly, their attitude is deplorable.  Some (a lot) humility would not go amiss.  I am still hoping that they behave appropriately and stay away.  It's a HUGE ask, I know!



I’d love them to stay away forever


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo it is time to celebrate 70 yrs of QE’s reign.  Let’s put up the bunting, brew some tea, bake some Mary Berry sponges [no soggy bottoms], and watch the fabulous coverage. The clothes should be spectacular, the hair and makeup superb, the jewels to swoon over.

So, grab your Launer’s and a hat [or tiara]. Put some jewels on and smile. 
Congratulations dear Queen Elizabeth. You’ve done a jolly good job.





Article from Feb., 2022:








						Queen Elizabeth hosts reception, cuts cake on eve of Platinum Jubilee
					

Queen Elizabeth II celebrated the eve of her 70 years on the throne Saturday cutting cake with guests at Sandringham Estate.




					nypost.com


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it is time to celebrate 70 yrs of QE’s reign.  Let’s put up the bunting, brew some tea, bake some Mary Berry sponges [no soggy bottoms], and watch the fabulous coverage. The clothes should be spectacular, the hair and makeup superb, the jewels to swoon over.
> 
> So, grab your Launer’s and a hat [or tiara]. Put some jewels on and smile. Congratulationsdear Queen
> 
> 
> View attachment 5413370
> 
> 
> Article from Feb., 2022:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth hosts reception, cuts cake on eve of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II celebrated the eve of her 70 years on the throne Saturday cutting cake with guests at Sandringham Estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Absolutely!  It's time to get into the swing of things! It's a once in a lifetime occasion to celebrate an amazing achievement by a wonderful lady!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5413329
> 
> _The *Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signalled they are to stick to the official script* during their flying visit to Britain for the Platinum Jubilee, avoiding “surprise” private events that might overshadow the Queen’s celebration.
> 
> Their habit of making “surprise” unpublicised appearances, most recently from Meghan at the memorial to murdered primary school children in Uvalde, Texas, has led to concerns of a “circus” following their every move during the visit.
> 
> Of the prospect of the couple only doing official engagements, one source said: “*We’ll see*.”
> 
> *It is not clear whether the Duke and Duchess will be accompanied on the visit **by a camera crew from Netflix*, who would need to apply for official media accreditation to film the public Jubilee events. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Does anyone stop to think how full of themselves they are with a statement like this?  It’s as good as saying that they are SO important that their presence could overshadow TQ. They have signaled?  Really?  I think it is more like BP signaled them to stay in the lane in which they have been assigned.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it is time to celebrate 70 yrs of QE’s reign.  Let’s put up the bunting, brew some tea, bake some Mary Berry sponges [no soggy bottoms], and watch the fabulous coverage. The clothes should be spectacular, the hair and makeup superb, the jewels to swoon over.
> 
> So, grab your Launer’s and a hat [or tiara]. Put some jewels on and smile.
> Congratulations dear Queen Elizabeth. You’ve done a jolly good job.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5413370
> 
> 
> Article from Feb., 2022:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth hosts reception, cuts cake on eve of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II celebrated the eve of her 70 years on the throne Saturday cutting cake with guests at Sandringham Estate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I will put on a hat, pull out a little black box Kelly (thats as close as I can come to a Launder bag) wear my biggest rhinestone brooch on the brightest color jacket I can find and drink English breakfast tea   Do I need to wear hose since this an appearance with TQ?  Def will wear black low heeled shoes.

Let’s Party!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait, what? Cleared out other visitors? I would have lost it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I will put on a hat, pull out a little black box Kelly (thats as close as I can come to a Launder bag) wear my biggest rhinestone brooch on the brightest color jacket I can find and drink English breakfast tea   Do I need to wear hose since this an appearance with TQ?  Def will wear black low heeled shoes.
> 
> Let’s Party!



I was thinking of hosting an afternoon tea just for fun, but I just can't be bothered because at this point I feel chronically exhausted. I did get the baking book a former royal chef just released.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what? Cleared out other visitors? I would have lost it.



Disgusting!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was thinking of hosting an afternoon tea just for fun, but I just can't be bothered because at this point I feel chronically exhausted. I did get the baking book a former royal chef just released.



Imo, buying the book is enough for now. Baby steps with lots of self care. 
We’ll get through this


----------



## csshopper

elvisfan4life said:


> I’d love them to stay away forever


Me too.
Wishful thinking: First take away the titles, then issue a travel ban that requires permission for entry to the UK on a visit by visit basis. Ex: Harry could come for Queen’s funeral someday; Maggot not.


----------



## Chanbal

The video seems to show the celebrity and the hired photographers leaving after done with their work.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what? Cleared out other visitors? I would have lost it.




And again, every time you think she can’t sink any lower she proves you wrong. What a disgusting human being.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Wow. How does she even live with herself? What a piece of work.


----------



## bag-mania

What gets me is how there are people who believe any nonsense she puts out there and don’t see how self-serving she is because they think she’s being nice.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what? Cleared out other visitors? I would have lost it.



What a hypocrite! She's walking aimlessly around the poor little children's graves with *her arms crossed on her chest, *a clear signal that she is totally detached from the situation and just putting on a performance and a bad one at that.


----------



## Lodpah

I think her dressing down itself is disrespectful. She crossed her arms as she’s walking and we know what that means: @


Maggie Muggins said:


> What a hypocrite! She's walking aimlessly around the poor little children's graves with *her arms crossed on her chest, *a clear signal that she is totally detached from the situation and just putting on a performance and a bad one at that.


I was about to post the same thing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> What gets me is how there are people who believe any nonsense she puts out there and don’t see how self-serving she is because they think she’s being nice.



Seriously. There are literally people commenting under the picture/video of her STANDING OVER HER PHOTOGRAPHER remarking how everyone is "bitter" and "jealous" and of course, "racist". It drives me crazy how people deliberately choose to ignore the obvious.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, I wonder where Harry was? Helping out the nannies, playing polo or thinking this was just not a good idea?


----------



## Chanbal

_This is awful_! The much anticipated video…


----------



## bag-mania

Were there any other celebrities who turned this tragedy into a PR opportunity? I haven’t seen any but then I don’t follow every famous person.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5413329
> 
> _The *Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signalled they are to stick to the official script* during their flying visit to Britain for the Platinum Jubilee, avoiding “surprise” private events that might overshadow the Queen’s celebration.
> 
> Their habit of making “surprise” unpublicised appearances, most recently from Meghan at the memorial to murdered primary school children in Uvalde, Texas, has led to concerns of a “circus” following their every move during the visit.
> 
> Of the prospect of the couple only doing official engagements, one source said: “*We’ll see*.”
> 
> *It is not clear whether the Duke and Duchess will be accompanied on the visit **by a camera crew from Netflix*, who would need to apply for official media accreditation to film the public Jubilee events. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph




They certainly won't. I can't get a room in town next weekend


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Were there any other celebrities who turned this tragedy into a PR opportunity? I haven’t seen any but then I don’t follow every famous person.



She got there before the President! 

One more opinion…  



_She flew in by private jet on what was said to be a private visit. But inevitably the pictures of Meghan laying flowers at the memorial of the Texas school massacre went round the world.

Despite being there incognito, her huge security detail gave the game away at the memorial set up by grieving parents. Pan out from the pics of a tearful Megs kneeling in humility like Mother Teresa and there is an army of photographers and film crews capturing every soulful moment.

All very moving — and perhaps consoling for many of those poor, grieving parents. But her sudden arrival — she got there before even President ***** — makes me worry she and Harry could do something to overshadow the Royal Family when they land in the UK next week for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.

*Let’s hope that in the midst of her mercy dash, Megs also found time to visit her seriously-ill father.

Since the Duchess of Hypocrisy hasn’t to our knowledge seen her dad since before her marriage, I’m not holding my breath*.









						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: Sorry Harry and Meghan, are NOT welcome at Jubilee
					

PLATELL'S PEOPLE: She flew in by private jet on what was said to be a private visit. But inevitably the pictures of Meghan laying flowers at the memorial of the Texas school massacre,




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for sharing this. One should be cautious with fanatics. A couple more of interesting posts from people that are rightfully shocked by the duchess PR-charity.



This brought back memories when Diana was upset that the BRF didn't praise her travelling to Angola to bring attention to landmines.  

She had a full camera crew with her and talked about how they just didn't understand her humanitarianism and how she had to travel with her own photographers and documentarists.

Just got the same vibe with Meg - she'll do as she pleases in spite of the criticism because she's a humanitarian.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> She got there before the President!



Why am I not surprised? I am hoping local media saw through her and comment on it. Clearly the usual suspects in the gossip media will continue their obsequious support.


----------



## altigirl88

I felt I must say this, after reading the above posts. I am also half black/half white. My husband is even also redheaded, lol. I am not racist at all. I first started following Meghan and Harry as I hadn’t seen someone who looked like me in such a position as she was about to be in, so I was definitely interested.Over time, though, I’ve been disappointed because they left and I didn’t get to see her doing much of the “princess-y” things. That’s where my consternation comes from, lol. I don’t wish them any malice or ill will.


----------



## Chanbal

altigirl88 said:


> I felt I must say this, after reading the above posts. I am also half black/half white. My husband is even also redheaded, lol. I am not racist at all. I first started following Meghan and Harry as I hadn’t seen someone who looked like me in such a position as she was about to be in, so I was definitely interested.Over time, though, I’ve been disappointed because they left and I didn’t get to see her doing much of the “princess-y” things. That’s where my consternation comes from, lol. I don’t wish them any malice or ill will.


I sincerely believe people here are not racist and don't wish them malice or ill will. I wouldn't participate on a thread that supports discrimination. Many of us are just shocked by so much greed, opportunism, arrogance, and hypocrisy.


----------



## CeeJay

Based on what I’ve read before, the Queen’s “minders” are going to have a tight circle around her .. so if H&M have any “surprises”, then it won’t likely be around her (which is a good thing)!  I’m just hoping that the rest of the BRF will also keep a very close eye on these two and should then have a “surprise”, they will be IMMEDIATELY SHUT DOWN and asked to leave just like Charles had done before.  I’m sure that William won’t have a problem with that, nor Princess Anne or Camilla for that matter .. honestly, the best would be for the BRF to say “thanks but no thanks” and tell them they are no longer invited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## altigirl88

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely believe people here are not racist and don't wish them malice or ill will. I wouldn't participate on a thread that supports discrimination. Many of us are just shocked by so much greed, opportunism, arrogance, and hypocrisy.


Their relationship hasn’t gone the way I expected, for sure, lol


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## mellibelly

She’s “dressed down” but made sure to pose with her arms crossed highlighting Diana’s gold carrier tank watch


----------



## Annawakes

_“Nobody has been allowed through”????????????

_


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what? Cleared out other visitors? I would have lost it.



How meaningless.   One usually stands still, pensively, praying if one is inclined.  One would normally approach each cross and name with reverence.  Could she go any faster?   Slam bam.  Why bother ?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

csshopper said:


> Me too.
> Wishful thinking: First take away the titles, then issue a travel ban that requires permission for entry to the UK on a visit by visit basis. Ex: Harry could come for Queen’s funeral someday; Maggot not.


The Queen is elderly and typical of that age group is forgiving and wants everyone surrounding her on this milestone.  Unfortunately for her devoted subjects, H and TW  are being accepted as part of public (St. Paul) events when they should be using the back door.


----------



## Milosmum0307

Lilliesdaughter said:


> How meaningless.   One usually stands still, pensively, praying if one is inclined.  One would normally approach each cross and name with reverence.  Could she go any faster?   Slam bam.  Why bother ?


The photo op.  That’s why she bothered.  I hate to think that anyone would exploit this tragedy for their own self-promotion, but obvious behavior is obvious.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She would be a horrible politician in the sense that her instincts are abysmal. She cannot read a room and recognize what is appropriate behavior. The media keeps covering for her for reasons I cannot understand. *She can’t be paying them all, can she?*


She is *playing* them all.  Trust me, I was being totally sarcastic.  Her deviousness is the only thing about politics she’d be great at!


----------



## rose60610

Meghan craves attention to the point of flying in a private plane across several states to insert herself in a monumental tragedy, bringing HER OWN camera crew to detail the trip.  I'm now convinced beyond all doubt she has a psychosis, versus merely being a narcissist and having a bizarre ego. I admit to having zero training in psychiatry, but I think Harry should pack up the kids and LEAVE for the their sake. MM is whacked beyond whacked. She used to have photographers mobbing her, but now she has to bring her own in order to promote herself?  Who paid for the plane and camera crew? Netflix?


----------



## mellibelly

mellibelly said:


> She’s “dressed down” but made sure to pose with her arms crossed highlighting Diana’s gold carrier tank watch


Cartier dang autocorrect


----------



## wisconsin

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely believe people here are not racist and don't wish them malice or ill will. I wouldn't participate on a thread that supports discrimination. Many of us are just shocked by so much greed, opportunism, arrogance, and hypocrisy.


Sometimes the the negativity here can be too much even for me who is not a Meghan Harry supporter but I don’t believe it stems from racism. I still come by to read because for the most part there is good insight here.


----------



## Aimee3

I just read an anonymous donor is paying $175,000 to pay for the funerals of those killed.  That’s the way you do it.  Anonymously!  Meanwhile TW struts her stuff with her photographers and donates a bit of snack food and thinks she’s doing the world a favor.


----------



## Milosmum0307

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what? Cleared out other visitors? I would have lost it.



Seeing this absolutely infuriates me.  How dare she?  I live and work close to Sandy Hook.  People in my office had children in that school (thankfully their children made it out alive, though they’re still traumatized by the events that day).  I CANNOT BELIEVE that it has happened again.  I was totally shaken by this.  When I left the office, they were reporting 2 children dead in Uvalde.  I was halfway home when my sister texted me that they had revised the death toll upward to 14 children.  I pulled over to the side of the road and sobbed.  The next day, my son’s kindergarten had an event outside in the field behind the playground.  A big, open, unprotected field.  I spent the whole time looking around and thinking about how vulnerable the children were, how a gunman could just walk over from the parking lot, and there was nothing and no one there to stop them.  My heart was pounding at one point.  Parents all over this country feel the way I do - grief, anger, and above all absolute fear.  My husband and I have dual citizenship and have finally begun to discuss leaving the United States.  We have lived abroad before, but we always intended to raise our son here and never considered doing otherwise.  Our parents risked everything and worked so unimaginably hard to give us a life here in this country, and I never thought I would ever dishonor that by leaving, but I can’t think of raising my son in a society so violent, so awash in guns, where militarized weapons are common and school children are disposable. I am just heartbroken. I cannot imagine having the gall to exploit this situation.  The absolute gall.  For all the stupid, transparent things the Markles have done in the name of self-promotion, this is the most reprehensible.  I’m not fond of comparing MM to her sister-in-law, but this made me think of the time Kate quietly showed up to lay flowers at a memorial to Sarah Everard.  No camera crew.  No clearing away other members of the public.  No bad acting. It was 100% more effective than whatever the f*ck THIS was.  Who is advising these clowns?  She should be ashamed of herself.


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean has a segment on why Haz did not accompany her. Neil believes Harry’s upbringing as a Royal helped him to understand this was not an acceptable thing to do. In another segment NS calls her out and says if’s her worst PR blunder ever.

Wonder if hot on the heels of the Polo debacle if Harry might be starting to have the tiniest inkling he has a problem on his hands?  Might he be more vigilant to keep her in check during the Jubilee, or is he so completely controlled by her he has no impact? Based on this latest PR stunt, I think he’s a lost cause.

Neil said  he confirmed with sources at Netflix they did not have cameras there to film her. If she hired her own with intent to sell the pictures that’s even more despicable.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean has a segment on why Haz did not accompany her. Neil believes Harry’s upbringing as a Royal helped him to understand this was not an acceptable thing to do. In another segment NS calls her out and says if’s her worst PR blunder ever.
> 
> Wonder if hot on the heels of the Polo debacle if Harry might be starting to have the tiniest inkling he has a problem on his hands?  Might he be more vigilant to keep her in check during the Jubilee, or is he so completely controlled by her he has no impact? Based on this latest PR stunt, I think he’s a lost cause.
> 
> Neil said  he confirmed with sources at Netflix they did not have cameras there to film her. If she hired her own with intent to sell the pictures that’s even more despicable.


I figured Harry wasn't invited but if it's true he made the decision this wasn't a good idea, maybe there is hope for him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

I'm sure this isn't going to be flattering......


----------



## Gal4Dior

Toby93 said:


> I'm sure this isn't going to be flattering......



Her ex-husband is actually decent looking, unlike her balding hobbit at their Montecito Manse.


----------



## kipp

Re: Megain's recent visit to Uvalde---if you are high profile and you want to make a difference, this is a better way to do it:








						Harry Styles Commits To Big Donation After Texas School Shooting
					

The pop star announced a cut of his upcoming tour proceeds will go toward Everytown for Gun Safety.




					www.huffpost.com
				




ETA:  this is apparently over $1 million dollars


----------



## Milosmum0307

kipp said:


> Re: Megain's recent visit to Uvalde---if you are high profile and you want to make a difference, this is a better way to do it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Styles Commits To Big Donation After Texas School Shooting
> 
> 
> The pop star announced a cut of his upcoming tour proceeds will go toward Everytown for Gun Safety.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this is apparently over $1 million dollars


I’m sure Duchess Dipshit will be sending over some Starbucks gift cards.


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> Re: Megain's recent visit to Uvalde---if you are high profile and you want to make a difference, this is a better way to do it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Styles Commits To Big Donation After Texas School Shooting
> 
> 
> The pop star announced a cut of his upcoming tour proceeds will go toward Everytown for Gun Safety.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this is apparently over $1 million dollars


For a brief moment, I read the title of the article as Hazz commits to big donation and


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I sincerely believe people here are not racist and don't wish them malice or ill will. I wouldn't participate on a thread that supports discrimination. Many of us are just shocked by so much greed, opportunism, arrogance, and hypocrisy.



Well said, @Chanbal. I agree - no one here wishes H&M malice or ill will. Nothing is racist. All of this criticism is based on_ their own_ _behavior and comments_. This jubilee will be a defining moment for them. The media with its syrupy sweet articles about Hazz being ‘the favorite’ may well ruin it. Stay tuned. The fun is about to begin.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said, @Chanbal. I agree - no one here wishes H&M malice or ill will. Nothing is racist. All of this criticism is based on_ their own_ _behavior and comments_. This jubilee will be a defining moment for them. The media with its syrupy sweet articles about Hazz being ‘the favorite’ may well ruin it. Stay tuned. The fun is about to begin.


Yep, the fun is about to begin. I agree with the comment below, they shouldn't have been invited to attend the Jubilee.


----------



## Icyjade

wisconsin said:


> Sometimes the the negativity here can be too much even for me who is not a Meghan Harry supporter but I don’t believe it stems from racism. I still come by to read because for the most part there is good insight here.



I’m Asian. So if people don’t like me I can go ahead and accuse them of being racist? What sort of reasoning is that? Am definitely not racist and just disliking TW for her clearly ugly personality. And finding her more and more awful with time as she exposes more of her ugly personality. Like being an insensitive publicity ho. Or pushing people around.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Okaaaay, my lovelies, we may need Angela Kelly to help us “choose”:



			https://www.sothebys.com/en/digital-catalogues/power-image-royal-aristocratic-tiaras


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


>




Why are people catering to her like this??? NOBODY has been allowed through but that stupid nobody.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> I’m not fond of comparing MM to her sister-in-law, but this made me think of the time Kate quietly showed up to lay flowers at a memorial to Sarah Everard.  No camera crew.  No clearing away other members of the public.  No bad acting. It was 100% more effective than whatever the f*ck THIS was.  Who is advising these clowns?  She should be ashamed of herself.



And yet, the sugars and stans are all over Twitter using this to justify Raptor's behaviour because "Kate did it too and your racist self sees nothing wrong with this!"


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why are people catering to her like this??? NOBODY has been allowed through but that stupid nobody.


Not everyone knows who she is, women in the center where she dropped sandwiches off had no idea until after she departed and then someone told them.

She is such a filthy liar she might have claimed to be a family member wanting a few moments to privately mourn.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why are people catering to her like this??? NOBODY has been allowed through but that stupid nobody.



Imo, people in Uvalde are stunned, shocked and flooded with grief. They have been pushed and pulled to their wit’s end. There is no energy for a nasty confrontation with a stranger. They are doing their best to get through this nightmare. This is why celebs, ‘do-gooder’s’, and others should not rush in. Give these people time to grieve and process what has happened. Most people understand that.

Saw a report where one of the city council members was begging the media and others to leave this little community alone. He was sobbing for everyone to leave. They need and want their privacy.  Later, much later, they will welcome the outsiders.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently she waltzed in there telling people to not believe anything the press writes about them. The woman is sick.

Also, not sure why that Buzzfeed woman thinks this makes the nutjob somehow look good.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently she waltzed in there telling people to not believe anything the press writes about them. The woman is sick.
> 
> Also, not sure why that Buzzfeed woman thinks this makes the nutjob somehow look good.




Of course, we should never believe what certain sites say, for example their fan sites. 
We all are internet-savvy. We can distinguish fact from fiction. They tried to peddle this idea during the O conversation. It’s all part of their ‘_we are better than you_’ paired with ‘_we know better than you_’ narrative.  Smarmy, self-serving bs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This.


----------



## K.D.

About that party, I'm bringing biscuits and tea


----------



## Stansy

K.D. said:


> About that party, I'm bringing biscuits and tea
> 
> View attachment 5413650





count me in for a nice cuppa tea


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This.




*Clout Chaser. *

Somehow we missed that lil name.  Thank you for posting @QueenofWrapDress. This guy’s page has some funny stuff in general, not about H&M.


----------



## duna

.


----------



## elvisfan4life

I fear Saturday - it’s lilabets first birthday - the Queen should be at the Epsom Derby the thing she will enjoy most and Duchess Dipshit will be doing her utmost to spoil the day by shoving her child to the forefront of world news


----------



## Annawakes

Toby93 said:


> I'm sure this isn't going to be flattering......



Finallyyyyyyy!!!!!  

Good to see Trevor cashing in. I hope this bit of info is actually true


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently she waltzed in there telling people to not believe anything the press writes about them. The woman is sick.
> 
> Also, not sure why that Buzzfeed woman thinks this makes the nutjob somehow look good.



Of course the whole convo was about her.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Not sure if anyone posted a similar clip prior but here's her leaving the site 

ETA: Clip is on the last slide.


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Re: Megain's recent visit to Uvalde---if you are high profile and you want to make a difference, this is a better way to do it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Styles Commits To Big Donation After Texas School Shooting
> 
> 
> The pop star announced a cut of his upcoming tour proceeds will go toward Everytown for Gun Safety.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  this is apparently over $1 million dollars


yes, putting his money where his mouth is...unlike the two hypocrites


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> I fear Saturday - it’s lilabets first birthday - the Queen should be at the Epsom Derby the thing she will enjoy most and Duchess Dipshit will be doing her utmost to spoil the day by shoving her child to the forefront of world news


Would it be possible that Lilib's official date of birth was arranged to coincide with the Jubilee? There seems to be always some sort of misinformation/mystery linked to the birth of their kids. For Archie, it was announced TW was in labour when he was already born and at home…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> EDIT:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: More info from the same source
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5413139
> View attachment 5413138



there is no words sufficient for this...disgusting, despicable


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> Not sure if anyone posted a similar clip prior but here's her leaving the site
> 
> ETA: Clip is on the last slide.




Wait, MEGHAN "was visibly emotional after the visit and comforted by the President of Archewell"?  I thought she was there to show support for the victims' families (sarcasm).  OF COURSE our Saint Meghan needed comfort and a hug. Did anyone ask her IF SHE WAS OK?  Oh, the NERVE of a grieving community not to coddle her with love and attention. And OF COURSE her photos were sold to a magazine. We keep saying she can't stoop any lower. But when the sad day comes when the Queen passes, we'd might as well expect Meghan to attend her funeral in a red dress. And photos sold to another magazine.


----------



## Chanbal

This picture was apparently posted by Nacho's wife and someone in the thread/comments thinks little Arch*e is on the right. I've no idea… All allegedly, of course!


----------



## EverSoElusive

I've made a comment recently comparing Madeleine and Harry, and I stand by it. I wonder who brought the so-called international hate on the Unsavory Prince and FREEtos Duchess (hint: themselves and their antics)  

Also, many of us here and outside of TPF, including the press were in support of the Troublesome Duo in the beginning. They were treated very nicely by the BRF and most of the general public. And then they ruined it all by being ingrates who made up lies, trashing the BRF. Every action taken by them when and after leaving the BRF was all about publicity for them albeit really bad ones. What *genuinely* good things have they done other than wh#ring themselves out like crack addicts needing money to score their next fix?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> there is no words sufficient for this...disgusting, despicable


Yep, many people are disgusted and the comments are not sweet.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I've made a comment recently comparing Madeleine and Harry, and I stand by it. I wonder who brought the so-called international hate on the Unsavory Prince and FREEtos Duchess (hint: themselves and their antics)
> 
> Also, many of us here and outside of TPF, including the press were in support of the Troublesome Duo in the beginning. They were treated very nicely by the BRF and most of the general public. And then they ruined it all by being ingrates who made up lies, trashing the BRF. Every action taken by them when and after leaving the BRF was all about publicity for them albeit really bad ones. What *genuinely* good things have they done other than wh#ring themselves out like crack addicts needing money to score their next fix?



guess I'm not keeping up
I don't know who Madeleine is


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> But when the sad day comes when the Queen passes, we'd might as well expect Meghan to attend her funeral in a red dress. And photos sold to another magazine.



She probably won't be allowed to walk out of any royal residence in a red dress and be asked to change in order to participate in the funeral procession but there WILL BE shenanigans. Zero doubt. 

Based on precedence, she might not even fly to the UK to pay her final respect to the Queen, probably citing anything from her being ill or pregnant, kids being ill, afraid for her life because of death threats, no security provided, etc.

I'm sure the Brits don't want her disgraceful a£s there either.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> guess I'm not keeping up
> I don't know who Madeleine is



Swedish princess  Victoria's younger sister.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## oldbag

K.D. said:


> About that party, I'm bringing biscuits and tea
> 
> View attachment 5413650


I received my Walkers tin the other day. The shipping box was so wet it fell apart when my husband opened it but fortunately the interior packing protected it. I have my tea from Westminster Abbey also so now I am ready to celebrate. I am a shameless Anglophile. I am happy thinking about the pagentry coming. I love your cookie tin, very elegant.


K.D. said:


> About that party, I'm bringing biscuits and tea
> 
> View attachment 5413650


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: thought the shirt could offensive so I put it in a spoiler. 


In her own words: I was such a fraud.



Spoiler: Graphic tee


----------



## CarryOn2020

oldbag said:


> I received my Walkers tin the other day. The shipping box was so wet it fell apart when my husband opened it but fortunately the interior packing protected it. I have my tea from Westminster Abbey also so now I am ready to celebrate. I am a shameless Anglophile. I am happy thinking about the pagentry coming. I love your cookie tin, very elegant.



This is going to soothe all of our ruffled feathers:


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is going to soothe all of our ruffled feathers:




Is this Trooping the Colour today or is it an old one? Sorry, I'm confused!

Ahh no, I just checked, it's Thursday as I thought!


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> Is this Trooping the Colour today or is it an old one? Sorry, I'm confused!



It was yesterday’s practice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Great article - Nflix looks awful as does she.  In the video @Chanbal posted above, be sure to notice the car she was in.  Hint: caddy suv, about $100K.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> It was yesterday’s practice.



Ah, thanks! For a moment I thought I was missing it, lol!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article - Nflix looks awful as does she.  In the video @Chanbal posted above, be sure to notice the car she was in.  Hint: caddy suv, about $100K.



shallow observation - her extensions are much longer than usual here


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In her own words:



@CarryOn2020 We must accept 'their truth'!


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> a miscarriage is very sad but I don't think it compares to losing a ten-year-old child....


Times 19.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, the Harkles are getting ready for their upcoming trip.


----------



## sdkitty

I was listening to this Fresh Air episode and I asked myself if we are being unfair to Meghan or hateful.  My answer is she brings this on herself.  Also, I don't think we here discussing her is the same as Twitter or FB - much smaller forum.

This was the interview
Nina Jankowicz was tapped to head the ***** administration's new Disinformation Governance Board but resigned after being deluged with online threats. Her new book is_ How to Be a Woman Online_.


----------



## 1LV

Milosmum0307 said:


> I’m sure Duchess Dipshit will be sending over some Starbucks gift cards.


“Duchess Dipshit”.  Love it. From this day forward I will think of her that way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I was listening to this Fresh Air episode and I asked myself if we are being unfair to Meghan or hateful.  My answer is she brings this on herself.  Also, I don't think we here discussing her is the same as Twitter or FB - much smaller forum.
> 
> This was the interview
> Nina Jankowicz was tapped to head the ***** administration's new Disinformation Governance Board but resigned after being deluged with online threats. Her new book is_ How to Be a Woman Online_.



I understand the conundrum. I do believe that many people use “hater” and “hating” incorrectly. _Disliking_ a celeb’s behavior is not _ hating_. Imo.  Kinda like when 1st world people claim they are starving. Not really correct usage. Just my 2 cents


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I understand the conundrum. I do believe that many people use “hater” and “hating” incorrectly. _Disliking_ a celeb’s behavior is not _ hating_. Imo.  Kinda like when 1st world people claim they are starving. Not really correct usage. Just my 2 cents



…"_some people think that opportunism and mercy are the same thing"_…


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I understand the conundrum. I do believe that many people use “hater” and “hating” incorrectly. _Disliking_ a celeb’s behavior is not _ hating_. Imo.  Kinda like when 1st world people claim they are starving. Not really correct usage. Just my 2 cents


yes, and this woman was getting very aggressive, threatening messages...not just criticism


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> I fear Saturday - it’s lilabets first birthday - the Queen should be at the Epsom Derby the thing she will enjoy most and Duchess Dipshit will be doing her utmost to spoil the day by shoving her child to the forefront of world news



You mean the invisible girl? How much fuss can they make over a child who is hidden away and rarely spoken about?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> yes, and this woman was getting very aggressive, threatening messages...not just criticism



_Threatening_ does indeed indicate _hate_.  Our comments here are not _threatening _nor _hateful. _


----------



## marietouchet

Recent recap

1. Dad very sick, no rush to bedside, he remains ill
2. M rushes to lay flowers and dole out Fritos WITH CAMERA CREW in tow
H does not go to Texas. Youtuber suggests (I am not making this up...) this is because the BRF never attends a tragedy scene ASAP - their presence will detract from grief-stricken affected (BRF always picks much later date to pay respects). 
3. H playing polo . Better reason to stay home than the I DONT WANT TO DETRACT thing ... Plus he has to pack for London. 
4. It does not seem like they are rushing to London to see family, catch up or simply let the kids get over jet lag so A&L are impeccably behaved
5. Will Doria go to London??? 

No word on work obligations for H&M - book date , it is finished ??? Next podcast date... Invictus video will surely not come out so late that we have all forgotten about it ? (Does anyone watch Olympics videos after the fact ?)


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Threatening_ does indeed indicate _hate_.  Our comments here are not _threatening _nor _hateful. _


I agree
I just took a beat to think about the fact that she's a woman and women receive a lot of very nasty criticism on the Internet.  But I don't think what we say here is that.
and I think she has it coming to her


----------



## carmen56

I would love to be a fly on the wall at BP and Clarence House when Haz and Raptor get together with the rest of the family.  HMQ has asked that there’s no drama, but knowing Raptor, there will be.  She just can’t help herself.


----------



## EverSoElusive

carmen56 said:


> I would love to be a fly on the wall at BP and Clarence House when Haz and Raptor get together with the rest of the family.  HMQ has asked that there’s no drama, but knowing Raptor, there will be.  She just can’t help herself.



Actually I'm more interested in knowing the conversations that Harry and FREEtos have at home behind closed doors. I don't imagine she's too kind to Harry these days because she's already bagged him and has two anchor babies setting her for life if Harry walks.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> It was yesterday’s practice.


It was today.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I've made a comment recently comparing Madeleine and Harry, and I stand by it. I wonder who brought the so-called international hate on the Unsavory Prince and FREEtos Duchess (hint: themselves and their antics)
> 
> Also, many of us here and outside of TPF, including the press were in support of the Troublesome Duo in the beginning. They were treated very nicely by the BRF and most of the general public. And then they ruined it all by being ingrates who made up lies, trashing the BRF. Every action taken by them when and after leaving the BRF was all about publicity for them albeit really bad ones. What *genuinely* good things have they done other than wh#ring themselves out like crack addicts needing money to score their next fix?




The best for Harry's family would be to divorce that nutjob. Even better he had married someone not completely crazy to begin with.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The best for Harry's family would be to divorce that nutjob. *Even better he had married someone not completely crazy to begin with.*



Alas, no sane person would find Harry attractive or want to deal with him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Actually I'm more interested in knowing the conversations that Harry and FREEtos have at home behind closed doors. I don't imagine she's too kind to Harry these days because she's already bagged him and has two anchor babies setting her for life if Harry walks.



He should walk and get the kids and let her sink into obscurity.


----------



## rose60610

Meghan HAD to rush to Texas ASAP to leverage a tragedy for her photo op. IMO, then, is that she will stop at absolutely NOTHING--so when she attends the Jubilee, Baby Lilibet will be shoved in the Queen's lap for a photo. Big bucks bidding war between magazines!!!! Unless TQ's security stops it from happening. Then there will be cries and accusations of RACISM. Count on it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He should walk and get the kids and let her sink into obscurity.



I agree. I can think of 2 possible scenarios of he did:

1) Nutmeg will try to withhold the kids completely from Harry. There would be a drawn out custody battle.
2) Knowing how money hungry Nutmeg is, she would probably try to sell the kids to their own dad at a crazy high price, if the BRF wants her out of Harry and the kids' lives.


----------



## Chanbal

Let's spot a few other differences: 1) one person went/walked discreetly to a site, while the other one took flights/SUVs (carbon footprint), bodyguards, assistants…, 2) one person didn't have her father in the hospital while the other one didn't visit her father seriously ill in a hospital nearby…


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Recent recap
> 
> 1. Dad very sick, no rush to bedside, he remains ill
> 2. M rushes to lay flowers and dole out Fritos WITH CAMERA CREW in tow
> H does not go to Texas. Youtuber suggests (I am not making this up...) this is because the BRF never attends a tragedy scene ASAP - their presence will detract from grief-stricken affected (BRF always picks much later date to pay respects).
> 3. H playing polo . Better reason to stay home than the I DONT WANT TO DETRACT thing ... Plus he has to pack for London.
> 4. It does not seem like they are rushing to London to see family, catch up or simply let the kids get over jet lag so A&L are impeccably behaved
> 5. Will Doria go to London???
> 
> No word on work obligations for H&M - book date , it is finished ??? Next podcast date... Invictus video will surely not come out so late that we have all forgotten about it ? (Does anyone watch Olympics videos after the fact ?)


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Meghan HAD to rush to Texas ASAP to leverage a tragedy for her photo op. IMO, then, is that she will stop at absolutely NOTHING--so when she attends the Jubilee, Baby Lilibet will be shoved in the Queen's lap for a photo. Big bucks bidding war between magazines!!!! Unless TQ's security stops it from happening. Then there will be cries and accusations of RACISM. Count on it.



There will be minders along with Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate and Anne surrounding the Queen. At this point, I think they will be very alert and playing gatekeepers to keep Nutmeg away from the Queen. I hope she's only allowed to curtsy to say hi and then told to stay at least 10 feet away. And the only time the Queen will have anything to do with Invisibet is simply a private closed door meeting with NO cameras allowed, not even phone camera.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Let's spot a few other differences: 1) one person went/walked discreetly to a site, while the other one took flights/SUVs (carbon footprint), bodyguards, assistants…, 2) one person didn't have her father in the hospital while the other one didn't visit her father seriously ill in a hospital nearby…




Scobie's intelligence level is frighteningly declining these days.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Scobie's intelligence level is frighteningly declining these days.



What??? I never thought he had any to begin with


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> There will be minders along with Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate and Anne surrounding the Queen. At this point, I think they will be very alert and playing gatekeepers to keep Nutmeg away from the Queen. I hope she's only allowed to curtsy to say hi and then told to stay at least 10 feet away. And the only time the Queen will have anything to do with Invisibet is simply a private closed door meeting with NO cameras allowed, not even phone camera.



I soooooooooo hope you're right!  Meghan, however, NEEDS THAT PHOTO!  I hope the minders check for all kinds of cameras as I don't trust MM not to carry some kind of micro device to capture a picture.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Let's spot a few other differences: 1) one person went/walked discreetly to a site, while the other one took flights/SUVs (carbon footprint), bodyguards, assistants…, 2) one person didn't have her father in the hospital while the other one didn't visit her father seriously ill in a hospital nearby…




P.S. This is exactly the kind of sh*t that annoys me to no end. Those people might be stupid, but they are not so stupid to not know EXACTLY what the difference is and why one is praised and one is not, yet they choose to bring it up anyway.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I soooooooooo hope you're right!  Meghan, however, NEEDS THAT PHOTO!  I hope the minders check for all kinds of cameras as I don't trust MM not to carry some kind of micro device to capture a picture.


I hope netflix finds out there isn't much interest in the two grifters anymore.  they had the big wedding.  a lot of people were excited.  that's pretty much over I think


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> I soooooooooo hope you're right!  Meghan, however, NEEDS THAT PHOTO!  I hope the minders check for all kinds of cameras as I don't trust MM not to carry some kind of micro device to capture a picture.



Remember during the Invictus fly-by trip where she had to stay in another room with footmen watching her? I hope it's this way the entire trip   

But we must not forget that it's been said they won't tolerate any mean spirited treatments, eye rolls, snide put-downs etc. and they would pack up and leave if those things happen while they are there for the Jubilee.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I hope netflix finds out there isn't much interest in the two grifters anymore.  they had the big wedding.  a lot of people were excited.  that's pretty much over I think


Netflix invested a lot of money and publicity hiring these two grifters. They're not letting them loose without trying to milk everything they can from them, no matter the angle or offensiveness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I went over to Lady C's channel fully intending to listen to the latest video while I do a few chores, but nearly 1 1/2 hours? I'm exhausted just finding this out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Remember during the Invictus fly-by trip where she had to stay in another room with footmen watching her? I hope it's this way the entire trip
> 
> But we must not forget that it's been said they won't tolerate any mean spirited treatments, eye rolls, snide put-downs etc. and they would pack up and leave if those things happen while they are there for the Jubilee.



Please, can someone be mean to them before they board the flight?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please, can someone be mean to them before they board the flight?



Or the flight should be cancelled due to aircraft problems


----------



## EverSoElusive

redney said:


> Netflix invested a lot of money and publicity hiring these two grifters. They're not letting them loose without trying to milk everything they can from them, no matter the angle or offensiveness.



Netflix probably wants palace footages but that's almost impossible. We'll see how these ingrates produce such footages. The Palace should sweep for bugs!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



More, Charles is not in London waiting for the dynamic duo to arrive …
NO he is in TRANSYLVANIA … per DM … you can’t make this up

He owns estate in Romania, and has visited with Ukrainian refugees on the trip, no photos of him & refugees, just minor photo op hiking around with local dignitaries


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here.


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.



Some post shared here mentioned she likely did it to look Latino.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wishing BLG a speedy recovery:


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Netflix invested a lot of money and publicity hiring these two grifters. They're not letting them loose without trying to milk everything they can from them, no matter the angle or offensiveness.


yes and I hope it's a big fail


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lots of positive, happy stuff here:





			https://mobile.twitter.com/Platinum2022


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

I'd like to know if the London gift shops that sell royal trinkets still stock H&M merch, and if so, is it marked down 95%?


----------



## Annawakes

Have the flight attendants been instructed not to look them in the eye?  


I’m still hoping neither of them will show their faces.

I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some big birthday announcement.


----------



## youngster

carmen56 said:


> *I would love to be a fly on the wall at BP and Clarence House when Haz and Raptor get together with the rest of the family. * HMQ has asked that there’s no drama, but knowing Raptor, there will be.  She just can’t help herself.



Me too.  It's a tough position for anyone in the family.  What are they supposed to talk to Harry and MM about when they do see them?  Everything is a minefield with those two. Can't ask them about their latest podcast, their latest production for Netflix, their next children's book, or their latest good work or important project for their foundation . . . because there is nothing there.  Meghan's appearance on Ellen?  Uh, no.  Harry's last interview at the Invictus Games?  Uh, no, since Harry managed to insult the entire family and Palace staff.   Meghan's last minute trip to Texas?  Nobody would touch this one.  Harry's upcoming book release? Yeah, nobody is going to touch this one either, unless it's after the Jubilee celebrations and behind closed doors with Charles.

Maybe polo is safe.  There will be long and involved discussions of the weather, the weather in Montecito, the weather in London, comparisons to the weather at various times of the year, barometers, rainfall gauges, outdoor thermometers, Farmer's Almanac predictions for the coming winter, and favorite sunscreen brands.  After they've exhausted the weather, I guess they can ask about the children and let them prattle on about how both children are clearly geniuses and will save the world with Mum and Dad,_ if only the world will let them.  _


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Hazz looking good here!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chanbal said:


>



Lol! Looks like old ships! Wow, that dress is terribly unflattering on her.


----------



## redney

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol! Looks like old ships! Wow, that dress is terribly unflattering on her.


Did they bring their security team to the BBQ?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> P.S. This is exactly the kind of sh*t that annoys me to no end. Those people might be stupid, but they are not so stupid to not know EXACTLY what the difference is and why one is praised and one is not, yet they choose to bring it up anyway.


I respectfully disagree.  they don't want to see it and therefore, they don't


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Remember during the Invictus fly-by trip where she had to stay in another room with footmen watching her? I hope it's this way the entire trip
> 
> But we must not forget that it's been said they won't tolerate any mean spirited treatments, eye rolls, snide put-downs etc. and they would pack up and leave if those things happen while they are there for the Jubilee.


and if there aren't any mean treatments, they can always make some up


----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I went over to Lady C's channel fully intending to listen to the latest video while I do a few chores, but nearly 1 1/2 hours? I'm exhausted just finding this out.



I speed her videos up to 1.5x or 1.75x.


----------



## DeMonica

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol! Looks like old ships! Wow, that dress is terribly unflattering on her.


Unflattering is an understatement. It looks like she grew boobs on her back. The Hunchback of Montecito.


----------



## mellibelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol! Looks like old ships! Wow, that dress is terribly unflattering on her.


Old ships because of her “yachting” history 
It’s fugly, not flattering and I’m sure $$$$


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Did they bring their security team to the BBQ?


wonder who invited them and if they actually know people in the community


----------



## Sharont2305

And why the bare feet? On both of them.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> And why the bare feet? On both of them.


Ha....I didn't catch that.  we know Harry has pretty feet


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> and if there aren't any mean treatments, they can always make some up



Everything is made up when it comes to FREEtos & Associate


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> and if there aren't any mean treatments, *they can always make some up*



And that's probably why they are attending. So they can claim there were mean things said to them and about them. Netflix demands product! And these professional victims lusting after paychecks are thus motivated to make crap up.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> And that's probably why they are attending. So they can claim there were mean things said to them and about them. Netflix demands product! And these professional victims lusting after paychecks are thus motivated to make crap up.


Maybe someone will (allegedly) comment on how nice and light the kids' skin is


----------



## Debbini

EverSoElusive said:


> Remember during the Invictus fly-by trip where she had to stay in another room with footmen watching her? I hope it's this way the entire trip
> 
> But we must not forget that it's been said they won't tolerate any mean spirited treatments, eye rolls, snide put-downs etc. and they would pack up and leave if those things happen while they are there for the Jubilee.


I hope they pack up and leave 15 minutes after arriving.


----------



## pukasonqo

LVSistinaMM said:


> Lol! Looks like old ships! Wow, that dress is terribly unflattering on her.


The whole photo is unflattering but it would be for anybody
Is she back to her normal colouring after cos playing a Latina? 
I really hope the fake tan was not MM intentionally doing brown face


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> Me too.  It's a tough position for anyone in the family.  What are they supposed to talk to Harry and MM about when they do see them?  Everything is a minefield with those two. Can't ask them about their latest podcast, their latest production for Netflix, their next children's book, or their latest good work or important project for their foundation . . . because there is nothing there.  Meghan's appearance on Ellen?  Uh, no.  Harry's last interview at the Invictus Games?  Uh, no, since Harry managed to insult the entire family and Palace staff.   Meghan's last minute trip to Texas?  Nobody would touch this one.  Harry's upcoming book release? Yeah, nobody is going to touch this one either, unless it's after the Jubilee celebrations and behind closed doors with Charles.
> 
> Maybe polo is safe.  There will be long and involved discussions of the weather, the weather in Montecito, the weather in London, comparisons to the weather at various times of the year, barometers, rainfall gauges, outdoor thermometers, Farmer's Almanac predictions for the coming winter, and favorite sunscreen brands.  After they've exhausted the weather, I guess they can ask about the children and let them prattle on about how both children are clearly geniuses and will save the world with Mum and Dad,_ if only the world will let them.  _


There is only one topic of polite conversation in the UK, the weather. Period.
MM better be boning up on the topic


----------



## csshopper

Enlarging the photo, the woman with the little boy looks like maybe she is wearing a uniform of some kind? I read somewhere they have a Norland College Nanny, like the Cambridges have had since George was born.

Noticed they are distinctly apart from the rest of what looks like a tight knit group, but maybe they just arrived?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Enlarging the photo, the woman with the little boy looks like maybe she is wearing a uniform of some kind? I read somewhere they have a Norland College Nanny, like the Cambridges have had since George was born.
> 
> Noticed they are distinctly apart from the rest of what looks like a tight knit group, but maybe they just arrived?



The Norland nanny uniform is an extremely unflattering, ugly-beige dress. But also, didn't Raptor specifically want a US nanny when Archie was born (for no good reason but to be anti and extra)?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Norland nanny uniform is an extremely unflattering, ugly-beige dress. But also, didn't Raptor specifically want a US nanny when Archie was born (for no good reason but to be anti and extra)?


Yes, I was surprised when a reference, which could be wrong, cited them having a Norland Nanny.


----------



## Chanbal

TW's compassion towards a father that she used to praise is amazing. She is only a couple of hours away from the hospital…


_The severe stroke was caused by a blood clot on the right side of Mr Markle’s brain.

He has been in a critical-care ward all week and has made what one doctor told him was ‘remarkable progress’.

While he is now able to speak a few words, he faces what he calls ‘an uphill battle’ to regain his power of speech.

‘I have lots of hard work to do and will do it,’ he wrote. ‘I want to get well. I’m so lucky to have had amazing care and love. Thank you everyone.’_


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> TW's compassion towards a father that she used to praise is amazing. She is only a couple of hours away from the hospital…
> 
> 
> _The severe stroke was caused by a blood clot on the right side of Mr Markle’s brain.
> 
> He has been in a critical-care ward all week and has made what one doctor told him was ‘remarkable progress’.
> 
> While he is now able to speak a few words, he faces what he calls ‘an uphill battle’ to regain his power of speech.
> 
> ‘I have lots of hard work to do and will do it,’ he wrote. ‘I want to get well. I’m so lucky to have had amazing care and love. Thank you everyone.’_


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting press release.  It sounds like a Mission Impossible, I wonder if Tom Cruise could help! 



_An insider said: “*Despite their estrangement, Meghan is concerned. She wants to know if there is any way to contact her father privately, without other family knowing about it* or having to get involved.”

“If she can contact their dad, she wants it to be totally private. It won’t involve Netflix, it won’t involve any photographs and it must not involve any tip-offs to the paparazzi._”


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Interesting press release.  It sounds like a Mission Impossible, I wonder if Tom Cruise could help!
> 
> 
> 
> _An insider said: “*Despite their estrangement, Meghan is concerned. She wants to know if there is any way to contact her father privately, without other family knowing about it* or having to get involved.”
> 
> “If she can contact their dad, she wants it to be totally private. It won’t involve Netflix, it won’t involve any photographs and it must not involve any tip-offs to the paparazzi._”



But someone was instructed to tell this to the world?  This is being duplicitous.  It is also an excuse not to speak to him because Sam and Tom, Jr. are going to be with him and will answer the phone or answer the text or email.  Bottom line is that she has framed this so it will look as if she wants to contact Tom, but can't.  Very clever.


----------



## Annawakes

Mustn’t involve tip offs to the paps?

here’s a tip……don’t tip them off


----------



## EverSoElusive

This could be TW(itch)'s jubilee outfit if she's trying to go green again


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Interesting press release.  It sounds like a Mission Impossible, I wonder if Tom Cruise could help!
> 
> 
> 
> Chanbal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting press release.  It sounds like a Mission Impossible, I wonder if Tom Cruise could help!
> 
> 
> 
> _An insider said: “*Despite their estrangement, Meghan is concerned. She wants to know if there is any way to contact her father privately, without other family knowing about it* or having to get involved.”
> 
> “If she can contact their dad, she wants it to be totally private. It won’t involve Netflix, it won’t involve any photographs and it must not involve any tip-offs to the paparazzi._”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This should give her paps plenty of time to scout the location and determine the best angle. Since he has impaired speech maybe she’ll just drop off a calligraphic note. Bonus, some wilted white roses to prop it up on.
> 
> Edited to add: And still not letting Hazbeen near him?
Click to expand...


----------



## pukasonqo

EverSoElusive said:


> This could be TW(itch)'s jubilee outfit if she's trying to go green again



Cristobal Balenciaga might be spinning in his grave, WTF is this? Green Lantern’s new uniform?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Alert: media hype










						Harry and William holding weekly FaceTime calls to heal rift ahead of Jubilee
					

The two brothers have reportedly been exchanging regular messages online, and been having face-to-face chats by themselves ahead of seeing each other at the Platinum Jubilee celebrations




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Already getting hard no’s.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> Already getting hard no’s.




_Godparents_ indicate a christening imo.  Nflix is disgusting.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alert: media hype
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and William holding weekly FaceTime calls to heal rift ahead of Jubilee
> 
> 
> The two brothers have reportedly been exchanging regular messages online, and been having face-to-face chats by themselves ahead of seeing each other at the Platinum Jubilee celebrations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Whoever wrote this piece of whatever chose the right pictures. Like Will, I'm  by so much crap.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## mellibelly

Neil Sean says since Madame Tussaud’s put the Hazbeen & Neverwas waxworks back in the royal enclosure for the Jubilee, guests have been “slapping” her and filming it with their phones!  I need to see one of those videos!!! Worth the price of admission to do that hahaha. Maybe bring a magnifying glass and look for his balls in another video?!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>




Still hoping/ wishing/ expecting  H&M to stay home.


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> Remember during the Invictus fly-by trip where she had to stay in another room with footmen watching her? I hope it's this way the entire trip
> 
> But we must not forget that it's been said they won't tolerate any mean spirited treatments, eye rolls, snide put-downs etc. and they would pack up and leave if those things happen while they are there for the Jubilee.



The staying in another room is just a rumour we will never know Harry said they both saw the Queen together  we will never know the truth but I think it unlikely she would be treated like that - the Royals are all on eggshells after all the revelations of duchess dipshit so far they wouldn’t give her more ammo


----------



## elvisfan4life

mellibelly said:


> Neil Sean says since Madame Tussaud’s put the Hazbeen & Neverwas waxworks back in the royal enclosure for the Jubilee, guests have been “slapping” her and filming it with their phones!  I need to see one of those videos!!! Worth the price of admission to do that hahaha. Maybe bring a magnifying glass and look for his balls in another video?!



What balls ? Good luck with finding what never existed


----------



## Luvbolide

A1aGypsy said:


> I understand their NF show is supposed to be about their charity work. They haven’t seemed to have done much lately (Invictus aside). So I wonder if this was a desperate and poorly calculated attempt at obtaining footage to fill out the documentary.
> 
> I’ve given them a long leash but this is truly beyond the pale.




I didn’t know about a supposed Netflix show about charity (cough, cough).  I thought that they are planning a documentary about Invictus and a show where a camera crew follows them around for more of a day-in-the-life type thing.  I was under the impression that Netflix pretty much read them the riot act.  They have been talking about the same 3 concepts for 2 or 3 years now.  Didn’t Netflix directly hire people to write and produce Pearl since no material was forthcoming?  If I was Ginge and Cringe I would have taken that as a giant hint that the end was near.  

Though I may have made that up in my mind - wishful thinking!  At the rate Netflix stock is cratering, there may be no project of any sort from them…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“If she can contact their dad, she wants it to be totally private. It won’t involve Netflix, it won’t involve any photographs and it must not involve any tip-offs to the paparazzi._”



That's why we're reading about it beforehand, hu?


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Still hoping/ wishing/ expecting  H&M to stay home*.
> View attachment 5414198



THIS 1000%!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

When are they supposed to arrive? 

Admittedly, I could deal with Harry (the blood is thicker than water thing plus as soon as he's with the others he'll go into royal mode and dust off his manners) but absolutely not with her. She does not deserve to be there, and I find it especially sad that we're all rooting for no pics with The Queen and the kids because of their sh*tty mother who'll use it to feed her already overgrown ego.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's why we're reading about it beforehand, hu?


I don't understand your question @QueenofWrapDress! It's rather obvious that such a meeting is in line with the duchess's charitable mission that she so kindly shares with us via PR releases.

The problem is that some people on Twitter, DM… want receipts…


----------



## Annawakes

Those guys in that meme….they look like they’ve had enough of that lady


----------



## Sophisticatted

I can believe the part about the FaceTime chats with Will.  It seems like the family has been gently working on Harry.  Visits from Eugenie, invitation to drop by when he’s “in the neighborhood”, visit from close childhood friend (who’s also close with Will).  

TW feels threatened.  It shows in al her press releases.  It seems as f we may be at a turning point.

Also, I don’t think NetFlix is really going to make a show about charity.  I think they are going to make a show about hypocrisy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> I can believe the part about the FaceTime chats with Will.



The part that got me is "William acknowledges she's a great mother and loyal wife." Girlfriend is loyal to exactly one person, herself. And that mother thing? Narcissists don't make great parents to begin with, and the few times we've seen her interact with Archie she was clumsy (as if she didn't handle him that often) and he was looking for Harry (remember that awful "Duck, Rabbit" video?).



> It seems like the family has been gently working on Harry.  Visits from Eugenie, invitation to drop by when he’s “in the neighborhood”, visit from close childhood friend (who’s also close with Will).



Close with Will and probably not too fond of her.



> TW feels threatened.  It shows in al her press releases.  It seems as f we may be at a turning point.



One can hope!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Here are a few pearls on the alleged visit to Texas and alleged upcoming memoir circulating on twitter today.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I feel physically repulsed reading that tweet by festivelady. I've maybe mentioned it before, in my area's dialect we say "I feel a cold sore coming on" when we're really, really disgusted. In my case, it could be full-on shingles instead of a dainty little lip blister.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The part that got me is "William acknowledges she's a great mother and loyal wife."



This is how we know it is her PR posting that nonsense.  DM says she wants to visit her dad. Um, ok. Do it. Take Hazz with ya. Take your kids, too.  Then, return to Cali and leave the Queen alone.


----------



## Chanbal

A great article by Tom Bower!    What a mess!


_*To show his illness was genuine, Thomas gave me his hospital records to prove why he could not fly to London for the wedding. *But he also talked about his fury neither Harry nor Meghan asked about his health. “*They didn’t seem to care,” he told me*…

Until her first marriage, to Trevor Engelson, a Hollywood film producer, Meghan repeatedly acknowledged Thomas’ financial and personal sacrifice to give her a secure home and pay for her good education.

That generosity was particularly pertinent because Meghan’s mother, Doria, was largely absent from Meghan’s life during her school years.

Meghan’s love for Thomas was recorded in endless letters and even Valentine’s cards she sent to her father.

Her bombardment of appreciation continued even during her 20s, as she struggled to become a Hollywood film star.

After each unsuccessful audition, Thomas consoled his daughter that rejection was not terrible, but part of the process. “I gave her money for her car,” he recalled, “I built a dark room for her because she wanted to do photography, and I gave money for her first wedding.”

Their relationship began to suffer after Meghan moved to Toronto in 2011 to star in TV drama Suits. Over the years, they spoke at most once a week, but met rarely.

Seven years later, after Meghan met Harry, Thomas no longer enjoyed the same close relationship with Meghan. Not surprisingly, his 34-year-old daughter was focused on her own life. *But perhaps no one in Britain understood the real Meghan*…

*The Sussexes and Palace officials are now engaged in frustrating negotiations. The Sussexes are likely demanding special treatment and prominent positions during all the events — separated from the rest of the VIPs.

They are also likely to demand the Queen’s introduction to her great-grandchildren should be filmed — no doubt exclusively by Netflix*.

*The American network CBS secured an exclusive three years ago when Meghan introduced baby Archie to the Queen. *After Meghan’s interview on CBS’ Oprah Winfrey show, I doubt the Palace will agree to a Netflix exclusive.

So far, the Sussexes have been told they can attend the service of Thanksgiving in St Paul’s cathedral. Just where they will sit has not been revealed.

With trepidation, we can only wait for more battlefield reports about the Royal Family feud. In the meantime, the Markle family’s warfare remains unresolved.

Recovering in hospital, Thomas Markle has been dealt a cruel blow. Ever since Meghan married Harry, the friendly grandfather has felt humiliated by his daughter.

*Now, breathing oxygen through a tube, Thomas undoubtedly lives in the hope that “Bean” will walk through the hospital door.

He dreams that before she flies to London, Meghan will suddenly appear, hold his hand, mop his brow and, while shedding a tear, whisper “I love you”*.

Hollywood has a tradition of producing happy endings. But sadly, the Meghan Markle biopic is unlikely to end on a positive note.

Instead of driving south to her father’s bedside, Meghan flew on Thursday on a private jet to Texas.

She lay a bunch of white roses at a shrine for slaughtered schoolchildren in Uvalde. Among the throng of TV cameras, some will suspect, was a Netflix crew…_










						Isolated Thomas Markle is fighting for life after being ghosted by Meghan
					

JUST one week ago I spoke to Thomas Markle, now fighting for his life in a California hospital. “I’ve just fallen,” he told me, from a pavement in Rosarito, his Mexican home. “Thankfully, some good…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I feel physically repulsed reading that tweet by festivelady*. I've maybe mentioned it before, in my area's dialect we say "I feel a cold sore coming on" when we're really, really disgusted. In my case, it could be full-on shingles instead of a dainty little lip blister.


You are not alone. I need a break!


----------



## EverSoElusive

elvisfan4life said:


> The staying in another room is just a rumour we will never know Harry said they both saw the Queen together  we will never know the truth but I think it unlikely she would be treated like that - the Royals are all on eggshells after all the revelations of duchess dipshit so far they wouldn’t give her more ammo



You are right, it could have been a rumor, nothing more. On the other hand, I personally feel that it could have actually happened because:

1) The Queen is the Queen, she could easily choose not to meet a person (and nothing can force her) with any number of plausible reasons.

2) Duchess FREEtos will leak false negative relevations or go out and lie on national TV again even if she was treated right by the BRF. 

While I'm sure that the BRF is more careful after the lies-filled O interview, I think they aren't exactly spending too much time worrying about what Nutmeg would do or say. The BRF has been focusing on their official royal duties with very little time to spare, and they live very privately with their respective families. 

Additionally, by not dignifying their deranged (barely a) family member, they know that will drive her insane and push her to leak implausible stories, which will make her lose what little credibility that she may have left and for the world to see her true colors. As it is, most people who were rooting for her at the beginning have switched to disliking her and are turned off by her actions. Nutmeg destroyed herself 

And here's my psycho smile for having such mean thoughts about St. FREEtos, patron saint of fake news:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Their relationship began to suffer after Meghan moved to Toronto in 2011 to star in TV drama Suits. Over the years, they spoke at most once a week, but met rarely._



Isn't it interesting...her landing Suits and moving to Toronto was exactly the moment her marriage quickly deteriorated too. Evil tongues might say she thought she'd made it and didn't need Thomas and Trevor anymore.

_*



			The American network CBS secured an exclusive three years ago when Meghan introduced baby Archie to the Queen.
		
Click to expand...

*



			After Meghan’s interview on CBS’ Oprah Winfrey show, I doubt the Palace will agree to a Netflix exclusive.
		
Click to expand...

_
Wait...didn't they do a short interview with Raptor and Harry only? I can't recall video footage with The Queen and Philip, just pictures.


----------



## Icyjade

Sophisticatted said:


> Also, I don’t think NetFlix is really going to make a show about charity. I think they are going to make a show about hypocrisy.



That could actually make the show a hit. Showing what horrid people the two are and what goes on behind the scenes of all that fakery. Who wants to watch the two of them pretend to be saints? Expose them for what they are and lots more will tune in I’m sure.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Icyjade said:


> That could actually make the show a hit. Showing what horrid people the two are and what goes on behind the scenes of all that fakery. Who wants to watch the two of them pretend to be saints? Expose them for what they are and lots more will tune in I’m sure.



I would rather chew my own hand off the an watch either of this two -starve them of attention and they will slink away


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone needed to spell it out.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> There is only one topic of polite conversation in the UK, the weather. Period.
> MM better be boning up on the topic


with all her success networking, I think she would know how to make polite conversation


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also the burn to Scobie  "Maybe try journalism school."


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> with all her success networking, I think she would know how to make polite conversation



She specialized in networking for the purpose of bagging a rich man


----------



## marietouchet

I so hope the Jubilee will be lovely and carefree


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> She specialized in networking for the purpose of bagging a rich man


she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams I think

Oh - I forgot - she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams I think
> 
> Oh - I forgot - she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince



You don't believe her? This is the goodhearted woman who - when supposedly being set up with him - only had one question: "Is. He. Kind?"

It was probably code for "How much is his net worth", but what do I know.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You don't believe her? This is the goodhearted women who - when supposedly being set up with him - only had one question: "Is. He. Kind?"
> 
> It was probably code for "How much is his net worth", but what do I know.


That is HILARIOUS
really, when you think about it, it was some bizarre twist of fate that he decided to marry her rather than doing what his grandfather would have advised


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear,  this ‘gathering’ will indeed detract from QE’s celebration.  Actually, it already is.  


_The date is set, the flights would be booked and right now, I’m guessing, there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars of designer clothes strewn across a vast, off-white bedroom full of Diptyque candles waiting to be packed.

It all can only mean one thing: The Sussexes are coming. 

The countdown is now on for Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex,to fly out of the US to head to London for their first proper visit since 2020 when they chucked over royal life to try to copy the Obamas’ payday playbook.



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-harry-and-the-queen-due-to-reunite-for-dysfunctional-jubilee/news-story/1a24b8b3f9c678a7324dd02331f87d76
		

_


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> That is HILARIOUS
> really, when you think about it, it was some bizarre twist of fate that he decided to marry her rather than doing what his grandfather would have advised




I think when Nutmeg came along and made Harry felt "seen" and "understood", Harry was already desperate to find a wife because he wanted what William has i.e. a good wife and beautiful kids. He could have gone slow but he just had to hit the gas and accelerate. The more he was advised, the more stubborn he got and did the opposite.


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear,  this ‘gathering’ will indeed detract from QE’s celebration.  Actually, it already is.
> 
> 
> _The date is set, the flights would be booked and right now, I’m guessing, there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars of designer clothes strewn across a vast, off-white bedroom full of Diptyque candles waiting to be packed.
> 
> It all can only mean one thing: The Sussexes are coming.
> 
> The countdown is now on for Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex,to fly out of the US to head to London for their first proper visit since 2020 when they chucked over royal life to try to copy the Obamas’ payday playbook.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-harry-and-the-queen-due-to-reunite-for-dysfunctional-jubilee/news-story/1a24b8b3f9c678a7324dd02331f87d76
> 
> 
> _


Sorry, when I read the “Sussexes are coming” this jumped to mind


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I think when Nutmeg came along and made Harry felt "seen" and "understood", Harry was already desperate to find a wife because he wanted what William has i.e. a good wife and beautiful kids. He could have gone slow but he just had to hit the gas and accelerate. The more he was advised, the more stubborn he got and did the opposite.


yes, I think her timing was right.
Had Harry been able to get some prior GF to marry him, he wouldn't have been available
It's pretty amazing the way the whole thing came down.  The RF accepting a thrice married bi-racial American actress and giving them the huge wedding.
Then them basically spitting in the faces of the RF and calling them racists.  Truth is stranger than fiction.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> yes, I think her timing was right.
> Had Harry been able to get some prior GF to marry him, he wouldn't have been available
> It's pretty amazing the way the whole thing came down.  The RF accepting a thrice married bi-racial American actress and giving them the huge wedding.
> Then them basically spitting in the faces of the RF and calling them racists.  Truth is stranger than fiction.



As some people would say, "you cannot make this up". 

If Harry had worked on himself and learned to love himself (not in a narcissistic way), he would probably be mentally healthy enough to secure a woman (or man, if he swings that way) and have a normal love relationship that could lead to a family of his own, like William's. 

Harry probably started feeling isolated and lonely once William has his own family to tend to, leaving very little bonding time for the brothers. After all, they were probably each other's #1 shoulder to cry on after losing their mom.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> As some people would say, "you cannot make this up".
> 
> If Harry had worked on himself and learned to love himself (not in a narcissistic way), he would probably be mentally healthy enough to secure a woman (or man, if he swings that way) and have a normal love relationship that could lead to a family of his own, like William's.
> 
> Harry probably started feeling isolated and lonely once William has his own family to tend to, leaving very little bonding time for the brothers. After all, they were probably each other's #1 shoulder to cry on after losing their mom.


yes, and since he was younger when Diana died, and is a different person from his brother, maybe he was more affected by her death - his emotional growth stunted
Anyway, she's got him and it's a mess


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean has a segment on why Haz did not accompany her. *Neil believes Harry’s upbringing as a Royal helped him to understand this was not an acceptable thing to do*. In another segment NS calls her out and says if’s her worst PR blunder ever.
> 
> Wonder if hot on the heels of the Polo debacle if Harry might be starting to have the tiniest inkling he has a problem on his hands?  Might he be more vigilant to keep her in check during the Jubilee, or is he so completely controlled by her he has no impact? Based on this latest PR stunt, I think he’s a lost cause.
> 
> Neil said  he confirmed with sources at Netflix they did not have cameras there to film her. If she hired her own with intent to sell the pictures that’s even more despicable.


You don't have to be raised Royal to understand what is decency and what is not.  I'm supposing most of us here are not royal, yet we are outraged by her actions.  She is devoid of any human decency.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> You don't have to be raised Royal to understand what is decency and what is not.  I'm supposing most of us here are not royal, yet we are outraged by her actions.  She is devoid of any human decency.


I would not assume she's lost or loosened her grip on him yet


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> yes, and since he was younger when Diana died, and is a different person from his brother, maybe he was more affected by her death - his emotional growth stunted
> Anyway, she's got him and it's a mess



Harry and FREEtos are both nutty in the head. They pretty much deserve each other. Harry is going to need a lot of mental health help if he ever leaves her. I cannot imagine how f"cked up the Invisikids are going to be growing up in this household. Someone needs to call CPS to do a welfare check


----------



## sdkitty

now they're saying William and Harry are buddies again

OK









						Prince William and Prince Harry “Are Very Much Back on Their Old Buddy Terms” Ahead of Platinum Jubilee
					

Thank you, WhatsApp and FaceTime, for facilitating this healing!




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, I smell something, too


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> with all her success networking, I think she would know how to make polite conversation


Well, I can’t imagine that some of the people she “networked” with (e.g., Jessica Mulroney) are the brightest bulbs in the world (they seem to be w/in the same “genre” of personality) .. and with the men?!?! .. I think she was likely the *~Peanut Butter~* type!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.



Well, it's like someone commented on Twitter, she had to look Latino this week.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Marry in haste, repent in leisure 


EverSoElusive said:


> I think when Nutmeg came along and made Harry felt "seen" and "understood", Harry was already desperate to find a wife because he wanted what William has i.e. a good wife and beautiful kids. He could have gone slow but he just had to hit the gas and accelerate. The more he was advised, the more stubborn he got and did the opposite.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> now they're saying William and Harry are buddies again
> 
> OK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Prince Harry “Are Very Much Back on Their Old Buddy Terms” Ahead of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Thank you, WhatsApp and FaceTime, for facilitating this healing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com




William has been so busy with different engagements almost on a daily basis. They really think William has time to FaceTime Harry daily? That's really excessive. Even once a week is still questionable because Nutmeg herself wouldn't want Harry to be so close to his family to retain control over him.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Well, I can’t imagine that some of the people she “networked” with (e.g., Jessica Mulroney) are the brightest bulbs in the world (they seem to be w/in the same “genre” of personality) .. and with the men?!?! .. I think she was likely the *~Peanut Butter~* type!!!


Ha
I had to to look up peanut butter


----------



## Sharont2305

I wish Prince Philip was still around


----------



## MiniMabel

EverSoElusive said:


> This could be TW(itch)'s jubilee outfit if she's trying to go green again





WTH is this?   I'm totally lost for words that someone, anyone, would wear this monstrosity.  Was she paid to do so?  How does one go to the loo?  Agree with another's comment that Balenciaga must be spinning in his grave.......this outfit is beyond abysmal and is surely a joke on the gullible "fashion" industry and so-called "celebrities".  Meanwhile, the rest of us are guffawing in incredulity!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Harry and FREEtos are both nutty in the head. They pretty much deserve each other. Harry is going to need a lot of mental health help if he ever leaves her. I cannot imagine how f"cked up the Invisikids are going to be growing up in this household. Someone needs to call CPS to do a welfare check



I really think the kids would be much better off if the BRF raised them. At worst, they'd be with emotionally stable nannies most of the time, but also, there's a bunch of cousins the same age and it looks like the Cambridges, Tindalls and Bea are doing a great job as parents and would probably embrace the lost children.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> now they're saying William and Harry are buddies again
> 
> OK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Prince Harry “Are Very Much Back on Their Old Buddy Terms” Ahead of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Thank you, WhatsApp and FaceTime, for facilitating this healing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



Someone really wants us to think they still have royal connections, no?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Well, it's like someone commented on Twitter, she had to look Latino this week.



I don't know about the  Latino thing (mainly because my simple brain just cannot compute how this would, uh, help her cause?), but I read the Sun article about abandoned Thomas and found it curious they had the spray tan Texas pic next to a picture of TM and teenaged Raptor and they were basically the same - rather fair - skin tone.

ETA: I worded that weirdly, Thomas and Raptor were the same shade, not spray tanned Raptor and teenaged Raptor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Ha
> I had to to look up peanut butter



What is it? I'm afraid what I'll find out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I wish Prince Philip was still around



When I was still in denial about his declining health I was so hoping he could be there for The Queen's milestone


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When I was still in denial about his declining health I was so hoping he could be there for The Queen's milestone


I think he'd have a few things to say about all this.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is it? I'm afraid what I'll find out


Had to look it up too.  When in doubt, just go to the Urban Dictionary.  lol!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really think the kids would be much better off if the BRF raised them. At worst, they'd be with emotionally stable nannies most of the time, but also, there's a bunch of cousins the same age and it looks like the Cambridges, Tindalls and Bea are doing a great job as parents and would probably embrace the lost children.




Per my comment from yesterday or the day before yesterday, I think the only way Nutmeg would let the kids go with Harry is by selling them at a high price to him.

No doubt the kids would be better off being raised by the BRF but Nutmeg would probably tell the world that's not ideal because the Brits have stiff upper lips and it's bad for the kids' mental health. Then cue the violin music, reminding us that no one asked if she's ok.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> Per my comment from yesterday or the day before yesterday, I think the only way Nutmeg would let the kids go with Harry is by selling them at a high price to him.
> 
> No doubt the kids would be better off being raised by the BRF but Nutmeg would probably tell the world that's not ideal because the Brits have stiff upper lips and it's bad for the kids' mental health. Then cue the violin music, reminding us that no one asked if she's ok.


The only reason why she wouldn't sell as they chain Harry to her and that can't be cut until the kids are 18.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is it? I'm afraid what I'll find out


I'd like to know too, please


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> The date is set, the flights would be booked and right now, *I’m guessing, there are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of dollars of designer clothes strewn across a vast, off-white bedroom* full of Diptyque candles waiting to be packed.



And none of them will fit.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> The only reason why she wouldn't sell as they chain Harry to her and that can't be cut until the kids are 18.



Yeap, anchor babies


----------



## redney

Toby93 said:


> I'd like to know too, please


The definition is likely against forum rules to post. NSFW. Suggest you visit Urban Dictionary.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is it? I'm afraid what I'll find out


Peanut butter “spreads easily” (her pin legs)!!!!!


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> She specialized in networking for the purpose of bagging *banging* a rich man


SORRY changed your statement to what I read (urban dictionary def) and cleared my blurry eyes to read it correctly.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> SORRY changed your statement to what I read (urban dictionary def) and cleared my blurry eyes to read it correctly.



She banged and bagged


----------



## redney

CeeJay said:


> Peanut butter “spreads easily” (her pin legs)!!!!!


Didn't think of it this way since Urban dictionary has a different definition...


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> She banged and bagged


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It wasn't the worst incident on that list, but I still think the rummaging through Harry's trunk and being told off by his security was the most bizarre one.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> I agree. I can think of 2 possible scenarios of he did:
> 
> 1) Nutmeg will try to withhold the kids completely from Harry. There would be a drawn out custody battle.
> 2) Knowing how money hungry Nutmeg is, she would probably try to sell the kids to their own dad at a crazy high price, if the BRF wants her out of Harry and the kids' lives.


If I were HM, I'd insist on DNA tests by my chosen experts before forking out any money and this makes me wonder if their refusal to bring the children to England is from fear that the BRF will find a way to have them secretly tested and that the DNA may not match one or both parents. Now, that would be interesting and entertaining.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> If I were HM, I'd insist on DNA tests by my chosen experts before forking out any money and this makes me wonder if their refusal to bring the children to England is from fear that the BRF will find a way to have them secretly tested and that the DNA may not match one or both parents. Now, that would be interesting and entertaining.



Archie looks very much like FREEtos so he's definitely her kid. Now Invisibet is a whole different story. Can't say we ever really had a good look at her


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Alas, no sane person would find Harry attractive or want to deal with him


I think his money and his status could’ve attracted somebody but i think the problem was they kept trying to pair him off with the ‘fixer’/nurse type and he wants to wallow in being ‘tortured’ and ‘misunderstood’ and M can certainly help with that. Once she’s done with him I dare say he may well find ‘nurse’ more appealing.  I suspect many of the sensible, sympathetic and medically-skilled golddiggers of the world are already staking out Johnny depp and elon musk’s homes though   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please, can someone be mean to them before they board the flight?


All we need is an attractive air hostess and we could have another Kelsey Grammar on RHOBH arch ahead of us…. Can you imagine? 


EverSoElusive said:


> Netflix probably wants palace footages but that's almost impossible. We'll see how these ingrates produce such footages. The Palace should sweep for bugs!


At this point I don’t get  what footage would be worth all this money and trouble.  Especially in secret camera in my shoe quality. 


EverSoElusive said:


> This could be TW(itch)'s jubilee outfit if she's trying to go green again



Heaven forfend she rip off ANOTHER  Kim Kardashian look


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Over on the Johnny Depp thread someone mentioned a Youtuber "diagnosed" Amber with being possessed or something by the Jezebel spirit and how to spot it in people, and being the curious person that I am I just had to google. Let's just say...sounds a lot like a good old friend of ours. 

A few tidbits: 

1. cunning, crafty, deceptive, manipulative and destructive

2. uses seduction and sexual persuasion to get what they want out of people

3. modus operandi is to tear apart relationships, families, entire entities (like...a monarchy?)

4. operates in subtle and sinnister ways

5. don't do the dirty work themselves but connive with others to get it done (like, having your own propaganda minister, an army of Russian bots and stans who harrass critical voices?)

6. like to cause division (sounds familiar?)

7. tendency to wanting to orchestrate and control everything (dito)


----------



## CeeJay

redney said:


> Didn't think of it this way since Urban dictionary has a different definition...


Hmmmm - well, I guess I’ll have to look at there definition, but I’ve known this one for about 30 years!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Over on the Johnny Depp thread someone mentioned a Youtuber "diagnosed" Amber with being possessed or something by the Jezebel spirit and how to spot it in people, and being the curious person that I am I just had to google. Let's just say...sounds a lot like a good old friend of ours.
> 
> A few tidbits:
> 
> 1. cunning, crafty, deceptive, manipulative and destructive
> 
> 2. uses seduction and sexual persuasion to get what they want out of people
> 
> 3. modus operandi is to tear apart relationships, families, entire entities (like...a monarchy?)
> 
> 4. operates in subtle and sinnister ways
> 
> 5. don't do the dirty work themselves but connive with others to get it done (like, having your own propaganda minister, an army of Russian bots and stans who harrass critical voices?)
> 
> 6. like to cause division (sounds familiar?)
> 
> 7. tendency to wanting to orchestrate and control everything (dito)


This is SPOT ON!!!!!


----------



## Aimee3

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm - well, I guess I’ll have to look at there definition, but I’ve known this one for about 30 years!!!


I can never look at peanut butter again the same innocent way I used to!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5414582


And there was also the one where Doofus and TW showed up uninvited, refused to leave and had to be stopped by courtiers when HM, C&C and W&K were viewing the Prince of Wales regalia during the 50th anniversary celebration of the Prince of Wales investiture.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> And there was also the one where Doofus and TW showed up uninvited, refused to leave and had to be stopped by courtiers when HM, C&C and W&K were viewing the Prince of Wales regalia during the 50th anniversary celebration of the Prince of Wales investiture.




How does one just crash such an event? Did TW(itch) woke up on that day, turned to Harry and just said, "You're Prince of Wales' other son and you deserve to be part of the event so we're going to get dressed and show up. They won't be able to stop us with cameras all around."?


----------



## Chanbal

Harry & Meghan renew lease on Frogmore Cottage ahead of Platinum Jubilee
					

HARRY and Meghan have made a surprise bid to return to the middle of Windsor life — by renewing their lease on Frogmore Cottage. The unexpected move will ensure a royal backdrop plus material on ta…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

> How does one just crash such an event? Did TW(itch) woke up on that day, turned to Harry and just said, "You're Prince of Wales' other son and you deserve to be part of the event so we're going to get dressed and show up. They won't be able to stop us with cameras all around."?



I believe they were supposed to wait with the other guests in the reception room, but it appears they wanted to make a grand entrance with the working royals because doncha know they are so much more important. 

50th Anniversary

ETA quote from @EverSoElusive


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5414784
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan renew lease on Frogmore Cottage ahead of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan have made a surprise bid to return to the middle of Windsor life — by renewing their lease on Frogmore Cottage. The unexpected move will ensure a royal backdrop plus material on ta…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Come on. For them to "renew" a lease, somebody had to offer the extension to them.  So who?  I don't believe it. And even if they DID come back, who would shield them from all the rotten tomatoes thrown at them? Besides, M&H want to be INDEPENDENT.  So why even offer the extension?  And if they ARE leasing, what money are they paying the lease with?


----------



## csshopper

This story doesn’t add up. Plus it displaces the cousin in his camp, Eugenie.


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan and Harry's UK popularity hits the floor - new poll
					

MEGHAN Markle's popularity in the UK stands at just 16 percent with her husband, Prince Harry, only seen positively by a third of people in the UK, new polling for Express.co.uk has revealed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, TW finally got her much desired security in the UK!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why isn’t Eugenie ready for her own place? I would hate to be displaced.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5414803
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's UK popularity hits the floor - new poll
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle's popularity in the UK stands at just 16 percent with her husband, Prince Harry, only seen positively by a third of people in the UK, new polling for Express.co.uk has revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




In a minute Scoobie Doo is going to tweet something to the effect of FREEtos being the most liked "royal"


----------



## needlv

Sadness or a feeling that inevitably she will pull stunts to make it all about her.  She must be on such a narc high knowing she will get all the attention wherever she goes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CeeJay said:


> Hmmmm - well, I guess I’ll have to look at there definition, but I’ve known this one for about 30 years!!!


Yeah that’s what I heard. I’ve also heard it used of fake tan- sometimes it’s smooth and sometimes it’s CRUNCHY and that’s pretty relevant for M too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

Leave it to Megain to beat the US President to the punch of paying respects at Uvalde. His staff knew better than to swoop in when the families needed some time to process their shattered lives.

With her entire team of professionals, you would think SOMEONE would have said, “hey, maybe it might not be the best idea” - but we all know TW - she’s full of the greatest ideas. Maybe that’s why everyone loves her so darn much.


----------



## redney

needlv said:


> Sadness or a feeling that inevitably she will pull stunts to make it all about her.  She must be on such a narc high knowing she will get all the attention wherever she goes.



KP could simply tell the dastardly duo they are no longer invited to the Jubilee festivities.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> How does one just crash such an event? Did TW(itch) woke up on that day, turned to Harry and just said, "You're Prince of Wales' other son and you deserve to be part of the event so we're going to get dressed and show up. They won't be able to stop us with cameras all around."?



Right? I have difficulties to figure out what goes on in their troubled minds.

Oh, and look how it worked out for them: stopped they were, both from entering the room and walking past The Queen. They even had to enter the church late because staff didn't let them walk in with The Queen, Charles and Camilla and the Cambridges.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5414784
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan renew lease on Frogmore Cottage ahead of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan have made a surprise bid to return to the middle of Windsor life — by renewing their lease on Frogmore Cottage. The unexpected move will ensure a royal backdrop plus material on ta…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Hu? Didn't they supposedly renew it earlier so Harry could still be a CoS?


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Come on. For them to "renew" a lease, somebody had to offer the extension to them.  So who?  I don't believe it. And even if they DID come back, who would shield them from all the rotten tomatoes thrown at them? Besides, M&H want to be INDEPENDENT.  So why even offer the extension?  And if they ARE leasing, what money are they paying the lease with?



Spot on.  Since they are Nflix ho’s, they now have $$$.




lanasyogamama said:


> Why isn’t Eugenie ready for her own place? I would hate to be displaced.



$$$.  She propably prefers a place she doesn’t really pay for.  Truly Andy’s daughter.




needlv said:


> Sadness or a feeling that inevitably she will pull stunts to make it all about her.  She must be on such a narc high knowing she will get all the attention wherever she goes.




QE brought this on herself imo. These ‘outer’ royals really have no reason to behave. They will still keep their titles, be included in all the invites, stay in all the wills, stay in LoS and CoS [hazz].  Maybe when Charles takes over, things will change.  Just my opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> It would be an all time low but do you think Dipshit will christen Lilibet at Windsor over the weekend? - Sat is her first birthday and Dipshit could then hold a party fit for a Princess ( which she isnt ) just  to upstage the Queens 70th????
> 
> Sadly nothing would shock me about her anymore - if she does she must have had assistance from Andrew’s mob to set it up - Fergie Beatrice Eugenie etc as all would be keen to help her and get their own revenge for the Firm not treating them the way they want to be treated  - The second in lines always want the throne it seems- now in the good old days that would be treason - get the Tower ready !!!



Yes, they will.  This is exactly what the Nflix bosses wanted.


----------



## redney

TW could *plan* a christening in direct competition with Jubilee events, but who from BRF would change their attendance at planned Jubilee events to attend the christening? Certainly not HM, C&C, W&K, Edward & Sophie, Beatrice. Maybe Eugenie? Fergie? She's a joke. 

The most senior and working royals certainly would not 'blow off' their Jubilee appearances to appear at a hastily planned christening designed solely to interfere with the Jubilee!


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> TW could *plan* a christening in direct competition with Jubilee events, but who from BRF would change their attendance at planned Jubilee events to attend the christening? Certainly not HM, C&C, W&K, Edward & Sophie, Beatrice. Maybe Eugenie? Fergie? She's a joke.
> 
> The most senior and working royals certainly would not 'blow off' their Jubilee appearances to appear at a hastily planned christening designed solely to interfere with the Jubilee!



Gotta give credit where it is due - QE and her 12 million can handle 2 Cali clowns.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More photos -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-victims-polo-returning-Platinum-Jubilee.html


----------



## pukasonqo

Meghan Markle 'trying to heal four-year rift' with father
					

The Duchess of Sussex , 40, reached out to Thomas Markle's camp, but it is understood that Meghan is concerned about involving her half-siblings Thomas Jr, 55, and Samantha, 57.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

As if.


----------



## Annawakes

Could she be so cold hearted that she used her own father to get to where she wanted…and then markled him?

I always thought she did truly love her dad while growing up, but was too ashamed of him (and he didn’t fit her Poor Me narrative), and that’s why she cut him out.

I wonder now if she never really loved him and it was all an act.  She love bombed her own father and then discarded him when she didn’t need him anymore.  Same with Trevor.

Things aren’t looking good for H.  Once she latches on to something or someone else better, he’s out.  Problem is, she is aging.  And people are seeing through her now.  That’s the only reason she would stay with H.  Because she can’t get anything better.


----------



## elvisfan4life

redney said:


> TW could *plan* a christening in direct competition with Jubilee events, but who from BRF would change their attendance at planned Jubilee events to attend the christening? Certainly not HM, C&C, W&K, Edward & Sophie, Beatrice. Maybe Eugenie? Fergie? She's a joke.
> 
> The most senior and working royals certainly would not 'blow off' their Jubilee appearances to appear at a hastily planned christening designed solely to interfere with the Jubilee!



The Queen has cleared her diary on Saturday


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> This could be TW(itch)'s jubilee outfit if she's trying to go green again




Hands-off IH please, my favourite actress. She works fo a living, actually can act, is a person in her own right and is a style icon


----------



## rose60610

If Lilibet gets christened, will Meghan say "the real" christening actually happened three days before? She might if she can't get a photo with the Queen to sell to the magazines.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You don't believe her? This is the goodhearted woman who - when supposedly being set up with him - only had one question: "Is. He. Kind?"
> 
> It was probably code for "How much is his net worth", but what do I know.



More likely she meant, is he stupid?


----------



## Jktgal

pukasonqo said:


> Meghan Markle 'trying to heal four-year rift' with father
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex , 40, reached out to Thomas Markle's camp, but it is understood that Meghan is concerned about involving her half-siblings Thomas Jr, 55, and Samantha, 57.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Interesting. Wonder who she got in touch with at the camp... the cook?


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> It would be an all time low but do you think Dipshit will christen Lilibet at Windsor over the weekend? - Sat is her first birthday and Dipshit could then hold a party fit for a Princess ( which she isnt ) just  to upstage the Queens 70th????
> 
> Sadly nothing would shock me about her anymore - if she does she must have had assistance from Andrew’s mob to set it up - Fergie Beatrice Eugenie etc as all would be keen to help her and get their own revenge for the Firm not treating them the way they want to be treated  - The second in lines always want the throne it seems- now in the good old days that would be treason - get the Tower ready !!!



No. Christenings don't happen like that. https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/christenings/christening-service-step-step


----------



## Chanbal

While I may be suspicious of his intentions, this seems suitable imo.


----------



## Chanbal

This is funny!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> Problem is, she is aging.  And people are seeing through her now.  That’s the only reason she would stay with H.  Because she can’t get anything better.



That's my fear, too. Because I truly believe he'd be better off back in the UK with his children but without the demon.


----------



## chaneljewel

Heard on the news this morning that H and M are now at the bottom of the poll for royalty popularity.   I cannot stand either and don’t care one bit about their pathetic, egotistical lives. I actually feel sorry for Lilibet.  It might be a cute nickname from a loved one but as an actual name, it’s awful. Both of these idiots didn’t consider the consequences of naming their daughter this name.  It was all about them and their position with QE.


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> No. Christenings don't happen like that. https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/christenings/christening-service-step-step



And I suggested she may have had people putting plans in place for some time so your point is ?


----------



## elvisfan4life

chaneljewel said:


> Heard on the news this morning that H and M are now at the bottom of the poll for royalty popularity.   I cannot stand either and don’t care one bit about their pathetic, egotistical lives. I actually feel sorry for Lilibet.  It might be a cute nickname from a loved one but as an actual name, it’s awful. Both of these idiots didn’t consider the consequences of naming their daughter this name.  It was all about them and their position with QE.



They disrespected the Queen by telling her they had used the name rather than asking her permission


----------



## elvisfan4life

chaneljewel said:


> Heard on the news this morning that H and M are now at the bottom of the poll for royalty popularity.   I cannot stand either and don’t care one bit about their pathetic, egotistical lives. I actually feel sorry for Lilibet.  It might be a cute nickname from a loved one but as an actual name, it’s awful. Both of these idiots didn’t consider the consequences of naming their daughter this name.  It was all about them and their position with QE.



They have been bottom for 2 years only Andrew is less popular and Fergie


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW has not reached out to TM, bur the video is interesting…


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Hands-off IH please, my favourite actress. She works fo a living, actually can act, is a person in her own right and is a style icon



I love IH aswell even though this outfit is a bit too much, lol!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

elvisfan4life said:


> They have been bottom for 2 years only Andrew is less popular and Fergie


You know it’s bad when the only thing between you and the bottom of the barrel is Andrew.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

LVSistinaMM said:


> Leave it to Megain to beat the US President to the punch of paying respects at Uvalde. His staff knew better than to swoop in when the families needed some time to process their shattered lives.
> 
> *With her entire team of professionals, you would think SOMEONE would have said, “hey, maybe it might not be the best idea” *- but we all know TW - she’s full of the greatest ideas. Maybe that’s why everyone loves her so darn much.



Replying to the bolded part  Either:

1) Someone from her team had told her it's a bad idea but she still went ahead because she thinks she knows better

OR

2) Because her team already knew she would act the above way so they didn't bother to even try


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> While I may be suspicious of his intentions, this seems suitable imo.




Thing is, we all know right now he is on his absolute best behavior, so I question his sincerity.  Of course, it could have been the club who insisted on it or other players.  Since he still has not met TM, I am not willing to give Hazz too much credit for doing anything on his own.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> And I suggested she may have had people putting plans in place for some time so your point is ?



I don't have a point besides a Royal christening is not usually arranged last minute in the middle of packed schedule for what is probably one of the largest and unprecedented Royal occasions in history. 

Had the occasion been arranged in good time I doubt the Queen's jockeys in the Queen's Colours would be promoting themselves in the national media. The reason the Queen will find it easier to miss the Derby this year is not because of a baby, but because her horses are not running in the Classic









						Epsom Derby 2022 runners and riders: full longlist of horses and trainers
					

Plus, how the Queen's hopes of a Platinum Jubilee Derby triumph were scuppered




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> I don't have a point besides a Royal christening is not usually arranged last minute in the middle of packed schedule for what is probably one of the largest and unprecedented Royal occasions in history.
> 
> Had the occasion been arranged in good time I doubt the Queen's jockeys in the Queen's Colours would be promoting themselves in the national media. The reason the Queen will find it easier to miss the Derby this year is not because of a baby, but because her horses are not running in the Classic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Epsom Derby 2022 runners and riders: full longlist of horses and trainers
> 
> 
> Plus, how the Queen's hopes of a Platinum Jubilee Derby triumph were scuppered
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk



It’s not a royal christening - it’s mad Meghan markle there is a huge difference


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> It’s not a royal christening - it’s mad Meghan markle there is a huge difference



She continues to use her ‘royal’ title. So, in many minds, it would indeed be a ‘royal’ christening. Not sure what the actual definitions are. In any case, it will be a distraction from the purpose of the jubilee.

According to DM, her hairdresser and others are already there. I guess they will attend.  So sad.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> This story doesn’t add up. Plus it displaces the cousin in his camp, Eugenie.


----------



## Debbini

elvisfan4life said:


> And I suggested she may have had people putting plans in place for some time so your point is ?


What bishop, archbishop, priest, clown.....would agree to christening that child the weekend of the Queen's Jubilee???


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5415090



Oooooh, it is one of the Discovery Land Company’s places. Interesting.

According to Express:
_The luxurious CostaTerra Golf and Ocean Club is the new home for the Princess and husband Jack Brooksbank, along with their one-year-old son August. 

The couple will reportedly be splitting their time between the UK and Portugal.








						Princess Eugenie and husband Jack move to Portugal as Sussexes renew cottage lease
					

PRINCESS EUGENIE has moved to an exclusive golf resort in Portugal with her family.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_





__





						CostaTerra | Discovery Land Company
					






					discoverylandco.com


----------



## Helventara

..


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5414784
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan renew lease on Frogmore Cottage ahead of Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan have made a surprise bid to return to the middle of Windsor life — by renewing their lease on Frogmore Cottage. The unexpected move will ensure a royal backdrop plus material on ta…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


this is from a tabloid though so take with a grain of salt?


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


>



“How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child!”
King Lear, Act 1, Scene 4


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> Leave it to Megain to beat the US President to the punch of paying respects at Uvalde. His staff knew better than to swoop in when the families needed some time to process their shattered lives.
> 
> With her entire team of professionals, you would think SOMEONE would have said, “hey, maybe it might not be the best idea” - but we all know TW - she’s full of the greatest ideas. Maybe that’s why everyone loves her so darn much.


she isn't the FL; she isn't a Texas representative; she has no roots there. there isn't anything she can do to help those people.  She had no business being there with her photographers.  shame!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> More likely she meant, is he stupid?


is he trainable?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> is he trainable?



Then whoever would have had to have replied "No!" 

Quod Erat Demonstrandum:


----------



## mellibelly

I live in LA was at a party yesterday and talking to several women. One has a hair dressing business and said she does TW’s hair and sometimes cuts Harry’s hair and I just about died. I said “Prince Harry??” and she confirmed. Honestly guys I couldn’t word all of the questions in my head fast enough where they wouldn’t be insulting her work! Like WTF is going on with TW’s ratty weave? How much hair is really left to cut on Handbag? No one else in the group seemed to care about the Harkles and they quickly changed the subject.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> I live in LA was at a party yesterday and talking to several women. One has a hair dressing business and said she does TW’s hair and sometimes cuts Harry’s hair and I just about died. I said “Prince Harry??” and she confirmed. Honestly guys I couldn’t word all of the questions in my head fast enough where they wouldn’t be insulting her work! Like WTF is going on with TW’s ratty weave? How much hair is really left to cut on Handbag? No one else in the group seemed to care about the Harkles and they quickly changed the subject.


sounds like you do find the person credible?
so what questions did you ask?  my first thought would be are they nice people? (insofar as the way they treat the hairdresser)


----------



## EverSoElusive

Debbini said:


> What bishop, archbishop, priest, clown.....would agree to christening that child the weekend of the Queen's Jubilee???




Maybe a clown would but she might just bring Rev. Michael Bruce Curry back and make it a OTT christening for Invisibet     

It's very unlikely that the Church of England would be entertaining an official christening on the same day or days leading up to the Jubilee celebration. And if that's the situation, that means FREEtos won't be able to parade down the people lined streets. Therefore she would just claim that they (again) did it in the backyard because they didn't need a spectacle for their very private family. 

I wonder which cute biracial child actress has been casted to play 1-year-old Invisibet  While I may dislike Invisibet's parents, I would really like to see the real baby with Archie and their cousins.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Debbini said:


> What bishop, archbishop, priest, clown.....would agree to christening that child the weekend of the Queen's Jubilee???



Well not the Archbishop of Canterbury he has covid


----------



## EverSoElusive

King WA at a local pub getting his own beer. While there's no visible security personnel in the picture, I'm sure there's at least a couple of them outside the shot. Still he's not surrounded by security while walking out of the pub. What a stark comparison to the Troublesome Duo, who constantly acts like they are being hounded and need close proximity security


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> sounds like you do find the person credible?
> so what questions did you ask?  my first thought would be are they nice people? (insofar as the way they treat the hairdresser)


Nah, ask if she is a big tipper lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> I live in LA was at a party yesterday and talking to several women. One has a hair dressing business and said she does TW’s hair and sometimes cuts Harry’s hair and I just about died. I said “Prince Harry??” and she confirmed. Honestly guys I couldn’t word all of the questions in my head fast enough where they wouldn’t be insulting her work! Like WTF is going on with TW’s ratty weave? How much hair is really left to cut on Handbag? No one else in the group seemed to care about the Harkles and they quickly changed the subject.


She probably would say Meg is nice and then shut down the conversation. TBH, she shouldn’t have told anyone if she ever expects to see them again.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Nah, ask if she is a big tipper lololol!



FREEtos probably feels like she shouldn't need to pay for her hair service nor tip because she would make a good reference/publicity and the stylist should be grateful to have her as a client. However, I certainly hope that she's paying AND tipping.


----------



## Lodpah

Read between the lines. They post headlines like these and then it’s “could’ “would”. I honestly think they’ve already managed to overshadow the Jubilee.









						Queen to Meet Lilibet for the First Time at Birthday Party
					

The queen will apparently meet her namesake Lilibet at her first birthday party this weekend in Windsor rather than attending one of her beloved horse races.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Read between the lines. They post headlines like these and then it’s “could’ “would”. I honestly think they’ve already managed to overshadow the Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen to Meet Lilibet for the First Time at Birthday Party
> 
> 
> The queen will apparently meet her namesake Lilibet at her first birthday party this weekend in Windsor rather than attending one of her beloved horse races.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Absolutely agree. They knew exactly what to do and have stolen limelight. The focus is on them with just a _little bit_ on QE. 
Sad, but true.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely agree. They knew exactly what to do and have stolen limelight. The focus is on them with just a _little bit_ on QE.
> Sad, but true.


They need drama


----------



## mellibelly

sdkitty said:


> sounds like you do find the person credible?
> so what questions did you ask?  my first thought would be are they nice people? (insofar as the way they treat the hairdresser)


Oh yes absolutely credible. I guarantee she wouldn’t have given up info anyways. My colorist and hairdresser work on celebrities and don’t say anything other than they are clients. 

The funny thing is no one gave a damn (just me haha) and quickly changed the subject. They are such Z listers here. Everyone is more interested in the Depp Heard trial. Personal stories about Heard are coming out of the woodwork


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting article, explains how the Palace is shaking in its boots -  this is  how H&M control QE and the Palace


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lavender marriage?


----------



## Chanbal

Good for Will! The further away he is from TW & Hazz, the merrier…










						Will and Kate to visit Cardiff as Harry and Meghan 'meet with Queen'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will meet performers and crew involved in a special Platinum Jubilee Celebration Concert taking place within the grounds of Cardiff Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely agree. They knew exactly what to do and have stolen limelight. The focus is on them with just a _little bit_ on QE.
> Sad, but true.


Kinda have to blame the media too. I guess the two have so much money to pay their PR. I hope the British media tamps down coverage on them and focus on the Jubilee.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lavender marriage?



Man, that’s a genuine smile, unlike his angry look when he’s with his wench.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lavender marriage?



Well I had to look that one up as it’s not a term I ever heard before but there’s literally  red hearts bursting out of Harry in this photo!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Good for Will! The further he is from TW & Hazz, the merrier…
> View attachment 5415314
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will and Kate to visit Cardiff as Harry and Meghan 'meet with Queen'
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will meet performers and crew involved in a special Platinum Jubilee Celebration Concert taking place within the grounds of Cardiff Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




So the Queen allegedly will be meeting Invisibet but why do they make it sound as though the Queen gave up on attending the derby especially to meet Invisibet and her uncouth parents? I thought she's not attending because her horses aren't competing.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Read between the lines. They post headlines like these and then it’s “could’ “would”. I honestly think they’ve already managed to overshadow the Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen to Meet Lilibet for the First Time at Birthday Party
> 
> 
> The queen will apparently meet her namesake Lilibet at her first birthday party this weekend in Windsor rather than attending one of her beloved horse races.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


well, I haven't seen or heard anything in the US media about Meghan's visit to TX.  Guess she can't overshadow dying children.  I would hope Harry would have the sense and decency not to try to mess up his grandmother's celebration


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> So the Queen allegedly will be meeting Invisibet but why do they make it sound as though the Queen gave up on attending the derby especially to meet Invisibet and her uncouth parents? I thought she's not attending because her horses aren't competing.


I believe QE is taking a break from the celebrations on June 4 to rest and to avoid stupid headlines from certain PR sources comparing events. It seems TW is planning a big b-day party for Lilib at the cottage. Though, I think it's possible QE will receive them for a few minutes on that day and be done with the introductions…


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



Gotta be one colded human with no empathy and compassion to reach out to your father. Wait! She didn’t even go to her uncles’ funerals.
I had a cousin like her. She’s now a lonely, miserable and regretful person and alone. She played all her cards early and left standing alone.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Gotta be one colded human with no empathy and compassion to reach out to your father. Wait! She didn’t even go to her uncles’ funerals.
> I had a cousin like her. She’s now a lonely, miserable and regretful person and alone. She played all her cards early and left standing alone.


maybe Chula Vista is too low class for her magnificence


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> well, I haven't seen or heard anything in the US media about Meghan's visit to TX.  Guess she can't overshadow dying children.  I would hope Harry would have the sense and decency not to try to mess up his grandmother's celebration


I take that back








						Meghan Markle visits Uvalde, Texas to pay respect to shooting victims
					

The Duchess of Sussex placed flowers at a makeshift memorial outside the courthouse in Uvalde.




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, I am so sick of their PR and these repetitive stories.  Like who cares?  This constant beating of the drum is so sad and pathetic.  That little girl is one year old and will never remember the five minute meeting she will have with TQ.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, I am so sick of their PR and these repetitive stories.  Like who cares?  This constant beating of the drum is so sad and pathetic.  That little girl is one year old and will never remember the five minute meeting she will have with TQ.


and the queen has so many grandkids and great grandchildren, I doubt she would be that excited to "meet" this baby


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, I am so sick of their PR and these repetitive stories.  Like who cares?  This constant beating of the drum is so sad and pathetic.  That little girl is one year old and will never remember the five minute meeting she will have with TQ.


You can bet MM will make sure there are photos to document it for all the world to see.  I think in this case those are called “the money shots”.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, I haven't seen or heard anything in the US media about Meghan's visit to TX.  Guess she can't overshadow dying children.  I would hope Harry would have the sense and decency not to try to mess up his grandmother's celebration


Well, a certain PR source wants the world to believe that we are very pleased! 


_While Americans are praising Meghan Markle for making a visit to  the site of Texas school shooting in personal capacity , some British royal experts have taken issue with pictures of Duchess._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> Personal stories about Heard are coming out of the woodwork



I wish it was Raptor's time because that probably means the end is near.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

The only people showering praise are the squaddies.  Rational people know it was the wrong thing to do.  Just the PR machine working overtime to walk back on this huge mistake.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The only people showering praise are the squaddies.  Rational people know it was the wrong thing to do.  Just the PR machine working overtime to walk back on this huge mistake.


I wonder if her people put out a press release.  I still say she didn't get much mileage out of it


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

I guess he really is proud of his feet


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry if I have not noticed this already being in thread - DM had various articles

Eugenie has moved to Portugal  !!!  but this was just recently noticed - for husband's job, so Frog Cott is sitting empty waiting for H&M

Bea - Her wardrobe ... oh my gosh - VAST improvement since marriage .
Bea is getting nice press for visit to Sweden on dyslexia, garden show,  and to Buck House garden party. Hmmm, I am such a cynic .. she must have a new PR person...  the article called her a steadfast royal (or words to that effect ).. is she aiming for a promotion in the absence of H&M ??

Of course, if you believe the press ... H&M are desperate for some BRF magic fairy dust (or words tot hat effect) - their business ventures are going south


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting article, explains how the Palace is shaking in its boots -  this is  how H&M control QE and the Palace




Archie was born in the UK 

Maybe he wasn't?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Honestly, I am so sick of their PR and these repetitive stories.  Like who cares?  This constant beating of the drum is so sad and pathetic.  That little girl is one year old and will never remember the five minute meeting she will have with TQ.



What makes you think the baby is not meeting with the Queen for her sake (or the Queen's?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> this is from a tabloid though so take with a grain of salt?


Yes! The news that JCMH has renewed the Frogmore lease has been published in more than one tabloid within the last six months so I'll put it down to the despicable duo's PR BS until it's confirmed by a reliable source.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Well, they have renewed the lease before.  I suspect it’s to make sure Harry is still technically a “resident citizen”.  Eugenia and family were basically subletters.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What’s the deal with Hazz’s bare feet?  Is he telling us he has autism?  Weird, odd, strange, I don’t get it. 
So glad W&K will miss the drama-party.


----------



## csshopper

I know it’s job related for Jack, but in accepting the relocation, Is the Portugal move in some recognition that her Sussex support may not be beneficial  to Eugenie in the UK at the moment?  Meanwhile her sister is getting recognition for supporting their Grandmother and showing new found poise and a Royal appearance. And seems to have a husband who is an asset. 

Reflecting on their wedding, Beatrice wearing a restyled gown of the Queen’s and her Grandfather, not in the best of health, making the effort to be present for the ceremony makes me think Beatrice and her husband are demonstrating gratitude and genuine love. It takes some fortitude as one of Andrew’s daughters to put herself out into the public and she is doing it gracefully.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What’s the deal with Hazz’s bare feet?  Is he telling us he has autism?  Weird, odd, strange, I don’t get it.
> So glad W&K will miss the drama-party.


my guess is this is his way of rebelling against all the things he was taught about behaving in a dignified way as a royal....he's a regular guy and can show his bare feet....I personally don't like seeing them

If he wants to act like one of the boys I'd rather see him go to the pub with shoes on


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I know it’s job related for Jack, but in accepting the relocation, Is the Portugal move in some recognition that her Sussex support may not be beneficial  to Eugenie in the UK at the moment?  Meanwhile her sister is getting recognition for supporting their Grandmother and showing new found poise and a Royal appearance. And seems to have a husband who is an asset.
> 
> Reflecting on their wedding, Beatrice wearing a restyled gown of the Queen’s and her Grandfather, not in the best of health, making the effort to be present for the ceremony makes me think Beatrice and her husband are demonstrating gratitude and genuine love. It takes some fortitude as one of Andrew’s daughters to put herself out into the public and she is doing it gracefully.



Imo Eug is following her husband’s job. Nothing more, nothing less. Jack has moved from the Casamigos company to this land company.  Bea married well while Eug married a not-so-wealthy guy. 

_The Brooksbanks have been subletting Frogmore from the Sussexes but will now spend part of the year at the CostaTerra Golf and Ocean Club, a luxury resort an hour south of Lisbon on Portugal's picturesque Atlantic coast. 

It comes after Mr Brooksbank, 36, landed a job with property tycoon Mike Meldman,  a longstanding business partner of George Clooney, according to the Telegraph.









						Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank move to PORTUGAL
					

The Brooksbanks have been subletting Frogmore  from the Sussexes but will now spend part of the year at the CostaTerra Golf and Ocean Club, a luxury resort an hour south of Lisbon.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## carmen56

If I was William or Kate, I'd send George, Charlotte and Louis to Granny Carol for the weekend!


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means!




It means he misses the royal sycophants and entitlements. It’s more of the ‘poor me’ nonsense.  Ick.


----------



## Chanbal

Time for Piers!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It means he misses the royal sycophants and entitlements. It’s more of the ‘poor me’ nonsense.  Ick.


He misses the royal perks. Apart of Doria and the few employees that need the job, he is isolated and bored in Montecito. I don't feel sorry for him, he is such a big hypocrite.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh, ok. Drinking beer out of a plastic cup.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, ok. Drinking beer out of a plastic cup.



The replies are hysterical!


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> I live in LA was at a party yesterday and talking to several women. One has a hair dressing business and said she does TW’s hair and sometimes cuts Harry’s hair and I just about died. I said “Prince Harry??” and she confirmed. Honestly guys I couldn’t word all of the questions in my head fast enough where they wouldn’t be insulting her work! Like WTF is going on with TW’s ratty weave? How much hair is really left to cut on Handbag? No one else in the group seemed to care about the Harkles and they quickly changed the subject.


That’s so weird, what kind of hairdresser does so many different kinds of hair and wigs ? I suppose H isn’t allowed a hairstylist of his own in case they seduce him. This might explain his tonsure.



Chanbal said:


>



Sam’s new strawberry blonde looks quite good. I think the press need to give the family some space tbh.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Lavender marriage?



I mean can you blame him? 
This is one of his old friends he’s been allowed to retain by M probably because he’s socially useful AND easy on the eye.

sexual orientations aside, I think most people would rather get into bed with a smiling human than a snarling pitbull.



Lodpah said:


> Kinda have to blame the media too. I guess the two have so much money to pay their PR. I hope the British media tamps down coverage on them and focus on the Jubilee.


I mean what’s there to focus on? I think a lot of Brits are disenchanted with royal pageantry and think it’s a waste of our money. The papers won’t sell what’s not selling. If the royals had any sense they’d have had a modest church service (especially given the rising cost of living, the Andrew fiasco and how the last two years have gone) and then there would be nothing to upstage and businesses still could’ve flogged souvenirs to the international markets.


sdkitty said:


> I guess he really is proud of his feet
> View attachment 5415377


He’s gotta have _something_ to be proud of 


CarryOn2020 said:


> What’s the deal with Hazz’s bare feet?  Is he telling us he has autism?  Weird, odd, strange, I don’t get it.
> So glad W&K will miss the drama-party.


Oh please don’t bring the poor much-misrepresented autistic community into it. I hate how the media goes for anti-social and rude for autistic when most autistic people are anxious about their varying levels of inability to read social cues.  H most definitely isn’t on the spectrum.


csshopper said:


> I know it’s job related for Jack, but in accepting the relocation, Is the Portugal move in some recognition that her Sussex support may not be beneficial  to Eugenie in the UK at the moment?  Meanwhile her sister is getting recognition for supporting their Grandmother and showing new found poise and a Royal appearance. And seems to have a husband who is an asset.
> 
> Reflecting on their wedding, Beatrice wearing a restyled gown of the Queen’s and her Grandfather, not in the best of health, making the effort to be present for the ceremony makes me think Beatrice and her husband are demonstrating gratitude and genuine love. It takes some fortitude as one of Andrew’s daughters to put herself out into the public and she is doing it gracefully.


I was about to say I think Eug gets a hard time on this thread and in the press in general. I think moving abroad is the best thing she could do as she can live on her own terms and stay out of the press.

I can’t for the life of me understand why she’s condemned for supporting Andrew because she hasn’t disowned him whereas it’s actually the Queen who (far from disowning him) has decided to keep him by her side at events, retain his title and pay off his accusers with public money and she gets nothing but praise and understanding.

The queen has literally hundreds of servants to cater to her needs and all her immediate family in close proximity she really doesn’t need one of her grandchildren structuring her and her baby’s life around grandma. I think both sisters are doing ok with a dodgy hand and it’s not weird they handle it in different ways.

That said, Eug  could maybe get a new wardrobe while she’s away and throw that headband in the sea…


----------



## CarryOn2020

I always enjoy your thoughtful posts and respect your opinions, even if mine differ a bit. Thank you. 


jelliedfeels said:


> Oh please don’t bring the poor much-misrepresented autistic community into it. I hate how the media goes for anti-social and rude for autistic when most autistic people are anxious about their varying levels of inability to read social cues.  H most definitely isn’t on the spectrum.



He did want us to believe he has some mental health issues, right?  He did have anger issues at school. He may indeed be on the spectrum for all I know.  It could be one of the big secrets he plans to reveal in his book.  Now we see bare feet on a almost 40 yr old man. Imo it’s jarringly odd.



“jelliedfeels said:


> I was about to say I think Eug gets a hard time on this thread and in the press in general. I think moving abroad is the best thing she could do as she can live on her own terms and stay out of the press.
> 
> I can’t for the life of me understand why she’s condemned for supporting Andrew because she hasn’t disowned him whereas it’s actually the Queen who (far from disowning him) has decided to keep him by her side at events, retain his title and pay off his accusers with public money and she gets nothing but praise and understanding.



So many rumors swirl around Eug that it gives most of us pause. No idea if they are true, but they are out there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t for the life of me understand why she’s condemned for supporting Andrew because she hasn’t disowned him whereas it’s actually the Queen who (far from disowning him) has decided to keep him by her side at events, retain his title and pay off his accusers with public money and she gets nothing but praise and understanding.



The one thing I condemn is her fondness of Raptor. I would not publicly swoon about my cousin's sh*tty wife after she went after my grandparents to be honest. The Andrew thing I can somewhat understand - he is her father, I am not 100% sure he did was he was accused of (no doubts he's a sleezeball, though) and I have not seen her speak about him at all.


----------



## mellibelly

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s so weird, what kind of hairdresser does so many different kinds of hair and wigs ? I suppose H isn’t allowed a hairstylist of his own in case they seduce him. This might explain his tonsure.



Hmm well the hairdresser is a black woman. Perhaps she specializes in weaves, extensions or straightening hair with texture. It was implied she mostly does TW’s hair. I imagine she gives him a quick trim like a child He looks unkept in general so I can’t see him going out of his way for grooming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

All this hairdresser talk reminds me I urgently need a haircut but I kind of divorced my new-ish hairdresser. The one I went to for years went out of business for health reasons and I am still not over the loss.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> I always enjoy your thoughtful posts and respect your opinions, even if mine differ a bit. Thank you.
> 
> 
> He did want us to believe he has some mental health issues, right?  He did have anger issues at school. He may indeed be on the spectrum for all I know.  It could be one of the big secrets he plans to reveal in his book.  Now we see bare feet on a almost 40 yr old man. Imo it’s jarringly odd.
> 
> 
> 
> So many rumors swirl around Eug that it gives most of us pause. No idea if they are true, but they are out there.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> The one thing I condemn is her fondness of Raptor. I would not publicly swoon about my cousin's sh*tty wife after she went after my grandparents to be honest. The Andrew thing I can somewhat understand - he is her father, I am not 100% sure he did was he was accused of (no doubts he's a sleezeball, though) and I have not seen her speak about him at all.


This is my point though, I don’t see what Eugenie has done regarding H&M that the rest of the royals haven’t done tenfold - mr and mrs raptor are still invited to events, still CofS, still have a royal residence, still have titles but for some reason when the queen or Charles are nice to H&M it is magnanimous or human whereas it’s seen as sycophantic or sinister when E does it.

As to Andrew she hasn’t done anything and she still gets associated with him. If anything the queen is a much more public supporter of Andrew. The queen let ghislaine come visit the palaces despite the rumours, bankrolled Andrew’s jet-setting, didn’t order an end to the Epstein friendship,  paid his case, probably paid off fergie, let him do dodgy military and weapons deals  and then stood by him for photo ops. None of this is a secret.


I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these negative stories were royal PR  tbh as there’s a precedent of the lower ranks taking the Ls to keep the higher ups looking good.

I don’t think any credible doctor would diagnose H with autism as while it is a wide-ranging condition he doesn’t seem to have any of the symptoms of neuro-variance or sensory processing disorder. Harry seems to love attention, chaos, excess, conflict and general sensory overload which is the opposite of what autistic people tend to want.
I would say he’s just jaded, likes to wallow in self-pity and he’s definitely had some issues with addiction and maybe anxiety.

add on- autism isn’t classed as a mental health issue. It’s a neurological condition and it is not consider it to be an illness like depression, for example, is an illness


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> Hmm well the hairdresser is a black woman. Perhaps she specializes in weaves, extensions or straightening hair with texture. It was implied she mostly does TW’s hair. I imagine she gives him a quick trim like a child He looks unkept in general so I can’t see him going out of his way for grooming.


I
I think hairdressers seem to be better at either short or long styles then they can further specialise in different textures so she will have definitely been chosen for her skill with M’s hair. I definitely see the kiddie trim on Harry as I don’t think any woman is allowed to be around him for too long 
M must have changed stylists from her wedding because I swear that was a white guy. I will say it looked better at the polo match than the wedding- that was awful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This is my point though, I don’t see what Eugenie has done regarding H&M that the rest of the royals haven’t done tenfold - mr and mrs raptor are still invited to events, still CofS, still have a royal residence, still have titles but for some reason when the queen or Charles are nice to H&M it is magnanimous or human whereas it’s seen as sycophantic or sinister when E does it.



Because when the royal accounts acknowledge e.g. their birthdays it's business, when Eugenie does it she personally goes out of her way.

But I completely agree with you that the whole family has enabled the troublemakers for way too long.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One thing is for certain, the gossip and stories do keep the royal families in the headlines. Perhaps it is the idea that it is better to be talked about than ignored.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting article, explains how the Palace is shaking in its boots -  this is  how H&M control QE and the Palace




The Cambridge children heirs to the throne - the Sussex children not


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> Sorry if I have not noticed this already being in thread - DM had various articles
> 
> Eugenie has moved to Portugal  !!!  but this was just recently noticed - for husband's job, so Frog Cott is sitting empty waiting for H&M
> 
> Bea - Her wardrobe ... oh my gosh - VAST improvement since marriage .
> Bea is getting nice press for visit to Sweden on dyslexia, garden show,  and to Buck House garden party. Hmmm, I am such a cynic .. she must have a new PR person...  the article called her a steadfast royal (or words to that effect ).. is she aiming for a promotion in the absence of H&M ??
> 
> Of course, if you believe the press ... H&M are desperate for some BRF magic fairy dust (or words tot hat effect) - their business ventures are going south



Well she is an Italian countess now maybe some Italian fairy dust chic has fallen on her that and lots of money


----------



## CarryOn2020

Final preparations = fun!









						Royal fanatics camp out to get prime spot on Mall for Platinum Jubilee
					

Royal superfans John Loughrey and Maria Scott waved for the cameras from their tents on The Mall in London today as anticipation builds ahead of the four-day bank holiday weekend.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because when the royal accounts acknowledge e.g. their birthdays it's business, when Eugenie does it she personally goes out of her way.
> 
> But I completely agree with you that the whole family has enabled the troublemakers for way too long.


The family and their team has made so many bad decisions ever since 
1990s I would be surprised if the institution as we know it outlives Will.

I am of the opinion Eugenie probably is doing the family business also. I think the royal purse paid for her flights to LA and I would be amazed if the PR team let those obvious photo ops of them in the restaurant be published if they didn’t want them to. They do have the connections to bury stories. I think she is meant to be seen as an ‘olive branch’ to H&M for their supporters while Will and Charles can maintain a bit of a distance from the sh*tshow. They can play both sides as realistically it doesn’t matter if the British public hates a minor princess but the heir….

on the whole I think moving abroad will be good for her on a personal level as she won’t have to do all this press biz for a few years (I wouldn’t be surprised if she was offered Portugal  as payment for humiliating herself on the 40 call and the rest.)

On a professional level they are probably hoping sending the royals abroad might get a bit more international interest as they are losing fans nationally


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of press, I'm going back to the roots and doing a bit more classic journalism as of today, and I am used to being super tight and not waste words for the online formats I usually write for. I just counted my words/keystrokes/lines and from every angle I have still so much space left but basically nothing more to say  Time for some word salad?


----------



## needlv

LOL!  Samantha wins the internet today









						Samantha Markle using bananas to communicate with her sister Meghan
					

EXCLUSIVE: Samantha Markle has issued a request to her sister Meghan via a banana just days after their father Thomas took ill - and insists the Duchess has not tried to make any contact with him




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And I am positive they won't be allowed to film the Sussexes in private unless it's a) in Frogmore Cottage and b) they are on their own. Oh what utterly interesting footage that will be.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Read between the lines. They post headlines like these and then it’s “could’ “would”. I honestly think they’ve already managed to overshadow the Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen to Meet Lilibet for the First Time at Birthday Party
> 
> 
> The queen will apparently meet her namesake Lilibet at her first birthday party this weekend in Windsor rather than attending one of her beloved horse races.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com





CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely agree. They knew exactly what to do and have stolen limelight. The focus is on them with just a _little bit_ on QE.
> Sad, but true.





Lodpah said:


> Kinda have to blame the media too. I guess the two have so much money to pay their PR. I hope the British media tamps down coverage on them and focus on the Jubilee.


I think most of these conjectures (or BS) come from US publications and probably fed to them by the despicable duo's PR teams and it may be quoted in some UK publications to show a US slant on the pair. However I think most UK citizens, except perhaps the anti-monarchists, want to enjoy HM's Jubilee celebrations and hope that the Montecito selfish family keep themselves and their drama in California. I certainly would like to be there to feel the general mood/excitement vis-à-vis the Jubilee.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> LOL!  Samantha wins the internet today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samantha Markle using bananas to communicate with her sister Meghan
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Samantha Markle has issued a request to her sister Meghan via a banana just days after their father Thomas took ill - and insists the Duchess has not tried to make any contact with him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5415654



This is so good!


----------



## Chanbal

This is so sweet…


----------



## Chanbal

Worse than the stock market!


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Well, a certain PR source wants the world to believe that we are very pleased!
> View attachment 5415342
> 
> _While Americans are praising Meghan Markle for making a visit to  the site of Texas school shooting in personal capacity , some British royal experts have taken issue with pictures of Duchess._



Can we file this under "fake news"?  Nobody I know has any respect for her whatsoever.


----------



## bellecate

Not sure how to post the video here but this clip from the polo match shows TW yet again pulling H away from trying to chat with someone.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Not sure how to post the video here but this clip from the polo match shows TW yet again pulling H away from trying to chat with someone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5415744



It’s this one.  Just click the blue arrow. The guy at the end deserves applause


----------



## Chanbal

I suggest reading this well written article that goes over the last several events, including the unexpected visit to Texas and how people felt about it (see link below). The author makes several valid points, including "_this reflects poorly on the Royal Family." _ 




_*All of this reflects poorly on the Royal Family* because they are willing to ignore the duo and their attention seeking PR stunts that are harmful and disgraceful. They are in effect abusing and monetising the titles and have brought the House of Windsor into disrepute…

*There is respect, but there is also anger and disappointment and *_*these days people value free speech more than protocol, and they will not hesitate to jeer the Sussexes, even if the Queen is there.*









						Staged PR Photos Galore At The Polo And A Bandwagon Tragedy
					

This week has seen new PR lows from both Harry and TW, while Thomas Markle had his own Backgrid deal and ended up in hospital (now released and under care). We have of course the weekly polo farces…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Old but I'm in agreement.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Here's the video of Jezebel taking out her lapdog on a leash again. The disrespect.

ETA: I see CarryOn already posted, wasn't shown to me on my phone!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s this one.  Just click the blue arrow. The guy at the end deserves applause



And that stupid walk of hers, aaaaarrrrgh!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also that stupids shorts thing is extremely unflattering on her appel-y midsection. I wonder how someone as vain as her has apparently difficulties taking clues from her mirror.


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> *All of this reflects poorly on the Royal Family* because they are willing to ignore the duo and their attention seeking PR stunts that are harmful and disgraceful. They are in effect abusing and monetising the titles and have brought the House of Windsor into disrepute…



I've wondering about this for sometime.  I am one of those who begin to think poorly about the RF. Coupled with the mess with Andrew, wouldn’t the people say enough is enough? No more RF as an institution if it can be so easily abused and monitized? 

I am not British so I am curious to know the mood there.


----------



## CeeJay

mellibelly said:


> Hmm well the hairdresser is a black woman. Perhaps she specializes in weaves, extensions or straightening hair with texture. It was implied she mostly does TW’s hair. I imagine she gives him a quick trim like a child He looks unkept in general so I can’t see him going out of his way for grooming.


Oh, I bet I know her .. she live in the Valley?!?!


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s this one.  Just click the blue arrow. The guy at the end deserves applause



Thanks for posting it.


----------



## 880

Why are they  allowed to keep frogmore ?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope the Cambridge’s children don’t have to skip events to avoid being set up for publicity photos with the Harkle’s kids


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Not sure how to post the video here but this clip from the polo match shows TW yet again pulling H away from trying to chat with someone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5415744



He’s not allowed to have friends.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> It means he misses the royal sycophants and entitlements. It’s more of the ‘poor me’ nonsense.  Ick.


You could *almost* feel sorry him, right up until the point where he sat there silent when TW spouted all her lies and accusations towards the BRF


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Old but I'm in agreement.



.. he/she is 100% absolutely correct, and this is something I have said a bazillion times in my Financial Services career .. "if you post incorrect/inaccurate financials, your credibility is gone and the clients WILL NOT come back!" .. can't even say how many times I was proven accurate!


----------



## Sharont2305

I hope that she gets the most awwwfuuull jet lag, so much so that she couldn't possibly attend anything. 
We can but dream eh?


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s this one.  Just click the blue arrow. The guy at the end deserves applause



There she goes with that butt-sashaying walk. When did that start? 

Those gooey red lips make her look so predator-like, eww.


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C's last video makes some interesting points… This is what I understood:
1) KL seems to be playing on both sides.
2) Titles have not been removed to facilitate a potential reinstatement in the monarchy at a later time.
3) Royal (youtube) channel apparently showed the visit to Texas as charitable. While it's not an official channel for the monarchy, it's allowed to use the word royal. Some people take information at face value
4) The use of a camera crew of TW's choosing.
5) Entitled people without empathy will do whatever it takes to advance their own agendas…

All Allegedly, of course!

If some of you have the patience and time to watch the video, please share your opinion particularly on item #2. I wonder if I understood it well. I'm having a hard time believing in so much …


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

BVBookshop said:


> I've wondering about this for sometime.  I am one of those who begin to think poorly about the RF. Coupled with the mess with Andrew, wouldn’t the people say enough is enough? No more RF as an institution if it can be so easily abused and monitized?
> 
> I am not British so I am curious to know the mood there.


If you have time watch the last Lady C's video (posted above). She has been a huge supporter of the BRF, but today she sounded particularly annoyed by the lack of response from the monarchy (see item #2).



880 said:


> Why are they  allowed to keep frogmore ?


Great question!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who is KL?


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> Why are they  allowed to keep frogmore ?


They do not OWN it, they RENT it from the crown. If you believe the internet, they have renewed the lease for another year.

According to Google, it has FIVE (!!!!) bedrooms, a kitchen and a nursery.  How will they manage for the visit???

PS Eugenie was living there for a bit - paying H&M some rent ??? But, she has vacated, so they might need someone new to sublet


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is KL?


TM's partner on the videos, the one that took the photos of the polo event. See if you can watch the video…


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe they’ll take in a Ukrainian family.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe they’ll take in a Ukrainian family.


----------



## mellibelly

CeeJay said:


> Oh, I bet I know her .. she live in the Valley?!?!


Not sure where she lives but her salon is in Venice. I just found it with a little digging. It’s called High Brow Hippie. Funny but I have been to their salon space many times when it used to be a residential apartment. I knew the person that lived there several years ago lol. If you look at their Instagram there are Harkle posts. And they were at the polo match in SB. So yes she is responsible for the ratty witch hair  I’m not going to fault their work because Nutmeg doesn’t seem to take professional advice. She managed to ruin Givenchy after all.


----------



## 880

marietouchet said:


> They do not OWN it, they RENT it from the crown. If you believe the internet, they have renewed the lease for another year.
> 
> According to Google, it has FIVE (!!!!) bedrooms, a kitchen and a nursery.  How will they manage for the visit???
> 
> PS Eugenie was living there for a bit - paying H&M some rent ??? But, she has vacated, so they might need someone new to sublet



Thanks for this info! I just somehow hoped that they would not be allowed to go back there or renew. 

Someone here posted the possibility that netfix might be able to get some footage in frogmore


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I like what she did to Julia Robert's hair.

ETA: that was in reply to mellibelly, today my new posts somehow don't refresh on time.


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> Well she is an Italian countess now maybe some Italian fairy dust chic has fallen on her that and lots of money


Her husband has good taste and she is finally getting away from the awful taste in clothing that she grew up with.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means!



this makes sense but I have doubts that he would admit it or be ok with it being put out publicly


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> What makes you think the baby is not meeting with the Queen for her sake (or the Queen's?


All  I said was that a one year old won't remember meeting the TQ and i don't think the meeting will be more than 5 min.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> All  I said was that a one year old won't remember meeting the TQ and i don't think the meeting will be more than 5 min.


even using the term "meeting" for the grandmother to see the baby seems a bit off
as you said, baby won't remember and won't know who this old lady is....QE has dozens of grandchildren and great grandchildren plus her duties so I don't think this will be huge for her


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> Thanks for this info! I just somehow hoped that they would not be allowed to renew. Someone here posted the possibility that netfix might be able to get some footage in frogmore which sounds awful


Even minor non working members of the BRF have grace and favor residences - for which they are expected to pay a nominal rent. Beatrice and Eugenie , Prince Michael of Kent are examples. Even Andrew has one.

The apartments and gardens rarely appear (and if so, only discreetly) in the background of some photos eg Diana and boys in front of her piano or William in the garden. But, American style home birthday videos with cake and balloons, I have not seen any of those.


----------



## redney

marietouchet said:


> But, American style home birthday videos with cake and balloons, have not seen any of those.


 
Yet. Wonder what TW has up her sleeve.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> All  I said was that a one year old won't remember meeting the TQ and i don't think the meeting will be more than 5 min.


I wanna see photos of QEII with Lili and her smash cake 

FYi a smash cake is a sometimes American tradition for a first birthday. 
It is a small cake with LOTs of chocolate frosting. Splash mats are everywhere, videos are required as the youngster sits in highchair and is served THE CAKE. He/she dives in - no silverware at that age, just hands - into the chocolate frosting and is covered head to toe. The birthday outfit is toast and the child is hosed off after. 
Videos are terribly useful for embarrassing the child at a later age. 




__





						smash cake for 1 year old - Google Search
					





					www.google.com


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> All  I said was that a one year old won't remember meeting the TQ and i don't think the meeting will be more than 5 min.



Sorry, I didn't mean to come across like that. I was agreeing.

I meant, it's not about the baby meeting the Queen or the Queen meeting the baby, it's about the H & M bigging-up H&M and the Birthday being the bigger than QEII's Platinum Jubilee (in their opinion)


----------



## mellibelly

Platty Joobs


----------



## Maggie Muggins

880 said:


> Thanks for this info! I just somehow hoped that they would not be allowed to go back there or renew.
> 
> *Someone here posted the possibility that netfix might be able to get some footage in frogmore*


BP has already stated that Netflix wasn't accredited to report on the Jubilee celebrations and if they show up they would be prevented from recording any events. I'm assuming that said photographers would also be prevented from accessing Frogmore Cottage which is part of the private Frogmore Estate also part of the Crown Estate and probably covered by some kind of security team/watch.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Sorry, I didn't mean to come across like that. I was agreeing.
> 
> I meant, it's not about the baby meeting the Queen or the Queen meeting the baby, it's about the H & M bigging-up H&M and the Birthday being the bigger than QEII's Platinum Jubilee (in their opinion)


Absolutely.  They are desperately using everything they can to gain attention.  I find the thrust of the current PR to be infuriating.  AS IF they could take anything away from The Queen or the importance of her 70 years on the throne.  So arrogant!


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> BP has already stated that Netflix wasn't accredited to report on the Jubilee celebrations and if they show up they would be prevented from recording any events. I'm assuming that said photographers would also be prevented from accessing Frogmore Cottage which is part of the private Frogmore Estate also part of the Crown Estate and probably covered by some kind of security team/watch.


I wonder if this could be end arounded by the Harkles.  What is to stop either of them from using a cell phone to video the other or the children in the house? Or even on the grounds.  They could protest that this is private family footage for their own enjoyment.


----------



## csshopper

Sorry, had bilateral cataract surgery this AM and, obviously, am not seeing clearly and not hitting the right tabs.

Time for a nap.


----------



## csshopper

Oops


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I wanna see photos of QEII with Lili and her smash cake
> 
> FYi a smash cake is a sometimes American tradition for a first birthday.
> It is a small cake with LOTs of chocolate frosting. Splash mats are everywhere, videos are required as the youngster sits in highchair and is served THE CAKE. He/she dives in - no silverware at that age, just hands - into the chocolate frosting and is covered head to toe. The birthday outfit is toast and the child is hosed off after.
> Videos are terribly useful for embarrassing the child at a later age.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> smash cake for 1 year old - Google Search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com



I am outing myself as super Grinch, but I don't find children covered in food cute, and I think wasting food like this is sacrilegious.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if this could be end arounded by the Harkles.  What is to stop either of them from *using a cell phone to video the other *or the children in the house? Or even on the grounds.  They could protest that this is private family footage for their own enjoyment.


I don't know if there are UK laws that would prevent HMTQ from imposing her own rules since Frogmore Cottage is part of the Crown Estate which she "owns" as monarch of the day and then as landlord maybe she could set certain restrictions such as no recordings and no photos on her private lands without her permission. HM is way too polite, but I would love to hear her say to TW: My land, my rules and if that doesn't suit you bi!ch, get out of Dodge.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Sorry, had bilateral cataract surgery this AM and, obviously, am not seeing clearly and not hitting the right tabs.
> 
> Time for a nap.


I had that done in 2009 one eye at a time and it wasn't a walk in the park back then. But it seems to have greatly improved since, however, take it easy and rest.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am outing myself as super Grinch, but I don't find children covered in food cute, and I think wasting food like this is sacrilegious.


Yes but in my mind’s eye … I see …
MM will insist on one hopefully , tee hee, and HMTQ a will finally say (what we all want to hear .. ) OFF WITH HER HEAD ! Lol


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> Sorry, had bilateral cataract surgery this AM and, obviously, am not seeing clearly and not hitting the right tabs.
> 
> Time for a nap.


Feel better!!!


----------



## Lodpah

Read ‘em and weep. Love how they say “most likely” “spend the whole day” Yahoo must be so happy to get so much money from their PR. They add words in their articles to make it seem likely. Also read carefully about most important royals and then mention only the two evil doers.









						Prince Harry & Meghan Markle's Daughter Lilibet Is Having a Special 1st Birthday Party to Meet the Royals
					

It’s a big week for members of the British royal family. Queen Elizabeth II’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations are finally here, and we’re eager to see all the photos from Trooping the Colour, the star-studded concert, and so much more. But there’s another occasion members of the royal family...




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## LittleStar88

So when are they expected to arrive for the Platty Joobs festivities?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> So when are they expected to arrive for the Platty Joobs festivities?



No idea, the press will let us know. Wonder if they will get a piece of this?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this makes sense but I have doubts that he would admit it or be ok with it being put out publicly


I agree with you. I wonder if publicly admitting to be homesick is part of a PR strategy to get sympathy from people in the UK. It's possible they are realizing that life in the US doesn't have the royal perks they seem to enjoy, and would like to return to the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Sorry, had bilateral cataract surgery this AM and, obviously, am not seeing clearly and not hitting the right tabs.
> 
> Time for a nap.


----------



## Debbie65

For anyone interested, I came across a Prince Harry and Meghan Markle movie.  So far so good!  I'm still watching it. Lol. Found it on youtube.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> So when are they expected to arrive for the Platty Joobs festivities?


Tomorrow!?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



Thank you all for your kind words.  By enlarging the font size have been able to read posts today and carefully key some words. So much Markle to monitor.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Thank you all for your kind words.  By enlarging the font size have been able to read posts today and carefully key some words. So much Markle to monitor.



So glad to hear you are on the mend. Continue getting well. The doctors are doing amazing things these days.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Thank you all for your kind words.  By enlarging the font size have been able to read posts today and carefully key some words. So much Markle to monitor.



I didn't know they did both eyes at once! When I had my LASIK I was basically blind for 12 hours because my eyes were so dry. Get better soon!


----------



## duna

csshopper said:


> Sorry, had bilateral cataract surgery this AM and, obviously, am not seeing clearly and not hitting the right tabs.
> 
> Time for a nap.



Yikes, I'm having it in September, and I'm pretty scared!


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> Yikes, I'm having it in September, and I'm pretty scared!



My sister had it last December. It was a huge success, no problems, no worries.  Of course, everyone is different, but it is nice to hear success stories. Take care, rest well, and forget about this H&M baloney.  [My tip: Always begin with the last page and work back from there.]


----------



## carmen56

LittleStar88 said:


> So when are they expected to arrive for the Platty Joobs festivities?



Supposedly arriving today.


----------



## CarryOn2020

You decide:  “Met’s Royalty and Specialist Protection unit have spent *weeks* liaising with the Prince’s team and guaranteed taxpayer-funded officers.”  Weeks??? I need a few hours to process this info. Weeks


----------



## CarryOn2020

No surprise here:


----------



## kemilia

marietouchet said:


> I wanna see photos of QEII with Lili and her smash cake
> 
> FYi a smash cake is a sometimes American tradition for a first birthday.
> It is a small cake with LOTs of chocolate frosting. Splash mats are everywhere, videos are required as the youngster sits in highchair and is served THE CAKE. He/she dives in - no silverware at that age, just hands - into the chocolate frosting and is covered head to toe. The birthday outfit is toast and the child is hosed off after.
> Videos are terribly useful for embarrassing the child at a later age.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> smash cake for 1 year old - Google Search
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.google.com


My family recently had a 1st B-Day bash for my great-nephew and he absolutely did not perform as the gaggle of overbearing guests had hoped. He cried and pushed away the cake (it had white frosting and all this Baby Shark cr*p on it). 

I, of course being an over-the-top cake lover was kinda happy he respected cake and would not touch it. Of course over-bearing grandmother HAD to show him how to mess it up so there was something for the videos. 

IMO, another crass "tradition" along with the reveal parties.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Sorry, had bilateral cataract surgery this AM and, obviously, am not seeing clearly and not hitting the right tabs.
> 
> Time for a nap.


Congrats! I had both eyes done last October and the first time I walked into a greenhouse this spring, the colors of the flowers were so brilliant I could not believe it. Enjoy your "new" eyes!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am outing myself as super Grinch, but I don't find children covered in food cute, and I think wasting food like this is sacrilegious.


Any food waste is a sin in my book. You have the right mindset.


----------



## kemilia

duna said:


> Yikes, I'm having it in September, and I'm pretty scared!


Don't be, mine went very well. My doc did one eye at a time--first the right then the left 2 weeks later. The hardest part was having 2 radically different "views"--old glasses didn't work on new eye so I would drive kinda looking over the old glasses with the new eye. Everything was fine after the second was done. Then I got readers from Target.

Oh and my doc had this lovely VCA pendant--all diamonds--that she borrows from her mom occasionally. And she didn't know what it was until I examined it and said hmmm--VCA. She said she was gonna look that up when she got home.


----------



## lanasyogamama

kemilia said:


> .
> 
> Oh and my doc had this lovely VCA pendant--all diamonds--that she borrows from her mom occasionally. And she didn't know what it was until I examined it and said hmmm--VCA. She said she was gonna look that up when she got home.


Ah to be so naive!!!


----------



## jennlt

kemilia said:


> Oh and my doc had this lovely VCA pendant--all diamonds--that she borrows from her mom occasionally. And she didn't know what it was until I examined it and said hmmm--VCA. She said she was gonna look that up when she got home.





lanasyogamama said:


> Ah to be so naive!!!


Ah, to have a mom with a VCA collection that I could borrow...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> Oh and my doc had this lovely VCA pendant--all diamonds--that she borrows from her mom occasionally. And she didn't know what it was until I examined it and said hmmm--VCA. She said she was gonna look that up when she got home.



My dentist and I talk designer bags whenever I visit...which was 27 times last year within 9 months.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Blooming lovely and happily married   Another cautionary tale about choosing wisely.












						Cressida Bonas stuns in floral number at Lipsy  party
					

The actress, 33, who dated Prince Harry for three years until 2014, opted for a £42 Mary Katrantzou x Lipsy Tiered Skirt Midi Dress for the party in central London.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blooming lovely and happily married   Another cautionary tale about choosing wisely.
> 
> View attachment 5416259
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cressida Bonas stuns in floral number at Lipsy  party
> 
> 
> The actress, 33, who dated Prince Harry for three years until 2014, opted for a £42 Mary Katrantzou x Lipsy Tiered Skirt Midi Dress for the party in central London.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wow, an inexpensive dress that fits and casual but well coiffed hair! More fool H.


----------



## Chanbal

PR working full power! Just in case, let's use the race card… (article from inews.co.uk)


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Tourre's words of wisdom!


----------



## Chanbal

Diem Nguyen Le put together an interesting summary of the Harkles' saga. 
*Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s bad luck streak: from Netflix cancelling Pearl, and royal memoir and blog delays, to Thomas Markle’s stroke – all before Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee*
*
Keeping Up with the Sussexes? The duke and duchess have plans for a Kardashians-inspired reality TV series, but Archewell’s animated series Pearl was axed after a US$140 million deal
Kourtney Kardashian has Poosh, Gwyneth Paltrow has Goop … and Markle had her lifestyle blog The Tig, but couldn’t get the website renewed – one of her top aides just quit too









						Trouble in paradise? Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s recent bad luck
					

The Sussexes have faced some bad luck lately, from cancelled Netflix shows to Meghan’s failed blog relaunch … what’s going on?




					www.scmp.com
				



*


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My dentist and I talk designer bags whenever I visit...which was 27 times last year within 9 months.


27 dentist visits in 9 months?! Has anyone asked if you're okay?


----------



## duna

kemilia said:


> Don't be, mine went very well. My doc did one eye at a time--first the right then the left 2 weeks later. *The hardest part was having 2 radically different "views"--old glasses didn't work on new eye so I would drive kinda looking over the old glasses with the new eye.* Everything was fine after the second was done. Then I got readers from Target.
> 
> Oh and my doc had this lovely VCA pendant--all diamonds--that she borrows from her mom occasionally. And she didn't know what it was until I examined it and said hmmm--VCA. She said she was gonna look that up when she got home.



I can imagine: I'll have to change all my glasses: my driving ones, my reading ones and my sun glasses!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Absolutely.  They are desperately using everything they can to gain attention.  I find the thrust of the current PR to be infuriating.  AS IF they could take anything away from The Queen or the importance of her 70 years on the throne.  So arrogant!


yes, arrogant is the perfect description of those two....staggeringly so


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My dentist and I talk designer bags whenever I visit...which was 27 times last year within 9 months.



Ugh, I am sorry. 




Chanbal said:


>




Ha! “With any luck, a member of the royal family will say something racist to my wife so that we can do another Oprah interview”!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you. I wonder if publicly admitting to be homesick is part of a PR strategy to get sympathy from people in the UK. It's possible they are realizing that life in the US doesn't have the royal perks they seem to enjoy, and would like to return to the UK.


maybe but for what it's worth, everyone here seems to think she would never go back (and play second fiddle to Kate)


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> yes, arrogant is the perfect description of those two....staggeringly so


Speaking of glasses types, I have a pair of computer glasses which is something in between readers and distance and for me they were a total game changer. When my husband asked about them they said he didn’t need them, but it’s something to ask about if you find the computer a little too far away for your readers, but need something while using it.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My dentist and I talk designer bags whenever I visit...which was 27 times last year within 9 months.


Oh no
I Hate going to the dentist
Hope you're exaggerating


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> maybe but for what it's worth, everyone here seems to think she would never go back (and play second fiddle to Kate)


Man, I would love seeing her curtsy to Kate!!!


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Man, I would love seeing her curtsy to Kate!!!


is that required at this stage?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



Quote from Omid Snow-job Scabies:
"Thomas Markle turned on his own daughter - Meghan owes him nothing."
The poor sap still doesn't realize that most people (TPFers anyway) don't give a damn about "his opinions" since we know he is just regurgitating TW's drivel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> maybe but for what it's worth, everyone here seems to think she would never go back (and play second fiddle to Kate)



And yet, she bows to the demands of the Nflix bosses. If they say do something, she does it. So two-faced.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> maybe but for what it's worth, *everyone here seems to think she would never go back*


Here, where? Not at this forum at least…


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> And yet, she bows to the demands of the Nflix bosses. If they say do something, she does it. So two-faced.


and let us not forget what Ellen got her to do


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> 27 dentist visits in 9 months?! Has anyone asked if you're okay?





In fact, the other dentist at the office - whom I had to see with a massive tooth and jaw infection that drove me up the wall with pain on a day my dentist was off - did call me a few hours later to see how I was doing. Both the infection and the 27 visits were owed to my former dentist who completely messed up two teeth the year before. I should have taken a page out of Raptor's book and sued!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> PR working full power! Just in case, let's use the race card… (article from inews.co.uk)
> View attachment 5416284
> 
> View attachment 5416287



I don't even know why articles like this still exist. Have these people missed everything we witnessed?


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In fact, the other dentist at the office - whom I had to see with a massive tooth and jaw infection that drove me up the wall with pain on a day my dentist was off - did call me a few hours later to see how I was doing. Both the infection and the 27 visits were owed to my former dentist who completely messed up two teeth the year before. I should have taken a page out of Raptor's book and sued!


I am so sorry you have to deal with all of this, and I hope you get things fixed soon!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> maybe but for what it's worth, everyone here seems to think she would never go back (and play second fiddle to Kate)



True, but we would also have bet money she'd never face the BRF again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Oh no
> I Hate going to the dentist
> Hope you're exaggerating



I am not, I counted my appointments


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you. I wonder if publicly admitting to be homesick is part of a PR strategy *to get sympathy from people in the UK*. It's possible they are realizing that life in the US doesn't have the royal perks they seem to enjoy, and would like to return to the UK.




Dream on!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here, where? Not at this forum at least…


that


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not, I counted my appointments


Ouch!  hope you're done
I had to have a root canal and a crown.  that was enough for me.  they want me to go in for cleaning, x-rays and exam.  I'm planning just cleaning


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> is that required at this stage?


Probably not, since she would have had to before she took off, right? But eventually I think she’ll have to!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> PR working full power! Just in case, let's use the race card… (article from inews.co.uk)
> View attachment 5416284
> 
> View attachment 5416287



Hmm, not PR, Alibhai-Brown is just an old lady who has a political agenda she has been pushing her entire life. She's another who is trying to use Meghan as a symbol for racism when she doesn't fit.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but we would also have bet money she'd never face the BRF again.


Desperate times call for desperate measures.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> I am so sorry you have to deal with all of this, and I hope you get things fixed soon!



Thank you, I've been mostly fine for this year. New dentist is awsome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Ouch!  hope you're done
> I had to have a root canal and a crown.  that was enough for me.  they want me to go in for cleaning, x-rays and exam.  I'm planning just cleaning



I am. But also as an experienced sufferer I advise you to do the x-rays at least because they will show hidden cavities at early stages.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Probably not, since she would have had to before she took off, right? But eventually I think she’ll have to!



I think it is because she still ranks below Kate.


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> is that required at this stage?



Of course Kate is superior to her in every way - she has to curtsey to everyone above her in the order of succession


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> Probably not, since she would have had to before she took off, right? But eventually I think she’ll have to!



Kate has to curtsey to Camilla - dipshit should have been obeying the rules while she was here but would probably argue they are racist


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Kate has to curtsey to Camilla - dipshit should have been obeying the rules while she was here but would probably argue they are racist


She confuses centuries of protocol with racism.


----------



## Toby93

kemilia said:


> My family recently had a 1st B-Day bash for my great-nephew and he absolutely did not perform as the gaggle of overbearing guests had hoped. He cried and pushed away the cake (it had white frosting and all this Baby Shark cr*p on it).
> 
> I, of course being an over-the-top cake lover was kinda happy he respected cake and would not touch it. Of course over-bearing grandmother HAD to show him how to mess it up so there was something for the videos.
> 
> IMO, another crass "tradition" along with the reveal parties.


Definitely agree with you there.  I find the *new* traditions quite tacky and I guess I am showing my age    Smash cakes, reveal parties, and push presents!  Just no....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Definitely agree with you there.  I find the *new* traditions quite tacky and I guess I am showing my age    Smash cakes, reveal parties, and push presents!  Just no....



As admitted before, I'm the Grinch of Grinches. Buuut...what's wrong with some nice, appropriate appreciation of a process that literally remodelled your body, put you at risk for all kinds of complications, was uncomfortable for several months and ended with 12 hours of painful, exhausting labor? Give me all the jewels.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> She confuses centuries of protocol with racism.



She's confused about so many things.


----------



## Chanbal

Brilliant!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She made a promise to her people and kept it for 70 years.

But eh, maybe "I can't wait to hit the ground running!" meant "I can't wait to hit the ground running back to LA."


----------



## Milosmum0307

Chanbal said:


> Tomorrow!?



A bold middle finger to Grandpa’s memorial service, but of course they’ll come for the pageantry!  Can’t monetize the mundane, after all.  Americans and their wallets respond better to glamour.

I’m still so disgusted by the Uvalde photo op that I can’t even find these grifters entertaining anymore.  I’m out for a while (because I find the sight of Harry’s balding pate and Meghan’s linebacker torso literally nauseating after that stunt) but will sadly miss your thoughts on the Jubilee festivities.  Enjoy!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Milosmum0307 said:


> I’m still so disgusted by the Uvalde photo op that *I can’t even find these grifters entertaining anymore.*



I've thought it before as well. But I've come to love our little corner of the internet and would miss y'all.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've thought it before as well. But I've come to love our little corner of the internet and would miss y'all.


I know
they're getting boring really (and more and more annoying)
but we need something to talk about other than bags


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I know
> they're getting boring really (and more and more annoying)
> but we need something to talk about other than bags


It's a lot cheaper. I'm done with Chanel for a some time, I hope! Though, I had a brief stay at the Perfume thread and spent $$$$ in a very short period of time… I feel a lot safer here.


----------



## rose60610

These frauds are incapable of attending anything without bringing attention to themselves. At least the British press isn't all lovey-dovey goo-goo eyed over these idiots and the moment they get out of line they'll be hammered. Let's see what ugly outfits with bad tailoring she brings to the trip. Anybody wanna bet she's going to wear something purple, because, she's ROYAL, you know. I wonder if she's going to force Harry to cut in front of William or even Charles. I put NOTHING past her. I hope somebody puts a muzzle over her stupid mouth. Or maybe not. Anything she says will be a disaster and she'll embarrass herself the world over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh. I still had hope.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As admitted before, I'm the Grinch of Grinches. Buuut...what's wrong with some nice, appropriate appreciation of a process that literally remodelled your body, put you at risk for all kinds of complications, was uncomfortable for several months and ended with 12 hours of painful, exhausting labor? Give me all the jewels.


Hey, I'm not against gifts of any kind, especially jewelry  It's the name, and how it has become a thing and expected.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Hey, I'm not against gifts of any kind, especially jewelry  It's the name, and how it has become a thing and expected.



Yeah, the name is tacky.


----------



## Toby93

rose60610 said:


> These frauds are incapable of attending anything without bringing attention to themselves. At least the British press isn't all lovey-dovey goo-goo eyed over these idiots and the moment they get out of line they'll be hammered. Let's see what ugly outfits with bad tailoring she brings to the trip. Anybody wanna bet she's going to wear something purple, because, she's ROYAL, you know. I wonder if she's going to force Harry to cut in front of William or even Charles. I put NOTHING past her. I hope somebody puts a muzzle over her stupid mouth. Or maybe not. Anything she says will be a disaster and she'll embarrass herself the world over.


Yep, but to be honest, I would NOT want to be standing anywhere near Kate.  The woman is perfection, and TW is........not


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Sophisticatted

I read somewhere (don’t know if it’s true) that one of William’s stipulations regarding Megxit was that he not be photographed with Harry henceforth.  It may be part of why the brothers were separated by their cousin during the funeral procession and also why Diana’s siblings stepped in between them at times during the statue unveiling. 

I’ve also read that Charles is not allowed to release any photos of himself (Charles) with William’s children unless express permission has been granted by William.

in any case, I imagine there will be a lot of strategic distancing (or grimacing and “scarfing”).


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> Any food waste is a sin in my book. You have the right mindset.


I hate the stupid wedding tradition of smashing cake into your new spouse's face too.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> It's a lot cheaper. I'm done with Chanel for a some time, I hope! Though, I had a brief stay at the Perfume thread and spent $$$$ in a very short period of time… I feel a lot safer here.


True. It’ll be a cold day in hell before we buy any of the things we see advertised on this thread.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It's a lot cheaper. I'm done with Chanel for a some time, I hope! Though, I had a brief stay at the Perfume thread and spent $$$$ in a very short period of time… I feel a lot safer here.


You mean you aren't going to shoot THOUSANDS to Archewell???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DP


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I hate the stupid wedding tradition of smashing cake into your new spouse's face too.


Me too! Painful comes to mind and it’s just weird, 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, the name is tacky.


I’m a bit of weirdo about traditions too. i

The thing I can’t stand is how companies are always trying to invent another Christmas tradition when in my opinion it’s the best catered for holiday already and yet Easter and Passover are total snooze fests by comparison. We need something to do before getting drunk and eating gross roast lamb - come on Hollywood think up something. Where is my hallmark comedy about sharing a seder with an unlikely true love? Or the Easter egg hunt of romantic misunderstandings

I’d also love mayday to make a comeback and everyone gets drunk and sings plainsong.

in jubilee related news,  here’s the commemoration packaging for some U.K. teabags:-


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's confused about so many things.


Most of all, she’s confused with her place /importance in the world. She belongs on her rotten bench at the bottom of the garden adjacent to the stagnant stinky pond that is fouling the neighborhood.

So glad to read your dental problems have been cured. My toes literally curled when I read ”27”. That comes under the heading of “when bad things happen to good people” not fair.


----------



## bag-mania

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle touch down in UK — as their popularity hits record lows
					

While the Queen remains firmly at the top of the list of respected royals, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were dealt fresh blows.




					nypost.com


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> and let us not forget what Ellen got her to do


I wonder if anyone remotely royal would leapfrog on Helen's command.  That was painful to see.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> True. It’ll be a cold day in hell before we buy any of the things we see advertised on this thread.


I have a very low tolerance for hypocrisy, and I needed your post today! Thank you!


----------



## lanasyogamama

The thing that bothers me is the new trend of decorating the inside and outside of the house for every holiday. I see people putting up lights for Halloween now, which to me is so ridiculous. I love home design and decoration, but more in a thoughtful, long-term curated way, not slapping a bunch of plastic stuff around the house that I have to take down four weeks later.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> I hate the stupid wedding tradition of smashing cake into your new spouse's face too.


Yes!!!!


----------



## DeMonica

Milosmum0307 said:


> *A bold middle finger to Grandpa’s memorial service, but of course they’ll come for the pageantry! * Can’t monetize the mundane, after all.  Americans and their wallets respond better to glamour.
> 
> I’m still so disgusted by the Uvalde photo op that I can’t even find these grifters entertaining anymore.  I’m out for a while (because I find the sight of Harry’s balding pate and Meghan’s linebacker torso literally nauseating after that stunt) but will sadly miss your thoughts on the Jubilee festivities.  Enjoy!


IMO, they did the RF a huge service by not coming. I can't forget Peter Phillips's face when walking next to Haphazard - that told it all. They had a relatively drama free memorial service for themselves - Andrew was rightfully there, it was his father's memorial service - I'm sure nobody missed the Sussex drama. 
I'm sure the RF invited the Disastrous Duo only to refute any claims of racism and mistreatment.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I still had hope.



I really find it hard to believe she was willing to come as she must realize she will be booed. Her skin must be so thick.


----------



## Toby93

I was looking at some pics that my cousins daughter took in May of 2108 when they were invited to Buckingham palace For Prince Charles' 70th birthday.
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
  I believe this was one of the first events that TW attended after the "spectacle" wedding.  I don't know, but she seems to have gotten a LOT darker recently.  Look at her hands in particular.....


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I really find it hard to believe she was willing to come as she must realize she will be booed. Her skin must be so thick.


...
they talk about the baby as if she is an adult or an older child.....she doesn't know she's in England.....maybe now there will be pics of her (not that I much care)


----------



## TC1

Sophisticatted said:


> I read somewhere (don’t know if it’s true) that one of William’s stipulations regarding Megxit was that he not be photographed with Harry henceforth.  It may be part of why the brothers were separated by their cousin during the funeral procession and also why Diana’s siblings stepped in between them at times during the statue unveiling.
> 
> I’ve also read that Charles is not allowed to release any photos of himself (Charles) with William’s children unless express permission has been granted by William.
> 
> in any case, I imagine there will be a lot of strategic distancing (or grimacing and “scarfing”).


They were photographed together at the unveiling of the Diana statue. And the funeral. Maybe not side by side..but still together. So I highly doubt that scenario.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As admitted before, I'm the Grinch of Grinches. Buuut...what's wrong with some nice, appropriate appreciation of a process that literally remodelled your body, put you at risk for all kinds of complications, was uncomfortable for several months and ended with 12 hours of painful, exhausting labor? Give me all the jewels.


HA!! .. well, add a Grinch to your group because I’m 100% with you on all!

Reveal Party = stupid 
Smash Cake = stupid 
Push Present = brilliant!!!!


----------



## altigirl88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I still had hope.



Oh my, back when William looked like a Ralph Lauren. Not that he looks bad, now. I miss the hair, lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

We almost missed mama's video in the middle of AH vs JD drama.


----------



## CeeJay

jelliedfeels said:


> Me too! Painful comes to mind and it’s just weird,
> 
> I’m a bit of weirdo about traditions too. i
> 
> The thing I can’t stand is how companies are always trying to invent another Christmas tradition when in my opinion it’s the best catered for holiday already and yet Easter and Passover are total snooze fests by comparison. We need something to do before getting drunk and eating gross roast lamb - come on Hollywood think up something. Where is my hallmark comedy about sharing a seder with an unlikely true love? Or the Easter egg hunt of romantic misunderstandings
> 
> I’d also love mayday to make a comeback and everyone gets drunk and sings plainsong.
> 
> in jubilee related news,  here’s the commemoration packaging for some U.K. teabags:-
> View attachment 5416544


One of the most hilarious skits I ever saw on SNL, was when Seinfeld was on the show and knocks on a family’s door (Elijah) during the Passover Seder.  What ensues after that had me in hysterics as Elijah proceeds to flirt massively with one of the girls!  It was particularly funny because we had just gotten home from my husband’s family Seder.


----------



## LittleStar88

lanasyogamama said:


> The thing that bothers me is the new trend of decorating the inside and outside of the house for every holiday. I see people putting up lights for Halloween now, which to me is so ridiculous. I love home design and decoration, but more in a thoughtful, long-term curated way, not slapping a bunch of plastic stuff around the house that I have to take down four weeks later.



We decorate for Halloween. Full-scale haunted yard with animated ghouls, lights, sound, smoke machine, etc. When some kids are too afraid to come to the door for candy you know it's a job well done  

We do it for the kids in the neighborhood. 

We also decorate for Christmas, but have the most fun with Halloween. But those are the only two.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I really find it hard to believe she was willing to come as she must realize she will be booed. *Her skin must be so thick.*



Just the opposite I think. It’s a strategy. If she is booed she will milk the experience as being a sign of British racism when she gets home. Any criticism of her will fall under that category. The best thing that could happen would be that she was completely ignored and overlooked, nothing positive or negative. However, with the press being the way it is, that is the last thing that will happen. Every insignificant detail will be headline news.


----------



## carmen56

Hooray for Johnny Depp - his court win has shoved the Harkles arrival here in London down the page in the DM online.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> I was looking at some pics that my cousins daughter took in May of 2108 when they were invited to Buckingham palace For Prince Charles' 70th birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5416561
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe this was one of the first events that TW attended after the "spectacle" wedding.  I don't know, but she seems to have gotten a LOT darker recently.  Look at her hands in particular.....


Image Caption:
Charles snickers and whispers to Camilla:
"Why is she laughing so hard? She didn't even hear the joke!"
Camilla to Charles:
"She's a ham... it's all an act for the cameras. She wants everyone to believe that she's a much loved member of the family!"


----------



## DeMonica

altigirl88 said:


> Oh my, back when William looked like a Ralph Lauren. Not that he looks bad, now. I miss the hair, lol


I'm sure he misses the hair too.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> Just the opposite I think. It’s a strategy. If she is booed she will milk the experience as being a sign of British racism when she gets home. Any criticism of her will fall under that category. The best thing that could happen would be that she was completely ignored and overlooked, nothing positive or negative. However, with the press being the way it is, that is the last thing that will happen. Every insignificant detail will be headline news.


Unfortunately, you're most likely right. The worst punishment for these two would be being ignored by the press, but I see a little chance of this happening. They desperately need material for their Netflix show: good, bad or ugly. Their security issues are already blown up out of proportion in the press. I'm sure Lilibet's birthday and rumoured Christening will be also posted everywhere, especially if the Queen decides to attend.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LittleStar88 said:


> We decorate for Halloween. Full-scale haunted yard with animated ghouls, lights, sound, smoke machine, etc. When some kids are too afraid to come to the door for candy you know it's a job well done
> 
> We do it for the kids in the neighborhood.
> 
> We also decorate for Christmas, but have the most fun with Halloween. But those are the only two.


That’s what I need to remember, that people who do it enjoy it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I hate the stupid wedding tradition of smashing cake into your new spouse's face too.



I'd be so p*ssed. And if he didn't know me well enough to know that I'd also question my choice.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aww when the real royals act really normal i.e. carrying their own bags and waving to say hi


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As admitted before, I'm the Grinch of Grinches. Buuut...what's wrong with some nice, appropriate appreciation of a process that literally remodelled your body, put you at risk for all kinds of complications, was uncomfortable for several months and ended with 12 hours of painful, exhausting labor? Give me all the jewels.


Haha i wish it were only 12 hours of labor. I had 26…


----------



## Chanbal

So they arrived on a private jet!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I hate the stupid wedding tradition of smashing cake into your new spouse's face too.


I DETESTED that and made sure it wasn't going to happen at our wedding!  Starting married life with  violence?  What genius thought this cake smashing thing up?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd be so p*ssed. And if he didn't know me well enough to know that I'd also question my choice.


I’ve always thought weddings where they smoosh the cake into the faces must not last long as there must be some underlying resentment there. I can’t imagine humiliatingly someone you love that way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh.


----------



## Chanbal

I thought they needed a tomato-proof card


----------



## Chanbal

On the sad saga…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh.



LOL, kudos to HM for coming up with this solution. The despicable duo "will be watching Trouping The Colour from Major General's Office overlooking the Horse Guards parade ground." We might see a picture of their ugly faces through a window, but I'm almost positive that no senior royal will be standing in close proximity to them in order to avoid being photographed with them.
ET add an 's' to kudos


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh.



From a special window because of the tomatoes… 






__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## chaneljewel

I was a supporter of H and M originally but both ruined that with their egotistical, selfish ways.  I noticed another thread which supports the two because of the supposedly toxicity of this one, but the only toxicity belongs to Harry and Meghan.   They’ve negatively judged their families and are now paying the price.


----------



## chaneljewel

Chanbal said:


> From a special window because of the tomatoes…
> View attachment 5416725
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



I thought about the tomatoes myself!!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

chaneljewel said:


> I was a supporter of H and M originally but both ruined that with their egotistical, selfish ways.  I noticed another thread which supports the two because of the supposedly toxicity of this one, but the only toxicity belongs to Harry and Meghan.   They’ve negatively judged their families and are now paying the price.


Many people on this thread started by being supporters… In any event, I can't understand the fans of this entitled couple. They must be very confused by their eagerness to join and celebrate the monarchy.


----------



## Lodpah

So we’re they transported in a caravan with the Bentley or the van? Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> So they arrived on a private jet!



And this is why Travalyst will fail. They demand WE do eco-friendly travel while they ONLY fly private, no matter how short/long the distance. Can’t wait until that phoney venture is in the reject pile with Pearl


----------



## rose60610

OK, so they're on British soil now.....and I find it amazing MM hasn't blurted out something idiotic yet. Give her time.


----------



## csshopper

chaneljewel said:


> I thought about the tomatoes myself!!


The windows may be soundproof, no “boos” allowed to penetrate, not so on the Palace balcony. Although there would probably be many, in deference to the Queen, who would be silent, I honestly think Raptor and her Handbag are so loathed and the Queen is being second guessed to a degree rarely experienced about her apparent welcome to them (Think perception of the RF to Diana’s death.) that boos would be heard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> So we’re they transported in a caravan with the Bentley or the van? Inquiring minds want to know.


Nothing that Twitter can't answer!


----------



## csshopper

New for this visit: Guardhouses flank the entrances, manned by sword wielding Sentries deployed  to protect their privacy from nefarious Netflix camera crews scoping out slits in the drawn drapes that would permit photo access to Frogmore interiors.

Just kidding


----------



## Sophisticatted

rose60610 said:


> OK, so they're on British soil now.....and I find it amazing MM hasn't blurted out something idiotic yet. Give her time.


The probably “silenced” her, I.e. told them no social media (etc.) or the invites would be rescinded immediately


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> OK, so they're on British soil now.....and I find it amazing MM hasn't blurted out something idiotic yet. Give her time.


Give her time...her Xanax probably hasn't even worn off yet!


----------



## Chanbal

Yeah…


----------



## Chanbal

Cute and yummy!


----------



## Lodpah

I ventured into the other thread out of curiosity and it's good to have two differing opinions.

All I can say is like begets like.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Yeah…




She was really butthurt over that title she claimed she didn't want, wasn't she. And BTW he has a courtesy title, just like any other firstborn son of a duke.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently they are not banned to the office while everyone else is on the balcony, but instead Camilla and Kate once again have to appease the jerks. If that's true, I'm starting to question The Queen. Or is this a seperate occasion? I'm so confused.

Also surely the nobodys are joining the two future queens, not the other way around.


----------



## Sharont2305

I just saw this on the other thread. Anyone want to tell them that child 2s birthday is not part of the Jubilee schedule?

*Platinum Jubilee schedule:

Thursday: Trooping The Colour (Harry & Meghan to join royal family in Horse Guards Parade)
Friday: Thanksgiving Service (Harry and Meghan will join the Queen at St Paul's Cathedral)
Saturday: Lilibet’s birthday, Epsom Derby & ‘Platinum Party At The Palace’ concert
Sunday: Platinum Jubilee Pageant
*


----------



## CarryOn2020

What is Eug doing?  Seems a bit desperate imo









						Princess Eugenie wishes her 'dear followers' a 'happy Jubilee'
					

The 32-year-old daughter of Prince Andrew and Sarah, Duchess of York, who lives in Windsor,  reshared a video posted by the Royal Family to her official Instagram page.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So apparently they are not banned to the office while everyone else is on the balcony, but instead Camilla and Kate once again have to appease the jerks. If that's true, I'm starting to question The Queen. Or is this a seperate occasion? I'm so confused.
> 
> Also surely the nobodys are joining the two future queens, not the other way around.



No, Camilla and Catherine will be in the office just for Trooping the Colour, like they usually are with all invited guests. They'll go back to BP the way they came, in the carriages and then we'll see them on the balcony. 
I don't think we'll see H&M today, unless M peeks out of the window during Trooping the Colour and a camera catches it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I just saw this on the other thread. Anyone want to tell them that child 2s birthday is not part of the Jubilee schedule?
> 
> *Platinum Jubilee schedule: what really will happen imo
> 
> Thursday: Trooping The Colour (Harry & Meghan to join royal family in Horse Guards Parade) at the window
> Friday: Thanksgiving Service (Harry and Meghan will join the Queen at St Paul's Cathedral) seated off to the side?
> Saturday: Lilibet’s birthday  possibly cancelled due to illness? Epsom Derby & ‘Platinum Party At The Palace’ concert
> Sunday: Platinum Jubilee Pageant H&M left Sat. night due to loud noises and upset kids*



My guess is they leave sometime Saturday, especially if Nflix hasn’t sent the check.


----------



## periogirl28

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww when the real royals act really normal i.e. carrying their own bags and waving to say hi



Golly what time was this? I was there yesterday!


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww when the real royals act really normal i.e. carrying their own bags and waving to say hi



All hail 'Queen' Charlotte, love the way she's carrying her bag!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> No, Camilla and Catherine will be in the office just for Trooping the Colour, like they usually are with all invited guests. They'll go back to BP the way they came, in the carriages and then we'll see them on the balcony.
> I don't think we'll see H&M today, unless M peeks out of the window during Trooping the Colour and a camera catches it.



Thank you! That makes sense!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I want to go to London so badly, but my enthusiasm was dampened after a triple-vaccinated family member caught Covid on a train wearing a mask and had to be hospitalized. They are also still positive, infectious AND sick 10 days later, so maybe not *sigh*

I was seriously considering going just after the Jubilee to see the Sotheby's tiara exhibition, pop into a few other museums and eat well.


----------



## Norm.Core

Sharont2305 said:


> I just saw this on the other thread. Anyone want to tell them that child 2s birthday is not part of the Jubilee schedule?
> 
> *Platinum Jubilee schedule:
> 
> Thursday: Trooping The Colour (Harry & Meghan to join royal family in Horse Guards Parade)
> Friday: Thanksgiving Service (Harry and Meghan will join the Queen at St Paul's Cathedral)
> Saturday: Lilibet’s birthday, Epsom Derby & ‘Platinum Party At The Palace’ concert
> Sunday: Platinum Jubilee Pageant*


Created roughly 6 weeks ago and 4 pages later... Not much really happens over there, especially when we leave them well enough alone.

It’s a bit of a tumbleweed thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

where’s H&M


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> where’s H&M


Stuck in that room with all the horrible racists, lol


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> where’s H&M



I suspect their appearances have been carefully choreographed by BP to prevent the Harkles going ‘off piste.’


----------



## EverSoElusive

Omg omg omg. Is this from today? I've never seen it in the past


----------



## EverSoElusive

Pictures!!


----------



## catlover46

carmen56 said:


> I suspect their appearances have been carefully choreographed by BP to prevent the Harkles going ‘off piste.’


I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s an agreement between the RF and the networks not to show H&M.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Eat your heart out Nutmeg. You'll never be queen and you'll never get this kinda treatment


----------



## catlover46

There’s a pic of her on the Daily Mail. She’s a wearing a tacky dark off the shoulder dress and an awful hat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CopyKate  
Leave those kids alone. They aren’t yours.


----------



## catlover46

CarryOn2020 said:


> CopyKate
> 
> View attachment 5416890
> 
> 
> View attachment 5416891


She’s so tacky and disrespectful wearing that off the shoulder dress. I’m so done with H&M. All they care about and the only reason they are there is to get that photo of Lili and TQ. That child is no more special than the rest of her great grandchildren.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## elvisfan4life

Chloe302225 said:


>




Pinocchio tapping her own nose lol what gives her the right to even speak to Zaras kids


----------



## elvisfan4life




----------



## lanasyogamama

She’s not leaving that window.


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> Pinocchio tapping her own nose lol what gives her the right to even speak to Zaras kids



Those are Peter’s girls and Lena & Mia Tindall [barely visible].
Who shushes other people’s kids during a flypast?  Ick ick ick.  Glad Mike stepped in.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That flyover was amazing!

Poor Louis!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would be so angry if someone who didn’t even know my child shushed them like that, especially adding in the factors of cameras and it getting published on social media, which immediately did.


----------



## mikimoto007

I wonder is the navy dress the same as the Roland Mouret she wore the night before her wedding. Really liked that dress, but seems a little off for the trooping.

Not convinced on the hat.


----------



## Annawakes

She’s trying to be cutesy again with that exaggerated shush.


----------



## Annawakes

She looks darker that’s for sure


----------



## lanasyogamama

Annawakes said:


> She’s trying to be cutesy again with that exaggerated shush.


Hamming for the cameras, big time.


----------



## Sophisticatted

TW pretending that she likes kids.  Rolleyes.  As someone else said, it’s really ALL about the window.  It looks like the circle of trust (Bea, Edo, Mike) was placed around the Cambridge kids.  Until Edo went to rescue the Phillips kids.  I wonder if the elder Duke was pulled in to distract and filibuster the Dumbartons in order t get TW away from the window.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> CopyKate
> Leave those kids alone. They aren’t yours.
> 
> View attachment 5416890
> 
> 
> View attachment 5416891



What? Are you kidding me?  I so wished somebody would tell HER to STFU!  What an attention whore. Nobody is talking to HER so she has to use somebody's kids to get attention for herself. Those kids will always have better manners than she ever will, and she's telling THEM to shush? I fear this is only the beginning of desperation attention ploys.  Ugh.


----------



## Aimee3

I had no idea what to expect but that flyover was simply stunning!  Very emotional and I’m not even from the UK.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> She’s so tacky and disrespectful wearing that off the shoulder dress. I’m so done with H&M. All they care about and the only reason they are there is to get that photo of Lili and TQ. That child is no more special than the rest of her great grandchildren.



In fact, none of the others has a completely crazy parent with lots of unflattering rumours.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I would be so angry if someone who didn’t even know my child shushed them like that, especially adding in the factors of cameras and it getting published on social media, which immediately did.



Especially HER. The ingrate who should have shushed herself many, many times.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those are Peter’s girls and Lena & Mia Tindall [barely visible].
> Who shushes other people’s kids during a flypast?  Ick ick ick.  Glad Mike stepped in.



Can't find it, what did he do?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mikimoto007 said:


> I wonder is the navy dress the same as the Roland Mouret she wore the night before her wedding. Really liked that dress, but seems a little off for the trooping.
> 
> Not convinced on the hat.



Not to be mean but unless she found one three sizes bigger I doubt it.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> I ventured into the other thread out of curiosity and it's good to have two differing opinions.
> 
> All I can say is like begets like.


I did too, and to my surprise I found there some of our members with their pertinent opinions.   
It is very important to have and discuss different views, but I have a hard time finding appreciation for people that use others (including family) the way they do.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Pinocchio tapping her own nose lol what gives her the right to even speak to Zaras kids


And Peters kids. She's probably saying something like don't trust the grown ups.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those are Peter’s girls and Lena & Mia Tindall [barely visible].
> Who shushes other people’s kids during a flypast?  Ick ick ick.  Glad Mike stepped in.



I think these were taken at Trooping the Colour itself, not Buckingham Palace where the flypast was. I saw footage from that room earlier and it is fairly small.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh!


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> All hail 'Queen' Charlotte, love the way she's carrying her bag!


she's a natural


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I thought I read somewhere they were flying commercial


----------



## sdkitty

elvisfan4life said:


> Pinocchio tapping her own nose lol what gives her the right to even speak to Zaras kids


the hair hanging over the side of her face doesn't seem right for the occasion


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can't find it, what did he do?



In one of the photos, he was in the background.  My hope is that he was able to move H&M out of the way.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> She’s trying to be cutesy again with that exaggerated shush.



I thought it looked conspiratory. Like “don’t tell anyone you saw me making off with this jewelry box!”


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I did too, and to my surprise I found there some of our members with their pertinent opinions.
> It is very important to have and discuss different views, but I have a hard time finding appreciation for people that use others (including family) the way they do.



Were they getting slammed?




sdkitty said:


> I thought I read somewhere they were flying commercial



Imo we will never know the truth.  They’ve taken up way too much air space, literally and figuratively.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!




Looks like they were sat at the equivalent of the kids' table at a holiday dinner.


----------



## kemilia

jennlt said:


> Ah, to have a mom with a VCA collection that I could borrow...


She said both her and her sister wear it from time to time. I said darn, you have to share with sis and she chuckled.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I thought I read somewhere they were flying commercial



I saw that too but so much of what we read is fabricated. I won’t even blame the misinformation on their PR agency. So many journalists are lazy and lack credibility these days.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I saw that too but so much of what we read is fabricated. I won’t even blame the misinformation on their PR agency. So many journalists are lazy and lack credibility these days.


so either could be true


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> so either could be true



There was a tweet that said they flew in on brooms, so anything is possible 
Some of these announcers have clearly had one too many G&T.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



Wow, they named names!


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Anne understands what goes on in Will's mind.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Guessing Hazz is throwing a fit over this


----------



## Chanbal

This is a cute video clip.


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> It looks like Anne understands what goes on in Will's mind.



How does one see with those black “hairy” hats. It always looks to me that it covers ones eyes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Hazz is throwing a fit over this



It’s ok, the sugars can photoshop Archie in.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> This is a cute video clip.



Louis is a legend!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Louis is a legend!


he's cute but I love Charlotte...cute hairdo in that pic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## regnews

Standing in a corner alone.....


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Hazz is throwing a fit over this



Louis's outfit…


----------



## CarryOn2020

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....



Eavesdropping.
From this angle, that hat looks really awful.  Looks bad from the other angle, too.


----------



## Chanbal

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....


But she didn't abandon the window!!!! _Mr. DeMille, I m_ Always _Ready for My Close Up_


----------



## Aimee3

How convenient that PA just got Covid!!! Way to save face?


----------



## sdkitty

People magazine fawning over her








						Meghan Markle Charms the Royal Kids as She and Prince Harry Reunite with Royal Family: See the Photos!
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are kicking off Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee at the palace!




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> People magazine fawning over her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Charms the Royal Kids as She and Prince Harry Reunite with Royal Family: See the Photos!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are kicking off Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee at the palace!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



They are on the SS payroll after all!


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> People magazine fawning over her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Charms the Royal Kids as She and Prince Harry Reunite with Royal Family: See the Photos!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are kicking off Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee at the palace!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Nice try People.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Nice try People.


she did somehow manage to get a "cute" picture out there


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....



Awww...did the face hurt from all the fake megawatt grinning? It's a blurry picture but it does look like the face slipped a little again, doesn't it.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh




Umm......Andrew "has Covid"?  Several months ago I predicted he'd have something to the effect of "emergency gall bladder surgery". Covid will do. Maybe I predicted that for Charles' eventual rise to the throne. By then it'll be gall bladder surgery.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Awww...did the face hurt from all the fake megawatt grinning? It's a blurry picture but it does look like the face slipped a little again, doesn't it.


she def isn't smiling
It must be infuriating to be relegated to a window seat


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> How convenient that PA just got Covid!!! Way to save face?



Maybe H&M should follow Andy’s lead.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> People magazine fawning over her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Charms the Royal Kids as She and Prince Harry Reunite with Royal Family: See the Photos!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are kicking off Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee at the palace!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Even the most ardent MM sugars have to realize the vomit inducing spin on this one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Awww...did the face hurt from all the fake megawatt grinning? It's a blurry picture but it does look like the face slipped a little again, doesn't it.



She is eavesdropping. I cannot identify the others in the photo, but she is listening intently = eavesdropping.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Even the most ardent MM sugars have to realize the vomit inducing spin on this one.


I doubt it


----------



## Katel




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is eavesdropping. I cannot identify the others in the photo, but she is listening intently = eavesdropping.



I think the guy in uniform is the Duke of Kent.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is eavesdropping. I cannot identify the others in the photo, but she is listening intently = eavesdropping.



Everyone attending should know to be wary of her and watch what they say. Shame on them if they haven’t learned that by now.


----------



## Chanbal

Well…


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eavesdropping.
> From this angle, that hat looks really awful.  Looks bad from the other angle, too.



It looks awful from ALL angles. Almost like she overdid it on purpose as to say "I'M wearing a hat!"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is eavesdropping. I cannot identify the others in the photo, but she is listening intently = eavesdropping.





sdkitty said:


> People magazine fawning over her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Charms the Royal Kids as She and Prince Harry Reunite with Royal Family: See the Photos!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are kicking off Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee at the palace!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


----------



## Debbini

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....


Good Lord, give it a break Megnut.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They probably all came to see Jezebel. Not.


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> People magazine fawning over her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Charms the Royal Kids as She and Prince Harry Reunite with Royal Family: See the Photos!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are kicking off Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee at the palace!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


People used to be a pretty honest and relatable magazine.....no more.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is eavesdropping. I cannot identify the others in the photo, but she is listening intently = eavesdropping.



Bingo!  EAVESDROPPING amid all the ambient noise so she can claim "vicious" things were said about her. Then, when she's proven to be a liar (again) she can go "B-b-b-b-b-b-but there was so much noise I th-th-th-th-thought they said " &^&^$%&* " about me".  Or whatever crap professional victims will pull out of their *** when called on their habitual lies.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> It looks awful from ALL angles. Almost like she overdid it on purpose as to say "I'M wearing a hat!"



Hey, she’s got to hide three microphones in that thing! A big hat is crucial for attaining the high quality production values Netflix demands.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh



Allegedly and conveniently.  We are all grateful whether true or not.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Eavesdropping.
> From this angle, that hat looks really awful.  Looks bad from the other angle, too.


I adore hats.  This one however gives off backward baseball cap vibes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Did anyone else relegated to remain INDOORS wear a hat?


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> That’s what I need to remember, that people who do it enjoy it!


One year it was really warm on Halloween and we were sitting out in the lawn giving out candy to the kids. My neighbor had a fog machine going and it was floating everywhere so super spooky. Well, my BF was drinking a large glass of red wine and a little boy asked him if it was blood, and my BF said "well, yes it is". The little boy laughed and ran off--now he has a good, creepy memory and that's what makes a good Halloween, IMO.


----------



## DoggieBags

Piers Morgan was one of the commentators today on FOX while they were showing the Trooping of the Colors. TW’s ears must have been burning lol. He mentioned several times what hypocrites they are lecturing everyone on carbon footprint while arriving in a private jet from CA. He had several other choice things to say about TW.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe she’s planning to go for the “nobody would talk to me and I had to stand all alone” narrative.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Maybe she’s planning to go for the “nobody would talk to me and I had to stand all alone” narrative.



Poor widdle Meghan! Nobody wants to talk to her because she’s so beautiful, kind, and glorious. They’re all just jealous!

l definitely see that as being the narrative.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Hey, she’s got to hide three microphones in that thing! A big hat is crucial for attaining the high quality production values Netflix demands.


you mean… ???


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Piers Morgan was one of the commentators today on FOX while they were showing the Trooping of the Colors. TW’s ears must have been burning lol. He mentioned several times what hypocrites they are lecturing everyone on carbon footprint while arriving in a private jet from CA. He had several other choice things to say about TW.


Watching these now!


----------



## bagshopr

I love the way Fox news Jubilee coverage is dissing Harry and Meghan, especially Meghan.


----------



## 880

Sophisticatted said:


> Did anyone else relegated to remain INDOORS wear a hat?


I like the hat and the dress, but both are too attention grabbing for this event ( and I think I would say that no matter who was wearing it)


----------



## Aimee3

The Daily Mail has a photo of the duo in a car with the windows rolled down so they can be visible to the crowd (but, but we need security! Right, so roll down the window???) and TW is grinning but the crowd isn’t even looking at them.  The crowd is turned away from them and looking at whoever is in the car behind the duo.  It must kill Handbag that he can’t wear his military uniform and be a part of the royals now that it’s right in front of him. Such a fool!


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the event is open for jokes!


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the event is open for jokes!



I'm sure she wanted to get her hands photographed to merch those rings.


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty 
Hope this addresses your question!


----------



## Gal4Dior

880 said:


> I like the hat and the dress, but both are too attention grabbing for this event ( and I think I would say that no matter who was wearing it)


I have a feeling her top is Dior. Especially if her hat maker is the official one for Dior.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty
> Hope this addresses your question!



I see that but do we know it's accurate?  so many "people" talking about these two 
We know they hypocrites so whether or not they took a private jet doesn't matter that much to me....if they did it's just another example of their hypocrisy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I would be so angry if someone who didn’t even know my child shushed them like that, especially adding in the factors of cameras and it getting published on social media, which immediately did.


But that's what she wants--to get her pic out there any way possible. And the more controversial the better.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Louis's outfit…



I haven't caught up on the posts and apologize if someone has already said this ... wonder if the sailor suit is the same one Prince W wore. They stored it away.  I like to think it is the same.  SO CUTE!


----------



## elvisfan4life

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....



That hat looks like deputy dawg


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> Nice try People.



Deluded or what


----------



## kemilia

Hermes Zen said:


> I haven't caught up on the posts and apologize if someone has already said this ... wonder if the sailor suit is the same one Prince W wore. They stored it away.  I like to think it is the same.  SO CUTE!


Yep, from 1985 (I did not know this, it was said somewhere else).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, Hazzi, let’s chat about _that_ book, shall we?


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> The Daily Mail has a photo of the duo in a car with the windows rolled down so they can be visible to the crowd (but, but we need security! Right, so roll down the window???) and TW is grinning but the crowd isn’t even looking at them.  The crowd is turned away from them and looking at whoever is in the car behind the duo.  It must kill Handbag that he can’t wear his military uniform and be a part of the royals now that it’s right in front of him. Such a fool!



Are they being booed?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sophisticatted said:


> Did anyone else relegated to remain INDOORS wear a hat?


 To be completely fair Beatrice appeared to be wearing a tiara!!!


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those are Peter’s girls and Lena & Mia Tindall [barely visible].
> Who shushes other people’s kids during a flypast?  Ick ick ick.  Glad Mike stepped in.



V formation for Victory. God bless the Queen.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> V formation for Victory. God bless the Queen.



Where did Mike step in ? I haven’t seen that he should have decked her


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Are they being booed?



I wonder if car windows will be wound down when they are transporting A & L to see the Queen?


----------



## Sophisticatted

elvisfan4life said:


> To be completely fair Beatrice appeared to be wearing a tiara!!!



Her headband reminded me of portraits of the first Queen Elizabeth.  Examples scroll down for more.


----------



## Cheddar Cheese

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am outing myself as super Grinch, but I don't find children covered in food cute, and I think wasting food like this is sacrilegious.


Backing you up on this QueenofWrapDress.

My frugal family, one side traditional farmers & the other lived through 2 WWs would have been horrified at the waste, any waste actually.

However the world moves through cycles this will change soon. Thinking of Ukraine a major breadbasket of the world.


----------



## Mrs.Z

elvisfan4life said:


> To be completely fair Beatrice appeared to be wearing a tiara!!!


No, it was a thick ugly pearl headband


----------



## csshopper

LOVE Kate's choice of jewelry: Diana's sapphires earrings worn as originally presented in all their glory. And showcased against her elegant white outfit to make them stand out even more along with a pendant of the jewels.

Powerfully understated message.

edited for clarification on the earrings


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> The Daily Mail has a photo of the duo in a car with the windows rolled down so they can be visible to the crowd (but, but we need security! Right, so roll down the window???) and TW is grinning but the crowd isn’t even looking at them.  The crowd is turned away from them and looking at whoever is in the car behind the duo.  It must kill Handbag that he can’t wear his military uniform and be a part of the royals now that it’s right in front of him. Such a fool!



I didn't want them there (still don't want them), but I'm starting to think this is everything but a pleasant event for them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> To be completely fair Beatrice appeared to be wearing a tiara!!!



Wasn't it a beaded headband like Kate likes to wear occasionally?


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> LOVE Kate's choice of jewelry: Diana's sapphires earrings worn as originally presented in all their glory. And showcased against her elegant white outfit to make them stand out even more along with a pendant of the jewels.
> 
> Powerfully understated message.
> 
> edited for clarification on the earrings


I'm never sure with these earrings if they belonged to Diana or were loaned to her by the Queen and now are loaned to Catherine.

ETA, I think they belonged to Diana. Happy to be corrected.


----------



## catlover46

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't want them there (still don't want them), but I'm starting to think this is everything but a pleasant event for them.


I’m pretty sure they are going to be SHUNNED by everyone and won’t even see HM. I bet they leave early especially if they can’t get the pic of TQ and Lili- that’s the only reason why they came.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if car windows will be wound down when they are transporting A & L to see the Queen?


----------



## csshopper

Same window where Maggot had been mugging it up: BUT, Cambridge children at the window sill with Mike Tindall, Edo and Beatrice very protectively placed behind them not allowing for any pushy Pinocchio to intrude. 

I’m sure it was not a coincidence, but part of a concerted effort to shield the Cambridge children from a photo the Suckesses would dearly love to have in their portfolio, Uncle Harry and Aunt Meg with a future King and his siblings.


----------



## DoggieBags

Mrs.Z said:


> No, it was a thick ugly pearl headband


I really wish she would get rid of those big headbands. She seems to have a bunch of them in different colors and fabrics and they are really not flattering for her


----------



## Sophisticatted

Is NetFlix stationed or a corner nearby?  Is this their one “official royal” shot?


----------



## Lodpah

Love this! This gives no credibility to the two.


----------



## bellecate

Such a shame with all the cousins attending the two hidden anchor children weren’t there as well.


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> I see that but do we know it's accurate?  so many "people" talking about these two
> We know they hypocrites so whether or not they took a private jet doesn't matter that much to me....if they did it's just another example of their hypocrisy


Piers Morgan mentioned that the Harkles arrived by private jet while he was a guest commentator on Fox News this morning during their telecast of the Trooping of the Colors.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> Piers Morgan mentioned that the Harkles arrived by private jet while he was a guest commentator on Fox News this morning during their telecast of the Trooping of the Colors.


honestly, I don't like him that much better than I like H&M.  He's using criticism of them for ratings.


----------



## Nutashha

I know we are discussing attires, but thought this might be cool too.

https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/meghan-waxfigure-moved-back-with-royal-family


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't want them there (still don't want them), but I'm starting to think this is everything but a pleasant event for them.



Reality can be a hard pill to swallow when you’ve built up your popularity in your head. Sunshine Sachs couldn’t hire hundreds of people to follow them around cheering for three days.


----------



## catlover46

It’s being reported that the Queen will not be attending the church service tomorrow due to experiencing “some discomfort” today.
I wonder if H&M will even attend now that she’s not going.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> honestly, I don't like him that much better than I like H&M.  He's using criticism of them for ratings.



Who is the lesser evil? To me it’s Piers.

If it galls Meghan that he is profiting from disparaging her, all the better. He’s made it his job and he’s doing it well. Unlike Meghan who hasn’t really accomplished anything in the past two years other than writing The Bench.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My mom is 89 and she’s very tired after a big day out.  I can imagine that today was a lot for HMTQ.


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> My mom is 89 and she’s very tired after a big day out.  I can imagine that today was a lot for HMTQ.


Mine is the same-for her age  the Queen is absolutely amazing even with her  health issues now - I think it’s the travelling and practical issues of access to St Paul’s that are the issues here far easier for events to be at the palace


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> honestly, I don't like him that much better than I like H&M.  He's using criticism of them for ratings.


Wasn’t he fired from his previous network after TW complained to the network about his rants about her? He didn’t like her before but after getting fired partly thanks to her I can only imagine what he thinks of her now. But then again I can’t think of any tv commentator or news anchor that just presents the news without slanting it in some way These days


----------



## csshopper

In spite of the Vanity Fair sugared version of the Suckesses flying commercial, Piers got the true story.

Articles with information they flew on a private 5 mil $ Embraer Jet from Santa Barbara CA airport, landing at RAF Farnborough, where they were met by a car provided by the Queen.

Consistently hypocrital.


----------



## Toby93

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....


Just wondering, why is she with someone else’s kids?  Where are her kids?


----------



## Pivoine66

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder if car windows will be wound down when they are transporting A & L to see the Queen?





I wish all those celebrating the wonderful Platinum Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II delightful celebrations, lots of pleasure - and - good weather!

I am hm surprised - all these photos of TW ! Is this a former actress'/"briefcase girl's" idea of discretion and - well, security?

And - has she contacted her suffering father in the meantime and presented his grandchildren to him before it is too late? Or would that make her pull on her heart strings too much?


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!



She looks so contrived here....actually a little bit scary.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> In spite of the Vanity Fair sugared version of the Suckesses flying commercial, Piers got the true story.
> 
> Articles with information they flew on a private 5 mil $ Embraer Jet from Santa Barbara CA airport, landing at RAF Farnborough, where they were met by a car provided by the Queen.
> 
> Consistently hypocrital.


The fact that it cost only 5 million is a scary thought. The jalopy of the Embraer? Those private jets cost upwards of 30 million. Probably rented from a rent a plane. Their rich friends must have said no to their planes for use.


----------



## Lodpah

andrashik said:


> She looks so contrived here....actually a little bit scary.


They’re so stupid. Where are their kids? I don’t know but she’s copying Michael Jackson when he first had his kids. I feel for the mental health of their kids. It’s good for children to have a good start and be able to go out in public. One day they’re probably going to ask why no pictures of them. They are being markled on the daily.


----------



## TC1

Lodpah said:


> V formation for Victory. God bless the Queen.


Isn't it a # 70?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh!



She's such a bad influence, she should be kept away from all children.


----------



## EverSoElusive

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....




This picture is SAD. Had she not threw the BRF under the bus and did the blasphemous O interview, she would have been part of the conversation. Now almost every family member is avoiding her like a plague because nobody wants to allow her the opportunity of twisting their words and intentions. If Prince Phillip was still alive, I bet you Nutmeg would have been scared to show her spray tanned face.

Now let's see what kinda crazy sh#t they are having SS leaking tomorrow onwards.

I'm still waiting to see Invisibet


----------



## Lodpah

They do a V formation then probably sequenced into 70. The V formation is a standard military maneuver at air shows and most likely a nod to V-E day?


----------



## chaneljewel

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....


Probably pouting and trying to justify how she can say “poor pitiful me as I was neglected”!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chaneljewel

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the event is open for jokes!



And it grows when I speak!!!   Like Pinocchio !!!


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Sharont2305

mellibelly said:


>



If I was Princess Anne I'd not be amused looking at these pictures.


----------



## Lodpah

Sad, so sad! One of the biggest events in the history of the UK and never to be repeated and they don’t bring the children. I guess their egos won’t be able to stand the attention the children would have received. I mean their appearance would have been recorded for posterity in the history books.


----------



## mellibelly

Wrong thread I know but I love this pic


----------



## Pivoine66

Lodpah said:


> Sad, so sad! One of the biggest events in the history of the UK and never to be repeated and they don’t bring the children. I guess their egos won’t be able to stand the attention the children would have received. I mean their appearance would have been recorded for posterity in the history books.


Maybe they are waiting for the real big photo-ops: Saturday - birthday of the girl and - IMO sadly - meeting the Queen?


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Just wondering, why is she with someone else’s kids?  Where are her kids?


They are perhaps reserved for a big Netf*x revelation!? It may have to do with the price of the milk.


----------



## mellibelly

Still can’t believe she had her car window down. Did she think the crowds would cheer and wave at her?! I was expecting a tomato to fly through!


----------



## kemilia

Pivoine66 said:


> Maybe they are waiting for the real big photo-ops: Saturday - birthday of the girl and - IMO sadly - meeting the Queen?


They will be brought out once the N*fl*x check clears.


----------



## kemilia

mellibelly said:


> Still can’t believe she had her car window down. Did she think the crowds would cheer and wave at her?! I was expecting a tomato to fly through!


N*fl*x was probably very definite--smile and show your overly bronzed face like your life ($$$) depends on it. 'Cause it does.


----------



## rose60610

Even though TQ is resting, I hope she is able to attend some more of her Jubilee. I'm waiting for H&M to trot out Archie and Lilibet and make the occasion all about themselves. With TQ in and out of the festivities, it must drive H&M nuts that they can't count on TQ to appear at any given time in order to ambush the cameras to merch the ideal photo of TQ, A and L. To launch Archie and Lilibet without TQ present makes their introduction a bit anticlimactic. And M&H are ALL ABOUT as much dRaMA as they can manufacture. Merch merch merch!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Reality can be a hard pill to swallow when you’ve built up your popularity in your head. Sunshine Sachs couldn’t hire hundreds of people to follow them around cheering for three days.


Yep, I bet it has been done!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those are Peter’s girls and Lena & Mia Tindall [barely visible].
> Who shushes other people’s kids during a flypast?  Ick ick ick.  Glad Mike stepped in.



I actually got a little weepy watching those jets; such a tribute to the Queen!!!


----------



## CeeJay

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....


Ah - how appropriate!!!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


> Still can’t believe she had her car window down. Did she think the crowds would cheer and wave at her?! I was expecting a tomato to fly through!



Rotten eggs are probably better


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

OK, so I did hear about five people cheering and applauding as M&H's car went by. I love the comment by one Twitter follower: "Probably the same rent-a-crowd from Invictus".


----------



## DoggieBags

Whichever designers lent her expensive clothes for the jubilee haven’t got their money’s worth yet. All we’ve seen so far is a rather ugly carnival barker inspired hat and the top of her dress.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I bet it has been done!




Lol, that was a small turnout and only a few were cheering. Kind of pathetic.


----------



## bagshopr

I wish the Queen would strike Harry from the line of succession as part of her Jubilee celebration. She could do it in person while H & M are visiting. Their reactions would be priceless!!


----------



## Lodpah

bagshopr said:


> I wish the Queen would strike Harry from the line of succession as part of her Jubilee celebration. She could do it in person while H & M are visiting. Their reactions would be priceless!!


Exactly. Why would the Brits want someone who lives in the US to be in the line of succession? That, in itself, is enough to remove him.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Who is the lesser evil? To me it’s Piers.
> 
> If it galls Meghan that he is profiting from disparaging her, all the better. He’s made it his job and he’s doing it well. Unlike Meghan who hasn’t really accomplished anything in the past two years other than writing The Bench.


I wouldn’t consider that an accomplishment either.


----------



## DoggieBags

bagshopr said:


> I wish the Queen would strike Harry from the line of succession as part of her Jubilee celebration. She could do it in person while H & M are visiting. Their reactions would be priceless!!


She hasn’t removed either Harry or Andrew as counselors of state yet so I don’t see her removing Harry from the line of succession.


----------



## Vintage Leather

I don’t see anything to criticize in her outfit.

I love the hat, and since she’s not going to be blocking anyone’s view or distracting from the important events of the day, it’s fitting. The dress is a dark navy, which is one of the more flattering colors on her, and one of the Union flag colors.

My only real complaint is that she’s using children to try to get her picture taken. And it’s the second time she’s done it in less than a week.

At least these kids have powerful grandparents to protect them from her machinations?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

Archie could have had the same relationship with the Queen but nooooo, the Troublesome Duo know better


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> Archie could have had the same relationship with the Queen but nooooo, the Troublesome Duo know better



Louis speaking comfortably and confidently to his great grandmother showing they have a normal relationship. This woman is a stranger to Archie. I find it quite sad actually. 
Can't they see it?


----------



## Sharont2305

Being that the Service is at St Paul's Cathedral tomorrow, am I the only one wondering how she's going to cosplay this?


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


>



I find this picture very amusing.  Remember when they were on the balcony and Harry had to tell her to shut up and turn around and she got all teary eyed?  

Didn't care for the hat at all or her hair, which was the usual sloppy look.  She was trying for the ingenue look, but at 40, closer to 41,, that is a bit difficult. The young girls were the only people willing to listen to word salad.  They're young and don't know any better.  Give them time.......  Harry managed to make himself just as scarce.  Only these two picture plus the car ride where she couldn't resist opening the window and giving the few onlookers the "Yeah it's me!" look.

Really don't know what was going on with her dress, but another off the shoulder at The Trooping?  She has done that before and apparently threw away the memo that said cover your shoulders next time.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Being that the Service is at St Paul's Cathedral tomorrow, am I the only one wondering how she's going to cosplay this?
> View attachment 5417239


Here's an idea.  Megan had her wedding dress cut down to a knee length dress and a portion of the veil is being used on veiling on a hat.  Whatever she wears, it won't fit and be the wrong color.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I bet it has been done!



There is nothing to say that the Netflix people aren't in the UK.  They could be there and came on a different flight.  Maybe she put down the window so they could photograph her.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> I find this picture very amusing.  Remember when they were on the balcony and Harry had to tell her to shut up and turn around and she got all teary eyed?
> 
> Didn't care for the hat at all or her hair, which was the usual sloppy look.  She was trying for the ingenue look, but at 40, closer to 41,, that is a bit difficult. The young girls were the only people willing to listen to word salad.  They're young and don't know any better.  Give them time.......  Harry managed to make himself just as scarce.  Only these two picture plus the car ride where she couldn't resist opening the window and giving the few onlookers the "Yeah it's me!" look.
> 
> Really don't know what was going on with her dress, but another off the shoulder at The Trooping?  She has done that before and apparently threw away the memo that said cover your shoulders next time.



Flower is special. She doesn't like rules, always wants to be the exception. She does not understand the word prudent. She does not understand how BR female family members are supposed to dress or behave.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> There is nothing to say that the Netflix people aren't in the UK.  They could be there and came on a different flight.  Maybe she put down the window so they could photograph her.




Probably this. I was looking at IG and it was very difficult to see other pictures of Nutmeg other than the same few that have been shared. The Brits and press were definitely not wasting their time, energy and phone/camera memory


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> Flower is special. She doesn't like rules, always wants to be the exception. She does not understand the word prudent. She does not understand how BR female family members are supposed to dress or behave.


She looks like she rents out by the hour at the Ritz Hotel in Paris.


----------



## EverSoElusive

So I'm not in the UK and I was at work when the event took place. Just saw this little gem of a video. Man did I teared up! You can tell that the Brits do love the Queen. 

On a lighter note, I also noticed that Camilla had Charles moved next to the Queen and Camilla herself moved to Charles' other side. Camilla knows her position and didn't try to steal Charles' limelight. We know had it been Nutmeg, she would never have moved away from the Queen's side.

Not sure why the video would not show but here's the link


----------



## gracekelly

Louis' Home Alone Macaulay Culkin face.  



caption:  That's Uncle Harry and his wife?


----------



## gracekelly

Caption:  Aunt Meghan taught me to do this.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## gracekelly

caption:  Please stop reading The Bench!  I can't take it anymore!


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles were a little far from the balcony. The hat is too big for an inside event imo.

















						Royals 'risking reputation' by allowing Harry and Meghan at Jubilee
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, joined her husband Prince Harry, 37, and royals to watch Trooping the Colour from the Major General's Office overlooking the Whitehall parade.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Flower is special. She doesn't like rules, always wants to be the exception. She does not understand the word prudent. *She does not understand how BR female family members are supposed to dress or behave.*



It's not that hard, she just doesn't care.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's not that hard, she just doesn't care.



Yeap, agree 

Even so, she'd probably just claim she has a learning disability  Always an excuse for everything.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry was shushing the little girls too? Makes me wonder if one or more of them is a shrieker. I’ll forgive H&M if that’s the case. There’s nothing as headache-inducing as a little girl screaming at a million decibels.


----------



## Chanbal

Michelle O's husband sent a very sweet message to QE, TW may not like it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry was shushing the little girls too? Makes me wonder if one or more of them is a shrieker. I’ll forgive H&M if that’s the case. There’s nothing as headache-inducing as a little girl screaming at a million decibels.



Those girls have strong bonds with each other. No way they’ll listen to bossy adults who aren’t their parents.
ETA:
Royal Girl Gang









						Princess Charlotte teams up with cousins for Trooping the Colour
					

Charlotte adorably poked her head out of the window to peer down at the parade alongside her cousins Savannah and Isla Phillips and Mia and Lena Tindall.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Harry was shushing the little girls too? Makes me wonder if one or more of them is a shrieker. I’ll forgive H&M if that’s the case. There’s nothing as headache-inducing as a little girl screaming at a million decibels.


A busy last night?


----------



## Lounorada

Coconuts40 said:


> This photo speaks volumes.
> Picked it up on DailyMail.
> The video just shows his head drop as soon as Meghan grabs his hand.
> 
> View attachment 5380723
> View attachment 5380723


This is all I see:






CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG
> View attachment 5381103
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Kisses Prince Harry, Pays Tribute to Princess Diana
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry made a stunning appearance at the Invictus Games Opening Ceremony.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com










Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5413329
> 
> _The *Duke and Duchess of Sussex have signalled they are to stick to the official script* during their flying visit to Britain for the Platinum Jubilee, avoiding “surprise” private events that might overshadow the Queen’s celebration.
> 
> Their habit of making “surprise” unpublicised appearances, most recently from Meghan at the memorial to murdered primary school children in Uvalde, Texas, has led to concerns of a “circus” following their every move during the visit._


_Sure_






CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaaay, my lovelies, we may need Angela Kelly to help us “choose”:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.sothebys.com/en/digital-catalogues/power-image-royal-aristocratic-tiaras
> 
> 
> View attachment 5413606
> View attachment 5413607
> View attachment 5413608









CarryOn2020 said:


> Already getting hard no’s.





The least they could do is make their lies believable.





mellibelly said:


> Neil Sean says since Madame Tussaud’s put the Hazbeen & Neverwas waxworks back in the royal enclosure for the Jubilee, guests have been “slapping” her and filming it with their phones!  I need to see one of those videos!!! Worth the price of admission to do that hahaha. Maybe bring a magnifying glass and look for his balls in another video?!









CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5414921





Never seen him look that happy and relaxed with his wIfE.




Chloe302225 said:


>



 she's so damn



Stephen Jones is one of my favourite milliners and that hat is beautiful _on the mannequin_, but TW doesn't have the grace to carry off a statement hat like that. It looks too small for her head the way it's sitting awkwardly on the top of her head and that hairstyle is all wrong for it. Hair should have been slicked back in a low bun.
Also, whyTF is she so orange?!  Maybe lay off the fake tan and bronzer for once.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> There is nothing to say that the Netflix people aren't in the UK.  They could be there and came on a different flight.  Maybe she put down the window so they could photograph her.


Wouldn't that be the last straw for the BRF, after telling them no Netflix cameras? Will and Charles can be a lot less forgiving than the Queen and that is who they will have to deal with.


----------



## Chanbal

Isn't this association a bit creepy?


----------



## CarryOn2020

So much negative energy from this jerk.  












						'Harry and Meghan were careful to avoid claims of hogging limelight'
					

RICHARD KAY: When they did edge into sight through the open windows of a VIP viewing area, Harry and Meghan were seen only with the most junior or most obscure of royals.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

MM is such a hypocrite. She can’t forgive her father who she said leaked a letter but she goes on Oprah complains about how bad the BRF, racism, suicidal ideation, bullying and not being protected but she goes back to them. We can figure out the math. That more than anything says a lot about her character. She’s all about her lust for fame and money.


----------



## Lodpah

A comment I read said those two shushing the children is a covert signal that they’re being silenced. Oh the conspiracy theories are abounding.


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> *So much negative energy from this jerk. *
> 
> View attachment 5417377
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan were careful to avoid claims of hogging limelight'
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: When they did edge into sight through the open windows of a VIP viewing area, Harry and Meghan were seen only with the most junior or most obscure of royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He's a crabby old man! They must have a very silent house. One of the girls looks like she could cry.

I like how Richard tries to excuse them. Too bad for them, that the only time they are seen is when they are "correcting" other's children. Not a good look for them. They bring down this whole event, unfortunately.


----------



## Debbini

Sharont2305 said:


> Louis speaking comfortably and confidently to his great grandmother showing they have a normal relationship. This woman is a stranger to Archie. I find it quite sad actually.
> Can't they see it?


I agree, it is sad. Can you imagine growing up, saying your great grandmother was the Queen but you never got to know her, spend time with her, have special pictures with her?!!! I would be upset, and I think these kids will be too.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower & Dan Wootton. TB is a straight shooter. I can't wait for his book, he promised that we will not be disappointed…


----------



## purseinsanity

regnews said:


> View attachment 5416973
> 
> 
> Standing in a corner alone.....


It would be more fitting for her to wear a dunce cap!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> She looks like she rents out by the hour at the Ritz Hotel in Paris.


Why disparage the Ritz?!!?  She's more Motel 6!


----------



## bellecate

Lodpah said:


> A comment I read said those two shushing the children is a covert signal that they’re being silenced. Oh the conspiracy theories are abounding.


Or shushing the kids so she can overhear what the grownups are talking about.


----------



## Chanbal

Would it be possible?


----------



## littlemisskeira

Lodpah said:


> MM is such a hypocrite. She can’t forgive her father who she said leaked a letter but she goes on Oprah complains about how bad the BRF, racism, suicidal ideation, bullying and not being protected but she goes back to them. We can figure out the math. That more than anything says a lot about her character. She’s all about her lust for fame and money.



Exactly. I wonder how she can face these people after she b.i.t.c.h.e.d about them to the world.
Truly one kind of t.h.i.c.k.  s.k.i.n.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Well, day 1 done and nothing too egregious from the DUMBartons. Let's see what tomorrow brings.


----------



## mikimoto007

Vintage Leather said:


> I don’t see anything to criticize in her outfit.
> 
> I love the hat, and since she’s not going to be blocking anyone’s view or distracting from the important events of the day, it’s fitting. The dress is a dark navy, which is one of the more flattering colors on her, and one of the Union flag colors.
> 
> My only real complaint is that she’s using children to try to get her picture taken. And it’s the second time she’s done it in less than a week.
> 
> At least these kids have powerful grandparents to protect them from her machinations?



I don't think she's using the kids to get a photo taken. It's not like the press would have ignored her if she appeared at the window alone. 

I find it baffling that she was driving through london with her window down.....didn't they have security concerns? Seems like the smart thing to so would be to lie low.


----------



## rose60610

Even if one of the kids was a shrieker, shouldn't it be up to one of the parents to shush the kid?  Not somebody who the kid wouldn't even know. Besides, H&M just arrived to London and here they are, telling a kid to "Shush--now get off my lawn--we're important and if this gets us a photo we'll do whatever it takes!" 

This, IMO, was a desperate ploy for a photo.


----------



## altigirl88

Sophisticatted said:


> Her headband reminded me of portraits of the first Queen Elizabeth.  Examples scroll down for more.


That’s exactly what they remind me of, too!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who took the photo?  Since they are so high up, was someone outside with a camera? 
Seems like a telephoto from the ground would have more of an angle to it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> How does one see with those black “hairy” hats. It always looks to me that it covers ones eyes.


They do, they are really heavyand they can’t see out of them very well. It’s all a bit daft if we’re honest but that’s tradition for you.


DoggieBags said:


> Piers Morgan was one of the commentators today on FOX while they were showing the Trooping of the Colors. TW’s ears must have been burning lol. He mentioned several times what hypocrites they are lecturing everyone on carbon footprint while arriving in a private jet from CA. He had several other choice things to say about TW.


The private jet thing is disgraceful. They are all the same these ‘VIPs’ they just hate the idea of the common man travelling about for some reason but it’s important and worthy when they do it. They should have gone to visit her father instead. It says a lot they’d rather take free rides and designer outfits from the ‘racists’ than go make amends with the poor relation.



mikimoto007 said:


> I don't think she's using the kids to get a photo taken. It's not like the press would have ignored her if she appeared at the window alone.
> 
> I find it baffling that she was driving through london with her window down.....didn't they have security concerns? Seems like the smart thing to so would be to lie low.


I agree what’s the point of insisting on  a bulletproof car (in Britain when they happily prance around the US) and winding the window down? What a pair of morons and they surely think we are too.

I’m a hat lover but I was a bit disappointed with the hats on day 1. I thought Catherine’s  one looked very eighties department store, Sophie’s pink one was fine a bit generic and M’s was just cartoony bad. It looked like the Tom and Jerry where Tom gets a zoot suit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

altigirl88 said:


> That’s exactly what they remind me of, too!



Supposedly it is from Zara. From RoyalHats.net:
_Princess Beatrice looks to have repeated her “Quilted Pearly Headband” from Zara, adding the brand’s “Pearl Bead Headband” in front for added oomph. If so, it works!_


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> In spite of the Vanity Fair sugared version of the Suckesses flying commercial, Piers got the true story.
> 
> Articles with information they flew on a private 5 mil $ Embraer Jet from Santa Barbara CA airport, landing at RAF Farnborough, where they were met by a car provided by the Queen.
> 
> Consistently hypocrital.





Pivoine66 said:


> Maybe they are waiting for the real big photo-ops: Saturday - birthday of the girl and - IMO sadly - meeting the Queen?



“Provided by the Queen “ I’m hoping for a big muzzle and a balaclava / sack today


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those girls have strong bonds with each other. No way they’ll listen to bossy adults who aren’t their parents.
> ETA:
> Royal Girl Gang
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Charlotte teams up with cousins for Trooping the Colour
> 
> 
> Charlotte adorably poked her head out of the window to peer down at the parade alongside her cousins Savannah and Isla Phillips and Mia and Lena Tindall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Let's not forget who their grandmother is, Princess Anne.


----------



## Sharont2305

Debbini said:


> I agree, it is sad. Can you imagine growing up, saying your great grandmother was the Queen but you never got to know her, spend time with her, have special pictures with her?!!! I would be upset, and I think these kids will be too.


Not only that, there'll come a time when the same applies with "my grandfather is King" and they'll not know him either. 
Not their cousins, the Cambridges, they won't know them either. The Cambridge kids have Pippas children as first cousins who they obviously are close to plus their second cousins the Tindall and Phillips children, again very close to. 
Who have A&L got? August? And he's moving to Portugal.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Exactly. Why would the Brits want someone who lives in the US to be in the line of succession? *That, in itself, is enough to remove him.*


Unfortunately not. Succession is just abut bloodlines


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> I don't think she's using the kids to get a photo taken. It's not like the press would have ignored her if she appeared at the window alone.
> 
> I find it baffling that she was driving through london with her window down.....didn't they have security concerns? Seems like the smart thing to so would be to lie low.



Their money (-shot) concerns obviously outweigh their security concerns


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Unfortunately not. Succession is just abut bloodlines



Right. There's a Scottish duke who lived happily in Australia or New Zealand minding his own business (literally) when he was informed he was now the owner of castle. I don't think he ever met the former duke.


----------



## elvisfan4life

What thing did Hapless have strung round his neck - he kept nervously straightening it Netflix must have insisted !!! Idiot - shame no pigeons shat on him


----------



## EverSoElusive

Looks like Nutmeg has been told to mind the hem   

Also, why does she look like she's bald under the hat? She shaved all her hair and forgot her wig and tendrils?  Maybe she'll cry alopecia and that people were mean to her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Imagine behind the Duke of Gloucester lol


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> Looks like Nutmeg has been told to mind the hem
> 
> Also, why does she look like she's bald under the hat? She shaved all her hair and forgot her wig and tendrils?  Maybe she'll cry alopecia and that people were mean to her
> 
> 
> View attachment 5417582



Second row minor royals


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## elvisfan4life

Still can’t get a dress to fit her trunk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Troublesome Duo is the last couple in this video if you want to see them in motion


----------



## elvisfan4life

Boo hoo  poor Ickle Harry what did they expect ????


----------



## elvisfan4life

elvisfan4life said:


> Boo hoo  poor Ickle Harry what did they expect ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5417585



Her rickus fixed smile is back like a shark about to attack


----------



## EverSoElusive




----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Yep, I bet it has been done!



That crowd was really shoulder to shoulder, wasn’t it?  Sidewalks were jam packed!


----------



## gelbergirl

Surely, Harry and Meghan & family will be escorted by the Queen's chauffeur back to the airport to make sure they get on that plane!


----------



## DoggieBags

The Harkles got booed going into the church and coming out of the church. charles and William got hearty cheers. And of course the Harkles held hands going into the church and then she had the controlling claw on Harry’s back when they were heading to their seats. They were seated second row across the aisle from the A list royals so most shots showed one side or the other. No money shot for TW that would show them beside Charles and camilla or William and Kate. And the Harkles appear to not be attending the Guild Hall reception after the service so no chance of a money shot for TW at the reception either. Coming out of the church it was clearly orchestrated so that Charles and Camilla and William and Kate were long gone before the Harkles were allowed to step out of the church. This is one of the more appropriate outfits TW has worn in years even if the fit in the rear isn’t perfect.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Golly, they try so hard. Hazzi polished his medals, MM found another ill-fitting ensemble and they were boo’ed. 
Will they go to the Guildhall reception?  Looks like they went back to ToadHall. 

ETA: Kate shines like the sun


----------



## periogirl28

DoggieBags said:


> The Harkles got booed going into the church and coming out of the church. charles and William got hearty cheers. And of course the Harkles held hands going into the church and then she had the controlling claw on Harry’s back when they were heading to their seats. They were seated second row across the aisle from the A list royals so most shots showed one side or the other. No money shot for TW that would show them beside Charles and camilla or William and Kate. And the Harkles appear to not be attending the Guild Hall reception after the service so no chance of a money shot for TW at the reception either. Coming out of the church it was clearly orchestrated so that Charles and Camilla and William and Kate were long gone before the Harkles were allowed to step out of the church. This is one of the more appropriate outfits TW has worn in years even if the fit in the rear isn’t perfect.


I agree with this totally. I shall stop here and not add more.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seriously, look at the faces of the crowd.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Looks like a raincoat in the back.


----------



## octopus17

She was posing away with that stupid smug grin searching for the nearest camera and he was blinking like crazy at one point - looked very stressed imo. Luckily they weren't given much airtime. Unfortunately the same can't be said for some of the UK online papers who are turning it into the Harry and Meghan show


----------



## Sophisticatted

The stance on that “usher” (sorry, I don’t know the correct term)!  His body language says, “Don’t you even THINK about seating yourselves elsewhere!”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Deepest respect for this great lady!
Not one to be trifled with


----------



## Chanbal

I read somewhere that the Harkles weren't invited.


----------



## Sharont2305

Apparently she had a microphone under her collar. I've not seen the footage myself but  you could see it as she was getting out of the car.


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


>


----------



## elvisfan4life

Annawakes said:


> Looks like a raincoat in the back.



My thoughts exactly Dior have nosedived


----------



## elvisfan4life

Cornflower Blue said:


> She was posing away with that stupid smug grin searching for the nearest camera and he was blinking like crazy at one point - looked very stressed imo. Luckily they weren't given much airtime. Unfortunately the same can't be said for some of the UK online papers who are turning it into the Harry and Meghan show



Only the scum rags like the Mirror their “readers” only look at pictures ( can’t actually read )


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that the Harkles weren't invited.




They were - they were expected and failed to show maybe the booing has made them cancel the birthday party and piss off home on their private jet!! The concert tomorrow looks like a washout - thunder weather warning !! And the Queen has already met Lilibet yesterday at the palace so no more unique photo opportunities


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deepest respect for this great lady!
> Not one to be trifled with



I really like princess Anne’s outfit. Loved that color on her


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently she had a microphone under her collar. I've not seen the footage myself but  you could see it as she was getting out of the car.


 Probably a camera too wait til they get home for the revelations - vile vile woman hope she never comes back


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


>




So thick skinned they won’t even hear this !!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently she had a microphone under her collar. I've not seen the footage myself but  you could see it as she was getting out of the car.



Today she had a microphone??? Or the last time they attended a service? 
Really ballsy to have one today, if I may say so.  Glad they were boo’ed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CentralTimeZone

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today she had a microphone??? Or the last time they attended a service?
> Really ballsy to have one today, if I may say so.  Glad they were boo’ed.


Can they use the footage? Without anyone else's consent?


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the article…
*Harry and Meghan not attending Thanksgiving reception after frosty reaction at St Paul's service*
_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be absent from the Thanksgiving reception, held at the Guildhall.

Guests at the reception include many of those who attended the religious service, including royals and senior politicians.

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived to boos at St Paul’s Cathedral this morning, ahead of the Service of Thanksgiving.*


The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were seated in the second row of the congregation for the Service of Thanksgiving, alongside Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands, and Lady Sarah Chatto, the daughter of Princess Margaret, and her family.

Harry and Meghan were forced to squeeze past his cousins Princess Beatrice and her husband Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi, and Princess Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank, who were already seated, to get to their places._









						Harry and Meghan not attending Thanksgiving reception after frosty reaction at St Paul's service
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex appeared publicly for the first time with the Royal Family since their arrival earlier this week




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## DoggieBags

elvisfan4life said:


> So thick skinned they won’t even hear this !!!


Unfortunately, she’ll probably twist it around and play the race card, ignoring all the things she’s said and done since Megxit that has led to their massive decline in popularity in the UK.


----------



## elvisfan4life

DoggieBags said:


> Unfortunately, she’ll probably twist it around and play the race card, ignoring all the things she’s said and done since Megxit that has led to their massive decline in popularity in the UK.



She needs help !!!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## LibbyRuth

There's little doubt in my mind that Meghan chose that hat and raincoat / dress in hopes of being compared to Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca.  She does not deserve the comparison.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Annawakes said:


> Looks like a raincoat in the back.


That big loose flap in the back makes a great place to hide a recording device box!


----------



## elvisfan4life

LibbyRuth said:


> There's little doubt in my mind that Meghan chose that hat and raincoat / dress in hopes of being compared to Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca.  She does not deserve the comparison.


 More like Frank Spencer in Mother’s do have em !!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Sophisticatted said:


> That big loose flap in the back makes a great place to hide a recording device box!



I was gonna ask why the back flap is sticking out all hunchback-like. Shouldn’t it lay flatter against the back?

The boos and being seated away from the others was hilarious. What did these two ingrates expect?


----------



## LizzieBennett

DoggieBags said:


> I really like princess Anne’s outfit. Loved that color on her


She looked fabulous!


----------



## elvisfan4life

LittleStar88 said:


> I was gonna ask why the back flap is sticking out all hunchback-like. Shouldn’t it lay flatter against the back?
> 
> The boos and being seated away from the others was hilarious. What did these two ingrates expect?


 Eggs and rotten tomatoes would have been good


----------



## LittleStar88

elvisfan4life said:


> Eggs and rotten tomatoes would have been good



Her white coat was a daring choice with that as a possibility!

CNN reported that H&M arrived to cheers and Boris was boo’d…









						Queen misses jubilee service with Harry and Meghan in attendance as Boris Johnson is booed | CNN
					

The second day of celebrations marking Queen Elizabeth II's 70-year reign began with members of the royal family, including Prince Harry and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, attending a religious service at the famed St Paul's Cathedral in central London on Friday.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Sophisticatted

Love how they seemed to be the last car to arrive.  It means that, with their windows rolled down, they could hear the cheers of the crowd for the people arriving ahead of them, and the boos could not be misconstrued as being for anyone else.


----------



## 1LV

elvisfan4life said:


> She needs help !!!


No doubt.  Or a healthy dose of reality, which she may have gotten from the boos.


----------



## Blue Irina

Meghan looks amazing! Love the white coat. 10/10


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

If the crowd’s faces didn’t tell the story, then leave it to Uncle Ed  

from the DM


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


>




I still cannot fathom how they had the brass neck to attend Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee, an event of such significance to the UK (I know not everyone is a Royalist but you know what I mean) and it's people. 

The booing to the Harkles was done quite discreetly, I thought, and that clever subtleness underlines the unsurpassable British skill for understatement and yet getting the message across crystal clearly. Bravo!

MM's outfit was moderately passable, but the rear pleat of the coat was singularly unflattering as was the spare piece of fabric sticking out across her shoulder blades. Did the seamstresses forget to tack it down? 

I do hope that we do not see them again.


----------



## DrDior

Is it just me or did Meghan grab a hat from the seasonal section at CVS?


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the crowd’s faces didn’t tell the story, then leave it to Uncle Ed
> 
> from the DM
> 
> View attachment 5417702





I'll raise you! Leave it to Sophie!


----------



## Chanbal

This is sweet!


----------



## CentralTimeZone

MiniMabel said:


> I'll raise you! Leave it to Sophie!


She can definitely throw a side eye


----------



## RAINDANCE

LizzieBennett said:


> She looked fabulous!


 Not only did Princess Anne look great today, she has kept trim and still has a fantastic figure. But even more impressive I thought was her horsemanship yesterday.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Michelle O's husband sent a very sweet message to QE, TW may not like it.



have to admit the little girls seem to like her....and look at the (real) long hair on that older girl


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> MM is such a hypocrite. She can’t forgive her father who she said leaked a letter but she goes on Oprah complains about how bad the BRF, racism, suicidal ideation, bullying and not being protected but she goes back to them. We can figure out the math. That more than anything says a lot about her character. She’s all about her lust for fame and money.


without the association with Harry's family they're pretty much nobodies


----------



## CarryOn2020

hollieplus2 said:


> She can definitely throw a side eye



So true. Supposedly Anne did the seating chart. She well understands pecking order which is really all that matters to the BRF. Ed knows his sister very well. She has no problem putting the next King’s son in “Siberia”. After yesterday’s photos, this is personal.
Yay Anne!


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Today she had a microphone??? Or the last time they attended a service?
> Really ballsy to have one today, if I may say so.  Glad they were boo’ed.


Today, apparently.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Talk about daggers. Look at the men behind Hazz.  That’s not happiness to see him.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Here is the article…
> *Harry and Meghan not attending Thanksgiving reception after frosty reaction at St Paul's service*
> _The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be absent from the Thanksgiving reception, held at the Guildhall.
> 
> Guests at the reception include many of those who attended the religious service, including royals and senior politicians.
> 
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrived to boos at St Paul’s Cathedral this morning, ahead of the Service of Thanksgiving.*
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were seated in the second row of the congregation for the Service of Thanksgiving, alongside Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands, and Lady Sarah Chatto, the daughter of Princess Margaret, and her family.
> 
> Harry and Meghan were forced to squeeze past his cousins Princess Beatrice and her husband Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi, and Princess Eugenie and her husband Jack Brooksbank, who were already seated, to get to their places._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan not attending Thanksgiving reception after frosty reaction at St Paul's service
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex appeared publicly for the first time with the Royal Family since their arrival earlier this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


oh no....if they were booed that would def be racism
does anyone want to hear that accusation again?


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently she had a microphone under her collar. I've not seen the footage myself but  you could see it as she was getting out of the car.



Ah, so the mic was in her collar. That must mean she has the GoPro tucked under the brims of her big hats.


----------



## elvisfan4life

No one else felt the need to hold hands - us against the nasty BRF again - they are so thick skinned - just go and stay away this time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

MiniMabel said:


> I still cannot fathom how they had the brass neck to attend Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee, an event of such significance to the UK (I know not everyone is a Royalist but you know what I mean) and it's people.
> 
> The booing to the Harkles was done quite discreetly, I thought, and that clever subtleness underlines the unsurpassable British skill for understatement and yet getting the message across crystal clearly. Bravo!
> 
> MM's outfit was moderately passable, but the rear pleat of the coat was singularly unflattering as was the spare piece of fabric sticking out across her shoulder blades. Did the seamstresses forget to tack it down?
> 
> I do hope that we do not see them again.


I noticed that peplum thing too....looks kinda like a trench coat


----------



## elvisfan4life

1LV said:


> No doubt.  Or a healthy dose of reality, which she may have gotten from the boos.


 Sadly I doubt the latter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Looks like Nutmeg has been told to mind the hem
> 
> Also, why does she look like she's bald under the hat? She shaved all her hair and forgot her wig and tendrils?  Maybe she'll cry alopecia and that people were mean to her
> 
> 
> View attachment 5417582



Late to the party, but that inappropriate grin drives me nuts. Also, how come she now even looks chubby and lumpy in an overcoat? (I'm more confused than bodyshaming) Bea's baby is quite a bit younger and she looks great.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> So true. Supposedly Anne did the seating chart. She well understands pecking order which is really all that matters to the BRF. Ed knows his sister very well. She has no problem putting the next King’s son in “Siberia”. After yesterday’s photos, this is personal.
> Yay Anne!


Does Ann possess the only pair of balls in that family?


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> without the association with Harry's family they're pretty much nobodies


 Even with the connection they are nobodies lol


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5417697
> 
> More like Frank Spencer in Mother’s do have em !!!



 Love Michael Crawford!


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> Can they use the footage? Without anyone else's consent?



They could also send the recording to Harry’s ghostwriter. The “memoir” needs something to spice it up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> have to admit the little girls seem to like her....and look at the (real) long hair on that older girl



FWIW,  Savannah Phillips has always had long hair and in almost all photos is sincerely smiling.













						Prince George’s true affection for cousin Savannah Phillips exposed
					

PRINCE GEORGE'S relationship with the extended Royal Family has rarely been documented but photographs from two separate occasions have revealed his close ties with cousin Savannah Phillips.




					www.express.co.uk
				




until Hazzie showed up :wow:


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> They could also send the recording to Harry’s ghostwriter. The “memoir” needs something to spice it up.


 Like words lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5417584
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still can’t get a dress to fit her trunk



This is a freaking still and I can still see she's sashaying up those stairs again.

But also, was that coat out in her size?


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a freaking still and I can still see she's sashaying up those stairs again.
> 
> But also, was that coat out in her size?


Can you hear a beeping sound when she backs up?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Boo hoo  poor Ickle Harry what did they expect ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5417585



I feel to bring a Brit to boo you must have really overdone it. Take notes, Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a freaking still and I can still see she's sashaying up those stairs again.
> 
> But also, was that coat out in her size?



“Don’t let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya” comes to mind.



elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5417584
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still can’t get a dress to fit her trunk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that the Harkles weren't invited.




Buuurn.


----------



## Chanbal

The white coat was 'nothing to write home about,' but opinions may vary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haaaaa, took me a second to process the point - always angry:


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a freaking still and I can still see she's sashaying up those stairs again.
> 
> But also, was that coat out in her size?


She is the only one who wears “bespoke” which doesn’t fit or flatter.   It is a gift.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Blue Irina said:


> Meghan looks amazing! Love the white coat. 10/10



If only she could have gotten it in her size.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the crowd’s faces didn’t tell the story, then leave it to Uncle Ed
> 
> from the DM
> 
> View attachment 5417702



Aunt Sophie is not impressed.


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



she's smiling in most of the pics and H looks either uncomfortable or angry to me - maybe both


----------



## rose60610

I love how M&H are on the other side of the church so they wouldn't even be included in the photos taken of Will or Charles. And that grin? Oh please. Harry hated being there IMO. What's up with the gloves? She was holding onto them going into the church but wearing them as she left. No rings to merch? Merch the gloves! 
Holding hands? It's like saying "See, I still really love this guy who I didn't realize was a Prince at first. I liberated him from his imprisoned royal life and we're living the dream in Montecito despite his racist rotten royal family who won't pay for our security. I've no idea why we get booed. See, they're racists if they boo ME. Told you so! I'm so glad I saved Harry. He's indebted to me!"


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel to bring a Brit to boo you must have really overdone it. Take notes, Harry.



He won’t, he is much too stupid to ever consider the booing is the result of their actions. It’s easier to play the victim.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the crowd’s faces didn’t tell the story, then leave it to Uncle Ed
> 
> from the DM
> 
> View attachment 5417702



Is she trying to push him along as he says hello to Bea?? She certainly hasn't changed her ways!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

Their only friends are the York girls who like their father are bitter misplaced spares like Harry


----------



## elvisfan4life

duna said:


> Is she trying to push him along as he says hello to Bea?? She certainly hasn't changed her ways!!


 It’s like the cinema Bea having to do the embarrassing half shuffle so H& M can struggle in to the cheap seats at the back lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Does Ann possess the only pair of balls in that family?



I think Zara does too. She doesn't look to me like someone who suffers fools gladly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

No one, literally no one else, is smiling.  H&M need to read the room!


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> she's smiling in most of the pics and H looks either uncomfortable or angry to me - maybe both


 I prefer his honest frown to her false “smile “ it’s a snark not a smile


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> It’s like the cinema Bea having to do the embarrassing half shuffle so H& M can struggle in to the cheap seats at the back lol



If they had arrived on time, as the others did, no one need to shuffle. Imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Marriage has been good for Hazz, I meant to say Beatrice…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> He won’t, he is much too stupid to ever consider the booing is the result of their actions. *It’s easier to play the victim.*



You're right. When all else fails, PLAY THE VICTIM!  I think it's in Chapter 2 of the Narcissist Handbook.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lilliesdaughter said:


> She is the only one who wears “bespoke” which doesn’t fit or flatter.   It is a gift.



It seriously is a mystery.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, literally no one else, is smiling.  H&M need to read the room!
> 
> View attachment 5417735


everyone has a serious expression except these two.....they must be sharing some sort of joke....of they rehearsed how they would look


----------



## duna

All that touching and handholding drives me nuts


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the crowd’s faces didn’t tell the story, then leave it to Uncle Ed
> 
> from the DM
> 
> View attachment 5417702


Meg's claw: Go on, H. LIKE WE PRACTICED IN THE CAR!!!
Harry (to Bea): Move over two spaces.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Chanbal said:


> The white coat was 'nothing to write home about,' but opinions may vary.



Third picture in, what's under her dress?


----------



## rose60610

Harry's frowns suggest "why couldn't I be the one with a false covid story"?


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, literally no one else, is smiling.  H&M need to read the room!
> 
> View attachment 5417735



Poor Sarah Chatto having to sit next to her....


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think Zara does too. She doesn't look to me like someone who suffers fools gladly.


So true. And Sophie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> have to admit the little girls seem to like her....and look at the (real) long hair on that older girl



Kids at that age will play and engage with almost anyone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Of course, the person answering the Edinburgh person (visible when you go to Twitter) didn't recognize the snark.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, literally no one else, is smiling.  H&M need to read the room!
> 
> View attachment 5417735



Meghan taught Harry to always look for the camera. Next lesson, learn when to turn away and pretend to be paying attention while the photographer takes your picture.


----------



## LittleStar88

I realized the look she is going for. Frigidaire basic model.


----------



## kemilia

elvisfan4life said:


> So thick skinned they won’t even hear this !!!


Oh, they heard the boos. 
And thank you to all of the those that did the booing--I was with you in spirit!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I clicked on the other thread by accident, our @Chanbal was savage


----------



## Chanbal

(posted the screenshot with the respective comment) 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> All that touching and handholding drives me nuts



But, but, how else can they show the world that they are soooooo in luuuuuv?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I realized the look she is going for. Frigidaire basic model.
> 
> View attachment 5417743


I think maybe she's trying to be like Kate but she doesn't have the impeccable tailoring.  and white isn't forgiving as far as wrinkling, bunching, etc.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> I realized the look she is going for. Frigidaire basic model.
> 
> View attachment 5417743



And here I thought she was going for the vintage nurse uniform look.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe she's trying to be like Kate but she doesn't have the impeccable tailoring.  and white isn't forgiving as far as wrinkling, bunching, etc.


Since the clothing she wears probably is on loan (from Dior) she can't alter it so that it fits. And the refrigerator comparison was right on!


----------



## Chanbal

Their PR is working hard, NYT is reporting 'boos' as 'cheers'.


----------



## lanasyogamama

duna said:


> All that touching and handholding drives me nuts


If my husband always had his hands on me like that I would have a very serious word with him.


----------



## Aimee3

Thank you @ Chantal and Queen of Wrap Dress for posting that photo with the pointy object under TW’s dress (or was it a coat?). I was going to try and post it but you beat me to it.  It sure does look like a hidden mic
since it’s not a nipple!


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> Since the clothing she wears probably is on loan (from Dior) she can't alter it so that it fits. And the refrigerator comparison was right on!


but wouldn't Dior want their clothes to look good?


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe she's trying to be like Kate but she doesn't have the impeccable tailoring.  and white isn't forgiving as far as wrinkling, bunching, etc.


I agree, she’s going for a “Kate wore it and everyone loved it, but when I wear it…”. She doesn’t get it.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree, she’s going for a “Kate wore it and everyone loved it, but when I wear it…”. She doesn’t get it.


she doesn't have Kate's body type nor her tailor


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> And here I thought she was going for the vintage nurse uniform look.
> 
> View attachment 5417755


I remember my mom wearing this style of nurses dress and little cap when I was small and she would be getting ready for work, I thought she looks so glamorous!


----------



## Aimee3

The NY Post is reporting that the duo was booed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So ‘lilac’ it looks cream!   DM is at it again  









						Queen's Platinum Jubilee: Meghan Markle makes her entrance
					

The Duchess of Sussex put on a typically glamorous display as she arrived with Prince Harry for the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral on Friday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Marriage has been good for Hazz, I meant to say Beatrice…



This bluebell is her colour and this is the first royal hat from this I’ve really liked.


hollieplus2 said:


> Third picture in, what's under her dress?


A mantrap.


bag-mania said:


> But, but, how else can they show the world that they are soooooo in luuuuuv?


Vow renewal then divorce six months later? Oh wait they’d have to pay for it this time.


Chanbal said:


> Their PR is working hard, NYT is reporting 'boos' as 'cheers'.


I know it’s a trivial matter but the dishonesty is so disconcerting.

Im sorry I’ve lost whoever said M’s hat looked like it was from the cvs but you are 100% correct. Why wear such an expensive and heavy weight coat with a light floppy straw hat (which did look very cheap) It’s like wearing a Christmas jumper with a sarong and flip flops.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Thank you @ Chantal and Queen of Wrap Dress for posting that photo with the pointy object under TW’s dress (or was it a coat?). I was going to try and post it but you beat me to it.  It sure does look like a hidden mic
> since it’s not a nipple!


You are welcome, but @QueenofWrapDress was the one that posted it. The screenshot from her post was only to show the pertinent comment…


----------



## MiniMabel

I think that H is squirming, really, really squirming with embarrassment inside.......he knows, full well, that they are not welcome.  At all.  I am also very sure that he was shocked at being booed, and he now fully realises how far he/they have fallen and that there is no coming back.  Dim though they both are, with their delusions of grandeur, I think that the reactions from QE's supporters did hit home.....the pair of them looked very uncomfortable.  

Presumably, this is why they didn't attend the event today.  He realises that the door is closed.  The British public are strong together and their opinion on such matters does count.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if William and the others were secretly relieved that the Harkles declined to attend, because that means no awkwardness, which means that they can then enjoy themselves without having to watch every word (especially if Me-again did have a microphone stashed on her person in contravention to being explicitly banned from recording anything).  

The Harkles have reached the end of the road here in the UK.  Their deplorable behaviour is unforgivable. QE will be sad, but she plays the long game and life goes on.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> And here I thought she was going for the vintage nurse uniform look.
> 
> View attachment 5417755



I thought maybe she was auditioning for a re-boot of Columbo.


----------



## altigirl88

Harry looks so unhappy. I wish he and William could thaw out, but I’d imagine it’s hard for William to trust him. On a side note, I LOVE Louise’s outfit. Age-appropriate, flattering. I also loved Sophie’s. Their colors coordinated so well. If I were William and Harry, I’d feel sort of odd going in St. Paul’s and considering that’s where their parents’ disastrous marriage began.
I’d love to see William and Harry back together. They’re not too much older than I and I’ve seen them together my whole life. I hope this occasion will help them reflect and maybe something positive will eventually happen, but it will take a long time to regain trust. I would imagine the family are waiting to see if any claims of mistreatment come out of this


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So ‘lilac’ it looks cream!   DM is at it again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's Platinum Jubilee: Meghan Markle makes her entrance
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex put on a typically glamorous display as she arrived with Prince Harry for the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5417768



*"Harry and Meghan introduced their daughter Lilibet, who turns one tomorrow, to the Queen yesterday"*
If the above is true, I take my hat off to QE! Why procrastinate?


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> *The NY Post is reporting that the duo was booed.*













						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle booed at Platinum Jubilee church service
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were also met with cheers, but the loud booing overtook the excitement of the couple’s appearance at a cathedral in London.




					pagesix.com


----------



## DoggieBags

RAINDANCE said:


> Not only did Princess Anne look great today, she has kept trim and still has a fantastic figure. But even more impressive I thought was her horsemanship yesterday.


I haven’t heard anything about the Cambridge children taking riding lessons. I wonder if they are taking up riding since a number of the royal ceremonies involve riding.


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> everyone has a serious expression except these two.....they must be sharing some sort of joke....of they rehearsed how they would look


It is worse than that I just found these


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharon Osbourne, Piers Morgan on boos for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle
					

Sharon Osbourne and Piers Morgan reacted to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle being booed by some onlookers as they attended a Platinum Jubilee church service.




					www.foxnews.com
				






> _I know they are making their living over talking about the royal family. But, I do feel sorry for him because I think that there must be a huge part of him that regrets. I mean, can you imagine how he felt yesterday __with the whole family in that procession__ and he would have normally been there on one of those horses with his uniform and everything. And there he was shushing children._


----------



## elvisfan4life

MiniMabel said:


> I think that H is squirming, really, really squirming with embarrassment inside.......he knows, full well, that they are not welcome.  At all.  I am also very sure that he was shocked at being booed, and he now fully realises how far he/they have fallen and that there is no coming back.  Dim though they both are, with their delusions of grandeur, I think that the reactions from QE's supporters did hit home.....the pair of them looked very uncomfortable.
> 
> Presumably, this is why they didn't attend the event today.  He realises that the door is closed.  The British public are strong together and their opinion on such matters does count.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if William and the others were secretly relieved that the Harkles declined to attend, because that means no awkwardness, which means that they can then enjoy themselves without having to watch every word (especially if Me-again did have a microphone stashed on her person in contravention to being explicitly banned from recording anything).
> 
> The Harkles have reached the end of the road here in the UK.  Their deplorable behaviour is unforgivable. QE will be sad, but she plays the long game and life goes on.


 I’m hoping the private jet is already on its way over the pond


----------



## elvisfan4life

altigirl88 said:


> Harry looks so unhappy. I wish he and William could thaw out, but I’d imagine it’s hard for William to trust him. On a side note, I LOVE Louise’s outfit. Age-appropriate, flattering. I also loved Sophie’s. Their colors coordinated so well. If I were William and Harry, I’d feel sort of odd going in St. Paul’s and considering that’s where their parents’ disastrous marriage began.
> I’d love to see William and Harry back together. They’re not too much older than I and I’ve seen them together my whole life. I hope this occasion will help them reflect and maybe something positive will eventually happen, but it will take a long time to regain trust. I would imagine the family are waiting to see if any claims of mistreatment come out of this



William has more sense family or not sometimes you have to cut your losses


----------



## piperdog

She's not doing Dior any favors with how that dress looks. First Givenchy with the wedding dress, and now Dior. Perhaps this is how she supports the UK fashion industry - she Markles the competition by wearing them poorly at high-profile events.


----------



## elvisfan4life

DoggieBags said:


> I haven’t heard anything about the Cambridge children taking riding lessons. I wonder if they are taking up riding since a number of the royal ceremonies involve riding.


 All royal children ride there are royal stables at Windsor all have ponies since they are toddlers


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> I’m hoping the private jet is already on its way over the pond




And here I am hoping that private jet returns to the UK  
Maybe they should go to France just as Wallis and Ed did.  Or South Africa as he said he wanted to. Just not the US, not the UK.  Find a quiet place, do some solid charity work - quietly -  and live a life devoted to service, not $$.  This visit looks to be an epic fail.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Courtesy of DM!


----------



## sdkitty

elvisfan4life said:


> It is worse than that I just found these
> View attachment 5417776
> View attachment 5417777


I'm sorry I know I'm biased but that bottom pic doesn't look appropriate for a grown man (and a royal) to be acting in church


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Courtesy of DM!



Is it me, or is she puffing her chest out in an odd way?


----------



## regnews




----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a freaking still and I can still see she's sashaying up those stairs again.
> 
> *But also, was that coat out in her size?*



Nothing is ever in her size. She likes to imagine that she's a size 0.


----------



## papertiger

hollieplus2 said:


> Can they use the footage? Without anyone else's consent?



Legally no, but the BRF are famous for not suing or making a fuss


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> I was gonna ask why the back flap is sticking out all hunchback-like. Shouldn’t it lay flatter against the back?
> 
> The boos and being seated away from the others was hilarious. What did these two ingrates expect?



If that outfit was bespoke it was obviously made for someone else


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chloe302225 said:


>



BESPOKE Dior and it still looks like a sack on her. Lord, she has all the money in the world as a "Royal", but dresses like an absolute mess. Once again, it's not well fitted and the back trench flap is distracting. I'm shaped the same way she is, but worse. I have a large chest. Even with my limited funds, I look more put together than her!


----------



## bag-mania

She may have been willing to be booed if it keeps Harry from ever wanting to go back to England again. Whenever he gets nostalgic she can throw it in his face, "remember how horrible they were to us last time!"


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> She may have been willing to be booed if it keeps Harry from ever wanting to go back to England again. Whenever he gets nostalgic she can throw it in his face, "remember how horrible they were to us last time!"


Oh please let this be true


----------



## Chanbal

People in the UK seem to be truly annoyed… nobody likes to be called racist imo.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Oh please let this be true



Yes, but then we're stuck with them over here. No matter, I guess we can absorb them with all of our other has-been celebrities.


----------



## MiniMabel

papertiger said:


> Legally no, but the BRF are famous for not suing or making a fuss




That's true, but I think that in this instance they would take a stand.  The Harkles seem to tarnish everything they touch and, going forward, the BRF need to be separated from that because keeping the Monarchy popular will be more difficult once QE is no longer queen.  

Although, I do now wonder whether the Harkles would use any footage anyway; the backlash against them would be enormous considering just the boos they received after only one appearance. The media reporting their less than warm welcome will go around the world.  Wonder how their fans will spin that?!  On the other hand, they have to produce H's memoirs so the money will talk.   I still shake my head at their gall to attend the Jubilee......words fail me, and that doesn't happen often!


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5417584
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still can’t get a dress to fit her trunk


I can sense her stupid sashay walk just from the still picture.


----------



## bag-mania

Vogue is calling Meghan in the white pale gray outfit "a stylish splash."









						Meghan Markle Makes a Stylish Return to London in Dior
					

She wore a belted coat with matching hat for her first public appearance back in London since leaving her role in the royal family.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Can we rename the thread “the second row sussexes “


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Yes, but then we're stuck with them over here. No matter, I guess we can absorb them with all of our other has-been celebrities.


 
You have states bigger than the entire UK- in fact almost all of them pick one you dislike most and send them there


----------



## K.D.

I'm wondering if there's a spreadsheet for every event where the women fill in, in order of rank, their preferred colour for that event. It seems the rainbow was filled up and Meghan was thus left with this chalky colour


----------



## DoggieBags

MiniMabel said:


> That's true, but I think that in this instance they would take a stand.  The Harkles seem to tarnish everything they touch and, going forward, the BRF need to be separated from that because keeping the Monarchy popular will be more difficult once QE is no longer queen.
> 
> Although, I do now wonder whether the Harkles would use any footage anyway; the backlash against them would be enormous considering just the boos they received after only one appearance. The media reporting their less than warm welcome will go around the world.  Wonder how their fans will spin that?!  On the other hand, they have to produce H's memoirs so the money will talk.   I still shake my head at their gall to attend the Jubilee......words fail me, and that doesn't happen often!


It may not be up to the Harkles. It would be Netflix that makes the decision and if the powers that be at Netflix think there is a high likelihood of getting sued by the BRF, the may decide not to use the footage. If she tries to sell it to some other news outlet again management would have to think about the potential impact if they got sued by the BRF


----------



## Sophisticatted

Harry seemed stunned when he first learned his seating arrangement and seemed very surprised at the boos. It’s  like he thought that as Diana’s son and the future monarch’s son and brother, his spot would always be secure.


----------



## carmen56

elvisfan4life said:


> Can we rename the thread “the second row sussexes “



They should have been seated in the back of beyond.


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> Harry seemed stunned when he first learned his seating arrangement and seemed very surprised at the boos. It’s  like he thought that as Diana’s son and the future monarch’s son and brother, his spot would always be secure.



Is it denial or is he being sheltered from reality? I can't believe the guy has never Googled himself and Meghan.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously, look at the faces of the crowd.



What the F is she smiling at?  Everyone else has solemn looks and this idiot is beaming like everyone is there for her.  She wishes.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cornflower Blue said:


> She was posing away with that stupid smug grin searching for the nearest camera and he was blinking like crazy at one point - looked very stressed imo. Luckily they weren't given much airtime. *Unfortunately the same can't be said for some of the UK online papers who are turning it into the Harry and Meghan show*


Why are they giving them any press at all?


----------



## rose60610

I realize there's a M&H Appreciation thread for those lost souls who feel M&H should be appreciated.  I think we all had hopes that M&H would remain a nice couple but they morphed into entitled brats who felt they were on their way to international influence but now thrive on playing the victim. When hope is all you have it'd be sad to burst the sugars' bubble.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Zara, Mike, and Peter seemed empathetically sad about the boos.  Edo and Bea seemed shocked and dismayed.  The Queen’s known absence probably made people feel freer to show their true feelings.  It might not be such a bad thing for those on the fringe of the family to see.


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> They were - they were expected and failed to show maybe the booing has made them cancel the birthday party and piss off home on their private jet!! The concert tomorrow looks like a washout - thunder weather warning !! *And the Queen has already met Lilibet yesterday at the palace *so no more unique photo opportunities


She did?


----------



## Sophisticatted

bag-mania said:


> Is it denial or is he being sheltered from reality? I can't believe the guy has never Googled himself and Meghan.



He gets his info from delusional spin doctor M, and her sycophantic Sucks.


----------



## DoggieBags

Sophisticatted said:


> Zara, Mike, and Peter seemed empathetically sad about the boos.  Edo and Bea seemed shocked and dismayed.  The Queen’s known absence probably made people feel freer to show their true feelings.  It might not be such a bad thing for those on the fringe of the family to see.


If Andrew didn’t have COVID and showed up I wonder if he would have been booed too without the Queen there


----------



## rose60610

Without her father, Meghan would not have amounted to anything before she met Harry. She got a well paying job in acting as a result of his help. Then she kicked him to the curb. Harry would be nothing without his family, he and M kicked them to the curb too. Now they find out that THEY are nothing without the people they smeared and kicked to the curb. Too late NOW!  

Gee, when you accuse the people who gave you a 50 million dollar wedding and endless riches of being racist and making you suicidal, it's a bit of a stretch to think you'd be welcome by them anymore. Who knew?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

MiniMabel said:


> *I still cannot fathom how they had the brass neck to attend Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee, an event of such significance to the UK (I know not everyone is a Royalist but you know what I mean) and it's people.*
> 
> The booing to the Harkles was done quite discreetly, I thought, and that clever subtleness underlines the unsurpassable British skill for understatement and yet getting the message across crystal clearly. Bravo!
> 
> MM's outfit was moderately passable, but the rear pleat of the coat was singularly unflattering as was the spare piece of fabric sticking out across her shoulder blades. Did the seamstresses forget to tack it down?
> 
> I do hope that we do not see them again.


I'm amazed they showed up.  Balls of steel after everything they've said and done.  Actually, more like shameless balls.


----------



## rose60610

DoggieBags said:


> If Andrew didn’t have COVID and showed up I wonder if he would have been booed too without the Queen there



I think that's why "he has Covid"


----------



## DoggieBags

Someone mentioned that The BBC apparently interviewed Scoobie Doo who apparently reiterated the Harkles are playing it low key to avoid stealing the limelight from the Queen. Why on earth is the BBC giving air time to the Harkles mouthpiece?


----------



## bag-mania

TMZ is reporting about the Queen meeting Lilibet.









						Queen Elizabeth Meets Great-Granddaughter Lilibet for First Time
					

Queen Elizabeth finally meets great-granddaughter Lilibet for the first time, during Platinum Jubilee.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’m sure H&M thought a 1st birthday party (piggybacked on The Queen’s BIG EVENT) would be like the prodigal son’s celebration, but in reality it would probably be just a few cousins showing up with a gift to be nice, and then leaving after a polite amount of time.  Charles might not leave the country this time, but I’m sure he’s still “busy”.  After the pre-wedding treatment of Charlotte, and the Oprah interview accusation against Kate (among other accusations), PLUS the threat of being secretly taped, there’s no way the Cambridges show up.  IMO.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is a freaking still and I can still see she's sashaying up those stairs again.
> 
> But also, was that coat out in her size?


Just saw your post, LOL!  Great minds.


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> I'm amazed they showed up.  Balls of steel after everything they've said and done.  Actually, more like shameless balls.


Balls of steel or sh!t for brains?


----------



## TC1

Late to post this..but if a relative starting shushing my children at an event where they are miles away from the Queen, and not a distraction..I would be pissed. You didn't bring your own children to this but you shush mine? GTFOH. 
Second..Meghan is wearing so much bronzer at that service her face is 10 times darker than her ankles. They both looked so sweaty. Surprised her collar wasn't stained brown.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Is it me, or is she puffing her chest out in an odd way?


looks kinda like she's thrusting her pelvis forward....she's doing well at keeping the smile plastered on.
now will she go back to the US saying she was holding back tears?


----------



## altigirl88

DoggieBags said:


> If Andrew didn’t have COVID and showed up I wonder if he would have been booed too without the Queen there


I find his Covid convenient
ETA this


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Vogue is calling Meghan in the white pale gray outfit "a stylish splash."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Makes a Stylish Return to London in Dior
> 
> 
> She wore a belted coat with matching hat for her first public appearance back in London since leaving her role in the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


she must be very happy with that coverage


----------



## altigirl88

I’m sure they’re all sighing in great relief that today is done
ETA Though there’s still what will be said after H&M get back over here to contemplate


----------



## Sophisticatted

So, I think the Queen has been super gracious to H&M for this event.  You want security?  OK, fine, I’ll send mine to retrieve you from the airport.  Rolleyes.  You want me to meet my namesake?  Ok, fine, “Hi mini me!  Bye mini me!  Another check off your wishlist, H&M!  Now, I’m off to rest up for my big events!  See you around!”


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Their PR is working hard, NYT is reporting 'boos' as 'cheers'.
> 
> View attachment 5417767


You mean like that reporter who said the crowd was shouting, "Let's Go Brandon"?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m sure H&M thought a 1st birthday party (piggybacked on The Queen’s BIG EVENT) would be like the prodigal son’s celebration, but in reality it would probably be just a few cousins showing up with a gift to be nice, and then leaving after a polite amount of time.  Charles might not leave the country this time, but I’m sure he’s still “busy”.  After the pre-wedding treatment of Charlotte, and the Oprah interview accusation against Kate (among other accusations), PLUS the threat of being secretly taped, there’s no way the Cambridges show up.  IMO.


i think senior royals are out and about the UK tomorrow - Anne in Edinburgh, Will in Cardiff, Charles or Edward in NI. Am I correct on this ?
i think the Sussexes will be summoned for 30 min tea with the kids to Windsor Castle and then dismissed.
We saw h+m arrive at Horseguards sans kids in their car on Thursday so i don't necessarily believe the kids were present that day.
I can't believe that any cousins will be available - the events of this weekend have been a couple of years in the planning and its a full schedule. Who is going to alter their plans at short notice?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> So true. Supposedly Anne did the seating chart. She well understands pecking order which is really all that matters to the BRF. Ed knows his sister very well. She has no problem putting the next King’s son in “Siberia”. After yesterday’s photos, this is personal.
> Yay Anne!


Admirable woman! She needs to be a Counselor of State replacing her worthless nephew.

Unfortunate Andrew was absent, she could have placed him at the end of the line up of his children, with the Harkles to his left, which would have put the Harkles beneath him in ranking. That would be a statement, the odiferous trio in one shot.

Edit: Auntie Anne gave Beatrice and Edo the preferable aisle seats, subtle recognition of their ongoing support of the Queen, even as “lesser Royals”?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> TMZ is reporting about the Queen meeting Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth Meets Great-Granddaughter Lilibet for First Time
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth finally meets great-granddaughter Lilibet for the first time, during Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I think TMZ is generally credible but not sure how they would know this


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *"Harry and Meghan introduced their daughter Lilibet, who turns one tomorrow, to the Queen yesterday"*
> If the above is true, I take my hat off to QE! Why procrastinate?



I'm surprised Zara gave her a smile.


----------



## Chanbal

Waiting for the BLG's verdict, but it seems obvious that Hazz is not pleased by the 'royal B-lister…' 











						Harry anxious about being a royal B lister, says body language expert
					

Prince William and Prince Harry struggled to hide their respective anxieties at St Paul's Cathedral on Friday, says body language expert Judi James.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised Zara gave her a smile.


It's so that M can't say no one was nice to me.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Admirable woman! She needs to be a Counselor of State replacing her worthless nephew.
> 
> Unfortunate Andrew was absent, she could have placed him at the end of the line up of his children, with the Harkles to his left, which would have put the Harkles beneath him in ranking. That would be a statement, the odiferous trio in one shot.


I liked the seating that emphasized the WORKING royals - Anne & husband deserved to be front and center
The balcony time for Lady Louise and brother - thumbs up. Over the years, Louise certainly showed great respect for her late grandfather , she is another deserving of some recognition.


----------



## Jayne1

Was this the first time Meg heard boos?  Was she expecting cheers - in the UK, of all places!

It seemed she was trying to hold a smile while going to the car.  She may actually have been surprised!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The white coat was 'nothing to write home about,' but opinions may vary.



From the pic posted by @Chanbal above, it looks like the little Doofus is asking Bea and others to scoot over for them probably as per the Witch's instructions followed by a push on the back to reinforce her command.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> If that outfit was bespoke it was obviously made for someone else


You are on fire today!!


----------



## periogirl28

CarryOn2020 said:


> So ‘lilac’ it looks cream!   DM is at it again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's Platinum Jubilee: Meghan Markle makes her entrance
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex put on a typically glamorous display as she arrived with Prince Harry for the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral on Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5417768


Is DM colourblind?


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I think TMZ is generally credible but not sure how they would know this


Because Mouthpiece Scoobie Doo of the prestigious Yahoo News said so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

MiniMabel said:


> Wonder how their fans will spin that?!



Easy...bUt ThOsE BrItisH RaCisTs!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised Zara gave her a smile.



I thought the same.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> From the pic posted by @Chanbal above, it looks like the little Doofus is asking Bea and others to scoot over for them probably as per the Witch's instructions followed by a push on the back to reinforce her command.
> 
> View attachment 5417842


Note her hand on his back - she is propping up 6. I am nothing if not a good student of BLG
I also not the front row - Edward et al - seems disturbed by seating kerfuffle. So, the idea that H&M wanted them all to scoot over is not farfetched - they did cause a stir.


----------



## Chanbal

The 'boos' here are very loud… I'm unable to post the video, but the link works. 



			https://video-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.1790-2/284940824_604565447270383_1611502008526716575_n.mp4?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=985c63&efg=eyJybHIiOjQ3MywicmxhIjo1MTIsInZlbmNvZGVfdGFnIjoic3ZlX3NkIn0%3D&_nc_ohc=fPS0pHq7rY0AX_Je1E_&_nc_oc=AQnY6qu9epC9t_xG0TE3Mmxx7yy-OxXYk24o7vqLmnUDh_zIBtJRC0iF7OZLFyUhrVQ&rl=473&vabr=263&_nc_ht=video-lax3-1.xx&edm=AIbDutUEAAAA&oh=00_AT_-vsWy4umpCQ4gl_qd0O-KFXKS_yHQ5Qyt3tgL7c1wcg&oe=629A62DE


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LizzieBennett

Maggie Muggins said:


> From the pic posted by @Chanbal above, it looks like the little Doofus is asking Bea and others to scoot over for them probably as per the Witch's instructions followed by a push on the back to reinforce her command.
> 
> View attachment 5417842


He certainly seemed taken aback at the seating arrangements.


----------



## chaneljewel

I’m not surprised that H and M were booed.  What they said about the RF was disgusting, and I’m sure the people want nothing to do with them.  Harry looked sad and I do believe that one day he will resent M for manipulating him into giving up his family.   Both are also selfish to deny their children the chance to know their great grandmother, a queen, and future king grandfather and uncle.  My goodness, what an honor and privilege for the kids!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Jayne1 said:


> Was this the first time Meg heard boos?  Was she expecting cheers - in the UK, of all places!
> 
> It seemed she was trying to hold a smile while going to the car.  She may actually have been surprised!


She probably expected the crowd to have a “stiff upper lip”. LOL.


----------



## chaneljewel

I’m actually surprised that someone didn’t throw tomatoes at her when she rolled down the car window.  Of course the people probably didn’t think to bring any because they didn’t think she’d open the window since she’s so worried about her security!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Is it denial or is he being sheltered from reality? I can't believe the guy has never Googled himself and Meghan.



‘Maybe he got played by Eug?  his longtime pal Charlie van Straubenzee?  Probably all they had to say was ‘everyone loves you’, blah blah. He and she fell for it. Same as Invictus [which has a copyright issue]


----------



## V0N1B2

sdkitty said:


> I think TMZ is generally credible but not sure how they would know this


I bet I know. Shhhhhhh...


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sophisticatted said:


> Zara, Mike, and Peter seemed empathetically sad about the boos.  Edo and Bea seemed shocked and dismayed.  The Queen’s known absence probably made people feel freer to show their true feelings.  It might not be such a bad thing for those on the fringe of the family to see.



Oh I don’t think Peter or Mike were remotely sad !!!! I think both would love to sort Harry out


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> She did?


 The full extended royal family with all children and nannies were at the palace yesterday after the flyover/ balcony appearance for a family celebration no press no cameras no pictures - they all met Lilibet  ( for the first time ) and Archie then - no big one on one - still very strong rumours the christening is tomorrow as well - likely only to be the minor royals and allies attending - remember the Queen didn’t go to Louis christening why should she go to Lilibet s a child she has met once and may never see again - hope she puts her feet up tomorrow scours  the Racing Post and watches the Derby on tv


----------



## elvisfan4life

elvisfan4life said:


> The full extended royal family with all children and nannies were at the palace yesterday after the flyover/ balcony appearance for a family celebration no press no cameras no pictures - they all met Lilibet  ( for the first time ) and Archie then - no big one on one - still very strong rumours the christening is tomorrow as well - likely only to be the minor royals and allies attending - remember the Queen didn’t go to Louis christening why should she go to Lilibet s a child she has met once and may never see again - hope she puts her feet up tomorrow scours  the Racing Post and watches the Derby on tv


 By allies I mean the Yorks Bea Eugenie etc


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> I think that's why "he has Covid"


 Harry too thick to think of that as an excuse


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> Courtesy of DM!



Ouch! I had seen them arriving but didn't see them leaving. The reception at the arrival was mixed, but I obviously missed the main spectacle, but this booing doesn't come as big surprise - at least to anyone who followed what happened in the last two years and have a logical mind. I think they overestimated their importance again. If I read their emotions correctly, they had been surprised by their placement in the cathedral.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sophisticatted said:


> I’m sure H&M thought a 1st birthday party (piggybacked on The Queen’s BIG EVENT) would be like the prodigal son’s celebration, but in reality it would probably be just a few cousins showing up with a gift to be nice, and then leaving after a polite amount of time.  Charles might not leave the country this time, but I’m sure he’s still “busy”.  After the pre-wedding treatment of Charlotte, and the Oprah interview accusation against Kate (among other accusations), PLUS the threat of being secretly taped, there’s no way the Cambridges show up.  IMO.


 All the senior royals are visiting Wales Scotland and NI tomorrow on behalf of the Queen


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> i think senior royals are out and about the UK tomorrow - Anne in Edinburgh, Will in Cardiff, Charles or Edward in NI. Am I correct on this ?
> i think the Sussexes will be summoned for 30 min tea with the kids to Windsor Castle and then dismissed.
> We saw h+m arrive at Horseguards sans kids in their car on Thursday so i don't necessarily believe the kids were present that day.
> I can't believe that any cousins will be available - the events of this weekend have been a couple of years in the planning and its a full schedule. Who is going to alter their plans at short notice?


 Bea and Eugenie are desperate enough they would turn up at the opening of a matchbox they are like their parents


----------



## EverSoElusive

Umm I wonder if Nutmeg complained about the church smelling musty this time


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> i think senior royals are out and about the UK tomorrow - Anne in Edinburgh, Will in Cardiff, Charles or Edward in NI. Am I correct on this ?
> i think the Sussexes will be summoned for 30 min tea with the kids to Windsor Castle and then dismissed.
> We saw h+m arrive at Horseguards sans kids in their car on Thursday so i don't necessarily believe the kids were present that day.
> I can't believe that any cousins will be available - the events of this weekend have been a couple of years in the planning and its a full schedule. Who is going to alter their plans at short notice?


 Correct - Charles in England Will and Catherine in Wales Anne and Tim in Scotland and Edward and Sophie in NI.

BTW  I wish people wouldn’t overlook Tim- he is a lovely man I have met at a work conference and spent the entire afternoon workshop and a long boring formal dinner event with - he is fun witty charming and adores and immensely proud of his wife - he is to Anne what Philip was to the Queen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> This is sweet!



Love him for doing this in front of a world wide audience.


----------



## EverSoElusive

DeMonica said:


> Ouch! I had seen them arriving but didn't see them leaving. The reception at the arrival was mixed, but I obviously missed the main spectacle, but this booing doesn't come as big surprise - at least to anyone who followed what happened in the last two years and have a logical mind. I think they overestimated their importance again. If I read their emotions correctly, they had been surprised by their placement in the cathedral.



I wish the boos were louder  Nutmeg must be really pissed off while trying to maintain her composure.


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> I think TMZ is generally credible but not sure how they would know this


 Copied from other press reports


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Love him for doing this in front of a world wide audience.


she's such an asset to that family


----------



## elvisfan4life

periogirl28 said:


> Is DM colourblind?


 Just gutter press


----------



## Chanbal

chaneljewel said:


> *I’m actually surprised that someone didn’t throw tomatoes at her when she rolled down the car window.*  Of course the people probably didn’t think to bring any because they didn’t think she’d open the window since she’s so worried about her security!!!


Didn't you hear the news? SS bought the entire crop ahead of time in preparation for the Harkles' visit to the UK. It was done at the same time they hired the 2 cheerleaders that appear in selected videos. 

I'm sorry for my reply, but it was very tempting.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> Love him for doing this in front of a world wide audience.


 Me too Charles went way up ( stratospheric) for me today


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> I wish the boos were louder  Nutmeg must be really pissed off while trying to maintain her composure.


 I was still hoping for the eggs and rotten tomatoes


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> By allies I mean the Yorks Bea Eugenie etc


I don't think Bea is an ally tbh.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

elvisfan4life said:


> I’m hoping the private jet is already on its way over the pond





CarryOn2020 said:


> And here I am hoping that private jet returns to the UK
> Maybe they should go to France just as Wallis and Ed did.  Or South Africa as he said he wanted to. Just not the US, not the UK.  Find a quiet place, do some solid charity work - quietly -  and live a life devoted to service, not $$.  This visit looks to be an epic fail.


I'm hoping they bale out over the Atlantic on some deserted island to finally get the privacy they want and we deserve. Which one of us would the hardest?!


----------



## papertiger

From the* Daily mail:

So much for security? Royal experts question Harry and Meghan for 'winding down window and waving' to crowds... despite claiming to keep a 'low profile' amid row over their personal protection*

*Royal biographer Angela Levin questioned why Harry and Meghan chose wind down their window*
*They were seen travelling in their car near Buckingham Palace ahead of Trooping the Colour*
*Ms Levin said couple had 'fought for more security' but seemed happy to 'wind down the window and wave' *
*Meghan briefly waved from the window, whilst Harry kept a lower profile in the seat next to her*
*Harry is taking legal action against the Home Office over the decision to withdraw police protection *
By HARRY HOWARD FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 10:19, 3 June 2022 | UPDATED: 11:44, 3 June 2022 

Royal biographer Angela Levin today questioned whether Harry and Meghan's decision to wind down their window to greet crowds yesterday was consistent with their fears about their security and an alleged promise to keep a low profile when in the UK.  
Ms Levin, a royal commentator and author of several biographies of senior members of the family, hit out at the couple during an interview on Talk TV. 
She said she was 'very angry' when the couple were seen with their window down as they travelled through crowds near Buckingham Palace. Meghan was seen briefly waving as they passed by onlookers. 
Ms Levin said they had 'fought for more security' but seemed happy to 'wind down the window and wave'.
The couple have been denied 24/7 armed protection from British Police after stepping down as working royals. Harry is taking legal action against the Home Office over the decision.
Harry has since claimed he does not feel safe when bringing his family to the UK and was 'unable to return home' over fears it is too dangerous. He had even offered to pay for British police bodyguards himself - but the Met said that their officers cannot be paid for. 
However, the Queen did send a car and a security detail to collect Harry and Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet when they landed at Farnborough Airport earlier this week after flying from their home in America.
The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was in high spirits as she gazed and waved out of the window, with a more reserved Harry, 37, peeking over her shoulder. 
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex reportedly told the Queen before their arrival in the UK earlier this week that they would keep a low profile and stick to appearing only at public engagements. 
The couple did not have a place on the Buckingham Palace balcony with senior members of the Royal Family yesterday because they are no longer working royals. 
Instead, they were pictured enjoying the scenes from a balcony on Horse Guards Parade. 






Royal biographer Angela Levin today slammed Harry and Meghan for greeting crowds from the window of their car yesterday, amid the ongoing row over their personal security





The couple made a low-key appearance at the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations and did not have a place on the Buckingham Palace balcony with senior members of the Royal Family because they are no longer working royals. Instead, they were pictured enjoying the scenes from a balcony on Horse Guards Parade. Above: The couple speak to the Duke of Kent, the Queen's cousin, from the balcony where they watched celebrations


Ms Levin said: 'I felt when I saw them what are you doing here you are irrelevant. 
'Why are you here. I was very angry when they wound the window down of their car.
'They are people who fought for more security, the utmost security yet they were happy to wind the window down and wave. Why're they doing that?
'Harry said he felt like he was in a zoo [when he was a working royal] so what he was doing waving to all the people. Why would you want to do that?'
Ms Levin also took aim at Meghan, who she claimed had 'absolutely trashed the royal family'. 
'She has made it very very difficult for the senior members who have the discipline not to fight back in public,' she added.

'My instinct was that what are you doing here. I don't think you can trash someone and then turn up with smiles.'
However, Meghan Markle's friend Omid Scobie, who penned the Finding Freedom biography about her and Prince Harry, insisted that the couple wanted to be as 'low profile as possible' during their trip. 
Speaking to the BBC today, he said: 'It is almost hard to believe, but I think that yesterday at Trooping the Colour was a great example. We didn’t really catch sight of them on TV cameras. 
'There were a few grainy photos of them in existence online but that is about as far as it goes.' 
The video of the couple emerged as the Queen was spotted arriving back at Windsor Castle on Thursday afternoon, after kicking off her Platinum Jubilee and joining senior royals on the Buckingham Palace balcony. 
Building manager Emily Sevenoaks, 28, said she had no idea it was the Sussexes when she decided to start filming on Cleveland Row in St James, central London. 
'I Honestly had no idea it was them,' she told MailOnline, 'I heard police escorts and flew over with the camera ready and then I realised mid filming... I was very lucky!' 
She said the black Audi and police escort had come out of the gated Stable Yard road, which allows access to Clarence House and St James's palace. 




The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was in high spirits as she gazed out of the window, with a more reserved Harry, 37, peeking over her shoulder while they travelled through throngs of royal fans near Buckingham Palace at around 12.20pm
The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was in high spirits as she gazed and waved out of the window, with a more reserved Harry, 37, peeking over her shoulder
The couple were believed to be on their way to Buckingham Palace ahead of the historic flypast, which featured 71 aircraft.  
Social media users were quick to comment on the clip, with one Twitter user declaring: 'Her smile says 'I'm baaaackk b*****s.' [Sic].
Others said Harry looked 'stressed', while another added: 'Harry is already on high alert. Look at his face.' 
Tougher critics mocked Meghan for rolling the window of the car down after Harry recently claimed he was 'unable to return home' from Los Angeles because the UK was too dangerous. 
One Twitter user jibed: 'When you are petrified about security issues but still choose to pull the window down for a photo-op in the Queen's procession.' 





The Audi car that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in with blacked out windows as they drove down the Mall in London with two police protection offices in it followed by another three close behind

The car that followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as it travelled down The Mall contained three Met police officers
The Sussexes were not allowed on the Buckingham Palace balcony yesterday, following Megxit, but did join other royals in the Major General's Office overlooking Horse Guards Parade in central London for Trooping the Colour.
An animated Meghan appeared to playfully 'shush' a group of young royals as they stood at a window overlooking the parade, while Harry was later seen mimicking the gesture in a separate photo.
Though their appearance ended months of speculation on whether the Sussexes would attend the Platinum Jubilee celebrations, there was no sign of their children Archie and Lilibet, who are also believed to be in the UK.
Today, the couple are set to attend the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral. 
It will be the first time they have attended an event together with other senior royals - including Prince Charles, Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge - since 2020's Commonwealth Day service, which was their last official engagement. 
Harry did attend Prince Philip's funeral last April and then united with his brother Prince William to unveil a statue of their mother Princess Diana at Kensington Palace.  

(Omitted some extra, extremely blurry pics)


----------



## LibbyRuth

EverSoElusive said:


> I wish the boos were louder  Nutmeg must be really pissed off while trying to maintain her composure.


I actually think it played out pretty well for Meghan.  I get the impression that she firmly wants them living happily ever after in California trying to create their own American royal family.  I could see where Harry would feel some pull to return to Britain at some point.  A boo-ing public is going to make that less desirable, and secure what she wants.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think Bea is an ally tbh.


 I do - the Yorks are all the same


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm hoping they bale out over the Atlantic on some deserted island to finally get the privacy they want and we deserve. Which one of us would the hardest?!



I'm a bit out of tears atm, but already feeling sorry for any animals on any island so could be crying in sympathy for a bush baby, lima or fellow tree-rat


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> TMZ is reporting about the Queen meeting Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth Meets Great-Granddaughter Lilibet for First Time
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth finally meets great-granddaughter Lilibet for the first time, during Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Poor old lady! No wonder that the Queen is knocked out after such an eventful and emotional day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

After all is said and done, was the 5 minutes of fame on O really worth it?

The Troublesome Duo pissed off most of the BRF and lost the trust of (mainly) Charles, Camilla, William, Kate and Anne. Even most Brits don't care for them judging by how they were received.

The only reason why they can still be back on any palace grounds and attend any royal events, is simply because of the Queen's love and grace. If it was up to Charles and William, these crazies would have been banned and forgotten.

If only the Queen would show them tough love and say no to them, and make herself unavailable like Charles and William do.

I guess now that the Troublesome Duo's wealth is dwindling quickly due to zero new or consistent income streams, that's why they are back sucking up to the BRF and renewing their Frogmore lease, probably trying to return to the UK.

I dunno who's more despicable, the Troublesome Duo or the Minions


----------



## EverSoElusive

LibbyRuth said:


> I actually think it played out pretty well for Meghan.  I get the impression that she firmly wants them living happily ever after in California trying to create their own American royal family.  I could see where Harry would feel some pull to return to Britain at some point.  A boo-ing public is going to make that less desirable, and secure what she wants.




She can live in Cali all she wants. The Brits don't want her back    Harry is already feeling lost, probably more home sick than Nutmeg allows him to show to the world.


----------



## calicocat

Chanbal said:


> This is sweet!



It looks like Camilla also made a similar gesture at the same time.  If so, how cute!


----------



## redney

EverSoElusive said:


> She can live in Cali all she wants. The Brits don't want her back    Harry is already feeling lost, probably more home sick than Nutmeg allows him to show to the world.


Exactly. They made their bed, now they can lie in it.


----------



## regnews




----------



## papertiger

LibbyRuth said:


> I actually think it played out pretty well for Meghan.  I get the impression that she firmly wants them living happily ever after in California trying to create their own American royal family.  I could see where Harry would feel some pull to return to Britain at some point.  A boo-ing public is going to make that less desirable, and secure what she wants.



I don't think anyone likes getting booed.

If M really had wanted to stay on the Cali-side of life, she would have used her father as an excuse and stayed home. They'll never be another party like the Platinum Jubilee they'd be expected to attend, so apart from a possible future coronation - one day, optional for them (long live the Queen). Whatever the outcome, they'd be no reason to ever set foot on UK soil.

They've just renewed the lease on Frogmore Cottage so I think they planned to come and go.

I used to live 1 minute from St Pauls and would have happily strolled down and booed the traitors and strolled home again. Glad someone had a backbone to though. Instead, I went shopping/hat Platinum Jubilee tea with a friend I hadn't seen for a long time (and I bought a fab Gottex swimsuit). Tomorrow I'lll be in the middle of town, there's only so much crowd--surfing I can do.


----------



## rhyvin

Makes you wish the Tower of London was still a viable option 


regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


----------



## redney

Good grief, she's orange. An oompa loopa! Harry looks like he finally gets how unwanted they are.


----------



## papertiger

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902



He looks so awful. What is he eating (or drinking) States-side?


----------



## Sharont2305

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


I'd love to know what Lady Sarah is thinking.


----------



## elvisfan4life

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


 Lady Sarah’s face - her mum would be so proud Margaret had the same expression


----------



## papertiger

rhyvin said:


> Makes you wish the Tower of London was still a viable option



You mean it isn't?


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Lady Sarah’s face - her mum would be so proud Margaret had the same expression


Plus we all know how close she is to her Aunt Elizabeth.


----------



## elvisfan4life

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


 Sarah is very close to the Queen wonder if she is reporting back ????


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry I know I'm biased but that bottom pic doesn't look appropriate for a grown man (and a royal) to be acting in church


I'm not a religious person, but I find your opinion justified considering how utterly disrespectful Dufus is acting and it seems as if he's trying to con others into behaving as inanely and ill-mannered as himself. IMO and as I've said before, he's badly in need of a mental health intervention and not with one of his Buttercup coaches.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902




Wow Lady Sarah is really simple! She literally had a regular cardigan/button up top on 

Meanwhile, Nutmeg cannot stop smiling the entire time. She probably didn't want any cameras to catch her looking pissed because she's afraid the press and public would comment saying that she didn't look happy to be there. Smile or not, she's bad press all the way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Bea and Eugenie are desperate enough they would turn up at the opening of a matchbox they are like their parents



I don't know about Bea. She seems pretty content in her marriage, and she doesn't even have a public Instagram.


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> Wow Lady Sarah is really simple! She literally had a regular cardigan/button up top on
> 
> Meanwhile, Nutmeg cannot stop smiling the entire time. She probably didn't want any cameras to catch her looking pissed because she's afraid the press and public would comment saying that she didn't look happy to be there. Smile or not, she's bad press all the way.


 Twin set and pearls


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> Wow Lady Sarah is really simple! She literally had a regular cardigan/button up top on



That seems to be her go to 'uniform' tbh, a cardigan and full skirt. She knows what works for her. I love her style.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> That seems to be her go to 'uniform' tbh, a cardigan and full skirt. She knows what works for her. I love her style


 Me too - Margaret was always so over the top it has always been so refreshing that Sarah is so natural - she is my age (and the same age as Edward ) and when she was growing up all attention was focused on Lady Helen Windsor or melons as she was known ( also the same age 1964 babies ) the first blonde bombshell of the royal family - I’m sure she is  a lovely girl but not overendowed in the  brains dept (just elsewhere lol)


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Me too - Margaret was always so over the top it has always been so refreshing that Sarah is so natural - she is my age (and the same age as Edward ) and when she was growing up all attention was focused on Lady Helen Windsor or melons as she was known ( also the same age 1964 babies ) the first blonde bombshell of the royal family - I’m due a lively girl but not overendowed in the  brains dept (just elsewhere lol)


I remember it well, I'm of the same generation as you, I loved following them then. I think Lady Helen was behind Harry today, didn't see her properly, only her husband.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> I remember it well, I'm of the same generation as you, I loved following them then.


 Yes it was fun as we seemed to be allowed to see a lot more of the 1964 babies growing up than the older royals


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Wow Lady Sarah is really simple! She literally had a regular cardigan/button up top on
> 
> Meanwhile, Nutmeg cannot stop smiling the entire time. She probably didn't want any cameras to catch her looking pissed because she's afraid the press and public would comment saying that she didn't look happy to be there. Smile or not, she's bad press all the way.



Lady Sarah has amazing style, not the first time she has worn a cardi/twin set
she has simple hats with amazing panache , no fancy feathers or bows just style
she always wears pieces from her mother , Pss Margaret, large pearls or a collet necklace


----------



## Chanbal

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


----------



## CarryOn2020

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902



Mercy, what _is_ this face he is making?  Rage? Sadness? Both? Is he about to explode?

Lady Sarah seems to follow the Dior style.  Her mother, Margaret, was a muse for Dior.  She is wearing Margaret’s earrings. Probably the pearl necklace belonged to Margaret.  Total A plus lady who wears the classics well.  Plus her sons are gorgeous  









						The moving way Princess Margaret inspired her daughter Lady Sarah Chatto's chic style
					

The late Princess Margaret has certainly inspired the style of many, and none more so than her daughter Lady Sarah Chatto. See the pictures here




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## Cheddar Cheese

DoggieBags said:


> I really like princess Anne’s outfit. Loved that color on her


You are so right DoggieBags!
Prince Anne looks great in these colours. Mose flattering outfit I’ve seen her wear.

Definitely getting  the feeling the entire team are giving their  very best for their Queen.


----------



## catlover46

CarryOn2020 said:


> Talk about daggers. Look at the men behind Hazz.  That’s not happiness to see him.
> 
> View attachment 5417710


They were being laughed at when they were walking up the aisle.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> From the* Daily mail:*
> The Audi car that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were in with blacked out windows as they drove down the Mall in London with two police protection offices in it followed by another three close behind
> 
> The car that followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as it travelled down The Mall contained three Met police officers
> The Sussexes were not allowed on the Buckingham Palace balcony yesterday, following Megxit, but did join other royals in the Major General's Office overlooking Horse Guards Parade in central London for Trooping the Colour.
> An animated Meghan appeared to playfully 'shush' a group of young royals as they stood at a window overlooking the parade, while Harry was later seen mimicking the gesture in a separate photo.
> Though their appearance ended months of speculation on whether the Sussexes would attend the Platinum Jubilee celebrations, there was no sign of their children Archie and Lilibet, who are also believed to be in the UK.
> Today, the couple are set to attend the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral.
> It will be the first time they have attended an event together with other senior royals - including Prince Charles, Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge - since 2020's Commonwealth Day service, which was their last official engagement.
> Harry did attend Prince Philip's funeral last April and then united with his brother Prince William to unveil a statue of their mother Princess Diana at Kensington Palace.
> 
> (Omitted some extra, extremely blurry pics)


Wow! Who in their right mind would order a car "_with blacked out windows_" for TW?


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan always has that big sh*t-eating grin. Can’t decide if it means everything is going exactly as she planned or if she refuses to give the crowd the satisfaction of seeing her uncomfortable.

Harry’s face is as transparent as a pane of glass.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Wow! Who in their right mind would order a car "_with blacked out windows_" for TW?





I love Sunset Boulevard with Gloria Swanson as ageing movie star Norma Desmond who refuses to accept that her day in the limelight has gone.  Very appropriate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



This is troubling. He’s never happy or smiling when he’s with her but when with other people his smiles are so genuine. Is he abused at home ala Amber Heard style? It’s so strange while his wife smiles like nothing’s wrong. If that was my husband never smiling while with him, I’d be concerned.

ETA: it just dawned on me, you know the service dogs that you like give signals to, i.e., a pat on the head, a touch on the nose, MM has him programmed by those hand in the back, etc. Ok I might be stretching here but it’s plausible that she’s got him lock and loaded to do her bidding. Stupid man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> This is troubling. He’s never happy or smiling when he’s with her but when with other people his smiles are so genuine. Is he abused at home ala Amber Heard style? It’s so strange while his wife smiles like nothing’s wrong. If that was my husband never smiling while with him, I’d be concerned.



Could it be drugs?  It does  look like MM knows what it is.


----------



## altigirl88

papertiger said:


> He looks so awful. What is he eating (or drinking) States-side?


I was wondering this, myself. He looks like he’s been drinking too much. Maybe combined with the sun exposure in California


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> This is troubling. He’s never happy or smiling when he’s with her but when with other people his smiles are so genuine. Is he abused at home ala Amber Heard style? It’s so strange while his wife smiles like nothing’s wrong. If that was my husband never smiling while with him, I’d be concerned.
> 
> ETA: it just dawned on me, you know the service dogs that you like give signals to, i.e., a pat on the head, a touch on the nose, MM has him programmed by those hand in the back, etc. Ok I might be stretching here but it’s plausible that she’s got him lock and loaded to do her bidding. Stupid man.


 He is being ruled by a certain bit of his anatomy i think - her talents are hidden ones


----------



## mellibelly

That One Photo - BLIND GOSSIP
					

[Blind Gossip] With all the drama surrounding this couple, you would think that the last thing on their mind would be a photo op. But it is! They are not producing the kind of content that justifies a big payday. They need help. They were pretty much ordered to go to [his family event] and […]




					blindgossip.com


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could it be drugs?  It does  look like MM knows what it is.


Could be. I think they lead a sad life. Always in a fishbowl and the thing is she wants that life. Imagine having really no purpose in life but living like that? I love life as a commoner, doing things without always being “on” and doing anything I want, simple pleasures.  Nah, they can keep their millions and gazillions, be photographed and stared at like animals in a zoo to be gawked at, made comments at, and entertaining people with every move they make.


----------



## Aimee3

The way I interpret the grinning moron (mm) is that she’s so thrilled to be there, she can’t help but grin.  This despite all the vitriol she spilled on Oprah, she loves being a duchess.  She probably has the servants in monticito call her duchess.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> From the pic posted by @Chanbal above, it looks like the little Doofus is asking Bea and others to scoot over for them probably as per the Witch's instructions followed by a push on the back to reinforce her command.
> 
> View attachment 5417842


The photo that seems to indicate her gloves went on after being seated 

gloves are on in photo seated next to Lady Sarah Chatto


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could it be drugs?  It does  look like MM knows what it is.



He’d look happier if he was on drugs. He’s in a pissy mood because he isn’t getting the attention/respect he thinks he’s due.

I fully expect Meghan to have a full blown photo shoot for Lilibet’s birthday. They are saving their PR cash for that.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



Companion photo to my previous post with pic before seating - no gloves , seated MM wears gloves


----------



## elvisfan4life

Why does it matter when she put gloves on ?


----------



## Lodpah

elvisfan4life said:


> He is being ruled by a certain bit of his anatomy i think - her talents are hidden ones


That’s why he never smiles when in public with her cause that’s probably the only thing he has from her.


----------



## DoggieBags

regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


Harry’s expression in this pic makes him look like someone in one of those horror movies just before he whips out his ax or chain saw and the blood starts flying


----------



## mellibelly

Blind gossip says the christening won’t happen because they couldn’t get a venue. Sounds like they are settling for the birthday party at Frogmore but who the heck would go from the RF besides Eug & Jack. Maybe they invited celebrities they’ve never met before?!


----------



## bag-mania

Have Archie and Lilibet been seen publicly at all yet? Did they come in on a different flight with their nannies?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> I'd love to know what Lady Sarah is thinking.


Ditto. I'd also love to know her reaction when she had been told that she would sit next to the Monster of Montecito. I also tip my hat to the Phillips siblings and Mike Tindall - they were taught well how to behave in public.


----------



## elvisfan4life

DeMonica said:


> Ditto. I'd also love to know her reaction when she had been told that she would sit next to the Monster of Montecito. I also tip my hat to the Phillips siblings and Mike Tindall - they were taught well how to behave in public.



She may have volunteered- the Queen often has afternoon tea with her and confides in her


----------



## Chanbal

This is an interesting video showing the Harkles' arrival today.  Some people are questioning whether TW is adjusting a mic at ~4:10. It's hard to see. To me, it looks a little more obvious her big smile being ignored by some people when she shakes hands.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Blind gossip says the christening won’t happen because they couldn’t get a venue. Sounds like they are settling for the birthday party at Frogmore but *who the heck would go from the RF besides Eug & Jack.* *Maybe they invited celebrities* they’ve never met before?!


I read that Kim K is in London and trying to get tickets to attend to one of the royal events.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> That One Photo - BLIND GOSSIP
> 
> 
> [Blind Gossip] With all the drama surrounding this couple, you would think that the last thing on their mind would be a photo op. But it is! They are not producing the kind of content that justifies a big payday. They need help. They were pretty much ordered to go to [his family event] and […]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blindgossip.com



I fully expect Meghan whipped out her cell phone and was snapping away furiously when the Queen met Lilibet. It won't matter if the lighting is bad or the angle is off, she desperately needs that money shot!


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> Why does it matter when she put gloves on ?



Wondering if this is an urban dictionary kind of thing. She was shaking hands when she walked in, so gloves off.




bag-mania said:


> I fully expect Meghan whipped out her cell phone and was snapping away furiously when the Queen met Lilibet. It won't matter if the lighting is bad or the angle is off, she desperately needs that money shot!



Nflix bosses are tough, especially in this economy.


----------



## bag-mania

Wasn't Harry getting hair plugs? If so, they didn't take. Seems like he'll be looking like his brother in another five years or so.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nflix bosses are tough, especially in this economy.



The boos can be edited out in post-production. They can add in the sound of a cheering crowd at that time.


----------



## marietouchet

elvisfan4life said:


> Why does it matter when she put gloves on ?


I was always told to wear my gloves into church, it is OK to remove them in church to be able to flip through a hymnal 

The Queen wears hers outside - a finishing touch to the outfit but also inside, if she has to shake a lot of hands or when she pins medals on chests - honors ceremony
Kate never seems to have gloves 
Maxima of the Netherlands always has them - always color coordinated to her outfit and in kidskin (maybe not PC but gorgeous) - the gloves add a polish to her outfit, she does carry them at all times - a nice touch

Gloves are a vanishing tradition,  but if you have them, you might as well wear them into church, not seated


----------



## redney

Will be awaiting SS's spin once Netflix fires them for not getting any content.


----------



## csshopper

The Queen’s team executed a masterful move yesterday in using a family wide function, the Lunch, in a tightly controlled environment, for Lili’s intro to the family. Private photos only, strained relations not in public view, not linking the intro to her actual birthdate, no advance publicity and no formal (that I have seen on line) statement from the Palace. Suckesses put in a box, followed by being minimized at St. Paul’s today. Hazbeen’s outrageously inappropriate hilariously laughing  display of behavior with the buffoon Jack Brooksbank further besmirched his image, all on camera. What a pair of dolts! Meanwhile TW with her plastered on sneer, demonstrated once again how she is incapable of any self awareness or appropriateness.

Edited to add, Lady Chatto’s look at Hazbeen is one of the best pics of the day.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, literally no one else, is smiling.  H&M need to read the room!
> 
> View attachment 5417735


The oompa lumpa is smiling while everyone is serious—perhaps they are observing their heir to the throne arriving, or the clergy,  or perhaps it is a religious moment pertaining to church protocols— you know, a solemn moment when only village idiots grin.


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> He’d look happier if he was on drugs. He’s in a pissy mood because he isn’t getting the attention/respect he thinks he’s due.
> 
> I fully expect Meghan to have a full blown photo shoot for Lilibet’s birthday. They are saving their PR cash for that.


Possibly it finally dawned on him inow how deep sh.t he's in. He missed out on that olive branch which had been held out to him at Prince Phillip's funeral.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting video showing the Harkles' arrival today.  Some people are questioning whether TW is adjusting a mic at ~4:10. It's hard to see. To me, it looks a little more obvious her big smile being ignored by some people when she shakes hands.



Oh dear ...
In the natural light, the MM hat is spanking white while the dress is cream ... a faux pas worthy of being sent to the Tower
One never mixes white and cream
Sarah next to MM is spot on, cream hat, cream top

PS no handbag in sight on arrival, the only thing IN her hands are gloves (not ON her hands)


----------



## DeMonica

elvisfan4life said:


> She may have volunteered- the Queen often has afternoon tea with her and confides in her


If she did it she deserves a medal for it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wondering if this is an urban dictionary kind of thing. She was shaking hands when she walked in, so gloves off.


I don't know, but gloves were off when she was supposedly adjusting the lapel (mic?).


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear ...
> In the natural light, the MM hat is spanking white while the dress is cream
> One never mixes white and cream
> Sarah next to MM is spot on, cream hat, cream top



Other sites say MM’s coat[?] is a pale grey. The hat is definitely white.  So hard to tell on my screen.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe she's trying to be like Kate but she doesn't have the impeccable tailoring.  and white isn't forgiving as far as wrinkling, bunching, etc.


Or hiding a mic.


----------



## bag-mania

DeMonica said:


> Possibly it finally dawned on him inow how deep sh.t he's in. He missed out on that olive branch which had been held out to him at Prince Phillip's funeral.



I wish that was true but I don't believe he is that self-aware. Harry's personality isn't very complicated. He comes off as surly and entitled because that is what he is.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> The Queen’s team executed a masterful move yesterday in using a family wide function, the Lunch, in a tightly controlled environment, for Lili’s intro to the family. Private photos only, strained relations not in public view, not linking the intro to her actual birthdate, no advance publicity and no formal (that I have seen on line) statement from the Palace. Suckesses put in a box, followed by being minimized at St. Paul’s today. Hazbeen’s outrageously inappropriate hilariously laughing  display of behavior with the buffoon Jack Brooksbank further besmirched his image, all on camera. What a pair of dolts! Meanwhile TW with her plastered on sneer, demonstrated once again how she is incapable of any self awareness or appropriateness.
> 
> Edited to add, Lady Chatto’s look at Hazbeen is one of the best pics of the day.


 Agree with everything great post


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> The photo that seems to indicate her gloves went on after being seated
> 
> gloves are on in photo seated next to Lady Sarah Chatto


Yes. It appears she removed her gloves to shake hands with the church official (I'm sorry I don't know his name or title) before entering the church.
See series of images in the middle of the page in the link below.

Church Service


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> I don't know, but gloves were off when she was supposedly adjusting the lapel (mic?).


 Ah gotcha !!! I see now - there is a bit where they have just sat down and Harry leans over and smirks at her and she grins back - maybe discussing the mic/ camera - of testing it - he isn’t the brightest though the weird looking eejit Beatrice has married looks like he could give him a run for his money too


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Wow Lady Sarah is really simple! She literally had a regular cardigan/button up top on
> 
> Meanwhile, Nutmeg cannot stop smiling the entire time. She probably didn't want any cameras to catch her looking pissed because she's afraid the press and public would comment saying that she didn't look happy to be there. Smile or not, she's bad press all the way.


...Yet still looked more elegant than MMM in her expensive, ill fitting clothing.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting video showing the Harkles' arrival today.  Some people are questioning whether TW is adjusting a mic at ~4:10. It's hard to see. To me, it looks a little more obvious her big smile being ignored by some people when she shakes hands.



She adjusts the exact same part of her collar when she gets out of the suv and then again at the 1:12 mark when they are speaking to the man at the entrance to the cathedral. The third time is at 4:10 when she’s seated and speaking to Lady Sarah. She’s definitely miked.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting video showing the Harkles' arrival today.  Some people are questioning whether TW is adjusting a mic at ~4:10. It's hard to see. To me, it looks a little more obvious her big smile being ignored by some people when she shakes hands.



She is definitely adjusting something that is beneath her collar and not the collar itself. It's obvious from the way her fingers are pinching at something - my guess is a small mic the same color as her dress.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



His "


marietouchet said:


> Oh dear ...
> In the natural light, the MM hat is spanking white while the dress is cream ... a faux pas worthy of being sent to the Tower
> One never mixes white and cream
> Sarah next to MM is spot on, cream hat, cream top
> 
> PS no handbag in sight on arrival, the only thing IN her hands are gloves (not ON her hands)


Interesting she's adjusting the same (microphone) ahem collar in different frames of this video.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> I read that Kim K is in London and trying to get tickets to attend to one of the royal events.


Netflix would LOVE the Kardashians at the bday party. Can you imagine?! My dog how far they have fallen


----------



## Chanbal

Piers, of course!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

purseinsanity said:


> I'm surprised Zara gave her a smile.


Sometimes breeding and manners slip through.  We all have found ourselves graciously greeting someone reflexively and afterwards wishing we had not and been merely civil.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I thought Megan's outfit was totally wrong for the occasion. It was way too heavy. I get that it's probably not as hot here as california but it's been a glorious early June day here today. The outfit was too heavy and wintery imo. Something more like the Emilia Wicksteed sailboat dress would have been much better (although not sleeveless in church.!) Most ladies were wearing summer dresses not even coat dresses.

IMO Megan or her stylist should pay some attention to Queen Mathilde (of Belgium) who, although taller than Mm, also has a more boxy shape, and yet always looks imaculate and clearly knows how to dress flatteringly for her shape.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

jennlt said:


> She is definitely adjusting something that is beneath her collar and not the collar itself. It's obvious from the way her fingers are pinching at something - my guess is a small mic the same color as her dress.
> View attachment 5417973


That definitely looks like a mic. Where is MI5?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Dior IG


----------



## Lodpah

Mrs.Z said:


> Dior IG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418008


Gee if a Dior outfit looks like that, forget about it. It looks hideous. No thanks.


----------



## Mrs.Z

The details


----------



## periogirl28

When I saw that back flap, it definitely reminded me of the back inverted pleat flap of a classic trench coat, except this one seems too short and therefore sticks out a lot more.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Ah gotcha !!! I see now - there is a bit where they have just sat down and Harry leans over and smirks at her and she grins back - maybe discussing the mic/ camera - of testing it - he isn’t the brightest though the weird looking eejit Beatrice has married looks like he could give him a run for his money too



I'm not known to be an Edo fan, but I don't know if I'd call a very successful business man an idiot.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Other sites say MM’s coat[?] is a pale grey. The hat is definitely white.  So hard to tell on my screen.


It looked white on my phone, but when I saw it on TV it looked pale gray.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I don’t care for the outfit, it gives me lab coat vibes and the color doesn’t do anything for her.  A wool skirt underneath?  It seems warm?! I do prefer her hair up when wearing a hat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> Dior IG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418008



If I were Dior I absolutely would not flaunt it that this illfitting thing was made to measure. It does not make me want to spend on Dior Haute Couture


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, this is good….   I have to say that I thought about it. The queen needs to rest, and this makes sense!








						Blind Item #7
					

Much like the royal pedophile's COVID, there is also another ruse. According to several employees at the streaming service, their well laid...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Mrs.Z

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If I were Dior I absolutely would not flaunt it that this illfitting thing was made to measure. It does not make me want to spend on Dior Haute Couture


Thus why they only posted pics from the front, the back was not good!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW this is Edo's family seat in Italy. Not bad.


----------



## mellibelly

sMeg


----------



## Maggie Muggins

chaneljewel said:


> I’m not surprised that H and M were booed.  *What they said about the RF was disgusting,* and I’m sure the people want nothing to do with them.  *Harry looked sad and I do believe that one day he will resent M for manipulating him into giving up his family. *  Both are also selfish to deny their children the chance to know their great grandmother, a queen, and future king grandfather and uncle.  My goodness, what an honor and privilege for the kids!


Agree, and I think they feed off each other's miseries like dwelling on the fake suffering at the hands of the BRF. It's quite possible they now believe their own lies. It's also possible that TW has convinced him that she really rescued him from the 'evil' BRF. He might need extensive therapy before he could believe that TW was/is a manipulative schemer.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good….   I have to say that I thought about it. The queen needs to rest, and this makes sense!
> View attachment 5418012
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> Much like the royal pedophile's COVID, there is also another ruse. According to several employees at the streaming service, their well laid...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


If that’s a true, it really stinks that she had to skip events to avoid them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this is good….   I have to say that I thought about it. The queen needs to rest, and this makes sense!
> View attachment 5418012
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> Much like the royal pedophile's COVID, there is also another ruse. According to several employees at the streaming service, their well laid...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I hope this isn’t true. I’d hate to think the Queen felt she needed to hide from any of her celebration because of those two. It’s all about her not them. They absolutely are not worth a single thought or consideration from her.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> If that’s a true, it really stinks that she had to skip events to avoid them.


And if true, don't even invite them in the first place!


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> If that’s a true, it really stinks that she had to skip events to avoid them.


Don’t believe that. The Harkles don’t have that kind of power. T Q needs her rest.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> If that’s a true, it really stinks that she had to skip events to avoid them.





bag-mania said:


> I hope this isn’t true. I’d hate to think the Queen felt she needed to hide from any of her celebration because of those two. It’s all about her not them. They absolutely are not worth a single thought or consideration from her.



I believe QE is really tired and she needs the rest. She is 96yo, and it is likely more enjoyable for her to watch some events on TV. This might be 'a win-win situation'.


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> That definitely looks like a mic. Where is MI5?


Hmmmm. Maybe she got caught and that’s the reason they returned to Frogmore and did not go to the Guild Hall? Or, we’re they never invited in the first place?

If there is definitive proof she was wired I hope the B**** is publicly outed and humiliated.


----------



## DoggieBags

lanasyogamama said:


> If that’s a true, it really stinks that she had to skip events to avoid them.


I seriously doubt that the Queen feels the need to hide from anyone. If she didn’t want to be filmed by Netflix I doubt that they’d be able to get any footage of her


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> I seriously doubt that the Queen feels the need to hide from anyone. If she didn’t want to be filmed by Netflix I doubt that they’d be able to get any footage of her


QE would not hide from anyone imo. Though, she may have found the need to rest useful in more than one way. I would…


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

jennlt said:


> She is definitely adjusting something that is beneath her collar and not the collar itself. It's obvious from the way her fingers are pinching at something - my guess is a small mic the same color as her dress.
> View attachment 5417973


Gotcha photo!


----------



## Chanbal

Here is the much anticipated video…


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Hmmmm. Maybe she got caught and that’s the reason they returned to Frogmore and did not go to the Guild Hall? Or, we’re they never invited in the first place?
> 
> If there is definitive proof she was wired I hope the B**** is publicly outed and humiliated.


I seem to remember H&M are not invited to Guildhall, but will attend a dinner party to night or tomorrow


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> That definitely looks like a mic. Where is MI5?


I saw her playing with that collar several times and wondered why ? what am I missing ?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I saw her playing with that collar several times and wondered why ? what am I missing ?



Some believe she was fiddling with a microphone she had hidden there. I don’t know who’s conversations she could record. They kept her away from anyone important.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

elvisfan4life said:


> Ah gotcha !!! I see now - there is a bit where they have just sat down and Harry leans over and smirks at her and she grins back - maybe discussing the mic/ camera - of testing it - *he isn’t the brightest though the weird looking eejit Beatrice has married *looks like he could give him a run for his money too


If this is the 'weird looking eejit' to which you're referring, he isn't Princess Beatrice's husband, but Princess Eugenie's husband Jack Brooskbank.


----------



## Aimee3

Say what we will about Edo, he always looks impeccably dressed and groomed unlike Hazbeen.  I bet even his feet get pedicures.


----------



## youngster

Aimee3 said:


> Say what we will about Edo, he always looks impeccably dressed and groomed unlike Hazbeen.  I bet even his feet get pedicures.



I think Edo is also the reason that Bea is looking better and better.  She looks fit and her clothing choices have been so much better lately.  She is wearing better colors that work with her hair and skin better too.  Maybe he found her a good stylist or maybe he has a good eye and let's her know when something isn't quite right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Maureen Callahan of the New York Post is my new hero.

*Harry and Meghan finally got what they deserve — a chorus of royally loud boos*

That smug smile, at long last, has been wiped off Meghan’s face. Actual tears, not her usual crocodile variety, welled up. She was visibly unnerved.

Makes sense. Like all malignant narcissists, Meghan is only capable of feeling sorry for herself. Lest we forget Meghan, the grand duchess, standing among impoverished, starving African children and griping — to a broadcast interviewer! — “Not many people have asked me if I’m OK.”

May I be among the first to ask: So, Meghan, how are you feeling now?

After two years of accusing the British royal family of everything from wishing Meghan would kill herself to being racist toward her unborn baby to being held literal prisoner by royal staffers to accusing Kate Middleton of making Meghan cry — while branding themselves as eco-warrior-humanitarian-mental-health-experts, motto, for real, “Be kind” — these two get their comeuppance.

It’s exquisite.

Turns out the royals know a bit about mental health and manipulators themselves, because they’ve deployed the only tactic that works: the gray rock. It’s like dealing with toddlers having tantrums — you just ignore, ignore, ignore until they tire themselves out.


The royals have played the long game, brilliantly putting the Sussexes in a no-win situation: Decline their invite and look mean, petty and vengeful, slighting the ailing queen on her historic jubilee. Accept and get the coldest of shoulders before an audience of billions.

Get the message now, kids?

How gratifying to see H&M shuffled off to the cheap seats in the second row, across the aisle from Charles and Camilla, William and Kate, none of whom cast a glance their way. How elegantly the BRF has slid in the knife: no official portraits with the queen, no appearance on the balcony, no access to any royals of consequence in public.

The message is as clear as Meghan’s blood diamonds — you know, the ones the Duchess of Woke wore, a gift from MBS after the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. (Bygones!)


Harry and Meghan are royals now in name only.

Hey, they always said they just wanted to be regular people, right?

H&M weren’t even in attendance at the buffet luncheon after Friday’s service. Will and Kate were, though.

Instead, those two slunk off to Frogmore Cottage, that dump they spent millions in taxpayer funds renovating before fleeing to Montecito.

One can imagine Harry and Meghan frantically doom-scrolling through their media coverage while drowning their sorrows in kale juice and victimhood, plotting how they might commodify this latest injustice.


After all, they’ll need the money. Charles stopped paying the bills over a year ago. Spotify isn’t happy. Neither is Netflix. George Clooney, Oprah — even Gayle won’t take their calls.

Even worse, this jubilee weekend was supposed to give Harry tons of material for his big tell-all memoir. All he’s going home with is a sad view from the second row.









						Harry and Meghan finally got what they deserve — a chorus of royally loud boos
					

Finally, Harry and Meghan got what they deserve after shamefully leaving the Royal family and accusing the Royal family of unfettered racism — boos!




					nypost.com


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Talk about daggers. Look at the men behind Hazz.  That’s not happiness to see him.
> 
> View attachment 5417710


Why was he wearing medals?  I thought he was stripped of all his military titles?!?!!!?


----------



## Katel

elvisfan4life said:


> Ah gotcha !!! I see now - there is a bit where they have just sat down and Harry leans over and smirks at her and she grins back - maybe discussing the mic/ camera - of testing it - he isn’t the brightest though the weird looking eejit Beatrice has married looks like he could give him a run for his money too





QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW this is Edo's family seat in Italy. Not bad.
> 
> View attachment 5418016


Yes, Edo carries himself much differently than Jack. I don’t know which one I would trust more, but Edo at least knows how to present himself when with royalty …



Maggie Muggins said:


> Agree, and I think they feed off each other's miseries like dwelling on the fake suffering at the hands of the BRF. It's quite possible they now believe their own lies. It's also possible that TW has convinced him that she really rescued him from the 'evil' BRF. He might need extensive therapy before he could believe that TW was/is a manipulative schemer.



They are very deluded (mentally ill, really) - they (somehow?) believe that they have done no wrong and everybody loves them.


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> Yes, Edo carries himself much differently than Jack. I don’t know which one I would trust more, but Edo at least knows how to present himself in royalty …
> 
> 
> 
> They are very deluded (mentally ill, really) - they somehow?) believe that they have done no wrong and everybody loves them.


The Duke and Duchess of Delusion!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sharont2305 said:


> That seems to be her go to 'uniform' tbh, a cardigan and full skirt. She knows what works for her. I love her style.
> View attachment 5417910
> View attachment 5417907
> View attachment 5417908



Oh my heart looking at the late Prince Phillip 

Sarah's style certainly suits her. She's not pretentious like Nutmeg.




Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting video showing the Harkles' arrival today.  Some people are questioning whether TW is adjusting a mic at ~4:10. It's hard to see. To me, it looks a little more obvious her big smile being ignored by some people when she shakes hands.




Not that it's possible but it looked like she dislocated her right nippl3 




CarryOn2020 said:


> Other sites say MM’s coat[?] is a pale grey. The hat is definitely white.  So hard to tell on my screen.



No, girl. Didn't they say it's lilac?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CeeJay said:


> Why was he wearing medals?  I thought he was stripped of all his military titles?!?!!!?


He was stripped of all his honorary military titles, however, he keeps the medals that he has earned while in the military.


----------



## altigirl88

Aimee3 said:


> Say what we will about Edo, he always looks impeccably dressed and groomed unlike Hazbeen.  I bet even his feet get pedicures.


He does, indeed, look like he gets pedicures  I bet he also smells good. To me he seems to be another who always finds the camera. OTH, I like that he got her a diamond engagement ring and not a colored gemstone as so many in the family do


----------



## Katel

Aimee3 said:


> Say what we will about Edo, he always looks impeccably dressed and groomed unlike Hazbeen.  I bet even his feet get pedicures.


He’s courteous and appropriate too - he understands how to present himself, and seems respectful, unlike Harry or TW.

My family would say “that boy was raised well.”


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Courtesy of DM!



I swear the last loud boo by a woman sounded like me!  It would have been if I was there but I would have continued LOUDLY!  Good for that woman!


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Gee if a Dior outfit looks like that, forget about it. It looks hideous. No thanks.


you're just jealous you don't have her beautiful legs


----------



## Genie27

sdkitty said:


> you're just jealous you don't have her beautiful legs


Dior is the last brand I’d pick if I were short and boxy (and I speak from frustrated experience - Dior does not cut for short women with wide waists.) 

Oddly enough most of the other ladies with imperfect figures all managed to find and wear clothes that fit their bodies.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m sorry that I can’t remember who said it, @Chanbal maybe? But whoever asked if MM picked her hat from the CVS seasonal section, I’ve been laughing about that ALL DAY.


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m sorry that I can’t remember who said it, @Chanbal maybe? But whoever asked if MM picked her hat from the CVS seasonal section, I’ve been laughing about that ALL DAY.


I was thinking at Party Time shop, seasonal store.


----------



## sgj99

duna said:


> All that touching and handholding drives me nuts


It’s so inappropriate!!!


----------



## Hermes Zen

csshopper said:


> Love him for doing this in front of a world wide audience.


AND especially in front of M !!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Just in case y'all need a break and to be reminded of the Queen's love for corgis


----------



## rose60610

Mrs.Z said:


> The details
> View attachment 5418009



In this photo she's walking with her legs far apart, like she's got a drum barrel between her thighs.


----------



## Jayne1

mellibelly said:


> She adjusts the exact same part of her collar when she gets out of the suv and then again at the 1:12 mark when they are speaking to the man at the entrance to the cathedral. The third time is at 4:10 when she’s seated and speaking to Lady Sarah. She’s definitely miked.


I noticed that too!  Same spot each time, what could be there. 

How she keeps that smile on her face is really impressive. I'd be more like Harry -  with a frown I couldn't adjust no matter how much I tried.

I thought her dress and hat were fine, and appropriate for the occasion.


----------



## needlv

I was 30 pages behind and finally caught up.  Just wanted to say the BRF stage managed that church service so well.  W&C and C&C entrance managed so no shots of H and M anywhere near them.

And H treated like the minor royal he now is. Second row, no where near the senior royals.  Ha!  Brilliant move BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Coldest of shoulders    That is how it’s done.


----------



## Chanbal

It all about 'boos' aka 'cheers' for NYT! 









						Fox News had a lot to say about Harry and Meghan being booed at a Platinum Jubilee event
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were booed exiting Queen Elizabeth II's Service of Thanksgiving




					www.salon.com


----------



## elvisfan4life

We know her next interview will be her in tears saying I was so brave I tried to forgive all they had done to me and I went holding my head high and smiling and doing my job and those nasty racist people booed me


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> And if true, don't even invite them in the first place!


 They were only there become the Queen wanted them to be


----------



## elvisfan4life

Maggie Muggins said:


> If this is the 'weird looking eejit' to which you're referring, he isn't Princess Beatrice's husband, but Princess Eugenie's husband Jack Brooskbank.
> View attachment 5418076



Sorry yes Eugenies husband - I have to say I’m not remotely interested in anything Andrew and Fergies daughters do - Bea seems the better of the two and has married well to a man who knows instinctively how to behave - this one looks like a public school buffoon with the intellect of a child as can be seen by his behaviour here with Harry -I hope he and Eugenie stay in in Portugal and out of royal life  - though I suspect she and Jack and H&M will be a cosy and troublesome quartet embarrassing the BRF from now on - well matched


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW this is Edo's family seat in Italy. Not bad.
> 
> View attachment 5418016



And Beatrice is a countess


----------



## CarryOn2020

elvisfan4life said:


> It’s Beas husband who is the Italian count sorry I think I confused you by mistakenly calling Edo Beas husband instead of Eugenie



Bea’s husband is Edo who is an Italian count.
Eug’s husband is Jack who worked for George Clooney’s tequila company, loves to party and now works for one of Clooney’s property developers - the Discovery Land Company.  Jack is going to Portugal to open this place — 
https://discoverylandco.com/communities/costa-terra-golf-and-ocean-club


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> In this photo she's walking with her legs far apart, like she's got a drum barrel between her thighs.



Working overtime to keep H on his leash


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bea’s husband is Edo who is an Italian count.
> Eug’s husband is Jack who worked for George Clooney’s tequila company, loves to party and now works for one of Clooney’s property developers - the Discovery Land Company.  Jack is going to Portugal to open this place —
> https://discoverylandco.com/communities/costa-terra-golf-and-ocean-club


 Yes I was clearly tired when I posted last night - Edo looks polished and classy and is an Italian count  - Jack looks like a pal of Harry’s from public school without an ounce of class


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Why does it matter when she put gloves on ?



@marietouchet and others have already answered, didn't see before I caught-up 

You are supposed to have them on outside and on arrival for when you shake hands with people. In the Summer cotton or even net gloves are worn if too worm, but they stay on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has there been a change for the party? Something unpleasant happen?  No mention of Archie?  No photo with Charles and Camilla?
Rumor is the jewelry  company MM was wearing used one of the photos of MM with the grandkids   without permission from the parents = sheesh.  Sparks must be flying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> Why was he wearing medals?  I thought he was stripped of all his military titles?!?!!!?



Three are 'just' Jubilee medals (Golden, Diamond & Platinum)


----------



## zen1965

Katel said:


> He’s courteous and appropriate too - he understands how to present himself, and seems respectful, unlike Harry or TW.
> 
> My family would say “that boy was raised well.”



Edo is an aristocrat himself; he obviously learnt a (protocol) thing or two during his youth.


----------



## CarryOn2020

zen1965 said:


> Edo is an aristocrat himself; he obviously learnt a (protocol) thing or two during his youth.



Absolutely agree.  Edo stands out as ‘raised very well’, especially when compared to those who were not.  No wonder Bea looks so happy.


----------



## Sharont2305

Hmmmm, proof?


----------



## mellibelly

Bea and Edo last night


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> Three are 'just' Jubilee medals (Golden, Diamond & Platinum)



Isn't the other one for Afghanistan service?


----------



## Sharont2305

carmen56 said:


> Isn't the other one for Afghanistan service?


Yes, Jubilee and personal ones.


----------



## duna

I was shocked this morning reading the most important Rome newspaper, Il Messaggero,  which has a whole page dedicated to the service in St Paul's. They say that the Harkles were a huge success (no mention of booing) and that the Royal Family totally ignored them, this was said in a negative way. Basically it was all praising the Harkles. 

No wonder I read nespapers less and less, they write such bulls**t!!!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW this is Edo's family seat in Italy. Not bad.
> 
> View attachment 5418016


“*It has been coming on so gradually, that I hardly know when it began.* *But I believe I must date it from my first seeing his beautiful grounds at Pemberley.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This reminds be of another forum I used to frequent where one of the ladies once asked if actor x or actor y was the better Mr. Darcy (referring to the movies), and that thread had answer after answer after answer saying "Colin Firth!!!" (who starred in a mini series)


----------



## elvisfan4life

mellibelly said:


> Bea and Edo last night




Wonder who they met up with ?


----------



## elvisfan4life

duna said:


> I was shocked this morning reading the most important Rome newspaper, Il Messaggero,  which has a whole page dedicated to the service in St Paul's. They say that the Harkles were a huge success (no mention of booing) and that the Royal Family totally ignored them, this was said in a negative way. Basically it was all praising the Harkles.
> 
> No wonder I read nespapers less and less, they write such bulls**t!!!!


 Maybe the Italian count in the family paid them to say that to please his wife and her cousin


----------



## CarryOn2020

These clips are historic.  It is slowly sinking in that he is out.  Charles does not look in Hazzie’s direction.  Spin that, Nflix.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> These clips are historic.  It is slowly sinking in that he is out.  Charles does not look in Hazzie’s direction.  Spin that, Nflix.



The woman behind Harry looking very stern at him.


----------



## duna

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

rose60610 said:


> In this photo she's walking with her legs far apart, like she's got a drum barrel between her thighs.


Not a drum barrel, just a camera and batteries for the “hidden” mic!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't understand why he doesn't just divorce her. She can't be worth all of this, especially not seeing how they never seem genuinely happy when together, it's always staged and exaggerated (and it's really funny to me how many people are apparently easily fooled and swoon over that greatest love of all) even when she is not embarrassing him or pushing him around.


----------



## Sharont2305

TW is bottom left.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lol


----------



## DeMonica

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Sometimes breeding and manners slip through.  We all have found ourselves graciously greeting someone reflexively and afterwards wishing we had not and been merely civil.


I think it's just being civil. Everybody knows that there's a war between Charles, Wills and Ginge, they just try to act as a lightning rod between them, just as Peter did at the funeral. The Phillipses have what it takes to look and act royal without any title - Princess Anne obviously did a very good job. The siblings might get a few bonus points from Grany for playing their parts well. I would be surprised though, if Zara or Peter came to Lilibet's b-day party.


----------



## 880

i disagree with a lot of what Tina brown says about M and H. But, I thought she laid out some of the main issues with them quite well, (though she definitely gave them too much benefit of the doubt). Mainly that both are entirely too spoiled and unthinking; filled with their own erroneous perception of self importance; and wanted to have it all which is antithetical to both the monarchy and M’s rumored political ambitions. . . kind of like a politician thinking he can have profitable side deals Even when they are conflicts of interest. Meghan is an aging middling TV actress who is acting in self interest, but I do think H was trained from infancy to know better. 

i did like her dior outfit, but as someone who is also not tall and thicker through the middle, diors higher slimmer waist and the central back slit do no favors.









						#QueensJubilee: Learn why you "never offer the Queen an ultimatum"
					

"The Palace Papers" author Tina Brown gives insight into Harry and Meghan's mistakes and Charles' outlook as king




					www.salon.com


----------



## DeMonica

bag-mania said:


> I wish that was true but I don't believe he is that self-aware. Harry's personality isn't very complicated. He comes off as surly and entitled because that is what he is.


No doubt, he's surly, entitled and I would add dumb, too. However, when you hear the boos yourself, and see the seats in the second row middle - not even aisle -, and get your public photo ops minimized by the firm (his words not mine) -  you can be as sheltered from the world as possible, even slightly imbecile, you might realize that you're not so much welcome to the UK and  your family.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I don't understand why he doesn't just divorce her.* She can't be worth all of this, especially not seeing how they never seem genuinely happy when together, it's always staged and exaggerated (and it's really funny to me how many people are apparently easily fooled and swoon over that greatest love of all) even when she is not embarrassing him or pushing him around.



It’s too late now. He has alienated himself from nearly everyone from his former life. Meghan didn’t do it all by herself, he did his share. He literally has no one else (unless you count that gorgeous polo player friend of his, Nacho).


----------



## Annawakes

If H is truly disturbed and surprised by the booing, the real question is, whether H realizes his popularity would rebound should he divorce and come back into the fold.  If Camilla can rehab her image, so can he, if he grew up and admitted his mistakes.

Wonder how long it’ll take for that to happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> If H is truly disturbed and surprised by the booing, the real question is, whether H realizes his popularity would rebound should he divorce and come back into the fold.  If Camilla can rehab her image, so can he, if he grew up and admitted his mistakes.
> 
> Wonder how long it’ll take for that to happen.



Long time. Doubt he will do more public appearances, unless he gets paid [which is doubtful].  Sure, he was sad yesterday, but not sad enough to realize his role in it. One lip reader said when H&M were waiting on the steps and boo’ing began, he turned to Zara and said, “I f-ing hate those morons.”  If true, wow.  :smh:


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Sharont2305 said:


> Hmmmm, proof?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418285


Wow. Good catch.  Brava.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> If H is truly disturbed and surprised by the booing, the real question is, whether H realizes his popularity would rebound should he divorce and come back into the fold.  If Camilla can rehab her image, so can he, if he grew up and admitted his mistakes.
> 
> Wonder how long it’ll take for that to happen.



I don’t see it happening any time soon. Camilla had an advantage in that she was smart and patient. Harry is neither. Like his wife, he wants instant gratification. Add to that he doesn’t believe he needs to earn popularity and respect, he expects it to be given as his birthright. He doesn’t think he’s done anything wrong.


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting the DM has extensive articles on all the frocks for the Church service , with designer names 

Everyone seems to have worn UK labels with one exception, she wore bespoke Dior …

Even us born Sophie Winkelman, wife of Frederick Windsor, some of P Michael wore a UK label, actually same 775 pound dress as Beatrice but different color


----------



## marietouchet

Also interesting how Charles, Anne, Edward, William have stepped in … they are acting like a quadrumvirate rather than having Charles take all the spotlight 
Anne is in charge of Epsom today , she is really getting treated as an equal to the men , thumbs up
I like the new four-way group of equals, modern and less stratified


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Interesting the DM has extensive articles on all the frocks for the Church service , with designer names
> 
> Everyone seems to have worn UK labels with one exception, she wore bespoke Dior …
> 
> Even us born Sophie Winkelman, wife of Frederick Windsor, some of P Michael wore a UK label, actually same 775 pound dress as Beatrice but different color


Sophie is English.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> Sophie is English.


Claudia of strictlys half sister she looked lovely yesterday


----------



## Katel

zen1965 said:


> Edo is an aristocrat himself; he obviously learnt a (protocol) thing or two during his youth.



Yes, I know … but not all “aristocrats” behave well in public … 
Edo smiles, is impeccable, appears pleasant, knows when to keep quiet … he knows it’s a game and he’s willing to play to stay in the bigger Royal sandbox.



Sharont2305 said:


> TW is bottom left.




Thank you for the last clip! On their entry into Westminster Abbey, where the D&D of Sucks had to shake everyone’s hand, it appeared that many turned their heads away from her - shunned - what a walk of shame up the stairs and into the church - such a wall of disgust and derision from everyone attending.




Annawakes said:


> If H is truly disturbed and surprised by the booing, the real question is, whether H realizes his popularity would rebound … *Wonder how long it’ll take for that to happen.*



Me too … Will his anger/dissatisfaction with TW overcome his anger toward his family? When you are deeply unhappy, nothing works well.
I think she’ll dump him soon - will he humble himself then and come home?


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


>




The part where Scoobie Doo said they will spend time at Windsor as a family privately for Invisibet's birthday is hilarious. Sounds like either they weren't approved for a huge fanfare (which I bet Nutmeg thought that they would be allowed) or nobody gave them time of day when they tried to invite other BR members. Nutmeg probably had her people ordered more plates for breaking when she's back in Montecito 





Sharont2305 said:


> Hmmmm, proof?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418285



If not a mic, maybe another price tag that she might have forgotten 





QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I don't understand why he doesn't just divorce her.* She can't be worth all of this, especially not seeing how they never seem genuinely happy when together, it's always staged and exaggerated (and it's really funny to me how many people are apparently easily fooled and swoon over that greatest love of all) even when she is not embarrassing him or pushing him around.



It's probably mainly because of the Invisikids. Nutmeg will use them as pawns to get what she wants. Also, as a kid of divorced parents, Harry probably wants a "perfect and happy family". Harry have drank so much of Nutmeg's Kool Aid that probably makes him feel helpless, unlovable and there's nothing out there for him beyond Urologia Queen. Until he asks for his family's help and plan a Katie Holmes' escape plan, he will be stuck. He has help all his life, he won't know what to do even if Nutmeg unlocked the door and gate for him.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Claudia of strictlys half sister she looked lovely yesterday


I know.


----------



## kipp

EverSoElusive said:


> The part where Scoobie Doo said they will spend time at Windsor as a family privately for Invisibet's birthday is hilarious. Sounds like either they weren't approved for a huge fanfare (which I bet Nutmeg thought that they would be allowed) or nobody gave them time of day when they tried to invite other BR members. Nutmeg probably had her people ordered more plates for breaking when she's back in Montecito
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If not a mic, maybe another price tag that she might have forgotten
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's probably mainly because of the Invisikids. Nutmeg will use them as pawns to get what she wants. Also, as a kid of divorced parents, Harry probably wants a "perfect and happy family". Harry have drank so much of Nutmeg's Kool Aid that probably makes him feel helpless, unlovable and there's nothing out there for him beyond Urologia Queen. Until he asks for his family's help and plan a Katie Holmes' escape plan, he will be stuck. He has help all his life, he won't know what to do even if Nutmeg unlocked the door and gate for him.



I doubt Harry would ever leave TW without an intervention—- but it’s because at this point I think he has Stockholm Syndrome.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Just in case y'all need a break and to be reminded of the Queen's love for corgis
> 
> View attachment 5418192


I heard there was a corgi parade in Canada


----------



## sdkitty

behind a paywall but headline:








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are So Far Enduring an Ice-Cold Platinum Jubilee
					

Harry and Meghan have been firmly treated as rather unimportant, second-class guests at Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee. Will this change before the weekend is out?



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## DoggieBags

DeMonica said:


> No doubt, he's surly, entitled and I would add dumb, too. However, when you hear the boos yourself, and see the seats in the second row middle - not even aisle -, and get your public photo ops minimized by the firm (his words not mine) -  you can be as sheltered from the world as possible, even slightly imbecile, you might realize that you're not so much welcome to the UK and  your family.


Except he can read the various articles in the US and other countries talking about how their return to England was a huge success and they were loudly cheered whenever they were out in public. His various sycophants like Scoobie Doo will continue to tell him what he wants to hear So he can continue deluding himself, ignore what actually happened, and remain in his alternate reality. The only thing that could make him face reality is if, or maybe when, he runs out of money and can no longer pay all the PR people, security, etc that are currently responsible for creating and maintaining his cozy little alternative reality bubble.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting video showing the Harkles' arrival today.  Some people are questioning whether TW is adjusting a mic at ~4:10. It's hard to see. To me, it looks a little more obvious her big smile being ignored by some people when she shakes hands.



She definitely fiddled with something under that collar at about the 1:11 mark (on my computer). There was nothing wrong with the collar that needed adjusting so my bet is she turned on some recording device. And just to toss some 007 spy stuff into the mix--the gloves are part of it (she walks in carrying the gloves then puts them on in church--why?).

ETA--she needed the gloves off initially to turn on/adjust the recording device. But why have gloves at all--she doesn't do gloves.


----------



## Sharont2305

This is hilarious, that poor shopkeeper


----------



## EverSoElusive

kipp said:


> I doubt Harry would ever leave TW without an intervention—- but it’s because at this point I think he has Stockholm Syndrome.




Nutmeg has brainwashed him enough to make him think that his family is against him, even when they weren't to begin with. Because of that, he did the dumbest thing i.e. lie on his family on US national TV, alienating his family. His every action from the time that they had planned to step down as senior royals, are very largely influenced or orchestrated by Nutmeg. The BRF is very unlikely to intervene because he will not listen to them. He will have to come to his own realization and ask for their help. We can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped no matter how good our intentions are.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> behind a paywall but headline:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are So Far Enduring an Ice-Cold Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have been firmly treated as rather unimportant, second-class guests at Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee. Will this change before the weekend is out?
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Not behind a paywall for me (?) and I don't subscribe. Here's the copy/paste:

Buckingham Palace’s favorite method of communication sometimes seems to be semaphore. Over the course of the Jubilee celebrations so far, the palace couldn’t have made it clearer via several mime shows that it has little interest in trying to flatter the egos of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle—nor any inclination to use the political capital of the queen’s last hurrah to sell a narrative of reconciliation between Harry and his brother Prince William, or their wives.

Instead, Harry and Meghan have been firmly treated as rather unimportant, second-class guests. Having apparently been strongly urged to do nothing to steal Her Majesty’s limelight they have had little choice other than to like it or lump it, as the old British saying goes.

The fact that they are so desperately unpopular in Britain that their ratings are in the toilet and on Friday they were subjected to audible boos amongst the more usual cheers when they arrived at St Paul’s Cathedral is likely to have made this ruthless strategic decision by the palace somewhat easier.

At the church service, the couple were seated across the aisle from Charles (representing the queen, who was too unwell to attend) and William, a long, long way, physically and spiritually, from the new nexus of royal power. Their seat mates were not future kings and queens of the United Kingdom but a collection of second division players; Beatrice, Eugenie, Prince Edward et al.

As Tina Brown, founding editor of The Daily Beast and author of the new book _The Palace Papers_, told The Daily Beast: “The seating definitely declared they have slipped to supporting players, buried in the royal B-list.”

After Friday’s service, and some careful choreography that avoided even the merest possibility of Sussex and Cambridge entering each other’s personal space or even making eye contact, the great and the good were whisked off to London’s Guildhall to hobnob and backslap, with the notable exception of Harry and Meghan, who, were back at their house in Windsor, Frogmore Cottage, before the last stragglers had left the shindig.

It was the latest in a series of meaningful unspoken slights. On Thursday they were excluded from any visual presentations around the Trooping the Color celebration (although a few grainy long-lens photos trickled out eventually), explicitly not invited to the Buckingham Palace balcony appearance with the queen and were not present at any of the beacon lighting ceremonies around the country.

The messaging clearly suggested that while it was jolly nice to have them there, these Californians were highly expendable in terms of the royal master plan—and certainly wouldn’t be getting any special treatment.

Nothing happens by accident in the world of royal choreography. Courtiers were well aware that the billions of eyes on social media were very much hoping for a re-run of the 2020 Commonwealth Service when Kate blanked Meghan.

The palace was understandably not interested in facilitating a game of spot the difference. And they know that if Harry or Meghan had been photographed with William or Kate, the giant exercise of compare and contrast is all anyone would have been talking about this weekend.

As far as the palace is concerned, that’s not what the millions of hours of planning that have gone into the Platinum Jubilee were intended to achieve.

The low-profiling of Harry and Meghan is likely to continue for the remainder of the weekend. For example, although sources say that William and Kate will each give speeches at Saturday night’s Platinum Party at the Palace, there is no indication that Harry and Meghan will even be in attendance.

For similar reasons, The Daily Beast understands that it is also considered highly unlikely that the queen will attend a rumored first birthday party for her great-grand-daughter Lilibet at Frogmore Cottage on Saturday, and even more unlikely that a photograph of the queen with Lilibet will be released, as some have suggested, again at least partially out of concern that to do so would provide a major distraction from the core message of the Jubilee, which is, of course: “God save the queen,” and the achievements of Queen Elizabeth.

Will the queen be seen in public again? Not on Saturday during the day at least—Buckingham Palace said she would not attend the Derby horse race; Princess Anne will most likely stand in for her. It is a wait-and-see for the concert at the palace on Saturday night.

A forecast of torrential downpours on Sunday is adding to fears the great national celebration could have a rather soggy, underwhelming end.

It was interesting to note that a story saying that the queen had met Lilibet at a lunch party on Thursday had its genesis in a claim by by Omid Scobie, the reporter who wrote the sympathetic Sussex biography _Finding Freedom_. Scobie, who is thought to be close to the Sussexes and their team, and was briefed by Meghan’s representatives when writing the book, said on a BBC breakfast show that the queen had finally met her namesake on Thursday.

The palace, for their part, flatly refused to comment on the veracity of Scobie’s claims, even off the record.

The reality is that despite several opportunities to position Harry and Meghan in any of many permutations with William Kate Charles and Camilla, the inherently risk-averse powers at the palace have definitively chosen not to do so.

The focus of a Jubilee is apparently the individual whose reign is being marked, but really this human is a Trojan horse for the wider institution of monarchy. In this sense, the Jubilee has given us a glimpse of the rapidly oncoming world of King Charles III, who was undoubtedly handed a gift from the heavens when his troublesome brother Andrew went down with Covid, meaning he could not attend the one event to which he had been invited, Friday’s church service, which Charles ended up presiding over in place of his ailing mother.

The glitz of its ceremony-making runs in tandem with the ruthlessness of the palace. Harry and Meghan have spent the last two years attacking the royal family, so it should hardly be a surprise that the institution has retaliated by treating them with ill-disguised disdain.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Not behind a paywall for me (?) and I don't subscribe. Here's the copy/paste:
> 
> Buckingham Palace’s favorite method of communication sometimes seems to be semaphore. Over the course of the Jubilee celebrations so far, the palace couldn’t have made it clearer via several mime shows that it has little interest in trying to flatter the egos of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle—nor any inclination to use the political capital of the queen’s last hurrah to sell a narrative of reconciliation between Harry and his brother Prince William, or their wives.
> 
> Instead, Harry and Meghan have been firmly treated as rather unimportant, second-class guests. Having apparently been strongly urged to do nothing to steal Her Majesty’s limelight they have had little choice other than to like it or lump it, as the old British saying goes.
> 
> The fact that they are so desperately unpopular in Britain that their ratings are in the toilet and on Friday they were subjected to audible boos amongst the more usual cheers when they arrived at St Paul’s Cathedral is likely to have made this ruthless strategic decision by the palace somewhat easier.
> 
> At the church service, the couple were seated across the aisle from Charles (representing the queen, who was too unwell to attend) and William, a long, long way, physically and spiritually, from the new nexus of royal power. Their seat mates were not future kings and queens of the United Kingdom but a collection of second division players; Beatrice, Eugenie, Prince Edward et al.
> 
> As Tina Brown, founding editor of The Daily Beast and author of the new book _The Palace Papers_, told The Daily Beast: “The seating definitely declared they have slipped to supporting players, buried in the royal B-list.”
> 
> After Friday’s service, and some careful choreography that avoided even the merest possibility of Sussex and Cambridge entering each other’s personal space or even making eye contact, the great and the good were whisked off to London’s Guildhall to hobnob and backslap, with the notable exception of Harry and Meghan, who, were back at their house in Windsor, Frogmore Cottage, before the last stragglers had left the shindig.
> 
> It was the latest in a series of meaningful unspoken slights. On Thursday they were excluded from any visual presentations around the Trooping the Color celebration (although a few grainy long-lens photos trickled out eventually), explicitly not invited to the Buckingham Palace balcony appearance with the queen and were not present at any of the beacon lighting ceremonies around the country.
> 
> The messaging clearly suggested that while it was jolly nice to have them there, these Californians were highly expendable in terms of the royal master plan—and certainly wouldn’t be getting any special treatment.
> 
> Nothing happens by accident in the world of royal choreography. Courtiers were well aware that the billions of eyes on social media were very much hoping for a re-run of the 2020 Commonwealth Service when Kate blanked Meghan.
> 
> The palace was understandably not interested in facilitating a game of spot the difference. And they know that if Harry or Meghan had been photographed with William or Kate, the giant exercise of compare and contrast is all anyone would have been talking about this weekend.
> 
> As far as the palace is concerned, that’s not what the millions of hours of planning that have gone into the Platinum Jubilee were intended to achieve.
> 
> The low-profiling of Harry and Meghan is likely to continue for the remainder of the weekend. For example, although sources say that William and Kate will each give speeches at Saturday night’s Platinum Party at the Palace, there is no indication that Harry and Meghan will even be in attendance.
> 
> For similar reasons, The Daily Beast understands that it is also considered highly unlikely that the queen will attend a rumored first birthday party for her great-grand-daughter Lilibet at Frogmore Cottage on Saturday, and even more unlikely that a photograph of the queen with Lilibet will be released, as some have suggested, again at least partially out of concern that to do so would provide a major distraction from the core message of the Jubilee, which is, of course: “God save the queen,” and the achievements of Queen Elizabeth.
> 
> Will the queen be seen in public again? Not on Saturday during the day at least—Buckingham Palace said she would not attend the Derby horse race; Princess Anne will most likely stand in for her. It is a wait-and-see for the concert at the palace on Saturday night.
> 
> A forecast of torrential downpours on Sunday is adding to fears the great national celebration could have a rather soggy, underwhelming end.
> 
> It was interesting to note that a story saying that the queen had met Lilibet at a lunch party on Thursday had its genesis in a claim by by Omid Scobie, the reporter who wrote the sympathetic Sussex biography _Finding Freedom_. Scobie, who is thought to be close to the Sussexes and their team, and was briefed by Meghan’s representatives when writing the book, said on a BBC breakfast show that the queen had finally met her namesake on Thursday.
> 
> The palace, for their part, flatly refused to comment on the veracity of Scobie’s claims, even off the record.
> 
> The reality is that despite several opportunities to position Harry and Meghan in any of many permutations with William Kate Charles and Camilla, the inherently risk-averse powers at the palace have definitively chosen not to do so.
> 
> The focus of a Jubilee is apparently the individual whose reign is being marked, but really this human is a Trojan horse for the wider institution of monarchy. In this sense, the Jubilee has given us a glimpse of the rapidly oncoming world of King Charles III, who was undoubtedly handed a gift from the heavens when his troublesome brother Andrew went down with Covid, meaning he could not attend the one event to which he had been invited, Friday’s church service, which Charles ended up presiding over in place of his ailing mother.
> 
> The glitz of its ceremony-making runs in tandem with the ruthlessness of the palace. Harry and Meghan have spent the last two years attacking the royal family, so it should hardly be a surprise that the institution has retaliated by treating them with ill-disguised disdain.


Maybe now Harry can see the results of what they have done.  But I'm sure the WIFE can spin it so that he accepts his circumstances and blames others for whatever he doesn't like


----------



## Genie27

So far, kudos to the palace on handling these two so skilfully. Shows what a thousand years experience in intrigue and strategy can do.


----------



## EverSoElusive

What Nutmeg thinks she looks like every time she sashays


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> Not behind a paywall for me (?) and I don't subscribe. Here's the copy/paste:
> 
> Buckingham Palace’s favorite method of communication sometimes seems to be semaphore. Over the course of the Jubilee celebrations so far, the palace couldn’t have made it clearer via several mime shows that it has little interest in trying to flatter the egos of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle—nor any inclination to use the political capital of the queen’s last hurrah to sell a narrative of reconciliation between Harry and his brother Prince William, or their wives.
> 
> Instead, Harry and Meghan have been firmly treated as rather unimportant, second-class guests. Having apparently been strongly urged to do nothing to steal Her Majesty’s limelight they have had little choice other than to like it or lump it, as the old British saying goes.
> 
> The fact that they are so desperately unpopular in Britain that their ratings are in the toilet and on Friday they were subjected to audible boos amongst the more usual cheers when they arrived at St Paul’s Cathedral is likely to have made this ruthless strategic decision by the palace somewhat easier.
> 
> At the church service, the couple were seated across the aisle from Charles (representing the queen, who was too unwell to attend) and William, a long, long way, physically and spiritually, from the new nexus of royal power. Their seat mates were not future kings and queens of the United Kingdom but a collection of second division players; Beatrice, Eugenie, Prince Edward et al.
> 
> As Tina Brown, founding editor of The Daily Beast and author of the new book _The Palace Papers_, told The Daily Beast: “The seating definitely declared they have slipped to supporting players, buried in the royal B-list.”
> 
> After Friday’s service, and some careful choreography that avoided even the merest possibility of Sussex and Cambridge entering each other’s personal space or even making eye contact, the great and the good were whisked off to London’s Guildhall to hobnob and backslap, with the notable exception of Harry and Meghan, who, were back at their house in Windsor, Frogmore Cottage, before the last stragglers had left the shindig.
> 
> It was the latest in a series of meaningful unspoken slights. On Thursday they were excluded from any visual presentations around the Trooping the Color celebration (although a few grainy long-lens photos trickled out eventually), explicitly not invited to the Buckingham Palace balcony appearance with the queen and were not present at any of the beacon lighting ceremonies around the country.
> 
> The messaging clearly suggested that while it was jolly nice to have them there, these Californians were highly expendable in terms of the royal master plan—and certainly wouldn’t be getting any special treatment.
> 
> Nothing happens by accident in the world of royal choreography. Courtiers were well aware that the billions of eyes on social media were very much hoping for a re-run of the 2020 Commonwealth Service when Kate blanked Meghan.
> 
> The palace was understandably not interested in facilitating a game of spot the difference. And they know that if Harry or Meghan had been photographed with William or Kate, the giant exercise of compare and contrast is all anyone would have been talking about this weekend.
> 
> As far as the palace is concerned, that’s not what the millions of hours of planning that have gone into the Platinum Jubilee were intended to achieve.
> 
> The low-profiling of Harry and Meghan is likely to continue for the remainder of the weekend. For example, although sources say that William and Kate will each give speeches at Saturday night’s Platinum Party at the Palace, there is no indication that Harry and Meghan will even be in attendance.
> 
> For similar reasons, The Daily Beast understands that it is also considered highly unlikely that the queen will attend a rumored first birthday party for her great-grand-daughter Lilibet at Frogmore Cottage on Saturday, and even more unlikely that a photograph of the queen with Lilibet will be released, as some have suggested, again at least partially out of concern that to do so would provide a major distraction from the core message of the Jubilee, which is, of course: “God save the queen,” and the achievements of Queen Elizabeth.
> 
> Will the queen be seen in public again? Not on Saturday during the day at least—Buckingham Palace said she would not attend the Derby horse race; Princess Anne will most likely stand in for her. It is a wait-and-see for the concert at the palace on Saturday night.
> 
> A forecast of torrential downpours on Sunday is adding to fears the great national celebration could have a rather soggy, underwhelming end.
> 
> It was interesting to note that a story saying that the queen had met Lilibet at a lunch party on Thursday had its genesis in a claim by by Omid Scobie, the reporter who wrote the sympathetic Sussex biography _Finding Freedom_. Scobie, who is thought to be close to the Sussexes and their team, and was briefed by Meghan’s representatives when writing the book, said on a BBC breakfast show that the queen had finally met her namesake on Thursday.
> 
> The palace, for their part, flatly refused to comment on the veracity of Scobie’s claims, even off the record.
> 
> The reality is that despite several opportunities to position Harry and Meghan in any of many permutations with William Kate Charles and Camilla, the inherently risk-averse powers at the palace have definitively chosen not to do so.
> 
> The focus of a Jubilee is apparently the individual whose reign is being marked, but really this human is a Trojan horse for the wider institution of monarchy. In this sense, the Jubilee has given us a glimpse of the rapidly oncoming world of King Charles III, who was undoubtedly handed a gift from the heavens when his troublesome brother Andrew went down with Covid, meaning he could not attend the one event to which he had been invited, Friday’s church service, which Charles ended up presiding over in place of his ailing mother.
> 
> The glitz of its ceremony-making runs in tandem with the ruthlessness of the palace. Harry and Meghan have spent the last two years attacking the royal family, so it should hardly be a surprise that the institution has retaliated by treating them with ill-disguised disdain.


Actually, in the scheme of things, on the second side of the Church ... where the progeny of the collateral lines of Windsors were seated ... 

I believe the Sussexes were AFTER the Wessexes, Gloucesters, Kents and Yorks - after B & E !!

It was a bit hard to tell, the Sussexes arrived after B&E, were H&M late ?? 

I wonder if B&E were supposed to get there first - to avoid having to move out of their seats of H&M


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> Maybe now Harry can see the results of what they have done.  But I'm sure the WIFE can spin it so that he accepts his circumstances and blames others for whatever he doesn't like


It'll be "See, I told you they were racists" about both the RF and us Brits.


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I was shocked this morning reading the most important Rome newspaper, Il Messaggero,  which has a whole page dedicated to the service in St Paul's. They say that the Harkles were a huge success (no mention of booing) and that the Royal Family totally ignored them, this was said in a negative way. Basically it was all praising the Harkles.
> 
> No wonder I read nespapers less and less, they write such bulls**t!!!!


It looks like the Rome newspaper needs to get a few video clips.


----------



## redney

For two people who claimed to despise cameras and craved their privacy, this shut out should be very welcomed. LOL. But we all know what a farce those claims are.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> It’s too late now. He has alienated himself from nearly everyone from his former life. Meghan didn’t do it all by herself, he did his share. He literally has no one else (unless you count that gorgeous polo player friend of his, Nacho).



I still think the family would open a door for him if he wanted to go back. But I might entirely overestimate their fondness of him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Even us born Sophie Winkelman, wife of Frederick Windsor, some of P Michael wore a UK label, actually same 775 pound dress as Beatrice but different color



Was that the lady in bright pink?


----------



## elvisfan4life

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was that the lady in bright pink?


 Yes there is a lovely picture of her and Zara too


----------



## Chanbal

A very cute video! Does it mean no Lilib's b-day party for the Cambridge kids???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> Not behind a paywall for me (?) and I don't subscribe. Here's the copy/paste:



This together with the NY Post piece is my favourite read of the weekend.


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> A very cute video! Does it mean no Lilib's b-day party for the Cambridge kids???



Cute!

According to Scabies, the Sussexes are having a private family birthday celebration at home. No one wanted to come to the party it seems.

Well, it looks like Netflix will get some footage from their UK trip after all.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> A very cute video! Does it mean no Lilib's b-day party for the Cambridge kids???



sweet....they all seem to be having a good time
wonder what will happen with the birthday party....I saw somewhere that the queen won't be there...so who will be there?  H's cousins?
In any case, the baby won't know or care


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> sweet....they all seem to be having a good time
> wonder what will happen with the birthday party....I saw somewhere that the queen won't be there...so who will be there?  H's cousins?
> In any case, the baby won't know or care


Scabies said it's a private party at home as a family, which we can presume to be their family of 4 (plus servants, nannies, etc)


----------



## Chanbal

Got my answer thanks to DM 










						William and Kate bring their children George and Charlotte to Wales
					

William and Kate, along with George, eight, and Charlotte, seven, met performers and crew involved in a special Platinum Jubilee Celebration Concert at  Cardiff Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What is she trying to do walking up those stairs, low-key twerk? It is so inappropriate.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Scabies said it's a private party at home as a family, which we can presume to be their family of 4 (plus servants, nannies, etc)


guess the one who's losing out is Archie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> guess the one who's losing out is Archie


TW doesn't care about him, she has nannies for that. TW is the one losing out on all of her expected photo ops with senior BRF members, as demanded by Netflix which = $$$$$. Whomp whomp.


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> Cute!
> 
> According to Scabies, the Sussexes are having a private family birthday celebration at home. No one wanted to come to the party it seems.
> 
> Well, it looks like Netflix will get some footage from their UK trip after all.


I think the Cambridge kids are working in Cardiff, instead of partying


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> TW doesn't care about him, she has nannies for that. TW is the one losing out on all of her expected photo ops with senior BRF members, as demanded by Netflix which = $$$$$. Whomp whomp.


well archie won't know what he is missing but might have enjoyed some play time with the cousins....they seem like happy, well adjusted children


----------



## DoggieBags

redney said:


> TW doesn't care about him, she has nannies for that. TW is the one missing out on all of her expected photo ops with senior BRF members, which = Netflix $$$$$. Whomp whomp.


She’s also losing out on all the $$ she gets for pushing designer clothes, jewelry, etc. if she’s not seen in public wearing the stuff at star studded events at the jubilee then she won’t get paid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> She’s also losing out on all the $$ she gets for pushing designer clothes, jewelry, etc. if she’s not seen in public wearing the stuff at star studded events at the jubilee then she won’t get paid.



Thought she just borrowed the clothes, jewelry, then returned them.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thought she just borrowed the clothes, jewelry, then returned them.


I was told that that oversized ill-fitting white Valentino suit she wore at the invictus games sold out as soon as pictures of her wearing it hit social media. People were calling their SAs to find them that suit. I’m guessing she’s worked out a monetary deal for the product placement pics.


----------



## CarryOn2020

When they find out where they are sitting - images are very revealing - so much anger and hate: 




Fake smile




Whaaaa?


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> sweet....they all seem to be having a good time
> wonder what will happen with the birthday party....I saw somewhere that the queen won't be there...so who will be there?  H's cousins?
> In any case, the baby won't know or care



Does Prince Charles get to see his grandchildren??


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> A very cute video! Does it mean no Lilib's b-day party for the Cambridge kids???




I don't think either Charles nor William and his family went because they had previous engaments: William and Kate in Cardiff and Charles in Northern Ireland, if I remember correctly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> Does Prince Charles get to see his grandchildren??



Only if he pays H&M millions   Just kidding , I have no idea but would not be surprised if they would allow it … for a fee.


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Only if he pays H&M millions   Just kidding , I have no idea but would not be surprised if they would allow it … for a fee.


And a guaranteed photo op and video footage for Netflix!


----------



## redney

duna said:


> I don't think either Charles nor William and his family went because they had previous engaments: William and Kate in Cardiff and Charles in Northern Ireland, if I remember correctly.


Exactly. These Jubilee engagements have likely been planned for months. The detested duo announced their plans to (1) even come to the UK and (2) have this birthday party what, weeks or days ago?


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> guess the one who's losing out is Archie


 Maybe the nannies have taken Louis to play with Archie ?


----------



## elvisfan4life

gelbergirl said:


> Does Prince Charles get to see his grandchildren??


 Yes and camillas grandchildren they are all very close


----------



## elvisfan4life

duna said:


> I don't think either Charles nor William and his family went because they had previous engaments: William and Kate in Cardiff and Charles in Northern Ireland, if I remember correctly.


 No Sophie and Edward are doing NI Charles and Camilla are in England


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

elvisfan4life said:


> Maybe the nannies have taken Louis to play with Archie ?



Why risk it. Who would trust TW around their kids?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Icyjade said:


> Why risk it. Who would trust TW around their kids?


 
Maybe they feel the kids shouldn’t miss out Archie hasn’t done anything wrong he’s only a kid


----------



## EverSoElusive

gelbergirl said:


> Does Prince Charles get to see his grandchildren??



At this point, prior engagement or not, PC probably doesn't care too much about seeing the Invisikids. There's no evidence from yesterday that PC even acknowledged the parents at St. Paul. PC continues to keep himself busy and would not give Nutmeg more ammunition to attack the BRF.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Icyjade said:


> Why risk it. Who would trust TW around their kids?



William and Kate certainly don't. Their kids were not photographed with the "good role model" Uncle Harry and his wife during these last few days at all.


----------



## redney

EverSoElusive said:


> William and Kate certainly don't. Their kids were not photographed with the "good role model" Uncle Harry and his wife during these last few days at all.


It didn't seem as if any of the Cambridges were in close vicinity of the detested duo at any public event. There was supposedly a private luncheon on Thursday, about which Scabies reported TQ met Invisibet, but the Palace has not verified this.


----------



## EverSoElusive

redney said:


> It didn't seem as if any of the Cambridges were in close vicinity of the detested duo at any public event. There was supposedly a private luncheon on Thursday, about which Scabies reported TQ met Invisibet, but the Palace has not verified this.



The Cambridge kids should definitely be kept away from the Troublesome Duo. If Invisikids were to have a play date with the Cambridge kids, the Troublesome Duo can drop the Invisikids at the Cambridges' doorstep and leave. Then come back at the agreed time to pick up Invisikids. Invisikids will be cared for by the Cambridges' nannies during the play date


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> Exactly. These Jubilee engagements have likely been planned for months. The detested duo announced their plans to (1) even come to the UK and (2) have this birthday party what, weeks or days ago?



I was thinking the same thing. All the waffling back and forth "We won't come unless there's acceptable security bla bla bla", I don't think anybody knew for sure they'd show up until they got off their private plane.  The Jubilee is all about the Queen and the hundreds of rehearsed detailed plans to celebrate HER, not the dastardly ingrates who think the world waits with bated breath over their next move. Were M&H thinking that the BRF would pause the Jubilee and give Lilibet a huge party with A-Lister celebs? I feel bad for A and L, their parents are despicable characters.


----------



## lallybelle

LOL her fans think HM stayed home to enjoy the day with the Suxxasses.


----------



## redney

lallybelle said:


> LOL her fans think HM stayed home to enjoy the day with the Suxxasses.


LOL even though Scabies, TW's own mouthpiece, tweeted HM is staying home to rest today?


----------



## DoggieBags

elvisfan4life said:


> Maybe they feel the kids shouldn’t miss out Archie hasn’t done anything wrong he’s only a kid


why would the Cambridges want to risk Louis ending up on Netflix without their permission? Nothing to gain and much to lose from the BRF perspective if they associate with the Harkles in an environment the BRF cannot control.


----------



## Katel

Katel said:


> Thank you for the last clip! On their entry into Westminster Abbey, where the D&D of Sucks had to shake everyone’s hand, it appeared that many turned their heads away from her - shunned - what a walk of shame up the stairs and into the church - such a wall of disgust and derision from everyone attending.



Sorry, St. Paul’s Cathedral, not Westminster Abbey.


----------



## rose60610

Considering the vicious accusations Meghan told Oprah, no BRF member in their right mind would want to chance seeing Meghan and Harry. Or put their kids in a potential situation where Meghan could claim somebody's child said such and such. Who knows what M&H would accuse them of? I'd hope any interaction behind closed doors is recorded by The Palace for the BRF's sake.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Icyjade said:


> Why risk it. Who would trust TW around their kids?



Plus, TW was exceptionally rude to the Cambridges nanny pre-wedding.


----------



## rose60610

Here's an idea for M&H for Netflix footage:  For Lilibet's birthday entertainment M can squat like a duck and eat chips like a squirrel. And brag about her vegan birthday cake recipe. 

But most importantly: HAS ANYONE ASKED MEGHAN IF SHE'S OK YET?


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> When they find out where they are sitting - images are very revealing - so much anger and hate:
> 
> View attachment 5418461
> 
> 
> Fake smile
> 
> View attachment 5418462
> 
> 
> Whaaaa?
> 
> View attachment 5418463


I am kind of surprised they weren’t told in advance


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

DoggieBags said:


> why would the Cambridges want to risk Louis ending up on Netflix without their permission? Nothing to gain and much to lose from the BRF perspective if they associate with the Harkles in an environment the BRF cannot control.


I would think N*flix would require written releases from anyone appearing with the little meal tickets knowing that any decent footage (of which there is probably very little) would be commercialized into a "documentary" and _that_ would not happen. Everyone taking off to continue the Jubilee elsewhere really works--genius!

TW burned her bridges with the bullying when she lived there--no friendly co-conspirators.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This has been bothering me for quite some time. I have parents in their 90s, too.  We have never called it a _meeting_ between [great-] grandparents and grandchild. Is it really a _meeting_?  Or is it a _visit_?  Calling it a _meeting_ makes it sound weird, odd, awkward.  Imo.


----------



## csshopper

DoggieBags said:


> She’s also losing out on all the $$ she gets for pushing designer clothes, jewelry, etc. if she’s not seen in public wearing the stuff at star studded events at the jubilee then she won’t get paid.


Somewhere in the world there is company, whose product line includes subversive monitoring devices, itching to use her in an ad. It will, however, include a short video to demonstrate how to properly disguise the microphone so it doesn’t protrude like a misplaced nipple resulting from a bad bra fitting. Dior should be cringing.

They may be spending their reclusive time crafting an addendum to Hazbeen’s book to really bash the RF because it has been made abundantly clear they may have been welcomed by the Queen, but she was a “crowd” of 1 + a representation by outnumbered Sussex Squad members, but they are on the verge of becoming “Harry Who?” and no one gives a damn if TW is “OK.”

I truly believe the second child’s birth was manipulated to occur in the midst of the Jubilee with her name and the celebration of her “coincidental”  first birthday intended to focus on the Suckesses to garner tributes and photos implying she would go forward ever as a reminder of her Great Grandmother thanks to their so called loving gesture.

Instead, a beautiful family of truly genuinely loving people especially Charles and Camilla, Anne and Edward and their families, the Cambridges, upended all that with their devotion to the Queen.And a dynamite little guy named Louis seems to have eclipsed Uncle Harry as someone with an especially close relationship to his Gan Gan. Further, this celebration has brought to the fore  the love between the Cambridges and the next King and his Consort. A simple thing, but Charlotte poking into Camilla’s purse during the carriage ride hints there is a lot of family bonding and love that exists but is not exploited in the press. Felt it during the Balcony appearances as well as Charles throwing a kiss to Kate.❤️

Can’t envision Raptor and her Handbag ever realizing how much the vitriol they spew has cost them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> This has been bothering me for quite some time. I have parents in their 90s, too.  We have never called it a _meeting_ between [great-] grandparents and grandchild. Is it really a _meeting_?  Or is it a _visit_?  Calling it a _meeting_ makes it sound weird, odd, awkward.  Imo.


Yeah, a meeting indicates an agenda, action items, and meeting minutes!! Although would hardly surprise me with them.


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I am kind of surprised they weren’t told in advance


Perhaps that was deliberate. A subtle but very definite "FU" to the duo.

The long game that played out with this Jubilee is really something we all could learn from.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I am kind of surprised they weren’t told in advance



My opinion - they were indeed told, but thought by arriving late everyone would move down 2 chairs and they could have the aisle.  Edo clearly held the line. Good for him. Word to wise - never trifle with an Italian count.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is she trying to do walking up those stairs, low-key twerk? It is so inappropriate.



there is no way she knows how to twerk!


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> This has been bothering me for quite some time. I have parents in their 90s, too.  We have never called it a _meeting_ between [great-] grandparents and grandchild. Is it really a _meeting_?  Or is it a _visit_?  Calling it a _meeting_ makes it sound weird, odd, awkward.  Imo.



I think they call it a meeting when there’s a new baby seeing a family member for the first time.


----------



## kemilia

csshopper said:


> Somewhere in the world there is company, whose product line includes subversive monitoring devices, itching to use her in an ad. It will, however, include a short video to demonstrate how to properly disguise the microphone so it doesn’t protrude like a misplaced nipple resulting from a bad bra fitting. Dior should be cringing.
> 
> They may be spending their reclusive time crafting an addendum to Hazbeen’s book to really bash the RF because it has been made abundantly clear they may have been welcomed by the Queen, but she was a “crowd” of 1 + a representation by outnumbered Sussex Squad members, but they are on the verge of becoming “Harry Who?” and no one gives a damn if TW is “OK.”
> 
> I truly believe the second child’s birth was manipulated to occur in the midst of the Jubilee with her name and the celebration of her “coincidental”  first birthday intended to focus on the Suckesses to garner tributes and photos implying she would go forward ever as a reminder of her Great Grandmother thanks to their so called loving gesture.
> 
> Instead, a beautiful family of truly genuinely loving people especially Charles and Camilla, Anne and Edward and their families, the Cambridges, upended all that with their devotion to the Queen.And a dynamite little guy named Louis seems to have eclipsed Uncle Harry as someone with an especially close relationship to his Gan Gan. Further, this celebration has brought to the fore  the love between the Cambridges and the next King and his Consort. A simple thing, but Charlotte poking into Camilla’s purse during the carriage ride hints there is a lot of family bonding and love that exists but is not exploited in the press. Felt it during the Balcony appearances as well as Charles throwing a kiss to Kate.❤
> 
> Can’t envision Raptor and her Handbag ever realizing how much the vitriol they spew has cost them.


When N*fl*x does a reverse on the deposit to their checking account of their fat advance--they will realize finally what their actions cost.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kkfiregirl said:


> I think they call it a meeting when there’s a new baby seeing a family member for the first time.



Is that a UK custom? Over here [in the hinterlands], we do not call it a _meeting_. For most of us, that word is loaded with negative connotations. With a newborn, we call it a _visit_.  _“Have you visited Jane and the baby?”_   “_Have you seen Jane’s baby?” _
That kind of thing.  Imo _meeting_ is so formal.


----------



## Sharont2305

Hair or... wire?


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


Interesting!! If it's a wire, they should be immediately escorted to the airport and bid a firm and permanent farewell.


----------



## Sharont2305

Also this, very interesting. He scrambled everything! It's all very James Bond, and the best Bond girl wasn't even there!


----------



## kemilia

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


Too neat to be part of her hair. I was wondering why she wore it coiled up for the church service since she's been all about the Veronica Lake look.

Everything else aside--how absolutely desperate must these 2 be to go through all of this to get recorded content? Little wonder why she was shushing those kids.


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> Also this, very interesting. He scrambled everything! It's all very James Bond, and the best Bond girl wasn't even there!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418522


Cheers to the BRF and their planners! Brilliant!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


It sure looks like a thick plastic covered wire to me!  She had a hairdresser flown in IIRC to do her hair so I doubt strands of hair would fall out of the bun like that.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is that a UK custom?


 
I think it’s American - I’ve heard people here saying that so and so relative is going to “meet” their new baby.


----------



## lanasyogamama

From Instagram…


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> My opinion - they were indeed told, but thought by arriving late everyone would move down 2 chairs and they could have the aisle.  Edo clearly held the line. Good for him. Word to wise - never trifle with an Italian count.


Reminds me of times when I’ve gone to a wedding and gotten there early to secure a good aisle seat and some people saunter in at the last minute and expect me to move down away from the aisle.  I hold my ground!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> From Instagram…
> 
> View attachment 5418526
> View attachment 5418526




Watching the video of them walking down the aisle alone in the church, you know Nutmeg wanted all eyes to be on her with that stupid grin on her face. I bet so many eyes were rolling that we couldn't see!


----------



## Sophisticatted

csshopper said:


> A simple thing, but Charlotte poking into Camilla’s purse during the carriage ride hints there is a lot of family bonding and love that exists but is not exploited in the press. Felt it during the Balcony appearances as well as Charles throwing a kiss to Kate.❤



One thing I noticed during the balcony scene was how tuned in to Louis Camilla was.  At one point he was clapping like crazy, and she joined in.  Then it seemed like she remembered where she was a stopped.


----------



## Katel

Amazing! Credit mike_tindall12 insta


----------



## octopus17

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


Maybe she's got a receiver in her hat, lol. Reminds me of that Spongebob episode when he's taking his driving test


----------



## lanasyogamama

Cornflower Blue said:


> Maybe she's got a receiver in her hat, lol. Reminds me of that Spongebob episode when he's taking his driving test


That’s a classic!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Katel said:


> Amazing! Credit mike_tindall12 insta





Great photo compilation


----------



## 1LV

Katel said:


> Amazing! Credit mike_tindall12 insta



I always thought Charlotte looked like her mom until I saw this.


----------



## redney

No Sussex sightings to be had at tonight's concert. Left out/uninvited again!








						Fans queue for hours ahead of star-studded Party at the Palace
					

The monarch and the famous bear tapped out the beat of the We Will Rock You anthem together on china teacups using silver spoons as a unique way of getting the celebrations under way.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> From Instagram…
> 
> View attachment 5418526
> View attachment 5418526



This is a great site, thanks so much for posting.  Love the clip where George confidently speaks to the actors.  he is definitely a leader.


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> No Sussex sightings to be had at tonight's concert. Left out/uninvited again!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fans queue for hours ahead of star-studded Party at the Palace
> 
> 
> The monarch and the famous bear tapped out the beat of the We Will Rock You anthem together on china teacups using silver spoons as a unique way of getting the celebrations under way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



They'll say they didn't attend due to, you know, SECURITY.    AND, you know, PRIVACY.


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> They'll say they didn't attend due to, you know, SECURITY.    AND, you know, PRIVACY.



I thought Elton John was their friend and they would at least show up to see him perform


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> I thought Elton John was their friend and they would at least show up to see him perform


I think his bit is pre recorded.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> From Instagram…
> 
> View attachment 5418526
> View attachment 5418526


Agree H&M were late and that caused the seating kerfuffle


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


Tacky , badly MM, you have been outed, microphone cable - badly done


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Agree H&M were late and that caused the seating kerfuffle




I wonder if they would have still pulled that stunt of trying to take their time and be the last ones to get to their seats had the Queen not skipped the mass.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> Bea and Edo last night



He reminds me a bit of Hugh Jackman there.


----------



## marietouchet

Anyone else notice … Mike Tindall wow … gracious behavior, loves his wife - let’s her take center stage, loves his kids and while we are talking tailoring …
His wardrobe is all bespoke , fits him to a T - an achievement for a sportsman with a non standard body , and a bit whimsical - within parameters of good taste, great detailing on suits, wears a morning coat and top hat with panache , swoon


----------



## 880

kipp said:


> I doubt Harry would ever leave TW without an intervention—- but it’s because at this point I think he has Stockholm Syndrome.


+1000

i also don’t think she will leave him unless she has another person in the wings.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> These clips are historic.  It is slowly sinking in that he is out.  Charles does not look in Hazzie’s direction.  Spin that, Nflix.



OMG the comments are by delusional sugars for the most part.  "THE Queen is MM".  Really?


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> Does Prince Charles get to see his grandchildren??



Does he want to see them?


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Isn't the other one for Afghanistan service?



Yup, should be.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Does he want to see them?



Savage! Love it


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I thought Elton John was their friend and they would at least show up to see him perform



I think he filmed his segment. He’s in Italy now, I believe.









						Elton John says he’s in ‘top health’ after reports of him looking ‘frail’ in wheelchair
					

“I want to thank all my fans for reaching out to ask about my health, after the tabloids ran a silly story about my ‘looking frail’ in a wheelchair.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

Look at pictures 3 and 4 in the slide. Mike tries to be funny but without turning himself into a big joke unlike Squatty Nutmeg.


----------



## purseinsanity

They took George and Charlotte with them.  Brilliantly avoiding their children being subjected to their evil Auntie's BS "birthday party".


----------



## Chanbal

The plot thickens! Hazz reminded TW to check the collar of her dress immediately after getting out of the car.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> If H is truly disturbed and surprised by the booing, the real question is, whether *H realizes his popularity would rebound should he divorce and come back into the fold*.  If Camilla can rehab her image, so can he, if he grew up and admitted his mistakes.
> 
> Wonder how long it’ll take for that to happen.


I frequently hear Camilla is quite charming and witty, qualities that take some intelligence.  I really don't think Haz has any intelligence at all.  He's done some horrible things, and I really think he's a dimwit.  He's a giant hypocrite, and all the pictures of him looking either surly and pi$$ed or acting like a buffoon aren't endearing to anyone.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> *Also interesting how Charles, Anne, Edward, William have stepped in* … they are acting like a quadrumvirate rather than having Charles take all the spotlight
> Anne is in charge of Epsom today , she is really getting treated as an equal to the men , thumbs up
> I like the new four-way group of equals, modern and less stratified


I'm sure Charles is intelligent enough to appreciate the family he can actually trust and count on.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> The plot thickens! Hazz reminded TW to check the collar of her dress immediately after getting out of the car.





I honestly have steam coming out of my ears if it is true that she has a mic.   

Look at all the others, attending the Platinum Jubilee to honour and respect QE and the Harkles behave like that??!! Words can't express my contempt for them.


----------



## Chanbal

QE was sent a Derby race card to participate from home in comfy clothes. It looks like she is not attending to any party in person.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The plot thickens! Hazz reminded TW to check the collar of her dress immediately after getting out of the car.



That graphic definitely shows an unsightly thing hanging from her chignon 
I am asking myself … why a hidden mic ?? I cannot begin to fathom


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> behind a paywall but headline:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Are So Far Enduring an Ice-Cold Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have been firmly treated as rather unimportant, second-class guests at Queen Elizabeth’s Platinum Jubilee. Will this change before the weekend is out?
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Interesting that the article states the claim QEII met Lilibet was solely from Scabies and none other, so who knows if it's even true or not.


----------



## redney

marietouchet said:


> That graphic definitely shows an unsightly thing hanging from her chignon
> I am asking myself … why a hidden mic ?? I cannot begin to fathom


Their Netflix bosses demand content, which, to their minds and bank accounts, outweighs respect to HM, the Monarchy, and the BRF - his own family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This has been bothering me for quite some time. I have parents in their 90s, too.  We have never called it a _meeting_ between [great-] grandparents and grandchild. Is it really a _meeting_?  Or is it a _visit_?  Calling it a _meeting_ makes it sound weird, odd, awkward.  Imo.



Reading this maybe y'all could clear something up for me because I've been thinking about it over the years and no dictionary cleared it up for me. If I'm meeting my friends say for dinner or something, what is it? It's not a meeting (business), it's not a date (romantic)?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still think the family would open a door for him if he wanted to go back. But I might entirely overestimate their fondness of him.


I don't know.  The future is William and I think it's hard for him to overlook not just the slights thrown his way, but especially the insinuations made about Kate.  Haz might be his brother, but that's the mother of his kids.  I don't think he'll ever forgive MMM, but Haz doesn't have much to go on either, IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

This is BEAUTIFUL!!!!! 



*The Queen and Paddington Bear get the Platinum Party at the Palace rocking.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> From Instagram…
> 
> View attachment 5418526
> View attachment 5418526



I clicked the laughing reaction because at this point it's amusing how pathetic they are.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> This is BEAUTIFUL!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *The Queen and Paddington Bear get the Platinum Party at the Palace rocking.*




It speaks volumes if the Queen would rather be having tea and photographed with the Paddington Bear than the Sucka$s3s


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> This is BEAUTIFUL!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *The Queen and Paddington Bear get the Platinum Party at the Palace rocking.*



It is just perfect I love it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Look at pictures 3 and 4 in the slide. Mike tries to be funny but without turning himself into a big joke unlike Squatty Nutmeg.




Those two seem like such a fun couple.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Remember last week they were claiming that Harry was a mentor to George? What a crock!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those two seem like such a fun couple.



They really do 

I must credit Anne. She must have done something right to raise grounded children and now they are raising wonderful children of their own. Never seen nor heard scandals involving Anne and her kids (unless I've missed them). Zara certainly have chosen the right person to be her life partner


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Remember last week they were claiming that Harry was a mentor to George? What a crock!



Mike Tindall, maybe. Uncle Harry? Hell to the naw, naw, naw.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Reading this maybe y'all could clear something up for me because I've been thinking about it over the years and no dictionary cleared it up for me. If I'm meeting my friends say for dinner or something, what is it? It's not a meeting (business), it's not a date (romantic)?



Perhaps ‘getting together’ or ‘going out to dinner’ or ‘I will dine with xyz’. Technically, ‘meeting’ is correct. My circle just does not use it for a baby. Again, it’s the negative connotations. None of us like to call anything a meeting


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


It explains the dress selection and hairdo/hat : weight of the dress fabric (which seemed heavy for the season), extra layer of the back flap for concealment insurance, wide collar, ditto. Coiled wire, coiled hair.  Unfortunately for the Degenerate Duo, the nipple burp, even on a chronically messy dresser, caused a cumulative closer look at her behavior and things unraveled.

Speculation : This is fun, makes them such dipshitz who got played by the Royals.

1. There was an accomplice outside to monitor.  It seemed strange Raptor’s gloves were off when outside.

2. Enters church, fusses with her collar. Thinks it’s Ok. Knowing they will be on camera, pulls gloves on to signal this to monitor.

3. Their smile, smirk, giggle exchange is them thinking they are getting away with something.

3. Unknown to them, seated behind them is the foil to their plan. His presence may be the reason for the Usher’s insistence on adhering to the designated seating plan, not the disrupter one the Harkles tried to pull off.

4. Don’t know when they would have figured out it went wrong, but Haz did seem anxious for their car to arrive, or maybe it was just the Booing in the background?

Random thoughts:  Did they travel in a Royal vehicle from the airport that had surveillance equipment in it? Was Frogmore bugged before they arrived? Is their more low key behavior than usual because the 18 minute meeting with the Queen at Windsor while they were on the way to Invictus laid down an ultimatum that made clear there was an “or else” at the end. Could explain (a) Haz’s ill advised Hoda Kotb interview spinning a tale of favoritism and special love and casting aspersions on those around the Queen as a diversion and (b) the murderous glimpses of Raptor’s mask slips during the following days as the meaning of their Windsor summons prompted revenge planning. “We’ll get pictures, we’ll get incriminating sound bites ‘cuz our team knows how to edit and splice.”

What I don’t understand is what they expected to record? Lamentation they are gone? Criticism of the Monarchy? Gossip about Will and Kate? Dislike for Camilla?

There’s no doubt of the Queen’s love of family, but Gran might be out of patience and exasperated with their behavior.  If she has the fortitude to whack Andrew, these two are teetering I hope. The failure to attend his grandfather’s memorial, her unconscionable treatment of her stroke ridden father and these attempted recording shenanigans if true, may, put them over over the brink.

All Haz has to look forward to is flying home into Nacho’s warm embrace. Meanwhile Raptor can spend her days anticipating the awaited book filled with Tom Bowers‘ truth about her “truths”.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> The plot thickens! Hazz reminded TW to check the collar of her dress immediately after getting out of the car.



I would have loved to have seen a clip of M singing God Save the Queen.  Did she or she just moved her mouth a bit or not at all?


----------



## Chanbal

They all seem so much happier and relaxed without the presence of the Harkles.
Courtesy of DM:


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Remember last week they were claiming that Harry was a mentor to George? What a crock!



As MM said in Uvalde [grrr], _don’t believe what you read.

“I asked her, ‘So, how’s your husband doing?’” Rankin said. “She said, ‘He’s doing very well.’ And then she whispered to me, ‘Don’t believe what you read.’”_









						Meghan Markle Said She Held Her Children “A Little Bit Tighter” After Learning About The Uvalde School Shooting
					

The director of the Uvalde community center where the Duchess of Sussex donated food told BuzzFeed News how Meghan’s visit unfolded.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## Lodpah

Someone earlier asked why Harry does not just divorce her. Well this doctor has it right. Three types of people who stay with narcs and I think maybe Harry falls in the flying monkey category. He’s too dumb also to figure things out. Enjoy!


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> They really do
> 
> I must credit Anne. She must have done something right to raise grounded children and now they are raising wonderful children of their own. Never seen nor heard scandals involving Anne and her kids (unless I've missed them). Zara certainly have chosen the right person to be her life partner


Looks like Peter's new girlfriend is at the concert, sitting behind Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I read that David Cholmondeley was the person who ushered H&M to their seats.  He is Rose Hanbury’s  husband. 
She is the lady MM accused of having an affair with William. 
Wouldn’t it have been fun if he pulled a _Will Smith?  _[take my wife’s name out of your f-ing mouth]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps ‘getting together’ or ‘going out to dinner’ or ‘I will dine with xyz’. Technically, ‘meeting’ is correct. My circle just does not use it for a baby. Again, it’s the negative connotations. None of us like to call anything a meeting



Getting together! Sounds perfect and I feel dumb


----------



## catlover46

Rumor has it they’ve left already.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Looks like Peter's new girlfriend is at the concert, sitting behind Charles.



Who is she? Also, is his ex-wife still in the UK, or did he keep the kids? Or are they only there because of the occasion?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> Rumor has it they’ve left already.



Just read that on Twitter.


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I clicked the laughing reaction because at this point it's amusing how pathetic they are.


The courtiers knew that Harry would pull something and they were ready for him.  Ya think he is getting the message that they are better at playing the game than he is?  He thinks it is very clever to wire up his wife with a mic?  We'll see how that works out.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just read that on Twitter.


This wouldn't surprise me at all.  If just a brief meeting with TQ, if any all, and Charles doesn't appear to have seen the children either, then why stick around?  They have really been put on ice this trip.  No pictures of the children and they are still invisible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The courtiers knew that Harry would pull something and they were ready for him.  Ya think he is getting the message that they are better at playing the game than he is?  He thinks it is very clever to wire up his wife with a mic?  We'll see how that works out.



Are we really sure they'd go that far? (I know, I know) What would they even have to record in a church?

But yeah, the courtiers have always been better at playing the game, it's just that in the past they were on his team and now they're not (or the other way around?).


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read that David Cholmondeley was the person who ushered H&M to their seats.  He is Rose Hanbury’s  husband.
> She is the lady MM accused of having an affair with William.
> Wouldn’t it have been fun if he pulled a _Will Smith?  _[take my wife’s name out of your f-ing mouth]


Wow!  I thought the guy who did that was younger, but it could have been.  That is really a kick in the pants.  Meghan wouldn't have understood the shade of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. I forgot the Pentecost singers, scrambled to find some eggs when I first heard them hours ago, just started to feel safe because it's freaking 10.30 p.m. and they just rang the doorbell. I'm hiding and hope someone else goes talk to them


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are we really sure they'd go that far? (I know, I know) What would they even have to record in a church?
> 
> But yeah, the courtiers have always been better at playing the game, it's just that in the past they were on his team and now they're not (or the other way around?).


I think the recording was more for conversations.  Why they would need to do that has me wondering.  
I have to laugh though, if you watch enough spy action movies and TV, there is always someone who has a hidden camera on them someplace.  Someone should have checked out her hat lol!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is she? Also, is his ex-wife still in the UK, or did he keep the kids? Or are they only there because of the occasion?


Peter has a house right near the family home and all of it is on Anne's property.  They share custody.  I really don't think that his ex would ever have a problem with the girls being with their relatives.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Peter has a house right near the family home and all of it is on Anne's property.  They share custody.  I really don't think that his ex would ever have a problem with the girls being with their relatives.



I asked because I remember at the time of their break-up it was discussed if she would move back to Canada. It's lovely to see people can get divorced and still be civil.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think the recording was more for conversations.  Why they would need to do that has me wondering.
> I have to laugh though, if you watch enough spy action movies and TV, there is always someone who has a hidden camera on them someplace.  Someone should have checked out her hat lol!



Good thing nobody was talking to them


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> She’s also losing out on all the $$ she gets for pushing designer clothes, jewelry, etc. if she’s not seen in public wearing the stuff at star studded events at the jubilee then she won’t get paid.





kemilia said:


> Too neat to be part of her hair. I was wondering why she wore it coiled up for the church service since she's been all about the Veronica Lake look.
> 
> Everything else aside--how absolutely desperate must these 2 be to go through all of this to get recorded content? Little wonder why she was shushing those kids.


well the hair up does seem more appropriate to me


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Getting together! Sounds perfect and I feel dumb



Oooh no, I think the media has been harping on this ‘meeting’ for at least a year so it gets stuck in our heads. I have reached that age where if someone says _let’s meet, _I say nooooo way. No meetings ever. Be glad to visit though. 




catlover46 said:


> Rumor has it they’ve left already.



  Please please be true.


----------



## Deleted 698298

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418332


Who is this good looking guy in the photo?


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> I think the recording was more for conversations.  Why they would need to do that has me wondering.
> I have to laugh though, if you watch enough spy action movies and TV, there is always someone who has a hidden camera on them someplace.  Someone should have checked out her hat lol!


Lol now it makes the two idiots were shushing the kids.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> I would have loved to have seen a clip of M singing God Save the Queen.  Did she or she just moved her mouth a bit or not at all?


Unless there was a problem with the mic, there will likely be a chance to verify that on the Nef*x reality show.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> Too neat to be part of her hair. I was wondering why she wore it coiled up for the church service since she's been all about the Veronica Lake look.
> 
> Everything else aside--how absolutely desperate must these 2 be to go through all of this to get recorded content? Little wonder why she was shushing those kids.



Imo She was shushing those kids to merch the rings and the hat.  The jewelry company has posted the photo on its IG account.  The name escapes me now, but it’s out there on Google.  Not sure if the hat guy needs that kind of publicity. He’s already well known.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo She was shushing those kids to merch the rings and the hat.  The jewelry company has posted the photo on its IG account.  *The name escapes me now*, but it’s out there on Google.  Not sure if the hat guy needs that kind of publicity. He’s already well known.


----------



## Chanbal

This is amazing… How foolish can one be to turn one's back on this!


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> Maybe they feel the kids shouldn’t miss out Archie hasn’t done anything wrong he’s only a kid


True, but can you imagine what it's like growing up with those two as parents?  I'm sure they're brain washing him non stop about how evil their families are.  Until he grows up and can see things clearly for himself, he'll probably be just like them.  He'll only realize what a$$holes they are maybe once he's older and by then it'll be too late.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This is amazing… How foolish can one be to turn one's back on this!



I loved it.  Very funny piece!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



That ring is barely visible so you know that this was merching and a picture so she would get her money.


----------



## Happyish

Does anyone know what's with Harry's tell-all book? I heard that it's on hold.

I have this fantasy they'll kiss and make-up (at least a little) during this trip. Harry's back in the UK-his home. Frogmore, where they're staying (and is now vacant), had been completely remodeled to their specs and is probably a whole lot nicer than new construction in Montecito that's down-wind from a swamp, and I have to imagine Harry has a feeling of security being in the UK that he can't find elsewhere, least of all California.

There's he's virtually marooned, a duck out of water and his only company is Megan, the staff and two kids. Why would he want to return--it's so isolating. At least in the UK he has a network of friends and family.

There's no shame in saying it didn't work. I want to come home . . . Wish he could do this.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Hair or... wire?
> View attachment 5418520


I have very thick hair, and no strand of hair of mine looks that thick in pictures!


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> *Anyone else notice … Mike Tindall* wow … gracious behavior, loves his wife - let’s her take center stage, loves his kids and while we are talking tailoring …
> His wardrobe is all bespoke , fits him to a T - an achievement for a sportsman with a non standard body , and a bit whimsical - within parameters of good taste, great detailing on suits, wears a morning coat and top hat with panache , swoon



Most certainly, yes, we _have_ noticed.


----------



## Happyish

gracekelly said:


> I loved it.  Very funny piece!


This was just charming. And moving. Thank you for posting.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know.  The future is William and I think it's hard for him to overlook not just the slights thrown his way, but especially the insinuations made about Kate.  Haz might be his brother, but that's the mother of his kids.  I don't think he'll ever forgive MMM, but Haz doesn't have much to go on either, IMO.


The slights to his wife and I’m sure he knows where the Rose lies originated.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Look, he is smiling. Yesterday he  took one for the team by sitting in front of the SourSuxxeses, today he can relax and enjoy.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> As MM said in Uvalde [grrr], _don’t believe what you read.
> 
> “I asked her, ‘So, how’s your husband doing?’” Rankin said. “She said, ‘He’s doing very well.’ And then she whispered to me, ‘Don’t believe what you read.’”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Said She Held Her Children “A Little Bit Tighter” After Learning About The Uvalde School Shooting
> 
> 
> The director of the Uvalde community center where the Duchess of Sussex donated food told BuzzFeed News how Meghan’s visit unfolded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


sandwiches again....she's so generous


----------



## Chanbal

Is Hazz the gentleman with a beard?


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> From Instagram…
> 
> View attachment 5418526
> View attachment 5418526



So, Harry and Meghan show up late to the service yesterday (instead of when they were supposed to show up), walk in without the group, and then expect that everyone will shuffle down the aisle so that they can sit at the end?  Beatrice is having none of it and stands her ground and won't give up her seat.  Very politely of course. Probably Bea was warned this could happen?

Who else thinks that Harry and Meghan wanted those aisle seats so they could jump up at the end and walk out with Charles, Camilla, Will and Kate, just to get those photos of them together and have a bit of a scene right there in St. Paul's or right outside?


----------



## Chanbal

Wow Camilla… Broken dishes at the cottage today?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

youngster said:


> So, Harry and Meghan show up late to the service yesterday (instead of when they were supposed to show up), walk in without the group, and then expect that everyone will shuffle down the aisle so that they can sit at the end?  Beatrice is having none of it and stands her ground and won't give up her seat.  Very politely of course. Probably Bea was warned this could happen?
> 
> *Who else thinks that Harry and Meghan wanted those aisle seats so they could jump up at the end and walk out with Charles, Camilla, Will and Kate, just to get those photos of them together and have a bit of a scene right there in St. Paul's or right outside?*


100%!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> So, Harry and Meghan show up late to the service yesterday (instead of when they were supposed to show up), walk in without the group, and then expect that everyone will shuffle down the aisle so that they can sit at the end?  Beatrice is having none of it and stands her ground and won't give up her seat.  Very politely of course. Probably Bea was warned this could happen?
> 
> Who else thinks that Harry and Meghan wanted those aisle seats so they could jump up at the end and walk out with Charles, Camilla, Will and Kate, just to get those photos of them together and have a bit of a scene right there in St. Paul's or right outside?


they're trashy


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Most certainly, yes, we _have_ noticed.


You know he had William's back 10000%.  They are friends.  He and Peter were deployed to calm down Harry.  They knew that Harry would be going ballistic.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, Harry and Meghan show up late to the service yesterday (instead of when they were supposed to show up), walk in without the group, and then expect that everyone will shuffle down the aisle so that they can sit at the end?  Beatrice is having none of it and stands her ground and won't give up her seat.  Very politely of course. Probably Bea was warned this could happen?
> 
> Who else thinks that Harry and Meghan wanted those aisle seats so they could jump up at the end and walk out with Charles, Camilla, Will and Kate, just to get those photos of them together and have a bit of a scene right there in St. Paul's or right outside?


Absolutely and her microphone was in place to pick up any conversation that took place.  She was wearing that wire for a reason.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Wow Camilla… Broken dishes at the cottage today?



This is how you support your husband on stage, don't hog the mike and don't cling onto him with your claws. Just stand there at a respectful distance and smile.
That outfit is stunning.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> they're trashy


Sneaky.  Nefarious. Can I say that I wouldn't trust them one bit?


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> This is how you support your husband on stage, don't hog the mike and don't cling onto him with your claws. Just stand there at a respectful distance and smile.
> That outfit is stunning. I think they were wide legged trousers underneath that stunning coat.


She looks absolutely wonderful!


----------



## altigirl88

elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5418393
> 
> Yes there is a lovely picture of her and Zara too


I _loved _Zara’s outfit. I think it was my favorite of the event. I don’t think I’ve ever seen her in an outfit so girly, lol


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz the gentleman with a beard?




OT: What's the song called?


----------



## periogirl28

EverSoElusive said:


> OT: What's the song called?


Sweet Caroline. Over here they sing it at football and cricket matches so everyone seems/ tends to know it.


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> OT: What's the song called?


Sweet Caroline.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> OT: What's the song called?



Neil Diamond’s Sweet Caroline - they’ve changed the words though


----------



## redney

If the Gruesome Twosome is not invited to Sunday's Platinum Pageant, they might as well hop in their private jet and go home. No more photo or recording opportunities for them in the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Sweet Caroline.


Rod Stewart was on the Bill Maher Show 1+ weeks ago and he was so funny!  He never said he was going back for this concert.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Reading this maybe y'all could clear something up for me because I've been thinking about it over the years and no dictionary cleared it up for me. If I'm meeting my friends say for dinner or something, what is it? It's not a meeting (business), it's not a date (romantic)?


I think in English, there are various ways to say the same thing.  To me, a "date" implies romance, a "meeting" can be business or even with an acquaintance ("I'm meeting up with some friends")


CarryOn2020 said:


> As MM said in Uvalde [grrr], _don’t believe what you read.
> 
> “I asked her, ‘So, how’s your husband doing?’” Rankin said. “She said, ‘He’s doing very well.’ And then she whispered to me, ‘Don’t believe what you read.’”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Said She Held Her Children “A Little Bit Tighter” After Learning About The Uvalde School Shooting
> 
> 
> The director of the Uvalde community center where the Duchess of Sussex donated food told BuzzFeed News how Meghan’s visit unfolded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


Yes, such an appropriate time to say such a thing and make it about herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> If the Gruesome Twosome is not invited to Sunday's Platinum Pageant, they might as well hop in their private jet and go home. No more photo or recording opportunities for them in the UK.


Considering that they have missed a lot, they should leave now.


----------



## csshopper

Smooth move to have 


periogirl28 said:


> Sweet Caroline.


American singer/songwriter Neil Diamond wrote it in 1969. Huge hit for him and many others. The beat never gets old.


----------



## RAINDANCE

gracekelly said:


> You know he had William's back 10000%.  They are friends.  He and Peter were deployed to calm down Harry.  They knew that Harry would be going ballistic.


 The Royal bouncers,  Mike and Peter,


----------



## gracekelly

RAINDANCE said:


> The Royal bouncers,  Mike and Peter,


One of Lady Sarah's sons is a body builder and in the  military.  Put him on the list lol!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz the gentleman with a beard?



What's with "Sweet Caroline" in all these clips??  Is it the anthem for the Jubilee or something?


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> As MM said in Uvalde [grrr], _don’t believe what you read.
> 
> “I asked her, ‘So, how’s your husband doing?’” Rankin said. “She said, ‘He’s doing very well.’ And then she whispered to me, ‘Don’t believe what you read.’”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Said She Held Her Children “A Little Bit Tighter” After Learning About The Uvalde School Shooting
> 
> 
> The director of the Uvalde community center where the Duchess of Sussex donated food told BuzzFeed News how Meghan’s visit unfolded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


I wonder if I should believe comments in various Texas news outlets.  How the townspeople of Uvalde, and especially parents were sick of the media. How policeman and bikers blocked news people on the first day of funerals to be held in order to give the families privacy while they buried their babies.   I guess it’s a good thing she got her a$$ down there with her camera crew when she did.  Vultures.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz the gentleman with a beard?



Maybe...if he used TW's fake tan spray.


----------



## pukasonqo

csshopper said:


> Smooth move to have
> 
> American singer/songwriter Neil Diamond wrote it in 1969. Huge hit for him and many others. The beat never gets old.


 Sweet Caroline was the first song my son heard out of uterus, it was playing in the nursery when my ex and the midwife took him for his first bath, probably a welcome change from Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds and The Pogues!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## altigirl88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Look, he is smiling. Yesterday he  took one for the team by sitting in front of the SourSuxxeses, today he can relax and enjoy.
> 
> View attachment 5418695


Hadn’t noticed it, before, but I think Louise bears a resemblance to Rosamund Pike


----------



## RAINDANCE

gracekelly said:


> One of Lady Sarah's sons is a body builder and in the  military.  Put him on the list lol!


Arthur Chatto was 3or 4 seats along from Megan on the same row and in his Royal Marines dress uniform. I wonder how Harry felt seeing that. 
Also i picked up that afterwards H+m walked down the aisle on the way out behind Peter Phillips+ David Linley ( Lord Snowden as he is now) with lady Sarah and Daniel chatto behind them so not just demoted to the cousins but the second cousins.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe...if he used TW's fake tan spray.


I was just trying to stay on topic, and he was the only gentleman behind Will.


----------



## purseinsanity

altigirl88 said:


> Hadn’t noticed it, before, but I think Louise bears a resemblance to Rosamund Pike


I think the elder Tindall daughter looks like Julia Stiles!


----------



## RAINDANCE

altigirl88 said:


> Hadn’t noticed it, before, but I think Louise bears a resemblance to Rosamund Pike


I think a big shout out is required for Lady Louise who has looked impeccable and poised at everything so far and is , I think, in the middle of her A levels.
(She's 6 m younger than my dd so should be year 13 ) (Upper sixth in the old days)


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



a WOC speaking out against The Wife.  Must be a conservative news outlet


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> a WOC speaking out against The Wife.  Must be a conservative news outlet


Both POC were not for her.  Both said they liked her at the beginning and cheered her on, until her hypocrisy and constant lecturing turned them off.  Kind of like most of us here.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Both POC were not for her.  Both said they liked her at the beginning and cheered her on, until her hypocrisy and constant lecturing turned them off.  Kind of like most of us here.


I've seen at least one Brit WOC (a writer) on US TV who was very supportive of her.  So for the Brits here, is this a conservative media outlet?  If not, then fine - someone agrees with most of us here


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> a WOC speaking out against The Wife.  Must be a conservative news outlet


I don't know her political views, but I believe that any person with common sense will have a hard time supporting TW.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I've seen at least one Brit WOC (a writer) on US TV who was very supportive of her.  So for the Brits here, is this a conservative media outlet?  If not, then fine - someone agrees with most of us here


I guess I don't understand your question?  If someone is a POC and doesn't like TW, it must mean they're politically conservative?  I don't see how one implies the other?


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I guess I don't understand your question?  If someone is a POC and doesn't like TW, it must mean they're politically conservative?  I don't see how one implies the other?


from what I've seen up to now, few if any POC will speak against her (in the media)
Not saying if that is how it should be or not, just what I've seen
So that makes me think these people, being exceptions, are coming from a conservative platform. I won't say more as we're getting into politics a bit


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the wires were detected and they were asked to stay at home after the Thanksgiving Service…


----------



## Chanbal

Protect yourselves and your loved ones! Dishes are flying out of the windows.


----------



## Debbini

Sharont2305 said:


> This is how you support your husband on stage, don't hog the mike and don't cling onto him with your claws. Just stand there at a respectful distance and smile.
> That outfit is stunning.


Agree! She looks fabulous!


----------



## octopus17

RAINDANCE said:


> I think a big shout out is required for Lady Louise who has looked impeccable and poised at everything so far and is , I think, in the middle of her A levels.
> (She's 6 m younger than my dd so should be year 13 ) (Upper sixth in the old days)


I really liked her dress at St. Pauls - I thought she looked ethereal and totally on point for her age and the occasion.

Also, I noticed her barrel clutch bag was the same as Sophie's except in a different colour. Think Sophie's was cream/gold and Louise's was a raspberry colour?


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that are feeling sorry for the Harkles (I know wrong thread):


----------



## Chanbal

Is Netfl*x following the news?


www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-03/harry-and-meghan-back-with-royals-but-relegated-at-queen-s-jubilee-service


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the wires were detected and they were asked to stay at home after the Thanksgiving Service…



A comment on Twitter says it was noted they both were wired in Saint Pauls and directive was given to staff to not engage or be very careful in any interaction. There was a comment early on somewhere that Harry seemed to fidget with the thing around his neck????

Neil Sean claims they were invited to the Guild Hall event, but "chose to return to their children at Frogmore instead".

Bullocks, they knew they were caught, plans thwarted, plus the sub royal treatment and the booing put them into hiding to plan their next moves. Seeing it all laid out on the Internet must have shocked them, they think they are so clever


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Is Netfl*x following the news?
> View attachment 5418817
> 
> www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-03/harry-and-meghan-back-with-royals-but-relegated-at-queen-s-jubilee-service


Netflix needs to study the many crowd pictures carefully, as an example, these do not look like potential subscribers anxious to view a Suckess reality show.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



That guy on the left is a such an apologist for them! Yuck


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Since there was a Secret Service guy sitting behind them in the church, wouldn't he of all people been able to detect any wires? As much as I don't trust them whatsoever, I can't believe M would have had any visible wires, even if they were supposed to be hidden.  There are far more subtle listening devices out there. We all know they're not the sharpest, but I'd think that even these idiots would have suited up with undetectable listening devices. I did think Meghan might have tried to mingle with the masses to show the world everyone still loves her and misses her. Well, at least that didn't happen.


----------



## Lounorada

bellecate said:


> Or shushing the kids so she can overhear what the grownups are talking about.


Exactly!







EverSoElusive said:


>



I imagine Kate feeling like this as she walked down that aisle...






Chloe302225 said:


>



No.






CarryOn2020 said:


> No one, literally no one else, is smiling.  H&M need to read the room!
> View attachment 5417735









QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.



WTF!?






bag-mania said:


> And here I thought she was going for the vintage nurse uniform look.
> View attachment 5417755


That's exactly what her outfit reminded me of! Except, the only difference is the women in this photo are wearing clothes that are fitted impeccably.




regnews said:


> View attachment 5417902


Why is she so orange! Her makeup is dreadful. If that was applied by a 'professional' then they should be banned from being anywhere near makeup let alone be aloud to apply it to someone's face. She's like one of the Kardashians.
I'd love to know what Sarah was thinking here 




Chanbal said:


> I read that Kim K is in London and trying to get tickets to attend to one of the royal events.











Mrs.Z said:


> Dior IG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418008


Still no.


It's so hard to believe that outfit was custom made Dior. Not only is it ill-fitting, it's made with such an ugly stiff fabric (similar to her wedding dress fabric). The way it gathers and clings in the wrong places, reminds me of that horrible neoprene fabric. It also clearly doesn't pair well with a belt.
Hate the colour too. It's a dirty white, like it got put in a coloured clothes wash by mistake and the colour ran slightly into the coat, changing the colour.
The hat is beyond ugly, it's like a cheap Easter bonnet for kids, before you add embellishments.





Sharont2305 said:


> TW is bottom left.





She's so pathetic.




elvisfan4life said:


> View attachment 5418393
> 
> Yes there is a lovely picture of her and Zara too


Zara looked lovely, the best I've ever seen her look. Her outfits the last few days, including her outfit to the Epsom Derby today have all been great.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> Exactly!
> View attachment 5418800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine Kate feeling like this as she walked down that aisle...
> View attachment 5418801
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> View attachment 5418814
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418816
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF!?
> View attachment 5418819
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's exactly what her outfit reminded me of! Except, the only difference is the women in this photo are wearing clothes that are fitted impeccably.
> 
> 
> 
> Why is she so orange! Her makeup is dreadful. If that was applied by a 'professional' then they should be banned from being anywhere near makeup let alone be aloud to apply it to someone's face. She's like one of the Kardashians.
> I'd love to know what Sarah was thinking here
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418821
> 
> View attachment 5418822
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still no.
> View attachment 5418840
> 
> It's so hard to believe that outfit was custom made Dior. Not only is it ill-fitting, it's made with such an ugly stiff fabric (similar to her wedding dress fabric). The way it gathers and clings in the wrong places, reminds me of that horrible neoprene fabric. It also clearly doesn't pair well with a belt.
> Hate the colour too. It's a dirty white, like it got put in a coloured clothes wash by mistake and the colour ran slightly into the coat, changing the colour.
> The hat is beyond ugly, it's like a cheap Easter bonnet for kids, before you add embellishments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418839
> 
> She's so pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> Zara looked lovely, the best I've ever seen her look. Her outfits the last few days, including her outfit to the Epsom Derby today have all been great.


Your posts are too far and few in between, but when they pop up, it's like Christmas morning!


----------



## lulu212121

I saw a video of William and Kate looking a little upset when they took their seats at the service yesterday. I don't think I've ever seen Kate like that. There's also that picture of Anne looking at William. I could not figure out what would have them like that before the service began, but maybe they were told a mic was spotted? I think that Hasbeen and TW were not invited to the lunch. I think this has been a bit of a test to see their intentions. I don't believe the invisikids are with them, either.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

Sharont2305 said:


> This is how you support your husband on stage, don't hog the mike and don't cling onto him with your claws. Just stand there at a respectful distance and smile.
> That outfit is stunning.


Love Camilla’s coat. I wish there were closeups of the embroidery.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Will Harry ever leave Megan?

Honestly, the petulant entitlement reminds me a lot of a cousin of mine. Based on T’s actions, my vote is for a tentative yes.

He won’t leave Meghan unless he has someone else to latch onto. However, I think that if a girl at the polo club makes him feel secure and strong and masculine and puts herself forward as needing him to be her savior? He’ll leave Megan so fast you’ll wonder about the skid marks. And if the polo girl is clever and patient and doesn’t get bored over the years, he will be back in the BRF, towing the line. Not at his previous glories, mind you. But on the right side of the church pews. 

And he’ll see Archie and Lili about every year or three, when someone else sets it up, and buy them a birthday gift once a decade.

I don’t mean to be cynical. But he looks so happy at the polo club, and so unhappy everyplace else, that I keep expecting it.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

DoggieBags said:


> Love Camilla’s coat. I wish there were closeups of the embroidery.



She looks great in the embroidered coat and those killer VCA earrings


----------



## Chanbal

No photo…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it my imagination or do they all look thinner?  QE’s jewelry is loose and so is Camilla. Charles looks thinner in the middle. Eug, Bea, Zara, all look trimmer. Maybe it is just my screen.


----------



## pukasonqo

The sashaying took me back to Ru Paul’s “Supermodel”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> No photo…




The red balloon!  Some say that is the lazy way to say happy birthday - 1 balloon.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> No photo…




If one wants a photo of L or A, THEY HAVE TO PAY!  BIG TIME!  Apparently M doesn't send photos of her kids to relatives. But will send lemon olive oil cakes and take private jets to exploit tragedies.


----------



## Icyjade

I wonder which child is the “golden child” and which will be the “scapegoat“ for the Harkles?


----------



## Chanbal

Can't blame the Cambridges… 


_A cynic might say the only reason the Sussexes showed up was to get that all-important snap of Lilibet with Lilibet, and to recharge their Royal status for Netflix.

Equally though, it’s clear that Prince William is in no mood for compromise. Perhaps he knows something we don’t. After all, the much talked about tell-all memoir by Harry was scheduled for publication this autumn. It’s hard to imagine any revelations more damning than those in the Oprah interview, but you never know.

And why should the Cambridges always be the ones to offer the olive branch, especially when they only end up getting poked in the eye with it?

Either way, one thing is clear. Not even the Queen herself, with her remarkable ability to bring people of all different backgrounds together, can bridge the current abyss between these two brothers. A sad footnote to an otherwise joyous weekend._









						SARAH VINE: It appears William and Kate want to avoid Harry and Meghan
					

SARAH VINE: You would never have known the brothers were related, let alone once so close they used to finish each other's sentences. The only thing they had in common were stony-faced expressions.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> Can't blame the Cambridges…
> View attachment 5418897
> 
> _A cynic might say the only reason the Sussexes showed up was to get that all-important snap of Lilibet with Lilibet, and to recharge their Royal status for Netflix.
> 
> Equally though, it’s clear that Prince William is in no mood for compromise. Perhaps he knows something we don’t. After all, the much talked about tell-all memoir by Harry was scheduled for publication this autumn. It’s hard to imagine any revelations more damning than those in the Oprah interview, but you never know.
> 
> And why should the Cambridges always be the ones to offer the olive branch, especially when they only end up getting poked in the eye with it?
> 
> Either way, one thing is clear. Not even the Queen herself, with her remarkable ability to bring people of all different backgrounds together, can bridge the current abyss between these two brothers. A sad footnote to an otherwise joyous weekend._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: It appears William and Kate want to avoid Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: You would never have known the brothers were related, let alone once so close they used to finish each other's sentences. The only thing they had in common were stony-faced expressions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


William and his family had large roles throughout the Jubilee weekend. Even if there were a few moments of sadness or anger or whatever, William had to carry on and he did, likely without giving Hazbeen and TW any significant time in his head.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> It speaks volumes if the Queen would rather be having tea and photographed with the Paddington Bear than the Sucka$s3s



Paddington is an adorable and polite little bear who isn’t wearing a wire.

Of course the Queen would prefer his company.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Prince Charles's speech in honour of HMTQ: "Your Majesty, Mummy..."  
Camilla looks radiant.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The red balloon!  Some say that is the lazy way to say happy birthday - 1 balloon.


It's very modest, but they may have never met Lilib. 



rose60610 said:


> If one wants a photo of L or A, THEY HAVE TO PAY!  BIG TIME!  Apparently M doesn't send photos of her kids to relatives. But will send lemon olive oil cakes and take private jets to exploit tragedies.



Photos are likely to be only shared with family, auntie and/or uncle Netfl*x.


----------



## Icyjade

elvisfan4life said:


> Maybe they feel the kids shouldn’t miss out Archie hasn’t done anything wrong he’s only a kid



But… at this point it’s not just about the child. It’s like if the parent is a known abuser or pedo (extreme examples I know), would you risk your child with that parent?




EverSoElusive said:


> The Cambridge kids should definitely be kept away from the Troublesome Duo. If Invisikids were to have a play date with the Cambridge kids, the Troublesome Duo can drop the Invisikids at the Cambridges' doorstep and leave. Then come back at the agreed time to pick up Invisikids. Invisikids will be cared for by the Cambridges' nannies during the play date





DoggieBags said:


> why would the Cambridges want to risk Louis ending up on Netflix without their permission? Nothing to gain and much to lose from the BRF perspective if they associate with the Harkles in an environment the BRF cannot control.



Exactly… and wasnt there some nasty incident when Princess Charlotte was younger before the wedding? No parent will want a repeat.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Paddington is an adorable and polite little bear who isn’t wearing a wire.
> 
> Of course the Queen would prefer his company.


The BRF had been warned about potential wires, so they were likely prepared. I wonder if they even met QE.


----------



## chowlover2

Chanbal said:


> The BRF had been warned about potential wires, so they were likely prepared. I wonder if they even met QE.
> 
> View attachment 5418925


I doubt it. Nothing released from the palace to verify it either.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Icyjade said:


> I wonder which child is the “golden child” and which will be the “scapegoat“ for the Harkles?



I think Archie will be the scapegoat and Lili will be the forgotten child.


----------



## Chanbal

chowlover2 said:


> I doubt it. Nothing released from the palace to verify it either.


Let's see if they show up tomorrow for the last event of the Jubilee. They are unusually quiet, including their minister of propaganda. Some people think they are already back in CA.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I think Archie will be the scapegoat and Lili will be the forgotten child.



I’m still seeking proof that there actually is a Lilibet. We have only seen one obscure photo of her in the entire year of her existence. That could have been anyone’s baby. 

ETA: They didn’t even bother to put a sepia toned artsy photo of her on the Archewell webpage today for her birthday. That’s what happens when you’re the second born and any excitement they had about having kids has worn off.


----------



## zinacef

If the said couple in fact jetted out yesterday, I’m sure Harry is feeling the isolation he’s never felt in his life—- in Montecito despite having his own family around him. His eyes looks empty, isolated and TW faking a happiness,all is well grin. It could have been better if only——but They got what they wanted—- to be isolated with nothing.


----------



## redney

zinacef said:


> If the said couple in fact jetted out yesterday, I’m sure Harry is feeling the isolation he’s never felt in his life—- in Montecito despite having his own family around him. His eyes looks empty, isolated and TW faking a happiness,all is well grin. It could have been better if only——but *They got what they wanted—- to be isolated with nothing.*


Privacy! Hidden from the cameras! Congratulations, Sussexes, you got exactly what you wished for.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I’m still seeking proof that there actually is a Lilibet. We have only seen one obscure photo of her in the entire year of her existence. That could have been anyone’s baby.
> 
> ETA: They didn’t even bother to put a sepia toned artsy photo of her on the Archewell webpage today for her birthday. That’s what happens when you’re the second born and any excitement they had about having kids has worn off.


But, but, but, we have a sighting from a first hand source. snark snark. 

Methane's hairstylist George Northwood says "Archie has grown to be the cutest, most well mannered little boy" and "Lilibet is just beautiful." 

And being quoted in Harpers Bazaar, Yahoo News, Elle, Express UK, the Sun UK, and Town and Country Magazines means is has to be true.   

Note: Northwood is the Stylist traveling with Methane and is credited with doing her hair for the Thanksgiving Service at St. Paul's yesterday. He may regret admitting that if the truth of her wired hair makes mainstream news.

Remember also, it was an Express UK writer, Aliss Higham, who recently told us how Charlotte "very much considers her Uncle Harry one of her role models" and sends cards and "sweet gifts" to her cousins and they'll call as a family to sing "happy birthdays and so on."  It's challenging to understand how this drivel gets published.


----------



## Icyjade

They have been iced out… the royal family plays the long game. The world now sees that they are just minor royals and have no clout (seating arrangement, balcony, etc). I’ve been reading some news articles from US and the comments are quite damning saying that they fully deserve to be booed.


----------



## elvisfan4life

1LV said:


> I wonder if I should believe comments in various Texas news outlets.  How the townspeople of Uvalde, and especially parents were sick of the media. How policeman and bikers blocked news people on the first day of funerals to be held in order to give the families privacy while they buried their babies.   I guess it’s a good thing she got her a$$ down there with her camera crew when she did.  Vultures.


Maybe they just asked for the extra security in case that thing tried to turn up again with the ginger one and kids in tow this time imagine the attention that would have got worldwide


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> Arthur Chatto was 3or 4 seats along from Megan on the same row and in his Royal Marines dress uniform. I wonder how Harry felt seeing that.
> Also i picked up that afterwards H+m walked down the aisle on the way out behind Peter Phillips+ David Linley ( Lord Snowden as he is now) with lady Sarah and Daniel chatto behind them so not just demoted to the cousins but the second cousins.


They were penned in for a reason - Sarah and David are incredibly close to the Queen - they grew up with Andrew and Edward and are loyal and loved members of the family


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lounorada said:


> Exactly!
> View attachment 5418800
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine Kate feeling like this as she walked down that aisle...
> View attachment 5418801
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.
> View attachment 5418814
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418816
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WTF!?
> View attachment 5418819
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's exactly what her outfit reminded me of! Except, the only difference is the women in this photo are wearing clothes that are fitted impeccably.
> 
> 
> 
> Why is she so orange! Her makeup is dreadful. If that was applied by a 'professional' then they should be banned from being anywhere near makeup let alone be aloud to apply it to someone's face. She's like one of the Kardashians.
> I'd love to know what Sarah was thinking here
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418821
> 
> View attachment 5418822
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still no.
> View attachment 5418840
> 
> It's so hard to believe that outfit was custom made Dior. Not only is it ill-fitting, it's made with such an ugly stiff fabric (similar to her wedding dress fabric). The way it gathers and clings in the wrong places, reminds me of that horrible neoprene fabric. It also clearly doesn't pair well with a belt.
> Hate the colour too. It's a dirty white, like it got put in a coloured clothes wash by mistake and the colour ran slightly into the coat, changing the colour.
> The hat is beyond ugly, it's like a cheap Easter bonnet for kids, before you add embellishments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5418839
> 
> She's so pathetic.
> 
> 
> 
> Zara looked lovely, the best I've ever seen her look. Her outfits the last few days, including her outfit to the Epsom Derby today have all been great.


Her Derby dress cost £50!!!! Way to go girl it’s not all about cost and posh designers


----------



## elvisfan4life

lulu212121 said:


> I saw a video of William and Kate looking a little upset when they took their seats at the service yesterday. I don't think I've ever seen Kate like that. There's also that picture of Anne looking at William. I could not figure out what would have them like that before the service began, but maybe they were told a mic was spotted? I think that Hasbeen and TW were not invited to the lunch. I think this has been a bit of a test to see their intentions. I don't believe the invisikids are with them, either.



The Palace has not issued a statement to deny the Queen has met the Sussex children indeed the official news channel has reported they were at the private family lunch party on Thursday so met all the family - I think we can assume the kids are in the UK

I felt Kate and William looked subdued as they had to follow the deliberately late Sussexes so the comparison that should have been avoided was being made - we had two inappropriate grinning Cheshire cats at a service of thanksgiving in a church where the star was missing due to ill health - I believe their expressions were the sorrow of the Queen missing her own event that she had looked forward to so much and also a thought towards the missing and much loved  Prince Phillip

the Sussexes like everyone else at the morning service were invited and expected at the guildhall lunch so rude to just drive off home

if the microphones /cameras whatever are found to be real then these two should be exiled from the royal family forthwith -they were told to behave - if they haven’t they should be dealt with

he was clearly fiddling with that thing round his neck ( I posted that on thurs ) she had something under her collar she was constantly fiddling with too - I’m sure if they have been up to anything we will see it once the techies have cleaned and spliced it all up in order to actually make it viewable -( like the boos have been removed and false cheers added already to the videos their few sightings ) so pathetic and  in my opinion whoever assists them is as despicable as they are


----------



## elvisfan4life

Vintage Leather said:


> Will Harry ever leave Megan?
> 
> Honestly, the petulant entitlement reminds me a lot of a cousin of mine. Based on T’s actions, my vote is for a tentative yes.
> 
> He won’t leave Meghan unless he has someone else to latch onto. However, I think that if a girl at the polo club makes him feel secure and strong and masculine and puts herself forward as needing him to be her savior? He’ll leave Megan so fast you’ll wonder about the skid marks. And if the polo girl is clever and patient and doesn’t get bored over the years, he will be back in the BRF, towing the line. Not at his previous glories, mind you. But on the right side of the church pews.
> 
> And he’ll see Archie and Lili about every year or three, when someone else sets it up, and buy them a birthday gift once a decade.
> 
> I don’t mean to be cynical. But he looks so happy at the polo club, and so unhappy everyplace else, that I keep expecting it.


He was always a party boy but he has always loved children and wanted his own - I feel he adores his children and would stay for them not her - he is by far the best parent of those two


----------



## Vintage Leather

elvisfan4life said:


> He was always a party boy but he has always loved children and wanted his own - I feel he adores his children and would stay for them not her - he is by far the best parent of those two



I sincerely hope and pray you are right. 
5 years ago, I would have said that he adored his brother and grandfather and that those ties would never break


----------



## elvisfan4life

Vintage Leather said:


> I sincerely hope and pray you are right.
> 5 years ago, I would have said that he adored his brother and grandfather and that those ties would never break


If you looked closer you would have seen he always had the second child/royal spare complex - the same as Margaret and Andrew - always attention seeking , trying to shock or trying to be one of us the loveable rogue in public while actually despising us - trying to find a place in that world once no longer the number 2- I believe the BRF felt M was the next thing in that long line of his misbehaving and they never expected him to actually marry her -it took them by surprise - William tried to get him to take his time but Harry rebelled and things have never been right between them since . Even  Andrew was  “Persuaded” that  Koo stark was unsuitable for him and Fergie was pushed towards him until he did the “right” thing- say what you like about her but she has stood by him and supported him through thick and thin and raised those girls despite only being on the fringes of royal life

Harry just did his own thing and everyone including him has to live with the consequences now

For centuries royals didn’t marry anyone outside of their inner circle - Outsiders and real commoners coming into the Royal family is very new - Sophie and Kate have been groomed and trained for years behind the scenes to be able to cope with their respective roles- even people like Diana whose family were a huge part of the inner circle of royal life for centuries was trained and groomed by the Queen mother and her own grandmother -Sophie and Kate are perfect fits - Harry made his choice who was never even going to try to fit -she wanted her own way and domination -now he has to live with his choice


----------



## elvisfan4life

If you believe the gutter press Zara and Peters kids attended the birthday party yesterday 








						Inside Harry and Meghan’s daughter Lilibet's first birthday party
					

HARRY and Meghan’s daughter Lilibet has marked her first birthday with a party — with her royal second cousins invited. The informal garden party was held at Windsor’s Frogmore Cottage with picnic-…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## PurseUOut

Those who think Harry will divorce Meghan and return to the U.S. are living in a fantasy world.

He has a wife who gracefully takes the hits for his choice to flee royal life in the U.K. His wife is beautiful, poised, intelligent and raises his stock much more than when he was single. He is seen now as a respectable man for defending his biracial wife and protecting his now multi-racial family. His wife looks at least a decade younger than she is and along with that I am sure he is pleased in all aspects of their marriage (as being with a woman of a certain age and level of experience will do). There is absolutely no incentive for him to ever leave her, especially for a younger ditzy doe-eyed polo girl - the same ones throwing themselves at him prior to meeting Meghan so what is the appeal of them now. As long as Meghan wants the marriage to continue he is there and happily so. He's not going anywhere.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This is a fxcking joke right? Kate has worn Philip Treacy long before Nutmeg came along. The whole "sweet nod" comment must have came group Camp Montecito   

Source: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/5401117/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-queen-jubilee-live/


The Duchess of Cambridge, 40, wore a yellow dress by Emilia Wickstead, paired with a matching yellow hat

*She also wore a hat designed by Philip Treacy for the occasion, which just so happens to be one of Meghan Markle's favourite hat designers*, according to OK Magazine.

*Royal fans might consider this choice of headwear to be a subtle nod to Meghan*, who also wore a Philip Treacy hat when attending Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding in 2018.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> This is a fxcking joke right? Kate has worn Philip Treacy long before Nutmeg came along. The whole "sweet nod" comment must have came group Camp Montecito
> 
> Source: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/5401117/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-queen-jubilee-live/
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 40, wore a yellow dress by Emilia Wickstead, paired with a matching yellow hat
> 
> *She also wore a hat designed by Philip Treacy for the occasion, which just so happens to be one of Meghan Markle's favourite hat designers*, according to OK Magazine.
> 
> *Royal fans might consider this choice of headwear to be a subtle nod to Meghan*, who also wore a Philip Treacy hat when attending Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding in 2018.



Yer, weird, Philip Treacy (Irish) is probably one of the leading milliners in the world and many of the BRF has worn PT for decades. This joining of the non-existent polka-dots is such a s t r e t c  h it would snap if it were hat elastic. It's just to rile up people and get them commenting (which is what we're doing).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I don't know her political views, but I believe that any person with common sense will have a hard time supporting TW.



I yesterday found the portal to hell on Twitter. It's an account named @HazznMeg and all the people you describe gather there.


----------



## mellibelly

Within 5 minutes of arriving she’s adjusted something under this collar 3 times, obviously a microphone. She’s a terrible actress. It’s like that scene at the beginning of Casino Royale where the agent keeps touching his earpiece and blows his cover


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> A comment on Twitter says it was noted they both were wired in Saint Pauls and directive was given to staff to not engage or be very careful in any interaction. There was a comment early on somewhere that Harry seemed to fidget with the thing around his neck????



If true, this might very well be Harry's nail in the coffin.



> Neil Sean claims they were invited to the Guild Hall event, but "chose to return to their children at Frogmore instead".



Sure. The woman that left behind her suckling to fly to the US to watch tennis and the parents that went on a non-royal tour to NYC for several days with a toddler and baby at home suddenly can't be without their children for longer than a few hours. They really think all of us are stupid.


----------



## mellibelly

In Philip Treacy’s own words:

"*I am a total royalist. *I love the Royal family. I think the Queen has done major things for hats, even though I don't make hers." *He made 36 hats for the 2011 royal wedding*, but the one that really caught people's attention was Princess Beatrice's, which was dubbed "the Bagel" on social media. *He is also the chosen hatter to the Duchess of Cornwall.*


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> Those who think Harry will divorce Meghan and return to the U.S. are living in a fantasy world.
> 
> He has a wife who gracefully takes the hits for his choice to flee royal life in the U.K. His wife is beautiful, poised, intelligent and raises his stock much more than when he was single. He is seen now as a respectable man for defending his biracial wife and protecting his now multi-racial family. His wife looks at least a decade younger than she is and along with that I am sure he is pleased in all aspects of their marriage (as being with a woman of a certain age and level of experience will do). There is absolutely no incentive for him to ever leave her, especially for a younger ditzy doe-eyed polo girl - the same ones throwing themselves at him prior to meeting Meghan so what is the appeal of them now. As long as Meghan wants the marriage to continue he is there and happily so. He's not going anywhere.


Ok. Please enlighten me with all her attributes.  Bi-racial, of course she's biracial but bad behavior has no color.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> It's so hard to believe that outfit was custom made Dior. Not only is it ill-fitting, it's made with such an ugly stiff fabric (similar to her wedding dress fabric). The way it gathers and clings in the wrong places, reminds me of that horrible neoprene fabric.




Fun fact, I recently tried on a neoprene sheet dress from a higher end highstreet retailer if you will, and the fit was fabulous. It totally smoothed over stuff and clung to all the right places even when I'm still 15 pounds away from my ideal weight. I returned it only because I don't wear sleeveless anything to occasions that call for a little black dress and I'd have had to shorten it which seemed like too much of a hassle at the time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vintage Leather said:


> He won’t leave Meghan unless he has someone else to latch onto.



Funnily that's the impression I get with Raptor. She has nowhere else to go or she would have left his sorry a*s already.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it my imagination or do they all look thinner?  QE’s jewelry is loose and so is Camilla. Charles looks thinner in the middle. Eug, Bea, Zara, all look trimmer. Maybe it is just my screen.



I've thought it with The Queen - she has really shrunk since Philip died - and the York girls (but both of them gave birth recently, so maybe that's expected). Not sure about Camilla and Charles, apparently I never paid attention before.


----------



## mellibelly

Sweet Nod™️ sounds like a cheap drugstore perfume TW would come out with


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


>



I think putting on the gloves was to hide how streaky her fake tan was getting- it always goes wrong on the hands first. Especially if the mitts are sweaty from grasping all day. 


880 said:


> i disagree with a lot of what Tina brown says about M and H. But, I thought she laid out some of the main issues with them quite well, (though she definitely gave them too much benefit of the doubt). Mainly that both are entirely too spoiled and unthinking; filled with their own erroneous perception of self importance; and wanted to have it all which is antithetical to both the monarchy and M’s rumored political ambitions. . . kind of like a politician thinking he can have profitable side deals Even when they are conflicts of interest. Meghan is an aging middling TV actress who is acting in self interest, but I do think H was trained from infancy to know better.
> 
> i did like her dior outfit, but as someone who is also not tall and thicker through the middle, diors higher slimmer waist and the central back slit do no favors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #QueensJubilee: Learn why you "never offer the Queen an ultimatum"
> 
> 
> "The Palace Papers" author Tina Brown gives insight into Harry and Meghan's mistakes and Charles' outlook as king
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.salon.com


I agree it doesn’t even think it looked like a Dior design. They certainly aren’t doing themselves any favours.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was that the lady in bright pink?





Yes. I wouldn’t blame megz for not joining the matching outfit brigade because Sophie would make her look like a sack of spuds.


gelbergirl said:


> Does Prince Charles get to see his grandchildren??


He’s not good tv so he doesn’t matter I mean he’s only the grandad after all


purseinsanity said:


> Interesting that the article states the claim QEII met Lilibet was solely from Scabies and none other, so who knows if it's even true or not.


Yes and we all know how honest he is. They have definitely not extinguished the rumours that the daughter ain’t real.


csshopper said:


> It explains the dress selection and hairdo/hat : weight of the dress fabric (which seemed heavy for the season), extra layer of the back flap for concealment insurance, wide collar, ditto. Coiled wire, coiled hair.  Unfortunately for the Degenerate Duo, the nipple burp, even on a chronically messy dresser, caused a cumulative closer look at her behavior and things unraveled.
> 
> Speculation : This is fun, makes them such dipshitz who got played by the Royals.
> 
> 1. There was an accomplice outside to monitor.  It seemed strange Raptor’s gloves were off when outside.
> 
> 2. Enters church, fusses with her collar. Thinks it’s Ok. Knowing they will be on camera, pulls gloves on to signal this to monitor.
> 
> 3. Their smile, smirk, giggle exchange is them thinking they are getting away with something.
> 
> 3. Unknown to them, seated behind them is the foil to their plan. His presence may be the reason for the Usher’s insistence on adhering to the designated seating plan, not the disrupter one the Harkles tried to pull off.
> 
> 4. Don’t know when they would have figured out it went wrong, but Haz did seem anxious for their car to arrive, or maybe it was just the Booing in the background?
> 
> Random thoughts:  Did they travel in a Royal vehicle from the airport that had surveillance equipment in it? Was Frogmore bugged before they arrived? Is their more low key behavior than usual because the 18 minute meeting with the Queen at Windsor while they were on the way to Invictus laid down an ultimatum that made clear there was an “or else” at the end. Could explain (a) Haz’s ill advised Hoda Kotb interview spinning a tale of favoritism and special love and casting aspersions on those around the Queen as a diversion and (b) the murderous glimpses of Raptor’s mask slips during the following days as the meaning of their Windsor summons prompted revenge planning. “We’ll get pictures, we’ll get incriminating sound bites ‘cuz our team knows how to edit and splice.”
> 
> What I don’t understand is what they expected to record? Lamentation they are gone? Criticism of the Monarchy? Gossip about Will and Kate? Dislike for Camilla?
> 
> There’s no doubt of the Queen’s love of family, but Gran might be out of patience and exasperated with their behavior.  If she has the fortitude to whack Andrew, these two are teetering I hope. The failure to attend his grandfather’s memorial, her unconscionable treatment of her stroke ridden father and these attempted recording shenanigans if true, may, put them over over the brink.
> 
> All Haz has to look forward to is flying home into Nacho’s warm embrace. Meanwhile Raptor can spend her days anticipating the awaited book filled with Tom Bowers‘ truth about her “truths”.


It’d be so sad if M really was a beard- I mean why not just come out or at least make a lavender marriage that doesn’t completely ruin your life. I sort of think he must have been very infatuated with her at least at one point.


CarryOn2020 said:


> As MM said in Uvalde [grrr], _don’t believe what you read.
> 
> “I asked her, ‘So, how’s your husband doing?’” Rankin said. “She said, ‘He’s doing very well.’ And then she whispered to me, ‘Don’t believe what you read.’”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Said She Held Her Children “A Little Bit Tighter” After Learning About The Uvalde School Shooting
> 
> 
> The director of the Uvalde community center where the Duchess of Sussex donated food told BuzzFeed News how Meghan’s visit unfolded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


It has just dawned on me that even in the positive news article it reports she asks a cursory question about the person she’s talking to’s family before she immediately brings it back to talking about her struggle with bad press with it the tacit implication that the lady is enjoying their conversation and her previous negative impression of M has been changed by how glorious she is in person.
Jesus even a fluff post can’t hide her rampant egoism and insensitivity. 


pukasonqo said:


> The sashaying took me back to Ru Paul’s “Supermodel”



She wishes lol


bag-mania said:


> I’m still seeking proof that there actually is a Lilibet. We have only seen one obscure photo of her in the entire year of her existence. That could have been anyone’s baby.
> 
> ETA: They didn’t even bother to put a sepia toned artsy photo of her on the Archewell webpage today for her birthday. That’s what happens when you’re the second born and any excitement they had about having kids has worn off.


It’s weird isn’t it? Given how much fanfare they gave to their son. Poor little forgotten second child. I really do hope she’s a stage baby with a real home elsewhere.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> His wife looks at least a decade younger than she is and along with that I am sure he is pleased in all aspects of their marriage (as being with a woman of a certain age and level of experience will do).



Unless you go closer and see that sun damaged skin on her face, neck, chest and hands I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’d be so sad if M really was a beard- I mean why not just come out or at least make a lavender marriage that doesn’t completely ruin your life. *I sort of think he must have been very infatuated with her at least at one point.*



I absolutely believe at the point of the wedding he was totally in love with her, while she was...scheming. I just think at this point he has seen enough of her crazy and selfishness that these feelings should have, uh, matured.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I absolutely believe at the point of the wedding he was totally in love with her, while she was...scheming. I just think at this point he has seen enough of her crazy and selfishness that these feelings should have, uh, matured.



I think he was more in-love with _idea_ of her, and she just made her-'altruistic'-self available. I think she was as much a personal-political move for him as he was a hoist up the social/money ladder for her.

Not only was she a 2-fingered salute to his family (US commoner, an actress, already twice divorced and in a big hurry to get hitched again) but he wanted to wash all his past sins away. I think he thought the fact he's a proven racist would suddenly be forgotten, literally washed away. Unfortunately, the heritage of his wife has nothing to do with his previous 'japes' and laddish 'humour'. 

Harry has absolutely no inner-moral compass, he thinks he's a good man by virtue of being Harry. He is a follower and not a leader. From whatever would win him a few laughs from his inner-circle over-privileged mates to signalling what he thinks will earn him a few woke-points on the world stage. It's all about outside affirmations.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wouldn't count on it, Tourree.


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> This is a fxcking joke right? Kate has worn Philip Treacy long before Nutmeg came along. The whole "sweet nod" comment must have came group Camp Montecito
> 
> Source: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/5401117/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-queen-jubilee-live/
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 40, wore a yellow dress by Emilia Wickstead, paired with a matching yellow hat
> 
> *She also wore a hat designed by Philip Treacy for the occasion, which just so happens to be one of Meghan Markle's favourite hat designers*, according to OK Magazine.
> 
> *Royal fans might consider this choice of headwear to be a subtle nod to Meghan*, who also wore a Philip Treacy hat when attending Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding in 2018.


I’m sure Philip Tracy will find it hilarious I think there are a good few hundred royals who have worn his creations for many many years before MM ever did lol - hilarious this is so scraping the bottom of the barrel now it’s becoming side splitting


----------



## elvisfan4life

Will they be there today for the final event ? Someone better check Cliff Richard isnt singing “wired for sound “ lol


----------



## carmen56

bag-mania said:


> Paddington is an adorable and polite little bear who isn’t wearing a wire.
> 
> Of course the Queen would prefer his company.



The Queen is such a great sport!


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> The Queen is such a great sport!



and a better actress than M


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Unless you go closer and see that sun damaged skin on her face, neck, chest and hands I guess.



Right, a decade younger?  Seems a huge stretch.  Imo her look is very similar to many others, esp in Hwood.  KimK started this look, Amal elevated it, and now lots of women have duplicated the look, including her friend at the polo field. Very _Emily in Paris_, ringarde.  Long long black hair, Smokey eye makeup, stick thin [MM loses a few points here], spike heels, etc.  If one of them doesn’t work out in the movie, the director can call up 20 more.  Copycat looks, no individuality.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I absolutely believe at the point of the wedding he was totally in love with her, while she was...scheming. I just think at this point he has seen enough of her crazy and selfishness that these feelings should have, uh, matured.



‘Imo they both were scheming from day one. Each for his/her own reasons, they knew they would leave. I’ve convinced myself that is why the other proper UK ladies said no to Hazz - they did not want to leave their homeland. Plus, he has anger issues, never a good marital choice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Unless you go closer and see that sun damaged skin on her face, neck, chest and hands I guess.



And let’s not forget that botched nose job!


----------



## DoggieBags

PurseUOut said:


> Those who think Harry will divorce Meghan and return to the U.S. are living in a fantasy world.
> 
> He has a wife who gracefully takes the hits for his choice to flee royal life in the U.K. His wife is beautiful, poised, intelligent and raises his stock much more than when he was single. He is seen now as a respectable man for defending his biracial wife and protecting his now multi-racial family. His wife looks at least a decade younger than she is and along with that I am sure he is pleased in all aspects of their marriage (as being with a woman of a certain age and level of experience will do). There is absolutely no incentive for him to ever leave her, especially for a younger ditzy doe-eyed polo girl - the same ones throwing themselves at him prior to meeting Meghan so what is the appeal of them now. As long as Meghan wants the marriage to continue he is there and happily so. He's not going anywhere.


i wasn’t going to respond but I’m sitting here having a lazy morning so here we go lol
1) I tend to agree with you that Harry will not divorce Meghan. But as to the rest of your post….
2) ”beautiful, poised, intelligent and raises his stock much more than when he was single ….” - first there is her Ellen appearance which is never going to go away and second, do an online search for the Markle claw and see numerous videos of her pushing, pulling, yanking Harry around at public events and just generally bulling her way in front of Harry regardless of protocol. Her public behavior is the antithesis of poised and dignified. It also doesn’t help that she apparently has no idea how to dress appropriately for various events and doesn’t understand that very expensive designer clothes do not magically fit all body types. 
3) “looks at least a decade younger than she is…”  - I actually think she looks her age. Not that I think she looks old but your average 40 year old woman today with the amount of disposable income TW has looks younger than your average 40 yer old who hasn’t had access to good food, good healthcare, good beauty products and good cosmetic surgeons from childhood. So in her peer group I think she looks average. Not unusually young looking. Others have also mentioned that her skin looks very sun damaged even under all the makeup, bronzer, etc. so it remains to be seen how her skin will age going forward.
4) ”he is now seen as a respectable man for defending his biracial wife…” - protecting her from what? She threw out accusations in the Oprah interview but named no one specific. And to this day, no one has come forward to provide any first hand accounts to support her accusations. I also think the issue of whether or not Harry is considered respectable these days depends on who you talk to. I would think he was more respected prior to his marriage when he was viewed as a war vet working to improve the lives of wounded war veterans via the Invictus games and other non-profits. Post marriage, we have yet to see any major charitable donation from the couple’s foundation. There’s been a lot of pontificating but actual large $$ donations from them I have yet to see. Any venture he or she has undertaken post marriage is clearly for profit and I include their recent attendance at the Invictus games in their for profit appearances / ventures. Anything they do these days including his recent participation in a series of charity polo matches has to be viewed through the Netflix content lens. Unless someone wants to make the case that they plan to donate their Netflix earnings to charity? And then of course there is the hypocrisy of their extensive private plane use versus their equally extensive lecturing of everyone else re travel related carbon footprints.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> This is a fxcking joke right? Kate has worn Philip Treacy long before Nutmeg came along. The whole "sweet nod" comment must have came group Camp Montecito
> 
> Source: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/5401117/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-queen-jubilee-live/
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 40, wore a yellow dress by Emilia Wickstead, paired with a matching yellow hat
> 
> *She also wore a hat designed by Philip Treacy for the occasion, which just so happens to be one of Meghan Markle's favourite hat designers*, according to OK Magazine.
> 
> *Royal fans might consider this choice of headwear to be a subtle nod to Meghan*, who also wore a Philip Treacy hat when attending Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding in 2018.


----------



## DoggieBags

Further to my post #94,217. I have to point out that they are clinging desperately to titles that spring from an institution they claim to despise. If the BRF is the racist, cruel, unfeeling institution the Harkles claim it is, then why do they continue to style themselves the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? You can’t have it both ways. But they sure are trying to make as much money off their titles as they can while simultaneously sniping and taking potshots at the BRF. Respect is earned and neither of the Harkles has done anything post marriage to merit either their royal titles or earn the respect they shrilly insist at every turn is their due. Just More of their hypocrisy.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Let’s hope they flew home on the luxury jet on sat and we won’t see them again


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Further to my post #94,217. I have to point out that they are clinging desperately to titles that spring from an institution they claim to despise. If the BRF is the racist, cruel, unfeeling institution the Harkles claim it is, then why do they continue to style themselves the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? You can’t have it both ways. But they sure are trying to make as much money off their titles as they can while simultaneously sniping and taking potshots at the BRF. Respect is earned and neither of the Harkles has done anything post marriage to merit either their royal titles or earn the respect they shrilly insist at every turn is their due. Just More of their hypocrisy.



Very well written. Thank you for taking the time to make these points. None of her supporters address the lies, the hypocrisy, the shameless merching, the shameless copying others while claiming it’s all her ideas [ick], the bullying behavior, ad nauseam. For every ‘positive’ they mention, there are at least 3 well-documented negatives.  I wish I could open their eyes to the H&M fakery, but they themselves seem to bully anyone with an opposing opinion. The intolerance is nauseating


----------



## Annawakes

Vintage Leather said:


> Will Harry ever leave Megan?
> 
> Honestly, the petulant entitlement reminds me a lot of a cousin of mine. Based on T’s actions, my vote is for a tentative yes.
> 
> He won’t leave Meghan unless he has someone else to latch onto. However, I think that if a girl at the polo club makes him feel secure and strong and masculine and puts herself forward as needing him to be her savior? He’ll leave Megan so fast you’ll wonder about the skid marks. And if the polo girl is clever and patient and doesn’t get bored over the years, he will be back in the BRF, towing the line. Not at his previous glories, mind you. But on the right side of the church pews.
> 
> And he’ll see Archie and Lili about every year or three, when someone else sets it up, and buy them a birthday gift once a decade.
> 
> I don’t mean to be cynical. But he looks so happy at the polo club, and so unhappy everyplace else, that I keep expecting it.


This is why TW is always at the polo club in her shorty shorts.  Watching like a hawk….always watching…..


----------



## rose60610

I don't believe the sugars of M&H are necessarily actual fans of M&H.  They're shills for the woke narratives that M&H supposedly espouse, but more importantly, believe bring in the most money.  Any opposition is met with whipping out the favorite flavor Victim Cards--Racist! Misogynist! Hater! bla bla bla.  
That's why M&H can take private jets anywhere and the sugars never complain. That's why Meghan can call the BRF "RACISTS" with no proof and the sugars 'believe' it. That's why M&H cast themselves as "victims" and the sugars wail over their misfortune. That's why Meghan can lie her head off and the sugars slather her with pity. 
The sugars applaud M&H for "having the courage" to throw the mean rotten rich white BRF under the bus but somehow don't seem to question their slobbering efforts to get back into the fold (trying to rearrange the seating at the church anyone? failing to make part of the Jubilee about Lilibet anyone?) It isn't about M&H. It's the narratives. Sadly for the sugars, the figureheads of these narratives are two spoiled entitled piss ants who embarrass themselves. What the sugars really need are more stupid people to believe what they're selling. I ain't buying. But I do feel sorry for the lost sugars who put their efforts (bots) into supporting M&H. I just may send them a wreath.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> If you believe the gutter press Zara and Peters kids attended the birthday party yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Harry and Meghan’s daughter Lilibet's first birthday party
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan’s daughter Lilibet has marked her first birthday with a party — with her royal second cousins invited. The informal garden party was held at Windsor’s Frogmore Cottage with picnic-…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I wonder what the Sun got in return for publishing such story. It's a list of invited guests, they could have added the Pope to it.

If the post below is true, was it a morning imaginary party?



EDIT to include a picture of the party that is circulating on Twitter.





EverSoElusive said:


> This is a fxcking joke right? Kate has worn Philip Treacy long before Nutmeg came along. The whole "sweet nod" comment must have came group Camp Montecito
> 
> Source: https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/5401117/meghan-markle-news-prince-harry-queen-jubilee-live/
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Cambridge, 40, wore a yellow dress by Emilia Wickstead, paired with a matching yellow hat
> 
> *She also wore a hat designed by Philip Treacy for the occasion, which just so happens to be one of Meghan Markle's favourite hat designers*, according to OK Magazine.
> 
> *Royal fans might consider this choice of headwear to be a subtle nod to Meghan*, who also wore a Philip Treacy hat when attending Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding in 2018.



The Sun again! Is the journal in financial trouble?



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I yesterday found the portal to hell on Twitter. It's an account named @HazznMeg and all the people you describe gather there.



Are we talking about the ones with common sense or the unfortunate ones?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

DoggieBags said:


> Further to my post #94,217. I have to point out that they are clinging desperately to titles that spring from an institution they claim to despise. If the BRF is the racist, cruel, unfeeling institution the Harkles claim it is, then why do they continue to style themselves the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? You can’t have it both ways. But they sure are trying to make as much money off their titles as they can while simultaneously sniping and taking potshots at the BRF. Respect is earned and neither of the Harkles has done anything post marriage to merit either their royal titles or earn the respect they shrilly insist at every turn is their due. Just More of their hypocrisy.


The perfect response to asinine posts attempting to extol the virtues of the Harkles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Are we talking about the ones with common sense or the unfortunate lunatics?



The ones _without _common sense.


----------



## Chanbal

Even you DM!


----------



## Chanbal

Good Question! I wonder if the birthday messages were written by the same person.   






			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/where-is-the-photo-of-lili-with-the-queen/news-story/3eb504398bd565af926fd80947643e65


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Good Question! I wonder if the birthday messages were written by the same person.
> View attachment 5419133
> 
> View attachment 5419134
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/where-is-the-photo-of-lili-with-the-queen/news-story/3eb504398bd565af926fd80947643e65



They probably tasked the landscaper to do it this time because everybody else is busy with executing and attending the Jubilee events


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If true, this might very well be Harry's nail in the coffin.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure. The woman that left behind her suckling to fly to the US to watch tennis and the parents that went on a non-royal tour to NYC for several days with a toddler and baby at home suddenly can't be without their children for longer than a few hours. They really think all of us are stupid.


thats what I was thinking....If it turns out they were recording during these events, how can that be forgiven?  could they actually remove him from the line of succession?  I know it's not easy but how much can they get away with?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funnily that's the impression I get with Raptor. She has nowhere else to go or she would have left his sorry a*s already.


she was just a bit more than a nobody before she snagged him.  where is she gonna go?


----------



## lallybelle

Hmmm....I believe that the kids may have attended, because Zara & Mike and Philip were at the Derby with Princess Anne and I don't recall seeing the kids with them in any pics. They could have been sent over w/ Nanny's etc. BUT I do not believe they stayed at Windsor with the Queen to watch the concert at all for 1 second. They have not attended 1 event since they were booed at the service on Friday, and if the report is to be believed they left already late afternoon yesterday. Also the report of HM meeting Lilli comes into question because I read I think in People that they did not in fact attend the private lunch after Trooping, which is when Scabie claims it happened. But since HM missed all the other events herself, I guess it's up to speculation if at some point they visited at Windsor.


----------



## Stansy

Two observations/thoughts:
the white/grey coat by Dior looks like something Melania would have worn, and given her height and posture would have looked good in
wouldn‘t it be funny if the MI5 guy seated behind the disastrous duo had been wired himself? Not that we will ever know unfortunately…


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Even you DM!




The Royal Standard is up at Buck Palace which means the Queen is watching the Pageant from there. Everybody who's anybody is enjoying the procession. 

Don't know where #6™ and TW™ are but frankly - who cares?


----------



## Chanbal

Stansy said:


> Two observations/thoughts:
> the white/grey coat by Dior looks like something Melania would have worn, and given her height and posture would have looked good in
> wouldn‘t it be funny if the MI5 guy seated behind the disastrous duo had been wired himself? Not that we will ever know unfortunately…


Side by side pictures circulating on Twitter have provided the same comparison, and the outfit verdict was in favor of a former first lady.

In addition to the MI5 former agent, it appears that the younger gentleman (the handsome one) behind TW is Major Jonny Thompson of the Scot Guard.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Harry’s eyes in the church pictures are completely empty.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Even you DM!



Everybody - except youngest children - was at the party , Zara , B E Peter etc so, I gotta think H&M were invited but had better things to do , haha

And as to the purported mic cable at the neck , could have been photoshopped, I have seen pix where it looked like a tendril sticking out of her messy bun - totally plausible 

But, yes, why fuss with collar all the time ??


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Side by side pictures circulating on Twitter have provided the same comparison, and the outfit verdict was in favor of a former first lady.
> 
> In addition to the MI5 former agent, it appears that the younger gentleman (the handsome one) behind TW is *Major Jonny Thompson of the Scot Guard*.
> 
> View attachment 5419173



Is he single? Does he look good in a kilt?


----------



## Chanbal

Many young kids at the celebrations, but no Arch*e or Lilib. This would have been a great opportunity to generate some sweet memories for the Harkles' kids.


----------



## csshopper

The highly paid spin doctors at work:

      invitees does not mean attendees at a birthday party
      Invite all the second tier cousins you can, doesn’t mean diddly squat. Maybe August was there, but if they were so anxious for cousin bonding why were Archie and Lilibet not with their parents in the group gathered to view Trooping of the Color? Maybe because their Mom wanted all attention on HERSELF and no distractions.

     “ it is thought“ does not mean it happened
     The Miscreants from Montecito can have all the thoughts they want about joining Gran in Windsor to watch the celebrations on TV, but I’d wager the metaphorical drawbridge was up and locked and they were nowhere near.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry
> 
> View attachment 5419197


  Thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Don't know where #6™ and TW™ are but frankly - who cares?



And I honestly doubt anyone cares about their little power games with their offspring at this point. The world had enough of the Cambridge, Phillips and Tindall kids this weekend.


----------



## LittleStar88

Stansy said:


> Two observations/thoughts:
> the white/grey coat by Dior looks like something Melania would have worn, and given her height and posture would have looked good in
> wouldn‘t it be funny if the MI5 guy seated behind the disastrous duo had been wired himself? Not that we will ever know unfortunately…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Deleted 698298

S


Chanbal said:


> Side by side pictures circulating on Twitter have provided the same comparison, and the outfit verdict was in favor of a former first lady.
> 
> In addition to the MI5 former agent, it appears that the younger gentleman (the handsome one) behind TW is Major Jonny Thompson of the Scot Guard.
> 
> View attachment 5419173


so so handsome


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry’s eyes in the church pictures are completely empty.



This picture together with the little snippet of footage where she was literally batting her eyelashes at him bring me firmly back to feeling sorry for him.


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry
> 
> View attachment 5419197


almost anyone is better looking than Haz.  That scruffy beard does Haz no favors, just adds to his unkempt smelly "look".


----------



## Nutashha

The icy vibes between Sussexes and the Cambridges were real tho!

https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/meghan-harry-didnt-meet-kate-william-queen-jubilee-event


----------



## Chanbal

Today!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## redney

Nutashha said:


> The icy vibes between Sussexes and the Cambridges were real tho!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/meghan-harry-didnt-meet-kate-william-queen-jubilee-event
> View attachment 5419212


Not surprising. The Cambridges had a busy Jubilee schedule, have no trust in HM and TW's motives to meet, and why would they after being publicly slammed to Oprah and a televised audience. Sayonara Sussexes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> Not surprising. The Cambridges had a busy Jubilee schedule, have no trust in HM and TW's motives to meet, and why would they after being publicly slammed to Oprah and a televised audience. *Sayonara Sussexes.*



That could go on a t-shirt.


----------



## bag-mania

If they were wearing microphones I have to believe they would also have worn them the day before when they supposedly brought Lilibet to see the Queen. Let’s see what People reports about it this week after they get home and have turned over their surveillance to Sunshine Sachs.


----------



## Chloe302225

I legitimately don't think H +M were asked to attend anything after the church service. The careful choreography to avoid any interaction couldn't really be accomplished with how everyone is seated at both the concert and pageant. Unless they were to be escorted to the seats with maybe Bea or Eug. But even then everyone would be looking to see if the the couples acknowledged each other. William and Kate can't look back and interact with Zara and Mike without it being awkward that they haven't spoken to M+H.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## redney

I wouldn't be surprised if they lied low for a while after returning to the US until coverage of the Jubilee dies down. They were excluded, publicly booed, and should have received the BRF's loud and clear message they are now minor members of the extended family and distrusted ones at that.

William and his family are the future and are lauded as such - this was made loud and clear throughout the celebrations.


----------



## DoggieBags

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5419211


I don’t think it was flattering on Melania either. It made her look wider in the hips than she actually is.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry
> 
> View attachment 5419197


LOL, you beat me to it! Anyway, he seems worth a second look.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Re: left three hours after church service...so they basically went to Frogmore, changed, instructed someone to pack and left? So childish. Also...what about the mystery birthday party, did they rent a party bus for the way to the airport?

Re: nobody has ever seen the baby. She really was hoping someone would pay big bucks for a photo spread or something, hu?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> LOL, you beat me to it! Anyway, he seems worth a second look.
> View attachment 5419218



It shows what stage of life I am in where the first thing I hone in on in that photo isn’t the gorgeous guy in the kilt, it’s the Queen‘s adorable pony!


----------



## redney

Remember there was gossip shortly after invisibet's birth around the alleged surrogate mother refusing to give up the baby? Wonder if there was any truth to this? If so perhaps it's ongoing or something to do with the surrogate not permitting photos? 

Conspiracy theory I know but the no photo thing is so odd from the attention-seekers.


----------



## DoggieBags

Maggie Muggins said:


> LOL, you beat me to it! Anyway, he seems worth a second look.
> View attachment 5419218


The pony is really cute too. Looks like a Thelwell pony


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


>




People showed up in full force everyday to mark the historic moment with the Queen! This is what Harry and Nutmeg thought and expected to happen for them but it never did and never will


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> LOL, you beat me to it! Anyway, he seems worth a second look.
> View attachment 5419218



The more I look at his pictures, the more I think he looks very much like my German ex-boyfriend  Handsome men I tell you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> People showed up in full force everyday to mark the historic moment with the Queen! This is what Harry and Nutmeg thought and expected to happen for them but it never did and never will



And yet, they could have been a part of it all had their egos not gotten the better of them.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: left three hours after church service...so they basically went to Frogmore, changed, instructed someone to pack and left? So childish. Also...what about the mystery birthday party, did they rent a party bus for the way to the airport?
> 
> Re: nobody has ever seen the baby. She really was hoping someone would pay big bucks for a photo spread or something, hu?


She may have been hoping that the first photos would be the baby with her namesake, The Queen. Those photos would probably have been worth big bucks.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Wasn’t there already a first picture? The Christmas card was it?


----------



## pukasonqo

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5419211


Inspector Gadget vibes on both


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> Remember there was gossip shortly after invisibet's birth around the alleged surrogate mother refusing to give up the baby? Wonder if there was any truth to this? If so perhaps it's ongoing or something to do with the surrogate not permitting photos?
> 
> Conspiracy theory I know but the no photo thing is so odd from the attention-seekers.



My conspiracy theory last year was that the surrogate never gave up the baby and that they had to get another surrogate girl as quickly as they could. The lack of photos was so that nobody would notice how much smaller the child was until she caught up in size. Finally we got the Christmas card photo at the end of the year.


----------



## DoggieBags

A1aGypsy said:


> Wasn’t there already a first picture? The Christmas card was it?


True but nothing since that one Christmas card photo. have there been more pics of Archie since that Christmas card photo?


----------



## redney

DoggieBags said:


> She may have been hoping that the first photos would be the baby with her namesake, The Queen. Those photos would probably have been worth big bucks.


IF - and that's a big IF - HM visited Invisibet, I'm 100% certain no photos were permitted. The Queen is too wise to let that happen.


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> My conspiracy theory last year was that the surrogate never gave up the baby and that they had to get another surrogate girl as quickly as they could. The lack of photos was so that nobody would notice how much smaller the child was until she caught up in size. Finally we got the Christmas card photo at the end of the year.


It's plausible!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> My conspiracy theory last year was that the surrogate never gave up the baby and that they had to get another surrogate girl as quickly as they could. The lack of photos was so that nobody would notice how much smaller the child was until she caught up in size. Finally we got the Christmas card photo at the end of the year.



I will say that rumour never made sense to me because in California, a surrogate is not the legal mother. So she wouldn't have a leg to stand on not wanting to give up someone else's baby.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> It shows what stage of life I am in where the first thing I hone in on in that photo isn’t the gorgeous guy in the kilt, it’s the Queen‘s adorable pony!


 I googled the Major's name and when the pics appeared, of course I saw the pony first, HM second, but then even though I'm 75, I still took the time to admire a fine man in uniform.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> True but nothing since that one Christmas card photo. have there been more pics of Archie since that Christmas card photo?



The truth is narcissists don’t like to share the spotlight, not even with their own kids. The Christmas card photo was of MEGHAN holding up the baby and not of the baby herself.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And yet, they could have been a part of it all had their egos not gotten the better of them.



One of their problems: They want to be the center of attention. 

They have never been good at playing the supporting role unlike the Cornwalls, Cambridges, Anne + Phillips + Tindalls, Wessexes, etc. 

They think if they are somewhere, the event should be about them.


----------



## pukasonqo

The sad thing is that, in the end, both Archie and Lilibet are the losers, no relationship with family and cousins (on both sides) cannot be healthy at all
Do these kids see and interact w other children?


----------



## kkfiregirl

pukasonqo said:


> The sad thing is that, in the end, both Archie and Lilibet are the losers, no relationship with family and cousins (on both sides) cannot healthy at all
> Do these kids see and interact w other children?



I’ll bet their nannies have been instructed to set up play dates with a select few “A-listers.”


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> They have never been good at playing the supporting role unlike the Cornwalls, Cambridges, Anne + Phillips + Tindalls, Wessexes, etc.



…. And yet the supporting role looks pretty dang good to me!


----------



## EverSoElusive

pukasonqo said:


> The sad thing is that, in the end, both Archie and Lilibet are the losers, no relationship with family and cousins (on both sides) cannot healthy at all
> *Do these kids see and interact w other children?*



Unlikely but wasn't Archie going to preschool and other parents were made to park far away or something? I wonder if he's still going. One of the first school pictures papped was of Nutmeg carrying Archie.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> The truth is narcissists don’t like to share the spotlight, not even with their own kids. The Christmas card photo was of MEGHAN holding up the baby and not of the baby herself.



Which one of her parents taught her this behavior?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Here's the picture I'm referring to.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I will say that rumour never made sense to me because in California, a surrogate is not the legal mother. So she wouldn't have a leg to stand on not wanting to give up someone else's baby.



Ah, but a surrogate could be from anywhere. Remember there was a lot of speculation that Archie was from a surrogate in England. All of the exaggerated belly cradling and different sized Moonbump photos were discussed.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> Which one of her parents taught her this behavior?




Well she's an independent girl. She's very smart and everything is self-taught      No one can teach her anything because she'll never listen.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I will say that rumour never made sense to me because in California, a surrogate is not the legal mother. So she wouldn't have a leg to stand on not wanting to give up someone else's baby.



That’s if we think the baby was truly born in California. She could have used a surrogate in Ukraine and picked the baby up on her private jet.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5419211



They've always had a lot in common


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Which one of her parents taught her this behavior?



The one who spoiled her so Thomas would be the likeliest.

I’m of the mind that most narcissists are born, not made, though. Some kids are just born acting like they’re royalty and thinking they are the best.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Ah, but a surrogate could be from anywhere. Remember there was a lot of speculation that Archie was from a surrogate in England. All of the exaggerated belly cradling and different sized Moonbump photos were discussed.



True, but why would you take that kind of risk when it could all be legally soundproof?


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> Well she's an independent girl. She's very smart and everything is self-taught      No one can teach her anything because she'll never listen.



agreed. I meant which one taught her (indirectly) by having the same narcissistic traits.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but why would you take that kind of risk when it could all be legally soundproof?



They’re cheap & a surrogate in the US would be more than they’d want to spend.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True, but why would you take that kind of risk when it could all be legally soundproof?



Ego. They (and especially she) believe they are smarter than anyone else.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5419211



Thing about the trench when it's done up like M, there's an upper edge under that collar that's perfect for a lapel mic


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> The one who spoiled her so Thomas would be the likeliest.
> 
> I’m of the mind that most narcissists are born, not made, though. Some kids are just born acting like they’re royalty and thinking they are the best.




She's the unique Flower. Someone should have told her that she's Belladonna


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry’s eyes in the church pictures are completely empty.


He has the dead look in his eyes as do sharks.


----------



## elvisfan4life

lallybelle said:


> Hmmm....I believe that the kids may have attended, because Zara & Mike and Philip were at the Derby with Princess Anne and I don't recall seeing the kids with them in any pics. They could have been sent over w/ Nanny's etc. BUT I do not believe they stayed at Windsor with the Queen to watch the concert at all for 1 second. They have not attended 1 event since they were booed at the service on Friday, and if the report is to be believed they left already late afternoon yesterday. Also the report of HM meeting Lilli comes into question because I read I think in People that they did not in fact attend the private lunch after Trooping, which is when Scabie claims it happened. But since HM missed all the other events herself, I guess it's up to speculation if at some point they visited at Windsor.


The lunch they swerved was the guildhall on fri they attended the private family lunch at Buckingham palace on thurs


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> I’m of the mind that most narcissists are born, not made, though. Some kids are just born acting like they’re royalty and thinking they are the best.



One would hope their parents wouldn’t indulge that thinking.


----------



## lallybelle

elvisfan4life said:


> The lunch they swerved was the guildhall on fri they attended the private family lunch at Buckingham palace on thurs


Yes I know about that. But I can swear I just read this morning that they didn't attend after Trooping as well. I'm gonna see if I can find it...

Got it, from People so you know it comes from their PR.


"As William and Kate made their way to their seats in the front row, there was no eye contact between the couple and Meghan and Harry, who were seated in the second row alongside Princess Eugenie, Princess Beatrice and their husbands. When Prince Charles passed by the row with Meghan and Harry, he was photographed looking away.
Following the service, many members of the royal family headed to the Lord Mayor's reception at The Guildhall — however, Meghan and Harry did not attend the lunch on Friday, *nor a small family lunch following the Trooping parade on Thursday*."


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5419211


No contest.


----------



## Stansy

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They've always had a lot in common


Except for the excessive PDA  but I will stop now as I don‘t want to be banned from the most entertaining thread on the forum


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It shows what stage of life I am in where the first thing I hone in on in that photo isn’t the gorgeous guy in the kilt, it’s the Queen‘s adorable pony!


You and me both.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> My conspiracy theory last year was that the surrogate never gave up the baby and that they had to get another surrogate girl as quickly as they could. The lack of photos was so that nobody would notice how much smaller the child was until she caught up in size. Finally we got the Christmas card photo at the end of the year.


If it were a surrogate refusing to give up a child, you'd think at least Haz' DNA would have been used and he'd put up a fight for his child?  I'm so confused.  I do find MMM's pregnancies sketchy.  
Full disclosure, I actually know the OBGYN who "delivered" the mystery child and I tried repeatedly to get the real scoop, but she played along like she'd done the delivery.  Who knows.


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> The sad thing is that, in the end, both Archie and Lilibet are the losers, no relationship with family and cousins (on both sides) cannot be healthy at all
> *Do these kids see and interact w other children?*


I'm not sure they even see sunlight!


----------



## Aimee3

I think it’s hilarious the “the gorgeous guy in a kilt” has taken over this thread and I’m all for it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> I think it’s hilarious the “the gorgeous guy in a kilt” has taken over this thread and I’m all for it!


He's good looking for sure, but give me Sam Heughan in a kilt any day of the week.










Just to tie this in...I never want to see Haz in a kilt or really in anything ever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

EverSoElusive said:


> Is he single? Does he look good in a kilt?


I bet he looks Great in a kilt!!


----------



## DoggieBags

EverSoElusive said:


> Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry
> 
> View attachment 5419197


He’s a hunk for sure. But every time I see TQ with her black handbag from now on I’m going to be thinking of marmalade sandwiches lol.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure they even see sunlight!




The only tan they'll ever get is likely from forced spray tan to appear darker to play into their mom's POC and racism storylines. Not that the children ask for it. I have a lot of sympathy for these poor babies.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm at a local dollar store. Lemon pound cake sans olive oil, anyone?


----------



## redney

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm at a local dollar store. Lemon pound cake sans olive oil, anyone?
> 
> View attachment 5419275


Buy it and ship it to The Queen, signed "MM"


----------



## EverSoElusive

DoggieBags said:


> He’s a hunk for sure. But every time I see TQ with her black handbag from now on I’m going to be thinking of marmalade sandwiches lol.



When the Queen has passed on, the skit with Paddington will remind us of the Queen's sense of humor


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chloe302225 said:


> Princess Eugenie's son and Princess Beatrice's stepson make their first official appearances | Daily Mail Online
> View attachment 5419270
> View attachment 5419271


Why post these here and not on the actual jubilee thread ? Over half the posts on here should be on other royal threads and not give this pair the appearance of popularity


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> I have a lot of sympathy for these poor babies.



It’s a good thing then, that they will have enough money to pay for therapy. Many other victims of narcissistic parents aren’t as lucky.


----------



## youngster

redney said:


> Remember there was gossip shortly after invisibet's birth around the alleged surrogate mother refusing to give up the baby? Wonder if there was any truth to this? If so perhaps it's ongoing or something to do with the surrogate not permitting photos?
> 
> Conspiracy theory I know but the no photo thing is so odd from the attention-seekers.



I think Harry is really set on shielding his kids and protecting their privacy while they are young, almost to a fanatical degree. I think he thinks his children will be raised like "regular people" and be able to walk the streets without being recognized. (They may grow up to agree or disagree with this lol.)   It may be the one thing he takes a stand on, and doesn't back down on with TW (who would probably love to be selling their photos and merching their outfits.)

He appears to really resent that aspect of his upbringing, probably didn't give it a thought until he was well into his teens and was caught behaving poorly.  He has such a complicated, weird history with the press though, all rolled up with thoughts of his mother and her death, though he conveniently ignores how Diana courted and used the press ceaselessly, and exacerbated by TW's complaints about her press coverage. Very conveniently ignoring all the mega-positive press they received for years until they brought about their own fall. So, I think hiding the kids is sort of a big middle finger to the press and public to an extent too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> If it were a surrogate refusing to give up a child, you'd think at least Haz' DNA would have been used and he'd put up a fight for his child?  I'm so confused.  I do find MMM's pregnancies sketchy.
> Full disclosure, I actually know the OBGYN who "delivered" the mystery child and I tried repeatedly to get the real scoop, but she played along like she'd done the delivery.  Who knows.




Can't blame her, she could probably be sued into nonexistance. But I do appreciate we have members that actually know people who know them and always try to get the tea for us


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry’s eyes in the church pictures are completely empty.


well, he is reaping what he has sown
If he doesn't like it, he has himself and his WIFE to thank


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> The only tan they'll ever get is likely from forced spray tan to appear darker to play into their mom's POC and racism storylines. Not that the children ask for it. *I have a lot of sympathy for these poor babies*.


So do I. I have a feeling there’s a therapist somewhere whose future vacation home(s) and children’s college tuition will be bankrolled by these two little fellows.  I sincerely hope I’m wrong.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I think Harry is really set on shielding his kids and protecting their privacy while they are young, almost to a fanatical degree. I think he thinks his children will be raised like "regular people" and be able to walk the streets without being recognized. (They may grow up to agree or disagree with this lol.)   It may be the one thing he takes a stand on, and doesn't back down on with TW (who would probably love to be selling their photos and merching their outfits.)



I think it's two aspects. I do think Harry really wants to protect his kids - but he's also participated in the rare pictures and videos and I can totally see him do the Cambridge approach with a few pictures a year in exchange to leaving the kids alone the rest of the time. I do think the obnoxiousness - really, the only thing missing is pulling a Michael Jackson and taking the kids out with a bag over their heads - comes from Raptor as a big, fat middle finger to the world...who might just not care as much as she thinks


----------



## Lounorada

purseinsanity said:


> Your posts are too far and few in between, but when they pop up, it's like Christmas morning!








PurseUOut said:


> Those who think Harry will divorce Meghan and return to the U.S. are living in a fantasy world.
> He has a wife who gracefully takes the hits for his choice to flee royal life in the U.K. His wife is beautiful, poised, intelligent and raises his stock much more than when he was single. He is seen now as a respectable man for defending his biracial wife and protecting his now multi-racial family. His wife looks at least a decade younger than she is and along with that I am sure he is pleased in all aspects of their marriage (as being with a woman of a certain age and level of experience will do). There is absolutely no incentive for him to ever leave her, especially for a younger ditzy doe-eyed polo girl - the same ones throwing themselves at him prior to meeting Meghan so what is the appeal of them now. As long as Meghan wants the marriage to continue he is there and happily so. He's not going anywhere.










DoggieBags said:


> Further to my post #94,217. I have to point out that they are clinging desperately to titles that spring from an institution they claim to despise. If the BRF is the racist, cruel, unfeeling institution the Harkles claim it is, then why do they continue to style themselves the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? You can’t have it both ways. But they sure are trying to make as much money off their titles as they can while simultaneously sniping and taking potshots at the BRF. Respect is earned and neither of the Harkles has done anything post marriage to merit either their royal titles or earn the respect they shrilly insist at every turn is their due. Just More of their hypocrisy.


Well said! I couldn't agree more.








Chanbal said:


> Even you DM!





Poor simple little fools. Always trying desperately to control the narrative yet failing miserably.


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> I think Harry is really set on shielding his kids and protecting their privacy while they are young, almost to a fanatical degree. I think he thinks his children will be raised like "regular people" and be able to walk the streets without being recognized. (They may grow up to agree or disagree with this lol.)   It may be the one thing he takes a stand on, and doesn't back down on with TW (who would probably love to be selling their photos and merching their outfits.)
> 
> He appears to really resent that aspect of his upbringing, probably didn't give it a thought until he was well into his teens and was caught behaving poorly.  He has such a complicated, weird history with the press though, all rolled up with thoughts of his mother and her death, though he conveniently ignores how Diana courted and used the press ceaselessly, and exacerbated by TW's complaints about her press coverage. Very conveniently ignoring all the mega-positive press they received for years until they brought about their own fall. So, I think hiding the kids is sort of a big middle finger to the press and public to an extent too.


How “regular people” will his kids be if they are smothered in security all their lives? I hope they don’t grow up to see only the life of privilege with no sense of responsibility but with the it’s all about me example being set by their parents who knows how they will turn out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chloe302225 said:


> Princess Eugenie's son and Princess Beatrice's stepson make their first official appearances | Daily Mail Online
> View attachment 5419270
> View attachment 5419271


So cool, I had not seen the children in other snaps, great they could come  

And this kind of debunks the idea that H&M could not come because they would have left A & L alone at Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh -


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> One would hope their parents wouldn’t indulge that thinking.



You would hope so but a true narcissist is like a force of nature. People tend to do whatever it takes to get along with them and unfortunately often that means making concessions to appease them to keep the peace.


----------



## bag-mania

Chloe302225 said:


> Princess Eugenie's son and Princess Beatrice's stepson make their first official appearances | Daily Mail Online
> View attachment 5419270
> View attachment 5419271



Wow, proud parents like to be seen with their children on momentous occasions. What a novel concept!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think it's two aspects. I do think Harry really wants to protect his kids - but he's also participated in the rare pictures and videos and I can totally see him do the Cambridge approach with a few pictures a year in exchange to leaving the kids alone the rest of the time. I do think the obnoxiousness - really, the only thing missing is pulling a Michael Jackson and taking the kids out with a bag over their heads - comes from Raptor as a big, fat middle finger to the world...who might just not care as much as she thinks



Generally, the Sucka$s3s think very highly of themselves. They always conjure up these images of being hounded by paparazzi. However, it's been proven many times that is far from the truth. Not that many people are interested to photograph or cheer on them when they are in public.

The Cambridges on the other hand, while they don't thrust their children into the spotlight, they personally release a few personal pictures every year and their children are photographed during royal engagements, feeding the public an appropriate dose of their kids. 

There are some paparazzi shots or some photos by private citizens who happened to spot the Cambridges, but have we seen an intrusive amount? No, not really. Remember a picture I shared recently of Kate, George and Charlotte either walking to or from their school? Most people in the picture weren't even paying attention to them so why do Harry and Co. feel the need to "shield" their kids citing privacy and security concerns? The delusions are alarming.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry’s eyes in the church pictures are completely empty.



That's because there's nothing in his head


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pretty sure QE’s green hat and coat were throwing shade at MM.  The black button definitely gave microphone vibes. Checkmate.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Pretty sure QE’s green hat and coat were throwing shade at MM.  The black button definitely gave microphone vibes. Checkmate.




They think they can outplay the Queen. The Queen is far superior and brilliant. She's dealt with enough fools that this is considered child's play for her


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> So cool, I had not seen the children in other snaps, great they could come
> 
> And this kind of debunks the idea that H&M could not come because they would have left A & L alone at Frogmore Cottage.


PS all the kids at the London show, especially 1 year old August, kind of debunks the idea that the "royal" kids were at the Frogmore birthday as stated in various PR releases 
No one in their right mind would have driven round trip London-Windsor in the Jubilee traffic jam


----------



## catlover46

Lady Colin Campbell has a new video up on YouTube.


----------



## VickyB

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently she had a microphone under her collar. I've not seen the footage myself but  you could see it as she was getting out of the car.


Interesting!!! right when she got out of the car, H said something and she nervously fiddled with her collar!!!


----------



## redney

Their Netflix bosses will be very disappointed with the lack of footage and recordings. All they've got are the church service, the boos from the crowds, Harry dropping an f-bomb, and chatter between them in the car and amongst the staff at Invisibet's birthday party. No photos with high ranking BRF, no front-row vantage points at Jubilee events.


----------



## redney

I'm certain the dastardly duo is the furthest from their thoughts. Kate lives rent-free in Nutmeg's head, not the other way around.


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry
> 
> View attachment 5419197



As they say...."EASY ON THE EYES" !!!


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> It’s a good thing then, that they will have enough money to pay for therapy. Many other victims of narcissistic parents aren’t as lucky.


If their parents don't spend it all on BS PR first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Can't blame her, she could probably be sued into nonexistance*. But I do appreciate we have members that actually know people who know them and always try to get the tea for us


Definitely.  In addition, HIPPA laws are strict.  She could lose her license.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like newspapers keep reporting on a meeting with QE and a b-day party based on speculations by a certain source… Scoobie? 

_*The queen*, who was not well enough to make most of her own Jubilee celebrations, *did not attend*. Laid up at Windsor with mobility problems, she was in her “comfy clothes” watching the racing on TV, as Zara later told reporters at the Derby horse race. HM is believed to be gathering her strength in the hope she can make a balcony appearance Sunday to wrap up the four-day weekend.

*William and Kate, meanwhile**, made it amply clear they were not attending Lilibet’s first birthday party, and nor were their children, by the simple expedient of making a high profile public appearance hundreds of miles away in Cardiff with George and Charlotte Saturday.*

Online joy was visible however, with birthday wishes for Lilibet issuing forth from the social media accounts of the Royal Family, Charles and Camilla, and Will and Kate. *In private, it is known that the queen met her namesake for the first time at a private meeting with Harry and his family.*

*The Sun says** Harry and Meghan “held an informal garden party at Frogmore Cottage, on the royal estate, with a birthday cake, balloons, party games and picnic snacks.”*_









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Hold First Birthday Party for Lilibet. No Senior Royals Went.
					

Senior royals sent well-wishes online, but did not attend Lilibet’s first birthday party. Plus, Kate shows off her kids’ baking skills as the final day of Jubilee revelry dawns.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				




_Royal commentator *Omid Scobie* speculated that Thursday was likely to have been the "first moment or the first chance for her [the Queen] to meet her namesake".

*However there has been no confirmation whether the Queen has met her great-granddaughter.
The couple stepped down as senior royals in early 2020 and moved to the US.

Neither Lilibet nor her older brother Archie have been seen in public since they arrived in the country for the weekend's celebrations*._









						Harry and Meghan: Royals wish Lilibet a happy first birthday
					

Senior royals tweet birthday wishes to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's daughter as she turns one.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Chanbal

Yeah! It's unbelievable without a pic.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Someone please tell me the jet has landed back in the USA


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> If their parents don't spend it all on BS PR first.



I think some kind family members would give them a loan …


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It looks like newspapers keep reporting on a meeting with QE and a b-day party based on speculations by a certain source… Scoobie?
> 
> _*The queen*, who was not well enough to make most of her own Jubilee celebrations, *did not attend*. Laid up at Windsor with mobility problems, she was in her “comfy clothes” watching the racing on TV, as Zara later told reporters at the Derby horse race. HM is believed to be gathering her strength in the hope she can make a balcony appearance Sunday to wrap up the four-day weekend.
> 
> *William and Kate, meanwhile**, made it amply clear they were not attending Lilibet’s first birthday party, and nor were their children, by the simple expedient of making a high profile public appearance hundreds of miles away in Cardiff with George and Charlotte Saturday.*
> 
> Online joy was visible however, with birthday wishes for Lilibet issuing forth from the social media accounts of the Royal Family, Charles and Camilla, and Will and Kate. *In private, it is known that the queen met her namesake for the first time at a private meeting with Harry and his family.*
> 
> *The Sun says** Harry and Meghan “held an informal garden party at Frogmore Cottage, on the royal estate, with a birthday cake, balloons, party games and picnic snacks.”*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Hold First Birthday Party for Lilibet. No Senior Royals Went.
> 
> 
> Senior royals sent well-wishes online, but did not attend Lilibet’s first birthday party. Plus, Kate shows off her kids’ baking skills as the final day of Jubilee revelry dawns.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Royal commentator *Omid Scobie* speculated that Thursday was likely to have been the "first moment or the first chance for her [the Queen] to meet her namesake".
> 
> *However there has been no confirmation whether the Queen has met her great-granddaughter.
> The couple stepped down as senior royals in early 2020 and moved to the US.
> 
> Neither Lilibet nor her older brother Archie have been seen in public since they arrived in the country for the weekend's celebrations*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan: Royals wish Lilibet a happy first birthday
> 
> 
> Senior royals tweet birthday wishes to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's daughter as she turns one.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


I'm getting so tired of reading, "The couple *stepped down* as senior royals" blah blah blah.  It's as annoying as the sweet nods!


----------



## RAINDANCE

purseinsanity said:


> Definitely.  In addition, HIPPA laws are strict.  She could lose her license.


Would be interesting to find out if Megan had an elective c section at 39 weeks for her second pregnancy so the birth date fell "right". 
I don't belive any surogacy rumours to be true. Her body shape changed too much post both pregnancies. I do think IVF was used, if not for Archie then definitely for Lili. And gender selection which is not allowed here in the UK ( or may be in certain very specific circumstances)


----------



## kkfiregirl

RAINDANCE said:


> Would be interesting to find out if Megan had an elective c section at 39 weeks for her second pregnancy so the birth date fell "right".



It’s definitely possible, and easy to request, especially if she had one with Archie.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jet allegedly left the Uk this afternoon


----------



## Lodpah

I’m sure Montecito is stocked up with plates for their return. I predict a War of the Roses scenario between those two, shortly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I’m sure Montecito is stocked up with plates for their return. I predict a War of the Roses scenario between those two, shortly.



One can hope! (no, I don't enjoy drama and divorces, I just think it would be much better for Harry's mental health to be far, far away from her)


----------



## Chanbal

This seems to be the question of the day! 


I bet @elvisfan4life is ready to answer the question below with a big YES! (back in Montecito)  

TW seemed surprised when they were shown the 'wrong side' of 2nd row… Though, the handsome major seemed to be expecting them…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I've made it half-way through Lady C's newest, and she says while she wrote her book on the troublesome two Omid Scobie harrassed her and she had her publisher tell him to "bugger off"


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm getting a bit more concerned. Is there any proof of Doria's life? Nutmeg hasn't paraded her mom around for a long time. Also, what's the update on Thomas? I don't suppose Nutmeg would drop by to visit him en route to LA


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> This seems to be the question of the day!
> 
> 
> I bet @elvisfan4life is ready to answer the question below with a big YES! (back in Montecito)
> 
> TW seemed surprised when they were shown the 'wrong side' of 2nd row… Though, the handsome major seemed to be expecting them…





Why, thank you for showing me Handsome Major in motion


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Harriet is a wise woman. Her first tweet wondered why they couldn't make it through even one public occasion without excessive PDA.


----------



## Lodpah

If the Queen can even “soften” the heart of the North Korean dictator by him sending a message then I pity whatever amateurish plots the dastardly two try. I’m sure they’re on the radar now by Intelligence sources for any “drama” they might cause and I hope nipped in the bud.

Netflix is not reading the room right and they deserve the loss of their gazzilion dollars they paid out to those two, if they even paid upfront.

I’m really trying to find something redeemable about them to say something positive but their attempt at spy craft failed miserably.

Well done to the mostly blackout media on them. Hopefully the only thing that’s going to be reported from now is what she’s wearing as they both failed to make an “impact” on the world.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> Jet allegedly left the Uk this afternoon


In this case they may have hosted a b-day party at the cottage with imaginary friends on Saturday. Oh Gosh, this is exhausting!


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Why, thank you for showing me Handsome Major in motion


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> The pony is really cute too. Looks like a Thelwell pony



Prob once I read through, someone will have written. A black Shetland pony is the mascot of the Blackwatch. Shetland ponies are the cutest ever (my neighbour has one in her back garden).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm getting a bit more concerned. Is there any proof of Doria's life? Nutmeg hasn't paraded her mom around for a long time. Also, what's the update on Thomas? I don't suppose Nutmeg would drop by to visit him en route to LA



She was there when they bought themselves that award. So she was alive earlier this year.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> If the Queen can even “soften” the heart of the North Korean dictator by him sending a message then I pity whatever amateurish plots the dastardly two try. I’m sure they’re on the radar now by Intelligence sources for any “drama” they might cause and I hope nipped in the bud.
> 
> Netflix is not reading the room right and they deserve the loss of their gazzilion dollars they paid out to those two, if they even paid upfront.
> 
> I’m really trying to find something redeemable about them to say something positive but their attempt at spy craft failed miserably.
> 
> Well done to the mostly blackout media on them. Hopefully the only thing that’s going to be reported from now is what she’s wearing as they both failed to make an “impact” on the world.


I did see some stupid report (yahoo maybe) about how cute it was that harry was mugging in church

here it is








						Prince Louis’s Faces Stole the Show Yesterday—Today It Was Prince Harry’s
					

Yesterday, Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee weekend kicked off with the annual Trooping the Colour ceremony (AKA her birthday #2...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> In this case they may have hosted a b-day party at the cottage with imaginary friends on Saturday. Oh Gosh, this is exhausting!



I mean, we all have seen Raptor talk to her imaginary friends in public when everyone else was ignoring her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Prob once I read through, someone will have written. A black Shetland pony is the mascot of the Blackwatch. Shetland ponies are the cutest ever (my neighbour has one in her back garden).



Aw, that makes me sad. Horses are not meant to be kept alone.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> no, I don't enjoy drama and divorces



I do, which is why I love this thread!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was there when they bought themselves that award. So she was alive earlier this year.



That sure has been a good minute. I wonder if she's been allowed to see the kids   She was used to the max during the wedding period, now she's almost as good as Marked like Thomas.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I did see some stupid report (yahoo maybe) about how cute it was that harry was mugging in church
> 
> here it is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Louis’s Faces Stole the Show Yesterday—Today It Was Prince Harry’s
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee weekend kicked off with the annual Trooping the Colour ceremony (AKA her birthday #2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



I don't know...a 4yo making faces is much cuter than a 40yo in my book, but what do I know.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw, that makes me sad. Horses are not meant to be kept alone.



She was a problem 'child'. Many companion animals were tried. I should also say that the 'garden' is a field and the field is next to a park.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Why, thank you for showing me Handsome Major in motion


Just for you @EverSoElusive  It's really enjoyable full screen!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She was a problem 'child'. Many companion animals were tried. I should also say that the 'garden' is a field and the field is next to a park.



My friend just bought a mini shetland for her daughter. It's the cutest little pinto coloured thing.


----------



## Tilis

Maggie Muggins said:


> LOL, you beat me to it! Anyway, he seems worth a second look.
> View attachment 5419218


It does indeed  Amazing what the right man can do for a kilt


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for you @EverSoElusive  It's really enjoyable full screen!





You're too kind   He is a sight to behold.


----------



## Chanbal

DM got a lip-reader.  Nefl*x will have so much material, those microphones must have captured every single word. Profound dialogues…  

*Harry and Meghan talking in the congregation  *

_Harry: 'So when we go...and then we have to… that's together...'

Megan: 'Yes...(nods)...should be fun (laughs).'

*At the end of the service*

Meghan to Harry: 'What?'

Meghan to Harry: 'Yes it was great.'

*Harry and Meghan speaking with Zara and Mike Tindall*

(As they leave the cathedral the four wait on the steps).

Harry: 'Hi here we are, let’s wait here for the car.'

Zara: 'Which one is your car?'

Harry: 'Aaahhh it’s the Range Rover.'

Meghan: 'Aaah yes there it is, the Range Rover, it's right there.'

Harry to Zara: 'Love your outfit. I didn’t know what colours you would wear blue, pink, orange.'

Zara turns and giggles, Meghan says: 'You look great.'_









						Lip reader reveals what the royals said at St Paul's Jubilee service
					

A lip reading expert has revealed some conversations shared by  royals as they attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service at St Paul's in central London today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> DM got a lip-reader.  Nefl*x will have so much material, those microphones must have captured every single word.
> 
> *Harry and Meghan talking in the congregation  *
> 
> _Harry: 'So when we go...and then we have to… that's together...'
> 
> Megan: 'Yes...(nods)...should be fun (laughs).'
> 
> *At the end of the service*
> 
> Meghan to Harry: 'What?'
> 
> Meghan to Harry: 'Yes it was great.'
> 
> *Harry and Meghan speaking with Zara and Mike Tindall*
> 
> (As they leave the cathedral the four wait on the steps).
> 
> Harry: 'Hi here we are, let’s wait here for the car.'
> 
> Zara: 'Which one is your car?'
> 
> Harry: 'Aaahhh it’s the Range Rover.'
> 
> Meghan: 'Aaah yes there it is, the Range Rover, it's right there.'
> 
> Harry to Zara: 'Love your outfit. I didn’t know what colours you would wear blue, pink, orange.'
> 
> Zara turns and giggles, Meghan says: 'You look great.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lip reader reveals what the royals said at St Paul's Jubilee service
> 
> 
> A lip reading expert has revealed some conversations shared by  royals as they attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service at St Paul's in central London today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


pretty mundane stuff


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> pretty mundane stuff



Nobody wants to talk to them beyond weather updates just in case their words get twisted


----------



## catlover46

I think Harry is about to go scorched earth on his family in the next few weeks. I could totally see him accusing The Queen,Phillip,and Charles of having Diana murdered. H&M are horrible people.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm getting a bit more concerned. Is there any proof of Doria's life? Nutmeg hasn't paraded her mom around for a long time. Also, what's the update on Thomas? I don't suppose Nutmeg would drop by to visit him en route to LA





QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was there when they bought themselves that award. So she was alive earlier this year.


The rumor is that Doria traveled to the UK with TW and Hazz. It makes sense to bring Doria, she can make sure that no photos are taken of the kid(s) during the Harkles absence.


----------



## sdkitty

catlover46 said:


> I think Harry is about to go scorched earth on his family in the next few weeks. I could totally see him accusing The Queen,Phillip,and Charles of having Diana murdered. H&M are horrible people.


if he does that will mean to me that he's a nut case...we'll see


----------



## marietouchet

catlover46 said:


> I think Harry is about to go scorched earth on his family in the next few weeks. I could totally see him accusing The Queen,Phillip,and Charles of having Diana murdered. H&M are horrible people.


Well, the relationship with his family is toast already


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if they intended to go to the Guildhall luncheon, but due to their activities (showing up late and miked) their chauffeur was instructed to take them back to Frogmore.  Perhaps was also instructed to show up a few minutes late, so they’d have to wait outside the church and hear the boos.

honestly, this event offered the duo the barest inclusion.  After this, there will probably be no reception at all.  I wonder if they will even be invited to the funeral.


----------



## catlover46

sdkitty said:


> if he does that will mean to me that he's a nut case...we'll see


I think he’s not right and was good at masking it until Meghan came along.


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, it has been confirmed that they departed today probably by private jet…   










						Harry and Meghan jet back to America BEFORE end of Platinum Jubilee
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were seen for the last time in public on Friday at the Thanksgiving service in St Paul's Cathedral before they flew back home when the Jubilee Pageant kicked off.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_The California-based couple missed tens of thousands of Union Flag-waving revellers celebrating eccentric British quirks over the past seven decades such as Daleks, space hoppers and James Bond cars.

*They also skipped the Queen's final appearance of the Jubilee.* She made a surprise visit to Buckingham Palace to wave at huge crowds.

*Harry and Meghan's 10,000-mile round trip from California is estimated to have cost £160,000 - yet it is not known who footed the bill.*_









						Meghan & Harry jet back to America BEFORE Queen's jubilee ends
					

HARRY and Meghan jetted back out of the country an hour before the royals appeared for a final time at the Queen’s Jubilee. The Sussexes and their two children Archie, aged three, and one-yea…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

They have kept Sunshine Sachs busy all weekend. Check out the revisionist history from _People_. They are now trying to spin H&M leaving England as being due to a rift between the brothers. Absolutely no mention of Meghan being the cause of it.

The complex dynamic between William, 39, and Harry, 37, has had a ripple effect across the wider family — including, of course, Meghan and Harry's decision to step back from senior royal duty and relocate with their family to California.

Some who know the brothers feel there were several issues that built upon one another, while one well-placed source previously told PEOPLE that the rift can't be easily put down to one thing. But insiders have repeatedly noted that Harry's special bond with his grandmother Queen Elizabeth, 96, remains intact.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Miss Final Day of Queen's Jubilee Celebration
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry did not join the royal family at the Platinum Jubilee Pageant on Sunday, the final event of Queen Elizbeth's Jubilee celebrations




					people.com


----------



## bag-mania

catlover46 said:


> I think he’s not right and was good at masking it until Meghan came along.



I think the family covered for his youthful indiscretions many times over the years. Only when he misbehaved publicly did we ever hear about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They have kept Sunshine Sachs busy all weekend. Check out the revisionist history from _People_. They are now trying to spin H&M leaving England as being due to a rift between the brothers. Absolutely no mention of Meghan being the cause of it.
> 
> The complex dynamic between William, 39, and Harry, 37, has had a ripple effect across the wider family — including, of course, Meghan and Harry's decision to step back from senior royal duty and relocate with their family to California.
> 
> Some who know the brothers feel there were several issues that built upon one another, while one well-placed source previously told PEOPLE that the rift can't be easily put down to one thing. But insiders have repeatedly noted that Harry's special bond with his grandmother Queen Elizabeth, 96, remains intact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Miss Final Day of Queen's Jubilee Celebration
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry did not join the royal family at the Platinum Jubilee Pageant on Sunday, the final event of Queen Elizbeth's Jubilee celebrations
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


A well placed source is likely Scoobie or TW. Will made sure to be seen in public all the time that the Harkles were in the UK. He didn't give them any chances to make up stories of him attending Lilib's birthday party…

A well placed source is now spreading the rumor that the Harkles watched some of the celebrations on TV with QE in Windsor. I believe they did, but the Harkles were at the Cottage and the queen at the Castle.


----------



## kemilia

redney said:


> Their Netflix bosses will be very disappointed with the lack of footage and recordings. All they've got are the church service, the boos from the crowds, Harry dropping an f-bomb, and chatter between them in the car and amongst the staff at Invisibet's birthday party. No photos with high ranking BRF, no front-row vantage points at Jubilee events.


When did H drop the F bomb? I missed that (spending too much time watching TW adjust the microphone *UNDER HER COLLAR LIKE NO COULD SEE THAT!*).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

catlover46 said:


> I think he’s not right and was good at masking it until Meghan came along.


Harry's Previous Girlfriends 
Dufus frequently behaved like an a$$hole and relished being known as the bad boy prince and he never seemed to be at a loss for date. Some ladies dated him for the publicity, some to brag about dating a prince and some really tried to help him mend his ways, but when Dufus refused to change, they left and instead of maligning him they simply stated they couldn't cope with royal life. It seems TW got the booby prize.


----------



## rose60610

They left an hour before the Jubilee ended? B-b-b-b-but I thought Harry wants to "make sure" TQ has "the right people around her".  And isn't there at least footage of the Sussex Squad of getting out of their car to board their plane? We could see if Doria was with them. Unless they made her fly commercial economy back to CA. It'd be more than M's father would get. 

Will Netflix fire them? Sue them for breach of contract? Is slandering the BRF of killing Diana their last card to play to appease the Netflix bosses?  Will they create a documentary a la The DaVinci Code insinuating that Charles etc killed her?  

We only saw two of Meghan's outfits. It'd be interesting to see if they had packed lots of suitcases/trunks to take many more outfits they intended to wear----but weren't allowed to go anywhere else to show them off.  Aww.


----------



## Aimee3

kemilia said:


> When did H drop the F bomb? I missed that (spending too much time watching TW adjust the microphone *UNDER HER COLLAR LIKE NO COULD SEE THAT!*).


The lip reader said Haz said it when people were booing and the car to pick them up hadn’t arrived yet.  He wanted to get the h3ll out of there.


----------



## Chanbal

On the microphones!


----------



## bag-mania

We don’t give Andrew credit for having any sense but I think he showed it this time. He knew how it would be and he decided to spare himself the humiliation of being a second tier royal and a target of public distain. Hopefully he also didn’t want to be a distraction on his mother’s big weekend.

A coincidental case of Covid indeed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

elvisfan4life said:


> What a fab pic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5419048



Will MM claim she invented wearing jeans?




redney said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if they lied low for a while after returning to the US until coverage of the Jubilee dies down. They were excluded, publicly booed, and should have received the BRF's loud and clear message they are now minor members of the extended family and distrusted ones at that.
> 
> William and his family are the future and are lauded as such - this was made loud and clear throughout the celebrations.



They SHOULD lay low, but can’t manage to STFU.


----------



## KellyObsessed

*I’m watching a wonderful documentary; The Queen and Canada, on CBC .  The Queen has visited Canada many times and has warm relations with many former Prime Ministers, and this documentary is so heartwarming.

Listening to Jean Chretien’s recollection of the “ radio hoaxer” brings back memories!  She thought he was drunk!
The Queen certainly has a sense of humour!

I felt so much pride as a Canadian to see Prince Charles, Prince William and Princess Anne all riding Canadian horses gifted by the RCMP in this Jubilee Trooping The Colour.    The Queen’s favourite horse Burmese was also a gift from Canada’s RCMP. 
It was a wonderful Jubilee celebration.*


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I did see some stupid report (yahoo maybe) about how cute it was that harry was mugging in church
> 
> here it is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Louis’s Faces Stole the Show Yesterday—Today It Was Prince Harry’s
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee weekend kicked off with the annual Trooping the Colour ceremony (AKA her birthday #2...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Cute on a 4 year old.  An almost 40 year old?  Not so much.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know...a 4yo making faces is much cuter than a 40yo in my book, but what do I know.


I swear I need to read the whole thread before I post!  I keep posting exactly what you said earlier.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> pretty mundane stuff


May as well have talked about the weather!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> We don’t give Andrew credit for having any sense but I think he showed it this time. He knew how it would be and he decided to spare himself the humiliation of being a second tier royal and a target of public distain. Hopefully he also didn’t want to be a distraction on his mother’s big weekend.
> 
> A coincidental case of Covid indeed.


Someone else asked whether Andrew's Covid is as contagious as the regular Covid? Great question!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Some outlets are reporting that Harry and Meghan had a secret meeting with Charles. No way do I believe that is true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Some outlets are reporting that Harry and Meghan had a secret meeting with Charles. No way do I believe that is true.


I read somewhere that the Harkles were seen leaving Clarence House prior to the Thanksgiving service. If that was the case, they would be already wired. Allegedly, of course!


----------



## bellecate

Did they actually bring the unseen children?


----------



## Chanbal

This doesn't make any sense, would they travel without the kids? The BRF posted birthday wishes to Lilib, they must have some evidence the girl exists. Also, if they left the kids in Montecito, I would think they would like to spend the 1st b-day with the kid. Would the kids be traveling with Doria in a separate car?


----------



## redney

The plot thickens. Could the kids be in a separate car with nannies? Or did the DUMBartons lie about bringing the kids? So weird!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm getting so tired of reading, "The couple *stepped down* as senior royals" blah blah blah.  It's as annoying as the sweet nods!


Me too and a sweet nod to never hearing it again


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> We don’t give Andrew credit for having any sense but I think he showed it this time. He knew how it would be and he decided to spare himself the humiliation of being a second tier royal and a target of public distain. Hopefully he also didn’t want to be a distraction on his mother’s big weekend.
> 
> A coincidental case of Covid indeed.


When he watched the coverage and heard the boos the Harkles received, he was glad he stayed home.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> The plot thickens. Could the kids be in a separate car with nannies? Or did the DUMBartons lie about bringing the kids? So weird!


Maybe they sold them. They need money.


----------



## Chanbal

According to NS, allegedly: 
The Harkles were offered tickets to the big party on Saturday night, but not to the royal box. So they watched the show at Frogmore Cottage.
TW is looking for a place to park the bench in the UK, a sponsor for the Pearl. She had several meetings.


----------



## Chanbal

News from the Aussies: _*Harry and Meghan are reaping the consequences of being 'talentless self-promoters'*_


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> Did they actually bring the unseen children?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5419526


They put them in the trunk. Those two DON’T want any competition for the camera (sarc intended).


----------



## Chanbal

Prince William and Prince Harry: brothers at arm’s length
					

In the end, after all the sound and fury of the past two years, the return of the royal drama queens was notable for its lack of drama. Some at the Palace feare




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

Glum-looking H & M are back home in California.      When the Sussexes arrived back in California on Sunday, equipment that appeared to be a high chair was seen being offloaded from the plane.



> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...leaving-UK-Queens-Platinum-Jubilee-ended.html
> 
> *Harry and Meghan back in California after leaving the UK before the Queen's Platinum Jubilee ended*
> 
> *Their children Lilibet and Archie were not seen, but baby equipment could be seen being offloaded from the private jet when they arrived back in America*
> A glum-looking Prince Harry has arrived back in California with Meghan Markle and their children as it emerged they left Britain on a private jet before the grand finale of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee even began yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is seen in the passenger seat of a vehicle while being driven away from the airport in Santa Barbara, California
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When the Sussexes arrived back in California on Sunday, equipment that appeared to be a high chair was seen being offloaded from the plane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan took a private jet from the UK back to America after the Queen's Jubilee


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> A well placed source is likely Scoobie or TW. Will made sure to be seen in public all the time that the Harkles were in the UK. He didn't give them any chances to make up stories of him attending Lilib's birthday party…
> 
> A well placed source is now spreading the rumor that the Harkles watched some of the celebrations on TV with QE in Windsor. I believe they did, but the Harkles were at the Cottage and the queen at the Castle.



Harry may have watched, but Raptor was probably washing her weave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

KellyObsessed said:


> *I felt so much pride as a Canadian to see Prince Charles, Prince William and Princess Anne all riding Canadian horses gifted by the RCMP in this Jubilee Trooping The Colour.    The Queen’s favourite horse Burmese was also a gift from Canada’s RCMP.
> It was a wonderful Jubilee celebration.*



I remember Burmese! It was a massive horse for such a small person, and I think after she retired The Queen stopped riding in the parade.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Hermes Zen said:


> Glum-looking H & M are back home in California.      When the Sussexes arrived back in California on Sunday, equipment that appeared to be a high chair was seen being offloaded from the plane.


I’m still so annoyed by their continual private jet usage. Hey Queen E! Charles! If you are wondering what unnecessary expenses are making the royal family unpopular during a cost of living crisis this might be a good place to start….

Its very odd there’s no images of the kids even in passing. I do think they just didn’t bring them.

Part of me thinks it’s all fake then part of me wonders whether the poor little girl is disabled and the parents use it as excuse to lock her and her brother up to ‘protect them’. This would go as far as using child actors for their few photo ops. Of course, being isolated and treated as too taboo to even be seen is no life for anyone and is completely dehumanising to the disabled individual but given the couple are obsessed with the limelight it wouldn’t be hard for them to convince themselves they are being honourable and sparing their kids being bullied.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

Hermes Zen said:


> Glum-looking H & M are back home in California.      When the Sussexes arrived back in California on Sunday, equipment that appeared to be a high chair was seen being offloaded from the plane.


Why do you need to travel w a high chair? I am sure they could have borrowed one from family
Maybe it is a throne a la Posh and Becks wedding


----------



## elvisfan4life

elvisfan4life said:


> Jet allegedly left the Uk this afternoon



Phew!!! Finally pics of them landing over the pond hurrah


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> This seems to be the question of the day!
> 
> 
> I bet @elvisfan4life is ready to answer the question below with a big YES! (back in Montecito)
> 
> TW seemed surprised when they were shown the 'wrong side' of 2nd row… Though, the handsome major seemed to be expecting them…



 Happy as the happiest person in the universe !!! Hurrah


----------



## duna

EverSoElusive said:


> Here's the picture I'm referring to.
> 
> View attachment 5419229



Seeing this pic again makes me think that no heavily pregnant woman, in this case for real, would carry such a heavy burdern, Archie must be over 10 kilos plus rucksack.....could it really be a moon bump?? I would NEVER EVER have carried such a weight, especially at the end of my 4 pregnancies , and they were all very easy pregnancies. This woman is fathomless.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> If the Queen can even “soften” the heart of the North Korean dictator by him sending a message then I pity whatever amateurish plots the dastardly two try. I’m sure they’re on the radar now by Intelligence sources for any “drama” they might cause and I hope nipped in the bud.
> 
> Netflix is not reading the room right and they deserve the loss of their gazzilion dollars they paid out to those two, if they even paid upfront.
> 
> I’m really trying to find something redeemable about them to say something positive but their attempt at spy craft failed miserably.
> 
> Well done to the mostly blackout media on them. Hopefully the only thing that’s going to be reported from now is what she’s wearing as they both failed to make an “impact” on the world.


 Have they failed though ??? I fear what is to come she looked so smug I’m sure she has more evil on the way


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> DM got a lip-reader.  Nefl*x will have so much material, those microphones must have captured every single word. Profound dialogues…
> 
> *Harry and Meghan talking in the congregation  *
> 
> _Harry: 'So when we go...and then we have to… that's together...'
> 
> Megan: 'Yes...(nods)...should be fun (laughs).'
> 
> *At the end of the service*
> 
> Meghan to Harry: 'What?'
> 
> Meghan to Harry: 'Yes it was great.'
> 
> *Harry and Meghan speaking with Zara and Mike Tindall*
> 
> (As they leave the cathedral the four wait on the steps).
> 
> Harry: 'Hi here we are, let’s wait here for the car.'
> 
> Zara: 'Which one is your car?'
> 
> Harry: 'Aaahhh it’s the Range Rover.'
> 
> Meghan: 'Aaah yes there it is, the Range Rover, it's right there.'
> 
> Harry to Zara: 'Love your outfit. I didn’t know what colours you would wear blue, pink, orange.'
> 
> Zara turns and giggles, Meghan says: 'You look great.'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lip reader reveals what the royals said at St Paul's Jubilee service
> 
> 
> A lip reading expert has revealed some conversations shared by  royals as they attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service at St Paul's in central London today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


 Just imagine all the fake bits that could be sliced into that with modern technology - I’m expecting a full episode or series of the birthday party


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> They left an hour before the Jubilee ended? B-b-b-b-but I thought Harry wants to "make sure" TQ has "the right people around her".  And isn't there at least footage of the Sussex Squad of getting out of their car to board their plane? We could see if Doria was with them. Unless they made her fly commercial economy back to CA. It'd be more than M's father would get.
> 
> Will Netflix fire them? Sue them for breach of contract? Is slandering the BRF of killing Diana their last card to play to appease the Netflix bosses?  Will they create a documentary a la The DaVinci Code insinuating that Charles etc killed her?
> 
> We only saw two of Meghan's outfits. It'd be interesting to see if they had packed lots of suitcases/trunks to take many more outfits they intended to wear----but weren't allowed to go anywhere else to show them off.  Aww.


 They wouldn’t have fitted anyway


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> I swear I need to read the whole thread before I post!  I keep posting exactly what you said earlier.


Great minds


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> News from the Aussies: _*Harry and Meghan are reaping the consequences of being 'talentless self-promoters'*_



 I love how Aussies just say it like it is


----------



## elvisfan4life

Hermes Zen said:


> Glum-looking H & M are back home in California.      When the Sussexes arrived back in California on Sunday, equipment that appeared to be a high chair was seen being offloaded from the plane.



Maybe they bought it at Selfridges with the pink car birthday present ???


----------



## DeMonica

EverSoElusive said:


> Presenting you Major Jonny Thompson in a kilt, next to the Queen herself!!! He's better looking than Harry
> 
> View attachment 5419197


Better looking than Harry? This one is hot while Ginge is aging awfully.


----------



## carmen56

Scuttled back to the US early, with their tails between their legs hopefully.  I’m hoping that their reception at St Paul’s convinces them that are not welcome nor wanted here.  I now await whinging tales of their appalling treatment by the RF throughout the Jubilee.


----------



## DeMonica

kkfiregirl said:


> That’s if we think the baby was truly born in California. She could have used a surrogate in Ukraine and picked the baby up on her private jet.


While I think that Harry is pretty dense, Monster Meg is smarter than that. Using surrogate mothers from countries where surrogacy hasn't been properly regulated yet, has proven to be very risky in the past. There were a number of cases in the paper where the surrogate refused to part with the baby and could not pressurized legally to give it up. I don't think that Meagain would take that risk. I can't believe in this "they had to find a new surrogate baby" theory, either. It could only happen if paternity of the baby had not mattered at all. If they wanted a child who's Ginge's biological child, the age difference would be at least 10 months - and unless you keep the child under locks for about three years, most people would realize that the baby is significantly younger than her "supposed" age, not just because of the size, but the level of development, too.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> According to NS, allegedly:
> The Harkles were offered tickets to the big party on Saturday night, but not to the royal box. So they watched the show at Frogmore Cottage.
> TW is looking for a place to park the bench in the UK, a sponsor for the Pearl. She had several meetings.



Well, of course, they couldn’t do THAT.  You know for SECURITY reasons!

Hoisted by their own petard!  Checkmate!


----------



## Sophisticatted

pukasonqo said:


> Why do you need to travel w a high chair? I am sure they could have borrowed one from family
> Maybe it is a throne a la Posh and Becks wedding



To merch it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

EverSoElusive said:


> The only tan they'll ever get is likely from forced spray tan to appear darker to play into their mom's POC and racism storylines. Not that the children ask for it. I have a lot of sympathy for these poor babies.


Pince, Paris and Blanket comes to my mind.....


----------



## DoggieBags

I watched Lady C’s latest. First one of her’s that I’ve watched and that Lady doesn’t stop talking lol. She mentioned that the Harkles had a private meeting with PC before they left to go to the Cathedral. I have no idea how accurate she is on this But I assume news of this supposed meeting will be leaked by Scooby Doo or SS at some point. Lady C also suggested that William and Catherine should only meet the Harkles in the future when they can be sure the entire interaction is recorded with both audio and visual with an expert testifying that the recording has not been altered in any way. This way they can counteract any misinformation the Harkle camp might put out. However imo that may not be enough since we see various news organizations completely ignoring the facts during the jubilee and reporting that the Harkles were very well received and loudly cheered when they appeared for the service at the Cathedral even though there are numerous video clips clearly showing that they were booed loudly when they exited the Cathedral. A lot of news organizations apparently think they should never let the facts get in the way of a good story I guess. So even if W and C record any future meetings with the Harkles, the Harkle camp will be able to find many news organizations to spread their misinformation anyway. Any contact between the brothers can only benefit Hazmat at this point.

edit add: she also said the idea that William has been face timing or been in regular contact with Harry is ludicrous because William is aware that he cannot trust the Harkles at all


----------



## pukasonqo

Racist BRF refuses to meet and acknowledge the mixed race children of PH an MM 
Maybe that will be how they spin this trip?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


>





I don't think we've ever seen her sashaying like this except during royal engagements when the cameras are rolling


----------



## lulilu

Blue Irina said:


> Meghan looks amazing! Love the white coat. 10/10


She looked more like Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> If the crowd’s faces didn’t tell the story, then leave it to Uncle Ed
> 
> from the DM
> 
> View attachment 5417702


This is where Harry is trying to get his cousins to scooch over so he can sit on the aisle.


----------



## EverSoElusive

duna said:


> *Seeing this pic again makes me think that no heavily pregnant woman, in this case for real, would carry such a heavy burdern, Archie must be over 10 kilos plus rucksack*.....could it really be a moon bump?? I would NEVER EVER have carried such a weight, especially at the end of my 4 pregnancies , and they were all very easy pregnancies. This woman is fathomless.



She only did that probably because she arranged to be papped with Archie. It's just to sell pictures. As for moon bump, we've speculated that in this thread many times and that's certainly a possibility


----------



## EverSoElusive

DoggieBags said:


> I watched Lady C’s latest. First one of her’s that I’ve watched and that Lady doesn’t stop talking lol. She mentioned that the Harkles had a private meeting with PC before they left to go to the Cathedral. I have no idea how accurate she is on this But I assume news of this supposed meeting will be leaked by Scooby Doo or SS at some point. *Lady C also suggested that William and Catherine should only meet the Harkles in the future when they can be sure the entire interaction is recorded with both audio and visual with an expert testifying that the recording has not been altered in any way. *This way they can counteract any misinformation the Harkle camp might put out. However imo that may not be enough since we see various news organizations completely ignoring the facts during the jubilee and reporting that the Harkles were very well received and loudly cheered when they appeared for the service at the Cathedral even though there are numerous video clips clearly showing that they were booed loudly when they exited the Cathedral. A lot of news organizations apparently think they should never let the facts get in the way of a good story I guess. So even if W and C record any future meetings with the Harkles, the Harkle camp will be able to find many news organizations to spread their misinformation anyway. Any contact between the brothers can only benefit Hazmat at this point.
> 
> edit add: she also said the idea that William has been face timing or been in regular contact with Harry is ludicrous because William is aware that he cannot trust the Harkles at all



Perhaps William and Kate should just avoid meeting them at all costs. They are no longer working royals so nothing to be discussed anyways. Or if needed, the Sussex Liars should be scanned for bugs, mics etc before entering a room to meet and speak with any other BRF members.


----------



## EverSoElusive

pukasonqo said:


> Racist BRF refuses to meet and acknowledge the mixed race children of PH an MM
> Maybe that will be how they spin this trip?



Would not put it past them especially nobody seemed to make time to attend the alleged birthday party


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What Archie is not having...makes me so angry for those poor kids.


----------



## carmen56

I feel so sorry for the Invisikids.  They could have had a grand time meeting and playing with the Tindall, Phillips and Cambridge cousins, and watching the parade yesterday.  Raptor will be gnashing her teeth at the photos of Louis sitting on Grandpa Charles lap - that could have been Archie and Lilibet, if not for Raptor and Ginger’s obsession with keeping the kids hidden.  One day it will rebound on them spectacularly.


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just for you @EverSoElusive  It's really enjoyable full screen!



Yummy - even when marching through manure.


----------



## EverSoElusive

carmen56 said:


> I feel so sorry for the Invisikids.  They could have had a grand time meeting and playing with the Tindall, Phillips and Cambridge cousins, and watching the parade yesterday.  Raptor will be gnashing her teeth at the photos of Louis sitting on Grandpa Charles lap - that could have been Archie and Lilibet, if not for *Raptor and Ginger’s obsession with keeping the kids hidden*.  One day it will rebound on them spectacularly.



Aside from trying to monetize their kids' pictures, I think the less pictures and memories the kids have with the BRF the better because they can easily manipulate the kids into believing Nutmeg's allegations: BRF is racist and didn't want to have anything to do with them. If there are photographic evidence on the internet that the Invisikids appear happy alongside their royal family members, it would be difficult for Nutmeg to spin her folk tale and the kids would likely question her. Again, just my speculation


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lilibet not existing just feels like such a huge lie, how would they ever get out of it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Lilibet not existing just feels like such a huge lie, how would they ever get out of it?



Same way the imaginary wedding that happened 3 days before the official one. Just ignore the facts and make-up anything that gets people talking. 

Could be they're hoping to adopt or borrow a baby. Who knows?  .  Seriously, at this point, would we be surprised by anything? Maybe H&M can operate from a parallel universe accessed through one of their 16 restrooms.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Lilibet not existing just feels like such a huge lie, how would they ever get out of it?



I may not like the Sussex Liars but I whole heartedly hope that Invisibet actually exists. I am quite concerned about the child's development being kept hidden like a recluse. What social skills would this child have? She has never been around others except for for her immediate family members and people that work at the house. Typing this out makes me sad for the child. 

Only Archie has been shown to the world a few times including being front and center on the family's first Christmas e-card! How would Invisbet feel when she's old enough to see things on the internet? Would she feel less loved?


----------



## CarryOn2020

My opinion - the kids will be fine.  If they ever decide to reach out to the BRF, undoubtedly they will be welcomed with open arms.  Are they missing out? Sure. Are they living in squalor?  Good grief, no.  They will grow up entitled, just like their dad with his ‘royal’ blood and their mother with her sense of superiority.  As they grow up,  they’ll realize the truth, but they will find their way. The king’s grandchildren will be just fine.


----------



## DeMonica

rose60610 said:


> They left an hour before the Jubilee ended? B-b-b-b-but I thought Harry wants to "make sure" TQ has "the right people around her".  And isn't there at least footage of the Sussex Squad of getting out of their car to board their plane? We could see if Doria was with them. Unless they made her fly commercial economy back to CA. It'd be more than M's father would get.
> 
> Will Netflix fire them? Sue them for breach of contract? Is slandering the BRF of killing Diana their last card to play to appease the Netflix bosses?  Will they create a documentary a la The DaVinci Code insinuating that Charles etc killed her?
> 
> *We only saw two of Meghan's outfits. It'd be interesting to see if they had packed lots of suitcases/trunks to take many more outfits they intended to wear----but weren't allowed to go anywhere else to show them off.  Aww.*


Actually it was more of two hats and one coat. I wonder if they had known before hand how little exposure they would get. 
Lying low is not Monster's style, getting her to obey instructions might show that there are more at stake than a Netflix obligation. The Troublesome Two might have realized that their financial pull isn't what they had estimated and try to mend fences with the RF for financial reasons. If they go on thrashing the monarchy furthermore, it was probably the last time we have seen them on UK soil. The RF had managed to show David his place and he had been an anointed king.  Of course, I can be absolutely wrong.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Some of the speculation here is just getting silly now - I firmly believe the children do both exist , were in the UK for the short visit , did meet the family at a general family lunch with the full extended royal family and I don’t think they are recluses either I believe they will have a hand picked close circle of friends at home and will develop like normal children of a wealthy background. 

There will probably be a photo of Lilibet and Lilibet too but hopefully one they do not have the ability to sell - the Queen has a photo on her desk with Lucas on her knee ( I think- it may be August ) it’s a personal family photo that she had chosen not to release to the public - I hope the photos with Archie and Lilibet bring her joy but remain private too


----------



## kemilia

lulilu said:


> This is where Harry is trying to get his cousins to scooch over so he can sit on the aisle.


Interesting that she did not shove her way to be in front of H, she was smart enough to know that these were his "people" and he stood a way better chance of getting them to move over, but she still kept her had on her puppet to give him the confidence he needed to try to alter the seating order to their (her) preference. Didn't work however--the best moment of the whole Markle Debacle, imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DeMonica said:


> Actually it was more of two hats and one coat. I wonder if they had known before hand how little exposure they would get.
> Lying low is not Monster's style, getting her to obey instructions might show that there are more at stake than a Netflix obligation. The Troublesome Two might have realized that their financial pull isn't what they had estimated and try to mend fences with the RF for financial reasons. If they go on thrashing the monarchy furthermore, it was probably the last time we have seen them on UK soil. The RF had managed to show David his place and he had been an anointed king.  Of course, I can be absolutely wrong.



The rings, remember she merched those rings.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

EverSoElusive said:


> Aside from trying to monetize their kids' pictures, I think the less pictures and memories the kids have with the BRF the better because they can easily manipulate the kids into believing Nutmeg's allegations: BRF is racist and didn't want to have anything to do with them. If there are photographic evidence on the internet that the Invisikids appear happy alongside their royal family members, it would be difficult for Nutmeg to spin her folk tale and the kids would likely question her. Again, just my speculation


This presumes they have a long term plan.  Though I agree with your premise, I do not believe they are that precise in their goals.   They are in need of instant gratification and attention and adulation. The monarchy can play the long game because each member is considered a link between generations past and future but those two are are like a Willie Wonka character—they want it NOW.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> The rings, remember she merched those rings.


So she wore that big hat with the navy bow only inside while shushing those children? Did I miss her sashaying around outside in it?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> The rings, remember she merched those rings.


Edward was never anointed.  He left months before his coronation. But the royals did successfully close the gate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> So she wore that big hat with the navy bow only inside while shushing those children? Did I miss her sashaying around outside in it?



No, the only photos are from inside. Some say it’s the Roland Mouret, first seen in 2018 the day before the spectacle wedding:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> While I think that Harry is pretty dense, Monster Meg is smarter than that. Using surrogate mothers from countries where surrogacy hasn't been properly regulated yet, has proven to be very risky in the past. There were a number of cases in the paper where the surrogate refused to part with the baby and could not pressurized legally to give it up. I don't think that Meagain would take that risk. I can't believe in this "they had to find a new surrogate baby" theory, either. It could only happen if paternity of the baby had not mattered at all. If they wanted a child who's Ginge's biological child, the age difference would be at least 10 months - and unless you keep the child under locks for about three years, most people would realize that the baby is significantly younger than her "supposed" age, not just because of the size, but the level of development, too.



All of this. I don't think highly of them, but none of these particular rumors ever made sense to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

carmen56 said:


> I feel so sorry for the Invisikids.  They could have had a grand time meeting and playing with the Tindall, Phillips and Cambridge cousins, and watching the parade yesterday.  Raptor will be gnashing her teeth at the photos of Louis sitting on Grandpa Charles lap - that could have been Archie and Lilibet, if not for Raptor and Ginger’s obsession with keeping the kids hidden.  One day it will rebound on them spectacularly.



Maybe teenaged A and L will ask for asylum with their British relatives.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, the only photos are from inside. Some say it’s the Roland Mouret, first seen in 2018 the day before the spectacle wedding:
> View attachment 5419674



I doubt that very dress would zip right now.


----------



## marietouchet

MY VOTE - a HUGE badly done for leaving early … 

They flew private and could left anytime, not throwing shade at the family, this was deliberate


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> The plot thickens. Could the kids be in a separate car with nannies? Or did the DUMBartons lie about bringing the kids? So weird!



I think you’re correct. The kids were probably packed off to the airport earlier with their nannies and the luggage in another large gas-guzzler.

We know for a fact that they cannot tolerate being around noisy children.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, the only photos are from inside. Some say it’s the Roland Mouret, first seen in 2018 the day before the spectacle wedding:
> View attachment 5419674



She looks very pretty and youthful here. At the church, she looks very orange and greasy— it’s quite a stark difference!


----------



## lanasyogamama

kkfiregirl said:


> She looks very pretty and youthful here. At the church, she looks very orange and greasy— it’s quite a stark difference!


I know it’s hard to see it now, but she was quite pretty in the beginning.


----------



## Chanbal

Today, I woke up feeling sorry for the Harkles. I hope it will not last, because they don't deserve much sympathy.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> I know it’s hard to see it now, but she was quite pretty in the beginning.



I remember how pretty she was! I joined this thread as a fan


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> Today, I woke up feeling sorry for the Harkles. I hope it will not last, because they don't deserve much sympathy.



Do go on …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Today, I woke up feeling sorry for the Harkles. I hope it will not last, because they don't deserve much sympathy.



I feel sorry for Harry often. For Raptor, not so much for various reasons.


----------



## csshopper

Pouty brats who didn’t get their way kick sand, pick up their toys, and go home early. 

Found Freedom yet?


----------



## CarryOn2020

I just feel sad.  I was hoping for the happy ending. 
H&M simply are not willing to compromise - or fire their obnoxious PR and give up the tired lectures. 
Coulda woulda shoulda.


----------



## wisconsin

yes, a happy ending would have been nice


----------



## Chanbal

I believe that leaving prior to QE's last appearance on balcony was rude to say the least. 



_There was widespread astonishment in royal circles Monday after it was confirmed that Meghan and Harry left Britain by private jet before the platinum jubilee celebrations were finished, delivering a snub to the queen and organizers of the event._









						Harry and Meghan Accused of ‘Overshadowing’ Queen’s Jubilee With Abrupt Exit
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle slammed the metaphorical door on their way out of the U.K., bringing a sour note to a weekend that was supposed to be one of celebration.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## elvisfan4life

marietouchet said:


> MY VOTE - a HUGE badly done for leaving early …
> 
> They flew private and could left anytime, not throwing shade at the family, this was deliberate


 Would have been better if they had t come at all £160,000 wasted


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Pouty brats who didn’t get their way kick sand, pick up their toys, and go home early.
> 
> Found Freedom yet?



Best line of the day


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I believe that leaving prior to QE's last appearance on balcony was rude to say the least.



They are just a*sholes. Harry need not come to The Queen's funeral and act like he's sad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are just a*sholes. Harry need not come to The Queen's funeral and act like he's sad.



Or that he is entitled to sit on the front row.  Sheeesh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, the only photos are from inside. Some say it’s the Roland Mouret, first seen in 2018 the day before the spectacle wedding:
> View attachment 5419674


Not trying to be mean here but her waist isn’t the same size in 2022 vs 2018 so could she fit into this 2018 dress now? As someone who has gone up several dress sizes over the years, I still keep a few of my favorite dresses in my prior smaller sizes in the vain hope that someday I’ll lose enough weight to fit into some of my old favorites again Lol.


----------



## Chanbal

I do love QE's green outfit, but I don't understand the black pom-pom on her hat. Was it a 'sweet nod' to the Harkles' microphones? 



Picture from DM


----------



## elvisfan4life

DoggieBags said:


> Not trying to be mean here but her waist isn’t the same size in 2022 vs 2018 so could she fit into this 2018 dress now? As someone who has gone up several dress sizes over the years, I still keep a few of my favorite dresses in my prior smaller sizes in the vain hope that someday I’ll lose enough weight to fit into some of my old favorites again Lol.


 A talented seamstress could have altered it to fit her


----------



## elvisfan4life

kkfiregirl said:


> I remember how pretty she was! I joined this thread as a fan


 I still think she is pretty what she looks like isn’t my issue it’s her nasty character and behaviour


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Today, I woke up feeling sorry for the Harkles. I hope it will not last, because they don't deserve much sympathy.



The days of me feeling sorry for either of them are long gone. This is the outcome they have unwittingly been working towards and they actually deserve the wake-up call. If they even see the reality of it all.

If they don't realize now that everything they have been doing is just wrong, then they are way beyond any help. They won't be redeemed until they actually do literal work and stop blaming the rest of the world for their failures.


----------



## elvisfan4life

LittleStar88 said:


> The days of me feeling sorry for either of them are long gone. This is the outcome they have unwittingly been working towards and they actually deserve the wake-up call. If they even see the reality of it all.
> 
> If they don't realize now that everything they have been doing is just wrong, then they are way beyond any help. They won't be redeemed until they actually do literal work and stop blaming the rest of the world for their failures.


 I don’t care if they never do anything - I just want them to stay away from the Uk from the BRF and stfu


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Not trying to be mean here but her waist isn’t the same size in 2022 vs 2018 so could she fit into this 2018 dress now? As someone who has gone up several dress sizes over the years, I still keep a few of my favorite dresses in my prior smaller sizes in the vain hope that someday I’ll lose enough weight to fit into some of my old favorites again Lol.



Samesies.  I feel certain we will see this look again. The hat cost around $1,000.00. Staggering, considering these times.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article!  



_Investigative journalist *Tom Bower*, who is working on a biography of Meghan, told MailOnline that the Sussexes had been 'trounced' on their return to the UK.

He said: '*I think Palace officials were unusually skilful in managing the Sussexes*. Just enough exposure to please the Queen but at the same time so limited to show them that they have been sidelined. Harry’s grim expression exposed and confirmed the troubles he now faces. Meghan now faces problems about her status. *Netflix are left with a problem: The Sussexes are no longer stars*'._

Royal author *Phil Dampier* told MailOnline: '*Their attitude seems to be if we’re not centre stage we don’t really want to be here.*

‘They must realise they are no longer popular with the general public, and travelling in and out by private jet hardly helps their so-called green credentials.

Richard Fitzwilliams said: '*This was about the Queen and the future of the monarchy, which they opted out of as senior working royals. Yet they owe their entire profile and contracts to the institution.* This fabulous four days showed now strong it is and also how wrong they were to do the interview on Oprah, which caused it to lose support among the young and ethnic minorities and aired when Prince Philip was ill.

‘*The Sussexes should have learnt a lesson over the last few days. When it actually comes to capturing hearts and minds it is about service, not about self*'.









						'Harry and Meghan are no stars', experts say after they left Jubilee
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will have been 'furious' at being forced into the background by the palace's 'men in suits' who they have been so scathing about, it has been claimed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> I do love QE's green outfit, but I don't understand the black pom-pom on her hat. Was it a 'sweet nod' to the Harkles' microphones?
> 
> View attachment 5419735
> 
> Picture from DM



If you enlarge that part of the hat, you can see it’s a hat pin.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I do love QE's green outfit, but I don't understand the black pom-pom on her hat. Was it a 'sweet nod' to the Harkles' microphones?
> 
> View attachment 5419735
> 
> Picture from DM



I wonder if it's a reference to her mourning for her husband. Hat pins are usually a little more discrete OR heavily jewelled.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is that what regret looks like?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Samesies.  I feel certain we will see this look again. The hat cost around $1,000.00. Staggering, considering these times.


Here is an article on TW's outfit and its hidden messages. Her desperate desire to belong to '_the 1%-er' _ultra-wealthy is not hidden imo…* *

_*The St. Paul’s outfit also plays into the 1%-er look she has leaned into more and more since decamping for Montecito. For starters, it is haute couture, the most elite of the fashion world - in terms of both access and price tag.* And what could be more 1% than white, a colour which takes staff, private travel, limitless dry cleaning budget to keep pristine? It’s a colour she has returned to again and again recently, from the Brandon Maxwell blazer she wore to the Invictus Games to the white Valentino mini dress worn on-stage for Global Citizen Live. And it seems almost too obvious to point out that it also signifies purity, innocence. Meghan in red or black would have been an easy tabloid target._





__





						The Hidden Messages In Meghan Markle’s Day 2 Jubilee Look
					

The hidden messages behind Meghan Markle's all-white Dior look at the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving look. Read more on Grazia.




					graziadaily.co.uk


----------



## kkfiregirl

elvisfan4life said:


> I still think she is pretty what she looks like isn’t my issue it’s her nasty character and behaviour



I agree, she is pretty, but her heavy-handed use of bronzer dims her attractiveness.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo she is sending a humorous signal to H&M or, maybe, a sweet nod to them.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article!
> View attachment 5419749
> 
> 
> _Investigative journalist *Tom Bower*, who is working on a biography of Meghan, told MailOnline that the Sussexes had been 'trounced' on their return to the UK.
> 
> He said: '*I think Palace officials were unusually skilful in managing the Sussexes*. Just enough exposure to please the Queen but at the same time so limited to show them that they have been sidelined. Harry’s grim expression exposed and confirmed the troubles he now faces. Meghan now faces problems about her status. *Netflix are left with a problem: The Sussexes are no longer stars*'._
> 
> Royal author *Phil Dampier* told MailOnline: '*Their attitude seems to be if we’re not centre stage we don’t really want to be here.*
> 
> ‘They must realise they are no longer popular with the general public, and travelling in and out by private jet hardly helps their so-called green credentials.
> 
> Richard Fitzwilliams said: '*This was about the Queen and the future of the monarchy, which they opted out of as senior working royals. Yet they owe their entire profile and contracts to the institution.* This fabulous four days showed now strong it is and also how wrong they were to do the interview on Oprah, which caused it to lose support among the young and ethnic minorities and aired when Prince Philip was ill.
> 
> ‘*The Sussexes should have learnt a lesson over the last few days. When it actually comes to capturing hearts and minds it is about service, not about self*'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Harry and Meghan are no stars', experts say after they left Jubilee
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will have been 'furious' at being forced into the background by the palace's 'men in suits' who they have been so scathing about, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


 So true they had it all at their fingertips for the asking and threw it away


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

elvisfan4life said:


> Someone please tell me the jet has landed back in the USA


Yes, UNFORTUNATELY!!!

Now, let’s see how long it will take the ingrates to “complain” about their treatment, especially the booing (which thrilled me to pieces); I’m sure they are working very hard on their VICTIM PR!  Uggh …


----------



## elvisfan4life

CeeJay said:


> Yes, UNFORTUNATELY!!!
> 
> Now, let’s see how long it will take the ingrates to “complain” about their treatment, especially the booing (which thrilled me to pieces); I’m sure they are working very hard on their VICTIM PR!  Uggh …


 
We don’t care long as she stays over the pond


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are just a*sholes. Harry need not come to The Queen's funeral and act like he's sad.


He will cry the loudest.  I’ve seen it before.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> So true they had it all at their fingertips for the asking and threw it away


It looks like they keep throwing away every single opportunity… It was very rude to fly back to CA before the Platinum Jubilee finale in which it was expected the queen's presence. I bet that a more humble and gracious presence would have benefited them. 

Here is one more interesting article…



_And yet there they were, and with the Queen’s blessing no less. At Friday’s thanksgiving in St Paul’s, Harry and Meghan, who was dressed primly in white (honestly love, why bother?), processed down the aisle, once again hogging the limelight. In fact, they are thought to have been charitably given it by a tirelessly forgiving, diplomatic, family-oriented Queen._


----------



## DoggieBags

elvisfan4life said:


> We don’t care long as she stays over the pond


I really hope they stay in CA and don’t move to NYC  celebrities who live here know they can be as under the radar as they want. The locals will leave them alone. The last thing we need is some publicity seeker forever on the pap stroll snarling up our traffic even more !


----------



## sdkitty

catlover46 said:


> I think he’s not right and was good at masking it until Meghan came along.


I think he needs a visitation from the ghost of Diana.  She went public with some very personal stuff but she was smarter than this one


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> I really hope they stay in CA and don’t move to NYC  celebrities who live here know they can be as under the radar as they want. The locals will leave them alone. The last thing we need is some publicity seeker forever on the pap stroll snarling up our traffic even more !



Agree, their best play at this point is to go to France as Wallis did or go to South Africa.  They  need to do the serious work for a long time. Right now they are box office poison, brought on by their own actions and PR. Once a week polo will not help.  Once a year food donation won’t help either.

ETA: mostly they need to stop the lies.

ETA2: Instead, my guess - he is furiously typing the book’s chapters.  Not sure he gets that he is the problem.


----------



## lulilu

1LV said:


> Does Ann possess the only pair of balls in that family?


*Yes!  Harry is so worried about security -- when Ann was young, someone tried to kidnap her, and ordered her out of her car.  She replied (something like) "I bloody well think not!"*



CarryOn2020 said:


> If they had arrived on time, as the others did, no one need to shuffle. Imo.


*From some of the footage, you can see they arrived immediately after Bea and Eug, but lagged back, ostensibly so they did not have to join them in a walk down the aisle and parade down on their own.  But also so they could try to get the girls to move over so they could sit on the end.  What losers.*



youngster said:


> Kids at that age will play and engage with almost anyone.


*And I am sure those children were raised with impeccable manners and would only act politely toward those two clowns.*



CarryOn2020 said:


> My opinion - they were indeed told, but thought by arriving late everyone would move down 2 chairs and they could have the aisle.  Edo clearly held the line. Good for him. Word to wise - never trifle with an Italian count.


*Exactly.  And they did enter the church almost immediately behind the sisters.  She just wanted her "sexy stroll" up the steps alone, and as you said, they wanted to manipulate the seating.  And enter alone, not with his cousins.  (The first time I remember that ass wiggling was when they were tossed from the garden party for Prince Charles the day after their wedding.  She must think she's all that.)*



elvisfan4life said:


> The lunch they swerved was the guildhall on fri they attended the private family lunch at Buckingham palace on thurs


*Is there anything from KP that confirms the family lunch with the Sussexes?  I have a hard time believing they'd all join them for lunch or anything else.  I don't even believe the Queen met the baby -- assuming they brought them at all.

I admit I have been reading way too much on twitter and other SM about all the festivities and the Sussexes participation (or lack thereof).  But I find that any time someone posts something positive about the Cambridges or other family members, the SS comes out in droves to post nasty stuff.  So, like a fool, I spend all my time blocking these horses azzes instead of reading.  I can't help myself.  It gives me some small modicum of satisfaction.*


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, their best play at this point is to go to France as Wallis did or go to South Africa.  They  need to do the serious work for a long time. Right now they are box office poison, brought on by their own actions and PR. Once a week polo will not help.  Once a year food donation won’t help either.
> 
> ETA: mostly they need to stop the lies.
> 
> ETA2: Instead, my guess - he is furiously typing the book’s chapters.  Not sure he gets that he is the problem.


I think she married him for the fame and the money.  so I don't see her going away and hiding.


----------



## scarf1

I just don’t see what they can do now. They seem to have burned up all their opportunities.


----------



## sdkitty

scarf1 said:


> I just don’t see what they can do now. They seem to have burned up all their opportunities.


He could maybe go back to the family and she could live as a wealthy divorcee....maybe she could get a job on the real housewives


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> The car that followed the Duke and Duchess of Sussex as it travelled down The Mall contained three Met police officers
> The Sussexes were not allowed on the Buckingham Palace balcony yesterday, following Megxit, but did join other royals in the Major General's Office overlooking Horse Guards Parade in central London for Trooping the Colour.
> An animated Meghan appeared to playfully 'shush' a group of young royals as they stood at a window overlooking the parade, while Harry was later seen mimicking the gesture in a separate photo.
> Though their appearance ended months of speculation on whether the Sussexes would attend the Platinum Jubilee celebrations, there was no sign of their children Archie and Lilibet, who are also believed to be in the UK.
> Today, the couple are set to attend the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral.
> It will be the first time they have attended an event together with other senior royals - including Prince Charles, Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge - since 2020's Commonwealth Day service, which was their last official engagement.
> Harry did attend Prince Philip's funeral last April and then united with his brother Prince William to unveil a statue of their mother Princess Diana at Kensington Palace.
> 
> (Omitted some extra, extremely blurry pics)


I'm thinking that those shushing pics were planned with the papparazzi. Why else would the telephoto lens be aimed towards a window showing some (royal) children? And shushing tends to be a fleeting action, but both Harkles held their poses long enough for good clear shots with "animated" expressions.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> It looks like they keep throwing away every single opportunity… It was very rude to fly back to CA before the Platinum Jubilee finale in which it was expected the queen's presence. I bet that a more humble and gracious presence would have benefited them.
> 
> Here is one more interesting article…
> 
> 
> 
> _And yet there they were, and with the Queen’s blessing no less. At Friday’s thanksgiving in St Paul’s, Harry and Meghan, who was dressed primly in white (honestly love, why bother?), processed down the aisle, once again hogging the limelight. In fact, they are thought to have been charitably given it by a tirelessly forgiving, diplomatic, family-oriented Queen._



 Fabulous


----------



## Chanbal

This a very interesting video on the Jubilee. It also includes comments from a Netfl*x's consultant who apparently thinks the Harkels are not within the most popular kids on the block…


----------



## Annawakes

They fled before people could boo them again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> I believe that leaving prior to QE's last appearance on balcony was rude to say the least.
> 
> 
> 
> _There was widespread astonishment in royal circles Monday after it was confirmed that Meghan and Harry left Britain by private jet before the platinum jubilee celebrations were finished, delivering a snub to the queen and organizers of the event._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Accused of ‘Overshadowing’ Queen’s Jubilee With Abrupt Exit
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle slammed the metaphorical door on their way out of the U.K., bringing a sour note to a weekend that was supposed to be one of celebration.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



 Frankly, hardly anyone, except the RF, knew  that they have left, and IMO even less cared about it. Therefore: I strongly disagree that they could overshadow the jubilee. IMO little Louis held more interest than the Troublesome Twosome, and nothing could overshadow the moment, when after seeing that the royal standard had been raised, the Queen finally appeared on the balcony as a closing of this impeccably executed Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
If they just got up and left on their own decision, they are even more idiotic than generally thought.


----------



## bag-mania

I hope if they did meet with Charles that there were witnesses on hand.

Whether they were trying to shake him down for more money or collect Netflix content, they cannot be trusted.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> He could maybe go back to the family and she could live as a wealthy divorcee....maybe she could get a job on the real housewives



She'd be great, but she won't. Not enough control for her, she's not going to share a camera lens with any other woman. Her claws are in deep and she's not going to be letting go of Harry without vile retribution. She'll stroke his ego, use guilt, blackmail, whatever. What's done is done.


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Frankly, hardly anyone, except the RF, knew  that they have left, and IMO even less cared about it. Therefore: I strongly disagree that they could overshadow the jubilee. IMO little Louis held more interest than the Troublesome Twosome, and nothing could overshadow the moment, when after seeing that the royal standard had been raised, the Queen finally appeared on the balcony as a closing of this impeccably executed Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
> If they just got up and left on their own decision, they are even more idiotic than generally thought.


so we don't know if they even had the kids with them.  If they did, why wouldn't they show them off as everyone else did?
Why didn't they go to the concert?  maybe because Harry wasn't given a role to take the stage like his brother, the future king?  or they would have had to sit a few rows back?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that what regret looks like?
> 
> View attachment 5419760



No, that’s his “scheming revenge on all those who have wronged him” look.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> I do love QE's green outfit, but I don't understand the black pom-pom on her hat. Was it a 'sweet nod' to the Harkles' microphones?
> 
> View attachment 5419735
> 
> Picture from DM


It looks like a microphone but I think this little piece of black is rather a nod to Prince Philip.


----------



## DeMonica

papertiger said:


> I wonder if it's a reference to her mourning for her husband. Hat pins are usually a little more discrete OR heavily jewelled.


I haven't read your post when I post mine. ITA.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

kkfiregirl said:


> She looks very pretty and youthful here. At the church, she looks very orange and greasy— it’s quite a stark difference!


One was taken at a distance.   Up close and personal, the inner ugliness and venom shows.


----------



## csshopper

Biggest mistake since Oprah and I hope it sends them spiraling further into the former celebrity abyss.

Their deliberate snub to the finale of Jubilee, the Queen’s historic/heroic appearance on the balcony, is an enormous F U to the woman millions have just finished celebrating and celebrating and celebrating. It will never be forgotten or forgiven.Thinking they will have the last word, “we’ll show them!” I think (hope) it will be the catalyst to conversations about title removal, Counselor of State revocation, complete lack of taxpayer money spent on any security in future visits, and maybe even nullify the Frogmore Lease. And they will be subject to random body scans to check for recording equipment if ever in the UK.

Interesting how they quietly arrived, hoping no one would discover it was on a private jet, but the Mouthpieces made certain it was known when they exited just to put an exclamation point on the timing in relationship to the Jubilee finale.

Due to their own actions, everyone has their number now, and it’s a Zero.

Siri directed me to a site, The Guardian, that gives Netflix as having 14.9 million subscribers in the UK. Any Suckess backlash via cancellations is not going to help their bottom line. Eat it Netflix.

As for Invictus, thinking of the massive military presence in the Jubilee, and the Queen as their Commander, how many of them will decide Haz is no longer to be tolerated as a result of his staggering disrespect to her?

They got their angry widdle foot stomping exit, but even more than Oprah, the negative echoes may never fade. They are so blindingly short sighted.


----------



## DeMonica

DoggieBags said:


> I really hope they stay in CA and don’t move to NYC  celebrities who live here know they can be as under the radar as they want. The locals will leave them alone. The last thing we need is some publicity seeker forever on the pap stroll snarling up our traffic even more !


They couldn't handle New York.


----------



## sdkitty

so according to this report, The Sun knows all about the birthday party.  IDK how credible The Sun is








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Hold First Birthday Party for Lilibet. No Senior Royals Went.
					

Karwai Tang/WireImageWelcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.Lilibet’s birthday party is the royal proxy warThe Daily Beast reported yesterday that it was “highly unlikely”...




					currently.att.yahoo.com
				




edit - so from what I can surmise, The Sun is a tabloid, not hard news - not surprised


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> He could maybe go back to the family and she could live as a wealthy divorcee....maybe she could get a job on the real housewives


Actually I can totally see her in a real housewife kind of show but it would just confirm what we know that she's a fame hungry gold digger, and all her big words about changing the world for the better are nothing but smoke and mirrors.


----------



## rose60610

Didn't somebody try to insinuate that H&M watched some of the Jubilee with TQ at Windsor? Then explain how TQ, who didn't attend some parts DUE TO NOT FEELING WELL was supposed to "entertain" H&M when they "showed up to watch TV with her".  

Also, I hope Frogmore was swept for bugs after they left. As well as wherever else they parked their *sses. 

Remember how they announced her being pregnant with Archie at Eugenie's wedding? And then they wanted to overshadow the Jubilee with Lilibet? *(OH I'M SORRY, BIG FAIL)* They never learn, do they?  No pictures with TQ or with Grandpa. Not even with future king Uncle William. Aww. 

Was their departure before the end of the Jubilee a snub in retaliation for the BRF snubbing them? If so, HILARIOUS!  Like the BRF is supposed to kiss their butts after all the vicious accusations? In addition to being stupid, greedy, oblivious and vindictive, they're just gross.


----------



## Chanbal

DeMonica said:


> Frankly, hardly anyone, except the RF, knew  that they have left, and IMO even less cared about it. Therefore: I strongly disagree that they could overshadow the jubilee. IMO little Louis held more interest than the Troublesome Twosome, and nothing could overshadow the moment, when after seeing that the royal standard had been raised, the Queen finally appeared on the balcony as a closing of this impeccably executed Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
> If they just got up and left on their own decision, they are even more idiotic than generally thought.


I don't think the Harkles' early departure overshadowed the Jubilee, they don't have that power. However, it was very impolite and ungracious (especially towards QE) not to wait for the celebration to end. It was a huge mistake on their part imo.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CeeJay said:


> Yes, UNFORTUNATELY!!!
> 
> Now, let’s see how long it will take the ingrates to “complain” about their treatment, especially the booing (which thrilled me to pieces); I’m sure they are working very hard on their VICTIM PR!  Uggh …


 Yay https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1621454/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-return-UK


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Didn't somebody try to insinuate that H&M watched some of the Jubilee with TQ at Windsor? Then explain how TQ, who didn't attend some parts DUE TO NOT FEELING WELL was supposed to "entertain" H&M when they "showed up to watch TV with her".
> 
> Also, I hope Frogmore was swept for bugs after they left. As well as wherever else they parked their *sses.
> 
> Remember how they announced her being pregnant with Archie at Eugenie's wedding? And then they wanted to overshadow the Jubilee with Lilibet? *(OH I'M SORRY, BIG FAIL)* They never learn, do they?  No pictures with TQ or with Grandpa. Not even with future king Uncle William. Aww.
> 
> Was their departure before the end of the Jubilee a snub in retaliation for the BRF snubbing them? If so, HILARIOUS!  Like the BRF is supposed to kiss their butts after all the vicious accusations? In addition to being stupid, greedy, oblivious and vindictive, they're just gross.


there is so much speculation and unsupported reporting about these people....who knows what really happened


----------



## elvisfan4life

DeMonica said:


> Frankly, hardly anyone, except the RF, knew  that they have left, and IMO even less cared about it. Therefore: I strongly disagree that they could overshadow the jubilee. IMO little Louis held more interest than the Troublesome Twosome, and nothing could overshadow the moment, when after seeing that the royal standard had been raised, the Queen finally appeared on the balcony as a closing of this impeccably executed Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
> If they just got up and left on their own decision, they are even more idiotic than generally thought.


 Agreed and they had no chance when the Queen played her ***** cards  -Louis and Paddington bear !!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> No, that’s his “scheming revenge on all those who have wronged him” look.


 Looks like the kids screamed all the way home on the private jet and he didn’t get a wink of sleep


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> so we don't know if they even had the kids with them.  If they did, why wouldn't they show them off as everyone else did?
> Why didn't they go to the concert?  maybe because Harry wasn't given a role to take the stage like his brother, the future king?  or they would have had to sit a few rows back?


Good questions! IMO their capability to asses their own situation is seriously impaired. They live in a fantasy world where they are the center of the universe and they don't have to make any effort to be loved and supported. I think they could have used the children for their advantage. I really enjoyed the children (Windsors, Tindalls and Phillipses), even Louis tantrums (IMO he was in a particularly bad mood yesterday, but still sang the Anthem.  ), because it was like watching a real family outing where the families happen to belong to the most famous family in the UK. I think if they had any capacity in their peanut brain, they would have played their parts and got a lot of media attention. Probably Charles and Wills wouldn't have budged, but they could have been all smiles with the family members who are still eager to talk to them, only God knows why.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> Biggest mistake since Oprah and I hope it sends them spiraling further into the former celebrity abyss.
> 
> Their deliberate snub to the finale of Jubilee, the Queen’s historic/heroic appearance on the balcony, is an enormous F U to the woman millions have just finished celebrating and celebrating and celebrating. It will never be forgotten or forgiven.Thinking they will have the last word, “we’ll show them!” I think (hope) it will be the catalyst to conversations about title removal, Counselor of State revocation, complete lack of taxpayer money spent on any security in future visits, and maybe even nullify the Frogmore Lease. And they will be subject to random body scans to check for recording equipment if ever in the UK.
> 
> Interesting how they quietly arrived, hoping no one would discover it was on a private jet, but the Mouthpieces made certain it was known when they exited just to put an exclamation point on the timing in relationship to the Jubilee finale.
> 
> Due to their own actions, everyone has their number now, and it’s a Zero.
> 
> Siri directed me to a site, The Guardian, that gives Netflix as having 14.9 million subscribers in the UK. Any Suckess backlash via cancellations is not going to help their bottom line. Eat it Netflix.
> 
> As for Invictus, thinking of the massive military presence in the Jubilee, and the Queen as their Commander, how many of them will decide Haz is no longer to be tolerated as a result of his staggering disrespect to her?
> 
> They got their angry widdle foot stomping exit, but even more than Oprah, the negative echoes may never fade. They are so blindingly short sighted.


 Beautifully put


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> Good questions! IMO their capability to asses their own situation is seriously impaired. They live in a fantasy world where they are the center of the universe and they don't have to make any effort to be loved and supported. I think they could have used the children for their advantage. I really enjoyed the children (Windsors, Tindalls and Phillipses), even Louis tantrums (IMO he was in a particularly bad mood yesterday, but still sang the Anthem.  ), because it was like watching a real family outing where the families happen to belong to the most famous family in the UK. I think if they had any capacity in their peanut brain, they would have played their parts and got a lot of media attention. Probably Charles and Wills wouldn't have budged, but they could have been all smiles with the family members who are still eager to talk to them, only God knows why.


I have serious doubts that the kids were even in England.  But The Sun says they had a party.


----------



## elvisfan4life

elvisfan4life said:


> Agreed and they had no chance when the Queen played her ***** cards  -Louis and Paddington bear !!!


 Lol I wasn’t referring to the president


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so according to this report, The Sun knows all about the birthday party.  IDK how credible The Sun is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Hold First Birthday Party for Lilibet. No Senior Royals Went.
> 
> 
> Karwai Tang/WireImageWelcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.Lilibet’s birthday party is the royal proxy warThe Daily Beast reported yesterday that it was “highly unlikely”...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit - so from what I can surmise, The Sun is a tabloid, not hard news - not surprised


I believe the Sun released its article based on a source (Scoobie?). If Lilib exists and was with them at the Cottage, it's very possible they hosted a small celebration for the girl. 
Will and family with their public appearances made sure everyone understood that they were not guests of such event. I wouldn't be surprised if Eug and son showed up… I doubt that Zara's kids would attend, but they could have stopped by on their way to somewhere else and delivered a gift. It's all speculation at this point.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> Agreed and they had no chance when the Queen played her ***** cards  -Louis and Paddington bear !!!


Haha! When I saw the pictures, I thought that 'allowing' Louis to show his lively personality was a great 'card'.   Paddington was the cherry on the top.


----------



## rose60610

Did H&M really expect Lilibet to momentarily take center stage during the Queen's Jubilee, an event that MARKED SEVENTY YEARS ON THE THRONE???????  For a woman who is also a recent widow? 

I guess naming their daughter after TQ's private nickname backfired on them.  They probably thought that the kid's first birthday during the Jubilee, an event that took years in the making, would surely carve out a time slot for "Lilibet II".  Since they're so pissed that the Jubilee didn't revolve around THEM and left before it was finished, I wouldn't be surprised if they get the kid's name legally changed. They didn't get anything to merch!! Time to find a name they can MERCH!!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I believe the Sun released its article based on a source (Scoobie?). If Lilib exists and was with them at the Cottage, it's very possible they hosted a small celebration for the girl.
> Will and family with their public appearances made sure everyone understood that they were not guests of such event. I wouldn't be surprised if Eug and son showed up… I doubt that Zara's kids would attend, but they could have stopped by on their way to somewhere else and delivered a gift. It's all speculation at this point.


makes sense that creepy Scoobie would be sharing with a tabloid....doesn't mean it's the truth though


----------



## TC1

They didn't go there for HMTQ or the Jubilee. They went for press for Netflix and a supposed Lilibet meeting. So it's not surprising they left early.


----------



## lulu212121

I wonder if we'll see Harry playing polo anymore. I have a feeling some of their friends are moles. The Royal Family seemed to know exactly how to handle them.


----------



## Chanbal

@EverSoElusive this is for you


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> I have serious doubts that the kids were even in England.  But The Sun says they had a party.


They certainly haven't shown anything that would confirm that party or a meeting with the Queen. They are not rushing to publish anything about those meetings. Maybe their phones have been confiscated just in case....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

duna said:


> Seeing this pic again makes me think that no heavily pregnant woman, in this case for real, would carry such a heavy burdern, Archie must be over 10 kilos plus rucksack.....could it really be a moon bump?? I would NEVER EVER have carried such a weight, especially at the end of my 4 pregnancies , and they were all very easy pregnancies. This woman is fathomless.


What I see in this pic is Archie being carried high on the baby bump, not low on the hip which would be normal.  So many things about this *staged* pic just do not make sense


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> @EverSoElusive this is for you




If only looks could kill  I'm glad he's right behind, keeping an eye on them (though that's probably not the case).


----------



## bellecate

They might have been ‘asked’ to leave if the Monarchy had confirmation of the recording equipment.


----------



## rose60610

DeMonica said:


> They certainly haven't shown anything that would confirm that party or a meeting with the Queen. They are not rushing to publish anything about those meetings. *Maybe their phones have been confiscated just in case.*...



Question is: How many phones/devices did they have?  I hope somebody frisked them good!


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> Question is: How many phones/devices did they have?  I hope somebody frisked them good!


 It’s worrying if they were miked up and did actually meet Charles at Clarence House miked up


----------



## wisconsin

They are going to sell the kids pictures for a fortune and then they won’t need the royal family any more. I am sure they have plans of building wealth and hence the snub by leaving early. Either that or they are just plain stupid.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t think there is a big market for baby pics anymore. People magazine is close to going digital only, they just don’t have the money.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie should be criticized for this behavior.  Still, look at MM’s hands. Now, we understand why she needed the gloves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TeamLouie for the win


----------



## rose60610

wisconsin said:


> They are going to sell the kids pictures for a fortune and then they won’t need the royal family any more. I am sure they have plans of building wealth and hence the snub by leaving early. *Either that or they are just plain stupid.*



my vote goes to "just plain stupid"


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I may not like the Sussex Liars but I whole heartedly hope that Invisibet actually exists. I am quite concerned about the child's development being kept hidden like a recluse. What social skills would this child have? She has never been around others except for for her immediate family members and people that work at the house. Typing this out makes me sad for the child.
> 
> Only Archie has been shown to the world a few times including being front and center on the family's first Christmas e-card! How would Invisbet feel when she's old enough to see things on the internet? Would she feel less loved?


Her own parents didn't even acknowledge her birthday.  Did they forget that was the date they claimed she was born?


----------



## gelbergirl

How did William and Kate avoid Harry and Meghan in that big room behind the balcony during the balcony event, Trooping the Color?


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, the only photos are from inside. Some say it’s the Roland Mouret, first seen in 2018 the day before the spectacle wedding:
> View attachment 5419674


I like this dress, one of her best although probably needed a much better bra. I think navy is her best colour.


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> MY VOTE - a HUGE badly done for leaving early …
> 
> They flew private and could left anytime, not throwing shade at the family, this was deliberate


 Lacking foresight again. Assuming they have no specific commitments ( like a day job) they could have stayed a few extra days and seen the Queen this week once she has rested and jubilee and focus on her is over.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Harry and Meghan extended olive branch to Prince William to no avail
					

Why Kate & William’s children didn’t end up meeting their Sussex cousins.




					pagesix.com
				




Stop being mean to H & M!  I cannot believe the Cambridges had other things planned!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

gelbergirl said:


> How did William and Kate avoid Harry and Meghan in that big room behind the balcony during the balcony event, Trooping the Color?


Easily. They were in separate places. William and Kate were on the balcony at Buckingham Palace. Hazbeen and Nutmeg were in a completely different building, the Major General's Office, about a half a mile away.


----------



## Lodpah

Mrs.Z said:


> Harry and Meghan extended olive branch to Prince William to no avail
> 
> 
> Why Kate & William’s children didn’t end up meeting their Sussex cousins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being mean to H & M!  I cannot believe the Cambridges had other things planned!!!!


Hmmm . . . these events were planned a long time ago. There’s an appreciation thread elsewhere.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Her own parents didn't even acknowledge her birthday.  Did they forget that was the date they claimed she was born?


On their Christmas card with the almost picture of her, her parents claimed she was the one “ who made them a family.” 

We know from several years of exposure to them now, “family” is not a demonstrated value of theirs, self adulation is. I hope they have great Nannies.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> What I see in this pic is Archie being carried high on the baby bump, not low on the hip which would be normal.  So many things about this *staged* pic just do not make sense


Check out her shoes. Dangerous footwear for a pregnant woman carrying a child.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Lodpah said:


> Hmmm . . . these events were planned a long time ago. There’s an appreciation thread elsewhere.


I was totally being sarcastic, please don’t send me to exile in the appreciation thread!!!!


----------



## gracekelly

I would like to see a comment from anyone who was alleged to have attended the birthday party.  I need a reason to believe that they actually brought the children.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> I was totally being sarcastic, please don’t send me to exile in the appreciation thread!!!!


Speaking of which, it's still on page 5 and the last post was at 5:22am UK time, on Saturday.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> Here is an article on TW's outfit and its hidden messages. Her desperate desire to belong to '_the 1%-er' _ultra-wealthy is not hidden imo…* *
> 
> _*The St. Paul’s outfit also plays into the 1%-er look she has leaned into more and more since decamping for Montecito. For starters, it is haute couture, the most elite of the fashion world - in terms of both access and price tag.* And what could be more 1% than white, a colour which takes staff, private travel, limitless dry cleaning budget to keep pristine? It’s a colour she has returned to again and again recently, from the Brandon Maxwell blazer she wore to the Invictus Games to the white Valentino mini dress worn on-stage for Global Citizen Live. And it seems almost too obvious to point out that it also signifies purity, innocence. Meghan in red or black would have been an easy tabloid target._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Hidden Messages In Meghan Markle’s Day 2 Jubilee Look
> 
> 
> The hidden messages behind Meghan Markle's all-white Dior look at the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving look. Read more on Grazia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> graziadaily.co.uk


 Except on the Dior website they said it was greige....

I despair sometimes about the quality and accuracy of reporting these days.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> If only looks could kill  I'm glad he's right behind, keeping an eye on them (though that's probably not the case).


He was there for a reason. He was letting Harry know he was being watched. Same with the MI6 guy. We’re on to you mister!


----------



## gracekelly

RAINDANCE said:


> Except on the Dior website they said it was greige....
> 
> I despair sometimes about the quality and accuracy of reporting these days.


Looked whitish to me


----------



## Lodpah

Mrs.Z said:


> I was totally being sarcastic, please don’t send me to exile in the appreciation thread!!!!


Got it!


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> so we don't know if they even had the kids with them.  If they did, why wouldn't they show them off as everyone else did?
> Why didn't they go to the concert?  maybe because Harry wasn't given a role to take the stage like his brother, the future king?  or they would have had to sit a few rows back?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Messed up my quoting there. 
I believe they were invited to the private events. Watching Trooping the Colour from indoors then an extended family lunch. Only public event was St Paul's. Guildhall lunch was invitation only, no media coverage, so private again. According to Dan Wooton they just blew this event off and were no shows. 
There was media coverage for the concert and pagent so my guess is they were not invited to those to ensure there was no distracting media coverage of them and their interactions.
I think the window wind down in the car and window picture were deliberately done to ensure paparazzi shots. Anyone with half a brain cell would know that paparazzi would try to get photos of the kids at the windows. But of course without their pictures there is no substantive proof they were there.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Speaking of which, it's still on page 5 and the last post was at 5:22am UK time, on Saturday.


I got curious.

50% of the posts are from the OP. Majority of others are 1 or 2 timers and the total includes posts from members from our thread who visited. Posting strings of pictures without comments counts as a post, which means Haz’s grotesque display of braying in church is worthy of appreciation.

Support everyone has a right to a viewpoint, but curiosity is satisfied. I am staying “home” with all the fab ladies here.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> It’s worrying if they were miked up and did actually meet Charles at Clarence House miked up


Just my 2 cents:
If the meeting occurred and it was immediately prior to the service, it's very possible that they were miked up. Though, I think Charles wouldn't discuss with them sensitive issues without the presence of courtiers/lawyers. If he met them alone, and while I think Charles is a decent person, he may not be ready to be king. In other words, I think that such meeting (if it occurred) was in the presence of lawyers, and it does't benefit the Harkles to make its content public.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I have serious doubts that the kids were even in England.  But The Sun says they had a party.



It was a Zoom party. You don’t have to be on the same continent or time zone to have a kiddie party. Just have the nanny hold baby up to the camera and show her a photo of a big cake and sing! Loads of fun for all.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> I got curious.
> 
> 50% of the posts are from the OP. Majority of others are 1 or 2 timers and the total includes posts from members from our thread who visited. Posting strings of pictures without comments counts as a post, which means Haz’s grotesque display of braying in church is worthy of appreciation.
> 
> Support everyone has a right to a viewpoint, but curiosity is satisfied. I am staying “home” with all the fab ladies here.


Me too! I   you all.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> I believe the Sun released its article based on a source (Scoobie?). If Lilib exists and was with them at the Cottage, it's very possible they hosted a small celebration for the girl.
> Will and family with their public appearances made sure everyone understood that they were not guests of such event. I wouldn't be surprised if Eug and son showed up… I doubt that Zara's kids would attend, but they could have stopped by on their way to somewhere else and delivered a gift. It's all speculation at this point.


Here's the thing. Here in the UK we knew about the extra bank holiday and long weekend a couple of years ago. Events have been years in the planning. H+M tried to play a "will they - won't they" game in respect of whether they would come. All the Royals with small children will have made arrangements for their kids months ago on the days they were busy. Zara, Peter who were at the racing on Saturday both live in Gloucestershire and while I expect they may have been staying up in London this weekend, I seriously doubt they detoured to Windsor or rearranged their planned childcare to suit the Sussesexs late invitation.
My guess is only bea and eug took their same age babies over for the birthday party. And I think that's great, good on those girls for continuing to behave well with kindness, manners and good grace.


----------



## gracekelly

I think they were invited to any event that other royals were invited to attend. The greater collection of royals went to all the events. If they didn’t go it was their choice. I don’t believe that they were insulted by lack of an invite. It would be a foolish thing for BP to do.  They showed what children they are by not going  It made it more obvious as to why they showed up. Asking for money and wanting pictures and film footage   I doubt that Charles saw the children  and perhaps not even  TQ and more doubtful that they even brought the children.


----------



## gracekelly

RAINDANCE said:


> Here's the thing. Here in the UK we knew about the extra bank holiday and long weekend a couple of years ago. Events have been years in the planning. H+M tried to play a "will they - won't they" game in respect of whether they would come. All the Royals with small children will have made arrangements for their kids months ago on the days they were busy. Zara, Peter who were at the racing on Saturday both live in Gloucestershire and while I expect they may have been staying up in London this weekend, I seriously doubt they detoured to Windsor or rearranged their planned childcare to suit the Sussesexs late invitation.
> My guess is only bea and eug took their same age babies over for the birthday party. And I think that's great, good on those girls for continuing to behave well with kindness, manners and good grace.


Did they post anything about attending? They could do that even without a picture.


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> Actually I can totally see her in a real housewife kind of show but it would just confirm what we know that she's a fame hungry gold digger, and all her big words about changing the world for the better are nothing but smoke and mirrors.


Lisa Rinna would throw her under the bus and stir the pot as usual.  MM would be an easy target.  I say go for it Megain!


----------



## redney

I read somewhere they were invited to the Platinum Party Concert on Saturday night but were not invited to sit in the Royal Box so they didn't attend.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> @EverSoElusive this is for you



I bet his insta has exploded. 
Someone should tell Haz that HMTQ is really quite happy with the people she has around her.
I'd never really registered before the fact that she's had decades of handsome military men attending on her.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @EverSoElusive this is for you



#nohomo??  What's that hashtag supposed to mean Jesus?  A little off putting unless it means something other than what I think it means??


----------



## CeeJay

pukasonqo said:


> Racist BRF refuses to meet and acknowledge the mixed race children of PH an MM
> Maybe that will be how they spin this trip?


Oh, I totally think that they are going to try this sh!t .. playing the victim & racist cards!  Heaven forbid either of them REALIZE that it is all their fault; their hypocrisy, "marketing/merching" themselves, the Oprah interview, Hazza's upcoming book .. seriously, what the F did they expect .. oh, because THEY WERE NOT THE CENTER OF ATTENTION!!! 

Thank you Brits (and others) who were there at St. Paul's and BOOED them .. I was thrilled to pieces to see that!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> I like this dress, one of her best although probably needed a much better bra. I think navy is her best colour.



Agree, she looks good in navy, white, black, red, etc. The issues are almost always _fit _and _style. _She does have a strong shoe and handbag game, too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> #nohomo??  What's that hashtag supposed to mean Jesus?  A little off putting unless it means something other than what I think it means??


I was surprised he used that expression.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Mrs.Z said:


> Harry and Meghan extended olive branch to Prince William to no avail
> 
> 
> Why Kate & William’s children didn’t end up meeting their Sussex cousins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being mean to H & M!  I cannot believe the Cambridges had other things planned!!!!


The had to work - literally.  Each of the working royals were sent to parts of the UK to attend celebrations for the jubilee.  Edward and Sophie went to Northern Ireland.  Princess Anne and her husband went to Scotland. William and Kate were sent to Wales.  Charles and Anne also attended a few of the events around London in place of the Queen when it was determined she could not attend. 

It's also worth noting that the working royals upped their commitments when Harry and Meghan left royal life because they have the same number of needs to be covered, but two less people do do them.


----------



## DeMonica

wisconsin said:


> They are going to sell the kids pictures for a fortune and then they won’t need the royal family any more. I am sure they have plans of building wealth and hence the snub by leaving early. Either that or they are just plain stupid.


I'm sure they had had plans but, as it turned out, some of them never came to fruition. So I vote for the later.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> #nohomo??  What's that hashtag supposed to mean Jesus?  A little off putting unless it means something other than what I think it means??



I think he’s trying to say, “I think this man is attractive, but I am not gay.”  It’s definitely a clumsy attempt at using slang.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since BLG was posting about the Scottish hunk [call it like it is], he wanted it to be clear that nothing should be implied. 

_No homo is a *slang phrase used at the end of a sentence to assert the statement spoken by the speaker had no intentional homosexual implications*._

According to Wikipedia


----------



## kkfiregirl

lulu212121 said:


> I wonder if we'll see Harry playing polo anymore.



I don’t think Meghan is going to let him out of the house anytime soon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Did they post anything about attending? They could do that even without a picture.



Eugenie did not. Beatrice doesn't have an Instagram account we know of.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> I read somewhere they were invited to the Platinum Party Concert on Saturday night but were not invited to sit in the Royal Box so they didn't attend.



There were so many non-royals in that box, though. I don't buy it. They probably expected to get better seats or something.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry and Meghan's team seen with wooden swing similar to Cambridges
					

EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex appear to have come home with presents from their family after they missed the Queen on the balcony at Jubilee.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> I think he’s trying to say, “I think this man is attractive, but I am not gay.”  It’s definitely a clumsy attempt at using slang.



But that's more of a slur than slang. Not a fan.


----------



## CeeJay

DeMonica said:


> Actually I can totally see her in a real housewife kind of show but it would just confirm what we know that she's a fame hungry gold digger, and all her big words about changing the world for the better are nothing but smoke and mirrors.


Yes, I could totally see this .. but, think about the current "Real Housewives of BH"?  Those that make the most noise and drama, typically get more camera time (thinking about Lisa Rinna and Erika), which is frightening!!  I haven't watched any of the "Real Housewives" shows in at least a few years, and don't plan to view them in the future!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> #nohomo??  What's that hashtag supposed to mean Jesus?  A little off putting unless it means something other than what I think it means??


It means you didn’t see the weapons he had underneath his kilt.


----------



## Debbini

elvisfan4life said:


> We don’t care long as she stays over the pond


"We" care because "we" live on this side of the pond


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eugenie did not. Beatrice doesn't have an Instagram account we know of.



Thanks for looking it up. Pretty telling IMO. She could have written the August  loved meeting his cousins etc.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry and Meghan's team seen with wooden swing similar to Cambridges
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex appear to have come home with presents from their family after they missed the Queen on the balcony at Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They were  taking things from Frog Cottage. They had the PP so could easily take things left behind. It that item was new, it would have been in a box in pieces.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But that's more of a slur than slang. Not a fan.



It’s not a slur, but I see your point. Homosexual isn’t a slur, but his usage of “homo” is homophobic.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry and Meghan's team seen with wooden swing similar to Cambridges
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Duke and Duchess of Sussex appear to have come home with presents from their family after they missed the Queen on the balcony at Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


How is it that the photographers are able to get pics of stuff getting offloaded, but no pics of actual kids?  Even ones where their faces are covered by blankets or something?  All this nonsense that a swing and scooter is "proof" that the kids were there just doesn't make sense.


----------



## lulilu

xincinsin said:


> I'm thinking that those shushing pics were planned with the papparazzi. Why else would the telephoto lens be aimed towards a window showing some (royal) children? And shushing tends to be a fleeting action, but both Harkles held their poses long enough for good clear shots with "animated" expressions.



*Totally agree -- what fake poses, fake smiles -- clearly posing from a photographer with a long lens to capture their "silly" moments with the children, who were imposed upon by them.  grrrrr*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember their last exit from a service? Chairs were pushed and they cut in front of Sophie&Ed. 
Not going to happen this time. Boxed in.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Here she is?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This was just posted in the royal fashion thread of all places. Apparently the Sussexes released it.

ETA: @lanasyogamama was quicker!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So her photographer is the one person she could persuade to come?


----------



## gelbergirl

Who is this woman?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This was just posted in the royal fashion thread of all places. Apparently the Sussexes released it.
> 
> ETA: @lanasyogamama was quicker!
> 
> View attachment 5420013


What a cutie! She does look like a combination of the two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Who is this woman?



Camilla Holmstroem, Misan Harriman's wife.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So her photographer is the one person she could persuade to come?



Persuade or pay?


----------



## bag-mania

lulu212121 said:


> I wonder if we'll see Harry playing polo anymore. I have a feeling some of their friends are moles. The Royal Family seemed to know exactly how to handle them.



That reminds me. It’s interesting to read how the polo association views Harry’s contribution to the team. It sounds to me like he was invited to play purely for the attention his name brings because he’s definitely out of his league compared to the others. They even lend him the best horses. By the way they still won without him this past weekend, what a surprise!









						LISLE NIXON MEMORIAL OVERTIME VICTORY: LOS PADRES CROWNING ACHIEVEMENT
					

In a riveting finish, Los Padres reigned over Mokarow Farms 15-14 in the Lisle Nixon Memorial at Santa Barbara Polo & Racquet Club in Carpinteria, California.




					www.uspolo.org


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> Persuade or pay?



He seems to stand firmly in the sugar pot, though. Remember that waffle about "They are waltzing through life as absolute soulmates and always have"?


----------



## CarryOn2020

With all the drama, this is anti-climatic.
Cute, sweet and adorable, just as all 1 year olds are.  Imo.

ETA:  now, let her grow up in peace and love.


----------



## kkfiregirl

The baby is very cute and Meghan washed off all that bronzer — she looks pretty & relaxed!


----------



## Lodpah

She’s going to the “rehab” our image mode. All those pics of the royal children must have awoken her consciousness to now go a different tack. It’s glutton be all icicles and ballon’s now, for a bit. They ran out of ideas, why not trot the children now. Still, a cute baby that LB. They can’t cry racism in the kids.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is the best Meghan has looked in ages.


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> The baby is very cute and Meghan washed off all that bronzer — she looks pretty & relaxed!


The baby is cute but when I see MM I see her ugly soul emanating from her aura. It comes from the inside. Need to get mg eyes checked.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Ok we have seen Lilibet now let her grow up in peace and out of the glare of cameras - you know like you said you wanted


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Her own parents didn't even acknowledge her birthday.  Did they forget that was the date they claimed she was born?



You meant to say they didn't make a main page announcement on the Archewell website? What???? Such double standard


----------



## 1LV

You can’t ignore how cute the other two little girls are!


----------



## csshopper

Cute little girl, feels anticlimactic after seeing all the cousins this week end.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Here she is?
> View attachment 5420008



Aww the baby finally appears! This baby doesn't look much like the baby in their last Christmas card though. The plot thickens


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One thing though: they really waited until after the Jubilee. I wonder if stern words were had because it completely differs from their usual modus operandi.


----------



## lallybelle

I mean they may as well have stayed home. 1 pic with people no one cares about? Why did this have to be in England?

Anyway she is cute. WTF with all the cloak and dagger around a simple birthday pic?


----------



## EverSoElusive

1LV said:


> You can’t ignore how cute the other two little girls are!



The two other girls are cuter though


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww the baby finally appears! This baby doesn't look much like the baby in their last Christmas card though. The plot thickens


The role was recast!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One thing though: they really waited until after the Jubilee. I wonder if stern words were had because it completely differs from their usual modus operandi.



Probably more like no one would buy what they were trying to sell


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah

It just dawned on me! The baby looks like Samatha Markle.


----------



## gracekelly

Cute little girl.  Pretty hair.  Markle nose.  Kind of a let down since no pic with granny.  Does anyone think they were paid a gazillion dollars for this?  I don't.  After Louis, most people don't care.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Yay https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1621454/Meghan-Markle-Prince-Harry-return-UK



This calls for another party! 

Thank you guys in the US, you're amazing


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> Probably more like no one would buy what they were trying to sell


I think you're right.  Plus Louis is still trending pretty big.  These pix are nothing.  It would be nice if a picture of Arkie showed up too.


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One thing though: they really waited until after the Jubilee. I wonder if stern words were had because it completely differs from their usual modus operandi.


I think they might have been instructed to wait. I wouldn't be surprised if the were ordered to stay in and not invited to the other public events. As it was written in one of the articles (daily beast ?) the Palace wanted to avoid all the risky situations and comparison pics. They might have been allowed to go home early. However, Meagan might have got the wind that, just like us, people doubt if the children were there at all, so she felt the need to  post a pic as soon as she could.
The toddler is gorgeous. So sad that she won't have that close contact with her cousins as the Cambridge children have. I hope still that she'll have a happy childhood.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> It’s not a slur, but I see your point. Homosexual isn’t a slur, but his usage of “homo” is homophobic.


maybe its like the N word - depends on who is using it
I had gay neighbor years ago and he used the word homo


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Still waiting on a suitable recast


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Mrs.Z said:


> Harry and Meghan extended olive branch to Prince William to no avail
> 
> 
> Why Kate & William’s children didn’t end up meeting their Sussex cousins.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stop being mean to H & M!  I cannot believe the Cambridges had other things planned!!!!


Please read the court documents indicating which royals represented the Queen at different locations. Please understand this weekend was about the Queen.  Please read and then try to understand.  Try to read the room while you are at it.   The Brits don’t want them back.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> It just dawned on me! *The baby looks like Samatha Markle.*



Don't you go there now. Nutmeg is going to hunt you down


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Please read the court documents indicating which royals represented the Queen at different locations. Please understand this weekend was about the Queen.  Please read and then try to understand.  Try to read the room while you are at it.   The Brits don’t want them back.




She replied earlier saying that it was just sarcasm  She didn't mean to come off as a stan.


----------



## carmen56

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww the baby finally appears! This baby doesn't look much like the baby in their last Christmas card though. The plot thickens



I thought the same.  Bub doesn’t look like her mum or dad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

carmen56 said:


> I thought the same.  Bub doesn’t look like her mum or dad.



I do think she looks a lot like toddler Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Lilliesdaughter  Stand down. It was sarcasm. See post 94,550.  




Mrs.Z said:


> I was totally being sarcastic, please don’t send me to exile in the appreciation thread!!!!



ETA: are there really ‘court documents’ that specify who went where?  _Legal_ courts do that? Or is this a _royal_ court?


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> The two other girls are cuter though


   Omg. I can’t take you anywhere!


----------



## RAINDANCE

Personally I would have preferred them to wait an extra day before releasing the photo but then at least they didn't release photo last night. 

Baby definitely looks like them both. 

Why no Harry on the photos- I hope that was his decision and he's not being sidelined. 
One of the best photos ever of Harry was the one in Canada , New Year 2019 ? with baby Archie.

My absolute admiration to the royal cousins who clearly did make changes to their plans to accommodate their cousin if reports that the Tindall & Phillips children attended are correct.
Proof indeed that behaving well is always, always the best course of action.


----------



## Aimee3

I’m surprised by TW’s outfit in that photo.  So drab and not designer.  I thought I even saw a stain on the pants!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

1LV said:


> Omg. I can’t take you anywhere!



I'm like Louis at the Jubilee


----------



## 1LV

Lodpah said:


> It just dawned on me! The baby looks like Samatha Markle.


Wouldn’t that be a kicker!?


----------



## EverSoElusive

RAINDANCE said:


> Personally I would have preferred them to wait an extra day before releasing the photo but then at least they didn't release photo last night.
> 
> Baby definitely looks like them both.
> 
> Why no Harry on the photos- I hope that was his decision and he's not being sidelined.
> One of the best photos ever of Harry was the one in Canada , New Year 2019 ? with baby Archie.
> 
> My absolute admiration to the *royal cousins who clearly did make changes to their plans to accommodate their cousin if reports that the Tindall & Phillips children attended are correct.*
> Proof indeed that behaving well is always, always the best course of action.



They made plan change??? When was this?   Did I miss something?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I’m surprised by TW’s outfit in that photo.  So drab and not designer.  I thought I even saw a stain on the pants!!!



is that a tag?  

ETA: maybe it is the label


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

I think the little one is a mixture of them.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> Cute little girl.  Pretty hair.  Markle nose.  Kind of a let down since no pic with granny.  Does anyone think they were paid a gazillion dollars for this?  I don't.  After Louis, most people don't care.


Louis is a hard act to follow.


----------



## EverSoElusive

1LV said:


> Wouldn’t that be a kicker!?




Now you're causing the casting director to lose his/her/their job


----------



## EverSoElusive

1LV said:


> Louis is a hard act to follow.




I agree. Even George as a toddler can't compete with Louis


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww the baby finally appears! *This baby doesn't look much like the baby in their last Christmas card though.* The plot thickens



The role of Lilibet has been recast due to the previous actress’s agent asking for too much money.


----------



## DeMonica

RAINDANCE said:


> Personally I would have preferred them to wait an extra day before releasing the photo but then at least they didn't release photo last night.
> 
> Baby definitely looks like them both.
> 
> Why no Harry on the photos- I hope that was his decision and he's not being sidelined.
> One of the best photos ever of Harry was the one in Canada , New Year 2019 ? with baby Archie.
> 
> My absolute admiration to the royal cousins who clearly did make changes to their plans to accommodate their cousin if reports that the Tindall & Phillips children attended are correct.
> Proof indeed that behaving well is always, always the best course of action.


I think it was mentioned that the Tindall and Phillips children were invited, but it wasn't confirmed that they had been there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MM looks really thin. Has there been some photoshopping?


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> The role of Lilibet has been recast due to the previous actress’s agent asking for too much money.




Or maybe the baby is traumatized from all the plate breaking that she heard and saw so she had to quit reality TV


----------



## gracekelly

This was the only thing that they could come up with to redeem themselves in public opinion. Let's see if it is really successful.  Once again, using a child for their own ends.


----------



## mia55

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5420014




She’s really looking very pretty here and the kid is super cute.


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> Don't you go there now. Nutmeg is going to hunt you down


She does! Even that slight tilt of the head.


----------



## Mrs.Z

MM looks really thin. Has there been some photoshopping?
[/QUOTE]
We are all living in a post-Kardashian society!  So yes, obviously yes!!!!


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM looks really thin. Has there been some photoshopping?


Lots of posts on Instagram saying it looks like an old photo of TW with not her latest face (nose and veneers), and of course not as puffy as we have seen her.  She also looks younger.  There does appear to be a rectangular inner tag on the pants but also a blackish stain lower down.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

EverSoElusive said:


> She replied earlier saying that it was just sarcasm  She didn't mean to come off as a stan.


I stand corrected and admit my misjudgment.   I apologize.   Disliking M vehemently is no excuse for intolerance on my part.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> She does! Even that slight tilt of the head.



Please do a side by side picture


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

EverSoElusive said:


> They made plan change??? When was this?   Did I miss something?


I was speculating that some plans for childcare for zara and Peters kids would have been made ages ago, and well before H+m confirmed attendance in the UK for the weekend and the birthday party. 
It was not a reported fact, just my supposition. 
We all have lots if theories here, some obvious, some sensible, some just wild !!!


----------



## 1LV

Could the timing of the photo release have anything to do with all the attention Prince Louis has received?  Regardless, I have to say kudos to her for waiting until the jubilee was over.


----------



## EverSoElusive

RAINDANCE said:


> I was speculating that some plans for childcare for zara and Peters kids would have been made ages ago, and well before H+m confirmed attendance in the UK for the weekend and the birthday party.
> It was not a reported fact, just my supposition.
> We all have lots if theories here, some obvious, some sensible, some just wild !!!




Ahh I see. I really thought I missed some juicy news     

On a lighter note, it would be nice if their kids can have a relationship with their cousins. It was nice seeing the relationship between the Cambridge and Tindall kids.


----------



## PurseUOut

1LV said:


> Could the timing of the photo release have anything to do with all the attention Prince Louis has received?  Regardless, I have to say kudos to her for waiting until the jubilee was over.



Could be, yikes. That kid's behavior tells me everything I need to know about what really goes on in the Cambridge household.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Here she is?
> View attachment 5420008


They had no choice but to exploit their child’s photograph, can’t say that I’m totally surprised.  She is adorable, but I wonder about the red hair because it always seems to appear that Archie has red hair .. but when they were pap-snapped in Malibu (perhaps?), it was very clear that his hair was dark brown.


----------



## gelbergirl

PurseUOut said:


> Could be, yikes. That kid's behavior tells me everything I need to know about what really goes on in the Cambridge household.



I thought he was a little young to be at that event.
Perhaps he could have been there a little while and then handed off the Nanny.
And then home.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM looks really thin. Has there been some photoshopping?



She has not eaten since the day she was booed & has lost a few lbs.


----------



## bag-mania

They knew they would be criticized if they released the photos on Saturday when the jubilee was still underway. Waiting until the day after it ended kept the accusations of upstaging at bay.


----------



## Mrs.Z

1LV said:


> Could the timing of the photo release have anything to do with all the attention Prince Louis has received?  Regardless, I have to say kudos to her for waiting until the jubilee was over.


Well, the truth is ….Lillibet knocked Louis off the front page of the Daily Mail, so yes, this is war!


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> Except on the Dior website they said it was greige....
> 
> I despair sometimes about the quality and accuracy of reporting these days.



It certainly wasn't white (even though she often wears, and looks good in white).

Nor did it have "power of simplicity" nor was it "sleek". It was fairly fussy save for the colour and the stuffy 'done-upness' and formality does her no favours at all, although she keeps revisiting it.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> Could be, yikes. That kid's behavior tells me everything I need to know about what really goes on in the Cambridge household.



What do you mean? It’s quite possible that their child doesn’t act like that at home. He’s ebullient and it’s nice that his parents haven’t stifled his personality.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> They knew they would be criticized if they released the photos on Saturday when the jubilee was still underway. Waiting until the day after it ended kept the accusations of upstaging at bay.



So they are growing up after all!


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> Please do a side by side picture


Can’t find a pic of Samantha as a child but if you see her pic it’s a strong resemblance. The eyes, coloring, etc.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> This was the only thing that they could come up with to redeem themselves in public opinion. Let's see if it is really successful.  Once again, using a child for their own ends.


Great minds think alike .. you beat me to it!!!


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> So they are growing up after all!



Maybe. There’s always hope.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Here she is?
> View attachment 5420008


The kids are all Harry and I wouldn't expect anything less from manipulative Meg. (I will never be convinced she was actually pregnant.)


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Well, the truth is ….Lillibet knocked Louis off the front page of the Daily Mail, so yes, this is war!


Louis doesn't care.    He had more publicity than this baby will ever get.  Louis is discussing his career with his agent (his mom) and it has been decided that Louis should go on hiatus. lolololol!


----------



## Lodpah

Jayne1 said:


> The kids are all Harry and I wouldn't expect anything less from manipulative Meg. (I will never be convinced she was actually pregnant.)


I’m curious as to what lead you to think this? Aside from the moon bumps?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Mrs.Z said:


> Well, the truth is ….Lillibet knocked Louis off the front page of the Daily Mail, so yes, this is war!



It's easy for Louis to be on the front page again because he's not locked up all the time and his parents don't need to pay for him to be on the front page.

Now on the other hand, the only reason Invisibet is on the front page is probably because Nutmeg had her people pay and ask for whatever paper that is to plaster her on the front page


----------



## RAINDANCE

Mrs.Z said:


> Well, the truth is ….Lillibet knocked Louis off the front page of the Daily Mail, so yes, this is war!


I've still got about 8 articles about Boris at the top of my Mail newsfeed !!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, she looks good in navy, white, black, red, etc. The issues are almost always _fit _and _style. _She does have a strong shoe and handbag game, too.


The issues are often related to her character, and it's hard to look at her outfits in a favorable way. The 'fake' smile and the way she walks, well captured by Harrysgreysuit, don't help either…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> Could be, yikes. That kid's behavior tells me everything I need to know about what really goes on in the Cambridge household.



And what would that be?


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> It's easy for Louis to be on the front page again because he's not locked up all the time and his parents don't need to pay for him to be on the front page.
> 
> Now on the other hand, the only reason Invisibet is on the front page is probably because Nutmeg had her people pay and ask for whatever paper that is to plaster her on the front page


The DM was happy to put this on the front page because if you read the article, they are throwing plenty of shade on her parents and their behavior this past weekend.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I stand corrected and admit my misjudgment.   I apologize.   Disliking M vehemently is no excuse for intolerance on my part.



No worries. We are glad you’re here and enjoy your posts.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The issues are often related to her character, and it's hard to look at her outfits in a favorable way. The 'fake' smile and the way she walks, well captured by Harrysgreysuit, don't help either…



Same exit walk  she used when they were told to leave Charles' birthday  party.  Every time I see it, stripper music from Gypsy plays in my head.


----------



## 1LV

PurseUOut said:


> Could be, yikes. That kid's behavior tells me everything I need to know about what really goes on in the Cambridge household.


It always seems to be the baby in the family who gets away with the most.  Allow me to offer up my “baby” and my sister as examples!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Here she is?
> View attachment 5420008


Not to be rude, but does anyone really even give a damn at this point?


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> Persuade or *pay*?


Pay?  No way, unless it's lemon olive cakes and sandwiches bought by the chauffeur!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Same exit walk  she used when they were told to leave Charles' birthday  party.  Every time I see it, stripper music from Gypsy plays in my head.



She needs a boa!


----------



## DeMonica

1LV said:


> Could the timing of the photo release have anything to do with all the attention Prince Louis has received?  Regardless, I have to say kudos to her for waiting until the jubilee was over.


I think they might have hoped to share more pics but it seems that the one they really wanted to share was never made. Or they just wait for the right moment to release it. IMO they really had to show something for this visit. They were reduced to marginal royal family members in the UK, and they lost importance elsewhere - it's understandable that they try to drum up a little public attention. In the times of the ongoing pandemics, war and the looming financial crisis they have to put a little effort in being interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Pay?  No way, unless it's lemon olive cakes and sandwiches bought by the chauffeur!



Maybe the photographer paid her  
Free publicity [and birthday cake] for him


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> She needs a boa!
> 
> View attachment 5420085



She probably still has one from her Jamaican beach wedding


----------



## 1LV

kkfiregirl said:


> She probably still has one from her Jamaican beach wedding


She said boa, not bong!


----------



## kkfiregirl

1LV said:


> She said boa, not bong!


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Cute little girl, feels anticlimactic after seeing all the cousins this week end.


no one is cuter than charlotte


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She needs a boa!
> 
> View attachment 5420085


And


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Not to be rude, but does anyone really even give a damn at this point?


It's anticlimatic.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5420014



cute like any baby....I think maybe both kids will be blessed with that beautiful red hair that isn't carrot-red......if anyone was curious about their skin tone, it seems pretty clear now they won't be victims of racism


----------



## Jayne1

Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?

I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?

Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.

I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?
> 
> I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?
> 
> Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.
> 
> I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol


yes, in spite of all the recessive/dominant theories, I guess genes can surprise us.  would you say harry's hair is straight?  I guess it is.  Meghan's real hair isn't so I agree it's interesting the kids seem to have straight hair.  but maybe as it grows out it can get curlier?  I have curly hair but in baby pics I don't think it looked curly

time will tell


----------



## 1LV

Jayne1 said:


> Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?
> 
> I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?
> 
> Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.
> 
> I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol


I have red hair.  My husband has brown hair.  We have three kids.  One started out with auburn hair. One started out with blonde hair. The last one was a strawberry blonde. Today every stinking one of them is a brunette.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, in spite of all the recessive/dominant theories, I guess genes can surprise us.  would you say harry's hair is straight?  I guess it is.  Meghan's real hair isn't so I agree it's interesting the kids seem to have straight hair.  but maybe as it grows out it can get curlier?  I have curly hair but in baby pics I don't think it looked curly
> 
> time will tell



I won't comment on these specific children because they are real children/people. 

Factually, and generally that is what is what conventional wisdom believes.


----------



## DeMonica

Jayne1 said:


> Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?
> 
> I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?
> 
> Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.
> 
> I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol


Meghan is mixed race and even her mother had Caucasians on her family tree if I'm not mistaken, so it's totally possible that she might carry a silent gene for red hair. The same can be said about the straight hair. The babies might have taken after the Spencers and the Markles, not the Raglans - and they might have  lovely black haired children with olive skin one day.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm late to the party again. 
Were the photographer, wife and kids the only guests at the Cottage? 









						New Photos Of Harry And Meghan's Daughter, Lilibet, Show She's A Redhead Like Her Dad
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrated their daughter's first birthday in the UK with a "casual, intimate backyard picnic."




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> Lots of posts on Instagram saying it looks like an old photo of TW with not her latest face (nose and veneers), and of course not as puffy as we have seen her.  She also looks younger.  There does appear to be a rectangular inner tag on the pants but also a blackish stain lower down.


I noticed that as well.  He face is fuller now and her nose is different.  This headshot like an old one from 2018.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I'm late to the party again.
> Were the photographer, wife and kids the only guests at the Cottage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Photos Of Harry And Meghan's Daughter, Lilibet, Show She's A Redhead Like Her Dad
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrated their daughter's first birthday in the UK with a "casual, intimate backyard picnic."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com



Even the father was missing from his own kid’s party. Maybe he took Archie to the local pub to knock back a pint.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I'm late to the party again.
> Were the photographer, wife and kids the only guests at the Cottage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Photos Of Harry And Meghan's Daughter, Lilibet, Show She's A Redhead Like Her Dad
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrated their daughter's first birthday in the UK with a "casual, intimate backyard picnic."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com



So far they are the only ones who have released a photo.


----------



## sdkitty

1LV said:


> I have red hair.  My husband has brown hair.  We have three kids.  One started out with auburn hair. One started out with blonde hair. The last one was a strawberry blonde. Today every stinking one of them is a brunett.


my mother and her sister were both what used to be called tow heads (white blonde) as young kids...my mother stayed blonde and her sister ended up as a red-head


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hate to be this person, but both of them having red hair at such a young age isn’t passing the common sense test with me.  Harry was so fair as a baby.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> my mother and her sister were both what used to be called tow heads (white blonde) as young kids...my mother stayed blonde and her sister ended up as a red-head


Wow.  Same with my mother and her sister!


----------



## Gal4Dior

No amount of baby pics are going to make me forget their vile behavior towards HM and the RF. I'm glad they left early. They were such a distraction to what was great about the Jubilee. I don't even know why they bothered to show up! You fly 12 hours there to stay 3 days? Stay home, stay quiet, and stop whining and complaining.

Their whole lifestyle is funded by the very institution they've demonized. They are such a hypocritical mess (don't even get me started on the private jet they took to get there), that no amount of good PR can fix "the ugly" that they embody.


----------



## lulilu

PurseUOut said:


> Could be, yikes. That kid's behavior tells me everything I need to know about what really goes on in the Cambridge household.


What are you convinced goes on in the Cambridge household??????


----------



## sdkitty

lulilu said:


> What are you convinced goes on in the Cambridge household??????


I'd like to know too
They seem like a very normal loving family to me


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> I hate to be this person, but both of them having red hair at such a young age isn’t passing the common sense test with me.  Harry was so fair as a baby.
> View attachment 5420099


I was just curious about genetics. Red hair is a recessive gene, that's all. But what Meg wants, Meg gets...


----------



## lanasyogamama

LVSistinaMM said:


> *Their whole lifestyle is funded by the very institution they've demonized.* They are such a hypocritical mess (don't even get me started on the private jet they took to get there), that no amount of good PR can fix "the ugly" that they embody.


nailed it.


----------



## Gal4Dior

lanasyogamama said:


> nailed it.


I'm sure that Bespoke Dior Couture she wore to the Thanksgiving service wasn't funded by their non-existent Netflix money. Papa Charles must have pitched in for that! Let's hope he wasn't the one who was racist towards Nutmeg! <gasp>


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> What are you convinced goes on in the Cambridge household??????


Lots of love and respect.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzie should be criticized for this behavior.  Still, look at MM’s hands. Now, we understand why she needed the gloves.



Are those MeMeMeAgain’s hands?  Eeek re: the spray tan fail, but … Man Mountain Dean?! Those are large hocks!


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth…



@bag-mania Would the b-day party be within Hazz's cancelations?


----------



## gracekelly

LVSistinaMM said:


> I'm sure that Bespoke Dior Couture she wore to the Thanksgiving service wasn't funded by their non-existent Netflix money. Papa Charles must have pitched in for that! Let's hope he wasn't the one who was racist towards Nutmeg! <gasp>


I think Prince Charles is way past giving MM a clothing allowance.  If they can afford a 16 bathroom mansion, then she can buy her own clothes.  If she can't, then she should take in laundry to pay for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Katel said:


> Are those MeMeMeAgain’s hands?  Eeek in the spray tan fail, but … Man Mountain Dean?! Those are large hocks!
> 
> View attachment 5420126


vitiligo?  or just something off with the photo?


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> Are those MeMeMeAgain’s hands?  Man Mountain Dean!
> 
> View attachment 5420126


Do you think the gloves removed the fake tan?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth…





_Therapy, therapy, therapy, and cancelled meetings after the weekend. Deep breaths. He is heartbroken but committed to difficult decisions, family and self care._

Boo Hoo, Harry.  You have broken many more hearts in you family than the one purported to be housed in your chest.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> vitiligo?  or just something off with the photo?


Her self tanner is wearing off.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Do you think the gloves removed the fake tan?


It must be the lemon juice that is taking it off.  You know, the lemon juice from all the olive oil lemon cakes she made to take with her for the family.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> I think Prince Charles is way past giving MM a clothing allowance.  If they can afford a 16 bathroom mansion, then she can buy her own clothes.  If she can't, then she should take in laundry to pay for them.


I forgot. TW gets clothes for free. Even as a Royal she wasn't supposed to, but still got them for free. I'm she does more than just merch her clothing...at least pre Harry....


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> _Therapy, therapy, therapy, and cancelled meetings after the weekend. Deep breaths. He is heartbroken but committed to difficult decisions, family and self care._
> 
> Boo Hoo, Harry.  You have broken many more hearts in you family than the one purported to be housed in your chest.


They are MASTERFUL at victimhood. They should teach a seminar on how to be spoiled, rich narcs with absolutely no self awareness or actual professional or life skills.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, it didn't work. Let's release Lilib's picture… 







__





						Blind Item #8
					

When you leave an event before it ends, the story becomes about you. That is what the alliterate one wanted. However, the world's social me...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## oldbag

Sharont2305 said:


> Speaking of which, it's still on page 5 and the last post was at 5:22am UK time, on Saturday.





CeeJay said:


> They had no choice but to exploit their child’s photograph, can’t say that I’m totally surprised.  She is adorable, but I wonder about the red hair because it always seems to appear that Archie has red hair .. but when they were pap-snapped in Malibu (perhaps?), it was very clear that his hair was dark brown.


I was born with bright red hair. My mother's hair was so dark brown it looked black, my father had black hair. My paternal grandmother had redish hair even though her mother was Native American. My red hair eventually turned brown/auburn before puberty. I have always felt a bit sad my red went away. I also have brown eyes. No light colored eyes, no freckles.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> The kids are all Harry and I wouldn't expect anything less from manipulative Meg. (I will never be convinced she was actually pregnant.)


so you think they used donated eggs?


----------



## CeeJay

oldbag said:


> I was born with bright red hair. My mother's hair was so dark brown it looked black, my father had black hair. My paternal grandmother had redish hair even though her mother was Native American. My red hair eventually turned brown/auburn before puberty. I have always felt a bit sad my red went away. I also have brown eyes. No light colored eyes, no freckles.


I’m 1/2 Irish and 1/2 Italian.  However, my Italian family was from Alta Italia, way up north where the Celtic invasions occurred.  As such, my Italian grandmother had Auburn hair (which had been more red as a child), but her sister had a shock of orange hair!  

On the Irish side, my Aunt (father’s sister) was a major-league carrot top, so when my parents had children, everyone thought that for sure, there would be a redhead.  My oldest sister was a dark Auburn growing up, but then turned chocolate brown and the middle sister was always a chocolate brown.  I was a major-league tow head and stayed blonde until after university where I then moused into that HORRIBLE Mouse brown color!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Her self tanner is wearing off.


ok
I know people here said she looked darker but why would a woman who is biracial and has done her best to look white all her life want to darken her skin?


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> vitiligo?  or just something off with the photo?



my guess are is it’s just shadows and light from all the overheads.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> ok
> I know people here said she looked darker but why would a woman who is biracial and has done her best to look white all her life want to darken her skin?



To stand out

OR

To show the world that she's proud to be black at her convenience


----------



## Chanbal

_An insider said: “Harry and Meghan wanted their photographer to capture the moment Lilibet met the Queen.

“But they were told no chance. It was a private family meeting.”

Buckingham Palace did not want to comment._









						Queen banned Harry and Meghan from photographing moment she first met Lilibet
					

THE Queen banned Harry and Meghan from bringing a photographer into Windsor Castle to capture the moment Lilibet met Lilibet. The Sussexes introduced their daughter Lilibet to her great-grandmother…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

Jayne1 said:


> I was just curious about genetics. Red hair is a recessive gene, that's all. But what Meg wants, Meg gets...


Recessive indeed, unless it's coupled up with another red head gene from the other parent. Just a little example what genes can do:



This is Def Leppard guitarist Phil Collen with his partner and their baby Samantha. The baby was definitely not adopted and She's a natural child of both of them.
Samantha and her father about 10 years later:


Phil might have dyed his hair blonde (I'm not sure, although I have seen him several times) but his stubble is definitely reddish in real life, so he's at least a so called silent red head. His mother was a red head. Samantha's mom is definitely not a red head but voilá her daughter is. Her skin tone has also changed throughout the years. So hair and skin color, also texture can be inherited in mysterious ways.


----------



## Lodpah

Cry me a river after you burned your bridges Harry



Burning Bridges

Friends all tried to warn me
But I held my head up high
All the time they warned me
But I only passed them by
They all tried to tell me
But I guess I didn't care
I turned my back and
Left them standing there
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Joey tried to help me find a job
A while ago
When I finally got it I didn't want to go
The party Mary gave for me
When I just walked away
Now there's nothing left for me to say
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Years have passed and I keep thinking
What a fool I've been
I look back into the past and
Think of way back then
I know that I lost everything I thought I that could win
I guess I should have listened to my friends
All the burning bridges that have fallen after me
All the lonely feelings and the burning memories
Everyone I left behind each time I closed the door
Burning bridges lost forevermore
Burning bridges lost forevermore


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> so you think they used donated eggs?


Very possible.  Then she could choose which donor to use by her looks.  No guarantee but wouldn’t put it past them.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> ok
> I know people here said she looked darker but why would a woman who is biracial and has done her best to look white all her life want to darken her skin?



So that any perceived slight that happened over the weekend could be blamed on racism. She doesn’t want anyone to forget that she is a POC.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> so you think they used donated eggs?



I don’t think so— she would need the babies to be biologically related to her so she can be equal to Kate.


----------



## Chanbal

Lilib is real!  She is a cutie, congratulations to the parents!
Is the hair red? Hair color can be tricky in photos. It's such a wonderful coincidence that her 1st birthday coincided with the Jubilee of QE (aka Lilibeth).




The above is from 'What to Expect'


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> why would a woman who is biracial and has done her best to look white all her life want to darken her skin?



Back in the day, looking white or racially ambiguous served her purposes (marrying rich, getting casted in roles), but these days, looking brown and multi-racial serves her current purposes.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> Lilib is real!  She is a cutie, congratulations to the parents!
> Is the hair red? Hair color can be tricky in photos. It's such an wonderful coincidence that her 1st birthday coincided with the Jubilee of QE (aka Lilibeth).
> View attachment 5420164
> 
> View attachment 5420161



She certainly has a lot of teeth and hair for a 12-month-old, but it definitely possible!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Lilib is real!  She is a cutie, congratulations to the parents!
> Is the hair red? Hair color can be tricky in photos. It's such an wonderful coincidence that her 1st birthday coincided with the Jubilee of QE (aka Lilibeth).
> View attachment 5420164
> 
> View attachment 5420161
> 
> The above is from 'What to Expect'



Oooo, another mystery. So now we are left to wonder whether she was born earlier, rather than on June 4th. We were told they couldn’t go to Phillip’s funeral because she was “heavily pregnant.” Or at least the surrogate was.

Either this baby is growing teeth at a phenomenal rate or she is a decoy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Any of y'all have a red haired little girl to be casted to play an older Lili?  I'm sure the search is on and there's a stipulation saying that the girl shall not resemble Samantha Markle


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> She certainly has a lot of teeth and hair for a 12-month-old, but it definitely possible!





bag-mania said:


> Oooo, another mystery. So now we are left to wonder whether she was born earlier, rather than on June 4th. We were told they couldn’t go to Phillip’s funeral because she was “heavily pregnant.” Or at least the surrogate was.
> 
> Either this baby is growing teeth at a phenomenal rate or she is a decoy.



Maybe she hired an amateur Photoshop user to add teeth to Lili's picture


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Oooo, another mystery. So now we are left to wonder whether she was born earlier, rather than on June 4th. We were told they couldn’t go to Phillip’s funeral because she was “heavily pregnant.” Or at least the surrogate was.
> 
> Either this baby is growing teeth at a phenomenal rate or she is a decoy.



There’s something about the H&M stories that *always* rings hollow.  This is no exception.  On one of the most popular weekends of the century, this professional, in-demand photographer who works for Vogue happened to be free. Free to photograph a hastily arranged child’s birthday.  Yeah, ok.  Tell me more.

ETA: And MM is currently that thin, with super slim shoulders and no butt.  Yeah, ok.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> There’s something about the H&M stories that *always* rings hollow.  This is no exception.  On one of the most popular weekends of the century, this professional, in-demand photographer who works for Vogue happened to be free. Free to photograph a hastily arranged child’s birthday.  Yeah, ok.  Tell me more.



She's got clout. She is Duchess of Sussex, remember?


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Maybe she hired an amateur Photoshop user to add teeth to Lili's picture



And make her hair red. Probably the same one who puts hair on Harry’s balding dome.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

1LV said:


> It always seems to be the baby in the family who gets away with the most.  Allow me to offer up my “baby” and my sister as examples!


Very true. I was born one year after a set of twins and three years before my baby sister. The twins were 'so cute' that I didn't have time to be a spoiled brat before my baby sister was born and I know that the twins and baby sister got away with lots of mischief.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> And make her hair red. Probably the same one who puts hair on Harry’s balding dome.



And maybe all that extra tan whenever she doesn't have enough time to self tan before a public appearance


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Very true. I was born one year after a set of twins and three years before my baby sister. The twins were 'so cute' that I didn't have time to be a spoiled brat before my baby sister was born and I know that the twins and baby sister got away with lot of mischief.




Aww you're a middle child like me


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

Whoa!!! I just went back to look at the child actress' birthday portrait. She indeed has way too many teeth for a one-year-old baby. I've babysat and been around many one-year-olds but I've never seen anything quite like it before  

Are we sure that this baby wasn't born 3 months before the published date of birth? Now I'm kinda creeped out.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Whoa!!! I just went back to look at the child actress' birthday portrait. She indeed has way too many teeth for a one-year-old baby. I've babysat and been around many one-year-olds but I've never seen anything quite like it before
> 
> Are we sure that this baby wasn't born 3 months before the published date of birth? Now I'm kinda creeped out.


IDK but that would seem to make more sense than photoshopping teeth onto a baby


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Aww you're a middle child like me


That's probably the reason we are kindred spirits and love looking at handsome men in kilts.


----------



## Lodpah

Have you guys seen this video of MM turning her head away when Kate is walking in:



Evil woman.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> IDK but that would seem to make more sense than photoshopping teeth onto a baby




The teeth photoshopping comment was just a joke    But yes, I agree that being born earlier is a more plausible reason. Or maybe all the organic diet boosted the teeth growth


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> Have you guys seen this video of MM turning her head away when Kate is walking in:
> 
> 
> 
> Evil woman.





Oh yeah!! Somebody posted it. Her head turned like one of those possessed bodies in an exorcist movie


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> Whoa!!! I just went back to look at the child actress' birthday portrait. She indeed has way too many teeth for a one-year-old baby. I've babysat and been around many one-year-olds but I've never seen anything quite like it before
> 
> Are we sure that this baby wasn't born 3 months before the published date of birth? Now I'm kinda creeped out.


What child actress photo? I like see!

4 kids I have and they did not have that many teeth but I don’t know I guess it’s possible?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> What child actress photo? I like see!
> 
> 4 kids I have and they did not have that many teeth but I don’t know I guess it’s possible?



Some of us have been joking about different aged children actresses have been casted to play Lili hence the child actor comment. But seriously though, I think the baby in the picture is actually older than 12 months


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's probably the reason we are kindred spirits and love looking at handsome men in kilts.



Say no more my soul sister   Handsome men in kilts all day, everyday for the win!!!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## redney

I'm late to the thread today. Awwww, she's a cutie! I'm glad they didn't release the photo DURING the Jubilee weekend. Agree with others - that's a LOT of teeth for a 12 month old. Hmmm.


----------



## EverSoElusive

redney said:


> I'm late to the thread today. Awwww, she's a cutie! I'm glad they didn't release the photo DURING the Jubilee weekend. Agree with others - that's a LOT of teeth for a 12 month old. Hmmm.



PS: I love your kitten. It's cuter


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

EverSoElusive said:


> PS: I love your kitten. It's cuter


awww, I do too! But it's not my kitty - found the picture via Google images a long time ago.


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Maybe she hired an amateur Photoshop user to add teeth to Lili's picture


Something is just weird with this pic of a supposedly one year old  Prince George at one had a few teeth.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Something is just weird with this pic of a supposedly one year old  Prince George at one had a few teeth.
> View attachment 5420203
> View attachment 5420204



I'm going to have nightmares tonight if y'all keep posting this picture and talking about the extra teeth


----------



## Chanbal

The last part of this video is hilarious. Louis stole the show…


----------



## lanasyogamama

You made me curious.  My now 16 yo had three teeth on the bottom and two on top for her first bday.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> You made me curious.  My now 16 yo had three teeth on the bottom and two on top for her first bday.
> View attachment 5420220




My, my, my where have you been hiding your cute (now grown up) baby? She is adorable


----------



## Lodpah

Toby93 said:


> Something is just weird with this pic of a supposedly one year old  Prince George at one had a few teeth.
> View attachment 5420203
> View attachment 5420204


I don’t want to come across like a conspiracy theorist but if this picture was taken the same day as the other picture or even a few days or after then it’s definitely off. One is not like the other.


----------



## xincinsin

lulilu said:


> *Totally agree -- what fake poses, fake smiles -- clearly posing from a photographer with a long lens to capture their "silly" moments with the children, who were imposed upon by them.  grrrrr*


The exaggerated expressions are similar to the ones at that dinner with Eugenie. Part of the "we are having a great time" narrative.

I keep wondering WHY the kids have to be shushed. It's not like there was a board meeting going on in that room. You put a group of kids in a room. It's a happy occasion. There's exciting stuff happening outside the window. And you expect them to be quiet? It's a huge building. If you want to hold a meeting, find another room. All that shushing is just for show to cater to the paps, and perhaps also to imply that the Harkles are trusted to take care of the royal kids. Further implication that they are good people because, you know, kids and animals are supposed to be good judges of character. 

BTW, the photo of Invisibet - she looks like Thomas Markle to me.


----------



## Happyish

DoggieBags said:


> Further to my post #94,217. I have to point out that they are clinging desperately to titles that spring from an institution they claim to despise. If the BRF is the racist, cruel, unfeeling institution the Harkles claim it is, then why do they continue to style themselves the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? You can’t have it both ways. But they sure are trying to make as much money off their titles as they can while simultaneously sniping and taking potshots at the BRF. Respect is earned and neither of the Harkles has done anything post marriage to merit either their royal titles or earn the respect they shrilly insist at every turn is their due. Just More of their hypocrisy.


Consider and compare Princess Mako. She married Kei Komuro, a paralegal, on 26 October 2021. As a result of her marriage to a commoner, she gave up her imperial title and left the imperial family. She refused a 1.3 million payout by the Japanese government to start her new non-royal life. She and her husband live in a one-bedroom apartment in New York. She shops at Bed, Bath & Beyond. There is no Cartier jewelry. No Netflix or book deals. No Ellen no Oprah and no drama . . .


----------



## Chanbal

Of course, they need the monarchy. 


*I’ve learned some members of the Royal Family and many senior courtiers were horrified at the detached and cold appearance by the exiled couple*_, who had also made the decision to fly out of the country before the Queen had even made her historic Buckingham Palace balcony appearance, alongside Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges, on Sunday evening.

And while Harry and Meghan cannot be accused of attempting to steal the limelight – even though Meghan did tellingly seem to wind down her car window in the presence of photographers – the couple’s actions appeared designed to make it clear to the world that they continue to disapprove of, not only their blood relatives, but the institution they represent.

Meanwhile, the lack of trust between the warring camps is now off the scale.

*It might sound like a ridiculous concept, but sources close to senior royals have warned them to consider that Harry and Meghan could secretly record their conversations.

I must be clear that there is no suggestion the couple would ever do that, but even the concern they would is illustrative of just how toxic relationships have become.*

There is also an ongoing fear the couple will continue to leak intimate family moments to favoured American TV broadcasters.

*I’m told Prince Charles and Prince William have made it known that they simply will no longer countenance even the smallest detail of their complex family relationships being used as fodder for US stars, after revelations by both Oprah Winfrey and Gayle King on US network CBS about private conversations between the senior royals caused fury.*

Somewhat astonishingly, Harry and Meghan are now considered bigger pariahs than Prince Andrew internally within the royal institution, even though all three were banished by the Queen from the post-Trooping the Colour Buckingham Palace balcony appearance.

Speaking to a number of senior US media executives, the crude reality is that the likes of Netflix and Spotify like their big money signing to be connected to the institution they have been so desperate from which to distance themselves.

*Courtiers are now watching closely to see if Harry and Meghan release any pictures of their weekend in the UK, especially their meeting with the Queen, in the coming weeks or months.*

But with the Platinum Jubilee over, the future of the royal relationships now hinges on Harry’s seemingly delayed autobiography, which remains without a publication date despite being due for release this year_.









						DAN WOOTTON: Gulf between Sussexes and royals is larger than ever
					

DAN WOOTTON: It wasn't just the public who were stunned at Harry and Meghan's notable snub following an awkward appearance at St Paul's Cathedral for the Service of Thanksgiving.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Happyish said:


> Consider and compare Princess Mako. She married Kei Komuro, a paralegal, on 26 October 2021. As a result of her marriage to a commoner, she gave up her imperial title and left the imperial family. She refused a 1.3 million payout by the Japanese government to start her new non-royal life. She and her husband live in a one-bedroom apartment in New York. She shops at Bed, Bath & Beyond. There is no Cartier jewelry. No Netflix or book deals. No Ellen no Oprah and no drama . . .


And her very sober yet heartful declaration of her intentions made me respect her greatly.


----------



## PurseUOut

lulilu said:


> What are you convinced goes on in the Cambridge household??????



Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder why Archie wasn’t in the face painting photo. It’s not like he had another engagement so he couldn’t attend his sister’s party.


----------



## wisconsin

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?


He’s a kid!, how can you even compare. Adults and kids are 2 different ballgames.Obviously you have never had a toddler or heard of the terrible twos,threes and fours.


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's probably the reason we are kindred spirits and love looking at handsome men in kilts.





EverSoElusive said:


> Say no more my soul sister   Handsome men in kilts all day, everyday for the win!!!



Och aye, will ye look at the sporran on that laddie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?



He looked like any typical energetic 4 year old to me, and a very cute one at that. You do realize they all go a little insane sitting in the same place for more than 3 minutes, especially if there are no toys, places to jump or run around, or things to climb, break or spill?


----------



## Chanbal

wisconsin said:


> He’s a kid!, how can you even compare. Adults and kids are 2 different ballgames.Obviously you have never had a toddler or heard of the terrible twos,threes and fours.



Hazz is not a toddler, but…


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> He looked like any typical energetic 4 year old to me, and a very cute one at that. You do realize they all go a little insane sitting in the same place for more than 3 minutes, especially if there are no toys, places to jump or run around, or things to climb, break or spill?


Louis is a lot of fun. It's impossible not to like him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The last part of this video is hilarious. Louis stole the show…




Has MM’s face always been disproportionatey larger than her body?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> Och aye, will ye look at the sporran on that laddie
> 
> View attachment 5420274


Are you saying that you're also a middle child, a kindred spirit and a soul sister with @EverSoElusive and myself? If so, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are you saying that you're also a middle child, a kindred spirit and a soul sister with @EverSoElusive and myself? If so, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.



I’m a middle, too. I love men in kilts


----------



## Vintage Leather

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?



You don’t deal much with small children, do you?

Was Louis’s actions appropriate? No.

Were they normal things that every four year old who knows their family is secure has done a time or 50? Yes. Very very normal.

I would be a lot more suspicious if he hadn’t acted out. He’s a 4 yr old child who was expected to stay in a confined area for 4 hours. The only children of that age I’ve met who could have managed that much stillness lived in  abusive households.

Now, I personally think that it would have been better parenting to have planned for his loss of attention, and had the nanny on standby so that after he saw GanGan and Paddington and Grandpa talk, he could be whisked away to burn off energy or get a nap. Its a sad fact that these photos will follow him for the rest of his life. But they are walking a delicate balance between being accessible, and giving their children memories of a lifetime, letting the kids know they are loved, and keeping their privacy. In this case, I think that optimism outweighed experience.


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?


I've raised four children. Children will act out. Plain and simple. Did you see the picture where he's kissing his mom also, all at the same event? Get off your high horse and until you have raised children who will sit calmly at an event for long periods of time, even 10 minutes is a long time for them, then I suggest you check their pulse.  Thank you and have a good night.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?



His daily routine had been disrupted by all the Jubilee busyness & he had to sit at an event with no toys or books for hours- it’s no surprise that he would go a little crazy. Frankly, I’m sure many adults in attendance shared his frustrations, but couldn’t quite display them the same way


----------



## PurseUOut

wisconsin said:


> He’s a kid!, how can you even compare. Adults and kids are 2 different ballgames.Obviously you have never had a toddler or heard of the terrible twos,threes and fours.



He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m a middle, too. I love men in kilts


Ooh, kindred spirit and soul sister, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


You are arguments are moot here. There's an appreciation thread yonder where you can extol all the virtues of the two and gush and be a sugar all you want.  No one is going to counter argue with you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.



TBH this feels like way too much chatter about 4 yr old behavior. We are adults, doubt any of us sat stone-still for the whole time. The worst part is the camera seemed to be on the royals for the entire show. That seems excessive to me.  It is time to stop the manifesting, the what-if’s, the woulda,shoulda,coulda.  Time to move onward.
  Peace be with you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My thoughts exactly. There is something off in that photo.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.



Do you think people’s dislike of Archie’s mother is automatically transferred onto him?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


Then, he's lucky to reside in England so his parents and whomever they chose, if they so desire, can take care of him without your input.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents



If it was a pattern, sure — we have NO IDEA how this kid acts when he’s had a lot of exercise and play time.


----------



## PurseUOut

CarryOn2020 said:


> TBH this feels like way too chatter about 4 yr old behavior. We are adults, doubt any of us sat stone-still for the whole time. The worst part is the camera seemed to be on the royals for the entire show. That seems excessive to me.  It is time to stop the manifesting, the what-if’s, the woulda,shoulda,coulda.  Time to move onward.
> Peace be with you.



If you read my initial post I said his behavior is indicative of what goes on at home and he's learning it from somewhere. It was an commentary on K&W's parenting (or lackthereof) rather than an out-right admonishment of a 4-year old's behavior.


----------



## wisconsin

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


O gosh. well with Brothers and so many nephews and a son myself,This is quite common behavior at that age. It’s not perfect behavior but is common enough.Girls give trouble/ act up later as we all know. He’s the youngest of three and maybe mom spoiled him a little bit.Hell,I would too.I am not going to comment on Archie because we did not see his cute self.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has MM’s face always been disproportionatey larger than her body?


The photographer may have used software like Photoshop.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> If you read my initial post I said his behavior is indicative of what goes on at home and he's learning it from somewhere. It was an commentary on K&W's parenting (or lackthereof) rather than an out-right admonishment of a 4-year old's behavior.



Please tell us how many perfectly behaved children you have raised.


----------



## PurseUOut

Maggie Muggins said:


> Then, he's lucky to reside in England so his parents and whomever they chose, if they so desire, can take care of him without your input.



I'm lucky that the taxpayers of England see firsthand who they are entrusting the future of the monarchy too. Hopefully luck will have it Charlotte can take the reigns - she seemed to reprimand her little brother quite effectively.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> I've raised four children. Children will act out. Plain and simple. Did you see the picture where he's kissing his mom also, all at the same event? Get off your high horse and until you have raised children who will sit calmly at an event for long periods of time, even 10 minutes is a long time for them, then I suggest you check their pulse.  Thank you and have a good night.


Beautiful!


----------



## PurseUOut

kkfiregirl said:


> Please tell us how many perfectly behaved children you have raised.



Thankfully none that kicked their sisters, hushed me in my mouth, didn't mind my commands, and pulled their girl cousin's hair without correction. But that's normal to you so I guess they are quite perfect after all.


----------



## Chanbal

PurseUOut said:


> If you read my initial post I said his behavior is indicative of what goes on at home and he's learning it from somewhere. It was an commentary on K&W's parenting (or lackthereof) rather than an out-right admonishment of a 4-year old's behavior.


Did you notice how well behaved Charlotte and George were during the entire Jubilee Celebration?
They are recipients of the same parenting, but they are older than Louis.


----------



## PurseUOut

Chanbal said:


> Did you notice how well behaved Charlotte and George were during the entire Jubilee Celebration?
> They are recipients of the same parenting, but they are older than Louis.



They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.



Children have different personalities!


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> Thankfully none that kicked their sisters, hushed me in my mouth, didn't mind my commands, and pulled their girl cousin's hair without correction. But that's normal to you so I guess they are quite perfect after all.



Fantastic for you! Have you considered that Louis might have adhd and his parents haven’t shared that with us?


----------



## Vintage Leather

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.





As an educator with over 27 years of experience, with over a decade spent with pre-literacy development, I can say with the utmost respect, you’re  doing a great job at showing how little you know about 4 year olds.

The attention span of a 4 year old is 8-12 minutes.

Pre-k educators are very well aware of this. That’s why most activities are planned for roughly 5 minutes. Anything that takes longer should have an active, physical component, preferably one that breaks the divide. (Causes the child to reach from left to right, or vise versa). A four hour pre-k session has roughly 10 activities, with breaks, snacks, naps, and physical activity built in.

And that’s for children that have received normal socialization for their first 4 years. Louis has spent half his life in lockdown. I am curious to see how this current crop of Pre-K is doing. My 16 year old is struggling with social interaction.

Expecting a child to sit quietly for longer than 15 minutes is expecting a miracle.



Would people have criticized Archie worse? Probably. It is a sad fact of this world that racism still exists, and that in the US, minorities have been expected to mature faster than their white counterparts. But both children should be allowed to be children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> If you read my initial post I said his behavior is indicative of what goes on at home and he's learning it from somewhere. It was an commentary on K&W's parenting (or lackthereof) rather than an out-right admonishment of a 4-year old's behavior.



Seriously, why fixate on this? [rhetorical question]  Life goes forward. Cheers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> Thankfully none that kicked their sisters, hushed me in my mouth, didn't mind my commands, and pulled their girl cousin's hair without correction. But that's normal to you so I guess they are quite perfect after all.



It’s also quite amazing, actually, that you were able to plan for every contingency with your children & none of them ever behaved more exuberantly than expected. I tip my hat to you!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## kkfiregirl

Vintage Leather said:


> Would people have criticized Archie worse? Probably. It is a sad fact of this world that racism still exists, and that in the US, minorities have been expected to mature faster than their white counterparts. But both children should be allowed to be children.



I agree with most of what you said, but how is Archie a minority? He & his sister both look white to me.


----------



## rose60610

Here's a cut/paste I did on the Wm/Kate thread in regard to Louis: 

"Kate and William looked stellar throughout. Louis did prove to be a handful at times, some unfortunate shenanigans, but yes, he's 4 and it was a l o n g weekend. I have to give Kate MUCH credit because if she pinched or snapped at him it'd have made headlines like "Abusive parent!" or some such thing. When your every move is recorded you'll always have people second guessing you. I think most parents the world over could empathize with those difficult behavioral moments."

To paraphrase another's comments: Louis has spent half of his life in Covid lockdown. And he was over stimulated at the Jubilee. 

I do agree with some others' comments that he could have been handed off to a nanny when he started to act up. But THEN we'd be seeing the handoff in public and have a damned if you do damned if you don't commentary on "just shove him off on the nanny" spectacle. 



PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.



George and Charlotte weren't subjected to a weekend long 70th year on the throne Jubilee either. Other four year olds sitting in entirely recorded VIP seats weren't, either.


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I see it a little bit - if I squint


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are you saying that you're also a middle child, a kindred spirit and a soul sister with @EverSoElusive and myself? If so, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


I’m not a middle but I love men in kilts too.


----------



## PurseUOut

Vintage Leather said:


> As an educator with over 27 years of experience, with over a decade spent with pre-literacy development, I can say with the utmost respect, you’re  doing a great job at showing how little you know about 4 year olds.
> 
> The attention span of a 4 year old is 8-12 minutes.
> 
> Pre-k educators are very well aware of this. That’s why most activities are planned for roughly 5 minutes. Anything that takes longer should have an active, physical component, preferably one that breaks the divide. (Causes the child to reach from left to right, or vise versa). A four hour pre-k session has roughly 10 activities, with breaks, snacks, naps, and physical activity built in.
> 
> And that’s for children that have received normal socialization for their first 4 years. Louis has spent half his life in lockdown. I am curious to see how this current crop of Pre-K is doing. My 16 year old is struggling with social interaction.
> 
> Expecting a child to sit quietly for longer than 15 minutes is expecting a miracle.
> 
> 
> 
> Would people have criticized Archie worse? Probably. It is a sad fact of this world that racism still exists, and that in the US, minorities have been expected to mature faster than their white counterparts. But both children should be allowed to be children.



With all due respect: if you consider a four-year old thumbing his nose at this mother, swatting at his mother, hushing his mother in her mouth after giving him a command, kicking his sister and pulling his girl cousin's hair normal behavior borne out of restlessness than there is nothing more I can say. I was *very* specific on what I saw that caused me concern and none of that had to do with what you explained here. We just have completely different philosophies regarding appropriate discipline and being attuned to correcting what could be very problematic uncontrollable behavior in the future when 4-year olds aren't so cute and lovable. Ciao.


----------



## csshopper

PurseUOut said:


> I'm lucky that the taxpayers of England see firsthand who they are entrusting the future of the monarchy too. Hopefully luck will have it Charlotte can take the reigns - she seemed to reprimand her little brother quite effectively.
> 
> Are you commenting as a licensed child psychologist? Or a child development specialist?
> 
> Pictured in an article posted on line, his Nannie, Maria, was seated in an aisle seat about 4 rows behind them, available if needed. His Mom, who knows him best, seemed to feel comfortable handling things herself. I think her demeanor, probably, reassured many Moms who were watching and  sometimes deal with the same restlessness in their young children during prolonged periods of inactivity.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?
> 
> I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?
> 
> Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.
> 
> I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol


I'm not a geneticist, but genes are often multifactorial and there's no set rules.  I have dark, thick, naturally curly hair and browner eyes than a cow's.  DH was blond most of his life (now dirty blonde) with blue eyes.  I always told him I hope we have kids with blue eyes and green eyes.  His response was, "Yeah, that'll never happen".  I have distant relatives that have green eyes, but not one Caucasian ancestor as far as I know.  My son came out blonde with blue eyes (now brown hair with blonde highlights and his blue eyes slowly turned green after age two) and my daughter had jet black, straight hair (now light brown with waves) and grey eyes which are now green eyes as well.  People can tell my children are related simply on their eye color.  Go figure.


----------



## Vintage Leather

kkfiregirl said:


> I agree with most of what you said, but how is Archie a minority? He & his sister both look white to me.



Because people there are enough “one drop” racists in the world, that even though Archie and Lili do have pale privilege, there will be people who hold them to different standards.


----------



## kkfiregirl

rose60610 said:


> But THEN we'd be seeing the handoff in public and have a *damned if you do damned if you don't* commentary on "just shove him off on the nanny" spectacle.



I agree with this. If she had a big bag of snacks and some sticker books, people would criticize her son for needing constant snacks & entertainment.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Vintage Leather said:


> Because people there are enough “one drop” racists in the world, that even though Archie and Lili do have pale privilege, there will be people who hold them to different standards.



I thought racial identity was based on how you look, so if you look black, then you are.


----------



## Chanbal

PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.


Recipient of the same parenting skills, though.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> ok
> I know people here said she looked darker but why would a woman who is biracial and has done her best to look white all her life want to darken her skin?


To further the racism narrative.


----------



## Zen101

PurseUOut said:


> If you read my initial post I said his behavior is indicative of what goes on at home and he's learning it from somewhere. It was an commentary on K&W's parenting (or lackthereof) rather than an out-right admonishment of a 4-year old's behavior.


Why are you carrying on about a 4 year old? He is 4! Insinuating what goes on in a child’s home because of this? Louis is not the only royal child to have had a tantrum/act out or whatever one wants to call it. Princess Madeleine of Sweden had her hands full with Leonore on a number of public occasions and people didn’t demonize her the way sick and vile sugars are doing over Louis. Spare me about if this were Archie. Cambridge fans don’t even write 1% of the abhorrent things that the sugars write about the Cambridge children. There are a lot of lovely photos of Louis hugging, smiling, giving his mum a peck, sitting on his father and grandfather’s lap but you’ve ignored all of that because it doesn’t suit your narrative.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> With all due respect: if you consider a four-year old thumbing his nose at this mother, hushing his mother in her mouth after giving him a command, kicking his sister and pulling his girl cousin's hair normal behavior borne out of restlessness than there is nothing more I can say. I was *very* specific on what I saw that caused me concern and none of that had to do with what you explained here. We just have completely different philosophies regarding appropriate discipline and being attuned to correcting what could be very problematic uncontrollable behavior in the future when 4-year olds aren't so cute and lovable. Ciao.



‘Yes, we do indeed have different views. And that is ok. 
When I look closely at the photo of a 4 yr old covering his mom’s mouth, I see someone saying, “Mom, help me. This noise is too much for me. I am tired. I don’t know how to deal with this much attention.”  He looks like he is about to burst into tears and is barely holding it together. In time, he will learn to cope with it all.  His mom handled it perfectly by not overreacting, staying calm, etc.  May all moms be so loving and kind.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> Recipient of the same parenting skills, though.




So basically, they have been practicing parenting for a long time


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The last part of this video is hilarious. Louis stole the show…



Forget Louis.  Is that Chris Hemsworth's brother towards the end??


----------



## Lodpah

The migration has begun! I guess the other thread was not gaining traction so  . . . just remember too much sugar can lead to Type 2 diabetes.


----------



## Lodpah

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's probably the reason we are kindred spirits and love looking at handsome men in kilts.


Dang! What a nice looking MAN!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

PurseUOut said:


> I'm lucky that the taxpayers of England see firsthand who they are entrusting the future of the monarchy too. Hopefully luck will have it Charlotte can take the reigns - she seemed to reprimand her little brother quite effectively.


Oh about the taxpayers, did you know that the BRF bring in enough revenue through tourism to help support themselves and the taxpayers? Oh and about the line of succession, did you know that you cannot remove anyone from the line of succession as it is each and every member of the BRF's birthright and each member would have to renounce it to be excluded. So for Charlotte to become queen some day, George would have to either renounce his birthright or die and I think that is a hideous thought for anyone to even begin to entertain.


----------



## xincinsin

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


I have a grandnephew around that age and he has the attention span of a gnat. I don't find his antics "cute" but I do find them "normal" and hope he will outgrow that phase. I'm the very strict "grand-aunt" and he sometimes mutters, "I can't do that because Grand Aunt will scold me". I am quite alarmed that you think we would hate on Archie for similar behaviour. You seem to be spinning a narrative yourself about Louis and his home life.


----------



## purseinsanity

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Why are you carrying on about a 4 year old? He is 4! Insinuating what goes on in a child’s home because of this? Louis is not the only royal child to have had a tantrum/act out or whatever one wants to call it. Princess Madeleine of Sweden had her hands full with Leonore on a number of public occasions and people didn’t demonize her the way sick and vile sugars are doing over Louis. Spare me about if this were Archie. Cambridge fans don’t even write 1% of the abhorrent things that the sugars write about the Cambridge children. There are a lot of lovely photos of Louis hugging, smiling, giving his mum a peck, sitting on his father and grandfather’s lap but you’ve ignored all of that because it doesn’t suit your narrative.


I find the "Ignore" button to be very useful in certain situations!


----------



## elvisfan4life

DeMonica said:


> I think it was mentioned that the Tindall and Phillips children were invited, but it wasn't confirmed that they had been there.


 The Tindalls  and Phillips are not working royals or HRHs so they had no royal duties to rearrange - Harry is their cousin same as William I’m sure they have not been told to take sides in private life -as the Queen said Harry ( and his family ) are loved members of the private family and always will be but the public royal family is another matter - they are only a minor part of that when specifically invited


----------



## elvisfan4life

mia55 said:


> She’s really looking very pretty here and the kid is super cute.




How do we know the photo was taken on Saturday?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> I’m not a middle but I love men in kilts too.


@Hermes Zen there are always exceptions and since you love men in kilts, you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so  welcome to the Club.


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> With all due respect: if you consider a four-year old thumbing his nose at this mother, swatting at his mother, hushing his mother in her mouth after giving him a command, kicking his sister and pulling his girl cousin's hair normal behavior borne out of restlessness than there is nothing more I can say. I was *very* specific on what I saw that caused me concern and none of that had to do with what you explained here. We just have completely different philosophies regarding appropriate discipline and being attuned to correcting what could be very problematic uncontrollable behavior in the future when 4-year olds aren't so cute and lovable. Ciao.



Wow, you could make a fortune teaching parents parenting skills that prevent such behavior from EVER happening with their 4 year old, even after a very unusual weekend that probably disrupted their child's schedule and stimulated them to an unusual level, and after the child was required to sit in the same place for a very long time with no age-appropriate entertainment. I'm truly jealous, imagine all the money people would pay for that! You could totally become a Hermès VIP If you aren't one already.


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> I've still got about 8 articles about Boris at the top of my Mail newsfeed !!!!!!!!!!!


 
Yes they mistimed that - you would have thought veteran Harry would know it was DDay which then of course also turned out to be Boris own DDay


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> How do we know the photo was taken on Saturday?


Or even in England!


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> I find the "Ignore" button to be very useful in certain situations!



Nooo, I need to see it all!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Hermes Zen there are always exceptions and since you love men in kilts, you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so  welcome to the Club.


Thank you so much @Maggie Muggins !!


----------



## Zen101

purseinsanity said:


> I find the "Ignore" button to be very useful in certain situations!


I’ll take your advice in this situation. It’s not even worth it. You can’t reason with the unreasonable.


----------



## elvisfan4life

kkfiregirl said:


> His daily routine had been disrupted by all the Jubilee busyness & he had to sit at an event with no toys or books for hours- it’s no surprise that he would go a little crazy. Frankly, I’m sure many adults in attendance shared his frustrations, but couldn’t quite display them the same way


 The woman who snored soundly behind Charles spoke for many


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> so you think they used donated eggs?


Such a good question. She did get pregnant the first time with her geriatric eggs exactly when she wanted, which was immediately after the wedding -  it’s not as if she could have a bump when she’s walking down the aisle.

I have no idea, but I wouldn’t put it past her.

Oh, and Lady C pointed out a different wording that the palace used to announce the birth of Archie. She thinks there was a surrogate.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> The migration has begun! I guess the other thread was not gaining traction so  . . . just remember too much sugar can lead to Type 2 diabetes.


Hit the ignore button and let them talk to themselves - they can’t seem to manage that -the other thread is still 5 pages - no one to play with !!! ( sounds familiar lol) - just don’t respond to them more than once and then hit ignore


----------



## csshopper

Meanwhile, in California the Second Row Royals may be trying to get a refund for their useless recording equipment. Meetings with Netflix maybe to try and figure out what’s saleable and can be salvaged? Raptor being told she need$ to reconcile with her father in a mini $erie$? Maybe taking advantage of the increased value of their home in the current real estate market, selling it for millions more than they paid, moving on, and trying a re boot in a new location?


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Or even in England!


 Frogmore Cottage had a very expensive refurbishment look at the decor - if that was taken after the refurb they should sue


----------



## elvisfan4life

kkfiregirl said:


> Nooo, I need to see it all!


 I don’t - don’t give stans fuel


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


>



This isn’t going to answer the question lol but I always thought the boyfriend was quite attractive!


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> Meanwhile, in California the Second Row Royals may be trying to get a refund for their useless recording equipment. Meetings with Netflix maybe to try and figure out what’s saleable and can be salvaged? Raptor being told she need$ to reconcile with her father in a mini $erie$? Maybe taking advantage of the increased value of their home in the current real estate market, selling it for millions more than they paid, moving on, and trying a re boot in a new location?


 Kalamazoo!!!- Elvis has apparently been living there for 45 years with only minimal sightings - they want privacy don’t they?

 Or can we actually believe anything they say or do after two years of this behaviour - and some one on here is criticising the behaviour of a 4 yr old child for a few minutes on one day !!!! - seriously ? No wonder Americans spend so much on therapy !!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Dang! What a nice looking MAN!


I do believe you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so please join the Club.


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Hermes Zen there are always exceptions and since you love men in kilts, you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so  welcome to the Club.


I find men in kilts extremely attractive too!


----------



## Lodpah

Maggie Muggins said:


> I do believe you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so please join the Club.



Thank you for the invite.  I appreciate finely tuned, easy on the eyes and sexy men.


----------



## Icyjade

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.



It’s unfair that I cannot accuse you of being a racist since Louis is white. 

If it was Archie and I say that he misbehaved you would say I’m a racist. That’s the difference.

Imagine that.


----------



## xincinsin

elvisfan4life said:


> Hit the ignore button and let them talk to themselves - they can’t seem to manage that -the other thread is still 5 pages - no one to play with !!! ( sounds familiar lol) - just don’t respond to them more than once and then hit ignore


Thank you for the wise advice!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But that's more of a slur than slang. Not a fan.





kkfiregirl said:


> It’s not a slur, but I see your point. Homosexual isn’t a slur, but his usage of “homo” is homophobic.


I don’t like the expression either, I always associate it with stupid frat boy talk and it’s like, ‘we know, god forbid you be so interesting as to express a true emotion’ 


Toby93 said:


> How is it that the photographers are able to get pics of stuff getting offloaded, but no pics of actual kids?  Even ones where their faces are covered by blankets or something?  All this nonsense that a swing and scooter is "proof" that the kids were there just doesn't make sense.


Does anyone have a relative who always gives you hand-me-downs when you go visit? That’s the vibe I’m getting. I agree. Seems highly unlikely to me none of these vicious paps wouldn’t have got a least one shot of the kid’s back _if they were there_ and we all know the DM will publish any old crap 


lanasyogamama said:


> Here she is?
> View attachment 5420008


lol I don’t believe a word of that sentence. I would even be surprised if those pics were taken in brita


Jayne1 said:


> Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?
> 
> I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?
> 
> Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.
> 
> I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol





lanasyogamama said:


> I hate to be this person, but both of them having red hair at such a young age isn’t passing the common sense test with me.  Harry was so fair as a baby.
> View attachment 5420099


100% the red hair is either photoshopped or that’s someone else’s baby. The red hair is an easy selling point for the sugar press ‘aww just like daddy ‘

Not to be that guy but them both being redhead also makes the whole ‘too dark’ thing a bit infeasible doesn’t it? I mean I know there’s redhead Australian aborigines and minority Chinese groups out there but it’s pretty much exclusively associated with whiteness. They must have realised that the reviled multiracial family story wasn’t selling anymore.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> ok
> I know people here said she looked darker but why would a woman who is biracial and has done her best to look white all her life want to darken her skin?



The reality is she’s made such a big point of her being ‘too dark’ to fit in the family so now looking darker is advantageous to her so she’s going to fake tan like there’s no tomorrow.

She is actually light-skinned  so when she was a jobbing actress she said herself she used to go for white and Latina roles as well.

It is all just as hustle and she knows it’s a very dicey topic so the press won’t call her out on it.

add on- when you look at the old videos of her with the royals there’s little discernible difference in skin tone between her and the Windsors aka whitest most patrician family in the U.K. so it does make sense she’s decided to rewrite history here with the old st tropez.


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> Recipient of the same parenting skills, though.



No wonder Kate was a marvel at handling Louis. She had a lot of practice


----------



## Jktgal

PurseUOut said:


> With all due respect: if you consider a four-year old thumbing his nose at this mother, swatting at his mother, hushing his mother in her mouth after giving him a command, kicking his sister and pulling his girl cousin's hair normal behavior borne out of restlessness than there is nothing more I can say. I was *very* specific on what I saw that caused me concern and none of that had to do with what you explained here. We just have completely different philosophies regarding appropriate discipline and being attuned to correcting what could be very problematic uncontrollable behavior in the future when 4-year olds aren't so cute and lovable. Ciao.


Wow, I feel bad for any toddler in your household.




Hermes Zen said:


> I’m not a middle but I love men in kilts too.


We need a 'men in kilts' thread....


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I wonder why Archie wasn’t in the face painting photo. It’s not like he had another engagement so he couldn’t attend his sister’s party.


He had a lucky charms ad to film that day.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Has MM’s face always been disproportionatey larger than her body?


Making the head slightly bigger is an old photoshop trick - meant to make you look skinnier. I mean heaven forfend we suggest these photos were altered in any way 


PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


We can’t compare them because Archie’s never been seen in public.  You seem very stressed about something that hasn’t happened and not exactly immune to making a lot of judgements about this one kid yourself. If it’s ok to judge Louis why not Archie?

add on- not that I’m suggesting we judge either of them-even the Mafia left the kids out of it.


----------



## papertiger

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.



I prefer well-behaved children.  That's what I always aimed to be. Louis is from another culture. In the UK, we don't medicalise our kids here so much. As a proud aunt to an autistic young man (at university) who obviously did display some very difficult behaviour patterns when he was a child,  I am very pleased that it's_ not_ normal to label most kids for just behaving - normally. 

We don't get to see Archie, nor do his British cousins of about the same age, so we'll never know how he behalves or socialises.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Recipient of the same parenting skills, though.




They forgot M sticking her tongue out in company on official visits


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> Frogmore Cottage had a very expensive refurbishment look at the decor - if that was taken after the refurb *they should sue*


We know that’s one thing the Harkles  are good at!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> my mother and her sister were both what used to be called tow heads (white blonde) as young kids...my mother stayed blonde and her sister ended up as a red-head



One of my brothers had the most beautiful auburn hair as a baby. As an adult, he's now a natural blonde. He did keep his eye colour, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?



While this is still no real answer to our question...Harry drove his little tricycle into peoples' legs at that age. Are you suggesting he learned that from either of his parents who chased the other one down the hall on a bike?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.



I was actually waiting for Archie's name to be brought up, thank you for not disappointing. Now, as he is not allowed to leave the house he won't be spotted misbehaving anytime soon.

Nobody thinks acting out is cute even if it's Louis, we just are little more understanding on a 4yo...a 4yo who had several appearances over the days and only acted out once I may point out.


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> Something is just weird with this pic of a supposedly one year old  Prince George at one had a few teeth.
> View attachment 5420203
> View attachment 5420204


That photo of George was in Australia, he was 9 or 10 months old.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.



And yet they grew up in the same household with the same parenting, so what is it now?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I'm getting bored of this being brought up time and time again (also extremely vicious...meaning the OP and not you, @CarryOn2020). Harry looks like Charles' son, Di met Hewitt when Harry was a toddler, and the child looks like Harry and other Windsor relatives (e.g. Lady Sarah Chatto).


----------



## Sharont2305

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


Yes, he is 4 and people seem to have not realised that here in the UK he and many other 4 year old have spent half their lives in lockdown!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

With all the discussion re: Louis, has this been shared? IMO it shows what a loving relationship the family has. Louis greeting his family after their Cardiff visit.










__





						Kate Middleton and Prince Louis reunited after separation in touching pictures | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
					

EXCLUSIVE pictures published by Express.co.uk reveal the touching moment the Duchess of Cambridge was reunited with Prince Louis after spending the day in Cardiff with her two older children, George and Charlotte.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## PurseUOut

Sigh.

For the last time - If you can't tell the difference between a boy child having a temper tantrum or being fussy vs. showing displays of disrespect and aggression towards his primary female caretaker after she clearly showed she was not pleased with his behavior then I am not arguing with you. If you think it is impish boyish appropriate behavior, fine, I don't care how you raise your kids. No one is going to tell you they are brats anyway, as it is considered impolite. 

I'll leave you with a visual of behavior of someone who is an adult and understands how to (sweetly) yet firmly instruct children to quiet down a little. My, they look traumatized. If she can do this with her young relatives I'm doubtful Archie will be caught thumbing his nose at her (btw - isn't that considered a great insult across the pond, almost akin to 'giving someone the finger' in America?) while his father, Harry, is sitting two seats feigning great indifference, allowing it to happen. Because Harry grew up in an environment with depressed mother and a emotionally neglectful father who never loved her and emotionally checked out of the marriage I am sure he recognizes how his lack of boundaries and spoiltness was able to manifest in his adolescence.


----------



## Icyjade

PurseUOut said:


> Sigh.
> 
> For the last time - If you can't tell the difference between a boy child having a temper tantrum or being fussy vs. showing displays of disrespect and aggression towards his primary female caretaker after she clearly showed she was not pleased with his behavior then I am not arguing with you. If you think it is impish boyish appropriate behavior, fine, I don't care how you raise your kids. No one is going to tell you they are brats anyway, as it is considered impolite.
> 
> I'll leave you with a visual of behavior of someone who is an adult and understands how to (sweetly) yet firmly instruct children to quiet down a little. My, they look traumatized. If she can do this with her young relatives I'm doubtful Archie will be caught thumbing his nose at her (btw - isn't that considered a great insult across the pond, almost akin to 'giving someone the finger' in America?) while his father, Harry, is sitting two seats feigning great indifference, allowing it to happen. Because Harry grew up in an environment with depressed mother and a emotionally neglectful father who never loved her and emotionally checked out of the marriage I am sure he recognizes how his lack of boundaries and spoiltness was able to manifest in his adolescence.
> 
> View attachment 5420377
> 
> View attachment 5420378



I saw someone showing up at the window to make her presence felt. But we can agree to disagree. 

Just that your post made me gag a bit. We are talking about the same ones who dissed their family, expected to be given money at the ripe age of over 30, ignored her very ill father who was in the hospital and overall just introducing us to the term “markled” right?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Icyjade said:


> With all the discussion re: Louis, has this been shared? IMO it shows what a loving relationship the family has. Louis greeting his family after their Cardiff visit.
> 
> View attachment 5420383
> View attachment 5420384
> View attachment 5420385
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton and Prince Louis reunited after separation in touching pictures | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE pictures published by Express.co.uk reveal the touching moment the Duchess of Cambridge was reunited with Prince Louis after spending the day in Cardiff with her two older children, George and Charlotte.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


 What discussion on Louis ???We love him - our British press headlines are literally that “we all love Louis “


----------



## andrashik

I am mostly a lurker here and I am catching up with the thread.
Ladies, you have made me smile and my mood is always improving when I am reading this thread.
I have seen the discussion about Prince Louis. As a kid, I have been reprimanded a lot and "educated" and not being let to live as kid. Of course, that does not mean letting your kid to be wild, but I feel like sometimes parents forget that kids are kids and they sometimes they do not put themselves in their shoes and they have the same expectations as for other adults. Adults do not understand that it's normal for kids to act foolishly and shouldn't think always as adults.


----------



## Sharont2305

Let's not forget that at THE most important time of that event, he stood on the balcony and sang the National Anthem.


----------



## elvisfan4life

In the words of the British Gas advert that has just popped up on my tv “ don’t let an old boiler spoil it “ so apt


----------



## RAINDANCE

elvisfan4life said:


> The Tindalls  and Phillips are not working royals or HRHs so they had no royal duties to rearrange - Harry is their cousin same as William I’m sure they have not been told to take sides in private life -as the Queen said Harry ( and his family ) are loved members of the private family and always will be but the public royal family is another matter - they are only a minor part of that when specifically invited


 I think you maybe misunderstood ?  My point was about rearranging _childcare _on Saturday. The Tindalls/Phillips were at the races - an adult only event as far as I ever noticed - so they would have made arrangements for their children during the day a long while ago. We saw Zara's smallest briefly on Sunday and then the consensus seemed to be he was taken away by a nanny. I think its highly unlikely that they don't have a full time nanny but Peters' kids are a bit older and maybe don't. However those girls at 9 and 11 are still not old enough to leave unattended. Maybe the nanny took them all to Windsor for the birthday party but even minor royals can't be in Windsor and Epsom at the same time !


I do agree that the first cousins were impeccably inclusive to H+M on the earlier part of the weekend.
H+M's shenanigans walking into St Paul's and the subsequent negative reception from the crowd was yet again an unintended consequence of their own self interested actions. I do believe that if they had gone up the steps all together as planned there would not have been boos. I suspect also there was palpable sense of froideur from the congregation as they walked down the aisle, again a consequence of their own actions. If H+M can't see that the cousins were as much trying to form a protective ring around THEM to minimize negative reporting about them as distance them from the senior royals, then what can you do ?


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Very true. I was born one year after a set of twins and three years before my baby sister. The twins were 'so cute' that I didn't have time to be a spoiled brat before my baby sister was born and I know that the twins and baby sister got away with lots of mischief.


According to studies, your behaviour is highly influenced by how many siblings you have and which place you occupy in the birth order. First ones are more serious, and generally more of an ally to the parents than the younger one. The youngest one is normally more of a rebel. I'm a first one and I was given more responsibilities from younger age and had to behave, my brother could be much more careless than my younger brother.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thoughts exactly. There is something off in that photo.



 I think she is so pretty on the left - it gives me young Julia Roberts vibes - but that hair has a definite auburn accent. Now may be it was dyed, (my 19 yo dd currently has a very purple undertone in her very dark Irish hair!) but it could be auburn/blonde genes from the Markles ?


----------



## mellibelly

Markle “sweetly” instructing children to quiet down is hilarious! The kids are thinking who is this stranger?! Every one of her interactions with children is awkward. I wouldn’t let that woman watch my dog let alone my child. He’d end up abandoned somewhere or with broken legs. 

A “sweet nod” of Cringe with kids


----------



## jehaga

Jayne1 said:


> Any geneticists here? Or anyone familiar with the study of genes and heredity?
> 
> I thought red hair is a recessive gene and I guess Meg must carry ginger genes for both children to be red heads?
> 
> Also, curly hair is a dominant gene trait and straight is recessive and both children have straight hair.
> 
> I know genes can be surprising, but in this case, both kids look just like Harry. He seems to have strong genes and I would have bet my house this would be the case, if you know what I mean. lol


Eye color as well.

Just as with kid number one, her arms look awkward and unnatural holding a child. There’s zero sense of mother and child bond in any of the few pictures of her with the kids.

If/when they divorce, would a DNA test possibly proving that MM has no shared genetics with the kids give the RF any leverage in negotiating an equitable settlement for the prodigal prince-turned-toad?


----------



## mellibelly

Also how convenient that she invited a *photographer* to Lili’s bday party to take pictures and leak, I mean, post, the pictures to social media at the agreed upon time when they were safely back in California. Everything is so coordinated with them. No wonder the RF didn’t show up. I don’t believe Zara and Mike’s kids were there. Did you see how Mike avoided speaking to them on the steps of the cathedral? Heck no he won’t let his kids be used by the Harkles.


----------



## 880

andrashik said:


> I am mostly a lurker here and I am catching up with the thread.
> Ladies, you have made me smile and my mood is always improving when I am reading this thread.
> I have seen the discussion about Prince Louis. *As a kid, I have been reprimanded a lot and "educated" and not being let to live as kid*. Of course, that does not mean letting your kid to be wild, but I feel like sometimes parents forget that kids are kids and they sometimes they do not put themselves in their shoes and they have the same expectations as for other adults. *Adults do not understand that it's normal for kids to act foolishly* and shouldn't think always as adults.


+1. In my own experience, it’s perhaps part generational and part cultural. on the whole, i think all of the children on display, not just the Cambridge children, acted better than some of their adult relatives.

i think Meghan is just a typical grasping fortune hunter, not a serious threat to the BRF.

i do think the BRF is better off without Harry.

JMO


----------



## mellibelly

Interesting! Lady C says the Harkles were expected at the Guildhall lunch but were no shows because of the booing outside and the cold shoulder inside the church. She also says they purposely showed up 15 minutes late to miss the bus they were supposed to take. The Range Rover was not meant for them!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mia55

elvisfan4life said:


> How do we know the photo was taken on Saturday?


Lol, that's a good question. Let me rephrase, that she was pretty when that pic was taken, Saturday or 10 years ago. No one knows the truth in their case


----------



## RAINDANCE

Can we have a new thread for the Tindalls/Phillip families?
Mia belting out and dancing like dervish to Abba was one of the priceless moments.
I found an image of Princess Anne presenting the Calcutta Cup to Mike when he was captain of the England Rugby team but I think its a chargeable image so can't post it here. I'm also not sure of the timelines of Zara and Mike' relationship and his rugby playing years.


----------



## mia55

This is a new lowest of low when I saw people criticizing Louis. How can anyone say anything negative to a four-year-old kid? I usually enjoy reading this thread than responding but this is way too crazy. I applaud all of you who responded to that criticism in a civil manner, you girls rock!
These negative comments against a kid show the upbringing of the person attacking, not the little kid. I have a four-year-old and when her schedule is disrupted, she doesn't care about anyone and so is every other kid of her age. Leave the kids alone.


----------



## elvisfan4life

RAINDANCE said:


> Can we have a new thread for the Tindalls/Phillip families?
> Mia belting out and dancing like dervish to Abba was one of the priceless moments.
> I found an image of Princess Anne presenting the Calcutta Cup to Mike when he was captain of the England Rugby team but I think its a chargeable image so can't post it here. I'm also not sure of the timelines of Zara and Mike' relationship and his rugby playing years.


Set one up - anyone can start a new thread

she dated and lived with a professional jockey Richard Johnson for many years before they split and she married Mike


----------



## elvisfan4life

mia55 said:


> This is a new lowest of low when I saw people criticizing Louis. How can anyone say anything negative to a four-year-old kid? I usually enjoy reading this thread than responding but this is way too crazy. I applaud all of you who responded to that criticism in a civil manner, you girls rock!
> These negative comments against a kid show the upbringing of the person attacking, not the little kid. I have a four-year-old and when her schedule is disrupted, she doesn't care about anyone and so is every other kid of her age. Leave the kids alone.


Well said I have found one poster,s continual posts offensive


----------



## littlemisskeira

just a honest question and i don't wish to come across as being racist - and i do apologise in advance if this offends anyone:

how did Archie and his sister come across as 100% white when the mum is not? I mean if I don't know who their mum is, I won't know they have mixed blood in them.


----------



## Sharont2305

littlemisskeira said:


> just a honest question and i don't wish to come across as being racist - and i do apologise in advance if this offends anyone:
> 
> how did Archie and his sister come across as 100% white when the mum is not? I mean if I don't know who their mum is, I won't know they have mixed blood in them.


I don't know how but it does happen. I worked with a girl who was white in skin colour, hair a mousey shade of brown. It was two years of knowing her that I found out her grandparents were Jamaican. She now has 3 children, two look white and one is slightly darker with afro hair (dark blonde)


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are you saying that you're also a middle child, a kindred spirit and a soul sister with @EverSoElusive and myself? If so, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


Can I join, pls?


----------



## EverSoElusive

OT

@Maggie Muggins  I petition for us to start a Major Jonny Thompson thread  He's the handsome man in kilt who got us swooning 

We should be joined by @CarryOn2020 @DeMonica @Hermes Zen @Jayne1 @Lodpah and everyone else that I might have missed.


----------



## EverSoElusive

elvisfan4life said:


> Don’t lurk -your post is so refreshing compared to some of the utter bs that has been allowed to be posted on here in the last day - which I have reported and would like to see removed as offensive to us Brits who let’s face it are in a minority on here so that ( if you listen to the experts on here ) makes them racist too



Please don't send me to the dungeon where Archie is   I'm sorry if any of my posts in the past days have annoyed or angered you.


----------



## Vintage Leather

littlemisskeira said:


> just a honest question and i don't wish to come across as being racist - and i do apologise in advance if this offends anyone:
> 
> how did Archie and his sister come across as 100% white when the mum is not? I mean if I don't know who their mum is, I won't know they have mixed blood in them.



There are six different genes that control skin tone, all of which have the ability to be dominant or recessive.

You can have three siblings from the same parents, and they can all look quite different.


----------



## bisbee

PurseUOut said:


> I'm lucky that the taxpayers of England see firsthand who they are entrusting the future of the monarchy too. Hopefully luck will have it Charlotte can take the reigns - she seemed to reprimand her little brother quite effectively.


OMG…the future of the monarchy does not rest on the actions of a 4 year old boy acting out because of boredom and excitement!


----------



## DeMonica

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


First of all this thread is about the Harkles, who keep their children under locks who except a few (blurry) pics are unknown to the public. Archie might be the most unruly child on the planet or a true angel, but we'll never get to know it because they don't take the risk to include them in your public life. It comes with the risk of course, but one thing is at least sure from this little show Louis put on that he has a very healthy relationship with his parents, the only grandparent he left with, and the rest of his family which, unfortunately, cannot be said about the Sussex children who are raised with technically no family around. Yes, they might know Doria - there's no proof that she's a frequent visitor at Montecito - but they are estranged from the rest of their families both sides. IMO it's quite unique to be in fight  with so many people from so many sides and raises the question of how family oriented you really are, but that's another question. It still open, though, how they would behave in public, especially if they would be supposed to sit through a four-hour event. If it happens, I'm sure we would be happy to discuss here in this thread. 
As someone who did babysitting for a number of children in my family and for others to earn some pocket money in my youth, not mentioning that I used to be child myself, I can assure you that this behaviour is not unusual at all for a 4 year old, particularly at that time of the day, when it's normally a nap time for a 4 year old in many parts of the world. Yes, maybe, the nanny could have taken him away earlier and bring him back when he felt like joining his family but the Cambridges preferred him around this time, maybe to please us or give him memories. If you watched them closely, you could see that the other - even significantly older siblings and cousins showed signs of being bored with pageantry, especially little Lena Tindall, but the camera didn't focus on them in a way it focused on Louis. They would walk back and forth, talking to each other, running through the pages of a book, etc. So stop being bias and  bashing this little boy and his parents' parenting skills.


----------



## Icyjade

mellibelly said:


> Also how convenient that she invited a *photographer* to Lili’s bday party to take pictures and leak, I mean, post, the pictures to social media at the agreed upon time when they were safely back in California. Everything is so coordinated with them. No wonder the RF didn’t show up. I don’t believe Zara and Mike’s kids were there. Did you see how Mike avoided speaking to them on the steps of the cathedral? Heck no he won’t let his kids be used by the Harkles.



I thought it was pathetic that the only friend they have is the photographer (and conveniently mixed race family too). What happened to Harry’s old friends?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vintage Leather said:


> There are six different genes that control skin tone, all of which have the ability to be dominant or recessive.
> 
> You can have three siblings from the same parents, and they can all look quite different.



Yeah, with basic genetics I should not have turned out Caspar white with green eyes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> I thought it was pathetic that the only friend they have is the photographer (and conveniently mixed race family too). What happened to Harry’s old friends?



Either markled or avoiding her like the plague.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How many adults stayed still throughout the concert?  Sure, it’s easy to criticize what we see on the screen, much more difficult to be the one being filmed.


----------



## DeMonica

PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.


https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...yal-children-naughtiest-moments-in-photos/11/


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Either markled or avoiding her like the plague.



Surely they were at the Derby or celebrating the Jubilee with others.  I hear most had a really good time 
As someone said, there was a bit of traffic jam around BuckPalace which most likely spilled over to ToadMore.

Undoubtedly we will get more photos and details as the week goes on.  Their PR is so clever to drip drip photos *Not*  
Anything to keep their names in the news.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Circling back to Lili's picture where she was sitting on the lawn alone... If the picture was taken by Misan Harriman, a supposedly pro photographer, then it's my personal opinion that it's a pretty poorly taken picture.

Why???

The child actress playing Lili looked like she was without legs. Surely Nutmeg could have had the nanny adjust the dress a little bit for Lil' Bit.


Lili's birthday wishes from the BRF on IG... Did anyone else notice that they were only posted in the form of a disappearing IG story? I know it was the Jubilee but still   


And where have Archie been? Lil' Bit could be photographed with other kids but not her own brother? What a weird family party  It must be serious money problem if they cannot afford two child actors at once.


----------



## DeMonica

Maggie Muggins said:


> Oh about the taxpayers, did you know that the BRF bring in enough revenue through tourism to help support themselves and the taxpayers? Oh and about the line of succession, did you know that you cannot remove anyone from the line of succession as it is each and every member of the BRF's birthright and each member would have to renounce it to be excluded. So for Charlotte to become queen some day, George would have to either renounce his birthright or die and I think that is a hideous thought for anyone to even begin to entertain.


Indeed. Also, for GBP 1 per capita/year you get endless fashion shows - the members of the BRF are the best ambassadors of the British fashion industry  - and an endless soap opera in addition to the revenue from tourism.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Circling back to Lili's picture where she was sitting on the lawn alone... If the picture was taken by Misan Harriman, a supposedly pro photographer, then it's my personal opinion that it's a pretty poorly taken picture.
> 
> Why???
> 
> The child actress playing Lili looked like she was without legs. Surely Nutmeg could have had the nanny adjust the dress a little bit for Lil' Bit.
> 
> 
> Lili's birthday wishes from the BRF on IG... Did anyone else notice that they were only posted in the form of a disappearing IG story? I know it was the Jubilee but still
> 
> 
> And where have Archie been? Lil' Bit could be photographed with other kids but not her own brother? What a weird family party  It must be serious money problem if they cannot afford two child actors at once.



Excellent points. Thank you.
2 more questions -
why would a highly acclaimed, professional photographer make the child stare at the sun?
why is she wearing a thin, sleeveless dress in the outside photo and bundled up in a sweater coat for the indoor photo?
Something strange about all of this. [Kate, an excellent photographer, would have done a better job imo].


----------



## DeMonica

elvisfan4life said:


> The Tindalls  and Phillips are not working royals or HRHs so they had no royal duties to rearrange - Harry is their cousin same as William I’m sure they have not been told to take sides in private life -as the Queen said Harry ( and his family ) are loved members of the private family and always will be but the public royal family is another matter - they are only a minor part of that when specifically invited


I wasn't implying that the Tindall or Phillips family snubbed the Harkles or took sides. The only thing that I pointed out was that while some papers had mentioned that the Phillips and Tindall children were *invited* to the party , the others papers had taken for granted that those children *attended *the party which is different. In the time of the party the Tindalls  were in Epsom for the day, so was Peter Phillips with his fiance, but of course, their nannies could take the Tindall and Phillips children to the party. IMO we can't know for sure what happened unless we see more pictures of Lilibet's birthday party.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?


It is not appropriate in any scenario but it is normal and predictable behavior for  a four year old required to sit for extended periods, after long days and many events quite different from his usual activities.  Even royal four year olds cannot be expected to exhibit perfect and proper demeanor under these circumstances. To presume otherwise is  pointless and unreasonable.


----------



## DeMonica

DeMonica said:


> According to studies, your behaviour is highly influenced by how many siblings you have and which place you occupy in the birth order. First ones are more serious, and generally more of an ally to the parents than the younger one. The youngest one is normally more of a rebel. I'm a first one and I was given more responsibilities from younger age and had to behave, my brother could be much more careless than my younger brother.


OOPs, I messed up :I meant he could be much more careless than I could at my younger brother's age.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ooh, kindred spirit and soul sister, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


Please may I join despite being the eldest?   Please.  Pretty please.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Icyjade said:


> I thought it was pathetic that the only friend they have is the photographer (and conveniently mixed race family too). What happened to Harry’s old friends?


They were Williams and stayed with him


----------



## rose60610

elvisfan4life said:


> Kalamazoo!!!- Elvis has apparently been living there for 45 years with only minimal sightings - they want privacy don’t they?
> 
> Or can we actually believe anything they say or do after two years of this behaviour - and some one on here is criticising the behaviour of a 4 yr old child for a few minutes on one day !!!! - seriously ? *No wonder Americans spend so much on therapy !!!!*



That's one of the most insightful statements I've seen.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Circling back to Lili's picture where she was sitting on the lawn alone... If the picture was taken by Misan Harriman, a supposedly pro photographer, then it's my personal opinion that it's a pretty poorly taken picture.
> 
> Why???
> 
> The child actress playing Lili looked like she was without legs. Surely Nutmeg could have had the nanny adjust the dress a little bit for Lil' Bit.
> 
> 
> Lili's birthday wishes from the BRF on IG... Did anyone else notice that they were only posted in the form of a disappearing IG story? I know it was the Jubilee but still
> 
> 
> And where have Archie been? Lil' Bit could be photographed with other kids but not her own brother? What a weird family party  It must be serious money problem if they cannot afford two child actors at once.


Lily is a cute little girl but regarding the picture, The Duchess of Cambridge’s birthday photos set a standard this photographer was not able to achieve.


----------



## LibbyRuth

The photos Kate takes of her kids are always going to offer something that a professional photographer can never achieve, because they give us a little insight into how a mother sees her children.
I think the photo of Lilli is very nice.  I'm glad they chose to share it to mark her first birthday.  I think it would be great if Harry and Meghan see how well it is received and that Lilli is not exploited by sharing it, so they know it will be safe to share a similar photo of both children each year to mark their birthdays. It's a nice tradition.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

The children are at least 75% caucasian so not a surprise to me they'd look caucasian. Meghan herself said in an interview that a teacher told her to tick the 'caucasian' box on her census because that's how she looks. So that comment about how dark the children's skin could actually be interpreted as hoping kids will not look white (so RF can look diverse on the balcony). I'd be annoyed if after all spent resources and problems, the kids look caucasian.


----------



## DeMonica

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't know how but it does happen. I worked with a girl who was white in skin colour, hair a mousey shade of brown. It was two years of knowing her that I found out her grandparents were Jamaican. She now has 3 children, two look white and one is slightly darker with afro hair (dark blonde)


I had a similar experience. A man I used to work with a gentleman whose family was also from Jamaica. He was married to a white woman and they have two daughters. One looked biracial with very curly mousey blonde hair and light blue eyes, but the other with brown eyes and hair would have passed for white easily. The later one had a blonde little girl who looked like she had been brought over by the Saxons from Denmark. When I looked surprised he explained that Jamaica is a melting pot and he had all kinds of people among his ancestors including even Chinese. I wouldn't have guessed by looking at him.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> Do you consider a four year old physically shushing his mother in public, making mocking gestures in response to her requests, pulling his female cousin's hair and kicking his sister all just "kid appropriate" behavior he learned out of nowhere?


he looked like a normal toddler to me....I'm not even a mom but I think they get tired and misbehave


----------



## sdkitty

Vintage Leather said:


> You don’t deal much with small children, do you?
> 
> Was Louis’s actions appropriate? No.
> 
> Were they normal things that every four year old who knows their family is secure has done a time or 50? Yes. Very very normal.
> 
> I would be a lot more suspicious if he hadn’t acted out. He’s a 4 yr old child who was expected to stay in a confined area for 4 hours. The only children of that age I’ve met who could have managed that much stillness lived in  abusive households.
> 
> Now, I personally think that it would have been better parenting to have planned for his loss of attention, and had the nanny on standby so that after he saw GanGan and Paddington and Grandpa talk, he could be whisked away to burn off energy or get a nap. Its a sad fact that these photos will follow him for the rest of his life. But they are walking a delicate balance between being accessible, and giving their children memories of a lifetime, letting the kids know they are loved, and keeping their privacy. In this case, I think that optimism outweighed experience.


why is it sad that the photos will follow him?  everything I've seen says he stole the show


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


come on....you're stirring the pot here I think


----------



## youngster

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.



I have children myself, have been around other children in that age range for years, and it is completely typical behavior of age 4, and Louis just turned 4 about 6 weeks ago, so I would not criticize Harry or Meghan when their children one day do something similar, though no one will ever know since the kids basically never appear in public. 

But, please, next time you see a 3 or 4 year old acting up in a theater, restaurant, supermarket, coffee shop, museum, concert, sporting event, outdoor mall, indoor mall, birthday party, block party, anniversary party, or wedding, feel free to share your opinion with the child's parents that they should be greatly concerned about their child, that they exhibit poor parenting skills, and what course of action they should take to cure their 3 or 4 year old of being 3 or 4 years old.  I'm sure they'd appreciate it.


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> I have children myself, have been around other children in that age range for years, and it is completely typical behavior of age 4, and Louis just turned 4 about 6 weeks ago, so I would not criticize Harry or Meghan when their children one day do something similar, though no one will ever know since the kids basically never appear in public.
> 
> But, please, next time you see a 3 or 4 year old acting up in a theater, restaurant, supermarket, coffee shop, museum, concert, sporting event, outdoor mall, indoor mall, birthday party, block party, anniversary party, or wedding, feel free to share your opinion with the child's parents that they should be greatly concerned about their child, that they exhibit poor parenting skills, and what course of action they should take to cure their 3 or 4 year old of being 3 or 4 years old.  I'm sure they'd appreciate it.


NO. WIRE. HANGERS!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Such a good question. She did get pregnant the first time with her geriatric eggs exactly when she wanted, which was immediately after the wedding -  it’s not as if she could have a bump when she’s walking down the aisle.
> 
> I have no idea, but I wouldn’t put it past her.
> 
> *Oh, and Lady C pointed out a different wording that the palace used to announce the birth of Archie. She thinks there was a surrogate.*


In the past BP used to announce a birth along this fashion: "HRH the Princess or Duchess or Countess of So-And-So was delivered of a daughter or a son..." That specific phraseology was missing in Archie's birth announcement, however, I haven't paid enough attention to ensuing royal births to notice whether or not the practice had been discontinued.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Let’s move on!

How does meggie look so fresh faced in the bday party pic?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> I find men in kilts extremely attractive too!


Then kindred spirit and soul sister of @EverSoElusive and myself, please join the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are you saying that you're also a middle child, a kindred spirit and a soul sister with @EverSoElusive and myself? If so, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.


I’m a middle, men in kilts weaken my knees! May I join the club.


----------



## chaneljewel

DeMonica said:


> I wasn't implying that the Tindall or Phillips family snubbed the Harkles or took sides. The only thing that I pointed out was that while some papers had mentioned that the Phillips and Tindall children were *invited* to the party , the others papers had taken for granted that those children *attended *the party which is different. In the time of the party the Tindalls  were in Epsom for the day, so was Peter Phillips with his fiance, but of course, their nannies could take the Tindall and Phillips children to the party. IMO we can't know for sure what happened unless we see more pictures of Lilibet's birthday party.


This won’t happen unless money can be made by H and M.  I do agree that this child has a lot of teeth for a one year old.  Usually a one year old has 2-4 teeth.  It seems the Lillibet in the photo must be older or developing at a rapid pace.  Just my observation.  I don’t know why these kids have to be so hush, hush by the parents.  People love seeing photos of kids as they bring smiles to us.  
As for Louis, he’s four.   Yes four year olds can go to pre-school, but their behavior is unpredictable at times. Just when you think they’re going to behave, they don’t.  I don’t judge any parent who’s child is acting like a wild one as I had my own issues with mine when young.  No matter what we think, there aren’t any perfectly behaved four year olds.


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> I saw someone showing up at the window to make her presence felt. But we can agree to disagree.
> 
> Just that your post made me gag a bit. We are talking about the same ones who dissed their family, expected to be given money at the ripe age of over 30, ignored her very ill father who was in the hospital and overall just introducing us to the term “markled” right?


Thanks for your great reply, I couldn't say it better myself.  
For the ones in need, shipping is free!


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> I've raised four children. Children will act out. Plain and simple. Did you see the picture where he's kissing his mom also, all at the same event? Get off your high horse and until you have raised children who will sit calmly at an event for long periods of time, even 10 minutes is a long time for them, then I suggest you check their pulse.  Thank you and have a good night.



LOL, ITA with you! I have raised 4 children aswell, all now successful adults, I have 7 grandchildren and I tell you, I thought Louis was rather well behaved for a 4 yearold!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> LOL, ITA with you! I have raised 4 children aswell, all now successful adults, I have 7 grandchildren and I tell you, I thought Louis was rather well behaved for a 4 yearold!


I thought he was very cute - but not as cute as Charlotte - no one is


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

duna said:


> LOL, ITA with you! I have raised 4 children aswell, all now successful adults, I have 7 grandchildren and I tell you, I thought Louis was rather well behaved for a 4 yearold!



And the whole event was more than 2 hours right? For a 4 year old, that is a long time to be sitting still.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> why is it sad that the photos will follow him?  everything I've seen says he stole the show


His parents released a statement saying how much they enjoyed the Jubilee - especially Louis


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I thought Harry could maybe have been his son a the time, but the older he gets the more he looks like Charles IMO!


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> so you think they used donated eggs?


She could have frozen her eggs even before she met H.


----------



## duna

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Hermes Zen there are always exceptions and since you love men in kilts, you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so  welcome to the Club.



LOL, I think there are a lot of us in this club


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Lily is a cute little girl but regarding the picture, The Duchess of Cambridge’s birthday photos set a standard this photographer was not able to achieve.


Interesting observation.


----------



## bubablu

lanasyogamama said:


> Let’s move on!
> 
> How does meggie look so fresh faced in the bday party pic?



Yes! This is what I want to know! It's like a photo of her but some years ago.


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> She could have frozen her eggs even before she met H.


reason I asked was there seemed to be some implications that it was possibly H's sperm and some white woman's eggs?  hence the straight red hair?


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I have children myself, have been around other children in that age range for years, and it is completely typical behavior of age 4, and Louis just turned 4 about 6 weeks ago, so I would not criticize Harry or Meghan when their children one day do something similar, though no one will ever know since the kids basically never appear in public.
> 
> But, please, next time you see a 3 or 4 year old acting up in a theater, restaurant, supermarket, coffee shop, museum, concert, sporting event, outdoor mall, indoor mall, birthday party, block party, anniversary party, or wedding, feel free to share your opinion with the child's parents that they should be greatly concerned about their child, that they exhibit poor parenting skills, and what course of action they should take to cure their 3 or 4 year old of being 3 or 4 years old.  I'm sure they'd appreciate it.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I have children myself, have been around other children in that age range for years, and it is completely typical behavior of age 4, and Louis just turned 4 about 6 weeks ago, so I would not criticize Harry or Meghan when their children one day do something similar, though no one will ever know since the kids basically never appear in public.
> 
> But, please, next time you see a 3 or 4 year old acting up in a theater, restaurant, supermarket, coffee shop, museum, concert, sporting event, outdoor mall, indoor mall, birthday party, block party, anniversary party, or wedding, feel free to share your opinion with the child's parents that they should be greatly concerned about their child, that they exhibit poor parenting skills, and what course of action they should take to cure their 3 or 4 year old of being 3 or 4 years old.  I'm sure they'd appreciate it.


AND - he wasn't having a screaming tantrum.  When I see kids screaming, crying, throwing themselves on the floor, that is disturbing.  He didn't do any of that.  Just a little naughty.


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny , was looking at what is actually a black hat pin … 
But my silly first instinct after microphonegate at church was to think - is that a mic ?

It is not her best hat pin imho lol


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> I’m a middle, men in kilts weaken my knees! May I join the club.


Yes, weak knees is one symptom of the soul sisters' admiration for handsome men in kilts and I'm sure for that reason alone @EverSoElusive would also welcome you to the club.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! Could Hazz's apparent absence from the b-day party be a sign that he didn't agree with the photo-op? There are always more questions than answers related to this couple. 


_It appeared that the Duke and Duchess had made the eminently sensible decision to protect their tots' privacy and had decided not to allow the nosy media into their kids' lives. Smart

But now, these Lili photos.

*The timing of their release is the key to understanding this surprising change of tack on the Sussexes' part with the shots coming out only about 24 hours after the family arrived back in the US after their ice-cold trip back to his homeland. And which curiously surfaced only hours after William and Kate, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge released a series of touching behind-the-scenes shots of their kids during the Jubilee.*

Lili's birthday aside, the four-day stint back in the UK was nothing short of a PR disaster for the couple who were sidelined by the royal family in the most humiliating – and blatant – way possible.

During Trooping the Colour, the only Windsors they were seen with were Princess Anne's grandchildren and the 86-year-old Duke of Kent. One report has suggested they were not invited to the family lunch that followed, however, given that the Queen is unfailingly polite I find that a bit hard to believe.

When the pair rolled up at the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's the following day, it was to some boos from the assembled crowd outside - there were cheers too. Things really took an embarrassing turn when they got inside. The Queen might have offered the concession to their former elevated positions by allowing them to arrive via their own car, and not the bus put on for her other grandchildren and they were given their own individual procession to their seats, but there any kindness bluntly stopped.

Images of them being led to their second-row seats in the middle of a clutch of B and C-list Windsors, with Harry's cousins Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and their husbands having to stand up to make way for them, were about as ignominious as they come.

Live TV cameras captured the couple being literally and figuratively sidelined.

They, like the rest of the congregation, then had to wait about 20 minutes for the first-string royal players to turn up. When Prince Charles as well as William and Kate arrived, not a single report suggests any sort of eye contact between them and the Sussexes. *The ghost of Oprah Winfrey loomed large inside the Christopher Wren-designed church.

Meghan might have kept a smile plastered on her face from start to finish and there might have been a few images of Harry laughing with his York cousins, but the strain and discomfort of the couple were as clear as day.*

And then? Harry and Meghan disappeared from view. They did not attend a single other Jubilee event though courtiers would surely have been willing to coordinate things so they could have attended without having to come within hissing distance of the Cambridges._









						Opinion: Meghan and Harry's desperate Lilibet move
					

Story behind beautiful photo speaks volumes, writes Daniela Elser.




					www.nzherald.co.nz


----------



## duna

littlemisskeira said:


> just a honest question and i don't wish to come across as being racist - and i do apologise in advance if this offends anyone:
> 
> how did Archie and his sister come across as 100% white when the mum is not? I mean if I don't know who their mum is, I won't know they have mixed blood in them.



Yes it happens. 

My sister ( white) married a very dark skinned Jamaican, they had two boys one darker than the other. The boys are now married to 2 English white girls and they each have two kids. My darker nephew's little girls are both white, the eldest blond with blue eyes like her mum, and my younger nephew's kids are also fair skinned although not with blue eyes. Sometimes it skipps a generation, my nephews' children, even if they marry white people could have a darker skinned child. Genetics are pretty unpredictable!


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> She could have frozen her eggs even before she met H.


This was discussed in one of the videos by Pdina &TM. As far as I recall, he confirmed knowing about the frozen eggs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> His parents released a statement saying how much they enjoyed the Jubilee - especially Louis


It was a very cute statement…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> OT
> 
> @Maggie Muggins  I petition for us to start a Major Jonny Thompson thread  He's the handsome man in kilt who got us swooning
> 
> We should be joined by @CarryOn2020 @DeMonica @Hermes Zen @Jayne1 @Lodpah and everyone else that I might have missed.


Yes, it's a great idea and pray tell, how do we start a new thread.


----------



## bag-mania

Is this why Lilibet was photographed in that particular pose? So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison. _People_ does get the Sunshine Sachs’ feed for their articles and it was obviously planned.











						See Queen Elizabeth at Age 1 Side-by-Side with Her Namesake Great-Granddaughter Lilibet!
					

See Queen Elizabeth and her namesake great-granddaughter Lilibet both at age 1




					people.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

880 said:


> She could have frozen her eggs even before she met H.



That could be why she didn’t have kids with her ex-husband - she was saving her eggs for the right “catch.”


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison



Both babies are very cute & I see a similar amount of teeth!


----------



## V0N1B2

Poor Meghan. So uninteresting that pages of childcare discussion overshadows what is supposed to be her thread.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Both babies are very cute & I see a similar amount of teeth!



True, although we don’t know if the Queen’s photo was taken at 12 months or at 18+ months, only that she was 1. She does have at least three teeth on top that I can see.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Is this why Lilibet was photographed in that particular pose? So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison. _People_ does get the Sunshine Sachs’ feed for their articles and it was obviously planned.
> 
> View attachment 5420533
> 
> https://people.com/royals/queen-elizabeth-lilibet-sise-by-side-photos-age-1/?amp=true


seems like the queen had a few front teeth at least in this pic


----------



## kemilia

wisconsin said:


> He’s a kid!, how can you even compare. Adults and kids are 2 different ballgames.Obviously you have never had a toddler or heard of the terrible twos,threes and fours.


I used to babysit my 4-5 yr old nephew (who is now a wonderful, successful 37 yr old) who would grab the steering wheel making me nearly go off the road, absolutely destroyed a nice breakfast we were having with a friend (have never been back to a Denny's EVER), and due to his out-of-control brattiness I hid behind a pillar at a mall to scare him into behaving because he thought I had left him alone there (which I said I would do if he did one more awful thing). When I saw Louie's behavior I thought "been there, experienced that".


----------



## gracekelly

Maybe this picture wasn’t taken in England  and it was the BD party of another child.


----------



## kemilia

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


Are you a trained educator?


----------



## lulu212121

EverSoElusive said:


> Circling back to Lili's picture where she was sitting on the lawn alone... If the picture was taken by Misan Harriman, a supposedly pro photographer, then it's my personal opinion that it's a pretty poorly taken picture.
> 
> Why???
> 
> *The child actress playing Lili looked like she was without legs.* Surely Nutmeg could have had the nanny adjust the dress a little bit for Lil' Bit.
> 
> 
> Lili's birthday wishes from the BRF on IG... Did anyone else notice that they were only posted in the form of a disappearing IG story? I know it was the Jubilee but still
> 
> 
> And where have Archie been? Lil' Bit could be photographed with other kids but not her own brother? What a weird family party  It must be serious money problem if they cannot afford two child actors at once.


I thought the same. Where are her legs? No foot poking through? I am still trying to figure out the pose. I thought maybe she was sitting on a ledge, but that still doesn't look right.


----------



## Miarta

Maggie Muggins said:


> @Hermes Zen there are always exceptions and since you love men in kilts, you must be a kindred spirit and a soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself, so  welcome to the Club.





Chanbal said:


> Thanks for your great reply, I couldn't say it better myself.
> For the ones in need, shipping is free!
> View attachment 5420485


hahahahahahaha, the best one yet!!!!!! Hahahahahah


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> OT
> 
> @Maggie Muggins  I petition for us to start a Major Jonny Thompson thread  He's the handsome man in kilt who got us swooning
> 
> We should be joined by @CarryOn2020 @DeMonica @Hermes Zen @Jayne1 @Lodpah and everyone else that I might have missed.


Thanks for the suggestion and here's the new thread: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads...ots-guards-and-handsome-men-in-kilts.1053254/


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent points. Thank you.
> 2 more questions -
> why would a highly acclaimed, professional photographer make the child stare at the sun?
> why is she wearing a thin, sleeveless dress in the outside photo and bundled up in a sweater coat for the indoor photo?
> Something strange about all of this. [Kate, an excellent photographer, would have done a better job imo].


Yes! Her dress looks like a thin linen material. Great for CA but not Frogmore. I did not see anyone dressed like this child throughout the Jubilee. It seemed the temps were cool. Many wore jackets and sweaters.

Hazbeen and TW are proven liars. I believe nothing that they show or tell.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Is this why Lilibet was photographed in that particular pose? So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison. _People_ does get the Sunshine Sachs’ feed for their articles and it was obviously planned.
> 
> View attachment 5420533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth at Age 1 Side-by-Side with Her Namesake Great-Granddaughter Lilibet!
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth and her namesake great-granddaughter Lilibet both at age 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


 
Unbelievable- how far do people want to reach  the only resemblance are they are both babies in a dress - almost any female baby that age would look pretty much as similar


----------



## bubablu

gracekelly said:


> Maybe this picture wasn’t taken in England  and it was the BD party of another child.


A child that is 10 yo now! LOL


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for your great reply, I couldn't say it better myself.
> For the ones in need, shipping is free!
> View attachment 5420485


I can’t decide which is more disrespectful to a religious community…this or that dirty rag M wore for a hijab in that mosque or maybe it was the oddly revealing abaya.

so many choices


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Is this why Lilibet was photographed in that particular pose? So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison. _People_ does get the Sunshine Sachs’ feed for their articles and it was obviously planned.
> 
> View attachment 5420533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth at Age 1 Side-by-Side with Her Namesake Great-Granddaughter Lilibet!
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth and her namesake great-granddaughter Lilibet both at age 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


It’s already started, by usurping the Queen’s beloved nickname and arranging her birth to coincide with the Jubilee, this Lily will be denied her own unique identity in life. It’s not unusual to use comparison pictures, but this one feels contrived, it’s not a candid.

Could also be a slam at the Queen. They were stymied by her in getting their Holy Grail photo, so they made sure the two Lilibets appeared together in a press release with as much mirror imaging as possible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t decide which is more disrespectful to a religious community…this or that dirty rag M wore for a hijab in that mosque or maybe it was the oddly revealing abaya.
> 
> so many choices



Team Dirty Rag.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> It’s already started, by usurping the Queen’s beloved nickname and arranging her birth to coincide with the Jubilee, this Lily will be denied her own unique identity in life. It’s not unusual to use comparison pictures, but this one feels contrived, it’s not a candid.
> 
> Could also be a slam at the Queen. They were stymied by her in getting their Holy Grail photo, so they made sure the two Lilibets appeared together in a press release with as much mirror imaging as possible.


 If so it’s pretty pathetic - what depths can they plummet to ?


----------



## Jayne1

Vintage Leather said:


> You can have three siblings from the same parents, and they can all look quite different.


My original question was - can someone who understands genetics explain how a recessive gene can happen twice and a dominate gene _not_ happen twice.

One child of course, anything can happen.  But what are the chances of two children following this pattern?

As I said, Harry must have some really strong genes.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, with basic genetics I should not have turned out Caspar white with green eyes.


Did more than one of your children turn out Casper - because that's what I find so interesting, in terms of genetics.


----------



## csshopper

elvisfan4life said:


> If so it’s pretty pathetic - what depths can they plummet to ?


Being a supremely diabolical duo, l’m not sure we can fathom that depth, but they will probably continue to provide examples. Two barren souls and not a shred of conscience between them.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t decide which is more disrespectful to a religious community…this or that dirty rag M wore for a hijab in that mosque or maybe it was the oddly revealing abaya.
> 
> so many choices


agree it's disrespectful...that was a joke, wasn't it?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’ve seen those candles for lots of celebs, real housewives, etc. The abaya was TWs choice.


----------



## gelbergirl

Would it have been at all possible for us to get a few more snaps of the kid?
Maybe one with Mom or Dad or Both?, one with Archie, a little candid of Lilbet doing something cute like playing with a toy?

The photo we got has left me kind of blah.  It makes Lilbet look kind of alone in the world.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> Would it have been at all possible for us to get a few more snaps of the kid?
> Maybe one with Mom or Dad or Both?, one with Archie, a little candid of Lilbet doing something cute like playing with a toy?
> 
> The photo we got has left me kind of blah.  It makes Lilbet look kin d of alone in the world.


just looks like an ordinary baby to me, cute but no cuter than others.  I said same about archie


----------



## Jayne1

PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.


George was a handful for a while.  I remember the whole family visiting Canada when he was roughly that age and he was quite the handful. Fun to watch, but easy for me to say, I'm just an observer.

He seems to have grown out of that and seems very well behaved now, as to what we saw this weekend.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, weak knees is one symptom of the soul sisters' admiration for handsome men in kilts and I'm sure for that reason alone @EverSoElusive would also welcome you to the club.



Please create a badge for us soul sisters. I'd use it as my avatar   





bag-mania said:


> Is this why Lilibet was photographed in that particular pose? So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison. _People_ does get the Sunshine Sachs’ feed for their articles and it was obviously planned.
> 
> View attachment 5420533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth at Age 1 Side-by-Side with Her Namesake Great-Granddaughter Lilibet!
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth and her namesake great-granddaughter Lilibet both at age 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



No, just no. The mom can cosplay all she wants but leave Lil' Bit out of it. She doesn't look like the Queen, not even a little bit. The pose wasn't well executed either.





sdkitty said:


> just looks like an ordinary baby to me, cute but no cuter than others.  I said same about archie



I'm sorry but their kids are so ordinary looking. @lanasyogamama  baby was way cuter. Just saying.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> It was a very cute statement…





They have a sense of humor. They aren't afraid to poke fun at their own offspring


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Please create a badge for us soul sisters. I'd use it as my avatar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, just no. The mom can cosplay all she wants but leave Lil' Bit out of it. She doesn't look like the Queen, not even a little bit. The pose wasn't well executed either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry but their kids are so ordinary looking. @lanasyogamama  baby was way cuter. Just saying.


@lanasyogamama baby was adorable - I agree, and not to pick apart a child, but meh


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> @lanasyogamama baby was adorable - I agree, and not to pick apart a child, but meh


generally for me what makes a baby cute is their personality, when they laugh and smile
and an older child like the wonderful Charlotte has the personality plus the cute hairdo etc.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Please may I join despite being the eldest?   Please.  Pretty please.


Anyone who loves handsome men in kilts is a kindred spirit and soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself. Please come join the club Here


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> Sigh.
> 
> For the last time - If you can't tell the difference between a boy child having a temper tantrum or being fussy vs. showing displays of disrespect and aggression towards his primary female caretaker after she clearly showed she was not pleased with his behavior then I am not arguing with you. If you think it is impish boyish appropriate behavior, fine, I don't care how you raise your kids. No one is going to tell you they are brats anyway, as it is considered impolite.
> 
> I'll leave you with a visual of behavior of someone who is an adult and understands how to (sweetly) yet firmly instruct children to quiet down a little. My, they look traumatized. If she can do this with her young relatives I'm doubtful Archie will be caught thumbing his nose at her (btw - isn't that considered a great insult across the pond, almost akin to 'giving someone the finger' in America?) while his father, Harry, is sitting two seats feigning great indifference, allowing it to happen. Because Harry grew up in an environment with depressed mother and a emotionally neglectful father who never loved her and emotionally checked out of the marriage I am sure he recognizes how his lack of boundaries and spoiltness was able to manifest in his adolescence.
> 
> View attachment 5420377
> 
> View attachment 5420378


this is just ridiculous...as much as many of us here dislike H&M, we don't pick on their kids....unless you count saying they are just cute - not that special
You are picking on a tiny child for acting like a child, just to make a point that Meghan is better than Kate (and your evidence is her picture shushing some other family's children?)
Continue stirring the pot if you wish


----------



## bag-mania

The Vogue staff needs to communicate so they don't contradict each other. It's bad enough they make the outrageous claim that Meghan Markle was one of the week's best dressed, but here they are saying the outfit was white when their earlier article called it gray. 









						This Week’s Best Dressed Stars Proved Neutrals Can Still Make a Statement
					

In muted hues, these stealthy-chic outfits packed punch.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## catlover46

CarryOn2020 said:


>





csshopper said:


> It’s already started, by usurping the Queen’s beloved nickname and arranging her birth to coincide with the Jubilee, this Lily will be denied her own unique identity in life. It’s not unusual to use comparison pictures, but this one feels contrived, it’s not a candid.
> 
> Could also be a slam at the Queen. They were stymied by her in getting their Holy Grail photo, so they made sure the two Lilibets appeared together in a press release with as much mirror imaging as possible.


Pretty sure Meghan hates the Queen and the rest of the family-she knows they are on to her BS.


----------



## bag-mania

They have pretty much abandoned their web site (like they do with everything else). I took the bullet of opening up Archewell. Other than updating the copyright to say 2022 I don't think they have added anything new to it this year.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Did more than one of your children turn out Casper - because that's what I find so interesting, in terms of genetics.



I understand what you are saying, but also, Archie has auburn hair and brown eyes. He is overall not as fair as his sister who looks like a typical redhead.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Please create a badge for us soul sisters. I'd use it as my avatar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, just no. The mom can cosplay all she wants but leave Lil' Bit out of it. She doesn't look like the Queen, not even a little bit. The pose wasn't well executed either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry but their kids are so ordinary looking. @lanasyogamama  baby was way cuter. Just saying.



She still is but now I’m not allowed to post her picture!


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> agree it's disrespectful...that was a joke, wasn't it?


Yes, I’m just commenting on how weird it is that these insensitive candles exist and then joking about how it’s part of an ongoing trend of M sloppily borrowing religious imagery, it’s not a great analogy now I spell it out though. 


lanasyogamama said:


> I’ve seen those candles for lots of celebs, real housewives, etc. The abaya was TWs choice.


Me too and I’m not even remotely Catholic or even Christian and I still find them a bit odd. I will say the married Harry at least gets into the spirit and  is usually seen with a facial expression one would expect of a Saint midway through a particularly painful martyrdom.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

zaq


Maggie Muggins said:


> Anyone who loves handsome men in kilts is a kindred spirit and soul sister to @EverSoElusive and myself. Please come join the club Here


Thank you.   I love to look and dream and fantasize as much as all you ladies who love hunks in kilts.  In my fantasy I am 20 or 30 or 40 again—and slender enough for the hunk to look back.


----------



## Pivoine66

bag-mania said:


> Is this why Lilibet was photographed in that particular pose? So it could be shown side by side with her great grandmother’s similar 1-year photo for comparison. _People_ does get the Sunshine Sachs’ feed for their articles and it was obviously planned.
> 
> View attachment 5420533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth at Age 1 Side-by-Side with Her Namesake Great-Granddaughter Lilibet!
> 
> 
> See Queen Elizabeth and her namesake great-granddaughter Lilibet both at age 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I don't know ...
Has anyone seen a photo comparison with Lili, the daughter of the former actress and former Deal or No Deal "briefcase girl", and her mother Doria?
and perhaps
have a photo comparison with Archie and TW's father?
She could also look very similar to her half-sister?

How is her father - couldn't she finally visit him and honour him - as a father, who raised her alone for some time, financed her privileged education and much more, if I recall correctly - giving him some moments and some pictures with his grandchildren, too?


----------



## bubablu

It will start in an hour, a little late for me. But our USA based team can see it live.


----------



## TC1

Is the photographer that released the pictures the one that (supposedly) was also to capture Gingi-Bet meeting HMTQ? She was with them in the UK and is conveniently a family friend? Do we know these were taken on the UK visit?


----------



## Katel

PurseUOut said:


> They never acted how Louis did when they were four, either.



How do you know? Did you live with them for a number of years? 

If you have children, you (may) know they are all different.


PurseUOut said:


> Sigh.
> 
> For the last time - If you can't tell the difference between a boy child having a temper tantrum or being fussy vs. showing displays of disrespect and aggression towards his primary female caretaker after she clearly showed she was not pleased with his behavior then I am not arguing with you. If you think it is impish boyish appropriate behavior, fine, I don't care how you raise your kids. No one is going to tell you they are brats anyway, as it is considered impolite.
> 
> I'll leave you with a visual of behavior of someone who is an adult and understands how to (sweetly) yet firmly instruct children to quiet down a little. My, they look traumatized. If she can do this with her young relatives I'm doubtful Archie will be caught thumbing his nose at her (btw - isn't that considered a great insult across the pond, almost akin to 'giving someone the finger' in America?) while his father, Harry, is sitting two seats feigning great indifference, allowing it to happen. Because Harry grew up in an environment with depressed mother and a emotionally neglectful father who never loved her and emotionally checked out of the marriage I am sure he recognizes how his lack of boundaries and spoiltness was able to manifest in his adolescence.
> 
> View attachment 5420377
> 
> View attachment 5420378





Ummm … where I’m from, it’s the parent’s job to reprimand /discipline, not a stranger’s job (emphasis on _stranger_). In this case, the stranger is considered very rude (what a surprise).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Is the photographer that released the pictures the one that (supposedly) was also to capture Gingi-Bet meeting HMTQ? She was with them in the UK and is conveniently a family friend? Do we know these were taken on the UK visit?



The photographer is a man and supposedly Meghan's friend, if we are to believe she has any. He got free advertising out of it so good for him I guess.









						Who is Misan Harriman? Meghan Markle's friend behind Lilibet birthday photo
					

Misan Harriman nicknames his camera lens "the truth seeker" and has photographed Angelina Jolie, Jay-Z, Tom Cruise and Princess Beatrice before Lilibet.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> It’s already started, by usurping the Queen’s beloved nickname and arranging her birth to coincide with the Jubilee, this Lily will be denied her own unique identity in life. It’s not unusual to use comparison pictures, *but this one feels contrived, it’s not a candid.*
> 
> Could also be a slam at the Queen. They were stymied by her in getting their Holy Grail photo, so they made sure the two Lilibets appeared together in a press release with as much mirror imaging as possible.


*FAKE, CONTRIVED AND PHOTOSHOPPED* needs to be stamped across the picture because nothing is ever real with them.


----------



## marietouchet

TC1 said:


> Is the photographer that released the pictures the one that (supposedly) was also to capture Gingi-Bet meeting HMTQ? She was with them in the UK and is conveniently a family friend? Do we know these were taken on the UK visit?


There are 2 pix 

1. B&W candid of M holding L, and wife of photog and her two children in makeup 
Surely this was taken in England ... since the wife is identified (sorry, I dont remember her name) and her location was/is verifiable 
The kiddie makeup tells me this was at the bday party

2. Posed color photo of L in front of blurry background that shows a white column, hmmm, could be Frog Cot ???
Could have been taken at different time  (before) than at party

I could not tell from the low res photos whether they L was wearing the same outfit in both snaps, I think not .... diff bow in her hair ?? Photos could have been from same day ..


----------



## bag-mania

I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Other than updating the copyright to say 2022 I don't think they have added anything new to it this year.



We will have to wait until 2023 to see more _*Compassion in Action*_!


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744



He’s thinking “how did I mess up so badly?” and “I really wish I can escape from this circus that is my life.”


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> We will have to wait until 2023 to see more _*Compassion in Action*_!



Supposedly Meghan's looooonnng awaited Spotify podcast was going to launch this summer. Funny, it's already summer and there is still no date announced.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744


Beam be up Scotty


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Supposedly Meghan's looooonnng awaited Spotify podcast was going to launch this summer. Funny, it's already summer and there is still no date announced.


Maybe she meant the Australian summer? 
Or summer in Antartica


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744


with his upbringing, he should know how to behave in church....this eye rolling and the mugging....uugh


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744


I don't think that photos like this show anything beyond that a photographer caught a picture of Harry looking up.  I've seen many pictures in the past that appear one way as a photo, then you see video of the same moment and realize that something else entirely actually happened.  And in truth, a person can be staring straight ahead looking at the speaker and be day dreaming during a church service.  I've been guilty of it before.  There is so much that Harry and Meghan do that make it SO easy to criticize.  i have to admit I don't fully understand why there's a need to dig so deep to find things like this to pile on further.


----------



## bellecate

pukasonqo said:


> Maybe she meant the Australian summer?
> Or summer in Antartica


Or perhaps summer in Chunga Changa.


----------



## gracekelly

PurseUOut said:


> He is four - not a toddler. He's old enough to attend Pre-K in the states. If he exhibited similar behaviors in the presence of trained educators they would absolutely address it with his parents as it not one typically seen acted out of hyperactivity. But he's Prince Louis so its "cute" and "normal" and no cause for concern. I can only imagine if that were Archie how the narrative would have been spinned around.


Oh please.  I have been through this drama with a niece and a nephew at the same age.  In both cases, they had a bit of a shock to the system in that they were in strange places with people they didn't know and for several hours.    Plus  higher noise levels really effect young children.  They hear a lot better than adults.  Babies cry to express how they feel if discomforted.  A four year old is going to express the same, it just comes out differently.  Considering all little Louis was put through for a few days, he behaved pretty well.  It just happened that his last melt down was at the last big event.


----------



## gracekelly

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't think that photos like this show anything beyond that a photographer caught a picture of Harry looking up.  I've seen many pictures in the past that appear one way as a photo, then you see video of the same moment and realize that something else entirely actually happened.  And in truth, a person can be staring straight ahead looking at the speaker and be day dreaming during a church service.  I've been guilty of it before.  There is so much that Harry and Meghan do that make it SO easy to criticize.  i have to admit I don't fully understand why there's a need to dig so deep to find things like this to pile on further.


I am going to agree with you.  Taking one picture and analyzing it to death is too much. One facial expression does not explain the general mood of a person.    It's just that we look for things, but in truth they are easy to find lolololol!


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are you saying that you're also a middle child, a kindred spirit and a soul sister with @EverSoElusive and myself? If so, welcome to the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.





Hermes Zen said:


> I’m not a middle but I love men in kilts too.





Lilliesdaughter said:


> Please may I join despite being the eldest?   Please.  Pretty please.





Maggie Muggins said:


> Then kindred spirit and soul sister of @EverSoElusive and myself, please join the "We Love Looking At Handsome Men In Kilts" Club.



I’m not a middle, but I’m in!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

V0N1B2 said:


> Poor Meghan. So uninteresting that pages of childcare discussion overshadows what is supposed to be her thread.


----------



## sdkitty

LibbyRuth said:


> I don't think that photos like this show anything beyond that a photographer caught a picture of Harry looking up.  I've seen many pictures in the past that appear one way as a photo, then you see video of the same moment and realize that something else entirely actually happened.  And in truth, a person can be staring straight ahead looking at the speaker and be day dreaming during a church service.  I've been guilty of it before.  There is so much that Harry and Meghan do that make it SO easy to criticize.  i have to admit I don't fully understand why there's a need to dig so deep to find things like this to pile on further.


you have a point there...a photo is just a brief moment


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Oh please.  I have been through this drama with a niece and a nephew at the same age.  In both cases, they had a bit of a shock to the system in that they were in strange places with people they didn't know and for several hours.    Plus  higher noise levels really effect young children.  They hear a lot better than adults.  Babies cry to express how they feel if discomforted.  A four year old is going to express the same, it just comes out differently.  Considering all little Louis was put through for a few days, he behaved pretty well.  It just happened that his last melt down was at the last big event.


and I wouldn't call that a meltdown


----------



## lmoses

PurseUOut said:


> With all due respect: if you consider a four-year old thumbing his nose at this mother, swatting at his mother, hushing his mother in her mouth after giving him a command, kicking his sister and pulling his girl cousin's hair normal behavior borne out of restlessness than there is nothing more I can say. I was *very* specific on what I saw that caused me concern and none of that had to do with what you explained here. We just have completely different philosophies regarding appropriate discipline and being attuned to correcting what could be very problematic uncontrollable behavior in the future when 4-year olds aren't so cute and lovable. Ciao.



Sorry!! I had to pick up my daughter from
Camp and apparently it posted my comment without finishing! I apologize if I am repeating my thoughts.


I have only commented a few times in all my years in tPF but these comments really have me bothered. I am the mother of two neurodivergent children and a former preschool teacher. I know nothing about how the Cambridge’s parent, but the expectation that a barely 4 year old could sit through a 2-3 hour event is simply absurd, especially if that child has any sort of attention or sensory issues.

Louis’ behavior reminds me lot of my son’s behavior at that age. He was a full of energy little boy ALL OF THE TIME. He also would completely lose once overly stimulated and figuring out that fine line was always a challenge. Fortunately, I have always been surrounded by a supportive group of friends who know that.

It is apparent that you have absolutely ZERO understanding of young children and their emotional and behavioral capabilities at that age (a little boy, who just turned turned 4). If you think it is realistic for a child to sit that long, perfectly still, with that much stimulation, then you need to go sit in any reputable EC classroom and observe what they are doing. I have seen two snapshots out of a 3 hour long parade that were a bit cringey, but totally normal behavior for a child his age who has sat without any sort of activity for that length of time.

I never knew if my son was going to have a meltdown and it was always hard trying to find a balance between living life and exposing him to the world without making it “too much”. He is much better now, but we have spent thousands of dollars in therapy to get to that place. I cannot imagine if we had been in the public eye.


We need a 'men in kilts' thread....
[/QUOTE]


----------



## elvisfan4life

So we waited a year for a picture of Lilibet -the big masterplan to further humiliate the monarchy and ruin the Jubilee after the OW fiasco and ……..outsmarted by Paddington Bear !!!!!! What utter humiliation for them lol


----------



## Laila619

The Meghan stans should stop worrying too much about little Louis’ behavior. I’m sure he will grow up to be a kind and productive adult. Certainly he will not turn out worse than Harry himself, as William and Catherine appear to be better parents than Charles and Diana were.   I highly doubt we will see him on Oprah in 30 years griping about how horrible his family is.


----------



## Chanbal

This particular video of Lady C has some interesting confirmations. Here is what I understood:
1) Misinformation was provided to Page Six about traveling from LA to London on a commercial flight.
2) Lady C found out that they used a private jet, informed Piers and the rest is history.
3) They missed events, but not because of lack of invitations. Their names were on the list of the Jubilee celebration events.
4) They managed to be late on the way to the Thanksgiving Service, and missed the bus with the other royals. Tactic attributed to TW, Hazz used not to be that smart.
6) They had to get the Harkles a car, since they couldn't arrive together with Charles and Camilla (Royals arrive to events based on rank, the lower ranks arrives first). So they got their own car and photo-op entrance. They got also all the boos by themselves.
7) Paying people to cheer is not uncommon. Some movie stars used to hire people to give them flowers…


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744


I actually thought this was part of a larger pic where William is also looking up. . . I thought it was weird at the time


----------



## Toby93

lmoses said:


> Sorry!! I had to pick up my daughter from
> Camp and apparently it posted my comment without finishing! I apologize if I am repeating my thoughts.
> 
> 
> I have only commented a few times in all my years in tPF but these comments really have me bothered. I am the mother of two neurodivergent children and a former preschool teacher. I know nothing about how the Cambridge’s parent, but the expectation that a barely 4 year old could sit through a 2-3 hour event is simply absurd, especially if that child has any sort of attention or sensory issues.
> 
> Louis’ behavior reminds me lot of my son’s behavior at that age. He was a full of energy little boy ALL OF THE TIME. He also would completely lose once overly stimulated and figuring out that fine line was always a challenge. Fortunately, I have always been surrounded by a supportive group of friends who know that.
> 
> It is apparent that you have absolutely ZERO understanding of young children and their emotional and behavioral capabilities at that age (a little boy, who just turned turned 4). If you think it is realistic for a child to sit that long, perfectly still, with that much stimulation, then you need to go sit in any reputable EC classroom and observe what they are doing. I have seen two snapshots out of a 3 hour long parade that were a bit cringey, but totally normal behavior for a child his age who has sat without any sort of activity for that length of time.
> 
> I never knew if my son was going to have a meltdown and it was always hard trying to find a balance between living life and exposing him to the world without making it “too much”. He is much better now, but we have spent thousands of dollars in therapy to get to that place. I cannot imagine if we had been in the public eye.
> 
> 
> We need a 'men in kilts' thread....


[/QUOTE]
I totally agree with you.  My son is now 34, married and in a wonderful career, but when he was a child....  He was exactly like little Louis, and when I showed the video to my husband, he said the same thing. He was a little terror, and it was difficult to take him anywhere. I just assumed this was normal until my daughter came along. It was night and day. Same parents, same parenting style, completely different children and personalities. He did outgrow this, and went on to university and the career of his choice. Louis is a normal little boy and could not be expected at 4 years old to sit through hours of celebrations without becoming overloaded*


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> So we waited a year for a picture of Lilibet -the big masterplan to further humiliate the monarchy and ruin the Jubilee after the OW fiasco and ……..outsmarted by Paddington Bear !!!!!! What utter humiliation for them lol


Let down.  Anti-climatic.  Yawn.  They just waited too long and put it out when everyone was suffering from Jubilee overload fatigue.  Who advised them to do this?  Bad advice, and  they probably paid for it.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Oh please.  I have been through this drama with a niece and a nephew at the same age.  In both cases, they had a bit of a shock to the system in that they were in strange places with people they didn't know and for several hours.    Plus  higher noise levels really effect young children.  They hear a lot better than adults.  Babies cry to express how they feel if discomforted.  A four year old is going to express the same, it just comes out differently.  *Considering all little Louis was put through for a few days, he behaved pretty well.  It just happened that his last melt down was at the last big event.*



I wish we had cell phone cameras when my children were that age, I could show everyone a few melt downs that achieved almost nuclear status, or could have been picked up by NASA from the space station.  Louis needs to up his game if he wants to compete at that level.


----------



## Debbini

PurseUOut said:


> Sigh.
> 
> For the last time - If you can't tell the difference between a boy child having a temper tantrum or being fussy vs. showing displays of disrespect and aggression towards his primary female caretaker after she clearly showed she was not pleased with his behavior then I am not arguing with you. If you think it is impish boyish appropriate behavior, fine, I don't care how you raise your kids. No one is going to tell you they are brats anyway, as it is considered impolite.
> 
> I'll leave you with a visual of behavior of someone who is an adult and understands how to (sweetly) yet firmly instruct children to quiet down a little. My, they look traumatized. If she can do this with her young relatives I'm doubtful Archie will be caught thumbing his nose at her (btw - isn't that considered a great insult across the pond, almost akin to 'giving someone the finger' in America?) while his father, Harry, is sitting two seats feigning great indifference, allowing it to happen. Because Harry grew up in an environment with depressed mother and a emotionally neglectful father who never loved her and emotionally checked out of the marriage I am sure he recognizes how his lack of boundaries and spoiltness was able to manifest in his adolescence.
> 
> View attachment 5420377
> 
> View attachment 5420378


Oh, for the love of God! You love the Harkles, we get it. There's an invitation to go join their appreciation thread. Louis is fine, just fine.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This particular video of Lady C has some interesting confirmations. Here is what I understood:
> 1) Misinformation was provided to Page Six about traveling from LA to London on a commercial flight.
> 2) Lady C found out that they used a private jet, informed Piers and the rest is history.
> 3) They missed events, but not because of lack of invitations. Their names were on the list of the Jubilee celebration events.
> 4) They managed to be late on the way to the Thanksgiving Service, and missed the bus with the other royals. Tactic attributed to TW, Hazz used not to be that smart.
> 6) They had to get the Harkles a car, since they couldn't arrive together with Charles and Camilla (Royals arrive to events based on rank, the lower ranks arrives first). So they got their own car and photo-op entrance. They got also all the boos by themselves.
> 7) Paying people to cheer is not uncommon. Some movie stars used to hire people to give them flowers…



Spot on. I have personal knowledge of people hiring people to do just that (not me but a client).


----------



## Happyish

Vintage Leather said:


> As an educator with over 27 years of experience, with over a decade spent with pre-literacy development, I can say with the utmost respect, you’re  doing a great job at showing how little you know about 4 year olds.
> 
> The attention span of a 4 year old is 8-12 minutes.
> 
> Pre-k educators are very well aware of this. That’s why most activities are planned for roughly 5 minutes. Anything that takes longer should have an active, physical component, preferably one that breaks the divide. (Causes the child to reach from left to right, or vise versa). A four hour pre-k session has roughly 10 activities, with breaks, snacks, naps, and physical activity built in.
> 
> And that’s for children that have received normal socialization for their first 4 years. Louis has spent half his life in lockdown. I am curious to see how this current crop of Pre-K is doing. My 16 year old is struggling with social interaction.
> 
> Expecting a child to sit quietly for longer than 15 minutes is expecting a miracle.
> 
> 
> 
> Would people have criticized Archie worse? Probably. It is a sad fact of this world that racism still exists, and that in the US, minorities have been expected to mature faster than their white counterparts. But both children should be allowed to be children.


I agree with you, but what does racism have to do with any of this? I see people as people first. At some point, I may notice skin color, bur frankly it's irrelevant. Is the person kind? Nice? Thoughtful? Mean? Nasty? Underhanded? Sneeky? As far as I'm concerned race is nothing but an accessory. It does not define someone (although some define themselves by it) it does not confine someone (although many think it does and allows it to do so.) 

Race, even religion, becomes weaponized when it's the first thing people see, and when it's given the blame for faults, quirks, incompetence, idiosyncrasies, and the like. 

To suggest criticisms of Archie's misbehavior would be attributable to racism seems very peculiar to me. 

A kid that is poorly raised and misbehaves as a result, is a kid that was poorly raised. Period. It has nothing to do with race. 

Sometimes a rose is just a rose.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Please create a badge for us soul sisters. I'd use it as my avatar


Please join me in Conversations for your avatar.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oops! Could Hazz's apparent absence from the b-day party be a sign that he didn't agree with the photo-op? There are always more questions than answers related to this couple.
> View attachment 5420520
> 
> 
> _*The timing of their release is the key to understanding this surprising change of tack on the Sussexes' part with the shots coming out only about 24 hours after the family arrived back in the US after their ice-cold trip back to his homeland. And which curiously surfaced only hours after William and Kate, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge released a series of touching behind-the-scenes shots of their kids during the Jubilee.*_



What makes the timing even more interesting is that Euge posted a photo of her son’s face on Saturday night.  Usually she posts his back


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> maybe its like the N word - depends on who is using it
> I had gay neighbor years ago and he used the word homo


Depends on your age too , my mother was born differently abled …
the word to describe her change every 5-10 years handicapped, disabled,  diff abled, has a limp etc
for me it was difficult to change vocabulary all the time for a person whose disability I never noticed, she was mom, not disabled


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> What makes the timing even more interesting is that Euge posted a photo of her son’s face on Saturday night.  Usually she posts his back



But we saw son's face at the pageant.  There is no need to continue to hide his on social media.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744


He's thinking, "Get me out of here."


----------



## bag-mania

Some in the media are finally calling them out on their blatant hypocrisy.

“They pontificate about helping people and the planet and then they take private jets,” royal expert Tom Quinn told the newspaper. “They tell people to look after the environment and then they don’t look after the environment themselves. It’s enormously hypocritical.”

The Bombardier 6000 is a “Russian oligarch kind of jet” and a natural fit for people who “just don’t care,” Quinn said. “It’s bad enough to get private jets, but to get one where the emissions are particular bad is almost like sticking two fingers up at the environmental lobby.”









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle slammed as hypocrites for flying home in private jet
					

The couple’s 5,500-mile trip from Farnborough, England, to Santa Barbara is estimated to have emitted nearly 60 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.




					nypost.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Some in the media are finally calling them out on their blatant hypocrisy.
> 
> “They pontificate about helping people and the planet and then they take private jets,” royal expert Tom Quinn told the newspaper. “They tell people to look after the environment and then they don’t look after the environment themselves. It’s enormously hypocritical.”
> 
> The Bombardier 6000 is a “Russian oligarch kind of jet” and a natural fit for people who “just don’t care,” Quinn said. “It’s bad enough to get private jets, but to get one where the emissions are particular bad is almost like sticking two fingers up at the environmental lobby.”ad is almost like sticking two fingers up at the environmental lobby.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle slammed as hypocrites for flying home in private jet
> 
> 
> The couple’s 5,500-mile trip from Farnborough, England, to Santa Barbara is estimated to have emitted nearly 60 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


that's fine but I wouldn't call this mainstream....I think NY Post is pretty much a tabloid


----------



## Sophisticatted

I read somewhere that they unexpectedly “dropped in on” Charles and Camilla right before the service.  Considering how many layers of people surround the members of the RF, especially on that day, it seems strange that they would be able to do this, but, if true, it seems that they were angling for a “ride with” to still seem important and connected and/or to get more taped conversation.  They also wanted their own car, no doubt.  Can’t ride on the royal plebe bus and rub elbows with the 2nd and 3rd tier!


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> I read somewhere that they unexpectedly “dropped in on” Charles and Camilla right before the service.  Considering how many layers of people surround the members of the RF, especially on that day, it seems strange that they would be able to do this, but, if true, it seems that they were angling for a “ride with” to still seem important and connected and/or to get more taped conversation.  They also wanted their own car, no doubt.  Can’t ride on the royal plebe bus and rub elbows with the 2nd and 3rd tier!


who knows what's true about these grifters


----------



## Chanbal

This is an intriguing video. _It seems an old picture_…


----------



## Annawakes

I’ve been thoroughly entertained by this thread.  Kudos to all who speak with the voice of reason.

My 2 cents is that they are so transparent.  After all the talk talk talk about privacy, they release those two pictures (they aren’t even great photos, and I’m not talking about how the baby looks….the party photo doesn’t look like it was professionally done at all)…in a desperate bid for attention after being frozen out.

I suspect the party photo was chosen only because TW seems pretty in that one.  Sharing the lens with another woman isn’t really her kind of thing.  I think she only picked that one because she likes the way she looks in it.


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> Depends on your age too , my mother was born differently abled …
> the word to describe her change every 5-10 years handicapped, disabled,  diff abled, has a limp etc
> for me it was difficult to change vocabulary all the time for a person whose disability I never noticed, she was mom, not disabled


Yes it’s sometimes hard to keep up with ‘political correct’ usage. My youngest sister had Downs Syndrome and when she was born the correct term then was MentallyRetarded and it has had many evolutions since then.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is an intriguing video. _It seems an old picture_…



I'm not sure what he's implying about Meghan in the video....that they made a video of her holding the baby and then photoshopped in an old head of hers at a younger age?  LOL.  is that possible?
she does look pretty fresh and un-made-up


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What makes the timing even more interesting is that Euge posted a photo of her son’s face on Saturday night.  Usually she posts his back


I don't know what to think. NS seems to be intrigued by some of TW's physical features in the photo. Some people seem to excel at misinformation.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Some in the media are finally calling them out on their blatant hypocrisy.
> 
> “They pontificate about helping people and the planet and then they take private jets,” royal expert Tom Quinn told the newspaper. “They tell people to look after the environment and then they don’t look after the environment themselves. It’s enormously hypocritical.”
> 
> The Bombardier 6000 is a “Russian oligarch kind of jet” and a natural fit for people who “just don’t care,” Quinn said. “It’s bad enough to get private jets, but to get one where the emissions are particular bad is almost like sticking two fingers up at the environmental lobby.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle slammed as hypocrites for flying home in private jet
> 
> 
> The couple’s 5,500-mile trip from Farnborough, England, to Santa Barbara is estimated to have emitted nearly 60 tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Their hypocrisy has no limits. It's good that Lady C, Piers and several others are making a point in providing evidence of this type of shenanigans…


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> Please join me in Conversations for your avatar.



You're the best @Maggie Muggins   Soul sister  you!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> The reality is she’s made such a big point of her being ‘too dark’ to fit in the family so now looking darker is advantageous to her so she’s going to fake tan like there’s no tomorrow.
> 
> She is actually light-skinned  so when she was a jobbing actress she said herself she used to go for white and Latina roles as well.
> 
> It is all just as hustle and she knows it’s a very dicey topic so the press won’t call her out on it.
> 
> add on- when you look at the old videos of her with the royals there’s little discernible difference in skin tone between her and the Windsors aka whitest most patrician family in the U.K. so it does make sense she’s decided to rewrite history here with the old st tropez.
> [/QUOTE
> View attachment 5420962


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> What makes the timing even more interesting is that Euge posted a photo of her son’s face on Saturday night.  Usually she posts his back



Instead of the Queen's picture as a toddler, someone should do a side by side of Lil' Bit and August. They look like they could be siblings


----------



## Toby93

Duplicate post


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'm not sure what he's implying about Meghan in the video....that they made a video of her holding the baby and then photoshopped in an old head of hers at a younger age?  LOL.  is that possible?
> she does look pretty fresh and un-made-up


See the BLG's comment.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> My thoughts exactly. There is something off in that photo.



Her eyebrows seemed to have grown closer together overnight


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> See the BLG's comment.




Nose is different to me  I'll be honest, the natural face looks better than all that heavy makeup.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> See the BLG's comment.



She looks 20 years younger on the left.


----------



## KellyObsessed

duna said:


> I thought Harry could maybe have been his son a the time, but the older he gets the more he looks like Charles IMO!


I've always thought Harry resembled the Queen Mum, and took after her side of the family.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## csshopper

Annawakes said:


> I’ve been thoroughly entertained by this thread.  Kudos to all who speak with the voice of reason.
> 
> My 2 cents is that they are so transparent.  After all the talk talk talk about privacy, they release those two pictures (they aren’t even great photos, and I’m not talking about how the baby looks….the party photo doesn’t look like it was professionally done at all)…in a desperate bid for attention after being frozen out.
> 
> I suspect the party photo was chosen only because TW seems pretty in that one.  Sharing the lens with another woman isn’t really her kind of thing.  I think she only picked that one because she likes the way she looks in it.


She may have used the party picture if these were the only people who attended.


----------



## Icyjade

Lili’s big reveal is so anti-climatic. More of a non-event than I’d expected actually. I think they underestimated Louis’ star power. An active and cute kid that dances, makes faces and interacted so beautifully with his great grandmother and grandfather (who happen to be the Queen and future King of UK) during the Jubilee weekend is more than a match for a still photo with no personality. 

Plates must be smashing in Montecito. What will they decide to do next I wonder…


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> See the BLG's comment.




Her foundation deliberately darkens her? She looks Latino in colouration without makeup. Isn’t it blackfishing or whatever the term is for people who deliberately darken themselves?


----------



## mellibelly

Just leaving this BLG post here


----------



## EverSoElusive

Icyjade said:


> Her foundation deliberately darkens her? She looks Latino in colouration without makeup. Isn’t it blackfishing or whatever the term is for people who deliberately darken themselves?



She probably self tans, uses a lot of bronzers and/or darker foundation whenever she wants to appear more colored. Just my speculation


----------



## Hermes Zen

@EverSoElusive LOVE your new avatar!!  Haba haba …     Thanks to help from @Maggie Muggins I’m guessing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is so good!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> @EverSoElusive LOVE your new avatar!!  Haba haba …     Thanks to help from @Maggie Muggins I’m guessing.



It is all @Maggie Muggins  Glad you approve!


----------



## Chanbal

Their hypocrisy is being widely shared!



_Prince Harry has described climate change as one of the “most pressing issues we are facing”. In May last year he told Oprah Winfrey: “We need to do better about stopping or allowing the things that are causing so much harm to so many of us at the source, rather than being distracted by the symptom.”_









						Harry and Meghan’s private jet to US raises climate questions
					

Couple emitted ten times more on return from jubilee than if they had flown commercial




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> This is so good!



If those two haven’t figured it out by now that they’re such a joke, then I don’t know.


----------



## youngster

Her teeth really don't match up in that photo from Thursday's service to the party photo supposedly on Saturday.  

Did she skip events on Friday to see a dentist and have the veneers redone? Maybe she gnawed them off in frustration after Thursday so it was necessity. Bizarre.  Everything is always just so bizarre.


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> Her teeth really don't match up in that photo from Thursday's service to the party photo supposedly on Saturday.
> 
> Did she skip events on Friday to see a dentist and have the veneers redone? Maybe she gnawed them off in frustration after Thursday so it was necessity. Bizarre.  Everything is always just so bizarre.




Maybe she used some gold clad sanding machine, borrowed from the Palace


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Might be photoshop? The other one was a pap pic.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Might be photoshop? The other one was a pap pic.


Considering she is noticeably slimmer and younger in the pic, I'd say the chances of photoshop are 100%


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> Lili’s big reveal is so anti-climatic. More of a non-event than I’d expected actually. I think they underestimated Louis’ star power. An active and cute kid that dances, makes faces and interacted so beautifully with his great grandmother and grandfather (who happen to be the Queen and future King of UK) during the Jubilee weekend is more than a match for a still photo with no personality.
> 
> Plates must be smashing in Montecito. What will they decide to do next I wonder…



The money shot they desperately wanted was one of Lilibet with the Queen. The plan was thwarted and no photographer was allowed so they had to make do with the baby sitting on the lawn.


----------



## DrDior

I once watched a demented toddler punch the hell out of his mother at a Chapters bookstore. Few things would cause me to stop dead in my tracks, but a 4 year old wailing on his mother’s face is one of them.

Louis is just fine.


----------



## Sophisticatted

My hypothesis: they had expectations of the money shot with the Queen AND they had expectations of a birthday party filled with royals.  The Queen allowed no photos and nobody made room in their schedule for a baby birthday party.  *So*, the pics (IMO) are from someone else’s party or gathering and *a* pic was hastily thrown out there.

ETA:  do we think they expected the royal chefs to whip up an impromptu, but oh so gorgeous looking birthday cake for the little one/social media?  Was the staff also supposed to produced balloons and elaborate floral arrangements and bunting?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Did Eugenie loaned August to Nutmeg before his haircut? 

(Just joking, in case some of you take things too seriously)


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> ETA:  do we think they expected the royal chefs to whip up an impromptu, but oh so gorgeous looking birthday cake for the little one/social media?  Was the staff also supposed to produced balloons and elaborate floral arrangements and bunting?



They confirmed they had the baker who did their wedding cake make the birthday cake as well as a baby “smash cake.”  









						Is This Lili's Birthday Cake? Meghan and Harry's Baker Sparks Speculation
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle celebrated daughter Lilibet Diana's first birthday in England amid the Platinum Jubilee events — read more




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Chanbal

The window issue will not help with Hazz's lawsuit imo


----------



## Hermes Zen

Yes, Baby Lilibet Is in the Royal Line of Succession—Here’s Where She Falls
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's daughter, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor is officially part of the British line of succession. Keep reading to find out where she falls.




					www.purewow.com
				




*Yes, Baby Lilibet Is in the Royal Line of Succession—Here’s Where She Falls*
By Alexandra Hough 
| 06-06-2022 | 2:58 PM



Earlier this weekend, Queen Elizabeth II finally got to meet one of her youngest great-grandchildren (and her namesake), Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, during an exciting celebration of the queen's Platinum Jubilee. And in case you were wondering, Lilibet is on the list of Queen Elizabeth's successors.

Almost two months after she was born on June 4, 2021, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s youngest child was added to the British line of successionon the official website of the royal family. We had assumed baby Lili was going to get a spot in line, but we couldn't be positive considering her parents are no longer senior members of the royal family.

However, since they let Archie keep his place, it makes sense that the same would go for his sister. Harry is sixth in line after Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, and his son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor is seventh.

Meanwhile, Baby Sussex falls right after her older brother and is eighth in line. The previous holder of that position, the Duke of York, has been pushed back one place as was the rest of the lineup.

Whatever the reason was for the delay (the royal gang is very busy after all), we’re just happy to know Lili’s name is on the list. (Now if only we could see some pictures from her meeting with Queen Elizabeth.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> They confirmed they had the baker who did their wedding cake make the birthday cake as well as a baby “smash cake.”



They had approximately 7 people at this party, so WHO ate all that cake?


----------



## csshopper

With many references on line to Lilibet’s resemblance to her Grandpa Markle, is it time for Haz to tell his wife to “Suck it up Buttercup and call your Father. We need the $$$$.“


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> Yes, Baby Lilibet Is in the Royal Line of Succession—Here’s Where She Falls
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's daughter, Lilibet 'Lili' Diana Mountbatten-Windsor is officially part of the British line of succession. Keep reading to find out where she falls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.purewow.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yes, Baby Lilibet Is in the Royal Line of Succession—Here’s Where She Falls*
> By Alexandra Hough
> | 06-06-2022 | 2:58 PM
> 
> 
> 
> Earlier this weekend, Queen Elizabeth II finally got to meet one of her youngest great-grandchildren (and her namesake), Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, during an exciting celebration of the queen's Platinum Jubilee. And in case you were wondering, Lilibet is on the list of Queen Elizabeth's successors.
> 
> Almost two months after she was born on June 4, 2021, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s youngest child was added to the British line of successionon the official website of the royal family. We had assumed baby Lili was going to get a spot in line, but we couldn't be positive considering her parents are no longer senior members of the royal family.
> 
> However, since they let Archie keep his place, it makes sense that the same would go for his sister. Harry is sixth in line after Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis, and his son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor is seventh.
> 
> Meanwhile, Baby Sussex falls right after her older brother and is eighth in line. The previous holder of that position, the Duke of York, has been pushed back one place as was the rest of the lineup.
> 
> Whatever the reason was for the delay (the royal gang is very busy after all), we’re just happy to know Lili’s name is on the list. (Now if only we could see some pictures from her meeting with Queen Elizabeth.)


Scoobie will be pleased with this article. He seems to be worried with the future of the monarchy without his masters.


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> They had approximately 7 people at this party, so WHO ate all that cake?


I counted 6, the photographer, wife, 2 kids, TW, and Lilib. So who else am I missing?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> This particular video of Lady C has some interesting confirmations. Here is what I understood:
> 1) Misinformation was provided to Page Six about traveling from LA to London on a commercial flight.
> 2) Lady C found out that they used a private jet, informed Piers and the rest is history.
> 3) They missed events, but not because of lack of invitations. Their names were on the list of the Jubilee celebration events.
> 4) They managed to be late on the way to the Thanksgiving Service, and missed the bus with the other royals. Tactic attributed to TW, Hazz used not to be that smart.
> 6) They had to get the Harkles a car, since they couldn't arrive together with Charles and Camilla (Royals arrive to events based on rank, the lower ranks arrives first). So they got their own car and photo-op entrance. They got also all the boos by themselves.
> 7) Paying people to cheer is not uncommon. Some movie stars used to hire people to give them flowers…



  Personally I believe the Queen insisted that they were not allowed to be alone and it was planned for them to arrive with Zara etc in the bus so that they would not be booed or if there was booing it was not so obvious it was directed at them     alone - it was clear certain more minor royals had been instructed to baby/ guard them
I could see that working 2 ways stopping them mugging the cameras taking pictures/ filming etc but also trying to stop them being completely humiliated - the Queen is too gracious to sit back and let that happen to them. Part of me also thinks the plan to send them on the bus was the
queens wicked sense of humour! - maybe she saw H with James Corden and has heard all his “just call me Harry “ and felt he would be most comfortable on a bus these days !!!! Shame he ruined it coming in the private jet while his granny in healthier times has always been known for travelling by train with the public


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie will be pleased with this article. He seems to be worried with the future of the monarchy without his masters.



What is dull is Scobie’s career as a royal commentator/reporter. He really needs to work on finding another line of work. Trash collection would be good. He’s used to dealing with it.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Imagine if all 3 children behaved the same like robots everyone would be screaming about child abuse and stifling their individuality


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I counted 6, the photographer, wife, 2 kids, TW, and Lilib. So who else am I missing?


Arkie and Harry. Where were they?  Went out for bugers and beer?  Pizza?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Lodpah said:


> Spot on. I have personal knowledge of people hiring people to do just that (not me but a client).


Watch the film Loving You -Deke Rivers (Elvis) is given a new car by his ruthless manager who then hires a mob of screaming girls who vandalise it trying to get a part of him - a thinly veiled reference to Col Tom Elvis’s manager who irl stopped at nothing to get fame and fortune ( then gambled it all away in Vegas )


----------



## elvisfan4life

mellibelly said:


> Just leaving this BLG post here
> View attachment 5420991


Use this as a response to every post


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie will be pleased with this article. He seems to be worried with the future of the monarchy without his masters.



Why do people even give the man who looks like a wax candle press coverage ? A complete nonentity - I keep thinking of scoobie snacks every time he is mentioned


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> This particular video of Lady C has some interesting confirmations. Here is what I understood:
> 1) Misinformation was provided to Page Six about traveling from LA to London on a commercial flight.
> 2) Lady C found out that they used a private jet, informed Piers and the rest is history.
> 3) They missed events, but not because of lack of invitations. Their names were on the list of the Jubilee celebration events.
> 4) They managed to be late on the way to the Thanksgiving Service, and missed the bus with the other royals. Tactic attributed to TW, Hazz used not to be that smart.
> 6) They had to get the Harkles a car, since they couldn't arrive together with Charles and Camilla (Royals arrive to events based on rank, the lower ranks arrives first). So they got their own car and photo-op entrance. They got also all the boos by themselves.
> 7) Paying people to cheer is not uncommon. Some movie stars used to hire people to give them flowers…




If that is true, then so much maneuvering just to appear as if they still have “special” status (to get their own car/arrival/departure before and after the church event) yet to fail so spectacularly with the boos from the crowd and their B list seats is amusing to watch. They greatly overestimated how popular they are. At this point, they need the royal connections more than the RF needs them. Even Princess Beatrice is having a major glow up and stepping up quite nicely. 

I do really wonder what they will do next for money. As much as they are a train wreck, the thought of watch their “docuseries” (cough, reality tv) makes me cringe. Can’t stand the thought of watching TW preen and do her sexy (cough, slutty) walk on TV… maybe they need to engineer some teary reunion with TM. What else can they sell?


----------



## csshopper

elvisfan4life said:


> Why do people even give the man who looks like a wax candle press coverage ? A complete nonentity - I keep thinking of scoobie snacks every time he is mentioned


Best description yet, “looks like a wax candle.”  The really cheap ones from the Dollar Store.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Best description yet, “looks like a wax candle.”  The really cheap ones from the Dollar Store.


Melted and reconstituted


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I counted 6, the photographer, wife, 2 kids, TW, and Lilib. So who else am I missing?



The nanny?  Nflix boss?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> Instead of the Queen's picture as a toddler, someone should do a side by side of Lil' Bit and August. They look like they could be siblings


Yes, and that really should put an end to the stupid James Hewitt rumours too, apart from the fact that James met Diana when Harry was three or four.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

(though I can think of more pressing topics than just this)


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Their hypocrisy is being widely shared!
> 
> View attachment 5421025
> 
> _Prince Harry has described climate change as one of the “most pressing issues we are facing”. In May last year he told Oprah Winfrey: “We need to do better about stopping or allowing the things that are causing so much harm to so many of us at the source, rather than being distracted by the symptom.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan’s private jet to US raises climate questions
> 
> 
> Couple emitted ten times more on return from jubilee than if they had flown commercial
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk



As far as I know they flew private from the US to the UK aswell!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, and that really should put an end to the stupid James Hewitt rumours too, apart from the fact that James met Diana when Harry was three or four.



Page 1 of this thread. Imo, those rumors won’t end until Diana is out of the news. Hazz does himself a disservice by keeping her front and center. Maybe he will wise up soon.

I hadn’t seen this clip - love Zara’s personality.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is why few trust these birthday photos are real.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I love the Tindalls, they are no-nonsense and fun. I also love that particular dress on Zara.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another one - note the oversized beach furniture


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like the sleuths have found it


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is why few trust these birthday photos are real.



Hmmmm Company who made the dress Lilibet is wearing has gone bust did she buy it a while ago then or is this photo not from the weekend ?


----------



## Icyjade

Royal babies…









						Can you guess who these royal cuties are from their baby snaps?
					

MANY people find babies all look alike – or can you tell One from another? Yesterday we brought you pictures of Prince Harry and Meghan’s daughter Lilibet as she celebrated her first birthday. The …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It's my birthday the coming weekend, should I release a mysterious picture that only makes partly sense?


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's my birthday the coming weekend, should I release a mysterious picture that only makes partly sense?



Only if you have photoshopped it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh...Wills and Charlotte in the middle. Louis in the left upper corner, George below Wills, Harry on George's right. Beatrice and Eugenie next to Charlotte, and in the lower right corner is Charles. No idea who the others are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's my birthday the coming weekend, should I release a mysterious picture that only makes partly sense?



Use one from 20 years ago. Everyone will comment on how well you’ve aged. It’s an old, new trick that dating apps use.


----------



## LibbyRuth

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like the sleuths have found it



I'm confused.  In those two pictures she's clearly wearing a different skirt/pants.  So is the theory that she photoshopped herself into the picture and changed what she was wearing?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bagshopr

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh...Wills and Charlotte in the middle. Louis in the left upper corner, George below Wills, Harry on George's right. Beatrice and Eugenie next to Charlotte, and in the lower right corner is Charles. No idea who the others are.


Diana is second down on the left.   Harry is top right.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I love the Tindalls, they are no-nonsense and fun. I also love that particular dress on Zara.


Lovely dress,  worn by Crown Princess Mary of Denmark this weekend also.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I don’t think there was a party.  I think there was HOPE for a party, and merching deals were made (with photographer and cake maker and high chair maker, at least).  My guess is that since Frogmore is on grounds belonging to the RF, they put rules in place about no outside guests during Jubilee and/or no photographing or filming of/by H&M while there (not wanting H&M to violate their privacy and not wanting them to use any part of the royal estate as an instagram backdrop).


----------



## CarryOn2020

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm confused.  In those two pictures she's clearly wearing a different skirt/pants.  So is the theory that she photoshopped herself into the picture and changed what she was wearing?



Could be.  Imo and I am not an expert, she photoshopped her face, slimmed down her body, added reddish highlights to her hair.  Clearly the face, teeth and nose are different from what we have been seeing. The body looks much thinner, too.  Whoever does H&M’s photoshopping needs to take the advanced course.  The t-neck does look like the brown one. The pants look like the ones she wore when interviewing/chatting with Gloria Steinem.  I expect more experts will weigh in soon.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The reddish highlights are confusing me. Didn’t she think that would invite questions? She’s never had light hair, or not since she met Hawwy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If the Sussex Liars still have enough money to squander, they should consider buying an island and live like this. That way Nutmeg can be queen of her own island. She can have her own press room a la White House and hire Scoobie Doo to be her press secretary. They can publish their own newspaper and magazine filled with everything Nutmeg, which they can read themselves


----------



## marietouchet

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm confused.  In those two pictures she's clearly wearing a different skirt/pants.  So is the theory that she photoshopped herself into the picture and changed what she was wearing?


Oh my gosh … look at the right contour of her face , totally photoshopped


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> Her foundation deliberately darkens her? She looks Latino in colouration without makeup. Isn’t it blackfishing or whatever the term is for people who deliberately darken themselves?


It's called blackface and refers to someone other than a POC darkening their face to portray a POC and it is regarded as highly offensive as it should be.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lanasyogamama said:


> The reddish highlights are confusing me. Didn’t she think that would invite questions? She’s never had light hair, or not since she met Hawwy.



I'm confused...I thought the photo they released was black & white...I think the one with the hair color has been tinted by someone else?


----------



## lanasyogamama

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm confused...I thought the photo they released was black & white...I think the one with the hair color has been tinted by someone else?
> 
> View attachment 5421163
> View attachment 5421163


Yeah, people are either removing the black and white filter or adding a color filter, so that may be impacting the hair color in an incorrect way.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like the sleuths have found it



I’ve seen the pit stained picture but this version of it seems like she spilled water down the front of her sweater. She can’t be sweating that much????


----------



## Annawakes

Looking at the party picture again I’m convinced it was a hastily made photo just to throw out and show *Yes we do have friends and people do still like us.*

TW is off to the side, the other woman is front and center.  Given how she pushed Harry off to one side of the bench at one of their interviews, there is no no way she wouldn’t have put herself front and center.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh … look at the right contour of her face , totally photoshopped


Is that why the hair looks so long in front and a messy haystack at the back? They added hair and shadow to disguise the cut & paste job?


----------



## youngster

Have to say that the little kids in the birthday party pic are so cute with their faces painted!

But, the little girl standing next to her mother, what is going on with her right hand and arm?  Was she reaching back and the hand/arm got blurred out due to the motion, or maybe she was twisting and turning in place?  Isn't the photographer supposed to be a pro?  Adorable little girl though.


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'm not saying it should actually happen, but I feel like PF could actually support 3 Harry and Meghan threads - one for admirers, one for conspiracy theorists, and one for just gossiping about what they do and where they go that recognizes the tackiness in a lot of it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm not saying it should actually happen, but I feel like PF could actually support 3 Harry and Meghan threads - one for admirers, one for conspiracy theorists, and one for just gossiping about what they do and where they go that recognizes the tackiness in a lot of it.


The speculations do indeed get a bit wild sometimes


----------



## elvisfan4life

God forbid one thread is one too many


----------



## bellecate

Oops.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Use one from 20 years ago. *Everyone will comment on how well you’ve aged. It’s an old, new trick that dating apps use.



And 20 lbs. ago. Amazing how much slimmer she looks on Saturday than she did on Friday.


----------



## RAINDANCE

However Mike Tindall has spilt some beans on his podcast and confirmed there were two lunches after Trooping on Thursday. One at the Palace for the balcony party, and a separate one for all the cousins who had watched at Horseguards.* H+M did not stay for this.*

That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. It was the ideal time to start to mend the fences THEY have broken over the last few years and to let the young kids meet each other. If their kids were jet lagged why did they not allow for this and fly over on Tuesday.

According to both Lady C and Dan Wootton they were invited to the Guildhall lunch after St Paul's also but last minute pulled out of that. Give that lunch was the epitome of the royal day job - meeting local community leaders and heroes - it cements an impression that they can't be bothered with ordinary people.

Somewhat mischievously ( and TBH I think highly unlikely) it would make me smile if Clarence House release a photo of all the Sussexes  inc both kids, with Charles and Camilla. A smiling photo with C+C  would be a bit awkward with any vitriol planned in the autobiography.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> I counted 6, the photographer, wife, 2 kids, TW, and Lilib. So who else am I missing?



I’m assuming Archie was present!


----------



## bag-mania

So the only attendees of the party besides them were the photographer and his family?


----------



## RAINDANCE

bag-mania said:


> And 20 lbs. ago. Amazing how much slimmer she looks on Saturday than she did on Friday.


Actually to be fair, she has become broad of torso after her pregnancies, not "overweight" so a side on angle as in the photo was a good choice. 

  and considerably more flattering than the currently fashionable " I need a Wee" pose


----------



## Aimee3

I read somewhere that the photo of just Lil said something like “photograph by John Doe” (sorry I forgot the photographers name so am using John Doe) but the black and white photo said “photo shared by John Doe” indicating that was not taken by him!


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> As far as I know they flew private from the US to the UK aswell!



Yes, but the Times seems to be playing a little more carefully than other news outlets. 

As far as I understood someone found out about their trip from the US to the UK by private jet, informed Lady C who informed Piers… So it's possible this was a private person and there are no professional pictures available of their arrival at Farnborough (I believe this was the airport).

On their way back, newspapers had already plenty of information, and it was likely relatively easy to get pictures to support the news.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> However Mike Tindall has spilt some beans on his podcast and confirmed there were two lunches after Trooping on Thursday. One at the Palace for the balcony party, and a separate one for all the cousins who had watched at Horseguards.* H+M did not stay for this.*
> 
> That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. It was the ideal time to start to mend the fences THEY have broken over the last few years and to let the young kids meet each other. If their kids were jet lagged why did they not allow for this and fly over on Tuesday.
> 
> According to both Lady C and Dan Wootton they were invited to the Guildhall lunch after St Paul's also but last minute pulled out of that. Give that lunch was the epitome of the royal day job - meeting local community leaders and heroes - it cements an impression that they can't be bothered with ordinary people.
> 
> Somewhat mischievously ( and TBH I think highly unlikely) it would make me smile if Clarence House release a photo of all the Sussexes  inc both kids, with Charles and Camilla. A smiling photo with C+C  would be a bit awkward with any vitriol planned in the autobiography.



A “good cousins’ lunch”   Good lunch with the cousins OR  lunch for the good cousins as opposed to those bad cousins.

_Mr Tindall said of the Jubilee: 'It was outstanding, to be fair. It was just great to be a part of', adding: 'We had *a good cousins' lunch *on the Thursday. That was a highlight'.



			https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10896165/Mike-Tindall-reveals-outstanding-cousins-lunch-Harry-Meghan-didnt-attend.html
		

_


----------



## LibbyRuth

RAINDANCE said:


> However Mike Tindall has spilt some beans on his podcast and confirmed there were two lunches after Trooping on Thursday. One at the Palace for the balcony party, and a separate one for all the cousins who had watched at Horseguards.* H+M did not stay for this.*
> 
> That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. It was the ideal time to start to mend the fences THEY have broken over the last few years and to let the young kids meet each other. If their kids were jet lagged why did they not allow for this and fly over on Tuesday.
> 
> According to both Lady C and Dan Wootton they were invited to the Guildhall lunch after St Paul's also but last minute pulled out of that. Give that lunch was the epitome of the royal day job - meeting local community leaders and heroes - it cements an impression that they can't be bothered with ordinary people.
> 
> Somewhat mischievously ( and TBH I think highly unlikely) it would make me smile if Clarence House release a photo of all the Sussexes  inc both kids, with Charles and Camilla. A smiling photo with C+C  would be a bit awkward with any vitriol planned in the autobiography.



There was just no way they could have flown in any earlier - Meghan was very busy at home tasting artisanal teas to curate for a collection she'll pretend she created by studying botany and  creating her own tea plants, and Harry had juggling lessons.  He's hoping to master juggling fire in the background of Meghan's tea video.


----------



## wisconsin

LibbyRuth said:


> I'm not saying it should actually happen, but I feel like PF could actually support 3 Harry and Meghan threads - one for admirers, one for conspiracy theorists, and one for just gossiping about what they do and where they go that recognizes the tackiness in a lot of it.


The conspiracy theories are crazy. And the dissection of every minute thing.


----------



## Icyjade

RAINDANCE said:


> However Mike Tindall has spilt some beans on his podcast and confirmed there were two lunches after Trooping on Thursday. One at the Palace for the balcony party, and a separate one for all the cousins who had watched at Horseguards.* H+M did not stay for this.*
> 
> That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. It was the ideal time to start to mend the fences THEY have broken over the last few years and to let the young kids meet each other. If their kids were jet lagged why did they not allow for this and fly over on Tuesday.
> 
> According to both Lady C and Dan Wootton they were invited to the Guildhall lunch after St Paul's also but last minute pulled out of that. Give that lunch was the epitome of the royal day job - meeting local community leaders and heroes - it cements an impression that they can't be bothered with ordinary people.
> 
> Somewhat mischievously ( and TBH I think highly unlikely) it would make me smile if Clarence House release a photo of all the Sussexes  inc both kids, with Charles and Camilla. A smiling photo with C+C  would be a bit awkward with any vitriol planned in the autobiography.



Family ties aside (since clearly not a priority for them), why would you not mend ties with your brother who will be the future king? Really brainless…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie will be pleased with this article. He seems to be worried with the future of the monarchy without his masters.



Check out the pic on Florine's post below. It's a true depiction of the Duplicitous Duo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

RAINDANCE said:


> However Mike Tindall has spilt some beans on his podcast and confirmed there were two lunches after Trooping on Thursday. One at the Palace for the balcony party, and a separate one for all the cousins who had watched at Horseguards.* H+M did not stay for this.*
> 
> That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. It was the ideal time to start to mend the fences THEY have broken over the last few years and to let the young kids meet each other. If their kids were jet lagged why did they not allow for this and fly over on Tuesday.



It does seem a bit odd, why not just one lunch for everyone?  I'd think the Queen could have said just that, let's get everyone together in the same room for lunch, how nice that will be.  But, she clearly did not, or there was some logistical reason why they did not do it.  Another reason is that perhaps William or Charles said they'd rather not sit through lunch with Harry and TW but that would mean they would be opposing the Queen and a decision about family and I doubt that would be the case.


----------



## CarryOn2020

wisconsin said:


> The conspiracy theories are crazy. And the dissection of every minute thing.



That is only because there have been _so many _*lies/half-truths/misdirections/etc. *imo.
Someone is earning a fortune sifting through all the bs.


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm confused...I thought the photo they released was black & white...I think the one with the hair color has been tinted by someone else?
> 
> View attachment 5421163
> View attachment 5421163


I also believe the photo was release in B&W, and some creative person took care of the color.   

There is something familiar with this photo. Would it be possible that the photo was initially taken with Arch*e who was replaced by Lilib?


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> But, the little girl standing next to her mother, what is going on with her right hand and arm?  Was she reaching back and the hand/arm got blurred out due to the motion, or maybe she was twisting and turning in place?  Isn't the photographer supposed to be a pro?  Adorable little girl though.



Something was removed from the photo in a sloppy way. You can see part of the mother’s dress by her arm is blurred. Maybe the little girl had been holding something in her hand that Meghan didn’t want in the picture?


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> It does seem a bit odd, why not just one lunch for everyone?  I'd think the Queen could have said just that, let's get everyone together in the same room for lunch, how nice that will be.  But, she clearly did not, or there was some logistical reason why they did not do it.  Another reason is that perhaps William or Charles said they'd rather not sit through lunch with Harry and TW but that would mean they would be opposing the Queen and a decision about family and I doubt that would be the case.


My GUESS .. 
The two lunches were scheduled ahead of time (food purchase and organizing), they did not spontaneously go out to Subway, get sandwiches and serve crisps at either lunch 
There were issues with H&M ahead of time - at least two weeks prior to arrival (long enough to organize separate lunches) - due to camera crews ??? starring role for A&L ?? 
Well things went south two weeks prior, and the BRF exiled H&M to the shadows for the duration of the jubilee
H&M retaliated with mics, and early flight out, and (what was obviously a timed bombshell) photo of L


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Yeah, people are either removing the black and white filter or adding a color filter, so that may be impacting the hair color in an incorrect way.


TW released a picture of the girl with red hair, so "the artist" is likely using the girl's hair as reference to color the B&W picture. So when Lilib's hair is adjusted to a reddish color on the B&W, TW's hair gets a similar shade. It looks good on her, she may want to keep it.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm confused...I thought the photo they released was black & white...I think the one with the hair color has been tinted by someone else?
> 
> View attachment 5421163
> View attachment 5421163


right - photo was B/W and I was thinking maybe that could be part of the reason she looks fresher - black and white is more forgiving?


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> I’ve seen the pit stained picture but this version of it seems like she spilled water down the front of her sweater. She can’t be sweating that much????


It's possible that a non - sympathizer increased the contrast.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m assuming Archie was present!



He probably got some cake. For whatever reason Harry and Archie were not part of the photoshoot. Odd for a man who wears a “Girl dad” t-shirt that he wouldn’t want to be in the photos. Maybe he was still sulking from the day before. I like the idea that Harry took Archie off somewhere to have fun while Meghan handled their PR business with the photographer.


----------



## lallybelle

OK so wait, H&M didn't do lunch with the window cousins and didn't attend with HM & Balcony crew. SO I ask again, when was this "meeting" with HM & Lily? Scoobie Doo clearly said it was at private lunch after trooping.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> So the only attendees of the party besides them were the photographer and his family?


I don't know. The photo with the photographer's family raises many questions.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's my birthday the coming weekend, should I release a mysterious picture that only makes partly sense?



The one under Louis is Diana. I think bottom right is Charles. I don't know who is the baby under Diana nor the one below Charlotte with the cap.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I don't know. The photo with the photographer's family raises many questions.



Yes, like did they hire a face painter for just a couple of kids? Or did the photographer bring his family by after they had been to a fair?


----------



## Happyish

Icyjade said:


> Her foundation deliberately darkens her? She looks Latino in colouration without makeup. Isn’t it blackfishing or whatever the term is for people who deliberately darken themselves?


I think it's just a California tan. It's summer. It happens.


----------



## Chanbal

Tourre is gifted with words!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Happyish said:


> I think it's just a California tan. It's summer. It happens.


Nah. California tans don't rub off from hands.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Yes, like did they hire a face painter for just a couple of kids? Or did the photographer bring his family by after they had been to a fair?


Yes, and no face painting for Lilib. The picture looks familiar to me from a while ago. A professional photographer with the right tools can do many modifications to a picture. I trust the Twitter experts will be able to unveil the mystery.


----------



## Chanbal

@bag-mania See nothing escapes to Twitter, The Mail, DM… So we will eventually learn more about the mystery picture.


----------



## rose60610

So Meghan doesn't want HER kids in others' photos but she has no problem putting OTHERS' kids in her photos. Hmm


----------



## Chanbal

As expected, they are trying to get as much attention as possible in the US. I can't blame QE for not allowing TW's photographer to take the much wanted photo… (Allegedly, of course!)



Edit: one more article!

_*The 45-year-old photographer was one of a handful of specially selected guests at the ‘casual backyard picnic’, which was also reportedly attended by Her Majesty The Queen*, hosted in honour of the milestone occasion. Among the images shared by Harriman was a sweet shot of mother Meghan holding baby Lilibet, alongside his wife, Camilla Holmstroem, and their two young daughters.

The man behind the idyllic photograph has known the couple for years and attended their wedding in 2018. Indeed, *without Harriman, Harry and Meghan may never have met, as the photographer introduced the now duchess to the ‘mutual friend’ that would later set her up with her future husband. *Details from the exclusive 2020 book about the couple titled, Finding Freedom, revealed that Meghan dined with Harriman at the exclusive Mayfair member's club 5 Hertford Street, on the eve preceding her blind date with the prince. _

https://www.tatler.com/article/who-...term-friend-that-took-lilibets-birthday-photo


----------



## Happyish

RAINDANCE said:


> However Mike Tindall has spilt some beans on his podcast and confirmed there were two lunches after Trooping on Thursday. One at the Palace for the balcony party, and a separate one for all the cousins who had watched at Horseguards.* H+M did not stay for this.*
> 
> That makes absolutely no sense to me at all. It was the ideal time to start to mend the fences THEY have broken over the last few years and to let the young kids meet each other. If their kids were jet lagged why did they not allow for this and fly over on Tuesday.
> 
> According to both Lady C and Dan Wootton they were invited to the Guildhall lunch after St Paul's also but last minute pulled out of that. Give that lunch was the epitome of the royal day job - meeting local community leaders and heroes - it cements an impression that they can't be bothered with ordinary people.
> 
> Somewhat mischievously ( and TBH I think highly unlikely) it would make me smile if Clarence House release a photo of all the Sussexes  inc both kids, with Charles and Camilla. A smiling photo with C+C  would be a bit awkward with any vitriol planned in the autobiography.



I think it's something different. I think someone said something to H & M or H or M. Or they were rebuffed. In any event, the reception was hardly warm. It was critical. Aside from family, there was also the booing.

I think they felt humiliated. I think Harry was hurt and shocked and that's what you see in his expression at church. They misgauged the reception they would receive. They felt unwelcome.

Rather than show up at a luncheon where there would have been a hushed response when they walked through the door, after which they would have been ignored or pandered to by lesser-royals or functionaries, they decided not to show up at all to avoid further embarrassment and humiliation.

Of course, they brought this on themselves.

An adult would have sucked-it-up and started the process of mending fences. Those that spurred them could have been ignored. Those that held out an olive branch could have been enjoyed. Of course, they're not that enlightened. Or mature.

At least a rapproprochment could have been started. If they wanted.

What exactly did they think, that they would be welcomed with open arms after bailing on the Royal Kingdom and biting the hand that feeds them?

Perhaps that's not surprising. They live in their own little bubble in California surrounded by snycophants who tell them what they want to hear. If not, they're fired.

I think Harry's beginning to realize how much he's lost and how little he's gained. There was always a way for him to have his "freedom," he just didn't realize it. IMHO, he has more responsibility and burdens now than he ever did before.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Happyish said:


> I think it's something different. I think someone said something to H & M or H or M. Or they were rebuffed. In any event, the reception was hardly warm. It was critical. Aside from family, there was also the booing.
> 
> I think they felt humiliated. I think Harry was hurt and shocked and that's what you see in his expression at church. They misgauged the reception they would receive. They felt unwelcome.
> 
> Rather than show up at a luncheon where there would have been a hushed response when they walked through the door, after which they would have been ignored or pandered to by lesser-royals or functionaries, they decided not to show up at all to avoid further embarrassment and humiliation.
> 
> Of course, they brought this on themselves.
> 
> An adult would have sucked-it-up and started the process of mending fences. Those that spurred them could have been ignored. Those that held out an olive branch could have been enjoyed. Of course, they're not that enlightened. Or mature.
> 
> At least a rapproprochment could have been started. If they wanted.
> 
> What exactly did they think, that they would be welcomed with open arms after bailing on the Royal Kingdom and biting the hand that feeds them?
> 
> Perhaps that's not surprising. They live in their own little bubble in California surrounded by snycophants who tell them what they want to hear. If not, they're fired.
> 
> I think Harry's beginning to realize how much he's lost and how little he's gained. There was always a way for him to have his "freedom," he just didn't realize it. IMHO, he has more responsibility and burdens now than he ever did before.


 His expression at the service was like a child of 4 one minute laughing like a demented loon then looking petulant then looking bored and staring upwards - maybe he needed Louis to play with


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> I’ve seen the pit stained picture but this version of it seems like *she spilled water down the front of her sweater.* She can’t be sweating that much????


I believe that's the shadow cast by her right hand.


----------



## CeeJay

EverSoElusive said:


> OT
> 
> @Maggie Muggins  I petition for us to start a Major Jonny Thompson thread  He's the handsome man in kilt who got us swooning
> 
> We should be joined by @CarryOn2020 @DeMonica @Hermes Zen @Jayne1 @Lodpah and everyone else that I might have missed.


Uh - add me in, can’t say how many times I would drool looking at the Scottish doorman at the hotel I stayed at in Edinburgh!!!  But even better, one night I came back late to the hotel (around 9pm as I worked late in the office) and there was a Stag-Do going on .. and ALL the men were wearing their kilts, etc.!  You better believe I crashed that do (heck - I just played the “dumb Yank” card and it worked!!!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




It's been a year and I still find that name nothing but grotesque and in your face respectless.


----------



## Icyjade

Happyish said:


> I think Harry's beginning to realize how much he's lost and how little he's gained. There was always a way for him to have his "freedom," he just didn't realize it. IMHO, he has more responsibility and burdens now than he ever did before.



He threw his family under the bus only to sell his soul to Netflix and other corporates that want him to do what they want to sell. Maybe he thought it would be easier (and we already know he expected Charles to continue funding him) to make money because he and TW are the “true stars” of the RF. Regardless if he still doesn’t see the truth by now he must be very delusional. Then again they are still spending money like water (private jet, really???) so who knows.


----------



## csshopper

Goggle search produced no references to Grandpa Markle commenting on Lilibet photos. Interesting.


----------



## redney

MM may have no conscious but I bet their trip and ice-cold reception is weighing heavily on Harry inside. Even if he initially envisioned stardom and financial fortunes for their life beyond the BRF, this weekend was likely an eye-opening dose of reality for him. Harry burned that bridge badly; unless he makes a Herculean and sincere  effort himself, without TW's scheming, to mend wounds, this is his future reality too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Goggle search produced no references to Grandpa Markle commenting on Lilibet photos. Interesting.



Isn't he still in rehab?


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> He threw his family under the bus only to sell his soul to Netflix and other corporates that want him to do what they want to sell. Maybe he thought it would be easier (and we already know he expected Charles to continue funding him) to make money because he and TW are the “true stars” of the RF. Regardless if he still doesn’t see the truth by now he must be very delusional. Then again they are still spending money like water (private jet, really???) so who knows.


EVEN if they were the "true stars" of the RF, that wouldn't be something that would last long.  The newness and youth (to the extent they are/were young) wears off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> The newness and youth (to the extent they are/were young) wears off.



I think they were hoping that the ‘multicultural’ aspect of their family would make them more interesting than the others.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania See nothing escapes to Twitter, The Mail, DM… So we will eventually learn more about the mystery picture.



That’s really cool!!


----------



## kkfiregirl

wisconsin said:


> The conspiracy theories are crazy. And the dissection of every minute thing.



I actually like the dissection - I’ve learned a lot here that I can put to use in real life (body language, spotting narcissistic behaviors/traits). Someone else on this thread, I think it was @Lilliesdaughter said we are like sociologists/cultural anthropologists & I agree with her!


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I think they were hoping that the ‘multicultural’ aspect of their family would make them more interesting than the others.


yes, it did when the first got engaged but they ruined it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> That’s really cool!!



I saw it over at the royal fashion thread and was fascinated. What a unique idea.


----------



## Chanbal

There is nothing like good humor…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She's worn it before!


----------



## MiniMabel

PurseUOut said:


> Thankfully none that kicked their sisters, hushed me in my mouth, didn't mind my commands, and pulled their girl cousin's hair without correction. But that's normal to you so I guess they are quite perfect after all.



Blimey, you've got a chip on your shoulder.  Your digs about the Cambridges are not welcome.   It seems a little churlish to focus on a little boy who was doing his best.  It's hard for most people to sit still and not want to use some energy for 4 hours.

As has been explained to you, a four year old sitting still for 4 hours is not realistic or reasonable.  A little cheekiness or "bad" behaviour is not surprising.  Catherine handled it beautifully, considering the world's eyes were on them.  To question their parenting is rather obnoxious, you can clearly see how close all of them are.

@Vintage Leather's post, as an expert, is self-explanatory.


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> My original question was - can someone who understands genetics explain how a recessive gene can happen twice and a dominate gene _not_ happen twice.
> 
> One child of course, anything can happen.  But what are the chances of two children following this pattern?
> 
> As I said, Harry must have some really strong genes.
> 
> 
> Did more than one of your children turn out Casper - because that's what I find so interesting, in terms of genetics.


See, I honestly think that they are always TRYING to make Archie’s hair look Red, but in fact, I remember the picture of Meghan and Archie at the beach and his hair was CLEARLY Dark Brown!!!  The beach picture was a pap-snap, so no photo editing!!!!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

CeeJay said:


> See, I honestly think that they are always TRYING to make Archie’s hair look Red, but in fact, I remember the picture of Meghan and Archie at the beach and his hair was CLEARLY Dark Brown!!!  The beach picture was a pap-snap, so no photo editing!!!!!


 Who cares !!  And I’m Irish with red hair dyed brown lol


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> There is nothing like good humor…



Harry, you were hoisted by your own petard!


----------



## Chanbal

If this is the case, it's perhaps time for Nefl*x to move on…










						Netflix 'dismayed' by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Jubilee failure
					

Prince Harry's biographer Angela Levin told GB News she'd heard Netflix  was desperate to secure images of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex with royals like the Queen and Prince William.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Harry, you were hoisted by your own petard!


Definitely, plus his so called special relationship with the Queen didn’t stop her big fat non negotiable “no chance” to the photo they asked for. That must have come as a huge shock.


----------



## bisbee

sdkitty said:


> agree it's disrespectful...that was a joke, wasn't it?





kkfiregirl said:


> I actually like the dissection - I’ve learned a lot here that I can put to use in real life (body language, spotting narcissistic behaviors/traits). Someone else on this thread, I think it was @Lilliesdaughter said we are like sociologists/cultural anthropologists & I agree with her!


More like conspiracy theorists…perhaps the FBI has the need for such skills!


----------



## kkfiregirl

bisbee said:


> More like conspiracy theorists…perhaps the FBI has the need for such skills!



I’m not sure I understand what you are saying.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

csshopper said:


> Definitely, plus his so called special relationship with the Queen didn’t stop her big fat non negotiable “no chance” to the photo they asked for. That must have come as a huge shock.


Maybe they’ll photoshop the Queen into a photo of Lil.  TW will never get away with it, not if the eagle eyes on this thread see it!


----------



## bisbee

kkfiregirl said:


> I’m not sure I understand what you are saying.


It was a joke…referring back to the skills of “recognizing body language, spotting narcissistic behaviors/traits and being like sociologists/cultural anthropologists.”


----------



## marietouchet

Anyone thinking what I am ?
We have seen the regency council -  Charles , Anne , William and Edward - front row of church - Camilla , Kate , Sophie as first alternates 
Andrew and Harry are out 
Councilors of state list soon to be modified


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Anyone thinking what I am ?
> We have seen the regency council -  Charles , Anne , William and Edward
> Andrew and Harry are out
> Councilors of state list soon to be modified


I sure hope so!


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan was able to schmooze a free facial in exchange for permission for Sarah Chapman to post (advertise) about it.

Her cream Dior ensemble and demure diamond jewelry stunned, as did her flawless, dewy complexion.

"What a wonderful weekend celebrating 70 years of our inspiring Queen! Such incredible events and positive energy throughout the 4 days," Chapman wrote. "For me, it was great to catch up with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, to meet sweet little Lilibet and *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow. *I always love seeing my clients and friends glowing at these fabulous events and I think she looked so graceful and radiant during the celebrations, along with many other familiar faces.”









						Meghan Markle Got a Facial From Sarah Chapman for the Platinum Jubilee Weekend
					

Chapman helped give Meghan some extra Markle sparkle during her trip to the UK.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

bisbee said:


> It was a joke…referring back to the skills of “recognizing body language, spotting narcissistic behaviors/traits and being like sociologists/cultural anthropologists.”



Got it, thanks! I’m a little slow sometimes …


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow*



I always thought it wasn’t advisable to get facials very close to big events.


----------



## LibbyRuth

kkfiregirl said:


> I actually like the dissection - I’ve learned a lot here that I can put to use in real life (body language, spotting narcissistic behaviors/traits). Someone else on this thread, I think it was @Lilliesdaughter said we are like sociologists/cultural anthropologists & I agree with her!


Is it truly studying all those things if the clues dissected always tend to affirm previously held beliefs?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Meghan was able to schmooze a free facial in exchange for permission for Sarah Chapman to post (advertise) about it.
> 
> Her cream Dior ensemble and demure diamond jewelry stunned, as did her flawless, dewy complexion.
> 
> "What a wonderful weekend celebrating 70 years of our inspiring Queen! Such incredible events and positive energy throughout the 4 days," Chapman wrote. "For me, it was great to catch up with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, to meet sweet little Lilibet and *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow. *I always love seeing my clients and friends glowing at these fabulous events and I think she looked so graceful and radiant during the celebrations, along with many other familiar faces.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Got a Facial From Sarah Chapman for the Platinum Jubilee Weekend
> 
> 
> Chapman helped give Meghan some extra Markle sparkle during her trip to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Further cementing her NON Royal status, Royals don’t accept free services, having it show up on line as an advert was probably another, literally, “in your face” message to the RF that she will do what she wants, protocol be damned. Ironic, she prepped so hard for what ended up being her humiliation scenes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Anyone thinking what I am ?
> We have seen the regency council -  Charles , Anne , William and Edward - front row of church - Camilla , Kate , Sophie as first alternates
> Andrew and Harry are out
> Councilors of state list soon to be modified


Counsellors of State are the Monarch's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession, but since HM is a widow, it will probably be the next five people in the line of succession.


----------



## kkfiregirl

LibbyRuth said:


> Is it truly studying all those things if the clues dissected always tend to affirm previously held beliefs?



Perhaps! I will say that Meghan still surprises me. I didn’t think she would show up to the church service & the photos of Lilibeth’s birthday party were not what I expected. So I will say that their actions don’t always line up with ‘previously held beliefs.’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Meghan was able to schmooze a free facial in exchange for permission for Sarah Chapman to post (advertise) about it.
> 
> Her cream Dior ensemble and demure diamond jewelry stunned, as did her flawless, dewy complexion.
> 
> "What a wonderful weekend celebrating 70 years of our inspiring Queen! Such incredible events and positive energy throughout the 4 days," Chapman wrote. "For me, it was great to catch up with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, to meet sweet little Lilibet and *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow. *I always love seeing my clients and friends glowing at these fabulous events and I think she looked so graceful and radiant during the celebrations, along with many other familiar faces.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Got a Facial From Sarah Chapman for the Platinum Jubilee Weekend
> 
> 
> Chapman helped give Meghan some extra Markle sparkle during her trip to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Regular sunscreen is far more effective than expensive facials.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Counsellors of State are the Monarch's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession, but since HM is a widow, it will probably be the next five people in the line of succession.



The next four adults. Otherwise the Cambridge kids would be CoS right now.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The next four adults. Otherwise the Cambridge kids would be CoS right now.


Yes of course, otherwise it would be entertaining to say the least.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Regular sunscreen is far more effective than expensive facials.



True but the horse is out of that barn and the damage is done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Regular sunscreen is far more effective than expensive facials.


I finally switched to a Korean sunscreen and I’m so much happier.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Maggie Muggins said:


> Counsellors of State are the Monarch's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession, but since HM is a widow, it will probably be the next five people in the line of succession.


Yes, my understanding too - the next 4 adults, of course.
so its Charles, William, harry and Andrew which is why it's become a problem now.
It's untenable that Andrew can deputise for HMTQ and anyway he has withdrawn from public life.
I personally have a huge problem with somebody who lives full times overseas being able to step in as head of state.

It is my view that Andrew needs to really fall on his sword as soon as possible and voluntarily stand down. That would enable Anne and Edward to be appointed, although technically it's Bea and Eug who are next.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> True but the horse is out of that barn and the damage is done.


We need whatever Meggie used between the Thanksgiving service and the birthday party!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I finally switched to a Korean sunscreen and I’m so much happier.



Yes!!! They are so much nicer than any Euro sunscreen I've tried (can't speak for US ones as I haven't tried those, but seeing we share many brands it's probably the same).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> We need whatever Meggie used between the Thanksgiving service and the birthday party!



Naw. She looks fresh-faced and younger without the heavy m/u, but even in the black and white you can see how spotty her skin is.


----------



## RAINDANCE

lanasyogamama said:


> We need whatever Meggie used between the Thanksgiving service and the birthday party!


In fact, if she was selling that, she probably wouldn't need any netifly deals, ever.


----------



## Chanbal

kkfiregirl said:


> I always thought it wasn’t advisable to get facials very close to big events.


Yes, but TW needed the article.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Meghan was able to schmooze a free facial in exchange for permission for Sarah Chapman to post (advertise) about it.
> 
> Her cream Dior ensemble and demure diamond jewelry stunned, as did her flawless, dewy complexion.
> 
> "What a wonderful weekend celebrating 70 years of our inspiring Queen! Such incredible events and positive energy throughout the 4 days," Chapman wrote. "For me, it was great to catch up with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, to meet sweet little Lilibet and *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow. *I always love seeing my clients and friends glowing at these fabulous events and I think she looked so graceful and radiant during the celebrations, along with many other familiar faces.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Got a Facial From Sarah Chapman for the Platinum Jubilee Weekend
> 
> 
> Chapman helped give Meghan some extra Markle sparkle during her trip to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Sorry, she make her clients sound like they are light bulbs
She met MM, Hazza and Liliibet…what about Archie?


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I'm not sure what he's implying about Meghan in the video....that they made a video of her holding the baby and then photoshopped in an old head of hers at a younger age?  LOL.  is that possible?
> she does look pretty fresh and un-made-up


Sorry really late reply on this but You can definitely de age her in photoshop or stick her head on a different body but I feel like this question has now been discussed for a while anyways 


Maggie Muggins said:


> It's called blackface and refers to someone other than a POC darkening their face to portray a POC and it is regarded as highly offensive as it should be.


So late reply but they are actually two similar but different terms:
Black face is like Al Jolson in the jazz singer and it’s meant to be unrealistic and is very offensive of course.

Black fishing is more like what Rachel Dolezal was up to. The person is colouring their skin and wearing wigs or even getting surgery in the hopes of being seen as biracial or black. They may or may not explicitly state they are biracial or black but they are probably trying to convince people they are through visual and verbal cues.
So it is a different offensive thing.

As to the earlier question of whether M is black fishing, I’d say she is in that she is using skin colour as a visual reason for her current exclusion when it was not only a self imposed exclusion but also it’s not  what she looked like at the time but I’m no expert on this.


LibbyRuth said:


> I'm not saying it should actually happen, but I feel like PF could actually support 3 Harry and Meghan threads - one for admirers, one for conspiracy theorists, and one for just gossiping about what they do and where they go that recognizes the tackiness in a lot of it.


Is this the forum equivalent of putting towels on all the pool chairs though? 





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't he still in rehab?


Dan Wooton (sp?) will be hammering on the door of that convalescent home as we speak.


Aimee3 said:


> Maybe they’ll photoshop the Queen into a photo of Lil.  TW will never get away with it, not if the eagle eyes on this thread see it!


well going off some of the previous attempts they’ll just photoshop the back of a ginger kid’s head on her  corgi’s body and call it a day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Sorry she make her clients sound like they are light bulbs
> She met MM, Hazza and Liliibet…what about Archie?



Please...Archie is so last season. Poor little guy.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> We need whatever Meggie used between the Thanksgiving service and the birthday party!



Must have been a time machine!


----------



## redney

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please...Archie is so last season. Poor little guy.


Has he been Markled already?


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Must have been a time machine!



time machine facial, lol


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes!!! They are so much nicer than any Euro sunscreen I've tried (can't speak for US ones as I haven't tried those, but seeing we share many brands it's probably the same).



Europe has better ones than US, we’re way behind.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw. She looks fresh-faced and younger without the heavy m/u, but even in the black and white you can see how spotty her skin is.



She spent too much time on the big lounger at the Inskip wedding


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Meghan was able to schmooze a free facial in exchange for permission for Sarah Chapman to post (advertise) about it.
> 
> Her cream Dior ensemble and demure diamond jewelry stunned, as did her flawless, dewy complexion.
> 
> "What a wonderful weekend celebrating 70 years of our inspiring Queen! Such incredible events and positive energy throughout the 4 days," Chapman wrote. "For me, it was great to catch up with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, to meet sweet little Lilibet and *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow. *I always love seeing my clients and friends glowing at these fabulous events and I think she looked so graceful and radiant during the celebrations, along with many other familiar faces.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Got a Facial From Sarah Chapman for the Platinum Jubilee Weekend
> 
> 
> Chapman helped give Meghan some extra Markle sparkle during her trip to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


 SC who had been flogging her snake oil products on QVC for years


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> Has he been Markled already?



We need to all meet back here in 20 years when Archie’s tell-all book comes out.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> I finally switched to a Korean sunscreen and I’m so much happier.


Would you mind sharing which one? I've been using one from the La Mer, but would like to try another sunscreen.  I think TW would also appreciate the info.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> We need whatever Meggie used between the Thanksgiving service and the birthday party!


Photoshop?


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> Sorry, she make her clients sound like they are light bulbs
> She met MM, Hazza and Liliibet…*what about Archie?*


I wouldn't be surprised if Arch*e was left at home in Montecito.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> As expected, they are trying to get as much attention as possible in the US. I can't blame QE for not allowing TW's photographer to take the much wanted photo… (Allegedly, of course!)
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: one more article!
> 
> _*The 45-year-old photographer was one of a handful of specially selected guests at the ‘casual backyard picnic’, which was also reportedly attended by Her Majesty The Queen*, hosted in honour of the milestone occasion. Among the images shared by Harriman was a sweet shot of mother Meghan holding baby Lilibet, alongside his wife, Camilla Holmstroem, and their two young daughters.
> 
> The man behind the idyllic photograph has known the couple for years and attended their wedding in 2018. Indeed, *without Harriman, Harry and Meghan may never have met, as the photographer introduced the now duchess to the ‘mutual friend’ that would later set her up with her future husband. *Details from the exclusive 2020 book about the couple titled, Finding Freedom, revealed that Meghan dined with Harriman at the exclusive Mayfair member's club 5 Hertford Street, on the eve preceding her blind date with the prince. _
> 
> https://www.tatler.com/article/who-...term-friend-that-took-lilibets-birthday-photo



Porkie pies all around!


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> We need to all meet back here in 20 years when Archie’s tell-all book comes out.


 
I will be in a care home dribbling


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> I think TW would also appreciate the info.



And you KNOW she pops in here from time to time, trying out all her new usernames

I like the sunscreen from Tatcha.


----------



## kkfiregirl

elvisfan4life said:


> I will be in a care home dribbling



No way! You’ll still be active on tPF making us guffaw


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> Would you mind sharing which one? I've been using one from the La Mer, but would like to try another sunscreen.  I think TW would also appreciate the info.


Dear Chanbal, ladies. I had to chime in with my best choice of protection: a non-messy-greasy spray that takes no time to apply, re-apply. IHTH
Sorry for the huge pic.
ETA: To stay topic: Meghan, The Duchess of all Duchess’s, you need one, too


----------



## Chanbal

The kids on the block, bye Hazz! 


_Those promising youth players – George, Charlotte, Louis – will be in full-time education for at least the next decade, ruling them out for royal work.

Watching the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee coverage, it was clear the talent is right there in the Royal Box, it’s just sitting quietly in the second (or third, or fourth) row, waiting to be called upon. _





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> We need to all meet back here in 20 years when Archie’s tell-all book comes out.



Seriously though, there are 100% will be books and movies in 20 years analyzing what happened, just like there are for Diana now.



Chanbal said:


> Would you mind sharing which one? I've been using one from the La Mer, but would like to try another sunscreen.  I think TW would also appreciate the info.



These are both great, and so inexpensive!  The shipping takes a very long time though.  









						Isntree - Hyaluronic Acid Watery Sun Gel SPF50+ PA++++ - 50ml
					

Eight-layer Hyaluronic Acid Moisture Cooling Sun Gel! Long-lasting moisture, gentle sunscreen. Gently applied UV absorbing particles strongly adhere to the skin and block UV rays. Blocks UV Rays upon application: SPF 50+, PA++++ Soft and refreshing inorganic sunblock covers the skin comfortably...




					www.stylevana.com
				













						BEAUTY OF JOSEON - Relief Sun : Rice + Probiotic SPF50+ PA++++ - 50ml
					

Moisturizing chemical sunscreen offers delicate UV protection with powerful broad-spectrum SPF50+ PA++++.  Enriched with 69% Rice Bran Water and Grain Ferment Extract Complex.  Deeply moisturizes and nourishes skin with Vitamin B and various minerals.  Lightweight creamy texture aids absorption...




					www.stylevana.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!  
Friendly reminder; there's lots of off topic posts and photos.  
Please post Jubilee pics of other Royals in the Jubilee thread and pics of Will and Kate in their thread, 
etc. . . if you're not discussing Harry and Megan, then you're likely off topic. 

Finally, if someone annoys you, add them to Ignore User, drama and confrontation has no business here, it ruins other's experiences on our forums.


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> See, I honestly think that they are always TRYING to make Archie’s hair look Red, but in fact, I remember the picture of Meghan and Archie at the beach and his hair was CLEARLY Dark Brown!!!  The beach picture was a pap-snap, so no photo editing!!!!!


That's a good point.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes!!! They are so much nicer than any Euro sunscreen I've tried (can't speak for US ones as I haven't tried those, but seeing we share many brands it's probably the same).


Are we talking mineral or chemical?  I like mineral... have any suggestions?

ETA - sorry didn't see admin post when I was posting...


----------



## lanasyogamama

Jayne1 said:


> That's a good point.
> 
> Are we talking mineral or chemical?  I like mineral... have any suggestions?
> 
> ETA - sorry didn't see admin post when I was posting...


The ones I posted are chemical.


----------



## 1LV

elvisfan4life said:


> I will be in a care home dribbling


I’ll be dribbling in Heaven. (You call that optimism)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is allowed to have at least one friend. Here he is hugging Nacho after they won two weeks ago.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I don't think this photo has been posted yet. Harry showing that he has the attention span of a gnat in church. Wonder what he's daydreaming about.
> 
> View attachment 5420744


Haz:  “Oh Lord please let lightning come and strike me, for I have been a fool!  Actually, I’m very intelligent, please strike down this harpie next to me!”


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes of course, otherwise it would be entertaining to say the least.


Put Louis in charge!!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Arkie and Harry. Where were they?  Went out for bugers and beer?  Pizza?


Fish & chips!


----------



## purseinsanity

LibbyRuth said:


> There was just no way they could have flown in any earlier - Meghan was very busy at home tasting artisanal teas to curate for a collection she'll pretend she created by studying botany and  creating her own tea plants, and Harry had juggling lessons.  He's hoping to master juggling fire in the background of Meghan's tea video.


Don’t forget she was very busy using dead children from a mass school shooting as a photo op!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Don’t forget she was very busy using dead children from a mass school shooting as a photo op!


that is maybe the lowest thing she has done yet (at least in the US)


----------



## Chanbal

Aminamina said:


> Dear Chanbal, ladies. I had to chime in with my best choice of protection: a non-messy-greasy spray that takes no time to apply, re-apply. IHTH
> Sorry for the huge pic.
> ETA: To stay topic: Meghan, The Duchess of all Duchess’s, you need one, too
> View attachment 5421461


So good to see a post from you!!!! Thanks for the sunscreen info. Stay safe!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watch to the end.  Wow.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Christopher Anderson is out now with his take on Harry and Meghan's "disappointing" trip to the Jubilee.  He said he was quite surprised that H&M were not included on the balcony for the Trooping of the Colour.  Even if we're given H&M the broadest benefit of the doubt in believing everything would be just fine - being as sensitive as they are to good behavior and protecting the Queen - couldn't they understand what was done could have been about keeping Andrew away?  Even if H&M want to believe they're in good standing and the Queen wanted them there, as "protectors of the Queen" couldn't they recognize they had to be collateral damage and not show up because it worked to keep others off the balcony?
We all knew they would not be on the balcony before their private jet ever took off from Montecito to get them across the pond.  If we knew, they had to know - so how can Christopher Anderson pretend anyone was surprised?


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> I will be in a care home dribbling


They have good internet these days.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> We need whatever Meggie used between the Thanksgiving service and the birthday party!


I’d love to lose 15 lbs over night!


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Sorry really late reply on this but You can definitely de age her in photoshop or stick her head on a different body but I feel like this question has now been discussed for a while anyways
> 
> So late reply but they are actually two similar but different terms:
> Black face is like Al Jolson in the jazz singer and it’s meant to be unrealistic and is very offensive of course.
> 
> Black fishing is more like what Rachel Dolezal was up to. The person is colouring their skin and wearing wigs or even getting surgery in the hopes of being seen as biracial or black. They may or may not explicitly state they are biracial or black but they are probably trying to convince people they are through visual and verbal cues.
> So it is a different offensive thing.
> 
> As to the earlier question of whether M is black fishing, I’d say she is in that she is using skin colour as a visual reason for her current exclusion when it was not only a self imposed exclusion but also it’s not  what she looked like at the time but I’m no expert on this.
> 
> Is this the forum equivalent of putting towels on all the pool chairs though?
> Dan Wooton (sp?) will be hammering on the door of that convalescent home as we speak.
> 
> well going off some of the previous attempts they’ll just photoshop the back of a ginger kid’s head on her  corgi’s body and call it a day.


Is it still black fishing if someone half black is doing it?  Just wondering since TW is doing it.  I am not white, but I can be rather pale if I’m not in the sun. At my parents anniversary weekend recently, i pulled my pant legs up on the patio (I never wear shorts…my legs used to be twigs like TW’s and now, let’s just say they’re not!) and my sister and daughter were both shocked how white they looked.  My sister said I was in threat of “losing your brown card”.


----------



## bag-mania

You knew it could only be a matter of time. It took three days but Sunshine Sachs came up with a scenario to make it sound like H&M DIDN’T WANT ATTENTION. 









						Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were 'Low-Key' During the Platinum Jubilee
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry stayed "low-key" during their visit the UK for the Platinum Jubilee, with their trip focused on seeing Queen Elizabeth




					people.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> You knew it could only be a matter of time. It took three days but Sunshine Sachs came up with a scenario to make it sound like H&M DIDN’T WANT ATTENTION.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were 'Low-Key' During the Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry stayed "low-key" during their visit the UK for the Platinum Jubilee, with their trip focused on seeing Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


trying to make them look like a class act
OK, if you say so
But Harry looked either unhappy or inappropriate most of the time.  and the WIFE was grinning in church when everyone else had serious expressions.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> trying to make them look like a class act
> OK, if you say so
> But Harry looked either unhappy or inappropriate most of the time.  and the WIFE was grinning in church when everyone else had serious expressions.



They are counting on the fact that 99% of _People_ readers didn’t watch the Jubilee and aren’t paying attention that closely. SS is being paid to sell those two as being wonderful philanthropists to a US audience and this is how they do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are counting on the fact that 99% of _People_ readers didn’t watch the Jubilee and aren’t paying attention that closely. SS is being paid to sell those two as being wonderful philanthropists to a US audience and this is how they do it.


I'm still waiting for an example of the philanthropy


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> You knew it could only be a matter of time. It took three days but Sunshine Sachs came up with a scenario to make it sound like H&M DIDN’T WANT ATTENTION.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were 'Low-Key' During the Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry stayed "low-key" during their visit the UK for the Platinum Jubilee, with their trip focused on seeing Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


It's just the same old same old.  _We really didn't want to steal the show from TQ, so we kept it on the down low.  _Total nonsense.  Does anyone believe this anymore?  The way she wiggled her way down the aisle at St. Paul's i would say that she wanted as much attention to her azz as she could get. This was their own private procession.  The shocker came when they got to the row for the C list and he couldn't sit on the end so he could jump in and follow William down the aisle during  the recessional.  I really think the late arrival and walk alone was planned for attention.  Harry probably thought that he would get the end seat since they were late.  Nope!   Bea and Edo were ready for them.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They are counting on the fact that 99% of _People_ readers didn’t watch the Jubilee and aren’t paying attention that closely. SS is being paid to sell those two as being wonderful philanthropists to a US audience and this is how they do it.


People doesn't have any readers and is going to shut up shop. so the message won't get out .  Tough luck!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I'm still waiting for an example of the philanthropy


There was ..... wait, I'm still thinking.


----------



## papertiger

Did we have this one yet?


----------



## Chanbal

The Telegraph on Louis's fun and lunch after Trooping the Colour…  

_Mike Tindall__, the Duke of Cambridge’s cousin, has revealed that the *young prince had “complete sugar highs” during the jubilee pageant after consuming handfuls of sweets behind the scenes*.

Mr Tindall also revealed that the Queen’s grandchildren and their families enjoyed a private lunch after Trooping the Colour, which he described as one of his highlights of the bank holiday weekend.

He said: "*Louis, he was just wanting to have fun, and my two (daughters) are always mischievous, so it was trying to keep a lid on*.

"There was a lot of sweets out back though, so they had complete sugar highs. It's tough for them. They're all young, so asking them to sit, because it was two til five or whatever, it's a long time.
"As any parent knows you just do whatever needs to be done."
…

*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex*, who joined the “cousins” to watch Trooping from the Major General's Office overlooking Horse Guards Parade, *are not thought to have joined the family lunch, instead returning to Frogmore Cottage in Windsor*._



			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> You knew it could only be a matter of time. It took three days but Sunshine Sachs came up with a scenario to make it sound like *H&M DIDN’T WANT ATTENTION*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Were 'Low-Key' During the Platinum Jubilee
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry stayed "low-key" during their visit the UK for the Platinum Jubilee, with their trip focused on seeing Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'm still waiting for an example of the philanthropy



This should give you a good idea of their major philanthropic act.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch to the end.  Wow.



We should warn people to turn off the sound since it was just silly, annoying music, but otherwise an interesting non-button find!


----------



## Norm.Core

sdkitty said:


> I'm still waiting for an example of the philanthropy


Please don’t hold your breath.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

Waiting for a repairman to show up and killing time.

There is nothing new here, it's data from our sharp-eyed posters, You Tubers, bloggers, news outlets etc but thought it would be fun to chronologically examine the disastrous reappearance of the Dunderhead Duo as they made bad decisions, miscalculated, were outplayed.

1. Started before they even arrived: Their PR lied they had departed on a commercial flight from LA to London.
    Lady C got a tip about the private jet from Santa Barbara to Farnborough Airport, alerted Piers Morgan, and they were outed.

2. Queen sent armored vehicle to transport the family to Frogmore Cottage, to placate Harry's paranoia about Security.
    Possibly fresh from a dental whitening treatment that made her teeth seem to glow in the dark confines of the car, TW rolled down the window visually announcing, "I'm here, right here, sitting duck, but I don't care, puleeese take my picture, more than one if you want, my silly handbag on the seat next to me is the one who worries. I know I am invincible."
Argument for security fears severely damaged by TW, stay tuned for Court hearing.

3. Trooping of the Color relegated them to a building distant from the action and the $ shots.
    TW staged her shots using children gathered in the window, while hovering over them in a wide brimmed hat ensured the need for wide angle lenses to capture it all.  Haz and his nasty scowl left some of the kids looking like they wanted to cry. Backlash for continuing their use of children to secure  publicity.
    They were captured on camera talking to the Duke of Kent. The contrast was sharp: he was in full military regalia and Haz was in his not a working Royal suit. Further, the Duke of Kent was honored as one of the Royals on the Balcony.  They were not. No further pictures of Dunderhead Duo. Maybe they walked home?

4. Here's where the annihilation really took place. Harry has forever known that Royal events are planned literally to the minute, every little detail addressed. To subvert being made to ride the Coach to St. Paul's Cathedral with lesser Royals and not be transported in their own car, they were deliberately late enough to the meeting up to cause the bus to depart without them. Since the meeting was with Charles and Camilla it is assumed their plan was to create a crisis whereby they would have to go in the car with Charles and Camilla. As part of that foursome at least one $$$ shot would be partial payment to Netflix. Even better it would disrupt the order of placement with the Cambridges. Their sweet revenge moment in the spotlight was going to be captured. NOT. TW was probably on the verge of wetting her pants to be so foiled. Instead they were unceremoniously dispatched in a Land Rover Security Car and whisked to the Cathedral. Charles and Camilla departed after them.

Traveling with the group of cousins and lesser Royals might have saved them from some boos. In a group including people who are liked and admired most likely would have been a buffer. Instead, they were afloat alone and easily identified targets for wrath. There were audible boos.

Upon entering the Cathedral, due to the timing of their arrival, they had what turned out to be a Perp walk, no rustles as people turned to admire. Instead, based on multiple pictures as they progressed, eye contact with them was not sought, majority of people did not smile at them and many outright scowled. At least one source identified the Marquess of Cholmondeley as the man who was  charged with seating them. Don't recognize the name? He is the husband of Rose Hanbury, the woman who was falsely accused of having an affair with Prince William based on a rumor attributed to the Sussex camp. Harry would have recognized him and known Chumley was probably specifically selected and was not an ally. Arriving late, with everyone else seated, it made their middle of the second row seating all the more obvious. Harry appeared to gesture to Bea to move over giving them aisle seats (the better to bolt into the Recession line near the Real Royals on the way out, which I read was suspected as their plan.) Instead, Chumley held firm in his directions to them, Bea stood her ground. Because of their misplaced hubris, the awkward shuffle in the aisle they caused, everyone in the Cathedral and the world wide audience was focused  their very obvious demotion to Second Row Royals.  When Catherine passed by, Raptor made a point of averting her head. So petty.  Not sure why, but it was pointed out two rows behind Harry a high ranking member of British Intelligence was seated. Best of all, for us, directly behind the Ingrate sat Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards. Sigh! After reading up on him and his relationship with the Queen it was clear no-one dare due anything to besmirch her Jubilee. Taking a chance here that Autospell doesn't cause me embarrassment, but he would take out his dirk in a flash to defend her in any circumstance.

Their exit was even more painful. Zara exchanged a few words with them. Within a narrow space on the steps, Mike Tindall cold shouldered them, not even making eye contact, Peter Phillips ignored both Haz and Raptor so she did one of her talking to herself schticks. One of the Chatto men stood with Mike equally stony. Haz was obviously jittery to go and it's claimed a lipreader caught a "f--- those morons" as the boos echoed.

They had barely left the area when the microphone under the collar stories were being revealed. Don't know what they recorded, but the message received from them is they are scum of earth low lives without conscious or scruples. Good, GOTCHA, by the Firm

Pretending to Royal attendance at the "casual, outdoor" party for Lilibet. party. Two people sitting on a blanket on the grass with a bottle of wine and a loaf of bread can be described as a "casual, outdoor" party. (Does anyone really think Anne's Granddaughters were at that party?). 

After four days of a family love fest revealed to the world, by a group I don't think any of us realized were so close, and with so many charismatic children, the release of Lilibet's picture was anticlimactic. Archie non existent. How can parents cruelly blank out a child?

The rude departure. Loved the reporting how people were said to sigh in relief they were leaving. No one begged them to stay.
Those of us in California wished the plane could have been permanently diverted to a remote atoll somewhere.

I feel badly for the hurt his betrayal has caused his Grandmother, but she is pragmatic. Their biggest mistake was underestimating her. There was never a chance of a Lilibet picture to be shopped around. How are they going to rationalize that to Netflix?


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> Europe has better ones than US, we’re way behind.
> 
> 
> 
> She spent too much time on the big lounger at the Inskip wedding
> 
> 
> View attachment 5421438


Notice how she is grabbing Hap-Hazza’s hand?!?!  This was the wedding that (supposedly) Harry had broken up with Megalomaniac before the wedding, so even though the invite to him was +1, he didn’t think she would show up .. and we’ll, OF COURSE, she showed up!!  There are a few pictures where she looks pissed off because Harry wasn’t spending every moment with her!


----------



## bag-mania

To get that horrible _People_ story out of our minds, here’s some of Angela Levin’s comments.  









						Netflix not happy about Prince Harry and Meghan’s failed Queen photo op: royal expert
					

Netflix won’t be so chill about this royal rejection: An expert claims the streaming platform will be disappointed by the nixed photo shoot with senior royals.




					nypost.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

CeeJay said:


> Notice how she is grabbing Hap-Hazza’s hand?!?!  This was the wedding that (supposedly) Harry had broken up with Megalomaniac before the wedding, so even though the invite to him was +1, he didn’t think she would show up .. and we’ll, OF COURSE, she showed up!!  There are a few pictures where she looks pissed off because Harry wasn’t spending every moment with her!




Man why did he took her back? Her roast chicken and her pee in the wood habit can't be that earth shattering


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

csshopper said:


> Further cementing her NON Royal status, Royals don’t accept free services, having it show up on line as an advert was probably another, literally, “in your face” message to the RF that she will do what she wants, protocol be damned. Ironic, she prepped so hard for what ended up being her humiliation scenes.


She's following in the footsteps of Fergie. After all, she has to earn a living.


----------



## Happyish

CeeJay said:


> Notice how she is grabbing Hap-Hazza’s hand?!?!  This was the wedding that (supposedly) Harry had broken up with Megalomaniac before the wedding, so even though the invite to him was +1, he didn’t think she would show up .. and we’ll, OF COURSE, she showed up!!  There are a few pictures where she looks pissed off because Harry wasn’t spending every moment with her!


I missed something. I missed a lot! They broke up? She showed up at a wedding he previously invited her to _after_ they broke up?


----------



## kkfiregirl

Happyish said:


> I missed something. I missed a lot! They broke up? She showed up at a wedding he previously invited her to _after_ they broke up?



Yes! It’s all covered in great detail in this thread


----------



## lanasyogamama

Happyish said:


> She's following in the footsteps of Fergie. After all, she has to earn a living.



I was just thinking that the other day, that she is the Fergie and Catherine is the Diana!




Happyish said:


> I missed something. I missed a lot! They broke up? She showed up at a wedding he previously invited her to _after_ they broke up?


Oh that’s a juicy story!!


----------



## Happyish

Norm.Core said:


> Please don’t hold your breath.


Wait. Wait. I've got it. It's an olive oil lemon cake.


----------



## Happyish

kkfiregirl said:


> Yes! It’s all covered in great detail in this thread


I appreciate you pointing this out, but this thread is 6350 pages long!


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> I was just thinking that the other day, that she is the Fergie and *Catherine is the Diana!*
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that’s a juicy story!!



Catherine can't be the Diana. Catherine doesn't act or do crazy or inappropriate stuff. Catherine is more of the Queen    I do get what you're saying though.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Happyish said:


> I appreciate you pointing this out, but this thread is 6350 pages long!



I thought maybe there was a search mechanism, where you can type in a few keywords and then see the relevant pages?


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, this is cool! More broken dishes in Montecito.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Catherine can't be the Diana. Catherine doesn't act or do crazy or inappropriate stuff. Catherine is more of the Queen    I do get what you're saying though.


Yeah, mostly I meant elegant versus not at all elegant!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

marietouchet said:


> Anyone thinking what I am ?
> We have seen the regency council -  Charles , Anne , William and Edward - front row of church - Camilla , Kate , Sophie as first alternates
> Andrew and Harry are out
> Councilors of state list soon to be modified


We live in hope.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> I thought maybe there was a search mechanism, where you can type in a few keywords and then see the relevant pages?



Can be done this way


----------



## kkfiregirl

EverSoElusive said:


> Can be done this way
> 
> View attachment 5421641


Brilliant, yes!


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Yeah, mostly I meant elegant versus not at all elegant!



I very much agree with you


----------



## Happyish

csshopper said:


> Waiting for a repairman to show up and killing time.
> 
> There is nothing new here, it's data from our sharp-eyed posters, You Tubers, bloggers, news outlets etc but thought it would be fun to chronologically examine the disastrous reappearance of the Dunderhead Duo as they made bad decisions, miscalculated, were outplayed.
> 
> 1. Started before they even arrived: Their PR lied they had departed on a commercial flight from LA to London.
> Lady C got a tip about the private jet from Santa Barbara to Farnborough Airport, alerted Piers Morgan, and they were outed.
> 
> 2. Queen sent armored vehicle to transport the family to Frogmore Cottage, to placate Harry's paranoia about Security.
> Possibly fresh from a dental whitening treatment that made her teeth seem to glow in the dark confines of the car, TW rolled down the window visually announcing, "I'm here, right here, sitting duck, but I don't care, puleeese take my picture, more than one if you want, my silly handbag on the seat next to me is the one who worries. I know I am invincible."
> Argument for security fears severely damaged by TW, stay tuned for Court hearing.
> 
> 3. Trooping of the Color relegated them to a building distant from the action and the $ shots.
> TW staged her shots using children gathered in the window, while hovering over them in a wide brimmed hat ensured the need for wide angle lenses to capture it all.  Haz and his nasty scowl left some of the kids looking like they wanted to cry. Backlash for continuing their use of children to secure  publicity.
> They were captured on camera talking to the Duke of Kent. The contrast was sharp: he was in full military regalia and Haz was in his not a working Royal suit. Further, the Duke of Kent was honored as one of the Royals on the Balcony.  They were not. No further pictures of Dunderhead Duo. Maybe they walked home?
> 
> 4. Here's where the annihilation really took place. Harry has forever known that Royal events are planned literally to the minute, every little detail addressed. To subvert being made to ride the Coach to St. Paul's Cathedral with lesser Royals and not be transported in their own car, they were deliberately late enough to the meeting up to cause the bus to depart without them. Since the meeting was with Charles and Camilla it is assumed their plan was to create a crisis whereby they would have to go in the car with Charles and Camilla. As part of that foursome at least one $$$ shot would be partial payment to Netflix. Even better it would disrupt the order of placement with the Cambridges. Their sweet revenge moment in the spotlight was going to be captured. NOT. TW was probably on the verge of wetting her pants to be so foiled. Instead they were unceremoniously dispatched in a Land Rover Security Car and whisked to the Cathedral. Charles and Camilla departed after them.
> 
> Traveling with the group of cousins and lesser Royals might have saved them from some boos. In a group including people who are liked and admired most likely would have been a buffer. Instead, they were afloat alone and easily identified targets for wrath. There were audible boos.
> 
> Upon entering the Cathedral, due to the timing of their arrival, they had what turned out to be a Perp walk, no rustles as people turned to admire. Instead, based on multiple pictures as they progressed, eye contact with them was not sought, majority of people did not smile at them and many outright scowled. At least one source identified the Marquess of Cholmondeley as the man who was  charged with seating them. Don't recognize the name? He is the husband of Rose Hanbury, the woman who was falsely accused of having an affair with Prince William based on a rumor attributed to the Sussex camp. Harry would have recognized him and known Chumley was probably specifically selected and was not an ally. Arriving late, with everyone else seated, it made their middle of the second row seating all the more obvious. Harry appeared to gesture to Bea to move over giving them aisle seats (the better to bolt into the Recession line near the Real Royals on the way out, which I read was suspected as their plan.) Instead, Chumley held firm in his directions to them, Bea stood her ground. Because of their misplaced hubris, the awkward shuffle in the aisle they caused, everyone in the Cathedral and the world wide audience was focused  their very obvious demotion to Second Row Royals.  When Catherine passed by, Raptor made a point of averting her head. So petty.  Not sure why, but it was pointed out two rows behind Harry a high ranking member of British Intelligence was seated. Best of all, for us, directly behind the Ingrate sat Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards. Sigh! After reading up on him and his relationship with the Queen it was clear no-one dare due anything to besmirch her Jubilee. Taking a chance here that Autospell doesn't cause me embarrassment, but he would take out his dirk in a flash to defend her in any circumstance.
> 
> Their exit was even more painful. Zara exchanged a few words with them. Within a narrow space on the steps, Mike Tindall cold shouldered them, not even making eye contact, Peter Phillips ignored both Haz and Raptor so she did one of her talking to herself schticks. One of the Chatto men stood with Mike equally stony. Haz was obviously jittery to go and it's claimed a lipreader caught a "f--- those morons" as the boos echoed.
> 
> They had barely left the area when the microphone under the collar stories were being revealed. Don't know what they recorded, but the message received from them is they are scum of earth low lives without conscious or scruples. Good, GOTCHA, by the Firm
> 
> Pretending to Royal attendance at the "casual, outdoor" party for Lilibet. party. Two people sitting on a blanket on the grass with a bottle of wine and a loaf of bread can be described as a "casual, outdoor" party. (Does anyone really think Anne's Granddaughters were at that party?).
> 
> After four days of a family love fest revealed to the world, by a group I don't think any of us realized were so close, and with so many charismatic children, the release of Lilibet's picture was anticlimactic. Archie non existent. How can parents cruelly blank out a child?
> 
> The rude departure. Loved the reporting how people were said to sigh in relief they were leaving. No one begged them to stay.
> Those of us in California wished the plane could have been permanently diverted to a remote atoll somewhere.
> 
> I feel badly for the hurt his betrayal has caused his Grandmother, but she is pragmatic. Their biggest mistake was underestimating her. There was never a chance of a Lilibet picture to be shopped around. How are they going to rationalize that to Netflix?


Hear, hear! I literally laughed out loud. For five minutes . . . Oh, that dirk remark! Thank you for bringing some much needed levity into play.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

Happyish said:


> I appreciate you pointing this out, but this thread is 6350 pages long!



Okay I searched Tom Inskip and found some good stuff!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

RAINDANCE said:


> Yes, my understanding too - the next 4 adults, of course.
> so its Charles, William, harry and Andrew which is why it's become a problem now.
> It's untenable that Andrew can deputise for HMTQ and anyway he has withdrawn from public life.
> I personally have a huge problem with somebody who lives full times overseas being able to step in as head of state.
> 
> It is my view that Andrew needs to really fall on his sword as soon as possible and voluntarily stand down. That would enable Anne and Edward to be appointed, although technically it's Bea and Eug who are next.


I think HM will eventually convince Andrew to resign and like you I don't believe that Dufus should keep his seat while living abroad. I think he was desperately pleading to keep it during the NBC interview with that cloying reporter when he said that he was the right person to protect HM by "making sure she was surrounded by the right people." As if he had a say in the matter! And you're right, Beatrice and Eugenie would be next unless they change the rules since I don't believe they can just pick and choose someone at random.


----------



## Happyish

EverSoElusive said:


> Can be done this way
> 
> View attachment 5421641


I typed in "break-up"  and "break up," limiting the search to just this thread and got 24 pages of entries that use the term . . . Oh well.


----------



## redney

Happyish said:


> I typed in "break-up"  and "break up," limiting the search to just this thread and got 24 pages of entries that use the term . . . Oh well.


Search Tom Inskip or Inskip. In a nut(meg)shell  supposedly they weren't dating anymore at the time of one of his BFF's wedding and no one expected him to bring a +1, but she showed up allegedly uninvited and their body language in the photos (Google those) show him scowling while she smiled and made herself welcome. Hmm. That sounds familiar even last week!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Happyish said:


> I typed in "break-up"  and "break up," limiting the search to just this thread and got 24 pages of entries that use the term . . . Oh well.



Other keywords to try:

Jamaica
Caribbean
Breakup
Wedding


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> To get that horrible _People_ story out of our minds, here’s some of Angela Levin’s comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix not happy about Prince Harry and Meghan’s failed Queen photo op: royal expert
> 
> 
> Netflix won’t be so chill about this royal rejection: An expert claims the streaming platform will be disappointed by the nixed photo shoot with senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


_
1) However, *a source with knowledge of the situation told The Post that claim is bunk*, stating that “they just enjoyed a private and intimate visit with the Queen.” They added that *the Sussexes didn’t even bother asking for photos as the 96-year-old **monarch* wasn’t feeling well — an explanation that Levin rebutted.

2) *Levin*, for one, agreed with the former explanation. “*Harry and Meghan wanted to see the Queen as soon as possible, so she saw them on the first day,” she claimed*. “She went in, and then *they asked if they brought their own photographer and they asked if he could take a picture of the two Lilibets*, and she said, ‘No, absolutely not possible.'_”


----------



## kkfiregirl

Happyish said:


> I typed in "break-up"  and "break up," limiting the search to just this thread and got 24 pages of entries that use the term . . . Oh well.



Okay, I’ll help you out. I didn’t want to be accused of bringing the thread back to the past. I copied one of @CeeJay’s post for you.

Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal. Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_). Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry. Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1. Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come. Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there. To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time. It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


----------



## Icyjade

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think HM will eventually convince Andrew to resign and like you I don't believe that Dufus should keep his seat while living abroad. I think he was desperately pleading to keep it during the NBC interview with that cloying reporter when he said that he was the right person to protect HM by "making sure she was surrounded by the right people." As if he had a say in the matter! And you're right, Beatrice and Eugenie would be next unless they change the rules since I don't believe they can just pick and choose someone at random.



Oh ok that would make sense re why B has been given higher profile recently


----------



## Chanbal

Several senior royals never saw Lilib… They were shocked with the release of a picture to the media before being shared with them. 
There was only a single meeting with QE (from another NS video)


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Several senior royals never saw Lilib… They were shocked with the release of a picture to the media before being shared with them.





Not even a good picture. Why be shocked?   The sooner they accept that Lil' Bit is Invisibet, the easier it is for them to forget the child's alleged existence.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Not even a good picture. Why be shocked?   The sooner they accept that Lil' Bit is Invisibet, the easier it is for them to forget the child's alleged existence.


Yep! NS confirmed that rumors of the Harkles being in contact with Will&Kate are not true.


----------



## Chanbal

One more video for your entertainment…


----------



## Happyish

kkfiregirl said:


> Okay, I’ll help you out. I didn’t want to be accused of bringing the thread back to the past. I copied one of @CeeJay’s post for you.
> 
> Personally, I think it might pertain to the rumor that she was a "yacht-girl" here in So-Cal. Supposedly, Tom Inskip (_Harry's best friend for many years_) went on a yacht cruise while out here, and guess who he banged (_yes - rumor, but still_). Apparently, when he found out about Harry & Meghan, he told Harry. Then, Harry gets invited to Inskip's wedding in Jamaica, and the invitation was +1. Well, when Harry found out about the Inskip+MM situation, he broke up with Meghan .. but being the gentleman that he was, he extended the invite but must have thought that she would never come. Well, nope .. not Meghan; come hell or high-water, she was going to be there. To me, those pictures show a VERY DIFFERENT story of their relationship and IMO clearly show that Harry (at least) WAS NOT IN LOVE with her at that time. It's the reason why I keep on asking .. what in God's name did she do to get Harry to turn around????


Thank you. First, I never would have found this. Second, I appreciate the succinct and clear summary. And third, now I understand (except for term "yacht-girl" but I get the drift . . . no pun intended)! 
xoxo


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Icyjade said:


> Oh ok that would make sense re why B has been given higher profile recently


That crossed my mind and I also wondered if Eugenie and her husband's move to Portugal would invalidate her from becoming a counsellor, leaving the door open for Edward although I wish it were Anne. It really ticks me off that they didn't go all the way back to Anne when they changed the law to equal primogeniture as she would then move ahead of Andrew and Edward, but IMO they didn't want to hurt those poor wee widdle boys' feelings by demoting them behind Anne. You see, I'm very biased as Anne is one of my favourite royals along with HM and Camilla.


----------



## Chanbal

For the members of the Kilt Club, here is one more pic of the Harkles' security officer during the Thanksgiving Service.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think HM will eventually convince Andrew to resign and like you I don't believe that Dufus should keep his seat while living abroad. I think he was desperately pleading to keep it during the NBC interview with that cloying reporter when he said that he was the right person to protect HM by "making sure she was surrounded by the right people." As if he had a say in the matter! And you're right, Beatrice and Eugenie would be next unless they change the rules since I don't believe they can just pick and choose someone at random.


You know, I'm Asian and this is really sounding like those cliched TV dramas we have when patriarch/matriarch is surrounded by ginormous clan, and that slimeball son keeps insinuating that he is the only person protecting the family fortune, while his pinch-faced wife is standing next to him sneering at everyone else. Whoever is writing the script for the Harkles must be an Asian drama fan.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


Agreed. This is just appalling.
Evidently, it never occurred to the writer that Meghan and Harry got the cold shoulder because of bad behavior. No, it could only have been _Racism_.
In other words, according to this author, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck, guess what? It's not a duck, it must be Racist! What other conclusion is at all possible?
Just Absurd. And this writer is published!!


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> that slimeball son keeps insinuating that he is the only person protecting the family fortune, while his pinch-faced wife is standing next to him sneering at everyone else



And at the same time saying that they are just a plane crash away from being the next in line to the throne…


----------



## Zen101

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


H&M’s sugars first line of defense when things don’t go their way; racism. No accountability or acknowledgment by their cheerleaders of anything wrong these two have done. Couldn’t even bring myself to read the article. The title was enough for me to scroll down.


----------



## zen1965

mellibelly said:


> Just leaving this BLG post here
> View attachment 5420991


To me the same holds true calling a 1-year old „meh“, her photo having no personality, etc.
No bueno, whatever one thinks of the parents.


----------



## Chanbal

Happyish said:


> Agreed. This is just appalling.
> Evidently, it never occurred to the writer that Meghan and Harry got the cold shoulder because of bad behavior. No, it could only have been _Racism_.
> In other words, according to this author, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck, guess what? It's not a duck, it must be Racist! What other conclusion is at all possible?
> Just Absurd. And this writer is published!!


In my view, people like the author of this article are the ones that promote division, discrimination, intolerance, and racism. She doesn't question the Harkles use of titles from an institution that she calls racist. She ignores that QE has several other grandkids that were not on the balcony. She criticizes the Harkles being seated behind senior royals, but ignores that they were on the 2nd row with other family members and had hundreds of people behind them. Would she expect to have them seated with the Archbishop? Are the Harkles more important than the people behind them? She doesn't question the use of private jets when they preach to others about carbon footprints. She doesn't question how they are getting all the multi-million dollar deals without credentials, while many people with a lot more qualifications are having a hard time getting decent jobs. It's sad that nowadays many people are silent because of being afraid to be called racists.


----------



## Zen101

Chanbal said:


> In my view, people like the author of this article are the ones that promote division, discrimination, intolerance, and racism. She doesn't question the Harkles use of titles from an institution that she calls racist. She ignores that QE has several other grandkids that were not on the balcony. She criticizes the Harkles being seated behind senior royals, but ignores that they were on the 2nd row with other family members and had hundreds of people behind them. Would she expect to have them seated with the Archbishop? Are the Harkles more important than the people behind them? She doesn't question the use of private jets when they preach to others about carbon footprints. She doesn't question how they are getting all the multi-million dollar deals without credentials, while many people with a lot more qualifications are having a hard time getting decent jobs. It's sad that nowadays many people are silent because of being afraid to be called racists.


You put it so well @Chanbal Everything you said.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


Writer hailing from New Jersey. She has won several accolades and characterizes her writing for The New Yorker as satire. 

I didn't see anything in her other writing as pro-Harkle, so she is probably suckered by the Woe is ME(gain) drama and is showing support for a fellow WOC.

I'm disappointed. I normally enjoy The New Yorker. This piece is not what I would term "satire" and it is terribly one-dimensional.


----------



## Jktgal

xincinsin said:


> You know, I'm Asian and this is really sounding like those cliched TV dramas we have when patriarch/matriarch is surrounded by ginormous clan, and that slimeball son keeps insinuating that he is the only person protecting the family fortune, while his pinch-faced wife is standing next to him sneering at everyone else. Whoever is writing the script for the Harkles must be an Asian drama fan.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> Is it still black fishing if someone half black is doing it?  Just wondering since TW is doing it.  I am not white, but I can be rather pale if I’m not in the sun. At my parents anniversary weekend recently, i pulled my pant legs up on the patio (I never wear shorts…my legs used to be twigs like TW’s and now, let’s just say they’re not!) and my sister and daughter were both shocked how white they looked.  My sister said I was in threat of “losing your brown card”.


Maybe it doesn’t. I might be being too harsh on MM because I’m biased against her at this point, but I would say that she has made quite a dramatic change in appearance which looks suspicious when coupled with the accusations she used about looking ‘too dark’ and this could be seen as an attempt to win empathy from darker skinned women who feel marginalised.

In your case wouldn’t say so because tanning is a natural way a person’s skin colour can change ans you aren’t making any claims of anything. It’s the claims that do it - one wouldn’t assume a tanned Greek or Thai person was trying to look biracial or black just because they have that complexion.

But yes maybe I am being too harsh on M saying she is black fishing. I think she might be cynically exploiting others’ misery for her own gains, though, but what’s new?

Add on - thinking about it, U think there must be a term for this besides black fishing. I mean how would one describe what Steven Seagal is doing when he claims to be every ethnicity under the sun at one point or another?


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I'm still waiting for an example of the philanthropy


Um sweetie she took a private jet to Texas to remind an aid worker at the scene of a brutal massacre of the importance of critical reading of news about her. If that’s not a selfless gesture what is?


----------



## Gal4Dior

So rewind a week or so. That publicity stunt at Uvalde?

Well. Matthew Mcconaughey actually met with families under the radar and actually talked to them and connected with them. Got to know them.

Weird as he may be, he did have a place there as he was from there, and yet he put the families first because all these discussions with them occurred without photos or news stories. It was only revealed during his speech when visiting the White House a day ago.









						The story of a Uvalde victim's green shoes captures the White House's attention
					

Maite Rodriguez, a lover of animals and the environment, dreamed of being a marine biologist. She was killed during the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas.




					www.npr.org
				




This just makes me so much more disgusted by Me Me Megain’s antics! Her cries for cheap publicity, painting herself as a humanitarian saint when she’s just a narcissist, in the midst of pure chaos and pain Uvalde families were feeling, she wanted people to know - don’t believe everything you read about him - okay, it’s all about you.

Everything about her is shallow. There are no deep relationships, which makes her former relationships so easy to cut off when it didn’t benefit her any longer.

It must be sad being her. Here she is. One of the most disliked women in the world, a former C list actress with a washed up career, and married to a spoiled, whiny, man child/balding ginger.

None of them are significant anymore, and the more they try, the more evident it is that will be that their sad set of hazbeens will be their legacy. The Hazzbeens, while began with a bang, will end with a pathetic almost silent whimper…and don’t think the moment that money runs dry, so will her love for her hapless husband.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Um sweetie she took a private jet to Texas to remind an aid worker at the scene of a brutal massacre of the importance of critical reading of news about her. If that’s not a selfless gesture what is?


I'm torn between gagging, gasping and giggling. Must sign off tpf for a while. I'm about to attend a serious lecture on mentorship and don't want to be seen grinning like a loon.


----------



## xincinsin

LVSistinaMM said:


> It must be sad being her. Here she is. One of the most hated women in the world, a former C list actress with a washed up career, and married to a spoiled, whiny, man child/balding ginger.


"Hated" is too strong a word. Mocked? Derided? Ridiculed?

I speak only for myself when I say my feelings for her are expressed by a lot of eye-rolling. But then, as I have mentioned before, I've had to deal with a number of office narcs (2 were full-fledged), and I remind myself to rejoice that I'm not working with Methane.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Waiting for a repairman to show up and killing time.
> 
> There is nothing new here, it's data from our sharp-eyed posters, You Tubers, bloggers, news outlets etc but thought it would be fun to chronologically examine the disastrous reappearance of the Dunderhead Duo as they made bad decisions, miscalculated, were outplayed.
> 
> 1. Started before they even arrived: Their PR lied they had departed on a commercial flight from LA to London.
> Lady C got a tip about the private jet from Santa Barbara to Farnborough Airport, alerted Piers Morgan, and they were outed.
> 
> 2. Queen sent armored vehicle to transport the family to Frogmore Cottage, to placate Harry's paranoia about Security.
> Possibly fresh from a dental whitening treatment that made her teeth seem to glow in the dark confines of the car, TW rolled down the window visually announcing, "I'm here, right here, sitting duck, but I don't care, puleeese take my picture, more than one if you want, my silly handbag on the seat next to me is the one who worries. I know I am invincible."
> Argument for security fears severely damaged by TW, stay tuned for Court hearing.
> 
> 3. Trooping of the Color relegated them to a building distant from the action and the $ shots.
> TW staged her shots using children gathered in the window, while hovering over them in a wide brimmed hat ensured the need for wide angle lenses to capture it all.  Haz and his nasty scowl left some of the kids looking like they wanted to cry. Backlash for continuing their use of children to secure  publicity.
> They were captured on camera talking to the Duke of Kent. The contrast was sharp: he was in full military regalia and Haz was in his not a working Royal suit. Further, the Duke of Kent was honored as one of the Royals on the Balcony.  They were not. No further pictures of Dunderhead Duo. Maybe they walked home?
> 
> 4. Here's where the annihilation really took place. Harry has forever known that Royal events are planned literally to the minute, every little detail addressed. To subvert being made to ride the Coach to St. Paul's Cathedral with lesser Royals and not be transported in their own car, they were deliberately late enough to the meeting up to cause the bus to depart without them. Since the meeting was with Charles and Camilla it is assumed their plan was to create a crisis whereby they would have to go in the car with Charles and Camilla. As part of that foursome at least one $$$ shot would be partial payment to Netflix. Even better it would disrupt the order of placement with the Cambridges. Their sweet revenge moment in the spotlight was going to be captured. NOT. TW was probably on the verge of wetting her pants to be so foiled. Instead they were unceremoniously dispatched in a Land Rover Security Car and whisked to the Cathedral. Charles and Camilla departed after them.
> 
> Traveling with the group of cousins and lesser Royals might have saved them from some boos. In a group including people who are liked and admired most likely would have been a buffer. Instead, they were afloat alone and easily identified targets for wrath. There were audible boos.
> 
> Upon entering the Cathedral, due to the timing of their arrival, they had what turned out to be a Perp walk, no rustles as people turned to admire. Instead, based on multiple pictures as they progressed, eye contact with them was not sought, majority of people did not smile at them and many outright scowled. At least one source identified the Marquess of Cholmondeley as the man who was  charged with seating them. Don't recognize the name? He is the husband of Rose Hanbury, the woman who was falsely accused of having an affair with Prince William based on a rumor attributed to the Sussex camp. Harry would have recognized him and known Chumley was probably specifically selected and was not an ally. Arriving late, with everyone else seated, it made their middle of the second row seating all the more obvious. Harry appeared to gesture to Bea to move over giving them aisle seats (the better to bolt into the Recession line near the Real Royals on the way out, which I read was suspected as their plan.) Instead, Chumley held firm in his directions to them, Bea stood her ground. Because of their misplaced hubris, the awkward shuffle in the aisle they caused, everyone in the Cathedral and the world wide audience was focused  their very obvious demotion to Second Row Royals.  When Catherine passed by, Raptor made a point of averting her head. So petty.  Not sure why, but it was pointed out two rows behind Harry a high ranking member of British Intelligence was seated. Best of all, for us, directly behind the Ingrate sat Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards. Sigh! After reading up on him and his relationship with the Queen it was clear no-one dare due anything to besmirch her Jubilee. Taking a chance here that Autospell doesn't cause me embarrassment, but he would take out his dirk in a flash to defend her in any circumstance.
> 
> Their exit was even more painful. Zara exchanged a few words with them. Within a narrow space on the steps, Mike Tindall cold shouldered them, not even making eye contact, Peter Phillips ignored both Haz and Raptor so she did one of her talking to herself schticks. One of the Chatto men stood with Mike equally stony. Haz was obviously jittery to go and it's claimed a lipreader caught a "f--- those morons" as the boos echoed.
> 
> They had barely left the area when the microphone under the collar stories were being revealed. Don't know what they recorded, but the message received from them is they are scum of earth low lives without conscious or scruples. Good, GOTCHA, by the Firm
> 
> Pretending to Royal attendance at the "casual, outdoor" party for Lilibet. party. Two people sitting on a blanket on the grass with a bottle of wine and a loaf of bread can be described as a "casual, outdoor" party. (Does anyone really think Anne's Granddaughters were at that party?).
> 
> After four days of a family love fest revealed to the world, by a group I don't think any of us realized were so close, and with so many charismatic children, the release of Lilibet's picture was anticlimactic. Archie non existent. How can parents cruelly blank out a child?
> 
> The rude departure. Loved the reporting how people were said to sigh in relief they were leaving. No one begged them to stay.
> Those of us in California wished the plane could have been permanently diverted to a remote atoll somewhere.
> 
> I feel badly for the hurt his betrayal has caused his Grandmother, but she is pragmatic. Their biggest mistake was underestimating her. There was never a chance of a Lilibet picture to be shopped around. How are they going to rationalize that to Netflix?


Brilliant, exactly as it happened. 
However, it wasn't one of "the Chatto men" with Mike, that was David, Earl of Snowdon.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jktgal said:


> View attachment 5421763


Oh my gosh this makes so much sense.


Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


This is a perfect summation of the level of cognitive dissonance that happens when you get exactly what you want and it doesn’t turn out how you’d hoped.

To me the very frustrating thing about all this is there are shady things the British monarchy and establishment at large have done which they’ve never bothered reporting on instead they are going to publish this easily renounced flummery under the guise of humour.

I mean are we really to imagine the New Yorker’s position is the Queen is racist? In which case how do they account for their usually rather fluffy commentary of her and institution.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Yeah, I'm sure that 96yo who had to rest on and off during the occasion of her lifetime was eager to meet a random baby not once, but several times. They really must think their followers are complete amoebas.


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> I'm torn between gagging, gasping and giggling. Must sign off tpf for a while. I'm about to attend a serious lecture on mentorship and *don't want to be seen grinning like a loon.*


Or like Megs in the thanksgiving service


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _1) However, *a source with knowledge of the situation told The Post that claim is bunk*, stating that “they just enjoyed a private and intimate visit with the Queen.” They added that *the Sussexes didn’t even bother asking for photos as the 96-year-old **monarch* wasn’t feeling well — an explanation that Levin rebutted._



They were not concerned when his 99yo grandfather was actively dying, so what do they care if The Queen was unwell?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724



Ah, the drama. And the inaccuracy. But whatever, Nina.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’ve been wondering whether this is just me being nuts but I have always hated people doing the shushing gesture ever since I was a kid. For some reason I’d rather someone shouted ‘shut the f up!’ than made that particular gesture. It just grinds my gears. So images of the gruesome twosome doing it at a public paid party is sort of my ultimate kryptonite


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve been wondering whether this is just me being nuts but I have always hated people doing the shushing gesture ever since I was a kid. For some reason I’d rather someone shouted ‘shut the f up!’ than made that particular gesture. It just grinds my gears. So images of the gruesome twosome doing it at a public paid party is sort of my ultimate kryptonite



Good point. In a way what she did or swearing are the same thing and signals exasperated adult out of control. She made children, at the age you can reason with, look and feel like babies.

Much better for kids (over toddler age) to hear _why_ they need to be quiet. A request simply put, repeated if needed, with an explanation as to why quiet is needed at a certain point educates the children. Next time they're in similar circumstances they will have learned to recognise a situation when quiet is preferred and will self-regulate.

What M did was make her some kind of dramatic-mime into an authoritative figure among kids that can be seen by others in that role. Nothing to do with the children or their noise output. Dare I say it, with her and H's hyper-vigilant and paranoiac behaviours, I actually think she rather enjoyed she could boss them (other Royal's off-spring) around, took 'the edge' of her own predicament.

You also have to wonder why the kids had to be quiet - since the crowd was practically deafening below. Perhaps she was really telling Brits to shut-up.


----------



## duna

elvisfan4life said:


> I will be in a care home dribbling



LOL, me too, if I'll still be here at all


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> Harry is allowed to have at least one friend. Here he is hugging Nacho after they won two weeks ago.
> 
> View attachment 5421507



This makes me laugh: one of my DDs went to a Polo match here in Rome, around the time H+M were expecting Archie, if I remember correctly, and TW still hadn't show her true self (she wasn't there, being heavily pregnant). Harry was in attendance as was Nacho. When my DD came back I asked her what she thought of Harry and she said "I didn't even notice him, I was much too concentrated on Nacho!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mr. Markle = Hazz


----------



## EverSoElusive

Ain't that the alleged truth?


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Ain't that the alleged truth?




Working him from the back as usual


----------



## egak

I just read an article that states that Prince Harry wants an apology from the Royal family and is apparently furious over the treatment he and the wife received over the Jubilee weekend. Mate, get a life.....you ain't receiving any apology!



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/furious-prince-harry-wants-apology-from-royals-over-rift-says-expert/news-story/bde35ee98b317e93ffd0e0fc352b5dc3


----------



## Sharont2305

egak said:


> I just read an article that states that Prince Harry wants an apology from the Royal family and is apparently furious over the treatment he and the wife received over the Jubilee weekend. Mate, get a life.....you ain't receiving any apology!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/furious-prince-harry-wants-apology-from-royals-over-rift-says-expert/news-story/bde35ee98b317e93ffd0e0fc352b5dc3


Apology from what? Tbf I thought they were treated well, lol. 
Meanwhile...and without an army of security, our future King, selling the Big Issue.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

egak said:


> I just read an article that states that Prince Harry wants an apology from the Royal family and is apparently furious over the treatment he and the wife received over the Jubilee weekend. Mate, get a life.....you ain't receiving any apology!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/furious-prince-harry-wants-apology-from-royals-over-rift-says-expert/news-story/bde35ee98b317e93ffd0e0fc352b5dc3


But... But... they were graciously low-key to allow HMTQ to have the spotlight


----------



## lulilu

^^^ I am not surprised that Harry is furious.  He has been furious since early childhood when he realized he wasn't going to be king.  How many photos are there of him pouting or acting out.  What a snide little sh1t.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Meghan was able to schmooze a free facial in exchange for permission for Sarah Chapman to post (advertise) about it.
> Her cream Dior ensemble and demure diamond jewelry stunned, as did her flawless, dewy complexion.
> "What a wonderful weekend celebrating 70 years of our inspiring Queen! Such incredible events and positive energy throughout the 4 days," Chapman wrote. "For me, it was great to catch up with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, to meet sweet little Lilibet and *treat Meghan to a facial to enhance her natural glow. *I always love seeing my clients and friends glowing at these fabulous events and I think she looked so graceful and radiant during the celebrations, along with many other familiar faces.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Got a Facial From Sarah Chapman for the Platinum Jubilee Weekend
> 
> 
> Chapman helped give Meghan some extra Markle sparkle during her trip to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


*I actually thought her skin/complexion looked fake as h3ll.  She looked really unattractive to me.  I am sure part of it had to do with the stupid grin she kept on her face though.  And the ill-fitting outfit she had on.  *



papertiger said:


> Good point. In a way what she did or swearing are the same thing and signals exasperated adult out of control. She made children, at the age you can reason with, look and feel like babies.
> Much better for kids (over toddler age) to hear _why_ they need to be quiet. A request simply put, repeated if needed, with an explanation as to why quiet is needed at a certain point educates the children. Next time they're in similar circumstances they will have learned to recognise a situation when quiet is preferred and will self-regulate.
> What M did was make her some kind of dramatic-mime into an authoritative figure among kids that can be seen by others in that role. Nothing to do with the children or their noise output. Dare I say it, with her and H's hyper-vigilant and paranoiac behaviours, I actually think she rather enjoyed she could boss them (other Royal's off-spring) around, took 'the edge' of her own predicament.
> You also have to wonder why the kids had to be quiet - since the crowd was practically deafening below. Perhaps she was really telling Brits to shut-up.


*I don't believe for one second that the children were being too loud.  The grossly exaggerated (and in M's case sickly sweet) shushing poses were meant for the photographer they assumed/arranged to take their photos.  Why else stick their faces in the window when it was the place for the children to view the action.  It was no coincidence that they both happened to make the same stupid shushing pose.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

egak said:


> I just read an article that states that Prince Harry wants an apology from the Royal family and is apparently furious over the treatment he and the wife received over the Jubilee weekend. Mate, get a life.....you ain't receiving any apology!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/furious-prince-harry-wants-apology-from-royals-over-rift-says-expert/news-story/bde35ee98b317e93ffd0e0fc352b5dc3



What is wrong with him. We know he's a bit weird and has always been, but he knows the inner workings of the BRF very well and he knows exactly he's basically a nobody at this point. He even mentioned it in an interview once William started having kids. So either his delusions are getting worse or someone has been in his ear. Possibly both combined.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulilu said:


> ^^^ I am not surprised that Harry is furious.  He has been furious since early childhood when he realized he wasn't going to be king.  How many photos are there of him pouting or acting out.  What a snide little sh1t.



I just don't understand why he'd WANT to be king. Maybe he doesn't understand that role too well.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't understand why he'd WANT to be king. Maybe he doesn't understand that role too well.


There was a story from when they were little boys when Harry told William that he, Harry, would be king instead of William (who expressed his reluctance).  And he was immensely jealous of the Queen having meetings with William over the years to explain his future.


----------



## Annawakes

He thinks being King means he gets to swan around in luxury, with every action received by thunderous applause and cheers.  So not smart.  He probably thinks the reason why things aren’t working out for them is because he ISN’T King.  “_if only I were the King!”  _
Can you imagine the delusions these two talk about when they’re alone?


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't understand why he'd WANT to be king. Maybe he doesn't understand that role too well.



Maybe he thought he could be King but also live in California and have fInAnCiAL iNdEpEnDeNcE.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> Brilliant, exactly as it happened.
> However, it wasn't one of "the Chatto men" with Mike, that was David, Earl of Snowdon.


Thank you once again for making things right. 

Proper credit needs to be given to all the family members who have rallied round the Queen. It demonstrates the  bonds that exist, a nephew, a grandson, and a grandson in law. These 3 men were clearly in sync and doing their “job”.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> In my view, people like the author of this article are the ones that promote division, discrimination, intolerance, and racism. She doesn't question the Harkles use of titles from an institution that she calls racist. She ignores that QE has several other grandkids that were not on the balcony. She criticizes the Harkles being seated behind senior royals, but ignores that they were on the 2nd row with other family members and had hundreds of people behind them. Would she expect to have them seated with the Archbishop? Are the Harkles more important than the people behind them? She doesn't question the use of private jets when they preach to others about carbon footprints. She doesn't question how they are getting all the multi-million dollar deals without credentials, while many people with a lot more qualifications are having a hard time getting decent jobs. It's sad that nowadays many people are silent because of being afraid to be called racists.


A great tragedy of our time is that labels like racism are used indiscriminately and thus become easy and lazy  explanations—often invalid—for complicated situations. This is the “literary” version of a sound byte.  But damn they are effective.


----------



## Chanbal

All this is very suspicious. We already have the confirmation from NS that senior royals never saw Lilib in person (and in photo only via the one released to the public), and QE? Did QE meet Lilib? If the post below is accurate, so why did they allegedly ask to meet QE on the first day? I believe that QE's sickness that prevented her from attending the Thanksgiving Service was aggravated by the Harkles. Who are TW & Hazz? Who is supporting them and why? We need Tom Bower on the case ASAP!



Edit: Adding another very intriguing post on the same issue. What is the true story?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *What is wrong with him.* We know he's a bit weird and has always been, but he knows the inner workings of the BRF very well and he knows exactly he's basically a nobody at this point. He even mentioned it in an interview once William started having kids. So either his delusions are getting worse or someone has been in his ear. Possibly both combined.


The deck of cards is ready. Victims?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


Tells us more about Nina Sharma than anything else.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chanbal said:


> All this is very suspicious. We already have the confirmation from NS that senior royals never saw Lilib in person (and in photo via the one released to the public), and QE? Did QE meet Lilib? If the post below is accurate, so why did they allegedly ask to meet QE on the first day? I believe that QE's sickness that prevented her to attend the Thanksgiving Service was aggravated by the Harkles. Who are TW & Hazz? Who is supporting them and why? We need Tom Bower on the case ASAP?




I disagree with the assertion that the kids would have been pushed in front of the camera at every chance.  Meghan and Harry have grabbed attention by refusing to show their kids when people want to see them. When that is the normal behavior, why would they suddenly change that?  
I think what fits as a more likely story given past behavior is that if the Palace truly did refuse the opportunity for a picture of the Queen with Lilibet, I could see them floating stories that the kids were not actually there with hopes that the Palace would then release a photo to prove they were there.  I don't think the Palace would actually take the bait, but I could see H&M hoping for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Prince Harry claims he was wrongly painted as a “lying spinning manipulator” in news reports about his High Court battle with the Home Office over security. 
The Duke of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publisher of the Mail on jSunday, after the paper ran a story following a hearing in the Duke’s separate High Court claim over his security arrangements when he is in the UK._


----------



## bag-mania

Happyish said:


> Agreed. This is just appalling.
> Evidently, it never occurred to the writer that Meghan and Harry got the cold shoulder because of bad behavior. No, it could only have been _Racism_.
> In other words, according to this author, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and acts like a duck, guess what? It's not a duck, it must be Racist! What other conclusion is at all possible?
> Just Absurd. And this writer is published!!



Since this author has devoted her entire career to racism she cannot/will not see anything else. I’m sorry, I guess I should have said Racism since she capitalized every instance of the word in her editorial the way others might capitalize the word God. That says it all.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Um sweetie she took a private jet to Texas to remind an aid worker at the scene of a brutal massacre of the importance of critical reading of news about her. If that’s not a selfless gesture what is?



Let’s not forget she brought some bags of Fritos!


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> Thank you once again for making things right.
> 
> Proper credit needs to be given to all the family members who have rallied round the Queen. It demonstrates the  bonds that exist, a nephew, a grandson, and a grandson in law. These 3 men were clearly in sync and doing their “job”.



H wanted to make sure the ‘right people’ were around the queen, protecting her. Guess what Harry, they were.


----------



## Chanbal

LibbyRuth said:


> I disagree with the assertion that the kids would have been pushed in front of the camera at every chance.  Meghan and Harry have grabbed attention by refusing to show their kids when people want to see them. When that is the normal behavior, why would they suddenly change that?
> I think what fits as a more likely story given past behavior is that if the Palace truly did refuse the opportunity for a picture of the Queen with Lilibet, I could see them floating stories that the kids were not actually there with hopes that the Palace would then release a photo to prove they were there.  I don't think the Palace would actually take the bait, but I could see H&M hoping for it.


I just added another twitter post to my previous post that supports the claims that QE didn't meet the Harkles' kids. At this point, I don't know what to think.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


>




That post is from the photographer so maybe he’s trying to boost his image to get more gigs. It’s understandable if he’s trying to promote himself. Still don’t understand why he prefers black and white images. The Invictus Games had lots of color around them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> That post is from the photographer so maybe he’s trying to boost his image to get more gigs. It’s understandable if he’s trying to promote himself. Still don’t understand why he prefers black and white images. The Invictus Games had lots of color around them.



Some of the commenters are asking why he released these today since Invictus was weeks ago. Is it because of trial or is it because of William’s volunteer day? Is it because Hazz lost the logo lawsuit?
Highly manipulative, indeed, imo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> All this is very suspicious. We already have the confirmation from NS that senior royals never saw Lilib in person (and in photo only via the one released to the public), and QE? Did QE meet Lilib? If the post below is accurate, so why did they allegedly ask to meet QE on the first day? I believe that QE's sickness that prevented her from attending the Thanksgiving Service was aggravated by the Harkles. Who are TW & Hazz? Who is supporting them and why? We need Tom Bower on the case ASAP!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Adding another very intriguing post on the same issue. What is the true story?





Maybe the kids and nanny flew commercial!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of the commenters are asking why did he release these today? Is it because of trial or is it because of William’s volunteer day?
> Highly manipulative, indeed, imo.



He’s trying to help them out and also he’s on the payroll. He may even consider himself to be their friend. And why not? After all, he was one of the only attendees at Lili’s party!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> There was ..... wait, I'm still thinking.


the sandwiches?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> the sandwiches?



But she didn’t bring enough for everyone. That’s the kind of breach in protocol you learn about in kindergarten.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> All this is very suspicious. We already have the confirmation from NS that senior royals never saw Lilib in person (and in photo only via the one released to the public), and QE? Did QE meet Lilib? If the post below is accurate, so why did they allegedly ask to meet QE on the first day? I believe that QE's sickness that prevented her from attending the Thanksgiving Service was aggravated by the Harkles. Who are TW & Hazz? Who is supporting them and why? We need Tom Bower on the case ASAP!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Adding another very intriguing post on the same issue. What is the true story?



If this is true, a simple statement from BP, “Although it has not yet taken place, The Queen continues to look forward to someday meeting her great granddaughter and to being re introduced to her great grandson.”

BOOM!  Suckesses scramble for cover and Sunshine Sucks goes into overdrive.

Or, the whole thing could be a set up.  Such as, conflicting stories are leaked in hopes BP would release a private photo to affirm a meeting had happened.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of the commenters are asking why he released these today since Invictus was weeks ago. Is it because of trial or is it because of *William’s volunteer day*? Is it because Hazz lost the logo lawsuit?
> Highly manipulative, indeed, imo.


Here is DM article on it.








						Prince William goes undercover as a Big Issue in Westminster
					

The Duke of Cambridge, 39, donned a red seller's vest and hat before standing in Rochester Row, Westminster, to quietly sell the magazine.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> But she didn’t bring enough for everyone. That’s the kind of breach in protocol you learn about in kindergarten.


well some woman in Texas thought she was wonderful for buying them food.  guess some people are easily impressed or charmed


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Um sweetie she took a private jet to Texas to remind an aid worker at the scene of a brutal massacre of the importance of critical reading of news about her. If that’s not a selfless gesture what is?


and she bought some people their lunch!
I'll bet she's jealous of Matthew McConaughey right now


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

From all I’ve read and seen, it does seem that they didn’t bring the invisible kids. Who would fly private and not have the whole entourage with them?  Blurry Photos posted show a wrapped up possibly high chair being unloaded from the plane, yet none of children or nannies.  If photographers were waiting in the bushes, those photos would exist and be posted, even if the photographers had to blur out the faces of the kids.  I am not sure the photo of lil on the grass was even taken in the UK.  I read it had been raining and the grass was all wet.  Would you sit your one year old on wet soggy grass just for a photo?  Oh, I just had a thought. Maybe we don’t see Lil’s legs because she’s sitting on a waterproof pad and that would be ugly in a photo.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well some woman in Texas thought she was wonderful for buying them food.  guess some people are easily impressed or charmed



People in the south typically have very good manners. They aren’t going to bash her for doing something thoughtful. And we know a lot of thought goes into Meghan’s self-promotion.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> From all I’ve read and seen, it does seem that they didn’t bring the invisible kids. Who would fly private and not have the whole entourage with them?  Blurry Photos posted show a wrapped up possibly high chair being unloaded from the plane, yet none of children or nannies.  If photographers were waiting in the bushes, those photos would exist and be posted, even if the photographers had to blur out the faces of the kids.  I am not sure the photo of lil on the grass was even taken in the UK.  I read it had been raining and the grass was all wet.  Would you sit your one year old on wet soggy grass just for a photo?  Oh, I just had a thought. Maybe we don’t see Lil’s legs because she’s sitting on a waterproof pad and that would be ugly in a photo.



Not bringing the kids would be the biggest conspiracy of all. Frankly, I can’t buy that one and I’m usually open to them. Now maybe Archie didn’t come, we didn’t get even a hint of his presence. But they claimed that Lili met with the Queen and that could be easily disputed by the palace if it didn’t happen.


----------



## Gal4Dior

sdkitty said:


> and she bought some people their lunch!
> I'll bet she's jealous of Matthew McConaughey right now


You know, she really should have done thoughtful notes with a sharpie on banana - instead. That always seems to go over well.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Not bringing the kids would be the biggest conspiracy of all. Frankly, I can’t buy that one and I’m usually open to them. Now maybe Archie didn’t come, we didn’t get even a hint of his presence. But they claimed that Lili met with the Queen and that could be easily disputed by the palace if it didn’t happen.


They are so untrustworthy that I've stopped trying to figure out what is going on in their noggins or their plastic pal's mind. Didn't they also claim that TQ has met Invisibet through zoom calls?


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724



You gotta effing be kidding me.  The New Yorker is one of the many shills for Wokism and will go to any desperate lying length to use "racism" for virtually anything. They could "find" racism in a blade of grass.  I used to subscribe to the New Yorker a while back. Last year I attempted taking them up on a steep discount subscription offer and immediately after my credit card was fraudulently used and I cancelled the card. This happened TWICE with trying to subscribe to the New Yorker going directly through THEM. They do have some things I like reading about and was willing to throw twenty bucks at a subscription promotion. Not any more. Nope.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Not bringing the kids would be the biggest conspiracy of all. Frankly, I can’t buy that one and I’m usually open to them. Now maybe Archie didn’t come, we didn’t get even a hint of his presence. But they claimed that Lili met with the Queen and that could be easily disputed by the palace if it didn’t happen.


but the palace doesn't talk about stuff much....they stay above the fray I think
Doesn't make sense for them to leave Archie home 
Who knows with these two.  they're not what I'd call normal people


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The deck of cards is ready. Victims?




I'd like to add an empathetic and sensitive "yeah, whatever" to the comments.




If you're going to play games with the media you better learn the rules of the game and who's got the power.


----------



## Sophisticatted

TW is the kind of person who might insist one kid stay home.  She wants to make sure Harry can’t change his mind about her and Megxit.  She was probably afraid Harry would keep himself and the kids in England if given the chance.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> From all I’ve read and seen, it does seem that they didn’t bring the invisible kids. Who would fly private and not have the whole entourage with them?  Blurry Photos posted show a wrapped up possibly high chair being unloaded from the plane, yet none of children or nannies.  If photographers were waiting in the bushes, those photos would exist and be posted, even if the photographers had to blur out the faces of the kids.  I am not sure the photo of lil on the grass was even taken in the UK.  I read it had been raining and the grass was all wet.  Would you sit your one year old on wet soggy grass just for a photo?  Oh, I just had a thought. Maybe we don’t see Lil’s legs because she’s sitting on a waterproof pad and that would be ugly in a photo.



More likely the high-chair was a gift they had to transport home to where the kids are (if there are any).


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> The deck of cards is ready. Victims?



Or maybe...


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I'd like to add an empathetic and sensitive "yeah, whatever" to the comments.
> 
> View attachment 5421950
> 
> 
> If you're going to play games with the media you better learn the rules of the game and who's got the power.
> 
> View attachment 5421953


IDK who this guy is but that shouldn't have been a surprise...is he their mouthpiece?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> People doesn't have any readers and is going to shut up shop. so the message won't get out .  Tough luck!


magazines and newspapers in general are hurting


----------



## Happyish

jelliedfeels said:


> Um sweetie she took a private jet to Texas to remind an aid worker at the scene of a brutal massacre of the importance of critical reading of news about her. If that’s not a selfless gesture what is?


Where are they getting all this money for private jets? Even if you're a member of a club, these cost a fortune. With the termination of contracts, their failure to perform and waning popularity, they have to know the well is going to run dry. The carbon footprint is one thing, but flouting a lifestyle of the rich and famous, when they're not really the former and the later is more like infamous, is perplexing. They've gone from actual to wannabes.


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> Where are they getting all this money for private jets? Even if you're a member of a club, these cost a fortune. With the termination of contracts, their failure to perform and waning popularity, they have to know the well is going to run dry. The carbon footprint is one thing, but flouting a lifestyle of the rich and famous, when they're not really the former and the later is more like infamous, is perplexing. They've gone from actual to wannabes.


good question
do they still have friends like Elton who would loan them a jet?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

High chair thoughts:  have there ever been any photos of RF babies in high chairs?  Maybe they took the chair from the premises for a future photo shoot (where they recreate missing timeline evidence) and/or they bought a matching one for the same reason.  Perhaps they even wanted to be seen with one at the airport to raise these speculations (any publicity is good publicity) and will feature a future instagram post Lilibet eating a regular meal hoping that people will think it’s a “Royal Highchair” and they can merch it that way.

I would think that stealing is doubtful due to security but apparently she wasn’t supposed to take the earrings with her and she did.  Also, it could be one Eugenie left behind.  They could be in cahoots with her.  I find it odd that she suddenly let her baby’s face be seen and I also find her husband’s job change and move to Portugal interesting as well.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> *High chair thoughts:  have there ever been any photos of RF babies in high chairs?  Maybe they took the chair from the premises for a future photo shoot (where they recreate missing timeline evidence) and/or they bought a matching one for the same reason.  *Perhaps they even wanted to be seen with one at the airport to raise these speculations (any publicity is good publicity) and will feature a future instagram post Lilibet eating a regular meal hoping that people will think it’s a “Royal Highchair” and they can merch it that way.
> 
> I would think that stealing is doubtful due to security but apparently she wasn’t supposed to take the earrings with her and she did.  Also, it could be one Eugenie left behind.  They could be in cahoots with her.  I find it odd that she suddenly let her baby’s face be seen and I also find her husband’s job change and move to Portugal interesting as well.






Not the same chairs:

1927 Elizabeth of York, one day to be Queen Elizabeth II (aged 14 months)




1902, Elizabeth (one day to be the) Queen Mother




(Don't know why Getty think they own this image, they don't)


----------



## SBLady

sdkitty said:


> good question
> do they still have friends like Elton who would loan them a jet?


Oprah has a jet.


----------



## bag-mania

Happyish said:


> Where are they getting all this money for private jets? Even if you're a member of a club, these cost a fortune. With the termination of contracts, their failure to perform and waning popularity, they have to know the well is going to run dry. The carbon footprint is one thing, but flouting a lifestyle of the rich and famous, when they're not really the former and the later is more like infamous, is perplexing. They've gone from actual to wannabes.



It’s amazing how much is given to famous people. Since it’s H&M I’ll assume they worked out a deal. Maybe they’ll mention the airline in their “podcast.”


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with him. We know he's a bit weird and has always been, but he knows the inner workings of the BRF very well and he knows exactly he's basically a nobody at this point. He even mentioned it in an interview once William started having kids. So either his delusions are getting worse or someone has been in his ear. Possibly both combined.


It has to do with accepting responsibility. He doesn't recognize his role in creating the situation of which he now complains. It's everyone else's fault but his.

As much as I deplore Meagan's grandstanding and self-promotion, the poor relationship Harry has with his family is primarily _Harry's_ fault. This is _his_ family. He wasn't there for his grandfather's Memorial service. He walked out on his grandmother's Jubilee. Then there's the divorce from the Royal Family, and the public-tell-all's. These are abominable faux-pas, ones that will never be forgotten or forgiven.

All Harry had to do was say was, "no." No Oprah. No publicity. No book. And with or without you, I'm going to see my family. I'm going to the Memorial. I going to attend the Jubilee--all of it. You don't like it, you can go home/stay at Frogmore.

Of course there was the booing, and he felt humiliated. But he ran away with his tail between his legs. If he had a different character, he would have tolerated it. Perhaps he would have issued a statement about attracting unnecessary negativity to his Grandmother's jubilee, and saying the Jubilee was about her, not about him. In any event, silent or otherwise, he should have withstood it. This wasn't about him. It was about his Grandmother. This was also about family. _His_ family. The RF held out the olive branch to him. He just couldn't see it. He chose one family over another, when he could have had both.

Whatever Megan's role, this is Harry's fault. It is Harry who renounced his family. It is Harry who has allowed this to happen.
He knew Meagan for little over? less than? a year before they were engaged. So we have a 38-year old man, who spent 38-years in the bubble of a family that adored and cherished him, and indulged his every whim, albeit that suppressed and suffocated him, and he renounced it all, for a woman he knew for approximately a year? 

How does that happen?
How does someone with so brief a connection have such an overwhelming influence as to cause someone to sever all ties?
That's what I don't understand . . .


----------



## Roxanna

It just crossed my mind,  considering all questions about TW being slightly differently looking  and baby girl looking very much  like her brother...what if its a pic of Archie?  If I remember correctly    TW while renovating cottage made a point that she  wanted to  raise her child  gender fluid thus the trendy neutral colour scheme was used. So,  who knows...


----------



## Happyish

SBLady said:


> Oprah has a jet.


I don't think they're on friendly terms anymore.


----------



## jelliedfeels

[


CarryOn2020 said:


> _Prince Harry claims he was wrongly painted as a “lying spinning manipulator” in news reports about his High Court battle with the Home Office over security.
> The Duke of Sussex is suing Associated Newspapers Limited (ANL), publisher of the Mail on jSunday, after the paper ran a story following a hearing in the Duke’s separate High Court claim over his security arrangements when he is in the UK._



I mean realistically there’s no one to root for but at the same time but I do love the idea of the DM’s defence being:-




bag-mania said:


> That post is from the photographer so maybe he’s trying to boost his image to get more gigs. It’s understandable if he’s trying to promote himself. Still don’t understand why he prefers black and white images. The Invictus Games had lots of color around them.


It’s very hard to colour match ginger when they fill in the bald spots. This way they can just do a light airbrush over the general area in black and white  

It’s also narratively fitting, no,  that he sees the world in black and white no longer full colour.

Also does this photo guy just follow him around? That’d make it easier to stage photos at home with Wifey and tag it as somewhere else.


----------



## papertiger

SBLady said:


> Oprah has a jet.



Yer?

I have it on good authority from a reindeer of a friend, H&M sent her an email requesting

and...

Oprah sent back an OOO auto response

See we can all make up stories  at least mine are more believable than H&M's


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> That post is from the photographer so maybe he’s trying to boost his image to get more gigs. It’s understandable if he’s trying to promote himself. Still don’t understand why he prefers black and white images. The Invictus Games had lots of color around them.


Maybe it’s how he sees the world. Black and/or White.

edit: @jelliedfeels i didn’t see your post before I wrote mine


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> It has to do with accepting responsibility. He doesn't recognize his role in creating the situation of which he now complains. It's everyone else's fault but his.
> 
> As much as I deplore Meagan's grandstanding and self-promotion, the poor relationship Harry has with his family is primarily _Harry's_ fault. This is _his_ family. He wasn't there for his grandfather's Memorial service. He walked out on his grandmother's Jubilee. Then there's the divorce from the Royal Family, and the public-tell-all's. These are abominable faux-pas, ones that will never be forgotten or forgiven.
> 
> All Harry had to do was say was, "no." No Oprah. No publicity. No book. And with or without you, I'm going to see my family. I'm going to the Memorial. I going to attend the Jubilee--all of it. You don't like it, you can go home/stay at Frogmore.
> 
> Of course there was the booing, and he felt humiliated. But he ran away with his tail between his legs. If he had a different character, he would have tolerated it. Perhaps he would have issued a statement about attracting unnecessary negativity to his Grandmother's jubilee, and saying the Jubilee was about her, not about him. In any event, silent or otherwise, he should have withstood it. This wasn't about him. It was about his Grandmother. This was also about family. _His_ family. The RF held out the olive branch to him. He just couldn't see it. He chose one family over another, when he could have had both.
> 
> Whatever Megan's role, this is Harry's fault. It is Harry who renounced his family. It is Harry who has allowed this to happen.
> He knew Meagan for little over? less than? a year before they were engaged. So we have a 38-year old man, who spent 38-years in the bubble of a family that adored and cherished him, and indulged his every whim, albeit that suppressed and suffocated him, and he renounced it all, for a woman he knew for approximately a year?
> 
> How does that happen?
> How does someone with so brief a connection have such an overwhelming influence as to cause someone to sever all ties?
> That's what I don't understand . . .


not making excuses for him but I don't think he is that strong and I think his emotional development is stunted....he is a nasty, temperamental man-boy (IMO of course)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Not bringing the kids would be the biggest conspiracy of all. Frankly, I can’t buy that one and I’m usually open to them. Now maybe Archie didn’t come, we didn’t get even a hint of his presence. But they claimed that Lili met with the Queen and that could be easily disputed by the palace if it didn’t happen.



Yes, only that the palace usually doesn't engage. I think their one-off "Recollections may vary" was as far as they were willing to go.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Or maybe...
> View attachment 5421959


Andersen just revealed himself to be a fraud as a royal expert. A true royal expert kept up and knew that only senior working royals woukd be on the balcony


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Roxanna said:


> It just crossed my mind,  considering all questions about TW being slightly differently looking  and baby girl looking very much  like her brother...what if its a pic of Archie?  If I remember correctly    TW while renovating cottage made a point that she  wanted to  raise her child  gender fluid thus the trendy neutral colour scheme was used. So,  who knows...



I don't think they look that much alike, and Archie has darker hair and brown eyes.


----------



## gracekelly

For the last two days Ihave have been  private jets flying over my house.  There is a big meeting in LA and everyone is flying In and out from multiple countries. The point is that there are a gazillion  private jets out there and many people who would lend them a plane. Nacho may have arranged a Netjet for them.  I doubt they spent a penny.

I am currently of the opinion that Archie was with them. If Lili met TQ, why not Archie as well?  No reports about him at all and no BD party pix.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

The RF did say they would start refuting Sussex untruths, BUT I don’t seethem caring about this one. A comment gives the Duo too much attention, and it really doesn’t matter in the end.  Slanderous claims in the Oprah interview matter, an imaginary friend meetup doesn’t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> How does that happen?
> How does someone with so brief a connection have such an overwhelming influence as to cause someone to sever all ties?
> That's what I don't understand . . .



I don't get it either, but also: I have never seen a grown man pushed and pulled around in public, directed by carefully placed hands like he is. Be it drugs, voodoo or some kind of expert psychological tactics, this is not normal, this is not healthy, and I do believe she is rotten to the core and sinister.

But also, the one thing I'll hold against him forever is how he treated his dying grandfather. And I hope it haunts him.


----------



## Happyish

csshopper said:


> If this is true, a simple statement from BP, “Although it has not yet taken place, The Queen continues to look forward to someday meeting her great granddaughter and to being re introduced to her great grandson.”
> 
> BOOM!  Suckesses scramble for cover and Sunshine Sucks goes into overdrive.
> 
> Or, the whole thing could be a set up.  Such as, conflicting stories are leaked in hopes BP would release a private photo to affirm a meeting had happened.


Frankly, all this maneuvering is exhausting and I can see where the Queen would not be forthcoming with any statement. She can't be bothered. Lest that sound callous, let me explain.

The Queen has lost a lot of weight. She is in poor health. The reference to mobility problems is so generic as to mean nothing. We don't know what's going on, but this is coded-language for the fact it isn't good.

Towards the end of days, people lose weight (even though they may be eating are are ostensibly healthy), sleep longer and during periods of wakefulness are still exhausted. This is the process of the body shutting down. It can start many, many months before the actual event. Too recently, I went through all this with a dying relative. Even the need to get dressed was exhausting. Little things let alone the big things were overwhelming. More and more was delegated or avoided. It wasn't that my relative wasn't interested or didn't care; she didn't have the impetus to respond. My fear is that this is what's happening to the Queen. She's lost a lot of weight and to the extent she's able, she only makes brief appearances.

The failure to see Lililibet, or only briefly, viewed in this lens, is understandable for a couple of reasons.

The Queen has done everything she could for Harry and Megan and lacks the strength and energy to respond further.  Harry has made his own life. He's no longer present and Lillibet is a stranger she'll never get to know. Harry's needs are a distant priority  beyond her physical and emotional capacity. The Queen is fighting for her life, but is dying nevertheless.

So I see the Queen's rebuffs as a function of her lack of strength or energy. What's done is done and the rest is for Charles and William to deal with.

This is a transitional period. If Harry can't or won't mend fences with his grandmother now, he'll live with that guilt forever.

The Jubilee was as much as a celebration saying, Thank you as it was Goodbye. If Harry couldn't see that, shame on him.


----------



## Happyish

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve been wondering whether this is just me being nuts but I have always hated people doing the shushing gesture ever since I was a kid. For some reason I’d rather someone shouted ‘shut the f up!’ than made that particular gesture. It just grinds my gears. So images of the gruesome twosome doing it at a public paid party is sort of my ultimate kryptonite


And what gives them the right to discipline other parents' kids? 
Those children were not left alone--nannies and family were present.


----------



## papertiger

Happyish said:


> Frankly, all this maneuvering is exhausting and I can see where the Queen would not be forthcoming with any statement. She can't be bothered. Lest that sound callous, let me explain.
> 
> The Queen has lost a lot of weight. She is in poor health. The reference to mobility problems is so generic as to mean nothing. We don't know what's going on, but this is coded-language for the fact it isn't good.
> 
> Towards the end of days, people lose weight (even though they may be eating are are ostensibly healthy), sleep longer and during periods of wakefulness are still exhausted. This is the process of the body shutting down. It can start many, many months before the actual event. Too recently, I went through all this with a dying relative. Even the need to get dressed was exhausting. Little things let alone the big things were overwhelming. More and more was delegated or avoided. It wasn't that my relative wasn't interested, she just didn't care; she didn't have the impetus to respond. My fear is that this is what's happening to the Queen. She's lost a lot of weight and to the extent she's able, she only makes brief appearances.
> 
> The failure to see Lililibet, or only briefly, viewed in this lens, is understandable for a couple of reasons.
> 
> The Queen has done everything she could for Harry and Megan and lacks the strength and energy to respond further.  Harry has made his own life. He's no longer present and Lillibet is a stranger she'll never get to know. Harry's needs are a distant priority  beyond her physical and emotional capacity. The Queen is fighting for her life, but is dying nevertheless.
> 
> So I see the Queen's rebuffs as a function of her lack of strength or energy. What's done is done and the rest is for Charles and William to deal with.
> 
> This is a transitional period. If Harry can't or won't mend fences with his grandmother now, he'll live with that guilt forever.
> 
> The Jubilee was as much as a celebration saying, Thank you as it was Goodbye. If Harry couldn't see that, shame on him.



_If_ they brought either kid (and I for one doubt it because they were probably told NO before they came).I expect she (great-grandmother) was also informed of facts, and wonders why they've travelled half-way round the world for a photo-op before 'it's too late' yet haven't taken the kids to see their grandfather on the other side of the pond (Mr. TM) when he only lives 3 hours drive away. She maybe ill and less mobile, but she's not stupid. No one likes to look like a mug, let alone the Queen.


----------



## csshopper

Disdain is spreading. A friend visiting family in Montecito texted there was friendly betting going on over glasses of wine last night whether or not Hazbeen saddles up for Polo post Jubilee, or “stays home to suck his thumb”. Jokes are he rides a horse because he can be in charge in the saddle and it keeps him out of reach of TW. 

Lingering comments about TW’s breach of etiquette with the polo trophy a few weeks ago. She’s a “pushy beech”. And being wired at St Paul’s raised a lot of hackles. Most Montecitans genuinely want privacy and thought their attempted invasion of it with the RF was disgraceful.


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> And what gives them the right to discipline other parents' kids?
> Those children were not left alone--nannies and family were present.


I think that shushing thing was just a "cute" photo op


----------



## csshopper

Happyish said:


> Frankly, all this maneuvering is exhausting and I can see where the Queen would not be forthcoming with any statement. She can't be bothered. Lest that sound callous, let me explain.
> 
> The Queen has lost a lot of weight. She is in poor health. The reference to mobility problems is so generic as to mean nothing. We don't know what's going on, but this is coded-language for the fact it isn't good.
> 
> Towards the end of days, people lose weight (even though they may be eating are are ostensibly healthy), sleep longer and during periods of wakefulness are still exhausted. This is the process of the body shutting down. It can start many, many months before the actual event. Too recently, I went through all this with a dying relative. Even the need to get dressed was exhausting. Little things let alone the big things were overwhelming. More and more was delegated or avoided. It wasn't that my relative wasn't interested or didn't care; she didn't have the impetus to respond. My fear is that this is what's happening to the Queen. She's lost a lot of weight and to the extent she's able, she only makes brief appearances.
> 
> The failure to see Lililibet, or only briefly, viewed in this lens, is understandable for a couple of reasons.
> 
> The Queen has done everything she could for Harry and Megan and lacks the strength and energy to respond further.  Harry has made his own life. He's no longer present and Lillibet is a stranger she'll never get to know. Harry's needs are a distant priority  beyond her physical and emotional capacity. The Queen is fighting for her life, but is dying nevertheless.
> 
> So I see the Queen's rebuffs as a function of her lack of strength or energy. What's done is done and the rest is for Charles and William to deal with.
> 
> This is a transitional period. If Harry can't or won't mend fences with his grandmother now, he'll live with that guilt forever.
> 
> The Jubilee was as much as a celebration saying, Thank you as it was Goodbye. If Harry couldn't see that, shame on him.


Eloquently stated!

I was riffing on the ”recollections may vary” statement post Oprah, what you have written makes the most sense.


----------



## lulu212121

csshopper said:


> Disdain is spreading. A friend visiting family in Montecito texted there was friendly betting going on over glasses of wine last night whether or not Hazbeen saddles up for Polo post Jubilee, or “stays home to suck his thumb”. Jokes are he rides a horse because he can be in charge in the saddle and it keeps him out of reach of TW.
> 
> Lingering comments about TW’s breach of etiquette with the polo trophy a few weeks ago. She’s a “pushy beech”. And being wired at St Paul’s raised a lot of hackles. Most Montecitans genuinely want privacy and thought their attempted invasion of it with the RF was disgraceful.


It will be interesting to see if he shows up for any more polo matches. I was thinking that was strange to all of the sudden have these pictures of him playing polo when he doesn't have a horse. Now I think he was hoping to be invited to ride with the other family members. He was showing he can still ride. 

If the children exist  I was thinking they wouldn't take them because, weren't they fearful of the kids being taken from them and that's why they left in the cover of darkness to Canada? I don't think the Royal Family will address the kids. They can't really refute because they probably don't really know either. Better to just go along. If it's all fake, it will come out soon enough.


----------



## Chanbal

The tough question of the day: would you considered this "Entertainment" or "Art"? 










						Prince Harry libel claim against Mail on Sunday has High Court hearing
					

The Duke of Sussex says the Mail on Sunday caused "distress" after accusing him of having "lied".



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Chanbal

NYP chose an interesting title for the article on the alleged apology request.












						‘Self-destructive’ Prince Harry wants apology for being ignored: royal expert
					

“The thing that really stood out for me on that day was Harry’s anger — he wears his emotions on his face and he looked absolutely furious,” royal analyst Angela Levin says.




					nypost.com


----------



## CeeJay

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


We’ll, obviously, this woman is a certifiable IDIOT!!!!  I just knew that the Harkles would play this card; how PATHETIC!  Harry needs to GROW the F up and grow a set, whereas Megalomaniac should employ more of her “international studies” education and learn to respect the customs of the BRF (but she won’t because .. you know, she’s so much smarter .. so HER ways are always correct)!


----------



## CarryOn2020

How to wear a mike - own it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, she will crush ya with 1 look - just 1 look - the Sophie Stare


----------



## bellecate

Can anyone tell if this is the old ring?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> That crossed my mind and I also wondered if Eugenie and her husband's move to Portugal would invalidate her from becoming a counsellor, leaving the door open for Edward although I wish it were Anne. It really ticks me off that they didn't go all the way back to Anne when they changed the law to equal primogeniture as she would then move ahead of Andrew and Edward, but IMO they didn't want to hurt those poor wee widdle boys' feelings by demoting them behind Anne. You see, I'm very biased as Anne is one of my favourite royals along with HM and Camilla.


Her children would also be better than Bea and Eugenie, IMO!


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think they look that much alike, and Archie has darker hair and brown eyes.



What color is Lilibet’s eyes?


----------



## rose60610

The amount of things Meghan had been given by the BRF is mind boggling. And Harry? Please. Compare Meghan to Wendi Deng, for example. They both went after famous rich men in a conniving way, but at least Deng didn't cast herself as a victim and made a huge go of her life after billionaire Murdock. She was smart enough to leverage the relationships she built as a result of that marriage into huge business ventures. Meghan on the other hand, burned every bridge imaginable. Who'd want to do any business with her? She's toxic. Even Disney doesn't have any more narration projects lined up for her. Netflix? Ha! Where's the content? Deng lined up her daughters to inherit billions. After Meghan drains Harry dry what is there going to be for her kids? For somebody who once had the world at her fingertips, she should go into the Guiness Book of Records for biggest life screwup.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724


When all else fails, it’s “RACISM”.  Obviously, since it’s written by Markle bot Nina Sharma.



jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe it doesn’t. I might be being too harsh on MM because I’m biased against her at this point, but I would say that she has made quite a dramatic change in appearance which looks suspicious when coupled with the accusations she used about looking ‘too dark’ and this could be seen as an attempt to win empathy from darker skinned women who feel marginalised.
> 
> In your case wouldn’t say so because tanning is a natural way a person’s skin colour can change ans you aren’t making any claims of anything. It’s the claims that do it - one wouldn’t assume a tanned Greek or Thai person was trying to look biracial or black just because they have that complexion.
> 
> But yes maybe I am being too harsh on M saying she is black fishing. I think she might be cynically exploiting others’ misery for her own gains, though, but what’s new?
> 
> Add on - thinking about it, U think there must be a term for this besides black fishing. I mean how would one describe what Steven Seagal is doing when he claims to be every ethnicity under the sun at one point or another?


I’m sorry if you misunderstood!  I don’t think you’re being too harsh at all and I’m here for it!!    I’m showing my age and don’t know all these new terms. I’m having to go to Urban Dictionary quite a bit, and I’m terrified they’ll do a search of my computer history and wonder WTF I’m looking up things like waffle, crocodile and lavender marriage  



jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve been wondering whether this is just me being nuts but I have always hated people doing the shushing gesture ever since I was a kid. For some reason I’d rather someone shouted ‘shut the f up!’ than made that particular gesture. It just grinds my gears. So images of the gruesome twosome doing it at a public paid party is sort of my ultimate kryptonite


It is a very condescending gesture.  I’d love to take those fingers and shove them up their you know whats!



CarryOn2020 said:


> Mr. Markle = Hazz



Wait…is he being accused of “Misinformation”??  One of their pet peeves?!!?  



Sharont2305 said:


> Apology from what? Tbf I thought they were treated well, lol.
> Meanwhile...and without an army of security, our future King, selling the Big Issue.
> View attachment 5421838
> View attachment 5421839
> View attachment 5421840


Haz: “We Royals don’t carry cash”
William: “But we do carry ATM cards!”


----------



## Chanbal

Arch*e and Paddington?  Oh, it's little Louis.


----------



## lulilu

I cancelled my NYer subscription.  I am done with them.
When was the engagement ring remade?


----------



## csshopper

The Montecito Journal Newspaper is a free weekly newspaper also available, free, on line.

Returning from the Jubilee if the Harkles read it, they will find articles in this week's edition that don't appear to be under the influence of Sunshine Sucks: Harry's Invictus Games Logo loss and a brief recap of their Jubilee experience, not warm and not fuzzy. Prior edition had an item about Netflix getting their "pound of flesh" from the  Kardashian-style show being filmed at their Riven Rock mansion. New information, it's described as including "interview shots." Hmmm, microphones at St. Paul's???


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> From all I’ve read and seen, it does seem that they didn’t bring the invisible kids. Who would fly private and not have the whole entourage with them?  Blurry Photos posted show a wrapped up possibly high chair being unloaded from the plane, yet none of children or nannies.  If photographers were waiting in the bushes, those photos would exist and be posted, even if the photographers had to blur out the faces of the kids.  I am not sure the photo of lil on the grass was even taken in the UK.  I read it had been raining and the grass was all wet.  Would you sit your one year old on wet soggy grass just for a photo?  Oh, I just had a thought. Maybe we don’t see Lil’s legs because she’s sitting on a waterproof pad and that would be ugly in a photo.


Those are my thoughts exactly!  The photographers were all there and got the pics of swings and scooters (probably gifts), but no pics of children.  Even if they were trying to hide their faces with blankets, the pics would be there.  It just doesn't make sense.  Archie was certainly old enough to be at the window with his mother to watch the celebrations, but she was there with other kids instead


----------



## Sharont2305

lulilu said:


> I cancelled my NYer subscription.  I am done with them.
> When was the engagement ring remade?


We first saw it in June 2019 at Trooping the Colour, a month after Archie was born and 13 months after the wedding.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Happyish said:


> Frankly, all this maneuvering is exhausting and I can see where the Queen would not be forthcoming with any statement. She can't be bothered. Lest that sound callous, let me explain.
> 
> The Queen has lost a lot of weight. She is in poor health. The reference to mobility problems is so generic as to mean nothing. We don't know what's going on, but this is coded-language for the fact it isn't good.
> 
> Towards the end of days, people lose weight (even though they may be eating are are ostensibly healthy), sleep longer and during periods of wakefulness are still exhausted. This is the process of the body shutting down. It can start many, many months before the actual event. Too recently, I went through all this with a dying relative. Even the need to get dressed was exhausting. Little things let alone the big things were overwhelming. More and more was delegated or avoided. It wasn't that my relative wasn't interested or didn't care; she didn't have the impetus to respond. My fear is that this is what's happening to the Queen. She's lost a lot of weight and to the extent she's able, she only makes brief appearances.
> 
> The failure to see Lililibet, or only briefly, viewed in this lens, is understandable for a couple of reasons.
> 
> The Queen has done everything she could for Harry and Megan and lacks the strength and energy to respond further.  Harry has made his own life. He's no longer present and Lillibet is a stranger she'll never get to know. Harry's needs are a distant priority  beyond her physical and emotional capacity. The Queen is fighting for her life, but is dying nevertheless.
> 
> So I see the Queen's rebuffs as a function of her lack of strength or energy. What's done is done and the rest is for Charles and William to deal with.
> 
> This is a transitional period. If Harry can't or won't mend fences with his grandmother now, he'll live with that guilt forever.
> 
> The Jubilee was as much as a celebration saying, Thank you as it was Goodbye. If Harry couldn't see that, shame on him.


Well and beautifully stated. You have given voice to what we all have felt but would not utter.  You bring me to tears.  We are watching this lovely lady fade before our eyes and it breaks our hearts.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> I think that shushing thing was just a "cute" photo op


100% agree with you.  She was posing to be photographed, and he looked like an idiot.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So now it is apparently good journalism to completely make up a story based on something that never happened. And from our fellow Aussies as well! I'm disappointed.

That whole article is super annoying, Kate had it easier, Kate is just not as feminist, etc.



> So let’s do a bit of experiment here. Consider one of the Louis tantrum photos and replace him with Archie and Kate with Meghan. Imagine that it was the Californian tot who was pulling faces at the former _Suits_ star who seemed wholly relaxed by his cheeky (and age-appropriate) tomfoolery.You hardly need to be a committed royal watcher to know that the reaction would have been a world apart.Meghan would have been crucified for her lax parenting with reams of shrill copy spewing forth calling out her touchy-feely Californian style of parenting. Where’s the discipline? Where’s the respect for the Crown? Can’t she control her own child?! Oh the shame of it all!



https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...d-kate/video/19772e0573d5c4e06ab4478adaa7d993
Prince Louis Antics Expose Kate and Meghan Doublestandard


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I’m sorry if you misunderstood! I don’t think you’re being too harsh at all and I’m here for it!!  I’m showing my age and don’t know all these new terms. *I’m having to go to Urban Dictionary quite a bit, and I’m terrified they’ll do a search of my computer history and wonder WTF I’m looking up things like waffle, crocodile and lavender marriage*



*This ^^ *add “Scottish men in kilts” 
**


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> NYP chose an interesting title for the article on the alleged apology request.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422109
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Self-destructive’ Prince Harry wants apology for being ignored: royal expert
> 
> 
> “The thing that really stood out for me on that day was Harry’s anger — he wears his emotions on his face and he looked absolutely furious,” royal analyst Angela Levin says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



more speculation....
I don't take this as anything close to factual...it's possible but these people don't know


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> The amount of things Meghan had been given by the BRF is mind boggling. And Harry? Please. Compare Meghan to Wendi Deng, for example. They both went after famous rich men in a conniving way, but at least Deng didn't cast herself as a victim and made a huge go of her life after billionaire Murdock. She was smart enough to leverage the relationships she built as a result of that marriage into huge business ventures. Meghan on the other hand, burned every bridge imaginable. Who'd want to do any business with her? She's toxic. Even Disney doesn't have any more narration projects lined up for her. Netflix? Ha! Where's the content? Deng lined up her daughters to inherit billions. After Meghan drains Harry dry what is there going to be for her kids? For somebody who once had the world at her fingertips, she should go into the Guiness Book of Records for biggest life screwup.


she's probably not as smart as wendy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

bag-mania said:


> Not bringing the kids would be the biggest conspiracy of all. Frankly, I can’t buy that one and I’m usually open to them. Now maybe Archie didn’t come, we didn’t get even a hint of his presence. But they claimed that Lili met with the Queen and that could be easily disputed by the palace if it didn’t happen.


I agree with you that Archie may not have been there since as you say no hint of his presence.

I’m thinking Lillibet was there and did briefly met with the Queen when they first got there. May or may not had done a dna test or just first in-person proof Lillibet existed. Since that was done Lillibet is now officially recognized (as my recent post pages back) as 8th in royal line of succession.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So now it is apparently good journalism to completely make up a story based on something that never happened. And from our fellow Aussies as well! I'm disappointed.
> 
> That whole article is super annoying, Kate had it easier, Kate is just not as feminist, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/h...d-kate/video/19772e0573d5c4e06ab4478adaa7d993
> Prince Louis Antics Expose Kate and Meghan Doublestandard


they started by saying Meghan wouldn't get the same treatment as Kate if her child acted up.  Hard to say since she is never seen with her kids.
  but then by the end they did say if Meghan had hung in, eventually she would get similar treatment to what Kate gets.
They did seem to take as truth that Meghan had no idea what she was in for.  What?  Harry would have an idea.  Did he deliberately hide it from her?  It's like her saying she knew almost nothing about the royal family - BS


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Disdain is spreading. A friend visiting family in Montecito texted there was friendly betting going on over glasses of wine last night whether or not Hazbeen saddles up for Polo post Jubilee, or “stays home to suck his thumb”. Jokes are he rides a horse because he can be in charge in the saddle and it keeps him out of reach of TW.
> 
> Lingering comments about TW’s breach of etiquette with the polo trophy a few weeks ago. She’s a “pushy beech”. And being wired at St Paul’s raised a lot of hackles. Most Montecitans genuinely want privacy and thought their attempted invasion of it with the RF was disgraceful.



I know y'll will come after me at some point but...once again, I feel sorry for him (and validated in finding her awful and blaming her more). Yes, he could and should man up, but I can't help but see a victim of abuse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> What color is Lilibet’s eyes?



They looked blue to me in that picture.


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> Here is DM article on it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William goes undercover as a Big Issue in Westminster
> 
> 
> The Duke of Cambridge, 39, donned a red seller's vest and hat before standing in Rochester Row, Westminster, to quietly sell the magazine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Timing is everything!


----------



## DeMonica

Aimee3 said:


> From all I’ve read and seen, it does seem that they didn’t bring the invisible kids. Who would fly private and not have the whole entourage with them?  Blurry Photos posted show a wrapped up possibly high chair being unloaded from the plane, yet none of children or nannies.  If photographers were waiting in the bushes, those photos would exist and be posted, even if the photographers had to blur out the faces of the kids.  I am not sure the photo of lil on the grass was even taken in the UK.  I read it had been raining and the grass was all wet.  Would you sit your one year old on wet soggy grass just for a photo?  Oh, I just had a thought. Maybe we don’t see Lil’s legs because she’s sitting on a waterproof pad and that would be ugly in a photo.


If I'm not mistaken The Harkles had already left the airport when the luggage was unloaded by their ppl. So whether the children were in the UK, is still a mystery. They might have taken the little ones anticipating a better reception than they actually received. Hoping that the children would be some kind of ice breakers between them and the family. I think telling the world that there was a party and most of the cousins participated when it's a complete lie would be a little too much, even from them. Although; they might surprise us, even when you'd think that they can't stoop lower.  I don't know if the listed participants, eg. Tindall and Phillips family, are active in social media at all apart from Eugenie, but they definitely have chosen members of the royal family who would not plaster the net with party photos anyway, so they could shroud what happened in mystery.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The tough question of the day: would you considered this "Entertainment" or "Art"?
> View attachment 5422097
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry libel claim against Mail on Sunday has High Court hearing
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex says the Mail on Sunday caused "distress" after accusing him of having "lied".
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



Definitely entertainment


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They looked blue to me in that picture.



Thanks- genetics are endlessly fascinating!


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> If I'm not mistaken The Harkles had already left the airport when the luggage was unloaded by their ppl. So whether the children were in the UK, is still a mystery. They might have taken the little ones anticipating a better reception than they actually received. Hoping that the children would be some kind of ice breakers between them and the family. I think telling the world that there was a party and most of the cousins participated when it's a complete lie would be a little too much, even from them. Although; they might surprise us, even when you'd think that they can't stoop lower.  I don't know if the listed participants, eg. Tindall and Phillips family, are active in social media at all apart from Eugenie, but they definitely have chosen members of the royal family who would not plaster the net with party photos anyway, so they could shroud what happened in mystery.


can you stoop lower than taking photogs to a site where children were murdered to show what a wonderful person you are?


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate had it easier, Kate is just not as feminist, etc.



… speaking of feminist. What is feminist about releasing a photo of your child where only the mother is present? Doesn’t that reinforce the idea that mothers are the primary caretakers of children?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They looked blue to me in that picture.



I thought all baby's eyes are blue?

...or am I thinking kittens  ?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know y'll will come after me at some point but...once again, I feel sorry for him (and validated in finding her awful and blaming her more). Yes, he could and should man up, but I can't help but see a victim of abuse.


not sure if I agree he's exactly a victim of abuse but I do think she wears the pants in the family and he is very immature.  Honestly none of us knows what goes on in that home but we can have our opinions


----------



## 880

Happyish said:


> It has to do with accepting responsibility. He doesn't recognize his role in creating the situation of which he now complains. It's everyone else's fault but his.
> 
> As much as I deplore Meagan's grandstanding and self-promotion, the poor relationship Harry has with his family is primarily _Harry's_ fault. This is _his_ family. He wasn't there for his grandfather's Memorial service. He walked out on his grandmother's Jubilee. Then there's the divorce from the Royal Family, and the public-tell-all's. These are abominable faux-pas, ones that will never be forgotten or forgiven.
> 
> All Harry had to do was say was, "no." No Oprah. No publicity. No book. And with or without you, I'm going to see my family. I'm going to the Memorial. I going to attend the Jubilee--all of it. You don't like it, you can go home/stay at Frogmore.
> 
> Of course there was the booing, and he felt humiliated. But he ran away with his tail between his legs. If he had a different character, he would have tolerated it. Perhaps he would have issued a statement about attracting unnecessary negativity to his Grandmother's jubilee, and saying the Jubilee was about her, not about him. In any event, silent or otherwise, he should have withstood it. This wasn't about him. It was about his Grandmother. This was also about family. _His_ family. The RF held out the olive branch to him. He just couldn't see it. He chose one family over another, when he could have had both.
> 
> Whatever Megan's role, this is Harry's fault. It is Harry who renounced his family. It is Harry who has allowed this to happen.
> He knew Meagan for little over? less than? a year before they were engaged. So we have a 38-year old man, who spent 38-years in the bubble of a family that adored and cherished him, and indulged his every whim, albeit that suppressed and suffocated him, and he renounced it all, for a woman he knew for approximately a year?
> 
> How does that happen?
> How does someone with so brief a connection have such an overwhelming influence as to cause someone to sever all ties?
> That's what I don't understand . . .


+1000


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know y'll will come after me at some point but...once again, I feel sorry for him (and validated in finding her awful and blaming her more). Yes, he could and should man up, but I can't help but see a victim of abuse.



It does not really matter which it is - victim or self-destructive. Some days it looks like he may be the victim, then other days it looks he does it to himself.  The list of example is endless. That recent photo of his angry face at the church is creepy. He appears to have very swift mood changes or he took something to calm himself down.  Imo, whatever it is, we all see there is a problem. A medical team should step in. Imo.

ETA: here’s the photo that seems creepy imo


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> not sure if I agree he's exactly a victim of abuse but I do think she wears the pants in the family and he is very immature.  Honestly none of us knows what goes on in that home but we can have our opinions



Yeah, I'm torn, coz nothing was ever going to get in the way of her prize turkey once she had him in her sites, he played along in a most nasty way towards his family, Queen and country, and now it's his own stupid fault he's stuffed.

Chicken (dinner's) come home to roost roast


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> not making excuses for him but I don't think he is that strong and I think his emotional development is stunted....he is a nasty, temperamental man-boy (IMO of course)


While I think you are right, I think he's very damaged and his parents set really bad example to him. Lovers on both sides, easily led by lovers, acting on impulses as a willful children, acting stupid -


sdkitty said:


> can you stoop lower than taking photogs to a site where children were murdered to show what a wonderful person you are?


Unfortunately, she can be pretty creative. IMO she's the "brain" of the operation.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> The Montecito Journal Newspaper is a free weekly newspaper also available, free, on line.
> 
> Returning from the Jubilee if the Harkles read it, they will find articles in this week's edition that don't appear to be under the influence of Sunshine Sucks: Harry's Invictus Games Logo loss and a brief recap of their Jubilee experience, not warm and not fuzzy. Prior edition had an item about Netflix getting their "pound of flesh" from the  Kardashian-style show being filmed at their Riven Rock mansion. New information, it's described as including "interview shots." Hmmm, microphones at St. Paul's???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422155


Thanks for posting this article. I'm glad that I just got some new reading glasses.  
I love it! … _they were even booed_…


----------



## papertiger

DeMonica said:


> While I think you are right, I think he's very damaged and his parents set really bad example to him. Lovers on both sides, easily led by lovers, acting on impulses as a willful children, acting stupid -
> 
> Unfortunately, she can be pretty creative. *IMO she's the "brain" of the operation.*



Which is not saying much considering their continuous decreasing popularity, they are a laughing stock


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know y'll will come after me at some point but...once again, I feel sorry for him (and validated in finding her awful and blaming her more). Yes, he could and should man up, but I can't help but see a victim of abuse.



Abuse? No. Manipulation? Absolutely! She plays him like a cheap fiddle to get what she wants. But he’s done too many shady things on his own not to hold him accountable.


----------



## lulilu

This pouting immature lout cannot be easy to live with.  There are so many photos of him pulling this "angry" face around -- he's been doing it for decades.  I am just astonished that a grown man would carry on this way.  What a loser.  But she asked for it.....


----------



## papertiger

lulilu said:


> View attachment 5422325
> 
> 
> This pouting immature lout cannot be easy to live with.  There are so many photos of him pulling this "angry" face around -- he's been doing it for decades.  I am just astonished that a grown man would carry on this way.  What a loser.  But she asked for it.....




OMG, you wouldn't think that man just got awarded a medal (and didn't have to do anything for it either). And we thought she was the ungrateful one  .

I think they're a match made in hell.


----------



## marietouchet

lulilu said:


> View attachment 5422325
> 
> 
> This pouting immature lout cannot be easy to live with.  There are so many photos of him pulling this "angry" face around -- he's been doing it for decades.  I am just astonished that a grown man would carry on this way.  What a loser.  But she asked for it.....


Love this shot - Sarah’s face is priceless


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know y'll will come after me at some point but...once again, I feel sorry for him (and validated in finding her awful and blaming her more). Yes, he could and should man up, but I can't help but see a victim of abuse.


I don't know if the word I'd use is abuse, but he's a child of immature, volatile, often irresponsible parents whose mistakes he seems to repeat. William seems to be after his paternal grandparents in character, not his parents, and those teas with Granny during his Eton days might have done good to him, so did Catherine. Harry was not that lucky, after all he was just a spare of an hair and not particularly bright one, and his chosen new master, Methane, is just an evil one.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I think they're a match made in hell.



I don’t like to use the crude term douchebag too often because I want it to really mean something when I do use it.

Harry is a douchebag.


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth! 










						Royal Gossip Says Prince Harry’s Memoir Has Apparently Been Rejected By Publisher Multiple Times
					

Sources say Harry has gone through draft and draft trying to get it right.




					www.suggest.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How embarrassing for the award-winning writer who actually penned that thing.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It does not really matter which it is - victim or self-destructive. Some days it looks like he may be the victim, then other days it looks he does it to himself.  The list of example is endless. That recent photo of his angry face at the church is creepy. He appears to have very swift mood changes or he took something to calm himself down.  Imo, whatever it is, we all see there is a problem. A medical team should step in. Imo.
> 
> ETA: here’s the photo that seems creepy imo



He looks like he’s trying really hard to not have his head rotate 360 degrees before spewing green vomit.  The priest should’ve done an exorcism then as well!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How embarrassing for the award-winning writer who actually penned that thing.



What's that expression?

Careful who you get into bed with


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!
> View attachment 5422361
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Gossip Says Prince Harry’s Memoir Has Apparently Been Rejected By Publisher Multiple Times
> 
> 
> Sources say Harry has gone through draft and draft trying to get it right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.suggest.com


He can’t even figure out the facts of his own life.  There have been so many lies that he can’t sort truth from fiction!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


>




And so clearly balding


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know y'll will come after me at some point but...once again, I feel sorry for him (and validated in finding her awful and blaming her more). Yes, he could and should man up, but I can't help but see a victim of abuse.



he is an adult and needs to be held accountable for his own actions.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!
> View attachment 5422361
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Gossip Says Prince Harry’s Memoir Has Apparently Been Rejected By Publisher Multiple Times
> 
> 
> Sources say Harry has gone through draft and draft trying to get it right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.suggest.com





QueenofWrapDress said:


> How embarrassing for the award-winning writer who actually penned that thing.


Maybe Mr Ghostwriter wrote well but the publisher didn't want to risk getting sued for brilliantly embellished tales.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Maybe Mr Ghostwriter wrote well but the publisher didn't want to risk getting sued for brilliantly embellished tales.



I don't think the BRF would sue but the publisher's name would become mud because they are supposed to fact-check.


----------



## Happyish

purseinsanity said:


> He looks like he’s trying really hard to not have his head rotate 360 degrees before spewing green vomit.  The priest should’ve done an exorcism then as well!


Does anyone know why he was wearing medals and what they're for? I thought he stepped down or was removed from _everything_ . . .


----------



## wisconsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> It does not really matter which it is - victim or self-destructive. Some days it looks like he may be the victim, then other days it looks he does it to himself.  The list of example is endless. That recent photo of his angry face at the church is creepy. He appears to have very swift mood changes or he took something to calm himself down.  Imo, whatever it is, we all see there is a problem. A medical team should step in. Imo.
> 
> ETA: here’s the photo that seems creepy imo




He’s probably worried about what he’ll face once he gets back home with his wife.


----------



## purseinsanity

Happyish said:


> Does anyone know why he was wearing medals and what they're for? I thought he stepped down or was removed from _everything_ . . .


I think three of them were for the Platinum Jubilee!


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!
> View attachment 5422361
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Gossip Says Prince Harry’s Memoir Has Apparently Been Rejected By Publisher Multiple Times
> 
> 
> Sources say Harry has gone through draft and draft trying to get it right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.suggest.com


What’s there to write? They’ve practically spilled everything on Oprah.


----------



## octopus17

CarryOn2020 said:


> It does not really matter which it is - victim or self-destructive. Some days it looks like he may be the victim, then other days it looks he does it to himself.  The list of example is endless. That recent photo of his angry face at the church is creepy. He appears to have very swift mood changes or he took something to calm himself down.  Imo, whatever it is, we all see there is a problem. A medical team should step in. Imo.
> 
> ETA: here’s the photo that seems creepy imo



That photo looks to me as if she's enjoying his discomfort and also like "See I told you"  - it's horrible ...


----------



## Zen101

Happyish said:


> Does anyone know why he was wearing medals and what they're for? I thought he stepped down or was removed from _everything_ . . .


For show? For Netflix to see how important he is? To remind all of us who he is? Still a Prince? Still a member of the royal family? Even though he’s no longer a working member... Anymore guesses? Yeah I don’t know either lol


----------



## chaneljewel

Cornflower Blue said:


> That photo looks to me as if she's enjoying his discomfort and also like "See I told you"  - it's horrible ...


Poor pitiful us!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the medals
1 for saying bad things about his father
1 for saying bad things about his brother
1 for saying bad things about the palace people
1 for claiming he can solve the climate issues
1 for kissing up to corporations [aka, being a corporate w$ore]

how many more does he have?
Okaaay, I have nothing good to say. I’ll tiptoe away into _that _other thread - ya kno, the one with the men .


----------



## Happyish

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the medals
> 1 for saying bad things about his father
> 1 for saying bad things about his brother
> 1 for saying bad things about the palace people
> 1 for claiming he can solve the climate issues
> 1 for kissing up to corporations [aka, being a corporate w$ore]
> 
> how many more does he have?
> Okaaay, I have nothing good to say. I’ll tiptoe away into _that _other thread - ya kno, the one with the men .


You mean men in _kilts_


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> It does not really matter which it is - victim or self-destructive. Some days it looks like he may be the victim, then other days it looks he does it to himself.  The list of example is endless. That recent photo of his angry face at the church is creepy. He appears to have very swift mood changes or he took something to calm himself down.  Imo, whatever it is, we all see there is a problem. A medical team should step in. Imo.
> 
> ETA: here’s the photo that seems creepy imo




His eyes in that picture are seriously haunting. How does she keep that smile plastered on next to that?


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> His eyes in that picture are seriously haunting. How does she keep that smile plastered on next to that?



You know she would keep smiling even if the building was on fire.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> You know she would keep smiling even if the building was on fire.


Especially because she’d be the most likely suspect to have set it ablaze!


----------



## csshopper

lulilu said:


> View attachment 5422325
> 
> 
> This pouting immature lout cannot be easy to live with.  There are so many photos of him pulling this "angry" face around -- he's been doing it for decades.  I am just astonished that a grown man would carry on this way.  What a loser.  But she asked for it.....


The look on her face tells me she enjoys this, it gives her future ammunition if she succeeds in pushing him over the edge. She will blame the RF for any mental illness and skip off to her next adventure. Yes, I do think she is capable of that behavior.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Has he forgotten that HE STEPPED DOWN??


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I don't think the BRF would sue but the publisher's name would become mud because they are supposed to fact-check.


The BRF would likely not sue unless Hazard said something horrible and defamatory (his truth), but since this is supposedly a story of his life, who is to say that he will not embellish the truth about his former pals and girlfriends? Or maybe he will aggrandize himself as a war hero, make up more tales about being the defender of the Queen?


----------



## Lodpah

wisconsin said:


> He’s probably worried about what he’ll face once he gets back home with his wife.


He.is.so.gross.and.unattractive.

I read a comment elsewhere that his growth was stunted at the age of 12. Yikes MM how can you sleep with a boar like that? Oh wait. . . $$$. The classy women dumped him so she settled for sloppy seconds as long as she gets her fame for her lust satisfied.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Has he forgotten that HE STEPPED DOWN??



Recollection may vary


----------



## Annawakes

Didn’t he make a big point of they “stepped BACK” not “stepped DOWN”?  I seem to remember that.  Seriously he thought they wouldn’t have to do any of the royal work but still enjoy all the frills and still be thought of as “senior royals”.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> What’s there to write? They’ve practically spilled everything on Oprah.


You are underestimating TW's alleged ability to generate falsehoods.


----------



## V0N1B2

lanasyogamama said:


> Has he forgotten that HE STEPPED DOWN??


I don’t think he (or she) sees it that way.  THey saw it as “stepping back” as in: were gonna live over here in California where we can make money off of our titles, and when a significant event happens in the UK, we’ll fly over and shake some hands, kiss some babies, and cut some ribbons. Then come home to California, merch their kid’ toques, visit some disaster area, help out in a kitchen, lather rinse repeat.


----------



## EverSoElusive

V0N1B2 said:


> I don’t think he (or she) sees it that way.  THey saw it as “stepping back” as in: were gonna live over here in California where we can make money off of our titles, and when a significant event happens in the UK, we’ll fly over and shake some hands, kiss some babies, and cut some ribbons. Then come home to California, merch their kid’ toques, visit some disaster area, help out in a kitchen, lather rinse repeat.



Their tagline should be: We want to have cake and eat it too


----------



## Happyish

I think we all need these!


			https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Markle-Wedding-Commemorative/dp/B07D61VDD1/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug%2Caps%2C140&sr=8-2
		

 and https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Making-Believe-Commemorative/dp/B07CJ72JH3/ref=sr_1_51?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug,aps,140&sr=8-51
There's more than these to choose from.
Just think you could have your morning coffee with Harry and Meghan.


----------



## Norm.Core

purseinsanity said:


> He can’t even figure out the facts of his own life.  There have been so many lies that he can’t sort truth from fiction!


Good one!


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz is not know for his great intellect, but he must be able to realize his stupid mistake… 


*The Sussexes were once the coolest couple and hottest ticket.*_ That prince and the showgirl romance. Their glamour and energy. The cachet of the Queen anointing them Commonwealth ambassadors. They made Kate and William look like mum and dad earnestly handing out scroggin on a Sunday hike.

But the gathering of the clan for its matriarch’s 70 years on the throne proved not just that the monarchy is stronger than its parts and only one member is truly irreplaceable, line of succession be damned, but that Harry and Meghan* have lost all currenc*y…

Not to be outdone, *the Sussexes played their own ***** card, a photo of little-seen daughter Lilibet. *Bam! It was a smart move, especially with the tot decked out not in Cali hemp rapper pants but aristocratic hair bow and smocked cotton dress.

*But not even a dear little girl in royal baby costume can fix everything.*_

*Harry must surely have been pricked by knowing he could have been on the palace balcony, uniformed, babies in arms, family loyalty intact. By knowing his children are strangers to William’s three. By knowing he horse traded it for a legacy which may amount to a Netflix show.*





__





						Harry should be careful what he wishes for.  He might get what he wants
					






					amp.smh.com.au


----------



## Chanbal

‘*Classless’ Harry and Meghan given ‘stiff arm’ by the Queen*


----------



## Sharont2305

Happyish said:


> Does anyone know why he was wearing medals and what they're for? I thought he stepped down or was removed from _everything_ . . .


Here you go... 
	

		
			
		

		
	



Mike Tindall wore two of these, the Diamond and the Platinum one. Also either Edo or Jack (or both) wore the Platinum one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Happyish said:


> I think we all need these!
> 
> 
> https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Markle-Wedding-Commemorative/dp/B07D61VDD1/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug%2Caps%2C140&sr=8-2
> 
> 
> and https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Making-Believe-Commemorative/dp/B07CJ72JH3/ref=sr_1_51?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug,aps,140&sr=8-51
> There's more than these to choose from.
> Just think you could have your morning coffee with Harry and Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 5422551
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422552


I’m surprised she hasn’t had them all incinerated given they still have her old nose.


DeMonica said:


> While I think you are right, I think he's very damaged and his parents set really bad example to him. Lovers on both sides, easily led by lovers, acting on impulses as a willful children, acting stupid -
> 
> Unfortunately, she can be pretty creative. IMO she's the "brain" of the operation.


all this talk about what an immature brat Charles was when he _became a father in his thirties _makes me glad he won’t get to be king till he’s at least in his 80s so hopefully he will have learnt to prioritise by then.

The lover thing is very common with aristocrats and royal circles very few of them don’t have a somewhat open marriage. I don’t think it’s quite the same  threat to family stability when you don’t have to rely on the other parent for sharing childcare and you don’t row about chores or money.

Add on- thinking about it they are probably less likely to get divorced as well because they don’t want to divide their estate but the divorce itself wouldn’t be as serious a financial consideration.


----------



## jelliedfeels

kkfiregirl said:


> You know she would keep smiling even if the building was on fire.


----------



## Chanbal

We will have an unhappy camper in Montecito today…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> His eyes in that picture are seriously haunting. How does she keep that smile plastered on next to that?



She's proficient. Dozens of pictures where he looks like he's about to cry (that last church service with the green abomination, the night at Royal Albert Hall where she had spun the fantastic tale of her suicidal self to manipulate him further) and she grins like a lunatic Cheshire cat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The look on her face tells me she enjoys this, it gives her future ammunition if she succeeds in pushing him over the edge. She will blame the RF for any mental illness and skip off to her next adventure. Yes, I do think she is capable of that behavior.



So do I.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's proficient. Dozens of pictures where he looks like he's about to cry (that last church service with the green abomination, the night at Royal Albert Hall where she had spun the fantastic tale of her suicidal self to manipulate him further) and she grins like a lunatic Cheshire cat.


Yep


----------



## Lodpah

So I watch a lot of documentaries and I watched this one about a drug called Scopolamine (aka "Devil's Breath) and it's big in Colombia and other parts of Latin America.  This drug is taken and renders one still able to function as a normal person but the problem is it allows a person to be manipulated to do anything the person who gives him/her the drug to do, i.e., hold my hand, give me all your money, do that, do this, etc. and the person complies whilst still in the present and incapacitates one's free will.  You just have to smell it and you can even breathe it into another person.

I'm not making this up. Hmmm . . . I wonder if that is what happened in Jamaica? Just throwing it out there . . .

People, there are wicked things out there for real.


----------



## papertiger

Happyish said:


> I think we all need these!
> 
> 
> https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Markle-Wedding-Commemorative/dp/B07D61VDD1/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug%2Caps%2C140&sr=8-2
> 
> 
> and https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Making-Believe-Commemorative/dp/B07CJ72JH3/ref=sr_1_51?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug,aps,140&sr=8-51
> There's more than these to choose from.
> Just think you could have your morning coffee with Harry and Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 5422551
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422552



That's put me off my coffee!


----------



## purseinsanity

Wo


Lodpah said:


> So I watch a lot of documentaries and I watched this one about a drug called Scopolamine (aka "Devil's Breath) and it's big in Colombia and other parts of Latin America.  This drug is taken and renders one still able to function as a normal person but the problem is it allows a person to be manipulated to do anything the person who gives him/her the drug to do, i.e., hold my hand, give me all your money, do that, do this, etc. and the person complies whilst still in the present and incapacitates one's free will.  You just have to smell it and you can even breathe it into another person.
> 
> I'm not making this up. Hmmm . . . I wonder if that is what happened in Jamaica? Just throwing it out there . . .
> 
> People, there are wicked things out there for real.



Wow, I’ve never heard that!  I wonder what quantities you have to give??  Scopolamine is for motion sickness.  Next time I’m on a cruise, I’m going to try to talk people into paying for my drinks


----------



## purseinsanity

Happyish said:


> I think we all need these!
> 
> 
> https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Markle-Wedding-Commemorative/dp/B07D61VDD1/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug%2Caps%2C140&sr=8-2
> 
> 
> and https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Making-Believe-Commemorative/dp/B07CJ72JH3/ref=sr_1_51?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug,aps,140&sr=8-51
> There's more than these to choose from.
> Just think you could have your morning coffee with Harry and Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 5422551
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422552


I think the Misfits of Montecito need to buy these all up so there’s stuff they can throw once the dishes are all used up.


----------



## Blyen

Just popping back in from my lurking habit to say that this picture cracks me up 
If Sophie is the queen of death stares,Lady Sarah is the princess consort  I can feel the disdain loud and clear 



CarryOn2020 said:


> It does not really matter which it is - victim or self-destructive. Some days it looks like he may be the victim, then other days it looks he does it to himself.  The list of example is endless. That recent photo of his angry face at the church is creepy. He appears to have very swift mood changes or he took something to calm himself down.  Imo, whatever it is, we all see there is a problem. A medical team should step in. Imo.
> 
> ETA: here’s the photo that seems creepy imo


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I think the Misfits of Montecito need to buy these all up so there’s stuff they can throw once the dishes are all used up.


Going by all the coverage of the Cambridge children I think she's started on all the tv's!


----------



## papertiger

Gets interesting towards 5 min mark, especially on H&M's arrival and plot to sit on the end of the row so they could leave with PC&C, PW&K etc.

DM's Palace Confidential









						What REALLY happened with the Jubilee seating plan?
					

Richard Eden, diary editor at Daily Mail, says that the seating plan for the key Platinum Jubilee event may have been set up to stop Harry and Meghan appearing in photographs with other senior royals




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Always the finger pointer, never the responsibility taker  

I'm pretty sure the Cambridges weren't the ones going on US national TV to spread lies and start bad blood, and completely incinerated the trust that the BRF had for the Sussex Liars. Not to mention, they threw shade and tried to undermine the BRF. 

After all is said and done, the Cambridges are supposed to be OK with this and expose their kids to Sussex Liars' lies, manipulation and potential secret recording to be used against the BRF?


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Always the finger pointer, never the responsibility taker
> 
> I'm pretty sure the Cambridges weren't the ones going on US national TV to spread lies and start bad blood, and completely incinerated the trust that the BRF had for the Sussex Liars. Not to mention, they threw shade and tried to undermine the BRF.
> 
> After all is said and done, the Cambridges are supposed to be OK with this and expose their kids to Sussex Liars' lies, manipulation and potential secret recording to be used against the BRF?




I think they were in Wales unless on-view in London at St Paul's, at the PJ pageant, on the Buck Pal balcony etc. 

Not sure when they were supposed to introduce their kids to the cabbage patch dolls Sussex' kids  ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Gets interesting towards 5 min mark, especially on H&M's arrival and plot to sit on the end of the row so they could leave with PC&C, PW&K etc.
> 
> DM's Palace Confidential
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What REALLY happened with the Jubilee seating plan?
> 
> 
> Richard Eden, diary editor at Daily Mail, says that the seating plan for the key Platinum Jubilee event may have been set up to stop Harry and Meghan appearing in photographs with other senior royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Oh, and in case it wasn't mentioned earlier, that as well as handsome men in kilts, Andrew Parker ex-head of M15 (2013-20) was (issued) seated right behind H&M.

How's that for security Harry? Did it make you feel more secure?   Certainly makes me feel better


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> Their tagline should be: We want to have cake and eat it too


...and we want to lick the beaters


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Always the finger pointer, never the responsibility taker
> 
> I'm pretty sure the Cambridges weren't the ones going on US national TV to spread lies and start bad blood, and completely incinerated the trust that the BRF had for the Sussex Liars. Not to mention, they threw shade and tried to undermine the BRF.
> 
> After all is said and done, the Cambridges are supposed to be OK with this and expose their kids to Sussex Liars' lies, manipulation and potential secret recording to be used against the BRF?




Not only that...how come that apparently the people who realize the Cambridges were BUSY with a highly choreographed event spread out over multiple days are a minority? And the children were probably completely wiped out after their appearances because I know I - an adult - would be drained.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW wasn't it said David Cholmondeley was seating the Troublesome Two? I don't think that's him, though.





DC:


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sharont2305 said:


> Here you go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422560
> 
> Mike Tindall wore two of these, the Diamond and the Platinum one. Also either Edo or Jack (or both) wore the Platinum one.



So, they give men medals to commemorate a woman’s life of service?

Honestly, the world we live in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW wasn't it said David Cholmondeley was seating the Troublesome Two? I don't think that's him, though.
> 
> View attachment 5422661
> 
> 
> 
> DC:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422662
> View attachment 5422666



My mistake. I will try to find where I read it. Thanks for the correction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My mistake. I will try to find where I read it. Thanks for the correction.



I think I saw it somewhere on Twitter, but my brain's a sieve these days.


----------



## sdkitty

Happyish said:


> I think we all need these!
> 
> 
> https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Markle-Wedding-Commemorative/dp/B07D61VDD1/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug%2Caps%2C140&sr=8-2
> 
> 
> and https://amazon.com/Prince-Meghan-Making-Believe-Commemorative/dp/B07CJ72JH3/ref=sr_1_51?crid=1BK3VGLK5UW6Y&keywords=meghan+markle+commemorative+mug&qid=1654835061&sprefix=megan+markle+commerative+mug,aps,140&sr=8-51
> There's more than these to choose from.
> Just think you could have your morning coffee with Harry and Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 5422551
> 
> 
> View attachment 5422552


I don't think the fairy tale princesses were almost-40-year olds with multiple prior marriages


----------



## rose60610

If H&M want their kids to meet the cousins so bad, then take them when there isn't a milestone event where every minute is scheduled. Once again, they can't allow someone to celebrate their own milestone event without making it about themselves. Oh wait, they're attention whores and feel justified to interrupt someone's wedding/Jubilee etc. It's all about photos to merch.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I saw it somewhere on Twitter, but my brain's a sieve these days.


I read it on line also, and mentioned it in a post. But can’t remember the source either.


----------



## sdkitty

from Daily Beast....Tom Sykes calling royals racist








						Post-Jubilee, Harry and Meghan’s Feud With the Royals Is Uglier Than Ever
					

Matt Dunham - WPA Pool/GettyRoyalist is The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.As further details of the belittling treatment dished out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during their visit to the U.K. to celebrate...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the Harkles had a chance to take a picture with Paddington in Piccadilly.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> from Daily Beast....Tom Sykes calling royals racist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post-Jubilee, Harry and Meghan’s Feud With the Royals Is Uglier Than Ever
> 
> 
> Matt Dunham - WPA Pool/GettyRoyalist is The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.As further details of the belittling treatment dished out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during their visit to the U.K. to celebrate...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


I saw Tom Sykes's article yesterday, but decided not to give it clicks! It's just retaliation propaganda imo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Open letter to Megalomaniac:

Dear Meg,

You went on Oprah, said that Kate made you cry and that she didn’t help you when you wanted to kill yourself.  She’s probably not super excited to be friends. 

Love, LYM


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I read it on line also, and mentioned it in a post. But can’t remember the source either.






QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I saw it somewhere on Twitter, but my brain's a sieve these days.




Agree, for me it is the oppressive heat wave [which is supposed to last another week or so].   
The heat plus the sun plus the humidity plus the poor air quality, I am definitely not thinking clearly.  After 1 hour outside, I now realize my limits.  Shopping either early in morning or late at night or use a service.  Now that I am comfortably inside, I will search the internet for the false info. Woe to whoever started the rumor.   [kidding, I have 0 energy to argue with anyone].

Plus , on that day , the Platy Jubly info was coming in fast and furious.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did anyone listen to Matthew McConaughey‘s speech to congress about Uvalde? I just listened to a longer clip and it has me crying so hard I don’t know if I’ll ever stop. Meghan should be ashamed of her two trays of food, Matthew and his wife spent a week there (never saw a picture of that) and the speech was so powerful.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Did anyone listen to Matthew McConaughey‘s speech to congress about Uvalde? I just listened to a longer clip and it has me crying so hard I don’t know if I’ll ever stop. Meghan should be ashamed of her two trays of food, Matthew and his wife spent a week there (never saw a picture of that) and the speech was so powerful.


and he is from there so has a legit interest compared to the Wife


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Did anyone listen to Matthew McConaughey‘s speech to congress about Uvalde? I just listened to a longer clip and it has me crying so hard I don’t know if I’ll ever stop. Meghan should be ashamed of her two trays of food, Matthew and his wife spent a week there (never saw a picture of that) and the speech was so powerful.



I thought Matthew did really, really well...I choked up when he mentioned the green shoes and pointed to I think it was his wife holding a pair. But also, that testimony of Uvalde pediatrician Dr. Roy Guerrero. OMG.

Yes, shame on that nasty bottom feeder who seriously managed to have some people believe she did a good thing when it was nothing but self-presentation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

How long before Mandana whoever has H&M make a statement?  Grrrr. 

ETA: not manifesting this, just expect more nonsense from the low-life’s.

ETA2:  here’s the story of coffins. :serious tears: 








						Texas man makes special, personalized caskets for Uvalde school shooting victims
					

A Texas man worked against the clock throughout the Memorial Day Weekend to make custom caskets for the 19 students killed in the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde on May 24.




					www.ksat.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought Matthew did really, really well...I choked up when he mentioned the green shoes and pointed to I think it was his wife holding a pair. But also, that testimony of Uvalde pediatrician Dr. Roy Guerrero. OMG.
> 
> Yes, shame on that nasty bottom feeder who seriously managed to have some people believe she did a good thing when it was nothing but self-presentation.


The green shoes is what set me off too.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Something doesn’t add up.


----------



## CarryOn2020

OT, if you want a giggle about the heat, read here:









						'We're struggling': Viral TikTok parodies Texas' extreme heats
					

We feel this too.




					www.mysanantonio.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Something doesn’t add up.




Ooops, they did it again.  Irks me they think they can get away with nonsense. 

ETA: Speaking of lies, deceptions, etc.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I remember when James Cordren did “fake instagram parties” on his show (maybe still does, I no longer watch).  At least he *put the parts TOGETHER! *So there would actually be a picture of the party people, the party paraphernalia, and the party activities in ONE shot.

I’m guessing the vendors liked the idea of practically free publicity, but EW!  Bottom of the barrel.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> Something doesn’t add up.




OMG, his babies are beautiful!

Do you think he would lie/photoshop for them? That seems so unlikely …


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Always the finger pointer, never the responsibility taker
> 
> I'm pretty sure the Cambridges weren't the ones going on US national TV to spread lies and start bad blood, and completely incinerated the trust that the BRF had for the Sussex Liars. Not to mention, they threw shade and tried to undermine the BRF.
> 
> After all is said and done, the Cambridges are supposed to be OK with this and expose their kids to Sussex Liars' lies, manipulation and potential secret recording to be used against the BRF?



fascinating it’s still the mum’s fault even when it’s obvious in this family the patriarchal relatives determine the terms of engagement. 


sdkitty said:


> I don't think the fairy tale princesses were almost-40-year olds with multiple prior marriages


I mean they are right in that originally these fairy tales are pretty nihilistic especially Hans Christian Andersen. 
Didn’t he write one where the pretty girl turns into a vicious dog or a cruel hag or something? I bet Harry is feeling like the little fir tree atm.


lanasyogamama said:


> Something doesn’t add up.



This is so weird. Do you think the tactic is to keep Harry strapped down by ensuring he’s just constantly confused? Because I don’t think she needs to try this hard.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Gets interesting towards 5 min mark, especially on H&M's arrival and plot to sit on the end of the row so they could leave with PC&C, PW&K etc.
> 
> DM's Palace Confidential
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What REALLY happened with the Jubilee seating plan?
> 
> 
> Richard Eden, diary editor at Daily Mail, says that the seating plan for the key Platinum Jubilee event may have been set up to stop Harry and Meghan appearing in photographs with other senior royals
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The seating plan provided nice pix for the benefit of QEII - masterful piece of architecting that plan - she had a new venue for these things, not being part of the ceremony but watching on the BBC

Hmm it was a surprise that H was the lowest ranked grandchild of QEII, and also surprising that Zara and Peter ranked above the Yorks


----------



## lanasyogamama

kkfiregirl said:


> OMG, his babies are beautiful!
> 
> Do you think he would lie/photoshop for them? That seems so unlikely …


I don’t know, that’s such a terrible thing to ask someone to do.


----------



## kkfiregirl

lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t know, that’s such a terrible thing to ask someone to do.



I agree, which is why I can’t see the conspiracy angle here …


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sheesh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

kkfiregirl said:


> I agree, which is why I can’t see the conspiracy angle here …


I think what that twitter account is trying to get across is that Mishan Harriman’s (sp. sorry I don’t know his name) youngest daughter looks to be a different age in the photos allegedly taken at Frogmore last weekend, than they do in his twitter post. No photoshop, just time travel.
As for my opinion, IDK.  I have such little experience with children that I couldn’t tell you what a 1-3-4 year old should even look like.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sheesh



Lady behind is aware
Jack is zoning them out , pretending they are not there
Gentleman behind , in uniform, MI5??? , well he is watching their every move like a hawk , is this gentleman their minder ? Note how the officer’s chair is exactly between H&M, not directly behind either, giving  him a better angle on them


----------



## V0N1B2

marietouchet said:


> Lady behind is aware
> Jack is zoning them out , pretending they are not there
> Gentleman behind , in uniform, MI5??? , well he is watching their every move like a hawk , is this gentleman their minder ? Note how the officer’s chair is exactly between H&M, not directly behind either, giving  him a better angle on them


Their minder? Good God woman! Where have you been? This is Major Johnny Hothunk. He even has his own thread now. Girl…. 




__





						Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards and Handsome Men In Kilts
					

Post News re Major Johnny Thompson and/or Handsome Men in Kilts. Everyone welcome.  Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards with HMTQ in August 2018.




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> from Daily Beast....Tom Sykes calling royals racist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post-Jubilee, Harry and Meghan’s Feud With the Royals Is Uglier Than Ever
> 
> 
> Matt Dunham - WPA Pool/GettyRoyalist is The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday.As further details of the belittling treatment dished out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during their visit to the U.K. to celebrate...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Article is so biased … and LYING it’s says William‘s family decided to go to Cardiff, instead of seeing Sussex kids
a each of the sets of four major royals went to a part of the UK on that day as part of Jubilee (Wessexes went to Belfast ? )
the trips were a carefully orchestrated acknowledgement of the WHOLE of the UK , not just England, and was orchestrated a YEAR prior … 
it was incumbent on H to make his calendar work around the already-agreed jubilee bits when he decided to come maybe 3 weels prior to festivities 

absolute rubbish that W chose not to be at the party , he was AT WORK


----------



## mellibelly

Swipe through to read everything


----------



## gracekelly

V0N1B2 said:


> Their minder? Good God woman! Where have you been? This is Major Johnny Hothunk. He even has his own thread now. Girl….
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards and Handsome Men In Kilts
> 
> 
> Post News re Major Johnny Thompson and/or Handsome Men in Kilts. Everyone welcome.  Major Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards with HMTQ in August 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


Major Johnny Hothunk!  Dead!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Article is so biased … and LYING it’s says William‘s family decided to go to Cardiff, instead of seeing Sussex kids
> a each of the sets of four major royals went to a part of the UK on that day as part of Jubilee (Wessexes went to Belfast ? )
> the trips were a carefully orchestrated acknowledgement of the WHOLE of the UK , not just England, and was orchestrated a YEAR prior …
> it was incumbent on H to make his calendar work around the already-agreed jubilee bits when he decided to come maybe 3 weels prior to festivities
> 
> absolute rubbish that W chose not to be at the party , he was AT WORK


It is very inflammatory.  Why does this guy see the need to do this?  He wants clicks for the paper?  It is so easily disproven. The schedule for Jubilee was made months in advance. The will we go or won't we go Harkles had that party as a last ditch effort to redeem their poor showing.


----------



## nyshopaholic

Page Six (and apparently every other tabloid in the U.S.) has bumped the Z-listers for Britney Spears’ wedding coverage today. I guess they weren’t  invited?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and he is from there so has a legit interest compared to the Wife


Plus there is talk that he might run for political office.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Plus there is talk that he might run for political office.


yes


----------



## Sophisticatted

mellibelly said:


> Swipe through to read everything



My only quibble about this is that, if the vendors actually showed up (vs. a virtual collab) I would expect a pic of the birthday girl WITH the cake.  Instead, there is a shot of the cake on a marble slab with a slice of concrete parking lot in the background.  And another pic of the cake on another slab.  

Either it didn’t happen, or pics weren’t allowed to be taken at Frogmore and nobody (but maybe Meg) wanted to violate that.


----------



## lallybelle

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sheesh




LMFAO. You have to def see this in motion She is so suspicious. OMG the look. Bahahhahaha


----------



## Sophisticatted

Also, I read the Tina Brown book recently.  I found it to be mostly incredibly boring.  I feel it flattered Meghan.  It made me think.  I bet the reason some “royal reporters” are being favorable to the Sussexes is because they feel a divorce is inevitable, and are betting one or both will talk and spill all sorts of details.  (Harry’s parents certainly did.). They are currying favor for a future payday.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Lady behind is aware
> Jack is zoning them out , pretending they are not there
> Gentleman behind , in uniform, MI5??? , well he is watching their every move like a hawk , is this gentleman their minder ? Note how the officer’s chair is exactly between H&M, not directly behind either, giving  him a better angle on them


MI5 was on scene, as they say. Former head, Andrew Parker, now retired, is seated behind the handsome in uniform Johnny. I’m guessing Harry recognized both, they have been high profile people to the Monarchy, and might have been uncomfortable with their presence.  

It may not be a coincidence the hunky Scot in full uniform was the one placed to be in every shot with Hazbeen, instead of the not unattractive, but not a head turner,
Andrew Parker.


----------



## mellibelly

Sophisticatted said:


> My only quibble about this is that, if the vendors actually showed up (vs. a virtual collab) I would expect a pic of the birthday girl WITH the cake.  Instead, there is a shot of the cake on a marble slab with a slice of concrete parking lot in the background.  And another pic of the cake on another slab.
> 
> Either it didn’t happen, or pics weren’t allowed to be taken at Frogmore and nobody (but maybe Meg) wanted to violate that.


My guess is the cake baker showed up to deliver the cake and snapped that pic. Probably not allowed to take a pic with the bday child because nutmeg had plans with the photographer to release his photo. I had a google to see the bday cake, and just like their wedding cake it’s a total snooze fest. Pink frosting in a rustic application with three real, not edible flowers. I can make a better cake than that and I’m not a professional baker.

I remember by sister and I being incredulous at the gruesome twosomes wedding cake at the time. Looked like something an amateur baker friend would make for a casual backyard wedding, not a royal wedding. Much like her hair, makeup and dress it fell flat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> My guess is the cake baker showed up to deliver the cake and snapped that pic. Probably not allowed to take a pic with the bday child because nutmeg had plans with the photographer to release his photo. I had a google to see the bday cake, and just like their wedding cake it’s a total snooze fest. Pink frosting in a rustic application with three real, not edible flowers. I can make a better cake than that and I’m not a professional baker.
> 
> I remember by sister and I being incredulous at the gruesome twosomes wedding cake at the time. Looked like something an amateur baker friend would make for a casual backyard wedding, not a royal wedding. Much like her hair, makeup and dress it fell flat.


I just googled it.  What an awful excuse for a cake!  It looks so last minute and just like the entire party.

At the time of the wedding, the BP event planners were asking  MM if she needed help with the wedding and she kept refusing and said she had everything under control.  Seriously?  Unless Meghan had been planning huge events during her adult life, how could she possible deal with a wedding the scope and size of the one they wanted to have.  The answer is that she could not because she had never done anything like this before. The dress, the flowers, the cake and whatever else was a disaster. She wouldn't have been complaining about the egg in the food if she had had a menu tasting beforehand.    She was so over her head and wouldn't acknowledge it because she thought it would be a sign of failure.  Very foolish.  I think the BP courtiers realized that they could never give her anything really important to do, because she had no experience and wouldn't as for help.  She barely make it through the Cenotaph wreath laying and that was with a guy standing with her telling her everything she had to do.

Look up hubris in the dictionary and you will see her name.


----------



## Chanbal

So he got his pic with Paddington


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I just googled it.  *What an awful excuse for a cake!  *It looks so last minute and just like the entire party.
> 
> At the time of the wedding, the BP event planners were asking  MM if she needed help with the wedding and she kept refusing and said she had everything under control.  Seriously?  Unless Meghan had been planning huge events during her adult life, how could she possible deal with a wedding the scope and size of the one they wanted to have.  The answer is that she could not because she had never done anything like this before. The dress, the flowers, the cake and whatever else was a disaster. She wouldn't have been complaining about the egg in the food if she had had a menu tasting beforehand.    She was so over her head and wouldn't acknowledge it because she thought it would be a sign of failure.  Very foolish.  I think the BP courtiers realized that they could never give her anything really important to do, because she had no experience and wouldn't as for help.  She barely make it through the Cenotaph wreath laying and that was with a guy standing with her telling her everything she had to do.
> 
> Look up hubris in the dictionary and you will see her name.



Yeah, because babies and toddlers don’t like cake in boring flavors like chocolate. No, everyone knows what little kids really want for their birthday is Amalfi lemon and elderflower flavored cake!


----------



## Sophisticatted

mellibelly said:


> My guess is the cake baker showed up to deliver the cake and snapped that pic. Probably not allowed to take a pic with the bday child because nutmeg had plans with the photographer to release his photo. I had a google to see the bday cake, and just like their wedding cake it’s a total snooze fest. Pink frosting in a rustic application with three real, not edible flowers. I can make a better cake than that and I’m not a professional baker.
> 
> I remember by sister and I being incredulous at the gruesome twosomes wedding cake at the time. Looked like something an amateur baker friend would make for a casual backyard wedding, not a royal wedding. Much like her hair, makeup and dress it fell flat.


But, supposedly (allegedly), the Sussexes HAD a photographer there, why not take a convincing pic (WITH the celebrants) and hashtag the baker?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> But, supposedly (allegedly), the Sussexes HAD a photographer there, why not take a convincing pic (WITH the celebrants) and hashtag the baker?



Privacy. 
They want privacy, dontcha know


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, because babies and toddlers don’t like cake in boring flavors like chocolate. No, everyone knows what little kids really want for their birthday is Amalfi lemon and elderflower flavored cake!



Babies, toddlers, and I will take the chocolate, thanks 

I'll leave a slice for the babs and tots


----------



## CarryOn2020

*The very posh £244 birthday cake Harry and Meghan bought for one-year-old baby Lilibet - complete with two tier Amalfi lemon and elderflower fillings and strawberry buttercream covering*

*Harry and Meghan ordered a pink two-tier floral cake for Lilibet's first birthday *
*Created by Violet Cakes, it featured a fruity Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling*
*Royal couple released a new picture of Lilibet who turned one on Saturday*
*Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently introduced Lilibet to Queen in Windsor*










						Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
					

The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Something doesn’t add up.




The thing is...if true, not only Meghan Markle is a liar. Why would an award winning photographer risk his reputation like this? (But also, I am slightly confused what the scandal is here)


----------



## bag-mania

I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Article is so biased … and LYING it’s says William‘s family decided to go to Cardiff, instead of seeing Sussex kids
> a each of the sets of four major royals went to a part of the UK on that day as part of Jubilee (Wessexes went to Belfast ? )
> the trips were a carefully orchestrated acknowledgement of the WHOLE of the UK , not just England, and was orchestrated a YEAR prior …
> it was incumbent on H to make his calendar work around the already-agreed jubilee bits when he decided to come maybe 3 weels prior to festivities
> 
> absolute rubbish that W chose not to be at the party , he was AT WORK


of course it's biased...he must be a friend of H&M


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...if true, not only Meghan Markle is a liar. Why would an award winning photographer risk his reputation like this?



Money? There are still many Meghan fans out there who would love to hire her photographer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?



We do battered and deepfried elderflowers which taste like batter and powdered sugar, and a drink that's made by soaking the flowers with water, lemon and sugar overnight. That one tastes...flowery, a bit like they smell.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
> 
> 
> The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Apologies to the baker, and everyone who licks their lips whenever they hear the words 'lemon and elderflower cake' and can eat foliage. £244 pounds for that? An Hermes scarf is only £370 and it's woven by elves and hand-sewn by angels. 

Just say NO - not worth the calories or breaking out of the no-sugar programme. 

and that name-banner looks photoshopped in - just sayin'
and it's also an incredibly bi-centric-gender-typical cake in flavour and colour - just sayin'


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We do battered and deepfried elderflowers which taste like batter and powdered sugar, and a drink that's made by soaking the flowers with water, lemon and sugar overnight. That one tastes...flowery, a bit like they smell.



I had to politely sip elderflower wine at a Platinum Jubilee Part last Friday 

Obviously the Champagne was too good, too French or all gone by the time I got there  .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> Swipe through to read everything




She can't be THAT stupid, can she? 

Also, we know the Tindalls didn't attend because they were at the derby. It was speculated they might have sent the kids, but eh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?



Here’s some for your next cocktail (if you drink)





__





						Pur Elderflower Liqueur | Wine.com
					

Pur Elderflower Liqueur from Germany - True to its tradition as an herbal elixir, Pur-likor Elderflower is made exclusively from the highly fragrant alpine elderflowers (Sambucus Nigra L Haschberg) i...




					www.wine.com


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She can't be THAT stupid, can she?
> 
> Also, we know the Tindalls didn't attend because they were at the derby. It was speculated they might have sent the kids, but eh.



She’s definitely not stupid, but she might think others are.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> My guess is the cake baker showed up to deliver the cake and snapped that pic. Probably not allowed to take a pic with the bday child because nutmeg had plans with the photographer to release his photo. I had a google to see the bday cake, and just like their wedding cake it’s a total snooze fest. Pink frosting in a rustic application with three real, not edible flowers. I can make a better cake than that and I’m not a professional baker.



I just googled it and thought exactly the same. It looks...homemade, and not as a compliment.


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The very posh £244 birthday cake Harry and Meghan bought for one-year-old baby Lilibet - complete with two tier Amalfi lemon and elderflower fillings and strawberry buttercream covering*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan ordered a pink two-tier floral cake for Lilibet's first birthday *
> *Created by Violet Cakes, it featured a fruity Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling*
> *Royal couple released a new picture of Lilibet who turned one on Saturday*
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently introduced Lilibet to Queen in Windsor*
> 
> View attachment 5423149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
> 
> 
> The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



£244 for that?  They were robbed!


----------



## Aminamina

kkfiregirl said:


> Here’s some for your next cocktail (if you drink)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pur Elderflower Liqueur | Wine.com
> 
> 
> Pur Elderflower Liqueur from Germany - True to its tradition as an herbal elixir, Pur-likor Elderflower is made exclusively from the highly fragrant alpine elderflowers (Sambucus Nigra L Haschberg) i...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wine.com


Elderflower Martini is quite good if executed by a norm bartender . But don’t try it at home. Sorry, I am being desperately off topic lately. But thanks to H&TW.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...if true, not only Meghan Markle is a liar. Why would an award winning photographer risk his reputation like this? (But also, I am slightly confused what the scandal is here)



If you compare M in the photo and her at St Pauls, then to make sense, never mind a lapel mic, she must have had a Netflix producer under her Dior coat with her.


----------



## Zen101

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The very posh £244 birthday cake Harry and Meghan bought for one-year-old baby Lilibet - complete with two tier Amalfi lemon and elderflower fillings and strawberry buttercream covering*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan ordered a pink two-tier floral cake for Lilibet's first birthday *
> *Created by Violet Cakes, it featured a fruity Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling*
> *Royal couple released a new picture of Lilibet who turned one on Saturday*
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently introduced Lilibet to Queen in Windsor*
> 
> View attachment 5423149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
> 
> 
> The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Why do they have to leak everything to the press? Do you ever read articles about what cake the other great-children of the queen have for their birthdays? Why do they have to merch/promote a company instead of just throwing the kid a birthday party with no strings attached? Why do people need to be informed of this cake?


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> £244 for that?  They were robbed!



That's for people who have to actually buy the cake.Do you really think they bought this? 

Somebody must have told her peonies are _very_ expensive flowers, or maybe they flew to the Amalfi coast to pick the lemons.

More Mega-logic:
Name of child = Lllly (or however they spell it)
Flavour of cake = elderflowers and lemon
=
Choose peonies for decoration  .


----------



## Aminamina

VintageBagsAddict said:


> W
> 
> Why do they have to leak everything to the press? Do you ever read articles about what cake the other great-children of the queen have for their birthdays? Why do they have to merch/promote a company instead of just throwing the kid a birthday party with no strings attached? Why do people need to be informed of this cake?


I guess, when you have nothing else to leak, you lick your cake, call yourselves a royal couple and leak your cake…hooha


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?


Its an old flavoring (elderflower wine). A few  years back (or ten IDK), it Re surged in popularity and was served at bridesmaids showers (at least in NE US). Sweet and flowery and summery. 

i love peonies; it’s not their fault they are decorating this cake


----------



## zen1965

Elderflower sirup mixed with sparkling water is very refreshing and a lovely non-alcoholic drink particularly in summer.



kkfiregirl said:


> Here’s some for your next cocktail (if you drink)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pur Elderflower Liqueur | Wine.com
> 
> 
> Pur Elderflower Liqueur from Germany - True to its tradition as an herbal elixir, Pur-likor Elderflower is made exclusively from the highly fragrant alpine elderflowers (Sambucus Nigra L Haschberg) i...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wine.com


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Apologies to the baker, and everyone who licks their lips whenever they hear the words 'lemon and elderflower cake' and can eat foliage. £244 pounds for that? An Hermes scarf is only £370 and it's woven by elves and hand-sewn by angels.
> 
> Just say NO - not worth the calories or breaking out of the no-sugar programme.
> 
> and that name-banner looks photoshopped in - just sayin'
> and it's also an incredibly bi-centric-gender-typical cake in flavour and colour - just sayin'
> 
> View attachment 5423163



OMG they are right. The Lilibet banner with the crooked letters was totally Photoshopped onto the cake. So it’s not even the actual cake. Was there anything honest about their visit?


----------



## 1LV

The “very posh” birthday cake for one year old Lily is representative of everything else they do - pretentious.


----------



## KellyObsessed

papertiger said:


> Not the same chairs:
> 
> 1927 Elizabeth of York, one day to be Queen Elizabeth II (aged 14 months)
> 
> View attachment 5421974
> 
> 
> 1902, Elizabeth (one day to be the) Queen Mother
> 
> View attachment 5421975
> 
> 
> (Don't know why Getty think they own this image, they don't)


Getty Images holds and stores all the Royal family images going back generations.     In the documentary, The Queen and Canada, they filmed inside the Getty Images Royal family storage vaults.


----------



## bag-mania

880 said:


> Its an old flavoring (elderflower wine). A few  years back (or ten IDK), it Re surged in popularity and was served at bridesmaids showers (at least in NE US). Sweet and flowery and summery.
> 
> i love peonies; it’s not their fault they are decorating this cake



I had elderberry wine once. Not the same thing but I guess comes from the same plant?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

KellyObsessed said:


> Getty Images holds and stores all the Royal family images going back generations.     In the documentary, The Queen and Canada, they filmed inside the Getty Images Royal family storage vaults.



Really? Not going to get into it here because it's OT, buy they were founded in March 1995, so who sold the Royal pics and who owned them to begin with? Getty host a collection and distribution service, they are not the owners of public domain photos. 

Putting your name across a public domain photo doesn't make it yours. Or perhaps it does? 









						It’s crunch time for Seattle-based photo giant Getty Images, and for photographers
					

If lower prices have benefited Getty's customers, they've also meant less money for stock photographers, whose once-generous earnings have in some cases fallen to as low as a few pennies per image.




					www.seattletimes.com
				












						Getty Images and Public Domain Photos | Illinois Public Media
					

In this week's Legal Issues in the News, University of Illinois College of Law's Paul Heald discusses whether or not it is illegal for Getty Images to charge for the use of public domain photos.




					will.illinois.edu


----------



## CarryOn2020

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Why do they have to leak everything to the press? Do you ever read articles about what cake the other great-children of the queen have for their birthdays? Why do they have to merch/promote a company instead of just throwing the kid a birthday party with no strings attached? Why do people need to be informed of this cake?



to prove it really happened?  Would the cake baker lie? Noooo, surely not [sarcasm].
Agree, that name label looks photoshopped - blurry on the right side


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks to be an ‘inclusive’ cake - Amalfi, French Alps, UK

St Germain Elderflower Liqueur
375ml
France- The secret to this sweet treat is elderflower blossoms hand picked in the foothills of the Alps. Try as an after dinner drink or added to some bubbly for a festive cocktail.


*Amalfi Lemons*
Trade between the Republic of Amalfi and the Middle East seems to have given us the word 'lemon' as well as 'garden' after the Arabic '_limuczello_' and '_jardeno_'.

The fruit was grown to provide vitamin C on long sea voyages to prevent scurvy, but it was small and inconsequential and practically inedible.

Nevertheless, Minori was a key port and the local lemons were traded across Italy and beyond.

Botanist G.B. Ferrari was the first to record the qualities of the local lemons in 1646. He wrote:

'_the nipple is prominent, the rind is rough, pleasantly scented with a sweet taste, the flesh has 8 or 9 segments, the taste is pleasantly sour_'.

By the 19th century the lemon has assumed a great social and economic importance and the enormous work of transforming the previously unproductive rural landscape along a stretch of land from Positano to Vietri sul Mare was complete.








						Story of the Amalfi Coast Lemon
					

A history of the cultivation of lemons along the Amalfi coast and the town of Sorrento and traditional health benefits of the fruit and uses




					www.deliciousitaly.com
				




*Strawberry Buttercream * — lots of flavors in this cake — UK has delicious strawberries, just in time for Wimbledon 

from the BBC




__





						Lemon & elderflower celebration cake recipe | BBC Good Food
					

Decorate this simple elderflower and lemon cake with edible flowers for a showstopping celebration dessert. It's perfect for a wedding or birthday



					www.bbcgoodfood.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

Or they could have gotten a cake she would enjoy…


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is...if true, not only Meghan Markle is a liar. Why would an award winning photographer risk his reputation like this? (But also, I am slightly confused what the scandal is here)



I think, but do not know - the questions are :
_- when_ were the photos taken  - the photographer was in LA in April [so how old is Lil?]
_- where_ were the photos taken - difficult to tell, but it could be Montecito, could be ToadLess, could be anywhere.

The confusion centers around how old Lil is, was she in the UK for the jubli, and where the heck is Arxchie. Only my opinion.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think, but do not know - the questions are :
> _- when_ were the photos taken  - the photographer was in LA in April [so how old is Lil?]
> _- where_ were the photos taken - difficult to tell, but it could be Montecito, could be ToadLess, could be anywhere.
> 
> The confusion centers around how old Lil is, was she in the UK for the jubli, and where the heck is Arxchie. Only my opinion.


My guess 
Supposedly L met QEii and HM asked for their photog to take a snap 
QEII said no 
I bet Misan was the HM photog


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Swipe through to read everything



This is interesting and credible. It's obvious that such party would likely be included in the reality show, so I'm not surprised that people declined the invitation. They probably had gifts delivered to the Cottage with polite excuses.


----------



## Aimee3

That cake looks awfully small if they were really expecting people to show up and serve it to them.  The flavors sound horrible. I don’t think any one year old would like lemon, and elderflower is nauseating to my palate…plus I’m allergic to strawberries so you can all have my piece.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It is very inflammatory.  Why does this guy see the need to do this?  He wants clicks for the paper?  It is so easily disproven. The schedule for Jubilee was made months in advance. The will we go or won't we go Harkles had that party as a last ditch effort to redeem their poor showing.


Just between us, I believe Will's trip was planned long time ago to make sure he wouldn't be near Windsor on that particular day. It has to do with predicting the moves…


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?



Are you familiar with lychee? That's what it tastes like to me 




bag-mania said:


> Money? There are still many Meghan fans out there who would love to hire her photographer.



They would willingly crowdfund


----------



## octopus17

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?


My father used to make elderflower wine and it smelt like Tom cats p1ss, was as dry and strong as be damned and would floor anybody foolhardy enough to drink it. (There was also banana wine which was similar except didn't have the same appalling smell of cat wee).
Put me clean off it altogether but maybe it's different in food - I certainly hope so!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The very posh £244 birthday cake Harry and Meghan bought for one-year-old baby Lilibet - complete with two tier Amalfi lemon and elderflower fillings and strawberry buttercream covering*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan ordered a pink two-tier floral cake for Lilibet's first birthday *
> *Created by Violet Cakes, it featured a fruity Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling*
> *Royal couple released a new picture of Lilibet who turned one on Saturday*
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently introduced Lilibet to Queen in Windsor*
> 
> View attachment 5423149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
> 
> 
> The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm too lazy to open the article, thanks for posting the picture of the cake. I thought the girl's name was Lilibeth and not Lilibet. I'm OK with the cake, I'll take a slice.


----------



## tiktok

At the end of the day they live a very sad life.

Everything is choreographed.
Everything is merched.
Everything is planned so it looks good on the surface even if it’s all hollow - like a kid’s birthday cake that no kid would like or want to eat.
They are under the illusion that half the world is against them.
They’re offended to the point of legal action by anything that’s written about them that isn’t blindingly adoring.
Everything they say is pretentious, totally made up or insincere.
They wear expensive clothes even though they look cheap just to look rich and important.
There’s no substance and no impact to what they do.
Their family wants nothing to do with them after they threw every single family member under the bus on international TV.
All their money is directed towards looking rich rather than enjoying the life those riches can afford you (I mean, can they even find the kids at their mansion?).
They have delusions they’re so important that they need to surround themselves with security so they can’t even walk around like normal people.

It must be so exhausting to live such an inauthentic life, always for someone else to think something about you rather than for your own happiness and simple pleasures. Makes me appreciate my own life so much more.


----------



## Chanbal

Please! This is so ridiculous…


----------



## Chanbal

Someone posted this, look at Arch*e's hand holding the basket.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Someone posted this, look at Arch*e's hand holding the basket.



Am I blind?  I can’t even see Archie’s right hand to check out his thumb in that collage?


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> That cake looks awfully small if they were really expecting people to show up and serve it to them.  The flavors sound horrible. I don’t think any one year old would like lemon, and elderflower is nauseating to my palate…plus I’m allergic to strawberries so you can all have my piece.



It was the same flavor of cake that the baker made for their wedding except this one had strawberry frosting. Meghan must have liked it and asked for it again.



lanasyogamama said:


> Or they could have gotten a cake she would enjoy…
> View attachment 5423288



You mean take into consideration what the child would like? That’s crazy talk! There’s only one member of that family whose wants and preferences must be catered to and it isn’t Lilibet.


----------



## xincinsin

kkfiregirl said:


> OMG, his babies are beautiful!
> 
> Do you think he would lie/photoshop for them? That seems so unlikely …


Maybe not photoshop or lie, but some misdirection? He posted the photos but didn't explicitly state that they were taken at the supposed party at Frogmore.
_It was such a privilege to celebrate the 1st birthday of Lilibet with my family and hers! Joy and face painting all around_
It's a very ambiguous statement. The photo selection shows a redhead child, Methane carrying a child and with Misan's family, and Misan with one of his kids. Nowhere does it say it was Lili's party. It just lets the viewer draw that inference.

And I think he would do it to help Methane. He is happy that he was one of the people who helped set her up with Hazard.



bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?


No elderflowers in the tropics, but I'm fond of elderflower cordial. Diluted with water and chilled in the fridge, it makes a slightly sourish drink with a faint flowery fragrance to help beat the heat. But it's not a flavour which I'd think kids would enjoy. Below is the elderflower cordial I like, and next to it is another flower-based syrup which the kids here love and which I think would have been a much more kid-friendly flavouring if Methane was really pushing the Flower association and a pink theme.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles and the grandiosity complex!   










						Prince Harry, Meghan ‘hijacked’ car to avoid ‘third-tier’ royals in the UK: Details
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are said to have ‘hijacked’ a car while in the UK in an effort to avoid sharing a bus with ‘third-tier’ royals, according to royal commentator...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Am I blind?  I can’t even see Archie’s right hand to check out his thumb in that collage?


You need to go to the original tweet and click the photo to open it up. His hand does look kind of weird, but he was holding the basket angled oddly behind him, so maybe his arm did twist in a strange way.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Am I blind?  I can’t even see Archie’s right hand to check out his thumb in that collage?


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> You need to go to the original tweet and click the photo to open it up. His hand does look kind of weird, but he was holding the basket angled oddly behind him, so maybe his arm did twist in a strange way.


Please be careful if attempting to mimic Arch*e's arm/hand position, it can be very painful.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> His hand does look kind of weird, but he was holding the basket angled oddly behind him, so maybe his arm did twist in a strange way.



That arm position looks very mannequin like      I probably just need to cleanse my eyes after ogling too much at men in kilts on the other thread


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5423381



Forget the hand, what is that black mass between the hand holding the basket and his butt?


----------



## chowlover2

O


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Forget the hand, what is that black mass between the hand holding the basket and his butt?



Every.single.thing must be questioned, re-questioned, examined, re-examined.  This is why many people do not like these 2.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Forget the hand, what is that black mass between the hand holding the basket and his butt?


Looks like black chicken feathers?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Every.single.thing must be questioned, re-questioned, examined, re-examined.  This is why many people do not like these 2.


They missed their calling as mystery writers.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Forget the hand, what is that black mass between the hand holding the basket and his butt?


If you magnify the picture, you can see that his left leg is creating a shadow on his right leg while his entire body is creating a shadow to the right of his body and in front of the basket.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Looks like black chicken feathers?



Did they Photoshop out half of a chicken?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

So who face painted the kids at the party? Why isn't she/he getting any credit? The photographer gets credit. The cake baker gives interviews and makes news. That whole photo is weird. A $300 elderflower and lemon filling in a cake for a ONE year old????  W H Y ????  If that's what the adults want to eat, OK, but the child?  A Duncan Hines cake mix would have made the kid's day. But you can't merch THAT!  Are there really enough Markle stans that buy into this sh*t to make their lies and absurdities profitable?  Archie gets photographed in his underwear and later walking in a poopy chicken coop then Lilibet gets a $300 cake? Did they think elderberry was TQ's favorite and assumed she was going to attend the party??  Oh! What a coup for a Lilibet (squared) photo to merch to the tabloids. Oh wait. That didn't happen. My bad  .  If you claim to crave privacy so bad, then why advertise your one year old's cake???  And supposed face painted guests?  So.....is Lilibet going to have a California birthday party? Doesn't look like it. But had Lilibet gotten a photo with TQ, you can bet there'd have been a huge CA party. PRIVACY!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> If you magnify the picture, you can see that his left leg is creating a shadow on his right leg while his entire body is creating a shadow to the right of his body and in front of the basket.



But that wouldn’t explain why some of the “shadow” is overlapping his jeans. It looks like something solid to me.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> But that wouldn’t explain why some of the “shadow” is overlapping his jeans. It looks like something solid to me.
> 
> View attachment 5423391


TW's mink coat?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> But that wouldn’t explain why some of the “shadow” is overlapping his jeans. It looks like something solid to me.
> 
> View attachment 5423391



Do they do these odd photos deliberately or is it rotten luck? I feel like it is deliberate.
Now who is the creeper that enjoys these odd photos?  Hazzio.

ETA: reminds me of playing the Beatles album backwards to hear the secret message.


----------



## EverSoElusive

The red circle.... Another sign that the photo was probably manipulated with Photoshop or whatever imaging tool. The person used liquify tool making that circled part looking warped. Again, allegedly


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do they do these odd photos deliberately or is it rotten luck? I feel like it is deliberate.
> Now who is the creeper that enjoys these odd photos?  Hazzio.


Everything related to these people is foggy…
Where is the girl's arm? (the one that is standing)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do they do these odd photos deliberately or is it rotten luck? I feel like it is deliberate.
> Now who is the creeper that enjoys these odd photos?  Hazzio.



I feel like it’s a game to analyze them.  

Here’s another photo of the cake. It is different from the other one we’ve seen but it’s interesting that they made a point to shoot it at the same angle. For some reason I think the cake looks more appetizing here than in the earlier pic.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> Everything related to these people is foggy…
> Where is the girl's arm? (the one that is standing)
> View attachment 5423402


She has moved her arm, like in old photos when exposure was long and you get a ghosting effect if the  subject moved, her mum was holding her hand, she has moved her arm and that is why her arm  is not in focus


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Everything related to these people is foggy…
> Where is the girl's arm? (the one that is standing)
> View attachment 5423402



My theory on that was the little girl was holding something in her hand that Meghan wanted removed. The stripes in the fabric of the mother’s dress are all blurry, but only in the area where the child’s arm should be.


----------



## Chanbal

From Page Six










						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle release new photos of daughter Lilibet after Jubilee
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s 1-year-old met Queen Elizabeth II, after whom Lilibet is named, for the first time last week during the monarch’s Platinum Jubilee.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> The red circle.... Another sign that the photo was probably manipulated with Photoshop or whatever imaging tool. The person used liquify tool making that circled part looking warped. Again, allegedly
> 
> View attachment 5423407


This is intriguing.  I've stared at this photo to a point of getting blurry eyed BUT I'm thinking the black area in discussion is Archie's shadow as you also see the shadow of left hand of person taking the photo.  I see part of his head, shoulder and part of him down to his boot.  Inside the shadow looks odd due to the rough ground (pebbles, sticks? notice around his boots).  The mystery to me ... is in your red circle around the right back jean loop seem like the shadow is slightly over his backend.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> *So who face painted the kids at the party?* *Why isn't she/he getting any credit? *The photographer gets credit. The cake baker gives interviews and makes news. That whole photo is weird. A $300 elderflower and lemon filling in a cake for a ONE year old????  W H Y ????  If that's what the adults want to eat, OK, but the child?  A Duncan Hines cake mix would have made the kid's day. But you can't merch THAT!  Are there really enough Markle stans that buy into this sh*t to make their lies and absurdities profitable?  Archie gets photographed in his underwear and later walking in a poopy chicken coop then Lilibet gets a $300 cake? Did they think elderberry was TQ's favorite and assumed she was going to attend the party??  Oh! What a coup for a Lilibet (squared) photo to merch to the tabloids. Oh wait. That didn't happen. My bad  .  If you claim to crave privacy so bad, then why advertise your one year old's cake???  And supposed face painted guests?  So.....is Lilibet going to have a California birthday party? Doesn't look like it. But had Lilibet gotten a photo with TQ, you can bet there'd have been a huge CA party. PRIVACY!!!



The face painter didn’t donate services in exchange for free advertising like the others. 

The woman who gave Meghan a facial should also be lumped in with the baker and the photographer.


----------



## EverSoElusive

My comment was regarding the right side of his jeans. Sorry I wasn't clear and sorry my circle was a little bigger than the part I claimed was liquified


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> The “very posh” birthday cake for one year old Lily is representative of everything else they do - pretentious.


Plus notice that she always have to tell you how much something costs. Very nouveau of her. Pathetic


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> My comment was regarding the right side of his jeans. Sorry I wasn't clear and sorry my circle was a little bigger than the part I claimed was liquified
> 
> View attachment 5423435


Agree that's the part that was puzzling to me too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> My theory on that was the little girl was holding something in her hand that Meghan wanted removed. The stripes in the fabric of the mother’s dress are all blurry, but only in the area where the child’s arm should be.


The skirt is blurry also further up next to the girl's head. And the mum's hand looks like she should have been grasping her daughter's hand. So daughter was holding something that floated like a small balloon or stuck up like a decoration that would undermine the tale (Christmas decor? Someone else's party favour?)


----------



## Lodpah

I’m not too invested in try to figure out the photos but some sleuths over on Quora mentioned her wearing her old ring. Didn’t she get it redone?


----------



## mellibelly

Wait a minute. This was the bday cake picture I saw. It looks like a single tier cake. This is from Page Six


----------



## mellibelly

Also are we sure these are peonies? I just bought a bunch from Trader Joe’s for $9.99 but mine are hot pink. If they are, peonies are *poisonous*. Why would you put poisonous flowers on a child’s cake?!


----------



## lulu212121

That little girl's hand was not moving as to create a blur, IMO. It looks like it was photoshopped out for whatever reason. I think orginally she was holding her mom's hand, maybe with a (not birthday) party favor. Very sloppy. That photographer should be embarrassed.


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?


I drink elderflower tea sometimes. It tastes like an herby floral tea. I also like Saint Germaine, an elderflower liquor mentioned earlier. It’s very sweet and added to champagne makes a nice cocktail. But I don’t want elderflower cake. Give me carrot, red velvet or chocolate


----------



## mellibelly

If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent


Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.


----------



## mellibelly

Ok I’m going stop harping on this cake in a sec. It really bothered me back in 2018 so I need to get it out of my system  This quote from People:

“Ptak and her team of six bakers have spent five days baking and icing each tier of the cake in Buckingham Palace”

7 people over 5 days to make this basic cake?! They probably charged tens of thousands. I could make this cake *by myself*. Have you seen what one baker in the finals of the Great British Bake Off make in one day?!


----------



## periogirl28

I drink Elderflower drinks all the time, cordials, cocktails etc. I love Amalfi lemons, while in Amalfi. Completely love Peonies, I don't think they belong on a cake designed to not poison anyone. I cannot understand why nothing is ever transparent, sincere or real with these two. A wedding 3 days earlier in the garden, a mystery meeting with the Queen, which did or did not happen.


----------



## Lodpah

I read the Clooneys were in town for the Jubilee. I wonder if they took the kids to the bday party? Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## Gal4Dior

mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.


So on MeGain’s since deleted IG account and her basic little blog she had, it was apparent she was a big fan of peonies. In fact, I remember her coyly posting a photo of a large bouquet of light pink peonies shortly after her and the Ginge started dating.

Also in her basic little blog was her love for this bakery when she visited London last (may or may not have been when she was seeing Harry. I suspect before). Her favorite cake was the lemon elderberry cake.

Anyhoo, that wedding cake was all Meg (insert gasp of surprise) and this Lillibet cake is the same.

This was all about her style and her taste, not what would make little Lili happy.

This woman thinks she’s an influencer, but in fact she is just a basic B - still trying to fit in with the 1% wearing bespoke Dior - and not succeeding.

At the end of the day, she’s still the self centered, vapid Rachel Markle from LA. A former suitcase girl, a supporting player on a B list cable show, who landed the biggest role of her life!

She has ended her acting career as the TW, the Royal Gaslighter, who is holding her idiot hobbit of a husband hostage by the poor life choices he’s always seemed to make.

I would feel sorry for Harry Markle, if he didn’t act like such a petulant child.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Just between us, I believe Will's trip was planned long time ago to make sure he wouldn't be near Windsor on that particular day. It has to do with predicting the moves…



It _was_ planned a long time ago (imagine the planning that went into the Jubilee?) but not because he didn't want to go to the H&M baby's b-day party for the will-they-won't-they couple of St. Elsewhere, but because he actually works.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Maybe not photoshop or lie, but some misdirection? He posted the photos but didn't explicitly state that they were taken at the supposed party at Frogmore.
> _It was such a privilege to celebrate the 1st birthday of Lilibet with my family and hers! Joy and face painting all around_
> It's a very ambiguous statement. The photo selection shows a redhead child, Methane carrying a child and with Misan's family, and Misan with one of his kids. Nowhere does it say it was Lili's party. It just lets the viewer draw that inference.
> 
> And I think he would do it to help Methane. He is happy that he was one of the people who helped set her up with Hazard.
> 
> 
> No elderflowers in the tropics, but I'm fond of elderflower cordial. Diluted with water and chilled in the fridge, it makes a slightly sourish drink with a faint flowery fragrance to help beat the heat. But it's not a flavour which I'd think kids would enjoy. Below is the elderflower cordial I like, and next to it is another flower-based syrup which the kids here love and which I think would have been a much more kid-friendly flavouring if Methane was really pushing the Flower association and a pink theme.
> View attachment 5423377



Does it come in chocolate though?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I feel like it’s a game to analyze them.
> 
> Here’s another photo of the cake. It is different from the other one we’ve seen but it’s interesting that they made a point to shoot it at the same angle. For some reason I think the cake looks more appetizing here than in the earlier pic.
> 
> View attachment 5423400



That is NOT a child's cake, that is a wedding cake (that someone iced in a hurry).

Peonies _died_ for that? There has to be a kinder way of decorating 

and @mellibelly is right! Peonies get people back:



			https://www.ehow.com/info_8686925_peonies-poisonous.html


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The very posh £244 birthday cake Harry and Meghan bought for one-year-old baby Lilibet - complete with two tier Amalfi lemon and elderflower fillings and strawberry buttercream covering*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan ordered a pink two-tier floral cake for Lilibet's first birthday *
> *Created by Violet Cakes, it featured a fruity Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling*
> *Royal couple released a new picture of Lilibet who turned one on Saturday*
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently introduced Lilibet to Queen in Windsor*
> 
> View attachment 5423149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
> 
> 
> The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I agree there’s nothing very posh about it, looks like a generic pink supermarket  cake with a M&S peony and roses bouquet on top of it and where’s the candle or a number 1?


bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?


I like elderflower and it’s a very old fashioned British sort of thing. Its very sweet and tastes like white flowers and citrus. It’s a bit like orange blossom water if you’ve had that.


bag-mania said:


> Money? There are still many Meghan fans out there who would love to hire her photographer.


I mean tbf to the guy he made her look much better in that photo than all the live coverage did. 
I think he certainly has photoshop pro at least.


mellibelly said:


> Also are we sure these are peonies? I just bought a bunch from Trader Joe’s for $9.99 but mine are hot pink. If they are, peonies are *poisonous*. Why would you put poisonous flowers on a child’s cake?!


Tbh I think this is just their stock photo of the cake for marketing purposes not even the actual one.
peonies range from red through pink and yellow to white and not all varietals are poisonous but they are certainly not a flower nice to eat the way a rose or elderflower is.
Also yes its an awful cake for a kid and just a rip off of their wedding one with no personality for a kid.

I do think they might have just put out their stock photo of their ‘sloppy pink flower cake for basics #1’
No photo of kid or anyone near it.


mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.


Ok I’ll bite, how can something be a Swiss meringue and a buttercream? An icing is too thick to mix with a meringue- it’d just turn into sloppy, sugary gloop….oh wait.

I totally agree it looks very basic and sloppy.  I’ve never seen it before and it’s so funny when you consider how much this thing cost and how they could’ve got top of the line stuff. Money can’t buy you taste I guess.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.



By Appointment - to the doctors


----------



## Icyjade

I’ve always found the super elaborate Indonesian cakes fascinating ever since I saw them in an article: 









						Proof - This Indonesian bakery creates the worlds most elaborate wedding cakes - Luxurylaunches
					

When it comes to celebrations, lavish cakes are a given. While the majority of us would love to gorge on a luscious piece of cake at any point in time,




					luxurylaunches.com


----------



## Pivoine66

Chanbal said:


> Please! This is so ridiculous…
> View attachment 5423318


To me, it all seems awkwardly forced in order to somehow remain in the media and somehow relevant -
and merching the personal privat nickname of HMTQ.

I vacillate between being/feeling rather appalled  and having to laugh, because her appearances somehow now evoke for me personally a line from W. Allen's film "Midnight in Paris": "Cheap is cheap". (Scene at ca. 28/29 minutes: Future mother in law tells fiancé of her daughter, who is shocked due to a hefty pricetag for antique chairs.)


----------



## papertiger

Pivoine66 said:


> To me, it all seems awkwardly forced in order to somehow remain in the media and somehow relevant -
> and merching the personal privat nickname of HMTQ.
> 
> I vacillate between being/feeling rather appalled  and having to laugh, because her appearances somehow now evoke for me personally a line from W. Allen's film "Midnight in Paris": "Cheap is cheap". (Scene at ca. 28/29 minutes: Future mother in law tells fiancé of her daughter, who is shocked due to a hefty pricetag for antique chairs.)



I don't know whether you know but H&M bought Lillibet domains before informing the Queen of their plans to call her by Her Majesty's nickname.

Firstly, they are supposed to ask permission, secondly they basically merched the Queen by buying her named domain before even informing her. They said they bought it to safeguard their daughter when more correctly they literally and commercially exploited the Queen. 

You know the saying 'he'd sell his own grandmother' well Hazer actually did! 

How twisted can you get?


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> I’ve never eaten anything made of elderflower. For those of you with more sophisticated palates, what does it taste like?



I've never *eaten* anything with elderflower but my grandparents used to make elderflower wine and it was


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Amalfi Lemons*
> Trade between the Republic of Amalfi and the Middle East seems to have given us the word 'lemon' as well as 'garden' after the Arabic '_limuczello_' and '_jardeno_'.



I was never fluent in Arabic, but I do have a feel for the language, and neither word sounds even remotely Arabic and if so the transcription is completely off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think, but do not know - the questions are :
> _- when_ were the photos taken  - the photographer was in LA in April [so how old is Lil?]
> _- where_ were the photos taken - difficult to tell, but it could be Montecito, could be ToadLess, could be anywhere.
> 
> The confusion centers around how old Lil is, was she in the UK for the jubli, and where the heck is Arxchie. Only my opinion.



If she was born three months earlier that at least would align with that ridiculously huge bump she was sporting for their announcement. Honestly, their deception is starting to annoy me, it's not even entertaining anymore.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think, but do not know - the questions are :
> _- when_ were the photos taken  - the photographer was in LA in April [so how old is Lil?]
> _- where_ were the photos taken - difficult to tell, but it could be Montecito, could be ToadLess, could be anywhere.
> 
> The confusion centers around how old Lil is, was she in the UK for the jubli, and where the heck is Arxchie. Only my opinion.



I agree, personally I think the kids stayed in Montecito....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5423381



That looks like his right hand is his left hand (index finger where the pinkie is supposed to be). So...weird. Also his hair looks much lighter here?


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Everything related to these people is foggy…
> Where is the girl's arm? (the one that is standing)
> View attachment 5423402



Yikes, the mother seems to be holding her daughter's hand...which isn't there


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.



That does not look like Swiss meringue buttercream, though. It is super, super smooth and slightly glossy. It would be rather difficult to put it on the cake and get this tiny little needlepoint indentions if that makes sense. You see that more with something stiffer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok I’ll bite, how can something be a Swiss meringue and a buttercream? An icing is too thick to mix with a meringue- it’d just turn into sloppy, sugary gloop….oh wait.



Swiss meringue buttercream is really a thing and I love it. You heat the eggwhite with the sugar until the sugar melts, whip that into meringue and then add room temperature butter. Then you can add extracts, melted chocolate,  lemon curd, fruit puree or jam to flavour it.

You can also make Italian (meringue) buttercream by whipping eggwhites, pouring in hot sugar syrup and then adding the butter, but I far prefer Swiss.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> Also are we sure these are peonies? I just bought a bunch from Trader Joe’s for $9.99 but mine are hot pink. If they are, peonies are *poisonous*. Why would you put poisonous flowers on a child’s cake?!


There is a whole YouTube video on this subject by The Sugar Scoop. The youtuber looked into it because she baked a cake and decorated it with peonies, and someone sent her a message informing her that the flowers were poisonous. She checked out sources which claimed peonies are poisonous but also found sources which claimed they are not. She tested by rubbing peony petals on her skin and lips but suffered no reaction. TL;DR she concluded that there was insufficient evidence that the flowers were poisonous.

I also checked Chinese language websites (peonies being the national flower of mainland China). There are a lot of recipes and herbal brews using peony petals, but many of the websites also caution that not every type is edible, and some do not recommend eating them raw. One specifically mentioned that it was inadvisable for people with a weak constitution to eat peonies, and suggested a 5 gram daily limit even for healthy adults. No website mentioned peony stalks or plant sap, which would be the parts in contact with the cake.

I also found the most gorgeous edible peonies made from wafer paper. They look yummy and very lifelike


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If she was born three months earlier that at least would align with that ridiculously huge bump she was sporting for their announcement. Honestly, their deception is starting to annoy me, it's not even entertaining anymore.


If she were born three months earlier, it would call into question Methane's dramatic alleged miscarriage/dental appointment.


----------



## Pivoine66

papertiger said:


> I don't know whether you know but H&M bought Lillibet domains before informing the Queen of their plans to call her by Her Majesty's nickname.
> 
> Firstly, they are supposed to ask permission, secondly they basically merched the Queen by buying her named domain before even informing her. They said they bought it to safeguard their daughter when more correctly they literally and commercially exploited the Queen.
> 
> You know the saying 'he'd sell his own grandmother' well Hazer actually did!
> 
> How twisted can you get?


Thank you for the information! This takes my breath away.

Then I feel really appalled by the Woman with a career as a former not quite so well known actress in a supporting TV role and "briefcase girl" and rather surprised by the man joggling for her, once upon a time a very popular Prince and Officer (?). 

Well, and a good laugh at her - hm - special way of walking up the stairs to a dignified SOLEMN service ... (still hearing the (supposed) mother in law in the movie "C is c "...)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I feel like it’s a game to analyze them.
> 
> Here’s another photo of the cake. It is different from the other one we’ve seen but it’s interesting that they made a point to shoot it at the same angle. For some reason I think the cake looks more appetizing here than in the earlier pic.
> 
> View attachment 5423400



This cost £244??! Rip off.


----------



## Sharont2305

A Marks & Spencer Colin the Caterpillar cake would've been better for a one year old.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The very posh £244 birthday cake Harry and Meghan bought for one-year-old baby Lilibet - complete with two tier Amalfi lemon and elderflower fillings and strawberry buttercream covering*
> 
> *Harry and Meghan ordered a pink two-tier floral cake for Lilibet's first birthday *
> *Created by Violet Cakes, it featured a fruity Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling*
> *Royal couple released a new picture of Lilibet who turned one on Saturday*
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently introduced Lilibet to Queen in Windsor*
> 
> View attachment 5423149
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan bought one-year-old baby Lilibet a two tier cake
> 
> 
> The pink birthday cake featured the youngster's name and fresh peony flowers - complete with an Amalfi lemon and elderflower filling and covered in strawberry buttercream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


obviously a one-year-old wouldn't care but it is beautiful I think


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sharont2305 said:


> A Marks & Spencer Colin the Caterpillar cake would've been better for a one year old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423582



I love M&S. They have good food items


----------



## sdkitty

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Why do they have to leak everything to the press? Do you ever read articles about what cake the other great-children of the queen have for their birthdays? Why do they have to merch/promote a company instead of just throwing the kid a birthday party with no strings attached? Why do people need to be informed of this cake?


because that's what their life is all about?
they claim to be humanitarians but I've yet to see news of their foundation giving anything substantial to anyone


----------



## wisconsin

rose60610 said:


> So who face painted the kids at the party? Why isn't she/he getting any credit? The photographer gets credit. The cake baker gives interviews and makes news. That whole photo is weird. A $300 elderflower and lemon filling in a cake for a ONE year old????  W H Y ????  If that's what the adults want to eat, OK, but the child?  A Duncan Hines cake mix would have made the kid's day. But you can't merch THAT!  Are there really enough Markle stans that buy into this sh*t to make their lies and absurdities profitable?  Archie gets photographed in his underwear and later walking in a poopy chicken coop then Lilibet gets a $300 cake? Did they think elderberry was TQ's favorite and assumed she was going to attend the party??  Oh! What a coup for a Lilibet (squared) photo to merch to the tabloids. Oh wait. That didn't happen. My bad  .  If you claim to crave privacy so bad, then why advertise your one year old's cake???  And supposed face painted guests?  So.....is Lilibet going to have a California birthday party? Doesn't look like it. But had Lilibet gotten a photo with TQ, you can bet there'd have been a huge CA party. PRIVACY!!!


To be honest, for many people and cultures, the one year birthday is for parents and adults. So the cake would be ok. I love the pink.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> It _was_ planned a long time ago (imagine the planning that went into the Jubilee?) but not because he didn't want to go to the H&M baby's b-day party for the will-they-won't-they couple of St. Elsewhere, but because he actually works.


Your explanation is great. I think when planning a big event, organizers have in consideration all potential noises & interferences.

There was always the possibility that the Harkles would be in the UK for the Jubilee. There is evidence that they allegedly use whatever they can for interviews, self-promotion, photo-Ops… Lilib's official b-day coincides with one of the main Jubilee days… Will&Kate have 3 kids. How can one avoid being trapped in a potential and unwanted 'commercial' venture? A good organizer would consider this way ahead of time imo.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> From Page Six
> View attachment 5423426
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle release new photos of daughter Lilibet after Jubilee
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s 1-year-old met Queen Elizabeth II, after whom Lilibet is named, for the first time last week during the monarch’s Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


photog's wife and kids are outshining Meghan and the baby - surprised she posed with them.  and her pants seem to have a spot on them? and are wrinkled - maybe linen.  I guess this is supposed to be "real"


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.


guess I'm in the minority here but I think that is very pretty


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lanasyogamama said:


> The green shoes is what set me off too.



I posted a photo of her holding the shoes in their thread but just noticed it was deleted…I don’t seem to have any messages about why…I’m guessing it was deemed political


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> *I don't know whether you know but H&M bought Lillibet domains before informing the Queen of their plans to call her by Her Majesty's nickname.*
> 
> Firstly, they are supposed to ask permission, secondly they basically merched the Queen by buying her named domain before even informing her. They said they bought it to safeguard their daughter when more correctly they literally and commercially exploited the Queen.
> 
> You know the saying 'he'd sell his own grandmother' well Hazer actually did!
> 
> How twisted can you get?


Yeah, it's good to be reminded of one more 'commercial venture'. Their PR still expected to have them on the balcony and seated in the first row @ the Thanksgiving Service.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> photog's wife and kids are outshining Meghan and the baby - surprised she posed with them.  and her pants seem to have a spot on them? and are wrinkled - maybe linen.  I guess this is supposed to be "real"


Yeah! They all look good in the photo, but I've no idea whether TW posed with or was Photoshopped with the photographer's family.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if DM is sending a hidden message to Hazz. 











						ANDREW LOWRIE: Edward gave up the throne for woman who didn't love him
					

ANDREW LOWRIE: It is doubtful whether Wallis ever loved Edward at all. She'd wanted to end her relationship with her royal lover when he became King in January 1936.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

Thank you to everyone who described how elderflower tastes!


----------



## 1LV

Sharont2305 said:


> A Marks & Spencer Colin the Caterpillar cake would've been better for a one year old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423582


This would be adorable for a one year old!   The cake L’bet got was to impress strangers though.  I can’t imagine everything I do being driven by what others will think of it.  If the truth is known, how miserable of a life that must be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I read one article that said that the baker also made a smash cake for Lili. Who knows if that is true but if it was I hope it was something the baby would like.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> because that's what their life is all about?
> they claim to be humanitarians but I've yet to see news of their foundation giving anything substantial to anyone


oh sorry I forgot about her visit to texas with her camera crew


----------



## Chanbal

I believe that the Harkles were seated in the middle of the row with Beatrice firmly at the end, so the lack of a 'gesture of acknowledgment' would be relatively discreet. The organizers were 5*s imo.  



_The moment came at the conclusion of the service of thanksgiving for Her Majesty and as *William**, his wife Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, their father Prince Charles and stepmother Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall made their way back up the aisle. With their expressions entirely neutral, the royal party passed the second row*, completely ignoring Harry and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, who returned the frosty favour. *There was not a nod or a discreet tilt of the head or any single discernible gesture of acknowledgment from either side*._



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/william-and-harry-rift-enters-dangerous-new-phase/news-story/ae9ce4259e9c080b2ba4c24796329e6f


----------



## bag-mania

One thing that seems to have been completely ignored, did they actually meet with Charles? Some outlets claimed there was an impromptu visit but others say nothing. The media has been focused on the rift between the brothers but has been ignoring the father and son, which is the more important relationship for the immediate future.


----------



## Chanbal

TW may have missed a chance of a photo-op, it looks like Los Padres lost 12:8.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I read one article that said that the baker also made a smash cake for Lili. Who knows if that is true but if it was I hope it was something the baby would like.


I had to look up what was a smash cake. It would have been a great PR photo if they had baby + smash cake, but I think they went for the grown-up floral cake to tie it back to their wedding and the image of the elegant duchess. No pics of any cake cutting or guests eating the cake, which really makes me doubt the party happened or, if it did, it was probably an adult-centric party with cocktails and much swanning around.


----------



## youngster

mellibelly said:


> Ok I’m going stop harping on this cake in a sec. It really bothered me back in 2018 so I need to get it out of my system  This quote from People:
> 
> “Ptak and her team of six bakers have spent five days baking and icing each tier of the cake in Buckingham Palace”
> 
> 7 people over 5 days to make this basic cake?! They probably charged tens of thousands. I could make this cake *by myself*. Have you seen what one baker in the finals of the Great British Bake Off make in one day?!



I actually think it is kind of a pretty cake but for a farmhouse/country/casual wedding because it does look like someone put it all together in their own kitchen. I think I could have baked that, the layers look uneven after all lol, its just not appropriate for a royal wedding and the setting of their reception to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I actually think it is a kind of a pretty cake but for a farmhouse/country/casual wedding because it does look like someone put it all together in their own kitchen. I think I could have baked that, the layers look uneven after all lol, its just not appropriate for a royal wedding and the setting of their reception to me.



This is kind of the theme of that marriage, isn't it? All those...misfits.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> TW may have missed a chance of a photo-op, it looks like Los Padres lost 12:8.



I’m sure the loss won’t stop them from hoisting the trophy if she’s there.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> One thing that seems to have been completely ignored, did they actually meet with Charles? Some outlets claimed there was an impromptu visit but others say nothing. The media has been focused on the rift between the brothers but has been ignoring the father and son, which is the more important relationship for the immediate future.


One story said they visited Clarence House, which was a rendezvous point for car to church, not a meeting with Charles
supposedly, they were to rendezvous with the Yorks, and the six of them were to take the same minivan to the Church. H&M would have been seated first inside the row, then the Yorks , a very stage managed entrance 
but H&M were late, went in land rover, Yorks were already seated and had to move out of the way so HM could get in, awkward


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> TW may have missed a chance of a photo-op, it looks like Los Padres lost 12:8.



Oooh H has a career on the professional polo circuit , next he will be modeling for Ralph Lauren Polo clothes


----------



## youngster

One benefit to putting handsome Major Johnny Thompson directly behind MM and Harry at the Thanksgiving Service, and staggering the seats so you can clearly see the Major's  handsome face, is that I find myself looking right past Harry to Major Thompson lolol!  Well played, courtiers, _well_ played.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Difficult to believe he is related to the BRF - note the Backgrid logo  











						Prince Harry is back on the polo fields of Santa Barbara
					

The Duke of Sussex, 37, played for his friend Nacho Figueras' team Los Padres at the Cancha de Estrella Polo Club in Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, on Friday




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bagshopr

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if DM is sending a hidden message to Hazz.
> 
> View attachment 5423615
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ANDREW LOWRIE: Edward gave up the throne for woman who didn't love him
> 
> 
> ANDREW LOWRIE: It is doubtful whether Wallis ever loved Edward at all. She'd wanted to end her relationship with her royal lover when he became King in January 1936.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Now THIS is a very interesting article. Thank you for posting!


----------



## mellibelly

youngster said:


> I actually think it is kind of a pretty cake but for a farmhouse/country/casual wedding because it does look like someone put it all together in their own kitchen. I think I could have baked that, the layers look uneven after all lol, its just not appropriate for a royal wedding and the setting of their reception to me.


This is exactly how I felt about their cake. It was inappropriate for the style of wedding they had. A cake like that would work for Bea and Edo’s small wedding and her vintage dress. It wasn’t the right look for a $40 million “spectacle” of a wedding with 600 guests, a custom Givenchy gown with a 17 foot veil, 16 foot train in St George’s Chapel with a carriage procession. This is why her messy bun hair was so wrong with the tiara as was the flower girls not wearing tights. Like a previous poster said, Nutmeg has bad, basic bish tastes and it shows in everything she picks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Difficult to believe he is related to the BRF - note the Backgrid logo
> 
> View attachment 5423691
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is back on the polo fields of Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, played for his friend Nacho Figueras' team Los Padres at the Cancha de Estrella Polo Club in Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, on Friday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wow he looks really bald here!


----------



## youngster

bagshopr said:


> Now THIS is a very interesting article. Thank you for posting!



It was interesting! I've read many articles about Wallis and Edward and the opinions range widely about whether she was obsessed with marrying him so she could be Queen or, the opposite, that she didn't really want to marry him and was exhausted and bored living "their great romance" for decades.  There is a fairly recent book out on her, The Real Wallis Simpson, that attempts to rehab her image though I have not read it yet.

One thing I do know, is that the entire world owes her gratitude.  Edward would have been an awful war time King, just horrific, and it makes me ill thinking what the world might look like today if he had remained king.  So, for that, she has my thanks and I don't judge her too harshly.  That, and she had some awesome bling.


----------



## Chloe302225

Lily's Birthday Cake Photo
					

Why are people critical of a cake?




					fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> But that wouldn’t explain why some of the “shadow” is overlapping his jeans. It looks like something solid to me.
> 
> View attachment 5423391





EverSoElusive said:


> The red circle.... Another sign that the photo was probably manipulated with Photoshop or whatever imaging tool. The person used liquify tool making that circled part looking warped. Again, allegedly
> 
> View attachment 5423407





EverSoElusive said:


> My comment was regarding the right side of his jeans. Sorry I wasn't clear and sorry my circle was a little bigger than the part I claimed was liquified
> 
> View attachment 5423435


I can only guess at what is the black mass/goop. It may be an article of clothing dropped on the ground. It could be a pet if they have one besides the chicken. Whatever it is, it's lying in his shadow because we can see his head's shadow at the far end. What I also find odd, there is a shadow of what looks like a hand with three fingers on the bottom right side of the basket on the second image. It could be anything because photoshopping can distort the whole image.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> photog's wife and kids are outshining Meghan and the baby - surprised she posed with them.  and her pants seem to have a spot on them? and are wrinkled - maybe linen.  I guess this is supposed to be "real"


never mind
I'm sure in her mind she and her baby are more beautiful than the other woman and her kids


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> You gotta effing be kidding me.  The New Yorker is one of the many shills for Wokism and will go to any desperate lying length to use "racism" for virtually anything. They could "find" racism in a blade of grass.  I used to subscribe to the New Yorker a while back. Last year I attempted taking them up on a steep discount subscription offer and immediately after my credit card was fraudulently used and I cancelled the card. This happened TWICE with trying to subscribe to the New Yorker going directly through THEM. They do have some things I like reading about and was willing to throw twenty bucks at a subscription promotion. Not any more. Nope.


Same here, canceled my subscription a few years back when it looked as though they were “supporting” the Harkle lies!


----------



## surfer

I haven't posted in this thread before, just been reading only but can't help sharing these two pics- anyone noticing the similar inspo in the styles?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> One story said they visited Clarence House, which was a rendezvous point for car to church, not a meeting with Charles
> supposedly, they were to rendezvous with the Yorks, and the six of them were to take the same minivan to the Church. H&M would have been seated first inside the row, then the Yorks , a very stage managed entrance
> but H&M were late, went in land rover, Yorks were already seated and had to move out of the way so HM could get in, awkward


Another story states they missed the bus on purpose so they would have to take a car because they wanted to arrive late and walk down the aisle by themselves to prove how special they were. Then they expected everyone to scoot over to give them the aisle seat so they could insert themself into the exiting procession right behind Charles and Camilla and the Cambridges, but no one budged and Dufus and TW had to take their assigned seat. To their dismay they realized that BP was well prepared to neutralize their little schemes.


----------



## CeeJay

SBLady said:


> Oprah has a jet.


Yes she does, but Oprah isn’t stupid ..  she’s got to know that these two are harping on everyone else about private jets and their carbon footprint, so I don’t think Oprah would lend them her jet knowing all too well that her (Oprah’s) name would be associated with their hypocrisy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

surfer said:


> I haven't posted in this thread before, just been reading only but can't help sharing these two pics- anyone noticing the similar inspo in the styles?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423770
> View attachment 5423771


Gloves!


----------



## bellecate

I’ll just leave this here. This is how you do a cake Meggie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll leave this here 



Note BLG’s reply - the competition is fierce


----------



## gracekelly

The Harkles thought they could hitch a ride with Dad and that would give them a leg up and be noticed.  It doesn't work that way.  The heir to the throne doesn't pick up hitchhikers.


----------



## Hermes Zen

surfer said:


> I haven't posted in this thread before, just been reading only but can't help sharing these two pics- anyone noticing the similar inspo in the styles?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423770
> View attachment 5423771


Wow, yes the white outfit plus the gloves!  Here again example of M copying others!  Thanks for posting @surfer !  Welcome!!


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave this here
> 
> 
> 
> Note BLG’s reply - the competition is fierce
> View attachment 5423860



Ladies of TPF you have competition 
Does HGS reads this forum?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ralph’s people called  - they are definitely *not* interested. Stop calling us and leave Nacho alone.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ralph’s people called  - they are definitely *not* interested. Stop calling us and leave Nacho alone.




Is ‘just call me Harry’ having someone help him undress???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> Like a previous poster said, Nutmeg has bad, basic bish tastes and it shows in everything she picks.



Yet somehow she thinks she's the cool girl.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The Harkles thought they could hitch a ride with Dad and that would give them a leg up and be noticed.  It doesn't work that way.  The heir to the throne doesn't pick up hitchhikers.


as we've been saying, they are reaping what they've sown.  they should not be surprised.  they should probably be grateful they were included at all

After that Oprah debacle, Who TF do they think they are?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> Wow, yes the white outfit plus the gloves!  Here again example of M copying others!  Thanks for posting @surfer !  Welcome!!



She should have paid attention to Wallis' clothes always fitting impeccably as well.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yet somehow she thinks she's the cool girl.



She was cool (to me) back when she had her blog and was her authentic basic bish self - but now she comes across as too ‘try hard.’


----------



## Sophisticatted

The colorized bananas on that Duchess of Windsor story.  LOL!  If that’s not shade, I don’t know what is!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Is ‘just call me Harry’ having someone help him undress???
> View attachment 5423899



‘Imo, these are surprising photos. Does a nearly 40 yr old need a dresser?  If so, perhaps this should be done privately. :sheesh:


----------



## kkfiregirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Imo, these are surprising photos. Does a nearly 40 yr old need a dresser?  If so, perhaps this should be done privately. :sheesh:



You’re so right … even 12 yo boys don’t want help getting dressed in public


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave this here
> 
> 
> 
> Note BLG’s reply - the competition is fierce
> View attachment 5423860





pukasonqo said:


> Ladies of TPF you have competition
> Does HGS reads this forum?


A few hours ago, I searched the Net on "Johnny Thompson Scots Guards" to find more news about him and when I clicked on the first link, it led me strait to our Johnny Thompson thread, here on TPF.  Dear Ladies, great job!


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> oh sorry I forgot about her visit to texas with her camera crew



If she was a good actress, she would have been able to produce some tears during the visit.


----------



## csshopper

Annawakes said:


> “_Clap clap clap my hands like a little girl, I’m so cute, I’m so delighted!  Oh wait, their sweaty arms are blocking my face, I’m gonna keep clapping like I’m still delighted but I’m seething inside…..how DARE they?!!!?!  That’s right move your arms back I’m gonna step up get out of the way of my huge hat, people gotta see meeeeeee!”_


Remembering the scenes from last month, Raptor’s non appearance at Polo today may be one of the few good decisions she’s made. This mess is still fresh in the minds of many. She made a fool of herself hijacking the 44th annual Lisle Nixon Memorial Tournament in May. Turned the semi final into a circus, sending people to social media to ask w t f is going on. The general answer was MM.

For the Final match, the real people in charge kept her out of the way. I do not know the Nesbitt’s but just a brief bit from on line. He is a hotel magnate, she is a “philanthropist“. He is former head of a major polo org, 10 acres of their 20 acres estate is a polo field. $65,000,000. ranch, 43,000 sq ft main house, 17 stall barn, butterfly habitat. That’s a fraction of it.

Huge supporters for charities, most recent party last week had a thousand guests and raised $2,000,000. There are pages of pics of others. Although Harry’s team is reported to practice on the Nesbit polo field, there’s no record of any social interaction with the Harkles.

These are the official pictures following the Final Match printed in the  Montecito Journal: Tradition, respect for the Memorial, “class”. The little girl in the pic is Nacho’s daughter


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> She was cool (to me) back when she had her blog and was her authentic basic bish self - but now she comes across as too ‘try hard.’


so you followed her blog? what prompted that?  were you a fan of Suits?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Remembering the scenes from last month, Raptor’s non appearance at Polo today may be one of the few good decisions she’s made. This mess is still fresh in the minds of many. She made a fool of herself hijacking the 44th annual Lisle Nixon Memorial Tournament in May. Turned the semi final into a circus, sending people to social media to ask w t f is going on. The general answer was MM.
> 
> For the Final match, the real people in charge kept her out of the way. I do not know the Nesbitt’s but just a brief bit from on line. He is a hotel magnate, she is a “philanthropist“. He is former head of a major polo org, 10 acres of their 20 acres estate is a polo field. $65,000,000. ranch, 43,000 sq ft main house, 17 stall barn, butterfly habitat. That’s a fraction of it.
> 
> Huge supporters for charities, most recent party last week had a thousand guests and raised $2,000,000. There are pages of pics of others. Although Harry’s team is reported to practice on the Nesbit polo field, there’s no record of any social interaction with the Harkles.
> 
> These are the official pictures following the Final Match printed in the  Montecito Journal: Tradition, respect for the Memorial, “class”. The little girl in the pic is Nacho’s daughter
> 
> View attachment 5423923



Sussexi


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave this here
> 
> 
> 
> Note BLG’s reply - the competition is fierce
> View attachment 5423860



Poor Hazz, he has no chances. One can read entitlement, ignorance and anger all over his face. Marriage has not been good for him imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Imo, these are surprising photos. Does a nearly 40 yr old need a dresser?  If so, perhaps this should be done privately. :sheesh:



Remember he’s royal! Of course he has a valet help him dress. Preferably one who knows how to discreetly hook up microphones and wires.


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> Remembering the scenes from last month, Raptor’s non appearance at Polo today may be one of the few good decisions she’s made. This mess is still fresh in the minds of many. She made a fool of herself hijacking the 44th annual Lisle Nixon Memorial Tournament in May. Turned the semi final into a circus, sending people to social media to ask w t f is going on. The general answer was MM.
> 
> For the Final match, the real people in charge kept her out of the way. I do not know the Nesbitt’s but just a brief bit from on line. He is a hotel magnate, she is a “philanthropist“. He is former head of a major polo org, 10 acres of their 20 acres estate is a polo field. $65,000,000 ranch, 43,000 sq ft main house, 17 stall barn, butterfly habitat. That’s a fraction of it.
> 
> Huge supporters for charities, most recent party last week had a thousand guests and raised $2,000,000. There are pages of pics of others. Although Harry’s team is reported to practice on the Nesbit polo field, there’s no record of any social interaction with the Harkles.
> 
> These are the official pictures following the Final Match printed in the  Montecito Journal: Tradition, respect for the Memorial, “class”. The little girl in the pic is Nacho’s daughter
> 
> View attachment 5423923




TU csshopper, so interesting. When I read “43,000 sq ft main house,” I thought - I want a house like that. 
Anyway, apparently Mr. Nesbitt is selling his “house.”









						Hotelier Patrick Nesbitt’s $65 Million California Estate Has a Polo Field and 17-Stall Stable
					

Even though it once appeared in a Britney Spears video, the mansion also holds a few secrets…




					robbreport.com
				




Whoops ETA: The news source date (today) confused me, I thought it was  recent news - but it was originally dated 2020.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Weird.


----------



## Chanbal

The bench looks familiar… 

_The Cambridges will move to a house on the Queen’s Windsor estate this summer. In time, it is understood they will move into “the big house” as the Prince of Wales does not plan to spend as much time as the Queen at Windsor Castle when he is king…

Kensington Palace will remain their London home, housing their private and press office, and Anmer Hall, their Norfolk home, will still be used regularly. “They absolutely love it up there, it’s their happy place,” says a friend of William’s. Their future plan is to make Anmer their more permanent base “after the school years”._








__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> Is ‘just call me Harry’ having someone help him undress???
> View attachment 5423899


I’m sure he has also help lacing his shoes and combing his ha……, um, lacing his shoes.


----------



## Chanbal

Special for the ladies of the Kilt Club…


----------



## csshopper

Katel said:


> TU csshopper, so interesting. When I read “43,000 sq ft main house,” I thought - I want a house like that.
> Anyway, apparently Mr. Nesbitt is selling his “house.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hotelier Patrick Nesbitt’s $65 Million California Estate Has a Polo Field and 17-Stall Stable
> 
> 
> Even though it once appeared in a Britney Spears video, the mansion also holds a few secrets…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> robbreport.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoops ETA: The story originally popped up dated today, but when I look at it again, it’s dated 2020 …


From what I read , they had it up for auction, then evidently took it off the market even though he was quoted as saying they had had a number of viable bids. Now as of this month it’s listed for sale at $55,000,000. Waaaaay out of my league.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yet somehow she thinks she's the cool girl.


That's because she uses threats to get her mirror to say what she wants to hear.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> so you followed her blog? what prompted that?  were you a fan of Suits?



No, I never followed her blog - I was saying that around the time I learned of her as a blogger/actress/whatever, she seemed like she was being her genuine ‘basic’ self.

I’ve also never seen an episode of suits, but it’s on my list of shows to _eventually_ watch.


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> TU csshopper, so interesting. When I read “43,000 sq ft main house,” I thought - I want a house like that.
> Anyway, apparently Mr. Nesbitt is selling his “house.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hotelier Patrick Nesbitt’s $65 Million California Estate Has a Polo Field and 17-Stall Stable
> 
> 
> Even though it once appeared in a Britney Spears video, the mansion also holds a few secrets…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> robbreport.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoops ETA: The news source date (today) confused me, I thought it was  recent news - but it was originally dated 2020.





csshopper said:


> From what I read , they had it up for auction, then evidently took it off the market even though he was quoted as saying they had had a number of viable bids. Now as of this month it’s listed for sale at $55,000,000. Waaaaay out of my league.


What am I missing here? Is this the Harkles' new chateaux? Is Arch*W*ll doing that well?


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ralph’s people called  - they are definitely *not* interested. Stop calling us and leave Nacho alone.



At least we were spared the partially exposed man boobs today. They may be what kept the microphone in place during the church service last week in St. Paul’s.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll leave this here
> 
> 
> 
> Note BLG’s reply - the competition is fierce
> View attachment 5423860





pukasonqo said:


> Ladies of TPF you have competition
> Does HGS reads this forum?


I never seriously thought there was a chance the Twitter crowd read this forum until I saw this tweet!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

The Twitter feeds I've seen that mention the Harkles are NOT. KIND. TO. THEM.   A few try to support them and of course blast their critics as racist. Their popularity is in free fall.  The sugars are facing tidal waves of derision. And when H&M left London there were so many fans wanting them back. OH WAIT! There weren't. Any.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> What am I missing here? Is this the Harkles' new chateaux? Is Arch*W*ll doing that well?



No, these are Montecito residents very active in polo and in philanthropy. people who are appropriate in their actions and have class, as opposed to MeMeMe.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Keeping the kids under cover [if they were there], showing up late, try to push their way into a photo op with Charles and William, showing up with microphones [wha????], releasing fake photos — there is only so much the world can take of their nonsense. I’ve had my fill of their lies and manipulations.  Their fall cannot come soon enough. Imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## needlv

So… the thing to note is

1.  Buckingham Palace has not confirmed the Queen met baby Lili

2.  That black and white photo with MM, Lili and others is a composite.  I swear I have seen MM in that exact pose on a different family pic.  I tried to look but it may have been scrubbed.  The photo is off… really off.


----------



## Toby93

duna said:


> I agree, personally I think the kids stayed in Montecito....


The supposed birthday pic with the painted faces has what appears to be a hot water heater in the background, which makes me think its in the UK.  Those heaters are the type of heating most homes in the UK have.


----------



## mellibelly

She brought an old garden bench from Toronto to England but left a dog behind?!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> The supposed birthday pic with the painted faces has what appears to be a hot water heater in the background, which makes me think its in the UK.  Those heaters are the type of heating most homes in the UK have.



The people could have been photoshopped into that room.  With all the ways to manipulate photos, we can’t trust any of this is real. [starting to sound like Andi now].


----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


> She brought an old garden bench from Toronto to England but left a dog behind?!



Not that I like Nutmeg or support her but with her having some money now, maybe she sourced and bought something similar or the same. I've seen plenty of black and white cushions like that. In fact, the waiting area in my office has them too


----------



## pukasonqo

mellibelly said:


> She brought an old garden bench from Toronto to England but left a dog behind?!


Well, that was probably the inspiration for the Award winning children’s book “The Bench”  and history cannot be left behind
Poor Megs, thought she was marrying a prince and is stuck w a frog (apologies to real frogs)


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ralph’s people called  - they are definitely *not* interested. Stop calling us and *leave Nacho alone.*




If he sticks around much longer Nacho might deserve his own thread. He is a fine-looking man. Can’t understand why he’s still friends with Harry. None of his other old friends are around. He’s loyal for sure.


----------



## bag-mania

Speaking of polo, apparently Harry is “living the dream.” But it’s a good excuse to show another photo of how much happier Harry looks when he’s with Nacho than with his wife.











						Prince Harry is 'living his dream in the US playing polo'
					

EMILY PRESCOTT: That's the fascinating insight offered to me by British player Millie Hine, who was victorious in the Chestertons Polo in the Park tournament yesterday.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

kkfiregirl said:


> She was cool (to me) back when she had her blog and was her authentic basic bish self - but now she comes across as too ‘try hard.’


I don’t think she’s ever been authentic. She’s Markled her way through life and always tried to project an image other than what she truly is.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Ugh now I have a mental image seared in my brain that I never wanted


----------



## Chanbal

What's the problem with the earrings?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> If he sticks around much longer Nacho might deserve his own thread. He is a fine-looking man. Can’t understand why he’s still friends with Harry. None of his other old friends are around. He’s loyal for sure.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## csshopper

Pure speculation on my part, but since her mother is a major mercher it seems odd that if Lilibet was wearing earrings they were photoshopped out. Unless, of course they were Saudi blood diamond studs, for example??? Minor stones for child size adornment and a mother who think she’s being clever and putting something
over on the RF???


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




So not only does he try to sell his grandmother but he also exploits his daughter's first birthday - which is not her party at all but a reality TV op.  

Anyone wanna be related to either one of these 2?


----------



## mikimoto007

surfer said:


> I haven't posted in this thread before, just been reading only but can't help sharing these two pics- anyone noticing the similar inspo in the styles?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423770
> View attachment 5423771



Honestly, like her or loathe her, Wallis was a style icon. She was always so polished and immaculate. I see very little in common between the two.


----------



## bagshopr

mikimoto007 said:


> Honestly, like her or loathe her, Wallis was a style icon. She was always so polished and immaculate. I see very little in common between the two.


I agree. Wallis was always impeccably styled.


----------



## kemilia

kkfiregirl said:


> You’re so right … even 12 yo boys don’t want help getting dressed in public


Don't forget the photos of his current Mummy wiping dirt/lipstick off his face.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> What's the problem with the earrings?




I think she doesn’t want people to criticize her for the price of the earrings or that the baby’s ears are pierced at all. I can’t remember for sure right now, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen Princess Charlotte wearing earrings.


----------



## zen1965

Chanbal said:


> Poor Hazz, he has no chances. One can read entitlement, ignorance and anger all over his face. Marriage has not been good for him imo.


Could it be just squinting in the sun?


----------



## sdkitty

IDK if they are putting this out there or if its just more speculation by some media outlet but if they are telling this story, it's not helpful








						Prince William and Kate Middleton Made “No Effort” to Introduce Their Kids to Lilibet
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton reportedly made literally no effort to introduce their children to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's baby daughter Lilibet.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She should have paid attention to Wallis' clothes always fitting impeccably as well.
> [/QU
> NM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Right. Why do I have the strong feeling he could have been a professional polo player in the UK as well if that was his "dream".

But the thing that totally gives it away: the dig at William. There was absolutely no need to mention him unless you're salty af.


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> No, I never followed her blog - I was saying that around the time I learned of her as a blogger/actress/whatever, she seemed like she was being her genuine ‘basic’ self.
> 
> I’ve also never seen an episode of suits, but it’s on my list of shows to _eventually_ watch.


I was just surprised you knew about her pre-Harry.  I didn't.  But she was somewhat successful with her blog so I guess people found her interesting


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> I was just surprised you knew about her pre-Harry.  I didn't.  But she was somewhat successful with her blog so I guess people found her interesting



No worries, it’s fine to ask!

I think I might have learned about her from tPF, probably around the time she started dating H & her style seemed relatable (affordable, haha).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> The supposed birthday pic with the painted faces has what appears to be a hot water heater in the background, which makes me think its in the UK.  Those heaters are the type of heating most homes in the UK have.


I noticed that but thought maybe it was something else - like a folded up playpen .....


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



maybe Harry is following him and he's being polite.  or maybe he genuinely likes H....he's good looking and a real athlete


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. Why do I have the strong feeling he could have been a professional polo player in the UK as well if that was his "dream".
> 
> But the thing that totally gives it away: the dig at William. There was absolutely no need to mention him unless you're salty af.



If it was his dream to be a professional polo player, no one would begrudge him leaving royal life to do that. But if he was training 4 times a week, why has it never come up before? Not until Methane trotted out her wardrobe of shorts?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



I could almost swear this guy visits this thread before planning his next video as he seems to regurgitate all the detective work done by our great posters!


----------



## xincinsin

kkfiregirl said:


> I think she doesn’t want people to criticize her for the price of the earrings or that the baby’s ears are pierced at all. I can’t remember for sure right now, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen Princess Charlotte wearing earrings.


Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.

I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.

I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Oooh H has a career on the professional polo circuit , next he will be modeling for Ralph Lauren Polo clothes


I thought i was kidding when i wrote that , a bit in today's DM - per an UNIMPEACHABLE source close to the polo team ... H works out every day, and practices polo 4 times a week  ...Sadly, W had to give up his polo hobby in favor of being imprisoned by the strictures of the BRF - or words to that effect

The does seem plausible, one of the shots with his shirt off, showed he is ripped

More gossip from internet - H's book has been rejected numerous times by publisher. IMHO, he is doing the responsible thing, finding new employment LOL


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.
> 
> I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.
> 
> I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.


A historical perspective ...
My mother - great BRF fan - my English granny named my mum Elizabeth - why do you suppose ???  followed QEII closely. My mom, had pierced ears and always cited the pierced ears of QEII. Pierced ears were considered louche in the day, so, QEII gave my mother legitimacy for her pierced ears. Per mom, it was a scandal when QEII got them pierced. But that happened later in the life of QEII, about age  16-18, when she started wearing expensive stuff.
So, of course, I could not have mine pierced until age 16 ...
Royals have pierced ears so they wont lose half a million pounds of clip on diamond earrings.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> So not only does he try to sell his grandmother but he also exploits his daughter's first birthday - which is not her party at all but a reality TV op.
> 
> Anyone wanna be related to either one of these 2?


Yeah! He confirmed the purpose of the b-day party, which was obvious to many of us here. However, I didn't know that they had not been invited to the TIME100 Gala on June 8 to celebrate the annual TIME100 list. They made the cover page last year, would it be a budget issue? 









						See the Best Photos From the 2022 TIME100 Gala
					

Ahead of the show, nine-time-Grammy-winning musician Mary J. Blige arrived for her performance looking fabulous in a flowing turquoise heart dress.




					time.com


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> If it was his dream to be a professional polo player, no one would begrudge him leaving royal life to do that. But if he was training 4 times a week, why has it never come up before? Not until Methane trotted out her wardrobe of shorts?


He had better be careful or he may get "burned out" from all of that hard work.  It's too bad he doesn't put that much effort into his charity work, or his "life of service", but they sure do like to lecture the rest of us poor riff raff about it


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> He had better be careful or he may get "burned out" from all of that hard work.  It's too bad he doesn't put that much effort into his charity work, or his "life of service", but they sure do like to lecture the rest of us poor riff raff about it


Ha
Yes, that life of service BS....service to themselves


----------



## mikimoto007

xincinsin said:


> Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.
> 
> I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.
> 
> I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.



I guess for me it's the other way round. Why would you subject your child to an unnecessary procedure that they aren't old enough to consent to? What possible reason is there to pierce a baby girl's ears? 

I actually don't have strong feelings either way, I don't have my own ears pierced, but to me that's a decision for the child to make when  they're older and can do the after care.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> because that's what their life is all about?
> they claim to be humanitarians but I've yet to see news of their foundation giving anything substantial to anyone



And right now, Archewell website is pretty abandoned   





sdkitty said:


> I was just surprised you knew about her pre-Harry.  I didn't.  But she was somewhat successful with her blog so I guess people found her interesting



I only knew of her existence because of the Suits series. That was big back home. I didn't watch it because of her though 

Recently started rewatching Criminal Minds and found her playing a missing person's girlfriend. Never remembered her being that so she must have been very unforgettable 





marietouchet said:


> I thought i was kidding when i wrote that , a bit in today's DM - per an UNIMPEACHABLE source close to the polo team ... H works out every day, and practices polo 4 times a week  ...Sadly, W had to give up his polo hobby in favor of being imprisoned by the strictures of the BRF - or words to that effect
> 
> The does seem plausible, one of the shots with his shirt off, showed he is ripped
> 
> More gossip from internet - H's book has been rejected numerous times by publisher. IMHO, he is doing the responsible thing, finding new employment LOL



Wedding in Jamaica when they were walking into the ocean, yeah he was pretty ripped. The Harry now? More beer belly than anything


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. Why do I have the strong feeling he could have been a professional polo player in the UK as well if that was his "dream".
> 
> But the thing that totally gives it away: the dig at William. There was absolutely no need to mention him unless you're salty af.



Hazz's mates are 17yo and 19yo kids, such a great opportunity to revive his teenage years…


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> IDK if they are putting this out there or if its just more speculation by some media outlet but if they are telling this story, it's not helpful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton Made “No Effort” to Introduce Their Kids to Lilibet
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton reportedly made literally no effort to introduce their children to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's baby daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



‘Obvious question - why should they put forth _any_ effort?  From my experience, it isn’t worth it.  People don’t really change that much.
Based on the jubilee behavior, they have not changed at all.  Still nursing the same ole wounds. Yawn.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> I think pierced ears on a woman or a teenager would maybe be more acceptable than on a baby in conservative white circles.  I think way back in the day, it was Hispanics or Italians who pierced baby girls ears.



I'm not sure about Hispanics but here in Italy a lot of people still do it, mainly lower classes, in higher circles it's considered vulgar.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.
> 
> I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.
> 
> I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.



Perhaps it is the earring that people will object to, not the actual piercing.  Imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> I'm not sure about Hispanics but here in Italy a lot of people still do it, mainly lower classes, in higher circles it's considered vulgar.



Speaking from my own experience, it is so very difficult and time consuming to find clip earrings.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> ‘Obvious question - why should they put forth _any_ effort?  From my experience, it isn’t worth it.  People don’t really change that much.
> Based on the jubilee behavior, they have not changed at all.  Still nursing the same ole wounds. Yawn.



I remember referencing the same allegations and as a fair few had commented, this probably had nothing to do with William and Kate not making an effort. Their schedule in the past weeks leading up to the Jubilee was preplanned at least a year ahead. Again, most of you also pointed out why would any working BRF members drop their official duties/engagements just to make way to meet Harry & Co. The Queen and her Jubilee celebration are far more important than two kids that have been kept invisible by their nutty parent. (ETA: Parents - plural!!)

Either way, I so agree with you, why should Will and Kate make any effort when it's been proven to be not worth it


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: polo 
IIRC Charles quit due to his injuries.  A fall for him, William too, could be devastating, so it’s best they do not play imo.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I remember referencing the same allegations and as a fair few had commented, this probably had nothing to do with William and Kate not making an effort. Their schedule in the past weeks leading up to the Jubilee was preplanned at least a year ahead. Again, most of you also pointed out why would any working BRF members drop their official duties/engagements just to make way to meet Harry & Co. The Queen and her Jubilee celebration are far more important than two kids that have been kept invisible by their nutty parent.
> 
> Either way, I so agree with you, why should Will and Kate make any effort when it's been proven to be not worth it


beyond not worth it....risky - who knows what stories they would make up?  Kate made her cry again?  Ha


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> IDK if they are putting this out there or if its just more speculation by some media outlet but if they are telling this story, it's not helpful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton Made “No Effort” to Introduce Their Kids to Lilibet
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton reportedly made literally no effort to introduce their children to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's baby daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Just my opinion, but I think even if some royals found time to meet up with the Harkles, it wouldn't have improved the situation. They would have been bleating, "X had lunch with us but she was so cold!" Better to let them come up with imaginary dining with TQ.

What the Harkles wanted was the limelight, and to get that, they had to be within spitting distance of all the people they called "racist" "made me cry" "stopped bankrolling me" "made it so I didn't want to live". No one they hurled accusations at earlier would want to give them more opportunities to create chaos.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking from my own experience, it is so very difficult and time consuming to find clip earrings.


I pierced mine because I found clip earrings painful to wear.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I remember referencing the same allegations and as a fair few had commented, this probably had nothing to do with William and Kate not making an effort. Their schedule in the past weeks leading up to the Jubilee was preplanned at least a year ahead. Again, most of you also pointed out why would any working BRF members drop their official duties/engagements just to make way to meet Harry & Co. The Queen and her Jubilee celebration are far more important than two kids that have been kept invisible by their nutty parent.
> 
> Either way, I so agree with you, why should Will and Kate make any effort when it's been proven to be not worth it



  I can’t remember exactly, I think  that discussion was in the W&k thread. This DM article pulls the discussion into this thread. [so many threads, so little time ]  Almost all comments were W&K should not have met with them. Absolutely the correct decision, the Queen’s jubilee was not the time nor the place.  Visiting with him simply because it is convenient for the ickyDuo is hard no. It confirms they have learned nothing.


----------



## Chanbal

Would this be considered good advertisement for Netfl*x?


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking from my own experience, it is so very difficult and time consuming to find clip earrings.



My MIL doesn't have pierced ears because she said getting her ears pierced would but too much though she's gone through childbirth   Trust me when I say I tend to have a really hard time buying her a new pair of earrings each time. I have since graduated to buying her brooches instead.





CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: polo
> IIRC Charles quit due to his injuries.  A fall for him, William too, could be devastating, *so it’s best they do not play imo.*



This 100%. They are future kings. Need to be alive and able bodied to carry out their duties. But you know who would swoop in to volunteer to be king very quickly though


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Just my opinion, but I think even if some royals found time to meet up with the Harkles, it wouldn't have improved the situation. They would have been bleating, "X had lunch with us but she was so cold!" Better to let them come up with imaginary dining with TQ.
> 
> What the Harkles wanted was the limelight, and to get that, they had to be within spitting distance of all the people they called "racist" "made me cry" "stopped bankrolling me" "made it so I didn't want to live". No one they hurled accusations at earlier would want to give them more opportunities to create chaos.
> 
> 
> I pierced mine because I found clip earrings painful to wear.


H&M have backed themselves into a corner ...
They blab about everything so no one wants to have anything to do with them.
And H&M tenaciously cling to the idea that they have a right to blab eg in a Netflix documentary
H&M just dont give up ...

Same song different verse... they are still being overly litigious and have not learned ...
H STILL is suing DM for publishing story about his fight with govt over security.
I have no clue if he has a reasonable right to privacy but as pragmatic person would think - enough is enough with this lawsuit thing

PS the lawsuits are another reason to not say anything to them, for fear it will wind up in court


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking from my own experience, it is so very difficult and *time consuming to find clip earrings*.


This is why I decided to have my ears pierced in my late 20s, and no regrets.

The Harkles's photos seem to be often altered, so I wonder what in Lilib's photo is real...


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> maybe Harry is following him and he's being polite.  or maybe he genuinely likes H....he's good looking and a real athlete


Re: Nacho Figueras. He’s described as one of Harry’s closest friends, always defending him in interviews, says Harry is the kind of man who wakes up in the morning thinking about ways to help kids. Gag. Also has helped with Sentable, Harry’s charity. Thinks Raptor is a “brilliant girl” Harry was meant to be with and that she should be admired for all she gave up to marry him for love. I stopped reading after that article.  Happily married, 4 children. Sounds like they hang out together.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Re: Nacho Figueras. He’s described as one of Harry’s closest friends, always defending him in interviews, says Harry is the kind of man who wakes up in the morning thinking about ways to help kids. Gag. Also has helped with Sentable, Harry’s charity. Thinks Raptor is a “brilliant girl” Harry was meant to be with and that she should be admired for all she gave up to marry him for love. I stopped reading after that article.  Happily married, 4 children. Sounds like they hang out together.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can’t remember exactly, I think  that discussion was in the W&k thread. This DM article pulls the discussion into this thread. [so many threads, so little time ]  Almost all comments were W&K should not have met with them. Absolutely the correct decision, the Queen’s jubilee was not the time nor the place.  Visiting with him simply because it is convenient for the ickyDuo is hard no. It confirms they have learned nothing.



Yeah it's kinda hard to keep track when we post so much and cross-post sometimes 

Nobody in the BRF, aside from the York girls, wants to be meeting with them especially in private because Harry & Co. would probably put out more lies about things said and done. Worse still, if these leeches were recording and have the audio manipulated, just like they do with their own kids' pictures, to simply fit into their narrative.

Also, Harry & Co. have so much time on their hands yet they don't plan personal trips to visit Harry's side of the family. Nutmeg didn't show up for Phillip's funeral and neither of them attended the memorial. That shows how much family actually meant to them. Even for the Jubilee, they just wanted their names in the news cycle by making people guess and speculate will or will they not be joining in.

All the BS about Zoom calls and how Charlotte considered Uncle Harry a "good role model", did the recent days really prove that Harry had repaired relationships with the people in his family? It was colder than Antarctica and so hard to watch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

EverSoElusive said:


> And right now, Archewell website is pretty abandoned
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I only knew of her existence because of the Suits series. That was big back home. I didn't watch it because of her though
> 
> Recently started rewatching Criminal Minds and found her playing a missing person's girlfriend. Never remembered her being that so she must have been very unforgettable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wedding in Jamaica when they were walking into the ocean, yeah he was pretty ripped. The Harry now?* More beer belly* than anything


And man boobs if I recall correctly.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> And right now, Archewell website is pretty abandoned
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I only knew of her existence because of the Suits series. That was big back home. I didn't watch it because of her though
> 
> Recently started rewatching Criminal Minds and found her playing a missing person's girlfriend. Never remembered her being that so she must have been very unforgettable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wedding in Jamaica when they were walking into the ocean, yeah he was pretty ripped. The Harry now? More beer belly than anything


Suits was big?  It was a basic cable show....not that big IMO


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> Suits was big?  It was a basic cable show....not that big IMO



I'm not from the US originally, so I didn't mean the US when I said "back home"


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Swiss meringue buttercream is really a thing and I love it. You heat the eggwhite with the sugar until the sugar melts, whip that into meringue and then add room temperature butter. Then you can add extracts, melted chocolate,  lemon curd, fruit puree or jam to flavour it.
> 
> You can also make Italian (meringue) buttercream by whipping eggwhites, pouring in hot sugar syrup and then adding the butter, but I far prefer Swiss.


Thank you for keeping me in check- I am getting too used to assuming these people get absolutely everything wrong 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Difficult to believe he is related to the BRF - note the Backgrid logo
> 
> View attachment 5423691
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is back on the polo fields of Santa Barbara
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, played for his friend Nacho Figueras' team Los Padres at the Cancha de Estrella Polo Club in Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, on Friday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What strikes me as funny is one minute they are renouncing the elitist, arcane world of royal life then the next minute they are playing… polo?



youngster said:


> It was interesting! I've read many articles about Wallis and Edward and the opinions range widely about whether she was obsessed with marrying him so she could be Queen or, the opposite, that she didn't really want to marry him and was exhausted and bored living "their great romance" for decades.  There is a fairly recent book out on her, The Real Wallis Simpson, that attempts to rehab her image though I have not read it yet.
> 
> One thing I do know, is that the entire world owes her gratitude.  Edward would have been an awful war time King, just horrific, and it makes me ill thinking what the world might look like today if he had remained king.  So, for that, she has my thanks and I don't judge her too harshly.  That, and she had some awesome bling.


They were very happy to pack Edward off or he’d have sunk the whole royal ship - no leader with fascist sympathies could have lasted out of being ousted during WW2. Wallis certainly came in handy, it does make me wonder whether they wanted MM to provide a similar service but it seems a very roundabout way. 


surfer said:


> I haven't posted in this thread before, just been reading only but can't help sharing these two pics- anyone noticing the similar inspo in the styles?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423770
> View attachment 5423771


You are so right! It’s a bit eerie how similar that white dress and gloves is. 
makes me wonder if MGC is a history buff… and a troll.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Weird.





kkfiregirl said:


> No worries, it’s fine to ask!
> 
> I think I might have learned about her from tPF, probably around the time she started dating H & her style seemed relatable (affordable, haha).


I think that’s one of the only positive adjectives one could give her. 


csshopper said:


> Pure speculation on my part, but since her mother is a major mercher it seems odd that if Lilibet was wearing earrings they were photoshopped out. Unless, of course they were Saudi blood diamond studs, for example??? Minor stones for child size adornment and a mother who think she’s being clever and putting something
> over on the RF???





xincinsin said:


> Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.
> 
> I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.
> 
> I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.





marietouchet said:


> A historical perspective ...
> My mother - great BRF fan - my English granny named my mum Elizabeth - why do you suppose ???  followed QEII closely. My mom, had pierced ears and always cited the pierced ears of QEII. Pierced ears were considered louche in the day, so, QEII gave my mother legitimacy for her pierced ears. Per mom, it was a scandal when QEII got them pierced. But that happened later in the life of QEII, about age  16-18, when she started wearing expensive stuff.
> So, of course, I could not have mine pierced until age 16 ...
> Royals have pierced ears so they wont lose half a million pounds of clip on diamond earrings.


Yes this is true. I’d say pierced earrings only got really mainstream in Europe in the 20th century. 

I’d say piercing a baby or toddlers ears is a bit taboo. I just asked my OH what he thinks and he said it looks common and I think this is a pretty widespread opinion. I don’t think that and it’s much more common in my background but I don’t want to do it on my kids as I’m concerned about the earrings getting caught during play/sport or getting ear infections.

In contrast, Piercings of many kinds are very popular with adults and not really taboo at all. I’d also say a lot of girls get their ears pierced as a present either when they start high school at 12 or they finish their GCSEs at 16.


csshopper said:


> Re: Nacho Figueras. He’s described as one of Harry’s closest friends, always defending him in interviews, says Harry is the kind of man who wakes up in the morning thinking about ways to help kids. Gag. Also has helped with Sentable, Harry’s charity. Thinks Raptor is a “brilliant girl” Harry was meant to be with and that she should be admired for all she gave up to marry him for love. I stopped reading after that article.  Happily married, 4 children. Sounds like they hang out together.


Sometimes you’ve got to tell a few white lies when your friend asks what you think about their crazy partner


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm not from the US originally, so I didn't mean the US when I said "back home"


where was it big?


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> where was it big?



Kuala Lumpur  Not sure about the rest of Malaysia.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> If it was his dream to be a professional polo player, no one would begrudge him leaving royal life to do that. But if *he was training 4 times a week*, *why has it never come up before? *Not until Methane trotted out her wardrobe of shorts?



Two possibilities. He’s been training hard in secret so that he wouldn’t embarrass himself if he couldn’t keep up and contribute to the team. The other reason, what looks more elitist than spending all of his free time playing polo? He’s supposed to be devoting himself to various charity work  for the environment and mental health. Plus producing important Netflix and Spotify programming. Instead he’s out having fun and pursuing his hobbies. Not doing a damn thing for anyone but himself.


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> I thought i was kidding when i wrote that , a bit in today's DM - per an UNIMPEACHABLE source close to the polo team ... H works out every day, and practices polo 4 times a week  ...Sadly, W had to give up his polo hobby in favor of being imprisoned by the strictures of the BRF - or words to that effect
> 
> The does seem plausible, one of the shots with his shirt off, showed he is ripped
> 
> More gossip from internet - H's book has been rejected numerous times by publisher. IMHO, he is doing the responsible thing, finding new employment LOL




Wait, who is ripped? Not Hawwy.


----------



## mellibelly

Harry has never been ripped. That old photo of him on the beach with Cringe was just youth imo. He’s always looked like he drinks too much beer. Now that he’s pushing 40 it’s caught up with him…puffy, dad bod, moobs. William on the other hand looks like someone that eats clean and works out regularly. He may not play polo much, but he clearly lives a healthy lifestyle.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



This is too funny! H&TW really look alike not just mentally and emotionally, but physically as well and enough to make one asks them what it feels like to be in lurve with yourself. If you wipe that smirk off her face and replace it with H's scowl: Same nose, same shape and close together eyes, similar ear shape, same pointy chin, same rounded cheekbones. Did I miss anything?


----------



## zen1965

xincinsin said:


> Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.
> 
> I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.
> 
> I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.



I am not from the US but I doubt that a small child would be allowed travel in a car on someone‘s lap. I also think that the little girl in the photo posted resembles Archie.
However, I completely agree with you that very likely they were after a photo with HM that they could sell.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> IDK if they are putting this out there or if its just more speculation by some media outlet but if they are telling this story, it's not helpful
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton Made “No Effort” to Introduce Their Kids to Lilibet
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton reportedly made literally no effort to introduce their children to Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's baby daughter Lilibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Why should they?  The one interaction that Charlotte and George had with Meghan did not go well and she didn't even want them as part of the wedding party.  It wasn't anything against Arkie and Lilypad.  It was solely a reaction to their mother and how she would use the meeting and take pictures,


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



I do think the original of this photo was taken in the UK not US
There is a radiator in the background, lower left
Those are rare in the US except for buildings much older than Casa Montecito
Funny how L seems to have longer hair in this snap than in the color one


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>





marietouchet said:


> A historical perspective ...
> My mother - great BRF fan - my English granny named my mum Elizabeth - why do you suppose ???  followed QEII closely. My mom, had pierced ears and always cited the pierced ears of QEII. Pierced ears were considered louche in the day, so, QEII gave my mother legitimacy for her pierced ears. Per mom, it was a scandal when QEII got them pierced. But that happened later in the life of QEII, about age  16-18, when she started wearing expensive stuff.
> So, of course, I could not have mine pierced until age 16 ...
> Royals have pierced ears so they wont lose half a million pounds of clip on diamond earrings.


It is one thing to have  ear piercing as an adult decision and another to do it to babies.  There are many cultures were ear piercing for babies is the norm.  I don't think the Royals fit into this category.  Personally, I think it is a decision that should be made by the individual.  I am not a fan of doing it to children. I decided to do it when i was 14.  I have a SIL who thinks the entire idea is barbaric and has never done it. Yes, she loses earrings lol!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I do think the original of this photo was taken in the UK not US
> There is a radiator in the background, lower left
> Those are rare in the US except for buildings much older than Casa Montecito
> Funny how L seems to have longer hair in this snap than in the color one


My thought was that this picture with the steam radiator was taken at the home of Harriman.  I was under the impression that the Frog Cot reno included a complete reno of the heating/AC system and plumbing and steam radiators would be taken out as old tech.  That is if the reno really ever took place and there are many doubts about that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Two possibilities. He’s been training hard in secret so that he wouldn’t embarrass himself if he couldn’t keep up and contribute to the team. The other reason, what looks more elitist than spending all of his free time playing polo? He’s supposed to be devoting himself to various charity work  for the environment and mental health. Plus producing important Netflix and Spotify programming. Instead he’s out having fun and pursuing his hobbies. Not doing a damn thing for anyone but himself.


I think this was his excuse to get out of the house and away from her.


----------



## csshopper

Apologies if this has already been posted, we've been moving fast the past few weeks in particular. Somehow I missed these during all the Jubilee coverage.  Maggot made it to Texas on May 27th for her ghoulish photo op. Questions arose about her not visiting her father, who had suffered a stroke.  One result was that on May 31 and June 3 Scobie emerged from his sewer bunker to share the following::

(1) From the May 31 Yahoo News where he said in reference to Thomas Markle, "... After tireless and failed attempts to repair their relationship,* Meghan doesn’t owe him a damn thing.*"

(2) This was Scobie being interviewed by Naga Munchetta on the BBC Breakfast show on June 3:
*Omid claimed Meghan and Thomas’ relationship has reached a close after the royal’s father left hospital last week*.
“There’s been a lot of speculation about whether Meghan will be meeting her father, who has been reportedly ill,” Naga asked.
Omid confirmed: “Thomas Markle recently was released from hospital after a suspected stroke."
*“But, of course, we know that relationship has really come to an end.*”

Her official mouthpiece has decreed it, with his vast medical background he has diagnosed a "suspected stroke" not a real one, so going forward no need to waste anytime speculating about a reconciliation. Unless of course in the Kingdom of Netflix it is decreed that she gather up her Pap crew and get loathsome self to Mexico or wherever her father is recuperating, use her limited acting skills to fake compassion and get some hot footage shot to save the Harkashian Show. Even better move him to Montecito into a bedroom on a remote wing, including a house tour bonus as the cameras trail behind.

If only among the boos heard in London had someone in the crowd yelled loudly enough to be heard over the noise, "Meghan is your Dad OK?"


----------



## Annawakes

csshopper said:


> Re: Nacho Figueras. He’s described as one of Harry’s closest friends, always defending him in interviews, says Harry is the kind of man who wakes up in the morning thinking about ways to help kids. Gag. Also has helped with Sentable, Harry’s charity. Thinks Raptor is a “brilliant girl” Harry was meant to be with and that she should be admired for all she gave up to marry him for love. I stopped reading after that article.  Happily married, 4 children. Sounds like they hang out together.


So that’s why TW let H keep him.  Because he thinks she’s “brilliant”.

My opinion of him, which was neither good or bad before, has definitely swayed toward the bad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I do think the original of this photo was taken in the UK not US
> There is a radiator in the background, lower left
> Those are rare in the US except for buildings much older than Casa Montecito
> Funny how L seems to have longer hair in this snap than in the color one



Could it be Canada?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is how to win hearts and minds — and it is so easy. Enjoy.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Annawakes said:


> So that’s why TW let H keep him.  Because he thinks she’s “brilliant”.
> 
> My opinion of him, which was neither good or bad before, has definitely swayed toward the bad.



Personally, I think she’s realized that he’s the only one of Harry’s friends who 1) is respected and 2) who she hasn’t alienated yet. So she’s love bombing him.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is how to win hearts and minds — and it is so easy. Enjoy.




So incredibly adorable!


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> My MIL doesn't have pierced ears because she said getting her ears pierced would but too much though she's gone through childbirth   Trust me when I say I tend to have a really hard time buying her a new pair of earrings each time. I have since graduated to buying her brooches instead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This 100%. They are future kings. Need to be alive and able bodied to carry out their duties. But *you know who would swoop in to volunteer to be king very quickly though*


Meghan, right?


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> My MIL doesn't have pierced ears because she said getting her ears pierced would but too much though she's gone through childbirth   Trust me when I say I tend to have a really hard time buying her a new pair of earrings each time. I have since graduated to buying her brooches instead.


There are great clip on vintage earrings on eBay.  I buy my vintage brooches there and Juliana is a favorite of mine.  There are many earrings in this line too.  Some have matching brooches.  Won't break the bank either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Robert Jobson is very indignant the Cambridges are adding a 3rd residence to their portfolio, to the point where people started wondering why. Someone quickly found the answer.

ETA: why has Omid's face weird bulges.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ETA: why has Omid's face weird bulges.



Omid literally doesn’t look like a human.  He needs to stop with the plastic surgery.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think this was his excuse to get out of the house and away from her.


tired of being bossed around?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> A historical perspective ...
> My mother - great BRF fan - my English granny named my mum Elizabeth - why do you suppose ???  followed QEII closely. My mom, had pierced ears and always cited the pierced ears of QEII. Pierced ears were considered louche in the day, so, QEII gave my mother legitimacy for her pierced ears. Per mom, it was a scandal when QEII got them pierced. But that happened later in the life of QEII, about age  16-18, when she started wearing expensive stuff.
> So, of course, I could not have mine pierced until age 16 ...
> Royals have pierced ears so they wont lose half a million pounds of clip on diamond earrings.



I love this thread and the things it teaches me. I love looking at antique and vintage jewelry on 1st Dibs and have wondered more than once why so many gorgeous big name jeweler earrings are clips. This answers the question.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> My thought was that this picture with the steam radiator was taken at the home of Harriman.  I was under the impression that the Frog Cot reno included a complete reno of the heating/AC system and plumbing and steam radiators would be taken out as old tech.  That is if the reno really ever took place and there are many doubts about that.


I've read that the renovations were done and that the entitled brats had only repaid a portion of the cost when they moved to Canada and that Charles had to pay the rest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Re: Nacho Figueras. He’s described as one of Harry’s closest friends, always defending him in interviews, says Harry is the kind of man who wakes up in the morning thinking about ways to help kids. Gag. Also has helped with Sentable, Harry’s charity. Thinks Raptor is a “brilliant girl” Harry was meant to be with and that *she should be admired for all she gave up to marry him for love*. I stopped reading after that article.  Happily married, 4 children. Sounds like they hang out together.



Oh. Did he say what exactly this was? Like...a dying career as a cable TV actress and a rented house in Toronto?

Where these direct quotes?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh. Did he say what exactly this was? Like...a dying career as a cable TV actress and a rented house in Toronto?
> 
> Where these direct quotes?


LOL
yes, she gave up a big career - just like Grace Kelly


----------



## marietouchet

Vintage Leather said:


> Personally, I think she’s realized that he’s the only one of Harry’s friends who 1) is respected and 2) who she hasn’t alienated yet. So she’s love bombing him.


NF needs H - how many good free agent (not previously committed to a team) polo players are there out there ? 
And for NF this is a business, and H draws crowds 

and hmmm 
suddenly he starts playing polo after 2.5 years in the US? Something changed … his handlers now allow him this expensive elitist non-woke sport? How are those ponies feeling after getting run into the ground ? do the handlers want him out of the house ? Is he burned out ? …


----------



## carmen56

bag-mania said:


> Two possibilities. He’s been training hard in secret so that he wouldn’t embarrass himself if he couldn’t keep up and contribute to the team. The other reason, what looks more elitist than spending all of his free time playing polo? He’s supposed to be devoting himself to various charity work  for the environment and mental health. Plus producing important Netflix and Spotify programming. Instead he’s out having fun and pursuing his hobbies. Not doing a damn thing for anyone but himself.



When does he fit in his CHIMPO duties?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh. Did he say what exactly this was? Like...a dying career as a cable TV actress and a rented house in Toronto?
> 
> Where these direct quotes?


This is one, if I can remember where I found the others, will post.

“He cares about making the world a better place. Then he found Meghan, who is an incredible girl,” Figueras said. “She gave up all of the things that she had to marry this man that she loves, which is great and people think of it like, ‘Oh, how easy it is for you, girl, to go marry this guy,’ but nobody know all the very hard things that go with that.”


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ETA: why has Omid's face weird bulges.




Gravity. Like Meghan, he’s over 40 trying to look 15 years younger. All the face peels and Botox in the world won’t stop sagging.


----------



## Jayne1

mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.


Take away the gold goblets and brassy cake-stands and you really see what the cakes look like.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles are loved in Santa Barbara. It's a long article (lots of love ), but link is provided at the end.


*If their recent visit to London for the queen’s platinum jubilee proved anything, it is that the British royal family is more popular than ever and has moved on mightily despite the efforts of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to soil the royals’ image by laying the family’s dirty laundry on an Oprah Winfrey special for all to hear.*

_*The duke’s new nickname might as well be “Second Row Harry,*” based on the seating arrangement for a thanksgiving service inside St. Paul’s Cathedral, at which, upon arrival, the duke and duchess were booed by spectators…

One wonders if Harry is beginning to feel like the character Tom Hanks portrayed in the 2000 movie “*Cast Away*.” Judging by the glum expression he wore upon arrival at Santa Barbara Airport, the cold shoulders he encountered at his old stomping ground may be taking a toll on his psyche. Or perhaps he misses the pomp and circumstance he once found imprisoning. (Where’s Wilson when you need him?)

And then there is the problem of reconciling a green stance with the desire for personal comfort. Only last year, *Harry ranted that climate change is one of “the two most pressing issues” in the world today*…

*On this last trip to London and back, total 24 hours, the Bombardier Global 6000 jet on which he and his family flew emitted 112,800 pounds of carbon dioxide*. 

By the way, that’s a lot for one trip for a family of four.

*Are we the only ones to note such hypocrisy?* Well, with her own private jet, Oprah, another pretend or part-time greenie, is unlikely to raise that question with Harry and Megs.

The duke’s unnerving experience at the platinum jubilee comes on the heels of Netflix canceling the duchess’s animated series, “Pearl,” before it even launched.

It is thought by royal insiders that Harry’s memoir, for which Penguin Random House has not yet announced a release date, may be the final nail in a coffin that seals shut any chance of reconciliation or resurrection to a royal existence.

(*Message to Harry: Cancel the book deal; you don’t need this.*)

On another front, our anti-social media war correspondent reports the latest buzz on the Internet: *The “Megxiteers” are blazing their belief that the photo posted of one year-old Lilibet is fake.* “Lilibet is not of Meghan’s body” is their latest mantra. 

Chief of “The Sugars” (and Sussex Squad apologist) Omid Scobie responds with cease-and-desist orders and a YouTube takedown. Lawyers have now entered the fray…_









						The Duke & Duchess of Woke (or Woe) - Santa Barbara News-Press
					

The relevancy of Montecito’s resident duke and duchess appears to be diminishing at the same rate…




					newspress.com


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> When does he fit in his CHIMPO duties?



I’m sure he can set aside 30 minutes for a Zoom call every 2 or 3 months.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh. Did he say what exactly this was? Like...a dying career as a cable TV actress and a rented house in Toronto?
> 
> Where these direct quotes?


Another Nacho quote:
"The headlines and the narrative is about them, you know, not getting along with so and so or not doing this or not doing that, is the baby sleeping or not sleeping," he said. "How about this guy, both of them, wake up every morning and all they think about is helping children. That's who he is. That's who they are."


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> Yes she does, but Oprah isn’t stupid ..  she’s got to know that these two are harping on everyone else about private jets and their carbon footprint, so I don’t think Oprah would lend them her jet knowing all too well that her (Oprah’s) name would be associated with their hypocrisy.


After how badly she conducted that interview without challenging how they contradicted themselves, I'm starting to think O is a bit stupid.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Re: Nacho Figueras. He’s described as one of Harry’s closest friends, always defending him in interviews, says Harry is the kind of man who wakes up in the morning thinking about ways to help kids. Gag. Also has helped with Sentable, Harry’s charity. Thinks Raptor is a “brilliant girl” Harry was meant to be with and that she should be admired for all she gave up to marry him for love. I stopped reading after that article.  Happily married, 4 children. Sounds like they hang out together.



Nacho doesn’t have good taste in friends. I hope he’s using Harry for his own reasons, like the baker and the photographer. 

Then again, anyone who rides horses for a living is going to take some spills. Maybe he took a kick to the head at some point that affects his judgment.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> After how badly she conducted that interview without challenging how they contradicted themselves, I'm starting to think O is a bit stupid.


Just biased in this case I think....certainly not a hard news interview, more a venue for them to air their opinions and grievances


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Kuala Lumpur  Not sure about the rest of Malaysia.


It’s so interesting what shows catch on in different parts of the world. I’m always surprised by how many people globally have seen Fawlty Towers and other old British sit coms.


Maggie Muggins said:


> This is too funny! H&TW really look alike not just mentally and emotionally, but physically as well and enough to make one asks them what it feels like to be in lurve with yourself. If you wipe that smirk off her face and replace it with H's scowl: Same nose, same shape and close together eyes, similar ear shape, same pointy chin, same rounded cheekbones. Did I miss anything?
> View attachment 5424383


They do look alike! That’s so funny. A real pair of dopplebangers. I’ve always thought she looked a bit like the queen with American teeth and a nose job or seven so it makes sense.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder seems a very apt phrase here….


csshopper said:


> Apologies if this has already been posted, we've been moving fast the past few weeks in particular. Somehow I missed these during all the Jubilee coverage.  Maggot made it to Texas on May 27th for her ghoulish photo op. Questions arose about her not visiting her father, who had suffered a stroke.  One result was that on May 31 and June 3 Scobie emerged from his sewer bunker to share the following::
> 
> (1) From the May 31 Yahoo News where he said in reference to Thomas Markle, "... After tireless and failed attempts to repair their relationship,* Meghan doesn’t owe him a damn thing.*"
> 
> (2) This was Scobie being interviewed by Naga Munchetta on the BBC Breakfast show on June 3:
> *Omid claimed Meghan and Thomas’ relationship has reached a close after the royal’s father left hospital last week*.
> “There’s been a lot of speculation about whether Meghan will be meeting her father, who has been reportedly ill,” Naga asked.
> Omid confirmed: “Thomas Markle recently was released from hospital after a suspected stroke."
> *“But, of course, we know that relationship has really come to an end.*”
> 
> Her official mouthpiece has decreed it, with his vast medical background he has diagnosed a "suspected stroke" not a real one, so going forward no need to waste anytime speculating about a reconciliation. Unless of course in the Kingdom of Netflix it is decreed that she gather up her Pap crew and get loathsome self to Mexico or wherever her father is recuperating, use her limited acting skills to fake compassion and get some hot footage shot to save the Harkashian Show. Even better move him to Montecito into a bedroom on a remote wing, including a house tour bonus as the cameras trail behind.
> 
> If only among the boos heard in London had someone in the crowd yelled loudly enough to be heard over the noise, "Meghan is your Dad OK?"


It’s really sad spelled out isn’t it? Wasting all this time complaining about not being a big enough part of this British party but no time to go make amends with an elderly and I’ll parent who at his worse is greedy and rude but certainly not cruel or abusive.


Vintage Leather said:


> Personally, I think she’s realized that he’s the only one of Harry’s friends who 1) is respected and 2) who she hasn’t alienated yet. So she’s love bombing him.


I think there’s something in that- as long as he’s the friend H is allowed to have she’s going to be super sweet to him. (If he ever annoys her though….)

She also probably thinks he fancies her and likes that idea and I’m sure it’s quite fun watching him run about 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Robert Jobson is very indignant the Cambridges are adding a 3rd residence to their portfolio, to the point where people started wondering why. Someone quickly found the answer.
> 
> ETA: why has Omid's face weird bulges.



Omid’s face is more tightly filled than a miser’s plate at the buffet (and probably with the same glutenous, white pap.)

I know I’m hitting the same beats again but I don’t think you need to be in bed with Haz, Meg and Omid to think funding another palace for W is excessive. I’m annoyed they are spending public money so excessively this year when everyone else is getting cuts, cuts, cuts and I certainly don’t care for omid.

also tbh I feel like royal reporting is such a closed circle these people must all know each other. Angela clearly knows them all. (Now whether they all like each other is a different question)


marietouchet said:


> NF needs H - how many good free agent (not previously committed to a team) polo players are there out there ?
> And for NF this is a business, and H draws crowds
> 
> and hmmm
> suddenly he starts playing polo after 2.5 years in the US? Something changed … his handlers now allow him this expensive elitist non-woke sport? How are those ponies feeling after getting run into the ground ? do the handlers want him out of the house ? Is he burned out ? …


Well there’s lots of big ticket donors at polo matches so they are probably on the lookout for someone to sponsor them 200k to take 12 cheese sandwiches and a Swiss roll to the next place of humanitarian need (NB they may choose to post just the cake if it’s somewhere cold like Chicago and gross poor people will be there.)

You are right though Nacho is probably loving all the free publicity for his frankly niche sport.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nacho doesn’t have good taste in friends. I hope he’s using Harry for his own reasons, like the baker and the photographer.
> 
> Then again, anyone who rides horses for a living is going to take some spills. Maybe he took a kick to the head at some point that affects his judgment.


maybe he's dazzled by the royalty of H


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles are loved in Santa Barbara. It's a long article (lots of love ), but link is provided at the end.
> View attachment 5424438
> 
> *If their recent visit to London for the queen’s platinum jubilee proved anything, it is that the British royal family is more popular than ever and has moved on mightily despite the efforts of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to soil the royals’ image by laying the family’s dirty laundry on an Oprah Winfrey special for all to hear.*
> 
> _*The duke’s new nickname might as well be “Second Row Harry,*” based on the seating arrangement for a thanksgiving service inside St. Paul’s Cathedral, at which, upon arrival, the duke and duchess were booed by spectators…
> 
> One wonders if Harry is beginning to feel like the character Tom Hanks portrayed in the 2000 movie “*Cast Away*.” Judging by the glum expression he wore upon arrival at Santa Barbara Airport, the cold shoulders he encountered at his old stomping ground may be taking a toll on his psyche. Or perhaps he misses the pomp and circumstance he once found imprisoning. (Where’s Wilson when you need him?)
> 
> And then there is the problem of reconciling a green stance with the desire for personal comfort. Only last year, *Harry ranted that climate change is one of “the two most pressing issues” in the world today*…
> 
> *On this last trip to London and back, total 24 hours, the Bombardier Global 6000 jet on which he and his family flew emitted 112,800 pounds of carbon dioxide*.
> 
> By the way, that’s a lot for one trip for a family of four.
> 
> *Are we the only ones to note such hypocrisy?* Well, with her own private jet, Oprah, another pretend or part-time greenie, is unlikely to raise that question with Harry and Megs.
> 
> The duke’s unnerving experience at the platinum jubilee comes on the heels of Netflix canceling the duchess’s animated series, “Pearl,” before it even launched.
> 
> It is thought by royal insiders that Harry’s memoir, for which Penguin Random House has not yet announced a release date, may be the final nail in a coffin that seals shut any chance of reconciliation or resurrection to a royal existence.
> 
> (*Message to Harry: Cancel the book deal; you don’t need this.*)
> 
> On another front, our anti-social media war correspondent reports the latest buzz on the Internet: *The “Megxiteers” are blazing their belief that the photo posted of one year-old Lilibet is fake.* “Lilibet is not of Meghan’s body” is their latest mantra.
> 
> Chief of “The Sugars” (and Sussex Squad apologist) Omid Scobie responds with cease-and-desist orders and a YouTube takedown. Lawyers have now entered the fray…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke & Duchess of Woke (or Woe) - Santa Barbara News-Press
> 
> 
> The relevancy of Montecito’s resident duke and duchess appears to be diminishing at the same rate…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> newspress.com


Note to Harry and Megs as addressed here, seems things have changed since the Hoda Kotb interview in April:
Apr 20, 2022 *...* "And *it* really feels that way, as well. We've been *welcomed* with open arms and *have* got such a great community up in *Santa Barbara*.".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I do think the original of this photo was taken in the UK not US
> There is a radiator in the background, lower left
> Those are rare in the US except for buildings much older than Casa Montecito
> Funny how L seems to have longer hair in this snap than in the color one


Yeah, the type of radiator is more associated to houses on the East Coast than West Coast. I doubt they would have it in Montecito. However, they could have used a picture from the Cottage as background.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It is one thing to have  ear piercing as an adult decision and another to do it to babies.  There are many cultures were ear piercing for babies is the norm.  I don't think the Royals fit into this category.  Personally, I think it is a decision that should be made by the individual.  I am not a fan of doing it to children. I decided to do it when i was 14.  *I have a SIL who thinks the entire idea is barbaric* and has never done it. Yes, she loses earrings lol!


That was my father's opinion. I had my years pierced in my 20s.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> That was my father's opinion. I had my years pierced in my 20s.


for a baby, I'd say why do something that's unnecessary and that hurts


----------



## DoggieBags

csshopper said:


> Another Nacho quote:
> "The headlines and the narrative is about them, you know, not getting along with so and so or not doing this or not doing that, is the baby sleeping or not sleeping," he said. "How about this guy, both of them, wake up every morning and all they think about is helping children. That's who he is. That's who they are."


So is nacho Tatoo or Mr. Rourke on this remake of Fantasy Island?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> This is one, if I can remember where I found the others, will post.
> 
> “He cares about making the world a better place. Then he found Meghan, who is an incredible girl,” Figueras said. “She gave up all of the things that she had to marry this man that she loves, which is great and people think of it like, ‘Oh, how easy it is for you, girl, to go marry this guy,’ but nobody know all the very hard things that go with that.”


Just guessing here. If Nacho Figueras is H's good friend, he may be trying to help him escape TW for a time and being of Latin descent he might understand women better than H and has figured out that TW craves constant attention and as such he bit his tongue to give her a glowing endorsement so she would allow her pet slave some free time to play polo.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> maybe he's dazzled by the royalty of H



I don’t think so. He seems to hang out in wealthy circles. Since he knew Harry pre-wife maybe they genuinely get along well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> This is one, if I can remember where I found the others, will post.
> 
> “He cares about making the world a better place. Then he found Meghan, who is an incredible girl,” Figueras said. “She gave up all of the things that she had to marry this man that she loves, which is great and people think of it like, ‘Oh, how easy it is for you, girl, to go marry this guy,’ but nobody know all the very hard things that go with that.”



Oh well. I hope he's had time to reconsider.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> This is one, if I can remember where I found the others, will post.
> 
> “He cares about making the world a better place. Then he found Meghan, who is an incredible girl,” Figueras said. “She gave up all of the things that she had to marry this man that she loves, which is great and people think of it like, ‘Oh, how easy it is for you, girl, to go marry this guy,’ but nobody know all the very hard things that go with that.”


yes, she fell in love with a guy who just happened to be a prince


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just guessing here. If Nacho Figueras is H's good friend, he may be trying to help him escape TW for a time and being of Latin descent he might understand women better than H and has figured out that TW craves constant attention and as such he bit his tongue to give her a glowing endorsement so she would allow her pet slave some free time to play polo.


I doubt that Nacho has any appreciation for TW, so let's wait and see. He and his wife might also be benefiting from free publicity by being associated to Hazz.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think so. He seems to hang out in wealthy circles. Since he knew Harry pre-wife maybe they genuinely get along well.


has he also done modelling (for ralph lauren)?  or is that someone else?


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just guessing here. If Nacho Figueras is H's good friend, he may be trying to help him escape TW for a time and being of Latin descent he might understand women better than H and has figured out that TW craves constant attention and as such he bit his tongue to give her a glowing endorsement so she would allow her pet slave some free time to play polo.


sorry if this offends anyone but speaking of being Latin, a lot of Latin men find monogamy unnecessary.  wonder if the WIFE worries about him being a bad influence on H


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> has he also done modelling (for ralph lauren)?  or is that someone else?



Yes, he has been modeling for Ralph Lauren for many years.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I doubt that Nacho has any appreciation for TW, so let's wait and see. He and his wife might also be benefiting from free publicity by being associated to Hazz.



Possibly, still Ralph does *not* want Hazz.  Ralph is too smart to get involved with H&M.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, he has been modeling for Ralph Lauren for many years.


he's hot - even if he doesn't have good taste in friends


----------



## CarryOn2020

Deja vu?


Correction: change ‘abortion’ to ‘miscarriage’

King William Vibes
_There are dozens of examples of this.  Her UN speech was plagiarised from Eleanor Roosevelt. Her miscarriage story was plagiarised from Stefanie Tong_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deja vu?
> 
> 
> Correction: change ‘abortion’ to ‘miscarriage’
> 
> King William Vibes
> _There are dozens of examples of this.  Her UN speech was plagiarised from Eleanor Roosevelt. Her miscarriage story was plagiarised from Stefanie Tong_



plagiarism
she is so arrogant


----------



## bag-mania

I wish the mainstream media would call her out on her plagiarism and hypocrisy, but they don’t care.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deja vu?
> 
> 
> Correction: change ‘abortion’ to ‘miscarriage’
> 
> King William Vibes
> _There are dozens of examples of this.  Her UN speech was plagiarised from Eleanor Roosevelt. Her miscarriage story was plagiarised from Stefanie Tong_



I don't understand this.  wouldn't her PR people know better than to use someone else's words without giving them credit?  do they think changing two words makes it OK?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I doubt that Nacho has any appreciation for TW, so let's wait and see. He and his wife might also be benefiting from free publicity by being associated to Hazz.


I agree, but if he's quoted as saying anything nice about her as mentioned in another post, I believe it would only be to help out his friend H.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand this.  wouldn't her PR people know better than to use someone else's words without giving them credit?  do they think changing two words makes it OK?



My guess is she doesn’t have Sunshine Sachs vet her writing. They may only see what she has them write for her, which may not be much.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> My guess is she doesn’t have Sunshine Sachs vet her writing. They may only see what she has them write for her, which may not be much.


so she does this herself?  what a poser


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so she does this herself?  what a poser



 
Either that or she has a Gen Z helper who didn’t think anyone would recognize a quote from long ago.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Either that or she has a Gen Z helper who didn’t think anyone would recognize a quote from long ago.


but they found it....I wish someone would sue for for this stuff


----------



## papertiger

Very interesting for _many_ reasons:


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> Just biased in this case I think....certainly not a hard news interview, more a venue for them to air their opinions and grievances


I think OW enjoyed every minute of that interview and that she was getting even with TRF for advising Diana to forgo the tell-all interview that OW had so coveted.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deja vu?
> 
> 
> Correction: change ‘abortion’ to ‘miscarriage’
> 
> King William Vibes
> _There are dozens of examples of this.  Her UN speech was plagiarised from Eleanor Roosevelt. Her miscarriage story was plagiarised from Stefanie Tong_




No shame!


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Very interesting for _many_ reasons:



rare for an American WOC to be anti-Meghan (as far as someone in the media).
I agree that Meghan doesn't appear black and probably hasn't really suffered much racism.  However, I will give her one thing - she may have suffered second-hand racism, having a black mother.  and I've wondered if one of the reasons Doria wasn't seen much at her school events was Meghan wasn't so proud of being a POC back then.  Now it's to her advantage.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

duna said:


> I'm not sure about Hispanics but here in Italy a lot of people still do it, mainly lower classes, in higher circles it's considered vulgar.


For adults ?   Or only young children ?   Thanks.   Just curious.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> rare for an American WOC to be anti-Meghan (as far as someone in the media).
> I agree that Meghan doesn't appear black and probably hasn't really suffered much racism.  However, I will give her one thing - she may have suffered second-hand racism, having a black mother.  and I've wondered if one of the reasons Doria wasn't seen much at her school events was Meghan wasn't so proud of being a POC back then.  Now it's to her advantage.



As someone who passes for white, some of things she said stuck in my throat. As you say, even someone who doesn't suffer direct racism on a regular basis like M still feels society's racist undercurrents. 

However, I felt equally unnerved by the British white woman (presuming) speaking on behalf of black women everywhere and arguing her point against an African-American woman who had a different opinion. Surreal.


----------



## pukasonqo

youngster said:


> So incredibly adorable!


It was adorable and also interesting to see a Sikh guard able to wear his turban as part of the uniform
Going back to the little one, I am glad the soldier had that gesture towards him; they cannot break ranks but acknowledging the little kid afterwards was kind


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Doesn't really start until 20 mins in


----------



## DeMonica

xincinsin said:


> Cultural question: why would she be criticized for piercing her alleged baby's ears? Honestly want to know because it is quite common where I am.
> 
> I believe they brought a baby girl with them because they wanted a money shot with TQ, and maybe brag about how this Jubilee is for both Lilibets. If they had scored that photo, there would be no need to have a secret party.
> 
> I think Archificial was left behind in Monteshitshow. There was a pic of their car leaving the airport after they arrived back in California. The person who posted it said it wasn't large enough for the Harkles + 2 kids + nannies + security. But if it was just one nanny and a baby on her lap, I think they could fit in, and one baby is easier to hide than a toddler.


When I visited England thirty years ago the subject of ear piercing came up at a talk with my landlady. We were talking about earrings, and I mentioned that my baby cousin got a beautiful pair as a christening gift. She said, in England people disapproved of piercing baby ears because gipsies would do this kind of things, so I guess it was a sign of low class.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deja vu?
> 
> 
> Correction: change ‘abortion’ to ‘miscarriage’
> 
> King William Vibes
> _There are dozens of examples of this.  Her UN speech was plagiarised from Eleanor Roosevelt. Her miscarriage story was plagiarised from Stefanie Tong_



The Womens Assoc. has posted an apology and reprinted with e.e. cummings work.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Robert Jobson is very indignant the Cambridges are adding a 3rd residence to their portfolio, to the point where people started wondering why. Someone quickly found the answer.
> 
> ETA: why has Omid's face weird bulges.



Re Scobie ever getting near any Cambridge residence:  I will quote Princess Charlotte on the subject. “You’re not coming.”


----------



## sdkitty

DeMonica said:


> When I visited England thirty years ago the subject of ear piercing came up at a talk with my landlady. We were talking about earrings, and I mentioned that my baby cousin got a beautiful pair as a christening gift. She said, in England people disapproved of piercing baby ears because gipsies would do this kind of things, so I guess it was a sign of low class.


ha
my mother was Irish and she took me and my sister back there once when we were young kids.  those people really disliked and looked down on the gypsies and the "tinkers"


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> yes, she gave up a big career - just like Grace Kelly


At least Grace got a  Prince of a real country and a Kelly.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Very interesting for _many_ reasons:




That woman who butts into their interview is insane. She represents why Meghan gets away with so much. Ignore the facts and see everything the way she wants.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> ha
> my mother was Irish and she took me and my sister back there once when we were young kids.  those people really disliked and looked down on the gypsies and the "tinkers"


In England they call themselves Travelers.   Anyone recall that TV show about their weddings?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> At least Grace got a  Prince of a real country and a Kelly.


she really was a big star and from what I gather she wasn't really that happy in her marriage.  I guess in those days divorce wasn't an option for someone like her


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand this.  wouldn't her PR people know better than to use someone else's words without giving them credit?  do they think changing two words makes it OK?


I think they are banking on most people not being well read and the sugars bleating they will sue ee cummins for plagiarism of MM’s words


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Possibly, still Ralph does *not* want Hazz.  Ralph is too smart to get involved with H&M.


This is exactly what I find amusing. Ralph Lauren’s brand idolizes everything British, upper class, country club/polo yet keeps it authentic. He uses the theme of luxe country life in so many ad campaigns. Harry refused Charles’ offer of a new country estate. He looks unkempt most of the time and does not behave like a gentleman. No way would he symbolize the RL brand.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she really was a big star and from what I gather she wasn't really that happy in her marriage.  I guess in those days divorce wasn't an option for someone like her



In terms of her position, religion's denomination and era nigh-on impossible. 

Another difference was her Prince ruled the country (principality) not #6 in-line.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> In England they call themselves Travelers.   Anyone recall that TV show about their weddings?



There are family groups called the Irish Travelers in the US. In the summer they go up and down the East Coast scamming people by saying they’ll do home repairs like driveway paving and roofing. They take a big deposit to buy “supplies” and then they never come back and do the work. A lot of elderly people get ripped off by them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Note to Harry and Megs as addressed here, seems things have changed since the Hoda Kotb interview in April:
> Apr 20, 2022 *...* "And *it* really feels that way, as well. We've been *welcomed* with open arms and *have* got such a great community up in *Santa Barbara*.".


Nothing changes in H and TW's alternate reality unless they say so. Their truths consist of a little white lie here, a little exaggeration there and a little fabrication yonder and a little photoshopping here and there. it doesn't appear to bother them that more and more people are learning of their mendacious ways because they are still surrounded by stans, bots and PR teams. I would get a sick migraine trying to keep track of all their lies and nonsense.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand this.  wouldn't her PR people know better than to use someone else's words without giving them credit?  do they think changing two words makes it OK?


Heck the new edition of Microsoft word will do plagiarism checks of your text against anything online

Or conversely - anyone else can use word to check your text for plagisrism


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deja vu?
> 
> 
> Correction: change ‘abortion’ to ‘miscarriage’
> 
> King William Vibes
> _There are dozens of examples of this.  Her UN speech was plagiarised from Eleanor Roosevelt. Her miscarriage story was plagiarised from Stefanie Tong_



Actually, abortion is the medical term for termination of a pregnancy, and a miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion. It's really too bad that the correct terminology should have so many bad connotations attached to it.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> she really was a big star and from what I gather she wasn't really that happy in her marriage.  I guess in those days divorce wasn't an option for someone like her


I also recall hearing that Grace Kelly’s father had to give that prince a 2 million dollar dowry!!!


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> I do think the original of this photo was taken in the UK not US
> There is a radiator in the background, lower left
> Those are rare in the US except for buildings much older than Casa Montecito
> Funny how L seems to have longer hair in this snap than in the color one


Yep, I noticed the radiator right away.  Such a British thing


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I wish the mainstream media would call her out on her plagiarism and hypocrisy, but they don’t care.


That's exactly what I was thinking.  Someone ask her that in an interview.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Very interesting for _many_ reasons:



Dear you-tubers - please edit your videos down to the most important content!

Sorry, pet peeve of mine.  I did appreciate the link.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> There are family groups called the Irish Travelers in the US. In the summer they go up and down the East Coast scamming people by saying they’ll do home repairs like driveway paving and roofing. They take a big deposit to buy “supplies” and then they never come back and do the work. A lot of elderly people get ripped off by them.



They're also a problem in Chicago/Chicagoland (suburbs).  And until I moved to Chicago I hadn't heard of "Chicagoland".


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh. Did he say what exactly this was? Like...a dying career as a cable TV actress and a rented house in Toronto?


She also gave up a dog, a blog plus 99 per cent of her family. The self-sacrifice boggles...



carmen56 said:


> When does he fit in his CHIMPO duties?


He is living it, doing the things he enjoys. It's a pity he needs to do stuff he hates like visit the BRF in order to keep cash flowing.


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> Yep, I noticed the radiator right away.  Such a British thing


Lots of them in Victoria, Canada as well.


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5423381


His hand is backwards!


----------



## Happyish

mellibelly said:


> Also are we sure these are peonies? I just bought a bunch from Trader Joe’s for $9.99 but mine are hot pink. If they are, peonies are *poisonous*. Why would you put poisonous flowers on a child’s cake?!


Think about it . . . No, no, no one is that devious. Or are they?


----------



## Happyish

papertiger said:


> By Appointment - to the doctors


How c


mellibelly said:


> If anyone’s curious here’s their wedding cake. This baker’s signature seems to be basic ass frosting covered with poisonous flowers. Much talent
> View attachment 5423471
> 
> Harry and Meghan tapped Claire Ptak of London-based bakery Violet Cakes to bake a cake that “incorporates the bright flavors of spring,” and that she did. The confection consists of tiers of lemon sponge cake drizzled with elderflower syrup and topped with an Amalfi lemon curd.
> The entire cake is coated with a Swiss meringue buttercream also infused with elderflower (which Ptak has described as “satiny and super delicious”), and is adorned with a mix of 150 fresh flowers, including *peonies* and roses.


How could this be their wedding cake? It's not big enough and I certainly don't see anywhere near 150 flowers. Maybe there were multiple cakes? 
Frankly it sounds delicious. But everything does right now. Even the peonies. I'm on a diet . . .


----------



## Happyish

Sharont2305 said:


> A Marks & Spencer Colin the Caterpillar cake would've been better for a one year old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5423582


And garnered a lot of support.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She should have paid attention to Wallis' clothes always fitting impeccably as well.


Wallis was very compulsive about her weight and generally wore couture.That would/should fit impeccabley.


----------



## Aimee3

Happyish said:


> His hand is backwards!


Maybe that’s why they’re hiding him!!!


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like we may continue reading the DM and writing posts here for some more time.  

_“The fear was that Harry and Meghan had already given away all the juicy family gossip to Oprah for free. *But now I am hearing that the Oprah interview was just the tip of the iceberg. Harry is going to reveal everything. There will be not Windsor secrets after his book comes out.* In the past, Harry would never touch the topic of his father, but in the past, Harry would never write a tell-all book. Everything has changed," the insider adds.

*Radar is told the palace is preparing to fight back on whatever Harry is planning to release in his memoir -- which is rumored to be a two-parter.*_
*Harry is also teaming up with Meghan to write a book on leadership, something that several haters found funny.*









						Prince Harry Will Address Who His Real Father Is In Memoir After Years Of Speculation That He's Not Prince Charles' Biological Son
					

Nothing is off the table, not even his biological father.




					radaronline.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Cute story about a Prince Harry impersonator. He and his Meghan impersonator partner have had a lot of work lately. I think they are more attractive than their real counterparts but that might be my bias showing. I thought this was interesting:

“From what I've observed, Harry typically presents quite anxious body language at events and public engagements. He often fiddles with his wedding ring and the buttons of his suit, which I think he does to help calm himself. He tends to smile less than me, so I try to smile a little less too, which is not very natural for me.”









						"I'm a Prince Harry lookalike—Meghan Markle changed my life overnight"
					

I've heard security staff at the royal palaces have our photos hung up on the walls.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## xincinsin

Happyish said:


> How could this be their wedding cake? It's not big enough and *I certainly don't see anywhere near 150 flowers*. Maybe there were multiple cakes?
> Frankly it sounds delicious. But everything does right now. Even the peonies. I'm on a diet . . .


Same thought occurred to me, but I excused it: maybe they used some actual elderflowers to bump up the number. Every elderflower cluster has 30 to 40 florets. 

Interestingly, many species of elderberry plants are poisonous when raw. So @mellibelly's comment that this baker's speciality seems to be frosting with poisonous flowers holds true.


----------



## Chanbal

__





						'Spoilt brat Harry: The truth no one will admit'
					

Prince Charles has been praised as a wise and loving parent. Harry has said: 'Sorry, father,' and the Queen has issued a statement saying she fully supports the handling of her grandson's drink and drugs saga




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Doesn't really start until 20 mins in



Oh my gosh , great video…
Yes start 20 min in … I skipped over the BLG commentary, and went to the story by his guest Taz
Taz does an awesome survey of the life of MM, how she reinvents herself , the transformation into an insta-humanitarian for ex, and why she Markles people - she does not want anyone who knew her in a previous life


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is too funny! H&TW really look alike not just mentally and emotionally, but physically as well and enough to make one asks them what it feels like to be in lurve with yourself. If you wipe that smirk off her face and replace it with H's scowl: Same nose, same shape and close together eyes, similar ear shape, same pointy chin, same rounded cheekbones. Did I miss anything?
> View attachment 5424383





kemilia said:


> And man boobs if I recall correctly.
> 
> View attachment 5424344


Yes, I missed something! Both have boobies!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Robert Jobson is very indignant the Cambridges are adding a 3rd residence to their portfolio, to the point where people started wondering why. Someone quickly found the answer.
> 
> ETA: why has Omid's face weird bulges.




Scoobie Doo looks more like a woman than man. Is he transitioning like Caitlyn Jenner? 





sdkitty said:


> for a baby, I'd say why do something that's unnecessary and that hurts



I cringe when I see a baby with pierced ears because I'm terrified that they may accidentally pull an earring and rip the earlobe  





bag-mania said:


> Yes, he has been modeling for Ralph Lauren for many years.



NF is hot   I'd like to see him in a kilt.





sdkitty said:


> so she does this herself?  what a poser



Poser or loser?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Spoilt brat Harry: The truth no one will admit'
> 
> 
> Prince Charles has been praised as a wise and loving parent. Harry has said: 'Sorry, father,' and the Queen has issued a statement saying she fully supports the handling of her grandson's drink and drugs saga
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What a difference 20 years makes. Today the DM would have you believe Charles was a wonderful father and I don’t think they would say he neglected to take charge of Harry’s drinking and drug use.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> *Harry is also teaming up with Meghan to write a book on leadership, something that several haters found funny.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Address Who His Real Father Is In Memoir After Years Of Speculation That He's Not Prince Charles' Biological Son
> 
> 
> Nothing is off the table, not even his biological father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


That *is* funny.
If Harry wrote a book about polo, he might be leveraging on his strengths.


----------



## Happyish

purseinsanity said:


> I don’t think she’s ever been authentic. She’s Markled her way through life and always tried to project an image other than what she truly is.


After all, she's an actress!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh , great video…
> Yes start 20 min in … I skipped over the BLG commentary, and went to the story by his guest Taz
> Taz does an awesome survey of the life of MM, how she reinvents herself , the transformation into an insta-humanitarian for ex, and why she Markles people - she does not want anyone who knew her in a previous life


Thanks for the recommended 20 minute start in. 

That woman (a Brit) can't pronounce Mulrooney, an Irish name?


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> That *is* funny.
> If Harry wrote a book about polo, he might be leveraging on his strengths.


It must be a book on leadership for people with large trust funds. He may include his wise advice for people to quit their jobs…


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> So that’s why TW let H keep him.  Because he thinks she’s “brilliant”.
> 
> My opinion of him, which was neither good or bad before, has definitely swayed toward the bad.


ITA.  I don’t follow polo so I’d literally never heard of him before and had zero opinion.  He seemed like a nice guy.  After reading that, he seems like an idiot.


----------



## Happyish

Annawakes said:


> So that’s why TW let H keep him.  Because he thinks she’s “brilliant”.
> 
> My opinion of him, which was neither good or bad before, has definitely swayed toward the bad.


Nacho is from Argentina. He's on the polo circuit. He played polo w the RF--including William and Harry and possibly Charles. Needless to say, that's a huge draw. I imagine he sees/plays with Harry only occasionally. Of course they get along. And why not? He's a smart man. It costs him nothing and it wouldn't be politic to do anything less.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I wish the mainstream media would call her out on her plagiarism and hypocrisy, but they don’t care.


The mainstream media doesn’t care about facts any more, so why would they care about a little plagiarism here or there?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Happyish

marietouchet said:


> NF needs H - how many good free agent (not previously committed to a team) polo players are there out there ?
> And for NF this is a business, and H draws crowds
> 
> and hmmm
> suddenly he starts playing polo after 2.5 years in the US? Something changed … his handlers now allow him this expensive elitist non-woke sport? How are those ponies feeling after getting run into the ground ? do the handlers want him out of the house ? Is he burned out ? …


Exercise is good for mental health. Besides, it he did nothing but stay at home, w M and two kids, he'd go bonkers.


----------



## Vintage Leather

xincinsin said:


> That *is* funny.
> If Harry wrote a book about polo, he might be leveraging on his strengths.



That’s actually a really good idea.

Maybe that’s why Nacho, who seems relatively sane otherwise, is saying such nice things. Maybe Harry and Nacho are coauthoring a book on Polo. 

Honestly, I’d read it.

I’d borrow it from the library, but I would read at least some of it


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Actually, abortion is the medical term for termination of a pregnancy, and a miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion. It's really too bad that the correct terminology should have so many bad connotations attached to it.


Thank you!  It also drives me crazy that people use “vagina” instead of vulva or labia.  If someone isn’t wearing underwear, you can’t see their vagina unless you have a speculum.  If you can, the person going commando has serious other medical conditions


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> She also gave up a dog, a blog plus 99 per cent of her family. The self-sacrifice boggles...
> 
> 
> He is living it, doing the things he enjoys. It's a pity he needs to do stuff he hates like visit the BRF in order to keep cash flowing.


She didn’t give up 99% of her family.  She’d kicked them to the curb long before.


----------



## purseinsanity

Happyish said:


> After all, she's an actress!


But not a good one


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> She didn’t give up 99% of her family.  She’d kicked them to the curb long before.


You have a point. I wonder when she started to re-work her image as Orphan (Meg)Annie.


----------



## duna

Lilliesdaughter said:


> For adults ?   Or only young children ?   Thanks.   Just curious.



We were talking of young children: most adult women have their ears pierced all across Europe, I don't know in other parts of the world.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> ha
> my mother was Irish and she took me and my sister back there once when we were young kids.  those people really disliked and looked down on the gypsies and the "tinkers"





gracekelly said:


> In England they call themselves Travelers.   Anyone recall that TV show about their weddings?





bag-mania said:


> There are family groups called the Irish Travelers in the US. In the summer they go up and down the East Coast scamming people by saying they’ll do home repairs like driveway paving and roofing. They take a big deposit to buy “supplies” and then they never come back and do the work. A lot of elderly people get ripped off by them.





rose60610 said:


> They're also a problem in Chicago/Chicagoland (suburbs).  And until I moved to Chicago I hadn't heard of "Chicagoland".


Friendly reminder it’s unfair to stereotype any entire group of people.


Toby93 said:


> Yep, I noticed the radiator right away.  Such a British thing


maybe they flew one over to give it a British feel making the running count stand at three large furniture items more worthy of moving overseas than a living dog.


Chanbal said:


> It looks like we may continue reading the DM and writing posts here for some more time.
> 
> _“The fear was that Harry and Meghan had already given away all the juicy family gossip to Oprah for free. *But now I am hearing that the Oprah interview was just the tip of the iceberg. Harry is going to reveal everything. There will be not Windsor secrets after his book comes out.* In the past, Harry would never touch the topic of his father, but in the past, Harry would never write a tell-all book. Everything has changed," the insider adds.
> 
> *Radar is told the palace is preparing to fight back on whatever Harry is planning to release in his memoir -- which is rumored to be a two-parter.*_
> *Harry is also teaming up with Meghan to write a book on leadership, something that several haters found funny.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Address Who His Real Father Is In Memoir After Years Of Speculation That He's Not Prince Charles' Biological Son
> 
> 
> Nothing is off the table, not even his biological father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


_His real dad? _Ganondorf?




bag-mania said:


> Cute story about a Prince Harry impersonator. He and his Meghan impersonator partner have had a lot of work lately. I think they are more attractive than their real counterparts but that might be my bias showing. I thought this was interesting:
> 
> “From what I've observed, Harry typically presents quite anxious body language at events and public engagements. He often fiddles with his wedding ring and the buttons of his suit, which I think he does to help calm himself. He tends to smile less than me, so I try to smile a little less too, which is not very natural for me.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "I'm a Prince Harry lookalike—Meghan Markle changed my life overnight"
> 
> 
> I've heard security staff at the royal palaces have our photos hung up on the walls.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I am always amazed how little look a likes resemble the people. I’m beginning to wonder if I should go for jobs as Cher or winston Churchill with the latter I could at least have a decent go at the buffet.


xincinsin said:


> That *is* funny.
> If Harry wrote a book about polo, he might be leveraging on his strengths.


I don’t think he’s even _that good_ at polo- he’s always falling off and losing- it’s just there’s only about 50 people in the world who can play it.

Ive always wondered this with the Winter Olympics. How do they determine who is abnormally good at sweeping ice or hurtling down a slide on a million pound sled?


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> This is one, if I can remember where I found the others, will post.
> 
> “He cares about making the world a better place. Then he found Meghan, who is an incredible girl,” Figueras said. “She gave up all of the things that she had to marry this man that she loves, which is great and people think of it like, ‘Oh, how easy it is for you, girl, to go marry this guy,’ but nobody know all the very hard things that go with that.”


Reminds me of that gushing admiration expressed by the World Central Kitchen guy, about them running towards the struggle. He just missed out the bit where they run there for photo ops.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> In England they call themselves Travelers.   Anyone recall that TV show about their weddings?



My big fat Gypsy Wedding? With that Thelma woman who made their dresses?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> Wallis was very compulsive about her weight and generally wore couture.That would/should fit impeccabley.



Like that bespoke Dior we just saw not fit?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like we may continue reading the DM and writing posts here for some more time.
> 
> _“The fear was that Harry and Meghan had already given away all the juicy family gossip to Oprah for free. *But now I am hearing that the Oprah interview was just the tip of the iceberg. Harry is going to reveal everything. There will be not Windsor secrets after his book comes out.* In the past, Harry would never touch the topic of his father, but in the past, Harry would never write a tell-all book. Everything has changed," the insider adds.
> 
> *Radar is told the palace is preparing to fight back on whatever Harry is planning to release in his memoir -- which is rumored to be a two-parter.*_
> *Harry is also teaming up with Meghan to write a book on leadership, something that several haters found funny.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Address Who His Real Father Is In Memoir After Years Of Speculation That He's Not Prince Charles' Biological Son
> 
> 
> Nothing is off the table, not even his biological father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com





So let's play and say it's Hewitt (he's not, but just for fun) or whoever that is not Charles. Never in a million years would Harry reveal that, not even to spite the BRF, because the moment he does he's done. Not a member of that family, not part of the succession line, no CoS, possibly not eligible to inherit anything.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He fell off yesterday. He and the horse are ok. Backgrid posted this - 












						Prince Harry falls off his horse in front of his celebrity friends
					

The Duke of Sussex, 37, was unscathed in the incident at the Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club, as was his ride, but it was a bad omen for the royal whose Los Padres team also lost the match.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## duna

lanasyogamama said:


> Omid literally doesn’t look like a human.  He needs to stop with the plastic surgery.



Yes, he really is creepy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

csshopper said:


> This is one, if I can remember where I found the others, will post.
> 
> “He cares about making the world a better place. Then he found Meghan, who is an incredible girl,” Figueras said. “She gave up all of the things that she had to marry this man that she loves, which is great and people think of it like, ‘Oh, how easy it is for you, girl, to go marry this guy,’ *but nobody know all the very hard things that go with that.”
> *




Such as???


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> He fell off yesterday. He and the horse are ok. Backgrid posted this -
> 
> View attachment 5424680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry falls off his horse in front of his celebrity friends
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, was unscathed in the incident at the Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club, as was his ride, but it was a bad omen for the royal whose Los Padres team also lost the match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yikes, this lady is risking big, if TW sees this pic I wouldn't want to be in her place. TW reminds me of Darlene in the series"Ozark".


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> That was my father's opinion. I had my years pierced in my 20s.



LOL, my father was shocked aswell when I had my ears pierced, I was about 16, and he was Italian aswell, while my mother, english, didn't care.


----------



## papertiger

I am surprised M had her girl baby's ear pierced. It's certainly not got anything to do with female empowerment, having one's own voice or gender equality. This is why M doesn't show the baby's ears. She already knows the implications and it doesn't fit with her narrative. 

In terms of educated parents, whatever the culture, it's very hard to understand why they would needlessly inflict piercing or wearing earrings on a* girl* baby or toddler. A girl baby is not a doll. My opinion and pure speculation, if Lilli is real, she was bought 'off the shelf' and not bespoke (apart from type - like dolls are bought) from a country/culture where babies have their ears pierced ASAP and already had pierced ears/earrings.

I was not even allowed to get my ears pierced until I was 16, and in my culture it's quite normal for little girls to have their ears pierced. When I had it done I had to pay for it myself, then I had an infection (probably bad earrings) and had to let them close) Then, I was told by an employer I _had_ to have them done again for a job (modelling hats) - and still under 18. 

You should have heard the conversation with my mother when I wanted to get (and got) my nose pierced (although I let it close-up when regularly doing martial arts). I guess no-one cares anymore now headlamps and face tattoos are path of the course for self-expression and identity. My sister has a tattoo but I would never get one and she would never have her ears pierced not wears earrings. 

IMO: All piercings, body modifications and elective surgery and life-changing treatments should 100% be by adult consent only.


----------



## floatinglili

sdkitty said:


> I think pierced ears on a woman or a teenager would maybe be more acceptable than on a baby in conservative white circles.  I think way back in the day, it was Hispanics or Italians who pierced baby girls ears.


My mother finally got her ears pierced at age 40. I suspect the influence was English manners. (Australian convict heritage / colonial stock).
Back in the day, piercing a child’s ears and especially a toddler’s, was very much frowned upon. I was once told that piercing baby ears was something that the decorative and demonstrative Catholics did! C of E / Anglicanism being all about a more austere approach.
Of course the huge rift between C of E and Catholic being initiated by Henry the 8th and reverberating down through society and through the ages.
When I snuck away and got my own ears pierced es at 14 my Mother was very angry with me.
Of course most of that has fallen away nowadays, including thankfully the rift between Catholic and C of E but the taboo on piercing baby ears would surely still exist especially for a Royal Baby??  
Because of my own cultural background, I can’t help thinking that piercing this baby’s ears was an act of ownership over a baby and a rejection of royal cultural traditions.
But perhaps the photoshop of her ears was a ‘sweet nod’ to the Queen’s heritage.


----------



## LittleStar88

What’s Harry going to do with himself when polo season is over?


----------



## jennlt

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s Harry going to do with himself when polo season is over?


Polish his mallet.


----------



## Pivoine66

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s Harry going to do with himself when polo season is over?


Sorry - couldn't help myself ...
If his wife pursues a political career ...
(credit to gettyimages.com "M... T..., accompanied by her husband D... and children ...")


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is the actual recipe, rather than the shameless plug for his book 









						Happy St George's Day - Chef Darren McGrady | The Royal Chef
					

Today is St Georges Day in England. St George has been the patron saint since his death in AD 303. According to legend, he was a soldier in the Roman army who killed a dragon and saved a princess. From the 15th century, St George’s Day used to be a national holiday in England, and…




					theroyalchef.com
				




Here is a video of McGrady making it:









						The Royal Chef Showed Us How Queen Elizabeth Picks Her Own Berries To Make This Dessert
					

Classic Liz!




					www.delish.com


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I am surprised M had her girl baby's ear pierced. It's certainly not got anything to do with female empowerment, having one's own voice or gender equality. This is why M doesn't show the baby's ears. She already knows the implications and it doesn't fit with her narrative.
> 
> In terms of educated parents, whatever the culture, it's very hard to understand why they would needlessly inflict piercing or wearing earrings on a* girl* baby or toddler. A girl baby is not a doll. My opinion and pure speculation, if Lilli is real, she was bought 'off the shelf' and not bespoke (apart from type - like dolls are bought) from a country/culture where babies have their ears pierced ASAP and already had pierced ears/earrings.
> 
> I was not even allowed to get my ears pierced until I was 16, and in my culture it's quite normal for little girls to have their ears pierced. When I had it done I had to pay for it myself, then I had an infection (probably bad earrings) and had to let them close) Then, I was told by an employer I _had_ to have them done again for a job (modelling hats) - and still under 18.
> 
> You should have heard the conversation with my mother when I wanted to get (and got) my nose pierced (although I let it close-up when regularly doing martial arts). I guess no-one cares anymore now headlamps and face tattoos are path of the course for self-expression and identity. My sister has a tattoo but I would never get one and she would never have her ears pierced not wears earrings.
> 
> IMO: All piercings, body modifications and elective surgery and life-changing treatments should 100% be by adult consent only.


do we know if that baby's ears are pierced?  discussion is because ears were blurred in a photo?
Anyway, I had mine pierced by my mom's friend when I was maybe 13.  they got infected.  I've never had the desire for any more piercings in ears or anywhere else.  I would say - not really paying attention - that most women in the US have at least the "normal" one hole in each ear.  You don't see many earrings that aren't for pierced ears.  I've bought vintage ones and they're not comfortable.
No tatts for me either but they are pretty prevalent around these parts - an not necessarily a good thing IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the actual recipe, rather than the shameless plug for his book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy St George's Day - Chef Darren McGrady | The Royal Chef
> 
> 
> Today is St Georges Day in England. St George has been the patron saint since his death in AD 303. According to legend, he was a soldier in the Roman army who killed a dragon and saved a princess. From the 15th century, St George’s Day used to be a national holiday in England, and…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theroyalchef.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a video of McGrady making it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Chef Showed Us How Queen Elizabeth Picks Her Own Berries To Make This Dessert
> 
> 
> Classic Liz!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com




Darren can do no wrong. He donated all of the royalties for his first book (which I am eager to get my hands on but it's out of print) to one of Diana's favourite charities.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?


sorry to hear all that
obviously the cancer is the worst of it.  hope it was caught early


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?



So sorry to hear about that. Surely, it will get better from this point   

FWIW the link in Darren’s tweet goes to his book. Looks like it is on sale. Hope that helps.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I had a peek at the recipe. 

It says



> In a large bowl whip the heavy cream with the granulated sugar and vanilla extract until stiff. Without over beating, carefully fold the raspberry puree into the whipped cream mix and set aside.



The mistake right there is that stiff whipped cream is already overbeaten. Do not whip cream to more than soft peaks or it will leave a greasy aftertaste even if it's not technically ruined (as in, whip it that one bit too far and you'll have granules of butter).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?



So very sorry


----------



## oldbag

[/QUOTE]


sdkitty said:


> do we know if that baby's ears are pierced?  discussion is because ears were blurred in a photo?
> Anyway, I had mine pierced by my mom's friend when I was maybe 13.  they got infected.  I've never had the desire for any more piercings in ears or anywhere else.  I would say - not really paying attention - that most women in the US have at least the "normal" one hole in each ear.  You don't see many earrings that aren't for pierced ears.  I've bought vintage ones and they're not comfortable.
> No tatts for me either but they are pretty prevalent around these parts - an not necessarily a good thing IMO


I was in a department store back in the 80s and while walking through I noticed a mother having her baby's ears pierced. I have never forgotten the sound of that baby's cries which climbed close to a scream. Mom was holding her in the chair to keep her still. I walked away with the opinion, my own, of how cruel that procedure was.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So sorry to hear about that. Surely, it will get better from this point
> 
> FWIW the link in Darren’s tweet goes to his book. Looks like it is on sale. Hope that helps.



Oh, I totally missed that while feeling sorry for myself. Sadly it only ships within the US and it's not available on amazon


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

oldbag said:


> I was in a department store back in the 80s and while walking through I noticed a mother having her baby's ears pierced. I have never forgotten the sound of that baby's cries which climbed close to a scream. Mom was holding her in the chair to keep her still. I walked away with the opinion, my own, of how cruel that procedure was.



Besides the painful procedure, I would be so afraid a baby and toddler would somehow catch the earrings on something and injure themselves.


----------



## oldbag

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the painful procedure, I would be so afraid a baby and toddler would somehow catch the earrings on something and injure themselves.


Or sonehow pull it out and swallow it. A nightmare I try not to imagine.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the painful procedure, I would be so afraid a baby and toddler would somehow catch the earrings on something and injure themselves.


apparently babies have been ok with this for years but I still say why cause them pain when you don't need to

in some cases, maybe it's the culture?  in others - like Meghan if she did do this - it could be they just want to put pretty earrings on their girls.  Maybe this is similar to some here who want to buy toddlers bags that cost thousands to be like their moms


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> He fell off yesterday. He and the horse are ok. Backgrid posted this -
> 
> View attachment 5424680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry falls off his horse in front of his celebrity friends
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, was unscathed in the incident at the Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club, as was his ride, but it was a bad omen for the royal whose Los Padres team also lost the match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He does look happy with Delfina… Haven't seen that smile with TW.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?



I'm so sorry.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> IMO: All piercings, body modifications and elective surgery and life-changing treatments should 100% be by adult consent only.


That and religion, according to my father.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s Harry going to do with himself when polo season is over?


Search for his missing balls.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the painful procedure, I would be so afraid a baby and toddler would somehow catch the earrings on something and injure themselves.



My guess is he would send it to you - just send him an email.  




__





						Contact - Chef Darren McGrady | The Royal Chef
					

For more information on The Royal Chef, Darren McGrady, press inquiries, booking for events or appearances, please contact us.




					theroyalchef.com


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s Harry going to do with himself when polo season is over?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now why would she release this info today?  









						Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?


I'm sorry about all the above, stay strong!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



PR towards her next target.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is why Will is allegedly the main target of Hazz and TW. He has courage… 
He is also likely the target of Eugenie, the Harkles supporter.  




_The Duke of Cambridge__ made it clear that unless the Duke of York — who had hoped to attend the ancient event at Windsor as a member of the order — was banned from taking his place in public among the knights, he wouldn’t be able to take part. The dramatic move, which comes amid suggestions Andrew wants his HRH status reinstated and position recognised and respected, shows the heightened tensions at the heart of the royal family over his planned comeback.

“The Duke of Cambridge was adamant. If York insisted on taking part publicly, he would withdraw,” a senior source said. Buckingham Palace has been contacted for comment._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wow. It does make sense now that maybe William put his foot down re: the Sussexes as well. Still, their retaliation via the yellow press is so juvenile.

So William can't play all the polo he wants? Cry me a river, he'll live to tell the story.

But also, I don't get Andrew. Why not lay low, keep his mouth shut and enjoy the financial perks he still has.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Interesting. She had fashion photographer Chris Allerton do the photos. He’s the one who did the fireworks photo, Archie’s christening and Christmas card. He’s the photographer she hires when she wants to make sure she looks good. He must have had another engagement for the jubilee.









						Story behind Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's most trusted photographer
					

The official photographs from Archie's christening will be taken by personal photographer Chris Allerton who also took the couple's wedding photos




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> This is why Will is allegedly the main target of Hazz and TW. He has courage…
> He is also likely the target of Eugenie, the Harkles supporter.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5424831
> 
> _The Duke of Cambridge__ made it clear that unless the Duke of York — who had hoped to attend the ancient event at Windsor as a member of the order — was banned from taking his place in public among the knights, he wouldn’t be able to take part. The dramatic move, which comes amid suggestions Andrew wants his HRH status reinstated and position recognised and respected, shows the heightened tensions at the heart of the royal family over his planned comeback.
> 
> “The Duke of Cambridge was adamant. If York insisted on taking part publicly, he would withdraw,” a senior source said. Buckingham Palace has been contacted for comment._




It sounds like Prince William is actually the one ensuring that HMTQ has the right people around her. And that the wrong people are nowhere to be seen.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> He fell off yesterday. He and the horse are ok. Backgrid posted this -
> 
> View attachment 5424680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry falls off his horse in front of his celebrity friends
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, was unscathed in the incident at the Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club, as was his ride, but it was a bad omen for the royal whose Los Padres team also lost the match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This brings back memories. Charles fell off of his horse a lot when he played polo. I remember photos of Diana looking concerned when it happened in the early years of their marriage. (She got over that.)


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Cant stomach reading the whole article.  Just the line I can see makes me gag.  She’s “currently based” in California as if she has multiple homes and/or is part of some large organization with multiple locations where she could possibly be stationed.  And based NOT with her/their family, but with *her two children *(Harry is completely excluded from that description). Ugh!

sounds like she’s preparing to move on.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chloe302225 said:


>




She looks pretty here- I think her hair looks great styled like this.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also, I don't get Andrew. Why not lay low, keep his mouth shut and enjoy the financial perks he still has.



For some rich people, it’s not enough to have a lot of money, they also need _visibility_ and _power_.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I’m guessing it took 6-8 weeks for all of the professional photo retouching to be done. Also by waiting awhile the articles about it are calling it a “low key visit” even though she was accompanied by a personal photographer.


----------



## Chanbal

On the Harkles' surprise appearance @ Clarence House.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> This is why Will is allegedly the main target of Hazz and TW. He has courage…
> He is also likely the target of Eugenie, the Harkles supporter.



And that might be why Eugenie was shipped off to another country away from Frogmore Cottage which is on the grounds of Will and Kate’s soon to be new home base.


----------



## kkfiregirl

bag-mania said:


> Also by waiting awhile the articles about it are calling it a “low key visit” even though she was accompanied by a personal photographer.



Not to mention, there is nothing low key about her facial expressions in the photos - she appears to be looking intently at each person


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> sounds like she’s preparing to move on.



That would be such good news.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the actual recipe, rather than the shameless plug for his book
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Happy St George's Day - Chef Darren McGrady | The Royal Chef
> 
> 
> Today is St Georges Day in England. St George has been the patron saint since his death in AD 303. According to legend, he was a soldier in the Roman army who killed a dragon and saved a princess. From the 15th century, St George’s Day used to be a national holiday in England, and…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theroyalchef.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a video of McGrady making it:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Chef Showed Us How Queen Elizabeth Picks Her Own Berries To Make This Dessert
> 
> 
> Classic Liz!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.delish.com




Yum! TU  



sdkitty said:


> do we know if that baby's ears are pierced?  discussion is because ears were blurred in a photo?
> Anyway, I had mine pierced by my mom's friend when I was maybe 13.  they got infected.  I've never had the desire for any more piercings in ears or anywhere else.  I would say - not really paying attention - that most women in the US have at least the "normal" one hole in each ear.  You don't see many earrings that aren't for pierced ears.  I've bought vintage ones and they're not comfortable.
> No tatts for me either but they are pretty prevalent around these parts - an not necessarily a good thing IMO



She’s not able to merch them properly, so she hid them?
Or for identifying - we don’t even know who that baby is - a piercing would be a way to identify if that pic was actually Invisibet? If she ever shows up and actually has virgin ears, yet a pic of “her” existed with pierced ears as a baby, well…


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> do we know if that baby's ears are pierced?  discussion is because ears were blurred in a photo?
> Anyway, I had mine pierced by my mom's friend when I was maybe 13.  they got infected.  I've never had the desire for any more piercings in ears or anywhere else.  I would say - not really paying attention - that most women in the US have at least the "normal" one hole in each ear.  You don't see many earrings that aren't for pierced ears.  I've bought vintage ones and they're not comfortable.
> No tatts for me either but they are pretty prevalent around these parts - an not necessarily a good thing IMO


I did notice L has very large earlobes - neither Of her parents does …


----------



## CarryOn2020

Andi, Eugi, H&M, the world has woken up. We’ve got your number.  Sail on


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> Not to mention, there is nothing low key about her facial expressions in the photos - she appears to be looking intently at each person



She wants everyone to know that SHE CARES SO MUCH!!


----------



## xincinsin

Chloe302225 said:


>



The duchess recycled her Cartier jewelry last seen at the Invictus Games?
This makes it sound like the visit happened at some other time. Weird....


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?


You deserved a much nicer birthday.


----------



## marietouchet

kkfiregirl said:


> For some rich people, it’s not enough to have a lot of money, they also need _visibility_ and _power_.


A also has his own problems eg there is a holdup on the sale of the chalet in Verbier 
so maybe he needs a return to the fold for financial reasons 
always … follow the money


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The duchess recycled her Cartier jewelry last seen at the Invictus Games?
> This makes it sound like the visit happened at some other time. Weird....



Note the use of _*titles - *_she is sooooo important.


*

*


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Note the use of _*titles - *_*she is sooooo important*.
> 
> 
> *
> View attachment 5424900
> *


Oh, yes!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She wants everyone to know that SHE CARES SO MUCH!!


guess this is what they mean by a life of service


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She wants everyone to know that SHE CARES SO MUCH!!


----------



## Helventara

.


Chloe302225 said:


>



why the reference to Denmark?  Am I missing something?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> A also has his own problems eg there is a holdup on the sale of the chalet in Verbier
> so maybe he needs a return to the fold for financial reasons
> always … follow the money



I'd think they'd happily pay him some money if he keeps a low profile and doesn't give them headaches.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Post Jubilee reboot + an attempt to offset major press coverage of Garter Day, especially Camilla joining the ranks. Charles, William, Anne, Edward, Camilla, and the disgraced Andrew (removed from public view) makes a huge visual statement of who is not included, the Second Row Royal. So much pomp and circumstance in Windsor, while ironically pictures are posted as Haz is dumped on his ass on a polo field “leading his best life.” Interesting that “Daddy David Foster” has popped up again, wonder what his appearance fee was?


----------



## xincinsin

BVBookshop said:


> .
> 
> why the reference to Denmark?  Am I missing something?


Geography fail? It does start off declaring Methane a "Danish Duchess" 
And the hashtags mention both Denmark and demark


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Chloe302225 said:


>



I like her look here, she looks good, apart from too much hair. 
Now, why can't she look this put together on 'official' duties?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She's not non-binary so why them or boys too. Never mind the speaker, doesn't what women have to say interest boys too? They've fed the 'non binary' line because basically she is identifying girls and non-binary people as victims (like her). 

Talk to children about being a person, or girls on being a woman, or don't bother. 

They both (H&M) make me so mad


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Geography fail? It does start off declaring Methane a "Danish Duchess"
> And the hashtags mention both Denmark and demark



That's hilarious!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I like her look here, she looks good, apart from too much hair.
> Now, why can't she look this put together on 'official' duties?



This happened in April. They’ve had over 8 weeks to get the photoshop correct.

ETA: Denmark can have her


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I like her look here, she looks good, apart from too much hair.
> Now, why can't she look this put together on 'official' duties?



How do you know this pic was taken then?


----------



## CarryOn2020

_the Duchess of Sussex joined Build Make Me's entrepreneurship course *in April *as a guest coach to give "inspiring and encouraging" feedback on the young people's sustainable business pitches._

Supposedly she was there in April, if I am reading the caption correctly.

ETA: the comments are hilarious
*britatomassoni*
sustainable business pitches = learn how to plagiarize speeches
*c_j1525*
She is teaching them how to get a Netflix contract


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> How do you know this pic was taken then?


I don't understand


----------



## Helventara

CarryOn2020 said:


> This happened in April. They’ve had over 8 weeks to get the photoshop correct.
> 
> ETA: *Denmark can have her*


Princess Mary could teach her a thing or two!


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like that bespoke Dior we just saw not fit?


IMHO, that wasn't couture. If so, the coat dress would have been at least $20,000 and would have required fittings in Paris. If that was not convenient, they would have dispatched one of their modiste's to Montecito to fit the canvas, then a second trip to fit the dress, after which it would have been delivered. If it didn't fit, another trip to Montecito would have been required--all at extra expense. By the time this would have been completed, the cost of the dress would have ballooned--perhaps to $50,000.
I doubt Megan would have pursued this. 

Megan has a fit problem. She's smaller on top than the bottom, and her waist isn't small. Therefore, to obtain a fit through the waist and hips, she has to go up in size. Generally, she appears to select something to fit her top, but as a result, the bottom doesn't fit correctly. 

A good seamstress could adjust for this and let out seams--assuming there's sufficient fabric to do so. But it's quite obvious she doesn't have one. Moreover, Christian Dior RTW, has next to no seam allowance, so this was not even an option. Why someone at CD didn't steer her correctly (after all, this is their image she's modeling) is beyond me. 

I don't know why she didn't pick another brand, a different dress altogether or find a better tailor. A made-to-order garment from a talented local dressmaker would have been ideal. She could have achieved a perfect fit (assuming the modiste had the requisite skills) saved a bundle, would have avoided the stigma from wearing an expensive branded item inconsistent with their avowed priorities, not to mention she could have achieved what appeared to be an effortless perfect fit.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _the Duchess of Sussex joined Build Make Me's entrepreneurship course *in April *as a guest coach to give "inspiring and encouraging" feedback on the young people's sustainable business pitches._
> 
> Supposedly she was there in April, if I am reading the caption correctly.
> 
> ETA: the comments are hilarious
> *britatomassoni*
> sustainable business pitches = learn how to plagiarize speeches
> *c_j1525*
> She is teaching them how to get a Netflix contract


It took weeks to release this?  Was she saving it to counteract her disasters?  Of course she was.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Post Jubilee reboot + an attempt to offset major press coverage of Garter Day, especially Camilla joining the ranks. Charles, William, Anne, Edward, Camilla, and the disgraced Andrew (removed from public view) makes a huge visual statement of who is not included, the Second Row Royal. So much pomp and circumstance in Windsor, while ironically pictures are posted as Haz is dumped on his ass on a polo field “leading his best life.” Interesting that “Daddy David Foster” has popped up again, wonder what his appearance fee was?


The Order of the Garter: HMTQ flanked by a beaming Camilla and Charles.


----------



## wisconsin

papertiger said:


> I am surprised M had her girl baby's ear pierced. It's certainly not got anything to do with female empowerment, having one's own voice or gender equality. This is why M doesn't show the baby's ears. She already knows the implications and it doesn't fit with her narrative.
> 
> In terms of educated parents, whatever the culture, it's very hard to understand why they would needlessly inflict piercing or wearing earrings on a* girl* baby or toddler. A girl baby is not a doll. My opinion and pure speculation, if Lilli is real, she was bought 'off the shelf' and not bespoke (apart from type - like dolls are bought) from a country/culture where babies have their ears pierced ASAP and already had pierced ears/earrings.
> 
> I was not even allowed to get my ears pierced until I was 16, and in my culture it's quite normal for little girls to have their ears pierced. When I had it done I had to pay for it myself, then I had an infection (probably bad earrings) and had to let them close) Then, I was told by an employer I _had_ to have them done again for a job (modelling hats) - and still under 18.
> 
> You should have heard the conversation with my mother when I wanted to get (and got) my nose pierced (although I let it close-up when regularly doing martial arts). I guess no-one cares anymore now headlamps and face tattoos are path of the course for self-expression and identity. My sister has a tattoo but I would never get one and she would never have her ears pierced not wears earrings.
> 
> IMO: All piercings, body modifications and elective surgery and life-changing treatments should 100% be by adult consent only.


I agree and the same applies to circumcision too. male or female. These are my views and I stand by them. I don’t want to hear any religious or political feedback on it . Thanks


----------



## Annawakes

Yeah.  She was saving these photos for when her image needed a boost.  Now what?


----------



## Happyish

Given Harry's poor reception at the Royal Jubilee, I wonder if the restraints will now be off, and as a result, his book will reveal a torrent of accusations and private events he may not otherwise have revealed.


----------



## bag-mania

realistically how much of a boost will she get from it?

She is a fickle supporter. Remember when she spoke at some girl power seminar/workshop thing a couple of years back? She made out like she was going to really help them on her website. But when the event was over so was her involvement. We haven’t heard a peep about that organization (that was so important to her) since.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> IMHO, that wasn't couture. If so, the coat dress would have been at least $20,000 and would have required fittings in Paris. If that was not convenient, they would have dispatched one of their modiste's to Montecito to fit the canvas, then a second trip to fit the dress, after which it would have been delivered. If it didn't fit, another trip to Montecito would have been required--all at extra expense. By the time this would have been completed, the cost of the dress would have ballooned--perhaps to $50,000.
> I doubt Megan would have pursued this.



You are not wrong, but her freaking wedding dress didn't fit. It's unexplainable really.


----------



## xincinsin

Happyish said:


> *Megan has a fit problem.* She's smaller on top than the bottom, and her waist isn't small. Therefore, to obtain a fit through the waist and hips, she has to go up in size. Generally, she appears to select something to fit her top, but as a result, the bottom doesn't fit correctly.


She has more than a fit problem. I think fellow posters here have speculated many times that she selects her outfits for the tall slim body which she thinks she has. And this ill-fitting look has persisted for so long that I believe anyone who dares tell her the truth gets sacked. It's an Emperor's New Clothes situation.

She seems to have a fondness for Dior. That bedsheet kaftan was also Dior. Maybe to her, it represents some pinnacle of elegance and style. PageSix really stretched it by claiming that although Methane wasn't carrying the Lady Dior bag, she has one so this white outfit is one of those "nods" to Diana.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

wisconsin said:


> I agree and the same applies to circumcision too. male or female. These are my views and I stand by them. I don’t want to hear any religious or political feedback on it . Thanks



I mean, it's entirely not the same as in the damage for FGM is way bigger, but I completely agree that children should not be subjected to body modifications unless medically necessary.


----------



## TC1

Last night the Time 100 gala happened to be on my TV. I noticed the intro was narrated by "Meghan the Duchess of Sussex" she got a voice over job y'all!!!!!


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: the comments are hilarious
> *britatomassoni*
> sustainable business pitches = learn how to plagiarize speeches


Now I get it; she doesn't plagiarize other people's work, she _recycles_ it because she's environmentally friendly!


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't understand



 sucks supplies pics and the story. Is there a timestamp? Can't see the Danish kids from the Netherlands -  

so...

How can we tell when the pic were taken?


----------



## papertiger

Happyish said:


> IMHO, that wasn't couture. If so, the coat dress would have been at least $20,000 and would have required fittings in Paris. If that was not convenient, they would have dispatched one of their modiste's to Montecito to fit the canvas, then a second trip to fit the dress, after which it would have been delivered. If it didn't fit, another trip to Montecito would have been required--all at extra expense. By the time this would have been completed, the cost of the dress would have ballooned--perhaps to $50,000.
> I doubt Megan would have pursued this.
> 
> Megan has a fit problem. She's smaller on top than the bottom, and her waist isn't small. Therefore, to obtain a fit through the waist and hips, she has to go up in size. Generally, she appears to select something to fit her top, but as a result, the bottom doesn't fit correctly.
> 
> A good seamstress could adjust for this and let out seams--assuming there's sufficient fabric to do so. But it's quite obvious she doesn't have one. Moreover, Christian Dior RTW, has next to no seam allowance, so this was not even an option. Why someone at CD didn't steer her correctly (after all, this is their image she's modeling) is beyond me.
> 
> I don't know why she didn't pick another brand, a different dress altogether or find a better tailor. A made-to-order garment from a talented local dressmaker would have been ideal. She could have achieved a perfect fit (assuming the modiste had the requisite skills) saved a bundle, would have avoided the stigma from wearing an expensive branded item inconsistent with their avowed priorities, not to mention she could have achieved what appeared to be an effortless perfect fit.



Dior Couture is far more expensive. I used to work in couture and it was a _long _time ago and _not_ for Dior. Coats were more expensive than $20K _then._

Dior, Chanel are almost _double_ other official (Fédération) couture houses and there's only 14 Maison that can boast official status atm and you have to be voted in to be a member of the club(s).

A RTW plastic mac is more than $5K now, a couture dress can be easily $100K.

That's the league M hopes to move in, she may have said 'sayonara to Zara' but unfortunately she's still off-the-peg.

They still do alterations for full price RTW so I have idea why she didn't get fitted or CD let her out the door like that.

Perhaps it was a stylist-lone, that can happen.


----------



## EverSoElusive

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s Harry going to do with himself when polo season is over?



He will resume his job as a victim 





Sharont2305 said:


> I like her look here, she looks good, apart from too much hair.
> Now, why can't she look this put together on 'official' duties?



She's a unique flower, a feminist and a rebel. She does what she is wants and always goes against professional advice  





BVBookshop said:


> Princess Mary could teach her a thing or two!



If she were to interact with Mary, she'll come out calling her a racist too, just because Mary is sharing her knowledge. Nutmeg is intimidated by other strong and smart women.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> Last night the Time 100 gala happened to be on my TV. I noticed the intro was narrated by "Meghan the Duchess of Sussex" she got a voice over job y'all!!!!!



She’s slipping down the ladder. Two years ago she got to host a Time 100 special. Last year she and Harry were on the list of the 100. Now she doesn’t get to attend but she can pre-record an introduction.


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> The Order of the Garter: HMTQ flanked by a beaming Camilla and Charles.
> View attachment 5424934


A picture for the history books. The Queen made a huge effort it seems, photo verification that clearly demonstrates her affection, respect, support for Camilla.

Haz has probably pulled out a few of his diminishing hairs in rage and frustration.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> She has more than a fit problem. I think fellow posters here have speculated many times that she selects her outfits for the tall slim body which she thinks she has. And this ill-fitting look has persisted for so long that I believe anyone who dares tell her the truth gets sacked. It's an Emperor's New Clothes situation.
> 
> She seems to have a fondness for Dior. That bedsheet kaftan was also Dior. Maybe to her, it represents some pinnacle of elegance and style. PageSix really stretched it by claiming that although Methane wasn't carrying the Lady Dior bag, she has one so this white outfit is one of those "nods" to Diana.



I know Audrey (Hepburn) was more Givenchy, but I think Mega-ego thinks heart-of-hearts, down to her bones she is the 21st century Audrey. Actress turned humanitarian and fashion icon. Bless  

In M's case, it just goes to show you she doesn't have a single mirror in any of her 16 bathrooms, let alone one in the hall by the front door. Deluded and beyond.


----------



## Aimee3

Happyish said:


> I don't know why she didn't pick another brand, a different dress altogether or find a better tailor. A made-to-order garment from a talented local dressmaker would have been ideal. She could have achieved a perfect fit (assuming the modiste had the requisite skills) saved a bundle, would have avoided the stigma from wearing an expensive branded item inconsistent with their avowed priorities, not to mention she could have achieved what appeared to be an effortless perfect fit.


The reason is simple. She’d rather wear a poorly fitted Dior than a no name garment that would fit perfectly.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> The reason is simple. She’d rather wear a poorly fitted Dior than a no name garment that would fit perfectly.



All flex, no class.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happyish said:


> Given Harry's poor reception at the Royal Jubilee, I wonder if the restraints will now be off, and as a result, his book will reveal a torrent of accusations and private events he may not otherwise have revealed.



Go ahead, Hazzi, take your best shot. Careful not fall off your ego.

IMO while I am delighted for Camilla, it’s heartbreaking to see how unwell the Queen looks.  Hope they let her rest.




papertiger said:


> I know Audrey (Hepburn) was more Givenchy, but I think Mega-ego thinks heart-of-hearts, down to her bones she is the 21st century Audrey. Actress turned humanitarian and fashion icon. Bless
> 
> In M's case, it just goes to show you she doesn't have a single mirror in any of her 16 bathrooms, let alone one in the hall by the front door. Deluded and beyond.



Anne Hathaway called. She is the 21st century AH, puhleeze.
ETA: Amal Clooney called. She claims she is the 21st century AH.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> Dior Couture is far more expensive. I used to work in couture and it was a _long _time ago and _not_ for Dior. Coats were more expensive than $20K _then._
> 
> Dior, Chanel are almost _double_ other official (Fédération) couture houses and there's only 14 Maison that can boast official status atm and you have to be voted in to be a member of the club(s).
> 
> A RTW plastic mac is more than $5K now, a couture dress can be easily $100K.
> 
> That's the league M hopes to move in, she may have said 'sayonara to Zara' but unfortunately she's still off-the-peg.
> 
> They still do alterations for full price RTW so I have idea why she didn't get fitted or CD let her out the door like that.
> 
> Perhaps it was a stylist-lone, that can happen.


I asked my Dior SA about TW’s jubilee coat dress and she said she didn’t think it was part of this year’s RTW collections. She thought it was MTO. As to the poor fit she said it was too tight in the back but that sometimes a client insist on a certain fit and Dior will not overrule the client.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I asked my Dior SA about TW’s jubilee coat dress and she said she didn’t think it was part of this year’s RTW collections. She thought it was MTO. As to the poor fit she said it was too tight in the back but that sometimes a client insist on a certain fit and Dior will not overrule the client.



We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything. Nobody could even make out the colour let alone the label inside. H&M make it up as she goes along. Put out whatever and blame the media later. 

If you think Harry would pay for a one-off MTO piece or Dior thinks she's a super-consumer, rustle-up a Dior outfit from Paris to Cali (and not the other way round)with less than 3 fittings when she's not a Dior couture customer (without PO-ing their _real_ couture clients) when they couldn't even say whether or not she would be going or which events, fine. 

What are CD going to do? Cause a fuss? 

I am obviously the most cynical one of _all _of you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Timetable seems wobbly. Was it April or earlier this year? 
Article in spoiler.








						Meghan helps girls with business pitches as guest coach for entrepreneur session
					

The duchess joined Project Fearless in Amsterdam in April to share her advice.




					www.messengernewspapers.co.uk
				







Spoiler: Project fearless



The Duchess of Sussex took on a role as a guest coach for a girls’ entrepreneurship course.

Meghan visited the Project Fearless initiative in Amsterdam in April while in the Netherlands for the Invictus Games.

Photos shared by the Dutch non-profit organisation on Monday showed Meghan hugging a delighted young participant, and also cheering with her hand in the air in a team photo with the teenagers.






Meghan hugging one of the participants (Chris Allerton/Archewell/PA)
In another image, the duchess sits cross-legged in a discussion circle, and standing at a whiteboard.
The duchess said, in a statement released by Archewell: “Safe, supportive spaces like Project Fearless allow girls the opportunity to express themselves, build each other up, gain resilience and tackle new challenges.”





Meghan visiting Project Fearless (Chris Allerton/Archewell/PA)
Project Fearless aims to give girls and non-binary youngsters aged nine to 14 the tools to succeed through after-school courses, including, among others, on climate science, skateboarding, kick-boxing and entrepreneurship.
It announced the duchess’ visit to mark its third birthday.
It described how former actress Meghan helped the students with their business pitches and “enthusiastically” took part in a group exercise on facing fears.





A team photo during Meghan’s session (Chris Allerton/Archewell/PA)
“Earlier this year, Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, joined our first entrepreneurship course as a guest coach,” it said.
“During her visit, she gave the girls inspiring and encouraging feedback on their sustainable business pitches, and enthusiastically joined in with a group exercise on facing fears.”





The duchess chatting to some of the teenagers taking part (Chris Allerton/Archewell/PA)
Merida Miller, founder of Project Fearless, said: “The duchess’ visit was a brilliant way to celebrate the impact Project Fearless has made over the last three years, introducing the girls to an accessible role model who is making a difference and using her voice.”


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> do we know if that baby's ears are pierced?  discussion is because ears were blurred in a photo?
> Anyway, I had mine pierced by my mom's friend when I was maybe 13.  they got infected.  I've never had the desire for any more piercings in ears or anywhere else.  I would say - not really paying attention - that most women in the US have at least the "normal" one hole in each ear.  You don't see many earrings that aren't for pierced ears.  I've bought vintage ones and they're not comfortable.
> No tatts for me either but they are pretty prevalent around these parts - an not necessarily a good thing IMO


I wanted my ears pierced as a child, but my british mother said no.  When I was 10, she relented and allowed my aunt to take me and my cousin to have them done.  When my daughter was 8, she wanted her ears pierced, so I took her and had it done.  She was so traumatized by the whole thing that I immediately regretted letting her have it done.  She cried all the way home   I could never put an infant through that.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything. Nobody could even make out the colour let alone the label inside. H&M make it up as she goes along. Put out whatever and blame the media later.
> 
> If you think Harry would pay for a one-off MTO piece or Dior thinks she's a super-consumer, rustle-up a Dior outfit from Paris to Cali (and not the other way round)with less than 3 fittings when she's not a Dior couture customer (without PO-ing their _real_ couture clients) when they couldn't even say whether or not she would be going or which events, fine.
> 
> What are CD going to do? Cause a fuss?
> 
> I am obviously the most cynical one of _all _of you.


posted on Dior’s instagram


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> I asked my Dior SA about TW’s jubilee coat dress and she said she didn’t think it was part of this year’s RTW collections. She thought it was MTO. As to the poor fit she said it was too tight in the back but that *sometimes a client insist on a certain fit *and Dior will not overrule the client.



Sounds just like her, doesn't it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything.



Didn't Dior post it on their Instagram? I fuzzily remember I said "If I was Dior I wouldn't flaunt this illfitting thing" or something along the lines.

ETA: reading the other comments I see Dior did indeed post it  I will never learn to not comment as I go along.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*This* is why the fit was off.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Jayne1

I thought she looked perfect for the occasion and I can't get over how she can keep that smile on her face. Butter wouldn't melt in her mouth, as the saying goes. 

H, on the other hand, cannot fake smile for the life of him. I am so curious about his book - he will discuss his opinion of his biological father?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything. Nobody could even make out the colour let alone the label inside. H&M make it up as she goes along. Put out whatever and blame the media later.
> 
> If you think Harry would pay for a one-off MTO piece or Dior thinks she's a super-consumer, rustle-up a Dior outfit from Paris to Cali (and not the other way round)with less than 3 fittings when she's not a Dior couture customer (without PO-ing their _real_ couture clients) when they couldn't even say whether or not she would be going or which events, fine.
> 
> What are CD going to do? Cause a fuss?
> 
> I am obviously the most cynical one of _all _of you.


For the life of me I don’t understand why she doesn’t make a trip to NM or Saks, use a personal shopper and have it all fitted. Of course I know the answer. You can’t do that and merch at the same time, plus you would have to pay for the clothing.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I thought she looked perfect for the occasion and I can't get over how she can keep that smile on her face. Butter wouldn't melt in her mouth, as the saying goes.
> 
> H, on the other hand, cannot fake smile for the life of him. I am so curious about his book - he will discuss his opinion of his biological father?


That smile is so plastered on her face that she looks demented.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> posted on Dior’s instagram



I think this coat looks absolutely awful on her. She looks like a Mac truck because it doesn’t fit


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd think they'd happily pay him some money if he keeps a low profile and doesn't give them headaches.


I think the second-row-for-H must have been a real wakeup call for A


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't Dior post it on their Instagram? I fuzzily remember I said "If I was Dior I wouldn't flaunt this illfitting thing" or something along the lines.
> 
> ETA: reading the other comments I see Dior did indeed post it  I will never learn to not comment as I go along.



Ha ha, you're right they did. 

They actually found the only pic of her looking OK in it too. 

SS22 was shown Jan 22 and books were closed early April and already paid for before leaving Montaigne. Prob ¢150K + for the full outfit. I still say it went through a stylist and PR and was borrowed which is why it doesn't fit.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry’s memoir is supposed to come out by the end of the year. It still doesn’t have a title or a release date. Most anticipated books are available for preorder on Amazon and Barnes & Noble six months out. He’s running out of time for a release this year. I’m guessing it will be pushed back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I think the second-row-for-H must have been a real wakeup call for A





marietouchet said:


> I think the second-row-for-H must have been a real wakeup call for A


It should have been, but he thinks his problem is gone. Plus he never trashed the family like Hazz did. People don’t like Andy because people just don’t like him. He comes across as believing the rest of the world is peasantry  compared to himself.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> That smile is so plastered on her face that she looks demented.



She had good training as suitcase girl. It helps if you Vaseline your teeth too.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> posted on Dior’s instagram




I saw. As I said I think it was a loan.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> He fell off yesterday. He and the horse are ok. Backgrid posted this -
> 
> View attachment 5424680
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry falls off his horse in front of his celebrity friends
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, 37, was unscathed in the incident at the Santa Barbara Polo and Racquet Club, as was his ride, but it was a bad omen for the royal whose Los Padres team also lost the match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He fell again!!! What did tell you all lol he’s not even good at it. 



DoggieBags said:


> I asked my Dior SA about TW’s jubilee coat dress and she said she didn’t think it was part of this year’s RTW collections. She thought it was MTO. As to the poor fit she said it was too tight in the back but that sometimes a client insist on a certain fit and Dior will not overrule the client.


That’s very interesting feedback so essentially design by committee possibly over email/videochat- a camel coat if you will 




papertiger said:


> We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything. Nobody could even make out the colour let alone the label inside. H&M make it up as she goes along. Put out whatever and blame the media later.
> 
> If you think Harry would pay for a one-off MTO piece or Dior thinks she's a super-consumer, rustle-up a Dior outfit from Paris to Cali (and not the other way round)with less than 3 fittings when she's not a Dior couture customer (without PO-ing their _real_ couture clients) when they couldn't even say whether or not she would be going or which events, fine.
> 
> What are CD going to do? Cause a fuss?
> 
> I am obviously the most cynical one of _all _of you.





That reminds me of that story of Liz Taylor getting a new dress from Dior and she was told she was the first and it was newly made and all that  for the Russian embassy and the when she arrived another actress ( Gina Lollobrigida) was wearing the same one with a different colour sash 

I think the Made to Meg’s specifics idea makes a lot of sense myself. It doesn’t look right or like one of their designs - it’s more a mix of ideas like it kept getting tweaked repeatedly and it’s not a super elaborate garment so they could have just devoted the b team to it for as long as they needed to and called it a day. This would explain the fit issues to a large extent. It’s the label and the promo that matters to M.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> He fell again!!! What did tell you all lol he’s not even good at it.
> 
> 
> That’s very interesting feedback so essentially design by committee possibly over email/videochat- a camel coat if you will
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5425031
> 
> That reminds me of that story of Liz Taylor getting a new dress from Dior and she was told she was the first and it was newly made and all that  for the Russian embassy and the when she arrived another actress ( Gina Lollobrigida) was wearing the same one with a different colour sash
> 
> I think the Made to Meg’s specifics idea makes a lot of sense myself. It doesn’t look right or like one of their designs - it’s more a mix of ideas like it kept getting tweaked repeatedly and it’s not a super elaborate garment so they could have just devoted the b team to it for as long as they needed to and called it a day. This would explain the fit issues to a large extent. It’s the label and the promo that matters to M.



That is a priceless picture!

At work we used to take the spare buttons off and away from the coats and jackets so the clients would have to come back to order new ones (which would of course take months). All the while, the spare buttons (that the client had already paid for) would be sitting in the draw under their name. They had accounts and invoices and we'd make a big fuss that we'd waive the bill on _this_ occasion and only charge them for the atelier, or not at all. The clients were so grateful. basically, we just wanted them to keep coming back, keep in touch and build good will, not become a client of another House.

CD knows what it's doing. It's from MTM (all couture is MTM) but I stand by what I said. I really doubt it was made to measure for _her_ and most likely loaned.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> For the life of me I don’t understand why she doesn’t make a trip to NM or Saks, use a personal shopper and have it all fitted. Of course I know the answer. You can’t do that and merch at the same time, plus you would have to pay for the clothing.


NM or Saks is not the place for cosplay outfits. 
Per Taz - excellent analysis of the MM wardrobe - lots and lots of photos - I had heard this before but the avalanche of photos in one video got through to me. 
MM is a fashion plagiarist - she incessantly copies Diana and Michelle O for the big photo ops. She is a humanitarian-wanna be (Diana) and emerging as a political-wanna be (Michelle). 
MM's attire is all cosplay, and you cant go to Dior and say make me look like Michelle or Diana.
It is driving me nuts, where have I seen that white trench coat look ??? Angelina ???


----
See BLG recent video on Youtube - the one where he reviews Taz comments - the icon for that video is unmistakable - look for GIANT BUCKET OF POPCORN 
 
@papertiger found that jewel of a video and must give her credit


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## DeMonica

sdkitty said:


> she really was a big star and from what I gather she wasn't really that happy in her marriage.  I guess in those days divorce wasn't an option for someone like her


If you recall her pictures taken at the ceremony she looked completely devastated. I think her family, which was rich as I've read somewhere, was against the wedding, too


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> That is a priceless picture!
> 
> At work we used to take the spare buttons off and away from the coats and jackets so the clients would have to come back to order new ones (which would of course take months). All the while, the spare buttons (that the client had already paid for) would be sitting in the draw under their name. They had accounts and invoices and we'd make a big fuss that we'd waive the bill on _this_ occasion and only charge them for the atelier, or not at all. The clients were so grateful. basically, we just wanted them to keep coming back, keep in touch and build good will, not become a client of another House.
> 
> CD knows what it's doing. It's from MTM (all couture is MTM) but I stand by what I said. I really doubt it was made to measure for _her_ and most likely loaned.


Makes sense. I have a hard time seeing cheapskate Harry being willing to spend that kind of money for one outfit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> NM or Saks is not the place for cosplay outfits.
> Per Taz - excellent analysis of the MM wardrobe - lots and lots of photos - I had heard this before but the avalanche of photos in one video got through to me.
> MM is a fashion plagiarist - she incessantly copies Diana and Michelle O for the big photo ops. She is a humanitarian-wanna be (Diana) and emerging as a political-wanna be (Michelle).
> MM's attire is all cosplay, and you cant go to Dior and say make me look like Michelle or Diana.
> It is driving me nuts, where have I seen that white trench coat look ??? Angelina ???
> 
> 
> ----
> See BLG recent video on Youtube - the one where he reviews Taz comments - the icon for that video is unmistakable - look for GIANT BUCKET OF POPCORN
> 
> @papertiger found that jewel of a video and must give her credit




Goggle the former president’s wife, Melania. She is wearing one from The Row, almost identical.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> That is a priceless picture!
> 
> At work we used to take the spare buttons off and away from the coats and jackets so the clients would have to come back to order new ones (which would of course take months). All the while, the spare buttons (that the client had already paid for) would be sitting in the draw under their name. They had accounts and invoices and we'd make a big fuss that we'd waive the bill on _this_ occasion and only charge them for the atelier, or not at all. The clients were so grateful. basically, we just wanted them to keep coming back, keep in touch and build good will, not become a client of another House.
> 
> CD knows what it's doing. It's from MTM (all couture is MTM) but I stand by what I said. I really doubt it was made to measure for _her_ and most likely loaned.


Thank you for the button info. When I used to buy Chanel at Saks, if you didn’t ask upfront for the buttons and fabric you didn’t get them. It took me a while to figure that out. They can’t get away with that now.  

It fit Gina better , but Liz didn’t over accessorize so it was a better look. Liz didn’t have to prove to the world that she had a ton of jewelry,  everyone already knew it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> That is a priceless picture!
> 
> At work we used to take the spare buttons off and away from the coats and jackets so the clients would have to come back to order new ones (which would of course take months). All the while, the spare buttons (that the client had already paid for) would be sitting in the draw under their name. They had accounts and invoices and we'd make a big fuss that we'd waive the bill on _this_ occasion and only charge them for the atelier, or not at all. The clients were so grateful. *basically, we just wanted them to keep coming back, keep in touch and build good will, not become a client of another House.*
> 
> CD knows what it's doing. It's from MTM (all couture is MTM) but I stand by what I said. I really doubt it was made to measure for _her_ and most likely loaned.



You bet if I found out you were wasting my time like this I'd never come back and tell all my friends  Did nobody ever ask why the garments didn't have spare buttons?


----------



## gracekelly

DeMonica said:


> If you recall her pictures taken at the ceremony she looked completely devastated. I think her family, which was rich as I've read somewhere, was against the wedding, too


Didn’t they think he was too old and a womanizer?  Plus Monaco always had a sleazy reputation. _A sunny place for shady people _


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You bet if I found out you were wasting my time like this I'd never come back and tell all my friends  Did nobody ever ask why the garments didn't have spare buttons?


Newbie buyers don’t realize or think about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I personally like Camilla. She's witty and loves horses and is very loyal to Charles. Do I condone cheating? I don't, but that was a lifetime ago and generally not unheard of in her social class.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Goggle the former president’s wife, Melania. She is wearing one from The Row, almost identical.


Thank you ! And yes Melania wore a similar white hat when she went to the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for the button info. When I used to buy Chanel at Saks, if you didn’t ask upfront for the buttons and fabric you didn’t get them. It took me a while to figure that out. They can’t get away with that now.



What's the extra fabric for?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's the extra fabric for?


It is such a small piece it is worthless for repair unless threads are used to reweave a tear. I use it if I am trying to match a top or bottom color.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally like Camilla. She's witty and loves horses and is very loyal to Charles. Do I condone cheating? I don't, but that was a lifetime ago and generally not unheard of in her social class.


Fun party would be Camilla, Zara and Mike and maybe even Peter Phillips. Sophie seems nice too.


----------



## MiniMabel

gracekelly said:


> Didn’t they think he was too old and a womanizer?  Plus Monaco always had a sleazy reputation. _A sunny place for shady people _




What is the story behind Grace Kelly's marriage?  Was she forced into marrying him?  I assume he was not her choice if she looked devastated on her wedding day as @DeMonica mentions?


----------



## Katel

gracekelly said:


> For the life of me I don’t understand why she doesn’t make a trip to NM or Saks, use a personal shopper and have it all fitted. Of course I know the answer. You can’t do that and merch at the same time, plus you would have to pay for the clothing.



Plus she would have to admit that she didn’t know everything. 



marietouchet said:


> I think the second-row-for-H must have been a real wakeup call for A



I wonder where they would’ve put him?


----------



## DeMonica

I was in a department store back in the 80s and while walking through I noticed a mother having her baby's ears pierced. I have never forgotten the sound of that baby's cries which climbed close to a scream. Mom was holding her in the chair to keep her still. I walked away with the opinion, my own, of how cruel that procedure was.
[/QUOTE]
My baby cousin's ears were pierced when she was still a newborn done in the hospital. The reasoning was that she wouldn't remember the pain later.  She probably forgot it, but she had definitely felt it - especially when it got inflamed and she tried to touch it. I got mine pierced when I was 18 because I got a pair of earrings by mistake and just wanted to wear them. I didn't find it particularly painful but I'd never do it to a baby.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> It should have been, but he thinks his problem is gone. Plus he never trashed the family like Hazz did. People don’t like Andy because people just don’t like him. *He comes across as believing the rest of the world is peasantry  compared to himself.*


Sounds like his nephew’s wife.  You know which one.


----------



## DeMonica

Chanbal said:


> This is why Will is allegedly the main target of Hazz and TW. He has courage…
> He is also likely the target of Eugenie, the Harkles supporter.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5424831
> 
> _The Duke of Cambridge__ made it clear that unless the Duke of York — who had hoped to attend the ancient event at Windsor as a member of the order — was banned from taking his place in public among the knights, he wouldn’t be able to take part. The dramatic move, which comes amid suggestions Andrew wants his HRH status reinstated and position recognised and respected, shows the heightened tensions at the heart of the royal family over his planned comeback.
> 
> “The Duke of Cambridge was adamant. If York insisted on taking part publicly, he would withdraw,” a senior source said. Buckingham Palace has been contacted for comment._



Then Andrew must be a complete and utter fool, possibly mentally retarded and definitely out of touch with reality. 0 common sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Fun party would be Camilla, Zara and Mike and maybe even Peter Phillips. Sophie seems nice too.



 I would add Savannah and Louis, really all the kids look fun.


----------



## purseinsanity

I


QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?


I’m so sorry!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> apparently babies have been ok with this for years but I still say why cause them pain when you don't need to
> 
> in some cases, maybe it's the culture?  in others - like Meghan if she did do this - it could be they just want to put pretty earrings on their girls.  Maybe this is similar to some here who want to buy toddlers bags that cost thousands to be like their moms


Again, God forbid I say anything remotely defending Megain, but ear piercing at a young age is actually quite common in certain cultures and even part of the naming ceremony.  I’m curious as to how many of the cultures that consider ear piercing “uncouth” and “low class” or “barbaric” promote circumcision?  Seems little baby boys don’t have much say in such a “barbaric” procedure either?


----------



## DoggieBags

DeMonica said:


> Then Andrew must be a complete and utter fool, possibly mentally retarded and definitely out of touch with reality. 0 common sense.


The disastrous interview Andrew gave shows a person who does not understand how he is viewed by a majority of people in the UK. How he views himself and how others view him are very much out of synch. He’s lived a life where he has been able to do what he wants when he wants with no consequences up to now. It’s hard to imagine him changing at this stage in his life. I’m not surprised that he thinks he can go back to business as usual.


----------



## DeMonica

wisconsin said:


> I agree and the same applies to circumcision too. male or female. These are my views and I stand by them. I don’t want to hear any religious or political feedback on it . Thanks


Male circumcision might have medical benefits, female is mutilation and highly dangerous.


----------



## papertiger

DeMonica said:


> *Then Andrew must be a complete and utter fool, possibly mentally retarded and definitely out of touch with reality. 0 common sense.*



  That's him.

I wouldn't insult the mentally retarded though. It's actually his fault he's like that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

DoggieBags said:


> The disastrous interview Andrew gave shows a person who does not understand how he is viewed by a majority of people in the UK. How he views himself and how others view him are very much out of synch. He’s lived a life where he has been able to do what he wants when he wants with no consequences up to now. It’s hard to imagine him changing at this stage in his life. I’m not surprised that he thinks he can go back to business as usual.


It is mind boggling that it was even considered for him to participate. The Order of the Garter “is an Order of CHIVALRY.”   Not a word or an action ever associated  with Andrew.

Long live (future) King William, he of good sense and decorum!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You bet if I found out you were wasting my time like this I'd never come back and tell all my friends  Did nobody ever ask why the garments didn't have spare buttons?



If anybody _would_ have asked, we would have told them the 'truth'. "Madame, they are in a draw with your name on so that they don't get lost or unnecessarily ruin the shape of the garment still attached. Our ateliers are able to sew them on with the matching thread and corresponding, coordinating back-button (the little button on the reverse, that makes sure the weight of the front button is more evenly distributed) and we would gladly provide this service if a button ever comes loose or falls off".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Pictures are worth a thousand words. 
"Girls, I don't give a sh!t what you're saying to me, but I have to look interested in your sob stories so they can take lots of pics of me-me-me doing good deeds."


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wow. It does make sense now that maybe William put his foot down re: the Sussexes as well. Still, their retaliation via the yellow press is so juvenile.
> 
> So William can't play all the polo he wants? Cry me a river, he'll live to tell the story.
> 
> But also, I don't get Andrew. Why not lay low, keep his mouth shut and enjoy the financial perks he still has.


Because he’s an a#%.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Pictures are worth a thousand words.
> "Girls, I don't give a sh!t what you're saying to me, but I have to look interested in your sob stories so they can take lots of pics of me-me-me doing good deeds."



I don't have Twitter, can't sign in, so I literally only get photos that show 'as is' on tPF. 

I would not feel happy about my daughter or non-binary child being pictured as part of their PR circus.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If anybody _would_ have asked, we would have told them the 'truth'. "Madame, they are in a draw with your name on so that they don't get lost or unnecessarily ruin the shape of the garment still attached. Our ateliers are able to sew them on with the matching thread and corresponding, coordinating back-button (the little button on the reverse, that makes sure the weight of the front button is more evenly distributed) and we would gladly provide this service if a button ever comes loose or falls off".



Raptor should hire you to do her PR. You do have a gift to make things sound good and could do wonders for her


----------



## Happyish

marietouchet said:


> NM or Saks is not the place for cosplay outfits.
> Per Taz - excellent analysis of the MM wardrobe - lots and lots of photos - I had heard this before but the avalanche of photos in one video got through to me.
> MM is a fashion plagiarist - she incessantly copies Diana and Michelle O for the big photo ops. She is a humanitarian-wanna be (Diana) and emerging as a political-wanna be (Michelle).
> MM's attire is all cosplay, and you cant go to Dior and say make me look like Michelle or Diana.
> It is driving me nuts, where have I seen that white trench coat look ??? Angelina ???
> 
> 
> ----
> See BLG recent video on Youtube - the one where he reviews Taz comments - the icon for that video is unmistakable - look for GIANT BUCKET OF POPCORN
> 
> @papertiger found that jewel of a video and must give her credit



Carla Bruni, France's former First Lady, frequently wore Dior for official functions. Of course it all looked fabulous, given that she was one of the original supermodels. Dior, for all of its' eccentricity, does have pieces worthy of royalty and capable of achieving a demure, lady-like look. So I can see why Megan would have been drawn to that concern. However, if Megan's outfit  was truly MTO, I shudder at the expense and I shudder at her apparent indifference to that expense. That it was loaned, as @papertiger suggests, would be far more palatable.
I can see where Dior would want to self-promote, but as a customer, this isn't a look I'd want to emulate.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for the button info. When I used to buy Chanel at Saks, if you didn’t ask upfront for the buttons and fabric you didn’t get them. It took me a while to figure that out. They can’t get away with that now.
> 
> It fit Gina better , but Liz didn’t over accessorize so it was a better look. Liz didn’t have to prove to the world that she had a ton of jewelry,  everyone already knew it.


Gina had lovely pieces of jewelry, too. I have watched Joanna Lumley's Great Cities of the World, where she visited Bulgari in Rome and had a chat with Gina there. Liz's famous diamond and emerald set was on display as well.


----------



## Happyish

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's the extra fabric for?


It provides extra fabric, so the garment can be rewoven in the event of that horrible "just-in-case" scenario . . . a cigarette drops and burns a hole, a moth eats something, etc. There may be other reasons. Perhaps @papertiger can weigh in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happyish said:


> While First Lady, Carla Bruni wore Dior nearly exclusively. Of course it all looked fabulous, given that she was one of the original supermodels. Dior, for all of its' eccentricity, does have pieces worthy of royalty and capable of achieving a demure, lady-like look. However, if this was truly MTO, *I shudder at the expense and I shudder at her apparent indifference to that expense*. That it was loaned, as @papertiger suggests, would be far more palatable.
> I can see where Dior would want to self-promote, but this isn't a look as a customer I'd want to emulate.




That woman spent a million of Charles' money on clothes within 9 months. She wore a bespoke Dior kaftan for two hours that cost 90000 pounds (not a typo, not an accidental extra zero) and still showed her underwear. She knows no measure and has no shame.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> Didn’t they think he was too old and a womanizer?  Plus Monaco always had a sleazy reputation. _A sunny place for shady people _


Something like that. I think she made a mistake, and so did poor Charlene. The whole Grimaldi family is hmm unique.


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Again, God forbid I say anything remotely defending Megain, but ear piercing at a young age is actually quite common in certain cultures and even part of the naming ceremony.  I’m curious as to how many of the cultures that consider ear piercing “uncouth” and “low class” or “barbaric” promote circumcision?  Seems little baby boys don’t have much say in such a “barbaric” procedure either?



You make some excellent points and I don’t disagree with you, but male circumcision can be a medically necessary surgery. When my son was born, my husband and I were opposed to it for many reasons, but to make a long story short, my son ended up needing to be circumcised in early childhood. Same story with my nephew- his parents didn’t want to subject their newborn to the procedure, but by the time he was 5, he needed to have it done.


----------



## DeMonica

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I personally like Camilla. She's witty and loves horses and is very loyal to Charles. Do I condone cheating? I don't, but that was a lifetime ago and generally not unheard of in her social class.


She definitely makes Charles happy and cares for him. I think these Windsor men prefer  strong women on their sides.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really think their treatment of Philip on his deathbed and naming their kid The Queen's family nickname she retired after Philip's death are the two most disgusting, cruel and nasty things they have done. 

And I have a feeling one of them was the driving force and the other one couldn't find his...backbone in time.


----------



## Vintage Leather

papertiger said:


> We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything. Nobody could even make out the colour let alone the label inside. H&M make it up as she goes along. Put out whatever and blame the media later.
> 
> If you think Harry would pay for a one-off MTO piece or Dior thinks she's a super-consumer, rustle-up a Dior outfit from Paris to Cali (and not the other way round)with less than 3 fittings when she's not a Dior couture customer (without PO-ing their _real_ couture clients) when they couldn't even say whether or not she would be going or which events, fine.
> 
> What are CD going to do? Cause a fuss?
> 
> I am obviously the most cynical one of _all _of you.



I typed up a long rant, and then the thread got away with me. 


But really, a trench coat and a wool skirt in June?!? That’s the stupidest outfit that I can imagine for June. Of course, I have issues with people also wearing a trench coat indoors as a freakin dress, unless you have a well known sense of irony, which neither Dior nor the Markles are known for. 

At a certain point, you have to put your foot down and not allow a spoiled brat to ruin your reputation. Can you imagine spending the equivalent of a downpayment on a rental property, just to look like a bobble head on top of an overstuffed sausage?

The collar needs to lay flat, rather than hover around her neck, the back should be cut wider, and the skirt should be fuller to give her the illusion of a narrower waist and hourglass figure


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DeMonica said:


> Something like that. I think she made a mistake, and so did poor Charlene. The whole Grimaldi family is hmm unique.


 
They are like the pirates of European royalty


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Raptor should hire you to do her PR. You do have a gift to make things sound good and could do wonders for her



Thank you  

But

Their money cannot buy me


----------



## DeMonica

papertiger said:


> That's him.
> 
> I wouldn't insult the mentally retarded though. It's actually his fault he's like that.


He's definitely not a brain surgeon. Such a shame, I found him good looking when young. A somewhat smart person wouldn't make those mistakes he had, and if he had made them, he should be awfully happy that he escaped court. I'd count my blessings and keep a low profile for the rest of my life.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW my birthday presents from the universe were my laptop I use daily for work breaking down beyond repair, my closest friend receiving a cancer diagnosis and a family member coughing up a lung with a post-Covid URI that has to be closely monitored so it doesn't turn into pneumonia. Can I say my hopes for the next year are slightly, uh, crushed right now?


Awful.  Hoping things get better for you and all concerned.


----------



## papertiger

Vintage Leather said:


> Dior is willing to claim the outfit.  According to the Dior Social media team, it’s a MTO greige trench coat. And they claim that underneath is a couture silk blouse and wool skirt
> 
> (although that’s the stupidest outfit that I can imagine for June. Of course, I have issues with people also wearing a trench coat indoors as a freakin dress, unless it’s a deconstructed McQueen or Westwood statement coatdress, but that’s a whole nother thing.)
> 
> At a certain point, you have to put your foot down and not allow a spoiled brat to ruin your reputation. Like, I can’t imagine buying any new Dior. I buy MTO to look nice, not like a clown.



MTM - but not made to _her_ measurements.

Done-up coat, right to the top button in case of snow (what else can you clip a lapel mic to?) gloves (inside) and wool skirt too. St Pauls is cold inside with no-one around but fully occupied, OMG, I would have been melting. I saw others were wearing tights (protocol) I guess all those men in uniforms were melting too.

I think Kate doing glamour at the the recent galas and premieres really unnerved our Cali-gal. Backfired as usual.

Happily, I will never be accused of wearing 'greige' (unless I mix my whites and darks in the wash)


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Because! Because! Because!  She is a total kill joy where the Windsors are concerned.  She has insulted Camilla before.  I think she holds her responsible for being thrown out of Charles' birthday party.  Maybe she was, but I'm sure she had good reason. The reality was that Meghan was thrown out because she was being inappropriate and it wasn't her BD party.  She got away with co-opting a friend's party when she was a kid and thought she could do it again.  Nope.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m guessing it took 6-8 weeks for all of the professional photo retouching to be done. Also by waiting awhile the articles about it are calling it a “low key visit” even though she was accompanied by a personal photographer.


This tells me that this was not a last minute decision to go to Invictus.  She had to schedule all of this.


----------



## papertiger

DeMonica said:


> He's definitely not a brain surgeon. Such a shame, I found him good looking when young. A somewhat smart person wouldn't make those mistakes he had, and if he had made them, he should be awfully happy that he escaped court. I'd count my blessings and keep a low profile for the rest of my life.



If you're someone who's been getting away with sh*t all your life, you never think you're going to get caught. JE wasn't a friend, he knew things, that's how those people operate. 

Harry's also getting caught time and time again now he doesn't have minions and security cleaning-up after him 24/7. Maybe it's not the BRF who should be worried about his book release, but the past catching-up when others write books about him. He will have to be very careful and he, like his uncle, are not careful people.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> The duchess recycled her Cartier jewelry last seen at the Invictus Games?
> This makes it sound like the visit happened at some other time. Weird....


OK, she was there to coach?  Give advice and help to people with their business pitches?  Does anyone see how inane this is?  She and her husband are floundering and can't get their business together and she is giving advice to teens?  This is as absurd as someone writing that she is a Danish Princess.  Please don't tell me that they thought this was Crown Princess Mary of Denmark.  Meghan isn't fit to be in the same room with CPMary.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I like her look here, she looks good, apart from too much hair.
> Now, why can't she look this put together on 'official' duties?



The messy hair will always keep her from looking professional and that is even if the clothing fits.

To quote Melanie Griffith in Working Girl, _"if you want to be taken seriously in business, then you need to have serious hair."_


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> OK, she was there to coach?  Give advice and help to people with their business pitches?  Does anyone see how inane this is?  She and her husband are floundering and can't get their business together and she is giving advice to teens?  This is as absurd as someone writing that she is a Danish Princess.  Please don't tell me that they thought this was Crown Princess Mary of Denmark.  Meghan isn't fit to be in the same room with CPMary.



I think someone thought that the Netherlands is in Denmark (or Denmark is in the Netherlands). 

Anyway, I guess it's all Europe, what's the diff? So whatever


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are like the pirates of European royalty


They are a very messy lot.  In fairness to the Grimaldis, GK had a track record with plenty of married American actors.  She might have looked like the ice queen, but she was far from it.  She was unhappy that Ranier didn't want her to act in movies after marriage and I would think that should have been discussed before they wed..  Doing a narration for a documentary was OK with him, but other than that, he didn't like the idea or think it was appropriate for his wife.  

Charlene's family had business iinterests in Monaco thanks to Albert and they had every reason for her to marry him and stay married to him.  I think once the twins hit 18, she will leave.  It's always about money.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I think someone thought that the Netherlands is in Denmark (or Denmark is in the Netherlands).
> 
> Anyway, I guess it's all Europe, what's the diff? So whatever


This is similar to a past US President referring to many countries in Africa as being dipsh*t.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> That's him.
> 
> I wouldn't insult the mentally retarded though. It's actually his fault he's like that.


He did the war hero thing well in the Falklands. I don't understand how he didn't become something better after instead of becoming a sleazy deal maker.  Harry should use him as an example of what path not to take.


----------



## Jayne1

DeMonica said:


> If you recall her pictures taken at the ceremony she looked completely devastated. I think her family, which was rich as I've read somewhere, was against the wedding, too


Are we talking about Grace?  Because I always said she looked so sad but no one thought the same as me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> We still only have her word it was CD, MTO or otherwise. Could be anything. Nobody could even make out the colour let alone the label inside. H&M make it up as she goes along. Put out whatever and blame the media later.
> 
> If you think Harry would pay for a one-off MTO piece or Dior thinks she's a super-consumer, rustle-up a Dior outfit from Paris to Cali (and not the other way round)with less than 3 fittings when she's not a Dior couture customer (without PO-ing their _real_ couture clients) when they couldn't even say whether or not she would be going or which events, fine.
> 
> What are CD going to do? Cause a fuss?
> 
> I am obviously the most cynical one of _all _of you.


Do you think Harry makes any decisions in this relationship?  other than deciding he's gonna go play polo.  the money may come from his family but I don't think he's the boss


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> If anybody _would_ have asked, we would have told them the 'truth'. "Madame, they are in a draw with your name on so that they don't get lost or unnecessarily ruin the shape of the garment still attached. Our ateliers are able to sew them on with the matching thread and corresponding, coordinating back-button (the little button on the reverse, that makes sure the weight of the front button is more evenly distributed) and we would gladly provide this service if a button ever comes loose or falls off".


Where was this if you're allowed to say.

I always asked Chanel for my extra buttons when I bought something. My SA seemed surprised that I would want them but Chanel buttons do fall off too (after many years, but still... )


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Are we talking about Grace?  Because I always said she looked so sad but no one thought the same as me.


I think she is talking about Charlene who was in tears.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I think she is talking about Charlene who was in tears.


Both looked devastatingly sad!  Although Charlene was really crying...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now why would she release this info today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's surprise engagement during the Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 40, who is now based in California with her two children, was in the Netherlands to support Prince Harry at the 2022 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Today is the day for the Order of the Garter ceremonies and Camilla made the order this year


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wow. It does make sense now that maybe William put his foot down re: the Sussexes as well. Still, their retaliation via the yellow press is so juvenile.
> 
> So William can't play all the polo he wants? Cry me a river, he'll live to tell the story.
> 
> But also, I don't get Andrew. Why not lay low, keep his mouth shut and enjoy the financial perks he still has.


Mo’Money


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> Do you think Harry makes any decisions in this relationship?  other than deciding he's gonna go play polo.  the money may come from his family but I don't think he's the boss


I do think so. I think he’s spoiled, arrogant, not too bright, and fond of his own way. And, MM, while out for the main chance, has her hands full trying to keep him calm. JMO though


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Where was this if you're allowed to say.
> 
> I always asked Chanel for my extra buttons when I bought something. My SA seemed surprised that I would want them but Chanel buttons do fall off too (after many years, but still... )



I'm not allowed to say. It was a long time ago but still work in the business (albeit more generally).

I only ever worked there one day a week. Took me the rest of the week to recover.


----------



## marietouchet

Happyish said:


> Carla Bruni, France's former First Lady, frequently wore Dior for official functions. Of course it all looked fabulous, given that she was one of the original supermodels. Dior, for all of its' eccentricity, does have pieces worthy of royalty and capable of achieving a demure, lady-like look. So I can see why Megan would have been drawn to that concern. However, if Megan's outfit  was truly MTO, I shudder at the expense and I shudder at her apparent indifference to that expense. That it was loaned, as @papertiger suggests, would be far more palatable.
> I can see where Dior would want to self-promote, but as a customer, this isn't a look I'd want to emulate.


Bruni was supporting French fashion when First Lady
Brigitte Macron does Louis Vuitton as French First Lady

Kate does a lot of McQueen, a UK  house, but also smaller UK brands
Camilla has bespoke tailored wear by UK designers, years ago she went to Antony Price - small English designer, can’t remember the names of her current designers

MM never really patronized UK designers, her wedding dress was famously by an English designer employed by the French house Givenchy
Honestly, I could see her doing Dior for all the wrong reasons since Kate and Camilla have snagged all the UK ones


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really think their treatment of Philip on his deathbed and naming their kid The Queen's family nickname she retired after Philip's death are the two most disgusting, cruel and nasty things they have done.
> 
> And I have a feeling one of them was the driving force and the other one couldn't find his...backbone in time.



It was odd giving informal names (nicknames) to both children as first names


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> I do think so. I think he’s spoiled, arrogant, not too bright, and fond of his own way. And, MM, while out for the main chance, has her hands full trying to keep him calm. JMO though


who knows?
but remember "what Meghan wants Meghan gets"?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> It was odd giving informal names (nicknames) to both children as first names


yes, you would think the could have given them a more formal name and then called them a nickname if they wanted to


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Bruni was supporting French fashion when First Lady
> Brigitte Macron does Louis Vuitton as French First Lady
> 
> Kate does a lot of McQueen, a UK  house, but also smaller UK brands
> Camilla has bespoke tailored wear by UK designers, years ago she went to Antony Price - small English designer, can’t remember the names of her current designers
> *
> MM never really patronized UK designers, her wedding dress was famously by an English designer employed by the French house Givenchy
> Honestly, I could see her doing Dior for all the wrong reasons since Kate and Camilla have snagged all the UK ones*



This was my pet peeve that I have written about many times on this thread. It was insulting.  Either she didn't think, didn't care or did it deliberately, but I don't think she was smart enough to go for the last reason.  At worst she could have picked a US designer.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> It was odd giving informal names (nicknames) to both children as first names


It was low rent. Sorry to say that.  No sorry.


----------



## kkfiregirl

gracekelly said:


> It was low rent. Sorry to say that.  No sorry.



I like Archie, I think it’s a name that can grow with a child, and I can see a grown man being called Archie. Lilibet is a tricky one; it sounds clunky with an American accent & even with a British accent it doesn’t sound suitable for an adult.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Because! Because! Because!  She is a total kill joy where the Windsors are concerned.  She has insulted Camilla before.  I think she holds her responsible for being thrown out of Charles' birthday party.  Maybe she was, but I'm sure she had good reason. The reality was that Meghan was thrown out because she was being inappropriate and it wasn't her BD party.  She got away with co-opting a friend's party when she was a kid and thought she could do it again.  Nope.


As Charles & Camilla and H&TW exit the church after Charles' birthday service, she sticks out her tongue and licks her lips followed by a pirouette (see video at 0:12) which she repeats again during the reception. She had to be told by a courtier to hand over something she received from a guest. On some blogs, they said that she was merching (a big no-no) with a guest(s) .


----------



## kkfiregirl

Maggie Muggins said:


> As Charles & Camilla and H&TW exit the church after Charles' birthday service, she sticks out her tongue and licks her lips followed by a pirouette (see video at 0:12) which she repeats again during the reception. She had to be told by a courtier to hand over something she received from a guest. On some blogs, they said that she was merching (a big no-no) with a guest(s) .




This was so awkward & Camila was visibly confused by MM.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are like the pirates of European royalty


Not “like” but the Grimaldi family’s ancestors actually were pirates.  I think it was back in the 1200’s a pirate threw the real king off the throne and installed himself as king.  At least that’s what I read.


----------



## Chanbal

The women's org that quoted TW, and people found out that was one more case of plagiarism, seems to have made its twitter account private.


----------



## Gal4Dior

DoggieBags said:


> I asked my Dior SA about TW’s jubilee coat dress and she said she didn’t think it was part of this year’s RTW collections. She thought it was MTO. As to the poor fit she said it was too tight in the back but that sometimes a client insist on a certain fit and Dior will not overrule the client.


Definitely not part of Fall/Winter or now upcoming Winter RTW. I just previewed the latest RTW collection for preorder, and it had none of the items she wore. It must be bespoke, which is depressing, because either all these great designers fail her, or she doesn't allow them to choose what works best for her body and tailor it correctly. My guess is the latter...


----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> I like Archie, I think it’s a name that can grow with a child, and I can see a grown man being called Archie. Lilibet is a tricky one; it sounds clunky with an American accent & even with a British accent it doesn’t sound suitable for an adult.


I don't like the name Archie but that's just personal taste....wonder how they came up with that one


----------



## Annawakes

I remember reading something about the time they named Archie.  That George at the time liked to be called “Archie” as a make believe name.  So then George couldn’t call himself that anymore.  Does anyone remember the same?

IF that is true, then both kids were named out of spite.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I remember reading something about the time they named Archie.  That George at the time liked to be called “Archie” as a make believe name.  So then George couldn’t call himself that anymore.  Does anyone remember the same?
> 
> IF that is true, then both kids were named out of spite.


how does that make George being named out of spite?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't like the name Archie but that's just personal taste....wonder how they came up with that one



I think it’s not as uncommon a name in the UK as it is in the US. Maybe they knew someone who had the name?


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I remember reading something about the time they named Archie.  That George at the time liked to be called “Archie” as a make believe name.  So then George couldn’t call himself that anymore.  Does anyone remember the same?
> 
> IF that is true, then both kids were named out of spite.



I remember something like that.


----------



## Annawakes

sdkitty said:


> how does that make George being named out of spite?


Archie was named out of spite.  To take away George’s play nickname.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't like the name Archie but that's just personal taste....wonder how they came up with that one



My grandfather was officially an _Arch_. Some did call him _Archie_ as a term of endearment, but to anyone who was not close to him, he was _Arch_. Of course, his grandchildren called him Grandpa 

ETA: supposedly Hazz had a wartime friend named _Archie_.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> how does that make George being named out of spite?



I think she meant they stole George’s nickname. Just like they stole the Queen’s nickname.


----------



## Annawakes

The other kid I was referring to was Lilibet.  Archie and Lilibet both named to spite the RF


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think she meant they stole George’s nickname. Just like they stole the Queen’s nickname.


SMH


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> Archie was named out of spite.  To take away George’s play nickname.


that's nasty if true


----------



## LizzieBennett

880 said:


> I do think so. I think he’s spoiled, arrogant, not too bright, and fond of his own way. And, MM, while out for the main chance, has her hands full trying to keep him calm. JMO though


+1000


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe MM liked the _Archie, Betty and Veronica_ comics?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe MM liked the _Archie, Betty and Veronica_ comics?
> 
> View attachment 5425218



Well he is a redhead!


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe MM liked the _Archie, Betty and Veronica_ comics?
> 
> View attachment 5425218


Or Archie Bunker


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> For the life of me I don’t understand why she doesn’t make a trip to NM or Saks, use a personal shopper and have it all fitted. Of course I know the answer. You can’t do that and merch at the same time, plus you would have to pay for the clothing.


She must be paying for a pretty high-powered stylist with plenty of connections, but not high-powered enough to get her clothes which fit because she isn't a standard size.



jelliedfeels said:


> I think the Made to Meg’s specifics idea makes a lot of sense myself. It doesn’t look right or like one of their designs - it’s more a mix of ideas *like it kept getting tweaked repeatedly and it’s not a super elaborate garment so they could have just devoted the b team to it for as long as they needed to and called it a day.* This would explain the fit issues to a large extent. It’s the label and the promo that matters to M.


Reminds me of the wedding dress.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG steps in


----------



## wisconsin

DeMonica said:


> Male circumcision might have medical benefits, female is mutilation and highly dangerous.


Not too significant or even early enough complications to warrant male baby circumsicion. Let them make an informed decision later. Agree with the point about female circumcision.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder what goes through the minds of Hazz and TW when they see photos like the ones below. Charles seems to be a great father-in-law, he visibly likes Kate.


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> Or Archie Bunker


Yep, I also thought about Archie Bunker.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I don't like the name *Archie* but that's just personal taste....wonder how they came up with that one


With TW, anything is possible and perhaps this was also one of her little jokes implying that in some way, the BRF a comical institution. When I heard the name, Archie, I first thought of this:


			https://www.adweek.com/galleycat/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/02/Archie-Conclusion-Issue.jpg


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: supposedly Hazz had a wartime friend named _Archie_.


That was one version. They even identified the Archie, IIRC.

The other version was that someone was talking to George, and when they asked for his name, he fibbed that his name was Archie. People thought that was so cute, and the Sussexi hijacked the name.

Both versions sound equally plausible/implausible. I was reading a tale on Reddit about how a couple shared with their family their name choice for their soon-to-be-born baby. The choices had personal and familial meaning for the husband. Their BIL (think he was married to the wife's sister) hijacked both first and middle chosen names when his child was born a few weeks earlier than the couple's baby, then threw a fit because the couple refused to name their baby anything else. It seems he claimed he had first dibs and they HAD to choose another set of names. So yeah, if the Sussexi hijack names, it would not surprise me. It fits with the plagiarism theme.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> My grandfather was officially an _Arch_. Some did call him _Archie_ as a term of endearment, but to anyone who was not close to him, he was _Arch_. Of course, his grandchildren called him Grandpa
> 
> ETA: supposedly Hazz had a wartime friend named _Archie_.



Well hello granddaughter of the great Arch 




CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe MM liked the _Archie, Betty and Veronica_ comics?
> 
> View attachment 5425218



I grew up reading Archie comics. Now you just ruined it for me


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> With TW, anything is possible and perhaps this was also one of her little jokes implying that in some way, the BRF a comical institution. When I heard the name, Archie, I first thought of this:
> 
> 
> https://www.adweek.com/galleycat/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/02/Archie-Conclusion-Issue.jpg


it's not a popular name in the US....more British or Irish


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> That was one version. They even identified the Archie, IIRC.
> 
> The other version was that someone was talking to George, and when they asked for his name, he fibbed that his name was Archie. People thought that was so cute, and the Sussexi hijacked the name.
> 
> Both versions sound equally plausible/implausible. I was reading a tale on Reddit about how a couple shared with their family their name choice for their soon-to-be-born baby. The choices had personal and familial meaning for the husband. Their BIL (think he was married to the wife's sister) hijacked both first and middle chosen names when his child was born a few weeks earlier than the couple's baby, then threw a fit because the couple refused to name their baby anything else. It seems he claimed he had first dibs and they HAD to choose another set of names. So yeah, if the Sussexi hijack names, it would not surprise me. It fits with the plagiarism theme.


Perhaps the Sucks named their company first and determined their (bio-engineered pale white red-head male) first child would be a marketing memento for their company?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Zen101

On the subject of the name Archie, I remembered this article I read in the Sun newspaper. Note, it was written in January 2019. Archie was born May 2019.








						Prince George tells a surprised dog walker that he is actually called Archie
					

PRINCE George has told a stranger that his name is Archie – sparking a mystery over whether it’s a family nickname or his own choice. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s five-year-old son was…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Zen101

Here is an article from the daily mail shortly after Archie was born, speculating if the newborn was named after prince George’s secret nickname...








						Did Harry choose the name 'Archie' as tribute to Prince George
					

On Wednesday the Duke and Duchess of Sussex revealed they had named their son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, months after Prince George revealed Archie was his nickname.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I was reading a tale on Reddit about how a couple shared with their family their name choice for their soon-to-be-born baby. The choices had personal and familial meaning for the husband. Their BIL (think he was married to the wife's sister) hijacked both first and middle chosen names when his child was born a few weeks earlier than the couple's baby, then threw a fit because the couple refused to name their baby anything else. It seems he claimed he had first dibs and they HAD to choose another set of names. So yeah, if the Sussexi hijack names, it would not surprise me. It fits with the plagiarism theme.



That sounds like the episode of Seinfeld where George says he wants to name his child Seven (it was Mickey Mantle‘s jersey number). Susan‘s cousin hears the name and decides to name her baby Seven and George is furious that she stole his name.

What makes it even funnier is that after that episode aired people actually started naming their kids Seven for awhile.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> That sounds like the episode of Seinfeld where George says he wants to name his child Seven (it was Mickey Mantle‘s jersey number). Susan‘s cousin hears the name and decides to name her baby Seven and George is furious that they she his name.
> 
> What makes it even funnier is that after that episode aired people actually started naming their kids Seven for awhile.


My teenaged daughter named her dog Seven after that episode but I prefer to call her Severiana (the dog, not the daughter!)


----------



## Gal4Dior

Question. Why the heck is there a post of TWs visit during the Invictus games? Must be for the ‘flix, as there was a professional photographer taking such “heartwarming” shots of the Patron Saint of Merching.
The Invictus Games were what, two or more months ago, and SUDDENLY this visit and photos of this visit appear on the day of the Order of the Garter? Sussssss….


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Two possibilities. He’s been training hard in secret so that he wouldn’t embarrass himself if he couldn’t keep up and contribute to the team. The other reason, what looks more elitist than spending all of his free time playing polo? He’s supposed to be devoting himself to various charity work  for the environment and mental health. Plus producing important Netflix and Spotify programming. Instead he’s out having fun and pursuing his hobbies. Not doing a damn thing for anyone but himself.


*His dad bod doesn't look as if it's been worked four hours a day.  Quite lumpy and frumpy.*



Toby93 said:


> Yep, I noticed the radiator right away.  Such a British thing


*Radiators are quite common in older US cities, especially on the east coast.  Many places I lived in had them.*


----------



## xincinsin

LVSistinaMM said:


> Question. Why the heck is there a post of TWs visit during the Invictus games? Must be for the ‘flix, as there was a professional photographer taking such “heartwarming” shots of the Patron Saint of Merching.
> The Invictus Games were what, two or more months ago, and SUDDENLY this visit and photos of this visit appear on the day of the Order of the Garter? Sussssss….


Also, I would have thought the organisation graced by the presence and wisdom of Her Lady of Perpetual Victimhood would be announcing their glory on social media the same day, not months later. Did they have to do an NDA to keep it quiet till it was advantageous for Methane to release the news?


----------



## CeeJay

lulilu said:


> *His dad bod doesn't look as if it's been worked four hours a day.  Quite lumpy and frumpy.*
> 
> Soooooooooooooo TRUE!  He’s got a beer belly going on that picture; kinda gross IMO!
> 
> *Radiators are quite common in older US cities, especially on the east coast.  Many places I lived in had them.*


Yes, definitely - in some cases, I used it as an extra Design unit (when not in use).


----------



## chowlover2

gracekelly said:


> In England they call themselves Travelers.   Anyone recall that TV show about their weddings?





EverSoElusive said:


> That arm position looks very mannequin like      I probably just need to cleanse my eyes after ogling too much at men in kilts on the other thread


My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding! I can’t even begin to imagine the money one of those gowns cost! Then on to life in a trailer!


----------



## mellibelly

I never understood why they didn’t name him Archibald. Is it because BALD is in the name and that’s where Harry’s kid is headed  At least then he could go by Archie or the much better Archer. It’s like naming your kid Mike instead of Michael. Just why?

Unpopular opinion, but my and my sister’s ears were pierced as babies and my parents weren’t gypsies LOL. I had no memory but was glad they were done so soon. Ear piercing is the least painful of all piercings imo, less painful than getting blood drawn. I don’t feel that it was abuse or that my parents did me dirty.


----------



## Happyish

gracekelly said:


> This was my pet peeve that I have written about many times on this thread. It was insulting.  Either she didn't think, didn't care or did it deliberately, but I don't think she was smart enough to go for the last reason.  At worst she could have picked a US designer.


She's done that too. Remember the Carolina Herrera dresses and gowns?


----------



## Chanbal

A recent article from a photographer on "*Why Virtue Signaling Photography Fails*" and TW's heartless trip to Uvalde.

*It’s Personal Branding Photography that by its very nature is doomed to undermine the message the client wants to send. *In all the cases above they tried to send the message of just how compassionate they were and in the case of the two politicians, appeal to their voter base. However, it comes across as *self-serving and empty **virtue signaling*. In Markle’s case her photos undermines the message she wanted to send of a compassionate, American Princess Diana. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with visiting a memorial or donating food to a blood drive. *The issue comes when you bring at least one photographer and potentially your own film crew.

And unfortunately these photos were very obviously staged and not just photos from news crews camped out at the Uvalde memorial *(which is another discussion in itself). *The depth of field in the shots, the framing with Rojelio Torres’ cross and the lack of people in the way suggest Markle and her photographer had time to plan and adjust the photoshoot.* *At a guess, the photographer would have taken at least a thousand photos of Markle during her trip to Uvalde and these were the best.* Combined, this polished look undermines her personal branding attempt as the next Princess Diana and raises questions. Was the purpose of her trip to Uvalde to comfort grieving families as a mother and to donate food? Or was it to get these photos? Because it’s the professional photos that destroyed her message…









						Why Virtue Signaling Photography Fails - Promote Right Photography
					

Meghan Markle, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Australian MP Tim Wilson have all suffered from this photography sin.




					promoteright.com.au


----------



## Happyish

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what goes through the minds of Hazz and TW when they see photos like the ones below. Charles seems to be a great father-in-law, he visibly likes Kate.



Never a misstep!


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> Gina had lovely pieces of jewelry, too. I have watched Joanna Lumley's Great Cities of the World, where she visited Bulgari in Rome and had a chat with Gina there. Liz's famous diamond and emerald set was on display as well.


I was just at Bulgari in Rome 4 days ago!


----------



## purseinsanity

DeMonica said:


> She definitely makes Charles happy and cares for him. I think these Windsor men prefer  strong women on their sides.


It seems their women are strong and many of the Windsor men (not talking Prince Phillip) are weaklings.  I was reading about Edward and Wallis, thanks to a link someone posted earlier, and went down a rabbit hole.  Thank God that twerp abdicated!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

My sister’s little dog is “Sir Archibald” and “Archie” for short.  When they named their kid Archie, all I think of is her dog.  Even his name is more formal than #7’s.


----------



## pukasonqo

Maybe Archie’s real name is Archimedes?


----------



## Chanbal

I used to dislike the name 'Archie', but it's growing on me. I hope he will turn out to be a decent person. His parents seem to be depriving him from having a lot of fun in his childhood.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> It was odd giving informal names (nicknames) to both children as first names


Archie is a formal name here in the UK, it's quite popular actually.


----------



## Chanbal

So Hazz is a relative of the Kardashians on the father's side… One big family!



Following his marriage to Rebecca, *David married Linda Thompson, and became stepfather to Brody and Brendan Jenner, Linda's children with Caitlyn Jenner, formerly known as Bruce Jenner.

The Jenners, who are also stepbrothers to the Kardashians through Bruce*, starred on fleeting reality show The Princes of Malibu during their time under his roof.









						Inside Prince Harry's relationship with David Foster, 72
					

The Duke of Sussex, 37, was pictured hanging out on the sidelines with American idol runner up Katharine, her composer husband David and their one-year-old son Rennie in California.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

kkfiregirl said:


> I like Archie, I think it’s a name that can grow with a child, and I can see a grown man being called Archie. Lilibet is a tricky one; it sounds clunky with an American accent & even with a British accent it doesn’t sound suitable for an adult.



Except they stole 'Archie' too, it was his cousin George's nickname.

Edited: @Annawakes already said it


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> With TW, anything is possible and perhaps this was also one of her little jokes implying that in some way, the BRF a comical institution. When I heard the name, Archie, I first thought of this:
> 
> 
> https://www.adweek.com/galleycat/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2015/02/Archie-Conclusion-Issue.jpg



Archie was quite a popular name in Scotland historically. There are seem to be quite a few Archies and Archibald in cemeteries and in churches. 

I looked at Wiki and apparently it comes from High-German: "Erkanbold, Erkanbald and Anglo-Saxon Eorcenbald".


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for the button info. When I used to buy Chanel at Saks, if you didn’t ask upfront for the buttons and fabric you didn’t get them. It took me a while to figure that out. They can’t get away with that now.
> 
> It fit Gina better , but Liz didn’t over accessorize so it was a better look. Liz didn’t have to prove to the world that she had a ton of jewelry,  everyone already knew it.


I agree Gina is a bit over accessorised for quite a busy dress - Liz looks great. Both are stunning of course. 


purseinsanity said:


> Again, God forbid I say anything remotely defending Megain, but ear piercing at a young age is actually quite common in certain cultures and even part of the naming ceremony.  I’m curious as to how many of the cultures that consider ear piercing “uncouth” and “low class” or “barbaric” promote circumcision?  Seems little baby boys don’t have much say in such a “barbaric” procedure either?


The old custom is king argument is for sure relevant here. 

For what it’s worth circumcision is not common in Britain and Europe. Some Jews and Muslims do it but a fair few reform groups are against it too.

A Jewish adherent would say that a boy’s circumcision is beyond cultural norm and is a crucial part of the terms of their relationship with god as set out by Abraham.
I’m not sure why Muslims do it - I think it’s more a cultural thing they borrowed from the Jews. I do know that early Christians stopped doing it because of  Peter’s vision at Joppa (and because it was a stumbling block in converting Gentiles) which led to male circumcision becoming rare in Christian dominated Europe. 

Male circumcision became an American standard because it was promoted as healthy and preventing boys from playing with themselves. I suppose if you are circumcising to be puritanical it makes sense you would also oppose an adornment like wearing earrings. 

I personally am against all of it and think it should be an adult or at least teenage decision for both cultural and religious reasons. 

Also I don’t think Meg’s part of any group that pierces ears as a cultural tradition unless I’m missing some important detail of vacuous valley girl lore. 


Vintage Leather said:


> I typed up a long rant, and then the thread got away with me.
> 
> 
> But really, a trench coat and a wool skirt in June?!? That’s the stupidest outfit that I can imagine for June. Of course, I have issues with people also wearing a trench coat indoors as a freakin dress, unless you have a well known sense of irony, which neither Dior nor the Markles are known for.
> 
> At a certain point, you have to put your foot down and not allow a spoiled brat to ruin your reputation. Can you imagine spending the equivalent of a downpayment on a rental property, just to look like a bobble head on top of an overstuffed sausage?
> 
> The collar needs to lay flat, rather than hover around her neck, the back should be cut wider, and the skirt should be fuller to give her the illusion of a narrower waist and hourglass figure


I agree when I see trench coat indoors I think spy or flasher. 


gracekelly said:


> He did the war hero thing well in the Falklands. I don't understand how he didn't become something better after instead of becoming a sleazy deal maker.  Harry should use him as an example of what path not to take.


I’m of the opinion sleazy dubious dealmaking and military self-aggrandisement pretty ingrained as a behaviour for a minor royal and we need to rearrange the whole board. 


bag-mania said:


> I think it’s not as uncommon a name in the UK as it is in the US. Maybe they knew someone who had the name?


It’s extremely trendy with the British right now as is Hunter and Evie/Eva/Ava/Evelyn and Isla for girls.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> A recent article from a photographer on "*Why Virtue Signaling Photography Fails*" and TW's heartless trip to Uvalde.
> 
> *It’s Personal Branding Photography that by its very nature is doomed to undermine the message the client wants to send. *In all the cases above they tried to send the message of just how compassionate they were and in the case of the two politicians, appeal to their voter base. However, it comes across as *self-serving and empty **virtue signaling*. In Markle’s case her photos undermines the message she wanted to send of a compassionate, American Princess Diana. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with visiting a memorial or donating food to a blood drive. *The issue comes when you bring at least one photographer and potentially your own film crew.
> 
> And unfortunately these photos were very obviously staged and not just photos from news crews camped out at the Uvalde memorial *(which is another discussion in itself). *The depth of field in the shots, the framing with Rojelio Torres’ cross and the lack of people in the way suggest Markle and her photographer had time to plan and adjust the photoshoot.* *At a guess, the photographer would have taken at least a thousand photos of Markle during her trip to Uvalde and these were the best.* Combined, this polished look undermines her personal branding attempt as the next Princess Diana and raises questions. Was the purpose of her trip to Uvalde to comfort grieving families as a mother and to donate food? Or was it to get these photos? Because it’s the professional photos that destroyed her message…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Virtue Signaling Photography Fails - Promote Right Photography
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Australian MP Tim Wilson have all suffered from this photography sin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> promoteright.com.au



Good to hear that perspective. 

We obviously know the answer to the question. 

The whole 'secret visit' thing just falls flat when you either bring your own photographer or allow cameras in. 

If you mean your visit to be secret it would just be a rumour at best, not gone into in every detail and plastered all over the Daily X - whatever the time frame. 

Anyway judging by the comments on all kinds of SM, even the PR Harkle-washing machine, people know _exactly_ what they're doing.


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> I used to dislike the name 'Archie', but it's growing on me. I hope he will turn out to be a decent person. His parents seem to be depriving him from having a lot of fun in his childhood.



Wow. Even Princess Bea's step son was interacting with Zara (around 5.13). Seems like a really nice family event for the kids with lots of cousins, aunties and uncles.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> My sister’s little dog is “Sir Archibald” and “Archie” for short.  When they named their kid Archie, all I think of is her dog.  Even his name is more formal than #7’s.



I had soft toy dog called Archibald (and a teddy called Sebastian) when I was little.

*Personal trauma alert*: One day, my little came cousin came to visit and my mother gave the soft toys to her to play with and let her take them home. I was 10. I returned to find both toys missing and was incensed my mother could give my 'animals' away. I just couldn't understand how she could have done such a thing. My mother just murmured about being "a big girl now'. I'm still angry, but also laughing at myself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> how does that make George being named out of spite?



Not George, Archie and his sister.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> I never understood why they didn’t name him Archibald. Is it because BALD is in the name and that’s where Harry’s kid is headed  At least then he could go by Archie or the much better Archer. It’s like naming your kid Mike instead of Michael. Just why?



This. Call the kid whatever nickname you want (unless it's someone else's), just give him a full name.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> OK, she was there to coach?  Give advice and help to people with their business pitches?  Does anyone see how inane this is?  She and her husband are floundering and can't get their business together and she is giving advice to teens?  This is as absurd as someone writing that she is a Danish Princess.  Please don't tell me that they thought this was Crown Princess Mary of Denmark.  Meghan isn't fit to be in the same room with CPMary.


Don't forget that she sold herself several times pretty successfully. I doubt, though, that this is the area of expertise she should give lectures to teenagers about.


----------



## DeMonica

gracekelly said:


> I think she is talking about Charlene who was in tears.


No, I talked about Grace Kelly, not Charlene. Although; Charlene didn't look any happier on her wedding day or after.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Also I don’t think Meg’s part of any group that pierces ears as a cultural tradition unless I’m missing some important detail of vacuous valley girl lore.


I feel kind of mean for thinking this, but if this girl really is her child, then I suspect she wanted to prep for merching a line of little girl jewellery. The "delicate" trinkets she keeps hawking would actually be nice for pre-teens (while she graduates to them heavy duty nails from Cartier).


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. Call the kid whatever nickname you want (unless it's someone else's), just give him a full name.



They are going to be such controlling parents in all the worst possible ways, and totally and inappropriate laissez-faire in others. Poor children.


----------



## DeMonica

wisconsin said:


> Not too significant or even early enough complications to warrant male baby circumsicion. Let them make an informed decision later. Agree with the point about female circumcision.


We don't have to agree. Let's just say if you see a little boy with an inflammation caused by phimosis, which unfortunately is not that rare,  you might change you mind.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Do we think that the Dior raincoat outfit was the planned outfit for Prince Phillip's memorial at the end of March ? I still can't understand how out of season it was. Unless as already widely speculated it _was_ to hide recording equipment. 

I think it's highly possible that any British designers with other royal clients (even minor royals) would be "sadly, too busy" for a short notice outfit. 
Didn't Michelle o wear Jason Wu ? That fifties fit and flare style that MO favoured and like Lady Sarah Chatto would be much more forgiving for Megan.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I was just going through the Tea at the Palace cookbook to decide if I want to keep or return, and it has a lemon elderflower cake inspired by that infamous wedding cake  It's a sign, isn't it.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I was just going through the Tea at the Palace cookbook to decide if I want to keep or return, and it has a lemon elderflower cake inspired by that infamous wedding cake  It's a sign, isn't it.


I'm very tempted by the cookbooks in the Royal Collex shop. Is Tea at the Palace any good (ignoring the lemon elderflower cake)?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I'm very tempted by the cookbooks in the Royal Collex shop. Is Tea at the Palace any good (ignoring the lemon elderflower cake)?



I was a bit underwhelmed. I liked that the treats were sorted by castle and had a little introduction to said castle and a few royal tidbits, but the recipes themselves were pretty basic and not that interesting. As someone with a few hundred cookbooks, I return a lot these days and I don't think this one will make the cut.

Have to say her lemon elderflower cake looked nicer than the original


----------



## pukasonqo

RAINDANCE said:


> Do we think that the Dior raincoat outfit was the planned outfit for Prince Phillip's memorial at the end of March ? I still can't understand how out of season it was. Unless as already widely speculated it _was_ to hide recording equipment.
> 
> I think it's highly possible that any British designers with other royal clients (even minor royals) would be "sadly, too busy" for a short notice outfit.
> Didn't Michelle o wear Jason Wu ? That fifties fit and flare style that MO favoured and like Lady Sarah Chatto would be much more forgiving for Megan.


If she wore it to hide recording devices she wasn’t subtle at all!
A bit Carmen San Diego mixed w Inspector Gadget was the end result


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG steps in



That’s a little too intimate for me.  I’ve been with DH for 26 years (22 married) and trust him implicitly, but even I would not want him that close to another woman, sweaty or not!  She looks like she’s about to pinch his nipple!


----------



## purseinsanity

lulilu said:


> *Radiators are quite common in older US cities, especially on the east coast.  Many places I lived in had them.*


Yep.  I’ve burned myself quite a number of times as a child on one of those.  Apparently I had a slow learning curve.


----------



## skyqueen

papertiger said:


> Archie was quite a popular name in Scotland historically. There are seem to be quite a few Archies and Archibald in cemeteries and in churches.
> 
> I looked at Wiki and apparently it comes from High-German: "Erkanbold, Erkanbald and Anglo-Saxon Eorcenbald".


Archibald Leach aka Cary Grant


----------



## wisconsin

DeMonica said:


> We don't have to agree. Let's just say if you see a little boy with an inflammation caused by phimosis, which unfortunately is not that rare,  you might change you mind.


I have seen both phimosis and penile cancer. It can be prevented and risk is likely similar for both circumcised and uncircumcised if handled correctly but yes we don’t have to agree.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> That’s a little too intimate for me.  I’ve been with DH for 26 years (22 married) and trust him implicitly, but even I would not want him that close to another woman, sweaty or not!  She looks like she’s about to pinch his nipple!


It's perhaps all in name of free publicity… I believe she sells or provides links to online goods.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I feel kind of mean for thinking this, but if this girl really is her child, then I suspect she wanted to prep for merching a line of little girl jewellery. The "delicate" trinkets she keeps hawking would actually be nice for pre-teens (while she graduates to them heavy duty nails from Cartier).


I can see it now…. (Fake) pearls by Meghan.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was a bit underwhelmed. I liked that the treats were sorted by castle and had a little introduction to said castle and a few royal tidbits, but the recipes themselves were pretty basic and not that interesting. As someone with a few hundred cookbooks, I return a lot these days and I don't think this one will make the cut.
> 
> Have to say her lemon elderflower cake looked nicer than the original


Interesting to know I must say I find most cookbooks a bit dull too just the same trendy recipes over and over. It would have been nice if they’d done some more historical England ah food too like salmagundi and junket and so on.


purseinsanity said:


> That’s a little too intimate for me.  I’ve been with DH for 26 years (22 married) and trust him implicitly, but even I would not want him that close to another woman, sweaty or not!  She looks like she’s about to pinch his nipple!


Maybe this is part of M’s game too. She signs off on some rather compromising pap pics of Harry and a honey trap and then she kicks off about how he was always chasing younger women in the divorce court. His fault divorce guaranteed. 
She knows he’s a Brainless as he is greedy as he is loyal and  he won’t think twice about why the claw is weirdly absent in the presence of a hot girl.

You can’t convince me she’d let the paps get close range pics of them being shady otherwise- this woman will move a gravestone to get her skinny side!


----------



## Chanbal

They may not have much to leak from the Jubilee anyway…










						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in 'last chance saloon' with royals
					

Speaking to Closer magazine, royal biographer and journalist Duncan Larcombe said the Duke and Duchess of Sussex had 'cemented themselves as royals' at the Jubilee events.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> Do you think Harry makes any decisions in this relationship?  other than deciding he's gonna go play polo.  the money may come from his family but I don't think he's the boss




Neil Sean said she had to talk him out of jumping on the jet right after the Thanksgiving service. He said while everyone assumes she’s the boss, he’s had a whole lifetime of getting what he wants. 



purseinsanity said:


> That’s a little too intimate for me.  I’ve been with DH for 26 years (22 married) and trust him implicitly, but even I would not want him that close to another woman, sweaty or not!  She looks like she’s about to pinch his nipple!



I agree I can’t imagine a man other than my husband putting his arms on me like that, or my husband getting that handsy


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was a bit underwhelmed. I liked that the treats were sorted by castle and had a little introduction to said castle and a few royal tidbits, but the recipes themselves were pretty basic and not that interesting. As someone with a few hundred cookbooks, I return a lot these days and I don't think this one will make the cut.
> 
> Have to say her lemon elderflower cake looked nicer than the original


Also Queen of the wrap dress I am sorry to hear things are not going well and I hope your friend responds well to treatment and feels better soon.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I have radiators in my house (Boston area), but they have pretty covers that I can put plants on!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree Gina is a bit over accessorised for quite a busy dress - Liz looks great. Both are stunning of course.
> 
> The old custom is king argument is for sure relevant here.
> 
> For what it’s worth circumcision is not common in Britain and Europe. Some Jews and Muslims do it but a fair few reform groups are against it too.
> 
> A Jewish adherent would say that a boy’s circumcision is beyond cultural norm and is a crucial part of the terms of their relationship with god as set out by Abraham.
> I’m not sure why Muslims do it - I think it’s more a cultural thing they borrowed from the Jews. I do know that early Christians stopped doing it because of  Peter’s vision at Joppa (and because it was a stumbling block in converting Gentiles) which led to male circumcision becoming rare in Christian dominated Europe.
> 
> Male circumcision became an American standard because it was promoted as healthy and preventing boys from playing with themselves. I suppose if you are circumcising to be puritanical it makes sense you would also oppose an adornment like wearing earrings.
> 
> I personally am against all of it and think it should be an adult or at least teenage decision for both cultural and religious reasons.
> 
> Also I don’t think Meg’s part of any group that pierces ears as a cultural tradition unless I’m missing some important detail of vacuous valley girl lore.
> 
> I agree when I see trench coat indoors I think spy or flasher.
> 
> I’m of the opinion sleazy dubious dealmaking and military self-aggrandisement pretty ingrained as a behaviour for a minor royal and we need to rearrange the whole board.
> 
> It’s extremely trendy with the British right now as is Hunter and Evie/Eva/Ava/Evelyn and Isla for girls.


Males was circumcised upon induction into the US Army during WW II.  This was deemed a health consideration and not done for puritanical reasons.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Interesting to know I must say I find most cookbooks a bit dull too just the same trendy recipes over and over. It would have been nice if they’d done some more historical England ah food too like salmagundi and junket and so on.



Exactly. I pre-order tons of cookbooks in advance each year and I'm fully prepared to pay for all of them, but it's the second or third year in a row where I've returned the majority and only kept a selected few. I'm tired of the 25th Middle Eastern cookbook that has nothing but the random staples all of us can make in our sleep by now. 

For an overview on traditional British baking I liked "Oats in the North, Wheat from the South" a lot. You could tell the author did really thorough research.



> Maybe this is part of M’s game too. She signs off on some rather compromising pap pics of Harry and a honey trap and then she kicks off about how he was always chasing younger women in the divorce court. His fault divorce guaranteed.
> She knows he’s a Brainless as he is greedy as he is loyal and  he won’t think twice about why the claw is weirdly absent in the presence of a hot girl.



I think she's totally capable of that, but isn't that specific woman Nacho's wife? So maybe not the best pick for her little games.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Neil Sean said she had to talk him out of jumping on the jet right after the Thanksgiving service. He said while everyone assumes she’s the boss, he’s had a whole lifetime of getting what he wants.



I don't know who Neil Sean is, but the plot holes I see:

1. Why would she do that? There was no interesting occasion for her to go to, she hates the UK and she doesn't give a sh*t what the Brits think of her. Plus, leaving before The Queen's balcony appearance was just as rude.

2. He's also had a whole lifetime of knowing he doesn't play the first fiddle. While  he might not have liked it particularly and has acted up before he didn't start demanding the same or better treatment than the actual heir to the throne until the gold digger came along.

3. We assume she is the boss because she pulls and pushes him around in public like a puppet, dog or unruly child depending on the day's mood, completely emasculating him in public for everyone to see. So I don't think we're all wrong.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I feel like there already are leaks from the despicable duo.  They are not about jubilee though.  They are about Adelaide cottage.  Example

it reminds me of how it has been said that William used to plant false information to see who he could trust.  Since Eugenie is now conveniently in Portugal, information that was provided at the last minute, these rumors are probably false, but a “close friend” can speak with “authority” about Will and Kate’s reasons and plans for Anmer.  Interesting how the true story and the “rumor” went to press right around the same time.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think she's totally capable of that, but isn't that specific woman Nacho's wife? So maybe not the best pick for her little games.



If it is Nacho’s wife then there’s no chance in hell of her taking up with Harry. Why would she?


----------



## jblended

Wait. There's also an H&M _appreciation_ thread? 


(sorry, please return to your regularly scheduled programming. I was merely caught off guard)


----------



## bag-mania

jblended said:


> Wait. There's also an H&M _appreciation_ thread?
> 
> 
> (sorry, please return to your regularly scheduled programming. I was merely caught off guard)



They wanted a safe space where they could adore Meghan and Harry without our comments.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They wanted a safe space where they could adore Meghan and Harry without our comments.


she still has a style thread too where she is admired


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

People are catching up.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she still has a style thread too where she is admired



I can’t go there. It makes me feel like I’m in an alternate reality.


----------



## jblended

bag-mania said:


> They wanted a safe space where they could adore Meghan and Harry without our comments.


Ah, thanks for explaining. To each their own. I'll stick to adoring my cats; they never badmouth me to the press! 



sdkitty said:


> she still has a style thread too where she is admired


Cannot. Compute. Nothing ever fits correctly. Ever.
What twilight zone have I fallen into here? 

Edit:


bag-mania said:


> I can’t go there. It makes me feel like I’m in an alternate reality.


Great minds!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if they miss it -


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree Gina is a bit over accessorised for quite a busy dress - Liz looks great. Both are stunning of course.
> 
> The old custom is king argument is for sure relevant here.
> 
> For what it’s worth circumcision is not common in Britain and Europe. Some Jews and Muslims do it but a fair few reform groups are against it too.
> 
> A Jewish adherent would say that a boy’s circumcision is beyond cultural norm and is a crucial part of the terms of their relationship with god as set out by Abraham.
> I’m not sure why Muslims do it - I think it’s more a cultural thing they borrowed from the Jews. I do know that early Christians stopped doing it because of  Peter’s vision at Joppa (and because it was a stumbling block in converting Gentiles) which led to male circumcision becoming rare in Christian dominated Europe.
> 
> Male circumcision became an American standard because it was promoted as healthy and preventing boys from playing with themselves. I suppose if you are circumcising to be puritanical it makes sense you would also oppose an adornment like wearing earrings.
> 
> I personally am against all of it and think it should be an adult or at least teenage decision for both cultural and religious reasons.
> 
> Also I don’t think Meg’s part of any group that pierces ears as a cultural tradition unless I’m missing some important detail of vacuous valley girl lore.
> 
> I agree when I see trench coat indoors I think spy or flasher.
> 
> I’m of the opinion sleazy dubious dealmaking and military self-aggrandisement pretty ingrained as a behaviour for a minor royal and *we need to rearrange the whole board.*
> 
> It’s extremely trendy with the British right now as is Hunter and Evie/Eva/Ava/Evelyn and Isla for girls.



I may be imagining things but I feel there has been a subtle but definite rearrangement of the pieces on the board.

Princess Anne was on horseback at Trooping with Charles and William and although she usually is, Edward is not. Whilst I can't point to anything specific, I feel as though I have seen a subtle shift in the order of line-ups etc. at and since the Jubilee whereby Anne is appearing before Edward and Sophie. Technically, Anne and Tim come behind Ed + Soph and, of course, the change to the order of primogeniture regarding females was enacted to be effective for Charlotte, and not back dated to Anne but I think there is definite re-ordering so that Anne is in effect being treated as de-facto next after Charles. What do others think ? (and there's certainly no Andrew shaped hole at all.)

I also think there is a new generation second tier being brought forward. The Queens own cousins, the Kents and Gloucesters are all over 75. BUT the interesting thing here is that Peter Phillips seems to be the leader of the new pack as the oldest. It's a very clever move IMO. Arranging all of William's cousins by age is a nifty* way of containing H+M.
(I am sure that this was the order of procession at St Paul's but would need to wade back in the thread to find the relevant post)

So there is no H+M shaped hole either! 
I think Zara & Mike / Bea & Edo are stepping up nicely to fill the minor royal spaces.

*nifty = particularly good, skillful, or effective.
eg . "nifty footwork"


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> I may be imagining things but I feel there has been a subtle but definite rearrangement of the pieces on the board.
> 
> Princess Anne was on horseback at Trooping with Charles and William and although she usually is, Edward is not. Whilst I can't point to anything specific, I feel as though I have seen a subtle shift in the order of line-ups etc. at and since the Jubilee whereby Anne is appearing before Edward and Sophie. Technically, Anne and Tim come behind Ed + Soph and, of course, the change to the order of primogeniture regarding females was enacted to be effective for Charlotte, and not back dated to Anne but I think there is definite re-ordering so that Anne is in effect being treated as de-facto next after Charles. What do others think ? (and there's certainly no Andrew shaped hole at all.)
> 
> I also think there is a new generation second tier being brought forward. The Queens own cousins, the Kents and Gloucesters are all over 75. BUT the interesting thing here is that Peter Phillips seems to be the leader of the new pack as the oldest. It's a very clever move IMO. Arranging all of William's cousins by age is a nifty* way of containing H+M.
> (I am sure that this was the order of procession at St Paul's but would need to wade back in the thread to find the relevant post)
> 
> So there is no H+M shaped hole either!
> I think Zara & Mike / Bea & Edo are stepping up nicely to fill the minor royal spaces.
> 
> *nifty = particularly good, skillful, or effective.
> eg . "nifty footwork"



100% agree. The shift is happening right before our eyes. H&M are most definitely out. The cousins are most definitely in.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> If it is Nacho’s wife then there’s no chance in hell of her taking up with Harry. Why would she?


Why would you go from Nacho to Tacho? (slang for trash can in my country)


----------



## 880

lanasyogamama said:


> Neil Sean said she had to talk him out of jumping on the jet right after the Thanksgiving service. He said while everyone assumes she’s the boss, he’s had a whole lifetime of getting what he wants.



yes this. He was #2 for much of his life, and a lot of people bent over backwards to spoil him (make up for the fact he wasn’t #1) i think he wanted a wife to support his worldview that he is more deserving or mistreated


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I may be imagining things but I feel there has been a subtle but definite rearrangement of the pieces on the board.
> 
> Princess Anne was on horseback at Trooping with Charles and William and although she usually is, Edward is not. Whilst I can't point to anything specific, I feel as though I have seen a subtle shift in the order of line-ups etc. at and since the Jubilee whereby Anne is appearing before Edward and Sophie. Technically, Anne and Tim come behind Ed + Soph and, of course, the change to the order of primogeniture regarding females was enacted to be effective for Charlotte, and not back dated to Anne but I think there is definite re-ordering so that Anne is in effect being treated as de-facto next after Charles. What do others think ? (and there's certainly no Andrew shaped hole at all.)
> 
> I also think there is a new generation second tier being brought forward. The Queens own cousins, the Kents and Gloucesters are all over 75. BUT the interesting thing here is that Peter Phillips seems to be the leader of the new pack as the oldest. It's a very clever move IMO. Arranging all of William's cousins by age is a nifty* way of containing H+M.
> (I am sure that this was the order of procession at St Paul's but would need to wade back in the thread to find the relevant post)
> 
> So there is no H+M shaped hole either!
> I think Zara & Mike / Bea & Edo are stepping up nicely to fill the minor royal spaces.
> 
> *nifty = particularly good, skillful, or effective.
> eg . "nifty footwork"



Astute observations


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> yes this. He was #2 for much of his life, and a lot of people bent over backwards to spoil him
> i think he wanted a wife to support his worldview that he is more deserving or mistreated



He and his brother (Wills) often flanked Charles or opened buildings etc together 

Things have changed.


----------



## Annawakes

I would extremely interested to hear what Nacho’s wife really thinks of TW.  And what kind of friendship she was with her.  Superficial?  I hope she is smart and guarded with what she lets slip around TW.

I think we’ve established that Nacho either isn’t that astute, or he *is* and he and his wife are just using them for bringing publicity to the sport.


----------



## csshopper

RAINDANCE said:


> I may be imagining things but I feel there has been a subtle but definite rearrangement of the pieces on the board.
> 
> Princess Anne was on horseback at Trooping with Charles and William and although she usually is, Edward is not. Whilst I can't point to anything specific, I feel as though I have seen a subtle shift in the order of line-ups etc. at and since the Jubilee whereby Anne is appearing before Edward and Sophie. Technically, Anne and Tim come behind Ed + Soph and, of course, the change to the order of primogeniture regarding females was enacted to be effective for Charlotte, and not back dated to Anne but I think there is definite re-ordering so that Anne is in effect being treated as de-facto next after Charles. What do others think ? (and there's certainly no Andrew shaped hole at all.)
> 
> I also think there is a new generation second tier being brought forward. The Queens own cousins, the Kents and Gloucesters are all over 75. BUT the interesting thing here is that Peter Phillips seems to be the leader of the new pack as the oldest. It's a very clever move IMO. Arranging all of William's cousins by age is a nifty* way of containing H+M.
> (I am sure that this was the order of procession at St Paul's but would need to wade back in the thread to find the relevant post)
> 
> So there is no H+M shaped hole either!
> I think Zara & Mike / Bea & Edo are stepping up nicely to fill the minor royal spaces.
> 
> *nifty = particularly good, skillful, or effective.
> eg . "nifty footwork"


RAINDANCE, Yes to all you said! It’s a interesting way to look at things post Jubilee. Thanks.

The Royal message seems to be getting delivered very cleverly. Peter Phillips is not often in the news like his sister Zara is, but in the past week his part in the cohesive family got some coverage: in what looked like a well planned operation, he was one of the 3 men (Peter, Mike Tindall, David, Earl of Snowden)who cold shouldered and kept the Sussexxi hemmed in while they waited for their car after the service at St Paul’s. Raptor was left talking to herself and Hazbeen fidgeted. Today Peter was seated in the first carriage with Prince Charles and Camilla at the opening of Royal Ascot . His children were very visible in the mix of great grandchildren at the Jubilee. Harry Who?

BTW. Re: Princess Beatrice. There was such extensive coverage of Jubilee events, this could have gotten lost, but I hope at some point it gets highlighted on her behalf. Beatrice attended one of The Big Lunch Jubilee Street Parties. One of the elderly ladies she approached by saying “Hello, I’m Beatrice” had absolutely no idea who she was. Following several questions from the lady, Beatrice had to explain and then clarify why she was there. Finally the woman said, “Oh you’re a Royal?” Beatrice said “yes“ and lovingly explained the Queen is her “Granny”. Through it all she was gracious, down to earth, and completely the antithesis of the entitled attitude her obnoxious father probably would have exhibited. Her Granny would have been very proud. Happy to see she and Edo photographed at Royal Ascot today with Prince Charles. Subtle message that Royal angst about Andrew is not applicable to Beatrice and Edo?


----------



## marietouchet

Re Beatrice, Eugenie and Andrew
A had it all, huge estate, titles, precedence and threw it all away …
B and E never really had as much growing up. Their divorced mother is and was out in the cold and has to earn a living writing books.  So, vast difference in living with dad vs mum , and that was not lost the girls. It was obvious how much Sarah had lost, iced out by the divorce. And as girls, well, they saw the example of Anne not getting credit for doing so much of the work
The press was cruel to S and A, and to the girls (over their fashion sense) but the girls weathered that better than H&M
H always had the BP PR machine to cover for his foibles, the York girls coped by themselves, self reliance


----------



## Jayne1

DeMonica said:


> No, I talked about Grace Kelly, not Charlene. Although; Charlene didn't look any happier on her wedding day or after.


Good, then I responded correctly. Grace looked so sad. Stunningly beautiful, but sad.


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s just take a moment to appreciate Harry’s friend Nacho in one of his Ralph Lauren ads. The guy has perfected the smolder!


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Re Beatrice, Eugenie and Andrew
> A had it all, huge estate, titles, precedence and threw it all away …
> B and E never really had as much growing up. Their divorced mother is and was out in the cold and has to earn a living writing books.  So, vast difference in living with dad vs mum , and that was not lost the girls. It was obvious how much Sarah had lost, iced out by the divorce. And as girls, well, they saw the example of Anne not getting credit for doing so much of the work
> The press was cruel to S and A, and to the girls (over their fashion sense) but the girls weathered that better than H&M
> H always had the BP PR machine to cover for his foibles, the York girls coped by themselves, self reliance


So... when I see the daughters at events such as the past weekend jubilee, they don't seem too bothered.  I would be mortified. Mom has been persona non grata for decades and dad is not allowed to be part of any celebrations, so he too is unwelcome.

Are they embarrassed (and not showing it) or are they princesses with a strong sense of self worth, like daddy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> So... when I see the daughters at events such as the past weekend jubilee, they don't seem too bothered.  I would be mortified. Mom has been persona non grata for decades and dad is not allowed to be part of any celebrations, so he too is unwelcome.
> 
> Are they embarrassed (and not showing it) or are they princesses with a strong sense of self worth, like daddy.



IMO they are simply trying to move onward. Both things can be true. They, really just Bea, can be embarrassed with a strong sense of self worth.  Imo


----------



## lallybelle

I just think it shows that none of the parents "sins" have been visited on the girls by the family. They have always been around with everyone else no matter what Andrew's or Sarah's position or latest sandal happened to be. Look no further than Bea's intimate wedding with HM & PP happily in attendence.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Exactly. I pre-order tons of cookbooks in advance each year and I'm fully prepared to pay for all of them, but it's the second or third year in a row where I've returned the majority and only kept a selected few. I'm tired of the 25th Middle Eastern cookbook that has nothing but the random staples all of us can make in our sleep by now.
> 
> For an overview on traditional British baking I liked "Oats in the North, Wheat from the South" a lot. You could tell the author did really thorough research.
> 
> 
> 
> I think she's totally capable of that, but isn't that specific woman Nacho's wife? So maybe not the best pick for her little games.


I have lots of cookbooks. Sharing one of my fav’s for pies. Norske Nook pies are well know if you live or drive through Wisconsin.  The crust is incredible. Challenge is to make the dough paper thin for a 11” pie tin. My fav filling is blueberry but any fruit filling is yummy. I have purchased Royal Teas and A Royal Cookbook but haven’t made anything from them yet. Since I’m new to British recipes I can’t say whether I like the recipes or not. Can’t wait to try though. After seeing posts here about Chef McGrady website I purchased both of his cookbooks this week.  Love reading your posts with baking tips and recipes.  I save those!! Thanks!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> So... when I see the daughters at events such as the past weekend jubilee, they don't seem too bothered.  I would be mortified. Mom has been persona non grata for decades and dad is not allowed to be part of any celebrations, so he too is unwelcome.
> 
> Are they embarrassed (and not showing it) or are they princesses with a strong sense of self worth, like daddy.



The girls haven’t done anything wrong and there’s nothing for them to be ashamed about. They love their parents, even if they aren’t popular with the general public.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> So... when I see the daughters at events such as the past weekend jubilee, they don't seem too bothered.  I would be mortified. Mom has been persona non grata for decades and dad is not allowed to be part of any celebrations, so he too is unwelcome.
> 
> Are they embarrassed (and not showing it) or are they princesses with a strong sense of self worth, like daddy.


It was either be mortified or stay home and hide.  i don't think that either parent wanted that for their girls.  In the past, they managed to do some silly things, but they aged out of it and have always seemed like very nice girls.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> People are catching up.



This article sums her up perfectly.  She was never going to fit in or even try.  She equated royalty with celebrity and found out the hard way that they are not the same thing.  "Playing charity polo while his brazen wife parades for the camera"


----------



## 880

Hermes Zen said:


> I have lots of cookbooks. Sharing one of my fav’s for pies. Norske Nook pies are well know if you live or drive through Wisconsin.  The crust is incredible. Challenge is to make the dough paper thin for a 11” pie tin. My fav filling is blueberry but any fruit filling is yummy. I have purchased Royal Teas and A Royal Cookbook but haven’t made anything from them yet. Since I’m new to British recipes I can’t say whether I like the recipes or not. Can’t wait to try though. After seeing posts here about Chef McGrady website I purchased both of his cookbooks this week.  Love reading your posts with baking tips and recipes.  I save those!! Thanks!
> 
> View attachment 5425792


+Hermes Zen, I need to add cream cheese to pie crust in order to roll out easily
+1 with thanks to @QueenofWrapDress re baking recommendations
i believe there is a Patrick o’brian (Master and Commander series ) cookbook I once owned re historic British food from soused pigs face to spotted pudding


----------



## Sophisticatted

RAINDANCE said:


> I may be imagining things but I feel there has been a subtle but definite rearrangement of the pieces on the board.
> 
> Princess Anne was on horseback at Trooping with Charles and William and although she usually is, Edward is not. Whilst I can't point to anything specific, I feel as though I have seen a subtle shift in the order of line-ups etc. at and since the Jubilee whereby Anne is appearing before Edward and Sophie. Technically, Anne and Tim come behind Ed + Soph and, of course, the change to the order of primogeniture regarding females was enacted to be effective for Charlotte, and not back dated to Anne but I think there is definite re-ordering so that Anne is in effect being treated as de-facto next after Charles. What do others think ? (and there's certainly no Andrew shaped hole at all.)
> 
> I also think there is a new generation second tier being brought forward. The Queens own cousins, the Kents and Gloucesters are all over 75. BUT the interesting thing here is that Peter Phillips seems to be the leader of the new pack as the oldest. It's a very clever move IMO. Arranging all of William's cousins by age is a nifty* way of containing H+M.
> (I am sure that this was the order of procession at St Paul's but would need to wade back in the thread to find the relevant post)
> 
> So there is no H+M shaped hole either!
> I think Zara & Mike / Bea & Edo are stepping up nicely to fill the minor royal spaces.
> 
> *nifty = particularly good, skillful, or effective.
> eg . "nifty footwork"



I have noticed that and wondered if Charles plans to change the primogeniture law in regards to Anne.  I’ve also wondered if they have approached her children (Peter and Zara) about carrying out some duties in a more official capacity (along with Bea).


----------



## CarryOn2020

True????





						Blind Item #7
					

It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## bag-mania

This article makes me want to look up the Archie conspiracy they are complaining about. I doubt they have any more clues about it than we had but maybe. 









						Meghan, Harry Conspiracy Article Promoted by Twitter in Breach of Ad Policy
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were accused of lying about their son Archie in a post that a Twitter spokesperson told Newsweek "violates our Quality Policy."



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> True????
> 
> 
> *TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2022*
> *Blind Item #7*
> 
> 
> It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Oprah would be mad to go there again, after getting her fingers burned last time!


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> I have noticed that and wondered if Charles plans to change the primogeniture law in regards to Anne.  I’ve also wondered if they have approached her children (Peter and Zara) about carrying out some duties in a more official capacity (along with Bea).


Peter and Zara were prominent at Ascot today as were other royals - Gloucesters , Pss Michael of Kent. They got carriage rides perhaps in recognition of their support for the BRF (good behavior). Beatrice did not get a carriage ride but there are many more days to Ascot.

I think the BRF is going out of its way to support/praise some of the members that have not been in the press a lot lately but are in good standing.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It was either be mortified or stay home and hide.  i don't think that either parent wanted that for their girls.  In the past, they managed to do some silly things, but they aged out of it and have always seemed like very nice girls.


Dont forget they are HRHs, the title still has its perks (grace and favor residences, best seats at any restaurant in town) even though it no longer guarantees a ginormous income


----------



## CeeJay

xincinsin said:


> Her Lady of Perpetual Victimhood


Absolutely the BEST moniker ever!!!!!


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> True????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



What do they have to talk about?  How poorly they were treated in the UK because they didn't get front and center seats at the Party at the Palace?  How the public booed them and hurt their feelings?  How they were seated in the _2nd row_ at the Thanksgiving Service?  Quelle horreur! That'll go over well.  

If it is a fluffy interview, talking about how they love their life in Montecito, and Harry is playing polo every day and the rescue chickens are thriving and blah blah blah, fine, I'm sure the sugars will eat it up.  If they criticize the family though, they can probably kiss everything good-bye, even possibly their titles.


----------



## CeeJay

lanasyogamama said:


> I have radiators in my house (Boston area), but they have pretty covers that I can put plants on!


We had them in our condo (an old brownstone in Brookline) and like you, I was able to put a cover on top such that I had Plants in the front (and a nice Candle Stand), whereas I had books in the back Bedroom.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The O2 interview, I think they are just mad about the Jubilee and seeking retaliation via threats.  Threats are the only real power they have now.  Their bluff was called, they lost.

if another one happens, O might want to redeem her reputation by making it a real interview.  The duo should beware.  Also, would NetFlix be ok with an interview?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> True????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



If they do another tell all interview for anybody but Netflix they will watch their contract get voided. Netflix has put up with too much to watch everything interesting about them being given to someone else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> What do they have to talk about?  How poorly they were treated in the UK because they didn't get front and center seats at the Party at the Palace?  How the public booed them and hurt their feelings?  How they were seated in the _2nd row_ at the Thanksgiving Service?  Quelle horreur! That'll go over well.
> 
> If it is a fluffy interview, talking about how they love their life in Montecito, and Harry is playing polo every day and the rescue chickens are thriving and blah blah blah, fine, I'm sure the sugars will eat it up.  If they criticize the family though, they can probably kiss everything good-bye, even possibly their titles.


it's a blind item so I don't put any stock in it


----------



## Lodpah

Wouldn’t it be a hoot if Netflix got smart and turned this around and does a show “How Two Ex Royals Destroyed Themselves and Made Irrelevant?” Or something to that effect. That would be a blockbuster.


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> +Hermes Zen, I need to add cream cheese to pie crust in order to roll out easily
> +1 with thanks to @QueenofWrapDress re baking recommendations
> i believe there is a Patrick o’brian (Master and Commander series ) cookbook I once owned re historic British food from soused pigs face to spotted pudding


At the second hand bookstore, I once found a pile of cooking magazines from the 60s and snapped them up, if only to figure out from the recipes what was being referenced in all the storybooks I read in my childhood.

Nose To Tail is an interesting British cookbook I hunted down. Using offal is common in Asian cooking, but I rarely come across recipes for it in British cooking except for sweetbreads.


----------



## Jayne1

Sophisticatted said:


> if another one happens, O might want to redeem her reputation by making it a real interview.  The duo should beware.


A real interview?  Don't think she's capable.

We've seen her interviewing technique over the years - fluff, support crying, interrupting to talk about herself, or angry that a someone pulled one over on her (James Frey, for example.)


----------



## xincinsin

Perhaps Methane's fondness for Dior is an inside joke and she is laughing at us. Christian Dior = CD = Common Denominator, which is her usual strategy to gain support. She complained to Piers Morgan's ex-boss by saying they were both women and mothers. She uses her WOC and alleged victim identity to appeal to certain sectors. It's very much an attempt to divide and conquer, us against them mentality that she fosters.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> A real interview?  Don't think she's capable.
> 
> We've seen her interviewing technique over the years - fluff, support crying, interrupting to talk about herself, or angry that a someone pulled one over on her (James Frey, for example.)


she's really more of entertainment person I think, not news.  And I guess she tries to stay out of the fray.  so if she has any regrets about H&M or is disappointed in them she's not saying.  she hasn't said much about Dr Oz either or Dr Phil.


----------



## rose60610

If Meghan REALLY believed in her causes she might have a tad more credibility.  The way she flits from hot topic of the moment to the next news of the day is proof she is nothing but an attention whore. Especially when she pops in with camera crew in tow and clothes to merch.  She must scan headlines daily and calculate how much coverage she can get out of the latest major event.  If she prays at all, she prays for a monumental tragedy or event she can drag a camera crew to for personal attention.  The best she could employ Lilibet for in London was a pathetic birthday cake for adults. She must have been deflated from failing to get a photo of TQ meeting her daughter.  But Paddington Bear was a super hit. See, Meghan, even P Bear knows to film weeks in advance.  If Meghan thinks so highly of family (only Doria was invited to the wedding) she might want to see her grandmother in law when she isn't in the middle of a 70 year event that had years in the making.  I'm surprised Meghan hasn't stocked up on marmalade just like Pad Bear to hustle attention. Will she surprise us and yank a marmalade sandwich out of a Lauder handbag? If she can merch it, then yes!


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> If Meghan REALLY believed in her causes she might have a tad more credibility.  The way she flits from hot topic of the moment to the next news of the day is proof she is nothing but an attention whore. Especially when she pops in with camera crew in tow and clothes to merch.  She must scan headlines daily and calculate how much coverage she can get out of the latest major event.  If she prays at all, she prays for a monumental tragedy or event she can drag a camera crew to for personal attention.  The best she could employ Lilibet for in London was a pathetic birthday cake for adults. She must have been deflated from failing to get a photo of TQ meeting her daughter.  But Paddington Bear was a super hit. See, Meghan, even P Bear knows to film weeks in advance.  If Meghan thinks so highly of family (only Doria was invited to the wedding) she might want to see her grandmother in law when she isn't in the middle of a 70 year event that had years in the making.  I'm surprised Meghan hasn't stocked up on marmalade just like Pad Bear to hustle attention. Will she surprise us and yank a marmalade sandwich out of a Lauder handbag? If she can merch it, then yes!


yes, I think (and of course I don't know her) she's pretty much an empty shell of a person.  She landed H and now her whole life is about keeping up the attention.  but I don't think she can.  a lot of people were excited that H got engaged to an American WOC but except for a limited number of stans, that level of excitement doesn't last.   and she's really not doing anything significant to sustain it.
Maybe I'm wrong.  maybe there are lots of little girls out there worshipping her, thinking they too can become a "princess"


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> True????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


The sugars are active in the comments.


----------



## lulilu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wow. It does make sense now that maybe William put his foot down re: the Sussexes as well. Still, their retaliation via the yellow press is so juvenile.
> So William can't play all the polo he wants? Cry me a river, he'll live to tell the story.
> But also, I don't get Andrew. Why not lay low, keep his mouth shut and enjoy the financial perks he still has.


*All the stories about Andrew reveal what a rude, crude, abusive, demanding, demeaning, entitled jerk he  is.  His interview, which he believed was helpful, shows he hasn't changed.  He will never stop trying to get back his royal status.*



Annawakes said:


> I remember reading something about the time they named Archie.  That George at the time liked to be called “Archie” as a make believe name.  So then George couldn’t call himself that anymore.  Does anyone remember the same?
> IF that is true, then both kids were named out of spite.


*I thought at the time that they were taking George's nickname out of spite. (It was not a "sweet nod" or "tribute" to George.  I am sure they see George as Archie's nemesis.   Lilibet is just an infuriating choice of names.  I don't believe for a second they got the Queen's blessing or even permission.  (Didn't they register/copyright/whatever the name before she was born?)  They are shameless.*



jelliedfeels said:


> I can see it now…. (Fake) pearls by Meghan.
> Interesting to know I must say I find most cookbooks a bit dull too just the same trendy recipes over and over. It would have been nice if they’d done some more historical England ah food too like salmagundi and junket and so on.


*Omgosh, I haven't thought of junket in a long time.  My mom is British and she made it for us all the time as kids.  A weird dessert.*


----------



## chowlover2

My Mom made me Junket when I was a kid. Do they still make it in the US?


----------



## lulilu

chowlover2 said:


> My Mom made me Junket when I was a kid. Do they still make it in the US?


IDK.  lol.  They used to sell it in boxes like Jello if I remember.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sounds like she did do something:


*'Thoughtful' Meghan Markle sent a voice note to volunteers at Grenfell community kitchen - asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' - to mark five-year anniversary of the tragedy*

*Meghan Markle left a voice note asking about the volunteers and their families on the five-year anniversary of the West London tower block tragedy *
*The Hubb Community Kitchen posted on its Facebook that the Duchess, 40, had sent the message asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' *
*Meghan and Prince Harry first visited the West London kitchen in 2018 following the blaze, which killed 72 people, on June 14th, 2017*
*Volunteers wrote in another post how the 'thoughtful' Duchess had sent 'flowers, a picture, chocolates' and made phone calls in the years since the tragedy*









						Meghan Markle leaves kind voice note for Grenfell kitchen volunteers
					

Volunteers at The Hubb Community Kitchen, set up to provide food for bereaved families, shared that the Duchess had been in touch on the five-year anniversary.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Annawakes

She sent pictures of herself probably.


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> The O2 interview, I think they are just mad about the Jubilee and seeking retaliation via threats.  Threats are the only real power they have now.  Their bluff was called, they lost.
> 
> if another one happens, O might want to redeem her reputation by making it a real interview.  The duo should beware.  Also, would NetFlix be ok with an interview?


Allegedly, publisher turned down the book due to lack of content, and  H&M went to the UK with mics and photographers, but failed to get anything for Netflix
So H&M are lacking content for two previous commitments for which they have been paid something
SO
I find it curious that they would sit down with O and spill whatever juicy tidbits
Arent the tidbits already committed to the book and /or Netflix ? that was an issue with the original O interview, they “used up” the story of racism, making it old fake news, alledgedly 

Of course, they may be desperate enough for income to spill to O first


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lulilu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like she did do something:
> 
> 
> *'Thoughtful' Meghan Markle sent a voice note to volunteers at Grenfell community kitchen - asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' - to mark five-year anniversary of the tragedy*
> 
> *Volunteers wrote in another post how the 'thoughtful' Duchess had sent 'flowers, a picture, chocolates' and made phone calls in the years since the tragedy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle leaves kind voice note for Grenfell kitchen volunteers
> 
> 
> Volunteers at The Hubb Community Kitchen, set up to provide food for bereaved families, shared that the Duchess had been in touch on the five-year anniversary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




*Did she send a few Cadbury bars?*


----------



## lulilu

I read somewhere that Netflix knew in advance they could not get film/photos of any of the events, so MM devised the birthday party story to hope to ensnare some royals to attend to be filmed.


----------



## papertiger

Disregard if someone already posted


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> She sent pictures of herself probably.



Pictures she wanted the volunteers to share with the press of course.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I read somewhere that Netflix knew in advance they could not get film/photos of any of the events, so MM devised the birthday party story to hope to ensnare some royals to attend to be filmed.



The whole birthday party was inane. Did they seriously believe anyone  would skip the jubilee activities that had planned for a year to attend a party for a one year old none of them had ever seen before? No wonder the only attendees were the photographer’s family.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The whole birthday party was inane. Did they seriously believe anyone  would skip the jubilee activities that had planned for a year to attend a party for a one year old none of them had ever seen before? No wonder the only attendees were the photographer’s family.




Maybe they wanted the refusals in writing so they could show how 'shunned' they are by the family.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> The whole birthday party was inane. Did they seriously believe anyone  would skip the jubilee activities that had planned for a year to attend a party for a one year old none of them had ever seen before? No wonder the only attendees were the photographer’s family.


They may sob about how everyone knew it was Invisibet's birthday, so it must have been a deliberate act of cruelty that their Jubilee schedule did not make allowances for the party.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like she did do something:
> 
> 
> *'Thoughtful' Meghan Markle sent a voice note to volunteers at Grenfell community kitchen - asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' - to mark five-year anniversary of the tragedy*
> 
> *Meghan Markle left a voice note asking about the volunteers and their families on the five-year anniversary of the West London tower block tragedy *
> *The Hubb Community Kitchen posted on its Facebook that the Duchess, 40, had sent the message asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' *
> *Meghan and Prince Harry first visited the West London kitchen in 2018 following the blaze, which killed 72 people, on June 14th, 2017*
> *Volunteers wrote in another post how the 'thoughtful' Duchess had sent 'flowers, a picture, chocolates' and made phone calls in the years since the tragedy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle leaves kind voice note for Grenfell kitchen volunteers
> 
> 
> Volunteers at The Hubb Community Kitchen, set up to provide food for bereaved families, shared that the Duchess had been in touch on the five-year anniversary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I like to think that Methane was sincere about aiding Grenfell and volunteering her time and effort. It was only when $$$$ reared its head in the form of the charity cookbook that things took a shady turn.


----------



## rose60610

chowlover2 said:


> My Mom made me Junket when I was a kid. Do they still make it in the US?



It was popular in the 70's, I think I'll make some for nostalgia!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This must hurt -
Bea&Edo look marvellous as does Sophie


----------



## CarryOn2020

One way to look at it - a voicemail


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> It was popular in the 70's, I think I'll make some for nostalgia!



Was that the 1870s?


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> One way to look at it - a voicemail




Bwahahaha! She phoned it in and they didn't even want to take her call.


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> Was that the 1870s?



1770s


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Maybe they wanted the refusals in writing so they could show how 'shunned' they are by the family.



That’s exactly what they wanted. They must continually stoke the fires of victimhood.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Victimhood is their bread and butter. It's easy to be a victim when you purposely set yourself up to do/say idiotic things. Ca-CHING!


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> The whole birthday party was inane. Did they seriously believe anyone  would skip the jubilee activities that had planned for a year to attend a party for a one year old none of them had ever seen before? No wonder the only attendees were the photographer’s family.


It plays right in to their desired narrative.  If we believe Tina Brown (and I think she's credible on this point) Meghan and Harry believe that everything in the royal family should be done based on star power.  We of course all know that everything in the royal family is done based on rank.  So Harry and Meghan stage an event that they know no one can come to (kind of like scheduling a wedding on a holiday weekend in hopes people will have conflicts and you can get gifts while keeping the bar bill lower) in order to run home and whine to Americans who don't understand royal ranking that people dared to choose events for a more distant relative over spending time with their beloved daughter on her fist birthday.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Many of us Americans have been aware for a *long* time.


----------



## 880

I read somewhere that the blonde woman snuggled against H at the polo match was not Nacho’s wife?


----------



## jennlt

880 said:


> I read somewhere that the blonde woman snuggled against H at the polo match was not Nacho’s wife?



I just read that in the comments of the tweet that @CarryOn2020 posted. Did you see it somewhere else? It would be much more intriguing if it's from multiple sources.


----------



## 880

jennlt said:


> I just read that in the comments of the tweet that @CarryOn2020 posted. Did you see it somewhere else? It would be much more intriguing if it's from multiple sources.



I think it was in the same place, so not multiple sources. I always assumed it was nachos wife. . .

also read that Netflix is poised to write off the deal. How much were they paid up front?


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> I just read that in the comments of the tweet that @CarryOn2020 posted. Did you see it somewhere else? It would be much more intriguing if it's from multiple sources.





880 said:


> I think it was in the same place, so not multiple sources. I always assumed it was nachos wife. . .
> 
> also read that Netflix is poised to write off the deal. How much were they paid up front?



Here’s a photo of Nacho’s wife (and Nacho). We can compare and see if it’s the same woman.


----------



## jennlt

880 said:


> I think it was in the same place, so not multiple sources. I always assumed it was nachos wife. . .
> 
> also read that Netflix is poised to write off the deal. How much were they paid up front?


I don't think we've ever heard anything but speculation about how much they've been paid by Netflix. I'm sure they got something up front but not as much as they would have liked. I hope Netflix has a clawback clause in their contract for lack of material because they may need it.


----------



## 880

CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG steps in



I can’t tell who this is; i think the comments under this pic assume it’s Nacho’s wife


----------



## bag-mania

880 said:


> I can’t tell who this is; i think the comments under this pic assume it’s Nacho’s wife



Yeah, I forgot the woman with Harry is wearing a ball cap which covers half her face. The photo isn’t very sharp so I can’t tell either.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> At the second hand bookstore, I once found a pile of cooking magazines from the 60s and snapped them up, if only to figure out from the recipes what was being referenced in all the storybooks I read in my childhood.
> 
> Nose To Tail is an interesting British cookbook I hunted down. Using offal is common in Asian cooking, but I rarely come across recipes for it in British cooking except for sweetbreads.


Offal used to be more popular. I’ve heard of tripe & pigs trotters being sold at football matches. My personal theory is the big change is due to the supermarkets taking over the meat sales in U.K. and they don’t like offal as it has a short self life for meat. That and the price of chicken is so low now it’s hard for anything to be cheaper and that’s gota good shelf life too.
I did have Szechuan style tripe the other day and loved it but of course the other big thing is offal has got an ick factor and a strong taste. 


lulilu said:


> *All the stories about Andrew reveal what a rude, crude, abusive, demanding, demeaning, entitled jerk he  is.  His interview, which he believed was helpful, shows he hasn't changed.  He will never stop trying to get back his royal status.
> 
> 
> I thought at the time that they were taking George's nickname out of spite. (It was not a "sweet nod" or "tribute" to George.  I am sure they see George as Archie's nemesis.   Lilibet is just an infuriating choice of names.  I don't believe for a second they got the Queen's blessing or even permission.  (Didn't they register/copyright/whatever the name before she was born?)  They are shameless.
> 
> 
> Omgosh, I haven't thought of junket in a long time.  My mom is British and she made it for us all the time as kids.  A weird dessert.*





chowlover2 said:


> My Mom made me Junket when I was a kid. Do they still make it in the US?


I’m glad to hear it’s got an afterlife in the US. I think it’s quite nutritious as puddings go.



xincinsin said:


> The sugars are active in the comments.


One-named host? Madame?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Here’s a photo of Nacho’s wife (and Nacho). We can compare and see if it’s the same woman.
> 
> View attachment 5426404


She’s elegant.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Check her insta - tall, lean, short hair.  
Cool video of Nacho driving her around SB. 






						Delfina Blaquier (@delfinablaquier) • Instagram photos and videos
					






					www.instagram.com


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> One way to look at it - a voicemail



The wording sounds a lot like the TW wrote it herself.  "Just being her kind self"???


----------



## papertiger

More comment:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Wouldn’t it be a hoot if Netflix got smart and turned this around and does a show “How Two Ex Royals Destroyed Themselves and Made Irrelevant?” Or something to that effect. That would be a blockbuster.


I would sign up for NF just to watch it.  Wouldn’t t it be interesting if they couldn’t sue for defamation because they had a contract?  If NF had the rights to the final edit, what could they say?  There wouldn’t be a hole deep enough to fall into for them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haaaaaaa
*You’re in the top 10% if you can spot Prince Harry in less than three minutes – are you in the exclusive club?*
By 
Alice Fuller, The Sun
June 15, 2022 10:24am 
Updated















						You’re in the top 10% if you can spot Prince Harry in less than three minutes – are you in the exclusive club?
					

One in 10 people can find Prince Harry in this picture in less than three minutes.




					nypost.com


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaaaa
> *You’re in the top 10% if you can spot Prince Harry in less than three minutes – are you in the exclusive club?*
> By
> Alice Fuller, The Sun
> June 15, 2022 10:24am
> Updated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re in the top 10% if you can spot Prince Harry in less than three minutes – are you in the exclusive club?
> 
> 
> One in 10 people can find Prince Harry in this picture in less than three minutes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



but why would I be looking?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Kind of stinks that someone at the party would reveal this, but funny nonetheless.









						Mike Tindall called Prince Harry a 'b***end' after Queen's Platinum Party
					

Mike Tindall, who is married to the Queen's granddaughter, made the rude remark after the Platinum Party at Buckingham Palace - just a day after he appeared to visibly avoid the Duke of Sussex, a report says




					www.mirror.co.uk
				








*Mike Tindall called Prince Harry a 'b***end' after Queen's Platinum Jubilee Party*
Mike Tindall, who is married to the Queen's granddaughter, made the rude remark after the Platinum Party at Buckingham Palace - just a day after he appeared to visibly avoid the Duke of Sussex, a report says






Mike Tindall (right) called Prince Harry a "b***end" in an overheard remark, a report says (
Image: Getty Images)

NEWS
POLITICS
FOOTBALL
CELEBS
TV
MONEY


By
Matthew DreschNews Reporter
18:39, 15 Jun 2022
UPDATED18:46, 15 Jun 2022









|
17
COMMENTS
Mike Tindall called Prince Harry a "b***end" during the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations.
A source overheard the former English rugby player referring to the Duke of Sussex's behaviour as that of a "b***end".

He made the comment to a fellow guest at a reception held after the televised Platinum Party concert at Buckingham Palace on June 4, the Daily Express reports. 
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were notably absent from all of the jubilee events, apart from a thanksgiving service held the day before the concert. 
Television footage showed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle approach Mr Tindall and his wife Zara, the Queen's granddaughter, following the ceremony on June 3.







Mr Tindall (right) appeared to visibly avoid speaking to Prince Harry after the Queen's thanksgiving service ( 
Image: 
POOL/AFP via Getty Images)
Mr Tindall appeared to visibly avoid speaking to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex by staring into the distance and then speaking to other royals.
Sponsored Link by Taboola

Most Adults On Medicare Don't Know This (Do It Today)Q MEDICARELearn More

Speaking about the clip, body language expert Judi James told the Express : “With Mike’s closeness to William in mind it also appeared to have created a bit of a dilemma as Harry stepped out into Zara’s group as they waited for their transport. 

"Zara looks happy to chat and even turns fully to talk to Harry here, who is looking anxious and keen to get into his own car.







Harry and Meghan only attended one event for the Platinum Jubilee ( 
Image: 
SplashNews.com)
*Get all the latest royal news sent to your inbox. Sign up for the free Mirror newsletter*
“Mike though remains facing forward, looking about and holding his order of service up with a look of awkwardness.

"In the end he talks to Viscount Lindley, who turns his own back on Harry, cutting the two men off from Zara’s conversation with Harry.
“This doesn’t appear to be Mike’s normal style of behaviour as he usually looks too easy-going and too tough to get involved in politics and it could be that his attention was taken arranging the right cars, but there are no signs of any farewell from him, either


----------



## CarryOn2020

Definition in spoiler 
TY tpf, Learning new words daily 



Spoiler: B***end



A _bell end _is slang the head of a penis. It’s used in UK as an insult for a jerk or someone acting stupid or contemptibly. It’s a bit similar to calling someone a _dickhead_.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Offal used to be more popular. I’ve heard of tripe & pigs trotters being sold at football matches. My personal theory is the big change is due to the supermarkets taking over the meat sales in U.K. and they don’t like offal as it has a short self life for meat. That and the price of chicken is so low now it’s hard for anything to be cheaper and that’s gota good shelf life too.
> I did have Szechuan style tripe the other day and loved it but of course the other big thing is offal has got an ick factor and a strong taste.



In theory I love the idea that the poor beast didn't die so people would eat steak and throw away the rest...but I am sooo squirmish with animal products. If I eat meat, like a few times a year, it's homeopathic doses of ground beef, sausage or chicken breast, and I'm usually full after a two bites. I am grossed out by animal fat, the smell of frying bacon makes me literally nauseous, I don't like to cook with butter or cream (I will use them for desserts, though). I will happily pour generous helpings of all kinds of oil into vegetable dishes and mop that up with bread, though


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s elegant.



And I really love her name. Also, I want a hot husband who happens to be rich *sigh*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> *Mike Tindall called Prince Harry a 'b***end' after Queen's Platinum Jubilee Party*



A what? Can't decipher that.

But also, Team Mike. Whatever he said can't possibly be ruder than sitting on Oprah making up lies about your entire family.

ETA: saw @CarryOn2020 already posted the translation and definition. Yes, definitely accurate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A what? Can't decipher that.
> 
> But also, Team Mike. Whatever he said can't possibly be ruder than sitting on Oprah making up lies about your entire family.



Scroll up. Definition in spoiler.  New word


----------



## Melocoton

I was thinking that it was "bookend"---I had no idea!  Learned a new word today.
TW's ever-plastered smile is scary.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Scroll up. Definition in spoiler.  New word



Unfortunately, it's not new to me, by brother went to a British public (private) school


----------



## papertiger

Melocoton said:


> I was thinking that it was "bookend"---I had no idea!  Learned a new word today.
> TW's ever-plastered smile is scary.



You think!?!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like she did do something:
> 
> 
> *'Thoughtful' Meghan Markle sent a voice note to volunteers at Grenfell community kitchen - asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' - to mark five-year anniversary of the tragedy*
> 
> *Meghan Markle left a voice note asking about the volunteers and their families on the five-year anniversary of the West London tower block tragedy *
> *The Hubb Community Kitchen posted on its Facebook that the Duchess, 40, had sent the message asking 'about our children and giving us news of hers' *
> *Meghan and Prince Harry first visited the West London kitchen in 2018 following the blaze, which killed 72 people, on June 14th, 2017*
> *Volunteers wrote in another post how the 'thoughtful' Duchess had sent 'flowers, a picture, chocolates' and made phone calls in the years since the tragedy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle leaves kind voice note for Grenfell kitchen volunteers
> 
> 
> Volunteers at The Hubb Community Kitchen, set up to provide food for bereaved families, shared that the Duchess had been in touch on the five-year anniversary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





CarryOn2020 said:


> One way to look at it - a voicemail



I mean the cynical side of me thinks they know this anniversary will be marked so why not get some PR? It was an enormous cause celebre and was heavily sold as a POC issue in the media so she’d be crazy not to spend a minute listening to her own voice back.


----------



## TimeToShop

Found this on IG. So there was a child with them? Guess TW had time for a facial since they didn’t attend much while there.  Also, if you’re promoting your skincare wouldn’t you have a better picture than a shaded side view? All comments seem to be positive. Wonder how many they’ve deleted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe, maybe not. For some reason the few people still on their side don't find it beneat them to bend the truth for them a little.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

TimeToShop said:


> Found this on IG. So there was a child with them? Guess TW had time for a facial since they didn’t attend much while there.  Also, if you’re promoting your skincare wouldn’t you have a better picture than a shaded side view? All comments seem to be positive. Wonder how many they’ve deleted.



As per the above she only met Lilibet and not Archie
Seems is advertising for both, she tells us about MMs loving, beautiful family (sans Archie) and promotes herself by telling that MMs glow (insert light bulb here) is the result of her facials
Wonder if you can choose your glow: 25 kilowatts, 50 kilowatts, nuclear explosion…


----------



## GilaBag

so funny...


----------



## bag-mania

TimeToShop said:


> Found this on IG. So there was a child with them? Guess TW had time for a facial since they didn’t attend much while there.  Also, if you’re promoting your skincare wouldn’t you have a better picture than a shaded side view? All comments seem to be positive. Wonder how many they’ve deleted.




This is the woman who I believe gave Meghan a facial in exchange for being able to promote herself.

Since her own motives are self-serving we should take her statement with a grain of salt. She may have said what she was told to/allowed to say.


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe, maybe not. For some reason the few people still on their side don't find it beneat them to bend the truth for them a little.


That’s true. She didn’t say it was an actual child. Perhaps TW let her peek into the darkened nursery where she saw a blanket over a small pillow and assumed it was a baby. ‍ 

That couple does inspire all kinds of weird theories.

edited to remove typo


----------



## TimeToShop

bag-mania said:


> This is the woman who I believe gave Meghan a facial in exchange for being able to promote herself.
> 
> Since her own motives are self-serving we should take her statement with a grain of salt. She may have said what she was told to/allowed to say.


When that house of cards falls a lot of people are going to look ridiculous.


----------



## bag-mania

TimeToShop said:


> When that house of cards falls a lot of people are going to look ridiculous.



They won’t though because memories are short. Unless the press turns on them and attacks with the fervor they usually reserve for politicians they don’t like, everyone who is a Sussex cheerleader will have their reputations intact even if they fibbed for them.


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> As per the above she only met Lilibet and not Archie
> Seems is advertising for both, she tells us about MMs loving, beautiful family (sans Archie) and promotes herself by telling that MMs glow (insert light bulb here) is the result of her facials
> Wonder if you can choose your glow: 25 kilowatts, 50 kilowatts, nuclear explosion…



We used to have an emoji that read 'No photos? It never happened' (or something similar).

Don't deliberate,
Don't worry,
Don't sweat it,
Don't try to make it make sense
Don't believe a word without receipts!!!!

We only have their word the Queen met Lilibet.
We _only _have their word
We only have _their_ word
We only have their _word_
We _only_ have their word
We only have _their _word
We only have their _word _
We _only_ have their word
We only have _their _word
We only have their _word _
We _only_ have their word

Doesn't matter if it came out of The Sun, The Mirror, The NY Post or my behind. If it came form H&M/  - sucks I will need exhibit A B & C because the only consistent and constant truth is that these people are LIARS

I feel like @CeeJay, she tells it just how she feels it.

Thank you, I feel better now


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Allegedly, publisher turned down the book due to lack of content, and  H&M went to the UK with mics and photographers, but failed to get anything for Netflix
> So H&M are lacking content for two previous commitments for which they have been paid something
> SO
> I find it curious that they would sit down with O and spill whatever juicy tidbits
> Arent the tidbits already committed to the book and /or Netflix ? that was an issue with the original O interview, they “used up” the story of racism, making it old fake news, alledgedly
> 
> Of course, they may be desperate enough for income to spill to O first


Silly me … I figured it out .. 

THEY left the jubilee/UK not happy, so, major TV interview (whinefest) required ASAP a to quell the ire
Same as right after Megxit …

They are not thinking the long game either in terms of BRF (are we burning our bridges ???) or in terms of getting paid (who will pay more for dishing the dirt?? To whom are we already obligated … )

if they do another interview, it is strictly to scratch today’s itch NOW


----------



## TimeToShop

bag-mania said:


> They won’t though because memories are short. Unless the press turns on them and attacks with the fervor they usually reserve for politicians they don’t like, everyone who is a Sussex cheerleader will have their reputations intact even if they fibbed for them.


It’s infuriating. They probably would spin it as something that awful RF made them do.


----------



## bag-mania

This magazine is one of the frivolous publications that always runs happy puff pieces about them. While the linked article is not exactly critical, the fact that they are pointing out the issue of H&M being creatures of the media is a start. Baby steps I guess.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Presence "Cast a Shadow" Over the Jubilee for the Royal Family: Expert
					

"There has been a huge amount of trust broken."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definition in spoiler
> TY tpf, Learning new words daily
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: B***end
> 
> 
> 
> A _bell end _is slang the head of a penis. It’s used in UK as an insult for a jerk or someone acting stupid or contemptibly. It’s a bit similar to calling someone a _dickhead_.


The things I learn on this forum!


----------



## mellibelly

Even the horse is sick of his sh!t!


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Even the horse is sick of his sh!t!




That is old footage from a previous fall. 

When I read about his fall this past weekend I thought he just fell off a horse. Turns out it was the horse that fell. They made such a big deal about Harry and little mention about whether the horse was okay. Was it truly an accident or was Harry riding recklessly and caused the horse to lose balance and slip? Not like anyone in the press is going to tell us.


----------



## Lodpah

I think MM has crossed over from just a having narcissistic, psycopathatic and sociapathic traits into being a diabolical woman. I mean, she just loves to create drama and upheaval, whilst dragging her emasculated-no-balls-idiotic-stupid-Harry-who-stopped-maturing-at-12-years-old, along with her.  And that stupid, creepy smile she plasters on is demonic. 

The make a good team. They're full of fake actions and totally deserve each other.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> True????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> It looks like the alliterate one and her husband are headed for interview two with the one named talk show host.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Based on what we’ve been reading as of late, this would be the nail in the coffin for these two.  

I’m not sure I believe it though; I really can’t imagine Oprah having a 2nd interview with them .. not sure she was pleased when the “reviews” came in.  Would Gayle King do it?! .. absolutely, I think she would but if she behaves like Oprah did and just sit there shaking her head and believing every word, she might not like the backlash.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> That is old footage from a previous fall.
> 
> When I read about his fall this past weekend I thought he just fell off a horse. Turns out it was the horse that fell. They made such a big deal about Harry and little mention about whether the horse was okay. Was it truly an accident or was Harry riding recklessly and caused the horse to lose balance and slip? Not like anyone in the press is going to tell us.
> 
> View attachment 5426767


I’m a huge animal lover and those horses suffer a lot, man-handled, hit with polo sticks and are in pain when they are subjected to polo. They should be stopped.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I’m a huge animal lover and those horses suffer a lot, man-handled, hit with polo sticks and are in pain when they are subjected to polo. They should be stopped.



I’m not anti-polo because from what I have heard polo ponies are generally well cared for and not overworked. When I saw a polo match the horses looked like they were genuinely enjoying it. Many of them are former racehorses who are athletic and full of energy.

Where it can get bad is if you have a player who is so competitive he handles the horse roughly. I remember the photo years ago of Harry on a gray horse with blood on it’s side from his aggressive spurring! Presumably that was one of his own horses. Since we haven’t heard that Harry and Meghan have bought a string of polo ponies, I assume he’s using horses borrowed from Nacho and others belonging to the club. I’m sure his teammates wouldn’t be happy if he has mistreated their horses.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> I’m not anti-polo because from what I have heard polo ponies are generally well cared for and not overworked. When I saw a polo match the horses looked like they were genuinely enjoying it. Many of them are former racehorses who are athletic and full of energy.
> 
> Where it can get bad is if you have a player who is so competitive he handles the horse roughly. I remember the photo years ago of Harry on a gray horse with blood on it’s side from his aggressive spurring! Presumably that was one of his own horses. Since we haven’t heard that Harry and Meghan have bought a string of polo ponies, I assume he’s using horses borrowed from Nacho and others belonging to the club. I’m sure his teammates wouldn’t be happy if he has mistreated their horses.


I see your point but it takes only one human or a few to be bad people to those horses. They do get hit tho by the sticks and manipulated subtly and all that twisting, turning is hard on the horses.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Of course, they may be desperate enough for income to spill to O first


Am I misremembering? Weren't there some disclaimers at the start of the infamous interview claiming that they weren't paid or they didn't know the questions beforehand? All I recall clearly was the solemn faux innocence on La Victime's face.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I see your point but it takes only one human or a few to be bad people to those horses. They do get hit tho by the sticks and manipulated subtly and all that twisting, turning is hard on the horses.



No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.
> 
> View attachment 5426843
> View attachment 5426844


Those eyes on the precious horse! He’s horrible!


----------



## Chanbal

must see it to believe it… 










						Meghan and Harry's titles spark 'removal discussion' amid royals
					

MEGHAN Markle's and Prince Harry's royal titles have sparked a discussion between senior royals as they question whether to remove them.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## mellibelly

So the video I posted was old. But I saw a horse that was sick of his rider pushing him around and knocked him off. Based on other pictures I’ve seen of Harry causing his polo ponies to bleed this isn’t surprising. I know I’m in the minority, but I don’t believe in zoos, sea worlds, elephants being ridden by tourists, swimming with dolphins and any type of animal racing including horses and dogs. I have zero sympathy for Harry being pushed off a horse. To be honest I half expected him to lose his temper on the horse that threw him off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> That is old footage from a previous fall.
> 
> When I read about his fall this past weekend I thought he just fell off a horse. Turns out it was the horse that fell. They made such a big deal about Harry and little mention about whether the horse was okay. Was it truly an accident or was Harry riding recklessly and caused the horse to lose balance and slip? Not like anyone in the press is going to tell us.



To be fair, I think Zara lost a horse that broke its neck during a tournament once. Jumping, polo, cross-country and racing comes with a higher risk, especially at a competitive level (which is why I'm not a fan).


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.
> 
> View attachment 5426843
> View attachment 5426844


This makes me ill. I see a man riding a horse like it isn’t a sentient being. Like it’s just a vehicle to be manipulated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.
> 
> View attachment 5426843
> View attachment 5426844



Geez, that is really ugly.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.
> 
> View attachment 5426843
> View attachment 5426844


It’s probably both- he’s crap at horse riding by most standards but because polo is such a small world everyone just lets it happen to keep the social circle in play.


----------



## Chanbal

Probably just rumors?





_A source told the tabloid that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry got into a fight after the former found out that she was not invited to the United Kingdom. There were reports that the Duke of Sussex will reunite with Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles for the holidays. However, there was no mention of the former actress joining them…

*Markle has been hanging out at the luxurious San Ysidro Ranch Hotel*, and this encouraged the tabloid to assume that she was staying there. They even claimed that locals are starting to wonder if Markle lives there._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't think the BRF would blatantly exclude her like this while still married, but I would enjoy it 

That said, I remember reading she stayed at a hotel after a fight a year or so ago, too. Maybe that's what she does, would fit the drama bill.


----------



## Chanbal

Ginger and Whinger aka Boo and Booette seem to be officially unhappy by their treatment in the UK…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lulu212121

Maybe its a sneaky ad for the hotel from Merchy Meg?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean...they surely know Archie exists? Though admittedly he hasn't been seen since last summer I guess.


----------



## Lodpah

They travel without their children, no one sees the children, no outings to show a happy family of 4. Not a glimpse. So how can they go about and be photographed and complain that they are stalked? Maybe the paparazzi don’t want to be sued?

Something’s not right. Someone should do a welfare check on those kids. Even if just to see and ask the Nannie’s if they are ok.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I’m not anti-polo because from what I have heard polo ponies are generally well cared for and not overworked. When I saw a polo match the horses looked like they were genuinely enjoying it. Many of them are former racehorses who are athletic and full of energy.
> 
> Where it can get bad is if you have a player who is so competitive he handles the horse roughly. I remember the photo years ago of Harry on a gray horse with blood on it’s side from his aggressive spurring! Presumably that was one of his own horses. Since we haven’t heard that Harry and Meghan have bought a string of polo ponies, I assume he’s using horses borrowed from Nacho and others belonging to the club. I’m sure his teammates wouldn’t be happy if he has mistreated their horses.



I grew-up riding. Spurs should be banned period.


----------



## Pivoine66

How is TW's father? Has he seen her and his grandchildren yet?  How does he feel? Hurt, perhaps?
How is her family? - HER biological family? Have they met her and the children? 
Has she ever invited them? Wouldn't that score huge bonus points in the media?

They really look nice and welcoming: credit pinterest.com


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.
> 
> View attachment 5426843
> View attachment 5426844



So M banned H from hunting but it's OK he 'rides' like this?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> must see it to believe it…
> View attachment 5426890
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's titles spark 'removal discussion' amid royals
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle's and Prince Harry's royal titles have sparked a discussion between senior royals as they question whether to remove them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I don't think title removal will happen any time soon, but this could just be a warning shot across the bows, *IF *it is true.

What saddens me most about the H+M debacle is that the previous Duke of Sussex was, it seems, the equivalent of a social justice campaigner in his day and I believe Queen Elizabeth deliberately bestowed this particular dukedom on Harry as a sign of confidence in what H+M could achieve as working royals in the UK, realms and commonwealth.

*Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex*_, KG, KT, GCB, GCH, PRS, FRSA (27 January 1773 – 21 April 1843) was the sixth son and ninth child of King George III and his queen consort, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. He was the only surviving son of George III who did not pursue an army or navy career. *He was known for his liberal views, which included reform of Parliament, abolition of the slave trade, Catholic Emancipation, and the removal of existing civil restrictions on Jews and Dissenters.[From Wikipedia] *_

Counsellors of State needs to be sorted ASAP though, especially given HMTQ's declining health and mobility issues.

If Andrew had a shred of dignity, courage, selflessness and common sense, or even some good advisors that he was paying heed to, he would voluntarily step down as CoS. Then, the clever thing would be for the working BRF to agree to a more prominent profile for Bea/Eug as a quid pro quo, with a view to them becoming working royals for William in due course. (This is already happening I think)

A voluntary step down by Andrew would put pressure on Harry.

It is, in my view, and I have written this before, absolutely unacceptable that an individual who does not live in the Uk and is not a working royal can deputise for the Monarch.


----------



## MiniMabel

RAINDANCE said:


> I don't think title removal will happen any time soon, but this could just be a warning shot across the bows, *IF *it is true.
> 
> What saddens me most about the H+M debacle is that the previous Duke of Sussex was, it seems, the equivalent of a social justice campaigner in his day and I believe Queen Elizabeth deliberately bestowed this particular dukedom on Harry as a sign of confidence in what H+M could achieve as working royals in the UK, realms and commonwealth.
> 
> *Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex*_, KG, KT, GCB, GCH, PRS, FRSA (27 January 1773 – 21 April 1843) was the sixth son and ninth child of King George III and his queen consort, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. He was the only surviving son of George III who did not pursue an army or navy career. *He was known for his liberal views, which included reform of Parliament, abolition of the slave trade, Catholic Emancipation, and the removal of existing civil restrictions on Jews and Dissenters.[From Wikipedia] *_
> 
> Counsellors of State needs to be sorted ASAP though, especially given HMTQ's declining health and mobility issues.
> 
> If Andrew had a shred of dignity, courage, selflessness and common sense, or even some good advisors that he was paying heed to, he would voluntarily step down as CoS. Then, the clever thing would be for the working BRF to agree to a more prominent profile for Bea/Eug as a quid pro quo, with a view to them becoming working royals for William in due course. (This is already happening I think)
> 
> A voluntary step down by Andrew would put pressure on Harry.
> 
> It is, in my view, and I have written this before, absolutely unacceptable that an individual who does not live in the Uk and is not a working royal can deputise for the Monarch.



Also, Anne should be a CoS.  Perhaps Edward and Sophie, too?  It should be people who are worthy of that office, not just anyone just because of where they are in the Line of Succession.  

Quality people are required to represent HMTQ and the UK.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean...they surely know Archie exists? Though admittedly he hasn't been seen since last summer I guess.




I find it hard to believe that members of the royal family don’t believe Archie exists …


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think the BRF would blatantly exclude her like this while still married, but I would enjoy it
> 
> That said, I remember reading she stayed at a hotel after a fight a year or so ago, too. Maybe that's what she does, would fit the drama bill.



There is no reason for her to flee to a hotel; she has enough space in her house to hide from her husband if she wants to.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Chanbal said:


> source told the tabloid that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry got into a fight after the former found out that she was not invited to the United Kingdom. There were reports that the Duke of Sussex will reunite with Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles for the holidays. However, there was no mention of the former actress joining them…



It’s strange that the article says Harry has been taking care of Archie, but there’s no mention of Lilibet at all.


----------



## xincinsin

kkfiregirl said:


> I find it hard to believe that members of the royal family don’t believe Archie exists …


In some Youtube post that was not very believing of the existence of the kids, one sugar stridently claimed in the comments that the entire BRF attended Archie's christening. Nope, it wasn't that big an event.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Ginger and Whinger aka Boo and Booette seem to be officially unhappy by their treatment in the UK…



I keep sniggering over the expression that Methane felt the snubs like a kick in the teeth. She can just get a fresh set of veneers if she feels so upset over it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Bickersons continue to bicker:









						Thomas Markle says he never planned to see his estranged daughter Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in the UK
					

Thomas Markle told Insider he was due to travel to London for the Queen's Jubilee in June but was unable to attend after having a stroke.




					www.insider.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lady Colin Campbell newest


----------



## LibbyRuth

kkfiregirl said:


> I find it hard to believe that members of the royal family don’t believe Archie exists …


Same.  I find it hard to believe members of the public don't believe the kids exist as well.  There have been pictures of the kids released, including paparazzi photos with Archie in a park. Are we to believe that they rent kids to keep the charade going?


----------



## EverSoElusive

kkfiregirl said:


> There is no reason for her to flee to a hotel; she has enough space in her house to hide from her husband if she wants to.




Especially in one of the 14/16 bathrooms, where she can be the face of poo poo spray again   She can have Darkshine Sucks leaking those pictures.


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> Same.  I find it hard to believe members of the public don't believe the kids exist as well.  There have been pictures of the kids released, including paparazzi photos with Archie in a park. Are we to believe that they rent kids to keep the charade going?


It's starting to sound like Nessie. I wouldn't be surprised if these under the radar kids end up in urban legend websites, along with Methane's amazing independently moving shrink/enlarge at will sentient bump.


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> Especially in one of the 14/16 bathrooms, where she can be the face of poo poo spray again   She can have Darkshine Sucks leaking those pictures.


Gives a whole new meaning to Sh1tface, doesn’t it?


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> Those eyes on the precious horse! He’s horrible!


Stupid H will do anything that will make him (and others) think he is a big deal. 

He's been a nasty little jerk from the beginning and being cruel to animals (remember that pic of his "kill" in Africa I think) jacks him up and temporarily feeds his princely ego--he needs to feel he's in charge of something since he knows he's a spare and now a second-row royal (that's gotta hurt!).

I wouldn't want him around any of my dogs--those beady little dead eyes of his would have me slamming the door in his face. Plus I think he's smelly all the time--just my gut feeling, nothing more (hope to never get close enough to get a whiff).


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> Stupid H will do anything that will make him (and others) think he is a big deal.
> 
> He's been a nasty little jerk from the beginning and being cruel to animals (remember that pic of his "kill" in Africa I think) jacks him up and temporarily feeds his princely ego--he needs to feel he's in charge of something since he knows he's a spare and now a second-row royal (that's gotta hurt!).
> 
> I wouldn't want him around any of my dogs--those beady little dead eyes of his would have me slamming the door in his face. Plus I think he's smelly all the time--just my gut feeling, nothing more (hope to never get close enough to get a whiff).



That's right, I forgot for a nano-second. 

Kills big game inhumanly in Africa for trophies and saves a few chickens in the US.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Ginger and Whinger aka Boo and Booette seem to be officially unhappy by their treatment in the UK…



Is this real ??? Must go look for corroboration

I am sure they feel this way, but a press release ??? If memory serves, they dont do direct PR releases, rather SS talks to People/Vanity Fair which reports the story always citing an anonymous source AKA insider


----------



## LibbyRuth

marietouchet said:


> Is this real ??? Must go look for corroboration
> 
> I am sure they feel this way, but a press release ??? If memory serves, they dont do direct PR releases, rather SS talks to People/Vanity Fair which reports the story always citing an anonymous source AKA insider



I doubt it is real.  I don't think it would make sense to send a press release to just one magazine - and one that isn't all that big.


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> I doubt it is real.  I don't think it would make sense to send a press release to just one magazine - and one that isn't all that big.



Yeah, it’s BS. Heat looks like it’s a UK celebrity magazine similar to People or Us in the US. If they were going the “poor mistreated us” route they would have had SS flood the usual publications with articles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If you have instagram, Delfina has posted a video of today’s polo practice. 
[saw 2 young ladies(?) there, but there is no interaction with Hazz]
ETA: video was removed from her IG !!  Wow o wow!


Let’s take a moment to reflect on Katie Couric’s statement from her 2021 book.


_In her new memoir, veteran journalist Katie Couric revealed that Prince Harry stunk of cigarettes and alcohol when she first met him, according to a manuscript of "Going There" obtained by the Daily Mail.

Couric first met the royal in 2012 at a polo match in Brazil, the Daily Mail reported. She was there on assignment to interview him for an ABC special about Queen Elizabeth II's Diamond Jubilee, per E! News.

When she met Prince Harry, the journalist said that he was in his "wild-oats sowing phase." It took place just two months before he was infamously photographed naked during a trip to Las Vegas, according to E! News.

In Couric's new memoir, the Daily Mail said, the news anchor recalled how the prince reeked of cigarettes and that alcohol seemed to "ooze from every pore" of his body._

*Katie Couric says Prince Harry had cigarettes and alcohol oozing from 'every pore' before he met Meghan Markle*








						Katie Couric says Prince Harry had cigarettes and alcohol oozing from 'every pore' before he met Meghan Markle
					

In Katie Couric's new memoir, "Going There," the veteran journalist said that she met the royal during his "wild-oats sowing phase" in 2012.




					www.insider.com


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, it’s BS. Heat looks like it’s a UK celebrity magazine similar to People or Us in the US. If they were going the “poor mistreated us” route they would have had SS flood the usual publications with articles.


You inspired me to take a gander of People's coverage of the Gruesome Twosome's Jubilee outing. According to them, it was the Harkles' choice not to interact with the Cambridges because, you know, they are such low-key people who dislike drama   And People also claims that Hazard video-calls TQ frequently, and both TQ and PP have viewed Archie running around. Alternative universe tripe.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The hotel rumors: I think it serves a purpose.  First, TW gets to merch the hotel.  Second, TW gets to signal “there’s trouble in paradise” and this is where the next Mr. Markle hopeful can find me.  Third, she is probably using the hotel as a way to search for her next target.  She can’t make money or snare money stewing at home.  

Polo:  I wonder if Netflix is using the footage.  Perhaps they are pivoting to “lifestyles of the very privileged “ vs “inside royal scoops”.  It might be why David Foster is suddenly around again.  He’s no stranger to reality lifestyle shows.

invisibet:  this just goes to show that the old practice of watching rf members give birth makes a little bit of sense (sadly).  I imagine if a child is produced, the RF will want a dna test, even if they don’t publicly announce it.


----------



## rose60610

Sophisticatted said:


> The hotel rumors: I think it serves a purpose.  First, TW gets to merch the hotel.  Second, TW gets to signal “there’s trouble in paradise” and this is where the next Mr. Markle hopeful can find me.  Third, *she is probably using the hotel as a way to search for her next target.  She can’t make money or snare money stewing at home. *
> 
> Polo:  I wonder if Netflix is using the footage.  Perhaps they are pivoting to “lifestyles of the very privileged “ vs “inside royal scoops”.  It might be why David Foster is suddenly around again.  He’s no stranger to reality lifestyle shows.
> 
> invisibet:  this just goes to show that the old practice of watching rf members give birth makes a little bit of sense (sadly).  I imagine if a child is produced, the RF will want a dna test, even if they don’t publicly announce it.



  I think you're on to something! Watch her pop up at other luxury spots eyeing mega rich targets. Maybe she wants lots of bodyguards since they likely have inside knowledge of who the other bodyguards are for uberwealthy men, many of whom operate under the radar. I can see Meghan ordering her security to lead her to potential targets. Any Silicon Valley run-of-the-mill-billionaire would do. Problem is, they'd all be smarter than Harry, work 20 hour days, and have a legal team advising them to steer clear of bridge burners.


----------



## Gal4Dior

You know, I think all this is hilarious. The whole Sucksux Show is such a joke! All these sugars are just buying this propaganda blindly...when the TW is truly the Empress with No Clothes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## goldenry

I remember a lot of people waiting outside and giving Charles a cheer, also seeing little William arrive in a pair of red shorts (with his father) to see his baby brother at the hospital. When he arrived it was said that Diana went out in the corridor to greet William and took him, in her arms, to take a look at baby Harry. Diana left hospital on the Sunday afternoon.

Later on, after Harry's name was announced, someone in the crowd at one of Charles's engagements called out "God for Harry, England and St George," and Charles grinned.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definition in spoiler
> TY tpf, Learning new words daily
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: B***end
> 
> 
> 
> A _bell end _is slang the head of a penis. It’s used in UK as an insult for a jerk or someone acting stupid or contemptibly. It’s a bit similar to calling someone a _dickhead_.


I'm seriously slapping my wrists for no longer collecting 'The List' nicknames because 'B***end' could be a serious contender for one of the most accurate nicknames.


----------



## rose60610

I wonder if Tindall had any names for MM. My guess Tindall spoke for all the royals when he called Harry "B...End".  It's better coming from him than from another royal. Let's see if he gets reprimanded for saying that. If not, then I think they were all in on it and made Tindall the deliverer so it'd make headlines. Even if he does get reprimanded, it wouldn't necessarily mean they weren't in on it .


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm seriously slapping my wrists for no longer collecting 'The List' nicknames because 'B***end' could be a serious contender for one of the most accurate nicknames.


Indicates he has at least part of the "equipment', the balls are long gone. 

Mike Tindall adores the Queen, B***end's treatment of her, as well as the disrespect demonstrated for Phillip will never be forgiven by Mike. 

Two commoners. Mike Tindall and Catherine Middleton, pride of the Royal Family.  
Two Royals.        Andrew and Harry, disgrace of the Royal Family
Thank goodness the first two came along.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if Tindall had any names for MM. My guess Tindall spoke for all the royals when he called Harry "B...End".  It's better coming from him than from another royal. Let's see if he gets reprimanded for saying that. If not, then I think they were all in on it and made Tindall the deliverer so it'd make headlines. Even if he does get reprimanded, it wouldn't necessarily mean they weren't in on it .



Mike is a sports guy. If pressed, he can use much worse language. Even if he must have a ‘time out’, he will be back in the game in no time. Besides, most everyone agrees - Hazz is a d|ck.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Isn't it kind of...curious he'd write that under a picture of the two of them playing polo? Like, wouldn't it be more appropriate commenting on Harry with his wife or children? Unless he doesn't smile and feel happy a lot these days.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Ginger and Whinger aka Boo and Booette seem to be officially unhappy by their treatment in the UK…



Wee widdle Maggot and 'B***end' are having tantrums!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I'd like to know what Delfina, the seasoned polo wife, thinks of Raptor's little trophy stunt.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I'd like to know what Delfina, the seasoned polo wife, thinks of Raptor's little trophy stunt.


Me too, I'm not on Instagram so can't check, but I wonder if Nacho posted any of those pictures to his account?


----------



## Hermes Zen

RAINDANCE said:


> I don't think title removal will happen any time soon, but this could just be a warning shot across the bows, *IF *it is true.
> 
> What saddens me most about the H+M debacle is that the previous Duke of Sussex was, it seems, the equivalent of a social justice campaigner in his day and I believe Queen Elizabeth deliberately bestowed this particular dukedom on Harry as a sign of confidence in what H+M could achieve as working royals in the UK, realms and commonwealth.
> 
> *Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex*_, KG, KT, GCB, GCH, PRS, FRSA (27 January 1773 – 21 April 1843) was the sixth son and ninth child of King George III and his queen consort, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. He was the only surviving son of George III who did not pursue an army or navy career. *He was known for his liberal views, which included reform of Parliament, abolition of the slave trade, Catholic Emancipation, and the removal of existing civil restrictions on Jews and Dissenters.[From Wikipedia] *_
> 
> Counsellors of State needs to be sorted ASAP though, especially given HMTQ's declining health and mobility issues.
> 
> If Andrew had a shred of dignity, courage, selflessness and common sense, or even some good advisors that he was paying heed to, he would voluntarily step down as CoS. Then, the clever thing would be for the working BRF to agree to a more prominent profile for Bea/Eug as a quid pro quo, with a view to them becoming working royals for William in due course. (This is already happening I think)
> 
> A voluntary step down by Andrew would put pressure on Harry.
> 
> It is, in my view, and I have written this before, absolutely unacceptable that an individual who does not live in the Uk and is not a working royal can deputise for the Monarch.


OT and yet not OT since we are talking about Sussex.  I recently was looking for formal gloves however I have non-standard size hands/fingers/arms are short.  I found Cornelia James and placed a custom order.  I started to read about the company and they are in Sussex and have made gloves for QE and other royals ... maybe even for M especially for her wedding.  Cornelia James was so very helpful, patient and quick!  Gloves are being shipped.  Can't wait to see them!  If anyone has a need, check them out ... even if you use standard size gloves.  Those are returnable/not custom.


----------



## WingNut

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if Tindall had any names for MM. My guess Tindall spoke for all the royals when he called Harry "B...End".  It's better coming from him than from another royal. Let's see if he gets reprimanded for saying that. If not, then I think they were all in on it and made Tindall the deliverer so it'd make headlines. Even if he does get reprimanded, it wouldn't necessarily mean they weren't in on it .


Or they'll "reprimand" him publicly, and over drinks toast him and say "you know we had to tell you that was naughty in public, but here's cheers to you for saying what we all feel".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Me too, I'm not on Instagram so can't check, but I wonder if Nacho posted any of those pictures to his account?



He did not. He posted two more pics of the team sans any extra people, but also I am starting to think he likes to wax poetically as well. Aren't two of the teammates teenagers???


----------



## MiniMabel

WingNut said:


> Or they'll "reprimand" him publicly, and over drinks toast him and say "you know we had to tell you that was naughty in public, but here's cheers to you for saying what we all feel".



I think it's done and dusted, in the past, and nothing at all will be said which is absolutely the right thing to do!   After all, as you say, it is what everyone is thinking and Mike was the right one to say it!


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aren't two of the teammates teenagers???



I think he’s referring to himself and Harry when he talks about ‘the fathers/los Padres’. But the way his post is written makes it seem like he and Harry are co-captains of the team.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> I think he’s referring to himself and Harry when he talks about ‘the fathers/los Padres’. But the way his post is written makes it seem like he and Harry are co-captains of the team.



Exactly. The team is four people, not two fathers. Maybe that's why they get along so well, their egos align.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Exactly. The team is four people, not two fathers. Maybe that's why they get along so well, their egos align.



It honestly sounds like he’s trying to boost Harry’s ego, not his own.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

...


RAINDANCE said:


> *I don't think title removal will happen any time soon,* but this could just be a warning shot across the bows, *IF *it is true.
> 
> What saddens me most about the H+M debacle is that the previous Duke of Sussex was, it seems, the equivalent of a social justice campaigner in his day and I believe Queen Elizabeth deliberately bestowed this particular dukedom on Harry as a sign of confidence in what H+M could achieve as working royals in the UK, realms and commonwealth.
> 
> *Prince Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex*_, KG, KT, GCB, GCH, PRS, FRSA (27 January 1773 – 21 April 1843) was the sixth son and ninth child of King George III and his queen consort, Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. He was the only surviving son of George III who did not pursue an army or navy career. *He was known for his liberal views, which included reform of Parliament, abolition of the slave trade, Catholic Emancipation, and the removal of existing civil restrictions on Jews and Dissenters.[From Wikipedia] *_
> 
> Counsellors of State needs to be sorted ASAP though, especially given HMTQ's declining health and mobility issues.
> 
> If Andrew had a shred of dignity, courage, selflessness and common sense, or even some good advisors that he was paying heed to, he would voluntarily step down as CoS. Then, the clever thing would be for the working BRF to agree to a more prominent profile for Bea/Eug as a quid pro quo, with a view to them becoming working royals for William in due course. (This is already happening I think)
> 
> A voluntary step down by Andrew would put pressure on Harry.
> 
> It is, in my view, and I have written this before, absolutely unacceptable that an individual who does not live in the Uk and is not a working royal can deputise for the Monarch.


Agree, they won't lose their title in the near future because if they do, TW will become HRH Princess Henry and people would probably start calling her Princess Meghan and I believe that's what she's been wanting all along. If I recall correctly, since H was born a prince, he would need to renounce his princely title and HRH himself; suggestions he would probably strongly reject.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaaaa
> *You’re in the top 10% if you can spot Prince Harry in less than three minutes – are you in the exclusive club?*
> By
> Alice Fuller, The Sun
> June 15, 2022 10:24am
> Updated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re in the top 10% if you can spot Prince Harry in less than three minutes – are you in the exclusive club?
> 
> 
> One in 10 people can find Prince Harry in this picture in less than three minutes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


He’s the one with the Burger King hat flipping burgers.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> I wonder if Tindall had any names for MM. My guess Tindall spoke for all the royals when he called Harry "B...End".  It's better coming from him than from another royal. Let's see if he gets reprimanded for saying that. If not, then I think they were all in on it and made Tindall the deliverer so it'd make headlines. Even if he does get reprimanded, it wouldn't necessarily mean they weren't in on it .


TW is probably referred to as TB. (Female dog). As for a reprimand, I think the most that will happen is that The Queen will give him one less cookie, but Princess Anne will slip him an extra and a wink.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> OT and yet not OT since we are talking about Sussex.  I recently was looking for formal gloves however I have non-standard size hands/fingers/arms are short.  I found Cornelia James and placed a custom order.  I started to read about the company and they are in Sussex and have made gloves for QE and other royals ... maybe even for M especially for her wedding.  Cornelia James was so very helpful, patient and quick!  Gloves are being shipped.  Can't wait to see them!  If anyone has a need, check them out ... even if you use standard size gloves.  Those are returnable/not custom.



I bought several pairs years ago. Love them!
Ya know, there are several shops like this that we in the US seldom hear about. Top quality, excellent customer service, simply the best.  Imo this is the benefit of royal watching 

ETA: like ‘em or not, they do dress impeccably well, even their _re-wears _look new.   Very impressive, imo.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it kind of...curious he'd write that under a picture of the two of them playing polo? Like, wouldn't it be more appropriate commenting on Harry with his wife or children? Unless he doesn't smile and feel happy a lot these days.



Strange comment.  Really strange.  I get male bonding and fellowship but this is not typical of men I know and have known —even those of close long-standing friendships.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Strange comment.  Really strange.  I get male bonding and fellowship but this is not typical of men I know and have known —even those of close long-standing friendships.



_What a joy to see u smile and be so happy. I love being your teammate._

Not over his wife, not over his kids, but being teammates.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Indicates he has at least part of the "equipment', the balls are long gone.
> 
> Mike Tindall adores the Queen, B***end's treatment of her, as well as the disrespect demonstrated for Phillip will never be forgiven by Mike.
> 
> Two commoners. Mike Tindall and Catherine Middleton, pride of the Royal Family.
> Two Royals.        Andrew and Harry, disgrace of the Royal Family
> Thank goodness the first two came along.


I listened to the Tindall podcast, no rude words
Supposedly the 4 letter word for H was in private, per an insider, per some tabloid
Heck, everyone says bad stuff in private, the trick is to not do it on camera


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> I listened to the Tindall podcast, no rude words
> Supposedly the 4 letter word for H was in private, per an insider, per some tabloid
> Heck, everyone says bad stuff in private, the trick is to not do it on camera


I’m surprise anyone invited to that party would have a loose lips, but I guess we do hear a lot from “palace sources”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Strange comment.  Really strange.  I get male bonding and fellowship but this is not typical of men I know and have known —even those of close long-standing friendships.



Maybe I read it wrong and he was trying to say Harry is always so happy and smiling since he met Raptor and left the UK...only that he's not. I don't know. It seemed like a very weird statement to me.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He did not. He posted two more pics of the team sans any extra people, but also I am starting to think he likes to wax poetically as well. Aren't two of the teammates teenagers???



Anyone else have sugar overload and nausea?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I listened to the Tindall podcast, no rude words
> Supposedly the 4 letter word for H was in private, per an insider, per some tabloid
> Heck, everyone says bad stuff in private, the trick is to not do it on camera



Also, nobody disagrees with him.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> I bought several pairs years ago. Love them!
> Ya know, there are several shops like this that we in the US seldom hear about. Top quality, excellent customer service, simply the best.  Imo this is the benefit of royal watching
> 
> ETA: like ‘em or not, they do dress impeccably well, even their _re-wears _look new.   Very impressive, imo.


And free shipping to the usa.  I was pleasantly surprised.  I placed the order late night and by the time I woke up the gloves were already cut.    Very happy to hear you LOVE their gloves!! Cheers.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> *Especially in one of the 14/16 bathrooms,* where she can be the face of poo poo spray again   She can have Darkshine Sucks leaking those pictures.


Let's keep some accuracy here,  the bathrooms are allegedly 19. Regarding her trademark spray, one could say she is a visionaire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> And free shipping to the usa.  I was pleasantly surprised.  I placed the order late night and by the time I woke up the gloves were already cut.    Very happy to hear you LOVE their gloves!! Cheers.




Do post pics when you get them!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm really in love with the merino gloves, but I'd like to know if they are mulesing free (and that it isn't mentioned makes me think they are not, which is a hard no for me).


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do post pics when you get them!


Will do!  I hope to order another pair in the future but wrist length. Especially the lavender color ones.  I think I saw a photo of QE wearing lavender gloves recently.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm really in love with the merino gloves, but I'd like to know if they are mulesing free (and that it isn't mentioned makes me think they are not, which is a hard no for me).


I suggest you sending them an email and ask just in case they may be able to accommodate.  I'll have to google 'mulesing free'.


----------



## 1LV

Hermes Zen said:


> I suggest you sending them an email and ask just in case they may be able to accommodate.  I'll have to google 'mulesing free'.


I just did, and wish I hadn’t.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> It honestly sounds like he’s trying to boost Harry’s ego, not his own.



That’s what it sounded like to me. I assumed he must be promoting something by inviting Harry to be on his team, but I don’t know what that could be. Could he genuinely like Harry and want to help him/cheer him up?

I’d actually prefer to believe Nacho was being self-serving in some way.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think the BRF would blatantly exclude her like this while still married, but I would enjoy it
> 
> That said, I remember reading she stayed at a hotel after a fight a year or so ago, too. Maybe that's what she does, would fit the drama bill.


So.....with or without the invisible kids?


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe I read it wrong and he was trying to say Harry is always so happy and smiling since he met Raptor and left the UK...only that he's not. I don't know. It seemed like a very weird statement to me.



I think that’s what he was trying to get across. I don’t know him, but maybe English isn’t his first language?


----------



## Toby93

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Strange comment.  Really strange.  I get male bonding and fellowship but this is not typical of men I know and have known —even those of close long-standing friendships.


He does say weird things on his posts.  Maybe its a language thing?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bellecate




----------



## CarryOn2020

Beyonceeee is in the house [on the newstands]




Send more plates and glasses. The pity party is just getting started.


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> OT and yet not OT since we are talking about Sussex.  I recently was looking for formal gloves however I have non-standard size hands/fingers/arms are short.  I found Cornelia James and placed a custom order.  I started to read about the company and they are in Sussex and have made gloves for QE and other royals ... maybe even for M especially for her wedding.  Cornelia James was so very helpful, patient and quick!  Gloves are being shipped.  Can't wait to see them!  *If anyone has a need, check them out* ... even if you use standard size gloves. Those are returnable/not custom.





CarryOn2020 said:


> I bought several pairs years ago. Love them!
> Ya know, there are several shops like this that we in the US seldom hear about. Top quality, excellent customer service, simply the best.  Imo this is the benefit of royal watching
> 
> ETA: like ‘em or not, they do dress impeccably well, even their _re-wears _look new.   Very impressive, imo.



I don't have a need, but can't resist a good piece… The gloves are beautiful, and I know I'm going to be in trouble.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> He does say weird things on his posts.  Maybe its a language thing?
> 
> View attachment 5427488



More like a cultural thing. Argentinian men have a reputation for being super demonstrative. They do a lot of hugging and don’t necessarily understand personal space. At least that’s the stereotype.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Beyonceeee is in the house [on the newstands]
> 
> View attachment 5427492
> 
> 
> Send more plates and glasses. The pity party is just getting started.



OT but I saw her eldest yesterday at some sports event. The last time I saw her she was the spitting image of Jay-Z, now suddenly you can totally see Beyoncé in her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> More like a cultural thing. Argentinian men have a reputation for being super demonstrative. They do a lot of hugging and don’t necessarily understand personal space. At least that’s the stereotype.



I'm still laughing about that comment someone made a few days ago about a lot of Latin men finding monogamy unnecessary. I thought that was great wording. But I'd love to know if Latin women agree haha.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Strange comment.  Really strange.  I get male bonding and fellowship but this is not typical of men I know and have known —even those of close long-standing friendships.


Nacho is south american and so am I, his post doesn’t seem strange to me at all
He is just boosting Tacho and trying to make him feel welcome but yes it can be a bit too much for some (you should read some of the feisbuk posts I get) plus, like me. English is his second language so sometimes what sounds suitable and good in Spanish doesn’t in English
He is using the Los Padres as a reference to them as fathers but I always thought that Los Padres was named after priests (also called padres in Spanish)…Nacho better read his history otherwise he might have opened a can of worms


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Nacho is south american and so am I, his post doesn’t seem strange to me at all
> He is just boosting Tacho and trying to make him feel welcome but yes it can be a bit too much for some (you should read some of the feisbuk posts I get) plus, like me. English is his second language so sometimes what sounds suitable and good in Spanish doesn’t in English.



Thanks for the translation. So does he really mean it or is it just an exuberant way of being polite?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm really in love with the merino gloves, but I'd like to know if they are mulesing free (and that it isn't mentioned makes me think they are not, which is a hard no for me).



If we buy the silk or cotton gloves, do we need to worry about the mulesing?  (I, too, googled it.  Barbaric.)


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thanks for the translation. So does he really mean it or is it just an exuberant way of being polite?


Good question, he probably means it as they are old friends and from a previous post he does have a history of posting similar statements 
Or maybe he had MM sending him artfully calligraphed post its on what to say


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Piers might be in trouble again…  










						Piers Morgan faces backlash for comparing Amber Heard to Meghan Markle
					

Fans blast Morgan: 'He is obsessed and his new show is tanking in the ratings'




					www.geo.tv


----------



## Chanbal

__





						Blind Item #5
					

The writer/mouthpiece for the alliterate one is finding himself increasingly shut out by the alliterate one. Don't be shocked if he lashes o...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> Nacho is south american and so am I, his post doesn’t seem strange to me at all
> He is just boosting Tacho and trying to make him feel welcome but yes it can be a bit too much for some (you should read some of the feisbuk posts I get) plus, like me. English is his second language so sometimes what sounds suitable and good in Spanish doesn’t in English
> He is using the Los Padres as a reference to them as fathers but I always thought that Los Padres was named after priests (also called padres in Spanish)…Nacho better read his history otherwise he might have opened a can of worms



He is Argentinian and known for his kindness and hospitality.  Imo he is being a kind friend.  He could be my friend


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we buy the silk or cotton gloves, do we need to worry about the mulesing?  (I, too googled it.  Barbaric.)



It only applies to merino wool from Australia IIRC. China doesn't do mulesing because they lack the flies that cause skin infection, and New Zealand has banned it. So there is a chance their source is fine, but I'll not entertain a purchase before I know. I'll email and report back.

Honestly, ignorance is bliss (but obviously no real option). My grandmother gave me a beautiful Persian lamb coat she had made in the late 60s or early 70s (perks of being the only one nearly as short as her). I loved that thing exactly as long as I for some reason didn't realize where it came from (which was about as long as it took me to exchange the buttons). How humans treat animals makes me sick.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5427511
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #5
> 
> 
> The writer/mouthpiece for the alliterate one is finding himself increasingly shut out by the alliterate one. Don't be shocked if he lashes o...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I don’t believe Scobie will ever turn on his mistress. Everything he has he owes to her. That’s a really sad thought.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5427506



Oh, the kids she didn't allow anyone to have a relationship with? The kids who are treated exactly as their rank requires and most certainly not different from the other non-Cambridge great-grandchildren? Which is entirely the problem the Sussexes have, they probably thought Archie should take George's place because his mother is a self-proclaimed Hollywood star and his father thinks he's granny's favourite.


----------



## Vintage Leather

CarryOn2020 said:


> If we buy the silk or cotton gloves, do we need to worry about the mulesing?  (I, too googled it.  Barbaric.)



Mulesing is only a practice with Merino wool, because merino sheep have wrinkly skin where feces and urine can collect. So you’ll never need to worry about it unless you’re buying Australian wool. 

Cotton is a plant, so as long as the workers are treated humanely, nothing is harmed.

Silkworms are a type of caterpillar that form silk cocoons. Most Silk is harvested by boiling those cocoons before the moths emerge. Eri silk is an alternative with a different species caterpillar that leave an opening in their  cocoons and they harvest the silk after the moth emerges. Ahimsa “peace” silk is the same species as traditional silk, but the harvesters let the moth emerge, then spin what remains. The fibers are much shorter and it is more expensive, but also more humane.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Piers might be in trouble again…
> View attachment 5427508
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan faces backlash for comparing Amber Heard to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Fans blast Morgan: 'He is obsessed and his new show is tanking in the ratings'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv



He is not wrong, though. Amber might be even more unlikeable and crazy, but the similarities are there. And I am pretty sure Raptor will go completely ballistic in case of a divorce, because it will either be Harry getting rid of her or Harry being completely blindsighted and putting up a fight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe Scobie will ever turn on his mistress. Everything he has he owes to her. That’s a really sad thought.



But hurt feelings and vanity are powerful.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Piers might be in trouble again…
> View attachment 5427508
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Piers Morgan faces backlash for comparing Amber Heard to Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Fans blast Morgan: 'He is obsessed and his new show is tanking in the ratings'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv



Feeling sorry for Amber now  

_She_ can act (Danish Girl - haven't seen her in anything else) just not on a witness stand. She also isn't boring. 

M can't act beyond knowing where a camera is, and she's as boring as porridge, just twice as bland (apologies to porridge everywhere).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> More like a cultural thing. Argentinian men have a reputation for being super demonstrative. They do a lot of hugging and don’t necessarily understand personal space. At least that’s the stereotype.


Those I personally know are particularly controlling of “their” women.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5427506


Here we are are doing the flip again.  They withheld their children and are blaming the royals.  So typical and boring.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe I read it wrong and he was trying to say Harry is always so happy and smiling since he met Raptor and left the UK...only that he's not. I don't know. It seemed like a very weird statement to me.



Well, he likes everybody. Ellen is a saint. The same Ellen who made his BFF's TW look like a fool on national television.

*Prince Harry's close friend Nacho Figueras defends 'wonderful human being' Ellen DeGeneres amid reports of a 'toxic' work culture on the set of her show and claims she 'makes the world a better place for millions'*

*Prince Harry's friend Nacho Figueras shared online defence of Ellen DeGeneres*
*In an Instagram post, he wrote: 'We are all so scared to say what we really think' *
*Said world is 'a very dangerous place because we cannot make anything right' *
*Nacho appeared on The Ellen DeGeneres' Show last year to defend the Sussexes *


----------



## Annawakes

I think he’s a sugar then.  The only explanation.


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Well, he likes everybody. Ellen is a saint. The same Ellen who made his BFF's TW look like a fool on national television.
> 
> *Prince Harry's close friend Nacho Figueras defends 'wonderful human being' Ellen DeGeneres amid reports of a 'toxic' work culture on the set of her show and claims she 'makes the world a better place for millions'*
> 
> *Prince Harry's friend Nacho Figueras shared online defence of Ellen DeGeneres*
> *In an Instagram post, he wrote: 'We are all so scared to say what we really think' *
> *Said world is 'a very dangerous place because we cannot make anything right' *
> *Nacho appeared on The Ellen DeGeneres' Show last year to defend the Sussexes *


Ellen is nice to those she deems worthy and you have to be someone who has something she could use for her to think so. (Off topic but Jen Aniston went on her show numerous times and seems to really like her too, why I wonder.)

It's everyone else Ellen is mean to, so Nacho is clueless here except when it comes to himself and his inability to see beyond himself.


----------



## Debbini

mellibelly said:


> So the video I posted was old. But I saw a horse that was sick of his rider pushing him around and knocked him off. Based on other pictures I’ve seen of Harry causing his polo ponies to bleed this isn’t surprising. I know I’m in the minority, but I don’t believe in zoos, sea worlds, elephants being ridden by tourists, swimming with dolphins and any type of animal racing including horses and dogs. I have zero sympathy for Harry being pushed off a horse. To be honest I half expected him to lose his temper on the horse that threw him off.


I agree 100% with you.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

...


gracekelly said:


> Here we are are doing the flip again.  They withheld their children and are blaming the royals.  So typical and boring.


Here are the only two occasions of which we are aware that HM and Prince Philip would have seen Archie before the liars, B***end and Mrs. Fabrication left for Canada and the USA and we also know that Archie remained in Canada with TW while H tried to negotiate a half-in and half-out deal, that HM nixed. Thereafter, the trio parked their butts in Canada until their move to California shortly before the border closed due to the Pandemic. As far as we know Archie never returned to the UK and I don't believe Invisibet, if she really exists, visited the UK during the Jubilee.

1. HM with Archie shortly after his birth.


2. I think HM attended Archie's Christening although not seen in this pic.


----------



## LittleStar88

Terrifying results with this AI image generator


----------



## bag-mania

Where has Doria been? We haven’t seen her since she went with them to the NAACP image awards a few months back.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> ...
> 
> Here are the only two occasions of which we are aware that HM and Prince Philip would have seen Archie before the liars, B***end and Mrs. Fabrication left for Canada and the USA and we also know that Archie remained in Canada with TW while H tried to negotiate a half-in and half-out deal, that HM nixed. Thereafter, the trio parked their butts in Canada until their move to California shortly before the border closed due to the Pandemic. As far as we know Archie never returned to the UK and I don't believe Invisibet, if she really exists, visited the UK during the Jubilee.
> 
> 1. HM with Archie shortly after his birth.
> View attachment 5427554
> 
> 2. I think HM attended Archie's Christening although not seen in this pic.
> View attachment 5427558


The Queen was not there.  She had another scheduled engagement for that day.


----------



## Zen101

bag-mania said:


> Where has Doria been? We haven’t seen her since she went with them to the NAACP image awards a few months back.


Methane wheels Doria out only when the R card is needed.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> The Queen was not there.  She had another scheduled engagement for that day.


Thanks! Then it's possible that HM has seen Archie only once before he was whisked away and Archie has been deprived of a meaningful relationship with his granny (and vice versa) because of his petulant parents.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Okay, is it just me, or are all of the “second chair royals” aka, the people who had to sit next to the duo, getting tremendous attention and coverage at Ascot? My feed is full of pictures of Peter Philips in the carriage, Beatrice and Zara (and their husbands)

I didn’t think much of it, because pretty, young and well dressed.  And then I realized that I had seen pictures of Lady Sarah Chatto three days in a row. And I don’t think she’s gotten that much coverage in the last decade. (She looks gorgeous, btw. Stunning pearl necklace with a clasp of white diamonds and either citrines or yellow diamonds set in high carat gold)


----------



## wisconsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> _What a joy to see u smile and be so happy. I love being your teammate._
> 
> Not over his wife, not over his kids, but being teammates.
> 
> View attachment 5427449


I don’t see anything wrong in that. Gender bonding  roles are a little different in the US from the rest of the world. This would be an ok thing to say in many parts of the world between men or women.Why should men or women have joy only in relation to spouses or children.


----------



## gracekelly

Vintage Leather said:


> Okay, is it just me, or are all of the “second chair royals” aka, the people who had to sit next to the duo, getting tremendous attention and coverage at Ascot? My feed is full of pictures of Peter Philips in the carriage, Beatrice and Zara (and their husbands)
> 
> I didn’t think much of it, because pretty, young and well dressed.  And then I realized that I had seen pictures of Lady Sarah Chatto three days in a row. And I don’t think she’s gotten that much coverage in the last decade. (She looks gorgeous, btw. Stunning pearl necklace with a clasp of white diamonds and either citrines or yellow diamonds set in high carat gold)


I think you are right.   Lots of pictures. The DM always has big coverage for Ascot, but this is the DM throwing shade at the Sussex as well. Rubbing it in that they too could have been part of the fun and close relationships the members have with one another.  Plus pay back to loyal family for services rendered during the Jubilee. Wasn’t Lady Sarah sitting next to Meghan?  She took one for the team lol!

Lady Sarah inherited her mother’s tiara and I think this was the one that could be broken down into separate pieces. Maybe some of what she wore were parts of it?  I had the feeling that the Pearl and diamond drops were parts of it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I think you are right.   Lots of pictures. The DM always has big coverage for Ascot, but this is the DM throwing shade at the Sussex as well. Rubbing it in that they too could have been part of the fun and close relationships the members have with one another.  Plus pay back to loyal family for services rendered during the Jubilee. Wasn’t Lady Sarah sitting next to Meghan?  She took one for the team lol!
> 
> Lady Sarah inherited her mother’s tiara and I think this was the one that could be broken down into separate pieces. Maybe some of what she wore were parts of it?  I had the feeling that the Pearl and diamond drops were parts of it


It's a really beautiful tiara!








						Princess Margaret's Dazzling Diamond Wedding Tiara
					

On this date in 1960, Princess Margaret of the United Kingdom arrived at Westminster Abbey for her royal wedding, wearing a remarkable diamond tiara that became iconic. Today, in honor of the anniversary, let's talk




					www.thecourtjeweller.com


----------



## Vintage Leather

gracekelly said:


> I think you are right.   Lots of pictures. The DM always has big coverage for Ascot, but this is the DM throwing shade at the Sussex as well. Rubbing it in that they too could have been part of the fun and close relationships the members have with one another.  Plus pay back to loyal family for services rendered during the Jubilee. Wasn’t Lady Sarah sitting next to Meghan?  She took one for the team lol!
> 
> Lady Sarah inherited her mother’s tiara and I think this was the one that could be broken down into separate pieces. Maybe some of what she wore were parts of it?  I had the feeling that the Pearl and diamond drops were parts of it


Princess Margaret is most associated with the mighty Poltimore tiara, which was her wedding tiara (and the one she wore in the infamous bath picture) and which could be reconfigured to be smaller, or to become a necklace, or 11 brooches. She bought it for herself for £5500. It was inherited by her son, the Earl of Snowden, who put it up on the block with a lot of his mothers other possessions.  (Blind item was that the Queen was livid and had a bit of a shopping spree, because she didn’t get right of first refusal, and some of the things were sentimental items from her childhood.) Made a little shy of a million at auction but has since disappeared into a private collection.

The first Earl of Snowden,  Margaret’s first husband, gave her a collection of three exquisite floral brooches. Margaret gave those to Lady Sarah Chatto as a wedding gift, and Lady Sarah had a tiara frame made for them.

And because tiara talk is useless without pics…


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> I think you are right.   Lots of pictures. The DM always has big coverage for Ascot, but this is the DM throwing shade at the Sussex as well. Rubbing it in that they too could have been part of the fun and close relationships the members have with one another.  Plus pay back to loyal family for services rendered during the Jubilee. Wasn’t Lady Sarah sitting next to Meghan?  She took one for the team lol!
> 
> Lady Sarah inherited her mother’s tiara and I think this was the one that could be broken down into separate pieces. Maybe some of what she wore were parts of it?  I had the feeling that the Pearl and diamond drops were parts of it


As per the article posted by @xincinsin the tiara was auctioned in 2002 after Margaret’s death


----------



## jelliedfeels

TimeToShop said:


> Found this on IG. So there was a child with them? Guess TW had time for a facial since they didn’t attend much while there.  Also, if you’re promoting your skincare wouldn’t you have a better picture than a shaded side view? All comments seem to be positive. Wonder how many they’ve deleted.



 Anything for the money



papertiger said:


> That's right, I forgot for a nano-second.
> 
> Kills big game inhumanly in Africa for trophies and saves a few chickens in the US.


 No one said those chickens were out of the firing line either… roast anyone?

he’s a massive hypocrite when he’s not lecturing us on climate change from a private jet he lectures us on racism in an SS officer costume. 


Lilliesdaughter said:


> Strange comment.  Really strange.  I get male bonding and fellowship but this is not typical of men I know and have known —even those of close long-standing friendships.


I interpret it as he’s glad to see him happy because he usually isn’t…wonder why. 


csshopper said:


> Well, he likes everybody. Ellen is a saint. The same Ellen who made his BFF's TW look like a fool on national television.
> 
> *Prince Harry's close friend Nacho Figueras defends 'wonderful human being' Ellen DeGeneres amid reports of a 'toxic' work culture on the set of her show and claims she 'makes the world a better place for millions'*
> 
> *Prince Harry's friend Nacho Figueras shared online defence of Ellen DeGeneres*
> *In an Instagram post, he wrote: 'We are all so scared to say what we really think' *
> *Said world is 'a very dangerous place because we cannot make anything right' *
> *Nacho appeared on The Ellen DeGeneres' Show last year to defend the Sussexes *


Again I’m going to give the handsome man the benefit of the doubt and assume this is a long game to advertise polo to the masses, to increase the number of players so he can get more tryouts so he can finally get a reason to kick Harry off the team


----------



## purseinsanity

H


QueenofWrapDress said:


> It only applies to merino wool from Australia IIRC. China doesn't do mulesing because they lack the flies that cause skin infection, and New Zealand has banned it. So there is a chance their source is fine, but I'll not entertain a purchase before I know. I'll email and report back.
> 
> Honestly, ignorance is bliss (but obviously no real option). My grandmother gave me a beautiful Persian lamb coat she had made in the late 60s or early 70s (perks of being the only one nearly as short as her). I loved that thing exactly as long as I for some reason didn't realize where it came from (which was about as long as it took me to exchange the buttons). How humans treat animals makes me sick.


How someone treats animals is a good indication of what kind of person (how kind especially) they are.  You don’t have to love animals, but treat them with respect.  They are living, breathing creatures too, and many are better than most humans IMO!  I’d take Guy the beagle over TW any day.  It saddens me how he must’ve felt when she dumped him.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Maggie Muggins said:


> ...
> 
> Agree, they won't lose their title in the near future because if they do, TW will become HRH Princess Henry and people would probably start calling her Princess Meghan and I believe that's what she's been wanting all along. If I recall correctly, since H was born a prince, he would need to renounce his princely title and HRH himself; suggestions he would probably strongly reject.



Yes, thanks for this - I think we'd discussed it here before and concluded same but I had forgotten that implication. It is likely unacceptable to both William and Charles  that Meghan become a princess before either Camilla or Katherine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> 2. I think HM attended Archie's Christening although not seen in this pic.



She did not, she had a prior engagement.


----------



## Sharont2305

Vintage Leather said:


> Princess Margaret is most associated with the mighty Poltimore tiara, which was her wedding tiara (and the one she wore in the infamous bath picture) and which could be reconfigured to be smaller, or to become a necklace, or 11 brooches. She bought it for herself for £5500. It was inherited by her son, the Earl of Snowden, who put it up on the block with a lot of his mothers other possessions.  (Blind item was that the Queen was livid and had a bit of a shopping spree, because she didn’t get right of first refusal, and some of the things were sentimental items from her childhood.) Made a little shy of a million at auction but has since disappeared into a private collection.
> 
> The first Earl of Snowden,  Margaret’s first husband, gave her a collection of three exquisite floral brooches. Margaret gave those to Lady Sarah Chatto as a wedding gift, and Lady Sarah had a tiara frame made for them.
> 
> And because tiara talk is useless without pics…


LOL, it's Snowdon, after the mountain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Lady Sarah inherited her mother’s tiara and I think this was the one that could be broken down into separate pieces. Maybe some of what she wore were parts of it?  I had the feeling that the Pearl and diamond drops were parts of it



The Poltimore tiara? It didn't have pearls and was sold at auction after Margaret's death.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Yes, thanks for this - I think we'd discussed it here before and concluded same but I had forgotten that implication. It is likely unacceptable to both William and Charles  that Meghan become a princess before either Camilla or Katherine.



Don't know. Both of them are aware that the princely title is the lesser one compared to the dukedom. And Princess Henry would just be rubbing it in that she's a mere appendix of her husband.


----------



## Sunshine247365

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m surprise anyone invited to that party would have a loose lips, but I guess we do hear a lot from “palace sources”



Wasn't Eugenie at the cousins lunch? Would be surprised if she didn't leak info to H and TW....


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Well, he likes everybody. Ellen is a saint. The same Ellen who made his BFF's TW look like a fool on national television.
> 
> *Prince Harry's close friend Nacho Figueras defends 'wonderful human being' Ellen DeGeneres amid reports of a 'toxic' work culture on the set of her show and claims she 'makes the world a better place for millions'*
> 
> *Prince Harry's friend Nacho Figueras shared online defence of Ellen DeGeneres*
> *In an Instagram post, he wrote: 'We are all so scared to say what we really think' *
> *Said world is 'a very dangerous place because we cannot make anything right' *
> *Nacho appeared on The Ellen DeGeneres' Show last year to defend the Sussexes *



He certainly loves his friends


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't know. Both of them are aware that the princely title is the lesser one compared to the dukedom. And Princess Henry would just be rubbing it in that she's a mere appendix of her husband.


But her stans (and Plastic Pal) would be trumpeting Princess M... constantly, as if she were the 2nd coming of Diana.
Is this an Oedipus complex?


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Well, he likes everybody. Ellen is a saint. The same Ellen who made his BFF's TW look like a fool on national television.
> 
> *Prince Harry's close friend Nacho Figueras defends 'wonderful human being' Ellen DeGeneres amid reports of a 'toxic' work culture on the set of her show and claims she 'makes the world a better place for millions'*
> 
> *Prince Harry's friend Nacho Figueras shared online defence of Ellen DeGeneres*
> *In an Instagram post, he wrote: 'We are all so scared to say what we really think' *
> *Said world is 'a very dangerous place because we cannot make anything right' *
> *Nacho appeared on The Ellen DeGeneres' Show last year to defend the Sussexes *


Ellen DeGeneres was reportedly accused of entertaining a 'toxic' environment for employees of her show, but she is likely delightful to most of her guests. Nacho seems to also defend the Sussexes who have been linked to bullying claims. I wonder if Nacho's critical thinking skills are impaired or if only a selected group of people matter to him. 











						Former Employees Say Ellen’s “Be Kind” Talk Show Mantra Masks A Toxic Work Culture
					

“If [Ellen] wants to have her own show and have her name on the show title, she needs to be more involved to see what's going on,” one former employee said.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't know. Both of them are aware that the princely title is the lesser one compared to the dukedom. And Princess Henry would just be rubbing it in that she's a mere appendix of her husband.


I think the risk is that she'll be called Princess Megan in a heartbeat though  
I have zero confidence that the Daily Fail, UK + US tabloids and Megan herself would ever correct it.
(The Duchess of Cambridge is called Kate Middleton in that low key passive aggressive British tabloids way on a daily basis  yet I bet very few people can even recall Sophie Wessex's maiden name !)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

TM "got no filter"… This is probably why he never got an invitation for a certain wedding.


----------



## duna

Vintage Leather said:


> Princess Margaret is most associated with the mighty Poltimore tiara, which was her wedding tiara (and the one she wore in the infamous bath picture) and which could be reconfigured to be smaller, or to become a necklace, or 11 brooches. She bought it for herself for £5500. It was inherited by her son, the Earl of Snowden, who put it up on the block with a lot of his mothers other possessions.  (Blind item was that the Queen was livid and had a bit of a shopping spree, because she didn’t get right of first refusal, and some of the things were sentimental items from her childhood.) Made a little shy of a million at auction but has since disappeared into a private collection.
> 
> The first Earl of Snowden,  Margaret’s first husband, gave her a collection of three exquisite floral brooches. Margaret gave those to Lady Sarah Chatto as a wedding gift, and Lady Sarah had a tiara frame made for them.
> 
> And because tiara talk is useless without pics…



I LOVED Sarah's Jasper Conran wedding dress and also her tiara and hairdo, one of my all time favourites!! Maybe the only thing I would have changed were the long sleeves, elbow length would have been nicer, it was July after all!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TM "got no filter"… This is probably why he never got an invitation for a certain wedding.




Former Youtube partner now turning on TM? I wonder if he was offered money or a lawsuit to change his mind so suddenly


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> TM "got no filter"… This is probably why he never got an invitation for a certain wedding.




Imo TM uses “no filter” because he relishes this spotlight. He well understands the importance of having a role on the world stage. I agree with those who say he is as shady as MM et al.

RE: Lady Sarah Chatto’s jewellery - almost all was inherited from Princess Margaret. Many of the pieces were inherited from Queen Mary. The jewels stand the test of time which shows  such amazingly good taste.


Spoiler: Lady Sarah jewellery








RE: Edo









						Edo Mapelli Mozzi went from royal plus one to enthusiastic husband
					

Once happy to take a backseat and to not bring attention to himself, Edo Mapelly Mozzi, 38, had shared more glimpses of his and Princess Beatrice's royal life on social media since the Jubilee.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## carmen56

I love that Lady Sarah always dresses very simply, yet looks very classy, something Raptor will never achieve.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't know. Both of them are aware that the princely title is the lesser one compared to the dukedom. And Princess Henry would just be rubbing it in that she's a mere appendix of her husband.


The sugars would see the title change as a promotion though, and use “Princess Meghan” every chance they got.  There would be no Princess Henry for them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't know. Both of them are aware that the princely title is the lesser one compared to the dukedom. And Princess Henry would just be rubbing it in that she's a mere appendix of her husband.


Does anyone else recall reading or hearing that prior to his wedding, William asked HM to keep his princely title and make Catherine a princess in her own right instead of giving them a dukedom? It's believable since Catherine has admitted wanting to marry a prince since childhood just like her MIL Diana, who as a child, had dreams of becoming the Princess of Wales. IMO, Catherine is more assertive than William and could have asked him to do it as a wedding present.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Does anyone else recall reading or hearing that prior to his wedding, William asked HM to keep his princely title and make Catherine a princess in her own right instead of giving them a dukedom? It's believable since Catherine has admitted wanting to marry a prince since childhood just like her MIL Diana, who as a child, had dreams of becoming the Princess of Wales. IMO, Catherine is more assertive than William and could have asked him to do it as a wedding present.



I don't remember that, but also it sounds like complete nonsense to me for various reasons. BTW William never lost the princely title, he's HRH Prince William, The Duke of Cambridge.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maggie Muggins said:


> Does anyone else recall reading or hearing that prior to his wedding, William asked HM to keep his princely title and make Catherine a princess in her own right instead of giving them a dukedom? It's believable since Catherine has admitted wanting to marry a prince since childhood just like her MIL Diana, who as a child, had dreams of becoming the Princess of Wales. IMO, Catherine is more assertive than William and could have asked him to do it as a wedding present.



i remember that.  Although, I remember reading that William really loved the title of Prince and didn’t want to give it up.  The queen was worried about the precedent it would set.  Now, with the Drama Duo, it is probably appreciated in hindsight.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't remember that, but also it sounds like complete nonsense to me for various reasons. BTW William never lost the princely title, he's HRH Prince William, Duke of Cambridge.


Sorry, I should've been more precise. In the article it was stated that William wanted them to be Prince William and Princess Catherine instead of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge so Catherine could be addressed as such.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, I should've been more precise. In the article it was stated that William wanted them to be Prince William and Princess Catherine instead of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge so Catherine could be addressed as such.


She'd never be Princess Catherine as she's not a  born Royal. 
Diana was never Princess Diana either. She was Diana, Princess of Wales. Catherine will be Catherine, Princess of Wales. Had William not accepted the Duke title she would be titled Princess William of Wales.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> She'd never be Princess Catherine as she's not a  born Royal.
> Diana was never Princess Diana either. She was Diana, Princess of Wales. Catherine will be Catherine, Princess of Wales. Had William not accepted the Duke title she would be titled Princess William of Wales.


I realize that, but in post #96,398 I was summarizing an article that I read where supposedly William asked HM to make Catherine a princess in her own right so she could be called Princess Catherine and I surmised that could've only been Catherine's request to William and of course, HM would have nixed the idea. And as I mentioned in post #96,401 I should've given a more precise
summary and explanation. I'm sorry for the confusion.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Does anyone else recall reading or hearing that prior to his wedding, William asked HM to keep his princely title and make Catherine a princess in her own right instead of giving them a dukedom? It's believable since Catherine has admitted wanting to marry a prince since childhood just like her MIL Diana, who as a child, had dreams of becoming the Princess of Wales. IMO, Catherine is more assertive than William and could have asked him to do it as a wedding present.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't remember that, but also it sounds like complete nonsense to me for various reasons. BTW William never lost the princely title, he's HRH Prince William, The Duke of Cambridge.



It wouldn't be actually possible, so if you read it, must have been musings of a nit-wit. 

If the monarchy isn't about birthright we may as well vote for a May queen or prom queen every year and pass the crystal tiaras around. 

I don't care the rest of world calls Megs-baby 'Princess Meghan' if the Sussexes lose their Duke/Duchess titles. The titles don't belong to the world or Disney. I don't believe they will lose them because the Queen gave them, but they may lose their HRHs (not just the use of them). 

I think we will see a continuation of relegation of the Sussexes as the Cambridge's children grow older, both in the media and the pecking order at functions. With the PoW/Cam, William/Kate and 3 off-spring in-line ahead of #6, H&M will have to work very hard for 'column inches' or a seat anywhere near the top table.  

One of the reasons Diana was photographed so heavily was because the younger Windsor (Princess Anne) was not a fashion plate or interested in being one (although she dressed/dresses well at events). Diana had the field to herself. M is already older than D when she died, (sad to say) older women don't get photographed that much - just look at pop stars or actresses (Zendaya v Halle Berry or '80s/'90s Madonna v '00s/'10's Madonna. Plus, Kate has the fashion figure and is actually gaining confidence. In 10 years no one is going to care what M is wearing, if they notice  . The Sussexes will be an irrelevance.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> One of the reasons Diana was photographed so heavily was because the younger Windsor (Princess Anne) was not a fashion plate or interested in being one (although she dressed/dresses well at events). Diana had the field to herself. M is already older than D when she died, (sad to say) older women don't get photographed that much - just look at pop stars or actresses (Zendaya v Halle Berry or '80s/'90s Madonna v '00s/'10's Madonna. Plus, Kate has the fashion figure and is actually gaining confidence. In 10 years no one is going to care what M is wearing, if they notice  . The Sussexes will be an irrelevance.



In 10 years too, the little children of the Cambridge's, Tindall's, Phillips', etc., will be in their teens and late teen years.  Lady Louise and her brother will be in their 20's so lots and lots of young royals and their cousins at their most attractive and active.  So many girls too, to watch how they dress and what items they recycle from their mother's or grandmother's closets and jewelry boxes.  Should be a lot of fun to watch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> In 10 years too, the little children of the Cambridge's, Tindall's, Phillips', etc., will be in their teens and late teen years.  Lady Louise and her brother will be in their 20's so lots and lots of young royals and their cousins at their most attractive and active.  So many girls too, to watch how they dress and what items they recycle from their mother's or grandmother's closets and jewelry boxes.  Should be a lot of fun to watch.



_We’re in good hands.  _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> In 10 years too, the little children of the Cambridge's, Tindall's, Phillips', etc., will be in their teens and late teen years.  Lady Louise and her brother will be in their 20's so lots and lots of young royals and their cousins at their most attractive and active.  So many girls too, to watch how they dress and what items they recycle from their mother's or grandmother's closets and jewelry boxes.  Should be a lot of fun to watch.



It will be. I don't really care about the other royals so long as they have a job they had to submit a CV and do an interview for and can keep themselves. Like I said, I'm not happy about the discrimination, ageism against women is the most accepted 'ism' there is, people don't even notice it. Most celebrate young pop-culture disruptors like Billie Elish (baggies) or Rihanna (near-nakedness) but goddess help you if you hit the red carpet in full-on Balenciaga green lycra like Isabelle Huppert.

So while I may hate H&M, I will not be celebrating the beachy comments that poke fun at any woman for daring to go out dressed-up aged 40+ or 'suddenly' becomes invisible. M's fashion sense is atrocious, and as we have established, her figure is hard to dress, and she doesn't take advice, so, mostly the negative comments about her awful outfits are her own darn fault. But, I am not going to be whooping and feeling happy when the inappropriate, hideous comments start, using terms like 'mutton dressed as lamb', 'age appropriate',  'women of a certain age should wear 'X'' or 'does she still legs for shorts?' etc.

IMHO, we _must try_ to separate criticising M's inappropriate manners and etiquette from body/hair/procedure shaming. For instance, her wearing shorts and dressed down to see H at a polo match was OK IMO, but her wearing a picture hat (afternoon formal) and shortish culottes (informal) to do a staged trophy presentation were a faux-pas.


----------



## csshopper

Their titles may never really go away. They could still show up in print, for example, as “Harry and Meaghan, formerly known as The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> Their titles may never really go away. They could still show up in print, for example, as “Harry and Meaghan, formerly known as The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”


H&M FKA D&Ds of Suss.


----------



## MiniMabel

papertiger said:


> It wouldn't be actually possible, so if you read it, must have been musings of a nit-wit.
> 
> If the monarchy isn't about birthright we may as well vote for a May queen or prom queen every year and pass the crystal tiaras around.
> 
> I don't care the rest of world calls Megs-baby 'Princess Meghan' if the Sussexes lose their Duke/Duchess titles. The titles don't belong to the world or Disney. I don't believe they will lose them because the Queen gave them, but they may lose their HRHs (not just the use of them).
> 
> I think we will see a continuation of relegation of the Sussexes as the Cambridge's children grow older, both in the media and the pecking order at functions. With the PoW/Cam, William/Kate and 3 off-spring in-line ahead of #6, H&M will have to work very hard for 'column inches' or a seat anywhere near the top table.
> 
> One of the reasons Diana was photographed so heavily was because the younger Windsor (Princess Anne) was not a fashion plate or interested in being one (although she dressed/dresses well at events). Diana had the field to herself. M is already older than D when she died, (sad to say) older women don't get photographed that much - just look at pop stars or actresses (Zendaya v Halle Berry or '80s/'90s Madonna v '00s/'10's Madonna. Plus, Kate has the fashion figure and is actually gaining confidence. _*In 10 years no one is going to care what M is wearing, if they notice  . The Sussexes will be an irrelevance.*_




No need to wait, we're already at that point!


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't know. Both of them are aware that the princely title is the lesser one compared to the dukedom. And Princess Henry would just be rubbing it in that she's a mere appendix of her husband.


Princess Michael of Kent comes to mind....I don't even know her first name


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> Princess Michael of Kent comes to mind....I don't even know her first name


It's Marie Christine Anna Agnes Hedwig Ida von Reibnitz


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> It's Marie Christine Anna Agnes Hedwig Ida von Reibnitz



I had to look it up to make sure you weren’t joking, that name sounds so made up!


----------



## Vintage Leather

bag-mania said:


> I had to look it up to make sure you weren’t joking, that name sounds so made up!


It does rather give 
Constantina, Charlotte Ermantrude, Guinevere Maisy Margarite-Anne vibes, doesn’t it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

40th birthday fireworks!



*William 'thinks Harry has been sucked into an alien world' and Kate was 'massively disrespected' on Oprah: As the Prince turns 40, his closest friends give REBECCA ENGLISH the most intimate portrait ever of our future king and his devastating family rifts*

*Prince William will turn 40 on Tuesday, a landmark birthday for future monarch, as well as a time of reckoning*
*A source has said 'William thinks Harry has been sucked into an alien world' since moving to Los Angeles*
*William has become closer to his father Prince Charles, say sources Prince of Wales, since Harry's royal exit*









						Prince William 'alternates from grief to anger' over rift with Harry
					

For the Duke of Cambridge, his 40th birthday is not only a milestone but a time of reckoning. He is on an inexorable journey to becoming king, a prospect that once scared him.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Wonder if Hazbeen will acknowledge William’s birthday?


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Wonder if Hazbeen will acknowledge William’s birthday?



Oh hell no.


----------



## gracekelly

Vintage Leather said:


> Princess Margaret is most associated with the mighty Poltimore tiara, which was her wedding tiara (and the one she wore in the infamous bath picture) and which could be reconfigured to be smaller, or to become a necklace, or 11 brooches. She bought it for herself for £5500. It was inherited by her son, the Earl of Snowden, who put it up on the block with a lot of his mothers other possessions.  (Blind item was that the Queen was livid and had a bit of a shopping spree, because she didn’t get right of first refusal, and some of the things were sentimental items from her childhood.) Made a little shy of a million at auction but has since disappeared into a private collection.
> 
> The first Earl of Snowden,  Margaret’s first husband, gave her a collection of three exquisite floral brooches. Margaret gave those to Lady Sarah Chatto as a wedding gift, and Lady Sarah had a tiara frame made for them.
> 
> And because tiara talk is useless without pics…


Thanks for the clarification.  I knew that Lady Sarah had something that could be reconfigured for more usage.  I wonder if her son was afraid of what TQ would say to his putting his mother's things up for auction.  Maybe he needed the money for death duties?


----------



## Vintage Leather

gracekelly said:


> Thanks for the clarification.  I knew that Lady Sarah had something that could be reconfigured for more usage.  I wonder if her son was afraid of what TQ would say to his putting his mother's things up for auction.  Maybe he needed the money for death duties?


Princess Margaret tried to organize things to minimize death duties, but they still had a £3mil bill after she passed.

He’s expressed some regrets about selling it, but at the time, he and Lady Sarah were uncertain “if anyone would come” to the auction. And the pre-auction estimate for the Poltimore was around £40,000, which is a fairly small drop in the very large bucket.
Now, the Queen Mum was notoriously stingy about giving up her tiaras, (not even passing the Queen’s tiaras to Elizabeth until she died!) which is why they bought a wedding tiara for Fergie. Most Margaret’s tiaras were loans rather than gifts (including the Lotus flower and Cartier Halo that we’ve seen on Catherine). The Turquoise parue was hers, however, and it wasn’t sold. So hopefully Serena still can wear it.

The Countess of Snowdon has worn a beechwood carved tiara that her husband made for her.

Margaret did have two tiaras that haven’t been seen since the 60s, and weren’t sold. But no one knows if they are with the Queen, or Margaret’s kids have them, or what.




And to keep from getting too far off topic, I really do think that going forward, the BRF should consider putting the jewels in a Family Foundation so that there is a clear loaning process, and nothing is lost like the poor Belgian collection (but did you see that the Duchess of Brabant has a new tiara!! Today was truly a happy tiara day!) with clearly delineated Joyas de Pasar. Of course, can you imagine dear Me-gains reaction to this?


----------



## gracekelly

Vintage Leather said:


> Princess Margaret tried to organize things to minimize death duties, but they still had a £3mil bill after she passed.
> 
> He’s expressed some regrets about selling it, but at the time, he and Lady Sarah were uncertain “if anyone would come” to the auction. And the pre-auction estimate for the Poltimore was around £40,000, which is a fairly small drop in the very large bucket.
> Now, the Queen Mum was notoriously stingy about giving up her tiaras, (not even passing the Queen’s tiaras to Elizabeth until she died!) which is why they bought a wedding tiara for Fergie. Most Margaret’s tiaras were loans rather than gifts (including the Lotus flower and Cartier Halo that we’ve seen on Catherine). The Turquoise parue was hers, however, and it wasn’t sold. So hopefully Serena still can wear it.
> 
> The Countess of Snowdon has worn a beechwood carved tiara that her husband made for her.
> 
> Margaret did have two tiaras that haven’t been seen since the 60s, and weren’t sold. But no one knows if they are with the Queen, or Margaret’s kids have them, or what.
> 
> View attachment 5428468
> 
> 
> And to keep from getting too far off topic, I really do think that going forward, the BRF should consider putting the jewels in a Family Foundation so that there is a clear loaning process, and nothing is lost like the poor Belgian collection (but did you see that the Duchess of Brabant has a new tiara!! Today was truly a happy tiara day!) with clearly delineated Joyas de Pasar. Of course, can you imagine dear Me-gains reaction to this?


Margaret looks stunning!  Tiara stories are always welcome!

Edit to add:  When I see pictures of the royal ladies wearing the whole enchilada of tiara, parure, etc. I think to myself how most women could not pull it off.  I think that they must be comfortable wearing it all, so it looks very natural on them.


----------



## Jayne1

Vintage Leather said:


> Princess Margaret is most associated with the mighty Poltimore tiara, which was her wedding tiara (and the one she wore in the infamous bath picture) and which could be reconfigured to be smaller, or to become a necklace, or 11 brooches. She bought it for herself for £5500. It was inherited by her son, the Earl of Snowden, who put it up on the block with a lot of his mothers other possessions.  (Blind item was that the Queen was livid and had a bit of a shopping spree, because she didn’t get right of first refusal, and some of the things were sentimental items from her childhood.) Made a little shy of a million at auction but has since disappeared into a private collection


David Linley?  The nerve!

Decades ago, Holt Renfrew (upscale, high end fashion store in Canada) offered gifts for points and since they had nothing I really wanted, I picked David Linley's desk set which was all made of paper with his drawings on it, signed of course. (Not very good drawings.)

I still have the set and the paper clipboard is right beside me on my desk - I use it as a coaster even though it's paper because it is large.

I always had an opinion of him ever since receiving my points gift since his talent does not appear to be in drawing. lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

gracekelly said:


> Thanks for the clarification.  I knew that Lady Sarah had something that could be reconfigured for more usage.  I wonder if her son was afraid of what TQ would say to his putting his mother's things up for auction.  Maybe he needed the money for death duties?



 I believe the money was needed for that, yes. The fact is if the Queen wanted it and felt it was significant enough to be in the royal collection,  she could have purchased it. 

The turquoise tiara is very Margaret. If there was ever so tiara to wear at Mustique that's it.

I loved Meghan's latest polo look. She usually does casual well. Why does she look so good in shorts and shirt but not in Dior?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Vintage Leather said:


> Princess Margaret tried to organize things to minimize death duties, but they still had a £3mil bill after she passed.
> 
> He’s expressed some regrets about selling it, but at the time, he and Lady Sarah were uncertain “if anyone would come” to the auction. And the pre-auction estimate for the Poltimore was around £40,000, which is a fairly small drop in the very large bucket.
> Now, the Queen Mum was notoriously stingy about giving up her tiaras, (not even passing the Queen’s tiaras to Elizabeth until she died!) which is why they bought a wedding tiara for Fergie. Most Margaret’s tiaras were loans rather than gifts (including the Lotus flower and Cartier Halo that we’ve seen on Catherine). The Turquoise parue was hers, however, and it wasn’t sold. So hopefully Serena still can wear it.
> 
> The Countess of Snowdon has worn a beechwood carved tiara that her husband made for her.
> 
> Margaret did have two tiaras that haven’t been seen since the 60s, and weren’t sold. But no one knows if they are with the Queen, or Margaret’s kids have them, or what.
> 
> View attachment 5428468
> 
> 
> And to keep from getting too far off topic, I really do think that going forward, the BRF should consider putting the jewels in a Family Foundation so that there is a clear loaning process, and nothing is lost like the poor Belgian collection (but did you see that the Duchess of Brabant has a new tiara!! Today was truly a happy tiara day!) with clearly delineated Joyas de Pasar. Of course, can you imagine dear Me-gains reaction to this?


To defend Linley, where was all this family sentimentality when he was landed with a load of debt from his mum and his aunty is one of the richest people in the world? 

To me, if he inherited it then it is his to sell whatever the queen felt and chances are he thought it would make more money on the block than she’d offer him. 
I reckon it’s kind of like the mafia if the queen makes him an offer it’s more insulting to refuse it than never offer the jewels to her in the first place. I wouldn’t be surprised if she secretly bought some of it at auction anyway

Aww I find that wooden tiara story really romantic. It’s a lovely thing too- I’d be so proud to wear it. 

I’d like to think I might be among those who could pull off a full parure peasant though I am  you just need somewhere swish to go to.


----------



## mikimoto007

RAINDANCE said:


> I think the risk is that she'll be called Princess Megan in a heartbeat though
> I have zero confidence that the Daily Fail, UK + US tabloids and Megan herself would ever correct it.
> (The Duchess of Cambridge is called Kate Middleton in that low key passive aggressive British tabloids way on a daily basis  yet I bet very few people can even recall Sophie Wessex's maiden name !)



I refer to her as Kate Middleton because that's the name she became famous under, it's the first name I think of when  I see her, nothing to do with passive aggression. People instantly know who Kate Middleton is, people don't instantly know who the duchess of Cambridge is.

Sophie was Sophie Rhys-Jones, but the two are not comparable. Sophie wasn't really famous before her marriage, whereas Kate was.



Maggie Muggins said:


> I realize that, but in post #96,398 I was summarizing an article that I read where supposedly William asked HM to make Catherine a princess in her own right so she could be called Princess Catherine and I surmised that could've only been Catherine's request to William and of course, HM would have nixed the idea. And as I mentioned in post #96,401 I should've given a more precise
> summary and explanation. I'm sorry for the confusion.



You know, I do remember those reports. I always thought it was nonsense, but I remember them.

Incidentally the queen allowed Princess Alice to use that form, even though she wasn't a blood princess. I suspect a lifetime of public service and being the queen's aunt had something to do with it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She does casual better, but the polo looks were mismatched and if not ill-fitting at least not flattering to her shape. That weird pleated shorts made her look pregnant from certain angles. But with Raptor, who knows if that was she was aiming for but the yellow press didn't spot it.


----------



## mikimoto007

jelliedfeels said:


> To defend Linley, where was all this family sentimentality when he was landed with a load of debt from his mum and his aunty is one of the richest people in the world?
> 
> To me, if he inherited it then it is his to sell whatever the queen felt and chances are he thought it would make more money on the block than she’d offer him.
> I reckon it’s kind of like the mafia if the queen makes him an offer it’s more insulting to refuse it than never offer the jewels to her in the first place. I wouldn’t be surprised if she secretly bought some of it at auction anyway
> 
> Aww I find that wooden tiara story really romantic. It’s a lovely thing too- I’d be so proud to wear it.
> 
> I’d like to think I might be among those who could pull off a full parure peasant though I am  you just need somewhere swish to go to.
> View attachment 5428663



Totally agree. It's not as if they need a tiara for an event every other week.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She does casual better, but the polo looks were mismatched and if not ill-fitting at least not flattering to her shape. That weird pleated shorts made her look pregnant from certain angles. But with Raptor, who knows if that was she was aiming for but the yellow press didn't spot it.



She looked like she was dressed similarly to other people there, no?

I didn't see any shots of her looking remotely pregnant- perhaps the Daily Mail didn't use those.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Aww I find that wooden tiara story really romantic. It’s a lovely thing too- I’d be so proud to wear it.
> 
> View attachment 5428663



It is pretty, especially with that updo, and I am a sucker for sentimental pieces. Also for some reason I really like wood jewelry. Does anyone remember that gold and wood link bracelet from VCA Liz Taylor had? I've had one on watch for ages plus the modern equivalent from Verdura because I love the look.


----------



## jelliedfeels

mikimoto007 said:


> I believe the money was needed for that, yes. The fact is if the Queen wanted it and felt it was significant enough to be in the royal collection,  she could have purchased it.
> 
> The turquoise tiara is very Margaret. If there was ever so tiara to wear at Mustique that's it.
> 
> I loved Meghan's latest polo look. She usually does casual well. Why does she look so good in shorts and shirt but not in Dior?


Yes 100-% I think they probably did through an agent they just didn’t want to tell him they did  

I like the turquoise one for being unusual- ironically it would’ve suited M better than what they gave her.

I agree I think she’s at her best in short dresses and shorts and shirts. I think the thing is M has quite a boyish frame so she suits something causal, short and carefree. When she tries to do glamour or high fashion it falls flat because she isn’t. Some more boyish/gamine looks would also accommodate her childish streak and make her seem fun if she’d only be a little less pretentious and scheming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mikimoto007 said:


> She looked like she was dressed similarly to other people there, no?



Mismatched as in her pieces didn't go together, not mismatched to other people present.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mismatched as in her pieces didn't go together, not mismatched to other people present.


They were just two different shades of blue right? I don't think she was going for a co ord look?


----------



## xincinsin

mikimoto007 said:


> She looked like she was dressed similarly to other people there, no?


No. This is one of the common complaints about her dressing. I think she tries to look different, even if she ends up wearing something that makes her stick out like a sore thumb. And I find it really strange that she frequently wears clothes out of season. Why would she opt for heavy coats in hot weather?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is pretty, especially with that updo, and I am a sucker for sentimental pieces. Also for some reason I really like wood jewelry. Does anyone remember that gold and wood link bracelet from VCA Liz Taylor had? I've had one on watch for ages plus the modern equivalent from Verdura because I love the look.


Oh I haven’t have you got a photo? I love Liz’s jewellery.



Here’s the Canadian tuxedo up for discussion to keep it on topic - she looks better than she did at the jubilee but it’s not exactly cutting edge style.


----------



## mikimoto007

xincinsin said:


> No. This is one of the common complaints about her dressing. I think she tries to look different, even if she ends up wearing something that makes her stick out like a sore thumb. And I find it really strange that she frequently wears clothes out of season. Why would she opt for heavy coats in hot weather?



I totally agree with you - a lot of the time she looks like she's attending a different event, but from these pictures, it looks pitched right? There's someone else in a hoodie and shorts, someone else in chinos and a T-shirt....


----------



## Sharont2305

mikimoto007 said:


> I refer to her as Kate Middleton because that's the name she became famous under, it's the first name I think of when  I see her, nothing to do with passive aggression. People instantly know who Kate Middleton is, people don't instantly know who the duchess of Cambridge is.
> 
> Sophie was Sophie Rhys-Jones, but the two are not comparable. Sophie wasn't really famous before her marriage, whereas Kate was.



I don't think either were really famous pre marriage tbh.


----------



## xincinsin

mikimoto007 said:


> I totally agree with you - a lot of the time she looks like she's attending a different event, but from these pictures, it looks pitched right? There's someone else in a hoodie and shorts, someone else in chinos and a T-shirt....


Some of the polo outfits were okay, some were strange. The white shirt with short shorts combo looked bad, not her size. 

And attitude counts towards image too. She was trying for glam while others were dressed for a day in the sun. That's what made her stick out. A couple of Sussex-friendly magazines were praising her cosplay attempt at Hepburn and Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh I haven’t have you got a photo? I love Liz’s jewellery.
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s the Canadian tuxedo up for discussion to keep it on topic - she looks better than she did at the jubilee but it’s not exactly cutting edge style.
> 
> View attachment 5428674



I hadn't seen that one. That looks much better than the other two polo outfits I was referring to.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh I haven’t have you got a photo? I love Liz’s jewellery.



Here you go:




Here's the Christie's listing...note how it sold for 22000 bucks, was estimated to make between 3000 and 5000, does come with earrings AND has the Liz Taylor provenance. Yeah, not willing to entertain the thought of paying 25000 bucks on 1stdibs for just a bracelet not touched by Liz but with visible scratches in the gold part. But I do love it.

Liz Taylor VCA Suite

Here's the verdura one:


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here you go:
> 
> View attachment 5428772
> 
> 
> Here's the Christie's listing...note how it sold for 22000 bucks, was estimated to make between 3000 and 5000, does come with earrings AND has the Liz Taylor provenance. Yeah, not willing to entertain the thought of paying 25000 bucks on 1stdibs for just a bracelet not touched by Liz but with visible scratches in the gold part. But I do love it.
> 
> Liz Taylor VCA Suite
> 
> Here's the verdura one:
> 
> View attachment 5428774




Very unusual.  And looking at the other pieces of jewellery, all were seriously undervalued by the auction house.   Elizabeth Taylor had some beautiful jewellery.

There is a book called "My Love Affair With Jewellery" which covers her collection........

elizabeths-love-affair-with-jewelry


----------



## bellecate

Such a happy boy with his caretaker/wife. 
Edit to add what a smile looks like.


----------



## xincinsin

To be fair, I don't think Methane is solely responsible for Hazard's alleged unhappiness. She may have (allegedly) stirred up his resentment, preyed on his insecurity, and puffed up his ego, but it is Hazard's own mean angry little mind that keeps him inside a mental dumpster. 

If the world would just give him what he imagines he deserves (fame & fortune mainly), he would be grinning 24/7. He doesn't want to see that if he really wanted a private life, his inherited millions were more than he needed to live on.


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh I haven’t have you got a photo? I love Liz’s jewellery.
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s the Canadian tuxedo up for discussion to keep it on topic - she looks better than she did at the jubilee but it’s not exactly cutting edge style.
> 
> View attachment 5428674



What is up with the giant car behind MM?  Is it just the angle of the photo?


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> What is up with the giant car behind MM?  Is it just the angle of the photo?


That does look weird. Maybe it's a van or camper or something to transport horses. The wheels don't look like a regular car.

I'm more interested in how she is positioning her hand to show off her jewellery. Is this a merching pose?


----------



## MiniMabel

xincinsin said:


> To be fair, I don't think Methane is solely responsible for Hazard's alleged unhappiness. She may have (allegedly) stirred up his resentment, preyed on his insecurity, and puffed up his ego, but it is Hazard's own mean angry little mind that keeps him inside a mental dumpster.
> 
> If the world would just give him what he imagines he deserves (fame & fortune mainly), he would be grinning 24/7. He doesn't want to see that if he really wanted a private life, _*his inherited millions were more than he needed to live on.*_



This. So many people can't afford to eat properly, heat their homes, struggle to pay for petrol/diesel to get to work so they can pay rent or mortgage and utility bills, but The Harkles have millions in the bank, a huge mansion they don't need etc etc and still aren't satisfied. If I had a small fraction of their wealth, I'd count myself very fortunate and try to give back something beneficial in some way. Instead, they grizzle like little kids! Truly, they are irrelevant in today's world.


----------



## MiniMabel

xincinsin said:


> That does look weird. Maybe it's a van or camper or something to transport horses. The wheels don't look like a regular car.
> 
> I'm more interested in how she is positioning her hand to show off her jewellery. Is this a merching pose?



It looks like a watch?  I can't see it clearly.  Annoying if it's Princess Diana's watch. I do wonder what Princess Diana, at the age she'd be now, would make of these two's behaviour.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She is short’ish and the Mercedes wagon/suv is tall.
Photo from DM
Note: BackGrid again is taking these photos 

ETA: probably not a good idea to get in a leg contest with Delfina


----------



## mikimoto007

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think either were really famous pre marriage tbh.



No, Kate was pretty recognisable, in the UK at least. Look at the videos of paparazzi trying to get shots of her. They don't do that if you're not famous.


xincinsin said:


> Some of the polo outfits were okay, some were strange. The white shirt with short shorts combo looked bad, not her size.
> 
> And attitude counts towards image too. She was trying for glam while others were dressed for a day in the sun. That's what made her stick out. A couple of Sussex-friendly magazines were praising her cosplay attempt at Hepburn and Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman



Yes, the one with the black hat was strange....but this one seems right.

I agree with you on the glamour point. I remember she wore a beautiful black and white dress to an event (it had birds? Oscar de la Renta or Herrera maybe?) and she looked way off kilter in comparison to everyone else.


----------



## Sharont2305

MiniMabel said:


> It looks like a watch?  I can't see it clearly.  Annoying if it's Princess Diana's watch. I do wonder what Princess Diana, at the age she'd be now, would make of these two's behaviour.


In my opinion, if Diana was still alive, there would be no Meghan.


----------



## Sharont2305

mikimoto007 said:


> No, Kate was pretty recognisable, in the UK at least. Look at the videos of paparazzi trying to get shots of her. They don't do that if you're not famous.
> 
> 
> Yes, the one with the black hat was strange....but this one seems right.
> 
> I agree with you on the glamour point. I remember she wore a beautiful black and white dress to an event (it had birds? Oscar de la Renta or Herrera maybe?) and she looked way off kilter in comparison to everyone else.


They did with Sophie too, I remember it well. Remember, Sophie was linked to the Queen's son, not grandson. I think Catherine was afforded a lot of privacy for a long while whilst they were in University. Sophie wasn't. Plus there was a car advert the Royals didn't like as the driver looked like Sophie and I think it had a paparazzi car chase of sorts in it.


----------



## mikimoto007

Sharont2305 said:


> They did with Sophie too, I remember it well. Remember, Sophie was linked to the Queen's son, not grandson. I think Catherine was afforded a lot of privacy for a long while whilst they were in University. Sophie wasn't. Plus there was a car advert the Royals didn't like as the driver looked like Sophie and I think it had a paparazzi car chase of sorts in it.



How interesting, I didn't know about the car advert at all. Honestly, I wouldn't have remembered Sophie's name before she was engaged.


----------



## xincinsin

mikimoto007 said:


> No, Kate was pretty recognisable, in the UK at least. Look at the videos of paparazzi trying to get shots of her. They don't do that if you're not famous.
> 
> 
> Yes, the one with the black hat was strange....but this one seems right.
> 
> I agree with you on the glamour point. I remember she wore a beautiful black and white dress to an event (it had birds? Oscar de la Renta or Herrera maybe?) and she looked way off kilter in comparison to everyone else.


Oscar de la Renta. Gorgeous dress, but just didn't look good on her. Maybe she was too short to carry it off well. And we never saw it again, so I am wondering if it was a loan. This was when they were still working royals but there were already rumours that she was slyly bypassing palace protocol to get Freebies and merching deals.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Poor woman. Someone pour Delfina a drink.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor woman. Someone pour Delfina a drink.




Again, women need to be careful of their surroundings. Delfina is fit, tall and beautiful.

this was not bad for MM, imo
2018.










						Meghan Markle attends Sentebale Polo Cup in Carolina Herrera dress
					

Meghan Markle didn’t let the British heatwave stop her from looking cool at the Sentebale Polo Cup on Thursday in Berkshire, England.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again, women need to be careful of their surroundings. Delfina is fit, tall and beautiful.
> 
> this was not bad for MM, imo
> 2018.
> View attachment 5428956
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle attends Sentebale Polo Cup in Carolina Herrera dress
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle didn’t let the British heatwave stop her from looking cool at the Sentebale Polo Cup on Thursday in Berkshire, England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com



This is one of her best looks.  This one and the navy dress she wore a day or two before the wedding.  I think it was a Roland Mouret.  She looks good in navy generally.
ETA:  Except for unflattering jean shorts, of course.  These latest pictures  from the polo field are not good.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, the Carolina Herrera dress was the one outfit of hers I loved. Until I learned what it cost and she wore it exactly once. So disrespectful of Charles' money.


----------



## duna

I never realized TW is so short....unless Delfina is super tall!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> David Linley?  The nerve!
> 
> Decades ago, Holt Renfrew (upscale, high end fashion store in Canada) offered gifts for points and since they had nothing I really wanted, I picked David Linley's desk set which was all made of paper with his drawings on it, signed of course. (Not very good drawings.)
> 
> I still have the set and the paper clipboard is right beside me on my desk - I use it as a coaster even though it's paper because it is large.
> 
> I always had an opinion of him ever since receiving my points gift since his talent does not appear to be in drawing. lol


Years ago I had a tour of Glamis Castle. There was a large screen that he had made for his cousins. Very intricate and beautiful. My SIL thought she could purchase one of his tables when she was in England. After she saw the prices, she said that she would need to win the lottery before that could happen lol!.


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> This is one of her best looks.  This one and the navy dress she wore a day or two before the wedding.  I think it was a Roland Mouret.  She looks good in navy generally.
> ETA:  Except for unflattering jean shorts, of course.  These latest pictures  from the polo field are not good.


This would have been before kids, when she still had a waist.  Her shape has changed and she needs to adjust her style, but she keeps wearing the wrong clothes


----------



## Toby93

duna said:


> I never realized TW is so short....unless Delfina is super tall!


Probably a bit of both


----------



## duna

Toby93 said:


> Probably a bit of both



Yeah, apparently Delfina is 5'11" so, yes, she's tall!


----------



## bag-mania

So the hugger was in fact Delfina? She and her husband are very fond of Harry (for some reason). He certainly smiles a lot when he’s with them.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is short’ish and the Mercedes wagon/suv is tall.
> Photo from DM
> Note: BackGrid again is taking these photos
> 
> ETA: probably not a good idea to get in a leg contest with Delfina
> 
> View attachment 5428858



In this photo she is standing like a stupid duck. For somebody who always stalks and stares into the cameras, why is she standing like this?


----------



## Lodpah

I come here daily for updates. Am I in in the right thread? Is there some subtle manipulation technique going on to ‘sway’ opinion of the Demented Evil Witch aka at TW?
I need more sleep, suppose. Remember, be on your guard.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> In this photo she is standing like a stupid duck. For somebody who always stalks and stares into the cameras, why is she standing like this?



She was standing next to a model. That’s her “rubbing my chin and thinking while spreading my legs a bit so you can see that my thighs don’t touch because I’m so thin and I am here with a super expensive luxury vehicle” pose.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nacho and Harry have been friends for a very long time.  Just google their 2 names, lots of stories about their polo games - much is simply good friend polo stuff.  Here is one from 2016 [yawn]:








						Harry poses with Borwick & Blaquier as he takes part in polo match
					

PRINCE HARRY was pictured with British polo player Malcolm Borwick and the wife of Argentine polo player Nacho Figueras as he took part in the Sentebale Polo Cup.




					www.express.co.uk
				





This caught my eye -





						Nacho Figueras Presents: High Season: Whitman, Jessica: 9781455563616: Amazon.com: Books
					

Nacho Figueras Presents: High Season [Whitman, Jessica] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Nacho Figueras Presents: High Season



					www.amazon.com
				




We all have a book in us


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nacho and Harry have been friends for a very long time.  Just google their 2 names, lots of stories about their polo games - much is simply good friend polo stuff.  Here is one from 2016 [yawn]:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry poses with Borwick & Blaquier as he takes part in polo match
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY was pictured with British polo player Malcolm Borwick and the wife of Argentine polo player Nacho Figueras as he took part in the Sentebale Polo Cup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This caught my eye -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nacho Figueras Presents: High Season: Whitman, Jessica: 9781455563616: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> Nacho Figueras Presents: High Season [Whitman, Jessica] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Nacho Figueras Presents: High Season
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all have a book in us



Looks like he has three books. That’s two more than Meghan and his are for adults.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> In this photo she is standing like a stupid duck. For somebody who always stalks and stares into the cameras, why is she standing like this?


She likes to "open her stance". Sometimes she does it when walking in formal wear. Maybe she thinks it makes her look ummmm "powerful"? Toothpicks cosplaying thunder thighs?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Looks like he has three books. That’s two more than Meghan and his are for adults.



So is he writing under the Jessica Whitman name? I’m not sure I understand what “presents” means. 
Still no date on Hazzie’s book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> She likes to "open her stance". Sometimes she does it when walking in formal wear. Maybe she thinks it makes her look ummmm "powerful"? Toothpicks cosplaying thunder thighs?



She needs to understand her competition 











						Meghan watches on as Prince Harry's polo team suffers defeat
					

MEGHAN Markle was spotted watching hubby Prince Harry as his polo team were hoofed into a heavy defeat in California. The Duchess of Sussex could be seen knocking back drinks as she chatted with WA…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## TC1

Does Archie not want to watch his dad play polo? You'd think he might, now that he's older. Didn't Meghan take him as an infant? Would make more sense now (IMO)


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> She needs to understand her competition
> View attachment 5429138
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan watches on as Prince Harry's polo team suffers defeat
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle was spotted watching hubby Prince Harry as his polo team were hoofed into a heavy defeat in California. The Duchess of Sussex could be seen knocking back drinks as she chatted with WA…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


Why is her hand so white while her forearm is so tanned?


----------



## oldbag

DoggieBags said:


> Why is her hand so white while her forearm is so





DoggieBags said:


> Why is her hand so white while her forearm is so tanned?


Maybe I am just seeing things but it seems no matter what she is doing, no matter how she is dressed or what she is holding, her wedding ring is front and center. We get it! You have a big diamond! So what.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## rose60610

oldbag said:


> We get it! You have a big diamond! So what.



We "get it" alright.  She bagged a world famous prince and was wallowing in a royal world of wealth and perks. Problem is, he's a spoiled idiot who allowed his wife to trash his family who gave them everything and burn all the bridges!  Without the BRF they are nothing!


----------



## csshopper

If this is their PR attempt to overshadow Royal Ascot photos this week, note to Sunshine Sucks, not even close.

The BLG nailed it.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So is he writing under the Jessica Whitman name? I’m not sure I understand what “presents” means.
> Still no date on Hazzie’s book.



Don’t know. Maybe she wrote them and then made a deal with him to put his photo and name on her books.


----------



## Lodpah

TC1 said:


> Does Archie not want to watch his dad play polo? You'd think he might, now that he's older. Didn't Meghan take him as an infant? Would make more sense now (IMO)


He will take take the spotlight off her. Seriously tho, I feel bad for those kids that not even an outing they take the kids. It’s wicked.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Such a happy boy with his caretaker/wife.
> Edit to add what a smile looks like.
> 
> View attachment 5428821
> View attachment 5428823


I don't put any stock in single photographs.  Any one of us can be caught looking grumpy, annoyed, picking our noses, whatever, for a second, then be happy the next.  Who goes around grinning like an idiot 24/7 (except TW at the Jubilee service)?  I consider myself an internally happy person for the most part, but I come across looking serious at most moments.  Now that my eyesight is going wonky, I squint a lot, making people think I'm mad.  Thank goodness no one is going around capturing me!  I think Haz is just in general a very unhappy, irritated, entitled person and TW just eggs that on more.


----------



## purseinsanity

MiniMabel said:


> This. So many people can't afford to eat properly, heat their homes, struggle to pay for petrol/diesel to get to work so they can pay rent or mortgage and utility bills, but The Harkles have millions in the bank, a huge mansion they don't need etc etc and still aren't satisfied. If I had a small fraction of their wealth, I'd count myself very fortunate and try to give back something beneficial in some way. Instead, they grizzle like little kids! Truly, they are irrelevant in today's world.


Internal happiness doesn't come from money or material things and if you're always comparing yourself to someone who has more (unless your Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos or whoever is the "richest" at this moment), you'll never be happy.  Haz wants to be William.  Ain't going to happen, and he will never be happy.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again, women need to be careful of their surroundings. Delfina is fit, tall and beautiful.
> 
> this was not bad for MM, imo
> 2018.
> View attachment 5428956
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle attends Sentebale Polo Cup in Carolina Herrera dress
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle didn’t let the British heatwave stop her from looking cool at the Sentebale Polo Cup on Thursday in Berkshire, England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com


That's one look of TW's I actually really liked.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> That's one look of TW's I actually really liked.



I agree with you, I liked it too! I think she could have even gone a little shorter with the shorts


----------



## kkfiregirl

purseinsanity said:


> Internal happiness doesn't come from money or material things and if you're always comparing yourself to someone who has more (unless your Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos or whoever is the "richest" at this moment), you'll never be happy.  Haz wants to be William.  Ain't going to happen, and he will never be happy.



My mom always says, “_comparison is the thief of joy_.”


----------



## kkfiregirl

Lodpah said:


> He will take take the spotlight off her. Seriously tho, I feel bad for those kids that not even an outing they take the kids. It’s wicked.



To be fair, the children are a little young for outings. One was born in 2019 and the other 2021? They still seem like babies to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> I agree with you, I liked it too! I think she could even gone a little shorter with the shorts



It was the Carolina Herrera dress from 2018, not the recent outfit


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again, women need to be careful of their surroundings. Delfina is fit, tall and beautiful.
> 
> this was not bad for MM, imo
> 2018.
> View attachment 5428956
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle attends Sentebale Polo Cup in Carolina Herrera dress
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle didn’t let the British heatwave stop her from looking cool at the Sentebale Polo Cup on Thursday in Berkshire, England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com


Yes navy does suit her best- I think she’s got a cold complexion. It probably helps that Delfina took one for the team in that awful 80s throwback dress and saggy kitten heels. Very strong ‘_you need to look ugly today, bridesmaid, because I’m the star!’ _vibes. 


CarryOn2020 said:


>



Maybe he sat on a spur? We can only hope   


TC1 said:


> Does Archie not want to watch his dad play polo? You'd think he might, now that he's older. Didn't Meghan take him as an infant? Would make more sense now (IMO)


That’s a very good question. Maybe they’ve already sent him to theatre school as god knows it’ll be an uphill struggle with those genes.


----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this has been posted already
apparently the grifters don't like laying in the bed they made
and this says Archie was with them when they visited the queen








						Meghan Markle Is Reportedly Upset Over the Royal Family's Treatment of Her Kids
					

Things are not always what they seem, and despite Queen Elizabeth II’s peacemaking gesture to invite Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle to the U.K. for her Platinum Jubilee earlier this month, there are still reportedly plenty of hurt feelings going around the royal family. The Duke and Duchess...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## youngster

DoggieBags said:


> Why is her hand so white while her forearm is so tanned?



That's what happens with a spray tan. It wears off the hands and face first, especially the hands.  The skin is thin on your hands too and there is usually lots of daily washing.


----------



## Aimee3

kkfiregirl said:


> To be fair, the children are a little young for outings. One was born in 2019 and the other 2021? They still seem like babies to me.


That Archie is already 3 years old.  He should be out and about by now.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> He does say weird things on his posts.  Maybe its a language thing?
> 
> View attachment 5427488


he is good looking


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has been posted already
> apparently the grifters don't like laying in the bed they made
> and this says Archie was with them when they visited the queen
> https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att...]165048838.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_11



M has ZERO reason to be "upset".  The Queen met with the kids in an already jam packed Jubilee that was likely years in the making. Nobody knew the grifters were going to attend until their plane landed. What did Meghan expect? That 96 year old Great-Grandma was going to do backflips on camera for the world to see?  M&H quit the Royals, The Royals did not quit on them. So why all the attention on Great Grandma and not Grandpa?  They weren't exactly beating down the door to see Charles. They were, however, begging to ride to the church in Charles' car. OOPS!  If family is sooo important, then why trash them on Oprah? M&H are stupid attention whores through and through. They should be thankful that TQ even met with them for a matter of minutes. Of course they had to leave the Jubilee early before it finished. Reminds of the time when Meghan stomped out of the theater with her hands splayed on her thighs without her rings after she stated she wanted to step down from the BRF. Spoiled rotten brat. She still thinks the world revolves around her and can't fathom why everyone wasn't kissing her butt at the Jubilee after she accused them all of racism and making her suicidal. It's like sucker punching somebody in the face and wondering why they don't shower you with gifts. She's a psychotic lying piece of garbage. She's the one who clawed her way into the BRF and put Harry in turbo mode to marry her. He's an idiot for going along with it. The she turns around and said the BRF is horrible, bla bla bla, to Oprah. Isn't Meghan the one who didn't want anybody in Montecito looking at her?  Then she should have been in her glory at the Jubilee when nobody would give her the time of day.


----------



## Lodpah

kkfiregirl said:


> To be fair, the children are a little young for outings. One was born in 2019 and the other 2021? They still seem like babies to me.


Hmmm . . . when my kids were small we would take a blanket, snacks, umbrellas and sit and watch my hubby play rugby, we would go to the beach, we would do things as a family. It was fun for them. The fresh air and playing with the other kids. My daughter would crawl around and play, clap her hands, give hugs, kisses, things that kids do. Of course I was not prancing around trying to be recognized, a lot of moms would sit and play with our kids. It can be done.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> She needs to understand her competition
> View attachment 5429138
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan watches on as Prince Harry's polo team suffers defeat
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle was spotted watching hubby Prince Harry as his polo team were hoofed into a heavy defeat in California. The Duchess of Sussex could be seen knocking back drinks as she chatted with WA…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com


On the MM appreciation thread (which I check out only because I like the photos) all these Santa Barbara pap shots were credited to Back Grid.

Does that mean she hired them?


----------



## bellecate

You’d think Netflix would have figured it out by now.  





kkfiregirl said:


> To be fair, the children are a little young for outings. One was born in 2019 and the other 2021? They still seem like babies to me.


We took our 3 boys out and about from the time they were babies. When the queen came to Canada in 1983 (IIRC) I packed up all 3 boys ages 6 months, 3 and 5 into the pram with lots of snacks and toys and stood for over an hour to be at the front of the line to see her.


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> You’d think Netflix would have figured it out by now.
> 
> View attachment 5429407
> 
> 
> We took our 3 boys out and about from the time they were babies. When the queen came to Canada in 1983 (IIRC) I packed up all 3 boys ages 6 months, 3 and 5 into the pram with lots of snacks and toys and stood for over an hour to be at the front of the line to see her.


Omgee, we took our kids everywhere.  The only time they didn't come with us was during "adult events."


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’ll say it again, the NetFlix production will probably be about hypocrisy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> You’d think Netflix would have figured it out by now.
> 
> View attachment 5429407
> 
> 
> We took our 3 boys out and about from the time they were babies. When the queen came to Canada in 1983 (IIRC) I packed up all 3 boys ages 6 months, 3 and 5 into the pram with lots of snacks and toys and stood for over an hour to be at the front of the line to see her.



I would like to hear their explanation, too   Also, I have a list of questions that I would like them to answer.


----------



## gracekelly

I'm thinking that this is the reply to the Sussex whine that they were treated badly and disrespected.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Friar Tuck?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Friar Tuck?



I've seen many pro athletes have meltdowns after big games.  Sometimes you feel for them, at other times they come off as total brats.  Haz just always looks bratty.


----------



## 880

xincinsin said:


> it is Hazard's own mean angry little mind that keeps him inside a mental dumpster.
> 
> If the world would just give him what he imagines he deserves (fame & fortune mainly), he would be grinning 24/7.



100% agree


----------



## octopus17

I reckon Meghan has got her work cut out for her. There seems to be a different phase brewing there and she might have to work hard to make sure "he's OK" rather than herself. Rather her than me....


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Friar Tuck?



The Claw appears!


----------



## purseinsanity

redney said:


> The Claw appears!


LOL, perfect picture of it too!  It's such a weird pose.  Who pushes their husband on the back like that?  The only time I can recall doing that to my husband was to push him out of traffic in Europe!


----------



## csshopper

Sophisticatted said:


> I’ll say it again, the NetFlix production will probably be about hypocrisy.


It will have to be a Mini Series, there is so much to (un)cover.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Friar Tuck?



One of these days, that little hand of his back is not going to do the trick.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Friar Tuck?



That pic on the right is not flattering to her body shape or his hairline.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has been posted already
> apparently the grifters don't like laying in the bed they made
> and this says Archie was with them when they visited the queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Reportedly Upset Over the Royal Family's Treatment of Her Kids
> 
> 
> Things are not always what they seem, and despite Queen Elizabeth II’s peacemaking gesture to invite Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle to the U.K. for her Platinum Jubilee earlier this month, there are still reportedly plenty of hurt feelings going around the royal family. The Duke and Duchess...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Interestingly worded: "Markle reportedly was “upset” that she didn’t get a picture of her daughter with the Queen."
So she wasn't aiming for a family portrait or even her two kids with TQ. 
And that comparison with Archie, actually you can't even see Archie in that photo. Methane could be showing them a Cabbage Patch doll for all you know.

BTW How reliable is Neil Sean? One of the marklenews1 IG posts has a piece of news attributed to him: Hazard is going to give up his Duke title before it is stripped from him.



bellecate said:


> You’d think Netflix would have figured it out by now.
> 
> View attachment 5429407


If this is true, Netflix is denser than we thought.


----------



## EverSoElusive

redney said:


> The Claw appears!



I'm surprised we don't see any spray tan stains on Harry's white shirt


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> On the MM appreciation thread (which I check out only because I like the photos) all these Santa Barbara pap shots were credited to Back Grid.
> 
> Does that mean she hired them?


I thought BackGrid was the company that Karl Larsen works for?  He is the guy who did the youtube videos with TWs dad, Thomas Markle.  Apparently they have had a falling out?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PurseUOut

Yikes, I hope Meghan sees how much Harry's immaturity and covetousness of his brother is only going to make life much harder for her. It's only a matter of time before he starts to turn on her and become much more difficult to control, if he hasn't already. Her only real saving grace would be trying to mend a relationship with Charles before QE dies. Even if she has to pack the kids up and head to the UK with Doria for a few weeks this summer (without Netflix) so they can spend time with their grandparents. She should do it for her kids sake as they don't have any real family they are close to outside of Doria. Charles is not likely to grant them titles but his amicable graces could better assure they'd be financially supported, given Harry's dwindling inherited health and the shaky nature of their media "deals".


----------



## lulu212121

PurseUOut said:


> Yikes, I hope Meghan sees how much Harry's immaturity and covetousness of his brother is only going to make life much harder for her. It's only a matter of time before he starts to turn on her and become much more difficult to control, if he hasn't already. Her only real saving grace would be trying to mend a relationship with Charles before QE dies. Even if she has to pack the kids up and head to the UK with Doria for a few weeks this summer (without Netflix) so they can spend time with their grandparents. She should do it for her kids sake as they don't have any real family they are close to outside of Doria. Charles is not likely to grant them titles but his amicable graces could better assure they'd be financially supported, given Harry's dwindling inherited health and the shaky nature of their media "deals".


I don't think so.


----------



## Stansy

Had Nacho und Delfina been invited to the HM wedding? With them being such close pals et al?
Maybe this has already been discussed and I overread….
Re the appreciation thread: sure thing I go in there - it is still on page 5 and there is nothing going on besides a couple polo pictures being posted  every now and then


----------



## xincinsin

kkfiregirl said:


> My mom always says, “_comparison is the thief of joy_.”


My grandma used to say something similar (in pithy Cantonese): 人比人，气死人 People who compare themselves to others just drive themselves crazy.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> I’ll say it again, the NetFlix production will probably be about hypocrisy.



That's their one area of expertise!


----------



## Chanbal

This thread is moving so fast… it's hard to keep up with it while . This post deserves an award imo


CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## Chanbal

An investigation into claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied members of her staff has led to Buckingham Palace “improving the policies and procedures” in its HR department, according to royal sources.

However, the findings from the highly sensitive inquiry, which was paid for privately by the Queen and conducted by an independent law firm, will never be published.
It is understood they will be kept under wraps to protect the privacy of those who took part and to limit tensions between the Sussexes and the palace. Courtiers have insisted the inquiry, which was launched in March last year, should “not be played out in public” to ensure those who took part felt “comfortable”.

Some participants are deeply disappointed the report is being “buried”.
It is understood that the inquiry only recently concluded but those who took part have not been informed of its outcome which has caused upset.

Changes to the royal household’s HR policies as a result of the inquiry were expected to be published in the annual Sovereign Grant report later this month, which details the use of the annual payment by the government to the Queen to fund the royal family’s official duties, and includes royal staffing.
The Sunday Times understands Buckingham Palace no longer plans to make any public statement on the inquiry, or even publicly acknowledge the subsequent changes to its HR policies.

The palace instigated the unprecedented investigation after it emerged that two senior members of staff claimed they had been bullied by Meghan during her time as a working royal. Another former employee said they had been “humiliated” and claimed two members of staff had been bullied. One aide claimed it felt “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation, which I guess could also be called bullying”.
Meghan, 40, denied the allegations which were first reported in The Times in March 2021. Her lawyers described the claims as a “calculated smear campaign” before the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey the same month and said the media was “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative” about the duchess.

The palace, which initially planned to conduct the inquiry internally, said it would “not tolerate any bullying and harassment” and was “very concerned by the allegations” that Meghan forced out two personal assistants and undermined the confidence of a third.

A palace spokesman said: “Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learnt. The royal household has had a dignity at work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”

After the allegations emerged, including claims that young members of staff were “broken” and reduced to tears by Meghan’s behaviour, a royal source said: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.” Another palace source said: “There’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”

The original complaint was made in October 2018 by Jason Knauf, then communications secretary for the Sussexes, who later served as chief executive of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s Royal Foundation until January this year.

In a formal complaint via email to Simon Case, then Prince William’s private secretary and the senior courtier in the household, now the cabinet secretary, Knauf said: “I am very concerned that the duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year.”
He described her behaviour as “totally unacceptable”, adding that “the duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights [and] I remain concerned that nothing will be done”. He also questioned “if the household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals”. The email was forwarded to the HR department but the complaint did not progress.

Knauf was among a handful of the Sussexes’ former staff who participated in the investigation, together with Meghan’s former PA, Melissa Touabti, who previously worked for Madonna and Robbie Williams. She left Kensington Palace six months after Harry and Meghan’s wedding, reportedly “traumatised” by her experience.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not invited to participate in the inquiry, but Meghan’s solicitor, Jenny Afia, a partner at the law firm Schillings, gave an interview to the BBC last year rebutting the claims. She said: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone, physically or emotionally. The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do I can’t believe she would ever do that.”
Buckingham Palace declined to comment.





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5429623
> 
> An investigation into claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied members of her staff has led to Buckingham Palace “improving the policies and procedures” in its HR department, according to royal sources.
> 
> However, the findings from the highly sensitive inquiry, which was paid for privately by the Queen and conducted by an independent law firm, will never be published.
> It is understood they will be kept under wraps to protect the privacy of those who took part and to limit tensions between the Sussexes and the palace. Courtiers have insisted the inquiry, which was launched in March last year, should “not be played out in public” to ensure those who took part felt “comfortable”.
> 
> Some participants are deeply disappointed the report is being “buried”.
> It is understood that the inquiry only recently concluded but those who took part have not been informed of its outcome which has caused upset.
> 
> Changes to the royal household’s HR policies as a result of the inquiry were expected to be published in the annual Sovereign Grant report later this month, which details the use of the annual payment by the government to the Queen to fund the royal family’s official duties, and includes royal staffing.
> The Sunday Times understands Buckingham Palace no longer plans to make any public statement on the inquiry, or even publicly acknowledge the subsequent changes to its HR policies.
> 
> The palace instigated the unprecedented investigation after it emerged that two senior members of staff claimed they had been bullied by Meghan during her time as a working royal. Another former employee said they had been “humiliated” and claimed two members of staff had been bullied. One aide claimed it felt “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation, which I guess could also be called bullying”.
> Meghan, 40, denied the allegations which were first reported in The Times in March 2021. Her lawyers described the claims as a “calculated smear campaign” before the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey the same month and said the media was “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative” about the duchess.
> 
> The palace, which initially planned to conduct the inquiry internally, said it would “not tolerate any bullying and harassment” and was “very concerned by the allegations” that Meghan forced out two personal assistants and undermined the confidence of a third.
> 
> A palace spokesman said: “Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learnt. The royal household has had a dignity at work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
> 
> After the allegations emerged, including claims that young members of staff were “broken” and reduced to tears by Meghan’s behaviour, a royal source said: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.” Another palace source said: “There’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”
> 
> The original complaint was made in October 2018 by Jason Knauf, then communications secretary for the Sussexes, who later served as chief executive of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s Royal Foundation until January this year.
> 
> In a formal complaint via email to Simon Case, then Prince William’s private secretary and the senior courtier in the household, now the cabinet secretary, Knauf said: “I am very concerned that the duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year.”
> He described her behaviour as “totally unacceptable”, adding that “the duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights [and] I remain concerned that nothing will be done”. He also questioned “if the household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals”. The email was forwarded to the HR department but the complaint did not progress.
> 
> Knauf was among a handful of the Sussexes’ former staff who participated in the investigation, together with Meghan’s former PA, Melissa Touabti, who previously worked for Madonna and Robbie Williams. She left Kensington Palace six months after Harry and Meghan’s wedding, reportedly “traumatised” by her experience.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not invited to participate in the inquiry, but Meghan’s solicitor, Jenny Afia, a partner at the law firm Schillings, gave an interview to the BBC last year rebutting the claims. She said: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone, physically or emotionally. The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do I can’t believe she would ever do that.”
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Sounds like the Palace are keeping an ace up their sleeve


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Her lawyers described the claims as a “*calculated smear campaign*”
> 
> ...Meghan’s solicitor, Jenny Afia ... said: “What bullying actually means is *improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone, physically or emotionally. *


How ironic that a vicious pretender with so many smear campaigns under her belt would be whining about the BRF conducting a smear campaign against her



Chanbal said:


> Interesting!



The last bit is  If people have to be deployed to keep an eye on them, it goes to show just how much they can be trusted.

And the booing that allegedly broke them, didn't some stans stridently claim that the boos were added to the audio track and the truth is that all the Montecito Morons received was adulation? They even presented a cleaned up version of the footage as proof that their idols are loved.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> Omgee, we took our kids everywhere.  The only time they didn't come with us was during "adult events."


I agree mind you I don’t have a team of nannies


lanasyogamama said:


> That pic on the right is not flattering to her body shape or his hairline.


Or hers either you can see the extension join.


xincinsin said:


> Interestingly worded: "Markle reportedly was “upset” that she didn’t get a picture of her daughter with the Queen."
> So she wasn't aiming for a family portrait or even her two kids with TQ.
> And that comparison with Archie, actually you can't even see Archie in that photo. Methane could be showing them a Cabbage Patch doll for all you know.
> 
> BTW How reliable is Neil Sean? One of the marklenews1 IG posts has a piece of news attributed to him: Hazard is going to give up his Duke title before it is stripped from him.
> 
> 
> If this is true, Netflix is denser than we thought.


I don’t think Neil Sean is super reliable- I think he’s way too kind on TW.


LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5429538


The window pictures? Surely they are public domain. 


PurseUOut said:


> Yikes, I hope Meghan sees how much Harry's immaturity and covetousness of his brother is only going to make life much harder for her. It's only a matter of time before he starts to turn on her and become much more difficult to control, if he hasn't already. Her only real saving grace would be trying to mend a relationship with Charles before QE dies. Even if she has to pack the kids up and head to the UK with Doria for a few weeks this summer (without Netflix) so they can spend time with their grandparents. She should do it for her kids sake as they don't have any real family they are close to outside of Doria. Charles is not likely to grant them titles but his amicable graces could better assure they'd be financially supported, given Harry's dwindling inherited health and the shaky nature of their media "deals".


That would require M being diplomatic and considerate………


I think they are still getting money from their dad TBH


Stansy said:


> Had Nacho und Delfina been invited to the HM wedding? With them being such close pals et al?
> Maybe this has already been discussed and I overread….
> Re the appreciation thread: sure thing I go in there - it is still on page 5 and there is nothing going on besides a couple polo pictures being posted  every now and then


I think they did but he wasn’t known then- the harkles split from BRF and him being one of the only friends who wasn’t iced has been quite good for his career and visibility I think.


Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5429623
> 
> An investigation into claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied members of her staff has led to Buckingham Palace “improving the policies and procedures” in its HR department, according to royal sources.
> 
> However, the findings from the highly sensitive inquiry, which was paid for privately by the Queen and conducted by an independent law firm, will never be published.
> It is understood they will be kept under wraps to protect the privacy of those who took part and to limit tensions between the Sussexes and the palace. Courtiers have insisted the inquiry, which was launched in March last year, should “not be played out in public” to ensure those who took part felt “comfortable”.
> 
> Some participants are deeply disappointed the report is being “buried”.
> It is understood that the inquiry only recently concluded but those who took part have not been informed of its outcome which has caused upset.
> 
> Changes to the royal household’s HR policies as a result of the inquiry were expected to be published in the annual Sovereign Grant report later this month, which details the use of the annual payment by the government to the Queen to fund the royal family’s official duties, and includes royal staffing.
> The Sunday Times understands Buckingham Palace no longer plans to make any public statement on the inquiry, or even publicly acknowledge the subsequent changes to its HR policies.
> 
> The palace instigated the unprecedented investigation after it emerged that two senior members of staff claimed they had been bullied by Meghan during her time as a working royal. Another former employee said they had been “humiliated” and claimed two members of staff had been bullied. One aide claimed it felt “more like emotional cruelty and manipulation, which I guess could also be called bullying”.
> Meghan, 40, denied the allegations which were first reported in The Times in March 2021. Her lawyers described the claims as a “calculated smear campaign” before the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey the same month and said the media was “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative” about the duchess.
> 
> The palace, which initially planned to conduct the inquiry internally, said it would “not tolerate any bullying and harassment” and was “very concerned by the allegations” that Meghan forced out two personal assistants and undermined the confidence of a third.
> 
> A palace spokesman said: “Members of staff involved at the time, including those who have left the household, will be invited to participate to see if lessons can be learnt. The royal household has had a dignity at work policy in place for a number of years and does not and will not tolerate bullying or harassment in the workplace.”
> 
> After the allegations emerged, including claims that young members of staff were “broken” and reduced to tears by Meghan’s behaviour, a royal source said: “The actual worst incidences haven’t come out. There are some harrowing stories to tell.” Another palace source said: “There’s a lot that could come out in the wash that hasn’t been told.”
> 
> The original complaint was made in October 2018 by Jason Knauf, then communications secretary for the Sussexes, who later served as chief executive of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s Royal Foundation until January this year.
> 
> In a formal complaint via email to Simon Case, then Prince William’s private secretary and the senior courtier in the household, now the cabinet secretary, Knauf said: “I am very concerned that the duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year.”
> He described her behaviour as “totally unacceptable”, adding that “the duchess seems intent on always having someone in her sights [and] I remain concerned that nothing will be done”. He also questioned “if the household policy on bullying and harassment applies to principals”. The email was forwarded to the HR department but the complaint did not progress.
> 
> Knauf was among a handful of the Sussexes’ former staff who participated in the investigation, together with Meghan’s former PA, Melissa Touabti, who previously worked for Madonna and Robbie Williams. She left Kensington Palace six months after Harry and Meghan’s wedding, reportedly “traumatised” by her experience.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not invited to participate in the inquiry, but Meghan’s solicitor, Jenny Afia, a partner at the law firm Schillings, gave an interview to the BBC last year rebutting the claims. She said: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone, physically or emotionally. The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do I can’t believe she would ever do that.”
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


I’m inclined to think that they found people weren’t willing to go on record/speak out and it wasn’t quite the pipe bomb they wanted.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> How ironic that a vicious pretender with so many smear campaigns under her belt would be whining about the BRF *conducting a smear campaign against her*
> 
> 
> The last bit is  If people have to be deployed to keep an eye on them, it goes to show just how much they can be trusted.
> 
> And the booing that allegedly broke them, didn't some stans stridently claim that the boos were added to the audio track and the truth is that all the Montecito Morons received was adulation? They even presented a cleaned up version of the footage as proof that their idols are loved.



Whilst the BRF are actually defending themselves against a hush-up that protected her


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> *I’m inclined to think that they found people weren’t willing to go on record/speak out and it wasn’t quite the pipe bomb they wanted.*



Not at all.

The BRF know the scandal surrounding her makes them all look bad, it was an HR procedure failure, and not just about the wrath of Attila let loose on Palace workers


----------



## duna

Stansy said:


> *Had Nacho und Delfina been invited to the HM wedding?* With them being such close pals et al?
> Maybe this has already been discussed and I overread….
> Re the appreciation thread: sure thing I go in there - it is still on page 5 and there is nothing going on besides a couple polo pictures being posted  every now and then



Yes they went to M&H's wedding, there are pics but I don't know how to post them....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Helventara

duna said:


> Yes they went to M&H's wedding, there are pics but I don't know how to post them....


Here’s a story. https://www.hellomagazine.com/royal...y-meghan-evening-reception-invite-sneak-peek/


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5429675


I'm guessing that all those comments were thrown at Louis by the sugars.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> An investigation into claims that the Duchess of Sussex bullied members of her staff has led to Buckingham Palace “improving the policies and procedures” in its HR department, according to royal sources.
> 
> However, the findings from the highly sensitive inquiry, which was paid for privately by the Queen and conducted by an independent law firm, will never be published.
> It is understood they will be kept under wraps to protect the privacy of those who took part and to limit tensions between the Sussexes and the palace. Courtiers have insisted the inquiry, which was launched in March last year, should “not be played out in public” to ensure those who took part felt “comfortable”.
> 
> Some participants are deeply disappointed the report is being “buried”.
> It is understood that the inquiry only recently concluded but those who took part have not been informed of its outcome which has caused upset.



Yeah right. You bet if that b*tch bullied me I'd want everyone to know. I like the BRF but I am pretty sure the only ones being uncomfortable is themselves here. Not cool. 



> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex were not invited to participate in the inquiry, but Meghan’s solicitor, Jenny Afia, a partner at the law firm Schillings, gave an interview to the BBC last year rebutting the claims. She said: “What bullying actually means is improperly using power repeatedly and deliberately to hurt someone, physically or emotionally. The Duchess of Sussex absolutely denies ever doing that. Knowing her as I do *I can’t believe she would ever do that.*”
> Buckingham Palace declined to comment.



I can. Besides my personal dislike, there's just too many stories out there, and no public appearance oh so down-to-earthly waving off curtsies and hugging instead to be oh so approachable won't help that. Plus, it totally fits the social climber bill...treating valued employees like chattel and spending someone else's money as if it grows on trees.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> Yikes, I hope Meghan sees how much Harry's immaturity and covetousness of his brother is only going to make life much harder for her. It's only a matter of time before he starts to turn on her and become much more difficult to control, if he hasn't already. Her only real saving grace would be trying to mend a relationship with Charles before QE dies. Even if she has to pack the kids up and head to the UK with Doria for a few weeks this summer (without Netflix) so they can spend time with their grandparents. She should do it for her kids sake as they don't have any real family they are close to outside of Doria. Charles is not likely to grant them titles but his amicable graces could better assure they'd be financially supported, given Harry's dwindling inherited health and the shaky nature of their media "deals".


dream on


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> I'm guessing that all those comments were thrown at Louis by the sugars.


More like Harry.


----------



## Katel

PurseUOut said:


> Yikes, I hope Meghan sees how much Harry's immaturity and covetousness of his brother is only going to make life much harder for her. It's only a matter of time before he starts to turn on her and become much more difficult to control, if he hasn't already. Her only real saving grace would be trying to mend a relationship with Charles before QE dies. Even if she has to pack the kids up and head to the UK with Doria for a few weeks this summer (without Netflix) so they can spend time with their grandparents. She should do it for her kids sake as they don't have any real family they are close to outside of Doria. Charles is not likely to grant them titles but his amicable graces could better assure they'd be financially supported, given Harry's dwindling inherited health and the shaky nature of their media "deals".




They are not welcome, that ship has sailed … one can’t waltz in and out of the RF, especially after their (repeatedly) disgraceful behavior.




papertiger said:


> Sounds like the Palace are keeping an ace up their sleeve
> 
> View attachment 5429629






jelliedfeels said:


> I’m inclined to think that they found people weren’t willing to go on record/speak out and it wasn’t quite the pipe bomb they wanted.



or it’s being held back “for a rainy day”


----------



## 1LV

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5429675


He looks like a jackass braying.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Sounds like the Palace are keeping an ace up their sleeve
> 
> View attachment 5429629


Totally off-topic, but I adore Alan Rickman. He was an Actor with a capital A, miles better than a certain Z-lister who is trying to retcon herself as a Hollywood star.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The shorts really should not flare out. Guessing MM wants to highlight her skinny [non-muscular] legs.
This is how the designer intended the shorts to look. Imo they look much better than MM’s. The flare emphasizes her boxy shape.
MM still needs to learn what a tailor can do.












						LANE SHORT -- LA ROCHELLE WASH
					

The Lane Short reimagines a classic denim short silhouette with a perfectly flattering fit. Drawing inspiration from our favorite vintage denim, the Lane Short features a high waist, functional patchwork front pockets, and a single back pocket to finish the look. Mindful touches add intrigue to...




					shopdoen.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The shorts really should not flare out. Guessing MM wants to highlight her skinny [non-muscular] legs.
> This is how the designer intended the shorts to look. Imo they look much better than MM’s. The flare emphasizes her boxy shape.
> MM still needs to learn what a tailor can do.
> 
> View attachment 5429722
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LANE SHORT -- LA ROCHELLE WASH
> 
> 
> The Lane Short reimagines a classic denim short silhouette with a perfectly flattering fit. Drawing inspiration from our favorite vintage denim, the Lane Short features a high waist, functional patchwork front pockets, and a single back pocket to finish the look. Mindful touches add intrigue to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shopdoen.com


I guess Meghan's legs even on top are skinnier than the model's.  Personally I think those shorts are kinda frumpy


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I guess Meghan's legs even on top are skinnier than the model's.  Personally I think those shorts are kinda frumpy



Imo they need the curvy body and to be fitted properly. Plus, they need to be worn with the _right_ attitude.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they need the curvy body and to be fitted properly. Plus, they need to be worn with the _right_ attitude.
> 
> View attachment 5429730


Meghan certainly has plenty of attitude
I will give her this - IMO her thighs are better than the knee to ankle part of her legs


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Meghan certainly has plenty of attitude
> I will give her this - IMO her thighs are better than the knee to ankle part of her legs



Imo she has the wrong kind of attitude - the _holier&smarter-than-thou_ kind. It never looks good on anyone. 
Very difficult to dress, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo she has the wrong kind of attitude - the _holier&smarter-than-thou_ kind. It never looks good on anyone.
> Very difficult to dress, too.


yeah, I just said attitude - not good attitude


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, there's nothing wrong with her body, just her personality, taste and maybe eyesight.


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> He looks like a jackass braying.


Because he is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT, I was just asked if I want to take on a batch of abandoned baby birds from my local bird lady because every single bird person (or wild animal person in general...the hedgehog people are literally suffering from burn-out because our modern environment is so hostile) is completely maxed out. She promises to help me not kill them. What do y'all think? It seems like such a huge commitment, but I work from home most days anyway and for a small songbird it's like 2 1/2 weeks from out of the egg to being able to fly. At which point they'll go back into an outdoor aviary to learn how to find food on their own.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, I was just asked if I want to take on a batch of abandoned baby birds from my local bird lady because every single bird person (or wild animal person in general...the hedgehog people are literally suffering from burn-out because our modern environment is so hostile) is completely maxed out. She promises to help me not kill them. What do y'all think? It seems like such a huge commitment, but I work from home most days anyway and for a small songbird it's like 2 1/2 weeks from out of the egg to being able to fly.


I have no idea what this would entail but it would be very sweet for you do to it


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, there's nothing wrong with her body, just her personality, taste and maybe eyesight.


Her body is better than mine, so I'm not in any position to critique it.  I know she has toothpick legs, but I still would rather have those than my new current thunder thighs any day of the week.  I even thought she was pretty in the beginning (not stunning, but pretty), but her inner ugliness and the multitude of unflattering stories about her behavior and nasty attitude have taken away any attractive quality about her.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, I was just asked if I want to take on a batch of abandoned baby birds from my local bird lady because every single bird person (or wild animal person in general...the hedgehog people are literally suffering from burn-out because our modern environment is so hostile) is completely maxed out. She promises to help me not kill them. What do y'all think? It seems like such a huge commitment, but I work from home most days anyway and for a small songbird it's like 2 1/2 weeks from out of the egg to being able to fly.


Do it and forevermore after they have left your nest, when you hear a songbird’s music, you’ll wonder if it is one of “yours”.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Her body is better than mine, so I'm not in any position to critique it.  I know she has toothpick legs, but I still would rather have those than my new current thunder thighs any day of the week.  I even thought she was pretty in the beginning (not stunning, but pretty), but her inner ugliness and the multitude of unflattering stories about her behavior and nasty attitude have taken away any attractive quality about her.



Right. Besides her behaviour, I will never be able to unsee the face malfunctions.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, I was just asked if I want to take on a batch of abandoned baby birds from my local bird lady because every single bird person (or wild animal person in general...the hedgehog people are literally suffering from burn-out because our modern environment is so hostile) is completely maxed out. She promises to help me not kill them. What do y'all think? It seems like such a huge commitment, but I work from home most days anyway and for a small songbird it's like 2 1/2 weeks from out of the egg to being able to fly. At which point they'll go back into an outdoor aviary to learn how to find food on their own.


It doesn't sound like too much time commitment (2.5 weeks?) but it's still a commitment and very honorable of you to even consider it.  I respect people who foster animals so much!  I'd love to do it someday, but not while my two aging pups are around.


----------



## bellecate

I’m always surprised at what is considered ‘newsworthy’.  Other than entertaining us with the ridiculousness of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> It doesn't sound like too much time commitment (2.5 weeks?) but it's still a commitment and very honorable of you to even consider it.  I respect people who foster animals so much!  I'd love to do it someday, but not while my two aging pups are around.



I'd love to foster kittens or mom cats with kittens, but no way with three cats - one very territorial - and a dog who already doesn't like the cats we have. At least the birds will be in a box and not slip out of the door into enemy territory.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. Besides her behaviour, I will never be able to unsee the face malfunctions.


and the pushing and pulling on her husband


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT, I was just asked if I want to take on a batch of abandoned baby birds from my local bird lady because every single bird person (or wild animal person in general...the hedgehog people are literally suffering from burn-out because our modern environment is so hostile) is completely maxed out. She promises to help me not kill them. What do y'all think? It seems like such a huge commitment, but I work from home most days anyway and for a small songbird it's like 2 1/2 weeks from out of the egg to being able to fly. At which point they'll go back into an outdoor aviary to learn how to find food on their own.



I like to gauge things by would I in the future regret not having done it. If you decide yes I hope you get enjoyment from it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> I’m always surprised at what is considered ‘newsworthy’.  Other than entertaining us with the ridiculousness of it.
> 
> View attachment 5429788



I went to Delfina's Insta and it seems she thanked Raptor for shooting the picture (which I think is Nacho, Delfina and one of their kids hugging?). I don't know, I'm not a fan of the Figueras' apparent soft spot for her (then again...maybe it's a soft spot for Harry? I know I've put up with partners I actively disliked for the sake of the relative or friend they were dating, and I went out of my way to be nice), but if she did take the picture and Delfina chose to use it it's only fair she give's credit I guess?


----------



## CarryOn2020

TW has and has had a great body. The issue is the _clothes she chooses. _ She can and has chosen beautiful clothes that fit her. She looks great on those occasions. Incidentally, she wore those same shorts in May. They looked much better then. She lost lots of weight, so the shorts are not fitting well.
ETA:  My opinion only 


May, 2022:




Yesterday:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> TW has and has had a great body. The issue is the _clothes she chooses. _ She can and has chosen beautiful clothes that fit her. She looks great on those occasions. Incidentally, she wore those same shorts in May. They looked much better then. She lost lots of weight, so the shorts are not fitting well.
> ETA:  My opinion only
> 
> 
> May, 2022:
> View attachment 5429808
> View attachment 5429809
> 
> 
> Yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 5429810


Are they the same shorts or just similar? The merching site identifies them as New.


Chloe302225 said:


>


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Her body is better than mine, so I'm not in any position to critique it.  I know she has toothpick legs, but I still would rather have those than my new current thunder thighs any day of the week.  I even thought she was pretty in the beginning (not stunning, but pretty), but her inner ugliness and the multitude of unflattering stories about her behavior and nasty attitude have taken away any attractive quality about her.


yes, it's hard for me to say anything nice about her....best I can do is to give the benefit of the doubt on stuff that's reported


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Are they the same shorts or just similar? The merching site identifies them as New.



To my eye, they look the same. Front pockets are the clue for me.  Of course, I could be wrong.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> To my eye, they look the same. Front pockets are the clue for me.  Of course, I could be wrong.


I was thinking how many women wear shorts out in public (with very expensive jewelry) but her friend in the photo is also wearing shorts so what do I know


----------



## Annawakes

I wish somebody would leak the results of the bullying probe.

I understand why the official stance is that they want to keep it confidential, and just release info about high level HR changes.

But it just lets the sugars triumphantly say, “See?  There was nothing to be found, so there was no bullying!”

I so wish someone would secretly leak it.  Let’s see if it happens.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> I wish somebody would leak the results of the bullying probe.
> 
> I understand why the official stance is that they want to keep it confidential, and just release info about high level HR changes.
> 
> But it just lets the sugars triumphantly say, “See?  There was nothing to be found, so there was no bullying!”
> 
> I so wish someone would secretly leak it.  Let’s see if it happens.


The sugars are demanding the release to prove Saint Methane is innocent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> The sugars are demanding the release to prove Saint Methane is innocent.



I'll bet money they found she did bully people and not much was done to stop it, so rather unflattering on The Firm. I will believe poor thing was smeared when her former employees publicly say so under oath. Maybe.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> The shorts really should not flare out. Guessing MM wants to highlight her skinny [non-muscular] legs.
> This is how the designer intended the shorts to look. Imo they look much better than MM’s. The flare emphasizes her boxy shape.
> MM still needs to learn what a tailor can do.
> 
> View attachment 5429722
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LANE SHORT -- LA ROCHELLE WASH
> 
> 
> The Lane Short reimagines a classic denim short silhouette with a perfectly flattering fit. Drawing inspiration from our favorite vintage denim, the Lane Short features a high waist, functional patchwork front pockets, and a single back pocket to finish the look. Mindful touches add intrigue to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shopdoen.com



Maybe she bought a size or a few larger to accommodate her waistline, so the leg opening is bigger as a result?


----------



## bellecate

Annawakes said:


> I wish somebody would leak the results of the bullying probe.
> 
> I understand why the official stance is that they want to keep it confidential, and just release info about high level HR changes.
> 
> But it just lets the sugars triumphantly say, “See?  There was nothing to be found, so there was no bullying!”
> 
> I so wish someone would secretly leak it.  Let’s see if it happens.



I would think if it wasn’t true TW would be screaming from the rooftop of her many bathrooms to have the results known. And sue, funny she hasn’t sued about it.


----------



## PurseUOut

CarryOn2020 said:


> TW has and has had a great body. The issue is the _clothes she chooses. _ She can and has chosen beautiful clothes that fit her. She looks great on those occasions. Incidentally, she wore those same shorts in May. They looked much better then. She lost lots of weight, so the shorts are not fitting well.
> ETA:  My opinion only
> 
> 
> May, 2022:
> View attachment 5429808
> View attachment 5429809
> 
> 
> Yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 5429810



Her shape is very hard to dress. She has broad shoulders, a short torso, little waist definition, and long, lean legs. I am bigger up top than bottom so I emphasize. You almost can't ever wear shirts tucked or clothes ending at the waist because it overemphasizes our torso. This is why I stick with wrap or peplum dresses/shirts or solid continuous colors that are fitted well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, plates are flying 
ETA: removed the bad language


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> I was thinking how many women wear shorts out in public (with very expensive jewelry) but her friend in the photo is also wearing shorts so what do I know


I sometimes wear shorts with my regular jewelry, and I actually like the way they flare out Lol

ETA: also, I don’t think they need to release the bullying report; it’s an internal Fail of HR as much as MM (I think another Poster above mentioned this)


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, plates are flying




Blimey, those stans have got their knickers in a twist!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, plates are flying




SussexSpartanMegHive? WTF  These are grown, supposedly professional women who act way more silly than the teenagers who needed a suicide hotline after Take That broke up.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll bet money they found she did bully people and not much was done to stop it, so rather unflattering on The Firm. I will believe poor thing was smeared when her former employees publicly say so under oath. Maybe.



They need to start playing hardball with these two. If they’re smart they told H&M exactly what the results of the investigation were while they were at the Jubilee. Then Buckingham Palace holds onto the results pending what is said in Harry’s book and any upcoming Netflix show. The results could always be released at any time.

That’s the carrot and stick approach. Personally, I don’t think they will play it in a way that would make Meghan and Harry rethink their plans.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

880 said:


> I sometimes wear shorts with my regular jewelry, and I actually like the way they flare out Lol
> 
> ETA: also, I don’t think they need to release the bullying report; it’s an internal Fail of HR as much as MM (I think another Poster above mentioned this)



I agree. They should not release the report. It reflects poorly on MM, mostly though it is Hazzie’s failure to clearly explain procedures to her. Imo


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree. They should not release the report. It reflects poorly on MM, mostly though it is Hazzie’s failure to clearly explain procedures to her. Imo


I think Harry was pretty much a teenager in terms of judgment and emotional IQ - not very capable of giving guidance, although he should have been having lived his life as a royal
Even looking at the photo posted recently of him on the polo pony having some kind of fit....uugh


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> I wish somebody would leak the results of the bullying probe.
> 
> I understand why the official stance is that they want to keep it confidential, and just release info about high level HR changes.
> 
> But it just lets the sugars triumphantly say, “See?  There was nothing to be found, so there was no bullying!”
> 
> I so wish someone would secretly leak it.  Let’s see if it happens.



there will be leaks if H&M are not careful


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> there will be leaks if H&M are not careful


no one seems to be holding them accountable yet they seem totally ungrateful for that


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is how they dominate the news cycle during Williams’s 40th birthday celebrations.  Tsk tsk, such nonsense.


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is how they dominate the news cycle during Williams’s 40th birthday celebrations.  Tsk tsk, such nonsense.


And I just saw on Google news a headline how William and Kate "snubbed" the invisbet party from Cosmopolitan magazine (I didn't click on the link).  What a crock!


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> The shorts really should not flare out. Guessing MM wants to highlight her skinny [non-muscular] legs.
> This is how the designer intended the shorts to look. Imo they look much better than MM’s. The flare emphasizes her boxy shape.
> MM still needs to learn what a tailor can do.
> 
> View attachment 5429722
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LANE SHORT -- LA ROCHELLE WASH
> 
> 
> The Lane Short reimagines a classic denim short silhouette with a perfectly flattering fit. Drawing inspiration from our favorite vintage denim, the Lane Short features a high waist, functional patchwork front pockets, and a single back pocket to finish the look. Mindful touches add intrigue to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shopdoen.com


I thought the Daisy Dukes would cost more than they do ($148)--maybe someone is being frugal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> TW has and has had a great body. The issue is the _clothes she chooses. _ She can and has chosen beautiful clothes that fit her. She looks great on those occasions. Incidentally, she wore those same shorts in May. They looked much better then. She lost lots of weight, so the shorts are not fitting well.
> ETA:  My opinion only
> 
> 
> May, 2022:
> View attachment 5429808
> View attachment 5429809
> 
> 
> Yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 5429810


Hmmm is she going for an Uber-thin Posh Spice look ? 
I noticed her trousers in the Netherlands, with wide floppy bottoms - that cover the shoes - and long enough to wipe the floor , another VB kind of look


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree. They should not release the report. It reflects poorly on MM, mostly though it is Hazzie’s failure to clearly explain procedures to her. Imo


Agree it was an HR fail either way but most companies don’t make public reports on issues handled by HR, so, I don’t know if that is required
taking action to reprimand the parties at fault is required but tough to do long after the fact


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> there will be leaks if H&M are not careful


The report is not currently being released , why ? Because it is not in the interest of BP not to release it …
the lack of a release does not exonerate MM, nor does it confirm the allegations

BP has recently reverted to the policy of saying nothing eg about MM, H and A, and IMHO it is working for a bit, they are on a high from the Jubilee and riding the wave


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm is she going for an Uber-thin Posh Spice look ?
> I noticed her trousers in the Netherlands, with wide floppy bottoms - that cover the shoes - and long enough to wipe the floor , another VB kind of look


IDK...she isn't fat but she isn't built like Victoria


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I thought the Daisy Dukes would cost more than they do ($148)--maybe someone is being frugal.


Daisy Dukes were sexier....Meghan's shorts are pretty short but still sorta mom-jeans-ish


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went to Delfina's Insta and it seems she thanked Raptor for shooting the picture (which I think is Nacho, Delfina and one of their kids hugging?). I don't know, I'm not a fan of the Figueras' apparent soft spot for her (then again...maybe it's a soft spot for Harry? I know I've put up with partners I actively disliked for the sake of the relative or friend they were dating, and I went out of my way to be nice), but if she did take the picture and Delfina chose to use it it's only fair she give's credit I guess?


My 2 cents:
The Figueras need publicity for their activities, and Harry is giving them a lot of exposition. All peace and love…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> TW has and has had a great body. The issue is the _clothes she chooses. _ She can and has chosen beautiful clothes that fit her. She looks great on those occasions. Incidentally, she wore those same shorts in May. They looked much better then. She lost lots of weight, so the shorts are not fitting well.
> ETA:  My opinion only
> 
> 
> May, 2022:
> View attachment 5429808
> View attachment 5429809
> 
> 
> Yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 5429810


It doesn't matter what she dresses, she looks rather vulgar and unattractive because of her (lack of) character.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree. They should not release the report. *It reflects poorly on MM*, mostly though it is Hazzie’s failure to clearly explain procedures to her. Imo


Would we care? 
Hazz needs to be very careful writing his book. The BRF may not release the report directly, but there are journalists like Valentine Low that can always have access to more information aka leaks.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Would we care?
> Hazz needs to be very careful writing his book. The BRF may not release the report directly, but there are journalists like Valentine Low that can always have access to more information aka leaks.



Yes, we do care. We have no interest in seeing her destroyed so much that she becomes a victim.  She would use that as a bully pulpit for years to come. Ick.  It will all spill out in the books.  Plus, the responsibility really does sit with Hazz.  His bellowing at Angela Kelley is beyond the pale. My guess is he yelled at most of the staff, too.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, we do care. We have no interest in seeing her destroyed so much that she becomes a victim.  She would use that as a bully pulpit for years to come. Ick.  It will all spill out in the books.  Plus, the responsibility really does sit with Hazz.  His bellowing at Angela Kelley is beyond the pale. My guess is he yelled at most of the staff, too.


Harry has become so angry and unappealing.  Pretty much his main claim to fame since he married her is going around talking about MY WIFE - as if being married made him a man.  And suing people.
If he wants to get some good press maybe he should be seen with his children.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, we do care. We have no interest in seeing her destroyed so much that she becomes a victim.  She would use that as a bully pulpit for years to come. Ick.  It will all spill out in the books.  Plus, the responsibility really does sit with Hazz.  His bellowing at Angela Kelley is beyond the pale. My guess is he yelled at most of the staff, too.


Tom Bower may have interviewed some of the same people who were in the Report?  His pre publication comments about his pending book on TW claim he has explosive information.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, we do care. We have no interest in seeing her destroyed so much that she becomes a victim.  She would use that as a bully pulpit for years to come. Ick.  It will all spill out in the books.  Plus, the responsibility really does sit with Hazz.  His bellowing at Angela Kelley is beyond the pale. My guess is he yelled at most of the staff, too.



The BRF is sitting on the report as a warning.  It will leak if MM and H divorce and she tries the “he was abusive” route whilst painting herself as the victim.  They will leak the report to trusted journalists.

so it’s like holding onto a card until it’s the right time to play it….


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> The BRF is sitting on the report as a warning.  It will leak if MM and H divorce and she tries the “he was abusive” route whilst painting herself as the victim.  They will leak the report to trusted journalists.
> 
> so it’s like holding onto a card until it’s the right time to play it….


The BRF is probably using the same strategies that Methane uses: mainly vagueness and info drip. How long has it been since Methane, Oprah and Gayle promised receipts regarding Woe Is Me's terrible life of ease in the UK?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Tom Bower may have interviewed some of the same people who were in the Report?  His pre publication comments about his pending book on TW claim he has explosive information.



Tom Bower plus Valentine Low plus numerous others - we’ll get all the details soon.  They have known for awhile how awful it was. But then, they knew for a long time how awful Hazzi was, too.  And Andi.


----------



## xincinsin

Can imagine what would happen if she sued: a grumpy Hazard "sitting" in the courtroom (via videocall) bellowing about injustice, Methane doing a "weep prettily" act, and a horde of stans outside and online baying for blood. Lots of excuses about how pregnancy stressed her and changed her normally dignified behaviour (aka blame it on Archie), and how nobody (except HMTQ) coddled her. Plastic Pal Omid will be in the forefront of the charge to defend the mistress of his meagre reputation. Also, expect a new wardrobe of expensive clothes and jewellery.


----------



## Silverplume

I would buy the denim shorts _only_ _if_ they were less than $15. I would wear them for gardening at home; no jewelry except maybe a short necklace and/or small earrings. I would complete my ensemble with a *non*-denim top with long sleeves, sturdy gloves, straw hat, and prescription sunnies.


----------



## purseinsanity

I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.


----------



## redney

purseinsanity said:


> I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.



He definitely seems more comfortable with Nacho than with His Wife!

_edited typo_


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.




To be fair, if I had Nacho with his arm around me I’d probably be leaning into it too.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, we do care. *We have no interest in seeing her destroyed so much that she becomes a victim. * She would use that as a bully pulpit for years to come. Ick.  It will all spill out in the books.  Plus, the responsibility really does sit with Hazz.  His bellowing at Angela Kelley is beyond the pale. My guess is he yelled at most of the staff, too.


This! As it is, the Sussex-friendly media and her stans are already pushing her victimhood like there was no tomorrow. The eternal, perpetual and primary victim. It's like a B-movie remake of The Highlander: There can only be One!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.



Next thing for him to say is that Nscho is the brother he never had


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  *I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.*



Nacho probably symbolizes his old life - before he had to worry about the cost of living and paying the bills.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, we do care. We have no interest in seeing her destroyed so much that she becomes a victim.  She would use that as a bully pulpit for years to come. Ick.  It will all spill out in the books.  Plus, the responsibility really does sit with Hazz.  His bellowing at Angela Kelley is beyond the pale. My guess is he yelled at most of the staff, too.


She is a (professional) victim independent of the release of the report imo. 



purseinsanity said:


> I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.




I think Hazz realized that this type of pictures gets clicks… It's pure business at this point imo. Naco and wife are nomads, and they should leave California soon. Hazz needs to find replacements asap.



gracekelly said:


> Next thing for him to say is that Nscho is the brother he never had



He is, isn't he?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Visit as a private citizen or 'help' from afar… I've no words!


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Visit as a private citizen or 'help' from afar… I've no words!



Well, this would give Netflix some material!  Who wants to believe that this is Megain’s idea?


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> Visit as a private citizen or 'help' from afar… I've no words!



I have no words for this couple of shameless opportunists. Is he going to join the International Legion of Defense of Ukraine (ILDU)? I laugh. Who’s going to pay for his security while he acts in Ukraine like TW in Texas? NATO? Nacho? SMH


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Visit as a private citizen or 'help' from afar… I've no words!



His  misplaced sense of importance is staggering. Or is TW sending him to distribute lemon olive oil cakes to the front lines?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I find it weird Haz has his arm on another man's leg with his hand resting on the knee.  He's also beaming.  I'm starting to think he's in love with Nacho more than anything.




That doesn't faze me, Latin, Mediterranean and Middle Eastern men are pretty touchy-feely with each other, maybe Harry adapted. What I do find weird is how Nacho doesn't seem to have another subject but Harry, Harry, Harry. Doesn't he have other friends, and why is Harry the only one who apparently has children?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> Well, this would give Netflix some material!  Who wants to believe that this is Megain’s idea?



Yeah, and if something happens to him she'll be a cheerful widow and blame the BRF. If they had just given him all the money and honours he would never have had to go to a war-torn country.


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, and if something happens to him she'll be a cheerful widow and blame the BRF. If they had just given him all the money and honours he would never have had to go to a war-torn country.


I was thinking exactly that—-she could literally “kill two birds with one stone.”


----------



## xincinsin

kipp said:


> I was thinking exactly that—-she could literally “kill two birds with one stone.”


Birdbrain...


----------



## Sophisticatted

kipp said:


> I was thinking exactly that—-she could literally “kill two birds with one stone.”



Exactly. No messy divorce. No custody battle. Lots of media mileage out of being his widow. No one to prevent her from doing anything she wants with her two little meal tickets. I’m sure a certain narcissistic war monger would LOVE to pick off a member of the RF like a prize trophy.

I hope this is just a wild and crazy rumor.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> The BRF is probably using the same strategies that Methane uses: mainly vagueness and info drip. How long has it been since Methane, Oprah and Gayle promised receipts regarding Woe Is Me's terrible life of ease in the UK?



The BRF has strategies, power and resources that Methane can only dream of - and does, every _single_ night of her flex-existence


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Nacho - he has that same pose with Chris Martin.  As much as he is a polo player, he is a model and businessman.  He knows what he is doing, then again, maybe not.  Of course he and Hazz were the only 2 fathers on that team, so maybe that is why it is just the two of them in the photo. Time will tell. The twins-ie outfits -   It feels weird imo.
RE: Ukraine - nah, Hazz will only go if it is safe and he has his minders.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't faze me, Latin, Mediterranean and Middle Eastern men are pretty touchy-feely with each other, maybe Harry adapted. What I do find weird is how Nacho doesn't seem to have another subject but Harry, Harry, Harry. Doesn't he have other friends, and why is Harry the only one who apparently has children?



Totally agree it's cultural and if you check out his instagram he does post other pics and people but they aren't shared here so it makes it seem like it's only Harry...


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What I do find weird is how Nacho doesn't seem to have another subject but Harry, Harry, Harry. Doesn't he have other friends, and why is Harry the only one who apparently has children?



I took a look at Nacho’s instagram feed and it seems like he posts about a lot besides Harry. He might also have other friends who don’t want to be posted on a public instagram.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

So if a trip to Ukraine isn't going to knock off Harry, where will Raptor be shipping him off to next?  Doesn't Ukraine already have enough worries without a spoiled worthless prince looking for photo ops? Shameless!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The BRF has strategies, power and resources that Methane can only dream of - and does, every _single_ night of her flex-existence



I have thought more than once she is lucky they have no special interest in destroying her. Still bold to be so impertinent.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Silverplume said:


> I would buy the denim shorts _only_ _if_ they were less than $15. I would wear them for gardening at home; no jewelry except maybe a short necklace and/or small earrings. I would complete my ensemble with a *non*-denim top with long sleeves, sturdy gloves, straw hat, and prescription sunnies.


Prescription sunglasses are a game changer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have thought more than once she is lucky they have no special interest in destroying her. Still bold to be so impertinent.



They know she has zero talent, so she herself does not present a significant threat.  Diana did present a threat to the monarchy because she was wife of the next King, mother of … . H&M really are simply full of gossipy, hot air.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> His  misplaced sense of importance is staggering. Or is TW sending him to distribute lemon olive oil cakes to the front lines?


I think there have been some Americans who have gone over their to fight with the Ukranian army.  I highly doubt Harry will do that.  He would compromise their security if he did
Would he bring a camera crew?


----------



## sdkitty

Here's some BS from Cosmopolitan
It was "tragic" the the two Lilibets didn't have a photo op








						So Here’s Why the Queen Didn’t Spend Much Time With Harry and Meghan’s Daughter, Lilibet, During the Jubilee
					

The Queen finally met Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's daughter, Lilibet, during the Platnium Jubilee but their meeting was reportedly very short. Here's why.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Nacho - he has that same pose with Chris Martin.  As much as he is a polo player, he is a model and businessman.  He knows what he is doing, then again, maybe not.  Of course he and Hazz were the only 2 fathers on that team, so maybe that is why it is just the two of them in the photo. Time will tell. The twins-ie outfits -   It feels weird imo.
> RE: Ukraine - nah, Hazz will only go if it is safe and he has his minders.



I’m starting to wonder if Nacho coming to Santa Barbara and creating the Los Padres team was so that he could cheer up Harry. I found this article from last year about Nacho. In addition to giving a background on who he is, it mentions his friendship with Harry two or three times throughout the article. Nacho has given proceeds from one of his businesses to Harry’s Africa charity. He might possibly be Harry’s only true friend (and I’m including TW in that statement).   

https://hauteliving.com/2021/03/world-famous-polo-player-nacho-figueras-shares-future-plans/695499/


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Visit as a private citizen or 'help' from afar… I've no words!



Oooohhh maybe Zelensky will lend him some camo to wear , could be a major fashion moment


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I’m starting to wonder if Nacho coming to Santa Barbara and creating the Los Padres team was so that he could cheer up Harry. I found this article from last year about Nacho. In addition to giving a background on who he is, it mentions his friendship with Harry two or three times throughout the article. Nacho has given proceeds from one of his businesses to Harry’s Africa charity. He might possibly be Harry’s only true friend (and I’m including TW in that statement).
> 
> https://hauteliving.com/2021/03/world-famous-polo-player-nacho-figueras-shares-future-plans/695499/



Yes, the connection is Sentebale.  Iirc Hazz and Nacho have been playing polo together  since mid-2000s, maybe earlier. In the Haute Living article, it details Nacho’s businesses aside from polo - design, building facilities for horses, fragrances, and , of course, modeling.   Perhaps Hazzi will get a job with one of those, _except modeling_. Stranger things have happened.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the connection is Sentebale.  Iirc Hazz and Nacho have been playing polo together  since mid-2000s, maybe earlier. In the Haute Living article, it details Nacho’s businesses aside from polo - design, building facilities for horses, fragrances, and , of course, modeling.   Perhaps Hazzi will get a job with one of those, except modeling. Stranger things have happened.


LOL....he's no model....of course he looks much less attractive to me these days due to his angry boy persona


----------



## lanasyogamama

He had moments of handsomeness in his day, but it’s gone now.  

I thought he looked really suave here, but now I wonder if he was angry about something!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> Here's some BS from Cosmopolitan
> It was "tragic" the the two Lilibets didn't have a photo op
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So Here’s Why the Queen Didn’t Spend Much Time With Harry and Meghan’s Daughter, Lilibet, During the Jubilee
> 
> 
> The Queen finally met Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's daughter, Lilibet, during the Platnium Jubilee but their meeting was reportedly very short. Here's why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


The giddy teenager tone of the article made me think it was written by an intern. But no, it was penned by the Cosmopolitan weekend editor  Tragic ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Old article - Nacho says the nicest things about William and Hazz. He seems to be a genuinely kind person.









						Polo player Nacho Figueras on Princes William and Harry: 'It's always fun to be around them'
					

Nacho Figueras dished to HELLO! about playing polo with the royals and whether he's ever given his pal Prince Harry dating advice.




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> They need to start playing hardball with these two. If they’re smart they told H&M exactly what the results of the investigation were while they were at the Jubilee. Then Buckingham Palace holds onto the results pending what is said in Harry’s book and any upcoming Netflix show. The results could always be released at any time.
> 
> That’s the carrot and stick approach. Personally, I don’t think they will play it in a way that would make Meghan and Harry rethink their plans.


Hardball … hmm … the problem is money … H&M are not thriving in their business ventures … and they have a high burn rate and have blown through a bunch of his inheritance … they are not yet in a stable position with regards to finances - a chronic issue with collateral members of the BRF
they need to cut the burn rate , crank out product, get rid of their expensive lawsuits
If the BRF pushes too far , things will get messy like Depp and Heard


----------



## CarryOn2020

Important to remember Jason Knauf’s role in all of this:









						Who is Jason Knauf, royal adviser behind Meghan Markle bullying claims?
					

Texan-born Knauf raised a red flag on Markle’s alleged bullying of royal staff.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Here's some BS from Cosmopolitan
> It was "tragic" the the two Lilibets didn't have a photo op
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So Here’s Why the Queen Didn’t Spend Much Time With Harry and Meghan’s Daughter, Lilibet, During the Jubilee
> 
> 
> The Queen finally met Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's daughter, Lilibet, during the Platnium Jubilee but their meeting was reportedly very short. Here's why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



I've put Cosmo, Elle and any other publication that H&M have in their pocket on ignore.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> He had moments of handsomeness in his day, but it’s gone now.
> 
> I thought he looked really suave here, but now I wonder if he was angry about something!
> 
> View attachment 5430364



Even here (I mean then) they must have Photoshopped his hair in.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I've put Como, Elle and any other publication that H&M have in their pocket on ignore.


good idea...sometimes I get these things thru yahoo and can't resist looking


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> I've put Cosmo, Elle and any other publication that H&M have in their pocket on ignore.


People is worst of all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> He had moments of handsomeness in his day, but it’s gone now.
> 
> I thought he looked really suave here, but now I wonder if he was angry about something!
> 
> View attachment 5430364



Oh wow. He's lost a LOT of hair in the course of his short marriage.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. He's lost a LOT of hair in the course of his short marriage.


that's the least of his worries....it's his nasty disposition that hurts him more IMO


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Old article - Nacho says the nicest things about William and Hazz. He seems to be a genuinely kind person.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polo player Nacho Figueras on Princes William and Harry: 'It's always fun to be around them'
> 
> 
> Nacho Figueras dished to HELLO! about playing polo with the royals and whether he's ever given his pal Prince Harry dating advice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com



He might be one of those people who sees the good in everyone. Hope that doesn’t come back to bite him in this case.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think there have been some Americans who have gone over their to fight with the Ukranian army.  I highly doubt Harry will do that.  He would compromise their security if he did
> Would he bring a camera crew?


Surely you jest. Of course he would go with a camera crew to document his being a great humanitarian. He will bring a few cartons of vegetables, a washing machine and a crate full of The Bench. There will be a Zoom call. with him and Zelensky speaking g with Migraine.  He will be wearing full body amor and have 4 guys around him for protection   and another carrying a change of clothing and his Depends.


----------



## gracekelly

What I would like to know is whether her strategy of being the victim is something she has used her whole life or it was ja plan devised when she married him. If this was newly devised, then she did not think this up. This was a plan that came from MA or her managers to get her back to the US in a blaze of fame and glory to make money. They managed to get part of that done with the Netflix and Spotify contracts. and we know nothing has been fulfilled so what next?  More victimhood? Netflix hates me? They are racist?


----------



## kemilia

needlv said:


> The BRF is sitting on the report as a warning.  It will leak if MM and H divorce and she tries the “he was abusive” route whilst painting herself as the victim.  They will leak the report to trusted journalists.
> 
> so it’s like holding onto a card until it’s the right time to play it….


Once again the BRF plays the long game. 

Wish I had that kind of patience and reserve sometimes (ok, most of the time!).


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> Here's some BS from Cosmopolitan
> It was "tragic" the the two Lilibets didn't have a photo op
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So Here’s Why the Queen Didn’t Spend Much Time With Harry and Meghan’s Daughter, Lilibet, During the Jubilee
> 
> 
> The Queen finally met Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's daughter, Lilibet, during the Platnium Jubilee but their meeting was reportedly very short. Here's why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



"Tragic"?  For whom??? Bbbbbbut I thought M&H wanted their kids to have PRIVACY!! So why are they heartbroken over no pictures??  And Harry gets flashbacks from camera flashes  (so he's going to Ukraine and making sure to get pictures of him there , uh-huh).  DID QE spend private time with each of her TWELVE grandkids during the Jubilee??  She's 96, and sadly getting more frail. So why hadn't M&H taken their kids to meet TQ before the Jubilee? It isn't as though they don't jet off on a whim to go anywhere else.  I'm glad TQ refused to be used.  And that the rest of the royals refused to be used in photo ops with A and L.  If they want Lilibet to meet Great Grandma so bad, they could always return to England. Or are they going to scream "Racism!" that 96 year old frail GG or Grandpa Charles or Uncle William aren't coming to the United States?  I'm waiting for that one.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> What I would like to know is whether her strategy of being the victim is something she has used her whole life or it was ja plan devised when she married him. If this was newly devised, then she did not think this up. This was a plan that came from MA or her managers to get her back to the US in a blaze of fame and glory to make money. They managed to get part of that done with the Netflix and Spotify contracts. and we know nothing has been fulfilled so what next?  More victimhood? Netflix hates me? They are racist?



She made a few million from Suits, met Harry and put his nuts in a vise, got a huge royal wedding and endless perks (oh sorry, dark nail polish was discouraged) and now makes her bread and butter off of playing the victim. Yet she obeyed Ellen to make a jackass out of herself.  Nahhhhhh, I'm not buying her tales of woe.


----------



## 880

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Nacho - he has that same pose with Chris Martin.  As much as he is a polo player, he is a model and businessman.  He knows what he is doing, then again, maybe not.  Of course he and Hazz were the only 2 fathers on that team, so maybe that is why it is just the two of them in the photo. Time will tell. The twins-ie outfits -   It feels weird imo.
> RE: Ukraine - nah, Hazz will only go if it is safe and he has his minders.


I think he might have decided to go to give Netflix something to focus on


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> She made a few million from Suits, met Harry and put his nuts in a vise, got a huge royal wedding and endless perks (oh sorry, dark nail polish was discouraged) and now makes her bread and butter off of playing the victim. Yet she obeyed Ellen to make a jackass out of herself.  Nahhhhhh, I'm not buying her tales of woe.


She didn’t  make that much money. This was a cable show and her role wasn’t that big. If she had 50k in the bank that was the most money she had.  The show paid her rent as part of the deal. She didn’t pay the union because she couldn’t afford it.


----------



## MiniMabel

He won't go to Ukraine, he won't be welcome there.  President Zelensky and his staff, quite rightly, wouldn't accept him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I’m starting to *wonder if Nacho coming to Santa Barbara and creating the Los Padres team was so that he could cheer up Harry*. I found this article from last year about Nacho. In addition to giving a background on who he is, it mentions his friendship with Harry two or three times throughout the article. Nacho has given proceeds from one of his businesses to Harry’s Africa charity. He might possibly be Harry’s only true friend (and I’m including TW in that statement).



It's possible.  I think it's also likely that it is for publicity, for himself and for the sport of polo.  There are, as one of our awesome posters stated earlier, about 50 people in the world who play polo.  OK, maybe 500 , so any publicity for the sport has to be good.  It was once an Olympic sport.  I can imagine that Nacho wishes it were again.


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> What I would like to know is whether her strategy of being the victim is something she has used her whole life or it was ja plan devised when she married him. If this was newly devised, then she did not think this up. This was a plan that came from MA or her managers to get her back to the US in a blaze of fame and glory to make money. They managed to get part of that done with the Netflix and Spotify contracts. and we know nothing has been fulfilled so what next?  More victimhood? Netflix hates me? They are racist?



I think she’s a professional victim, or at least a professional at employing whatever method works on the people she’s trying to influence including victimhood. She’s not super bright but just bright enough to know who her BS will work on. We all know she got this far only because H isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer. I’m sure if you can find out enough about her history and the people involved you’ll find she manipulated people in this way and others before, just not on the global stage.


----------



## rose60610

tiktok said:


> *She’s not super bright but just bright enough to know who her BS will work on.*



WISELY PUT!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> He had moments of handsomeness in his day, but it’s gone now.
> 
> I thought he looked really suave here, but now I wonder if he was angry about something!
> 
> View attachment 5430364


They both look much better in this. She should’ve worn this as her wedding dress imho especially as Stella mc is a Brit brand & it would give her a whisper of eco credentials- 2 wedding dresses is kind of silly too,


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> They both look much better in this. She should’ve worn this as her wedding dress imho especially as Stella mc is a Brit brand & it would give her a whisper of eco credentials- 2 wedding dresses is kind of silly too,


This dress would never be allowed as her wedding dress. I do prefer it though.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> This dress would never be allowed as her wedding dress. I do prefer it though.


You are right it’s too much décolletage for a formal church wedding but they could’ve made her a lace wrap or a bolero or something for in church and she could take it off for the photos. Anything to escape the table cloth that brought down Claire Waight Keller


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> You are right it’s too much décolletage for a formal church wedding but they could’ve made her a lace wrap or a bolero or something for in church and she could take it off for the photos. Anything to escape the table cloth that brought down Claire Waight Keller



Shrug would have been perfect

Why have one dress when you can have the public paying for 2?

Besides (hate to bring this up again) but Mega-baby was lining herself up to be the new Audrey (Givenchy muse) and a 21C fashion icon par excellence. If you look at her church dress, it was even inspired by a fusion of 2 Givenchy wedding dresses, one was modelled on/by Audrey Hepburn.

No idea why not everybody didn't i_mmediately_ didn't get the comparison 

Megs must have been


----------



## lanasyogamama

rose60610 said:


> "Tragic"?  For whom??? Bbbbbbut I thought M&H wanted their kids to have PRIVACY!! So why are they heartbroken over no pictures??  And Harry gets flashbacks from camera flashes  (so he's going to Ukraine and making sure to get pictures of him there , uh-huh).  DID QE spend private time with each of her TWELVE grandkids during the Jubilee??  She's 96, and sadly getting more frail. So why hadn't M&H taken their kids to meet TQ before the Jubilee? It isn't as though they don't jet off on a whim to go anywhere else.  I'm glad TQ refused to be used.  And that the rest of the royals refused to be used in photo ops with A and L.  If they want Lilibet to meet Great Grandma so bad, they could always return to England. Or are they going to scream "Racism!" that 96 year old frail GG or Grandpa Charles or Uncle William aren't coming to the United States?  I'm waiting for that one.


Tragic for Magpie’s wallet.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> She didn’t  make that much money. This was a cable show and her role wasn’t that big. If she had 50k in the bank that was the most money she had.  The show paid her rent as part of the deal. She didn’t pay the union because she couldn’t afford it.


You really think she was paid that little?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thinking back to her elementary school days, when she wrote to the dishwashing company,  that was the start of the _savior-victim_ role imo.  The big bad corporation vs. stereotype roles for women.  The hammer only sees nails.  Her Suits role iirc put her in the _savior-victim _role. Most of her storyline was the under-educated paralegal finds the hard-to-find case that wins the whole case just in the nick of time.  She’s been working that angle for a long time - as many others have [Amber?].

ETA: the Audrey look-alike?








						Meghan Markle Channeled Audrey Hepburn at the Royal Wedding and We Can't Look Away
					

It was all in the designer.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’ll stand up for Audrey.  I love Audrey and what she represented, but I do not see MM as Audrey on any level.  This is how the media fluffs ya, then drops ya. [cannot remember which movie this comes from].











						How Audrey Hepburn is Meghan Markle's role model
					

Comparisons between the Meghan Markle at Royal Ascot this week and Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady were perhaps inevitable, so striking was the resemblance.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> You really think she was paid that little?


There a lot of people with fingers in your paycheck.  Your manager, agent, lawyer, PR people. Plus taxes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They look nothing alike   
Just my opinion, clearly the DM disagreed.












						How Audrey Hepburn is Meghan Markle's role model
					

Comparisons between the Meghan Markle at Royal Ascot this week and Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady were perhaps inevitable, so striking was the resemblance.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll stand up for Audrey.  I love Audrey and what she represented, but I do not see MM as Audrey on any level.  This is how the media fluffs ya, then drops ya. [cannot remember which movie this comes from].
> 
> View attachment 5430509
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Audrey Hepburn is Meghan Markle's role model
> 
> 
> Comparisons between the Meghan Markle at Royal Ascot this week and Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady were perhaps inevitable, so striking was the resemblance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The thing that drives me crazy with any of these declarations of “The next Audrey, Marilyn, Oprah, etc”, is that the thing that made them so intriguing is that there hasn’t been anyone like them before, it’s the original looks, talent, etc, that made them so special.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> They look nothing alike
> Just my opinion, clearly the DM disagreed.
> 
> View attachment 5430511
> View attachment 5430513
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Audrey Hepburn is Meghan Markle's role model
> 
> 
> Comparisons between the Meghan Markle at Royal Ascot this week and Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady were perhaps inevitable, so striking was the resemblance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yeah black and white doesn’t make her Audrey- she looks more like a racoon especially with those beady eyes.

Im someone who thinks Audrey is a bit overrated but I will still say she is leagues ahead of M in everything - looks, style, acting ability and philanthropy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> It's possible.  I think it's also likely that it is for publicity, for himself and for the sport of polo.  There are, as one of our awesome posters stated earlier, about 50 people in the world who play polo.  OK, maybe 500 , so any publicity for the sport has to be good.  It was once an Olympic sport.  I can imagine that Nacho wishes it were again.



I also factor in their other teammates, two 17-year-olds. I suspect Nacho is mentoring those two young men, getting them used to playing polo on a professional team but where there aren’t any high stakes. Nacho himself is in his 40s and he’s probably thinking about retiring. He may be training the next generation.


----------



## DoggieBags

lanasyogamama said:


> You really think she was paid that little?


suits ran from 2011 to 2019. I saw a 2015 article that said newcomers that got regular roles in cable tv series were paid between $15k to $20k per episode. Experienced actors could get as much as $80k - $100k per episode. Of course the casts of long running hit shows like Seinfeld and Friends got way more per episode after the shows proved to be long running mega hits.


----------



## TC1

I watched Suits. It seemed like she left the writers in a lurch after meeting Harry. She quit the show..and she had a fairly large role. Soo, they just did that plot where the character moved..they were still referenced, but not shown.


----------



## DoggieBags

DoggieBags said:


> suits ran from 2011 to 2019. I saw a 2015 article that said newcomers that got regular roles in cable tv series were paid between $15k to $20k per episode. Experienced actors could get as much as $80k - $100k per episode. Of course the casts of long running hit shows like Seinfeld and Friends got way more per episode after the shows proved to be long running mega hits.


TW appeared in 108 episodes of suits so she was probably paid several million $$ during her time on suits. But as @gracekelly said, she had to pay her agent, lawyer, etc. Out of her suits paycheck


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I also factor in their other teammates, two 17-year-olds. I suspect Nacho is mentoring those two young men, getting them used to playing polo on a professional team but where there aren’t any high stakes. Nacho himself is in his 40s and he’s probably thinking about retiring. He may be training the next generation.



His oldest is playing polo as well. No clue why he's not in the team.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> TW appeared in 108 episodes of suits so she was probably paid several million $$ during her time on suits. But as @gracekelly said, she had to pay her agent, lawyer, etc. Out of her suits paycheck


I know this is nothing compared to bigger shows like Friends but still seems like a lot for a supporting actor on a basic cable show that not very many people watched


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> TW appeared in 108 episodes of suits so she was probably paid several million $$ during her time on suits. But as @gracekelly said, she had to pay her agent, lawyer, etc. Out of her suits paycheck



I bet she had her husband Trevor pay most of her bills right up until she decided to dump him. At least she did if she was the same woman back then as she is today.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> His oldest is playing polo as well. No clue why he's not in the team.



Because no kid wants to be on the same team as their parent, even if he is the best in the world.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> He had moments of handsomeness in his day, but it’s gone now.
> 
> I thought he looked really suave here, but now I wonder if he was angry about something!
> 
> View attachment 5430364


Yeah...nope, doesn't do anything for me here.  I never found him attractive.  I think it's mostly because his profile as a kid is still his profile now, just a bigger head with bigger ego.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't faze me, Latin, Mediterranean and Middle Eastern men are pretty touchy-feely with each other, maybe Harry adapted. What I do find weird is how Nacho doesn't seem to have another subject but Harry, Harry, Harry. Doesn't he have other friends, and why is Harry the only one who apparently has children?


I agree.  I think what I find more disturbing is he's only touchy-feely with Nacho; it's not the cultural touchy-feely ness Nacho might have with everyone.  Haz isn't even touchy feely with TW, but over the top with Nacho.  Things that make me go hmmm


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did not know this.  Wow.









						Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
					

Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I agree.  I think what I find more disturbing is he's only touchy-feely with Nacho; it's not the cultural touchy-feely ness Nacho might have with everyone.  Haz isn't even touchy feely with TW, but over the top with Nacho.  Things that make me go hmmm



Plenty of photos of Hazz touchy-feely with other men. In fact, there were _rumors_.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This might just convince Harry that he could and should go to Ukraine too


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plenty of photos of Hazz touchy-feely with other men. In fact, there were _rumors_.


Oh really?  I never followed Haz before he joined with TW, so I had no idea!
Maybe that's why he's so angry and miserable all the time?  He feels like he has to stay in the closet??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> She didn’t  make that much money. This was a cable show and her role wasn’t that big. If she had 50k in the bank that was the most money she had.  The show paid her rent as part of the deal. She didn’t pay the union because she couldn’t afford it.


I read a stan's defence of the "self-made millionaire" tag. According to the stan, not only was Methane paid MEGA bucks for her role in Suits, she was also earning big bucks from her blog merchandising. The number of zeros in her supposed annual income tally was 5 or more. If she was mooching off the men on her life for her daily necessities and her wardrobe was being sponsored, I figured she could have socked away a tidy sum.


----------



## jennlt

We've seen Harry with his polo horses, so here's a comparison picture of William with one of his horses. What a difference. The horse looks much happier, too.


----------



## Aimee3

purseinsanity said:


> Oh really?  I never followed Haz before he joined with TW, so I had no idea!
> Maybe that's why he's so angry and miserable all the time?  He feels like he has to stay in the closet??


Well..if they have at least as many closets in that house as toilets, hypocrite Harry will have a lot of closets to hide in.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They look nothing alike
> Just my opinion, clearly the DM disagreed.
> 
> View attachment 5430511
> View attachment 5430513
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Audrey Hepburn is Meghan Markle's role model
> 
> 
> Comparisons between the Meghan Markle at Royal Ascot this week and Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady were perhaps inevitable, so striking was the resemblance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What’s lower than a poor man’s Audrey Hepburn? They say Jayne Mansfield was a poor man’s Marilyn Monroe but Jayne was actually stunning and had a 149 IQ. Nutmeg is a faxed photocopy of a polaroid of Audrey and the machine is low on toner.


----------



## Annawakes

I do wonder if that is what TW has on him.  We speculate about “what changed” at the friend’s Jamaica wedding.  Where H had dumped her and she showed up anyway.


----------



## kkfiregirl

Annawakes said:


> I do wonder if that is what TW has on him.  We speculate about “what changed” at the friend’s Jamaica wedding.  Where H had dumped her and she showed up anyway.



I don’t think it would be shameful for him to be gay- he would still be royal prince with immense privilege and comfort.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> We've seen Harry with his polo horses, so here's a comparison picture of William with one of his horses. What a difference. The horse looks much happier, too.




William probably inherited his grandmother’s love of horses. When his brother rides it looks like he’s driving a rental car he doesn’t care about.


----------



## lanasyogamama

kkfiregirl said:


> I don’t think it would be shameful for him to be gay- he would still be royal prince with immense privilege and comfort.


I read a fiction book last summer about a Prince of England falling in love with the US presidents son!


----------



## Hermes Zen

I promised to share more when I received my Cornelia James made in Sussex silk opera gloves ... well I received them today!  I ordered it after midnight on Thursday by am when I woke up the gloves were cut by the end of that day they were done, packed and ready to ship and picked up (Thursday).  Arrived today on west coast usa.  AND, the gloves fit !!!  Biggest achievement is the hand/fingers each were perfectly made to my dimensions.  They told me to place my measurements in the comment/note section in checkout and they did exactly what I had requested.  I also asked for the swarovski buttons instead of the fabric ones.  Here are the photos!  The box is beautiful and comes with same silk pouch to store the gloves.  Plus, a very nice note on the back side of the Cornelia James card, and tab that has the maker and inspection person names.  

Sorry no photo of me wearing them.  I may be wearing these to a formal in August.  If I remember will take a pick but I know this is OT.  However, they are made in Sussex and my tie to M & H.    I'm ready to order another pair of gloves ... maybe ones in lilac.


----------



## chowlover2

Gorgeous, and those buttons are everything!


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> We've seen Harry with his polo horses, so here's a comparison picture of William with one of his horses. What a difference. The horse looks much happier, too.



Gives me goosebumps. My son's expression is like that when he hugs/hugged his beloved doggies and kitties (and calls them cute nonsensical pet names).


----------



## Zen101

I don’t even know what to say. Using someone to get footage for your Netflix show under dangerous circumstances is deplorable. 








						Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
					

Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

VintageBagsAddict said:


> I don’t even know what to say. Using someone to get footage for your Netflix show under dangerous circumstances is deplorable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
> 
> 
> Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Daily Express ran it as "A UKRAINIAN paramedic involved in Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's latest Netflix documentary ..." which was quite funny as "latest Netflix docu" implies that the Gruesome Twosome had previous productions.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did not know this.  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
> 
> 
> Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk





VintageBagsAddict said:


> I don’t even know what to say. Using someone to get footage for your Netflix show under dangerous circumstances is deplorable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
> 
> 
> Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



They need to stay relevant to make the money they seem to like. Private jets, Dior attires, Cartier… are expensive.









						Meghan Markle's kind phone call to family of teacher killed in Texas shooting
					

The nephew of Irma Garcia, a teacher who was killed alongside 19 children and a fellow educator during a school shooting in Uvalde, Texas last month, said that "sweet and lovely" Meghan Markle has shared her condolences with the family




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The video is great!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #1
					

I don't know for sure what happened overseas, but go ask crew members who worked on any season after season one of that cable show the allit...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

Stay away from Montecito today…


----------



## Stansy

^ the comments on the blind are gold!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is so freaking inapproriate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> I promised to share more when I received my Cornelia James made in Sussex silk opera gloves ... well I received them today!  I ordered it after midnight on Thursday by am when I woke up the gloves were cut by the end of that day they were done, packed and ready to ship and picked up (Thursday).  Arrived today on west coast usa.  AND, the gloves fit !!!  Biggest achievement is the hand/fingers each were perfectly made to my dimensions.  They told me to place my measurements in the comment/note section in checkout and they did exactly what I had requested.  I also asked for the swarovski buttons instead of the fabric ones.  Here are the photos!  The box is beautiful and comes with same silk pouch to store the gloves.  Plus, a very nice note on the back side of the Cornelia James card, and tab that has the maker and inspection person names.
> 
> Sorry no photo of me wearing them.  I may be wearing these to a formal in August.  If I remember will take a pick but I know this is OT.  However, they are made in Sussex and my tie to M & H.    I'm ready to order another pair of gloves ... maybe ones in lilac.



So beautiful and it seems their customer service is stellar.

They answered re: my mulesing inquiery. No beautiful royally approved wool gloves for me  "We're always looking for ethical suppliers, but at the moment we cannot confirm our wool is 100 % mulesing free".


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did not know this.  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
> 
> 
> Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



I find this impossible to believe or, more accurately, I hope it is untrue. 

It's utterly deplorable if it is true; and why would a medic from Ukraine do that?  What is the connection between her and The Harkles?   To use footage of the results of war crimes in their documentary?  It's beyond the pale. No, it can't be true.


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> I find this impossible to believe or, more accurately, I hope it is untrue.
> 
> It's utterly deplorable if it is true; and why would a medic from Ukraine do that?  What is the connection between her and The Harkles?   To use footage of the results of war crimes in their documentary?  It's beyond the pale. No, it can't be true.


Some articles say that the medic was supposed to take part in the Invictus Games and was given the camera to take footage for Heart of Invictus. If you recall, the Harkles made a big show of connecting with the Ukraine team at the Games (and Methane drew their flag upside down as a sweet nod of course  ).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That was so stupid. That flag has two colours, and they stand for the sky and wheat fields. Shouldn't be hard to get right, especially not for an International Affairs graduate.


----------



## papertiger

MiniMabel said:


> I find this impossible to believe or, more accurately, I hope it is untrue.
> 
> It's utterly deplorable if it is true; and why would a medic from Ukraine do that?  What is the connection between her and The Harkles?   To use footage of the results of war crimes in their documentary?  It's beyond the pale. No, it can't be true.




From selling their children/granny/family to war profiteering.

All we need now are accusations of family abandonment, debilitating work-place bullying and open racism passed-off as a joke and...


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so freaking inapproriate.



When was the last time she hugged her own husband like this?


----------



## papertiger

Stansy said:


> When was the last time she hugged her own husband like this?



Wait, what? This isn't Harry? 

The woman has no boundaries!


----------



## Aminamina

EverSoElusive said:


> This might just convince Harry that he could and should go to Ukraine too



Liev Schrieber and Angelina visited for a cause as well before Ben Stiller. All kept Very low profile, too


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Wait, what? This isn't Harry?
> 
> The woman has no boundaries!



I thought it was Harry too, lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Wait, what? This isn't Harry?
> 
> The woman has no boundaries!



It's Nacho! Harry is in the background.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did not know this.  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ukrainian paramedic who filmed war horrors for Prince Harry Netflix film freed
> 
> 
> Yuliia Paievska, 53, known as Taira, smuggled out the footage on a data card that was hidden in a tampon after she was given a body camera to record the siege of Mariupol before she was captured
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



I read the article and couldn't believe this. The Harkles are not CBS, ABC, NBC, Associated Press, Reuters, Wall Street Journal, CNN etc News. They're desperate to make a buck by churning out any content for Netflix. That they'd put anybody in danger for their project is beyond the pale. The woman paramedic who did the recording participated in Invictus. But still!! You don't do that to people. Especially when your obvious and only goal is to make money. They are not informing, not spreading awareness, not doing anything beneficial other than lining their own pockets. And putting another person in danger to do it, even if they were willing to do it. 

Here's a partial cut/paste: 

"War reporter on Russian state TV Channel 1, Irina Kuksenkova, said the “criminal transfer” of Taira to Ukraine had caused a “fierce fuss” and a “major showdown” in the Kremlin-controlled DPR.

After being released, Taira said in a video: “I know that everything will work out, and we will all be home as I am now.”

She had filmed the siege of Mariupol using a body camera that Netflix gave her for a film produced by Prince Harry.  

She had been a star athlete who took part in archery and swimming in the Invictus Games for Ukraine, the international sporting competition for wounded soldiers created by the British royal.

She passed the harrowing war footage - concealed in a tampon - to an Associated Press team, the last international journalists in the city.

They passed through 15 checkpoints before successfully smuggling it out."

What if she got killed? Or never released?  Would M&H have provided for her family? Or would they just send a damn olive oil cake? You think she's safe just walking about now? She's got a Russian target on her back now thanks to Netflix and M&H. Do they care? Sick, sick, sick!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plenty of photos of Hazz touchy-feely with other men. In fact, there were _rumors_.


It is possible that the two couples have a covert ménage à quatre?


----------



## Sophisticatted

papertiger said:


> Wait, what? This isn't Harry?
> 
> The woman has no boundaries!



I noticed that after she touched his arm, he immediately put his hands on his hips and his elbows out in a defensive manner.  He really was not comfortable with that at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are we certain it was Nacho and not one of the teens?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we certain it was Nacho and not one of the teens?



I’m pretty sure it’s him. It would be really inappropriate for her to be touching a boy like that. He walks around her and goes back to talk to Harry right before the video ends.

Of greater interest, right after Meghan hugs Nacho, Delfina goes behind and hugs Harry but he doesn’t seem to reciprocate. I hope Delfina doesn’t feel threatened by Raptor.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we certain it was Nacho and not one of the teens?


Are the teens rich? That's an important factor in Methane's dispensation of goodwill. Who are these two 17-year-olds playing polo with Nachos?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Delfina’s insta says they are moving on to Aspen for polo. Does Hazzie go with them?









						Aspen Valley Polo Club’s summer lineup gets going July 3 with Independence Cup | WPN
					

The Aspen Valley Polo Club is set to open its summer season on July 3 with the traditional Independence Cup, the start of a busy lineup of events that carries into September. This includes the marquis Aug. 28 Summer Polo Benefit for the Aspen Valley Hospital Foundation, which last year raised...




					www.worldpolonews.com


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> It is possible that the two couples have a covert ménage à quatre?



That's what I was thinking


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> That's what I was thinking



I can understand why Harry and Meghan would find it appealing but what’s in it for Nacho and Delfina?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The team - scroll past Hazzie and Nacho’s info. Both are 16 yrs old.









						Who is who in Prince Harry’s Los Padres polo team? | WPN
					

Harry’s VERY posh polo squad: Prince’s Los Padres team includes a Ralph Lauren model dubbed ‘David Beckham of the sport’, a 16-year-old from a player dynasty and a rising teen star (but it was an opponent’s baby girl who Meghan cooed over!) Prince Harry was joined by the ‘David Beckham of Polo’...




					www.worldpolonews.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So beautiful and it seems their customer service is stellar.
> 
> They answered re: my mulesing inquiery. No beautiful royally approved wool gloves for me  "We're always looking for ethical suppliers, but at the moment we cannot confirm our wool is 100 % mulesing free".


Happy you asked. If they’ve been looking for ethical suppliers they must have been asked before, maybe your inquiry will make them look harder. I hope they do. Never heard of mulesing before you mentioned it. Was an eye opener for me. Thank you for educating me!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The team - scroll past Hazzie and Nacho’s info. Both are 16 yrs old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is who in Prince Harry’s Los Padres polo team? | WPN
> 
> 
> Harry’s VERY posh polo squad: Prince’s Los Padres team includes a Ralph Lauren model dubbed ‘David Beckham of the sport’, a 16-year-old from a player dynasty and a rising teen star (but it was an opponent’s baby girl who Meghan cooed over!) Prince Harry was joined by the ‘David Beckham of Polo’...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.worldpolonews.com



Both of them look older than 16. They sure grow up attractive in Argentina.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Both of them look older than 16. They sure grow up attractive in Argentina.



On that World Polo site, many men look quite attractive.  
Not to be mean-spirited but why do they allow Hazz?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m pretty sure it’s him. It would be really inappropriate for her to be touching a boy like that. He walks around her and goes back to talk to Harry right before the video ends.
> 
> Of greater interest, right after Meghan hugs Nacho, Delfina goes behind and hugs Harry but he doesn’t seem to reciprocate. I hope Delfina doesn’t feel threatened by Raptor.


When you have a great looking high profile husband like Nacho, you get used to women hanging on him.   She knows who he comes home to and that’s all that matters. The Harkles will be exiting their lives shortly.  No worries.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Of greater interest, right after Meghan hugs Nacho, Delfina goes behind and hugs Harry but he doesn’t seem to reciprocate. I hope Delfina doesn’t feel threatened by Raptor.



Doubt it. Delfina has actual talent and success in her own right, comes from a well-known family and they have been together for at least 22 years (oldest boy is 21). In fact, I have been thinking Raptor better annoys her not too much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> *Are the teens rich?* That's an important factor in Methane's dispensation of goodwill. Who are these two 17-year-olds playing polo with Nachos?



Doubt it, but I bet their parents are


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

rose60610 said:


> I read the article and couldn't believe this. The Harkles are not CBS, ABC, NBC, Associated Press, Reuters, Wall Street Journal, CNN etc News. They're desperate to make a buck by churning out any content for Netflix. That they'd put anybody in danger for their project is beyond the pale. The woman paramedic who did the recording participated in Invictus. But still!! You don't do that to people. Especially when your obvious and only goal is to make money. They are not informing, not spreading awareness, not doing anything beneficial other than lining their own pockets. And putting another person in danger to do it, even if they were willing to do it.
> 
> Here's a partial cut/paste:
> 
> "War reporter on Russian state TV Channel 1, Irina Kuksenkova, said the “criminal transfer” of Taira to Ukraine had caused a “fierce fuss” and a “major showdown” in the Kremlin-controlled DPR.
> 
> After being released, Taira said in a video: “I know that everything will work out, and we will all be home as I am now.”
> 
> She had filmed the siege of Mariupol using a body camera that Netflix gave her for a film produced by Prince Harry.
> 
> She had been a star athlete who took part in archery and swimming in the Invictus Games for Ukraine, the international sporting competition for wounded soldiers created by the British royal.
> 
> She passed the harrowing war footage - concealed in a tampon - to an Associated Press team, the last international journalists in the city.
> 
> They passed through 15 checkpoints before successfully smuggling it out."
> 
> What if she got killed? Or never released?  Would M&H have provided for her family? Or would they just send a damn olive oil cake? You think she's safe just walking about now? She's got a Russian target on her back now thanks to Netflix and M&H. Do they care? Sick, sick, sick!


I wouldn't blame the Harkles for Taira's endangerment, kidnapping and captivity. Too much honor for them to be mentioned in the same sentence with her. She did what she, as the Hero of Ukraine, the medic, the volunteer who has been saving people's lives in Ukraine since the beginning of russusn invasion in 2014 had to do: record the atrocities of Russian aggression for the world to see the truth. Here's is the video about her:


----------



## rose60610

Aminamina said:


> I wouldn't blame the Harkles for Taira's endangerment, kidnapping and captivity. Too much honor for them to be mentioned in the same sentence with her. She did what she, as the Hero of Ukraine, the medic, the volunteer who has been saving people's lives in Ukraine since the beginning of russusn invasion in 2014 had to do: record the atrocities of Russian aggression for the world to see the truth. Here's is the video about her:




Thanks for the video! Nonetheless, the Harkles are, AGAIN, sponging off of somebody else's courage, sacrifice and good will.  Things that THEY will never have or do! So they leverage somebody else's efforts to try to make themselves look good. DEMENTED!


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doubt it. Delfina has actual talent and success in her own right, comes from a well-known family and they have been together for at least 22 years (oldest boy is 21). In fact, I have been thinking Raptor better annoys her not too much.


Based on that article of him in that Haute online piece, he seems like a very humble man who truly loves his wife and children.  Raptor can try as hard as she wants, but I believe she will be rebuffed and will piss him (and his wife) off such that it could affect his “friendship” with Himbo (which honestly, I just don’t get) unless Nachos thought being Harry’s friend would provide him better opportunities.


----------



## CeeJay

rose60610 said:


> Thanks for the video! Nonetheless, the Harkles are, AGAIN, sponging off of somebody else's courage, sacrifice and good will.  Things that THEY will never have or do! So they leverage somebody else's efforts to try to make themselves look good. DEMENTED!


It’s SICK!!! .. and I really hope that this is the mega-nail in their coffin!  Truly, to do something like this to make $$$ from it?!?!  DISGUSTING!!!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so freaking inapproriate.



That's not Haz???!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> That's not Haz???!



It's Nacho. Harry's in the background.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I can understand why Harry and Meghan would find it appealing but what’s in it for Nacho and Delfina?


Maybe they like to rough it?


----------



## wisconsin

sdkitty said:


> Harry has become so angry and unappealing.  Pretty much his main claim to fame since he married her is going around talking about MY WIFE - as if being married made him a man.  And suing people.
> If he wants to get some good press maybe he should be seen with his children.


She won’t let him


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe they like to rough it?



Meghan might know some tricks from the yacht days. 

I don’t know what Harry could possibly bring to the table.


----------



## sdkitty

wisconsin said:


> She won’t let him


makes no sense


----------



## bag-mania

Spotify has been beyond patient with them. 1 1/2 years and only a single 20 minute preview podcast to show for it? If they had any integrity they would return the money they were given but I bet it has already been spent.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> makes no sense



It's been my theory for a while that after she didn't get out of the children what she wanted - starting with Archie not being titled a prince - she decided to not show the tiniest glimpse of the kids to spite the evil BRF, the evil Brits, the mean rest of the world and to maybe force interest. Their actions are too extreme to be explained with privacy alone, and I have a feeling Harry - who probably has a genuine interest in shielding his offspring - would probably be ok with the occasional picture like the Cambridges' approach.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Spotify has been beyond patient with them. 1 1/2 years and only a single 20 minute preview podcast to show for it? If they had any integrity they would return the money they were given but I bet it has already been spent.



Seriously. If I handled my contracts and deadlines like this I'd be so out of luck. Most of us would be. That said, I doubt they can just keep millions without any service in return. Spotify's lawyers can't be that stupid.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been my theory for a while that after she didn't get out of the children what she wanted - starting with Archie not being title a prince - she decided to not show the tiniest glimpse of the kids to spite the evil BRF, the evil Brits, the mean rest of the world and to maybe force interest. Their actions are too extreme to be explained with privacy alone, and I have a feeling Harry - who probably has a genuine interest in shielding his offspring - would probably be ok with the occasional picture like the Cambridges' approach.


I wonder if he has any idea that maybe his image is not good now....that all his suing and ranting makes him look bad?  If so, then showing him as a loving father could help.  I do believe she is probably the boss in everything but as you say, Harry may really want to shield the kids.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if he has any idea that maybe his image is not good now....that all his suing and ranting makes him look bad?  If so, then showing him as a loving father could help.  I do believe she is probably the boss in everything but as you say, *Harry may really want to shield the kids.*



Seeing that the two pap occasions where her with Archie - one even while he was conveniently abroad - it might be the one thing he did put his foot down with. I still think there's a difference in shielding your children and basically not let them leave the house.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Taira’s situation is 60% Nflix trying to cover for H&M. 40% is on H&M for needing this kind of cover.
Nflix needs to drop them - quickly. Any other corporation should beware. They do not deliver. Imo.

RE: the loving father - imo it is too late for that. He has lost the royal glow, the royal aura.  He puts out a really mean-spirited vibe, even in their Christmas photo where all eyes were on the girl.  The little boy was somewhat ignored. Another cautionary tale about being careful who we choose.  Now that I think about, Diana kinda lost the glow once she disconnected, too. Sure, she was pretty, just not at the royal level of pretty. All my opinion.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Taira’s situation is 60% Nflix trying to cover for H&M. 40% is on H&M for needing this kind of cover.
> Nflix needs to drop them - quickly. Any other corporation should beware. They do not deliver. Imo.


I'd love to know what Netflix senior management says about them behind closed doors.....Probably that they are a problem


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.



WOO-HOO!! .. I'm ALL here for that!!!!!!  But wait, which one? .. Spotify or Netflix? (I'm hoping Netflix)!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CeeJay said:


> WOO-HOO!! .. I'm ALL here for that!!!!!!  But wait, which one? .. Spotify or Netflix? (I'm hoping Netflix)!!



imo the blind item is about Spotify.  Nflix should do the same.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doubt it, but I bet their parents are


Yup, I bet so as well.  I remember going to some of the Polo Matches when I lived in Connecticut, and let me tell you .. the player's families were NOT poor by any means!  There were plenty of very high-end vehicles parked, these folks had the full-on Picnic food & beverages .. and from my horse friends, they all said "very fine horses".  Nachos is probably trying to teach them; who better, right?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> WOO-HOO!! .. I'm ALL here for that!!!!!!  But wait, which one? .. Spotify or Netflix? (I'm hoping Netflix)!!



This one was Spotify. Maybe if one makes a move, the other will follow suit.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. If I handled my contracts and deadlines like this I'd be so out of luck. Most of us would be. That said, I doubt they can just keep millions without any service in return. Spotify's lawyers can't be that stupid.


Right??? .. when I had my own Management Consulting/IT business in Boston, I sure as heck made sure that I responded to all inquiries and I got the JOB DONE!!  That's why I had 98% repeat business in a tough market!  When you are on your own (or have your own company), you work WAY MORE than 40 hours a week!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.




Maybe if she put her time and effort towards *working* rather than swanning about the polo field ...


----------



## CeeJay

sdkitty said:


> I'd love to know what Netflix senior management says about them behind closed doors.....Probably that they are a problem


I think it's high-time that I call my BIZ friends in LA to get the scoop-a-poop (the ones that knew the Markles way back when), because I bet they have heard something!  I'll see what I can find out ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

Credit, Kudos, Applause to the Lipstick Alley site for the photos below:
_Prince Philip on the cover of Tatler - July 1962_


 

_60 years later…_


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> imo the blind item is about Spotify.  Nflix should do the same.


Yeah, I kind of think so too, but that might just be the icing on the cake for Netflix, for them to take action.  Given the "response" that Megalomaniac got for her visit to Uvalde, this Ukraine "video" might just do it for them .. it's DISGUSTING in my opinion! 

One thing that I thought about (and at first kind of chuckled about it re: "Tampon" - remember Charles to Camilla), was that .. whoa, if you can get a video/audio using something like that, how much do we all believe 100% that those two definitely had recording devices on their persons during the Jubilee?!?!?!


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe if she put her time and effort towards *working* rather than swanning about the polo field ...


I'm becoming more & more convinced that that's really the only thing she truly KNOWS how to do!!!  I bet you anything, that her role on Suits was likely due to her "casting couch" abilities (if she was a Yacht Girl - she would know what to do).  She married Trevor because he was a Producer; she expected him to get roles for her (you know 'GOOD' roles) and when he didn't deliver?? .. buh-bye.  So then there is a casting call for Suits and she gets the part with her HORRIFIC acting???  Nah, don't believe it!


----------



## bag-mania

CeeJay said:


> WOO-HOO!! .. I'm ALL here for that!!!!!!  But wait, which one? .. Spotify or Netflix? (I'm hoping Netflix)!!



It says audio so they mean Spotify. If it was Netflix they would have said video.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if he has any idea that maybe his image is not good now....that all his suing and ranting makes him look bad?  If so, then showing him as a loving father could help.  I do believe she is probably the boss in everything but as you say, Harry may really want to shield the kids.


or maybe he thinks he is a big strong MAN defending his WIFE


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Netflix is just announcing the layoffs of more people and are saying they expect more!  The ship is tanking big-time; they must seriously be thinking about giving these two DAS BOOT!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> Netflix is just announcing the layoffs of more people and are saying they expect more!  The ship is tanking big-time; they must seriously be thinking about giving these two DAS BOOT!!!



I'd rather see two entitled multimillonaires lose their gig than normal working folks their job.


----------



## youngster

So, did Harry manage to wish his brother a happy 40th today or did he ignore him?


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> So, did Harry manage to wish his brother a happy 40th today or did he ignore him?



The real question is will the media call them out for ignoring it the way they called out the entire royal family for not going to Lilibet’s last minute imaginary birthday party?


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> So, did Harry manage to wish his brother a happy 40th today or did he ignore him?


Today’s the day he cleans out the chicken coop.


----------



## xincinsin

CeeJay said:


> One thing that I thought about (and at first kind of chuckled about it re: "Tampon" - remember Charles to Camilla), was that .. whoa, if you can get a video/audio using something like that, how much do we all believe 100% that those two definitely had recording devices on their persons during the Jubilee?!?!?!


Uh huh, hiding a recording device in her tampon would explain her "open stance" and bow-legged walk... (Ignore me, it's early morning here and I haven't had coffee yet... )


----------



## gracekelly

If you are going to do a podcast, you have to have something to talk about in an intelligent fashion.  What is she going to talk about besides herself.  So far she can't see beyond her own nose (is that a pun?) and references all things in life back to herself.  Unless you have had a life chock full of interesting things, and have had interesting relationships with well known people and are chock full of information and anecdotes, or are an authority on a particular subject or have an interest in a particular field, what is there to talk about?  She can't whine for an hour about her perceived mistreatment by Harry's family.  She had no real experience in the real Hollywood of major movies and television. Is she going to talk politics or what is happening in world events?  Is she going to talk about the invisible children?   No wonder there hasn't been any podcast.  She has nada.


----------



## Jayne1

Hermes Zen said:


> I promised to share more when I received my Cornelia James made in Sussex silk opera gloves ... well I received them today!  I ordered it after midnight on Thursday by am when I woke up the gloves were cut by the end of that day they were done, packed and ready to ship and picked up (Thursday).  Arrived today on west coast usa.  AND, the gloves fit !!!  Biggest achievement is the hand/fingers each were perfectly made to my dimensions.  They told me to place my measurements in the comment/note section in checkout and they did exactly what I had requested.  I also asked for the swarovski buttons instead of the fabric ones.  Here are the photos!  The box is beautiful and comes with same silk pouch to store the gloves.  Plus, a very nice note on the back side of the Cornelia James card, and tab that has the maker and inspection person names.
> 
> Sorry no photo of me wearing them.  I may be wearing these to a formal in August.  If I remember will take a pick but I know this is OT.  However, they are made in Sussex and my tie to M & H.   I'm ready to order another pair of gloves ... maybe ones in lilac.


I love the "made by" and "checked by" - sounds like quality!


----------



## Katel

Maggie Muggins said:


> It is possible that the two couples have a covert ménage à quatre?



I’ve seen many people post this rumor … and especially with that last picture where H was hanging on Delfina … (a trois)


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd rather see two entitled multimillonaires lose their gig than normal working folks their job.


100% totally agree, especially during these tough times!


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Today’s the day he cleans out the chicken coop.


That's OK because if Harry calls him to wish him a happy BD, William will be washing his hair or what is left of it.  

Phone ringing at Amner Hall.  

Harry:  Just called to wish William a Happy Birthday
Charlotte:  He's getting ready for his big party.  You're not coming.
Louis:  (emitting a loud noise that resembles a Bronx cheer)
George:  Dads in a meeting, but i will convey your best wishes to him.  Who are you again?
Kate:  Kids who are you talking to? 
Charlotte, Louis and George:  No one! (Giggling at one another)
Kate:  Please hang up the phone.  I told you not to speak to phone spammers! we don't need an auto warranty and our Amazon account has not been hacked.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> If you are going to do a podcast, you have to have something to talk about in an intelligent fashion.  What is she going to talk about besides herself.  So far she can't see beyond her own nose (is that a pun?) and references all things in life back to herself.  Unless you have had a life chock full of interesting things, and have had interesting relationships with well known people and are chock full of information and anecdotes, or are an authority on a particular subject or have an interest in a particular field, what is there to talk about?  She can't whine for an hour about her perceived mistreatment by Harry's family.  She had no real experience in the real Hollywood of major movies and television. Is she going to talk politics or what is happening in world events?  Is she going to talk about the invisible children?   No wonder there hasn't been any podcast.  She has nada.


Soooooooooo true!!!  She will ALWAYS be an LA Valley girl!


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> Soooooooooo true!!!  She will ALWAYS be an LA Valley girl!


Pleez.  I know some very smart people who live and lived in the Valley.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> What is dull is Scobie’s career as a royal commentator/reporter. He really needs to work on finding another line of work. Trash collection would be good. He’s used to dealing with it.





Or he'd be even more suited to get a job sweeping up all the animal sh*t at a zoo, seeing as all he does is talk utter sh*te.





csshopper said:


> Best description yet, “looks like a wax candle.”  The really cheap ones from the Dollar Store.









lanasyogamama said:


> Europe has better ones than US, we’re way behind.
> She spent too much time on the big lounger at the Inskip wedding
> View attachment 5421438


Were they photoshopped to appear closer together and holding hands? Because the shadow of the shoreline is broken like it's been cut and pasted back together  Photoshop fail.







Chanbal said:


> Is this the revenge of the Harkles? Disgusting!
> View attachment 5421726
> 
> View attachment 5421725
> 
> View attachment 5421724










Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!
> View attachment 5422361
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Gossip Says Prince Harry’s Memoir Has Apparently Been Rejected By Publisher Multiple Times
> 
> 
> Sources say Harry has gone through draft and draft trying to get it right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.suggest.com










Chanbal said:


> The Harkles and the grandiosity complex!
> View attachment 5423379
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan ‘hijacked’ car to avoid ‘third-tier’ royals in the UK: Details
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are said to have ‘hijacked’ a car while in the UK in an effort to avoid sharing a bus with ‘third-tier’ royals, according to royal commentator...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk





They didn't even deserve to be on the bus. They should have had to thumb a lift with some random strangers.




DoggieBags said:


> posted on Dior’s instagram



Oh Dior... how embarrassing that you admitted to creating this ill-fitting, unseasonal, fugly outfit for a very unlikable person. You fools.







sdkitty said:


> she still has a style thread too where she is admired


WhyTF?! Everything she wears is ill-fitting and/or doesn't suit her body shape.







bag-mania said:


> No, I get it. They have to be really agile, make sharp turns and might get hit by the ball or someone’s mallet. When I was looking for photos I noticed Harry yanks hard on his reins a lot. I don’t know if this is standard in polo or if he’s a crappy rider. Here’s a couple more photos of him from the same day. Neither of these horses is the one who fell.
> View attachment 5426843
> View attachment 5426844


One of the most pointless & unnecessary sports ever, it makes my blood boil at the thought of it. If you want to run around after a ball trying to hit it with a stick-like object, then get off the poor horse, use your own damn legs to run after a ball and go play hockey, tennis, golf, hurling or any other sport where you have to hit a ball with a stick-like object 





mellibelly said:


> What’s lower than a poor man’s Audrey Hepburn? They say Jayne Mansfield was a poor man’s Marilyn Monroe but Jayne was actually stunning and had a 149 IQ. Nutmeg is a faxed photocopy of a polaroid of Audrey and the machine is low on toner.


----------



## tiktok

youngster said:


> So, did Harry manage to wish his brother a happy 40th today or did he ignore him?



Tomorrow we'll hear how Harry wished him happy birthday privately and they're really building bridges now... and that the Sussexes sent a lemon / olive oil / elderflower cake to some charity as a sweet nod to something that involves their mother somehow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> If you are going to do a podcast, you have to have something to talk about in an intelligent fashion. ... She can't whine for an hour about her perceived mistreatment by Harry's family.


My office narc could talk for hours about how he was falling-down drunk in every country he has ever visited, how he single-handedly propped up the entire company, and how he planned to ditch his current lover because he deserved someone better/richer/whiter (yes, he was unabashedly racist). He spoke with great conviction and delusion to his captive audience in the office and never realized how foolish and unattractive he sounded. I figure Methane would submit something along that vein for Archetypes and be very embittered as to why Spotify kept vetoing it.


----------



## xincinsin

Lounorada said:


> Were they photoshopped to appear closer together and holding hands? Because the shadow of the shoreline is broken like it's been cut and pasted back together  Photoshop fail.
> View attachment 5431263


A nice analysis of the Photoshop fail in this and a couple of other H&M photos 








						Some people have claimed that Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex’s pictures have been photoshopped. Is that true and if that is the case, are ...
					

Answer (1 of 5): Yes! There was an example a couple of years ago that was very noticeable for the trained eye:  Recently, on Twitter, there were some claims that the video for the Time Magazine 100, was computer generated. It is the video which was aired on September 22, the one where Harry and M...




					www.quora.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Lounorada said:


> Were they photoshopped to appear closer together and holding hands? Because the shadow of the shoreline is broken like it's been cut and pasted back together  Photoshop fail.
> View attachment 5431263



OMG you're right!  And look at the little table and the chaise behind them!  Totally "broken" lines!


----------



## Sharont2305

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5431280


Ah, Dame Maggie, I'm telling you, the Dowager would sort TW out... with one look.


----------



## needlv

I am really hoping that Netflix does some type of parody/comedy series called “the duchess…” and take thinly veiled shots at H and M and what they were like “behind the scenes” inspired from real stories of Netflix cameramen etc.  eg, a vain dlist former actress desperately trying for fame … sort of like that tv show Veep?

That I would watch.


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if Hazz's guardian major is in one the videos, but it might be an interesting article for the girls of the Kilt Club. 










						Troops And Shetland Pony Mascot Welcome Queen To Balmoral Castle With Guard Of Honour
					

The Queen cast her eye over soldiers from Balaklava Company, 5th Battalion the Royal Regiment of Scotland outside the castle gates.




					www.forces.net


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Come on Spotify, rip off the bandaid. We'll be celebrating you.


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> That's not Haz???!



I'm glad I wasn't the only one fooled, lol! Good to see you around this thread by the way How is "our" baby Barenia Toile??


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


>




The comments   

Comment A - Oh, I forgot about Spotify
Comment B - So did Harry and Meghan


----------



## Chanbal

Makled?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

There is another article about the possibility of Hazz renouncing his Suss*x title, coincidence?










						Prince Andrew could be stripped of his Duke of York title
					

The royal has faced fresh calls to lose his Duke of York title - which he was given by the Queen on his wedding day in 1986 - following the multi-million pound out-of-court settlement Virginia Giuffre.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

It seems like with other celeb deals, you really don’t hear about them until they’re about to release and promote the product.  I’m sure there are tons of deals we never heard about because they didn’t go anywhere. Has been and never was announce things the second pen hits paper and now they have to deal with their inability to produce.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Makled?




I honestly doubt the Troublesome Two have anything to do with that...but also, they just radiate bad luck, don't they?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been my theory for a while that after she didn't get out of the children what she wanted - starting with Archie not being titled a prince - she decided to not show the tiniest glimpse of the kids to spite the evil BRF, the evil Brits, the mean rest of the world and to maybe force interest. Their actions are too extreme to be explained with privacy alone, and I have a feeling Harry - who probably has a genuine interest in shielding his offspring - would probably be ok with the occasional picture like the Cambridges' approach.


I'm going to add a theory of my own--if any of their 2 children was brought to the UK for the Jubilee it was Invisibet--hoping for a photo op with TQ. 

Archie was left back in Cali because TW has worries that their children could be kept in the UK due to some ancient royal laws or whatever--she needs that insurance the meal tickets bring her. Since she is devious it is easy for her to think that of others. But she is always smarter (in her mind) so A stayed home. Just my theory.


----------



## kemilia

CeeJay said:


> Yup, I bet so as well.  I remember going to some of the Polo Matches when I lived in Connecticut, and let me tell you .. the player's families were NOT poor by any means!  There were plenty of very high-end vehicles parked, these folks had the full-on Picnic food & beverages .. and from my horse friends, they all said "very fine horses".  Nachos is probably trying to teach them; who better, right?


Polo ponies are some of the most expensive horses out there I think. "Regular" folk don't have them and/or play polo. It's a pretty elitist activity (I refuse to call any activity a "sport" that uses animals).


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


>



Was this photo of “Pinocchio” with the framed photo of Pinocchio and Lili in the background taken on Aug 4, Pinocchio’s birthday?  If so that framed photo is really old!  However that doesn’t look like a 2 month old baby and that’s what she would’ve been on Aug 4.  Then they release that photo just recently and we are supposed to think it was taken at Lili’s first birthday party??


----------



## kemilia

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5431259
> 
> Or he'd be even more suited to get a job sweeping up all the animal sh*t at a zoo, seeing as all he does is talk utter sh*te.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431260
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Were they photoshopped to appear closer together and holding hands? Because the shadow of the shoreline is broken like it's been cut and pasted back together  Photoshop fail.
> View attachment 5431263
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431266
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431269
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431280
> 
> They didn't even deserve to be on the bus. They should have had to thumb a lift with some random strangers.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh Dior... how embarrassing that you admitted to creating this ill-fitting, unseasonal, fugly outfit for a very unlikable person. You fools.
> View attachment 5431283
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WhyTF?! Everything she wears is ill-fitting and/or doesn't suit her body shape.
> View attachment 5431286
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the most pointless & unnecessary sports ever, it makes my blood boil at the thought of it. If you want to run around after a ball trying to hit it with a stick-like object, then get off the poor horse, use your own damn legs to run after a ball and go play hockey, tennis, golf, hurling or any other sport where you have to hit a ball with a stick-like object
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431292


EXCELLENT photoshop catch! I learned a lot back in the days of KK's photo shop fails, gotta get my eyeballs back to work again.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Archie was left back in Cali because TW has worries that their children could be kept in the UK due to some ancient royal laws or whatever--she needs that insurance the meal tickets bring her. Since she is devious it is easy for her to think that of others. But she is always smarter (in her mind) so A stayed home. Just my theory.



I can’t imagine anyone rational believing that the royal family would try to steal the children. There are many other children in this generation of the royal line and quite frankly those two are not necessary to its future. I’d find it more believable that Meghan left one kid behind so that Harry wouldn’t get it in his head to bolt with them once he was on native soil.  

My belief is they didn’t need Archie for this trip so he was left at home.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I can’t imagine anyone rational believing that the royal family would try to steal the children. There are many other children in this generation of the royal line and quite frankly those two are not necessary to its future. I’d find it more believable that Meghan left one kid behind so that Harry wouldn’t get it in his head to bolt with them once he was on native soil.
> 
> My belief is they didn’t need Archie for this trip so he was left at home.


H taking the kids off to somewhere makes sense, I doubt she trusts him--she knows his mental problems and it seems he can be off balanced. 

If someone got a hold of him and talked sense into him he may just go off to some country manor with the kids to figure things out, and her grip might slip. No courtiers are going to go to bat for her at this point.


----------



## youngster

So, the former first couple, Barack and Michelle, are leaving Spotify for Audible. If what I read is true, Spotify wanted more content than they were willing to provide.  I could see the Harkles putting out some press release that they are doing the same so, naturally, their Spotify deal is at an end.  Crazy to me how all these famous people think they should be paid millions for a teeny tiny amount of actual content.  In the Harkles case, 25 minutes or so for one episode.  One can hope that Spotify has learned a lesson from all this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What a stark contrast to Raptor's face malfunction because Harry didn't do exactly what she wanted in front of the altar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, I was wondering why Zara was oh so friendly. I think she might be a very good actress indeed


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> H taking the kids off to somewhere makes sense, I doubt she trusts him--she knows his mental problems and it seems he can be off balanced.
> 
> If someone got a hold of him and talked sense into him he may just go off to some country manor with the kids to figure things out, and her grip might slip. No courtiers are going to go to bat for her at this point.



If the jubilee proved anything it’s that Harry has burned too many bridges to ever go back to his old life. He’s not brave enough or competent enough to go it alone so I expect he’ll stay right where he is.


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> It seems like with other celeb deals, you really don’t hear about them until they’re about to release and promote the product.  I’m sure there are tons of deals we never heard about because they didn’t go anywhere. *Has been and never was* announce things the second pen hits paper and now they have to deal with their inability to produce.


Perfect! Absolutely perfect.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Pleez.  I know some very smart people who live and lived in the Valley.


Yes, you are one of them .. but sadly, I found percentage-wise that didn't seem to be the case (especially a neighbor who didn't even know that the Revolutionary War was fighting the British .. seriously?!?!?!?!)!!!!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

kemilia said:


> Polo ponies are some of the most expensive horses out there I think. "Regular" folk don't have them and/or play polo. It's a pretty elitist activity (I refuse to call any activity a "sport" that uses animals).


MOST DEFINITELY!!! .. and hence the reason why there really aren't that many players out there!  The area in Connecticut where I went to see the Polo matches was in a very exclusive area, lots of old-time Yankee $$$ and big houses.  Miss Porter's school was right down the road and it was a friend of mine who attended Miss Porter's who invited me to the matches (otherwise, I couldn't just "go in")!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

1LV said:


> Perfect! Absolutely perfect.


I can’t take credit, I read it somewhere!


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t take credit, I read it somewhere!


I love it.  Best and most fitting one I’ve heard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kkfiregirl

youngster said:


> So, the former first couple, Barack and Michelle, are leaving Spotify for Audible. If what I read is true, Spotify wanted more content than they were willing to provide. I could see the Harkles putting out some press release that they are doing the same so, naturally, their Spotify deal is at an end.



And this is why people on the internet (rightfully) call them the _fauxbamas_, because they are always trying to copy the former first couple.


----------



## kkfiregirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, I was wondering why Zara was oh so friendly. I think she might be a very good actress indeed




This was so awkward to witness- it reminded me of the Christmas singing performance where she couldn’t get anyone to hold her hand.

edit- I watched it again & Zara is being polite but she is teeming with nervous energy/jitters- she looks uncomfortable and anxious to be done with the conversation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, it looks awkward _because it is. 
_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kkfiregirl said:


> This was so awkward to witness- it reminded me of the Christmas singing performance where she couldn’t get anyone to hold her hand.
> 
> edit- I watched it again & Zara is being polite but she is teeming with nervous energy/jitters- she looks uncomfortable and anxious to be done with the conversation.



And her face when they finally step away!


----------



## duna

N/m


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## sdkitty

kkfiregirl said:


> And this is why people on the internet (rightfully) call them the _fauxbamas_, because they are always trying to copy the former first couple.


as I've said repeatedly, the grifters are not worthy to shine their shoes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It is kind of tragic. I don't care about the useless briefcase girl, but Harry could have gone places had he not broken up with his family and their vast ressources and skillful staff that made him look good and developed projects for him.

And I still can't see how being the king's closest advisor with all the perks is such a horrible position to be in.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, it looks awkward _because it is.
> _



Is that Hazmat to the right behind Meghan with his GUT hanging out?  Gross!!!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And I still can't see how being the king's closest advisor with all the perks is such a horrible position to be in.



He’s too stupid and self-important to be useful as an advisor. Let’s face it, he’s the Andrew of his generation. It makes me worried about how Louis is going to turn out.


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


> What’s lower than a poor man’s Audrey Hepburn? They say Jayne Mansfield was a poor man’s Marilyn Monroe but Jayne was actually stunning and had a 149 IQ. Nutmeg is a faxed photocopy of a polaroid of Audrey and the machine is low on toner.


Jayne Mansfield was great - she and that generation of  more minor stars really wrote the book on reinventing yourself 

I loved this little video a drag queen I really like  made about her:




Chanbal said:


> They need to stay relevant to make the money they seem to like. Private jets, Dior attires, Cartier… are expensive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's kind phone call to family of teacher killed in Texas shooting
> 
> 
> The nephew of Irma Garcia, a teacher who was killed alongside 19 children and a fellow educator during a school shooting in Uvalde, Texas last month, said that "sweet and lovely" Meghan Markle has shared her condolences with the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


She’s budgeting for what matters- after all talk is cheap- literally in this case.

I assume she’s now done for the year now good works wise.


Chanbal said:


> There is another article about the possibility of Hazz renouncing his Suss*x title, coincidence?
> View attachment 5431506
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew could be stripped of his Duke of York title
> 
> 
> The royal has faced fresh calls to lose his Duke of York title - which he was given by the Queen on his wedding day in 1986 - following the multi-million pound out-of-court settlement Virginia Giuffre.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Good for the people of York for putting their foot down- they don’t deserve such a toxic association and tbh I think Sussex is less bothered because Brits don’t tend to associate H with his title quite as much  but it’d still be good. 


lanasyogamama said:


> It seems like with other celeb deals, you really don’t hear about them until they’re about to release and promote the product.  I’m sure there are tons of deals we never heard about because they didn’t go anywhere. Has been and never was announce things the second pen hits paper and now they have to deal with their inability to produce.


You are right it’s very odd- just goes to show how heavy the PR is I guess. I mean you occasionally hear they sign the deal- then the product/ad whatever arrives pretty quickly-


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt the Troublesome Two have anything to do with that...but also, they just radiate bad luck, don't they?


I wonder whether the implication is she’s got a guilty conscience/ secret and that’s why she quit suddenly.

I think it’s probably more likely she’s having some sort of health problems herself that she just doesn’t want to share with the whole world because she maybe treated some D lister a year ago.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a stark contrast to Raptor's face malfunction because Harry didn't do exactly what she wanted in front of the altar.



Anyone who puts Kate Bush in their romantic songs play list gets a tick. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, it looks awkward _because it is.
> _



The sheer awkwardness is difficult to watch 
“_Why again does she need a bodyguard no one even talks to her they all look like they’re ignoring her”_

I feel like OP answers their own question here- she pays someone to look interested in her


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He’s too stupid and self-important to be useful as an advisor. Let’s face it, he’s the Andrew of his generation. It makes me worried about how Louis is going to turn out.


His parents are more hands-on.  hopefully he'll turn out ok


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He’s too stupid and self-important to be useful as an advisor. Let’s face it, he’s the Andrew of his generation. It makes me worried about how Louis is going to turn out.



The Cambridges seem like involved parents without much drama, so there's hope.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Cambridges seem like involved parents without much drama, so there's hope.


yes, I think Elizabeth was a better queen than mom unfortunately


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes, I think Elizabeth was a better queen than mom unfortunately



I think you are right, but to be fair she ascended to the throne when she had two toddlers, and she was the one actually running the show. William probably won't be king for another ten years, so his children will be teenagers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is kind of tragic. I don't care about the useless briefcase girl, but Harry could have gone places had he not broken up with his family and their vast ressources and skillful staff that made him look good and developed projects for him.
> 
> And I still can't see how being the king's closest advisor with all the perks is such a horrible position to be in.


Margaret chose to stay.  She was told she could marry Capt Townsend, but she would not be HRH anymore.  She looked around and saw which side her bread was buttered......


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Jeremy Scott was obviously heavily influenced by the 'fashion-forward' Prince.





Jeremy Scott Adidas Originals 2016(?)


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> He’s too stupid and self-important to be useful as an advisor. Let’s face it, he’s the Andrew of his generation. It makes me worried about how Louis is going to turn out.



Louis will hopefully get a (real) job


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is kind of tragic. I don't care about the useless briefcase girl, but Harry could have gone places had he not broken up with his family and their vast ressources and skillful staff that made him look good and developed projects for him.
> 
> And I still can't see how being the king's closest advisor with all the perks is such a horrible position to be in.


I doubt he was ever considered astute or knowledgeable enough to rank as advisor to anyone much less his sovereign.


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I doubt he was ever considered astute or knowledgeable enough to rank as advisor to anyone much less his sovereign.


he was more likeable as the bad boy when he was young but that doesn't last....he has not developed into an admirable man - even though he feels so grown up now that he has a WIFE


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I doubt he was ever considered astute or knowledgeable enough to rank as advisor to anyone much less his sovereign.



They would have found a place for him, if only as emotional support animal to William. May I remind the crowd he's still CoS


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, it looks awkward _because it is.
> _



Well, yeah .. when you are that VAPID, who wants to carry on a conversation with you .. oh wait, Himbo (Harry)!


----------



## Lounorada

xincinsin said:


> A nice analysis of the Photoshop fail in this and a couple of other H&M photos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some people have claimed that Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex’s pictures have been photoshopped. Is that true and if that is the case, are ...
> 
> 
> Answer (1 of 5): Yes! There was an example a couple of years ago that was very noticeable for the trained eye:  Recently, on Twitter, there were some claims that the video for the Time Magazine 100, was computer generated. It is the video which was aired on September 22, the one where Harry and M...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.quora.com





purseinsanity said:


> OMG you're right!  And look at the little table and the chaise behind them!  Totally "broken" lines!





kemilia said:


> EXCELLENT photoshop catch! I learned a lot back in the days of KK's photo shop fails, gotta get my eyeballs back to work again.


Even after looking at it again I noticed another odd thing which is the line on his arm, where the bottom half of his arm is weirdly a few shades darker than the other half- split with a sharp line 
That line on his arm, the broken line of the table in the background and the broken line on the shoreline all join up in a vertical line. 
I have no idea when/where this pic was taken and I don't know why there was a need to make them look closer in the picture, it's quite pathetic. It looks more like an amateur cut/paste job done on Microsoft Paint than a job for photoshop


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Even after looking at it again I noticed another odd thing which is the line on his arm, where the bottom half of his arm is weirdly a few shades darker than the other half- split with a sharp line
> That line on his arm, the broken line of the table in the background and the broken line on the shoreline all join up in a vertical line.
> I have no idea when/where this pic was taken and I don't know why there was a need to make them look closer in the picture, it's quite pathetic. It looks more like an amateur cut/paste job done on Microsoft Paint than a job for photoshop
> 
> View attachment 5431811
> View attachment 5431813



When you hire a student intern and the only pay you offer is “experience” this is what you can expect to get.


----------



## bag-mania

What was the Spotify podcast supposed to be about? I seem to remember they were going to have influential people as guests. Maybe the problem was they couldn’t find any willing to indulge them.


----------



## CeeJay

papertiger said:


> Jeremy Scott was obviously heavily influenced by the 'fashion-forward' Prince.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431749
> 
> 
> Jeremy Scott Adidas Originals 2016(?)
> 
> View attachment 5431748


HA HA HA .. good one!!! 

I think I said this before, but I had a colleague in London who served with Hazz-ard and he said that the guy did NOTHING!  Was a lazy boozer, "super"-protected by security and WAS NOT a Helicopter Pilot as he NEVER passed the test (he took it 3 times and the military said "no more").  He was (in essence) a wingman, but they didn't put him on any truly "hazardous" assignments.  My colleague said that if he was ever invited to a Military even with Hap-Hazzard, he would TURN his back on him because he was not a "true soldier"!


----------



## xincinsin

Lounorada said:


> Even after looking at it again I noticed another odd thing which is the line on his arm, where the bottom half of his arm is weirdly a few shades darker than the other half- split with a sharp line
> That line on his arm, the broken line of the table in the background and the broken line on the shoreline all join up in a vertical line.
> I have no idea when/where this pic was taken and I don't know why there was a need to make them look closer in the picture, it's quite pathetic. It looks more like an amateur cut/paste job done on Microsoft Paint than a job for photoshop
> 
> View attachment 5431811
> View attachment 5431813


I presume that, like in the Christmas photo, they composited the preferred parts of a series of photos. So Hazard looked better in Photo A but Methane looked better in Photo B, and jigsaw happened.


----------



## Vintage Leather

mellibelly said:


> What’s lower than a poor man’s Audrey Hepburn? They say Jayne Mansfield was a poor man’s Marilyn Monroe but Jayne was actually stunning and had a 149 IQ. Nutmeg is a faxed photocopy of a polaroid of Audrey and the machine is low on toner.


“Poor Man’s Marilyn” isn’t a commentary on her looks and intelligence - just on her character’s standards.

Marilyn played characters who believed you couldn’t truly love a poor man, because you’d spend too much time worrying about money. Love is a product of leisure.
Jane’s characters fall for club owners and script writers, and mobsters.



CeeJay said:


> Well, yeah .. when you are that VAPID, who wants to carry on a conversation with you .. oh wait, Himbo (Harry)!



I think you’re being far to kind to ole hazzmat. 

A himbo has abs of steel and a heart of gold, whose kindness and optimism are occasionally cause them to act foolishly.  The rejection of toxic masculinity while still identifying as having masc traits. The human equivalent of a golden retriever.

Hazzmat lacks the abs, the heart and the lack of toxicity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



I suspect that most of the "experts" she was eyeing for Archtypes had opinions which didn't align with hers. Maybe all she had on board were Shola on how women's voices need to be HEARD (i.e. Methane), Janina Gavankar on how unfair the media is to women (i.e. Methane), Omid on how successful women (i.e. Methane) are typecasted. They might have proposed Harry the ButterCup coach as the mental health expert who REALLY understands women and the challenges they face (Methane again).


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think you are right, but to be fair she ascended to the throne when she had two toddlers, and she was the one actually running the show. William probably won't be king for another ten years, so his children will be teenagers.


I think a big part of the problem isn’t so much the child raising as there were always nannies around to give them attention and how different is that from the millions of kids in daycare really? The real problem is that these royal men  get infantilised well into adulthood- in Charles’ case well into old age and it means they can’t take responsibility for anything and are just obsessed with their childhoods.


papertiger said:


> Jeremy Scott was obviously heavily influenced by the 'fashion-forward' Prince.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5431749
> 
> 
> Jeremy Scott Adidas Originals 2016(?)
> 
> View attachment 5431748


This rainbow camouflage reminds me of some one hit wonder from the last few decades and it is going to nag me like mad until I remember who it is…


bag-mania said:


> He’s too stupid and self-important to be useful as an advisor. Let’s face it, he’s the Andrew of his generation. It makes me worried about how Louis is going to turn out.


Aw he’s only a little kid and I think the whole royal thing will be scrapped during his lifetime. He will hopefully have his own life anyways.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


>



Well most people would think they’ve got enough money for her to be a SAHM if she wanted though maybe he just resents having to work to pay for her to play with her dolls all day


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

Just leaving this here as a reminder of the vile woman - feel bad for her mom and kidss


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



The comments are hilarious, especially those which comment on his additional hair.
This one is my favourite: *“Still his mother’s son”? Yes, that is usually how it works for all of who have been born. *


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aw, did Raptor not read anything about her again and felt the need to get her side of the story out?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> This rainbow camouflage reminds me of some one hit wonder from the last few decades and it is going to nag me like mad until I remember who it is…



Well, Andy Warhol (on screen prints) did it first in the 1980s


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




"Prince Harry 'very keen' to offer his military experience"  

Macho BS. Again, PR to peacock at the expense of real people suffering. 'Offering' is just an advert for his amazing manliness and leadership qualities  -  and garnering interest in their Ukrainian podcast/broadcast etc.


Like how TBLG caught that no paps would have been allowed at the Polo match. All fake footage commissioned by H&M - and even then they can't control themselves not to look like a cheap episode of _Swingers_.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw, did Raptor not read anything about her again and felt the need to get her side of the story out?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432049


Of course they didn't. They just wanted an up-close and personal tête-à-tête with HMTQ, being so concerned about her, you know. What a hoot!


----------



## Sharont2305

She, or the minion that typed this out, can't even get her own title right, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> She, or the minion that typed this out, can't even get her own title right, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432097


There she goes again, using "same as you" as a reason to hop on bandwagons: "As a mom, as a friend..."


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> There she goes again, using "same as you" as a reason to hop on bandwagons: "As a mom, as a friend..."



  as neat saccharine


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> She, or the minion that typed this out, can't even get her own title right, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432097



If it was not to The Duchess' liking, the minion would be mincemeat by now. From this staying-up, we can assume the narc Duchess is fine with it.

Just the use of the word "kids" in the actual letter, and not children, is so faux 'down to your level' pretentiousness on headed paper that signs-off with her title.

And a bloody exclamation mark!!! 

Another one of those letters written to be shown, paraded around and can be mounted on the wall.

Send an email like the rest of the World and get over yourself woman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Helventara

Sharont2305 said:


> She, or the minion that typed this out, can't even get her own title right, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432097


She should market her letters and snacks as energy bars or super food or any other of nourishment source as she seems to think that her mere word salads and snacks are invigorating 

ETA:  why, again WHY, use the title bestowed from a racist institution like it’s her surname?  WHY?!


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> If it was not to The Duchess' liking, the minion would be mincemeat by now. From this staying-up, we can assume the narc Duchess is fine with it.
> 
> Just the use of the word "kids" in the actual letter, and not children, is so faux 'down to your level' pretentiousness in a headed paper that signs-off with her title.
> 
> And a bloody exclamation mark!!!
> 
> Another one of those letters written to be shown, paraded around and can be mounted on the wall.
> 
> Send an email like the rest of the World and get over yourself woman.


And, I think, ladies should be with a capital L in this case. I may be wrong, please correct me.


----------



## Helventara

Sharont2305 said:


> And, I think, *ladies should be with a capital L in this case*. I may be wrong, please correct me.


Good catch!


----------



## xincinsin

Just wondering: why is it always snacks, sandwiches, cake, gifts sponsored by other people? They always trumpet those meagre offerings. And all contributions which sound like they may be in cash are glossed over. Are their "cash" contributions also "in kind"?

ETA: forgot about the meaningful bananas


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> She, or the minion that typed this out, can't even get her own title right, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432097


This grammar, Jesus, it’s as bad as mine on this forum. That comma splice on the last sentence is chronic. The sign off too  
If I got this in the post with a couple of tubes of rich teas I’d assume it was a prank.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw, did Raptor not read anything about her again and felt the need to get her side of the story out?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432049


_Neena neena you didn’t dump me! I dumped you! I was never with you anyway. I don’t even like you! _

Jesus she’s like an unlikeable version of Helga from Hey Arnold.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> This grammar, Jesus, it’s as bad as mine on this forum. That comma splice on the last sentence is chronic. The sign off too
> If I got this in the post with a couple of tubes of rich teas I’d assume it was a prank.



At last we can blame autocorrect (which is never correct)


----------



## lallybelle

I have nothing but respect and for Shannon Watts and Moms  Demand. They have been doing the work for years on gun violence. Miss thing need not insert herself in the conversation...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just don't get why people still jump in awe. If I received that letter I would absolutely not post it on Twitter


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



Parading in her shorts!!


----------



## Annawakes

The crest/logo on that letter.  Is it just an “M” now with a crown above it?  I thought they had an intertwined H and M logo.

What is the crown for again?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> The crest/logo on that letter.  Is it just an “M” now with a crown above it?  I thought they had an intertwined H and M logo.
> 
> What is the crown for again?



Kween of the Sugars!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That said, Jerry Hall has not exactly the best taste in men, has she.


----------



## sdkitty

I think this is BS








						Kate Middleton Reportedly Called Harry & Gave Him the Nudge to Acknowledge William's 40th Birthday
					

It’s pretty clear that Prince William and Prince Harry aren’t doing much talking these days, but there’s someone who is trying their best to bring the brothers together. Kate Middleton has reportedly been working behind the scenes in hopes that she can get the dialogue flowing in the smallest of...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



using Diana AGAIN


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, Jerry Hall has not exactly the best taste in men, has she.


I'm pretty sure that six years will give her money to last the rest of her life


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm pretty sure that six years will give her money to last the rest of her life



That doesn't make a nearly 100yo guy any hotter though (or a serial cheater less gross).


----------



## rose60610

Morbid thought: Murdoch must be darned healthy. I mean, the guy is 91, if Hall waited it out would she stand to get a bundle more as a widow than as a divorcee? Or maybe this was an arranged marriage from the get-go to feed his ego after Deng divorced him and Hall just can't take it anymore? At any rate, a 91 year old billionaire must be hugely attractive to MM. All she'd have to do is substitute lard for the olive oil and feed him cake, cake, cake!  No vegan diet for Rupert!


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Morbid thought: Murdoch must be darned healthy. I mean, the guy is 91, if Hall waited it out would she stand to get a bundle more as a widow than as a divorcee? Or maybe this was an arranged marriage from the get-go to feed his ego after Deng divorced him and Hall just can't take it anymore? At any rate, a 91 year old billionaire must be hugely attractive to MM. All she'd have to do is substitute lard for the olive oil and feed him cake, cake, cake!  No vegan diet for Rupert!


he's probably too smart to go for that grifter


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> he's probably too smart to go for that grifter



Agreed. But that won't stop HER!  Remember how she visited Gov Newsom to probably beg to be appointed senator to replace KH? And thought the world should feel sorry for her after marrying into the BRF? And went to the U.N. to accomplish whatever didn't happen?  Meghan probably keeps tabs on all the billionaires. She doesn't get it. Nobody can stand her. There's over 2600 billionaires in the world now. That's a big spread sheet but I have confidence in Meghan that she does and can handle it! After all, the BRF probably will never take Harry back, that bridge got cremated into ashes. Without the BRF, she's learning Harry isn't that marketable. Onward to greener pastures!


----------



## Cinderlala

Oh my.  That letter. 

I love that she leads with _Personal Correspondence_ as if she has any other correspondence. 

And her stationery looks like it's from Pottery Barn Kids.  Which would be fine...if she was a kid.


----------



## Jayne1

Lounorada said:


> Even after looking at it again I noticed another odd thing which is the line on his arm, where the bottom half of his arm is weirdly a few shades darker than the other half- split with a sharp line
> That line on his arm, the broken line of the table in the background and the broken line on the shoreline all join up in a vertical line.
> I have no idea when/where this pic was taken and I don't know why there was a need to make them look closer in the picture, it's quite pathetic. It looks more like an amateur cut/paste job done on Microsoft Paint than a job for photoshop
> 
> View attachment 5431811
> View attachment 5431813


I've seen that photo posted so many times and never noticed!

Also his hand is not quite the right way a real hand would hold hers.


----------



## Cinderlala

Jayne1 said:


> I've seen that photo posted so many times and never noticed!
> 
> Also his hand is not quite the right way a real hand would hold hers.


 
I think she added herself to the photo.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, Jerry Hall has not exactly the best taste in men, has she.


She got this billionaire to marry her though.  lol. Jagger has always been notoriously stingy.


----------



## Jayne1

Cinderlala said:


> I think she added herself to the photo.


That's what I think.  The photo was posted around the time it was thought they had broken up.


----------



## lulu212121

Sharont2305 said:


> And, I think, ladies should be with a capital L in this case. I may be wrong, please correct me.


Thank you for pointing out these mistakes. This one letter shows how truly elementary she is. Embarrassing.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Agreed. But that won't stop HER!  Remember how she visited Gov Newsom to probably beg to be appointed senator to replace KH? And thought the world should feel sorry for her after marrying into the BRF? And went to the U.N. to accomplish whatever didn't happen?  Meghan probably keeps tabs on all the billionaires. She doesn't get it. Nobody can stand her. There's over 2600 billionaires in the world now. That's a big spread sheet but I have confidence in Meghan that she does and can handle it! After all, the BRF probably will never take Harry back, that bridge got cremated into ashes. Without the BRF, she's learning Harry isn't that marketable. Onward to greener pastures!


who knows what goes on in that lizard brain of hers


----------



## csshopper

IF they took the money increasingly being wasted on Sunshine Sucks and used it instead as donations to these worthy causes, that would be worth reporting.

Surprised the accompanying note wasn’t done in calligraphy.

They are going to have to hustle to post something today. The Cambridges are on a roll and lighting up the Net.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> IF they took the money increasingly being wasted on Sunshine Sucks and used it instead as donations to these worthy causes, that would be worth reporting.
> 
> Surprised the accompanying note wasn’t done in calligraphy.
> 
> They are going to have to hustle to post something today. The Cambridges are on a roll and lighting up the Net.


I can't even imagine having a life that is built around seeking public attention.  at least Harry has his polo (not that I like it but it's something to do other than attention seeking, I think).  Or maybe he's doing it just for attention.  IDK


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooooh no. Are there any windows left in Monteshito?
QE’s brooch, Diana’s earrings and bracelet. Wow.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh no. Are there any windows left in Monteshito?
> QE’s brooch, Diana’s earrings and bracelet. Wow.



While I do not like the dress K does wear it well. And the jewelry is making a definite statement. 
W looks great too (once again thank goodness that he was born first).


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh no. Are there any windows left in Monteshito?
> QE’s brooch, Diana’s earrings and bracelet. Wow.



WoW! So regal even without all the pomp.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The jokes write themselves.


----------



## Gal4Dior

CarryOn2020 said:


> The jokes write themselves.




Aww HELL.TO.THE.NO.

That's so gross. No amount of money in the world...


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh no. Are there any windows left in Monteshito?
> QE’s brooch, Diana’s earrings and bracelet. Wow.



It’s green!  Lololol!  Right there this is worthy of every window in the Casa being broken. This brooch must have been sitting in the Royal Jewelry archive all these years.

Perhaps there is a brooch for the Duchess of Sussex?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think this is BS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton Reportedly Called Harry & Gave Him the Nudge to Acknowledge William's 40th Birthday
> 
> 
> It’s pretty clear that Prince William and Prince Harry aren’t doing much talking these days, but there’s someone who is trying their best to bring the brothers together. Kate Middleton has reportedly been working behind the scenes in hopes that she can get the dialogue flowing in the smallest of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


The only reason I think there could be a kernel of truth to this is that Catherine views Harry as suffering from mental illness.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I'm pretty sure that six years will give her money to last the rest of her life


Of course there was a pre nup. She knew she was signing on as a nurse. I think he was the problem and not her. I have never seen one bad thing written about Jerry Hall.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> The only reason I think there could be a kernel of truth to this is that Catherine views Harry as suffering from mental illness.



I’m thinking it’s not true. Catherine has information about the situation that none of us are privy to and it’s likely worse than we can imagine. If they wouldn’t talk to Harry at the jubilee, she certainly isn’t calling him. Her loyalty is to her husband and William has no desire to speak to his brother.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> IF they took the money increasingly being wasted on Sunshine Sucks and used it instead as donations to these worthy causes, that would be worth reporting.
> 
> Surprised the accompanying note wasn’t done in calligraphy.
> 
> They are going to have to hustle to post something today. The Cambridges are on a roll and lighting up the Net.


amazingly a lot of people are buying how wonderful she is for picking up the phone or buying sandwiches - not calling them out for living in a huge mansion, travelling on private jets and Not giving any substantial donations to anyone

she called the family of one of the Uvalde victims....how would she get their phone number?  anyway they were apparently thrilled


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m thinking it’s not true. Catherine has information about the situation that none of us are privy to and it’s likely worse than we can imagine. If they wouldn’t talk to Harry at the jubilee, she certainly isn’t calling him. Her loyalty is to her husband and William has no desire to speak to his brother.


I agree with you regarding her loyalty to her husband. She could not ignore Meghan and not ignore Harry as well at the Jubilee. Actually, I think they were spared from having any proximity to the Sussex so that made it easy.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I agree with you regarding her loyalty to her husband. She could not ignore Meghan and not ignore Harry as well at the Jubilee. Actually, I think they were spared from having any proximity to the Sussex so that made it easy.



They were wary about the microphones as well. They have to assume any phone call they make to them is likewise being recorded.


----------



## octopus17

gracekelly said:


> It’s green!  Lololol!  Right there this is worthy of every window in the Casa being broken. This brooch must have been sitting in the Royal Jewelry archive all these years.
> 
> Perhaps there is a brooch for the Duchess of Sussex?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432547
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432549


Quick where's the Sharpie! Surely she needs some sort of message written on it...


----------



## bag-mania

I curse whoever taught Meghan that sending a small token gift of food and coffee means automatically getting glowing press from the mainstream media. It’s been her go-to move for awhile now.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I curse whoever taught Meghan that sending a small token gift of food and coffee means automatically getting glowing press from the mainstream media. It’s been her go-to move for awhile now.


apparently this is their "life of service"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I curse whoever taught Meghan that sending a small token gift of food and coffee means automatically getting glowing press from the mainstream media. It’s been her go-to move for awhile now.


too funny my computer glasses need a cleaning ... 

I read small *token of blood and food *... thought of the early marriage of Angelina Jolie - where she exchanged blood tokens 
Then woke up to the need to clean glasses because it is about* food and coffee not blood* ...

But then my imagination kicked in ... isnt Angelina a humanitarian idol of MM??
So maybe I am not hallucinating about the blood ???


----------



## charlottawill

LVSistinaMM said:


> Aww HELL.TO.THE.NO.
> 
> That's so gross. No amount of money in the world...



Marry for money, earn every penny.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> The jokes write themselves.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I read small *token of blood and food *... thought of the early marriage of Angelina Jolie - where she exchanged blood tokens
> Then woke up to the need to clean glasses because it is about* food and coffee not blood* ...
> 
> But then my imagination kicked in ... isnt Angelina a humanitarian idol of MM??
> So maybe I am not hallucinating about the blood ???



You can be forgiven for seeing blood because there is something vampiric about Meghan.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I curse whoever taught Meghan that sending a small token gift of food and coffee means automatically getting glowing press from the mainstream media. It’s been her go-to move for awhile now.


Getting people dizzy on a sugar high.  Wonderful.  How about sending something nutritious?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Getting people dizzy on a sugar high.  Wonderful.  How about sending something nutritious?



But it’s supposed to be a special treat coming right from Duchess Meghan!! It doesn’t sound nearly as wonderful and fun if the press is gushing over her for sending a couple of veggie trays.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I curse whoever taught Meghan that sending a small token gift of food and coffee means automatically getting glowing press from the mainstream media. It’s been her go-to move for awhile now.


does any other celeb (or whatever you call her) do this?  I can't think of any.   I guess these gestures mean she cares.  But she and H are supposed to be heading a charitable foundation, aren't they?  the charity is giving sandwiches?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> does any other celeb (or whatever you call her) do this?  I can't think of any.   I guess these gestures mean she cares.  But she and H are supposed to be heading a charitable foundation, aren't they?  the charity is giving sandwiches?



They haven’t updated their charitable website in several months. You know they would be tooting their own horn on the site if they had done anything remotely philanthropic.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> But it’s supposed to be a special treat coming right from Duchess Meghan!! It doesn’t sound nearly as wonderful and fun if the press is gushing over her for sending a couple of veggie trays.


How about a roast beef sandwich or shrimp salad?  Too expensive for her lol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The sugars did it again. Maybe they need all that security because their fanbase is batsh*t crazy.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sugars did it again. Maybe they need all that security because their fanbase is batsh*t crazy.



The best the sugars can hope for - another photoshop.


----------



## 880

Meghan is fine with the Royal title. She just didn’t want to do the work. 

In Harry’s mind, he’s number 2. That’s what she bought into.

Time and distance from the UK will make them even less relevant


----------



## scarlet555

880 said:


> Meghan is fine with the Royal title. She just didn’t want to do the work.
> 
> In Harry’s mind, he’s number 2. That’s what she bought into.
> 
> Time and distance from the UK will make them even *less relevant*



Let’s pray this happens …


----------



## redney

880 said:


> Meghan is fine with the Royal title. She just didn’t want to do the work.
> 
> In Harry’s mind, he’s number 2. That’s what she bought into.
> 
> Time and distance from the UK will make them even *less relevant*


Based on the Harkles seats at the Jubilee church service, the BRF has publicly shown they think the Harkles are less relevant.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Of course they didn't. They just wanted an up-close and personal tête-à-tête with HMTQ, being so concerned about her, you know. What a hoot!


Honestly it reminds me of house of Gucci when Mauricio meets Patricia at a party and she doesn’t know the name of the hostess. 


kemilia said:


> While I do not like the dress K does wear it well. And the jewelry is making a definite statement.
> W looks great too (once again thank goodness that he was born first).


I agree love the colour but those vampire’s  wife dresses always look a bit sweaty to me given they are polyester blends.
Though that may also be a horror flashback from that photo of M sweating away in her fecal brown satin.


Cornflower Blue said:


> Quick where's the Sharpie! Surely she needs some sort of message written on it...


Great minds!
I was thinking #bekind(to me)


sdkitty said:


> does any other celeb (or whatever you call her) do this?  I can't think of any.   I guess these gestures mean she cares.  But she and H are supposed to be heading a charitable foundation, aren't they?  the charity is giving sandwiches?


Yes that’s a very good catch, I think all other celebs would consider it embarrassing and demeaning for both parties. 
I mean even by dodgy charity foundation standards this is cheap. I really hope the IRS is watching and compiling a file. I’d love for them to get Wesley Sniped.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sugars did it again. Maybe they need all that security because their fanbase is batsh*t crazy.



This is so incredibly pathetic...


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> Meghan is fine with the Royal title. She just didn’t want to do the work.
> 
> In Harry’s mind, he’s number 2. That’s what she bought into.
> 
> Time and distance from the UK will make them even less relevant


She probably equated being a royal with being a socialite, and a life of service meant a life of being served. 
Blinded by the dazzle of the tiaras


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sugars did it again. Maybe they need all that security because their fanbase is batsh*t crazy.




 For the life of me I cannot understand how there can be people who actually like them!!!


----------



## Chanbal

While I think the obstetrician may have been suspended, it also came to my mind that she may have become a patient of Dr. Hazz @BetterWhatever. He recommends people to quit their jobs if …   









						Meghan Markle's obstetrician who helped deliver Lilibet shuts practice
					

Dr Melissa Drake made the announcement on Instagram, where she said it had been 'the honor of my life to work with the women of Santa Barbara' before announcing a 'leave of absence' from June 30.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So mean but so true.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Let’s not forget H’s new daddy

(Who knows why I chose this photo of all the images of Ken Sunshine out there - I suppose it just speaks to the deeply held commitment to selfless philanthropy  of everyone involved with this couple  )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well Tourre, I find a lot of her shenanigans a bit weird to put it mildly.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well Tourre, I find a lot of her shenanigans a bit weird to put it mildly.



In addition to latest bandwagon strategy, she seems to be targetting low-hanging fruit where the people are probably not those who pay attention to royal gossip and are easily impressed by and less skeptical of her Duchess moniker. I would be a lot more believing of her sincerity if it wasn't always a photo op.


----------



## xincinsin

Newsweek now says Archetypes will air later this year. So the summer drop date is presumably postponed.

Pro-,Harkle article. One broadcaster claimed listening to Hazard speak of Methane's alleged suicidal thoughts was "slobbering"  








						Prince Harry says media 'won't stop' until Meghan dies in resurfaced clip
					

The video clip went viral after reports surfaced that the findings of a palace investigation into accusations of bullying against Meghan would no be made public




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I curse whoever taught Meghan that sending a small token gift of food and coffee means automatically getting glowing press from the mainstream media. It’s been her go-to move for awhile now.



Mostly, it just makes her look cheap. 

The fact that these 'personal', 'secret' gestures are always being discovered and discussed worldwide and exploited for publicity also makes her look devious, dim and THIRSTY, THIRSTY, THIRSTY!


----------



## kipp

papertiger said:


> Mostly, it just makes her look cheap.
> 
> The fact that these 'personal', 'secret' gestures are always being discovered and discussed worldwide and exploited for publicity also makes her look devious, dim and THIRSTY, THIRSTY, THIRSTY!



I’d add desperate!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

kipp said:


> I’d add desperate!



Yes! Nailed! 

Devious, dim and desperate Duchess fits perfectly


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> While I think the obstetrician may have been suspended, it also came to my mind that she may have become a patient of Dr. Hazz @BetterWhatever. He recommends people to quit their jobs if …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's obstetrician who helped deliver Lilibet shuts practice
> 
> 
> Dr Melissa Drake made the announcement on Instagram, where she said it had been 'the honor of my life to work with the women of Santa Barbara' before announcing a 'leave of absence' from June 30.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wonder if it is significant that this doctor’s husband runs a fertility clinic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Mostly, it just makes her look cheap.
> 
> The fact that these 'personal', 'secret' gestures are always being discovered and discussed worldwide and exploited for publicity also makes her look devious, dim and THIRSTY, THIRSTY, THIRSTY!



Also, don't most offices have, uh, food? I'm rarely ever at the office but they have a full-on coffee and tea station, cold drinks, fruit and sweets. I wouldn't be all that exited if someone sent over "snacks".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, don't most offices have, uh, food? I'm rarely ever at the office but they have a full-on coffee and tea station, cold drinks, fruit and sweets. I wouldn't be all that exited if someone sent over "snacks".



Our office has a table down the centre and people bring in things for/from celebrations almost every day. A bl**dy lemon drizzle elderflower cake wouldn't even get noticed among the other food.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> She probably equated being a royal with being a socialite, and a life of service meant a life of being served.
> Blinded by the dazzle of the tiaras


It's understandable that for a d-list (or zlist as @CeeJay says) actress, the Huge amount of attention she got at the time of the engagement and the wedding was dazzling.  In spite of some people supposedly warning her about life as a royal, she must have thought it would be so glamorous.  I wonder if they have regrets.  I don't believe the story she told on Oprah about having severe depression and being unable to get help "from HR"
I think the may have thought they could be American royals.  But we don't have royals here and I think their star is fading.  Hope so anyway.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> It's understandable that for a d-list (or zlist as @CeeJay says) actress, the Huge amount of attention she got at the time of the engagement and the wedding was dazzling.  In spite of some people supposedly warning her about life as a royal, she must have thought it would be so glamorous.  I wonder if they have regrets.  I don't believe the story she told on Oprah about having severe depression and being unable to get help "from HR"
> I think the may have thought they could be American royals.  But we don't have royals here and I think their star is fading.  Hope so anyway.


Narcs have no regrets, but maybe she was a tad depressed - certainly nothing was going her way and she isn't the type who can take criticism.

Was she depressed enough to contemplate ending it? I doubt it. All the narcs I've ever worked with denied responsibility for their failures to the day they quit the company. 

Would she claim suicidal tendencies to push Hazard into decamping and proposing half-in, half-out? Oh yes! Everyone tends to forget that their original plan was to be part-time royals and the sobstories for Oprah were devised later as tantrums for not getting their way.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if it is significant that this doctor’s husband runs a fertility clinic.



or a surrogate one? :


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> or a surrogate one? :


seems odd that the identity of her doctor would be leaked... with HPAA laws, doctors offices can barely talk about a patient to their spouse, never mind leak something to the press or public.  I suppose there could be a gossipy employee who said something anonymously but how credible would that be?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That doesn't make a nearly 100yo guy any hotter though (or a serial cheater less gross).


well, IDK.  Money doesn't buy happiness but it sure can help.  and it seems to me at the time she married him, people thought it was real.  maybe she found him interesting.  agree, he isn't hot by any means.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Two thoughts:

first - won’t surprise me one bit if the doc shows up in Hollywood.

Second, I am going to move my work to England. We aren’t even given coffee or a place to eat at my work.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> or a surrogate one? :



Exactly.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> Based on the Harkles seats at the Jubilee church service, the BRF has publicly shown they think the Harkles are less relevant.


Using a sporting term, I would say they are out in left field  They have no more meaning at this point than any other member of the extended royal family. Their negative behavior has pushed them even farther out.  Really, they are not even in left field, they are in the farthest portion of the parking lot


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> While I think the obstetrician may have been suspended, it also came to my mind that she may have become a patient of Dr. Hazz @BetterWhatever. He recommends people to quit their jobs if …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's obstetrician who helped deliver Lilibet shuts practice
> 
> 
> Dr Melissa Drake made the announcement on Instagram, where she said it had been 'the honor of my life to work with the women of Santa Barbara' before announcing a 'leave of absence' from June 30.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Nothing on the Med Board, but that takes a while. I will keep my eye on the Quarterly Report.   I think she burned out and rather quickly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Do we know who made the doctor’s name public?


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> She probably equated being a royal with being a socialite, and a life of service meant a life of being served.
> Blinded by the dazzle of the tiaras


I mean the supreme irony of it all is the royal life  is both extremely glamorous (palaces/designer clothes/gorgeous jewels/international travel) and extremely easy (most work is essentially parties and social appearances and all your speeches/projects are written for you) especially if you are a second son and wife who really don’t have that much work. The thing is she had to surrender her image and accept the limit of her place in the pecking order and for some people, especially narcs, power is everything.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well Tourre, I find a lot of her shenanigans a bit weird to put it mildly.



It is very much the attitude of a feudal overlord or the manager of a Victorian workhouse which rather undermines the idea that she is just too modern and American to fit in with the archaic British royalty 

speaking of an old world view it is Christmas  everyday with H as the king of fools and M as 
Lady of misrule 


xincinsin said:


> Newsweek now says Archetypes will air later this year. So the summer drop date is presumably postponed.
> 
> Pro-,Harkle article. One broadcaster claimed listening to Hazard speak of Methane's alleged suicidal thoughts was "slobbering"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says media 'won't stop' until Meghan dies in resurfaced clip
> 
> 
> The video clip went viral after reports surfaced that the findings of a palace investigation into accusations of bullying against Meghan would no be made public
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Slobbering? Sounds like someone has got a weird fetish.

It’s just so weird that whole M’s suicide ideation chapter has been kind of buried - H talks about being depressed and sad about his mum and drinking but the far more dangerous and urgent mental health story of M isn’t discussed in their advocacy at all.

Almost feels like she can’t be bothered researching the part now it’s served it’s purpose. 


Carryon2020 said:


>



Pfft as if she would ever care remotely about anything to do with Africa.
She can never forgive the whole continent for not asking if she was ok and if it’s not in The USA it’s apparently incomprehensible to her.


sdkitty said:


> well, IDK.  Money doesn't buy happiness but it sure can help.  and it seems to me at the time she married him, people thought it was real.  maybe she found him interesting.  agree, he isn't hot by any means.


The power though…Lady Macbeth could never….



A1aGypsy said:


> Two thoughts:
> 
> first - won’t surprise me one bit if the doc shows up in Hollywood.
> 
> Second, I am going to move my work to England. We aren’t even given coffee or a place to eat at my work.


Please do! We’d love to have another one of us   All the watercress sandwiches and bakewell tarts you can eat!


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Two thoughts:
> 
> first - won’t surprise me one bit if the doc shows up in Hollywood.
> 
> Second, I am going to move my work to England. We aren’t even given coffee or a place to eat at my work.



Welcome!

Our food table dominates the room. I never have to go to the canteen  . Endless stream of chocolate birthday/anniversary/children's cake, food 'donations' from weekend BBQs and also sample makeup, skincare, clothes/accessories (non H, Gucci or similar unfortunately).  We also have.a fridge, food cupboard, water dispenser, coffee/tea cupboard and a personal mug/glass cupboard.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Using a sporting term, I would say they are out in left field  They have no more meaning at this point than any other member of the extended royal family. Their negative behavior has pushed them even farther out.  Really, they are not even in left field, they are in the farthest portion of the parking lot


they did them to themselves....I suspect they may be very afraid of losing relevance at this point


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well, IDK.  Money doesn't buy happiness but it sure can help.  and it seems to me at the time she married him, people thought it was real.  maybe she found him interesting.  agree, he isn't hot by any means.



He must have moves like Jagger.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Our food table dominates the room. I never have to go to the canteen  . Endless stream of chocolate birthday/anniversary/children's cake, food 'donations' from weekend BBQs and also sample makeup, skincare, clothes/accessories (non H, Gucci or similar unfortunately).  We also have.a fridge, food cupboard, water dispenser, coffee/tea cupboard and a personal mug/glass cupboard.



Ok, I'm coming. Your workplace covers all bases.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, I've been following today's news (we all saw it coming, but I'm still speechless by this complete disregard for women), and I'll break something if she self-importantly and insincerely jumps on that newest bandwagon as well.


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, I've been following today's news (we all saw it coming, but I'm still speechless by this complete disregard for women), and I'll break something if she self-importantly and insincerely jumps on that newest bandwagon as well.


I'd wager quite a bit of money that she will.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She for sure will


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> She, or the minion that typed this out, can't even get her own title right, it's Meghan, Duchess of Sussex not Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5432097


It's because she's "THE" Duchess.  In her mind, the only one that counts.  
Like "The Ohio University", whose name always cracked me up (no offense to any alumni, like my cousin!).


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, Jerry Hall has not exactly the best taste in men, has she.


She must equate "best" with "rich".


----------



## purseinsanity

LVSistinaMM said:


> Aww HELL.TO.THE.NO.
> 
> That's so gross. No amount of money in the world...


ITA.  My mother, who rarely says a single negative thing about anyone, once found out her friend was marrying a much old, uber rich Cardiologist who was not so gifted in the looks department.  She gasped out loud and blurted out, "You'd be constipated for a week if you had to sleep with him!  Money is not everything!", then was horrified when she realized she said it out loud.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> It's because she's "THE" Duchess.  In her mind, the only one that counts.
> Like "The Ohio University", whose name always cracked me up (no offense to any alumni, like my cousin!).


She better watch out because The Ohio State University just trademarked "The" and since they obviously have better trademark lawyers than she does, she may be sued for her erroneous use of "The"  in her moniker








						Ohio State University wins trademark for the word 'THE'
					

Ohio State University has officially registered a trademark for the word "THE" after a nearly three-year battle to clinch legal branding access to a word that's deeply meaningful to the school's overall identity.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it ok to say that, whatever comment they make, H&M will make this issue political rather than constitutional? Hazzie has shown that he knows nothing of our constitution, not too sure she does either.  To my knowledge, he has not become a US citizen and she never became a UK citizen, right?,


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Our food table dominates the room. I never have to go to the canteen  . Endless stream of chocolate birthday/anniversary/children's cake, food 'donations' from weekend BBQs and also sample makeup, skincare, clothes/accessories (non H, Gucci or similar unfortunately).  We also have.a fridge, food cupboard, water dispenser, coffee/tea cupboard and a personal mug/glass cupboard.



am joining the other TPFers who are storming the snack table

and @jelliedfeels offered Bakewell tart 
(am thinking of the still warm individual bakewell tart at Scott’s restaurant, but I am equal opportunity bakewell


----------



## K.D.

Is there a Bakewell left with my name on it?  If so, I'll come in to the office on a Friday night.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I would like a Klondike bar, please.  We are baking well here in the heat dome, so we need a cool treat


----------



## papertiger

K.D. said:


> Is there a Bakewell left with my name on it?  If so, I'll come in to the office on a Friday night.



Don't worry, you can have mine, I only stock-up on the chocolate. 

Doesn't anyone want the Amalfi lemon and elderflower cake, or what about the lemon drizzle???... please, please, _please _




or are we leaving them for security over the weekend? 

Elderflower cake or lemon drizzle? Anyone?




Lemon drizzle? Anyone?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  My mother, who rarely says a single negative thing about anyone, once found out her friend was marrying a much old, uber rich Cardiologist who was not so gifted in the looks department.  She gasped out loud and blurted out, "You'd be constipated for a week if you had to sleep with him!  Money is not everything!", then was horrified when she realized she said it out loud.



I mean, to be fair, even an ugly man can be charming with an endearing personality. It's just that my daddy issues aren't that bad that they'd stretch to 30 or 40 years my senior.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, to be fair, even an ugly man can be charming with an endearing personality. It's just that my daddy issues aren't that bad that they'd stretch to 30 or 40 years my senior.


even for a billionaire? (assuming he was charming or interesting)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Nothing on the Med Board, but that takes a while. I will keep my eye on the Quarterly Report.   I think she burned out and rather quickly.



I gathered from what I read that she was a solo practitioner, which is rare for OB/Gyns anymore. That could certainly burn someone out  quickly, especially if dealing with a lot of demanding wealthy women. Imagine having to deal with dozens like MM.


----------



## Vintage Leather

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, to be fair, even an ugly man can be charming with an endearing personality. It's just that my daddy issues aren't that bad that they'd stretch to 30 or 40 years my senior.



When the guy is in his 90s, it isn’t daddy issues. It’s statistics.

For the last year, I’ve worked with a non-profit that provides education and enrichment for the elderly. I’ve also assisted in palliative care for relatives. It’s a heartbreaking, thankless exercise and you go through a lot of verbal abuse. Sometimes physical, but most 90 year olds aren’t strong enough to hurt.

But it ends.

Mr Murdoch has a decade - at most two - before his body gives out completely. So as long as you have a pre-nup that protects you, whether the relationship terminated in divorce or death, it’s not a terrible job.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo, while almost all men have similar traits, billionaires would be the worst males to deal with. Big dollars with big egos, kindness is not their strength. Doubt they leave any decisions for the lil woman. Birds in gilded cages comes to mind. JH has her own money and lifestyle. _Succession_ has proven to me those billionaires aren’t worth it, unless you are a _Marsha_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> even for a billionaire? (assuming he was charming or interesting)



I really don't think so. I ditched a hot, educated millionaire I had met while interning abroad for a penniless student who I happened to be actually in love with...who then later went on to break my heart badly. Looking back, maybe I don't make the smartest decisions either


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so. I ditched a hot, educated millionaire I had met while interning abroad for a penniless student who I happened to be actually in love with...who then later went on to break my heart badly. Looking back, maybe I don't make the smartest decisions either



Oh, you did the right thing imo. Always marry for love. 
Marry for money, you earn every penney. Just look at the Kardashians


----------



## charlottawill

Vintage Leather said:


> When the guy is in his 90s, it isn’t daddy issues. It’s statistics.
> 
> For the last year, I’ve worked with a non-profit that provides education and enrichment for the elderly. I’ve also assisted in palliative care for relatives. It’s a heartbreaking, thankless exercise and you go through a lot of verbal abuse. Sometimes physical, but most 90 year olds aren’t strong enough to hurt.
> 
> But it ends.
> 
> Mr Murdoch has a decade - at most two - before his body gives out completely. So as long as you have a pre-nup that protects you, whether the relationship terminated in divorce or death, it’s not a terrible job.



Maybe he's leaving her for a younger woman


----------



## Chanbal

Was this arranged through SS?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. Can someone please share a puke bag, I forgot to bring mine.


----------



## charlottawill

Vintage Leather said:


> When the guy is in his 90s, it isn’t daddy issues. It’s statistics.
> 
> For the last year, I’ve worked with a non-profit that provides education and enrichment for the elderly. I’ve also assisted in palliative care for relatives. It’s a heartbreaking, thankless exercise and you go through a lot of verbal abuse. Sometimes physical, but most 90 year olds aren’t strong enough to hurt.
> 
> But it ends.
> 
> Mr Murdoch has a decade - at most two - before his body gives out completely. So as long as you have a pre-nup that protects you, whether the relationship terminated in divorce or death, it’s not a terrible job.



I was feeling a bit sorry for JH when I heard earlier today that she only got $15 mil from Jagger in 1999. Using an online calculator, if she invested $10 mil of that at an average rate of return it would be worth half a billion today. I don't think we have to worry about her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Was this arranged through SS?




Agree with the commenters -
- Hazz is not a professional polo player. He is simply someone who plays polo occasionally. So the “pwife” stuff is a stretch.
- Nacho has 4 or 5 children. He has an expensive hobby, expensive house in Argentina, etc. Yes, he has millions, but he is not a billionaire. He has very high expenses, so he is most likely grateful for this association. It keeps his name in the news. Probably helps sell his cologne.
- Delfina and Nacho were there for several months. Never heard of this close-buddy friendship until they get ready to leave. Notice there were never huge crowds at the polo field.  Supposedly they leave tomorrow for Aspen. Worth noting Delfina doesn’t say MM is a wonderful mother. In fact, she never mentions the kids. Hmmm.

yes, this is all PR.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Without sounding snobbish, another lesson from _Succession_ is that millionaires are a dime a dozen (haaaa).
The real achievement is billionaire. H&M are far from that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh? The Figueras are based in the US? Now Delfina posting on her Insta about a trip with her daughter to a deli I thought was a bit far away from the polo field makes more sense.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie thinks the RF will be making an announcement soon. Anyone know anything?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh? The Figueras are based in the US? Now Delfina posting on her Insta about a trip with her daughter to a deli I thought was a bit far away from the polo field makes more sense.




The Figueras have many businesses:


He actually began exploring options outside polo in 2013, when he launched the Figueras Design Group, a global design consultancy firm headquartered in Buenos Aires. Upcoming projects include Guenoc Valley, a 20,000-acre development in Napa Valley with an equestrian club, polo fields, a polo club, clubhouse, pony camp, golf course and winery (FDG will be largely in charge of designing the equestrian leg of the project, as well as the homes and clubhouse), and AMAALA, an ultra-luxury destination on Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea Coast, of which Figueras was named an ambassador and advisory board member last January.

Additionally, his focuses include Cris Yatay, his spectacular 30-acre Argentinian breeding ranch; wellness brand Flow Water, in which he is an investor and member of the board of advisers; Veuve Clicquot and NetJets, for which he is a global ambassador; and FuboTV, a streaming service with live sports and entertainment-focused content; he joined its board of directors in August. He is also working on creating his own bitter, currently slated for a spring release, as well as a collaboration with renowned Argentinian winery Catena Zapata.

_But first and foremost, he is preparing for the global expansion of his unisex fragrance line, the Ignacio Figueras Collection. After nearly two decades as a spokesperson for Ralph Lauren Black Label and Ralph Lauren Fragrances, Figueras was ready to branch out on his own. He enlisted Moroccan master perfumer Carlos Benaim, who has worked with brands such as Frederic Malle, Prada and Calvin Klein, to create six signature scents, which officially launched at Bergdorf Goodman and Harrods in December 2019._








						World Famous Polo Player Nacho Figueras Shares Future Plans
					

World famous polo player Nacho Figueras has no intention of slowing down any time soon. Discover his "high goals" for the future here.




					hauteliving.com
				



Article from 2021


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it ok to say that, whatever comment they make, H&M will make this issue political rather than constitutional? Hazzie has shown that he knows nothing of our constitution, not too sure she does either.  To my knowledge, he has not become a US citizen and she never became a UK citizen, right?,



For people who believe that the First Amendment is "bonkers", they sure do take full advantage of it.  The First Amendment also gives everyone the right to tell M&H to STFU.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This rings kind of true to me too.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> _But first and foremost, he is preparing for the global expansion of his unisex fragrance line, the Ignacio Figueras Collection. After nearly two decades as a spokesperson for Ralph Lauren Black Label and Ralph Lauren Fragrances, Figueras was ready to branch out on his own. He enlisted Moroccan master perfumer Carlos Benaim, who has worked with brands such as Frederic Malle, Prada and Calvin Klein, to create six signature scents, which officially launched at Bergdorf Goodman and Harrods in December 2019._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> World Famous Polo Player Nacho Figueras Shares Future Plans
> 
> 
> World famous polo player Nacho Figueras has no intention of slowing down any time soon. Discover his "high goals" for the future here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hauteliving.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article from 2021



It occurred to me that it was Nacho’s photo that we’ve all seen on those big Ralph Lauren displays in the fragrance departments at Macy’s and other department stores over the years. You never think about who the person is behind the hunky model.

Farewell, Nacho! You added a rare bit of beauty to this thread, despite your questionable taste in friends.


----------



## bellecate




----------



## Norm.Core

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5433646


Hilarious! These two are total asshats.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> seems odd that the identity of her doctor would be leaked... with HPAA laws, doctors offices can barely talk about a patient to their spouse, never mind leak something to the press or public.  I suppose there could be a gossipy employee who said something anonymously but how credible would that be?


I remember People Magazine ran an article mentioning the doctor by name when Lilibet was supposedly born.  People is one of Haz and TW's spokespeople, so I'm assuming they named the doctor themselves.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, to be fair, even an ugly man can be charming with an endearing personality. It's just that my daddy issues aren't that bad that they'd stretch to 30 or 40 years my senior.





My favorite line from the movie goes something like, "There's a very common neuroses whereby the male child subconsciously wishes to sleep with his mother, but what puzzles me Harold, is that you want to sleep with your grandmother."


----------



## mellibelly

“pwife (polo wife) - genius of you to come up with this!” 

My god this is moronic. Imagine the drivel coming out of Methane if this is considered her pinnacle of wit and humor. Conversations with her must be excruciating!!


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> “pwife (polo wife) - genius of you to come up with this!”
> 
> My god this is moronic. Imagine the drivel coming out of Methane if this is considered her pinnacle of wit and humor. Conversations with her must be excruciating!!


That's why most of her conversations we've seen are with herself


----------



## mellibelly

I don’t believe anything from Newsweek regarding Archetypes. Newsweek is a Sunshine Sucks rag. No the end is coming to that deal. They’ll be dropping that trademark application soon, mark my words.


----------



## mellibelly

They have no chance in Hades getting an Audible deal like the Obamas. The gruesome twosome are the equivalent of box office poison. No content contracts will come their way again because they can’t produce anything! He should stick to polo and she can merch to sugars on the Tig 2.0 or be a Real Housewife. End of list of their marketable skills.


----------



## youngster

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5433646



Spin, spin, spin ..... they keep SS busy. We   all knew they'd try to use the O's leaving as cover for their parting of ways (that is, being fired) by Spotify.


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> Welcome!
> 
> Our food table dominates the room. I never have to go to the canteen  . Endless stream of chocolate birthday/anniversary/children's cake, food 'donations' from weekend BBQs and also sample makeup, skincare, clothes/accessories (non H, Gucci or similar unfortunately).  We also have.a fridge, food cupboard, water dispenser, coffee/tea cupboard and a personal mug/glass cupboard.




Gis a job!  Sounds like a great place to work.


----------



## needlv

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5433646



Sooooo…. This means Spotify has fired them?  Or will do so soon?


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> For the life of me I cannot understand how there can be people who actually like them!!!


She plays the underdog well. Best role of her life. To give you a RL example, my office narc departed the company 10 years ago and I still encounter colleagues who thought he was a lovely guy and a victim of personality clash with the boss and me. My theory is that so long as they did not suffer from his ineptitude and lies, they had no reason to question his pleasant facade. They are astounded when they hear my side of the story.


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  My mother, who rarely says a single negative thing about anyone, once found out her friend was marrying a much old, uber rich Cardiologist who was not so gifted in the looks department.  She gasped out loud and blurted out, "You'd be constipated for a week if you had to sleep with him!  Money is not everything!", then was horrified when she realized she said it out loud.



When I was 21 man 30 years older than me, very prominent, tricked me into going out to dinner with him where he told me his father and grandfather had married 21 year olds when they were 50, implying he was looking for the same. I was so shocked and got out of there as fast as I could.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

This Elon hard times video reminds me of poor Ginger Muppet getting financially cutoff with only the tens of millions inherited from mummy and great granny


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Please do! We’d love to have another one of us   All the watercress sandwiches and bakewell tarts you can eat!


My friends went on a bus tour once which took them to Bakewell. I skipped it after getting motion sickness on the last bus tour we took (to Derbyshire). They kindly bought some tarts for me.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This rings kind of true to me too.



I mean the picture she chose is absolutely perfect for reflecting the desired dynamic- M front and centre and tanned up for her cheesecake photo doing a bathing beauty stance and the other person/friend completely swathed in shadow (why does D have one brown leg and one pale leg btw? I think this one needs to be added to Photoshop fails) 


mellibelly said:


> “pwife (polo wife) - genius of you to come up with this!”
> 
> My god this is moronic. Imagine the drivel coming out of Methane if this is considered her pinnacle of wit and humor. Conversations with her must be excruciating!!


I thought it was in reference to her trips to the woods.   
maybe it’s the foursome’s sweet nod to the fact that  H still enjoys a golden shower.


----------



## Stansy

mellibelly said:


> They have no chance in Hades getting an Audible deal like the Obamas. The gruesome twosome are the equivalent of box office poison. No content contracts will come their way again because they can’t produce anything! He should stick to polo and she can merch to sugars on the Tig 2.0 or be a Real Housewife. End of list of their marketable skills.


She markled her own skills (assuming she ever had any).


----------



## jelliedfeels

kipp said:


> I'd wager quite a bit of money that she will.


I maybe wrong but I don’t think so- M won’t touch an issue until she’s absolutely certain she’s following the consensus and doing the most bare minimum token gesture and I think this one is too divisive for her to send some biscuits to. 


880 said:


> am joining the other TPFers who are storming the snack table
> 
> and @jelliedfeels offered Bakewell tart
> (am thinking of the still warm individual bakewell tart at Scott’s restaurant, but I am equal opportunity bakewell


I’m glad you like my choice. I’m glad I lead with bakewell rather than curd tart or mince pie   
[m


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. Can someone please share a puke bag, I forgot to bring mine.


Here you go - I found this stupid grey one which says DOSSER on it


----------



## bellecate

TW’s motto must be ‘Why tell the truth when you can lie instead’.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5433646



Bwhahaha. Who here was it who called it? They are so transparent. Or rather, she is, because that's exactly her thing...don't get something, explain publicly you never wanted it anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

TW may not be pleased, I almost feel sorry for Hazz…


----------



## Chanbal

Who reads Marie Claire these days? "heartbroken" is not a synonym of "relieved"


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Who reads Marie Claire these days? "heartbroken" is not a synonym of "relieved"
> 
> View attachment 5433750


We need the "whut?" emoji added to our reaction selection.


----------



## lanasyogamama

“Pwife” is soooo annoying. Funny how the only pic of the two of them is from Backgrid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since the other two players on the team are teens, Hazzie and Nacho are the only ones with wives. So, imo, it is a meaningless distinction. Will be interesting to see what happens in Aspen. Will Hazzie play?

Wonder if they realize they could have been part of something great?


----------



## CarryOn2020

If interested, more photos of the fast friends, new besties, whatev’s








						Meghan Markle Spotted Supporting Prince Harry at Polo Match in Santa Barbara (Photos) | meghan markle at polo match with prince harry 30 - Photo
					

Meghan Markle Spotted Supporting Prince Harry at Polo Match in Santa Barbara (Photos): Photo #4777713. Meghan Markle is cheering on Prince Harry!    The 40-year-old Duchess of Sussex was spotted rooting for her husband while he played in a polo match on Friday (June…




					www.justjared.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If interested, more photos of the fast friends, new besties, whatev’s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Spotted Supporting Prince Harry at Polo Match in Santa Barbara (Photos) | meghan markle at polo match with prince harry 30 - Photo
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Spotted Supporting Prince Harry at Polo Match in Santa Barbara (Photos): Photo #4777713. Meghan Markle is cheering on Prince Harry!    The 40-year-old Duchess of Sussex was spotted rooting for her husband while he played in a polo match on Friday (June…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justjared.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5434032



The Backgrid leftovers from last week. One thing that strikes me is how many of the photos have Meghan with her arms crossed in front of her. I’m not the body language guy but doesn’t that show that she was uncomfortable in that environment?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The Backgrid leftovers from last week. One thing that strikes me is how many of the photos have Meghan with her arms crossed in front of her. I’m not the body language guy but doesn’t that show that she was uncomfortable in that environment?


or is is the same pics being shown repeatedly?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> The Backgrid leftovers from last week. One thing that strikes me is how many of the photos have Meghan with her arms crossed in front of her. I’m not the body language guy but doesn’t that show that she was uncomfortable in that environment?



I've always heard it's a defensive posture.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The Backgrid leftovers from last week. One thing that strikes me is how many of the photos have Meghan with her arms crossed in front of her. I’m not the body language guy but doesn’t that show that she was uncomfortable in that environment?



Megs has 2 speeds: Defend or attack, same as her ex-military husband.

I don't think it's just the polo environment, although she knows she's an outsider (as all are if new to the horsey world) .She's just a defensive person generally (and why she's always waiting for an attack (or perceived attack). 

Both H&M have huge chips on their shoulders, and for no apparent reason. You could not get more privileged than these 2 from cradles 'till now. Even if no one is looking at either one of them, they always think they are being looked at, which makes them look suspicious, which makes people look.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> “Pwife” is soooo annoying. Funny how the only pic of the two of them is from Backgrid.



It is so juvenile. Plus, the self-acclaimed feminist defining herself once again over her husband? You don't say.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, to be fair, even an ugly man can be charming with an endearing personality. It's just that my daddy issues aren't that bad that they'd stretch to *30 or 40 years my senior*.


This reminds me of my youth. My older sister had almost wall-to-wall bookshelves filled with Harlequin books and assorted magazines in her bedroom. I used to sneak in to grab a book that I'd stick in the middle of a school book to read while pretending to do homework. The stories were almost always the same: older man meets young golden haired female and they fall madly in love after hating each other on first sight or else it was love at first sight. The only differences between the romances were the countries and cities in which they took place. In spite of reading and dreaming, I managed to do my homework each night, complete my education, get a job and grow up to marry a man only a few months older than me.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> or is is the same pics being shown repeatedly?



Yes, I’m sure the polo club will be relieved when paid paparazzi are no longer being brought in. They might be happy with whatever promotion of the sport and their club they got, but they won’t miss the celebrity grandstanding.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is so juvenile. Plus, the self-acclaimed feminist defining herself once again over her husband? You don't say.



This is the same woman who thought it was so cute to call her husband H. Her nicknames are simple and silly. Believe me even that is a huge improvement from how she used to be. Poor Trevor had to endure the indignity of having his pet name from her being “Trevity Trev Trev” said in a baby voice.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I've always heard it's a defensive posture.



Yep. She’s a control freak and she was in a situation where she had no control whatsoever. Hence her fish out of water stance.


----------



## youngster

bellecate said:


> TW’s motto must be ‘Why tell the truth when you can lie instead’.
> View attachment 5433726



This just blows me away. The one thing I thought she was telling the truth about, her Northwestern college education, turns out she was lying after all?
Wow, just    So, she actually has a degree in Communications but was not a double major in International Relations and Theater.   I know people exaggerate on their resumes all the time but flat out lying about your major is really extra.   Just guessing, but I'd imagine that papers and reporters took her at her word because who lies about something like this?  What is wrong with her.
ETA:  This probably then explains partly why she was so woefully ill prepared.  I kept thinking how does an International Relations major not know some of the stuff she didn't know?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> ETA:  This probably then explains partly why she was so woefully ill prepared.  I kept thinking how does an International Relations major not know some of the stuff she didn't know?



I don't know. I majored in Communications sort of (not really, but it's in the same field), not Political Science or International Relations, and I have rolled my eyes many times at her stupidity. Like, did she put effort into NOT having basic education and general knowledge?


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> This just blows me away. The one thing I thought she was telling the truth about, her Northwestern college education, turns out she was lying after all?
> Wow, just    So, she actually has a degree in Communications but was not a double major in International Relations and Theater.   I know people exaggerate on their resumes all the time but flat out lying about your major is really extra.   Just guessing, but I'd imagine that papers and reporters took her at her word because who lies about something like this?  What is wrong with her.
> ETA:  This probably then explains partly why she was so woefully ill prepared.  I kept thinking how does an International Relations major not know some of the stuff she didn't know?


seems to me self-promotion and networking are her big talents.  and they've served her well


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> seems to me self-promotion and networking are her big talents.  and they've served her well



Indeed. Someone like her snagging one of the most eligible bachelors of the world (that was when his public image was still somewhat intact of course) really was a masterpiece.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> The Backgrid leftovers from last week. One thing that strikes me is how many of the photos have Meghan with her arms crossed in front of her. I’m not the body language guy but doesn’t that show that she was uncomfortable in that environment?


When a person crosses their arms, it usually means they are unreceptive to whatever is being communicated, offered or presented to them. If they also close their eyes while crossing their arms, it means they think you are not as important or intelligent depending on the circumstances.


----------



## bellecate

We can only hope this is true. J


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I was cleaning up the million tabs I had open and found the one for the hotel Raptor allegedly stayed in after a fight with Harry. Did you know the Kennedys honeymooned there in one of the cottages?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. I majored in Communications sort of (not really, but it's in the same field), not Political Science or International Relations, and I have rolled my eyes many times at her stupidity. Like, did she put effort into NOT having basic education and general knowledge?


Not everyone who is accepted into and educated at Northwestern and similar schools deserves to be there.  There are many back doors regardless of economic or social, educational or ethnic requirements.  That is a fact of life.  Further, once in a school not everyone excels.  Some just get by. Barely.  M is a street smart conniving opportunist.  She is not educated.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Indeed. Someone like her snagging one of the most eligible bachelors of the world (that was when his public image was still somewhat intact of course) really was a masterpiece.



By the time she snagged him, he had been rejected by 3, possibly more, upper class ladies with proper ? connections.   Imo the ‘most eligible bachelor’ stuff came from the media. More of the Diana-hype.

Chels, Cressida and Florence, more?
Old article 








						Prince Harry's trysts with his new love 'Flee': But will the Queen approve of Miss Brudenell-Bruce?
					

One might argue that anyone who has the name Florence Anne-Marie Brudenell-Bruce has a certain obligation to live up to such a splendid moniker.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

His big....bank account?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> By the time she snagged him, he had been rejected by 3, possibly more, upper class ladies with proper ? connections.   Imo the ‘most eligible bachelor’ stuff came from the media. More of the Diana-hype.
> 
> Chels, Cressida and Florence, more?



Sure, but he was still a member of the most famous royal family in the world, son to a future king and brother to another, and loaded as in his whole lifestyle was funded, he was set up to earn millions, and his own money was basically fun money.

Now he's an international joke going broke with no purpose in life.


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Not everyone who is accepted into and educated at Northwestern and similar schools deserves to be there.  There are many back doors regardless of economic or social, educational or ethnic requirements.  That is a fact of life.  Further, once in a school not everyone excels.  Some just get by. Barely.  M is a street smart conniving opportunist.  She is not educated.


but she is excellent at opportunism


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> apparently this is their "life of service"









QueenofWrapDress said:


> The sugars did it again. Maybe they need all that security because their fanbase is batsh*t crazy.



 







QueenofWrapDress said:


> So mean but so true.










Chanbal said:


> Was this arranged through SS?



Looks like she's another one who is full of






bellecate said:


> View attachment 5433646





They are so damn predictable it's pathetically hilarious 




charlottawill said:


> His big....bank account?


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean the picture she chose is absolutely perfect for reflecting the desired dynamic- M front and centre and tanned up for her cheesecake photo doing a bathing beauty stance and the other person/friend completely swathed in shadow (why does D have one brown leg and one pale leg btw? I think this one needs to be added to Photoshop fails)
> 
> I thought it was in reference to her trips to the woods.
> maybe it’s the foursome’s sweet nod to the fact that  H still enjoys a golden shower.


That picture makes her look like she's reaching into her front pocket for a packet of smokes!


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> TW’s motto must be ‘Why tell the truth when you can lie instead’.
> View attachment 5433726
> View attachment 5433727
> View attachment 5433728
> View attachment 5433729


There is literally not a single honest thing about this total fraud of a woman!


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> I'd wager quite a bit of money that she will.


maybe she can bring sandwiches to PP


----------



## lulu212121

bag-mania said:


> The Backgrid leftovers from last week. One thing that strikes me is how many of the photos have Meghan with her arms crossed in front of her. I’m not the body language guy but doesn’t that show that she was uncomfortable in that environment?


What kind of vehicle is the white one she's "posing" in front of? It's a monster compared to her! There's a person in the background that looks proportionate to the vehicles.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## bag-mania

Another article comparing them to Edward and Wallis.









						Harry and Meghan should learn from Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson’s exile
					

The Duke of Windsor died in May 1972 — just over 50 years ago — after almost 40 years spent in exile from the Royal Family. It’s an exile that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should perhaps stu…




					nypost.com


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> When a person crosses their arms, it usually means they are unreceptive to whatever is being communicated, offered or presented to them. If they also close their eyes while crossing their arms, it means they think you are not as important or intelligent depending on the circumstances.



But "I an not going to listen to you" is a form of self-defence. It's a closed stance.

Ciertainly not a good look on someone who thinks of herself as a diplomat.

She even makes hugs and/or other supportive gestures (e.g.hand on someone's back) look predatory


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> But "I an not going to listen to you" is a form of self-defence. It's a close stance.
> 
> Cirainly not a good look on someone who thinks of herself as a diplomat.
> 
> She even makes hugs and/or other supportive gestures (e.g.hand on someone's back) look predatory



well, the supportive gestures look predatory to us...not to everyone LOL


----------



## lanasyogamama

Who stands like this? Seriously?


----------



## Chanbal

_In a more qualitative response, they answered: “Harry chose to leave his royal role so that includes his offspring.”_









						Britons reject Meghan Markle daughter Lilibet as 'Princess': 'No connection to Britain'
					

Britons demand no royal title for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's kids.In a new poll carried out by Express.co.uk, the locals assert the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their children deserve no...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Who stands like this? Seriously?




I guess she needed some air down there


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I guess she needed some air down there



Photoshop   Not that she is above standing like a bull, this looks photoshopped to my eye. The lines of the truck are off.

Love the new name of the club - _Wannabeabrit Polo Club in Santa Barbara.   _


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> His big....bank account?



 I'm sure her first question regarding Rupert Murdoch would be "Is he kind?"


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Photoshop   Not that she is above standing like a bull, this looks photoshopped to my eye. The lines of the truck are off.
> 
> Love the new name of the club - _Wannabeabrit Polo Club in Santa Barbara.   _


Oh you’re right! When you zoom in it’s very messed up.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> I'm sure her first question regarding Rupert Murdoch would be "Is he kind?"



Her first question after marrying him would be “can I drown him without anyone noticing?”


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> Another article comparing them to Edward and Wallis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan should learn from Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson’s exile
> 
> 
> The Duke of Windsor died in May 1972 — just over 50 years ago — after almost 40 years spent in exile from the Royal Family. It’s an exile that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should perhaps stu…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



It didn’t mention that E&W were quite wealthy as a result of personal and negotiated settlement while ”poor” Hackles only got a few million in inheritance. Hence the fabulous jewellery that W had and Megain can only dream of.


----------



## rose60610

So her major was in Communications? And not Int'l Relations?  That would explain why she had no idea that Great Britain was a Commonwealth.  Remember that one?  Not that I believe ANYTHING she says.....    So......who explained to her that her wedding veil was hand embroidered to include all the flowers of the Commonwealth nations? And THEN she pulled out the "I didn't know"  crap.  

I think we agree that Harry is an idiot. And I have to think that the BRF must have requested SOME kind of investigative background work on Meghan.  So when she trots out the Northwestern University double major why wasn't there a list of questions? This stuff is so easy to verify these days. If Harry is in love he's in love. She could have majored in Poultry Science ( I mean...ok, let's move on) and he'd have loved her. Though she wouldn't have been on a TV show, I get it. Harry had his pick of pretty "young" things, why her? Did she pick up superlative skills from her Yacht Girl days?  That could explain it. Though a major in Poultry Science wouldn't have led her into Yacht Girl opportunities, I get that too. What kind of "woe is ME" story did she snare him in?  Doesn't matter. If you're stupid, you're stupid. 

I'm beginning to think that the BRF is behind the exposure of lies of her university major if it's true.  It could be a public ruse to give Harry a little "OMG I didn't know she could lie" BS that leads into a divorce that brings him back into the BRF fold. Farfetched, but stranger things have happened. The BRF would have known all along, and held this card in case a situation unfolded that made it come into play.


----------



## Chanelconvert

sdkitty said:


> It's understandable that for a d-list (or zlist as @CeeJay says) actress, the Huge amount of attention she got at the time of the engagement and the wedding was dazzling.  In spite of some people supposedly warning her about life as a royal, she must have thought it would be so glamorous.  I wonder if they have regrets.  I don't believe the story she told on Oprah about having severe depression and being unable to get help "from HR"
> I think the may have thought they could be American royals.  But we don't have royals here and I think their star is fading.  Hope so anyway.



I can’t help myself from commenting because this not being able to get help always makes me laugh….

It really baffles me when someone pretends to be so outspoken, smart, and strong woman also wants to play the victim. 

How in the name of hell did she managed to go to Wimbledon in her jeans, made a surprise appearance at the British academy, then fly to the US to attend an expensive baby shower, but you can’t escape whoever you need to escape to see a freakin psychiatrist? C’mon. Does she honestly believe that every woman in the planet believes those lies that she spews out?

What an idiot!


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> I'm beginning to think that the BRF is behind the exposure of lies of her university major if it's true.  It could be a public ruse to give Harry a little "OMG I didn't know she could lie" BS that leads into a divorce that brings him back into the BRF fold. Farfetched, but stranger things have happened. The BRF would have known all along, and held this card in case a situation unfolded that made it come into play.



Meghan has been caught in so many lies in the past 5 years and her fans and the most of the press just do not care. There’s no sign that Harry is looking for an out and it’s too late for that regardless. He betrayed his family and they are never going to trust him again.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Meghan has been caught in so many lies in the past 5 years and her fans and the most of the press just do not care. There’s no sign that Harry is looking for an out and it’s too late for that regardless. He betrayed his family and they are never going to trust him again.


Her fans will explain away any and all cognitive dissonance by claiming the BRF and haters are maligning her. It's a terribly useful excuse and reflects worse on her fans than on her. If any enlightened fan ever accosts her, Methane will probably just wave away responsibility by saying: "I didn't realize anyone would be stupid enough to believe my stories."


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> His big....bank account?



Interesting when you look at the photo shop you see that extremely white Rupert Murdoch and Jerry Hall   would apparently be  ‘too dark’ for the royal family too.


lanasyogamama said:


> Who stands like this? Seriously?



Someone who’s merchandise is chafing


rose60610 said:


> So her major was in Communications? And not Int'l Relations?  That would explain why she had no idea that Great Britain was a Commonwealth.  Remember that one?  Not that I believe ANYTHING she says.....    So......who explained to her that her wedding veil was hand embroidered to include all the flowers of the Commonwealth nations? And THEN she pulled out the "I didn't know"  crap.
> 
> I think we agree that Harry is an idiot. And I have to think that the BRF must have requested SOME kind of investigative background work on Meghan.  So when she trots out the Northwestern University double major why wasn't there a list of questions? This stuff is so easy to verify these days. If Harry is in love he's in love. She could have majored in Poultry Science ( I mean...ok, let's move on) and he'd have loved her. Though she wouldn't have been on a TV show, I get it. Harry had his pick of pretty "young" things, why her? Did she pick up superlative skills from her Yacht Girl days?  That could explain it. Though a major in Poultry Science wouldn't have led her into Yacht Girl opportunities, I get that too. What kind of "woe is ME" story did she snare him in?  Doesn't matter. If you're stupid, you're stupid.
> 
> I'm beginning to think that the BRF is behind the exposure of lies of her university major if it's true.  It could be a public ruse to give Harry a little "OMG I didn't know she could lie" BS that leads into a divorce that brings him back into the BRF fold. Farfetched, but stranger things have happened. The BRF would have known all along, and held this card in case a situation unfolded that made it come into play.


I mean not to be snotty but is it much harder to do IR than communications?  Isnt the American system you get into school and do a bit of everything but you have to do further tests to do medicine or go to law school? Also I thought being a theatre major was considered a bit easy too. Like a lot of things about her  it’s just odd if your daddy is already bribing your way through school why not at least pay for the double major?
maybe he couldn’t afford a double major bribe and she decided to ice him there and then for being unsupportive and useless.


----------



## Helventara

Chanelconvert said:


> How in the name of hell did she managed to go to Wimbledon in her jeans, made a surprise appearance at the British academy, then fly to the US to attend an expensive baby shower, but you can’t escape whoever you need to escape to see a freakin psychiatrist? C’mon. Does she honestly believe that every woman in the planet believes those lies that she spews out?


I don’t get this either. I mentioned it up thread that, to me, this is the most baffling question in the whole saga. I would imagine, a reasonable person would connect the dots and spot the lies. But even some usually reasonable people truly believe she’s a victim. I mean, look at the appreciation thread. 

I don’t understand.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal

This may not please the PeeWife.


----------



## Chanbal

Absolutely!  



_Nile Gardiner, a Washington-based foreign policy expert and Royal Family enthusiast, told Express.co.uk: "The popularity of Meghan and Harry in the US has declined significantly over the course of the year, and that will continue to decline.

"The image of Meghan is plummeting in the US as it is in the UK…

He said: _*"Many Americans are bewildered as to why she is still the Duchess of Sussex when she speaks out so much against the monarchy. There is no good reason she still holds a royal title.*"









						Meghan Markle popularity and image 'plummeting' in the US - expert
					

MEGHAN MARKLE'S popularity in her home country of the United States is plummeting at an alarming rate, an expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One more title that seems accurate. They could have had a wonderful life in the States with Hazz's >$40M, work on projects they are able to accomplish, and sponsor causes they believe in. Hollywood would have been thrilled to invite them to their events imo.


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> This may not please the PeeWife.



And it’s earned through hard work and not simplistic cosplay.


----------



## Chanelconvert

BVBookshop said:


> I don’t get this either. I mentioned it up thread that, to me, this is the most baffling question in the whole saga. I would imagine, a reasonable person would connect the dots and spot the lies. But even some usually reasonable people truly believe she’s a victim. I mean, look at the appreciation thread.
> 
> I don’t understand.


Ooohhh. I didn’t know about the appreciation thread. I really enjoyed the start of their romance and the wedding, then poof, the true mask came off. I think people are starting to see right through her, she’s not everywhere anymore. Remember at the opening of the lion king? But they can’t even score an invite to the former president O and Beckham’s Events.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanelconvert said:


> Ooohhh. I didn’t know about the appreciation thread. I really enjoyed the start of their romance and the wedding, then poof, the true mask came off. I think people are starting to see right through her, she’s not everywhere anymore. Remember at the opening of the lion king? But they can’t even score an invite to the former president O and Beckham’s Events.



You got that wrong, they were obviously invited but chose to not attend (I'm being sarcastic here, I find their predictable, compulsive lies to make themselves look better ridiculous).


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Interesting when you look at the photo shop you see that extremely white Rupert Murdoch and Jerry Hall   would apparently be  ‘too dark’ for the royal family too.
> 
> Someone who’s merchandise is chafing
> 
> I mean not to be snotty but is it much harder to do IR than communications?  Isnt the American system you get into school and do a bit of everything but you have to do further tests to do medicine or go to law school? Also I thought being a theatre major was considered a bit easy too. Like a lot of things about her  it’s just odd if your daddy is already bribing your way through school why not at least pay for the double major?
> maybe he couldn’t afford a double major bribe and she decided to ice him there and then for being unsupportive and useless.


I think it was just that that particular double major seems so perfect for her career as an actress and then her new role in the BRF.


----------



## youngster

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean not to be snotty but i*s it much harder to do IR than communications*?  Isnt the American system you get into school and do a bit of everything but you have to do further tests to do medicine or go to law school? Also I thought being a theatre major was considered a bit easy too. Like a lot of things about her  it’s just odd if your daddy is already bribing your way through school why not at least pay for the double major?
> maybe he couldn’t afford a double major bribe and she decided to ice him there and then for being unsupportive and useless.



A double major can take an extra semester or even an extra year, depending on the majors and whether there is any crossover between the two.  I've known kids who've done it in 4 years though through excellent organization of their schedules, heavier course loads and adding summer classes as well.  (ETA:  In an American university, once you declare a major, you have to fulfill the requirements of that major so the majority of your classes will be in that subject. There are extra spaces for electives though so you can experiment and take classes that are completely unrelated to your major but that are of interest. I used my electives to take French, Art History, History of Ancient Greece, etc.)

With any major though, I think easy is relative. I know people who breezed through STEM majors who would have been terrified to take a Theater class.  I would have found it excruciating.   But if you are a theater kid, who plans to be an actor, majoring in Theater is probably fun and a breeze relatively speaking, though I'm sure there is pressure to perform well.  I don't know how good Northwestern's theater major is though. It's not Yale Drama.  It also depends on what other classes are taken to fill out a course load.  Are you balancing those theater classes with economics, foreign languages, history, accounting, etc., or are you taking Intro to Popular Culture or Intro to Dinosaurs? 

In the 20 years since MM graduated, a Communications degree has probably become more complex because of technology and social media.  But, it is generally considered an easier major, probably the easiest major if I'm being honest. International Relations is definitely more difficult than Communications.  I know the International Relations classes that one of my kids took were quite difficult and a lot of work.   Their classes in Communications, one or two of which were required for their major, were pretty straightforward and easy in comparison.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> So her major was in Communications? And not Int'l Relations?  That would explain why she had no idea that Great Britain was a Commonwealth.  Remember that one?  Not that I believe ANYTHING she says.....    So......who explained to her that her wedding veil was hand embroidered to include all the flowers of the Commonwealth nations? And THEN she pulled out the "I didn't know"  crap.
> 
> I think we agree that Harry is an idiot. And I have to think that the BRF must have requested SOME kind of investigative background work on Meghan.  So when she trots out the Northwestern University double major why wasn't there a list of questions? This stuff is so easy to verify these days. If Harry is in love he's in love. She could have majored in Poultry Science ( I mean...ok, let's move on) and he'd have loved her. Though she wouldn't have been on a TV show, I get it. Harry had his pick of pretty "young" things, why her? Did she pick up superlative skills from her Yacht Girl days?  That could explain it. Though a major in Poultry Science wouldn't have led her into Yacht Girl opportunities, I get that too. What kind of "woe is ME" story did she snare him in?  Doesn't matter. If you're stupid, you're stupid.
> 
> I'm beginning to think that the BRF is behind the exposure of lies of her university major if it's true.  It could be a public ruse to give Harry a little "OMG I didn't know she could lie" BS that leads into a divorce that brings him back into the BRF fold. Farfetched, but stranger things have happened. The BRF would have known all along, and held this card in case a situation unfolded that made it come into play.


IDK how she hooked him but my guess is she was attractive enough to spark some interest and then she was crafty enough to know how to manipulate him.  Plus maybe yacht girl skills and witchcraft


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Absolutely!
> View attachment 5434612
> 
> 
> _Nile Gardiner, a Washington-based foreign policy expert and Royal Family enthusiast, told Express.co.uk: "The popularity of Meghan and Harry in the US has declined significantly over the course of the year, and that will continue to decline.
> 
> "The image of Meghan is plummeting in the US as it is in the UK…
> 
> He said: _*"Many Americans are bewildered as to why she is still the Duchess of Sussex when she speaks out so much against the monarchy. There is no good reason she still holds a royal title.*"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle popularity and image 'plummeting' in the US - expert
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE'S popularity in her home country of the United States is plummeting at an alarming rate, an expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I took a quick peek at the "other thread" where everyone still idolizes them. I guess it's true that, "There are none so blind as those who will not see!" But, I can't feel too sorry for anyone who ignores stats and fact checking to swallow Mr. and Mrs. Misinformation's truths. Maybe I felt a wee tiny bit of sympathy for H when they married, but after seeing their shenanigans and remembering H for the sh!tty little brat and bad boy he was, I gave up on The Miscreants and I hope their lies lead to their disgrace and permanent obscurity.


----------



## kkfiregirl

sdkitty said:


> IDK how she hooked him but my guess is she was attractive enough to spark some interest and then she was crafty enough to know how to manipulate him.  Plus maybe yacht girl skills and witchcraft



I think she pretended to be “self-made” and down to earth, which was the opposite of his life and everyone in his social circle. Her biracial heritage intrigued him & she had also been married before, so was perhaps a bit more sophisticated and knowledgeable about relationships and manipulation techniques.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> IDK how she hooked him but my guess is she was attractive enough to spark some interest and then she was crafty enough to know how to manipulate him.  Plus maybe yacht girl skills and witchcraft



All of that, perhaps paired with MarkusA’s assistance


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> All of that, perhaps paired with MarkusA’s assistance


I wonder what he got for changing her life....her enduring friendship?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> IDK how she hooked him but my guess is she was attractive enough to spark some interest and then she was crafty enough to know how to manipulate him.  Plus maybe yacht girl skills and witchcraft



I know we often joke about it but I am not dismissing witchcraft. How Meghan managed to go from having been  dumped by Harry to crashing his friend’s wedding to Harry being madly in love with her is nothing short of sorcery.


----------



## bag-mania

kkfiregirl said:


> I think she pretended to be “self-made” and down to earth, which was the opposite of his life and everyone in his social circle. Her biracial heritage intrigued him & she had also been married before, so was perhaps a bit more sophisticated and knowledgeable about relationships and manipulation techniques.



In other words he was putty in her hands, dullard that he is!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> In other words he was putty in her hands, dullard that he is!


maybe he liked her worldliness


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> maybe he liked her worldliness


…or her wordiness
Did she bombed him w calligraphed bananas?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> A double major can take an extra semester or even an extra year, depending on the majors and whether there is any crossover between the two.  I've known kids who've done it in 4 years though through excellent organization of their schedules, heavier course loads and adding summer classes as well.  (ETA:  In an American university, once you declare a major, you have to fulfill the requirements of that major so the majority of your classes will be in that subject. There are extra spaces for electives though so you can experiment and take classes that are completely unrelated to your major but that are of interest. I used my electives to take French, Art History, History of Ancient Greece, etc.)
> 
> With any major though, I think easy is relative. I know people who breezed through STEM majors who would have been terrified to take a Theater class.  I would have found it excruciating.   But if you are a theater kid, who plans to be an actor, majoring in Theater is probably fun and a breeze relatively speaking, though I'm sure there is pressure to perform well.  I don't know how good Northwestern's theater major is though. It's not Yale Drama.  It also depends on what other classes are taken to fill out a course load.  Are you balancing those theater classes with economics, foreign languages, history, accounting, etc., or are you taking Intro to Popular Culture or Intro to Dinosaurs?
> 
> In the 20 years since MM graduated, a Communications degree has probably become more complex because of technology and social media.  But, it is generally considered an easier major, probably the easiest major if I'm being honest. International Relations is definitely more difficult than Communications.  I know the International Relations classes that one of my kids took were quite difficult and a lot of work.   Their classes in Communications, one or two of which were required for their major, were pretty straightforward and easy in comparison.


Thanks- it is completely different from the U.K. system where you apply for 3 years of a given subject and you apply directly to the 
maybe I should have suspected IR is more difficult than communications given how thick she is about the first thing about any other country- I mean I know more than her and my degree is nowhere near geography or politics. [/QUOTE]


kkfiregirl said:


> I think she pretended to be “self-made” and down to earth, which was the opposite of his life and everyone in his social circle. Her biracial heritage intrigued him & she had also been married before, so was perhaps a bit more sophisticated and knowledgeable about relationships and manipulation techniques.


I think so- she had the illusion of being different enough while being separated enough from the working classes. I do think the BRF in general did embrace the idea of getting a Biracial wife for mr Nazi outfit


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> Who stands like this? Seriously?



They claim this look "commands attention"?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> I know we often joke about it but I am not dismissing witchcraft. How Meghan managed to go from having been  dumped by Harry to crashing his friend’s wedding to Harry being madly in love with her is nothing short of sorcery.


Maybe add a little blackmail to the sorcery. There's no telling what she learned at the wedding party. Alcohol can cause loose lips and loose lips sink ships.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think so- she had the illusion of being different enough while being separated enough from the working classes. I do think the BRF in general did embrace the idea of getting a Biracial wife for mr Nazi outfit



But...but...that was all William's fault!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> PeeWife.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> "seems so perfect for her career"



That's probably why she started using it. She reportedly did an internship with the State Dept. and then took, but did not pass, the test  to join them in a foreign service career. Her true major may be the explanation for that.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> So her major was in Communications? And not Int'l Relations?  That would explain why she had no idea that Great Britain was a Commonwealth.  Remember that one?  Not that I believe ANYTHING she says.....    So......who explained to her that her wedding veil was hand embroidered to include all the flowers of the Commonwealth nations? And THEN she pulled out the "I didn't know"  crap.
> 
> I think we agree that Harry is an idiot. And I have to think that the BRF must have requested SOME kind of investigative background work on Meghan.  So when she trots out the Northwestern University double major why wasn't there a list of questions? This stuff is so easy to verify these days. If Harry is in love he's in love. She could have majored in Poultry Science ( I mean...ok, let's move on) and he'd have loved her. Though she wouldn't have been on a TV show, I get it. Harry had his pick of pretty "young" things, why her? Did she pick up superlative skills from her Yacht Girl days?  That could explain it. Though a major in Poultry Science wouldn't have led her into Yacht Girl opportunities, I get that too. What kind of "woe is ME" story did she snare him in?  Doesn't matter. If you're stupid, you're stupid.
> 
> I'm beginning to think that the BRF is behind the exposure of lies of her university major if it's true.  It could be a public ruse to give Harry a little "OMG I didn't know she could lie" BS that leads into a divorce that brings him back into the BRF fold. Farfetched, but stranger things have happened. The BRF would have known all along, and held this card in case a situation unfolded that made it come into play.



I firmly believe that the palace dug up every little detail about her past, but they knew if he was told not to marry her he'd have stubbornly gone ahead anyway. Any parent knows this. And they'd have been framed as being racist. They really had no choice but to let him forge ahead down his path of self-destruction. I'm sure things would have been handled differently if he were the heir.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

From @charlottawill post "That's probably why she started using it. She reportedly did an internship with the State Dept. and then took, but did not pass, the test to join them in a foreign service career. Her true major may be the explanation for that."


She apparently started an Internship in Argentina, but was sent home after having a fling with a 20-year-old US marine.

ETA quote


----------



## Helventara

pukasonqo said:


> …or her wordiness
> Did she bombed him w calligraphed bananas?


But she did!  Remember this?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> IDK how she hooked him but my guess is she was attractive enough to spark some interest and then she was crafty enough to know how to manipulate him.  Plus maybe yacht girl skills and witchcraft



Compared to the aristocratic British girls he had dated she probably seemed sophisticated and exotic, and given that he's not too bright he was an easy target for her.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This may not please the *PeeWife*.



I keep thinking The Prince Ass and the Pee. Forgive me, Hans Christian Andersen. I know she wanted to be The Little Mermaid, but she is more akin to Charybdis and Scylla.


----------



## 880

Simple. He wanted to be different and she dangled the idea of being able to monetize his status in the US: have His cake and eat it too. he assumed that he would always be the most popular Royal and could get away with it (probably bc he was spoiled and coddled all his life). the problem is Harry couldn’t accept his dwindling role in the BRF even before he left. 

I don’t like her one bit, but she’s simply a grasping, aging third rate actress who is looking out for her self interest, and who got too big for her britches. I thin the reason why everyone thinks she is so nefarious is that she snagged a prince and then couldn’t deal with the responsibility. But it does seem like he wanted to leave the monarchy and the UK before he met her, and he certainly knew or should have known the drill. So, I actually think he should shoulder the lions share of the blame.

even if he is unhappy, it’s possible that he won’t want to get divorced bc he doesn’t want to face the I told you so comments from basically everyone


----------



## redney

880 said:


> Simple. He wanted to be different and she dangled the idea of being able to monetize his status in the US: have His cake and eat it too. he assumed that he would always be the most popular Royal and could get away with it (probably bc he was spoiled and coddled all his life). the problem is Harry couldn’t accept his dwindling role in the BRF even before he left.


This, 100%. If he stayed with Cressida or Chelsy (and either with him), it would've meant staying in the BRF as the spare for the rest of his life. Meagain gave him an option to leave and strike out on his own. She likely saw this early on and told him exactly what he wanted to hear. Not surprising he fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> I don’t like her one bit, but she’s simply a grasping, aging third rate actress who is looking out for her self interest, and who got too big for her britches. *I think the reason why everyone thinks she is so nefarious is that she snagged a prince and then couldn’t deal with the responsibility. *But it does seem like he wanted to leave the monarchy and the UK before he met her, and he certainly knew or should have known the drill. So, I actually think he should shoulder the lions share of the blame.



That's actually not my problem with her at all. Royal life isn't for everyone, had she just acknowleged that and left quietly I wouldn't have held that against her at all (leaving aside she didn't leave because royal life wasn't for her but because she didn't get the star role she thought she deserved). But she is disgustingly self-important, lacks any self-awareness, badmouthed the family that gave her everything when she decided they didn't give enough - and did so not by stating facts, but being completely unfazed about making up the most ridiculous lies -, still rides on said family's coattails because she lacks both talent and work ethics, and last but not least, she treats her fellow humans including her husband like sh*t. THAT's what I hold against her.

As for Harry, I am still not convinced he actually wanted to leave. He was unsatisfied with certain aspects of his life, sure - but let's be real, he had nowhere else to go. In fact, he still has nowhere else to go because he can't be successful without The Firm having his back, developing projects for him, guarding his public image and financing a big chunk of his living expenses.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> This, 100%. If he stayed with Cressida or Chelsy (and either with him), it would've meant staying in the BRF as the spare for the rest of his life. Meagain gave him an option to leave and strike out on his own. She likely saw this early on and told him exactly what he wanted to hear. Not surprising he fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.



I think Chelsey was good for him and helped tame his inner demons. But also, I completely understand why she didn't want to nanny him anymore and I'm glad she moved on and found happiness.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Something we don’t know or just clickbait?









						The stories behind Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton's engagement rings
					

Both Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton were gifted engagement rings inspired by Princess Diana - a special tribute to a legendary figure and mother-in-law.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's actually not my problem with her at all. Royal life isn't for everyone, had she just acknowleged that and left quietly I wouldn't have held that against her at all (leaving aside she didn't leave because royal life wasn't for her but because she didn't get the star role she thought she deserved). But she is disgustingly self-important, lacks any self-awareness, badmouthed the family that gave her everything when she decided they didn't give enough - and did so not by stating facts, but being completely unfazed about making up the most ridiculous lies -, still rides on said family's coattails because she lacks both talent and work ethics, and last but not least, she treats her fellow humans including her husband like sh*t. THAT's what I hold against her.
> 
> As for Harry, I am still not convinced he actually wanted to leave. He was unsatisfied with certain aspects of his life, sure - but let's be real, he had nowhere else to go. In fact, he still has nowhere else to go because he can't be successful without The Firm having his back, developing projects for him, guarding his public image and financing a big chunk of his living expenses.


yes to all of that...and don't forget the way she has treated the father who gave her an expensive education and everything else he could


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> By the time she snagged him, he had been rejected by 3, possibly more, upper class ladies with proper ? connections.   Imo the ‘most eligible bachelor’ stuff came from the media. More of the Diana-hype.
> 
> Chels, Cressida and Florence, more?
> Old article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's trysts with his new love 'Flee': But will the Queen approve of Miss Brudenell-Bruce?
> 
> 
> One might argue that anyone who has the name Florence Anne-Marie Brudenell-Bruce has a certain obligation to live up to such a splendid moniker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Seems interesting to me that his "type" were all blondes; blonde hair, blue eyes, long hair (and very attractive).  Then he ends up with Megalomaniac?!?!?! .. hmmmm, makes me wonder about these "Skills" (If we can even call them that) that she has?!?!?!!


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s not forget that many of the women Harry dated over the years were actresses and models. He has always been attracted to the showy type. When he could never seal the deal with the few BRF-approved women he dated, he went for someone he could get. Watching his brother expanding his family while Harry was still a bachelor started to grate on him. Meghan was in the right place at the right time to hook him. He was wanting to be hooked.


----------



## kipp

CeeJay said:


> Seems interesting to me that his "type" were all blondes; blonde hair, blue eyes, long hair (and very attractive).  Then he ends up with Megalomaniac?!?!?! .. hmmmm, makes me wonder about these "Skills" (If we can even call them that) that she has?!?!?!!



I wonder if the blonde blue eyed types were just a lot more common among the British high level/society women he would be expected to date.  As I recall, he had a poster of Halle Berry in his school dorm room…


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> Why is this in the Harry thread?



And why isn’t it loading?  Clickbait?


----------



## Aimee3

kipp said:


> I wonder if the blonde blue eyed types were just a lot more common among the British high level/society women he would be expected to date.  As I recall, he had a poster of Halle Berry in his school dorm room…


What I wonder is how come Cressida and Chelsea both dated H for years, (not at the same time lol), when they seem fairly intelligent with a lot going for them.  So since neither wanted the public royal life, what attracted them to this man-child and for such a long time?  Did the publicity help them in their careers?  I don’t know very much about them/him at that epoch, except the nazi uniform and the nude Vegas party.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but he was still a member of the most famous royal family in the world, son to a future king and brother to another, and loaded as in his whole lifestyle was funded, he was set up to earn millions, and his own money was basically fun money.
> 
> Now he's an international joke going broke with no purpose in life.


Perfect summation of “The man he has become” , supposedly the tag line of his unpublished book.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but he was still a member of the most famous royal family in the world, son to a future king and brother to another, and loaded as in his whole lifestyle was funded, he was set up to earn millions, and his own money was basically fun money.
> 
> Now he's an international joke going broke with no purpose in life.


guess maybe that wasn't enough if he had to be second to brother
I wonder if he realizes how stupid he looks....probably not - the WIFE probably tells him what to think


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I know we often joke about it but I am not dismissing witchcraft. How Meghan managed to go from having been  dumped by Harry to crashing his friend’s wedding to Harry being madly in love with her is nothing short of sorcery.


A vial of pee? I still shake my head he felt it appropriate to share that as an attraction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> guess maybe that wasn't enough if he had to be second to brother
> I wonder if he realizes how stupid he looks....probably not - the WIFE probably tells him what to think



I understand he had a problem with this, I just don't understand why. It seems like my dream job, most of the perks with not half of the responsibilities. I'd also happily be #2's wife instead of the future queen for the very same reasons.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Let’s not forget that many of the women Harry dated over the years were actresses and models. He has always been attracted to the showy type. When he could never seal the deal with the few BRF-approved women he dated, he went for someone he could get. Watching his brother expanding his family while Harry was still a bachelor started to grate on him. Meghan was in the right place at the right time to hook him. He was wanting to be hooked.


timing is everything
I wonder what having a Wife means to him.  He uses the word at every opportunity.  My first thought is it makes him feel grown up.  Some men feel a wife is a possession or someone subservient to them.  I doubt Meghan would be willing to play that role.


----------



## charlottawill

CeeJay said:


> Seems interesting to me that his "type" were all blondes; blonde hair, blue eyes, long hair (and very attractive).  Then he ends up with Megalomaniac?!?!?! .. hmmmm, makes me wonder about these "Skills" (If we can even call them that) that she has?!?!?!!



I think he had a crush on Kate and was subconsciously looking for someone like her, looks wise. Not that TW even comes close, but it is interesting that he suddenly switched from a string of blondes to a brunette.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I think he had a crush on Kate and was subconsciously looking for someone like her, looks wise. Not that TW even comes close, but it is interesting that he suddenly switched from a string of blondes to a brunette.


could be coincidence
he was introduced to her and she knew how to come on to him....the rest is history


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Chanelconvert said:


> How in the name of hell did she managed to go to Wimbledon in her jeans, made a surprise appearance at the British academy, then fly to the US to attend an expensive baby shower, but you can’t escape whoever you need to escape to see a freakin psychiatrist? C’mon. Does she honestly believe that every woman in the planet believes those lies that she spews out?
> 
> What an idiot!


Well, Oprah bought it hook, line, and sinker.


----------



## Jayne1

regnews said:


> From another forum... William really ANGRY.



I got some serious flash back of his mother with that "my children" comment.


----------



## purseinsanity

regnews said:


> Longer clip on youtube. William (and Kate in background) angry with this guy. Starts at 1:29



I'm sure it's freeing to not have security with you every moment, but this seems a little reckless to me.  You've got the next two generations of kings.  Also humorous that they're out without security, but Haz thinks security for him and his WIFE are paramount.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Compared to the aristocratic British girls he had dated she probably seemed sophisticated and exotic, and given that he's not too bright he was an easy target for her.


Totally agree on the "not too bright". I think they feed each other's ego and they are both after fame and fortune without having to do the work. They probably thought that they could EP their way into the A-list category. "Harry and Meghan present", followed by a calligraphic scroll of the Archewell logo, and then someone else's hard work goes on air with them taking the credit.

I see Methane as a catalyst. Before her arrival, Hazard probably was unhappy but, as he is without talent, didn't see an alternative. And the BRF was giving him avenues to expend his petulant energy: Sentabale and Invictus could not have started without his family's support. Methane spun him a golden tale of marketing their popularity. Without talent herself, she saw no problem in his lack of talent and figured they could just grift their way to Hollywood fame.  



CarryOn2020 said:


>



That smirk at the end undermines all the elegance that she was aiming for and makes her look cheap.


----------



## rose60610

For all the money they're paying their PR team, they're losers to (IMO) about 90% of people who know (care) who they are.  If true, does that mean Sunshine Sachs is gong to be sued also ?    One of these days M&H are going to implode, announce a divorce, or do something really radical, like actually work at something. Their ship is sinking. Nobody wants their portrait. Not even the BRF wants them around them. They severed all ties from both their families. How can they beg their way back into the BRF? They can't. Not since Meghan accused the BRF of driving her into suicidal thoughts. Talk their way back in after that?  Errr, no.

By the way, the dopey duo isn't mentioned on Mr. Sunshine's wiki page.  He doesn't even want to be associated with them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors are all over the place, reminds of the Charles and Diana days.  Better buckle up, could be a wild ride.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Well, Oprah bought it hook, line, and sinker.


Those memes are going to live forever, both Oprah's OTT responses and Methane's fake woe-is-me expressions.


----------



## xincinsin

Apart from employing hired guns Sunshine Sucks who do what they do for the $$$, it looks like Methane has agents and lawyers wrapped round her unnaturally misshapen fingers. They must have negotiated a doozy of a contract if Netflix, Spotify and the publisher are still holding their collective breath waiting for the Ditzy Duo to generate content.


----------



## jelliedfeels

TBF everyone was blonde in the 00s - it was the Abercrombie and Blake lively era. I’d say black and brown is slightly more fashionable now. Rule of thumb is whatever Beyoncé or Scar Jo is doing.

I don’t lay too much stock in the hair colour preference as I’ve never favoured any over another. I’m sure H has more particular musthaves like a lovely, kind personality and excellent manners 

add On- ok maybe there’s a slight lie that I do like red hair the best 9 times out of 10.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> So her major was in Communications? And not Int'l Relations?  That would explain why she had no idea that Great Britain was a Commonwealth.  Remember that one?  Not that I believe ANYTHING she says.....    So......who explained to her that her wedding veil was hand embroidered to include all the flowers of the Commonwealth nations? And THEN she pulled out the "I didn't know"  crap.
> 
> I think we agree that Harry is an idiot. And I have to think that the BRF must have requested SOME kind of investigative background work on Meghan.  So when she trots out the Northwestern University double major why wasn't there a list of questions? This stuff is so easy to verify these days. If Harry is in love he's in love. She could have majored in Poultry Science ( I mean...ok, let's move on) and he'd have loved her. Though she wouldn't have been on a TV show, I get it. Harry had his pick of pretty "young" things, why her? Did she pick up superlative skills from her Yacht Girl days?  That could explain it. Though a major in Poultry Science wouldn't have led her into Yacht Girl opportunities, I get that too. What kind of "woe is ME" story did she snare him in?  Doesn't matter. If you're stupid, you're stupid.
> 
> I'm beginning to think that the BRF is behind the exposure of lies of her university major if it's true.  It could be a public ruse to give Harry a little "OMG I didn't know she could lie" BS that leads into a divorce that brings him back into the BRF fold. Farfetched, but stranger things have happened. The BRF would have known all along, and held this card in case a situation unfolded that made it come into play.



I'm not usually on M's side, but if the US as anything like the UK, degree courses have to be equivocal to each other to pass general bodies of education quality standards. Some courses are just a bit more prestigious sounding than others. The work students have to do meeds to equivocal.

A communication degree should not be worth less than any other. And in fact, we don't know, if Northwestern just went generic on the description.

Her degree may well be described as in communications and also be more accurately and specifically be a double major. However, I can't find her double major, but things do change over time and she was there 20 years ago. Anyone else know courses at undergrad level early '00s?

I was suspicious that the School of Communications included Theatre, in the UK they often under schools of performance or arts. Theatre studies are within the School of Communication at Northwestern, but I could only find graduate and professional programmes. She doesn't have a MFA and I couldn't find anything with 'Theatre' in the title, they're specific to (theatre) role.





__





						Theatre Programs | Northwestern School of Communication
					






					communication.northwestern.edu
				




My guess is, she may have made the double major to sound more impressive and fit her current narrative (I use that word in it's original media studies sense (not my 'major')) - but it's just pretentious to think that one degree is worth more than another.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This may not please the PeeWife.




There'll be NO plates left in Montecito McMansion!


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> A double major can take an extra semester or even an extra year, depending on the majors and whether there is any crossover between the two.  I've known kids who've done it in 4 years though through excellent organization of their schedules, heavier course loads and adding summer classes as well.  (ETA:  In an American university, once you declare a major, you have to fulfill the requirements of that major so the majority of your classes will be in that subject. There are extra spaces for electives though so you can experiment and take classes that are completely unrelated to your major but that are of interest. I used my electives to take French, Art History, History of Ancient Greece, etc.)
> 
> With any major though, I think easy is relative. I know people who breezed through STEM majors who would have been terrified to take a Theater class.  I would have found it excruciating.   But if you are a theater kid, who plans to be an actor, majoring in Theater is probably fun and a breeze relatively speaking, though I'm sure there is pressure to perform well.  I don't know how good Northwestern's theater major is though. It's not Yale Drama.  It also depends on what other classes are taken to fill out a course load.  Are you balancing those theater classes with economics, foreign languages, history, accounting, etc., or are you taking Intro to Popular Culture or Intro to Dinosaurs?
> 
> In the 20 years since MM graduated, a Communications degree has probably become more complex because of technology and social media.  But, it is generally considered an easier major, probably the easiest major if I'm being honest. International Relations is definitely more difficult than Communications.  I know the International Relations classes that one of my kids took were quite difficult and a lot of work.   Their classes in Communications, one or two of which were required for their major, were pretty straightforward and easy in comparison.



Thanks, you answered a lot of questions. 

I think 'difficulty' is a relative term too, 'easy courses' are usually perceived from outside.  In terms of academic context, communications should have just as much theory underpinning student essays and dissertations/theses as, say, pure philosophy, sociology or linguistics.   

As you say, if you have family in the theatre/film/TV world and have grown-up in that world, a theatre course is going to be relatively easier for that particular student.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Thanks- it is completely different from the U.K. system where you apply for 3 years of a given subject and you apply directly to the
> maybe I should have suspected IR is more difficult than communications given how thick she is about the first thing about any other country- I mean I know more than her and my degree is nowhere near geography or politics.





Some courses are 4 years in the UK. Usually, it's because the second or third year were spent abroad, or it's was a vocational degree, e.g. in health or social care.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I firmly believe that the palace dug up every little detail about her past, but they knew if he was told not to marry her he'd have stubbornly gone ahead anyway. Any parent knows this. And they'd have been framed as being racist. They really had no choice but to let him forge ahead down his path of self-destruction. I'm sure things would have been handled differently if he were the heir.



I agree. They have the whole of MI5/6 at there disposal. Others have only had average search-engines and can dig dirt.

We saw a whole lot of 'past' disappear from the Net before she married H and was made a Duchess. They (the Palace) completely went along with her plan to present herself as a conservative (small c) humanitarian beauty, and they did a 'job on us' .

All part of her plan too IMO. Get the man,  get the past erased using 'the Firm's' resources, get some Royal pics doing 'good works', get the BIG F&D wedding like she was a 19 virgin (sorry, but that was totally the vibe) then - leave to get away from all the rules and go after the BIG money.

It could of worked if they weren't so greedy/horrible/litigious/duplicitous/hypocritical/desperate.

People are just _sick _of over-privileged, whiny, hyper-controlled/controlling narcs


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> My guess is, she may have made the double major to sound more impressive and fit her current narrative (I use that word in it's original media studies sense (not my 'major')) - but it's just pretentious to think that one degree is worth more than another.



My Media Studies program had restricted admission with a very steep NC - at that point, way higher than law school, so there's that. It's also not unusual for a German university to ask for linguistic proficiency in at least two languages to be admitted (usually a choice of English, French, Latin, though sometimes Ancient Greek, Hebrew, Italian or Spanish can be substituted). My minors also required to acquire basic knowledge in several more languages, so I feel I did work for my degree 

ETA: we also could pick a percentage of our classes from Political Science, Sociology, American Studies etc. which I did. My favourite class ever was a class on Christmas traditions with the Protestant Theology department (I'm not Protestant). I wrote a paper on the origins of the Christmas tree, and we spent several hours singing Christmas carols in a beautiful hidden chapel (my university's main building is a former palace).

I will say though my sibling's med school exams gave me anxiety, so maybe some degrees are indeed harder than others.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's actually not my problem with her at all. Royal life isn't for everyone, had she just acknowleged that and left quietly I wouldn't have held that against her at all (leaving aside she didn't leave because royal life wasn't for her but because she didn't get the star role she thought she deserved). But she is disgustingly self-important, lacks any self-awareness, badmouthed the family that gave her everything when she decided they didn't give enough - and did so not by stating facts, but being completely unfazed about making up the most ridiculous lies -, still rides on said family's coattails because she lacks both talent and work ethics, and last but not least, she treats her fellow humans including her husband like sh*t. THAT's what I hold against her.
> 
> As for Harry, I am still not convinced he actually wanted to leave. He was unsatisfied with certain aspects of his life, sure - but let's be real, he had nowhere else to go. In fact, he still has nowhere else to go because he can't be successful without The Firm having his back, developing projects for him, guarding his public image and financing a big chunk of his living expenses.



I agree with everything except I do believe H wanted to go. I just think he didn't know what going meant because he has literally lived the life of a Prince. 

I think the William feud started long before he got married and went into competitive mode against his brother. He never shuts-up about _his_ family like no-one has ever had a family before. He has a real problem with his masculinity. How else can we explain making-up (and going along with) so many unproven and blatantly false lies? The whole 'I need to protect the Queen' whilst at the I Games was


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors are all over the place, reminds of the Charles and Diana days.  Better buckle up, could be a wild ride.



A few days ago, I saw a video posted somewhere else comparing Doria's life choices to TW's... I didn't post it here because Doria has the right to remain a private citizen imo. However, it goes along with the infamous words about not giving the milk for free…


----------



## Chanbal

People seem to be questioning whether this article is part of the Harkles' revenge… 









						Charles Took $3M in Cash Stuffed In Bags From Sheik
					

Plus, Andrew tries to ride it out, even as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell says the photo of him with Virginia Roberts Giuffre makes her “shake” in terror.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My Media Studies program had restricted admission with a very steep NC - at that point, way higher than law school, so there's that. It's also not unusual for a German university to ask for linguistic proficiency in at least two languages to be admitted (usually a choice of English, French, Latin). My minors also required to acquire basic knowledge in several more languages, so I feel I did work for my degree
> 
> I will say though my sibling's med school exams gave me anxiety, so maybe some degrees are indeed harder than others.



I used to teach communication students at one of the highest ranking London universities (I know my grammar and spelling doesn't always suggest that fact  ) but I've never been a communications student.

Someone who is scientifically-inclined may find a medical degree easier than communications - or anything else. It's just a student's inclinations as well as expectations. 

I worked with someone who graduated with an outstanding prestigious physics degree (and went on to work in systems control in the financial sector). He was completely at sea with concepts on ideology, philosophy and political economy because of the variables and debatable points. 

Universities and national bodies take great pains to equalise degree courses. I really would not think less of Meghan if she just said she had a degree in communications. 

_Everything_ has to be competitive with her, she needs to impress people all the time - but then I believe in the US, education is_ even_ more competitive than it is in Europe. Somehow, a double major becomes 'a thing'.  I guess it's easy enough to find out if she was there 3 or 4 years_ if_ that's the big difference.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think the William feud started long before he got married and went into competitive mode against his brother. He never shuts-up about _his_ family like no-one has ever had a family before. He has a real problem with his masculinity. How else can we explain making-up (and going along with) so many unproven and blatantly false lies? The whole 'I need to protect the Queen' whilst at the I Games was



Maybe Kate was the peacemaker. Then along came Raptor who hates her guts and that was that. Agree with his weird take on masculinity, is it normal for a 40yo to be oh so proud to have a wife (not proud of his wife or her accomplishments, but simply proud he got lucky - or in his case, signed his own death sentence  )?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> _Everything_ has to be competitive with her, she needs to impress people all the time - *but then I believe in the US, education is even more competitive than it is in Europe.* Somehow, a double major becomes 'a thing'.  I guess it's easy enough to find out if she was there 3 or 4 years_ if_ that's the big difference.



It's a completely unknown concept for Germany that one university is way better than another. Obviously some programs have a better reputation than others, but at the end of the day, a degree is a degree. You don't see the equivalent of a Harvard graduate making double the money or something.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I agree. They have the whole of MI5/6 at there disposal. Others have only had average search-engines and can dig dirt.
> 
> We saw a whole lot of 'past' disappear from the Net before she married H and was made a Duchess. They (the Palace) completely went along with her plan to present herself as a conservative (small c) humanitarian beauty, and they did a 'job on us' .
> 
> All part of her plan too IMO. Get the man,  get the past erased by 'the Firm's' resources, get some Royal pics doing 'good works', get the BIG F&D wedding like she was a 19 virgin (sorry, but that was totally the vibe) then - leave to get away from all the rules and go after the BIG money.
> 
> It could of worked if they weren't so greedy/horrible/litigious/duplicitous/hypocritical/desperate.
> 
> People are just _sick _of over-privileged, whiny, hyper-controlled/controlling narcs


They were also done in by the pandemic. If the world had not essentially shut down, they could have dragged on the charade with red carpets and party invites.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> *He never shuts-up about his family like no-one has ever had a family before. *He has a real problem with his masculinity. How else can we explain making-up (and going along with) so many unproven and blatantly false lies? The whole 'I need to protect the Queen' whilst at the I Games was


  
I suppose in this sense, he is as much a plagiarist as his wife.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's a completely unknown concept for Germany that one university is way better than another. Obviously some programs have a better reputation than others, but at the end of the day, a degree is a degree. You don't see the equivalent of a Harvard graduate making double the money or something.



In the UK, we have Oxbridge (Oxford and Cambridge) which were the first universities. For a long time, they didn't even allow Catholics to study (University of London was the first) or women. Then they allowed women to study, but could not receive degrees. Oxbridge are reportedly where everyone wants to go, and foreign, including US students, often choose to do a semester/year there to grab an Oxford/Cambridge collage mention on their CV (and they are charged an arm and a leg for it). Actually, they are very tricky places for outsiders, foreigners, any kind of people that show diversity (neuro or other). Then, we have what are called 'red brick' universities which often promote a certain progressive political stance, and are thought by some to be superior for arts, humanities, socio-sciences and medicine. Then, there are newer universities that started as polytechnics. 

Our university system is practically divided along class lines. The upper-classes _have_ to get into and go to Oxbridge as some kind of finishing school, it's all about showing how much you fit in (with a certain set). Red bricks are often full of middle-class students in denial about being middle-class, and are about virtue signalling (caring about humanity is very competitive) and being more special/sensitive than anyone else, before heading off to make _lots_ of money in something that sounds vaguely glamorous or worthy, and the rest to to the rest. Then there are specialist art schools, the more prestigious, the less interfered with students are. 

Students everywhere all seem proportionally equally bright and dim, though often seem better debating and knowing what's expected of them at Oxbridge/Red Bricks, but that's down to our inherited class-engineered, tiered school system (IMHO). 

As we know, William went to St Andrews which is a (departure of the norm for a royal) and Harry didn't go to university - also 'daring' but then we know his academic record, so just as well.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> People seem to be questioning whether this article is part of the Harkles' revenge…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles Took $3M in Cash Stuffed In Bags From Sheik
> 
> 
> Plus, Andrew tries to ride it out, even as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell says the photo of him with Virginia Roberts Giuffre makes her “shake” in terror.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


This is a monster of an article which has a lot to discuss but it does seem to go along with  a lot of what we’ve speculated here about Andrew. Very disappointed the royals aren’t being more proactive in encouraging his resignation from the title.

I don’t think we need to blame Harry for this - after all he’s hardly forcing Charles to accept this money, and to me the possible (some might say obvious) bribery of a public figure is an significant matter of public interest.

If this news story goes anywhere Charles will just have another of his aides resign to cover for him.

Also for what it’s worth there already is a day to commemorate the abolition of slavery - 2nd of December.








						International Day for the Abolition of Slavery | United Nations
					

The International Day for the Abolition of Slavery focuses on eradicating contemporary forms of slavery, such as trafficking in persons, sexual exploitation, the worst forms of child labour, forced marriage, and the forced recruitment of children for use in armed conflict.




					www.un.org
				



That he and his team do not know this is I think itself testament to how useful these commemorations  can be. Though arguably it could also be a telling sign of how seriously they consider these talking points.

Add on- this is just my hot take but I think we should stop putting commemoration days in December as it just gets completely overshadowed by Christmas. Stick em in March, April, May or June when people are looking for something to do and it’s not too cold.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> People seem to be questioning whether this article is part of the Harkles' revenge…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles Took $3M in Cash Stuffed In Bags From Sheik
> 
> 
> Plus, Andrew tries to ride it out, even as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell says the photo of him with Virginia Roberts Giuffre makes her “shake” in terror.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


How reliable is the Daily Beast?
The article stitches together a lot of stuff but seems kind of hollow. I'm not pro-Charles, but that throwaway line about Harry seems silly. He was probably smarter only in that he would take a bag of diamonds rather than a suitcase of cash.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> I agree with everything except I do believe H wanted to go. I just think he didn't know what going meant because he has literally lived the life of a Prince.
> 
> I think the William feud started long before he got married and went into competitive mode against his brother. He never shuts-up about _his_ family like no-one has ever had a family before. He has a real problem with his masculinity. How else can we explain making-up (and going along with) so many unproven and blatantly false lies? The whole 'I need to protect the Queen' whilst at the I Games was



Agree 100%
I thought there were corroborations of Harry having issues and wanting out, well before Meghan. . . with the BRF, his prior girlfriends, etc. Either he wanted to be William or he wanted out.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> I was suspicious that the School of Communications included Theatre, in the UK they often under schools of performance or arts. Theatre studies are within the School of Communication at Northwestern, but I could only find graduate and professional programmes. She doesn't have a MFA and I couldn't find anything with 'Theatre' in the title, they're specific to (theatre) role.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theatre Programs | Northwestern School of Communication
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> communication.northwestern.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is, she may have made the double major to sound more impressive and fit her current narrative (I use that word in it's original media studies sense (not my 'major')) - but it's just pretentious to think that one degree is worth more than another.



scroll down, the undergraduate programs are listed under the graduate


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> A few days ago, I saw a video posted somewhere else comparing Doria's life choices to TW's... I didn't post it here because Doria has the right to remain a private citizen imo. However, it goes along with the infamous words about not giving the milk for free…


to be fair, that giving away the milk for free thing is far from exclusive to Doria...my mother said that too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> scroll down, the undergraduate programs are listed under the graduate



Thanks!!!

They say:

"Many theatre undergraduates go on to enjoy success as theatre, television, and film artists. Others find that with the combination of theatrical studies and a solid liberal arts education, they are prepared to pursue a career in a variety of fields, including law, teaching, business, performance coaching, and sales and marketing" 


Law? 

Am I missing something? 

We have post-grad conversion courses in the UK (MA Conversion) but not sure anyone with a theatre degree/major would be taken that seriously (coipition is fierce).  All degrees are similar in difficulty, however, the choice of one's degree/major_ usually_ has something to do with future ambitions  

I guess _playing_ a fictional layer on TV/film is what they mean


----------



## lanasyogamama

Do you think Hawwy has reached out to Charles to ask for his share of the $3 million in cash yet?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors are all over the place, reminds of the Charles and Diana days.  Better buckle up, could be a wild ride.




This is where I take what gossip writers say with a grain of salt. Why should we believe Neal Sean saying he knows that Charles called Doria? How could he know? Was he hiding in Charles’ closet? There are certain things that are deliberately leaked to the press but I don’t believe this guy is on that list.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Do you think Hawwy has reached out to Charles to ask for his share of the $3 million in cash yet?



I’m surprised Harry knew about it. Why would Charles tell his knucklehead son about his questionable  activities?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I’m surprised Harry knew about it. Why would Charles tell his knucklehead son about his questionable  activities?


did he know?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> did he know?



Maybe not. 
I saw this in the article but it appears it was referring to a separate incident. Just how corrupt is Charles? 

Prince Harry pointedly accused his father of being involved in what he described as a “scandal” over the affair.


----------



## sdkitty

wow, if Meghan is behind this I can hardly believe it...."girl power"?
identifying as a pwife?  this is the feminist/activist?








						Meghan Markle Has Come Up With a New Name for Herself as Prince Harry’s Wife
					

Meghan Markle has been known by a lot of names: Duchess of Sussex, Rachel Zane in Suits, and now, “pwife.” One of her BFFs Delfina Blaquier couldn’t help but gush about Meghan, affectionately giving her the proud new nickname of a fellow polo wife, or “pwife.” She posted a paparazzi snapshot of...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> wow, if Meghan is behind this I can hardly believe it...."girl power"?
> identifying as a pwife?  this is the feminist/activist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Come Up With a New Name for Herself as Prince Harry’s Wife
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been known by a lot of names: Duchess of Sussex, Rachel Zane in Suits, and now, “pwife.” One of her BFFs Delfina Blaquier couldn’t help but gush about Meghan, affectionately giving her the proud new nickname of a fellow polo wife, or “pwife.” She posted a paparazzi snapshot of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



Meh, the writer is a fangirl trying to make it look like Meghan has friends. seems like a lot of the writers for these piddly web sites are stans.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Maybe not.
> I saw this in the article but it appears it was referring to a separate incident. Just how corrupt is Charles?
> 
> Prince Harry pointedly accused his father of being involved in what he described as a “scandal” over the affair.


an article I saw said Charles said he did nothing wrong - that the money went to his foundation....but it also said part of it was used for pay for costs of his residence....and just the source is a problem I think


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> wow, if Meghan is behind this I can hardly believe it...."girl power"?
> identifying as a pwife?  this is the feminist/activist?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Come Up With a New Name for Herself as Prince Harry’s Wife
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been known by a lot of names: Duchess of Sussex, Rachel Zane in Suits, and now, “pwife.” One of her BFFs Delfina Blaquier couldn’t help but gush about Meghan, affectionately giving her the proud new nickname of a fellow polo wife, or “pwife.” She posted a paparazzi snapshot of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



These are people in their 40s with several kids. This sounds like a group of 15yos.


----------



## kkfiregirl

papertiger said:


> Law?
> 
> Am I missing something?
> 
> We have post-grad conversion courses in the UK (MA Conversion) but not sure anyone with a theatre degree/major would be taken that seriously (coipition is fierce). All degrees are similar in difficulty, however, the choice of one's degree/major_ usually_ has something to do with future ambitions



In the US, aspiring lawyers have to score well on the LSAT (and sometimes the GRE) to get into a top-rated law school, so the undergraduate major is less significant (so long as grades are adequate). There are law students from every background and undergraduate major imaginable .


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> an article I saw said Charles said he did nothing wrong - *that the money went to his foundation....but it also said part of it was used for pay for costs of his residence*....and just the source is a problem I think



Yes and isn’t that what Harry and Meghan want to do? I wonder how many of these charitable foundations have a similar shadiness to them.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> A double major can take an extra semester or even an extra year, depending on the majors and whether there is any crossover between the two.  I've known kids who've done it in 4 years though through excellent organization of their schedules, heavier course loads and adding summer classes as well.  (ETA:  In an American university, once you declare a major, you have to fulfill the requirements of that major so the majority of your classes will be in that subject. There are extra spaces for electives though so you can experiment and take classes that are completely unrelated to your major but that are of interest. I used my electives to take French, Art History, History of Ancient Greece, etc.)
> 
> With any major though, I think easy is relative. I know people who breezed through STEM majors who would have been terrified to take a Theater class.  I would have found it excruciating.   But if you are a theater kid, who plans to be an actor, majoring in Theater is probably fun and a breeze relatively speaking, though I'm sure there is pressure to perform well.  I don't know how good Northwestern's theater major is though. It's not Yale Drama.  It also depends on what other classes are taken to fill out a course load.  Are you balancing those theater classes with economics, foreign languages, history, accounting, etc., or are you taking Intro to Popular Culture or Intro to Dinosaurs?
> 
> In the 20 years since MM graduated, a Communications degree has probably become more complex because of technology and social media.  But, it is generally considered an easier major, probably the easiest major if I'm being honest. International Relations is definitely more difficult than Communications.  I know the International Relations classes that one of my kids took were quite difficult and a lot of work.   Their classes in Communications, one or two of which were required for their major, were pretty straightforward and easy in comparison.


Has there ever been even one mention of Meghan participating in a college production?  Northwestern has produced many name actors.


----------



## CeeJay

gracekelly said:


> Has there ever been even one mention of Meghan participating in a college production?  Northwestern has produced many name actors.


VERY, VERY TRUE .. we sure had to know about all her "school" productions in her teenage youth!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

papertiger said:


> I'm not usually on M's side, but if the US as anything like the UK, degree courses have to be equivocal to each other to pass general bodies of education quality standards. Some courses are just a bit more prestigious sounding than others. The work students have to do meeds to equivocal.
> 
> A communication degree should not be worth less than any other. And in fact, we don't know, if Northwestern just went generic on the description.
> 
> Her degree may well be described as in communications and also be more accurately and specifically be a double major. However, I can't find her double major, but things do change over time and she was there 20 years ago. Anyone else know courses at undergrad level early '00s?
> 
> I was suspicious that the School of Communications included Theatre, in the UK they often under schools of performance or arts. Theatre studies are within the School of Communication at Northwestern, but I could only find graduate and professional programmes. She doesn't have a MFA and I couldn't find anything with 'Theatre' in the title, they're specific to (theatre) role.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Theatre Programs | Northwestern School of Communication
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> communication.northwestern.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is, she may have made the double major to sound more impressive and fit her current narrative (I use that word in it's original media studies sense (not my 'major')) - but it's just pretentious to think that one degree is worth more than another.





sdkitty said:


> an article I saw said Charles said he did nothing wrong - that the money went to his foundation....but it also said part of it was used for pay for costs of his residence....and just the source is a problem I think


I find it difficult to believe that Charles would pocket monies intended for the charities to which he is devoted. It seems completely out of character.  This is a man with a personal fortune and more than adequate income for his lifestyle.  Perhaps I am naïve but I prefer to think there are some members of the royal family with integrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I find it difficult to believe that Charles would pocket monies intended for the charities to which he is devoted. It seems completely out of character.  This is a man with a personal fortune and more than adequate income for his lifestyle.  Perhaps I am naïve but I prefer to think there are some members of the royal family with integrity.


I do too but it seemed like from what I read, it was technically ok for him to use that money as he did.  so then if that is the case, the question becomes is it acceptable to take money from a source like that


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Totally agree on the "not too bright". I think they feed each other's ego and they are both after fame and fortune without having to do the work. They probably thought that they could EP their way into the A-list category. "Harry and Meghan present", followed by a calligraphic scroll of the Archewell logo, and then someone else's hard work goes on air with them taking the credit.
> 
> I see Methane as a catalyst. Before her arrival, Hazard probably was unhappy but, as he is without talent, didn't see an alternative. And the BRF was giving him avenues to expend his petulant energy: Sentabale and Invictus could not have started without his family's support. Methane spun him a golden tale of marketing their popularity. Without talent herself, she saw no problem in his lack of talent and figured they could just grift their way to Hollywood fame.
> 
> 
> That smirk at the end undermines all the elegance that she was aiming for and makes her look cheap.


I don't know if that was a smirk or she thought she was being seductive.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Thanks!!!
> 
> They say:
> 
> "Many theatre undergraduates go on to enjoy success as theatre, television, and film artists. Others find that with the combination of theatrical studies and a solid liberal arts education, they are prepared to pursue a career in a variety of fields, including law, teaching, business, performance coaching, and sales and marketing"
> 
> 
> Law?
> 
> Am I missing something?
> 
> We have post-grad conversion courses in the UK (MA Conversion) but not sure anyone with a theatre degree/major would be taken that seriously (coipition is fierce).  All degrees are similar in difficulty, however, the choice of one's degree/major_ usually_ has something to do with future ambitions
> 
> I guess _playing_ a fictional layer on TV/film is what they mean


I could see theatre training being useful in the courtroom, but a theatre grad would still have to do well enough on the LSAT to be admitted to law school, deal with the rigors of it for three years, and then pass the bar exam.

ETA, missed an earlier post re law school.


----------



## Nutashha

And I don't think Charles met the kids either!

https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/kate-william-didnt-meet-meghan-harry-kids-during-visit-uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I find it difficult to believe that Charles would pocket monies intended for the charities to which he is devoted. It seems completely out of character.  This is a man with a personal fortune and more than adequate income for his lifestyle.  Perhaps I am naïve but I prefer to think there are some members of the royal family with integrity.


Just to clarify, the allegation is not that he is pocketing money given to his charity, as such, but that he is accepting money for his charities either from morally dubious individuals or in return for favours (also possibly the charity may be laundering that money but that’s another story.)

In the first instance chronologically, he received money from a man, Mahfouz Mein Mubarak, who was later named a knight and Charles’ aide in fact resigned over the allegation that the donation was secured by the offer of an honour- which to me would suggest that there was pretty good evidence they were taking cash for these honours
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-as-charity-boss-amid-cash-for-honours-claims

The second man, HBJ the Qatari, is the one who was giving the money in cash in carrier bags- the reason given for this donation was that Charles used his sway to get this man out of his financial commitment to a building project and to help him get into another deal in London.




__





						Prince Charles: calls for investigations into ‘cash in bags’ controversy | King Charles III | The Guardian
					

Government and Charity Commission urged to examine claims Qatari sheikh donated €3m




					amp.theguardian.com
				




So this money was apparently deposited in C’s private coutts bank account before going to the charities - which also sounds a bit suspicious too tbh.
added to this are the fact both of these are his personal charities and we don’t know whether he receives a wage from his management of them. 

I mean this is all moral piecemeal when you consider the British royal family are both open supporters and have functioned as representatives of the arms trade so I wouldn’t put too high a worth on their moral compasses.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> Just to clarify, the allegation is not that he is pocketing money given to his charity, as such, but that he is accepting money for his charities either from morally dubious individuals or in return for favours (also possibly the charity may be laundering that money but that’s another story.)
> 
> In the first instance chronologically, he received money from a man, Mahfouz Mein Mubarak, who was later named a knight and Charles’ aide in fact resigned over the allegation that the donation was secured by the offer of an honour- which to me would suggest that there was pretty good evidence they were taking cash for these honours
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-as-charity-boss-amid-cash-for-honours-claims
> 
> The second man, HBJ the Qatari, is the one who was giving the money in cash in carrier bags- the reason given for this donation was that Charles used his sway to get this man out of his financial commitment to a building project and to help him get into another deal in London.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles: calls for investigations into ‘cash in bags’ controversy | King Charles III | The Guardian
> 
> 
> Government and Charity Commission urged to examine claims Qatari sheikh donated €3m
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So this money was apparently deposited in C’s private coutts bank account before going to the charities - which also sounds a bit suspicious too tbh.
> added to this are the fact both of these are his personal charities and we don’t know whether he receives a wage from his management of them.
> 
> I mean this is all moral piecemeal when you consider the British royal family are both open supporters and have functioned as representatives of the arms trade so I wouldn’t put too high a worth on their moral compasses.


could this get big enough to have charles skipped from succession?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Totally agree on the "not too bright". I think they feed each other's ego and they are both after fame and fortune without having to do the work. They probably thought that they could EP their way into the A-list category. "Harry and Meghan present", followed by a calligraphic scroll of the Archewell logo, and then someone else's hard work goes on air with them taking the credit.
> 
> I see Methane as a catalyst. Before her arrival, Hazard probably was unhappy but, as he is without talent, didn't see an alternative. And the BRF was giving him avenues to expend his petulant energy: Sentabale and Invictus could not have started without his family's support. Methane spun him a golden tale of marketing their popularity. Without talent herself, she saw no problem in his lack of talent and figured they could just grift their way to Hollywood fame.
> 
> 
> That smirk at the end undermines all the elegance that she was aiming for and makes her look cheap.


when was this made? for what purpose?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> could this get big enough to have charles skipped from succession?



Is it possible Andrew or his ‘friends’ are involved in all of this being publicized now?
 Agree the BRF certainly has dealt with its share of shady characters over the years. Btw, where are those earrings?








						Meghan's 'blood money' earrings condemned by Khashoggi's lawyer
					

The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the Saudi Crown Prince.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Interesting Turkish proverb


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


>




The clowns live in the USA and the BRF are far above the Harkles' shenanigans.  Nothing to worry about.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> to be fair, that giving away the milk for free thing is far from exclusive to Doria...my mother said that too


I believe the expression is “ why buy the cow when you are getting the milk for free.”


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Well, Oprah bought it hook, line, and sinker.


I think Oprah was predisposed to buy everything they said


----------



## lanasyogamama

Has BLG stopped doing short videos?


----------



## bag-mania

Nutashha said:


> And I don't think Charles met the kids either!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/kate-william-didnt-meet-meghan-harry-kids-during-visit-uk
> View attachment 5435625



Ugh, that article is so poorly written it is hard to follow. Sounds like the author thinks that the royals should have dropped all of Saturday's events which had been organized over a year's time and instead changed their schedules to attend a party for a 1-year-old none of them had ever seen that was planned, at most, a few days before. Oh the ego! (And the clickbait!)

And the lies. The Queen most certainly DID NOT attend Lilibet's party. No one else is claiming she did.

While the Sussexes were in the UK, they threw a little intimate party for their one-year-old daughter Lilibet at their old Windsor house, which Queen attended.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

The whole “cash in multiple shopping bags” is what makes it fishy to me.  They couldn’t bring a check or do a wire transfer?  Who goes around with shopping bags of cash????


----------



## rose60610

From CNN:

"(CNN)Clarence House said Prince Charles received charitable donations and the correct processes were followed regarding those donations after a British newspaper reported the Prince of Wales once accepted a suitcase containing €1 million ($1.05 million) in cash from a Qatari politician.
According to the Sunday Times, the suitcase containing €1 million in cash was one of three lots of cash he personally received, totaling €3 million, from former Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani between 2011 and 2015. CNN has not independently verified The Sunday Times report.
"Charitable donations received from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim were passed immediately to one of the Prince's charities who carried out the appropriate governance and have assured us that all the correct processes were followed," Clarence House told CNN in a statement.
A royal source tells CNN they dispute many of the details in the Sunday Times report. The royal source said they do not dispute the fact of the charitable donations and asserted that all the correct processes were followed from what they have looked at, from over a decade ago. They add the report contained several mistakes, and their lawyers are involved.
The Sunday Times reported on one occasion, Sheikh Hamad gave Prince Charles €1 million reportedly stuffed into carrier bags from the upmarket London department store, Fortnum and Mason.
On another occasion, Prince Charles accepted a duffel bag containing €1 million during a private one-on-one meeting at Clarence House in 2015, the Sunday Times reports.
The Sunday Times reports the payments were deposited into the accounts of the Prince of Wales's Charitable Fund (PWCF), an entity that bankrolls the prince's private projects and his country estate in Scotland.
There is no suggestion the payments were illegal."

I don't see the big deal here. "Dubious characters"?????  Considering the many millions some of our truly dubious characters here in the U.S. have gotten (for uranium, access, favors, etc)  I don't give a single damn about Chuck's donation haul from Al Thani. You wanna talk about foundation donations?  Don't get me started. Besides, we can't discuss them here. We can, however, discuss Archewell and how it seems to be tapped for hundred dollar donations that get headline attention for the "generosity" of the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

They may have been invited for tea… 



*Harry and Meghan were spotted driving to Oprah's massive Montecito mansion where they spent over an hour with the talk show host on Saturday afternoon*
*Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show Harry behind the wheel of his black Range Rover with Meghan taking the back seat while Archewell Chief Operating Officer Mandana Dayani sat up front *
*What looked like a baby car seat was strapped in next to Meghan, but it is unknown if either Lilibet or Archie were in the car to visit Auntie Oprah *
*Dayani, 40, was hired in September 2021 to oversee the charity's 'growth strategy and day-to-day operations'*
*Meghan, 40, went fresh faced and makeup free during the trip, while Harry, 37, kept it low key in a t-shirt, baseball cap and sunglasses*
*News of the couple's visit to Oprah could come as a surprise to Queen if there's another tell-all interview in the works - less than 18 months after their sensational chat with the talk show host*









						Harry and Meghan are seen pulling into Oprah's Montecito home
					

Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show the former royals, 37 and 40, turning into the 70-acre property late Saturday afternoon accompanied by a woman believed to be the pair's friend Janina Gavankar.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> They may have been invited for tea…
> View attachment 5435685
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan were spotted driving to Oprah's massive Montecito mansion where they spent over an hour with the talk show host on Saturday afternoon*
> *Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show Harry behind the wheel of his black Range Rover with Meghan taking the back seat while Archewell Chief Operating Officer Mandana Dayani sat up front*
> *What looked like a baby car seat was strapped in next to Meghan, but it is unknown if either Lilibet or Archie were in the car to visit Auntie Oprah *
> *Dayani, 40, was hired in September 2021 to oversee the charity's 'growth strategy and day-to-day operations'*
> *Meghan, 40, went fresh faced and makeup free during the trip, while Harry, 37, kept it low key in a t-shirt, baseball cap and sunglasses*
> *News of the couple's visit to Oprah could come as a surprise to Queen if there's another tell-all interview in the works - less than 18 months after their sensational chat with the talk show host*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are seen pulling into Oprah's Montecito home
> 
> 
> Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show the former royals, 37 and 40, turning into the 70-acre property late Saturday afternoon accompanied by a woman believed to be the pair's friend Janina Gavankar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I'm surprised Meghan wasn't driving. She trusted Harry to drive all by himself! And where are all the Security Escalades?? No makeup? Meghan missed a merching opportunity!!


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> The whole “cash in multiple shopping bags” is what makes it fishy to me.  They couldn’t bring a check or do a wire transfer?  Who goes around with shopping bags of cash????


well, checks and wire transfers are traceable, not cash


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I'm surprised Meghan wasn't driving. She trusted Harry to drive all by himself! And where are all the Security Escalades?? No makeup? Meghan missed a merching opportunity!!


they needed a caravan for a five minute drive?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is Oprah a slow learner or something?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is Oprah a slow learner or something?



we can hope this isn't true or that they are meeting with O but she won't do another special with them


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> they needed a caravan for a five minute drive?


They could have ridden their bikes unaccompanied and unnoticed. I doubt the paps hang out outside their gate. Staged like everything else they do.


----------



## rose60610

Considering how much Meghan emphasized their need for security, I'd have expected at least one security vehicle for even a one minute drive. Although Oprah's security surveillance probably goes well beyond her property. Surely the Harkles would know they were going to be photographed going to Oprah's house so they could have brought a security detail to PROVE they're always in DANGER!  DRAMA!!!  Drama is the only thing these losers have left.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I do too but it seemed like from what I read, it was technically ok for him to use that money as he did.  so then if that is the case, the question becomes is it acceptable to take money from a source like that


Why didn't the Sheik just donate directly to the Prince's charity?  I suspect the answer is that there is something that he wanted.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think Oprah was predisposed to buy everything they said


She was predisposed not to question everything they said.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> The whole “cash in multiple shopping bags” is what makes it fishy to me.  They couldn’t bring a check or do a wire transfer?  Who goes around with shopping bags of cash????



Way back when....Sheiks and Kings used to travel to the Mayo Clinic for treatment and their aides would bring in the cash in suitcases or brief cases to pay the bills.  It is a bit classier than a shopping bag.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> we can hope this isn't true or that they are meeting with O but she won't do another special with them


The pap/Backgid photo is the threat of it happening. They could have been going over there to borrow more dishes.   Harry threatens to throw "truth bombs" thinking that it will force money out of his father's wallet so he will stay quiet.  I think Charles is way past that, but it won't keep Harry from trying.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Way back when....Sheiks and Kings used to travel to the Mayo Clinic for treatment and their aides would bring in the cash in suitcases or brief cases to pay the bills.  It is a bit classier than a shopping bag.



I have been to the Mayo Clinic numerous times and I've seen them in the halls. But I don't recall if their aides were carrying briefcases.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Nutashha said:


> And I don't think Charles met the kids either!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/kate-william-didnt-meet-meghan-harry-kids-during-visit-uk
> View attachment 5435625


The perpetual grin, why does she think this is a good look? Kinda like a creepy movie character.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kemilia said:


> The perpetual grin, why does she think this is a good look? Kinda like a creepy movie character.


TW's Alter Ego


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They may have been invited for tea…
> View attachment 5435685
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan were spotted driving to Oprah's massive Montecito mansion where they spent over an hour with the talk show host on Saturday afternoon*
> *Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show Harry behind the wheel of his black Range Rover with Meghan taking the back seat while Archewell Chief Operating Officer Mandana Dayani sat up front *
> *What looked like a baby car seat was strapped in next to Meghan, but it is unknown if either Lilibet or Archie were in the car to visit Auntie Oprah *
> *Dayani, 40, was hired in September 2021 to oversee the charity's 'growth strategy and day-to-day operations'*
> *Meghan, 40, went fresh faced and makeup free during the trip, while Harry, 37, kept it low key in a t-shirt, baseball cap and sunglasses*
> *News of the couple's visit to Oprah could come as a surprise to Queen if there's another tell-all interview in the works - less than 18 months after their sensational chat with the talk show host*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are seen pulling into Oprah's Montecito home
> 
> 
> Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show the former royals, 37 and 40, turning into the 70-acre property late Saturday afternoon accompanied by a woman believed to be the pair's friend Janina Gavankar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



MM does not look happy here imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Considering how much Meghan emphasized their need for security, I'd have expected at least one security vehicle for even a one minute drive. Although Oprah's security surveillance probably goes well beyond her property. Surely the Harkles would know they were going to be photographed going to Oprah's house so they could have brought a security detail to PROVE they're always in DANGER!  DRAMA!!!  Drama is the only thing these losers have left.



Staged for Backgrid.

O and her brand are so last year. Sad that she has chosen to exit in this way. 
Still, looking forward to the numerous jokes that come from this interview tale of lies.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Staged for Backgrid.
> 
> O and her brand are so last year. Sad that she has chosen to exit in this way.
> Still, looking forward to the numerous jokes that come from this interview tale of lies.


I wouldn't write O off yet


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> *Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show Harry behind the wheel of his black Range Rover with Meghan taking the back seat while Archewell Chief Operating Officer Mandana Dayani sat up front *
> *What looked like a baby car seat was strapped in next to Meghan, but it is unknown if either Lilibet or Archie were in the car to visit Auntie Oprah *
> *Dayani, 40, was hired in September 2021 to oversee the charity's 'growth strategy and day-to-day operations'*
> *Meghan, 40, went fresh faced and makeup free during the trip, while Harry, 37, kept it low key in a t-shirt, baseball cap and sunglasses*



Hmmm. Dayani is COO of Archewell.  Sooooo......was this trip to hit up Oprah for a foundation donation  ? Is hitting up Oprah their "growth strategy"  ? No wonder Meghan looks depressed. I thought they LOVED Oprah! You'd think they be EXCITED  to see Oprah! Guess not!!  I hope that at least Harry's shirt was ironed, but that would be setting a high bar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like MM is getting a ‘talking to’


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Hmmm. Dayani is COO of Archewell.  Sooooo......was this trip to hit up Oprah for a foundation donation  ? Is hitting up Oprah their "growth strategy"  ? No wonder Meghan looks depressed. I thought they LOVED Oprah! You'd think they be EXCITED  to see Oprah! Guess not!!  I hope that at least Harry's shirt was ironed, but that would be setting a high bar.


maybe she's unhappy or bored in the back seat with the kids....will put on her happy face for Oprah


----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG, please step up - finger pointing, Hazzie’s hand at his throat. Lots of baaad energy, no?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5435737


wonder if H feels like a big man driving his Wife around


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I have been to the Mayo Clinic numerous times and I've seen them in the halls. But I don't recall if their aides were carrying briefcases.


lol! Straight to the business office.  They don't have to stop at Station U in the lobby.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ewwww


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> wonder if H feels like a big man driving his Wife around


They had security behind them.  Was there one in front too?  How can they say M isn't wearing makeup?  You can't see anything.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> They may have been invited for tea…
> View attachment 5435685
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan were spotted driving to Oprah's massive Montecito mansion where they spent over an hour with the talk show host on Saturday afternoon*
> *Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show Harry behind the wheel of his black Range Rover with Meghan taking the back seat while Archewell Chief Operating Officer Mandana Dayani sat up front *
> *What looked like a baby car seat was strapped in next to Meghan, but it is unknown if either Lilibet or Archie were in the car to visit Auntie Oprah *
> *Dayani, 40, was hired in September 2021 to oversee the charity's 'growth strategy and day-to-day operations'*
> *Meghan, 40, went fresh faced and makeup free during the trip, while Harry, 37, kept it low key in a t-shirt, baseball cap and sunglasses*
> *News of the couple's visit to Oprah could come as a surprise to Queen if there's another tell-all interview in the works - less than 18 months after their sensational chat with the talk show host*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are seen pulling into Oprah's Montecito home
> 
> 
> Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show the former royals, 37 and 40, turning into the 70-acre property late Saturday afternoon accompanied by a woman believed to be the pair's friend Janina Gavankar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



My beloved TPFers, please explain to me, what else is there for them to peddle in a second interview IF it happens?   They are barely around the BRF after the first sh|tshow and they were pretty much given cold shoulders during the Jubilee celebration.

As for the baby car seat, they are trying to make us think that Invisibet is real and she does get to leave the dungeon, probably after reading many speculations and allegations from people like yours truly on the internet doubting the kid's existence


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG, please step up - finger pointing, Hazzie’s hand at his throat. Lots of baaad energy, no?
> 
> View attachment 5435737



Is the car behind them Harkle Security??  So they CAN'T drive 5 minutes without security!  They're IMPORTANT!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> They had security behind them.  Was there on in front too?  How can they say M isn't wearing makeup?  You can see anything.



I’ve seen enough, none of the happy KimK ‘bde’, no smiles, just a very unpleasant person pointing her finger and lecturing/posturing. Think I will pass on this clown car.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww



She right.  This looks like Janina Gavankar.  Dayani has a bigger nose.
Gavankar



Dayani


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve seen enough, none of the happy KimK ‘bde’, no smiles, just a very unpleasant person pointing her finger and lecturing/posturing. Think I will pass on this clown car.




Come hang out with me instead


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> My beloved TPFers, please explain to me, what else is there for them to peddle in a second interview IF it happens?   They are barely around the BRF after the first sh|tshow and they were pretty much given cold shoulders during the Jubilee celebration.
> 
> As for the baby car seat, they are trying to make us think that Invisibet is real and she does get to leave the dungeon, probably after reading many speculations and allegations from people like yours truly on the internet doubting the kid's existence


Oh my dear!  Haven't you heard?  They were so disrespected and ignored at the Jubilee!  They were treated like peons and didn't sit with William and Charles!  They didn't get on the balcony with The Queen.  They had to use small children in order to get photographed in a room far away from the real action.  The BD party for Lili!  There is plenty for them to peddle and whine about.  

Oprah"  Were you silent or were you silenced?  Did you miss the process into St. Paul's with your brother and father or were you just late because the alarm didn't go off?  Did you miss going to the tea and luncheons because you didn't want to sit next to the exit or was it because you had too much to drink and smoke the night before?
Did everyone miss Lili's BD party because they were at their prescheduled events or were they just being mean and ignoring you?

So much to tell!!!


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Is the car behind them Harkle Security??  So they CAN'T drive 5 minutes without security!  They're IMPORTANT!


They have to make sure that Harry drives on the right/correct side of the street.  He is a slow learner.


----------



## kipp

I'm not disputing that the other woman looks like Janina Gavankar, but why would she be going with the Harkles to Oprah's?  ?????


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Oh my dear!  Haven't you heard?  They were so disrespected and ignored at the Jubilee!  They were treated like peons and didn't sit with William and Charles!  They didn't get on the balcony with The Queen.  They had to use small children in order to get photographed in a room far away from the real action.  The BD party for Lili!  There is plenty for them to peddle and whine about.
> 
> Oprah"  Were you silent or were you silenced?  Did you miss the process into St. Paul's with your brother and father or were you just late because the alarm didn't go off?  Did you miss going to the tea and luncheons because you didn't want to sit next to the exit or was it because you had too much to drink and smoke the night before?
> Did everyone miss Lili's BD party because they were at their prescheduled events or were they just being mean and ignoring you?
> 
> So much to tell!!!



You can be executive producer for the second interview   Please don't forget a shoutout to all of us in this thread!!

Jokes aside, O would be a fool is she's gonna entertain these two clowns again. She needs to stop stooping so low when she worked really hard to get to where she's at and built her empire. Perhaps the clowns can use their podcast airtime to whinge since they can't seem to create any contents to fulfill their Spotify contract


----------



## LittleStar88

Aimee3 said:


> The whole “cash in multiple shopping bags” is what makes it fishy to me.  They couldn’t bring a check or do a wire transfer?  Who goes around with shopping bags of cash????



Floyd Mayweather is the only one I can think of who rolls around with bags of cash...



> At any given time when he's out and about, Mayweather will have thousands of dollars on his person. He keeps about $60,000 on him for light evenings, and claims he can fit $1 million in a hockey bag when he's decides to roll deep.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As a reminder, *this* is what winning looks like - at any age:


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> I'm not disputing that the other woman looks like Janina Gavankar, but why would she be going with the Harkles to Oprah's?  ?????


I assumed it was a nanny....she seems to surround herself with people who look like her


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if we should send chips and sodas to the disgusting duo  
Maybe some of the elderflower cake.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I'm not disputing that the other woman looks like Janina Gavankar, but why would she be going with the Harkles to Oprah's?  ?????


She's an actress.   Maybe Oprah is making the Meghan Markle story and she will play her.  She is similar looking. Stranger things have happened.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I assumed it was a nanny....she seems to surround herself with people who look like her


Yep it is positive reinforcement lolololol!


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> You can be executive producer for the second interview   Please don't forget a shoutout to all of us in this thread!!
> 
> Jokes aside, O would be a fool is she's gonna entertain these two clowns again. She needs to stop stooping so low when she worked really hard to get to where she's at and built her empire. Perhaps the clowns can use their podcast airtime to whinge since they can't seem to create any contents to fulfill their Spotify contract


Any chance they want Oprah on the podcast? After all she is a great self made woman success story.

I am willing to executive produce, but I want cash  only.  No checks, transfers etc.  I'm not proud, they can put it in a shopping bag.  I can bring some nice ones


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo Oprah _once was_ a “great self-made woman”, but her brand has not aged well. 










						Harry and Meghan hire leftie director to helm Netflix reality show
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have hired Oscar-nominated, campaigning director Liz Garbus to helm their Netflix docu-series, Page Six can reveal.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo Oprah _once was_ a “great self-made woman”, but her brand has not aged well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan hire leftie director to helm Netflix reality show
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have hired Oscar-nominated, campaigning director Liz Garbus to helm their Netflix docu-series, Page Six can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


"leftie" ok....they're not biased


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> well, checks and wire transfers are traceable, not cash


Yes, exactly!!!!  (Unless the bills were marked!) Fishy, fishy, fishy!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is Oprah a slow learner or something?




She made $9 million off of the last one. Oprah knows everything she needs to know.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Hmmm. Dayani is COO of Archewell.  Sooooo......was this trip to hit up Oprah for a foundation donation  ? Is hitting up Oprah their "growth strategy"  ? No wonder Meghan looks depressed. I thought they LOVED Oprah! You'd think they be EXCITED  to see Oprah! Guess not!!  I hope that at least Harry's shirt was ironed, but that would be setting a high bar.



Maybe Oprah's their last resort. She's got deep pockets and no shareholders to report to. 


> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/oprah-winfreys-bold-reason-for-not-taking-her-company-public.html


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Any chance they want Oprah on the podcast? After all she is a great self made woman success story.
> 
> I am willing to executive produce, but I want cash  only.  No checks, transfers etc.  I'm not proud, they can put it in a shopping bag.  I can bring some nice ones



Frankly, the clowns seem to have some rich and famous acquaintances, or so they want us to believe. Why not invite them as guests? O is a good kickstarter. Then maybe the swoonworthy Nacho (Nachos?). Of course Nutmeg can invite Abigail Spencer. Priyanka Chopra if she's not too busy with her baby. Jessica Mulroney?


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Frankly, the clowns seem to have some rich and famous acquaintances, or so they want us to believe. Why not invite them as guests? O is a good kickstarter. Then maybe the swoonworthy Nacho (Nachos?). Of course Nutmeg can invite Abigail Spencer. Priyanka Chopra if she's not too busy with her baby. Jessica Mulroney?



I thought she was on the outs with Chopra and Mulroney?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I thought she was on the outs with Chopra and Mulroney?


is abagail spencer elite enough to hang with the duchess?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM does not look happy here imo.



Maybe they're going to throw themselves on Oprah's mercy for a financial lifeline.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Yep it is positive reinforcement lolololol!



Or maybe she doesn't want Hazy distracted by a cute CA blonde. I'm sure she's keenly aware of the cliche of husbands cheating with the nanny.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> "leftie" ok....they're not biased



Keep in mind that Rupert Murdoch owns The Post.


----------



## Luvbolide

sdkitty said:


> they needed a caravan for a five minute drive?



Isn’t that just ridiculous?  A caravan of Range Rovers - they could walk in no time at all.  More hypocracy by the eco warriors…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Luvbolide said:


> Isn’t that just ridiculous?  A caravan of Range Rovers - they could walk in no time at all.  More hypocracy by the eco warriors…



Could be security or the Nflix crew was in the other Rover.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is Oprah a slow learner or something?




LOL!!  One certainly wonders!  Cringe and Ginge may have called on her to chat with them about how to at least get started on producing content for Netflix and/or Spotify.  All they can figure out on their own is talking about it.  MM’s idea for Spotify, the details are lost to me now, sounded absolutely boring.  And Netflix is circling the drain.  Their kiddie show has already been scrubbed by Netflix.  Now they need to come up with something about the BRF, but they don’t really have any material unless they start another whinefest.  They have dragged camera crews all over the world and all they have is footage of themselves.  Who cares?!?!

I haven’t ruled out the thought that Oprah is playing her cards right.  Inviting them over, listening to them, maybe even offering them real advice.  Then sending them on their way after telling them that she is too busy right now to get more involved and certainly too busy to do another “tell-all”.  Or,Oprah could just refer them to Gayle King!!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be security or the Nflix crew was in the other Rover.


yes, I thought it was probably security but really? they need an escort for a five minute drive in an upscale area?  what does he think is going to happen?  the paps are gonna chase them and the Wife is going to be killed?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nflix’s co-CEO, Ted Sarandos, also lives in that neighborhood.  Are we certain they went to Oprah’s?

old article








						Rob Lowe says Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn't use his home for their Oprah interview, and thinks it was really at the TV icon's house
					

Rob Lowe said he believes that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry filmed their tell-all interview at Oprah Winfrey's house.




					www.insider.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> to be fair, that giving away the milk for free thing is far from exclusive to Doria...my mother said that too


DH and I lived together before we were even engaged and one of his friends (who had become my friend too) gave me the same advice!


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe they are pitching a new tale of racism and woe to Oprah. They are finally ready to reveal who speculated about Archie’s skin color. Ooo aah! “The family was so mean to us and we have fabricated conversations that didn’t actually happen but people who hate the royal institution will be eager to believe whatever we say is true.
How about it, O, is that worth a few million?”


----------



## rose60610

Since Meghan was in the back seat, no makeup, looking blah, and Harry was his usual grubby self driving, along with a buddy, I wonder if they were going to Oprah's for some kind of intervention.  Like, Oprah was trying to drill some sense into their stupid heads that they should should STFU since it's obvious nobody likes them and is disgusted by them.  THEN! If they clean up their act a little bit, Oprah will agree to do an interview in an attempt to unravel some of their disastrous reputation. I wonder if a Netflix exec was present, too, to emphasize that they are currently big time losers and if they expect one more nickel from Netflix, they have to do a 180 on their current standing. At this point, they should lick their wounds and start from the ground up. They can start by actually doing SOMETHING and quit staring into cameras like an attention whore. They can at least pretend to care about under privileged people and start building homes for them. They can even plagiarize THAT idea from a former ***** who rehabbed his image by doing so. I'm not sure they can champion any animal causes because then people would ask "didn't your own dog get two broken legs regardless of the fact that he lived a royal life?".  Come on, there's more respect for the Kardashian's than for these idiots. The K fam I believe is fully aware of how OTT they all are but are skillful about building bank deposits. M&H simply presume that everybody should worship them, because, um, because, ah, well, um, they're ROYAL!  Let's face it, their sugars are bots.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Has BLG stopped doing short videos?


I have a hard time with his live videos - too much time not talking, responding to viewers... I haven't watched any lately.


----------



## Jayne1

Luvbolide said:


> Isn’t that just ridiculous?  A caravan of Range Rovers - they could walk in no time at all.  More hypocracy by the eco warriors…


Does no one in LA and surrounding areas walk?  The weather is probably nice and it's a short walk, as you said.  People would role their eyes at me if I got in a car to walk such a short distance.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> could this get big enough to have charles skipped from succession?


I severely doubt it- they are terrified of setting any precedent that shows they are removable- that’s why they won’t Chuck out Andrew or Harry. Ultimately they can just spin it that this 70-something, multiple business owing, highly tax literate billionaire was just being naive and wanting to help his charity. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it possible Andrew or his ‘friends’ are involved in all of this being publicized now?
> Agree the BRF certainly has dealt with its share of shady characters over the years. Btw, where are those earrings?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's 'blood money' earrings condemned by Khashoggi's lawyer
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was last night criticised by a lawyer fighting for justice for murdered Jamal Khashoggi over her decision to wear diamond earrings given to her by the Saudi Crown Prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think you are right but not in that way. I think the royal PR people themselves are pushing this story to front to try and bury the momentum on York’s campaign to get rid of Andrew. Ultimately nothing will happen to Charles because of this but not responding to huge numbers of people objecting to Andrew makes them look really bad. 


Aimee3 said:


> I believe the expression is “ why buy the cow when you are getting the milk for free.”


So is it a sex idiom? As in ‘don’t put out till you’re married or whatever’ or is it more broadly don’t be generous? I’m confused. 


Aimee3 said:


> The whole “cash in multiple shopping bags” is what makes it fishy to me.  They couldn’t bring a check or do a wire transfer?  Who goes around with shopping bags of cash????


Someone who doesn’t want the exact amounts and provenance of the money tracing and doesn’t want it being taxed. Getting a tax donation and then putting it into a personal account before passing it to a charity you own (which aren’t taxed as heavily) sounds like a clear tax dodge. It also obscures the amounts of money discussed nicely so we can’t work out how much is being spent on helping teens set up candle companies or whatever princes trust actually does. 


rose60610 said:


> From CNN:
> 
> "(CNN)Clarence House said Prince Charles received charitable donations and the correct processes were followed regarding those donations after a British newspaper reported the Prince of Wales once accepted a suitcase containing €1 million ($1.05 million) in cash from a Qatari politician.
> According to the Sunday Times, the suitcase containing €1 million in cash was one of three lots of cash he personally received, totaling €3 million, from former Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani between 2011 and 2015. CNN has not independently verified The Sunday Times report.
> "Charitable donations received from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim were passed immediately to one of the Prince's charities who carried out the appropriate governance and have assured us that all the correct processes were followed," Clarence House told CNN in a statement.
> A royal source tells CNN they dispute many of the details in the Sunday Times report. The royal source said they do not dispute the fact of the charitable donations and asserted that all the correct processes were followed from what they have looked at, from over a decade ago. They add the report contained several mistakes, and their lawyers are involved.
> The Sunday Times reported on one occasion, Sheikh Hamad gave Prince Charles €1 million reportedly stuffed into carrier bags from the upmarket London department store, Fortnum and Mason.
> On another occasion, Prince Charles accepted a duffel bag containing €1 million during a private one-on-one meeting at Clarence House in 2015, the Sunday Times reports.
> The Sunday Times reports the payments were deposited into the accounts of the Prince of Wales's Charitable Fund (PWCF), an entity that bankrolls the prince's private projects and his country estate in Scotland.
> There is no suggestion the payments were illegal."
> 
> I don't see the big deal here. "Dubious characters"?????  Considering the many millions some of our truly dubious characters here in the U.S. have gotten (for uranium, access, favors, etc)  I don't give a single damn about Chuck's donation haul from Al Thani. You wanna talk about foundation donations?  Don't get me started. Besides, we can't discuss them here. We can, however, discuss Archewell and how it seems to be tapped for hundred dollar donations that get headline attention for the "generosity" of the Harkles.


Well I suppose the question is he’s already admitted he sold a knighthood to someone and what else he might be endangering the integrity of to secure these bags.  Also as mentioned above, if he’s participating in tax evasion, that’s pretty morally dubious 


CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG, please step up - finger pointing, Hazzie’s hand at his throat. Lots of baaad energy, no?
> 
> View attachment 5435737





CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww



Yes funny how that woman is there in the passenger seat. The finger wagging makes me think of that RHOA episode with the psychic ‘tapping into the energy


I assume H drives So he has to stay sober an extra couple of hours. 


sdkitty said:


> "leftie" ok....they're not biased


Yeah I dunno why they’ve got to demean the director- leave those barbs for the harkles. 


EverSoElusive said:


> Frankly, the clowns seem to have some rich and famous acquaintances, or so they want us to believe. Why not invite them as guests? O is a good kickstarter. Then maybe the swoonworthy Nacho (Nachos?). Of course Nutmeg can invite Abigail Spencer. Priyanka Chopra if she's not too busy with her baby. Jessica Mulroney?


Yes so strange none of their besties want to be recorded by them. Do they not trust them to portray their words fairly?


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


>



I don’t believe this. No one would give M’s talent an honourable mention.


----------



## xincinsin

Spotted an apt pun and nickname in one of the marklenews1 comment threads: UnSussexfuls


----------



## needlv

mellibelly said:


>




Her father confirmed she was born in 1981.  She probably did what some young people do sometimes… lie and say you are older than you are to get access/into a club etc etc.


----------



## Chanbal

_Filing frenzy. *Meghan Markle* is again attempting to dismiss half-sister *Samantha Markle*‘s defamation lawsuit — but a judge denied the duchess’ request. The previous attempt to dismiss the claim was denied as moot because Samantha filed an amended complaint…

The Tig blogger, however, argued in her dismissal that there was no reason to involve a judge on this matter. “We do not empanel juries to rule on whether two people are ‘close,’ or whether one genuinely feels that they ‘grew up as an only child,'” Meghan’s docs stated. “Courts are not equipped to adjudicate the legitimacy of a person’s feelings about their childhood and relationships. Nor should they be. … This dispute has no place in this Court or any other.”
_
*Meghan also requested to be awarded her attorneys’ fees. Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell — who Samantha unsuccessfully attempted to have removed from the case — denied Meghan’s motion on June 21.*









						Meghan Markle Slams Samantha's 'Desperation,' Attempts to Dismiss Lawsuit
					

Samantha Markle sued Meghan Markle one year after the duchess' March 2021 CBS tell-all interview — get the details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5435900
> 
> _Filing frenzy. *Meghan Markle* is again attempting to dismiss half-sister *Samantha Markle*‘s defamation lawsuit — but a judge denied the duchess’ request. The previous attempt to dismiss the claim was denied as moot because Samantha filed an amended complaint…
> 
> The Tig blogger, however, argued in her dismissal that there was no reason to involve a judge on this matter. “We do not empanel juries to rule on whether two people are ‘close,’ or whether one genuinely feels that they ‘grew up as an only child,'” Meghan’s docs stated. “Courts are not equipped to adjudicate the legitimacy of a person’s feelings about their childhood and relationships. Nor should they be. … This dispute has no place in this Court or any other.”_
> 
> *Meghan also requested to be awarded her attorneys’ fees. Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell — who Samantha unsuccessfully attempted to have removed from the case — denied Meghan’s motion on June 21.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Slams Samantha's 'Desperation,' Attempts to Dismiss Lawsuit
> 
> 
> Samantha Markle sued Meghan Markle one year after the duchess' March 2021 CBS tell-all interview — get the details
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com


Why are they describing her as "The Tig blogger" and not some other high falutin title like, well, THE Duchess of Sussex?


----------



## mellibelly

Yes I’m sure she lied about her age in the seventeen contest. It just proves she’s a pathological liar, even from a young age. Pretending to be older to get into a club is very different from lying about your age in a contest entry.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Why are they describing her as "The Tig blogger" and not some other high falutin title like, well, THE Duchess of Sussex?


Her tenure as Tig blogger was a lot longer!


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I thought she was on the outs with Chopra and Mulroney?



She probably is but what real friends does she really have? I can't really name any except for the people who were previously associated with her 




sdkitty said:


> is abagail spencer elite enough to hang with the duchess?



Looks like it given their time at the polo match recently


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes, I thought it was probably security but really? they need an escort for a five minute drive in an upscale area?  *what does he think is going to happen?  the paps are gonna chase them* and the Wife is going to be killed?



And does it still count if they hired the paps who are following them?


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> *Meghan’s docs stated. “Courts are not equipped to adjudicate the legitimacy of a person’s feelings *about their childhood and relationships. Nor should they be. … This dispute has no place in this Court or any other.”



So Meg wants the lawsuit against her dismissed because courts can't adjudicate feelings but Harry is in court suing a newspaper because they hurt his feelings? Do they honestly not see how ridiculous they are?

_The story, published in the Mail on Sunday and online, referred to the prince's separate legal case against the Home Office over security arrangements when he and his family are in the UK.
In a written statement to Thursday's preliminary hearing, _*Prince Harry said it had caused him "substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress, which is continuing"*








						Prince Harry libel claim against Mail on Sunday has High Court hearing
					

The Duke of Sussex says the Mail on Sunday caused "distress" after accusing him of having "lied".



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> _In a written statement to Thursday's preliminary hearing, _*Prince Harry said it had caused him "substantial hurt, embarrassment and distress, which is continuing"*



Oh really...I can think of a lot of other things that should cause him embarrassment.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> could this get big enough to have charles skipped from succession?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Why didn't the Sheik just donate directly to the Prince's charity?  I suspect the answer is that there is something that he wanted.



It is also very bad manners to refuse a gift in some cultures (I know, I _know_) but you try refusing a drink with a Russian or Irish person, or hospitality anywhere in the ME.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I have a hard time with his live videos - too much time not talking, responding to viewers... I haven't watched any lately.



The last live was all over the place TBH

I think he said he was going on tour


----------



## Aimee3

> Aimee3 said:
> I believe the expression is “ why buy the cow when you are getting the milk for free.”


JelliedFeels asked:
So is it a sex idiom? As in ‘don’t put out till you’re married or whatever’ or is it more broadly don’t be generous? I’m confused.


Aimee3 responds:
I’ve only ever heard the expression used in referring to sex before you’re married/engaged, but I suppose it could mean “don’t be generous” although I must admit having never heard it used in that context.
PS hope I did the multi quote thing correctly


----------



## CarryOn2020

DM reporting what we already know, but the comments = wow









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle hire director for Netflix reality show
					

According to PageSix, the Duke, 37, and Duchess of Sussex, 40, have hired documentarian Liz Garbus for the reality show, which they have been working on for a year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Why didn't the Sheik just donate directly to the Prince's charity?  I suspect the answer is that there is something that he wanted.



I agree it looks bad, but also for some reason those UAE billionaires are known for carrying around massive amounts of cash instead of just whipping out their black Amex card or something.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww



Very interesting!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It is also very bad manners to refuse a gift in some cultures (I know, I _know_) but you try refusing a drink with a Russian or Irish person, or hospitality anywhere in the ME.



I went to Iran as a student for a monthlong language class. One of my co-students had friends there and they insisted to invite our whole group (like 15 people), and they served a freaking feast. I'm a generous cook (both in the amount of food I prepare and the number of dishes I make, and I love the Middle Eastern way of snacking on a ton of small plates), but they put me to shame. That table was COVERED in plates and bowls.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Aimee3 responds:
> I’ve only ever heard the expression used in referring to sex before you’re married/engaged, but I suppose it could mean “don’t be generous” although I must admit having never heard it used in that context.
> PS hope I did the multi quote thing correctly



Now that you spell it out like this: I have never heard it used in another context either, so I think it's a bit weird to tell that a teenaged girl. But that might just be me.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that you spell it out like this: I have never heard it used in another context either, so I think it's a bit weird to tell that a teenaged girl. But that might just be me.


maybe today mothers of teenaged girls are more likely (some at least) to offer advice on birth control but back in the day it was celibacy all the way.  so this would be old fashioned advice.


----------



## lallybelle

Ahhh, so the whole camera (were they or weren't they trying to slip in cameras) shenanigans in NYC was about this show. So umm yeah about those wires and weird collar adjustments at the Thanksgiving Service....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> She made *$9 million* off of the last one. Oprah knows everything she needs to know.


$9,000,000 for allowing Mr. & Mrs. Misinformation to lie with impunity. Millions of $$$ worth of sweet revenge against the BRF, who years ago had advised Diana to cancel a planned tell-all interview with OP. One has to wonder if OW appeared or felt as smug once the lies were revealed or was the money enough to console her, assuage her hurt feelings and massage her massive ego.


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> an article I saw said Charles said he did nothing wrong - that the money went to his foundation....but it also said part of it was used for pay for costs of his residence....and just the source is a problem I think


In my book a cash transaction amounting to 3m USD is shady (as f@§$). #AML


----------



## sdkitty

In Style says she was wearing a "Canadian tuxedo" at the polo match.  and her hair was half up/half down.  Never heard of canadian tuxedo and hair looks like a messy pony to me.
Gotta keep that PR machine going








						Meghan Markle Gives the Canadian Tuxedo a Summery Twist
					

Meghan Markle wore the summer version of the Canadian tuxedo to Prince Harry's polo match.




					www.instyle.com


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> $9,000,000 for allowing Mr. & Mrs. Misinformation to lie with impunity. Millions of $$$ worth of sweet revenge against the BRF, who years ago had advised Diana to cancel a planned tell-all interview with OP. One has to wonder if OW appeared or felt as smug once the lies were revealed or was the money enough to console her, assuage her hurt feelings and massage her massive ego.


I think $9mil sweetened the deal sufficiently. And if Oprah looked (and acted) the fool, she can always claim that she was supporting a fellow WOC and didn't (sob!) realize that a royal would lie to her.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Keep in mind that Rupert Murdoch owns The Post.


And he is ditching Jerry Hall, so is now available


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> maybe today mothers of teenaged girls are more likely (some at least) to offer advice on birth control but back in the day it was celibacy all the way.  so this would be old fashioned advice.


Definitely. It's been around as long as I can remember, and I'm old. It simply meant why would someone marry you if they can have sex with you without doing so.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> In Style says she was wearing a "Canadian tuxedo" at the polo match.  and her hair was half up/half down.  Never heard of canadian tuxedo and hair looks like a messy pony to me.
> Gotta keep that PR machine going
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Gives the Canadian Tuxedo a Summery Twist
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore the summer version of the Canadian tuxedo to Prince Harry's polo match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.instyle.com



That's a new one on me too, but here it is. The things we learn here   


> https://www.dictionary.com/browse/canadian-tuxedo


----------



## jelliedfeels

Aimee3 said:


> JelliedFeels asked:
> So is it a sex idiom? As in ‘don’t put out till you’re married or whatever’ or is it more broadly don’t be generous? I’m confused.
> 
> 
> Aimee3 responds:
> I’ve only ever heard the expression used in referring to sex before you’re married/engaged, but I suppose it could mean “don’t be generous” although I must admit having never heard it used in that context.
> PS hope I did the multi quote thing correctly


Thank you for that. The plot thickens eh? 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree it looks bad, but also for some reason those UAE billionaires are known for carrying around massive amounts of cash instead of just whipping out their black Amex card or something.


Traditionally Muslims (who can afford to) don’t use credit cards as they aren’t supposed to either lend or receive money that interest is charged on- so given we are talking about elite men of the Gulf here it’s not surprising they prefer cash as they want to be seen as strict adherents.  

Many gulf shops also aren’t set up for card transactions anyways and a lot still prefer a cash or tab system so it’s just not as practical over there.


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> Traditionally Muslims (who can afford to) don’t use credit cards as they aren’t supposed to either lend or receive money that interest is charged on- so given we are talking about elite men of the Gulf here it’s not surprising they prefer cash as they want to be seen as strict adherents.
> 
> Many gulf shops also aren’t set up for card transactions anyways and a lot still prefer a cash or tab system so it’s just not as practical over there.



What about having the bank wire the money? Or an official bank check payable to the organization? 

Maybe they just wanted to look big pimpin like Floyd Mayweather. Rollin' stacks deep?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Does no one in LA and surrounding areas walk?  The weather is probably nice and it's a short walk, as you said.  People would role their eyes at me if I got in a car to walk such a short distance.


People on LA don’t walk if they can ride They prefer to use the treadmill, go for a hike  or go for a run. I once parked my car at Saks shopped and then walked down the block to NM. I was the only person walking on Wilshire Blvd.  People in cars riding by looked at me like I was a freak lololol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Traditionally Muslims (who can afford to) don’t use credit cards as they aren’t supposed to either lend or receive money that interest is charged on- so given we are talking about elite men of the Gulf here it’s not surprising they prefer cash as they want to be seen as strict adherents.



OMG you're right...says the Mid East Studies minor who completely forgot. Probably because I pay my CC off each month so I don't pay any interest


----------



## jelliedfeels

LittleStar88 said:


> What about having the bank wire the money? Or an official bank check payable to the organization?
> 
> Maybe they just wanted to look big pimpin like Floyd Mayweather. Rollin' stacks deep?


Oh yes a gulf citizen could certainly bank transfer money or make out a cheque to C’s charity if they wanted to- and one assumes he didn’t as it would be easier to trace, c wanted to funnel it through his personal account and may have wanted to see C in person_ for some reason_ while handing over this money- perhaps some reason it would also be inadvisable to write down in a email or letter.

I just also wanted to clarify there is also a culture reason that credit cards are less commonly seen in gulf states.

the guys were talking about, though, none Of them need to worry about proving they are rich.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Ghislaine will go on a long vacation. I don't know, part of me thinks if she really had a ton of dirt on Andrew she might have offered it for a milder sentence.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Ghislaine will go on a long vacation. I don't know, part of me thinks if she really had a ton of dirt on Andrew she might have offered it for a milder sentence.


Not sure it would have made a difference. The US was never going to extradite the Queen's son and he is/was never going to come here willingly so they couldn't really do anything with that info. Now if she had dirt on US Citizens maybe but I have a feeling a lot of people in power didn't want that info coming out.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> People seem to be questioning whether this article is part of the Harkles' revenge…


Yes! My first thought exactly







Chanbal said:


> They may have been invited for tea…
> View attachment 5435685
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan were spotted driving to Oprah's massive Montecito mansion where they spent over an hour with the talk show host on Saturday afternoon*
> *Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show Harry behind the wheel of his black Range Rover with Meghan taking the back seat while Archewell Chief Operating Officer Mandana Dayani sat up front *
> *What looked like a baby car seat was strapped in next to Meghan, but it is unknown if either Lilibet or Archie were in the car to visit Auntie Oprah *
> *Dayani, 40, was hired in September 2021 to oversee the charity's 'growth strategy and day-to-day operations'*
> *Meghan, 40, went fresh faced and makeup free during the trip, while Harry, 37, kept it low key in a t-shirt, baseball cap and sunglasses*
> *News of the couple's visit to Oprah could come as a surprise to Queen if there's another tell-all interview in the works - less than 18 months after their sensational chat with the talk show host*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are seen pulling into Oprah's Montecito home
> 
> 
> Exclusive DailyMail.com photos show the former royals, 37 and 40, turning into the 70-acre property late Saturday afternoon accompanied by a woman believed to be the pair's friend Janina Gavankar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





A few things:
1. Are they actually _for real_!!?? Another interview full of lies and fantasies with lazy Oprah (if true)? GTFOH

2. I'm sure they leave their house and go places regularly yet there are never pictures, but *of course* as soon as they are supposedly visiting very famous & rich Oprahs house, they hire paparazzi and make sure to have themselves photographed while driving there?
So desperate.

3. TW looks a mess in the backseat, dishevelled and pi**ed off. Where's that usual fake creepy smile of hers now? Oh dear! 





CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG, please step up - finger pointing, Hazzie’s hand at his throat. Lots of baaad energy, no?
> 
> View attachment 5435737


I see they are far too important to drive a vehicle that has license plates? I guess license plates are for us peasants.






Chanbal said:


>


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lounorada said:


> Yes! My first thought exactly
> View attachment 5436245
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5436246
> 
> A few things:
> 1. Are they actually _for real_!!?? Another interview full of lies and fantasies with lazy Oprah (if true)? GTFOH
> 
> 2. I'm sure they leave their house and go places regularly yet there are never pictures, but *of course* as soon as they are supposedly visiting very famous & rich Oprahs house, they hire paparazzi and make sure to have themselves photographed while driving there?
> So desperate.
> 
> 3. TW looks a mess in the backseat, dishevelled and pi**ed off. Where's that usual fake creepy smile of hers now? Oh dear!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I see they are far too important to drive a vehicle that has license plates? I guess license plates are for us peasants.
> View attachment 5436258
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5436263


I hadn’t noticed that- is it even legal to drive without plates in the US?



hollieplus2 said:


> Not sure it would have made a difference. The US was never going to extradite the Queen's son and he is/was never going to come here willingly so they couldn't really do anything with that info. Now if she had dirt on US Citizens maybe but I have a feeling a lot of people in power didn't want that info coming out.


I agree. They haven’t got a chance of extraditing him and the royal family have already made that clear.
I wouldn’t doubt she has compromising information about a fair few US citizens but  I also think that GHislaine would be extremely wary about offering information on anyone important given Epstein’s sudden death. What’s a shorter sentence if you’ve got to always be looking over your shoulder?

add on - to put it bluntly, she is still alive so she can be the fall guy and now she is locked up I’m sure some people will be hoping to draw a line under this. Evidently someone trusts her discretion on those files over JE.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> 2. I'm sure they leave their house and go places regularly yet there are never pictures, but *of course* as soon as they are supposedly visiting very famous & rich Oprahs house, they hire paparazzi and make sure to have themselves photographed while driving there?
> So desperate.



That's such a good point.


----------



## Chanbal

They are driving with the interior lights on to facilitate the photo-ops?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> DH and I lived together before we were even engaged and one of his friends (who had become my friend too) gave me the same advice!



I learned of it back in the 70s/80s when couples started cohabitating before marriage (myself included) and family members used the saying to express their "concern".


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>




If you look closely it's just an optical illusion as this commenter explains:

"It’s caused by the shade of the car.  Half his right hand is lit by the sun while the other half (the fingers) are in the shade. His left hand is in the forefront and it does throw the whole perspective off."


----------



## Aimee3

It's definitely ILLEGAL to drive a car in the US without license plates. So I think either the plate was photoshopped out, or perhaps in California there is normally no license plate on the front of the car (California girls please advise!).  The only other option would be if it were a brand new car and in the back window would be a paper "plate" which the car dealer would provide until the real plates arrive.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> It's definitely ILLEGAL to drive a car in the US without license plates. So I think either the plate was photoshopped out, or perhaps in California there is normally no license plate on the front of the car (California girls please advise!).  The only other option would be if it were a brand new car and in the back window would be a paper "plate" which the car dealer would provide until the real plates arrive.



CA is a two plate state. As you said, photoshopped out, or could be new and still have the paper tag in the back.


----------



## mellibelly

That Janina woman, whoever she is, has the same inauthentic phony demeanor as Methane in the BLG clip. She also has a creepy joker mouth where the corners turn up in a sinister way. Botched plastic surgery?


----------



## charlottawill

Lounorada said:


> "TW looks a mess in the backseat, dishevelled and pi**ed off."



Maybe there was a makeup/hair team waiting for her wherever they were headed, in preparation for filming? Might also explain the presence of the woman in the front seat.


----------



## youngster

I'd guess the plates were photoshopped out. Not sure why they'd bother. You used to be able to get all kinds of info if you had a car plate # but laws were passed more than 30 years ago in the U.S. to close that loophole after an actress was killed by a stalker fan who got info on her from her license plate # at the Dept of Motor Vehicles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They are driving with the interior lights on to facilitate the photo-ops?




A++ observations. I completely missed those. Thank you for the video 

Hazz is not wearing his seat belt. Ut oh.  BLG makes it clear this was yet again fake Harkle news. They seriously want to dominate each news cycle. Amateurs. Yawn.  Did they release the info on Charles? The old tape of William?  Rrrright.  We see their game.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> If you look closely it's just an optical illusion as this commenter explains:
> 
> "It’s caused by the shade of the car.  Half his right hand is lit by the sun while the other half (the fingers) are in the shade. His left hand is in the forefront and it does throw the whole perspective off."


It's possible. Some people noticed that the reflection on the front of the car is the same on the several photos, suggesting that the car was parked for the photo-op…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It's possible. Some people noticed that the reflection on the front of the car is the same on the several photos, suggesting that the car was parked for the photo-op…
> 
> View attachment 5436318



Now that's really pathetic if true.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Since when does security allow its clients to be the lead car?  That should be the first clue.  
Sheesh, the disgusting duo is so very desperate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since when does security allow its clients to be the lead car?  That should be the first clue.
> Sheesh, the disgusting duo is so very desperate.



They are for sure. In free fall with no soft landing in sight. They blew their last chance to mend the relationship with his family by leaving the Jubilee in a huff. Hazy was so concerned about Granny having the right people around her? The Duke of Dimwattage is too stupid to realize that she has had them all along, and always will. Notice how relaxed and happy she's looking these days?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Gal4Dior

OMG Vogue posted a photo of TW on IG having a FaceTime convo with Gloria Steinem regarding Roe. She is not important, and should NOT be featured. Archewell must have paid big for this placement in Vogue. She can have this convo with Steinem WITHOUT a need to have it placed in Vogue! 

So many activist work quietly in the wings, and actually provide MEANINGFUL contributions. This and the Uvalde visit make me sick.


----------



## charlottawill

LVSistinaMM said:


> OMG Vogue posted a photo of TW on IG having a FaceTime convo with Gloria Steinem regarding Roe. She is not important, and should NOT be featured. Archewell must have paid big for this placement in Vogue. She can have this convo with Steinem WITHOUT a need to have it placed in Vogue!
> 
> So many activist work quietly in the wings, and actually provide MEANINGFUL contributions. This and the Uvalde visit make me sick.



Maybe she was offering up housing to women from other states seeking abortions in CA.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this her house? Pants and sweater look like the birthday photo.  









						Gloria Steinem, the Duchess of Sussex, and Jessica Yellin on Abortion Rights, the ERA, and Why They Won’t Give Up Hope
					

“She reminds me that when you have anger, you have to channel that energy into something that makes a difference,” the Duchess of Sussex says of Steinem. “That’s what activism is. It’s about how we show up.”




					www.vogue.com


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Maybe she was offering up housing to women from other states seeking abortions in CA.


That's exactly what I was thinking. Meg loves to copy people... so copy Steinem and offer a room!


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> If you look closely it's just an optical illusion as this commenter explains:
> 
> "It’s caused by the shade of the car.  Half his right hand is lit by the sun while the other half (the fingers) are in the shade. His left hand is in the forefront and it does throw the whole perspective off."



Why am I seeing three sets of fingers?!   
I see his left hand at the top of the wheel. Then I see a set of fingers scratching the right side of his face, as well as another set of fingers jutting up from behind the wheel on his right side. Harry is like one of those optical posters from the early 90s.


----------



## Gal4Dior

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this her house? Pants and sweater look like the birthday photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gloria Steinem, the Duchess of Sussex, and Jessica Yellin on Abortion Rights, the ERA, and Why They Won’t Give Up Hope
> 
> 
> “She reminds me that when you have anger, you have to channel that energy into something that makes a difference,” the Duchess of Sussex says of Steinem. “That’s what activism is. It’s about how we show up.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


I honestly did a double take questioning 1) this looks like Gloria Steinem, oh wait...2) why is this in black and white?; 3) WTF is she sitting on this twin bed/couch?

This girl doesn't know who the heck she is. She just cosplays people she thinks are of value.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Why am I seeing three sets of fingers?!
> I see his left hand at the top of the wheel. Then I see a set of fingers scratching the right side of his face, as well as another set of fingers jutting up from behind the wheel on his right side. Harry is like one of those optical posters from the early 90s.



It is his left thumb that creates the illusion. BLG discusses this with an excellent graphic.




Jayne1 said:


> That's exactly what I was thinking. Meg loves to copy people... so copy Steinem and offer a room!



Right. She is definitely stepping into the political arena which fine *if *she gives up the title.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> That's exactly what I was thinking. Meg loves to copy people... so copy Steinem and offer a room!


Highly unlikely because of the ever popular "security issues".


----------



## CarryOn2020

LVSistinaMM said:


> I honestly did a double take questioning 1) this looks like Gloria Steinem, oh wait...2) why is this in black and white?; 3) WTF is she sitting on this twin bed/couch?
> 
> This girl doesn't know who the heck she is. She just cosplays people she thinks are of value.



Definitley a weird vibe in that photo of her.  Very weird, imo.


----------



## charlottawill

Hmmm.....


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> Why am I seeing three sets of fingers?!
> I see his left hand at the top of the wheel. Then I see a set of fingers scratching the right side of his face, as well as another set of fingers jutting up from behind the wheel on his right side. Harry is like one of those optical posters from the early 90s.


It's the Markle Claw sneaking up from the back seat to control the puppet's head


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this her house? Pants and sweater look like the birthday photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gloria Steinem, the Duchess of Sussex, and Jessica Yellin on Abortion Rights, the ERA, and Why They Won’t Give Up Hope
> 
> 
> “She reminds me that when you have anger, you have to channel that energy into something that makes a difference,” the Duchess of Sussex says of Steinem. “That’s what activism is. It’s about how we show up.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com



Didn't we say that for sure she would insert herself into this issue?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Does no one in LA and surrounding areas walk?  The weather is probably nice and it's a short walk, as you said.  People would role their eyes at me if I got in a car to walk such a short distance.


HA HA HA .. love this, and NO .. depending on where in LA County you live, oftentimes you have to drive!  However, when we lived in Pasadena (in Old Town - very near Colorado Boulevard), we could walk to a store.  However, if you needed to go to the Grocery store, get in that car baby!!!!!


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> A++ observations. I completely missed those. Thank you for the video
> 
> Hazz is not wearing his seat belt. Ut oh.  BLG makes it clear this was yet again fake Harkle news. They seriously want to dominate each news cycle. Amateurs. Yawn.  Did they release the info on Charles? The old tape of William?  Rrrright.  We see their game.


First of all, does Harry have a US Driving license?!?!?!  Unlike Europe (where you can get an "International" license to utilize), not sure it works that way in the US (unless you are using a rental car).  Hmmmmm ...


----------



## Jayne1

CeeJay said:


> HA HA HA .. love this, and NO .. depending on where in LA County you live, oftentimes you have to drive!  However, when we lived in Pasadena (in Old Town - very near Colorado Boulevard), we could walk to a store.  However, if you needed to go to the Grocery store, get in that car baby!!!!!


Okay, but what if you wanted to visit a neighbour? Get some fresh air and those steps per day we're always told to get. 

It's cool to go for a walk here in Toronto... a little exercise, a little window shopping, maybe stop for a latte, say hi to the neighbour you haven't seen all winter...  lol


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## mellibelly

I’m sorry but she looks like Humpty Dumpty in this photo. Like her feet don’t touch the floor  and as someone mentioned, why is it in black in white? Trying to give the moment some drama and levity while she LOOKS AT HER PHONE in a spare bedroom


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## mellibelly

This is so embarrassing for Methane and her friend. Boohoo, designers wouldn’t give them free clothes because they were industry nobodies. And this is the first time I’ve seen this hideous orange dress from the wedding. You guys, she got it from a Halloween costume shop here in LA why admit this? It’s soo cringe. Fringe & Cringe lmao


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> I’m sorry but she looks like Humpty Dumpty in this photo. Like her feet don’t touch the floor  and as someone mentioned, why is it in black in white? Trying to give the moment some drama and levity while she LOOKS AT HER PHONE in a spare bedroom



That is exactly the vibe I get. She could be looking at some horrible photos of herself, too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dp


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guttural????  No, visceral is the proper word.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> I’m sorry but she looks like Humpty Dumpty in this photo. Like her feet don’t touch the floor  and as someone mentioned, why is it in black in white? Trying to give the moment some drama and levity while she LOOKS AT HER PHONE in a spare bedroom



From the same oh-so-serious [not] publication - just turn the page and you’ll see this:





Photo: Getty Images
_I’m a Barbie girl, in a Barbie world, life in plastic, it’s fantastic_! You know those iconic Aqua lyrics, and Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling are embodying that spirit.








						Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling’s Life in Plastic Is Fantastic
					

The new Barbie movie’s costume design already looks super promising.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Ghislaine will go on a long vacation. I don't know, part of me thinks if she really had a ton of dirt on Andrew she might have offered it for a milder sentence.


She will behave herself in prison. She won’t serve the full sentence. Maybe 5 years


----------



## gracekelly

CeeJay said:


> First of all, does Harry have a US Driving license?!?!?!  Unlike Europe (where you can get an "International" license to utilize), not sure it works that way in the US (unless you are using a rental car).  Hmmmmm ...


The rule in CA is that if yiu are residing here, you have to get a CA License and register your auto if you brought it in from out of state.


----------



## MommyDaze

gracekelly said:


> She will behave herself in prison. She won’t serve the full sentence. Maybe 5 years


Federal prison time. No parole. Even with time off for good behavior she will do at least 80% of the 20 years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


>



They have been BFF’s for almost 2 whole years


----------



## jelliedfeels

I stand corrected. M must think there is a large enough majority on this issue. 

Personally I hate how every discussion of women’s healthcare seems to begin and end with this topic and honestly it’s at best a bad solution to the wider problem. 

I’m a bit disappointed this has ended her meddling in gun reform as I feel that’s a more pressing discussion and at least it was in the news.


----------



## Chanbal

TW never misses a bandwagon. The photo illustrating TW @ work was graciously provided by Archw*ll…


----------



## Chanbal

_They're just getting started_… 










						Meghan Markle’s showdown with Prince Harry
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry looked as loved-up as ever at the polo last week, but insiders tell heat they’re at odds over the subject – with Harry said to be desperate to scale back the attention, while the former actress has told friends they’re just getting started.




					heatworld.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Why does the woman in the video look like M?  Is my mind playing tricks like those photoshopped photos with her face on another’s body?!?

Edited to add: I saw someone else’s response and sound like it was M. WELL, I should not read this thread when sick. Hard for me to tell if I’m hallucinating or not! Makes my head spin more.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Chanbal

The duchessss and her "ridiculous" hubby seem desperate 'to be in the news' aka 'to get $$$$'… 


_The Duchess of Sussex has pledged to take her fight for equal rights to Washington DC, as she condemns the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade.

The Duchess has joined feminist campaigner Gloria Steinham to publicly criticise the decision as endangering women, warning of a “blueprint for reversing rights”.

Saying the reaction to the ruling in her house was “guttural”, with the “feminist” Prince Harry equally despairing, she argued it is now essential for legislation enshrining equal rights to be “pushed through”.

In conversation with Steinem for Vogue magazine, the Duchess said: “*Well, Gloria, maybe it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon*.”_





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This woman annoys me like no other living being. The arrogance. A Z-lister "takes on the supreme court"...get lost, Meghan. The one thing that comforts me right now: give it another week and she's found a new hobby.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> The duchessss and her "ridiculous" hubby seem desperate 'to be in the news' aka 'to get $$$$'…
> View attachment 5436604
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex has pledged to take her fight for equal rights to Washington DC, as she condemns the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
> 
> The Duchess has joined feminist campaigner Gloria Steinham to publicly criticise the decision as endangering women, warning of a “blueprint for reversing rights”.
> 
> Saying the reaction to the ruling in her house was “guttural”, with the “feminist” Prince Harry equally despairing, she argued it is now essential for legislation enshrining equal rights to be “pushed through”.
> 
> In conversation with Steinem for Vogue magazine, the Duchess said: “*Well, Gloria, maybe it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


“Her” fight?


----------



## Suncatcher

Is there a cause of the moment she has not supported?  I wish Meghan Markle would just shut up.  I continue to find it so odd that American publications refer to her by her English title when she is wading in on American political issues.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> TW never misses a bandwagon. The photo illustrating TW @ work was graciously provided by Archw*ll…



I have to say this is very accurate: "That’s what activism is. It’s about how we show up." She sure knows how to show up at every latest bandwagon to hitch a ride.

And the tone of the Vogue article... The journalist is undoubtedly a stan. Methane is portrayed as Steinem's equal or even superior (it is Methane who calls Steinem to discuss the issue). It is implied that she is a leading feminist with widespread popular support. 

And I find this : Steinem claims that the Harkles are a trusted source of info: "_We trust them and nothing but nothing replaces trust. It is the most important quality or attribute. We can see things on television and not believe them or not trust them. But when people like these two tell us, then we trust it._" The journalist describes them positively as "a happy man and woman with a huge public platform". Such b.s.


----------



## DoggieBags

_Saying the reaction to the ruling in her house was “guttural”, —
 i can just visualize Dumb and Dumber growling at each other over the morning news After Netflix‘s refusal to proceed with TW’s animation concept, getting booed coming out of the Cathedral in London, and various other stumbles along their fantasy path to becoming THE instruments for world peace, I can see that they have a lot to make guttural sounds about_


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> TW never misses a bandwagon. The photo illustrating TW @ work was graciously provided by Archw*ll…



Did she have to sell the big table?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> TW never misses a bandwagon. The photo illustrating TW @ work was graciously provided by Archw*ll…




Warning:

Megatron hijack!

How many abortions has M had? Has she gone through the process? Would she go through it? Does she say?

She talked about miscarriage in graphic terms. Almost every detail. Does she talk about surrogacy, infertility?

If not, or not willing to go _there _in terms of women's reproductive health, the things that wouldn't make her a victim/not-so (picture) perfect, back out and butt out.

I am all for women's voices being heard but this doesn't play well for the BRF, not even if it's in the US. So much for the Royals not being political. The BRF need to cut ties once and for all.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman annoys me like no other living being. The arrogance. A Z-lister "takes on the supreme court"...get lost, Meghan. The one thing that comforts me right now: give it another week and she's found a new hobby.


I laughed out loud at her pompous statement. She is soooo out of touch with reality. And dragging her handbag with her. A second row Royal embarrassing himself yet again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nothing screams independent feminist like Polo wife, royal wife, private jets, private security, McMansion, and _*Vogue*_, the publication of choice for all serious activists [hahahaha].  Yawn. Snore. Such a bore.


----------



## Annawakes

So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.



Where is her Hermes throw?

Anyone else having a guttural reaction to this?


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.


That must be her "serious" hairstyle - as opposed to her "iconic" messy bun.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Where is her Hermes throw?
> 
> Anyone else having a guttural reaction to this?



So funny 
Homelessness vs McMansion
Environment vs private jet
Monarchy reform vs the court of Harry Antoinette


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.




The picture is of course posed to the HILT:

Semiotics (move over BLG ):
Working informal attire and hair do = trick 'reportage' in her 'no-one-here-but-me' styling (just ignore the 10+ team around her and photographer)
On the couch = no time to walk to the other side of the house, this is URGENT and it's going to take ALL NIGHT that's why I need to recharge my phone already (we've seen the office or 'office' at her 40/40- she'll still have at least 100 copies of The Wench Bench stacked up).
Working (devices open/papers (notes/official docs by her side) = This is serious, I am deep DEEP in research but people need my input/decisions
Computer open - but looking at her phone = someone important is messaging her, she's very up-to-the-second and 'in-the-loop'
Black and white (her preferred style) = serious for posterity, some will be looking at this photo 50 years from now.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> TW never misses a bandwagon. The photo illustrating TW @ work was graciously provided by Archw*ll…



who cares what Meghan says?
I will say one thing though - talking about them is a relief compared to other things going on in the world/our country.  they are basically harmless - except possibly to the RF


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman annoys me like no other living being. The arrogance. A Z-lister "takes on the supreme court"...get lost, Meghan. The one thing that comforts me right now: give it another week and she's found a new hobby.


yes, so arrogant and full of herself


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> Where is her Hermes throw?
> 
> Anyone else having a guttural reaction to this?




This Daily Beast headline has gotta be one of the dumbest I’ve ever seen. I’m sure if he fixed the environment, homelessness and the monarchy people would be like, “Will, dear, that doesn’t count unless you make peace with your lying, opportunistic, greedy brother and his scheming wife asap”.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Warning:
> 
> Megatron hijack!
> 
> How many abortions has M had? Has she gone through the process? Would she go through it? Does she say?
> 
> She talked about miscarriage in graphic terms. Almost every detail. Does she talk about surrogacy, infertility?
> 
> If not, or not willing to go _there _in terms of women's reproductive health, the things that wouldn't make her a victim/not-so (picture) perfect, back out and butt out.
> 
> I am all for women's voices being heard but this doesn't play well for the BRF, not even if it's in the US. So much for the Royals not being political. The BRF need to cut ties once and for all.


I’m kind of relieved that we haven’t heard the saga of her personal experience tbh fictional or not.

I do agree this politicking under their titles has got to stop and it’s about time the BRF did something

For a change though, I would actually respect her if she made good on her claims. I might not agree with the methodology in its entirety but if she wants to throw her money behind a legal battle to appeal the decision  that would be using  an actual proportional amount of their enormous wealth to actually try and create change,rather than just handing out ‘sweet’ messages and biscuits like the demented feudalist I suspect she is.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> who cares what Meghan says?
> I will say one thing though - talking about them is a relief compared to other things going on in the world/our country.  they are basically harmless - except possibly to the RF


Reminds me of Mostly Harmless  
Maybe a Vogon will blast an interplanetary highway through the Chateau of Riven Rock (prophetic name!)



tiktok said:


> This Daily Beast headline has gotta be one of the dumbest I’ve ever seen. I’m sure if he fixed the environment, homelessness and the monarchy people would be like, “Will, dear, that doesn’t count unless you make peace with your lying, opportunistic, greedy brother and his scheming wife asap”.


After all, the Gutteral Guttersnipes did make an effort to ram an olive branch through him...


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> This Daily Beast headline has gotta be one of the dumbest I’ve ever seen. I’m sure if he fixed the environment, homelessness and the monarchy people would be like, “Will, dear, that doesn’t count unless you make peace with your lying, opportunistic, greedy brother and his scheming wife asap”.



No one can resolve "the angry dispute with his brother..." Harry_ is_ *Mr. Angry *


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> She will definitely have to behave herself in prison. I don’t think she’s getting out in 5 years
> 
> I’m kind of relieved that we haven’t heard the saga of her (personal experience tbh.



Agreed!

But, she never would.

Abortion is still a hugely controversial subject (I know, stating the obvious). But M is always on the side of the bl**ding angels 

And it's truly amazing how a 38 y o could defy nature, and (if we believe what we're told) get pregnant not once, not twice but 3 times in 2 years with no problems. So convenient for catching-up with the Cambridges.

Harry wants a family. Bang! Harry gets a family in almost record time.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Agreed!
> 
> But, she never would.
> 
> Abortion is still a hugely controversial subject (I know, stating the obvious). But M is always on the side of the bl**ding angels
> 
> And it's truly amazing how a 38 y o could defy nature, and (if we believe what we're told) get pregnant not once, not twice but 3 times in 2 years with no problems. So convenient for catching-up with the Cambridges.
> 
> Harry wants a family. Bang! Harry gets a family in almost record time.


she could easily create a fictional tale about when and why she had an abortion - something sympathetic.  hopefully she won't bother to do that


----------



## Annawakes

Yes, I always thought it kind of odd that she got pregnant so quickly, given her age.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Hermes Zen said:


> Edited to add: I saw someone else’s response and sound like it was M. *WELL, I should not read this thread when sick. Hard for me to tell if I’m hallucinating or not! Makes my head spin more.*



Hope you are feeling better soon, dear!


----------



## rose60610

IMO the only reason Meghan is so buddy buddy with Gloria Steinem is because when elderly Steinem dies Meghan wants to be in pole position to take her place. The landscape is already set, all she has to do is invade the void. Voila! Instant attention and constant cameras. 

And I want Maxwell to write a book in prison telling her "truth", complete with a list of names. Publishers must be begging for this book.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> In Style says she was wearing a "Canadian tuxedo" at the polo match.  and her hair was half up/half down.  Never heard of canadian tuxedo and hair looks like a messy pony to me.
> Gotta keep that PR machine going
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Gives the Canadian Tuxedo a Summery Twist
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore the summer version of the Canadian tuxedo to Prince Harry's polo match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.instyle.com


A Canadian tuxedo is all denim.  Jeans and a denim top for example.  I first learned the term years ago when Britney and Justin were still together and came up with this masterpiece :


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> TW never misses a bandwagon. The photo illustrating TW @ work was graciously provided by Archw*ll…



* quote from Gloria - part of the interview 

- Gloria, what kind of impact does it have when people like Meghan and Harry own this issue, speaking openly about abortion and equal rights and reproductive access—a happy man and woman with a huge public platform?

G.S.:* It’s very, very, very important. Because what they both have is trust. We trust them and nothing but nothing replaces trust. It is the most important quality or attribute. We can see things on television and not believe them or not trust them. But when people like these two tell us, then we trust it. 


Really Gloria?  who is the "we" that trusts H&M?
I'm really disappointed in the credibility being given to them
Why?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> CA is a two plate state. As you said, photoshopped out, or could be new and still have the paper tag in the back.


I hated having plates in the front at first, but it definitely makes getting into the right Uber much easier!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this her house? Pants and sweater look like the birthday photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gloria Steinem, the Duchess of Sussex, and Jessica Yellin on Abortion Rights, the ERA, and Why They Won’t Give Up Hope
> 
> 
> “She reminds me that when you have anger, you have to channel that energy into something that makes a difference,” the Duchess of Sussex says of Steinem. “That’s what activism is. It’s about how we show up.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


She literally inserts herself into every.single.thing.  She is truly a jack of all trades, master of none.  Except she doesn't know jack about anything!


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> She literally inserts herself into every.single.thing.  She is truly a jack of all trades, master of none.  Except she doesn't know jack about anything!



the full story is in their appreciation thread

IDK how she does it.....is everyone giving her credibility because she is a Duchess?  up until a couple of years ago, almost no one knew who she was.  what has she accomplished since then?  starting a foundation that has given out a few sandwiches?


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone else having a guttural reaction to this?




I'm definitely having a guttural reaction to this.    
I guess some people are desperate to have William and Harry hug and make up but I don't understand why.  What is it to anyone whether Will and Harry are talking and getting along well, or not?  It doesn't have anything to do with Will's projects or endeavors or whether he will be a good King or not. I guess it's something to write about, especially if SS is breathing down your neck pushing that narrative.  Need Harry back in the fold, on the inside, need those photos and sparkly royal fairy dust.

When people betray your trust and say horrible and untrue things about your family on national TV, all while your grandfather is dying, why do you need to immediately forgive and hug and make up?  You don't. You keep them at arms length until they apologize and truly show some remorse for what they did (which is about as likely as pigs flying with Harry and MM.)  You don't ever likely truly trust them again, especially when you know they are going to write some kind of crazy, nothing-is-their-fault type tell all book plus are filming a reality TV show.  At minimum, Will is showing excellent judgment to keep his distance from Harry.  He needs to see what's in the book Harry is writing, how many falsehoods and lies are told, what the impact is on the Queen and PC, and how their reality TV show unfolds.  At that point, he can decide whether a relationship with his brother can be salvaged or is worth salvaging.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guttural????  No, visceral is the proper word.



Maybe she'll attempt to get a law degree without going to school a la Kim Kardashian.  Nah.  Kimmy is actually putting in the work.  TW has the attention span of my 6 year old nephew with ADHD.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.


I'm sure she's thinking, "Do I look relatable enough?  Is this lighting good?  The no makeup makeup was such an awesome idea H".


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sure she's thinking, "Do I look relatable enough?  Is this lighting good?  The no makeup makeup was such an awesome idea H".


and sitting on the sofa rather than at a desk?  wonder what prompted that....guess that's what she thinks we "regular" plebians do


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> she could easily create a fictional tale about when and why she had an abortion - something sympathetic.  hopefully she won't bother to do that


I don't think she will.  A miscarriage is "innocent".  If she really was a yacht girl, I wouldn't be surprised at all if she has had several abortions, but discussing that would blow the BRF's mind.  It's hard to go from one generation where Charles had to marry a virgin, to his son's wife who had an abortion or more.  I just don't think it'll fly?


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Yes, I always thought it kind of odd that she got pregnant so quickly, given her age.


A lot of women in their 30s have no problem getting pregnant.  It's the ones in their 50s like Geena Davis that initially claim they got pregnant on their own (with twins) that make me give them a side eye.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> A lot of women in their 30s have no problem getting pregnant.  It's the ones in their 50s like Geena Davis that initially claim they got pregnant on their own (with twins) that make me give them a side eye.


I hadn't heard that about Geena Davis.....she might have gotten pregnant with twins at age with fertility drugs - but naturally? NO.  I would venture to say that would be just about impossible


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I hadn't heard that about Geena Davis.....she might have gotten pregnant with twins at age with fertility drugs - but naturally? NO.  I would venture to say that would be just about impossible


Fertility drugs aren't going to work on 50+ year old ovaries.  If they did, I hope they did a case study on her.  I have no doubt she used donor eggs.  I understand it's none of our business how she got pregnant, but then don't blast it in interviews either.  I remember reading her articles and she made it sound like she did it on her own.  It annoyed me how these celebrities try to make themselves sound superhuman.  They're not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

I'm beginning to think that MM does not have political ambitions so much as she has ambitions to be hired to fill a chair on The View.  I mean, it's perfect for her.  Multi-million dollar paycheck for sitting around a table and talking, talking, talking, wearing pretty clothes, never having to take responsibility for solving anything, but getting all the warm feels as you shine your lights all over the place but, you know, never having to actually solve any problem or issue, just talk talk talk for your multi-million dollar paycheck.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I'm beginning to think that MM does not have political ambitions so much as she has ambitions to be hired to fill a chair on The View.  I mean, it's perfect for her.  Multi-million dollar paycheck for sitting around a table and talking, talking, talking, wearing pretty clothes, never having to take responsibility for solving anything, but getting all the warm feels as you shine your lights all over the place but, you know, never having to actually solve any problem or issue, just talk talk talk for your multi-million dollar paycheck.


Maybe but I don't think that's prestigious enough for the Duchess


----------



## Aimee3

TW is only a duchess/royal by marriage, and to me this is not the same as someone born to the title.  If H had married somebody else, MM would still be a nobody.
Actually, to me, she is STILL a nobody.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.



with *important papers* strewn all around her.  Kind of like her probably empty binders she carries for *important meetings*.  So serious, that one.  Such a hard worker.


----------



## jennalovesbags

sdkitty said:


> In Style says she was wearing a "Canadian tuxedo" at the polo match.  and her hair was half up/half down.  Never heard of canadian tuxedo and hair looks like a messy pony to me.
> Gotta keep that PR machine going
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Gives the Canadian Tuxedo a Summery Twist
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wore the summer version of the Canadian tuxedo to Prince Harry's polo match.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.instyle.com


Canadian tuxedo is a fairly common phrase where I'm from, but I also live close to the border


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennalovesbags said:


> Canadian tuxedo is a fairly common phrase where I'm from, but I also live close to the border


I’ve also heard it referred to as an Alaskan tuxedo!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am loving the comments on Vogue.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

..


xincinsin said:


> I have to say this is very accurate: "That’s what activism is. It’s about how we show up." She sure knows how to show up at *every latest bandwagon to hitch a ride.*
> 
> And the tone of the Vogue article... The journalist is undoubtedly a stan. Methane is portrayed as Steinem's equal or even superior (it is Methane who calls Steinem to discuss the issue). It is implied that she is a leading feminist with widespread popular support.
> 
> And I find this : Steinem claims that the Harkles are a trusted source of info: "_We trust them and nothing but nothing replaces trust. It is the most important quality or attribute. We can see things on television and not believe them or not trust them. But when people like these two tell us, then we trust it._" The journalist describes them positively as "a happy man and woman with a huge public platform". Such b.s.


This! TW probably sees herself as thee prime activator and motivator so that she only needs to jump on a bandwagon for her stans everyone to follow suit because she is after all not so woke, knowledgeable and important and once she has pissed off imbued everyone with her arrogance fervor, she moves on to the next cause that in her mind alone absolutely needs her fame and expertise to succeed.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I'm beginning to think that MM does not have political ambitions so much as she has ambitions to be hired to fill a chair on The View.  I mean, it's perfect for her.  Multi-million dollar paycheck for sitting around a table and talking, talking, talking, wearing pretty clothes, never having to take responsibility for solving anything, but getting all the warm feels as you shine your lights all over the place but, you know, never having to actually solve any problem or issue, just talk talk talk for your multi-million dollar paycheck.


Talk and get angry.  Perfect!
Only problem is she'd have to show up every day, and I don't think the poor thing could handle that much effort!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> * quote from Gloria - part of the interview
> G.S.:* It’s very, very, very important. Because what they both have is trust. *We trust them and nothing but nothing replaces trust. *It is the most important quality or attribute. We can see things on television and not believe them or not trust them. *But when people like these two tell us, then we trust it*.



Trust tends to increase as people age… Poor Gloria!


----------



## Hermes Zen

youngster said:


> Hope you are feeling better soon, dear!


Thank you so much @youngster.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she could easily create a fictional tale about when and why she had an abortion - something sympathetic.  hopefully she won't bother to do that



I don't think she'd do that. Far too much a hot potato if actually holding hands-up. 

(Male) lawyer was called a murderer the other day just for discussing the issue.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> * quote from Gloria - part of the interview
> 
> - Gloria, what kind of impact does it have when people like Meghan and Harry own this issue, speaking openly about abortion and equal rights and reproductive access—a happy man and woman with a huge public platform?
> 
> G.S.:* It’s very, very, very important. Because what they both have is trust. We trust them and nothing but nothing replaces trust. It is the most important quality or attribute. We can see things on television and not believe them or not trust them. But when people like these two tell us, then we trust it.
> 
> 
> Really Gloria?  who is the "we" that trusts H&M?
> I'm really disappointed in the credibility being given to them
> Why?



But when did she say it?

I wouldn't trust either of them to feed my cat (and he can feed himself)


----------



## TC1

There have been a lot of celebrities marching, posting resources and lobbying (Busy Phillips comes to mind) actually advocating for change. This idiot posting for a picture pretending to be concerned and saying she needs to go to "D.C soon"   GTFOH no one cares.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I don't think she'd do that. Far too much a hot potato if actually holding hands-up.
> 
> (Male) lawyer was called a murderer the other day just for discussing the issue.
> [/QUOTE
> there are people who would disagree with her if she takes a stand but more Americans would agree so I don't think it would be that risky


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Interesting, she must have a stockpile of photos ready for any occasion.


----------



## Chanbal

DM puts it in a more transparent way… 








						Meghan Markle hints at political ambitions in Roe v Wade interview
					

The Duchess of Sussex is seething over the Supreme Court's decision and told feminist activist Gloria Steinem, 88: 'Well, Gloria, it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> DM puts it in a more transparent way…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle hints at political ambitions in Roe v Wade interview
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is seething over the Supreme Court's decision and told feminist activist Gloria Steinem, 88: 'Well, Gloria, it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


she has no qualifications but then again, we've had stranger things happen....uugh


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Suncatcher

The comments on the Vogue post are deservedly and uniformly scathing. She is deeply disliked and Vogue must know that (and she must know that too) but in social media all clicks are good I guess.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Maybe but I don't think that's prestigious enough for the Duchess



How would that be any worse than a Netflix reality show? Her options are dwindling so she may have to "lower" herself to join something like that.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> she has no qualifications but then again, we've had stranger things happen....uugh



apparently she's got the plate throwing down


----------



## sdkitty

Suncatcher said:


> The comments on the Vogue post are deservedly and uniformly scathing. She is deeply disliked and Vogue must know that (and she must know that too) but in social media all clicks are good I guess.


maybe I didn't read carefully enough but I saw some supportive comments there


----------



## papertiger

Suncatcher said:


> The comments on the Vogue post are deservedly and uniformly scathing. She is deeply disliked and Vogue must know that (and she must know that too) but in social media all clicks are good I guess.



Can someone post/screenshot some of the comments? I can't get them up on my device


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> How would that be any worse than a Netflix reality show? Her options are dwindling so she may have to "lower" herself to join something like that.



I think she's shouting "hallelujah"


----------



## Chanbal

TW aka Mother Teresa of Montecito has so many causes, but I'm still waiting for her to solve California's homeless crisis.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> TW aka Mother Teresa of Montecito has so many causes, but I'm still waiting for her to solve California's homeless crisis.



More pledges.  Have any of their pledges actually been followed through?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> More pledges.  *Have any of their pledges actually been followed through?*


----------



## TC1

purseinsanity said:


> More pledges.  Have any of their pledges actually been followed through?


Why post results about vaccine fundraisers when you can send personal correspondence, an olive oil cake, a voicemail or starbucks gift cards??


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> TW aka Mother Teresa of Montecito has so many causes, but I'm still waiting for her to solve California's homeless crisis.



OMG iI bet she wants to speak before Congress!  _As a young mother and woman of color ……._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suncatcher

papertiger said:


> Can someone post/screenshot some of the comments? I can't get them up on my device


----------



## marietouchet

La crise du jour ... I am exhausted with flitting from one cause to another like a butterfly ... POC, bullying, Ukraine, RvW - it never ends 
No stay power


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> Can someone post/screenshot some of the comments? I can't get them up on my device


There’s so many. The negative far outweigh the positives.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



as if he gives a care about social causes....oh, Wife told him he's mad


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> OMG iI bet she wants to speak before Congress!  _As a young mother and woman of color ……._


as a WOC who grew up more privileged than most of us white women


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> as if he gives a care about social causes....oh, Wife told him he's mad


Correction *bonkers*


----------



## csshopper

TC1 said:


> There have been a lot of celebrities marching, posting resources and lobbying (Busy Phillips comes to mind) actually advocating for change. This idiot posting for a picture pretending to be concerned and saying she needs to go to "D.C soon"   GTFOH no one cares.


Inquiring minds want to know: will she fly commercial?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> as a WOC who grew up more privileged than most of us white women


Meghan grew up white and she stayed that way until forced to acknowledge her black side.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Meghan grew up white and she stayed that way until forced to acknowledge her black side.


or until it became useful for her


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle faces backlash after she spoke out about Roe v Wade
					

US politicians have slammed the Duchess of Sussex for 'inserting drama' into American politics after she shared her outrage over the Supreme Court's Roe v Wade abortion ruling.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5437030
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle faces backlash after she spoke out about Roe v Wade
> 
> 
> US politicians have slammed the Duchess of Sussex for 'inserting drama' into American politics after she shared her outrage over the Supreme Court's Roe v Wade abortion ruling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


why are these people dignifying her with a response?


----------



## papertiger

Thank you @bellecate and @Suncatcher


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> why are these people dignifying her with a response?


The article is appalling, saying she'd be our second black president (she's black again folks!) and the second actor to be voted.  The current President's sister claims "of course" she'd be a great candidate.  Say what???  I guess if you like your politicians to be lying sacks of $hit, she'd definitely be a great option!
TW also calls on "all men" to make a stand.  I know this is turning into a male vs female thing, but it's hardly that simple.  She really knows how to dumb things down, doesn't she?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> or until it became useful for her


Exactly.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> The article is appalling, saying she'd be our second black president (she's black again folks!) and the second actor to be voted.  The current President's sister claims "of course" she'd be a great candidate.  Say what???  *I guess if you like your politicians to be lying sacks of $hit, she'd definitely be a great option!*
> TW also calls on "all men" to make a stand.  I know this is turning into a male vs female thing, but it's hardly that simple.  She really knows how to dumb things down, doesn't she?


One thing is true.  Men can do their part by keeping their zippers zipped.  Condoms are helpful, unless you want to appear on Judge Lauren's Paternity Court program.

Unfortunately, _politicians to be lying sacks of $hit _is true for a great many of them.  If they didn't start out that way, they learn.  Meghan is already ahead of the game, so she would be perfect lolololol!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> the whole thing is ridiculous....I'll bet the pesident's sister was put on the spot being asked about Meghan so she just gave a positive response.  I don't think she called the press to tell them she wants Meghan to be president


The President's family should be left alone and they should be quiet.  Just because your relative holds a high office, that doesn't make you an expert.  They need to be schooled in how to react to media intrusions into their lives.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The President's family should be left alone and they should be quiet.  Just because your relative holds a high office, that doesn't make you an expert.  They need to be schooled in how to react to media intrusions into their lives.


the president's sister is active in politics...I believe she was his campaign manager at one time ( I think earlier in his career)


----------



## redney

Just the thought of her running for office is laughable. Come on, really? Completely unqualified for any public office, even as a city council person in Santa Barbara.  She'd get a lot more than boos on church steps. She's a freaking joke and I'm puzzled why anyone would give her a serious thought.


----------



## Miarta

Lodpah said:


> Fact from books and people! Mother Teresa was actually found to have withheld medical treatment for the people in her care as she thought suffering was good for the soul. So many people died needlessly. There’s books out there about people who volunteered at her parsonage. The bundles of money she took from donations from donors were supposedly hand carried to the Vatican by MT.


You have to be able to read small print, you know like when new study comes out (egg yolk bad or good) who is actually sponsoring research. Who ever is sponsoring it there is where findings a pointing to. For the Mother Theresa it’s a complex story But very interesting one. To make it short, she was not there to heal and help sick people. She was there to aid dying abandoned forgotten who were dying on the side of the road. Calcutta was and is hell on earth and she made their last moments on this earth more bearable and dignified. Without her, countless nameless souls would die without ever knowing human kindness. (I did extensive work on Mother Theresa ) so if you look at her from that prospective … she was a saint.


----------



## LittleStar88

redney said:


> Just the thought of her running for office is laughable. Come on, really? Completely unqualified for any public office, even as a city council person in Santa Barbara.  She'd get a lot more than boos on church steps. She's a freaking joke and I'm puzzled why anyone would give her a serious thought.



Not the Repubs or Demos... So would need to be as an independent, and we all know those folks never win.

I'll be here for it, though. She will be chewed up and spit back out. TW will serve delicious gaffes. Will anyone ask her if she is ok? Probably not!


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> A Canadian tuxedo is all denim.  Jeans and a denim top for example.  I first learned the term years ago when Britney and Justin were still together and came up with this masterpiece :
> 
> View attachment 5436742


Sorely distracted by her necklace...


----------



## charlottawill

So this is interesting.....was Oprah a fan of Suits? 









						'All Rise' Star Simone Missick Has the Perfect Role for Oprah Winfrey
					

The actress and executive producer talks to ET on the set of the OWN legal drama.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

sdkitty said:


> who cares what Meghan says?
> I will say one thing though - talking about them is a relief compared to other things going on in the world/our country.  they are basically harmless - except possibly to the RF


But…some elected or ratified officials were considered harmless.. until they weren’t/aren’t.  We would all be better off in the end if she slithered back under her rock.


----------



## Lounorada

papertiger said:


> Can someone post/screenshot some of the comments? I can't get them up on my device


I scrolled through a lot of the comments on that Vogue post earlier and didn't find any positive ones. I'm sure there are some in there somewhere but I didn't see them! I had to screenshot some of them because more than a few made me laugh out loud.
Instagram

















ETA: Double posted attachment


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> How would that be any worse than a Netflix reality show? Her options are dwindling so she may have to "lower" herself to join something like that.


She may assume that, by merit of her illustrious presence, reality shows will be henceforth viewed as uplifting and full of compassion.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> I scrolled through a lot of the comments on that Vogue post earlier and didn't find any positive ones. I'm sure there are some in there somewhere but I didn't see them! I had to screenshot some of them because more than a few made me laugh out loud.
> Instagram
> View attachment 5437085
> View attachment 5437086
> View attachment 5437087
> View attachment 5437088
> View attachment 5437089
> View attachment 5437090
> View attachment 5437091
> View attachment 5437092
> 
> 
> View attachment 5437093
> 
> 
> View attachment 5437094
> 
> 
> View attachment 5437096


OMG!  Thanks for posting this.  They really roasted her good lolol!  Duchess of Bandwagon!  Priceless!


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> She may assume that, by merit of her illustrious presence, reality shows will be henceforth viewed as uplifting and full of compassion.


This sounds like Mr. Collins describing his esteemed patroness Lady Catherine de Bourgh.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


>



Meghan:  Is there egg in that?


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  I've read a lot about Mother Teresa that makes me think she was anything but a saint!


Which makes her an appropriate role model for Methane.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> She will behave herself in prison. She won’t serve the full sentence. Maybe 5 years


And then please write a book!


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> Meghan:  Is there egg in that?


No, but there's egg all over her face - again


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Meghan:  Is there egg in that?


Always wondered about that egg tantrum. Does she not eat egg? But she will eat chicken?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Always wondered about that egg tantrum. Does she not eat egg? But she will eat chicken?


I don't know what her deal is.  I have a friend who is allergic to the albumin in the egg.


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> No, but there's egg all over her face - again


Yep. Her face is getting as yellow as those bananas she loves so much.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> And then please write a book!


She will!  She probably already has the book deal.  She needs it for the legal bills. The thing is the victims may go after that money.

After the sentence was read, the DH made a comment that murderers get less time than they gave her.  The difference is that her victims are still alive and have to live with the experience.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I don't know what her deal is.  I have a friend who is allergic to the albumin in the egg.


Must check out those fancy poisonous flower cakes. The reviews of the cakes from that bakery are very mixed, ranging from drooling to dry and tasteless. They are supposed to be all natural and organic, but I don't recall them being egg-less.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Not the Repubs or Demos... So would need to be as an independent, and we all know those folks never win.



She would run as the Green Party candidate of course. 

She is such a strong crusader for the environment and social issues after all.


----------



## lanasyogamama

What a little s***


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I'm beginning to think that MM does not have political ambitions so much as she has ambitions to be hired to fill a chair on The View.  I mean, it's perfect for her.  Multi-million dollar paycheck for sitting around a table and talking, talking, talking, wearing pretty clothes, never having to take responsibility for solving anything, but getting all the warm feels as you shine your lights all over the place but, you know, never having to actually solve any problem or issue, just talk talk talk for your multi-million dollar paycheck.



Imo she would not be able to keep up with the conversation.  That is why she failed at the royal job. Small talk is not her thing.  Thinking on her feet is not her thing.  Reading the room is not her thing.  She can only lecture from a prepared script and never take questions.  Not the best person to lead an important issue.  Unreal that GS supports her.  Such a letdown.


----------



## lallybelle

Wtf? I just read that a “royal source” say that PC met Ivisibet and how he and Camilla were gushing how nice it was to meet her and see H, M & Archie.
Where was the reporting on this weeks ago?


----------



## bag-mania

lallybelle said:


> Wtf? I just read that a “royal source” say that PC met Ivisibet and how he and Camilla were gushing how nice it was to meet her and see H, M & Archie.
> Where was the reporting on this weeks ago?



The royal source must be Sunshine Sachs. It was also said that Archie was there and we saw nothing of him that weekend.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lallybelle said:


> Wtf? I just read that a “royal source” say that PC met Ivisibet and how he and Camilla were gushing how nice it was to meet her and see H, M & Archie.
> Where was the reporting on this weeks ago?



Fake news. Cheap shot. This is what H&M do - they know full well the Palace will not respond.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Soon, someone will post the office/whatever she is sitting in.


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> Inquiring minds want to know: will she fly commercial?



She expects Air Force One to pick her up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

sdkitty said:


> she could easily create a fictional tale about when and why she had an abortion - something sympathetic.  hopefully she won't bother to do that


When I started reading this thread I recall discussion of how many times M was married and and there was speculation that H was hubby #3.  Even rumor if she got married at a very young age that was annulled.  My first thought was, why would she get married so young?  Pregnant?  Also with Ex-Hubby Engelson, There was a pregnancy contract because she was at that time starting to become a raising z-list star and wanted to keep her figure so in the contract was a physical trainer, nanny etc.  Even with a contract maybe if she did got pregnant she may have decided to abort. Hate to think it but it could be a possibility.  Maybe this will come out later.  Food for thought.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> When I started reading this thread I recall discussion of how many times M was married and and there was speculation that H was hubby #3.  Even rumor if she got married at a very young age that was annulled.  My first thought was, why would she get married so young?  Pregnant?  Also with Ex-Hubby Engelson, There was a pregnancy contract because she was at that time starting to become a raising z-list star and wanted to keep her figure so in the contract was a physical trainer, nanny etc.  Even with a contract maybe if she did got pregnant she may have decided to abort. Hate to think it but it could be a possibility.  Maybe this will come out later.  Food for thought.



Not sure those were only rumors - imo there is some truth to all of it
We know there were long-term relationships, married or not : Joe Giuliano, Corey Vitiello, Trev [about 10 years?], Hazzie. 
Of course, he has his share, too. Both were _older_ when they started seeing each other.

old article:
*Meghan Markle 'demanded' her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract' ensuring he would pay for a personal trainer, nutritionist and nanny so she could stay in celebrity shape after having his baby*

*Meghan Markle, 37, made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign an agreement  that he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if they had a baby *
*The agreement did not involve lawyers with Meghan penning an informal document, which also included child care details, for Engelson to sign*
*The former Suits actress met Engelson in 2004 and they got engaged in 2010, tying the knot in a beachfront ceremony in 2011 before splitting in 2013*
*A friend told DailyMailTV Meghan was focused on making sure she did not lose her figure if she had a child over fears it would harm her career*
*They said: 'She knows the heavy-weighted body-type runs in her family and has been terrified of putting on extra pounds, particularly given her career'*
*They added: 'She demanded a personal trainer and nutritionist... I'm sure a nanny was discussed too, but the main focus was on health and weight'*
*Earlier this month it was announced that Meghan and Prince Harry, who wed in May, are expecting their first child together next spring*









						Meghan Markle made her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract'
					

Meghan Markle penned an informal agreement that she made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign that stipulated he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if she had a baby.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

lanasyogamama said:


> I am loving the comments on Vogue.



This photo to me is reminiscent to the b/w 1960's grainy DC photos of staff sitting on a couch (leather way better than M's daybed?) in the O office thinking intensely. Like they are about to make a very important decision.  You know what I mean?!?  What a total FAKE!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> This photo to me is reminiscent to the b/w 1960's grainy DC photos of staff sitting on a couch (leather way better than M's daybed?) in the O office thinking intensely. Like they are about to make a very important decision.  You know what I mean?!?  What a total FAKE!



The ring looks like Trev’s.

Article from 2019:








						Meghan Markle’s redesigned engagement ring from Prince Harry now looks A LOT like the one her ex Trevor Engelson gave her
					

IT WAS revealed last month that Meghan Markle had her engagement ring from Prince Harry redesigned, replacing the gold pave band with diamonds. And eagle-eyed fans claim that it now looks very simi…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ring looks like Trev’s.
> 
> Article from 2019:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s redesigned engagement ring from Prince Harry now looks A LOT like the one her ex Trevor Engelson gave her
> 
> 
> IT WAS revealed last month that Meghan Markle had her engagement ring from Prince Harry redesigned, replacing the gold pave band with diamonds. And eagle-eyed fans claim that it now looks very simi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


What?!?  What did I miss?  I'm still sick so what did I miss regarding her engagement ring to my posting?  Apologies if I didn't make sense in my post.


----------



## Hermes Zen

redney said:


> Just the thought of her running for office is laughable. Come on, really? Completely unqualified for any public office, even as a city council person in Santa Barbara.  She'd get a lot more than boos on church steps. She's a freaking joke and I'm puzzled why anyone would give her a serious thought.


If she does, I'm leaving the country.  Any room in England or France or Asia for me and my DH?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure those were only rumors - imo there is some truth to all of it
> We know there were long-term relationships, married or not : Joe Giuliano, Corey Vitiello, Trev [about 10 years?], Hazzie.
> Of course, he has his share, too. Both were _older_ when they started seeing each other.
> 
> old article:
> *Meghan Markle 'demanded' her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract' ensuring he would pay for a personal trainer, nutritionist and nanny so she could stay in celebrity shape after having his baby*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 37, made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign an agreement  that he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if they had a baby *
> *The agreement did not involve lawyers with Meghan penning an informal document, which also included child care details, for Engelson to sign*
> *The former Suits actress met Engelson in 2004 and they got engaged in 2010, tying the knot in a beachfront ceremony in 2011 before splitting in 2013*
> *A friend told DailyMailTV Meghan was focused on making sure she did not lose her figure if she had a child over fears it would harm her career*
> *They said: 'She knows the heavy-weighted body-type runs in her family and has been terrified of putting on extra pounds, particularly given her career'*
> *They added: 'She demanded a personal trainer and nutritionist... I'm sure a nanny was discussed too, but the main focus was on health and weight'*
> *Earlier this month it was announced that Meghan and Prince Harry, who wed in May, are expecting their first child together next spring*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle made her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle penned an informal agreement that she made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign that stipulated he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if she had a baby.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Trev honey, you should have dumped her right there and then.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> This photo to me is reminiscent to the b/w 1960's grainy DC photos of staff sitting on a couch (leather way better than M's daybed?) in the O office thinking intensely. Like they are about to make a very important decision.  You know what I mean?!?  What a total FAKE!


My thoughts too! I kept thinking: was there a photo of some important figure in this or a similar position?

Edited: In case I trespass on the political taboo.


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> My thoughts too! I kept thinking: was there a photo of Kissinger or some other important figure in this or a similar position?


I know there's got to be but I'm not good in finding one.


----------



## Gal4Dior

rose60610 said:


> IMO the only reason Meghan is so buddy buddy with Gloria Steinem is because when elderly Steinem dies Meghan wants to be in pole position to take her place. The landscape is already set, all she has to do is invade the void. Voila! Instant attention and constant cameras.
> 
> And I want Maxwell to write a book in prison telling her "truth", complete with a list of names. Publishers must be begging for this book.


I feel Meggy misses the point. Steinem spent a lifetime of enacting change and fighting for women’s rights. TW just comes in, says a few useless phrases, snaps a photo, and posts it on the interwebs for admiration. It’s sickening. Put your money where your mouth is. No snacks, no bananas, no visits or protests surrounded by security and Netflix cameras.

She is all talk, NO action. No real work. It’s all smoke and mirrors with this fraud and I’m tired of her getting kudos for doing absolutely nothing positive for these causes. Even with millions of dollars and a British title, she’s still as useless as she was when she was a briefcase girl.

I used to think her annoying, but after Uvalde and Roe- she disgusts me! How many REAL activists have sacrificed for her to benefit from fake goodwill making calls and FaceTiming from her Montecito Manse????


----------



## PurseUOut

CarryOn2020 said:


>




This is not a good look for BP. They should release their findings (with specific witnesses and names redacted) or at least provide a list of corrective actions that have been recommended to HR as a result of the (confirmed?) bullying by Meghan. At this point I question if an investigation was even completed at all.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  I've read a lot about Mother Teresa that makes me think she was anything but a saint!


I don't know enough about Mother Teresa's situation…

However, people with strong beliefs often impose them to others, and that is a big problem imo.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like she overlooked a great opportunity to advertise The B*nch aka Laptop Stand Riser.


----------



## Chanbal

An opinion to be shared…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

LVSistinaMM said:


> I feel Meggy misses the point. Steinem spent a lifetime of enacting change and fighting for women’s rights. TW just comes in, says a few useless phrases, snaps a photo, and posts it on the interwebs for admiration. It’s sickening. Put your money where your mouth is. No snacks, no bananas, no visits or protests surrounded by security and Netflix cameras.
> 
> She is all talk, NO action. No real work. It’s all smoke and mirrors with this fraud and I’m tired of her getting kudos for doing absolutely nothing positive for these causes. Even with millions of dollars and a British title, she’s still as useless as she was when she was a briefcase girl.
> 
> I used to think her annoying, but after Uvalde and Roe- she disgusts me! How many REAL activists have sacrificed for her to benefit from fake goodwill making calls and FaceTiming from her Montecito Manse????


Agreed, Vogue missed an opportunity to actually talk to the spokespeople and the activists who have campaigning and warning about this for years. 


Chanbal said:


> It looks like she overlooked a great opportunity to advertise The B*nch aka Laptop Stand Riser.



Both of these women are going to end up with back problems going from this pose. I suppose M could claim it’s from carrying her deluded husband through life.


Another grim reality take from me but I was thinking about M’s personal story moment and I’ve thought of one.

My biggest concern in the overturn of this regulation is the prosecution and wrongful conviction of women who experience natural miscarriage and those who suffer from physical or mental health crises during pregnancy as attempted infanticides. There has already been reports of trials of this kind even before R v W was overturned.

It strikes me that M’s story of her suicide ideation during her pregnancy with A is exactly the sort of case that could lead to her wrongful prosecution (if she were an impoverished woman in a hostile situation with inadequate healthcare provision).

However, I’m wondering if she even remembers the details of this story and wouldn’t care to try it to recall them for fear of getting caught out on her lies. (Let’s face it. It has never been a believable tale that a pregnant royal in a country with free state healthcare with strict laws on confidentiality was unable to get provision for a possible mental health emergency .)

On a practical note, it might also demean the cause if one’s takeaway is not of the threat of wrongful imprisonment but how satisfying it would be to see M hoist by her own petard.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hermes Zen said:


> If she does, I'm leaving the country.  Any room in England or France or Asia for me and my DH?



Come stay with me, I live in a beautiful rural spot that's only 45 mins to the next cool metropolis.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Trev honey, you should have dumped her right there and then.



Especially seeing he funded her lifestyle anyway


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> I scrolled through a lot of the comments on that Vogue post earlier and didn't find any positive ones. I'm sure there are some in there somewhere but I didn't see them! I had to screenshot some of them because more than a few made me laugh out loud.
> Instagram
> View attachment 5437085
> View attachment 5437087
> View attachment 5437088
> View attachment 5437089
> View attachment 5437090
> View attachment 5437091
> View attachment 5437092
> 
> 
> View attachment 5437093
> 
> 
> View attachment 5437094
> 
> 
> View attachment 5437096
> 
> ETA: Double posted attachment



I'm really glad we're logging these comments, apparently Vogue has been deleting negs


----------



## xincinsin

Grabbed this comment that was just posted. (Pardon the clumsy pics) It was in response to a Megatron fan.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I'm really glad we're logging these comments, apparently Vogue has been deleting negs


The sugars are out in full force. Some are particularly forceful because people are mocking Methane for calling herself DOS. One cried out: "*Her name is Duchess of Sussex!*" Riiiiight....

And this is interesting. I thought she and her gutteral prince didn't do social media to avoid heartbreak?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'm really glad we're logging these comments, apparently Vogue has been deleting negs



Speaking of Vogue, I found it really sh*tty that they basically doxxed Kylie Jenner's pregnancy by making a huge congratulatory post on their Insta hours before she announced it.



xincinsin said:


> The sugars are out in full force. Some are particularly forceful because people are mocking Methane for calling herself DOS. One cried out: "*Her name is Duchess of Sussex!*" Riiiiight....
> 
> And this is interesting. I thought she and her gutteral prince didn't do social media to avoid heartbreak?
> View attachment 5437440



They still have the account, it just hasn't been updated after their dramatic Goodbye in 2020.

BTW Raptor did something good today. I ordered a summer dress in several sizes and for a moment I thought I'd keep the smaller size that fits my waist but squeezes the boobs. But then I thought about all those times Raptor stepped out in illfitting clothes, and now I'm keeping the bigger one and having the waist tailored. Ha!

(BTW, I ordered four sizes because going off the measurement chart, only the biggest one would fit my chest. Biggest and 2nd biggest one are too big everywhere. And online stores complain about return rates!)


----------



## xincinsin

Someone in a marklenews1 comment thread mentioned that there was a connection between Sunshine Sachs and Gloria Steinem. Implied that Steinem was a SS client and they connected her with Methane.

Sunshine was the press contact for Ms Foundation for Women and Steinem is the founding mother for it. That's the only connection I've found so far from Google page 1.


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  I've read a lot about Mother Teresa that makes me think she was anything but a saint!


I also remember reading some negative things about her back then. 

Being a "public school" kid having to go to catechism after Mass on Sundays taught by nuns, I knew pretty well from 1st grade on up what nasty human beings some nuns were. Now, I know they all weren't like this but when you are a little kid and some stranger in a very strange outfit is basically telling you every week that you're going to hell--well I just thought "hey--Mother Teresa is just another nun that happened to get famous".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## bellecate

They put out anything to stay in the news. They may have paid for the trip but I’m guessing they were also reimbursed (Netflix?) by someone for it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG a millionaire couple for once didn't freeload but paid for their own flights! I'm stunned!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> What?!?  What did I miss?  I'm still sick so what did I miss regarding her engagement ring to my posting?  Apologies if I didn't make sense in my post.



Apologies, I thought you were saying you thought the photo was a fake or an older one that she posted just now.  I think it is an older photo, especially when looking at her ring.  It seems odd that she is wearing the same outfit as in the Lilibet photo.  In other words, this photo was taken long before the Supreme Court decision was announced imo.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> What a little s***


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo she would not be able to keep up with the conversation.  That is why she failed at the royal job. Small talk is not her thing.  Thinking on her feet is not her thing.  Reading the room is not her thing.  She can only lecture from a prepared script and never take questions.  Not the best person to lead an important issue.  Unreal that GS supports her.  Such a letdown.


well IDK....if sherri shepherd could do it that's a pretty low bar IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Soon, someone will post the office/whatever she is sitting in.



Appropriate nickname for H, Haznonuts, from a Twitter poster.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure those were only rumors - imo there is some truth to all of it
> We know there were long-term relationships, married or not : Joe Giuliano, Corey Vitiello, Trev [about 10 years?], Hazzie.
> Of course, he has his share, too. Both were _older_ when they started seeing each other.
> 
> old article:
> *Meghan Markle 'demanded' her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract' ensuring he would pay for a personal trainer, nutritionist and nanny so she could stay in celebrity shape after having his baby*
> 
> *Meghan Markle, 37, made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign an agreement  that he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if they had a baby *
> *The agreement did not involve lawyers with Meghan penning an informal document, which also included child care details, for Engelson to sign*
> *The former Suits actress met Engelson in 2004 and they got engaged in 2010, tying the knot in a beachfront ceremony in 2011 before splitting in 2013*
> *A friend told DailyMailTV Meghan was focused on making sure she did not lose her figure if she had a child over fears it would harm her career*
> *They said: 'She knows the heavy-weighted body-type runs in her family and has been terrified of putting on extra pounds, particularly given her career'*
> *They added: 'She demanded a personal trainer and nutritionist... I'm sure a nanny was discussed too, but the main focus was on health and weight'*
> *Earlier this month it was announced that Meghan and Prince Harry, who wed in May, are expecting their first child together next spring*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle made her first husband sign a 'pregnancy contract'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle penned an informal agreement that she made her first husband Trevor Engelson sign that stipulated he would pay for a personal trainer and a nutritionist if she had a baby.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



As a “feminist” with her own bank account and money, she can’t pay for this crap herself?


----------



## sdkitty

LVSistinaMM said:


> I feel Meggy misses the point. Steinem spent a lifetime of enacting change and fighting for women’s rights. TW just comes in, says a few useless phrases, snaps a photo, and posts it on the interwebs for admiration. It’s sickening. Put your money where your mouth is. No snacks, no bananas, no visits or protests surrounded by security and Netflix cameras.
> 
> She is all talk, NO action. No real work. It’s all smoke and mirrors with this fraud and I’m tired of her getting kudos for doing absolutely nothing positive for these causes. Even with millions of dollars and a British title, she’s still as useless as she was when she was a briefcase girl.
> 
> I used to think her annoying, but after Uvalde and Roe- she disgusts me! How many REAL activists have sacrificed for her to benefit from fake goodwill making calls and FaceTiming from her Montecito Manse????


this is why it's disappointing that Steinem is showing her so much respect.  I don't get it.  Why?


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> I also remember reading some negative things about her back then.
> 
> Being a "public school" kid having to go to catechism after Mass on Sundays taught by nuns, I knew pretty well from 1st grade on up what nasty human beings some nuns were. Now, I know they all weren't like this but when you are a little kid and some stranger in a very strange outfit is basically telling you every week that you're going to hell--well I just thought "hey--Mother Teresa is just another nun that happened to get famous".


my sister and I were afraid of being sent to Catholic school.  and the Catholic school kids were often pretty rowdy when they weren't in school


----------



## PurseUOut

xincinsin said:


> Grabbed this comment that was just posted. (Pardon the clumsy pics) It was in response to a Megatron fan.
> View attachment 5437397
> View attachment 5437398
> View attachment 5437399



From all accounts neither Meghan nor Harry are financially independent. They both need to earn income. If Meghan is making media appearances in connection with their charitable foundation or philonthraphic works then that IS her job. Would it be more acceptable if she started a business like a clothing/make-up/skin-care line or would she be or crucified for using her "title" and connection to the RF for profit?


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> From all accounts neither Meghan nor Harry are financially independent. They both need to earn income. If Meghan is making media appearances in connection with their charitable foundation or philonthraphic works then that IS her job. Would it be more acceptable if she started a business like a clothing/make-up/skin-care line or would she be or crucified for using her "title" and connection to the RF for profit?


But what are they doing to help anyone?  they haven't given any substantial financial aid to anyone that we know of.  This is the life of service?  talking about her opinions?  I share some of her opinions but that doesn't mean I need to hear them from her.


----------



## PurseUOut

sdkitty said:


> But what are they doing to help anyone?  they haven't given any substantial financial aid to anyone that we know of.  This is the life of service?  talking about her opinions?  I share some of her opinions but that doesn't mean I need to hear them from her.



Its my understanding their foundation offers grants to specific NGOs and charities directly impacting the causes they care about. Much like how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation operates. IMO there are way more questionable 'charitable' organizations than Archewell (The Cl1nton Foundation, BLM to name a couple). You can chose whether or not to "hear" from her but it doesn't discount the fact its unreasonable to expect Meghan and Harry to work for free if they aren't financially independent themselves.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Miarta said:


> Thank you for elaborating on majority of facts that I already said ;D


R/whoosh

I certainly have no interest in challenging anyone’s religious beliefs but if you think redirecting enormous sums of donations back into a wealthy institution while those they were meant for die agonising and preventable deaths is ethical and the best we can do in international aid then I think your ethical beliefs may need some consideration.


----------



## Miarta

jelliedfeels said:


> R/whoosh
> 
> I certainly have no interest in challenging anyone’s religious beliefs but if you think redirecting enormous sums of donations back into a wealthy institution while those they were meant for die agonising and preventable deaths then I think your ethical beliefs may need some consideration.


I’m not believer. Pure logic. Someone with her background no education and limited experience ……  She was used.
i will not respond on this subject any further because there is no point. The glass is half empty or half full???  Depends on a perso.


----------



## Annawakes

It makes no sense to me to have an entire article devoted to praising that they paid for their own flights. Seriously?!

They put out drivel praising themselves for things real people do every day.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> Its my understanding their foundation offers grants to specific NGOs and charities directly impacting the causes they care about. Much like how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation operates. IMO there are way more questionable 'charitable' organizations than Archewell (The Cl1nton Foundation, BLM to name a couple). You can chose whether or not to "hear" from her but it doesn't discount the fact its unreasonable to expect Meghan and Harry to work for free if they aren't financially independent themselves.


I just took a quick look at their website.  No grant application that I can see.  they have made a commitment to world central kitchen but I guess they would have to come up with the money to keep the commitment.
Why attack the ******* Foundation?  And really how could you possibly compare these two posers to bill and melinda gates?


----------



## jelliedfeels

PurseUOut said:


> From all accounts neither Meghan nor Harry are financially independent. They both need to earn income. If Meghan is making media appearances in connection with their charitable foundation or philonthraphic works then that IS her job. Would it be more acceptable if she started a business like a clothing/make-up/skin-care line or would she be or crucified for using her "title" and connection to the RF for profit?


Who is crucifying them? Shall I make popcorn? But seriously they receive glowing press for the most banal gestures - a bit of justified  critique from the little people in the common section is hardly crucifying anyone.

They have both used their titles on commercial products before - her book and his endorsing better up. Not to mention their earlier attempt to make a Sussex royal merch line. They have pretty clearly been criticised for that too. However, I’d say billions of people find a way to get by without a merchandise line too

They’ve got more than enough money to be financially independent. Harry inherited a substantial amount of money - some  £14 million, no tax, from Diana and another amount from his Grandmother. There has been no sign that they have been removed from any family wills so there’s every chance he will inherit more millions within the decade.

Oh and let’s not forget M was a commercially successful actress  

They don’t need to be doing any of this PR just to make money. They already have more than enough to live comfortably just from handouts, what we are seeing is very clearly greed and the lust for influence and attention.


----------



## sdkitty

IDK who the supposed source of this is...








						Prince Charles enjoys ‘very emotional’ first meeting with Lilibet
					

The Prince of Wales enjoyed a “very emotional” first meeting with his granddaughter, Lilibet, a senior royal aide has revealed.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> IDK who the supposed source of this is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles enjoys ‘very emotional’ first meeting with Lilibet
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales enjoyed a “very emotional” first meeting with his granddaughter, Lilibet, a senior royal aide has revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Is Horrid Scoobie branding himself a senior royal aide? It's his style of OTT effusive blather. Besides, they didn't state whose royal aide. Maybe it was Methane's Royal aide.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Is Horrid Scoobie branding himself a senior royal aide? It's his style of OTT effusive blather. Besides, they didn't state whose royal aide. Maybe it was Methane's Royal aide.


I would think if Charles was so excited we would see a report linked more directly to him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

PurseUOut said:


> Its my understanding their foundation offers grants to specific NGOs and charities directly impacting the causes they care about. Much like how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation operates. IMO there are way more questionable 'charitable' organizations than Archewell (The Cl1nton Foundation, BLM to name a couple). You can chose whether or not to "hear" from her but it doesn't discount the fact its unreasonable to expect Meghan and Harry to work for free if they aren't financially independent themselves.


It is reasonable to expect them to work or engage in projects for which they will be financially compensated on the basis of them actually doing the work as opposed to trading on their royal titles. When has she ever put out a statement or been quoted in the news without her Duchess of Sussex title being prominently appended to her name multiple times? When she did the voice over for the Disney elephant documentary, they had already left the BRF but all the Disney ads prominently displayed narrated by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. The truth is she can’t get any paying gigs as plain Meghan Markle. She can only get paid gigs by trading on her royal title. If they truly wanted to be independent and separate from the BRF then they should stop using their royal titles completely. Meghan, as an American citizen, absolutely has the right to contact her elected representatives to voice her concerns on various topics. But it is not reasonable to use her BRITISH royal title while dabbling in AMERICAN politics.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> From all accounts neither Meghan nor Harry are financially independent. They both need to earn income. If Meghan is making media appearances in connection with their charitable foundation or philonthraphic works then that IS her job. Would it be more acceptable if she started a business like a clothing/make-up/skin-care line or would she be or crucified for using her "title" and connection to the RF for profit?



British Royal titles should never be used [misused] to merchandize products or political positions. Ever. They are not voted into ‘office’ so they do not represent the will of the people. This seems to be a difficult concept for many to grasp. 

If a person wants to do sell products/run for office/etc., then renounce the title and use their own name. Simple enough to do. [so why don’t H&M do that?  As many have said, they are nothing without their titles].


----------



## PurseUOut

sdkitty said:


> I just took a quick look at their website.  No grant application that I can see.  they have made a commitment to world central kitchen but I guess they would have to come up with the money to keep the commitment.
> Why attack the ******* Foundation?  And really how could you possibly compare these two posers to bill and melinda gates?



Reread what I wrote. I said the structure of their foundation is similar to what the Gates Foundation does; by funding charities who are directly impacting the causes they care about. Mackenzie Scott (Jeff Bezos' ex-wife) also has similar giving philosophies. And the Cl1nton Foundation has been wrought with controversy as a cursory review of Google will show you.

In this article it states Archewell Foundation has made new grants, in addition to those they made for women's day to The Center on Poverty and Inequality, National Women’s Law Center, The 19th and Smart Works.









						Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s Archewell Foundation Just Made Another Major Announcement
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation just offered grants to two noteworthy non-profit organizations. Find out more here.




					www.purewow.com


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> The duchessss and her "ridiculous" hubby seem desperate 'to be in the news' aka 'to get $$$$'…
> View attachment 5436604
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex has pledged to take her fight for equal rights to Washington DC, as she condemns the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
> 
> The Duchess has joined feminist campaigner Gloria Steinham to publicly criticise the decision as endangering women, warning of a “blueprint for reversing rights”.
> 
> Saying the reaction to the ruling in her house was “guttural”, with the “feminist” Prince Harry equally despairing, she argued it is now essential for legislation enshrining equal rights to be “pushed through”.
> 
> In conversation with Steinem for Vogue magazine, the Duchess said: “*Well, Gloria, maybe it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Taking a trip to DC because she’s certainly made a difference everywhere else she went.  Not.

”Guttural”? Really?


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> Reread what I wrote. I said the structure of their foundation is similar to what the Gates Foundation does; by funding charities who are directly impacting the causes they care about. Mackenzie Scott (Jeff Bezos' ex-wife) also has similar giving philosophies. And the Cl1nton Foundation has been wrought with controversy as a cursory review of Google will show you.
> 
> In this article it states Archewell Foundation has made new grants, in addition to those they made for women's day to The Center on Poverty and Inequality, National Women’s Law Center, The 19th and Smart Works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s Archewell Foundation Just Made Another Major Announcement
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation just offered grants to two noteworthy non-profit organizations. Find out more here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.purewow.com


this is the first I've heard of them making grants...doesn't say how much money is involved.  their website doesn't seem to say anything about grants being available or give grant application
Mackenzie Scott has given huge amounts of money.  giving philosophy could be similar but actual giving is so far apart.


----------



## xincinsin

Somehow, the word "guttural" reminds me of turkeys... Perhaps Her Heinous will pardon a few for Thanksgiving.


----------



## 1LV

Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.


My first thought was she’s looking up words she thinks will make her sound smart.


----------



## PurseUOut

jelliedfeels said:


> Who is crucifying them? Shall I make popcorn? But seriously they receive glowing press for the most banal gestures - a bit of justified  critique from the little people in the common section is hardly crucifying anyone.
> 
> They have both used their titles on commercial products before - her book and his endorsing better up. Not to mention their earlier attempt to make a Sussex royal merch line. They have pretty clearly been criticised for that too. However, I’d say billions of people find a way to get by without a merchandise line too
> 
> They’ve got more than enough money to be financially independent. Harry inherited a substantial amount of money - some  £14 million, no tax, from Diana and another amount from his Grandmother. There has been no sign that they have been removed from any family wills so there’s every chance he will inherit more millions within the decade.
> 
> Oh and let’s not forget M was a commercially successful actress
> 
> They don’t need to be doing any of this PR just to make money. They already have more than enough to live comfortably just from handouts, what we are seeing is very clearly greed and the lust for influence and attention.



You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> Maybe but I don't think that's prestigious enough for the Duchess


Yet.  Give it time.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.


perhaps if they really wanted a "life of service" they could live in a regular house rather than a huge mansion


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> I just took a quick look at their website.  No grant application that I can see.  they have made a commitment to world central kitchen but I guess they would have to come up with the money to keep the commitment.
> Why attack the ******* Foundation?  And really how could you possibly compare these two posers to bill and melinda gates?


Oh honey. I wish there wasn’t a politics ban on this forum because there are some tales!


PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.


You also made a declarative statement on their finances by saying they couldn’t be financially independent.

We don’t know if the royal family are paying their security costs. Their security was organised and provided for them the times when they visited the U.K. at the very least.

Finally, the threat of going broke does not exempt them from criticism for doing morally dubious things just as it wouldn’t anyone else. They shouldn’t merchandise their titles and they shouldn’t use the suffering of others to market themselves. End of.


----------



## PurseUOut

DoggieBags said:


> It is reasonable to expect them to work or engage in projects for which they will be financially compensated on the basis of them actually doing the work as opposed to trading on their royal titles. When has she ever put out a statement or been quoted in the news without her Duchess of Sussex title being prominently appended to her name multiple times? When she did the voice over for the Disney elephant documentary, they had already left the BRF but all the Disney ads prominently displayed narrated by Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. The truth is she can’t get any paying gigs as plain Meghan Markle. She can only get paid gigs by trading on her royal title. If they truly wanted to be independent and separate from the BRF then they should stop using their royal titles completely. Meghan, as an American citizen, absolutely has the right to contact her elected representatives to voice her concerns on various topics. But it is not reasonable to use her BRITISH royal title while dabbling in AMERICAN politics.





jelliedfeels said:


> Oh honey. I wish there wasn’t a politics ban on this forum because there are some tales!
> 
> You also made a declarative statement on their finances by saying they couldn’t be financially independent.
> 
> We don’t know if the royal family are paying their security costs. Their security was organised and provided for them the times when they visited the U.K. at the very least.
> 
> Finally, the threat of going broke does not exempt them from criticism for doing morally dubious things just as it wouldn’t anyone else. They shouldn’t merchandise their titles and they shouldn’t use the suffering of others to market themselves. End of.



By their own admission in the Oprah interview, they used Tyler Perry's home upon arrival to California and their security was stripped by the RF while in Canada. This wouldn't be an issue for someone who has independent wealth.

I am again, not understanding how it is 'morally dubious' for them to use their titles in connection with their work. Harry is a “Prince of the royal blood.” He was born a Prince. He was born His Royal Highness Prince Henry Charles Albert David, son of The Prince of Wales and his wife Diana, Princess of Wales Lady Diana Frances Spencer. None of that can be taken away from him. The Duke of Sussex, along with The Earl of Dumbarton (in Scotland) and Baron Kilkeel (in Northern Ireland) were titles conferred to Harry PRIOR to his marriage. These titles cannot be rescinded by the Queen as they were conferred, but only by act of Parliament at her request. Until then, the Sussex title is Harry's (and by extension, Meghan, has his wife) rightful titles to use. Even if they did remove their titles on their commercial projects or foundation work - Harry is still known to the world as "Prince Harry". He is still 6th in line to the British throne. It would not reduce the level of threat they face. It would not decrease their security expenses and legal expenditures. 

I do not recall Meghan or Harry being directly involved in American politics or using their titles to influence any election. The closest I've seen her come is supporting Ketanji Brown Jackson for SCOTUS, but that is not a political appointment or elected position. Reproductive rights are not necessarily political, as there are (fiscal) conservatives who do recognize a woman's right to chose and support greater gun control.


----------



## sdkitty

behind a paywall but very sensational headline








						Meghan Markle Bullying Report Buried by Palace Which Is ‘Terrified of Upsetting or Provoking Harry and Meghan’
					

Allegations were first made in 2018—but mysteriously only surfaced right before the big Oprah interview



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> this is the first I've heard of them making grants...doesn't say how much money is involved.  their website doesn't seem to say anything about grants being available or give grant application
> Mackenzie Scott has given huge amounts of money.  giving philosophy could be similar but actual giving is so far apart.



My thoughts exactly - they could literally be making a few $1,000 grants, get a press story for each one, the grants pay for themselves with PR and they’re out maybe $5,000 a year in total.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It sure would be too bad if that report were leaked!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> My thoughts exactly - they could literally be making a few $1,000 grants, get a press story for each one, the grants pay for themselves with PR and they’re out maybe $5,000 a year in total.


I'd be willing to bet if they were giving substantial amounts - in line with their very luxurious lifestyle - we would hear about it


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> perhaps if they really wanted a "life for service" they could live in a regular house rather than a huge mansion



@sdkitty as you know, the evidence shows there are huge differences between these foundations.
Gates - BG earned his billions through hard work. Once he had his millions, he set up his foundation to give away money.
Earn the money, set up foundation.  A before B.

H&M - demand BRF money, spend it on themselves, use the BRF’s connections, ask [really, expect] the rest of us to send donations, piggyback on everyone else’s ideas. They lead their lavish lifestyle while expecting the rest of us to support them.  It is absurd. It is their effort to create monarchy over here.  We see through their nonsense.

Perhaps before claiming the “structures” are similar [whatever that means], the poster  [PurseUOut] should re-read the purposes of these foundations. Additionally, be sure to check what each has actually done.
Imo, ymmv


----------



## sdkitty

Perhaps before claiming the “structures” are similar [whatever that means],  you should re-read the purposes of these foundations. Additionally, be sure to check what each has actually done.


@sdkitty as you know, the evidence shows there are huge differences between these foundations.
Gates - BG earned his billions through hard work. Once he had his millions, he set up his foundation to give away money.
Earn the money, set up foundation.  A before B.

H&M - demand BRF money, spend it on themselves, use the BRF’s connections, ask the rest of us to send donations, piggyback on everyone else’s ideas. They lead their lavish lifestyle while expecting the rest of us to support them.  It is absurd.  This is why they fail.
Imo, ymmv
[/QUOTE]
yes to all that
Harry has literally had everything handed to him on a silver plate all of his life.  The WIFE who now has the privilege isn't gonna give it up voluntarily (like going back to living in a house rather than a mansion)


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## DoggieBags

PurseUOut said:


> By their own admission in the Oprah interview, they used Tyler Perry's home upon arrival to California and their security was stripped by the RF while in Canada. This wouldn't be an issue for someone who has independent wealth.
> 
> I am again, not understanding how it is 'morally dubious' for them to use their titles in connection with their work. Harry is a “Prince of the royal blood.” He was born a Prince. He was born His Royal Highness Prince Henry Charles Albert David, son of The Prince of Wales and his wife Diana, Princess of Wales Lady Diana Frances Spencer. None of that can be taken away from him. The Duke of Sussex, along with The Earl of Dumbarton (in Scotland) and Baron Kilkeel (in Northern Ireland) were titles conferred to Harry PRIOR to his marriage. These titles cannot be rescinded by the Queen as they were conferred, but only by act of Parliament at her request. Until then, the Sussex title is Harry's (and by extension, Meghan, has his wife) rightful titles to use. Even if they did remove their titles on their commercial projects or foundation work - Harry is still known to the world as "Prince Harry". He is still 6th in line to the British throne. It would not reduce the level of threat they face. It would not decrease their security expenses and legal expenditures.
> 
> I do not recall Meghan or Harry being directly involved in American politics or using their titles to influence any election. The closest I've seen her come is supporting Ketanji Brown Jackson for SCOTUS, but that is not a political appointment or elected position. Reproductive rights are not necessarily political, as there are (fiscal) conservatives who do recognize a woman's right to chose and support greater gun control.


The attached article talks about her using her duchess of Sussex title when calling various US senators about the issue of paid parental leave that was part of a proposed ***** spending bill. Again, calling them and introducing herself as Meghan Markle, concerned American citizen is fine. Calling US senators seeking to influence the vote on proposed legislation while introducing herself as the Duchess of Sussex is highly inappropriate. Some of the Senators indicated as much.
As to the level of threat requiring 24/7 security, I fail to see it. I know people who have provided security for visiting heads of state and they just laughed when I mentioned the subject of Harry suing the British government over not providing him with security. If Harry feels he needs full teams of 24/7 security, that’s his prerogative as long as he is paying for it out of his own pocket but it’s ridiculous for him to try to force the British taxpayers to pay for his security bills when the British government whose job it is to know this stuff has determined he does not require the level of security he is demanding.








						Meghan Markle blasted for lobbying US senators, using her royal title
					

Meghan Markle was blasted Thursday after it emerged she has been cold-calling US senators on their private numbers — and using her royal title while lobbying them.




					pagesix.com


----------



## TC1

charlottawill said:


> So this is interesting.....was Oprah a fan of Suits?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'All Rise' Star Simone Missick Has the Perfect Role for Oprah Winfrey
> 
> 
> The actress and executive producer talks to ET on the set of the OWN legal drama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


I was also a fan of watching Suits. The lead actor Gabriel Macht is HAF


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Perhaps before claiming the “structures” are similar [whatever that means],  you should re-read the purposes of these foundations. Additionally, be sure to check what each has actually done.
> 
> 
> @sdkitty as you know, the evidence shows there are huge differences between these foundations.
> Gates - BG earned his billions through hard work. Once he had his millions, he set up his foundation to give away money.
> Earn the money, set up foundation.  A before B.
> 
> H&M - demand BRF money, spend it on themselves, use the BRF’s connections, ask the rest of us to send donations, piggyback on everyone else’s ideas. They lead their lavish lifestyle while expecting the rest of us to support them.  It is absurd.  This is why they fail.
> Imo, ymmv


yes to all that
Harry has literally had everything handed to him on a silver plate all of his life.  The WIFE who now has the privilege isn't gonna give it up voluntarily (like going back to living in a house rather than a mansion)
[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Apparently he is accustomed to people with bags of cash showing up at the palace, then he takes that cash and spends as he wishes. Party on, dude, just make sure it is *your* own dime.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> this is the first I've heard of them making grants...doesn't say how much money is involved.  their website doesn't seem to say anything about grants being available or give grant application
> Mackenzie Scott has given huge amounts of money.  giving philosophy could be similar but actual giving is so far apart.



Making a grant, and giving a grant are two very different things. They can make grants till the cows come home but until they actually give that grant that money is still in their pockets.


----------



## PurseUOut

DoggieBags said:


> The attached article talks about her using her duchess of Sussex title when calling various US senators about the issue of paid parental leave that was part of a proposed ***** spending bill. Again, calling them and introducing herself as Meghan Markle, concerned American citizen is fine. Calling US senators seeking to influence the vote on proposed legislation while introducing herself as the Duchess of Sussex is highly inappropriate. Some of the Senators indicated as much.
> As to the level of threat requiring 24/7 security, I fail to see it. I know people who have provided security for visiting heads of state and they just laughed when I mentioned the subject of Harry suing the British government over not providing him with security. If Harry feels he needs full teams of 24/7 security, that’s his prerogative as long as he is paying for it out of his own pocket but it’s ridiculous for him to try to force the British taxpayers to pay for his security bills when the British government whose job it is to know this stuff has determined he does not require the level of security he is demanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle blasted for lobbying US senators, using her royal title
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was blasted Thursday after it emerged she has been cold-calling US senators on their private numbers — and using her royal title while lobbying them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Paid parental leave is NOT a political issue and is well within the lines of her caused-based advocacy work. Paid parental leave has widespread bipartisan support in the United States and is hardly a controversial "hot button" political issue as over 82% of Americans support it. Your article suggests she contacted both d3mocrat and r3publican senators regarding the advocacy of paid parental leave in the spending bill so I am failing to see where she is influencing politics along partisan lines. If she were campaigning for a specific politician, or a specific appropriation in the bill (e.g., raise taxes on the wealthy to fund paid parental leave) whilst using her title I can see where there could possible be a conflict of interest and undue influence.

If I recall, Prince Harry requested security while they were living in Canada, a commonwealth country, fully intending on serving on behalf of the queen, just not in a senior capacity. As long as they are in the United States I agree they shouldn't have British security supplied by British taxpayers if they are not in a commonwealth country. Its more reason they need to work/have income to support their own security needs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> Paid parental leave is NOT a political issue and is well within the lines of her caused-based advocacy work. Paid parental leave has widespread bipartisan support in the United States and is hardly a controversial "hot button" political issue as over 82% of Americans support it. Your article suggests she contacted both d3mocrat and r3publican senators regarding the advocacy of paid parental leave in the spending bill so I am failing to see where she is influencing politics along partisan lines. If she were campaigning for a specific politician, or a specific appropriation in the bill (e.g., raise taxes on the wealthy to fund paid parental leave) whilst using her title I can see where there could possible be a conflict of interest and undue influence.
> 
> If I recall, Prince Harry requested security while they were living in Canada, a commonwealth country, fully intending on serving on behalf of the queen, just not in a senior capacity. As long as they are in the United States I agree they shouldn't have British security supplied by British taxpayers if they are not in a commonwealth country. Its more reason they need to work/have income to support their own security needs.



They should *not* have security supplied by American taxpayers either. Surely by now they know they are *expected to pay their own way.*

If H&M are cold calling senators and representatives in DC or any state, *that* is political.

ETA: kindly supply links to your sources of information.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> Paid parental leave is NOT a political issue and is well within the lines of her caused-based advocacy work. Paid parental leave has widespread bipartisan support in the United States and is hardly a controversial "hot button" political issue as over 82% of Americans support it. Your article suggests she contacted both d3mocrat and r3publican senators regarding the advocacy of paid parental leave in the spending bill so I am failing to see where she is influencing politics along partisan lines. If she were campaigning for a specific politician, or a specific appropriation in the bill (e.g., raise taxes on the wealthy to fund paid parental leave) whilst using her title I can see where there could possible be a conflict of interest and undue influence.
> 
> If I recall, Prince Harry requested security while they were living in Canada, a commonwealth country, fully intending on serving on behalf of the queen, just not in a senior capacity. As long as they are in the United States I agree they shouldn't have British security supplied by British taxpayers if they are not in a commonwealth country. Its more reason they need to work/have income to support their own security needs.


I don't disagree with her "advocacy work"....I just don't see a great value in it
Let's see the money shared whist she lives the opulent life in the 16 bath mansion
One celeb who comes to mind who seems to be doing something of value is Eva Longoria




__





						Our Programs - Eva Longoria Foundation
					






					evalongoriafoundation.org


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Somehow, the word "guttural" reminds me of turkeys... Perhaps Her Heinous will pardon a few for Thanksgiving.



That's guttural for me (from 0:30, it's a horror movie I never watched and don't plan to - I don't do horror movies or I'll never sleep again - but I did watch an analysis out of curiosity because that movie was huge when it came out apparently).



Honestly, don't they have staff who check their social media blabberings before posting?


----------



## CeeJay

Jayne1 said:


> Okay, but what if you wanted to visit a neighbour? Get some fresh air and those steps per day we're always told to get.
> 
> It's cool to go for a walk here in Toronto... a little exercise, a little window shopping, maybe stop for a latte, say hi to the neighbour you haven't seen all winter...  lol


Oh trust me, I remember those days very well .. living in Boston (actually Brookline).  We were very lucky because we were close to quite a few boutiques/shops and so on the nice days, yes .. you would walk to them.  However, when that cold winter weather came, NFW to the outside walks (other than to your car to them have to scrape all the ice & snow off .. you know what I'm talking about!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone *(which is not funded by the RF)*. Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.



And why would it be. You leave a job, you lose the benefits.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She would run as the Green Party candidate of course.
> 
> She is such a strong crusader for the environment and social issues after all.


Here’s an example of what sometimes happens with campaign contributions. They disappear.  Given their track record with money, that would be a concern. Not to worry, the chances of her running are slim and nil, and receiving more than $25 from her sugars is the same. This will remain her PR BS until it actually happens


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's guttural for me (from 0:30, it's a horror movie I never watched and don't plan to - I don't do horror movies or I'll never sleep again - but I did watch an analysis out of curiosity because that movie was huge when it came out apparently).
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, don't they have staff who check their social media blabberings before posting?



I have seen this movie. Interesting and disturbing. Actually her sugars have a similar group consciousness as the crying women.


BTW, isn’t it interesting that Meghan didn’t understand the difference between gutteral and gut. She obviously tried to say they had a gut reaction to the ruling, but to say guttural was totally wrong. So much for her higher education.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Come stay with me, I live in a beautiful rural spot that's only 45 mins to the next cool metropolis.


Thank you @QueenofWrapDress !!  My DH and I would love it!


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> The attached article talks about her using her duchess of Sussex title when calling various US senators about the issue of paid parental leave that was part of a proposed ***** spending bill. Again, calling them and introducing herself as Meghan Markle, concerned American citizen is fine. Calling US senators seeking to influence the vote on proposed legislation while introducing herself as the Duchess of Sussex is highly inappropriate. Some of the Senators indicated as much.
> As to the level of threat requiring 24/7 security, I fail to see it. I know people who have provided security for visiting heads of state and they just laughed when I mentioned the subject of Harry suing the British government over not providing him with security. If Harry feels he needs full teams of 24/7 security, that’s his prerogative as long as he is paying for it out of his own pocket but it’s ridiculous for him to try to force the British taxpayers to pay for his security bills when the British government whose job it is to know this stuff has determined he does not require the level of security he is demanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle blasted for lobbying US senators, using her royal title
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was blasted Thursday after it emerged she has been cold-calling US senators on their private numbers — and using her royal title while lobbying them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


but but but....he needs a fleet of security guards to protect his WIFE from the fate of his mother, who died in a car accident while being driven by a drunk chauffer
(and I say this as a person who likes Diana but from what I understand if she had accepted her usual royal bodyguards she would be alive today)


----------



## Miarta

kemilia said:


> I also remember reading some negative things about her back then.
> 
> Being a "public school" kid having to go to catechism after Mass on Sundays taught by nuns, I knew pretty well from 1st grade on up what nasty human beings some nuns were. Now, I know they all weren't like this but when you are a little kid and some stranger in a very strange outfit is basically telling you every week that you're going to hell--well I just thought "hey--Mother Teresa is just another nun that happened to get famous".


I feel exactly the same as you only difference that I was boarded in a catholic school, lol. O boy , some of them were as mean as they come! Lol


----------



## DoggieBags

PurseUOut said:


> Paid parental leave is NOT a political issue and is well within the lines of her caused-based advocacy work. Paid parental leave has widespread bipartisan support in the United States and is hardly a controversial "hot button" political issue as over 82% of Americans support it. Your article suggests she contacted both d3mocrat and r3publican senators regarding the advocacy of paid parental leave in the spending bill so I am failing to see where she is influencing politics along partisan lines. If she were campaigning for a specific politician, or a specific appropriation in the bill (e.g., raise taxes on the wealthy to fund paid parental leave) whilst using her title I can see where there could possible be a conflict of interest and undue influence.
> 
> If I recall, Prince Harry requested security while they were living in Canada, a commonwealth country, fully intending on serving on behalf of the queen, just not in a senior capacity. As long as they are in the United States I agree they shouldn't have British security supplied by British taxpayers if they are not in a commonwealth country. Its more reason they need to work/have income to support their own security needs.


Trying to influence US elected officials in how they allocate US tax payer funds while using a foreign title is not appropriate. It doesn’t matter if the line item under discussion is supported by the majority of Americans or not. She is calling in her capacity as the Duchess of Sussex, a non-US office/title that was granted by a non-US head of state. If she were calling in her capacity as Meghan Markle, US citizen then fine. Using your argument, any of our US elected officials should be able to call various British members of parliament to tell them how they think they should vote on various spending bills. I’m sure that would go over really well with the British public.


----------



## kkfiregirl

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent.



This is the internet. Anyone can have an opinion on anything and can say whatever they want (barring offensive speech, of course). Last I checked, we are not crafting a PhD thesis on Harry & his wife.

edit: this is also the celebrity gossip sub forum, and gossiping is what we shall do (whether credible or not).


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I would think if Charles was so excited we would see a report linked more directly to him


And much sooner than weeks after the alleged meeting.


----------



## Cinderlala

Their issue re: security is...something else.  They seem to think they need more security than the rest of the royal family put together.  It seems to be the type of thing someone super self-obsessed would think----"I'm SO high profile, I'm in SO much danger!!!  Oh, wait, I'd better bring my own camera crew everywhere I go so there will be some pictures of it."


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> My first thought was she’s looking up words she thinks will make her sound smart.


It's like someone mentioned before (I apologize this thread moves so fast, and I'm too lazy to see who!), "visceral" would have been more appropriate than "guttural".  I think of Braveheart or animals being eaten by lions, or the picture of Haz braying like a donkey at losing his polo match as "guttural" noises.


----------



## PurseUOut

DoggieBags said:


> Trying to influence US elected officials in how they allocate US tax payer funds while using a foreign title is not appropriate. It doesn’t matter if the line item under discussion is supported by the majority of Americans or not. She is calling in her capacity as the Duchess of Sussex, a non-US office/title that was granted by a non-US head of state. If she were calling in her capacity as Meghan Markle, US citizen then fine. Using your argument, any of our US elected officials should be able to call various British members of parliament to tell them how they think they should vote on various spending bills. I’m sure that would go over really well with the British public.



If calling US senators on behalf of a cause is considered political, then most 501(c)(3) non profit organizations would loose their tax exempt status. This is something advocacy and non-profit groups do all day every day.

Paid paternity leave is not a political issue nor is it a fundamental piece of legislation (like the Afforable Care Act) necessitating an act of Congress. It is, at best, a humanitarian issue and if you consider it political, it is very much a NON-PARTISAN one.

If Meghan endorsed a political candidate because of their stance on paid paternity leave = political

If Meghan publicly supported the Paid Parental Leave Act of 2022 which is a piece of legislation codified by law that states have to enforce, not merely a line item appropriated in the Presidents budget = political

Similarly when Catherine met with UK lawmakers advocating on behalf of putting more money toward early childhood development. According to you she would be directly engaging in politics by meeting with politicians and “influencing” how UK tax dollars are spent. So what is the difference between what Catherine is did (in her direct capacity as a working Royal being funded by the British taxpayers) and Meghan, who is for all intents and purposes a private citizen holding a foreign title.


----------



## rose60610

It's pretty bad when a story about 40 and 37 year olds paying for their own airfare   makes the news. Especially when their net worth wasn't even of their own making. It begs the question: who pays for their airfares for trips the the U.N., Uvalde, etc? If Meghan can wear $10,000 outfits, why is it so wonderful that they paid their own airfare? Should we be in shock and awe over affording toilet paper for 19 bathrooms, too? I'd LOVE for MM to run for office. Her opponent would be utterly DAZZLED that they get credit for "paying their own airfare" (the same people, who, by the way, were given a 50 million dollar wedding). But, by all means, let us all be absolutely astounded that they paid for their OWN airfare  .  

You know, I paid most of my own way through college when I was roughly half their age and think nothing of it. But H&M paying for their OWN airfare, my goodness, how magnanimous of them. Next we'll find out, they may be even be capable of feeding themselves.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> Calling US senators seeking to influence the vote on proposed legislation while introducing herself as the Duchess of Sussex is highly inappropriate. Some of the Senators indicated as much.



Some of them were also surprised - and not in a good way - she got her grubby little hands on their secret phone numbers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> If calling US senators on behalf of a cause is considered political, then most 501(c)(3) non profit organizations would loose their tax exempt status. This is something advocacy and non-profit groups do all day every day.
> 
> Paid paternity leave is not a political issue nor is it a fundamental piece of legislation (like the Afforable Care Act) necessitating an act of Congress. It is, at best, a humanitarian issue and if you consider it political, it is very much a NON-PARTISAN one.
> 
> If Meghan endorsed a political candidate because of their stance on paid paternity leave = political
> 
> If Meghan publicly supported the Paid Parental Leave Act of 2022 which is a piece of legislation codified by law that states have to enforce, not merely a line item appropriated in the Presidents budget = political
> 
> Similarly when Catherine met with UK lawmakers advocating on behalf of putting more money toward early childhood development. According to you she would be directly engaging in politics by meeting with politicians and “influencing” how UK tax dollars are spent. So what is the difference between what Catherine is did (in her direct capacity as a working Royal being funded by the British taxpayers) and Meghan, who is for all intents and purposes a private citizen holding a foreign title.



Could you supply links to websites that support your views?  Or are these simply your opinions?  
If simply your opinions, the sweeping generalizations are a bit much imo.


----------



## rose60610

People who are not financially independent probably shouldn't complain about expenses while living in a fourteen million dollar mansion of their own choosing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has Dan switched sides?

DAN WOOTTON: I never doubted it would happen but, beware, Meghan is kicking off her delusional bid to end up in the White House early. That’s why Buckingham Palace must release probe into her alleged bullying of staff










						DAN WOOTTON: Meghan is kicking off delusional White House bid early
					

DAN WOOTTON: The only certainty is that Meghan, as the highest profile ********ic activist in the world, is going to cause more headaches for the Royal Family - and she doesn't give a damn.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> but but but....he needs a fleet of security guards to protect his WIFE from the fate of his mother, who died in a car accident while being driven by a drunk chauffer
> (and I say this as a person who likes Diana but from what I understand if she had accepted her usual royal bodyguards she would be alive today)



Or worn a seat belt. Not victim blaming, just stating facts. It was a whole chain of poor decisions made by several people that night.


----------



## Cinderlala

PurseUOut said:


> If calling US senators on behalf of a cause is considered political, then most 501(c)(3) non profit organizations would loose their tax exempt status. This is something advocacy and non-profit groups do all day every day.
> 
> Paid paternity leave is not a political issue nor is it a fundamental piece of legislation (like the Afforable Care Act) necessitating an act of Congress. It is, at best, a humanitarian issue and if you consider it political, it is very much a NON-PARTISAN one.
> 
> If Meghan endorsed a political candidate because of their stance on paid paternity leave = political
> 
> If Meghan publicly supported the Paid Parental Leave Act of 2022 which is a piece of legislation codified by law that states have to enforce, not merely a line item appropriated in the Presidents budget = political
> 
> Similarly when Catherine met with UK lawmakers advocating on behalf of putting more money toward early childhood development. According to you she would be directly engaging in politics by meeting with politicians and “influencing” how UK tax dollars are spent. So what is the difference between what Catherine is did (in her direct capacity as a working Royal being funded by the British taxpayers) and Meghan, who is for all intents and purposes a private citizen holding a foreign title.




This is not a question of what is considered political in the United States.  And, being "NON-PARTISAN" does not take an issue outside the realm of politics.

The issue is that the citizen is using a UK royal title while engaging in US political behavior. 

The irony is that she could easily get away with all of this if she could stop being so desperate to see her name in print.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German gossip mag titles "Meghan and the Jubilee: she Completely Lost it". Apparently she had a melt-down when the birthday party didn't go as planned.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has Dan switched sides?
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: I never doubted it would happen but, beware, Meghan is kicking off her delusional bid to end up in the White House early. That’s why Buckingham Palace must release probe into her alleged bullying of staff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Meghan is kicking off delusional White House bid early
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: The only certainty is that Meghan, as the highest profile ********ic activist in the world, is going to cause more headaches for the Royal Family - and she doesn't give a damn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Why do I feel like her making a run for the White House is being shoved down our throats?!  ENOUGH ALREADY.  I don't give a damn about this idiotic woman and I'm so sick of these journalists constantly bringing it up.  It's like they're wishing for it to happen.  Is Oprah promoting the Secret book again??


----------



## csshopper

PurseUOut said:


> Its my understanding their foundation offers grants to specific NGOs and charities directly impacting the causes they care about. Much like how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation operates. IMO there are way more questionable 'charitable' organizations than Archewell (The Cl1nton Foundation, BLM to name a couple). You can chose whether or not to "hear" from her but it doesn't discount the fact its unreasonable to expect Meghan and Harry to work for free if they aren't financially independent themselves.


If she wants to work as “Meghan Wales” or even “Megan Markle”, go for it.  But, sit down and STFU with the “Duchess of Sussex” when merching and when meddling in politics. It violates their Megxit agreement and is atrociously hypocritical from someone who declared titles are not important. 

She’s an insult to the REAL Duchesses Catherine and Camilla, who work tirelessly in support of the Queen, Country, and. Commonwealth, not themselves.


----------



## MiniMabel

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.



Nor are you, I think? 

Don't be silly, of course they have "enough" money! Many, many people have absolutely nothing at all, so I do think that the millions that The Harkles have is more than sufficient, don't you?  "THEIR" lifestyle does not have to be as lavish and spendthrift as it is. It's absolutely shameful and tone deaf to say that that they may not have enough.  Even someone with one cell in a brain the size of a pea knows that millions is more than "enough". Lottery winners (of large amounts) receive professional financial assistance after their win so there's no reason for them to go broke unless they choose to squander the money.  And , after all, The Harkles specifically stated that they wanted financial independence so there's no need for the BRF to cover their security at all.........and it's not clear whether they even need at the level of security that they think they do. They are, effectively, not Royal any longer, only by tittle but not by standard of behaviour or deed.


----------



## csshopper

Where is Hazbeen in all this political clap trap? The whiney one has carried on for decades about being The Spare. Can anyone really envision him as a First Husband?  A Prince in the White House, get real.


----------



## sdkitty

CeeJay said:


> Seems interesting to me that his "type" were all blondes; blonde hair, blue eyes, long hair (and very attractive).  Then he ends up with Megalomaniac?!?!?! .. hmmmm, makes me wonder about these "Skills" (If we can even call them that) that she has?!?!?!!


witchcraft


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Where is Hazbeen in all this political clap trap? The whiney one has carried on for decades about being The Spare. Can anyone really envision him as a First Husband?  A Prince in the White House, get real.



My understanding is he must renounce his title, his LoS, his CoS. In effect, she is silencing him.


----------



## bellecate

Living in that commonwealth country, they were having their security mainly paid for by  us taxpayers. Why we should pay their security when they were not representing the Crown was ridiculous. Canada said no to continuing paying.


----------



## pukasonqo

Cinderlala said:


> This is not a question of what is considered political in the United States.  And, being "NON-PARTISAN" does not take an issue outside the realm of politics.
> 
> The issue is that the citizen is using a UK royal title while engaging in US political behavior.
> 
> The irony is that she could easily get away with all of this if she could stop being so desperate to see her name in print.



If she runs for office will she let go of the DoS title than she seems so fond of?
I am not going to blast her for enjoying the perks of wealth but for a self appointed justice warrior she likes the title A LOT
I’m not going into the historical and political issues re: monarchies but MM seems very fond of its grandeur and titles for a girl from the US of A


----------



## PurseUOut

csshopper said:


> If she wants to work as “Meghan Wales” or even “Megan Markle”, go for it.  But, sit down and STFU with the “Duchess of Sussex” when merching and when meddling in politics. It violates their Megxit agreement and is atrociously hypocritical from someone who declared titles are not important.
> 
> She’s an insult to the REAL Duchesses Catherine and Camilla, who work tirelessly in support of the Queen, Country, and. Commonwealth, not themselves.



Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use. 

Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.


----------



## Cinderlala

She can use her title.  Just not if she's doing political things.  It's not that hard.


----------



## DoggieBags

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.


Fact check. Harry did not have that title before he got married. The Queen gave Harry and Meghan the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex when they got married. William and Catherine were given the titles of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge when they got married. Harry and Meghan did not voluntarily choose to give up using the HRH titles. They were not stripped of the HRH titles at the time they left the BRF but they had to agree not to use them once they were no longer working royals. I think but am not positive that the Queen has the ability to strip them of their HRH titles if she wishes but revoking the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex would take an act of Parliament.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> *behind a paywall but very sensational headline*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Bullying Report Buried by Palace Which Is ‘Terrified of Upsetting or Provoking Harry and Meghan’
> 
> 
> Allegations were first made in 2018—but mysteriously only surfaced right before the big Oprah interview
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Here it is the article for you:

*Meghan Markle Bullying Report Buried by Palace Which Is ‘Terrified of Upsetting or Provoking Harry and Meghan’*

_The row over allegations that Meghan Markle bullied members of staff when she was a working member of the royal family—furiously denied by Meghan as a “smear campaign” at the time—descended into farce Thursday, after Buckingham Palace confirmed rumors that it would not publish a report it commissioned into the matter, not allow those who gave evidence to the report to see it, and not make public any changes to palace HR policy resulting from the report.

A source said the palace would not be commenting further but told The Daily Beast: “Recommendations will be taken forward,” adding, “Lessons have been learned.”

The palace told The Telegraph they were drawing the veil of secrecy to protect the “confidentiality” of, among others, those who gave evidence in the report,* however there was widespread suspicion Thursday that the palace was actually acting to avoid antagonizing Harry and Meghan.

The couple still have the power to inflict tremendous reputational damage on the royals. Harry has a memoir scheduled to come out in the autumn and they have been seen with Oprah Winfrey in recent days, prompting fears the couple could be planning another sitdown.*

The bullying allegations were made by Meghan and Harry’s communications director Jason Knauf in 2018, who wrote to their private secretary, alleging “totally unacceptable” behavior and claiming “that the Duchess was able to bully two PAs out of the household in the past year.”

However the claims only surfaced in The Times days before Harry and Meghan’s big interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which they accused a royal family member of racism. The move was widely seen as an “oppo dump” by the palace intended to blunt or distract from the impact of Harry and Meghan’s revelations.

The couple denied the allegations, saying Meghan was “saddened by this latest attack on her character, particularly as someone who has been the target of bullying herself.”

Buckingham Palace vowed to investigate the allegations but the Daily Mail reports that at a briefing Wednesday for the annual royal financial report it was revealed the findings would never be published, with the so-called Master of the Privy Purse, Sir Michael Stevens, saying of the investigation: “There is nothing on this in the report. As we said last year, this work was undertaken privately and had no Sovereign Grant money spent on it.”

*The Mail said** that staff who participated in the inquiry “only recently discovered it had been wound up” and “will not be told what its findings are*.”

A source told the Mail: “Considering those who participated did so at great personal and reputational risk to themselves, the fact that they haven’t even been told what the findings are is unfathomable. I am sure they will be deeply distressed, but perhaps not entirely surprised given how things have been handled. The household seems to be terrified of upsetting or provoking Harry and Meghan.”

The revelation about the investigation being buried emerged as the annual report into the Sovereign Grant was published. It showed that the queen’s total annual expenditure increased by 17 per cent to £102.4 million ($122 million) during 2021/22, and that the property maintenance budget soared by £14.4 million ($17.26 million) to £63.9 million ($76.2 million), largely driven by extensive renovations at Buckingham Palace._
https://www.thedailybeast.com/megha...assive-inaccuracies-in-palace-bullying-claims


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors.



Recollections may vary.



> Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture.



Uhm, no. He was created the Duke of Sussex just before his wedding. What is your understanding of when he got that title?


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> I was also a fan of watching Suits. The lead actor Gabriel Macht is HAF



I'm pretty sure he's the reason my daughter watched it.


----------



## A1aGypsy

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.



You are right, it is their job.

Here is the problem with MM using her title _while gaining a personal financial benefit_ - in the commonwealth there is something called the Crown Act (or similar) in most countries. It recognizes that public servants hold special positions and powers. And it recognizes that those positions / powers could be ripe for abuse. Misuse of those positions could bring the government into disrepute. As such, the law prohibits them from using those positions, or the fact that they hold them, in ways to personally benefit.

So, a post person, if employed by the Crown (govt), could be fired for saying: “I’m a post person in her Majesty’s service so I know the best envelopes to use - buy my design.”

By the very natural of the position of Duchess, MM is a public servant. And she could use that title in her charity work or work directly done in the interests of the Crown. She cannot use that title to make necklace sales which put money in her own pocket.

And, seems to me, if a post person can be fired for such behaviour, then surely something should be done about someone is such an influential and affluent position misusing her position.

There are also very stringent rules about public servants engaging in politics.


----------



## PurseUOut

DoggieBags said:


> Fact check. Harry did not have that title before he got married. The Queen gave Harry and Meghan the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex when they got married. William and Catherine were given the titles of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge when they got married. Harry and Meghan did not voluntarily choose to give up using the HRH titles. They were not stripped of the HRH titles at the time they left the BRF but they had to agree not to use them once they were no longer working royals. I think but am not positive that the Queen has the ability to strip them of their HRH titles if she wishes but revoking the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex would take an act of Parliament.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Recollections may vary.
> 
> 
> 
> Uhm, no. He was created the Duke of Sussex just before his wedding. What is your understanding of when he got that title?



Yes, you are correct. The Queen confers dukedom for all senior male members of the royal family officially upon marriage.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> but but but....he needs a fleet of security guards to protect his WIFE from the fate of his mother, who died in a car accident while being driven by a drunk chauffer
> (and I say this as a person who likes Diana but from what I understand if she had accepted her usual royal bodyguards she would be alive today)



It has also been reported that they all likely would have survived if they had been wearing seatbelts. Poor decisions all around.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It has also been reported that they all likely would have survived if they had been wearing seatbelts. Poor decisions all around.


yes, and again, I like diana and it was tragic but I don't agree that it was the paps fault.....maybe partly but ultimately not


----------



## PurseUOut

A1aGypsy said:


> You are right, it is their job.
> 
> Here is the problem with MM using her title _while gaining a personal financial benefit_ - in the commonwealth there is something called the Crown Act (or similar) in most countries. It recognizes that public servants hold special positions and powers. And it recognizes that those positions / powers could be ripe for abuse. Misuse of those positions could bring the government into disrepute. As such, the law prohibits them from using those positions, or the fact that they hold them, in ways to personally benefit.
> 
> So, a post person, if employed by the Crown (govt) could be fired for saying: “I’m a post person in her Majesty’s service so I know the best envelopes to use - buy my design.”
> 
> By the very natural of the position of Duchess, MM is a public servant. And she could use that title in her charity work or work directly done in the interests of the Crown. She cannot use that title to make necklace sales which put money in her own pocket.
> 
> And, seems to me, if a post person can be fired for such behaviour, then surely something should be done about someone is such an influential and affluent position misusing her position.
> 
> There are also very stringent rules about public servants engaging in politics.



Fair enough, but as I mentioned before Catherine publicly met with UK lawmakers on a matter of "policy" (early childhood development) which some would argue is an abuse of her position as a public servant being funded by the taxpayers. I do not necessarily agree with that premise, but if you are going to hold Meghan Markle to that standard - some who isn't a recipient of UK taxpayer money and is an American citizen - then why is it ok for Catherine to meet directly with politicians in any capacity when she is publicly funded by the UK taxpayer? 

And then what about Fergie? She is divorced and still permitted to have the Duchess of York title that she used commercially for her own books, interviews, etc.


----------



## A1aGypsy

PurseUOut said:


> Fair enough, but as I mentioned before Catherine publicly met with UK lawmakers on a matter of "policy" (early childhood development) which some would argue is an abuse of her position as a public servant being funded by the taxpayers. I do not necessarily agree with that premise, but if you are going to hold Meghan Markle to that standard - some who isn't a recipient of UK taxpayer money and is an American citizen - then why is it ok for Catherine to meet directly with politicians in any capacity when she is publicly funded by the UK taxpayer?
> 
> And then what about Fergie? She is divorced and still permitted to have the Duchess of York title that she used commercially for her own books, interviews, etc.



So Kate’s (or whatever we are supposed to call her) visit was in the service of the Crown. They are permitted to engage in approved discussions about socially beneficial topics. There are complex rules around what they can discuss and what they can say. 

And Fergie is an absolute poster child for why this law exists.


----------



## tiktok

https://www.thecut.com/2022/06/meghan-markle-calls-on-men-to-be-vocal-about-the-end-of-roe.html#comments
		


I haven't even read the article but the comments are awesome.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> https://www.thecut.com/2022/06/meghan-markle-calls-on-men-to-be-vocal-about-the-end-of-roe.html#comments
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't even read the article but the comments are awesome.


can't open


----------



## charlottawill

PurseUOut said:


> Fair enough, but as I mentioned before Catherine publicly met with UK lawmakers on a matter of "policy" (early childhood development) which some would argue is an abuse of her position as a public servant being funded by the taxpayers. I do not necessarily agree with that premise, but if you are going to hold Meghan Markle to that standard - some who isn't a recipient of UK taxpayer money and is an American citizen - then why is it ok for Catherine to meet directly with politicians in any capacity when she is publicly funded by the UK taxpayer?
> 
> And then what about Fergie? She is divorced and still permitted to have the Duchess of York title that she used commercially for her own books, interviews, etc.



This explains it well. Since their divorce she is Sarah, Duchess of York, but she is not "The" Duchess of York. That would be reserved for Andrew's wife should he to remarry. Seems minor, I know, but it's not to the Brits. If she remarries she can no longer use it. Kind of like a divorced woman still using her husband's surname. But I can't disagree with your point that she still uses it for financial gain. 



> https://www.quora.com/Why-does-Sara...-to-the-Queens-son-Prince-Andrew-Duke-of-York


----------



## PurseUOut

charlottawill said:


> This explains it well. Since their divorce she is Sarah, Duchess of York, but she is not "The" Duchess of York. That would be reserved for Andrew's wife should he to remarry. Seems minor, I know, but it's not to the Brits. If she remarries she can no longer use it. Kind of like a divorced woman still using her husband's surname. But I can't disagree with your point that she still uses it for financial gain.



Interesting. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## DoggieBags

A1aGypsy said:


> So Kate’s (or whatever we are supposed to call her) visit was in the service of the Crown. They are permitted to engage in approved discussions about socially beneficial topics. There are complex rules around what they can discuss and what they can say.
> 
> And Fergie is an absolute poster child for why this law exists.


And Fergie’s money grubbing actions both while she was still married to Andrew and after their divorce were widely and repeatedly criticized by a majority of people in the UK. Wasn’t she accused of selling access to Andrew at one point?


----------



## Cinderlala

Using a title for financial gain is entirely different from using it with regard to politics.  And, calling herself whatever she wants while dealing with politics in the UK is not something that affects the United States, which is the whole point.

Edited to add:  Not that using it for financial gain is good, it's just not the same as trying to influence politicians/politics.  Plus, she's already using it for her own financial gain anyway.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> And Fergie’s money grubbing actions both while she was still married to Andrew and after their divorce were widely and repeatedly criticized by a majority of people in the UK. Wasn’t she accused of selling access to Andrew at one point?



They really do seem well suited to each other, perhaps why they have been unofficially living together for years. The question for me is, A) did they split because of his wandering eye, B) because the RF was tired of her being an embarrassment, or C) all of the above?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.



He did not have that title long before Meghan. It was bestowed upon him as a wedding gift. The exact title they were getting was only announced on their wedding day. The same with William and Kate.


----------



## LittleStar88

Where's Harry? He's frolicking barefoot in the grass while Duchess Bandwagon hustles.

Honestly, I don't think Harry wants to work. Not in the sense of work like most people do. Sure, he will turn up and do some little video for BetterUp or give a speech. But these things require minimal effort on his part and he walks away with money and an inflated ego. He does this what, once every several months? Punctuated by barefoot frolics, riding his bicycle, play with the dog at the beach, juggle like a jester in the background, driving miss thing around to wherever... He is a _Man Of Leisure_.

She wants to hustle and get her fingers in ALLLLLLL of the pies. Let her do her misguided struggle for relevancy. Harry was bred to do the minimum, if anything at all... And just as much as she needs his title, he needs her to keep things coming in for them.

Harry would not last one week in a real job, be it a corporate executive (they do work long hours), flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant, or anything in between. That boy would straight up CRUMBLE.


----------



## Zen101

charlottawill said:


> They really do seem well suited to each other, perhaps why they have been unofficially living together for years. The question for me is, A) did they split because of his wandering eye, B) because the RF was tired of her being an embarrassment, or C) all of the above?


Seems Fergie was the unfaithful one. She was the one caught having her toes sucked by another man.


----------



## csshopper

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.


You’re right, Duchess is a job, but Markle didn’t have the mettle to do the Duchess job, so cut and ran.  IMO, since she no longer fits the job description, she should not use the title that goes with it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> ,
> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.



Again, no links to support your statements.  I do not have time to correct your false statements. Just google, then you will know.
Cheers


----------



## charlottawill

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Seems Fergie was the unfaithful one. She was the one caught having her toes sucked by another man.


I do remember that being splashed all over the tabloids, but was it in response to Randy Andy's escapades? Of course I'm speculating, but I don't get the sense that she would have been the first to stray, considering everything that has come to light about him since then. He has always been an entitled brat. Hmm...where else have we heard that?


----------



## EverSoElusive

My take? Nutmeg shouldn't be using any British royal titles if she's not in the UK and serving the Crown, Harry's wife or not. She's using the duchess title because she wants to feel superior and the perceived special treatment that comes with being a BRF member. For her, it's all about the status and the riches, it was never really about the life of service.

Nutmeg can comment, support and oppose anything using her own name i.e. Meghan Markle but must leave out the duchess title because it's not recognized in the US and she's not representing the British government. If she wants to feel a little special, maybe Meghan Wales. I'm pretty sure that legally, especially in the US, her legal name is still Rachel Meghan Markle and I bet that's what it says on her American passport. 

On a lighter note, maybe this British cutie pie can be casted to play Invisibet    She's precious!


----------



## Zen101

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.



Look, Meghan can continue using the title all she wants since it’s the only thing that makes her feel important. “Linked not ranked” anybody? Yes, people have every right to criticize her for the hypocrisy of using a title she got by marriage from an institution she called racist. If she respected herself, she would have denounced that title when she and Harry decided to leave but she didn’t and hasn’t renounced it. She clings on to it for dear life. Each letter, message or utterance is peppered with Duchess of Sussex. Her real name brings her absolutely nothing of significant achievement before or after marriage. Is she ashamed of her real name? Why not just Meghan Markle? Is it because the title elevates her in her mind? Once again, “linked not ranked” anybody? It doesn’t matter how sycophants try to dress Meghan up. She is a hypocrite for continuing to use her title after publicly denouncing the royal family. She has a choice. She can refer to herself by her real name. By continuing to use her title and wading into politics, she opens herself up for criticism. No one in the public sphere is above criticism. Politicians, musicians, actors etc are criticized all the time. So if she’s going to put herself out there, inserting herself into any and everything, she should expect to be criticized. It comes with the territory. Period.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> TW aka Mother Teresa of Montecito has so many causes, but I'm still waiting for her to solve California's homeless crisis.



How could she possibly join any of the protests in Washington without all of her security?  It also appears as though Ms. Steinem is not quite as sharp as she used to be if she thinks that that pair is “trusted”. Does she not read or watch tv?


----------



## redney

Whoa this thread moves fast. I checked Candid (merged with Guidestar.org), which is a database of information about charities and non-profit organizations, including charitable foundations. Seems that while Archewell is registered, it has not yet filed an IRS Form 990-N, which is required for all nonprofits with gross receipts under $50,000 or they'll lose their tax-exempt status.

ETA: Candid-Guidestar edit


----------



## Toby93

Duplicate


----------



## EverSoElusive

Since we sometimes refer to Harry as Just Call Me Harry = JCMH

Why don't we refer to Nutmeg as Just Call Her Meghan = JCHM


----------



## Zen101

charlottawill said:


> I do remember that being splashed all over the tabloids, but was it in response to Randy Andy's escapades? Of course I'm speculating, but I don't get the sense that she would have been the first to stray, considering everything that has come to light about him since then. He has always been an entitled brat. Hmm...where else have we heard that?



What has been mostly said and printed by reporters is that, Andrew was away in the Navy and he was gone majority of the time leaving fergie feeling very lonely. She was the first to allegedly start an affair according to majority of what I’ve read in the newspapers over the years, if they’re to be believed.


----------



## PurseUOut

Chloe302225 said:


> He did not have that title long before Meghan. It was bestowed upon him as a wedding gift. The exact title they were getting was only announced on their wedding day. The same with William and Kate.



I was corrected on that.


----------



## PurseUOut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Again, no links to support your statements.  I do not have time to correct your false statements. Just google, then you will know.
> Cheers



I admit I was corrected on assuming the Dukedom was Harry's prior to marriage. Other than that I am unaware of anything else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

VintageBagsAddict said:


> What has been mostly said and printed by reporters is that, Andrew was away in the Navy and he was gone majority of the time leaving fergie feeling very lonely. She was the first to allegedly start an affair according to majority of what I’ve read in the newspapers over the years, if they’re to be believed.



Those pictures were taken after they separated.


----------



## bag-mania

VintageBagsAddict said:


> She was the first to allegedly start an affair according to majority of what I’ve read in the newspapers over the years, *if they’re to be believed.*



And that’s the problem. They cannot be believed. Back in the 80s the papers still had the double standard of cutting cheating men slack while depicting cheating women as harlots. We know both Andrew and Fergie cheated. As did Charles and Diana. That brings up an interesting question. Have there been any royal couples from that era, or earlier, who it is strongly believed were entirely faithful to one another? It seems like infidelity was rampant.


----------



## Zen101

A1aGypsy said:


> Those pictures were taken after they separated.


Ah, thanks for the correction.


----------



## PurseUOut

csshopper said:


> You’re right, Duchess is a job, but Markle didn’t have the mettle to do the Duchess job, so cut and ran.  IMO, since she no longer fits the job description, she should not use the title that goes with it.



This is a fair point, although one can argue since leaving the job she isn't getting the perks of a Duchess, either (and she shouldn't).

I guess I don't see where she is wrong for using Duchess of Sussex if that is what she technically is and has rights to. Unpopular opinion I also don't really support Andrew being stripped of his titles unless he is convicted of a crime. Back to Meghan she is still the wife of Harry, Duke of Sussex, 6th in line to the British throne. Her children are also in the line of succession (I think). She's still known to the world as "Meghan Markle" and her going by Meghan doesn't change any of the level of threat she would face from entities seeking to do harm against her, and by extension, Harry and his direct blood ties to the monarch. xx


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.


I think you are lost — literally and figuratively.


----------



## bellecate




----------



## LVlvoe_bug

PurseUOut said:


> This is a fair point, although one can argue since leaving the job she isn't getting the perks of a Duchess, either (and she shouldn't).
> 
> I guess I don't see where she is wrong for using Duchess of Sussex if that is what she technically is and has rights to. Unpopular opinion I also don't really support Andrew being stripped of his titles unless he is convicted of a crime. Back to Meghan she is still the wife of Harry, Duke of Sussex, 6th in line to the British throne. Her children are also in the line of succession (I think). She's still known to the world as "Meghan Markle" and her going by Meghan doesn't change any of the level of threat she would face from entities seeking to do harm against her, and by extension, Harry and his direct blood ties to the monarch. We don't have titles per se' but if President 0bama decided to drop "President" and formally go by "Barack 0bama" in all of his engagements, does that somehow change his need for govt subsidized security.


I guess I don’t understand why she wants to use a title from a family or organization that made her feel so horrible and claimed are racist and went on national tv saying so? She may technically have the right to use it but then she needs to stop with all the negative claims. She can’t have it both ways…


----------



## kipp

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I guess I don’t understand why she wants to use a title from a family or organization that made her feel so horrible and claimed are racist and went on national tv saying so? She may technically have the right to use it but then she needs to stop with all the negative claims. She can’t have it both ways…


THIS.  It's the hypocrisy and opportunism that's so galling.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> And Fergie’s money grubbing actions both while she was still married to Andrew and after their divorce were widely and repeatedly criticized by a majority of people in the UK. Wasn’t she accused of selling access to Andrew at one point?


After her marriage to Edward, Sophie also tried to sell access to some members of the BRF and also left a £1.7m business debt that she'll never pay back. It's no wonder Edward & Sophie are so well-behaved, probably  as thanks for the bennies received from HM back then, like a huge raise and access to one of the largest royal homes.  

2009 article worth reading






						Sophie Wessex, her £1.7m business debt - and why she won’t pay
					

£280 to couriers, £958 for office supplies, £640 for printing, not to mention £590,153 to the bank...these are some of the debts the wealthy Countess of Wessex won’t have to pay now the business she founded is being wound up.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Edited to remove extra link


----------



## lallybelle

So SS is spinning that TW is thrilled that she's been cleared of the bullying charges. US printed an article full of drivel about how their (She & Hazz) also sad the report won't be released. First off, the RF said the findings wouldn't become public, NOT that you were cleared. And sure your sad about it remaining private. Uh huh. yep. sure thing.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> yes, and again, I like diana and it was tragic but I don't agree that it was the paps fault.....maybe partly but ultimately not


Agree.  The paps are there, the paps are always there especially since she called them, but speeding was not necessary and seat belts always are.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> This explains it well. Since their divorce she is Sarah, Duchess of York, but she is not "The" Duchess of York. That would be reserved for Andrew's wife should he to remarry. Seems minor, I know, but it's not to the Brits. If she remarries she can no longer use it. Kind of like a divorced woman still using her husband's surname. But I can't disagree with your point that she still uses it for financial gain.


The thing is, Sarah F spent decades making an income in the US and whether it's Duchess of York or "The" Duchess of York means very little to most Americans and especially the American media. If she wanted to be on a TV or talk show, they were thrilled to have her.

They'd always ask her about something going on in the BRF and she would be coy but really she had no idea since she was pushed out. Nevertheless, the American media seemed to think she was still "The" Duchess of York.


----------



## needlv

__





						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Heartbreak: Sussex Pair Blaming Each Other As Their Million-Dollar Dreams Crash Down? William's Brother Reportedly Called Charles For A Loan
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly going broke.




					epicstream.com
				




*Are Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Going Broke?*
Star Magazine, in its upcoming July 4, 2022 issue, reported that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are in danger of losing everything, including their lucrative Netflix deal worth $100 million, despite their effort to cash in on their notoriety in the U.S. A number of projects of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have either been stalled or failed.

An unnamed insider told the entertainment news outlet:



> “Harry and Meghan’s attempt to make a comeback in the U.K. failed. The trip was a total disaster. Harry and Meghan left the monarchy to become superstars, but nothing is going according to plan and now they’re scrambling to stay relevant. They are in dire straits.”


Meghan Markle allegedly envisioned a totally different future with Prince Harry when tied the knot in May 2018. An unidentified royal source stated:



> “She thought marrying him would make her a modern-day Princess Diana. The public hasn’t accepted her [as] they did Diana. They see her as an opportunist.”



The alleged obsession of Meghan Markle with fame has not gone over well either. As a result, per a tipster, “their dreams of taking over America are falling apart.” The former _Suits_ actress and Prince Harry are reportedly facing their own Megxit as they have already lost five staffers in a matter of months.

An informant told Star Magazine:



> “Harry and Meghan are impossible to work with. People call them ‘the bosses from hell’ because they think they’re A-list stars. Meghan is a perfectionist and orders her staff around like they’re butlers. The turnover is sky-high because it’s impossible to live up to Meghan’s expectations.”


It was also claimed that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been desperate to revive their Archewell brand upon their return to their $14.7 million-worth mansion in Montecito, Calif. In May, Meghan’s planned animated Netflix series called _Pearl_ was shelved.

A source stated:



> “They signed their Netflix deal two years ago and the only thing to make it to the editing room so far is Harry’s documentary about the Invictus Games. They are rapidly becoming has-beens, and need to start doing something quickly.”


It added that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have got a lavish lifestyle to fund, saying:



> “Their expenses are enormous. Harry and Meghan are anxious about all their overhead. Plus, Meghan loves to shop.”



*The same insider said things are so bad that Prince Harry even made an emergency call to his father for a loan*


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Where's Harry? He's frolicking barefoot in the grass while Duchess Bandwagon hustles.
> 
> Honestly, I don't think Harry wants to work. Not in the sense of work like most people do. Sure, he will turn up and do some little video for BetterUp or give a speech. But these things require minimal effort on his part and he walks away with money and an inflated ego. He does this what, once every several months? Punctuated by barefoot frolics, riding his bicycle, play with the dog at the beach, juggle like a jester in the background, driving miss thing around to wherever... He is a _Man Of Leisure_.
> 
> She wants to hustle and get her fingers in ALLLLLLL of the pies. Let her do her misguided struggle for relevancy. Harry was bred to do the minimum, if anything at all... And just as much as she needs his title, he needs her to keep things coming in for them.
> 
> Harry would not last one week in a real job, be it a corporate executive (they do work long hours), flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant, or anything in between. That boy would straight up CRUMBLE.


What happened to him being "Chief Impact Officer" at ButterCup?  
A made up title for a Haz been prince.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> And that’s the problem. They cannot be believed. Back in the 80s the papers still had the double standard of cutting cheating men slack while depicting cheating women as harlots. We know both Andrew and Fergie cheated. As did Charles and Diana. That brings up an interesting question. Have there been any royal couples from that era, or earlier, who it is strongly believed were entirely faithful to one another? It seems like infidelity was rampant.


Any rumors about QEII's parents?  They seemed happily married.  We've heard about Prince Phillip's wandering eye, but I don't recall anything about QEII?  Maybe rumors about her were off limits, but she seemed googly eyed about Phillip from the beginning.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Where's Harry? He's frolicking barefoot in the grass while Duchess Bandwagon hustles.
> 
> Honestly, I don't think Harry wants to work. Not in the sense of work like most people do. Sure, he will turn up and do some little video for BetterUp or give a speech. But these things require minimal effort on his part and he walks away with money and an inflated ego. He does this what, once every several months? Punctuated by barefoot frolics, riding his bicycle, play with the dog at the beach, juggle like a jester in the background, driving miss thing around to wherever... He is a _Man Of Leisure_.
> 
> She wants to hustle and get her fingers in ALLLLLLL of the pies. Let her do her misguided struggle for relevancy. Harry was bred to do the minimum, if anything at all... And just as much as she needs his title, he needs her to keep things coming in for them.
> 
> Harry would not last one week in a real job, be it a corporate executive (they do work long hours), flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant, or anything in between. That boy would straight up CRUMBLE.


Haz didn't work (real work anyway) a day of his life of 37 or so years.  Why would he want to start now?


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


>



Ugh that picture of Haz trying to twerk is disturbing on so many levels.  Partly because I half expect his pants to split down the middle and we'd be stuck looking at his pasty white, doughy a$$ covered in red hair.


----------



## csshopper

PurseUOut said:


> This is a fair point, although one can argue since leaving the job she isn't getting the perks of a Duchess, either (and she shouldn't).
> 
> I guess I don't see where she is wrong for using Duchess of Sussex if that is what she technically is and has rights to. Unpopular opinion I also don't really support Andrew being stripped of his titles unless he is convicted of a crime. Back to Meghan she is still the wife of Harry, Duke of Sussex, 6th in line to the British throne. Her children are also in the line of succession (I think). She's still known to the world as "Meghan Markle" and her going by Meghan doesn't change any of the level of threat she would face from entities seeking to do harm against her, and by extension, Harry and his direct blood ties to the monarch. We don't have titles per se' but if President 0bama decided to drop "President" and formally go by "Barack 0bama" in all of his engagements, does that somehow change his need for govt subsidized security.


Please accept this is being typed with a polite tone, in written communications it is not always clear.  

  My personal opinion of The Sussexes is they don’t  belong in the same sentence for any kind of comparison to the O’s. To me, they are worlds apart for many reasons. 

I find it disingenuous that Megan insists on using a title gifted to her, not earned, and uses that gift against the giver, the Queen. She and Hazbeen slip and slide around their “truths” about love and respect for his Grandmother, the Monarch, his military Commander and Chief, all the while making pronouncements against the institution she represents, people she loves, and engaging in actions, or in the case of his Grandfather’s service, non attendance, that, are hurtful to her.


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Heartbreak: Sussex Pair Blaming Each Other As Their Million-Dollar Dreams Crash Down? William's Brother Reportedly Called Charles For A Loan
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are reportedly going broke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> epicstream.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Harry and Meghan are impossible to work with. People call them ‘the bosses from hell’ because they think they’re A-list stars. Meghan is a perfectionist and orders her staff around like they’re butlers. The turnover is sky-high because it’s impossible to live up to Meghan’s expectations.”



If M is such a perfectionist and expect everyone else to be, how is it she herself can't be one?  Everything she does fails.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Elsner has turned, too?  Interesting
Full article in spoiler


			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/harry-and-meghans-180-million-windfall-on-the-line/news-story/793b564fe394055ca1a8b57205d970a2
		



Spoiler: Game over?



*Meghan and Harry’s $180 million windfall on the line | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site*
This weekend Americans will devolve into paroxysms of flag wavin’, grillin’, and beer drinkin’ as they celebrate the 4th of July weekend. On that day back in 1776, the country rejected the rule of the British monarchy and declared they wanted to go it alone, ratifying the Declaration of Independence. (Thank you Thomas Jefferson and your way with a quill.)

A couple of centuries later two more people – Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex – followed nearly the same path, sans muskets though, and announced that they too had had enough of existing under the monarchy’s thumb.

For Harry and Meghan in 2020, as in the 1770s, the New World waited, brimming with promise and other cliches.

But for the couple, like the republic, what started with such promise and optimism has started to come apart at the seams.






Harry and Meghan have started to come apart. Picture: Chris Jackson/Getty Images for the Invictus Games Foundation.
In fact, events of the last week paint a bleak picture of the United States of Sussex.

At the heart of things is the fact that they have failed to win over Americans.

The most recent polling in late May has shown that 48 per cent of people have a total favourable view of Harry, down from 54 per cent in March last year. Meanwhile, currently 30 per cent of respondents reported a negative view of him, an increase from 26 per cent in 2021.

There is no sort of home-ground advantage for Meghan whose total favourability, 45 per cent, is unchanged from last year. Meanwhile, those with a negative view of her have increased from 33 per cent in 2021 to 36 per cent now.

Perhaps one way to understand this sorry state of affairs is to ask; what have they actually done to earn the support or endorsement of the US?

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex might have thrown off the supposedly restrictive yoke of the monarchy and spoken truth to power in prime time, but more than two years into their lives in California they don’t really stand for anything.





A recent poll found those with a negative view of Meghan have increased from 33 per cent in 2021 to 36 per cent.
At regular interviews they have taken it upon themselves to put out statements about things such as the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and vaccine equality but as leaders they have proven to be the celebrity equivalent of cardboard straws- a good idea in theory and which in actuality is just all a bit soggy and useless.

On Wednesday, _Vogue US_ published a conversation between Meghan, Gloria Steinem and journalist Jessic Yellin about the Supreme Court’s recent horrifying reversal of Roe vs Wade. It should have been a real get – the articulate and educated young advocate (the duchess) and the battle-tested icon (who are friends) speaking candidly.

(Full, vociferous credit here for Meghan for not staying silent at this terrifying juncture in the US for women.)

24-hours after the piece appeared online, _the New York Times_, _the Washington Post_, _Forbes_ and _Time_, all of which have previously covered the Sussexes, had reported on what once would have been a news-making conversation.

Ask yourself, what actually sets them apart, aside from titles, from the other celebrities with causes (Kim Kardashain and criminal justice reform; Leonardo DiCaprio and the environment); the other celebrities with charitable foundations (Jennifer Lopez, Miley Cryus and myriad other stars) or the other celebrities who probably have Oprah’s personal mobile number (Kim again, Barack *****, and Rihanna)?

Fundamentally, after nearly 850 days of living and working in the United States, Harry and Meghan have yet to make any real political, cultural or social impact while all the while their precious momentum sputters out.

Overall, it’s been a case of Yankee Doodle Don’t.

Part of this could be attributed to the fact that their careers as content producers have so far have failed to soar. (Work with me here- eagles, gettit?) They might have nabbed enough big name deals to keep Variety in headlines but thus far their output could be jotted down on a beer coaster.





Harry and Meghan have yet to make any real political, cultural or social impact while all the while their precious momentum sputters out. Picture: Matt Dunham / Pool / AFP.
The recent travails of the US stock market should make them nervous. (Stick with me here.) Netflix has had $290 billion wiped off its value in two months, which has translated into some high profile bloodletting. A number of upcoming shows from a number of producers, including the children’s cartoon the duchess had been working on, have been axed.

In April, Netflix announced they are on track to lose two million subscribers this quarter, prompting the share market to go into panic mode, lopping nearly 70 per cent off the company’s value.

In this climate, Harry and Meghan will have to earn their keep, which might go some way to explaining the reality-like series they are reportedly working on for the streamer.

(Will we see the duke and duchess bicker about who drank the last of the matcha or witness their son Archie taking out a $1700 Kelly Wearsteler lamp while practising with his tiny polo mallet? Such voyeuristic access would go a long way to staying on the right side of Netflix bosses surely.)

Meanwhile, over at Spotify, things do not augur that much better for the Sussexes. Earlier this week it was announced that the streaming platform had parted ways with some of their other A++-list hires, former President and First Lady Barack and Michelle *****.

There has been no sign as yet of Meghan’s debut podcast called _Archetypes_, a series she has promised will “explore and subvert the labels that try to hold women back,” and which is set to launch sometime this northern summer.





Harry has yet to announce any audio project of his own. Picture: Valerie Macon / AFP.
Harry, meanwhile, has yet to announce any audio project of his own.

Spotify has gotten very, very little bang so far for all those bucks.

The bigger picture here is that being a duke and duchess does mean they are immune to the chilly economic winds sweeping the US and Australia. A hell of a lot has changed for Netflix and Spotify since they got their cheque books out in 2020 and with recession talk and a sweeping cost of living crisis, big-budget hires such as the Sussexes could face a frigid future.

Or, as Scott Galloway, a New York University Stern Business School Professor very bluntly said of the couple during a recent episode of his influential media and technology _Pivot_ podcast: “What the f**k have they done? A whole lot of nothing … You’re just going to see a lot of [companies deciding] give up these high profile celebrity feel good partnerships because all of a sudden, s**t’s gotten real in the market.”

It’s not just the vast, vast skads of money that are on the line here but the wholesale success of the gamble they took when they walked away from royal life. Are Harry and Meghan on the precipice of becoming respected producers or are they about to become a cautionary tale? Are they about to live their very own American dream, or an American nightmare of their own making?

_Daniela Elser is a royal expert and a writer with more than 15 years’ experience working with a number of Australia’s leading media titles_


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Since we sometimes refer to Harry as Just Call Me Harry = JCMH
> 
> Why don't we refer to Nutmeg as Just Call Her Meghan = JCHM


Sorry but she demands JCMD.


----------



## Chanbal

It's a valid question!










						RICHARD KAY examines the history of Meghan's alleged bullying of staff
					

RICHARD KAY: What do the so-called 'Duchess Difficult' and the Palace fear about the report which detailed allegations about Meghan's behaviour towards her staff before Megxit?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

J Moir is right on the money!  




*What do Harry and Meghan stand for these days? That is the question I ask myself as the Sussexes gallop hither and thither across America, cherry-picking good causes or tragic incidents or graveyards upon which to lavish their concern.*
_
They spare no one, not even themselves, when they offer comfort to all. Sometimes with a camera crew in tow to capture every last glutinous drop of Sussexian compassion, sometimes not.

Yet from the school shooting in Texas to the abortion debate to the war in Ukraine, nothing escapes their attention.

You can depend on these self-styled royals-in-exile to turn up, perhaps even uninvited, but always mustard keen to be seen applying their dripping poultice of paternalistic sympathy onto society’s wounds.

Meghan and Harry, please exactly describe your brand of modern compassion, I hear you all cry. And they oblige on their Archewell website, explaining that ‘compassion means listening with open ears to the suffering of communities’.

*And then to channel their troubles and woes ‘into action for those who need it the most’. Unless they happen to be members of their own staff, of course.*

For now we learn that a long-awaited report into how allegations of staff bullying by the Duchess of Sussex were handled by Palace officials — and what, if any, changes to working practices were made — will never be published. What?

No comment, nothing to see here. Please move along quietly as frantic courtiers beat the retreat on the royal drums of discretion.

Fearing heightened tensions between the Sussexes and The Firm — or future damaging revelations from the eternally peeved pair — the findings will never be made public.

Instead, the report will be sealed inside a lead-lined casket, tied to a ten-ton gargoyle and hurled into the depths of the Buckingham Palace lake.

*Really? What a slap in the face for those employees who risked personal and reputational damage by speaking out about the Duchess’s alleged bullying in the first place. How must they feel, realising that they are merely collateral damage in a much bigger war?

The Palace should be ashamed of themselves. A few years ago, a number of royal staff members believed they were targeted, bullied and persecuted by the Duchess of Sussex when she was a working royal. It was said that she left staff in tears and drove two assistants out of their jobs* — although her lawyers claimed this was untrue and that Meghan was the victim of an ‘orchestrated smear campaign’.

The problem is that now no one is willing to have a tootle on the trumpet of truth.

So we will never know what really happened — which suits the Sussexes just fine.

*For now, it is becoming clear that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are officially bombproof. The sinking of this report suggests that the Palace are terrified of them and that no one can dare criticise them, else they will be accused of racism, sexism, colonialism or of bullying a poor, motherless son who never got over himself and never will.*

It just makes things worse. For in the end, the smears — on both sides — only get bigger and bigger, an oil slick of obfuscation and mystery that drags everyone into its greasy maw.

This week, some demented Meghanites are even suggesting that the report named the Duchess of Cambridge as the bully in residence and not the sainted Meghan. And that is the reason why it has been hushed up.

Given that the report was looking into HR procedures, this cannot possibly be true. And if it were the case, you can be sure the Sussexes would be clamouring for clarity. Meghan would be insisting the report is published to clear her name.

But what happened to listening with open ears, Meghan and Harry?! If the couple really were the champions of the underdog that they endlessly purport to be, if they truly are really those doughty fighters of oppression and defenders of justice, then they would insist — nay, they would DEMAND — that the report is published.

Those poor, crushed serfs, toiling in the royal palaces, getting shouted at for leaving the paperclips in a mess, left to suffer alone in the darkness, with no lovely duchessy poultice to alleviate their pain.

*Were they silent or were they silenced by the Palace? That is the question Oprah is not going to be asking any time soon. Meanwhile, Meghan continues to use her UK title to meddle in U.S. politics and no one says a word.*_









						JAN MOIR: Harry & Meghan should demand 'bullying' report is published
					

JAN MOIR: What do Harry and Meghan stand for these days? That is the question I ask myself as the Sussexes gallop hither and thither across America.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

I had forgotten about this email, but it deserves its own post imo (Source: DM)


----------



## PurseUOut

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I guess I don’t understand why she wants to use a title from a family or organization that made her feel so horrible and claimed are racist and went on national tv saying so? She may technically have the right to use it but then she needs to stop with all the negative claims. She can’t have it both ways…





csshopper said:


> Please accept this is being typed with a polite tone, in written communications it is not always clear.
> 
> My personal opinion of The Sussexes is they don’t  belong in the same sentence for any kind of comparison to the O’s. To me, they are worlds apart for many reasons.
> 
> I find it disingenuous that Megan insists on using a title gifted to her, not earned, and uses that gift against the giver, the Queen. She and Hazbeen slip and slide around their “truths” about love and respect for his Grandmother, the Monarch, his military Commander and Chief, all the while making pronouncements against the institution she represents, people she loves, and engaging in actions, or in the case of his Grandfather’s service, non attendance, that, are hurtful to her.



These are both fair points. I can't say I disagree.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> They really do seem well suited to each other, perhaps why they have been unofficially living together for years. The question for me is, A) did they split because of his wandering eye, B) because the RF was tired of her being an embarrassment, or C) all of the above?



I was a literally a child back then, but wasn't it that she was photographed having her toe sucked by someone not Andrew?



charlottawill said:


> I do remember that being splashed all over the tabloids, but was it in response to Randy Andy's escapades? Of course I'm speculating, but I don't get the sense that she would have been the first to stray, considering everything that has come to light about him since then. He has always been an entitled brat. Hmm...where else have we heard that?



I don't think it matters. As I understand it, you can f*ck around all you want in those circles, you just must not be caught, especially not by a paparazzi.



EverSoElusive said:


> Nutmeg can comment, support and oppose anything using her own name i.e. Meghan Markle but must leave out the duchess title because it's not recognized in the US and she's not representing the British government. If she wants to feel a little special, maybe Meghan Wales. I'm pretty sure that legally, especially in the US, her legal name is still Rachel Meghan Markle and I bet that's what it says on her American passport.



Her name is not Wales, though. Harry's name ceased to be Wales when he received the dukedom. She could go as Meghan Sussex. Kate has been known to give her name to shops when they were living at Anglesey as Mrs. Cambridge.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> She's still known to the world as "Meghan Markle" and her going by Meghan doesn't change any of the level of threat she would face from entities seeking to do harm against her, and by extension, Harry and his direct blood ties to the monarch.



Which threats and entities seeking to harm her are you speaking of, though? I honestly think most of that is in her self-important head. There wasn't a British Ku Klux Klan marching up and down Frogmore Cottage's front lawn. She can be perfectly private if she wants to (e.g. their honeymoon...up to this day, location is unknown and not a single pap pic was released), it's just that she is addicted to attention and most of the time alerts the paps she claims to hate. 

How come #2 together with his wife and #3 and 4 can go to a soccer game and sit with the unwashed masses, but Ms. Markle needs to clear out a whole section at Wimbledon to watch Serena play?


----------



## PurseUOut

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Look, Meghan can continue using the title all she wants since it’s the only thing that makes her feel important. “Linked not ranked” anybody? Yes, people have every right to criticize her for the hypocrisy of using a title she got by marriage from an institution she called racist. If she respected herself, she would have denounced that title when she and Harry decided to leave but she didn’t and hasn’t renounced it. She clings on to it for dear life. Each letter, message or utterance is peppered with Duchess of Sussex. Her real name brings her absolutely nothing of significant achievement before or after marriage. Is she ashamed of her real name? Why not just Meghan Markle? Is it because the title elevates her in her mind? Once again, “linked not ranked” anybody? It doesn’t matter how sycophants try to dress Meghan up. She is a hypocrite for continuing to use her title after publicly denouncing the royal family. She has a choice. She can refer to herself by her real name. By continuing to use her title and wading into politics, she opens herself up for criticism. No one in the public sphere is above criticism. Politicians, musicians, actors etc are criticized all the time. So if she’s going to put herself out there, inserting herself into any and everything, she should expect to be criticized. It comes with the territory. Period.



I was corrected that Harry's dukedom was not conferred prior to marriage, but in fact a wedding gift from the Queen. If the titles were gifted in their capacity as senior working royals, and not by birth, I can understand the criticism of using their gifted titles publicly as non-working royals when the tiles should have been technically "returned" to the Queen to be re-conferred once their status changed, if she so chose. Ultimately we don't really know what discussions went on between H, M and the Queen or if keeping their titles was informally agreed on by the Queen.


----------



## xincinsin

I totally believe that Meghan Markle is a bully and a narcissist, and it's a belief based on her public behaviour and not sensational gossip. 

But I'm not here to argue with those who think she is pure and saintly. To each his/her own.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> If M is such a perfectionist and expect everyone else to be, how is it she herself can't be one?  Everything she does fails.


One of my father's favorite sayings when I was growing up:

He who knows not, and knows not he knows not, *he is a fool*—shun him; he who knows not, and knows he knows not, he is simple—teach him; he who knows, and knows not he knows, he is asleep—wake him; he who knows, and knows he knows, he is wise—follow him. '—Arab Proverb. 

Every time I think of TW and Hazbeen, I think of just the first line:  (S)He who knows not, and knows not (s)he knows not, *(S)he is a fool*—*shun him (her)*


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> I totally believe that Meghan Markle is a bully and a narcissist, and it's a belief based on her public behaviour and not sensational gossip.
> 
> *But I'm not here to argue with those who think she is pure and saintly. To each his/her own.*


Therefore there’s a thread for this, where one can freely expand and amplify the purity and saintliness. 
Maybe we should start asking mods to move OOT?  (kidding… everyone is entitled to their opinion).


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> J Moir is right on the money!
> 
> View attachment 5438086
> 
> 
> *What do Harry and Meghan stand for these days? That is the question I ask myself as the Sussexes gallop hither and thither across America, cherry-picking good causes or tragic incidents or graveyards upon which to lavish their concern.*
> 
> _They spare no one, not even themselves, when they offer comfort to all. Sometimes with a camera crew in tow to capture every last glutinous drop of Sussexian compassion, sometimes not.
> 
> Yet from the school shooting in Texas to the abortion debate to the war in Ukraine, nothing escapes their attention.
> 
> You can depend on these self-styled royals-in-exile to turn up, perhaps even uninvited, but always mustard keen to be seen applying their dripping poultice of paternalistic sympathy onto society’s wounds.
> 
> Meghan and Harry, please exactly describe your brand of modern compassion, I hear you all cry. And they oblige on their Archewell website, explaining that ‘compassion means listening with open ears to the suffering of communities’.
> 
> *And then to channel their troubles and woes ‘into action for those who need it the most’. Unless they happen to be members of their own staff, of course.*
> 
> For now we learn that a long-awaited report into how allegations of staff bullying by the Duchess of Sussex were handled by Palace officials — and what, if any, changes to working practices were made — will never be published. What?
> 
> No comment, nothing to see here. Please move along quietly as frantic courtiers beat the retreat on the royal drums of discretion.
> 
> Fearing heightened tensions between the Sussexes and The Firm — or future damaging revelations from the eternally peeved pair — the findings will never be made public.
> 
> Instead, the report will be sealed inside a lead-lined casket, tied to a ten-ton gargoyle and hurled into the depths of the Buckingham Palace lake.
> 
> *Really? What a slap in the face for those employees who risked personal and reputational damage by speaking out about the Duchess’s alleged bullying in the first place. How must they feel, realising that they are merely collateral damage in a much bigger war?
> 
> The Palace should be ashamed of themselves. A few years ago, a number of royal staff members believed they were targeted, bullied and persecuted by the Duchess of Sussex when she was a working royal. It was said that she left staff in tears and drove two assistants out of their jobs* — although her lawyers claimed this was untrue and that Meghan was the victim of an ‘orchestrated smear campaign’.
> 
> The problem is that now no one is willing to have a tootle on the trumpet of truth.
> 
> So we will never know what really happened — which suits the Sussexes just fine.
> 
> *For now, it is becoming clear that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are officially bombproof. The sinking of this report suggests that the Palace are terrified of them and that no one can dare criticise them, else they will be accused of racism, sexism, colonialism or of bullying a poor, motherless son who never got over himself and never will.*
> 
> It just makes things worse. For in the end, the smears — on both sides — only get bigger and bigger, an oil slick of obfuscation and mystery that drags everyone into its greasy maw.
> 
> This week, some demented Meghanites are even suggesting that the report named the Duchess of Cambridge as the bully in residence and not the sainted Meghan. And that is the reason why it has been hushed up.
> 
> Given that the report was looking into HR procedures, this cannot possibly be true. And if it were the case, you can be sure the Sussexes would be clamouring for clarity. Meghan would be insisting the report is published to clear her name.
> 
> But what happened to listening with open ears, Meghan and Harry?! If the couple really were the champions of the underdog that they endlessly purport to be, if they truly are really those doughty fighters of oppression and defenders of justice, then they would insist — nay, they would DEMAND — that the report is published.
> 
> Those poor, crushed serfs, toiling in the royal palaces, getting shouted at for leaving the paperclips in a mess, left to suffer alone in the darkness, with no lovely duchessy poultice to alleviate their pain.
> 
> *Were they silent or were they silenced by the Palace? That is the question Oprah is not going to be asking any time soon. Meanwhile, Meghan continues to use her UK title to meddle in U.S. politics and no one says a word.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Harry & Meghan should demand 'bullying' report is published
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: What do Harry and Meghan stand for these days? That is the question I ask myself as the Sussexes gallop hither and thither across America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




This is a good article by Jan Moir, and features some sublimely accurate descriptions of The Harkles , but I do not agree that the BRF are "terrified".

The email from Jason Knauf clearly confirms that MM is/was a bully and his email has, effectively, refuted the need for the BRF to release information because the whole world already knows, from that, that she is guilty. He had real concern about her behaviour, and nothing to gain from lying.  It's very possible that the employees involved have had meetings with the appropriate courtiers after the report was finalised and that they had no expectations that the result would be published.  Perhaps it's just that the media wanted the tea to spill to get headlines and clicks. 

The BRF weigh up everything very carefully and there are, of course, always instances to keep the powder dry until it's required.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> It's pretty bad when a story about 40 and 37 year olds paying for their own airfare   makes the news. Especially when their net worth wasn't even of their own making. It begs the question: who pays for their airfares for trips the the U.N., Uvalde, etc? If Meghan can wear $10,000 outfits, why is it so wonderful that they paid their own airfare? Should we be in shock and awe over affording toilet paper for 19 bathrooms, too? I'd LOVE for MM to run for office. Her opponent would be utterly DAZZLED that they get credit for "paying their own airfare" (the same people, who, by the way, were given a 50 million dollar wedding). But, by all means, let us all be absolutely astounded that they paid for their OWN airfare  .
> 
> You know, I paid most of my own way through college when I was roughly half their age and think nothing of it. But H&M paying for their OWN airfare, my goodness, how magnanimous of them. Next we'll find out, they may be even be capable of feeding themselves.



They can legally and morally still say they paid their own airfare and expense it back through Netflix (or other 399774 businesses/subs they set-up(s)). 

We know that whatever 'principles' these two make noise about, their only two steadfast principles are making money and making noise.


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan and Harry told to ‘step away’ from royal titles and try alternative name
					

An expert on British and European royalty has come up with a possible solution to avoid any criticism over their continued use of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex monikers




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

MiniMabel said:


> This is a good article by Jan Moir, and features some sublimely accurate descriptions of The Harkles , but I do not agree that the BRF are "terrified".
> 
> The email from Jason Knauf clearly confirms that MM is/was a bully and his email has, effectively, refuted the need for the BRF to release information because the whole world already knows, from that, that she is guilty. He had real concern about her behaviour, and nothing to gain from lying.  It's very possible that the employees involved have had meetings with the appropriate courtiers after the report was finalised and that they had no expectations that the result would be published.  Perhaps it's just that the media wanted the tea to spill to get headlines and clicks.
> 
> The BRF weigh up everything very carefully and there are, of course, always instances to keep the powder dry until it's required.




I read this headline from someone's else's copy of the Telegraph yesterday whilst on train (very long journey). 

In my defence of stealing a glance, we have copies of all papers freely available at work, bought and paid for, I'm not (always) a total cheapskate  (unlike Madame Mercher de Sussex) 

Warning: subscription required/paywall/trial

Palace won't publish review into handling of bullying claims against Meghan, Duchess of Sussex



Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5438209
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry told to ‘step away’ from royal titles and try alternative name
> 
> 
> An expert on British and European royalty has come up with a possible solution to avoid any criticism over their continued use of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex monikers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



*I can just see them introducing themselves as 'Meghan Sussex, Harry Sussex'   


kicking and s c rrrrrrr e a m iiiiiiii n g!!!!!!!!!!*

They will hold onto 'brand' Duke and Duchess of Sussex with that _hideous_ M + H monogram that looks like it was created by Disney for an Ariel merch franchise



QueenofWrapDress said:


> German gossip mag titles "Meghan and the Jubilee: she Completely Lost it". Apparently she had a melt-down when the birthday party didn't go as planned.







CarryOn2020 said:


> My understanding is he must renounce his title, his LoS, his CoS. In effect, she is silencing him.





As you can tell I am 5 pages behind.



pukasonqo said:


> If she runs for office will she let go of the DoS title than she seems so fond of?
> I am not going to blast her for enjoying the perks of wealth but for a self appointed justice warrior she likes the title A LOT
> I’m not going into the historical and political issues re: monarchies but MM seems very fond of its grandeur and titles for a girl from the US of A



She wouldn't lose it, but she couldn't use it.

I think a lot of people (opposing and same party) would dig-up historical legislation. Although, there is sufficient evidence that not only does she not work for the Crown's interest, but actually undermines everyday in every way and seems to despise the British people.



A1aGypsy said:


> You are right, it is their job.
> 
> Here is the problem with MM using her title _while gaining a personal financial benefit_ - in the commonwealth there is something called the Crown Act (or similar) in most countries. It recognizes that public servants hold special positions and powers. And it recognizes that those positions / powers could be ripe for abuse. Misuse of those positions could bring the government into disrepute. As such, the law prohibits them from using those positions, or the fact that they hold them, in ways to personally benefit.
> 
> So, a post person, if employed by the Crown (govt), could be fired for saying: “I’m a post person in her Majesty’s service so I know the best envelopes to use - buy my design.”
> 
> By the very natural of the position of Duchess, MM is a public servant. And she could use that title in her charity work or work directly done in the interests of the Crown. She cannot use that title to make necklace sales which put money in her own pocket.
> 
> And, seems to me, if a post person can be fired for such behaviour, then surely something should be done about someone is such an influential and affluent position misusing her position.
> 
> There are also very stringent rules about public servants engaging in politics.



That's the thing with 'toffs'. They (British Upper-classes)  don't have a rule book because they were educated to either not cut off their noses to spite their faces, or be prepared to get their head chopped off. She is a toff by adoption (marrying-in) but not even a subject of the Queen, therefore there are no (written) consequences.



LittleStar88 said:


> Where's Harry? He's frolicking barefoot in the grass while Duchess Bandwagon hustles.
> 
> Honestly, I don't think Harry wants to work. Not in the sense of work like most people do. Sure, he will turn up and do some little video for BetterUp or give a speech. But these things require minimal effort on his part and he walks away with money and an inflated ego. He does this what, once every several months? Punctuated by barefoot frolics, riding his bicycle, play with the dog at the beach, juggle like a jester in the background, driving miss thing around to wherever... He is a _Man Of Leisure_.
> 
> She wants to hustle and get her fingers in ALLLLLLL of the pies. Let her do her misguided struggle for relevancy. Harry was bred to do the minimum, if anything at all... And just as much as she needs his title, he needs her to keep things coming in for them.
> 
> Harry would not last one week in a real job, be it a corporate executive (they do work long hours), flipping burgers at a fast food restaurant, or anything in between. That boy would straight up CRUMBLE.



and that ladies and gentlemen is what a gentleman was not only brought-up to do, but_ supposed_ to do. All hat charity stuff must have felt like just too much like hard work for JCMH.

Magatron is a Lady but not a lady, the upper-classes have always laughed at the American work ethic. Not sure how much is actual work and how much is looking like she is and PR ops. 

In the words of their (prob only) friend, they are both candles in the wind


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> One of my father's favorite sayings when I was growing up:
> 
> He who knows not, and knows not he knows not, *he is a fool*—shun him; he who knows not, and knows he knows not, he is simple—teach him; he who knows, and knows not he knows, he is asleep—wake him; he who knows, and knows he knows, he is wise—follow him. '—Arab Proverb.


That's really deep and thought-provoking. My family saying was more at the level of:
"How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was a literally a child back then, but wasn't it that she was photographed having her toe sucked by someone not Andrew?



Shortly after she and Andrew separated this happened. Prince Philip never forgave her for it. 


> https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/toe-sucking-photo-drove-sarah-13384631


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think it matters. As I understand it, you can f*ck around all you want in those circles, you just must not be caught, especially not by a paparazzi.


I think that's why Prince Philip never forgave her. In their circles, infidelity is forgivable, indiscretion is not.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I think that's why Prince Philip never forgave her. In their circles, infidelity is forgivable, indiscretion is not.



Exactly, same morality they felt towards the 'criminal classes', it's not the stealing that's an issue, it's being stupid enough to get caught. Once you're caught, bang! We're going to make an example of you. 

IMO, Fergie still suffers the aftereffects of this 'indiscretion'. 

If M ever got caught whilst looking for her #4, #6 would be reeling-in his MY WIFE speech.


----------



## papertiger

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Look, Meghan can continue using the title all she wants since it’s the only thing that makes her feel important. “Linked not ranked” anybody? Yes, people have every right to criticize her for the hypocrisy of using a title she got by marriage from an institution she called racist. If she respected herself, she would have denounced that title when she and Harry decided to leave but she didn’t and hasn’t renounced it. She clings on to it for dear life. Each letter, message or utterance is peppered with Duchess of Sussex. Her real name brings her absolutely nothing of significant achievement before or after marriage. Is she ashamed of her real name? Why not just Meghan Markle? Is it because the title elevates her in her mind? Once again, “linked not ranked” anybody? It doesn’t matter how sycophants try to dress Meghan up. She is a hypocrite for continuing to use her title after publicly denouncing the royal family. She has a choice. She can refer to herself by her real name. By continuing to use her title and wading into politics, she opens herself up for criticism. No one in the public sphere is above criticism. Politicians, musicians, actors etc are criticized all the time. So if she’s going to put herself out there, inserting herself into any and everything, she should expect to be criticized. It comes with the territory. Period.


----------



## 1LV

Cinderlala said:


> This is not a question of what is considered political in the United States.  And, being "NON-PARTISAN" does not take an issue outside the realm of politics.
> 
> The issue is that the citizen is using a UK royal title while engaging in US political behavior.
> 
> The irony is that she could easily get away with all of this if she could stop being so desperate to see her name in print.


Wait. Did I say I like this?  What I meant to say is I LOVE this.


----------



## 1LV

csshopper said:


> Where is Hazbeen in all this political clap trap? The whiney one has carried on for decades about being The Spare. Can anyone really envision him as a First Husband?  *A Prince in the White House*, get real.


A Prince in the outhouse is more like it.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Meghan Markle Is 'Happy Her Name Has Been Cleared' in Bullying Investigation
					

Meghan Markle was accused of bullying palace staff in 2018 — exclusive details on her reaction to the investigation conclusion




					www.usmagazine.com
				




Her name was cleared?  These headlines never cease to amaze me, remind me how delusional these two are and just how much money they spend on PR.


----------



## MiniMabel

Mrs.Z said:


> Meghan Markle Is 'Happy Her Name Has Been Cleared' in Bullying Investigation
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was accused of bullying palace staff in 2018 — exclusive details on her reaction to the investigation conclusion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her name was cleared?  These headlines never cease to amaze me, remind me how delusional these two are and just how much money they spend on PR.



I don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror each day, honestly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lallybelle

Yeah that's the article I was talking about. Shameless.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Leak the report!!!!


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> I don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror each day, honestly.


Funhouse mirror...


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I do wish people could accept the criticism of the incredibly excessive spending of the royals is legitimate and has nothing to do with H though. 


PurseUOut said:


> These are both fair points. I can't say I disagree.


I think it’s very magnanimous of you to say so too. 

For what it’s worth I do think you have a point that the other royals do use their titles in commercial ventures when it suits them and do use their titles for political clout when it suits them.

One fairly recent example would be Prince Charles’ risibly stupid attempt to get the NHS to adopt and pay for homeopathic remedies just because it’s a hobby horse of his.








						Prince Charles wanted more homeopathy on the NHS in new 'spider memos'
					

The Prince of Wales told then Health Secretary Alan Johnson in September 2007 than an 'anti-homeopathy campaign' was damaging the NHS.



					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



The reality is there’s a lot of skeletons in the royal closets but H&M seem to have made the wardrobe out of glass.



charlottawill said:


> I think that's why Prince Philip never forgave her. In their circles, infidelity is forgivable, indiscretion is not.


I don’t know if I can ever forgive having to hear this much about toe sucking either. 

I just wish they could adopt the old fire and brimstone attitude with some other members of the family too.


----------



## sdkitty

Icyjade said:


> Megain is clearly guilty of bullying else they would have triggered some law suit by now right? They don’t dare to risk opening up the inquiry or even to have ex-staff testify in public eyes during the law suit.
> 
> On a separate note, Princess Diana was clearly highly desirable after her divorce and probably wooed by other billionaires apart from the known one/s. Doubt the same will happen for Megain despite her cosplay attempts.
> 
> @PurseUOut why dont you keep to the other thread to Stan her? We can all agree to keep to our respective groups right?


As much as they like to sue, not sure they would take on the palace.  Wonder if they have seen the contents of the alleged report.  I suspect not.
Agree Diana was more more famous and desirable than Meghan after her divorce, even if it was her death that made her iconic.

  as far as @PurseUOut, a different POV make the tread interesting.  Even if we aren't welcome at the other thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020

IMO this is exactly how the name thing happened. This is what H&M do - always play the ‘gotcha’ game.
There is a word for people like that -   Arseholes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Will we hear from H&M?  Perhaps a thoughtful pose?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will we hear from H&M?  Perhaps a thoughtful pose?


----------



## duna

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. *I can assure you even a multi-million* *dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone* (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.



Well then they should both get proper jobs instead of whining and being kept by the bank of Dad!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> Well then they should both get proper jobs instead of whining and being kept by the bank of Dad!


Ha
I had Entertainment Tonight on TV while preparing dinner last night.  Wasn't paying full attention but what I got from it was a "royal reporter" (named Katy) says their net worth is over $60 million plus they have a $100 million deal with Netflix.  they are financially independent.  and Charles had a wonderful introduction to Lili


----------



## duna

PurseUOut said:


> Why? Because you said so? They've chosen to give up the HRH titles and abandon the use of "royal" in any of their philanthropic or commercial endeavors*. Like it or not Duke of Sussex is Harry's conferred title. He had it before Meghan came into the picture*. It takes an act of Parliament to remove it, on request of the monarch. Meghan enjoys the feminine form of his title, Duchess, so long as she remains married to him. That is their right to use.
> 
> Catherine and Camilla have their lives, luxuries and conveniences heavily subsidized by the British taxpayer, so their "hard work" isn't charity, it is their job.



Actually the title Duke of Sussex was given  to Harry by the Queen in 2018 before the wedding, so marrying him Meghan became Ducchess of Sussex. Until then, Harry was HRH Prince Henry of Wales.


----------



## duna

DoggieBags said:


> Fact check. Harry did not have that title before he got married. The Queen gave Harry and Meghan the titles of Duke and Duchess of Sussex when they got married. William and Catherine were given the titles of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge when they got married. Harry and Meghan did not voluntarily choose to give up using the HRH titles. They were not stripped of the HRH titles at the time they left the BRF but they had to agree not to use them once they were no longer working royals. I think but am not positive that the Queen has the ability to strip them of their HRH titles if she wishes but revoking the titles Duke and Duchess of Sussex would take an act of Parliament.



Oops, sorry, I posted the same thing before I read your post


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

They should not go, imo









						Prince Harry's 'keen' to attend birthday bash - Meghan 'not so keen'
					

Prince Harry is "keen" to make a return to the UK for Prince William's birthday bash, but Meghan doesn't want to return to the "hornet's nest where she did her own stirring", a royal expert claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

Any PR person should tell them that they will look tremendously out of touch and petty complaining about mistreatment from BRF during a second Oprah interview or a tell all book. A stiff upper lip works best whether one is in the UK, the US, or elsewhere in the world.

Also, if M has to make any substantive comment, i am not sure why a PR person would advise her to take it to Vogue or Oprah, and not allow it to be distributed via Netfix or Spotify


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should not go, imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's 'keen' to attend birthday bash - Meghan 'not so keen'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is "keen" to make a return to the UK for Prince William's birthday bash, but Meghan doesn't want to return to the "hornet's nest where she did her own stirring", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Absolutely not , they would ruin the whole thing!!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I find it hard to believe H is a morning person. Maybe, if we are being generous, he made coffee for his friends only after pulling an all night bender once in a while but I just don’t see him jumping out of bed to do something considerate especially for his ‘social inferiors’. He’s always seemed like a selfish hedonist.

If anything I can see M doing it (though she probably still has someone else actually make it) but you have to sit with her for a ‘morning meeting’ where she pulls your work to pieces and belittles you after you commuted to be there for 5.30.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should not go, imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's 'keen' to attend birthday bash - Meghan 'not so keen'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is "keen" to make a return to the UK for Prince William's birthday bash, but Meghan doesn't want to return to the "hornet's nest where she did her own stirring", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Are they actually invited?


----------



## CarryOn2020

jennlt said:


> Are they actually invited?



Perhaps one of those ‘left-handed invites’ -
 “We hope you can come, but fully understand if you have other commitments.  No recording equipment of any kind is permitted. Leave all electronic devices at home.  Personal security may not carry any weapons. Cheers.”


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I believe this. Before he met her I think he was a happy idiot, but she has brought out the worst in him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Once again, for Nflix.
Hazzie makes a video; William writes a heartfelt letter. 









						Prince William shares emotional letter on his mothers 61st Birthday
					

Prince William has released a statement in honour of this year's Diana Award, on what would have been her 61st birthday. He called the recipients 'an inspiration'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should not go, imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's 'keen' to attend birthday bash - Meghan 'not so keen'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is "keen" to make a return to the UK for Prince William's birthday bash, but Meghan doesn't want to return to the "hornet's nest where she did her own stirring", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



And why can't he go solo to his brother's party? Oh right, as if she would ever allow that. Probably afraid he wouldn't return.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> If anything I can see M doing it (though she probably still has someone else actually make it) but you have to sit with her for a ‘morning meeting’ where she pulls your work to pieces and belittles you after you commuted to be there for 5.30.



I had the misfortune of working for a woman like that the first few years out of college. It was hell on earth.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should not go, imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's 'keen' to attend birthday bash - Meghan 'not so keen'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is "keen" to make a return to the UK for Prince William's birthday bash, but Meghan doesn't want to return to the "hornet's nest where she did her own stirring", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Who says they’d even be invited?


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her name is not Wales, though. Harry's name ceased to be Wales when he received the dukedom. She could go as Meghan Sussex. Kate has been known to give her name to shops when they were living at Anglesey as Mrs. Cambridge.




I was sure about their kids being able to use Sussex as their last name (if they were to mirror George and siblings) but I was wondering if Nutmeg could have. Thanks for pointing it out


----------



## csshopper

Re: Diana’s Birthday messages from her sons:

Harry made it about himself;

William the Award Recipients.


----------



## MiniMabel

jelliedfeels said:


> I find it hard to believe H is a morning person. Maybe, if we are being generous, he made coffee for his friends only after pulling an all night bender once in a while but I just don’t see him jumping out of bed to do something considerate especially for his ‘social inferiors’. He’s always seemed like a selfish hedonist.
> 
> If anything I can see M doing it (though she probably still has someone else actually make it) but you have to sit with her for a ‘*morning meeting*’ where she pulls your work to pieces and belittles you after you commuted to be there for 5.30.



I read "moaning meeting" which your latter comments fully comply with!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

csshopper said:


> Re: Diana’s Birthday messages from her sons:
> 
> Harry made it about himself;
> 
> William the Award Recipients.


Quelle surprise!


----------



## Chanbal

Of course she knows the difference, but her supporters/audience buy all her crap… 







__





						Blind Item #2
					

Speaking of trying to rid themselves of something, this former cable actress turned worldwide celebrity should know the difference between s...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Aw, so down to earth that Duchess!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I find it hard to believe H is a morning person. Maybe, if we are being generous, he made coffee for his friends only after pulling an all night bender once in a while but I just don’t see him jumping out of bed to do something considerate especially for his ‘social inferiors’. He’s always seemed like a selfish hedonist.



I mean, define morning. Maybe it was their ritual he made them coffee before their daily briefing, which could have been at 11 instead of 8. That said, I've read several times in different articles how staff complained that Harry started to treat them sh*tty on a regular basis only after Raptor arrived. So with all his flaws apparently he was mostly personable before.


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure why this is on Yahoo today…  











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told Netflix execs to end The Crown before it catches up to their own royal drama.




					www.yahoo.com
				




Many of the comments are precious, I selected this one for you!


----------



## Chanbal

Accidentally clicked on this piece of expensive PR ****, the entire article is 


_Princess Diana__ and Meghan Markle stepped into the royal spotlight at very different points in their lives. Meghan joined the royal family as a 36-year-old biracial American actress; Diana, as the 20-year-old daughter of a British earl. Yet the two are linked by their attempts to revolutionize royalty.
In fact, the women share more in common than their diametrically different backgrounds would suggest — as explored in the latest issue of PEOPLE Royals, out now.
*Like Diana, the Duchess of Sussex*, 40, joined the royal family on a wave of public enthusiasm. And, like Diana, her royal fantasy ultimately turned sour under the weight of tabloid intrusion and a perceived lack of support from inside the royal family…

Since then Meghan has famously stepped back from frontline royal duties and relocated to California with Prince Harry, far away from the prying eyes of the British tabloids. _*Here, the Duchess of Sussex is free to continue her cause-driven work and raise her children — and Diana's grandkids — Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1, on her own terms.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Accidentally clicked on this piece of expensive PR ****, the entire article is
> View attachment 5438759
> 
> _Princess Diana__ and Meghan Markle stepped into the royal spotlight at very different points in their lives. Meghan joined the royal family as a 36-year-old biracial American actress; Diana, as the 20-year-old daughter of a British earl. Yet the two are linked by their attempts to revolutionize royalty.
> In fact, the women share more in common than their diametrically different backgrounds would suggest — as explored in the latest issue of PEOPLE Royals, out now.
> *Like Diana, the Duchess of Sussex*, 40, joined the royal family on a wave of public enthusiasm. And, like Diana, her royal fantasy ultimately turned sour under the weight of tabloid intrusion and a perceived lack of support from inside the royal family…
> 
> Since then Meghan has famously stepped back from frontline royal duties and relocated to California with Prince Harry, far away from the prying eyes of the British tabloids. _*Here, the Duchess of Sussex is free to continue her cause-driven work and raise her children — and Diana's grandkids — Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1, on her own terms.*




Articles like this are why People is going to become Digital only, no longer a print magazine.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


>



I don't see pee in the back left where M is wearing green.  Looks dark and is she holding a roll of tp?!


----------



## LittleStar88

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.



Usually when someone can't afford their lifestyle anymore they stop living beyond their means or go get a better-paying job. Or a second job. Downsize from a 16 toilet mansion to something more appropriate for their budget.

Poor planning on their part does not mean they are entitled to more. Literally MILLIONS of dollars is enough for anyone to live off of in the US. They wanted to be FiNaNcIaLlY iNdEpEnDeNt so time to learn how to be an adult and budget the money they have rather than burn through it and demand more.

Maybe Meghan should stop buying Hermes blankets and Cartier necklaces and use that money to hire someone to put them on a proper budget? An accountant would determine they need to turn it down a few notches. When you only have so much money coming in, you can't spend more just because you determine that is just your "lifestyle". That's how anyone will go broke, and very quickly.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles have received >1/2 of the established money from Netfl*x…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

*sigh* I want an employer who pays me big bucks, then watches me swan from event to event instead of working. Please? I'm also way nicer to staff.


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> I believe this. Before he met her I think he was a happy idiot, but she has brought out the worst in him.


When I looked closely at that photo of Meghan standing behind the queen, I zeroed in on her eyes and shivers went down my back. With that evil look would you let someone like this be in charge of your care? Recollections may vary and so do accidents.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles have received >1/2 of the established money from Netfl*x…



If this is true, then the Netflix powers that be are even more stupid than one can imagine (and no wonder the company is doing so poorly overall).


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> If this is true, then the Netflix powers that be are even more stupid than one can imagine (and no wonder the company is doing so poorly overall).


They seem to be spending a ton of money… PR, lawyers, private jets… are all very costly.

According to Lady C's last video, their last photo-op visit to Oprah has to do with Netfl*x. I only watched a couple of small segments of the video, but from what I understood, Oprah is a friend and is trying to help them pressure Netfl*x.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles have received >1/2 of the established money from Netfl*x…



This is the worst news I’ve heard all day


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

I’m losing a lot of respect for Oprah. Fair enough she did their interview but I’m not sure why she keeps helping them even after all the backlash from the interview and conflicting reports about what was said in it….


----------



## LittleStar88

Man.... Netflix is putting all of their eggs in the wrong basket with these two. Who really wants to watch some glossy fluff piece about these two flaunting their Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams lifestyle unless there are drunk tears and tables being flipped.


----------



## Chanbal

A couple of interesting headlines from DM:

TW is ver accommodating. She ate chips or cookies "like a Chipmunk," drunk milk out of baby bottle…why wouldn't she eat deep-fried Oreos?  


_It is a privilege to run for President of the United States and these are desperate times in our country. We need more than an ex-C list actress-turned-royal with no civic or political experience to speak of. Marrying a prince doesn't make you a leader. It makes you a celebrity and I thought ********s were sick and tired of celebrity presidents. You want to be president and make it to the Emerald City? You got to make your way through Oz first and there's nothing glamorous about that. You will get sweaty, your makeup won't stay in place, you won't be able to wear $6,000 designer outfits. Meghan, trust me, you don't want to run for president. And I can assure you, the American public doesn't have any interest in voting for you anyway._

Bezos is a much better match to TW's ambitions. Hope the bridge will not be dismantled.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Not sure why this is on Yahoo today…
> View attachment 5438748
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Insisted That Netflix End 'The Crown' Before It Gets to Their Drama
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly told Netflix execs to end The Crown before it catches up to their own royal drama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many of the comments are precious, I selected this one for you!
> View attachment 5438750


Can you imagine!  Netflix could be so petty and turn the tables on them and it wouldn't be a pretty portrayal.  Popcorn for all of us!


----------



## gracekelly

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I’m losing a lot of respect for Oprah. Fair enough she did their interview but I’m not sure why she keeps helping them even after all the backlash from the interview and conflicting reports about what was said in it….


They made her a lot of money. As long as they can do this, she will help them.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> This is the worst news I’ve heard all day


I don't believe half of what he says.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Accidentally clicked on this piece of expensive PR ****, the entire article is
> View attachment 5438759
> 
> _Princess Diana__ and Meghan Markle stepped into the royal spotlight at very different points in their lives. Meghan joined the royal family as a 36-year-old biracial American actress; Diana, as the 20-year-old daughter of a British earl. Yet the two are linked by their attempts to revolutionize royalty.
> In fact, the women share more in common than their diametrically different backgrounds would suggest — as explored in the latest issue of PEOPLE Royals, out now.
> *Like Diana, the Duchess of Sussex*, 40, joined the royal family on a wave of public enthusiasm. And, like Diana, her royal fantasy ultimately turned sour under the weight of tabloid intrusion and a perceived lack of support from inside the royal family…
> 
> Since then Meghan has famously stepped back from frontline royal duties and relocated to California with Prince Harry, far away from the prying eyes of the British tabloids. _*Here, the Duchess of Sussex is free to continue her cause-driven work and raise her children — and Diana's grandkids — Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1, on her own terms.*



I don't believe that Diana attempted to revolutionize anything.  Did she try  annoy the monarchy after she divorced?  Maybe.  She knew that dating non-aristos of different ethnic backgrounds would cause them to take notice.  I suspect the riding instructor upset them more than her Pakistani surgeon who was an educated professional of merit.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> A couple of interesting headlines from DM:
> 
> TW is ver accommodating. She ate chips or cookies "like a Chipmunk," drunk milk out of baby bottle…why wouldn't she eat deep-fried Oreos?
> View attachment 5438837
> 
> _It is a privilege to run for President of the United States and these are desperate times in our country. We need more than an ex-C list actress-turned-royal with no civic or political experience to speak of. Marrying a prince doesn't make you a leader. It makes you a celebrity and I thought ********s were sick and tired of celebrity presidents. You want to be president and make it to the Emerald City? You got to make your way through Oz first and there's nothing glamorous about that. You will get sweaty, your makeup won't stay in place, you won't be able to wear $6,000 designer outfits. Meghan, trust me, you don't want to run for president. And I can assure you, the American public doesn't have any interest in voting for you anyway._
> 
> Bezos is a much better match to TW's ambitions. Hope the bridge will not be dismantled.
> View attachment 5438831


I think Jeff will just have to buy The Netherlands or he won't be able to sail his new yacht.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

If her experience in the royal family and press in the UK was bad and made her flee , what makes her think running for president or any office will be better here? if she didn’t like her role or didn’t want to do the work in the royal family and she walked away ok her choice but you can’t just walk away from being President.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

gracekelly said:


> They made her a lot of money. As long as they can do this, she will help them.


Exactly why I am losing respect for her…I would think Oprah has enough money she doesn’t need to work for them..I think she’s making herself look really bad….


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> They seem to be spending a ton of money… PR, lawyers, private jets… are all very costly.
> 
> According to Lady C's last video, their last photo-op visit to Oprah has to do with Netfl*x. I only watched a couple of small segments of the video, but from what I understood, Oprah is a friend and is trying to help them pressure Netfl*x.


"Trying to help them pressure Netfl*x." Shouldn't it be the opposite? Why would they pressure Netfl*x?


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Usually when someone can't afford their lifestyle anymore they stop living beyond their means or go get a better-paying job. Or a second job. Downsize from a 16 toilet mansion to something more appropriate for their budget.
> 
> Poor planning on their part does not mean they are entitled to more. Literally MILLIONS of dollars is enough for anyone to live off of in the US. They wanted to be FiNaNcIaLlY iNdEpEnDeNt so time to learn how to be an adult and budget the money they have rather than burn through it and demand more.
> 
> Maybe Meghan should stop buying Hermes blankets and Cartier necklaces and use that money to hire someone to put them on a proper budget? An accountant would determine they need to turn it down a few notches. When you only have so much money coming in, you can't spend more just because you determine that is just your "lifestyle". That's how anyone will go broke, and very quickly.



If they were really interested in privacy and a life of service, they'd sell the mansion, live a more modest lifestyle (minimal staff, no private jets, etc.) and actually get involved, quietly, with the causes about which they like to spout pretentious word salads. But she thought being a member of the BRF would be a life of never-ending luxury, jewels and designer clothing in return for showing up at ribbon cuttings. Oops.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> The duchessss and her "ridiculous" hubby seem desperate 'to be in the news' aka 'to get $$$$'…
> View attachment 5436604
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex has pledged to take her fight for equal rights to Washington DC, as she condemns the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade.
> 
> The Duchess has joined feminist campaigner Gloria Steinham to publicly criticise the decision as endangering women, warning of a “blueprint for reversing rights”.
> 
> Saying the reaction to the ruling in her house was “guttural”, with the “feminist” Prince Harry equally despairing, she argued it is now essential for legislation enshrining equal rights to be “pushed through”.
> 
> In conversation with Steinem for Vogue magazine, the Duchess said: “*Well, Gloria, maybe it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon*.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Hey, Pwife!


You want to get involved in one countries politics while using a royal title from another country? Then drop that title you so dearly cling on to, you inappropriate, attention-seeking imbecile.





Annawakes said:


> So obvious she posed for that picture.  “I’m deep in thought….”, right.


Her actual thought at that moment:







xincinsin said:


> So funny
> Homelessness vs McMansion
> Environment vs private jet
> Monarchy reform vs the court of Harry Antoinette


*"Harry Antoinette"


*
I'm gonna use that name for him the future  





kipp said:


> THIS.  *It's the hypocrisy and opportunism that's so galling*.


Agreed. 
Meanwhile, their only train of thought seems to be:







Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5438209
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry told to ‘step away’ from royal titles and try alternative name
> 
> 
> An expert on British and European royalty has come up with a possible solution to avoid any criticism over their continued use of their Duke and Duchess of Sussex monikers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk


JCMH & JCMPwife:







Mrs.Z said:


> Meghan Markle Is 'Happy Her Name Has Been Cleared' in Bullying Investigation
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was accused of bullying palace staff in 2018 — exclusive details on her reaction to the investigation conclusion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her name was cleared?  These headlines never cease to amaze me, remind me how delusional these two are and just how much money they spend on PR.











Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5438759
> 
> _Princess Diana__ and Meghan Markle stepped into the royal spotlight at very different points in their lives. Meghan joined the royal family as a 36-year-old biracial American actress; Diana, as the 20-year-old daughter of a British earl. Yet the two are linked by their attempts to revolutionize royalty.
> In fact, the women share more in common than their diametrically different backgrounds would suggest — as explored in the latest issue of PEOPLE Royals, out now.
> *Like Diana, the Duchess of Sussex*, 40, joined the royal family on a wave of public enthusiasm. And, like Diana, her royal fantasy ultimately turned sour under the weight of tabloid intrusion and a perceived lack of support from inside the royal family…
> 
> Since then Meghan has famously stepped back from frontline royal duties and relocated to California with Prince Harry, far away from the prying eyes of the British tabloids. _*Here, the Duchess of Sussex is free to continue her cause-driven work and raise her children — and Diana's grandkids — Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1, on her own terms.*


----------



## gracekelly

Don't you love the outright lie of the spin?  Meghan's name was cleared?  It most certainly was not.  All that happened was that the decision was made not to publicly embarrass her and have her go after the staffers she bullied.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> If this is true, then the Netflix powers that be are even more stupid than one can imagine (and no wonder the company is doing so poorly overall).



Last week Netflix had a layoff of an additional 300 employees. Maybe if they hadn’t made horrible deals like this one they wouldn’t be in such a financial mess.









						Netflix Begins Second Round of Layoffs, 300 Positions Cut (EXCLUSIVE)
					

Layoffs have hit Netflix again, with the streamer letting go of roughly 300 staffers on Thursday, Variety has learned exclusively. The cuts are across multiple business functions in the company, wi…



					variety.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Last week Netflix had a layoff of an additional 300 employees. Maybe if they hadn’t made horrible deals like this one they wouldn’t be in such a financial mess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Begins Second Round of Layoffs, 300 Positions Cut (EXCLUSIVE)
> 
> 
> Layoffs have hit Netflix again, with the streamer letting go of roughly 300 staffers on Thursday, Variety has learned exclusively. The cuts are across multiple business functions in the company, wi…
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com



So sorry for those normal employees


----------



## needlv

In March this year Prince William leaked that Harry was not invited to his 40th.  We shouldn’t listen to the usual “are they/aren’t they” PR which we know MM loves.  They aren’t invited.

there are multiple outlets who reported it.  





__





						Report For William's 40th: Prince Harry Likely Not Invited
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## charlottawill

Not a fan of Meghan McCain but this is a hilarious thought


----------



## miss_chiff

In regards to @Chanbal ’s post…
Oprah’s Executive VP used to work at King World (Oprah’s), then Netflix, then back to Oprah. So it’s quite possible there may be some behind the scene ‘connections’ going on with Netflix. 









						Oprah’s Harpo Names Terry Wood as Executive VP to Oversee Apple Content
					

Oprah Winfrey’s Harpo Productions has named former Netflix exec Terry Wood as its executive vice president, a newly created role. She will spearhead production of original content for the par…



					variety.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> They should not go, imo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's 'keen' to attend birthday bash - Meghan 'not so keen'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is "keen" to make a return to the UK for Prince William's birthday bash, but Meghan doesn't want to return to the "hornet's nest where she did her own stirring", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I’m calling BS on this one.


----------



## lanasyogamama

That would be so ridiculous if they went. Which makes it distinctly possible.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> That would be so ridiculous if they went. Which makes it distinctly possible.


They would describe any proposal to gatecrash as an "olive branch" and moan about how their kind gesture and sweet nod was ignored.


----------



## Toby93

From Tatler 
Clearly a hit with the young ones, news has come to light regarding Prince Charles's latest meeting with his youngest grandchild, Lilibet. According to _Mail Online_ royal sources, the 73-year-old was ‘very emotional’ during the time he spent with the toddler over the Platinum Jubilee weekend.

The sources shared that Charles and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall, were thrilled to be reunited with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex during their short visit to the UK. ‘The prince and the duchess were absolutely thrilled to see them. The prince, of course, hasn't seen his grandson Archie for a bit of time and so it was very, very, very special to have some time with him. He hadn't met Lili, his granddaughter, and so to meet her was very emotional, a very, very wonderful thing.'

Harry and Meghan hosted baby Lilibet's first birthday party at Frogmore Cottage over the weekend, *with the Queen reportedly in attendance,* although she allegedly did not wish to be photographed during the event. The couple shared a picture of their daughter from the gardens of the house (the first-ever shared with the public), to mark the milestone occasion. The photograph was taken by Harry and Meghan's long-term friend and confidant, Misan Harriman.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> Last week Netflix had a layoff of an additional 300 employees. Maybe if they hadn’t made horrible deals like this one they wouldn’t be in such a financial mess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix Begins Second Round of Layoffs, 300 Positions Cut (EXCLUSIVE)
> 
> 
> Layoffs have hit Netflix again, with the streamer letting go of roughly 300 staffers on Thursday, Variety has learned exclusively. The cuts are across multiple business functions in the company, wi…
> 
> 
> 
> variety.com




I really hope that we will have a chance to hear Netflix explain why they entered into a contract with these two and what the actual terms are.  How could they have possibly doled out $50 million when they have received ZERO content.?!?!  One lawsuit has already been filed - hoping for more to jump on that bandwagon!  I struggle to understand how Netflix could have possibly signed a deal with two unknowns (in the field) with no experience and not even a clue as to what they might produce.

Ooooohhh - what if Netflix and Ginge and Cringe end up in a breach of contract suit - that would be fun to watch!  It could take the place of the Depp v Heard spectacle!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Can you imagine!  *Netflix could be so petty and turn the tables on them and it wouldn't be a pretty portrayal.*  Popcorn for all of us!


Well, if Netfl*x is willing to show the 'simple truth' instead of "_their truth,_" I'll upgrade my subscription… 
I may even buy an additional one and gift it.


----------



## Chanbal

LVlvoe_bug said:


> *If her experience in the royal family and press in the UK was bad and made her flee , what makes her think running for president or any office will be better here? *if she didn’t like her role or didn’t want to do the work in the royal family and she walked away ok her choice but you can’t just walk away from being President.


Good points, but they may not be a concern at the present time. I believe TW is still on the phase of evaluating the sound of the words 'Madam President' and 'duchesssss'…


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> "Trying to help them pressure Netfl*x." Shouldn't it be the opposite? *Why would they pressure Netfl*x?*


It's a great question for Lady C. I didn't watch the entire video.

I wonder if the 'indication' of OW being open to or interested in discussing additional information may make them look 'more valuable,' particularly if Netfl*x is deciding whether to keep or get rid of them.

I just saw the article posted by @miss_chiff, and a potential connection between OW and Netfl*x.


----------



## Chanbal

If the last paragraph is indeed from V Low, it supports that both Arch*e and LiliDi were in the UK. 



_Buckingham Palace has refused to disclose the steps it has taken to protect victims of bullying after an investigation into allegations made against the Duchess of Sussex.

The palace, which has been accused repeatedly of “burying” the report into the bullying claims made against the duchess, which were revealed by The Times, said its review was “confidential”. It said that “lessons have been learnt” in the review, but refused to say what those lessons were.

The palace’s refusal came despite guidance from a royal source last year that any changes in policies would be published in the annual Sovereign Grant report on royal finances.

There was speculation that the palace’s main concern was to avoid risking further confrontation with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have denied the claims by Jason Knauf, their former communications secretary.

The staff who gave evidence to the bullying review, which was carried out by an independent law firm and was financed privately, are also concerned that they have been kept in the dark. None of them have been told what the results were.

A senior palace source said that members of the royal family had been made aware of the changes to policies and procedures of the royal household’s human resources department, as had staff.

The Times revealed in March last year that Knauf had submitted an official complaint in October 2018 accusing Meghan of bullying members of staff. The email — sent to Simon Case, Prince William’s private secretary, who is now the cabinet secretary — alleged she had driven out two personal assistants and that staff had been “humiliated” on several occasions. However, even though the complaint was sent by Case to the HR department, it seemed nothing was done about it.

Meghan’s lawyers called the claims, which emerged days before the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey, a “calculated smear campaign”. They accused The Times of “being used by Buckingham Palace to peddle a wholly false narrative” about the duchess.

After the story was published, the palace said it was “clearly concerned” about the allegations. “Accordingly, our HR team will look into the circumstances outlined in the article,” it said.

A senior palace source said: “I’m not going to comment on the changes that have been made to the policies and procedures — I’ll just say that the policies and procedures have been updated.”

The source went on to say: “Because of the confidentiality of the discussions, we have not communicated the detailed recommendations. The recommendations have been incorporated within policies and procedures wherever appropriate and policies and procedures have changed.”

*Charles ‘thrilled’ to see grandchildren

The Prince of Wales had an “emotional” first meeting with his one-year-old granddaughter Lilibet when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex flew from California for the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee, a royal source said. Charles was also “thrilled” to see his grandson Archie, three, for the first time since the Sussexes left Britain in 2020. Harry and Meghan kept a low profile and were said to have not spent any time privately with the Duke of Cambridge. However, they did have tea with the Queen at Windsor Castle*._









						Palace refuses to reveal how it will fight bullying after Meghan report
					

Buckingham Palace has refused to disclose the steps it has taken to protect victims of bullying after an investigation into allegations made against the Duches




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

A butler!!! If this is true, I feel sorry for Hazz.


----------



## Chanbal

According NS, Charles and Camilla did not have the time and opportunity to get emotional and spend time with Hazz, TW, and LiliDi… not sure where Arch*e was during the visit.   @gracekelly what should we believe?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

gracekelly said:


> Can you imagine!  Netflix could be so petty and turn the tables on them and it wouldn't be a pretty portrayal.  Popcorn for all of us!



They may actually make more money that way given how unpopular the Harkles are.


----------



## Annawakes

Toby93 said:


> From Tatler
> Clearly a hit with the young ones, news has come to light regarding Prince Charles's latest meeting with his youngest grandchild, Lilibet. According to _Mail Online_ royal sources, the 73-year-old was ‘very emotional’ during the time he spent with the toddler over the Platinum Jubilee weekend.
> 
> The sources shared that Charles and his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall, were thrilled to be reunited with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex during their short visit to the UK. ‘The prince and the duchess were absolutely thrilled to see them. The prince, of course, hasn't seen his grandson Archie for a bit of time and so it was very, very, very special to have some time with him. He hadn't met Lili, his granddaughter, and so to meet her was very emotional, a very, very wonderful thing.'
> 
> Harry and Meghan hosted baby Lilibet's first birthday party at Frogmore Cottage over the weekend, *with the Queen reportedly in attendance,* although she allegedly did not wish to be photographed during the event. The couple shared a picture of their daughter from the gardens of the house (the first-ever shared with the public), to mark the milestone occasion. The photograph was taken by Harry and Meghan's long-term friend and confidant, Misan Harriman.


Too many “very”s.  Like there was no effort made to even make this sound real


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Too many “very”s.  Like there was no effort made to even make this sound real



Very, _very_ good point!!!!

Move over BLG, tPF crew coming through


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> From Tatler
> Clearly a hit with the young ones, news has come to light regarding Prince Charles's latest meeting with his youngest grandchild, Lilibet. According to _Mail Online_ royal sources, the 73-year-old was ‘very emotional’ during the time he spent with the toddler over the Platinum Jubilee weekend.



What, emotional during the whole 10 minutes he probably had to spare during the event of a lifetime?



> Harry and Meghan hosted baby Lilibet's first birthday party at Frogmore Cottage over the weekend, *with the Queen reportedly in attendance,* although she allegedly did not wish to be photographed during the event. The couple shared a picture of their daughter from the gardens of the house (the first-ever shared with the public), to mark the milestone occasion. The photograph was taken by Harry and Meghan's long-term friend and confidant, Misan Harriman.



These a*shole know da*n well the nearly 100yo woman was resting so she could make her balcony appearance on Sunday. They are disgusting.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> They may actually make more money that way given how unpopular the Harkles are.


I would watch an exposé but I wouldn't care to watch a self-aggrandizing programme which was what Pearl and Archetypes were shaping up to be. Once Methane started her fashion week at the Netherlands, I am suspecting that Heart of Invictus will turn into some Harlequin romance featuring their torrid love story.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> You are not aware of their finances and are in no position to say they have "enough" money to be financially independent. By your standards, maybe, but only M, H and their accountants can determine such for THEIR lifestyle. I can assure you even a multi-million dollar inheritance does not go far given their security cost alone (which is not funded by the RF). Even regular lottery winners who win tens of millions of dollars with no overhead expenses like the Sussexes go broke.


one will likely go broke sooner if living in a huge 16-bath mansion in a very expensive part of CA


----------



## Chanbal

Impressive how QE recovered so fast from a bloodshot eye.**


It was one of the highlights of the Platinum Jubilee celebrations - the Red Arrows’ patriotic plumes of red, white and blue filling the skies over Buckingham Palace, to the delight of the Royal family on the balcony.
Yet *The Telegraph has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were in such a rush to leave last month’s Trooping the Colour ceremony in honour of the Queen’s 70 years on the throne that they missed the flypast altogether*.

As the aerial show featuring the Royal Air Force aerobatics team captivated the nation, the couple were already making their way back to Frogmore Cottage, their Windsor home, to see their children Archie, three, and Lilibet, one.

Although prevented from watching from the balcony, *they could have joined their fellow “non-working” royals on the roof of St James’ Palace for the display by 70 aircraft including Typhoon fighters, but opted to go home instead.

The swift exit meant the couple also avoided a family lunch with royal cousins*, including Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips, after watching the parade of pomp and pageantry together from the Major General’s Office overlooking Horse Guards.

According to several sources, *the cousins had planned to pay Harry and Meghan a visit at Frogmore later that day, but the “celebratory” lunch went on much longer than planned.* As one insider put it: “It was quite boozy and went on well into the early evening, by which point there was no time to get to Windsor to see the Sussexes.”

The details of exactly what happened when the Duke and the Duchess of Sussex were reunited with the Royal family for the first time since their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview have emerged amid talk of an “uneasy truce” between the couple and “The Firm” over allegations of bullying against the Duchess, which she denies.

On Thursday, it emerged that an official investigation into the handling of claims made against Meghan would be kept secret, with even those who participated kept in the dark about its findings.

*The review, conducted by an independent legal firm, will never be published, nor will staff be updated on the changes made as a result.*

The decision has raised serious questions about transparency at the publicly funded institution and its responsibility towards members of staff working closely with the Royal family.

The unusual silence on either side about the issue has also led to speculation that Buckingham Palace and Sussexes, who work closely with their lawyers, are both moving to downplay the long-running dispute.

Both sides are understood to be hopeful of drawing a line under the episode - after the Duke and Duchess met with the Queen at Windsor Castle as soon as they arrived in the UK on June 1.

*Contrary to reports they introduced her to Lilibet after the Trooping ceremony, they actually flew into Farnborough airport the day before and headed straight for Her Majesty’s private apartments.

The couple had hoped to bring their own photographer to capture the first meeting between the sovereign, whose family nickname is Lilibet, and her great-granddaughter.

However, the Queen personally intervened to prevent an official image being taken, apparently advising the couple that she had a bloodshot eye and did not want to feature in any pictures for public consumption.* It came after aides expressed fears that publicising a private meeting could set a dangerous precedent, not least if any photographs were shared with US television networks or Netflix, with whom the couple have signed a multi-million dollar contract.

*The Duke is thought to have expressed a desire to get an official photograph of the two Lilibets together at some point in the future. 

The Telegraph has also learned that the Sussexes’ decision to take a solo walk down the lengthy aisle of St Paul’s Cathedral for the service of thanksgiving on June 3 “raised eyebrows” behind palace walls - not least when they could have walked with Beatrice, Eugenie and their husbands, who were seated next to them in the pews.*

One of the reasons the couple were spotted leaving Clarence House that Friday morning was because they were in a security “pod” with the Duke of York’s daughters, *having apparently expressed concerns about their level of protection throughout the whistlestop visit. 

Clive Alderton, the Prince of Wales’ private secretary, was strategically seated at the end of the row behind the Sussexes *- who had no contact with the Duke of Duchess of Cambridge during the hour-long service, nor throughout the weekend.

Although the wider family were invited to Lilibet’s first birthday party on the Saturday, only the Tindalls’ and Mr Phillips’ children attended, while their parents spent the afternoon at the Epsom Derby.

According to one source: *“There was a bit of reluctance among the royals to admit to having any involvement in Lilibet’s birthday party.”*

That day, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge took Prince George and Princess Charlotte on their first official engagement to Wales, carrying out a series of duties in Cardiff. There was no interaction between the couples or their children.

*The Sussexes were offered the opportunity to attend both the Party at the Palace on the Saturday night and Sunday afternoon’s Platinum Pageant, but declined both - leaving the UK before the colourful carnival swept down The Mall*.





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Cinderlala

I'm beginning to think that doing their PR is the easiest job in the world---invent sources, use invented sources to make creative use of possible 'truths' (write whatever lies you want), 'leak' those lies to the press, spin anything around to make everything a positive, and rake in the cash.  I wonder if SS is hiring...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A...bloodshot eye and all the royal cousins drinking so heavily they forgot the time


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A...bloodshot eye and all the royal cousins drinking so heavily they forgot the time


I wouldn’t be surprised if the drinking part of that story was true!  What better way to avoid the Harkles and their shenanigans than by being drunk!


----------



## Cinderlala

kipp said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if the drinking part of that story was true!  What better way to avoid the Harkles and their shenanigans than by being drunk!



The Desperate Duo might be enough to drive anyone to drink.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> A butler!!! If this is true, I feel sorry for Hazz.



I'm usually one to say a picture is just a small moment and doesn't necessarily say anything but that shot of her next to the queen looks smug...hard for me to see it any other way


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> I'm beginning to think that doing their PR is the easiest job in the world---invent sources, use invented sources to make creative use of possible 'truths' (write whatever lies you want), 'leak' those lies to the press, spin anything around to make everything a positive, and rake in the cash.  I wonder if SS is hiring...



I think you're on to something. All this sounds like a lot of nonsense. They know the public is eager to hear all the sordid details, so when they can't write anything factual they just make it up. And here we all are dissecting and discussing it 

My guess is that the Harkles bolted early because TW did not want to face any further humiliation, like what we saw as they were leaving the church service. And I doubt anyone was sorry to see them go.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I'm usually one to say a picture is just a small moment and doesn't necessarily say anything but that shot of her next to the queen looks smug...hard for me to see it any other way



I'd say it's proof that a picture can be worth a thousand words.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> "Ginge and Cringe"



Of all their nicknames that one never fails to make me laugh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> I'm usually one to say a picture is just a small moment and doesn't necessarily say anything but that shot of her next to the queen looks smug...hard for me to see it any other way



Right?!  It's like a glimpse (warning) of her true personality.  Smug, haughty, looking down on all the little people.  Royal Rachel with her over-inflated sense of self-importance.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> And he is ditching Jerry Hall, so is now available


this is right out of Succession cable series









						‘Nasty Surprise’: Jerry Hall Reportedly Blames Murdoch Split on His Kids
					

A pal said Murdoch’s children thought Hall was keeping the 91-year-old from them when she was actually trying to protect him from COVID.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I'm usually one to say a picture is just a small moment and doesn't necessarily say anything but that shot of her next to the queen looks smug...hard for me to see it any other way


Yes! TW is literally looking down her nose at HMTQ, a sure sign that she feels superior and more important than HM.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Right?!  It's like a glimpse (warning) of her true personality.  Smug, haughty, looking down on all the little people.  Royal Rachel with her over-inflated sense of self-importance.



Not a fan of Meghan McCain, but her DM opinion piece about Royal Rachel running for president is spot on.


----------



## mellibelly

I believe that Telepgraph article to be true except for the Phillips and Tindall children attending Invisibet’s party. We saw the cold shoulder from Peter and Mike at the church. I can’t believe they would send their kids to hang with the “B*llend” and its wife. And a one year old’s birthday is not the same as a say 8 year old’s party. We’re meant to believe these older kids had fun eating elderflower cake at a baby party?! No, they weren’t there. Part of the reason Handbag and TW packed up and left so quickly…no one came but the photographer and his family. All of these elaborate stories, I mean lies, Sunshine Sucks spins…the most obvious explanation is the truth.

Edited to add: pictures or it didn’t happen. There was a photographer, if Philips and Tindall children were present we would see photos.


----------



## mellibelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes! TW is literally looking down her nose at HMTQ, a sure sign that she feels superior and more important than HM.


This picture was from the balcony at Buckingham Palace? The smug, down her nose look is directed at the masses gathered below. Don’t forget as a child she made other children call her Queen at a birthday party that wasn’t hers! She’s vile.


----------



## youngster

I'm wondering if the Palace burying the Meghan bullying report, and refusing to release it, is part of their plan to deal with Harry and MM over Harry's upcoming book.  They won't release the bullying report and will keep it under wraps, unless Harry lies, embarrasses the family again, or writes about private details of private conversations without gaining consent, or something like that.  So, it will be conveniently leaked should that happen. Or, later this summer, the Palace will change course and say that, due to push back from from the people who came forward and put their careers on the line, they will be releasing it after all at some date this fall/winter which will more or less conveniently coincide with the release of Harry's book.


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> Not a fan of Meghan McCain but this is a hilarious thought



I’m not a fan of Meghan McCain either, but this is fabulous! Thank you for sharing it
(now I would like to see if goldbelly has a deal with the makers of deep fried Oreos lol


----------



## rose60610

Talk is cheap. Saying Charles was emotional when visiting Lilibet neither proves he actually saw the kid or was emotional. So where are the pictures? Oh that's right, THERE AREN'T ANY.  My guess is that Charles never met Lilibet, let alone was emotional. So what if Meghan was "cleared" of bullying. Just being mentioned is damaging, and nobody is going to change their mind one way or the other from what they originally thought. The sugars could be shown tons of proof and still defend her.  Isn't it true that Meghan said "It isn't my job to coddle them" in regard to how she treats staff?

Well, it isn't MY job to coddle Meghan, either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I think you're on to something. All this sounds like a lot of nonsense. They know the public is eager to hear all the sordid details, so when they can't write anything factual they just make it up. And here we all are dissecting and discussing it
> 
> My guess is that the Harkles bolted early because TW did not want to face any further humiliation, like what we saw as they were leaving the church service. And I doubt anyone was sorry to see them go.



H&M also know the Palace will never respond [directly]. H&M can say anything, capture the news cycle, and stick their noses in the air.
My guess is QE, Charles and W have long memories. QE’s team certainly knows how to throw shade when necessary.

‘Saying it’ does not make it so.


----------



## rose60610

They showed the world, once again, how arrogant they are by not riding with the cousins to the church, arriving late and smug, and requesting that the cousins move over. Nope! Mr. MI5 was sitting right behind their assigned spots. Did H&M really want the aisle or did they not want Mr. MI5 breathing down their wretched little necks? Didn't work!  Their arrogance knows NO bounds!


----------



## Sharont2305

Cinderlala said:


> Right?!  It's like a glimpse (warning) of her true personality.  Smug, haughty, looking down on all the little people.  Royal Rachel with her over-inflated sense of self-importance.


"Move over lady, its me they've come to see"


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Once again, for Nflix.
> Hazzie makes a video; William writes a heartfelt letter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William shares emotional letter on his mothers 61st Birthday
> 
> 
> Prince William has released a statement in honour of this year's Diana Award, on what would have been her 61st birthday. He called the recipients 'an inspiration'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'd forgotten about that awful statue with the pilgrim belt.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes! TW is literally looking down her nose at HMTQ, a sure sign that she feels superior and more important than HM.


of course we don't know for sure what she was feeling but it looks like that...imagine that with the queen?  people much more important than her have been in awe of this woman


----------



## csshopper

Netflix CEO Contact Information. Left the info on his salary in the part I copied. Being a poor judge of character and rushing into ill conceived business relationships pays handsomely.

*Email Address*
To share your message or request, you can also send him an email. Please note down the *official email address of Netflix CEO Reed Hastings: rhastings@netflix.com*. You can also try an alternate email address: *reed.hastings@netflix.com.*

*Salary*
*The total compensation received by Mr. Reed Hastings* for handling the post of President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board at Netflix is *$38,577,129*. The total compensation includes salary amount $700,000, stock options worth value $37,411,492 and other types of compensation value $465,637. The info mentioned her is based on the data filed for the year 2019.
* Net Worth*
The total Net Worth of *Mr. Reed Hastings is approximately $189 Million dollars*. This info is based on the updated data filed as on date as of 21 December 2020.


Found this information in case anyone else is interested in sending him a message regarding the company business practices with the Narcissistic, Hypocritical, Grifting Snarkles.

I don't expect an answer to mine, but did include we had

(1) been part of the recent mass exit of subscribers

(2) And with Netflix having initially been bamboozled into throwing multi millions of dollars into a contract with 2 uniquely unqualified posers with nothing to show for the investment, news of an apparent directive from Hazbeen and Raptor regarding their demand for cessation of production of "The Crown," caused any lingering faith in Netflix business practices to evaporate. (Would NF really be stupid enough to suspend one of their most successful series to avoid a tantrum from the Second Row Royals?)

(3) Further, the unending tag line of "for their Netflix series" added on to multiple offensive paparazzi actions (the cringe worthy NYC/UN faux Royal Tour, Methane's intrusion into Invictus, her being outed at Uvalde helping the photographers stage set the shot, Haz supposedly wanting to go to the Ukraine, her butting into US politics, concealed recording equipment at the Jubilee and a few I have probably forgotten, there have been so many) has caused us to give our Financial Advisor direction to plan for divesting Netflix stock. Talking with the checkbook, association with Netflix violates our family values.

This will be a_ piddling_ amount of money, Netflix will never notice it, but maybe someone will pay attention to the message behind divestments. Netflix association with the Sussexes has become a derisive joke, and as long as they pander to the Second Row Royals, therefore mismanaging
corporate assets, there are people who will distance themselves from the company.

I did praise the decision to axe "Pearl."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, define morning. Maybe it was their ritual he made them coffee before their daily briefing, which could have been at 11 instead of 8. That said, I've read several times in different articles how staff complained that Harry started to treat them sh*tty on a regular basis only after Raptor arrived. So with all his flaws apparently he was mostly personable before.


I dunno, I think they probably just got used to his particular brand of awful but when Tw arrived it was double the work and triple the nightmare but I just don’t buy this image of him suddenly changing his views on social status and boundaries at all.


The royals have been around servants so much I doubt they feel any embarrassment about doing or not doing the chores. People I’ve seen from societies that still have servants are the same- if anything they would consider blurring the boundaries too much to be more awkward.
I feel like it’s be a bit like if we went to a restaurant and I went and got our own drinks or food- were just not socially conditioned to do that.

Similarly a prince isn’t conditioned to think of The class subservience elements of someone fetching things for him- he just accepts it as the way of things.



Chanbal said:


> A couple of interesting headlines from DM:
> 
> TW is ver accommodating. She ate chips or cookies "like a Chipmunk," drunk milk out of baby bottle…why wouldn't she eat deep-fried Oreos?
> View attachment 5438837
> 
> _It is a privilege to run for President of the United States and these are desperate times in our country. We need more than an ex-C list actress-turned-royal with no civic or political experience to speak of. Marrying a prince doesn't make you a leader. It makes you a celebrity and I thought ********s were sick and tired of celebrity presidents. You want to be president and make it to the Emerald City? You got to make your way through Oz first and there's nothing glamorous about that. You will get sweaty, your makeup won't stay in place, you won't be able to wear $6,000 designer outfits. Meghan, trust me, you don't want to run for president. And I can assure you, the American public doesn't have any interest in voting for you anyway._
> 
> Bezos is a much better match to TW's ambitions. Hope the bridge will not be dismantled.
> View attachment 5438831


Bezos- talk about overcompensating.  

“stop lecturing us on your half-baked political ideologies- you have no connection to the common man at all and only got where you are from by being daddy’s daughter and by marrying a man of greater influence.” _Says Meghan McCain. _

What is it about Meghans?

Also are fried Oreo’s nice or are they horribly dry?

I absolutely love greasy junk and it’s not appealing….

Also fuego takis have started being sold here and that is a bit of a game changer for me


----------



## Chanbal

PDina makes some valid points imo.


----------



## Chanbal

_Nicky Haslam Shares Curious Information…_


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes! TW is literally looking down her nose at HMTQ, a sure sign that she feels superior and more important than HM.



My sense is that she was feeling very self-satisfied that she, a "poor black girl from the hood", made it to the balcony of BP with the royal family. I wouldn't necessarily say that she felt more important than HM. If she did, then she was completely delusional. I think she was having a Meghan Antoinette moment, looking down on the commoners to whom she thinks she is superior.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Also are fried Oreo’s nice or are they horribly dry?
> 
> I absolutely love greasy junk and it’s not appealing….



They sound disgusting to me, I'm not fond of fried food, but they are standard fare at state fairs in the Midwest. For some reason Midwesterners love to deep fry just about any kind of food imaginable and eat it on a stick. Pickles, Snickers, corn dogs, etc.

Here's the Oreo recipe if you're feeling adventurous:



> https://www.myrecipes.com/recipe/deep-fried-oreos


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> _Nicky Haslam Shares Curious Information…_




Who is the presenter of this video clip?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> They sound disgusting to me, I'm not fond of fried food, but they are standard fare at state fairs in the Midwest. For some reason Midwesterners love to deep fry just about any kind of food imaginable and eat it on a stick. Pickles, Snickers, corn dogs, etc.
> 
> Here's the Oreo recipe if you're feeling adventurous:
> [/QUOTE
> I think they're pretty standard at fairs in general


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> I think they're pretty standard and fairs in general


I’ve only been to one fair and all I remember is a greased pig Competition. The Oreo looks delicious to me lol.
@jelliedfeels , ive also never had fuego takis, so am taking notes, thanks


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> They sound disgusting to me, I'm not fond of fried food, but they are standard fare at state fairs in the Midwest. For some reason Midwesterners love to deep fry just about any kind of food imaginable and eat it on a stick. Pickles, Snickers, corn dogs, etc.



I have a weak spot for fried food, but I can't get behind frying like, uh, everything. I like Snicker bars well enough without them being dunked into batter and fried just to triple their calories, thank you very much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. Are we getting closer??? (I'll believe it when I see it, though. Who would leave their toddlers for six months?)


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a weak spot for fried food, but I can't get behind frying like, uh, everything. I like Snicker bars well enough without them being dunked into batter and fried just to triple their calories, thank you very much.



MM loves fried food, too 
_Back in 2016, before she was even engaged to Prince Harry, Markle told Best Health it was one of her favorite foods. "I could eat french fries all day," she gushed. "And I love pasta. I love carbs — who doesn't love a carbohydrate?"

Read More: https://www.mashed.com/632354/the-food-meghan-markle-says-she-could-eat-all-day/?utm_campaign=clip_


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Are we getting closer??? (I'll believe it when I see it, though. Who would leave their toddlers for six months?)




A tax dodge?  Visa issues?  Hmm.


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> A tax dodge?  Visa issues?  Hmm.


Or trouble in marital "paradise"?


----------



## Annawakes

How can he stand being away from his WIFE for 6 months!

Seriously, though, how can he stand being away from his two little ones for 6 months.  Unless they don’t exist


----------



## Cinderlala

His access to the children is probably limited to whatever TW deems an acceptable amount of time not focused on her and her endless needs.

I can definitely understand wanting to be away from her for over six months.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Redbirdhermes

I recently began reading this most entertaining thread.  With regards to Harry spending more time in the UK, I think we should follow the money.  His father will soon be calling the shots, and he may have less of the ‘all in’ or ‘all out’ view than the Queen.  Harry could be getting a stipend and performing some duties in exchange for more of a presence in the UK.  I expect he will be hopping on a British Airways flight to CA with great frequency.  Pure speculation with absolutely no support on my part.  The fun is in waiting and watching.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Small world?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Could this be a way for him to keep that role that required living in the UK? It came up a couple months ago.


----------



## redney

Redbirdhermes said:


> I recently began reading this most entertaining thread.  With regards to Harry spending more time in the UK, I think we should *follow the money*.  His father will soon be calling the shots, and he may have less of the ‘all in’ or ‘all out’ view than the Queen.  Harry could be getting a stipend and performing some duties in exchange for more of a presence in the UK.  I expect he will be hopping on a British Airways flight to CA with great frequency.  Pure speculation with absolutely no support on my part.  The fun is in waiting and watching.


Could be! Guess all that huffing and puffing over being fInAnCiAlLy InDePeNdEnT and the alleged racist treatment of Meghan by the BRF, and his anger with British tabloids isn't as important when you start running out of money...


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> How can he stand being away from his WIFE for 6 months!
> 
> Seriously, though, how can he stand being away from his two little ones for 6 months.  Unless they don’t exist


Maybe not in one stretch? Every other month? With Her Heinous accompanying him (with her leash) every now and then when she can fix up a merching deal that includes a first class cabin for her and her retinue? 

Her next production, if Archetypes founders on the reef of laziness, might be a riff (aka plagiarism) of Gloria Gaynor - I Will Survive: the inspiring story of how a poor orphan WOC overcame the racist BRF. Pseudonyms will be used of course and Diana will be portrayed by a POC doing a cameo. She doesn't have any inspiration that does not centre on herself.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Are we getting closer??? (I'll believe it when I see it, though. Who would leave their toddlers for six months?)



This doesn't seem to fit with the narrative that his pending book is expected to shred the family, especially Camilla. He dumps on everyone, yet returns to live at Frogmore and do some work for the RF? 

Sounds like the Megxit deal, has the RF caved?

I'm confused.


----------



## gracekelly

If Harry is that interested in his children, he won't leave them for 6 months.  How is that 6 months supposed to happen?  As a lump sum or in increments?


----------



## lulu212121

Who in the UK is going to want to see or hear from Hasbeen? They do not like, nor want him there. Charles is stupid if this rumor is real.


----------



## bellecate

Sugars gone wild indeed!


----------



## redney

The "race" in becoming the "next Queen of England. Fact."  hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha!!  These idiots are delusional!


----------



## gracekelly

lulu212121 said:


> Who in the UK is going to want to see or hear from Hasbeen? They do not like, nor want him there. Charles is stupid if this rumor is real.


Charles is not going to jeopardize his standing by bringing back his son who has the lowest poll numbers of the royals.  He has his own issues with the charity donations.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> The "race" in becoming the "next Queen of England. Fact."  hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha!!  These idiots are delusional!


They think this is an elected office?!?!?!  The delusion, ignorance and stupidity is epic.


----------



## Jayne1

bellecate said:


> Sugars gone wild indeed!
> View attachment 5439693
> View attachment 5439694


Satire?


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Satire?


You would hope so or these people are really nuts!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Are we getting closer??? (I'll believe it when I see it, though. Who would leave their toddlers for six months?)




Maybe trouble is really in paradise especially with the recent claim about Nutmeg staying at a hotel because they had a fight. 

Nutmeg is controlling as fxck. Impossible that she would let Harry stay in the UK for 6 months without her. She would need him locally in order for her to scrutinize his every move and tell him what to do. If she's actually allowing him to do it, then either they are headed into separation before a divorce or he's returning to the UK to attempt getting new materials for their reality show or Harry's book.

And since they claimed that they wanted to be financially independent, wouldn't it be great if Harry was told that he can't stay on the palace ground but to rent his own flat in London


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> Or trouble in marital "paradise"?



One can only hope.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Sugars gone wild indeed!
> View attachment 5439693
> View attachment 5439694



These people are so unhinged it's scary.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> This doesn't seem to fit with the narrative that his pending book is expected to shred the family, especially Camilla. He dumps on everyone, yet returns to live at Frogmore and do some work for the RF?
> 
> Sounds like the Megxit deal, has the RF caved?
> 
> I'm confused.


If the RF cave, they will lose all respect. OTOH, the tomato industry in the UK will flourish.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> Sugars gone wild indeed!
> View attachment 5439693
> View attachment 5439694


Her sugars are crazy. World class celebrity? She is an international joke. 
And I'm having a nice time imagining "Queen Meghan" literally shaking with rage aka disintegrating with fury, molecules scattering in a frenzy.

I wonder if this Julian CS Nutkins is the same person as Julian Whip-Nutkins also of Margate. Whip-Nutkins threw a tantrum on Reddit a few years ago.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> You would hope so or *these people are really nuts*!


Who are these people? It's amazing how the Harkles have been interfering with the lives of so many people… 

_*CNN was urged by the Sussex Squad to sack her…*_





…






__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Who are these people? It's amazing how the Harkles have been interfering with the lives of so many people…
> 
> _*CNN was urged by the Sussex Squad to sack her…*_
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5439826
> 
> …
> View attachment 5439827
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph




Two observations: this is Victoria Arbiter, a well-known journalist with connections to the BRF via her father, a former press secretary to The Queen, not someone I'd consider an easy target. So this is downright scary.

But also, this is Victoria Arbiter, a well-known journalist. I haven't unlocked the article yet and won't be able to right now because I need to get dressed and leave, but how did she fall for a scam by the sugars?


----------



## jelliedfeels

880 said:


> I’ve only been to one fair and all I remember is a greased pig Competition. The Oreo looks delicious to me lol.
> @jelliedfeels , ive also never had fuego takis, so am taking notes, thanks


They are great - from Mexico originally - corn tortilla snacks but very spicy. Available at all good bodegas. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a weak spot for fried food, but I can't get behind frying like, uh, everything. I like Snicker bars well enough without them being dunked into batter and fried just to triple their calories, thank you very much.


deep frying chocolate bars is bad, I agree. too soft and mushy.

I don’t think biscuits are good at extremes of temperature at all- I don’t like ice cream sandwiches either.

My favourite thing deep fried is fish - battered cod to tilapia it’s all so tender yet crispy.




CarryOn2020 said:


> MM loves fried food, too
> _Back in 2016, before she was even engaged to Prince Harry, Markle told Best Health it was one of her favorite foods. "I could eat french fries all day," she gushed. "And I love pasta. I love carbs — who doesn't love a carbohydrate?"
> 
> Read More: https://www.mashed.com/632354/the-food-meghan-markle-says-she-could-eat-all-day/?utm_campaign=clip_


It is amazing she can sound this disingenuous talking about something as simple as food.
It is very..




csshopper said:


> This doesn't seem to fit with the narrative that his pending book is expected to shred the family, especially Camilla. He dumps on everyone, yet returns to live at Frogmore and do some work for the RF?
> 
> Sounds like the Megxit deal, has the RF caved?
> 
> I'm confused.


I mean  *maybe* it is a face save to bury the book.

Either way I don’t think they take the book that seriously because he’s not going to say anything that incriminating because he will just look like a collaborator too - it functions much better as a threat than a published text. It’ll be just like fergie’s book where she was complaining about the ‘grey suits’ and somehow never mentioned Epstein or ghislaine or Andrew’s arms dealing and embezzlement.

Dumping on Camilla is the only logical thing for Harry to do really because he can’t actually say anything too bad about the bloodline because that’s the family’s only claim to authority. Wicked stepmother, dead mummy, anonymous nasty men in press department, *****y HR manager etc etc. it’ll be a load of everyone’s fault but the people with real authority.

I think a lot of general readers realise this and aren’t going to run out to get the gossip. I mean look at how disappointed they were by finding freebies sales.  And now they’ve tried to tease people again with the Oprah interview with some vague witch hunting but no real scandal.


----------



## duna

Redbirdhermes said:


> I recently began reading this most entertaining thread.  With regards to Harry spending more time in the UK, I think we should follow the money.  His father will soon be calling the shots, and he may have less of the ‘all in’ or ‘all out’ view than the Queen.  Harry could be getting a stipend and performing some duties in exchange for more of a presence in the UK.  *I expect he will be hopping on a British* *Airways flight to CA with great frequency*.  Pure speculation with absolutely no support on my part.  The fun is in waiting and watching.



Surely you mean a private jet??


----------



## duna

Jayne1 said:


> Satire?



That's what I was thinking, I can't imagine there are people who actually believe this rubish!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> That's what I was thinking, I can't imagine there are people who actually believe this rubish!



That "Queen of Australia" part sure seems like it. The other unhinged one, I've read it so many times, they really insist on believing it.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

duna said:


> Surely you mean a private jet??


He won’t need a private jet when traveling solo.  I remember when my kids were 1 and 3 and I decided to pass on a family wedding abroad rather than trying to deal with the logistics of traveling with two small children.  If I’d had a private jet option I would have taken it too.  It vastly simplifies the logistics, and everyone arrives rested and relaxed.  Even if they truly believe in saving the environment, I can understand making an exception when bringing the kids.

And, the RF is playing the long game.  Charles will be in charge soon, and his wife used to be the most hated person in the UK.  He hasn’t forgotten that opinions can change, and I’m sure he wants to see his grandchildren more.  I think we will see him act so that this can happen.  Time will tell.


----------



## duna

Redbirdhermes said:


> He won’t need a private jet when traveling solo.  I remember when my kids were 1 and 3 and I decided to pass on a family wedding abroad rather than trying to deal with the logistics of traveling with two small children.  If I’d had a private jet option I would have taken it too.  It vastly simplifies the logistics, and everyone arrives rested and relaxed.  Even if they truly believe in saving the environment, I can understand making an exception when bringing the kids.
> 
> And, the RF is playing the long game.  Charles will be in charge soon, and his wife used to be the most hated person in the UK.  He hasn’t forgotten that opinions can change, and I’m sure he wants to see his grandchildren more.  I think we will see him act so that this can happen.  Time will tell.



I was being sarcastic!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> *Maybe not in one stretch? Every other month? *With Her Heinous accompanying him (with her leash) every now and then when she can fix up a merching deal that includes a first class cabin for her and her retinue?
> 
> Her next production, if Archetypes founders on the reef of laziness, might be a riff (aka plagiarism) of Gloria Gaynor - I Will Survive: the inspiring story of how a poor orphan WOC overcame the racist BRF. Pseudonyms will be used of course and Diana will be portrayed by a POC doing a cameo. She doesn't have any inspiration that does not centre on herself.


You called it right as I can see this eco-warrior travelling by private jet to increase his carbon footprint to sixfold instead of twofold in one year without any qualms.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> I believe that Telepgraph article to be true except for the Phillips and Tindall children attending Invisibet’s party. We saw the cold shoulder from Peter and Mike at the church. I can’t believe they would send their kids to hang with the “B*llend” and its wife. And a one year old’s birthday is not the same as a say 8 year old’s party. We’re meant to believe these older kids had fun eating elderflower cake at a baby party?! No, they weren’t there. Part of the reason Handbag and TW packed up and left so quickly…no one came but the photographer and his family. All of these elaborate stories, I mean lies, Sunshine Sucks spins…the most obvious explanation is the truth.
> 
> Edited to add: pictures or it didn’t happen. There was a photographer, if Philips and Tindall children were present we would see photos.



Voice of sanity, TY  

Ginge and cringe really capitalise on the fact that the Palace (or any royal) never comment, deny or confirm. 

Worldwide, I'm not sure most people understand that aspect of the BRF, which means these cringe-worthy, fake-history (non)happenings go unchallenged and get repeated without a challenge. 

Def agree, no photo, never happened


----------



## bellecate

I can’t see her letting him go by himself for any length of time. Without him close at hand she’s a nobody, who would call her to do anything. But then, she may be just as delusional as her sugars and thinks she doesn’t need him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> The "race" in becoming the "next Queen of England. Fact."  hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahaha!!  These idiots are delusional!


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> I can’t see her letting him go by himself for any length of time. Without him close at hand she’s a nobody, who would call her to do anything. But then, she may be just as delusional as her sugars and thinks she doesn’t need him.



But she's a WORLD CLASS celebrity!


----------



## MiniMabel

I don't think that JCMH will return to live in the UK, in any way.  There is no place for him here, and certainly none for her.  He's no longer popular and no longer wanted here; the booing at the Platinum Jubilee confirmed that most clearly (and they know it because they ran away back to the USA as quickly as rats up a drain pipe).  The Harkles (I wonder if the property is in his name only?) renewed the lease on Frogmore Cottage just so he could stay in the Line of Succession; however, his behaviour is not appropriate to hold that office and I sincerely hope that Charles and William remove him and put Anne there in his place. Similarly, PA should also be removed forthwith and Edward should take his place.

With regard to the rantings of the Sussex Squad and the lady journalist who's been threatened, I think that the individuals concerned should be taken to court and given a criminal record.  People can be traced via IP addresses, etc. Why don't The Harkles tell their stans to pipe down? It's all getting out of control, and for what? Two people who are in love with themselves.


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> Why don't The Harkles tell their stans to pipe down? It's all getting out of control, and for what? Two people who are in love with themselves.


Plausible deniability. Just like how they denied that they contributed to that exercise in self-glorification otherwise known as Funding Freebies. If any of their loonybin stans ever physically attack the BRF or commit arson, Methane will claim that it has nothing to do with her and she is oh so full of compassion for the poor stan going to prison.


----------



## Sferics

I wonder what he will do after she divorced him.


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry 'dragged around like a performing seal' by Meghan Markle – expert
					

According to Ingrid Seward, it only took four months for the American actress to get her 'mesmerised' future husband to dote on her with total devotion as he became 'obsessed'




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sferics said:


> I wonder what he will do after she divorced him.



Licking his wounds and sucking up to the BRF to get back into the fold


----------



## Sferics

EverSoElusive said:


> Licking his wounds and sucking up to the BRF to get back into the fold


I think, you're right - not many other options are there for him.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Licking his wounds and sucking up to the BRF to get back into the fold



And playing more polo I'm sure when he's rid of the ball and chain.


----------



## Sferics

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry 'dragged around like a performing seal' by Meghan Markle – expert
> 
> 
> According to Ingrid Seward, it only took four months for the American actress to get her 'mesmerised' future husband to dote on her with total devotion as he became 'obsessed'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk





The Daily Star seems slow boat, hm?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry 'dragged around like a performing seal' by Meghan Markle – expert
> 
> 
> According to Ingrid Seward, it only took four months for the American actress to get her 'mesmerised' future husband to dote on her with total devotion as he became 'obsessed'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



for me, the way she has been seen pushing and pulling on him, interrupting him, etc. is maybe the worst aspect of that biatch.  Just Plain Rude.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sferics said:


> I wonder what he will do after she divorced him.



What he _should _do is go to Africa. He said he always wanted to do that.  Or was that yet another lie?

old article, 2019
_Harry told a British broadcaster that he feels “more like myself” in Africa, adding that Cape Town would be an “amazing place for us to be able to base ourselves,” the Sunday Times of London reported Saturday.
“The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince. “There’s a lot of things to be done. There’s a lot of problems here, but there’s huge potential for solutions.”_








						Prince Harry hints at moving to Africa: ‘I feel more like myself’
					

“The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince.




					pagesix.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What he _should _do is go to Africa. He said he always wanted to do that.  Or was that yet another lie?
> 
> old article, 2019
> _Harry told a British broadcaster that he feels “more like myself” in Africa, adding that Cape Town would be an “amazing place for us to be able to base ourselves,” the Sunday Times of London reported Saturday.
> “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince. “There’s a lot of things to be done. There’s a lot of problems here, but there’s huge potential for solutions.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hints at moving to Africa: ‘I feel more like myself’
> 
> 
> “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


seems he's changed his mind


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> seems he's changed his mind


Nah. TW told him no Africa, I bet.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sferics said:


> I think, you're right - not many other options are there for him.





charlottawill said:


> And playing more polo I'm sure when he's rid of the ball and chain.




Maybe undergoing some psychiatric treatment  That would do him a lot of good after being married to and under the thumb of TW(itch).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> What he _should _do is go to Africa. He said he always wanted to do that.  Or was that yet another lie?
> 
> old article, 2019
> _Harry told a British broadcaster that he feels “more like myself” in Africa, adding that Cape Town would be an “amazing place for us to be able to base ourselves,” the Sunday Times of London reported Saturday.
> “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince. “There’s a lot of things to be done. There’s a lot of problems here, but there’s huge potential for solutions.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hints at moving to Africa: ‘I feel more like myself’
> 
> 
> “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com





redney said:


> Nah. TW told him no Africa, I bet.




They want palaces, glamour and spotlight. Africa is not London or LA. Nutmeg would be pissed while Harry would be bored shltless. If they are the kind of philanthropists that get their hands dirty, I'm sure they can do a lot of good and meaningful work.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Yeah, there are “actually” no paps in Africa


----------



## CarryOn2020

As many of us have noted, his Africa statement was nonsense.  The first of many, it seems.


----------



## EverSoElusive

And if they do move to Africa, TW(itch) may very well have primates raising the Invisikids because when do we ever see them do anything with their kids other than the rare staged photos and videos for promotional purposes (e.g. beach video first shown on the O interview)


----------



## gracekelly

Redbirdhermes said:


> He won’t need a private jet when traveling solo.  I remember when my kids were 1 and 3 and I decided to pass on a family wedding abroad rather than trying to deal with the logistics of traveling with two small children.  If I’d had a private jet option I would have taken it too.  It vastly simplifies the logistics, and everyone arrives rested and relaxed.  Even if they truly believe in saving the environment, I can understand making an exception when bringing the kids.
> 
> And, the RF is playing the long game.  Charles will be in charge soon, and his wife used to be the most hated person in the UK.  He hasn’t forgotten that opinions can change, and I’m sure he wants to see his grandchildren more.  I think we will see him act so that this can happen.  Time will tell.


 Camilla has worked very hard at royaling.  She hasn’t made anything about herself and has been a very supportive wife and member of the family. People like and admire her now, and The Queen gave her the ultimate seal of approval by stating that Camilla should have the title of Queen. It took many years for this to happen, not weeks or months. Harry’s penance would be very long, and patience is not his long suit. He would want his military patronages back for one thing, and the armed services might be rather resistant to that   He can go back and stay at Frog Cot anytime he wishes. He has the lease so it is his. He has gone so far over the edge that a rescue team would have a hard time bringing him back and that also depends on William. He has a lot to say and I think even more than his father regarding this.  The real litmus will be Harry’s book. Nothing happens until that is published.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Voice of sanity, TY
> 
> Ginge and cringe really capitalise on the fact that the Palace (or any royal) never comment, deny or confirm.
> 
> Worldwide, I'm not sure most people understand that aspect of the BRF, which means these cringe-worthy, fake-history (non)happenings go unchallenged and get repeated without a challenge.
> 
> Def agree, no photo, never happened


Yes, thexe are the disturbing most aspects. No refutation from the palace and people don’t realize that this is the BP SOP.

Based on body language alone, those two men would never allow their children to be part of the Harkle circus. Bad e luv that the two girls were in the window photos. Peter didn’t even realize that it happened until later.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Plausible deniability. Just like how they denied that they contributed to that exercise in self-glorification otherwise known as Funding Freebies. If any of their loonybin stans ever physically attack the BRF or commit arson, Methane will claim that it has nothing to do with her and she is oh so full of compassion for the poor stan going to prison.


A subpoena for cell phone records and laptops would help show who said what to whom.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Nah. TW told him no Africa, I bet.


or it was just talk....one thing to like visiting, another thing to live there


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> They want palaces, glamour and spotlight. Africa is not London or LA. Nutmeg would be pissed while Harry would be bored shltless. If they are the kind of philanthropists that get their hands dirty, I'm sure they can do a lot of good and meaningful work.


TW definitely wants the glamour. When she performs her hip swiveling moves, it is strictly for the camera. The whole solo walk at St Paul’s was for the camera. That was filmed and NF can use it and will big it up as if they were so important that they got the solo walk. They are not gong to mention that they were sitting in the bleachers. It’s all in the editing.


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> or it was just talk....one thing to like visiting, another thing to live there


True with most places!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> TW definitely wants the glamour. When she performs her hip swiveling moves, it is strictly for the camera. The whole solo walk at St Paul’s was for the camera. That was filmed and NF can use it and will big it up as if they were so important that they got the solo walk. They are not gong to mention that they were sitting in the bleachers. It’s all in the editing.


It will be framed as their grand entrance and return to the royal fold. Of course NF won't show the part where Megs was ignored by Peter Phillips.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It will be framed as their grand entrance and return to the royal fold. Of course NF won't show the part where Megs was ignored by Peter Phillips.


the are arrogant and becoming boring.....if she had any inkling of this she must be panicked....what to do?!!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thank you!
> 
> Now, how long will it take to screenshot every frame of that video?!


You are very welcome. I'm glad you were able to watch the video,  because my post seems to have been deleted. Not sure why, since the video is related to the subject of this thread. The image below is from the video and shows the Major with the Harkles…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was just thinking how she really has some unlikely allies. When she first married Harry and started to give the BRF grief, so many of my Middle Eastern friends were cheering her on only because they immensely dislike them due to their colonial past. Which I found curious because in those cultures being respectful to your elders is everything (up to breaking up with a potential spouse they deem unsuitable), and yet they enjoyed her disrespect with unexpected glee.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> You are very welcome. I'm glad you were able to watch the video,  because my post seems to have been deleted. Not sure why, since the video is related to the subject of this thread. The image below is from the video and shows the Major with the Harkles…
> View attachment 5440258


The Major is really keeping an eye on the duo. 
Please let's have a conversation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking how she really has some unlikely allies. When she first married Harry and started to give the BRF grief, so many of my Middle Eastern friends were cheering her on only because they immensely dislike them due to their colonial past. Which I found curious because in those cultures being respectful to your elders is everything (up to breaking up with a potential spouse they deem unsuitable), and yet they enjoyed her disrespect with unexpected glee.


strange....but I guess they dislike the RF that much


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> the are arrogant and becoming boring.....if she had any inkling of this she must be panicked....what to do?!!


I have to believe it is finally sinking in with them that their grand plan has crashed and burned. The Hollywood connections they envisioned haven't materialized. She is in no way equipped to run for office. They have to be getting close to negative cash flow. I don't believe NF handed them 50 mil up front. If they did, the CEO should be fired. I do believe the report of Hazy asking Dad for a lifeline.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> You are very welcome. I'm glad you were able to watch the video,  because my post seems to have been deleted. Not sure why, since the video is related to the subject of this thread. The image below is from the video and shows the Major with the Harkles…
> View attachment 5440258


Do we know if Hazy knows who he is, and was he aware that he was seated right behind them, I assume by design?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Definitely get Wallis&Ed vibes from H&M.

Article from 2020








						Wallis Simpson's hard lessons for Harry and Meghan
					

What the Sussexes could learn from the miserable exile of Edward VIII and his demonised US lover.



					www.bbc.com
				





Spoiler: Thy princess  privilege



*Wallis Simpson's hard lessons for Harry and Meghan*
22 February 2020
*By Jude Sheerin*
BBC, Washington







Getty Images
*A popular, playful prince falls in love with a strong-willed US divorcee, who ends up vilified by a hostile British press. In Harry and Meghan, some royal watchers see echoes of Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson, the couple at the heart of the abdication crisis eight decades ago. But does the comparison hold up? It could do if the Duke and Duchess of Sussex end up reliving the Duke and Duchess of Windsor's unhappy exile.*
In December 1936, The King gave up his throne and an Empire of half a billion souls so he could wed a woman who was divorcing her second husband.
The public vitriol spewed on his bride-to-be, Wallis Simpson, might strike a chord with the latest American to marry into Britain's royal family.
On top of being condemned as a social climber from a Baltimore, Maryland, row-house, Simpson was reviled as a cheap adventuress, a lesbian, a nymphomaniac, a Nazi spy and a hermaphrodite. 
She was portrayed as a sexual enchantress who supposedly learned "ancient Chinese skills" in the brothels of Shanghai, where her first husband, a US Navy pilot, had been stationed.
But the media's attacks on Simpson weren't just in print. 
Daily Express reporters hurled bricks through the window of her rented Regent's Park, London, home, the newspaper's owner, Lord Beaverbrook, would later acknowledge.

How might Harry and Meghan make money?
The Harry and Meghan story
As the abdication crisis loomed, Simpson fled to France, pursued across the country by reporters to Cannes.
She evaded this "ravenous besieging army", as she described them, in car chases and sometimes by crawling through bathroom windows.





Getty Images
Edward and Wallis became increasingly bitter
Anne Sebba, author of That Woman, the Life of Wallis Simpson, says Harry and Meghan's decision to step back from royal duties is nowhere near as constitutionally seismic given that Simpson was accused of almost destroying the British monarchy and Empire.
Sebba tells the BBC: "We're not living in 1936 when people were terrified about divorced women.
"They thought it was going to herald a wicked society where everyone would get divorced. 
"But the really big difference is that Edward was King and Harry is sixth in line to the throne - he's never going to be King."
Simpson received sack-loads of hate mail, much of it misogynistic. 
She wrote in her memoirs: "There can be few expletives applicable to my sex that were missing from my morning tray."





Getty Images
Read all about it: News of the abdication sent shockwaves far beyond Britain
But some of the strongest invective came from other women.
According to Hugo Vickers' biography, Behind Closed Doors, the Tragic, Untold Story of Wallis Simpson, the Queen once said: "The two people who have caused me the most trouble in my life are Wallis Simpson and Hitler."
Continuing that theme, Simpson's childhood friend, Mary Kirk, who married the royal consort's cuckolded second husband, Ernest Simpson, wrote in a diary of her erstwhile love rival: "I think of her as people think of Hitler, an evil force… full of animal cunning".
Princess Margaret referred to her uncle's lover as "that ghastly woman".
The popular narrative endures that Edward - as has been said of Harry - was a wimp manipulated by an ambitious and demanding lover.
But despite Simpson's reputation as "the woman who stole the King", Edward had always found royal duties unbearably tedious. 
Like Meghan and Harry, he dreamt of escaping to live in Canada. 
What would Canadians think about welcoming the royal couple?
Alan "Tommy" Lascelles, his assistant private secretary, said he realised after a long conversation with the prince in 1927 that "words like 'decency', 'honesty', 'duty', 'dignity' and so on meant absolutely nothing to him".
The royal consigliere concluded Edward was "an archangel ruined".
As Harry and Meghan steer a new course, they will no doubt seek to avoid drifting into the sort of aimless existence led by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.
Aside from Edward's wartime spell as governor of the Bahamas, neither he nor his wife ever worked again.
Olivette Otele, Britain's first female black history professor, points out that while Meghan has been a successful actress, activist and lifestyle blogger, Simpson never had a job in her life.
"One was a socialite," says the University of Bristol lecturer, "and the other is an independent, successful woman who has relied on her own income to make a living."
Prof Otele says "the veiled and overt racist attacks" against the Duchess of Sussex, who is mixed race, are another reason why it is "completely nonsensical" to draw parallels between the two. 
"Wallis Simpson, of course she was mistreated by the British press," says Prof Otele, "but it was never to the same extent [as Meghan]."
Black British women on Meghan and race
A miniature court in exile surrounded by emblems of royalty, Edward and Wallis spent the rest of their lives sponging off wealthy friends. 
Like Harry and Meghan, Edward and Wallis hobnobbed with Hollywood royalty, hosting movie stars such as Richard Burton and Marlene Dietrich at their French country retreat.
Edward had little to do other than play golf. He professed no regrets about his 11-month reign, though his stories too often began with the words: "When I was King..."
He blamed everyone but himself for his abdication, from Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin to the Queen Mother.
"Twenty years I worked for my country and they kicked me out on my ass," the embittered duke told a friend.
Perhaps the greatest irony of all for the so-called fairytale romance of the century is that most biographers agree that Edward had cast aside his crown for a woman who did not even really love him.





Chris Allerton/SussexRoyal
Archie was christened in a private ceremony, from which the press and the public were excluded
On the Windsors' long evenings together, whisky would be served after dinner and "they had nothing to say to each other so the contents of the decanter just went slowly down, down, down", recalled their private secretary, John Utter.
According to Andrew Morton's book Wallis in Love, Simpson's heart actually belonged to her friend, Herman Rodgers, a wealthy Yale graduate. 
The duchess is said to have made this stunning confession to Rodgers' second wife on their wedding day in 1950.
The Windsors were also peeved by their fading fame.

Harry and Meghan to end use of 'SussexRoyal' brand
Charles Pick, publisher of the duchess' 1956 memoirs The Heart Has Its Reasons, said that when they first met to discuss her book Simpson rose from a chaise longue to complain about being pushed off the newspaper front pages by Marilyn Monroe.
In 1966 the duke and duchess took a train to Vienna, Austria, and grumbled about the paparazzi they expected to find lurking at their destination. 
But an aide noticed they could not hide their disappointment when no photographers materialised.

*As Harry and Meghan embrace a kind of semi-exile, they might do well to bear in mind some words of advice from Shakespeare.
In Henry IV, Part I, the king rebukes his son, Prince Harry, for shirking his duty and suggests he has "mingled his royalty with cap'ring fools".
"For thou has lost thy princely privilege," the monarch berates his heir. "Not an eye / But is aweary of thy common sight."
*


----------



## EverSoElusive

What karma? What clout does Nutmeg have besides all the lies she's telling? Can somebody fill me in?   

Delusional stans.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking how she really has some unlikely allies. When she first married Harry and started to give the BRF grief, so many of my Middle Eastern friends were cheering her on only because they immensely dislike them due to their colonial past. Which I found curious because in those cultures being respectful to your elders is everything (up to breaking up with a potential spouse they deem unsuitable), and yet they enjoyed her disrespect with unexpected glee.



I suspect there are many around the world who would like to see the institution of the royal family destroyed.   It has nothing to do with liking Meghan personally. More like she is the tool by which that could be achieved.

Yes, I called Meghan a tool!


----------



## bag-mania

Sferics said:


> I wonder what he will do after she divorced him.



I can tell you what he WON’T do and that’s get a job and work.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Ok so mods please be kind- I’m going to try and avoid politics as much as humanly possible.


CarryOn2020 said:


> What he _should _do is go to Africa. He said he always wanted to do that.  Or was that yet another lie?
> 
> old article, 2019
> _Harry told a British broadcaster that he feels “more like myself” in Africa, adding that Cape Town would be an “amazing place for us to be able to base ourselves,” the Sunday Times of London reported Saturday.
> “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince. “There’s a lot of things to be done. There’s a lot of problems here, but there’s huge potential for solutions.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hints at moving to Africa: ‘I feel more like myself’
> 
> 
> “The rest of our lives, especially our life’s work, will be predominantly focused on Africa, on conservation,” said the prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I hugely suspect the ‘I want to save Africa’ storyline was fed to H by the royal press department. They were going for a more global philanthropy expansionist image at the time but they are, in general, retracting due to thinking that image won’t sell so well after covid and because the commonwealth already got rebuffed when two Caribbean islands  sought independence.

More and more people are also becoming critical of the white saviour narrative too and h and m has always favoured the white saviour role with the photo-op heavy ‘me personally giving bread to an orphan’ school of charity rather than the more useful and less prominent roles.

there’s plenty of rich and glam parts of Africa where they could live in a McMansion gated community and mince around with the polo set but as others have identified it doesn’t square with their plans to take selfies with Hollywood royalty.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking how she really has some unlikely allies. When she first married Harry and started to give the BRF grief, so many of my Middle Eastern friends were cheering her on only because they immensely dislike them due to their colonial past. Which I found curious because in those cultures being respectful to your elders is everything (up to breaking up with a potential spouse they deem unsuitable), and yet they enjoyed her disrespect with unexpected glee.


It’s just nuance, surely?  If someone is morally reprehensible to you them being older than you doesn’t supersede their actions. Even if the Queen lives to be 200 I won’t consider her morals to be particularly worthy of respect and the same goes for her children. 

The BRF are involved in a lot of evil stuff in the ME region NOW as well as in the colonial past. They continue to maintain close ties with the Saudi royals and their elite envoys:




__





						Queen Elizabeth’s platinum jubilee: A reminder of the special bonds between Saudi and British royal families
					

Get the latest breaking news and headlines from the largest Arab News website. Get world news, sport news, business news, entertainment, lifestyle, video and photos.




					www.arabnews.com
				





			https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-british-royal-family-gulf-rulers-visits-decade
		

despite their documented human rights abuses including Kashoggi but there have been many more incidents that didn’t get the press his murder did. 
The BRF have acted as envoys for the British arms trade 

 Through these actions tacitly endorse the  bombing of Yemen through their endorsement of the Saudi elite and the British arms industry:-
https://caat.org.uk/homepage/stop-arming-saudi-arabia/companies-supplying-the-war-in-yemen/

BAE are open sponsors of the princes trust and the ‘Millie’s’ awards to British soldiers with Charles.
Harry doesn’t get off the hook here as guess who the biggest sponsors of his darling invictus are - Lockheed Martin.

ME people are probably more aware of all this as the western press are much more deficient on reporting the details of these relationships than the ME media.

Alas that’s the tragedy of it all, your friends are just being practical because they know the press won’t seriously pursue any of these human rights abuses.  A much more palatable critical news story is ‘white elite person says mean things to black elite person.’

I don’t support pushing this narrative myself as I think that H& mM were lying about the skin colour comments and quickly got lost in their lies which ultimately undermines everything but I do recognise the school of thought that this is as close to actual criticism as the likes of the Daily Mail gets to the Royals these days and anything is better than nothing. 
I also don’t support using this narrative as I think Harry is just as complicit in all these shady deals as the rest of them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think you misunderstood what I was saying (and also, I keep on top of ME media pretty well, in several languages), but honestly, it's too early for me to dissect this whopper of a comment  In short, what I say about elders and respect still stands, BRF shenanigans or not. It's one thing to have a point in critizising an institution and their involvement in unsavory things, another one to celebrate an extremely rude DIL.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> What karma? What clout does Nutmeg have besides all the lies she's telling? Can somebody fill me in?
> 
> Delusional stans.




Have I missed something? What karma is hitting anyone besides some bad press for Charles - a man who rolled out the red carpet for that ill-mannered thing?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think you misunderstood what I was saying (and also, I keep on top of ME media pretty well, in several languages), but honestly, it's too early for me to dissect this whopper of a comment  In short, what I say about elders and respect still stands, BRF shenanigans or not. It's one thing to have a point in critizising an institution and their involvement in unsavory things, another one to celebrate an extremely rude DIL.


I agree with you that I didn’t need to be quite so voluble in my reply definitely but I feel like some of the facts are so wild i explicit link what I’m referencing. I just wanted to give my perspective on why people might be glad the institution is getting criticised even if what the particular criticism is is incorrect. I myself think it’s a short term gain long term loss.

I do think it’s a bit of a stereotype to say ME people prioritise x over y.

what I didn’t do very well is I didn’t explain why I think ‘respect your elders’ can actually be quite an insidious custom.
What it does to me is install an unchangeable hierarchy of authority and infantilises the younger adult . What if your older family have hateful ideas or even have bad intentions for you? Why do we need to add this complication that something you can’t change ie birth order means it’s an act of social defiance to disagree with them one adult to another? (We’ve seen that in fact sometimes that these perceived defiances can have dangerous consequences) I just question how different it is from the old sexist ideas like wives respect your husband with no mention of husbands respecting their wives- a one way street of credibility. 

I mean not that I think the royals were planning to do something bad to H&M because of their defiance of the hierarchy (if anything I think they’ve rewarded them) but the idea that they were wrong because it is rude to someone older than them is tone policing.  

On a lighter note I’ve got no problem being rude about H&M either and they are much older than me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree with you that I didn’t need to be quite so voluble in my reply definitely but I feel like some of the facts are so wild i explicit link what I’m referencing. I just wanted to give my perspective on why people might be glad the institution is getting criticised even if what the particular criticism is is incorrect. I myself think it’s a short term gain long term loss.



Oh, I enjoyed reading it, as I do with all your postings. I just didn't have the brain capacity to answer appropriately as I had already woken up to a lot of personal drama. Now that I've mostly calmed down everyone and stress-eaten pizza for breakfast I'm better 



> what I didn’t do very well is I didn’t explain why I think ‘respect your elders’ can actually be quite an insidious custom.
> What it does to me is install an unchangeable hierarchy of authority and infantilises the younger adult . What if your older family have hateful ideas or even have bad intentions for you? Why do we need to add this complication that something you can’t change ie birth order means it’s an act of social defiance to disagree with them one adult to another? (We’ve seen that in fact sometimes that these perceived defiances can have dangerous consequences) I just question how different it is from the old sexist ideas like wives respect your husband with no mention of husbands respecting their wives- a one way street of credibility.



I completely agree.



> I mean not that I think the royals were planning to do something bad to H&M because of their defiance of the hierarchy (if anything I think they’ve rewarded them) but the idea that they were wrong because it is rude to someone older than them is tone policing.



To be fair, my problem with them is not being rude to someone older than them (unless it's their dying grandparent that is...it's not like Philip was, say, part of the Khmer Rouge), my problem is biting the hand that feeds you and literally trying to destroy a family simply out of spite because they didn't get their way. They are worse than any 3yo having their tantrum phase. I swear Archie is probably the mature one in that household.



> On a lighter note I’ve got no problem being rude about H&M either and they are much older than me





I mean, I'm rude about people older than me all the time. It's just I'm not usually rude TO them (admittedly I'm generally polite to everyone I encounter in my daily life).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comment under the article claiming Harry wants to divide his time between the US and UK:



> I have always suspected Harry was not quite stable. His behaviors as a young man called the question. The crown was able to protect him until a vulnerable young man met a controlling deceitful woman. The first thing that controller does is separate the subject from his family and all emotional support.  And the rest is played out for the cameras.


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> and stress-eaten pizza for breakfast


Hope you are okay! I’ve been following and agreeing with all of the posts, but I’ve been too busy stuffing breakfast pizza into my mouth to comment. (I don’t have much stress; I just fell off the diet and here it’s a holiday weekend, so I thought I would indulge).

does anyone think all of the unsavory press will result in William passing over Charles? Either way, Harry seems to realize he needs to mend bridges. I wouldn’t doubt that there might even be a secret agreement not to go forward with book and bullying report will be suppressed. Esp. Since the book drafts weren’t going well anyway. . .

personally, I think Charles will give the kids titles; Meghan and Harry will divorce; Harry will scurry back to the UK; and, Meghan will find a rich much older man who doesn’t mind Harry’s seconds. Meghans issue was her impatience. If she had done some time as a senior Royal, then slowly edged out, it wouldnt have been as offensive. But, I suspect that part of her charm was she fed Harry the idea of a quick have your cake and eat it too, which is what he always wanted. No magic. Just promises of a fairy tale. He would have been warned from an early age about fortune hunters; he simply thought he knew better. He took all his girlfriends to Africa. He just was enamored of marrying someone who could lay claim to being biracial bc he’s so modern and open minded. An easy way to distinguish himself from the rest of the BRF during a time when he must have felt even less relevant.

One thing that I think she does have in common with Wallis. Wallis, it is said, really preferred to be the mistress of a King. She apparently got the shock of her life when he decided he had to give up the throne to marry her. Wallis didn’t want to become one of the most hated and infamous women of the world. Likewise, on a much smaller scale, since Harry isn’t heir, Meghan would have been far better off as one of Harry’s ex girlfriends. Then, if she had wanted to date someone else, she would have had the cachet of association, but not actual connection with the BRF. Everyone would have been better off.

i also think Harry hides behind what Meghan wants, she gets. Harry, I suspect, wants plenty. He just also wants to be known as the nice guy, too noble to stoop to ask for such things himself.. i have many cousins who feel they are too important to work. Yet, they expect their  lifestyle to be fully supported bc of who they are, and they do get homes, cars, education, allowances, child expenses, all paid. Same holier than thou attitude on a much much smaller scale.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> Hope you are okay! I’ve been following and agreeing with all of the posts, but I’ve been too busy stuffing breakfast pizza into my mouth to comment. (I don’t have much stress; I just fell off the diet and here it’s a holiday weekend, so I thought I would indulge).



Thank you. I am theoretically dieting too, but eh. Lost 10 pounds, 10 more to go, upped working out (I HATE working out. It's no fun at all to me, it will never become a beloved habit and I just do it because I sit on a desk 10 hours a day). Enjoy your holiday weekend, I take Sundays off from dieting always. I feel it's not only my mind but also my metabolism that benefits. 



> does anyone think all of the unsavory press will result in William passing over Charles?



I don't think so. It would need a way bigger scandal for that to happen. 



> personally, I think Charles will give the kids titles; Meghan and Harry will divorce; Harry will scurry back to the UK; and, Meghan will find a rich much older man who doesn’t mind Harry’s seconds.



That sounds like an ideal scenario (maybe not for the rich older man).

BTW both kids HAVE titles. Just not the ones their mother thought they should be entitled to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW both kids HAVE titles. Just not the ones their mother thought they should be entitled to.


Do they have titles? I thought with Archie, the initial story was that his parents declined titles because they wanted him to have a normal childhood. Maybe that was a Scobie fantasy? Their alleged mother is probably all buoyed up by her sugars' belief that she will soon be the  Kween of England. I'm hoping that some of her sugars are already on national and Interpol security watchlists because some of their vitriolic comments are threats to harm people and in some countries would be considered cyber crime.


----------



## MiniMabel

I think we all agree that, in an ideal world, the Harkles would be stripped on their Duke and Duchess titles, HRH titles (not just not being allowed to use them but, as they're forbidden to do so, they may as well have them removed anyway) and also JCMH should only be JCMH and not use the title of "Prince" ever again.  In addition, JCMH to be removed from the line of succession (as I've mentioned previously) and they and their children to just use the Wales surname. They perform no official duties for the BRF and do not represent them in any way. Their children are a million miles away from the Throne and do not need titles in the USA (for example, Sophie and Edward's daughter, Lady Louise, didn't take up the title of Princess, I think?).  The Harkles are simply no-where near being Royal in any  way.  They chose to step away to live independent lives in another country (making a song and dance about it), far away from the UK and, after all, one cannot be "half in and half out" can one?! 

I appreciate that the removal of titles etc is not straightforward but, really, it must done because those two just do not deserve them and it does rankle that they use them for potentially monetary gain and to big themselves up.  Honestly, how do they sleep at night after that Oprah interview and various other word salad and crapola that they peddle. Makes my blood boil how people behave today and think they're above the consequences.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just not the ones their mother thought they should be entitled to.


Imagine how ridiculous Princess Lilibet would sound. Good name for a show dog or race horse maybe.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The look she gave Doria still gives me the chills.

Also, someone commented they have a relative with untreated personality disorders and when they are not "insincerely mimicking normal human behaviour" their eyes are dead. Insincerely mimicking normal human behaviour, that's worded perfectly.


----------



## Lodpah

I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.

Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy. 

It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


----------



## redney

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


Oh no, I'm so very sorry for your loss. Saying goodbye to a beloved furry family member is so very hard.  Sending big hugs to you.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.



I am so sorry, Lodpah. Losing a furbaby is a horrible experience. We never get to have them with us nearly long enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.



Oh Lodpah I'm so very sorry. My cat's death anniversary is coming up next weekend, it's been two years and that stupid hole hasn't shrunk at all. Sending you a big hug.


----------



## WingNut

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.



I’m so so sorry. Losing a beloved pet is crushingly heartbreaking. My heart goes out to you as I’m hugging my dogs..

I hope this thread continues the distraction. H & M could use some lessons in behavior and loyalty from dogs!!

Edited for wording.


----------



## jennlt

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


I'm so sorry for the heartbreak you're going through. Furbabies are  essential members of the family and the pain of losing them is unbearable. Sending you hugs


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Nah. TW told him no Africa, I bet.



Yup,_ after_ they married


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.



Our hearts go out to you.

I lost my baby (cat) end of last year, it's beyond devastating. I am haunted


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## papertiger

MiniMabel said:


> I think we all agree that, in an ideal world, the Harkles would be stripped on their Duke and Duchess titles, HRH titles (not just not being allowed to use them but, as they're forbidden to do so, they may as well have them removed anyway) and also JCMH should only be JCMH and not use the title of "Prince" ever again.  In addition, JCMH to be removed from the line of succession (as I've mentioned previously) and they and their children to just use the Wales surname. They perform no official duties for the BRF and do not represent them in any way. Their children are a million miles away from the Throne and do not need titles in the USA (for example, Sophie and Edward's daughter, Lady Louise, didn't take up the title of Princess, I think?).  The Harkles are simply no-where near being Royal in any  way.  They chose to step away to live independent lives in another country (making a song and dance about it), far away from the UK and, after all, one cannot be "half in and half out" can one?!
> 
> I appreciate that the removal of titles etc is not straightforward but, really, it must done because those two just do not deserve them and it does rankle that they use them for potentially monetary gain and to big themselves up.  Honestly, how do they sleep at night after that Oprah interview and various other word salad and crapola that they peddle. Makes my blood boil how people behave today and think they're above the consequences.



I'd like that too, unfortunately although Parliament could strip them of the Duke and Duchess titles, there is no way of stripping JCMH of his Prince title, it is his birthright, and since he was, is and will always be one, MM will be Princess Harry.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


I am so very sorry for your loss…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'd like that too, unfortunately although Parliament could strip them of the Duke and Duchess titles, there is no way of stripping JCMH of his Prince title, it is his birthright, and since he was, is and will always be one, MM will be Princess Harry.



That said...wouldn't that be the ultimate blow to her ego. So many people ask if Princess Michael's name is really Michael


----------



## bisousx

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.



My heart goes out to you and your family. Losing my dog was one of the hardest things I’ve had to experience and I still feel his loss everyday. Lots of hugs to you  He knows you loved him with all your heart.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said...wouldn't that be the ultimate blow to her ego. So many people ask if Princess Michael's name is really Michael



She would insist on being called Princess Meghan (unfortunately) even though it's incorrect. Who is going to tell them different?


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Our hearts go out to you.
> 
> I lost my baby (cat) end of last year, it's beyond devastating. I am haunted


We said goodbye to our sweet girl doggie in January and I miss her every day.



Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.




I know how much you're hurting. We said goodbye to our sweet girl doggie in January and I miss her every day.



papertiger said:


> I'd like that too, unfortunately although Parliament could strip them of the Duke and Duchess titles, there is no way of stripping JCMH of his Prince title, it is his birthright, and since he was, is and will always be one, MM will be Princess Harry.


I think Princess Henry?


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said...wouldn't that be the ultimate blow to her ego. So many people ask if Princess Michael's name is really Michael


Yes, I was one of them until I learned what her real name is from this thread!!!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> We said goodbye to our sweet girl doggie in January and I miss her every day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know how much you're hurting. We said goodbye to our sweet girl doggie in January and I miss her every day.
> 
> 
> I think Princess Henry?



 

You are correct! Sadly, others will be even less likely to remember to call her Princess Henry, without a decree or media reinforcement.


----------



## bellecate

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


So sorry for your loss.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


>



The look on Sophie’s face, love it. It says exactly how she’s feeling.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> Imagine how ridiculous Princess Lilibet would sound. Good name for a show dog or race horse maybe.


Brilliant.  Love you ladies.


----------



## LittleStar88

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.



Im so sorry for your loss. My heart breaks for you


----------



## bellecate

It seems “recollections may vary” after being told what to think by TW.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bellecate said:


> It seems “recollections may vary” after being told what to think by TW.
> View attachment 5440814
> View attachment 5440815
> View attachment 5440816


Two more articles showing TW copying Diana's fashion. Some are bit exaggerated, but most are close enough to call M a copycat and it's probably also her way of controlling Dufus by nurturing his Oedipus Complex.   









						19 Times Meghan Markle Was Inspired by Princess Diana's Style - Slice
					

Are Meghan's fashion choices due to sleek styling, or has the Duchess of Sussex been inspired by someone else?




					www.slice.ca
				












						Meghan Markle's Green Erdem Coat Pays Tribute to Princess Diana
					

The two royals seem to have similar taste.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


I'm so very sorry for your loss!  As the mother of many fur babies in the past, and two currently, the loss of any is so painful and your post brought tears to my eyes.  Sending you lots of hugs!  As fortunate as you were to have your baby, he or she was blessed to you have you as their mommy!


----------



## 880

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


I am so sorry for your loss @Lodpah! Hugs


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> What karma? What clout does Nutmeg have besides all the lies she's telling? Can somebody fill me in?
> 
> Delusional stans.



Karma?  If such a thing existed, young innocents wouldn't be killed doing their schoolwork, etc... the list goes on and on. Horrible things would not happen to those who did nothing to deserve it and evil people who did a life time of horrible things would not die peacefully in their beds at an old age.

I think all those stans are just bots, quite frankly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


>



Maybe that's what he was looking for?  A replacement mother?  He has been playing the pity card all these years, so maybe he found exactly what he wanted?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


@Lodpah My heart breaks for you.  It is a very painful loss.  My one and only baby passed over 21 years ago and I still tear up.  I pray your baby passed peacefully.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I, too, come here for the distraction and y’all always help me   thank you.
The loss of a beloved pet imo is like losing a beloved family member. It all hurts. As we get older and lose friends and family, it gets tougher in many ways. I’m so sorry to all who experience loss of any kind.  Keep a going, rest lots and live well - breakfast pizza sounds delicious.  Does anyone have a recipe  [yes, I am being snarky]

As for Hazz and respect for elders, imo it is not simply elders H&M must show respect for, it is everyone. He has been so disrespectful over the years that it really is quite shocking. Certainly, I believe we must speak truth to power, but do so in a respectful and caring manner. Yes, it is a skill, but it is not that difficult to master. This actually does get easier with age - well, that is my experience anyway. Love, hugs, and perfect pizzas for all


----------



## needlv

@Lodpah - I am so sorry for your loss… it’s always hard losing a loved animal.  My heart goes out to you.

If you want some distraction, try reading this awful post, probably written by MM to distract from all the bad news that follows her…









						Prince Harry Infatuated With Meghan Markle – ‘Would Follow Her To The Ends Of The Earth, He’s Obsessed,’ Says Royal Expert Ingrid Seward
					

Prince Harry has been totally infatuated with Meghan Markle.  Prince Harry Is Infatuated With Meghan-'Totally Mesmerised, He Would Follow Her To The Ends Of The Earth, He’s Obsessed' That is according to Royal expert Ingrid Seward. There




					theovertimer.com


----------



## needlv

*Blind Items Revealed #23*


March 25, 2022
You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks that followed the release, the number of sales really rose exponentially. The reason? It is now estimated that the author of said book, who all of you know, bought about 70% of the total number of books sold.
_Meghan Markle/The Bench






						Blind Items Revealed #23
					

March 25, 2022 You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks tha...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> As for Hazz and respect for elders, imo it is not simply elders H&M must show respect for, it is everyone. He has been so disrespectful over the years that it really is quite shocking. Certainly, I believe we must speak truth to power, but do so in a respectful and caring manner. Yes, it is a skill, but it is not that difficult to master. *This actually does get easier with age *- well, that is my experience anyway. Love, hugs, and perfect pizzas for all


This is the guy who is said to have stopped emotionally maturing when he lost his mother? Difficult to imagine him getting any less petulant when he and TW are both stuck in their temperamental teens.

@Lodpah So sorry for your loss. My family shared a cat with our neighbor and the kitty was killed in what looked like a misadventure last month. Her ashes are with us as we try to decide where to place the urn so that her spirit can view both her families. RIP Miaou Miaou


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This is the guy who is said to have stopped emotionally maturing when he lost his mother? Difficult to imagine him getting any less petulant when he and TW are both stuck in their temperamental teens.
> 
> @Lodpah So sorry for your loss. My family shared a cat with our neighbor and the kitty was killed in what looked like a misadventure last month. Her ashes are with us as we try to decide where to place the urn so that her spirit can view both her families. RIP Miaou Miaou



OMG! So, so sorry for your loss too


----------



## andrashik

Wasn't he going to therapy even before he met Claws? He needs to apply what he learned, but I guess it is too easy to consider himself a victim and have this mentality. 
I wonder who would want him as a BetterUp coach or whatever that company name was, as he demonstrated over and over again that he is instable.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Wasn't he going to therapy even before he met Claws? He needs to apply what he learned, but I guess it is too easy to consider himself a victim and have this mentality.
> I wonder who would want him as a BetterUp coach or whatever that company name was, as he demonstrated over and over again that he is instable.


It would be ironic if his brand of coaching was to promote victim mentality since that is working so well for him. If you don't like your job, quit just like I did. And if your ex-company won't continue to pay you, gripe on national TV, just like I did. Remember, it's not your fault, it's always somebody else's fault.


----------



## kipp

To @Lodpah and @xincinsin and everyone else who has lost a pet recently (or even not so recently!)---I send my deepest condolences to you.  Losing a pet is truly heartbreaking.  May their memories be a blessing to you.


----------



## jennlt

I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.

My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.

It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m sending good thought to all of you.


----------



## kipp

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best


Wow, @jennit, how horrible the last few weeks have been for you and yours!  I am so sorry that you and your family are going through all this!   
To keep this post on topic, I too come here for a diversion from the daily awful news.  There is no comparison between the perceived travails of the Harkles to the real ones of more ordinary people...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> *Blind Items Revealed #23*
> 
> 
> March 25, 2022
> You remember that children's book that was released last year to a lot of fanfare, but not such great sales? In the weeks that followed the release, the number of sales really rose exponentially. The reason? It is now estimated that the author of said book, who all of you know, bought about 70% of the total number of books sold.
> _Meghan Markle/The Bench_



That's so ridiculous but totally something she would do.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.



I'm so very sorry. Sometimes the universe just piles on too much onto one single person.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

andrashik said:


> Wasn't he going to therapy even before he met Claws? He needs to apply what he learned, but I guess it is too easy to consider himself a *victim* and have this *mentality*.
> I wonder who would want him as a BetterUp coach or whatever that company name was, as he demonstrated over and over again that he is instable.


I've seen many people with this victim mentality because it is less taxing to wallow in self pity and the compassion they receive is more rewarding than the difficult work needed to resolve their problems.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've seen many people with this victim mentality because it is less taxing to wallow in self pity and the compassion they receive is more rewarding than the difficult work needed to resolve their problems.


I remember when office narc went to one of the sympathetic colleagues to gripe about his life (despised his parents, despised his boyfriend, deserved a better-paying job, deserved more recognition in the church choir, etc etc). SC (sympathetic colleague) came to me for advice not long after that. According to SC (who was a very pragmatic woman), every solution or alleviation she suggested was turned down as unworkable. I gently broke it to SC that what office narc wanted was loads of sympathy. He didn't want solutions. He wanted people to comfort him and agree with him because he was a Victim of Fate (tm). SC blinked at me disbelievingly


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> This is the guy who is said to have stopped emotionally maturing when he lost his mother? Difficult to imagine him getting any less petulant when he and TW are both stuck in their temperamental teens.
> 
> @Lodpah So sorry for your loss. My family shared a cat with our neighbor and the kitty was killed in what looked like a misadventure last month. Her ashes are with us as we try to decide where to place the urn so that her spirit can view both her families. RIP Miaou Miaou



Apologies, my point was, as we get older, it gets easier *for the rest of us* to speak truth to power in a respectful way. 
H&M may [big if] learn by their 60s. My guess is they will be similar to Andi&Fergie, Wallis&Ed who never really learned.


----------



## 880

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best



i am so sorry! Sending you virtual hugs

somehow I wonder if H can see the writing on the wall and leaked how in love he is. So, when the marriage ends, he can retreat to the UK, look pitiful, and everyone will feel sorry for him as a victim of the awful woman. (I agree she is awful, but I think he is just as bad if not worse and they deserve each other)


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best



  I wouldn't even know where to start, so, so sorry


----------



## piperdog

Sincere condolences to all who have suffered losses of beloved 2 or 4-legged family members. I can at least remember the joy mine gave me before they passed, and my current dog is getting lots of extra love today. As for the rest, I feel like I understand less and less of the world these days, but I am grateful for the distractions and smiles TPF, and this forum especially, provide.


----------



## kemilia

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


I am so sorry for you. I totally understand your pain and grief oh too well. Take care of your self.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh Lodpah I'm so very sorry. My cat's death anniversary is coming up next weekend, it's been two years and that stupid hole hasn't shrunk at all. Sending you a big hug.


I lost my darling Nini in September and I still get all teary at times. When is that @#/% hole gonna close? I always say I loved her too much but what else could I do? 

At least we all know we are among friends here that understand--the awful duo has brought us together (this is probably the only nice thing about them).


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I, too, come here for the distraction and y’all always help me   thank you.
> *The loss of a beloved pet imo is like losing a beloved family member. It all hurts. As we get older and lose friends and family, it gets tougher in many ways. *I’m so sorry to all who experience loss of any kind. Keep a going, rest lots and live well - breakfast pizza sounds delicious. Does anyone have a recipe  [yes, I am being snarky]
> 
> As for Hazz and respect for elders, imo it is not simply elders H&M must show respect for, it is everyone. He has been so disrespectful over the years that it really is quite shocking. Certainly, I believe we must speak truth to power, but do so in a respectful and caring manner. Yes, it is a skill, but it is not that difficult to master. This actually does get easier with age - well, that is my experience anyway. Love, hugs, and perfect pizzas for all


So true!  My dogs are at the door SO excited to see me every.single.time I come in, whereas my teenagers comment hours later when they finally come out of their shrines, "Oh, you're home?".


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best


OMG I cannot begin to fathom what you are going through!  Why is it that bad things seem to come in waves??  Hugs to you and your family and wishing everyone a speedy recovery.  I guess we can at least thank Haz and TW for making our eyes roll and scoffing at them in this thread.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> So true!  My dogs are at the door SO excited to see me every.single.time I come in, whereas my teenagers comment hours later when they finally come out of their shrines, "Oh, you're home?".



Right? My little one was severely handicapped, so when I had to go somewhere someone else had to step in to babysit. The moment I came through the door he'd perk up as he knew my steps


----------



## Lodpah

A collective thank you and love to you all. To those who loved your pets that died I’m so terribly sorry. My dog died a sudden and violent attack by another dog so it was so sudden. The vets did everything they could. They had him stabilized but he died the next day. I knew he died but I still took him to the ER to get him CPR, any hope I was clinging to. 

Please know that I appreciate your condolences while still processing this nightmare.


----------



## Lodpah

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best


Im so terribly sorry you are going through so much. Hugs to you.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's so ridiculous but totally something she would do.



I remember many of us assumed she was buying them up at the time. She could donate the books off to various schools and libraries and they would still count as sales.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Lodpah said:


> A collective thank you and love to you all. To those who loved your pets that died I’m so terribly sorry. My dog died a sudden and violent attack by another dog so it was so sudden. The vets did everything they could. They had him stabilized but he died the next day. I knew he died but I still took him to the ER to get him CPR, any hope I was clinging to.
> 
> Please know that I appreciate your condolences while still processing this nightmare.


I am so, so sorry. What an absolutely horrible and traumatic experience for you and your beloved dog


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> A collective thank you and love to you all. To those who loved your pets that died I’m so terribly sorry. My dog died a sudden and violent attack by another dog so it was so sudden. The vets did everything they could. They had him stabilized but he died the next day. I knew he died but I still took him to the ER to get him CPR, any hope I was clinging to.
> 
> Please know that I appreciate your condolences while still processing this nightmare.



That must have been so traumatic, I can't even imagine your thoughts and feelings right now.


----------



## 1LV

Of the many disrespectful things she’s done throwing on a coat and riding a chicken inside the cathedral takes the cake.


----------



## MiniMabel

1LV said:


> Of the many disrespectful things she’s done throwing on a coat and riding a chicken inside the cathedral takes the cake.
> 
> View attachment 5441316



The standout for me from this photo will always be Sophie's face.  She "speaks" for all of us.


----------



## 1LV

MiniMabel said:


> The standout for me from this photo will always be Sophie's face.  She "speaks" for all of us.


Her expression leaves little doubt.


----------



## 880

Lodpah said:


> A collective thank you and love to you all. To those who loved your pets that died I’m so terribly sorry. My dog died a sudden and violent attack by another dog so it was so sudden. The vets did everything they could. They had him stabilized but he died the next day. I knew he died but I still took him to the ER to get him CPR, any hope I was clinging to.
> 
> Please know that I appreciate your condolences while still processing this nightmare.


i am so very sorry for your loss, and I am shocked and dismayed at how this could have happened. sending you thoughts and prayers.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I remember many of us assumed she was buying them up at the time. She could donate the books off to various schools and libraries and they would still count as sales.


She probably donates then write it off her taxes.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> She probably donates then write it off her taxes.


During that faux royal NY trip, didn't it emerge that parents of the kids who received the book were "encouraged" to make a $5 donation to Archewell? So she buys the books, donates them to libraries, schools & the needy, writes the cost off as a business expense, saves on taxes, gets some money back as well, and adds "best-selling children's book author" to her glowing bio. History will probably repeat itself when her wellness/leadership book is published.


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## zinacef

What about Lilibet? Where is she?


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


>



Boy, she lost a LOT of weight since the Jubilee last month


----------



## bag-mania

zinacef said:


> What about Lilibet? Where is she?



They can only travel with one child at a time.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Boy, she lost a LOT of weight since the Jubilee last month



No unseasonal heavy coat. No shorts. No camera crew. How odd...


----------



## 880

lanasyogamama said:


>



Maybe they stayed in one of the private villas near Amangani


----------



## redney

What? No cameras? This is content for Netflix! Doing the "All American" thing at a small town parade. Do their Netflix bosses know??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

What you can tell from the pics Archie and his sister have a strong resemblance. Contrary to the general spirit of this thread I believe they both exist. And as much as I dislike their parents I appreciate that they keep the kids out of the spotlight and do not parade them around at any given opportunity.

Why Wyoming, though? To further bolster their enormous carbon footprint?


----------



## jelliedfeels

@jennit I am so sorry things are going so badly. I really do hope your family gets better soon and you should be proud you are such a caring and supportive rock for all of them.
We will try and keep up the jokes our end.


----------



## jelliedfeels

@Lodpah I’m sorry it’s so sad to lose a beloved pet and in such a way too.


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> @Lodpah - I am so sorry for your loss… it’s always hard losing a loved animal.  My heart goes out to you.
> 
> If you want some distraction, try reading this awful post, probably written by MM to distract from all the bad news that follows her…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Infatuated With Meghan Markle – ‘Would Follow Her To The Ends Of The Earth, He’s Obsessed,’ Says Royal Expert Ingrid Seward
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been totally infatuated with Meghan Markle.  Prince Harry Is Infatuated With Meghan-'Totally Mesmerised, He Would Follow Her To The Ends Of The Earth, He’s Obsessed' That is according to Royal expert Ingrid Seward. There
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theovertimer.com



What tickles me is I’ve always thought that ‘obsessed’ and ‘infatuated’ are meant to specifically describe an excessive yet superficial and short term form of love that harms at least one of the couple- not really the kind of love you should be putting a ring on- so I think they are either accidentally perceptive or subtly shady here. 


andrashik said:


> Wasn't he going to therapy even before he met Claws? He needs to apply what he learned, but I guess it is too easy to consider himself a victim and have this mentality.
> I wonder who would want him as a BetterUp coach or whatever that company name was, as he demonstrated over and over again that he is instable.


Who is going to be their next spokesperson do we think? Tony Soprano? 


lanasyogamama said:


>





Toby93 said:


> Boy, she lost a LOT of weight since the Jubilee last month



Oh my god I was about to say the same thing. Those arms are Waaay too toned as well. 

This whole thing is a troll post for clicks. That’s not her IMHO. There must be a million long haired brown women across America with a cute little boy in tow.

Hell, that could be a photo of me and my kid except I also have bingo wings (maybe the Stan would also do me a favour and photoshop my arms too)

Also this story makes no sense, she’s too fancy to sit with people who can afford Wimbledon tickets but she wants to go stand on a hot street with the working class of a flyover state ? The majority of whom I assume are unlinked to fashionable causes? Suuuurrrreee. 


zen1965 said:


> What you can tell from the pics Archie and his sister have a strong resemblance. Contrary to the general spirit of this thread I believe they both exist. And as much as I dislike their parents I appreciate that they keep the kids out of the spotlight and do not parade them around at any given opportunity.
> 
> Why Wyoming, though? To further bolster their enormous carbon footprint?


Their carbon footprint does not bear thinking about at all. M’s will be bigger than at least one countries and H’s is definitely several countries worth at this point.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


>




That's so...random.


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> What tickles me is I’ve always thought that ‘obsessed’ and ‘infatuated’ are meant to specifically describe an excessive yet superficial and short term form of love that harms at least one of the couple- not really the kind of love you should be putting a ring on- so I think they are either accidentally perceptive or subtly shady here.
> 
> Who is going to be their next spokesperson do we think? Tony Soprano?
> 
> 
> Oh my god I was about to say the same thing. Those arms are Waaay too toned as well.
> 
> This whole thing is a troll post for clicks. That’s not her IMHO. There must be a million long haired brown women across America with a cute little boy in tow.
> 
> Hell, that could be a photo of me and my kid except I also have bingo wings (maybe the Stan would also do me a favour and photoshop my arms too)
> 
> Also this story makes no sense, she’s too fancy to sit with people who can afford Wimbledon tickets but she wants to go stand on a hot street with the working class of a flyover state ? The majority of whom I assume are unlinked to fashionable causes? Suuuurrrreee.
> 
> Their carbon footprint does not bear thinking about at all. M’s will be bigger than at least one countries and H’s is definitely several countries worth at this point.


In retrospect I think I was a little generous to myself saying my body bears a passing resemblance to this lady but I think my point still stands as she doesn’t look much like Meg either


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I got more bad news...at this point it covers health, financial, personal and bad news via proxy. As it seems to be that way for a lof of us here, maybe we should consider a joint exorcism or something? I'm doing a lemon cleanse later, no clue if it helps but at least it won't do any harm.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> In retrospect I think I was a little generous to myself saying my body bears a passing resemblance to this lady but I think my point still stands as she doesn’t look much like Meg either



I am completely indignant that I've been working out for a full four weeks and I don't see any change  Might have something to do with the fitness grade of a 100yo and the fact I have yet to pick a workout longer than 25 mins.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I got more bad news...at this point it covers health, financial, personal and bad news via proxy. As it seems to be that way for a lof of us here, maybe we should consider a joint exorcism or something? I'm doing a lemon cleanse later, no clue if it helps but at least it won't do any harm.


I recommend burning sage for a cleanse and letting the smoke go into every room
I hope you are OK


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I got more bad news...at this point it covers health, financial, personal and bad news via proxy. As it seems to be that way for a lof of us here, maybe we should consider a joint exorcism or something? I'm doing a lemon cleanse later, no clue if it helps but at least it won't do any harm.


I have sage for the taking in the office and a multitude of crystals at home.


----------



## EverSoElusive

zinacef said:


> What about Lilibet? Where is she?



They haven't found a suitable child actress to progress with Invisbet's age     




bag-mania said:


> They can only travel with one child at a time.



Money for a second nanny might have been allocated for plate purchases!


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## needlv

Prince Harry - is this your Twitter account????


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I got more bad news...at this point it covers health, financial, personal and bad news via proxy. As it seems to be that way for a lof of us here, maybe we should consider a joint exorcism or something? I'm doing a lemon cleanse later, no clue if it helps but at least it won't do any harm.


I am sorry 
I am also participating in the joint session. I have some scented candles, maybe it will work. I also have some holy water but I do not know where it is


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> I recommend burning sage for a cleanse and letting the smoke go into every room
> I hope you are OK



Thank you, good point! I used to smudge my home regularly and somehow stopped a few years ago. I'll order some.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> I am sorry
> I am also participating in the joint session. I have some scented candles, maybe it will work. I also have some holy water but I do not know where it is



I think more than the substance it's the intention. You can probably burn all the sage or incense you want if you don't put your mind to cleansing off the bad luck. I agree though that some substances are more helpful than others.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


>




Honestly, I hope he loses. The entitlement has to stop.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I have sage for the taking in the office and a multitude of crystals at home.



Fun story: a few years ago I had a horrid streak of bad luck as well and my bff gave me a mixture of tiny crystals in a test tube supposed to bind bad luck and straighten out energetic kinks. You were supposed to put the tube in a jug of water overnight and drink it. I thought why not, easy enough, no harm done.

That was until tube after tube broke on me. I'd leave the jug on my bathroom counter at night behind closed doors (so unlikely one of the cats got into the room, then closed the door behind itself after leaving) and come to pour a glass in the morning only to find the glass broken and the crystals scattered all over the bottom of the jug. I think we replaced it twice before giving up. My friend is still using the one and only test tube she bought for herself 

(In hindsight I could have just put the crystals in and pour the water through a sieve before drinking, but it wasn't my thing really anyway, so I just abandoned the mission)


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## bag-mania

Wyoming? Are they in the market to buy a giant ranch to use as an escape from all the stress from their high-profile, hard-working lives?


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think more than the substance it's the intention. You can probably burn all the sage or incense you want if you don't put your mind to cleansing off the bad luck. I agree though that some substances are more helpful than others.


Yeah I know. I was joking  but still... maybe she used on us the same methods she used on JustHarry ,some vodoo sh*t


----------



## andrashik

bag-mania said:


> Wyoming? Are they in the market to buy a giant ranch to use as an escape from all the stress from their high-profile, hard-working lives?


Maybe they can be neighbours with Jefree Star


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


>




I would support a talk to the hand move by the judge.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am completely indignant that I've been working out for a full four weeks and I don't see any change  Might have something to do with the fitness grade of a 100yo and the fact I have yet to pick a workout longer than 25 mins.


Hang in there. I know how frustrating it is but perseverance pays.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Wyoming? Are they in the market to buy a giant ranch to use as an escape from all the stress from their high-profile, hard-working lives?


Maybe she's lowering her sights from Queen of Montecito to Queen of Jackson Hole.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Boy, she lost a LOT of weight since the Jubilee last month



"Duke and Duchess of Netflix"


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> "Duke and Duchess of Netflix"


“They were next to their friends.”  What friends?

Could be Meghan, we’ve seen that squat before.


----------



## Annawakes

*But did they fly private??*


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Isn't the Billionaire Club Meeting happening close to there? Maybe they were hoping to Network.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It is so weird to me that every pic of Archie is from the side/back.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Babies sleep a lot.  I wouldn't be surprised if the parade was right during the one year old's morning nap.  They probably have household help so able to just take the boy to the parade.


----------



## LibbyRuth

lanasyogamama said:


> It is so weird to me that every pic of Archie is from the side/back.


In this case, I think it's due to the person who took the pictures sneaking them in.  But I don't think it's that unusual of an approach for children of people in the public eye.  Andy Roddick/Brooklyn Decker, and Justin Timberlake/Jessica Biel are two couples I can think of off the top of my head who tend to only share pics of their kids that don't show their faces.


----------



## LittleStar88

LibbyRuth said:


> In this case, I think it's due to the person who took the pictures sneaking them in.  But I don't think it's that unusual of an approach for children of people in the public eye.  Andy Roddick/Brooklyn Decker, and Justin Timberlake/Jessica Biel are two couples I can think of off the top of my head who tend to only share pics of their kids that don't show their faces.



Dax Shepherd & Kristin Bell also only share pics of their kids with faces obscured.

It's interesting to me that they were fully able to go to Wyoming and *_no one knew_* and they didn't have a full camera crew in tow. Maybe when the kids are with them they don't call the paps/publicize their presence?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I think I could do with Harry's lifestyle. I went horseriding for the past few days and it is quite fun - injured horse that has to walk 20 mins a day to build strength and sick owner who can't provide  the exercise, but after like 15+ years out of practice I'm an even more anxious rider than I used to be. I'm happy I am past the "OMFG it moves!" stage. 

Sadly part of why I gave up riding was that one of my ankles started to hurt miserably and swell up after just a few minutes with no doctor being able to find out what the problem was, and the a*shole is still doing the same, only that 20 mins of a leisurely stroll aren't as bad as two hours of a brisk ride across the country. 

So maybe I'm not starting that polo career anytime soon haha.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I think I could do with Harry's lifestyle. I went horseriding for the past few days and it is quite fun - injured horse that has to walk 20 mins a day to build strength and sick owner who can't provide  the exercise, but after like 15+ years out of practice I'm an even more anxious rider than I used to be. I'm happy I am past the "OMFG it moves!" stage.
> 
> Sadly part of why I gave up riding was that one of my ankles started to hurt miserably and swell up after just a few minutes with no doctor being able to find out what the problem was, and the a*shole is still doing the same, only that 20 mins of a leisurely stroll aren't as bad as two hours of a brisk ride across the country.
> 
> So maybe I'm not starting that polo career anytime soon haha.



Harry's lifestyle is a dream! TW does all the hustling, house full of "help", and he gets to be tended to all day, play, lounge around, etc... He's a human version of the family dog.


----------



## charlottawill

hollieplus2 said:


> Isn't the Billionaire Club Meeting happening close to there? Maybe they were hoping to Network.


I think you meant TW looking for her next victim.


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> I think you meant TW looking for her next victim.


Maybe she thinks a weekend in the very posh resort town of Jackson hole (where it’s service professionals cannot afford to live) is comparable to political jaunts to middle america. The royal family blending in with the common folk of the US


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> It is so weird to me that every pic of Archie is from the side/back.


These are the best pictures I've seen of him yet. I wonder if MM knew this person was "sneaking" pics, or she wanted someone to take candid shots knowing they'd end up on social media. We saw zero pics of him watching Dad play polo, but suddenly we get pics of him at a parade in Wyoming? I don't think anything she does is without calculation.


----------



## xincinsin

The comparison between security personnel behaviour intrigues me. 

When the Douchess had a section at Wimbledon cleared out for Her Holy butt, there was a story of a.security guy sheepishly requesting people not to take pics of her because she was there in a personal capacity. 

At Jackson Hole, if that was really her, the security guy was making sure people in that vicinity knew he was saving seats for a certain FAMILY.  The diff between tax-payer funded and Harry's inheritance funded.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't think I've ever loved Tourre that hard.

Semi-literate tabloid hack paying someone intelligent for credibility


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone's on FIRE.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I got more bad news...at this point it covers health, financial, personal and bad news via proxy. As it seems to be that way for a lof of us here, maybe we should consider a joint exorcism or something? I'm doing a lemon cleanse later, no clue if it helps but at least it won't do any harm.


So sorry about the most recent bad news. Hopefully, things will get better soon.
BTW, I found the 10 pounds you lost. Let me know if you want it back.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


>



He looks like Haz, if that's really Archie.


----------



## wisconsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Harry's lifestyle is a dream! TW does all the hustling, house full of "help", and he gets to be tended to all day, play, lounge around, etc... He's a human version of the family dog.


Can’t be easy to live with MM


----------



## needlv

So… is it possible this is why the sighting in Wyoming of Archie?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> He looks like Haz, if that's really Archie.


I'm inclined to believe it is. Looks just like the Christmas card. And she appears to be wearing her standard Cartier watch and bracelet. I can understand leaving Invisibet home with the nanny or Doria. The person who took the pic really did get up close and personal - Harry's elbow is in one of the pics. I guess he felt safe enough in Wyoming to have apparently minimal security.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> I'm inclined to believe it is. Looks just like the Christmas card. And she appears to be wearing her standard Cartier watch and bracelet. I can understand leaving Invisibet home with the nanny or Doria. The person who took the pic really did get up close and personal - Harry's elbow is in one of the pics. I guess he felt safe enough in Wyoming to have apparently minimal security.



I think it’s them and deliberately leaked by MM.  why the story about “saving seats”?  There are no seats!?!  Or is that a saying in the USA, even-if you are standing?

Also “Meghan is gorgeous” comment… sounds like her PR


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I'm inclined to believe it is. Looks just like the Christmas card. And she appears to be wearing her standard Cartier watch and bracelet. I can understand leaving Invisibet home with the nanny or Doria. The person who took the pic really did get up close and personal - Harry's elbow is in one of the pics. I guess he felt safe enough in Wyoming to have apparently minimal security.



At the Marklenews account over on Insta the person who supposedly took the picture chimed in. She said it was them (but I agree Raptor looks suspiciously skinny, not only compared to the Jubilee but also compared to her Pwife gigs) and their security did their job which is why she only has pics from behind or sideways.


----------



## rose60610

If that's really the Harkle clan in WY, then what's up with Hazza having gone to TX for a rodeo and now they're in WY?? They can't possibly be trying to prove that can identify with commoners. This is just weird. What are they up to? Something is cookin'.


----------



## redney

Jackson, WY is pretty darn affluent. They're definitely not mixing with the commoners wherever they're staying. Did the parade appearance for something. Certainly not to appear as "regular" people. Flew private into JAC I'm sure.

From this: https://www.businessinsider.com/most-unequal-place-america-jackson-wyoming-photos-2019-8

In the Jackson metro area, which encompasses Teton County in Wyoming and Teton County in Idaho, the wealthiest residents make, on average, 132 times as much as everyone else: The average income of the 1% is more than $16.1 million, and the average income of the bottom 99% is $122,447.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At the Marklenews account over on Insta the person who supposedly took the picture chimed in. She said it was them (but I agree Raptor looks suspiciously skinny, not only compared to the Jubilee but also compared to her Pwife gigs) and their security did their job which is why she only has pics from behind or sideways.


In fairness to her, she is skinny - arms and legs that is. She just has no waist, so she always looks thick around the middle. But the way she is photographed there you can only see the skinny arms and legs. Whatever we may think of his scheming mother and clueless father, Archie is a cute little boy.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> Jackson, WY is pretty darn affluent. They're definitely not mixing with the commoners wherever they're staying. Did the parade appearance for something. Certainly not to appear as "regular" people. Flew private into JAC I'm sure.
> 
> From this: https://www.businessinsider.com/most-unequal-place-america-jackson-wyoming-photos-2019-8
> 
> In the Jackson metro area, which encompasses Teton County in Wyoming and Teton County in Idaho, the wealthiest residents make, on average, 132 times as much as everyone else: The average income of the 1% is more than $16.1 million, and the average income of the bottom 99% is $122,447.



"This ranching community maintains its cowboy roots, but has a glamorous edge that attracts visitors and second home-owners like *Kanye West and Kim Kardashian, Harrison Ford, Sandra Bullock, Brad Pitt, Pippa Middleton, Tiger Woods, Uma Thurman, Matthew McConaughey*, and more."

Maybe she's hoping to make some friends (with money and connections) there. What do we make of Pippa Middleton being on the list? 



> https://www.jacksonholewy.com/blog/the-top-6-reasons-celebrities-love-jackson-hole/


----------



## rose60610

Lots of places are very affluent and full of celebrities, so why Jackson Hole?  Easier to stand out? They don't do anything without an agenda driven reason.


----------



## csshopper

A site celebitchy.com has a discussion about them being in Jackson with speculation it’s related to Polo, the Jackson Hole Polo Club is part of the U.S. Polo Association.

Mostly favorable to the Sussexi, and hysterically hypocritical, which they aren’t smart enough to figure out, about the disrespect of Archie being photographed by strangers.  Guess they choose to ignore all the preschoolers in LA planting flowers for Diana, the trapped kids in NYC who had to endure a reading of The Bench so Raptor’s rapacious ego could be stroked, etc. who showed up on international news. Plus snark about how wonderful he was waving the American flag, that will show the nasty Brit’s who questioned his skin color a thing or two. I quit reading.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Lots of places are very affluent and full of celebrities, so why Jackson Hole?  Easier to stand out? They don't do anything without an agenda driven reason.


Could they be guests of somebody? Any Oprah pals in that part of town? Can't imagine that the tightwad twins shelled out for a private jet and accommodation themselves, but can totally believe they would sponge off someone's largesse.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I understand he had a problem with this, I just don't understand why. It seems like my dream job, most of the perks with not half of the responsibilities. I'd also happily be #2's wife instead of the future queen for the very same reasons.


HA! .. I somewhat agree with you @QueenofWrapDress, but given my Type A+++ personality, I would have to do something .. likely in the Arts. To think that HapHazard would sit around all day playing video games?!? .. well, I guess PacMan would be at/about his intellectual level!!


----------



## csshopper

Maybe Nacho and Delfina hooked them up with someone?


----------



## Jayne1

I just assumed they needed Netfl*x content and their photographers are following them around, Kardashian style.


----------



## bag-mania

Look at how far Newsweek has fallen as a publication. This article is basically an advertisement for a jeweler, and a young and not a very discerning jeweler at that. “Super inspired” by Meghan indeed  

"I've always been super inspired by her," Yarlagagga said.

"I listened to her UN Women's speech when I was in high school. I watched _Suits_ and I was a part of an organization called One Young World—I was one of their ambassadors and she's a counselor for them."









						Meghan Markle has clear "intention" when selecting her jewels
					

Shilpa Yarlagadda, founder of jewelry brand Shiffon Co., described seeing Meghan Markle wearing the brand's design as "an amazing moment."



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> Look at how far Newsweek has fallen as a publication. This article is basically an advertisement for a jeweler, and a young and not a very discerning jeweler at that. “Super inspired” by Meghan indeed
> 
> "I've always been super inspired by her," Yarlagagga said.
> 
> "I listened to her UN Women's speech when I was in high school. I watched _Suits_ and I was a part of an organization called One Young World—I was one of their ambassadors and she's a counselor for them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has clear "intention" when selecting her jewels
> 
> 
> Shilpa Yarlagadda, founder of jewelry brand Shiffon Co., described seeing Meghan Markle wearing the brand's design as "an amazing moment."
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



I think they should have to add “PAID Endorsement” or similar words whenever i see stupid articles like this.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


>




IMO there is a ‘*regal*’ way of behaving, then there is H&M’s chaotic, slipshod way.

RE: this Arxi photo = all of this is suspicious, my best guess is it is _not_ H&M or the kid. Only my 2 cents, [plus those arms do not look like her imo].

@QueenofWrapDress, so happy you (and everyone else) are here and did not drink the _test tube_ _koolaid_


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Look at how far Newsweek has fallen as a publication. This article is basically an advertisement for a jeweler, and a young and not a very discerning jeweler at that. “Super inspired” by Meghan indeed
> 
> "I've always been super inspired by her," Yarlagagga said.
> 
> "I listened to her UN Women's speech when I was in high school. I watched _Suits_ and I was a part of an organization called One Young World—I was one of their ambassadors and she's a counselor for them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has clear "intention" when selecting her jewels
> 
> 
> Shilpa Yarlagadda, founder of jewelry brand Shiffon Co., described seeing Meghan Markle wearing the brand's design as "an amazing moment."
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



$uper in$pired… $$$$$


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you, good point! I used to smudge my home regularly and somehow stopped a few years ago. I'll order some.



I like to smudge with sage to clear stagnant and negative energies then follow up with sweetgrass. Sweetgrass welcomes in positive energy. I like to think I’m power washing a space with sage and then the sweetgrass adds back the good.


----------



## Hermes Zen

This is a big stretch but when I heard on the news today that Cali Gov is visiting Montana, my mind went to M&H in Jackson Hole Wyoming.  Not that far apart.  Maybe a hookup soon to discuss M's desire to get into po*t*Ics.


----------



## tiktok

Hermes Zen said:


> This is a big stretch but when I heard on the news today that Cali Gov is visiting Montana, my mind went to M&H in Jackson Hole Wyoming.  Not that far apart.  Maybe a hookup soon to discuss M's desire to get into po*t*Ics.



I highly doubt it. The Cali gov is too savvy politically to align himself with someone no one in Hollywood (or elsewhere for that matter) would touch with a 10-foot pole nowadays.


----------



## Hermes Zen

@QueenofWrapDress sending you many positive thoughts and hugs your way.   I hope all will work out for the better soon.


----------



## Hermes Zen

tiktok said:


> I highly doubt it. The Cali gov is too savvy politically to align himself with someone no one in Hollywood (or elsewhere for that matter) would touch with a 10-foot pole nowadays.


I hope you are right!  Although hadn't they met when they first moved to California?


----------



## mellibelly

csshopper said:


> A site celebitchy.com has a discussion about them being in Jackson with speculation it’s related to Polo, the Jackson Hole Polo Club is part of the U.S. Polo Association.
> 
> Mostly favorable to the Sussexi, and hysterically hypocritical, which they aren’t smart enough to figure out, about the disrespect of Archie being photographed by strangers.  Guess they choose to ignore all the preschoolers in LA planting flowers for Diana, the trapped kids in NYC who had to endure a reading of The Bench so Raptor’s rapacious ego could be stroked, etc. who showed up on international news. Plus snark about how wonderful he was waving the American flag, that will show the nasty Brit’s who questioned his skin color a thing or two. I quit reading.



Celeb*tchy is the WORST. Full blown Sussex squad hags. I used to read it many years ago for celebrity gossip. So much hate on Kate for being lazy, her fashion and wearing too many buttons (is that a thing?!) I recall them being pro Hillary and anti Bernie Sanders. Probably when I was banned from commenting, because I liked the Cambridges and Bernie. That site comes off as batsh!t crazy. And they have terrible fashion taste. The complete opposite of TPF. That’s when I rediscovered TPF and the Celebrity News & Gossip forums


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> Look at how far Newsweek has fallen as a publication. This article is basically an advertisement for a jeweler, and a young and not a very discerning jeweler at that. “Super inspired” by Meghan indeed
> 
> "I've always been super inspired by her," Yarlagagga said.
> 
> "I listened to her UN Women's speech when I was in high school. I watched _Suits_ and I was a part of an organization called One Young World—I was one of their ambassadors and she's a counselor for them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has clear "intention" when selecting her jewels
> 
> 
> Shilpa Yarlagadda, founder of jewelry brand Shiffon Co., described seeing Meghan Markle wearing the brand's design as "an amazing moment."
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Are we sure Methane didn’t write this fawning word salad:
“Fiercely proud of not using the services of a stylist, Meghan has carefully curated her image to convey a number of messages while settling into an authentic royal aesthetic.”
  

When I was in high school I read The Feminine Mystique. Imagine thinking Methane’s UN speech is the height of feminism


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe Hazz is out with the ‘nanny’?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Arxi seems to be really small, imo


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Hazz is out with the ‘nanny’?



Yeah there’s no way that’s her. That woman is skinny and is probably about 5’8 or 5’9 and M is not.
but the OP has got what they wanted - a lot of attention for their account and probably some new followers. They might even have some business to promote in JH and now more people know what a beautiful place it is. I’d never heard of it.

Add on- the irony in all of this is that images of this little boy have now been paraded around the internet probably without his parents’ consent whereas we’ve had to wade through endless word salads on the sanctity of the privacy of darling little elite Archie bot (sorry I say bot? I meant boy of course   )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> “Fiercely proud of not using the services of a stylist, Meghan has carefully curated her image to convey a number of messages while settling into an authentic royal aesthetic.”



Are those people blind?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Hazz is out with the ‘nanny’?




Compared to the Uvalde pic the thighs shrunk quite a bit, too.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Compared to the Uvalde pic the thighs shrunk quite a bit, too.


Maybe she's snorting some of that good stuff she did when on Suits?  Allegedly of course.


----------



## tiktok

Hermes Zen said:


> I hope you are right!  Although hadn't they met when they first moved to California?



I vaguely remember some meeting but this was a while ago when maybe there was more hope they’d actually do something useful or have real influence - now everyone has been disabused of that notion…


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cosmopolitan said:


>



I hope it gets thrown out of court. I’m sick of him wasting our money on his ego. 


charlottawill said:


> I'm inclined to believe it is. Looks just like the Christmas card. And she appears to be wearing her standard Cartier watch and bracelet. I can understand leaving Invisibet home with the nanny or Doria. The person who took the pic really did get up close and personal - Harry's elbow is in one of the pics. I guess he felt safe enough in Wyoming to have apparently minimal security.


I think a lot of people are thinking this is a hoax but it bears repeating that H lives in The USA where carrying knives, guns and rifles is legal in many states and he kicked up a fuss about needing security in the U.K. where you can’t do any of the above - what a load of rubbish.


bag-mania said:


> Look at how far Newsweek has fallen as a publication. This article is basically an advertisement for a jeweler, and a young and not a very discerning jeweler at that. “Super inspired” by Meghan indeed
> 
> "I've always been super inspired by her," Yarlagagga said.
> 
> "I listened to her UN Women's speech when I was in high school. I watched _Suits_ and I was a part of an organization called One Young World—I was one of their ambassadors and she's a counselor for them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has clear "intention" when selecting her jewels
> 
> 
> Shilpa Yarlagadda, founder of jewelry brand Shiffon Co., described seeing Meghan Markle wearing the brand's design as "an amazing moment."
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


One of my (many) pet peeves is companies whose name is a word purposefully misspelled. Those gags are only acceptable if you are a 90s rapper



Who knew one of the great Feminist acts of resistance was watching Suits? 

Is the scene where M blows a guy to get ahead at work  soon to be immortalised by Judy Chicago?


mellibelly said:


> Celeb*tchy is the WORST. Full blown Sussex squad hags. I used to read it many years ago for celebrity gossip. So much hate on Kate for being lazy, her fashion and wearing too many buttons (is that a thing?!) I recall them being pro Hillary and anti Bernie Sanders. Probably when I was banned from commenting, because I liked the Cambridges and Bernie. That site comes off as batsh!t crazy. And they have terrible fashion taste. The complete opposite of TPF. That’s when I rediscovered TPF and the Celebrity News & Gossip forums


You are a witch and you feel the burn? I love you! 


Not to get too into politics but it’s not surprising celebitchy likes the two things mentioned above. Both have very big toxic girl boss, monetised feminism elite energy.

TPF is the connoisseur’s forum


mellibelly said:


> Are we sure Methane didn’t write this fawning word salad:
> “Fiercely proud of not using the services of a stylist, Meghan has carefully curated her image to convey a number of messages while settling into an authentic royal aesthetic.”
> 
> 
> When I was in high school I read The Feminine Mystique. Imagine thinking Methane’s UN speech is the height of feminism


She dresses herself? An able-bodied 40 year old 
Talk about struggling to find an achievement for a Fail child. This very much has the feel of when rich want to set up a cooking Insta and they post the most unappealing slop


Also that’s just a lie- obviously she had a stylist in the BRF and uses someone else now. How else do we explain the sample sizes?

Additionally is doing an embarassing speech at the UN just a rite of passage for bad actors now? Angie used to be alright but she hasn’t been able to move her face for at least the last ten years.

I think feminists everywhere are experiencing a deep embarrassment that the movement is being co-opted into an MLM for the vacuous.


----------



## Hermes Zen

tiktok said:


> I vaguely remember some meeting but this was a while ago when maybe there was more hope they’d actually do something useful or have real influence - now everyone has been disabused of that notion…


It was last year and yes, lots have happened since.  I sure hope you are right.  As I had mentioned pages back I'm moving if M gets in any p-office.  I'm accepting @QueenofWrapDress 's offer to move to Germany!  Me and my DH will be there in a split second.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG people. In attempt to shrink MY body parts (to look good in my upcoming pap pics of course!) I thought I'd do a Chloe Ting video from her hourglass challenge. Mind you the challenge is like four videos a day for 25 days, I picked one. After literally falling flat on my face with the first exercise, then having to skip the next two because I physically couldn't I abandoned the mission and picked another instructor. WTFFF.

BTW I'm sure we have work-out geeks here. I pick another work-out six days a week, then repeat the week for roughly the month (so basically, four repeats of 6 different videos). Would it make more sense to repeat the same video a few days in a row or is my approach ok? I mix walking work-outs (which get me sweaty and out of breath, but not sore) and like "target" videos (legs, waist, upper body, full body) which kill me for days and then one stretching or yoga session on Saturdays.

Did I say I hate every single minute?

BTW Marklenews over on Insta identified the "friend" the Sussexes where with in Wyoming...Raptor's Pilates instructor


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

jennlt said:


> I will admit that I am also one who comes here to laugh at the absurd antics and sartorial shenanigans of the narcissistic Netflixes as a respite from real life.
> 
> My aunt died suddenly a few weeks ago, my nephew and my stepfather were in hospital (ICU) for over a week for different illnesses and my mother, who has incurable but treatable cancer, now has osteonecrosis of the jaw from her cancer meds. My nephew is so sick that they want to put him in long-term care.  A family member visited my parents and then tested positive for Covid the day after the visit. Now my mother and stepfather, both already weak from health issues and aging, have Covid, too. My 15 year-old dog is also ill and we are making him as comfortable as possible with pain meds because his vet says he wouldn't survive the surgery he needs.
> 
> It's overwhelming but I appreciate all of you for enduring my lame jokes that help me relieve a little stress.  I am even more grateful for the witty, wonderful posts from all of you that make me laugh and forget my cares for a while. Cheers to all my lovely TPF friends! You really are the best


 I am so so sorry for everything you and your family are going through. You and your family will be kept in my prayers  Praying for grace, strength, and peace during this challenging season of your life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry, not even the link will display properly


----------



## PurseUOut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Compared to the Uvalde pic the thighs shrunk quite a bit, too.




That is her. She was skinny in Uvalde and probably lost more weight since. Its just the angle.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG people. In attempt to shrink MY body parts (to look good in my upcoming pap pics of course!) I thought I'd do a Chloe Ting video from her hourglass challenge. Mind you the challenge is like four videos a day for 25 days, I picked one. After literally falling flat on my face with the first exercise, then having to skip the next two because I physically couldn't I abandoned the mission and picked another instructor. WTFFF.
> 
> BTW I'm sure we have work-out geeks here. I pick another work-out six days a week, then repeat the week for roughly the month (so basically, four repeats of 6 different videos). Would it make more sense to repeat the same video a few days in a row or is my approach ok? I mix walking work-outs (which get me sweaty and out of breath, but not sore) and like "target" videos (legs, waist, upper body, full body) which kill me for days and then one stretching or yoga session on Saturdays.
> 
> Did I say I hate every single minute?
> 
> BTW Marklenews over on Insta identified the "friend" the Sussexes where with in Wyoming...Raptor's Pilates instructor


Is she claiming her workout can give you a hourglass body shape? Because that’s a grift - no work out can physically change your body shape.

The Pilates instructor thing makes even less sense. Why would she have an instructor from the other side of the country? Or does her instructor have a nicer holiday home than a genuine princess


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Look at how far Newsweek has fallen as a publication. This article is basically an advertisement for a jeweler, and a young and not a very discerning jeweler at that. “Super inspired” by Meghan indeed
> 
> "I've always been super inspired by her," Yarlagagga said.
> 
> "I listened to her UN Women's speech when I was in high school. I watched _Suits_ and I was a part of an organization called One Young World—I was one of their ambassadors and she's a counselor for them."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has clear "intention" when selecting her jewels
> 
> 
> Shilpa Yarlagadda, founder of jewelry brand Shiffon Co., described seeing Meghan Markle wearing the brand's design as "an amazing moment."
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


A collection of meaningless statements that go nowhere. For instance, "One of Meghan's most famous uses of jewelry in her time as a member of the royal family was her wearing a diamond tiara from the personal collection of Queen Elizabeth II on her 2018 wedding day." 
Why was it a famous use? What was the significance? 
Didn't all the recent royal brides wear a diamond tiara loaned to them by the Queen?


----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


>




More money the UK people are forking-out. 

Directly or indirectly, I hope we're not paying for both sides!!!!   I don't see JCMH paying for anything, ever.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fun story: a few years ago I had a horrid streak of bad luck as well and my bff gave me a mixture of tiny crystals in a test tube supposed to bind bad luck and straighten out energetic kinks. You were supposed to put the tube in a jug of water overnight and drink it. I thought why not, easy enough, no harm done.
> 
> That was until tube after tube broke on me. I'd leave the jug on my bathroom counter at night behind closed doors (so unlikely one of the cats got into the room, then closed the door behind itself after leaving) and come to pour a glass in the morning only to find the glass broken and the crystals scattered all over the bottom of the jug. I think we replaced it twice before giving up. My friend is still using the one and only test tube she bought for herself
> 
> (In hindsight I could have just put the crystals in and pour the water through a sieve before drinking, but it wasn't my thing really anyway, so I just abandoned the mission)



Sorry for laughing but that's actually very funny  - in hindsight anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Is she claiming her workout can give you a hourglass body shape? Because that’s a grift - no work out can physically change your body shape.



I think it's just a fancy name that appeals to the masses. Though apparently people have shrunk their waists. 



> The Pilates instructor thing makes even less sense. Why would she have an instructor from the other side of the country? Or does her instructor have a nicer holiday home than a genuine princess



Maybe they travel with an entourage. I am not entirely sure anything makes sense with these two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> A collection of meaningless statements that go nowhere. For instance, "One of Meghan's most famous uses of jewelry in her time as a member of the royal family was her wearing a diamond tiara from the personal collection of Queen Elizabeth II on her 2018 wedding day."
> Why was it a famous use? What was the significance?
> Didn't all the recent royal brides wear a diamond tiara loaned to them by the Queen?



Too bad that will forever be her only use of that tiara... or any. While others have been loaned not one, but three


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> More money the UK people are forking-out.
> 
> Directly or indirectly, I hope we're not paying for both sides!!!!   I don't see JCMH paying for anything, ever.


Didn’t the Daily Mail have to pay for at least part of TW’s legal fees when she won her lawsuit? So if JCMH loses his case, I assume the judge could order him to pay for at least part of the government’s court costs?


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Didn’t the Daily Mail have to pay for at least part of TW’s legal fees when she won her lawsuit? So if JCMH loses his case, I assume the judge could order him to pay for at least part of the government’s court costs?



No doubt she asked for costs. I'd have to look at the ruling.

The Home Office will have to a) win _and_ b) would have to have _already_ asked Harry to pay their costs _if_ they win. I have a hard time believing Harry is paying for this legal fight himself. I hope he is, an arrogant gamble. I hope the HO have asked for costs, I hope they win, are awarded costs and it costs him a small fortune of his own money. But, as we know (in the UK) _none_ of the BRF are good at paying for anything with their own money, and Harry is one of the worst liggers of them all.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Didn’t the Daily Mail have to pay for at least part of TW’s legal fees when she won her lawsuit? So if JCMH loses his case, I assume the judge could order him to pay for at least part of the government’s court costs?



I looked it up. The Daily Mail had to pay 90% costs of M's case + £1 damages.


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> A collection of meaningless statements that go nowhere. For instance, "One of Meghan's most famous uses of jewelry in her time as a member of the royal family was her wearing a diamond tiara from the personal collection of Queen Elizabeth II on her 2018 wedding day."
> Why was it a famous use? What was the significance?
> Didn't all the recent royal brides wear a diamond tiara loaned to them by the Queen?


I am confused, when did MM gave a speech at the UN? According to that jeweller she was at school when MM spoke at the UN
Apologies I quoted the wrong post!


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> I am confused, when did MM gave a speech at the UN? According to that jeweller she was at school when MM spoke at the UN
> Apologies I quoted the wrong post!



Perhaps her jeweller sponsor  friend is getting her mixed up with Greta Thunberg (her speech was 2019 when she was 15/16) .


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG people. In attempt to shrink MY body parts (to look good in my upcoming pap pics of course!) I thought I'd do a Chloe Ting video from her hourglass challenge. Mind you the challenge is like four videos a day for 25 days, I picked one. After literally falling flat on my face with the first exercise, then having to skip the next two because I physically couldn't I abandoned the mission and picked another instructor. WTFFF.
> 
> BTW I'm sure we have work-out geeks here. I pick another work-out six days a week, then repeat the week for roughly the month (so basically, four repeats of 6 different videos). Would it make more sense to repeat the same video a few days in a row or is my approach ok? I mix walking work-outs (which get me sweaty and out of breath, but not sore) and like "target" videos (legs, waist, upper body, full body) which kill me for days and then one stretching or yoga session on Saturdays.
> 
> Did I say I hate every single minute?
> 
> BTW Marklenews over on Insta identified the "friend" the Sussexes where with in Wyoming...Raptor's Pilates instructor


I think you have a good approach. I would recommend doing some thing focused on the upper body couple days a week and then a lower body workout a couple days a week, and then as you mentioned some stretching or yoga one day a week.


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> I am confused, when did MM gave a speech at the UN? According to that jeweller she was at school when MM spoke at the UN
> Apologies I quoted the wrong post!


I think it's this one (with added plagiarism for better impact). Methane also allegedly claimed that she got a standing ovation which some have called an exaggeration aka lie.








						Meghan Markle plagiarism row: Duchess in shock dispute after speech
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has often spoken out about gender equality and is a self-confessed feminist, but her UN Women's speech in 2015 may have included plagiarised quotes from a former FLOTUS.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> No doubt she asked for costs. I'd have to look at the ruling.
> 
> The Home Office will have to a) win _and_ b) would have to have _already_ asked Harry to pay their costs _if_ they win. I have a hard time believing Harry is paying for this legal fight himself. I hope he is, an arrogant gamble. I hope the HO have asked for costs, I hope they win, are awarded costs and it costs him a small fortune of his own money. But, as we know (in the UK) _none_ of the BRF are good at paying for anything with their own money, and Harry is one of the worst liggers of them all.


I had to look up ligger. I have to remember that one. Good word to describe JCMH


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG people. In attempt to shrink MY body parts (to look good in my upcoming pap pics of course!) I thought I'd do a Chloe Ting video from her hourglass challenge. Mind you the challenge is like four videos a day for 25 days, I picked one. After literally falling flat on my face with the first exercise, then having to skip the next two because I physically couldn't I abandoned the mission and picked another instructor. WTFFF.
> 
> BTW I'm sure we have work-out geeks here. I pick another work-out six days a week, then repeat the week for roughly the month (so basically, four repeats of 6 different videos). Would it make more sense to repeat the same video a few days in a row or is my approach ok? I mix walking work-outs (which get me sweaty and out of breath, but not sore) and like "target" videos (legs, waist, upper body, full body) which kill me for days and then one stretching or yoga session on Saturdays.
> 
> Did I say I hate every single minute?
> 
> BTW Marklenews over on Insta identified the "friend" the Sussexes where with in Wyoming...Raptor's Pilates instructor



Not a fitness expert, but it is generally considered a good idea to switch things up, like alternating days of cardio with strength training. But I hear you about falling on your face. I get a lot of fitness things on my IG feed. They look easy but when I attempt some of them I get discouraged. I have to remind myself the people doing them are usually half my age. And you have to find something you actually enjoy doing to be able to stick with it. If you hate it, it's the wrong routine for you.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I had to look up ligger. I have to remember that one. Good word to describe JCMH



Yes, sorry! Very Britt (unless you speak Gammel-Norsk). 

Originally back-stage slang, someone (friend of a friend of a friend) that comes backstage for the free-food, drugs, asks favours and hangs-out.  Works ike an eternal house-guest, fee-loader, gate-crasher.


----------



## LittleStar88

I thought they need SeCuRiTy??

I’m so surprised that they felt safe enough to be in a big crowd without a huge security brigade in a country where mass shootings are almost commonplace.


----------



## Annawakes

I think it’s odd that there aren’t more pictures of them at the parade.  Surely other people would have also snuck photos?

I also think it’s odd that Arxie’s face is clearly in view whereas the parents’ faces are not.  It’s not their MO.  And where is the lawsuit for releasing pictures of Arxie?

This whole thing was planned I believe.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hate that they’ve turned me into a weird conspiracy person, but the woman’s hair also looks more flowy and natural then Mugsy’s ever has.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Annawakes said:


> I think it’s odd that there aren’t more pictures of them at the parade.  Surely other people would have also snuck photos?
> 
> I also think it’s odd that Arxie’s face is clearly in view whereas the parents’ faces are not.  It’s not their MO.  And where is the lawsuit for releasing pictures of Arxie?
> 
> This whole thing was planned I believe.



I honestly think not many people knew who they were… Or cared?


----------



## Cinderlala

She wasn't even that thin on her show.  I'm not saying she wasn't thin then, just that she has never been that small.  

The Wyoming woman is a truly small woman.  Very, very slim.  If Cringe was that slim, she would effortlessly look fabulous in clothing.  Plus, how could she endure that many minutes without clawing Ginge into place?


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> Yes, sorry! Very Britt (unless you speak Gammel-Norsk).
> 
> Originally back-stage slang, someone (friend of a friend of a friend) that comes backstage for the free-food, drugs, asks favours and hangs-out.  Works ike an eternal house-guest, fee-loader, gate-crasher.


Sounds like another word for cat


----------



## Sophisticatted

Honestly, they’ve both shown so many antisocial behaviors with people trying to take photos of them in public that this has to be one of the following:
1) deliberate and planned with the “bystander” being in on it
2) fakes a la Alison Jackson


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Sounds like another word for cat



Apart from the whining meow (cat not Harry) Actually, thinking about it, harry has a very annoying whiny manner, no wonder his horse throws him off. 

BTW, my cat strongly denies any drug-taking beyond worming and flee-treatment and any suggestion otherwise are merely speculative. He'd like it to be known henceforth, if this misinformation and inference is repeated in any publication, he's going to be pressing charges for deformation Depp-Windsor-style.


----------



## bellecate

Sure hoping he loses his case, and quickly.


----------



## lanasyogamama

He really is a “bell end”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Apart from the whining meow (cat not Harry) Actually, thinking about it, harry has a very annoying whiny manner, no wonder his horse throws him off.
> 
> BTW, my cat strongly denies any drug-taking beyond worming and flee-treatment and any suggestion otherwise are merely speculative. He'd like it to be known henceforth, if this misinformation and inference is repeated in any publication, he's going to be pressing charges for deformation Depp-Windsor-style.
> 
> View attachment 5442463



Same with my dog and cat. I have long suspected they read TPF when I’m asleep. Seems like they’ve picked up some undesirable tips/strategies/tactics.


----------



## rose60610

Hard to believe she could go anywhere without spilling a bunch of senseless word salad. So they just watched a parade? Didn't eat anywhere? Visit all their A-lister friends? Stay anywhere? Landed, watched, and took off again?  Didn't they have an entourage of security from the plane to the parade seating and back again? Stuff isn't adding up.


----------



## bellecate

He never stops.


----------



## rose60610

bellecate said:


> He never stops.
> View attachment 5442547




I don't get it. Shouldn't the bottom line be: If you're a WORKING royal you get paid security.  When you voluntarily step down from your duties you also forgo paid security. Take your own security on your travels but don't expect them to be invited to share in others' security details. If Harry needed BRF security SO BAD, or somehow believes he should know BRF security "secrets", then he should have stayed a working royal. He wants it both ways. Spoiled brat. He's the spare. So spare us!


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> I don't get it. Shouldn't the bottom line be: If you're a WORKING royal you get paid security.  When you voluntarily step down from your duties you also forgo paid security. Take your own security on your travels but don't expect them to be invited to share in others' security details. If Harry needed BRF security SO BAD, or somehow believes he should know BRF security "secrets", then he should have stayed a working royal. He wants it both ways. Spoiled brat. He's the spare. So spare us!



Not even the spare anymore. Down there at #6 now.


----------



## xincinsin

Frankly, the way Hazard is using $$$ as a crude weapon to browbeat the Home Office into submitting to his demands, I personally would find it very difficult to dredge up any sympathy if someone decided to make it a fact that he HazNoB*llz.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Just giving another viewpoint as someone who is caring for elderly parents.   My father was the Queen's age, and recently passed away at age 95 after spending 15 months in hospice.   Now, the Queen will never go into a long-term care facility,  but given how elderly and frail she appears, my guess is that her care right now is similar.   For my dad, he received the best of care, and I trusted the nurses and aides, but we still had a family member visit him every single day.  My sister and I exchanged notes daily, so we never went for a visit without knowing what happened the day before.   I found it particularly valuable when a family member who saw him infrequently visited, as everyone has a different relationship with him and sees things differently.   In my humble opinion,  the Queen also needs family members to visit to check on her well-being.   As much as you trust her staff, we don't know them, we can't know them, and we should not assume that they always have her best interests in mind.

I suspect that nearby family members do check on her frequently, even if this doesn't show up on the news.


----------



## PurseUOut

rose60610 said:


> I don't get it. Shouldn't the bottom line be: If you're a WORKING royal you get paid security.  When you voluntarily step down from your duties you also forgo paid security. Take your own security on your travels but don't expect them to be invited to share in others' security details. If Harry needed BRF security SO BAD, or somehow believes he should know BRF security "secrets", then he should have stayed a working royal. He wants it both ways. Spoiled brat. He's the spare. So spare us!



I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.

If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

PurseUOut said:


> I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.
> 
> If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.



So Harry should have been able to keep his UK security in the U.S. as long as he was willing to pay for it? I don't think you're referring to making UK security move to the U.S. If the BRF allowed Harry to have UK security as long as he paid for it, then what's the difference between extending that same offer to anybody who comes to the UK and says "I'll pay for UK security"?  Harry severed his ties. Voluntarily. In fact, he said everybody in the BRF is "trapped". Sure, he's blood related, but HE was the one who kicked the rest of them to the curb, said they're "trapped", was complicit with Meghan saying that they're "racist", and made her "suicidal". And he still thinks he's entitled to UK security just because he was willing to pay for it (largely with money that came from the BRF)?  He's in the process of writing a book that many believe will be full of slams against the BRF. I think the only thing the BRF should give Harry is a box of butt wipes. They "owe" him nothing. He isn't going to inherit the throne any more than the royal gardener. He needs no reason to be privy to any intel the UK security forces have. Even if he pays for it. Besides, lemon olive oil cakes are not anybody's sovereign currency that can be exchanged for pounds, US$, euros, yen, or francs.


----------



## 880

I may be confusing the issue, but it was my limited understanding that a non working Royal, for the purposes of state security, is a private citizen. You are not supposed to be able to pay for state security. If this is incorrect, I’m sure someone will jump in.


----------



## pukasonqo

Just wondering where the $$$$ for these lawsuits is coming from…


----------



## V0N1B2

xincinsin said:


> A collection of meaningless statements that go nowhere. For instance, "One of Meghan's most famous uses of jewelry in her *JUST UNDER A YEAR AND A HALF* as a *WORKING* member of the royal family was her wearing a diamond tiara from the personal collection of Queen Elizabeth II on her 2018 wedding day."
> Why was it a famous use? What was the significance?
> Didn't all the recent royal brides wear a diamond tiara loaned to them by the Queen?


Felt compelled to fix the quote.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> Just giving another viewpoint as someone who is caring for elderly parents.   My father was the Queen's age, and recently passed away at age 95 after spending 15 months in hospice.   Now, the Queen will never go into a long-term care facility,  but given how elderly and frail she appears, my guess is that her care right now is similar.   For my dad, he received the best of care, and I trusted the nurses and aides, but we still had a family member visit him every single day.  My sister and I exchanged notes daily, so we never went for a visit without knowing what happened the day before.   I found it particularly valuable when a family member who saw him infrequently visited, as everyone has a different relationship with him and sees things differently.   In my humble opinion,  the Queen also needs family members to visit to check on her well-being.   As much as you trust her staff, we don't know them, we can't know them, and we should not assume that they always have her best interests in mind.
> 
> I suspect that nearby family members do check on her frequently, even if this doesn't show up on the news.



I'm so sorry for your loss. When my grandfather fell sick, someone - often multiple people - visited every single day he was hospitalized as well. It was not only because we didn't trust anyone would care as much as we did but also because he needed the pick-me-up. 

Also, we don't disagree with the message, but we thought it coming from Harry - who's been nothing but trouble for quite a while and chose to relocate to another continent - was rich. 

I've said it many times on the thread, I will never forgive his treatment of dying Philip, and I explicitely blame him here and not his terrible wife. Then the impertinence of highjacking The Queen's family nickname she had asked to not use anymore after she was widowed. That wasn't a sweet nod, that was a big fat middle finger. So please Harry, take several seats, you don't care one bit about your grandmother's wellbeing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.
> 
> If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.



Yeah, no. You cannot book police protection (and demand access to intel!) like you'd book a hair appointment.


----------



## DoggieBags

PurseUOut said:


> I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.
> 
> If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.


The security teams provided by the British Government to working Royals, visiting dignitaries, and other persons that the British government may believe have imminent and credible threats against them is a finite resource. They are not rent-a-cops. If anybody who wanted the security (I.e. Visiting celebrities, billionaires, non-working royals, etc.) and could afford to pay for it was allowed to “rent” government security teams, they would not have enough trained personnel to meet the demand. There are many other non-working members of the royal family living in the UK who are not covered by government security. Those who do some work for the BRF are covered during the times they are making public appearances on behalf of the BRF. I have no idea why the Harkles require 24/7 British government security when they are in the UK as private citizens. I believe Harry was told they would be covered during the times they participated in BRF events in the UK so they had security while they were attending the platinum jubilee.


----------



## gracekelly

pukasonqo said:


> Just wondering where the $$$$ for these lawsuits is coming from…


I think we all wonder about that. Someone posited that it could be Al-Fayed. I could see this as he has more than enough money and the desire to tweak the Royals. Hell hath no fury like an Al-Fayed scorned (denied) citizenship. Of course he blamed PP for his son’s death as well.


----------



## K.D.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62044951 
*Prince Harry faced tensions with royal officials as security downgraded, court hears*
By Joseph Lee
BBC News


Published
2 hours ago
Share






IMAGE SOURCE, GETTY IMAGES
Image caption, 
Prince Harry and Meghan attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service on a rare UK visit
*The Duke of Sussex faced "significant tensions" with a top aide to the Queen involved in downgrading his security, a court has been told.*
Challenging the decision, Prince Harry's lawyer said he had not been aware Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, played a role.
The decision was "materially prejudiced" as key information was withheld, Shaeed Fatima QC said.
The duke lost full protection after he stepped back from royal duties in 2020.
Without a guarantee of police protection, Prince Harry believes it is too dangerous to bring his family from the US to visit the UK - which his lawyer has previously said "is and always will be his home".
The duke's legal team argued the decision about his security by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, was invalid because of "procedural unfairness".


UK is still my home, says Harry in security row
Harry files legal claim over UK police protection
They questioned whether it was "appropriate" for Sir Edward or other members of the Royal Household to sit on the committee, when Prince Harry had been told it was "independent".
ADVERTISEMENT


Representing the duke, Ms Fatima said: "He didn't know at that stage that the Royal Household was involved at all."





IMAGE SOURCE, GETTY IMAGES
Image caption, 
Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, had a tense relationship with Prince Harry, lawyers said
She said Prince Harry should have been able to make direct representations to Ravec to ensure his arguments were properly communicated to the committee and been given an opportunity to respond to points being made by others, including members of the Royal Household.
Ms Fatima said his offer to pay for his own police protection "was not conveyed to Ravec" and so the decision was "materially prejudiced".








This court action is still at an early stage. Mr Justice Swift is being asked to decide whether Prince Harry has an arguable case going forward. That decision won't come for another few weeks.
However - the written and oral submissions heard in Court three this morning are headline-making because of the detail and most notably what were described as "significant tensions" between Prince Harry and the Queen's private secretary, Sir Edward Young.

No specifics were read out in court - sensitive information was kept out of the public hearing. But it does point to the breakdown in relations between the Sussexes and the Royal Household prior to their move abroad. 
Whatever Mr Justice Swift decides, there may be further legal action as counsel for the Duke of Sussex has indicated a second judicial review claim has been started into whether he should be allowed to fund the security himself rather than having taxpayers pay for it.
An offer Prince Harry's counsel say was made - including in an email to Sir Edward Young in 2020 - but which was not passed on to Ravec. 




Lawyers for the Home Office say Ravec was entitled to make the decision it did - to provide police protection to Prince Harry and Meghan on a case-by-case basis when they visit the UK.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said in written arguments that personal tensions between Prince Harry and Royal Household officials are "irrelevant" to his change in status when he stepped back from royal duties.
He said there was "no basis" to conclude that the duke making representations to the committee would have led to a different outcome.

Prince Harry has previously argued his private security team cannot replicate the work of police protection in the UK, with their access to local intelligence and legal powers.
He and Meghan have only rarely visited since their move to California. On one visit in July 2021, the duke's car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.
The Sussexes also stopped in the UK in April, meeting the Queen on the way to the Invictus Games, and attended the thanksgiving service during the Platinum Jubilee last month.


----------



## bellecate

K.D. said:


> https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62044951
> *Prince Harry faced tensions with royal officials as security downgraded, court hears*
> By Joseph Lee
> BBC News
> 
> 
> Published
> 2 hours ago
> Share
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE SOURCE, GETTY IMAGES
> Image caption,
> Prince Harry and Meghan attended the Platinum Jubilee thanksgiving service on a rare UK visit
> *The Duke of Sussex faced "significant tensions" with a top aide to the Queen involved in downgrading his security, a court has been told.*
> Challenging the decision, Prince Harry's lawyer said he had not been aware Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, played a role.
> The decision was "materially prejudiced" as key information was withheld, Shaeed Fatima QC said.
> The duke lost full protection after he stepped back from royal duties in 2020.
> Without a guarantee of police protection, Prince Harry believes it is too dangerous to bring his family from the US to visit the UK - which his lawyer has previously said "is and always will be his home".
> The duke's legal team argued the decision about his security by the Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures, known as Ravec, was invalid because of "procedural unfairness".
> 
> 
> UK is still my home, says Harry in security row
> Harry files legal claim over UK police protection
> They questioned whether it was "appropriate" for Sir Edward or other members of the Royal Household to sit on the committee, when Prince Harry had been told it was "independent".
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> Representing the duke, Ms Fatima said: "He didn't know at that stage that the Royal Household was involved at all."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMAGE SOURCE, GETTY IMAGES
> Image caption,
> Sir Edward Young, the Queen's private secretary, had a tense relationship with Prince Harry, lawyers said
> She said Prince Harry should have been able to make direct representations to Ravec to ensure his arguments were properly communicated to the committee and been given an opportunity to respond to points being made by others, including members of the Royal Household.
> Ms Fatima said his offer to pay for his own police protection "was not conveyed to Ravec" and so the decision was "materially prejudiced".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This court action is still at an early stage. Mr Justice Swift is being asked to decide whether Prince Harry has an arguable case going forward. That decision won't come for another few weeks.
> However - the written and oral submissions heard in Court three this morning are headline-making because of the detail and most notably what were described as "significant tensions" between Prince Harry and the Queen's private secretary, Sir Edward Young.
> 
> No specifics were read out in court - sensitive information was kept out of the public hearing. But it does point to the breakdown in relations between the Sussexes and the Royal Household prior to their move abroad.
> Whatever Mr Justice Swift decides, there may be further legal action as counsel for the Duke of Sussex has indicated a second judicial review claim has been started into whether he should be allowed to fund the security himself rather than having taxpayers pay for it.
> An offer Prince Harry's counsel say was made - including in an email to Sir Edward Young in 2020 - but which was not passed on to Ravec.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lawyers for the Home Office say Ravec was entitled to make the decision it did - to provide police protection to Prince Harry and Meghan on a case-by-case basis when they visit the UK.
> Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said in written arguments that personal tensions between Prince Harry and Royal Household officials are "irrelevant" to his change in status when he stepped back from royal duties.
> He said there was "no basis" to conclude that the duke making representations to the committee would have led to a different outcome.
> 
> Prince Harry has previously argued his private security team cannot replicate the work of police protection in the UK, with their access to local intelligence and legal powers.
> He and Meghan have only rarely visited since their move to California. On one visit in July 2021, the duke's car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.
> The Sussexes also stopped in the UK in April, meeting the Queen on the way to the Invictus Games, and attended the thanksgiving service during the Platinum Jubilee last month.



There is no “I’m so disgusted by his arrogance and sense of entitlement “ button.  He’s proved himself to be a nothing but a loathsome nobody who thinks he’s a somebody.


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I got more bad news...at this point it covers health, financial, personal and bad news via proxy. As it seems to be that way for a lof of us here, maybe we should consider a joint exorcism or something? I'm doing a lemon cleanse later, no clue if it helps but at least it won't do any harm.


OH NO!! .. so sorry to hear this @QueenofWrapDress !!!  What is it lately with 'stuff' happening?? .. dealing with my arthritis issues and other auto-immune issues, my HUGE fear was that either one of us (me or the hubby) would get COVID (even though we've had the 3 shots)!!  So, on the 4th of July, there was a little community get-together which was fun and I finally got to meet our neighbors (the HB had met many as he goes to a weekly Saturday morning coffee .. which I can't do as I simply can't get around well anymore). 

So, then I start to develop a sore throat .. not bad at first, but THEN ?!?! .. and meanwhile, the HB is coughing up a storm (both early precursors to a COVID infection).  So, yesterday, I got our test kits all set and YUP, both of us have it .. CRAP!!!  The HB is sleeping like crazy and coughing up a storm (I kicked him out of our bedroom .. he can sleep in our guest bedroom!).  Me?!?! .. muscles & joints ache, still horrible sore throat, but the worst?? .. the NAUSEA!  I had really hoped that we would never get this mess!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Redbirdhermes said:


> Just giving another viewpoint as someone who is caring for elderly parents.   My father was the Queen's age, and recently passed away at age 95 after spending 15 months in hospice.   Now, the Queen will never go into a long-term care facility,  but given how elderly and frail she appears, my guess is that her care right now is similar.   For my dad, he received the best of care, and I trusted the nurses and aides, but we still had a family member visit him every single day.  My sister and I exchanged notes daily, so we never went for a visit without knowing what happened the day before.   I found it particularly valuable when a family member who saw him infrequently visited, as everyone has a different relationship with him and sees things differently.   In my humble opinion,  the Queen also needs family members to visit to check on her well-being.   As much as you trust her staff, we don't know them, we can't know them, and we should not assume that they always have her best interests in mind.
> 
> I suspect that nearby family members do check on her frequently, even if this doesn't show up on the news.



Similar situation here with 93 and 94 yr old in-laws.  QE still has life in her years which imo is the key. Troubling  to see once vibrant people bedridden and incoherent.  



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, no. You cannot book police protection (*and demand access to intel!*) like you'd book a hair appointment.



IMO that _access_ is the b.i.g. issue.  He wants the MI5/6 intel.  That should be a _hard no_.  If the security service becomes aware of a threat, they will take the necessary steps to protect them as they would with any royal.  H&M’s people do not need access to the files.


----------



## bag-mania

Is Charles’ choice really controversial though? Their understanding of that word is different than mine.









						Why Meghan, Harry 3-Year Campaign Makes Charles' Latest Hire Controversial
					

Prince Charles' new press secretary comes from a newspaper group Meghan Markle said had an "agenda of publishing intrusive or offensive stories" about her.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## PurseUOut

rose60610 said:


> So Harry should have been able to keep his UK security in the U.S. as long as he was willing to pay for it? I don't think you're referring to making UK security move to the U.S. If the BRF allowed Harry to have UK security as long as he paid for it, then what's the difference between extending that same offer to anybody who comes to the UK and says "I'll pay for UK security"?  Harry severed his ties. Voluntarily. In fact, he said everybody in the BRF is "trapped". Sure, he's blood related, but HE was the one who kicked the rest of them to the curb, said they're "trapped", was complicit with Meghan saying that they're "racist", and made her "suicidal". And he still thinks he's entitled to UK security just because he was willing to pay for it (largely with money that came from the BRF)?  He's in the process of writing a book that many believe will be full of slams against the BRF. I think the only thing the BRF should give Harry is a box of butt wipes. They "owe" him nothing. He isn't going to inherit the throne any more than the royal gardener. He needs no reason to be privy to any intel the UK security forces have. Even if he pays for it. Besides, lemon olive oil cakes are not anybody's sovereign currency that can be exchanged for pounds, US$, euros, yen, or francs.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, no. You cannot book police protection (and demand access to intel!) like you'd book a hair appointment.





DoggieBags said:


> The security teams provided by the British Government to working Royals, visiting dignitaries, and other persons that the British government may believe have imminent and credible threats against them is a finite resource. They are not rent-a-cops. If anybody who wanted the security (I.e. Visiting celebrities, billionaires, non-working royals, etc.) and could afford to pay for it was allowed to “rent” government security teams, they would not have enough trained personnel to meet the demand. There are many other non-working members of the royal family living in the UK who are not covered by government security. Those who do some work for the BRF are covered during the times they are making public appearances on behalf of the BRF. I have no idea why the Harkles require 24/7 British government security when they are in the UK as private citizens. I believe Harry was told they would be covered during the times they participated in BRF events in the UK so they had security while they were attending the platinum jubilee.



Ya'll are not understanding the legal argument at stake here.

There is a concept in U.K. and U.S. called "due process". Meaning, in most cases, when you deprive or remove something from someone they are enjoying the rights privileges of, you need to have a reason and give them an opportunity to rebut or appeal.

The issue at hand is Harry had tax-payer funded UK security as a consequence of being born a royal in the direct line of succession and, later, being working royal. Those privileges (funded by the taxpayer) were removed as consequence of him being a non-working royal.

The Home Office argued that the security privileges were revoked because public funds are not used to protect non-working royals. This was a mistake on their part. Legally, if the material issue of fact is taxpayers aren't funding security for non-working royals, then they have to consider Harry's offer to reimburse the taxpayer when deciding to revoke his detail. Because the Home Office didn't raise national security or police bandwith concerns when deciding to remove their security, they need to justify why they won't allow Harry to keep his security if he pays for it.


----------



## PurseUOut

CarryOn2020 said:


> IMO that _access_ is the b.i.g. issue.  He wants the MI5/6 intel.  That should be a _hard no_.  If the security service becomes aware of a threat, they will take the necessary steps to protect them as they would with any royal.  H&M’s people do not need access to the files.



The Home Office should have gave that as a reason for revoking his security, but they made it a matter of money so they can save face and appear they aren't excluding Harry and Meghan as national security threats. Big mistake.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

PurseUOut said:


> I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.
> 
> If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.



No. Our police force and intelligent services are not for sale.

Apart from licensed guns for sport or pest control, weapons are only carried by military personnel and special police officers. Private security operatives are not allowed to carry weapons or be privy to intelligence. This is why H is fighting for our defence staff to guard him. Harry doesn't need armed protection because he doesn't perform Royal duties. Neither do any of his family. Non-working Royals don't have state sponsored security on-tap, not because we can't afford it but because it's unnecessary.

Police do charge for certain security events where commercial organisations benefit from their presence, this is not an ongoing state of personal protection but public safety.

Even police protection cannot save Harry from paranoia or boos. Better he stays abroad where he is obviously so much safer and happier.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My guess is H&M want access to the files so they can make the ‘threats’ public.  They give the impression they want to shame and embarrass anyone who disagrees with them. Again, the Royal security services are quite capable of assessing and managing the royals’ safety. Royal security should not be used as the petulant prince’s private guards.


----------



## jelliedfeels

PurseUOut said:


> That is her. She was skinny in Uvalde and probably lost more weight since. Its just the angle.
> 
> View attachment 5442341


I think that this image is photoshopped within an inch of its life- they were her cameramen after all and she almost looks cut out of her surroundings and legs are weirdly posed. When she got snapped the same month in loads of pictures by her enemies at the DM she looks…. Different shall we say. 


papertiger said:


> I looked it up. The Daily Mail had to pay 90% costs of M's case + £1 damages.


So she still lost money which is satisfying and the mail lost money too….
Maybe she should keep suing them 


Cinderlala said:


> She wasn't even that thin on her show.  I'm not saying she wasn't thin then, just that she has never been that small.
> 
> The Wyoming woman is a truly small woman.  Very, very slim.  If Cringe was that slim, she would effortlessly look fabulous in clothing.  Plus, how could she endure that many minutes without clawing Ginge into place?


Very valid points especially the clawing!
She’s so rarely seen without her handbag. I mean are we to assume H was up on slopes deep in the powder with Kanye and Jeffrey Star? 


papertiger said:


> Apart from the whining meow (cat not Harry) Actually, thinking about it, harry has a very annoying whiny manner, no wonder his horse throws him off.
> 
> BTW, my cat strongly denies any drug-taking beyond worming and flee-treatment and any suggestion otherwise are merely speculative. He'd like it to be known henceforth, if this misinformation and inference is repeated in any publication, he's going to be pressing charges for deformation Depp-Windsor-style.
> 
> View attachment 5442463


What a pretty boy!
Now is that really your cat or do you hire a series of lookalikes from talent agencies to keep us all guessing?   


bellecate said:


> He never stops.
> View attachment 5442547





PurseUOut said:


> I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.
> 
> If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.


It isn’t quite just the money that is the issue and it isn’t really the home office’s decision alone whether they are family and what the arrangement is - it would be the royals who decide ultimately I think. The home office just implements it.

So,’tbh, I don’t think Harry has got a leg to stand on legally ( I could be wrong). He surely has to demonstrate he is in great danger and he has no means of protection besides our police force- which is clearly not the case. There is nothing to stop him hiring private bouncers which is what we assume he must do in the US. These guards have apparently proven effective preventing  any trouble and who he could bring with him as hired protecti anyway. He resides comfortably in the US despite (we can assume) not having any access to any national intelligence there. There is no logical reason to assume he is in any greater danger here than he is in CA or indeed Texas (where it’s legal to open carry guns and he was happily mingling at the rodeo.)

Other members of the royal family who aren’t classed as working royals are protected by the detail at the event but I don’t believe they get an escort to or from their homes and they don’t have anyone most days. H actually got better than many  as he was in an armoured car in the main convoy whereas the queen’s  cousin went home on a bike.

The idea that the U.K. is his home and that this is sufficient grounds to claim state security is ludicrous. He owns and resides in an overseas address and he has spent less than a week in the U.K. in the last few years. He probably isn’t paying taxes to Uncle Sam but that’s a different story.

Ultimately a private citizen can’t claim they have a right to public security. Harry would claim he is in the role of a public figure as a royal but I think they will find that even if that’s the case that doesn’t mean he can set the terms of what he is provided or indeed ask for more than he is allocated by the royal household and the home office.

Also, the cynical  part of me thinks the royals wouldn’t want him to reimburse the public security as then we would find out how much it cost us…


----------



## papertiger

From BBC









						Prince Harry faced tensions with royal officials as security downgraded, court hears
					

The Duke of Sussex says officials were involved in decisions about his security that were unfair.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				










This court action is still at an early stage. Mr Justice Swift is being asked to decide whether Prince Harry has an arguable case going forward. That decision won't come for another few weeks.
However - the written and oral submissions heard in Court three this morning are headline-making because of the detail and most notably what were described as "significant tensions" between Prince Harry and the Queen's private secretary, Sir Edward Young.
No specifics were read out in court - sensitive information was kept out of the public hearing. But it does point to the breakdown in relations between the Sussexes and the Royal Household prior to their move abroad. 
Whatever Mr Justice Swift decides, there may be further legal action as counsel for the Duke of Sussex has indicated a second judicial review claim has been started into whether he should be allowed to fund the security himself rather than having taxpayers pay for it.
An offer Prince Harry's counsel say was made - including in an email to Sir Edward Young in 2020 - but which was not passed on to Ravec. 




Lawyers for the Home Office say Ravec was entitled to make the decision it did - to provide police protection to Prince Harry and Meghan on a case-by-case basis when they visit the UK.
Sir James Eadie QC, representing the Home Office, said in written arguments that personal tensions between Prince Harry and Royal Household officials are "irrelevant" to his change in status when he stepped back from royal duties.
He said there was "no basis" to conclude that the duke making representations to the committee would have led to a different outcome.
Prince Harry has previously argued his private security team cannot replicate the work of police protection in the UK, with their access to local intelligence and legal powers.
He and Meghan have only rarely visited since their move to California. On one visit in July 2021, the duke's car was chased by photographers as he left a charity event.
The Sussexes also stopped in the UK in April, meeting the Queen on the way to the Invictus Games, and attended the thanksgiving service during the Platinum Jubilee last month.


----------



## PurseUOut

jelliedfeels said:


> *It isn’t quite just the money that is the issue *and it isn’t really the home office’s decision alone whether they are family and what the arrangement is - it would be the royals who decide ultimately I think. The home office just implements it.



The Home office made it 100% about money when deciding to remove Harry's detail. To my knowledge, they didn't question whether he was entitled to police protection as a born royal, they didn't bring up national security concerns or a matter of having enough police bandwith. It was just that they weren't obligated to use taxpayer funds to pay for it. Had the firm been honest and endured whatever scrutiny from Meghan and Harry "outcasted" as national security threats, there would be nothing for them to legally stand on. There still may not be, as it is up to a judge to decide the merits of the case. Either way, the firm needs to get much clearer on the boundaries between non-working and working royals to avoid these legal scrutiny. Perhaps they got the memo when they excluded Harry and Meghan from priority seating at the Jubilee Thanksgiving service and them not being on the balcony.


----------



## CeeJay

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Arxi seems to be really small, imo



Does it look like Archie also has Red hair?!?!  The fact that the "supposed" Lilibet had Red hair and Archie as well?? .. Red hair is more of a recessive gene and while Red hair figured greatly in the Spencer clan, it doesn't really 'jive' with Meghan's heritage IMO.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I think that this image is photoshopped within an inch of its life- they were her cameramen after all and she almost looks cut out of her surroundings and legs are weirdly posed. When she got snapped the same month in loads of pictures by her enemies at the DM she looks…. Different shall we say.
> 
> 
> 
> What a pretty boy!
> Now is that really your cat or do you hire a series of lookalikes from talent agencies to keep us all guessing?
> 
> 
> It isn’t quite just the money that is the issue and it isn’t really the home office’s decision alone whether they are family and what the arrangement is - it would be the royals who decide ultimately I think. The home office just implements it.
> 
> So,’tbh, I don’t think Harry has got a leg to stand on legally ( I could be wrong). He surely has to demonstrate he is in great danger and he has no means of protection besides our police force- which is clearly not the case. There is nothing to stop him hiring private bouncers which is what we assume he must do in the US. These guards have apparently proven effective preventing  any trouble and who he could bring with him as hired protecti anyway. He resides comfortably in the US despite (we can assume) not having any access to any national intelligence there. There is no logical reason to assume he is in any greater danger here than he is in CA or indeed Texas (where it’s legal to open carry guns and he was happily mingling at the rodeo.)
> 
> Other members of the royal family who aren’t classed as working royals are protected by the detail at the event but I don’t believe they get an escort to or from their homes and they don’t have anyone most days. H actually got better than many  as he was in an armoured car in the main convoy whereas the queen’s  cousin went home on a bike.
> 
> The idea that the U.K. is his home and that this is sufficient grounds to claim state security is ludicrous. He owns and resides in an overseas address and he has spent less than a week in the U.K. in the last few years. He probably isn’t paying taxes to Uncle Sam but that’s a different story.
> 
> Ultimately a private citizen can’t claim they have a right to public security. Harry would claim he is in the role of a public figure as a royal but I think they will find that even if that’s the case that doesn’t mean he can set the terms of what he is provided or indeed ask for more than he is allocated by the royal household and the home office.
> 
> Also, the cynical  part of me thinks the royals wouldn’t want him to reimburse the public security as then we would find out how much it cost us…



I agree. If he pays, Harry being Harry (and Megatron) will try to set a security agenda. He visited the Queen without anyone knowing until his PR announced it to the World and then he (the loose cannon he is) decided to do a gossip interview about the Queen and tell everyone how poorly protected she was. At the Jubilee, H & M decided to go in a different vehicle to the bus he was supposed to travel on. How can security organise themselves if H&M choose to flout the carefully planned routes and procedures. 


He is really my baby. H was a very well behaved cat until recently. He has been very whiny since his brother died last Autumn, but at least he doesn't wail and howl outside anymore (I think he thought his brother was lost). I try to feed him a very healthy expensive  diet but lately he literally moans and complains until I give him those cheap 'fast food' wet food sachets. He_ knows_ he can be very persuasive - especially if I'm on Zoom, Skype or TEAMS call.


----------



## PurseUOut

CeeJay said:


> Does it look like Archie also has Red hair?!?!  The fact that the "supposed" Lilibet had Red hair and Archie as well?? .. Red hair is more of a recessive gene and while Red hair figured greatly in the Spencer clan, it doesn't really 'jive' with Meghan's heritage IMO.



Not sure what "heritage" you are speaking of but Meghan is biracial (white and black). Thomas Markle Jr. (Meghan's half-brother) has red hair.


----------



## jelliedfeels

PurseUOut said:


> Ya'll are not understanding the legal argument at stake here.
> 
> There is a concept in U.K. and U.S. called "due process". Meaning, in most cases, when you deprive or remove something from someone they are enjoying the rights privileges of, you need to have a reason and give them an opportunity to rebut or appeal.
> 
> The issue at hand is Harry had tax-payer funded UK security as a consequence of being born a royal in the direct line of succession and, later, being working royal. Those privileges (funded by the taxpayer) were removed as consequence of him being a non-working royal.
> 
> The Home Office argued that the security privileges were revoked because public funds are not used to protect non-working royals. This was a mistake on their part. Legally, if the material issue of fact is taxpayers aren't funding security for non-working royals, then they have to consider Harry's offer to reimburse the taxpayer when deciding to revoke his detail. Because the Home Office didn't raise national security or police bandwith concerns when deciding to remove their security, they need to justify why they won't allow Harry to keep his security if he pays for it.


I get what you mean. He’s basically pushing that he’s being deprived of what he has a right to due to the committee being rigged against him.

Ultimately I think the due process argument won’t work as he has repeatedly made announcements that he has given up his work and wanted financial independence. Meaning that he is no longer in the same position or the recipient of the same privileges.

I think the argument he didn’t think there would be a representative of the royal household at RAvec and that representative would likely be the Queen’s secretary is complete bull**** personally- why would she not want to have a say and likely considerable sway in her family’s provision? It’s not like this committee exists for any other reason and I doubt anyone on that committee would want to do something to displease her.

He’s trying to strawman another grey suit essentially (and it does feel like they are getting picked off like cans on a wall these last few years) but even if the grey suit didn’t like him or didn’t mention his email at the meeting it doesn’t not mean that the committee did not make appropriate arrangements for him or that they weren’t following the orders of people who outrank him. If he wants to be a royal for the day he also has to stay in the pecking order.

add on- I’m not sure the money issue is the home office’s main argument maybe I’ve missed it but I think  H is trying to push the offer to pay to make them look unreasonable/ like it’s a money thing. I think their argument is basically- it’s the committee’s job to decide what is appropriate not Harry’s and he’s  not entitled to what he was asking for.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CeeJay said:


> OH NO!! .. so sorry to hear this @QueenofWrapDress !!!  What is it lately with 'stuff' happening?? .. dealing with my arthritis issues and other auto-immune issues, my HUGE fear was that either one of us (me or the hubby) would get COVID (even though we've had the 3 shots)!!  So, on the 4th of July, there was a little community get-together which was fun and I finally got to meet our neighbors (the HB had met many as he goes to a weekly Saturday morning coffee .. which I can't do as I simply can't get around well anymore).
> 
> So, then I start to develop a sore throat .. not bad at first, but THEN ?!?! .. and meanwhile, the HB is coughing up a storm (both early precursors to a COVID infection).  So, yesterday, I got our test kits all set and YUP, both of us have it .. CRAP!!!  The HB is sleeping like crazy and coughing up a storm (I kicked him out of our bedroom .. he can sleep in our guest bedroom!).  Me?!?! .. muscles & joints ache, still horrible sore throat, but the worst?? .. the NAUSEA!  I had really hoped that we would never get this mess!


I’m sorry to hear you and your husband are ill Ceejay and fingers crossed it passes quickly. Get lots of rest definitely.


----------



## PurseUOut

jelliedfeels said:


> He’s trying to strawman another grey suit essentially (and it does feel like they are getting picked off like cans on a wall these last few years) but even if the grey suit didn’t like him or didn’t mention his email at the meeting it doesn’t not mean that the committee did not make appropriate arrangements for him or that they weren’t following the orders of people who outrank him. If he wants to be a royal for the day he also has to stay in the pecking order.



I think it is safe to say both Meghan and Harry are taking advantage of the firm's naivety and the loopholes in the legal system to cover up how hastily they left the RF as senior royals without much of a plan. In hindsight they should have given the firm enough notice about their intentions to step down and pissed off as working royals while waiting for an opportunity for the firm to carve out a place for them in the U.K.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## CeeJay

PurseUOut said:


> Not sure what "heritage" you are speaking of but Meghan is biracial (white and black). Thomas Markle Jr. (Meghan's half-brother) has red hair.


I'm very well aware of Meghan's "heritage", but was not aware that her half-brother has Red hair!  Knowing that now (thank you), does make a difference on H&M's children having the possibility of Red hair.


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I'm very well aware of Meghan's "heritage", but was not aware that her half-brother has Red hair!  Knowing that now (thank you), does make a difference on H&M's children having the possibility of Red hair.



Genetics are fun and interesting. Also, if the babies were IVF, is it possible they selected the gender and hair color?

One to two percent of humans have red or orange hair and the red pigment gene is only carried by people with European ancestry. When a baby receives an allele for red hair, it will blend with its accompanying allele. A red-blonde genotype presents as strawberry blonde and a red-brown genotype presents as auburn.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

I don't know about the rest of you, but Harry and his "security" .. well, given their (supposed) visit to Jackson Hole, well it may not be "secure" as the UK, since: 

*"Montana law allows any person to conceal carry a weapon without a concealed weapon permit, 
so long as that person is eligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law*_.  Montana issues concealed 
weapon permits, which must be applied for and obtained from your local Montana county sheriff."_​
.. and sadly, as we here in the US recently saw .. yet another mass shooting at a July-4th parade held in a very prominent area outside of Chicago, IL!!!  I'm not going to get into my opinion on guns/assault rifles as that would be too political for here, but given that H&M have lived in the US for a few years now??? .. they've heard about other mass shootings (Meghan's visit to Uvalde after all) ..


----------



## CeeJay

LittleStar88 said:


> Genetics are fun and interesting. Also, if the babies were IVF, is it possible they selected the gender and hair color?
> 
> One to two percent of humans have red or orange hair and the red pigment gene is only carried by people with European ancestry. When a baby receives an allele for red hair, it will blend with its accompanying allele. A red-blonde genotype presents as strawberry blonde and a red-brown genotype presents as auburn.
> 
> View attachment 5442723


I always loved studying Genetics (had I continued on in Medicine, it would have likely been my choice of discipline)!  Between my husband and I, there would have been a very good chance that we would have had a Redhead, as I had a very carrot top Aunt (my Father's sister - Irish), my Italian Grandmother (believe it or not - was a Mahogany Red) and the husband's family had it's fair share of redheads .. but you NEVER know!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

CeeJay said:


> I don't know about the rest of you, but Harry and his "security" .. well, given their (supposed) visit to Jackson Hole, well it may not be "secure" as the UK, since:
> 
> *"Montana law allows any person to conceal carry a weapon without a concealed weapon permit,
> so long as that person is eligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law*_.  Montana issues concealed
> weapon permits, which must be applied for and obtained from your local Montana county sheriff."_​
> .. and sadly, as we here in the US recently saw .. yet another mass shooting at a July-4th parade held in a very prominent area outside of Chicago, IL!!!  I'm not going to get into my opinion on guns/assault rifles as that would be too political for here, but given that H&M have lived in the US for a few years now??? .. they've heard about other mass shootings (Meghan's visit to Uvalde after all) ..



The reality is that you don't even need a permit to carry anywhere (though it would be illegal in some states). I know lots of people who carry in CA without a permit.

I could literally put a gun in my handbag and no one would know it. So from a safety perspective, they simply are not safe roaming about anywhere - security or otherwise. Whether it be from a rooftop building as we saw in Chicago recently or simply by being in close proximity as a general person in a crowd and not appearing to be a threat.


----------



## charlottawill

PurseUOut said:


> Not sure what "heritage" you are speaking of but Meghan is biracial (white and black). Thomas Markle Jr. (Meghan's half-brother) has red hair.


Genes can do weird things. There is red hair on both sides, so I'm not surprised they have a red haired child. My husband insisted for years that we couldn't have a blue-eyed child but we did, and it wasn't the mailman.


----------



## Toby93

Annawakes said:


> I think it’s odd that there aren’t more pictures of them at the parade.  Surely other people would have also snuck photos?
> 
> I also think it’s odd that Arxie’s face is clearly in view whereas the parents’ faces are not.  It’s not their MO.  And where is the lawsuit for releasing pictures of Arxie?
> 
> This whole thing was planned I believe.


Why is Archie always in profile?  Why not just one of him straight on?  Why all the cloak and dagger?  I honestly don't believe any pic to do with this pair anymore.  Everything is manipulated and photoshopped and altered


----------



## piperdog

PurseUOut said:


> Ya'll are not understanding the legal argument at stake here.
> 
> There is a concept in U.K. and U.S. called "due process". Meaning, in most cases, when you deprive or remove something from someone they are enjoying the rights privileges of, you need to have a reason and give them an opportunity to rebut or appeal.
> 
> The issue at hand is Harry had tax-payer funded UK security as a consequence of being born a royal in the direct line of succession and, later, being working royal. Those privileges (funded by the taxpayer) were removed as consequence of him being a non-working royal.
> 
> The Home Office argued that the security privileges were revoked because public funds are not used to protect non-working royals. This was a mistake on their part. Legally, if the material issue of fact is taxpayers aren't funding security for non-working royals, then they have to consider Harry's offer to reimburse the taxpayer when deciding to revoke his detail. Because the Home Office didn't raise national security or police bandwith concerns when deciding to remove their security, they need to justify why they won't allow Harry to keep his security if he pays for it.


I think we can understand the legal argument and the concept of due process quite clearly and still come to a different conclusion. Disclaimer: I'm not a UK lawyer and haven't read much more about this that what's in this thread. You certainly seem better-versed than I about how this case has proceeded so far.
However, unless the process in place for the consideration of such requests (e.g., the random whims,  belligerent demands, or Netflix-influenced requests of a spoiled prince in the midst of a prolonged public temper tantrum) specifically gives the requester the right to be represented at and participate in the consideration of those requests, I don't necessarily see a due process violation if Harry or his representatives weren't at the table. If there is a process and the Committee didn't follow it, then sure, there may be a basis for a successful claim. But, keeping it tied to the money, which you said was the key, if the UK does not allow its security forces to become the equivalent of rent-a-cops, then I don't see how Harry's offer to pay would be dispositive, either. Nor do I think his offer to do something (privately pay for state security) that isn't allowed and has never been done merits any special consideration or a full representational hearing. Basically, unless there is a process in place that the UK govt didn't follow, I don't see how even a summary rejection of his 'offer' by the committee without hearing or whatever he's whinging about was improper.
I'll agree that his rights have been diminished, but that's due to the changed circumstances that he initiated. I also agree that Harry, Meghan, and their legal team are taking full advantage of the fact that the rest of the family probably expected their separation from duties as working members of the Family to be handled discretely within the family instead of in court. I can only hope that the Firm's legal team has caught on and will treat them with the same 'consideration' they've shown HMTQ.
Disclaimer #2: This is very simplified based on what I learned of US due process during law school back in prehistoric days. And much of our due process jurisprudence comes from those "bonkers" amendments and may not be at all relevant to the UK.


----------



## MiniMabel

papertiger said:


> *No. Our police force and intelligent services are not for sale.*
> 
> Apart from licensed guns for sport or pest control, weapons are only carried by military personnel and special police officers. Private security operatives are not allowed to carry weapons or be privy to intelligence. This is why H is fighting for our defence staff to guard him. Harry doesn't need armed protection because he doesn't perform Royal duties. Neither do any of his family. Non-working Royals don't have state sponsored security on-tap, not because we can't afford it but because it's unnecessary.
> 
> Police do charge for certain security events where commercial organisations benefit from their presence, this is not an ongoing state of personal protection but public safety.
> 
> Even police protection cannot save Harry from paranoia or boos. Better he stays abroad where he is obviously so much safer and happier.



This. JCMH and his wife do not perform any duties on behalf of the Royal Family and therefore are not entitled to security in the UK.  He can pay for his own if he deems it necessary, or bring his own security over, but I don't think they're in much danger except from finally realising how much they are disliked or being on the receiving end of rotten eggs or tomatoes! They got off lightly with just being booed! Anyway, didn't Lilibet "possibly" come to the dangerous UK with them for the Platinum Jubilee? I assume they had their own protection officers with them then?  To be honest, I think we're all extremely weary of their bleating and hope they don't come back!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CeeJay said:


> So, then I start to develop a sore throat .. not bad at first, but THEN ?!?! .. and meanwhile, the HB is coughing up a storm (both early precursors to a COVID infection).  So, yesterday, I got our test kits all set and YUP, both of us have it .. CRAP!!!  The HB is sleeping like crazy and coughing up a storm (I kicked him out of our bedroom .. he can sleep in our guest bedroom!).  Me?!?! .. muscles & joints ache, still horrible sore throat, but the worst?? .. the NAUSEA!  I had really hoped that we would never get this mess!



I have no clue. Maybe the universe is done with the human race. My friend blamed Mercury the planet but apparently it should be long gone by now. So sorry to hear you both caught the plague and feel so sick now. Get well soon! 

My family member managed to get post-Covid bronchitis and is still coughing weeks later (not all the time, but in coughing fits during the day). It really sucks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Is Charles’ choice really controversial though? Their understanding of that word is different than mine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Meghan, Harry 3-Year Campaign Makes Charles' Latest Hire Controversial
> 
> 
> Prince Charles' new press secretary comes from a newspaper group Meghan Markle said had an "agenda of publishing intrusive or offensive stories" about her.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



It's not unless you're a narcissist. "I picked a fight with someone and you didn't get up and leave the occasion to make a point!" Yeah, hard no from me. Also, just because someone works at a news network doesn't mean they are personally responsible for everything anyone over there writes and publishes unless it's something nasty like antisemitism, then a person with integrity needs to part ways. I really don't think Markle gossip fits that bill.


----------



## Aimee3

They are so worried about security that TW rolls down the window of a secure car so she can be photographed?  That should nullify any protection they might have been given.
Jackson Hole is in Wyoming and right near some of the gorgeous national parks (Yellowstone and grand teutons).  There have been several episodes of tourists getting seriously hurt by charging bears and bison and some of these people were allegedly far enough away from the animals (recommended distances) so I could see why your guides might be carrying arms for protection in emergencies.
@CeeJay. If you and your husband are really suffering you could ask your doctor for Paxlovid.  It does relieve symptoms but a good percentage of people get relapses (although much more mild cases) a week or 10 days later.  Hope you feel better soon!


----------



## LittleStar88

Aimee3 said:


> They are so worried about security that TW rolls down the window of a secure car so she can be photographed?  That should nullify any protection they might have been given.
> Jackson Hole is in Wyoming and right near some of the gorgeous national parks (Yellowstone and grand teutons).  There have been several episodes of tourists getting seriously hurt by charging bears and bison and some of these people were allegedly far enough away from the animals (recommended distances) so I could see why your guides might be carrying arms for protection in emergencies.
> @CeeJay. If you and your husband are really suffering you could ask your doctor for Paxlovid.  It does relieve symptoms but a good percentage of people get relapses (although much more mild cases) a week or 10 days later.  Hope you feel better soon!



I caught covid two weeks ago today. Took Paxlovid on day 2 (I am immunocompromised) and I believe it made a huge difference. Feeling pretty darn good now, just a small little dry cough remains. So far no rebound and testing negative 

Paxlovid isn't usually given to just anyone (favors elderly/immunocompromised) but good to talk to your doctor to see if they are willing to Rx it and must be taken within 5 days of positive test/symptoms.

I really thought that TW rolling down that window was going to be the nail in the coffin of their case. She did not think ahead at all when she did that. What a dunce move!


----------



## Toby93

CeeJay said:


> I don't know about the rest of you, but Harry and his "security" .. well, given their (supposed) visit to Jackson Hole, well it may not be "secure" as the UK, since:
> 
> *"Montana law allows any person to conceal carry a weapon without a concealed weapon permit,
> so long as that person is eligible to possess a firearm under state or federal law*_.  Montana issues concealed
> weapon permits, which must be applied for and obtained from your local Montana county sheriff."_​
> .. and sadly, as we here in the US recently saw .. yet another mass shooting at a July-4th parade held in a very prominent area outside of Chicago, IL!!!  I'm not going to get into my opinion on guns/assault rifles as that would be too political for here, but given that H&M have lived in the US for a few years now??? .. they've heard about other mass shootings (Meghan's visit to Uvalde after all) ..


Not to state the obvious, but his whole argument is ridiculous.  He left the UK where it is illegal to carry a knife, never mind a handgun, to live in a country where practically every day there is a mass shooting of some sort.  What is it again that feels "safer" in the US?  As a non-US citizen, it is interesting to watch this whole thing play out.  He really is controlled by this woman.  He has to know that from a security standpoint, if he was sincere about his safety, he would be living elsewhere.  Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the US and visit every chance I get, but I am not the one whining about feeling safer in California than London.


----------



## bellecate

CeeJay said:


> OH NO!! .. so sorry to hear this @QueenofWrapDress !!!  What is it lately with 'stuff' happening?? .. dealing with my arthritis issues and other auto-immune issues, my HUGE fear was that either one of us (me or the hubby) would get COVID (even though we've had the 3 shots)!!  So, on the 4th of July, there was a little community get-together which was fun and I finally got to meet our neighbors (the HB had met many as he goes to a weekly Saturday morning coffee .. which I can't do as I simply can't get around well anymore).
> 
> So, then I start to develop a sore throat .. not bad at first, but THEN ?!?! .. and meanwhile, the HB is coughing up a storm (both early precursors to a COVID infection).  So, yesterday, I got our test kits all set and YUP, both of us have it .. CRAP!!!  The HB is sleeping like crazy and coughing up a storm (I kicked him out of our bedroom .. he can sleep in our guest bedroom!).  Me?!?! .. muscles & joints ache, still horrible sore throat, but the worst?? .. the NAUSEA!  I had really hoped that we would never get this mess!


Sorry to hear about your health issues. I understand totally how tough having arthritis can be having had both knees replaced in the last 8 months because of it and having it in my spine. Horrid you’re feeling poorly now with Covid. Rest lots and come on here to get your laughs.


----------



## bag-mania

They pretend they need the security because they think it adds to their status as celebrities. They want us to believe they have to contend with crowds of thousands pushing to see them. When in reality it is more like half a dozen sugars lingering on the curb wanting selfies with them!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> Why is Archie always in profile?  Why not just one of him straight on?  Why all the cloak and dagger?  I honestly don't believe any pic to do with this pair anymore.  Everything is manipulated and photoshopped and altered


Amen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CeeJay

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have no clue. Maybe the universe is done with the human race. My friend blamed Mercury the planet but apparently it should be long gone by now. So sorry to hear you both caught the plague and feel so sick now. Get well soon!
> 
> My family member managed to get post-Covid bronchitis and is still coughing weeks later (not all the time, but in coughing fits during the day). It really sucks.


Thanks, and you pointed out something that has me very concerned re: bronchitis or pneumonia!  As many times as I tell the HB to cover his mouth/nose, he doesn’t and as such, it’s over 90% certainty that I’ll end up with a massive sinus infection which can then progress into the others (its happened before).  Meanwhile, he TRIED to sneak himself into the Master Bedroom, but I caught him (thank god) and told him it was the guest bedroom or I would ship him out to the community clubhouse!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just a friendly reminder


----------



## CeeJay

Aimee3 said:


> They are so worried about security that TW rolls down the window of a secure car so she can be photographed?  That should nullify any protection they might have been given.
> Jackson Hole is in Wyoming and right near some of the gorgeous national parks (Yellowstone and grand teutons).  There have been several episodes of tourists getting seriously hurt by charging bears and bison and some of these people were allegedly far enough away from the animals (recommended distances) so I could see why your guides might be carrying arms for protection in emergencies.
> @CeeJay. If you and your husband are really suffering you could ask your doctor for Paxlovid.  It does relieve symptoms but a good percentage of people get relapses (although much more mild cases) a week or 10 days later.  Hope you feel better soon!


Oy vay, you can tell I’m sick when I get my state geography incorrectly because it’s something I’m usually really good at!  Sheesh ..


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a friendly reminder



Love the look on Major Johnny's face.  He is just waiting for them to do something so he can whip out his sheep lasso and haul them out of there. (We don't really know what he has going on under that kilt or hidden in his sporran.) use your imagination.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Love the look on Major Johnny's face.  He is just waiting for them to do something so he can whip out his sheep lasso and haul them out of there. (We don't really know what he has going on under that kilt or hidden in his sporran.) use your imagination.



To me he is looking at TW with disdain. He's been around the RF long enough to know who fits in and who doesn't.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Not to state the obvious, but his whole argument is ridiculous.  He left the UK where it is illegal to carry a knife, never mind a handgun, to live in a country where practically every day there is a mass shooting of some sort.  What is it again that feels "safer" in the US?  As a non-US citizen, it is interesting to watch this whole thing play out.  He really is controlled by this woman.  He has to know that from a security standpoint, if he was sincere about his safety, he would be living elsewhere.  Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the US and visit every chance I get, but I am not the one whining about feeling safer in California than London.


I live in the US (have for most of my life), and I've never felt more unsafe as I do now.  I am by no means a paranoid person, but with smash and grabs, random acts of violence, and the obvious mass shootings, it's not the same as it used to be.  During the July Fourth festivities in our small town, they held a free concert in the park before the fireworks show.  It was quite crowded, and after COVID, I wasn't used to being in such a large crowd.  While we were enjoying ourselves, the thought that any one of the people in the crowd could be a lunatic with a gun and kill many of us crossed my mind.  How HazBeen feels "safer" in the US is laughable.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Love the look on Major Johnny's face.  He is just waiting for them to do something so he can whip out his sheep lasso and haul them out of there. (We don't really know what he has going on under that kilt or hidden in his sporran.) use your imagination.



He has the look of someone who caught the whiff of something that smells horrible and is forcing himself not to react.


----------



## xincinsin

PurseUOut said:


> I think the issue is he offered to pay for his continuation of UK security, and they stripped his access without considering their offer to pay/reimburse the taxpayer.
> 
> If *paid* UK security is provided to working royals, and money is the material issue at hand, so long as he and Meghan were willing to front the costs of UK security they should have been permitted to keep it. The Home Office should have been honest and assert they didn't want non-working royals to have access to UK security for intelligence/national security reasons. They erred in trying to keep up appearances that Harry and Meghan are "family" when in fact their living in the U.S., even an ally country, could severely comprise UK intelligence.


Money is not the issue at hand. Only in the corrupt regimes of the world do wealthy wastrels get to pay for the state to protect them. The Home Office does not need to be transparent about this for the reason you are proposing. The primary reason is that Hazard and Meghan are no longer working royals and therefore not entitled to UK-provided security. It is not the HO or BRF's responsibility to coddle them because they are too dense to understand that if you don't do the work, you don't enjoy the perks. 

The UnSussexfuls are still stuck in the mindset that they could con their way out of a full-time job by offering part-time services. If the BRF had agreed to their half-in/half-out proposal, I have no doubt that they would be going on 12 months of parental leave and generally lollygagging through life while the taxpayer or Bank of Dad funds everything. After all, this is the con job they are pulling on those foolish enough to sign lucrative contracts with them.


----------



## xincinsin

PurseUOut said:


> The Home office made it 100% about money when deciding to remove Harry's detail. To my knowledge, they didn't question whether he was entitled to police protection as a born royal, they didn't bring up national security concerns or a matter of having enough police bandwith. It was just that they weren't obligated to use taxpayer funds to pay for it. Had the firm been honest and endured whatever scrutiny from Meghan and Harry "outcasted" as national security threats, there would be nothing for them to legally stand on. There still may not be, as it is up to a judge to decide the merits of the case. Either way, the firm needs to get much clearer on the boundaries between non-working and working royals to avoid these legal scrutiny. Perhaps they got the memo when they excluded Harry and Meghan from priority seating at the Jubilee Thanksgiving service and them not being on the balcony.


Why does everyone else have to be scrupulously honest when Cali Hari and his puppeteer get to ooze around lying about everything?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> He has the look of someone who caught the whiff of something that smells horrible and is forcing himself not to react.


I was watching him in the video.  The man has amazing self control.  He didn't move a muscle.  No way to know what he was really thinking as his facial expression didn't change.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Money is not the issue at hand. Only in the corrupt regimes of the world do wealthy wastrels get to pay for the state to protect them. The Home Office does not need to be transparent about this for the reason you are proposing. The primary reason is that Hazard and Meghan are no longer working royals and therefore not entitled to UK-provided security. It is not the HO or BRF's responsibility to coddle them because they are too dense to understand that if you don't do the work, you don't enjoy the perks.
> 
> The UnSussexfuls are still stuck in the mindset that they could con their way out of a full-time job by offering part-time services. If the BRF had agreed to their half-in/half-out proposal, I have no doubt that they would be going on 12 months of parental leave and generally lollygagging through life while the taxpayer or Bank of Dad funds everything. After all, this is the con job they are pulling on those foolish enough to sign lucrative contracts with them.


I thought that Meghan said it wasn't her role to coddle anyone.  Gee Wiz!  I guess the same is true when it comes to her.  No coddling of Meghan and that goes for Harry too.


----------



## bellecate

I have nothing to say on this.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I have nothing to say on this.
> View attachment 5442811



Ugh, that pendant looks cheap and tacky. It has absolutely nothing to do with Meghan other than she wore one last year during the Covid vaccination event they attended, you know the one that occurred _after_ most people had already been vaccinated. The company that made it must be struggling to unload them so they are trying to tie it to this year’s current events to move sales.

In a bandwagon sense, the necklace company is very much like Meghan.


----------



## joyeaux

Re: the *OMGCandid* Wyoming pics… that a brand new Insta account by a “teacher” posted, the only one in a big crowd apparently to snap a pic, complete with bad grammar and weird mention of how “gorgeous” MM was  

Please look at Archie‘s shadow in the pic where he’s holding a flag. The placement of the flag in relation to where he’s holding it is flipped. The waving flag turns into a perfect straight square in the shadow. The little dots of “sun” in between his legs and elbow are also off.

Oh and JCMH has, apparently, for the first time in a gazillion years, taken off his bracelets.

(I don’t normally analyze photos to death but when I do… )


----------



## bellecate

joyeaux said:


> Re: the *OMGCandid* Wyoming pics… that a brand new Insta account by a “teacher” posted, the only one in a big crowd apparently to snap a pic, complete with bad grammar and weird mention of how “gorgeous” MM was
> 
> Please look at Archie‘s shadow in the pic where he’s holding a flag. The placement of the flag in relation to where he’s holding it is flipped. The waving flag turns into a perfect straight square in the shadow. The little dots of “sun” in between his legs and elbow are also off.
> 
> Oh and JCMH has, apparently, for the first time in a gazillion years, taken off his bracelets.
> 
> (I don’t normally analyze photos to death but when I do… )



Is that a lollipop in that child’s mouth?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

Harry resigned from the company but still expects to be part of the group benefits package. Does he honestly really believe still entitled to all the benefits of a job he doesn't do?


----------



## bag-mania

joyeaux said:


> Re: the *OMGCandid* Wyoming pics… that a brand new Insta account by a “teacher” posted, the only one in a big crowd apparently to snap a pic, complete with bad grammar and weird mention of how “gorgeous” MM was
> 
> Please look at Archie‘s shadow in the pic where he’s holding a flag. The placement of the flag in relation to where he’s holding it is flipped. The waving flag turns into a perfect straight square in the shadow. The little dots of “sun” in between his legs and elbow are also off.
> 
> Oh and JCMH has, apparently, for the first time in a gazillion years, taken off his bracelets.
> 
> (I don’t normally analyze photos to death but when I do… )



H&M love their photo editing! The shadows do look weird.



bellecate said:


> Is that a lollipop in that child’s mouth?



I was just about to ask that. It’s either a lollipop or else Archie learned how to roll his own cigarettes in Wyoming.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I thought that Meghan said it wasn't her role to coddle anyone.  Gee Wiz!  I guess the same is true when it comes to her.  No coddling of Meghan and that goes for Harry too.


Meghan is "special". I would assume, based on her lack of acting talent, that she has been coddled all her life/career. And no, being a conwoman and career victim does not prove that she can act since many people are seeing through her fake tears. 

It must have been a rude shock that, after she bagged a prince, she discovered that (a) he doesn't have much power or sway, (b) the position of Queen isn't through popular vote and (c) the Firm expected her to do her share of the work. 

For point b, no offense to Americans in general, but I find it quite understandable that an American woman who got by on wiles rather than wit, does not "get" the concept of the British monarchy. When I was on Quora, there were plenty of Americans who argued that the world functioned according to US law. They were resistant to correction by more knowledgeable Americans and the international community. Remember how Methane failed the Foreign Service exam as well as a Britishness pop quiz? Pretty sure she believed the Queen was equivalent to the US President and she had a shot at it.


----------



## wisconsin

Is there still no way to delete posts?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Meghan is "special". I would assume, based on her lack of acting talent, that she has been coddled all her life/career. And no, being a conwoman and career victim does not prove that she can act since many people are seeing through her fake tears.
> 
> It must have been a rude shock that, after she bagged a prince, she discovered that (a) he doesn't have much power or sway, (b) the position of Queen isn't through popular vote and (c) the Firm expected her to do her share of the work.
> 
> For point b, no offense to Americans in general, but I find it quite understandable that an American woman who got by on wiles rather than wit, does not "get" the concept of the British monarchy. When I was on Quora, there were plenty of Americans who argued that the world functioned according to US law. They were resistant to correction by more knowledgeable Americans and the international community. Remember how Methane failed the Foreign Service exam as well as a Britishness pop quiz? Pretty sure she believed the Queen was equivalent to the US President and she had a shot at it.


Last year I took the practice Foreign Service exam for fun.  I wanted to see how hard it was.  Well guess what, it was hard and if you read the literature that goes with it, you are instructed to study  and take several practice exams prior to the real thing.  The one take home message that I got from the questions and scenarios that you are asked to deal with  in the exam is that you are being tested to see if you can be a team player and if you understand chain of command and how to work within it.  These are two major things that Meghan Markle would fail at absolutely. You have to reason, appreciate the mindset of others unlike yourself and be able to work within those parameters.  Again, could Meghan do this?  

I am sorry, but there is no excusing her willful ignorance when it came to the royal family.  If she couldn't take the time to read about English history, the monarchy of the family, then there was clear intention on her part NEVER to stick around and it was there from the very beginning.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

rose60610 said:


> So Harry should have been able to keep his UK security in the U.S. as long as he was willing to pay for it? I don't think you're referring to making UK security move to the U.S. If the BRF allowed Harry to have UK security as long as he paid for it, then what's the difference between extending that same offer to anybody who comes to the UK and says "I'll pay for UK security"?  Harry severed his ties. Voluntarily. In fact, he said everybody in the BRF is "trapped". Sure, he's blood related, but HE was the one who kicked the rest of them to the curb, said they're "trapped", was complicit with Meghan saying that they're "racist", and made her "suicidal". And he still thinks he's entitled to UK security just because he was willing to pay for it (largely with money that came from the BRF)?  He's in the process of writing a book that many believe will be full of slams against the BRF. I think the only thing the BRF should give Harry is a box of butt wipes. They "owe" him nothing. He isn't going to inherit the throne any more than the royal gardener. He needs no reason to be privy to any intel the UK security forces have. Even if he pays for it. Besides, lemon olive oil cakes are not anybody's sovereign currency that can be exchanged for pounds, US$, euros, yen, or francs.


Hear.  Hear.  Attention must be paid.


----------



## xincinsin

V0N1B2 said:


> Felt compelled to fix the quote.


 Thank you, @V0N1B2
"One of Meghan's most famous uses of jewelry in her *JUST UNDER A YEAR AND A HALF* as a *WORKING* member of the royal family..." Of course we know that during that 1.5 years, she spent less than a year actually working as she travelled the world (despite being trapped without her passport <face-palm>) and had maternity leave.



K.D. said:


> They questioned whether it was "appropriate" for Sir Edward or other members of the Royal Household to sit on the committee, when Prince Harry had been told it was "*independent*".
> 
> Prince Harry has previously argued his private security team cannot replicate the work of police protection in the UK, with their access to local intelligence and legal powers.


We do know that Cali Hari's comprehension of the concept of independence is flawed, especially when it comes to financial independence and the US Constitution's First Amendment.

If he gets any headway in this frivolous demand, he will be expecting all governments everywhere to share intelligence with him. Because he is so in danger everywhere  Harry, teach your wife not to wind down the window of an armoured vehicle because the next time she does it in the UK, she will be getting tomatoes to go with her word salad. The Brits will be ready.


----------



## charlottawill

joyeaux said:


> Re: the *OMGCandid* Wyoming pics… that a brand new Insta account by a “teacher” posted, the only one in a big crowd apparently to snap a pic, complete with bad grammar and weird mention of how “gorgeous” MM was
> 
> Please look at Archie‘s shadow in the pic where he’s holding a flag. The placement of the flag in relation to where he’s holding it is flipped. The waving flag turns into a perfect straight square in the shadow. The little dots of “sun” in between his legs and elbow are also off.
> 
> Oh and JCMH has, apparently, for the first time in a gazillion years, taken off his bracelets.
> 
> (I don’t normally analyze photos to death but when I do… )



I'm not a shadow expert but your observation about the flag shadow is indeed interesting. Thanks Sherlock


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It’s either a lollipop or else Archie learned how to roll his own cigarettes in Wyoming.


 It is a red lollipop, it was clear in one of the pictures. They're commonly handed out to kids at parades.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CeeJay said:


> OH NO!! .. so sorry to hear this @QueenofWrapDress !!!  What is it lately with 'stuff' happening?? .. dealing with my arthritis issues and other auto-immune issues, my HUGE fear was that either one of us (me or the hubby) would get COVID (even though we've had the 3 shots)!!  So, on the 4th of July, there was a little community get-together which was fun and I finally got to meet our neighbors (the HB had met many as he goes to a weekly Saturday morning coffee .. which I can't do as I simply can't get around well anymore).
> 
> So, then I start to develop a sore throat .. not bad at first, but THEN ?!?! .. and meanwhile, the HB is coughing up a storm (both early precursors to a COVID infection).  So, yesterday, I got our test kits all set and YUP, both of us have it .. CRAP!!!  The HB is sleeping like crazy and coughing up a storm (I kicked him out of our bedroom .. he can sleep in our guest bedroom!).  Me?!?! .. muscles & joints ache, still horrible sore throat, but the worst?? .. the NAUSEA!  I had really hoped that we would never get this mess!


Best wishes to you and your husband for a complete recovery.


----------



## joyeaux

bellecate said:


> Is that a lollipop in that child’s mouth?



Sure is. Because, ’Merica!! Harkles, they’re just like us!


----------



## LittleStar88

Chris Rock’s show in SF … He mentioned TW.



> Meghan Markle was also in his crosshairs, with Rock saying she should’ve expected to experience racism and wasn’t a victim, which drew repeated protests from one audience member. He also dropped another local reference here, talking about how Black families also wonder about a baby’s skin tone and whether the child will look more like Steph Curry or Draymond Green.











						Chris Rock shares personal text messages at SF show
					

He addressed the slap, roasted Elon Musk and turned Steph Curry into a punch line.




					www.sfgate.com


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## LittleStar88

And who could have been the shady Wyoming billionaire?



> One was Moscow billionaire Igor Makarov, named under a 2017 law requiring the U.S. Treasury Department to list oligarchs and political figures close to the Russian government. Makarov’s company faced questions in the past about controversial transactions with Russia’s state-owned gas giant and about possible influence peddling involving the daughter of a U.S. congressman.











						Wyoming Is the Onshore-Offshore Tax Haven of Oligarch Dreams
					

Remember when the go-to reference when you were making a joke about financial finagling was the Caymans?




					www.esquire.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

mellibelly said:


>



Yet another couple that looks weirdly alike. We should name this the dopplebangers thread.


LittleStar88 said:


> The reality is that you don't even need a permit to carry anywhere (though it would be illegal in some states). I know lots of people who carry in CA without a permit.
> 
> I could literally put a gun in my handbag and no one would know it. So from a safety perspective, they simply are not safe roaming about anywhere - security or otherwise. Whether it be from a rooftop building as we saw in Chicago recently or simply by being in close proximity as a general person in a crowd and not appearing to be a threat.





Toby93 said:


> Not to state the obvious, but his whole argument is ridiculous.  He left the UK where it is illegal to carry a knife, never mind a handgun, to live in a country where practically every day there is a mass shooting of some sort.  What is it again that feels "safer" in the US?  As a non-US citizen, it is interesting to watch this whole thing play out.  He really is controlled by this woman.  He has to know that from a security standpoint, if he was sincere about his safety, he would be living elsewhere.  Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the US and visit every chance I get, but I am not the one whining about feeling safer in California than London.


100% the security thing makes no sense. Guns are also legal to carry in his previous domicile Canada too and also in many of the countries in Africa he loved to visit.  Yet his native Britain is the only place where he thinks he could be jumped.

I suppose he’d say the British are just so much more racist than anyone else….sure Harry - I’m sure racists everywhere would want to take down your ginger ass over all the activists making a difference. You truly are a latter day Wilberforce or Malcolm X


bellecate said:


> I have nothing to say on this.
> View attachment 5442811


Ah yes simply buy this item and you too will be a empowered political heavyweight making an incredible stand against mass injustice 


I think I’ve seen this logo before and I think it’s a bit of an ugly chimera of a design and it also looks like it is the logo for a certain sexual practice than anything else to me.


joyeaux said:


> Re: the *OMGCandid* Wyoming pics… that a brand new Insta account by a “teacher” posted, the only one in a big crowd apparently to snap a pic, complete with bad grammar and weird mention of how “gorgeous” MM was
> 
> Please look at Archie‘s shadow in the pic where he’s holding a flag. The placement of the flag in relation to where he’s holding it is flipped. The waving flag turns into a perfect straight square in the shadow. The little dots of “sun” in between his legs and elbow are also off.
> 
> Oh and JCMH has, apparently, for the first time in a gazillion years, taken off his bracelets.
> 
> (I don’t normally analyze photos to death but when I do… )


Yeah 100% this account is a hoax. It’s all made up but they’ve got they wanted views, clicks and engagement. Calling M gorgeous was definitely a tell too. Where was her notorious ‘king rat’ hair?  


LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5442854


I dunno I’m beginning to think these anonymous tips are a little formulaic. Heck I could start writing them at this point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PurseUOut

xincinsin said:


> Money is not the issue at hand. Only in the corrupt regimes of the world do wealthy wastrels get to pay for the state to protect them. The Home Office does not need to be transparent about this for the reason you are proposing. The primary reason is that Hazard and Meghan are no longer working royals and therefore not entitled to UK-provided security. It is not the HO or BRF's responsibility to coddle them because they are too dense to understand that if you don't do the work, you don't enjoy the perks.



No they don’t need to be transparent about their reasons for denying him security but not doing so risks a lawsuit. Not wanting to get your hands dirty and playing like a supportive family risks lawsuits. H&M have been surprisingly successful in their legal endeavors when I thought they otherwise didn’t have a case so I am interested in how this plays out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Marklenews'  summary struck me as funny.


----------



## papertiger

CeeJay said:


> I'm very well aware of Meghan's "heritage", but was not aware that her half-brother has Red hair!  Knowing that now (thank you), does make a difference on H&M's children having the possibility of Red hair.


But the red hair come from his mother, M isn’t related to his mother.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Marklenews'  summary struck me as funny.



No surprise here..


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> But the red hair come from his mother, M isn’t related to his mother.


I'm sure sooner or later some genealogist in Methane's pocket will state that she is the descendant of a (red-headed) African Princess and therefore a worthy bride for the Penurious Prince. Her bought-and-paid-for experts already make many spurious claims on her behalf, like how she has the most mellifluous voice of all for audio recordings.

I can still recall many decades ago when one of the tabloids wrote an article with many exclamation marks claiming that Diana could trace her lineage back to Genghis Khan.


----------



## papertiger

PurseUOut said:


> No they don’t need to be transparent about their reasons for denying him security but not doing so risks a lawsuit. Not wanting to get your hands dirty and playing like a supportive family risks lawsuits. H&M have been surprisingly successful in their legal endeavors when I thought they otherwise didn’t have a case so I am interested in how this plays out.



M couldn’t really lose the case against them Mail. The law courts would have copyright cases coming out their ears had their mail won. It’s th £1 damages that indicate the (non)severity of her ‘suffering‘. A mere token. She technically won but the judge dismissed her claims.

You probably know all this anyway , but obviously in tone and manner (calligraphy), the letter was clearly written for posterity and publication, and was not personal. The Mail tried to prove it was supervised and guided by Palace staff and therefore not solely her work. At the end of the da, it’s her name on the letter and that’s what gives her copyright. There are hundreds of songs and thousands of books written by people with help and advice. It’s still the named composer/lyricist or author that is awarded copyright (you can even buy copyright) so the Mail’s argument was week.

Had H&M still been working Royals, they would not have been allowed to file a claim. IMO, the outcome was going to be pretty obvious, the case was brought about not for the money but a warning for all (media) they have a love hate relationship with the media. They both hate the media, they both are obsessed by the media, they both want to work (in) the media. They used the Palace to eradicate inconvenient stories in the media.  They use the media to create (their) truth which they think will create history, they are used to controlling the media, they couldn’t let the media get away with their worst nightmare, letting her family speak. They are both hyper sensitive and hypocritical. SHE that was silenced by his family, couldn’t wait to silence her own, this was a warning to all others not give them a voice. They shut down and shut up anyone that doesn’t think the sun shines out of every one of their pores.

The case for Harry’s security is about status and control. He knows the most important thing is to make them look important on British soil. With a full security detail he, his wife and children will not only be shielded from (perceived) physical harm, and be ushered in and out of everywhere as VVIPs, but more importantly saved from media attention, public scrutiny . That way they can carry on spinning their own tales without interference or criticism.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> "... it also looks like it is the logo for a certain sexual practice than anything else to me."


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> And who could have been the shady Wyoming billionaire?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wyoming Is the Onshore-Offshore Tax Haven of Oligarch Dreams
> 
> 
> Remember when the go-to reference when you were making a joke about financial finagling was the Caymans?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.esquire.com



I wondered when the report of their visit broke if they were staying at the ultra exclusive Amangani resort, which by the way:

"Aman Resorts has changed hands several times over the years. *It’s been owned since 2014 by Vladislav Doronin, who was once labeled one of the “kings of Russian real estate” by Forbes magazine."*

It was recently sold, buyer unknown. Another Russian oligarch friend of theirs? They seem to have had several in recent years. 



> https://www.jhnewsandguide.com/news...cle_65b74155-34f0-58a7-8932-a09ed36be66c.html


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> I wondered when the report of their visit broke if they were staying at the ultra exclusive Amangani resort, which by the way:
> 
> "Aman Resorts has changed hands several times over the years. *It’s been owned since 2014 by Vladislav Doronin, who was once labeled one of the “kings of Russian real estate” by Forbes magazine."*
> 
> It was recently sold, buyer unknown. Another Russian oligarch friend of theirs? They seem to have had several in recent years.


Interesting, wasn’t JCMH willing to go to Ukraine and stop the war by his presence?
Unless this a russian dissident it is not a good image doing business or taking freebies from this friend


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just a friendly reminder





Please do keep reminding us!


----------



## csshopper

I’m a doubter, to me the Markle News items are starting to read as if “Anonymous “, is a singular, not plural author(s).

Some of it doesn’t seem plausible. Methane is a control freak, getting drunk I can believe,  BUT being drunk in public is a huge image risk, too many ops for a candid photo by a fellow reveler to sell for big bucks. I don’t think she would let her guard down for that. Hazbeen is a different story, she might even encourage him to make an azz of himself, more sympathy votes for her if there’s a divorce, plus it would embarrass the RF.


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5442854



"Anonymous" is often one needs to know. I don't support the Harkles but it's all too easy to crank out stuff like this. As dim as H&M are, why would they allow themselves to be seen at a parade and hole up at a reputedly shady Russian billionaire's house? Consider this: there was no merching of the clothes/jewelry "Meghan" was wearing in WY.  Since when do they do anything without trying to milk a nickel?  Wouldn't they have laid down a red, white and blue wreath somewhere accompanied by six pages of symbolism explanations and instructions for Venmo payments?  Or something to that effect?  Unless Harry shows up on the back of a rodeo bull in Cody, I'll have difficulty believing they were there.  Now if Netflix renegs on the money, Harry just might have to consider the rodeo circuit......


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is there a SoHo House in JHole?  Perhaps they stayed there [if they were there].
ETA:
I looked it up. Here ya go:








						See Inside the Luxurious Wyoming Retreat the Kardashians Visited for the Season Finale of Their Show (Video)
					

In the season finale of "Keeping Up With the Kardashians," the family visited Caldera House, a luxury resort located in Wyoming.




					www.travelandleisure.com


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Now if Netflix renegs on the money, Harry just might have to consider the rodeo circuit......



He has enough to handle staying on a polo pony. A bucking bull would have him off in half a second.

I can absolutely see them accepting favors from Russian oligarchs. The key is they don’t want to be caught doing it in a provable way. Speculation is fine, they just don’t want there to be evidence.


----------



## Toby93

Duplicate


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> 100% the security thing makes no sense. *Guns are also legal to carry in his previous domicile Canada* too and also in many of the countries in Africa he loved to visit.  Yet his native Britain is the only place where he thinks he could be jumped.
> 
> I suppose he’d say the British are just so much more racist than anyone else….sure Harry - I’m sure racists everywhere would want to take down your ginger ass over all the activists making a difference. You truly are a latter day Wilberforce or Malcolm X
> 
> Ah yes simply buy this item and you too will be a empowered political heavyweight making an incredible stand against mass injustice


I agree with most of what you said, but guns are absolutely NOT legal to carry in Canada.


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> Yet another couple that looks weirdly alike. We should name this the dopplebangers thread.
> 
> 
> 100% the security thing makes no sense. Guns are also legal to carry in his previous domicile Canada too and also in many of the countries in Africa he loved to visit.  Yet his native Britain is the only place where he thinks he could be jumped.
> 
> I suppose he’d say the British are just so much more racist than anyone else….sure Harry - I’m sure racists everywhere would want to take down your ginger ass over all the activists making a difference. You truly are a latter day Wilberforce or Malcolm X
> 
> Ah yes simply buy this item and you too will be a empowered political heavyweight making an incredible stand against mass injustice
> 
> 
> I think I’ve seen this logo before and I think it’s a bit of an ugly chimera of a design and it also looks like it is the logo for a certain sexual practice than anything else to me.
> 
> Yeah 100% this account is a hoax. It’s all made up but they’ve got they wanted views, clicks and engagement. Calling M gorgeous was definitely a tell too. Where was her notorious ‘king rat’ hair?
> 
> I dunno I’m beginning to think these anonymous tips are a little formulaic. Heck I could start writing them at this point.


I don't think an argument can be made for the UK being too racist for his delicate wife.  A report just came out and the most popular name for boys in the UK this year is Mohammed.  It is one of the most multi-cultural countries in the world, especially London.


----------



## bellecate

Another picture from the parade.
Edited to add: Has Hairy always been so hairy on his arms and legs?


----------



## andrashik

xincinsin said:


> I'm sure sooner or later some genealogist in Methane's pocket will state that she is the descendant of a (red-headed) African Princess and therefore a worthy bride for the Penurious Prince. Her bought-and-paid-for experts already make many spurious claims on her behalf, like how she has the most mellifluous voice of all for audio recordings.
> 
> I can still recall many decades ago when one of the tabloids wrote an article with many exclamation marks claiming that Diana could trace her lineage back to Genghis Khan.


One of the reasons I am on this thread - besides the witty remarks, is that I learn new words. English is not my first language so I always enjoy reading all of your ladies' messages and learn new words and things , even though sometimes I tend to forget the words haha


----------



## CarryOn2020

New photos!!









						Harry and Meghan are seen attending 4th of July parade with Archie
					

Their detractors like to paint them as woke and out of touch - but Harry and Meghan could pass for a typical American family in these photos taken at a traditional 4th of July parade.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why is she poking him?
What is in her hand?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why is she poking him?
> What is in her hand?
> View attachment 5443225



I can't pile on them too much - this time  . I skimmed the DM piece and the whole thing looks and sounds pretty innocuous. But I would love to know who they were "guests" of. And you know they flew private courtesy of a friend.

My brother and his wife love JH/Grand Teton, and they are not wealthy. He's a retired military officer, so they travel pretty much on a budget. I've only seen pictures that he's posted on social media but it does look beautiful.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> I can't pile on them too much - this time  . I skimmed the DM piece and the whole thing looks and sounds pretty innocuous. But I would love to know who they were "guests" of. And you know they flew private courtesy of a friend.
> 
> My brother and his wife love JH/Grand Teton, and they are not wealthy. He's a retired military officer, so they travel pretty much on a budget. I've only seen pictures that he's posted on social media but it does look beautiful.


I’ve been there a handful of times, the area is beautiful and some wonderful shopping. Unique. Couldn’t imagine them moving there as the winters are very cold with lots of snow.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bellecate said:


> Another picture from the parade.
> Edited to add: Has Hairy always been so hairy on his arms and legs?
> 
> View attachment 5443221


Yes - google Prince Harry short sleeves and you'll see other pictures where he's got considerable hair on his arms.  It's light, so it does not show up in every picture.  But when the sun catches it right, like this pic, you see it.


----------



## Annawakes

Sitting on the curb with the unwashed masses…a far cry from clearing out a whole section at Wimbledon…maybe she needed to be drunk to pull off this PR stunt…


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> I agree with most of what you said, but guns are absolutely NOT legal to carry in Canada.


Sorry I meant own not carry as in I get the impression it’s easier for John smith to buy a gun there as opposed to here where you either have to join a gang or take up range shooting and hope your enemy transforms  into a flying plate.



CarryOn2020 said:


> New photos!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are seen attending 4th of July parade with Archie
> 
> 
> Their detractors like to paint them as woke and out of touch - but Harry and Meghan could pass for a typical American family in these photos taken at a traditional 4th of July parade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The opening quote ‘their detractors paint them as woke’ and who might be among them, eh DM  ?

Face shots or that could be anyone, I am still struggling to see why anyone would care either way though tbh, this is so dull compared to the usual smorgasbord of cringe they provide,


CarryOn2020 said:


> Why is she poking him?
> What is in her hand?
> View attachment 5443225


That’s where his reset button is.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> I don't think an argument can be made for the UK being too racist for his delicate wife.  A report just came out and the most popular name for boys in the UK this year is Mohammed.  It is one of the most multi-cultural countries in the world, especially London.



To be clear I was being sarcastic, I think we’ve all noted, American posters included, on the irony of moving to the US to escape the ‘anti-black world of Britain’ as it is a bit like jumping in the sea to avoid a puddle but then, I don’t believe for a second that experiencing racism firsthand is a problem for M, H or their children anywhere.


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> Sorry I meant own not carry as in I get the impression it’s easier for John smith to buy a gun there as opposed to here where you either have to join a gang or take up range shooting and hope your enemy transforms  into a flying plate.
> 
> On the racism thing: I was being sarcastic, I think we’ve all noted, American posters included, on the irony of moving to the US to escape the ‘anti-black world of Britain’ as it is a bit like jumping in the sea to avoid a puddle.
> 
> The opening quote ‘their detractors paint them as woke’ and who might be among them, eh DM  ?
> 
> Face shots or that could be anyone, I am still struggling to see why anyone would care either way though tbh, this is so dull compared to the usual smorgasbord of cringe they provide,
> 
> That’s where his reset button is.


No need to be sorry  I'm not sure where you are located, but it is definitely not easier to own a gun here in Canada, as compared  to the US.  You need to take several courses in person to obtain a license, police check, spousal reference and acquaintance refs.  To purchase a handgun (for now - they are in the process of being banned for purchase) there is an at least 2 week waiting period but I have heard its almost a month right now.

I am not sure why his ridiculous inquiry is being entertained in the UK.  Hopefully, the HO is just going through the motions and will deny him.  He made his choice to leave and it is no ones fault but his own that they were in such a rush that they didn't stop to consider all that it entailed.  They really are the modern day Edward and Wallis, minus the class


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why is she poking him?
> What is in her hand?
> View attachment 5443225


He's got lovely hair.


----------



## gelbergirl

Sharont2305 said:


> He's got lovely hair.



Gorgeous head of hair.  And I like his little outfit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So his motion did get approved. Yahoo already ran with the story he "won" the case. Tourre has stuff to say.


----------



## pukasonqo

Cute little kid, nice seeing that they can mix w the great unwashed w no dramas


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> 100% the security thing makes no sense. Guns are also legal to carry in his previous domicile Canada too and also in many of the countries in Africa he loved to visit.  Yet his native Britain is the only place where he thinks he could be jumped.


No, guns are illegal here in Canada -- although the ones who are up to no good do manage to sneak them in from south of the border.  Which is illegal.


----------



## Jayne1

bellecate said:


> Another picture from the parade.
> Edited to add: Has Hairy always been so hairy on his arms and legs?
> 
> View attachment 5443221


It's her (her posture and mannerisms are easy to recognize) and it's been assumed she's back on her skinny drug cocktail.  lol

Netfl*x content!


----------



## bellecate

Jayne1 said:


> No, guns are illegal here in Canada -- although the ones who are up to no good do manage to sneak them in from south of the border.  Which is illegal.


Guns are not illegal in Canada. There are many illegal guns in Canada but more legally owned guns. You pay your money, take the gun safety courses, apply for a licence, get the police check and all the other required steps. Then purchase your gun/s.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So his motion did get approved. Yahoo already ran with the story he "won" the case. Tourre has stuff to say.


Of Course, Yahoo, home of the family mouthpiece Scurvy, whose reported ”truths” related to the Sussexi are always nebulous.


----------



## Zen101

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Harry may very well win. The British court is something else. I wouldn’t put my hope in them. The Judge may probably end up being biased towards Harry. He’s a former working royal but there’s still the attachment. I mean, if Meghan can get away with not remembering stuff in her daily mail case and it being brushed under the carpet as something she simply forgot, then Harry might win if the judge finds the newspaper hurt his feelings.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Harry may very well win. The British court is something else. I wouldn’t put my hope in them. The Judge may probably end up being biased towards Harry. He’s a former working royal but there’s still the attachment. I mean, if Meghan can get away with not remembering stuff in her daily mail case and it being brushed under the carpet as something she simply forgot, then Harry might win if the judge finds the newspaper hurt his feelings.



If you open the comments to the tweet, Tourre's second one says the judge has ties to the BRF and it sounds like he thinks he might be biased to begin with.


----------



## Zen101

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you open the comments to the tweet, Tourre's second one says the judge has ties to the BRF and it sounds like he thinks he might be biased to begin with.



Definitely. I don’t think the case will be heard with an open mind. If it goes forward, it will all be for show. My feeling is, the daily mail has lost before it even begins.


----------



## CarryOn2020

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Definitely. I don’t think the case will be heard with an open mind. If it goes forward, it will all be for show. My feeling is, the daily mail has lost before it even begins.



Agree. Seems that the BRF gets some ‘friendly breaks’ for the courts imo. Not implying anything untoward, as we know QE almost always wins — usually for good reasons.

ETA:  imo they look like plenty of other American families who enjoyed celebrating our freedom from the tyranny of the dreadful English king [no offense intended  ]


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Another picture from the parade.
> Edited to add: Has Hairy always been so hairy on his arms and legs?
> 
> View attachment 5443221



Security looks conspicuous by its absence


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree. Seems that the BRF gets some ‘friendly breaks’ for the courts imo. Not implying anything untoward, as we know QE almost always wins — usually for good reasons.
> 
> ETA:  imo they look like plenty of other American families who enjoyed celebrating our freedom from the tyranny of the dreadful English king [no offense intended  ]



They don't call high-ranking Barristers (and solicitors) Queen's Counsel for nothing


----------



## joyeaux

Ok y’all, here I go again spending too much time on this but… it’s just so strange to me:



> In the Daily Mail’s top story coverage of the Wyoming thing , look at his ring and bracelets (first pic) in comparison to the “originals” on Instagram, Harry’s ring is now gold. His bracelets can magically appear out of thin air.


(Redacting this. Recollections may vary. Or this is likely not the same guy). 

I honestly want to know what the point of this would be? Taking focus off the lawsuit (that is being reported as a “win” for him)? PR to show Harkle patriotism? Any thoughts?

Ok off to get a life now


----------



## LittleStar88

pukasonqo said:


> Cute little kid, nice seeing that they can mix w the great unwashed w no dramas



He's super adorable! I'd be happy to see more photos of him.

It looks like they've learned not to drag a big obvious camera crew with them trying to relate to the plebs. Now they have just one random pleb-looking person to post the "secret sighting" that eventually gets news coverage and a ton of pictures... Clever, but we've got her number!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

joyeaux said:


> Ok y’all, here I go again spending too much time on this but… it’s just so strange to me:
> 
> In the Daily Mail’s top story coverage of the Wyoming thing , in comparison to the “original civilian on Insta” pics, Harry’s ring is now gold. His bracelets can magically appear out of thin air.
> 
> I honestly want to know what the point of this would be? Taking focus off the lawsuit (that is being reported as a “win” for him)? PR to show Harkle patriotism? Any thoughts?
> 
> Ok off to get a life now
> 
> View attachment 5443351
> 
> 
> View attachment 5443362
> 
> 
> View attachment 5443363



Hazz is wearing shorts, so I am not sure the photo with the silver watch is Hazz.   Perhaps he is wearing those pants that convert to shorts?


----------



## bag-mania

Attending an Independence Day parade in Wyoming is so random. Meghan and Harry sitting on a dirty curb for no particular reason other than absorbing the local flavor? I'm not buying it. 

At some point the other shoe will drop and we will understand why this scenario occurred.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Attending an Independence Day parade in Wyoming is so random. Meghan and Harry sitting on a dirty curb for no particular reason other than absorbing the local flavor? I'm not buying it.
> 
> At some point the other shoe will drop and we will understand why this scenario occurred.



Maybe they're chasing the wealthy people who carry a lower profile - for some reason and I haven't thought through yet how it isn't just for the money. We'll see them pop up in Aspen or whatever other affluent cities like these... Money aside, why?


----------



## joyeaux

Good point!! Definitely that would make sense. The guy with the freckled arm and same shirt color is likely someone else. Sorry guys! I’ll go back and edit the last post as I’m obviously a runway train with this   


(But I still stand by the shadow of Archie and the flag being ridiculously off with perfect square flag shadow and placement of said flag… )


----------



## joyeaux

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is wearing shorts, so I am not sure the photo with the silver watch is Hazz.   Perhaps he is wearing those pants that convert to shorts?





Good point!! Definitely that would make sense. The guy with the freckled arm and same shirt color is likely someone else. Sorry guys! I’ll go back and edit the last post as I’m obviously a runway train with this  


(But I still stand by the shadow of Archie and the flag being ridiculously off with perfect square flag shadow and placement of said flag… )


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is wearing shorts, so I am not sure the photo with the silver watch is Hazz.   Perhaps he is wearing those pants that convert to shorts?


That might be "security".


----------



## bellecate

joyeaux said:


> Ok y’all, here I go again spending too much time on this but… it’s just so strange to me:
> 
> In the Daily Mail’s top story coverage of the Wyoming thing , look at his ring and bracelets (first pic) in comparison to the “originals” on Instagram, Harry’s ring is now gold. His bracelets can magically appear out of thin air.
> 
> I honestly want to know what the point of this would be? Taking focus off the lawsuit (that is being reported as a “win” for him)? PR to show Harkle patriotism? Any thoughts?
> 
> Ok off to get a life now
> 
> View attachment 5443351
> 
> 
> View attachment 5443362
> 
> 
> View attachment 5443363


The one sitting holding the child’s arm is in shorts, hairy legs. The one standing is in long pants. Perhaps one of the missing security?


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz is wearing shorts, so I am not sure the photo with the silver watch is Hazz.   Perhaps he is wearing those pants that convert to shorts?


Didn’t see your reply before I posted. ‘Great minds’.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe they're chasing the wealthy people who carry a lower profile - for some reason and I haven't thought through yet how it isn't just for the money. We'll see them pop up in Aspen or whatever other affluent cities like these... Money aside, why?
> 
> View attachment 5443384



Excuse me, let's just back-up here, but, why is a Prince (or two) in line to the British throne at a gathering to celebrate the winning of a war against the British?


----------



## LittleStar88

papertiger said:


> Excuse me, let's just back-up here, but, why is a Prince (or two) in line to the British throne at a gathering to celebrate the winning of a war against the British?



Right?!? Hahaha I love the irony. I was just thinking this myself. 

I guess he wants to celebrate living in a country where he can freely call the 1st Amendment BONKERS.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could it be the Swiss billionaire who lives close by?









						Swiss-born billionaire is accused of violating US election law
					

Hansjorg Wyss, who has an estimated net worth of $5.1 billion and in lives in Wyoming, has become a major donor to liberal groups in recent years, but  remains tight-lipped about his citizenship status.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Excuse me, let's just back-up here, but, why is a Prince (or two) in line to the British throne at a gathering to celebrate the winning of a war against the British?



Irony? 
The likely truth is they were told to be there by Meghan. Maybe they think it’s a punishment to the British people for their underwhelming welcome last month.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Attending an Independence Day parade in Wyoming is so random. Meghan and Harry sitting on a dirty curb for no particular reason other than absorbing the local flavor? I'm not buying it.
> 
> At some point the other shoe will drop and we will understand why this scenario occurred.



Quoting the BLG, "_follow the money!_" The result of a simple Google search:


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could it be the Swiss billionaire who lives close by?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Swiss-born billionaire is accused of violating US election law
> 
> 
> Hansjorg Wyss, who has an estimated net worth of $5.1 billion and in lives in Wyoming, has become a major donor to liberal groups in recent years, but  remains tight-lipped about his citizenship status.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Tyler Perry has a home in JH. Maybe the Harkles are back in his good graces.

ETA: He also has a private jet.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Tyler Perry has a home in JH. Maybe the Harkles are back in his good graces.


Unless they went to visit Brad Pitt, my bet is on Hansjorg Wyss as the host.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Unless they went to visit Brad Pitt, my bet is on Hansjorg Wyss as the host.
> View attachment 5443453



It doesn’t have to be a celebrity. There are plenty of billionaires who we have never heard about. I figure they are trying to hit up some rich person with a cockamamie business deal.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It doesn’t have to be a celebrity. There are plenty of billionaires who we have never heard about. I figure they are trying to hit up some rich person with a cockamamie business deal.



There are Mars and Walton billionaires in JH and both families are very private. Lukas Walton is a strong possibility. Grandson of Sam Walton, inherited billions when his father died in a plane crash in 2005. He is young and devotes his time to the Walton family foundation and environmental issues. Maybe the Harkles are trying to hit him up for a donation to one of their causes. 

We really are a bunch of Lady Whistledowns aren't we?   



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lukas_Walton


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Unless they went to visit Brad Pitt, my bet is on Hansjorg Wyss as the host.
> View attachment 5443453



You have been missed   Welcome back


----------



## octopus17

papertiger said:


> Excuse me, let's just back-up here, but, why is a Prince (or two) in line to the British throne at a gathering to celebrate the winning of a war against the British?


He's thick as two short planks?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I was watching him in the video.  The man has amazing self control.  He didn't move a muscle.  No way to know what he was really thinking as his facial expression didn't change.


How many times did you watch the video?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I wondered when the report of their visit broke if they were staying at the ultra exclusive Amangani resort, which by the way:
> 
> "Aman Resorts has changed hands several times over the years. *It’s been owned since 2014 by Vladislav Doronin, who was once labeled one of the “kings of Russian real estate” by Forbes magazine."*
> 
> It was recently sold, buyer unknown. Another Russian oligarch friend of theirs? They seem to have had several in recent years.


My question is, why are Russian Oligarchs so interested in helping these fools?


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Of all their nicknames that one never fails to make me laugh



Me, too!  It is my favorite!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> How many times did you watch the video?


Several. It kept me from shopping online lolololol!


----------



## mellibelly

I heard a new one…Mooch & Hooch


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> My question is, why are Russian Oligarchs so interested in helping these fools?


Information brokering. You never know what comes in useful. That would have been true prior to the invasion of Ukraine.


----------



## Stansy

charlottawill said:


> There are Mars and Walton billionaires in JH and both families are very private. Lukas Walton is a strong possibility. Grandson of Sam Walton, inherited billions when his father died in a plane crash in 2005. He is young and devotes his time to the Walton family foundation and *environmental issues*. Maybe the Harkles are trying to hit him up for a donation to one of their causes.
> 
> We really are a bunch of Lady Whistledowns aren't we?



i wonder how he feels about the use of private jets…


----------



## Chanbal

Thanks @CarryOn2020 It's great to be back, I missed you all. I'm still updating myself on the Harkles' saga.

The pictures taken during the Wyoming photo-op seem to show a lack of spontaneity, enthusiasm… Arch*e  looks also a little apathetic imo. It's probably my wrong impression.


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He is not wrong, but look who's talking. Dear David doesn't have the best eye for design himself I'm afraid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tourre isn't convinced either (I personally do think sending body doubles out is crazy even for them, so I guess it was them attending the parade).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

PurseUOut said:


> Not sure what "heritage" you are speaking of but Meghan is biracial (white and black). Thomas Markle Jr. (Meghan's half-brother) has red hair.


Thomas Jr's mother (TM Sr's first wife) had reddish blond hair and if it's her natural colour, it could be the reason for TM Jr's red hair in which case it wouldn't affect TW's progeny.  On the other hand, TM Sr sometimes appears to have reddish hair tones, and if it's his natural colour, it could be passed on to any of his descendants.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourre isn't convinced either (I personally do think sending body doubles out is crazy even for them, so I guess it was them attending the parade).



I usually agree with his opinions but the word descendants is incorrect.  It should have been ancestors.  But yes, it seemed strange.


----------



## jennlt

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I usually agree with his opinions but the word descendants is incorrect.  It should have been ancestors.  But yes, it seemed strange.


He corrected his mistake in the comments section


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thomas Jr's mother (TM Sr's first wife) had reddish blond hair and if it's her natural colour, it could be the reason for TM Jr's red hair in which case it wouldn't affect TW's progeny.  On the other hand, TM Sr sometimes appears to have reddish hair tones, and if it's his natural colour, it could be passed on to any of his descendants.
> View attachment 5443891
> View attachment 5443892


Pretty sure that is the brassy color that dyed hair gets when it fades.  I used to tell my hairdresser that I didn’t want my hair to turn orange.  She never listened, apparently.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thomas Jr's mother (TM Sr's first wife) had reddish blond hair and if it's her natural colour, it could be the reason for TM Jr's red hair in which case it wouldn't affect TW's progeny.  On the other hand, TM Sr sometimes appears to have reddish hair tones, and if it's his natural colour, it could be passed on to any of his descendants.
> View attachment 5443891
> View attachment 5443892


I will say, Samantha Markle looks like her mother and leave it at that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady C has tea. I haven't watched yet, but apparently she has a few things to say about Wyoming.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020 It's great to be back, I missed you all. I'm still updating myself on the Harkles' saga.
> 
> The pictures taken during the Wyoming photo-op seem to show a lack of spontaneity, enthusiasm… Arch*e  looks also a little apathetic imo. It's probably my wrong impression.




Re Duchess Marmalade's post, a picture is worth a thousand words.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady C has tea. I haven't watched yet, but apparently she has a few things to say about Wyoming.




I don't have the patience to watch her videos but THE PUPPIES!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourre isn't convinced either (I personally do think sending body doubles out is crazy even for them, so I guess it was them attending the parade).




It's pretty clear at this point that it's them. But it's unnecessary to mock a child - "The very hairy, small looking Harry". It's no wonder why they and other celebs keep their kids out of the public eye. If you don't like the parents it's one thing, but leave the kid alone. This happened early on with Chelsea C.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It's pretty clear at this point that it's them. But it's unnecessary to mock a child - "The very hairy, small looking Harry". It's no wonder why they and other celebs keep their kids out of the public eye. If you don't like the parents it's one thing, but leave the kid alone. This happened early on with Chelsea C.



Hu? I read this as he wrote it. They light is so that you can see the hairs on Harry's arms that are usually too blonde to be noticed. Also, he's usually like what, two heads taller than her? But sitting in the background he doesn't look that tall here.


----------



## Stansy

charlottawill said:


> It's pretty clear at this point that it's them. But it's unnecessary to mock a child - "The very hairy, small looking Harry". It's no wonder why they and other celebs keep their kids out of the public eye. If you don't like the parents it's one thing, but leave the kid alone. This happened early on with Chelsea C.


I thought that he was referring to Harry‘s very hairy arms not Archie‘s locks…


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It's pretty clear at this point that it's them. But it's unnecessary to mock a child - "The very hairy, small looking Harry". It's no wonder why they and other celebs keep their kids out of the public eye. If you don't like the parents it's one thing, but leave the kid alone. This happened early on with Chelsea C.



Agree, best never to show the kids. Alternatively, if they show the kids at regular intervals, then it is no surprise to see the kid. It’s human nature to look for hidden stuff, right? Imo the hidden face photos encourage the derision. H&M, on national tv, made a _huge_ issue out of the child’s looks. They should expect pushback.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? I read this as he wrote it. They light is so that you can see the hairs on Harry's arms that are usually too blonde to be noticed.



Oooos, I thought “small Harry” was referring to Hazz and the awful photoshopping.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Lady C has tea. I haven't watched yet, but apparently she has a few things to say about Wyoming.




To save everyone half an hour of their time, H&M stuff starts at 34.11min (unless you're obsessed by UK politics).

She's such a tease though, she's saving the juicy stuff til another time


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


>



It could be just the angle, but H’s face just looks off somehow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> It could be just the angle, but H’s face just looks off somehow.



I can't see her face at all.


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> I can't see her face at all.


True her face is always angled away in all the shots. I was referring to Harry’s face.


----------



## coleigh

CeeJay said:


> Does it look like Archie also has Red hair?!?!  The fact that the "supposed" Lilibet had Red hair and Archie as well?? .. Red hair is more of a recessive gene and while Red hair figured greatly in the Spencer clan, it doesn't really 'jive' with Meghan's heritage IMO.


Determining someone's heritage is complex.  My ex-husband and I are both biracial.  He has blond hair, and I have brown reddish hair.  We have two daughters, one with blond hair and one with dark brown hair.  I guess one would need to know Meghan's family to know why her children have the physical characteristics that produced them as whole people.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> I heard a new one…Mooch & Hooch


There's another word that rhymes and starts with a "C", but I dare not say it, lest I get sofa king banned.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Information brokering. You never know what comes in useful. That would have been true prior to the invasion of Ukraine.


That could be treason!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourre isn't convinced either (I personally do think sending body doubles out is crazy even for them, so I guess it was them attending the parade).



I'm shocked TW's eyes in the back of her head didn't notice the camera!


----------



## charlottawill

Stansy said:


> I thought that he was referring to Harry‘s very hairy arms not Archie‘s locks…


You're right, I took it that he was referring to Archie.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? I read this as he wrote it. They light is so that you can see the hairs on Harry's arms that are usually too blonde to be noticed. Also, he's usually like what, two heads taller than her? But sitting in the background he doesn't look that tall here.


You're right. I took it that he was referring to Archie.


----------



## A1aGypsy

purseinsanity said:


> My question is, why are Russian Oligarchs so interested in helping these fools?



I suspect it is likely the same reason why a human trafficker wanted to cozy up to his Uncle- insurance.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm shocked TW's eyes in the back of her head didn't notice the camera!


Seriously.  This is a woman who finds the lens every single time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In the Lady C video, around the 44:00 mark, she discusses the security issue.  If I could be wrong, if he wins, then the US taxpayers will be funding their US security. His security will have access to all(?) of our files??? Wowowow!  Toward the beginning, she makes a fair point that he is continuing to live like the entitled prince that he was raised to be.  Financially he is not behaving like someone who has left the royal life.  _Only spend other people’s money_ - wish I had learned that lesson earlier.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> That could be treason!


Both have already shown a proficiency in betraying family and a love of $$$$$. I'm glad they "stepped down/back". They are bad news.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the Lady C video, around the 44:00 mark, she discusses the security issue.  If I could be wrong, if he wins, then the US taxpayers will be funding their US security. His security will have access to all(?) of our files??? Wowowow!  Toward the beginning, she makes a fair point that he is continuing to live like the entitled prince that he was raised to be.  Financially he is not behaving like someone who has left the royal life.  _Only spend other people’s money_ - wish I had learned that lesson earlier.


The lawsuit is in a British court. This only concerns security that is or is not provided by the British government for JCMH and his family while they are in the UK. This has zero to do with security issues in the US. A British court would have no jurisdiction over whether or not the US Federal, state or city governments choose to provide security for the Harkles while they are in the US.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

DoggieBags said:


> The lawsuit is in a British court. This only concerns security that is or is not provided by the British government for JCMH and his family while they are in the UK. This has zero to do with security issues in the US. A British court would have no jurisdiction over whether or not the US Federal, state or city governments choose to provide security for the Harkles while they are in the US.


In my understanding, there is a correlation between British security protection and the inference or statement declaring them qualified for international protection and the costs to be borne by whichever country they visit or reside in.  Hope our legal minds can step in here.


----------



## xincinsin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> In my understanding, there is a correlation between British security protection and the inference or statement declaring them qualified for international protection and the costs to be borne by whichever country they visit or reside in.  Hope our legal minds can step in here.


I think many have pointed out that Hazard's endgame is to regain his Internationally protected person status. That will then force governments to provide him with state security wherever he goes. It would be scandalous because The Wench will definitely flaunt it as a status symbol and it will save the UnSussexfuls a bundle of money while costing the world a fortune as they will definitely demand more security than HMTQ.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> I think many have pointed out that Hazard's endgame is to regain his Internationally protected person status. That will then force governments to provide him with state security wherever he goes. It would be scandalous because The Wench will definitely flaunt it as a status symbol and it will save the UnSussexfuls a bundle of money while costing the world a fortune as they will definitely demand more security than HMTQ.


Thank you for your response.  Another reason to find them offensive and abusive and greedy


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> I think many have pointed out that Hazard's endgame is to regain his Internationally protected person status. That will then force governments to provide him with state security wherever he goes. It would be scandalous because The Wench will definitely flaunt it as a status symbol and it will save the UnSussexfuls a bundle of money while costing the world a fortune as they will definitely demand more security than HMTQ.



Princess Anne is the daughter of the Queen, does tonnes of engagements as a working Royal and does not have full time security.









						'Anne doesn't get full time security and her protection was shot'
					

The Duke of Sussex (pictured with Meghan) should not be expecting bodyguards supplied to him when he decides to return home, Dai Davies said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The Harkles have such an over inflated sense of self and ego….


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> The Harkles have such an over inflated sense of self and ego….



The Harkles's sense of humor must be zero…


----------



## Chanbal

Because 100% of his income and 'importance' depend on the 1.4%. 


_That translates to 1.4 per cent (again, very approximately) of the Duke’s time has been spent in the UK since the couple triggered the sonic boom that was Megxit…

*Why is Harry fighting tooth and nail over a decision that does not affect 98.6 per cent of his life?*_



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/prince-harry-court-battle-exposes-one-commitment-he-refuses-to-make/news-story/2bf3204a73fb77f5e6603c51e5854510


----------



## Chanbal

The book will likely be postponed until the Harkles get the answers they want to their demands. I wouldn't consider this a relief for BP.











						Prince Harry's controversial tell-all memoir 'has been delayed'
					

Prince Harry's upcoming tell-all memoir failed to appear on a list of upcoming Penguin Random House releases, suggesting it may be delayed till next year




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the Lady C video, around the 44:00 mark, she discusses the security issue.  If I could be wrong, if he wins, then the US taxpayers will be funding their US security. His security will have access to all(?) of our files??? Wowowow!  Toward the beginning, she makes a fair point that he is continuing to live like the entitled prince that he was raised to be.  Financially he is not behaving like someone who has left the royal life.  _Only spend other people’s money_ - wish I had learned that lesson earlier.



 

We went through this a while back. 

Once he has the status, he can demand the same level of protection of a visiting dignitary, and that includes intelligence on everyone he has/is/will (be in) contact with.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> The lawsuit is in a British court. This only concerns security that is or is not provided by the British government for JCMH and his family while they are in the UK. This has zero to do with security issues in the US. A British court would have no jurisdiction over whether or not the US Federal, state or city governments choose to provide security for the Harkles while they are in the US.



I understand that his reviewed status in the UK will change that when abroad. Even NY layed-out the red carpet plus security when the went on a faux royal trip to 20 centenary of 9/11. H&M didn't have to pay a cent.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Princess Anne is the daughter of the Queen, does tonnes of engagements as a working Royal and does not have full time security.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Anne doesn't get full time security and her protection was shot'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex (pictured with Meghan) should not be expecting bodyguards supplied to him when he decides to return home, Dai Davies said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Harkles have such an over inflated sense of self and ego….



She is also the daughter of the reigning monarch and not (only) the grandson.

If PA was hurt or killed it would have greater impact on national morale than if Harry was. His number in the line of succession is not equal to his popularity or importance of Anne in public consciousness.

Quite frankly if he disappeared in the Australian outback tomorrow I wouldn't care, and nor would 90% of this country. I certainly wouldn't be GoFunding a search party.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> She is also the daughter of the reigning monarch and not (only) the grandson.
> 
> If PA was hurt or killed it would have greater impact on national morale than if Harry was. His number in the line of succession is not equal to his popularity or importance of Anna in public consciousness.
> 
> Quite frankly if he disappeared in the Australian outback tomorrow I wouldn't care, and nor would 90% of this country. I certainly wouldn't be GoFunding a search party.


That reminds me of that idiot Stan who set up a GoFundMe to pay off the Sussexi mortgage. Major sigh....


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Because 100% of his income and 'importance' depend on the 1.4%.
> View attachment 5444325
> 
> _That translates to 1.4 per cent (again, very approximately) of the Duke’s time has been spent in the UK since the couple triggered the sonic boom that was Megxit…
> 
> *Why is Harry fighting tooth and nail over a decision that does not affect 98.6 per cent of his life?*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/prince-harry-court-battle-exposes-one-commitment-he-refuses-to-make/news-story/2bf3204a73fb77f5e6603c51e5854510





Icyjade said:


> Princess Anne is the daughter of the Queen, does tonnes of engagements as a working Royal and does not have full time security.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Anne doesn't get full time security and her protection was shot'
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex (pictured with Meghan) should not be expecting bodyguards supplied to him when he decides to return home, Dai Davies said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Harkles have such an over inflated sense of self and ego….



Agreed on the self and ego.

Basically, Entertainment is guessing that because JCMHRH* wife is a WOC (and his children POC) they are all more at risk than Anne. There is no evidence to support such histrionics. Once again,

Harry has decided to channel (performatively) his mother's paranoia (enhanced by outsiders and interested parties) into an argument for self-aggrandisement.

*Just call me Harry His Royal Highness


----------



## papertiger

I don't believe we have this, on the claims against Meghan's bullying:









						Buckingham Palace confirms 'revised policies' after inquiry into claims Meghan 'humiliated' staff
					

Buckingham Palace launched the investigation in March 2021, after it was alleged Meghan drove out two personal assistants and staff were "humiliated" on several occasions.




					news.sky.com
				





Buckingham Palace is facing questions about why it won't reveal more about the findings of an investigation into bullying allegations made against the Duchess of Sussex.

The palace has confirmed a private investigation into complaints that Meghan had bullied members of staff had concluded, claims she has always denied.


It confirmed the review had looked at how palace staff had handled the complaints, rather than scrutinising details of the allegations themselves.

But after revealing that HR policies had been improved as a result, it refused to make details of the changes or the findings public.

A senior palace source said: "Because of the confidentiality of the discussions we have not communicated the detailed recommendations. The recommendations have been incorporated within policies and procedures wherever appropriate and policies and procedures have changed.


"So all members of staff, all members of the royal family will be aware of what the policies and procedures are, the revised policies and procedures."
https://news.sky.com/story/prince-h...n-libel-fight-against-mail-on-sunday-12648056

Buckingham Palace launched the investigation in March 2021, after it was alleged Meghan drove out two personal assistants and staff were "humiliated" on several occasions.

The duchess's lawyers denied the allegations when they were made. Current and former staff were expected to be invited to speak about their experiences of working for Meghan.


Sky News understands that only very limited numbers of people were interviewed as part of the process. Archewell, the Sussexes' organisation and charitable foundation, would not confirm if the duchess had been asked to be involved or told of the recommendations.

The investigation was carried out by a law firm and funded privately, thought to be by a senior member of the royal family. The palace had suggested that any changes in policies or procedures recommended would be *shared in the Sovereign Grant report*.

While there is an extensive HR section and "Staff Report" in the annual accounts, it isn't clear if any of the listed procedures have changed as a result of the investigation.

It does outline the royal household's Concern at Work policy which encourages individuals to raise any concerns they may have about the conduct of others and sets out how issues can be aired, with the policy accessible to staff on the intranet site - known as the Coronet.

-------------------------------


Basically, since lessons seemed to have been learned (b the Palace) we can infer that Meghan not only bullied the staff, but protected her against good practice and UK employment law. Had it been any other employer they would have been taken to a tribunal. So much for M's claims she was bullied by the Palace. The Palace not only protected Meghan (then, treated as one of their own) but did so wrongly and unlawfully.

There is chaos wherever these two go, they are TOXIC.


----------



## Annawakes

Okay, I think I get it…shady oligarchs give freebies to them…they also finance the duo’s lawsuits….if JCMH wins and gets internationally protected person status….and hence access to all kinds of intelligence info…..the oligarchs get “reimbursed” with intelligence info.

Nobody does anything for anybody without reimbursement.  This seems plausible to me.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Okay, I think I get it…shady oligarchs give freebies to them…they also finance the duo’s lawsuits….if JCMH wins and gets internationally protected person status….and hence access to all kinds of intelligence info…..the oligarchs get “reimbursed” with intelligence info.
> 
> Nobody does anything for anybody without reimbursement.  This seems plausible to me.


Possibly he thinks that his exalted status will protect him from consequences of trading in UK secrets, while she will whip out the handy dandy racist card if she gets caught peddling US intelligence. Being covert is not in their DNA.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She is also the daughter of the reigning monarch and not (only) the grandson.
> 
> If PA was hurt or killed it would have greater impact on national morale than if Harry was. His number in the line of succession is not equal to his popularity or importance of Anna in public consciousness.
> 
> Quite frankly if he disappeared in the Australian outback tomorrow I wouldn't care, and nor would 90% of this country. I certainly wouldn't be GoFunding a search party.



Plus, she was already the victim of an attempted kidnapping. Charles was the victim of an attempted assassination. Yet somehow you don't see then whine 24/7 and demand more security.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> I understand that his reviewed status in the UK will change that when abroad. Even NY layed-out the red carpet plus security when the went on a faux royal trip to 20 centenary of 9/11. H&M didn't have to pay a cent.


I never heard anything about any request from the British government for security to be provided to the Harkles when they were in NY last year. I think the security provided was event specific as opposed to 24/7 but not positive about that. The UN of course always has massive security and the Veteran’s event at the Intrepid Museum that they attended would normally have had some security any way. I just don’t recall them having a police escort everywhere they went in NYC. I thought the Harkles brought their own private security team to NYC and there would have been some coordination between their team and the NYPD which is standard practice. As you can imagine, NYC gets a bunch of high profile visitors who bring their own security teams so the NYPD has protocols in place for dealing with all the private security.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I never heard anything about any request from the British government for security to be provided to the Harkles when they were in NY last year. I think the security provided was event specific as opposed to 24/7 but not positive about that. The UN of course always has massive security and the Veteran’s event at the Intrepid Museum that they attended would normally have had some security any way. I just don’t recall them having a police escort everywhere they went in NYC. I thought the Harkles brought their own private security team to NYC and there would have been some coordination between their team and the NYPD which is standard practice. As you can imagine, NYC gets a bunch of high profile visitors who bring their own security teams so the NYPD has protocols in place for dealing with all the private security.



Totally, I wasn't suggesting it was anything more than event specific.

But it was billed and flouted as a visit by 2 visiting dignitaries. It could have easily been a private visit on another occasion. The UN visit, an add-on (making them seem like credible VIPs) as was the flog-a-Bench reading with the children.

To remind ourselves, see article below, confusion as to the status of the couple and in what capacity they were at the commemoration are towards the end. Questioning the amount of security towards th middle.

From the Telegraph:

*Duke and Duchess of Sussex hit New York in first tour of their post-royal era*
Prince Harry and Meghan attract huge media attention and crowds on their visit to the One World Trade Center

*ByHannah Furness,  ROYAL CORRESPONDENT* and Jamie Johnson23 September 2021 • 4:16pm






*With its handshakes, dignitaries, wreaths, photocalls, a press pack and security as far as the eye could see, it had all the hallmarks of a royal tour.
Except for one minor detail: they no longer represent Queen and country.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex did not let that small matter stand in the way of their first major excursion since moving to California, recreating the royal tours of their previous life for their new audience of Americans.
Surrounded by security, they spent the first of an expected three-day trip to New York with US politicians, paid a visit to the 9/11 memorial and met with the American ambassador to the UN.*
The couple, who were not joined by their children Archie, who is two, and three-month-old Lili, stayed at the Carlyle Hotel, where the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge stayed on a royal tour in 2014, and Diana, Princess of Wales before them.




*Prince Harry and Meghan will also meet Bill de Blasio. mayor of New York City, his writer and activist wife, Chirlane McCray, and their son Dante de Blasio *CREDIT: Anadolu
*Known as the “White House of New York”, because President John F Kennedy kept an apartment there, the Royal Suite costs upwards of $8,000 a night.*
*Jazz and cocktails*
The Duke and Duchess were spotted sipping cocktails and listening to jazz at Bemelmans Bar inside the building on Wednesday night, where dishes include a $340 sharing plate of caviar and a $22 croque monsieur.
*The unfolding visit was met with polite bafflement back in Britain, with diplomats and courtiers watching from afar the Sussexes’ new self-created roles as visiting dignitaries.
One source emphasised that they are now a US-based couple making a US visit.
The Duke and Duchess began their visit at the One World Trade Center, where a reporter described an “air of a state visit” with dozens of security guards, NYPD officers, sniffer dogs and a press pen.*

The couple, who walked from their convoy across the cleared plaza and into the tower building, were both dressed sombrely, with Prince Harry in a dark suit and Meghan in a navy roll-necked jumper, coat and high heels.
One World Trade Center was built on the site of the original Twin Towers and the visit comes just two weeks after the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.
On floors 100 and 102, the Sussexes took in the view over New York City, accompanied by Kathy Hochul, the New York State Governor, Bill de Blasio, New York City Mayor, his wife, Chirlane McCray, and their son, Dante de Blasio.
Faced with around 40 journalists and cameramen from the US, the couple posed for photographs and, after some confusion, took instructions about where to look and stand.
Asked if she was enjoying her time in New York, Meghan said: “It’s wonderful to be back, thank you.”

*Guns and body armour – high security on display*
After a second photocall outside the building, the couple hugged their hosts goodbye and walked hand-in-hand, waving to a small group of well-wishers.
*They were encircled by a rolling cordon of plain-clothes officers, suited security guards and more than 100 New York police officers, some holding M4 machine guns and wearing body armour.*
The Duke and Duchess paused at the memorial to the North tower, a vast pool of water with the names of those who lost their lives 20 years ago etched in metal around it.
They then walked slowly towards a wreath of white roses and orchids they had provided.
The couple spent nearly an hour at the museum and the surrounding area but did not visit the garden memorial for British victims visited by the Queen in 2010 and Prince Harry in 2009.
They were accompanied by Patricia Harris, the chief executive officer of Bloomberg Philanthropies and board member of 9/11 Memorial & Museum, who later wrote on Twitter that “leading the way with compassion & unity is at the heart of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex’s work”.
The Duke said afterwards that his visit had been “great”.




The Duke and Duchess were shown the view from the tower before posing for the press CREDIT: Getty Images North America




Governor Kathy Hochul, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio, Chirlane McCray and Dante de Blasio pose at One World Observatory CREDIT: Getty Images North America

They later visited Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US Ambassador to the UN, who said they had an “important discussion of Covid-19, racial justice, and raising mental health awareness”.
*Photographs from their meeting with the Ambassador were taken by Matt Sayles, who is based in LA and has previously taken portraits of the couple.*
The Sussexes are in New York to take part in Global Citizen Live, an event on Saturday urging leaders to adopt a vaccine equity policy to help end the Covid-19 pandemic.

*Fans now hope the couple will fill the time in between the two pre-publicised events with a range of engagements, as they would on a royal tour*.
*Critics, however, were left bemused at the announcements, questioning the basis on which they were meeting US politicians in their new role outside the working Royal family.*
The Duchess has previously been in New York for her baby shower, a two-day extravaganza that saw her celebrate with friends in the penthouse of The Mark hotel.
A spokesman for Buckingham Palace said: *“It is not for us to comment on engagements undertaken by the Duke and Duchess.”*



_________________________________

Non-bylines in bold are my own.
I have deleted some of the unnecessary 'window-dressing' photos

Original full article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...eghan-hit-new-york-first-tour-post-royal-era/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of the NYC trip...I wonder if stern words were spoken because so far there was no other faux royal tour.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of the NYC trip...I wonder if stern words were spoken because so far there was no other faux royal tour.


Hmmm I thought H got some sort of nifty Dutch protection for Invictus …
Arguably not a faux royal tour, the Dutch royals were respectful but not out in full force …
As if the Dutch just wanted uneventful games, and were willing to do a bit of compromise in the name of peace and quiet


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of the NYC trip...I wonder if stern words were spoken because so far there was no other faux royal tour.


Or maybe no other major city in the US has been willing to roll out the red carpet in a manner that would satisfy the Grifters. NYC at the time had a deeply unpopular mayor who never met a celebrity he didn’t like and a new Governor who had just taken over after the prior Governor was forced to resign due to numerous allegations of sexual harassment from his staff. As a new Governor, she was probably trying to raise her profile and might have thought that a photo op with the Harkles would help.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm I thought H got some sort of nifty Dutch protection for Invictus …
> Arguably not a faux royal tour, the Dutch royals were respectful but not out in full force …
> As if the Dutch just wanted a an uneventful games, and were willing to do a bit of compromise in the name of peace and quiet


Weren't they pretty much snubbed by the Dutch royals - no formal reception or dinner invitation as I recall?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The book will likely be postponed until the Harkles get the answers they want to their demands. I wouldn't consider this a relief for BP.
> View attachment 5444376
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's controversial tell-all memoir 'has been delayed'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's upcoming tell-all memoir failed to appear on a list of upcoming Penguin Random House releases, suggesting it may be delayed till next year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


...Indefinitely?


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> ...Indefinitely?



Or at least while his grandmother is still alive. After that, I believe the gloves will come off.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Or at least while his grandmother is still alive. After that, I believe the gloves will come off.


I think the gloves have already come off.  After her passing, I hope Charles and William take off THEIR gloves.  I think William, at least,  has shown he's not going to let everything they say slide.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Or maybe no other major city in the US has been willing to roll out the red carpet in a manner that would satisfy the Grifters. NYC at the time had a deeply unpopular mayor who never met a celebrity he didn’t like and a new Governor who had just taken over after the prior Governor was forced to resign due to numerous allegations of sexual harassment from his staff. As a new Governor, she was probably trying to raise her profile and might have thought that a photo op with the Harkles would help.


BTW your Dior bag is beautiful


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Or at least while his grandmother is still alive. After that, I believe the gloves will come off.


He may not want to share TW's memories of his childhood with his grandmother while the grandmother is still alive.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> He may not want to share TW's memories of his childhood with his grandmother while the grandmother is still alive.


Recollections are bound to vary.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm I thought H got some sort of nifty Dutch protection for Invictus …
> Arguably not a faux royal tour, the Dutch royals were respectful but not out in full force …
> As if the Dutch just wanted uneventful games, and were willing to do a bit of compromise in the name of peace and quiet



Yer, but he is Mr Invictus, so he's allowed to have that one.

I'm sure the rest of the (working) BRF had 'words' about the NYC trip, one of those words being "STOP"


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Or at least while his grandmother is still alive. After that, I believe the gloves will come off.



The more whiny he is in the book, the more like an own goal it'll be. 

Firstly, because no-one like a 'grass', secondly, because he'll be cutting his nose off to spite his face (and his face holds the pursestrings) and thirdly, because no one reads (those) books anymore, they certainly don'r pay for them, we'll all just tune-in to YT to see what Lady C and BL Guy think.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> The book will likely be postponed until the Harkles get the answers they want to their demands. I wouldn't consider this a relief for BP.
> View attachment 5444376
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's controversial tell-all memoir 'has been delayed'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's upcoming tell-all memoir failed to appear on a list of upcoming Penguin Random House releases, suggesting it may be delayed till next year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



My guess: 
The draft book is not interesting enough, not salacious enough, not controversial enough, not anything that anyone would want to read or that would generate serious sales numbers, so they are having to go back to the drawing board.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MiniMabel

youngster said:


> My guess:
> The draft book is not interesting enough, not salacious enough, not controversial enough, not anything that anyone would want to read or that would generate serious sales numbers, so they are having to go back to the drawing board.




I'd be surprised if it even gets published. By next year, (but sooner preferably), I do hope they'll be yesterday's news!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> My guess:
> The draft book is not interesting enough, not salacious enough, not controversial enough, not anything that anyone would want to read or that would generate serious sales numbers, so they are having to go back to the drawing board.


This is taking so long, who cares at this point?  It must be as dull as dishwater, though Moehringer is supposed to be such a great author.  He must have had nothing to work with outside of complaining and whining.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Okay, I think I get it…shady oligarchs give freebies to them…they also finance the duo’s lawsuits….if JCMH wins and gets internationally protected person status….and hence access to all kinds of intelligence info…..the oligarchs get “reimbursed” with intelligence info.



There is access and then there’s access that matters. Nobody is ever going to give Harry any critical information. Maybe give him a few throwaway “secrets” that everybody already knows so that he can feel important.


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry Could Return to Royal Life to Take 'Pressure' Off William, Says Royal Biographer
					

The monarchy got much slimmer very abruptly.




					www.marieclaire.com
				




Tina Brown is dreaming or on drugs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

On Lipstick Alley, Quora, Reddit, etc., rumors are flying that a divorce is imminent, that since the PlatJub they have been separated mainly because Hazz feels diminished. Another rumor is they plan to have a second wedding so she can show ‘the woman she has become’ [whatever that means].  

ETA: I’m not buying it. any of it


----------



## redney

The more time that elapses before his "book" is released, the less interest people will have in it & "Second Row Harry." Keep delaying the book and it too will end up in the bargain bins or being bought up by TW and Hazbeen, like her book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> On Lipstick Alley, Quora, Reddit, etc., rumors are flying that a divorce is imminent, that since the PlatJub they have been separated mainly because Hazz feels diminished. Another rumor is they plan to have a second wedding so she can show ‘the woman she has become’ [whatever that means].
> 
> *ETA: I’m not buying it.*



Which one?

ETA: I feel it's inevitable that he'll start blaming her at some point. I mean, I blame her too  , but also he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who is willing to see his own part and responsibility in this mess that's their lives.


----------



## Aimee3

I’m waiting for Trevor’s book.  (Isn’t that TW’s previous husband’s name?). Since he wasn’t blabbing his mouth off to Oprah or anyone else on tv or in the tabloids anything he has to say will be new to my ears.  We’ve heard all that H can whine/lie about already.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which one?
> 
> ETA: I feel it's inevitable that he'll start blaming her at some point. I mean, I blame her too  , but also he doesn't strike me as the kind of guy who is willing to see his own part and responsibility in this mess that's their lives.



He doesn’t have the cojones. If anyone ends that marriage, it is going to be her. After going on about “whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets.” he would never admit he made a huge mistake. That would be too great a blow to his fragile ego.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I’m waiting for Trevor’s book.  (Isn’t that TW’s previous husband’s name?). Since he wasn’t blabbing his mouth off to Oprah or anyone else on tv or in the tabloids anything he has to say will be new to my ears.  We’ve heard all that H can whine/lie about already.



Trevor has put the whole ugly affair of his years with Meghan behind him. He has good sense.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> This is taking so long, who cares at this point?  It must be as dull as dishwater, though Moehringer is supposed to be such a great author.  He must have had nothing to work with outside of complaining and whining.


Maybe he was hoping to blackmail his family and they are not budging, so his book is not getting written since he never really wanted to publish it anyway.  It was just leverage.


----------



## bag-mania

If the book contract was like their Spotify and Netflix contracts, they’ll use up the millions they were given at signing and then never follow through and fulfill their promises.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> My guess:
> The draft book is not interesting enough, not salacious enough, not controversial enough, not anything that anyone would want to read or that would generate serious sales numbers, so they are having to go back to the drawing board.


When I heard that the publisher had signed a three book deal with him I couldn't figure out what he could possibly have to say that would fill three volumes. Finding Freedom didn't do very well, did it? Between this, Netflix and Spotify they are up the proverbial creek without a paddle.


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> There is access and then there’s access that matters. Nobody is ever going to give Harry any critical information. Maybe give him a few throwaway “secrets” that everybody already knows so that he can feel important.


That’s right. Hopefully shady oligarchs are taking note that every thing they’ve committed to have not come to fruition.  If the duo don’t deliver, disentangling themselves from shady oligarchs won’t just be a matter of breaking a contract, I imagine.  It could get ugly.

All pure speculation of course.


----------



## Sophisticatted

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry Could Return to Royal Life to Take 'Pressure' Off William, Says Royal Biographer
> 
> 
> The monarchy got much slimmer very abruptly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tina Brown is dreaming or on drugs.



I read her book (The Palace Papers) and felt she was positive towards H&M and critical towards the BRF.  I speculate that she is buttering the duo up for a future project.  She knows they are the very messy weak links, and she has placed her bets.  IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> On Lipstick Alley, Quora, Reddit, etc., rumors are flying that a divorce is imminent, that since the PlatJub they have been separated mainly because Hazz feels diminished. Another rumor is they plan to have a second wedding so she can show ‘the woman she has become’ [whatever that means].
> 
> ETA: I’m not buying it. any of it



Divorce, yes. Second wedding, doubtful. Then again, vow renewals are sometimes a precursor to divorce. See: Heidi Klum and Seal, RHONY Ramona Singer and her first husband are two that come to mind.


----------



## csshopper

The vow renewal fits their hypocrisy pattern.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> This is taking so long, who cares at this point?  It must be as dull as dishwater, though Moehringer is supposed to be such a great author.  He must have had nothing to work with outside of complaining and whining.


Complaining, whining, contradictions and frequent retcon. Moehringer will have to write one of those "choose your own plot" interactive stories: if you believe Hazard's version of the incident, turn to page 56.



CarryOn2020 said:


> On Lipstick Alley, Quora, Reddit, etc., rumors are flying that a divorce is imminent, that since the PlatJub they have been separated mainly because Hazz feels diminished. Another rumor is they plan to have a second wedding so she can show ‘the woman she has become’ [whatever that means].
> 
> ETA: I’m not buying it. any of it


Divorce? Only when either of them has found someone better/richer. 

That should be a third wedding, since she has already declared worldwide that they were married in their backyard, then did the meaningless-to-them spectacle. Maybe she will appear on Say Yes to the Dress. Perfectly possible, you know, since my newsfeed suddenly has David Emanuel and Randy Fenoli making comments about the Princess Di wedding gown. They could do a special featuring Diana cosplay !!!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Divorce, yes. Second wedding, doubtful. Then again, vow renewals are sometimes a precursor to divorce. See: Heidi Klum and Seal, RHONY Ramona Singer and her first husband are two that come to mind.


Try any of the RH cast members that renewed their vows (there are many).      To me, it's like the kiss of death of a marriage: renewing vows on reality TV, and tattooing your SO's name on your body. Just no bueno.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Complaining, whining, contradictions and frequent retcon. Moehringer will have to write one of those "choose your own plot" interactive stories: if you believe Hazard's version of the incident, turn to page 56.
> 
> 
> Divorce? Only when either of them has found someone better/richer.
> 
> That should be a third wedding, since she has already declared worldwide that they were married in their backyard, then did the meaningless-to-them spectacle. Maybe she will appear on Say Yes to the Dress. Perfectly possible, you know, since my newsfeed suddenly has David Emanuel and Randy Fenoli making comments about the Princess Di wedding gown. They could do a special featuring Diana cosplay !!!


I hope Balenciaga designs her renewal wedding gown 
If you saw their most recent creations, you'll know why.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I’m waiting for Trevor’s book.  (Isn’t that TW’s previous husband’s name?). Since he wasn’t blabbing his mouth off to Oprah or anyone else on tv or in the tabloids anything he has to say will be new to my ears.  We’ve heard all that H can whine/lie about already.



Megsy Baby (Lady C's nickname for her) has a new book coming out too, only she won't be writing it, Tom Bower's biography, and I don't think she'll like it (if it ever comes out). If it does come out, I don't think she'll fight it in the courts which will publicise it even more. Maybe what's-her-name from _Marieclaire_ that wrote the Palace Papers and Harry's 'Recollections may Vary' effort is hoping to counter Bower's.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s unofficial biography is out now
					

Tom Bower’s new book about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, titled ’Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, is out now and available at Amazon




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I hope Balenciaga designs her renewal wedding gown
> If you saw their most recent creations, you'll know why.



I like the latest offerings from Balenciaga although clear to see Kering are obviously pouring money in. They are obviously paying KK. 

She's far, _far_ too boring to wear Bal. Megsy Baby would either wear some goody-two-shoes designer she can '_chup_' for free for the rest of her life and can say she's help make, OR she'd keep pushing "I am the new Audrey/Diana" narrative she never gets tired of.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> The vow renewal fits their hypocrisy pattern.





charlottawill said:


> Divorce, yes. Second wedding, doubtful. Then again, vow renewals are sometimes a precursor to divorce. See: Heidi Klum and Seal, RHONY Ramona Singer and her first husband are two that come to mind.



How about a vow renewal, _then_ a divorce, 

Dress and jewel merch ops, followed by media obsession for months,  win-win.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The vow renewal fits their hypocrisy pattern.



It will be super intimate, just them, an officiant and a Netflix crew.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> BTW your Dior bag is beautiful


Thank you!


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It will be super intimate, just them, an officiant and a Netflix crew.


What about the invisikids? Maybe Archie can carry the new rings and Liliybet can throw petals


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> What about the invisikids? Maybe Archie can carry the new rings and Liliybet can throw petals



not to mention a new opportunity to push elderflower and Amalfi lemon drizzle cake with bananas (with personal messages written in calligraphy) on the side to all their paid-for guests


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry Could Return to Royal Life to Take 'Pressure' Off William, Says Royal Biographer
> 
> 
> The monarchy got much slimmer very abruptly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tina Brown is dreaming or on drugs.


I agree.  One cannot imagine relying on an immature, undisciplined, self-centered person who has publicly insulted family members and the monarchy itself. There are others to step forward and assist. H is not an asset.


----------



## Sophisticatted

csshopper said:


> The vow renewal fits their hypocrisy pattern.



It would be “ just for them”.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> How about a vow renewal, _then_ a divorce,
> 
> Dress and jewel merch ops, followed by media obsession for months,  win-win.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> It would be “ just for them”.


Feminist Harry would add "obey" to his vows as a gutteral demonstration of his devotion.


----------



## bag-mania

Married less than 5 years and already renewing their vows? I don’t know about anyone else, but when I see a couple renewing their vows so soon I assume it’s because they have a rocky, tumultuous relationship where one of them needs the extra “security” of having the other recommit.


----------



## DoggieBags

Unless Netflix is paying for the ceremony, I don’t see the Harkles renewing their vows any time soon. I doubt they would be willing to foot the bill themselves.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> It would be “ just for them”.



and they'd need to renew their vows 3 days before the published date - just to completely throw their paid-for guests into a spin (and the perfect excuse to to refuse to pay when the invoices flood in)


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Married less than 5 years and already renewing their vows? I don’t know about anyone else, but when I see a couple renewing their vows so soon I assume it’s because they have a rocky, tumultuous relationship where one of them needs the extra “security” of having the other recommit.




The only renewal of vows ceremony I've been to was arranged because the husband had a terminal illness, and they both wanted an excuse to see all their friends and family in life-affirming celebration and announce to one another/congregation their continued/continuing love for each other. It was very moving and serious church service too (Church of England) no daisy garlands and barefoot woke life-affirmations in front of a chicken pen, a mirror and Netflix cameras like just-call-me-'Lord and Lady Muck' probably would


----------



## duna

I don't know about renewing their vows, it's a very unusual thing where I live, but I'm pretty sure there will be a separation/divorce sooner or later. It can't be a coincidence that H looks so glum whenever he's out with her and laughs away when he's with his mates, well, Nacho anyway!


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Married less than 5 years and already renewing their vows? I don’t know about anyone else, but when I see a couple renewing their vows so soon I assume it’s because they have a rocky, tumultuous relationship where one of them needs the extra “security” of having the other recommit.



Maybe MM wants to upgrade her engagement ring


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> Maybe MM wants to upgrade her engagement ring


For the 100th time!


----------



## bellecate

He sure didn’t think of all the consequences of his trashing his family.


----------



## bag-mania

It’s laughable of that article to imply that Harry and Meghan are thinking of anybody but themselves. If they had actually cared about the future status of their children, they would have handled their defection from the royal family differently.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Right? But also they can get over themselves, that child is one of a dozen or so great-grandchildren and really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

Plus...what do they care, didn't the BRF traumatize Harry and they made a point of their children being private citizens?


----------



## rose60610

Umm, renewing vows? Their first wedding cost 50 million. A side by side comparison would look a little...odd?  The money wouldn't be coming out their pockets for the renewal, either. Is the motive actually a lame attempt to resurrect a connection to the A-listers who attended the first one? They attended out of respect and prestige of the Crown, IMO, than for H&M themselves. I don't see George and Amal attending this one. If H&M have a vow renewal, you know they'll be wired.   And all they'll get are clucking noises from the rescue chickens.


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> Umm, renewing vows? Their first wedding cost 50 million. A side by side comparison would look a little...odd?  The money wouldn't be coming out their pockets for the renewal, either. Is the motive actually a lame attempt to resurrect a connection to the A-listers who attended the first one? They attended out of respect and prestige of the Crown, IMO, than for H&M themselves. I don't see George and Amal attending this one. If H&M have a vow renewal, you know they'll be wired.   And all they'll get are clucking noises from the rescue chickens.


Perhaps paid for by Netflix trying to get some content.


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> I don't know about renewing their vows, it's a very unusual thing where I live, but I'm pretty sure there will be a separation/divorce sooner or later. It can't be a coincidence that H looks so glum whenever he's out with her and laughs away when he's with his mates, well, Nacho anyway!


I went over to the 'other thread' on the weekend, someone has posted a timeline of photos of them together from the engagement onwards. The difference in Harry pre and after Mexit is quite frankly astonishing. Pre he looks happy and in love, now he looks so unhappy. I was actually taken aback.


----------



## xincinsin

It could be part of the "documentary" of their lives. They have to create some highlights for the programme. Methane can cosplay Bridezilla and get a choir to do 12 versions of something saccharine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I went over to the 'other thread' on the weekend, someone has posted a timeline of photos of them together from the engagement onwards. The difference in Harry pre and after Mexit is quite frankly astonishing. Pre he looks happy and in love, now he looks so unhappy. I was actually taken aback.



Ok, you made me look 
Hazzi is most definitely _not_ aging well. Maybe he will look better in his 60s [doubtful].

IMO it is his anger on display.  Anger ages people quicker than liquor, no?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I went over to the 'other thread' on the weekend, someone has posted a timeline of photos of them together from the engagement onwards. The difference in Harry pre and after Mexit is quite frankly astonishing. Pre he looks happy and in love, now he looks so unhappy. I was actually taken aback.



Not only is he like a fish out of water and nothing is really going right for him, from my personal narc experience I strongly suspect that now that she has him exactly where she wants him - estranged from friends and family, has made a fool out of himself more times than one can count - she doesn't try especially hard to treat him well.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> He sure didn’t think of all the consequences of his trashing his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5445080
> View attachment 5445081
> View attachment 5445082
> View attachment 5445083


Have there been any photos released of any one of the other great grandchildren with the Queen? Apart from George that is, which were official photos and Charles and William were in them too. I know we've seen photos of a few of the great grandchildren with her and Prince Philip and that's fine, they were group photos. I'm sure there are numerous private photos of a single child with the Queen and/or Prince Philip and that's exactly what they are, private photos. Why does M think that if a photo of Lilibet and the Queen is ever taken then it has to be made public? Oh, I know... Kerching!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This one probably rankles H&M


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not only is he like a fish out of water and nothing is really going right for him, from my personal narc experience I strongly suspect that now that she has him exactly where she wants him - estranged from friends and family, has made a fool out of himself more times than one can count - she doesn't try especially hard to treat him well.



No doubt she reminds him daily how much SHE has sacrificed to be with him. Narcissists are incapable of seeing the damage they cause others. In Meghan’s galaxy she is the sun and everyone else exists to orbit around her and make her happy. I very much doubt she is happy and she’s going to take it out on the only person who is close.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> *No doubt she reminds him daily how much SHE has sacrificed to be with him*. Narcissists are incapable of seeing the damage they cause others. In Meghan’s galaxy she is the sun and everyone else exists to orbit around her and make her happy. I very much doubt she is happy and she’s going to take it out on the only person who is close.


So true. And exactly what she declared in the OW interview: some laundry list of the things she lost. No doubt she has added to that list now that another year has passed.


----------



## sgj99

bellecate said:


> He sure didn’t think of all the consequences of his trashing his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5445080
> View attachment 5445081
> View attachment 5445082
> View attachment 5445083



when you choose to remove yourself from public royal duty (and trash the system as well) then deal with the consequences


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whoa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tom Cruise, he’s got this


----------



## Zen101

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, you made me look
> Hazzi is most definitely _not_ aging well. Maybe he will look better in his 60s [doubtful].
> 
> IMO it is his anger on display.  Anger ages people quicker than liquor, no?


Yes, I think it’s the anger too. In the words of Mark Twain:
 “Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored, than to anything on which it is poured”.


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Maybe MM wants to upgrade her engagement ring



or remodel it - again


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> He sure didn’t think of all the consequences of his trashing his family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5445080
> View attachment 5445081
> View attachment 5445082
> View attachment 5445083



Maybe she will do something (for) herself so she can be written in like the rest of us mere mortals. 

"Linked not ranked", "linked not ranked" who said that?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> It’s laughable of that article to imply that Harry and Meghan are thinking of anybody but themselves. If they had actually cared about the future status of their children, they would have handled their defection from the royal family differently.



If they really cared, they'd still be working Royals in the UK.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right? But also they can get over themselves, that child is one of a dozen or so great-grandchildren and really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
> 
> Plus...what do they care, didn't the BRF traumatize Harry and they made a point of their children being private citizens?



She's an American, born and brought-up in the US, and still very privileged, why should she care?


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Umm, renewing vows? Their first wedding cost 50 million. A side by side comparison would look a little...odd?  The money wouldn't be coming out their pockets for the renewal, either. Is the motive actually a lame attempt to resurrect a connection to the A-listers who attended the first one? They attended out of respect and prestige of the Crown, IMO, than for H&M themselves. I don't see George and Amal attending this one. If H&M have a vow renewal, you know they'll be wired.   And all they'll get are clucking noises from the rescue chickens.




but *rose*, this would not be about money - that was for others, this would be purely abut love, positivity and (their) truth


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> If they really cared, they'd still be working Royals in the UK.



If they had truly wanted to step back and live a quieter and PRIVATE life, they could have done so. Had they approached the situation like adults and worked out the details and timing of their exit plan with the family I'm sure they would have made out better as far as maintaining their money and status. Instead, they angrily flounced out of the country like a 13-year-old drama queen!

Of course the problem was they believed they could keep all of the money and benefits of being royal while only giving up the work.


----------



## Chanbal

Why Hazz? How did he get this?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?




These organisations are soooooo out of touch


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> If they had truly wanted to step back and live a quieter and PRIVATE life, they could have done so. Had they approached the situation like adults and worked out the details and timing of their exit plan with the family I'm sure they would have made out better as far as maintaining their money and status. Instead, they angrily flounced out of the country *like a 40-year-old drama queen*!
> 
> Of course the problem was they believed they could keep all of the money and benefits of being royal while only giving up the work.



I edited this to reflect Claw's current age, @bag-mania ---I hope you don't mind.  

SO many flaws in their plan:
1)  Private lives are PRIVATE---someone wanting privacy does not seek publicity.
2)  They were being left alone in Canada.  Should have stayed there if true privacy was desired.  (To be fair, no one is seeking them in the US, either.)
3)  When one commoditizes one's family, that family is less likely to be involved with the commoditizing individuals.
4)  Action #3 will create feelings of betrayal for individuals who have been sold out!
5)  The Claw thought the world would be endlessly fascinated with her...
6)  The absolute biggest problem with the plan is that without the commoditized RF they are nothing.  (Which would be fine for a couple who actually wanted a quiet, private life.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whoa.




I personally like the Cambridge's approach. There's no way the heir to the throne can live a blissfully anonymous life until he's 18, but I don't feel they overdo it. I find their way of introducing them to the lifestyle quite gentle.

But also, this just sounds so salty. You bet if the Troublesome Two paraded their kids around not a single harsh word would be spoken from the sugars and stans.


----------



## Zen101

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?



I suppose she’ll be tagging along. Sigh. Let’s see if she wears a winter coat in July.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?




I sure hope Raptor doesn't write it.


----------



## Chanbal

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?





papertiger said:


> These organisations are soooooo out of touch





VintageBagsAddict said:


> I suppose she’ll be tagging along. Sigh. Let’s see if she wears a winter coat in July.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sure hope Raptor doesn't write it.



It's possibly this is a rumor like the one about being always invited to attend the Oscars.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?



Probably asked if he could.  I doubt they would contact him out of the blue


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Unless Netflix is paying for the ceremony, I don’t see the Harkles renewing their vows any time soon. I doubt they would be willing to foot the bill themselves.


Bingo! This would totally be a reality TV move, to be followed of course by the divorce.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?




Everyone else is enjoying their vacation


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sure hope Raptor doesn't write it.



if she does, someone will have written it before her, originality has never been her strong point


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sure hope Raptor doesn't write it.


Someone has to!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This one probably rankles H&M
> 
> View attachment 5445204


No doubt, but if they had done things differently they probably would have been there. Their decision to effectively leave the RF led to the decision to slim down the balcony crowd. If they had been decent human beings instead of attention seeking drama mongers I think they would have been included. TW overestimated herself and underestimated The Firm. Because of her narcissism and greed she blew the opportunity of a lifetime. What a foolish woman.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whoa.




It could be that Kate and William asked George whether he wanted to go, or not.  Could have been his choice.  He loves sports.  He likely plays tennis or is learning.  They could have asked: _ "George, do you want to go with me and your Mum to see the men's final match at Wimbledon on Sunday?  Mummy will hand out the trophy at the end.  It's going to be very warm and you do need to wear a suit due to the dress standards.  Your choice."  _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Yes, I think it’s the anger too. In the words of Mark Twain:
> “Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored, than to anything on which it is poured”.



Thank you! I was going crazy trying to remember that and who said it.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?



I am surprised the UN is allowing them back in after the last visit that went so well


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> It could be that Kate and William asked George whether he wanted to go, or not.  Could have been his choice.  He loves sports.  He likely plays tennis or is learning.  They could have asked: _ "George, do you want to go with me and your Mum to see the men's final match at Wimbledon on Sunday?  Mummy will hand out the trophy at the end.  It's going to be very warm and you do need to wear a suit due to the dress standards.  Your choice."  _



He just looked so miserable during the match, and then meeting Djokovic and getting to hold the trophy, didn't he?


----------



## bellecate

I imagine an apology will not be coming.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> I imagine an apology will not be coming.
> View attachment 5445433





She has struck out as an actor, a royal, a writer and a podcaster. We know she looks greedily at the Kardashian empire and thinks she can replicate it. But we all know how they got started. God help us if there is a "leaked" Harkle sex tape.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I am surprised the UN is allowing them back in after the last visit that went so well



I’m not. The UN loves the attention.


----------



## csshopper

They made it a point to meet with his widow when they were in South Africa. She was quoted at the time as saying she felt “a vibe” with them. 

Mabye olive oil lemon cakes are in production for a donation from Archwell to a charity in honor of Mandela and it bought Hazbeen a speaking gig.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> If they had truly wanted to step back and live a quieter and PRIVATE life, they could have done so. Had they approached the situation like adults and worked out the details and timing of their exit plan with the family I'm sure they would have made out better as far as maintaining their money and status. Instead, they angrily flounced out of the country like a 13-year-old drama queen!
> 
> Of course the problem was they believed they could keep all of the money and benefits of being royal while only giving up the work.



I don’t think they thought their move carefully, apart from being a prince (not by merit but by accident of birth) JCMH has nothing going on that would make him a celebrity or a big player in any stage
I am still waiting for their projects to come to fruition but nothing ever does, empty words, no action and the talent to achieve absolutely nothing seems to be their modus operandi


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> She was quoted at the time as saying she felt “a vibe” with them.



That's not something to be proud of. She was a controversial figure, at times criminal.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?



Sunshine Sucks has the UN on its client list. Maybe they are doing this event and pushed for Hazard to do the keynote. I wonder if Hazard is charging the UN for his appearance? 



Cinderlala said:


> 5)  The Claw thought the world would be endlessly fascinated with her...


Typical narc mindset.
The tabloid journalists are certainly fascinated with her. I am impressed by her fervour in seeking the limelight and her absolute blinkered view of her life choices. No matter how despicable her behaviour is, especially during Megxit and the OW interview, I would have forgotten about her if she had not persisted in CLAWing her way out of the cesspit to make scandalous headlines.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sure hope Raptor doesn't write it.


Mandela has many memorable quotes. Maybe she will string them together to form a speech. In the name of flattery of course.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Why Hazz? How did he get this?



This is incorrect.  He is addressing  small group at an informal meeting.   This is more PR BS from the Sussex camp to make him look important.  Plus the cameras will no doubt be rolling for NF.  Especially since she is scheduled to hold his hands and rub his back whilst he gives the speech she wrote.


From the UN Agenda.  
*Informal meeting of the plenary to mark the observance of “Nelson Mandela International Day”.*

This is NOT an address to the UN General Assembly which does not reconvene until September 13, 2022.








						Event: 77th Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 77) | SDG Knowledge Hub | IISD
					

Tracking the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda




					sdg.iisd.org


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> They made it a point to meet with his widow when they were in South Africa. She was quoted at the time as saying she felt “a vibe” with them.
> 
> Mabye olive oil lemon cakes are in production for a donation from Archwell to a charity in honor of Mandela and it bought Hazbeen a speaking gig.


Feeling a vibe can be interpreted many ways.  Good or bad.  Warm feeling in the tummy or the need to violently throw up.


----------



## andrashik

VintageBagsAddict said:


> I suppose she’ll be tagging along. Sigh. Let’s see if she wears a winter coat in July.


Of course she will! Where will she hide her microphones and wires?


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> Of course she will! Where will she hide her microphones and wires?


She won’t need to.  NF will film it.


----------



## lulu212121

gracekelly said:


> This is incorrect.  He is addressing  small group at an informal meeting.   This is more PR BS from the Sussex camp to make him look important.  Plus the cameras will no doubt be rolling for NF.  Especially since she is scheduled to hold his hands and rub his back whilst he gives the speech she wrote.
> 
> 
> From the UN Agenda.
> *Informal meeting of the plenary to mark the observance of “Nelson Mandela International Day”.*
> 
> This is NOT an address to the UN General Assembly which does not reconvene until September 13, 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Event: 77th Session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 77) | SDG Knowledge Hub | IISD
> 
> 
> Tracking the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sdg.iisd.org


Thank you for clarifying this. Big difference.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Sunshine Sucks has the UN on its client list.


From DM:_ The speech, as part of Nelson Mandela Day, will see the *Duke of Sussex** speak in front of an informal General Assembly gathering*._

My 2 cents: Sunshine S found him an empty room to deliver TW's word salad and plenty of Netf*l cameras to register the event. The Harkles are familiar with dressing up for photo-ops and be on stage without audiences. Would they drag D*ria for such event as they did for NAACP? @NAACP, they all looked 'so convincing' thanking and bowing to a pretending audience in an empty room.  









						BREAKING: Prince Harry will be joined by Meghan Markle in speech to UN
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be in New York City on Monday with the prince set to address the United Nations. The speech, as part of Nelson Mandela Day, will see the Duke speak at the GA.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## andrashik

Breaking news 

BREAKING: Prince Harry will be joined by Meghan Markle in speech to UN https://mol.im/a/11003967 via https://dailym.ai/android


----------



## xincinsin

What a world we live in, when a wife joining her husband on stage is breaking news  
The implication of course is that they are both stars in their own right, and it is double the honour for the UN to have both there.
She is going to lay on a thick layer of fake tan indubitably.


----------



## needlv

These two are getting boring.  Same “fake royal” behaviours - pretend charity/photo ops, endless PR released by them and yet they have not produced a podcast, show or anything of substance.  They haven’t got a brand or single focus.

I am kind of bored.

I want to see something really messy… lol.  Like H overheard at a bar - admitting his wife is a golddigger, or getting caught cheating or she gets caught on tape screaming at staff… 

They are sliding into irrelevance.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> These two are getting boring.  Same “fake royal” behaviours - pretend charity/photo ops, endless PR released by them and yet they have not produced a podcast, show or anything of substance.  They haven’t got a brand or single focus.
> 
> I am kind of bored.
> 
> I want to see something really messy… lol.  Like H overheard at a bar - admitting his wife is a golddigger, or getting caught cheating or she gets caught on tape screaming at staff…
> 
> They are sliding into irrelevance.



Let me make a prediction: they will blame the BRF for their failure to produce programmes and podcasts. Because they were "forced" to make a living, never having had a plan for how they were going to sustain a life of financial independence. So it's definitely the BRF's fault that they failed as producers and entrepreneurs. 

They spent so much time countering the tabloid press/Home Office and being mega-influencers that they just had no time to produce anything for Netflix/Spotify/Penguin. Then they will brandish stacks of The Bench to prove that they can be astounding if only they had the time (maybe 40 mins).


----------



## lallybelle

andrashik said:


> Breaking news
> 
> BREAKING: Prince Harry will be joined by Meghan Markle in speech to UN https://mol.im/a/11003967 via https://dailym.ai/android


I mean...did anyone think she wouldn't  insert herself. It would be more breaking news if she didn't tbh.


----------



## Annawakes

She will do 90% of the talking, him 10% if even that.  After all, she is a veteran at addressing the UN right?  I’m sure there are lots of important people in the informal gathering. 
Get ready for word salad y’all!


----------



## 880

needlv said:


> These two are getting boring.  Same “fake royal” behaviours - pretend charity/photo ops, endless PR released by them and yet they have not produced a podcast, show or anything of substance.  They haven’t got a brand or single focus.
> 
> I am kind of bored.
> 
> I want to see something really messy… lol.  Like H overheard at a bar - admitting his wife is a golddigger, or getting caught cheating or she gets caught on tape screaming at staff…
> 
> They are sliding into irrelevance.




Yes something interesting lol

as someone else mentioned, lots of NYers are away and if there is any traffic issue won’t be affected


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She has struck out as an actor, a royal, a writer and a podcaster. We know she looks greedily at the Kardashian empire and thinks she can replicate it. But we all know how they got started. God help us if there is a "leaked" Harkle sex tape.


Well, considering she got him by peeing in the woods, I can only imagine it would contain a certain kind of shower?


----------



## bag-mania

Oh gag. Jack Royston can’t scrub enough at the end of the day to get this garbage he wrote off of himself.   











						Harry's Next Big Speech Nods to Inspiring Moment in Meghan's Early Career
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will stage their third post-royal visit to New York for an organization Meghan Markle worked with before their marriage.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## charlottawill

In case you were wondering what happened to the BetterUp gig, here he is shilling for them this morning:









						Watch Prince Harry interview Olympian Chloe Kim about mental health in new film
					

The two high-profile personalities sat down to talk about the value of good mental health.




					www.today.com


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Oh gag. Jack Royston can’t scrub enough at the end of the day to get this garbage he wrote off of himself.
> 
> View attachment 5445860
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's Next Big Speech Nods to Inspiring Moment in Meghan's Early Career
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will stage their third post-royal visit to New York for an organization Meghan Markle worked with before their marriage.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Well, considering she got him by peeing in the woods, I can only imagine it would contain a certain kind of shower?


Like @andrashik, I am not a native speaker of English. Imagine my surprise the first time I ventured into the more exotic and erotic reaches of fanfiction. The showers you refer to made me   Of course my recollections might vary...


----------



## Chanelconvert

xincinsin said:


> Let me make a prediction: they will blame the BRF for their failure to produce programmes and podcasts. Because they were "forced" to make a living, never having had a plan for how they were going to sustain a life of financial independence. So it's definitely the BRF's fault that they failed as producers and entrepreneurs.
> 
> They spent so much time countering the tabloid press/Home Office and being mega-influencers that they just had no time to produce anything for Netflix/Spotify/Penguin. Then they will brandish stacks of The Bench to prove that they can be astounding if only they had the time (maybe 40 mins).





> They’ll do a Blac Chyna


----------



## kipp

After reading about how yet again Megain is inserting herself in everything Has-been does and thinking about how controlling she is, I am reminded about that QEII Birthday celebration concert at Royal Albert Hall I attended in April 2018---M and H were there and H gave a speech about the Commonwealth Trust.  When he got out of the Royal Box to go to the stage, M also left with him, although she stayed backstage.   But even then, when I thought it was kind of cool that they were engaged, kept thinking, WHY?  Why would she need to go with him?  Isn't he adult enough to walk to the backstage by himself?  Some things were evident a very long time ago... and now that she is his wife, she can try to (and probably WILL) upstage him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> In case you were wondering what happened to the BetterUp gig, here he is shilling for them this morning:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch Prince Harry interview Olympian Chloe Kim about mental health in new film
> 
> 
> The two high-profile personalities sat down to talk about the value of good mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com



Just no.


----------



## zen1965

I fail to see the connection between H and Nelson Mandela.

Mandela fought for his ideas, spent decades in a horrific prison and after his release was instrumental for preventing a bloodbath and assuring a relatively peaceful transition during a highly charged period in SA.

And H? He lost his mum at a young age, yes, but was coddled and enabled by his family all his life just to turn around and against them to spend his idle existence in a Californian mansion whining about his life of hardship.

i am disgusted that H is mentioned in the same breath with Nelson Mandela who was a truly exceptional human being.


----------



## papertiger

kipp said:


> After reading about how yet again Megain is inserting herself in everything Has-been does and thinking about how controlling she is, I am reminded about that QEII Birthday celebration concert at Royal Albert Hall I attended in April 2018---M and H were there and H gave a speech about the Commonwealth Trust.  When he got out of the Royal Box to go to the stage, M also left with him, although she stayed backstage.   But even then, when I thought it was kind of cool that they were engaged, kept thinking, WHY?  Why would she need to go with him?  Isn't he adult enough to walk to the backstage by himself?  Some things were evident a very long time ago... and now that she is his wife, she can try to (and probably WILL) upstage him.




You know she's the real STAR right?


----------



## papertiger

zen1965 said:


> I fail to see the connection between H and Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Mandela fought for his ideas, spent decades in a horrific prison and after his release was instrumental for preventing a bloodbath and assuring a relatively peaceful transition during a highly charged period in SA.
> 
> And H? He lost his mum at a young age, yes, but was coddled and enabled by his family all his life just to turn around and against them to spend his idle existence in a Californian mansion whining about his life of hardship.
> 
> i am disgusted that H is mentioned in the same breath with Nelson Mandela who was a truly exceptional human being.




Well you know, H is a champion of the underdogs and the poor right?


----------



## LittleStar88

... Outside of their tiny ecosystem, who even cares that he is speaking at this event? The vast majority of the planet doesn't care about what he has to say at this event or anywhere else.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> After reading about how yet again Megain is inserting herself in everything Has-been does and thinking about how controlling she is, I am reminded about that QEII Birthday celebration concert at Royal Albert Hall I attended in April 2018---M and H were there and H gave a speech about the Commonwealth Trust.  When he got out of the Royal Box to go to the stage, M also left with him, although she stayed backstage.   But even then, when I thought it was kind of cool that they were engaged, kept thinking, WHY?  Why would she need to go with him?  Isn't he adult enough to walk to the backstage by himself?  Some things were evident a very long time ago... and now that she is his wife, she can try to (and probably WILL) upstage him.



WTF. He is very capable of doing things and speaking on his own (with a little help of The Firm), he's been doing it for years before that grifter ever set eyes on him. It is her who's the nobody, but even I am shocked how f*cking needy and controlling or both she was from the very beginning. Why not just stay put, was she afraid he'd run? He better had!


----------



## andrashik

charlottawill said:


> In case you were wondering what happened to the BetterUp gig, here he is shilling for them this morning:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch Prince Harry interview Olympian Chloe Kim about mental health in new film
> 
> 
> The two high-profile personalities sat down to talk about the value of good mental health.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


I have a better one 
Prince Harry shares tips for achieving 'peak mental fitness'


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ort-film-BetterUp.html?adobe_mc=TS=1657639555

Oh wow , I am cured of anxiety , it is so inspiring


----------



## bag-mania

Wonder when was the last time Harry "flexed his mind." He certainly doesn't give the impression of being a man who uses his brain much.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> Wonder when was the last time Harry "flexed his mind." He certainly doesn't give the impression of being a man who uses his brain much.



Stop!  lol


----------



## xincinsin

zen1965 said:


> I fail to see the connection between H and Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Mandela fought for his ideas, spent decades in a horrific prison and after his release was instrumental for preventing a bloodbath and assuring a relatively peaceful transition during a highly charged period in SA.
> 
> And H? He lost his mum at a young age, yes, but was coddled and enabled by his family all his life just to turn around and against them to spend his idle existence in a Californian mansion whining about his life of hardship.
> 
> i am disgusted that H is mentioned in the same breath with Nelson Mandela who was a truly exceptional human being.


I bet Hazard will try to draw parallels like how he was trapped for decades in a castle, and then he and the wench will PDA madly on the stage to demonstrate how much they are each other's saviour. Methane will likely be his opening act just like for Invictus and give us her version of his life as a deprived orphan, before summoning, oops I mean "inviting", him on stage to brag about their visit to SA.


----------



## zen1965

xincinsin said:


> I bet Hazard will try to draw parallels like how he was trapped for decades in a castle, and then he and the wench will PDA madly on the stage to demonstrate how much they are each other's saviour. Methane will likely be his opening act just like for Invictus and give us her version of his life as a deprived orphan, before summoning, oops I mean "inviting", him on stage to brag about their visit to SA.



Alas, you‘re probably right.


----------



## gracekelly

Such a disconnect with him. Is he damaged from Diana’s early death, but recovered?  If so, why does he whine about it all the time?  What evidence is there that he has resilience?  Migraine has to hold his hand and put her hand on his back so he can function. She will be standing up there with him to support him and do everything including moving his mouth like a puppet with the word salad she wrote


----------



## piperdog

LittleStar88 said:


> ... Outside of their tiny ecosystem, who even cares that he is speaking at this event? The vast majority of the planet doesn't care about what he has to say at this event or anywhere else.
> 
> View attachment 5445924


While I agree with you, unfortunately it gives them a veneer of respectability to be able to say they've addressed a UN gathering. It will likely generate fantastic footage for Nflix, and lets them continue pretending to be serious people. To me, it just cheapens the UN. Any organization that deals with H&M automatically becomes suspect to me, especially when there's a SunshineSux connection, and the UN is no exception. I suppose I'm a little happier to know how the world really works ($$ and connections) but it still makes me a little sad that institutions that should be above it clearly aren't. 

So I'll add the UN to my list of organizations that have Markled themselves by giving these two charlatans a platform.


----------



## gracekelly

piperdog said:


> While I agree with you, unfortunately it gives them a veneer of respectability to be able to say they've addressed a UN gathering. It will likely generate fantastic footage for Nflix, and lets them continue pretending to be serious people. To me, it just cheapens the UN. Any organization that deals with H&M automatically becomes suspect to me, especially when there's a SunshineSux connection, and the UN is no exception. I suppose I'm a little happier to know how the world really works ($$ and connections) but it still makes me a little sad that institutions that should be above it clearly aren't.
> 
> So I'll add the UN to my list of organizations that have Markled themselves by giving these two charlatans a platform.


They Markled themselves a long time ago IMO.  Went to the UN several times on school trips. It was always empty because these people were out at Lutece, The Four Seasons, Mortimers etc having expensive lunches paid for by their respective countries while the limo double parked in front and was exempt from a parking ticket due to diplomatic status.  Fakers, crooks and do nothings  I want my UNICEF trick ‘r treat money returned.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> They Markled themselves a long time ago IMO.  Went to the UN several times on school trips. It was always empty because these people were out at Lutece, The Four Seasons, Mortimers etc having expensive lunches paid for by their respective countries while the limo double parked in front and was exempt from a parking ticket due to diplomatic status.  Fakers, crooks and do nothings  I want my UNICEF trick ‘r treat money returned.



My mother said the same thing. She said they betrayed their founders' principles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

zen1965 said:


> I fail to see the connection between H and Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Mandela fought for his ideas, spent decades in a horrific prison and after his release was instrumental for preventing a bloodbath and assuring a relatively peaceful transition during a highly charged period in SA.
> 
> And H? He lost his mum at a young age, yes, but was coddled and enabled by his family all his life just to turn around and against them to spend his idle existence in a Californian mansion whining about his life of hardship.
> 
> i am disgusted that H is mentioned in the same breath with Nelson Mandela who was a truly exceptional human being.


The connection clearly is that he is married to WOC.  That's it


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> They Markled themselves a long time ago IMO.  Went to the UN several times on school trips. It was always empty because these people were out at Lutece, The Four Seasons, Mortimers etc having expensive lunches paid for by their respective countries while the limo double parked in front and was exempt from a parking ticket due to diplomatic status.  Fakers, crooks and do nothings  I want my UNICEF trick ‘r treat money returned.



Thank you! We would be better off believing in the tooth fairy before believing the UN is the wonderful organization we’ve always been told it is. Maybe they started out that way decades ago but corruption happened quickly. I can see where Harry and Meghan would fit right in.


----------



## bellecate




----------



## Lodpah

As long as these two idiots pay to play they will always be in the rags. Such hypocrites. Complain about the media yet they supposedly pay the media through their PR to keep them relevant.
What wasted money. If they did good works their publicity is free. You can’t make sense of their stupidity. How do they sustain their lifestyle? Even MC Hammer had 30M  at one time and still ended up bankrupt.

Who is funding these two?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5446090



Oh I remember very well how she took off her engagement ring (not sure it was for that reason though, my first thought was her patronizing self didn't want to expose the poor Africans to her bling) and how silly I thought that was.


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5446090


They can file lawsuits from now until the end of time, whine & make prissy ass threats, but win-lose-or draw nothing will change who they are or what they are.  Ever.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Who is funding these two?



Good question! Let’s toss our guesses out there. Here’s mine.

1) They are still living off of the sign-on money from Netflix, Spotify, and the book. I know, I know, surely they must have depleted it by now. But maybe it was much more than we ever could have imagined.

2) Charles is secretly funding them because they are blackmailing him. I hold on to this theory because it would make a great TV show in the future!

3) Russian oligarchs. Enough said.

4) Anyone who wishes to see the British Royal Family and its traditions brought down and destroyed. This list could include governments (domestic or foreign), the media, and individuals.

5) They are facing credit card debt on a scale the rest of us cannot fathom.


----------



## bag-mania

I cannot understand the supporters who never question their behavior.


----------



## bellecate

Would sure be some good karma is this a big slide to oblivion they’re on.


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Good question! Let’s toss our guesses out there. Here’s mine.
> 
> 1) They are still living off of the sign-on money from Netflix, Spotify, and the book. I know, I know, surely they must have depleted it by now. But maybe it was much more than we ever could have imagined.
> 
> 2) Charles is secretly funding them because they are blackmailing him. I hold on to this theory because it would make a great TV show in the future!
> 
> 3) Russian oligarchs. Enough said.
> 
> 4) Anyone who wishes to see the British Royal Family and its traditions brought down and destroyed. This list could include governments (domestic or foreign), the media, and individuals.
> 
> 5) They are facing credit card debt on a scale the rest of us cannot fathom.


Good points. I agree with 2 and 3. The IRS should really investigate them. I mean if Lisa Marie Presley can blow (no pun intended) 100M (with no PR costs I magine and that’s too much blow up a nose), I don’t believe their personal finances sustain them, especially with TW spending money like crazy.

There’s something strange going on. I’m beginning to think PC has an agenda too. I don’t believe he’s stopped supporting them now. Hell, skip PC and go straight to PW, if possible. 

For those who don’t think do, a couple of women recently fooled even the one percenters.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Such a disconnect with him. Is he damaged from Diana’s early death, but recovered?  If so, why does he whine about it all the time?  What evidence is there that he has resilience?  Migraine has to hold his hand and put her hand on his back so he can function. She will be standing up there with him to support him and do everything including moving his mouth like a puppet with the word salad she wrote


Give credit where due ... H is following in Doria's steps and becoming a wellness coach. It's a profession, we should not be so negative about his trying.
Now, do I have the least desire/intention to CHOOSE him as my coach ? I dont think so ... 

On the other hand, M has not yet landed in a profession.  Or, maybe I am not giving credit ... is there a word for the profession of telling everyone else what to do ?? She seems to have turned into H's side kick ? is that possible ?? Way too self effacing ... 

At least, on her trip,  she did not liken the folks in Uvalde to tacos... she provided lunch, I think, Fritos maybe


----------



## Lodpah

andrashik said:


> I have a better one
> Prince Harry shares tips for achieving 'peak mental fitness'
> View attachment 5445928
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11005905/Prince-Harry-promotes-mental-health-coaching-mental-fitness-new-short-film-BetterUp.html?adobe_mc=TS=1657639555
> 
> Oh wow , I am cured of anxiety , it is so inspiring


FKCU him! He has no idea what the hell he is talking about. He and his demon should just go straight to hell. People need to grief and release and go through the process.  Trauma fixing is not about flexing but getting treatment with a professional and working it out. It takes time sometimes years of professional therapy to heal. 

Yeah go tell someone suicidal to flex their brain when they can’t figure out or trying to figure out why they’re in that place.

He’s so dangerous with his advice.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG explains:


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Give credit where due ... H is following in Doria's steps and becoming a wellness coach. It's a profession, we should not be so negative about his trying.
> Now, do I have the least desire/intention to CHOOSE him as my coach ? I dont think so ...
> 
> On the other hand, M has not yet landed in a profession.  Or, maybe I am not giving credit ... is there a word for the profession of telling everyone else what to do ?? She seems to have turned into H's side kick ? is that possible ?? Way too self effacing ...
> 
> At least, on her trip,  she did not liken the folks in Uvalde to tacos... she provided lunch, I think, Fritos maybe



But he's not qualified (no university/college education beyond ordering soldiers around*). He suffers from paranoia, issues with masculinity and autonomy. He can't even get is _own_ life together in a practical sense. He has a completely co-dependent relationship and has estranged nearly all his family.

*I'm not suggesting that people who don't to to college/university do not have IQ or EI, but people who put themselves in a management role or give life-changing advice should have an advanced education and specific training IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> FKCU him! He has no idea what the hell he is talking about. He and his demon should just go straight to hell. People need to grief and release and go through the process.  Trauma fixing is not about flexing but getting treatment with a professional and working it out. It takes time sometimes years of professional therapy to heal.
> 
> Yeah go tell someone suicidal to flex their brain when they can’t figure out or trying to figure out why they’re in that place.
> 
> He’s so dangerous with his advice.



Delusional.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Good question! Let’s toss our guesses out there. Here’s mine.
> 
> 1) They are still living off of the sign-on money from Netflix, Spotify, and the book. I know, I know, surely they must have depleted it by now. But maybe it was much more than we ever could have imagined.
> 
> 2) Charles is secretly funding them because they are blackmailing him. I hold on to this theory because it would make a great TV show in the future!
> 
> 3) Russian oligarchs. Enough said.
> 
> 4) Anyone who wishes to see the British Royal Family and its traditions brought down and destroyed. This list could include governments (domestic or foreign), the media, and individuals.
> 
> 5) They are facing credit card debt on a scale the rest of us cannot fathom.



I find 2 very likely..not necessarily because they have dirt on Charles but because I feel the BRF would find it slightly embarrassing if the son of the future king really lived like Just Harry.

About 4...it's been my - admittedly tin-hatty - presumption for a while that's how they met and why it progressed to the point we're at now. Because what are the chances really.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Thank you! We would be better off believing in the tooth fairy before believing the UN is the wonderful organization we’ve always been told it is. Maybe they started out that way decades ago but corruption happened quickly. I can see where Harry and Meghan would fit right in.


I will believe the Tooth Fairy any day!


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Would sure be some good karma is this a big slide to oblivion they’re on.
> View attachment 5446187
> View attachment 5446188


Don't know about the rest of you, but "their brand" is a phrase I'd be happy to never hear again. When did every become so concerned about "their brand"? Now get off my lawn!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rut roh [out of respect for @charlottawill, I changed the font size and struck through the offensive word]
ETA:  Also, I moved my lawn chair to another yard  

*Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day Speech to Relaunch **Brand** After Jubilee Humiliation*

BACK AGAIN
A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?









						Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day to Relaunch Their Brand
					

A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rut roh
> 
> 
> *Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day Speech to Relaunch **Brand** After Jubilee Humiliation*
> 
> BACK AGAIN
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day to Relaunch Their Brand
> 
> 
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find a way to embarrass themselves this time too.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find a way to embarrass themselves this time too.



They will say/do something embarrassing or tacky but the press will prop them up as they always do. We will read about many “sweet nods” the next day.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rut roh [out of respect for @charlottawill, I changed the font size and struck through the offensive word]
> ETA:  Also, I moved my lawn chair to another yard
> 
> *Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day Speech to Relaunch **Brand** After Jubilee Humiliation*
> 
> BACK AGAIN
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day to Relaunch Their Brand
> 
> 
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Doesn't anyone think about the fact that making yourself a "brand" is the same as saying you are a created image and not necessarily anything like the real person?  The first time I thought about this was reading an interview with Cindy Crawford.  She said she kept kept her sanity by separating who she is as a person with the image that she puts forth as a model and spokesperson.  Her brand "Cindy Crawford" is her business she said, but that is not the real "her." OK, I get that.  For the Sussex they have not made that separation.  They are their brand as they stand before you, i.e. not real people and a creation.  I believe this is certainly true for Harry. A long time ago,  BP created the brand of Harry the Warrior/Hero to put forth to the world.  The real Harry is nothing like that from what I have observed.  As for Meghan, I don't know what the real Meghan brand is or her real self.  It changes with the turn of the clock and calendar.  You only need a brand when you want to market something about yourself.  What is there about either Harry or Meghan that is worth marketing?  They can call themselves humanitarians, social activists or any other label.  If there is nothing sustainable  to back it up whether it is money, actions, or societal impact, then it is just talk and there is no brand to rest on.  If a person like Elon Musk   claimed that his brand is that of  entrepreneurial Renaissance man, I would believe it because of all the things he has done.   What have the Sussex done or achieved?  Nothing.  There is no brand.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Doesn't anyone think about the fact that making yourself a "brand" is the same as saying you are a created image and not necessarily anything like the real person?  The first time I thought about this was reading an interview with Cindy Crawford.  She said she kept kept her sanity by separating who she is as a person with the image that she puts forth as a model and spokesperson.  Her brand "Cindy Crawford" is her business she said, but that is not the real "her." OK, I get that.  For the Sussex they have not made that separation.  They are their brand as they stand before you, i.e. not real people and a creation.  I believe this is certainly true for Harry. A long time ago,  BP created the brand of Harry the Warrior/Hero to put forth to the world.  The real Harry is nothing like that from what I have observed.  As for Meghan, I don't know what the real Meghan brand is or her real self.  It changes with the turn of the clock and calendar.  You only need a brand when you want to market something about yourself.  What is there about either Harry or Meghan that is worth marketing?  They can call themselves humanitarians, social activists or any other label.  If there is nothing sustainable  to back it up whether it is money, actions, or societal impact, then it is just talk and there is no brand to rest on.  If a person like Elon Musk   claimed that his brand is that of  entrepreneurial Renaissance man, I would believe it because of all the things he has done.   What have the Sussex done or achieved?  Nothing.  There is no brand.



"In my day" haha a brand was a detergent, a car or a cereal, not an individual. But Cindy Crawford makes a valid point. And you can hang with me on my lawn anytime


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s do the math.
Their brand = _nothing_.
So they are relaunching _nothing_ which = _nothing_. 
_Nothing _ x 3 = _nothing_


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s do the math.
> Their brand = _nothing_.
> So they are relaunching _nothing_ which = _nothing_.
> _Nothing _ x 3 = _nothing_


MM's anthem....



>


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rut roh [out of respect for @charlottawill, I changed the font size and struck through the offensive word]
> ETA:  Also, I moved my lawn chair to another yard
> 
> *Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day Speech to Relaunch **Brand** After Jubilee Humiliation*
> 
> BACK AGAIN
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day to Relaunch Their Brand
> 
> 
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



This is disgusting.  Using Nelson Mandela to relaunch their brand.  And giving a speech to a white British prince - who has what to do with Nelson Mandela??  Really disgusting.

No wonder princeharryisaracist and Meghanmarkleisaliar is trending on Twitter.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> MM's anthem....


Yep!  Plus Billy had another one for her that is apropos.  I actually saw him in Las Vegas back in the late 80's when he was the opening act for Don Rickles.  He put on a great show.


----------



## zinacef

Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Like @andrashik, I am not a native speaker of English. Imagine my surprise the first time I ventured into the more exotic and erotic reaches of fanfiction. The showers you refer to made me   Of course my recollections might vary...


I'm older than Urban Dictionary, so the first time I heard this shower mentioned was in a sex ed class.  My first thought was, "A what??".  Others were more, ahem, educated, than I.  Boy, was that class eye opening.


----------



## gracekelly

I'm sad to pass along this news about our dear friend and frequent poster Ceejay.  Thank you @Vlad for making a thread for her.






						Ceejay
					

It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## purseinsanity

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!


Wait, what????  OMG.  That's so sad.  RIP Ceejay.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find 2 very likely..not necessarily because they have dirt on Charles but because I feel the BRF would find it slightly embarrassing if the son of the future king really lived like Just Harry.


I suspect Hazard's emissaries bombard PC or other less strong-willed members of the BRF with annoying messages asking for money. Keeps his own hands clean under the guise of being financially independent. 

As for #4, the original plan was probably not to take down the BRF but to cultivate a pliant royal. And for that, Methane did a great job at snaring the idiot of the family, surgically extracting his backbone and keeping him on a leash. The Sandringham Summit was a blackmail session but Hazard was decimated. They overplayed their hand. I'm not sure what Methane thought the pinnacle of the success of her mission would be, but if she was overheard talking about plane crashes, then she is either unbelievably crass (I believe it) or there was skulduggery planned (I also believe it).



CarryOn2020 said:


> Rut roh [out of respect for @charlottawill, I changed the font size and struck through the offensive word]
> ETA:  Also, I moved my lawn chair to another yard
> 
> *Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day Speech to Relaunch **Brand** After Jubilee Humiliation*
> 
> BACK AGAIN
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Will Use Mandela Day to Relaunch Their Brand
> 
> 
> A talk to the U.N. on Mandela Day? Could there be a more perfect stage to erase the embarrassment of the Platinum Jubilee?
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Was the Daily Beast ever a reliable source of  news? Their pro-Sux articles are  



charlottawill said:


> Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find a way to embarrass themselves this time too.





bag-mania said:


> They will say/do something embarrassing or tacky but the press will prop them up as they always do. We will read about many “sweet nods” the next day.


If the Netflix crew is there, at least we won't be taken aback by mystery 3rd nipples pushing against her shirt. And of course cheers and a standing ovation can be edited in later.



gracekelly said:


> Doesn't anyone think about the fact that making yourself a "brand" is the same as saying you are a created image and not necessarily anything like the real person?  The first time I thought about this was reading an interview with Cindy Crawford.  She said she kept kept her sanity by separating who she is as a person with the image that she puts forth as a model and spokesperson.  Her brand "Cindy Crawford" is her business she said, but that is not the real "her." OK, I get that.  For the Sussex they have not made that separation.  They are their brand as they stand before you, i.e. not real people and a creation.  I believe this is certainly true for Harry. A long time ago,  BP created the brand of Harry the Warrior/Hero to put forth to the world.  The real Harry is nothing like that from what I have observed.  As for Meghan, I don't know what the real Meghan brand is or her real self.  It changes with the turn of the clock and calendar.  You only need a brand when you want to market something about yourself.  What is there about either Harry or Meghan that is worth marketing?  They can call themselves humanitarians, social activists or any other label.  If there is nothing sustainable  to back it up whether it is money, actions, or societal impact, then it is just talk and there is no brand to rest on.  If a person like Elon Musk   claimed that his brand is that of  entrepreneurial Renaissance man, I would believe it because of all the things he has done.   What have the Sussex done or achieved?  Nothing.  There is no brand.


No brand, but they are well on their way to becoming the poster child for many unsavoury traits.


----------



## LittleStar88

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!



OMG this is awful news


----------



## Vlad

gracekelly said:


> I'm sad to pass along this news about our dear friend and frequent poster Ceejay.  Thank you @Vlad for making a thread for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ceejay
> 
> 
> It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com



Thank you for posting @gracekelly, I know that Claudia was also very active in this MM thread and had friends here.


----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan Markle dubbed 'Princess of Montecito' by locals as she demands 'completely secluded' tables at restaurants
					

The Duchess allegedly secretly books out conference rooms at the five-star Beverly Hills Hotel




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## needlv

Thanks for sharing the thread.  It’s so sad! RIP Ceejay.


gracekelly said:


> I'm sad to pass along this news about our dear friend and frequent poster Ceejay.  Thank you @Vlad for making a thread for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ceejay
> 
> 
> It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan Markle dubbed 'Princess of Montecito' by locals as she demands 'completely secluded' tables at restaurants
> 
> 
> The Duchess allegedly secretly books out conference rooms at the five-star Beverly Hills Hotel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


My eyes are failing me. When I read "A report in Closer magazine reads: "Meghan just keeps it very private these days but her royal status gives her a lot of leverage.", I saw "her royal status gives her a lot of cleavage"


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> My eyes are failing me. When I read "A report in Closer magazine reads: "Meghan just keeps it very private these days but her royal status gives her a lot of leverage.", I saw "her royal status gives her a lot of cleavage"



I’m guessing that cleavage opens doors.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I'm sad to pass along this news about our dear friend and frequent poster Ceejay.  Thank you @Vlad for making a thread for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ceejay
> 
> 
> It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


RIP Ceejay. Will miss your sparkling wit.


----------



## youngster

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!



I just saw this, that our dear Ceejay passed away on Sunday.  I am so sad and so shocked by this.
ETA: I can hardly imagine tPF without her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

@CeeJay  dear lady, you brightened this thread with your wisdom and sparkling personality. Your passing has caught me [and many others] by surprise - we were not ready to hear this :tears:  You will be greatly missed, never forgotten. 
Much love to CeeJay, her husband, Paul, and family and all of us.


----------



## purseinsanity

Vlad said:


> Thank you for posting @gracekelly, I know that Claudia was also very active in this MM thread and had friends here.


Thank you @Vlad for honoring her.  I still can't believe it.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan Markle dubbed 'Princess of Montecito' by locals as she demands 'completely secluded' tables at restaurants
> 
> 
> The Duchess allegedly secretly books out conference rooms at the five-star Beverly Hills Hotel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


Mmmmkay.  The "locals" call her that?  LOLOL.  Sure, local as in Haz and the chickens.  Probably also her staff because she demands it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

needlv said:


> Thanks for sharing the thread.  It’s so sad! RIP Ceejay.


OMG!  I can't believe it!  How sad!  Thank you @gracekelly for letting us know and @Vlad for your kind words.  @CeeJay will be greatly missed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!


Oh no! That’s terrible


----------



## youngster

I mean, who's gonna remind us going forward that TW was not C-list but  *ZZZZZZZZZZ list*?
I'm feeling weepy as I type.  RIP sweet Ceejay.


----------



## Suncatcher

So sorry to hear of Ceejay’s passing. I found her posts to be humorous and full of personality. May she Rest In Peace.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!


So truly sorry to hear this. I feel as if I knew her personally—as I do with many of you ladies. Her loss creates a void, without a doubt.  ( what is the OG sub?   Thank you )


----------



## Toby93

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!


That is shocking news.  So sad, she was always so insightful and smart. She will definitely be missed here.


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> Was the Daily Beast ever a reliable source of  news? Their pro-Sux articles are


Went and did some research. The Daily Beast is a "high-end tabloid". Factual rating for articles runs from above 80% to as low as below 40% depending on the article. Language used is emotional sensational clickbait. Founded by Tina Brown who does have a pro-Sux bias.


----------



## Lodpah

No! Ceejay was so cool and always on point. So sad to hear that. RIP in Ceejay. This is so sad.


----------



## needlv

8 days to go and Tom Bowers book will be out…

The title - Revenge





__





						Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
					

Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.




					www.bookdepository.com
				




i may end up buying this one….


----------



## zen1965

youngster said:


> I mean, who's gonna remind us going forward that TW was not C-list but  *ZZZZZZZZZZ list*?
> I'm feeling weepy as I type.  RIP sweet Ceejay.


I also have tears in my eyes.
Such devastating news.
RIP, dear Ceejay.


----------



## carmen56

I'm shocked to hear about Ceejay.  I enjoyed her posts to this forum immensely, she will be very much missed. May she rest in peace.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh no that’s awful. Poor Ceejay. We will all miss her insights and humour. Her taste in Balenciaga was also unrivalled. RIP Bal Queen.


----------



## andrashik

Moments like this put life in perspective. How ephemeral life can be and even though we wish things to last, it cannot happen. I loved her corrections regarding claw's z list status and her insights. 
I am sure she fought till the end and knew we were there for her.


----------



## csshopper

Thanking her husband, Vlad and @gracekelly for letting us know. Will definitely miss her wit and the perspective she shared,  having some experiences with real people who knew Raptor. Like so many other of the wonderful ladies here, someone I thought it would be fun to get together with.


----------



## duna

Rip dear Ceejay❤️ your wit and your capitals will be greatly missed!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

I’m totally shocked and sad to hear the news. We will miss you CeeJay. You will not be forgotten and someone will bring up memories of your wit and wonderful contributions to this thread. RIP.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

zinacef said:


> Hey! Y’all our beloved contributor Ceejay had recently passed away!  OMG! I am so shocked! pls visit the OG sub , I know I will miss her wit and class!



What...OMG. Not the news I expected to see at all  I'm so sorry and I will absolutely miss her wit and snark.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I'm sad to pass along this news about our dear friend and frequent poster Ceejay.  Thank you @Vlad for making a thread for her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ceejay
> 
> 
> It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com



She was here just a few days ago


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> As for #4, the original plan was probably not to take down the BRF but to cultivate a pliant royal. And for that, Methane did a great job at snaring the idiot of the family, surgically extracting his backbone and keeping him on a leash. The Sandringham Summit was a blackmail session but Hazard was decimated. They overplayed their hand. I'm not sure what Methane thought the pinnacle of the success of her mission would be, but if she was overheard talking about plane crashes, then she is either unbelievably crass (I believe it) or there was skulduggery planned (I also believe it).



Absolutely, I agree with all of this. 

The infamous plane quote, I believe it because Lady C quoted it word by word and said she could back it up, and she is always very, very careful of being sued.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vlad said:


> Thank you for posting @gracekelly, I know that Claudia was also very active in this MM thread and had friends here.



We will truly miss her. Also, her poor husband thinking of updating us as one of the first things to do! My heart breaks for him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you @Vlad for honoring her.  I still can't believe it.



I'll admit when I first saw @zinacef post the horrible news for a split second I thought it was a cruel joke (not that I think anyone would go there, it was just my brain refusing to take in the facts).


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll admit when I first saw @zinacef post the horrible news for a split second I thought it was a cruel joke (not that I think anyone would go there, it was just my brain refusing to take in the facts).


I am the same. I still cannot believe it 
I am really shocked and sad


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was here just a few days ago



I feel stunned by this morning's news of Ceejay's untimely passing. I am erratic contributor to this thread but as a fellow sufferer of an autoimmune arthritis condition, I had noted she was not doing so well in recent post and she had been in my thoughts all week.

We will all miss her hugely in this thread and I particularly want to note how inspirational she was in leading such a full and engaged life, here on the forum and in the real world, despite suffering at times greatly from a very debilitating condition with such fortitude and courage. I have posted my condolences of the dedicated thread.


----------



## Helventara

This thread will not be the same without @CeeJay. Such shocking news 
I relate so much with her stories as a woman in corporate world. I admire her bravery, fighting all those obstacles around her. I felt as if I knew her in person. What a loss. My condolences to her family.

ETA: we all enjoy the witty conversation here but actually behind those postings, we do face difficulties, illnesses, losses, as mentioned a few pages back. I also want to acknowledge that I appreciate how much this thread has become a safe space for all of us and my thoughts are with all of you.


----------



## zinacef

BVBookshop said:


> This thread will not be the same without @CeeJay. Such shocking news
> I relate so much with her stories as a woman in corporate world. I admire her bravery fighting all those obstacles around her. I felt as if I knew her in person. What a loss. My condolences to her family.


I totally agree! I always look forward to what she has to contribute to the latest shenanigans that our lovely couple is doing! It made me realize that we have some sort of fellowship, fun of discussing even what other people would not touch with a 10 foot pole.


----------



## djfmn

I am a reader of this thread but I have never posted before. I come here for the entertainment,  honest opinions and some of the best posts. Ceejay's posts were some of the best. She was smart, eloquent, incredibly funny and I loved reading them. I will miss her - who will be the ZZZZ list corrector! Sincere condolences to her family and all her tpf friends.


----------



## Chanelconvert

That is really sad. I was just looking at her @CeeJay thread the other night, in the balenciaga forum.


----------



## jennlt

RIP @CeeJay. You were feisty and fabulous and your absence will be felt by all of us. My deepest condolences to her husband Paul and her family.


----------



## bellecate

@CeeJay you will be greatly missed here, your wit and colourful posts were very much enjoyed. Teary while I type this I will miss seeing your bold and colourful fonts and contributions. 
RIP Claudia you will be missed.


----------



## Jktgal

It's very shocking news and my heart skipped several beats just now. You will be very much missed, @CeeJay. Rest in peace. Vale.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

needlv said:


> 8 days to go and Tom Bowers book will be out…
> 
> The title - Revenge
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i may end up buying this one….


Wow. Great title.  Short and sweet.  I can tell this is no word salad .  I might buy this one too!  If the bestseller book lists weren’t rigged I’d say we could make it appear up there.


----------



## Sunshine247365

Chanbal said:


> From DM:_ The speech, as part of Nelson Mandela Day, will see the *Duke of Sussex** speak in front of an informal General Assembly gathering*._
> 
> My 2 cents: Sunshine S found him an empty room to deliver TW's word salad and plenty of Netf*l cameras to register the event. The Harkles are familiar with dressing up for photo-ops and be on stage without audiences. Would they drag D*ria for such event as they did for NAACP? @NAACP, they all looked 'so convincing' thanking and bowing to a pretending audience in an empty room.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BREAKING: Prince Harry will be joined by Meghan Markle in speech to UN
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be in New York City on Monday with the prince set to address the United Nations. The speech, as part of Nelson Mandela Day, will see the Duke speak at the GA.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




This is just offensive linking him with Mandela in any context. Mandela was about forgiveness, positive action and reconciliation - something these grifters don't know anything about.  I can't fathom what he could possibly add to the event aside from offending just about every South African based on the comments on twitter today


----------



## rose60610

Recurring pattern:

Use deceased Diana for pity and money making opportunities
Use deceased soldiers in cemetery for photo op
Use deceased Prince Philip for wreath merching
Use deceased Uvalde victims for photo op
Now Mandela? At the U.N.?  Nobody should be surprised at this point

They got all the time in world to exploit deceased people, even if they have to travel via private jet to do so, yet can't make time to see her own ailing father, the one who sent her to private schools and helped her become a celebrity. And she still has sugars.


----------



## youngster

So, Harry is going to _relaunch their brand_ via a speech at _an informal General Assembly gathering at the UN_?  How excessively optimistic of them.


----------



## djfmn

I was born and raised in South Africa by a British mother and father (parents were from the border of Belgium and Netherlands). I left SA during the apartheid era and immigrated to the USA. As someone who was born and raised there and who had enormous respect for Madiba (his Xhosa clan name. A clan name is much more important than a surname as it refers to the ancestor from which a person is descended) or Tata (the isiXhosa word that means “father” and is a term of endearment that many South Africans use for Mr Mandela. He was a father figure to many, they call him Tata regardless of their own age) as he is known by South Africans it is so disheartening not to have someone who lived there and can speak from experience of either that time period or having known Mr Mandela. JCMH's grandmother is far more suited to give this speech although her health does not permit her to travel. Doing it via video conferencing would be far more appropriate than having JCMH do it in person. Here are two stories about Queen Elizabeth and her close friendship to Nelson Mandela.

The Queen and Nelson Mandela were closer than most people know. Their relationship was so tight that, even two years after stepping down from his presidency, Mr Mandela visited London, and was treated to a coach ride with the Queen. He arrived on July 9, 1998, for a four-day visit, and on the last day he concluded his trip to England by accompanying Her Majesty on a coach drive through the busy streets of London. He stayed as her guest of honor at Buckingham Palace.

(This was told by Peter Hain ex South African and UK Labour Minister)
"On his 90th birthday, Nelson Mandela was phoned by Her Majesty the Queen."
"They were very close.”
"He was handed the phone and said 'Hello Elizabeth, how is the Duke?’
"Afterwards his wife reprimanded him.”
"She said 'you cannot refer to Her Majesty like that!'
"He replied: 'But she calls me Nelson!'"


Nelson Mandela was one of very few people, outside of her family, who called the Queen by her first name.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> So, Harry is going to _relaunch their brand_ via a speech at _an informal General Assembly gathering at the UN_?  How excessively optimistic of them.


The notion of Archewell as a damp squib amuses me.
Their brand sunk like a stone in the swamp of irrelevancy.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Haven’t they tried this “relaunching” business before?


----------



## lulu212121

djfmn said:


> I was born and raised in South Africa by a British mother and father (parents were from the border of Belgium and Netherlands). I left SA during the apartheid era and immigrated to the USA. As someone who was born and raised there and who had enormous respect for Madiba (his Xhosa clan name. A clan name is much more important than a surname as it refers to the ancestor from which a person is descended) or Tata (the isiXhosa word that means “father” and is a term of endearment that many South Africans use for Mr Mandela. He was a father figure to many, they call him Tata regardless of their own age) as he is known by South Africans it is so disheartening not to have someone who lived there and can speak from experience of either that time period or having known Mr Mandela. JCMH's grandmother is far more suited to give this speech although her health does not permit her to travel. Doing it via video conferencing would be far more appropriate than having JCMH do it in person. Here are two stories about Queen Elizabeth and her close friendship to Nelson Mandela.
> 
> The Queen and Nelson Mandela were closer than most people know. Their relationship was so tight that, even two years after stepping down from his presidency, Mr Mandela visited London, and was treated to a coach ride with the Queen. He arrived on July 9, 1998, for a four-day visit, and on the last day he concluded his trip to England by accompanying Her Majesty on a coach drive through the busy streets of London. He stayed as her guest of honor at Buckingham Palace.
> 
> (This was told by Peter Hain ex South African and UK Labour Minister)
> "On his 90th birthday, Nelson Mandela was phoned by Her Majesty the Queen."
> "They were very close.”
> "He was handed the phone and said 'Hello Elizabeth, how is the Duke?’
> "Afterwards his wife reprimanded him.”
> "She said 'you cannot refer to Her Majesty like that!'
> "He replied: 'But she calls me Nelson!'"
> 
> 
> Nelson Mandela was one of very few people, outside of her family, who called the Queen by her first name.


Thank you for sharing this.  
Insulting to have Hazbeen give a speech. How is he relevant to Mr. Mandela?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Haven’t they tried this “relaunching” business before?


If at first you don't succeed..


----------



## charlottawill

lulu212121 said:


> Thank you for sharing this.
> Insulting to have Hazbeen give a speech. How is he relevant to Mr. Mandela?


He'll probably work something into the speech along the lines of "On behalf of my grandmother" or "I know my grandmother would", anything to keep that invaluable connection alive in people's minds.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Haven’t they tried this “relaunching” business before?


Somewhere there is probably a betting pool wagering their diminishing chances of success. Pathetic, grubbing, tedious, clueless, boring. Adjectives to describe them are multiplying with each back lashed effort.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

djfmn said:


> I was born and raised in South Africa by a British mother and father (parents were from the border of Belgium and Netherlands). I left SA during the apartheid era and immigrated to the USA. As someone who was born and raised there and who had enormous respect for Madiba (his Xhosa clan name. A clan name is much more important than a surname as it refers to the ancestor from which a person is descended) or Tata (the isiXhosa word that means “father” and is a term of endearment that many South Africans use for Mr Mandela. He was a father figure to many, they call him Tata regardless of their own age) as he is known by South Africans it is so disheartening not to have someone who lived there and can speak from experience of either that time period or having known Mr Mandela. JCMH's grandmother is far more suited to give this speech although her health does not permit her to travel. Doing it via video conferencing would be far more appropriate than having JCMH do it in person. Here are two stories about Queen Elizabeth and her close friendship to Nelson Mandela.
> 
> The Queen and Nelson Mandela were closer than most people know. Their relationship was so tight that, even two years after stepping down from his presidency, Mr Mandela visited London, and was treated to a coach ride with the Queen. He arrived on July 9, 1998, for a four-day visit, and on the last day he concluded his trip to England by accompanying Her Majesty on a coach drive through the busy streets of London. He stayed as her guest of honor at Buckingham Palace.
> 
> (This was told by Peter Hain ex South African and UK Labour Minister)
> "On his 90th birthday, Nelson Mandela was phoned by Her Majesty the Queen."
> "They were very close.”
> "He was handed the phone and said 'Hello Elizabeth, how is the Duke?’
> "Afterwards his wife reprimanded him.”
> "She said 'you cannot refer to Her Majesty like that!'
> "He replied: 'But she calls me Nelson!'"
> 
> 
> Nelson Mandela was one of very few people, outside of her family, who called the Queen by her first name.


Lovely.   Thank you.


----------



## Nutashha

OMG! I just heard about this!

https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/harry-and-meghan-another-oprah-interview


----------



## Cinderlala

I will give their PR team props for managing to constantly create non-news stories.  (Although, I could do it just as easily since their actions are typically speculative.) (Often imaginary.)


----------



## papertiger

Nutashha said:


> OMG! I just heard about this!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/harry-and-meghan-another-oprah-interview
> View attachment 5446792



Well, it can't be worse than the last one


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

Even if there is another interview, how many people care about the hurt feelings of an almost-middle-aged Prince and his word-salad-spewing wife?

How long can the victim schtick last?


----------



## purseinsanity

lulu212121 said:


> Thank you for sharing this.
> Insulting to have Hazbeen give a speech. How is he relevant to Mr. Mandela?


How is Haz relevant, period???  
They make a mockery of everything.


----------



## bag-mania

Nutashha said:


> OMG! I just heard about this!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/harry-and-meghan-another-oprah-interview
> View attachment 5446792



I don’t believe it. There’s absolutely  nothing in it for Oprah to do another. As celebrities go, they are getting stale and the last thing she wants is to be known as the mouthpiece for their whining. She has a legacy to protect.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe it. There’s absolutely  nothing in it for Oprah to do another. As celebrities go, they are getting stale and the last thing she wants is to be known as the mouthpiece for their whining. She has a legacy to protect.


Me neither. Besides, we know they weren’t heading to Oprah’s house that day they were papped in the car driving around Montecito with Meghan’s friend riding in the front seat. Oprah was apparently out of town visiting her sick brother or something.

As for Arkaywell, they’ve re-launched that foundation more times than the space shuttle. YAWN


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting DM article showing photos of the 5 Cambridges leaving Kensington Palace by helicopter, presumably for vacation.

Not trying to excuse H but ... Imagine a childhood where you left for as vacay from a helo pad at your palace - a life of privilege I cannot imagine

I kinda see why H wants the security folks back, they come bearing helos to the airport, who wants to stand in line ? but hey, he gave up that life...


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, Harry is going to _relaunch their brand_ via a speech at _an informal General Assembly gathering at the UN_?  How excessively optimistic of them.


Relaunching of a brand that doesn't exist.  Now that is a neat trick!


----------



## charlottawill

Nutashha said:


> OMG! I just heard about this!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/harry-and-meghan-another-oprah-interview
> View attachment 5446792


They're just repeating the same rumors. I'll believe it when it comes from Oprah's people, and I'm not holding my breath. But you never know anymore. I don't understand why Oprah would waste her time with these two at this point.


----------



## gracekelly

djfmn said:


> I was born and raised in South Africa by a British mother and father (parents were from the border of Belgium and Netherlands). I left SA during the apartheid era and immigrated to the USA. As someone who was born and raised there and who had enormous respect for Madiba (his Xhosa clan name. A clan name is much more important than a surname as it refers to the ancestor from which a person is descended) or Tata (the isiXhosa word that means “father” and is a term of endearment that many South Africans use for Mr Mandela. He was a father figure to many, they call him Tata regardless of their own age) as he is known by South Africans it is so disheartening not to have someone who lived there and can speak from experience of either that time period or having known Mr Mandela. JCMH's grandmother is far more suited to give this speech although her health does not permit her to travel. Doing it via video conferencing would be far more appropriate than having JCMH do it in person. Here are two stories about Queen Elizabeth and her close friendship to Nelson Mandela.
> 
> The Queen and Nelson Mandela were closer than most people know. Their relationship was so tight that, even two years after stepping down from his presidency, Mr Mandela visited London, and was treated to a coach ride with the Queen. He arrived on July 9, 1998, for a four-day visit, and on the last day he concluded his trip to England by accompanying Her Majesty on a coach drive through the busy streets of London. He stayed as her guest of honor at Buckingham Palace.
> 
> (This was told by Peter Hain ex South African and UK Labour Minister)
> "On his 90th birthday, Nelson Mandela was phoned by Her Majesty the Queen."
> "They were very close.”
> "He was handed the phone and said 'Hello Elizabeth, how is the Duke?’
> "Afterwards his wife reprimanded him.”
> "She said 'you cannot refer to Her Majesty like that!'
> "He replied: 'But she calls me Nelson!'"
> 
> 
> Nelson Mandela was one of very few people, outside of her family, who called the Queen by her first name.


Thank you for a beautiful post.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> *Interesting DM article showing photos of the 5 Cambridges leaving Kensington Palace by helicopter, presumably for vacation*.
> 
> Not trying to excuse H but ... Imagine a childhood where you left for as vacay from a helo pad at your palace - a life of privilege I cannot imagine
> 
> I kinda see why H wants the security folks back, they come bearing helos to the airport, who wants to stand in line ? but hey, he gave up that life...


I do wish they'd all stop flying together.  TW's horrible comment always comes to mind.  Why chance it??


----------



## redney

I am late to read the very sad news about Ceejay but wanted to share in my shock and grieving with you all here.


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> Me neither. Besides, we know they weren’t heading to Oprah’s house that day they were papped in the car driving around Montecito with Meghan’s friend riding in the front seat. Oprah was apparently out of town visiting her sick brother or something.


That's what I was going to say... apparently O was in TN because of her father who recently passed, so who knows what M&H were up to with their pap shots in a secluded gated community were apparently no paps hang out.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I do wish they'd all stop flying together.  TW's horrible comment always comes to mind.  Why chance it??


My thoughts exactly but I hate to even bring it up.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Relaunching of a brand that doesn't exist.  Now that is a neat trick!


I am thinking the BRF has ceded the UN to H&M - they can hang out in NY, so long as they don't muck up the Commonwealth


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I am thinking the BRF has ceded the UN to H&M - they can hang out in NY, so long as they don't muck up the Commonwealth


I don't think so.  Sophie Wessex was there earlier this year.








						Sophie, Countess of Wessex Arrives in New York City to Deliver United Nations Keynote Address
					

Queen Elizabeth's daughter-in-law is speaking at an event in support of women’s rights in Afghanistan.




					www.vanityfair.com
				




They are not giving Harry an inch of anything.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I was going to say... apparently O was in TN because of her father who recently passed, so who knows what M&H were up to with their pap shots in a secluded gated community were apparently no paps hang out.


I assumed that they drove to her gate and positioned the cars and took pictures.  Who would have stopped them.  Can't account for the weeper in the back seat.  Did they go unannounced and then she started crying when they were told by staff that Oprah was not at home?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

But would she go to Oprah’s without makeup and call the paps to photograph her unmadeup face???


----------



## TimeToShop

Aimee3 said:


> But would she go to Oprah’s without makeup and call the paps to photograph her unmadeup face???



Perhaps they heard Oprah’s father was ill. The no makeup would show everyone the urgency she felt to get to her bestie as fast as she could. It probably never occurred to them that Oprah would be with her father. Ill relatives mean nothing to them, it’s just easier to throw them under the bus.


----------



## xeyes

If this is true, then either they somehow haven’t figured out the obvious joke, or they don’t care.






						Blind Item #10
					

The alliterate one and her husband have signed a lease on a house in Bel Air. The alliterate one has been getting tired of the commute.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				






[Edited for typo]


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> "they’ve re-launched that foundation more times than the space shuttle"


 I come for the dirt but stay for the jokes


----------



## bag-mania

xeyes said:


> If this is true, then either they somehow havem’t figured out the obvious joke, or they don’t care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #10
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband have signed a lease on a house in Bel Air. The alliterate one has been getting tired of the commute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5446986



Tired of the commute? To where? It’s not like they have jobs. It must be the commute to the finer restaurants and shopping.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> But would she go to Oprah’s without makeup and call the paps to photograph her unmadeup face???



She would meet the make up artist at the site and preferably have Oprah pay for it!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Tired of the commute? To where? It’s not like they have jobs. It must be the commute to the finer restaurants and shopping.


In their desperation they may believe that being relatively out of sight in Montecito is out of mind in the entertainment industry and being in LA may bring them more opportunities socially and financially. But that would be just another delusion imo. Or, it could be her next step toward being on RHoBH.


----------



## Chanbal

@CeeJay, you were a A-list Member of this thread. RIP my friend.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> In their desperation they may believe that being relatively out of sight in Montecito is out of mind in the entertainment industry and being in LA may bring them more opportunities socially and financially. But that would be just another delusion imo. Or, it could be her next step toward being on RHoBH.



Maybe if they, I don’t know, delivered a finished TV show or podcast they wouldn’t be so forgotten by the entertainment industry.


----------



## charlottawill

xeyes said:


> If this is true, then either they somehow havem’t figured out the obvious joke, or they don’t care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #10
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband have signed a lease on a house in Bel Air. The alliterate one has been getting tired of the commute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5446986



The comments on that   

Such as:

"It was taking too long for the paps to get to her house. She had to do a 3 hr 'spontaneous 'Nature walk before any showed up."


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> In their desperation they may believe that being relatively out of sight in Montecito is out of mind in the entertainment industry and being in LA may bring them more opportunities socially and financially. But that would be just another delusion imo. Or, it could be her next step toward being on RHoBH.


They would have had to be brain dead not to realize that Montecito was not the place to live if the wanted business meetings and to be closer to what is happening.  IMO it would be the equivalent of living at the country home in England that Charles wanted to build for them.  That was too out of the mainstream for them so why pick Montecito?  They could have had a perfectly nice private residence at many places in LA.  There is a well known TV actress who collects real estate and she just put up one of her properties for sale in the town where I live and it is three acres!  Three acres in So Cal!  That is pretty darn private, yet in the city of LA technically.   People don't commute from LA to Montecito on a daily basis as a rule.  It is too far to do both ways every day.  That said, there are people who do the 3 or 4 days in LA and then go to SB for the other days. That requires two residences however you look at it.

Another twist would be that Montecito is up for sale.  They vacated and want to live in LA or at least she does and he wants to go back to England.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> They would have had to be brain dead not to realize that Montecito was not the place to live if the wanted business meetings and to be closer to what is happening.  IMO it would be the equivalent of living at the country home in England that Charles wanted to build for them.  That was too out of the mainstream for them so why pick Montecito?  They could have had a perfectly nice private residence at many places in LA.  There is a well known TV actress who collects real estate and she just put up one of her properties for sale in the town where I live and it is three acres!  Three acres in So Cal!  That is pretty darn private, yet in the city of LA technically.   People don't commute from LA to Montecito on a daily basis as a rule.  It is too far to do both ways every day.  That said, there are people who do the 3 or 4 days in LA and then go to SB for the other days. That requires two residences however you look at it.
> 
> Another twist would be that Montecito is up for sale.  They vacated and want to live in LA or at least she does and he wants to go back to England.



The plot thickens.....


----------



## xincinsin

Cinderlala said:


> How long can the victim schtick last?


Her Heinous's entire future livelihood is based on it. She is Victim Numero Uno. Hazard was co-opted as victim #2 after she tearfully informed him that he was trapped and got him a therapist that assured him it was true. The children have been given the victim image ASAP: poor Archificial suffered racism before he was born, and the Bet didn't get to take the money shot with Great-Granny. Boo hoo... Career victim. 



bag-mania said:


> I don’t believe it. *There’s absolutely  nothing in it for Oprah to do another. *As celebrities go, they are getting stale and the last thing she wants is to be known as the mouthpiece for their whining. She has a legacy to protect.


Do they have enough in the bank to get Oprah's bestie to do it?



Jayne1 said:


> ... who knows what M&H were up to with their pap shots in a secluded gated community were apparently no paps hang out.


Backgrid is probably on their list of approved visitors.



Aimee3 said:


> But would she go to Oprah’s without makeup and call the paps to photograph her unmadeup face???


Supports the conventional victim look.



bag-mania said:


> Tired of the commute? To where? It’s not like they have jobs. It must be the commute to the finer restaurants and shopping.


Wasn't there a story a few pages back about how she held all her meetings in swanky hotel conference rooms?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Do they have enough in the bank to get Oprah's bestie to do it?



Gayle? I don't think she would want to tarnish her "brand"


----------



## xincinsin

I received bad news recently. A narc who was involuntarily transferred out of my department 7 years ago managed to get a transfer back. She won't be in the same team as I am, and I'm hoping we will have zero interaction. I believe the head of department decided to give her another chance. This narc preys on others and is known for twisting the situation so that she does as little work as possible. She also hides behind a veneer of pious sayings while stabbing people in the back without remorse. I shall codename her "Markle Deux"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

djfmn said:


> I was born and raised in South Africa by a British mother and father (parents were from the border of Belgium and Netherlands). I left SA during the apartheid era and immigrated to the USA. As someone who was born and raised there and who had enormous respect for Madiba (his Xhosa clan name. A clan name is much more important than a surname as it refers to the ancestor from which a person is descended) or Tata (the isiXhosa word that means “father” and is a term of endearment that many South Africans use for Mr Mandela. He was a father figure to many, they call him Tata regardless of their own age) as he is known by South Africans it is so disheartening not to have someone who lived there and can speak from experience of either that time period or having known Mr Mandela. JCMH's grandmother is far more suited to give this speech although her health does not permit her to travel. Doing it via video conferencing would be far more appropriate than having JCMH do it in person. Here are two stories about Queen Elizabeth and her close friendship to Nelson Mandela.
> 
> The Queen and Nelson Mandela were closer than most people know. Their relationship was so tight that, even two years after stepping down from his presidency, Mr Mandela visited London, and was treated to a coach ride with the Queen. He arrived on July 9, 1998, for a four-day visit, and on the last day he concluded his trip to England by accompanying Her Majesty on a coach drive through the busy streets of London. He stayed as her guest of honor at Buckingham Palace.
> 
> (This was told by Peter Hain ex South African and UK Labour Minister)
> "On his 90th birthday, Nelson Mandela was phoned by Her Majesty the Queen."
> "They were very close.”
> "He was handed the phone and said 'Hello Elizabeth, how is the Duke?’
> "Afterwards his wife reprimanded him.”
> "She said 'you cannot refer to Her Majesty like that!'
> "He replied: 'But she calls me Nelson!'"
> 
> 
> Nelson Mandela was one of very few people, outside of her family, who called the Queen by her first name.


Thank you for writing this. I really enjoy the new and interesting things we learn on this thread. A great group of people come here.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't there a story a few pages back about how she held all her meetings in swanky hotel conference rooms?



I had wondered if they have the offices of Archewell listed as being out of their Montecito mansion for tax purposes. I haven’t heard anything about them having office space elsewhere. That would explain why she arranges meetings in various hotel conference rooms rather than having everyone who wants to pitch an idea, or those she wants to pitch to, inside their house.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CeeJay was on my mind all day. We all need to promise that any references to Maggot being B,C, or D list are replaced with a ZZZZZZZZ in her honor!


----------



## charlottawill

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Yes, I think it’s the anger too. In the words of Mark Twain:
> “Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored, than to anything on which it is poured”.



Thought this was relevant


----------



## A1aGypsy

Sigh. How can anyone not adore Paul Rudd??


----------



## ceemee

xeyes said:


> If this is true, then either they somehow haven’t figured out the obvious joke, or they don’t care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #10
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband have signed a lease on a house in Bel Air. The alliterate one has been getting tired of the commute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5446986
> 
> 
> [Edited for typo]


Is this confirmation that they don’t own the mansion in Montecito? Why lease another place? It’s not like they have unlimited funds. They have nothing going on right now that’s making them money. I don’t know why they picked Montecito to live in anyway. It’s far away from all the action in LA which is more Meghan & Harry’s type of place.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I received bad news recently. A narc who was involuntarily transferred out of my department 7 years ago managed to get a transfer back. She won't be in the same team as I am, and I'm hoping we will have zero interaction. I believe the head of department decided to give her another chance. This narc preys on others and is known for twisting the situation so that she does as little work as possible. She also hides behind a veneer of pious sayings while stabbing people in the back without remorse. I shall codename her "Markle Deux"



Sorry to hear of this. I thoroughly enjoy your posts for your wit, keen insight, and succinct commentary.  I hope you're able to turn the tables on your retread narc. Maybe enlist some unfortunate close narc co-workers and train them to recognize the narc's toxicity. Then in turn, arm them with some of your brilliant observations on how to deflect or deflate the narc's manipulation techniques. Narc may then be run out of town AGAIN!  Please keep us posted!


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Thought this was relevant



Well the hair helps a lot...


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Well the hair helps a lot...



You've heard the saying "The eyes are a window to the soul"? No amount of hair is going to help that dead-eyed look.


----------



## K.D.

lanasyogamama said:


> CeeJay was on my mind all day. We all need to promise that any references to Maggot being B,C, or D list are replaced with a ZZZZZZZZ in her honor!


We can rename the thread ' Prince Harry and the Z-list Actress ' in her honour


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Tired of the commute? To where? It’s not like they have jobs. It must be the commute to the finer restaurants and shopping.


----------



## Chanbal

Still updating myself on this thread, and not sure if these twitters have been posted here. 

It looks like OW was not at home during the 'royal' visit.


----------



## Chanbal

xeyes said:


> If this is true, then either they somehow haven’t figured out the obvious joke, or they don’t care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #10
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband have signed a lease on a house in Bel Air. The alliterate one has been getting tired of the commute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5446986
> 
> 
> [Edited for typo]


It looks like several inquiring minds wanna know "_A commute to do what_?"


----------



## mellibelly

xeyes said:


> Blind Item #10
> 
> 
> The alliterate one and her husband have signed a lease on a house in Bel Air. The alliterate one has been getting tired of the commute.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I have to repost some of the comments, I was snorting with laughter. Almost as good as our banter here





Juggling windows


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That bit about geographic cure is interesting. It sure sounds like her (she's been known to markle people and pets and move places, Harry hasn't).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

charlottawill said:


> You've heard the saying "The eyes are a window to the soul"? No amount of hair is going to help that dead-eyed look.



1000% I submit into evidence a fine Stanley Tucci


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It looks like several inquiring minds wanna know "_A commute to do what_?"


Maybe she thinks once she is so obviously "visible" & "available", business opportunities will flow in.


----------



## needlv

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's hidden NY teaser show shelved - claim
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's "teaser trailer" for behind the scenes footage of their time in New York has been scrapped, a royal expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				





*MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's "teaser trailer" for behind the scenes footage of their time in New York has been scrapped.

*


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Sorry to hear of this. I thoroughly enjoy your posts for your wit, keen insight, and succinct commentary.  I hope you're able to turn the tables on your retread narc. Maybe enlist some unfortunate close narc co-workers and train them to recognize the narc's toxicity. Then in turn, arm them with some of your brilliant observations on how to deflect or deflate the narc's manipulation techniques. Narc may then be run out of town AGAIN!  Please keep us posted!


Thank you. The department is huge (900 people working 24/7). Perhaps I will be lucky and she'll be on the night or graveyard shift, and we will spy each other only in passing. My boss knows I cannot stand Markle Deux, so I won't be asked to work on anything with her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Thank you. The department is huge (900 people working 24/7). Perhaps I will be lucky and she'll be on the night or graveyard shift, and we will spy each other only in passing. My boss knows I cannot stand Markle Deux, so I won't be asked to work on anything with her.



Sounds like your boss respects you and values your contributions.  With your knowledge of H&M’s tactics, this MarkleDeux will get nothing by you. As we’ve learned here, we simply rise above their nonsense and they will fade away, especially with Major Johnny Thompson looking out for you.


----------



## Stansy

But I thought they said the Montecito place was their Forever Home ?? 
shows again that their memory is quite short-lived…


----------



## EverSoElusive

Stansy said:


> But I thought they said the Montecito place was their Forever Home ??
> shows again that their memory is quite short-lived…



The grass is always greener for them  besides their dwindling wealth and failing memory.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> You've heard the saying "The eyes are a window to the soul"? No amount of hair is going to help that dead-eyed look.


Yeah 100% lots of hot bald people out there. Skin (skunk anansie), the rock and vin diesel and Bruce Willis all come to mind, 


I mean heck even Star Trek had a smoking hot bald Captain…. Sisko
	

		
			
		

		
	




In other news I’m not loving the new look to this forum. The font is a bit hard to read and it’s very busy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah 100% lots of hot bald people out there. Skin (skunk anansie), the rock and vin diesel and Bruce Willis all come to mind,
> 
> 
> I mean heck even Star Trek had a smoking hot bald Captain…. Sisko
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5447336
> 
> 
> In other news I’m not loving the new look to this forum. The font is a bit hard to read and it’s very busy.



I appreciate all the new achievements. Perhaps the algorithm for the ‘similar threads’ options needs tweaking. Lipo & dental for H&M?  Still, it is fun to have new things to explore


----------



## LittleStar88

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah 100% lots of hot bald people out there. Skin (skunk anansie), the rock and vin diesel and Bruce Willis all come to mind,
> 
> 
> I mean heck even Star Trek had a smoking hot bald Captain…. Sisko
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5447336
> 
> 
> *In other news I’m not loving the new look to this forum. The font is a bit hard to read and it’s very busy.*



It's very overwhelming. Not sure the purpose of the badges? Harder to navigate, honestly. I guess it will take some time to get used to


----------



## CarryOn2020

We already know this, now so does the IG&Twitterverse


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some thoughts on the forum changes - we are not alone :
https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/tpf-update-jul-14-2022.1054130/unread


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, the new layout is kind of hectic and not very user friendly. Also not sure about the suggested threads below...the Kate and William thread suggest two threads from 2007 (!!!) discussing their break-up


----------



## Cinderlala

xincinsin said:


> Her Heinous's entire future livelihood is based on it. She is Victim Numero Uno. Hazard was co-opted as victim #2 after she tearfully informed him that he was trapped and got him a therapist that assured him it was true. The children have been given the victim image ASAP: poor Archificial suffered racism before he was born, and the Bet didn't get to take the money shot with Great-Granny. Boo hoo... Career victim.



It has definitely worked for her so far.  I just wonder how long the "woe is me" strategy will continue to resonate with the general public.  A public dealing with inflation and economic uncertainty may be less sympathetic toward the 'hurt feelings' of two overly privileged, do-nothing whiners.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dear Hillary and Chelsea are moving onto their turf 
H&C have a eight installment podcast with influencing strong women eg Megan THEE Stallion


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> I have to repost some of the comments, I was snorting with laughter. Almost as good as our banter here
> View attachment 5447245



Sheer brilliance!!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, the new layout is kind of hectic and not very user friendly. Also not sure about the suggested threads below...the Kate and William thread suggest two threads from 2007 (!!!) discussing their break-up


I find it very distracting and too "busy".  I hate change, LOL.  Writing responses in grey is throwing me off too!


----------



## redney

marietouchet said:


> Oh dear Hillary and Chelsea are moving onto their turf
> H&C have a eight installment podcast with influencing strong women eg Megan THEE Stallion


I was just coming here to post this. They beat TW to it! Looks interesting!  Even if TW manages to cobble together some sort of woman-focused podcast, there's no way any of these women will agree to appear with TW after appearing on a similar show. 

ETA: TPF bocks their surname. To access the link enter their surname into it

https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/gutsy-premiere-hillary-*******-chelsea-*******-apple-tv-1235316541/
Hillary Rodham ******* and Chelsea *******’s docuseries “Gutsy” will debut on Apple TV+ on Sept. 9. The streamer announced the premiere date Thursday morning.

“Gutsy” is an eight-part documentary series that follows the former Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady of the United States and her daughter as they speak with prominent women who have impacted the culture and their communities over the years. Kim Kardashian, Megan Thee Stallion, Dr. Jane Goodall, Gloria Steinem, Wanda Sykes, Amy Schumer, Goldie Hawn and Kate Hudson are among the names joining the *******s throughout the series.

Based on the *******s’ book “The Book of Gutsy Women,” Apple TV+ describes the docuseries as “a thought-provoking journey to speak with pioneering women artists, activists, community leaders and everyday heroes who show us what it truly means to be gutsy.” The streamer also states that “Gutsy” will explore the mother-daughter relationship of its two hosts.

The production was first announced with a straight-to-series order in December 2020.

“Gutsy” comes from Apple by HiddenLight Productions, the production banner founded by the two *******s and Sam Branson, in association with Left/Right LLC.

Hillary ******* and Chelsea ******* serve as executive producers on the series, alongside Johnny Webb, Siobhan Sinnerton, Roma Khanna, Ken Druckerman, Banks Tarver and Anna Chai. Chai also serves as showrunner. Kevin Vargas and Claire Featherstone serve as producers, while Huma Abedin and Bari Lurie serve as consulting producers.

HiddenLight has expanded its industry reach in recent months, establishing an unscripted label in January that is currently working on an eight-part Channel 4 series.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean heck *even Star Trek had a smoking hot bald Captain…. Sisko*
> 
> In other news I’m not loving the new look to this forum. The font is a bit hard to read and it’s very busy.



That’s hilarious.   

As usual I’m having difficulty adapting to the change. Hoping it feels less awkward soon.


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> 1000% I submit into evidence a fine Stanley Tucci
> View attachment 5447247


Am kind of embarrassed to admit being a grandmotherly, actually great grandmotherly, fangirl of his. If he ever shows up in a Johnny styled kilt I’m not sure my heart could take it.


----------



## rose60610

One key difference between the Harkles vs Will & Kate: every breath the Harkles take seems orchestrated and agenda driven. Odd for a couple who wanted to "find freedom" and "live privately".  Will & Kate simply go out, (adhering to a preset schedule, no doubt), perform their duties, are good speakers, are genuinely warm and don't have to work at drawing attention to themselves. Granted, he's the future king and the cameras are always rolling. But the Harkles beg for cameras and attention and are a disaster every time they open their stupid mouths. W&K make all their events appear effortless, H&M are all bad clothes, messy hair and always calculating. When attention wanes, they resort to "honoring" dead people to make news.  Eegads, they're just effing SICK!!!


----------



## Cinderlala

Yes, @rose60610 , it is the desperation* for adulation/fame/spotlight that is so very, very offputting. 

I do actually think H would have actually enjoyed living a relatively private life & this need* for media is very Claw-driven. 



*--Honestly, the only word I think adequately describes this is "THIRST" even though that might be too 2020.


----------



## Cinderlala

Things are effortless for W&K because this is their job and they've both been doing it for over a decade.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Things are effortless for W&K because this is their job and they've both been doing it for over a decade.


I would not call it effortless. I believe a lot of effort goes into making it look effortless. I imagine K practicing walking in heels around her home, on stairs, while lifting a toddler, etc. I'm sure they both have days where they don't feel up to smiling through official engagements, meet and greets, but they carry on because as you said, it's their job. They've both grown into their roles, I'm sure in part because they accept the help of trusted advisors, unlike the Z lister and her "cucked plonker" of a husband.


----------



## Cinderlala

Right, W&K make it look effortless. I am not someone who believes a royal's job is easy. 

I used to think it would be fabulous until I watched something about the Queen.  It was then that I realized I would hate it!  I never want to be famous, I don't enjoy small talk, I quite like staying in (unless I actually really want to be out), I hate being judged, and I love my privacy.

Honestly, I don't think it would be an easy job for anyone.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Right, W&K make it look effortless. I am not someone who believes a royal's job is easy.
> 
> I used to think it would be fabulous until I watched something about the Queen.  It was then that I realized I would hate it!  I never want to be famous, I don't enjoy small talk, I quite like staying in (unless I actually really want to be out), I hate being judged, and I love my privacy.
> 
> Honestly, I don't think it would be an easy job for anyone.


I can't imagine the pressure of relentless internet scrutiny today. I couldn't do it.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, the new layout is kind of hectic and not very user friendly. Also not sure about the suggested threads below...the Kate and William thread suggest two threads from 2007 (!!!) discussing their break-up


Ya, not a fan of the new format. Still haven’t been able to figure out how to find my watched threads on my iPhone. To keep it on topic how can I keep up on what the dastardly duo are up to.


----------



## djfmn

bellecate said:


> Ya, not a fan of the new format. Still haven’t been able to figure out how to find my watched threads on my iPhone. To keep it on topic how can I keep up on what the dastardly duo are up to.


I cannot find my watched threads either and I am on my laptop.


----------



## Vlad

bellecate said:


> Ya, not a fan of the new format. Still haven’t been able to figure out how to find my watched threads on my iPhone. To keep it on topic how can I keep up on what the dastardly duo are up to.



On your phone, hit the “burger” menu on the bottom right of your screen, and navigate to forums to open that Dropdown menu. There is your watched threads and forums.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I can't imagine the pressure of *relentless internet scrutiny* today. I couldn't do it.


Methane's dream existence - proviso being that the scrutiny is A+++ approval and gushing praise for her appearance. She is really the epitome of skin-deep.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I miss having the previous/next arrows  up at the top of the column. Never realized how much I used it until it was gone.

While her publicist is trying to put a positive spin on it, I somehow doubt the neighbors are calling her “princess of Montecito” in a kind way.









						Meghan Markle dubbed ‘Princess of Montecito’ by California neighbors
					

Markle and Prince Harry moved to the ritzy town in 2020 after resigning as senior royals. Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Serena Williams also live there.




					pagesix.com


----------



## charlottawill

Okayyyy......


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I miss having the previous/next arrows  up at the top of the column. Never realized how much I used it until it was gone.
> 
> While her publicist is trying to put a positive spin on it, I somehow doubt the neighbors are calling her “princess of Montecito” in a kind way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle dubbed ‘Princess of Montecito’ by California neighbors
> 
> 
> Markle and Prince Harry moved to the ritzy town in 2020 after resigning as senior royals. Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Serena Williams also live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



“She spends a fair amount of time at Oprah’s palatial house, where they’ll kick back with her closest friend, Gayle King, and talk about everything from Meghan’s future plans to what’s going on back in the UK and how Harry’s coping with everything,” the source alleged."

Emphasis on "alleged". What drivel.


----------



## djfmn

djfmn said:


> I cannot find my watched threads either and I am on my laptop.


Finally found it again. On the forums menu. Looked there before and didnt see it.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> “She spends a fair amount of time at Oprah’s palatial house, where they’ll kick back with her closest friend, Gayle King, and talk about everything from Meghan’s future plans to what’s going on back in the UK and how Harry’s coping with everything,” the source alleged."
> 
> Emphasis on "alleged". What drivel.


Her ideal friendship: they sit around and talk about her and her concerns.


----------



## mellibelly

A comment from Instagram lmao


----------



## Hermes Zen

mellibelly said:


> I have to repost some of the comments, I was snorting with laughter. Almost as good as our banter here
> 
> View attachment 5447241
> 
> View attachment 5447246
> 
> Juggling windows
> 
> View attachment 5447244
> 
> View attachment 5447245


I LOVED THIS!  But … big sigh … as I’m reading I’m thinking how @CeeJay would be posting her witty comments to this. Still in disbelief and I only known her from this thread for a couple years. I better stop. Getting weepy.


----------



## wisconsin

Vlad said:


> On your phone, hit the “burger” menu on the bottom right of your screen, and navigate to forums to open that Dropdown menu. There is your watched threads and forums.


Thanks. And how do we find new posts? Also any way to delete mistake posts now?


----------



## andrashik

bag-mania said:


> I miss having the previous/next arrows  up at the top of the column. Never realized how much I used it until it was gone.
> 
> While her publicist is trying to put a positive spin on it, I somehow doubt the neighbors are calling her “princess of Montecito” in a kind way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle dubbed ‘Princess of Montecito’ by California neighbors
> 
> 
> Markle and Prince Harry moved to the ritzy town in 2020 after resigning as senior royals. Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Serena Williams also live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I miss the like button which was on the right side of the post. Now I need to concentrate to press it 
Soon she will be called princess of Bel Air


----------



## xincinsin

redney said:


> I was just coming here to post this. They beat TW to it! Looks interesting!  Even if TW manages to cobble together some sort of woman-focused podcast, there's no way any of these women will agree to appear with TW after appearing on a similar show.
> 
> ETA: TPF bocks their surname. To access the link enter their surname into it
> 
> https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/gutsy-premiere-hillary-*******-chelsea-*******-apple-tv-1235316541/
> Hillary Rodham ******* and Chelsea *******’s docuseries “Gutsy” will debut on Apple TV+ on Sept. 9. The streamer announced the premiere date Thursday morning.
> 
> “Gutsy” is an eight-part documentary series that follows the former Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady of the United States and her daughter as they speak with prominent women who have impacted the culture and their communities over the years. Kim Kardashian, Megan Thee Stallion, Dr. Jane Goodall, Gloria Steinem, Wanda Sykes, Amy Schumer, Goldie Hawn and Kate Hudson are among the names joining the *******s throughout the series.
> 
> Based on the *******s’ book “The Book of Gutsy Women,” Apple TV+ describes the docuseries as “a thought-provoking journey to speak with pioneering women artists, activists, community leaders and everyday heroes who show us what it truly means to be gutsy.” The streamer also states that “Gutsy” will explore the mother-daughter relationship of its two hosts.
> 
> The production was first announced with a straight-to-series order in December 2020.
> 
> “Gutsy” comes from Apple by HiddenLight Productions, the production banner founded by the two *******s and Sam Branson, in association with Left/Right LLC.
> 
> Hillary ******* and Chelsea ******* serve as executive producers on the series, alongside Johnny Webb, Siobhan Sinnerton, Roma Khanna, Ken Druckerman, Banks Tarver and Anna Chai. Chai also serves as showrunner. Kevin Vargas and Claire Featherstone serve as producers, while Huma Abedin and Bari Lurie serve as consulting producers.
> 
> HiddenLight has expanded its industry reach in recent months, establishing an unscripted label in January that is currently working on an eight-part Channel 4 series.


Gutsy? Well, now we know what Methane's next podcast will be named. No, not Archipelago. It's going to be... 

*Gutteral!*
“Gutteral” is a two-part documentary series that follows the Duchess of Sussex and her prince as they speak with women who have impacted her life over the years. Doria Raglan, Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem, Stella Parton, Melissa McCarthy, the Duchess's close comrade Pwife and the Duchess's Pilates instructor are among the names joining the Sussexi throughout the series.

Based on the Duchess's own life, Archewell Productions describes the docuseries as “a thought-provoking journey to speak with illustrious women of power who tell us what it truly means to mentor a rare talent.” It also states that “Gutteral” will explore the close relationship of its host with guests.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Gutsy? Well, now we know what Methane's next podcast will be named. No, not Archipelago. It's going to be...
> 
> *Gutteral!*
> “Gutteral” is a two-part documentary series that follows the Duchess of Sussex and her prince as they speak with women who have impacted her life over the years. Doria Raglan, Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem, Stella Parton, Melissa McCarthy, the Duchess's close comrade Pwife and the Duchess's Pilates instructor are among the names joining the Sussexi throughout the series.
> 
> Based on the Duchess's own life, Archewell Productions describes the docuseries as “a thought-provoking journey to speak with illustrious women of power who tell us what it truly means to mentor a rare talent.” It also states that “Gutteral” will explore the close relationship of its host with guests.


Ironic it’s a strong mother-daughter duo who have out maneuvered Methane, she who has no use for family and would not understand their relationship.


----------



## andrashik

xincinsin said:


> Gutsy? Well, now we know what Methane's next podcast will be named. No, not Archipelago. It's going to be...
> 
> *Gutteral!*
> “Gutteral” is a two-part documentary series that follows the Duchess of Sussex and her prince as they speak with women who have impacted her life over the years. Doria Raglan, Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem, Stella Parton, Melissa McCarthy, the Duchess's close comrade Pwife and the Duchess's Pilates instructor are among the names joining the Sussexi throughout the series.
> 
> Based on the Duchess's own life, Archewell Productions describes the docuseries as “a thought-provoking journey to speak with illustrious women of power who tell us what it truly means to mentor a rare talent.” It also states that “Gutteral” will explore the close relationship of its host with guests.


You are on a roll today!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> While her publicist is trying to put a positive spin on it, I somehow doubt the neighbors are calling her “princess of Montecito” in a kind way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle dubbed ‘Princess of Montecito’ by California neighbors
> 
> 
> Markle and Prince Harry moved to the ritzy town in 2020 after resigning as senior royals. Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Serena Williams also live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Right? It took one look for me at that headline to know they were mocking her and her attitude.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> “She spends a fair amount of time at Oprah’s palatial house, where they’ll kick back with her closest friend, Gayle King, and talk about everything from Meghan’s future plans to *what’s going on back in the UK* and how Harry’s coping with everything,” the source alleged."



How would they know? The family isn't speaking to them.


----------



## mellibelly

Who TF is Stella Parton? First thought was a poor man’s Dolly


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

So this new format doesn’t have emojis?


----------



## Helventara

It does but hidden. This screen shot is from an ipad.


----------



## mellibelly

Hermes Zen said:


> I LOVED THIS!  But … big sigh … as I’m reading I’m thinking how @CeeJay would be posting her witty comments to this. Still in disbelief and I only known her from this thread for a couple years. I better stop. Getting weepy.


Same. I felt like I knew her IRL and she’s been on my mind nonstop. What a funny, original, jewel box of a lady


----------



## andrashik

mellibelly said:


> Same. I felt like I knew her IRL and she’s been on my mind nonstop. What a funny, original, jewel box of a lady


Maybe some day we would all reunite and laugh at the Z list actress in the afterlife. She will be a mess there too


----------



## EverSoElusive

Did anyone figure out how to post IG post/media on the mobile website yet? Or what is the code that I can use to do it?

@Vlad Any input on this? TIA


----------



## Vlad

EverSoElusive said:


> Did anyone figure out how to post IG post/media on the mobile website yet? Or what is the code that I can use to do it?
> 
> @Vlad Any input on this? TIA



You should be able to just paste the link to the media on TPF, and the board should automatically embed it.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> A comment from Instagram lmao
> View attachment 5447797





xincinsin said:


> Her ideal friendship: they sit around and talk about her and her concerns.


Maybe in her dreams.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Who TF is Stella Parton? First thought was a poor man’s Dolly


Dolly's songwriter sister. First I've heard of her.


----------



## Zen101

charlottawill said:


> Dolly's songwriter sister. First I've heard of her.


Right? I’ve heard of Dolly, not her sister. We shouldn’t give her that much attention. What’s with her saying “Americans” are shocked like she is speaking for all of us Americans. Woman, speak for yourself. Just because she has bought Meghan’s woe is me story and believes it hook, line and sinker doesn’t mean we all do. Thankfully, there are Americans who think for themselves.


----------



## bag-mania

You know you are desperately wading through the weeds to find celebrity support when you get around to Dolly’s  unknown little sister!


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Who TF is Stella Parton? First thought was a poor man’s Dolly


imo she looks nothing like Dolly  
[I know, DP has had multiple surgeries]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. I hope one of us has a subscription


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Dolly's songwriter sister. First I've heard of her.


I'd give her a pass for now. Read her Wikipedia entry and she seems okay. Maybe she has been hoodwinked by Woe is Me-me-me-again stories. Or is there a Sunshine Sucks connection ... again? I'm not inspired enough to investigate.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I'd give her a pass for now. Read her Wikipedia entry and she seems okay. Maybe she has been hoodwinked by Woe is Me-me-me-again stories. Or is there a Sunshine Sucks connection ... again? I'm not inspired enough to investigate.



She isn’t alone. Many people bought into the victim narrative that was pushed out via Oprah and the general media.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Who TF is Stella Parton? First thought was a poor man’s Dolly


She reminds me of Ashley Judd with a blond wig.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Stansy said:


> But I thought they said the Montecito place was their Forever Home ??
> shows again that their memory is quite short-lived…


I suspect Plastic Pal was the source of that melodramatic declaration. His status seems to range elastically between "the Duchess's friend" at one extreme and "someone she can't even recall talking with" at the other.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> Okayyyy......



“It’s terrible to have to try and claw for media attention which is being unfairly dominated by your older sibling just because _some people_ think they deserve more prominence ” says Dolly’s sister.

I knew about her before now but only in connection to Dolly because I love Dolly.
I’m going to do her a favour and assume she thinks Megz is some tourist who got whipped for going topless in Dubai or the like.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. I hope one of us has a subscription



I’ll have a good hard think about buying it but they might just tease us you know. Problem is given its a Rupert murdoch production it does feel a bit like paying the rat to stop scoffing my cheese.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. I hope one of us has a subscription



Anything juicy will quickly find its way to the internet.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> “It’s terrible to have to try and claw for media attention which is being unfairly dominated by your older sibling just because _some people_ think they deserve more prominence ” says Dolly’s sister.


That sounds to me like she feels a kinship with Harry and is therefore sympathetic to their "plight".


----------



## gracekelly

An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"

click on the archive link

archive.ph


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Excerpts from the book are starting to come out! Seems she's lied...a lot lol.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"
> 
> click on the archive link
> 
> archive.ph


I love the opening ‘he’d never heard of her’
The cover photo is amazing as it shows even in the peak of her looks she had beady eyes and scraggly hair like a pig drawn by Ronald Searle:

This article is very good at putting things in perspective tbh. I feel like the media now acts like H married a well-known but not super A list actress like a Nia Long or an Ellen Pompeo when in reality no one knew who M was before she got the H connection.


----------



## Lodpah

I’m going on vacation soon. I’ll pick up a copy of this book. Harry’s book will be an afterthought after this book comes out. So Serena was not really a friend, lol.


----------



## Lodpah

hollieplus2 said:


> Excerpts from the book are starting to come out! Seems she's lied...a lot lol.


She’ll go down in the history books as The Lying Duchess.


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> Excerpts from the book are starting to come out! Seems she's lied...a lot lol.


Nothing we didn’t already know. The question is will there be anything revealed in it that is new to us?


----------



## Zen101

Lodpah said:


> I’m going on vacation soon. I’ll pick up a copy of this book. Harry’s book will be an afterthought after this book comes out. So Serena was not really a friend, lol.


So Serena really said according to the article that she’s not her friend but an acquaintance lol. Damn.


----------



## Zen101

gracekelly said:


> An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"
> 
> click on the archive link
> 
> archive.ph


This is so funny yet true :
“Harry gave her a ring that he had commissioned, with two of Diana’s diamonds set in yellow Botswana gold. He was particularly proud of his design. Meghan did not conceal her excitement, even though it would seem she was secretly determined to have it redesigned as soon as possible.”


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## Suncatcher

It is explosive in my opinion.


----------



## Kiradris

gracekelly said:


> An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"
> 
> click on the archive link
> 
> archive.ph


This excerpt is amazing - from the VF interviewer being able to clock her manipulation right off the bat, to her throwing an absolute tantrum through her PR Agency about her non-existent philanthropy not being the subject of the article.  And to Serena straight up admitting they are only acquaintances!  I'm definitely now going to pre-order this!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think I'm ordering a copy. BTW Thomas apparently spilled the beans her infamous child activist letter at only 11 was met with complete silence. The company that supposedly changed their whole campaign because of Raptor never bothered to answer


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> I love the opening ‘he’d never heard of her’
> The cover photo is amazing as it shows even in the peak of her looks she had beady eyes and scraggly hair like a pig drawn by Ronald Searle:
> 
> This article is very good at putting things in perspective tbh. I feel like the media now acts like H married a well-known but not super A list actress like a Nia Long or an Ellen Pompeo when in reality no one knew who M was before she got the H connection.
> 
> View attachment 5510640


More than that. They know she wasZZZZZ list


----------



## papertiger

VintageBagsAddict said:


> This is so funny yet true :
> “Harry gave her a ring that he had commissioned, with two of Diana’s diamonds set in yellow Botswana gold. He was particularly proud of his design. Meghan did not conceal her excitement, even though it would seem she was secretly determined to have it redesigned as soon as possible.”



How ungrateful is that, wow  

DH bought me a Valentines present 2009 and I kept it just as is and grew to 'love' it  These are things we do because we care about our loved-one's feelings.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Dolly's songwriter sister. First I've heard of her.



The Z-list and spare siblings unite


----------



## 880

One of the links I clicked on led to a blurb of an article entitled 
Harry fed up with being the spare

i think that is the starting point


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> “It’s terrible to have to try and claw for media attention which is being unfairly dominated by your older sibling just because _some people_ think they deserve more prominence ” says Dolly’s sister.



Aww, poor thing. Is she talking about herself (no idea who's older here), because in Harry's case, his older sibling not only does have the more important job, he's actually pretty good at it. Just like during their military days when Harry wanted to be a helicopter pilot but William was the one who actually passed the tests.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> More than that. They know she wasZZZZZ list



Gosh, our CeeJay would have had a field day with this new book.


----------



## papertiger

The Times 
	

	



__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph
				




My favourite lines:

*“'I’ve never defined myself by my relationship*.” She was an independent woman who would not be defined by her relationship with Harry."

Said the soon to be Duchess of Forevermore


----------



## CarryOn2020

_The messenger was Keleigh Thomas Morgan, a partner at *Sunshine Sachs*, her Los Angeles public relations agency. After the agency’s years of struggle to get Meghan noticed, Vanity Fair’s approach proved that her relationship with Harry was priceless._

This _company_ needs to be cancelled asap.
I give credit to our dearly beloved CeeJay for making this book happen. She knew we would need something delicious to discuss  High praise, lots of credit and gracious thanks to our dearly beloved @gracekelly for the link.  Gracious thanks and highest praise to our dearly beloved @Vlad and Meg for giving us this forum. The teamwork here is phenomenal.
Thanks so much, all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My favourite lines:
> 
> *“'I’ve never defined myself by my relationship*.” She was an independent woman who would not be defined by her relationship with Harry."
> 
> Said the soon to be Duchess of Forevermore



"I love a great love story" is what did it for me when I first heard it. Who talks about their own relationship like this? 

Also notice how the VF guy makes a point of mentioning her walls were plastered with pictures of herself


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "I love a great love story" is what did it for me when I first heard it. Who talks about their own relationship like this?
> 
> Also notice how *the VF guy makes a point of mentioning her walls were plastered with pictures of herself *



Well, she went from vanity to the expectation for others to frame and mount her carefully worded letters in calligraphy on their underserving walls


----------



## CarryOn2020

Considering the rumors about H&M, interesting turn of phrase here - from the VF article:

Destabilised, soon after Meghan called Kashner: “I thought this could have been an actual friendship. I don’t now think that can happen.” Kashner, she implied, had *“queered the deal”* with Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> She’ll go down in the history books as The Lying Duchess.


The Duchess of Deception


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"
> 
> click on the archive link
> 
> archive.ph


Great read, thanks! I expect we'll be at 7000 pages by the end of the month


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

VintageBagsAddict said:


> So Serena really said according to the article that she’s not her friend but an acquaintance lol. Damn.


Probably describes the majority of the wedding guests.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another excerpt in spoiler



Spoiler



Meghan, Prince Harry and the war between the royal family | News | Th…​April 09 2021, 12.00pm BST





On April 9, 2021, Prince Philip had died. His funeral was set for April 17. Harry arrived in London just before the service. The mood was sombre. Daily, the media extolled Philip’s remarkable life and devotion to the country. The duke had planned a simple funeral at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. The rehearsals displayed faultless military drill. Few would not be touched by the perfection of British ceremonial tradition. The weather was forecast to be perfect. The only uncertainty was the relationship between Harry and his family. How would he cope with his father and brother? Meghan had cited her seven months’ pregnancy as the reason for not travelling.

In Windsor Castle the Queen was preparing to face the public on one of the saddest days of her life. Philip had been her rock for the previous 70 years. To comply with Covid restrictions she would grieve alone inside the chapel. “Thank goodness Meghan is not coming,” the monarch said in a clear voice to her trusted aides. Buckingham Palace declined to comment last night.

Harry’s presence remained a problem. As a private citizen stripped of his military titles he could not dress in uniform. To minimise the embarrassment for both Harry and Andrew, who was mired in allegations of sexual sleaze, all the male members of the royal family dressed in morning suits. To avoid any problems with William, the brothers were separated as they walked towards St George’s Chapel by their cousin Peter Phillips.
During that short procession many watched whether Harry signalled any regret towards his family. Some interpreted his sideways glance towards William as the outsider’s unease. No one grasped the truth about Harry’s nervousness. In four weeks’ time his Apple TV series about mental health would be broadcast. Transmission had been delayed until after the funeral.




William and Harry, with their cousin Peter Phillips positioned between them, walk with Andrew behind the Duke of Edinburgh’s hearse at Windsor Castle on April 17 last year
SPLASH NEWS
Looking at his family standing in St George’s Chapel, Harry must have known that his damnation of them in the Apple TV series would widen the rift. Sitting alone and isolated, the 94-year-old monarch’s grief was concealed behind a black mask. Everyone was moved by her dignity. William looked tense, Kate serene, Charles visibly anguished. Only Harry’s expression defied accurate reporting. Flapping his order of service against his thighs as he left the chapel, he was clearly impatient. None knew that Harry, the once adored young prince, had betrayed his whole family.
After the service, eager for signs of reconciliation, the media seized on Kate’s manoeuvre to engineer a conversation between the brothers. Cameras followed them as they walked up the hill towards the castle. Later reports of the aftermath veered between a two-hour conversation between Harry, William and Charles, and a perfunctory exchange before everyone departed. Few realised that Harry wanted to return to California as fast as possible. The three princes spoke briefly before Charles drove to his cottage in the Brecon Beacons in Wales. William was handed the burden of rescuing the monarchy from the damage caused by his brother and his uncle Andrew.
Buckingham Palace finally understood very precisely on May 14 that the Sussexes were beyond control. Apple TV released Harry’s broadside, called _The Me You Can’t See_. In it Harry denounced William, whom he had previously praised as the only person he “could trust”, and dishonoured Charles, whom he had previously thanked for being so “kind”, for causing a cycle of “genetic pain”. He had even criticised the Queen, despite saying she was “hugely admired”. All were cast as villains responsible for his “cycles of suffering” and “unresolved anger”.
Related Articles
The Duke of Edinburgh​
‘He looked,” recalled his aide and friend Michael Parker, “as if you’d dropped half the world on him.” Prince Philip and the young Princess Elizabeth had travelled to Kenya at the beginning of 1952 at the start of a royal
April 09 2021, 12.00pm BST
Comparing his life to “a mixture between _The Truman Show _and being in a zoo”, he said of his family: “I’ve seen behind the curtain. I’ve seen the business model. I know how this operation runs . . . I don’t want to be part of this.” Instead of being reconciled with his family, he had in effect monetised his anguish.
Ramping up his earlier accusations aired in the Oprah Winfrey interview, Harry described how he and Meghan felt “bullied into silence . . . I thought my family would help, but every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, just got met with total silence, total neglect. We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job. Meghan was struggling.” Even while they negotiated their departure — “hunted and helpless” in London — there were “forces working against us”. Who rebuffed Harry’s pleas remained unidentified.
The Palace struggled to understand why Harry should publicly criticise the Queen and his dead grandfather for their upbringing of Charles. America’s men were gripped by Harry’s advocacy of therapy. He was credited with removing the stigma of admitting to anxiety and depression.
The gulf between the Windsors and Harry was widening. Five days earlier, Harry had nailed his colours to political campaigning. At Vax Live, a Los Angeles charity concert, Harry told an audience that Pfizer and other pioneers of Covid vaccines should abandon their intellectual property rights and let poorer countries have their patents free. President ***** supported that gesture, but it was opposed by Britain and the EU. Harry’s participation would have been impossible as a member of the royal family. As would Meghan’s two-minute video. She weighed in by asserting that women of colour had been disproportionately affected by Covid. Women’s progress, said Meghan, had been “wiped out” for a generation.
Powerless over events in California, Charles had good reason on his accession to strip the Sussexes and their children of their titles. The Sussexes’ status depended substantially on their royal titles. Every appearance or statement was issued under the label “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex”. Neither considered it odd to honour the Queen yet damn her as a bad parent to Charles, or label her family as racist and neglectful of Meghan.
In America, no one would be aware of those contradictions. But Harry could not assume that Charles would tolerate the enmity without retribution. In the possibly brief time before the Queen died, Harry needed to cement his status.
The Sussexes organised a Lilibet website before their daughter was born. Lilibet was the name used by George V, the Queen’s grandfather, as he imitated his young granddaughter’s attempts to say her own name. After his death in 1936 the name stuck, but was only used by the closest members of the Queen’s family.
Harry’s daughter was born at Santa Barbara’s Cottage Hospital on June 4. On the same day, but two days before the birth was announced, Meghan’s lawyers registered the lilibetdiana.com website. After the birth, but before the public announcement, Harry called the Queen. He told his grandmother about the birth and their decision to call their daughter Lilibet.
To stymie the Sussexes, the Palace told the BBC that the Queen was “never asked” for permission for the use of her name. In his telephone call, Harry was “telling” the Queen about the name.
Once the BBC broadcast that report, the Sussexes’ PR machine was activated. Meghan’s spokeswoman claimed that Harry would not have chosen the name if the Queen had not been “supportive”. Fired up by the Sussexes’ anger, their lawyers Schillings announced that unless the BBC apologised and withdrew that report, the Sussexes would sue for defamation. Seemingly pitching Harry against the Queen, the Palace supported the BBC. The Sussexes retreated. Schillings’ threat evaporated. The Sussexes were defeated.
Legal wrangles in London could be easily forgotten in California. Only when the whole royal family descended on the G7 summit hosted by the prime minister in Cornwall on June 12, and Kate was filmed laughing with Jill *****, could Meghan see the unequal struggle for attention. For the British, the sight of William, Charles and the Queen walking through a garden, and alongside the world’s leaders, represented the monarchy’s enduring strength, and William and Kate represented its future. The Windsors felt reassured by the international accolades. Their future public appearances were carefully scheduled and inserted on to a grid, building up to a climax later that year in New York. Their own royal event was planned to consolidate their status in America.
In their timetable, the unveiling of a bronze memorial to Diana in Kensington Palace’s Sunken Garden on what would have been her 60th birthday became a sideshow. In the bitterness sparked by the Sussexes, only the Spencer family were present alongside the brothers. Everyone else, including Diana’s grandchildren, stayed away. Meghan’s absence passed without comment, except in those parts of America where Diana was revered.
Standing in front of an uninspiring depiction of Diana, William and Harry defied speculation. The ceremony would not trigger a reconciliation. William’s reluctance to attend was well known.
Any doubts about Harry’s strength of feeling were dispelled by his stony silence after the Queen announced on Accession Day 2022 that Camilla would be Britain’s next queen. Seventeen years after their controversial marriage, Charles had persuaded his mother and a majority of Britons that Camilla should be crowned during his own coronation. Charles may have had good reason to fear that Harry’s dislike of Camilla had been re-energised by Meghan.
Most Britons could not understand Harry’s seeming hostility towards his country and family. What many saw as his disloyalty to his grandmother was particularly mystifying. Occasionally, he appeared willing to betray every value he formerly held dear.
Yet visibly retaining their relationship with the Queen was critically important for the Sussexes’ status. By March 2022 the ailing 95-year-old monarch had repeatedly cancelled public engagements. The exception was her appearance at Prince Philip’s memorial service. To the royal family’s misfortune, the event was overshadowed by Andrew’s bold appearance centre-stage, escorting his mother to her seat in Westminster Abbey. Defiantly ignoring his banishment from public duties, Andrew also indicated that he expected to appear in the spotlight during the Queen’s jubilee celebrations in June.
Keeping Andrew out of sight was one problem. Another was Harry and Meghan’s demand also to appear with the Queen on Buckingham Palace’s balcony. If the three outcasts did successfully appear in the spotlight, the media’s focus would no longer be the Queen’s achievements over 70 years, but on her dysfunctional son and grandson. Inevitably, the public reaction would be unenthusiastic.
The obstacles for Meghan and Harry to appear centre-stage were considerable — not least because their presence was opposed by Charles. Charles preferred that the Sussexes, as private citizens, were not invited on to the balcony or to ride in a royal carriage. Instead, they would be confined to the VIP enclosures. In Meghan’s view those optics were unsatisfactory, partly because her value to Netflix was to stand near the Queen.
To achieve this goal Harry asked the Queen’s resistant advisers. When this failed he asked the Queen if he could visit her in Windsor on his way to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games. To secure her agreement, Harry appeared to give the impression that the meeting would offer an “olive branch” to “clear the air”. At the last moment, keen to see her grandson and instinctively forgiving of Meghan, the Queen agreed to meet the couple on April 14. William avoided the problem with a previous arrangement to ski with his family in France.
After spending the night with his cousin Eugenie, Harry and Meghan were driven to Windsor Castle. On the Queen’s insistence they met Charles and Camilla before her. The Sussexes arrived late. Their first encounter was civilised but failed to resolve the fraught relations created by their Oprah Winfrey interview. By contrast, there was no tension drinking tea with the Queen. Yet the issue of their appearance on the balcony remained unresolved. The danger of allowing the meeting surfaced six days later.
Followed by Netflix cameras, the Sussexes proved themselves modern and compassionate as they faultlessly mixed in The Hague with the athletes. Always smiling and dressed in an unending change of expensive clothes while watching the events, Meghan played the stunning hostess and pledged to offer “service” to the world. But, as later events seemed to show, festering was their fury that the Palace had refused all of their demands for a prominent role at the jubilee in return for returning to Britain with their children.
Harry could not resist venting his anger to an American NBC TV reporter. His “special” relationship with the Queen, he told the world, meant that the Queen confided in him secrets unknown to others of her family.
Her four children and seven other grandchildren, he implied, were excluded from her confidence. More inflammatory, he declared his duty was to make sure that his grandmother was “protected and got the right people around her”. Charles, Anne, William and all the Queen’s staff, implied Harry, were inadequate for the task. He appeared to speak from the heart. It seemed Harry had resumed the war against his family. The “olive branch” media headline about his visit to Windsor splintered.
Predictably, Harry’s assertion of his special status aroused accusations about his “breathtaking arrogance” with “no bounds to his self-delusion”. Responding to the public fury, Downing Street even issued a statement that the Queen was well-protected.
The most striking moment of his TV appearance was his refusal to answer whether he missed his “brother and dad”. Ignoring his family, he perhaps supposed, would be offset among most American viewers by warmly responding to any mention of his mother. Asked about Diana’s “presence” in his life, he replied: “It’s constant. It has been over the past two years, more so than ever before.” He added: “It’s almost as though she’s done her bit with my brother and now she’s very much helping me. She got him set up, and now she’s helping me set up.”

Unconvincingly, the multimillionaire implicitly linked his mother to a plea for “a more equal world”. Finally, he volunteered that America was his “home”.
Within those few minutes on television Harry had demonstrated the danger of his appearance at the jubilee celebrations. Everything was about himself and Meghan.
Merely four years after Harry and Meghan’s wedding the royal family had been transformed from a relatively harmonious group, embracing multiculturalism as part of their service to Britain and the Commonwealth, into a beleaguered institution uncertain of its future. To their harshest critics, the Sussexes had become agents of destruction.
© Tom Bower, 2022. Extracted from REVENGE: MEGHAN, HARRY AND THE WAR BETWEEN THE WINDSORS by Tom Bower, to be published by Blink Publishing, on July 21 at £22.


----------



## charlottawill

Cosmopolitan said:


>



If only the palace walls could talk....


----------



## Kiradris

Oh good lord, Cosmo has this to say about the Bower book: "Ugh, this book doesn't sound like it's going to be particularly kind to Meghan and Harry so here's to hoping they're coping with its upcoming release okay."   Cosmo has always been garbage, but I'm curious as to whether other US new outlets will have a similar reaction, or just ignore it since it's not glowing.


----------



## bag-mania

Kiradris said:


> Oh good lord, Cosmo has this to say about the Bower book: "Ugh, this book doesn't sound like it's going to be particularly kind to Meghan and Harry so here's to hoping they're coping with its upcoming release okay."   Cosmo has always been garbage, but I'm curious as to whether other US new outlets will have a similar reaction, or just ignore it since it's not glowing.


Any legitimate news outlets already knew the truth about H&M long ago and chose to ignore it, or worse, to prop them up whenever they could. Don’t expect much from them now. I’m betting most of them will pretend this book doesn’t exist.


----------



## charlottawill

Harry had to have seen the kitchen gallery. Anyone with more than two brain cells would have fled right then and there.


----------



## gracekelly

880 said:


> One of the links I clicked on led to a blurb of an article entitled
> Harry fed up with being the spare
> 
> i think that is the starting point


Harry fed up with being the spare?  That is hilarious. The truth, (and is he that stupid?) is that Meghan has been and will always be the spare.  She is nothing without him. Vanity Fair wouldn't have given her 3 lines if not for her dating Harry.  

To read that Sunshine Sachs, try as they might, couldn't get attention paid to her when she was on the ZZZZZ list.  A cable show in Canada wasn't good enough.  Her part wasn't good enough. Her acting and making this a breakthrough role wasn't good enough.  Harry made her and Harry can take it away.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Probably describes the majority of the wedding guests.


At lest Serena was "acquainted" with her.  The Clooneys didn't know her from a bean pole.  Can't blame them for not passing up the opportunity of going to a royal wedding.  The other reality is that Amal Clooney probably knew a large number of the guests present and certainly more than Meghan, who outside of her invited guests, could count the number of people there that she knew or had previously met on one hand.


----------



## bag-mania

Hope the author has his footnotes in order. Harry and Meghan will be scouring that book trying to find something they can sue about.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Hope the author has his footnotes in order. Harry and Meghan will be scouring that book trying to find something they can sue about.


I have to believe his sources have been vetted by lawyers and are airtight. Time will tell...


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Harry made her and Harry can take it away.


She was nothing before him, she is nothing without him. But she doesn't see it that way. She believed they would be unstoppable. Ego is a hell of a drug.


----------



## Kiradris

charlottawill said:


> I have to believe his sources have been vetted by lawyers and are airtight. Time will tell...


Everything I've read about this author indicates he is meticulous with his research - like if there was anyone who would be best to write this book, it's him, because he has evidence to back up everything.

He wrote a book about Prince Charles as well which was none too flattering, so no one should accuse him of being a big meanie picking on sweet gurl Megsy.


----------



## xeyes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "I love a great love story" is what did it for me when I first heard it. Who talks about their own relationship like this?
> 
> Also notice how the VF guy makes a point of mentioning her walls were plastered with pictures of herself



Once again, our Megs would have done well to heed her predecessor:

“You have no idea how hard it is to live out a great romance." -- Wallis Simpson


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> She was nothing before him, she is nothing without him. But she doesn't see it that way.* She believed they would be unstoppable.* Ego is a hell of a drug.


^^^^^THIS, THIS, THIS!^^^^^ A thousand times this!!!!!  She thought their popularity knew no bounds and would be endless.  Because of course it would be, she's amazing, don'tcha know???  She's been saying it for decades.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Probably describes the majority of the wedding guests.



Some of them neither one of them had ever met, she must of just picked them from the the Forbes 100


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> I miss having the previous/next arrows  up at the top of the column. Never realized how much I used it until it was gone.
> 
> While her publicist is trying to put a positive spin on it, I somehow doubt the neighbors are calling her “princess of Montecito” in a kind way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle dubbed ‘Princess of Montecito’ by California neighbors
> 
> 
> Markle and Prince Harry moved to the ritzy town in 2020 after resigning as senior royals. Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and Serena Williams also live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com





I really miss those previous/next buttons at the top, too!  Used them constantly!

This article sounds as if MM hardly sees the kids at all.  She drives into LA to walk the dogs?  WTF!!  And going to “meetings” and out to lunch once a week?  Wonder who she sees or goes with on these occasions.  Sounds like she takes off on her own a lot.  Ridiculous!  Wonder if they ever use their pool and/or tennis courts.


----------



## Suncatcher

I think the LA move is about them living apart. What stood out in the excerpt how Serena downplayed the friendship; the queen was thankful she didn’t come; she was a nobody before she got on the cover; she is not an activist or philanthropist; and she is a master manipulator and liar.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Some of them neither one of them had ever met, she must of just picked them from the the Forbes 100


But who does that?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Isn’t it typical in the royal world to invite the parents’ friends, too?  Iirc Charles and Diana did that.

ETA: maybe that was because Charles is the heir, not sure about *zzzzzzzz *listers


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> But who does that?



I guess we're lucky most of them must have laughed refused been unavailable


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Some of them neither one of them had ever met, she must of just picked them from the the Forbes 100


In true narcissist fashion their wedding guests were chosen based on who would give them the most attention and who had the most potential to be useful to them in the future.


----------



## bellecate

hollieplus2 said:


> Excerpts from the book are starting to come out! Seems she's lied...a lot lol.


Is anyone surprised about that. It seems her pants are always on fire! From an early age to her *ZZZ* (#CJ) list acting career to present day. Her motto seems to be, 'why tell the truth when a lie will do'.


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I'm ordering a copy. BTW Thomas apparently spilled the beans her infamous child activist letter at only 11 was met with complete silence. The company that supposedly changed their whole campaign because of Raptor never bothered to answer




Well, I’ll give her this - she has one h e l l of a nerve lying the way she does.  She tells her stupid P&G story.  Guess no one bothered to do any fact checking.

This sounds like a fun beach read!


----------



## lanasyogamama

This book sounds great!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooo la la


The smart set’s talking about... Spencer scion’s acting chops​Aware, no doubt, of complaints that showbusiness is full of expensively educated stars such as Old Etonian Eddie Redmayne and Old Harrovian Benedict Cumberbatch, one new actor, who’s posher than all of them, has dropped his illustrious surname.

I can disclose that Earl Spencer’s son and heir, Viscount Althorp, Louis Frederick John Spencer, has trained as an actor.

Princess Diana’s nephew, 28, who will inherit the 13,000-acre Althorp estate in Northamptonshire, has registered his stage name as Louis John Lyons.

He’s just completed training at ArtsEd drama school in West London and has already been signed by the Tavistock Wood talent agency, whose stars include Dominic West and Lily James. Perhaps Louis could play his father in Netflix hit The Crown?















						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Schroders heiress finds love with Eton top shot
					

EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: She is arguably the most eligible woman in Britain - a beguiling blonde with estates in England and Scotland, plus the lioness's share of her family's £5 billion fortune.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another excerpt in spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, Prince Harry and the war between the royal family | News | Th…​April 09 2021, 12.00pm BST
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On April 9, 2021, Prince Philip had died. His funeral was set for April 17. Harry arrived in London just before the service. The mood was sombre. Daily, the media extolled Philip’s remarkable life and devotion to the country. The duke had planned a simple funeral at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. The rehearsals displayed faultless military drill. Few would not be touched by the perfection of British ceremonial tradition. The weather was forecast to be perfect. The only uncertainty was the relationship between Harry and his family. How would he cope with his father and brother? Meghan had cited her seven months’ pregnancy as the reason for not travelling.
> 
> In Windsor Castle the Queen was preparing to face the public on one of the saddest days of her life. Philip had been her rock for the previous 70 years. To comply with Covid restrictions she would grieve alone inside the chapel. “Thank goodness Meghan is not coming,” the monarch said in a clear voice to her trusted aides. Buckingham Palace declined to comment last night.
> 
> Harry’s presence remained a problem. As a private citizen stripped of his military titles he could not dress in uniform. To minimise the embarrassment for both Harry and Andrew, who was mired in allegations of sexual sleaze, all the male members of the royal family dressed in morning suits. To avoid any problems with William, the brothers were separated as they walked towards St George’s Chapel by their cousin Peter Phillips.
> During that short procession many watched whether Harry signalled any regret towards his family. Some interpreted his sideways glance towards William as the outsider’s unease. No one grasped the truth about Harry’s nervousness. In four weeks’ time his Apple TV series about mental health would be broadcast. Transmission had been delayed until after the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Harry, with their cousin Peter Phillips positioned between them, walk with Andrew behind the Duke of Edinburgh’s hearse at Windsor Castle on April 17 last year
> SPLASH NEWS
> Looking at his family standing in St George’s Chapel, Harry must have known that his damnation of them in the Apple TV series would widen the rift. Sitting alone and isolated, the 94-year-old monarch’s grief was concealed behind a black mask. Everyone was moved by her dignity. William looked tense, Kate serene, Charles visibly anguished. Only Harry’s expression defied accurate reporting. Flapping his order of service against his thighs as he left the chapel, he was clearly impatient. None knew that Harry, the once adored young prince, had betrayed his whole family.
> After the service, eager for signs of reconciliation, the media seized on Kate’s manoeuvre to engineer a conversation between the brothers. Cameras followed them as they walked up the hill towards the castle. Later reports of the aftermath veered between a two-hour conversation between Harry, William and Charles, and a perfunctory exchange before everyone departed. Few realised that Harry wanted to return to California as fast as possible. The three princes spoke briefly before Charles drove to his cottage in the Brecon Beacons in Wales. William was handed the burden of rescuing the monarchy from the damage caused by his brother and his uncle Andrew.
> Buckingham Palace finally understood very precisely on May 14 that the Sussexes were beyond control. Apple TV released Harry’s broadside, called _The Me You Can’t See_. In it Harry denounced William, whom he had previously praised as the only person he “could trust”, and dishonoured Charles, whom he had previously thanked for being so “kind”, for causing a cycle of “genetic pain”. He had even criticised the Queen, despite saying she was “hugely admired”. All were cast as villains responsible for his “cycles of suffering” and “unresolved anger”.
> Related Articles
> The Duke of Edinburgh​‘He looked,” recalled his aide and friend Michael Parker, “as if you’d dropped half the world on him.” Prince Philip and the young Princess Elizabeth had travelled to Kenya at the beginning of 1952 at the start of a royal
> April 09 2021, 12.00pm BST
> Comparing his life to “a mixture between _The Truman Show _and being in a zoo”, he said of his family: “I’ve seen behind the curtain. I’ve seen the business model. I know how this operation runs . . . I don’t want to be part of this.” Instead of being reconciled with his family, he had in effect monetised his anguish.
> Ramping up his earlier accusations aired in the Oprah Winfrey interview, Harry described how he and Meghan felt “bullied into silence . . . I thought my family would help, but every single ask, request, warning, whatever it is, just got met with total silence, total neglect. We spent four years trying to make it work. We did everything we possibly could to stay there and carry on doing the role and doing the job. Meghan was struggling.” Even while they negotiated their departure — “hunted and helpless” in London — there were “forces working against us”. Who rebuffed Harry’s pleas remained unidentified.
> The Palace struggled to understand why Harry should publicly criticise the Queen and his dead grandfather for their upbringing of Charles. America’s men were gripped by Harry’s advocacy of therapy. He was credited with removing the stigma of admitting to anxiety and depression.
> The gulf between the Windsors and Harry was widening. Five days earlier, Harry had nailed his colours to political campaigning. At Vax Live, a Los Angeles charity concert, Harry told an audience that Pfizer and other pioneers of Covid vaccines should abandon their intellectual property rights and let poorer countries have their patents free. President ***** supported that gesture, but it was opposed by Britain and the EU. Harry’s participation would have been impossible as a member of the royal family. As would Meghan’s two-minute video. She weighed in by asserting that women of colour had been disproportionately affected by Covid. Women’s progress, said Meghan, had been “wiped out” for a generation.
> Powerless over events in California, Charles had good reason on his accession to strip the Sussexes and their children of their titles. The Sussexes’ status depended substantially on their royal titles. Every appearance or statement was issued under the label “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex”. Neither considered it odd to honour the Queen yet damn her as a bad parent to Charles, or label her family as racist and neglectful of Meghan.
> In America, no one would be aware of those contradictions. But Harry could not assume that Charles would tolerate the enmity without retribution. In the possibly brief time before the Queen died, Harry needed to cement his status.
> The Sussexes organised a Lilibet website before their daughter was born. Lilibet was the name used by George V, the Queen’s grandfather, as he imitated his young granddaughter’s attempts to say her own name. After his death in 1936 the name stuck, but was only used by the closest members of the Queen’s family.
> Harry’s daughter was born at Santa Barbara’s Cottage Hospital on June 4. On the same day, but two days before the birth was announced, Meghan’s lawyers registered the lilibetdiana.com website. After the birth, but before the public announcement, Harry called the Queen. He told his grandmother about the birth and their decision to call their daughter Lilibet.
> To stymie the Sussexes, the Palace told the BBC that the Queen was “never asked” for permission for the use of her name. In his telephone call, Harry was “telling” the Queen about the name.
> Once the BBC broadcast that report, the Sussexes’ PR machine was activated. Meghan’s spokeswoman claimed that Harry would not have chosen the name if the Queen had not been “supportive”. Fired up by the Sussexes’ anger, their lawyers Schillings announced that unless the BBC apologised and withdrew that report, the Sussexes would sue for defamation. Seemingly pitching Harry against the Queen, the Palace supported the BBC. The Sussexes retreated. Schillings’ threat evaporated. The Sussexes were defeated.
> Legal wrangles in London could be easily forgotten in California. Only when the whole royal family descended on the G7 summit hosted by the prime minister in Cornwall on June 12, and Kate was filmed laughing with Jill *****, could Meghan see the unequal struggle for attention. For the British, the sight of William, Charles and the Queen walking through a garden, and alongside the world’s leaders, represented the monarchy’s enduring strength, and William and Kate represented its future. The Windsors felt reassured by the international accolades. Their future public appearances were carefully scheduled and inserted on to a grid, building up to a climax later that year in New York. Their own royal event was planned to consolidate their status in America.
> In their timetable, the unveiling of a bronze memorial to Diana in Kensington Palace’s Sunken Garden on what would have been her 60th birthday became a sideshow. In the bitterness sparked by the Sussexes, only the Spencer family were present alongside the brothers. Everyone else, including Diana’s grandchildren, stayed away. Meghan’s absence passed without comment, except in those parts of America where Diana was revered.
> Standing in front of an uninspiring depiction of Diana, William and Harry defied speculation. The ceremony would not trigger a reconciliation. William’s reluctance to attend was well known.
> Any doubts about Harry’s strength of feeling were dispelled by his stony silence after the Queen announced on Accession Day 2022 that Camilla would be Britain’s next queen. Seventeen years after their controversial marriage, Charles had persuaded his mother and a majority of Britons that Camilla should be crowned during his own coronation. Charles may have had good reason to fear that Harry’s dislike of Camilla had been re-energised by Meghan.
> Most Britons could not understand Harry’s seeming hostility towards his country and family. What many saw as his disloyalty to his grandmother was particularly mystifying. Occasionally, he appeared willing to betray every value he formerly held dear.
> Yet visibly retaining their relationship with the Queen was critically important for the Sussexes’ status. By March 2022 the ailing 95-year-old monarch had repeatedly cancelled public engagements. The exception was her appearance at Prince Philip’s memorial service. To the royal family’s misfortune, the event was overshadowed by Andrew’s bold appearance centre-stage, escorting his mother to her seat in Westminster Abbey. Defiantly ignoring his banishment from public duties, Andrew also indicated that he expected to appear in the spotlight during the Queen’s jubilee celebrations in June.
> Keeping Andrew out of sight was one problem. Another was Harry and Meghan’s demand also to appear with the Queen on Buckingham Palace’s balcony. If the three outcasts did successfully appear in the spotlight, the media’s focus would no longer be the Queen’s achievements over 70 years, but on her dysfunctional son and grandson. Inevitably, the public reaction would be unenthusiastic.
> The obstacles for Meghan and Harry to appear centre-stage were considerable — not least because their presence was opposed by Charles. Charles preferred that the Sussexes, as private citizens, were not invited on to the balcony or to ride in a royal carriage. Instead, they would be confined to the VIP enclosures. In Meghan’s view those optics were unsatisfactory, partly because her value to Netflix was to stand near the Queen.
> To achieve this goal Harry asked the Queen’s resistant advisers. When this failed he asked the Queen if he could visit her in Windsor on his way to the Netherlands for the Invictus Games. To secure her agreement, Harry appeared to give the impression that the meeting would offer an “olive branch” to “clear the air”. At the last moment, keen to see her grandson and instinctively forgiving of Meghan, the Queen agreed to meet the couple on April 14. William avoided the problem with a previous arrangement to ski with his family in France.
> After spending the night with his cousin Eugenie, Harry and Meghan were driven to Windsor Castle. On the Queen’s insistence they met Charles and Camilla before her. The Sussexes arrived late. Their first encounter was civilised but failed to resolve the fraught relations created by their Oprah Winfrey interview. By contrast, there was no tension drinking tea with the Queen. Yet the issue of their appearance on the balcony remained unresolved. The danger of allowing the meeting surfaced six days later.
> Followed by Netflix cameras, the Sussexes proved themselves modern and compassionate as they faultlessly mixed in The Hague with the athletes. Always smiling and dressed in an unending change of expensive clothes while watching the events, Meghan played the stunning hostess and pledged to offer “service” to the world. But, as later events seemed to show, festering was their fury that the Palace had refused all of their demands for a prominent role at the jubilee in return for returning to Britain with their children.
> Harry could not resist venting his anger to an American NBC TV reporter. His “special” relationship with the Queen, he told the world, meant that the Queen confided in him secrets unknown to others of her family.
> Her four children and seven other grandchildren, he implied, were excluded from her confidence. More inflammatory, he declared his duty was to make sure that his grandmother was “protected and got the right people around her”. Charles, Anne, William and all the Queen’s staff, implied Harry, were inadequate for the task. He appeared to speak from the heart. It seemed Harry had resumed the war against his family. The “olive branch” media headline about his visit to Windsor splintered.
> Predictably, Harry’s assertion of his special status aroused accusations about his “breathtaking arrogance” with “no bounds to his self-delusion”. Responding to the public fury, Downing Street even issued a statement that the Queen was well-protected.
> The most striking moment of his TV appearance was his refusal to answer whether he missed his “brother and dad”. Ignoring his family, he perhaps supposed, would be offset among most American viewers by warmly responding to any mention of his mother. Asked about Diana’s “presence” in his life, he replied: “It’s constant. It has been over the past two years, more so than ever before.” He added: “It’s almost as though she’s done her bit with my brother and now she’s very much helping me. She got him set up, and now she’s helping me set up.”
> 
> Unconvincingly, the multimillionaire implicitly linked his mother to a plea for “a more equal world”. Finally, he volunteered that America was his “home”.
> Within those few minutes on television Harry had demonstrated the danger of his appearance at the jubilee celebrations. Everything was about himself and Meghan.
> Merely four years after Harry and Meghan’s wedding the royal family had been transformed from a relatively harmonious group, embracing multiculturalism as part of their service to Britain and the Commonwealth, into a beleaguered institution uncertain of its future. To their harshest critics, the Sussexes had become agents of destruction.
> © Tom Bower, 2022. Extracted from REVENGE: MEGHAN, HARRY AND THE WAR BETWEEN THE WINDSORS by Tom Bower, to be published by Blink Publishing, on July 21 at £22.



I really enjoyed this piece - thank you for posting it.


----------



## Icyjade

gracekelly said:


> An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"
> 
> click on the archive link
> 
> archive.ph


The producers of Suits were “awestruck” that an actress from their series with a mere 1.5 million viewers had made Vanity Fair’s cover


wowow. See… z list actress… this book is really something. Thanks all for sharing the extracts


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Gutsy? Well, now we know what Methane's next podcast will be named. No, not Archipelago. It's going to be...
> 
> *Gutteral!*
> “Gutteral” is a two-part documentary series that follows the Duchess of Sussex and her prince as they speak with women who have impacted her life over the years. Doria Raglan, Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem, Stella Parton, Melissa McCarthy, the Duchess's close comrade Pwife and the Duchess's Pilates instructor are among the names joining the Sussexi throughout the series.
> 
> Based on the Duchess's own life, Archewell Productions describes the docuseries as “a thought-provoking journey to speak with illustrious women of power who tell us what it truly means to mentor a rare talent.” It also states that “Gutteral” will explore the close relationship of its host with guests.


"Gutteral"???  Isn't that her reaction to the abortion ruling.  LOL is there a limit on big words she uses for her salads??


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "I love a great love story" is what did it for me when I first heard it. Who talks about their own relationship like this?
> 
> Also notice how the VF guy makes a point of mentioning her walls were plastered with pictures of herself


VF is finally redeeming itself a bit!


----------



## kipp

Luvbolide said:


> Well, I’ll give her this - she has one h e l l of a nerve lying the way she does.  She tells her stupid P&G story.  Guess no one bothered to do any fact checking.
> 
> This sounds like a fun beach read!


I think this part of the article, along with the insistence on the VF article focusing on her "faux" philanthropy, and the photos of herself plastered on the wall says it all!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

bellecate said:


> Is anyone surprised about that. It seems her pants are always on fire! From an early age to her *ZZZ* (#CJ) list acting career to present day. Her motto seems to be, 'why tell the truth when a lie will do'.


This is what I don't understand. She isn't stupid, yet she lied a lot. Surely she knew ( maybe in a small corner of her mind,burried away haha) that some of her lies will be uncovered. But as narcissistic people think, she thought she will get away with it. Maybe she is a little stupid


----------



## carmen56

I bit the bullet and pre-ordered the Kindle version of the Bower book.  Can't wait to read it!


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> America’s men were gripped by Harry’s advocacy of therapy. He was credited with removing the stigma of admitting to anxiety and depression.


I think this bit is giving H way too much credit. Pop psychology has been an enormously popular subject for at least 10-15 years before this and the current fever has probably got more to do with the likes of Jordan the lobster. Tbh I think Brock Lesnar is a more influential redhead in discussing depression and suicide than H. 


Kiradris said:


> Oh good lord, Cosmo has this to say about the Bower book: "Ugh, this book doesn't sound like it's going to be particularly kind to Meghan and Harry so here's to hoping they're coping with its upcoming release okay."   Cosmo has always been garbage, but I'm curious as to whether other US new outlets will have a similar reaction, or just ignore it since it's not glowing.


Lol well they need to get their rebuttal book out  stat. Tbh I feel like even this revenge book is coming out a bit late to make a big splash. After the interview would have been really impactful. I feel like a lot of people who aren’t in one camp or the other don’t care anymore. 


bag-mania said:


> Any legitimate news outlets already knew the truth about H&M long ago and chose to ignore it, or worse, to prop them up whenever they could. Don’t expect much from them now. I’m betting most of them will pretend this book doesn’t exist.


This is true. The truth is free but the fantasy pays very well. 


Kiradris said:


> Everything I've read about this author indicates he is meticulous with his research - like if there was anyone who would be best to write this book, it's him, because he has evidence to back up everything.
> 
> He wrote a book about Prince Charles as well which was none too flattering, so no one should accuse him of being a big meanie picking on sweet gurl Megsy.


He’s pretty good on politicians. I might pick up the one on Charles as well & then there’s a bit of foreground. 


xeyes said:


> Once again, our Megs would have done well to heed her predecessor:
> 
> “You have no idea how hard it is to live out a great romance." -- Wallis Simpson


Wallis wasn’t wrong. Waking up next to a fascist moron you were seducing for clout every day must take some doing- great jewellery at least I guess. 


Luvbolide said:


> I really miss those previous/next buttons at the top, too!  Used them constantly!
> 
> This article sounds as if MM hardly sees the kids at all.  She drives into LA to walk the dogs?  WTF!!  And going to “meetings” and out to lunch once a week?  Wonder who she sees or goes with on these occasions.  Sounds like she takes off on her own a lot.  Ridiculous!  Wonder if they ever use their pool and/or tennis courts.


That is bizarre, I wouldn’t take my dogs for a walk in a busy place like LA unless I was trying to get them run over…again. 

Isn’t so cal somewhat well known for the countryside and beaches? 

I’m sure she goes to lunches with other ‘trophy’ wives that is her logical social group. I’m sure the conversation is riveting. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooo la la
> 
> 
> The smart set’s talking about... Spencer scion’s acting chops​Aware, no doubt, of complaints that showbusiness is full of expensively educated stars such as Old Etonian Eddie Redmayne and Old Harrovian Benedict Cumberbatch, one new actor, who’s posher than all of them, has dropped his illustrious surname.
> 
> I can disclose that Earl Spencer’s son and heir, Viscount Althorp, Louis Frederick John Spencer, has trained as an actor.
> 
> Princess Diana’s nephew, 28, who will inherit the 13,000-acre Althorp estate in Northamptonshire, has registered his stage name as Louis John Lyons.
> 
> He’s just completed training at ArtsEd drama school in West London and has already been signed by the Tavistock Wood talent agency, whose stars include Dominic West and Lily James. Perhaps Louis could play his father in Netflix hit The Crown?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Schroders heiress finds love with Eton top shot
> 
> 
> EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: She is arguably the most eligible woman in Britain - a beguiling blonde with estates in England and Scotland, plus the lioness's share of her family's £5 billion fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’m sure he’s a lovely person but he does have chronic smug face. I’m sure what the world needs now is one more posh boy British actor - we used to have gorgeous actors but now it’s a Rich boy’s game Benedict cumberbatch is the best looking one- it’s criminal


----------



## pukasonqo

What worries me is having JCMH who has zero qualifications giving advice on MH issues


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The comments are gold.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The comments are gold.




She's literally offensive


----------



## Helventara

I just realize that @CeeJay thread over at the Balenciaga forum has over 100 posts and at page 8 vs. the 'other' appreciation thread of the Z duos with its 90 posts  (already beefed up with posts of old pictures from their years together to increase counts  ). I hope dear @CeeJay would  be thrilled.


----------



## Luvbolide

pukasonqo said:


> What worries me is having JCMH who has zero qualifications giving advice on MH issues




So true!  I don’t think he should be pontificating to anyone, but especially not to people who may be particularly vulnerable.  After all, this is the clown who advises those who don’t like their jobs to quit and they will be so much happier!  What a freaking moron.

The idea that the pair of them, with limited educations and/or life experience should be offering advice to anyone about anything is ludicrous!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am still so confused how her shenanigans are pretty well documented if you wanted to look for them, yet there are still tons of people simply ignoring her shadiness and choosing to celebrate her and hype her up. Just...why?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am still so confused how her shenanigans are pretty well documented if you wanted to look for them, yet there are still tons of people simply ignoring her shadiness and choosing to celebrate her and hype her up. Just...why?




I think all along H&M's game has been banking on the fact that people not only can't tell fact from fiction but also they a) don't care and b) think all info is equal, truth _or_ lie.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I think this bit is giving H way too much credit. Pop psychology has been an enormously popular subject for at least 10-15 years before this and the current fever has probably got more to do with the likes of Jordan the lobster. Tbh I think Brock Lesnar is a more influential redhead in discussing depression and suicide than H.
> 
> Lol well they need to get their rebuttal book out  stat. Tbh I feel like even this revenge book is coming out a bit late to make a big splash. After the interview would have been really impactful. I feel like a lot of people who aren’t in one camp or the other don’t care anymore.
> 
> This is true. The truth is free but the fantasy pays very well.
> 
> He’s pretty good on politicians. I might pick up the one on Charles as well & then there’s a bit of foreground.
> 
> Wallis wasn’t wrong. Waking up next to a fascist moron you were seducing for clout every day must take some doing- great jewellery at least I guess.
> 
> That is bizarre, I wouldn’t take my dogs for a walk in a busy place like LA unless I was trying to get them run over…again.
> 
> Isn’t so cal somewhat well known for the countryside and beaches?
> 
> I’m sure she goes to lunches with other ‘trophy’ wives that is her logical social group. I’m sure the conversation is riveting.
> 
> I’m sure he’s a lovely person but he does have chronic smug face. I’m sure what the world needs now is one more posh boy British actor - we used to have gorgeous actors but now it’s a Rich boy’s game Benedict cumberbatch is the best looking one- it’s criminal




Reading the abstracts, I think the book's been too kind and in some instances gives them too much credit for actually having a plan. They have schemes, not plans (involve doing things - not just talking) nor strategy (requires at least one brain). They are schemers.

They also have knee-jerk reactions to everything that doesn't fit into their scheme to be 'King and Queen of the World'. For instance, trying to sue the BBC. Good thing the Palace knew they would come out as a source in court and so backed the BBC immediately. That would have been yet another court case backed by public funds (the BBC is funded by a compulsory license fee). Harry would obviously like to bankrupt the country just fighting off his stupid lawsuits.

Their LIES rely on the Palace keeping their 'no comment' rule and public stupidity/ignorance


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Firm really miscalculated how destructive she would be, didn't they.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Firm really miscalculated how destructive she would be, didn't they.



Him too. Harry is a traitor - in the very plain, historic sense of the word. In years gone by his head would literally be in a basket by his feet. Not saying I would want it,  but to me, since he grew-up not just any British subject, but as part of the establishment and 'fought' for his country, he (should) know(s) the rules - he should know better or face some consequences.

She's not a British citizen (and 'We' therefore have not jurisdiction over her) and yet she is a Duchess (how was that ever passed?)

Prince who is a traitor and a British duchess who is not British????

The book should _not_ have been called _Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War between the Windsors. _implying blame on both sides, and either H&M getting their own back on some dastardly 'thing' that happened, or the rest of the BRF taking revenge (which denotes their behaviour not neutral but vindictive). Tom Bower wants to sell to both 'sides'. I am not on a side, they are the BRF and one of them has chosen to defect.
​IMO should have been_ Traitor: Harry Loses his Heart, Head and the Plot . _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Him too. Harry is a traitor - in the very plain, historic sense of the word. In years gone by his head would literally be in a basket by his feet. Not saying I would want,  but to me, since he grew-up not just any British subject, but as part of the establishment, (should) know(s) the rules and 'fought' for his country - he should know better or face some consequences.



Oh, totally. Probably on a pike for everyone to see even. Still, I am of the firm belief it would never have surfaced like this had he just married someone not completely crazy who's lacking any basic human trait. If he had someone like Kate who'd be calming him instead of stirring up conflicts he wasn't even aware he had I doubt he would have escalated like this.



papertiger said:


> IMO should have been_ Traitor: Harry Loses his Heart, Head and the Plot . _



 Why don't all those experts, sources and writers just hire us as their advisors. As a collective we'd be really good at it.


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> Him too. Harry is a traitor - in the very plain, historic sense of the word. In years gone by his head would literally be in a basket by his feet. Not saying I would want it,  but to me, since he grew-up not just any British subject, but as part of the establishment and 'fought' for his country, he (should) know(s) the rules - he should know better or face some consequences.
> 
> She's not a British citizen (and 'We' therefore have not jurisdiction over her) and yet she is a Duchess (how was that ever passed?)
> 
> Prince who is a traitor and a British duchess who is not British????
> 
> The book should _not_ have been called _Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War between the Windsors. _implying blame on both sides, and either H&M getting their own back on some dastardly 'thing' that happened, or the rest of the BRF taking revenge (which denotes their behaviour not neutral but vindictive). Tom Bower wants to sell to both 'sides'. I am not on a side, they are the BRF and one of them has chosen to defect.
> ​IMO should have been_ Traitor: Harry Loses his Heart, Head and the Plot . _


And adding to the title: and his Zzz list wife


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, totally. Probably on a pike for everyone to see even. Still, I am of the firm belief it would never have surfaced like this had he just married someone not completely crazy who's lacking any basic human trait. If he had someone like Kate who'd be calming him instead of stirring up conflicts he wasn't even aware he had I doubt he would have escalated like this.
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't all those experts, sources and writers just hire us as their advisors. As a collective we'd be really good at it.


I don't think we would be expensive to hire  or maybe I am speaking for myself hahah


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The comments are gold.




The new Angelina Jolie w the difference that AJ actually does visits refugee camps, is involved w the UN and actually works


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> And adding to the title: and his Zzz list wife


Nah, I say leave her name off altogether, it’ll annoy the f**k out her - and beyond


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maybe they needed to go to Montecito for a couple years to play into the “we want a quiet life” story and now they’re ready for LA.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Anyone else having trouble pulling the Tom Bowers book up on an Amazon search?


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> I don't think we would be expensive to hire  or maybe I am speaking for myself hahah



I think we would make an A1 detective agency


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Anyone else having trouble pulling the Tom Bowers book up on an Amazon search?



I couldn't find it at all at first (amazon Germany though), but I tried again yesterday with the full title and author name and it came up. Alternatively, I've found books that wouldn't show up at all by searching their ISBN.


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am still so confused how her shenanigans are pretty well documented if you wanted to look for them, yet there are still tons of people simply ignoring her shadiness and choosing to celebrate her and hype her up. Just...why?


i think many people stick to their first favorable impressions and then double down, so facts don’t really register with them


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I couldn't find it at all at first (amazon Germany though), but I tried again yesterday with the full title and author name and it came up. Alternatively, I've found books that wouldn't show up at all by searching their ISBN.


I won’t get political, but Amazon has been known to bury books.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I won’t get political, but Amazon has been known to bury books.



Not doubting that at all, just...why. What's so special about her people go out on a limb? I really don't get it.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The comments are gold.



All I can focus on are the overly arched eyebrows that, you know, show how innocent and compassionate she really is.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am still so confused how her shenanigans are pretty well documented if you wanted to look for them, yet there are still tons of people simply ignoring her shadiness and choosing to celebrate her and hype her up. Just...why?


It makes me wonder if there is someone/something behind her. It cost money to try and clean up her image to hook in JCMH. Also the ever changing story of when and how they met.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> All I can focus on are the overly arched eyebrows that, you know, show how innocent and compassionate she really is.



Too bad, all I can see is patronizing.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> gracekelly said:
> 
> 
> 
> An extract from Tom Bower's book.. about the Vanity Fair article "Wild About Harry"
> 
> click on the archive link
> 
> archive.ph
Click to expand...

So many things have happened during my partial absence from TPF that I'm almost lost. 

Tom Bower's book is out, but I sill have no idea how to get it.

Thanks @gracekelly for posting this great article. So P&G and Cl*nton's stories are just fictitious like many other kid's stories… I wonder why TW didn't state that she led the gift wrapping for underprivileged kids @ the North Pole. 

_*"They could also find no evidence*, as Meghan claimed, that she received a reply from *******. Unknown to Kashner, *Thomas Markle knew ******* and P&G had not replied to Meghan.* *The success of her “campaign” was fictitious, invented by an adoring father*."_


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I couldn't find it at all at first (amazon Germany though), but I tried again yesterday with the full title and author name and it came up. Alternatively, I've found books that wouldn't show up at all by searching their ISBN.


My tiny orthographic contribution … the last name is BOWER not BOWERS


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> So many things have happened during my partial absence from TPF that I'm almost lost.
> 
> Tom Bower's book is out, but I sill have no idea how to get it.
> 
> Thanks @gracekelly for posting this great article. So P&G and Cl*nton's stories are just fictitious like many other kid's stories… I wonder why TW didn't state that she led the gift wrapping for underprivileged kids @ the North Pole.
> 
> _*"They could also find no evidence*, as Meghan claimed, that she received a reply from *******. Unknown to Kashner, *Thomas Markle knew ******* and P&G had not replied to Meghan.* *The success of her “campaign” was fictitious, invented by an adoring father*."_


Buy at BookDepository.com. Free shipping

$18 paperback


----------



## Chanbal

Who can blame QE!?



_*A shocking new book chronicling the details of the Sussex's royal fallout, a story detailing the Queen's supposed relief at Meghan Markle's absence from Prince Philip's funeral has been laid out bare.*_


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



What a bombshell. The book is going to prove all the things we have been saying all along


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Buy at BookDepository.com. Free shipping
> 
> $18 paperback


Haha, I did it!!! Thanks again @gracekelly


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Wallis wasn’t wrong. Waking up next to a fascist moron you were seducing for clout every day must take some doing- great jewellery at least I guess.


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> What a bombshell. The book is going to prove all the things we have been saying all along


It’s true!!! 
But I only wonder if the FIRM also knew about all of MM’s lies before Harry got engaged.  The Brits do have  amazingly good intelligence!  It’s difficult to imagine they were fooled…


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sure she goes to lunches with other ‘trophy’ wives that is her logical social group


I believe that is what she aspires to, but the ones who have any actual clout probably wouldn't want to be caught dead with her. She will end up in that refuge of wannabes, RHoBH or something similar. I guess it's not a bad paycheck for some of them and feeds their need for drama and attention, so she'd be a perfect fit. As for walking the dogs in LA, she probably does it in Brentwood or Pacific Palisades knowing the paps are always roaming there and it is safe. Everything she does is calculated.


----------



## Icyjade

kipp said:


> It’s true!!!
> But I only wonder if the FIRM also knew about all of MM’s lies before Harry got engaged.  The Brits do have  amazingly good intelligence!  It’s difficult to imagine they were fooled…


Anything critical of MM will be interpreted as them being racists... Tough one when the racist card is used all the time.


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> It’s true!!!
> But I only wonder if the FIRM also knew about all of MM’s lies before Harry got engaged.  The Brits do have  amazingly good intelligence!  It’s difficult to imagine they were fooled…


They knew, but he would have stubbornly forged ahead even if confronted with the truth about her. Love can be deaf, dumb and blind. The Firm will come out ahead in the end.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder why TW didn't state that she led the gift wrapping for underprivileged kids @ the North Pole.


----------



## youngster

I would be willing to bet money too, that she used the Proctor & Gamble story and the fictitious Hilary ******* letter as part of her application for Northwestern University.  Admissions officers would eat that up and it would differentiate her application from a pile of others.

Thomas Markle probably thought these were just tiny little lies to prop Meghan up, to give her good material for an Admissions essay, something that no one would ever care about and see what he started?  You'd think someone, somewhere would have asked to see the actual letter from Hilary.


----------



## charlottawill

Think the Queen will get an advance copy autographed by Bower?


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> It’s true!!!
> But I only wonder if the FIRM also knew about all of MM’s lies before Harry got engaged.  The Brits do have  amazingly good intelligence!  It’s difficult to imagine they were fooled…


I think they knew she was “fabricating” certain aspects of her life and chalked it up to her being an actress. Probably considered it all harmless until it wasn’t. I don’t think anyone at BP fully expected the level of meanness and deceit that they both showed themselves capable of. They figured that they had dealt with the Diana level of crazy and could deal with this too. The worst part of what they did was not taking a firm stand with Harry. This could have been stopped. He would have had a massive temper tantrum, but if no money was forthcoming to support them, it is unlikely that he would have spent his last dime just to be defiant.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I would be willing to bet money too, that she used the Proctor & Gamble story and the fictitious Hilary ******* letter as part of her application for Northwestern University.  Admissions officers would eat that up and it would differentiate her application from a pile of others.
> 
> Thomas Markle probably thought these were just tiny little lies to prop Meghan up, to give her good material for an Admissions essay, something that no one would ever care about and see what he started?  You'd think someone, somewhere would have asked to see the actual letter from Hilary.


Absolutely. This is exactly what they look for. Plus she snowed them on the interview because they wanted to be snowed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Icyjade said:


> Anything critical of MM will be interpreted as them being racists... Tough one when the racist card is used all the time.


Something tells me that the book will show that she never had to deal with racism once during her entire life.


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> This is what I don't understand. She isn't stupid, yet she lied a lot. Surely she knew ( maybe in a small corner of her mind,burried away haha) that some of her lies will be uncovered. But as narcissistic people think, she thought she will get away with it. Maybe she is a little stupid


She has always gotten away with lying because she’s never suffered any ramifications from it. The only reason a chronic liar would stop is if it came back on her badly. Even then the lying wouldn’t end, but she’d be a bit more careful about it next time. Because she rides all the popular bandwagons the press mostly gives her a free pass.

This is the point where I remind everyone that this isn’t just a Meghan issue. We have no clue how many famous people are presented to us as being wonderful when in reality they are anything but.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not doubting that at all, just...why. What's so special about her people go out on a limb? I really don't get it.


It’s the ultra simple view that the BRF is presented as being the BIG BAD therefore Meghan must be the brave underdog who was being treated badly through absolutely no fault of her own. Add the racial aspect to the story and it became a competition for support of her from the press. And the press tells the rest of us what we should think so…


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> What a bombshell. The book is going to prove all the things we have been saying all along


And have been harshly criticized for it!  




@Chanbal  welcome back, we have missed you.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> And have been harshly criticized for it!


But isn't it telling though that there are far more people posting on this thread than on the "appreciation" thread? We see you, Zeezy.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

Edit:  @CarryOn2020 I just noticed, you saw it first!


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TB's book may expose a romance overlap. Cory's story is circulating again, 'Wild about Cory!?'









						Meghan Markle Cozied Up with Old Boyfriend Before Prince Harry
					

Meghan Markle was quite affectionate with her ex-boyfriend right before Harry.




					amp.tmz.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Nah, I say leave her name off altogether, it’ll annoy the f**k out her - and beyond


How about this thread title: The Traitorous Prince Dufus and Her Reprehensive Hustling Prevaricating Wife AKA The Claw


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> How about this thread title: The Traitorous Prince Dufus and Her Reprehensive Hustling Prevaricating Wife AKA The Claw



Is this book pushing Hazzi deeper into the MM mess or trying to give him an out?  Imo, it is difficult to know. 
As for TM, seems he and MM really do enjoy turning life into a soap opera.  Now, who will show up for the Monday’s speech?  

_Britain’s Prince Harry will address the U.N. General Assembly at its annual celebration Monday of Nelson Madela International Day and is expected to speak about the legacy of the South African anti-apartheid leader who spent 27 years in prison and became his country’s first Black leader.










						Loading…
					





					www.washingtonpost.com
				



_


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this book pushing Hazzi deeper into the MM mess or trying to give him an out?  Imo, it is difficult to know.
> As for TM, seems he and MM really do enjoy turning life into a soap opera.  Now, who will show up for the Monday’s speech?
> 
> _Britain’s Prince Harry will address the U.N. General Assembly at its annual celebration Monday of Nelson Madela International Day and is expected to speak about the legacy of the South African anti-apartheid leader who spent 27 years in prison and became his country’s first Black leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.washingtonpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



It's (not so) hilarious they've asked a whiter-than-white Prince that represents privilege, the establishment and a descendent of colonialists to speak about Nelson Mandela an "_anti-apartheid leader who spent 27 years in prison and became his country’s first Black leader."_

If anyone suggests that having a POC wife suddenly makes him a freedom-fighter (yes, I did use that phrase) than I beg to differ, the equivalent of "my best friend is X". Not only no qualifications but absolutely unqualified.


----------



## Chanbal

The new TPF posting system is driving me …
Fresh from the BLG:

_Hazz has a severe lack of empathy… _


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Buy at BookDepository.com. Free shipping
> 
> $18 paperback



Woohoo! Ordered! Thank you!!!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this book pushing Hazzi deeper into the MM mess or trying to give him an out?  Imo, it is difficult to know.
> *As for TM, seems he and MM really do enjoy turning life into a soap opera. * Now, who will show up for the Monday’s speech?
> 
> _Britain’s Prince Harry will address the U.N. General Assembly at its annual celebration Monday of Nelson Madela International Day and is expected to speak about the legacy of the South African anti-apartheid leader who spent 27 years in prison and became his country’s first Black leader.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.washingtonpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


It proves that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree and makes one wonder how severe Thomas Markle Sr's health issues were or if he exaggerated his condition to receive more sympathy.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> It proves that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree and makes one wonder how severe Thomas Markle Sr's health issues were or if he exaggerated his condition to receive more sympathy.



Probably a bit of both. I don’t doubt the severity of his health issues but he probably milked them as much as he could for sympathy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Wonder what Harry makes of the book's content. Some of these must be revelation to him. Also, makes sense that ZZZ actress prevented anyone from meeting her family and blow her cover.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If I read the excerpt correctly, it said Hazzi called TM prior to the wedding and did ask permission. TM told him not to hit her. That is weird enough imo.  Didn’t TM say he had not spoken to Hazz?  So another lie? Misleading stories? Certainly, low-level drama.  Ick. .


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I read the excerpt correctly, it said Hazzi called TM prior to the wedding and did ask permission. TM told him not to hit her. That is weird enough imo.  Didn’t TM say he had not spoken to Hazz?  So another lie? Misleading stories? Certainly, low-level drama.  Ick. .



I feel like I heard this a while back, before the book excerpt. Thought it was a weird thing to say but maybe he was just trying to be protective.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

We knew it was bad, but WTF is this woman. Her impertinence and entitlement knows no limit.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We knew it was bad, but WTF is this woman. Her impertinence and entitlement knows no limit.



Sigh..when I thought I've seen it all from this woman..I guess I am still surprised.
One stupid question. So all of these people ( British Vogue editor,  VF) kept silent until now. What made them change their mind? Were they waiting for the right opportunity?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And more.


----------



## MiniMabel

"I want to break the internet".  She's 40 years old and a mother of two children. There are no words.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I read the excerpt correctly, it said Hazzi called TM prior to the wedding and did ask permission. TM told him not to hit her. That is weird enough imo.  Didn’t TM say he had not spoken to Hazz?  So another lie? Misleading stories? Certainly, low-level drama.  Ick. .


I thought that bit about TM telling Hazy not to raise a hand to her was really odd. Why would he bring that up? Our son-in-law asked my husband for his approval to propose to our daughter. I'm pretty sure my husband didn't respond with anything like that. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





It makes me wonder if that was an issue between him and Doria. Who BTW throughout all the drama has kept her mouth shut. It does seem to me that Zeezy takes after her father more so than her mother from what I've read.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like I heard this a while back, before the book excerpt. Thought it was a weird thing to say but maybe he was just trying to be protective.


Protective or projecting?


----------



## V0N1B2

Are these posts from Royal instagram blog thingy excerpts from Tom Bower’s book? If so, I’m ordering my copy stat.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And more.



I can just hear Camilla referring to her as an "adventuress" and "minx". So much classier than gold digger and hoe


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> "romance overlap."


You are much more polite than I am. 

I personally like Shakespeare's term "bedswerver" 



> https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/7-obscure-words-for-cheating-and-infidelity


----------



## mellibelly

I had no idea there was British Vogue tea! No wonder she wasn’t invited to Enninful’s wedding. I’m hoping the Givenchy wedding dress drama is covered. Off to order the book now!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> Are these posts from Royal instagram blog thingy excerpts from Tom Bower’s book? If so, I’m ordering my copy stat.



Yes!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I can just hear Camilla referring to her as an "adventuress" and "minx". So much classier than gold digger and hoe



I like how he elegantly says that's what Camilla might have called someone like her, not claiming she actually did refer to her like this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suncatcher

Wow when I think it can’t worse for her, it does. This book will be devastating for a thin skinned Markle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> I had no idea there was British Vogue tea! No wonder she wasn’t invited to Enninful’s wedding. I’m hoping the Givenchy wedding dress drama is covered. Off to order the book now!



Yeah, I think I'll get a copy too. Will make for a great summer read.


----------



## andrashik

Hmm very interesting


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I read the excerpt correctly, it said Hazzi called TM prior to the wedding and did ask permission. TM told him not to hit her. That is weird enough imo.  Didn’t TM say he had not spoken to Hazz?  So another lie? Misleading stories? Certainly, low-level drama.  Ick. .





LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like I heard this a while back, before the book excerpt. Thought it was a weird thing to say but maybe he was just trying to be protective.



Unless Meghan had a history of having boyfriends or a husband who hit her, I think it is a very odd thing to say.  Did Thomas have a temper?  Was he speaking from his own experience?  Meghan has a temper.  Where did she get that from ?  Which parent?  Did she have a history of hitting? Hmmmm.....We know she has a history of throwing things.

BTW, there was a public service announcement that all residents of Santa Barbara County should be on the lookout for a woman stealing crockery, and  glassware and  and then breaking it.  Lock up your dishes folks!


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> Hmm very interesting



Harry vetted the guard as well as he vetted his wife.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like how he elegantly says that's what Camilla might have called someone like her, not claiming she actually did refer to her like this.


I was lurking around another site and a poster there called her a brazen hussy lololo.!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> You are much more polite than I am.
> 
> I personally like Shakespeare's term "bedswerver"


I don't recall that one!  I do know that he might have told her "get thee to a nunnery!"
Back then a nunnery wasn't quite the same place you think of today.


----------



## marietouchet

kipp said:


> It’s true!!!
> But I only wonder if the FIRM also knew about all of MM’s lies before Harry got engaged.  The Brits do have  amazingly good intelligence!  It’s difficult to imagine they were fooled…


The Bower story - she was supposed NOT to talk about H to Vanity Fair, but gushed about being in love , making BP furious … BP saw through her all along 

my interpretation of this story - he had to propose after all that hoopla , the whole thing was kinda like a setup, think shotgun wedding kind of setup, a ginormous manipulation


----------



## mellibelly

gracekelly said:


> Unless Meghan had a history of having boyfriends or a husband who hit her, I think it is a very odd thing to say.  Did Thomas have a temper?  Was he speaking from his own experience?  Meghan has a temper.  Where did she get that from ?  Which parent?  Did she have a history of hitting? Hmmmm.....We know she has a history of throwing things.


I had a terrible thought…do we think ZZZZZ implied to Thomas Markle that her previous husband Trevor hit her? That would be a good excuse to abruptly end a marriage where you mail back the ring. Is she really that similar to Amber Heard?!


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> I had a terrible thought…do we think ZZZZZ implied to Thomas Markle that her previous husband Trevor hit her? That would be a good excuse to abruptly end a marriage where you mail back the ring. Is she really that similar to Amber Heard?!


I'm more inclined to believe that Trevor wasn't helping her career as she had hoped so she decided to start looking for greener pastures. But who knows?


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder whatever is left of the book by the time we get it…


_The Duchess of Sussex rejected a suggestion by the Queen and the Prince of Wales that she fly to the US to reconcile with her father, a new book has claimed.

Tom Bower, a biographer who has written a book about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex entitled Revenge, claimed the Prince - and possibly the monarch - were “irritated” by the Duchess’s failure to make peace with Thomas Markle.

In an extract published on Saturday in The Sunday Times newspaper, Bower described how, two months after the Duke and Duchess were married in May 2018, the couple faced pressure to resolve the rift.

Mr Markle did not attend the wedding after it was revealed he had been working with a paparazzi agency to stage photos which were sold worldwide in the months before the ceremony.

He subsequently made several television appearances in which he criticised the conduct of his daughter and the royal family.

According to Bower’s book, the Prince “berated” the Duke and questioned why the Duchess could not just go to see her father.

The Duke told his father that his wife refused to phone Mr Markles because she suspected his phone “was (not) in his possession” and “his email account was compromised”, the book said.

Bower writes:* “Meghan’s excuses irritated Charles and perhaps also the Queen.

“The monarch must have found it hard to believe that Meghan could not resolve her differences with Thomas Markle.”*

It is claimed that the Queen and the Prince joined the Duke and Duchess on a conference call on which they urged the Duchess to fly to America for “a reconciliation”.

Bower writes: “Meghan rejected the suggestion...the conference call ended with both the senior royals perplexed.”

Buckingham Palace declined to comment in line with its long-standing policy to never respond to unofficial books, as did Clarence House.

The Duchess later said during the same visit to Castle Mey “they fundamentally don’t understand”, referring to the palace, according to the book.

A spokeswoman for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex has not yet responded to a request for comment.

Bower’s book claims to be a “characteristically explosive and rigorously researched account of the rift between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal family, touching on every aspect of scandal and suspicion”.

The biography, entitled Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, is out on July 21 and serialised by The Times, The Sunday Times and The Sun._









						The Queen and Prince Charles suggested Meghan fly to the US to reconcile with her father, book claims
					

Tom Bower's book 'Revenge' claims the Duchess of Sussex rejected the idea leaving the Prince of Wales 'irritated'




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Suncatcher said:


> Wow when I think it can’t worse for her, it does. This book will be devastating for a thin skinned Markle.


But is she really or is it just part of her act? I think we will see more of the 3Ds of a narcissist - deny, deflect, dismiss. And a lawsuit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And more.



When read with the historical perspective, this indeed a shocking story.  It proves H&M are jerks and will not be coming back. Nope. No. Not going to happen.  Much too much has happened.  Thanks so much for posting these.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> But is she really or is it just part of her act? I think we will see more of the 3Ds of a narcissist - deny, deflect, dismiss. And a lawsuit.



Let’s see if she shows up at the Monday speech.  Could get ugly for both of them.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

andrashik said:


> Sigh..when I thought I've seen it all from this woman..I guess I am still surprised.
> One stupid question. So all of these people ( British Vogue editor,  VF) kept silent until now. What made them change their mind? Were they waiting for the right opportunity?


Lemmings.  No courage or integrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like I heard this a while back, before the book excerpt. Thought it was a weird thing to say but maybe he was just trying to be protective.


Or, he was warning Haz if she struck him, he should not hit back?


----------



## purseinsanity

MiniMabel said:


> "I want to break the internet".  She's 40 years old and a mother of two children. There are no words.


Well, so does Kim Kardashian, and she's got 4 kids.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I thought that bit about TM telling Hazy not to raise a hand to her was really odd. Why would he bring that up? Our son-in-law asked my husband for his approval to propose to our daughter. I'm pretty sure my husband didn't respond with anything like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes me wonder if that was an issue between him and Doria. Who BTW throughout all the drama has kept her mouth shut. It does seem to me that Zeezy takes after her father more so than her mother from what I've read.


I would think some things are so obvious, that it goes without saying.  If my DH actually had to say that to a future son in law, that would be a problem.


----------



## csshopper

This isn’t an original observation, but don’t remember where I read it this week.

Re: Monday and the speech at the UN. Based on Mandela’s relationship with the Royal Family, the Queen would be the most appropriate speaker. They had multiple Interactions through the years, there was evidently respect and liking, he called her Elizabeth and she called him Nelson. Whoever was relating this in the article pointed out the Queen could have done a video tribute. Too bad no one asked.


----------



## Cinderlala

IMO, she's worse than Amber Heard because there are still many people who believe *all* TW's lies. Don't get me wrong, I'd guess a HUGE number of people (even in the US) wouldn't recognize her if she hit them with her car.  (Hence, going to LA to walk the dog---who's going to photograph her if she stays in her own neighborhood to do that???)  

The Claw is breathtakingly manipulative & she lies incessantly.  It's as natural as breathing, for her.  

I'm sure she believes her own lies.  The problem for her is that Harry will _eventually_ see.  He will then understand that everything about her/their relationship is based on a foundation of shifty lies.  He's probably already started seeing the cracks in her facade and that is part of his current unhappiness.  Because what's his way out??  If he leaves, he leaves his children.  Not only leaves his children but leaves them with the Claw!  

The whole situation is so bizarre that it wouldn't even make a believable movie despite being actually real.  

I would be very interested to know how early her parents/siblings/friends realized something was just a little bit off about Rachel...


----------



## Cinderlala

purseinsanity said:


> Well, so does Kim Kardashian, and she's got 4 kids.


To be fair, that's basically KK's job.  The Claw still doesn't have a job.  

I guess, technically, she left her job to be someone who is not defined by who she married.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cinderlala said:


> To be fair, that's basically KK's job.  The Claw still doesn't have a job.
> 
> I guess, technically, she left her job to be someone who is not defined by who she married.


I am not a Kardashians fan at all, but I think Kris Jenner is a business genius for turning a sex tape into a global empire for most of her kids.  Kim K hustles, I will give her that.  I respect her for working for what she wants.  That's waaaay more than MM does.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I thought that bit about TM telling Hazy not to raise a hand to her was really odd. Why would he bring that up? Our son-in-law asked my husband for his approval to propose to our daughter. I'm pretty sure my husband didn't respond with anything like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes me wonder if that was an issue between him and Doria. Who BTW throughout all the drama has kept her mouth shut. It does seem to me that Zeezy takes after her father more so than her mother from what I've read.


It makes me wonder if she had a past relationship where she was hit. OR she told people she was hit.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I can just hear *Camilla* referring to her as an "adventuress" and "minx". So much classier than gold digger and hoe


Speaking of the Duchess of Cornwall, it's her 75th birthday tomorrow (July 17th). Wonder if the despicable duo will send her happy birthday greetings? 
Photo taken by Catherine.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Speaking of the Duchess of Cornwall, it's her 75th birthday tomorrow (July 17th). Wonder if the despicable duo will send her happy birthday greetings?
> Photo taken by Catherine.



They blew off William’s birthday so there isn’t a chance in hell of them mentioning Camilla.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Or, he was warning Haz if she struck him, he should not hit back?


Maybe. People tend to forget that the woman can also be the violent partner in a marriage or relationship.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe. People tend to forget that the woman can also be the violent partner in a marriage or relationship.


The more I think about it, I think @csshopper may be on target.  She is a thrower of things and that is first cousin to hitting.  If Meghan is the one reporting that this is what her father said to Harry, I think she twisted it around.  Her father may have told Harry don't hit her back if she strikes you.


----------



## purseinsanity

Wouldn't it be genius if Buckingham Palace actually secretly commissioned the Bower book themselves?  They could let out all sorts of secrets they've dug up on TW, and it gives Bower protection from lawsuits by Hazbeen and TW.  Maybe that's why he has the balls to tell TW "don't even try to come after me".  BP has deep pockets and a whole lot of connections.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What is somewhat amusing to me is that all of these supporters [Vogue, Enniful, etc.] now look worse than duped.  It seems they were complicit in this deceit.  Who will trust them now?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> *Wouldn't it be genius if Buckingham Palace actually secretly commissioned the Bower book themselves?*  They could let out all sorts of secrets they've dug up on TW, and it gives Bower protection from lawsuits by Hazbeen and TW.  Maybe that's why he has the balls to tell TW "don't even try to come after me".  BP has deep pockets and a whole lot of connections.


And to protect BP and himself, Bower could add, "In cooperation with MI5" in small print on the back cover.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

_10 Lawsuits in 3 Years_… And no mention of Tom Bower's book yet! 








						Harry and Meghan's 10 Lawsuits in 3 Years and What They Say About Couple
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have between them launched an average of around three lawsuits a year since 2019—against both the British government and media.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## lulu212121

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like I heard this a while back, before the book excerpt. Thought it was a weird thing to say but maybe he was just trying to be protective.


I recall the same. In one of his very early interviews. He said it was the only time he talked to Hazbeen.

eta, I bet its in this thread maybe around the time right before the wedding.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She has to be losing her mind over this book.  She will definitely strike back.


----------



## csshopper

Who is protecting the children from their wacko parents as all this drama plays out and they potentially go into free fall? Neither are emotionally healthy and there is apparently no family to form a safety net. Doria would be a long shot, she has never even acknowledged, that I can find, her granddaughter Lily’s 1st birthday for example. When was the last time Meghan took Doria off the shelf and put her on display? Meghan’s hair dresser and photographer are quoted as having seen the children, which is  meaningless.  Nacho and his pwife have moved on to other polo fields. But, other than the hope there are really great Nannies, Archie and Lily seem vulnerable. I honestly don’t think either narcissistic parent has it in them to consider the impact of their behaviors on their children.


----------



## Chanbal

Cory certainly owes Hazz  a debt of gratitude for marrying TW!   




_MEGHAN’S “hectic night” with Rory McIlroy in New York left the golf superstar feeling below par, Tom Bower’s explosive new book reveals.

*The author sets out how Meghan grew close to the superstar in August 2014, while she was with her then partner, chef Cory Vitiello.*

Meghan, then 33, met Rory, 25, while she was staying with a close friend near the Fitzpatrick Manhattan Hotel, where McIlroy had a suite, he writes.

*During the ice-bucket challenge craze, McIlroy “unexpectedly” nominated Meghan.*

Bower writes: “She accepted the challenge, on condition that Rory came to her friend’s apartment and personally poured the bucket over her on the balcony. After the video was posted, the two went to the Fitzpatrick hotel for a drink.”

Bower writes that they had dinner at the lavish Cipriani restaurant in a party of 20 people and were photographed sitting close together.

He continues: “*The following morning, McIlroy arrived at the Ringwood golf course to play in a new competition. Worse for wear after a hectic night, he fell back to 101st place. His performance suffered. ‘I wasn’t quite on my game,’ he confessed. ‘I was enjoying myself’.*”

Eight weeks later, Meghan travelled to Dublin for a conference with then-boyfriend Cory. Yet Bower writes that on the night of October 17 she and Rory had dinner.

*A newspaper report from the time claimed that Meghan and Rory – a favourite to win the Open Championship in St Andrews this weekend – were spotted “looking very cosy”.*

Bower writes that Cory was “annoyed” by the article and “challenged Meghan”, who made it clear she had not betrayed him.

He writes how Meghan discussed “finding an Englishman to marry”, but the agent was “surprised” by the mention of Ashley because of his “unpleasant past”._









						Meg's 'hectic' night with Rory McIlroy left star feeling rough, claims new book
					

MEGHAN’S “hectic night” with Rory McIlroy in New York left the golf superstar feeling below par, Tom Bower’s explosive new book reveals. The author sets out how Meghan grew close to the superstar i…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

What a summer scorcher! I feel I should post in the appreciation thread but but the residents there might not be appreciative...


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG on TW's activism…


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Speaking of the Duchess of Cornwall, it's her 75th birthday tomorrow (July 17th). Wonder if the despicable duo will send her happy birthday greetings?
> Photo taken by Catherine.



Catherine, who actually has some talent.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Cory certainly owes Hazz  a debt of gratitude for marrying TW!
> 
> View attachment 5525275
> 
> 
> _MEGHAN’S “hectic night” with Rory McIlroy in New York left the golf superstar feeling below par, Tom Bower’s explosive new book reveals.
> 
> *The author sets out how Meghan grew close to the superstar in August 2014, while she was with her then partner, chef Cory Vitiello.*
> 
> Meghan, then 33, met Rory, 25, while she was staying with a close friend near the Fitzpatrick Manhattan Hotel, where McIlroy had a suite, he writes.
> 
> *During the ice-bucket challenge craze, McIlroy “unexpectedly” nominated Meghan.*
> 
> Bower writes: “She accepted the challenge, on condition that Rory came to her friend’s apartment and personally poured the bucket over her on the balcony. After the video was posted, the two went to the Fitzpatrick hotel for a drink.”
> 
> Bower writes that they had dinner at the lavish Cipriani restaurant in a party of 20 people and were photographed sitting close together.
> 
> He continues: “*The following morning, McIlroy arrived at the Ringwood golf course to play in a new competition. Worse for wear after a hectic night, he fell back to 101st place. His performance suffered. ‘I wasn’t quite on my game,’ he confessed. ‘I was enjoying myself’.*”
> 
> Eight weeks later, Meghan travelled to Dublin for a conference with then-boyfriend Cory. Yet Bower writes that on the night of October 17 she and Rory had dinner.
> 
> *A newspaper report from the time claimed that Meghan and Rory – a favourite to win the Open Championship in St Andrews this weekend – were spotted “looking very cosy”.*
> 
> Bower writes that Cory was “annoyed” by the article and “challenged Meghan”, who made it clear she had not betrayed him.
> 
> He writes how Meghan discussed “finding an Englishman to marry”, but the agent was “surprised” by the mention of Ashley because of his “unpleasant past”._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg's 'hectic' night with Rory McIlroy left star feeling rough, claims new book
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S “hectic night” with Rory McIlroy in New York left the golf superstar feeling below par, Tom Bower’s explosive new book reveals. The author sets out how Meghan grew close to the superstar i…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


She really is a....


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Cory certainly owes Hazz  a debt of gratitude for marrying TW!
> 
> View attachment 5525275
> 
> 
> _MEGHAN’S “hectic night” with Rory McIlroy in New York left the golf superstar feeling below par, Tom Bower’s explosive new book reveals.
> 
> *The author sets out how Meghan grew close to the superstar in August 2014, while she was with her then partner, chef Cory Vitiello.*
> 
> Meghan, then 33, met Rory, 25, while she was staying with a close friend near the Fitzpatrick Manhattan Hotel, where McIlroy had a suite, he writes.
> 
> *During the ice-bucket challenge craze, McIlroy “unexpectedly” nominated Meghan.*
> 
> Bower writes: “She accepted the challenge, on condition that Rory came to her friend’s apartment and personally poured the bucket over her on the balcony. After the video was posted, the two went to the Fitzpatrick hotel for a drink.”
> 
> Bower writes that they had dinner at the lavish Cipriani restaurant in a party of 20 people and were photographed sitting close together.
> 
> He continues: “*The following morning, McIlroy arrived at the Ringwood golf course to play in a new competition. Worse for wear after a hectic night, he fell back to 101st place. His performance suffered. ‘I wasn’t quite on my game,’ he confessed. ‘I was enjoying myself’.*”
> 
> Eight weeks later, Meghan travelled to Dublin for a conference with then-boyfriend Cory. Yet Bower writes that on the night of October 17 she and Rory had dinner.
> 
> *A newspaper report from the time claimed that Meghan and Rory – a favourite to win the Open Championship in St Andrews this weekend – were spotted “looking very cosy”.*
> 
> Bower writes that Cory was “annoyed” by the article and “challenged Meghan”, who made it clear she had not betrayed him.
> 
> He writes how Meghan discussed “finding an Englishman to marry”, but the agent was “surprised” by the mention of Ashley because of his “unpleasant past”._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg's 'hectic' night with Rory McIlroy left star feeling rough, claims new book
> 
> 
> MEGHAN’S “hectic night” with Rory McIlroy in New York left the golf superstar feeling below par, Tom Bower’s explosive new book reveals. The author sets out how Meghan grew close to the superstar i…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


This is very interesting. My husband is a serious golfer, so although I don't play I pick up a lot about the players. In May 2014 McIlroy broke up with then fiancee, pro tennis player Caroline Wozniacki, reportedly via text. She claimed to have been blindsided by it. This incident with Zeezy happened shortly thereafter. Luckily for him he escaped her claws and married someone from the pro golf world in 2016.


----------



## mellibelly

Jktgal said:


> What a summer scorcher! I feel I should post in the appreciation thread but the *resident* there might not be appreciative...


I fixed your typo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The BLG on TW's activism…




My my, never have seen that photo of MM and Corey.  So much shady stuff, definitely need another book to sort it out.


----------



## gracekelly

Wondering if BP put out the word to speak with Bower, Hoping the book would come out with the truth because they knew they weren’t going to publish the bullying report.


----------



## jelliedfeels

jelliedfeels said:


> I think this bit is giving H way too much credit. Pop psychology has been an enormously popular subject for at least 10-15 years before this and the current fever has probably got more to do with the likes of Jordan the lobster. Tbh I think Brock Lesnar is a more influential redhead in discussing depression and suicide than H.
> 
> Lol well they need to get their rebuttal book out  stat. Tbh I feel like even this revenge book is coming out a bit late to make a big splash. After the interview would have been really impactful. I feel like a lot of people who aren’t in one camp or the other don’t care anymore.
> 
> This is true. The truth is free but the fantasy pays very well.
> 
> He’s pretty good on politicians. I might pick up the one on Charles as well & then there’s a bit of foreground.
> 
> Wallis wasn’t wrong. Waking up next to a fascist moron you were seducing for clout every day must take some doing- great jewellery at least I guess.
> 
> That is bizarre, I wouldn’t take my dogs for a walk in a busy place like LA unless I was trying to get them run over…again.
> 
> Isn’t so cal somewhat well known for the countryside and beaches?
> 
> I’m sure she goes to lunches with other ‘trophy’ wives that is her logical social group. I’m sure the conversation is riveting.
> 
> I’m sure he’s a lovely person but he does have chronic smug face. I’m sure what the world needs now is one more posh boy British actor - we used to have gorgeous actors but now it’s a Rich boy’s game Benedict cumberbatch is the best looking one- it’s criminal


Just quoting myself as a source a La H&M thinking about it the acting only being for the rich trend has spread far beyond the U.K. I mean M’s strong connections to the LA film industry clearly explain how she could even get a job as ‘hot girl #5’ when she a) can’t act and b) It does stagger me when she gets called a beauty or hot- she’s really close to ugly in my opinion. Plain Jane at best. The wig (awful as it is) high heels and the fake tan is doing a lot of the heavy lifting.


papertiger said:


> She's literally offensive


I mean the ultimate irony is “I’m not someone who doesnt have a job! I’m a well-known, hard-working philanthropist” said every rich house wife or husband self-conscious about not having a job ever.

I believe that is what she aspires to, but the ones who have any actual clout probably wouldn't want to be caught dead with her. She will end up in that refuge of wannabes, RHoBH or something similar. I guess it's not a bad paycheck for some of them and feeds their need for drama and attention, so she'd be a perfect fit. As for walking the dogs in LA, she probably does it in Brentwood or Pacific Palisades knowing the paps are always roaming there and it is safe. Everything she does is calculated.
she isn’t entertaining enough for real housewives. She’d be on one of the knock-off shows that gets cancelled instantly


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She really is a....



Thanks a lot.  You just ruined a child hood favorite song.  

  

(No joking though, you kinda did.  )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> I fixed your typo


Boy, I miss Ceejay and her corrections!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is sick (though I'll say, I'd be surprised if VF let her decide what to title the cover?).


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is sick (though I'll say, I'd be surprised if VF let her decide what to title the cover?).




It's one thing for others to make comparisons, join the dots or notice coincidences. The headline was possibly accidental (lots of Harry puns, probably all used previously). Would today's VF staff be aware of a headline from 1980s British Sun tabloid? Perhaps they did.

The problem with Megatron, is that she is a control freak and can't leave anything to chance. Such an obvious, deliberate manipulator, the acting (out) of a 6 year old child would be more subtle and convincing. She has been desperate for Diana comparisons. TBH, media celebs come and go, I'm not even sure Diana (in memorandum) is such a star-turn these days.

In retrospect, the whole Diana thing doesn't give-off philanthropy and  - of  s vibes so much as it brings-up the whole Di v Chas  &/or Di-hard v Cami-knickers. All of that histrionic soap opera and whining from the entitled over-privileged that couldn't keep their private-lives private seems so unnecessary and déclassé now (the Johnny and Amber of their day).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The Bower story - she was supposed NOT to talk about H to Vanity Fair, but gushed about being in love , making BP furious … BP saw through her all along
> 
> my interpretation of this story - he had to propose after all that hoopla , the whole thing was kinda like a setup, think shotgun wedding kind of setup, a ginormous manipulation



Iirc he was already forced to make an announcement they were dating after SOMEONE leaked it to the press.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Iirc he was already forced to make an announcement they were dating after SOMEONE leaked it to the press.


I thought it was supposed to be low-key but she tottered around town showing off necklaces with their initials?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I thought it was supposed to be low-key but she tottered around town showing off necklaces with their initials?



Don't quote me, but I think first there were the hints (e.g. the necklace, the spooning bananas on her Insta), and when the press was slow to catch on, SOMEONE tipped them off.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is sick (though I'll say, I'd be surprised if VF let her decide what to title the cover?).



Can't get over that arms akimbo pose no matter how many times I've seen it. I wonder how long or how often she made that pose until she was satisfied that enough photos were snapped so that somebody somewhere somehow sometime would go  "Omg Diana v.2"!


----------



## Luvbolide

csshopper said:


> This isn’t an original observation, but don’t remember where I read it this week.
> 
> Re: Monday and the speech at the UN. Based on Mandela’s relationship with the Royal Family, the Queen would be the most appropriate speaker. They had multiple Interactions through the years, there was evidently respect and liking, he called her Elizabeth and she called him Nelson. Whoever was relating this in the article pointed out the Queen could have done a video tribute. Too bad no one asked.



Agree - having the Queen would have been ten million times more appropriate.  Mandela deserves sooo much better than this excommunicated royal twerp!


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> *I thought that bit about TM telling Hazy not to raise a hand to her was really odd*. Why would he bring that up? Our son-in-law asked my husband for his approval to propose to our daughter. I'm pretty sure my husband didn't respond with anything like that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes me wonder if that was an issue between him and Doria. Who BTW throughout all the drama has kept her mouth shut. It does seem to me that Zeezy takes after her father more so than her mother from what I've read.



Maybe because her previous husbands did....but who wouldn't? (joke  )

Actually it's more likely she hit THEM!!


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is sick (though I'll say, I'd be surprised if VF let her decide what to title the cover?).




Twisted!


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> Catherine, who actually has some talent.


Chris Getty is credited for this photo.


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> Can't get over that arms akimbo pose no matter how many times I've seen it. I wonder how long or how often she made that pose until she was satisfied that enough photos were snapped so that somebody somewhere somehow sometime would go  "Omg Diana v.2"!



Agreed!  Until I saw that photo I didn’t think much of the theory that MM was consciously copying Diana, but that photo erased all doubt.  About 1/2 step short of getting a life sized photo of Diana on cardboard to carry around with her.  You know the kind?  The ones where you put your face into a hole where the photo’s face would have been.  

She is one seriously disturbed person.


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> Maybe because her previous husbands did....but who wouldn't? (joke  )
> 
> Actually it's more likely she hit THEM!!


Or maybe her father knew that she was capable of behaving in a way that made anyone want to slap her, and this was his way of protecting her. 

Not to say I'm in favour of causing physical harm except in self- defense, but after suffering the antics of 3 full-blown narcs in my 30 years in this office, I can imagine how much a person would want to retaliate if the narc in their life was fond of throwing things at them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Not to say I'm in favour of causing physical harm except in self- defense, but after suffering the antics of 3 full-blown narcs in my 30 years in this office, I can imagine how much a person would want to retaliate if the narc in their life was fond of throwing things at them.



True, but if the narc's victim was good at setting boundaries and standing up for themselves they wouldn't be trapped in this unhealthy relationship to begin with. The narc is extremely good at chipping away even at the most stable sanity, self-esteem etc. and once you notice, it's possibly too late.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maximum level creepy:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I remember when the VF cover came out, all I could keep thinking is that she looked like a mouse. But everyone was going on and on about how gorgeous she is, so I stayed quiet.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Boy, I miss Ceejay and her corrections!


Yep! She was supposed to be here with us for the TB's book release. She knew people that knew TW, and she was our first reliable source imo. She was never intimidated by sugars. I believe she was the first one to have the courage to describe this couple as 'con artists.'


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is sick (though I'll say, I'd be surprised if VF let her decide what to title the cover?).






papertiger said:


> It's one thing for others to make comparisons, join the dots or notice coincidences. The headline was possibly accidental (lots of Harry puns, probably all used previously). Would today's VF staff be aware of a headline from 1980s British Sun tabloid? Perhaps they did.
> 
> The problem with Megatron, is that she is a control freak and can't leave anything to chance. Such an obvious, deliberate manipulator, the acting (out) of a 6 year old child would be more subtle and convincing. She has been desperate for Diana comparisons. TBH, media celebs come and go, I'm not even sure Diana (in memorandum) is such a star-turn these days.
> 
> In retrospect, the whole Diana thing doesn't give-off philanthropy and  - of  s vibes so much as it brings-up the whole Di v Chas  &/or Di-hard v Cami-knickers. All of that histrionic soap opera and whining from the entitled over-privileged that couldn't keep their private-lives private seems so unnecessary and déclassé now (the Johnny and Amber of their day).


It's a big coincidence, I wonder if she mentioned to be wild about someone during the conversation… It is my understanding that she knows a few techniques to plant an idea in someone's mind.


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> It's a big coincidence, I wonder if she mentioned to be wild about someone during the conversation… It is my understanding that she knows a few techniques to plant an idea in someone's mind.


Did you read this from somewhere? It is very interesting if she really knows


----------



## Chanbal

I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, even Harry complied to the colour code. But also...me thinks Raptor has overplayed her hand and really, really annoyed someone out there.


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> Did you read this from somewhere? It is very interesting if she really knows


Nope, just my observations of her apparently seductive behavior. I could be 100% wrong.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, even Harry complied to the colour code. But also...me thinks Raptor has overplayed her hand and really, really annoyed someone out there.



They should photoshop TW’s outfit into a bland beige color.  She didn’t comply to the rules, well then we will just photoshop you into complying!


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, even Harry complied to the colour code. But also...me thinks Raptor has overplayed her hand and really, really annoyed someone out there.



Wow, now that you have pointed out the issue - the tan dress really sticks out like a sore thumb

Dress color seems like such nonsense to worry about - BUT those photos never die, they get pulled out for DECADES . Ex we are still hating the Diana wedding dress. 

So, the outfit COLOR is very important in that job 

Think of how much good press QEII gets for her cheery outfits, she does not wear TAUPE


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Chris Getty is credited for this photo.


Thanks for the correction. I had seen a story about a photoshoot that Catherine did with Camilla recently and assumed she had taken it.


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Chris Getty is credited for this photo.


I believe this was the photo that Catherine took. I still don’t understand the rudeness of publications still referring to her as Kate Middleton.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…



I can't listen to an entire video of this fake, annoying and cloying b!tch's nasal and whiny voice. I was going to add that there aren't enough words to describe TW, but here are the many phony synonyms one can use.  Please help yourselves.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, even Harry complied to the colour code. But also...me thinks Raptor has overplayed her hand and really, really annoyed someone out there.



The comments : "...I finally nailed a *big stupid* and gonna milk it all day every day".

I remember thinking when that photo came out what an awful color to wear to a spring christening. Harry apparently got the memo. Are we to believe he didn't tell her? I'm sure she knew what she was supposed to wear and did this to ruin the photo and upset Kate. What normal person would choose a baby poop brown dress? She will do anything for attention.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Sharont2305 said:


> Chris Getty is credited for this photo.


The photographer is Chris Jackson, who works for Getty.  He does a lot of royal photography.  I follow him on Instagram to see photos and his travel as it happens.  He is chrisjacksongetty on insta.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Nope, just my observations of her apparently seductive behavior. I could be 100% wrong.


Yes, I have read about MM’s seductive/persuasive behavior.  Imo much is similar to Diana’s coy, shy, girlish behavior.  Jackie O used to do similar stuff. It’s all about manipulation, insincere manners and selling the brand.









						Meghan Markle has adopted a 'presidential and persuasive' voice
					

British behaviour expert Judi James suggested the couple's trailer, released yesterday, showed Meghan using 'persuasive' techniques to convince her husband to take the lead.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…




 Shocking that Enniful is really that dim.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, even Harry complied to the colour code. But also...me thinks Raptor has overplayed her hand and really, really annoyed someone out there.



IIRC, it has been mentioned here on this thread, that TW was sticking out like a sore thumb so she would be noticed first in the photo.


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> This is very interesting. My husband is a serious golfer, so although I don't play I pick up a lot about the players. In May 2014 McIlroy broke up with then fiancee, pro tennis player Caroline Wozniacki, reportedly via text. She claimed to have been blindsided by it. This incident with Zeezy happened shortly thereafter. Luckily for him he escaped her claws and married someone from the pro golf world in 2016.


ETA: McIlroy is currently in the lead of the final round of "The Open", and the announcer said it would be his first win of a major tournament since 2014. Maybe Zeezy put a curse on him?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…




If he (EE) and the Vogue team were so PO at her why was he so fawning and sycophantic ?

Shame she wasn't as good as her word and leave fashion to the professional


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The comments : "...I finally nailed a *big stupid* and gonna milk it all day every day".
> 
> I remember thinking when that photo came out what an awful color to wear to a spring christening. Harry apparently got the memo. Are we to believe he didn't tell her? I'm sure she knew what she was supposed to wear and did this to ruin the photo and upset Kate. What normal person would choose a baby poop brown dress? She will do anything for attention.



Except she fades into the background


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shocking that Enniful is really that dim.



I can't tell which one is being more patronising


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Wow, now that you have pointed out the issue - the tan dress really sticks out like a sore thumb
> 
> Dress color seems like such nonsense to worry about - BUT those photos never die, they get pulled out for DECADES . Ex we are still hating the Diana wedding dress.
> 
> So, the outfit COLOR is very important in that job
> 
> Think of how much good press QEII gets for her cheery outfits, she does not wear TAUPE



Not in public anyway. 

Huge difference to what one choses for oneself at the weekend and off-duty to formal wear and strict dress-codes.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> It's one thing for others to make comparisons, join the dots or notice coincidences. The headline was possibly accidental (lots of Harry puns, probably all used previously). Would today's VF staff be aware of a headline from 1980s British Sun tabloid? Perhaps they did.


It's from a famous song that has been used in many places, including Downton Abbey, but here's a fun fact about its origin:

"I'm Just Wild About Harry" was the most popular number of the production, which was the first financially successful Broadway play to have African-American writers and an all African-American cast.[1] The song broke what had been a taboo against musical and stage depictions of romantic love between African-Americans.



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I'm_Just_Wild_About_Harry


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> It's from a famous song that has been used in many places, including Downton Abbey, but here's a fun fact about its origin:
> 
> "I'm Just Wild About Harry" was the most popular number of the production, which was the first financially successful Broadway play to have African-American writers and an all African-American cast.[1] The song broke what had been a taboo against musical and stage depictions of romantic love between African-Americans.



I know the song, Judy Garland did a great version. It's just unusual for journalists to use the same headline (well it used to be).


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…



What a phony waste indeed. Seeing professionals going along with her scheme is…guttural


----------



## papertiger

Obscure footnote:

I don't know whether US tPFers have a programme called _Death in Paradise_, but in S1 (2011) 

The first British detective was introduced to his accommodation, only to find his home was already occupied and being squatted - by a lizard. He called his non-rent-paying shack-mate lizard 'Harry' because it reminded him of Prince Harry.


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> It's from a famous song that has been used in many places, including Downton Abbey, but here's a fun fact about its origin:
> 
> "I'm Just Wild About Harry" was the most popular number of the production, which was the first financially successful Broadway play to have African-American writers and an all African-American cast.[1] The song broke what had been a taboo against musical and stage depictions of romantic love between African-Americans.


Wasn't this very thread called 'We're just wild about Harry' before madam came along?


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> If he (EE) and the Vogue team were so PO at her why was he so fawning and sycophantic ?
> 
> Shame she wasn't as good as her word and leave fashion to the professional


Recollections may have varied since then?


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> Recollections may have varied since then?



Apparently so (you'll have to go back a few pages)


----------



## Chanbal

This is so good…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Obscure footnote:
> 
> I don't know whether US tPFers have a programme called _Death in Paradise_, but in S1 (2011)
> 
> The first British detective was introduced to his accommodation, only to find his home was already occupied and being squatted - by a lizard. He called his non-rent-paying shack-mate lizard 'Harry' because it reminded him of Prince Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5525491



Yes, and have enjoyed every episode. Hope he’s still in the cast for the upcoming 12 season. DI’s come and go, he’s outlasted them all.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, even Harry complied to the colour code. But also...me thinks Raptor has overplayed her hand and really, really annoyed someone out there.



IIRC this wasn't the only time she deliberately wore an outfit that wasn't colour coordinated.


----------



## Chanbal

TB seems to have a lot more info he didn't print…


----------



## Chanbal

One more episode from TB's book… 




			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Another interesting headline! It doesn't seem to help TW's political aspirations… 










						Fact-checking Meghan Markle: Vanity Fair couldn’t verify activism claims, new book says
					

When Meghan Markle was dating Prince Harry, she hoped that a cover story in the national magazine would emphasize her role as an activist and philanthropist. A new book explains why that didn&#8217…




					www.mercurynews.com


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> The comments : "...I finally nailed a *big stupid* and gonna milk it all day every day".
> 
> I remember thinking when that photo came out what an awful color to wear to a spring christening. Harry apparently got the memo. Are we to believe he didn't tell her? I'm sure she knew what she was supposed to wear and did this to ruin the photo and upset Kate. What normal person would choose a baby poop brown dress? She will do anything for attention.


It was Meghan (in her mind) asserting herself right from the start. Nobody was going to tell her what to do. She was letting them know their rules and dress codes would not apply to her.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh, this is a good one…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> Obscure footnote:
> 
> I don't know whether US tPFers have a programme called _*Death in Paradise*_, but in S1 (2011)
> 
> The first British detective was introduced to his accommodation, only to find his home was already occupied and being squatted - by a lizard. He called his non-rent-paying shack-mate lizard 'Harry' because it reminded him of Prince Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5525491


BritBox is airing a few seasons of this programme. I haven't watched it, but now, I must take a peek just for the sake of the little lizard named Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Wasn't this very thread called 'We're just wild about Harry' before madam came along?


Yes, and coincidentally that was about the time we stopped being wild about him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If he (EE) and the Vogue team were so PO at her why was he so fawning and sycophantic ?
> 
> Shame she wasn't as good as her word and leave fashion to the professional



From what I understood his team saw through her way earlier than he did. He was still occupied with her...colour (which, sorry to say, is not the same as his, but ok).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Another interesting headline! It doesn't seem to help TW's political aspirations…
> View attachment 5525525
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fact-checking Meghan Markle: Vanity Fair couldn’t verify activism claims, new book says
> 
> 
> When Meghan Markle was dating Prince Harry, she hoped that a cover story in the national magazine would emphasize her role as an activist and philanthropist. A new book explains why that didn&#8217…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mercurynews.com



I like that headline. More people should fact-check.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like that headline. More people should fact-check.


Today’s journalists only fact check people they already don’t like.


----------



## CobaltBlu

HELLOOOOOOOO!!!!  Just wanted to say hootie hoo; I have been reading and keeping entertained through my bout of Covid.  
I am loving these book excerpts and comments.  

I miss CeeJay like the dickens, and can just imagine all she would be saying with each and every post. 
You all are doing her proud, that is for sure. 

Carry on, pip pip. 
I am here SMHing and WTFing with you all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> HELLOOOOOOOO!!!!  Just wanted to say hootie hoo; I have been reading and keeping entertained through my bout of Covid.
> I am loving these book excerpts and comments.
> 
> I miss CeeJay like the dickens, and can just imagine all she would be saying with each and every post.
> You all are doing her proud, that is for sure.
> 
> Carry on, pip pip.
> I am here SMHing and WTFing with you all



Are you somewhat recovered? I'm going back and forth between my wish to travel and my bigger wish not to catch the plague which seems easier just staying home haha.

Yeah, I've thought a dozen times CeeJay ought to be here and give a witty, snarky comment. So unfair.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I ordered my book via Prime and it will still take until Thursday to arrive? I guess it's shipped from the UK then.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Please don't mind me. I'm trying to figure out how to post a YT video. Still trying to get used to the updated website  I hate that we can't preview post before posting to make sure a media will post correctly.

If I get it to work, I just want to say this song reminds me of Z-list, psycho indeed!


----------



## LizzieBennett

Chanbal said:


> TB seems to have a lot more info he didn't print…



I find it difficult to believe that the Queen would say something like that about Meghan to anyone other than perhaps Angela Kelly and I don’t think that Angela Kelly would repeat that statement if she did.   For me that just doesn’t ring true in the context the author presents in his book.   The Queen may very well have thought that, but I just can’t believe she would voice that sentiment aloud.   She is too private a person in my opinion.


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> It was Meghan (in her mind) asserting herself right from the start. Nobody was going to tell her what to do. She was letting them know their rules and dress codes would not apply to her.


What an ungrateful cow. Especially since all of her clothes including that horsesh!t colored dress were paid for by Charles.


----------



## CobaltBlu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you somewhat recovered? I'm going back and forth between my wish to travel and my bigger wish not to catch the plague which seems easier just staying home haha.
> 
> Yeah, I've thought a dozen times CeeJay ought to be here and give a witty, snarky comment. So unfair.


Yes, I am pretty recovered, tomorrow will be two weeks.  I had two vaccines and one booster (pfizer), but honestly there were a couple of days where the congestion was brutal. It started with a scratchy throat, so heads up. I am with you, and in fact I am more afraid of catching it again than I was of catching it after the vaccine regime. Of course before the vaccines I was terrified. I got a second booster (CanSino) Friday; I read its good to mix them and anyway thats all that is offered where I live and we are officially in the 5th wave.  

And, yes, I do think of CeeJay often when I am on the boards; she is definitely missed and very fondly remembered. 

Back to topic:  Here is a little nugget about their popularity...or lack thereof. 








						How Meghan and Harry's Platinum Jubilee visit affected U.K. popularity
					

Meghan Markle made her first public return to Britain for Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee after two years of difficult popularity ratings for the couple.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Please don't mind me. I'm trying to figure out how to post a YT video. Still trying to get used to the updated website  I hate that we can't preview post before posting to make sure a media will post correctly.
> 
> If I get it to work, I just want to say this song reminds me of Z-list, psycho indeed!




We can preview - the button has moved to the top right corner of the post.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> What an ungrateful cow. Especially since all of her clothes including that *horsesh!t colored dress *were paid for by Charles.


Thank you! I truly enjoy the colourful expressions in this thread that often leave vivid impressions in my mind and for example, I can picture TW wearing a dress made of horse manure.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I ordered my book via Prime and it will still take until Thursday to arrive? I guess it's shipped from the UK then.


I wonder if the kindle version is out
ETA: oh it is. Taking it now


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> I wonder if the kindle version is out



It is in Germany, and also the Audible version.


----------



## bag-mania

LizzieBennett said:


> I find it difficult to believe that the Queen would say something like that about Meghan to anyone other than perhaps Angela Kelly and I don’t think that Angela Kelly would repeat that statement if she did.   For me that just doesn’t ring true in the context the author presents in his book.   The Queen may very well have thought that, but I just can’t believe she would voice that sentiment aloud.   She is too private a person in my opinion.


I agree it doesn’t sound like the Queen to not be more discreet. The only reason it may be credible is that something happens to people when they reach an advanced age. (No, I don’t mean dementia.) They begin to realize they don’t give a sh!t about what other people think and start speaking without using their filters all the time. There’s no way to know if the Queen has reached that level of exasperation with her family’s drama, but nobody could blame her if she has.


----------



## mellibelly

Methane must be losing her mind right about now. All of the embarrassing stories confirming she’s a liar and a fraud aren’t from the palace. They are connected to Vogue and Vanity Fair staff. I hope Spotify and Netflix are taking note. Even if the quote from the Queen isn’t true, how crushing to have HM say how glad she is that you aren’t there BY NAME when your entire relevancy depends on your supposed closeness to HM.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> We can preview - the button has moved to the top right corner of the post.



Do you mind showing me where the preview button is with a screenshot? I can't find it


----------



## mellibelly

I imagine she’s looking at her laptop, iPad and phone on the couch like that black & white photo with TPF, Reddit, YouTube, Twitter, Daily Mail all open reading the comments about herself while screaming at her staff to shut it down


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Do you mind showing me where the preview button is with a screenshot? I can't find it


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Methane must be losing her mind right about now. All of the embarrassing stories confirming she’s a liar and a fraud aren’t from the palace. They are connected to Vogue and Vanity Fair staff. I hope Spotify and Netflix are taking note. Even if the quote from the Queen isn’t true, how crushing to have HM say how glad she is that you aren’t there BY NAME when your entire relevancy depends on your supposed closeness to HM.



Let’s see if she shows up tomorrow.  This could be interesting.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I have read about MM’s seductive/persuasive behavior.  Imo much is similar to Diana’s coy, shy, girlish behavior.  Jackie O used to do similar stuff. It’s all about manipulation, insincere manners and selling the brand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has adopted a 'presidential and persuasive' voice
> 
> 
> British behaviour expert Judi James suggested the couple's trailer, released yesterday, showed Meghan using 'persuasive' techniques to convince her husband to take the lead.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The difference being at the beginning Diana I believe was a shy young girl unlike *ZZZZ *who was an older divorced worldly ZZZ level conniving actress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> The difference being at the beginning Diana I believe was a shy young girl unlike *ZZZZ *who was an older divorced worldly ZZZ level conniving actress.


Divorced with plenty of experience with men. The golfer story was news to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maximum level creepy:



I'm starting to think Bower is a lurker here too!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I remember when the VF cover came out, all I could keep thinking is that she looked like a mouse. But everyone was going on and on about how gorgeous she is, so I stayed quiet.


I thought so too!  

Like one of those innocent looking cartoon mice.  Like Jack in Cinderella.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…



I can't stomach watching the whole thing.  There are the overly arched eye brows to emphasize innocence and the utterly phony laugh, "Just call me Meghan".  Where have I heard that before?  She's such a stupid cow.


----------



## bellecate

She’s always had and has a grift going.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thinking of CeeJay who in almost every post said she knew someone who told her MM was a liar.  CeeJay told us we would be shocked to find out how much MM has lied about.  Wonder if TomB contacted her?  Has anyone seen Doria?

Requiescat in pace, CeeJay 


Article from Feb., 2020 [but we knew long ago]:








						Meghan Markle admits she lied to casting directors for a part
					

The clip from a promotional appearance Meghan did for Suits shows her confessing to lying. Meghan and Harry have already begun a transition phase of living in Canada and the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> She’s always had and has a grift going.
> 
> View attachment 5530613
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530614


In other words, she stole them.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I agree it doesn’t sound like the Queen to not be more discreet. The only reason it may be credible is that something happens to people when they reach an advanced age. (No, I don’t mean dementia.) They begin to realize they don’t give a sh!t about what other people think and start speaking without using their filters all the time. There’s no way to know if the Queen has reached that level of exasperation with her family’s drama, but nobody could blame her if she has.


Totally agree. I just read a comment somewhere that said you don't get grouchier as you get older, you just become more honest.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> She’s always had and has a grift going.
> 
> View attachment 5530613
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530614


Look at how dirty they became!  She never even cleaned them.  I wouldn't wear shoes looking like that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> In other words, she stole them.



I'm just amazed how many sh*tty things are coming out now, and it doesn't even matter if they are true (I completely believe she took the shoes, though). The remarkable thing is that they are written about her for everyone to see. I guess the royal immunity is wearing off, hu?


----------



## Kevinaxx

SMH 

To be fair I can’t believe the staff didn’t see that one coming. For someone whose as diva as her with little to no clout in her line of work, of course she’s going to take the expensive shoes (she demanded they purchase for the shoot) with her.


----------



## gracekelly

Meg told off every one of Harry's pals who defied her woke values, says new book
					

SOME of Prince Harry’s oldest friends clashed with Meghan Markle over her strict woke views – and concluded she had no sense of humour, according to an explosive new book. From the very beginning o…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




Aside from the fact that these aristo types have no problem making anti-Semitic, race related, anti-gay etc remarks, she didn't understand British wit even when they said something that was politically correct.   She should have just sucked it up or left the room  and told Harry privately that these were not her kind of people.  Sitting there and arguing or lecturing strangers was not the way to go.  She had no understanding that these were people that Harry grew up with.  I am not excusing their comments, but these folks are who they are and they were not about to change for her.  I don't think that Harry, in his heart of hearts, has changed his views either and is still exactly like the men he grew up with. If she disappeared tomorrow, he would revert to be just like them.


----------



## gracekelly

Kevinaxx said:


> View attachment 5530619
> 
> 
> SMH
> 
> To be fair I can’t believe the staff didn’t see that one coming. For someone whose as diva as her with little to no clout in her line of work, of course she’s going to take the expensive shoes (she demanded they purchase for the shoot) with her.


If she had diamond earrings from Harry Winston given to her to wear like Sharon Stone did, she would have held on to them too.  Sharon fought to keep them and managed to wear them for a year before she had to give them back.


----------



## pukasonqo

Kevinaxx said:


> View attachment 5530619
> 
> 
> SMH
> 
> To be fair I can’t believe the staff didn’t see that one coming. For someone whose as diva as her with little to no clout in her line of work, of course she’s going to take the expensive shoes (she demanded they purchase for the shoot) with her.



Why is her back so arched on those pics?


----------



## gracekelly

The close aide who heard TQ remark that she was glad that Meghan was not going to the funeral had to be Angela Kelly, or her Lady in Waiting, Lady Susan Hussy, or the footman who kept her company and watched TV with her.  Apparently they watched Line of Duty and enjoyed it.  I am taking bets that Hussy and/or AK were allowed to spill some beans about what was going on at the palace.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

pukasonqo said:


> Why is her back so arched on those pics?


So she can thrust her body closer to him.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Divorced with plenty of experience with men. The golfer story was news to me.


Plenty of experience with men.  Bawhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> Why is her back so arched on those pics?


The shoes do not fit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Aside from the fact that these aristo types have no problem making anti-Semitic, race related, anti-gay etc remarks, she didn't understand British wit even when they said something that was politically correct.   She should have just sucked it up or left the room  and told Harry privately that these were not her kind of people.  Sitting there and arguing or lecturing strangers was not the way to go.  She had no understanding that these were people that Harry grew up with.  I am not excusing their comments, but these folks are who they are and they were not about to change for her.  I don't think that Harry, in his heart of hearts, has changed his views either and is still exactly like the men he grew up with. If she disappeared tomorrow, he would revert to be just like them.



I agree with all of this, but I do think it doesn't hurt to try to be on at least polite terms with your husband's childhood friends. She can be assured she is not their kind of person either, but they would never have said it to her face.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> If she had diamond earrings from Harry Winston given to her to wear like Sharon Stone did, she would have held on to them too.  Sharon fought to keep them and managed to wear them for a year before she had to give them back.


HW diamond earrings I can see, but those shoes do her no favors, like so much of what she wears.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The shoes do not fit.


Probably from her briefcase girl days, or as Midge Maisel says before she goes on stage, "tits out".


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> He called his non-rent-paying shack-mate lizard 'Harry' because it reminded him of Prince Harry.


The lizard's cuter and surely less drama.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with all of this, but I do think it doesn't hurt to try to be on at least polite terms with your husband's childhood friends. She can be assured she is not their kind of person either, but they would never have said it to her face.


Exactly.  They would be unfailingly polite and them discuss it later, which is what they did by texting.


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> The cover photo is amazing as it shows even in the peak of her looks she had beady eyes and scraggly hair like a pig drawn by Ronald Searle:
> View attachment 5510640


I don't like her either but she extremely photogenic and probably so pretty in person...


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> I read in another thread that her connection to Enninful was through Markus, there are plenty of pictures illustrating their very close friendship. It's interesting to watch this video after reading what Tom Bower wrote about the Vanity Fair article. What a phony…




This is godawful, like fingernails on a blackboard. Who is the gentleman?  His gushing and fawning is excessive, to put it mildly. The way these people talk, it's all so fake and smarmy. Time for a shower, methinks!


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5525615



You are my savior  Thank you!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I don't like her either but she extremely photogenic and probably so pretty in person...


Imo she looks like so many other Hwood females - long dark hair, smokey eye, glossy lips, scary skinny, intelligence is questionable. 
Fake and smarmy phonies, as @MiniMabel says.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> If she had diamond earrings from Harry Winston given to her to wear like Sharon Stone did, she would have held on to them too.  Sharon fought to keep them and managed to wear them for a year before she had to give them back.


I always found that story puzzling. Sharon Stone was a star who I'm sure could have afforded to pay for them. Didn't she try to claim they were a gift and HW said no way? It's common practice for high jewelers to lend pieces for the red carpet, but not gift them. The necklace that Gwyneth Paltrow wore when she won her Oscar was purchased afterward by her father for I believe $400k.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I always found that story puzzling. Sharon Stone was a star who I'm sure could have afforded to pay for them. Didn't she try to claim they were a gift and HW said no way? It's common practice for high jewelers to lend pieces for the red carpet, but not gift them. The necklace that Gwyneth Paltrow wore when she won her Oscar was purchased afterward by her father for I believe $400k.



Celebrities typically can afford stuff but the problem is, some of them feel entitled and that stuff should be gifted to them and they shouldn't need to pay for anything. Z-list is a typical example


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> Methane must be losing her mind right about now. All of the embarrassing stories confirming she’s a liar and a fraud aren’t from the palace. They are connected to Vogue and Vanity Fair staff. I hope Spotify and Netflix are taking note. Even if the quote from the Queen isn’t true, how crushing to have HM say how glad she is that you aren’t there BY NAME when your entire relevancy depends on your supposed closeness to HM.



I think the QEII quote is true, I also don't think it's a big deal she said it. 

And is someone (was allowed to) report(ed) it, it was done so with her knowing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I don't like her either but she extremely photogenic and probably so pretty in person...


At the time I knew nothing about her and thought she was pretty enough, but not anything special. The woman who snapped her at the July 4th parade said she was beautiful in person. That is not unusual. Back in the 90s my husband and I attended his admin's wedding. I had never met her in person, only talked on the phone. She gushed, "You're so much prettier in person!". 
Uh, thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Celebrities typically can afford stuff but the problem is, some of them feel entitled and that stuff should be gifted to them and they shouldn't need to pay for anything. Z-list is a typical example



Our CeeJay had more than one story about celebs trying to get her jewelry for free. Of course she nipped that in the bud.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> I imagine she’s looking at her laptop, iPad and phone on the couch like that black & white photo with TPF, Reddit, YouTube, Twitter, Daily Mail all open reading the comments about herself while screaming at her staff to shut it down



Finally the Duchess should be happy then, her wish has come true, maybe she'll "break the Internet"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

MiniMabel said:


> This is godawful, like fingernails on a blackboard. Who is the gentleman?  His gushing and fawning is excessive, to put it mildly. The way these people talk, it's all so fake and smarmy. Time for a shower, methinks!



The Vogue UK editor-in-chief.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Celebrities typically can afford stuff but the problem is, some of them feel entitled and that stuff should be gifted to them and they shouldn't need to pay for anything. Z-list is a typical example


The amount of freebies they get in Oscar swag bags has always amazed me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Finally the Duchess should be happy then, her wish has come true, maybe she'll "break the Internet"



Be careful what you wish for, hu? At least always add a disclaimer to your wishes so it doesn't turn out like this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> The amount of freebies they get in Oscar swag bags has always amazed me.



It's kind of disgusting. Multimillionares going home with 100000+ in gifts. Why not donate the money to a cause? They don't need more stuff.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think the QEII quote is true, I also don't think it's a big deal she said it.
> 
> And is someone (was allowed to) report(ed) it, it was done so with her knowing.



And that really tells us all we need to know.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I think the QEII quote is true, I also don't think it's a big deal she said it.
> 
> And is someone (was allowed to) report(ed) it, it was done so with her knowing.


All I know is, she has looked much happier since the Jubilee. It really makes me wonder if she did get a galley proof from Bower.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm just amazed how many sh*tty things are coming out now, and it doesn't even matter if they are true (I completely believe she took the shoes, though). The remarkable thing is that they are written about her for everyone to see. I guess the royal immunity is wearing off, hu?



Yup, been a while, but the rest of the (media) world seems to be catching-up. 

There are always those protected people or 'holy cows'. Seems the the 'holy cow' is now just being recognised as a cow.  

Harry is still a lizard though. He used to be thought of as quite cute, even though little green. Now he's just scaly with a forked tongue


----------



## Jktgal

What do y'all think? Is it the engagement shoes? Omo this is so delicious I'm hyperventilating.
Tbh the ads are actually good - interesting and catchy, and she looked good.


----------



## jellyv

papertiger said:


> Yup, been a while, but the rest of the (media) world seems to be catching-up.
> 
> There are always those protected people or *'holy cows'. *Seems the the 'holy cow' is now just being recognised as a cow.


[Btw the US English idiom for this is "sacred cow."]


----------



## Jayne1

Do you think Bower will investigate the rumours of Meg and whether she actually gave birth?  That's what always interested me.

Did anyone find out the name of her OB-GYN or where she gave birth in the UK and why she was so secretive. 

I love a good mystery/conspiracy theory and hope Bower explored it too.


----------



## charlottawill

Jktgal said:


> What do y'all think? Is it the engagement shoes? Omo this is so delicious I'm hyperventilating.
> Tbh the ads are actually good - interesting and catchy, and she looked good.
> 
> View attachment 5530637
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530638


It sure looks like them. Great find!


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Do you think Bower will investigate the rumours of Meg and whether she actually gave birth?  That's what always interested me.
> 
> Did anyone find out the name of her OB-GYN or where she gave birth in the UK and why she was so secretive.
> 
> I love a good mystery/conspiracy theory and hope Bower explored it too.


I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. Invisibet's origin seems murkier to me. Although I find her to be a loathsome creature, she is entitled to medical privacy. I wouldn't want people snooping around in my medical history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> At the time I knew nothing about her and thought she was pretty enough, but not anything special. The woman who snapped her at the July 4th parade said she was beautiful in person. That is not unusual. Back in the 90s my husband and I attended his admin's wedding. I had never met her in person, only talked on the phone. She gushed, "You're so much prettier in person!".
> Uh, thanks.


I was responding to the comment about her "beady eyes and scraggly hair like a pig drawn by Ronald Searle" and thought it went a bit too far.  lol

She really is pretty and in most photos, she looks very attractive. Especially since the photos are from all angles.  It's hard to look good at all angles unless you are photogenic, I think.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I was responding to the comment about her "beady eyes and scraggly hair like a pig drawn by Ronald Searle" and thought it went a bit too far.  lol
> 
> She really is pretty and in most photos, she looks very attractive. Especially since the photos are from all angles.  It's hard to look good at all angles unless you are photogenic, I think.


The opposite can also be true. I've seen people who look better in photos than in person.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. Invisibet's origin seems murkier to me. Although I find her to be a loathsome creature, she is entitled to medical privacy. I wouldn't want people snooping around in my medical history.


Except it isn't done in the BRF and that's what she signed up for.

I agree, a regular private person does not owe anyone anything, but a person's lifestyle supported by the British government/ Sovereign Grant (which she was at the time of Archie's birth) does.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. Invisibet's origin seems murkier to me. Although I find her to be a loathsome creature, she is entitled to medical privacy. I wouldn't want people snooping around in my medical history.



Absolutely. Unless you try to scam the BRF with a baby you didn't carry when that's the prerequisite for being in the LOS. But again, that's between them and her, not us and her.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I always found that story puzzling. Sharon Stone was a star who I'm sure could have afforded to pay for them. Didn't she try to claim they were a gift and HW said no way? It's common practice for high jewelers to lend pieces for the red carpet, but not gift them. The necklace that Gwyneth Paltrow wore when she won her Oscar was purchased afterward by her father for I believe $400k.



There _could_ have been a mix-up, info from the stylist, I very much think she was just being 'cheeky'. 

Clothes and accessories are often gifted to celebs, some are paid to wear (not much use given back except as samples anyway, and the soft advertising is aimed at a more mainstream market) 

but 

IME I have_ never_ known high-jewellery being gifted for one event. They are under security's eye the whole time from safe > employee > celeb and back again immediately after the event <<<, sometimes the stylist doesn't get to handle them at all. If Stone walked off with the stones, it was 99.9% no mistake. Had she wanted to buy them, a discount could have been arranged. That night she got a lot of people in trouble. 

Someone would have got into big trouble for Meghan's 'gifted' shoes too. Lots of people in the fashion industry are on temp and freelance contracts. You don't need to fire or even reprimand people not to work with them again.  It's a very small world too, much smaller than you may think.


----------



## Jktgal

There's something abt getting things "free" that ummm ... excites people? In the jewelry threads, people spending hundreds of thousands $ are waxing lyrical abt free macarons, or kvetching they didn't  get the free cleaning kit (which they could just buy on ebay for $25).

Nothing is ever free. If not you, someone else is paying for it.

Edit - the tpf auto censor is so good, helps me improve my english to find synonyms for curses ha


----------



## EverSoElusive

I might be the minority here but those shoes that Z-list conveniently made them hers are ugly to me      She could have chosen another pair.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's kind of disgusting. Multimillionares going home with 100000+ in gifts. Why not donate the money to a cause? They don't need more stuff.



It's just stuff for PR. Influencers of all kinds get boxes every day


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

pukasonqo said:


> Why is her back so arched on those pics?


She forgot to stand straight — still doing her pelvic thrust exercises.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Except it isn't done in the BRF and that's what she signed up for.
> 
> I agree, a regular private person does not owe anyone anything, but a person's lifestyle supported by the British government/ Sovereign Grant (which she was at the time of Archie's birth) does.


Wasn't she pressing for a home birth at Frogmore but ended going to the same hospital as the other royal women? I suspect she thought creating an air of mystery around the birth would get her more attention than the royal precedent of presenting the newborn outside the hospital. We know she's all about attention and drama.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> There _could_ have been a mix-up, info from the stylist, I very much think she was just being 'cheeky'.



Yeah, but the moment the jeweler called and asked for their bling back she knew they were no present. I can somewhat see walking off with them (not really, but...), but keeping them for years and wearing them out is another kind of bold.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. Invisibet's origin seems murkier to me. Although I find her to be a loathsome creature, she is entitled to medical privacy. I wouldn't want people snooping around in my medical history.



Archie's birth is just as murky in terms of Royal protocol. Something weird went on there too IMO


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Wasn't she pressing for a home birth at Frogmore but ended going to the same hospital as the other royal women? I suspect she thought creating an air of mystery around the birth would get her more attention than the royal precedent of presenting the newborn outside the hospital. We know she's all about attention and drama.


Interesting that ... Frogmore Cottage was under reno at the time ... Nottingham Cottage (Kensington) is minute with 2 bedrooms ... 
where in the heck WAS she planning to have this home birth ?? At FC ??? with jackhammers going in the background of her aqua birth in the jacuzzi ???


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but the moment the jeweler called and asked for their bling back she knew they were no present. I can somewhat see walking off with them (not really, but...), but keeping them for years and wearing them out is another kind of bold.



Yup, agreed,  I was trying to give her the benefit of the doubt. She should have just bought the bl**dy things if she liked them. End of.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Someone would have got into big trouble for Meghan's 'gifted' shoes too. Lots of people in the fashion industry are on temp and freelance contracts. You don't need to fire or even reprimand people not to work with them again.  It's a very small world too, much smaller than you may think.



It's a bit unfair to blacklist someone because the celeb is not only a lying liar, but a thieving thieve. How about they are not coming back or at least have to sign a contract everything they take will be billed?

When I was interning in Turkey 300 bucks from an event went missing. The boss felt he was being super generous going half with the admin who may or may not have lost them. Seriously? Aren't you insured or write that sh*t off?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Wasn't she pressing for a home birth at Frogmore but ended going to the same hospital as the other royal women? I suspect she thought creating an air of mystery around the birth would get her more attention than the royal precedent of presenting the newborn outside the hospital. We know she's all about attention and drama.



My speculation, and only speculation.... Home birth means only a very small group of people know when Archie was actually born. Then Z-list could easily lie on the birth certificate and list her chosen date as the DOB to coincide with or overshadow a certain date within the BRF (e.g. someone else's birthday, wedding anniversary, death anniversary etc). Like I said, she's a psycho so I wouldn't put this past her


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s see if she shows up tomorrow.  This could be interesting.


Will there be cameras? She’ll be there!!


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> So she can thrust her body closer to him.


A specific body part?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG people. A fluff piece popped up on my phone and I opened it because I thought Team SS is starting the counter-offensive. So the piece is about the US father's day and how Raptor made it oh so special for Harry. They are quoting a "close source" with the following:

"Harry isn't the type for big, showy parties. As a rule, [Raptor] and Harry like to keep their parties modest and down-to-earth. Both of them would always choose something sentimental over spending big bucks, that's just how they are."

I cannot stop laughing. Like their 40 million bucks wedding or her 1-million-in-9-months wardrobe?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thinking of CeeJay who in almost every post said she knew someone who told her MM was a liar.  CeeJay told us we would be shocked to find out how much MM has lied about.  Wonder if TomB contacted her?  *Has anyone seen Doria?*
> 
> Requiescat in pace, CeeJay
> 
> 
> Article from Feb., 2020 [but we knew long ago]:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she lied to casting directors for a part
> 
> 
> The clip from a promotional appearance Meghan did for Suits shows her confessing to lying. Meghan and Harry have already begun a transition phase of living in Canada and the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I don’t think Doria has been seen since the end of February when she showed up with them at the NAACP image awards.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but the moment the jeweler called and asked for their bling back she knew they were no present. I can somewhat see walking off with them (not really, but...), but keeping them for years and wearing them out is another kind of bold.


I think many actors are narcissists at heart, and she may have thought the publicity from their dispute was doing them a favor. Or maybe she was counting on them eventually giving up, writing them off and leaving her alone.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Archie's birth is just as murky in terms of Royal protocol. Something weird went on there too IMO


If Bower delves into the secrecy of the birth, with a detailed search for information, I'll buy his book!  lol


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG people. A fluff piece popped up on my phone and I opened it because I thought Team SS is starting the counter-offensive. So the piece is about the US father's day and how Raptor made it oh so special for Harry. They are quoting a "close source" with the following:
> 
> "Harry isn't the type for big, showy parties. As a rule, [Raptor] and Harry like to keep their parties modest and down-to-earth. Both of them would always choose something sentimental over spending big bucks, that's just how they are."
> 
> I cannot stop laughing. Like their 40 million bucks wedding or her 1-million-in-9-months wardrobe?


Will they ever learn to just shut up? That's why they couldn't cut it as royals, where rule number one is never complain, never explain. 

She's probably the "close source", like when "the former guy" used to call in to NY papers under an assumed name with "tips".


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's a bit unfair to blacklist someone because the celeb is not only a lying liar, but a thieving thieve. How about they are not coming back or at least have to sign a contract everything they take will be billed?
> 
> When I was interning in Turkey 300 bucks from an event went missing. The boss felt he was being super generous going half with the admin who may or may not have lost them. Seriously? Aren't you insured or write that sh*t off?



Companies have insurance, but it puts the price up if they keep claiming. I'm not sure beige suede shoes would be much good after being worn anyway, but they are sold on to agencies and sample sales so they often get costs back (if they're retuned). Remember they're not losing full retail, minus around 70-80% to find material + labour cost. Minus the profit, what costs the rest is what we like too fancy addresses, nice stores, online returns, packaging etc.

Celebs can also claim event outfits as PR expenses that help with tax bills (if they earn a lot) or pay wholesale prices (celebs often get big discounts at _some_ stores)  they seriously don't _need_ to steal or literally walk away with the shoes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She's probably the "close source", like when "the former guy" used to call in to NY papers under an assumed name with "tips".



You might just be right because the article goes on to say how she wrote him yet another poem and as she does beautiful calligraphy it is a real piece of art


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> I might be the minority here but those shoes that Z-list conveniently made them hers are ugly to me      She could have chosen another pair.


She's fond of that brand. She wore a black pair by them with the blue one-shouldered gown to whatever pseudo award ceremony they attended. I only know this because I remember saying that they didn't look any different than something you'd find at DSW


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I always found that story puzzling. Sharon Stone was a star who I'm sure could have afforded to pay for them. Didn't she try to claim they were a gift and HW said no way? It's common practice for high jewelers to lend pieces for the red carpet, but not gift them. The necklace that Gwyneth Paltrow wore when she won her Oscar was purchased afterward by her father for I believe $400k.


Stone's argument was that she was doing them a favor by wearing them since she was such a big star.  She gave them free PR etc.  They called her bluff on it. I'm sure they were quite large and flawless diamonds. They cost a mint.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Do you think Bower will investigate the rumours of Meg and whether she actually gave birth?  That's what always interested me.
> 
> Did anyone find out the name of her OB-GYN or where she gave birth in the UK and why she was so secretive.
> 
> I love a good mystery/conspiracy theory and hope Bower explored it too.


He referred to Lilypad as Harry's daughter.  He didn't say "their daughter."  There is some meaning to that IMO.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I was responding to the comment about her "beady eyes and scraggly hair like a pig drawn by Ronald Searle" and thought it went a bit too far.  lol
> 
> She really is pretty and in most photos, she looks very attractive. Especially since the photos are from all angles.  It's hard to look good at all angles unless you are photogenic, I think.


She is photogenic and was even more so when younger.  When she doesn't overdo the makeup and combs her hair, she looks even better.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> My speculation, and only speculation.... Home birth means only a very small group of people know when Archie was actually born. Then Z-list could easily lie on the birth certificate and list her chosen date as the DOB to coincide with or overshadow a certain date within the BRF (e.g. someone else's birthday, wedding anniversary, death anniversary etc). Like I said, she's a psycho so I wouldn't put this past her


Didn't a birth certificate have to be filed and signed by whoever attended, or is it different than in the US? It's been a long time but I recall having to give information to someone before I left the hospital.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> My speculation, and only speculation.... Home birth means only a very small group of people know when Archie was actually born. Then Z-list could easily lie on the birth certificate and list her chosen date as the DOB to coincide with or overshadow a certain date within the BRF (e.g. someone else's birthday, wedding anniversary, death anniversary etc). Like I said, she's a psycho so I wouldn't put this past her


I doubt that she had a home birth.  She was a geriatric mother and had never delivered.  I would think that even she wasn't stupid enough to take a chance.  When Zara had Lucas on the bathroom floor, and not because she wanted to or planned it, she had already delivered two children.


----------



## LittleStar88

This book is like Christmas in July


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> He referred to Lilypad as Harry's daughter.  He didn't say "their daughter."  There is some meaning to that IMO.


I'm not a geneticist, but looking at Archie and the supposed birthday pic of her they appear to have zero of her physical traits. I know genetics is tricky, but you'd think there would be some visible evidence that she is their birth mother.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Zara had Lucas on the bathroom floor,


I was not aware of that


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Didn't a birth certificate have to be filed and signed by whoever attended, or is it different than in the US? It's been a long time but I recall having to give information to someone before I left the hospital.



I'll be honest. I have no idea. That's why I prefaced by saying it's just a speculation    Had she had a home birth, she could have coerced or threatened the person into doing what they wanted.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Doria has been seen since the end of February when she showed up with them at the NAACP image awards.


I hope she is not ill.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I hope she is not ill.


 Z-list probably told her to lay low because Z-list can't have anyone share the attention and limelight


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Methane must be losing her mind right about now.


The chickens have come home to roost, so to speak


----------



## 1LV

Am I the only one unable to find the blasted book on (U.S.) Amazon.com?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I hope she is not ill.



I don’t think Doria is sick. We would have heard about it if she was. More likely it’s that she is not currently useful to Meghan so she waits in the background. No doubt they’ll trot her out sooner or later when needed.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The chickens have come home to roost, so to speak



The chicken's have come home to roost roast, this time I hope for good


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz flew premium economy, but TW arrived by private jet. Demands and more demands… _“Harry must be f***ing nuts.” _


*Without hesitation, Meghan challenged every guest whose conversation contravened her values.*_ According to some of Harry’s friends, *again and again she reprimanded them about the slightest inappropriate nuance. *Nobody was exempt. Harry’s world would not be her world.

Beyond Harry’s hearing, some friends questioned Meghan’s “wokery”. Meghan was a dampener on the party, they concluded. *She lacked any sense of humour.* Driving home after Sunday lunch, the texts pinged between the cars: “OMG what about HER?” said one; “Harry must be f***ing nuts.”

A seminal moment occurred during the couple’s trip to Jamaica in March 2017 to celebrate the marriage of Tom “Skippy” Inskip, Harry’s Etonian friend who had been present in Las Vegas during Harry’s nude romp. *Harry flew premium economy from London; Meghan arrived from Toronto in a friend’s private jet…*

Next, *Meghan demanded that she be registered in the hotel under an alias, Jane Smith*. “Her identity must be kept secret,” said her agent, Lori Sale. “Meghan doesn’t want to be hassled by the hotel staff, other guests or photographers.” The production team were flummoxed. *No one in French-speaking Montreal really knew Meghan.* In the event, the hotel refused the request. No paparazzi gathered outside the hotel.

Inside the hotel room, ignoring the flower displays, bottles of her favourite wine and even a special calligraphy pen carefully laid out on the tables, *she criticised the hotel’s Tempurpedic bathrobe and slippers. She wanted Dior.* The tea was the wrong blend and the vegan green juice was warm.

“The Princess is coming,” sniggered one assistant as, hard-faced, Meghan arrived on set, avoiding eye contact with the crew. She disappeared upstairs to her dressing-room…

*“She is definitely the meanest person I’ve ever met. Just saying,” Jean Malek, the third director, posted on Facebook.*

In the post-production of the advertisements *Meghan sent countless demands about changes to the colour of her lipstick and her waistline. *One request regarding a photograph of her sitting down with open sandals generated particular mirth: “Please fix my feet for me — I get slaughtered online for [sic] people picking apart my feet, sadly. There’s a scar on my left foot + my right foot isn’t the prettiest (long toe etc) ...”_



			archive.ph


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Doria is sick. We would have heard about it if she was. More likely it’s that she is not currently useful to Meghan so she waits in the background. No doubt they’ll trot her out sooner or later when needed.


Base on all that I have learned here, Zeezy got the attention/drama seeking gene from TM. We've really heard very little about her mother. She seems to fly under the radar, unlike her daughter.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Am I the only one unable to find the blasted book on (U.S.) Amazon.com?


If it isn’t available on Amazon or Barnes & Noble then I would guess maybe it does not have a US distributor at this time. I’m hoping H&M haven’t found a way to block its release in the US but nothing would surprise me.

The book can be purchased from the UK. It may take more time to get it but it would be worth it.





__





						Revenge : Tom Bower : 9781788705868
					

Revenge by Tom Bower, 9781788705868, available at Book Depository with free delivery worldwide.




					www.bookdepository.com


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> If it isn’t available on Amazon or Barnes & Noble then I would guess maybe it does not have a US distributor at this time. I’m hoping H&M haven’t found a way to block its release in the US but nothing would surprise me.
> 
> The book can be purchased from the UK. It may take more time to get it but it would be worth it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com


Thank you so much.  I’ll order it now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> Thank you so much.  I’ll order it now.


You’re welcome. I originally posted the hardcover listing but I edited it to show the paperback instead. Why not save a few bucks?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Totally agree. I just read a comment somewhere that said you don't get grouchier as you get older, you just become more honest.


Yep, the filter falls away.
When I was 12 or 13 years old worrying about what outfit to wear to school the next day because of unwritten "rules", my aunt told me that the best thing about getting older is you don't care what anyone else thinks any more.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> Am I the only one unable to find the blasted book on (U.S.) Amazon.com?



Someone else had the same problem yesterday.


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> Why is her back so arched on those pics?


She's thrusting out her pelvis...her money maker.

Sorry, that was crude.  #sorrynotsorry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, I hope Bower has tea on that Inskip wedding.


----------



## Toby93

Jktgal said:


> What do y'all think? Is it the engagement shoes? Omo this is so delicious I'm hyperventilating.
> Tbh the ads are actually good - interesting and catchy, and she looked good.
> 
> View attachment 5530637
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530638


Reitmans is a Canadian store, and I saw their ads on TV, but I have NEVER seen these ads before?  They use her name in the ads, as if she was some sort of star, but I had never heard of her before she got her claws in PH.  I wish I still had never heard of her.....


----------



## gracekelly

Harry's friends have a little acronym...NQOS   

Not Quite Our Sort.  

That pretty much sums it all up.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> At the time I knew nothing about her and thought she was pretty enough, but not anything special. The woman who snapped her at the July 4th parade said she was beautiful in person. That is not unusual. Back in the 90s my husband and I attended his admin's wedding. I had never met her in person, only talked on the phone. She gushed, "You're so much prettier in person!".
> Uh, thanks.


People can be so stupid.  I had a client, who once inside my office, remarked that I'm shorter than she thought.  I was taken aback, because I'd never met her and couldn't understand why she thought anything of my height.  I asked her what she meant and she replied that the photo of me in the waiting room was placed at a point she assumed I was that tall!  All of my colleagues pictures were up and all were at the same height on the wall.  I couldn't help but tell her the pictures are simply on the wall, not placed according to our head height, otherwise they'd done a remarkable job of finding men and women all the same height for our office!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> People can be so stupid.  I had a client, who once inside my office, remarked that I'm shorter than she thought.  I was taken aback, because I'd never met her and couldn't understand why she thought anything of my height.  I asked her what she meant and she replied that the photo of me in the waiting room was placed at a point she assumed I was that tall!  All of my colleagues pictures were up and all were at the same height on the wall.  I couldn't help but tell her the pictures are simply on the wall, not placed according to our head height, otherwise they'd done a remarkable job of finding men and women all the same height for our office!


Oh dear.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Our CeeJay had more than one story about celebs trying to get her jewelry for free. Of course she nipped that in the bud.


My jeweler in LA told me he has several famous clients that refused to return items because they "should be given them for free".  After several hundred thousand dollars of losses, he refuses to loan anything to anyone famous any more.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Reitmans is a Canadian store, and I saw their ads on TV, but I have NEVER seen these ads before?  They use her name in the ads, as if she was some sort of star, but I had never heard of her before she got her claws in PH.  I wish I still had never heard of her.....


----------



## EverSoElusive

Under normal circumstances, I'd not spend any money on things related to Z-list and her lovesick puppy. However, the excerpts are far too juicy that I had to pre-order the e-book on Amazon at $11+ last night. Should be available in my Kindle library on July 21st


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Harry's friends have a little acronym...NQOS
> 
> Not Quite Our Sort.
> 
> That pretty much sums it all up.


William's friends had a similar attitude about Catherine at first. Call it snobbery if you like, but haven't you ever met a friend's new significant other and said "What are they thinking?" Your closest friends know you and can often be more objective about your new love. They'll see things that you might have a blind spot for.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Interesting that ... Frogmore Cottage was under reno at the time ... Nottingham Cottage (Kensington) is minute with 2 bedrooms ...
> where in the heck WAS she planning to have this home birth ?? At FC ??? with jackhammers going in the background of her aqua birth in the jacuzzi ???


She's just FOS.  I remember reading that she wanted a home birth with Invisibet as well.  That didn't happen.  (Or did it?  Dun dunn dahh...)


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I'm not a geneticist, but looking at Archie and the supposed birthday pic of her they appear to have zero of her physical traits. I know genetics is tricky, but you'd think there would be some visible evidence that she is their birth mother.


Shoot me for defending her in the slightest, but neither of my children looks even an iota like me.  I always thought darker features were dominant, but apparently not.  I have the C section scars to prove I gave birth, but no stranger ever assumes that they're mine.  I've been assumed to be the nanny so many times, that any irritation I felt about the mix up has long passed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

1LV said:


> Am I the only one unable to find the blasted book on (U.S.) Amazon.com?


I haven't been able to find it for Canada as well.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


>



And why an unknown American actress as "brand ambassador" for a Canadian store?  I could understand if it was a big star, but she most definitely was not.


----------



## Suncatcher

Beyond being a master manipulator, liar and social climber she comes across as really mean. I don’t hate much but I hate mean people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Bower’s publisher - as I understand this, his publisher is a small company. They only paid for a European launch. The North America launch will be later this month, probably around July 21.

RE:  Suits - @Toby93, I agree. She was never the star of that show. Not even the second tier. Although Gina Torres was in fewer episodes, she was the star in every scene. MM and her friend, Patrick Adams, behaved as if they were so very important. In reality, they were awful. True, it was a show of lesser known actors, mostly *zzzzz* listers. 









						Suits (TV Series 2011–2019) - IMDb
					

Suits (TV Series 2011–2019) cast and crew credits, including actors, actresses, directors, writers and more.




					www.imdb.com


----------



## bellecate

So much new stuff coming to light. All things we here had already figured out here.


----------



## lanasyogamama

mellibelly said:


> Methane must be losing her mind right about now. All of the embarrassing stories confirming she’s a liar and a fraud aren’t from the palace. They are connected to Vogue and Vanity Fair staff. I hope Spotify and Netflix are taking note. Even if the quote from the Queen isn’t true, how crushing to have HM say how glad she is that you aren’t there BY NAME when your entire relevancy depends on your supposed closeness to HM.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone else had the same problem yesterday.


Someone already answered, but I read on Reddit that it isn’t available in the US yet.  I can’t wait to buy it!


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Someone already answered, but I read on Reddit that it isn’t available in the US yet.  I can’t wait to buy it!



You can get it from bookdepository.com with free worldwide shipping 






						Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
					

Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.




					www.bookdepository.com
				





Or Kindle e-book, will be sent to your library on 7/21: https://www.amazon.com/Revenge-Megh...e+bower&qid=1658102185&sprefix=,aps,83&sr=8-1


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely. Unless you try to scam the BRF with a baby you didn't carry when that's the prerequisite for being in the LOS. But again, that's between them and her, not us and her.


A reporter or one of the many YouTubers should put together a chronology of baby bump pictures from first appearance through the months up to Lilibet’s  birth. 

The official announcement read, “We were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili”. In typical Sussex style it is deliberately vague, did she “arrive” on the 6:00 train, in a taxi, or did she arrive via a surrogate and was handed off to them?  What the Announcement did not say is the normal format of a Royal birth as in, “The Duchess of Cambridge was safely delivered of….”


----------



## 1LV

bellecate said:


> I haven't been able to find it for Canada as well.


Hmmm.  I wonder what the deal is.


----------



## csshopper

1LV said:


> Am I the only one unable to find the blasted book on (U.S.) Amazon.com?


No, you have frustrated company. Not there yet. Maybe because it’s published in the UK?


----------



## CarryOn2020

1LV said:


> Hmmm.  I wonder what the deal is.


so far the publisher only released in Europe.  It is a small publisher.


----------



## bag-mania

Amazon and Barnes & Noble usually make a book available for pre-order if they are planning to carry it. The Kindle version is available from Amazon UK but not from the American site. I guess we could barrage Amazon with requests for it but if the delay is because they haven’t worked out the $$$ with the publisher yet then don’t expect its North American release this week.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Amazon and Barnes & Noble usually make a book available for pre-order if they are planning to carry it. The Kindle version is available from Amazon UK but not from the American site. I guess we could barrage Amazon with requests for it but if the delay is because they haven’t worked out the $$$ with the publisher yet then don’t expect its North American release this week.




The Kindle e-book is available on Amazon US. I pre-ordered it yesterday and I shared the link above in response to @lanasyogamama  






						Amazon.com: Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors eBook : Bower, Tom: Kindle Store
					

Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors - Kindle edition by Bower, Tom. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors.



					www.amazon.com
				





But definitely no paperback available on Amazon US yet, if you're looking for a paper copy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> A reporter or one of the many YouTubers should put together a chronology of baby bump pictures from first appearance through the months up to Lilibet’s  birth.
> 
> The official announcement read, “We were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili”. In typical Sussex style it is deliberately vague, did she “arrive” on the 6:00 train, in a taxi, or did she arrive via a surrogate and was handed off to them?  What the Announcement did not say is the normal format of a Royal birth as in, “The Duchess of Cambridge was safely delivered of….”



True to Z-list's style, perhaps the birth announcement didn't mirror the typical BRF ones because maybe Z-list insisted on wording it herself, wanting to 'be different' or 'stand out'. Much like how she didn't get on with the dress code during Louis' christening


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> The Kindle e-book is available on Amazon US. I pre-ordered it yesterday and I shared the link above in response to @lanasyogamama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors eBook : Bower, Tom: Kindle Store
> 
> 
> Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors - Kindle edition by Bower, Tom. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But definitely no paperback available on Amazon US yet, if you're looking for a paper copy.


It let you pre-order the Kindle version? Because when I click on the link this is the message I’m getting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> It let you pre-order the Kindle version? Because when I click on the link this is the message I’m getting.
> 
> View attachment 5530835




Don't use the app. Go to Amazon.com/ebooks on your web browser instead  Then search for 'revenge Bower'. It will come up.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Don't use the app. Go to Amazon.com/ebooks on your web browser instead  Then search for 'revenge Bower'. It will come up.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530837


Excellent, thank you!!


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I'm not a geneticist, but looking at Archie and the supposed birthday pic of her they appear to have zero of her physical traits. I know genetics is tricky, but you'd think there would be some visible evidence that she is their birth mother.


I'm with you on that.

So far, Bower is confirming stories we already discussed.  Nothing new really.

I'm hoping he delves into the surrogacy rumours, the University hazing rumours, the Jessica Mulroney dumping (if that really happened) and so on. Not the stuff we already know.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> It let you pre-order the Kindle version? Because when I click on the link this is the message I’m getting.
> 
> View attachment 5530835


I just now tried and got the same message,


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Hazz flew premium economy, but TW arrived by private jet. Demands and more demands… _“Harry must be f***ing nuts.” _
> View attachment 5530679
> 
> *Without hesitation, Meghan challenged every guest whose conversation contravened her values.*_ According to some of Harry’s friends, *again and again she reprimanded them about the slightest inappropriate nuance. *Nobody was exempt. Harry’s world would not be her world.
> 
> Beyond Harry’s hearing, some friends questioned Meghan’s “wokery”. Meghan was a dampener on the party, they concluded. *She lacked any sense of humour.* Driving home after Sunday lunch, the texts pinged between the cars: “OMG what about HER?” said one; “Harry must be f***ing nuts.”
> 
> A seminal moment occurred during the couple’s trip to Jamaica in March 2017 to celebrate the marriage of Tom “Skippy” Inskip, Harry’s Etonian friend who had been present in Las Vegas during Harry’s nude romp. *Harry flew premium economy from London; Meghan arrived from Toronto in a friend’s private jet…*
> 
> Next, *Meghan demanded that she be registered in the hotel under an alias, Jane Smith*. “Her identity must be kept secret,” said her agent, Lori Sale. “Meghan doesn’t want to be hassled by the hotel staff, other guests or photographers.” The production team were flummoxed. *No one in French-speaking Montreal really knew Meghan.* In the event, the hotel refused the request. No paparazzi gathered outside the hotel.
> 
> Inside the hotel room, ignoring the flower displays, bottles of her favourite wine and even a special calligraphy pen carefully laid out on the tables, *she criticised the hotel’s Tempurpedic bathrobe and slippers. She wanted Dior.* The tea was the wrong blend and the vegan green juice was warm.
> 
> “The Princess is coming,” sniggered one assistant as, hard-faced, Meghan arrived on set, avoiding eye contact with the crew. She disappeared upstairs to her dressing-room…
> 
> *“She is definitely the meanest person I’ve ever met. Just saying,” Jean Malek, the third director, posted on Facebook.*
> 
> In the post-production of the advertisements *Meghan sent countless demands about changes to the colour of her lipstick and her waistline. *One request regarding a photograph of her sitting down with open sandals generated particular mirth: “Please fix my feet for me — I get slaughtered online for [sic] people picking apart my feet, sadly. There’s a scar on my left foot + my right foot isn’t the prettiest (long toe etc) ...”_
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



I can’t stand her, but in this case it sounds like Harry and his friends are a pretty insufferable, entitled and over-privileged group as well. Which given what we know about him isn’t very surprising.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> I just now tried and got the same message,



Use your browser and go to amazon.com/ebooks then search for 'revenge Bower'. Don't use your Amazon app


----------



## Zen101

Jayne1 said:


> I'm with you on that.
> 
> So far, Bower is confirming stories we already discussed.  Nothing new really.
> 
> I'm hoping he delves into the surrogacy rumours, the University hazing rumours, the Jessica Mulroney dumping (if that really happened) and so on. Not the stuff we already know.


I’d also like to know if the alleged first husband before Trevor story is true. I still doubt the first marriage rumor because if it were true, it would have come out by now or maybe it’s true. I don’t know. Just not sold on it. I’m curious to see if Bower’s book will mention it.


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> What an ungrateful cow. Especially since all of her clothes including that horsesh!t colored dress were paid for by Charles.


In her convoluted mind, perhaps she was prepared to tell people who remarked on her non-coordinating choice: "Well, I had nothing to wear. All my clothes were left behind in storage in North America." And then she has reason to go on another shopping spree...


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> So she can thrust her body *pelvis* closer to him.


Could not resist. She loves to thrust her pelvis forward.
In the video where she turns her back on TQ, she approaches the guy pelvis first.
In the garden pic where H is behind her and Archie is in her arms, with only her face visible, her pelvis is thrust further than her chin.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I do believe she was pregnant with and gave birth to Archie. Invisibet's origin seems murkier to me. Although I find her to be a loathsome creature, she is entitled to medical privacy. I wouldn't want people snooping around in my medical history.


If she carried and birthed Archie, there will be renewed interest in her swaying and ever-shape-shifting bump.


----------



## mellibelly

Only a psychopath would attempt to upstage* A BABY *by not following the dress code*.  *She failed miserably though. My eyes immediately go to Catherine and Louis as they’re wearing the lightest colors. Darker colors like horsesh!t thankfully recede. Would be a simple photoshop job to remove Zeezy from the picture entirely.


----------



## mellibelly

I’m forgetting she tried upstaging the bride by announcing her pregnancy at E’s wedding. Confirmed psychopath


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> I’m forgetting she tried upstaging the bride by announcing her pregnancy at E’s wedding. Confirmed psychopath



Imo Eug was/is a willing participant in the H&M charade.

Old news, but still, wow:


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> The Kindle e-book is available on Amazon US. I pre-ordered it yesterday and I shared the link above in response to @lanasyogamama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors eBook : Bower, Tom: Kindle Store
> 
> 
> Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors - Kindle edition by Bower, Tom. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But definitely no paperback available on Amazon US yet, if you're looking for a paper copy.


It's no longer available @amazon.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo Eug was/is a willing participant in the H&M charade.


Agreed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> It's no longer available @amazon.
> 
> View attachment 5530878




That's mighty weird. It is still showing as available for pre-order as long as I use the webpage *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*  and do a search using '*revenge Bower*'.


The key is NOT to use the Amazon app or Kindle app. I've noticed when I use the apps, they are telling me the e-book is unavailable for purchase. And looks like if you clicked on on the e-book's direct URL, it will give that error too  So yeah, just do the manual search as mentioned above


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> The official announcement read, “We were blessed with the arrival of our daughter, Lili”. In typical Sussex style it is deliberately vague, did she “arrive” on the 6:00 train, in a taxi, or did she arrive via a surrogate and was handed off to them? What the Announcement did not say is the normal format of a Royal birth as in, “The Duchess of Cambridge was safely delivered of….”


It's pretty common to see "arrival" used in birth announcements. Since they are not working royals why would they use the royal format? I do agree that the circumstances of her birth are murky, but hey, we know how much they value their privacy.


----------



## Luvbolide

bellecate said:


> She’s always had and has a grift going.
> 
> View attachment 5530613
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530614



Wow - there’s just no end to her beyond-inflated sense of entitlement.  

As for me, I am getting less disappointed/angry with BP for biting the bullying report.  There are enough example of how she speaks to and treats others in these book excerpts to know that the bullying behavior was accurately reported.  

I can just see the two of them propped up in bed with multiple cell phones screaming at and bombarding their staff with texts to get all of the negative things “off the internet now”!!  And then her *****ing that the bathrobe and slippers that she was provided aren’t Dior!!  

What a nightmare she is.


----------



## andrashik

I


EverSoElusive said:


> Don't use the app. Go to Amazon.com/ebooks on your web browser instead  Then search for 'revenge Bower'. It will come up.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530837


Interesting. Mine was 16.96$ ( kindle version)


----------



## Luvbolide

gracekelly said:


> Meg told off every one of Harry's pals who defied her woke values, says new book
> 
> 
> SOME of Prince Harry’s oldest friends clashed with Meghan Markle over her strict woke views – and concluded she had no sense of humour, according to an explosive new book. From the very beginning o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aside from the fact that these aristo types have no problem making anti-Semitic, race related, anti-gay etc remarks, she didn't understand British wit even when they said something that was politically correct.   She should have just sucked it up or left the room  and told Harry privately that these were not her kind of people.  Sitting there and arguing or lecturing strangers was not the way to go.  She had no understanding that these were people that Harry grew up with.  I am not excusing their comments, but these folks are who they are and they were not about to change for her.  I don't think that Harry, in his heart of hearts, has changed his views either and is still exactly like the men he grew up with. If she disappeared tomorrow, he would revert to be just like them.




Oh dear, do you mean she won’t be able to say “my husband’s a  feminist” every ten minutes any more?


----------



## xincinsin

Are the sugars screaming? They must be on the offensive by now.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Are the sugars screaming? They must be on the offensive by now.


They are awaiting instructions from their controller. The bots  are getting restless and Scobie is getting Botox injected to his sweat glands.


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> Wow - there’s just no end to her beyond-inflated sense of entitlement.
> 
> As for me, I am getting less disappointed/angry with BP for biting the bullying report.  There are enough example of how she speaks to and treats others in these book excerpts to know that the bullying behavior was accurately reported.
> 
> I can just see the two of them propped up in bed with multiple cell phones screaming at and bombarding their staff with texts to get all of the negative things “off the internet now”!!  And then her *****ing that the bathrobe and slippers that she was provided aren’t Dior!!
> 
> What a nightmare she is.



The investigation was unfortunately only about the Palace's failures, not hers. Therefore, the findings and future implementations  would only be about the Palace's HR practices.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hazz flew premium economy, but TW arrived by private jet. Demands and more demands… _“Harry must be f***ing nuts.” _
> View attachment 5530679
> 
> *Without hesitation, Meghan challenged every guest whose conversation contravened her values.*_ According to some of Harry’s friends, *again and again she reprimanded them about the slightest inappropriate nuance. *Nobody was exempt. Harry’s world would not be her world.
> 
> Beyond Harry’s hearing, some friends questioned Meghan’s “wokery”. Meghan was a dampener on the party, they concluded. *She lacked any sense of humour.* Driving home after Sunday lunch, the texts pinged between the cars: “OMG what about HER?” said one; “Harry must be f***ing nuts.”
> 
> A seminal moment occurred during the couple’s trip to Jamaica in March 2017 to celebrate the marriage of Tom “Skippy” Inskip, Harry’s Etonian friend who had been present in Las Vegas during Harry’s nude romp. *Harry flew premium economy from London; Meghan arrived from Toronto in a friend’s private jet…*
> 
> Next, *Meghan demanded that she be registered in the hotel under an alias, Jane Smith*. “Her identity must be kept secret,” said her agent, Lori Sale. “Meghan doesn’t want to be hassled by the hotel staff, other guests or photographers.” The production team were flummoxed. *No one in French-speaking Montreal really knew Meghan.* In the event, the hotel refused the request. No paparazzi gathered outside the hotel.
> 
> Inside the hotel room, ignoring the flower displays, bottles of her favourite wine and even a special calligraphy pen carefully laid out on the tables, *she criticised the hotel’s Tempurpedic bathrobe and slippers. She wanted Dior.* The tea was the wrong blend and the vegan green juice was warm.
> 
> “The Princess is coming,” sniggered one assistant as, hard-faced, Meghan arrived on set, avoiding eye contact with the crew. She disappeared upstairs to her dressing-room…
> 
> *“She is definitely the meanest person I’ve ever met. Just saying,” Jean Malek, the third director, posted on Facebook.*
> 
> In the post-production of the advertisements *Meghan sent countless demands about changes to the colour of her lipstick and her waistline. *One request regarding a photograph of her sitting down with open sandals generated particular mirth: “Please fix my feet for me — I get slaughtered online for [sic] people picking apart my feet, sadly. There’s a scar on my left foot + my right foot isn’t the prettiest (long toe etc) ...”_
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



To be fair, they'd hate anyone outside their class or acquaintance. 

Also, to be woke is to be 'an agent for change', last thing these guys would want would be change. They are anti-change. 

Not to be fair, they were probably right about a lot of it. M must be insufferable if you're not useful to her (and on the charm offensive). I'd like to see her 'compete' with some real political activists who engage with arguments on a deeper level (beyond Twitter) and actually read a couple of books (cover to cover, and not just left the cover on display). Megatron wouldn't stand a chance.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's (not so) hilarious they've asked a whiter-than-white Prince that represents privilege, the establishment and a descendent of colonialists to speak about Nelson Mandela an "_anti-apartheid leader who spent 27 years in prison and became his country’s first Black leader."_
> 
> If anyone suggests that having a POC wife suddenly makes him a freedom-fighter (yes, I did use that phrase) than I beg to differ, the equivalent of "my best friend is X". Not only no qualifications but absolutely unqualified.





Luvbolide said:


> Agree - having the Queen would have been ten million times more appropriate.  Mandela deserves sooo much better than this excommunicated royal twerp!


I think it’s awful he’s going to be there but realistically he’s there because he’s a royal (well ex-royal but not really) and that entitles him- it’s not because of Meg  

I hope they get the signing guy from the Funeral To come back and keep accidentally slapping him in the face mid-speech.



papertiger said:


> Obscure footnote:
> 
> I don't know whether US tPFers have a programme called _Death in Paradise_, but in S1 (2011)
> 
> The first British detective was introduced to his accommodation, only to find his home was already occupied and being squatted - by a lizard. He called his non-rent-paying shack-mate lizard 'Harry' because it reminded him of Prince Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5525491


The CG on that lizard makes it look specifically like H in that time article with the super smooth hair.


tiktok said:


> I can’t stand her, but in this case it sounds like Harry and his friends are a pretty insufferable, entitled and over-privileged group as well. Which given what we know about him isn’t very surprising.


There is a rousing coda to this story too - one day little Megerella did get that Dior bathrobe and she wore it to all her social functions in the Middle East.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo Eug was/is a willing participant in the H&M charade.
> 
> Old news, but still, wow:



I’m more amazed that Eug spends so much and still looks bad - please someone help that poor girl.


EverSoElusive said:


> That's mighty weird. It is still showing as available for pre-order as long as I use the webpage *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*  and do a search using '*revenge Bower*'.
> 
> 
> The key is NOT to use the Amazon app or Kindle app. I've noticed when I use the apps, they are telling me the e-book is unavailable for purchase. And looks like if you clicked on on the e-book's direct URL, it will give that error too  So yeah, just do the manual search as mentioned above


I think the app doesn’t let you pre-order.


Luvbolide said:


> Oh dear, do you mean she won’t be able to say “my husband’s a  feminist” every ten minutes any more?


I’m still patiently waiting for H to do anything remotely feminist.


papertiger said:


> To be fair, they'd hate anyone outside their class or acquaintance.
> 
> Also, to be woke is to be 'an agent for change', last thing these guys would want would be change. They are anti-change.
> 
> Not to be fair, they were probably right about a lot of it. M must be insufferable if you're not useful to her (and on the charm offensive). I'd like to see her 'compete' with some real political activists who engage with arguments on a deeper level (beyond Twitter) and actually read a couple of books (cover to cover, and not just left the cover on display). Megatron wouldn't stand a chance.


Yes I don’t know if they’ve ever had much of a leg to stand on championing H as an activist for political equality given the previous reports of him.

While I agree with you, papertiger, that the aristocracy is very closed ranks I do think there’s a long standing tradition of letting wealthy foreigners and especially ‘socialites’ or celebrities even z listers into their ranks as we saw on Downton  clearly she was meant to be the new Consuelo Vanderbilt - without the money or the style.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Someone already answered, but I read on Reddit that it isn’t available in the US yet.  I can’t wait to buy it!



But the listing should be up for pre-order (my favourite feature...I pre-order a lot of new cookbook releases and I have one right now where the price on ordering is 10 bucks less than it is today. Now with a German book the actual price would be binding, with an English edition they guarantee you get the better price).


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> To be fair, they'd hate anyone outside their class or acquaintance.
> 
> Also, to be woke is to be 'an agent for change', last thing these guys would want would be change. They are anti-change.
> 
> Not to be fair, they were probably right about a lot of it. M must be insufferable if you're not useful to her (and on the charm offensive). I'd like to see her 'compete' with some real political activists who engage with arguments on a deeper level (beyond Twitter) and actually read a couple of books (cover to cover, and not just left the cover on display). Megatron wouldn't stand a chance.


But...she reads books!!! And she is knowledgeable about everything, even quantum physics! 
You are just jealous!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> I don't like her either but she extremely photogenic and probably so pretty in person...


Nah I don’t think so but that is just my opinion. Beauty is subjective after all. I do really think you can see prettier women (with the same olive skin/brown hair colouring- not counting any other kinds of looks) walking down any street in the world anyday and the work she has had done has just made her eyes look beadier and given her an aura of desperation.

I’d also say there’s plenty of photos to suggest she is not photogenic on this thread alone. Maybe I was wrong to call her a Ronald Searle pig though- those pigs have got a lot of character.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Vogue UK editor-in-chief.


This video expresses a lot of the problems UK vogue Is having with the tone of their editorials IMO. If I wanted fawning puff pieces about nobodies I would read _Hello_ and the standards of photography and styling are horrific.

Base on all that I have learned here, Zeezy got the attention/drama seeking gene from TM. We've really heard very little about her mother. She seems to fly under the radar, unlike her daughter.

I think D charges per appearance myself - insert milk comment here.


Toby93 said:


> Reitmans is a Canadian store, and I saw their ads on TV, but I have NEVER seen these ads before?  They use her name in the ads, as if she was some sort of star, but I had never heard of her before she got her claws in PH.  I wish I still had never heard of her.....


So my Canadian friends help us out- what kind of shop is Reitmans? Is it office clothes?
I can hear the polyester crackling through the screen.
It does somewhat remind me a bit of this British place;





						Bonmarché | Ladies Clothes & Fashion At Prices You'll Love
					

Shop online from a wide selection of women's clothing in sizes 10-28 from the UK's largest value retailer for ladies clothes. Visit Bonmarché today.




					www.bonmarche.co.uk
				



Which is associated with the mature clientele.

Or is it more like say 








						Women's Clothes | Women's Clothing & Fashion Online | New Look
					

Discover the latest women's clothing and fashion online at New Look. From chic dresses to jackets and footwear, shop women's clothes, with free delivery.




					www.newlook.com
				



Which is just a giant high street clothes shop for all ages but including younger. 


charlottawill said:


> William's friends had a similar attitude about Catherine at first. Call it snobbery if you like, but haven't you ever met a friend's new significant other and said "What are they thinking?" Your closest friends know you and can often be more objective about your new love. They'll see things that you might have a blind spot for.


Which does show the friends’ instincts are not always right as marrying Catherine was easily the best PR move W has ever made.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Which does show the friends’ instincts are not always right as marrying Catherine was easily the best PR move W has ever made.



Plus if they are not the world's best actors they seem genuinely happy and content with each other.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I think it’s awful he’s going to be there but realistically he’s there because he’s a royal (well ex-royal but not really) and that entitles him- it’s not because of Meg
> 
> I hope they get the signing guy from the Funeral To come back and keep accidentally slapping him in the face mid-speech.
> 
> 
> The CG on that lizard makes it look specific in like H in that time article with the super smooth hair.
> 
> There is a rousing coda to this story too - one day little Megerella did get that Dior bathrobe and she wore it to all her social functions in the Middle East.
> 
> I’m more amazed that Eug spends so much and still looks bad - please someone help that poor girl.
> 
> I think the app doesn’t let you pre-order.
> 
> I’m still patiently waiting for H to do anything remotely feminist.
> 
> Yes I don’t know if they’ve ever had much of a leg to stand on championing H as an activist for political equality given the previous reports of him.
> 
> While I agree with you, papertiger, that the aristocracy is very closed ranks I do think there’s a long standing tradition of letting wealthy foreigners and especially ‘socialites’ or celebrities even z listers into their ranks as we saw on Downton



They don't mind the 'wealthy foreigners'' money, the foreigners, wealthy or not, were/are still heartily laughed at behind their backs. The fictional Lady Cora (echoing the 'Dollar princesses' or fortune brides of yesteryear) obviously suffered from/for it on occasion.

These people have a way of saying something without even moving their mouthes "you don't belong (here')" and you don't actually have to be foreign either, I'm sure a 'nice lass' from Tottenham (North London) or 'girl' 'with a (British) regional accent would have also got the sharp end of their stick. You can trust me on this, my mother and brother went to public school (both schools had unwritten 'ethnic' quotas). Inclusivity isn't in these people's vocabulary. Exclusive entitlement of the hooray Henrys goes from childhood to the grave.

I think in a way, this is why Harry gets on well with Megatron. They are both snobs, just in their own way. Nothing and no one is good enough for either. It's still 'them and us'. Even 'inclusive' includes cancelation if you're not.  He's always felt an outsider even though he hasn't been, he's certainly not a self- assured man. I can only imagine that he thinks she's an US 'us', certainly from the tales she's told she presented herself that way, the 'feminist, workaholic, philanthropist, rags-2-riches with an exotic twist' the perfect 21st C American Princess. Marriage obviously suits them both.

He also thinks he's manifesting his mothers' dream, which is basically - just sad (and probably incorrect).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

CobaltBlu said:


> HELLOOOOOOOO!!!!  Just wanted to say hootie hoo; I have been reading and keeping entertained through my bout of Covid.
> I am loving these book excerpts and comments.
> 
> I miss CeeJay like the dickens, and can just imagine all she would be saying with each and every post.
> You all are doing her proud, that is for sure.
> 
> Carry on, pip pip.
> I am here SMHing and WTFing with you all



Hiya CB, good to see you around


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I ordered my book via Prime and it will still take until Thursday to arrive? I guess it's shipped from the UK then.



Here on Amazon Italy it's coming out on the 21st! I think it can be pre-ordered, I have to check.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You're right, the German listing says "Out on the 21st" too...but weirdly it's no pre-order, the listing looks available. Whatever, the 21st is close enough I guess.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> I agree it doesn’t sound like the Queen to not be more discreet. *The only reason it may be credible is that something happens to people* *when they reach an advanced age*. (No, I don’t mean dementia.)r *They begin to realize they don’t give a sh!t about what othe* *people think and start speaking without using their filters all the time.* There’s no way to know if the Queen has reached that level of exasperation with her family’s drama, but nobody could blame her if she has.


LOL, this makes me laugh! Although I'm 30 years younger than the Queen I'm already begining to think this way


----------



## EverSoElusive

andrashik said:


> I
> 
> Interesting. Mine was 16.96$ ( kindle version)




Mine was $11+ on July 16th then yesterday it was showing as $9+ on the website


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Which does show the friends’ instincts are not always right as marrying Catherine was easily the best PR move W has ever made.


Agreed, but I've never heard that it was against her personally, just that she wasn't from their social class. Her mother worked as a flight attendant and then started a mail order business - oh the horror!


----------



## Annawakes

Zeezy.  That’s got to be the BEST name of all!!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I agree it doesn’t sound like the Queen to not be more discreet. The only reason it may be credible is that something happens to people when they reach an advanced age. (No, I don’t mean dementia.) They begin to realize they don’t give a sh!t about what other people think and start speaking without using their filters all the time. There’s no way to know if the Queen has reached that level of exasperation with her family’s drama, but nobody could blame her if she has.


I imagine a slightly raised eyebrow from QEII when topic must have been raised when briefed by courtiers in her daily briefing

no way the topic did not come up at least to the level of her private secretary, if not to her , he , of course, would know how to raise topic appropriately


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> Zeezy.  That’s got to be the BEST name of all!!


And maybe Canada and the UK can call her Zed-Zed.


----------



## marietouchet

H gonna brief UN General assembly today on climate and Mandela
Hmmm last time I looked - UN folks like to vacation in July - sure meeting will be well attended
m will tag along / if we get lucky someone ask about book excerpts
Where is the popcorn emoji ?

My money is on private plane to NY - anyone wanna take the bet ?


----------



## Genie27

jelliedfeels said:


> So my Canadian friends help us out- what kind of shop is Reitmans? Is it office clothes?
> I can hear the polyester crackling through the screen.


Yes it’s what my friend calls “office lady” clothing - generic medium quality basics - I don’t even know if they’re still around anymore. Maybe they got Markled too. That ad campaign was aiming for a 'younger, cooler demographic' who 'wouldn't believe that her outfit was from that brand.' 

I googled...seems they have an umbrella of brands...but it's definitely no Dior. It's not even Talbots or JCrew level.    
www.reitmans.com if anyone wants to emulate the D


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I thought I’d come here to distract my mind off my grief of losing my beautiful doggie who died on Wednesday. Just a moment’s relief. Man, the pain of losing a member of your family like my dog is incomprehensible.
> 
> Please do me a favor and if you have a pet hug them tightly right now and tell them you love them as a memory to my sweetest boy.
> 
> It helped a bit this distraction. Thank you.


so sorry for your loss....it is heartbreaking to lose a pet


----------



## Genie27

Genie27 said:


> Yes it’s what my friend calls “office lady” clothing - generic medium quality basics - I don’t even know if they’re still around anymore. Maybe they got Markled too. That ad campaign was aiming for a 'younger, cooler demographic' who 'wouldn't believe that her outfit was from that brand.'
> 
> I googled...seems they have an umbrella of brands...but it's definitely no Dior. It's not even Talbots or JCrew level.
> www.reitmans.com if anyone wants to emulate the D


Funny because a lot of her dumpy mud-hut colour tent dresses look like they came from there.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> My money is on private plane to NY - anyone wanna take the bet ?


Not taking that bet. If I’m going to throw my money away, I’d prefer to be doing something fun.


----------



## andrashik

marietouchet said:


> H gonna brief UN General assembly today on climate and Mandela
> Hmmm last time I looked - UN folks like to vacation in July - sure meeting will be well attended
> m will tag along / if we get lucky someone ask about book excerpts
> Where is the popcorn emoji ?
> 
> My money is on private plane to NY - anyone wanna take the bet ?


5$ they will fly commercial, but first class!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh no, was that dress out in her size AGAIN?

Also, I really want to wipe that smug grin off her face, it's starting to actively irritate me.


----------



## V0N1B2

Jktgal said:


> What do y'all think? Is it the engagement shoes? Omo this is so delicious I'm hyperventilating.
> Tbh the ads are actually good - interesting and catchy, and she looked good.
> 
> View attachment 5530637
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530638


The shoes in these stills are the Amazona (by Aquazzura), not the same pair as the engagement photos.  Kim Kardashian wore the crap out of this model when they were popular 5+ years ago. Zedzed seems to really favour her style. Just waiting for the butt injections in 4, 3, 2…


----------



## Chanbal

There is something very disturbing about the Harkles and their multiple demands. Why do they demand private jets, royal titles, Dior hotel slippers…? People that believe in equality treat others the same way they want to be treated, with respect! They don't leave employees in “tears,” or afraid to lose their jobs if not surrender to unreasonable demands. They don't hire PR agencies to sell an empty 'brand.' Instead, they contribute to a better world with their own work. I really hope Tom Bower's book will unmask these people.


----------



## xincinsin

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718
> 
> View attachment 5538719
> View attachment 5538720



Did she skip the tanning lotion this time? And where are their beefy armed security?

@QueenofWrapDress I think that's not a smug grin, it's a rictus grimace.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718
> 
> View attachment 5538719
> View attachment 5538720



The wannabe’s have arrived, pretending to care about those less fortunate  
Perhaps Hazz should have listened to his ‘friends’.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh no, was that dress out in her size AGAIN?
> 
> *Also, I really want to wipe that smug grin off her face, it's starting to actively irritate me.*


Me too! So instead, I just said to myself, "With that ponytail, she does look like a horse's ass!"


----------



## WingNut

Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him? Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?

Oh wait....I just answered my own question. 

Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WingNut said:


> Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him? Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?
> 
> Oh wait....I just answered my own question.
> 
> Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...



It is so inappropriate. Their public appearances are their work. Who has their freaking hands on their spouse at all times in public?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

WingNut said:


> *Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him?* Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?
> 
> Oh wait....I just answered my own question.
> 
> Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...


Doncha know that it's to show the world they are sooooooooooooo much in lurve!


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo 

_

_


ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.



There is hardly anyone there! Of the people there, some look like they are intern age or even a bit younger. Like someone brought their kids. (Look to the right and around the middle of the audience.)


----------



## bag-mania

WingNut said:


> Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him? Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?
> 
> Oh wait....I just answered my own question.
> 
> Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...



When you want to convince the world you are SOOO in love you hold hands with your husband like a preteen with her first boyfriend.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is that a Birkin?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I love it!


----------



## Cosmopolitan

lanasyogamama said:


> Is that a Birkin?


Looks like Mulberry


----------



## tiktok

lanasyogamama said:


> Is that a Birkin?


I think it’s a Mulberry. Now she’s a great devotee of British brands.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> H gonna brief UN General assembly today on climate and Mandela
> Hmmm last time I looked - UN folks like to vacation in July - sure meeting will be well attended
> m will tag along / if we get lucky someone ask about book excerpts
> Where is the popcorn emoji ?
> 
> My money is on private plane to NY - anyone wanna take the bet ?


Today show reported they flew commercial with two bodyguards.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.



Wow. I am guessing no one told them it would be a speech to a mostly-empty room?

Empty like the opening act no one cares about before the main event. How embarrassing.


----------



## Chanbal

Great advertisement for Tom Bower's book!


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> Is that a Birkin?



It's a Mulberry Bayswater tote, not the classic design but a variation they began making a few years ago.  I'm sure it was a deliberate choice, being a British brand.


----------



## charlottawill

WingNut said:


> Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him? Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?
> 
> Oh wait....I just answered my own question.
> 
> Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...


It is weird, especially in that setting. It would be different if they were out at dinner.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cosmopolitan said:


> Looks like Mulberry
> 
> View attachment 5538741


Even back then, she looked angry. No friendly vibes at all.  Guess the yoga was not working.


----------



## sdkitty

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718
> 
> View attachment 5538719
> View attachment 5538720



wonder how he got this gig


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Is that a Birkin?


Mulberry Bayswater tote. But in the Reitman's ad someone posted yesterday it did appear she might be carrying a Birkin, or else something very similar. I'm sure she knows she'd get blowback for carrying a Birkin to the UN. A Birkin will have to wait until she's on RHoBH.


----------



## sdkitty

apologize is this has been posted already.  I thought it sounded pretty credible


_Welcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday._

*Charles wanted Meghan to make her dad “stop”*

Prince Charles became so irritated by Thomas Markle’s TV appearances—especially his criticism of the royal family—that he “berated” son Prince Harry of wife Meghan Markle, “Can’t she just go and see him and make this stop?”

In his book, _Revenge: Meghan, Harry, and the War Between the Windsors_, Tom Bower also writes that shortly after Harry and Meghan’s 2018 wedding, Charles and Queen Elizabeth “urged” Meghan to fly to America for a reconciliation. This request was rejected by Meghan, fearing “a frenzy of media attention and intrusion that could bring more embarrassment to the royal family.”

Bower writes: “Harry did not tell his father about Thomas’ fury at being ignored by his daughter. Harry explained that Meghan refused to telephone Thomas Markle because she suspected that ‘his phone was not in his possession’ and ‘his email account was compromised.’ The inconsistencies of Meghan’s excuses not only irritated Charles but perhaps also the queen.” (Which seems strange, given some of those “excuses” were about protecting the royals themselves.)

In the latest extracts from the book in the _Sunday Times_, Bower also reports that Camilla “found it hard to believe that Meghan would sacrifice her independence to serve silently as a team player” within the royal family, and reports in granular detail the fury the Sussexes felt towards the media if they didn’t feel they were being sufficiently lionized. Meghan was also said to be upset at being criticized so much when Kate Middleton seemed to orbit above any media negativity.

Bower writes: “Meghan was angry that Palace officials refused to protect her image. She refused to accept that staff were not employed to promote her as an individual, but instead placed her within the grid of the entire Royal Family. In particular, Meghan fumed about the refusal officially to criticize Thomas Markle. From her perspective, Meghan was isolated, vulnerable and stifled by conventions.”

On a tour of Australia, Bower writes, “Every night, Harry trawled social media, searching for snide comments on the internet. Every morning he and Meghan turned on their phones to surf the internet. Thin-skinned, they were inflamed by the slightest criticism. Both bombarded their staff with demands for removal of the criticism.”

Astute followers of the royal saga will recall that during her privacy and copyright trial with the _Daily Mail_, Meghan’s text messages to her former communications boss revealed she wrote a letter to her father only to “protect my husband from this constant berating” and said the royals “fundamentally [didn’t] understand” her reasons for her estrangement from her father.

Bower’s claim that Meghan was ordered to go to her father’s home in Mexico also appears to rely at least in part on one of her witness statements in that trial.






*Devil, Prada, cont…*

Bower also writes the staff at _Vogue_ UK were “exasperated” by Meghan’s demands when she guest-edited an issue in September 2019. The theme of the issue was Game Changers who “reshape society in radical and positive ways.”

“I want to break the internet,” Meghan exclaimed to the editorial staff, Bower says. “Listening to the duchess, the editorial team’s expressions showed silent exasperation. They believed most of her contributions were superficial, lacking rhyme or reason.”

Meghan wanted to appear on the cover, just as Kate Middleton had done three years previously to mark _Vogue_’s centenary. The editorial team allegedly convinced Meghan not to, as it would be “boastful.” Then followed demands from Meghan to promote the magazine, and demands from Buckingham Palace to cease promoting it, Bower says—phone calls that left Sara Latham, head of communications for Meghan and Prince Harry, in tears, Bower says.

In any case, as Alaina Demopoulos wrote in the Daily Beast, the resulting issue, while featuring many worthy inspiring female subjects, may have benefited from a bit more levity.

“In public, Enninful would say that it was Meghan’s decision not to appear on the cover because she wished to remain ‘humble,’” Bower writes. “The cover was given to, among others, Salma Hayek, a Hollywood star married to François-Henri Pinault—a French billionaire who happened to be one of Vogue’s leading advertisers.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> wonder how he got this


The next king of the UK and Commonwealth made it happen, possibly.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh no, was that dress out in her size AGAIN?
> 
> Also, I really want to wipe that smug grin off her face, it's starting to actively irritate me.


I don't know, if it wasn't for the hand-holding I'd be inclined to say she got the assignment right this time. But as always, there's something that throws the whole thing off.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh no, was that dress out in her size AGAIN?
> 
> Also, I really want to wipe that smug grin off her face, it's starting to actively irritate me.


Yes I agree, her grin annoyes me no end and the hand holding too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

tiktok said:


> I think it’s a Mulberry. Now she’s a great devotee of British brands.


That's not a current pic is it? I think that's pre-Harry.


----------



## Traveladdie

tiktok said:


> I think it’s a Mulberry. Now she’s a great devotee of British brands.


I don't think she could win either way with the public. If she had a Birkin, she would have been chided for the expense of the bag, and having  Mulberry elicits side-eye because some think she is trying to suck up. That says a lot.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Don't use the app. Go to Amazon.com/ebooks on your web browser instead  Then search for 'revenge Bower'. It will come up.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5530837


I tried this link this morning from my computer and it still isn't working. The only Tom Bower book available with "revenge" in the title is the one he wrote years ago about Simon Cowell.

It concerns me since Amazon is in the business of moving books. They never make it this difficult to find a new release. The last time we had such a hard time was when Samantha's book was due to come out and kept getting delayed. The conspiracy theory part of me is wondering whether a lawsuit is brewing or if Amazon employees are mainly populated with sugars.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh no, was that dress out in her size AGAIN?
> 
> Also, I really want to wipe that smug grin off her face, it's starting to actively irritate me.



She has to have a fixed grin on her face at _all _times, who knows when someone may take a photo  

Goodness forbid they shouldn't be pictures holding hands either. 

They look cabin crew


----------



## youngster

Reading the excerpts of Bower's book, I can only imagine that the Palace is really glad they are both gone.  They must have been so awful to deal with on a daily basis.  The drama must have been endless.  When they pop up here and there now, all the Palace has to do is basically shrug and say they are private citizens, no comment.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> They look cabin crew


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The wannabe’s have arrived, pretending to care about those less fortunate
> Perhaps Hazz should have listened to his ‘friends’.




He looks about as happy as if he was going to face a firing squad


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.



The optics of this are dramatic. Sunshine Sucks, who ballyhooed this as a major Keynote address, come off as clueless azzes as they clearly do not understand this schmuck can’t even fill half the seats. It’s an insult to Nelson Mandela, an appropriate speaker would have drawn an appropriate crowd. Netflix may be cringing, if this is best they can do in drawing a crowd, the prospect of this duo generating new viewers purchasing NF subscriptions seems dim.

This is reminiscent of Lily’s birthday at Frogmore: What if they gave a party and no one showed up?

Her grimacing “smile” is grotesque. 

The speaker, while still seated, was so nervous he kept fiddling with his ring, which in turn I think bothered her since what he was doing involved his two hands and she didn’t have access to one to claw onto. 
 (Channeling The Body Language Guy).

It’s only just begun Suckesses. What is particularly enjoyable about the early excerpts is the already apparent length and breadth of the incidents related, waaay beyond the RF.


----------



## 1LV

youngster said:


> There is hardly anyone there! Of the people there, some look like they are intern age or even a bit younger. Like someone brought their kids. (Look to the right and around the middle of the audience.)


You know what Scoobie calls that?  Standing room only.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.



They will die this picture was taken  

Looks like the building was evacuated before his speech.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Guess it was chilly at the UN.
fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> You know what Scoobie calls that?  Standing room only.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> They will die this picture was taken
> 
> Looks like the building was evacuated before his speech.



It is entirely possible that I have lost a year or so, we are only 2 years into this decade, right?  Seems early to call it a painful decade.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.


I retract my former statement


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


Cameras do that for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is entirely possible that I have lost a year or so, we are only 2 years into this decade, right?  Seems early to call it a painful decade.


I'm sure the past two years have felt like a decade to them.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761



I try not to make personal remarks on people's natural physical attributes, happily neither one has the nose Mother Nature gave them,. It's true his nose looks like someone who drinks too much - and has done for a long time, and her nose - - very unfortunate  photo


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> The optics of this are dramatic. Sunshine Sucks, who ballyhooed this as a major Keynote address, come off as clueless azzes as they clearly do not understand this schmuck can’t even fill half the seats. It’s an insult to Nelson Mandela, an appropriate speaker would have drawn an appropriate crowd. Netflix may be cringing, if this is best they can do in drawing a crowd, the prospect of this duo generating new viewers purchasing NF subscriptions seems dim.
> 
> This is reminiscent of Lily’s birthday at Frogmore: What if they gave a party and no one showed up?
> 
> Her grimacing “smile” is grotesque.
> 
> The speaker, while still seated, was so nervous he kept fiddling with his ring, which in turn I think bothered her since what he was doing involved his two hands and she didn’t have access to one to claw onto.
> (Channeling The Body Language Guy).
> 
> It’s only just begun Suckesses. What is particularly enjoyable about the early excerpts is the already apparent length and breadth of the incidents related, waaay beyond the RF.


LOL at the "claw" reference


----------



## andrashik

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


Is my eyesight failing me or her ni**ples are out?


----------



## andrashik

Oh uh oh, bonkers!








						Prince Harry is set to lecture the UN General Assembly on poverty
					

The Duke of Sussex, arrived with his wife Meghan, and weighed in on American politics as he slammed the 'rolling back of constitutional rights' during his speech.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> You can get it from bookdepository.com with free worldwide shipping
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or Kindle e-book, will be sent to your library on 7/21: https://www.amazon.com/Revenge-Meghan-Harry-between-Windsors-ebook/dp/B0B6FZJ95Q/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=HQFFZKQG3QR8&keywords=revenge+bower&qid=1658102185&sprefix=,aps,83&sr=8-1





bag-mania said:


> It let you pre-order the Kindle version? Because when I click on the link this is the message I’m getting.
> 
> View attachment 5530835





bag-mania said:


> I tried this link this morning from my computer and it still isn't working. The only Tom Bower book available with "revenge" in the title is the one he wrote years ago about Simon Cowell.
> 
> It concerns me since Amazon is in the business of moving books. They never make it this difficult to find a new release. The last time we had such a hard time was when Samantha's book was due to come out and kept getting delayed. The conspiracy theory part of me is wondering whether a lawsuit is brewing or if Amazon employees are mainly populated with sugars.


Totally agree.  There is 100% a reason it’s not available for preorder. 


1LV said:


> You know what Scoobie calls that?  Standing room only.


If anyone mentions it they’ll say it was distancing for Covid and that there was overwhelming demand to be in the room. 


andrashik said:


> Is my eyesight failing me or her ni**ples are out?


Oh they weren’t going to miss addressing the UN!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


On my screen it looks like there’s a large dot on the end of her nose. A new Pinocchio extension ready to sprout?

Edit: oops. meant to respond to papertiger’s post. Haven’t had my coffee yet.


----------



## Jayne1

For those wondering -- I remember seeing the Reitmans commercials on TV here in Toronto.  They seemed to be shown around dinner time and I would be in the kitchen preparing. They aren't a company to do TV, so it caught my attention and I thought, who is Meghan Markle and why are they making her into a big deal?

Reitmans own lots of other mall brands that are mid to slightly lower end. Very functional type of clothes, nothing so fashionable that won't be in style in a year.

Anyway, nice commercials and after Harry came along, I realized who MM was.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

andrashik said:


> Is my eyesight failing me or her ni**ples are out?


Yes and she her nose has a red tip, but she isn't Rudolf.


----------



## LittleStar88

andrashik said:


> Oh uh oh, bonkers!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is set to lecture the UN General Assembly on poverty
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, arrived with his wife Meghan, and weighed in on American politics as he slammed the 'rolling back of constitutional rights' during his speech.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Everyone take a shot for every time he mentions his mother in a speech... 


_Addressing the UN, Harry said: ‘For me there is one photo in particular that stands out. On my wall and in my heart everyday is an image of *my mother* and Mandela meeting in Cape Town in 1987.

‘It was presented to me by the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu, whose friendship and inspiration were their own treasured gift.

‘My wife and I had the honor of introducing our four-month-old son to him in 2019. But when I first looked at the photo straight away what jumped out was the joy on *my mother’*s face._


----------



## marietouchet

New makeup style … definitely conveying a feeling to me ….. VERY dark foundation that sends a message
Are you feeling what I am feeling ?



Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in New York City at UN General Assembly
https://mol.im/a/11024613


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


She is so consistent, I wonder if it’s fake nipples




Either way, it’s a cheap look.


----------



## Traveladdie

Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


----------



## xincinsin

Traveladdie said:


> Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


I applaud your optimism. Since your last visit, a new thread has been started for those who wish to appreciate them. You may find it more to your taste. 

Also, we are not seeking perfection, but we do mock their false facade.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.



What happened? Why is she not sitting on top of the speaker's desk? (is that the word?)


----------



## lulu212121

Traveladdie said:


> Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


There's a thread for that! Check pages 2-10.


----------



## Traveladdie

xincinsin said:


> I applaud your optimism. Since your last visit, a new thread has been started for those who wish to appreciate them. You may find it more to your taste.


Fantastic! Thank you!


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> H gonna brief UN General assembly today on climate and Mandela
> Hmmm last time I looked - UN folks like to vacation in July - sure meeting will be well attended
> m will tag along / if we get lucky someone ask about book excerpts
> Where is the popcorn emoji ?
> 
> My money is on private plane to NY - anyone wanna take the bet ?


Lord almighty is there no relief? 


Genie27 said:


> Yes it’s what my friend calls “office lady” clothing - generic medium quality basics - I don’t even know if they’re still around anymore. Maybe they got Markled too. That ad campaign was aiming for a 'younger, cooler demographic' who 'wouldn't believe that her outfit was from that brand.'
> 
> I googled...seems they have an umbrella of brands...but it's definitely no Dior. It's not even Talbots or JCrew level.
> www.reitmans.com if anyone wants to emulate the D


I am always mystified by these ad campaigns where they say ‘you won’t believe it’s X! It’s just that good!’ I mean is the implication that existing customers of X have no taste and have been previously buying cr*p? 


Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718
> 
> View attachment 5538719
> View attachment 5538720



I mean what even is the point of this? A couple of highly entitled elites gather together to congratulate themselves over what? That Mandela did all the hard work for them? What has this got to do with promoting equality in South Africa or anywhere else? It just feels like they are just cashing on his name and legacy tbh and it might as well be ‘Disney’ day or ‘big Mac’s equality pledge’ but that’s the UN for you I guess. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh no, was that dress out in her size AGAIN?
> 
> Also, I really want to wipe that smug grin off her face, it's starting to actively irritate me.


Starting? 


lanasyogamama said:


> Is that a Birkin?


It’s a mulberry belted Bayswater I think. 


papertiger said:


> He looks about as happy as if he was going to face a firing squad


Well he is essentially as I don’t think the UN HQ has the standards of security needed to protect these two VVVVVVVIPs


CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


Not to be *****y but…. I submit this as further evidence she isn’t photogenic. She definitely can’t handle that severe a hairstyle face on. Honestly she looks more like Rob Van Damme than Kim kardashian.


----------



## ceemee

andrashik said:


> Oh uh oh, bonkers!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is set to lecture the UN General Assembly on poverty
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, arrived with his wife Meghan, and weighed in on American politics as he slammed the 'rolling back of constitutional rights' during his speech.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He needs to stop talking about US politics. If he thinks it’s bad now with the criticism he’s getting….  Right now most Americans don’t pay attention to him. But if keeps wading in on US politics, he’ll really see that what it’s like to be bashed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ceemee said:


> He needs to stop talking about US politics. If he thinks it’s bad now with the criticism he’s getting….  Right now most Americans don’t pay attention to him. But if keeps wading in on US politics, he’ll really see that what it’s like to be bashed.



I am not even an US citizen or based over there and it irks me. Like...you abandoned ship in your homecountry, and now you're in the US lecturing them on all kinds of things you have no firm grip of. Then again, sounds quite like Raptor's introduction to his friends. Maybe they really are a match made in heaven.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Traveladdie said:


> Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


1. I don’t think it needs to be either/or. I have a very low opinion of everyone in the royal family and the fact the institution still exists. 
2. No one is asking them to try and become celebrity pundits/politicos/philanthropists/author etc - if they think their views or products are worthy of publication they are also open to critique. Essentially if someone wants to sell me a pedigree cat- I’m entitled to speak out if it’s actually a weasel. 
3. They could live private lives of obscurity having left public office- it is THEIR decision to remain in the public eye and to try and monetise their appearances and they are certainly monetising it. 
4. They have made a lot of unfounded comments about the British public as a whole and thus they can’t be that surprised if they catch a little chagrin.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Not to be *****y but…. I submit this as further evidence she isn’t photogenic. She definitely can’t handle that severe a hairstyle face on. Honestly she looks more like Rob Van Damme than Kim kardashian.



Admittedly I have seen pictures of her where she did look good in the face. But for me, I can never unsee the face malfunctions and mask slips. She scares me.


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not even an US citizen or based over there and it irks me. Like...you abandoned ship in your homecountry, and now you're in the US lecturing them on all kinds of things you have no firm grip of. Then again, sounds quite like Raptor's introduction to his friends. Maybe they really are a match made in heaven.


He probably slept through History.


----------



## marietouchet

Oooohhhh 
H needs to find and read a copy of the US Constitution before saying anything


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> wonder how he got this gig


My bet is on  S*chs and respective powerful connections!









						Global Citizen Announces Inaugural Thought Leadership Summit, Global Citizen NOW
					

Urgent gathering to defeat poverty and protect the planet will convene world leaders, cultural leaders and business leaders on May 22-23 in New York City, and...




					www.prnewswire.com


----------



## Zen101

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.


Maybe they’ll CGI people into those empty chairs when it airs on Netflix. Maybe they won’t pan the camera to the empty chairs at all lol. Imagine your camp hyping this speech up so much that the majority don’t turn up to see or hear you talk. I hope those who didn’t turn up are enjoying their vacation. I wouldn’t make time for these two either.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not even an US citizen or based over there and it irks me. Like...you abandoned ship in your homecountry, and now you're in the US lecturing them on all kinds of things you have no firm grip of. Then again, sounds quite like Raptor's introduction to his friends. Maybe they really are a match made in heaven.


Well,  I am a US citizen and live here, and I  can tell you that Harry can say whatever he wants as most of us don't care.  I'm not a bit surprised about the poor attendance.  My guess is that his speaking fees are dropping rapidly.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Yes!  Harry can say whatever he wants, remember we have free speech in the USA which he already criticized.  I would personally prefer he shut it and go back to the UK, no wait he hates it there too….happy nowhere Harry, perhaps the problem is you!


----------



## ceemee

marietouchet said:


> Oooohhhh
> H needs to find and read a copy of the US Constitution before saying anything


The thing is, will Harry even understand what the US Constitution says? He’s not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. This is the same guy who attended the 4th of July parade. A celebration of when the US decided to break away from the UK & basically tell Harry’s ancestors where to shove it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am not even an US citizen or based over there and it irks me. Like...you abandoned ship in your homecountry, and now you're in the US lecturing them on all kinds of things you have no firm grip of. Then again, sounds quite like Raptor's introduction to his friends. Maybe they really are a match made in heaven.



I think anyone, anywhere in the world, would be irked by someone moving to their country and then lecturing about how _you're doing it wrong._ (Or, that the 1st amendment is bonkers.  That one, he's never living down over here.)  Especially given the multi-million dollar, private jet flying, armed security lifestyle they live. 

Also, most people under the age of 40 have no memory of his mother so he'll find those references less and less helpful over time.


----------



## rose60610

The disaster interview with Oprah; embarrassing herself (again) agreeing to mimic animals on Ellen; shushing royal kiddies at the Jubilee; blatantly exploiting tragedies for photo ops; hanging with Gloria Steinem; showing up at the U.N. as some sort of Mandela whatever--she can't decide how to market herself. She's all over the place. Seems her only criteria is to hog any camera lens she can find. She is soooo gutter desperate for attention. Had she shut her stupid mouth and followed through with the expected royal duties she'd be getting all the attention and more than she ever dreamed of. But NO! She thought she could become an instant multi billionaire by snagging the spare and set up shop as the World's Foremost Authority of Everything just by being herself without doing anything. Meghan is THE definition of DELUSIONAL!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Traveladdie said:


> Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


If I saw them in person, without hesitation I would say it to their faces.  I’m one of those women of a certain age.  The handholding is disgusting because *they* make it a big deal — she completely stops and turns with her hand outstretched [it looks and is immature, unnatural and condescending]. Sure, they may win the bar fight, but words are far more powerful than their punches.  They knew they would leave the BRF and insisted on the television wedding ceremony. They not only lied, they stole.  Make apologies and pay back the money.  Stop the doom and gloom speeches which serve no purpose. Offer solutions [not committees, not websites, blah blah] or leave the stage. All my opinion, ymmv. 

Yes, I would say it all to their faces.


----------



## Toby93

andrashik said:


> Is my eyesight failing me or her ni**ples are out?


Yep, so unbelievably unprofessional.  She can't even get a decent bra


----------



## charlottawill

Traveladdie said:


> Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


Scoobie Doo, is that you?


----------



## Redbirdhermes

youngster said:


> I think anyone, anywhere in the world, would be irked by someone moving to their country and then lecturing about how _you're doing it wrong._ (Or, that the 1st amendment is bonkers.  That one, he's never living down over here.)  Especially given the multi-million dollar, private jet flying, armed security lifestyle they live.
> 
> Also, most people under the age of 40 have no memory of his mother so he'll find those references less and less helpful over time.


This reminds me of an English foreign exchange student that attended my high school for a year many years ago.  He spent the entire year trying to correct our pronunciation,  the words we used, etc, because we (meaning everyone in the US) were doing it all wrong.  Because the English were first and are always right.  It irked me at the time, but no longer. I figure it is a trait of the English and quit worrying about it.  

We were in Scotland a few years ago, and the locals were definitely not fans of the BRF.  I  said, well, we dumped them in 1776, and now they just provide entertainment.  Yeah, this Scotsman was not liking paying for our entertainment!


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I tried this link this morning from my computer and it still isn't working. The only Tom Bower book available with "revenge" in the title is the one he wrote years ago about Simon Cowell.
> 
> It concerns me since Amazon is in the business of moving books. They never make it this difficult to find a new release. The last time we had such a hard time was when Samantha's book was due to come out and kept getting delayed. The conspiracy theory part of me is wondering whether a lawsuit is brewing or if Amazon employees are mainly populated with sugars.



@bag-mania I hate that Amazon made it so tricky. Since my last response to you, I discovered that you shouldn't be clicking on the direct URL that I posted. When clicking on the URL (even if opened on web browser) and using the Amazon and Kindle apps, it will say that the Kindle e-book is unavailable for purchase.

The only way that works so far is by opening a web browser and go to *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*. Once there, simply search for '*revenge Bower*'. It is still working as of this moment


----------



## Gal4Dior

EverSoElusive said:


> @bag-mania I hate that Amazon made it so tricky. Since my last response to you, I discovered that you shouldn't be clicking on the direct URL that I posted. When clicking on the URL (even if opened on web browser) and using the Amazon and Kindle apps, it will say that the Kindle e-book is unavailable for purchase.
> 
> The only way that works so far is by opening a web browser and go to *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*. Once there, simply search for '*revenge Bower*'. It is still working as of this moment
> 
> View attachment 5538826


How strange. I've tried several times and I still can't get it to pull up for purchase.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did Nflix demand the removal of the video?  So pathetic, if true.
DM has already posted the transcript and photos of the empty auditorium have circled the globe 4 times. Give it a rest, Suxxeses


----------



## EverSoElusive

Gal4Dior said:


> How strange. I've tried several times and I still can't get it to pull up for purchase.



Did you go to the correct URL? If you go to Amazon.com without /ebooks at the end, you'll encounter the error saying it's unavailable for purchase too.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> The only way that works so far is by opening a web browser and go to *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*. Once there, simply search for '*revenge Bower*'. It is still working as of this moment



I've tried multiple times on both iPhone and macBook with no luck. Maybe I'll have to settle for this bargain  



> https://www.amazon.com/Harry-Meghan...om+Bower&qid=1658167635&s=digital-text&sr=1-8


"Get it for $1.99 while you can. SALE ENDS JULY 31!* Finally, Volume 2, the second installment of the "Harry & Meghan" series, is on its way! Pre-order your copy now so you can be the first to read about the next phase of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's historical move from the UK to California. This mini-biography is the first to be released since their daughter and American-born royalty Lilibet “Lili” Diana met her gan-gan Queen Elizabeth—*and much of it is told in their own words.

An incisive, analytical and occasionally satirical view of the racism, press intrusion and betrayal they’ve faced since moving to America,* this mini-biography contains fresh new details and up-to-the-minute news on the couple **(Please note page counts before purchasing; these books are short, quick looks at one moment in time).**

More dramatic than a season of The Crown, *more gripping than any soap opera and more intriguing than any mystery thriller,* the true story of Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex rocking the British royal family is like no other book you’ve ever read."


----------



## Gal4Dior

EverSoElusive said:


> Did you go to the correct URL? If you go to Amazon.com without /ebooks at the end, you'll encounter the error saying it's unavailable for purchase too.


I did. There is no error message, but rather it doesn't even pull up as an option to select.


----------



## MommyDaze

EverSoElusive said:


> Did you go to the correct URL? If you go to Amazon.com without /ebooks at the end, you'll encounter the error saying it's unavailable for purchase too.


Doesn’t work for me either and I’m using the correct URL. Tried both Safari and Chrome.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> She can't even get a decent bra


Or doesn't want to.


----------



## WingNut

Gal4Dior said:


> I did. There is no error message, but rather it doesn't even pull up as an option to select.



Same here. I've been trying all morning (in the US)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Not a therapist or a body language expert, but I think the constant hand holding in public is an emotional crutch that one, or both of them, need (or say they need). It's a physical reminder that_ they aren't alone in the big bad world _with all those triggering cameras and nosy questions by the nasty press when they are out in public.  More of that_ us versus them_ mentality that Meghan has likely been pushing since they got engaged.


----------



## Chanbal

Gal4Dior said:


> How strange. I've tried several times and I still can't get it to pull up for purchase.


It's very strange that Amaz*n doesn't have TB's book available for sale in the US. Would this be the work of TW's lawyers? We know that the American audience is her target. 

I ordered mine via www.bookdepository.com.


----------



## Aimee3

He looks so unkempt and smelly.  The holding hands constantly makes me wonder if she can’t walk in heels and thus claws onto him for stability.  I wish my husband would let me do that with him when we go out and I want to wear heels.  He has no patience and tells me to just wear flats…as if!!!!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What happened? Why is she not sitting on top of the speaker's desk? (is that the word?)


Lantern?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> He looks so unkempt and smelly.  The holding hands constantly makes me wonder if she can’t walk in heels and thus claws onto him for stability.  I wish my husband would let me do that with him when we go out and I want to wear heels.  He has no patience and tells me to just wear flats…as if!!!!



She is very capable of walking on her own if Harry isn't around.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did Nflix demand the removal of the video?  So pathetic, if true.
> DM has already posted the transcript and photos of the empty auditorium have circled the globe 4 times. Give it a rest, Suxxeses



This one's onto something:


----------



## Aimee3

I can’t bring up the book either BUT if you want it on kindle, you can order it on the UK Amazon website.  Very strange.  You think sunshine sucks is behind it?


----------



## Jktgal

Traveladdie said:


> William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


The Will and Kate thread is so boring. I'd welcome some juicy gossip! Did Kate forgot to return her borrowed jewelry from the.... Queen? . William banging the horse-faced woman who is Kate's friend?   Unless it's "they routinely engage in 3-some involving bananas, cake and pictures of Diana" it doesn't really compare....


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## CentralTimeZone

Gal4Dior said:


> How strange. I've tried several times and I still can't get it to pull up for purchase.


Same!


----------



## charlottawill

Jktgal said:


> bananas, cake and pictures of Diana


----------



## bag-mania

The book isn’t available on Barnes & Noble either. I am hoping that this is distribution issue and not a conspiracy!


----------



## Jayne1

Couldn't find it on the .ca website either. Even though it gave me a "tom bower meghan markle" prompt.


----------



## Jayne1

If anyone is interested:


----------



## Toby93

Gal4Dior said:


> How strange. I've tried several times and I still can't get it to pull up for purchase.


Yep, same here.  I gave up and ordered on book depository


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Helventara

Jktgal said:


> The Will and Kate thread is so boring. I'd welcome some juicy gossip! Did Kate forgot to return her borrowed jewelry from the.... Queen? . William banging the horse-faced woman who is Kate's friend?   Unless it's "they routinely engage in 3-some involving bananas, cake and pictures of Diana" it doesn't really compare....


I'd actually welcome some fans to talk with us. But really talk and engage and not deflect.  Perhaps explain to us 'meanies' why they feel OK to demand money from a job they they left behind or the family they vilified?  Their lies have been identified so many times but let’s start at the basic. 
I wish one fan would stay and really explain to us like a normal person.


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> *He looks so unkempt and smelly. * The holding hands constantly makes me wonder if she can’t walk in heels and thus claws onto him for stability.  I wish my husband would let me do that with him when we go out and I want to wear heels.  He has no patience and tells me to just wear flats…as if!!!!


That's what I thought too.  She is so wrapped up in herself that she let him go out looking like that!  He really needs a good haircut.


----------



## LittleStar88

OMG his speech is such a snorefest.


----------



## Aimee3

Well I wouldn’t put it past her BUT some men just don’t listen. Sometimes my husband and I are going out for dinner with friends and I will say to him “you’re not going to wear _that?”_


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Lantern?





papertiger said:


> Lantern?


"Lectern" (n) a tall stand with a sloping top to hold a book or notes, from which someone, typically a preacher, or lecturer can read while standing up

Perfect for someone like Hazbeen who preaches and lectures.


----------



## Cinderlala

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718



^^^^This is NOT the body of the woman from the 4th of July pictures.  




WingNut said:


> Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him?



A captor can't release her captive---he could get away.    Plus, she absolutely must cling to him as he is her only sliver of semi-relevance.



papertiger said:


> He looks about as happy as if he was going to face a firing squad



She had her Claw in him by then.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> "Lectern" (n) a tall stand with a sloping top to hold a book or notes, from which someone, typically a preacher, or lecturer can read while standing up
> 
> Perfect for someone like Hazbeen who preaches and lectures.


My autocorrect has got a mind of its own. Should have been lectern, been at one all morning (so  unnaturally hot here) I’m surprised the equipment didn’t implode or melt. 

Lantern is what I need to read with. Too hot to turn the lights on. Never try to work and nip to tPF at the same time especially at dusk.


----------



## kemilia

EverSoElusive said:


> You can get it from bookdepository.com with free worldwide shipping
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or Kindle e-book, will be sent to your library on 7/21: https://www.amazon.com/Revenge-Meghan-Harry-between-Windsors-ebook/dp/B0B6FZJ95Q/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=HQFFZKQG3QR8&keywords=revenge+bower&qid=1658102185&sprefix=,aps,83&sr=8-1


thank you for the info.


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> ^*^^^This is NOT the body of the woman from the 4th of July pictures. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A captor can't release her captive---he could get away.    Plus, she absolutely must cling to him as he is her only sliver of semi-relevance.
> 
> 
> 
> She had her Claw in him by then.


The shoulders on the woman in Wyoming were tiny - I totally agree with you, this is NOT the same body frame as July 4th!


----------



## mikimoto007

I think Meghan looks great today - slick,dull, professional, for once totally on point.

I haven't heard Harry's speech, but I just find the whole concept of him at the UN bizarre.

The frantically clutching for each other is beyond weird.


----------



## andrashik

BVBookshop said:


> I'd actually welcome some fans to talk with us. But really talk and engage and not deflect.  Perhaps explain to us 'meanies' why they feel OK to demand money from a job they they left behind or the family they vilified?  Their lies have been identified so many times but let’s start at the basic.
> I wish one fan would stay and really explain to us like a normal person.


Yeah. It really vexes me when all of you ladies are stating facts with real examples and suddenly all of her fans dissappear and don't respond.
I remember a while ago , a user was somewhat on Claw's side but engaged in a civilised discussion and saw the light.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tourre never disappoints  (highlighted the 2nd tweet so it would be shown alongside the original one)


----------



## TimeToShop

Not many in attendance


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Spot on.


----------



## bellecate

Aimee3 said:


> I can’t bring up the book either BUT if you want it on kindle, you can order it on the UK Amazon website.  Very strange.  You think sunshine sucks is behind it?


If anyone has found it on Kobo please let me know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PurseUOut

Is she wearing a bullet proof vest? You can see somewhat of an outline in the second picture near her shoulder. Which would explain why her shoulders look broader and thicker around the middle compared to her picture in Wyoming.


----------



## TimeToShop

The guy after him called him, Prince Duke of Wessex


----------



## LittleStar88

TimeToShop said:


> Not many in attendance




Everyone looks so bored. The few people who are there.. This is so cringe!


----------



## CobaltBlu

EverSoElusive said:


> @bag-mania I hate that Amazon made it so tricky. Since my last response to you, I discovered that you shouldn't be clicking on the direct URL that I posted. When clicking on the URL (even if opened on web browser) and using the Amazon and Kindle apps, it will say that the Kindle e-book is unavailable for purchase.
> 
> The only way that works so far is by opening a web browser and go to *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*. Once there, simply search for '*revenge Bower*'. It is still working as of this moment
> 
> View attachment 5538826


This doesnt work for me either on any browser. I suspect if you clear your cache/history/cookies it might no longer work for you either.  I can only get the kindle version on amazon UK.  thanks so much for trying though, but yea, this doesnt work even if you type in the address as you indicated.  boo!!!


----------



## bellecate

PurseUOut said:


> Is she wearing a bullet proof vest? You can see somewhat of an outline in the second picture near her shoulder. Which would explain why her shoulders look broader and thicker around the middle compared to her picture in Wyoming.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538863
> View attachment 5538864


In some of the other photos her headlights are on. They wouldn’t show through a vest.


----------



## Sharont2305

Her hand on his upper arm "yes Harry, you may shake the nice man's hand"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is not normal. It has nothing to do with being affectionate as the sugars want to spin it.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> @bag-mania I hate that Amazon made it so tricky. Since my last response to you, I discovered that you shouldn't be clicking on the direct URL that I posted. When clicking on the URL (even if opened on web browser) and using the Amazon and Kindle apps, it will say that the Kindle e-book is unavailable for purchase.
> 
> The only way that works so far is by opening a web browser and go to *https://www.amazon.com/ebooks*. Once there, simply search for '*revenge Bower*'. It is still working as of this moment
> 
> View attachment 5538826


Thank you for helping but I cannot find the book on Amazon at all. It is as if it has been wiped from their system. 

I hope you and anyone else who was able to order actually gets their e-book on Thursday.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She just can't stop. It's f*cking bizarre.

I wonder when she'll start changing his diapers in public. That woman is completely not right in the head.

Geez, can someone please swoop in and rescue Harry?


----------



## sdkitty

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718
> 
> View attachment 5538719
> View attachment 5538720



they should just call her WIFE of H, rather than Duchess


----------



## regnews




----------



## Cinderlala

PurseUOut said:


> Is she wearing a bullet proof vest? You can see somewhat of an outline in the second picture near her shoulder. Which would explain why her shoulders look broader and thicker around the middle compared to her picture in Wyoming.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538863
> View attachment 5538864



It wouldn't explain the hips.

Edited to add: I'm not saying anything is wrong with her body, it's just not the one in the 7-4 pix.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She just can't stop. It's f*cking bizarre.
> 
> I wonder when she'll start changing his diapers in public. That woman is completely not right in the head.
> 
> Geez, can someone please swoop in and rescue Harry?



He certainly does not look happy about the constant grabbing by her.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG his speech is such a snorefest.


Such a pointless self-serving waste of everyone's time. If they really wanted to honor Mandela on his bday they should have showed up with a seven figure check in hand for the Mandela Rhodes Foundation or similar. Put your money where your mouth is Harry. Oops, forgot, they don't have any. 



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandela_Rhodes_Scholarship


----------



## charlottawill

TimeToShop said:


> Not many in attendance



They all just practiced social distancing. By not showing up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is not normal. It has nothing to do with being affectionate as the sugars want to spin it.


Stockholm syndrome.


----------



## charlottawill

regnews said:


>



And she's got that stupid smile plastered on her face like a Stepford wife.


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> Don't worry, I'm sure they'll find a way to embarrass themselves this time too.


Mission accomplished.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Well I wouldn’t put it past her BUT some men just don’t listen. Sometimes my husband and I are going out for dinner with friends and I will say to him “you’re not going to wear _that?”_


My husband is perpetually fashion challenged. I cannot tell you how many times in the decades we've been together we've had that conversation. He gets huffy and then the night starts out on a bad foot, so I've learned to deliver it more gently. As in, "I think this shirt would look nicer" or "These shoes go better with your outfit". After all, if he said something about my outfit, not that it would ever happen haha, I'd get upset. And play to their ego - "You look very stylish" or "You look ten years younger wearing that!". Never fails


----------



## kemilia

This is one of the worst outings ever--her grabbing his whole arm when he has it resting on his leg. And patting it and not letting go. Sad.
My take is he is DEFINITELY on "something" to help him get through this speech or whatever it is--he looks like he is walking to his own execution! And he used to give speeches and addresses all the time so this should just be a walk in the park. I agree with whoever said it earlier--the BRF is not saying anything due to them being worried about what he might do to himself. And she's just grinning and manipulating her money-puppet. So icky, really getting hard to watch. Shivers.


----------



## MiniMabel

regnews said:


>




I actually feel uncomfortable, and sad, watching this. He moves his hand away, twice, but she takes it back again and holds his arm firmly. 

He looks very uncomfortable, and rather stressed, in this clip. Dare I say I feel sorry for him there?  There's certainly seems to be something not right. Close contact and hand-holding is fine (if both are happy with it), when the situation is appropriate, but on this particular occasion it's not suitable behaviour. They are 39? and 40 years old and the constant hand-holding is sometimes sweet, although often a little embarrassing, but this gripping his arm is next level when the world is watching. It seems it's about control. I think we knew this but seeing this played out so clearly is unsettling.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is not normal. It has nothing to do with being affectionate as the sugars want to spin it.


He is deeply troubled and she has made the most of it.


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> Not many in attendance




If this had been the attendance at my 'gig' today I would be _crying_


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> I  think anyone, anywhere in the world, would be irked by someone moving to their country and then lecturing about how _you're doing it wrong._ (Or, that the 1st amendment is bonkers.  That one, he's never living down over here.)  Especially given the multi-million dollar, private jet flying, armed security lifestyle they live.
> 
> Also, most people under the age of 40 have no memory of his mother so he'll find those references less and less helpful over time.


Well this couple being the generous sort they are they have leant their expertise in how to do better to most of the countries they have visited:-
Zed told us Brits we don’t have mental healthcare and we’re all racist. Before that she told off the South Africans for their lack of courtesy in not asking about her every five minutes. Let’s not forget she also gave Muslim women everywhere some hints on how to sex up their modesty wear by letting your hair fall out of your hijab (rendering it pointless) and somehow making an abaya show your underwear. 

H is the relative slowpoke as to my knowledge he’s only told the Americans they are bonkers and the Canadians they are too boring for him to live among them. Get to work H! 


Redbirdhermes said:


> This reminds me of an English foreign exchange student that attended my high school for a year many years ago.  He spent the entire year trying to correct our pronunciation,  the words we used, etc, because we (meaning everyone in the US) were doing it all wrong.  Because the English were first and are always right.  It irked me at the time, but no longer. I figure it is a trait of the English and quit worrying about it.
> 
> We were in Scotland a few years ago, and the locals were definitely not fans of the BRF.  I  said, well, we dumped them in 1776, and now they just provide entertainment.  Yeah, this Scotsman was not liking paying for our entertainment!





But seriously that’s a silly concept of how accents and languages work - of course Americans sound different to other English speakers   people from U.K. towns 15 miles away from each other sound completely different!


Jktgal said:


> The Will and Kate thread is so boring. I'd welcome some juicy gossip! Did Kate forgot to return her borrowed jewelry from the.... Queen? . William banging the horse-faced woman who is Kate's friend?   Unless it's "they routinely engage in 3-some involving bananas  , cake and pictures of Diana" it doesn't really compare....


I agree. It does need spicing up. Maybe I should split my efforts but I am worried I will never get anything done, 


Cinderlala said:


> ^^^^This is NOT the body of the woman from the 4th of July pictures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A captor can't release her captive---he could get away.    Plus, she absolutely must cling to him as he is her only sliver of semi-relevance.
> 
> 
> 
> She had her Claw in him by then.


100% that’s not the same woman.  I never bought it 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Spot on.



Very ‘I am not in danger… I am the danger’ but with less brains and  less hair. 


Sharont2305 said:


> Her hand on his upper arm "yes Harry, you may shake the nice man's hand"
> 
> View attachment 5538876


So weird. This looks like weekend at Bernie’s or something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If this had been the attendance at my 'gig' today I would be _crying_



I feel his nonexistant audience is the least of his problems, though.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Spot on.




By what right does a Prince have to talk about democracy - beyond birth-right and divine-right that is?


----------



## TC1

Genie27 said:


> Yes it’s what my friend calls “office lady” clothing - generic medium quality basics - I don’t even know if they’re still around anymore. Maybe they got Markled too. That ad campaign was aiming for a 'younger, cooler demographic' who 'wouldn't believe that her outfit was from that brand.'
> 
> I googled...seems they have an umbrella of brands...but it's definitely no Dior. It's not even Talbots or JCrew level.
> www.reitmans.com if anyone wants to emulate the D


I personally think that Reitmans was trying to copy some of her wardrobe from Suits on the cheap. A lot of scenes filmed in Toronto, she was here too..so it was kind of a "you can look like her" on the office chic scale. I'm sure her pay to be a brand model wasn't much.


----------



## papertiger

PurseUOut said:


> Is she wearing a bullet proof vest? You can see somewhat of an outline in the second picture near her shoulder. Which would explain why her shoulders look broader and thicker around the middle compared to her picture in Wyoming.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538863
> View attachment 5538864




She is _not_ wearing a bullet proof vest (IMO)


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> She is _not_ wearing a bullet proof vest (IMO)


LOL
much as I dislike her, I'm glad I'm not scrutinized as she is (not that she doesn't ask for it but anyway)


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> And she's got that stupid smile plastered on her face like a Stepford wife.



She does it _every_ time, it's either something the someone (not so) professional has told her to do or she's thought of it all by her 'clever'self, it just makes her look


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Oooohhhh
> H needs to find and read a copy of the US Constitution before saying anything


The topic to which he was referring , I shall not mention due to its controversy, even the learned RBG  had a lot to say on this topic vis a vis the Constitution


----------



## lanasyogamama

I could see giving my husband a quick pat on the shoulder after he finished a speech like that, but the hand grabbing is so inappropriate for what is effectively a business meeting.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I could see giving my husband a quick pat on the shoulder after he finished a speech like that, but the hand grabbing is so inappropriate for what is effectively a business meeting.


as proud as he seems to be of his WIFE, he does appear to be uncomfortable with all this grabbing....wonder if he's getting tired of it


----------



## Vintage Leather

Traveladdie said:


> Every once in awhile I pop into this thread to see if there are any neutral or supportive comments about Harry and Megan. The internet is the safest place to say something somewhat unkind in private that we might never say in public, so taking a peek anywhere online can be dicey in general. I don't think ANY of the Windsors are more perfect than the others. It's confounding to read so much ill-will directed towards Harry and Megan in particular.  I believe that both of them, like all people, can be insensitive, uncharitable, selfish, and irrational. It is my opinion that they hold hands so much not only out of love but because they are each others strength. Our discussion here is just a tiny microcosm of the chatter worldwide so existing as a family cannot be easy. I don't understand why clinging to each other is seen as a deficit to their relationship. We are not going on (there have been mentions) and on about William's alleged affair or any of the rumors about Kate. It's disheartening.


There’s whole threads of supportive comments! Check out the Meghan Markle Style thread or the Appreciation Thread.

We actually did discuss the William affair rumors back in ‘21 when Giles Coren (the reporter for the Sun) implied that his source for the rumors was the Sussexes. 

Actually, those are the rumors I’d love to see investigated in Bowen’s book. 

I haven’t heard negative rumors about Kate, but she and William have their own thread as well. Kinda boring, but the pictures are adorable.


----------



## TimeToShop

Oh my word. I bet she “wrote” H’s speech. Can‘t they do something original?


----------



## PurseUOut

youngster said:


> Not a therapist or a body language expert, but I think the constant hand holding in public is an emotional crutch that one, or both of them, need (or say they need). It's a physical reminder that_ they aren't alone in the big bad world _with all those triggering cameras and nosy questions by the nasty press when they are out in public.  More of that_ us versus them_ mentality that Meghan has likely been pushing since they got engaged.



I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> LOL
> much as I dislike her, I'm glad I'm not scrutinized as she is (not that she doesn't ask for it but anyway)



It would be awful!  But, people would scrutinize her less if she lied less frequently.  Or fewer people would scrutinize her---I wouldn't be on any H&M thread if she wasn't so bizarre, controlling, & manipulative.

Unfortunately for her, scrutiny comes with fame.  She could have lived the very quiet, private, far less scrutinized life she claimed she wanted if she had stayed in Vancouver. 

To be clear, there's nothing physically wrong with her appearance.  The parade photos are just a continuation of her bizarre lies.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry looks like an abused partner. That’s why he smiles and looks so relaxed away from her. But he’s still a dipS.


----------



## Cinderlala

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.



No one with crippling social anxiety would marry into the BRF.  There is no need for her to go with Harry to this event.  There is almost never a need for her to attend anything.  With crippling social anxiety, she would happily stay far, far out of the spotlight.


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


>




This one literally made me LOL!!  Love the expression on her face - even though it was really for a marmalade sandwich!


----------



## Toby93

Love this


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> No one with crippling social anxiety would marry into the BRF.  There is no need for her to go with Harry to this event.  There is almost never a need for her to attend anything.  With crippling social anxiety, she would happily stay far, far out of the spotlight.


she is the one who wants so much to be in the public eye, esp as an activist so having to appear as the WIFE rather than as the central figure must be galling


----------



## EverSoElusive

CobaltBlu said:


> This doesnt work for me either on any browser. I suspect if you clear your cache/history/cookies it might no longer work for you either.  I can only get the kindle version on amazon UK.  thanks so much for trying though, but yea, this doesnt work even if you type in the address as you indicated.  boo!!!





bag-mania said:


> Thank you for helping but I cannot find the book on Amazon at all. It is as if it has been wiped from their system.
> 
> I hope you and anyone else who was able to order actually gets their e-book on Thursday.




Hey everyone  

I'm very sorry that the instructions didn't work for anyone to purchase the Kindle e-book. It was still working for me earlier but I suppose it's been pulled between now and then.

Good thing is, July 21st is just a few days away so you guys are not missing anything. If it was up to me, I really just want to spend $0.99 instead of $11.86, now $9.49     

Again, I'm awfully sorry


----------



## charlottawill

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


I doubt someone with crippling social anxiety would pursue an acting career. I would sooner believe it about him, and coupled with her narcissism they form the perfect co-dependent pair.


----------



## Toby93

I'm guessing this must be from today also.  Did we think that TW would let Hazbeen have all the spotlight?  Definitely looks like Gloria's best days are behind her sadly, if she is hitching her wagon to this narc


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PurseUOut

Cinderlala said:


> No one with crippling social anxiety would marry into the BRF.  There is no need for her to go with Harry to this event.  There is almost never a need for her to attend anything.  With crippling social anxiety, she would happily stay far, far out of the spotlight.



This is not true and a common misconception about anxiety disorders. Plenty of actual celebrities suffer from anxiety and are still in the spotlight:









						Famous people with anxiety
					

Anxiety can trigger extreme physical and psychological symptoms. Many of America’s most famous people deal with the disorder. Learn more from WebMD's celebrity slideshow.




					www.webmd.com
				




Did you consider maybe Meghan felt anxious she would be perceived as an unsupportive wife is she didn't attend his speech? Perhaps Harry requested she go with him?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Savage


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I'm guessing this must be from today also.  Did we think that TW would let Hazbeen have all the spotlight?  Definitely looks like Gloria's best days are behind her sadly, if she is hitching her wagon to this narc
> 
> View attachment 5538962
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538963
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538964


this has to be right up there as one of her worst looks...shorts with the skinny legs.  apparently she thinks those legs are an asset but I don't agree


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> This is not true and a common misconception about anxiety disorders. Plenty of actual celebrities suffer from anxiety and are still in the spotlight:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Famous people with anxiety
> 
> 
> Anxiety can trigger extreme physical and psychological symptoms. Many of America’s most famous people deal with the disorder. Learn more from WebMD's celebrity slideshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.webmd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you consider maybe Meghan felt anxious she would be perceived as an unsupportive wife is she didn't attend his speech? Perhaps Harry requested she go with him?


LOL
do you think there is any chance she would have stayed away?


----------



## Luvbolide

WingNut said:


> Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him? Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?
> 
> Oh wait....I just answered my own question.
> 
> Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...




This drives me nuts, too.  Like they are still in high school.  But maybe it is easier and/or quicker to deploy the claw from this position!


----------



## Cinderlala

PurseUOut said:


> This is not true and a common misconception about anxiety disorders. Plenty of actual celebrities suffer from anxiety and are still in the spotlight:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Famous people with anxiety
> 
> 
> Anxiety can trigger extreme physical and psychological symptoms. Many of America’s most famous people deal with the disorder. Learn more from WebMD's celebrity slideshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.webmd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you consider maybe Meghan felt anxious she would be perceived as an unsupportive wife is she didn't attend his speech? Perhaps Harry requested she go with him?



Dealing with anxiety and suffering from a crippling social anxiety disorder are two very different things.  The clue is in the name---crippling.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> this has to be right up there as one of her worst looks...shorts with the skinny legs.  apparently she thinks those legs are an asset but I don't agree


They are a weird choice. Those are my Mom shorts from the 90s. I look at pictures now and say "What was I thinking?". It's hot in NY, why not just a skirt?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Her hand on his upper arm "yes Harry, you may shake the nice man's hand"
> 
> View attachment 5538876





QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is not normal. It has nothing to do with being affectionate as the sugars want to spin it.


We've observed her long enough to know that she's a Control Freak!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I'm guessing this must be from today also.  Did we think that TW would let Hazbeen have all the spotlight?  Definitely looks like Gloria's best days are behind her sadly, if she is hitching her wagon to this narc
> 
> View attachment 5538962
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538963
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538964


It doesn't surprise me one bit that she is cozying up to a feminist icon, the better to burnish her meager credentials.


----------



## PurseUOut

charlottawill said:


> I doubt someone with crippling social anxiety would pursue an acting career. I would sooner believe it about him, and coupled with her narcissism they form the perfect co-dependent pair.



People throw around narcissist without knowing that social anxiety exists and often masks for narcissism. No compassion, no consideration into maybe she is fearful and anxious as it relates to her appearance with Harry. IMO, Meghan is way too hyper-aware, perfectionist, and insecure in her position to be a narcissist. Socially anxious and akward? Yes - most Type A perfectionist gung-ho people are. But she's not a narcissist. Harry is definitely one.



sdkitty said:


> LOL
> do you think there is any chance she would have stayed away?



Who gives a speech at the UN without their spouse being there? Lol. Besides, people would criticize her for not supporting Harry, for only wanting the attention on her, for trying to upstage him by means of withdrawal, etc. I even saw a video by someone (who claims to be an expert in narcissism) who said Meghan doesn't "display" her children publicly as a means of keeping control and the attention on her. WTF?


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> People throw around narcissist without knowing that social anxiety exists and often masks for narcissism. No compassion, no consideration into maybe she is fearful and anxious as it relates to her appearance with Harry. IMO, Meghan is way too hyper-aware, perfectionist, and insecure in her position to be a narcissist. Socially anxious and akward? Yes - most Type A perfectionist gung-ho people are. But she's not a narcissist. Harry is definitely one.
> 
> 
> 
> Who gives a speech at the UN without their spouse being there? Lol. Besides, people would criticize her for not supporting Harry, for only wanting the attention on her, for trying to upstage him by means of withdrawal, etc. I even saw a video by someone (who claims to be an expert in narcissism) who said Meghan doesn't "display" her children publicly as a means of keeping control and the attention on her. WTF?


It may be true that it's very normal for a spouse to be there but I still stand by my opinion that you couldn't keep her away.  Public attention and respect for being an activist or philanthropist or whatever they claim to be is her big dream-come-true.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

kemilia said:


> This is one of the worst outings ever--her grabbing his whole arm when he has it resting on his leg. And patting it and not letting go. Sad.
> My take is he is DEFINITELY on "something" to help him get through this speech or whatever it is--he looks like he is walking to his own execution! And he used to give speeches and addresses all the time so this should just be a walk in the park. I agree with whoever said it earlier--the BRF is not saying anything due to them being worried about what he might do to himself. And she's just grinning and manipulating her money-puppet. So icky, really getting hard to watch. Shivers.


He forgot to cross his arms and pat his shoulders to self soothe.   And close his eyes. Guess he flunked that session.


----------



## Toby93

PurseUOut said:


> People throw around narcissist without knowing that social anxiety exists and often masks for narcissism. No compassion, no consideration into maybe she is fearful and anxious as it relates to her appearance with Harry. IMO, Meghan is way too hyper-aware, perfectionist, and insecure in her position to be a narcissist. Socially anxious and akward? Yes - most Type A perfectionist gung-ho people are. But she's not a narcissist. Harry is definitely one.
> 
> 
> 
> Who gives a speech at the UN without their spouse being there? Lol. Besides, people would criticize her for not supporting Harry, for only wanting the attention on her, for trying to upstage him by means of withdrawal, etc. I even saw a video by someone (who claims to be an expert in narcissism) who said Meghan doesn't "display" her children publicly as a means of keeping control and the attention on her. WTF?


I think I will reserve my opinion until after I read the Bower book, but from the history or bullying and diva antics, I would have to disagree.
Destructive levels of narcissism[edit]​Narcissism, in and of itself, is a normal personality trait, however, high levels of narcissistic behavior can be damaging and self-defeating.[29][_unreliable source?_] Destructive narcissism is the constant exhibition of a few of the intense characteristics usually associated with pathological Narcissistic Personality Disorder such as a "*pervasive pattern of grandiosity", which is characterized by feelings of entitlement and superiority, arrogant or haughty behaviors, *and a generalized lack of empathy and concern for others.[2] On a spectrum, destructive narcissism is more extreme than healthy narcissism but not as extreme as the pathological condition.[30]


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Dealing with anxiety and suffering from a crippling social anxiety disorder are two very different things.  The clue is in the name---crippling.


While it is true many prominent people deal with varying degrees of anxiety, based on this I'm pretty sure Zeezy does not suffer from social anxiety disorder. But he might. 



> https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/social-anxiety-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20353561


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


M's face is looking more like her wax figure at Madame Tussauds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> I'm guessing this must be from today also.  Did we think that TW would let Hazbeen have all the spotlight?  Definitely looks like Gloria's best days are behind her sadly, if she is hitching her wagon to this narc
> 
> View attachment 5538962
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538963
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538964



Those shorts are doing her no favors at all!


----------



## sdkitty

headline from Daily Beast.....behind a paywall....maybe someone can open:

Harry’s Buddies on Meghan: ‘He Must Be F*cking Nuts’


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> This is one of the worst outings ever--her grabbing his whole arm when he has it resting on his leg. And patting it and not letting go. Sad.
> My take is he is DEFINITELY on "something" to help him get through this speech or whatever it is--he looks like he is walking to his own execution! And he used to give speeches and addresses all the time so this should just be a walk in the park. I agree with whoever said it earlier--the BRF is not saying anything due to them being worried about what he might do to himself. And she's just grinning and manipulating her money-puppet. So icky, really getting hard to watch. Shivers.


He pulled away from her and then she grabbed him again.  i think she had the problem and not him.  She was clinging on to him for dear life literally and figuratively because after this Bower book comes out she is really toasted.

I watched the entire speech on YT.  Very terse delivery and definitely written for him and not by her and very well rehearsed.  There were subtle teleprompters all over the place and the UN people were reading the speech on their laptops.  He delivered it like it was the end of the world, and it might be for him.  


The UN took down the video after the UK representative complained that Harry was not representing the UK at the UN and he had no business delving into US political issues.  


I also watched the Piers Morgan interview with Tom Bower.  No great revelations there, except for Bower to say that Meghan got what she wanted, which was to be famous and a household name.  He admired her ability to do this as well considering that he felt she had nothing to back it up and came from nowhere.


----------



## PurseUOut

Toby93 said:


> I think I will reserve my opinion until after I read the Bower book, but from the history or bullying and diva antics, I would have to disagree.
> Destructive levels of narcissism[edit]​Narcissism, in and of itself, is a normal personality trait, however, high levels of narcissistic behavior can be damaging and self-defeating.[29][_unreliable source?_] Destructive narcissism is the constant exhibition of a few of the intense characteristics usually associated with pathological Narcissistic Personality Disorder such as a "*pervasive pattern of grandiosity", which is characterized by feelings of entitlement and superiority, arrogant or haughty behaviors, *and a generalized lack of empathy and concern for others.[2] On a spectrum, destructive narcissism is more extreme than healthy narcissism but not as extreme as the pathological condition.[30]



None of this describes Meghan, imo.

I will admit she is socially akward at times, she is hyper-aware, she over-performs to the point of where it appears fake, she can lack situational awareness and a realization of proper social cues for the setting. She is Type-A and they are notorious for being stubborn, having tunnel vision, seeing the world with black/white thinking and reluctant to change. She is biracial so people can be reluctant to afford her the grace to have a wide range of emotions (even awkwardly) or even make poor decisions without resulting to the extreme and questioning her intentions. But to me that does not mean she is a narcissist.

Past behavior is indicative of future behavior and to my knowledge Meghan's coworkers and those whose she worked closely with over the years prior to her joining TRF have nothing but positive things to say about her. Can a supposed narcissist mask it for that long in the U.S. only to reveal their true selves across the pond? Maybe. I won't buy his book but I interested in reading parts of it. My perspective is open, especially if sources are revealed and willing to go on record with their claims first-hand.


----------



## charlottawill

PurseUOut said:


> People throw around narcissist without knowing that social anxiety exists and often masks for narcissism.



I stand corrected. This is very interesting. Thank you for pointing it out. I actually learn things here. 



> https://www.asteroidpublishers.com/uploads/articlepdfs/JPMHB-00173225.pdf


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> She does it _every_ time, it's either something the someone (not so) professional has told her to do or she's thought of it all by her 'clever'self, it just makes her look


Imo it is for the cameraman, so he can get his shot. She is not doing any of this for us.


----------



## gracekelly

PurseUOut said:


> None of this describes Meghan, imo.
> 
> I will admit she is socially akward at times, she is hyper-aware, she over-performs to the point of where it appears fake, she can lack situational awareness and a realization of proper social cues for the setting. She is not a white woman so people will not afford her the grace to have a wide range of emotions (even awkwardly) or even make poor decisions without resulting to the extreme and questioning her intentions. But to me that does not mean she is a narcissist.
> 
> Past behavior is indicative of future behavior and to my knowledge Meghan's coworkers and those whose she worked closely with over the years prior to her joining TRF have nothing but positive things to say about her. Can a supposed narcissist mask it for that long in the U.S. only to reveal their true selves across the pond? Maybe. I won't buy his book but I interested in reading parts of it. My perspective is open, especially if sources are revealed and willing to go on record with their claims first-hand.


There is a fellow by the name of HG. Tudor who has rather long videos on YT right now going through the Bower book.  Every other word out of his mouth is narcissist.  I listened to a couple and then had to turn it off because it was too repetetive.

River, another well known YTuber, is taking some of the Bower book with a big grain of salt and that he doesn't believe the quotes..  He seems to think that Bower feels he can get away with some of the quotes attributed to royals, such as TQ saying that she was glad MM wasn't going to be at the funeral, because the royals don't respond to questions.  I had to talk back to the TV and tell River that Bower was a barrister and won all his lawsuits for libel.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> headline from Daily Beast.....behind a paywall....maybe someone can open:
> 
> Harry’s Buddies on Meghan: ‘He Must Be F*cking Nuts’


It's in the middle of page 6590


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


>



Cute outfit if you are going to the mall.  Poor Gloria looks as if she was let out of the home for the day.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> This is not true and a common misconception about anxiety disorders. Plenty of actual celebrities suffer from anxiety and are still in the spotlight:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Famous people with anxiety
> 
> 
> Anxiety can trigger extreme physical and psychological symptoms. Many of America’s most famous people deal with the disorder. Learn more from WebMD's celebrity slideshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.webmd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you consider maybe Meghan felt anxious she would be perceived as an unsupportive wife is she didn't attend his speech? Perhaps Harry requested she go with him?


Maybe he should stay home, perhaps write a column, or do his podcast. Plenty of ways around the anxiety. Continuing to make himself the national joke with meaningless phrases probably doesn’t help his fragile ego, no?


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


Most likely because she knows she lied.  The fear of being found out surely terrifies her, causes much inner turmoil.  She knows she is a fraud, has publicly admitted it and now there is a book about it.


----------



## PurseUOut

Chloe302225 said:


>




Meghan has a very nice figure (we have similar body types) but unfortunately it is not one that looks flattering in all outfits. Trust me, I would love to wear my shirts tucked in and rock the casual aesthetic but it does nothing but make me look frumpy and ill-proportioned.


----------



## jennlt

The BLG has a short video about the claw and the UN


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It doesn't surprise me one bit that she is cozying up to a feminist icon, the better to burnish her meager credentials.


Maybe if she was cozying up to a younger icon, someone who is actually getting stuff done. Gloria’s day has passed. This looks like MM is doing Oprah and Gayle a favor.  Surely by now we all realize talk is cheap. These activists who yell into microphones are last decade’s news.  The world has moved on. H&M should move with it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> None of this describes Meghan, imo.
> 
> I will admit she is socially akward at times, she is hyper-aware, she over-performs to the point of where it appears fake, she can lack situational awareness and a realization of proper social cues for the setting. She is Type-A and they are notorious for being stubborn, having tunnel vision, seeing the world with black/white thinking and reluctant to change. She is biracial so people can be reluctant to afford her the grace to have a wide range of emotions (even awkwardly) or even make poor decisions without resulting to the extreme and questioning her intentions. But to me that does not mean she is a narcissist.
> 
> Past behavior is indicative of future behavior and to my knowledge Meghan's coworkers and those whose she worked closely with over the years prior to her joining TRF have nothing but positive things to say about her. Can a supposed narcissist mask it for that long in the U.S. only to reveal their true selves across the pond? Maybe. I won't buy his book but I interested in reading parts of it. My perspective is open, especially if sources are revealed and willing to go on record with their claims first-hand.


None of us know her.  Do you?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


>



The 80s called. They want their shorts back along with the shoes.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Most likely because she knows she lied.  The fear of being found out surely terrifies her, causes much inner turmoil.  She knows she is a fraud, has publicly admitted it and now there is a book about it.


I had a random thought about MM the other day.   If she had stayed in a relationship with Cory in Toronto she could have had many of the things she wanted.  Big fish in a little pond with a social/media profile.  They could have done a cooking show together with him doing the cooking and her acting as hostess. (That was what she had told Shalit that she wanted to do, but after he saw her on the Brooklyn pickle challenge with Hillary Duff on her show, that was thrown out the window.)  She and Messica could have stayed friends and run around pretending they were fashion experts.  It would have been a happier life.  Sometimes you have to be careful about what you wish for.


----------



## gracekelly

Chloe302225 said:


>



She forgot to wash the mudpack off of her face before she left the hotel.  She look about 9 shades darker.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The 80s called. They want their shorts back along with the shoes.


Heels with shorts?  Seriously?


----------



## mikimoto007

I love the shorts....I know it's nothing ground breaking, but I love how smart and fresh it is. I just wish the shorts were more tapered. Love the tan clutch.


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> People throw around narcissist without knowing that social anxiety exists and often masks for narcissism. No compassion, no consideration into maybe she is fearful and anxious as it relates to her appearance with Harry. IMO, Meghan is way too hyper-aware, perfectionist, and insecure in her position to be a narcissist. Socially anxious and akward? Yes - most Type A perfectionist gung-ho people are. But she's not a narcissist. Harry is definitely one.
> 
> 
> 
> Who gives a speech at the UN without their spouse being there? Lol. Besides, people would criticize her for not supporting Harry, for only wanting the attention on her, for trying to upstage him by means of withdrawal, etc. I even saw a video by someone (who claims to be an expert in narcissism) who said Meghan doesn't "display" her children publicly as a means of keeping control and the attention on her. WTF?


You’re answering the questions without Answering the questions.


----------



## charlottawill

PurseUOut said:


> Past behavior is indicative of future behavior and to my knowledge Meghan's coworkers and those whose she worked closely with over the years prior to her joining TRF have nothing but positive things to say about her. Can a supposed narcissist mask it for that long in the U.S. only to reveal their true selves across the pond? Maybe. I won't buy his book but I interested in reading parts of it. My perspective is open, especially if sources are revealed and willing to go on record with their claims first-hand.


I have wondered why no high school or college friends or acquaintances have come forward and said she is difficult or a diva. But it is also possible that as she began to advance in her career she developed delusions of grandeur and started cutting off relationships that were no longer beneficial to her - being "Markled", as we call it. 

The fact is, when she met Harry she was only a secondary character on a moderately successful cable TV show. She was not famous. Hooking up with him catapulted her onto the world media stage. Based on her observable actions to date, her delusion of being a change maker is just that up to this point, a delusion. And as has been discussed here, Tom Bower is a lawyer and known to be a meticulous researcher, so I think it's safe to say his sources are unimpeachable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I stand corrected. This is very interesting. Thank you for pointing it out. I actually learn things here.


I am always suspicious/skeptical of any of these “Peer Reviewed Open Access Journals”.  Not always a reliable source. Imo


----------



## Aimee3

you can watch the whole speech on the daily mail.  I didn't watch, just fast forwarded, and he looked absolutely miserable.  The comments were pretty much negative too.  Apparently there was a demonstration against them outside the U.N.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> you can watch the whole speech on the daily mail.  I didn't watch, just fast forwarded, and he looked absolutely miserable.  The comments were pretty much negative too.  Apparently there was a demonstration against them outside the U.N.


Another rousing success for the Harkles in NY


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> I stand corrected. This is very interesting. Thank you for pointing it out. I actually learn things here.


This sounds pretty spot on to me:


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chloe302225 said:


>



carried? Or merching?


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> Heels with shorts?  Seriously?


I never understood this with her. I guess she's trying to show off her killer legs. It looks ridiculous! With that outfit, an espadrille, wedge, or lower block heel would have much better. Similar to her silly stilettos in Polo grass look. 

I think this girl thinks she's the master of everything...except she's the master of none.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, this happened. Must be awful to bring out the msnbc crowd.









						Prince Harry's speech on Nelson Mandela was a disservice to his legacy
					

The British royal offered an insipid, cliché-laden take that only further watered down the anti-apartheid icon's story.




					www.msnbc.com


----------



## kemilia

Chloe302225 said:


>



Interesting--why wouldn't she just wear the emerald green outfit? I liked it more than the black, and to be honest--this is not a look I would own in duplicate. Just odd, imo. Unless some merching (freebie) was offered to her.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kemilia said:


> Interesting--why wouldn't she just wear the emerald green outfit? I liked it more than the black, and to be honest--this is not a look I would own in duplicate. Just odd, imo. Unless some merching (freebie) was offered to her.



She's probably trying to mirror Kate. Kate has many duplicate outfits in a variety of colors because they actually worked for her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> She's probably trying to mirror Kate. Kate has many duplicate outfits in a variety of colors because they actually worked for her.


Or the Robert Palmer girls [thanks to LSA]


----------



## gracekelly

mikimoto007 said:


> I love the shorts....I know it's nothing ground breaking, but I love how smart and fresh it is. I just wish the shorts were more tapered. Love the tan clutch.


It was cute and preppy until you hit the shoes.  Good for lunch at the CC and hitting the Mall later.


----------



## Toby93

kemilia said:


> Interesting--why wouldn't she just wear the emerald green outfit? I liked it more than the black, and to be honest--this is not a look I would own in duplicate. Just odd, imo. Unless some merching (freebie) was offered to her.


It looks about a size or 2 small than the black outfit.  Was this a few years ago?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this happened. Must be awful to bring out the msnbc crowd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's speech on Nelson Mandela was a disservice to his legacy
> 
> 
> The British royal offered an insipid, cliché-laden take that only further watered down the anti-apartheid icon's story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msnbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i


I guess the speech wasn't woke enough for them.  Honestly, Mandela was an afterthought in this speech except to tie him to dead mommy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list may be in her 40s but it's not like she's aging horribly looking 20 years older or having extreme weight problem. If she uses more sense and some professional help, she can dress nicely looking her age and part, without being obscene or frumpy. She can still look pretty, classy and fun without looking trying-too-hard. 

I simply don't understand the shirt-short outfit. Instead of those ugly shorts, she could have easily worn a pair of skinny jeans or pants and paired it with the shirt and heels, for a polished look. We all have seen her done the suggested look and we know she looked good in it. Did she dressed frumpy because she's out with an older lady like 88-year-old Gloria S, just to look more matronly? Odd AF. And I'm sorry people, the clutch is MFing ugly


----------



## kipp

charlottawill said:


> It doesn't surprise me one bit that she is cozying up to a feminist icon, the better to burnish her meager credentials.


It's all for Netflix!


----------



## Suncatcher

The videos from the UN speech are so cringey and damning. Why do they have to always hold hands. So juvenile. That aside, I liked the shirt and shirt look but it would have looked better with a lower heel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It doesn't surprise me one bit that she is cozying up to a feminist icon, the better to burnish her meager credentials.


I found out today GS is Christian Bale’s step-mom.
ETA:  always networking


----------



## Toby93

PurseUOut said:


> None of this describes Meghan, imo.
> 
> I will admit she is socially akward at times, she is hyper-aware, she over-performs to the point of where it appears fake, she can lack situational awareness and a realization of proper social cues for the setting. She is Type-A and they are notorious for being stubborn, having tunnel vision, seeing the world with black/white thinking and reluctant to change. She is biracial so people can be reluctant to afford her the grace to have a wide range of emotions (even awkwardly) or even make poor decisions without resulting to the extreme and questioning her intentions. But to me that does not mean she is a narcissist.
> 
> Past behavior is indicative of future behavior and to my knowledge Meghan's coworkers and those whose she worked closely with over the years prior to her joining TRF have nothing but positive things to say about her. Can a supposed narcissist mask it for that long in the U.S. only to reveal their true selves across the pond? Maybe. I won't buy his book but I interested in reading parts of it. My perspective is open, especially if sources are revealed and willing to go on record with their claims first-hand.


Where are you finding information on her coworkers and those working closely with her saying positive things about her?  All I have heard is negative comments, especially lately, from those involved in the Reitmans commercials, to those working on her "guest editor" Vogue issue.  She alienated her own family when they were no longer useful to her, and invited total strangers to her wedding because they were celebrities.  Of the hundreds of people at the wedding, her only relative was her mother?  Sorry, but all I see is a clawing, social climbing narcissist, who has now alienated and distanced Hazbeen from his own family, but clings to the title bestowed on her by said family.


----------



## djfmn

charlottawill said:


> I have wondered why no high school or college friends or acquaintances have come forward and said she is difficult or a diva. But it is also possible that as she began to advance in her career she developed delusions of grandeur and started cutting off relationships that were no longer beneficial to her - being "Markled", as we call it.
> 
> The fact is, when she met Harry she was only a secondary character on a moderately successful cable TV show. She was not famous. Hooking up with him catapulted her onto the world media stage. Based on her observable actions to date, her delusion of being a change maker is just that up to this point, a delusion. And as has been discussed here, Tom Bower is a lawyer and known to be a meticulous researcher, so I think it's safe to say his sources are unimpeachable.


I might be wrong but I do think I remember our dear Ceejay saying what parents (who Ceejay was friends with) of her high school peers said about some of her diva/difficult behavior.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey everyone
> 
> I'm very sorry that the instructions didn't work for anyone to purchase the Kindle e-book. It was still working for me earlier but I suppose it's been pulled between now and then.
> 
> Good thing is, July 21st is just a few days away so you guys are not missing anything. If it was up to me, I really just want to spend $0.99 instead of $11.86, now $9.49
> 
> Again, I'm awfully sorry


Thanks for trying on our behalf. It will show up eventually. Right now our lively discussions and some of the you tubers are providing plenty to think about.


----------



## TimeToShop

The cosplay continues..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## purseinsanity

I find myself really missing Ceejay today, and wondering what lovely snarky comments she'd have with the book coming out.  
I guess we never know how much time we have left, and the fact she posted here a day before she passed is special yet jarring at the same time.  I just want to tell you all how much I appreciate each and every one of you, whether I agree with everything you post or not.  You've all made the last couple years very enjoyable for me, and I come to ThePurseForum not as much for the bags any more, but for this thread above all.  You all mean so much to me!   Thank you!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> And maybe Canada and the UK can call her Zed-Zed.


We can call them HazZed??


----------



## EverSoElusive

Was this discussed before?? I didn't know that Z-list didn't curtsy to the Queen at the spectacle of a wedding


----------



## TimeToShop

EverSoElusive said:


> Was this discussed before?? I didn't know that Z-list didn't curtsy to the Queen at the spectacle of a wedding
> 
> 
> View attachment 5539037



And after the Queen had paid for that farce. Certainly Harry knew that was expected and could have whispered a reminder or stopped in front of HM.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan Markle Snubbed by Role Model Emma Watson During London Visit—Book
					

Meghan Markle viewed Emma Watson as "her hero" but received a "mortifying" rebuff from the "Harry Potter" star during a pre-royal public appearance together.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

TimeToShop said:


> And after the Queen had paid for that farce. Certainly Harry knew that was expected and could have whispered a reminder or stopped in front of HM.



Z-list equates modernizing the monarchy to complete elimination of protocols and traditions


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Savage



That's his "I'd rather be playing polo with Nacho" look.


----------



## TimeToShop

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list equates modernizing the monarchy to complete elimination of protocols and traditions


Except for the tradition of the crown paying her bills


----------



## EverSoElusive

TimeToShop said:


> Except for the tradition of the crown paying her bills




Everything is not to her liking unless it benefits her, of course


----------



## charlottawill

Ooohhh she looks p*ssed!


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Ooohhh she looks p*ssed!




How did Harry manage to remove the claws? I'm shocked


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Ooohhh she looks p*ssed!



She’s certainly aware she is being photographed. That’s her “I’m pretending to pay close attention to whoever is speaking” look. The expression on Harry’s face is priceless. Even he can’t figure out what she’s thinking.


----------



## rose60610

Chloe302225 said:


>




Does anybody find it odd or ironic that Meghan is wearing high heels with shorts as she's guiding the Icon of the Women's Liberation? I thought high heels were anathema to the lib movement (as well as latching oneself to a prince for fame and fortune, but I digress).


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Ooohhh she looks p*ssed!



Imo he looks pissed off. He knew this was a sham, overhyped [by her?] with zero audience. The comparisons to William are inevitable.  It is exactly what he was running from.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Does anybody find it odd or ironic that Meghan is wearing high heels with shorts as she's guiding the Icon of the Women's Liberation? I thought high heels were anathema to the lib movement (as well as latching oneself to a prince for fame and fortune, but I digress).



She's cosplaying late MIL. Again.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes and she her nose has a red tip, but she isn't Rudolf.


Rudolph was lovable and helpful and just wanted to fit in, everything TW isn't.


----------



## purseinsanity

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


Maybe so, but if someone has such crippling social anxiety, such as Kim Basinger for example, most hide away and don't seek attention in every single thing they do.  She craves the attention and seeks it.


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Does anybody find it odd or ironic that Meghan is wearing high heels with shorts as she's guiding the Icon of the Women's Liberation? I thought high heels were anathema to the lib movement (as well as latching oneself to a prince for fame and fortune, but I digress).


From what I remember watching Gloria Steinem all those years ago -- she was never one to be dowdy or unsexy. She thought women could be both liberated and sexy and she was. I loved her clothes and hair.  lol


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Rudolph was lovable and helpful and just wanted to fit in, everything TW isn't.



Right. Even "Bumble" the Abominable Snow Monster redeemed himself at the end by being chosen to put the gold star on top of the Christmas tree.  Meghan goes through life like Godzilla, operating with a reptilian brain, destroying her husband's bond with the BRF,  and wondering why nobody can stand her.


----------



## mellibelly

Who wore it better?


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> How did Harry manage to remove the claws? I'm shocked


She looks like Doria here. He is wondering if he will be punished tonight.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Meghan Markle Snubbed by Role Model Emma Watson During London Visit—Book
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle viewed Emma Watson as "her hero" but received a "mortifying" rebuff from the "Harry Potter" star during a pre-royal public appearance together.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Is it my imagination or does the ZeeZee have a lot of role models? Does she view them as stepping stones in her "path to unparalleled stardom" (as per the Daily Express  ) as she does all her bandwagons?


----------



## andrashik

PurseUOut said:


> People throw around narcissist without knowing that social anxiety exists and often masks for narcissism. No compassion, no consideration into maybe she is fearful and anxious as it relates to her appearance with Harry. IMO, Meghan is way too hyper-aware, perfectionist, and insecure in her position to be a narcissist. Socially anxious and akward? Yes - most Type A perfectionist gung-ho people are. But she's not a narcissist. Harry is definitely one.
> 
> 
> 
> Who gives a speech at the UN without their spouse being there? Lol. Besides, people would criticize her for not supporting Harry, for only wanting the attention on her, for trying to upstage him by means of withdrawal, etc. I even saw a video by someone (who claims to be an expert in narcissism) who said Meghan doesn't "display" her children publicly as a means of keeping control and the attention on her. WTF?


Oh, so that is why she doesn't visit her father. Due to anxiety!! And writing that letter to "pull at heartstrings" , cause she had crippling anxiety and couldn't go there and talk with him. So sad 

ETA: sarcasm aside, I had crippling anxiety and I couldn't even leave the bed so no, she did not have crippling anxiety.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> If anyone is interested:



Thanks for posting this video. The all thing brought to my mind Ingrid Seward's words that Hazz is being '_dragged around like performing sea_l.' 

Soulmate? Poor Hazz! Does he believe this? 


What work is he talking about? 


What did he give? Headaches? Is he talking about TW's lemon cakes? 











						Harry being 'dragged around like performing seal' since meeting Meghan
					

PRINCE HARRY has been "dragged around like a performing seal" since meeting Meghan Markle, a royal expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Did she use a double or photoshop?


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> you can watch the whole speech on the daily mail.  I didn't watch, just fast forwarded, and he looked absolutely miserable.  The comments were pretty much negative too.  Apparently there was a demonstration against them outside the U.N.


The BLG shows the entire speech on his video. As far as I recall from the video, 10 out of the 16 people in the audience were either sleeping or on the phone.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is back, finally!


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> The BLG shows the entire speech on his video. As far as I recall from the video, 10 out of the 16 people in the audience were either sleeping or on the phone.


Ok, more than 16 people… but yeah, not full house. Clearly more empty seats than occupied ones.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zen1965

youngster said:


> There is hardly anyone there! Of the people there, some look like they are intern age or even a bit younger. Like someone brought their kids. (Look to the right and around the middle of the audience.)


Embarrassingly low attendance. I am not surprised.
He delivers a speech and she tags along holding his hand. Hardly the professional image they crave. But then, referencing your mother, your children and your wife at any given opportunity is hardly what I call professional. They just never get it. #exasperated


----------



## Lodpah

zen1965 said:


> Embarrassingly low attendance. I am not surprised.
> He delivers a speech and she tags along holding his hand. Hardly the professional image they crave. But then, referencing your mother, your children and your wife at any given opportunity is hardly what I call professional. They just never get it. #exasperated


It’s embarrassing isn’t it?


----------



## Luvbolide

Chloe302225 said:


>




I am probably in the minority, but I think that shorts look ridiculous with pumps, especially pumps with a stiletto heel.  Wow- I am really shocked at how frail Gloria Steinem looks.  Haven’t seen pics of her in a long time, though.  Wonder what MM is going to drag the poor woman to…


----------



## xincinsin

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


If she suffers from any social anxiety, it's probably because she is nervous of people actually fact-checking her in person. I've had the misfortune of dealing with major and minor narcs amongst my colleagues and I'd say Methane would fit right in with them. One of them actually had the gall to go to our boss and complain that I wasn't friendly (I always fact-checked him). Our boss had a really hard time trying to phrase tactfully: "Anthony, she would be a lot more friendly if you didn't lie with every breath you take." 

The thing about narcs is that they take advantage of common goodwill. None of us want to condemn someone as greedy or mean-spirited or delusional, so we tend to ignore a lot of red flags and chalk up bad behaviour to anxiety, inexperience or poor upbringing. However, when we see the same bad behaviour repeating itself despite correction and a tendency to throw others under the bus for their own benefit, then I say it cannot be excused as social anxiety.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Oh, so that is why she doesn't visit her father. Due to anxiety!! And writing that letter to "pull at heartstrings" , cause she had crippling anxiety and couldn't go there and talk with him. So sad
> 
> ETA: sarcasm aside, I had crippling anxiety and I couldn't even leave the bed so no, she did not have crippling anxiety.


----------



## xincinsin

WingNut said:


> Why in God's name is she A.L.W.A.Y.S holding hands with him? Is he a child that needs to be tethered to his adult at all times?
> 
> Oh wait....I just answered my own question.
> 
> Maybe she just needs to have him attached to one of those clip on leashes. So un-adult...


It's not the constant holding hands that has me  It's the videos of her refusing to let go, and they do the rubber-band-hands act - stretch stretch stretch, OMG they are snapping apart!


----------



## Icyjade

Chloe302225 said:


>



Am I the only old fashioned one who think she missed a button on top? It’s almost like she wants a malfunction to happen.


----------



## Traveladdie

PurseUOut said:


> None of this describes Meghan, imo.
> 
> I will admit she is socially akward at times, she is hyper-aware, she over-performs to the point of where it appears fake, she can lack situational awareness and a realization of proper social cues for the setting. She is Type-A and they are notorious for being stubborn, having tunnel vision, seeing the world with black/white thinking and reluctant to change. She is biracial so people can be reluctant to afford her the grace to have a wide range of emotions (even awkwardly) or even make poor decisions without resulting to the extreme and questioning her intentions. But to me that does not mean she is a narcissist.
> 
> Past behavior is indicative of future behavior and to my knowledge Meghan's coworkers and those whose she worked closely with over the years prior to her joining TRF have nothing but positive things to say about her. Can a supposed narcissist mask it for that long in the U.S. only to reveal their true selves across the pond? Maybe. I won't buy his book but I interested in reading parts of it. My perspective is open, especially if sources are revealed and willing to go on record with their claims first-hand.


Well stated response.


----------



## Traveladdie

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


I suspect being a member of the royal family exasperates any level of anxiety she does have as that spotlight is brighter than anything she had on her as an actress.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Ooohhh she looks p*ssed!




What are those weird color splotches in her hair.  Can’t see them unless the photo is taken from above.  This hairstyle needs to go - too severe.  I think she should cut it shorter and wear it wavy.  It is not as if she needs it long to wear up with tiaras or hats anymore!


----------



## PurseUOut

andrashik said:


> Oh, so that is why she doesn't visit her father. Due to anxiety!! And writing that letter to "pull at heartstrings" , cause she had crippling anxiety and couldn't go there and talk with him. So sad
> 
> ETA: sarcasm aside, I had crippling anxiety and I couldn't even leave the bed so no, she did not have crippling anxiety.



The same loving father who betrayed her trust by leaking her private letter to the media? The same father whose daughter wrote a scathing memoir about her? I wonder why she doesn't pass the peas to him at Thanksgiving.


----------



## Icyjade

Why are we forgetting ex best friends Ninaki Priddy and Jessica Mulroney? 

“What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan,” Priddy said. “All I can say now is that *I think Meghan was calculated, very calculated, in the way she handled people and relationships*. She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends. *Once she decides you’re not part of her life, she can be very cold.* It’s this shutdown mechanism she has.”




Why do the sugars always conveniently forget about them? Or the ex-husbands/boyfriends… or ex-family… but yeah, sugars do what sugars do.


----------



## purseinsanity

PurseUOut said:


> The same loving father who betrayed her trust by leaking her private letter to the media? The same father whose daughter wrote a scathing memoir about her? I wonder why she doesn't pass the peas to him at Thanksgiving.


I sincerely hope that in the future, one of my adult children doesn’t hold me responsible for the actions of another adult child.  Especially if the child holding the grudge made out like a bandit with my money and affection when compared to the other.


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Why are we forgetting ex best friends Ninaki Priddy and Jessica Mulroney?
> 
> “What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan,” Priddy said. “All I can say now is that *I think Meghan was calculated, very calculated, in the way she handled people and relationships*. She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends. *Once she decides you’re not part of her life, she can be very cold.* It’s this shutdown mechanism she has.”
> 
> View attachment 5539143
> 
> 
> Why do the sugars always conveniently forget about them? Or the ex-husbands/boyfriends… or ex-family… but yeah, sugars do what sugars do.


Because their recollections conveniently vary


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The 80s called. They want their shorts back along with the shoes.



M's cabin-crew dress was quite nice on her, one of her best outfits IMO - could be the way forward for small Russian airline. But the huge bag, perhaps she was thinking of staying the night in the auditorium  

Those shorts and shoes should _never_ be seen together, and then she cuts her body with an unfashionable horizontal matchy-matchy  belt. Shorts are in fashion but not that kind. 

Gloria _is_ an icon, and should be, but sadly younger people don't even know the second-wave's big names. Gen Z think feminism was created with the #Me Too (which is in itself is a great thing BTW). 

Sorry, it's already hot here and its not even 8am.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Traveladdie said:


> I suspect being a member of the royal family exasperates any level of anxiety she does have as that spotlight is brighter than anything she had on her as an actress.


She pursued that spotlight. If she was having such bad social anxiety and Hazard was so conscious of her alleged mental state, why would they propose half-in/half-out, and after so-called stepping back, still crave the limelight?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> She pursued that spotlight. If she was having such bad social anxiety and Hazard was so conscious of her alleged mental state, why would they propose half-in/half-out, and after so-called stepping back, still crave the limelight?


Because they want their lemon, olive oil, elderflower cake, and they want to eat it too


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I think I will reserve my opinion until after I read the Bower book, but from the history or bullying and diva antics, I would have to disagree.
> Destructive levels of narcissism[edit]​Narcissism, in and of itself, is a normal personality trait, however, high levels of narcissistic behavior can be damaging and self-defeating.[29][_unreliable source?_] Destructive narcissism is the constant exhibition of a few of the intense characteristics usually associated with pathological Narcissistic Personality Disorder such as a "*pervasive pattern of grandiosity", which is characterized by feelings of entitlement and superiority, arrogant or haughty behaviors, *and a generalized lack of empathy and concern for others.[2] On a spectrum, destructive narcissism is more extreme than healthy narcissism but not as extreme as the pathological condition.[30]



Her narcism traits are clear IMO. M's part grandiose and part vulnerable. Her needing H's full attention in public is more for her comfort than his, but she's also showing us she's in charge. 

Harry was born privileged, his behaviour is pretty normal for a (petulant) Prince. He's just taking advantage.


----------



## andrashik

PurseUOut said:


> The same loving father who betrayed her trust by leaking her private letter to the media? The same father whose daughter wrote a scathing memoir about her? I wonder why she doesn't pass the peas to him at Thanksgiving.


I think the letter was written after she refused to see him at Charles's request.
And also, I think she knew he would publish the letter or parts of it and she wrote it specifically for that..


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> The BLG has a short video about the claw and the UN




Harry looks like he was let out on day release from her behaviour. It is absolutely, 100% shocking that she does this in public (to anyone).


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> Harry looks like he was let out on day release from her behaviour. It is absolutely, 100% shocking that she does this in public (to anyone).


I wonder what Catherine and William think. I bet they saw the video.


----------



## chowlover2

I bet they are having a good laugh about it!


----------



## PurseUOut

andrashik said:


> *I think the letter was written after she refused to see him at Charles's request.*
> And also, I think she knew he would publish the letter or parts of it and she wrote it specifically for that..



So he's entitled to Meghan's presence? On the basis of what, because he's her 'father'? 
And because she refused that gave him the right to reveal a private letter to the media? But Meghan's a narcissist....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.



Oh really. How did she function before she found her crutch?


----------



## Lodpah

If this has not been posted, it's awesome.


----------



## mikimoto007

EverSoElusive said:


> Was this discussed before?? I didn't know that Z-list didn't curtsy to the Queen at the spectacle of a wedding
> 
> 
> View attachment 5539037


It's not true. She did curtsey but it was very difficult to see due to the camera angle because the camera was above her.


----------



## PurseUOut

papertiger said:


> Her narcism traits are clear IMO. M's part grandiose and part vulnerable. Her needing H's full attention in public is more for her comfort than his, but she's also showing us she's in charge.
> 
> Harry was born privileged, his behaviour is pretty normal for a (petulant) Prince. He's just taking advantage.



Maybe I don't have Meghan-hate blinders on but that video did not look like a woman who was in control of anything. In fact it confirmed to me she is very much out of control - much more than I realized - along with being hyper-aware, anxious and quite insecure in herself and how she appears with Harry. I genuinely felt sorry for her. It's telling she seems much more relaxed when she's with Gloria and not around him. Nonetheless, she's stuck. She knows what she gave up for him. Harry has a convenient and entrapped scapegoat as long as he wants her.


----------



## Jktgal

papertiger said:


> But the huge bag, perhaps she was thinking of staying the night in the auditorium



But what will she use to bring home the souvenirs from the UN??


----------



## andrashik

PurseUOut said:


> So he's entitled to Meghan's presence? On the basis of what, because he's her 'father'?
> And because she refused that gave him the right to reveal a private letter to the media? But Meghan's a narcissist....


It is something responsible healthy adults do.....I mean..she idolatrised him and now he is worthless.


----------



## Luvbolide

Icyjade said:


> Am I the only old fashioned one who think she missed a button on top? It’s almost like she wants a malfunction to happen.


Right there with you!  Not only is the blouse about to fall off, but it shows a visible tan line, which is tacky as he!l.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

Icyjade said:


> Ok, more than 16 people… but yeah, not full house. Clearly more empty seats than occupied ones.
> 
> View attachment 5539128


This room is HUGE - I've been in the room for an event and attendance at that time was reportedly 500 people and the room still felt empty. Just checked google and capacity is reported to be 1,800.

The seating is by country (labeled as such) though I am not sure how many rows are allocated per country. But if a whole row is empty it means the whole country delegation did not attend/bother sending a delegate.


----------



## csshopper

Icyjade said:


> Am I the only old fashioned one who think she missed a button on top? It’s almost like she wants a malfunction to happen.


Plus, she didn't extend her skin darkening make up far enough so with the gaping neckline it's more obvious.


----------



## PurseUOut

Icyjade said:


> Why are we forgetting ex best friends Ninaki Priddy and Jessica Mulroney?
> 
> “What came to light after Trevor and I spoke ended my friendship with Meghan,” Priddy said. “All I can say now is that *I think Meghan was calculated, very calculated, in the way she handled people and relationships*. She is very strategic in the way she cultivates circles of friends. *Once she decides you’re not part of her life, she can be very cold.* It’s this shutdown mechanism she has.”
> 
> View attachment 5539143
> 
> 
> Why do the sugars always conveniently forget about them? Or the ex-husbands/boyfriends… or ex-family… but yeah, sugars do what sugars do.



You know real friendships go thru ups and downs. Meghan and Jessica are still friends to my knowledge.

Nonetheless, both of these women are only commenting on perceptions of Meghan - which she's entitled to and is often the result of  when someone asserts boundaries or ends friendships/relationships for their personal reasons.

What I want to see is someone come out with an actual FIRST hand account of them visibly witnessing Meghan being bratty, a diva, entitled, and abusive/belittling/ entitled to her staff and other people around her. Her asserting boundaries that feel good to her but may disappoint (but not materially harm) others is not entitlement. Her choosing which mediums to speak to people that feels comfortable and safe for her that may disappoint (not materially harm) others is not narcissistic. Her not desiring to continue romantic relationships or friendships (especially this Ninanki girl who went straight to the daily mail) makes her normal person with flaws, not a monster.


----------



## andrashik

Is she darker here?











						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spotted leaving NYC Italian restaurant
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent their Monday evening dining with friends at Tribeca hotspot Locanda Verde - where one can easily run up a tab of $85 a person.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

lulu212121 said:


> WoW! You got an excuse for everything she does.


love blinders


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> The same loving father who betrayed her trust by leaking her private letter to the media?



You mean the letter she carefully crafted fully intending to leak it herself via her friends that were also young mothers?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

chowlover2 said:


> I bet they are having a good laugh about it!



If that was my brother I wouldn't find it the least bit funny. He's a wreck and she's an abuser and I'd be worried sick.


----------



## csshopper

PurseUOut said:


> You know real friendships go thru ups and downs. Meghan and Jessica are still friends to my knowledge.
> 
> Nonetheless, both of these women are only commenting on perceptions of Meghan - which she's entitled to and is often the result of  when someone asserts boundaries or ends friendships/relationships for their personal reasons.
> 
> What I want to see is someone come out with an actual FIRST hand account of them visibly witnessing Meghan being bratty, a diva, entitled, and abusive/belittling/ entitled to her staff and other people around her. Her asserting boundaries that feel good to her but may disappoint (but not materially harm) others is not entitlement. Her choosing which mediums to speak to people that feels comfortable and safe for her that may disappoint (not materially harm) others is not narcissistic. Her not desiring to continue romantic relationships or friendships (especially this Ninanki girl who went straight to the daily mail) makes her normal person with flaws, not a monster.


Ninaki Priddy was Meghan's friend from the age of TWO. She had a lifetime of *experiences* with Meghan's behaviors, not simply "perceptions". It's sounds like you are dismissive of her because she doesn't fit your narrative.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> She knows what she gave up for him.



And what would that be? Besides a rented house in Toronto and a fizzling-out acting career that was never all that.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And what would that be? Besides a rented house in Toronto and a fizzling-out acting career that was never all that.


Her dog!!! Of course


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> You know real friendships go thru ups and downs. Meghan and Jessica are still friends to my knowledge.
> 
> Nonetheless, both of these women are only commenting on perceptions of Meghan - which she's entitled to and is often the result of  when someone asserts boundaries or ends friendships/relationships for their personal reasons.
> 
> What I want to see is someone come out with an actual FIRST hand account of them visibly witnessing Meghan being bratty, a diva, entitled, and abusive/belittling/ entitled to her staff and other people around her. Her asserting boundaries that feel good to her but may disappoint (but not materially harm) others is not entitlement. Her choosing which mediums to speak to people that feels comfortable and safe for her that may disappoint (not materially harm) others is not narcissistic. Her not desiring to continue romantic relationships or friendships (especially this Ninanki girl who went straight to the daily mail) makes her normal person with flaws, not a monster.


What the H is wrong with you? You are speaking to a room full of women who can see the forest. There's a tread for you to idolize, spout her virtues to kingdom come and whatever you want to pedestalize. No one hates your precious witch, I just call out her swell-headness.


These guys are experts. They contract with intelligence, hospitals, all the credentials you can imagine. 





PurseUOut said:


> You know real friendships go thru ups and downs. Meghan and Jessica are still friends to my knowledge.
> 
> Nonetheless, both of these women are only commenting on perceptions of Meghan - which she's entitled to and is often the result of  when someone asserts boundaries or ends friendships/relationships for their personal reasons.
> 
> What I want to see is someone come out with an actual FIRST hand account of them visibly witnessing Meghan being bratty, a diva, entitled, and abusive/belittling/ entitled to her staff and other people around her. Her asserting boundaries that feel good to her but may disappoint (but not materially harm) others is not entitlement. Her choosing which mediums to speak to people that feels comfortable and safe for her that may disappoint (not materially harm) others is not narcissistic. Her not desiring to continue romantic relationships or friendships (especially this Ninanki girl who went straight to the daily mail) makes her normal person with flaws, not a monster.


----------



## Lodpah

andrashik said:


> Her dog!!! Of course


That is a super sensitive topic for me. I love animals and dogs.  I can understand people giving up dogs for reasons beyond their control, but for a man so she can't be bothered, now that's a whole other criteria which makes me turn a side eye at her. 

I remember the Ellen article whereas Ellen didn't really remember her, the lunch with a former First Lady, lol, it goes on and on.


----------



## Icyjade

Lodpah said:


> There's a tread for you to idolize


But no one goes there. This thread on the other hand moves so fast it can be hard to keep up. Can’t be helped, when you are popular then everyone wants to join the fun…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> That is a super sensitive topic for me. I love animals and dogs.  I can understand people giving up dogs for reasons beyond their control, but for a man so she can't be bothered, now that's a whole other criteria which makes me turn a side eye at her.
> 
> I remember the Ellen article whereas Ellen didn't really remember her, the lunch with a former First Lady, lol, it goes on and on.



Right. I had a super special needs pet, I understand it's not for everyone, but I would not have given him up for anything.


----------



## Lilacgal

andrashik said:


> Is she darker here?
> View attachment 5539154


Yes!!! She needs to sell the I'm WOC narrative to her sugars. The delusion is real with this one. I'm beginning to believe TW exited the RF so she could continue to act and dress like the Zzzzz list celebrity she truly is. At least that's one thing that isn't fake about her. Meghan is the epitome of "Don't cast your pearls before swine".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. I had a super special needs pet, I understand it's not for everyone, but I would not have given him up for anything.


You can see a person's character on how he/she treats animals...so I wonder what her fan will say about this.


----------



## xincinsin

PurseUOut said:


> What I want to see is someone come out with *an actual FIRST hand account *of them visibly witnessing Meghan being bratty, a diva, entitled, and abusive/belittling/ entitled to her staff and other people around her. Her asserting boundaries that feel good to her but may disappoint (but not materially harm) others is not entitlement. Her choosing which mediums to speak to people that feels comfortable and safe for her that may disappoint (not materially harm) others is not narcissistic. Her not desiring to continue romantic relationships or friendships (especially this Ninanki girl who went straight to the daily mail) makes her normal person with flaws, not a monster.


Hi, @PurseUOut  I fully agree that we are all entitled to our own opinion regarding Methane. I do not know her personally although I assure you that if I had a chance to meet her and interview her, I would be asking all those questions which Oprah avoided.

In lieu of "an actual FIRST hand account", my impressions of her are derived from videos of her behaviour, words from her own mouth/pen and actions she makes. I cannot un-see her nasty expressions which are well-documented. I cannot un-remember all the self-pitying and self-grandiose behaviour she exhibits in videos & photos. I cannot un-view all the weird Photoshopped-to-death images she releases or un-read her strange public utterances and the Knauf emails which she had admitted were from her and which document her attempt to manipulate the BRF and her own father. As for her dotty memory, well, the narcs I survived were also very fond of using that excuse.


----------



## needlv

I don’t mind the z-list actresses outfit at the UN - it is the best she has looked in a while.  She did fail in getting the right underwear though.  No one needs to see nips in the context of the UN attendance!  

The shorts … ewww, no.  pleats make her look wider than she is.  

As for Haz, he needs a health clinic.  The guy looks like he is about to break down.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> My bet is on  S*chs and respective powerful connections!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Global Citizen Announces Inaugural Thought Leadership Summit, Global Citizen NOW
> 
> 
> Urgent gathering to defeat poverty and protect the planet will convene world leaders, cultural leaders and business leaders on May 22-23 in New York City, and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.prnewswire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538813


It’s so eye rolling isn’t it? This charity purports to be about vaccine equality In 3rd world and instead they throw their money into puff pieces and participation prizes for these idiots,


TimeToShop said:


> Oh my word. I bet she “wrote” H’s speech. Can‘t they do something original?



It makes more sense in W’s context but the Diana ref is pretty cringe every time.


Toby93 said:


> I'm guessing this must be from today also.  Did we think that TW would let Hazbeen have all the spotlight?  Definitely looks like Gloria's best days are behind her sadly, if she is hitching her wagon to this narc
> 
> View attachment 5538962
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538963
> 
> 
> View attachment 5538964


Same old hagiography sigh - I am so sick of it. 


PurseUOut said:


> This is not true and a common misconception about anxiety disorders. Plenty of actual celebrities suffer from anxiety and are still in the spotlight:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Famous people with anxiety
> 
> 
> Anxiety can trigger extreme physical and psychological symptoms. Many of America’s most famous people deal with the disorder. Learn more from WebMD's celebrity slideshow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.webmd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you consider maybe Meghan felt anxious she would be perceived as an unsupportive wife is she didn't attend his speech? Perhaps Harry requested she go with him?


I think the best argument against this theory is that this couple  have made numerous comments and even a whole tv show about their mental health and there’s never been any mention of M being diagnosed with an anxiety disorder and no way would she keep a juicy topic like that hidden. 

Now as to H, I think it’s a difficult thing to call him a narcissist for sure because I think the line where incredible entitlement and privilege earned only by your birth and completely assumed since then and a narcissistic delusion of grandeur begins is extremely faint and neither will make for a very nice man IMHO 


sdkitty said:


> It may be true that it's very normal for a spouse to be there but I still stand by my opinion that you couldn't keep her away.  Public attention and respect for being an activist or philanthropist or whatever they claim to be is her big dream-come-true.


She’d invite the press to his prostate exam if she could hold his hand and get a saviour edit but even the paps draw the line somewhere.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or the Robert Palmer girls [thanks to LSA]
> 
> View attachment 5539004



No chance LOL!


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She just can't stop. It's f*cking bizarre.
> 
> I wonder when she'll start changing his diapers in public. That woman is completely not right in the head.
> 
> Geez, can someone please swoop in and rescue Harry?




Holy s**t, watching this video almost makes me feel sorry for him!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It was cute and preppy until you hit the shoes.  Good for lunch at the CC and hitting the Mall later.



Casual tan leather belt and fancy beaded clutch. Just no.

I prefer what GS is wearing


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I find myself really missing Ceejay today, and wondering what lovely snarky comments she'd have with the book coming out.
> I guess we never know how much time we have left, and the fact she posted here a day before she passed is special yet jarring at the same time.  I just want to tell you all how much I appreciate each and every one of you, whether I agree with everything you post or not.  You've all made the last couple years very enjoyable for me, and I come to ThePurseForum not as much for the bags any more, but for this thread above all.  You all mean so much to me!   Thank you!


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Does anybody find it odd or ironic that Meghan is wearing high heels with shorts as she's guiding the Icon of the Women's Liberation? I thought high heels were anathema to the lib movement (as well as latching oneself to a prince for fame and fortune, but I digress).



To the second wave (1970s) yes, heels and makeup were supposedly a   but the third wave (1990s) championed choice, power dressing and owning the sexy 'goddess' inside the woman.

I think GS was often derided as the feminist movement's prettiest (and therefore acceptable ) champion by the mainstream and ruffled feathers with others in the movement too as they didn't enjoy her being a 'poster girl'.

Since @jelliedfeels used 'hagiography' not long ago, which as an absolutely brilliant word, I feel compelled to use masculine scopophilia. It's hard to know how we (women) should know how to dress when we have (thought to) be dressing to please others for so long.

I don't care M wears heels, but at least find an outfit that works or is fashionable. Cos play is for people who want to be other people. Dare I say, what's great about the Duchess of Cambridge is she has found a style that really works, and then occasionally breaks free when she needs to wow. Diana was the same, she had worked out what suited her athletic frame after a few years. M feels like she is still experimenting, OK for teen who doesn't know who she may be yet, but really lacking (authority, confidence, self-awareness) in a mature woman. M is older now than when Diana died. Why not stick to the 'uniform' of professional cross-Atlantic wiggle-dress she just wore at the UN talk (all the female UK's _The Apprentice_ contestants wear them non-stop too) _if_ that's what she's into. I don't like them, far too dolled-up for the office IMO, the look to me says estate agent (realtor(?)) cabin crew, PR girl, but then I like suits and boots for work and fairly minimal makeup atm. She could have just gone for the off-duty look completely and wear skinnies (as someone else suggested) or leggings with a oversized man's-style shirt. She has a square-apple shape, but she dresses like a willow (Kate's figure). In trying to show-off her long legs (proportionally to her body) she needs carry on the line, not tie a contrast 'knot' with a belt at her (short) waist then shorten further with contrasting colours for top and bottom.

It's very hard to even comment on the make-up, I am scared to think of what's going on in her mind there.








CarryOn2020 said:


>




@Chanbal "Did she use a double or photoshop?"

The couple always employ lookalikes. I suggest they hire a nanny that also operates also a body-double. That's not her - certainly not lately. Confirmed.


----------



## EverSoElusive

OK, people. I had to put the other thread on ignore because I accidentally clicked on it and was confused to be brought to posts from early June. As I tried to re-catch up thinking I missed those posts, it was nothing but gag worthy photos and high fructose corn syrup


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> You can see a person's character on how he/she treats animals...so I wonder what her fan will say about this.



They will find a way to twist it to make her look good.


----------



## zen1965

regnews said:


>



I find her constant need for PDA tiresome and repulsive. So does Harry by the looks of it.


----------



## TimeToShop

I’d really like to know her thought process. Is she trolling Kate? Does she really think she looks better? She comes across as a sad Kate wanna be. That spray tan is getting close to Oompa Loompa orange.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Why not stick to the 'uniform' of professional cross-Atlantic wiggle-dress she just wore at the UN talk (all the female UK's _The Apprentice_ contestants wear them non-stop too) _if_ that's what she's into. I don't like them, far too dolled-up for the office IMO, the look to me says estate agent (realtor(?)) cabin crew, PR girl, but then I like suits and boots for work and fairly minimal makeup atm.



You're better than me, I feel I haven't worn actual clothes in like two years with my handful of work occasions outside the house and a very slimmed down social life. The sad thing about my line of work is that nobody would bat an eyelash if I showed up to a meeting in pyjamas as long as they were not the seductive kind 

In theory I like that pencil skirt, tailored dress look, but I don't know...I prefer to tone it down and simplify it for work occasions because aren't women always struggling to be taken seriously as is? 

On another note, I'd love for you to style me, I always love reading your fashion opinions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> I’d really like to know her thought process. Is she trolling Kate? Does she really think she looks better? She comes across as a sad Kate wanna be. That spray tan is getting close to Oompa Loompa orange.




Why would she deliberately copy a woman she literally hates? Make it make sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

This style makes her look so wide from the back  Like a linebacker.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes and she her nose has a red tip, but she isn't Rudolf.





purseinsanity said:


> Rudolph was lovable and helpful and just wanted to fit in, everything TW isn't.


She's more RudeAF than Rudolph


----------



## Aminamina

I think she was playing up to New Yorkers being dressed in black.
 Might have been browsing through the pictures of Carolyn Besset-Kennedy


kemilia said:


> Interesting--why wouldn't she just wear the emerald green outfit? I liked it more than the black, and to be honest--this is not a look I would own in duplicate. Just odd, imo. Unless some merching (freebie) was offered to her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey everyone
> 
> I'm very sorry that the instructions didn't work for anyone to purchase the Kindle e-book. It was still working for me earlier but I suppose it's been pulled between now and then.
> 
> Good thing is, July 21st is just a few days away so you guys are not missing anything. If it was up to me, I really just want to spend $0.99 instead of $11.86, now $9.49
> 
> Again, I'm awfully sorry


Don’t be sorry! You were trying to help us get our hands on the book! Hopefully it will be released in the US soon and if not I’ll order from book depository. 


mellibelly said:


> Who wore it better?
> View attachment 5539097
> 
> View attachment 5539098


The seat cushion because it doesn’t look so desperate. 


CarryOn2020 said:


>



Wow, this comparison really proves it. That was 100% not her at the parade.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I enjoyed hearing the two bozos getting taken down in this podcast this morning. I have it queues up for you!


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> Is she darker here?
> View attachment 5539154
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spotted leaving NYC Italian restaurant
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent their Monday evening dining with friends at Tribeca hotspot Locanda Verde - where one can easily run up a tab of $85 a person.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yes, she seems to be. Whoever chose the pictures did a great job, they both look fine to me.


----------



## Chanbal

Lilacgal said:


> Yes!!! *She needs to sell the I'm WOC narrative to her sugars.* The delusion is real with this one. I'm beginning to believe TW exited the RF so she could continue to act and dress like the Zzzzz list celebrity she truly is. At least that's one thing that isn't fake about her. Meghan is the epitome of "Don't cast your pearls before swine".


Interesting twitter post!


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would she deliberately copy a woman she literally hates? Make it make sense.


I don't think anyone is copying anyone. When Kate wore the other dress I thought it was more reminiscent of Meghan's minimal style, but really these are two women who photographed in virtually everything they wear. There will be some overlap without either of them intending to.


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> You can see a person's character on how he/she treats animals...*so I wonder what her fan will say about this*.


Nothing! From Ancient Wisdom:
_There is no worse blind man than the one who doesn't want to see. There is no worse deaf man than the one who doesn't want to hear. _


----------



## andrashik

TimeToShop said:


> I’d really like to know her thought process. Is she trolling Kate? Does she really think she looks better? She comes across as a sad Kate wanna be. That spray tan is getting close to Oompa Loompa orange.



She has one talent though. Finding the camera all the damn time


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Ooohhh she looks p*ssed!



TW's picture reminds me of Star Trek's Ilia (an android) except Ilia had a much nicer personality than ZedZed.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> From what I remember watching Gloria Steinem all those years ago -- she was never one to be dowdy or unsexy. She thought women could be both liberated and sexy and she was. I loved her clothes and hair.  lol


She famously did a stint as a Playboy bunny for an expose she was writing:



> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/26/gloria-steinem-bunny-tale-still-relevant-today


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would she deliberately copy a woman she literally hates? Make it make sense.



Who knows what’s going on in TW‘s deluded head? There’s no way she didn’t see the pictures from the Top Gun premiere. She had to know there’d be comparisons. She must have thought she looked better or she wouldn’t have worn it.


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> Am I the only old fashioned one who think she missed a button on top? It’s almost like she wants a malfunction to happen.


When you ordered this:


And got this:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Please join me in thanking this woman! 










						Prince Harry is slammed for 'virtue-signaling' UN speech
					

Meghan McCain blasted Harry for 'not offering any solutions' to the US  issues. Protesters also stood outside also held up a sign which said 'why are they here'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> I wonder what Catherine and William think. I bet they saw the video.


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Is she darker here?
> View attachment 5539154
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spotted leaving NYC Italian restaurant
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent their Monday evening dining with friends at Tribeca hotspot Locanda Verde - where one can easily run up a tab of $85 a person.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


To be fair, I think it's just the lighting. I much prefer how I look in evening/restaurant lighting vs. broad daylight.


----------



## marietouchet

Genie27 said:


> He probably slept through History.





charlottawill said:


> When you ordered this:
> View attachment 5539243
> 
> And got this:
> View attachment 5539245


Interesting wardrobe evolution …
she wore a lot beige/ taupe when in the UK 
had the oversized unconstructed colorful outfits eg  the wine red pantsuit, red formal , on last NT trip
invictus outfits failed to register with me , a bit of denim ???
Virginal white for Jubilee
now she is in all black …. Too sombre 
She is sending messages, beats me what they are … what is the WORD SALAD equivalent term for a WARDROBE that is all over the map ??? a FASHION SALAD ???

and having grown up in Manhattan .. I KNOW .. one NEVER  wears shorts on the East side, no matter how hot it is …


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

lulu212121 said:


> WoW! You got an excuse for everything she does.


Hesitated to comment on that post.   But I agree and  felt it “was a paid political announcement brought to us by Kool-aid”


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would she deliberately copy a woman she literally hates? Make it make sense.


Correction, she hates what Kate has - beauty, class, grace, public adoration and William.  She'd skin her and wear her if she could.


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Ok, more than 16 people… but yeah, not full house. Clearly more empty seats than occupied ones.
> 
> View attachment 5539128


20?


----------



## zinacef

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guess it was chilly at the UN.
> fwiw, the wannabe’s/pretenders/has-been’s almost never get it right.  He looks hung-over imo
> View attachment 5538761


I don’t know why can’t she not check if her head lights are on all the time! or what kind of bra does she wear that it’s always like this.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> and having grown up in Manhattan .. I KNOW .. one NEVER wears shorts on the East side, no matter how hot it is …


Yup. Shorts are for the Hamptons.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> She looks like Doria here. He is wondering if he will be punished tonight.


Was I a bad boy Mommy?


----------



## 880

I think the power dynamic is turning in their marriage. Originally H may have thought M was the way out of the BRF. She persuaded him that he could have his cake and eat it too, bc that’s what he wanted to believe. There have been articles that H was unhappy at being the spare #2 and being relegated to the side wings of royalty #6 well before M came along. Now, he realizes that he is even more irrelevant. It simply took him a while bc he’s not all that smart. Meghan’s a self promoting third rate actress out for herself which hasn’t changed.

re shorts, she probably thinks she’s at the fashion forefront. When I was growing up, no shorts, no spaghetti straps, on the UES. But those were the days when children and accompanying staff took the service elevator.


----------



## lanasyogamama

One thing on the shorts and heels, she could pull off the flats thing like Alexa Chung which I would love to be able to do. It’s a really youthful look.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You're better than me, I feel I haven't worn actual clothes in like two years with my handful of work occasions outside the house and a very slimmed down social life. The sad thing about my line of work is that nobody would bat an eyelash if I showed up to a meeting in pyjamas as long as they were not the seductive kind
> 
> In theory I like that pencil skirt, tailored dress look, but I don't know...I prefer to tone it down and simplify it for work occasions because aren't women always struggling to be taken seriously as is?
> 
> On another note, I'd love for you to style me, I always love reading your fashion opinions.



Thank you for your confidence, I may be a sad disappointment to you IRL. 

What women wear to work is very interesting to me (whatever type of work they do). In business. If a man (or represent male) it tends to be, that the higher-up he goes the less his appearance matters, some blame Silicon Valley, but actually it started much earlier than that (look at Richard Branson in the 1980s - and sorry to make you do that). 

Women on the other hand are expected to look good all the way up the ladder. I was talking to a friend who works high-up at the Bank of England, and we're agreed , Hermes scarf and/or pearls and (straight/pencil) skirt or dress suit for meetings and important, serious occasions, shift dress for other less serious occasions, careful cocktail (usually LBD) with solitaires/pears for work-related social events.  No knitwear, no summer frocks, no (detectably) stretchy anything and everything to the knee. This seems to be pretty much all (high) finance and lawyers in the UK. 

I feel for all women in the public eye but M has to deal with it.  She looks better in sheath dresses because they elongate her torso (if she doesn't ruin it with a contrasting belt) and doesn't add focus on her legs. Popularised to the max by Mouret's Galaxy dress (2005) they now look a bit dated for high fashion, but if they work for someone fine. Her version is not so sexy, but it's still a bit tight for a professional setting. Her heeled pumps look vaguely old fashioned, especially in a professional setting (they haven't made female Gucci employees wear high heels since Frida left). She obviously feels attached to her high heels like a child to a security blanket. The challenge with her need to show her very slim legs with short anything, is she'll accentuate her imbalance, her heavier top-half against the proportions of her lower half. People say there's a rule that if you add volume to the top, go slim on the bottom and vice versa, but that does _not_ apply to her figure type. She needs balance. That's also why capes and anything that adds more volume to the top half don't work for her, she needs a long straight line down to her knees, regardless of shoe type. 

I changed my job a few years ago, happily got a promotion a year(?) later. Until then I worked much more in an office male dominated, everything vaguely fashionable (beyond boring or Boden - nothing wrong with Boden but it is pretty much middle-class mum's territory) was commented on and reduced me in their eyes. One day, I didn't dress 'properly' for a meeting and I knew my authority was compromised. 

Now, I'm in a much larger but mixed office, and everyone wears what they like. I could never wear a Summer dress or casuals to do my job, I either have to go high-fashion or undone suiting. I need all the help I can to create an impression of authority. I will wear shorts or minis (with tights or leggings) but only with a longline/oversized jacket, and most often boots (all kinds). Sometimes pencil or straight skirt, sometimes suit trousers. Usually, I stick to Saint Laurent, Gucci, Guy Laroche (not trading since pandemic hit  ) Ackerman, McQueen and so on. This year I spent far too much on other stuff already, so I bought 2 extra jackets in the Cos sale, one pale pink double-breasted in pure wool, another, single breasted in grey flannel. Great for putting over slip-dress at the weekend/evening too. Chuck on (literally) a silk scarf, rings, earrings and - go.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> I think the power dynamic is turning in their marriage. Originally H may have thought M was the way out of the BRF. She persuaded him that he could have his cake and eat it too, bc that’s what he wanted to believe. There have been articles that H was unhappy at being the spare #2 and being relegated to the side wings of royalty #6 well before M came along. Now, he realizes that he is even more irrelevant. It simply took him a while bc he’s not all that smart. Meghan’s a self promoting third rate actress out for herself which hasn’t changed.
> 
> re shorts, she probably thinks she’s at the fashion forefront. When I was growing up, no shorts, no spaghetti straps, on the UES. But those were the days when children and accompanying staff took the service elevator.



From his face at the conference, I think he was told by the Palace in no uncertain terms "DO NOT GO AHEAD". He went ahead anyway. 

IMO, that's why he's looking like a toddler that's been told off. She's trying to comfort him, but he knows he's going to be in deep s**t.


----------



## bag-mania

PurseUOut said:


> I know its difficult for those to find empathy but I think Meghan has crippling social anxiety despite the sashaying, the "claw", the fake smiles, and the performances of 'perfection'. To me, those are all actions of someone who is fearful, hyper-aware, and extremely anxious about any perceived judgment or criticism.


You are talking about the same woman who brought her own photographer to Uvalde to take photos of her laying flowers at a memorial site for murdered children. Those photos weren’t candid shots from the phones of strangers! It is telling that to my knowledge no other celebrity attempted to turn a national tragedy into a play for publicity. She stands alone as a vulture in that regard.

I agree with you that she is hyper aware. Everything she does is carefully calculated and crafted to project herself in the way she wants to be seen. Some believe in the image she is selling, others do not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> *One thing on the shorts and heels, she could pull off the flats *thing like Alexa Chung which I would love to be able to do. It’s a really youthful look.


I think she wants the extra inches from the heels. Though, she could have opted for Kate's style wedge pumps. They seem a lot more comfortable to walk the streets of NYC.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> This style makes her look so wide from the back  Like a linebacker.
> 
> View attachment 5539213


I believe she thinks her shoulders and legs are sexy, so she bares them as often as she can. And the coy hint of nipples and misc underwear is probably from bad advice someone gave her when she was still working on her Man-eater slate of skills.


----------



## andrashik

marietouchet said:


> Interesting wardrobe evolution …
> she wore a lot beige/ taupe when in the UK
> had the oversized unconstructed colorful outfits eg  the wine red pantsuit, red formal , on last NT trip
> invictus outfits failed to register with me , a bit of denim ???
> Virginal white for Jubilee
> now she is in all black …. Too sombre
> She is sending messages, beats me what they are … what is the WORD SALAD equivalent term for a WARDROBE that is all over the map ??? a FASHION SALAD ???
> 
> and having grown up in Manhattan .. I KNOW .. one NEVER  wears shorts on the East side, no matter how hot it is …


May I ask why?


----------



## Chanbal

Oops! Are rats abandoning ship?! Why is Sam Kashner now regretting not to have published information that couldn't be confirmed by the Vanity Fair's fact-checkers? Has he been contacted by TW's lawyers? Has SK been approached by the squad?  

_In a letter entitled ‘My interview with Meghan Markle’ to The Times, Mr Kashner paid tribute to Meghan and Prince Harry calling the pair a “love match” and urged critics to let them “live their life in peace”.

The letter said: “Sir, I’m afraid Tom Bower didn’t convey my admiration and respect for Meghan Markle in the excerpt from his new book in The Times on Saturday.

“I found Ms Markle to be exceptionally warm and gracious and admitted her intelligence and her remarkable courage, as I still do.

“*I regretted the oft-published account of challenging Proctor & Gamble being edited out of my Vanity Fair article , because I’d wanted to highlight her lifelong activism*. The piece itself was quite laudatory._









						'Telling truth' Meghan Markle backer fumes at explosive claims
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's biographer has leapt to the defence of the Duchess of Sussex after she was accused of "manipulating" a magazine editor.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## regnews

Chanbal said:


> Oops! Are rats abandoning ship?! Why is Sam Kashner now regretting not to have published information that couldn't be confirmed by the Vanity Fair's fact-checkers? Has he been contacted by TW's lawyers? Has SK been approached by the squad?
> 
> _In a letter entitled ‘My interview with Meghan Markle’ to The Times, Mr Kashner paid tribute to Meghan and Prince Harry calling the pair a “love match” and urged critics to let them “live their life in peace”.
> 
> The letter said: “Sir, I’m afraid Tom Bower didn’t convey my admiration and respect for Meghan Markle in the excerpt from his new book in The Times on Saturday.
> 
> “I found Ms Markle to be exceptionally warm and gracious and admitted her intelligence and her remarkable courage, as I still do.
> 
> “*I regretted the oft-published account of challenging Proctor & Gamble being edited out of my Vanity Fair article , because I’d wanted to highlight her lifelong activism*. The piece itself was quite laudatory._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Telling truth' Meghan Markle backer fumes at explosive claims
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry's biographer has leapt to the defence of the Duchess of Sussex after she was accused of "manipulating" a magazine editor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



In other words it's all true in the book. He denied nothing....... he just added some compliments. Guess he had a lot of hate from the sugars....


----------



## jelliedfeels

. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this happened. Must be awful to bring out the msnbc crowd.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's speech on Nelson Mandela was a disservice to his legacy
> 
> 
> The British royal offered an insipid, cliché-laden take that only further watered down the anti-apartheid icon's story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msnbc.com


Zeeshan Aleem was 100% dead on. H gave a speech which made no mention  of Mandela’s politics, his achievements or how he can be used as an example today. It felt like he barely knew who NM was and was only concerned with forcing himself and his family into the narrative purely because he knows NM is considered important like a ghastly clout chaser. 
Embarrassing is the word. 

I guess the speech wasn't woke enough for them.  Honestly, Mandela was an afterthought in this speech except to tie him to dead mommy.
Realistically, I’m sorry but meeting Diana was probably not that significant an event in NM’s  life. He did so much important work  by the time he was doing the meet and greet with celebs it was a victory lap. He may well have been happier to meet the spice girls. 


bag-mania said:


> Meghan Markle Snubbed by Role Model Emma Watson During London Visit—Book
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle viewed Emma Watson as "her hero" but received a "mortifying" rebuff from the "Harry Potter" star during a pre-royal public appearance together.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


How can you be a role model when you are nearly ten years younger? 

I suppose M never got to be a child actress despite living in LA so maybe that’s what she means. 


Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this video. The all thing brought to my mind Ingrid Seward's words that Hazz is being '_dragged around like performing sea_l.'
> 
> Soulmate? Poor Hazz! Does he believe this?
> View attachment 5539101
> 
> What work is he talking about?
> View attachment 5539102
> 
> What did he give? Headaches? Is he talking about TW's lemon cakes?
> View attachment 5539103
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry being 'dragged around like performing seal' since meeting Meghan
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has been "dragged around like a performing seal" since meeting Meghan Markle, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I know this is almost a cliche to point out  but it is just so PATRONISING to be like ‘ I love Africa’ like it’s all one country. 
NM was President of South Africa. Why the heck is H bringing up his bloody camping trip in Kenya like they are one and the same place?  I’d never begin a speech about say Angela M*rk*l with ‘last year I was camping in Greece when….’


papertiger said:


> To the second wave (1970s) yes, heels and makeup were supposedly a   but the third wave (1990s) championed choice, power dressing and owning the sexy 'goddess' inside the woman.
> 
> I think GS was often derided as the feminist movement's prettiest (and therefore acceptable ) champion by the mainstream and ruffled feathers with others in the movement too as they didn't enjoy her being a 'poster girl'.
> 
> Since @jelliedfeels used 'hagiography' not long ago, which as an absolutely brilliant word, I feel compelled to use masculine scopophilia. It's hard to know how we (women) should know how to dress when we have (thought to) be dressing to please others for so long.
> 
> I don't care M wears heels, but at least find an outfit that works or is fashionable. Cos play is for people who want to be other people. Dare I say, what's great about the Duchess of Cambridge is she has found a style that really works, and then occasionally breaks free when she needs to wow. Diana was the same, she had worked out what suited her athletic frame after a few years. M feels like she is still experimenting, OK for teen who doesn't know who she may be yet, but really lacking (authority, confidence, self-awareness) in a mature woman. M is older now than when Diana died. Why not stick to the 'uniform' of professional cross-Atlantic wiggle-dress she just wore at the UN talk (all the female UK's _The Apprentice_ contestants wear them non-stop too) _if_ that's what she's into. I don't like them, far too dolled-up for the office IMO, the look to me says estate agent (realtor(?)) cabin crew, PR girl, but then I like suits and boots for work and fairly minimal makeup atm. She could have just gone for the off-duty look completely and wear skinnies (as someone else suggested) or leggings with a oversized man's-style shirt. She has a square-apple shape, but she dresses like a willow (Kate's figure). In trying to show-off her long legs (proportionally to her body) she needs carry on the line, not tie a contrast 'knot' with a belt at her (short) waist then shorten further with contrasting colours for top and bottom.
> 
> It's very hard to even comment on the make-up, I am scared to think of what's going on in her mind there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @Chanbal "Did she use a double or photoshop?"
> 
> The couple always employ lookalikes. I suggest they hire a nanny that also operates also a body-double. That's not her - certainly not lately. Confirmed.


I’m honoured to be mentioned. 
On the idea of how women are meant to see dressing - a similar idea occurred to me when I was thinking about the clothes industry and how disproportionately weighted it is to Womenswear. Are we women just the peacocks of our species ? Can we get out of this and do we want to or is it innate to femininity? 
I agree about the body double thing. I think they are a bit paranoid and they’d say ‘it’s for our security’. That and obviously the attention. 

The outfit is cabin crew you are right and black is an odd choice for a ‘celebration’ event. 

Yes the make up is very suspicious. 


Maggie Muggins said:


> TW's picture reminds me of Star Trek's Ilia (an android) except Ilia had a much nicer personality than ZedZed.
> 
> View attachment 5539230
> View attachment 5539229


The shade! That lady (Persis Khambatta) was a real prize winning beauty queen! Miss India. Zed couldn’t win Miss Back Alley as she’d flunk the talent section at least. 

I think that profile is photoshopped. Look how soft focus the white shirt and lapel around her face and nose is compared the rest of the image and how delicate her features are compared to when she’s in motion and harder to fix up.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If Harry stopped banging on about his wife, his kids, and his Mom, what would he have to talk about? Those are literally his life achievements.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Cute outfit if you are going to the mall.  *Poor Gloria looks as if she was let out of the home for the day.*


There are so many things that don't make sense, and this is one of them. Gloria Steinem made her name in political activism, why is she doing this now? Is she in financial trouble?

Edit: I found this interesting article about GS's relation with money. 

_Whether it’s that we won’t have enough, we won’t make enough, or we will not be able to take care of ourselves, *everyone has a money fear, or ten. Steinem’s was that she would end up a bag lady*, although she recently pointed out to me that she’s never held down a ‘steady’ job…_

“*I think one of the most important things I learned about money is that I could support myself and buy freedom, *_despite all the instruction to my generation of women to marry a good provider_.”

_There is a saying that for women, life begins at 50. For Steinem, that’s when her efforts to preserve and build wealth kicked in_.









						Gloria Steinem's Relationship with Money
					

An interview with the feminist activist about her financial life.




					www.psychologytoday.com


----------



## Aimee3

I wonder how much the hairdresser was paid for that horrific part in the middle plastered down low pony tail, or did she Markle him too and did her hair/wig herself?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am so sick of the middle part thing. It’s not flattering to most women!


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> I wonder how much the hairdresser was paid for that horrific part in the middle plastered down low pony tail, or did she Markle him too and did her hair/wig herself?


I actually found the tight ponytail quite scary. Not bodyshaming. My hair has thinned as I grow older. But ZeeZee is much younger than I am and she already looks like she doesn't have much hair left. Reminded me a lot of her outing with TQ where she sported greasy windswept hair that showed a lot of scalp.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mikimoto007 said:


> I don't think anyone is copying anyone. When Kate wore the other dress I thought it was more reminiscent of Meghan's minimal style, but really these are two women who photographed in virtually everything they wear. There will be some overlap without either of them intending to.



She has been copying not only Diana's outfits but also her poses more times than mere coincidence would allow for, though.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Absolutely!  There is NO WAY


----------



## Maggie Muggins

PurseUOut said:


> Maybe I don't have Meghan-hate blinders on but that video did not look like a woman who was in control of anything. In fact it confirmed to me she is very much out of control - much more than I realized - along with being hyper-aware, anxious and quite insecure in herself and how she appears with Harry. I genuinely felt sorry for her. It's telling she seems much more relaxed when she's with Gloria and not around him. Nonetheless, she's stuck. *She knows what she gave up for him.* Harry has a convenient and entrapped scapegoat as long as he wants her.


You make it sound like she was a superstar so let's see what she gave up! Her stellar acting parts: A two-bit role giving a BJ to some HS jock in a parked car.  As Rachel on Suits, who screws around on the job. The role where she's in a coma until the end of the movie. The USO tour when the performers sang together on the stage and yet it's obvious they were ignoring her.
Also, in Toronto when she frequently phoned the cops to report a stalker outside her apartment only to have said stalker (aka lone reporter) snap a picture of the cops rescuing poor ZedZed, at least until the smart cops put a stop to it.
BTW, she didn't give up family and friends for Dufus, but instead she threw them under the bus because she was either ashamed of them or no longer needed their help to get ahead.
You see, hate has nothing to do with knowing that MM is a compulsive liar and narcissist with an overinflated ego.


----------



## Toby93

Luvbolide said:


> I am probably in the minority, but I think that shorts look ridiculous with pumps, especially pumps with a stiletto heel.  Wow- I am really shocked at how frail Gloria Steinem looks.  Haven’t seen pics of her in a long time, though.  Wonder what MM is going to drag the poor woman to…


Didn't you hear....they are going to Washington to protest, after Hazbeens "gutteral" reaction


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> One day, I didn't dress 'properly' for a meeting and I knew my authority was compromised.


The more things change....


----------



## Chanbal

THANKS Piers & Ndaba!


----------



## Gal4Dior

andrashik said:


> Is she darker here?
> View attachment 5539154
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spotted leaving NYC Italian restaurant
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent their Monday evening dining with friends at Tribeca hotspot Locanda Verde - where one can easily run up a tab of $85 a person.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


OMG LOL! Are they going to the same place? Or even the same City? He's dressed like JCMH going about his day and TW is dressed for the Met Gala at night. 

She needs to do herself a favor and fire herself as stylist. That bag in that size isn't meant for evening and her ensemble is clearly EVENING. Also the color? Huh? Wouldn't a black bag be more fitting with her outfit?? 

Also find it hilarious that in all the photos, the JCMH isn't even looking at the camera or smiling, but TW is posing for the camera and searching it out, per usual. How does he NOT see how much of an attention seeking yacht girl she is?? Does blindness run in the family? She thinks she is living her Hollywood life with all these pap shots, grinning like a Cheshire cat over all the attention she thinks she rightfully deserves.

Apparently, money (and a title) can't buy you style...or taste...or class.


----------



## PurseUOut

bag-mania said:


> You are talking about the same woman who brought her own photographer to Uvalde to take photos of her laying flowers at a memorial site for murdered children. Those photos weren’t candid shots from the phones of strangers! It is telling that to my knowledge no other celebrity attempted to turn a national tragedy into a play for publicity. She stands alone as a vulture in that regard.
> 
> I agree with you that she is hyper aware. Everything she does is carefully calculated and crafted to project herself in the way she wants to be seen. Some believe in the image she is selling, others do not.



She's a mother of two young children. Perhaps she was incredibly moved as we all should be when tragedies like this happen. She showed up with ONE security guard, donated blood, brought food. There was no cameras she brought. She never even introduced herself. No footage showing her saying anything. Unless her presence was offensive to you.

I think there is a bigger issue here than Meghan - 21 souls perished needlessly because of neglectful and corrupt efforts to restrict reasonable gun legislation in America.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> She's a mother of two young children. Perhaps she was incredibly moved as we all should be when tragedies like this happen. She showed up with ONE security guard, donated blood, brought food. There was no cameras she brought.
> 
> I think there is a bigger issue here than Meghan - 21 souls perished needlessly because of neglectful and corrupt efforts to restrict reasonable gun legislation in America.


oh, so the cameras were just there coincidentally?


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> She's a mother of two young children. Perhaps she was incredibly moved as we all should be when tragedies like this happen. She showed up with ONE security guard, donated blood, brought food. There was no cameras she brought.
> 
> I think there is a bigger issue here than Meghan - 21 souls perished needlessly because of neglectful and corrupt efforts to restrict reasonable gun legislation in America.


I happen to completely agree with your second point, but re your first one - if she truly wanted to do something impactful she would have shown up after all the cameras were gone to bring awareness to the fact that nothing prevents that disaster from happening again rather than bringing Cheetos and just happening to be snapped by every media outlet in the US that was already there snapping everything that was happening. Give me a break.


----------



## Toby93

Icyjade said:


> Am I the only old fashioned one who think she missed a button on top? It’s almost like she wants a malfunction to happen.


Nope, I saw it too and thought that the Duchess of Cambridge would never let this happen


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> oh, so the cameras were just there coincidentally?


One picture is worth a thousand words…










						'PR Stunt': Meghan Markle's Uvalde Trip To Donate Blood Sparks Controversy
					

"There's nothing wrong with caring about people & showing up to support a hurting community," one user defended Markle.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## PurseUOut

tiktok said:


> I happen to completely agree with your second point, but re your first one - if she truly wanted to do something impactful she would have shown up after all the cameras were gone to bring awareness to the fact that nothing prevents that disaster from happening again rather than bringing Cheetos and just happening to be snapped by every media outlet in the US that was already there snapping everything that was happening. Give me a break.



So she can time when the media will be there? Give me a break.



Chanbal said:


> One picture is worth a thousand words…
> View attachment 5539339
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'PR Stunt': Meghan Markle's Uvalde Trip To Donate Blood Sparks Controversy
> 
> 
> "There's nothing wrong with caring about people & showing up to support a hurting community," one user defended Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



The press was already there to cover the event. They were not there for her. She did donate and did help. Using the matter of dead children to call this woman to task is rather distasteful and sick, imo. I won't be commenting anymore on this.


----------



## rose60610

I find it ironic that the Women's Lib movement "first wave" was often about rebelling against what is referred to "attracting the male gaze". I can't see the fashion designers and cosmetics companies having liked that too much. Money talks, so it became "acceptable" for women to want to be feminine again, or pursue power dressing (could never figure out those thin neck ribbons as symbols of 'authority' I always thought they looked stupid--reminded me of old farm kitchen wall paper with blue geese wearing neck ribbons), shoulder pads, heels and heavy makeup came back with a vengeance to the orchestrated delight of fashion designers. Movements evolve, I get that, and I think women were well on their way to gaining more and more power, getting elected to office, etc. Law school enrollments, for example, have often at least 50% women students. Sadly, it seems fashionable today for celebrities who are often worth tens of millions of dollars b*tching that they're  just "poor little victims" and suffer oppression wherever they go.  I see the pendulum swinging back from the days of "I Am Woman Hear Me Roar" to "Wah, wah, somebody looked at me wrong, I need a safe space for my feelings because I don't have the skills to verbally confront and stand up for myself since I grew up texting my buddies who sit right beside me despite spending two hundred thousand dollars on college tuition." Fashion-wise anything goes now, but some people forget there's situation appropriate dressing, and some twenty-somethings have actually brought a parent along to job interviews. If I hear Meghan cast herself as some kind of victim again (which will be in about five minutes) I'll be tempted to send her a box of butt wipes.


----------



## Chanbal

PurseUOut said:


> The press was already there to cover the event. They were not there for her. She did donate and did help. Using the matter of dead children to call this woman to task is rather distasteful and sick, imo. *I won't be commenting anymore on this.*


Thank you!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Listen, she invites these comparisons!


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> So she can time when the media will be there? Give me a break.
> 
> 
> 
> The press was already there to cover the event. They were not there for her. She did donate and did help. Using the matter of dead children to call this woman to task is rather distasteful and sick, imo. I won't be commenting anymore on this.


did you see the post right above this?  what is she doing there?  seems to be interacting with a camera crew.  you don't see it that way?


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has been copying not only Diana's outfits but also her poses more times than mere coincidence would allow for, though.



I haven't seen anything that really supports that. I've certainly seen pictures of them dressed in similar outfits (same as I have with Kate) but I would expect that for women who are photographed in virtually everything they wear -there is always going to be crossover. It doesn't mean one is copying the other or one is inspired by the other.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> So she can time when the media will be there? Give me a break.
> 
> 
> 
> The press was already there to cover the event. They were not there for her. She did donate and did help. Using the matter of dead children to call this woman to task is rather distasteful and sick, imo. I won't be commenting anymore on this.


She can generate press for going to the bathroom with all the US tabloids in her pocket (oh, sorry, newspapers, we don’t have tabloids in the US) but she can’t bring the press to Uvalde for such a worthy cause? If so maybe her charitable star power isn’t so great after all and she should just get a job instead of running a foundation.
If you believe what you just said I have a Nigerian prince who’s taking investments for you.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> did you see the post right above this?  what is she doing there?  seems to be interacting with a camera crew.  you don't see it that way?


Looks to me like she is interacting with them, checking her phone and setting up for a good angle.


----------



## Icyjade

PurseUOut said:


> I won't be commenting anymore


Best thing you have said so far in this thread

Also ladies… we seem to have an influx…


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Best thing you have said so far in this thread
> 
> Also ladies… we seem to have an influx…
> 
> View attachment 5539364


Yep. Let's stay civil. After all, we do remind them that they have their own thread to gush over ZeeZee and the Handbag.


----------



## charlottawill

Gal4Dior said:


> OMG LOL! Are they going to the same place? Or even the same City? He's dressed like JCMH going about his day and TW is dressed for the Met Gala at night.
> 
> She needs to do herself a favor and fire herself as stylist. That bag in that size isn't meant for evening and her ensemble is clearly EVENING. Also the color? Huh? Wouldn't a black bag be more fitting with her outfit??
> 
> Also find it hilarious that in all the photos, the JCMH isn't even looking at the camera or smiling, but TW is posing for the camera and searching it out, per usual. How does he NOT see how much of an attention seeking yacht girl she is?? Does blindness run in the family? She thinks she is living her Hollywood life with all these pap shots, grinning like a Cheshire cat over all the attention she thinks she rightfully deserves.
> 
> Apparently, money (and a title) can't buy you style...or taste...or class.


She spends a lot of money to look bad. The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.


----------



## xincinsin

mikimoto007 said:


> I haven't seen anything that really supports that. I've certainly seen pictures of them dressed in similar outfits (same as I have with Kate) but I would expect that for women who are photographed in virtually everything they wear -there is always going to be crossover. It doesn't mean one is copying the other or one is inspired by the other.


The copying of the Diana poses brings us much hilarity. It's part of her approach to life: copy and plagiarise.


----------



## Icyjade

xincinsin said:


> The copying of the Diana poses brings us much hilarity. It's part of her approach to life: copy and plagiarise.



And to ensure that her thriving husband feels the constant presence of his dead mother.

(Ugh, feels creepy even typing that out)


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> There are so many things that don't make sense, and this is one of them. Gloria Steinem made her name in political activism, why is she doing this now? Is she in financial trouble?
> 
> Edit: I found this interesting article about GS's relation with money.
> 
> _Whether it’s that we won’t have enough, we won’t make enough, or we will not be able to take care of ourselves, *everyone has a money fear, or ten. Steinem’s was that she would end up a bag lady*, although she recently pointed out to me that she’s never held down a ‘steady’ job…_
> 
> “*I think one of the most important things I learned about money is that I could support myself and buy freedom, *_despite all the instruction to my generation of women to marry a good provider_.”
> 
> _There is a saying that for women, life begins at 50. For Steinem, that’s when her efforts to preserve and build wealth kicked in_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gloria Steinem's Relationship with Money
> 
> 
> An interview with the feminist activist about her financial life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.psychologytoday.com


Maybe Gloria has been promised rent free living in Montecito if needed? Maybe the Guest House? Even a room down the hall in the main house? She could have her pick of bathrooms.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> She spends a lot of money to look bad. The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.


No worry - it all goes back today


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Listen, she invites these comparisons!
> 
> View attachment 5539345
> View attachment 5539346


I hope she walks smack into a wall someday while distracted trolling for the camera.


----------



## csshopper

mikimoto007 said:


> I haven't seen anything that really supports that. I've certainly seen pictures of them dressed in similar outfits (same as I have with Kate) but I would expect that for women who are photographed in virtually everything they wear -there is always going to be crossover. It doesn't mean one is copying the other or one is inspired by the other.


It’s unfortunate we don’t have a way to sort pictures by topic in a voluminous thread like this one. There would be pages of examples in support of QueenofWrapDress’s statement of fact.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I find it ironic that the Women's Lib movement "first wave" was often about rebelling against what is referred to "attracting the male gaze". I can't see the fashion designers and cosmetics companies having liked that too much. Money talks, so it became "acceptable" for women to want to be feminine again, or pursue power dressing (could never figure out those thin neck ribbons as symbols of 'authority' I always thought they looked stupid--reminded me of old farm kitchen wall paper with blue geese wearing neck ribbons), shoulder pads, heels and heavy makeup came back with a vengeance to the orchestrated delight of fashion designers. Movements evolve, I get that, and I think women were well on their way to gaining more and more power, getting elected to office, etc. Law school enrollments, for example, have often at least 50% women students. Sadly, it seems fashionable today for celebrities who are often worth tens of millions of dollars b*tching that they're  just "poor little victims" and suffer oppression wherever they go.  I see the pendulum swinging back from the days of "I Am Woman Hear Me Roar" to "Wah, wah, somebody looked at me wrong, I need a safe space for my feelings because I don't have the skills to verbally confront and stand up for myself since I grew up texting my buddies who sit right beside me despite spending two hundred thousand dollars on college tuition." Fashion-wise anything goes now, but some people forget there's situation appropriate dressing, and some twenty-somethings have actually brought a parent along to job interviews. If I hear Meghan cast herself as some kind of victim again (which will be in about five minutes) I'll be tempted to send her a box of butt wipes.



I think you mean the Second Wave (First wave was the Suffragettes, Suffragists and Votes for Women movement in the early 20th C). The male gaze (Mulvey '75) was how the entire world (including women) were looked at through a male (fantasy) lens, so she would probably agree with you. (Third wave) Naomi Wolf is deeply unfashionable now but she penned _The Beauty Myth_ on how commerce needs women to feel anxious about our looks in order to sell us whatever their version of what beauty is at any given time. 

The dentist tried to sell me Botox last week  . I know it's an optional treatment for teeth-grinding (forgotten the actual condition again) but the way the dentist tried to sell it to me was that the side-effects could be a cosmetic advantage (too).  

Women have been made more avaricious consumers only because they are easier to embarrass or to provoke fear into (see punk band, The Slits 'Typical Girls' whose original line-up didn't have much time for academic feminism themselves). Ironically, historically  (late-19C/20C) middle-class, urban European/US women experienced a kind of new freedom in the new dept stores, a place they could go publicly unchaperoned and socialise. I'm sure it was an exciting pastime for the teenage Boomers discovering their first wages could buy cool outfits in the new boutiques, meeting in groups at cafes and hanging out during shopping trips. For women shopping meant freedom to express themselves as well as a conforming to a type (appealing to men). Many working class women also found jobs in retail and the fashion industry away from traditionally dangerous factories (although those jobs with terrible conditions (esp. in fashion) still existed/exist domestically and abroad)

But yes, I agree with you. Life is a) not fair, so you have to fight for justice (not whine about it) b) realise that there is a strength that comes from living through adversity and c) be responsible (as much as possible) for yourself and stand by your own decisions.  Universities are told to support (nearly always female) students who have chosen to become sex workers. How about other work? How about taking responsibility for your own choices? How about all students being supported equally?  All these 'anti' woke films are often just as exploitative, even if they are directed by a woman (_Cuties_ included). 

I'm hearing a lot of women (and men) who are older now look back on their earlier selves as teens and early 20s too with regret and see power-play and exploitation for what it was. Inexperience at the time, they were probably made to feel guilty, even for letting things happen or not speaking-up. You can't look after the teen you were back then and change history, you have to look after the person you are now, set and have clear boundaries. We can have feelings, we just have to learn how to control them.


----------



## Jktgal

Someone didn't get the memo from Sunshine....


----------



## Debbini

PurseUOut said:


> So he's entitled to Meghan's presence? On the basis of what, because he's her 'father'?
> And because she refused that gave him the right to reveal a private letter to the media? But Meghan's a narcissist....


He's ENTITLED to her presence?! Lol....pass the sugar


----------



## xincinsin

Don't forget the Ignore button, fellow Zed-sleuths. Wonderful advice that I've utilized many times when we experience a sugar high.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> She spends a lot of money to look bad. The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.


Hmm my analysis of her fashion issues - every trip the wardrobe is different, she has no sustaining style, I see cosplay in it all rather than her own personality , and she jumps from one costume to another
Compare and contrast - Kate has evolved over the last decade but I still see her inner girly-girly in every outfit, she has Learned to balance the requirements of the job (pants are rare, hats required , longer hemlines, diff colors in diff countries ) and her own persona ( flowers in all fascinators, earrings by KikI McD, she likes lace dresses )


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would she deliberately copy a woman she literally hates? Make it make sense.


Imo they want to prove they can be just like the BRF/W&K, except on this continent.  They’ve got the cameras, they’ve got the media, they’ve got the recognition, so they should be king/queen, right?  Such egos, out of touch with reality. Supposedly, Charles _wants_ to set up a ‘royal’ house over here.  So, H&M believe they can lead the way.  Problem for Charles is that he was not counting on how much ridicule Hazzi would receive. Seems he himself may have bought  the  propaganda about the royals and those politicians [one is currently in the WH].  Imo it was all for the politicians’ PR.  Charles et al.  did not count on the pandemic and Hazzi exposing his lack of intelligence. 

It is sickening that anyone in the UK thinks the USA would willingly give up its freedoms and rejoin the UK. Our dearly beloved CeeJay had many choice words for those who think that way.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Interesting twitter post!



No one looks happy. Interesting.


----------



## MiniMabel

charlottawill said:


> She spends a lot of money to look bad. *The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.*


That's more than £7,700 on one outfit! Why spend so much?  MM must surely already have plenty of clothes.  I really would love to know exactly how they are financed, including incomings and outgoings!


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> This style makes her look so wide from the back  Like a linebacker.
> 
> View attachment 5539213


Maybe this is why she always wants Hazz to go last. He can cover her rear view, literally.


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they want to prove they can be just like the BRF/W&K, except on this continent.  They’ve got the cameras, they’ve got the media, they’ve got the recognition, so they should be king/queen, right?  Such egos, out of touch with reality. Supposedly, Charles _wants_ to set up a ‘royal’ house over here.  So, H&M believe they can lead the way.  Problem for Charles is that he was not counting on how much ridicule Hazzi would receive. Seems he himself may have bought  the  propaganda about the royals and those politicians [one is currently in the WH].  Imo it was all for the politicians’ PR.  Charles et al.  did not count on the pandemic and Hazzi exposing his lack of intelligence.
> 
> _*It is sickening that anyone in the UK thinks the USA would willingly give up its freedoms and rejoin the UK. Our dearly beloved CeeJay had many choice words for those who think that way.*_



I don't think that the majority of the people in the UK think that way. I don't think they think about it at all.  It never occurred to me until you mentioned it!  Each country can choose it's allies but, as you say, we don't need to be in each other's back pockets. Each country's freedoms and sovereignty is specific and precious to them.  Agreed, Ceejay's comments would have been on-point, I am sure!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they want to prove they can be just like the BRF/W&K, except on this continent.  They’ve got the cameras, they’ve got the media, they’ve got the recognition, so they should be king/queen, right?  Such egos, out of touch with reality. Supposedly, Charles _wants_ to set up a ‘royal’ house over here.  So, H&M believe they can lead the way.  Problem for Charles is that he was not counting on how much ridicule Hazzi would receive. Seems he himself may have bought  the  propaganda about the royals and those politicians [one is currently in the WH].  Imo it was all for the politicians’ PR.  Charles et al.  did not count on the pandemic and Hazzi exposing his lack of intelligence.
> 
> It is sickening that anyone in the UK thinks the USA would willingly give up its freedoms and rejoin the UK. Our dearly beloved CeeJay had many choice words for those who think that way.


Very much "anything you can do, we can do better". Their stans already hail them as King and Queen, obviously drunk on the Koolaid that the monarchy is elected at the polls.


----------



## LittleStar88

MiniMabel said:


> That's more than £7,700 on one outfit! Why spend so much?  MM must surely already have plenty of clothes.  I really would love to know exactly how they are financed, including incomings and outgoings!


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5539415


If they can be bothered to set up a network of 11 or 12 companies, they will be funneling all income and expenses through those. Everything is a business expense. When Handbag claims that he has no money, he sounds righteously sincere because those shell companies and holding companies probably give him only fun money so that he can avoid paying taxes.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> And to ensure that her thriving husband feels the constant presence of his dead mother.
> 
> (Ugh, feels creepy even typing that out)


Maybe Prince Philip will pay them a visit too   Lots of negative energy there at Riven Rock.


----------



## mikimoto007

xincinsin said:


> The copying of the Diana poses brings us much hilarity. It's part of her approach to life: copy and plagiarise.





csshopper said:


> It’s unfortunate we don’t have a way to sort pictures by topic in a voluminous thread like this one. There would be pages of examples in support of QueenofWrapDress’s statement of fact.



Yeah, I think I might have seen some discussion around it, I've just never seen anything that convinced me.

I finally saw a little bit of Harry's speech. If Africa is so meaningful to him, and he's no longer tied to the royal family...why on earth doesn't he just move there? I know the answer to that, but how does he rationalise it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

andrashik said:


> I think the letter was written after she refused to see him at Charles's request.
> And also, I think she knew he would publish the letter or parts of it and she wrote it specifically for that..


Now that we know more about TM’s past behavior, I’m thinking he encouraged her to write him a letter.
Easy to leave a voicemail - if you can’t call me, send me a letter.


----------



## CobaltBlu

purseinsanity said:


> I find myself really missing Ceejay today, and wondering what lovely snarky comments she'd have with the book coming out.
> I guess we never know how much time we have left, and the fact she posted here a day before she passed is special yet jarring at the same time.  I just want to tell you all how much I appreciate each and every one of you, whether I agree with everything you post or not.  You've all made the last couple years very enjoyable for me, and I come to ThePurseForum not as much for the bags any more, but for this thread above all.  You all mean so much to me!   Thank you!


100% right here.  Thank you for writing this. The genius of the PurseForum is it is so much more than purses. I have been thinking about CeeJay also. Her comments about the speech and the book would be solid gold.


----------



## gracekelly

PurseUOut said:


> She's a mother of two young children. Perhaps she was incredibly moved as we all should be when tragedies like this happen. She showed up with ONE security guard, donated blood, brought food. There was no cameras she brought. She never even introduced herself. No footage showing her saying anything. Unless her presence was offensive to you.
> 
> I think there is a bigger issue here than Meghan - 21 souls perished needlessly because of neglectful and corrupt efforts to restrict reasonable gun legislation in America.


She didn’t donate blood. Let’s get that straight. She donated trays of food. Period.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> She looks like Doria here. He is wondering if he will be punished tonight.


I wonder how their 50 shades dungeon is set up and what kind of whips Z-list have for her perusal    




TimeToShop said:


> I’d really like to know her thought process. Is she trolling Kate? Does she really think she looks better? She comes across as a sad Kate wanna be. That spray tan is getting close to Oompa Loompa orange.



I'm glad it wasn't just me. First thought came to mind was Kate!! Regardless, Kate looked better, this outfit or any other because she dresses her body type 




CarryOn2020 said:


> No worry - it all goes back today


Are you sure? Maybe she's going to keep them like those engagement announcement Aquazurras  Just saying. After all, she's still unemployed!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> She spends a lot of money to look bad. The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.



_That_ jumpsuit


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> I don't think that the majority of the people in the UK think that way. I don't think they think about it at all.  It never occurred to me until you mentioned it!  Each country can choose it's allies but, as you say, we don't need to be in each other's back pockets. Each country's freedoms and sovereignty is specific and precious to them.  Agreed, Ceejay's comments would have been on-point, I am sure!


If you have the time, google Charles and the global reset. It was the theme of Davos, 2021.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> _That_ jumpsuit


But hey, it's sustainable! The model is 5'11", is wearing a US 0 and does not have shoulders like a linebacker   Made in NY, hmm... borrowed?



> https://www.gabrielahearst.com/products/vicky-jumpsuit-black-r22?variant=41130388816064


----------



## TC1

MiniMabel said:


> That's more than £7,700 on one outfit! Why spend so much?  MM must surely already have plenty of clothes.  I really would love to know exactly how they are financed, including incomings and outgoings!


But remember. They "give more than they take"   as per H's regurgitated speech


----------



## Lodpah

Gal4Dior said:


> carried? Or merching?


That pelvis thrust, tho! I’m gonna walk around my office thrusting my pelvis out. Let me see how long I can do it before I’m sent home due to ‘not right in the head’. Just don’t want to throw my hips out.


----------



## Genie27

TC1 said:


> But remember. They "give more than they take"   as per H's regurgitated speech


Flushing 17 toilets does not equate 'giving'


----------



## charlottawill

Surprise surprise.....I knew I'd seen it before.



> https://tomandlorenzo.com/2021/12/s...oples-choice-awards-red-carpet-fashion-style/


----------



## CarryOn2020

Queen Maxima wore a similar outfit - in 2017  










						Kate Middleton Takes a Page Out of *This* Royal’s Fashion Playbook with Latest Red Carpet Look
					

Kate Middleton rocked a black-and-white Roland Mouret gown to the 'Top Gun: Maverick' premiere in London. As it turns out, a similar ensemble was worn by Queen Máxima of the Netherlands back in 2017.




					www.purewow.com


----------



## Chanbal

Jktgal said:


> Someone didn't get the memo from Sunshine....
> 
> View attachment 5539388


Per Piers's video, Mandela spent 27 years in a small prison cell while Hazz and TW had to leave a Palace to live in a mansion. The struggles sound a tiny little different.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> But hey, it's sustainable! The model is 5'11", is wearing a US 0 and does not have shoulders like a linebacker   Made in NY, hmm... *borrowed*?


Well, I hope she kept the tags attached!

Watching Stephane Rolland Haute Couture AW/22/23 a I type. Dresses start at around €100,000 and I’m thinking better value for money. 

That jumpsuit looks like merde


----------



## bag-mania

PurseUOut said:


> She's a mother of two young children. Perhaps she was incredibly moved as we all should be when tragedies like this happen. She showed up with ONE security guard, donated blood, brought food. There was no cameras she brought. She never even introduced herself. No footage showing her saying anything. Unless her presence was offensive to you.
> 
> I think there is a bigger issue here than Meghan - 21 souls perished needlessly because of neglectful and corrupt efforts to restrict reasonable gun legislation in America.


Do you honestly believe she showed up and was photographed there by accident? You must realize that celebrities can come and go without being seen any time they wish, particularly the ones who bring security guards. 

She went there for the sole purpose of BEING SEEN. The fact that she brought a couple grocery bags of snacks with her was to get credit for GIVING. The people who got the Fritos were certainly appreciative but let’s be clear, Meghan did absolutely nothing towards making any difference in her visit to Uvalde other than blatant self-promotion. You don’t have to fly to another state and stand outside the county courthouse with a bouquet to show you care. Millions care privately and some actually are trying to do something about it.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> She spends a lot of money to look bad. The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.


I felt the jumpsuit was the best thing she has worn since, umm, like forever. It fit which is an accomplishment. The maroon BV bag--a definite no. Shoes were nice. Greased back pony-tail--another nope.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Queen Maxima wore a similar outfit - in 2017
> View attachment 5539462
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton Takes a Page Out of *This* Royal’s Fashion Playbook with Latest Red Carpet Look
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton rocked a black-and-white Roland Mouret gown to the 'Top Gun: Maverick' premiere in London. As it turns out, a similar ensemble was worn by Queen Máxima of the Netherlands back in 2017.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.purewow.com


And she looks stunning, as usual. 

Maxima, Kate, and ZeeZy....


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> I felt the jumpsuit was the best thing she has worn since, umm, like forever. It fit which is an accomplishment. The maroon BV bag--a definite no. Shoes were nice. Greased back pony-tail--another nope.


The ponytail may be to cope with the hot humid weather. Kate did a ponytail in Jamaica. Sometimes you just have to give in to Mother Nature. And summer in NY is the worst imo. I could have joined my husband there for a work event this week. He has a huge suite at a very nice midtown hotel, but I said no thanks. 95 for the next few days.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> She didn’t donate blood. Let’s get that straight. She donated trays of food. Period.


I didn't think she donated blood, first I heard of it. Fritos yes though. 

And wasn't that a N*tfl*x crew with the cameras?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Surprise surprise.....I knew I'd seen it before.


It doesn’t look great on Scarlett either.  I think you have to be super tall.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> The ponytail may be to cope with the hot humid weather. Kate did a ponytail in Jamaica. Sometimes you just have to give in to Mother Nature. And summer in NY is the worst imo. I could have joined my husband there for a work event this week. He has a huge suite at a very nice midtown hotel, but I said no thanks. 95 for the next few days.


But who will hold your husband’s hand at his work event?


----------



## wisconsin

Jktgal said:


> The Will and Kate thread is so boring. I'd welcome some juicy gossip! Did Kate forgot to return her borrowed jewelry from the.... Queen? . William banging the horse-faced woman who is Kate's friend?   Unless it's "they routinely engage in 3-some involving bananas, cake and pictures of Diana" it doesn't really compare....


You can post the gossip there if you believe it and if you deem it appropriate.You do you!


----------



## Chanbal

The number of attendees (16-19) seems to match the number of bathrooms in the Montecito mansion. I feel like this observation is as profound as the Hazz's UN speech.


----------



## CarryOn2020

wisconsin said:


> You can post the gossip there if you believe it and if you deem it appropriate.You do you!


The thing about W&K is they know how to do _private_.  So unlike the noisy, showy, glossy H&M.  So unlike.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies if already posted:


----------



## papertiger

I have a public announcement to make: 

Never, ever, stand on the edge of a wide-angle group shot.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> It doesn’t look great on Scarlett either.  I think you have to be super tall.


Agreed. Scarlett is only 5'3" and curvy, and that picture was taken a few months after she'd had a baby. ZeeZy may have seen her and been "inspired". I'll bet ScarJo is another one she aspires to be. In her dreams...

"The world's highest-paid actress in 2018 and 2019, she has featured multiple times on the _Forbes_ Celebrity 100 list. _Time_ magazine named her one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2021. Her films have grossed over $14.3 billion worldwide, making Johansson the highest-grossing box office star of all time. She has received various accolades, including a Tony Award and a British Academy Film Award, in addition to nominations for two Academy Awards and five Golden Globe Awards."


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> I have a public announcement to make:
> 
> Never, ever, stand on the edge of a wide-angle group shot.
> 
> View attachment 5539498


I’m not sure anyone was flattered in this specific photo!!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Agreed. Scarlett is only 5'3" and curvy, and that picture was taken a few months after she'd had a baby. ZeeZy may have seen her and been "inspired". I'll bet ScarJo is another one she aspires to be. In her dreams...
> 
> "The world's highest-paid actress in 2018 and 2019, she has featured multiple times on the _Forbes_ Celebrity 100 list. _Time_ magazine named her one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2021. *Her films have grossed over $14.3 billion worldwide, making Johansson the highest-grossing box office star of all time.* She has received various accolades, including a Tony Award and a British Academy Film Award, in addition to nominations for two Academy Awards and five Golden Globe Awards."



At least _she_ should be able to afford a $4K+ jump-suit then, M is _supposed_ to saving the planet single double-handedly


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m not sure anyone was flattered in this specific photo!!



Woman in the middle looks pretty good to me, great idea to dress in a complimentary colour to the flags/logo behind.

Terrible lighting though for sure.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Woman in the model looks pretty good to me, great idea to dress in a complimentary colour to the flags/logo behind.
> 
> Terrible lighting though for sure.


In so many aspects of life lighting is everything.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> In so many aspects of life lighting is everything.



This should also be a public announcement!

And sorry, not complimentary colours exactly but close.

M looks like a 8 person on a table laid for for 7.

I used to love my Envol UN anniversary special edition scarf. The UN does nothing except for itself anymore


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I have a public announcement to make:
> 
> Never, ever, stand on the edge of a wide-angle group shot.
> 
> View attachment 5539498


This photo screams Harry and Meghan weren’t originally supposed to be in it but they squeezed themselves in there anyway.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> In so many aspects of life lighting is everything.


Imagine if she had her dad close to her? He could have traveled with her and do ALL her lighting. After all he’s an academy award winning lighting person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dine like commoners vulgars at NYC Italian restaurant​(To you CeeJay, I miss your corrections.) 









						Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
					

Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dine like commoners vulgars at NYC Italian restaurant​(To you CeeJay, I miss your corrections.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Of course Harry looks happy! He was drinking.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> M looks like a 8 person on a table laid for for 7.


The group minus the Harkles would have fit perfectly in that space. The photo is a visual metaphor for the whole charade.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Of course Harry looks happy! He was drinking.


is he allowed to drink now?  thought the WIFE forbade it


----------



## bag-mania

Can you imagine being in a nice restaurant celebrating your birthday with your loved ones when suddenly Meghan (with her security entourage) shows up at your table?   

“There was a random birthday celebration at the table next to theirs,” the source recalled. “Meghan went up to them with Harry and said, ‘I wish you the happiest birthday,’ to the table next to her. *They were all dumbfounded* and just said, ‘Thank you so much.'”


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan were brought to UN by South African ambassador
					

The couple were also brought to New York City by the office of the South African Ambassador to the UN, though it remains unclear if they traveled on a private jet or on a commercial flight.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Oh lookie!  It's another secret!  Are these people 8 years olds? (no disrespect to 8 year olds intended)  Must be a secret to bilk money out of something.  It's "rooted in leadership development."  Harry are you tying to sell Butteritup to people who can't afford it?  How about out on creating jobs so that people can have people to lead?

I can't get over the brown shoe polish she put on her face.   Who is she kidding.  Brown when it suits her?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine being in a nice restaurant celebrating your birthday with your loved ones when suddenly Meghan (with her security entourage) shows up at your table?
> 
> “There was a random birthday celebration at the table next to theirs,” the source recalled. “Meghan went up to them with Harry and said, ‘I wish you the happiest birthday,’ to the table next to her. *They were all dumbfounded* and just said, ‘Thank you so much.'”


and these aren't unsophisticated people....I'm sure that's a very expensive restaurant so they may not have been that flattered by the attention of the duchess


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Of course Harry looks happy! He was drinking.


She was eating raw meat.  Well she does that at home too.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and these aren't unsophisticated people....I'm sure that's a very expensive restaurant so they may not have been that flattered by the attention of the duchess


Any real NY denizen took one look at them and labeled them tourists. Out of towners!  A dreaded label by NYC standards.  Bridge and Tunnel crowd is second to that.   They didn't given them a second glance.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine being in a nice restaurant celebrating your birthday with your loved ones when suddenly Meghan (with her security entourage) shows up at your table?
> 
> “There was a random birthday celebration at the table next to theirs,” the source recalled. “Meghan went up to them with Harry and said, ‘I wish you the happiest birthday,’ to the table next to her. *They were all dumbfounded* and just said, ‘Thank you so much.'”


If they were dumbfounded it was because strangers just don't go up to strangers and speak in NY.  In LA. yes.  NYC no.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Any real NY denizen took one look at them and labeled them tourists. Out of towners!  A dreaded label by NYC standards.  Bridge and Tunnel crowd is second to that.   They didn't given them a second glance.


The bit about the diners being told they'd be asked to leave if they took photos with their phones was pure ZeeZy - "Don't look at us -  no, look at us!" If they hadn't had their security team walk in ahead to announce their arrival and get the attention of the diners no one would have given them a second glance.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I think you mean the Second Wave (First wave was the Suffragettes, Suffragists and Votes for Women movement in the early 20th C). The male gaze (Mulvey '75) was how the entire world (including women) were looked at through a male (fantasy) lens, so she would probably agree with you. (Third wave) Naomi Wolf is deeply unfashionable now but she penned _The Beauty Myth_ on how commerce needs women to feel anxious about our looks in order to sell us whatever their version of what beauty is at any given time.
> 
> The dentist tried to sell me Botox last week  . I know it's an optional treatment for teeth-grinding (forgotten the actual condition again) but the way the dentist tried to sell it to me was that the side-effects could be a cosmetic advantage (too).
> 
> Women have been made more avaricious consumers only because they are easier to embarrass or to provoke fear into (see punk band, The Slits 'Typical Girls' whose original line-up didn't have much time for academic feminism themselves). Ironically, historically  (late-19C/20C) middle-class, urban European/US women experienced a kind of new freedom in the new dept stores, a place they could go publicly unchaperoned and socialise. I'm sure it was an exciting pastime for the teenage Boomers discovering their first wages could buy cool outfits in the new boutiques, meeting in groups at cafes and hanging out during shopping trips. For women shopping meant freedom to express themselves as well as a conforming to a type (appealing to men). Many working class women also found jobs in retail and the fashion industry away from traditionally dangerous factories (although those jobs with terrible conditions (esp. in fashion) still existed/exist domestically and abroad)
> 
> But yes, I agree with you. Life is a) not fair, so you have to fight for justice (not whine about it) b) realise that there is a strength that comes from living through adversity and c) be responsible (as much as possible) for yourself and stand by your own decisions.  Universities are told to support (nearly always female) students who have chosen to become sex workers. How about other work? How about taking responsibility for your own choices? How about all students being supported equally?  All these 'anti' woke films are often just as exploitative, even if they are directed by a woman (_Cuties_ included).
> 
> I'm hearing a lot of women (and men) who are older now look back on their earlier selves as teens and early 20s too with regret and see power-play and exploitation for what it was. Inexperience at the time, they were probably made to feel guilty, even for letting things happen or not speaking-up. You can't look after the teen you were back then and change history, you have to look after the person you are now, set and have clear boundaries. We can have feelings, we just have to learn how to control them.


This is very edifying content, Papertiger, thank you for all your hard work.

I remembered what I was going to say! 

The fact that Naomi Wolf has been on the Ali G Show and has not recorded anything with H&M is all one really needs to recommend her. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they want to prove they can be just like the BRF/W&K, except on this continent.  They’ve got the cameras, they’ve got the media, they’ve got the recognition, so they should be king/queen, right?  Such egos, out of touch with reality. Supposedly, Charles _wants_ to set up a ‘royal’ house over here.  So, H&M believe they can lead the way.  Problem for Charles is that he was not counting on how much ridicule Hazzi would receive. Seems he himself may have bought  the  propaganda about the royals and those politicians [one is currently in the WH].  Imo it was all for the politicians’ PR.  Charles et al.  did not count on the pandemic and Hazzi exposing his lack of intelligence.
> 
> It is sickening that anyone in the UK thinks the USA would willingly give up its freedoms and rejoin the UK. Our dearly beloved CeeJay had many choice words for those who think that way.


I’m extremely cynical about the motivations of Charles and would put nothing past his greed but I think some form of reunification of the former colony and coloniser might be *a bit too of an ambitious project* for him.

They (the BRF) are clearly trying to make inroads into the international community certainly and Diversify their support base but I suspect that is because they know they are facing a nose dive in popularity with the coming generations and they want to astroturf some support bases internationally to influence the Brits and their commonwealth and to sure up their ongoing existence. (To the extent I would not be shocked at all if he was still paying H’s bills.)

I mean let’s not forget when the queen was ingratiating herself with her young and modern royal  routine in her early rule Britain still retained most of the empire. Charles, if he does make it to the throne, will arrive at a far different kingdom.

I also think it’s not like the US would let that happen, lol, Uncle Sam definitely likes to be the top in any relationship




CarryOn2020 said:


> Easy to leave a voicemail - if you can’t call me, send me a letter.


I might be misremembering this but I thought it was J Knauf and the royal family who were pushing for her to reconcile with her dad for PR reasons and she suggested a couriered letter over meeting in person. 


gracekelly said:


> She didn’t donate blood. Let’s get that straight. She donated trays of food. Period.


Well of course she can’t. Can you imagine all those cameras around to catch the puff of smoke coming out of her arm 


Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dine like commoners vulgars at NYC Italian restaurant​(To you CeeJay, I miss your corrections.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Geez talk about a damper on the evening…

I assume they approached the other table to ask whether they wanted to give a special birthday donation to Asswell or perhaps just foot the bill  

Honestly I don’t know how many more incredibly thrilling articles I can take about these two - it’s so banal.


----------



## gracekelly

I side-eye anything to do with the UN involving money.  Archewell has no money as far as I know.  Someone correct me if I am wrong. The Harkles are brokering some deal where they don't give any actual money or real substance and are going to piggyback off someone else?  I still think Butterup is involved because of the _leadership _angle  That means it is going to cost someone. something. The Invictus people found that out the hard way.  The Mandela people better have a close hand on their wallets.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The bit about the diners being told they'd be asked to leave if they took photos with their phones was pure ZeeZy - "Don't look at us -  no, look at us!" If they hadn't had their security team walk in ahead to announce their arrival and get the attention of the diners no one would have given them a second glance.


I guess Meg didn't want to be photographed using the wrong fork.


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> is he allowed to drink now?  thought the WIFE forbade it


I don’t know. Anything to keep him compliant. I think he still drinks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Apologies if this has already been posted


----------



## CobaltBlu

So they are working on a tippity-top-secret with NM foundation and the "keynote speech" made no mention of it?  
What is that? 
Also, I checked out the restaurant and from the looks of it it is pricy and delicious and MM is way overdressed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> _That_ jumpsuit


Speaking of Gloria Steinem - I wonder if this tacky jumpsuit and heels is a ‘sweet nod’ to GS’ playboy bunny outfit?

I also have the sudden urge to avoid pints of Guinness. 

All I can say is if BV weren’t already struggling with declining sales they just got a veritable white elephant in their backyard.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> If they were dumbfounded it was because strangers just don't go up to strangers and speak in NY.  In LA. yes.  NYC no.


the whole thing about NY is that celebs can go out and about and not be approached or bothered by the public (allegedly).  but the duchess wants to be noticed.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I side-eye anything to do with the UN involving money.  Archewell has no money as far as I know.  Someone correct me if I am wrong. The Harkles are brokering some deal where they don't give any actual money or real substance and are going to piggyback off someone else?  I still think Butterup is involved because of the _leadership _angle  That means it is going to cost someone. something. The Invictus people found that out the hard way.  The Mandela people better have a close hand on their wallets.


We do not know because H&M keep it a secret  Same for his immigration status.
Worth noting that a UK CoS who is #6 in line goes into the UN and trash-talks the nation that is hosting him.  
What is wrong with us?  Who benefits from his presence here?


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> So they are working on a tippity-top-secret with NM foundation and the "keynote speech" made no mention of it?
> What is that?
> Also, I checked out the restaurant and from the looks of it it is pricy and delicious and MM is way overdressed.


Probably assumed it was like Craig's in LA and she had to be ready for her closeup.


----------



## Chanbal

Is Amaz*n helping to suffocate TB's book? Come on Bezos sell the book, you can do it!


_Feared British biographer Tom Bower is due to publish his long-anticipated new book about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, on Thursday, July 21.








						Harry, Meghan Book Will Be 'Suffocated Out' in U.S. Despite Bombshells
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been urged not to overreact to a bombshell biography that targeted their cherished relationship with Queen Elizabeth II.



					www.newsweek.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m extremely cynical about the motivations of Charles and would put nothing past his greed but I think some form of reunification of the former colony and coloniser might be *a bit too of an ambitious project* for him.
> 
> They (the BRF) are clearly trying to make inroads into the international community certainly and Diversify their support base but I suspect that is because they know they are facing a nose dive in popularity with the coming generations and they want to astroturf some support bases internationally to influence the Brits and their commonwealth and to sure up their ongoing existence. (To the extent I would not be shocked at all if he was still paying H’s bills.)
> 
> I mean let’s not forget when the queen was ingratiating herself with her young and modern royal  routine in her early rule Britain still retained most of the empire. Charles, if he does make it to the throne, will arrive at a far different kingdom.
> 
> I also think it’s not like the US would let that happen, lol, Uncle Sam definitely likes to be the top in any relationship
> ======
> I might be misremembering this but I thought it was J Knauf and the royal family who were pushing for her to reconcile with her dad for PR reasons and she suggested a couriered letter over meeting in person.


Without getting into too much politics, I, too, side eye and question the BRF’s motivations. Rest assured stuff happens in the background that we rarely hear about.  [Raise your hand if you know why W arrived at Wimbledon before K&George.]  I agree C is still paying H’s bills.  Wherever money is involved, greedy hands will show up - lots of money on both sides of the pond. Based on current land sales, the US govt. may not play a huge role.  Fairly certain H&M are pawns in this chess game. My opinion and mine only.

RE: Knauf -  as I understand this tangled web, he and Charles and Camilla encouraged MM to reconcile with TM.  So, she wrote that letter. My guess is TM coached her on the letter.  My reasoning is, based on Bowers book, TM has experience with manipulating letters.  He has received lots of press on the Dear Daddy letter as well as the P&G letter.   They all know exactly what they are doing and what they want to achieve. Some days it feels like we are the only ones holding the line [yes, I’ve been watching too much Game of Thrones].


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> There was no cameras she brought.



She is literally seen looking over her photographer's shoulder to see if she looked good in the shot or whatever. Of course, they could simply have met over the graves of innocent children and bonded. Or maybe not.


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> We do not know because H&M keep it a secret  Same for his immigration status.
> Worth noting that a UK CoS who is #6 in line goes into the UN and trash-talks the nation that is hosting him.
> What is wrong with us?  *Who benefits from his presence here?*



Only the Claw.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Home | Soul-Satisfying Urban Italian Menu Locanda Verde in New York, NY
					

Locanda Verde is our TriBeCa neighborhood taverna serving Chef Andrew Carmellini's soul-satisfying urban Italian menu.




					www.locandaverdenyc.com
				



&
_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn’t get the royal treatment when they dined at Italian restaurant Locanda Verde in Tribeca on Monday night.

“There was lots and lots of security all throughout the restaurant, but they weren’t in [a] private room,” a source exclusively told Page Six on Tuesday, adding that they were “seated in the middle of the busy restaurant.”

We’re told that other patrons dining at the NYC hotspot that evening were told by the Sussexes’ security team that they would be “asked to leave” if they tried to snap any photos of the royal pair.

But the Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday at a nearby table.









						Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
					

Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

By the way, where is @poopsie? I've not seen her posts for awhile.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> By the way, where is @poopsie? I've not seen her posts for awhile.


system says she posted in this tread 41 minutes ago


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Is Amaz*n helping to suffocate TB's book? Come on Bezos sell the book, you can do it! (Pardon for some of the lyrics)
> View attachment 5539539
> 
> _Feared British biographer Tom Bower is due to publish his long-anticipated new book about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, on Thursday, July 21._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan Book Will Be 'Suffocated Out' in U.S. Despite Bombshells
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been urged not to overreact to a bombshell biography that targeted their cherished relationship with Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com



What is extremely odd is you can't currently find Tom Bower's book on US Amazon, but you CAN find a 24-page "review" of it that some random person who hasn't read it yet wrote and is peddling. How is that for suffocated?


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Home | Soul-Satisfying Urban Italian Menu Locanda Verde in New York, NY
> 
> 
> Locanda Verde is our TriBeCa neighborhood taverna serving Chef Andrew Carmellini's soul-satisfying urban Italian menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.locandaverdenyc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> &
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn’t get the royal treatment when they dined at Italian restaurant Locanda Verde in Tribeca on Monday night.
> 
> “There was lots and lots of security all throughout the restaurant, but they weren’t in [a] private room,” a source exclusively told Page Six on Tuesday, adding that they were “seated in the middle of the busy restaurant.”
> 
> We’re told that other patrons dining at the NYC hotspot that evening were told by the Sussexes’ security team that they would be “asked to leave” if they tried to snap any photos of the royal pair.
> 
> But the Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday at a nearby table.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Dining like commoners, with a security team that sweeps the room ....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Dining like commoners, with a security team that sweeps the room ....


H probably thinks the paps are gonna chase his WIFE and cause her death


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine being in a nice restaurant celebrating your birthday with your loved ones when suddenly Meghan (with her security entourage) shows up at your table?
> 
> “There was a random birthday celebration at the table next to theirs,” the source recalled. “Meghan went up to them with Harry and said, ‘I wish you the happiest birthday,’ to the table next to her. *They were all dumbfounded* and just said, ‘Thank you so much.'”



Just...why. I bet she thought she was giving them the experience of a lifetime.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why. I bet she thought she was giving them the experience of a lifetime.


well, yes.  she is the duchess, WIFE of the prince


----------



## Cinderlala

marietouchet said:


> Dining like commoners, with a security team that sweeps the room ....



Raptor likes to let the commoners know she sees them...and they'd better see her!



sdkitty said:


> H probably thinks the paps are gonna chase his WIFE and cause her death



This is what she has convinced him is true and it's how she got him to leave the UK---she was constantly in peril!!  I mean anyone can see how terrified she is at the restaurant.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> Raptor likes to let the commoners know she sees them...and they'd better see her!
> 
> 
> 
> This is what she has convinced him is true and it's how she got him to leave the UK---she was constantly in peril!!  I mean anyone can see how terrified she is at the restaurant.


considering how obsessed he seems to be with his mother, the may have come up with this one on his own


Cinderlala said:


> Raptor likes to let the commoners know she sees them...and they'd better see her!
> 
> 
> 
> This is what she has convinced him is true and it's how she got him to leave the UK---she was constantly in peril!!  I mean anyone can see how terrified she is at the restaurant.


considering how obsessed with his mother and her death he seems to be, he may have come up with that theory on his own


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We’re told that other patrons dining at the NYC hotspot that evening were told by the Sussexes’ security team that they would be “asked to leave” if they tried to snap any photos of the royal pair._



Now I am very non-confrontational in real life. But you bet if some random security guy came up to me and tried to intimidate me I would have had a few things to say. Who do these people think they are.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I am very non-confrontational in real life. But you bet if some random security guy came up to me and tried to intimidate me I would have had a few things to say. Who do these people think they are.


LOL
they are royalty, doncha know


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well, yes.  she is the duchess, WIFE of the prince


And everyone in NYC wants to be a royal   especially the upper crust of NYC society [pun intended]


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> What is extremely odd is you can't currently find Tom Bower's book on US Amazon, but you CAN find a 24-page "review" of it that some random person who hasn't read it yet wrote and is peddling. How is that for suffocated?



I saw that on Amazon DE as well. It's expensive, too!


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I am very non-confrontational in real life. But you bet if some random security guy came up to me and tried to intimidate me I would have had a few things to say. Who do these people think they are.


You and me both. If I knew it was them and I was being told to "behave" like that I'd be paying the chef to piss in her salad dressing.

ETA: Since I really don't give a rat's ass about these self-entitled idiots (other than the entertainment factor they provide on this thread as a stress reliever) I'd realistically be more likely to complain to the manager that as a result, I've lost my appetite, and leave.


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> considering how obsessed he seems to be with his mother, the may have come up with this one on his own
> 
> considering how obsessed with his mother and her death he seems to be, he may have come up with that theory on his own



The origin was definitely on his mind but I'd be willing to bet she exploited the concern by massively overdramatizing the level of any actual danger.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> The origin was definitely on his mind but I'd be willing to bet she exploited the concern by massively overdramatizing the level of any actual danger.


well there was that story she told Oprah about wanting to kill herself and crying in H's arms due to the royal HR dept not helping her
sorry I have to laugh at that.  this arrogant woman who was allegedly bullying staff wanted help from HR.  she didn't know she wasn't an employee


----------



## andrashik

charlottawill said:


> Probably assumed it was like Craig's in LA and she had to be ready for her closeup.


Ladies..you are forgetting that she has crippling anxiety!!!


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> well there was that story she told Oprah about wanting to kill herself and crying in H's arms due to the royal HR dept not helping her
> sorry I have to laugh at that.  this arrogant woman who was allegedly bullying staff wanted help from HR.  she didn't know she wasn't an employee



That's when she knew she had finally found her audience...H.


----------



## Toby93

Insta is calling this The Many Shades of Meggie


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

Toby93 said:


> Insta is calling this The Many Shades of Meggie
> 
> View attachment 5539604


OK this is the first I've seen the shorts outfit in all its glory. Ugh. She just cannot get the style right.

I have to add a disclaimer (sort of). As much as I dislike her, she isn't physically horrible (that's as much of a compliment I can dig up) and there might be a sympathy molecule in my brain for the style challenges she faces. I'm built very similarly (just better, HA, because I work out a ton), long & thin-legged, short torso-d, and on top of it busty but very narrow in the hips. Ergo getting a defined waist is a challenge. Accentuating the positive while not highlighting the negative is always on my mind. As mentioned before, you should not amplify the widest part of the body with things that make it look wider. Here, waist, shoulders, just not good. And the shorts are just ugly. The dress she wore to the UN wasn't bad (actually I agree it was one of her best), I just wish she didn't look so....lumpy in the boob area. Can't she find a decent undergarment? Jeez....


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe this is why she always wants Hazz to go last. He can cover her rear view, literally.


Nah , it is an assertiveness thing 
Ladies go first in the US, but he goes first in the UK due to title
She tried to go first in the UK and got a lot of pushback


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> Ladies..you are forgetting that she has crippling anxiety!!!


Yet according to this article it’s Harry who is suffering from anxiety.   









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle's Awkward Hand-Holding Video at U.N. Goes Viral
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visited the United Nations to honor Nelson Mandela's legacy, but social media users were studying their body language.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine being in a nice restaurant celebrating your birthday with your loved ones when suddenly Meghan (with her security entourage) shows up at your table?
> 
> “There was a random birthday celebration at the table next to theirs,” the source recalled. “Meghan went up to them with Harry and said, ‘I wish you the happiest birthday,’ to the table next to her. *They were all dumbfounded* and just said, ‘Thank you so much.





Lodpah said:


> Imagine if she had her dad close to her? He could have traveled with her and do ALL her lighting. After all he’s an academy award winning lighting person.


NVM me. There’s no option as far as I can see to cancel a post.


----------



## csshopper

I contacted Amazon Customer Service a few minutes ago inquiring about the status of the book. You can scroll through the transcript of the conversation (excuse my typo of "available" in my last response). Strange! 

Also, the awkwardness of this printed transcript + the "Insert" box appearing at the bottom.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I happen to go back to the tab where I had tried to look up the book and it looks like we’re getting closer?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> What is extremely odd is you can't currently find Tom Bower's book on US Amazon, but you CAN find a 24-page "review" of it that some random person who hasn't read it yet wrote and is peddling. How is that for suffocated?


Yes, I saw it. It's ridiculous and scary at the same time. Cancel culture? Amaz*n sells everything from fake VCA to this weird review book. Why is Amaz*n not selling the book? Would Sachs have dirt on Bez*s?


----------



## Aimee3

_Sorry I can’t seem to get out of italic mode but I wanted to post about the restaurant locande verde.  I’ve been there a few times although not recently.  It’s noisy and crowded and used to be (maybe still , but it’s summer and a lot of people are away) hard to get a reservation but I’m thrilled they didn’t give in to TW’s demand to have the entire outdoor seating area just for her 4 some and put them smack in the middle of the crowded dining room.  If you’re going to be in a public restaurant, are you even allowed to prevent people from taking photos although I doubt anyone knew who they were nor cared._


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Yet according to this article it’s Harry who is suffering from anxiety.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle's Awkward Hand-Holding Video at U.N. Goes Viral
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle visited the United Nations to honor Nelson Mandela's legacy, but social media users were studying their body language.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I think Judi James needs a few (many) lessons from the BLG


----------



## mellibelly

That shorts outfit is hideous from head to toe 

Of course this nobody ZZZZ lister has her security threaten other diners. I promise you no one gave AF about them. I’ve dined in restaurants with REAL A listers and they didn’t have obvious security. Off the top of my head Nicole Kidman, J Lo, the late Larry King, Jennifer Garner, Charlize Theron, the Olsen twins…heck even Jon Hamm started chatting with me! No one in LA/NY and I’m sure most major cities takes pictures of celebrities in nice restaurants.


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> That shorts outfit is hideous from head to toe
> 
> Of course this nobody ZZZZ lister has her security threaten other diners. I promise you no one gave AF about them. I’ve dined in restaurants with REAL A listers and they didn’t have obvious security. Off the top of my head Nicole Kidman, J Lo, the late Larry King, Jennifer Garner, Charlize Theron, the Olsen twins…heck even Jon Hamm started chatting with me! No one in LA/NY and I’m sure most major cities takes pictures of celebrities in nice restaurants.


John Hamm.....I'm jealous


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Insta is calling this The Many Shades of Meggie
> 
> View attachment 5539604



Hold up.
Do I see tanning lotion stains around the neckline?


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Scoobie, he is so worried with his master. Thanks Valentine Low for helping him…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Vicky Jumpsuit
					

Exclusive to Gabriela Hearst A bold silhouette is seen here with a contrasting combination of black and white. Our signature knot detailing is utilized as an upper back detail and frames a cut-out on this fitted strapless jumpsuit. A slight flare is seen towards the hem of the pant allowing for...




					www.gabrielahearst.com


----------



## Chanbal

I watched this video with a little more attention, and it's quite intriguing towards the end (it starts at about 5:08)… it seems to claim that it was Doria who engineered the split between TM and MM…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

mellibelly said:


> That shorts outfit is hideous from head to toe
> 
> Of course this nobody ZZZZ lister has her security threaten other diners. I promise you no one gave AF about them. I’ve dined in restaurants with REAL A listers and they didn’t have obvious security. Off the top of my head Nicole Kidman, J Lo, the late Larry King, Jennifer Garner, Charlize Theron, the Olsen twins…heck even Jon Hamm started chatting with me! No one in LA/NY and I’m sure most major cities takes pictures of celebrities in nice restaurants.





sdkitty said:


> John Hamm.....I'm jealous


I saw Jon Hamm at a restaurant in Martha’s Vineyard and he was so handsome I almost passed out.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw Jon Hamm at a restaurant in Martha’s Vineyard and he was so handsome I almost passed out.


he is so handsome, like an old school movie star.....I'm thinking montgomery clift
I don't know why he didn't get some real leading movie roles after Madmen...but he is working and its not over yet


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> he is so handsome, like an old school movie star.....I'm thinking montgomery clift
> I don't know why he didn't get some real leading movie roles after Madmen...but he is working and its not over yet


Could be because he was involved in some nasty, very ugly frat boy stuff when in college?   Google is our friend.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I watched this video with a little more attention, and it's quite intriguing towards the end (it starts at about 5:08)… it seems to claim that it was Doria who engineered the split between TM and MM…



Tom described D as ‘an odd woman’.  I want to check with our experts, just so I am clear.  Does that mean something different in the UK than it does in the US?   Is that a common description used in the UK?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> Is Amaz*n helping to suffocate TB's book? Come on Bezos sell the book, you can do it!
> View attachment 5539539
> 
> _Feared British biographer Tom Bower is due to publish his long-anticipated new book about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, on Thursday, July 21.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan Book Will Be 'Suffocated Out' in U.S. Despite Bombshells
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have been urged not to overreact to a bombshell biography that targeted their cherished relationship with Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Bit the bullet for the team.   Mine will come from the UK and upon receipt and reading will be happy to send it on.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Home | Soul-Satisfying Urban Italian Menu Locanda Verde in New York, NY
> 
> 
> Locanda Verde is our TriBeCa neighborhood taverna serving Chef Andrew Carmellini's soul-satisfying urban Italian menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.locandaverdenyc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> &
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn’t get the royal treatment when they dined at Italian restaurant Locanda Verde in Tribeca on Monday night.
> 
> “There was lots and lots of security all throughout the restaurant, but they weren’t in [a] private room,” a source exclusively told Page Six on Tuesday, adding that they were “seated in the middle of the busy restaurant.”
> 
> We’re told that other patrons dining at the NYC hotspot that evening were told by the Sussexes’ security team that they would be “asked to leave” if they tried to snap any photos of the royal pair.
> 
> But the Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday at a nearby table.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


How can private security legally remove diners from a public restaurant for using their phones?  I do not think that would stand. They certainly could not physically touch you.  Further, sitting in the center of a venue is not safe.  There is a reason interviewers or executives sit in the  power position of “back to the wall.”


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tom described D as ‘an odd woman’.  I want to check with our experts, just so I am clear.  Does that mean something different in the UK than it does in the US?   Is that a common description used in the UK?


I believe it means 'strange,' but will wait for additional input.


----------



## bag-mania

What if the table next to them wanted to take photos of their birthday party? Would they be told by management that they would have to wait until their dinner was over and to take photos when they were out on the sidewalk because Meghan might be in the shot? The arrogance of their demands.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be because he was involved in some nasty, very ugly frat boy stuff when in college?   Google is our friend.


really?  but that would be many years ago.  don't know how nasty ...had not hear that


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> commerce needs women to feel anxious about our looks in order to sell us whatever their version of what beauty is at any given time.



"Hope in a jar!"



papertiger said:


> The dentist tried to sell me Botox last week  . I know it's an optional treatment for teeth-grinding (forgotten the actual condition again) but the way the dentist tried to sell it to me was that the side-effects could be a cosmetic advantage (too).



I've heard that many dentists are getting into cosmetic procedures, especially lip fillers, since a large part of their very job is giving shots in the mouth and they are extremely adept at it. 



papertiger said:


> Women have been made more avaricious consumers only because *they are easier* to embarrass or *to provoke fear into*



Political operatives know this all too well for manipulation purposes.  "You can only be saved by voting for XYZ!", "Your life/family/bla bla bla's survival depends voting for XYZ!", "If you don't vote for XYZ then you're a traitor/hater/misogynist" or other hyperbolic language that plays on emotions and guilt. It's easier to manipulate somebody into doing something than it is to persuade through logic and reason. 



papertiger said:


> We can have feelings, we just have to learn how to control them.



Yes. In addition, we have to recognize when we're being played for somebody else's personal gain through emotion and/or guilt, not logic.


----------



## youngster

Lodpah said:


> Imagine if she had her dad close to her? He could have traveled with her and do ALL her lighting. After all *he’s an academy award winning lighting person*.



Her Dad won an Emmy, not an Oscar.  Still, I'm sure he knows his lighting.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be because he was involved in some nasty, very ugly frat boy stuff when in college?   Google is our friend.


 Wow wow wow. I have never heard that, but not terribly surprised. It's tragic that young men are still dying as a result of this institutionally accepted sociopathic behavior in the name of "brotherhood".  

An acquaintance of mine met him some years ago at a small in-home political fundraiser and said he was really handsome in person but clearly had been drinking prior to his arrival.  I think that was a problem too, but I believe he's cleaned it up. Playing Don Draper may not have been a real stretch for him.


----------



## LizzieBennett

sdkitty said:


> really?  but that would be many years ago.  don't know how nasty ...had not hear that


Doesn’t he have problems with alcohol?   I think that may be an issue with his career.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I've heard that many dentists are getting into cosmetic procedures, especially lip fillers, since a large part of their very job is giving shots in the mouth and they are extremely adept at it.


I've seen this. If I want it I'll go to a dermatologist. I was taken aback when I saw a sign offering it at my former Ob/Gyn's office.


----------



## Chanbal

By Amber Athey:   


_Prince Harry, who only lives here because his wife dreams of doing animated voiceovers for Netflix, routinely opines on our Constitution with all of the British pomposity that led to the Revolutionary War. Newsflash: Americans do not like it when foreigners tell us what to do or how we should feel. And yet Prince Harry (do I even have to use his title anymore?) is too arrogant and lacking in self awareness to sit down and shut up._



			archive.ph


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> Any real NY denizen took one look at them and labeled them tourists. Out of towners! A dreaded label by NYC standards. *Bridge and Tunnel crowd is second to that.*



  In Chicago one of the derisive equivalent terms is "708'ers" as in "seven-oh-eighters" in reference to a non-Chicago proper telephone area code.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I am very non-confrontational in real life. But you bet if some random security guy came up to me and tried to intimidate me I would have had a few things to say. Who do these people think they are.


For sure, I would immediately have started taking pictures and would have created quite the scene if told to leave. Their nerve knows no bounds.


----------



## mellibelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw Jon Hamm at a restaurant in Martha’s Vineyard and he was so handsome I almost passed out.





sdkitty said:


> he is so handsome, like an old school movie star.....I'm thinking montgomery clift
> I don't know why he didn't get some real leading movie roles after Madmen...but he is working and its not over yet


He’s soo handsome. I was a huge fan of Mad Men and his turn as Liz Lemon’s dumb ex bf on 30 Rock. He sat next to me at a restaurant bar and started talking to me

Isn’t he in the new Top Gun? He seems to work consistently in movies.


----------



## mellibelly

LizzieBennett said:


> Doesn’t he have problems with alcohol?   I think that may be an issue with his career.


Yes I hate to mention this, but when I met him he was clearly buzzed if not a little drunk. He smelled strongly of alcohol. This was pre-Covid so hopefully he’s cleaned up since then. 

To bring this back to the Harkles, this handsome star doesn’t have security so why does a Z lister no one would recognize?


----------



## mellibelly

bellecate said:


> For sure, I would immediately have started taking pictures and would have created quite the scene if told to leave. Their nerve knows no bounds.


Same! I promise if they move to LA and I see them, I’ll take pics and post them here for all of us to laugh over Worth it!!


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> He’s soo handsome. I was a huge fan of Mad Men and his turn as Liz Lemon’s dumb ex bf on 30 Rock. He sat next to me at a restaurant bar and started talking to me
> 
> Isn’t he in the new Top Gun? He seems to work consistently in movies.


yes, he is in top gun - a supporting role I guess.  He needs a real leading man role in a movie.  I would have been so excited if he talked to me.  lucky you


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the secret project the Harkles have with the NM foundation has to do with Life Coaching.

Below is a video on Hazz and Life Coaching that should be watched by people that receive such services.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the secret project the Harkles have with the NM foundation has to do with Life Coaching.
> 
> Below is a video on Hazz and Life Coaching that should be watched by people that receive such services.



I was just going to post this! He’s ESPECIALLY dry and funny in this one.


----------



## Chanbal

I need to stop posting today, but… Enjoy! 










						Harry's a lost soul who thinks he's Mandela - he's not fit to sew his shirt
					

WHEN I first heard Prince Harry was making a speech to honour Nelson Mandela Day, my first, and indeed only, thought was this: why? Of all the eight billion people on Planet Earth, is there anyone …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama




----------



## bag-mania

Harry the human root canal! That is exactly how I’m going to think of him.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5539670


Consider the source. Like wow Super woke MSNBC wrote this about them

oh and FYI, MM offered the bottle of water to someone she knew, ie the lady instrumental in organizing the speech , so not a random act of kindness 

And finally, yes, Sophie Wessex addressed the full-up UN General Assembly. The UNGA does not meet until the fall, this was a mini-me UNGA, with one seat in ten filled


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5539670


I found this part of the opinion piece hilarious: "...when he did mention Mandela’s great deeds, the prince said “that doesn’t mean he was perfect. No. he was something better. He was human.” I'm not sure what that meant, but I do know it allowed Harry to sound reverent without really saying anything."


----------



## Genie27

Wait, aren’t we all human? 

Also in that article someone posted earlier today about Gloria S - a quote halfway through she talks about money and how we should use it to link rather than rank us. 

Ugh Methane. There ya go plagiarizing again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #3
					

The ginger haired one has no idea why the world is laughing and cringing at him today which is a big part of the problem. You would think th...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## mellibelly

Taz confirmed the Dilettante Duke and it’s wife arrived by private jet and a fleet of SUVs. The nerve of the “cucked plonker” bringing up climate change to the UN


----------



## andrashik

mellibelly said:


> He’s soo handsome. I was a huge fan of Mad Men and his turn as Liz Lemon’s dumb ex bf on 30 Rock. He sat next to me at a restaurant bar and started talking to me
> 
> Isn’t he in the new Top Gun? He seems to work consistently in movies.


What do you think of Charlie Hunnam? I saw him in a movie and fell in love instantly.
To stay on topic, yeah Claw is nasty!


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Taz confirmed the Dilettante Duke and it’s wife arrived by private jet and a fleet of SUVs. The nerve of the “cucked plonker” bringing up climate change to the UN



From Page Six: "_Meghan Markle may not be royalty in the US, but she acted like “a princess” while dining at hip eatery Locanda Verde with Prince Harry Monday night, a spy said.

“[She] asked the people at Locanda Verde to have the entire inner outdoor courtyard – which seats 50 – for herself and four people, including Prince Harry,” a source told Page Six."_


----------



## Yanca

Their supporters call those who questions them haters or hating them for no reason, but the most, myself included are just astounded by their sheer hypocrisy and seemingly dishonesty and insincerity. Compassion in action- their motto,  service is universal, their charities etc, but what have they done really, aside from the Puff PR pieces and attention- the wife seemed to crave, and cherish.  From what I can gather, all they have done is donate food ( food truck, bagels, packed lunch) , snacks- chips and drinks  and coffee  gift cards here and there- knowing the Organizations will write and tweet about it- and they will come across as humanitarians , that are changing the world if they are activist- have they really made any Huge difference or changes? charity begins at home but they are estranged with both side of their families, they want to silenced those that ask legitimate questions about them- private jets, outfits and jewelries that costs thousands but always preaching the common people, using other people kids image - The royal kids in the jubilee, the kids in California preschool) while not willing to show their own kids - which is acceptable but why do it to other people kids then?  Hates the Royal family but uses the titles , The wife even used her initials with a crown on a letter to a charity- signed as the Duchess of Sussex. They just want adoration and to accept what they have to say- but what they say is mostly noise- like Prince H United Nation speech, what will it do really? - aside from numerous mention on TV and websites. All they have pledge to do or accomplish is still yet to be witness- Spotify, books, Netflix, I just don't feel the sincerity and dedication in what they do, it seemed it's mostly just to satisfy The wife's need to be in the news. All they do seemed contrived, calculated and staged- even the paparazzi photos .  The mainstream media always seem to cater to them and  are unwilling to report news that are unfavorable  - and show both sides- like the Tom Bower book- why is not available for pre order at Amazon in the US? why is not being talked about?  It's up to the readers to discern if its gossip, untruths or the facts- if its not the truth they seem to sue  for every little thing- why are we not hearing any threats from  the wife? If she has nothing her PR and her should not be afraid or prevent it from being sold. If they are really just humanitarians just wanting to change the world for the better- then they have to work harder and show something tangible.


----------



## Chanbal

One more headline about Hazz's performance at UN




			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/prince-harry-addressing-an-almost-empty-room-at-un-is-a-new-low/news-story/7776918d66dbafef244bb87df4fb9db4


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Taz confirmed the Dilettante Duke and it’s wife arrived by private jet and a fleet of SUVs. The nerve of the “cucked plonker” bringing up climate change to the UN



I had not seen the clip where he pulls his hand away and she grabs it back with both of hers. Unbelievable. This will not end well.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> If Harry stopped banging on about his wife, his kids, and his Mom, what would he have to talk about? Those are literally his life achievements.


I don't think having her as his wife is much of an achievement...


----------



## purseinsanity

PurseUOut said:


> She's a mother of two young children. Perhaps she was incredibly moved as we all should be when tragedies like this happen. She showed up with ONE security guard, donated blood, brought food. There was no cameras she brought. She never even introduced herself. No footage showing her saying anything. Unless her presence was offensive to you.
> 
> I think there is a bigger issue here than Meghan - 21 souls perished needlessly because of neglectful and corrupt efforts to restrict reasonable gun legislation in America.


Meghan...is that YOU!??!


----------



## bellecate

The delusions are strong with the sugars.  
Edited to add a couple of comments. They are every bit as delusional as well.


----------



## jelliedfeels

@PurseUOut 
I do agree that I feel awful bringing this up again as the coverage of M’s trip to  Uvalde was a disgraceful incident and the press who covered it as well as Meghan should be deeply embarrassed that they trivialised such a horrific incident and stole the narrative away from the important discussion of gun control. 

Maybe M went there with the best of intentions and maybe she couldn’t help the press taking photos of her and interviewing people who met her and running with the story. Maybe. 

But isn’t it a little odd that if we compare that  to their trip to this Italian restaurant or the nightclub? Evidently the press knew they were there and got little sound bites about what happened but weirdly enough there’s no pictures of H&M swigging champagne or stuffing their faces with Italian sausage . 

Their security seemed more than able to contain everyone in a public space of hundreds but couldn’t cover M for ten minutes while she laid flowers?

 I mean all she needed was 3 big guys standing on either side and behind her and they couldn’t have got a shot of her at the graves and apparently she travels with security everywhere


----------



## Chanbal

Amaz*n is still not selling Tom Bower's book in the US or making it easy to get it from the UK. This is their message when trying to get the kindle version:



Amaz*n UK delivers to the US, but charges £11.55 for shipping.



I ordered the paperback version from Book D, and I'm afraid it may be released at a later date.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Just a little musing…

I am one of the more lively critics of both of this couple’s physical appearance on this thread. Some people have expressed the opinion that it is is cruel or misogynistic to criticise their looks especially M’s as she is a middle-aged woman and we should stick to the already rich vein of the iniquities of their actions and their poor characters.

They do have a point. Of course actions are more important than appearance. Of course it can be galling to see womens’ looks compared to each other like poodles at the dog show.

However, I think it’s permissible for two reasons.

 1. These people are influencers and they are essentially trying to sell us their appearance and lifestyle and as I’ve said before if it’s up for sale it’s up for review.

2, these two clearly have a strong belief in their moral superiority. I don’t know if the critique seen in many articles that H’s speech about Mandela was self-serving and didn’t discuss Mandela at all would penetrate the skull. I highly doubt M feels an inch of regret that *somehow* all her (financially) modest and private gestures of support to charities keep getting leaked to the press or suggestions that she might consider a more effective method of philanthropy than in-person photographed food drops.

To put it simply, the opinion of the common man on what actually counts in life is of little account to them.

HOWEVER, we do know they read about themselves very fastidiously and several sources have suggested what really grinds their gears is jokes or comments about their looks- like M complaining about her feet on suits or H’s hilarious hair photoshops. That’s what actually gets to them. People questioning if they really are literally the ‘beautiful people’.

Therefore I respectfully submit that some good does come out of the insults after all….


----------



## xincinsin

I was thinking about the Meghan public image which simultaneously uses the contradictory concepts of the eternal victim and the strong feminist.  Would people vote for someone who uses "The World is Unfair to Me" platform?


----------



## pukasonqo

mellibelly said:


> Yes I hate to mention this, but when I met him he was clearly buzzed if not a little drunk. He smelled strongly of alcohol. This was pre-Covid so hopefully he’s cleaned up since then.
> 
> To bring this back to the Harkles, this handsome star doesn’t have security so why does a Z lister no one would recognize?



Because without the security bringing up attention by ensuring their privacy nobody would know or care who they are…a legend in their own lunchtime
And that applies to many celebrities and some  nonentities


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I've seen this. If I want it I'll go to a dermatologist. I was taken aback when I saw a sign offering it at my former Ob/Gyn's office.



My ENT (funnily in German it's TNE) does a plethora of cosmetic surgeries including breast implants. WTF. Also I've seen one if his rhinoplasties and it's not attractive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Amaz*n is still not selling Tom Bower's book in the US or making it easy to get it from the UK. This is their message when trying to get the kindle version:
> View attachment 5539749
> 
> 
> Amaz*n UK delivers to the US, but charges £11.55 for shipping.
> View attachment 5539747
> 
> 
> I ordered the paperback version from Book D, and I'm afraid it may be released at a later date.



Yeah, you need to use a VPN to be able to buy it. Even with my German account I can't buy a German e-book if I'm in the US.


----------



## papertiger

UK readers (perhaps international too?):

Available for pre-order through Waterstones for £18.99:



			https://www.waterstones.com/book/revenge/tom-bower/9781788705035
		


Strange the 'reviews' are allowed when it's not even out yet. Don't you have to buy things to comment on them?


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> The ponytail may be to cope with the hot humid weather. Kate did a ponytail in Jamaica. Sometimes you just have to give in to Mother Nature. And summer in NY is the worst imo. I could have joined my husband there for a work event this week. He has a huge suite at a very nice midtown hotel, but I said no thanks. 95 for the next few days.


The weather in NYC right now is very hot, humid, and muggy. However, TW is being driven around NYC in an air conditioned SUV. She only has to take a few steps in the hot weather from her vehicle straight into an air conditioned restaurant where they’ve got the AC cranked on high. Some smaller restaurants may not have super AC but a place like Locando Verde absolutely would have the AC blasting away so she could have worn her hair down regardless of the outside temps. So I assume her pony tail is a deliberate fashion choice as opposed to something dictated by the weather. A lot of New Yorkers wear black even in the summer so I don’t see her choice of a black outfit for dining out in the summer as being inappropriate. I don’t think it’s a fabulous look on her but it’s not the worst thing I’ve seen her wear except for the clutch which really looks out of place with that outfit style wise and color wise. The other thing about NYC is there are many many restaurants where celebrities can dine without worrying about paps lurking waiting to take their picture. Locando Verde given it’s location in the Greenwich Hotel is one of the restaurants more likely to have a pap or two lurking outside since celebrities have been known to stay at that hotel and eat at that restaurant and there is the Robert De Niro connection. I believe he still owns Locando Verde. So there’s a high probability that TW either alerted the paps or knew they were already there when she chose that restaurant.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> By Amber Athey:
> View attachment 5539662
> 
> _Prince Harry, who only lives here because his wife dreams of doing animated voiceovers for Netflix, routinely opines on our Constitution with all of the British pomposity that led to the Revolutionary War. Newsflash: Americans do not like it when foreigners tell us what to do or how we should feel. And yet Prince Harry (do I even have to use his title anymore?) is too arrogant and lacking in self awareness to sit down and shut up._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Believe me when I say, the British public want him to shut-up too


----------



## xincinsin

Do you get the feeling that some "wise person" once told them: "_To lead, all you have to do is point the way. You do not actually have to lead the way_"? And hence they are busy opining from any platform money can buy, but they don't actually *do* anything worthwhile for their causes. (And I keep seeing Emperor Palpatine in my mind's eye...)


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Home | Soul-Satisfying Urban Italian Menu Locanda Verde in New York, NY
> 
> 
> Locanda Verde is our TriBeCa neighborhood taverna serving Chef Andrew Carmellini's soul-satisfying urban Italian menu.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.locandaverdenyc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> &
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle didn’t get the royal treatment when they dined at Italian restaurant Locanda Verde in Tribeca on Monday night.
> 
> “There was lots and lots of security all throughout the restaurant, but they weren’t in [a] private room,” a source exclusively told Page Six on Tuesday, adding that they were “seated in the middle of the busy restaurant.”
> 
> We’re told that other patrons dining at the NYC hotspot that evening were told by the Sussexes’ security team that they would be “asked to leave” if they tried to snap any photos of the royal pair.
> 
> But the Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday at a nearby table.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle acted like ‘a princess’ while dining at NYC restaurant with Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex didn’t seem to mind interacting with the other diners and Markle even approached a person celebrating their birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I’ve been in many restaurants in NYC when celebs were dining there and have never had the celebs’ security wander around telling other diners that they would be booted out of the restaurant if they took shots of the celebs. Of course I’ve never tried taking photos of any celebs I’ve encountered in restaurants so can’t say if someone would have come up to me afterwards to tell me I shouldn‘t have taken the shots. But if I had been in the restaurant when the Gruesome Twosome’s security started throwing their weight around in this manner, I would have complained to management about the unnecessary disruption to my dining experience. So many of the finer dining restaurants have private rooms so it’s absolutely a play for attention by the needy Z-lister for them to be seated in the main dining room having their security bother other diners who probably could not have cared less about those two.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Do you get the feeling that some "wise person" once told them: "_To lead, all you have to do is point the way. You do not actually have to lead the way_"? And hence they are busy opining from any platform money can buy, but they don't actually *do* anything worthwhile for their causes. (And I keep seeing Emperor Palpatine in my mind's eye...)



I don't know if you've ever seen the film _Smashing_, it was a 1960s spoof on what they saw of talentless teenagers becoming stars in the 1960s entertainment world. It basically is seen from a cynical POV that the general public don't care about talent or values, they  will be buy (into) anything they're told to buy into.

PR firms  like  - sucks basically keep the narrative rolling (I mean narrative in the original media studies sense- not just a fashionable word for content, plot or story): If we say H&M are X, Y & Z enough then people will believe it.

I'm not pro/anti Amber Heard, but you saw her utter _puzzlement_ at why she was questioned over her financial "pledge" to charity questioned. We read about large charity donations being pledged or 'going to' good causes in the papers/online every day so we assume people take a glimpse and question no further, story and narrative as one. However, if you look at the set-up or what's being pushed or drip-fed to us, the narrative (Amber gives to charity) is at odds with the truth (Amber doesn't give to charity).

We have constantly been criticised on this thread for reading the metanarrative logically. It's only now that experts in the respective fields are asking questions and unpicking the BS publicly that support what most of us have been saying all along. As you say, H&M do nothing except tell the world how wonderful they are through PR and spin, not only living like gods but regarded as angels.

IMO, Harry will not be able to carry on delivering keynote speeches in important international organisations and places for too much longer. Firstly, he's not good enough (born to it is obviously not good enough) secondly, he doesn't have anyone to write adequate speeches (read UN speech  ) and thirdly the BRF will be holding a family summit on crisis management and future strategy as I write this  . They cannot control Megatron, but we know she's not invite worthy without him, even in the US she's still someone's wife. They are pap-worthy, the photos still have reach, but, like the Ks, they are only photo-op-deep. If you're not merching influencers based on image, there's no point (to their only successful worth and function).

As you say, bottom line, it's hard to command attention and make people engage if you've done nothing (or not much) and have no relatable values (hence the obsessive emphasis on their nuclear family - even though they estrange their own) and lack of authenticity. She's a bad actor because he can't stop ACTING, and he's a bad actor because he's had no training and thinks it's birthright to be perfect so doesn't train or practice. Throughout their respective lives they've had people make them look good. Unfortunately, they don't know how to do it for themselves.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> I have a public announcement to make:
> 
> Never, ever, stand on the edge of a wide-angle group shot.
> 
> View attachment 5539498





papertiger said:


> I have a public announcement to make:
> 
> Never, ever, stand on the edge of a wide-angle group shot.
> 
> View attachment 5539498



LOL, I learned it the hard way aswell: at my grandaughter's christening I ended up on the side of the group photo and it made me look almost fat (I'm skinny really!) not quite as bad as ZedZed though


----------



## Pivoine66

DoggieBags said:


> I’ve been in many restaurants in NYC when celebs were dining there and have never had the celebs’ security wander around telling other diners that they would be booted out of the restaurant if they took shots of the celebs. Of course I’ve never tried taking photos of any celebs I’ve encountered in restaurants so can’t say if someone would have come up to me afterwards to tell me I shouldn‘t have taken the shots. But if I had been in the restaurant when the Gruesome Twosome’s security started throwing their weight around in this manner, I would have complained to management about the unnecessary disruption to my dining experience. So many of the finer dining restaurants have private rooms so it’s *absolutely a play for attention by the needy Z-lister* for them to be seated in the main dining room having their security bother other diners who probably could not have cared less about those two.


Exactly that in my personal opinion.
Some security walking around a discreet restaurant giving instructions? That sounds IMPO so much like the idea of a classless social climber who thinks she has to show off her (IMO so evident new) status. Cheap is cheap?
(My DH would have calmly asked for the bill.) (Edited to insert: and henceforth he would probably no longer find this restaurant in his selection.
To my surprise he offered me his opinion here, although he usually prefers to focus his thoughts on other things in life.)
.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bellecate said:


> The delusions are strong with the sugars.
> Edited to add a couple of comments. They are every bit as delusional as well.
> 
> View attachment 5539750
> 
> 
> View attachment 5539751



Esinam Mizen sounded like PurseUOut with the self-aware description of Z-list


----------



## EverSoElusive

These are uber realistic (yet creepy) silicone baby dolls. Very talented lady, just in case Z-list needs to get one made


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m so annoyed that Amazon isn’t doing preorders for the Bower book.


----------



## papertiger

Dare I say it, Amazon is not the only book shop in the world. 

I am not affiliated in anyway to them, but: 

for non-UK members *Waterstones* do delivery to the following destinations: 

Åland Islands, Albania, Algeria, American Samoa, Andorra, Angola, Anguilla, Antarctica, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Australia, Austria, Azores, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bhutan, Bolivia, Plurinational State of, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bouvet Island, Brazil, British Indian Ocean Territory, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Canary Islands, Cape Verde, Cayman Islands, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Christmas Island, Cocos, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Congo, The ********ic Republic of The, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Curaçao, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Falkland Islands, Faroe Islands, Fiji, Finland, France, French Guiana, French Polynesia, French Southern Territories, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Gibraltar, Greece, Greenland, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Guam, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lao People's ********ic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macao, Macedonia, Madagascar, Madeira, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Martinique, Mauritius, Mayotte, Mexico, Micronesia, Federated States of, Moldova, Republic of, Monaco, Montenegro, Montserrat, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Niue, Norfolk Island, Northern Mariana Islands, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Palestine, State of, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Pitcairn, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Qatar, Réunion, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Barthélemy, Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan Da Cunha, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Martin, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Saint Vincent and The Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sint Maarten, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Svalbard and Jan Mayen, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tokelau, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turks and Caicos Islands, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States Minor Outlying Islands, United States Of America, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of, Viet Nam, Virgin Islands, British, Virgin Islands, U.S., Wallis and Futuna, Western Sahara, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

£9 to Europe + £1 for additional items 
£12.50 to other destinations + £1 for additional items 


There is also AbeBooks 






						Revenge Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors - AbeBooks
					

Review of Tom Bower Book Revenge : Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors by Noah, Ethon and a great selection of related books, art and collectibles available now at AbeBooks.co.uk.



					www.abebooks.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'll have to check my Amazon account past midnight (in the US) to see if the Kindle e-book is sent to my account   Fingers crossed. Hopefully the book is as good as the excerpts that have been shared.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Dare I say it, Amazon is not the only book shop in the world.
> 
> I am not affiliated in anyway to them, but:
> 
> for non-UK members *Waterstones* do delivery to the following destinations:
> 
> Åland Islands, Albania, Algeria, American Samoa, Andorra, Angola, Anguilla, Antarctica, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Aruba, Australia, Austria, Azores, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bermuda, Bhutan, Bolivia, Plurinational State of, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bouvet Island, Brazil, British Indian Ocean Territory, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Canary Islands, Cape Verde, Cayman Islands, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Christmas Island, Cocos, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Congo, The ********ic Republic of The, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Curaçao, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Falkland Islands, Faroe Islands, Fiji, Finland, France, French Guiana, French Polynesia, French Southern Territories, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Gibraltar, Greece, Greenland, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Guam, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lao People's ********ic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macao, Macedonia, Madagascar, Madeira, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Martinique, Mauritius, Mayotte, Mexico, Micronesia, Federated States of, Moldova, Republic of, Monaco, Montenegro, Montserrat, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Niue, Norfolk Island, Northern Mariana Islands, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Palestine, State of, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Pitcairn, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Qatar, Réunion, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Barthélemy, Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan Da Cunha, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Martin, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, Saint Vincent and The Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sint Maarten, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Svalbard and Jan Mayen, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tokelau, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turks and Caicos Islands, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States Minor Outlying Islands, United States Of America, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vatican City, Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of, Viet Nam, Virgin Islands, British, Virgin Islands, U.S., Wallis and Futuna, Western Sahara, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
> 
> £9 to Europe + £1 for additional items
> £12.50 to other destinations + £1 for additional items
> 
> 
> There is also AbeBooks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revenge Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors - AbeBooks
> 
> 
> Review of Tom Bower Book Revenge : Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors by Noah, Ethon and a great selection of related books, art and collectibles available now at AbeBooks.co.uk.
> 
> 
> 
> www.abebooks.co.uk


You’re right, I just like my kindle.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> You’re right, I just like my kindle.



For sure, and I can totally understand, but isn't interesting that a decision by A-mazon, a single distributor has such power over what we read.

I am not. conspiracy theory fan but the first thing that a dictatorship, coup or revolution do when they want to size power is take over broadcasting, information and publishing centres.


----------



## Chanbal

Pivoine66 said:


> Exactly that in my personal opinion.
> *Some security walking around a discreet restaurant giving instructions? *That sounds IMPO so much like the idea of a classless social climber who thinks she has to show off her (IMO so evident new) status. Cheap is cheap?
> (My DH would have calmly asked for the bill.) (Edited to insert: and henceforth he would probably no longer find this restaurant in his selection.
> To my surprise he offered me his opinion here, although he usually prefers to focus his thoughts on other things in life.)
> .


If it is true that the restaurant allowed the Harkles' bodyguards to give instructions to other patrons is totally unacceptable. Otherwise, the restaurant seems to have been fine. The Harkles' apparent demands for a private area that was previously reserved for other people were denied.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> For sure, and I can totally understand, but isn't interesting that a decision by A-mazon, a single distributor has such power over what we read.
> 
> I am not. conspiracy theory fan but the first thing that a dictatorship, coup or revolution do when they want to size power is take over broadcasting, information and publishing centres.


Yes, I hate it.  I heard on a podcast a few months ago that at one point no matter what you searched for in books Michelle Obamas book would show up as a result. Nothing against her just saying that they sell what they want to sell.


----------



## zen1965

papertiger said:


> _That_ jumpsuit


Thank you for this!
It is horrendous, particularly the back.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Some of the comments are hilarious…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

andrashik said:


> What do you think of Charlie Hunnam? I saw him in a movie and fell in love instantly.
> To stay on topic, yeah Claw is nasty!


liked him in Sons of Anarchy


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



He really needs a hair stylist ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

This cannot be emphasized enough - plus those tanning lotion lines are gross.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> The weather in NYC right now is very hot, humid, and muggy. However, TW is being driven around NYC in an air conditioned SUV. She only has to take a few steps in the hot weather from her vehicle straight into an air conditioned restaurant where they’ve got the AC cranked on high. Some smaller restaurants may not have super AC but a place like Locando Verde absolutely would have the AC blasting away so she could have worn her hair down regardless of the outside temps. So I assume her pony tail is a deliberate fashion choice as opposed to something dictated by the weather. A lot of New Yorkers wear black even in the summer so I don’t see her choice of a black outfit for dining out in the summer as being inappropriate. I don’t think it’s a fabulous look on her but it’s not the worst thing I’ve seen her wear except for the clutch which really looks out of place with that outfit style wise and color wise. The other thing about NYC is there are many many restaurants where celebrities can dine without worrying about paps lurking waiting to take their picture. Locando Verde given it’s location in the Greenwich Hotel is one of the restaurants more likely to have a pap or two lurking outside since celebrities have been known to stay at that hotel and eat at that restaurant and there is the Robert De Niro connection. I believe he still owns Locando Verde. So there’s a high probability that TW either alerted the paps or knew they were already there when she chose that restaurant.


as far as the hair, the pony would not be susceptible to humidity I don't think since it's not her hair.  The part growing from the scalp might be.  I have curly hair but I've never had a chemical straightening like keratin so IDK if humidity will affect hair like that.  I do know that humidity is a biatch for NC hair that's not treated.  Just walking from the limo to the indoors would be enough to get you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

W&K coming to Boston in December  
  Phew, a dose of sanity will be exactly what we all need.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I swear CeeJay told us parts of this story.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> W&K coming to Boston in December
> Phew, a dose of sanity will be exactly what we all need.


I saw people wondering if the bozos would attend.  I highly doubt it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Some of the comments are hilarious…



That was fantastic!


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s worth a try [and it *is* time]


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I am not. conspiracy theory fan but the first thing that a dictatorship, coup or revolution do when they want to size power is take over broadcasting, information and publishing centres.


I love conspiracy theories so here it goes. You cannot buy Tom Bower’s new book from any US outlet at the moment. Maybe it is as simple as being a distribution issue, but the fact that it was available and then it was pulled raises red flags. Even Apple had to take the audio version down.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I love conspiracy theories so here it goes. You cannot buy Tom Bower’s new book from any US outlet at the moment. Maybe it is as simple as being a distribution issue, but the fact that it was available and then it was pulled raises red flags. Even Apple had to take the audio version down.
> 
> View attachment 5571797


so what do you think?  there have been lots of unauthorized bios that the subjects weren't happy about.  are you thinking there is some sort of legal action here?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sign the petition, call your congressperson, send him back.  He has meddled enough in our politics and our commerce.
It will only get worse.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sign the petition, call your congressperson, send him back.  He has meddled enough in our politics and our commerce.


he's doing a good job making a fool of himself w/o our help


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I love conspiracy theories so here it goes. *You cannot buy Tom Bower’s new book from any US outlet at the moment. *Maybe it is as simple as being a distribution issue, but the fact that it was available and then it was pulled raises red flags. Even Apple had to take the audio version down.
> 
> View attachment 5571797


----------



## CarryOn2020

Support our freedoms!
If we don’t support our freedoms, they will surely take them away.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sign the petition, call your congressperson, send him back.  He has meddled enough in our politics and our commerce.
> It will only get worse.



Can't you send him to (another) a little island somewhere? 

Plenty of options: Alcatraz; Guantanamo; Cuba etc


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> Some of the comments are hilarious…




I deliberately refuse to hear H's speach, but the part shown in this video is nuts!!!! I'm amazed that anyone let him say those things!!!!! I don't know the journalist but he is so right!!!!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Well, TBF, someone bought that hideous jumpsuit for $4K + so it shows us anything's possible


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Can't you send him to (another) a little island somewhere?
> 
> Plenty of options: Alcatraz; Guantanamo; Cuba etc


We don’t care what you do with him as long as you get him outta here.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so what do you think?  there have been lots of unauthorized bios that the subjects weren't happy about.  are you thinking there is some sort of legal action here?


It would certainly fit their MO. That book could become a bestseller if it was released on time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> We don’t care what you do as long as you get him outta here.
> 
> View attachment 5571805



He's yours now, you get rid of him.

Everything has import duties here, if he comes through customs we're Returning to Sender one way >>>>>OUT>>>>>>


----------



## Chanbal

This could be a great motivational picture for kids! Look who I call if you don't do your homework.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I love it, shut that sh!t down!!!


----------



## piperdog

papertiger said:


> I think you mean the Second Wave (First wave was the Suffragettes, Suffragists and Votes for Women movement in the early 20th C). The male gaze (Mulvey '75) was how the entire world (including women) were looked at through a male (fantasy) lens, so she would probably agree with you. (Third wave) Naomi Wolf is deeply unfashionable now but she penned _The Beauty Myth_ on how commerce needs women to feel anxious about our looks in order to sell us whatever their version of what beauty is at any given time.
> 
> The dentist tried to sell me Botox last week  . I know it's an optional treatment for teeth-grinding (forgotten the actual condition again) but the way the dentist tried to sell it to me was that the side-effects could be a cosmetic advantage (too).
> 
> Women have been made more avaricious consumers only because they are easier to embarrass or to provoke fear into (see punk band, The Slits 'Typical Girls' whose original line-up didn't have much time for academic feminism themselves). Ironically, historically  (late-19C/20C) middle-class, urban European/US women experienced a kind of new freedom in the new dept stores, a place they could go publicly unchaperoned and socialise. I'm sure it was an exciting pastime for the teenage Boomers discovering their first wages could buy cool outfits in the new boutiques, meeting in groups at cafes and hanging out during shopping trips. For women shopping meant freedom to express themselves as well as a conforming to a type (appealing to men). Many working class women also found jobs in retail and the fashion industry away from traditionally dangerous factories (although those jobs with terrible conditions (esp. in fashion) still existed/exist domestically and abroad)
> 
> But yes, I agree with you. Life is a) not fair, so you have to fight for justice (not whine about it) b) realise that there is a strength that comes from living through adversity and c) be responsible (as much as possible) for yourself and stand by your own decisions.  Universities are told to support (nearly always female) students who have chosen to become sex workers. How about other work? How about taking responsibility for your own choices? How about all students being supported equally?  All these 'anti' woke films are often just as exploitative, even if they are directed by a woman (_Cuties_ included).
> 
> I'm hearing a lot of women (and men) who are older now look back on their earlier selves as teens and early 20s too with regret and see power-play and exploitation for what it was. Inexperience at the time, they were probably made to feel guilty, even for letting things happen or not speaking-up. You can't look after the teen you were back then and change history, you have to look after the person you are now, set and have clear boundaries. We can have feelings, we just have to learn how to control them.


I love and agree with every word of this. As a philosophy/political science double major at a women's college in the late 80's, I read A LOT of feminist theory. I was also very lucky to have professors who taught the full range of ideas - from Phyllis Schlafly to Catherine MacKinnon and bell hooks.  Even then Wolf was among my favorites, along with Camille Paglia, because they weren't afraid to challenge anything - including feminist orthodoxy. Consequently both are, as you said, deeply unfashionable. Sadly, I think _The Beauty Myth_ is just as applicable today as it was back then. The pressures may be more subtle than the 80s, but are far more insidious. 
And it sickens me that Meghan and Harry (in their glaring mediocrity and undeserved status) have been permitted, if not encouraged, to stand on the shoulders of the giants who did actual work for their causes through the 80s (e.g., Steinem and Mandela) and pretend to carry it forward through word salad and empty gestures while filling their own pockets. I never truly understood the how decline and fall of the great historical civilizations occurred, but now I fear we're living through the next one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> He's yours now, you get rid of him.
> 
> Everything has import duties here, if he comes through customs we're Returning to Sender one way >>>>>OUT>>>>>>


The real problem is the BRF’s failure to stop his nonsense. The title, the CoS, the financial backing, etc.  It’s all on Charles to handle, he needs to hear the roar of the people.


----------



## Jktgal

I'm very used to new releases not available to me on Kindle _initially _- it will be there eventually, usually. I suspect it's haggling for revenues between author and platform? Especially now that the book is a proven best seller. Perhaps Bower would like a larger cut of sales.


----------



## sdkitty

Jktgal said:


> I'm very used to new releases not available to me on Kindle _initially _- it will be there eventually, usually. I suspect it's haggling for revenues between author and platform? Especially now that the book is a proven best seller. Perhaps Bower would like a larger cut of sales.


I like that theory better than the idea that H&M have some sort of influence on Amazon


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> The delusions are strong with the sugars.
> Edited to add a couple of comments. They are every bit as delusional as well.
> 
> View attachment 5539750
> 
> 
> View attachment 5539751


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> Some of the comments are hilarious…



I saw that last night and was literally rolling with laughter. He was on fire!


----------



## bag-mania

Jktgal said:


> I'm very used to new releases not available to me on Kindle _initially _- it will be there eventually, usually. I suspect it's haggling for revenues between author and platform? Especially now that the book is a proven best seller. Perhaps Bower would like a larger cut of sales.


Isn’t it the publisher who works out a book’s international sales? Authors really don’t have as much power to negotiate as you would think. It is both the print and digital formats that have been pulled and are not available anywhere in the US, not just from Amazon. 

It will be telling if *@EverSoExclusive* gets her e-book tonight since she got in under the wire before it was taken down.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This could be a great motivational picture for kids! Look who I call if you don't do your homework.
> View attachment 5571806


I hope she realizes when she sees this that the tight ponytail, especially with the hair part perfectly aligned with her forehead vein, is not a good look, especially when you'll be photographed in harsh daylight. Reminds me of this


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This could be a great motivational picture for kids! Look who I call if you don't do your homework.
> View attachment 5571806


There were comments on marklenews1 about that strange vein that runs down her parting and bisects her forehead. It reminded me of that alien in Men in Black who could take off his human skin suit. Of course it's most likely a combo of bad lighting and uneven application of spray tan.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I hope she realizes when she sees this that the tight ponytail, especially with the hair part perfectly aligned with her forehead vein, is not a good look, especially when you'll be photographed in harsh daylight. Reminds me of this
> 
> View attachment 5571822


Look at my man Worf rockin’ those forehead ridges!


----------



## WingNut

charlottawill said:


> I hope she realizes when she sees this that the tight ponytail, especially with the hair part perfectly aligned with her forehead vein, is not a good look, especially when you'll be photographed in harsh daylight. Reminds me of this
> 
> View attachment 5571822


Funniest comparison I've seen. Bravo!!!!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

papertiger said:


> Believe me when I say, the British public want him to shut-up too


I am so not tech savvy.  Turning on and using my new phone was a learning curve.  Paying bills online is my only strength on a computer.    This is my question regarding TPF  thread we are on.  I used to get it pulled up automatically.  Now I need to put it in search.  Also, some days lately it will not appear even then.  Anyone else having this or a similar issue?    Thx


papertiger said:


> Believe me when I say, the British public want him to shut-up too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t it the publisher who works out a book’s international sales? Authors really don’t have as much power to negotiate as you would think. It is both the print and digital formats that have been pulled and are not available anywhere in the US, not just from Amazon.
> 
> It will be telling if *@EverSoExclusive* gets her e-book tonight since she got in under the wire before it was taken down.


I wish Piers Morgan would give us his take on it.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Consider the source. Like wow Super woke MSNBC wrote this about them
> 
> oh and FYI, MM offered the bottle of water to someone she knew, ie the lady instrumental in organizing the speech , so not a random act of kindness
> 
> And finally, yes, Sophie Wessex addressed the full-up UN General Assembly. The UNGA does not meet until the fall, this was a mini-me UNGA, with one seat in ten filled


AND more on the water bottle …
MM had a ginormous tote , if she has a purse it is typically small, so this monster tote caught my eye 
Selected to be big enough for bottle, so she could have a photo op of graciously offering the H2O ?
very careful stage managing of purse selection


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> This could be a great motivational picture for kids! Look who I call if you don't do your homework.
> View attachment 5571806


My brain automatically shifts to Ceejay mode when I enter this thread and it fixed the quote "it truly was an honor to meet her" to "*it truly was a horror to meet her"  *


----------



## marietouchet

Tee hee , tee hee .. 
Some story I found on internet , fake news maybe but I loved it too much not to share …
NETFLIX a trying to make the Harkle documentary premiere coincide with new season of THE CROWN , and release of H’s book …

the book by H is MIA
And THE CROWN … hmmm … next season will cover the uncomfortable subject of Diana’s death … nice of NETFLIX a to make coincide with Montecito-cam in the chicken coop


----------



## xincinsin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I am so not tech savvy.  Turning on and using my new phone was a learning curve.  Paying bills online is my only strength on a computer.    This is my question regarding TPF  thread we are on.  I used to get it pulled up automatically.  Now I need to put it in search.  Also, some days lately it will not appear even then.  Anyone else having this or a similar issue?    Thx


There is a feedback dropbox thread where tpfers can report issues.




__





						TPF Update Jul 14, 2022
					

Hi all,  We've just updated TPF to the latest branch of the forum software. While I am working out all the kinks still, please use this thread to post any feedback you may have so I can have it addressed.  I have disabled the achievements / gamification elements, I don't think we will need those...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> I wish Piers Morgan would give us his take on it.


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I am so not tech savvy.  Turning on and using my new phone was a learning curve.  Paying bills online is my only strength on a computer.    This is my question regarding TPF  thread we are on.  I used to get it pulled up automatically.  Now I need to put it in search.  Also, some days lately it will not appear even then.  Anyone else having this or a similar issue?    Thx



probably has to do with the update. Post here: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/tpf-update-jul-14-2022.1054130/page-5#post-35244604


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> There is a feedback dropbox thread where tpfers can report issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TPF Update Jul 14, 2022
> 
> 
> Hi all,  We've just updated TPF to the latest branch of the forum software. While I am working out all the kinks still, please use this thread to post any feedback you may have so I can have it addressed.  I have disabled the achievements / gamification elements, I don't think we will need those...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


Thanks, you got there first


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> Can't you send him to (another) a little island somewhere?
> 
> Plenty of options: Alcatraz; Guantanamo; Cuba etc


 Guantamano is in Cuba
I know Australia is an island and a continent but we certainly don’t want them here


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Guantamano is in Cuba
> I know Australia is an island and a continent but we certainly don’t want them here


You’re right! i personally don’t mind where. Surely Tasmania has a block of unused toilets


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Thanks, you got there first


Only because I went looking for it a few hours ago because the search function had failed


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> as far as the hair, the pony would not be susceptible to humidity I don't think since it's not her hair.  The part growing from the scalp might be.  I have curly hair but I've never had a chemical straightening like keratin so IDK if humidity will affect hair like that.  I do know that humidity is a biatch for NC hair that's not treated.  Just walking from the limo to the indoors would be enough to get you.


I feel like I’ve talked about the fried king rat enough already but yeah I was going to say… she isn’t worrying about it getting frizzy cos that pony definitely isn’t growing out of her scalp   


Chanbal said:


> This could be a great motivational picture for kids! Look who I call if you don't do your homework


That woman is going to be washing Dorito dust out of her hair for hours.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Can't you send him to (another) a little island somewhere?
> 
> Plenty of options: Alcatraz; Guantanamo; Cuba etc


We don't want her in Singapore either. 

May I suggest Sentinel Island?


----------



## jelliedfeels

The cargo cult to Prince Philip in Vanuatu seems the place. I would imagine their initial delight at having a relative of his to stay would transform in the most delightful way as they got to know them both. 








						The tribes mourning their 'god' Prince Philip - BBC News
					

As Britain grieves his death, so do some Pacific tribespeople who revere him as a spiritual figure.




					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## carmen56

charlottawill said:


> I hope she realizes when she sees this that the tight ponytail, especially with the hair part perfectly aligned with her forehead vein, is not a good look, especially when you'll be photographed in harsh daylight. Reminds me of this
> 
> View attachment 5571822


That’s an insult to Worf!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> You’re right! i personally don’t mind where. Surely Tasmania has a block of unused toilets



How about St. Helena? It's still technically UK but I think it's far enough and it will make them feel important 'cos that's where Napoleon was sent!


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> That’s an insult to Worf!


I can almost hear Worf’s take on Meghan now, “_She is without honor!!_”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I swear CeeJay told us parts of this story.




Yes, I remember that as well. Not the part about driving around checking mail, but the part where she didn't get the lead and lost in on TM who refused to play her nasty little games.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> He really needs a hair stylist ...


He needs a stylist as well.   I get that the suit is the Dior’s look for men but that shirt collar did him no favors.  And the tie added nothing.  He reminded me of a high school boy thinking Thom Browne suits  bring distinction because they are the newest look.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



It looks like he had his teeth removed!


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> How about St. Helena? It's still technically UK but I think it's far enough and it will make them feel important 'cos that's where Napoleon was sent!



Bit close.

What about the Falklands, Andrew can go visit them 11 months of the year  Then we'll give them to Argentina.


----------



## Swanky

Hi! Lots of topic discussion the last day or so, please stick to the topic of your 2 "favorite royals"  lol


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Support our freedoms!
> If we don’t support our freedoms, they will surely take them away.
> 
> View attachment 5571800


Wouldn't that include freedom of speech?  It would seem that there are other forces at work in North America.  Why is the new book not available here


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> There is a feedback dropbox thread where tpfers can report issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TPF Update Jul 14, 2022
> 
> 
> Hi all,  We've just updated TPF to the latest branch of the forum software. While I am working out all the kinks still, please use this thread to post any feedback you may have so I can have it addressed.  I have disabled the achievements / gamification elements, I don't think we will need those...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


Thank you


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



In his case, the clothes do not make the man. He's a messy heap, needs a good haircut, a shave and I swear I can smell an odor emanating from the screen.


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> In his case, the clothes do not make the man. He's a messy heap, needs a good haircut, a shave and I swear I can smell an odor emanating from the screen.


Yes! Weed and patchouli


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> It looks like he had his teeth removed!


Looks like one of his chickens.


----------



## Aimee3

I was wondering if one of you ladies in the UK could call Blink Publishing, an imprint of Bonnier Books Ltd. Which is the publisher of Tom Bower’s book and ask why the book doesn’t seem to be available in the USA?  Maybe they will spill the beans?


----------



## charlottawill

So are they still in NY or did they already flee to CA with tails tucked between legs?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I can almost hear Worf’s take on Meghan now, “_She is without honor!!_”


And she will not go to Sto-vo-cor. She is a p’takh!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Actually I found an email for the publisher and emailed them. Let’s see what their response is, if any!


----------



## charlottawill

This sums things up:



And:


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> In his case, the clothes do not make the man. He's a messy heap, needs a good haircut, a shave and I swear I can smell an odor emanating from the screen.


Of course he is merching. Unfortunately for the brand he looks like a hot mess and they won’t be using his picture in a promotion.   She has now convinced him to do these things, showing how he has changed.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> I was wondering if one of you ladies in the UK could call Blink Publishing, an imprint of Bonnier Books Ltd. Which is the publisher of Tom Bower’s book and ask why the book doesn’t seem to be available in the USA?  Maybe they will spill the beans?


They are now ready to ship the hardcover, but not the paperback.


----------



## gracekelly

This is really worth watching.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I like that theory better than the idea that H&M have some sort of influence on Amazon


Maybe an issue the publisher is a small independent one instead of Penguin, Random House etc.? 

Info on the Book Depository page associated with the book identifies "Bonnier Books" as publisher and "Imprint-BLINK Publisher.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t it the publisher who works out a book’s international sales? Authors really don’t have as much power to negotiate as you would think. It is both the print and digital formats that have been pulled and are not available anywhere in the US, not just from Amazon.
> 
> It will be telling if *@EverSoExclusive* gets her e-book tonight since she got in under the wire before it was taken down.




Stay tuned! I'll keep all my favorite people in this thread posted


----------



## gracekelly

According to this they fought before going to the UN. The writer is referring to that strange hand grabbing when they were seated prior to his giving the speech. 


u/AngryBees88
Commented on 23 hours ago


> The dynamic totally makes sense after viewing Princess Tiffany's video alleging that they had a huuuuuge blow-out in the hotel room before this happened. Allegedly there was a ton of broken crockery, and Meghan was screaming at Harry that he hadn't done enough to get her onstage, with Harry telling her that he can't help that the attention is on him because he was born a royal, and asking her why can't she be happy with HIS successes and opportunities? Sounds like Megs is well aware that she is NOT the draw, and is really starting to resent Harry for any positive role he is given. It would also be a typical narc move to to cause a huge blowout right before their partner has an important engagement, to throw them off their game. No wonder Harry is seething and not wanting her to take his hand, and why she clutches on even harder, trying to force him to make up with her. So disturbing. He needs to leave this unhinged witch, and soon. She will actively attempt to destroy him when the marriage is over, and he needs to get the wagons circled around him NOW, for the protection of himself and his children. Go see your dad, Harry!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> So are they still in NY or did they already flee to CA with tails tucked between legs?



I don't think Raptor is capable of that. Harry, he must notice he's a joke by now, doesn't he.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Of course he is merching. Unfortunately for the brand he looks like a hot mess and they won’t be using his picture in a promotion.   She has now convinced him to do these things, showing how he has changed.



I don't think he had a clue how hard earning a living (that suited her) would actually be, given how ill-equipped he was for it. He looks utterly miserable and older than 38. The only time I've seen him looking happy recently was while playing polo with Nacho. I almost feel sorry for him. But as they say, "Marry in haste, repent at leisure".


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think Raptor is capable of that. Harry, he must notice he's a joke by now, doesn't he.


Everyone is making fun of him. They also think she set him up. That would be pretty stupid if only because her fame comes from him, however her ego is so big she doesn’t see this entirely.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> According to this they fought before going to the UN. The writer is referring to that strange hand grabbing when they were seated prior to his giving the speech.
> 
> 
> u/AngryBees88
> Commented on 23 hours ago



I agree with her predictions of the very ugly divorce and yes, he should go see his family and ask for their support. I also do think the fight is believable, but I do wonder who was standing in front of their door to listen to their every word


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> According to this they fought before going to the UN. The writer is referring to that strange hand grabbing when they were seated prior to his giving the speech.
> 
> 
> u/AngryBees88
> Commented on 23 hours ago


Body Language Guy had a vid yesterday about why she seems to want to make him look bad.

May also explain the aggressive pelvic thrust body language from her yesterday, even on display when exiting a restaurant with Gloria. Every time I see it I think, "once a yacht girl, always a yacht girl" merching herself.

Sadly, I'm serious about this. Harry needs to be monitored during the day, mood swings, facial expressions, actions seem to indicate medications, and if so, they are no longer effective at whatever dosage he's using.


----------



## Lodpah

I read somewhere their dinner guests consisted of their staff. Do they really have “friends”? By now all those “friends” they attempted to curate, like the Clooneys and Serena must be like “oh h3ll no, don’t want to be associated with them.”

I can’t UN hear throwple. Throw up couple. Yes I did put UN by choice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Sadly, I'm serious about this. Harry needs to be monitored during the day, mood swings,



I don't say that lightly, but if something happens to him, she will have had a big part in that. She is so unbelievably toxic and he just doesn't have  the mental stability to deal with her.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> Body Language Guy had a vid yesterday about why she seems to want to make him look bad.
> 
> May also explain the aggressive pelvic thrust body language from her yesterday, even on display when exiting a restaurant with Gloria. Every time I see it I think, "once a yacht girl, always a yacht girl" merching herself.
> 
> Sadly, I'm serious about this. Harry needs to be monitored during the day, mood swings, facial expressions, actions seem to indicate medications, and if so, they are no longer effective at whatever dosage he's using.


Some people on the net says it’s just a matter of time he will implode on her publicly. After all he does not have his family around to help him. It’s just a matter of time.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> According to this they fought before going to the UN. The writer is referring to that strange hand grabbing when they were seated prior to his giving the speech.
> 
> 
> u/AngryBees88
> Commented on 23 hours ago


Honestly, this 100% makes sense with his poor showing and body language and her hand grabbing.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with her predictions of the very ugly divorce and yes, he should go see his family and ask for their support. I also do think the fight is believable, but I do wonder who was standing in front of their door to listen to their every word


The maid?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Yes, we would have heard for sure if the “friends” were anybody of note.


----------



## Lodpah

To those who attack our thread and call us racists and see TW as a perfect person I think it’s appropriate to say we here can go by this saying calling the TW by this saying:
There are lies, damned lies and statistics. She’s proven that a lot. 
I don’t know who to credit that saying but it fits. Lol.


----------



## gracekelly

They both have bad tempers and violence in their natures. Something really bad could happen. I think Thomas’ comment to Harry was not completely about Harry. I think he was telling him not to hit her back if she started up with him. There were probably tantrums of her throwing things when she was growing up. Tea throwing incident in NZ. What else? There is probably more.  Does Trevor have anything to tell?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> Some people on the net says it’s *just a matter of time he will implode on her publicly. *After all he does not have his family around to help him. It’s just a matter of time.


I'm waiting to see this happen


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think Raptor is capable of that. Harry, he must notice he's a joke by now, doesn't he.


He practically writes them for us.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> I don't think he had a clue how hard earning a living (that suited her) would actually be, given how ill-equipped he was for it. He looks utterly miserable and older than 38. The only time I've seen him looking happy recently was while playing polo with Nacho. I almost feel sorry for him. But as they say, "Marry in haste, repent at leisure".


She’s holding on till he gets his second inheritance I think I read somewhere he gets it when he turns 40?
I felt sorry for him at one point but he does seem like an abused man but he’s still an arse. 

I really wonder what she has on him. Something stupid like maybe a fetish? Harry if you are reading this it’s cool man, that’s not the worse that can happen you. 

Call EJ and take the kids out and get on that jet and bolt. She’s going to tear you down and destroy you. I think she will literally destroy guy.


----------



## Kevinaxx

Quick google for revenge book 




I’m just going to order from UK.

And with regards to the UN hand holding pic, this popped into my head as a result


----------



## rose60610

Few people have as many red flags as Claw. She doesn't communicate with any of her family, not even Doria these days as far as we know. For somebody who supposedly majored in Int'l Relations she "didn't know about the Commonwealth". When boyfriends and husbands can't be milked anymore she discards them like trash. Her "widdle girlie poo-poo" voice drives me nuts. She demanded pity for having all the riches of the BRF (well, she failed to replace Kate, boo-hoo, but she should have realized she couldn't pity her way into making Harry higher than #6). We've caught her in how many lies? Thankfully nobody gave her the time of day at the Jubilee, the BRF learned the hard way. She uses dead people for photo ops. She's so toxic and radioactive that she might as well glow in the dark.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, we would have heard for sure if the “friends” were anybody of note.


Possibly included the woman employee who had conveniently been seated behind Meghan at the UN.  The one placed so that when her  staged coughing took place "compassionate" Meghan could be observed digging into her unusually large tote to pull out a water bottle and turn around to hand it off to her. "Coincidentally" the camera was on Meghan at the exact moment.


----------



## Sophisticatted

lanasyogamama said:


> It looks like he had his teeth removed!


He looks like a cross between Beeker (Muppets) and The Farmer (Shawm the Sheep).


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> AND more on the water bottle …
> MM had a ginormous tote , if she has a purse it is typically small, so this monster tote caught my eye
> Selected to be big enough for bottle, so she could have a photo op of graciously offering the H2O ?
> very careful stage managing of purse selection


The woman was part of the Nflix crew.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jenniferlr

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with her predictions of the very ugly divorce and yes, he should go see his family and ask for their support. I also do think the fight is believable, but I do wonder who was standing in front of their door to listen to their every word


This has probably been discussed before, but I was just wondering again today if Eugenie was informally asked by the Queen to act as the family lifeline. Something along the lines "for Harry's sake, stay friendly and tolerate the wife just in case it doesn't work out and he wants to come back."  I know she gets a lot of flack for it, but if she's regularly interacting with Harry, it makes it a lot easier for him to call her and ask her for help managing an exit, without raising too many red flags in Montecito. I do imagine any kind of exit would need an element of surprise and happen along the lines of what Katie Holmes did back in the day.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't say that lightly, but if something happens to him, she will have had a big part in that. She is so unbelievably toxic and he just doesn't have  the mental stability to deal with her.



Unfortunately, I think she'd be fine with that.  Here's a horrifying thought, she could trot out the children and live out a sick Jackie O fantasy on a global stage because he's still Prince H.  

I do truly think he is nearing a breakdown and he needs someone to help him.  (Far away from the Claw.)


----------



## csshopper

Sophisticatted said:


> He looks like a cross between Beeker (Muppets) and The Farmer (Shawm the Sheep).


Looks like he’s debating if he can maybe crawl in and hide.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sophisticatted said:


> He looks like a cross between Beeker (Muppets) and The Farmer (Shawm the Sheep).


I’d much rather meet either of those two than Hawwy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I swear CeeJay told us parts of this story.



Yes, dear CeeJay *knew*.  Here is the video - 6 mins of her nasal voice :


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Charles, Camilla, MI6 [7 or 8 or whatever], we beg you. Get this guy help.  It will only get worse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> In his case, the clothes do not make the man. He's a messy heap, needs a good haircut, a shave and I swear I can smell an odor emanating from the screen.


Katie Couric in her book said he “reeked of cigarettes and alcohol.” 
Wondering why Charles and Camilla don’t pull him back?  This is a terrible blight on their leadership.


----------



## Stansy

Funny when even in the appreciation thread TW‘s name gets spelled incorrectly…


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Charles, Camilla, MI6 [7 or 8 or whatever], we beg you. Get this guy help.  It will only get worse.


This pic is really concerning. He was raised a prince with people all around him but then got taken away and locked up by an evil witch who does not allow him access to his family. The prince knows no other life but what he was raised as. 

Dang, the BRF or those celebrity friends if his should intervene. 

I imagine the Queen is spared these pictures. I wonder if Harry says things subtly but we just don’t pick up on it? Ok I’m off my conspiracy chair.


----------



## Cinderlala

Lodpah said:


> This pic is really concerning. *He was raised a prince with people all around him but then got taken away and locked up by an evil witch who does not allow him access to his family. The prince knows no other life but what he was raised as.*
> 
> Dang, the BRF or those celebrity friends if his should intervene.
> 
> I imagine the Queen is spared these pictures. I wonder if Harry says things subtly but we just don’t pick up on it? Ok I’m off my conspiracy chair.



I was literally just writing this exact same sentiment!

I'm concerned about Harry.  He has no system of support.  He is estranged from his family, friends, and his entire previous existence.  That's a very vulnerable position for someone who struggles with mental health issues.  Add to that an unsupportive (at best) spouse and it's just a ticking time bomb.


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I am very non-confrontational in real life. But you bet if some random security guy came up to me and tried to intimidate me I would have had a few things to say. Who do these people think they are.


If that happened to me, I would call over my server and tell them to pack up my meal now (and toss in the bread)--no one approaches me and says something like that, especially over these 2 losers.


----------



## Cinderlala

It's still difficult for society to comprehend men as being abused in domestic abuse situations.  Look at Johnny Depp, it's unlikely he would have had much support without the recorded evidence of AH mocking him for being abused by her.

Imagine how much harder it would be for a British Prince to be believed---or even admit it to himself.


Editing to add: please overlook any odd phrasing, etc.  I'm quite sleep deprived & it's taking a huge toll on my brain.


----------



## Lodpah

Cinderlala said:


> I was literally just writing this exact same sentiment!
> 
> I'm concerned about Harry.  He has no system of support.  He is estranged from his family, friends, and his entire previous existence.  That's a very vulnerable position for someone who struggles with mental health issues.  Add to that an unsupportive (at best) spouse and it's just a ticking time bomb.


I don’t think it’s going to end up well for him. He might have been the suicidal one. I do think think TW will milk it to her glory if Harry was to get sick or melt down into a mental crises.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Lodpah said:


> To those who attack our thread and call us racists and see TW as a perfect person I think it’s appropriate to say we here can go by this saying calling the TW by this saying:
> There are lies, damned lies and statistics. She’s proven that a lot.
> I don’t know who to credit that saying but it fits. Lol.


It was published by Mark Twain, who in turn attributed it to Prime Minister Disraeli

Ironically, one politician who did use it in a speech became the head of the Royal Statistical Society


----------



## bag-mania

Kevinaxx said:


> And with regards to the UN hand holding pic, this popped into my head as a result



Kang and Kodos make a much better couple.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MiniMabel

The Tom Bower "Revenge" book is on eBay.


----------



## Lodpah

MiniMabel said:


> The Tom Bower "Revenge" book is on eBay.


Be careful of that tho. When I ordered the QE doll on EBay the transaction went through but when I looked at the ship date it was a year out!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Unfortunately, I think she'd be fine with that.  Here's a horrifying thought, she could trot out the children and live out a sick Jackie O fantasy on a global stage because he's still Prince H.
> 
> I do truly think he is nearing a breakdown and he needs someone to help him.  (Far away from the Claw.)



Yes to all of this.


----------



## bag-mania

There are none so greedy as a reseller on eBay. Be warned.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My book is supposed to arrive tomorrow. It's 10:45 PM and it hasn't shipped yet.


----------



## MiniMabel

Lodpah said:


> Be careful of that tho. When I ordered the QE doll on EBay the transaction went through but when I looked at the ship date it was a year out!



Aah, that's a good point.

There is one seller, worldofbooks20, who I've purchased from in the past with no problems but, probably, for the Revenge book it's worth asking if it's actually in stock before ordering (for all sellers)!


----------



## bag-mania

Did all of the celebrity threads just get merged into one place? I see the style threads in here.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Do you get the feeling that some "wise person" once told them: "_To lead, all you have to do is point the way. You do not actually have to lead the way_"? And hence they are busy opining from any platform money can buy, but they don't actually *do* anything worthwhile for their causes. (And I keep seeing Emperor Palpatine in my mind's eye...)


That's good -- point the way, not actually have to lead the way.  It really fits.

I was thinking about this too.  All this talk, but no real action, just probably lots of thoughts.  They are so self involved, they probably think they are achieving something.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Did all of the celebrity threads just get merged into one place? I see the style threads in here.


Looks like it! A little messy to find my usual haunts until some of them settle to the bottom.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.



What was she alluding to at the very beginning?  I'm totally lost.


----------



## csshopper

Williams's upbeat announcement about bringing the EarthShot Awards to Boston this December has posted. What a breath of fresh air he is!

Sunshine Sucks is probably busy at work trying to find opportunities to buy appearances in Boston for the Human Root Canal and TW so they can claim to have been there first. If they do show up, someone should plunk Hazbeen (a moniker more appropriate with every fizzled appearance) on Bunker Hill and give the idiot sod a history lesson.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree with her predictions of the very ugly divorce and yes, he should go see his family and ask for their support. I also do think the fight is believable, but I do wonder who was standing in front of their door to listen to their every word


Maybe it was the limo driver who overheard on the way to the UN, and we know people love to gossip. I did wonder where they were staying. Hotel unlikely or we'd have seen more pics. Must have bummed a place off of someone. I believe last time they stayed at a place owned by her friend Misha Nonoo. Assuming they are still friends. 









						'It has been a lot': Misha Nonoo opens up about giving birth during coronavirus pandemic
					

The Bahrain-born designer, who is close friends with Meghan Markle, welcomed her first child last week




					www.thenationalnews.com


----------



## CobaltBlu

kemilia said:


> If that happened to me, I would call over my server and tell them to pack up my meal now *(and toss in the bread)*--no one approaches me and says something like that, especially over these 2 losers.


 HAHAHA!!  I would do this exactly.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Did all of the celebrity threads just get merged into one place? I see the style threads in here.



Yes they did. Just look for th style threads by the prefixes. 

This one is usually near the top so should be easy to find


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The maid?


Of course! I don't think they're staying at a hotel, more likely bummed a place from someone. I'm sure a lowly maid would happily call up The Post or Daily News for that juicy tidbit in exchange for a check.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps they stayed here - this was in 2021:








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle stayed at luxury UN building on NYC trip
					

While in town for the Salute to Freedom Gala, the couple stayed “in a friend’s four-bedroom apartment with river views,” according to a source.




					pagesix.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, dear CeeJay *knew*.  Here is the video - 6 mins of her nasal voice :



When I saw that it was clear to me that she has had stars in her eyes from an early age, probably due in part to her father's job and growing up in the midst of LaLaLand. I like to imagine CeeJay is somewhere sipping (and sharing ) tea with Diana and others.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> What was she alluding to at the very beginning?  I'm totally lost.


"tragedies have happened before"

Duke of Edinburgh's sister and family (husband and two boys) died in a plane crash 1937 ("only a plane cash away"). Only one child (daughter) that didn't go to London on the plane survived.

Fear for Harry's life/health ("come for a cup of tea under the laburnum tree"). The tree is toxic if ingested
​


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Look at my man Worf rockin’ those forehead ridges!


This?


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> I was literally just writing this exact same sentiment!
> 
> I'm concerned about Harry.  He has no system of support.  He is estranged from his family, friends, and his entire previous existence.  That's a very vulnerable position for someone who struggles with mental health issues.  Add to that an unsupportive (at best) spouse and it's just a ticking time bomb.


It's true that he spoke of getting away and living a "normal" life, but I do not think the life he is living now is what he envisioned.  A lot of people think out loud, and we all know the grass is always greener, but honestly, I do think that if he left on his own and stepped back (before TW) he would still have the support of his family and have his friends around him.  

What has happened is truly alarming, to be isolated and cut off from everyone and being told that he was trapped and everyone is against *them* is just sick.  He gets trotted out like a trained seal while the narc basks in the reflected spotlight.  

I do see this all coming to head in the very near future.  He grew up in the spotlight and I believe he would be fine stepping back and living a private life.  Unfortunately, his current wife is an attention wh*re and all of the lies she told him about getting out were just that - lies.  

She never had any intention of stepping back, and thought she could parlay her royal title into Hollywood status.


----------



## Cinderlala

Toby93 said:


> It's true that he spoke of getting away and living a "normal" life, but I do not think the life he is living now is what he envisioned.  A lot of people think out loud, and we all know the grass is always greener, but honestly, I do think that if he left on his own and stepped back (before TW) he would still have the support of his family and have his friends around him.
> 
> What has happened is truly alarming, to be isolated and cut off from everyone and being told that he was trapped and everyone is against *them* is just sick.  He gets trotted out like a trained seal while the narc basks in the reflected spotlight.
> 
> I do see this all coming to head in the very near future.  He grew up in the spotlight and I believe he would be fine stepping back and living a private life.  Unfortunately, his current wife is an attention wh*re and all of the lies she told him about getting out were just that - lies.
> 
> She never had any intention of stepping back, and thought she could parlay her royal title into Hollywood status.



Yes, exactly!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This?
> View attachment 5572156


I shouldn't laugh because it really is sad. It seems he has been in need of help for years and is now in a downward spiral. Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp? How about "Physician, heal thyself" first?


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> It's true that he spoke of getting away and living a "normal" life, but I do not think the life he is living now is what he envisioned.  A lot of people think out loud, and we all know the grass is always greener, but honestly, I do think that if he left on his own and stepped back (before TW) he would still have the support of his family and have his friends around him.
> 
> What has happened is truly alarming, to be isolated and cut off from everyone and being told that he was trapped and everyone is against *them* is just sick.  He gets trotted out like a trained seal while the narc basks in the reflected spotlight.
> 
> I do see this all coming to head in the very near future.  He grew up in the spotlight and I believe he would be fine stepping back and living a private life.  Unfortunately, his current wife is an attention wh*re and all of the lies she told him about getting out were just that - lies.
> 
> She never had any intention of stepping back, and thought she could parlay her royal title into Hollywood status.


He wanted a "normal" life?  He has done nothing since he left that was normal because his wife doesn't want a normal life.  She wants glamour, notoriety, money and to be loved by millions.  None of that comes with normal and he knew that and was on board for it.  It was the only way that in his mind he could surpass his brother.  Currently, all he has done since he left England is make himself look worse by comparison.  This is going to be a sad ending.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I shouldn't laugh because it really is sad. It seems he has been in need of help for years and is now in a downward spiral. Chief Impact Officer of BetterUp? How about "Physician, heal thyself" first?


He is definitely IMPACTED.  Life has stuck him in the head and the result isn't pretty.  Harry isn't dealing well with how things are turning out and I don't think he knows why it is happening.  When things went more smoothly for him, it was because the people doing the planning and manipulation (gray men/courtiers)  had his best interests at heart and not their own.  The table turned completely when he met Meghan.  It has always been about her and whatever she plans for him is secondary to the effect that it will have for her.  She comes first and he is a plus one to her.  She is not accepting of the fact that she is in the secondary position and will always be so.


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> Guantamano is in Cuba
> *I know Australia is an island and a continent but we certainly don’t want them here*


Nope! You're mistaken, it's all love between the Aussies and the Harkles. 
Here is the proof!!!!


----------



## bag-mania

I can’t bring myself to feel sorry for him. He has shown too much callousness and disregard. He didn’t have to throw his family under the bus and he did that by choice. I don’t know what his father and brother did to deserve his wrath but you can tell he’s eaten up inside with resentment, particularly towards them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bet we will get a smiling pic on the electric bike again soon.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I know it was posted but I can't seem to find it now. Can someone please reshare the clip where Z-list pulled Harry's hand back with both her hands at the UN?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This was in June -


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> He is definitely IMPACTED.  Life has stuck him in the head and the result isn't pretty.  Harry isn't dealing well with how things are turning out and I don't think he knows why it is happening.  When things went more smoothly for him, it was because the people doing the planning and manipulation (gray men/courtiers)  had his best interests at heart and not their own.  The table turned completely when he met Meghan.  *It has always been about her and whatever she plans for him is secondary to the effect that it will have for her. * She comes first and he is a plus one to her.  She is not accepting of the fact that she is in the secondary position and will always be so.



What Raptor wants, Raptor gets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I can’t bring myself to feel sorry for him. He has shown too much callousness and disregard. He didn’t have to throw his family under the bus and he did that by choice. I don’t know what his father and brother did to deserve his wrath but you can tell he’s eaten up inside with resentment, particularly towards them.


I don't disagree with you, but I also believe she is a master manipulator who has preyed upon his weaknesses and insecurity for her own gain.


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> I can’t bring myself to feel sorry for him. He has shown too much callousness and disregard. He didn’t have to throw his family under the bus and he did that by choice. I don’t know what his father and brother did to deserve his wrath but you can tell he’s eaten up inside with resentment, particularly towards them.



That's fair.  But, I don't think the wrath started until the Claw convinced him of their terrible mistreatment of her and he believed every single thing she said.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was in June -
> View attachment 5572191


What does the little girl have in her hand? I thought it was sardines at first.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was in June -
> View attachment 5572191



"Reunited and it feels so good..."


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> What does the little girl have in her hand? I thought it was sardines at first.


 Maybe souvenir bottle openers or corkscrews.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was in June -
> View attachment 5572191


It was a happier, simpler time.

What a difference a few weeks makes. I miss seeing hunky Nacho in this thread but for his sake and that of his p-wife, they are better off away from those two.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> I know it was posted but I can't seem to find it now. Can someone please reshare the clip where Z-list pulled Harry's hand back with both her hands at the UN?


It's in here - go to 12:20


----------



## V0N1B2

Cinderlala said:


> That's fair.  But, I don't think the wrath started until the Claw convinced him of their terrible mistreatment of her and he believed every single thing she said.


Yes. Reading the excerpts from Tom Bower’s book, I just can’t get over the entitlement of hers. It’s evident in every single chapter/transcript. There was a lot of it in her early years by the sounds of that story about Claw having a sh!tfit on her dad for doing the lighting for the school play, to the Australian tour where she demanded her friend Jessica (and her hubs) come to Oz so she could be surrounded by people she trusts. The tales of the early days of their charitable foundation in Britain, not wanting professionals in charge… I thought there wouldn’t be much new in this book - and a lot of it isn’t new to most of us - but I am absolutely astounded at her entitlement. Blown away by it, actually.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I don't disagree with you, but I also believe she is a master manipulator who has preyed upon his weaknesses and insecurity for her own gain.





Cinderlala said:


> That's fair.  But, I don't think the wrath started until the Claw convinced him of their terrible mistreatment of her and he believed every single thing she said.


True, but is Harry being stupid and manipulated a good enough excuse to give him a pass? When you think about it, every douchebag you’ll ever meet probably has something in his life you can feel bad about. Doesn’t mean I’m going to feel more sympathy for Harry than I do for the jerk up the street. Harry made his choice and I believe he’ll stick with it. If anyone pulls the plug it will have to be her.


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Hazz


----------



## Chanbal

Spoiler: Contents


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> True, but is Harry being stupid and manipulated a good enough excuse to give him a pass? When you think about it, every douchebag you’ll ever meet probably has something in his life you can feel bad about. Doesn’t mean I’m going to feel more sympathy for Harry than I do for the jerk up the street. Harry made his choice and I believe he’ll stick with it. If anyone pulls the plug it will have to be her.


Excellent point. May I add every single member of that BRF knew Hazzie’s failings. They propped him, indulged his whims, gave him money and tiles that he did not earn and foisted him on us.  They need to be named and shamed on this mess, too. So, no, no sympathy for the douchebags, pardon my French.


----------



## needlv

They do deserve each other.  But Haz does look like he needs rehab or a mental health clinic.

Until Haz realises that he is at fault (and stops trying to blame his decisions and failures on others), there is no way forward.

Both of them are entitled, arrogant @sses - claiming they are victims.  
it’s not going to end well.  And the divorce will be spectacular…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> True, but is Harry being stupid and manipulated a good enough excuse to give him a pass? When you think about it, every douchebag you’ll ever meet probably has something in his life you can feel bad about. Doesn’t mean I’m going to feel more sympathy for Harry than I do for the jerk up the street. Harry made his choice and I believe he’ll stick with it. If anyone pulls the plug it will have to be her.


Someone here made an interesting point in that Eugenie may have been tasked with keeping the lines of communication open with him in the event that things continue to go south, which seems increasingly likely. I could see The Firm making ZeeZy "an offer she can't refuse" to go away - i.e., pressure her into accepting a divorce settlement using dirt they've held back on her for just such a situation. I'm sure it exists. I can't imagine they would let him hit bottom in front of the world without intervening, it would not be a good look for the monarchy. I gave Ginge and Cringe 5-10 years in 2018, I'm going with 5 at this point. I think they're in for a bumpy ride over the next year.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is good!


----------



## Aimee3

Let's face it.  The only thing he has that she wants is his title.  Take that away and he's nothing, and she's even less than nothing.  The few offers will dry up and if PC cuts the purse strings (I'm not sure I believe that he has) TW will drop him faster than she can say bye bye.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> What was she alluding to at the very beginning?  I'm totally lost.


The part about tea? I believe she's referring to Zeezy poisoning him with tea made from a poisonous tree called Laburnum. Or maybe Hazy harming himself.


----------



## Chanbal

__


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> It's in here - go to 12:20



Body Language Guy has taken the video of Hazbeen trying to get free of her hand and enlarged it. Hazbeen’s face, clearly shows his tension and upset in direct result to her possessive capture of his arm. The smile she keeps plastered on her face is scary. She definitely “won”. His emasculated inability to deal with her is pathetic.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Let's face it.  The only thing he has that she wants is his title.  Take that away and he's nothing, and she's even less than nothing.  The few offers will dry up and if PC cuts the purse strings (I'm not sure I believe that he has) TW will drop him faster than she can say bye bye.



But what options does she really have? She won't be a hot commodity in the trophy wife marketplace. The Firm will have to give her a sizable parting gift to get rid of her.


----------



## Yanca

I wonder how long this recent UN " quasi royal tour" fix will last for The Wifes' need for attention and adoration.  She already was given the greatest platform when she married Haz- opportunity  for endless  attention, for charity works, for philanthropy and public service- at the same time  while being photograph - which she seems to enjoy, to model clothes, had she only learn and willing to   accept the cultures and norms of her new country, if she only accepts the monarchy, it's intricacies, the ranks, the hierarchy  and the reasons behind, and  not try to overshadow other Royals when it's their turn to do the royal engagements, if she was a team player and  was really genuine in her intent of supporting her husband- and in the end  the Queen- her platforms  and Global reach will be much wider. The thing that I don't like is when people ask them or call them out- we are automatically labeled as haters, racists- which is funny because as a minority (Asian) myself, I am browner than the wife, and have also experienced prejudice but don't make it as an excuse if people will not like me or call me out if I was in the wrong.  I wish them both well if they are truly intent on making this world a better place and they can start by not silencing people or burying the truths. Hopefully Tom Bower " revenge " book becomes available in the US soon, it's really a wonder why it's not available on Amazon us and Apple.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> I know it was posted but I can't seem to find it now. Can someone please reshare the clip where Z-list pulled Harry's hand back with both her hands at the UN?
> 
> From The Body Language Guy on You Tube:​"Watch Meghan DOMINATING Harry with her DOUBLE CLAW gesture! "​


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> What does the little girl have in her hand? I thought it was sardines at first.


Sardines are the perfect treat to reward M's trained seal for good behavior


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Someone here made an interesting point in that Eugenie may have been tasked with keeping the lines of communication open with him in the event that things continue to go south, which seems increasingly likely. I could see The Firm making ZeeZy "an offer she can't refuse" to go away - i.e., pressure her into accepting a divorce settlement using dirt they've held back on her for just such a situation. I'm sure it exists. I can't imagine they would let him hit bottom in front of the world without intervening, it would not be a good look for the monarchy. I gave Ginge and Cringe 5-10 years in 2018, I'm going with 5 at this point. I think they're in for a bumpy ride over the next year.


After all Harry has said and done, do you think the family really wants him back in the fold? He has already shown himself to be disloyal and perhaps hateful towards them. Could they trust him again?

It would be unfair of the family to use Eugénie as their agent to keep tabs on H&M. Hopefully that isn’t the case. She always got along with Harry before so maybe she reaches out to him of her own accord.


----------



## bag-mania

Have any of the gossip websites or columnists discussed why the Tom Bower book isn’t available in the US? It seems like the kind of story they would be all over.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> It's in here - go to 12:20




Good god. I just died and came back to life watching that one scene repeated      WTF was she thinking, when this was sorta a work engagement with dignitaries? If this was a casual party, it's still completely weird with her acting as though he's paying extra attention to some other woman and she's jealous or insecure.

Early on during their relationship/marriage, Harry was into the incessant hand holding but it looks like he's getting tired of it. The look on his face was priceless when she grabbed his hand back yet she tried to look casual with a smile? People, she psycho!


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> I know it was posted but I can't seem to find it now. Can someone please reshare the clip where Z-list pulled Harry's hand back with both her hands at the UN?


I posted it in post #99,120 and here it is again


----------



## rose60610

I don't get why they insist that no one take pictures of them since she hogs every other camera she can find. Millions of pictures were taken of them when they were still in the good graces of the BRF and they loved it. I loved how Claw was told she couldn't have the outdoor part of the restaurant because it was already booked by a party of 15. B-b-b-b-but I thought she was SOOOO important she could have had the pesky party move. Guess not!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> After all Harry has said and done, do you think the family really wants him back in the fold?


The better to keep tabs on him. He and Uncle Andy can keep each other company in exile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> I posted it in post #99,120 and here it is again



The glum look on Hazard's face and the rictus grin on hers - don't they remind you of the Cirque du Soleil photos? The ones of her in tight blue sequin dress, supposedly after she told him that she didn't want to live anymore and she sobbed whenever the lights went down? Maybe she did a repeat performance of the "don't want to live anymore" act.


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> I don't get why they insist that no one take pictures of them since she hogs every other camera she can find. Millions of pictures were taken of them when they were still in the good graces of the BRF and they loved it. I loved how Claw was told she couldn't have the outdoor part of the restaurant because it was already booked by a party of 15. B-b-b-b-but I thought



Either she's trying to act like she's very private or low profile OR she just doesn't want photos and videos on people's cellphones just in case these people captured negative moments and the materials getting reposted everywhere online, further ruining her already bad reputation and hard for her to do damage control.

Pap photos are arranged by her so she doesn't mind them because these people put her in the news cycle and she probably tells them what headlines should go with the pictures too.

I'm so glad this thread allows me to sharpen my conspiracy theorist skills


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Either she's trying to act like she's very private or low profile OR she just doesn't want photos and videos on people's cellphones just in case these people captured negative moments and the materials getting reposted everywhere online, further ruining her already bad reputation and hard for her to do damage control.
> 
> Pap photos are arranged by her so she doesn't mind them because these people put her in the news cycle and she probably tells them what headlines should go with the pictures too.
> 
> I'm so glad this thread allows me to sharpen my conspiracy theorist skills


You are correct. She wants to control the photos of herself that are released. That means they must be touched up and tweaked to her liking before Sunshine Sachs can distribute them.


----------



## Jayne1

I'm in Canada and the book isn't available, but another Canadian said they got it from Booktopia, an Australian seller.


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> I'm in Canada and the book isn't available, but another Canadian said they got it from Booktopia, an Australian seller.
> View attachment 5572293


Very odd indeed that no online store on this side of the world doesn't carry it, even Amazon


----------



## Jayne1

Also this is the one she must have:


----------



## Toby93

I am also in Canada and ended up buying from Book Depository.  $34.99CDN with free shipping.  Not sure how long it will to get here, since it will be coming from the UK.  Very strange that Chapters/Indigo doesn't have it as that's where I got The Palace Papers a few weeks ago.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they want to prove they can be just like the BRF/W&K, except on this continent.  They’ve got the cameras, they’ve got the media, they’ve got the recognition, so they should be king/queen, right?  Such egos, out of touch with reality. Supposedly, Charles _wants_ to set up a ‘royal’ house over here.  So, H&M believe they can lead the way.  Problem for Charles is that he was not counting on how much ridicule Hazzi would receive. Seems he himself may have bought  the  propaganda about the royals and those politicians [one is currently in the WH].  Imo it was all for the politicians’ PR.  Charles et al.  did not count on the pandemic and Hazzi exposing his lack of intelligence.
> 
> It is sickening that anyone in the UK thinks the USA would willingly give up its freedoms and rejoin the UK. Our dearly beloved CeeJay had many choice words for those who think that way.



Charles must be crazy if he thinks the US is going to want a royal anything set up over here.  Thought the point was made crystal clear more than 2 centuries ago.  He can do whatever he wants in the British Embassy though!


----------



## needlv

If anyone wants to read a sample, the first 100 pages of Tom Bowers book is here.









						Revenge
					

THE SUNDAY TIMES NO. 1 BESTSELLER 'Explosive' The Sun'Accounts from insiders who have never spoken before' The Times'Bombshell' The MirrorThe British Royal Family believed that the dizzy success of the Sussex wedding, watched and celebrated around...




					www.overdrive.com
				




click on sample.  And if you have an iPad, once it loads, swipe from right to left to move the pages.  

it’s a good read.  I’m going to go buy it but my local bookstore won’t have physical copies until 2 August…


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> No one looks happy. Interesting.



Whoever set this UN gig up didn’t do the Delusional Duo any favors.  It was ridiculous to use a room that seats 1100, particularly if lots of their folks vacation in July.  Surely there are smaller rooms they could use.  Even if the smaller room wasn’t full, it wouldn’t look like a yawning chasm the way this one does.

And that speech - OMG!  When your speech is reviewed as “insipid and cliche-ridden”, you are in trouble.  I assumed that someone else wrote speeches for Harry the Dim - he surely cannot do it himself.  Is there such a thing as freelance speech writers?  Seems like there would be.  He needs to have that stat!  

He also needs serious work on his delivery.  The fake, oozing sincerity, the dramatic pauses for no apparent reason since there is never any applause coming.  He looks like a fool trying to act oh so serious and grave.  He can’t pull that off.

Neither of them seems very good at delivering a speech of any length - as in more than 5 minutes.  And here they are, expecting $1 million per speech!  Hope that isn’t the amount that they used when planning their budget!  (no, I don’t think they have one either.)


----------



## Chanbal

On their way to Robert De Niro's restaurant…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> On their way to Robert De Niro's restaurant…



Jesus can hardly keep up with them, they’ve given him so much body language material in the last day.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> If anyone wants to read a sample, the first 100 pages of Tom Bowers book is here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revenge
> 
> 
> THE SUNDAY TIMES NO. 1 BESTSELLER 'Explosive' The Sun'Accounts from insiders who have never spoken before' The Times'Bombshell' The MirrorThe British Royal Family believed that the dizzy success of the Sussex wedding, watched and celebrated around...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overdrive.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> click on sample.  And if you have an iPad, once it loads, swipe from right to left to move the pages.
> 
> it’s a good read.  I’m going to go buy it but my local bookstore won’t have physical copies until 2 August…


My local public library has Overdrive. I found The Palace Papers. Let's see if they will select Revenge for their virtual collection.


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> If anyone wants to read a sample, the first 100 pages of Tom Bowers book is here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revenge
> 
> 
> THE SUNDAY TIMES NO. 1 BESTSELLER 'Explosive' The Sun'Accounts from insiders who have never spoken before' The Times'Bombshell' The MirrorThe British Royal Family believed that the dizzy success of the Sussex wedding, watched and celebrated around...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overdrive.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> click on sample.  And if you have an iPad, once it loads, swipe from right to left to move the pages.
> 
> it’s a good read.  I’m going to go buy it but my local bookstore won’t have physical copies until 2 August…


I'm trying really hard not to read the sample so that I can enjoy the e-book if Amazon doesn't cancel it last minute


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> The better to keep tabs on him. He and Uncle Andy can keep each other company in exile.


Somehow I don’t think Harry and Andy get along. They are both so arrogant they would probably spend their days outdoing each other in their entitlement.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

So I guess Z-list had SS hit back after all the bad press about their latest NYC trip. They sure try to make her look perfect and like a saint  Apparently she's a hero for offering the coughing lady in the back some water. If there was no camera around, do you think she would have?






And more merching?


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> So I guess Z-list had SS hit back after all the bad press about their latest NYC trip. They sure try to make her look perfect and like a saint  Apparently she's a hero for offering the coughing lady in the back some water. If there was no camera around, do you think she would have?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And more merching?
> 
> View attachment 5572343



Pinky promise to other women? Oh l*rd... now I'm subscribing to the throuple description.
If Sucky  is trying to burnish her reputation to perfection, perhaps they should re-look at Hazard's word salad regarding how being human is better than being perfect


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I don't get why they insist that no one take pictures of them since she hogs every other camera she can find. Millions of pictures were taken of them when they were still in the good graces of the BRF and they loved it. I loved how Claw was told she couldn't have the outdoor part of the restaurant because it was already booked by a party of 15. B-b-b-b-but I thought she was SOOOO important she could have had the pesky party move. Guess not!


A reputable place usually won't bow to tactics like that, unless maybe you're a true A lister. About ten years ago a minor celebrity, one of the co-hosts of a popular TV show, was in town where I live. He tried to use his name to get a table at the hot new restaurant on a Saturday night but was told they were fully booked. The celebrity's co-host then took to social media and tried to bully the owner, a James Beard award-winning chef, into giving her co-host a table. It didn't work. The owner said he wasn't bumping a guest with a prior reservation for a celebrity. And the whining co-host got blowback here for being a bullying b*tch.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Pinky promise to other women? Oh l*rd... now I'm subscribing to the throuple description.
> If Sucky  is trying to burnish her reputation to perfection, perhaps they should re-look at Hazard's word salad regarding how being human is better than being perfect


Am I the only one who thinks she should have told the woman to keep the bottle?    Who takes that back?  Is she planning on drinking out of it after a stranger took a swig


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she should have told the woman to keep the bottle?    Who takes that back?  Is she planning on drinking out of it after a stranger took a swig


I saw that too and I was grossed out


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> __



I'm trying to not read too many of the excerpts - waiting on my book to arrive


----------



## EverSoElusive

Kindle e-book update!!!

My card was just charged and e-book had been delivered to my Kindle library


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> Kindle e-book update!!!
> 
> My card was just charged and e-book had been delivered to my Kindle library


Was this on Amazon in the US?


----------



## Chanbal

Until we get the book…


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> He really needs a hair stylist ...


A shower too.  Some deodorant who come in handy, I would presume.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I love conspiracy theories so here it goes. You cannot buy Tom Bower’s new book from any US outlet at the moment. Maybe it is as simple as being a distribution issue, but the fact that it was available and then it was pulled raises red flags. Even Apple had to take the audio version down.
> 
> View attachment 5571797


So the same sugars that gaslit Samantha Markle's book are doing the same to Bower?  WTF are these people hell bent on saving Hazzed?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This could be a great motivational picture for kids! Look who I call if you don't do your homework.
> View attachment 5571806


Why does TW look freakishly gigantic here??  Is the poster a little person??  WTF.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she should have told the woman to keep the bottle?    Who takes that back?  Is she planning on drinking out of it after a stranger took a swig





EverSoElusive said:


> I saw that too and I was grossed out


It had to be a staged act of compassion. Even before Covid, we would not have shared a bottle of water with a coughing stranger (unless it was a dire trapped-in-cave situation, and even then...).


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> Guantamano is in Cuba
> I know Australia is an island and a continent but we certainly don’t want them here


How about Antarctica?


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I don't disagree with you, but I also believe she is a master manipulator who has preyed upon his weaknesses and insecurity for her own gain.



Well, he made his bed and_ he_ let's her do it. He never shuts up about their 'blessed union'. He won't want to admit it's all been a mistake, the pride of that 'man' is a brick wall he's built around himself. 

It's just as much about his anger as it is about her ambition.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It had to be a staged act of compassion. Even before Covid, we would not have shared a bottle of water with a coughing stranger (unless it was a dire trapped-in-cave situation, and even then...).



and post Covid? Is it good idea to share your bottle of water with a stranger?

and are you telling me they don't have water at UN functions?

Totally planned. They probably wrote the story ready to go before it happened. It's to make sure there's a story about_ her _after the 'show'.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Why does TW look freakishly gigantic here??  Is the poster a little person??  WTF.


We need an in-scale comparative shot of fan vs Methane vs SUV because Methane looked short next to the SUV.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, dear CeeJay *knew*.  Here is the video - 6 mins of her nasal voice :



Is her friend ever in the video?  (I can't watch the whole thing.)  Or is it all about MeMeMeGain as usual??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My book is supposed to arrive tomorrow. It's 10:45 PM and it hasn't shipped yet.



It did ship, but won't arrive until Monday. Which tells me it is indeed shipped from the UK, I just don't know why they couldn't make it so I have it on publication date.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Nope! You're mistaken, it's all love between the Aussies and the Harkles.
> Here is the proof!!!!




I thought it back then, I think it now: that stupid cow stepped out without a jacket so she could make Harry give his to her so the press would fawn once again about that great love.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> But what options does she really have? She won't be a hot commodity in the trophy wife marketplace. The Firm will have to give her a sizable parting gift to get rid of her.



I don't know so much, they gave Fergie - a wave goodbye. Her only function now is the mother of her children.

M seems controlled, but she over-reaches all the time and every time. She controls others better than she can control herself. I think M will do something ruthless/OTT/HUGE that will mean she'll hang herself. If she publicly embarrasses H and he can' keep up the pretence of their infantile solid relationship, he will ping back to Daddy & Co crying like an elastic band let go.

And if he thinks he was silenced and on a short leash before, if he ever comes back to the UK, he will be monitored non-stop, all the security he wants. My guess is, he may well end-up living in Africa if they ever split.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> So I guess Z-list had SS hit back after all the bad press about their latest NYC trip. They sure try to make her look perfect and like a saint  Apparently she's a hero for offering the coughing lady in the back some water. If there was no camera around, do you think she would have?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And more merching?
> 
> View attachment 5572343



Wait...she took the bottle BACK???  From a coughing woman?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Spoiler: Contents
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5572219




Why not though! Dont leave us hanging, Tom.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she should have told the woman to keep the bottle?    Who takes that back?  Is she planning on drinking out of it after a stranger took a swig





EverSoElusive said:


> I saw that too and I was grossed out


Haha sorry just saw your posts!


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Totally planned. They probably wrote the story ready to go before it happened. *It's to make sure there's a story about her after the 'show'.*


Hear hear! Maybe she had hopes that she could be first on stage and introduce him like she did at Invictus.

I speculate that, while H is a traitor and idiot, she is the one who spun the "escape gilded cage" fantasy for him. In the UK, they would always be #6 & wife. She must have assumed that in her native land, she would take precedence, and H would become her plus one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent point. May I add every single member of that BRF knew Hazzie’s failings. They propped him, indulged his whims, gave him money and tiles that he did not earn and foisted him on us.  They need to be named and shamed on this mess, too. So, no, no sympathy for the douchebags, pardon my French.
> 
> View attachment 5572216



I disagree. I don't think it's uncommon to help set up the stupid child in a family business. You have the ressources and you want them to succeed. What she does is running him to the ground, triggering all his mental health problems and magnifying them, which you can hardly accuse the BRF of.


----------



## Pivoine66

Chanbal said:


> Until we get the book…



Thank you for posting this video (and so so many more), dear Chanbal.

What I find somehow surprising (again in the media):

According to Bower and staff at VF and a video here on tpf (already here some time ago) there is *no evidence* - none at all - that the former actress and briefcase girl *ever really got involved humanitarian, socially, philanthropically or for women or racial equality/rights,* although she likes to make that so much about herself. Personally, I find exactly this an important point and am almost disappointed that this IMO *significant inconsistency* is not much more clearly highlighted in the media about "St. Meghan - with (acc. to those mentioned above) no evidence of ever having truly selflessly stood up *and actually worked for and actually pursued* a Saint cause".


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Either she's trying to act like she's very private or low profile OR she just doesn't want photos and videos on people's cellphones just in case these people captured negative moments and the materials getting reposted everywhere online, further ruining her already bad reputation and hard for her to do damage control.
> 
> Pap photos are arranged by her so she doesn't mind them because these people put her in the news cycle and she probably tells them what headlines should go with the pictures too.
> 
> I'm so glad this thread allows me to sharpen my conspiracy theorist skills



You're right IMO, all about control, control, control.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> But what options does she really have? She won't be a hot commodity in the trophy wife marketplace. The Firm will have to give her a sizable parting gift to get rid of her.



Right. I have no doubts she'll be gone the second something better comes along, but at this point, she was nowhere else to go really. She is a middle-aged mother of two without any remarkable talent who everyone has heard a thing or two about, and they are not flattering.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> It had to be a staged act of compassion. Even before Covid, we would not have shared a bottle of water with a coughing stranger (unless it was a dire trapped-in-cave situation, and even then...).


It’s a member of the Z-list actresses staff.  Her PR is really desperate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. I have no doubts she'll be gone the second something better comes along, but at this point, she was nowhere else to go really. She is a middle-aged mother of two without any remarkable talent who everyone has heard a thing or two about, and they are not flattering.



And I recall that Sarah F got very little by way of divorce settlement to Andrew.  Nothing even close to Diana’s $20M…

MM can ask for money, but the BRF can just play a waiting game and keep them on permanent ignore to see if it implodes in its own time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> And I recall that Sarah F got very little by way of divorce settlement to Andrew.  Nothing even close to Diana’s $20M…
> 
> MM can ask for money, but the BRF can just play a waiting game and keep them on permanent ignore to see if it implodes in its own time.



If Raptor walks away with a big settlement it will be damage control.


----------



## Lodpah

Leona Helmsley and TW are going to be look alike when the TW gets older. The only redeeming quality that LH had was that she cared immensely for her dogs. 

I'm not going to spoil it for you guys but I just listened to a chapter on audiobooks and it is as bad as I thought. Like really bad behavior, like Leona Helmsley bad.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If Raptor walks away with a big settlement it will be damage control.



Depends on who files the divorce and where, and what they've got on each other.

He's over-emotional and won't shut-up and neither will she, so hush money isn't going to work whatever. M's already proved she's a fantasist and a trouble maker, she'll never sign a NDA. More likely Intel find some dirt on her that will make her pause for breath and keep her head down. I'm sure that Ace is already up the Palace's sleeve (not sure that metaphor works but I like the picture it conjures.)

Like someone said, if they pay themselves 'small' amounts from 'foundations' and 'charities', what's she going to be entitled to? The house maybe, he won't care. Isn't Cali 50/50 after marriage? I know nothing but I got this for the Net:  "This means that any assets or property gained during the course of a marriage belong equally to both spouses and, therefore, *the property must be equally divided between the two spouse by the court in a divorce*." Not the trust fund inheritance his mother left - believe me that is tied-up so tight you'd need Houdini to unravel it.

It's going to be hard for her to prove she made him what he is today (I mean a Prince and international figure, not the moody toddler). He's probably had a pay-cut (if the truth were told) certainly his potential earnings have gone way down. She's not going to be able to even have a piece of Frogmore Cottage let alone the (Disney) castle she dreams of.

Her only hope is  file in the US somewhere, make him look like a bad parent so the kids don't go to the UK and ask for exorbitant maintenance. I'd like to see the US courts get ol' H to pay up if that was a US state decision, 'suddenly' H would pull 'an Andrew' and pull diplomatic immunity or whatever he needs to. Where's she going to get the money to pay for the long fight coz the BRF would rather give the money to lawyers beyond this point than her.


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> and post Covid? Is it good idea to share your bottle of water with a stranger?
> 
> and are you telling me they don't have water at UN functions?
> 
> Totally planned. They probably wrote the story ready to go before it happened. It's to make sure there's a story about_ her _after the 'show'.


Agree. Wag the Dog movie is always on my mind when it comes to TW and JCMH


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Her only hope is  file in the US somewhere, make him look like a bad parent so the kids don't go to the UK and ask for exorbitant maintenance. I'd like to see the US courts get ol' H to pay up if that was a US state decision, 'suddenly' H would pull 'an Andrew' and pull diplomatic immunity or whatever he needs to. Where's she going to get the money to pay for the long fight coz the BRF would rather give the money to lawyers beyond this point than her.



Didn't someone say his diplomatic status or something makes it so that a divorce can only be filed for in the UK? So that wouldn't work for her either.


----------



## Lodpah

"Cloven Hoofs, what the fcuk do we do with those?".  Just saying. I'm paraphrasing, maybe not.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> She’s holding on till he gets his second inheritance I think I read somewhere he gets it when he turns 40?
> I felt sorry for him at one point but he does seem like an abused man but he’s still an arse.
> 
> I really wonder what she has on him. Something stupid like maybe a fetish? Harry if you are reading this it’s cool man, that’s not the worse that can happen you.
> 
> Call EJ and take the kids out and get on that jet and bolt. She’s going to tear you down and destroy you. I think she will literally destroy guy.


Let you freak flag fly Harry!
Nothing can be weirder than your choice of bride anyways 


Kevinaxx said:


> Quick google for revenge book
> 
> View attachment 5572040
> 
> 
> I’m just going to order from UK.
> 
> And with regards to the UN hand holding pic, this popped into my head as a result



Blackwells is a lovely bookshop with a beautiful flagship in Oxford. I’d recommend them.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, dear CeeJay *knew*.  Here is the video - 6 mins of her nasal voice :



She knew indeed. Executive level hack detection. 


charlottawill said:


> Of course! I don't think they're staying at a hotel, more likely bummed a place from someone. I'm sure a lowly maid would happily call up The Post or Daily News for that juicy tidbit in exchange for a check.


Maybe the hosts themselves called it in after being forced to buy a new dinner service.


papertiger said:


> "tragedies have happened before"
> 
> Duke of Edinburgh's sister and family (husband and two boys) died in a plane crash 1937 ("only a plane cash away"). Only one child (daughter) that didn't go to London on the plane survived.
> 
> Fear for Harry's life/health ("come for a cup of tea under the laburnum tree"). The tree is toxic if ingested
> ​





charlottawill said:


> The part about tea? I believe she's referring to Zeezy poisoning him with tea made from a poisonous tree called Laburnum. Or maybe Hazy harming himself


I know murder is a dark topic but all this talk of poisoned tea is helping me live my Miss Marple in Pocketful of Rye fantasy




Toby93 said:


> It's true that he spoke of getting away and living a "normal" life, but I do not think the life he is living now is what he envisioned.  A lot of people think out loud, and we all know the grass is always greener, but honestly, I do think that if he left on his own and stepped back (before TW) he would still have the support of his family and have his friends around him.
> 
> What has happened is truly alarming, to be isolated and cut off from everyone and being told that he was trapped and everyone is against *them* is just sick.  He gets trotted out like a trained seal while the narc basks in the reflected spotlight.
> 
> I do see this all coming to head in the very near future.  He grew up in the spotlight and I believe he would be fine stepping back and living a private life.  Unfortunately, his current wife is an attention wh*re and all of the lies she told him about getting out were just that - lies.
> 
> She never had any intention of stepping back, and thought she could parlay her royal title into Hollywood status.


You know the more I get to know Harry from his solo/duo efforts the more I think the ‘normal life’ thing was a total lie. H himself is just too superior to think he merits what’s called a normal life. His idea of hell would be to be the same as the general public. He only wants the veneer of a normal life so he can place himself at forefront as a spokesperson for the ‘normal man’ while retaining everything he has from his name and family as we saw from the speech.
He could give up his title tomorrow and be Harry Brown but he definitely won’t with or without ZZ topless.


V0N1B2 said:


> What does the little girl have in her hand? I thought it was sardines at first.


It might be she was just trying to figure out who had the most life in their eyes H, M or the fish.


Chanbal said:


> Spoiler: Contents
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5572219



Intriguing…. He’s just letting us know if the sales are good he can bring us the sequel   


CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent point. May I add every single member of that BRF knew Hazzie’s failings. They propped him, indulged his whims, gave him money and tiles that he did not earn and foisted him on us.  They need to be named and shamed on this mess, too. So, no, no sympathy for the douchebags, pardon my French.
> 
> View attachment 5572216


I mean to be fair, they tried to foist them on Canada first  
__
I know the sugars like to make out that Thomas and Samantha Markle are in ISIS and the like but I don’t approve of all this muck-raking about M’s family. 

If it was a biography centred around a dysfunctional childhood then it’s more reasonable but it just feels like it’s not that relevant and a bit mean spirited in a memoir essentially about celebrity/royal politics. 


EverSoElusive said:


> Either she's trying to act like she's very private or low profile OR she just doesn't want photos and videos on people's cellphones just in case these people captured negative moments and the materials getting reposted everywhere online, further ruining her already bad reputation and hard for her to do damage control.
> 
> Pap photos are arranged by her so she doesn't mind them because these people put her in the news cycle and she probably tells them what headlines should go with the pictures too.
> 
> I'm so glad this thread allows me to sharpen my conspiracy theorist skills


Well that and she can’t trust the general public to photoshop her wonky nose and their receding hairlines.

I mean the difference between her face in those posed water pics vs the video of her walking in is like if you glued cotton wool to a pitbull and called it a poodle.


Toby93 said:


> Am I the only one who thinks she should have told the woman to keep the bottle?    Who takes that back?  Is she planning on drinking out of it after a stranger took a swig


Weird she can’t even nail an obvious photo-op.

I guess she has to conserve the Kool-aid supplies- I think it’s running out.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree. I don't think it's uncommon to help set up the stupid child in a family business. You have the ressources and you want them to succeed. What she does is running him to the ground, triggering all his mental health problems and magnifying them, which you can hardly accuse the BRF of.


Sure. No reasonable person can argue there’s anything remotely meritocratic about royalty and as much as we laugh at him for being the thickest of a pretty uninspiring family it’s not entirely their fault as they have hundreds of years of inbreeding to contend with- a bit of humility wouldn’t go amiss though.


----------



## Lodpah

A comment I found so appropos. "She wears her fixed grin on her victims like her trophy."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I know the sugars like to make out that Thomas and Samantha Markle are in ISIS and the like but I don’t approve of all this muck-raking about M’s family.
> 
> If it was a biography centred around a dysfunctional childhood then it’s more reasonable but it just feels like it’s not that relevant and a bit mean spirited in a memoir essentially about celebrity/royal politics.



I agree. Especially seeing that Doria - who I personally at this point do think is...difficult too and contributed just as much to Raptor's attitude as Thomas, just in a different way - other than Thomas doesn't seek out the spotlight and remains tightlipped and private.


----------



## xincinsin

All this talk of divorce court is giving me visions of Nutmeg demanding: "Windsor Castle or they will never see the kids again!" 

And the BRF are thinking, "You don't let us see the kids anyway, so what's the diff?"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> All this talk of divorce court is giving me visions of Nutmeg demanding: "Windsor Castle or they will never see the kids again!"
> 
> And the BRF are thinking, "You don't let us see the kids anyway, so what's the diff?"



Also, who cares really this much. I wouldn't lose sleep over my cousin or nephew not letting me see his children. The only people who probably used to care are the Cambridges and the Waleses.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, who cares really this much. I wouldn't lose sleep over my cousin or nephew not letting me see his children. The only people who probably used to care are the Cambridges and the Waleses.



Maybe.  But Will has made the decision to distance both himself and his family.  And I don’t blame him one bit - he needs to protect himself, his future and his family and H and the Z-list actress are destructive.

Charles may be weaker.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Maybe.  But Will has made the decision to distance both himself and his family.  And I don’t blame him one bit - he needs to protect himself, his future and his family and H and the Z-list actress are destructive.
> 
> Charles may be weaker.



Hence "used to care"


----------



## jblended

Spoiler: May I post about Ceejay here?



I don't really follow much on these two because they bore me to death with their reality TV antics, but with the book's excerpts doing the rounds, I had to pop in. So much of what Ceejay said in the early days of this thread are proven right and I imagine she would have found it very amusing the way they gruesome twosome are now uncovered. RIP Ceejay. You're a legend and you'll be missed!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> A comment I found so appropos. "She wears her fixed grin on her victims like her trophy."


Is that from the fim Joker?


----------



## duna

I just ordered a copy of Revenge on Amazon Italy. I checked Waterstones UK but it's only pre-order.....


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> Was this on Amazon in the US?


Yes, it was. I ordered before it got pulled.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree. I don't think it's uncommon to help set up the stupid child in a family business. You have the ressources and you want them to succeed. What she does is running him to the ground, triggering all his mental health problems and magnifying them, which you can hardly accuse the BRF of.


I have been thinking about this, and @CarryOn2020's view that those in the BRF who enabled Hazard should be named and shamed.

It's been on my mind because this kind of "enabling" happens a lot in my family and society. Is it a culture thing? In my country, there is no expectation for the offspring to become independent at 18 or to move out. Living with parental units is quite the norm (and brings with it its own set of MIL/DIL issues). 

Parents and grandparents will often render additional assistance to the children who are less successful than their siblings. Yes, we would look askance at those who raise their kids to be entitled boors, but I think I would be a hypocrite to rail at the BRF or the Markles/Raglands because they doted on their kids and tried to smooth the path for them. It's not wholly their fault that they have felt the poison of the serpent's tooth.


----------



## andrashik

Sigh... apparently she made Kate cry








						Kate 'burst into tears' after Meghan 'wouldn't compromise'
					

Writing in his new book Revenge, royal biographer Tom Bower claimed the Duchess of Sussex, 40, 'wouldn't compromise' on the fit of Charlotte's bridesmaid dress.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Opinion | Prince Harry's U.N. speech on Mandela shows how clueless the royal family still is
					

The British royal referenced Mandela’s “vision of a freer, more peaceful world” even though his country's colonialism denied South Africa that dream.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I have been thinking about this, and @CarryOn2020's view that those in the BRF who enabled Hazard should be named and shamed.
> 
> It's been on my mind because this kind of "enabling" happens a lot in my family and society. Is it a culture thing? In my country, there is no expectation for the offspring to become independent at 18 or to move out. Living with parental units is quite the norm (and brings with it its own set of MIL/DIL issues).
> 
> Parents and grandparents will often render additional assistance to the children who are less successful than their siblings. Yes, we would look askance at those who raise their kids to be entitled boors, but I think I would be a hypocrite to rail at the BRF or the Markles/Raglands because they doted on their kids and tried to smooth the path for them. It's not wholly their fault that they have felt the poison of the serpent's tooth.


If he had stayed on his side of the pond and stayed out of US politics and healthcare, there would be no issue.
Seems that he is here on a diplomatic (?) passport [or is it a special royal one?] This means he has immunity and no responsibility. None. He can drive drunk, cause accidents, injure people and *nothing* happens to him. No prosecution, No fine, nothing. This is why Andi was able to get away with his nonsense.   Absolutely, families should help their offspring. That is the parents’ job. The BRF has done much more than that, much worse, imo. Titles. CoS. Lots of $$$$.
This guy has power and immunity.  Imo that is shameful and that is on the BRF.

From Wikipedia: _Diplomatic immunity is a form of legal immunity that ensures diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country's laws, although they may still be expelled._
From 2012, 








						Do Royals Like Prince Harry Have Diplomatic Immunity? - E! Online
					

Heads of state, such as the Queen, enjoy sovereign immunity. Princes aren't sovereigns, but they're often treated that way




					www.eonline.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you for posting this video (and so so many more), dear Chanbal.
> 
> What I find somehow surprising (again in the media):
> 
> According to Bower and staff at VF and a video here on tpf (already here some time ago) there is *no evidence* - none at all - that the former actress and briefcase girl *ever really got involved humanitarian, socially, philanthropically or for women or racial equality/rights,* although she likes to make that so much about herself. Personally, I find exactly this an important point and am almost disappointed that this IMO *significant inconsistency* is not much more clearly highlighted in the media about "St. Meghan - with (acc. to those mentioned above) no evidence of ever having truly selflessly stood up *and actually worked for and actually pursued* a Saint cause".


For someone who wants everyone to think that she's the smartest person in the room (not just smart), she's certainly dumb as a rock. Unless we're living in stone age, she should know that she would be found out eventually with the amount of lies that she has told. 

Even after marrying Harry, she's still peddling snake oil and always thrusting herself in front of the cameras deliberately. If she just does some actual/substantial work and speaks without oversharing and lying, I think she would be ok. 

Now with people picking apart the things that she said or did or didn't say or do, she's definitely going to "die" a very public death, with more humiliation than I personally would care to suffer.

I cannot comprehend how she can still walk around with a psycho smile on her face and feel no shame. She is so thin-skinned and thick-skinned at the same time. How is that even possible?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Sigh... apparently she made Kate cry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate 'burst into tears' after Meghan 'wouldn't compromise'
> 
> 
> Writing in his new book Revenge, royal biographer Tom Bower claimed the Duchess of Sussex, 40, 'wouldn't compromise' on the fit of Charlotte's bridesmaid dress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I never doubted it. And I fully believe the account of Kate going over with flowers to smooth things over though she did nothing wrong to begin with and Raptor smashing the door in her face.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> For someone who wants everyone to think that she's the smartest person in the room (not just smart), she's certainly dumb as a rock.



Gosh, I hate the new format. Apparently now you can't split up a quote. I had to copy the part I'm going to quote next and delete it from the original quote. And even if there IS a way: this is completely not intuitive and user friendly.

Anyway: does anyone else remember that article that came out shortly after the wedding that claimed "The intelligence of all the members of the Royal Family combined doesn't equal hers." Yeah, RIGHT. These are all people who have been meticulously educated, speak several languages (there's footage of Philip on Youtube effortlessly conversing in both German and French, fluently. Raptor couldn't even master British English it seems), many of them hold university degrees, The Queen herself is one of the most skilled diplomats of the world. But sure, Raptor surpasses them all. I'll agree they can't match her malevolence.



> I cannot comprehend how she can still walk around with a psycho smile on her face and feel no shame. She is so thin-skinned and thick-skinned at the same time. How is that even possible?



Her brain is seriously not wired correctly. I'm sure there are others like her, but I've never seen it to that extent.


----------



## Aimee3

Announcement:  
Just got an email from the publisher about availability of Tom Bower's book and this is what it said
"the book is available in your territory (USA/Cananda) to buy from Amazon UK, Waterstones UK, Book Despository and more."
My direct question if it would be available from Amazon USA was not specifically addressed.  
I'm going to order the E-book if it's still available.  Will be a juicy beach book!


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never doubted it. And I fully believe the account of Kate going over with flowers to smooth things over though she did nothing wrong to begin with and Raptor smashing the door in her face.


A grown woman who was in her late 30s at that time, acting like a spoiled child. What a shame! She burned bridges so early on and yet the BRF is forced to be anything but nice to her. If this was just a regular family, they would have been cut off and disowned so fast! 

I'm not saying that they should be on their knees but they should be grateful for what a good and easy life they have. Not everyone is fortunate like them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just spent about 10 minutes trying to use my VPN to make it look like I was buying the Kindle book from a London address, but Amazon knew I was in the US and wouldn’t let me order it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> How about Antarctica?


He might feel more at home on some Arctic ice mass, where he could mingle with and/or talk to his imaginary penguin friends, who most likely would be less critical of his behaviour than we are although he deserves all the backlash he's receiving.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just ordered in book depository. But I’m still mad that the distribution is being limited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, I hate the new format. Apparently now you can't split up a quote. I had to copy the part I'm going to quote next and delete it from the original quote. And even if there IS a way: this is completely not intuitive and user friendly.
> 
> Anyway: does anyone else remember that article that came out shortly after the wedding that claimed "The intelligence of all the members of the Royal Family combined doesn't equal hers." Yeah, RIGHT. These are all people who have been meticulously educated, speak several languages (there's footage of Philip on Youtube effortlessly conversing in both German and French, fluently. Raptor couldn't even master British English it seems), many of them hold university degrees, The Queen herself is one of the most skilled diplomats of the world. But sure, Raptor surpasses them all. I'll agree they can't match her malevolence.
> 
> 
> 
> Her brain is seriously not wired correctly. I'm sure there are others like her, but I've never seen it to that extent.


She’s a 40 yr old, divorced, unemployed woman with 2 kids under 4 and a husband who is not mentally healthy [by his own admission]. Sure, she may have a somewhat sordid, pearl-clutching past, so what? Imo she is *not* the problem. He is.


----------



## LittleStar88

.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I have been thinking about this, and @CarryOn2020's view that those in the BRF who enabled Hazard should be named and shamed.
> 
> It's been on my mind because this kind of "enabling" happens a lot in my family and society. Is it a culture thing? In my country, there is no expectation for the offspring to become independent at 18 or to move out. Living with parental units is quite the norm (and brings with it its own set of MIL/DIL issues).
> 
> Parents and grandparents will often render additional assistance to the children who are less successful than their siblings. Yes, we would look askance at those who raise their kids to be entitled boors, but I think I would be a hypocrite to rail at the BRF or the Markles/Raglands because they doted on their kids and tried to smooth the path for them. It's not wholly their fault that they have felt the poison of the serpent's tooth.


What a large question. I will try my best mods. 

So as carryon2020 has alluded to Harry isn’t really comparable to normal children because he is entitled to things as a result of his blood only. Harry inherited the right to a royal house of his own and a title because he is Charles’ offspring. Given their bloodline is the only reason the royals are the royals it is not in their interests to show it can be withdrawn thus it’s a bit different from conventional parenting where there it is personal discretion. 

Historically (this is grossly generalising but you can pick it out), in many cultures the idea of adult children moving out and settling their own households is relatively modern among the vast majority of the population. In many parts of Europe and Asia families would remain in a homestead like structure and work and interact together. The only person who commonly left home permanently  was the new bride who would move into her husband’s homestead. Temporary or longer absences did occur if someone left to go to find fixed-term work, to go to war or to join a religious order (which also employ models of non-nuclear communal living.) with people coming and going and essentially no social mobility the idea of settling your own home would just be impossible for most people. 
of course another big factor is people didn’t live as long and could die precariously so a 20 year mortage model makes little sense for them, the other big factor here is the changing nature of property rights and the possibility of owning property and land outside of the super elite classes but I won’t go too into that. 

Even elite classes often lived in extended family structures. The lord of the Manor House is say a 40 year old with 3 teenage kids but he still has a responsibility to house within his manor his widowed mother and his great aunt lbecause That’s his patriarchal responsibility inherited with the house on the death of his dad if there’s essentially no other property to put them in. Whereas the super rich aristos like the royals have enough palaces to give all the family  a manor each. 


The rise of the in industrial revolution era Europe saw the creation of billions of far smaller homes built to house communities of workers and the creation of the house owner class as middle class  employees sought the opportunity to invest in buying the new asset of a house as opposed to the land it was built on (although many middle class people still rented) and actually many still housed their adult unmarried children just in smaller barracks   

To fast forward to the modern era At periods of the modern age of significant growth there’s enough employment opportunities at entry level positions and the promise of longer term employment to make families splitting into smaller households in different areas viable. These are often when a lot of new homes are built. 
In times of economic downturn the value of property tends to hold and the supply and demand remains the same or increases but the employment opportunities are fewer so it becomes harder to move out and set up an independent homestead. 

It should also be noted even cultures that favoured smaller families don’t tend to see adult children leave until they get married rather than a set age of adulthood. 
So In conclusion I think this you are an adult at 18 and so need to pay your own rent is a very modern idea competitively and it makes sense it is because for vast periods of history for different reasons it was just not considered  a possibility 










						Opinion | Prince Harry's U.N. speech on Mandela shows how clueless the royal family still is
					

The British royal referenced Mandela’s “vision of a freer, more peaceful world” even though his country's colonialism denied South Africa that dream.




					www.nbcnews.com
				



I remain amazed that the sheer weight of irony of his position didn’t materialise as he made his speech and come crashing down on him like an Acme anvil.


----------



## 1LV

EverSoElusive said:


> So I guess Z-list had SS hit back after all the bad press about their latest NYC trip. They sure try to make her look perfect and like a saint  Apparently she's a hero for offering the coughing lady in the back some water. If there was no camera around, do you think she would have?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And more merching?
> 
> View attachment 5572343



Pinky promise?  Pinky? Promise?  Save me a seat at lunch in the school cafeteria, too!!


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I'm not going to spoil it for you guys but I just listened to a chapter on audiobooks and it is as bad as I thought. Like really bad behavior, like Leona Helmsley bad.


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> Sigh... apparently she made Kate cry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate 'burst into tears' after Meghan 'wouldn't compromise'
> 
> 
> Writing in his new book Revenge, royal biographer Tom Bower claimed the Duchess of Sussex, 40, 'wouldn't compromise' on the fit of Charlotte's bridesmaid dress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh Gosh, this could be a scene of an horror movie! 

_Oprah asked Meghan: '*Was there a situation where she (Kate) might have cried*? Or she could have cried?'

But the Duchess of Sussex replied: '*No, no. The reverse happened*.

'And *I don't say that to be disparaging to anyone*, because it was a really hard week of the wedding.

'And she was upset about something, but she owned it, and she apologised.

'And *she brought me flowers and a note, apologising*. And she did what I would do if I knew that I hurt someone, right, to just take accountability for it.'

Meghan added that it was 'shocking' that the 'reverse of that would be out in the world'.

She continued: '*A few days before the wedding, she was upset about something pertaining - yes, the issue was correct - about flower girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings*._


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he had stayed on his side of the pond and stayed out of US politics and healthcare, there would be no issue.
> Seems that he is here on a diplomatic (?) passport [or is it a special royal one?] This means he has immunity and no responsibility. None. He can drive drunk, cause accidents, injure people and *nothing* happens to him. No prosecution, No fine, nothing. This is why Andi was able to get away with his nonsense.   Absolutely, families should help their offspring. That is the parents’ job. The BRF has done much more than that, much worse, imo. Titles. CoS. Lots of $$$$.
> This guy has power and immunity.  Imo that is shameful and that is on the BRF.
> 
> From Wikipedia: _Diplomatic immunity is a form of legal immunity that ensures diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country's laws, although they may still be expelled._
> From 2012,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do Royals Like Prince Harry Have Diplomatic Immunity? - E! Online
> 
> 
> Heads of state, such as the Queen, enjoy sovereign immunity. Princes aren't sovereigns, but they're often treated that way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


I would love to know what kind of passport he has and if he is taxed on his income generated by his Chimpo job and speeches.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Leona Helmsley and TW are going to be look alike when the TW gets older. The only redeeming quality that LH had was that she cared immensely for her dogs.
> 
> I'm not going to spoil it for you guys but *I just listened to a chapter on audiobooks* and it is as bad as I thought. Like really bad behavior, like Leona Helmsley bad.


How? Instructions, please.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If Raptor walks away with a big settlement it will be damage control.


The thing is they could never trust her to keep her mouth shut. No amount of money will satisfy her thirst for attention. If there are cameras around, she’ll be talking and since she’s a chronic liar she could be a thorn in the BRF’s side for many years to come.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> What a large question. I will try my best mods.
> 
> So as carryon2020 has alluded to Harry isn’t really comparable to normal children because he is entitled to things as a result of his blood only. Harry inherited the right to a royal house of his own and a title because he is Charles’ offspring. Given their bloodline is the only reason the royals are the royals it is not in their interests to show it can be withdrawn thus it’s a bit different from conventional parenting where there it is personal discretion.
> 
> Historically (this is grossly generalising but you can pick it out), in many cultures the idea of adult children moving out and settling their own households is relatively modern among the vast majority of the population. In many parts of Europe and Asia families would remain in a homestead like structure and work and interact together. The only person who commonly left home permanently  was the new bride who would move into her husband’s homestead. Temporary or longer absences did occur if someone left to go to find fixed-term work, to go to war or to join a religious order (which also employ models of non-nuclear communal living.) with people coming and going and essentially no social mobility the idea of settling your own home would just be impossible for most people.
> of course another big factor is people didn’t live as long and could die precariously so a 20 year mortage model makes little sense for them, the other big factor here is the changing nature of property rights and the possibility of owning property and land outside of the super elite classes but I won’t go too into that.
> 
> Even elite classes often lived in extended family structures. The lord of the Manor House is say a 40 year old with 3 teenage kids but he still has a responsibility to house within his manor his widowed mother and his great aunt lbecause That’s his patriarchal responsibility inherited with the house on the death of his dad if there’s essentially no other property to put them in. Whereas the super rich aristos like the royals have enough palaces to give all the family  a manor each.
> 
> 
> The rise of the in industrial revolution era Europe saw the creation of billions of far smaller homes built to house communities of workers and the creation of the house owner class as middle class  employees sought the opportunity to invest in buying the new asset of a house as opposed to the land it was built on (although many middle class people still rented) and actually many still housed their adult unmarried children just in smaller barracks
> 
> To fast forward to the modern era At periods of the modern age of significant growth there’s enough employment opportunities at entry level positions and the promise of longer term employment to make families splitting into smaller households in different areas viable. These are often when a lot of new homes are built.
> In times of economic downturn the value of property tends to hold and the supply and demand remains the same or increases but the employment opportunities are fewer so it becomes harder to move out and set up an independent homestead.
> 
> It should also be noted even cultures that favoured smaller families don’t tend to see adult children leave until they get married rather than a set age of adulthood.
> So In conclusion I think this you are an adult at 18 and so need to pay your own rent is a very modern idea competitively and it makes sense it is because for vast periods of history for different reasons it was just not considered  a possibility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Prince Harry's U.N. speech on Mandela shows how clueless the royal family still is
> 
> 
> The British royal referenced Mandela’s “vision of a freer, more peaceful world” even though his country's colonialism denied South Africa that dream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remain amazed that the sheer weight of irony of his position didn’t materialise as he made his speech and come crashing down on him like an Acme anvil.


Thank you for the historical perspective, @jelliedfeels. I must try to stop thinking about these issues and enjoy light-hearted gossip!  
And that Acme anvil image


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I just ordered in book depository. But I’m still mad that the distribution is being limited.


Why it is almost as if somebody doesn’t want it to become a best seller. But who would that be and why? 

In the words of the Wicked Witch of the West, “Curses, curses! Somebody always helps that girl!”


----------



## Bronxlady

Hi!  I’ve been reading this thread for a long time, but don’t think I ever posted.  I live in the U.S., and am so frustrated by my inability to order the book from a U.S. vendor!  I placed an order on book depository on July 18, but the book is still showing as “Awaiting Publication“ on my order.  Just wanted to let you know.


----------



## LittleStar88

Bronxlady said:


> Hi!  I’ve been reading this thread for a long time, but don’t think I ever posted.  I live in the U.S., and am so frustrated by my inability to order the book from a U.S. vendor!  I placed an order on book depository on July 18, but the book is still showing as “Awaiting Publication“ on my order.  Just wanted to let you know.



Welcome!! It's nice to see more like-minded people here. Looking forward to your posts 

I also bought the book from book depository but have no idea if I will actually ever receive a copy. Not sure why it's not being released in the US at the same time. I heard August 2nd for us here in the US but have no idea if that is true or not. So strange.


----------



## LizzieBennett

bag-mania said:


> Why it is almost as if somebody doesn’t want it to become a best seller. But who would that be and why?
> 
> In the words of the Wicked Witch of the West, “Curses, curses! Somebody always helps that girl!”
> 
> View attachment 5572499



Which company is publishing Prince Harry’s autobiography?   Wonder if they are pressuring the US sellers to delay offering the Bower book?


----------



## Bronxlady

LittleStar88 said:


> Welcome!! It's nice to see more like-minded people here. Looking forward to your posts
> 
> I also bought the book from book depository but have no idea if I will actually ever receive a copy. Not sure why it's not being released in the US at the same time. I heard August 2nd for us here in the US but have no idea if that is true or not. So strange.


Thank you!  I guess we will just have to wait and see on the book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> The thing is they could never trust her to keep her mouth shut. No amount of money will satisfy her thirst for attention. If there are cameras around, she’ll be talking and since she’s a chronic liar she could be a thorn in the BRF’s side for many years to come.


And no NDA would work, because she would claim she is being "silenced". If what Tom Bower said is true, then ZeeZee's lawyers and sunshine cronies, plus the Plastic Pal and Stepford Squad do a lot of intimidation. NDA usage is for her to silence others.


----------



## youngster

An author that I read has often posted that when she publishes a new book, it is not released everywhere throughout the world on the same date, so she puts out a list of availability by date by country.  Sometimes, it is a month later in certain parts of the world.  Sometimes, just an extra few days.  So, it may not be a grand conspiracy to keep the book out of the U.S.   It may just be an extra few days or a week or two.


----------



## bag-mania

LizzieBennett said:


> Which company is publishing Prince Harry’s autobiography?   Wonder if they are pressuring the US sellers to delay offering the Bower book?


Penguin Random House will publish Harry’s book if they ever receive an acceptable manuscript. I don’t think they are the problem.

I don’t know the advantage when distributing books to holding off in certain parts of the world. For most authors it would be time for the publisher to promote it, but that particular book has all the promotion it needs.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> My direct question if it would be available from Amazon USA was not specifically addressed.
> *I'm going to order the E-book if it's still available.*  Will be a juicy beach book!


If you succeed in getting the e-book, please share with us how you did it. The one I bought from the Book Depository still shows as 'processing' and 'awaiting publication'.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> An author that I read has often posted that when she publishes a new book, it is not released everywhere throughout the world on the same date, so she puts out a list of availability by date by country.  Sometimes, it is a month later in certain parts of the world.  Sometimes, just an extra few days.  So, it may not be a grand conspiracy to keep the book out of the U.S.   It may just be an extra few days or a week or two.


That is true but when that happens the date of availability would be listed and pre-orders would be available. In this case pre-orders were sold but then the book was inexplicably pulled from Amazon US, Apple, etc.

It is almost as if those companies received a cease and desist letter or something.


----------



## andrashik

Well, I think this is why they write their own speeches (which are terrible)








						I nearly wrote speeches for Meghan and Harry
					

Clare Foges reveals that she was so impressed at first with Meghan Markle that she considered working for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex writing speeches. She explains why her opinions changed




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you for posting this video (and so so many more), dear Chanbal.
> 
> What I find somehow surprising (again in the media):
> 
> According to Bower and staff at VF and a video here on tpf (already here some time ago) there is *no evidence* - none at all - that the former actress and briefcase girl *ever really got involved humanitarian, socially, philanthropically or for women or racial equality/rights,* although she likes to make that so much about herself. Personally, I find exactly this an important point and am almost disappointed that this IMO *significant inconsistency* is not much more clearly highlighted in the media about "St. Meghan - with (acc. to those mentioned above) no evidence of ever having truly selflessly stood up *and actually worked for and actually pursued* a Saint cause".


You are very welcome. Here is one more, which I think it's good.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, this sounds worse than anticipated.


----------



## lanasyogamama

LizzieBennett said:


> Which company is publishing Prince Harry’s autobiography?   Wonder if they are pressuring the US sellers to delay offering the Bower book?


I saw a post on Reddit that said there was not a US publisher yet. I didn’t screenshot it because I didn’t know if it was reliable, but now I am thinking that it makes sense.


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this sounds worse than anticipated.



After what is in Bower's book, how could anyone now question the British Royal family and staff bullying claims?


----------



## Chanbal

Oops!   











						Meghan Markle was prone to 'unpredictable' outbursts, biography claims
					

Tom Bower, author of Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, claims the Duchess of Sussex 'reduced people to tears with her passive aggressive tone'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Oh, this sounds worse than anticipated.



She recommended love potions and seductive poses on the Tig? Now I'm wondering what kind of blog that was. Like National Enquirer? Her stans claim that it was a highly profitable venture. I've seen stories that ZeeZee earned a 6-figure sum from it every year.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower @ GMB


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> You are very welcome. Here is one more, which I think it's good.



"Brand Sussex died today"   I love the candor of the Aussies compared to the kid glove coverage on the Today show in the US.


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> If you succeed in getting the e-book, please share with us how you did it. The one I bought from the Book Depository still shows as 'processing' and 'awaiting publication'.
> 
> View attachment 5572519


Unfortunately I have NOT succeeded in ordering the E book on Amazon yet but I’m going to keep trying.  I usually order E books directly from my kindle and that was a complete fail as it doesn’t show up at all. I will try later when I have access to my computer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

More from the Aussies!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower @ GMB



Interesting how the host digs in about her being famous before Harry. How many of you here had ever heard of her before they got engaged?  I pay attention to celebrity news and I had never heard of her. I had to ask my daughter who watched Suits, and she said MM was only a supporting player. I think it is a stretch to say she was a famous or a star.


----------



## V0N1B2

needlv said:


> If anyone wants to read a sample, the first 100 pages of Tom Bowers book is here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revenge
> 
> 
> THE SUNDAY TIMES NO. 1 BESTSELLER 'Explosive' The Sun'Accounts from insiders who have never spoken before' The Times'Bombshell' The MirrorThe British Royal Family believed that the dizzy success of the Sussex wedding, watched and celebrated around...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overdrive.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> click on sample.  And if you have an iPad, once it loads, swipe from right to left to move the pages.
> 
> it’s a good read.  I’m going to go buy it but my local bookstore won’t have physical copies until 2 August…


Eye-opening. Again, things you kinda already knew, but have been confirmed. Interesting connection to Serena Williams - I guess she met her thru Brett Ratner then?
I now completely understand why she is the way she is. “What Meaghan wants, Meghan gets”.  I can understand Samantha’s animosity towards her. Some interesting things about her mum. 
Can’t hate on her for her hustle though. She’s her own biggest fan and promoter.

The only passage that was not factual was the part Tom Bower wrote about meeting Jessica Mulroney and the Trudeaus, and that Justin’s father Pierre was the Prime Minister for four years. He was the PM for a total of 15 years (‘68-‘79 & ‘80-‘84)


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Interesting how the host digs in about her being famous before Harry. How many of you here had ever heard of her before they got engaged?  I pay attention to celebrity news and I had never heard of her. I had to ask my daughter who watched Suits, and she said MM was only a supporting player. I think it is a stretch to say she was a famous or a star.


Before Hazz:


----------



## charlottawill

V0N1B2 said:


> that Justin’s father Pierre was the Prime Minister for four years. He was the PM for a total of 15 years (‘68-‘79 & ‘80-‘84)


That's a pretty glaring oversight and things like that could be used to call the veracity of the entire book into question.  I'm surprised that got by Bower given his reputation as a meticulous researcher.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> The thing is they could never trust her to keep her mouth shut. No amount of money will satisfy her thirst for attention. If there are cameras around, she’ll be talking and since she’s a chronic liar she could be a thorn in the BRF’s side for many years to come.



True, but my idea was more about a waterproof NDA with hefty penalties in exchange for the money. I know @papertiger said there is no way in hell she'd sign it, but...there's a very real possibility that she'll need the money. She has nothing going for her really, but she sure enjoys her current lifestyle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> An author that I read has often posted that when she publishes a new book, it is not released everywhere throughout the world on the same date, so she puts out a list of availability by date by country.  Sometimes, it is a month later in certain parts of the world.  Sometimes, just an extra few days.  So, it may not be a grand conspiracy to keep the book out of the U.S.   It may just be an extra few days or a week or two.



I pre-order a lot of books (for once, if I see them, I don't want to keep track of when they get out, and also as I read a lot of English books there's always the chance the price will go up between pre-listing and publication date. German book prices are bound - so if they go up, that's what I will pay - but English books fall unter amazon's price guarantee), and they are usually available for pre-order 6 to 12 months prior. So it doesn't make sense you can't find it when publication date is imminent, and even less that people were able to pre-order it and a minute later the listing was untraceable.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I pre-order a lot of books (for once, if I see them, I don't want to keep track of when they get out, and also as I read a lot of English books there's always the chance the price will go up between pre-listing and publication date. German book prices are bound - so if they go up, that's what I will pay - but English books fall unter amazon's price guarantee), and they are usually available for pre-order 6 to 12 months prior. So it doesn't make sense you can't find it when publication date is imminent, and even less that people were able to pre-order it and a minute later the listing was untraceable.



I think @lanasyogamama posted earlier that a Reddit post stated there is no U.S. publisher yet so that's why the trouble ordering or pre-ordering in the U.S.  Maybe if there are big sales in the UK, it will get a U.S. publisher?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> More from the Aussies!




Isn't that supposed to say "Z" instead of "C"? CeeJay would agree.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I think @lanasyogamama posted earlier that a Reddit post stated there is no U.S. publisher yet so that's why the trouble ordering or pre-ordering in the U.S.  Maybe if there are big sales in the UK, it will get a U.S. publisher?



Everything's possible, but when I order my English language cookbooks they don't come from a German publisher either. The German edition will often come out a year or so later, but that doesn't compromise the ability to get the original. 

I just went to amazon.com to check, and I choose Ottolenghi Shelf Love as my test balloon. You can get the US version (obviously on top of the list), the UK version (which was the original) and a French version.


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> I think @lanasyogamama posted earlier that a Reddit post stated there is no U.S. publisher yet so that's why the trouble ordering or pre-ordering in the U.S.  Maybe if there are big sales in the UK, it will get a U.S. publisher?


It certainly seems like there is money to be made!


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles have been wearing a lot of Dior!


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> More from the Aussies!




This is f*'n brilliant. Love the Aussies and their unfiltered no-BS take on them!


----------



## Chanbal

Chapter 1.1
The reader includes too many of his own comments and opinions, which may not agree with Tom Bower's views…


----------



## jennlt




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> I*nteresting how the host digs in about her being famous before Harry*. How many of you here had ever heard of her before they got engaged?  I pay attention to celebrity news and I had never heard of her. I had to ask my daughter who watched Suits, and she said MM was only a supporting player. I think it is a stretch to say she was a famous or a star.


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5572668


The worst thing is that it likely represents the reality. This ordeal must be very painful for Charles, Will, QE…


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> That's a pretty glaring oversight and things like that could be used to call the veracity of the entire book into question.  I'm surprised that got by Bower given his reputation as a meticulous researcher.


They probably meant 4 terms not 4 years, or maybe the 4 years because that’s what it was wished he’d only served.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> The worst thing is that it likely represents the reality. This ordeal must be very painful for Charles, Will, QE…


From the pictures at the UN, it looks as though Harry has also come to a painful realization. I almost feel sorry for him. Almost.


----------



## Jayne1

V0N1B2 said:


> The only passage that was not factual was the part Tom Bower wrote about meeting Jessica Mulroney and the Trudeaus, and that Justin’s father Pierre was the Prime Minister for four years. He was the PM for a total of 15 years (‘68-‘79 & ‘80-‘84)


Were his researchers confused about which Trudeau?

Justin has been PM since 2015 so that's closer to 4 years and Pierre, his father, as you said was PM for 15.

I wish Bower did not make that mistake, since it makes you wonder what other mistakes...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

If I should guess I'd say Bea is not impressed with the Harkle's treatment of her grandparents.


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


>



Where did these tall tales come from? SMH. Hollywood star, famous actress, supermodel, humanitarian, activist, philanthropist? SMH some more.
If  sucks has been promoting this fiction of her all these years，I must admit that they are as good as the courtiers who created the smokescreen that Harry was fun and had a good heart. The Harkles deserve each other. They really are influencers because they have certainly brought out the worst in each other.


----------



## V0N1B2

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5572668


If I wasn’t so in love with my own image, I would make this photo my avatar.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Bronxlady said:


> Hi!  I’ve been reading this thread for a long time, but don’t think I ever posted.  I live in the U.S., and am so frustrated by my inability to order the book from a U.S. vendor!  I placed an order on book depository on July 18, but the book is still showing as “Awaiting Publication“ on my order.  Just wanted to let you know.





bellecate said:


> They probably meant 4 terms not 4 years, or maybe the 4 years because that’s what it was wished he’d only served.


Sadly, editing of late has been lax and at times grammatically incorrect—if not patently awkward. I have often wondered if it was human error or reliance on computer use of spellcheck, autocorrect, etc.


----------



## jennlt

V0N1B2 said:


> If I wasn’t so in love with my own image, I would make this photo my avatar.


Maybe BLG is selling it on a tee shirt and then you could make it your own by drawing horns on her head and a pointy beard on her face


----------



## gracekelly

Bower confirmed my first though about Kashner’s letter to The Times. He totally panicked that he would never get another celeb interview and I’m sure SS told him that. He had to write a letter , but did so very carefully because he knew Bower had the goods on him.

I was surprised at how hard the host on GMB stanned for her. Bower was amused, but held his ground


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> Interesting how the host digs in about her being famous before Harry. How many of you here had ever heard of her before they got engaged?  I pay attention to celebrity news and I had never heard of her. I had to ask my daughter who watched Suits, and she said MM was only a supporting player. I think it is a stretch to say she was a famous or a star.



Never.  I had absolutely no idea who she was when I read that JCMH was dating an American actress.

She was NOT very famous.  The show Suits was not very famous.  Not even the network that aired Suits was super famous!   It was one out of HUNDREDS of cable channels available in the US.  

I even watched other shows on the same network but had literally never seen her or heard of her before H.


----------



## Cinderlala

Somewhere in the preview of the book, there's a description of Raptor's acting abilities given by an individual who had worked with/directed/I-can't-remember who said Raptor was not a great actress because she could not get past herself to become someone else.  She was fine as an actress playing herself, but could not play another character. 

I know, such a vague reference!   But, you'll know when you see it in the book.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I had never heard of Suits when the VF came out.


----------



## Cinderlala

One of the articles linked somewhere in this thread said Suits averaged 1.5 million viewers.  That is a very small show for the US.

And, hilariously, the same article said viewership didn't even increase after Raptor was linked with JCMH.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sunshine Sachs must be getting tired of the Body Language Guy’s videos. They are putting their own “expert” out with a breakdown of why the claw in the UN was actually a helpful, loving gesture.









						A Body-Language Expert Analyzed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s PDA in New York City
					

Obsessed with all these sweet deets.




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Bower confirmed my first though about* Kashner’s *letter to The Times. He totally panicked that he would never get another celeb interview and I’m sure SS told him that. He had to write a letter , but did so very carefully because he knew Bower had the goods on him.


Kashner is likely afraid of SS, but it's better for him to be quiet. There is already some dirty on him circulating. 



gracekelly said:


> *I was surprised at how hard the host on GMB stanned for her.* Bower was amused, but held his ground


It's amazing how the GMB's organizers had Piers removed and replaced by a TW's stan.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> A reputable place usually won't bow to tactics like that, unless maybe you're a true A lister. About ten years ago a minor celebrity, one of the co-hosts of a popular TV show, was in town where I live. He tried to use his name to get a table at the hot new restaurant on a Saturday night but was told they were fully booked. The celebrity's co-host then took to social media and tried to bully the owner, a James Beard award-winning chef, into giving her co-host a table. It didn't work. The owner said he wasn't bumping a guest with a prior reservation for a celebrity. And the whining co-host got blowback here for being a bullying b*tch.


and the people she allegedly tried to bump would be much more likely to return to the restaurant than she and H would....so why insult them?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Sunshine Sachs must be getting tired of the Body Language Guy’s videos*. They are putting their own “expert” out with a breakdown of why the claw in the UN was actually a helpful, loving gesture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Body-Language Expert Analyzed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s PDA in New York City
> 
> 
> Obsessed with all these sweet deets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


Too bad!


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I would love to know what kind of passport he has and if he is taxed on his income generated by his Chimpo job and speeches.


To-date no one has had a solid answer on the passport he's using, immigration status and tax status in the US. 

I remember detailing what it takes for regular Americans to petition their foreign spouses for a spousal visa, which would lead to a green card eventually. It is a really long process (typically takes more than 12 months to be processed and approved) and you don't just get to live in America unless you have the right status stemming from an issued visa or a green card. Family based visa will still require the foreign spouse to either have an Employment Authorization Document (while waiting on a green card) or green card to work. 

Based on a previous discussion within this thread, someone mentioned that he could have been granted an O-1 visa, which is meant for people with extraordinary ability or achievement, allowing him to live and work in the US. Even with an O-1 visa, he would actually need a sponsor (in the form of an employer or an employer's representative) and this visa is valid for 3 years initially and then can only be renewed 1 year at a time if you stay with the same employer or a 3 months extension if you switch employers. I don't think this would have been dished out freely just because he's a prince, when he doesn't have any real skills or an employer.

I've been through the US immigration process and things move at a snail pace. If they went through what regular folks typically do, it's impossible that his visa or green card was approved fast enough for his move to the US and to start "working" so quickly. Doing any kind of work without the right US immigration status is actually illegal. And of course if you can work legally, then taxes must be filed!

The main reason why we couldn't seem to find any proper info on his status is simply because he's a foreign royal family member. Perhaps he is treated as an exception to the rule and received special consular processing and a different type of status. I would really like to know but until we can find a USCIS personnel or a US State Department consular personnel to shed some light on policy, this will simply be eternal question marks for peasants like me.





bag-mania said:


> Why it is almost as if somebody doesn’t want it to become a best seller. But who would that be and why?
> 
> In the words of the Wicked Witch of the West, “Curses, curses! Somebody always helps that girl!”
> 
> View attachment 5572499


Z-list's children book was a flop. She can't have an actual and properly written book ended up being a bestseller and highly ranked, outshining hers. That aside, she doesn't want dirt on her to come out. Too late though. Variety of excerpts have been shared by others. Appalling is an understatement when describing Z-list and her lovesick puppy.


----------



## Chanbal

One more story confirmed…









						Meghan 'accused Victoria Beckham of indiscretion' - resulting in 'damaging' call
					

In Tom Bower's explosive book he has revealed Harry felt 'persecuted' by the media and trolls - he and Meghan would take to the internet to look at what was being said about them




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs must be getting tired of the Body Language Guy’s videos. *They are putting their own “expert” out with a breakdown of why the claw in the UN was actually a helpful, loving gesture.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Body-Language Expert Analyzed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s PDA in New York City
> 
> 
> Obsessed with all these sweet deets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


Then again…


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5572486


I had to look up Leona H and Lordy do we learn some things from this thread.


Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh, this could be a scene of an horror movie!
> 
> _Oprah asked Meghan: '*Was there a situation where she (Kate) might have cried*? Or she could have cried?'
> 
> But the Duchess of Sussex replied: '*No, no. The reverse happened*.
> 
> 'And *I don't say that to be disparaging to anyone*, because it was a really hard week of the wedding.
> 
> 'And she was upset about something, but she owned it, and she apologised.
> 
> 'And *she brought me flowers and a note, apologising*. And she did what I would do if I knew that I hurt someone, right, to just take accountability for it.'
> 
> Meghan added that it was 'shocking' that the 'reverse of that would be out in the world'.
> 
> She continued: '*A few days before the wedding, she was upset about something pertaining - yes, the issue was correct - about flower girl dresses, and it made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings*._



I’ve always said this story is one of the best tells on M’s feminist credentials - she jumped at the first chance to try and bury another woman of status in the most  catty, petty, simpering story I’ve heard in a while. I mean the idea of women cat-fighting and crying over dresses is just so deeply embarrassing if I was involved I’d have buried it immediately. C didn’t comment on it at the very least.


xincinsin said:


> Thank you for the historical perspective, @jelliedfeels. I must try to stop thinking about these issues and enjoy light-hearted gossip!
> And that Acme anvil image


I’m glad it entertained you- we aim to please and to overthink  

Oh look here’s H&M





Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower @ GMB



Fascinating how their ratings are in the midnight zone since they decided to get marks in- doesn’t matter what issue they are just general limp biscuits. 

I know I’m biased but Bower does have a relaxed confidence about him which really supports his story - the opposite of H in his Oprah interview who looked like he was giving birth to Napalm the entire time and ZZ topless whose face froze and reconfigured more than a bad windows update. 


jennlt said:


>



This photo is going straight in my reaction photos library for future sarcasm.




V0N1B2 said:


> If I wasn’t so in love with my own image, I would make this photo my avatar.


I might steal your idea if I may- I’m not so attached to Decker.


----------



## Chanbal

TB's book is already sold out @ Book Depository.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles have been wearing a lot of Dior!
> View attachment 5572665



God, this woman is so freaking cheap.


----------



## Cinderlala

Chanbal said:


> Then again…




Eww, ick!!!


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> One more story confirmed…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'accused Victoria Beckham of indiscretion' - resulting in 'damaging' call
> 
> 
> In Tom Bower's explosive book he has revealed Harry felt 'persecuted' by the media and trolls - he and Meghan would take to the internet to look at what was being said about them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Regarding reading "negative" stories about themselves, I wonder if they visited this forum


----------



## 880

xincinsin said:


> I have been thinking about this, and @CarryOn2020's view that those in the BRF who enabled Hazard should be named and shamed.
> 
> It's been on my mind because this kind of "enabling" happens a lot in my family and society. Is it a culture thing? In my country, there is no expectation for the offspring to become independent at 18 or to move out. Living with parental units is quite the norm (and brings with it its own set of MIL/DIL issues).
> 
> Parents and grandparents will often render additional assistance to the children who are less successful than their siblings. Yes, we would look askance at those who raise their kids to be entitled boors, but I think I would be a hypocrite to rail at the BRF or the Markles/Raglands because they doted on their kids and tried to smooth the path for them. It's not wholly their fault that they have felt the poison of the serpent's tooth.


+1 with this being the norm in my culture too

  ETA: +1 with @jelliedfeels , that the cat fight over bridesmaid dresses should have been buried immediately 

on another topic, I thought I read somewhere in this thread that Harry could not find a publisher for his upcoming memoir?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Then again…




This is so sad really. He's a very damaged man.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Then again…



Beat me Whip me?  Spank me when I am bad?  Hold my hand and i will be a good boy. Please don't punish me.


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> Regarding reading "negative" stories about themselves, I wonder if they visited this forum


Gosh i hope so!  We certain gave them an earful!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> God, this woman is so freaking cheap.


It's the Sharon Stone Syndrome, i.e. you should be happy to give it to me because of who I am and I get to keep it too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> It's the Sharon Stone Syndrome, i.e. you should be happy to give it to me because of who I am and I get to keep it too.



Not condoning Sharon's sh*tty behavior, but at least she's an actual star.


----------



## K.D.

I've definitely been reading too much here cause today I overheard in my (non US/UK) office someone saying 'Harry, he's no longer Prince of Wales, is he?' and almost wanted to join the conversation to correct them...


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> What a large question. I will try my best mods.
> 
> So as carryon2020 has alluded to Harry isn’t really comparable to normal children because he is entitled to things as a result of his blood only. Harry inherited the right to a royal house of his own and a title because he is Charles’ offspring. Given their bloodline is the only reason the royals are the royals it is not in their interests to show it can be withdrawn thus it’s a bit different from conventional parenting where there it is personal discretion.
> 
> Historically (this is grossly generalising but you can pick it out), in many cultures the idea of adult children moving out and settling their own households is relatively modern among the vast majority of the population. In many parts of Europe and Asia families would remain in a homestead like structure and work and interact together. The only person who commonly left home permanently  was the new bride who would move into her husband’s homestead. Temporary or longer absences did occur if someone left to go to find fixed-term work, to go to war or to join a religious order (which also employ models of non-nuclear communal living.) with people coming and going and essentially no social mobility the idea of settling your own home would just be impossible for most people.
> of course another big factor is people didn’t live as long and could die precariously so a 20 year mortage model makes little sense for them, the other big factor here is the changing nature of property rights and the possibility of owning property and land outside of the super elite classes but I won’t go too into that.
> 
> Even elite classes often lived in extended family structures. The lord of the Manor House is say a 40 year old with 3 teenage kids but he still has a responsibility to house within his manor his widowed mother and his great aunt lbecause That’s his patriarchal responsibility inherited with the house on the death of his dad if there’s essentially no other property to put them in. Whereas the super rich aristos like the royals have enough palaces to give all the family  a manor each.
> 
> 
> The rise of the in industrial revolution era Europe saw the creation of billions of far smaller homes built to house communities of workers and the creation of the house owner class as middle class  employees sought the opportunity to invest in buying the new asset of a house as opposed to the land it was built on (although many middle class people still rented) and actually many still housed their adult unmarried children just in smaller barracks
> 
> To fast forward to the modern era At periods of the modern age of significant growth there’s enough employment opportunities at entry level positions and the promise of longer term employment to make families splitting into smaller households in different areas viable. These are often when a lot of new homes are built.
> In times of economic downturn the value of property tends to hold and the supply and demand remains the same or increases but the employment opportunities are fewer so it becomes harder to move out and set up an independent homestead.
> 
> It should also be noted even cultures that favoured smaller families don’t tend to see adult children leave until they get married rather than a set age of adulthood.
> So In conclusion I think this you are an adult at 18 and so need to pay your own rent is a very modern idea competitively and it makes sense it is because for vast periods of history for different reasons it was just not considered  a possibility
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Prince Harry's U.N. speech on Mandela shows how clueless the royal family still is
> 
> 
> The British royal referenced Mandela’s “vision of a freer, more peaceful world” even though his country's colonialism denied South Africa that dream.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I remain amazed that the sheer weight of irony of his position didn’t materialise as he made his speech and come crashing down on him like an Acme anvil.


Europe may different then the UK. In the UK the landowners (landed gentry) have always owned most of the land, estates (often including whole villages) and freeholds. Nearly all owed their jobs and/homes to the Lord of the  manor. This has ensured all the land is owned by the same families for generations. The eldest son keeping almost everything, hence keeping the estate whole. Marrying other blue bloods meant and more titles split down the (male) generations (Archie could have been given Earl of Dumbarton) and some families have numerous titles.  Houses built on Ducal estates are nearly always leasehold or tide (go with the job) farms likewise. Very few own their homes outright (freehold) on an estate. I do, but as I explained earlier the Duke still owns the mining rights under my house. There would have been no middle classes without merchants and trade (despised by the upper class). The industrialists shook things up, basically they exploited the rural working classes and casual labourers that followed the seasonal work AFTER the landowners replaced many of them with farming machinery or changing land use, that’s  why many went to towns and cities for work.

Our crown and nobility still own a chunk of our country.




I think the biggest change in the UK was in the 1960s when grownup children of all classes left home before  they married and not just service, soldiers and sailors etc. Of course, many families lived in rented accommodation, some many in one large house. That was still going on in London in he 1970s.


----------



## papertiger

K.D. said:


> I've definitely been reading too much here cause today I overheard in my (non US/UK) office someone saying 'Harry, he's no longer Prince of Wales, is he?' and almost wanted to join the conversation to correct them...


According to someone at the UN he’s the Duke of Wessex


----------



## DL Harper

In the course of lurking (and being THOROUGHLY entertained and disgusted at the same time) for a while now, I decided to share something I read long ago.  Sorry if it's a repeat post here. 

*Written in Oct 2018*, here's a part of the article:

But now Princess Diana's former friend and personal psychic Simone Simmons has made a shocking string of predictions, claiming Harry and Meghan will break up after just three years of marriage.
"I give their marriage two-and-a-half to three years," Simone, who claims she still communicates to Princess Diana from the grave, alleged to UK publication _The Daily Star_.
"I don't want to see him badly hurt, and Harry won't know what's hit him when it does happen," the healer continued.
"He is head over heels in love. Harry is like the embodiment of Diana, he is so sensitive."
Simone also believes the royal couple will have two children before they divorce.
As for the reason of their split, the psychic believes Meghan's scandal-prone family will be the couple's ultimate undoing.
"Even people with dysfunctional families are not as dissociated as hers," Simone said.
"Look at her last two relationships. They didn't last much longer than two years. This will probably be no different."

Wonder what Ms Simmons might have to say about the current happenings??  True - her time frame prediction for the divorce is a bit off, but even so......


----------



## lanasyogamama

I saw this on Reddit.  It shows that the hem on Charlotte’s dress was left uneven and frayed if you zoom in.


----------



## Lodpah

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5572668


If Harry does not see this or he does see it and does nothing then he deserves all the backlash against his emasculation. The least he can do is tell his wife to tone down the controls and make an effort to live what they say.

The fact that the body language guy has had over a 100 million views should wake Netflix and Spotify that their clients are not well liked.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


>


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The thing is they could never trust her to keep her mouth shut. No amount of money will satisfy her thirst for attention. If there are cameras around, she’ll be talking and since she’s a chronic liar she could be a thorn in the BRF’s side for many years to come.


Exactly!


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw this on Reddit.  It shows that the hem on Charlotte’s dress was left uneven and frayed if you zoom in.



Why didn't Catherine and/or her dresser fix it?  Didn't they take the dress home so Charlotte could get dressed at home?


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> Then again…




It would have been better for all if he quietly paid for BDSM sessions and have a dominatrix play mummy
Then MM and JCMH could have stay in the UK and live an undeserved life of privilege


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw this on Reddit.  It shows that the hem on Charlotte’s dress was left uneven and frayed if you zoom in.



Also, it is much shorter than the other girls'.  One almost wonders if Me-gain intentionally wanted Charlotte to look worse than the other flower girls --- because the Raptor is a spiteful you know what.


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Also, it is much shorter than the other girls'.  One almost wonders if Me-gain intentionally wanted Charlotte to look worse than the other flower girls --- because she is a spiteful you know what.


no way she could make that little girl look bad


----------



## kipp

sdkitty said:


> no way she could make that little girl look bad


Agree, Charlotte is a cutie no matter what.   Maybe I was inarticulate---probably the better words would have been less put together.  In Raptor's mind though it could have been 'worse.'


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


>




Wasn’t planning to but out of sheer perversity just bought a copy at Amazon Australia


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Fine, the US is Team Raptor. But what with traitorous Canada and Australia?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF is not like any other family, imo.


----------



## Lodpah

I think a lot for f people owe Samantha Markle an apology. I’ll go first, sorry Samantha, I should not have judged you and thought you were just fame hungry. 

Wish you all the best in your lawsuit and hope you asked for punitive damages that will set you up for life for what your sister did to your reputation and the death threats you received from the sugars. 

BTW, where can I buy your book?


----------



## bag-mania

We cannot buy the book in the US but it is already a best seller on Amazon UK. Congrats to Mr. Bower. 

It says we can have it shipped to the US. Has anyone tried it through Amazon UK?


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fine, the US is Team Raptor. But what with traitorous Canada and Australia?



No, not at all in the U.S.  The press and chattering class (the Talking Heads as a former President used to call them) know of them.  The celeb magazines know them.  People who follow celebrities in general know of them.  They have their sugars of course.  But, the majority of people in the U.S likely couldn't pick them out of a police line up. I know my DH, my kids, and some of my closest friends couldn't.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Then again…


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The BRF is not like any other family, imo.



So much for the media narrative that he was something of a hero in Afghanistan, no doubt created by the palace.


----------



## sdkitty

kipp said:


> Also, it is much shorter than the other girls'.  One almost wonders if Me-gain intentionally wanted Charlotte to look worse than the other flower girls --- because the Raptor is a spiteful you know what.


we don't know for sure what happened but if she was jealous and vindictive toward that tiny little girl, that would be a Very poor reflection on her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> No, not at all in the U.S.  The press and chattering class (the Talking Heads as a former President used to call them) know of them.  The celeb magazines know them.  People who follow celebrities in general know of them.  They have their sugars of course.  But, the majority of people in the U.S likely couldn't pick them out of a police line up. I know my DH, my kids, and some of my closest friends couldn't.



Sorry for being unclear, I was only referring to the people who apparently can pull a book off the shelves, not suggesting every US citizen is a stan. What a scary thought!


----------



## Cinderlala

kipp said:


> Also, it is much shorter than the other girls'.  One almost wonders if Me-gain intentionally wanted Charlotte to look worse than the other flower girls --- because the Raptor is a spiteful you know what.



You can be certain that was Raptor's intent.  Unfortunately for her, I didn't even notice the other girls & I bet most people didn't either. 

I can see why Kate was upset---come after me that's fine, but mess with my child and I will end you.

Edited to add: obviously Charlotte is absolutely adorable!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Here is the Amazon UK link to get the Kindle version.






						Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors. The Sunday Times no 1 bestseller eBook : Bower, Tom: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store
					

Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors. The Sunday Times no 1 bestseller eBook : Bower, Tom: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store



					www.amazon.co.uk
				




And here is the link to get the hardcover. Looks like it will take about two weeks for Amazon to guarantee delivery in the US, but at least they will do it.






						Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors: Amazon.co.uk: Bower, Tom: 9781788705035: Books
					

Buy Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors by Bower, Tom (ISBN: 9781788705035) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.



					www.amazon.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My book is currently in Kent.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Sunshine Sachs must be getting tired of the Body Language Guy’s videos. They are putting their own “expert” out with a breakdown of why the claw in the UN was actually a helpful, loving gesture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Body-Language Expert Analyzed Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s PDA in New York City
> 
> 
> Obsessed with all these sweet deets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


I have to say, that possibility entered my mind, especially watching them get off the escalator in the UN. She turned to take his hand and he willingly accepted. Has she managed to convince him that by holding her hand at all times it will ease his anxiety? It looked so awkward, treating him like a toddler. She's the one who craves the spotlight. I think he hates it (outside of the polo field) but has been thrust into it for the money.


----------



## 1LV

​https://twitter.com/BaronessBruck


< Those close to Harry believed that he had long harboured a fantasy to be told what to do by a woman. In his search for maternal sympathy, Meghan promised to be an understanding mother figure as well as an adoring lover… > 

If this is true. . . Sick.  Sick.  Sick.  Maybe one day he will wake up, and be as grossed out by it all as we have been.


----------



## Cinderlala

pukasonqo said:


> It would have been better for all if he quietly paid for BDSM sessions and have a dominatrix play mummy
> Then MM and JCMH could have stay in the UK and live an undeserved life of privilege



Had this been the solution, we could have all been spared from the Raptor.


----------



## bag-mania

Didn’t Edward enjoy being dominated by Wallis? Could Harry and Meghan be their reincarnations?   

ETA: No, not possible. Meghan was born a few years before Wallis died.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Where did these tall tales come from? SMH. Hollywood star, famous actress, supermodel, humanitarian, activist, philanthropist? SMH some more.


Michael Jackson (a guy with a huge sense of self importance) started calling himself the King of Pop and that's what the media started using, to this day.

Howard Stern, in a riff on this, but also a guy with a huge sense of self importance, started calling himself King of all Media and that too took off to an extent.

If Meg (or Sunshine Sachs) states famous actress, humanitarian, activist enough times, it will be taken as gospel.  Not to those who look closely and do some research, but to the general public who doesn't care.


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t Edward enjoy being dominated by Wallis? Could Harry and Meghan be their reincarnations?
> 
> ETA: No, not possible. Meghan was born a few years before Wallis died.



Raptor wishes!  Her bizarre Wallis copy-cat outfit at St. James was...alarming.  

(To be fair, I always find her demented perma-grin alarming and it's impossible for me to separate the grin from that outfit.)


----------



## Yanca

Tom Bower Revenge  Book in Book depository is both unavailable in hardcover and paperback ( sold out) My order still says processing. I hope to get it soon


----------



## Aimee3

I've said this before, probably more than once, that I actually did watch Suits from the very beginning. The premise of the show was cute and preposterous which is why I watched it.  (A guy running from the police, ends up running into a room where a law firm partner is conducting interviews for a new hire, gets interviewed to cover why he's there, and ends up getting hired even though he's not a lawyer etc) The characters all had strong personalities, i.e. all except MM, who was bland, boring and forgettable. They could have easily swapped another actress in for her part without sacrificing anything to the show.
Too bad they didn't!


----------



## Chanbal

Yanca said:


> Tom Bower Revenge  Book in Book depository is both unavailable in hardcover and paperback ( sold out) My order still says processing. I hope to get it soon


I just checked the status of my order and no changes yet. We will have to take advantage of the little pieces kindly shared by others online.


----------



## CarryOn2020

archive.ph
		




> Article in spoiler






> Spoiler: Tears
> 
> 
> 
> Long-serving aide to the Queen reportedly claimed Prince Harry and Me…​By Victoria Ward, 21 July 2022 • 6:56pm
> Lady Hussey is alleged to have said of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's marriage: 'That will all end in tears' Credit: Michael M Santiago/Getty Images
> One of the Queen’s longest-serving aides warned that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s marriage would “all end in tears”, a new biography claims.
> Lady Hussey, a lady-in-waiting to the Queen since 1960, is alleged to have made the comment at a lunch with a group of theatre executives a few months before the couple got married.
> In his book Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors, Tom Bower writes: “While discussing the possibility that Meghan might become associated with the National Theatre after the wedding, Hussey became unexpectedly serious about the couple’s future.
> “That will all end in tears,” she is alleged to have warned. “Mark my words.”
> As one of the Queen’s most trusted confidantes, Lady Hussey, 83, was said to have been part of a Palace team directed to help the Duchess of Sussex settle into life within the Royal family.
> The team was led by Samantha Cohen, the Queen’s former assistant private secretary, who was persuaded to withdraw her resignation to help the Duchess through the wedding and beyond.
> Lady Hussey and “other close companions of the Queen” visited the Duchess at Nottingham Cottage to offer help and advice, the book claims.
> In response, the American actress was said to be “insistent” that she would not allow Buckingham Palace to shape her, dictate her thoughts or activities.
> 
> Lady Hussey has been a lady-in-waiting to the Queen since 1960 Credit: Max Mumby/Indigo/Getty Images
> Bower also describes the alleged circumstances that led to an 11-year-old Meghan writing to Procter and Gamble to complain about a “very sexist” television advert that had women up in arms.
> She also wrote to Hillary *******, then US First Lady, to complain about the advert for Ivory dishwashing soap that declared: “Women all over America are fighting greasy pots and pans.”
> Three months later, the company changed the word “women” to “people” and the Duchess has repeatedly relayed the story - suggesting it gave her, an aspiring activist, her first taste of success.
> Bower claims that when the future Duchess received no reply, her father wrote follow-up letters “demanding” that the corporation and Mrs ******* acknowledge his daughter - but that “nothing happened”.
> He is then alleged to have used his contacts to arrange for Linda Ellerbee, a host on children’s television channel Nickelodeon, to report Meghan’s protest at her school.
> “Although Thomas knew that Meghan’s letter had not influenced the executives’ decision – there was no evidence that her letter was even read – he encouraged her conviction that the change was her personal victory,” Bower claims.
> Elsewhere, the book delves into the oft-repeated incident involving Princess Charlotte’s fraught bridesmaid dress fitting.





Spoiler: Tears






> Bower repeats the original version of events that saw the Duchess of Cambridge, tired having only recently given birth to Prince Louis, cry following a disagreement about tights and the length of the dress.
> Meghan’s position was supported by her friend Jessica Mulroney, mother of another bridesmaid, Ivy.
> “Some would say that the Duchess of Sussex compared Ivy favourably against Charlotte,” Bower writes. “Others were surprised by Meghan’s close attachment to Mulroney.”
> The Duchess of Sussex would later insist in her Oprah Winfrey interview that it was she who cried.
> Bower also alleges that to please the Duchess, the Duke of Sussex split from his old friends and even changed his telephone number without telling his family.


----------



## Chanbal

Bulling: Ellen is sorry and TW denies through her lawyer.  I bet her denial is comparable to the one about her participation in Finding Freebies (also through her lawyer).


_*DeGeneres* later commented to the press that she was "disappointed to learn" of the accusations, [and] "for that, *I am sorry*." *Meghan* has always *denied she bullied her staff though her lawyer* also said in November 2021 that she does not want to negate anyone's experience._









						Meghan and Ellen DeGeneres Were 'United by Accusations of Bullying'—Book
					

Author Tom Bower has claimed that Meghan and DeGeneres, Montecito neighbors, were "desperate to stay relevant for the American public" in 2021.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Chanbal

The kindle version is currently available in Australia, but unfortunately not for us…


----------



## Chanbal

Thank the Aussies!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower @ GMB



It was interesting to hear the host arguing with Tom Bower and insisting that TW was a *very famous actress* before she met Harry.  Glad to see Bower didn't back down and said there were only a million viewers and most people had never heard of her or her show


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower is very brave…


----------



## SDinTO

I ordered from Amazon UK and my order was dispatched today.


----------



## cat1234

bag-mania said:


> We cannot buy the book in the US but it is already a best seller on Amazon UK. Congrats to Mr. Bower.
> 
> It says we can have it shipped to the US. Has anyone tried it through Amazon UK?
> 
> View attachment 5572787


----------



## cat1234

I just ordered my copy from Amazon US.  It is coming in August.  It was pricier than Book Depository but I’m getting nervous about US publication so just purchased it.  Amazon is ruled by profit so hopefully they’ll see the demand for this book.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Honestly, I'd like to change my member name to "Lady Hussey".  What a great name!


----------



## Chanbal

This is interesting!


----------



## Cinderlala

youngster said:


> Honestly, I'd like to change my member name to "Lady Hussey".  What a great name!



I thought this was a new nickname for TW until I saw the link.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> It was interesting to hear the host arguing with Tom Bower and insisting that TW was a *very famous actress* before she met Harry.  Glad to see Bower didn't back down and said there were only a million viewers and most people had never heard of her or her show


Maybe she was a very famous something else? Sounds like BH (Before Harry), she had already achieved some measure of fame as a courtesan, diva, seductress... Wonder if her MO in Canada was the same as in the UK: asking around for wealthy men to date, and simpering that they had to be nice/kind. 

Would I be right to assume that her love affair with Cory started before she mailed the rings back to Trevor? Haven't seen any mention of those dates, only the suspicious date change for the Cory-Harry transfer of affections.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Here is the Amazon UK link to get the Kindle version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors. The Sunday Times no 1 bestseller eBook : Bower, Tom: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store
> 
> 
> Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors. The Sunday Times no 1 bestseller eBook : Bower, Tom: Amazon.co.uk: Kindle Store
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here is the link to get the hardcover. Looks like it will take about two weeks for Amazon to guarantee delivery in the US, but at least they will do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors: Amazon.co.uk: Bower, Tom: 9781788705035: Books
> 
> 
> Buy Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors by Bower, Tom (ISBN: 9781788705035) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.co.uk





I hope mine is still not "awaiting publication"


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

gracekelly said:


> Why didn't Catherine and/or her dresser fix it?  Didn't they take the dress home so Charlotte could get dressed at home?


Probably not. The dress lacks charm as well as proper proportion and is ill fitting.  The shoes chosen are clumsy.  If I recall correctly it was done by Dior.  Another fail.  For posterity.


----------



## xincinsin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Probably not. The dress lacks charm as well as proper proportion and is ill fitting.  The shoes chosen are clumsy.  If I recall correctly it was done by Dior.  Another fail.  For posterity.


Givenchy did the ill-fitting bridal gown and Dior did the bridesmaids' dresses?


----------



## lanasyogamama

cat1234 said:


> I just ordered my copy from Amazon US.  It is coming in August.  It was pricier than Book Depository but I’m getting nervous about US publication so just purchased it.  Amazon is ruled by profit so hopefully they’ll see the demand for this book.


I still don’t see it!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5572938
> 
> I hope mine is still not "awaiting publication"


.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

pukasonqo said:


> Wasn’t planning to but out of sheer perversity just bought a copy at Amazon Australia


Wasn’t waiting for US Kindle, as I was expecting this.  Ordered from Book Depository several days ago. Guess I need to begin a chain of some sort beginning with you all. Now I need to receive it!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> I still don’t see it!


I googled Tom Bower Revenge and what came up was Amazon US. I clicked on that, signed into my Amazon account and was able to order the book. Hardcover with shipping and taxes came to just under $38.00. It says it will ship between Aug 2-23.  Kindle version wasn’t available.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> Givenchy did the ill-fitting bridal gown and Dior did the bridesmaids' dresses?


Perhaps Dior is incorrect.   If so, my apologies.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Perhaps Dior is incorrect.   If so, my apologies.


I thought I read it was Dior too.


----------



## cat1234

lanasyogamama said:


> I still don’t see it!


It popped up this morning  and I put it in my cart.  I did a google search and it was there.  Now it’s not.


----------



## lanasyogamama

cat1234 said:


> It popped up this morning  and I put it in my cart.  I did a google search and it was there.  Now it’s not.


If I go to Amazon.co.uk in a browser I can see it, but not from my Amazon app


----------



## rose60610

These are some comments in the Page Six column about the NYC restaurant episode after #6 gave his "speech" at the U.N. :


"The moment they came to my table to stop me from using my phone I would have hit record. Even the police in NYC cannot confiscate your phone without a warrant. You can film the whole exchange and pay your rent for the year. I would have looked at them and said your on American soil honey...I don't bow for disgraced royalty.
It’s completely LEGAL in the United States to take photos of other people in public places, I suppose they got the restaurant to sign off on them,but who WOULD “take a photo”? What, because they’re circus freaks? Oh, wait...

She started at the bottom and married up! Remember that! She is a no body

surprised? Just wish I was celebrating my birthday and Me-me-meghan came to my table.  That would be some serious Netflix material.

So, it’s ok if they approach a table to offer birthday wishes but no one is allowed to approach them… got it."


Seems.....NOBODY can stand them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Now that's interesting. With Oprah, Harry spun it like the BRF refused to fund his wife - which I found highly unlikely back then (besides the fact I feel the millions shoved down his throat annually should have been enough to keep a wife) - when they just didn't want to provide f*cking 24/7 police protection for a GIRLFRIEND.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she was a very famous something else? Sounds like BH (Before Harry), she had already achieved some measure of fame as a courtesan, diva, seductress... Wonder if her MO in Canada was the same as in the UK: asking around for wealthy men to date, and simpering that they had to be nice/kind.
> 
> Would I be right to assume that her love affair with Cory started before she mailed the rings back to Trevor? Haven't seen any mention of those dates, only the suspicious date change for the Cory-Harry transfer of affections.


All I know is, Meg was not a household name here in Toronto, the Reitmans commercial baffled me because I had not heard of her.  I don't remember seeing her in the society type press, she may have dated a well known chef, but it never hit the papers.  Once Harry appeared on the scene, she really blew up.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that's interesting. With Oprah, Harry spun it like the BRF refused to fund his wife - which I found highly unlikely back then (besides the fact I feel the millions shoved down his throat annually should have been enough to keep a wife) - when they just didn't want to provide f*cking 24/7 police protection for a GIRLFRIEND.



I could have told Camilla that no child of Meg's would have really curly hair.  And they don't.

Which brings me back to one of my original questions - did Bower ever write about the surrogate rumours, even to discuss that they were just rumours and why all the secrecy?


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> If I go to Amazon.co.uk in a browser I can see it, but not from my Amazon app
> 
> View attachment 5573009


I looked about 10 mins ago on the Amazon US site. Book was available. Kindle, not yet.
No conspiracy here, this is how the publishing industry works. Imo.


----------



## bag-mania

I saw the hardcover version earlier on the Amazon US site but it was not being sold directly from Amazon. A British book company was selling it on the US site. It would take until the middle of August to get it, because it would still ship from the UK. 

I have not seen the book available directly from Amazon US since it was taken down a few days ago


----------



## xincinsin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Perhaps Dior is incorrect.   If so, my apologies.


No apologies necessary. I have no idea who designed for the little girls. My attention was snared by the "too big and stiff" wedding gown. (Also, I had no flower girls, but a tiny nephew was assigned to roll on my marital bed for luck   )


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that's interesting. With Oprah, *Harry spun it like the BRF refused to fund his wife* - which I found highly unlikely back then (besides the fact I feel the millions shoved down his throat annually should have been enough to keep a wife) - when they just didn't want to provide f*cking 24/7 police protection for a GIRLFRIEND.



If I had any inkling that my future DIL was going to spend a million of my bucks a year on clothes and still show up with bad underwear, I would refuse to fund her too. Just saying ...


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> I side-eye anything to do with the UN involving money.  Archewell has no money as far as I know.  Someone correct me if I am wrong. The Harkles are brokering some deal where they don't give any actual money or real substance and are going to piggyback off someone else?  I still think Butterup is involved because of the _leadership _angle  That means it is going to cost someone. something. The Invictus people found that out the hard way.  The Mandela people better have a close hand on their wallets.


I think you are correct.  Either not much $'s coming in or they are spending on expenses or moving it out into another shell.

Form 990-N (e-Postcard)​Organizations who have filed a 990-N (e-Postcard) annual electronic notice. Most small organizations that receive less than $50,000 fall into this category.
Tax Year 2020 Form 990-N (e-Postcard)​Tax Period:
2020 (01/01/2020 - 12/31/2020)
EIN:
85-2213963
Legal Name (Doing Business as):
Archewell Inc



Mailing Address:
9665 Wilshire Blvd 5th FL
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
United States

Principal Officer's Name and Address: 
JAMES HOLT

9665 Wilshire Blvd 5th FL
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
United States

Gross receipts not greater than:
$50,000

Organization has terminated:
No

Website URL:


----------



## Chanbal

A few pieces from TB's book:

Queen of Bolivia:


Jealousy:


 TW as an actress:



She married Trevi-Trev a few days prior to the official wedding in Jamaica:



 Does this sound familiar?



TW's aloof self-interest, the picture of QE in Hazz's wedding came to my mind.


 Why?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This chick is pathological. She should not be allowed to roam free amongst normal people. Also...did she mix up her marriage to Trevor with her marriage to Harry? Secret ceremony before the actual wedding and all.


----------



## Chanbal

Lucky Cory


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seriously. He must thank the gods daily that he got away.


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #2
					

The alliterate one and her husband had a huge blowup prior to his big speech in NYC. Apparently she wanted a role in it and was upset she ha...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Chanbal

One more interesting article.   












__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> One more interesting article.
> View attachment 5573088
> 
> 
> View attachment 5573090
> 
> 
> View attachment 5573089
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Majorly creeped out by the retcon vibes.
"With Harry by my side, we can change the world." I doubt there was any altruism in that statement. More likely she meant that she wanted the world to bend to her will.


----------



## andrashik

I find it interesting the Queen's aide choice of words about Bower's  affirmations regarding the funeral.

"At least one of these claims has been disputed, with a source close to the queen previously telling _Newsweek_ that it was "unlikely" the queen was thinking of anyone but Philip at the time of his funeral."

It isn't a straight denial.
The article is below ( it cannot be embedded in the post due to the name of the former first lady)

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-alarmed-michelle-*****-royal-wedding-book-1726624


----------



## Vintage Leather

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Probably not. The dress lacks charm as well as proper proportion and is ill fitting.  The shoes chosen are clumsy.  If I recall correctly it was done by Dior.  Another fail.  For posterity.


According to royal.uk 

“Clare Waight Keller designed the six young Bridesmaids’ dresses in the Givenchy Haute Couture Atelier in Paris.

The dresses were designed to have the same timeless purity as Ms. Markle's dress.

Each dress is sculpted in Ivory silk Radzimir, and is high-waisted with short puff sleeves and hand finished with a double silk ribbon detail tied at the back in a bow. The Bridesmaids’ dresses include pockets and pleated skirts to create a relaxed and luxurious silhouette.

The Bridesmaids are wearing white leather Aquazurra shoes; each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”


----------



## Toby93

Vintage Leather said:


> According to royal.uk
> 
> “Clare Waight Keller designed the six young Bridesmaids’ dresses in the Givenchy Haute Couture Atelier in Paris.
> 
> The dresses were designed to have the same timeless purity as Ms. Markle's dress.
> 
> Each dress is sculpted in Ivory silk Radzimir, and is high-waisted with short puff sleeves and hand finished with a double silk ribbon detail tied at the back in a bow. The Bridesmaids’ dresses include pockets and pleated skirts to create a relaxed and luxurious silhouette.
> 
> The Bridesmaids are wearing* white leather Aquazurra shoes;* each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”


The very same brand that she demanded for the Reitmans shoot, and then stole.  Now she can be generous on someone else's dime


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Europe may different then the UK. In the UK the landowners (landed gentry) have always owned most of the land, estates (often including whole villages) and freeholds. Nearly all owed their jobs and/homes to the Lord of the  manor. This has ensured all the land is owned by the same families for generations. The eldest son keeping almost everything, hence keeping the estate whole. Marrying other blue bloods meant and more titles split down the (male) generations (Archie could have been given Earl of Dumbarton) and some families have numerous titles.  Houses built on Ducal estates are nearly always leasehold or tide (go with the job) farms likewise. Very few own their homes outright (freehold) on an estate. I do, but as I explained earlier the Duke still owns the mining rights under my house. There would have been no middle classes without merchants and trade (despised by the upper class). The industrialists shook things up, basically they exploited the rural working classes and casual labourers that followed the seasonal work AFTER the landowners replaced many of them with farming machinery or changing land use, that’s  why many went to towns and cities for work.
> 
> Our crown and nobility still own a chunk of our country.
> 
> View attachment 5572771
> 
> 
> I think the biggest change in the UK was in the 1960s when grownup children of all classes left home before  they married and not just service, soldiers and sailors etc. Of course, many families lived in rented accommodation, some many in one large house. That was still going on in London in he 1970s.


Fascinating stuff. I suppose another significant factor is the growth of the skyscraper and of building flat blocks over streets of houses- though of course the preponderance of flats over houses varies.

On the graph- I’m wondering if the duchy of Cornwall and the Church of England count as charities rather than royal or religious land for tax reasons. They do have the ability to transform when it suits them.  Of course universities count as charities too and they are big landowners. It is all very interesting anyway. 


DL Harper said:


> In the course of lurking (and being THOROUGHLY entertained and disgusted at the same time) for a while now, I decided to share something I read long ago.  Sorry if it's a repeat post here.
> 
> *Written in Oct 2018*, here's a part of the article:
> 
> But now Princess Diana's former friend and personal psychic Simone Simmons has made a shocking string of predictions, claiming Harry and Meghan will break up after just three years of marriage.
> "I give their marriage two-and-a-half to three years," Simone, who claims she still communicates to Princess Diana from the grave, alleged to UK publication _The Daily Star_.
> "I don't want to see him badly hurt, and Harry won't know what's hit him when it does happen," the healer continued.
> "He is head over heels in love. Harry is like the embodiment of Diana, he is so sensitive."
> Simone also believes the royal couple will have two children before they divorce.
> As for the reason of their split, the psychic believes Meghan's scandal-prone family will be the couple's ultimate undoing.
> "Even people with dysfunctional families are not as dissociated as hers," Simone said.
> "Look at her last two relationships. They didn't last much longer than two years. This will probably be no different."
> 
> Wonder what Ms Simmons might have to say about the current happenings??  True - her time frame prediction for the divorce is a bit off, but even so......


Evidently ZZs family aren’t creating enough trouble- come on guys! Time to take one for the team!


pukasonqo said:


> It would have been better for all if he quietly paid for BDSM sessions and have a dominatrix play mummy
> Then MM and JCMH could have stay in the UK and live an undeserved life of privilege


I’ve no doubt he had all the hookers he wanted - I’m sure the men (like Markus) who run the ‘gentleman’s clubs’ H loves so much know a thing or 2 about tricks. (I think ZZ offers a different kind of satisfaction.)

The elite and prostitutes have a long history together- I mean who else has the money and free time for 6 hours of Nazi foot play? 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that's interesting. With Oprah, Harry spun it like the BRF refused to fund his wife - which I found highly unlikely back then (besides the fact I feel the millions shoved down his throat annually should have been enough to keep a wife) - when they just didn't want to provide f*cking 24/7 police protection for a GIRLFRIEND.



When I read the hair thing I pictured this:- 


I guess South Park was being anti-black and anti-semitic - either that or it’s just a funny image 

I’m sure they could afford a guard but they must have been looking over the empty, private grounds of the castle and thinking ‘why again?’


Chanbal said:


> A few pieces from TB's book:
> 
> Queen of Bolivia:
> View attachment 5573061
> 
> Jealousy:
> View attachment 5573060
> 
> TW as an actress:
> View attachment 5573059
> 
> 
> She married Trevi-Trev a few days prior to the official wedding in Jamaica:
> View attachment 5573065
> 
> 
> Does this sound familiar?
> View attachment 5573063
> 
> 
> TW's aloof self-interest, the picture of QE in Hazz's wedding came to my mind.
> View attachment 5573072
> 
> Why?
> View attachment 5573074


I wonder if she’s any more aware of the political sympathies of Bolivia now and why they might not appreciate a monarchy but she hasn’t  been a real testament to northwestern so far   

The thing about deleting the wedding videos is strange. I was about to say I’m surprised she didn’t convert to Judaism given she ‘became Anglican’ with H but thinking about it being a Jew would be a disadvantage if she was already planning to upgrade T for a prince.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more interesting article.
> View attachment 5573088
> 
> 
> View attachment 5573090
> 
> 
> View attachment 5573089
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



WTFFF. Now, did I believe she didn't know who he was, and was I sure she did everything she could to not let him escape? No and yes, but seeing it black on white is something else.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vintage Leather said:


> The Bridesmaids are wearing white leather Aquazurra shoes; each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. *The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”*



Seeing our CeeJay isn't here to do all the editing: "The shoes are a gift from *Prince Charles *to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day."


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing our CeeJay isn't here to do all the editing: "The shoes are a gift from *Prince Charles *to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day."


Do we know if the generous Ms Markle paid for anything for the wedding? Surely the self-made millionaire paid for something. Or did she transform into the poor little orphan girl when it was time to settle the bills?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Fascinating stuff. I suppose another significant factor is the growth of the skyscraper and of building flat blocks over streets of houses- though of course the preponderance of flats over houses varies.
> 
> On the graph- I’m wondering if the duchy of Cornwall and the Church of England count as charities rather than royal or religious land for tax reasons. They do have the ability to transform when it suits them.  Of course universities count as charities too and they are big landowners. It is all very interesting anyway.
> 
> Evidently ZZs family aren’t creating enough trouble- come on guys! Time to take one for the team!
> 
> I’ve no doubt he had all the hookers he wanted - I’m sure the men (like Markus) who run the ‘gentleman’s clubs’ H loves so much know a thing or 2 about tricks. (I think ZZ offers a different kind of satisfaction.)
> 
> The elite and prostitutes have a long history together- I mean who else has the money and free time for 6 hours of Nazi foot play?
> 
> When I read the hair thing I pictured this:-
> View attachment 5573138
> 
> I guess South Park was being anti-black and anti-semitic - either that or it’s just a funny image
> 
> I’m sure they could afford a guard but they must have been looking over the empty, private grounds of the castle and thinking ‘why again?’
> 
> I wonder if she’s any more aware of the political sympathies of Bolivia now and why they might not appreciate a monarchy but she hasn’t  been a real testament to northwestern so far
> 
> The thing about deleting the wedding videos is strange. I was about to say I’m surprised she didn’t convert to Judaism given she ‘became Anglican’ with H but thinking about it being a Jew would be a disadvantage if she was already planning to upgrade T for a prince.


Church of England and  Duchy of Cornwall are separate from charitable or tax exempt. Duchy has to pay tax but not corporate tax, CoE doesn’t pay tax but receives no subsidies . Land owners get subsidies though (at least they have until recently - I think the have to declare use of land for something though or they get taxed on it (stop property developers sitting on land as forced future investment)). The aristocracy still own land equivalent to many counties.

The Crown, QEII and the Church off England (which QEII is head of) are listed separately. All 3 are in the top 50 land owners in the UK.

The Church of England gets no help from the Gov. however they are a major landowner, freeholder and landlord. E.g. they own most of Soho in London.

i guess we’re lucky QEII didn’t give major land parcels to H&M along with titles. I think H&M were on ‘probation’ at Frogmore Cottage. They only had to sit it out. Under Charles, I’m sure they would have had an upgrade, bigger place, estate money coming in as well as part of the Grant. Not only are they so greedy, they’re also gimme gimme NOW impatient


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> i guess we’re lucky QEII didn’t give major land parcels to H&M along with titles. I think H&M were on ‘probation’ at Frogmore Cottage. They only had to sit it out. Under Charles I’m sure they would have had an upgrade, bigger place, estate money coming in as well as part of the Grant. Not only are they so greed, they’re also gimme gimme NOW impatient


Perhaps it was strategic. The longer she waited, the more people would poke holes in her stories, and the more work she would be expected to do. It was too risky: time would expose her lack of talent, her merching deals and her vampiric hunger for designer freebies. So she had to grab as much as she could right away, then jump ship with the dunce she married, assuming that the gravy train would trail after him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My book is currently in Kent.



I just checked mine, ordered yesterday: it started off in Kent aswell and now it's in Belgium....I should receive it on the 27th.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Do we know if the generous Ms Markle paid for anything for the wedding? Surely the self-made millionaire paid for something. Or did she transform into the poor little orphan girl when it was time to settle the bills?



I don't think she even paid for a Starbucks coffee the minute that ring was on her finger.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I just checked mine, ordered yesterday: it started off in Kent aswell and now it's in Belgium....I should receive it on the 27th.



Mine too, apparently they are travel buddies so far  I guess they'll part ways soon, though. Also mine is scheduled to arrive on Monday.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps it was strategic. The longer she waited, the more people would poke holes in her stories, and the more work she would be expected to do. It was too risky: time would expose her lack of talent, her merching deals and her vampiric hunger for designer freebies. So she had to grab as much as she could right away, then jump ship with the dunce she married, assuming that the gravy train would trail after him.



I think you're right, I think they knew they were not going to stay long. She knew Harry was only going to have seconds of everything, once Will's children had grown, he  (and she) would be delegated further and the attention would be much more on Will en famille. I think, being expected to live in a relatively modest house, no 'football wife' lifestyle including designer freebies, and most of all, no fabulous hanging-out in London night spots/clubs every night, I'm sure it was a shock to her. They must have asked for more, much more, and got turned down, that's my theory of why quite so soon. I don't think Tiara-gate helped at all!!! Or her bullying. She is certainly not used to be told-off or even 'talked to'. I suppose if you are titled (or soon going to be) when mere 'plebs' try to advise you or inform you of procedure, you can't quite believe it. I'm sure in some ways the fantasy went to her head, the reality was not what she'd expected.

She and he thought that reception in Australia was a sign they were the new king and queen of the world, and away from the BRF, taking it as a sign. It went to both their heads. I also doubt anyone would ever find out about anything, she had the full Palace clean-up job help her.

_We_ know they're both talentless, but _she_ thinks she's an expert in everything, so I don't think she thought she (or they) would get found out. I'm pretty sure she thinks she's invincible, doubt creeps in only under the public's gaze (why else the Joker's constant smile for paps pics she gets to further edit anyway). Maybe growing up in Hollywood fantasy and reality do actually get mixed-up. Maybe she thinks since she 'wrote' the story so far and it's all come true, everything she thinks will magically just happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Vintage Leather said:


> According to royal.uk
> 
> “Clare Waight Keller designed the six young Bridesmaids’ dresses in the Givenchy Haute Couture Atelier in Paris.
> 
> The dresses were designed to have the same timeless purity as Ms. Markle's dress.
> 
> Each dress is sculpted in Ivory silk Radzimir, and is high-waisted with short puff sleeves and hand finished with a double silk ribbon detail tied at the back in a bow. The Bridesmaids’ dresses include pockets and pleated skirts to create a relaxed and luxurious silhouette.
> 
> *The Bridesmaids are wearing white leather Aquazurra shoes; each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. *The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”


I will say it - those are f-ugly shoes.
A note - Hazzie had the initials put in the boys’ coats, too. Guessing the palace or the tailor suggested it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> They must have used for more, much more, and got turned down, that's my theory of why quite so soon. I don't think Tiara-gate helped at all!!! Or her bullying.



I feel the turning point was after their split with the Cambridges - when they demanded Frogmore HOUSE (after they were denied Windsor Castle) and to set up their very own court and The Queen all but laughed into their faces.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yesterday, I sent an email to Blink, the publisher of TomB’s book, asking when the book would be available in the USA. 
Here is the reply:

_Hello,
We are the book’s UK publisher and do not have the rights to distribute the book in America.
Many thanks_


----------



## andrashik

A fashionista








						Meghan 'used Rwanda trip as a backdrop for shoot', biography claims
					

Writing in his new book Revenge, Tom Bower claims the Duchess of Sussex 'disappeared' with a Canadian fashion photographer for 'hours' during the trip to Rwanda.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hey guys! If you happen to receive a PM from me, respond if you want and/or are comfortable   Z-list related, I promise.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Vintage Leather said:


> According to royal.uk
> 
> “Clare Waight Keller designed the six young Bridesmaids’ dresses in the Givenchy Haute Couture Atelier in Paris.
> 
> The dresses were designed to have the same timeless purity as Ms. Markle's dress.
> 
> Each dress is sculpted in Ivory silk Radzimir, and is high-waisted with short puff sleeves and hand finished with a double silk ribbon detail tied at the back in a bow. The Bridesmaids’ dresses include pockets and pleated skirts to create a relaxed and luxurious silhouette.
> 
> The Bridesmaids are wearing white leather Aquazurra shoes; each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”


Thank you for the correction and article.  My personal opinion remains the same.


----------



## needlv

Prince H has won the right to have a judicial review.  Ie, that security claim gets a full review.









						Harry wins bid to bring High Court challenge over police protection
					

Prince Harry is taking legal action over a decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family when visiting from north America.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv

needlv said:


> Prince H has won the right to have a judicial review.  Ie, that security claim gets a full review.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry wins bid to bring High Court challenge over police protection
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is taking legal action over a decision not to allow him to pay for police protection for himself and his family when visiting from north America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



To clarify it just means his claim can go ahead for a review.  Not that he won the case about getting security.


----------



## lallybelle

Got the alert earlier that is was available again on Book Depository and ordered! Hopefully this doesn't take forever...lol.


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> To clarify it just means his claim can go ahead for a review.  Not that he won the case about getting security.


I know someone posted about due process but truthfully, I wish Harry doesn't get to keep wasting taxpayers money with his security nonsense. The level of entitlement of this man child is alarming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Hey guys! If you happen to receive a PM from me, respond if you want and/or are comfortable   Z-list related, I promise.



I have been looking for like 5 mins now and was too stupid to find the PMs. I had to go via the email notification. 

If anyone else is having the same problem, click on your user name in the top row, then a menu should open and there's a letter symbol (I never click as I never use the notifications, I just keep the threads I'm interested in open). I don't know, a VISIBLE letter symbol that also showed the messages waiting like the old forums had was slightly more convenient.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have been looking for like 5 mins now and I'm too stupid to find the PMs. I had to go via the email notification.


You found it


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I wonder if she’s any more aware of the political sympathies of Bolivia now and why they might not appreciate a monarchy but she hasn’t been a real testament to northwestern so far


----------



## papertiger

Somethines I'm not sure if we're following the news or creating it: Back to this saga from the DB today


Meghan Markle, Kate Middleton, and the Bridesmaid’s Dress Saga That Just Won’t Die​
Tom Sykes
Fri, 22 July 2022, 9:50 am







Photo Illustration by Thomas Levinson/The Daily Beast/Getty

The extraordinary story of how two powerful women fell out, apparently terminally, over a fitting for a child’s bridesmaid’s dress once again transfixed the world this week.
The women in question, of course, are Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle, and the tale blew up again with investigative journalist Tom Bower writing in his new book, _Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors_, once again about the saga, and once again pinning the blame firmly on Meghan. That this story never appears to end neatly encapsulates the exhausting levels of dysfunction at the heart of the royal family—and the media fascination that attends it.
Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton’s Feud Over Who Made Who Cry Rumbles On

As a reminder, the initial version of the story, that appeared in U.K. papers via the _Daily Telegraph_’s respected royal correspondent Camilla Tominey, was that during a bridesmaid fitting ahead of Meghan and Prince Harry’s wedding in 2018, Meghan made Kate cry in a heated argument over whether or not the bridesmaids, one of whom included Kate’s daughter Charlotte, should wear tights. Kate thought they should, as per royal convention; Meghan did not want them to.
The gossipy vignette, which didn’t surface until six months after the wedding, would likely have soon been forgotten had not Meghan brought it up during her and Harry’s bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview.
In the program, Meghan said the incident had been “a turning point” in the relationship, saying: “[Kate] made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.” She added that Kate sent her flowers and a note afterwards to apologize having “owned” her part in the incident, and that she had “forgiven her”—but that when neither Kate nor the palace stepped in to correct the record when the _Telegraph_ story first appeared, she realized the palace machinery was not there to protect or defend her.
Here’s a sample of the dialogue with Oprah that ensued:
_Meghan: Everyone in the institution knew it wasn't true.
Oprah: So, why didn't somebody just say that?
Meghan: That's a good question._
In an article for _Harper’s Bazaar_, Omid Scobie, who co-authored the sympathetic Harry and Meghan biography _Finding Freedom_, wrote that in January 2020, soon after the couple had announced their exit from the royal family, Kensington Palace asked Harry to sign a statement denouncing a report that claimed William had “constantly bullied” the Sussexes in the preceding months.
Meghan’s reply is instructive: “Well, if we’re just throwing any statement out there now, then perhaps KP can finally set the record straight about me [not making Kate cry],” Meghan emailed an aide, according to Scobie, who cited a source.
That Meghan’s suggestion was high-handedly ignored—“The Duchess of Cambridge, she was told, should never be dragged into idle gossip,” Scobie wrote—is unsurprising to seasoned royal watchers. The hurt feelings of spare heirs or their wives are rarely a priority for the institution.
However it is clear that this story, which should have been highly forgettable, became something of a significant watershed for Meghan.
Indeed, Scobie writes: “Meghan was repeatedly told that it would not be possible to set the record straight,” which suggests that she repeatedly asked for it to be done.
One of the many fascinating things about the story is that it gives a rare insight into just how fast the relationship between Meghan and Kate deteriorated.
Meghan told Oprah that the incident happened “a few days before the wedding” which was on 19 May 2018. Less than six months earlier, over Christmas 2017, William and Kate hosted Harry and Meghan at their Norfolk country home, Anmer Hall.
How did things go so wrong so fast? “They were just completely different people,” former royal editor of the _Sun_ Duncan Larcombe told The Daily Beast. “Their styles couldn’t have been more different. Meghan was this go-getting American woman who believed she had an obligation to voice her opinion, and Kate had basically modeled herself on the queen and signed up for a life of duty with the aim of causing the minimum of fuss or controversy. It’s hardly surprising it blew up just a few months later.”
Scobie and Durand made a similar point in _Finding Freedom_, saying that, “Kate did little to bridge the divide.” One source told Scobie that Kate felt “they didn’t have much in common other than the fact that they lived at Kensington Palace.”
And for all the joyous appearance at Christmas 2017, when the so-called “Fab Four” were photographed happily striding into church together, Kate and Meghan alongside each other, by February 2018 the cracks were starting to show in public.
At a joint appearance for their doomed joint foundation, Harry admitted “working as a family does have its challenges” and joked that disagreements came “so thick and fast” they were hard to keep track of.
In March 2019, in what is now often seen as a final effort to stave off disaster, it was announced that the Cambridge and Sussex offices were dividing, but it was to no avail. In the summer of that year, Harry finally confirmed the feud to ITV interviewer Tom Bradby, after the palace had spent more than a year rubbishing reports of it. Crucially, Meghan confessed to her misery during the same program, _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey._
However, the saga of the bridesmaid’s dress came to fatally poison the relationship between the two women, and the episode continues to exert a strange fascination today, as Bower’s latest coverage of the incident reveals. (It may not be dispassionate: Bower himself admitted in an interview with _Good Morning Britain_ that Meghan’s side did not engage with him in the writing of the book and he believes they were warned off cooperating with him by Meghan. Perhaps it is perhaps unsurprising that she comes out poorly.)
Somehow, an argument over the coverage of the bridesmaid dress incident became an inflection point from which neither side was able to come back, revealing everything that went wrong with the relationship between the Sussexes and the Windsors in microcosm.
In this one story we see distilled the stuffy insistence on tradition versus the free-spirited Californian reformer; the brushing aside of the concerns of those who are down the hierarchy; and the goldfish bowl of royal life, where everything has to mean something, where every piddling argument ends up in the papers and where people who are supposed to be working for you are actually working for someone else.
It is quite possible, of course, that they both ended up in tears—especially as Meghan was a few weeks out from getting married and, as we now know, having enormously complicated issues with her father, and Kate was just three weeks postpartum (Prince Louis was born on April 23). Yet still, four years on, the blame game over the bridesmaid’s dress continues—and it is likely that Bower’s book will not be the last word on it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


I personally don't care who cried, I know plenty of people who can turn-on tears if need be. This whole women cry when they're under stress or hormonal is even more abhorrent to me than who made who cry and why.


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> A fashionista
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'used Rwanda trip as a backdrop for shoot', biography claims
> 
> 
> Writing in his new book Revenge, Tom Bower claims the Duchess of Sussex 'disappeared' with a Canadian fashion photographer for 'hours' during the trip to Rwanda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



What an awful golddigging opportunist she is.


----------



## skyqueen

I just saw this and couldn't resist...not everyone was a fan! 
Bingo...........


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton’s Feud Over Who Made Who Cry Rumbles On



I mean, Kate never breathed a word and most definitely never went on Oprah to bring it up yet again (and apparently completely twisted the truth while doing so).

So...cry softly, Raptor. (I realize it's funnier a) in German and b) if you've watched the movie it's taken from  )


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Majorly creeped out by the retcon vibes.
> "With Harry by my side, we can change the world." I doubt there was any altruism in that statement. More likely she meant that she wanted the world to bend to her will.


I didn't know TW prior to Hazz's wedding. I only started noticing her after her multiple and annoying press releases in the US, and these were the vibes I got from that:


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> I find it interesting the Queen's aide choice of words about Bower's  affirmations regarding the funeral.
> 
> "*At least one of these claims has been disputed, with a source close to the queen* previously telling _Newsweek_ that it was "unlikely" the queen was thinking of anyone but Philip at the time of his funeral."
> 
> It isn't a straight denial.
> The article is below ( it cannot be embedded in the post due to the name of the former first lady)
> 
> https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-alarmed-michelle-*****-royal-wedding-book-1726624



Would the close source be Hazz? Hazz claims "_he's Queen's closest confidant._" 










						Harry claims he's Queen's 'closest confidant' and says she tells him secrets
					

Prince Harry lifted the lid on his secret meeting with the Queen, talking about their special relationship and giving an update on her well-being after recent medical concerns




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Vintage Leather said:


> The Bridesmaids are wearing white leather Aquazurra shoes; each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. *The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”*


Paid by Charles???


----------



## xincinsin

Vintage Leather said:


> The Bridesmaids are wearing white leather Aquazurra shoes; each pair is monogrammed with the Bridesmaids initials, and the wedding date. The shoes are a gift from Ms. Markle to the young ladies as a keepsake of the special day.”


Are shoes, with or without monogrammes, a common wedding keepsake in the UK or the US? My friends who had bridesmaids gave jewellery as a keepsake.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Are shoes, with or without monogrammes, a common wedding keepsake in the UK or the US? My friends who had bridesmaids gave jewellery as a keepsake.



Probably because they were so young - Charlotte was just 3 yrs old.  Hazzi did the initials on the pageboys’ clothes, too. 

_The four page boys’ uniforms, meanwhile, were modelled on the Blues and Royals frockcoat – an old regiment of both Prince Harry and his best man, the Duke of Cambridge. Both the brothers fittingly donned their adult equivalent of the uniform on the day. The page boy outfits, meanwhile, were made from blue doeskin, in a single-breasted style with a stand-up collar, finished with figured braiding in the regimental pattern. The braiding was downscaled especially for the boys – and would otherwise have reached beyond their shoulders. Each page also had their initials embroidered in gold on their shoulder straps as a remembrance of the special event. The uniforms were made by Dege & Skinner tailors, of London’s Savile Row.








						A Who’s Who of Harry and Meghan’s bridesmaids and pageboys
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex had an adorable crop of boys and girls playing an important role on the special day




					www.tatler.com
				



_


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t Edward enjoy being dominated by Wallis? Could Harry and Meghan be their reincarnations?
> 
> ETA: No, not possible. Meghan was born a few years before Wallis died.


yes, that was my understanding about the Duke and Duchess of Windsor


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t Edward enjoy being dominated by Wallis? Could Harry and Meghan be their reincarnations?
> 
> ETA: No, not possible. Meghan was born a few years before Wallis died.


Not reincarnation. But maybe possession? (Is it obvious that I read a lot of horror and sci-fi?)


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I could have told Camilla that no child of Meg's would have really curly hair.  And they don't.
> 
> Which brings me back to one of my original questions - did Bower ever write about the surrogate rumours, even to discuss that they were just rumours and why all the secrecy?


why do you say that about the hair?  Meghan's hair was curly when she was a child.  she is wearing a wig now


----------



## CarryOn2020

Whaaaaa?  Martina?  Seriously?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Are shoes, with or without monogrammes, a common wedding keepsake in the UK or the US? My friends who had bridesmaids gave jewellery as a keepsake.


Jewelry costs extra money… However, what would she do with kids' used shoes?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa?  Martina?  Seriously?



So interesting the Harkles, the Markles and the BRF  have continuously and relentlessly fed the media stories, yet when there’s comment or some back/fact checking so many get irate on their behalf- especially the Harkles.

They have played the victim card well. probably the only thing they have done well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa?  Martina?  Seriously?




Is their UN nonsense what Martina understands as private family fun or what? Also, I always find it slightly unhinged when people go on swearing tirades.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is their UN nonsense what Martina understands as private family fun or what? Also, I always find it slightly unhinged when people go on swearing tirades.


Comments are gold:


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> why do you say that about the hair?  Meghan's hair was curly when she was a child.  she is wearing a wig now


I don't think it's a wig. I could be wrong but I think she straightens what she has naturally and adds extensions.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG's interpretation seems right, '_her proximity made him more nervous'_…


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I don't think it's a wig. I could be wrong but I think she straightens what she has naturally and adds extensions.


yes, maybe I'm using wig and extensions as the same thing but that isn't her natural hair texture.....I'm not expert as I don't straighten my NC hair but I think she probably has a chemical process on the top of her head and most of the rest is extensions.


----------



## V0N1B2

xincinsin said:


> Do we know if the generous Ms Markle paid for anything for the wedding? Surely the self-made millionaire paid for something. Or did she transform into the poor little orphan girl when it was time to settle the bills?


Another major red flag. Not only did she want to walk herself down the aisle like some kind of orphan, she had no bridesmaids. I understand it isn’t like regular (non-royal) weddings with 2/3/4 Bridesmaids and a few flower girls etc. But she had no Maid/Matron of Honour, maybe 4 of her actual friends at their wedding and not one relative besides her mother? People had to know there was something up with this chick back then. What kind of person has this big fairytale wedding - and a Royal Wedding at that - and doesn’t have her bestest bestest friend standing beside her? 
Who gifts Aquazzura shoes to little children? It’s not like they can ever wear them again, and they probably wouldn’t have even fit them a few months after the wedding.

I know I wrote it before, but when you start reading the book, it all becomes crystal clear. She was absolutely spoiled rotten and given the world by her father since birth. Told how special and smart and beautiful and precious she is... Her father absolutely ruined that child and turned her into the complete megalomaniac she is today. The second he was of no use to her (when she started to make some money from Suits) he was cast aside like garbage.  Paid to private school, paid for university, paid for her acting lessons, paid for camps, paid for her to go to Europe with Ninaki Priddy and her family, paid for her to live in Buenos Aires, paid for her to fly back there to visit a boyfriend, paid for the last minute flight home when things didn’t go her way down there... She used him and his contacts to better herself, and she’s done it with every man in her life since.  Now she’s got a title for life and the second Harry’s financial taps are turned off, she throw him to the dogs. 

Re: Harry’s security neurosis: I believe its all Meghan. Her issues with needing PRIVACY go way back. She’s the one with the deluded fantasy of being hounded by paparazzi. Harry grew up with the Royal Rota - he was used to having his photo taken at certain events.  
As an aside, is anyone able to find a statement or snippet from an interview from Harry where he speaks of his mother’s death and/or “the flashbulbs taking him right back” before the summer of 2016? Because I believe all these ideas in his head have been planted by his wife. 

They were planning their exit from the Royal Family during their trip to Australia, because it was then that Meghan felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family, so Harry now felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family. When one hears the word protected, we often think of it in security terms, but Meghan felt her image/name/honour should be protected. The RF didn’t do enough to come out publicly and support her. Again - megalomaniac, narcissist, delusions of grandeur, persecution complex... this woman’s got it all. We just call that a crazy ass b!tch where I come from.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

YES!


----------



## Aimee3

re TW's hair...probably Brazilian Blowout or Japanese Straightening IF that's actually her hair that we are seeing.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Aimee3 said:


> re TW's hair...probably Brazilian Blowout or Japanese Straightening IF that's actually her hair that we are seeing.


The hair was a big reason I thought something was fishy with the parade pictures. That woman’s hair looked like it moved much more naturally.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is their UN nonsense what Martina understands as private family fun or what? Also, I always find it slightly unhinged when people go on swearing tirades.


Was Oprah keeping private family matters private? Did she have a problem with H&M doing that interview? No? Huh...


----------



## Annawakes

Just had a little laugh today.  I was visiting with a friend and we were talking about current events.  In the middle I mentioned I kept up with the antics of Zeezy and Handbag.  She looked at me and said, “They’re idiots.” 

I didn’t know that was her opinion of them, and it made me laugh.  So there ARE “regular” people (outside of this thread I mean) who think they’re idiots.  That’s good to know!  I know my friend doesn’t follow their antics like we do.


----------



## LittleStar88

V0N1B2 said:


> Another major red flag. Not only did she want to walk herself down the aisle like some kind of orphan, she had no bridesmaids. I understand it isn’t like regular (non-royal) weddings with 2/3/4 Bridesmaids and a few flower girls etc. But she had no Maid/Matron of Honour, maybe 4 of her actual friends at their wedding and not one relative besides her mother? People had to know there was something up with this chick back then. What kind of person has this big fairytale wedding - and a Royal Wedding at that - and doesn’t have her bestest bestest friend standing beside her?
> Who gifts Aquazzura shoes to little children? It’s not like they can ever wear them again, and they probably wouldn’t have even fit them a few months after the wedding.
> 
> I know I wrote it before, but when you start reading the book, it all becomes crystal clear. She was absolutely spoiled rotten and given the world by her father since birth. Told how special and smart and beautiful and precious she is... Her father absolutely ruined that child and turned her into the complete megalomaniac she is today. The second he was of no use to her (when she started to make some money from Suits) he was cast aside like garbage.  Paid to private school, paid for university, paid for her acting lessons, paid for camps, paid for her to go to Europe with Ninaki Priddy and her family, paid for her to live in Buenos Aires, paid for her to fly back there to visit a boyfriend, paid for the last minute flight home when things didn’t go her way down there... She used him and his contacts to better herself, and she’s done it with every man in her life since.  Now she’s got a title for life and the second Harry’s financial taps are turned off, she throw him to the dogs.
> 
> Re: Harry’s security neurosis: I believe its all Meghan. Her issues with needing PRIVACY go way back. She’s the one with the deluded fantasy of being hounded by paparazzi. Harry grew up with the Royal Rota - he was used to having his photo taken at certain events.
> As an aside, is anyone able to find a statement or snippet from an interview from Harry where he speaks of his mother’s death and/or “the flashbulbs taking him right back” before the summer of 2016? Because I believe all these ideas in his head have been planted by his wife.
> 
> They were planning their exit from the Royal Family during their trip to Australia, because it was then that Meghan felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family, so Harry now felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family. When one hears the word protected, we often think of it in security terms, but Meghan felt her image/name/honour should be protected. The RF didn’t do enough to come out publicly and support her. Again - megalomaniac, narcissist, delusions of grandeur, persecution complex... this woman’s got it all. We just call that a crazy ass b!tch where I come from.



THIS 100%


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pivoine66

Chanbal said:


> The BLG's interpretation seems right, '_her proximity made him more nervous'_…



Thank you, again, for sharing, dear Chanbal.

At 7:43 : "What is Harry's line of work, besides DRIVING MISS CRAZY". 

(I am not a native speaker, so hope, I have understood correctly?)


----------



## AbbytheBT

V0N1B2 said:


> Another major red flag. Not only did she want to walk herself down the aisle like some kind of orphan, she had no bridesmaids. I understand it isn’t like regular (non-royal) weddings with 2/3/4 Bridesmaids and a few flower girls etc. But she had no Maid/Matron of Honour, maybe 4 of her actual friends at their wedding and not one relative besides her mother? People had to know there was something up with this chick back then. What kind of person has this big fairytale wedding - and a Royal Wedding at that - and doesn’t have her bestest bestest friend standing beside her?
> Who gifts Aquazzura shoes to little children? It’s not like they can ever wear them again, and they probably wouldn’t have even fit them a few months after the wedding.
> 
> I know I wrote it before, but when you start reading the book, it all becomes crystal clear. She was absolutely spoiled rotten and given the world by her father since birth. Told how special and smart and beautiful and precious she is... Her father absolutely ruined that child and turned her into the complete megalomaniac she is today. The second he was of no use to her (when she started to make some money from Suits) he was cast aside like garbage.  Paid to private school, paid for university, paid for her acting lessons, paid for camps, paid for her to go to Europe with Ninaki Priddy and her family, paid for her to live in Buenos Aires, paid for her to fly back there to visit a boyfriend, paid for the last minute flight home when things didn’t go her way down there... She used him and his contacts to better herself, and she’s done it with every man in her life since.  Now she’s got a title for life and the second Harry’s financial taps are turned off, she throw him to the dogs.
> 
> Re: Harry’s security neurosis: I believe its all Meghan. Her issues with needing PRIVACY go way back. She’s the one with the deluded fantasy of being hounded by paparazzi. Harry grew up with the Royal Rota - he was used to having his photo taken at certain events.
> As an aside, is anyone able to find a statement or snippet from an interview from Harry where he speaks of his mother’s death and/or “the flashbulbs taking him right back” before the summer of 2016? Because I believe all these ideas in his head have been planted by his wife.
> 
> They were planning their exit from the Royal Family during their trip to Australia, because it was then that Meghan felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family, so Harry now felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family.


This!! I just finished the book - As a native of CA, who lived in SoCal as a young adult, and have daughters (one still in LA)  I can see exactly how this type of narcissistic personality was cultivated and rewarded. It is a world of image and connections with thousands of beautiful ”strivers” in the entertainment world looking everyday to reinvent themselves and stay “in view”.  Blogs, influencers, corporate party events, poverty tourism, etc. just supercharged a “storytelling” world that was already out there.  I have also worked in PR - for a govt agency lol so don‘t hate on me- and worked/lived in 3rd world countries and this book lays out exactly what goes into making that sausage. So so many people in the industry worldwide make money on marketing and selling their people. Reading her background  and career trajectory piece by piece, it slowly dawned on me that “protection” has always meant image spinning and the ability to have people on tap devoted to protecting her brand.  Honestly, she is just one example of thousands of narcissists out there raised in this environment and it all made me sad for everyone. 
I have been fascinated by the Harkles journey because - originally - it appeared that their platform would help shine a light on those less fortunate and under represented, using modern communication tools to leverage and assist good works ongoing and already out there! 
As part of the Royal Family they wouldn‘t have to engage in that awful, messaging/funding competition between govts, NGOs and ”non-profit” foundations that is the epitome of resource waste.  I mean - I don't think the Kardashians pretend to be anything else than moneymakers off this ”branding” market the world has created.  And Meghan was raised in the exact same SoCal environment but chose to focus on “Compassion“ as her brand. 
The amount of money, resources and attention they have siphoned off of good people doing good things worldwide has astounded, and frankly, shocked me. 
The Harkles personal treatment of their family members is a rant for another post! Sure miscommunications happen in every family, and no one is perfect, but their refusal to heal rifts and move forward for the sake of their children minimally, is the most significant reason to banish them as ”compassionate and humanitarian” leaders.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> Are shoes, with or without monogrammes, a common wedding keepsake in the UK or the US? My friends who had bridesmaids gave jewellery as a keepsake.


If financially able, a bride will provide gowns and shoes and accessories as well as a gift which may be jewelry.  The average person expects attendants to purchase whatever the bride has chosen for them to wear. This expense added to often needed transportation and hotel accommodations creates quite a burden.  Considerate brides — and there are some — might request a black patent shoe or ballet slippers for a child to wear.   I think in this case, it was meant to be a memento to be cherished. After all, it was THE wedding.


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Kate never breathed a word and most definitely never went on Oprah to bring it up yet again (and apparently completely twisted the truth while doing so).
> 
> So...cry softly, Raptor. (I realize it's funnier a) in German and b) if you've watched the movie it's taken from  )


Schantal, heul leise


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Kate felt “they didn’t have much in common other than the fact that they lived at Kensington Palace.”


To put some perspective on this, I recall reading years ago that when Kate and William went "on a break" after dating for about five years, her mother cautioned her not to embark on another relationship as it would hurt any chances of a proposal from him. Stupid, I know, especially in this day and age, but that's how it is with the BRF. Meghan, on the other hand, used a number of men, beginning with her father, to advance her interests and then cast them aside. I do not say this to "slut shame" anyone, it is just an example of their very different mindsets.


----------



## charlottawill

This is an appropriate situation for handholding - honeymooners strolling in Paris. Not while entering the UN General Assembly to give a speech as someone looking to be taken seriously on the world stage.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The BLG's interpretation seems right, '_her proximity made him more nervous'_…



"Driving Miss Crazy"


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> why do you say that about the hair?  Meghan's hair was curly when she was a child.  she is wearing a wig now


As I mentioned... I was hoping Bower would address the secrecy about her pregnancy. I can't help wondering if Meg even contributed. They look just like Harry... not the most popular opinion I know, but I just knew they would not look like Meg.


----------



## V0N1B2

charlottawill said:


> This is an appropriate situation for handholding - honeymooners strolling in Paris. Not while entering the UN General Assembly to give a speech as someone looking to be taken seriously on the world stage.
> 
> View attachment 5573526


Where are their bodyguards and security detail? Did they have the street cleared out for them in order to pass by? I mean Bennifer is comparable if not a wee higher profile compared to HarGan in the star power department. Amirite?

PS: the karmic komedy of HarGan’s UN speech is that it was completely overshadowed by Bennifer’s wedding. 
Bet they weren’t expecting to be 2nd story on entertainment tonight. Whoomp Whoomp


----------



## charlottawill

What, ZeeZy and Hazy not invited? Hmm....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> What, ZeeZy and Hazy not invited? Hmm....




Of course they were. They chose not to go because they were busy sprinkling fairy dust on the really pressing issues and didn't want to indulge in frivolities.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you, again, for sharing, dear Chanbal.
> 
> At 7:43 : "What is Harry's line of work, besides DRIVING MISS CRAZY".
> 
> (I am not a native speaker, so hope, I have understood correctly?)


"Driving Miss Crazy" is a clever combination of "Driving Miss Daisy", a play about an elderly Southern woman and her African-American chauffeur, and the phrase "driving me crazy", which means to make someone angry or annoyed.  At face value, driving Miss Crazy would mean Harry's job is to chauffeur his nutty wife around.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> As I mentioned... I was hoping Bower would address the secrecy about her pregnancy. I can't help wondering if Meg even contributed. They look just like Harry... not the most popular opinion I know, but I just knew they would not look like Meg.


interesting theory but even if she used a surrogate they could have used her eggs


----------



## carmen56

Just finished the book.


----------



## jennlt

carmen56 said:


> Just finished the book.


 Any revelations to share with us?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

carmen56 said:


> Just finished the book.



NM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Actress and foodblogger  I've only ever seen one of her "recipes", zucchini cooked to mush and it looked like already digested.

Also Cory  She sure ain't no Nicole Kidman.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

An interesting comment: "She mirrors her victims. With Trevor the producer is was acting, with Cory the chef she was a foodblogger, and with Harry she's a faux humanitarian. She is nothing on her own."

Remember Richard Gere in Runaway Bride asking the stood up grooms how Julia Roberts likes her eggs and all of them answering "..., just like me."?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Actress and foodblogger  I've only ever seen one of her "recipes", zucchini cooked to mush and it looked like already digested.
> 
> Also Cory  She sure ain't no Nicole Kidman.



Farm to table food like she remembers eating as a chlld? At Sizzler? 

Lies upon lies upon lies. I was hesitant to buy the book but it's sounding like an epic vacation read.


----------



## marietouchet

AbbytheBT said:


> This!! I just finished the book - As a native of CA, who lived in SoCal as a young adult, and have daughters (one still in LA)  I can see exactly how this type of narcissistic personality was cultivated and rewarded. It is a world of image and connections with thousands of beautiful ”strivers” in the entertainment world looking everyday to reinvent themselves and stay “in view”.  Blogs, influencers, corporate party events, poverty tourism, etc. just supercharged a “storytelling” world that was already out there.  I have also worked in PR - for a govt agency lol so don‘t hate on me- and worked/lived in 3rd world countries and this book lays out exactly what goes into making that sausage. So so many people in the industry worldwide make money on marketing and selling their people. Reading her background  and career trajectory piece by piece, it slowly dawned on me that “protection” has always meant image spinning and the ability to have people on tap devoted to protecting her brand.  Honestly, she is just one example of thousands of narcissists out there raised in this environment and it all made me sad for everyone.
> I have been fascinated by the Harkles journey because - originally - it appeared that their platform would help shine a light on those less fortunate and under represented, using modern communication tools to leverage and assist good works ongoing and already out there!
> As part of the Royal Family they wouldn‘t have to engage in that awful, messaging/funding competition between govts, NGOs and ”non-profit” foundations that is the epitome of resource waste.  I mean - I don't think the Kardashians pretend to be anything else than moneymakers off this ”branding” market the world has created.  And Meghan was raised in the exact same SoCal environment but chose to focus on “Compassion“ as her brand.
> The amount of money, resources and attention they have siphoned off of good people doing good things worldwide has astounded, and frankly, shocked me.
> The Harkles personal treatment of their family members is a rant for another post! Sure miscommunications happen in every family, and no one is perfect, but their refusal to heal rifts and move forward for the sake of their children minimally, is the most significant reason to banish them as ”compassionate and humanitarian” leaders.


Thank you for taking one for the team by reading this and reporting


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Farm to table food like she remembers eating as a chlld? At Sizzler?
> 
> *Lies upon lies upon lies. *I was hesitant to buy the book but it's sounding like an epic vacation read.



Hope this doesn’t spoil the book for anyone, the lies astound me.  I know people lie, but these lies are way beyond the pale.
1. P&G was a lie. There was no letter.
2. The lottery win was a lie. TM did not win any lotteries.
3. Doria did indeed work at a weed farm in Cali. 
That is as much as I can process in a day.  Too much sleeze for me. Ymmv. 

So, whose idea was it to lie to the world?  Why did the BRF put the world thru the sham of a wedding?  They could have said ‘go ahead, marry her if you must, but we will not lie to our country - no multi-million dollar wedding.’  Clearly, the BRF had leverage.  Their judgment [Charles? QE?] is highly questionable. Imo.


----------



## xeyes

charlottawill said:


>


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope this doesn’t spoil the book for anyone, the lies astound me.  I know people lie, but these lies are way beyond the pale.
> 1. P&G was a lie. There was no letter.
> 2. The lottery win was a lie. TM did not win any lotteries.
> 3. Doria did indeed work at a weed farm in Cali.
> That is as much as I can process in a day.  Too much sleeze for me. Ymmv.
> 
> So, whose idea was it to lie to the world?  Why did the BRF put the world thru the sham of a wedding?  They could have said ‘go ahead, marry her if you must, but we will not lie to our country - no multi-million dollar wedding.’  Clearly, the BRF had leverage.  Their judgment [Charles? QE?] is highly questionable. Imo.


I saw the weed part when I was busy doing what I did (  ) last night and I was shocked. Everything about Z-list's background is murky and shady.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope this doesn’t spoil the book for anyone, the lies astound me.  I know people lie, but these lies are way beyond the pale.
> 1. P&G was a lie. There was no letter.
> 2. The lottery win was a lie. TM did not win any lotteries.
> 3. Doria did indeed work at a weed farm in Cali.
> That is as much as I can process in a day.  Too much sleeze for me. Ymmv.
> 
> So, whose idea was it to lie to the world?  Why did the BRF put the world thru the sham of a wedding?  They could have said ‘go ahead, marry her if you must, but we will not lie to our country - no multi-million dollar wedding.’  Clearly, the BRF had leverage.  Their judgment [Charles? QE?] is highly questionable. Imo.


Or else a massive intelligence fail. Hard to believe if Bower was able to unearth all this dirt the MI5, or whatever it is called, didn't.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> I saw the weed part when I was busy doing what I did (  ) last night and I was shocked. Everything about Z-list's background is murky and shady.


The first red flag for me was the fact that Doria had no one to escort her in the church until Charles graciously did. Not a father, brother, cousin, uncle, nephew, family friend? That was weird.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, Serena’s comment makes sense:
"You’ve got to be who you are, Meghan, you can’t hide"​Meghan’s comment about herself makes sense, too - “I was such a fraud.” 

In these post-pandemic days when authenticity matters most, these liars must be exposed.  My guess is there are many more.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan’s comment about herself makes sense, too - “I was such a fraud.”


A rare moment of self-awareness.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> The first red flag for me was the fact that Doria had no one to escort her in the church until Charles graciously did. Not a father, brother, cousin, uncle, nephew, family friend? That was weird.


Pretty confident by now that Z-list deliberately didn't want any of her family members to be there, except for puppet Doria.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Speaking for myself, I will not support any projects or companies H&M are involved in.
Those companies hitched their wagons to liars, charlatans, con-people, etc.  All of them need to be cancelled, sooner the better.
ETA:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking for myself, I will not support any projects or companies H&M are involved in.
> Those companies hitched their wagons to liars, charlatans, con-people, etc.  All of them need to be cancelled, sooner the better.
> ETA:
> View attachment 5573597


I concur


----------



## EverSoElusive

6666 pages? This is indeed the devil's thread


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly people from the UK are sending copies of TB's book to Hazz in Montecito. Ok ladies, which one of you did it? @papertiger?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly people from the UK are sending copies of TB's book to Hazz in Montecito. Ok ladies, which one of you did it? @papertiger?


----------



## Chanbal

One could say that Tom Bower's book attempts to preserve the monarchy, and its release date is a b-day gift to George.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More lies


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Has the world woken up now?


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope this doesn’t spoil the book for anyone, the lies astound me.  I know people lie, but these lies are way beyond the pale.
> 1. P&G was a lie. There was no letter.
> 2. The lottery win was a lie. TM did not win any lotteries.
> 3. Doria did indeed work at a weed farm in Cali.
> That is as much as I can process in a day.  Too much sleeze for me. Ymmv.
> 
> So, whose idea was it to lie to the world?  *Why did the BRF put the world thru the sham of a wedding?  They could have said ‘go ahead, marry her if you must, but we will not lie to our country - no multi-million dollar wedding.’  Clearly, the BRF had leverage.  Their judgment [Charles? QE?] is highly questionable. Imo.*


Exactly my thoughts, too. I'm glad you point this out about the royal family. Imo. they knew all along and they let it go on and on and on. No way do I believe they had no idea about TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

They sent a gift to PG????


----------



## Zen101

charlottawill said:


> A rare moment of self-awareness.


Oprah has always said one of her favorite quotes by Maya Angelou is; “if someone shows you who they are, believe them”. So, if Meghan out of her own mouth called herself a fraud, I believe her. Meghan is a fraud.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Or else a massive intelligence fail. Hard to believe if Bower was able to unearth all this dirt the MI5, or whatever it is called, didn't.


Most people by their late 30s have something they wouldn’t be proud of or prefer others not knowing but she takes it to a new level, she boasted and propagated some  of those lies. I’m sure the BRF would have protected her if still in favour, they’ve cut her loose and let TB have her.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies



their whole life is one big photoshop


----------



## AbbytheBT

CarryOn2020 said:


> More lies



A) The photoshopping scary good  B)The constant, calculated work of image promotion and virtue signaling boggles the mind and C) How will any Harkle “family photo” ever not be suspected of manipulation?


----------



## Zen101

The video is only 4 minutes long if you’ve never seen it. 
Maya Angelou: “If someone says to you “I am selfish”, “I’m mean” or “I’m unkind”... believe them. They know themselves much better than you do”.
In the case of Meghan, she has admitted to being “such a fraud”. I believe her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Gotta love that British sense of humor.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Tsk tsk tsk. The girl didn't just turn. She was raised a spoilt brat. No wonder she out of control


----------



## EverSoElusive

AbbytheBT said:


> A) The photoshopping scary good  B)The constant, calculated work of image promotion and virtue signaling boggles the mind and C) How will any Harkle “family photo” ever not be suspected of manipulation?


And how can anyone not doubt her baby bumps and baby "Archie" on a string out on a walk in her backyard


----------



## charlottawill

Sounds about right.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> And how can anyone not doubt her baby bumps and baby "Archie" on a string out on a walk in her backyard



Has anyone in Montecito come forward and said they've actually seen Invisibet around town? Don't most parents take their kids out for breakfast, ice cream and such? It's hard to imagine a one year old child has not been seen in public with her parents and sibling. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but it is strange. Unless her big reveal is going to be on Netflix minus the money shot with TQ.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More lies.
No royal connection or ancestry from Malta.  No LA riots.  No blended doll family.
I need a lie-down now or a stop by the good Major’s thread  









						RICHARD KAY on Megan's eye-popping new biography
					

RICHARD KAY: An exclusive new biography of the Duchess of Sussex by Tom Bower questions many of the claims made by Meghan Markle of her early life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

It's hard to get surprised at this point, but… 





Spoiler: scary


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It's hard to get surprised at this point, but…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: scary



I remember we discussed that the Oprah interview was scripted at the time. It was devised to be entertainment, never news.


----------



## charlottawill

She is sick. That is all.


----------



## bag-mania

The true crime about the Oprah interview was how bad her acting was, even with all the practice and rehearsal.

Oooo, post #100,000! We’ve been busy!


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #5
					

The book that was released this week, confirms everything I have said for years about the alliterate one still with her boyfriend while runn...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> On their way to Robert De Niro's restaurant…





Their ridiculous “security “ and “paps” BS is about to make my head explode!  Soooo much attention they attract, but oh look - all of it called by MM.  have some pride for heaven’s sake!


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope this doesn’t spoil the book for anyone, the lies astound me.  I know people lie, but these lies are way beyond the pale.
> 1. P&G was a lie. There was no letter.
> 2. The lottery win was a lie. TM did not win any lotteries.
> 3. Doria did indeed work at a weed farm in Cali.
> That is as much as I can process in a day.  Too much sleeze for me. Ymmv.
> 
> So, whose idea was it to lie to the world?  Why did the BRF put the world thru the sham of a wedding?  They could have said ‘go ahead, marry her if you must, but we will not lie to our country - no multi-million dollar wedding.’  Clearly, the BRF had leverage.  Their judgment [Charles? QE?] is highly questionable. Imo.
> 
> CarryOn2020,
> 
> Don’t know why this is not posting in usual response format?
> All you said!
> 
> Sadly, I don’t think this book is sufficient to slow her down, certainly not to change her behaviors, which have been in place for decades. Her “performance” at the UN, rictus smile in place and Harry submissive under claw control is a good example. She is hard core evil, a pathological liar of epic dimensions who doesn’t give a damn what her actions do to others, and is so enamored of herself, she will outsmart them all, she believes. Harry is even more emasculated than I ever imagined. IF he eventually realizes who she really is, I think he would be too afraid to leave her. He has been ANGRY for years and she has used it and manipulated it. I think the stupid sod will probably be flattered to read about her extensive research and carefully plotted successful strategies to capture him and “not let him escape” as she told a friend, who she then Markled. Everything is the fault of the Royal Family. H & TW are totally immoral and flaunt it. I predict his book will be gutter level nastiness.
> 
> Doria was a criminal. Pot farms were illegal during the time period she was working on one. The image of her sitting on the front lawn of their house smoking a joint is interesting. Lousy mother role model, left for 10 years, couldn’t hold a job, was a heavy doper according to Thomas, reportedly emotionally abusive to her stepchildren, male and female lovers, and was the one who told Meghan “don’t give the milk away for free”.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Has anyone in Montecito come forward and said they've actually seen Invisibet around town? Don't most parents take their kids out for breakfast, ice cream and such? It's hard to imagine a one year old child has not been seen in public with her parents and sibling. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but it is strange. Unless her big reveal is going to be on Netflix minus the money shot with TQ.


I don't think anyone ever came forward. 

It's strange indeed that Invisibet never seems to be around town with her parents, and Archie has only been out in a controlled (by Z-list) environment several times, the latest being the 4th of July in Wyoming.

After the crappy birthday shots (maybe fully photoshopped images), no reveal of Invisibet is a big reveal anymore. We all have seen the child at last, if that's really her. She's a very ordinary looking child with nothing to boast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> Tsk tsk tsk. The girl didn't just turn. She was raised a spoilt brat. No wonder she out of control
> 
> View attachment 5573630


The part where Thomas Markle was quoted as saying (I’m paraphrasing slightly) “I couldn’t afford the first two but I was going to make sure flower was never left wanting anything” or something like that.  


charlottawill said:


> Has anyone in Montecito come forward and said they've actually seen Invisibet around town? Don't most parents take their kids out for breakfast, ice cream and such? It's hard to imagine a one year old child has not been seen in public with her parents and sibling. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but it is strange. Unless her big reveal is going to be on Netflix minus the money shot with TQ.


Darling... you know they’re far too famous to be out and about. I mean do they even make bulletproof vests for toddlers?
Isn’t this usually how they drive through Montecito? They need privacy doll, PRIVACY!!!!











BTW dolls, HAPPY 100,000 POSTS! WOOOOOT  Here’s my gift to you all...


----------



## EverSoElusive

Why was there a need to lie about a name change from Ragland to Wisdom? 




Seemingly, recollections ALWAYS vary when it comes to Z-list's life stories. Sure she's got the dolls as confirmed by Thomas but Z-list had to spin the story into a fairytale  




Z-list is nothing but a b|tch even as a child. It's shocking that Priddy remained a friend well into adulthood until she walked away after Trevor era. Girl, I'd have kicked Z-list out of my life by the time I was a teen. Priddy's better than me


----------



## Lodpah

mellibelly said:


>



Also the caskets were made and donated.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Thomas demanded that P&G and Hillary acknowledge his daughter? Really?! He is one of the root causes of Z-list's entitlement issue. I'm starting to lose sympathy for him. 

I know he's trying to be a better dad and give Z-list what he couldn't with his older kids but clearly he's giving Z-list a false sense of achievement, telling her that she's won or succeeded even if she didn't. No wonder she has God complex. 





Despite her dad's advice, she lacks 'appearance of authenticity' and acting talent, other than lying and being manipulative!

Why should we be surprised that she demonstrates extreme jealousy when she's raised entitled?





@CeeJay I miss you. I think you shared this with us previously  

Thomas created the monster but shocked that her princess wanted to write the rules. The irony!


----------



## Hermes Zen

1LV said:


> ​https://twitter.com/BaronessBruck
> 
> 
> < Those close to Harry believed that he had long harboured a fantasy to be told what to do by a woman. In his search for maternal sympathy, Meghan promised to be an understanding mother figure as well as an adoring lover… >
> 
> If this is true. . . Sick.  Sick.  Sick.  Maybe one day he will wake up, and be as grossed out by it all as we have been.


OMGOSH the photo of M in the SM outfit with whip (1000 pages back) just flashed through my head and what's worse is I saw H too!!  YUUUCK!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh. Run Harry. You are better than this.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm seeing a pattern here. There sure is a lot of 'what Meghan wants, Meghan gets' going on. It's always her asking someone for something. Thomas of course bent over backwards everytime.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't think anyone ever came forward.
> 
> It's strange indeed that Invisibet never seems to be around town with her parents, and Archie has only been out in a controlled (by Z-list) environment several times, the latest being the 4th of July in Wyoming.
> 
> After the crappy birthday shots (maybe fully photoshopped images), no reveal of Invisibet is a big reveal anymore. We all have seen the child at last, if that's really her. She's a very ordinary looking child with nothing to boast.


it was Z-list’s body double ( that body borrowed from a former life) not Z-list


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> it was Z-list’s body double ( that body borrowed from a former life) not Z-list


From the back, the girl could have been Abigail Spencer too


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




I'm fascinated how a)the sugars aren't mad their idol is an a*shole but that someone is pointing it out and b) how they'll spin anything to the BRF being at fault. It's worrisome, really.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If I was Thomas, I would not be in awe. And it's clear that she's calculating and controlling. It's not about love for her. She's a user.




Did they mean 'looking for a *bigger fish*'? She's as loose as they come. Not interested in casual dating my a£s


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm fascinated how a)the sugars aren't mad their idol is an a*shole but that someone is pointing it out and b) how they'll spin anything to the BRF being at fault. It's worrisome, really.


They all belong in a psych ward


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Sounds about right.




That's an insult to the Kardashians. They seem functional next to Raptor, even Khloe.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This part is new and funny to me    Very bipolar and MPD-like. Even after becoming a duchess, she never used Rachel despite that being her first name





Doria doesn't really strike me as a Clarisonic woman   This must be yet another lie made up by Z-list.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. Run Harry. You are better than this.



Yet again, where is her 'crippling anxiety".
At this point I am sorry for him. He is tied for life. Poor kids. They lack a mother figure.
Harry should think of their wellbeing and search for options. I am sure Catherine will love them more than Claw which is sad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

In the book during the wedding to Trevity-trev-trev he pledged to give MM “the family life she never had”
Didn’t JCMH said something similar?
She is either Orphan Annie or Cinderella…


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's an insult to the Kardashians. They seem functional next to Raptor, even Khloe.


I am sure Kim ,even though, she is shallow and everything, loves her kids more...


----------



## EverSoElusive

Seems like Z-list was only good for sex and drug related scenes


----------



## EverSoElusive

pukasonqo said:


> In the book during the wedding to Trevity-trev-trev he pledged to give MM “the family life she never had”
> Didn’t JCMH said something similar?
> She is either Orphan Annie or Cinderella…


Cinderella for sure because that's how she imagined herself - rags to riches, baby! And everything is a Disney fantasy


----------



## EverSoElusive

Correction: *Z-list* actress per @CeeJay


----------



## EverSoElusive

Ahem. Z-list didn't get mentioned in the publicity for launch and she's not the best actor   I bet she was pissed but couldn't make any demands to make sure that she stayed casted.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Apparently Z-list had been forbidding people from taking pictures before Harry's time!




What kind of sane person wouldn't want some photos or videos of their big day to look back on?


----------



## andrashik

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573836
> 
> Apparently Z-list had been forbidding people from taking pictures before Harry's time!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5573838
> 
> What kind of sane person wouldn't want some photos or videos of their big day to look back on?


The person that knows when opportunity arrives, she will discard her husband like a used old bra


----------



## Icyjade

might be this dress?


----------



## Icyjade

He sounds awful


----------



## Icyjade

there was some discussion of her hair earlier?


----------



## andrashik

Reddit is on fire


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> if that's really her


And that's still a question mark at this point. The picture was supposedly taken at Frogmore, yet there were airport employees who insisted there were no children on the flights that the Harkles traveled on.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Also the caskets were made and donated.


I saw an interview with the man responsible. An amazing human.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. Run Harry. You are better than this.



When Lady Hussey reportedly said "This will all end in tears" I don't think she meant MM's.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573809
> 
> If I was Thomas, I would not be in awe. And it's clear that she's calculating and controlling. It's not about love for her. She's a user.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5573810
> 
> Did they mean 'looking for a *bigger fish*'? She's as loose as they come. Not interested in casual dating my a£s


I wouldn't say loose. She is ruthlessly ambitious and calculating and used a series of men to achieve her goals. She is hardly the first woman to do that.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's an insult to the Kardashians. They seem functional next to Raptor, even Khloe.


Whatever else you want to say about them, they seem to be a close-knit and loving family. I think so much of their schtick is just for the cameras and the money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Whatever else you want to say about them, they seem to be a close-knit and loving family. I think so much of their schtick is just for the cameras and the money.



True. I happen to like them for that exact reason (also, they did make a f*cking fortune out of moderate wealth).


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True. I happen to like them for that exact reason (also, they did make a f*cking fortune out of moderate wealth).


Kris Jenner is a shrewd businesswoman by all accounts.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


>






Lodpah said:


> Also the caskets were made and donated.


This sounds like misinformation from Montecito. It was $170K, not $175K, and Jackson not the Harkles.

_Three days later, Jackson and a close friend flew to Uvalde, briefly met with Gov. Greg Abbott and presented a check for $170,000 with an offer to pay for all funeral expenses._









						Touched by Uvalde, Bo Jackson donated to pay for funerals
					

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Former sports superstar Bo Jackson helped pay for the funerals of the 19 children and two teachers killed in the Uvalde school massacre in May, revealing himself as one of the …




					thehill.com


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> their whole life is one big photoshop


Like the Kardashians …

suddenly I thought of a social media story - Ye/Kanye dissed Kim for letting North do TikTok … some kids should not be using filtering all day long


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm seeing a pattern here. There sure is a lot of 'what Meghan wants, Meghan gets' going on. It's always her asking someone for something.


Now we know where that came from. She performed in the musical _Damn Yankees _when she was young. 

From the song
 “Whatever Lola Wants Lola Gets”

Whatever Lola wants
Lola gets
And little man
Little Lola wants you
Make up your mind
To have
No regrets
Recline yourself
Resign yourself
You're through

I always get what I aim for
And your heart and soul
Is what I came for

Whatever Lola wants
Lola gets
No use to fight
Don't you know you can't win
You're no exception to the rule
I'm Irresistible you fool
Give in
Give in
Give in


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Tsk tsk tsk. The girl didn't just turn. She was raised a spoilt brat. No wonder she out of control
> 
> View attachment 5573630


apparently her half-siblings weren't treated the same way.....maybe Thomas favored her due to his age/stage of life at the time she came along?  or it was just one of those things - he found her to be adorable.  Either way, it seems they spoiled her literally.  and now her father is being repaid.  Seems unfair that he, who gave her everything, is shunned while Doria gets to be the CEO of a business on the RF's dime.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> there was some discussion of her hair earlier?
> 
> View attachment 5573842


Based on those photos where she has straggly limp thin hair, I'm believing that most of the time she uses a huge amount of extensions, like equivalent to half a wig.This has been a very educational thread. I learnt more about extensions than I ever imagined I would!  But that Time cover with Hairy the Hairdresser, that tidal wave of hair was definitely courtesy of airbrush.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


>



There should be a new definition of illiterate—someone who can read but does not comprehend words as written or changes the meaning of  words to suit their lack of understanding.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. Run Harry. You are better than this.



This makes me wonder if when he pulled his hand away and she grabbed it back with two hands, holding on as if her life depended on it (because it does) that maybe she realized she had pushed him too far. She's killing the goose that laid her golden egg.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Based on those photos where she has straggly limp thin hair, I'm believing that most of the time she uses a huge amount of extensions, like equivalent to half a wig.This has been a very educational thread. I learnt more about extensions than I ever imagined I would!  But that Time cover with Hairy the Hairdresser, that tidal wave of hair was definitely courtesy of airbrush.


"Give me hair like Kate's!"


----------



## Melocoton

This book seems to be full of amazing bits.  On one hand, it's entertaining and bordering on unbelieveable that a person would do all this to try to be famous/get ahead/appear like something they are not.  Then, on the other, it's pretty sad that this woman is like this.  Amazingly, Z-lister is out there still hustling whatever it is she's trying to peddle.  I guess any press is good press for her.  But, yet, geez, stop trying to make Fetch happen, TW.


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> There should be a new definition of illiterate—someone who can read but does not comprehend words as written or changes the meaning of  words to suit their lack of understanding.



The definition of illiterate is actually pretty broad. I think this one works -  "having or demonstrating very little or no education".



> https://www.dictionary.com/browse/illiterate


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> apparently her half-siblings weren't treated the same way.....maybe Thomas favored her due to his age/stage of life at the time she came along?  or it was just one of those things - he found her to be adorable.  Either way, it seems they spoiled her literally.  and now her father is being repaid.  Seems unfair that he, who gave her everything, is shunned while Doria gets to be the CEO of a business on the RF's dime.


In one of the quotes here he acknowledged that he didn't have the money for his first two kids but was going to make up for it with ZeeZy. That turned out well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I always get what I aim for
> And your heart and soul
> Is what I came for



That's so true. Maybe replace heart with wealth.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This makes me wonder if when he pulled his hand away and she grabbed it back with two hands, holding on as if her life depended on it (because it does) that maybe she realized she had pushed him too far. She's killing the goose that laid her golden egg.



I don't think she's capable of seeing it that way. She probably just wanted to put on their usual show for the public and Harry wasn't playing nice enough for her liking.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573814
> 
> 
> *Seems like Z-list was only good for sex and drug related scenes *





EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573815
> 
> 
> *Correction: Z-list actress per @CeeJay*





EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573830
> 
> *Ahem. Z-list didn't get mentioned in the publicity for launch and she's not the best actor   I bet she was pissed but couldn't make any demands to make sure that she stayed casted.*


ZedZed is a terrible actress because she had absolutely no empathy. She can't put herself in someone else's shoes to understand or see their own unique feelings, traits, qualities and quirks and so it would be impossible for her to reproduce a specific character on screen. IMO, she is basically selfish, jealous, arrogant, etc., but since she sees herself as being perfect, I don't think she could accurately portray herself either. Seriously, what I'd like most is for someone to wipe away that in-your-face smug grin. A passerby with a cream pie would do.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573814
> 
> 
> Seems like Z-list was only good for sex and drug related scenes


No acting was required, she was just being Meghan in front of a camera.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh. She's such a deeply mean POS.


----------



## Cinderlala

To be fair to Thomas, lots of kids are totally spoiled but are able to grow up without becoming global menaces.  

She is scheming and manipulative and delusional.  Spoiled children may become entitled adults but they are rarely as truly destructive as Raptor.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> The definition of illiterate is actually pretty broad. I think this one works -  "having or demonstrating very little or no education".


Your information is much more apt and precise. Thanks.  I really must go back to using a dictionary for clarification.


----------



## Chanbal

My bet is the TW's work with the ghost-writer will continue, but the racist's name will change. Tom Bower may have done a big favor for Camilla.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> apparently her half-siblings weren't treated the same way.....maybe Thomas favored her due to his age/stage of life at the time she came along?  or it was just one of those things - he found her to be adorable.  Either way, it seems they spoiled her literally.  and now her father is being repaid.  Seems unfair that he, who gave her everything, is shunned while Doria gets to be the CEO of a business on the RF's dime.


In the book, it was mentioned that Thomas wanted to give everything to Z-list, that he never could afford to his older kids. When Z-list came along, he was making money 




xincinsin said:


> Based on those photos where she has straggly limp thin hair, I'm believing that most of the time she uses a huge amount of extensions, like equivalent to half a wig.This has been a very educational thread. I learnt more about extensions than I ever imagined I would!  But that Time cover with Hairy the Hairdresser, that tidal wave of hair was definitely courtesy of airbrush.


When I first moved to the US, I was always confused as to how African-American women change their hairstyle so frequently, one day super curly and the next super straight or a whole different bright color. 

Anyways, now that I've worked with a lot of them upon joining the American workforce, I've learned a thing or two. 

They generally have voluminous curly natural hair, yet quite brittle due to all the chemical work that they have done to their hair, since they do not typically wear their hair in its natural curly state most of the time.

Here's what they generally get done:

Pressed/ironed straight, with or without additional extension pieces (generally the person still have a length to their natural hair)
Pressed straight top and curled bottom, with or without extension pieces (generally the person still have a length to their natural hair)
Full on wig (this is more typical if the person has very, very short hair or head shaved bald)
Glue and wig cap weave
Sew-in weave to natural (already cornrowed) hair
Braids (typically extensions are used for both volume and length)
Having said that, Z-list seems more like the kind of person that does the first two options (JLo is another in the same boat with her damaged natural hair) because:

She can afford frequent pressing or keratin blowout.
She is extremely vain therefore she will never choose to keep extremely short natural hair (I mean short to the scalp) by choice or have her head shaved, to be more of a wig wearer.
She's very unlikely to go for glue and cap weave option because it's not as gentle and classy for her bougie a$s.
She's very unlikely to go for sew-in weave either because that's harmful and painful from what I've been told.
I'm not getting racial but purely speaking about her hair, when was the last time she was seen wearing her natural curly hair? Probably in middle school and once she entered high school, she started having her hair straightened, and my guess is that Thomas paid for it everytime.




Maggie Muggins said:


> ZedZed is a terrible actress because she had absolutely no empathy. She can't put herself in someone else's shoes to understand or see their own unique feelings, traits, qualities and quirks and so it would be impossible for her to reproduce a specific character on screen. IMO, she is basically selfish, jealous, arrogant, etc., but since she sees herself as being perfect, I don't think she could accurately portray herself either. Seriously, what I'd like most is for someone to wipe away that in-your-face smug grin. A passerby with a cream pie would do.


That's exactly what the book said about her not being able to play another character! She's always just playing herself.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I wouldn't say loose. She is ruthlessly ambitious and calculating and used a series of men to achieve her goals. She is hardly the first woman to do that.


I agree with you that she's not the first woman to use a series of men to get what she wants. However, I called her loose because I bet she had to sleep around a lot (more than we will ever know) before she can hook one man to use for a short period of time prior to Markling the current and moving on to the next target. If she can't get the next target hooked immediately or the man was smart enough to see through her and not take the bait, then the sleeping around cycle starts again


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> When I first moved to the US, I was always confused as to how African-American women change their hairstyle so frequently, one day super curly and the next super straight or a whole different bright color.
> 
> Anyways, now that I've worked with a lot of them upon joining the American workforce, I've learned a thing or two.


If you haven't seen it this is a very entertaining and informative documentary by Chris Rock about black women and their hair.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> If you haven't seen it this is a very entertaining and informative documentary by Chris Rock about black women and their hair.




Thank you for sharing  When I see Chris Rock, I cannot help but think about that unfortunate slap.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. She's such a deeply mean POS.



Consider this - he knew he did a terrible job and he was pleased with himself about it.  Kinda like the defiant kid - see, mom, look what a mess I made. Ever the z list actress, MM played it cool on the outside, but inside she is seething. She must know her status is diminished by his petulant behavior.  None of this explains the scary photo of him, the one taken as they were leaving. Wonder if anyone has a video of this.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I'm reading again. 

Here's multiple confirmations that she's a nobody Z-list and secured zero interests despite enlisting SS


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> In one of the quotes here he acknowledged that he didn't have the money for his first two kids but was going to make up for it with ZeeZy. That turned out well.


Have never heard anything about TM’s first wife at all, good, bad or indifferent ….
MM is 13 years younger than Samantha ? So, the first wife must have been in the picture a bit after MM was born - Sam was not a legal adult …
funny how so many thing in the saga of MM are absolute BLANKS, sooooo much airbrushing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C on her recent video addresses a question about why TB's book has not been published in the US yet.  Tom Bower has not found a publisher in the US so far, publishers are nervous because TW is a WOC. She discusses how the fear of being cancelled across university campuses has paralyzed large publishing companies.


----------



## EverSoElusive

When Z-list was in London, she was on a prowl for an Englishman. She was transparent about it  

But this was all before she was set up in a blind date with Harry. I bet she was already orchestrating a plan to hook him before she even sat down to interact with him at the blind date because she was hard on wanting to find an Englishman.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. She's such a deeply mean POS.



The comments are both hilarious and sad:

"Blink three times if you've realised you need help yet Harry." 

"How'd i do mummy - are you proud of me? Can we go to the toy store and get me a present?"

“You could have done better … at talking about me and how I’m a crusader just like your mom and I may likely surpass her in fame and glory - but I need better security bc I’m hounded by a paparazzi.”

"Look at that *****face expression on her - she is so jealous of his social standing in life, despite acquiring a life beyond her wildest dreams by marrying him. *She was right, she IS like a Disney character only not Ariel… she is Cruella*"


----------



## Chanbal

Celeb haunt Soho House is being sued by small firm in copyright claim
					

EXCLUSIVE: A High Court action against the company founded by restaurateur Nick Jones, 58, brought by Cantilever Bar Systems, claims Soho House 'flagrantly' copied its bar designs




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> My bet is the TW's work with the ghost-writer will continue, but the racist's name will change. Tom Bower may have done a big favor for Camilla.
> View attachment 5574073




It's too easy to cast Camilla as a villain.

I am not a die hard fan of C (nor a Di-hard Stan) but Harry better be very careful, she has more sway with Charles than anyone else on the planet.


----------



## oldbag

A


Lilliesdaughter said:


> Your information is much more apt and precise. Thanks.  I really must go back to using a dictionary for clarification.


Idiot works well also.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Lady C on her recent video addresses a question about why TB's book has not been published in the US yet.  Tom Bower has not found a publisher in the US so far, publishers are nervous because TW is a WOC. She discusses how the fear of being cancelled across university campuses has paralyzed large publishing companies.


 I don't know if I buy that.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> When Z-list was in London, she was on a prowl for an Englishman. She was transparent about it
> 
> But this was all before she was set up in a blind date with Harry. I bet she was already orchestrating a plan to hook him before she even sat down to interact with him at the blind date because she was hard on wanting to find an Englishman.
> 
> View attachment 5574126
> 
> View attachment 5574127


Thank you for sharing all these excerpts. It is fascinating, infuriating and sad. I cannot wait for karma to visit her.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5574130
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Celeb haunt Soho House is being sued by small firm in copyright claim
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: A High Court action against the company founded by restaurateur Nick Jones, 58, brought by Cantilever Bar Systems, claims Soho House 'flagrantly' copied its bar designs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Goodness! She looked so unkempt here


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Thank you for sharing all these excerpts. It is fascinating, infuriating and sad. I cannot wait for karma to visit her.


People like her are generally smart. Alas, they usually try to scheme and outsmart others instead of using their intelligence for something good and useful.


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> Sounds about right.



okay, I need to buy the book wow!
thank you for sharing the article


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> It's too easy to cast Camilla as a villain.



A correspondent for the TV tabloid show Inside Edition was talking about the book and referred to Camilla's "ginger Afro" comment as being confirmation that she was the source of the question about the baby's skin color in the Oprah interview. WTF? How do you conflate the two?


----------



## mellibelly

I just started the book and in the first chapter there’s an error that gets repeated several times. It’s reminding me of the Canadian PM error someone mentioned previously. Bower calls the town that Tom, Doria and young Methane live in Woodward Hills. It’s Wood*LAND* Hills. He writes it at least 4x. There is no Woodward Hills in LA County or even in California. Woodland Hills is next to Canoga Park where she was born. What a weird mistake to make?!


----------



## EverSoElusive

This is Z-list all day everyday. 

So she sucks at acting because she can only play herself but outside of acting, she's cosplaying and copying other women that she idolizes pretty well.

Another irony of Z-list that I cannot wrap my head around much like how I didn't understand how she can be so thin-skinned and thick-skinned at the same time.




I've never seen her carrying an Hermes but a Mulberry so I take it Hermes never entertained Z-list


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Consider this - he knew he did a terrible job and he was pleased with himself about it.  Kinda like the defiant kid - see, mom, look what a mess I made.



I did not read it like this at all.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> I just started the book and in the first chapter there’s an error that gets repeated several times. It’s reminding me of the Canadian PM error someone mentioned previously. Bower calls the town that Tom, Doria and young Methane live in Woodward Hills. It’s Wood*LAND* Hills. He writes it at least 4x. There is no Woodward Hills in LA County or even in California. Woodland Hills is next to Canoga Park where she was born. What a weird mistake to make?!


Again, it calls his supposed reputation for meticulous research into question. You know things like this will be blown up to distract from the meat of the book.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> People like her are generally smart. Alas, they usually try to scheme and outsmart others instead of using their intelligence for something good and useful.



Shes not clever smart so much as cunning smart. 

2 very different skill sets. One is being interested in things outside of the self, the the other only being interested in the self.

We can study the identity politics or cultural studies at most unis, but even the most progressive institutions don’t have modules in subjects like me myself and I nor cult leadership.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> A correspondent for the TV tabloid show Inside Edition was talking about the book and referred to Camilla's "ginger Afro" comment as being confirmation that she was the source of the question about the baby's skin color in the Oprah interview. WTF? How do you conflate the two?


If there was a legit ginger afro comment, that's a legit curiosity with Harry being a ginger. The family could have been just as curious about the skin color because the baby is mixed raced, not because they are racists. 

Only thing I think is insane is that a hair comment is claimed to being racism based skin color concern.

Z-list and co are crazy! They sure love twisting everything. Maybe that's why Z-list loves yoga


----------



## 880

if anyone is interested, I googled revenge bower, scrolled down to an Amazon link in the US, and I was able to order a hardcover copy delivery estimate August 10-22. I also received a confirmation email from Amazon.

when I opened my Amazon acct, it was not available, IDKW.

thank you to @EverSoElusive and others who have advised on ordering


----------



## mellibelly

charlottawill said:


> Again, it calls his supposed reputation for meticulous research into question. You know things like this will be blown up to distract from the meat of the book.


Yes, hopefully it gets corrected before the book is released in the US. The sugars will use these minor errors to dispute the whole thing

How do we get word to him LOL


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5574135
> 
> This is Z-list all day everyday.
> 
> So she sucks at acting because she can only play herself but outside of acting, she's cosplaying and copying other women that she idolizes pretty well.
> 
> Another irony of Z-list that I cannot wrap my head around much like how I didn't understand how she can be so thin-skinned and thick-skinned at the same time.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574143
> 
> I've never seen her carrying an Hermes but a Mulberry so I take it Hermes never entertained Z-list


I'm sure the staffers at Hermes who read that email got a good laugh out of it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure the staffers at Hermes who read that email got a good laugh out of it.


I bet    Z-list should have done better research because Hermes doesn't do celebrity ambassadors or endorsements.


----------



## charlottawill

So a sugar posted this on Twitter re "Tightgate". Kate, before she and William were engaged, was appropriately in costume for an 80's themed roller disco party. They clearly do not understand the concept of context:



But wait, there's more! This was the comeback


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> So a sugar posted this on Twitter re "Tightgate". Kate, before she and William were engaged, was appropriately in costume for an 80's themed roller disco party. They clearly do not understand the concept of context:
> 
> 
> 
> But wait, there's more! This was the comeback



Never seen Kate being a Karen. Haven't heard any palace staffers complained about Kate being a mean b!tch. That speaks for itself   They can smear all they want. The world has seen Z-list evilness and heard her lies. Many have exposed her. They can keep giving rope to Z-list to hang herself.


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> When Z-list was in London, she was on a prowl for an Englishman. She was transparent about it
> 
> But this was all before she was set up in a blind date with Harry. I bet she was already orchestrating a plan to hook him before she even sat down to interact with him at the blind date because she was hard on wanting to find an Englishman.
> 
> View attachment 5574126
> 
> View attachment 5574127


Yes, and after befriending Cundy, the claw promptly ghosted her the minute she met Harry. Claw has no time for the wimmenfolk, especially if they’re unable to give her a leg up, or after they’ve helped advance her somehow. 

I sure would like to have a chat with Jessica Mulroney - the keeper of secrets and skeletons.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Wow! She snapped at a guy for letting her go first? Just because one is a feminist, I don't think we can't appreciate a simple act of chivalry.





Z-list must have envisioned herself as Tyra Banks or RuPaul      I think even Kate is taller than Z-list.

Someone needs to edit this book and change it to chicken legs.


----------



## V0N1B2

charlottawill said:


> I don't know if I buy that.


I do kind of in a way, just due to the racial climate in the US right now, but on the other hand, do Americans really think they’re the only country in the world with Black people?


----------



## Cinderlala

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5574173
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574174
> 
> Z-list must have envisioned herself as Tyra Banks or RuPaul      I think even Kate is taller than Z-list.
> 
> Someone needs to edit this book and change it to chicken legs.



Kate is quite a bit taller than the Claw.  I'd guess TW is about 5'5 and I'm pretty sure Kate is 5'9.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ouch.


----------



## Cinderlala

^^^I loved that part of the Tom Bower interview! ^^^  

I had wondered what was said in that conversation.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5574173
> 
> Wow! She snapped at a guy for letting her go first? Just because one is a feminist, I don't think we can't appreciate a simple act of chivalry.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574174
> 
> Z-list must have envisioned herself as Tyra Banks or RuPaul      I think even Kate is taller than Z-list.
> 
> Someone needs to edit this book and change it to chicken legs.



Kate:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Wow! She snapped at a guy for letting her go first? Just because one is a feminist, I don't think we can't appreciate a simple act of chivalry.



How times have changed. She sure gets a kick out of going in front of her husband who outranks her.


----------



## MiniMabel

charlottawill said:


> So a sugar posted this on Twitter re "Tightgate". Kate, before she and William were engaged, was appropriately in costume for an 80's themed roller disco party. They clearly do not understand the concept of context:
> 
> 
> 
> But wait, there's more! This was the comeback




It's offensive that an innocent photo of Catherine having fun has been used by a crazy. 

Was MM auditioning for something p*rn-related in those photos?  Looks rather scuzzy, trying to appear sexy or tempting?! Blimey.  It's very off-putting seeing people in these kinds of attention-seeking poses. Lok at me! Look at me!  No, thanks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I can't stop thinking about "Why can't you ever be happy for me." Harry is a prick, but this is so sad especially when the person in question is your spouse, the person who should be your #1 cheerleader.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm reading again.
> 
> Here's multiple confirmations that she's a nobody Z-list and secured zero interests despite enlisting SS
> 
> View attachment 5574117
> View attachment 5574118
> 
> View attachment 5574119



This book must be having the same effect in British social circles this weekend as Lady Whistledown's papers in Bridgerton. Heat wave? What heat wave?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

_Katz’s deli nyc CD _


mellibelly said:


> I just started the book and in the first chapter there’s an error that gets repeated several times. It’s reminding me of the Canadian PM error someone mentioned previously. Bower calls the town that Tom, Doria and young Methane live in Woodward Hills. It’s Wood*LAND* Hills. He writes it at least 4x. There is no Woodward Hills in LA County or even in California. Woodland Hills is next to Canoga Park where she was born. What a weird mistake to make?!


I believe these are often spellcheck adjustments missed while typing and proofreaders are lazy regarding facts  and may move too fast. I think writers often rely on staff too often and this is the result.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> It's offensive that an innocent photo of Catherine having fun has been used by a crazy.
> 
> Was MM auditioning for a something p*rn-related in those photos?  Looks rather scuzzy, trying to appear sexy or tempting?! Blimey.  It's very off-putting seeing people in these kinds of attention-seeking poses. Lok at me! Look at me!  No, thanks.



Back then, probably for a sugar babies website. At the rate she's going, she'll next appear on OnlyFans. 



> https://washingtoncitypaper.com/art...-baby-sites-and-apps-meet-sugar-local-babies/


----------



## EverSoElusive

V0N1B2 said:


> I do kind of in a way, just due to the racial climate in the US right now, but on the other hand, do Americans really think they’re the only country in the world with Black people?


I'm Southeast Asian (born and raised completely in Asia), currently living in the US, specifically Atlanta, where they have a large African-American population.

You have no idea how many people walk around with ginormous chips on their shoulders because of enslavement history and they would turn just about anything into a racial issue and racism i.e. the world is against black people. It's really exhausting trying to have an innocent conversation because you might just get called a racist.

I do not discuss a lot of things with my African-American colleagues and friends unless I know for a fact that they are open-minded and rational, to avoid unnecessary tension 

This is also the reason why I wanted an e-book and not paper copy of Bower's book. I wanted to be able to read it discreetly without getting grilled or cursed at for reading a "racist" book


----------



## EverSoElusive

Who is this Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne person? Sounds like she got Z-list some decent engagements and exposures that SS didn't manage to. However, I've never heard of her and there hasn't been any recent known connection of them working together now. I'm assuming Gina got Markled just like everybody else after she bagged the prince?


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Who is this Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne person? Sounds like she got Z-list some decent engagements and exposures that SS didn't manage to. However, I've never heard of her and there hasn't been any recent known connection of them working together now. I'm assuming Gina got Markled just like everybody else after she bagged the prince?
> 
> View attachment 5574193
> 
> View attachment 5574194



The sad part is, the positive qualities described here could have made her a popular member of the BRF if not for her enormous ego.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I guess that clears up the theory poor Raptor has to clinge to Harry at all times because she can't walk in heels.


----------



## andrashik

charlottawill said:


> The sad part is, the positive qualities described here could have made her a popular member of the BRF if not for her enormous ego.


I think she is just superficially charming. Everything she's done was with a reason. Underneath she is not the person she claimes to be.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Any recent connection between Z-list and Fitzpatrick? Did she stay in his hotel during the last 2 UN visits in NYC?

Having read this part, I guess she probably didn't have to fork out much whenever she was around Fitzpatrick. Could Fitzpatrick been a sugar daddy at some point?






More confirmation that she's an unknown and nobody was interested to hire her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

An awesome post on reddit (on the markle subreddit) said: "Has anyone called to see if she is okay?" 
I think some of you ladies know how to bake a elderflower cake? Can someone send it to her?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm Southeast Asian (born and raised completely in Asia), currently living in the US, specifically Atlanta, where they have a large African-American population.
> 
> You have no idea how many people walk around with ginormous chips on their shoulders because of enslavement history and they would turn just about anything into a racial issue and racism i.e. the world is against black people. It's really exhausting trying to have an innocent conversation because you might just get called a racist.
> 
> I do not discuss a lot of things with my African-American colleagues and friends unless I know for a fact that they are open-minded and rational, to avoid unnecessary tension
> 
> This is also the reason why I wanted an e-book and not paper copy of Bower's book. I wanted to be able to read it discreetly without getting grilled or cursed at for reading a "racist" book



I can understand why POC would have ginormous chips on their shoulders. And why someone would feel the world is against black people. Perhaps being open to those conversations with your colleagues and friends would enable them to share their experiences and perspectives. I imagine dealing with actual racism must be quite exhausting as well.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I can't stop thinking about "Why can't you ever be happy for me." Harry is a prick, but this is so sad especially when the person in question is your spouse, the person who should be your #1 cheerleader.


IME, partners, especially  if in the same profession, are often very competitive with each other, she’s on another level though, seriously a maniac. She doesn’t value any of her unbridled good luck, not only a talentless nobody but actually believes her own baseless hype.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> An awesome post on reddit (on the markle subreddit) said: "Has anyone called to see if she is okay?"
> I think some of you ladies know how to bake a elderflower cake? Can someone send it to her?



I do thanks to a former royal chef, but I think I'll be washing my hair this weekend and the next few weeks.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Who is this Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne person? Sounds like she got Z-list some decent engagements and exposures that SS didn't manage to. However, I've never heard of her and there hasn't been any recent known connection of them working together now. I'm assuming Gina got Markled just like everybody else after she bagged the prince?
> 
> View attachment 5574193
> 
> View attachment 5574194


I have perfected the art of being immune to love bombing.

if anyone needed any more proof Megatron is a classic, chronic narcissist, there you go   As above


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW Pinterest just showed me an elderflower and lemon biscuit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I have perfected the art of being immune to love bombing.
> 
> if anyone needed any more proof Megatron is a classic, chronic narcissist, there you go   As above



I'm not sure if I perfected the art or if I'm just so broken that exaggerated display of affection makes me uncomfortable and lets me run


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> I think she is just superficially charming. Everything she's done was with a reason. Underneath she is not the person she claimes to be.


And that's the paradox about her. She couldn't get acting roles because she supposedly can't act, but she obviously can when the situation warrants it.


----------



## Lodpah

Melocoton said:


> This book seems to be full of amazing bits.  On one hand, it's entertaining and bordering on unbelieveable that a person would do all this to try to be famous/get ahead/appear like something they are not.  Then, on the other, it's pretty sad that this woman is like this.  Amazingly, Z-lister is out there still hustling whatever it is she's trying to peddle.  I guess any press is good press for her.  But, yet, geez, stop trying to make Fetch happen, TW.


The thing is she already had everything but she was too greedy to realize that.


----------



## Lodpah

I was watching a YouTube video where Johnny Depp was talking to AH on the phone in a last ditch effort to resolve the issues they had and one thing JD said to AH was when he realized she was psycho was he told her “you don’t exist, I made you up in my mind.” Basically saying she wasn’t who he thought she was. JD was calm while AH was so unhinged. Gaslighting JD, screaming, crying, etc. I imagine that’s how TW is with Harry.


----------



## andrashik

charlottawill said:


> And that's the paradox about her. She couldn't get acting roles because she supposedly can't act, but she obviously can when the situation warrants it.


From the book, I understood that she was love bombing and overly nice and approachable. This hardly counts as acting ( please correct me if I am wrong) She lacks the depth an actor achieves when portraying different characters.
After all, they all found out how nasty she is


----------



## EverSoElusive

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I can understand why POC would have ginormous chips on their shoulders. And why someone would feel the world is against black people. Perhaps being open to those conversations with your colleagues and friends would enable them to share their experiences and perspectives. I imagine dealing with actual racism must be quite exhausting as well.


I'm a POC myself yet I don't have a big chip on my shoulder. There were really horrible things done to my race and people during the Japanese occupation in my home country yet I don't have a big chip on my shoulder. There are people like myself who choose to learn from history and move on so that we can progress and be happy.

Before retreating and readjusting my openness to discuss, I was always interested in having a conversation about things including race and religion with people, which includes African-Americans. However, once I discovered how defensive and combative African-Americans can be, I decided that it's a futile attempt when they aren't interested in anything other than the chips on their shoulders. 

While I may not come out to speak about things with select people because of the aforementioned reason, that doesn't mean that I don't listen to them when they initiate the sharing of their experiences and perspectives. 

I've personally experienced racism in my life and I'm sure it will continue to happen, and yes, it is exhausting but I can choose to not let it become the focal point of my life, creating an eternal anger. 

Also, racism doesn't just happen black people. Black people can be equally racist to other colored races. I see and experience that in the US


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure if I perfected the art or if I'm just so broken that exaggerated display of affection makes me uncomfortable and lets me run


I'm always suspicious if someone gushes without even knowing me (and they are not tipsy). I'm quite a friendly person myself, and sometimes i do hit it off with people, but  full red alert if they go OTT. I fully expect they'll want to move in with me within the week, want a favour  or money or need an alibi for a serious crime.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> And that's the paradox about her. She couldn't get acting roles because she supposedly can't act, but she obviously can when the situation warrants it.


Sometimes not even then


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW Pinterest just showed me an elderflower and lemon biscuit.


I'm enjoying some homemade chocolate chip cookies from my client's aunt. You can send me some of that elderflower and lemon biscuits if you make some


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> "Has anyone called to see if she is okay?"


Sorry, I've been busy re-arranging my sock drawer.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> I'm always suspicious if *someone gushes without even knowing me* (and they are not tipsy). I'm quite a friendly person myself, and sometimes i do hit it off with people, but  full red alert if they go OTT. I fully expect they'll want to move in with me within the week, want a favour  or money or need an alibi for a serious crime.


I find it creepy when people do that. I'm friendly with people but I also make sure to keep them at arms length. Never know when someone would misconstrue your general friendliness or kindness.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> ^^^I loved that part of the Tom Bower interview! ^^^
> 
> I had wondered what was said in that conversation.


And it explains the look on Sophie Wessex's face. So much for his special connection with his grandmother.

ETA, it also confirms my belief that Johnny Thompson was there by design to keep watch over them. I doubt he was going to tolerate them trying to play musical chairs in the church. Imagine being close to 40 but your grandmother still thinks you need a minder in church


----------



## Yanca

Anybody has  any intel of where else can we buy the book in the US,  my Book depository order status is still processing after they have restocked.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5574215
> 
> Any recent connection between Z-list and Fitzpatrick? Did she stay in his hotel during the last 2 UN visits in NYC?
> 
> Having read this part, I guess she probably didn't have to fork out much whenever she was around Fitzpatrick. Could Fitzpatrick been a sugar daddy at some point?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574218
> 
> View attachment 5574219
> 
> More confirmation that she's an unknown and nobody was interested to hire her.


_Fitzpatrick, a hotelier and philanthropist who received an honorary OBE from the Queen for his work toward the peace process in Northern Ireland and his massive charity work, has been a friend of Markle’s for some time, meeting with her in his New York hotel with thanks to Irish golfer Rory McIlroy and even inviting her along to the White House and his ******* fundraiser.









						How an Irish businessman landed in the Suits cast crew for the Royal wedding
					

The hotelier John Fitzpatrick is on his way to Windsor this weekend to see his friend Meghan Markle tie the knot with Prince Harry.




					www.irishcentral.com
				





_


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list scored a free trip to Malta through Elle, was supposed to be writing about Malta then came back and just scratched everything off. She used the opportunity to travel for free and to promote herself instead. WTF????

This trip was also for her to discover her mixed race roots yet it turns out she never had any ancestry there or anything to do with the two named "ancestors". I'm surprised she didn't already say that she's a descendant of Mary I  

I hope Elle has blacklisted her!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Yanca said:


> Anybody has  any intel of where else can we buy the book in the US,  my Book depository order status is still processing after they have restocked.


I can't send you a PM. Send me one and I'll reply with something


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Fitzpatrick, a hotelier and philanthropist who received an honorary OBE from the Queen for his work toward the peace process in Northern Ireland and his massive charity work, has been a friend of Markle’s for some time, meeting with her in his New York hotel with thanks to Irish golfer Rory McIlroy and even inviting her along to the White House and his ******* fundraiser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How an Irish businessman landed in the Suits cast crew for the Royal wedding
> 
> 
> The hotelier John Fitzpatrick is on his way to Windsor this weekend to see his friend Meghan Markle tie the knot with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishcentral.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574278
> _



Her awful fashion sense on display once again. Did she really think that was a good look?  

And I can almost hear the wheels spinning in her head: "Neeson - movie star - widowed - jackpot!"


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Fitzpatrick, a hotelier and philanthropist who received an honorary OBE from the Queen for his work toward the peace process in Northern Ireland and his massive charity work, has been a friend of Markle’s for some time, meeting with her in his New York hotel with thanks to Irish golfer Rory McIlroy and even inviting her along to the White House and his ******* fundraiser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How an Irish businessman landed in the Suits cast crew for the Royal wedding
> 
> 
> The hotelier John Fitzpatrick is on his way to Windsor this weekend to see his friend Meghan Markle tie the knot with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishcentral.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574278
> _


Handsome but ties with Z-list. Hmm


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5574267
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574268
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574269
> 
> 
> 
> Z-list scored a free trip to Malta through Elle, was supposed to be writing about Malta then came back and just scratched everything off. She used the opportunity to travel for free and to promote herself instead. WTF????
> 
> This trip was also for her to discover her mixed race roots yet it turns out she never had any ancestry there or anything to do with the two named "ancestors". I'm surprised she didn't already say that she's a descendant of Mary I
> 
> I hope Elle has blacklisted her!



I read that excerpt elsewhere yesterday and her comments about Malta were cringeworthy. Seems to be a pattern with her.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Fitzpatrick, a hotelier and philanthropist who received an honorary OBE from the Queen for his work toward the peace process in Northern Ireland and his massive charity work, has been a friend of Markle’s for some time, meeting with her in his New York hotel with thanks to Irish golfer Rory McIlroy and even inviting her along to the White House and his ******* fundraiser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How an Irish businessman landed in the Suits cast crew for the Royal wedding
> 
> 
> The hotelier John Fitzpatrick is on his way to Windsor this weekend to see his friend Meghan Markle tie the knot with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishcentral.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574278
> _


she must be wearing very high heels here; Liam Neeson is 6'4"


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Her awful fashion sense on display once again. Did she really think that was a good look?
> 
> And I can almost hear the wheels spinning in her head: "Neeson - movie star - widowed - jackpot!"


That's better than many of her failed looks after becoming a duchess


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she must be wearing very high heels here; Liam Neeson is 6'4"


She is reportedly 5'6" and as mentioned in an earlier excerpt, she walks well in 4 inch heels, as we've seen her wearing repeatedly. So that would put her at 5'10".


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> That's better than many of her failed looks after becoming a duchess


True, she had the struggling actress excuse back then. What was her excuse after PC started picking up the tab for her designer duds?


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> True, she had the struggling actress excuse back then. What was her excuse after PC started picking up the tab for her designer duds?


She's cosplaying Diana, wearing stuff that doesn't suit her frame


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I fee so sorry


For Hazy or George?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list scored a free trip to Malta through Elle, was supposed to be writing about Malta then came back and just scratched everything off. She used the opportunity to travel for free and to promote herself instead. WTF????
> 
> This trip was also for her to discover her mixed race roots yet it turns out she never had any ancestry there or anything to do with the two named "ancestors". I'm surprised she didn't already say that she's a descendant of Mary I
> 
> I hope Elle has blacklisted her!



I'm stunned by the audacity and also how this schemer got so far in life without anyone deciding to put a stop to it. WTF indeed.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list asked to be promoted to be a UN ambassador   The delusion is real. Then when not promoted, she quit HeForShe initiative and cut ties with UN women. But she still had the nerves to go back to UN HQ with her Garfield grin. Shameless!


----------



## 880

Yanca said:


> Anybody has  any intel of where else can we buy the book in the US,  my Book depository order status is still processing after they have restocked.








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

:tdown:




					forum.purseblog.com
				




i ordered a hard copy, see post 100,086


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm stunned by the audacity and also how this schemer got so far in life without anyone deciding to put a stop to it. WTF indeed.


She is both a psychopath and a sociopath   Lethal combination!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


>



If H whines that he's no longer third in line since the birth of W's children, he's certainly proving with his every action since leaving the BRF that he's just a turd in line anyway.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm stunned by the audacity and also how this schemer got so far in life without anyone deciding to put a stop to it. WTF indeed.



Well someone finally did and it's glorious! Hats off to Tom Bower and his team. This has sealed the gruesome twosome's fate as being employable only for reality TV or cable shopping shows. Or maybe guest speaker at garden club luncheons.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> For Hazy or George?


Sorry, I tried to delete my post but something went wrong... butter fingers I guess.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If N3tflix has some huevos, they should make a new season of The Crown covering Z-list and Harry. I would be  and cheering in front of the TV


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Fitzpatrick, a hotelier and philanthropist who received an honorary OBE from the Queen for his work toward the peace process in Northern Ireland and his massive charity work, has been a friend of Markle’s for some time, meeting with her in his New York hotel with thanks to Irish golfer Rory McIlroy and even inviting her along to the White House and his ******* fundraiser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How an Irish businessman landed in the Suits cast crew for the Royal wedding
> 
> 
> The hotelier John Fitzpatrick is on his way to Windsor this weekend to see his friend Meghan Markle tie the knot with Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishcentral.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574278
> _


Ok - this has got to be one of the most unflattering of dresses I have seen on TW   I guess she has a long history of not knowing how to dress for her body shape!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Ok - this has got to be one of the most unflattering of dresses I have seen on TW   I guess she has a long history of not knowing how to dress for her body shape!


It looks like an unfortunate bridesmaid dress.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Two words come to mind: Demanding and diva. She thinks she's Beyonce or JLo level


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The tea mug is just not on brand  

Pretentious cow.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



Involving a child, NO, that is fighting below the belt


----------



## EverSoElusive

What world does this clown live in? Demanding for a first class fare on a client's dime by exclaiming Jessica M is her best friend. These business people must be on drugs to have paid for it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

papertiger said:


> I'm always suspicious if someone gushes without even knowing me (and they are not tipsy). I'm quite a friendly person myself, and sometimes i do hit it off with people, but  full red alert if they go OTT. I fully expect they'll want to move in with me within the week, want a favour  or money or need an alibi for a serious crime.


So---first, sorry about the blank post (moderators, please delete!)---but re: this, my experience is that a lot of people (executives, in particular) love having people they don't know gush over them.  I never understood it but it's obviously a thing.  And it often works.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> I just started the book and in the first chapter there’s an error that gets repeated several times. It’s reminding me of the Canadian PM error someone mentioned previously. Bower calls the town that Tom, Doria and young Methane live in Woodward Hills. It’s Wood*LAND* Hills. He writes it at least 4x. There is no Woodward Hills in LA County or even in California. Woodland Hills is next to Canoga Park where she was born. What a weird mistake to make?!


What is sad is that publishers don’t pay for quality editing and proofreading anymore. It’s one of my pet peeves that there are so many typos and mistakes in books these days that should have been caught before publication.


----------



## CarryOn2020

​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
*The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
*If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
*A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
*The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
*








						The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
					

The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> ​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
> ​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
> *The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
> *If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
> *A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
> *The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


If this is true, I'm betting the Harkles and kids will go, and there will be a bunch of videos and photos photoshopped for Netflix.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kipp said:


> If this is true, I'm betting the Harkles and kids will go, and there will be a bunch of videos and photos photoshopped for Netflix.



Could be ‘drug rehab’  or re-education for Harry - the BRF needs to protect him.  The Mandela speech really underscored the need to keep him away from the microphones. Or as MM might say - he is bad for her brand.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> ​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
> ​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
> *The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
> *If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
> *A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
> *The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Is this z-list’s own PR?  Who is the source? Sunshine Sachs?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be ‘drug rehab’ or re-education for Harry - the BRF needs to protect him.


Exactly. Get him away from their Montecito bubble and deprogram him. I think the palace is alarmed at what they are seeing and reading. I doubt the Queen would have extended this invitation otherwise. But you know a Netflix crew won't be allowed, so it remains to be seen if they actually show up.


----------



## marietouchet

kipp said:


> If this is true, I'm betting the Harkles and kids will go, and there will be a bunch of videos and photos photoshopped for Netflix.


But security ? He is suing the government and DM about security
It would not do if he just went without all the xtra stuff he claims he needs, proving he can get by …
I do assume there were special jubilee arrangements
But he is not likely to get such consideration again


----------



## EverSoElusive

General consensus, disrespectful and ungrateful. I believe the palace bullying allegations were never untrue. Z-list is an awful human being


----------



## EverSoElusive

Why does this incident sound so familiar like the one involving Kate?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list life is filled with Photoshop galore!!!


----------



## Annawakes

I’m glad to hear she didn’t get the role of UN ambassador.  Some people were smart enough to see through her BS.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list life is filled with Photoshop galore!!!
> 
> View attachment 5574370


I think you need to take a break from all this, with a nice big glass of wine.  I know I do


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> Ok - this has got to be one of the most unflattering of dresses I have seen on TW   I guess she has a long history of not knowing how to dress for her body shape!



First of all, Liam Neeson has a rep as being very… well endowed. I wonder if MM found out. 

Second, I’m lol at this prediction. 
	

		
			
		

		
	








CarryOn2020 said:


> ​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
> ​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
> *The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
> *If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
> *A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
> *The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I think this is Harkle PR.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Annawakes said:


> I’m glad to hear she didn’t get the role of UN ambassador.  Some people were smart enough to see through her BS.


Is that why she had a fit at that fair in Africa?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5574360
> View attachment 5574361
> View attachment 5574362
> View attachment 5574364
> 
> 
> General consensus, disrespectful and ungrateful. I believe the palace bullying allegations were never untrue. Z-list is an awful human being


My goodness. MM is more of a B:tch than I could have imagined.  I don’t know why they didn’t pick a different actress to be their spokesperson, nor why they didn’t fire her the first day.  It’s not like she was anybody important that they had to kowtow to.  I guess she feels more important if she belittles people.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> I agree with you that she's not the first woman to use a series of men to get what she wants. However, I called her loose because I bet she had to sleep around a lot (more than we will ever know) before she can hook one man to use for a short period of time prior to Markling the current and moving on to the next target. If she can't get the next target hooked immediately or the man was smart enough to see through her and not take the bait, then the sleeping around cycle starts again


Really loose. Harry secretly flys into Toronto, is stashed at a friend’s house, possibly Mulroney’s, while Cory is still living in the home he shared with Raptor. She was was hooking (pun intended) up with H behind Cory’s back.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> My goodness. MM is more of a B:tch than I could have imagined.  I don’t know why they didn’t pick a different actress to be their spokesperson, nor why they didn’t fire her the first day.  It’s not like she was anybody important that they had to kowtow to.  I guess she feels more important if she belittles people.


I think Z-list's agent Lori Sale secured this gig for her. I'm not quite sure how things work but assuming that there was a signed contract, perhaps that's why it was difficult for them to just get rid of her. But I agree, they should have fired her and get a different person.

Z-list is so entitled that she feels she's more important than everyone judging by her demands and the disrespect that she exhibits. If she feels she can walk all over the Queen and the late Prince Phillip, what makes you think she's going to respect others? It is quite sad to see there's such a horrible person walking this earth among us.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Really loose. Harry secretly flys into Toronto, is stashed at a friend’s house, possibly Mulroney’s, while Cory is still living in the home he shared with Raptor. She was was hooking (pun intended) up with H behind Cory’s back.


From the book, it seems like she's cheating on Cory with Rory before Harry, and she was actively looking for a new beau. She is only loyal to herself.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I think you need to take a break from all this, with a nice big glass of wine.  I know I do


Good thing I read very slowly and I'm doing different things at the same time   But I might have to raid my husband's wine collection if I were to take your advice! He's the drinker in the family, not me


----------



## wisconsin

MiniMabel said:


> Mistake


----------



## bag-mania

This book has it all. I have every expectation Bower will be hit with one or more lawsuits from Meghan and Harry. If they don’t sue him it will only be because Meghan won’t want all of these unflattering truths hashed out in court.

I cannot express enough gratitude to Tom Bower for doing the research and writing this book. Well done, sir!


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Seriously, what I'd like most is for someone to wipe away that in-your-face smug grin. A passerby with a cream pie would do.


Banana cream pie...



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. She's such a deeply mean POS.



I hope the lipreader was wrong. This is such a cruel response, like beating a puppy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some humor -


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> This book has it all. I have every expectation Bower will be hit with one or more lawsuits from Meghan and Harry. If they don’t sue him it will only be because Meghan won’t want all of these unflattering truths hashed out in court.
> 
> I cannot express enough gratitude to Tom Bower for doing the research and writing this book. Well done, sir!
> 
> View attachment 5574394


I’m beginning to think Netflix should interview or do a docuseries on Bower and his research and POV.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh really?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Yellow highlight: Z-list makes a huge deal out of a small thing. This ties in with her entitlement issue.

Pink highlight: Another incident of someone being reduced to tears


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I think this is Harkle PR.


Is it the “olive branch”  language?


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it the “olive branch”  language?



Every since they became the Troublesome Duo, my favorite term that I've read is 'recollections may vary'  Kudos to the palace!

Olive branch, who?


----------



## Chanbal

Reading between the lines…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> First of all, Liam Neeson has a rep as being very… well endowed. I wonder if MM found out.



I had heard same. For those of us of a certain age, remember Paul Newman's quote about why he wouldn't cheat on wife Joanne Woodward - "Why go out for a hamburger when you have steak at home? Well Zeezy would be the hamburger to Natasha Richardson.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Oh looky looky what we have here! Z-list asked to be set up on a blind date with Harry, not that someone offered to set them up 






And didn't she claimed that she didn't know anything about Harry?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Really loose. Harry secretly flys into Toronto, is stashed at a friend’s house, possibly Mulroney’s, while Cory is still living in the home he shared with Raptor. She was was hooking (pun intended) up with H behind Cory’s back.


I doubt Hazy was aware of her domestic situation. And remember, if they cheat with you, they'll cheat on you.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I hope the lipreader was wrong. This is such a cruel response, like beating a puppy.


  Agreed, but it appears to be in keeping with her character. Or lack thereof.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some humor -



This is brilliant. I've never seen it before, thank you!


----------



## bag-mania

880 said:


> I’m beginning to think Netflix should interview or do a docuseries on Bower and his research and POV.


Seriously. Netflix lost 1 million subscribers last quarter and they actually felt positive about that because they expected to lose 2 million. They don’t have any money to fritter away on boring ego boosts for those two.


----------



## charlottawill

Is there anything in the book about the rumors of William cheating being started by her and her supporters? I believe she was behind it. It's the kind of cruel tactic that seems right up her alley.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Oh looky looky what we have here! Z-list asked to be set up on a blind date with Harry, not that someone offered to set them up
> View attachment 5574405
> View attachment 5574406
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And didn't she claimed that she didn't know anything about Harry?
> View attachment 5574407



"I really don't know anything about the royal family"    So how how long do we think it will be before she shows her surgically altered face in public again? Next national tragedy? I'm sure the residents of Montecito are having a field day with it. This will be at the top of many a book club's reading list.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Gina was doing A LOT for Z-list yet Z-list treated her like some kinda slave  She reminds me of Priddy. She stuck around longer than she should have.

And see how Z-list started to act like royalty after she met Harry? 







Then she also expected Gina to work for free. The audacity!  






Again, Z-list made another person cried


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> From the book, it seems like she's cheating on Cory with Rory before Harry, and she was actively looking for a new beau. She is only loyal to herself.


I forgot Rory, who got “played” and his golf game suffered. 

Is there some secret code to guys  from a woman with a wide legged stance and a pelvic thrust?


----------



## bag-mania

It is fascinating the way some of the publications that have always been pro-Meghan are carefully picking quotes from the Bower book where they can still be somewhat supportive of her. To me, this article sounds more critical of Charles than Meghan but maybe I’m not reading it in the way it was intended.









						Meghan Markle Refused Both the Queen’s and Prince Charles’ Urgings to Reconcile with Estranged Father Thomas Markle, Book Claims
					

A new book lays bare a tense summer of 2018, just two months after Prince Harry and Meghan’s royal wedding.




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list life is filled with Photoshop galore!!!
> 
> View attachment 5574370


I fully support Meghan Photoshopping her gnarly feet every time she wears sandals. If anything, she needs to find someone who can do a better job.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It is fascinating the way some of the publications that have always been pro-Meghan are carefully picking quotes from the Bower book where they can still be somewhat supportive of her. To me, this article sounds more critical of Charles than Meghan but maybe I’m not reading it in the way it was intended.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Refused Both the Queen’s and Prince Charles’ Urgings to Reconcile with Estranged Father Thomas Markle, Book Claims
> 
> 
> A new book lays bare a tense summer of 2018, just two months after Prince Harry and Meghan’s royal wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


Agreed, but her excuse about why she couldn't go to Mexico is pure BS.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> And see how Z-list started to act like royalty after she met Harry?


But she wasn't acting like royalty. She may have thought she was acting as royalty does, but she was acting like a spoiled petulant brat.


----------



## Annawakes

lanasyogamama said:


> Is that why she had a fit at that fair in Africa?


I believe so.  Just another one of her hyprocrisy’s…now using the UN (twice) for PR, once for the “tour” and another for Hazy’s “speech”.  I thought she had markled the UN.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Gina was doing A LOT for Z-list yet Z-list treated her like some kinda slave  She reminds me of Priddy. She stuck around longer than she should have.
> 
> *And see how Z-list started to act like royalty after she met Harry?*
> 
> View attachment 5574426
> View attachment 5574427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then she also expected Gina to work for free. The audacity!
> 
> View attachment 5574428
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, Z-list made another person cried
> 
> View attachment 5574429


No no no, ZedZed refused to learn how to behave as a royal however, as the old saying goes, she has always acted as if her sh!t doesn't stink.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Icyjade

charlottawill said:


> Is there anything in the book about the rumors of William cheating being started by her and her supporters? I believe she was behind it. It's the kind of cruel tactic that seems right up her alley.


Nope, not mentioned


----------



## Katel

Lady C talks about the “approved and unapproved woke US narrative” around 47.00 and that the big US publishers are terrified to go against the woke crowd and that’s why TB’s Revenge doesn’t have a US publisher - yet.


----------



## Katel

She also briefly said there’s nothing (controversial) mentioned about the pregnancies, but that she’s just skimmed through it currently.


----------



## Icyjade

Katel said:


> She also quickly mentioned that there’s nothing (controversial) mentioned about the pregnancies, but that she’s just skimmed through it currently.


Yes nothing. No moon bumps or surrogates etc. Just the untruthful birth announcements.


----------



## Icyjade

Maybe why he now resents his brother


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



I was really disappointed to see how George Clooney and Amal were early defenders/supporters. Payback for the wedding invite?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
> ​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
> *The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
> *If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
> *A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
> *The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



That sounds like the drivel put out by SS to make them look important.


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> I fully support Meghan Photoshopping her gnarly feet every time she wears sandals. If anything, she needs to find someone who can do a better job.



she knows she has horrible feet, but wore open  toed shoes with her NAACP prom dress for the award show?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Yellow highlight: Z-list makes a huge deal out of a small thing. This ties in with her entitlement issue.
> 
> Pink highlight: Another incident of someone being reduced to tears
> 
> View attachment 5574398



The parrot incident might be the one time I agree with her. It makes me sick people still keep this swarm animals who in the wild fly miles and miles each day alone in small cages.


----------



## Pivoine66

CarryOn2020 said:


> ​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
> ​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
> *The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
> *If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
> *A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
> *The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



If true, I fear the former actress/briefcase girl may have achieved what she possibly originally wanted. I imagine the invitation to HMTQ might be to close a deal - ending this sordid daily dragging of the Royal Family into the headlines and thus dragging the Monarchy down into a soap opera as - _in my personal opinion_/perception - apparently loved by the - to me and apparently many others unknown -  former actress - in return for a paid luxury life à la Wallis.

The other "challenge" I envisage: M may not stick to contracts - promises - etc., or "friends" and stans could leak sth/would have one rumour or another spread in the media. IMPO she needs the press photos and reports about her like other water. Besides, she seems to be quite desperate to "win over the Royal Family" (evil Narcissist? to the fullest and worst?). I have come to believe that she knows no bounds and that maybe some sort of addiction of the former actress/briefcase girl to having the "upper hand" does/would not stop even at the Dignity and Respect for/of such a long established Monarchy and the British People.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Oh looky looky what we have here! Z-list asked to be set up on a blind date with Harry, not that someone offered to set them up
> View attachment 5574405
> View attachment 5574406
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And didn't she claimed that she didn't know anything about Harry?
> View attachment 5574407



So surprised. Not. 

And I bet Violet was markled soon after so she couldn't spill the beans.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Is there anything in the book about the rumors of William cheating being started by her and her supporters? I believe she was behind it. It's the kind of cruel tactic that seems right up her alley.



I absolutely believe it too.

BTW Pippa named her new baby Rose. Just sayin'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> Was MM auditioning for something p*rn-related in those photos?  Looks rather scuzzy, trying to appear sexy or tempting?! Blimey.  It's very off-putting seeing people in these kinds of attention-seeking poses. Lok at me! Look at me!  No, thanks.


That pose stretched out on the lounger. Do my eyes deceive me or are her bikini bottoms deliberately so loose that you can glimpse her nether region?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> That pose stretched out on the lounger. Do my eyes deceive me or are her bikini bottoms deliberately so loose that you can glimpse her nether region?



I remember when that picture was first posted on the thread and saying "She can't even wear a bikini that fits".


----------



## Icyjade

The book highlighted how people benefited from the expensive baby shower: 








and a bit later in the book


----------



## andrashik

From Tom Bower's book:


I thought they want privacy for their kids..apparently not


----------



## Icyjade

Actually after reading the book I no longer feel sorry for JCMH. The harkles deserve to be miserable with each other. I’m glad his ex’s left and are seemingly happy now.

Seeing how the spares have turned out (Andrew, Margaret, Harry), do hope the Cambridge kids escape the curse.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> This book has it all. I have every expectation Bower will be hit with one or more lawsuits from Meghan and Harry. If they don’t sue him it will only be because Meghan won’t want all of these unflattering truths hashed out in court.
> 
> I cannot express enough gratitude to Tom Bower for doing the research and writing this book. Well done, sir!
> 
> View attachment 5574394


The funny thing is we covered a lot of these things in their thread way back too.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry and TW's dictums are below cause you know we are the unwashed masses will lap up everything the dastardly duo say, except the few, the proud and the TPFers who know better. TW is the new Semiramis. *Semiramis married her son,* Nimrod, and she is called the Queen of Heaven (blashphemously as there is no Queen of Heaven). One of Semiramis' names in culture is Artemis and also . . . drumroll . . . Diana! 

Harry and TW's Dictums:

"Truth is Beautiful . . . without doubt . . .But so are lies." (RWE)
"The Great Masses of the People Will More Easily Fall Victims to a Big Lie than to a Small One." (AH)
"A Lie Told Often Enough Becomes the Truth (VL)"
"What is Truth (PP)"

(Sung to the tune of the Marine Corps song). Please feel free to change it up as I'm not a poet, songwriter or any of that. 

From the shelves of the Hermes Store
To the Flagship Store of Luis Vuitton 
We will buy our holy graillll bags 
In the air, on land and sea; 
First to snatch the latest offerings  
And to keep on our collecting; 
We are proud to call the 
BS out on the Montecito Duo 

Our bags unfurled to every breeze 
From dawn to setting sun; 
We have bought in ev'ry clime and place 
Where we could swipe a card; 
In the snow of far-off Northern lands 
And in sunny tropic scenes; 
You will find us always on the hunt-- 
of the Montecito Duo's BS

Here's health to you and to our bags 
Which we are proud to always carry 
In many a strife we've fought for truth
And never lost our nerve; 
If the Sugars and the Appreciation Thread
Ever look on Heaven's scenes; 
They will find this thread is guarded 
By our dear sweet CEEJAY.

Ok, I know it's corny and all.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> From Tom Bower's book:
> View attachment 5574528
> 
> I thought they want privacy for their kids..apparently not


Looks more like she wanted a bigger silver platter to present Archie. All those protestations were false and she wheeled and dealed her own kids. Harry bought into her mercenary ways too - now I'm wondering if he really loves his kids or he sees them as a means to an end as well


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> "NAACP prom dress"


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> ​Wonder if they’ll be allowed to leave [if they go]
> ​The Queen 'has invited Harry, Meghan and their children Archie and Lilibet to Balmoral this summer as she extends an olive branch to the Sussexes... but other members of the Royal Family won't be around'​
> *The Queen is reported to have invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral for summer*
> *If they accept, they could spend time with the monarch apart from other royals*
> *A source claimed the couple 'barely had 15 minutes' with her during the Jubilee*
> *The Queen is said to have arrived at a lodge on her Highlands estate on Thursday*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen 'has invited Harry and Meghan to Balmoral this summer'
> 
> 
> The Queen has reportedly invited Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (pictured together) and their family to spend time at Balmoral Castle this summer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


DM is a tabloid, right?  I take everything I see about these two grifters with a grain of salt


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Yellow highlight: Z-list makes a huge deal out of a small thing. This ties in with her entitlement issue.
> 
> Pink highlight: Another incident of someone being reduced to tears
> 
> View attachment 5574398


this is bizarre....I love animals and if it's true that she believes parrots belong in the wild, I have no problem with that opinion.  However to put up a tantrum about it and refuse to stay at the hotel is way over the top.  Also this is the first time I've seen that reason given for her reaction to the parrot.  My first thought was she didn't like the parrot or it could be some sort of superstition - she saw it as a bad omen.

I'm asking belatedly here - do you all think everything in this book is credible?


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> I forgot Rory, who got “played” and his golf game suffered.
> 
> Is there some secret code to guys  from a woman with a wide legged stance and a pelvic thrust?


She's good at spinning her web. She claimed that she excels at networking. Maybe she should write a book and that should help us all to hook a prince or king!  




bag-mania said:


> I fully support Meghan Photoshopping her gnarly feet every time she wears sandals. If anything, she needs to find someone who can do a better job.


She probably expected free service, like she did from Gina, hence the abysmal work


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> this is bizarre....I love animals and if it's true that she believes parrots belong in the wild, I have no problem with that opinion.  However to put up a tantrum about it and refuse to stay at the hotel is way over the top.  Also this is the first time I've seen that reason given for her reaction to the parrot.  My first thought was she didn't like the parrot or it could be some sort of superstition - she saw it as a bad omen.
> 
> I'm asking belatedly here - do you all think everything in this book is credible?



Apparently, TB could have put a lot more in the book. He says he only put things in with verifiable evidence or credible sources


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> She's good at spinning her web. She claimed that she excels at networking. Maybe she should write a book and that should help us all to hook a prince or king!
> 
> 
> 
> She probably expected free service, like she did from Gina, hence the abysmal work



SHE _says_ she excels at networking. If I went around telling everyone I'm a Nobel prize winner in literature some people may believe me, it doesn't make it true.

Me-again also thinks she's a:
Philanthropist
World leader
Sexy
Fashion icon
The next Diana
Irresistible to men and women alike
Great with children
An amazing speaker
A young mother
Brilliant speech writer
Empowering to women
Etc

Doesn't make _any_ of them true.

'Excelling at networking' is also a 'threat' made into an 'opportunity'. Years ago and outside business circles, people would have called the same talent a excelling at social climbing or gold-digging. Not that I care, as I said Harry deserves her, but I don't give her credit for what I think is her most hideous but questionable 'virtue'.

From TB's book, she's been quoted as being "fake-sweet". Perfect description. Too much saccharine has been proven to be fatal for rats so you can imagine what it does to humans. She is superficially charming, with no authenticity or staying power, so are gigolos, it just means she's low rent with a high price-tag.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> SHE _says_ she excels at networking. If I went around telling everyone I'm a Nobel prize winner in literature some people may believe me, it doesn't make it true.
> 
> Me-again also thinks she's a:
> Philanthropist
> World leader
> Sexy
> Fashion icon
> The next Diana
> Irresistible to men and women alike
> Great with children
> An amazing speaker
> A young mother
> Brilliant speech writer
> Empowering to women
> Etc
> 
> Doesn't make _any_ of them true.
> 
> 'Excelling at networking' is also a 'threat' made into an 'opportunity'. Years ago and outside business circles, people would have called the same talent a excelling at social climbing or gold-digging. Not that I care, as I said Harry deserves her, but I don't give her credit for what I think is her most hideous but question 'virtue'.
> 
> From TB's book, she's been quoted as being "fake-sweet". Perfect description. Too much saccharine has been proven to be fatal for rats so you can imagine what it does to humans.


for a z-list actress like her to land a prince, I would have to agree she's very good at networking.  call it what you want but looking for a wealthy English man and landing the prince is an accomplishment.  as far as the rest of the list above, I'm not impressed.  She's a poser and I'm sorry that she's been successful in getting undeserved (IMO) sympathy from POC, as well as a lot of Americans in general.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The parrot incident might be the one time I agree with her. It makes me sick people still keep this swarm animals who in the wild fly miles and miles each day alone in small cages.


I agree with you on animal welfare. However, I highly doubt that animal welfare was on Z-list's mind (look at how fast she abandoned Bogart) the time when she wanted out in a drop of a hat. For her, it was probably more of an annoyance and that it seemed unclassy to stay in a hotel that allowed animals, which may cause noise and smell problem. I feel bad for Gina because in the preceding paragraph, it's said that she arranged the week long free accommodation with much difficulty and here we go again with Z-list acting like a diva


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I'm always suspicious if someone gushes without even knowing me (and they are not tipsy). I'm quite a friendly person myself, and sometimes i do hit it off with people, but  full red alert if they go OTT. I fully expect they'll want to move in with me within the week, want a favour  or money or need an alibi for a serious crime.


It's especially creepy when they keep looking you in the eye, repeat your name every other sentence, and try to touch you on the arm. It automatically tells me that they want to sell you a bridge somewhere.


----------



## sdkitty

I'll admit I'm biased but this makes Harry sound like her employee!








						Meghan Markle's California Neighbors Have a Nickname for Her
					

Meghan Markle has been dubbed the "Princess of Montecito" by her SoCal neighbors.




					www.instyle.com


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It's especially creepy when they keep looking you in the eye, repeat your name every other sentence, and try to touch you on the arm. It automatically tells me that they want to sell you a bridge somewhere.



  

that 'thing', that rom-com, lingering look thing, which is supposed to say 'I'm so deeply interested in YOU, YOU are so so fas-cin-a-ting'


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> SHE _says_ she excels at networking. If I went around telling everyone I'm a Nobel prize winner in literature some people may believe me, it doesn't make it true.
> 
> Me-again also thinks she's a:
> Philanthropist
> World leader
> Sexy
> Fashion icon
> The next Diana
> Irresistible to men and women alike
> Great with children
> An amazing speaker
> A young mother
> Brilliant speech writer
> Empowering to women
> Etc
> 
> Doesn't make _any_ of them true.
> 
> 'Excelling at networking' is also a 'threat' made into an 'opportunity'. Years ago and outside business circles, people would have called the same talent a excelling at social climbing or gold-digging. Not that I care, as I said Harry deserves her, but I don't give her credit for what I think is her most hideous but questionable 'virtue'.
> 
> From TB's book, she's been quoted as being "fake-sweet". Perfect description. Too much saccharine has been proven to be fatal for rats so you can imagine what it does to humans. She is superficially charming, with no authenticity or staying power, so are gigolos, it just means she's low rent with a high price-tag.


After reading some chapters, the very main words I would use are:

Entitled
Disrespectful
Liar
Jezebel
Evil (to the core)
User
Manipulative
Ungrateful

Every chapter would prove one or more of these traits. 

If you're a Nobel prize winner, please send me an autograph


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> for a z-list actress like her to land a prince, I would have to agree she's very good at networking.  call it what you want but looking for a wealthy English man and landing the prince is an accomplishment.  as far as the rest of the list above, I'm not impressed.  She's a poser and I'm sorry that she's been successful in getting undeserved (IMO) sympathy from POC, as well as a lot of Americans in general.


With her, I really would just change networking to social climbing. And I agree, it is quite an accomplishment because I know I personally  wouldn't have been able to do what she did


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> If you're a Nobel prize winner, please send me an autograph




But that would blow my cover LOL


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> With her, I really would just change networking to social climbing. And I agree, it is quite an accomplishment because I know I personally  wouldn't have been able to do what she did


call it what you will but she is apparently very good at turning on the charm when she wants to....the sad thing is (as we've said before) she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams and then went about destroying the whole situation.....she could have had a beautiful life (even being second to Kate) but thought she could do better.  I don't buy all the crap she told Oprah about depression.  I think she wants to be an A-list American celebrity.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> But that would blow my cover LOL


Your cover for being the one sending copies of TB's book to Montecito HQ?   Joking!


----------



## Mumotons

andrashik said:


> I think she is just superficially charming. Everything she's done was with a reason. Underneath she is not the person she claimes to be.


Meghan has always reminded me of the book by Dauphine Du Maurier, Rebecca, able to dazzle and charm all she meets while being ruthless and bad on the inside


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Your cover for being the one sending copies of TB's book to Montecito HQ?   Joking!


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Maybe why he now resents his brother
> 
> View attachment 5574459


My 2 cents :

I feel sorry for Hazz to have to take the blame for Will. They were both teenagers and it's not unheard that teenage years often come with stupidity. There was no need for so much 'cover up'. I also feel sorry that he was questioning his own legitimacy as a kid. This should have been clarified by Charles, and the requested DNA test. It seems the adult support growing up may have failed these kids and Will still a kid became the 'adult in charge.' I believe Will did what he could, but Hazz has a lot of baggage. All this together with his mother's death seem to have transformed him into a very troubled person and an easy prey for unscrupulous people. I would think that he wants to stay close to his kids, so he is likely trapped in a very difficult situation. If he had married someone strong and decent, he may have been a better human being. He needs good psychiatric services ASAP, but far away from TW, OW, GK… He needs to be close to people that are truly interested in helping him and not in profiting from him. While I think there is no hope for TW, I wonder if Hazz might still be able to rehabilitate his character.


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> Meghan has always reminded me of the book by Dauphine Du Maurier, Rebecca, able to dazzle and charm all she meets while being ruthless and bad on the inside



She only dazzles and charms gullible and naive people.

Look at the rest of invited congregation at St Paul's cathedral during the Queen's Jubilee

They all got her number


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> call it what you will but she is apparently very good at turning on the charm when she wants to....the sad thing is (as we've said before) she succeeded beyond her wildest dreams and then went about destroying the whole situation.....she could have had a beautiful life (even being second to Kate) but thought she could do better.  I don't buy all the crap she told Oprah about depression.  I think she wants to be an A-list American celebrity.


100% 

She could have had everything you said yet it was never enough. In the book, it's said that she has intense envy when she's not the lead in a school play. We wouldn't be wrong to say that she's indeed envious of Kate for being the wife of the future king. She doesn't want to be the second fiddle.

Let's just say this, had she just bagged a rich and famous Englishman, none of the drama would have happened. She would have probably just been splashed across tabloids for being a socialite and the main focus would have been fashion, food and wellness. 

However, she somehow bagged a prince so she made a mess of everything because she wanted the institution to change and become what she wants or thinks should be, and of course, probably succession course to be changed, making Harry the king and Z-list the queen. Because!!! In an alternate universe


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> While I think there is no hope for TW, I wonder if Hazz might still be able to rehabilitate his character.


He’s almost 40… I’ll give him some slack in his 20’s but I think he’s old enough by now to cut the slack. I think he’s a pathetic human being who has sold his soul ( and family) for money.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> I was really disappointed to see how George Clooney and Amal were early defenders/supporters. Payback for the wedding invite?


It sounded to me that Sachs is a very powerful PR agency. They must have dirt on many people…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> for a z-list actress like her to land a prince, I would have to agree she's very good at networking.  call it what you want but looking for a wealthy English man and landing the prince is an accomplishment.  as far as the rest of the list above, I'm not impressed.  She's a poser and I'm sorry that she's been successful in getting undeserved (IMO) sympathy from POC, as well as a lot of Americans in general.


I wouldn't call snagging this prince an accomplishment when said prince had already been dumped by several women, who just refused to publicly shame him for his faults, habits, hijinks, drinking, carousing, etc.. Dufus' list of sins and problems is most likely unending, which in reality made him the booby prize instead of the catch of the century and an easy pray to ZedZed's brainwashing and manipulative ways.


----------



## carmen56

Well, if HMQ has invited Hazz and co. to Balmoral, I hope she also asks Major Johnny along to keep an eye on proceedings.


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> Actually after reading the book I no longer feel sorry for JCMH. The harkles deserve to be miserable with each other. I’m glad his ex’s left and are seemingly happy now.
> 
> *Seeing how the spares have turned out (Andrew, Margaret, Harry), do hope the Cambridge kids escape the curse.*


I think they will. Will & Kate seem to be down-to-earth and loving parents.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Everybody mentioned in Chapter 13 A Troubled Prince (the one that icyjade quoted) were terrible.

I'm shocked to read for the first time that William was an a$sh0l3 with a temper after his mom died. However, when he went away to university, from then on he has changed to be a better person and he has blossomed into his role as the future king.

If Harry is still resenting William for having to take the blame for the excessive indulgence in Highgrove's basement later renamed Club H, then that's another proof that Harry needs to grow up and move on. They are adults in the late 30s and one a 40-year-old with kids of their own now. They have bigger fish to fry! 

Pre-Z-list, Harry had his issues but he had a loving brotherly relationship with William. Once Z-list came onboard, the relationship was torn to shreds. If that's not evil, I don't know what is. Z-list unearthed every insecurity and resentment, which Harry had dealt with by seeing a therapist at William's urging, and re-planted bad seeds. If she didn't do this, she wouldn't have been able to distance him from his family and control him.


----------



## EverSoElusive

carmen56 said:


> Well, if HMQ has invited Hazz and co. to Balmoral, I hope she also asks Major Johnny along to keep an eye on proceedings.


Oh I'd love to see the sexy man some more


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> *I'm asking belatedly here - do you all think everything in this book is credible?*


Tom Bower has an excellent reputation, but he could have been misled by some of his sources. However, the book is likely relatively accurate.


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wouldn't call snagging this prince an accomplishment when said prince had already been dumped by several women, who just refused to publicly shame him for his faults, habits, hijinks, drinking, carousing, etc.. Dufus' list of sins and problems is most likely unending, which in reality made him the booby prize instead of the catch of the century and an easy pray to ZedZed's brainwashing and manipulative ways.


The thing that confuses me, IF the prince was such a dufus etc back then, why oh why did Chelsea and Cressida stay with him for years?  Supposedly, neither of these women wanted the limelight so were allegedly with him because they loved him, (not for fame and fortune, like TW), but what the heck was lovable about him? I read he's selfish, stingy, he looks unkempt, obviously has an "attitude" etc, I just don't get it!  These women did not need him!


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> The thing that confuses me, IF the prince was such a dufus etc back then, why oh why did Chelsea and Cressida stay with him for years?  Supposedly, neither of these women wanted the limelight so were allegedly with him because they loved him, (not for fame and fortune, like TW), but what the heck was lovable about him? I read he's selfish, stingy, he looks unkempt, obviously has an "attitude" etc, I just don't get it!  These women did not need him!


I still think being a prince from the most famous royal family in the world gives someone a certain panache - even in spite of himself.  Up to a point I guess.  Eventually in the cases of Chelsea and Cressida, reality took priority.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is a very sad subject, and it's important to prevent people from spreading misinformation about it imo.The Governor confirms that Jackson paid for everything.


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I read he's selfish, stingy, he looks unkempt, obviously has an "attitude" etc



sounds about average in the UK 

The difference is they don’t usually holiday in castles and have £30M in the bank.


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> that 'thing', that rom-com, lingering look thing, which is supposed to say 'I'm so deeply interested in YOU, YOU are so so fas-cin-a-ting'


I get it all the time from insurance agents who stop me in malls. I know that they are just trying to make a living, but I admit that a couple of times, I have told that their approach is really off-putting and they need to go back to school if they don't understand the meaning of No.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> I was really disappointed to see how George Clooney and Amal were early defenders/supporters. Payback for the wedding invite?


Well, G and A knew nothing of MM, but she had the rep as a humanitarian 
And A is an accomplished human rights barrister, so , superficially they are/were in the same line of work 
Now , of course, G and A are silent


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Should this be posted on the Appreciation thread?  









						I'm selling Harry's PANTS after he gifted them to me on wild Vegas night out
					

THE former stripper who partied with Prince Harry on his wild night out in Las Vegas says she’s selling the undies she claims he gifted her. Carrie Reichert, 43, claims the Duke of Susse…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> But security ? He is suing the government and DM about security
> It would not do if he just went without all the xtra stuff he claims he needs, proving he can get by …
> I do assume there were special jubilee arrangements
> But he is not likely to get such consideration again


H needs another VICTIM moment, along the lines of: 

 I could not go to Scotland with the kids (to see Gan Gan for maybe the last time … ) and to be the Earl of Dumbarton, since boo boo, I would have had inadequate security surrounded by all of QEII’s Highland regiment of guards


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Let's just say this, had she just bagged a rich and famous Englishman, none of the drama would have happened. She would have probably just been splashed across tabloids for being a socialite and the main focus would have been fashion, food and wellness.


I think drama would have continued but not on the world stage. If she wormed her way into English high society, there will always be a richer and more famous Englishman to tempt her. She won the lottery when she snagged Hazard. And, like a casino addict, threw in all her chips hoping for a larger bonanza. I still believe she had someone steering her in the right direction to get to Hazard, that her backer wanted a pliant royal to influence decisions and that she got bigheaded and Markled her backer.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Aimee3 said:


> The thing that confuses me, IF the prince was such a dufus etc back then, why oh why did Chelsea and Cressida stay with him for years?  Supposedly, neither of these women wanted the limelight so were allegedly with him because they loved him, (not for fame and fortune, like TW), but what the heck was lovable about him? I read he's selfish, stingy, he looks unkempt, obviously has an "attitude" etc, I just don't get it!  These women did not need him!


From what I've read, both Chelsea and Cressida tried to help him reform his ways and they tried to convince him to seek professional help that he obviously refused. They stopped dating him when it became too exhausting looking after him without seeing any improvement. Too avoid any drama, both stated they couldn't cope with the demands of royal life.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I think drama would have continued but not on the world stage. If she wormed her way into English high society, there will always be a richer and more famous Englishman to tempt her. She won the lottery when she snagged Hazard. And, like a casino addict, threw in all her chips hoping for a larger bonanza. I still believe she had someone steering her in the right direction to get to Hazard, that her backer wanted a pliant royal to influence decisions and that she got bigheaded and Markled her backer.


but doesn't a manipulative yacht girl like her lose some of her allure after 40?  if she wanted to go for another wealthy Englishman she might have to go for an old one


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I think drama would have continued but not on the world stage. If she wormed her way into English high society, there will always be a richer and more famous Englishman to tempt her. She won the lottery when she snagged Hazard. And, like a casino addict, threw in all her chips hoping for a larger bonanza. I still believe she had someone steering her in the right direction to get to Hazard, that her backer wanted a pliant royal to influence decisions and that she got bigheaded and Markled her backer.


Yeah, there would be drama but probably not to the point of destroying a royal family  With just a rich and famous Englishman, it's probably going to be affairs, sex scandals, money problems, divorce, illegitimate child, fraudulent business, failed business venture etc.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> From what I've read, both Chelsea and Cressida tried to help him reform his ways and they tried to convince him to seek professional help that he obviously refused. They stopped dating him when it became too exhausting looking after him without seeing any improvement. Too avoid any drama, both stated they couldn't cope with the demands of royal life.


But C and C being well acquainted personally with the UK - not just via snooping with Google - knew the lay of the land in terms of what one can/cannot do in the UK with friends, BRF, society, at many levels 

MM’s incorrectly thought she could change all that and/or everyone would change for her, huge error in her calculation


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> But C and C being well acquainted personally with the UK - not just via snooping with Google - knew the lay of the land in terms of what one can/cannot do in the UK with friends, BRF, society, at many levels
> 
> MM’s incorrectly thought she could change all that and/or everyone would change for her, huge error in her calculation


could she really have been that calculating and still so stupid?  Look at what she accomplished.  Not only marrying a prince from the most famous RF in the world, but having a huge wedding - at almost 40 and having been married and divorced more than once.  I know a lot of people in the US were so excited for her at the time of the wedding and engagement.  but now on hindsight, it seems the RF made a mistake giving H what he wanted in terms of the wedding, etc.

IDK maybe her sense of entitlement (created by her parents) made her so arrogant she thought she could get away with anything.  But that family has persevered for centuries.  I don't think she can bring them down.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm shocked to read for the first time that William was an a$sh0l3 with a temper after his mom died.



I'm not (nor have I read it yet as my book is still in transit, so maybe that will change). He lost a mother too, and I don't find it the least bit shocking or even unusual a traumatized teenager would act up. Plus, I've read the occasional rumour he still has that temper now and then. 

What I do find shocking is a ruthless PR machine piling onto Harry who was struggling as is. If that's true (and why wouldn't it be, after all we think TB did meticulous research and can back up his claims should someone sue) it is apalling. Good parenting (and even the appropriate way to benefit the crown) would have been to put an end to the partying if it was getting so out of hand. Sorry Charles, I'm not impressed.

And what I do find unhealthy is if nearly 40yo Harry still is unable to move on from his loss. And by moving on I don't mean "Get over it" in a callous way, but learning to cope in a non-destructive manner.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> could she really have been that calculating and still so stupid?  Look at what she accomplished.  Not only marrying a prince from the most famous RF in the world, but having a huge wedding - at almost 40 and having been married and divorced more than once.  I know a lot of people in the US were so excited for her at the time of the wedding and engagement.  but now on hindsight, it seems the RF made a mistake giving H what he wanted in terms of the wedding, etc.
> 
> IDK maybe her sense of entitlement (created by her parents) made her so arrogant she thought she could get away with anything.  But that family has persevered for centuries.  I don't think she can bring them down.


Been listening to excerpts of the Bower book on YouTube …
He claims she did EXTENSIVE research on H and Diana, despite telling Oprah she knew NOTHING … make your own conclusions
But she thought she could marry in and it would work somehow …
she trusted in her skills as manipulator, ignoring any fundamental understanding of the UK temperament
I would not use the adjective stupid, but rather stress she was over confident  -fully realizing  the disconnects ahead of time, cultural disconnects eg US vs UK


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I still think being a prince from the most famous royal family in the world gives someone a certain panache - even in spite of himself.  Up to a point I guess.  Eventually in the cases of Chelsea and Cressida, reality took priority.



Right. Even if the guy himself is not a catch, his position in the world is.


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> this is bizarre....I love animals and if it's true that she believes parrots belong in the wild, I have no problem with that opinion.  However to put up a tantrum about it and refuse to stay at the hotel is way over the top.  Also this is the first time I've seen that reason given for her reaction to the parrot.  My first thought was she didn't like the parrot or it could be some sort of superstition - she saw it as a bad omen.
> 
> I'm asking belatedly here - do you all think everything in this book is credible?



I think she wanted to create a scene that could later become part of a “story” (or anecdote) people told about her.  I also think she likes being difficult and making other people jump when she says jump.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is a very sad subject, and it's important to prevent people from spreading misinformation about it imo.The Governor confirms that Jackson paid for everything.




This is so gross. If they had just a little bit of self-esteem and a sense for right and wrong they would have come forward and denied this rumour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I get it all the time from insurance agents who stop me in malls. I know that they are just trying to make a living, but I admit that a couple of times, I have told that their approach is really off-putting and they need to go back to school if they don't understand the meaning of No.



I ran into one of those selling telecommunication contracts. I said I was in a hurry and they went like "We can do it on your way out!" Well, the supermarkt is not closing, I'm on a tight schedule and that won't change on my way out.


----------



## redney

That the terrible two have not issued a statement or filed a lawsuit denying what's in Bowers' book says a LOT.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> That the terrible two have not issued a statement or filed a lawsuit denying what's in Bowers' book says a LOT.


give them time though.....they do seem to love suing


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not (nor have I read it yet as my book is still in transit, so maybe that will change). He lost a mother too, and I don't find it the least bit shocking or even unusual a traumatized teenager would act up. Plus, I've read the occasional rumour he still has that temper now and then.
> 
> What I do find shocking is a ruthless PR machine piling onto Harry who was struggling as is. If that's true (and why wouldn't it be, after all we think TB did meticulous research and can back up his claims should someone sue) it is apalling. Good parenting (and even the appropriate way to benefit the crown) would have been to put an end to the partying if it was getting so out of hand. Sorry Charles, I'm not impressed.
> 
> And what I do find unhealthy is if nearly 40yo Harry still is unable to move on from his loss. And by moving on I don't mean "Get over it" in a callous way, but learning to cope in a non-destructive manner.


Call me naive but I personally never really read such things about William. Perhaps, the Palace covered up stuff and have stuff scrubbed to give William a positive and wholesome look. He's human like us so it's undeniable that he too would have a temper.

The little basement "club" is Charles' fault completely, if anyone was to be blamed. He had the basement converted to accommodate excessive drinking and drug tolerance, in a way, to avoid dealing with his kids' anger regarding their mom's death and the loss of their trusted nanny Tiggy. Aside from royal engagements, instead of being there for his kids, he was with Camilla mostly, which further infuriated his kids.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Right. Even if the guy himself is not a catch, his position in the world is.*


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not (nor have I read it yet as my book is still in transit, so maybe that will change). He lost a mother too, and I don't find it the least bit shocking or even unusual a traumatized teenager would act up. Plus, I've read the occasional rumour he still has that temper now and then.
> 
> What I do find shocking is a ruthless PR machine piling onto Harry who was struggling as is. If that's true (and why wouldn't it be, after all we think TB did meticulous research and can back up his claims should someone sue) it is apalling. Good parenting (and even the appropriate way to benefit the crown) would have been to put an end to the partying if it was getting so out of hand. Sorry Charles, I'm not impressed.
> 
> And what I do find unhealthy is if nearly 40yo Harry still is unable to move on from his loss. And by moving on I don't mean "Get over it" in a callous way, but learning to cope in a non-destructive manner.


Yes! Not get over it , rather get through it!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The parrot incident might be the one time I agree with her. It makes me sick people still keep this swarm animals who in the wild fly miles and miles each day alone in small cages.





xincinsin said:


> Looks more like she wanted a bigger silver platter to present Archie. All those protestations were false and she wheeled and dealed her own kids. Harry bought into her mercenary ways too - *now I'm wondering if he really loves his kids or he sees them as a means to an end as well*


Do we ever see him taking his kids anywhere? To be fair they are still very small but you would think there would be something. Then again, his own father wasn’t very interactive with his kids.

ETA: Aren’t most pet parrots bred in captivity these days? It would be cruel to set a bunch of birds “free” who are 100% bonded with humans and have always lived every minute of their lives inside.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Do we ever see him taking his kids anywhere? To be fair they are still very small but you would think *there would be something.* Then again, his own father wasn’t very interactive with his kids.


You would think... Beaches, parks, restaurants, toy stores, maybe even to Harry's polo games. Farmers market if Z-list is still into organic everything and roast chicken


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Staring at this photo of Oprah and wondering if all that hair is real  
This thread has made me doubt people with lush locks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I start to feel an inkling of sympathy for Raptor. She is a disgusting piece of human garbage, but maybe she never had a chance to grow up completely normal with this set of parents.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> You would think... Beaches, parks, restaurants, toy stores, maybe even to Harry's polo games. Farmers market if Z-list is still into organic everything and roast chicken


I cannot recall anything with just him and Archie. There was a pumpkin patch/petting zoo photoshoot with Meghan but of course that was orchestrated not natural.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Staring at this photo of Oprah and wondering if all that hair is real
> This thread has made me doubt people with lush locks.


My vote? I think it's real. 

The volume of her curled hair looks a lot like what a lot of black people would possess.

And  when Oprah would straighten her hair to put it up in a ponytail, her hair volume doesn't look like she added extensions (for volume, not so much length).

With her wealth, I wouldn't be surprised either if she has a really good stylist who can make her extensions or wigs to look as though they are her real hair, if these weren't her own natural locks


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Call me naive but I personally never really read such things about William. Perhaps, the Palace covered up stuff and have stuff scrubbed to give William a positive and wholesome look. He's human like us so it's undeniable that he too would have a temper.
> 
> The little basement "club" is Charles' fault completely, if anyone was to be blamed. He had the basement converted to accommodate excessive drinking and drug tolerance, in a way, to avoid dealing with his kids' anger regarding their mom's death and the loss of their trusted nanny Tiggy. Aside from royal engagements, instead of being there for his kids, he was with Camilla mostly, which further infuriated his kids.


I bet there were years when the boys preferred not to be with dad, and avoided him 
lack of contact was perhaps due to both sides - dad and boys


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I start to feel an inkling of sympathy for Raptor. She is a disgusting piece of human garbage, but maybe she never had a chance to grow up completely normal with this set of parents.



You just stop that sympathy right now, QueenofWrapDress.   

Think of how many tens of millions of people don’t have normal upbringings. Yet they somehow manage. Meghan started out with so many advantages compared to others. She was incredibly spoiled and indulged but I don’t think either of her parents taught her to treat people as if they were disposable. That came from Meghan herself and it started at a young age. She is who she is.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> My vote? I think it's real.
> 
> The volume of her curled hair looks a lot like what a lot of black people would possess.
> 
> And  when Oprah would straighten her hair to put it up in a ponytail, her hair volume doesn't look like she added extensions (for volume, not so much length).
> 
> With her wealth, I wouldn't be surprised either if she has a really good stylist who can make her extensions or wigs to look as though they are her real hair, if these weren't her own natural locks


Hmm agree great stylist , her own hair - maybe …
but don’t forget she is getting older, and her hair has been over processed for years
i think of photos from her TV show , like 20 - 30 years ago ??? Luxurious bouffant hair
no one has the best hair at her age


----------



## 880

I agree with @bag-mania . Honestly I’m a bit tired of adults blaming their unhappiness; bad behavior or choices; or life generally on parental issues. Both H and M are old enough that they should just accept responsibility.

+1 with @marietouchet re Oprah’s hair from thirty years ago. In fact both her hair and face look a lot better today.

ETA: Her former PR agents etc should have dropped any client that was so difficult.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aha! Of course Z-list had to rewrite her background to look better and not like some Z-list or jezebel


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Hmm agree great stylist , her own hair - maybe …
> but don’t forget she is getting older, and her hair has been over processed for years
> i think of photos from her TV show , like 20 - 30 years ago ??? Luxurious bouffant hair
> no one has the best hair at her age


After everything I said in another previous comment, I completely forgotten about hair plugs. Maybe that's what Oprah have   No doubt she would suffer hair loss with over processing and age


----------



## kipp

Sorry about changing the current subjects (hair and the basement parties) but I have to revisit the topics of Megain's strategic transactional MO and fake gushiness that were a few thread pages back (LOL). 

In my own life experience I never saw these types of interactions *at this level* until to my surprise (because I am really a nobody) a few years ago I was asked to serve on the Board of a large, important, and truly valued non-profit organization.  It was an eye-opener, since in my orbit, I had never seen anything like it!

Not all, but many of my colleagues routinely would fake gush over everything and everyone, obviously thinking that this was necessary, especially in order to "make deals," not only for the organization but also among themselves.  And it typically worked!  It was astonishing to me how ego-centric some of these very powerful people who were thought of as community leaders (eg. corporation chairs, high level lawyers, news publishers) and how easily they could be taken in by such nonsense.  When constructive criticism would actually be warranted, these people would stay silent, apparently because many did not want to "rock the boat" or not look like a team player.  In other cases, implied retribution was also a factor. 

So what we know and are reading about the Raptor gives me deja vu about my non-profit Board experience.  Obviously, Megain perfected these methods in order to get what she wanted and they were successful for her, too.  So, I guess we shouldn't really be all that surprised, even though I still find it repulsive.  
(At least for my Board experience, the end-result was to support a valuable non-profit organization not a fake one...)


----------



## EverSoElusive

kipp said:


> Sorry about changing the current subjects (hair and the basement parties) but I have to revisit the topics of Megain's strategic transactional MO and fake gushiness that were a few thread pages back (LOL).
> 
> In my own life experience I never saw these types of interactions *at this level* until to my surprise (because I am really a nobody) a few years ago I was asked to serve on the Board of a large, important, and truly valued non-profit organization.  It was an eye-opener, since in my orbit, I had never seen anything like it!
> 
> Not all, but many of my colleagues routinely would fake gush over everything and everyone, obviously thinking that this was necessary, especially in order to "make deals," not only for the organization but also among themselves.  And it typically worked!  It was astonishing to me how ego-centric some of these very powerful people who were thought of as community leaders (eg. corporation chairs, high level lawyers, news publishers) and how easily they could be taken in by such nonsense.  When constructive criticism would actually be warranted, these people would stay silent, apparently because many did not want to "rock the boat" or not look like a team player.  In other cases, implied retribution was also a factor.
> 
> So what we know and are reading about the Raptor gives me deja vu about my non-profit Board experience.  Obviously, Megain perfected these methods in order to get what she wanted and they were successful for her, too.  So, I guess we shouldn't really be all that surprised, even though I still find it repulsive.
> (At least for my Board experience, the end-result was to support a valuable non-profit organization not a fake one...)


It makes me want to vomit whenever I see people fake gushing over stuff and people, no matter how high or low level it is. And trust me, I'd be judging these people in my head so hard that I probably could not control all my eye rolls that ensue thereafter


----------



## EverSoElusive

The Markling was real. She Markled people that she had previously asked to help raise her profile and/or to hook her up with an Englishman man.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Who other than Harry would do something like this for a twit of a girlfriend? William has never done such a thing for Kate though she was his serious girlfriend for years, right?  






Thomas is pretty delusional too, thinking that Z-list didn't reach the 'point of entitlement' YET   Of course he didn't. She was and still is his princess.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I absolutely believe it too.
> 
> BTW Pippa named her new baby Rose. Just sayin'.


And that says a lot imo. Would Pippa have given her daughter a name that is upsetting to her sister? I doubt it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This right here shows that Z-list brought the media frenzy upon herself. They didn't know anything about the relationship until she started the 'outing' shenanigans herself! 

In previous chapter, when Harry still had some huevos, he did tell Z-list that it's necessary for them to keep the relationship under wraps for starters. True to Z-list's style, of course she needed to mark her territory so that other women know that Harry was now hers and also to ensure that she got all the publicity in the press, without expecting that they would pick apart her less than perfect family background.

When she got negative press instead of a positive one, then she started telling Harry that they came after her and it was due to her race. Please, girl!


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> The thing that confuses me, IF the prince was such a dufus etc back then, why oh why did Chelsea and Cressida stay with him for years?  Supposedly, neither of these women wanted the limelight so were allegedly with him because they loved him, (not for fame and fortune, like TW), but what the heck was lovable about him? I read he's selfish, stingy, he looks unkempt, obviously has an "attitude" etc, I just don't get it!  These women did not need him!


I'm sure he could be quite charming when he was younger and was playing the fun-loving carefree spare.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Everybody mentioned in Chapter 13 A Troubled Prince (the one that icyjade quoted) were terrible.
> 
> I'm shocked to read for the first time that William was an a$sh0l3 with a temper after his mom died. However, when he went away to university, from then on he has changed to be a better person and he has blossomed into his role as the future king.
> 
> If Harry is still resenting William for having to take the blame for the excessive indulgence in Highgrove's basement later renamed Club H, then that's another proof that Harry needs to grow up and move on. They are adults in the late 30s and one a 40-year-old with kids of their own now. They have bigger fish to fry!
> 
> Pre-Z-list, Harry had his issues but he had a loving brotherly relationship with William. Once Z-list came onboard, the relationship was torn to shreds. If that's not evil, I don't know what is. Z-list unearthed every insecurity and resentment, which Harry had dealt with by seeing a therapist at William's urging, and re-planted bad seeds. If she didn't do this, she wouldn't have been able to distance him from his family and control him.



That rumor about W’s temper has been out there for a long time.  In fact, it still is the narrative that gets sent out any time Hazz does something the world doesn’t like.  Here is an old interview with Charles, W & H.  It seems none of them have aged nearly as well as Prince Philip, QE, Princess Anne, etc.  My guess is the TBower book is the tip of the iceberg.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Been listening to excerpts of the Bower book on YouTube …
> He claims she did EXTENSIVE research on H and Diana, despite telling Oprah she knew NOTHING … make your own conclusions
> But she thought she could marry in and it would work somehow …
> she trusted in her skills as manipulator, ignoring any fundamental understanding of the UK temperament
> I would not use the adjective stupid, but rather stress she was over confident  -fully realizing  the disconnects ahead of time, cultural disconnects eg US vs UK


She bought into the _image_ the BRF projects, not the _reality_.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> but doesn't a manipulative yacht girl like her lose some of her allure after 40?  if she wanted to go for another wealthy Englishman she might have to go for an old one


Rupert Murdoch may be old but he's not stupid. She'll have to set her sights further afield for her next victim. It seems that there are lots of Russian oligarchs floating around these days who might view her as a trophy, even if tarnished. Or there's the Middle East. It worked for Lindsay Lohan. It took her awhile but she found someone there who is apparently OK with her past. ZeeZy may want to get some pointers from her.


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> Who other than Harry would do something like this for a twit of a girlfriend? William has never done such a thing for Kate though she was his serious girlfriend for years, right?
> 
> View attachment 5574739
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas is pretty delusional too, thinking that Z-list didn't reach the 'point of entitlement' YET   Of course he didn't. She was and still is his princess.
> 
> View attachment 5574746


That’s because Kate has family and there was no need for such major preparations for a thanksgiving dinner with the family she allegedly never had.   Perhaps H should’ve googled MM while all the dirt and yacht photos were still out there!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Rupert Murdoch may be old but he's not stupid. She'll have to set her sights further afield for her next victim. It seems that there are lots of Russian oligarchs floating around these days who might view her as a trophy, even if tarnished. Or there's the Middle East. It worked for Lindsay Lohan. It took her awhile but she found someone there who is apparently OK with her past. ZeeZy may want to get some pointers from her.


I don't know if just money would be enough for her.  She needs fame.  So she will probably hang onto Harry until everyone finds the both of them boring and no one reports on what they do.  I hope that day will come.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list doesn't ever listen to the professionals (no wonder so many outfit failures) and then would exclaim she never got any assistance, and play a victim.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> That’s because Kate has family and there was no need for such major preparations for a thanksgiving dinner with the family she allegedly never had.   Perhaps H should’ve googled MM while all the dirt and yacht photos were still out there!!!!


The thing is, if she didn't want to celebrate Thanksgiving at Thomas' Mexican home or Doria's LA home, probably because they weren't fancy enough for her new status, maybe she should have just paid for a nice Airbnb somewhere. Still, that's way too much pretension.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Staring at this photo of Oprah and wondering if all that hair is real
> This thread has made me doubt people with lush locks.


It's real, just bought from someone else's head. Oprah can afford the best. The Chris Rock documentary "Black Hair" addresses how much human hair for wigs is sold by poor people in India.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> You just stop that sympathy right now, QueenofWrapDress.
> 
> Think of how many tens of millions of people don’t have normal upbringings. Yet they somehow manage. Meghan started out with so many advantages compared to others. She was incredibly spoiled and indulged but I don’t think either of her parents taught her to treat people as if they were disposable. That came from Meghan herself and it started at a young age. She is who she is.


Or from watching too many soap operas?  Imagine being surrounded by all that drama in person.  Definitely not healthy.


----------



## sdkitty

I haven't see anyone from the Married With Children comment on her.  Of course she was just a kids but anyway....


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't know if just money would be enough for her.  She needs fame.  So she will probably hang onto Harry until everyone finds the both of them boring and no one reports on what they do.  I hope that day will come.


I believe that once he realizes she's played him like Itzhak Perlman plays a Stradivarius he'll go crawling back to the BRF for help in extricating himself from the mess he has made of his life. He has to have seen or heard some of the more incriminating tales in the book by now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kipp said:


> Sorry about changing the current subjects (hair and the basement parties) but I have to revisit the topics of Megain's strategic transactional MO and fake gushiness that were a few thread pages back (LOL).
> 
> In my own life experience I never saw these types of interactions *at this level* until to my surprise (because I am really a nobody) a few years ago I was asked to serve on the Board of a large, important, and truly valued non-profit organization.  It was an eye-opener, since in my orbit, I had never seen anything like it!
> 
> Not all, but many of my colleagues routinely would fake gush over everything and everyone, obviously thinking that this was necessary, especially in order to "make deals," not only for the organization but also among themselves.  And it typically worked!  It was astonishing to me how ego-centric some of these very powerful people who were thought of as community leaders (eg. corporation chairs, high level lawyers, news publishers) and how easily they could be taken in by such nonsense.  When constructive criticism would actually be warranted, these people would stay silent, apparently because many did not want to "rock the boat" or not look like a team player.  In other cases, implied retribution was also a factor.
> 
> So what we know and are reading about the Raptor gives me deja vu about my non-profit Board experience.  Obviously, Megain perfected these methods in order to get what she wanted and they were successful for her, too.  So, I guess we shouldn't really be all that surprised, even though I still find it repulsive.
> (At least for my Board experience, the end-result was to support a valuable non-profit organization not a fake one...)


Remember she was in a sorority.  Pair that with all the fakery in Hwood and this is what we get.


----------



## pukasonqo

Aimee3 said:


> That’s because Kate has family and there was no need for such major preparations for a thanksgiving dinner with the family she allegedly never had.   Perhaps H should’ve googled MM while all the dirt and yacht photos were still out there!!!!


 Why would KM celebrate Thanksgiving? It is an USA holiday not a British one


----------



## Redbirdhermes

sdkitty said:


> I haven't see anyone from the Married With Children comment on her.  Of course she was just a kids but anyway....


A photo and some comments from the set.









						Meghan Markle beams alongside 7ft basketball star Vlade Divac on set of Married With Children in never-before-seen throwback pic
					

LIGHTING up as she poses with basketball hero Vlade Divac on the set of Married With Children, 12-year-old Meghan Markle looks the picture of happiness. Prince Harry’s actress fiancée was lucky eno…




					www.thescottishsun.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember she was in a sorority.  Pair that with all the fakery in Hwood and this is what we get.


True. I have heard stories from my daughter who went to school in LA, belonged to a sorority, and knows Mini Megs.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or from watching too many soap operas?  Imagine being surrounded by all that drama in person.  Definitely not healthy.


I remember watching many hours of General Hospital and All My Children when I was young. If anything the soaps taught me how not to act. The villains always got their comeuppance  eventually (although sometimes it took years). 

As exaggerated as soap operas are, almost everyone knows at least one person in their life who would have been right at home in one. Those people revel in stirring the pot and creating drama. Despite her many successes, Meghan is never satisfied with what she has. That incessant desire for more will be her downfall.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I remember watching many hours of General Hospital and All My Children when I was young. If anything the soaps taught me how not to act. The villains always got their comeuppance  eventually (although sometimes it took years).
> 
> As exaggerated as soap operas are, almost everyone knows at least one person in their life who would have been right at home in one. _*Those people revel in stirring the pot and creating drama.*_ Despite her many successes, Meghan is never satisfied with what she has. That incessant desire for more will be her downfall.


Well said.  Loved AMC.  Perhaps she believes she is Erica Kane.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Who other than Harry would do something like this for a twit of a girlfriend? William has never done such a thing for Kate though she was his serious girlfriend for years, right?
> 
> View attachment 5574739
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas is pretty delusional too, thinking that Z-list didn't reach the 'point of entitlement' YET   Of course he didn't. She was and still is his princess.
> 
> View attachment 5574746


To put the Middleton holidays in perspective … remember the family owns a party-theme business, and even Pippa has written a party hosting book
My guess is that Carole Middleton knows how to throw a fun party, all her guests have to do is show up
And William always gets an invite to the QEII holiday parties
So, neither W nor K needs to throw a lot of big parties


----------



## marietouchet

Redbirdhermes said:


> A photo and some comments from the set.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle beams alongside 7ft basketball star Vlade Divac on set of Married With Children in never-before-seen throwback pic
> 
> 
> LIGHTING up as she poses with basketball hero Vlade Divac on the set of Married With Children, 12-year-old Meghan Markle looks the picture of happiness. Prince Harry’s actress fiancée was lucky eno…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thescottishsun.co.uk


One point I had forgotten … 
Recently saw some comedy highlights from Married with Children … oh my gosh … the show is totally politically incorrect by modern standards , but still funny in an odd way 
The show focused on the saga of Al, employed in a shoe store , pulling out shoes all day long for women to try on …
Running joke, every episode about the feet of FAT ladies 

So TM a made his money from a show that would be on every WOKE person’s hate list
Ironic is it not ?


----------



## muddledmint

EverSoElusive said:


> The thing is, if she didn't want to celebrate Thanksgiving at Thomas' Mexican home or Doria's LA home, probably because they weren't fancy enough for her new status, maybe she should have just paid for a nice Airbnb somewhere. Still, that's way too much pretension.


Don’t be silly, meghan markle does not pay for anything that she deserves to get for free


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> To put the Middleton holidays in perspective … remember the family owns a party-theme business, and even Pippa has written a party hosting book
> My guess is that Carole Middleton knows how to throw a fun party, all her guests have to do is show up
> And William always gets an invite to the QEII holiday parties
> So, neither W nor K needs to throw a lot of big parties


Noted on your comment but my original post about the Thanksgiving celebration was mainly regarding the need for the use of Landons' Hollywood mansion. All just to play into Z-list's self-importance because she was then a prince's girlfriend hence her mom's humble home was not good enough.


----------



## EverSoElusive

muddledmint said:


> Don’t be silly, meghan markle does not pay for anything that she deserves to get for free


Her then boyfriend Prince Harry could have paid for it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

I was scrolling through twitter and observed some nasty attacks on Catherine. The sugars are crazy


----------



## Sophisticatted

The “trip to Balmoral” may be a summons because of Harry’s speech at the UN (there is a rumor the RF told him not to do it).  It may also be a “divorce summit” to hash out divorce agreements with RF lawyers as PRIVATELY as possible.  Or, it could just be a PR lie.

It’s just interesting to have a “family” vacation with a promise of “no other family present, just the queen”.  Maybe they’ll finally get that Lillibet with Gan Gan pic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> ETA: Aren’t most pet parrots bred in captivity these days? It would be cruel to set a bunch of birds “free” who are 100% bonded with humans and have always lived every minute of their lives inside.



Breeding them doesn't eliminate their basic needs, though. Of course you can't just plant a pet in the jungle, but you can absolutely find a better environment with space to move and fellow parrots. No hotel needs a parrot in their lobby.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not (nor have I read it yet as my book is still in transit, so maybe that will change). He lost a mother too, and I don't find it the least bit shocking or even unusual a traumatized teenager would act up. Plus, I've read the occasional rumour he still has that temper now and then.
> 
> What I do find shocking is a ruthless PR machine piling onto Harry who was struggling as is. If that's true (and why wouldn't it be, after all we think TB did meticulous research and can back up his claims should someone sue) it is apalling. Good parenting (and even the appropriate way to benefit the crown) would have been to put an end to the partying if it was getting so out of hand. Sorry Charles, I'm not impressed.
> 
> And what I do find unhealthy is if nearly 40yo Harry still is unable to move on from his loss. And by moving on I don't mean "Get over it" in a callous way, but learning to cope in a non-destructive manner.


It doesn’t serve TW’s agenda for him to become mentally healthy. She’s isolated him geographically as well as emotionally. Catch 22, The family can’t reach him, he only has a chance if he realizes/admits he needs help and she manipulates his life so that will not likely happen.

The account in the book in how she strategized to get the engagement on her terms was chilling! She’s quoted as telling a friend it was so he “could not escape”. A prelude to their life. Her malevolence is really staggering.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Aha! Of course Z-list had to rewrite her background to look better and not like some Z-list or jezebel
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574730



I'll be off for a few days, I need to reinvent myself. See ya!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> And that says a lot imo. Would Pippa have given her daughter a name that is upsetting to her sister? I doubt it.



Exactly.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Harry specifically told Z-list not to speak about their relationship or him but guess what? She wasn't coy to announce the following:






Z-list was mad that the Vanity Fair feature wasn't about her philanthropy and activism, which couldn't be verified by Vanity Fair's fact-checkers. And she thinks everyone that crossed paths with her is or wants to be her friend. How sad


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> This right here shows that Z-list brought the media frenzy upon herself. They didn't know anything about the relationship until she started the 'outing' shenanigans herself!
> 
> In previous chapter, when Harry still had some huevos, he did tell Z-list that it's necessary for them to keep the relationship under wraps for starters. True to Z-list's style, of course she needed to mark her territory so that other women know that Harry was now hers and also to ensure that she got all the publicity in the press, without expecting that they would pick apart her less than perfect family background.
> 
> When she got negative press instead of a positive one, then she started telling Harry that they came after her and it was due to her race. Please, girl!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5574755



Gosh, she makes me sick to my stomach.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be off for a few days, I need to reinvent myself. See ya!


Easy peasy. Just have someone edit your Wikipedia page


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list doesn't ever listen to the professionals (no wonder so many outfit failures) and then would exclaim she never got any assistance, and play a victim.
> 
> View attachment 5574788



Effing drama queen. He did not blame her, he gave her strategies to lower the exposure.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I believe that once he realizes she's played him like Itzhak Perlman plays a Stradivarius he'll go crawling back to the BRF for help in extricating himself from the mess he has made of his life. He has to have seen or heard some of the more incriminating tales in the book by now.



One can only hope.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Effing drama queen. He did not blame her, he gave her strategies to lower the exposure.


People like her twist everything to look like others are against them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> The account in the book in how she strategized to get the engagement on her terms was chilling! She’s quoted as telling a friend it was so he “could not escape”. A prelude to their life. Her malevolence is really staggering.



This IS a hostage situation. The hostage may look like he's a willing accomplice, but he's just suffering from Stockholm syndrom.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Diana's siblings and best friend didn't see any similarities between Diana and Z-list. In fact, they didn't think she would fit in with Harry's family either. 

So looks like more than just William had cautioned Harry but he refused to listen


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sophisticatted said:


> The “trip to Balmoral” may be a summons because of Harry’s speech at the UN (there is a rumor the RF told him not to do it).  It may also be a “divorce summit” to hash out divorce agreements with RF lawyers as PRIVATELY as possible.  Or, it could just be a PR lie.
> 
> It’s just interesting to have a “family” vacation with a promise of “no other family present, just the queen”.  Maybe they’ll finally get that Lillibet with Gan Gan pic.


There's a higher probability that this was a story planted by SS. It's very unlikely that the Queen is all by her lonesome with no other family members around.

Although one (referring to myself) can wish that it was a divorce summit


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

Interesting insight on reddit:


I didn't know that she leaked details about their house in Finding Freebies


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> There's a higher probability that this was a story planted by SS. It's very unlikely that the Queen is all on her lonesome with no other family members around.
> 
> Although one (referring to myself) can wish that it was a divorce summit


Isn’t Andi with QE or nearby?  Plus, she will have massive security so Hazz will be protected.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Interesting insight on reddit:
> View attachment 5574876
> 
> I didn't know that she leaked details about their house in Finding Freebies



WTF. They also described Anmer Hall in detail which is not only rude but also a security risk. As Harry must have known that very well and I like to think he loves his niece and nephews it probably once again came from the ruthless predator.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t Andi with QE or nearby?  Plus, she will have massive security so Hazz will be protected.


Also, isn't Anne's home nearby too?


----------



## jelliedfeels

I know someone posted about due process but truthfully, I wish Harry doesn't get to keep wasting taxpayers money with his security nonsense. The level of entitlement of this man child is alarming.
I agree it’s enfuriating. 


papertiger said:


> Somethines I'm not sure if we're following the news or creating it: Back to this saga from the DB today
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Kate Middleton, and the Bridesmaid’s Dress Saga That Just Won’t Die​
> Tom Sykes
> Fri, 22 July 2022, 9:50 am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo Illustration by Thomas Levinson/The Daily Beast/Getty
> 
> The extraordinary story of how two powerful women fell out, apparently terminally, over a fitting for a child’s bridesmaid’s dress once again transfixed the world this week.
> The women in question, of course, are Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle, and the tale blew up again with investigative journalist Tom Bower writing in his new book, _Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors_, once again about the saga, and once again pinning the blame firmly on Meghan. That this story never appears to end neatly encapsulates the exhausting levels of dysfunction at the heart of the royal family—and the media fascination that attends it.
> Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton’s Feud Over Who Made Who Cry Rumbles On
> 
> As a reminder, the initial version of the story, that appeared in U.K. papers via the _Daily Telegraph_’s respected royal correspondent Camilla Tominey, was that during a bridesmaid fitting ahead of Meghan and Prince Harry’s wedding in 2018, Meghan made Kate cry in a heated argument over whether or not the bridesmaids, one of whom included Kate’s daughter Charlotte, should wear tights. Kate thought they should, as per royal convention; Meghan did not want them to.
> The gossipy vignette, which didn’t surface until six months after the wedding, would likely have soon been forgotten had not Meghan brought it up during her and Harry’s bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview.
> In the program, Meghan said the incident had been “a turning point” in the relationship, saying: “[Kate] made me cry, and it really hurt my feelings.” She added that Kate sent her flowers and a note afterwards to apologize having “owned” her part in the incident, and that she had “forgiven her”—but that when neither Kate nor the palace stepped in to correct the record when the _Telegraph_ story first appeared, she realized the palace machinery was not there to protect or defend her.
> Here’s a sample of the dialogue with Oprah that ensued:
> _Meghan: Everyone in the institution knew it wasn't true.
> Oprah: So, why didn't somebody just say that?
> Meghan: That's a good question._
> In an article for _Harper’s Bazaar_, Omid Scobie, who co-authored the sympathetic Harry and Meghan biography _Finding Freedom_, wrote that in January 2020, soon after the couple had announced their exit from the royal family, Kensington Palace asked Harry to sign a statement denouncing a report that claimed William had “constantly bullied” the Sussexes in the preceding months.
> Meghan’s reply is instructive: “Well, if we’re just throwing any statement out there now, then perhaps KP can finally set the record straight about me [not making Kate cry],” Meghan emailed an aide, according to Scobie, who cited a source.
> That Meghan’s suggestion was high-handedly ignored—“The Duchess of Cambridge, she was told, should never be dragged into idle gossip,” Scobie wrote—is unsurprising to seasoned royal watchers. The hurt feelings of spare heirs or their wives are rarely a priority for the institution.
> However it is clear that this story, which should have been highly forgettable, became something of a significant watershed for Meghan.
> Indeed, Scobie writes: “Meghan was repeatedly told that it would not be possible to set the record straight,” which suggests that she repeatedly asked for it to be done.
> One of the many fascinating things about the story is that it gives a rare insight into just how fast the relationship between Meghan and Kate deteriorated.
> Meghan told Oprah that the incident happened “a few days before the wedding” which was on 19 May 2018. Less than six months earlier, over Christmas 2017, William and Kate hosted Harry and Meghan at their Norfolk country home, Anmer Hall.
> How did things go so wrong so fast? “They were just completely different people,” former royal editor of the _Sun_ Duncan Larcombe told The Daily Beast. “Their styles couldn’t have been more different. Meghan was this go-getting American woman who believed she had an obligation to voice her opinion, and Kate had basically modeled herself on the queen and signed up for a life of duty with the aim of causing the minimum of fuss or controversy. It’s hardly surprising it blew up just a few months later.”
> Scobie and Durand made a similar point in _Finding Freedom_, saying that, “Kate did little to bridge the divide.” One source told Scobie that Kate felt “they didn’t have much in common other than the fact that they lived at Kensington Palace.”
> And for all the joyous appearance at Christmas 2017, when the so-called “Fab Four” were photographed happily striding into church together, Kate and Meghan alongside each other, by February 2018 the cracks were starting to show in public.
> At a joint appearance for their doomed joint foundation, Harry admitted “working as a family does have its challenges” and joked that disagreements came “so thick and fast” they were hard to keep track of.
> In March 2019, in what is now often seen as a final effort to stave off disaster, it was announced that the Cambridge and Sussex offices were dividing, but it was to no avail. In the summer of that year, Harry finally confirmed the feud to ITV interviewer Tom Bradby, after the palace had spent more than a year rubbishing reports of it. Crucially, Meghan confessed to her misery during the same program, _Harry & Meghan: An African Journey._
> However, the saga of the bridesmaid’s dress came to fatally poison the relationship between the two women, and the episode continues to exert a strange fascination today, as Bower’s latest coverage of the incident reveals. (It may not be dispassionate: Bower himself admitted in an interview with _Good Morning Britain_ that Meghan’s side did not engage with him in the writing of the book and he believes they were warned off cooperating with him by Meghan. Perhaps it is perhaps unsurprising that she comes out poorly.)
> Somehow, an argument over the coverage of the bridesmaid dress incident became an inflection point from which neither side was able to come back, revealing everything that went wrong with the relationship between the Sussexes and the Windsors in microcosm.
> In this one story we see distilled the stuffy insistence on tradition versus the free-spirited Californian reformer; the brushing aside of the concerns of those who are down the hierarchy; and the goldfish bowl of royal life, where everything has to mean something, where every piddling argument ends up in the papers and where people who are supposed to be working for you are actually working for someone else.
> It is quite possible, of course, that they both ended up in tears—especially as Meghan was a few weeks out from getting married and, as we now know, having enormously complicated issues with her father, and Kate was just three weeks postpartum (Prince Louis was born on April 23). Yet still, four years on, the blame game over the bridesmaid’s dress continues—and it is likely that Bower’s book will not be the last word on it.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> I personally don't care who cried, I know plenty of people who can turn-on tears if need be. This whole women cry when they're under stress or hormonal is even more abhorrent to me than who made who cry and why.


Yeah it really doesn’t matter who cried- it just reflects poorly on M that she claims they reconciled and then she’s bringing it up again in public on tv to make C look bad. The classy thing to do if asked about it would be to wave it off ‘there were lots of stories in the press’ or ‘we’re over it’ would be fine.


xincinsin said:


> Are shoes, with or without monogrammes, a common wedding keepsake in the UK or the US? My friends who had bridesmaids gave jewellery as a keepsake.


I’d say shoes are a weird present too because they  grow out so quick and get dirty on floor. I would say jewellery or a gift card is much more common. I was a flower girl t


CarryOn2020 said:


> Whaaaaa?  Martina?  Seriously?



Lol royal correspondents stop reporting on the royal family!

That’s like tennis players throwing a tantrum because they


papertiger said:


> So interesting the Harkles, the Markles and the BRF  have continuously and relentlessly fed the media stories, yet when there’s comment or some back/fact checking so many get irate on their behalf- especially the Harkles.
> 
> They have played the victim card well. probably the only thing they have done well.


100% it’s all they’ve ever had going for them and it’s the only reason anyone thinks this spoilt behaviour has any credence whatsoever.


charlottawill said:


> I don't think it's a wig. I could be wrong but I think she straightens what she has naturally and adds extensions.





sdkitty said:


> yes, maybe I'm using wig and extensions as the same thing but that isn't her natural hair texture.....I'm not expert as I don't straighten my NC hair but I think she probably has a chemical process on the top of her head and most of the rest is extensions.


100% agree that’s what her hair is most of the time. Though I do think she does sometimes wear a full wig too- like when it was those very long thick flicky waves or the shoulder Bob- just because it looks like 2 very different textures and the crown shape looks different.


Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you, again, for sharing, dear Chanbal.
> 
> At 7:43 : "What is Harry's line of work, besides DRIVING MISS CRAZY".
> 
> (I am not a native speaker, so hope, I have understood correctly?)


Yes that’s very funny


AbbytheBT said:


> This!! I just finished the book - As a native of CA, who lived in SoCal as a young adult, and have daughters (one still in LA)  I can see exactly how this type of narcissistic personality was cultivated and rewarded. It is a world of image and connections with thousands of beautiful ”strivers” in the entertainment world looking everyday to reinvent themselves and stay “in view”.  Blogs, influencers, corporate party events, poverty tourism, etc. just supercharged a “storytelling” world that was already out there.  I have also worked in PR - for a govt agency lol so don‘t hate on me- and worked/lived in 3rd world countries and this book lays out exactly what goes into making that sausage. So so many people in the industry worldwide make money on marketing and selling their people. Reading her background  and career trajectory piece by piece, it slowly dawned on me that “protection” has always meant image spinning and the ability to have people on tap devoted to protecting her brand.  Honestly, she is just one example of thousands of narcissists out there raised in this environment and it all made me sad for everyone.
> I have been fascinated by the Harkles journey because - originally - it appeared that their platform would help shine a light on those less fortunate and under represented, using modern communication tools to leverage and assist good works ongoing and already out there!
> As part of the Royal Family they wouldn‘t have to engage in that awful, messaging/funding competition between govts, NGOs and ”non-profit” foundations that is the epitome of resource waste.  I mean - I don't think the Kardashians pretend to be anything else than moneymakers off this ”branding” market the world has created.  And Meghan was raised in the exact same SoCal environment but chose to focus on “Compassion“ as her brand.
> The amount of money, resources and attention they have siphoned off of good people doing good things worldwide has astounded, and frankly, shocked me.
> The Harkles personal treatment of their family members is a rant for another post! Sure miscommunications happen in every family, and no one is perfect, but their refusal to heal rifts and move forward for the sake of their children minimally, is the most significant reason to banish them as ”compassionate and humanitarian” leaders.


This is a very perceptive comment on the situation. 

I would say to me though, the royals are not divorced from the world of self-publicising billionaire philanthropy- they are the originators of it! I would say the court of Queen  Victoria’ finessed the blueprint of what Hollywood does today. 
M

Or else a massive intelligence fail. Hard to believe if Bower was able to unearth all this dirt the MI5, or whatever it is called, didn't.
I do wonder whether they just have such a low opinion of the average commoner that they thought ZZ’s iniquities wouldn’t be even that bad compared to the next girl H might pick up. 


charlottawill said:


> I'm sure he could be quite charming when he was younger and was playing the fun-loving carefree spare.


Let’s not forget he’s not badly off either and it would be pretty good for their social standing. 


EverSoElusive said:


> Breeding them doesn't eliminate their basic needs, though. Of course you can't just plant a pet in the jungle, but you can absolutely find a better environment with space to move and fellow parrots. No hotel needs a parrot in their lobby.


I love parrots! Why are we talking about them? I would quite like one but I’m worried my life wouldn’t be intellectually stimulating enough for it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

EverSoElusive said:


> Diana's siblings and best friend didn't see any similarities between Diana and Z-list. In fact, they didn't think she would fit in with Harry's family either.
> 
> So looks like more than just William had cautioned Harry but he refused to listen
> 
> View attachment 5574875


How odd they didn’t see any resemblance between their charismatic, young, beautiful, sensitive, caring, intuitive, stylish and charming relative and Megsy….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I love parrots! Why are we talking about them? I would quite like one but I’m worried my life wouldn’t be intellectually stimulating enough for it.



Bower revealed after having her PR person or manager or whatever scrounge a free stay in a luxury hotel - which apparently wasn't easy to come by - she threw a fit after seeing a caged parrot in the lobby and refused to stay at the hotel. While obviously once again way too much drama I said earlier this is probably the one time I agree with her because it hurts my heart people keep swarm birds that fly miles a day alone in a small cage.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Yellow and blue highlights: Related to lies she told 1) she didn't look up Harry 2) no help was given to her in adjusting to becoming a royal family member.

Pink highlight: Z-list chose not to listen, learn and adjust!


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> It's real, just bought from someone else's head. Oprah can afford the best. The Chris Rock documentary "Black Hair" addresses how much human hair for wigs is sold by poor people in India.


Tbh I think there’s a lot of manufactured outrage aimed specifically at black women about the wig industry. Lots of people wear wigs and extensions but it does feel like the criticism for wearing this hair falls disproportionately on black women- I guess part of the reason is it is just more obvious that Beyoncé doesn’t really have chest length blonde waves than Britney but realistically Britney doesn't either. However, I do think part of it is people being territorial about what hair people *should* have. 

I wear extensions myself and have worn wigs and while I obviously don’t want poor people to be exploited for my desires I think there needs to be transparency  and greater regulation in the vast majority of our dealings with India and the exploitation is far from limited to hair (and ironically it is probably one of the most renewable resources that are harvested there.)


----------



## EverSoElusive

While Harry may be a real prince who grew up in a palace, he certainly lives in a Disney movie   Stardust???


----------



## EverSoElusive

jelliedfeels said:


> How odd they didn’t see any resemblance between their charismatic, young, beautiful, sensitive, caring, intuitive, stylish and charming relative and Megsy….


We should compile outfit comparison photos and send them to the Spencer sisters and Diana's best friend


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bower revealed after having her PR person or manager or whatever scrounge a free stay in a luxury hotel - which apparently wasn't easy to come by - she threw a fit after seeing a caged parrot in the lobby and refused to stay at the hotel. While obviously once again way too much drama I said earlier this is probably the one time I agree with her because it hurts my heart people keep swarm birds that fly miles a day alone in a small cage.


I think she made a fuss about the parrot because it isn’t “on brand” for her to be promoting a hotel with a caged parrot. The deal for the free hotel stay was to appear on the cover of the hotel mag and to post about the hotel on her tig blog. The parrot doesn’t jive with her animal loving, humanitarian persona. I don’t believe she gives a crap about parrots otherwise.


----------



## muddledmint

EverSoElusive said:


> Her then boyfriend Prince Harry could have paid for it


They are Very Important Persons, don’t you realize? It was an honor for lord what’s his name to have meghan spend thanksgiving in his house. Paying for things is for the vulgar unwashed masses.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I wear extensions myself and have worn wigs and while I obviously don’t want poor people to be exploited for my desires I think there needs to be transparency  and greater regulation in the vast majority of our dealings with India and the exploitation is far from limited to hair (and ironically it is probably one of the most renewable resources that are harvested there.)


I never wore wigs, but I'm becoming more interested on the subject. I wonder if TPF has some resources about it.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> How odd they didn’t see any resemblance between their charismatic, young, beautiful, sensitive, caring, intuitive, stylish and charming relative and Meg



deleted


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

I've stated my sympathy for Gina but having reached this chapter, my sympathy is thinning. As much as she had worked with Z-list previously and was a friend (more like means to an end), she was already Markled. Why trying so hard to meet and greet Z-list at that point? If this world was without consequences and lawless, and I was Gina in Edinburgh, I'd have spat in Z-list's face instead


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> I never wore wigs, but I'm becoming more interested on the subject. I wonder if TPF has some resources about it.


Maybe start a thread in the beauty subforum?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> I think she made a fuss about the parrot because it isn’t “on brand” for her to be promoting a hotel with a caged parrot. The deal for the free hotel stay was to appear on the cover of the hotel mag and to post about the hotel on her tig blog. The parrot doesn’t jive with her animal loving, humanitarian persona. I don’t believe she gives a crap about parrots otherwise.



That's probably true.


----------



## EverSoElusive

If Harry didn't understand Z-list's confusion, then ultimately BOTH of them didn't understand the job of BEING A ROYAL.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I've stated my sympathy for Gina but having reached this chapter, my sympathy is thinning. As much as she had worked with Z-list previously and was a friend (more like means to an end), she was already Markled. Why trying so hard to meet and greet Z-list at that point? If this world was without consequences and lawless, and I was Gina in Edinburgh, I'd have spat in Z-list's face instead
> 
> View attachment 5574905



Just...why. This all seems so unnecessary. I'm sure she could have made a minute of smalltalk and moved on instead of creating a scene once again.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list is not dumb by any means. I think she understood and Harry had advised her on the pecking order but she simply chose to ignore it and did whatever her princess heart desired.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why. This all seems so unnecessary. I'm sure she could have made a minute of smalltalk and moved on instead of creating a scene once again.


Gina probably still wasn't over the fact that she was Markled after everything that she has put in motion to raise Z-list's profile. She likely was hoping for some time to reminisce their time working together and wanting some gratitude from Z-list.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> The “trip to Balmoral” may be a summons because of Harry’s speech at the UN (there is a rumor the RF told him not to do it).  It may also be a “divorce summit” to hash out divorce agreements with RF lawyers as PRIVATELY as possible.  Or, it could just be a PR lie.
> 
> It’s just interesting to have a “family” vacation with a promise of “no other family present, just the queen”.  Maybe they’ll finally get that Lillibet with Gan Gan pic.


If the Queen wants to take the upper hand with the Ingrates, she should do another group great-grandchild portrait like the one she did when Charlotte was a baby. The Ingrates won't get their private shot, but they won't be able to say their children were excluded. It would really p*ss them off.


----------



## Aimee3

Just wondering…are there deep dark dungeons in Balmoral????


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Breeding them doesn't eliminate their basic needs, though. Of course you can't just plant a pet in the jungle, but you can absolutely find a better environment with space to move and fellow parrots. No hotel needs a parrot in their lobby.


I have seen them at resorts in Hawaii and Mexico in large outdoor cages with other parrots, and there have been handlers who took them out several times a day for guests to interact with. They didn't seem stressed or mistreated, but I will take your word for it.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Maybe start a thread in the beauty subforum?


Haha! It's an idea, but I have zero knowledge on the subject. I don't even know where to buy one. Hopefully, an expert on the subject will chime in. Not TW, of course.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I have seen them at resorts in Hawaii and Mexico in large outdoor cages with other parrots, and there have been handlers who took them out several times a day for guests to interact with. They didn't seem stressed or mistreated, but I will take your word for it.


I don't know that much about parrots but from what I understand these and other similar birds do require attention (assuming they are kept as pets).  If they don't get it, they can harm themselves - plucking out their feathers, etc.  I've also heard from people who had them that they can have strong preferences for people.  A parrot loving a man for instance and disliking his wife.  they are pretty smart I think.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> Just wondering…are there deep dark dungeons in Balmoral????


Dun dun dun      If Z-list was locked up down there, she might just turn it into her secondary 50 shades dungeon   Joking, of course.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> And that says a lot imo. Would Pippa have given her daughter a name that is upsetting to her sister? I doubt it.


Absolutely - this was a fake story and I think it was 100% started by Z-List


----------



## Chanbal

Sachs might be out of ideas, but working hard as usual.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

The Duchess's discount? More like an embarrassment  Or Finding Freebies


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said.  Loved AMC.  Perhaps she believes she is Erica Kane.


Lol, now there's a name from the past   I was addicted to All My Children!


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> One point I had forgotten …
> Recently saw some comedy highlights from Married with Children … oh my gosh … the show is totally politically incorrect by modern standards , but still funny in an odd way
> The show focused on the saga of Al, employed in a shoe store , pulling out shoes all day long for women to try on …
> Running joke, every episode about the feet of FAT ladies
> 
> So TM a made his money from a show that would be on every WOKE person’s hate list
> Ironic is it not ?


Not to forget that this was NOT a show that I would want a child viewing.  Very suggestive and downright raunchy.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> One point I had forgotten …
> Recently saw some comedy highlights from Married with Children … oh my gosh … the show is totally politically incorrect by modern standards , but still funny in an odd way
> The show focused on the saga of Al, employed in a shoe store , pulling out shoes all day long for women to try on …
> Running joke, every episode about the feet of FAT ladies
> 
> So TM a made his money from a show that would be on every WOKE person’s hate list
> Ironic is it not ?


IDK how it would play today but Al was not supposed to be a role model (like bill cosby).  He was more or of a bad example like archie bunker
Funny how Bill Cosby, the actor turned out (not ha funny, more shocking)


----------



## charlottawill

Apologies if already posted, but this is funny - sound up:


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Not to forget that this was NOT a show that I would want a child viewing.  Very suggestive and downright raunchy.


It was not a family show, but it was very popular on Sunday nights. I recall people discussing it on Monday mornings in the office. Times change. Many old shows do not hold up well.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Omg Z-list's nephew is a trip     Cannabis product called Markle's Sparkle. Let me see if Amazon sells it


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Sachs might be out of ideas, but working hard as usual.




A very lame attempt at damage control by Sunshine Suckup.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Absolutely - this was a fake story and I think it was 100% started by Z-List



She is the very definition of a psychopath:

"Psychopaths are more “cold-hearted” and calculating. They carefully plot their moves, and use aggression in a planned-out way to get what they want. If they’re after more money or status in the office, for example, they’ll make a plan to take out any barriers that stand in the way, even if it’s another person’s job or reputation."


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> A very lame attempt at damage control by Sunshine Suckup.


They're really scraping bottom aren't they? Oh to be a fly on the wall at Monteshitshow this weekend. ZeeZy's house of cards is about to come toppling down.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

So thoughtful of Harry!  I'm sure he would be competition… Delusional as usual.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> So thoughtful of Harry!  I'm sure he would be competition… Delusional as usual.



Good call. Who wants to see his fugly pouty puss staring out from bookshelves at holiday time like some demented Ginger Grinch.

Plus, they may hope the visions of Second Row Royals, and the Preacher Prince pontificating to a minuscule and obviously bored audience will have receded by then. 

Wishful thinking.


----------



## 880

EverSoElusive said:


> Gina was doing A LOT for Z-list yet Z-list treated her like some kinda slave  She reminds me of Priddy. She stuck around longer than she should have.
> 
> And see how Z-list started to act like royalty after she met Harry?
> 
> View attachment 5574426
> View attachment 5574427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then she also expected Gina to work for free. The audacity!
> 
> View attachment 5574428
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, Z-list made another person cried
> 
> View attachment 5574429


So why wouldn’t gina just say no? The upside wouldn’t even be that great

ETA: @CarryOn2020 , @Toby93 , I remember Erica Kane/Susan Lucci too 

i wonder if she paid for her dior outfits at the jubilee?


----------



## EverSoElusive

880 said:


> So why wouldn’t gina just say no? The upside wouldn’t even be that great


Gina said no to the no-pay gig  I was just shocked by Z-list's audacity to ask Gina to work for her without pay.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

EverSoElusive said:


> Gina said no to the no-pay gig  I was just shocked by Z-list's audacity to ask Gina to work for her without pay.


Seriously, it’s just like I was talking about earlier in my post about how these people operate. I invited a big wig (and very, very wealthy guy) to our non-profit charity event and he thought he could come gratis.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> So thoughtful of Harry!  I'm sure he would be competition… Delusional as usual.



H Memwa


----------



## miss_chiff

@charlottawill  and @xincinsin,
Regarding Oprah’s hair… She’s got a big head and a lot of hair. Thing to remember is with her hair texture is that it gets abused a lot. Meaning, relaxer, blow outs, curling, rollers, hair products and who knows,  by now possibly even coloring. She’s taping everyday (at least back in the day), and that puts a lot of stress on her hair to have it perfect everyday for shooting the show along with photo shoots. At some point, the hair needs a break/rest, that’s where any weaves, wigs and such would come in handy to give said breaks (or a different look). It’s can be really brutal on the hair to have all that treatment done often.
Sorry off topic. Just wanted to reply.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Yellow and blue highlights: Related to lies she told 1) she didn't look up Harry 2) no help was given to her in adjusting to becoming a royal family member.
> 
> Pink highlight: Z-list chose not to listen, learn and adjust!
> 
> View attachment 5574882
> View attachment 5574883


It's really sad that a woman who trades on being authentic is actually such a fraud. Her definition of authenticity must be different from mine.


EverSoElusive said:


> I've stated my sympathy for Gina but having reached this chapter, my sympathy is thinning. As much as she had worked with Z-list previously and was a friend (more like means to an end), she was already Markled. Why trying so hard to meet and greet Z-list at that point? If this world was without consequences and lawless, and I was Gina in Edinburgh, I'd have spat in Z-list's face instead
> 
> View attachment 5574905


Are all narcs like this? The worst office narc I ever suffered openly admitted that whenever he changed jobs, he changed his cellphone number so that he could ghost his previous colleagues. We found out when we had to contact him urgently and the number on file no longer worked. Then someone who knew an ex-colleague of his learnt that they had been close (went on holidays together etc) and they didn't understand why they were cut off.


----------



## Chanbal

If mog1717 is right, TW (and possibly some of the girls from the Kilt Club? ) will join QE @Balmoral.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> It's really sad that a woman who trades on being authentic is actually such a fraud. Her definition of authenticity must be different from mine.
> 
> Are all narcs like this? The worst office narc I ever suffered openly admitted that whenever he changed jobs, he changed his cellphone number so that he could ghost his previous colleagues. We found out what we had to contact him urgently and the number on file no longer worked. Then someone who knew an ex-colleague of his learnt that they had been close (went on holidays together etc) and they didn't understand why they were cut off.


Isn't it sad that there are still people who support Z-list despite the uncovering of her lies.

The Palace did the right thing when they responded post-Oprah interview by saying 'recollections may vary'. 

Not sure if all narcs are like that but changing phone number everytime a job change happens seems like a pain in the butt. Again, we shouldn't be surprised if a narc typically ghosts people. Guess they would do whatever works.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> It was not a family show, but it was very popular on Sunday nights. I recall people discussing it on Monday mornings in the office. Times change. Many old shows do not hold up well.


I guess what I meant was, it was not the greatest place to be bringing your young impressionable child.  I would not want my child to be around the set when they were rehearsing and shooting the show.


----------



## Mumotons

They are suggesting people would want this as a gift 








						Prince Harry's memoir 'has been written and signed off by lawyers'
					

Prince Harry (pictured) is reported to have completed his eagerly awaited autobiography, with the final manuscript said to have been already signed off by lawyers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> The Duchess's discount? More like an embarrassment  Or Finding Freebies
> 
> View attachment 5574931



And shouldn't she as a royal be wearing British designers? I'll bet that was told to her but disregarded like all else.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I guess what I meant was, it was not the greatest place to be bringing your young impressionable child.  I would not want my child to be around the set when they were rehearsing and shooting the show.


Ahh, sorry, missed that.


----------



## Chanbal

They seem to be making the case for security in CA… 










						Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
					

Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> They are suggesting people would want this as a gift
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's memoir 'has been written and signed off by lawyers'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry (pictured) is reported to have completed his eagerly awaited autobiography, with the final manuscript said to have been already signed off by lawyers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sorry Hazz, but I already have plans to gift a few copies of Tom Bower's book…

Like The Bench, Hazz's master piece will likely be gifted (sold?) to schools, libraries, … and it may also end up as a computer stand/riser.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> Call me naive but I personally never really read such things about William. Perhaps, the Palace covered up stuff and have stuff scrubbed to give William a positive and wholesome look. He's human like us so it's undeniable that he too would have a temper.
> 
> The little basement "club" is Charles' fault completely, if anyone was to be blamed. He had the basement converted to accommodate excessive drinking and drug tolerance, in a way, to avoid dealing with his kids' anger regarding their mom's death and the loss of their trusted nanny Tiggy. Aside from royal engagements, instead of being there for his kids, he was with Camilla mostly, which further infuriated his kids.


When you really think about it, neither W or JCMH had a real childhood because they were too busy being a parent to Diana, who would cry on their shoulder whenever she was upset and that included driving to their school so they could console her. While at Kensington Palace, she would often barge into the living room to rant about her problems and feelings while the boys listened attentively. The flare up would almost always end with Diana requesting that the boys reaffirm their undying love for her and confirmation that she was the parent who loved them best. The two boys were already emotionally damaged before Diana's tragic death.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Do you think This book will make Camilla’s Reading Room book list?


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> They seem to be making the case for security in CA…
> View attachment 5574995
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Really? On May 31st, Harry and Meghan were flying back from the Jubilee? How did Invisiblet have her luncheon with the Queen and the garden party with that elderflower cake on June 3rd, if they were flying back from the UK?


----------



## Toby93

V0N1B2 said:


> Really? On May 31st, Harry and Meghan were flying back from the Jubilee? How did Invisiblet have her luncheon with the Queen and the garden party with that elderflower cake on June 3rd, if they were flying back from the UK?


Good catch


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> Do you think This book will make Camilla’s Reading Room book list?


I was thinking the same thing - do you think the Duchess of Cambridge will be reading


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Sorry Hazz, but I already have plans to gift a few copies of Tom Bower's book…
> 
> Like The Bench, Hazz's master piece will likely be gifted (sold?) to schools, libraries, … and it may also end up as a computer stand/riser.


I'm sure I can buy it at Walmart on clearance


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> I was thinking the same thing - do you think the Duchess of Cambridge will be reading


Maybe discreetly in the form of an e-book like what I'm doing


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> They seem to be making the case for security in CA…
> View attachment 5574995
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



TW probably didn’t like whatever H got her for their anniversary, screamed and yelled and threw plates that set off the burglar alarm.


----------



## V0N1B2

Aimee3 said:


> TW probably didn’t like whatever H got her for their anniversary, screamed and yelled and threw plates that set off the burglar alarm.


More like dude from the Netflix crew forgot his code and tripped the alarm


----------



## EverSoElusive

This is a permanent theme in Z-list's life: Idealize, devalue, discard.





Just finished Chapter 24. It makes me sick. I still stand by my comment saying that she's evil to the core  The letter she sent to Thomas was totally to gaslight him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They seem to be making the case for security in CA…
> View attachment 5574995
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Desperate plea for sympathy  - not falling for it


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the Aussies should take over of news delivery worldwide.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm sure I can buy it at Walmart on clearance


I don't need a computer stand, so I'm not even buying it on clearance. I trust DM will provide all the details.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Desperate plea for sympathy  - not falling for it


Me either. Given the geography of Montecito, a deer or other animal making contact could set off security alarms, for example, motion censor or maybe electric fencing on the perimeters.  Or, it’s a deranged sugar, who thinks she’s Meghan’s sister and is trying to find her to give her a hug.

Also, remember reading TorontoPD was fed up with all the alarm calls to her place, with none seeming to have been necessary, except of course to get attention.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I never knew about this. Was this discussed here? I don't recall it being spoken about during the O interview either  

Regardless, they can't seem to stop themselves from having someone telling others not to approach them. How crazy are they, really???  

Kate goes to the park with her kids and never had any issue but of course the second fiddles think they are king and queen.


----------



## Chanbal

One more opinion…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Me either. Given the geography of Montecito, a deer or other animal making contact could set off security alarms, for example, motion censor or maybe electric fencing on the perimeters.  Or, it’s a deranged sugar, who thinks she’s Meghan’s sister and is trying to find her to give her a hug.
> 
> Also, remember reading TorontoPD was fed up with all the alarm calls to her place, with none seeming to have been necessary, except of course to get attention.



Maybe it was Oprah


----------



## EverSoElusive

Big FAT lie!!!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't know that much about parrots but from what I understand these and other similar birds do require attention (assuming they are kept as pets).  If they don't get it, they can harm themselves - plucking out their feathers, etc.  I've also heard from people who had them that they can have strong preferences for people.  A parrot loving a man for instance and disliking his wife.  *they are pretty smart I think.*


They are super intelligent and have very distinct personalities. I know someone who has a pet cockatoo and he is bonded with the family. You can tell he loves them and they love him. He has a big cage but the door is left open and he can come and go as he pleases. They live in Florida so they take him outside and he gets fresh air and he enjoys sitting with them. They speak to him conversationally and he responds appropriately so you can tell he understands. Like dogs and cats I think they often have a favorite person.


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Maybe discreetly in the form of an e-book like what I'm doing


After she was thrown under the bus by this psychopath, she should be relishing all this


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe it was Oprah


OW is very shrewd. I would like to know what she really thinks about the Harkles.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> After she was thrown under the bus by this psychopath, she should be relishing all this


Kate is classier than me so I'm just gonna say it for her, karma is a b!tch


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> OW is very shrewd. I would like to know what she really thinks about the Harkles.


She probably hates that she was ever associated with them


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> She probably hates that she was ever associated with them


I hope so. I had a much better opinion of her before the infamous interview.


----------



## EverSoElusive

We know that the Queen is a rare breed of woman but she's more amazing than any word could describe her. She overlooked so many things that Z-list did and the constant embarrassments that she caused the BRF. The Queen certainly tried her hardest to appease Z-list though she didn't really have to yet the Queen gave Z-list one more thing that she never deserved, in hopes of making Z-list feel included and valued.

Wow! The Queen has a big heart


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> I hope so. I had a much better opinion of her before the infamous interview.


When I was still living back in Asia, I used to watch Oprah after coming home from school. I used to like her and her interviews


----------



## EverSoElusive

Am I making the right assumption that the Palace was lied to about Z-list going into labor when in fact she has already given birth???


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Kate is classier than me so I'm just gonna say it for her, karma is a b!tch


If she reads the UK newspapers, she won't need to buy the book 


Chanbal said:


> I hope so. I had a much better opinion of her before the infamous interview.


Same here.  I hope she realizes she was being used.  If she didn't know what a gold digger TW was before, she should after seeing the highlights of the book.  Oprah is truly a self made woman, and she has nothing in common with the z-lister.


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> They seem to be making the case for security in CA…
> View attachment 5574995
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Oh dear , poor HM, we should cut them some slack


----------



## andrashik

Some "royal" tea


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> Easy peasy. Just have someone edit your Wikipedia page





Chanbal said:


> They seem to be making the case for security in CA…
> View attachment 5574995
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Their security must not be that good then.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> They seem to be making the case for security in CA…
> View attachment 5574995
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan suffer TWO security breaches at California mansion
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were believed to be at their home in Montecito, Calif., with their children, two-year-old Archie and one-year-old Lilibet, when an alarm was triggered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I'm sure the home invaders checked for their anniversary before planning the job.  
Maybe if she didn't keep flaunting expensive jewellery, they would be less interested in breaking in.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Same here.  I hope she realizes she was being used.  If she didn't know what a gold digger TW was before, she should after seeing the highlights of the book.  Oprah is truly a self made woman, and she has nothing in common with the z-lister.


My disappointment with OW was bigger because as you said, she is a self made woman. I didn't want to lose my admiration for her. 

I think OW and TW started by using each other. OW wanted the interview and TW wanted her first class ticket (Netfl*x and other multi-million dollar contracts) to the US. I believe OW's ambition made her temporarily blind to TW's personality. I wish she would find a way to repair this situation.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I'm sure the home invaders checked for their anniversary before planning the job.
> Maybe if she didn't keep flaunting expensive jewellery, they would be less interested in breaking in.


What is the name of the company TW hires when she wants paparazzi photos? I wonder if there is a comparable company where one can hire a couple of 'invaders.'


----------



## mellibelly

muddledmint said:


> I think she made a fuss about the parrot because it isn’t “on brand” for her to be promoting a hotel with a caged parrot. The deal for the free hotel stay was to appear on the cover of the hotel mag and to post about the hotel on her tig blog. The parrot doesn’t jive with her animal loving, humanitarian persona. I don’t believe she gives a crap about parrots otherwise.


THIS. She is a fake animal rights activist. Hello, this is the hag that abandoned her rescue dog, pretends to be vegan when it suits her and claims to hate when Handbag hunts grouse, but eats roast chicken and steak tartare when no one is looking. I promise those chickens and cows lived a more miserable existence than that parrot in a 5 star hotel. Why one bird and not another? Duchess of Hypocrisy. If she paid her own way she could have stayed somewhere else. When you get a freebie who the F is she to throw a hissy fit? She is not Angelina. She is ZZZZZZ to infinity.


----------



## mellibelly

I love the fake security alarm story. Like anyone is trying to break into the Olive Garden flagship of Montecito  
Maybe it’s neighborhood kids ding dong dashing their gate. Or raccoons/coyotes trying the break into the Chick Inn. I promise it’s not a human fan obsessed with Hazbeen & Neverwas


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> What is the name of the company TW hires when she wants paparazzi photos? I wonder if there is a comparable company where one can hire a couple of 'invaders.'


I feel like that’s a plot of an old movie. Wife gets fake kidnapped to get her husband to pay a ransom that she collects. Anyone? And the joke is he doesn’t want to pay LOL.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> What is the name of the company TW hires when she wants paparazzi photos? I wonder if there is a comparable company where one can hire a couple of 'invaders.'


Since there was no mention of any arrests, she might have saved money and just imagined the intrusions like she did in Toronto.
"Oh, Officer! I was so scared! I'm sure I saw shadows in the bushes!"


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

I just came across this


----------



## mellibelly

I’m thinking of Ruthless People with Bette Midler hahaha. “I’ve been kidnapped by KMart!!!” I can’t see the royal family paying Megnuts ransom.


----------



## mellibelly

Omg I need to rewatch this movie  
RF: We’ll take Harry but not TW LOL


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I never wore wigs, but I'm becoming more interested on the subject. I wonder if TPF has some resources about it.


There’s been some threads about wigs but there’s no dedicated artificial hair thread. I am wondering about kicking it off, 


Chanbal said:


> What is the name of the company TW hires when she wants paparazzi photos? I wonder if there is a comparable company where one can hire a couple of 'invaders.'


I can just picture it- “H, SS called do you want the actors to wear tin foil hats, NRA t shirts or just be wrapped in a  confederate flag? Hang on- why not all three? Let’s get them chanting Gina Torres for prime time Emmy while they are at it. Now you need to put out a couple of cases of my book so they’ve got something to steal..”

Since there was no mention of any arrests, she might have saved money and just imagined the intrusions like she did in Toronto.


xincinsin said:


> "Oh, Officer! I was so scared! I'm sure I saw shadows in the bushes!"


You are 100 correct she’s got previous on this very lie. I hope they are paying some taxes for all this police time….


----------



## andrashik

mellibelly said:


> I love the fake security alarm story. Like anyone is trying to break into the Olive Garden flagship of Montecito
> Maybe it’s neighborhood kids ding dong dashing their gate. Or raccoons/coyotes trying the break into the Chick Inn. I promise it’s not a human fan obsessed with Hazbeen & Neverwas


Nooooo. They want her elderflower cake!!!


----------



## andrashik

Trending on twitter 


Claw's has achieved her dreams. She broke the Internet!


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Nooooo. They want her elderflower cake!!!


Or her lemon tree! How can she bake charity cakes without her own lemons?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I just came across this
> View attachment 5575085


I love the Aussies' take on them!
They look more plastic than Barbie.


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> Nooooo. They want her elderflower cake!!!


i think you mean they want to put it back


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Or her lemon tree! How can she bake charity cakes without her own lemons?!


She’ll have her body-double fly to Amalfi on a borrowed private jet and pick some up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My book is out for delivery (together with two more pre-orders...maybe I need to take a summer break this year)!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't think it will make my Christmas list.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think it will make my Christmas list.



Christmas is obviously the best time to sell your family


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> My disappointment with OW was bigger because as you said, she is a self made woman. I didn't want to lose my admiration for her.
> 
> I think OW and TW started by using each other. OW wanted the interview and TW wanted her first class ticket (Netfl*x and other multi-million dollar contracts) to the US. I believe OW's ambition made her temporarily blind to TW's personality.* I wish she would find a way to repair this situation*.


Like an actual investigative interview where she would actually press for answers and call out Z-list's lies??    




xincinsin said:


> I love the Aussies' take on them!
> They look more plastic than Barbie.


They ARE plastic. Fake all the way!!!


----------



## andrashik

Well well well 


Especially the last part


----------



## lanasyogamama

I grew up with Oprah as well, but she has definitely been fooled by not great folks a few times.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> THIS. She is a fake animal rights activist. Hello, this is the hag that abandoned her rescue dog, pretends to be vegan when it suits her and claims to hate when Handbag hunts grouse, but eats roast chicken and steak tartare when no one is looking. I promise those chickens and cows lived a more miserable existence than that parrot in a 5 star hotel. Why one bird and not another? Duchess of Hypocrisy. If she paid her own way she could have stayed somewhere else. When you get a freebie who the F is she to throw a hissy fit? She is not Angelina. She is *ZZZZZZ to infinity*.


Thank you so much for this idea!   New nicknames for the psychopath:  ZZZZZZ∞ or ZedZed∞


----------



## diane278

A couple of days ago, I ordered the Tom Bower book. I’m in the US, and ordered on eBay. The seller is in Canada. It shipped the day after I ordered it. The tracking number indicates it’ll be here by the 8th. The seller is grandeagleretail.
(The web page showed only one available but they keep selling them, and since it shipped promptly, I think they must have more than they listed.…but that’s only a guess.)


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> *Like an actual investigative interview where she would actually press for answers and call out Z-list's lies??*
> 
> 
> 
> They ARE plastic. Fake all the way!!!


It would be interesting, but I don't think OW would confront TW. However, she could choose Tom Bower's book for her book club and have an opened-minded discussion about it and perhaps narcissism. 

She could also choose to discuss people she interviewed that turn out to be major frauds. It comes to mind, for example, a self-proclaimed faith healer who later faced >600 accusations of sexual abuse. The other side of the 'Truth.'

She could also address the risks associated with mental health healers without credentials, as a follow up to the mental health show she did with Hazz. Indeed, she could put him in contact with certified mental health professionals. He is looking more and more disturbed. 

She is a smart lady with vast resources, I believe she could come up with an approach to improve this mess.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My book depository order is still “processing”. I’m losing confidence.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It would be interesting, but I don't think OW would confront TW. However, she could choose Tom Bower's book for her book club and have an opened-minded discussion about it and perhaps narcissism.
> 
> She could also choose to discuss people she interviewed that turn out to be major frauds. It comes to mind, for example, a self-proclaimed faith healer who later faced >600 accusations of sexual abuse. The other side of the 'Truth.'
> 
> She could also address the risks associated with mental health healers without credentials, as a follow up to the mental health show she did with Hazz. Indeed, she could put him in contact with certified mental health professionals. He is looking more and more disturbed.
> 
> She is a smart lady with vast resources, I believe she could come up with an approach to improve this mess.


Oprah won’t do a damn thing. She got exactly what she wanted, the spotlight was back on her after several years of waning relevance. That she got an additional $9 million didn’t hurt either. She won’t do anything else to help Meghan but she sure isn’t going to reveal how fabricated/staged her interview was. She has a reputation to protect.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> Oprah won’t do a damn thing. She got exactly what she wanted, the spotlight was back on her after several years of waning relevance. That she got an additional $9 million didn’t hurt either. She won’t do anything else to help Meghan but she sure isn’t going to reveal how fabricated/staged her interview was. She has a reputation to protection.


100%.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 1LV

Notified today that my book has shipped, and should arrive by August 23.  Must be coming by canoe and covered wagon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It’s a new level of  “what is she thinking?”


----------



## CarryOn2020

https://pagesix.com/2022/07/22/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-ivanka-*****-she-does-it-all/Meghan Markle wanted to be like Ivanka *****: ‘Beautiful, intelligent, she does it all’​By Sara Nathan
July 22, 2022 | 11:18am






In 2014, Meghan Markle gushed over Ivanka *****, saying she straddles "the line between letting yourself go or looking like you just stepped off a runway."NY Post photo composite
​Meghan Markle fan-girled over former first daughter Ivanka ***** before embarking on royal life, a new book reports.
The Duchess of Sussex interviewed Ivanka for her now-defunct blog “The Tig” back in 2014, four years before she married Prince Harry. As writer Tom Bower writes in his new book, “Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors,” out now in the UK, Markle gushed to her followers that she wanted to be just like the businesswoman. “Staggeringly beautiful, no question, but so incredibly savvy and intelligent that she’s not just carved a niche for herself under her father’s famed ***** notoriety, she has undoubtedly created her own empire,” she wrote.
“It’s so easy to knock the girls who come from privilege — to assume they rested on their laurels and garnered accolades simply by being fancy from the womb,” she wrote. “But I always remember Ivanka being different — she wasn’t dancing on tables as a teenager or releasing pop albums. She wasn’t running amok publicly, swearing and being smacked with DUIs. Instead she was graduating from The Wharton School (cum laude, I might add), launching the ***** Hotel Collection, and building her own brand.”

Her email conversation with the heiress, who once had her own perfume, shoe and bag range along with helping her father run the ***** property empire, left her gushing that “she does it all.”

Markle wrote: “When we have drinks, I will make sure I order whatever she does — because this woman seems to have the formula for success (and happiness) down pat.”

She was also impressed by Ivanka’s ability to straddle “the line between letting yourself go or looking like you just stepped off a runway (or at least had the time to put some lipstick on).”

Afterward, Ivanka’s “beautiful designs” of shoes, furniture and clothes were “embraced” on “The Tig,” writes Bower.
Then starring on “Suits,” the actress also revealed her intention to become friends with Ivanka and hang out the next time they were both in New York.
Just two years later, Donald J. ***** was elected president and his daughter was installed as an aide in the White House. On May 4, 2016, Markle denounced ***** in a TV interview as “misogynistic.” *****, in turn, called her “nasty.”

https://pagesix.com/2022/07/22/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-ivanka-*****-she-does-it-all/


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> https://pagesix.com/2022/07/22/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-ivanka-*****-she-does-it-all/Meghan Markle wanted to be like Ivanka *****: ‘Beautiful, intelligent, she does it all’​By Sara Nathan
> July 22, 2022 | 11:18am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 2014, Meghan Markle gushed over Ivanka *****, saying she straddles "the line between letting yourself go or looking like you just stepped off a runway."NY Post photo composite
> ​Meghan Markle fan-girled over former first daughter Ivanka ***** before embarking on royal life, a new book reports.
> The Duchess of Sussex interviewed Ivanka for her now-defunct blog “The Tig” back in 2014, four years before she married Prince Harry. As writer Tom Bower writes in his new book, “Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors,” out now in the UK, Markle gushed to her followers that she wanted to be just like the businesswoman. “Staggeringly beautiful, no question, but so incredibly savvy and intelligent that she’s not just carved a niche for herself under her father’s famed ***** notoriety, she has undoubtedly created her own empire,” she wrote.
> “It’s so easy to knock the girls who come from privilege — to assume they rested on their laurels and garnered accolades simply by being fancy from the womb,” she wrote. “But I always remember Ivanka being different — she wasn’t dancing on tables as a teenager or releasing pop albums. She wasn’t running amok publicly, swearing and being smacked with DUIs. Instead she was graduating from The Wharton School (cum laude, I might add), launching the ***** Hotel Collection, and building her own brand.”
> 
> Her email conversation with the heiress, who once had her own perfume, shoe and bag range along with helping her father run the ***** property empire, left her gushing that “she does it all.”
> 
> Markle wrote: “When we have drinks, I will make sure I order whatever she does — because this woman seems to have the formula for success (and happiness) down pat.”
> 
> She was also impressed by Ivanka’s ability to straddle “the line between letting yourself go or looking like you just stepped off a runway (or at least had the time to put some lipstick on).”
> 
> Afterward, Ivanka’s “beautiful designs” of shoes, furniture and clothes were “embraced” on “The Tig,” writes Bower.
> Then starring on “Suits,” the actress also revealed her intention to become friends with Ivanka and hang out the next time they were both in New York.
> Just two years later, Donald J. ***** was elected president and his daughter was installed as an aide in the White House. On May 4, 2016, Markle denounced ***** in a TV interview as “misogynistic.” *****, in turn, called her “nasty.”
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2022/07/22/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-ivanka-*****-she-does-it-all/


I’ve always thought she was more like the dad.


----------



## wisconsin

Chanbal said:


> It would be interesting, but I don't think OW would confront TW. However, she could choose Tom Bower's book for her book club and have an opened-minded discussion about it and perhaps narcissism.
> 
> She could also choose to discuss people she interviewed that turn out to be major frauds. It comes to mind, for example, a self-proclaimed faith healer who later faced >600 accusations of sexual abuse. The other side of the 'Truth.'
> 
> She could also address the risks associated with mental health healers without credentials, as a follow up to the mental health show she did with Hazz. Indeed, she could put him in contact with certified mental health professionals. He is looking more and more disturbed.
> 
> She is a smart lady with vast resources, I believe she could come up with an approach to improve this mess.


I agree. I used to really love Oprah but she should OWN her mistakes . Pun intended.


----------



## andrashik

But where is the cake?


----------



## sdkitty

andrashik said:


> But where is the cake?
> View attachment 5575313


This is one of the few times I've seen it reported that they gave money.  did they know this child?  at the risk of sounding judgey, $5,000 isn't that much from philanthropists who live in a 16-bath mansion
Guess it's better than sandwiches


----------



## DL Harper

lanasyogamama said:


> My book depository order is still “processing”. I’m losing confidence.


FYI - ordered mine from them to be shipped to the States.  I sent an email yesterday inquiring about the status and this was their response this morning:
From the Book Depository Customer Service Team: 
"We are currently experiencing some delays obtaining stock from our suppliers. We expect to receive stock imminently. Your patience and understanding is appreciated at this time. 
Once we have stock this title will be dispatched to you. If you do not wish to continue with this order, please advise and we can cancel this for you. I am very sorry that we could not have been of more assistance in this matter. 
Our sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused."


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Oprah won’t do a damn thing.* She got exactly what she wanted, the spotlight was back on her after several years of waning relevance. That she got an additional $9 million didn’t hurt either. She won’t do anything else to help Meghan but she sure isn’t going to reveal how fabricated/staged her interview was. She has a reputation to protect.


Unfortunately, I think you are 100% right. Lack of sleep makes me less skeptical, and I start believing that there is hope for some people.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm live-tracking mine, I should see the amazon guy every minute. He's literally about to turn into my street.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> This is one of the few times I've seen it reported that they gave money.  did they know this child?  at the risk of sounding judgey, $5,000 isn't that much from philanthropists who live in a 16-bath mansion
> Guess it's better than sandwiches


The article says Trevor & wife also donated, so the reporter speculated that perhaps Methane knew the bereaved family from way back when.

I shall not be critical. As you noted, at least it is better than sandwiches, and she didn't bring her camera crew to the funeral.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Oprah won’t do a damn thing. She got exactly what she wanted, the spotlight was back on her after several years of waning relevance. That she got an additional $9 million didn’t hurt either. She won’t do anything else to help Meghan but she sure isn’t going to reveal how fabricated/staged her interview was. She has a reputation to protect.


I wouldn't write Oprah off just yet.  Her Own network may not be as big as it could be but her net worth is estimated at over two billion.  I think she can draw a crowd if she wants to. She has a ton of charisma.  I recall when she did the favorites episodes back in the day she really made the viewer believe these were products she used and loved.  Now when I see everyone (The View, the other morning shows) doing the same thing, it's just sales.

What her relationship is with Meghan now, we don't know.  Haven't heard much about H&M from O or Gayle lately but time will tell.

Oh wait - the People puff piece I shared yesterday said Meghan goes and visits Oprah often and they chat.  Harry drives her.


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> But where is the cake?
> View attachment 5575313


This is very sad, but their donation sounds like paid advertisement. @bag-mania I got my skeptical cap on.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> This is one of the few times I've seen it reported that they gave money.  did they know this child?  at the risk of sounding judgey, $5,000 isn't that much from philanthropists who live in a 16-bath mansion
> Guess it's better than sandwiches


There are lots of Go Fund Me charitable funds, I do not know this one in particular or why it resonates with H&M

PS just had wicked thought ... my bad  ... One Go Fund Me group collected some $6M, later suspected of going to buy the fund owner's mansion...


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is very sad, but their donation sounds like paid advertisement. @bag-mania I got my skeptical cap on.



Let's put this into perspective:

The retainer _alone_ for a US PR company is between $1,500 per month and $20,000.

M's jumpsuit was almost $5K

Me thinks they needed a qualifiable tax-break and/or cheap good news story.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be off for a few days, I need to reinvent myself.


And read your book!!




andrashik said:


> But where is the cake?
> View attachment 5575313


God forbid they not announce the donation. 


DL Harper said:


> FYI - ordered mine from them to be shipped to the States.  I sent an email yesterday inquiring about the status and this was their response this morning:
> From the Book Depository Customer Service Team:
> "We are currently experiencing some delays obtaining stock from our suppliers. We expect to receive stock imminently. Your patience and understanding is appreciated at this time.
> Once we have stock this title will be dispatched to you. If you do not wish to continue with this order, please advise and we can cancel this for you. I am very sorry that we could not have been of more assistance in this matter.
> Our sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused."


Thank you! My hope is restored!


----------



## andrashik

xincinsin said:


> The article says Trevor & wife also donated, so the reporter speculated that perhaps Methane knew the bereaved family from way back when.
> 
> I shall not be critical. As you noted, at least it is better than sandwiches, and she didn't bring her camera crew to the funeral.


Yes but maybe I am cynical, in light of her abusive behaviour she chose to donate...and also she put it in the news...which for me isn't genuine at all


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm live-tracking mine, I should see the amazon guy every minute. He's literally about to turn into my street.


Are you meeting him with an olive cake or a sandwich?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> This is one of the few times I've seen it reported that they gave money.  did they know this child?  at the risk of sounding judgey, $5,000 isn't that much from philanthropists who live in a 16-bath mansion
> Guess it's better than sandwiches





Chanbal said:


> This is very sad, but their donation sounds like paid advertisement. @bag-mania I got my skeptical cap on.



There is something that feels a little odd about this story. The mother is the founder of the LA Alliance of Moms and has spent the last several years with her identity completely wrapped up in being a mom. According to the article she also owns an eco-conscious brand of children's clothing. Seems like Meghan knows her from at least back to the Trevor marriage if not earlier.

Nobody is saying what happened to the little boy.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is very sad, but their donation sounds like paid advertisement. @bag-mania I got my skeptical cap on.


I don't see this tiny (for them) donation as being worth bragging about.  Maybe their sugars see it differently.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> There is something that feels a little odd about this story. The mother is the founder of the LA Alliance of Moms and has spent the last several years with her identity completely wrapped up in being a mom. According to the article she also owns an eco-conscious brand of children's clothing. Seems like Meghan knows her from at least back to the Trevor marriage if not earlier.
> 
> Nobody is saying what happened to the little boy.


I'm guessing heart failure. The little boy has a twin sister who had to be fitted with a pacemaker some time ago. One of my close friends had a child who was born with congenital heart problems. The child made it to his teens before the heart simply gave out. It was very sad.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Yes but maybe I am cynical, in light of her abusive behaviour she chose to donate...and also she put it in the news...which for me isn't genuine at all


I doubt that she can do anything genuine nowadays. Not that she is incapable of it. I believe she was sincere about the Grenfell Tower charity kitchen. But her whole life now seems to be consumed with her brand and getting more clout and money.


----------



## muddledmint

If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


----------



## lanasyogamama

muddledmint said:


> If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


$6!!  I’d have paid way more! Thank you


----------



## onab

lanasyogamama said:


> $6!!  I’d have paid way more! Thank you


Worked for me too!  I was just coming here to tell you all.  I don't have unlimited, but just punched the kindle buy it button.  $6


----------



## marleneryd

muddledmint said:


> If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


Thank you!! I have Kindle Unlimited and this worked for me too! Can’t wait to start reading!


----------



## Sophisticatted

My take on the GoFund Me donation:

She’s trying to do damage control for her tarnished image (previously cheap donations, donations declared but not given).  Her PR probably told her she will have to give some real money just this one time.  So, PR move.
The GoFundMe mother seems to be well known and well connected.  This makes the donation more visible (and gets a headline) as well as signals to other people who know about this (preferably well known and well connected).  It’s a “networking opportunity”, basically.
The use of the kids’ names reminds everyone that she is a mother, isn’t seeking any attention for herself (rolleyes), tugs a people’s heartstrings, and is a point of connection to the mother of the dead child and others.  She is again taking advantage of a dead and/or vulnerable individual.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Are you meeting him with an olive cake or a sandwich?



My bad, I should have been better prepared. I'm surprised what a hefty volume it is, more than 400 pages. Also it has footnotes, like scientific papers   He names most of his sources, too. 

Now I was reading another book, but I'll markle it until I've finished Revenge.


----------



## bag-mania

I love the book's interpretation of her acting ability.   

Like the vast majority of wannabes, Meghan portrayed her own wants and needs, and not the requirements of the role. She was her own person. She could not convincingly become another person. She never played a part which she could adapt to herself. Lacking natural mystery, she remained a B actress struggling with one-liners that might end up on the cutting-room floor.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> This is one of the few times I've seen it reported that they gave money.  did they know this child?  at the risk of sounding judgey, $5,000 isn't that much from philanthropists who live in a 16-bath mansion
> Guess it's better than sandwiches


Bet it was paid by Sunshine Sucks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

lanasyogamama said:


> My book depository order is still “processing”. I’m losing confidence.


I finally received an email from them stating it had been received from the publisher and I would be notified when shipped. Baby steps.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Bet it was paid by Sunshine Sucks.


Reputation rescue after it was proven that they didn't contribute $170k at Uvalde?


----------



## mellibelly

papertiger said:


> Let's put this into perspective:
> 
> The retainer _alone_ for a US PR company is between $1,500 per month and $20,000.
> 
> M's jumpsuit was almost $5K
> 
> Me thinks they needed a qualifiable tax-break and/or cheap good news story.


According to the book she was paying Sunshine Sucks $7,500 a month before she even met Harry and she was getting zero press as a nobody actress. I can’t imagine what they pay now for the full time spin.

I just heard a horrible stat. 100% of private jet flights is tax deductible in the US whereas underpaid and overworked teachers can only write off $250 of the school supplies they have to buy

The fact that these two losers don’t anonymously donate that measly $5k and write off their private jets and her expensive hideous clothes…eff them. She took a private jet to Uvalde to donate bagels. Same thing.


----------



## djfmn

lanasyogamama said:


> $6!!  I’d have paid way more! Thank you


Yay I bought it on Amazon Kindle $6. I am in the United States.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> According to the book she was paying Sunshine Sucks $7,500 a month before she even met Harry and she was getting zero press as a nobody actress. I can’t imagine what they pay now for the full time spin.
> 
> I just heard a horrible stat. 100% of private jet flights is tax deductible in the US whereas underpaid and overworked teachers can only write off $250 of the school supplies they have to buy
> 
> The fact that these two losers don’t anonymously donate that measly $5k and write off their private jets and her expensive hideous clothes…eff them. She took a private jet to Uvalde to donate bagels. Same thing.


You can deduct costs of PR as expenses too


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s a new level of  “what is she thinking?”



I think she outdid herself in the hot mess category in that blue abomination in the bottom row. It looked bad enough on Ivanka, but ZeeZy's copycat look is


----------



## Redbirdhermes

mellibelly said:


> According to the book she was paying Sunshine Sucks $7,500 a month before she even met Harry and she was getting zero press as a nobody actress. I can’t imagine what they pay now for the full time spin.
> 
> I just heard a horrible stat. 100% of private jet flights is tax deductible in the US whereas underpaid and overworked teachers can only write off $250 of the school supplies they have to buy
> 
> The fact that these two losers don’t anonymously donate that measly $5k and write off their private jets and her expensive hideous clothes…eff them. She took a private jet to Uvalde to donate bagels. Same thing.


Do Harry and Meghan own the jet?  The cost of owning an aircraft is fully tax deductible if used primarily for business.  I have an accountant friend whose specialty is tax work for aircraft owners.  Just taking a flight, when you don't own the plane, falls under different tax rules.  I highly doubt that they own that Bombardier.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> This is one of the few times I've seen it reported that they gave money.  did they know this child?  at the risk of sounding judgey, $5,000 isn't that much from philanthropists who live in a 16-bath mansion
> Guess it's better than sandwiches


A 16 bath mansion that they are undoubtedly struggling to pay for.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't write Oprah off just yet.  Her Own network may not be as big as it could be but her net worth is estimated at over two billion.  I think she can draw a crowd if she wants to. She has a ton of charisma.  I recall when she did the favorites episodes back in the day she really made the viewer believe these were products she used and loved.  Now when I see everyone (The View, the other morning shows) doing the same thing, it's just sales.
> 
> What her relationship is with Meghan now, we don't know.  Haven't heard much about H&M from O or Gayle lately but time will tell.
> 
> Oh wait - the People puff piece I shared yesterday said Meghan goes and visits Oprah often and they chat.  Harry drives her.


I have on my skeptic hat when it comes to O and G.
  O is funding candidates which may be why MM continues to say she wants in politics.


----------



## charlottawill

Redbirdhermes said:


> Do Harry and Meghan own the jet? The cost of owning an aircraft is fully tax deductible if used primarily for business.


Highly unlikely, maybe borrowed, probably private charter. They don't have the means to own one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

muddledmint said:


> If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


Thanks so much   it worked for me, too.
Love love TPF.


----------



## charlottawill

1LV said:


> I’ve always thought she was more like the dad.


Agreed, and that's probably why they hate each other. They see each other for what they really are.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is very sad, but their donation sounds like paid advertisement. @bag-mania I got my skeptical cap on.


My GoFundMe donations are always anonymous. Just saying...


----------



## charlottawill

sorry double post


----------



## xincinsin

Redbirdhermes said:


> Do Harry and Meghan own the jet?  The cost of owning an aircraft is fully tax deductible if used primarily for business.  I have an accountant friend whose specialty is tax work for aircraft owners.  Just taking a flight, when you don't own the plane, falls under different tax rules.  I highly doubt that they own that Bombardier.


Thinking deviously. If their friend loans them the use of the private jet, but does it as a contribution in kind to Archewell, they could claim it as a charitable donation!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Reputation rescue after it was proven that they didn't contribute $170k at Uvalde?


It's going to take a lot more than a $5K donation to salvage what's left of her reputation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> My GoFundMe donations are always anonymous. Just saying...


and these donations can always be refunded. So H&M get the positive press for a day, then cancel.  After all we’ve been through with them,  never believe their bs - good or bad.  They lie.


----------



## MiniMabel

EverSoElusive said:


> Yellow and blue highlights: Related to lies she told 1) she didn't look up Harry 2) no help was given to her in adjusting to becoming a royal family member.
> 
> Pink highlight: Z-list chose not to listen, learn and adjust!
> 
> View attachment 5574882
> View attachment 5574883


The pink highlighted section. I find this really offensive. Who the h*ll does she think she is??  MM was, is, and always will be, a nobody in terms of any place at all in the BRF. I can imagine the disgust the BRF felt when they were presented with such an attitude; a self-serving, self-obsessed creature with no dignity or manners thinking she could control them. Being a member of the BRF means non-negotiable structure, rules; it's a strict framework which allows very little digression from specific procedures. A z-list "actress" thought she could remain "independent" and still swan around wearing the jewels and expensive clothes, everything paid for; what a despicable individual. Honestly, my blood boils.

The BRF, however, are, as always, cool, calm and collected and, playing the long game, have let TB's book do the talking......and what tales it is telling!


----------



## Redbirdhermes

xincinsin said:


> Thinking deviously. If their friend loans them the use of the private jet, but does it as a contribution in kind to Archewell, they could claim it as a charitable donation!


Not sure how H and M flying to the Jubilee is compassion in action (or some other Archewell mission), but I'm sure there might be some way to finagale that to be a contribution.  I'm pretty sure the BRF doesn't need charitable contributions themselves.


----------



## charlottawill

onab said:


> Worked for me too!  I was just coming here to tell you all.  I don't have unlimited, but just punched the kindle buy it button.  $6


Likewise....there goes the rest of the day...or the next few  

Kind of surprising that it's on Kindle already. It would seem to eat into sales of the hardcover which is $37.99. Unless they assume there are lots of people like us who don't want to be seen with the book.


----------



## 880

djfmn said:


> Yay I bought it on Amazon Kindle $6. I am in the United States.


I got it via kindle unlimited 

thank you for sharing this @muddledmint and others


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My bad, I should have been better prepared. I'm surprised what a hefty volume it is, more than 400 pages. Also it has footnotes, like scientific papers   He names most of his sources, too.
> 
> Now I was reading another book, but I'll markle it until I've finished Revenge.


To truly "Markle" the first one you can't go back to it. You have to move on to something better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

More news from our favourite POS. The 2nd slide is especially bad.


----------



## mellibelly

Redbirdhermes said:


> Do Harry and Meghan own the jet?  The cost of owning an aircraft is fully tax deductible if used primarily for business.  I have an accountant friend whose specialty is tax work for aircraft owners.  Just taking a flight, when you don't own the plane, falls under different tax rules.  I highly doubt that they own that Bombardier.


You’re correct, the entire cost of the jet is tax deductible. They clearly don’t own a jet, but I’m sure they claim their private jet expenses as travel expenses while doing Archewell “business” or whatever their other shell companies are.


----------



## marietouchet

marleneryd said:


> Thank you!! I have Kindle Unlimited and this worked for me too! Can’t wait to start reading!





Chanbal said:


> This is very sad, but their donation sounds like paid advertisement. @bag-mania I got my skeptical cap on.


Agree, NO ONE mentions the amount of a donation, NO ONE


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> More news from our favourite POS. The 2nd slide is especially bad.



#2…she had staff bake the banana bread and then took credit LMFAO. Wonder which staff member baked that lemon olive oil cake!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> To truly "Markle" the first one you can't go back to it. You have to move on to something better.



It's the 3rd part of a trilogy. I might _semi-markle_ it then.


----------



## mellibelly

So I’m halfway through the book and have to take a breather. She is truly an awful human being and I haven’t even gotten to the wedding


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Bet it was paid by Sunshine Sucks.


well, if it was I'm pretty sure they will bill Meghan for it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> #2…she had staff bake the banana bread and then took credit LMFAO. Wonder which staff member baked that lemon olive oil cake!



I remember that bread saga, but back then it was wholewheat or something and in Frogmore Cottage. Not sure if someone messed up the details or she pulled that sh*t more than once. 

Also, how do you mess up/perfect banana bread? Quick breads are so easy to make for even entry level bakers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> A 16 bath mansion that they are undoubtedly struggling to pay for.


well if they want to appear to be very wealthy and say they are philanthropists whose life is service, they need to put their money where their mouths are


----------



## marietouchet

mellibelly said:


> You’re correct, the entire cost of the jet is tax deductible. They clearly don’t own a jet, but I’m sure they claim their private jet expenses as travel expenses while doing Archewell “business” or whatever their other shell companies are.


A Kylie-Kim level jet costs like $70M, H&M are not in that league ...
And the maintenance costs are ASTRONOMICAL .... to keep the avionics functional ... Ask anyone who has ever owned a private plane

IMHO ..
Their fixation on SECURITY is really about CONVENIENCE (not threat level)
Think of the crowds at the Jubilee Church service, they pulled up to the door in a security driven car, no walking for blocks in 4 in heels, no anxiety about finding a parking spot for the BIG car in London
Fly private means - plane will take off when you want, no 24 hr waits in airport lounges


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> So I’m halfway through the book and have to take a breather. She is truly an awful human being and I haven’t even gotten to the wedding


so bottom line, she's a user...has been all her life, starting with daddy?


----------



## bag-mania

To my fellow skeptics: Regarding the donation I'm going to be _that person_ who asks the awkward question, why is there a GoFundMe?

The parents of the little boy are fairly wealthy people. The father is a partner in his law firm. According to his firm's web site "_He represents filmmakers, actors, writers, athletes and various media personalities, as well as companies and professionals in the media and entertainment industries._" So that explains why he is known by people in show business. Perhaps he is one of Meghan's lawyers?

Here is the link to the father's law web page.





						Julian Zajfen | Ziffren Brittenham LLP
					






					www.ziffrenlaw.com
				




The mother works as a combination philanthropist/influencer/business owner. Here is how she is described: "_When she’s away from her little ones, she runs a girl’s romper line, little minis, and is the Head of Community for HEYMAMA, part think tank, part community of inspirational, career-driven, modern mamas. Oh, and as if that wasn’t enough, she's a co-founder of Alliance of Moms and a heart ambassador for Children’s Hospital Los Angeles._"








						Articles by Kelly Zajfen
					

Articles by Kelly Zajfen




					cupcakesandcashmere.com
				




The family is undoubtedly going through a horrific time in losing their child. But they are not the typical GoFundMe recipients who cannot afford a funeral. I will be surprised if they accept the money unless it is to re-donate to another children's cause.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> To my fellow skeptics: Regarding the donation I'm going to be _that person_ who asks the awkward question, why is there a GoFundMe?
> 
> The parents of the little boy are fairly wealthy people. The father is a partner in his law firm. According to his firm's web site "_He represents filmmakers, actors, writers, athletes and various media personalities, as well as companies and professionals in the media and entertainment industries._" So that explains why he is known by people in show business. Perhaps he is one of Meghan's lawyers?
> 
> Here is the link to the father's law web page.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Julian Zajfen | Ziffren Brittenham LLP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ziffrenlaw.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The mother works as a combination philanthropist/influencer/business owner. Here is how she is described: "_When she’s away from her little ones, she runs a girl’s romper line, little minis, and is the Head of Community for HEYMAMA, part think tank, part community of inspirational, career-driven, modern mamas. Oh, and as if that wasn’t enough, she's a co-founder of Alliance of Moms and a heart ambassador for Children’s Hospital Los Angeles._"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Articles by Kelly Zajfen
> 
> 
> Articles by Kelly Zajfen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cupcakesandcashmere.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The family is undoubtedly going through a horrific time in losing their child. But they are not the typical GoFundMe recipients who cannot afford a funeral. I will be surprised if they accept the money unless it is to re-donate to another children's cause.


I wonder who started it and if the parents are embarassed


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I wonder who started it and if the parents are embarassed


It was started by somebody named Kate Jefferson in Connecticut. Don't know if she is a family friend or some stranger who follows the mother on one of the mommy boards. They have collected $48,000+ so far. 









						George Zajfen, organized by Kate Jefferson
					

The generosity and kindness you have all demonstrated in response to this page has been overwhelming and… Kate Jefferson needs your support for George Zajfen



					www.gofundme.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It was started by somebody named Kate Jefferson in Connecticut. Don't know if she is a family friend or some stranger who follows the mother on one of the mommy boards. They have collected $48,000+ so far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> George Zajfen, organized by Kate Jefferson
> 
> 
> The generosity and kindness you have all demonstrated in response to this page has been overwhelming and… Kate Jefferson needs your support for George Zajfen
> 
> 
> 
> www.gofundme.com


I suppose they could donate the money....or politely tell this woman the don't need it and to stop


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Fairly early on in the book:

"Every evening she set off saying to herself , 'You never know, tonight I might meet  the man who will change my life.'"

So...cheap.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I suppose they could donate the money....or politely tell this woman the don't need it and to stop


There are many worthy children's hospitals and research organizations. Just as long as they don't give it to Archewell!


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> So I’m halfway through the book and have to take a breather. She is truly an awful human being and I haven’t even gotten to the wedding


I have felt that way for a few days now.  It is a similar feeling to how I felt about Diana’s lies and manipulations with the help of the sycophantic media.  Since those days, I side-eye everything [good or bad] about the BRF.   Simply said, they are not paragons of anything other than moving forward - they do that really well.  QE will be a difficult act to follow, not sure Charles can pull it off.


----------



## bisbee

I don’t know about this Go Fund Me in particular, but the one I saw and donated to is for Children’s Hospital in LA, not for the family.


----------



## CobaltBlu

muddledmint said:


> If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


hahah!  I can read this for free!  sweeee!  Thank you so much @muddledmint.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fairly early on in the book:
> 
> "Every evening she set off saying to herself , 'You never know, tonight I might meet  the man who will change my life.'"
> 
> So...cheap.



more likely


----------



## bag-mania

I think I discovered why we usually see Harry shoeless in their family photos. Isn't this exactly how he looked at that billionaires summit where he preached about climate change back in 2019?   

From Chapter 6:

"She stipulated her ideal man. Dressed in a linen shirt, she visualised him barefoot on a beach, eating a slice of pizza and inviting her for a drink on the way home."


----------



## CobaltBlu

so, in one of excerpts from Bower's book, it was mentioned that MM was very interested in The Rules, a handbook/ruthless strategy guide for dating and how to catch a man.  

I was thinking that some of the younger members may not be familiar with The Rules, which are over 25 years old....so here ya go...









						"The Rules" Book, Revisited 25 Years Later | Cup of Jo
					

The best (worst) advice from the classic dating book.




					cupofjo.com
				











						The Rules, 20 years later: Why do men and women still follow the same old dating script?
					

The stubborn, perplexing, enduring power of old-fashioned courtship rituals.




					www.vox.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fairly early on in the book:
> 
> "Every evening she set off saying to herself , 'You never know, tonight I might meet  the man who will change my life.'"
> 
> So...cheap.


A raging feminist indeed.


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


Wow! I got it, I'm now charging my kindle. Thank you!!!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I think I discovered why we usually see Harry shoeless in their family photos. Isn't this exactly how he looked at that billionaires summit where he preached about climate change back in 2019?
> 
> From Chapter 6:
> 
> "She stipulated her ideal man. Dressed in a linen shirt, she visualised him barefoot on a beach, eating a slice of pizza and inviting her for a drink on the way home."



I live on a beach half a year, trust me, pizza and sand are never a good combination, not even if it's on a sliver platter held by Johnny Thompson.

In my fantasy beach or no beach, food or no food, pizza is not what I dream about. The woman is not only a cliche but has no imagination or taste.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I live on a beach half a year, trust me, pizza and sand are never a good combination, *not even if it's on a sliver platter held by Johnny Thompson.*
> 
> In my fantasy beach or no beach, food or no food, pizza is not what I dream about. The woman is not only a cliche but has no imagination or taste.


Oh I think I could make an exception in that case. What’s a little sandy pizza?


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> So I’m halfway through the book and have to take a breather. She is truly an awful human being and I haven’t even gotten to the wedding


I believe the silence out of Montecito is telling. She's probably on her phone screaming at people to make it all go away while he's shellshocked by the harsh reality of what he married.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I believe the silence out of Montecito is telling. She's probably on her phone screaming at people to make it all go away while he's shellshocked by the harsh reality of what he married.


Unless he is not.  How sad would that be?  She must be burning down the wires to Sunshine Sachs about what they are going to do to counteract this.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> The family is undoubtedly going through a horrific time in losing their child. But they are not the typical GoFundMe recipients who cannot afford a funeral. I will be surprised if they accept the money unless it is to re-donate to another children's cause.


Do we know who set it up? I would not put it past ZeeZy herself. It takes minutes to set one up, throw in a $5k donation to get it started and then give themselves a public pat on the back.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I believe the silence out of Montecito is telling. She's probably on her phone screaming at people to make it all go away while he's shellshocked by the harsh reality of what he married.


The folks at Sunshine Sachs must be burning the midnight oil these days. Look for some glowing puff piece of virtue about her to come out before the end of the week.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Unless he is not.  How sad would that be?  She must be burning down the wires to Sunshine Sachs about what they are going to do to counteract this.


You beat me to it! I doubt Harry is allowed to read the book. That would be a big no-no in that house. That man lives in not-so-blissful ignorance.


----------



## Chanbal

onab said:


> Worked for me too!  I was just coming here to tell you all.  I don't have unlimited, but just punched the kindle buy it button.  $6


I subscribed to Kindle unlimited for 4.99/2 months and got the book for free.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Unless he is not.  How sad would that be?  She must be burning down the wires to Sunshine Sachs about what they are going to do to counteract this.



I feel like too much time has passed and anything done at this point looks like nothing more than desperate attempts to negate the bad press.

It's going to take more than words in articles to undo this.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I wonder who started it and if the parents are embarassed


Does the GoFundMe say it is for expenses, or was it set up as a memorial for the child, to be donated to charity. Like when people request "In lieu of flowers please make memorial donations..."


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like too much time has passed and anything done at this point looks lie nothing more than desperate attempts to negate the bad press.
> 
> It's going to take more than words in articles to undo this.


Maybe they are playing the wait for it to die down game.

That go fund me for that little boy is rather odd.  I wonder if the Harkles contributed before or after Trevor.  Unless these parents are planning to donate to a charity in their son's name, this makes no sense.  These people are not destitute.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fairly early on in the book:
> 
> "Every evening she set off saying to herself , 'You never know, tonight I might meet  the man who will change my life.'"
> 
> So...cheap.


Said the feminist who wants to change the world.


----------



## Chanbal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I finally received an email from them stating it had been received from the publisher and I would be notified when shipped. Baby steps.


Mine from Books Depository still shows as 'awaiting publication'. It's probably because I bought the paperback version… No worries, since I have now the kindle version.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Julian Zajfen is an entertainment attorney.  Kissing up by Meghan?  Trevor as well?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Mine from Books Depository still shows as 'awaiting publication'. It's probably because I bought the paperback version… No worries, since I have now the kindle version.
> View attachment 5575540


I cancelled my order and picked it up on Kindle with the 30 days free.


----------



## bisbee

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they are playing the wait for it to die down game.
> 
> That go fund me for that little boy is rather odd.  I wonder if the Harkles contributed before or after Trevor.  Unless these parents are planning to donate to a charity in their son's name, this makes no sense.  These people are not destitute.


As I said, I don’t know who started the other fund, but here is the one the parents know about…funds go to the Children’s Hospital.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like too much time has passed and anything done at this point looks lie nothing more than desperate attempts to negate the bad press.
> 
> It's going to take more than words in articles to undo this.


Assuming it actually happens, I hope the Balmoral trip will be an intervention. There may not be other family members present while they're there, but I'd like to see ZeeZy and Hazy greeted by a battery of mental health professionals, palace advisers, and attorneys with an offer she can't refuse.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> You beat me to it! I doubt Harry is allowed to read the book. That would be a big no-no in that house. That man lives in not-so-blissful ignorance.


But I can't imagine people from his former life haven't reached out to him to say it's time to come to your senses and get out.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It was started by somebody named *Kate Jefferson* in Connecticut. Don't know if she is a family friend or some stranger who follows the mother on one of the mommy boards. They have collected $48,000+ so far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> George Zajfen, organized by Kate Jefferson
> 
> 
> The generosity and kindness you have all demonstrated in response to this page has been overwhelming and… Kate Jefferson needs your support for George Zajfen
> 
> 
> 
> www.gofundme.com


TW's acquaintance?   


bag-mania said:


> There are many worthy children's hospitals and research organizations. Just as long as they don't *give it to Archewell!*


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> #2…she had staff bake the banana bread and then took credit LMFAO. Wonder which staff member baked that lemon olive oil cake!


ZedZed∞ likes to take credit for other people's work. In 2018, she wrote the preface for the Hubb Community Kitchen Cookbook, a collection of recipes from the Grenfell Tower Fire survivors, that has since been referred to a Meghan Markle's New Charity Cookbook or some other 'Meghan' variation, and it appears as though ZedZed∞ never tried to correct the misconceptions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Incidentally, a German gossip mag titled today "Harry and Meghan: Divorce! He wants sole custody". Now I don't think we're that far, but I'd support both a divorce and him getting the children and taking them back to the UK.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> more likely
> 
> 
> View attachment 5575508



Maleficent Markle seems appropriate


----------



## muddledmint

charlottawill said:


> But I can't imagine people from his former life haven't reached out to him to say it's time to come to your senses and get out.


They don’t have his phone number


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> so, in one of excerpts from Bower's book, it was mentioned that MM was very interested in The Rules, a handbook/ruthless strategy guide for dating and how to catch a man.
> 
> I was thinking that some of the younger members may not be familiar with The Rules, which are over 25 years old....so here ya go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The Rules" Book, Revisited 25 Years Later | Cup of Jo
> 
> 
> The best (worst) advice from the classic dating book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cupofjo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8353915/rules-dating-advice[/URL



Little miss feminist is quite the hypocrite.


----------



## charlottawill

muddledmint said:


> They don’t have his phone number


Scary if true.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Incidentally, a German gossip mag titled today "Harry and Meghan: Divorce! He wants sole custody". Now I don't think we're that far, but I'd support both a divorce and him getting the children and taking them back to the UK.


I think it's increasingly a possibility.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Does the GoFundMe say it is for expenses, or was it set up as a memorial for the child, to be donated to charity. Like when people request "In lieu of flowers please make memorial donations..."


See the link I posted #100,521. It said it was for funeral expenses and anything else the family needed.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> The folks at Sunshine Sachs must be burning the midnight oil these days. Look for some glowing puff piece of virtue about her to come out before the end of the week.


It'll be like p*ssing on a forest fire.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I cancelled my order and picked it up on Kindle with the 30 days free.


Why buy when you can get it for free?  Seems appropriate. After all that's her life philosophy.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

Much anticipated… 



_However, multiple sources confirmed to Page Six that the Sussexes will not be going to visit Harry’s grandmother.

*The couple will stay in the US ahead of the publication of Harry’s much-anticipated memoir this fall.*

Harry, 37, and Markle, 40, last saw the Queen in June when they flew to the UK to celebrate her Platinum Jubilee. There, they introduced baby daughter Lilibet — nicknamed Lili — to the monarch for the first time._









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not invited to Balmoral for Queen’s retreat
					

Despite reports the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were asked to the Queen on her annual summer break in the highlands, we’re told there was no such invite.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It'll be like p*ssing on a forest fire.


The book is still hard to find in the US and they want to keep it that way. My guess is they will gloss over it and pretend it never happened. In another week or two the UK press will stop reporting about Tom Bower’s book and everything will settle down online. Then it’s back to business as usual for Meghan.   

The truth is out there now but we can’t make the stans read it (or accept it).


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> See the link I posted #100,521. It said it was for funeral expenses and anything else the family needed.


The Harkles' paid advertisement is already on DM.


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Scoobie, he has no chances here.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The book is still hard to find in the US and they want to keep it that way. My guess is they will gloss over it and pretend it never happened. In another week or two the UK press will stop reporting about Tom Bower’s book and everything will settle down online. Then it’s back to business as usual for Meghan.
> 
> The truth is out there now but we can’t make the stans read it (or accept it).


Sachs is working hard to overshadow the recent events.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Much anticipated…
> 
> View attachment 5575575
> 
> _However, multiple sources confirmed to Page Six that the Sussexes will not be going to visit Harry’s grandmother.
> 
> *The couple will stay in the US ahead of the publication of Harry’s much-anticipated memoir this fall.*
> 
> Harry, 37, and Markle, 40, last saw the Queen in June when they flew to the UK to celebrate her Platinum Jubilee. There, they introduced baby daughter Lilibet — nicknamed Lili — to the monarch for the first time._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not invited to Balmoral for Queen’s retreat
> 
> 
> Despite reports the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were asked to the Queen on her annual summer break in the highlands, we’re told there was no such invite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


As if anyone ever believed this nonsense.  I think this is the hand of William.  He wants to put down these blatant lies.  

Imagine how uncomfortable all the other people would be around them.  Watching every word uttered for fear of it appearing in a tell all book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like too much time has passed and anything done at this point looks like nothing more than desperate attempts to negate the bad press.
> 
> It's going to take more than words in articles to undo this.


Iirc on the O show, H&M said such-and-such-a-thing did not happen.   That excuse will not be good enough now.  These days no celebrity/politician/whoever has enough pull or credibility to counteract the Bower claims imo.  Even if QE and Charles said some of the stuff did not happen, I would not believe them. As @LittleStar88 says way too much time has passed.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Poor Scoobie, he has no chances here.



Hunky vs Flunky.  No contest!


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The book is still hard to find in the US and they want to keep it that way. My guess is they will gloss over it and pretend it never happened. In another week or two the UK press will stop reporting about Tom Bower’s book and everything will settle down online. Then it’s back to business as usual for Meghan.
> 
> The truth is out there now but we can’t make the stans read it (or accept it).


Notice how that headline that they aren't going is in really BIG PRINT.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> Sachs is working hard to overshadow the recent events.



No matter how many times they are googled or whatever he’s still number 6 and she’s little more than his plus 1.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

Wanna bet Oprah read it this weekend?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Wanna bet Oprah read it this weekend?



Oprah's interview was a puff piece....as far as her son being brown, it appears he isn't so....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


> My book depository order is still “processing”. I’m losing confidence.


I emailed them and asked to cancel - they were very prompt and refunded 4 hours later.  I ordered on July 17th and as of last night, it still said "awaiting publication"


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> I emailed them and asked to cancel - they were very prompt and refunded 4 hours later.  I ordered on July 17th and as of last night, it still said "awaiting publication"



I was also able to get a refund today ... Got the Kindle version


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Toby93 said:


> I emailed them and asked to cancel - they were very prompt and refunded 4 hours later.  I ordered on July 17th and as of last night, it still said "awaiting publication"


I did the same.   Their site claims it can be done prior to shipping.   I am awaiting a reply.  Wonder if they are overwhelmed.


----------



## Toby93

Sophisticatted said:


> My take on the GoFund Me donation:
> 
> She’s trying to do damage control for her tarnished image (previously cheap donations, donations declared but not given).  Her PR probably told her she will have to give some real money just this one time.  So, PR move.
> The GoFundMe mother seems to be well known and well connected.  This makes the donation more visible (and gets a headline) as well as signals to other people who know about this (preferably well known and well connected).  It’s a “networking opportunity”, basically.
> The use of the kids’ names reminds everyone that she is a mother, isn’t seeking any attention for herself (rolleyes), tugs a people’s heartstrings, and is a point of connection to the mother of the dead child and others.  She is again taking advantage of a dead and/or vulnerable individual.


Again, you can donate anonymously on GoFundMe, but she obviously chose not to.  They needed to be given credit for the donation, and for it to be "leaked"


----------



## Toby93

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I did the same.   Their site claims it can be done prior to shipping.   I am awaiting a reply.  Wonder if they are overwhelmed.


Mine was not even processed, so who knows how long I would have had to wait for it to be shipped overseas.  It might be on the clearance rack before I received it


----------



## Luvbolide

Chanbal said:


> If you succeed in getting the e-book, please share with us how you did it. The one I bought from the Book Depository still shows as 'processing' and 'awaiting publication'.
> 
> View attachment 5572519



I am having the same - ordered from Book Depository, but status is “Processing” and it notes “Awaiting “Publication”.  I am in the US - it sounds as if all the orders from the US are on hold and my guess is that they won’t be shipped until the book is published in the US.  I sure hope I am wrong!


----------



## Toby93

Luvbolide said:


> I am having the same - ordered from Book Depository, but status is “Processing” and it notes “Awaiting “Publication”.  I am in the US - it sounds as if all the orders from the US are on hold and my guess is that they won’t be shipped until the book is published in the US.  I sure hope I am wrong!


I think you should be able to cancel - others have been able to purchase the kindle edition on Amazon.  I do see it right now for $6.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From royal instablog — wow


royalinstablog I have seen alot of Misinformation about Bob's security case, claiming it was a WIN  especially from the so called royal reporters who lack simple comprehension to understand what the Judge said 

This is is what I understood

Bob claims that since he is 6th in line to the throne and he had to seek consent from the Queen for his marriage. He deserves to be protected (The Judge dismissed this claim)

Bob said he did not know who was on the board of RAVEC (he is such a dummy, RAVEC means Royal and VIP executive committee, what did he think the R meant) and had no idea the Queen's private secretary was part of it and they made a decision based on his bad relationship with Edward young ( the Judge dismissed this claim, he doesn't need to know the members of RAVEC)

He said he wanted to be a part time royal but the family refused so he still deserves his security (claim dismissed)

The Judge also said, why is he just filing the report after so many months (it doesn't makes sense )

Literally all his claims were dismissed 

Now the judge said, okay we will review how RAVEC came about their decision to remove you and ascertain they did it fairly.

You will be allowed to put up a new defense but you can not use all of these previous claims which we just dismissed.

Literally, the judge is saying because you are 6th in line doesn't mean you are entitled to protection.

Honestly, he doesn't have any stand right now. The Judge and RAVEC are going to go with the Case by Case security settings they have for him. Just like how he was provided during Jubilee.

Now we wonder why we are suddenly getting reports of his home alarm system which happened many months ago  They are trying to create a scenario that he is in D@nger  Send me security

They will need to come up with more tangible claims than that


----------



## ceemee

Tom Bower’s book is available now on Amazon.com. Just put in the ISBN number 9781788705035 in the search box. The book is free if you have Kindle unlimited. The hardcover is around $34.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think I’ll keep my order and give the hard copy to my mom.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> Assuming it actually happens, I hope the Balmoral trip will be an intervention. There may not be other family members present while they're there, but I'd like to see ZeeZy and Hazy greeted by a battery of mental health professionals, palace advisers, and attorneys with an offer she can't refuse.


Probably an unpopular opinion but I don’t know why people care what happens to Harry. There’s been a lot of finger pointing at TW as the root of all evil with all that has happened since she got her claws into Harry. But Harry was always a self-entitled dimwitted racist fribble. The BRF publicity machine managed to gloss over most of his undesirable character traits and project the image of a high spirited, good hearted Harry, staunch supporter of his older brother and a war veteran who wanted to help his fellow vets. Without the BRF PR machine to back him, Harry unchained is simply showing his true self. So why should we care if he returns to the BRF fold or not? TW has probably encouraged and fed into his worst character traits but she didn’t create his flaws, she merely exploited them for her own gain.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Probably an unpopular opinion but I don’t know why people care what happens to Harry. There’s been a lot of finger pointing at TW as the root of all evil with all that has happened since she got her claws into Harry. But Harry was always a self-entitled dimwitted racist fribble. The BRF publicity machine managed to gloss over most of his undesirable character traits and project the image of a high spirited, good hearted Harry, staunch supporter of his older brother and a war veteran who wanted to help his fellow vets. Without the BRF PR machine to back him, Harry unchained is simply showing his true self. So why should we care if he returns to the BRF fold or not? TW has probably encouraged and fed into his worst character traits but she didn’t create his flaws, she merely exploited them for her own gain.


Some of us [ahem] want them out of the USA.  If he is on a royal (?) visa, paying no taxes, and jetting all over the country, he really needs to go back imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> I am having the same - ordered from Book Depository, but status is “Processing” and it notes “Awaiting “Publication”.  I am in the US - it sounds as if all the orders from the US are on hold and my guess is that they won’t be shipped until the book is published in the US.  I sure hope I am wrong!


Did you order the paperback version? While the release date was the same as the hardcover, paperbacks are usually released at a later date. I ordered mine on July 16, and I doubt it will be shipped anytime soon.
I highly recommend getting the kindle version using the kindle unlimited. I'm reading it on my computer while my kindle gets charged.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of us [ahem] want them out of the USA.  If he is on a royal (?) visa, paying no taxes, and jetting all over the country, he really needs to go back imo.


as much as they give us something to talk about here, they are getting less and less interesting....yes, go home H and shut up M


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> From royal instablog — wow
> 
> 
> royalinstablog I have seen alot of Misinformation about Bob's security case, claiming it was a WIN  especially from the so called royal reporters who lack simple comprehension to understand what the Judge said
> 
> This is is what I understood
> 
> Bob claims that since he is 6th in line to the throne and he had to seek consent from the Queen for his marriage. He deserves to be protected (The Judge dismissed this claim)
> 
> Bob said he did not know who was on the board of RAVEC (he is such a dummy, RAVEC means Royal and VIP executive committee, what did he think the R meant) and had no idea the Queen's private secretary was part of it and they made a decision based on his bad relationship with Edward young ( the Judge dismissed this claim, he doesn't need to know the members of RAVEC)
> 
> He said he wanted to be a part time royal but the family refused so he still deserves his security (claim dismissed)
> 
> The Judge also said, why is he just filing the report after so many months (it doesn't makes sense )
> 
> Literally all his claims were dismissed
> 
> Now the judge said, okay we will review how RAVEC came about their decision to remove you and ascertain they did it fairly.
> 
> You will be allowed to put up a new defense but you can not use all of these previous claims which we just dismissed.
> 
> Literally, the judge is saying because you are 6th in line doesn't mean you are entitled to protection.
> 
> Honestly, he doesn't have any stand right now. The Judge and RAVEC are going to go with the Case by Case security settings they have for him. Just like how he was provided during Jubilee.
> 
> Now we wonder why we are suddenly getting reports of his home alarm system which happened many months ago  They are trying to create a scenario that he is in D@nger  Send me security
> 
> They will need to come up with more tangible claims than that


I saw on the local tv news this afternoon that Harry had a big win against the British government in his lawsuit. And reporters wonder why the general public doesn’t trust reporters? The newscaster basically regurgitated the Harkles position with zero fact checking. The timing of this news clip is interesting since the judge’s decision to allow Harry’s lawsuit to proceed on a limited basis came out before the Bower book’s release. So why is the news clip coming out today? Another SS publicity ploy to distract from the Bower book?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I remember that bread saga, but back then it was wholewheat or something and in Frogmore Cottage. Not sure if someone messed up the details or she pulled that sh*t more than once.
> 
> Also, how do you mess up/perfect banana bread? Quick breads are so easy to make for even entry level bakers.


There was another bread saga? I remember the banana bread from the Australia tour. Back when they still received good press and everyone just couldn’t believe a royal gifted banana bread she “baked”. 

I agree that banana bread is the easiest thing to make. Even children make it…so simple it can be made in one bowl. Imagine her rejecting the loaves like she’s some great chef. Tom Bower says she can only cook vegetable soup in a blender, roast chicken and grill hamburgers


----------



## EverSoElusive

This right here is over-photoshopping   Even during her Suits era, she was never this skinny. Just sayin'.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some of us [ahem] want them out of the USA.  If he is on a royal (?) visa, paying no taxes, and jetting all over the country, he really needs to go back imo.


Fair points! i am irritated by our local politicians giving them photo ops every time they come to NYC. Our mayor and Governor should be working on solving our many local issues instead of wasting time fawning over those useless parasites aka the Harkles.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> This right here is over-photoshopping   Even during her Suits era, she was never this skinny. Just sayin'.
> 
> View attachment 5575669


Those proportions aren’t human.


----------



## mellibelly

marietouchet said:


> A Kylie-Kim level jet costs like $70M, H&M are not in that league ...
> And the maintenance costs are ASTRONOMICAL .... to keep the avionics functional ... Ask anyone who has ever owned a private plane
> 
> IMHO ..
> Their fixation on SECURITY is really about CONVENIENCE (not threat level)
> Think of the crowds at the Jubilee Church service, they pulled up to the door in a security driven car, no walking for blocks in 4 in heels, no anxiety about finding a parking spot for the BIG car in London
> Fly private means - plane will take off when you want, no 24 hr waits in airport lounges


Convenience AND Status. Having full time security means they’re important (they’re not) 


sdkitty said:


> so bottom line, she's a user...has been all her life, starting with daddy?


Yes, her father literally spoiled her rotten. He created a rotten to the core woman and now his family name will forever be a verb!  


CarryOn2020 said:


> I have felt that way for a few days now.  It is a similar feeling to how I felt about Diana’s lies and manipulations with the help of the sycophantic media.  Since those days, I side-eye everything [good or bad] about the BRF.   Simply said, they are not paragons of anything other than moving forward - they do that really well.  QE will be a difficult act to follow, not sure Charles can pull it off.


While fun to read it’s kind of icky to deep dive into the life of an unlikeable, mediocre person with delusions of grandeur. I’m jumping between Revenge and Theodore Roosevelts autobiography to keep my  sanity. Talk about a pendulum swing hahaha


----------



## lulu212121

EverSoElusive said:


> This right here is over-photoshopping   Even during her Suits era, she was never this skinny. Just sayin'.
> 
> View attachment 5575669


I think she was hoping for some "outrage publicity" over this over photoshopped photo, then she could share her feigned outrage and we would all know who she was. Always looking for some way to get people to talk about her. Again, copying someone else, the Kardashian method of publicity. We see thru you.


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Interesting how the host digs in about her being famous before Harry. How many of you here had ever heard of her before they got engaged?  I pay attention to celebrity news and I had never heard of her. I had to ask my daughter who watched Suits, and she said MM was only a supporting player. I think it is a stretch to say she was a famous or a star.



I sooo totally agree with you.  I actually don’t know anyone who had heard of her when her engagement was announced.

Though I do have a bit of a confession - I watched a bit of Suits, but couldn’t watch much.  The women lawyers did not look like any female lawyers that I know - never seen a firm where all of the women lawyers waltz around in clothes bursting at the seams.  MM’s love interest, a young male lawyer, never passed the Bar, but somehow he got hired - because nobody checks the status of their attorneys.  And once found out, the firm is fine with it. (Though query What their malpractice insurance carrier would think!)

Anyway, of course I took note of MM - she stuck out to me because she was soo FAKE!  And I hate fake people.  I couldn’t figure out if that was part of her role, so she was acting fake or if that was her real self.  Suspicion confirmed - she is Uber fake and definitely not a talented actress!


----------



## ceemee

Luvbolide said:


> I am having the same - ordered from Book Depository, but status is “Processing” and it notes “Awaiting “Publication”.  I am in the US - it sounds as if all the orders from the US are on hold and my guess is that they won’t be shipped until the book is published in the US.  I sure hope I am wrong!


I think it’s because Book Depository is selling some of the books in Amazon.com. I noticed the hardcover book available to buy is from Book Depository US. https://www.amazon.com/Revenge/dp/1...58798738&sprefix=9781788705035,aps,263&sr=8-1


----------



## sdkitty

Luvbolide said:


> I sooo totally agree with you.  I actually don’t know anyone who had heard of her when her engagement was announced.
> 
> Though I do have a bit of a confession - I watched a bit of Suits, but couldn’t watch much.  The women lawyers did not look like any female lawyers that I know - never seen a firm where all of the women lawyers waltz around in clothes bursting at the seams.  MM’s love interest, a young male lawyer, never passed the Bar, but somehow he got hired - because nobody checks the status of their attorneys.  And once found out, the firm is fine with it. (Though query What their malpractice insurance carrier would think!)
> 
> Anyway, of course I took note of MM - she stuck out to me because she was soo FAKE!  And I hate fake people.  I couldn’t figure out if that was part of her role, so she was acting fake or if that was her real self.  Suspicion confirmed - she is Uber fake and definitely not a talented actress!


I have that issue with the tight clothes on a character on the show Bull....looks like she's going to a cocktail party all the time


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower on Hazz's memoir, TW's hunt for a famous and rich man, the Harkles' keyboard warriors…


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> This right here is over-photoshopping   Even during her Suits era, she was never this skinny. Just sayin'.
> 
> View attachment 5575669


Yep, my daughter saw this pic a few days ago and pointed out that it was obviously photoshopped and her head looked too big for the tiny body she has given herself


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> Sachs is working hard to overshadow the recent events.



Weren't they complaining about bots that were spreading hate? 
They can use bots for their own interests but god forbid someone say something about them.

I have read that Tom Bower said he wouldn't have written the book if she hadn't appeared on the Oprah show.


----------



## andrashik

I have finished the book and at the end, Bower implied ( if I understood correctly) HM mess had an influence on the Cambridges' trip to Jamaica - their accusations about racism struck a cord

ETA- in a bad way - apparently they were believing Claw's lies


----------



## andrashik

Ladies, some of you ordered the paperback edition right?
I have read that according to Neil Sean, the paperback edition will contain extra chapters


----------



## CarryOn2020

andrashik said:


> I have finished the book and at the end, Bower implied ( if I understood correctly) HM mess had an influence on the Cambridges' trip to Jamaica - their accusations about racism struck a cord
> 
> ETA- in a bad way - apparently they were believing Claw's lies


Apparently Toya Holness, former Archewell director of something, is a cousin of Andrew Holness, Jamaica’s PM during the W&K tour.  Many suspect some ‘suggestions’ were made to cause the mayhem.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> This right here is over-photoshopping   Even during her Suits era, she was never this skinny. Just sayin'.
> 
> View attachment 5575669


She is making Barbie look fat


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> Ladies, some of you ordered the paperback edition right?
> I have read that according to Neil Sean, the paperback edition will contain extra chapters


I just cancelled mine and received confirmation of it. Neil Sean likes to make things up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> Probably an unpopular opinion but I don’t know why people care what happens to Harry.



Because she's a user and abuser and he's a mentally fragile man. Not even an entitled prick deserves that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> I have read that Tom Bower said he wouldn't have written the book if she hadn't appeared on the Oprah show.



Fair enough. Play stupid games, win stupid prices.


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t understand. They have 24 hour security men and their house still got breached? Something ain’t adding up. I don’t believe it.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> She is making Barbie look fat


Long long ago, my first Barbie doll was Barbie's BFF. Her name was Midge. She had freckles and ginger hair cut in a bob with turned out ends. I can still remember my mum's eyes goggling when she measured Midge's bust/waist/hips


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> I don’t understand. They have 24 hour security men and their house still got breached? Something ain’t adding up. I don’t believe it.


She seems to have an affinity for houses that can be breached: Toronto (invisible invaders?) , UK (potential nosy neighbours  ), Canada (drones, wasn't it?), and now Cali mystery marauders. It's the Streisand Effect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I'm past the wedding to Trevor. Doria's family wasn't there because she chose the expensive destination wedding at a celebrity inn, from Thomas's side only Thomas, Thomas jun. and Samantha were invited (who sent her daughter as she was already in a wheelchair by then), she controlled the whole thing like a drill sergeant, and her parents where surprised to learn about the lies she'd told Trevor about her childhood (cue "The family she never had") and wondering what else she'd told him that had no footing in reality.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. When she picked Bogart from the shelter he was already promised to someone else. Instead fo picking another dog, she made her friends bombard the shelter with emails and had them tell them she was working on Suits. What a freaking nutjob.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s a new level of  “what is she thinking?”



Maybe they have the same plastic surgeon and decided to go full matchy-matchy  


CarryOn2020 said:


> https://pagesix.com/2022/07/22/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-ivanka-*****-she-does-it-all/Meghan Markle wanted to be like Ivanka *****: ‘Beautiful, intelligent, she does it all’​By Sara Nathan
> July 22, 2022 | 11:18am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 2014, Meghan Markle gushed over Ivanka *****, saying she straddles "the line between letting yourself go or looking like you just stepped off a runway."NY Post photo composite
> ​Meghan Markle fan-girled over former first daughter Ivanka ***** before embarking on royal life, a new book reports.
> The Duchess of Sussex interviewed Ivanka for her now-defunct blog “The Tig” back in 2014, four years before she married Prince Harry. As writer Tom Bower writes in his new book, “Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors,” out now in the UK, Markle gushed to her followers that she wanted to be just like the businesswoman. “Staggeringly beautiful, no question, but so incredibly savvy and intelligent that she’s not just carved a niche for herself under her father’s famed ***** notoriety, she has undoubtedly created her own empire,” she wrote.
> “It’s so easy to knock the girls who come from privilege — to assume they rested on their laurels and garnered accolades simply by being fancy from the womb,” she wrote. “But I always remember Ivanka being different — she wasn’t dancing on tables as a teenager or releasing pop albums. She wasn’t running amok publicly, swearing and being smacked with DUIs. Instead she was graduating from The Wharton School (cum laude, I might add), launching the ***** Hotel Collection, and building her own brand.”
> 
> Her email conversation with the heiress, who once had her own perfume, shoe and bag range along with helping her father run the ***** property empire, left her gushing that “she does it all.”
> 
> Markle wrote: “When we have drinks, I will make sure I order whatever she does — because this woman seems to have the formula for success (and happiness) down pat.”
> 
> She was also impressed by Ivanka’s ability to straddle “the line between letting yourself go or looking like you just stepped off a runway (or at least had the time to put some lipstick on).”
> 
> Afterward, Ivanka’s “beautiful designs” of shoes, furniture and clothes were “embraced” on “The Tig,” writes Bower.
> Then starring on “Suits,” the actress also revealed her intention to become friends with Ivanka and hang out the next time they were both in New York.
> Just two years later, Donald J. ***** was elected president and his daughter was installed as an aide in the White House. On May 4, 2016, Markle denounced ***** in a TV interview as “misogynistic.” *****, in turn, called her “nasty.”
> 
> https://pagesix.com/2022/07/22/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-ivanka-*****-she-does-it-all/


Ivanka was definitely trying to become a thing about ten years ago- so it makes sense M was trying to hitch her waggon to her.

When you think about it, back before she became the little orphan of colour for her wedding - M was going for the same Cher  from Clueless starting her fashion line vibe and backstory Ivanka does. In a different world M probably would’ve tried to marry one of DT’s kids to get some of his assets- heck what am I saying, I’m sure she’d have gone for him himself as I don’t think she so immune to stepping over the party lines when it suits her.



andrashik said:


> But where is the cake?
> View attachment 5575313


Are we supposed to be impressed? Shed have us believe spent more than that on her Guinness jumpsuit.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Those proportions aren’t human.





lulu212121 said:


> I think she was hoping for some "outrage publicity" over this over photoshopped photo, then she could share her feigned outrage and we would all know who she was. Always looking for some way to get people to talk about her. Again, copying someone else, the Kardashian method of publicity. We see thru you.





Toby93 said:


> Yep, my daughter saw this pic a few days ago and pointed out that it was obviously photoshopped and her head looked too big for the tiny body she has given herself





gracekelly said:


> She is making Barbie look fat




Y'all, we're such ungrateful pricks to Z-list when she showed us mercy by not showing us her feet, which you know, she said people make fun of therefore must be photoshopped


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Agree, NO ONE mentions the amount of a donation, NO ONE


Well these two have to now because we know they made a news story out of ‘generously giving’ an old cake. 


bag-mania said:


> I think I discovered why we usually see Harry shoeless in their family photos. Isn't this exactly how he looked at that billionaires summit where he preached about climate change back in 2019?
> 
> From Chapter 6:
> 
> "She stipulated her ideal man. Dressed in a linen shirt, she visualised him barefoot on a beach, eating a slice of pizza and inviting her for a drink on the way home."


Linen shirt and pizza? I’m getting Bernie Focker here… Anyone else? 


Definitely not H….weird that. 



CobaltBlu said:


> so, in one of excerpts from Bower's book, it was mentioned that MM was very interested in The Rules, a handbook/ruthless strategy guide for dating and how to catch a man.
> 
> I was thinking that some of the younger members may not be familiar with The Rules, which are over 25 years old....so here ya go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The Rules" Book, Revisited 25 Years Later | Cup of Jo
> 
> 
> The best (worst) advice from the classic dating book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cupofjo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rules, 20 years later: Why do men and women still follow the same old dating script?
> 
> 
> The stubborn, perplexing, enduring power of old-fashioned courtship rituals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vox.com


I remember a male relative gave me a copy as a ‘joke’ when I was a teenager and I was *a little* insulted. 


gracekelly said:


> Julian Zajfen is an entertainment attorney.  Kissing up by Meghan?  Trevor as well?


100% it’s status posting trying to be in the right crowd. It’s creepy really as you’d think the last thing grieving parents would want is this media attention. They really should have given an anonymous donation - oh wait that’s physically impossible. 


Chanbal said:


> Much anticipated…
> 
> View attachment 5575575
> 
> _However, multiple sources confirmed to Page Six that the Sussexes will not be going to visit Harry’s grandmother.
> 
> *The couple will stay in the US ahead of the publication of Harry’s much-anticipated memoir this fall.*
> 
> Harry, 37, and Markle, 40, last saw the Queen in June when they flew to the UK to celebrate her Platinum Jubilee. There, they introduced baby daughter Lilibet — nicknamed Lili — to the monarch for the first time._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not invited to Balmoral for Queen’s retreat
> 
> 
> Despite reports the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were asked to the Queen on her annual summer break in the highlands, we’re told there was no such invite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


No offence to the Scots of the thread but I’ve never seen why anyone would want to hang around Balmoral all August anyway- it is a soggy drag of a place- so I think this might be a gesture that backfired.


----------



## jelliedfeels

backfired. 


DoggieBags said:


> Probably an unpopular opinion but I don’t know why people care what happens to Harry. There’s been a lot of finger pointing at TW as the root of all evil with all that has happened since she got her claws into Harry. But Harry was always a self-entitled dimwitted racist fribble. The BRF publicity machine managed to gloss over most of his undesirable character traits and project the image of a high spirited, good hearted Harry, staunch supporter of his older brother and a war veteran who wanted to help his fellow vets. Without the BRF PR machine to back him, Harry unchained is simply showing his true self. So why should we care if he returns to the BRF fold or not? TW has probably encouraged and fed into his worst character traits but she didn’t create his flaws, she merely exploited them for her own gain.


100% agree with you. 
I’m sure they will both claim abuse if they do ever decide to split because they both have long histories of playing the victim. 
I don’t see him as an abuse victim at all. I think he’s acting out of his own free will- they are partners in crime and he’s not less culpable because he’s the weaker spirit. I do get all of this is just our opinions and read of what’s presented but I think the comparison to domestic violence gets close to a little insulting to the victims.


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. When she picked Bogart from the shelter he was already promised to someone else. Instead fo picking another dog, she made her friends bombard the shelter with emails and had them tell them she was working on Suits. What a freaking nutjob.


It seems to me she’s orcestrated this attack on the shelter to get a chance droping Ellen Degenerous name in connection to the dog! To milk this episode…She’s such a sorry ar$


----------



## EverSoElusive

I finished the book last night but I'll be honest, I lost interest towards the last 5 chapters or so. While it's nice to have all the stuff laid out in a book (making it convenient to read), I must admit that most of the things were already discussed in this thread so we aren't really missing much. 

Whatever the sins of the BRF may be, and they are great at playing the long game, I personally felt that at times (while reading the book) they were no match to the conniving Z-list. But of course with the length of rope that Z-list had (and still has), she hung herself over and over again. Z-list has more lives than a cat. She just won't die! 

For a minute, I was interested to read the other side of the story i.e. Finding Freebies. However, I quickly deleted the sample excerpt from Kindle after just skimming through 3 pages   I don't want my head to be filled with lies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Nevermind, already posted


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Incidentally, a German gossip mag titled today "Harry and Meghan: Divorce! He wants sole custody". Now I don't think we're that far, but I'd support both a divorce and him getting the children and taking them back to the UK.


I just read this aswell in an Italian mag!


----------



## lallybelle

So I did the same as some of y'all and canceled my Book Depository and got the Kindle Unlimited free trial. Barely cracked it yet, but holy ****. Thomas Markle had a menace on his hands and did nothing but give in to it. All of the stuff he rebuts as her "childhood" experiences and such are just woah.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## andrashik

I didn't know the last ep she was in Suites was this


----------



## Chanbal

It may be a valid point!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower on Hazz's memoir, TW's hunt for a famous and rich man, the Harkles' keyboard warriors…



 

for Harry she was a “match made in Heaven“

for Meghan, he was the kind of man she was looking for “famous and rich”


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



This is a great example of MM not pulling off a look, and it isn’t because MO is a waif.  She just has presence. And a tailor.


----------



## piperdog

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Fairly early on in the book:
> 
> "Every evening she set off saying to herself , 'You never know, tonight I might meet  the man who will change my life.'"
> 
> So...cheap.


Yeah, that just screams feminist.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. When she picked Bogart from the shelter he was already promised to someone else. Instead fo picking another dog, she made her friends bombard the shelter with emails and had them tell them she was working on Suits. What a freaking nutjob.





Aminamina said:


> It seems to me she’s orcestrated this attack on the shelter to get a chance droping Ellen Degenerous name in connection to the dog! To milk this episode…She’s such a sorry ar$


Poor Bogart! He could have had a life with someone who loved him. Instead he was used as a pawn by a selfish b!tch to give herself animal advocate credibility. Notice she wasn’t interested in adopting anything but a cute little puppy that would photograph well with her. She threw him away when he was of no further use to her. We will never know if he got a decent home or if she quietly dumped him off at a shelter in Canada.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> I finished the book last night but I'll be honest, I lost interest towards the last 5 chapters or so. While it's nice to have all the stuff laid out in a book (making it convenient to read), I must admit that most of the things were already discussed in this thread so we aren't really missing much.
> 
> Whatever the sins of the BRF may be, and they are great at playing the long game, I personally felt that at times (while reading the book) they were no match to the conniving Z-list. But of course with the length of rope that Z-list had (and still has), she hung herself over and over again. Z-list has more lives than a cat. She just won't die!
> 
> For a minute, I was interested to read the other side of the story i.e. Finding Freebies. However, I quickly deleted the sample excerpt from Kindle after just skimming through 3 pages   I don't want my head to be filled with lies.


Several youtube book reviewers had the same feelings - they got tired of the book before the end - sturm and drang all the way through 
It is not a specific anecdote that is the problem with Z, it is the preponderance of stuff all her life


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Several youtube book reviewers had the same feelings - they got tired of the book before the end - sturm and drang all the way through
> It is not a specific anecdote that is the problem with Z, it is the preponderance of stuff all her life


As exhausting and frustrating as it is to read about her, imagine what it must be like to be around her! 

I am reading the book in small chunks, about three or four chapters a day. That’s as much Meghan as I can handle.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> for Harry she was a “match made in Heaven“
> 
> for Meghan, he was the kind of man she was looking for “famous and rich”


Harry is a very troubled person and I wonder if he realizes that his actions have been tarnishing Diana's reputation imo. 

When I joined this thread, I was convinced that he had been TW's prey, then I thought they were both deplorable and deserved each other. Now I think he is rather dumb, has a weak character, and TW plays him like a fiddle.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> N/M


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Bower's description of Scobie is comedy gold. He's an expert at throwing shade while pretending to be polite.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I finished the book last night but I'll be honest, I lost interest towards the last 5 chapters or so. While it's nice to have all the stuff laid out in a book (making it convenient to read), I must admit that most of the things were already discussed in this thread so we aren't really missing much.
> 
> Whatever the sins of the BRF may be, and they are great at playing the long game, I personally felt that at times (while reading the book) they were no match to the conniving Z-list. But of course with the length of rope that Z-list had (and still has), she hung herself over and over again. Z-list has more lives than a cat. She just won't die!
> 
> For a minute, I was interested to read the other side of the story i.e. Finding Freebies. However, I quickly deleted the sample excerpt from Kindle after just skimming through 3 pages   I don't want my head to be filled with lies.


I was thinking too that I don't need to read the book as everything will be shared here


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> No offence to the Scots of the thread but I’ve never seen why anyone would want to hang around Balmoral all August anyway- it is a soggy drag of a place- so I think this might be a gesture that backfired.



I bet in this heatwave a lot of people would be happy with some fog


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> When I joined this thread, I was convinced that he had been TW's prey, then I thought they were both deplorable and deserved each other. Now I think he is rather dumb, has a weak character, and TW plays him like a fiddle.


All of those statements are true.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Harry is a very troubled person and I wonder if he realizes that his actions have been tarnishing Diana's reputation imo.
> 
> When I joined this thread, I was convinced that he had been TW's prey, then I thought they were both deplorable and deserved each other. Now I think he is rather dumb, has a weak character, and TW plays him like a fiddle.


Agree, weak, dumb, she played him like a fiddle, he knew nothing about the real world, finances, he did not know what he was getting into with MEGXIT
But, she overplayed her hand a bit, their business opportunities - all based on HIS stature, reputation - seem to be drying up
This is not the $100 M fantasy touted by the media after the Netflix deal - there has to be a lot of stress anymore

Gosh knows how the rest of then year will go - HIS book, new season of CROWN, NETFLIX home movies

I predict the end of the year will be full of spreadsheets comparing events documented three time - Omid's book - her autobiography, Bower book, and his autobiography
One wonders if he is up to it ? She is not taking center stage much except to hold his hand (push him) when speech required to embarrassingly empty room, he is the front man anymore - is being set up for a fall ???

PS he now has the body language of someone just trying to get by, not THRIVING lol


----------



## Goodfrtune

muddledmint said:


> If you are in the US and have kindle unlimited, you can read Revenge now! It’s available in Canada. You have to search for the ibn if you are on the US site. Search 9781788705035 and you can access! (Found this info on Reddit and it worked for me)


Thank you!! It worked!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I do get all of this is just our opinions and read of what’s presented but I think the comparison to domestic violence gets close to a little insulting to the victims.



Nobody on this thread has ever claimed she beats him up regularly behind closed doors, but psychological abuse, in particularly narcissistic abuse, is very real. Maybe one has to have experienced it to spot the signs and to fully understand the damage.


----------



## andrashik

A comment on reddit had me and I realized one thing.
Like the user said "after all the mud they flung at the RF demanding apologies and answers, now that shoe is on the other foot, they are going on the never explain never complain route".
And this is so true! It's funny how they do the same things they said about the RF and their unresponsiveness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I did not know Ashley Cole was married by the time Raptor considered him.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. When she picked Bogart from the shelter he was already promised to someone else. Instead fo picking another dog, she made her friends bombard the shelter with emails and had them tell them she was working on Suits. What a freaking nutjob.


AND M dumps Bogart !!!   He could have had a wonderful forever home! What a *B!TCH!!! * M needs to be dumped dumped dumped like Bogart !  See how she feels !  *B!TCH !!  *

Sorry not sorry. * *


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> AND M dumps Bogart !!!   He could have had a wonderful forever home! What a *B!TCH!!! * M needs to be dumped dumped dumped like Bogart !  See how she feels !  *B!TCH !!  *
> 
> Sorry not sorry. **


I hope Bogart is in a better home now with people who love him


----------



## TC1

Luvbolide said:


> I sooo totally agree with you.  I actually don’t know anyone who had heard of her when her engagement was announced.
> 
> Though I do have a bit of a confession - I watched a bit of Suits, but couldn’t watch much.  The women lawyers did not look like any female lawyers that I know - never seen a firm where all of the women lawyers waltz around in clothes bursting at the seams.  MM’s love interest, a young male lawyer, never passed the Bar, but somehow he got hired - because nobody checks the status of their attorneys.  And once found out, the firm is fine with it. (Though query What their malpractice insurance carrier would think!)
> 
> Anyway, of course I took note of MM - she stuck out to me because she was soo FAKE!  And I hate fake people.  I couldn’t figure out if that was part of her role, so she was acting fake or if that was her real self.  Suspicion confirmed - she is Uber fake and definitely not a talented actress!


I watched all of Suits. The main characters (Mike & Harvey) are really good (IMO) MM isn't really in it all that much. The plot of Mike practicing law without passing the bar comes up in the plot, just FYI
I just remember as soon as the news came out she was dating Harry she ended her contract. Left them in a bit of a lurch for the last season...story line wise.


----------



## Aimee3

TC1 said:


> I watched all of Suits. The main characters (Mike & Harvey) are really good (IMO) MM isn't really in it all that much. The plot of Mike practicing law without passing the bar comes up in the plot, just FYI
> I just remember as soon as the news came out she was dating Harry she ended her contract. Left them in a bit of a lurch for the last season...story line wise.


And she really didn’t have to do that. Didn’t the Queen say she could continue her “acting career?”  She was quick to dump (markle) Suits because she thought she’d hit the jackpot with the royal family.


----------



## Toby93

TC1 said:


> I watched all of Suits. The main characters (Mike & Harvey) are really good (IMO) MM isn't really in it all that much. The plot of Mike practicing law without passing the bar comes up in the plot, just FYI
> I just remember as soon as the news came out she was dating Harry she ended her contract. Left them in a bit of a lurch for the last season...story line wise.


I read that too, but according to the Bower book, she was being dropped - her contract was not being renewed.  I'm betting that the book is correct and the "ending her contract" line was put out by her PR firm


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> And she really didn’t have to do that. Didn’t the Queen say she could continue her “acting career?”  She was quick to dump (markle) Suits because she thought she’d hit the jackpot with the royal family.


The BRF told Hazz that she SHOULD continue her acting career ( ) because he was only going to get so much from them and it would supplement their income.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

TC1 said:


> I watched all of Suits. The main characters (Mike & Harvey) are really good (IMO) *MM isn't really in it all that much*. The plot of Mike practicing law without passing the bar comes up in the plot, just FYI


How is that possible? SHE WAS THE STAR OF THE SHOW!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> The BRF told Hazz that she SHOULD continue her acting career ( ) because he was only going to get so much from them and it would supplement their income.



That's what he says. I truly believe they offered it to her as a goody to make the transition easier and the professional victims twisted it. After all, wouldn't Harry's perks be enough to keep a wife? (ok, maybe not one who spends a million pounds on clothes in just nine months, but generally)


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Desperate plea for sympathy  - not falling for it


A made up excuse why they have to move.  Not that they can't afford it, they aren't safe!


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’ve heard about the Queen stating TW could keep her job.  I think TW wanted to twist it as exclusion/not full acceptance.  I think with the issues surrounding Fergie (and the other spouses), the thought was it would be better for her to be able to have something separate.  I’m sure they also felt she was “too independent” to fit into the RF structured way of a life of service.  The point about TW also financially supporting H is interesting and could also be true.

Had she stayed an actress, her connections to the RF would have meant she wouldn’t have had to scrabble so hard for roles.  She could have had a life of attending certain RF events (a la Zara and Bea, et al) without all the more drudgery tasks.  She should have accepted that offer from the Queen.


----------



## TC1

Toby93 said:


> I read that too, but according to the Bower book, she was being dropped - her contract was not being renewed.  I'm betting that the book is correct and the "ending her contract" line was put out by her PR firm


They were headed into the final season, so there wasn't anything to renew. As far as I know she was still supposed to appear a few times but made it seem like she was MUCH too important now and couldn't possibly film a TV series anymore. So..they would refer to her character as being out of town, etc. LOL


----------



## Hermes Zen

I think M's heart stopped when she was offered to continue to act beacuse she knew how awful and lacked acting talent.    She tried for years and never was any more than a zzzzz list.  She was relieved when she married H that got her out of acting.  IMHO of course.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I was thinking too that I don't need to read the book as everything will be shared here


You're right about that  I'm glad that I didn't spend more than $10 to read the e-book. Just kinda wish I could get some of my time back 

And did anyone of you read the latest article by People about Pippa choosing a name for Rose with a connection to Invisibet


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> They were headed into the final season, so there wasn't anything to renew. As far as I know she was still supposed to appear a few times but made it seem like she was MUCH too important now and couldn't possibly film a TV series anymore. So..they would refer to her character as being out of town, etc. LOL


Can you imagine how self-important and insufferable  she would have been on the set once she was engaged to a prince! They wouldn’t have gotten a decent day’s work out of her.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> OW is very shrewd. I would like to know what she really thinks about the Harkles.


How shrewd can she be. Bower said the reason for writing his book was her interview and how badly it was done.


charlottawill said:


> I believe the silence out of Montecito is telling. She's probably on her phone screaming at people to make it all go away while he's shellshocked by the harsh reality of what he married.


But Harry gets the last word with his book coming out last.


----------



## zinacef

EverSoElusive said:


> You're right about that  I'm glad that I didn't spend more than $10 to read the e-book. Just kinda wish I could get some of my time back
> 
> And did anyone of you read the latest article by People about Pippa choosing a name for Rose with a connection to Invisibet j


always a nod to something , what a stretch SS.


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> Can you imagine how self-important and insufferable  she would have been on the set once she was engaged to a prince! They wouldn’t have gotten a decent day’s work out of her.


I believe she backed out at the first sign of it being a "relationship" and by this I mean the first time she tipped off the press...so I don't imagine she ever even returned to set.


----------



## redney

EverSoElusive said:


> And did anyone of you read the latest article by People about Pippa choosing a name for Rose with a connection to Invisibet


Oh FFS. I had to Google and look. That's RIDICULOUS! (saving everyone a search: the writer stupidly compares the name Rose (as in the flower) to Lili (as in another flower). BARF.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> How shrewd can she be. Bower said the reason for writing his book was her interview and how badly it was done.
> 
> But Harry gets the last word with his book coming out last.


It’s not like a conversation. People can read Hs first.

I have a feeling his is not going to a best seller for too long, if at all.
basically the media will take the one or two juicy bits and no one will buy it, the rest will be woke padding and how much he’s in love love love


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think Oprah has an “it” factor to be an influential personality when she’s on television, but in a speech class in college I had a textbook full of transcripts of speeches by famous people.  I read a commencement speech she did.  It was very inarticulate (compared to many other speeches I read).  She’s great at the power of suggestion and the power of seeming to connect with her audience.  In writing, without her audio/visual “presence” she is far less convincing and impressive.

Sorry for the sidetrack.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> It’s not like a conversation. People can read Hs first.
> 
> I have a feeling his is not going to a best seller for too long


I’d be surprised if his memoir sold many copies. I think they are over exposed. Too many idiotic PR puff pieces, the Oprah interview, the finding $$ nonsensical book, the Bower hatchet book. There’s nothing new. The shock value is gone. Just same old very tired bs regurgitated over and over. The booing at the church in London and the poorly attended UN speech are a sign that more and more people are sick of hearing from or about them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Sophisticatted said:


> I think Oprah has an “it” factor to be an influential personality when she’s on television, but in a speech class in college I had a textbook full of transcripts of speeches by famous people.  I read a commencement speech she did.  It was very inarticulate (compared to many other speeches I read).  She’s great at the power of suggestion and the power of seeming to connect with her audience.  In writing, without her audio/visual “presence” she is far less convincing and impressive.
> 
> Sorry for the sidetrack.


I like that - thanks for the info.

O has always said she has never once been nervous in front of the cameras.  I always thought that was her secret weapon. Just being confident, but not a huge amount of substance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> And did anyone of you read the latest article by People about Pippa choosing a name for Rose with a connection to Invisibet


The ‘olive branch’ invite did not work, so now it is Pippa’s baby name.  



TC1 said:


> I believe she backed out at the first sign of it being a "relationship" and by this I mean the first time she tipped off the press...so I don't imagine she ever even returned to set.


Correct, the show was ending. The writers had completed the [unpopular and tiresome] Rachel/Mike story so her part was done. When it seemed the H&M wedding was inevitable, the writers added a segment for Mike to appear to say how well things were going. I’m guessing the BRF knew she did not have any offers. Rather than have her fuming to the world  “they won’t let me work”, they called her bluff, said ‘go ahead, work’.  That was really my first clue she was not the adored bride she and the media pretended she was.  Then the engagement interview happened and everything became clearer.  The whole thing was a farce. Hazzi was really dim not to have realized what the BRF was doing - pushing him out.  Just my opinion.









						Meghan Markle wasn't actually invited back for the Suits finale
					

There's a reason why creator Aaron Korsh didn't invite her back




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> so bottom line, she's a user...has been all her life, starting with daddy?


I’m feeling a bit sorry for her father

IMO, the book makes clear that Harry was always angry about being second string.

supposedly Harry’s book, whenever it appears, will  be all about that.

He wanted to someone to take his side and help ease his way out.


----------



## mellibelly

Hermes Zen said:


> AND M dumps Bogart !!!   He could have had a wonderful forever home! What a *B!TCH!!! * M needs to be dumped dumped dumped like Bogart !  See how she feels !  *B!TCH !!  *
> 
> Sorry not sorry. **


This is when I realized something was wrong with this chick. Markling her dog was evil. The other moment for me was ZZZ on stage with Rosamund Pike presenting an award to the Givenchy designer. Rosamund, an actual movie star, correctly stands in the background so Claire can receive her award and speak. Meanwhile ZZZ stands to the side of Claire double clutching her bump to steal attention. What a psycho!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Bower quotes lenghty passages of The Tig. She is such a bad writer, pretentious and boring. I don't know how she ever got published by reputable magazines (or rather, I do know, but WTF).


----------



## muddledmint

TC1 said:


> I watched all of Suits. The main characters (Mike & Harvey) are really good (IMO) MM isn't really in it all that much. The plot of Mike practicing law without passing the bar comes up in the plot, just FYI
> I just remember as soon as the news came out she was dating Harry she ended her contract. Left them in a bit of a lurch for the last season...story line wise.


That’s the meghan markle MO. Leave everyone and everything in a lurch once she has no further use for them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently her relationship with Misan Harriman goes back to at least 2014 though Bower doesn't say how and why. He asked Boris Becker (famous German tennis player who won his first Wimbledon as a teenager and who's currently in jail in the UK for forgetting to claim some hidden money after declaring bankruptcy) to get her a speaking gig in Dublin.

I am puzzled how she can just make random people pester other people to do her favours.

ETA: it was Becker who introduced Raptor to Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne! BTW I wonder if she played the WOC card with him because he has a thing for black women...both his first and second wife plus the mother of his daughter - the reason marriage #1 ended - are black as is his new gf.


----------



## Lodpah

Hermes Zen said:


> AND M dumps Bogart !!!   He could have had a wonderful forever home! What a *B!TCH!!! * M needs to be dumped dumped dumped like Bogart !  See how she feels !  *B!TCH !!  *
> 
> Sorry not sorry. **


I recently lost my baby boy dog and recently picked up two scraggly, homeless dogs and man, the love our fur babies give us is immeasurable. One of my new dogs has some health issues which I’m waiting on insurance to kick in so he can get surgery but the the thought of returning him never crossed my mind.

The way she allegedly dumped her dog or dogs says much about her character.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I recently lost my baby boy dog and recently picked up two scraggly, homeless dogs and man, the love our fur babies give us is immeasurable. One of my new dogs has some health issues which I’m waiting on insurance to kick in so he can get surgery but the the thought of returning him never crossed my mind.
> 
> The way she allegedly dumped her dog or dogs says much about her character.



You know the drill...pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## MiniMabel

The Harkles inhabit a world consisting of a house of cards filled with smoke and mirrors and built on shifting sand. They're on a sticky wicket and they can only go further downhill from here on. I think that JCMH's book will be a damp squib, a total and utter waste of paper and ink to publish it. They're an embarrassment, really, with their word salad and lies, self-entitlement and expections of things they don't deserve. I don't know how they hold their heads up.


----------



## Toby93

redney said:


> Oh FFS. I had to Google and look. That's RIDICULOUS! (saving everyone a search: the writer stupidly compares the name Rose (as in the flower) to Lili (as in another flower). BARF.


Wow - I had to google it too!  The SS machine is really going into overdrive, trying to distract from the Bower book.  If I was Pippa, I would be LIVID at having my child mentioned in the same sentence as TW


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You know the drill...pics or it didn't happen.


Here are the two strays but they belong to me now!

They have their own living area in the house lol.


----------



## Toby93

mellibelly said:


> This is when I realized something was wrong with this chick. Markling her dog was evil. The other moment for me was ZZZ on stage with Rosamund Pike presenting an award to the Givenchy designer. Rosamund, an actual movie star, correctly stands in the background so Claire can receive her award and speak. Meanwhile ZZZ stands to the side of Claire double clutching her bump to steal attention. What a psycho!
> View attachment 5576230


"That evening she made a surprise appearance at
the British Fashion Awards at the Royal Albert Hall.527
Wearing an off-the-shoulder black Givenchy gown
with *matching black-painted fingernails,* Meghan told
her audience, 'It is such an honour to be here cele-
brating British fashion and British fashion designers
in my new home of the UK.' Some wondered why
Meghan could not, for once, have compromised and
worn a British-designed dress. Soon after the event,
Meghan's photo on the British Fashion Council's Insta-
gram site was deleted."
Even I know that the royals NEVER wear anything but neutral colours on their nails. Right from the start she made a mockery of the monarchy


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ‘olive branch’ invite did not work, so now it is Pippa’s baby name.
> 
> 
> Correct, the show was ending. The writers had completed the [unpopular and tiresome] Rachel/Mike story so her part was done. When it seemed the H&M wedding was inevitable, the writers added a segment for Mike to appear to say how well things were going. I’m guessing the BRF knew she did not have any offers. Rather than have her fuming to the world  “they won’t let me work”, they called her bluff, said ‘go ahead, work’.  That was really my first clue she was not the adored bride she and the media pretended she was.  Then the engagement interview happened and everything became clearer.  The whole thing was a farce. Hazzi was really dim not to have realized what the BRF was doing - pushing him out.  Just my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wasn't actually invited back for the Suits finale
> 
> 
> There's a reason why creator Aaron Korsh didn't invite her back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


It's always a nod to stay in the news cycle  

Now if they said that between Pippa and Kate, sure. But Pippa and Z-list when Z-list is evil to Kate, big FAT NO


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> This is a great example of MM not pulling off a look, and it isn’t because MO is a waif.  She just has presence. And a tailor.


Definitely. The central detail of the belt and the longer coat definitely helps. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Nobody on this thread has ever claimed she beats him up regularly behind closed doors, but psychological abuse, in particularly narcissistic abuse, is very real. Maybe one has to have experienced it to spot the signs and to fully understand the damage.


To be clear, I wasn’t referring purely to physical abuse. I recognise the experience of emotional and verbal abuse and of narcissistic abuse. Those problems are very real. However, That’s not what I see in the relationship between H & M specifically at all and that’s where the diversion is. 


lanasyogamama said:


> How is that possible? SHE WAS THE STAR OF THE SHOW!!





Hermes Zen said:


> I think M's heart stopped when she was offered to continue to act beacuse she knew how awful and lacked acting talent.    She tried for years and never was any more than a zzzzz list.  She was relieved when she married H that got her out of acting.  IMHO of course.


I mean the irony is they’d have given her loads of cameo work as a royal - it’s not like she had any competition for role of celebrity wife of H 


papertiger said:


> It’s not like a conversation. People can read Hs first.
> 
> I have a feeling his is not going to a best seller for too long, if at all.
> basically the media will take the one or two juicy bits and no one will buy it, the rest will be woke padding and how much he’s in love love love


I picture it as being more a childhood memoir which treads the familiar tropes of emotionally distinct, perfectionist father and saintly mother. He’s got to keep his appeal broad and I think he’s probably thinking that’ll play to the crowds but yeah I don’t see that story having any appeal after the Kenneth anger edition has already come o it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

CarryOn2020 said:


> go ahead, work’. That was really my first clue she was not the adored bride she and the media pretended she was. Then the engagement interview happened and everything became clearer. The whole thing was a farce. Hazzi was really dim not to have realized what the BRF was doing - pushing him out. Just my opinion.


Agree that the BRF was pushing him out. I believe bower even wrote somewhere that the BRF really only supports those in the direct line of succession; and, in H’s case, post marriage, that Prince Charles’s income would be insufficient. Therefore, others have to make their own way

@jelliedfeels , i think Bowers indicated that the H memoir may have some childhood drama, but a lot more about the cash for honors scandals and other things from his POV

ETA: @Toby93 already spoke about the BRF recommending that MM continue working in a prior post above


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> I’m feeling a bit sorry for her father
> 
> IMO, the book makes clear that Harry was always angry about being second string.
> 
> supposedly Harry’s book, whenever it appears, will  be all about that.
> 
> He wanted to someone to take his side and help ease his way out.


Imho, many of us on this thread have felt bad for Thomas for a while
Samantha even garnered sympathy here esp. after her book , she was the first to give a few dates that showed cracks in the official story of MM  per Omid and SS
Doria, hmmm, what a mystery … I don’t personally feel one way or the other for her


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> It’s not like a conversation. People can read Hs first.
> 
> I have a feeling his is not going to a best seller for too long, if at all.
> basically the media will take the one or two juicy bits and no one will buy it, the rest will be woke padding and how much he’s in love love love



And a dedication to those who make his heart go pumpity pump…Shakespeare you were outdone by MM and that witty remark of hers


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The ‘olive branch’ invite did not work, so now it is Pippa’s baby name.
> 
> 
> Correct, the show was ending. The writers had completed the [unpopular and tiresome] Rachel/Mike story so her part was done. When it seemed the H&M wedding was inevitable, the writers added a segment for Mike to appear to say how well things were going. I’m guessing the BRF knew she did not have any offers. Rather than have her fuming to the world  “they won’t let me work”, they called her bluff, said ‘go ahead, work’.  That was really my first clue she was not the adored bride she and the media pretended she was.  Then the engagement interview happened and everything became clearer.  The whole thing was a farce. Hazzi was really dim not to have realized what the BRF was doing - pushing him out.  Just my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wasn't actually invited back for the Suits finale
> 
> 
> There's a reason why creator Aaron Korsh didn't invite her back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


Disagree a bit
I would not say the BRF a started to PUSH him out after engagement, but rather they did treat the couple with guarded skepticism while MM was accorded privileges not given to K
The deep FREEZE by BRF seems to date to after the wedding hoopla, tears, tights, tiaras, bullying, housing needs, mystery birth of A , all that was in a single year


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Disagree a bit
> I would not say the BRF a started to PUSH him out after engagement, but rather they did treat the couple with guarded skepticism while MM was accorded privileges not given to K
> The deep FREEZE by BRF seems to date to after the wedding hoopla, tears, tights, tiaras, bullying, housing needs, mystery birth of A , all that was in a single year



Yeah, pushing out is taking it too far. Slimmed down monarchy or not, the workload just can't be handled by like four people. Look how many people help out The Queen, with her cousins being elderly as well. If they become unavailable, that would slim down the monarchy organically already. The Sussexes would have had a place in the monarchy if they had just embraced their rank and not pushed for more, always more.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> But Harry gets the last word with his book coming out last.



If it actually does.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I have that issue with the tight clothes on a character on the show Bull....looks like she's going to a cocktail party all the time


On the 90s show Ally McBeal I thought Calista Flockhart's skirts were unrealistically short for an attorney, but it got the attention the producers no doubt intended. It may be the same with Suits and Bull.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> There was another bread saga? I remember the banana bread from the Australia tour. Back when they still received good press and everyone just couldn’t believe a royal gifted banana bread she “baked”.
> 
> I agree that banana bread is the easiest thing to make. Even children make it…so simple it can be made in one bowl. Imagine her rejecting the loaves like she’s some great chef. Tom Bower says she can only cook vegetable soup in a blender, roast chicken and grill hamburgers



I wonder if she used the "engagement chicken" recipe on all of her victims. She did for Harry.



> https://www.yahoo.com/video/ina-garten-engagement-chicken-really-200500068.html


----------



## mellibelly

Toby93 said:


> "That evening she made a surprise appearance at
> the British Fashion Awards at the Royal Albert Hall.527
> Wearing an off-the-shoulder black Givenchy gown
> with *matching black-painted fingernails,* Meghan told
> her audience, 'It is such an honour to be here cele-
> brating British fashion and British fashion designers
> in my new home of the UK.' Some wondered why
> Meghan could not, for once, have compromised and
> worn a British-designed dress. Soon after the event,
> Meghan's photo on the British Fashion Council's Insta-
> gram site was deleted."
> Even I know that the royals NEVER wear anything but neutral colours on their nails. Right from the start she made a mockery of the monarchy


Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump


----------



## A1aGypsy

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


----------



## mellibelly

charlottawill said:


> I wonder if she used the "engagement chicken" recipe on all of her victims. She did for Harry.


She probably did, the same way she used “the family I never had” with Trevor and Harry  

I actually wondered if that was a subtle dig from Bower. The 3 things she actually knew how to cook 1. Vegetable soup in a blender - the Vitamix she claimed was the only thing she took at the end of the marriage to Trevor 2. Roast chicken - engagement roast chicken or the urban dictionary definition 3. Grilled hamburgers - the cringe Maxim shoot where she grilled burgers in hotpants


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??



I agreed with you back then. She completely overdid it. And I'll never forget her exiting the car and flicking her coat open so the press could get a better shot of her bump.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apparently Toya Holness, former Archewell director of something, is a cousin of Andrew Holness, Jamaica’s PM during the W&K tour.  Many suspect some ‘suggestions’ were made to cause the mayhem.



She either got tired of working for free, paychecks bouncing, or being sent to pick up dry cleaning. Or all of the above.


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


Idiotic. I don't ever remember doing that while I was pregnant. Or else it really is fake and she's doing it to keep it in place.

ETA, "What To Expect" recommends it, but she got flack from plenty of people for it. It's fine to do privately, but constantly in public is just attention seeking. 



> https://www.today.com/parents/meghan-markle-cradled-her-baby-bump-it-s-upsetting-some-t145031


----------



## AbbytheBT

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


There aren’t even words to describe that weird constant cradle pose.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> I was thinking too that I don't need to read the book as everything will be shared here


+1 with @EverSoElusive. I read the book, and I didn’t really learn anything that I couldn’t learn here.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> the urban dictionary definition


The things I learn here


----------



## mellibelly

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


It’s cuckoo and you were right! She’s in a working professional capacity at this event. I can’t imagine doing this crazy double bump cradling at work! It’s not like she’s 8 months pregnant here…it’s a tiny bump. Like the handholding, this is inappropriate. 

At the time I didn’t know about this Harkle thread so I was on Celebitchy commenting. I was also called a hater for stating this was a *LOOK AT ME I’m carrying the Ginger’s spawn* move.


----------



## bagshopr

charlottawill said:


> Idiotic. I don't ever remember doing that while I was pregnant. Or else it really is fake and she's doing it to keep it in place.


Yep, she's got her hands on both ends of the prosthetic bump to keep it from shifting.


----------



## andrashik

On well..







						Blind Item #3
					

The alliterate one had multiple meetings with the ghostwriter writing her husband's biography. She wanted to make sure there was a dumpster ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Ivanka was definitely trying to become a thing about ten years ago


Another person born on third and thinks she hit a home run. Of course ZeeZy the deprived child looked at her with envy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


People we're getting crucified each time they said something about Z-list's incessant bump cradling when she was pregnant and the rebuttal was always "Oh Kate does it too but no one said anything bad about it".

I'm sure some of the time Kate was really cradling her bump just to cradle the bump but I bet you, other times, it probably looked as though she was doing that simply due the way that she would typically stand at engagements i.e. her arms and hands in front of her, fingers interlocking or holding a clutch.

With Z-list, it's very different. She's trying to remind people that she's pregnant with a royal baby every single chance she's got. That's so unnecessary and weird as fxck.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It may be a valid point!



What I'd like to know is why on earth are W&K going to Boston in DECEMBER??


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I’ve heard about the Queen stating TW could keep her job.  I think TW wanted to twist it as exclusion/not full acceptance.  I think with the issues surrounding Fergie (and the other spouses), the thought was it would be better for her to be able to have something separate.  I’m sure they also felt she was “too independent” to fit into the RF structured way of a life of service.  The point about TW also financially supporting H is interesting and could also be true.
> 
> Had she stayed an actress, her connections to the RF would have meant she wouldn’t have had to scrabble so hard for roles.  She could have had a life of attending certain RF events (a la Zara and Bea, et al) without all the more drudgery tasks.  She should have accepted that offer from the Queen.


Or was the Queen politely saying "Don't quit your day job?" From the Oxford Dictionary:

"used as a humorous way of advising someone not to pursue something at which they are unlikely to be successful."

She knew where things were headed.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Somebody at the Palace should have yelled at Z-list like that the first time she tried to misbehave


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So freaking rude (the woman touching the horse without permission, not the guard yelling).


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> And did anyone of you read the latest article by People about Pippa choosing a name for Rose with a connection to Invisibet


I saw that earlier. Rose is somehow like Lilibet because they call her Lili? Where do they come up with their garbage?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> They wouldn’t have gotten a decent day’s work out of her.


But did they ever?


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> I believe she backed out at the first sign of it being a "relationship" and by this I mean the first time she tipped off the press...so I don't imagine she ever even returned to set.


Well she was no Grace Kelly, so that's not surprising. The actress, not our Grace Kelly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm an avid reader, but that book is draining. I've only made it to page 80 so far because I need to take breaks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So freaking rude (the woman touching the horse without permission, not the guard yelling).



I hate stupid tourists. In some countries that could get you arrested. I'd like to use this as an excuse to post a picture of some handsome officers in Monaco. I asked permission before I took their picture, and they said yes but I had to stay at a distance.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I saw that earlier. Rose is somehow like Lilibet because they call her Lili? Where do they come up with their garbage?


They must be high when they came up with the garbage


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> This is when I realized something was wrong with this chick. Markling her dog was evil. The other moment for me was ZZZ on stage with Rosamund Pike presenting an award to the Givenchy designer. Rosamund, an actual movie star, correctly stands in the background so Claire can receive her award and speak. Meanwhile ZZZ stands to the side of Claire double clutching her bump to steal attention. What a psycho!
> View attachment 5576230


I'd love to know what Rosamund was thinking - how about "Just another American attention whore" ?


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I hate stupid tourists. In some countries that could get you arrested. I'd like to use this as an excuse to post a picture of some handsome officers in Monaco. I asked permission before I took their picture, and they said yes but I had to stay at a distance.
> 
> View attachment 5576403


I spot a pattern here i.e.your love for men in uniform  Thanks for the eye candy


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> They must be high when they came up with the garbage


I think they did it for the annoyance factor.  They are hoping to annoy the Cambridges.


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> This is when I realized something was wrong with this chick. Markling her dog was evil. The other moment for me was ZZZ on stage with Rosamund Pike presenting an award to the Givenchy designer. Rosamund, an actual movie star, correctly stands in the background so Claire can receive her award and speak. Meanwhile ZZZ stands to the side of Claire double clutching her bump to steal attention. What a psycho!
> View attachment 5576230


She needed to double clutch to keep the pillow from falling down to her ankles.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> "That evening she made a surprise appearance at
> the British Fashion Awards at the Royal Albert Hall.527
> Wearing an off-the-shoulder black Givenchy gown
> with *matching black-painted fingernails,* Meghan told
> her audience, 'It is such an honour to be here cele-
> brating British fashion and British fashion designers
> in my new home of the UK.' Some wondered why
> Meghan could not, for once, have compromised and
> worn a British-designed dress. Soon after the event,
> Meghan's photo on the British Fashion Council's Insta-
> gram site was deleted."
> Even I know that the royals NEVER wear anything but neutral colours on their nails. Right from the start she made a mockery of the monarchy


If I was nice, i would say that she didn't realize what she was doing, but I'm not nice.  She did it to insult and the same way she did not choose a UK design house  for her wedding dress.  It doesn't matter where the designer came from, it mattered that it was a French company with French workers and Charles' British pounds went to France when they should have stayed in the country and employed British people.  Maybe Meghan thought she was marrying Napoleon.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm an avid reader, but that book is draining. I've only made it to page 80 so far because I need to take breaks.


I believe he set out to make it an irrefutable expose of her web of lies, so he had to leave no skeleton buried nor stone unturned. Their silence tells me he succeeded.


----------



## mellibelly

andrashik said:


> On well..
> View attachment 5576373
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> The alliterate one had multiple meetings with the ghostwriter writing her husband's biography. She wanted to make sure there was a dumpster ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Not very bright are they? If it was so upsetting falling to second row royals, this book will end all invitations full stop. They’ll be on the street with the masses behind the barriers if this book is anything like the O interview.


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> Not very bright are they? If it was so upsetting falling to second row royals, this book will end all invitations full stop. They’ll be on the street with the masses behind the barriers if this book is anything like the O interview.


The book will turn them into celeb-oddities.  People whispering when they see them and pointing at them.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember *every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump*
> View attachment 5576359



“Double clawing the bump.”

Classic!!


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> What I'd like to know is why on earth are W&K going to Boston in DECEMBER??


Here's Why








						Prince William and Kate Middleton Are Coming to Boston. Here's Why
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton are coming to Boston in December, as they announced Wednesday that the city has been selected to host their second annual Earthshot Prize awards ceremony. “In 2022, we’re back and bringing Earthshot to the USA where we’ll award the next five winners of the...




					www.nbcboston.com


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> On well..
> View attachment 5576373
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #3
> 
> 
> The alliterate one had multiple meetings with the ghostwriter writing her husband's biography. She wanted to make sure there was a dumpster ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


We all expected this. It’s a book about him but she controls what goes into it. Funny it makes it sound like he wasn’t in the meetings about his own memoir.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Imho, many of us on this thread have felt bad for Thomas for a while
> Samantha even garnered sympathy here esp. after her book , she was the first to give a few dates that showed cracks in the official story of MM  per Omid and SS
> Doria, hmmm, what a mystery … I don’t personally feel one way or the other for her


If I am reading the book correctly, the Markles will go down as the liars of the century.  How can we trust anything they say now?



mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump


The “over the right shoulder” photo seems to be her signature.
  She is so easily mocked. :sheesh:


----------



## 880

There is a disorder (I googled it once bc I was certain it applied to members of my family) that entails an individual sincerely believing he is smarter and more capable than he really is. I think it applies to Harry. I don’t think M particularly cares about anything except making money and being famous. It’s the combination that’s so awful.

ETA:

the dunning Kruger effect

Without him, she would be no different than many other small screen actresses trying to make a living. 
He propelled her onto a world stage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is hilarious.  Smear campaign?  Summer is heating up, I’m here for it.


_Omid Scobie’s Yahoo UK column last week was particularly good, although I’m loving Scobie’s columns in general. Last week’s piece was about how Prince Harry has done a lot better than everyone expected away from the Windsors, and that he’s living the life Diana wanted for herself. Scobie detailed Harry’s many successes, from Travalyst to Invictus to Archewell to BetterUp and Scobie spilled some tea about how palace aides predicted, to Scobie, in 2020 that Harry would fail without the palace mechanics. Scobie also wrote this about Harry’s long-awaited and much-discussed memoir:
_


> _Of course, whether you are a working member of The Firm or not, drama will always be lurking around the corner for any royal, whose private lives are rarely that. His forthcoming memoir – which is now finished and has completed legal checks – will no doubt invite some of it in, even if, as sources have told me over the past year, it doesn’t include those much-reported “attacks” on his family.
> The book will be Harry’s biggest chance to tell his side of the story – and paint a clearer picture of the man, husband, father and global citizen he is today. Just like his late mother, he too has spent considerable lengths of his life misunderstood._


_[From Yahoo UK]_
_
Scobie actually broke news there, that the memoir is done and it had “completed legal checks.” Weirdly, very few British outlets picked up on the news. Very few outlets even covered Scobie’s column at all, probably because it was so positive about Harry. Now, days later, the Sunday Sun had this curious piece:
_


> _Prince Harry’s bombshell memoir is written and a finished manuscript signed off by lawyers — The Sun can reveal. His publishers, Penguin Random House, are now trying to get it out for the Thanksgiving and Christmas market in the US.
> It is understood *ghostwriter JR Moehringer *completed the manuscript earlier in the summer. A publishing source said: “The manuscript has been finished and gone through all of the legal processes. It’s done and out of Harry’s hands. The publishing date has been pushed back once but it is on track for the end of the year.”
> Sources say the Queen, was the only member of the family who Harry informed about the writing of his memoir._


_[From The Sun]_
_
Do you believe the Sun has their own American publishing sources and those sources confirmed what Scobie wrote last week? Or is the Sun gussying up Scobie’s exclusive as their own? Well, no matter. We’re getting Harry’s memoir this year! I can’t wait. As I’ve said a few times now, my guess is that Harry asked Penguin Random House to play everything close to the vest for now, because as soon as the British media and the palaces get a release date for the book, *Harry will be subjected to another massive smear campaign.*





						Cele|bitchy | The Sun: Prince Harry’s ghostwriter ‘completed the manuscript’
					

Celebitchy is a daily gossip and entertainment blog, started in 2006, which also focuses on liberal politics, royal coverage and fashion.




					www.celebitchy.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, this gives me hope that he will renounce - even if the article is from July, 2021.  


_Announced last night by Penguin Publishers, the Duke of Sussex's tell-all book will lift the lid on what it's really like to be royal, and is written from the perspective of who he is today, _*rather than the 'prince [he] once was'.*








						Who is J.R. Moehringer, the ghostwriter of Prince Harry's tell-all memoir?
					

The Pulitzer Prize-winner is currently working with George Clooney on an adaptation of another of his books, and also wrote Andre Agassi's explosive life story




					www.tatler.com


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think they did it for the annoyance factor.  They are hoping to annoy the Cambridges.


I think it's just the nature of People magazine. Their articles have always seemed to have a noncontroversial, sometimes fawning tone, more so than their competitor US Weekly.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> If I was nice, i would say that she didn't realize what she was doing, but I'm not nice.  She did it to insult and the same way she did not choose a UK design house  for her wedding dress.  It doesn't matter where the designer came from, it mattered that it was a French company with French workers and Charles' British pounds went to France when they should have stayed in the country and employed British people.  Maybe Meghan thought she was marrying Napoleon.


 The international relations major probably doesn't even know how badly things ended for Napoleon.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> I think they did it for the annoyance factor.  They are hoping to annoy the Cambridges.


If that's the actual reason, then it's safe to say that they would have probably failed miserably because the Cambridges are way too busy to pay attention to petty BS such as Z-list's nonsensical sweet nods. Unlike Z-list and Co., the Cambridges actually have to prepare for their long list of engagements besides raising their wonderful kids (with nannies' help, of course)


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Reasonable question imo


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> View attachment 5572777


He reminds me of Ben Stein!


----------



## xincinsin

TC1 said:


> I watched all of Suits. The main characters (Mike & Harvey) are really good (IMO) MM isn't really in it all that much. The plot of Mike practicing law without passing the bar comes up in the plot, just FYI
> I just remember as soon as the news came out she was dating Harry she ended her contract. Left them in a bit of a lurch for the last season...story line wise.





Toby93 said:


> I read that too, but according to the Bower book, she was being dropped - her contract was not being renewed.  I'm betting that the book is correct and the "ending her contract" line was put out by her PR firm


I recall there was an interview with someone (a scriptwriter?) who said when they found out about her relationship), they took steps immediately to write her out of Suits because they *knew*  it was going to be LOVE.



Toby93 said:


> The BRF told Hazz that she SHOULD continue her acting career ( ) because he was only going to get so much from them and it would supplement their income.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's what he says. I truly believe they offered it to her as a goody to make the transition easier and the professional victims twisted it. After all, wouldn't Harry's perks be enough to keep a wife? (ok, maybe not one who spends a million pounds on clothes in just nine months, but generally)


And maybe she oversold herself. If you go into a relationship humblebragging that you are making millions and have a lucrative career as an acclaimed actress and blogger (and supermodel), plus you are a philanthropist, your prospective in-laws are going to expect you to carry on bringing home some bacon if you intend to carry on being a philanthropist. It would be sheer cheek to expect your in-laws to give you money to be a philanthropist.

The income figures which stans brandish and which are quoted by pro-Sussex media and unfact-checked media like Yahoo are eye-popping. According to them, she was getting more than $100k for "small roles".








						Meghan Markle, Half of a Financially Fit Power Couple, Is Now Worth $50 Million or More
					

Meghan Markle, better known as Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, is the American-born wife of Prince Henry. She is a prolific philanthropist and humanitarian who was a successful actor in the hit series...




					finance.yahoo.com
				





EverSoElusive said:


> You're right about that  I'm glad that I didn't spend more than $10 to read the e-book. Just kinda wish I could get some of my time back
> 
> And did anyone of you read the latest article by People about Pippa choosing a name for Rose with a connection to Invisibet





redney said:


> Oh FFS. I had to Google and look. That's RIDICULOUS! (saving everyone a search: the writer stupidly compares the name Rose (as in the flower) to Lili (as in another flower). BARF.


Sigh... My name is a flower. Am I going to say that they are all a sweet nod to me? People is becoming increasingly nonsensical.



Jayne1 said:


> How shrewd can she be. Bower said the reason for writing his book was her interview and how badly it was done.
> 
> But Harry gets the last word with his book coming out last.


That OW interview was such a farce. But if Mr Award-winning Ghostwriter's masterpiece was edited by the ungrammatical Mistress of Menace, it might top the interview. For all we know, Hazard may be practically an orphan and Zedzed has given him the family he never had. (That might actually happen...)


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Disagree a bit
> I would not say the BRF a started to PUSH him out after engagement, but rather they did treat the couple with guarded skepticism while MM was accorded privileges not given to K
> The deep FREEZE by BRF seems to date to after the wedding hoopla, tears, tights, tiaras, bullying, housing needs, mystery birth of A , all that was in a single year


The one aspect of this circus that I found very interesting in Bowers book was the fact that TW as a divorced woman should NOT have been allowed to marry in a Church of England.  The Queen made a huge exception in this case.  Charles and Camilla were not allowed in 2005 and the Queens own daughter, Princess Anne had to marry her second husband in Scotland in order to be married in a church.  

The stupidity of those stans who say that the BRF were out to get her from the start is mind boggling.  In my personal opinion, the BRF bent over backwards to accommodate this psychopath and were rewarded by both Hazz and TW trying to bring down the monarchy.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Now, this gives me hope that he will renounce *- even if the article is from July, 2021.
> 
> 
> _Announced last night by Penguin Publishers, the Duke of Sussex's tell-all book will lift the lid on what it's really like to be royal, and is written from the perspective of who he is today, _*rather than the 'prince [he] once was'.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is J.R. Moehringer, the ghostwriter of Prince Harry's tell-all memoir?
> 
> 
> The Pulitzer Prize-winner is currently working with George Clooney on an adaptation of another of his books, and also wrote Andre Agassi's explosive life story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tatler.com


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> He reminds me of Ben Stein!





	

		
			
		

		
	
I can see that.


----------



## bag-mania

Why do I get the feeling that 90% of Harry’s memoir is going to be about what happened to him after 2016?


----------



## Icyjade

charlottawill said:


> I believe he set out to make it an irrefutable expose of her web of lies, so he had to leave no skeleton buried nor stone unturned. Their silence tells me he succeeded.



I hope Tom Bower is now writing a book about Hazbeen… to counter whatever lies will come from Hazbeen’s ghost-written, TW enhanced version of his memoir. 

To make the book a “bestseller”, there must surely be royal dirt… I kind of suspect a fair bit on William since they grew up together and Tom Bower wrote about how Hazbeen took most of the heat for their youthful escapades.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> View attachment 5573814
> 
> 
> Seems like Z-list was only good for sex and drug related scenes


Exactly.  Bringing forth emotions from past experiences


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

TW looks more maternal to  her fake bumps than she does with the few glimpses we’ve gotten of her with her alleged children.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Why do I get the feeling that 90% of Harry’s memoir is going to be about what happened to him after 2016?


Nope, TW's has an excellent memory. She remembers all Harry's genetic pain since he was born.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Nope, TW's has an excellent memory. She remembers all Harry's genetic pain since he was born.


From research that she claimed she never did


----------



## Chanbal

Icyjade said:


> I hope Tom Bower is now writing a book about Hazbeen… to counter whatever lies will come from Hazbeen’s ghost-written, TW enhanced version of his memoir.
> 
> To make the book a “bestseller”, there must surely be royal dirt… I kind of suspect a fair bit on William since they grew up together and Tom Bower wrote about how Hazbeen took most of the heat for their youthful escapades.


I wish he could release the findings about TW that he didn't publish.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Nope, TW's has an excellent memory. She remembers all Harry's genetic pain since he was born.


She should. She tells him what he should feel.


----------



## Chanbal

The confirmation that Hazz read T Bower's book. I wonder which chapter he most enjoyed. Predator?


_Prince Harry is reportedly ready to ‘settle scores’ against claims made against him and his wife Meghan Markle by royal author Tom Bower in a new explosive biography._









						Prince Harry ready to ‘settle scores’ against explosive claims with memoir
					

Prince Harry is reportedly ready to ‘settle scores’ against claims made against him and his wife Meghan Markle by royal author Tom Bower in a new explosive biography.Royal expert Duncan...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> @jelliedfeels , i think Bowers indicated that the H memoir may have some childhood drama, but a lot more about the cash for honors scandals and other things from his POV


If he used innuendo and implied stuff, it could have made it past legal checks. Remember how H bragged about not trusting someone that Charles had dealings with. He likes to think of himself as smarter than his father. If they use the same MO as in the OW interview (e.g, "someone" made racist remarks about Archie's skintone but I'm not saying who), they could imply the BRF/Markles/Raglands are all villains, and Prince Penury and his Princess Pinocchio are the only saints in the bunch.



A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


For this dress, she probably did it so that she can show off her nail polish against the dark fabric. All that belly clutching and coat flicks: I never did any of that for my pregnancies and never saw any of my pregnant friends do it either.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> So freaking rude (the woman touching the horse without permission, not the guard yelling).


He already showed restraint. He rebuked her only when she made a 2nd grab for the reins. The horse already protested after the first grab.



EverSoElusive said:


> They must be high when they came up with the garbage


  



bag-mania said:


> We all expected this. It’s a book about him but she controls what goes into it. Funny it makes it sound like he wasn’t in the meetings about his own memoir.


Funny, but we are not surprised, right?



CarryOn2020 said:


> If I am reading the book correctly, the Markles will go down as the liars of the century.  How can we trust anything they say now?


But... but... Gloria Steinem herself said that we can trust all the garbage they spew! 



880 said:


> There is a disorder (I googled it once bc I was certain it applied to members of my family) that entails an individual sincerely believing he is smarter and more capable than he really is. I think it applies to Harry. I don’t think M particularly cares about anything except making money and being famous. It’s the combination that’s so awful.
> 
> ETA:
> 
> the dunning Kruger effect
> 
> Without him, she would be no different than many other small screen actresses trying to make a living.
> He propelled her onto a world stage.


May I also contribute Johari Window? An HR colleague told me about the Dunning Kruger effect and the Johari Window when I told her about the havoc created by one of the office narcs.








						Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				











						Johari window - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Chanbal

Noise for Hazz's book release…


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> What I'd like to know is why on earth are W&K going to Boston in DECEMBER??


They’re coming to see meeeee!!!!

Seriously though, it doesn’t usually snow until after Christmas.


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m only on chapter 6 and I have to say I would be MORTIFIED if I were her. Like, shrink into a corner and just die kind of mortified. The things in this book are so embarrassing and there’s a patronizing tone to it that is like rubbing salt into a wound.

It could be 100% false but people will believe it anyhow and my gosh how humiliating that must be! 

So cringe. And I’m loving every word of it!


----------



## A1aGypsy

I love Boston. I’d go to Boston at Christmastime in a heartbeat. I bet it’s beautiful.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m only on chapter 6 and I have to say I would be MORTIFIED if I were her. Like, shrink into a corner and just die kind of mortified. The things in this book are so embarrassing and there’s a patronizing tone to it that is like rubbing salt into a wound.
> 
> It could be 100% false but people will believe it anyhow and my gosh how humiliating that must be!
> 
> So cringe. And I’m loving every word of it!


I don't think she understands mortification. She's probably wailing to Hazard about how racist Tom Bower is and how much she is suffering (victim victim victim victim!!!)


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


>



Good grief!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Yep, exactly what I would expect the two charlatans to say.  Iirc O said the interview was MM’s _truth_.  So, it’s ok, they can make up anything. While QE’s ‘recollections may vary’ seemed to be  an excellent comeback to all the lies, in retrospect perhaps it would have been better to say ‘they lie’ and here are the receipts.  Just end this nonsense. It only brings the BRF, Markles, Doria, et al down.

ETA: This is ‘my’ truth. Ymmv


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



This is the same as Hazard saying that the media hurt his feelings? 
Methane may need to add a disclaimer before all her pompous pronouncements: "The following is descriptive and subjective as well as based on my feelings. Any relationship to objectivity is irrelevant. This is My Truth."


----------



## 880

xincinsin said:


> This is the same as Hazard saying that the media hurt his feelings?
> Methane may need to add a disclaimer before all her pompous pronouncements: "The following is descriptive and subjective as well as based on my feelings. Any relationship to objectivity is irrelevant. This is My Truth."


As per Bower, she may have said on her blog something to the effect of be empowered to create your own truth or reality

I skimmed over some of the more embarrassing cringy moments, so I’m not entirely sure lol


----------



## csshopper

After layers and layers of factual material, my take away from the book, she is incapable of humanity. She was nasty, is nasty and will forever more be nasty. She has zero empathy .

Based on who she is, predict in the future there will be gossip, incidents, stories about conflicts with her children as they mature. She will see them as rivals and if she can’t control them as she has done with Harry the Human Root Canal there will be h*** to pay.

Unless someone can start getting involved in another year or two to chart a different course, some day there will be a woman, who has been groomed to feel  as entitled as her mother did, raging at people “MY GRANDMOTHER was the QUEEN of England and I’m named after her, how dare you tell me “no”. Don’t you know I am THE Lilibet Diana?

Doria is not very likeable. Thomas was even more of an enabler than I realized, do have some sympathy for his current health issues.

Not going to waste time trying to understand why stans/sugars “appreciate” and support her. Not worth the effort.

Hazbeen needs to be held accountable for his egregious behaviors separate and apart from TW. He’s had his own nasty for years just as she has. The toxicity of their coupling took it to a new level of depravity.

In spite of all that, I’m glad I read it. Admiration to the people who shared their stories!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Here's Why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton Are Coming to Boston. Here's Why
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton are coming to Boston in December, as they announced Wednesday that the city has been selected to host their second annual Earthshot Prize awards ceremony. “In 2022, we’re back and bringing Earthshot to the USA where we’ll award the next five winners of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcboston.com


Oh I know it's for Earthshot, but couldn't they pick a better time of year to have it in Boston? The way things are going with the weather these days there will be a record breaking blizzard. Then again, perhaps a heat wave. 

And is this a subtle dig at ZeeZy?:

"I think that Prince William particularly wants to make a mark on a major global issue like climate change," said Nicoletta Gullace, a modern British history professor at the University of New Hampshire who often speaks about the royals. "If William comes he would do well to bring Kate because there will be a lot of interest in what she’s wearing, and *she’s also a very genial and amiable presence. She always makes a good impression publicly."*


----------



## Icyjade

This is a fairly old article but would like to highlight that as compared to TW, the Duchess of Cambridge went through years of harassment by the British press without any support nor security. YEARS. Yet no moaning about the lack of support or anything like that unlike Hazbeen and TW. Compare and contrast. 









						Will's Cup of Tea
					

For more than four years, Kate Middleton has navigated the perilous waters of being Prince William’s girlfriend, handling the snobbery, sniping, and spotlight without official support or guidance. As Britain’s odds-makers bet on a wedding, the author takes a look at the bonds—and the...




					www.vanityfair.com
				




“In all these years,” says a relative of the Prince’s, “without any training, quite simply she has never put a foot wrong. It’s remarkable.”

And 

All the royal press—and former courtiers I spoke to—agreed that until Prince William formalizes their relationship Middleton is in an awkward spot. She is not officially entitled to any royal benefits paid for by the taxpayers, such as security; she has no spokesperson and is not receiving any official guidance on what to wear or how to conduct herself in royal circles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s another old article about Hazzi.  It is from May, 2016.  Not much new except he does show he is aware of that many people do not respect his so-called ‘efforts’.  Also it confirms he was in no way ready for marriage, so many red flags. He had no job, supposedly because no job matched with his royal duties. LOL. Such excuses.  Anyway, I found it interesting.

_Harry is clearly determined to try. “I just hope that people read this article and go, ‘You know, fair enough, he’s digging out blind [military slang for making an all-out effort], he’s doing the best he can.’ I need to earn more respect from a lot more people, of course I do.”

He added: “What you see is what you get with me. It’s genuine. I will always try and bring an element of fun and happiness to everything I do. That probably is subconsciously very much a part of my mother — trying to fill that void. Trying to fill an unbelievable pair of boots, whether it’s her . . . or especially the Queen. It’s a hard thing to do.”_



			archive.ph
		




Spoiler



I’ll use my position until Prince George becomes more interesting tha…​Many challenges await Prince Harry as he plans the next phase of a royal life transformed by his departure from the army last year. As the 31-year-old embarks on an array of charitable projects — while also, as one of the world’s most scrutinised bachelors, trying to manage a private life — he remains acutely aware of the precariousness of privilege and the need to “do good stuff”.

In a wide-ranging interview with The Sunday Times, Harry spoke candidly about his efforts to “stay relevant” and “to make a difference”. He spoke of the difficulties of filling the void left by the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, and the danger that he might become “boring” now Prince George and Princess Charlotte, his nephew and niece, are beginning to hog royal headlines.


“I’m in this privileged position and I will use it for as long as I can, or until I become boring, or until George ends up becoming more interesting,” he laughed, during the interview in Kensington Palace last week.
“There’s nothing worse than going through a period in your life where you’re making a massive difference and then suddenly, for whatever reason it is — whether it’s media or the public perception of you — you drop off. You want to make a difference but no one’s listening to you.”
These were less pressing worries when Harry was serving as a co-pilot gunner in an Apache helicopter in Afghanistan in 2012 and 2013. The experience transformed his media image from that of a playboy prince and turned him into a passionate campaigner for veterans’ causes, most notably the Invictus Games, the Paralympic-style sporting event for wounded and injured servicemen and women that he launched two years ago. The 2016 event starts today in Orlando, Florida.





Roya Nikkhah interviews Prince Harry at Kensington Palace
“I do miss the army,” Harry said. “It was a hideaway, which was great and something that I needed at that time of my life. It teaches you courage, discipline, respect for others, the value of friendships, respect for the monarchy.”
There were “really dark, really bad times” too, notably when his first tour of Afghanistan ended abruptly in 2008, after Australian media blew his cover. “To be pulled out, leaving your blokes behind . . . was one of the darkest moments of my life,” he said. “Not knowing if I was going to get a phone call saying ‘three of your blokes have just been blown up after you left Afghanistan’. And that was completely out of my control.”




The prince served in Afghanistan in 2008
JOHN STILLWELL
Harry also works with his brother William and sister-in-law Kate — the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge — on the Heads Together mental health campaign, which focuses on the “invisible injuries” suffered by former military personnel.
If leaving the army was hard, Harry’s darkest moment of all was the death of his mother in a car crash in Paris in 1997. Almost 20 years later, it is clear her sons still miss her deeply. “There’s this gaping void, not just in mine and William’s lives, but there’s a huge gaping void in a lot of other people’s lives too,” Harry said. “She’s got a lot of unfinished business.”
Among the roles to which he is now committing himself — with his mother very much in mind — is that of an ambassador raising HIV/Aids awareness in Britain. He feels the issue has faded from public discussion yet still presents many unresolved challenges.
“She started very punchy [on the Aids issue],” Harry said of his mother. “She smashed the stigma around HIV on more than one occasion. It had a huge impact, and . . . a huge impact on my life as well.”
Ten years ago, Harry co-founded the Sentebale charity with Prince Seeiso of Lesotho to help children affected by HIV/Aids in the southern African state. He is also working with the Elton John Aids Foundation and other charities to study how he might develop “an education and convening” role. “Elton was massively onside,” Harry said. “He told me, ‘You underestimate the power you have to convene people on all sorts of different issues’. That’s the privilege of the position I’m in.
“I don’t consciously channel myself down certain avenues specifically because I think my mum would be proud. But she sure as hell would be proud of me, hopefully, that I’m doing it.”




Harry and Diana in 1995 on the anniversary of VJ Day
The Eton and Sandhurst-educated prince has had plenty of experience of being pursued by paparazzi, and his twenties were peppered with scandalmongering headlines. That he not only survived but also learnt how to turn the media to his advantage was confirmed last month by his mock battle on Twitter with President Barack *****, a fan of Britain’s younger royals.
The exchange of teasing videos promoting the Invictus Games did more for the transatlantic special relationship than any number of summits with David Cameron, and Harry is patently thrilled that the event he started has become an international success. Next year’s event will be held in Toronto, Canada.
“I saw it as a chance to create a platform that [wounded service personnel] can use as part of rehabilitation for themselves,” he said. “A chance for them to set goals in life, rather than sitting at home, worrying about things. Sport seemed to be the linchpin. Their stories will move and inspire a whole generation.”
Harry refers to Britain’s Invictus team as “mates” and when asked whether he thinks enough is being done for veterans displayed a rare flash of his father’s outspokenness. “No, I don’t think enough’s being done,” he said. “Of course the government could do more.”
He also worries about the effect of cuts to the military. “Yes, of course I do. My father does — we regularly talk about it. When I signed up 10 years ago . . . there were so many of us, there was a certain pocket of people who literally just had desk jobs, so we’d skip their personal fitness tests. If you had to go to war [there would be] a large percentage of people who simply would not be able to carry their kit and operate in a hot or very cold climate.”


> My body has been ruined over the last 10 years of army servicenone


Now that the army is shrinking, Harry added: “I view it as every single individual in the army now is an athlete with a weapon. We are arguably the best armed forces in the world. But as it reduces, we need to ensure that we keep that.”
While Harry has learnt how to harness social media to promote his work with veterans, he remains cautious about its impact on young people’s lives — including his own. He said he had “massive concerns” that for many young people today, sport and outdoor pursuits have been replaced with indoor digital obsessions. “It worries me that the majority of people now think that all their friends exist in their hand. You go to inner-city communities . . . and the kids know more about their ‘friends’ on Facebook than they do about their neighbours and the kids that they play with in the playground — if they even go to the playground.”
As a child, Harry said, he played in the garden with toy soldiers. “I had an imagination . . . now it’s like, ‘There’s an iPad, off you go’. It’s all created for you. All you have to do is press buttons. That worries me.” He is now planning to work on a major global project aimed at reconnecting young people with nature and the environment.
While he uses social media “to find out stories or weight of opinions on certain issues”, he says there is a darker side to the web “and I don’t like how some people use it”.
One of those uses, inevitably, is to examine his romantic attachments, an issue that clearly plays on his mind after the near-hysteria that surrounded his relationships with his last two serious girlfriends, Cressida Bonas and Chelsy Davy.
He talked candidly of the “massive paranoia that sits inside me” about the scrutiny any girl he speaks to in public must endure. “If or when I do find a girlfriend, I will do my utmost . . . to ensure that me and her can get to the point where we’re actually comfortable with each other before the massive invasion that is inevitably going to happen into her privacy,” he said. “The other concern is that even if I talk to a girl, that person is then suddenly my wife, and people go knocking on her door.”
The kind of life that most people take for granted is simply not available to Harry. “When people finish work in the City or wherever work is, if you want to have a bit of downtime, you might go to the pub with your mates. I do that less, because it’s not downtime for me . . . I don’t know who I’m going to bump into, I don’t know if someone’s going to try and grab a selfie, I don’t know who’s going to be waiting outside. So there is very little private life.”
Which is not to say he has closed the door on romance. “I’m not putting work before the idea of a family, marriage and all that kind of stuff,” he said. “To be fair, I haven’t had that many opportunities to get out there and meet people. At the moment, my focus is very much on work. But if someone slips into my life then that’s absolutely fantastic.”
He clearly relishes the role of uncle to George and Charlotte but joked: “You know what it’s like [with other people’s children] — it’s great and then when they start crying it’s like, ‘Here, have them back!’ ”
Some of this may help explain why sport has become so important to Harry. He is patron of the England Rugby All Schools programme, and will be working with the Sported organisation and several charities to boost the profile of community sports clubs. He is also keen to become a rugby coach and next year will build what aides call “a more formal role” in championing sport. It is an important goal for a polo-playing prince who admits to getting “a little bit of grief” for his association with an elite pastime.


> The other concern is that even if I talk to a girl, that person is then suddenly my wife, and people go knocking on her doornone


“I know it doesn’t look great, riding round playing polo,” he said, “but it is the best form of raising that much money for so many charities.” Nor are polo ponies the easiest of rides: on a charity outing in South Africa last year, he “fell off twice on my head”. He added: “I’ve actually been receiving a bit of medical care on my body, which has basically been ruined over the last 10 years of army service.”
Harry needs no reminding of the perils of a playboy image: for all the enthusiasm that marked the Queen’s 90th birthday this year, sharp questions have been asked about whether the younger royals earn their keep.
When it emerged last year that the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh carried out more official engagements than William, Kate and Harry combined, comments about “work-shy” princes soon followed. It’s an issue Harry is very aware of. “There’s a lot of people out there who view us, the younger generation of the monarchy, [and say,] ‘Well, you’ve had a job, so why wouldn’t you have another job?’
“I thought long and hard about getting a job. I did 10 years in the army — best job in the world. I wanted to be valued in society in that sense.” He added: “I don’t get any satisfaction from sitting at home on my arse — and that’s a body part by the way, not a swearword.”
What prevented him from finding a full-time job seems to have been the difficulty of combining a profession with other royal duties. “The reality is that most of the areas that I looked at . . . just simply weren’t going to work. Some jobs are not even on the table, sadly.”
One of the reasons he left the army, he said, was because royal duties had begun to increase “and I felt unsafe flying that aircraft and not being as up-to-date and as able and skilled as everybody else”.
As the Queen ages, it also seems likely that other family members will take over more of her duties — particularly long-distance tours. “I absolutely adore my grandmother and I would take on everything she wants us to,” Harry said. “She wants to carry on, which is fine, and there’s a pecking order, but we will be there, ready to support her, when need be.”
Yet there remains that awkward battle for “relevance” and the question of whether a prince now fifth in line to the throne can persuade thrifty Britons that he represents value for privilege.
Harry is clearly determined to try. “I just hope that people read this article and go, ‘You know, fair enough, he’s digging out blind [military slang for making an all-out effort], he’s doing the best he can.’ I need to earn more respect from a lot more people, of course I do.”
He added: “What you see is what you get with me. It’s genuine. I will always try and bring an element of fun and happiness to everything I do. That probably is subconsciously very much a part of my mother — trying to fill that void. Trying to fill an unbelievable pair of boots, whether it’s her . . . or especially the Queen. It’s a hard thing to do.”
@RoyaNikkhah


----------



## andrashik

The sugars have gone crazy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> The one aspect of this circus that I found very interesting in Bowers book was the fact that TW as a divorced woman should NOT have been allowed to marry in a Church of England.  The Queen made a huge exception in this case.  Charles and Camilla were not allowed in 2005 and the Queens own daughter, Princess Anne had to marry her second husband in Scotland in order to be married in a church.



Still not convinced and thinking everyone is missing a piece here. Charles and Anne were members of the CoE when they got divorced. Raptor was not. In the Catholic church, as long as you don't marry in a church you are considered unmarried - which is why Felipe was able to marry Letizia because her first marriage was a legal ceremony only. 

That said, maybe it's different because e.g. in Germany you have to have the legal ceremony before the church wedding while in the UK apparently you can sign the paperwork in the church.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> I wonder if she used the "engagement chicken" recipe on all of her victims. She did for Harry.


“The chicken is roasted for hours at a fierce heat and is completely stuffed…just like you”

Of all the unbelievable things they’ve told us the idea of them holding hands over the giblets has got to be up there for me. I don’t think H could make a jam sandwich for himself. 




charlottawill said:


> Another person born on third and thinks she hit a home run. Of course ZeeZy the deprived child looked at her with envy.


Hey hey! She’s a 40 year old recent orphan after her father died of embarrassingly bad press and her mother evaporated. 

It makes me think of the major general in pirates of Penzance. 


charlottawill said:


> The international relations major probably doesn't even know how badly things ended for Napoleon.


I mean to be fair to Napoleon he did a lot more to promote meritocratic leadership and civil rights in his adopted home that H or M ever have. 


Chanbal said:


> I wish he could release the findings about TW that he didn't publish.


I wonder if he’s holding out to do a sequel if he can ride the legal line and get a best seller first time. 


charlottawill said:


> Oh I know it's for Earthshot, but couldn't they pick a better time of year to have it in Boston? The way things are going with the weather these days there will be a record breaking blizzard. Then again, perhaps a heat wave.
> 
> And is this a subtle dig at ZeeZy?:
> 
> "I think that Prince William particularly wants to make a mark on a major global issue like climate change," said Nicoletta Gullace, a modern British history professor at the University of New Hampshire who often speaks about the royals. "If William comes he would do well to bring Kate because there will be a lot of interest in what she’s wearing, and *she’s also a very genial and amiable presence. She always makes a good impression publicly."*


I agree I’ve said before I’ve no idea why you’d put a commemorative day in December- just inconvenient for every body and as I’ve commented a million times what’s the point of flying a cortège of private jets of vips out to someone else’s continent promote the environment exactly?  I mean why not hold it in Boston, Lincolnshire?


----------



## jelliedfeels

880 said:


> +1 with @EverSoElusive. I read the book, and I didn’t really learn anything that I couldn’t learn here.


I suppose the book has an air of objective authority to it. 

I mean some people would say this thread is biased


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> As per Bower, she may have said on her blog something to the effect of be empowered to create your own truth or reality
> 
> I skimmed over some of the more embarrassing cringy moments, so I’m not entirely sure lol


Ugh! I think this "create your own truth" (or delusion and lies) is a narc thing. My ex-boss used to have 3-hour performance appraisal sessions with a narc. Raging debate on why her truth (you are performing below par) was so different from his truth (I'm a genius! Everyone is jealous of my magnificence!). The lady who sat nearest her office cringed because she could hear snippets through the vents.


----------



## andrashik

jelliedfeels said:


> I suppose the book has an air of objective authority to it.
> 
> I mean some people would say this thread is biased


This thread is downright mean and jealous! I bet you cannot even roast a chicken!


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> The sugars have gone crazy
> View attachment 5576553


That crown on her head looks an awful lot like the one the White Witch wore in The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, but Cate Blanchett was lot more classier that this liar. And the Photoshop job looks awful - oh well, they did extend the reach of the Claws.


----------



## muddledmint

I’m only on chapter 7 of revenge and while I do think it’s pretty good and definitely entertaining, the author’s obvious bias weakens the blow against meghan. I think he would have made a stronger case if he had been more careful in fact checking and more impartial in his reporting. For example, on page 85, he says that meghan was disappointed because the costume designer for suits “said in an interview that meghan was not her favorite actress to dress.” I looked up this interview and the costume designer said no such thing. She only said that Gina Torres was her favorite, which is very different from saying meghan was not her favorite. It’s not a huge thing, but it’s kind of deceptive to frame it the way he does in the book, and it makes me more skeptical about other things as well. I guess I was expecting more from this author.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


It’s her behaviour like this that makes me think she’s more weird than I even thought before, and also so damn happy they both left (The UK)


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


We are so agreed


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Or was the Queen politely saying "Don't quit your day job?" From the Oxford Dictionary:
> 
> "used as a humorous way of advising someone not to pursue something at which they are unlikely to be successful."
> 
> She knew where things were headed.



I think it was an entirely generous gesture of he Queen, trying to be modern and careful. No malice a forethought and no shade.

She was probably told 1000 times by H how famous and important M was, a HUGE star in the US. QE2 probably was thinking, M wouldn’t be content staying home or walking around factories in Sheffield shaking hands with the union rep and mrs Smith from the canteen.

The BRF didn’t know she was at the end of the road and all dried up with the acting work, H probably had her down as a contemporary Grace Kelly. Half of us here apologised for not knowing her before H, but really, her whole career, even with a father respected in the biz giving her a head star, never amounted to much. The woman is a poseur, not an actress.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Somebody at the Palace should have yelled at Z-list like that the first time she tried to misbehave




would she have gone up to a NY Police office and put your hand on his gun for a poto-op? What’s more worrying is the video creator thinks she was the one being wronged 

IMO, this  _is_ how M thinks about the monarchy and the UK generally.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> That crown on her head looks an awful lot like the one the White Witch wore in The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, but Cate Blanchett was lot more classier that this liar. And the Photoshop job looks awful - oh well, they did extend the reach of the Claws.



I'm not sure why they are so obsessed with photoshopping Raptor's face on Kate's body seeing Kate is bland, boring, haggard, old, stuck up, a Karen, a bad mother and who knows what (these are all things I've seen the sugars write about her).


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> The sugars have gone crazy
> View attachment 5576553


Second thought about this silly picture. Why did the sugars have to borrow Catherine's body and dress? Couldn't they have put Methane back in one of her ostentatious gowns? The red Intrepid one with the droopy bust would work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It’s her behaviour like this that makes me think she’s more weird than I even thought before, and also so damn happy they both left (The UK)



I had to read that a few times to get that "they" are Raptor and Harry. I was wondering where the dress designer ended up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Too bad when you can never keep your stories straight.


----------



## EverSoElusive

andrashik said:


> This thread is downright mean and jealous! I bet you cannot even roast a chicken!


While some of us may not know how to roast a chicken, we are very good at roasting Z-list and Co.  

* Urban Dictionary has the definition of 'roast' if some of you are trying to figure out my comment


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had to read that a few times to get that "they" are Raptor and Harry. I was wondering where the dress designer ended up



She left Givenchy that's for sure. 

Meghan seems to have been the kiss of death to Clare Waight Keller (at Givenchy at the time). Her last notable thing she did was win an award that night in 2018 and now -  nothing(?).


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> *IMO, this  is how M thinks about the monarchy and the UK generally.*


This right here is Z-list all day everyday. 

I've never put much thoughts into Z-list's "create your own truth" mantra but with it being brought up by multiple people in the last days, I now look at it very differently and interpret it like you guys do. 

She is all about altering facts when things don't go her way and fit her narrative or any of her fake personas. So I guess in a way, she is being true to herself by operating based on that mantra.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I did not know Ashley Cole was married by the time Raptor considered him.


I think he was already separated from Cheryl, they split up in 2010, as per Google.


----------



## duna

Got my hardback copy this morning, it's big


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I did not know Ashley Cole was married by the time Raptor considered him.





duna said:


> I think he was already separated from Cheryl, they split up in 2010, as per Google.


If she wanted him, I doubt something as trivial (to her) as marriage would have stopped her. Her father did say when she identified her next boyfriend, she zeroed in and took no hostages. No wonder she didn't want to let Harry anywhere near her family. Her fictional history would have collapsed if the indulgent father started talking about her childhood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

After having read 1/4 of the book I come to the conclusion Raptor was a POS long before she met Harry. I just don't understand how he disregarded ALL of the red flags.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> After having read 1/4 of the book I come to the conclusion Raptor was a POS long before she met Harry. I just don't understand how he disregarded ALL of the red flags.


Must have been that “roast chicken”!
Getting out of the gutter now…..


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was thinking...isn't it kind of tragic she snagged the world's most eligible bachelor (disclaimer: not by his own merit) with his huge platform and blew it so that she still has to hustle and force herself on people like back in 2014 when nobody knew her name?


----------



## zen1965

A1aGypsy said:


> Okay, I took a LOT of flack for commenting negatively on this at the time but can we now please agree that, setting aside mother’s love and excitement over a first babe, this looks ridiculous??


I did, too. And I agree 100% .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Stumbling over this sentence by John Fitzpatrick: "Officially I was not dating her - we were best friends."

What does that even mean? 

This was while she was still living with Cory BTW, but that didn't keep her from leaving him in a hotel room in was it Ireland to go out all night with Rory the golf player.

Fitzpatrick is the age of her father and has lots of money and connections. I have thoughts.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s another old article about Hazzi.  It is from May, 2016.  Not much new except he does show he is aware of that many people do not respect his so-called ‘efforts’.  Also it confirms he was in no way ready for marriage, so many red flags. He had no job, supposedly because no job matched with his royal duties. LOL. Such excuses.  Anyway, I found it interesting.
> 
> _Harry is clearly determined to try. “I just hope that people read this article and go, ‘You know, fair enough, he’s digging out blind [military slang for making an all-out effort], he’s doing the best he can.’ I need to earn more respect from a lot more people, of course I do.”
> 
> He added: “What you see is what you get with me. It’s genuine. I will always try and bring an element of fun and happiness to everything I do. That probably is subconsciously very much a part of my mother — trying to fill that void. Trying to fill an unbelievable pair of boots, whether it’s her . . . or especially the Queen. It’s a hard thing to do.”_
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I’ll use my position until Prince George becomes more interesting tha…​Many challenges await Prince Harry as he plans the next phase of a royal life transformed by his departure from the army last year. As the 31-year-old embarks on an array of charitable projects — while also, as one of the world’s most scrutinised bachelors, trying to manage a private life — he remains acutely aware of the precariousness of privilege and the need to “do good stuff”.
> 
> In a wide-ranging interview with The Sunday Times, Harry spoke candidly about his efforts to “stay relevant” and “to make a difference”. He spoke of the difficulties of filling the void left by the death of his mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, and the danger that he might become “boring” now Prince George and Princess Charlotte, his nephew and niece, are beginning to hog royal headlines.
> 
> 
> “I’m in this privileged position and I will use it for as long as I can, or until I become boring, or until George ends up becoming more interesting,” he laughed, during the interview in Kensington Palace last week.
> “There’s nothing worse than going through a period in your life where you’re making a massive difference and then suddenly, for whatever reason it is — whether it’s media or the public perception of you — you drop off. You want to make a difference but no one’s listening to you.”
> These were less pressing worries when Harry was serving as a co-pilot gunner in an Apache helicopter in Afghanistan in 2012 and 2013. The experience transformed his media image from that of a playboy prince and turned him into a passionate campaigner for veterans’ causes, most notably the Invictus Games, the Paralympic-style sporting event for wounded and injured servicemen and women that he launched two years ago. The 2016 event starts today in Orlando, Florida.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roya Nikkhah interviews Prince Harry at Kensington Palace
> “I do miss the army,” Harry said. “It was a hideaway, which was great and something that I needed at that time of my life. It teaches you courage, discipline, respect for others, the value of friendships, respect for the monarchy.”
> There were “really dark, really bad times” too, notably when his first tour of Afghanistan ended abruptly in 2008, after Australian media blew his cover. “To be pulled out, leaving your blokes behind . . . was one of the darkest moments of my life,” he said. “Not knowing if I was going to get a phone call saying ‘three of your blokes have just been blown up after you left Afghanistan’. And that was completely out of my control.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The prince served in Afghanistan in 2008
> JOHN STILLWELL
> Harry also works with his brother William and sister-in-law Kate — the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge — on the Heads Together mental health campaign, which focuses on the “invisible injuries” suffered by former military personnel.
> If leaving the army was hard, Harry’s darkest moment of all was the death of his mother in a car crash in Paris in 1997. Almost 20 years later, it is clear her sons still miss her deeply. “There’s this gaping void, not just in mine and William’s lives, but there’s a huge gaping void in a lot of other people’s lives too,” Harry said. “She’s got a lot of unfinished business.”
> Among the roles to which he is now committing himself — with his mother very much in mind — is that of an ambassador raising HIV/Aids awareness in Britain. He feels the issue has faded from public discussion yet still presents many unresolved challenges.
> “She started very punchy [on the Aids issue],” Harry said of his mother. “She smashed the stigma around HIV on more than one occasion. It had a huge impact, and . . . a huge impact on my life as well.”
> Ten years ago, Harry co-founded the Sentebale charity with Prince Seeiso of Lesotho to help children affected by HIV/Aids in the southern African state. He is also working with the Elton John Aids Foundation and other charities to study how he might develop “an education and convening” role. “Elton was massively onside,” Harry said. “He told me, ‘You underestimate the power you have to convene people on all sorts of different issues’. That’s the privilege of the position I’m in.
> “I don’t consciously channel myself down certain avenues specifically because I think my mum would be proud. But she sure as hell would be proud of me, hopefully, that I’m doing it.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Diana in 1995 on the anniversary of VJ Day
> The Eton and Sandhurst-educated prince has had plenty of experience of being pursued by paparazzi, and his twenties were peppered with scandalmongering headlines. That he not only survived but also learnt how to turn the media to his advantage was confirmed last month by his mock battle on Twitter with President Barack *****, a fan of Britain’s younger royals.
> The exchange of teasing videos promoting the Invictus Games did more for the transatlantic special relationship than any number of summits with David Cameron, and Harry is patently thrilled that the event he started has become an international success. Next year’s event will be held in Toronto, Canada.
> “I saw it as a chance to create a platform that [wounded service personnel] can use as part of rehabilitation for themselves,” he said. “A chance for them to set goals in life, rather than sitting at home, worrying about things. Sport seemed to be the linchpin. Their stories will move and inspire a whole generation.”
> Harry refers to Britain’s Invictus team as “mates” and when asked whether he thinks enough is being done for veterans displayed a rare flash of his father’s outspokenness. “No, I don’t think enough’s being done,” he said. “Of course the government could do more.”
> He also worries about the effect of cuts to the military. “Yes, of course I do. My father does — we regularly talk about it. When I signed up 10 years ago . . . there were so many of us, there was a certain pocket of people who literally just had desk jobs, so we’d skip their personal fitness tests. If you had to go to war [there would be] a large percentage of people who simply would not be able to carry their kit and operate in a hot or very cold climate.”
> 
> Now that the army is shrinking, Harry added: “I view it as every single individual in the army now is an athlete with a weapon. We are arguably the best armed forces in the world. But as it reduces, we need to ensure that we keep that.”
> While Harry has learnt how to harness social media to promote his work with veterans, he remains cautious about its impact on young people’s lives — including his own. He said he had “massive concerns” that for many young people today, sport and outdoor pursuits have been replaced with indoor digital obsessions. “It worries me that the majority of people now think that all their friends exist in their hand. You go to inner-city communities . . . and the kids know more about their ‘friends’ on Facebook than they do about their neighbours and the kids that they play with in the playground — if they even go to the playground.”
> As a child, Harry said, he played in the garden with toy soldiers. “I had an imagination . . . now it’s like, ‘There’s an iPad, off you go’. It’s all created for you. All you have to do is press buttons. That worries me.” He is now planning to work on a major global project aimed at reconnecting young people with nature and the environment.
> While he uses social media “to find out stories or weight of opinions on certain issues”, he says there is a darker side to the web “and I don’t like how some people use it”.
> One of those uses, inevitably, is to examine his romantic attachments, an issue that clearly plays on his mind after the near-hysteria that surrounded his relationships with his last two serious girlfriends, Cressida Bonas and Chelsy Davy.
> He talked candidly of the “massive paranoia that sits inside me” about the scrutiny any girl he speaks to in public must endure. “If or when I do find a girlfriend, I will do my utmost . . . to ensure that me and her can get to the point where we’re actually comfortable with each other before the massive invasion that is inevitably going to happen into her privacy,” he said. “The other concern is that even if I talk to a girl, that person is then suddenly my wife, and people go knocking on her door.”
> The kind of life that most people take for granted is simply not available to Harry. “When people finish work in the City or wherever work is, if you want to have a bit of downtime, you might go to the pub with your mates. I do that less, because it’s not downtime for me . . . I don’t know who I’m going to bump into, I don’t know if someone’s going to try and grab a selfie, I don’t know who’s going to be waiting outside. So there is very little private life.”
> Which is not to say he has closed the door on romance. “I’m not putting work before the idea of a family, marriage and all that kind of stuff,” he said. “To be fair, I haven’t had that many opportunities to get out there and meet people. At the moment, my focus is very much on work. But if someone slips into my life then that’s absolutely fantastic.”
> He clearly relishes the role of uncle to George and Charlotte but joked: “You know what it’s like [with other people’s children] — it’s great and then when they start crying it’s like, ‘Here, have them back!’ ”
> Some of this may help explain why sport has become so important to Harry. He is patron of the England Rugby All Schools programme, and will be working with the Sported organisation and several charities to boost the profile of community sports clubs. He is also keen to become a rugby coach and next year will build what aides call “a more formal role” in championing sport. It is an important goal for a polo-playing prince who admits to getting “a little bit of grief” for his association with an elite pastime.
> 
> “I know it doesn’t look great, riding round playing polo,” he said, “but it is the best form of raising that much money for so many charities.” Nor are polo ponies the easiest of rides: on a charity outing in South Africa last year, he “fell off twice on my head”. He added: “I’ve actually been receiving a bit of medical care on my body, which has basically been ruined over the last 10 years of army service.”
> Harry needs no reminding of the perils of a playboy image: for all the enthusiasm that marked the Queen’s 90th birthday this year, sharp questions have been asked about whether the younger royals earn their keep.
> When it emerged last year that the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh carried out more official engagements than William, Kate and Harry combined, comments about “work-shy” princes soon followed. It’s an issue Harry is very aware of. “There’s a lot of people out there who view us, the younger generation of the monarchy, [and say,] ‘Well, you’ve had a job, so why wouldn’t you have another job?’
> “I thought long and hard about getting a job. I did 10 years in the army — best job in the world. I wanted to be valued in society in that sense.” He added: “I don’t get any satisfaction from sitting at home on my arse — and that’s a body part by the way, not a swearword.”
> What prevented him from finding a full-time job seems to have been the difficulty of combining a profession with other royal duties. “The reality is that most of the areas that I looked at . . . just simply weren’t going to work. Some jobs are not even on the table, sadly.”
> One of the reasons he left the army, he said, was because royal duties had begun to increase “and I felt unsafe flying that aircraft and not being as up-to-date and as able and skilled as everybody else”.
> As the Queen ages, it also seems likely that other family members will take over more of her duties — particularly long-distance tours. “I absolutely adore my grandmother and I would take on everything she wants us to,” Harry said. “She wants to carry on, which is fine, and there’s a pecking order, but we will be there, ready to support her, when need be.”
> Yet there remains that awkward battle for “relevance” and the question of whether a prince now fifth in line to the throne can persuade thrifty Britons that he represents value for privilege.
> Harry is clearly determined to try. “I just hope that people read this article and go, ‘You know, fair enough, he’s digging out blind [military slang for making an all-out effort], he’s doing the best he can.’ I need to earn more respect from a lot more people, of course I do.”
> He added: “What you see is what you get with me. It’s genuine. I will always try and bring an element of fun and happiness to everything I do. That probably is subconsciously very much a part of my mother — trying to fill that void. Trying to fill an unbelievable pair of boots, whether it’s her . . . or especially the Queen. It’s a hard thing to do.”
> @RoyaNikkhah


again with the mother reference.....uugh


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stumbling over this sentence by John Fitzpatrick: "Officially I was not dating her - we were best friends."
> 
> What does that even mean?
> 
> This was while she was still living with Cory BTW, but that didn't keep her from leaving him in a hotel room in was it Ireland to go out all night with Rory the golf player.
> 
> Fitzpatrick is the age of her father and has lots of money and connections. I have thoughts.


I just read that and paused too. What a weird way to say “we’re just friends.” Either the author or Fitzpatrick is clearly trying to insinuate there was something more going on. Like I posted before, bower does try to twist things to make meghan look bad, even though it’s unnecessary because she does that on her own. I can believe she was cheating on Cory with Fitzpatrick, but I can also believe that bower took this quote out of context to make it appear more salacious.


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> I’m only on chapter 7 of revenge and while I do think it’s pretty good and definitely entertaining, the author’s obvious bias weakens the blow against meghan. I think he would have made a stronger case if he had been more careful in fact checking and more impartial in his reporting. For example, on page 85, he says that meghan was disappointed because the costume designer for suits “said in an interview that meghan was not her favorite actress to dress.” I looked up this interview and the costume designer said no such thing. She only said that Gina Torres was her favorite, which is very different from saying meghan was not her favorite. It’s not a huge thing, but it’s kind of deceptive to frame it the way he does in the book, and it makes me more skeptical about other things as well. I guess I was expecting more from this author.


The designer's statement that 'Gina Torres was her favorite' must have annoyed TW. From what I read, she must be the chosen one.

I wonder how T. Bower refrained from writing about TW a little less politely. I believe he knows a lot more about her. I suspect that many people, including family members, provided a ton of off record information. I recall him saying that TW's family knows a lot and advised her to talk to them. I don't think he was talking about the info included in the book.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stumbling over this sentence by John Fitzpatrick: "*Officially I was not dating her* - we were best friends."
> 
> What does that even mean?
> 
> This was while she was still living with Cory BTW, but that didn't keep her from leaving him in a hotel room in was it Ireland to go out all night with Rory the golf player.
> 
> Fitzpatrick is the age of her father and has lots of money and connections. I have thoughts.


Makes you think what they were unofficially. Friends with benefits?
Cory must have been simply a convenient place to hang her hat and leech off. When she was busy asking Liz Cundy and Piers Morgan for rich Englishmen, she declared herself single.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> After having read 1/4 of the book I come to the conclusion Raptor was a POS long before she met Harry. I just don't understand how he disregarded ALL of the red flags.


witchcraft?


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was thinking...isn't it kind of tragic she snagged the world's most eligible bachelor (disclaimer: not by his own merit) with his huge platform and blew it so that she still has to hustle and force herself on people like back in 2014 when nobody knew her name?


What are you talking about? She is sought after and has 100 mil $ deals!!


----------



## DoggieBags

EverSoElusive said:


> This right here is Z-list all day everyday.
> 
> I've never put much thoughts into Z-list's "create your own truth" mantra but with it being brought up by multiple people in the last days, I now look at it very differently and interpret it like you guys do.
> 
> She is all about altering facts when things don't go her way and fit her narrative or any of her fake personas. So I guess in a way, she is being true to herself by operating based on that mantra.


Isn’t this all part of the fake news social media driven world we seem to be living in? Prominent politicians, celebrities, etc. are very quick to label any negative news concerning them as fake news these days. TW is not unique in her drive to create her own truth nor is she the first to utilize this strategy to achieve her goals. Recollections may vary indeed.


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> The designer's statement that 'Gina Torres was her favorite' must have annoyed TW. From what I read, she must be the chosen one.
> 
> I wonder how T. Bower refrained from writing about TW a little less politely. I believe he knows a lot more about her. I suspect that many people, including family members, provided a ton of off record information. I recall him saying that TW's family knows a lot and advised her to talk to them. I don't think he was talking about the info included in the book.


Oh, I totally believe it. I would love to see all the off the record stuff! But my point was that bower damages his credibility by twisting the meaning of what people said in such a deceptive way. That interview was linked with a footnote! Anyone can go look and see that what the costume designer said is not at all what bower reports in the book. Maybe bower did have some off the record info that the costume designer hated Meghan’s guts (totally likely), but to make it seem like the costume designer said that in an interview when she didn’t is a cheap trick.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> She left Givenchy that's for sure.
> 
> Meghan seems to have been *the kiss of death to *Clare Waight Keller (at Givenchy at the time). Her last notable thing she did was win an award that night in 2018 and now -  nothing(?).


An expression that could perhaps be applied to others. I wonder why the obstetrician '_has shut her practice with little notice'_.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> An expression that could perhaps be applied to others. I wonder why the obstetrician '_has shut her practice with little notice'_.



Basically she takes gold and turns it into lead


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> Hey hey! She’s a 40 year old recent orphan after her father died of embarrassingly bad press and her mother evaporated.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> After having read 1/4 of the book I come to the conclusion Raptor was a POS long before she met Harry. I just don't understand how he disregarded ALL of the red flags.


Pardon the vulgarity, but he was c*ntstruck.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was thinking...isn't it kind of tragic she snagged the world's most eligible bachelor (disclaimer: not by his own merit) with his huge platform and blew it so that she still has to hustle and force herself on people like back in 2014 when nobody knew her name?


Done in by her narcissism. I have no sympathy for her. The only sympathy I have is for the kids, assuming they exist.


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> Oh, I totally believe it. I would love to see all the off the record stuff! But my point was that bower damages his credibility by twisting the meaning of what people said in such a deceptive way. That interview was linked with a footnote! Anyone can go look and see that what the costume designer said is not at all what bower reports in the book. Maybe bower did have some off the record info that the costume designer hated Meghan’s guts (totally likely), but to make it seem like the costume designer said that in an interview when she didn’t is a cheap trick.



I don't know, it seems pretty safe to assume and follows, since M was displeased not being the favourite named actor mentioned, she was annoyed at not being mentioned.

She wasn't asked to speak at the UN about Mandela, it didn't stop her shouting at H (reportedly) beforehand that she should have been, nor sticking herself in the lineup for the photo op later - and in front of her husband that was the speaker.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> After having read 1/4 of the book I come to the conclusion Raptor was a POS long before she met Harry. *I just don't understand how he disregarded ALL of the red flags.*


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stumbling over this sentence by John Fitzpatrick: "Officially I was not dating her - we were best friends."
> 
> What does that even mean?
> 
> This was while she was still living with Cory BTW, but that didn't keep her from leaving him in a hotel room in was it Ireland to go out all night with Rory the golf player.
> 
> Fitzpatrick is the age of her father and has lots of money and connections. I have thoughts.


Ok, so I clearly have way too much time on my hands …. But I found the interview referenced in the footnote for this and it does not sound as weird as bower makes it out to be. The interviewer says, “You weren’t dating her,” like he is skeptical but just wants to confirm, and Fitzpatrick says: “no, I was not dating her, officially I was not dating her, and I want that to be clear.” Honestly, it seems like Fitzpatrick is just a really nice guy who was taken in by meghan. They start talking about Rory and meghan around the 35 min mark.


----------



## justwatchin

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


She looks like she’s trying to make sure the faux belly doesn’t drop to the floor; nothing maternal about it


----------



## jennlt

BLG is schooling the Sucker Squad


----------



## xincinsin

justwatchin said:


> She looks like she’s trying to make sure the faux belly doesn’t drop to the floor; nothing maternal about it


The entire Archie pregnancy, she seemed determined to draw attention to that belly with her flicking and cradling. 
She should have just worn this tee.


----------



## Pivoine66

DoggieBags said:


> Isn’t this all part of the fake news social media driven world we seem to be living in? Prominent politicians, celebrities, etc. are very quick to label any negative news concerning them as fake news these days. *TW is not unique in her drive to create her own truth nor is she the first to utilize this strategy to achieve her goals. Recollections may vary indeed.*



But she, with a
- true career as a former Deal-or-No-Deal briefcase girl and supporting actress on a TV series,
- NO Evidence of any true work and enduring actions as a Humanitarian or Feminist,
is *besmirching the British Royal Family, the Monarchy and the British people* after she had a wedding of about 50 million performed for her, had about 1 million in clothing - more than all the other ladies of the Royal Families in Europe - paid for by her father-in-law and all this lying in a huge internationally broadcasted TV interview while the Queen's husband and "rock" is terminally ill.
Well, and what about *her* father, her family and especially the *her POC family* on Doria's side (at a wedding worth about 50 million with a hairdresser flown in etc., she couldn't pay or have paid for their expenses to join her at her wedding?).
Sorry for the long rant, but I personally find this too serious to be able to ignore it or accept it as the spirit of the times "Zeitgeist".

Sorry: edited to add: Her "slipping memory" in Court could, to my knowledge (of course, can be wrong), have been perceived / investigated as criminal conduct in quite some countries.


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stumbling over this sentence by John Fitzpatrick: "Officially I was not dating her - we were best friends."
> 
> What does that even mean?
> 
> This was while she was still living with Cory BTW, but that didn't keep her from leaving him in a hotel room in was it Ireland to go out all night with Rory the golf player.
> 
> Fitzpatrick is the age of her father and has lots of money and connections. I have thoughts.


This struck me to. There was another discussion in the book where Fritzpatrick says he “escorted” her around town and I took that to be a hint that she was technically an escort. He would put her up in his hotel and take her all over NY to dinners and parties in exchange for…


muddledmint said:


> Ok, so I clearly have way too much time on my hands …. But I found the interview referenced in the footnote for this and it does not sound as weird as bower makes it out to be. The interviewer says, “You weren’t dating her,” like he is skeptical but just wants to confirm, and Fitzpatrick says: *“no, I was not dating her, officially I was not dating her, and I want that to be clear.” *Honestly, it seems like Fitzpatrick is just a really nice guy who was taken in by meghan. They start talking about Rory and meghan around the 35 min mark.



People that use prostitutes and escorts wouldn’t say they dated them, they’re hired as it’s a transaction. “I was not dating her, *officially*…”. He’s not going to come out and say she was an escort, that would be embarrassing for him. But reading between the lines that’s exactly the relationship.


----------



## sdkitty

Pivoine66 said:


> But she, with a
> - true career as a former Deal-or-No-Deal briefcase girl and supporting actress on a TV series,
> - NO Evidence of any true work and enduring actions as a Humanitarian or Feminist,
> is *besmirching the British Royal Family, the Monarchy and the British people* after she had a wedding of about 50 million performed for her, had about 1 million in clothing - more than all the other ladies of the Royal Families in Europe - paid for by her father-in-law and all this lying in a huge internationally broadcasted TV interview while the Queen's husband and "rock" is terminally ill.
> Well, and what about *her* father, her family and especially the *her POC family* on Doria's side (at a wedding worth about 50 million with a hairdresser flown in etc., she couldn't pay or have paid for their expenses to join her at her wedding?).
> Sorry for the long rant, but I personally find this too serious to be able to ignore it or accept it as the spirit of the times "Zeitgeist".


yes, it was very strange that Doria was the only family member there


----------



## jennlt

It looks like the fauxmanitarian with the funky feet has been spurned by her favorite footwear company


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> Ok, so I clearly have way too much time on my hands …. But I found the interview referenced in the footnote for this and it does not sound as weird as bower makes it out to be. The interviewer says, “You weren’t dating her,” like he is skeptical but just wants to confirm, and Fitzpatrick says: “*no, I was not dating her, officially I was not dating her,* and I want that to be clear.” Honestly, it seems like Fitzpatrick is just a really nice guy who was taken in by meghan. They start talking about Rory and meghan around the 35 min mark.



So it was not official, but they were dating behind the scenes. Is that right?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> So it was not official, but they were dating behind the scenes. Is that right?




Sounds like he just wanted to a)name drop and b) keep in with the Sussexes c) say she went out with him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> It looks like the fauxmanitarian with the funky feet has been spurned by her favorite footwear company




Thing is Meghan makes the shoes look a bit old-fashioned


----------



## Toby93

andrashik said:


> What are you talking about? She is sought after and has 100 mil $ deals!!


Not exactly sure how to take this?  Are you being sarcastic, or do you really admire her?


----------



## bag-mania

muddledmint said:


> I’m only on chapter 7 of revenge and while I do think it’s pretty good and definitely entertaining, the author’s obvious bias weakens the blow against meghan. I think he would have made a stronger case if he had been more careful in fact checking and more impartial in his reporting. For example, on page 85, he says that meghan was disappointed because the costume designer for suits “said in an interview that meghan was not her favorite actress to dress.” I looked up this interview and the costume designer said no such thing. She only said that Gina Torres was her favorite, which is very different from saying meghan was not her favorite. It’s not a huge thing, but it’s kind of deceptive to frame it the way he does in the book, and it makes me more skeptical about other things as well. I guess I was expecting more from this author.


Does anyone write impartially anymore? Fact-based, unbiased reporting of information was left behind in the 20th century. Everyone has a POV they are pushing. (Some would say agenda.)

I agree Tom Bower skewed his facts to read negatively about Meghan but I consider his book a small attempt at balance for all those glowing biographies of Harry and Meghan which are packed with easily-refutable lies. As near as I can tell, his is the first book to show what’s behind the SS curtain of Meghan misinformation. It’s far from perfect but it’s a start and hopefully others will pick up where he left off.


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> Thing is Meghan makes the shoes look a bit old-fashioned


You don't think that her wearing 5" stilettos and an ill-fitting but fabulously expensive designer frock while running towards the struggle clutching a freshly baked banana bread/olive oil cake/elderflower cake and simultaneously laser focusing on the camera lens and batting her lashes makes her look like a modern woman?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Not exactly sure how to take this?  Are you being sarcastic, or do you really admire her?


If you're familiar with @andrashik comments, you'll know that was just sarcasm  He/she cannot stand Z-list and Co., like many of us here.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Stumbling over this sentence by John Fitzpatrick: "Officially I was not dating her - we were best friends."
> 
> What does that even mean?
> 
> This was while she was still living with Cory BTW, but that didn't keep her from leaving him in a hotel room in was it Ireland to go out all night with Rory the golf player.
> 
> Fitzpatrick is the age of her father and has lots of money and connections. I have thoughts.





muddledmint said:


> I just read that and paused too. What a weird way to say “we’re just friends.” Either the author or Fitzpatrick is clearly trying to insinuate there was something more going on. Like I posted before, bower does try to twist things to make meghan look bad, even though it’s unnecessary because she does that on her own. I can believe she was cheating on Cory with Fitzpatrick, but I can also believe that bower took this quote out of context to make it appear more salacious.





xincinsin said:


> Makes you think what they were unofficially. Friends with benefits?
> Cory must have been simply a convenient place to hang her hat and leech off. When she was busy asking Liz Cundy and Piers Morgan for rich Englishmen, she declared herself single.





muddledmint said:


> Ok, so I clearly have way too much time on my hands …. But I found the interview referenced in the footnote for this and it does not sound as weird as bower makes it out to be. The interviewer says, “You weren’t dating her,” like he is skeptical but just wants to confirm, and Fitzpatrick says: “no, I was not dating her, officially I was not dating her, and I want that to be clear.” Honestly, it seems like Fitzpatrick is just a really nice guy who was taken in by meghan. They start talking about Rory and meghan around the 35 min mark.






mellibelly said:


> This struck me to. There was another discussion in the book where Fritzpatrick says he “escorted” her around town and I took that to be a hint that she was technically an escort. He would put her up in his hotel and take her all over NY to dinners and parties in exchange for…
> 
> People that use prostitutes and escorts wouldn’t say they dated them, they’re hired as it’s a transaction. “I was not dating her, *officially*…”. He’s not going to come out and say she was an escort, that would be embarrassing for him. But reading between the lines that’s exactly the relationship.





Chanbal said:


> So it was not official, but they were dating behind the scenes. Is that right?






papertiger said:


> Sounds like he just wanted to a)name drop and b) keep in with the Sussexes c) say she went out with him




A few pages back, I made a comment wondering if Fitzpatrick was her sugar daddy because I was just as confused when I read about him and what he alleged claimed  

With Z-list's Soho House and yacht club (alleged) affiliations, I'm really not surprised if she slept around to move up socially and had men pay for her sh!t. Again, I'm very much aware she's not the first woman to have done that (if she did) but I'm commenting specifically about Z-list in Z-list's thread (kthx )


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone write impartially anymore? Fact-based, unbiased reporting of information was left behind in the 20th century. Everyone has a POV they are pushing. (Some would say agenda.)
> 
> I agree Tom Bower skewed his facts to read negatively about Meghan but I consider his book a small attempt at balance for all those glowing biographies of Harry and Meghan which are packed with easily-refutable lies. As near as I can tell, his is the first book to show what’s behind the SS curtain of Meghan misinformation. It’s far from perfect but it’s a start and hopefully others will pick up where he left off.


Reading in between the lines,I think Bower is very impressed at how she made lemon chiffon pudding from one small lemon. Meghan was correct when she said she was a genius at networking. She turned on enormous charm to achieve her goals. That was her best acting and it was so good,that she lost the ability that a REAL actor would have to take on a multiple personae for roles. She could only play herself and that was the major problem with her career.  It’s not that Bower admires things she did to get ahead, he admires the way she managed to achieve them. He isn’t giving his approval, just his admiration.

One major message that I get is that she was consumed with the idea of getting married to Mr Right. I thought she was this independent feminist who told off a man holding an elevator door for her that it wasn’t necessary.   (Common courtesy Meghan, he would have done it for a man as well.)  She was 35 and the clock was ticking Harry. Lucky you to have appeared when you did.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> A few pages back, I made a comment wondering if Fitzpatrick was her sugar daddy because I was just as confused when I read about him and what he alleged claimed
> 
> With Z-list's Soho House and yacht club (alleged) affiliations, I'm really not surprised if she slept around to move up socially and had men pay for her sh!t. Again, I'm very much aware she's not the first woman to have done that (if she did) but I'm commenting specifically about Z-list in Z-list's thread (kthx )


He was social climbing. His hotel was no great shakes.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> He was social climbing. His hotel was no great shakes.


He probably is. Besides, his hotel was just a 3-star, not quite Z-list's cup of tea. Regardless, Z-list and Fitzpatrick were using each other. Win-win for both.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Reading in between the lines,I think Bower is very impressed at how she made lemon chiffon pudding from one small lemon. Meghan was correct when she said she was a genius at networking. She turned on enormous charm to achieve her goals. That was her best acting and it was so good,that she lost the ability that a REAL actor would have to take on a multiple personae for roles. She could only play herself and that was the major problem with her career.  It’s not that Bower admires things she did to get ahead, he admires the way she managed to achieve them. He isn’t giving his approval, just his admiration.
> 
> One major message that I get is that she was consumed with the idea of getting married to Mr Right. I thought she was this independent feminist who told off a man holding an elevator door for her that it wasn’t necessary.   (Common courtesy Meghan, he would have done it for a man as well.)  She was 35 and the clock was ticking Harry. Lucky you to have appeared when you did.


Meghan tapped into a strategy for success that wouldn’t have worked 20 years ago and it may not work 20 years from now, but it works perfectly today. That “I’m a strong woman and I’m being attacked by people who are threatened by my strength/insight/wonderfulness” schtick plays really well these days. Her die-hard fans refuse to listen to anything negative about her because they believe what they want to believe. Truth is in the eye of the beholder!


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Pardon the vulgarity, but he was c*ntstruck.


How did H miss that her true colors?? Themes that keep coming back in the book excerpts on Youtube - THE ROYAL GRIFT CHANNEL.  

1. He was a RICH MESS (VICTIM).  31 year old underperformer, mommy was a saint, daddy had mistress, too much booze and substances.. MAJOR SECURITY issue, not due to some terrorist threat level, but due to papparazzi covering his bad behavior in public. 

2. She did her HOMEWORK ASTOUNDINGLY well, she researched the BRF, made sure her team (friends, PR, agent etc) got her all the right photo ops. 

3. She aggressively RUSHED things along and MANIPULATED his fear of PRESS.
SHE disclosed affair to Vanity fair after 6 mos, then complained that the press was following her and Doria.   That allowed him to publicly rebuke the hated press. PRESS/SECURITY is a HOT SPOT for him. He does not see straight on this topic. 

Give her credit, she had a plan and it worked.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I agree Tom Bower skewed his facts to read negatively about Meghan but I consider his book a small attempt at balance for all those glowing biographies of Harry and Meghan which are packed with easily-refutable lies. As near as I can tell, his is the first book to show what’s behind the SS curtain of Meghan misinformation. It’s far from perfect but it’s a start and hopefully others will pick up where he left off.


I like the way he writes; he is able to make important points using few words. For example below, I like how he makes it clear that many women had already contacted P&G about the detergent, and that TW's tendency to join bandwagons started very early.


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> You don't think that her wearing 5" stilettos and an ill-fitting but fabulously expensive designer frock while running towards the struggle clutching a freshly baked banana bread/olive oil cake/elderflower cake and simultaneously laser focusing on the camera lens and batting her lashes makes her look like a modern woman?


Do we need to add in "while shoving Harry aside"?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Meghan tapped into a strategy for success that wouldn’t have worked 20 years ago and it may not work 20 years from now, but it works perfectly today. That “I’m a strong woman and I’m being attacked by people who are threatened by my strength/insight/wonderfulness” schtick plays really well these days. Her die-hard fans refuse to listen to anything negative about her because they believe what they want to believe. Truth is in the eye of the beholder!


BLG agrees:


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> I like the way he writes; he is able to make important points using few words. For example below, I like how he makes it clear that many women had already contacted P&G about the detergent, and that TW's tendency to join bandwagons started very early.
> 
> View attachment 5576980


Yes, overall he did a good job making a comprehensive picture of the real meghan. It is also compulsively readable, even though the cringe factor/secondhand embarrassment makes it simultaneously hard to read. I just think he could have been more devastating to the sussexes if he hadn’t been so obviously pressing his agenda. The bias blunts his sword. I think bower was banking on the assumption that most readers wouldn’t bother to look into the footnotes and realize that he was massaging the truth a bit to get his point across.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> How did H miss that her true colors?? Themes that keep coming back in the book excerpts on Youtube - THE ROYAL GRIFT CHANNEL.
> 
> 1. He was a RICH MESS (VICTIM).  31 year old underperformer, mommy was a saint, daddy had mistress, too much booze and substances.. MAJOR SECURITY issue, not due to some terrorist threat level, but due to papparazzi covering his bad behavior in public.
> 
> 2. She did her HOMEWORK ASTOUNDINGLY well, she researched the BRF, made sure her team (friends, PR, agent etc) got her all the right photo ops.
> 
> 3. She aggressively RUSHED things along and MANIPULATED his fear of PRESS.
> SHE disclosed affair to Vanity fair after 6 mos, then complained that the press was following her and Doria.   That allowed him to publicly rebuke the hated press. PRESS/SECURITY is a HOT SPOT for him. He does not see straight on this topic.
> 
> Give her credit, she had a plan and it worked.


Alternatively, the BRF had a plan and _it _worked.  When I read that interview with the royal reporter Roya Nikkah,  it noted that Hazz was concerned about finding a job, letting people down and proving his worth.  Of course, in between all of those ‘worries’, he was a heavy drinker [druggie?]. Add in Eugenie and her ‘friends’,  this mess was inevitable. Perhaps Eug’s contributions will appear in the next book.  None of this happened in a vacuum.  Imo.


----------



## andrashik

Toby93 said:


> Not exactly sure how to take this?  Are you being sarcastic, or do you really admire her?


I was being sarcastic of course


----------



## CarryOn2020

muddledmint said:


> Yes, overall he did a good job making a comprehensive picture of the real meghan. It is also compulsively readable, even though the cringe factor/secondhand embarrassment makes it simultaneously hard to read. I just think he could have been more devastating to the sussexes if he hadn’t been so obviously pressing his agenda. *The bias blunts his sword.* I think bower was banking on the assumption that most readers wouldn’t bother to look into the footnotes and realize that he was massaging the truth a bit to get his point across.


Imo  Bower’s book is providing the receipts that some people need to believe all that many have been saying.  MM is a liar and Hazz is dim. Tom has said he, as a loyal monarchist, was highly offended and put off by the O interview.  Someone needed to challenge it. He stepped up. I applaud his willingness to identify the lies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the article:

_Rather than defending the veracity of their client’s assertion, the Duchess of Sussex’s lawyers have chosen instead to say that Meghan’s claim was ‘obviously not meant to be a statement of objective fact'. In other words, duh, people – Meghan knows she has two half-siblings, Samantha and Thomas. No, her remark, say the lawyers, are ‘a textbook example of a subjective statement about how a person feels about her childhood.’

Well, there is something objectively hilarious about that use of ‘textbook’. Haven’t you read all those textbooks in which people claim to be only children when they aren’t? The official statements of the Duke and Duchess often deploy this torturously sub-Freudian lingo – as if not really written for public consumption, let alone clarity, but for two pairs of eyes in particular. Harry and Meghan’s apparent *addiction to therapy talk* – as an outlet for self-pity – overwhelms everything, including, it seems, even the notion of such a thing as truth. 

That may be why the Markle story holds such a sway over the public imagination. *We are living in the post-truth age, a time of alternative facts, fake news and algorithmic distortions*. *Meghan Markle is the Grand Duchess of Post-Truthiness*, which is why she has gravitated back to Hollywood, the la la land where rich people can buy their reality and blather on endlessly about mental well-being. Their official Instagram, Sussexroyal ™ is almost a parody is *this feelings-first worldview: ‘Today, I feel …’ declares one post. You – yes, you – fill in the blank.*_


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> Do we need to add in "while shoving Harry aside"?


Absolutely! I'm sure her elbows are as sharp as her tongue.


----------



## charlottawill

muddledmint said:


> Yes, overall he did a good job making a comprehensive picture of the real meghan. It is also compulsively readable, even though the cringe factor/secondhand embarrassment makes it simultaneously hard to read. I just think he could have been more devastating to the sussexes if he hadn’t been so obviously pressing his agenda. The bias blunts his sword. I think bower was banking on the assumption that most readers wouldn’t bother to look into the footnotes and realize that he was massaging the truth a bit to get his point across.


I look forward to reading it in flight this weekend. It should certainly make the time go faster.


----------



## 880

muddledmint said:


> Yes, overall he did a good job making a comprehensive picture of the real meghan. It is also compulsively readable, even though the cringe factor/secondhand embarrassment makes it simultaneously hard to read. I just think he could have been more devastating to the sussexes if he hadn’t been so obviously pressing his agenda. The bias blunts his sword. I think bower was banking on the assumption that most readers wouldn’t bother to look into the footnotes and realize that he was massaging the truth a bit to get his point across.


I agree with you overall.  Someone else here did make the point that there was so much sugar, that Bower provided the counter. And, obviously readers knew that going in. The examples mentioned (like the wardrobe person who said M was not her favorite or the Fitzgerald best friend) didn’t really bother me one way or the other. Perhaps, that was bc I was cringing in reaction to her behavior.

@charlottawill , I think it’s perfect for a long flight, but it’s a slow read. Mainly bc she’s acted this way for her entire life

the duchess of post truthiness


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> It looks like the fauxmanitarian with the funky feet has been spurned by her favorite footwear company




Ah, a relative of Philip.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> He was social climbing. His hotel was no great shakes.



When they met, she was the nobody and he had money and was friends with the Cl*ntons. In fact, I would love to know HOW exactly they met. Besides, Raptor would never have hung out with someone who couldn't do anything for her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternatively, the BRF had a plan and _it _worked.  When I read that interview with the royal reporter Roya Nikkah,  it noted that Hazz was concerned about finding a job, letting people down and proving his worth.  Of course, in between all of those ‘worries’, he was a heavy drinker [druggie?]. Add in Eugenie and her ‘friends’,  this mess was inevitable. Perhaps Eug’s contributions will appear in the next book.  None of this happened in a vacuum.  Imo.



I really don't think so because from a BRF viewpoint it doesn't make sense. They can afford a slacker. They had tried to elevate him all his life. They would always choose to bury the scandal instead of exposing it for everyone to see.


----------



## andrashik

I love Piers's posts about her


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I look forward to reading it in flight this weekend. It should certainly make the time go faster.


I already packed my fully charged kindle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> @charlottawill , I think it’s perfect for a long flight, but it’s a slow read. Mainly bc she’s acted this way for her entire life



Right. I thought I would breeze through it (I once read a Harry Potter in one sitting) but I seriously need to take breaks because it's draining me. She is just such an unbelievably disgusting person and I have a hard time computing how this extent of character flaws is even possible.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really don't think so because from a BRF viewpoint it doesn't make sense. They can afford a slacker. They had tried to elevate him all his life. They would always choose to bury the scandal instead of exposing it for everyone to see.


That is certainly possible. Imo more happened behind the scenes than we know -  they knew he had issues,  they knew women did not find him a “catch”  [Cressida may have been the last straw - her mother is a friend of Charles, right?], they knew he was and would be a problem for Charles.  Wallis never made much sense either, but they let that disaster go forward. Diana was so young that she seemed an odd choice. Maybe they feel they need the drama in order to stay relevant. Idk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Tip of the iceberg?  Do tell, please.


----------



## Toby93

andrashik said:


> I was being sarcastic of course


Lol....thank goodness!  There were a few people who seemed to log in to the wrong thread a few weeks ago


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When they met, she was the nobody and he had money and was friends with the Cl*ntons. In fact, I would love to know HOW exactly they met. Besides, Raptor would never have hung out with someone who couldn't do anything for her.


exactly - she is a user.  I can't stand users


----------



## Toby93

andrashik said:


> I love Piers's posts about her
> View attachment 5577040
> 
> View attachment 5577044


so...are "objective facts" the same as "alternative facts"


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternatively, the BRF had a plan and _it _worked. When I read that interview with the royal reporter Roya Nikkah, it noted that Hazz was concerned about finding a job, letting people down and proving his worth. Of course, in between all of those ‘worries’, he was a heavy drinker [druggie?]. Add in Eugenie and her ‘friends’, this mess was inevitable. Perhaps Eug’s contributions will appear in the next book. None of this happened in a vacuum. Imo.


The book seems to imply that the partying started with the BIG unsupervised Club H mess at Highgrove
At first W and H had friends over
Of course, Charles was always away - business but also with Camilla
H continued to party after W went to Uni - H was 16 then? So, it started when he was 14???

To put drugs in perspective for the smart set ... a year ago, Tatler - THE society mag - had an article about society magic mushroom parties


----------



## andrashik

So Tom Bower's revenge book was trending on twitter then Claw's a narcisist and now Harry is a traitor   


I think they are done


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Reading in between the lines,I think Bower is very impressed at how she made lemon chiffon pudding from one small lemon. Meghan was correct when she said she was a genius at networking. She turned on enormous charm to achieve her goals. That was her best acting and it was so good,that she lost the ability that a REAL actor would have to take on a multiple personae for roles. She could only play herself and that was the major problem with her career.  It’s not that Bower admires things she did to get ahead, he admires the way she managed to achieve them. He isn’t giving his approval, just his admiration.
> 
> One major message that I get is that she was consumed with the idea of getting married to Mr Right. I thought she was this independent feminist who told off a man holding an elevator door for her that it wasn’t necessary.   (Common courtesy Meghan, he would have done it for a man as well.)  She was 35 and the clock was ticking Harry. Lucky you to have appeared when you did.



Actually, I think people are _not_ charmed, they do what she says because they are unnerved by her sheer brazenness and realise she is bat-sh*t


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Actually, I think people are _not_ charmed, they do what she says because they are unnerved by her sheer brazenness and realise she is bat-sh*t



I don't get where this huge ego comes from.  My best guess is mommy and daddy taught her that she was the most special little princess ever.  I doubt she was born this way.

Maybe they forgot to teach her to treat other people well.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tip of the iceberg?  Do tell, please.


Oh, dear, they “Have found some of the allegations gut wrenching.”

Like Cory stashed at home while H and M hooked up elsewhwhere?

 Or that real people, not “ a source” or “a spokesperson” have stated chapter and verse their first hand experiences? It must be gut wrenching to see the control crumbled and exposed. Raptor always assumed her way was THE way.

Knowing how much is in this book and how it is being received, they must be in fear of the notes Bower has possibly ready to go. Did M glue pledges‘ eyelids together at her sorority at Northwestern, did she get booted from the South American Embassy for sex with a married employee, have any old yacht patrons landed to share, was Doria in prison, (pot was illegal while she was in Humboldt evidently harvesting and packaging to sell pot.) and what IS the real story about baby bumps and babies and a disappearing doctor and on and on.

How does she reconcile her “subjective statements” about her family and pre Haz life with what has been documented in the Book? “Recollections may vary” may not mean much to Hazbeen.

If it all makes them sick, they have 16 toilets to choose from.  This is the life THEY have wrought.


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When they met, she was the nobody and he had money and was friends with the Cl*ntons. In fact, I would love to know HOW exactly they met. Besides, Raptor would never have hung out with someone who couldn't do anything for her.


Well in the SoundCloud interview, he said he was at some event at a restaurant and went to say hi to Rory, who was sitting with meghan (that was the same day as the ice bucket challenge, which is supposedly how Rory and meghan met). That’s how he was introduced to meghan, according to him.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Actually, I think people are _not_ charmed, they do what she says because they are unnerved by her sheer brazenness and realise she is bat-sh*t



She's vindictive AF and it's always a lawsuit away. If not a lawsuit, probably a smear campaign by her team and one should be ready to get cancelled! Once again, evil TO THE CORE


----------



## TC1

I just find it interesting that a couple who is very litigious has yet to file anything against this book, author or publisher??


----------



## muddledmint

csshopper said:


> Oh, dear, they “Have found some of the allegations gut wrenching.”
> 
> Like Cory stashed at home while H and M hooked up elsewhwhere?
> 
> Or that real people, not “ a source” or “a spokesperson” have stated chapter and verse their first hand experiences? It must be gut wrenching to see the control crumbled and exposed. Raptor always assumed her way was THE way.
> 
> Knowing how much is in this book and how it is being received, they must be in fear of the notes Bower has possibly ready to go. Did M glue pledges‘ eyelids together at her sorority at Northwestern, did she get booted from the South American Embassy for sex with a married employee, have any old yacht patrons landed to share, was Doria in prison, (pot was illegal while she was in Humboldt evidently harvesting and packaging to sell pot.) and what IS the real story about baby bumps and babies and a disappearing doctor and on and on.
> 
> How does she reconcile her “subjective statements” about her family and pre Haz life with what has been documented in the Book? “Recollections may vary” may not mean much to Hazbeen.
> 
> If it all makes them sick, they have 16 toilets to choose from.  This is the life THEY have wrought.


Have any of you seen the Sasquatch documentary on Hulu about marijuana growing and humboldt county?? I am lol thinking of doria in that setting. Those pot growers were nuts.


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> Have any of you seen the Sasquatch documentary on Hulu about marijuana growing and humboldt county?? I am lol thinking of doria in that setting. Those pot growers were nuts.


I'm beginning to wonder about Doria.  did she teach her daughter anything about empathy or consideration for others?


----------



## gracekelly

muddledmint said:


> Have any of you seen the Sasquatch documentary on Hulu about marijuana growing and humboldt county?? I am lol thinking of doria in that setting. Those pot growers were nuts.


They were and are dangerous and it is well known.  There are certain places there where you don't stop the car to admire the scenery.  The weapon of choice is a stainless steel longbow.  It is has arrows that kill.   If she was picking leaves, she had dangerous friends.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> She's vindictive AF and it's always a lawsuit away. If not a lawsuit, probably a smear campaign by her team and one should be ready to get cancelled! Once again, evil TO THE CORE


I think they are going with the laying low and working on a campaign to show what compassionate people they are.  Good luck.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG agrees:




I believe in many of the issues raised by Hazard-waste-of-space and the Me-Me-ME-aghain, they are just the opposite of all those values. 

Sustainability - jetting around the globe?
Green - 16 bathrooms?
Saving the planet - by merching everything they touch and shooting as much wildlife as possible - even on protected land?
Transparency - by staging everything and photoshopping the rest?
Being kind - by never letting your relatives see your children pr visiting them?
Being relatable - calling yourself Duke and Duchess even when inappropriate?
Being a feminist - and riding on the coattails of your husband?
Not being racist - and dressing up as a white supremacist and calling your friends racist names?
Etc
Etc


----------



## TC1

Waiting on an Oprah apology like when James Frey bamboozled her....


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. I thought I would breeze through it (I once read a Harry Potter in one sitting) but I seriously need to take breaks because it's draining me. She is just such an unbelievably disgusting person and I have a hard time computing how this extent of character flaws is even possible.


This. It’s not the quality of the writing, it’s the subject that is so unpleasant.

Many of us read for enjoyment. While it is enjoyable to see the truth about Meghan finally coming out, it is hard not to become angry reading all the instances of people who helped Meghan get to where she is. From a young age she schemed and manipulated her way step by step up the ladder. Like Bower, I almost have a grudging respect for how much she managed to accomplish by sheer force of will. ALMOST.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Waiting on an Oprah apology like when James Frey bamboozled her....


Oprah has a few friends she may be embarassed about


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> Have any of you seen the Sasquatch documentary on Hulu about marijuana growing and humboldt county?? I am lol thinking of doria in that setting. Those pot growers were nuts.



I've (been) driven through it a few times, staying in Eureka (not to grow, smoke or harvest). We were told, apparently, lots of people take a vacation there and get paid in pot. I haven't been through there in 10 years so maybe things are much more 'commercial' now.

I have to say for balance, the people we met there were some of the nicest I've met anywhere (in the world) there was no trouble and I only have good memories.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to wonder about Doria.  did she teach her daughter anything about empathy or consideration for others?


Nah. Doria only taught her ONE lesson: don't give away the milk for free


----------



## CarryOn2020

muddledmint said:


> Well in the SoundCloud interview, he said he was at some event at a restaurant and went to say hi to Rory, who was sitting with meghan (that was the same day as the ice bucket challenge, which is supposedly how Rory and meghan met). That’s how he was introduced to meghan, according to him.


Here is the ice bucket video.  True love?








						Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle did Ice Bucket Challenge
					

Megan Markle looks calm and collected as golf star Rory McIlroy waits behind her with a box of iced water and pours it over her head on a rooftop as part of a viral video challenge for charity.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## muddledmint

gracekelly said:


> They were and are dangerous and it is well known.  There are certain places there where you don't stop the car to admire the scenery.  The weapon of choice is a stainless steel longbow.  It is has arrows that kill.   If she was picking leaves, she had dangerous friends.


Yes those people are crazy. The documentary starts out with a story about pot farmers being chopped to pieces and it being blamed on sasquatch


----------



## csshopper

muddledmint said:


> Have any of you seen the Sasquatch documentary on Hulu about marijuana growing and humboldt county?? I am lol thinking of doria in that setting. Those pot growers were nuts.


Years ago in the 70’s we had dear friends who annually invited our family to join them at their summer cabin in the woods in an area that unexpectedly became popular with pot farmers. The last time we were scheduled to visit they told us if we saw guys on the road with rifles to just ignore them: we made alternate plans. Our friends ultimately sold, the culture became more criminal as cartels started to get involved, and safety was not assured. They made a tidy profit on their cabin and relocated to a beach time share in San Diego.


----------



## Chanbal

The Meghan and Harry Show…


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the ice bucket video.  True love?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's girlfriend Meghan Markle did Ice Bucket Challenge
> 
> 
> Megan Markle looks calm and collected as golf star Rory McIlroy waits behind her with a box of iced water and pours it over her head on a rooftop as part of a viral video challenge for charity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That ice bucket challenge was so stupid. But it was a bandwagon, so of course Meghan had to do it.


----------



## bag-mania

muddledmint said:


> Have any of you seen the Sasquatch documentary on Hulu about marijuana growing and humboldt county?? I am lol thinking of doria in that setting. Those pot growers were nuts.


Poor Sasquatch! Always has to take the fall for drug people killing each other in the woods.


----------



## andrashik

Uh oh uh ladies! Some tea ( all allegedly in case Claw is here )
Claw was yelling and calling Oprah to , of course, share her truth.

Here is where I got it from:


I think they are out of plates in Montecito
ETA: grammar  , got excited


----------



## CarryOn2020

If she really wanted to counteract the claims, she should make a video, release on insta or FB or YouTube.  W&K release wonderful videos on their insta’s, no problem.  Why does she need want a sycophantic interviewer


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I wouldn’t believe anything TW says. The expression that comes to mind is ”nobody believes a liar even if/when they’re telling the truth.”


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That ice bucket challenge was so stupid. But it was a bandwagon, so of course Meghan had to do it.


I am surprised that she allowed her hair to be drenched.  Extensions and Brazilian blowouts are expensive.

This was the time when she was seeing/living with  Cory and she told him there was nothing going on with Rory.  Sure honey.


----------



## muddledmint

andrashik said:


> Uh oh uh ladies! Some tea ( all allegedly in case Claw is here )
> Claw was yelling and calling Oprah to , of course, share her truth.
> 
> Here is where I got it from:
> 
> 
> I think they are out of plates in Montecito
> ETA: grammar  , got excited



I love this. Who is big brother?

Also, didn’t meghan and Harry and someone from archewell recently go to Oprah’s house? There were photos of them making the drive. I wonder if this was after she got the advance copy of revenge and went to plead for help from Oprah


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I wouldn’t believe anything TW says. The expression that comes to mind is ”nobody believes a liar even if/when they’re telling the truth.”


Of course, we won’t believe it. Pffft.  I won’t believe anything she or he say, even if to O, Gayle, or whoever.   My question remains, why does she want an interviewer?  There are plenty of other choices.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I think they are going with the laying low and working on a campaign to show what compassionate people they are.  Good luck.



Agreed.  There really isn't anything that either Harry or MM can do to refute the Bower's book. The people quoted in it were speaking their truth after all, and on the record. How do you criticize them for speaking "their truth" after the Oprah debacle?   They knew Meghan, they worked with her, they fielded her phone calls and emails and texts, spent time with her one-on-one, and had to run interference for her at events and cater to her whims and demands. These aren't random, unnamed sources. Basically impossible for her or Harry to state that the recollections and perceptions of those people are not valid or truthful, not after the Oprah interview, where MM's feelings were the truth, and facts be damned.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, we won’t believe it. Pffft.  I won’t believe anything she or he say, even if to O, Gayle, or whoever.   My question remains, why does she want an interviewer?  There are plenty of other choices.


If Z-list got huevos, she should let Piers Morgan interview her   He will probe and ask all the hard questions that Oprah didn't ask.


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Uh oh uh ladies! Some tea ( all allegedly in case Claw is here )
> Claw was yelling and calling Oprah to , of course, share her truth.
> 
> Here is where I got it from:
> 
> 
> I think they are out of plates in Montecito
> ETA: grammar  , got excited




I believe every word of it. No journalist with a shred of credibility will go near her now. Forget the roast chicken, her goose is cooked. Bower could not have picked a better title. "Revenge"? Hell yes, his revenge on behalf of the Queen and the monarchy. It is glorious.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> If she really wanted to counteract the claims, she should make a video, release on insta or FB or YouTube.  W&K release wonderful videos on their insta’s, no problem.  Why does she need want a sycophantic interviewer


Maybe she could do a podcast in response?


----------



## EverSoElusive

needlv said:


> Maybe she could do a podcast in response?


They weren't capable of producing contents for their Spotify podcast so I'm a little pessimistic about their abilities to do so


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> Uh oh uh ladies! Some tea ( all allegedly in case Claw is here )
> Claw was yelling and calling Oprah to , of course, share her truth.
> 
> Here is where I got it from:
> 
> 
> I think they are out of plates in Montecito
> ETA: grammar  , got excited



Don’t know who Big Brother is supposed to be, but his claims don’t make sense. I fully believe Meghan is furious about the Bower book. However, why would she be trying to force more Royal gossip into a book about Harry? How would that be retaliating against Bower?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Don’t know who Big Brother is supposed to be, but his claims don’t make sense. I fully believe Meghan is furious about the Bower book. However, why would she be trying to force more Royal gossip into a book about Harry? How would that be retaliating against Bower?


Could it be Hazzi did not let her read it?  Now she is ‘checking’ to make sure all the dirt is in there?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Don’t know who Big Brother is supposed to be, but his claims don’t make sense. I fully believe Meghan is furious about the Bower book. However, why would she be trying to force more Royal gossip into a book about Harry? How would that be retaliating against Bower?


I took it as gossip about others. More of 'her truth".


----------



## EverSoElusive

If Harry wasn't so brainwashed/damaged/dumb/(whatever adjective you see fit), do you think he would have felt it's a major red flag that his "my wife" takes every opportunity to lie about his family?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I took it as gossip about others. More of 'her truth".


_If_ the meeting happened, I hope Moehringer told her to shove it. His reputation as a writer will be hanging by a thread after this if he gives in and makes Harry’s book all about perceived slights against Meghan.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

youngster said:


> Agreed.  There really isn't anything that either Harry or MM can do to refute the Bower's book. The people quoted in it were speaking their truth after all, and on the record. How do you criticize them for speaking "their truth" after the Oprah debacle?   They knew Meghan, they worked with her, they fielded her phone calls and emails and texts, spent time with her one-on-one, and had to run interference for her at events and cater to her whims and demands. These aren't random, unnamed sources. Basically impossible for her or Harry to state that the recollections and perceptions of those people are not valid or truthful, not after the Oprah interview, where MM's feelings were the truth, and facts be damned.





bag-mania said:


> Don’t know who Big Brother is supposed to be, but his claims don’t make sense. I fully believe Meghan is furious about the Bower book. However, why would she be trying to force more Royal gossip into a book about Harry? How would that be retaliating against Bower?


Angry bulls react to any fabric waved before them.  She is seeing red and charging.  


bag-mania said:


> Don’t know who Big Brother is supposed to be, but his claims don’t make sense. I fully believe Meghan is furious about the Bower book. However, why would she be trying to force more Royal gossip into a book about Harry? How would that be retaliating against Bower?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Haven’t read the article, but here we go - more gloves are off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the Spectator article:

_It got Cockburn thinking: this bizarre transition to Holistic Harry happened pretty fast. His days, which used to be filled with public engagements and parties, now see him meditating in Montecito, announcing that we should all take time for ourselves, even proclaiming that if we don’t like our job, that we should just quit like he did. *What are the characteristics of a cult again?* A charismatic leader who is preoccupied with money-making; an us-versus-them mentality, mind-numbing techniques such as meditation, elitists who think they’re saving the world and so on and so on…_

ETA: Hazzi, charismatic???  No. Just. No.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to wonder about Doria.  did she teach her daughter anything about empathy or consideration for others?


Doria remains the great mystery … amazing how she has stayed under the radar , how ?


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> Doria remains the great mystery … amazing how she has stayed under the radar , how ?



The book didn’t really flatter Thomas or Doria.  She just wanted to party and smoke a lot of weed, and Thomas worked very long hours and made it up by spoiling MM and never saying “no”.


----------



## muddledmint

needlv said:


> The book didn’t really flatter Thomas or Doria.  She just wanted to party and smoke a lot of weed, and Thomas worked very long hours and made it up by spoiling MM and never saying “no”.


I thought he sounded like a loving and attentive dad. Maybe too indulgent, but there are much worse fathers who raised normal people. I think meghan was born a narcissist and being spoiled just enabled her innate personality to come out in full glory.


----------



## bag-mania

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Angry bulls react to any fabric waved before them.  She is seeing red and charging.


Great analogy! Now I’m imagining Meghan pawing the ground and snorting in rage after reading excerpts from Bower’s book.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

andrashik said:


> So Tom Bower's revenge book was trending on twitter then Claw's a narcisist and now Harry is a traitor
> View attachment 5577093
> 
> I think they are done


At least, JCMH is done!


----------



## Hermes Zen

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


Wow.  I've never been pregnant.  Would one constantly hold their bump like this? It looks like the baby was going to slide out or maybe it was a fake moonbump and it was sliding down?!?  What would be the reason besides wanting attention?  Okay, I think I know the answer(s) but had to comment !!!


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Doria remains the great mystery … amazing how she has stayed under the radar , how ?


If Doria was clamoring for attention and money then she would be fair game but she’s been careful about keeping a low profile. As far as I know she has never done an interview or commented on her daughter. What can be written about somebody who never talks?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> If Doria was clamoring for attention and money then she would be fair game but she’s been careful about keeping a low profile. As far as I know she has never done an interview or commented on her daughter. What can be written about somebody who never talks?


I'm sure Doria is on the payroll and is kept on a short leash


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I'm sure Doria is on the payroll and is kept on a short leash


Could be. I don’t think Doria does anything she doesn’t want to do. If she’s looking after Archie and the invisible girl I’d expect she’s being compensated accordingly.


----------



## andrashik

muddledmint said:


> I love this. Who is big brother?
> 
> Also, didn’t meghan and Harry and someone from archewell recently go to Oprah’s house? There were photos of them making the drive. I wonder if this was after she got the advance copy of revenge and went to plead for help from Oprah


It's the user's step brother and he works in the entertainment industry


----------



## Hermes Zen

EverSoElusive said:


> If Z-list got huevos, she should let Piers Morgan interview her   He will probe and ask all the hard questions that Oprah didn't ask.


If only there was a GIANT LOVE emoji I could use on your post !  Love love love this!!   Thanks @EverSoElusive!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Uh oh uh ladies! Some tea ( all allegedly in case Claw is here )
> Claw was yelling and calling Oprah to , of course, share her truth.
> 
> Here is where I got it from:
> 
> 
> I think they are out of plates in Montecito
> ETA: grammar  , got excited




I find it interesting that apparently Kate's appearance really ticked her off. She is such a small, petty person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> If she really wanted to counteract the claims, she should make a video, release on insta or FB or YouTube.  W&K release wonderful videos on their insta’s, no problem.  Why does she need want a sycophantic interviewer



To stress her importance and credibility.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Actually, I think people are _not_ charmed, they do what she says because they are unnerved by her sheer brazenness and realise she is bat-sh*t



And what happens when they don't toe the line? My narcs spread lies about me. Supposedly I was an unfair boss/colleague who expected them to take responsibility for errors which were "obviously" an "act of God". A fair number of my colleagues knew the narcs were lying but just went along with him/her to preserve the peace. 

Methane, when faced with resistance, throws tantrums and turns on the waterworks. At the beginning, I suspect she tapped into Hazard's Great White Saviour mentality. Once he was hooked, she started confusing him: "_I'm just a poor victimized biracial orphan who, against all odds, has become a top movie star, supermodel and millionaire. I also a renowned humanitarian and philanthropist (even though no one has heard of me). I'm so weak and fearful that I need you to hold my hand ALL THE TIME. I'm also so strong and independent that you should cede the spotlight to me ALL THE TIME_."



csshopper said:


> Oh, dear, they “Have found some of the allegations *gut wrenching*.”
> 
> Like Cory stashed at home while H and M hooked up elsewhwhere?
> 
> Or that real people, not “ a source” or “a spokesperson” have stated chapter and verse their first hand experiences? It must be gut wrenching to see the control crumbled and exposed. Raptor always assumed her way was THE way.


I'm sorry. Every time I see the word "gut", I laugh. Methane has spoilt that word for me. Luckily I like bananas and elderflower cordial too much for any association with her to stick.

Apropos of nothing, bananas from my garden. Yummy!





muddledmint said:


> Well in the SoundCloud interview, he said he was at some event at a restaurant and went to say hi to Rory, who was sitting with meghan (that was the same day as the ice bucket challenge, which is supposedly how Rory and meghan met). That’s how he was introduced to meghan, according to him.


Wasn't it the story that Rory picked Methane for the challenge? Did someone give him a list and he randomly stabbed at it? Or did her reputation precede her to influence his choice?



gracekelly said:


> I think they are going with the laying low and working on a campaign to show what compassionate people they are.  Good luck.


Wonder which BFF they will trot out to claim that they are amazing.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it interesting that apparently Kate's appearance really ticked her off. She is such a small, petty person.



By petty, I'm guessing you mean eaten-up with jealousy, the* toxic-green* variety. Both of H&M are truly beyond the normal range of anything. 

I'm not a superfan of Kate. To me she seems a nice person, doing her job best she can. Isn't that what most of us are and do? I can literally feel her spit bile, even that W&K Royal wedding comment in the Tig was obviously just pure jealousy and green envy - nothing to do with her so called feminism. That that can spark so much hate and pettiness from M really shows you that M is not a nice person and has way too much time on her hands


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Judging by the teaser someone is trolling big time.


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, we won’t believe it. Pffft.  I won’t believe anything she or he say, even if to O, Gayle, or whoever.   My question remains, why does she want an interviewer?  There are plenty of other choices.


Because other choices are not.on.brand!!


----------



## andrashik

Now JCMH is worried about his family
"The Duke is reportedly "worried sick" his highly anticipated memoir "will lead to a new war with the royals". The source told Heat magazine that "Meghan is urging him to tell his truth and not hide what really happened" while he struggles with what to include. They added: "Every passage is being revised again and again. Harry keeps remembering new things he wants to include, and then suddenly panics about toning down certain anecdotes."








						Meghan steps in as Harry 'worried sick'
					

MEGHAN MARKLE has stepped in as Prince Harry is "worried sick" his upcoming memoir will spark a new row with the Firm, a source has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Aminamina

Error.


----------



## Aminamina

andrashik said:


> Now JCMH is worried about his family
> "The Duke is reportedly "worried sick" his highly anticipated memoir "will lead to a new war with the royals". The source told Heat magazine that "Meghan is urging him to tell his truth and not hide what really happened" while he struggles with what to include. They added: "Every passage is being revised again and again. Harry keeps remembering new things he wants to include, and then suddenly panics about toning down certain anecdotes."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan steps in as Harry 'worried sick'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has stepped in as Prince Harry is "worried sick" his upcoming memoir will spark a new row with the Firm, a source has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


What a sorry pair of scorpions,


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> If only there was a GIANT LOVE emoji I could use on your post !  Love love love this!!   Thanks @EverSoElusive!


Aww thank you  

Wouldn't it be nice if the interview actually happens. It will probably surpass the viewership of the O interview!


----------



## papertiger

M clearly said *"I grew-up an only child, which everyone who grew-up around me know"

"I wish I had siblings" *

She did not say that she grew-up _as_ an only child, or that she felt like she was an only child.

FACT is, she thinks she's the only person on the planet - never mind in her family. Ghosted to a new level, dense the existence of anyone and everyone that isn't "one-brand"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Now JCMH is worried about his family
> "The Duke is reportedly "worried sick" his highly anticipated memoir "will lead to a new war with the royals". The source told Heat magazine that "Meghan is urging him to tell his truth and not hide what really happened" while he struggles with what to include. They added: "Every passage is being revised again and again. Harry keeps remembering new things he wants to include, and then suddenly panics about toning down certain anecdotes."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan steps in as Harry 'worried sick'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has stepped in as Prince Harry is "worried sick" his upcoming memoir will spark a new row with the Firm, a source has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



See...a good wife would calm him down. The a*shole is riling him up trying to escalate things.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> M clearly said *"I grew-up an only child, which everyone who grew-up around me know"
> 
> "I wish I had siblings" *
> 
> She did not say that she grew-up _as_ an only child, or that she felt like she was an only child.
> 
> FACT is, she thinks she's the only person on the planet - never mind in her family. Ghosted to a new level, dense the existence of anyone and everyone that isn't "one-brand"




She's such a lying liar who lies. Also, my youngest sibling is quite a bit younger than the youngest of us older ones. I never heard them express they were an only child and longed for siblings, but they are also not completely crazy.


----------



## jennlt

muddledmint said:


> I love this. Who is big brother?
> 
> *Also, didn’t meghan and Harry and someone from archewell recently go to Oprah’s house? *There were photos of them making the drive. I wonder if this was after she got the advance copy of revenge and went to plead for help from Oprah




Oprah was not in Montecito at the time they staged their photo op; she was at her home in Hawaii and then flew directly to her father's funeral in Nashville, iirc. Several pages back, @Chanbal posted an article refuting the Harkles supposed visit. Found it, it's post #98,442.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Now JCMH is worried about his family
> "The Duke is reportedly "worried sick" his highly anticipated memoir "will lead to a new war with the royals". The source told Heat magazine that "Meghan is urging him to tell his truth and not hide what really happened" while he struggles with what to include. They added: "Every passage is being revised again and again. Harry keeps remembering new things he wants to include, and then suddenly panics about toning down certain anecdotes."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan steps in as Harry 'worried sick'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has stepped in as Prince Harry is "worried sick" his upcoming memoir will spark a new row with the Firm, a source has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Him being "worried sick" gives Pinocchio the perfect opportunity to lengthen her nose further.
"Don't you worry about it, H. I'll help you sort the memwah out."
The whole description of his indecisiveness makes him sound quite mental.



papertiger said:


> M clearly said *"I grew-up an only child, which everyone who grew-up around me know"
> 
> "I wish I had siblings" *
> 
> She did not say that she grew-up _as_ an only child, or that she felt like she was an only child.
> 
> FACT is, she thinks she's the only person on the planet - never mind in her family. Ghosted to a new level, dense the existence of anyone and everyone that isn't "one-brand"



I'm starting to agree with the Youtuber who calls her solely by the nickname Nutmeg. Methane could give the Joker a run for his money (after all, she already raided his wardrobe  )


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Doria remains the great mystery … amazing how she has stayed under the radar , how ?


Read first few chapters of book … Bower interviewed Thomas Markle 
She gives birth, divorces, goes to live with M at Doria‘s mom 
Divorced due to her smoking too much weed and her affairs per TM
Around age 9 for M, D announces she will travel , leaves M with dad
Doria is virtually absent From narrative until M goes to college ???!!!??
I get it she refused an interview but still ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Read first few chapters of book … Bower interviewed Thomas Markle
> She gives birth, divorces, goes to live with M at Doria‘s mom
> Divorced due to her smoking too much weed and her affairs per TM
> Around age 9 for M, D announces she will travel , leaves M with dad
> Doria is virtually absent From narrative until M goes to college ???!!!??
> I get it she refused an interview but still ..


In book reading, read until M goes to college then cheated , read last chapter , will be going back for rest

Wondering why title REVENGE - by whom ? on whom ?
I was feeling enormous ANIMOSITY from HM toward BRF at the end , H leaked stuff about dad and bags of cash story
Bower was being subtle, intimating what is to come , the BOOK by H will be BADDDDDDD NEWS for BRF, REVENGE by HM a in BRF as I read it now 

Book will Be published a few days before Michelle Oh’s book, not a featured spot in lineup for the H book, as if sales are not expected to be much

PS publication date around the time of W and K’s big NY splash at Earthshot prize, hmmm


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> If Doria was clamoring for attention and money then she would be fair game but she’s been careful about keeping a low profile. As far as I know she has never done an interview or commented on her daughter. What can be written about somebody who never talks?


Bower interviewed everybody, onviously no one was talking about Doria
only disparaging remarks by Thomas were about her weed use and affairs, when he was asked for reasons for divorce
long blanks about Doria in the account by Thomas
she is the original INVISIBLE woman


----------



## marietouchet

Thank you in order … for pointing out where’d to find book 
Am reading book on kindle Unlimited in the US
it is a UK edition, some words are MISSPELLED LOL !!!! 
But i fail to remember who gave the tip here THANK YOU 
THANK YOU ALL for being. A fun community 
and tolerating my misspellings …


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Thing is Meghan makes the shoes look a bit old-fashioned


Yeah she does she makes them look like knock off manalos/loubs and besides  no one wants a close up of those feet. 


Aminamina said:


> Because other choices are not.on.brand!!



It is amazing that Whitney, deeply sunk into her terrible addiction by that point, is still a more convincing at lying than H in his interview. 


papertiger said:


> M clearly said *"I grew-up an only child, which everyone who grew-up around me know"
> 
> "I wish I had siblings" *
> 
> She did not say that she grew-up _as_ an only child, or that she felt like she was an only child.
> 
> FACT is, she thinks she's the only person on the planet - never mind in her family. Ghosted to a new level, dense the existence of anyone and everyone that isn't "one-brand"



This is just creepy. She’s such a freak. 


marietouchet said:


> In book reading, read until M goes to college then cheated , read last chapter , will be going back for rest
> 
> Wondering why title REVENGE - by whom ? on whom ?
> I was feeling enormous ANIMOSITY from HM toward BRF at the end , H leaked stuff about dad and bags of cash story
> Bower was being subtle, intimating what is to come , the BOOK by H will be BADDDDDDD NEWS for BRF, REVENGE by HM a in BRF as I read it now
> 
> Book will Be published a few days before Michelle Oh’s book, not a featured spot in lineup for the H book, as if sales are not expected to be much
> 
> PS publication date around the time of W and K’s big NY splash at Earthshot prize, hmmm


I agree I thought revenge was a bad title it’s so generic, I feel like the obvious title is ‘Varying Recollections’ or ‘the Windsor MLM’ or ‘true grift’


----------



## andrashik

Scoobie is working hard








						Meghan Markle's biographer pinpoints when demand for Kate and Prince William plummeted
					

MEGHAN MARKLE's biographer has pinpointed when demand for Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince William "waned" in the US.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

How much longer can Meghan possibly milk her brief time among the royals? She's been away longer than she lived there at this point.

Harry's memoir will be a fascinating work of fiction. I'm sure Meghan will have added her own special touches to show how Harry was abused and broken until she swooped in to save him, at a tragic cost to her own career and well-being!


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree I thought revenge was a bad title it’s so generic, I feel like the obvious title is ‘Varying Recollections’ or ‘the Windsor MLM’ or ‘true grift’


Based on everything I've read so far, I'm taking it as Bower's revenge on behalf of the Queen and the monarchy for ZeeZy's web of lies, deception and grift. He said the O interview prompted him to write the book to set things straight. I think he won, game, set and match. Unless Hazy has some real dirt on Dad, William and Uncle Andy no one will be interested in what he has to say. The story of a poor motherless boy who found his soulmate in ZeeZy won't sell the book. 

"True Grift" has a nice ring to it though


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Scoobie is working hard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's biographer pinpoints when demand for Kate and Prince William plummeted
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's biographer has pinpointed when demand for Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince William "waned" in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5577460











						Duchess Of Cambridge Kate Middleton GIF - Duchess Of Cambridge Kate Middleton Duke Of Cambridge - Discover & Share GIFs
					

Click to view the GIF




					tenor.com


----------



## TC1

bag-mania said:


> That ice bucket challenge was so stupid. But it was a bandwagon, so of course Meghan had to do it.


I don't know if it was the most clever idea. But it raised $115 million for ALS. Which is more than I can say for most of these charity initiatives or "pledges"


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Harry's memoir will be a fascinating work of fiction. *I'm sure Meghan will have added her own special touches to show how Harry was abused and broken until she swooped in to save him, at a tragic cost to her own career and well-being!*


She is a true saint 
OTOH it will be most entertaining to see how they spin their blind date and their pee-pee adventure. Plastic Pal did a magnificent job fictionalizing the luxury date in Africa. It was almost like he was there, perhaps masquerading as one of the serving girls who brought them exotic tit-bits  Will Hazard's subjective truth be the same?
_Meghan, on the last day of an incredible three-week stay, stretched her body into the perfect warrior pose. She quietly took in her surroundings from the grounds of their final home away from home on this trip, a modern villa in Livingstone, Zambia, just under ten miles upstream from Victoria Falls. The rising sun washed over her makeshift yoga garden, while an exotic flock of birds that looked as if they had just had their tails dipped in pots of colourful paints serenaded her._


----------



## muddledmint

jennlt said:


> Oprah was not in Montecito at the time they staged their photo op; she was at her home in Hawaii and then flew directly to her father's funeral in Nashville, iirc. Several pages back, @Chanbal posted an article refuting the Harkles supposed visit. Found it, it's post #98,442.



Muahahaha the markles are so pathetic


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Based on everything I've read so far, I'm taking it as Bower's revenge on behalf of the Queen and the monarchy for ZeeZy's web of lies, deception and grift. He said the O interview prompted him to write the book to set things straight. I think he won, game, set and match. Unless Hazy has some real dirt on Dad, William and Uncle Andy no one will be interested in what he has to say. The story of a poor motherless boy who found his soulmate in ZeeZy won't sell the book.
> 
> "True Grift" has a nice ring to it though


Reading between the lines, I think Bower is suggesting that H has a bunch of dirt on dad
AND there is so much acrimony it could come out


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


> Scoobie is working hard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's biographer pinpoints when demand for Kate and Prince William plummeted
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE's biographer has pinpointed when demand for Kate, Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince William "waned" in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5577460


SCOOBIE refers to the popularity of WK in the US, did they ever have a big following in the US? It is not part of the Commonwealth …do they care ?
meanwhile JCMH popularity 8n the UK has plummeted


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Reading between the lines, I think Bower is suggesting that H has a bunch of dirt on dad


And that’s the big question, isn’t it? Are there skeletons in Charles’ closet that we don’t already know about? There may well be but I don’t know whether Harry is privy to them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And that’s the big question, isn’t it? Are there skeletons in Charles’ closet that we don’t already know about? There may well be but I don’t know whether Harry is privy to them.


well, if he truly throws his father and Camilla under the bus I hope they cut him off totally....It doesn't make sense.  do they think they can get enough money out of a tell-all book to make up for all the potential funding from daddy?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Him being "worried sick" gives Pinocchio the perfect opportunity to lengthen her nose further.
> "Don't you worry about it, H. I'll help you sort the memwah out."
> The whole description of his indecisiveness makes him sound quite mental.
> 
> 
> I'm starting to agree with the Youtuber who calls her solely by the nickname Nutmeg. Methane could give the Joker a run for his money (after all, she already raided his wardrobe  )



and his permeant grin (at least when cameras are on her)


----------



## Aminamina

Scoobie is obviously not well in the head. I almost feel offended reading the stupidity he throws up. The way he spreads his lies is similar to the works of russian propaganda: just drown any bit of truth in the ocean of lies, lies…till the truth becomes indecipherable to the ”masses”(sugars).


marietouchet said:


> SCOOBIE refers to the popularity of WK in the US, did they ever have a big following in the US? It is not part of the Commonwealth …do they care ?
> meanwhile JCMH popularity 8n the UK has plummeted


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Bower's description of Scobie. I love how he uses "unusual" as an insult  

"Omid Scobie is an unusual journalist. Critics have highlighted that his face changed after working in Japan for US Weekly, and Richard Eden, in the Daily Mail, suggested that his age has also varied. Some would say that as a royal editor for Harper's Bazaar, the Anglo-Iranian is a propagandist."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So they have met.

"Harry had never heard of [Raptor], but he trusted the judgement of his childhood friend Violet von Westenholz. Nothing would be lost meeting the unknown actress for a drink."

In hindsight I'd say the assessement of "nothing would be lost" was wrong.

I'd also say Violet is a matchmaking fail who should NOT be trusted with setting up people (admittedly, I just think Raptor is very skilled in overriding people's knowledge of humand nature during the first few meetings). I wonder if she sometimes looks at the mess and wishes she had just politely declined.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bower's description of Scobie. I love how he uses "unusual" as an insult
> 
> "Omid Scobie is an unusual journalist. Critics have highlighted that his face changed after working in Japan for US Weekly, and Richard Eden, in the Daily Mail, suggested that his age has also varied. Some would say that as a royal editor for Harper's Bazaar, the Anglo-Iranian is a propagandist."


I don't understand the Anglo Iranian reference


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it interesting that apparently Kate's appearance really ticked her off. She is such a small, petty person.


To be honest--if I looked like me (just regular) and my sil, who I do love, appeared in that golden gown at that movie premier--I would have a moment of "why didn't I get her legs at least? Or her hair? Arrghh!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand the Anglo Iranian reference



His father is British and his mother is Iranian. I think that's what Bower is referring to.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> To be honest--if I looked like me (just regular) and my sil, who I do love, appeared in that golden gown at that movie premier--I would have a moment of "why didn't I get her legs at least? Or her hair? Arrghh!"


sorry for repeating myself but I think she probably finds it super annoying that she, the "Hollowood star" isn't as attractive as Kate - doesn't have the tall slender Diana body that Kate has.  I'd bet she thought she could outshine Kate

Oh - and Kate has beautiful natural hair - not a wig or extensions


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Four days after meeting for the first time she was already posting hints on her Instagram. A normal man would have run.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So when Harry first flew to Toronto Raptor was still living with Cory. I wonder what she told him as a reason that he couldn't stay with her/even see her house?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So when Harry first flew to Toronto Raptor was still living with Cory. I wonder what she told him as a reason that he couldn't stay with her/even see her house?


I'm quite sure a woman like her wouldn't have any trouble coming up with something to fool a dimwit like H


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> In book reading, read until M goes to college then cheated , read last chapter , will be going back for rest
> 
> Wondering why title REVENGE - by whom ? on whom ?
> I was feeling enormous ANIMOSITY from HM toward BRF at the end , H leaked stuff about dad and bags of cash story
> Bower was being subtle, intimating what is to come , the BOOK by H will be BADDDDDDD NEWS for BRF, REVENGE by HM a in BRF as I read it now
> 
> Book will Be published a few days before Michelle Oh’s book, not a featured spot in lineup for the H book, as if sales are not expected to be much
> 
> PS publication date around the time of W and K’s big NY splash at Earthshot prize, hmmm


I guess I'm a simpleton. I pretty much assumed it meant the nasty stuff that Z-list and Co. started doing because:


The Palace or rather, Knauf (he got blamed a lot) didn't hit back whenever Z-list got bad press while she was still living in the UK as a working (not so)royal.
Their nonsensical demands were rejected during Megxit. 

Hence, the book title - Revenge!


----------



## Pivoine66

marietouchet said:


> In book reading, read until M goes to college then cheated , read last chapter , will be going back for rest
> 
> Wondering why title REVENGE - by whom ? on whom ?
> I was feeling enormous ANIMOSITY from HM toward BRF at the end , H leaked stuff about dad and bags of cash story
> Bower was being subtle, intimating what is to come , the* BOOK by H will be BADDDDDDD NEWS for BRF, REVENGE by HM *a in BRF as I read it now
> 
> Book will Be published a few days before Michelle Oh’s book, not a featured spot in lineup for the H book, as if sales are not expected to be much
> 
> PS publication date* around the time of W and K’s big NY splash at Earthshot prize,* hmmm


If this is true (Harry's publishing real dirt on his father, brother ...), then I wonder: Does Harry have a single genuine, sincere friend? In my opinion, he has to step in  - NOW -  

Not only Harry seems to be possibly on the verge of collapse, the whole situation is IMPO. 

IMPO too: There will be NO WIN Situation for him, maybe a huuge scandal for GB and the Royal Family, but HE, Harry, not his wife, - will loose the most.

Wouldn't a sincerely loving wife who truly appreciates her husband do everything in her power to prevent this?


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Bower interviewed everybody, onviously no one was talking about Doria
> only disparaging remarks by Thomas were about her weed use and affairs, when he was asked for reasons for divorce
> long blanks about Doria in the account by Thomas
> she is the original INVISIBLE woman


Doria probably was and still being approached by people, asking her to talk but she is very loyal to Z-list thus far. Not to mention, Z-list is her meal ticket so maybe that's why she wouldn't bite the hand that feeds her. While I don't care for her, I must say that she has extremely high self control for not opening her mouth to either tell the truth or peddle her daughter's lies.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So when Harry first flew to Toronto Raptor was still living with Cory. I wonder what she told him as a reason that he couldn't stay with her/even see her house?


I haven’t gotten to that part yet but I’ll assume Meghan still kept her Toronto residence. Spending most of her time at Cory’s doesn’t mean she would give up her base of operations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I haven’t gotten to that part yet but I’ll assume Meghan still kept her Toronto residence. Spending most of her time at Cory’s doesn’t mean she would give up her base of operations.


They rented an apartment together 

During their relationship, she still took trips alone or with friends. Typically, her cheating took place while she wasn't in Toronto.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> They rented an apartment together
> 
> 
> View attachment 5577600


Thank you! So much for that independent woman myth she tried to portray. She never missed an opportunity to get a man to foot the bill for her, did she?


----------



## mellibelly

I have no sympathy for Handbag. Spilling family “secrets” that may/may not be true to make money? I hope the BRF markle him. I wouldn’t want a family member like that in my life. As for a friend saving him, who has time or energy to rescue a middle aged man who ghosted you? Even his bf Tom Inskip wasn’t invited to the wedding reception! Let Handbag lie in the bed he made with The Claw. There need to be consequences for the actions of these two.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, if he truly throws his father and Camilla under the bus I hope they cut him off totally....It doesn't make sense.  do they think they can get enough money out of a tell-all book to make up for all the potential funding from daddy?


I think it’s the scorched earth strategy. If they can’t personally benefit from being royal, then they’re going do everything in their power to see that no one does.


----------



## gracekelly

Finished the book. Prince Louis presciently said it all



Look over there. I told you there were amimimals


----------



## mellibelly

Nutmeg expected her father to disown his other children. When he refused he was ghosted. And Doria plays the game for $$$ from Nutmeg. She stopped taking calls from Thomas around this time. Before, Thomas and Doria would Thanksgiving together with an adult Nutmeg. Thomas even paid for a Hawaiian vacation post divorce for himself, Doria and Nutmeg. D is like M, only out for money.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> His father is British and his mother is Iranian. I think that's what Bower is referring to.


thanks but I don't see the relevance of stick that in there


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Doria probably was and still being approached by people, asking her to talk but she is very loyal to Z-list thus far. Not to mention, Z-list is her meal ticket so maybe that's why she wouldn't bite the hand that feeds her. While I don't care for her, I must say that she has extremely high self control for not opening her mouth to either tell the truth or peddle her daughter's lies.


Everyone is closed mouthed about Doria, even Thomas - except for reasons for divorce
Sam also did not blab in her book, she did not like Doria, her step-mother, fair enough, and her dad gave M things S never got - he was earning less when S was young, but yes, TM ADORED M

What I dont understand is why would M be at odds with Sam ? Sam was out of the house  mostly due to the age difference ... why bother disliking someone who is not there?

Again, I suspect that big chunks of the story are not being told about M's days before college - airbrushed out eg Doria's mom and half-siblings, Tom Markle JR also gets short shrift. 

I do get why TM indulged MM - Doria was MIA, he took care of MM and often worked  18 HOUR DAYS


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pivoine66 said:


> Wouldn't a sincerely loving wife who truly appreciates her husband do everything in her power to prevent this?



Yes, but not only has she never loved the man, just his money and clout, I truly believe she enjoys wrecking havoc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I haven’t gotten to that part yet but I’ll assume Meghan still kept her Toronto residence. Spending most of her time at Cory’s doesn’t mean she would give up her base of operations.



No, she was sharing a house with Cory at the time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> thanks but I don't see the relevance of stick that in there



I didn't read it as a big reveal, rather a description. Like Kate Middleton, daughter of entrepeneurs, or Raptor, the mixed-race actress when she was riding that wave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Everyone is closed mouthed about Doria, even Thomas - except for reasons for divorce
> Sam also did not blab in her book, she did not like Doria, her step-mother, fair enough, and her dad gave M things S never got - he was earning less when S was young, but yes, TM ADORED M



Which is weird in itself. I wonder if Raptor got her tendency for drama from Thomas and her nutjob behaviour from Doria. Why would you not spill the beans on a person you dislike and have no contact with unless you fear they'll go ballistic on you?

I didn't have an opinion on Doria (besides thinking she didn't sound like the most devoted parent) for the longest time because she did keep a low profile, refused to talk and was pleasant when Raptor still trotted her out in the UK. But something I can't pinpoint is not sitting right with me.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> well, if he truly throws his father and Camilla under the bus I hope they cut him off totally....It doesn't make sense.  do they think they can get enough money out of a tell-all book to make up for all the potential funding from daddy?


Well, see last chapter of book, H felt his treatment at Jubilee was tantamount to being erased from the family 

Bower goes into how H was misbehaving before hand (demanding Netflix pix in exchange for trip), so BRF retaliated with NO BALCONY, H&M retaliated with early departure, but trotted out photo of Lili for attention

I deplore the use of the child in this


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand the Anglo Iranian reference


I get it ... MM has played the race card very effectively, Omid also uses it. And the race issue has had effect on the BRF.  

The book analyses the W and K trip to the Caribbean ... it did not go well, the island was all in a WOKE frenzy about Colonial heritage. Bower suggests that the island's WOKENESS has in part to all the MM publicity about race, POC etc 

The Firm did not have an accurate read on this WOKENESS before W and K stepped in it, so, they bear some of the blame 

So, if you want to hurt the BRF keep playing that card


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't have an opinion on Doria (besides thinking she didn't sound like the most devoted parent) for the longest time because she did keep a low profile, refused to talk and was pleasant when Raptor still trotted her out in the UK. But something I can't pinpoint is not sitting right with me.


Again, I've only read about a third of the book so bear with me if any of this was covered. Wasn't there a period of time, like a few years during Meghan's adolescence, where Doria was completely out of the picture? I remember there was a rumor on this thread that she may have been in jail during that time. There has never been any proof of it and I don't believe Bower would put it in his book even if there was. Doria is left to be a mystery.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So when Harry first flew to Toronto Raptor was still living with Cory. I wonder what she told him as a reason that he couldn't stay with her/even see her house?


SECURITY!!!


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t have a good opinion of Doria.  If she really was missing during ZeeZy’s childhood, off having affairs and doing drugs, I strongly hope she has nothing to do with looking after the “children”.  What does she possibly know about raising a well adjusted child?  A and L would do well to stay far far away from Doria.

So I think it’s a terrible theory that Doria is not seen because she’s busy taking care of the “kids”.

I’m sure she is getting paid for appearances, and right now ZeeZy doesn’t really need  her for an appearance…..so she doesn’t appear.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Again, I've only read about a third of the book so bear with me if any of this was covered. Wasn't there a period of time, like a few years during Meghan's adolescence, where Doria was completely out of the picture? I remember there was a rumor on this thread that she may have been in jail during that time. There has never been any proof of it and I don't believe Bower would put it in his book even if there was. Doria is left to be a mystery.



He said in the first few chapters that after the divorce Raptor lived with her, but when she was around 8 (don't quote me, could as well be 10) she started a new business that required travel and handed her over to Thomas. That was the start of nobody ever seeing her, e.g. she watched ONE of Raptor's highschool plays while Thomas was present for all of them, and Bower makes no mention of her having weekends with Raptor or taking part in any childcare, but explains how she spent time at her friends' houses and Thomas brought her on set with him.

What Bower did say is that she worked on a weed farm when that was still illegal.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


Not only did she do it to garner attention, but it kept the moonbump from sliding all over the place, as it usually did!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Somebody at the Palace should have yelled at Z-list like that the first time she tried to misbehave



A little loud, but I find people obnoxious who feel the right to go up and touch any animal or baby without asking permission.  I never pet anyone’s dog without asking (the dog could be mean!) and not many people want a stranger’s germs on their baby!


----------



## andrashik

Part 2 of sugars crazyness


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I don’t have a good opinion of Doria.  If she really was missing during ZeeZy’s childhood, off having affairs and doing drugs, I strongly hope she has nothing to do with looking after the “children”.  What does she possibly know about raising a well adjusted child?  A and L would do well to stay far far away from Doria.
> 
> So I think it’s a terrible theory that Doria is not seen because she’s busy taking care of the “kids”.
> 
> I’m sure she is getting paid for appearances, and right now ZeeZy doesn’t really need  her for an appearance…..so she doesn’t appear.


she's busy running her nursing home


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> We all expected this. It’s a book about him but she controls what goes into it. *Funny it makes it sound like he wasn’t in the meetings about his own memoir.*


Recollections may vary


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> She left Givenchy that's for sure.
> 
> Meghan seems to have been the kiss of death to Clare Waight Keller (at Givenchy at the time). Her last notable thing she did was win an award that night in 2018 and now -  nothing(?).


TW seems to be the kiss of death for quite a number of things.  She’s a Black Widow.


----------



## andrashik

Annnd apparently some reddit users discovered some domains registered and they are speculating that she has her claws on them










						Wait. What?
					

Source: Crazy Days and Nights The alliterate one has at least one domain registered that makes it seem as if she would like to run for President. Meghan Markle  Meghan2024.com  Meghan Markle reportedly networking with ********s, eyes




					www.foxella.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Reading between the lines, I think Bower is suggesting that H has a bunch of dirt on dad
> AND there is so much acrimony it could come out


So what's the worst that could come of that? That PC steps aside for William? Gee, wouldn't that be catastrophic?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: Omid: according to Bower he often describes himself as Anglo-Iranian, so I guess that's why he went with it.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> SCOOBIE refers to the popularity of WK in the US, did they ever have a big following in the US? It is not part of the Commonwealth …do they care ?
> meanwhile JCMH popularity 8n the UK has plummeted


I think it's safe to say that most people in the US know who W&K are and view them either favorably or indifferently, while the I think the opposite would be true of the Desperate Duo, insane sugars notwithstanding.


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Annnd apparently some reddit users discovered some domains registered and they are speculating that she has her claws on them
> View attachment 5577646
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait. What?
> 
> 
> Source: Crazy Days and Nights The alliterate one has at least one domain registered that makes it seem as if she would like to run for President. Meghan Markle  Meghan2024.com  Meghan Markle reportedly networking with ********s, eyes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxella.com



For dogcatcher of Montecito maybe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bower's description of Scobie. I love how he uses "unusual" as an insult
> 
> "Omid Scobie is an unusual journalist. Critics have highlighted that his face changed after working in Japan for US Weekly, and Richard Eden, in the Daily Mail, suggested that his age has also varied. Some would say that as a royal editor for Harper's Bazaar, the Anglo-Iranian is a propagandist."


Omid’s father is a successful marketing guru.  An excellent connection for aspirationals imo.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> To be honest--if I looked like me (just regular) and my sil, who I do love, appeared in that golden gown at that movie premier--I would have a moment of "why didn't I get her legs at least? Or her hair? Arrghh!"


True, but would you go to psychopathic lengths to hurt her and her marriage?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: Omid: according to Bower he often describes himself as Anglo-Iranian, so I guess that's why he went with it.


I wonder why he does this....I googled Anglo Iranian and found nothing except info about an oil company....is he trying to say he's not all Iranian?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself but I think she probably finds it super annoying that she, the "Hollowood star" isn't as attractive as Kate - doesn't have the tall slender Diana body that Kate has.  I'd bet she thought she could outshine Kate
> 
> Oh - and Kate has beautiful natural hair - not a wig or extensions



Kate is everything she is not but wants to be. Her obsession consumes her and colors everything she does.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Nutmeg expected her father to disown his other children. When he refused he was ghosted. And Doria plays the game for $$$ from Nutmeg. She stopped taking calls from Thomas around this time. Before, Thomas and Doria would Thanksgiving together with an adult Nutmeg. Thomas even paid for a Hawaiian vacation post divorce for himself, Doria and Nutmeg. D is like M, only out for money.
> 
> View attachment 5577616



Doesn’t this tell us exactly who D is?  “Feeding anger and spite” kinda says it all.


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> SECURITY!!!



I imagine her saying "Babe I think a hotel would be so much safer, private and discreet for a high profile royal like you". She knew which buttons to push from day one.


----------



## xeyes

bag-mania said:


> Don’t know who Big Brother is supposed to be, but his claims don’t make sense. I fully believe Meghan is furious about the Bower book. However, why would she be trying to force more Royal gossip into a book about Harry? How would that be retaliating against Bower?





andrashik said:


> Now JCMH is worried about his family
> "The Duke is reportedly "worried sick" his highly anticipated memoir "will lead to a new war with the royals". The source told Heat magazine that "Meghan is urging him to tell his truth and not hide what really happened" while he struggles with what to include. They added: "Every passage is being revised again and again. Harry keeps remembering new things he wants to include, and then suddenly panics about toning down certain anecdotes."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan steps in as Harry 'worried sick'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has stepped in as Prince Harry is "worried sick" his upcoming memoir will spark a new row with the Firm, a source has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Earlier in this thread, there was speculation that part of the motivation behind having Hazbo talking about his mental health challenges so openly came from Megsy Baby, so that there would be first-person evidence of instability for her to weaponize in an eventual divorce. That may be a stretch, but, if not, then her “assistance” with the book may be advancing that - we’ll have to wait for the book’s release to see.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I'm beginning to wonder about Doria.  did she teach her daughter anything about empathy or consideration for others?


Both parents are partially to blame for her sense of entitlement.  Children learn from what they see and hear.  My 16 year old daughter recently did an internship with a major investment firm.  The secretary went on and on about how well behaved, well spoken, and nice my daughter was the whole time to everyone. She said, “You did a good job Mama” which was the best compliment to me!


----------



## marietouchet

I think Scoobie's stock is down.

He is nominally still reporting on royalty for YAHOO and H&M are not exactly royalty anymore. I doubt his


CarryOn2020 said:


> Omid’s father is a successful marketing guru.  An excellent connection for aspirationals imo.


Omid is not unlike M , he is a chameleon, and has the magic ability to change at will 
it is a skill, perhaps over used


----------



## marietouchet

Annawakes said:


> I don’t have a good opinion of Doria.  If she really was missing during ZeeZy’s childhood, off having affairs and doing drugs, I strongly hope she has nothing to do with looking after the “children”.  What does she possibly know about raising a well adjusted child?  A and L would do well to stay far far away from Doria.
> 
> So I think it’s a terrible theory that Doria is not seen because she’s busy taking care of the “kids”.
> 
> I’m sure she is getting paid for appearances, and right now ZeeZy doesn’t really need  her for an appearance…..so she doesn’t appear.


Grandma disappearing to take care of grandkids is the most likely possibility in most families
but this family is not lIke any other and WE DO NOT KNOW where she is, except she appeared at the awards ceremony 
wasnt that ceremony about POC ? Maybe my memory is faulty , but having mom on stage while you accept an award was odd


----------



## marietouchet

xeyes said:


> Earlier in this thread, there was speculation that part of the motivation behind having Hazbo talking about his mental health challenges so openly came from Megsy Baby, so that there would be first-person evidence of instability for her to weaponize in an eventual divorce. That may be a stretch, but, if not, then her “assistance” with the book may be advancing that - we’ll have to wait for the book’s release to see.


But then mental health issues is so in keeping with the ever present leitmotif of Theo being victims 
and she was suicidal, and not thriving , so she did it too


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> If Z-list got huevos, she should let Piers Morgan interview her   He will probe and ask all the hard questions that Oprah didn't ask.


She has balls.  Harry’s.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Remember that press statement from Harry via Jason Knauf when they were barely dating, drawing parallels between Raptor and Diana? Guess whose idea that was. Hint: not Harry's.


----------



## charlottawill

I just started reading and immediately caught the Woodward/Woodland Hills mistake. I assume it wasn't caught because the British editors/publisher are not familiar with the LA area. I am glad I have it on Kindle. At 500+ pages it would be awkward to carry around in hardback.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He said in the first few chapters that after the divorce Raptor lived with her, but when she was around 8 (don't quote me, could as well be 10) she started a new business that required travel and handed her over to Thomas. That* was the start of nobody ever seeing her, e.g. she watched ONE of Raptor's highschool plays while Thomas was present for all of them*, and Bower makes no mention of her having weekends with Raptor or taking part in any childcare, but explains how she spent time at her friends' houses and Thomas brought her on set with him.
> 
> What Bower did say is that she worked on a weed farm when that was still illegal.


The bolded part...

The only reason why Thomas wasn't at this one play Damned Yankees was because Z-list got mad at him after Thomas decided to do the lighting for a school play against Z-list's wish. She didn't want Thomas to do the lighting because her drama teacher made her choose between going to a summer retreat and a role in The Pyjama Game play, but not both. She chose the retreat but was still bitter about it. She was so pissed that she even moved into Doria's home briefly and refused to speak to Thomas.

I believe this was one of the many stories that @CeeJay  shared with us too.


----------



## mellibelly

Aminamina said:


> Scoobie is obviously not well in the head. I almost feel offended reading the stupidity he throws up. The way he spreads his lies is similar to the works of russian propaganda: just drown any bit of truth in the ocean of lies, lies…till the truth becomes indecipherable to the ”masses”(sugars).


This is exactly why Lady C calls him Goebbels


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, she was sharing a house with Cory at the time.


And she made sure Vanity Fair changed the storyline to say that she met Hazz in July instead of May because that's when Cory moved out.  I don't doubt for a minute that she actually did get her claws in him in May, and had no problem two timing Cory to go after the BBD - Bigger, Better Deal


----------



## needlv




----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Grandma disappearing to take care of grandkids is the most likely possibility in most families
> but this family is not lIke any other and WE DO NOT KNOW where she is, except she appeared at the awards ceremony
> wasnt that ceremony about POC ? Maybe my memory is faulty , but having mom on stage while you accept an award was odd


Doria gets trotted out whenever TW needs to play the race card.  Same with the over bronzing.  Interesting that the producers of Suits didn't know she was biracial.  I have heard that on her resume, she listed herself as white.


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Everyone is closed mouthed about Doria, even Thomas - except for reasons for divorce
> Sam also did not blab in her book, she did not like Doria, her step-mother, fair enough, and her dad gave M things S never got - he was earning less when S was young, but yes, TM ADORED M
> 
> What I dont understand is why would M be at odds with Sam ? Sam was out of the house  mostly due to the age difference ... why bother disliking someone who is not there?
> 
> Again, I suspect that big chunks of the story are not being told about M's days before college - airbrushed out eg Doria's mom and half-siblings, Tom Markle JR also gets short shrift.
> 
> I do get why TM indulged MM - Doria was MIA, he took care of MM and often worked  18 HOUR DAYS


Maybe people didn't talk much about Doria because they weren't around her a lot and didn't really know what she did during her disappearance or away time. Sure, stories can be made up but TB probably won't be able to include them in the book if they can't be verified.

Very little focus has been placed on Doria's family probably because Z-list didn't live with them a lot or spend time with them. She was mostly with Thomas during her childhood therefore most stories only involved Thomas. Very unlikely that the press wants to publish about Doria's family unless Z-list was in it.

Sam moved out fairly quickly and at that time, I suppose she minded her own business. Again, without spending a ton of time around Doria, what was there for Samantha to spill in her book?

Z-list has a strong innate need to be THE center of attention. With Samantha being the other daughter, I bet she didn't want competition for her dad's attention and money, even if Samantha wasn't around and wasn't competing with her.


----------



## Aimee3

Toby93 said:


> Doria gets trotted out whenever TW needs to play the race card.  Same with the over bronzing.  Interesting that the producers of Suits didn't know she was biracial.  I have heard that on her resume, she listed herself as white.


*I* didn’t know she was biracial and I watched Suits from season 1, episode 1!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> *I* didn’t know she was biracial and I watched Suits from season 1, episode 1!


Me too.  I had no idea.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> *I* didn’t know she was biracial and I watched Suits from season 1, episode 1!


@Aimee3 Are you serious?   When I saw her for the first time from watching Suits, I thought to myself that she's probably mixed race because she is didn't look 100% of any race. Given that it's an American drama series, I assumed she was mixed black and white. Didn't look any kind of Asian so didn't think that was in her mix and she didn't look Hispanic to me at all.


----------



## pukasonqo

mellibelly said:


>




Meantime nurses are overworked and underpaid
People on benefits (pensions, jobseeker, etc) struggle w the high cost of living but the people’s prince brings a petulant lawsuit that is being fronted by taxes


----------



## lanasyogamama

Another minor at error I noticed in the book is that he call Pennsylvania part of New England, which it is not. I think may be a long long time ago Pennsylvania was referred to as a New England colony.


----------



## pukasonqo

EverSoElusive said:


> @Aimee3 Are you serious?   When I saw her for the first time from watching Suits, I thought to myself that she's probably mixed race because she is didn't look 100% of any race. Given that it's an American drama series, I assumed she was mixed black and white. Didn't look any kind of Asian so didn't think that was in her mix and she didn't look Hispanic to me at all.



Actually there are many Latinas of similar appearance to MM especially before she tuned her nose to look more caucasian
Latinos are mostly a mix of indigenous,african, european and, in some cases, asian
I did my DNA out of curiosity and talk about mixed!


----------



## EverSoElusive

pukasonqo said:


> Actually there are many Latinas of similar appearance to MM especially before she tuned her nose to look more caucasian
> Latinos are mostly a mix of indigenous,african, european and, in some cases, asian
> I did my DNA out of curiosity and talk about mixed!


Regardless, you're beautiful


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> *I* didn’t know she was biracial and I watched Suits from season 1, episode 1!


I was not aware until I read it somewhere after the wedding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Another minor at error I noticed in the book is that he call Pennsylvania part of New England, which it is not. I think may be a long long time ago Pennsylvania was referred to as a New England colony.


Pennsylvania was always considered one of the middle colonies. But Bower is English and so are his editors so I’ll cut them some slack on not knowing that. That type of error isn’t relevant to Meghan’s story.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Pennsylvania was always considered one of the middle colonies. But Bower is English and so are his editors so I’ll cut them some slack on not knowing that. That type of error isn’t relevant to Meghan’s story.


Similarly, most Americans couldn't name the difference between the UK and Great Britain.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Now JCMH is worried about his family
> "The Duke is reportedly "worried sick" his highly anticipated memoir "will lead to a new war with the royals". The source told Heat magazine that "Meghan is urging him to tell his truth and not hide what really happened" while *he struggles with what to include. They added: "Every passage is being revised again and again. Harry keeps remembering new things he wants to include, and then suddenly panics about toning down certain anecdotes."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan steps in as Harry 'worried sick'
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE has stepped in as Prince Harry is "worried sick" his upcoming memoir will spark a new row with the Firm, a source has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I read this again and LOL. Doesn't the wording make it sound like Prince Penury is writing it all himself? Are they trying to bury the fact that he is using a ghostwriter? You know, in their subjective reality, there is NO ghostwriter.

The way she blabbed on the OW interview and how it is expected that he will blab in this memoir, would any of the A-listers they are sucking up to want a relationship with them? In his position as CHIMPO, if he really does coach anyone (yoohoo, Serena!), does he even understand about confidentiality, or will the people who talk to him get their mental health issues blabbed too? Maybe he thinks client confidentiality is bonkers as well?


----------



## 880

Harry is not worried about how the BRF will perceive his new war. At this point he’s worried about earning his advance

i agree with the post above that pegged their attitude as one of scorched earth.

They aren’t learning from their mistakes even when faced with the dire consequences of their actions

They‘re more alike than different, and somehow both were so coddled that neither grew up

Meghan wanted to be an only child. She’s a mediocre grifter wanna be actress

harry wanted to be first born and not the spare. He‘s dumb and arrogant

they deserve each other and this mess


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I read this again and LOL. Doesn't the wording make it sound like Prince Penury is writing it all himself? Are they trying to bury the fact that he is using a ghostwriter? You know, in their subjective reality, there is NO ghostwriter.
> 
> The way she blabbed on the OW interview and how it is expected that he will blab in this memoir, would any of the A-listers they are sucking up to want a relationship with them? In his position as CHIMPO, if he really does coach anyone (yoohoo, Serena!), does he even understand about confidentiality, or will the people who talk to him get their mental health issues blabbed too? Maybe he thinks client confidentiality is bonkers as well?


Does anyone really believe that Harry is worried sick? if he was that worried, he wouldn't publish anything.  The only thing he should be worried about is that he has absolute proof to back up whatever story he is including in the book.


----------



## gracekelly

880 said:


> Meghan wanted to be an only child. She’s a mediocre grifter wanna be actress
> 
> harry wanted to be first born and not the spare. He‘s a coddled idiot who has had decades to shape up
> 
> They treat past significant others and family poorly. They‘re more alike than different
> 
> They aren’t learning from their mistakes even when faced with the dire consequences of their actions
> 
> they deserve each other and this mess


There are articles written that each sibling grows up in a different family.  I know that is true for my family.  It certainly was true for the Markles with two older children.  Meghan did effectively grow up as an only child for the most part.  She had time and money lavished on her that the older two did not.  Samantha was jealous IMO of this.  She especially felt rejected after her early DX of MS.  She probably felt she was being rejected as the imperfect daughter. Hearing about perfect little Miss Meg probably drove her nuts.   Tom. Jr. seemed like a more go with the flow kind of guy.  Funny,  Harry should be identifying with Samantha as the second rater.


----------



## muddledmint

I’ve been reading revenge on and off for 2 days now and have only just hit 25%. It is hard to power through this. So much disgust and second hand embarrassment. It’s kind of like a super rich dessert. Delicious but only in small bites. Honestly, I’m exhausted just reading about Meghan’s desperate hustle before Harry. How did she have the energy to do all that AND be a complete ***** whenever she felt like she had the upper hand?


----------



## pukasonqo

EverSoElusive said:


> Regardless, you're beautiful



Aww, thank you!


----------



## 880

gracekelly said:


> Funny, Harry should be identifying with Samantha as the second rater.


as soon as I read this ^, agree completely!  


muddledmint said:


> It is hard to power through this. So much disgust and second hand embarrassment. It’s kind of like a super rich dessert. Delicious but only in small bites


Exactly, but I’m embarrassed about my apparent desire to savor super rich desserts lol


----------



## tiktok

880 said:


> They aren’t learning from their mistakes even when faced with the dire consequences of their actions
> 
> They‘re more alike than different, and somehow both were so coddled that neither grew up



What still puzzles me is how suing everyone in sight and throwing both their families under every possible bus they can spot is supposed to encourage anyone in Hollywood or elsewhere to work with them. No one wants to be around or work with people they know are going to either sell them out or sue them for the tiniest perceived slight. The only possible place to go from here is some professional back stabbers franchise like Real Housewives.


----------



## Helventara

Toby93 said:


> Doria gets trotted out whenever TW needs to play the race card.  Same with the over bronzing.  Interesting that the producers of Suits didn't know she was biracial.  I have heard that on her resume, she listed herself as white.


The producer must know because in the show, her father was played by Wendell Pierce.


----------



## muddledmint

tiktok said:


> What still puzzles me is how suing everyone in sight and throwing both their families under every possible bus they can spot is supposed to encourage anyone in Hollywood or elsewhere to work with them. No one wants to be around or work with people they know are going to either sell them out or sue them for the tiniest perceived slight. The only possible place to go from here is some professional back stabbers franchise like Real Housewives.


They are their own worst enemy


----------



## andrashik

Some people are starting to see through the murky fog HM created. I chuckled reading the excommunication part 

"He’s on a mission to save the world and that has caused the once happy grandson of Queen Elizabeth to believe he’s some kind of Messiah.

Pride and narcissism often come with a Messiah complex, as does a personality change.  In Harry’s case, he’s become unhappy and grumpy as his woke wife pushes him further and further into political black holes.

The Royal Family needs to finally take off the velvet gloves and give this woke couple their due: excommunication, Pennsylvania Amish-style."








						Excommunicate Prince Harry, Amish-Style | FrontpageMag
					

Prince Harry used to be thought of as the jolly good royal, a “game” guy who never let his quest for adventure get in the way of family loyalty.  The




					www.frontpagemag.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

BVBookshop said:


> The producer must know because in the show, her father was played by Wendell Pierce.


They didn't know when it all started but thereafter, they found out and that's why Wendell Pierce was casted to be Rachel Zane's dad.


----------



## andrashik

Is it visa or mastercard?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

muddledmint said:


> I’ve been reading revenge on and off for 2 days now and have only just hit 25%. It is hard to power through this. So much disgust and second hand embarrassment. It’s kind of like a super rich dessert. Delicious but only in small bites. Honestly, I’m exhausted just reading about Meghan’s desperate hustle before Harry. How did she have the energy to do all that AND be a complete ***** whenever she felt like she had the upper hand?


Z-list is an energy sucker. She sucks all of ours that's why she has overflowing energy to do all that and more. Meanwhile we are half dead just reading the book


----------



## jelliedfeels

andrashik said:


> Part 2 of sugars crazyness
> View attachment 5577643


I read this as Charles given he’s so known for his affairs and I can see Camila not giving a rat’s ass. Good for him for still having the flexibility at his age. 


andrashik said:


> Annnd apparently some reddit users discovered some domains registered and they are speculating that she has her claws on them
> View attachment 5577646
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait. What?
> 
> 
> Source: Crazy Days and Nights The alliterate one has at least one domain registered that makes it seem as if she would like to run for President. Meghan Markle  Meghan2024.com  Meghan Markle reportedly networking with ********s, eyes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxella.com


Yes she’s done such a spectacular job with all her previous and current websites she could definitely run  a few more   


QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I wouldn’t be surprised if he was getting the nonentity wrong on purpose just to troll him, perhaps also it will one day fully turn into Omarkle Scobie too. 


charlottawill said:


> For dogcatcher of Montecito maybe.


She certainly knows a thing or two about getting rid of unwanted dogs. 


sdkitty said:


> I wonder why he does this....I googled Anglo Iranian and found nothing except info about an oil company....is he trying to say he's not all Iranian?


So I think it works on 2 levels 
1. He’s reminding us all in big letters he’s a POC because that’s a big part of his brand 
2. There’s actually a British Raj era term ‘Anglo-Indian’ which means people who had a privileged position in Imperial India because they were mixed race - Indian and British, are Christians and because they adopted British dress and cultural customs. 








						Anglo-Indian people - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				




This doesn’t make any sense for Iran of course as it was called Persia at the time and doesn’t have the same history as India but I think he’s using the similarity of the words to suggest this connotation of being a man of a privileged class.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list is an energy sucker. She sucks all of ours that's why she has overflowing energy to do all that and more. Meanwhile we are half dead just reading the book


This here is a good pic of her impersonation as an energy vampire 
I saved the pic after one website noted that her "cute/charming" freckles were completely airbrushed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> I get it ... MM has played the race card very effectively, Omid also uses it. And the race issue has had effect on the BRF.
> 
> The book analyses the W and K trip to the Caribbean ... it did not go well, the island was all in a WOKE frenzy about Colonial heritage. Bower suggests that the island's WOKENESS has in part to all the MM publicity about race, POC etc
> 
> The Firm did not have an accurate read on this WOKENESS before W and K stepped in it, so, they bear some of the blame
> 
> So, if you want to hurt the BRF keep playing that card


The independence movements within the Caribbean have been a grassroots organisations for decades before M was even a sweat mark on a casting couch. I think him calling it a woke frenzy is disingenuous as their demands are completely reasonable - every nation is entitled to self-governance and to choose their head of state and to successfully and peacefully remove an unsatisfactory head of state. 

If the people of Jamaica don’t think the Windsors is who they want then that’s their choice and I find the idea that it’s seriously got anything to do with Meghan bizarre. She’s just not that important. 

I suppose, if anything, the idea that the BRF could mollify the dissatisfaction of the black Islanders by hitching the spare up with the crispy-fried Z lister and calling that progressive is an inditement of how out of touch they are.


EverSoElusive said:


> They didn't know when it all started but thereafter, they found out and that's why Wendell Pierce was casted to be Rachel Zane's dad.
> 
> View attachment 5577947
> View attachment 5577948


Whichever troll wrote that racist comment they must be absolutely delighted as it seems to be brought up *every single time* M’s race or suits is mentioned and it was apparently 1 comment, just 1, from a random account in amongst a sea of more positive or neutral feedback (I mean we can’t go too nuts as hardly anyone watched the show but….) Talk about feeding the trolls


----------



## Pivoine66

muddledmint said:


> I’ve been reading revenge on and off for 2 days now and have only just hit 25%. It is hard to power through this. So much disgust and second hand embarrassment. It’s kind of like a super rich dessert. Delicious but only in small bites. Honestly, I’m exhausted just reading about Meghan’s desperate hustle before Harry. How did she have *the energy to do all that AND be a complete ***** whenever she felt like she had the upper hand*?


I'm afraid the former Deal-or-No-Deal ...- *not Activist or Humanitarian* nothing like that to be found acc. to TB's book -  
might use all this kind of energy to have Harry smear HIS RF as much as possible, since she might have a very vested interest in having published nasty dirt on Prince Charles and other members of the Royal family *to get the critical headlines off her and her allegedly doubious shady character traits surfacing widely *due to Tom Bower's book. 

By the way, besides Mr. Omid, was anything mentioned in the book about her powerful friend of the SoHo-house (- wasn't he a waiter before he ranked up in Soho-house?) - No, surely he wouldn't be involved in any kind of spreading true/false - or leaking any information.


----------



## andrashik

jelliedfeels said:


> The independence movements within the Caribbean have been a grassroots organisations for decades before M was even a sweat mark on a casting couch. I think him calling it a woke frenzy is disingenuous as their demands are completely reasonable - every nation is entitled to self-governance and to choose their head of state and to successfully and peacefully remove an unsatisfactory head of state.
> 
> If the people of Jamaica don’t think the Windsors is who they want then that’s their choice and I find the idea that it’s seriously got anything to do with Meghan bizarre. She’s just not that important.


I think maybe he implied that her claims added fuel to their dissatisfaction


----------



## xincinsin

An old (2019) Buzzfeed article popped up in my newsfeed. IMO Buzzfeed is very pro-Sussex.

I found this description of her, presumably by Plastic Pal, very deceptively phrased.
Omid Scobie, royal contributor for ABC News and correspondent for Harper’s Bazaar, told BuzzFeed News that Meghan — _*the first black American woman with no royal pedigree*_* to marry into the House of Windsor *— has been otherized from the start.

So a black American woman with royal pedigree previously married into the House of Windsor? Because if what he said is true, then the opposite should also be true. My mind went  It's a truism.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> I think maybe he implied that her claims added fuel to their dissatisfaction


There were certainly conspiracy theories that Toya Holness instigated her cousin to stir up more discontent. And of course the sugars all crowed that if the Prince and Duckess of Falsesito had gone there, they would have done much better, being so woke and tanned.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> @Aimee3 Are you serious?   When I saw her for the first time from watching Suits, I thought to myself that she's probably mixed race because she is didn't look 100% of any race. Given that it's an American drama series, I assumed she was mixed black and white. Didn't look any kind of Asian so didn't think that was in her mix and she didn't look Hispanic to me at all.



Unless I saw Doria for the first time I thought she was Italian or something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> I’ve been reading revenge on and off for 2 days now and have only just hit 25%. It is hard to power through this. So much disgust and second hand embarrassment. It’s kind of like a super rich dessert. Delicious but only in small bites. Honestly, I’m exhausted just reading about Meghan’s desperate hustle before Harry. How did she have the energy to do all that AND be a complete ***** whenever she felt like she had the upper hand?



That's exactly how I feel.


----------



## jelliedfeels

andrashik said:


> I think maybe he implied that her claims added fuel to their dissatisfaction


I think it’s a bit of an ass-pull to discredit the independence movement myself. All the focus on M is coming from the British and American press as far as I can see and it’s trying to characterise independence as a partisan royal vs Sussex issue which trivialises it and tries to convince us that exiting Windsor rule would be a bad thing for the Carribean islands. (Even if it is, and I suspect it isn’t, they are still sovereign nations and it’s their decision not the royals)

The island based movements seem more concerned with the lack of development and failure to apologise for slavery and later human rights abuses  - so I get why the more royal friendly British press want to skate around that and make it about the lies of a tacky actress.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> An old (2019) Buzzfeed article popped up in my newsfeed. IMO Buzzfeed is very pro-Sussex.
> 
> I found this description of her, presumably by Plastic Pal, very deceptively phrased.
> Omid Scobie, royal contributor for ABC News and correspondent for Harper’s Bazaar, told BuzzFeed News that Meghan — _*the first black American woman with no royal pedigree*_* to marry into the House of Windsor *— has been otherized from the start.
> 
> So a black American woman with royal pedigree previously married into the House of Windsor? Because if what he said is true, then the opposite should also be true. My mind went  It's a truism.











						Stuart Jeffries: Was the consort of George III Britain's first black queen?
					

Stuart Jeffries: Queen Charlotte was the wife of George III and, like him, of German descent. But did she also have African ancestry?




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## zen1965

marietouchet said:


> I get it ... MM has played the race card very effectively, Omid also uses it. And the race issue has had effect on the BRF.
> 
> The book analyses the W and K trip to the Caribbean ... it did not go well, the island was all in a WOKE frenzy about Colonial heritage. Bower suggests that the island's WOKENESS has in part to all the MM publicity about race, POC etc
> 
> The Firm did not have an accurate read on this WOKENESS before W and K stepped in it, so, they bear some of the blame
> 
> So, if you want to hurt the BRF keep playing that card


I feel this assumption by Bower is quite demeaning to the country in question. I know for a fact that are there are numerous former colonialised countries that are very critical of their former „colonial masters“ due to economic plundering and gross human rights abuses during colonial times. This criticism by former colonies has nothing to do with wokeness. To me, attributing this to wokeness leaves a bitter aftertaste and implies a support of colonial practices. To blame nutmeg in this context is not just far-fetched but ridiculous IMHO. Maybe Bower still bemoans the loss of the British empire….


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> An old (2019) Buzzfeed article popped up in my newsfeed. IMO Buzzfeed is very pro-Sussex.
> 
> I found this description of her, presumably by Plastic Pal, very deceptively phrased.
> Omid Scobie, royal contributor for ABC News and correspondent for Harper’s Bazaar, told BuzzFeed News that Meghan — _*the first black American woman with no royal pedigree*_* to marry into the House of Windsor *— has been otherized from the start.
> 
> So a black American woman with royal pedigree previously married into the House of Windsor? Because if what he said is true, then the opposite should also be true. My mind went  It's a truism.


I mean she ain’t black so she isn’t the first of that long string of qualifiers. Omid is clearly using ‘black’ as the catch all for any non 100% white person which is…. odd given he supposedly loves encouraging diversity. 

It’s strange you see this all the time when the PR is trying to progressive; ‘we are happy to announce that Nadia the first left-handed, ginger, Mormon, Welsh, Cricket-playing, Dyslexic, bisexual woman has joined our PR team.’  

You can almost hear their annoyance crackle at realising there’s already another bisexual Mormon and a Welsh, ginger Dyslexic on the staff. 

It does strike me as a rather an othering experience itself to be broken down into all these categories like the taxonomy of a newly discovered kind of beetle but what do I know?


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Stuart Jeffries: Was the consort of George III Britain's first black queen?
> 
> 
> Stuart Jeffries: Queen Charlotte was the wife of George III and, like him, of German descent. But did she also have African ancestry?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


That was an interesting read! I kind of doubt Plastic Pal knows about it. Or if he did, he probably dismissed it as she wasn't American.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> That was an interesting read! I kind of doubt Plastic Pal knows about it.



I think Lady C has written about it in one of her books too. Still, all only.a theory


----------



## EverSoElusive

Pivoine66 said:


> I'm afraid the former Deal-or-No-Deal ...- *not Activist or Humanitarian* nothing like that to be found acc. to TB's book -
> might use all this kind of energy to have Harry smear HIS RF as much as possible, since she might have a very vested interest in having published nasty dirt on Prince Charles and other members of the Royal family *to get the critical headlines off her and her allegedly doubious shady character traits surfacing widely *due to Tom Bower's book.
> 
> By the way, besides Mr. Omid, was anything mentioned in the book about her powerful friend of the SoHo-house (- wasn't he a waiter before he ranked up in Soho-house?) - No, surely he wouldn't be involved in any kind of spreading true/false - or leaking any information.


Yes, Markus Anderson was mentioned in the book. However, there was no mention of him being a waiter or leaking any information. The thing that was said to have united them is befriending celebrities to "enhance their personal fortune"  

Anyhow, he's definitely Z-list's friend (unlike Serena Williams who was not shy to say she wasn't Z-list's friend) so at one point or another, he might have leaked something, be it a truth or lie.


----------



## Pivoine66

EverSoElusive said:


> Yes, Markus Anderson was mentioned in the book. However, there was no mention of him being a waiter or leaking any information. The thing that was said to have united them is befriending celebrities to "enhance their personal fortune"
> 
> Anyhow, he's definitely Z-list's friend (unlike Serena Williams who was not shy to say she wasn't Z-list's friend) so at one point or another, he might have leaked something, be it a truth or lie.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5578057


Thank you, dear EverSoElusive, for taking your time to check and copy paste information from the book.

I am not tech savvy, so... But I found this - didn't open it though.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Pivoine66 said:


> Thank you, dear EverSoElusive, for taking your time to check and copy paste information from the book.
> 
> I am not tech savvy, so... But I found this - didn't open it though.
> View attachment 5578085


My pleasure 

We all had to start somewhere so if he was a waiter, I wouldn't be surprised that he moved up quickly with him being a brown-noser (that's what I call a$s kissers  ) and social climber.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I forgot who asked but here's how Z-list managed to spend time with Harry when he flew to Toronto for the first time, right under Cory's nose - allegedly, Harry was probably staying at the Mulroney's  

After that trip of Harry's, per the book, Z-list was confident that she's hooked Harry so it was then she finally kicked Cory to the curb


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I think Lady C has written about it in one of her books too. Still, all only.a theory


Let's hope the sugars don't learn of this. Imagine the outrage - how dare Kate name her daughter after a black queen, leaving St Meghan no choice but to name her daughter after a white queen


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> @Aimee3 Are you serious?   When I saw her for the first time from watching Suits, I thought to myself that she's probably mixed race because she is didn't look 100% of any race. Given that it's an American drama series, I assumed she was mixed black and white. Didn't look any kind of Asian so didn't think that was in her mix and she didn't look Hispanic to me at all.


I was busy enjoying the other characters in the show who had such charisma (especially the actress who played Donna, and the Louis Litt character) that both MM and her character was so bland she just faded into the woodwork.  She looked white at first glance and I never gave her much thought.  I thought her scenes were boring.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Aimee3 said:


> I was busy enjoying the other characters in the show who had such charisma (especially the actress who played Donna, and the Louis Litt character) that both MM and her character was so bland she just faded into the woodwork.  She looked white at first glance and I never gave her much thought.  I thought her scenes were boring.


I watched the entire series. I really like Harvey and Donna (as cliche as they can be). Definitely enjoyed Gretchen a lot too. Even Gretchen was better than Rachel! Can you believe that?


----------



## andrashik

This pic says it all


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Committing Knauf to a conundrum, [Raptor] demanded that the statement should reflect the parallel between her potential fate and Diana's. Knauf suggested that over-dramatising [Raptor]'s distress would backfire, but Harry was adamant. If [Raptor]'s wish to be equated with Diana was not satisfied, insisted Harry, he would probably lose her. Knauf asquiesced."

They had been dating barely five months at that point. I have no words.


----------



## Aimee3

EverSoElusive said:


> I watched the entire series. I really like Harvey and Donna (as cliche as they can be). Definitely enjoyed Gretchen a lot too. Even Gretchen was better than Rachel! Can you believe that?


Gretchen was terrific.  She didn’t even have to say anything, just gave the best facial expressions.  I loved her character. She had sass!


----------



## csshopper

Have been reading the Reviews on Amazon from readers of REVENGE.

Overwhelmingly positive even as many noted much of it was not new, but benefitted from the chronology and the details. Predictably there are a few one star slams from the stans , none whom admitted to reading it all. Some people can’t handle real, not subjective, truth.

Many have commented on how their view of Harry shifted after reading the book, not a victim as much as previously thought, but actually her equal in all the nastiness. Comments often included references to his being dim witted, dense, and “not the sharpest knife in the drawer.” Gets frequently slammed for his treatment of his family.

Bower’s agents should be pleased, seems to be interest for a Volume 2 with hope for a full investigation, for example, of the pregnancies, births, parentage of Archie and his sister.

Also, if there is confirmation of some of the yacht girl, Northwestern sorority girl rumors etc. In other words, deeper dirt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Two days later on 10th November, Richard Kay, the Daily Mail's senior royal writer, was strolling outside his newspaper's office in Kensington High Street. To his surprise he spotted [Raptor]. Until then, nobody realised that she was in London. *Following her back from Kensington's most expensive food shop carrying a bulding bag adorned with with the slogan 'Alleviate Poverty' to Kensington Palace,* Kay concluded that if Harry and [Raptor] were living together their relationship was more serious than anyone had realised."

Can't make that sh*t up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Many have commented on how their view of Harry shifted after reading the book, not a victim as much as previously thought, but actually her equal in all the nastiness.



I'm only 150 pages in, shortly before the engagement. So far, she's the praying mantis who quickly bit of his head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, that "Don't give the milk away for free"? Bower mentions that Raptor herself confirmed the sexual context speaking to a Vancouver newspaper. So weird for a hippy mother in the 1990s, hu?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

I'm on chapter 11, no Harry yet. But she certainly is a horrific human being  (I can't find the vomiting emoji...)


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, that "Don't give the milk away for free"? Bower mentions that Raptor herself confirmed the sexual context speaking to a Vancouver newspaper. So weird for a hippy mother in the 1990s, hu?


yes, the is somewhat old fashioned advice but maybe doria got it from her mother...if it's even true that she told Meghan that
NM - I guess this was confirmed


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes, the is somewhat old fashioned advice but maybe doria got it from her mother...if it's even true that she told Meghan that
> NM - I guess this was confirmed



Admittedly, Raptor "confirming" something does not necessarily mean it's actually true.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> yes, the is somewhat old fashioned advice but maybe doria got it from her mother...if it's even true that she told Meghan that
> NM - I guess this was confirmed


The first time I heard it was in a comment made by her father in an interview. If I remember correctly,  it was in the context of him talking about how his little girl had changed and, as part of the answer, he referenced what her mother had taught her.


----------



## marietouchet

Deep thoughts about the upcoming political career .. Bower emphasized those ambitions in last chapters, but is this a serious thing? My thoughts on timing NOT political issues

She is NOT interested in some low level position on the Montecito school board, no, her interests lie at the NATIONAL level. Well, there are not THAT MANY of those positions around in California.

She cant be Attorney General , no law degree, unless she is enrolled at Kim K law school ...
Governor is possible, current gov may run at higher level, making room, and Caitlin and Arnold paved the way for actors, but that 's a stretch no guarantee that incumbent will make room
I am thinking Representative or Senator in 2024. Any later than 2024 and she is OLD NEWS.

MM could move out of state like Hillary did ?? 

If she is interested she has to show her hand in the next two years. It all depends on how the H book goes down..


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> The first time I heard it was in a comment made by her father in an interview. If I remember correctly,  it was in the context of him talking about how his little girl had changed and, as part of the answer, he referenced what her mother had taught her.


we're all trying to figure out why she is so nasty and selfish.  I think she's spoiled.  She also somewhat seems to fit the description of a sociopath but Googling that I found that they are usually abused as children so that doesn't seem to fit here.


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> Deep thoughts about the upcoming political career .. Bower emphasized those ambitions in last chapters, but is this a serious thing? My thoughts on timing NOT political issues
> 
> She is NOT interested in some low level position on the Montecito school board, no, her interests lie at the NATIONAL level. Well, there are not THAT MANY of those positions around in California.
> 
> She cant be Attorney General , no law degree, unless she is enrolled at Kim K law school ...
> Governor is possible, current gov may run at higher level, making room, and Caitlin and Arnold paved the way for actors, but that 's a stretch no guarantee that incumbent will make room
> I am thinking Representative or Senator in 2024. Any later than 2024 and she is OLD NEWS.
> 
> MM could move out of state like Hillary did ??
> 
> If she is interested she has to show her hand in the next two years. It all depends on how the H book goes down..


I could just see it. Whatever she’d run for if she didn’t win (and who with a brain would vote for her?  She’s got zero qualifications and her track record sucks) she’d play the r*ce card.  Plus she’d probably have to renounce her duchess title and we know she’s holding on to that with both claws!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Deep thoughts about the upcoming political career .. Bower emphasized those ambitions in last chapters, but is this a serious thing? My thoughts on timing NOT political issues
> 
> She is NOT interested in some low level position on the Montecito school board, no, her interests lie at the NATIONAL level. Well, there are not THAT MANY of those positions around in California.
> 
> She cant be Attorney General , no law degree, unless she is enrolled at Kim K law school ...
> Governor is possible, current gov may run at higher level, making room, and Caitlin and Arnold paved the way for actors, but that 's a stretch no guarantee that incumbent will make room
> I am thinking Representative or Senator in 2024. Any later than 2024 and she is OLD NEWS.
> 
> MM could move out of state like Hillary did ??
> 
> If she is interested she has to show her hand in the next two years. It all depends on how the H book goes down..



With this book now in the public realm, her opponent would have an easy win.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> we're all trying to figure out why she is so nasty and selfish.  I think she's spoiled.  She also somewhat seems to fit the description of a sociopath but Googling that I found that they are usually abused as children so that doesn't seem to fit here.


Imo it’s being raised in a soap opera and drug environment. Drama drama drama.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it’s being raised in a soap opera and drug environment. Drama drama drama.


drug environment?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Gretchen was terrific.  She didn’t even have to say anything, just gave the best facial expressions.  I loved her character. She had sass!


Jessica [Gina Torres] was amazing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> drug environment?


It is in the book.  
The therapists say that drugs damage the brains of the young.  Imo we are witnessing the results on a world stage. The BRF really needs to intervene. If not now, when?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is in the book.
> The therapists say that drugs damage the brains of the young.  Imo we are witnessing the results on a world stage. The BRF really needs to intervene. If not now, when?


sorry I don't understand what you're saying.  It's in the book that Meghan was in a drug envronment growing up?  what does that have to do with the BRF?


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> I could just see it. Whatever she’d run for if she didn’t win (and who with a brain would vote for her?  She’s got zero qualifications and her track record sucks) she’d play the r*ce card.  Plus she’d probably have to renounce her duchess title and we know she’s holding on to that with both claws!


Unfortunately we’ve had plenty of politicians world wide that have zero qualifications.  Some have won simply for being actors or having been married to experienced politicians.  Apparently people really believe in osmosis


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> sorry I don't understand what you're saying.  It's in the book that Meghan was in a drug envronment growing up?  what does that have to do with the BRF?


Sorry, don’t worry about it, I’ll explain it later.  I’ve must dash off to appointments today.  Based on all I have read, H&M and their circle of sycophants simply are not worth our 5 minutes [except to protest their behavior].


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Enjoy!


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it’s being raised in a soap opera and drug environment. Drama drama drama.





sdkitty said:


> drug environment?





CarryOn2020 said:


> It is in the book.
> The therapists say that drugs damage the brains of the young.  Imo we are witnessing the results on a world stage. The BRF really needs to intervene. If not now, when?





sdkitty said:


> sorry I don't understand what you're saying.  It's in the book that Meghan was in a drug envronment growing up?  what does that have to do with the BRF?



RE: Drugs

Z-list and family - There was mentions of weed and drug use within her family.





Harry and family - After Diana's death, Charles converted their Highgrove basement to accommodate the princes' weekend parties where drugs were tolerated.





Hope that clears the air


----------



## gelbergirl

EverSoElusive said:


> RE: Drugs
> 
> Z-list and family - There was mentions of weed and drug use within her family.
> 
> View attachment 5578332
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and family - After Diana's death, Charles converted their Highgrove basement to accommodate the princes' weekend parties where drugs were tolerated.
> 
> View attachment 5578333
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that clears the air



I wonder what this basement looks like


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> I could just see it. Whatever she’d run for if she didn’t win (and who with a brain would vote for her?  She’s got zero qualifications and her track record sucks) she’d play the r*ce card.  Plus she’d probably have to renounce her duchess title and we know she’s holding on to that with both claws!


What would she call herself if she gave up her title? Her sugars are constantly complaining that since she is now a one name wonder like Beyonce, it is dreadfully rude of the media to use her maiden surname. Could she go with just one name in politics or would she transform into Meghan Sussex or Meghan Royal or maybe Meghan Duchess (as stridently screeched by one bonkers stan: her name is Duchess!)


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> What would she call herself if she gave up her title? Her sugars are constantly complaining that since she is now a one name wonder like Beyonce, it is dreadfully rude of the media to use her maiden surname. Could she go with just one name in politics or would she transform into Meghan Sussex or Meghan Royal or maybe Meghan Duchess (as stridently screeched by one bonkers stan: her name is Duchess!)


She's still an American citizen with a US passport, which is still probably under her birth name. If she were to run for office, her name would be based on her legal name on American legal IDs i.e. drivers license and passport.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> I could just see it. Whatever she’d run for if she didn’t win (and who with a brain would vote for her?  She’s got zero qualifications and her track record sucks) she’d play the r*ce card.  Plus she’d probably have to renounce her duchess title and we know she’s holding on to that with both claws!


I dont know if she could win... but reading the book, she never sets her sights low, she would runbfor some major office
I dont think the title is a technical disqualification, just might be massively inconvenient/inappropriate


----------



## Jayne1

mellibelly said:


> Wow I did not know the photos were deleted. I remember every photo of that night had TW double clawing the bump
> View attachment 5576359
> View attachment 5576360
> View attachment 5576361


Tell me she's not holding the moon bump in place for dear life...


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Have been reading the Reviews on Amazon from readers of REVENGE.
> 
> Overwhelmingly positive even as many noted much of it was not new, but benefitted from the chronology and the details. Predictably there are a few one star slams from the stans , none whom admitted to reading it all. Some people can’t handle real, not subjective, truth.
> 
> Many have commented on how their view of Harry shifted after reading the book, not a victim as much as previously thought, but actually her equal in all the nastiness. Comments often included references to his being dim witted, dense, and “not the sharpest knife in the drawer.” Gets frequently slammed for his treatment of his family.
> 
> Bower’s agents should be pleased, seems to be interest for a Volume 2 with hope for a full investigation, for example, of the pregnancies, births, parentage of Archie and his sister.
> 
> Also, if there is confirmation of some of the yacht girl, Northwestern sorority girl rumors etc. In other words, deeper dirt.


NASTY Harry ??? yes, that does come across in the book, esp. the closing chapters with all the misbehavior about the Jubilee - that was one time to transcend it all and he did not, no one will soon forget that

But that goes back to Diana. Morton book - she was NASTY when she fed the material to Morton ... She was not thinking of consequences. The book is still there for her grandkids to read. 
But we remember her as a saint ... and H was always painted as the poor orphan.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Have been reading the Reviews on Amazon from readers of REVENGE.
> 
> Overwhelmingly positive even as many noted much of it was not new, but benefitted from the chronology and the details. Predictably there are a few one star slams from the stans , none whom admitted to reading it all. Some people can’t handle real, not subjective, truth.
> 
> Many have commented on how their view of Harry shifted after reading the book, not a victim as much as previously thought, but actually her equal in all the nastiness. Comments often included references to his being dim witted, dense, and “not the sharpest knife in the drawer.” Gets frequently slammed for his treatment of his family.
> 
> Bower’s agents should be pleased, seems to be interest for a Volume 2 with hope for a full investigation, for example, of the pregnancies, births, parentage of Archie and his sister.
> 
> Also, if there is confirmation of some of the yacht girl, Northwestern sorority girl rumors etc. In other words, deeper dirt.


Did anyone look at the footnotes, I did ... 

- COPIOUS material from talks with Thomas Markle. Good stuff.
- A remark that most interviewees declined to be named - hard to judge their inputs ... hmmmm
- Lots of quotes from Omid and Daily Mail 
- Cites from legal documents


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> drug environment?


Her mother worked on an illegal pot farm in Humboldt County, Thomas talks about being taken aback by her heavy use of it when she was home and mentions her sitting in the middle of the front lawn of their house smoking a joint. There is also mention of drug use on the part of both parents.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> But that goes back to Diana. Morton book - she was NASTY when she fed the material to Morton ... She was not thinking of consequences. The book is still there for her grandkids to read.
> But we remember her as a saint ... and H was always painted as the poor orphan.


Yes, Diana just had to have the world know she wasn't happy.  

She had everything gifted to her that anyone could possibly want, other than a husband who did not adore her (which she should have known is how it often worked in the BRF) but other than an uncaring husband, she had everything. And she was still miserable and desperate for everyone to know she was miserable.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> That was an interesting read! I kind of doubt Plastic Pal knows about it. Or if he did, he probably dismissed it as she wasn't American.


Without judging the heritage of Queen Charlotte ... 

Lots of DNA testing results in modern historical papers... and you know what ? genetic results are rarely super clean cut, every body is a bit related to every body else 

On the humorous side, useless trivia - some 16 million modern people are (supposedly) related to Genghis Khan and they dont all live on the Central Asian steppes


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Her mother worked on an illegal pot farm in Humboldt County, Thomas talks about being taken aback by her heavy use of it when she was home and mentions her sitting in the middle of the front lawn of their house smoking a joint. There is also mention of drug use on the part of both parents.


I remember seeing her mother at the wedding and thinking she was the calmest, most serene individual I have ever seen, or on drugs. lol


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, Diana just had to have the world know she wasn't happy.
> 
> She had everything gifted to her that anyone could possibly want, other than a husband who did not adore her (which she should have known is how it often worked in the BRF) but other than an uncaring husband, she had everything. And she was still miserable and desperate for everyone to know she was miserable.


I could never get over her involving her sons in her emotional meltdowns and using them to dump on. Early on I remember reading how the Head Master at Will's school called him into his office to explain to him his mother's appearance on TV was probably going to lead to teasing, or worse. Diana had never warned the boys of what she was doing.

This is one of the concerning things about Meghan. She emulates Diana, it does not bode well for Archie and his sister.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Yes, Markus Anderson was mentioned in the book. However, there was no mention of him being a waiter or leaking any information. The thing that was said to have united them is befriending celebrities to "enhance their personal fortune"
> 
> Anyhow, he's definitely Z-list's friend (unlike Serena Williams who was not shy to say she wasn't Z-list's friend) so at one point or another, he might have leaked something, be it a truth or lie.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5578057



Okay Mr Bower, you’re making too many mistakes and this one is really p*issing me off.

Toronto is the 4th largest city in all of North America.

Mexico City is number one, then New York, LA and 4th is Toronto. We surpassed Chicago decades ago.

To say we are a small community when we are a world leader in areas of business, finance, technology, _entertainment_ and culture and with a huge population of immigrants from all over the globe, we are one of the most multicultural cities in the world.

So Meg was not a "noticed fish in a small pond" but rather a smallish fish in a very large pond who only got noticed when she started dating H.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MiniMabel

Jayne1 said:


> Tell me she's not holding the moon bump in place for dear life...
> 
> View attachment 5578383



Why is she doing this?  This is next level attention-seeking! The other lady looks none too impressed, even, I would say, deliberately avoiding looking at her.  I really detest people who think they're so special and want to be looked at all the time.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Without judging the heritage of Queen Charlotte ...
> 
> Lots of DNA testing results in modern historical papers... and you know what ? genetic results are rarely super clean cut, every body is a bit related to every body else
> 
> On the humorous side, useless trivia - some 16 million modern people are (supposedly) related to Genghis Khan and they dont all live on the Central Asian steppes


Including Diana! This crazy nugget has stuck in my mind for decades.




__





						Loading…
					





					www.washingtonpost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Harry gave her a ring that he had commissioned, with two of Diana's diamonds set in yellow Botswana gold. He was particularly proud of his design. [Raptor] did not conceal her excitement, though she was secretly determined to have the ring redesigned as soon as possible."

When even a male lawyer notices those frivolities it's bad. Also, I love his elegance in throwing shade


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Now this one...speechless. Why, oh why did he go ahead and married her? She broke his trust numerous times early on. She lied and deceived. Nobody, and that includes his close friends, close family and wider family liked her. The signs were there.

Re: the Vanity Fair interview.

"Harry, [Keleigh Thomas Morgan - a partner as Sunshine Sachs] revealed, had only agreed to the article because, as [Raptor] declared, the producers wanted to celebrate Suit's centenary."

Which was a flat-out lie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Okay Mr Bower, you’re making too many mistakes and this one is really p*issing me off.
> 
> Toronto is the 4th largest city in all of North America.
> 
> Mexico City is number one, then New York, LA and 4th is Toronto. We surpassed Chicago decades ago.
> 
> To say we are a small community when we are a world leader in areas of business, finance, technology, _entertainment_ and culture and with a huge population of immigrants from all over the globe, we are one of the most multicultural cities in the world.
> 
> So Meg was not a "noticed fish in a small pond" but rather a smallish fish in a very large pond who only got noticed when she started dating H.



I think he was referring to the movie industry and its social circle in Toronto - he compares it to LA where she never made it.


----------



## wisconsin

Jayne1 said:


> Okay Mr Bower, you’re making too many mistakes and this one is really p*issing me off.
> 
> Toronto is the 4th largest city in all of North America.
> 
> Mexico City is number one, then New York, LA and 4th is Toronto. We surpassed Chicago decades ago.
> 
> To say we are a small community when we are a world leader in areas of business, finance, technology, _entertainment_ and culture and with a huge population of immigrants from all over the globe, we are one of the most multicultural cities in the world.
> 
> So Meg was not a "noticed fish in a small pond" but rather a smallish fish in a very large pond who only got noticed when she started dating H.


Ha— also Toronto’s number one for the safest then on that list


----------



## 1LV

Jayne1 said:


> Tell me she's not holding the moon bump in place for dear life...
> 
> View attachment 5578383


It’s her “bird in the hand” pose.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## jelliedfeels

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, Diana just had to have the world know she wasn't happy.
> 
> She had everything gifted to her that anyone could possibly want, other than a husband who did not adore her (which she should have known is how it often worked in the BRF) but other than an uncaring husband, she had everything. And she was still miserable and desperate for everyone to know she was miserable.


I mean tbf it is the royal prerogative to get given everything on a platter and then either complain ro insist it’s incredibly hard work at least.  


csshopper said:


> I could never get over her involving her sons in her emotional meltdowns and using them to dump on. Early on I remember reading how the Head Master at Will's school called him into his office to explain to him his mother's appearance on TV was probably going to lead to teasing, or worse. Diana had never warned the boys of what she was doing.
> 
> This is one of the concerning things about Meghan. She emulates Diana, it does not bode well for Archie and his sister.


I think she copies D but she has nothing of the emotions or mental health problems or ED issues Diana had so it would be a horrible facade version of D’s admitted emotional overreactions. 


xincinsin said:


> Including Diana! This crazy nugget has stuck in my mind for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.washingtonpost.com


Temujin was also a great proponent of the revenge dress


1LV said:


> It’s her “bird in the hand” pose.


What kind of bird? Peacock? Cockerel? Great tit?


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I'm on chapter 11, no Harry yet. But she certainly is a horrific human being  (I can't find the vomiting emoji...)



let me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm shortly before the engagement is announced. She is a horrible human being and I have no explanation (besides the voodoo or Jezebel theories) why he went ahead with the wedding.


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> Tell me she's not holding the moon bump in place for dear life...
> 
> View attachment 5578383


This picture makes my skin crawl   It is so embarrassing and cringe-worthy, yet she stands there like a simpleton and basks in the attention.


----------



## redney

Toby93 said:


> This picture makes my skin crawl   It is so embarrassing and cringe-worthy, yet she stands there like a simpleton and basks in the attention.


She looks completely ridiculous.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Toby93 said:


> This picture makes my skin crawl   It is so embarrassing and cringe-worthy, yet she stands there like a simpleton and basks in the attention.



Kind of like when she rolled down the car window during the Jubilee.

Always ready for her close-up.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list is thirsty. End of story


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm shortly before the engagement is announced. She is a horrible human being and I have no explanation (besides the voodoo or Jezebel theories) why he went ahead with the wedding.


The term is vagmatized

Sorry, I hate typing out the word but that’s my theory!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Reflecting with her staff in Kensington Palace on her popularity, *[Raptor] credited her success with being uniquely special*, an attitude reinforced by Harry. Diana's stardust, Harry suggested, was falling on to [Raptor]. None of [Raptor]'s staff volunteered that only by being a member of the Royal Family was [Raptor] special."

OMFG.


----------



## andrashik

Prince Harry plans to give up British citizenship for Meghan Markle, report claims
					

The Duke of Sussex remains a U.K. citizen and he has reportedly not applied for American citizenship despite living in California.




					www.ibtimes.co.uk
				




Not gonna happen


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I'm slightly confused why Thomas blames Doria for Raptor discarding every other family member before the wedding. After all, they had been amicable for what, 25 years after the divorce? Spent holidays together, went on vacation occasionally, and Bower even mentions Thomas would stay with Doria sometimes when he travelled to LA from Mexico, and she'd volunteer to do his laundry. So why would she suddendly be so hostile and try to destroy him? 

My theory is that it's less painful than admitting he raised a complete a*shole and sociopath.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Reflecting with her staff in Kensington Palace on her popularity, *[Raptor] credited her success with being uniquely special*, an attitude reinforced by Harry. _*Diana's stardust, Harry suggested, was falling on to [Raptor].*_ None of [Raptor]'s staff volunteered that only by being a member of the Royal Family was [Raptor] special."
> 
> OMFG.


Told you, they think they are in a Disney movie


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Have been reading the Reviews on Amazon from readers of REVENGE.
> 
> Overwhelmingly positive even as many noted much of it was not new, but benefitted from the chronology and the details. Predictably there are a few one star slams from the stans , none whom admitted to reading it all. *Some people can’t handle real, not subjective, truth.*
> 
> Many have commented on how their view of Harry shifted after reading the book, not a victim as much as previously thought, but actually her equal in all the nastiness. Comments often included references to his being dim witted, dense, and “not the sharpest knife in the drawer.” Gets frequently slammed for his treatment of his family.
> 
> Bower’s agents should be pleased, seems to be interest for a Volume 2 with hope for a full investigation, for example, of the pregnancies, births, parentage of Archie and his sister.
> 
> Also, if there is confirmation of some of the yacht girl, Northwestern sorority girl rumors etc. In other words, deeper dirt.


ZedZed∞ lies because it is less stressful than facing reality...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jayne1 said:


> Tell me she's not holding the moon bump in place for dear life...
> 
> View attachment 5578383


Let's put this picture in perspective. The BFA took place Dec 11, 2018 and Archie was born (supposedly) May 6, 2019. That means ZedZed∞ would've been between four and five months pregnant. I know that all pregnancies vary, but by the end of the first trimester (1st pregnancy) my boobies had doubled in size and here she is bump showing, but almost flat chested. Does anyone else recall their pregnancy changes as compared to TW so we can assess this moon bump?


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> The term is vagmatized
> 
> Sorry, I hate typing out the word but that’s my theory!


I like to say she Vagazzled him .  My Gynecologist friend said she’s seen quite a lot of vajayjays in her 20+ years of practice, and is quite puzzled by what exactly TW’s has that has Haz ready to try to topple a monarchy


----------



## bag-mania

With the exception of that guy from Vanity Fair, have any of the people mentioned in Bower’s book come forward to say anything he said about them wasn’t true? Anyone standing up to defend Meghan?


----------



## CarryOn2020

If you have the time, this video from Tatler [I know, I know] explains the importance of Scotland *now*.  [hint - Russian oligarchs] Wonder why the Dumbartons aren’t moving to their area?  Seems like a smart move if they are looking for $$$.  Apologies to all who live in this beautiful land.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think he was referring to the movie industry and its social circle in Toronto - he compares it to LA where she never made it.


Toronto is called Hollywood North and has a multi-billion dollar industry.  

My point was, Meg was never a big fish in a small pond.  No one heard of her until Harry.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's put this picture in perspective. The BFA took place Dec 11, 2018 and Archie was born (supposedly) May 6, 2019. That means ZedZed∞ would've been between four and five months pregnant. I know that all pregnancies vary, but by the end of the first trimester (1st pregnancy) my boobies had doubled in size and here she is bump showing, but almost flat chested. Does anyone else recall their pregnancy changes as compared to TW so we can assess this moon bump?


I was excited when I finally went up 2 cup sizes at the end of second trimester. But my bump was small for my first pregnancy. I didn't really show till 5 months. If Methane was really pregnant either time, then she was augmenting her bump size for extra attention IMO.

First round, I doubt that even Hazard would agree to a false pregnancy. But he would agree to IVF if she really had eggs frozen and to moon bump usage. I believe she would have given him some crap story about how she really wants to give him a family quick, you know - to replace the family he never had  And the doting fool would have accepted her reason for the moon bump: vanity and protection. "But the added layer will show everyone that I'm REALLY pregnant and it will cushion our baby against harm. You know I received all those death threats..." Then she bats her lashes at him, making sure to squeeze out a few tears.


----------



## bag-mania

She was pregnant within a few months of the wedding. Whether it was IVF or surrogate or natural, she wanted that anchor on Harry as quickly as possible.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> She was pregnant within a few months of the wedding. Whether it was IVF or surrogate or natural, she wanted that anchor on Harry as quickly as possible.


At 37, she would be classed as a geriatric mother.  She *had* to get pregnant ASAP as her chances were already slim to become pregnant without intervention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> At 37, she would be classed as a geriatric mother.  She *had* to get pregnant ASAP as her chances were already slim to become pregnant without intervention.


But, but, Toby93, I distinctly remember Meghan with her posse of “young mothers.” Surely she must have been in her 20s? 

Recollections may vary.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She was pregnant within a few months of the wedding. Whether it was IVF or surrogate or natural, she wanted that anchor on Harry as quickly as possible.


yes...for a woman her age who had presumably been on birth control to get pregnant that fast is unusual


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes...for a woman her age who had presumably been on birth control to get pregnant that fast is unusual


Everything about them makes me suspicious so I go a little overboard. I remember wondering at the time whether Harry or Meghan knew they had fertility problems and they went right to IVF or surrogate immediately.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Reflecting with her staff in Kensington Palace on her popularity, *[Raptor] credited her success with being uniquely special*, an attitude reinforced by Harry. Diana's stardust, Harry suggested, was falling on to [Raptor]. None of [Raptor]'s staff volunteered that only by being a member of the Royal Family was [Raptor] special."
> 
> OMFG.


Her unique factor is like those online sellers who sell OOAK items and ask you how many you would like to buy.

I had a narc subordinate who said I could not compare his performance with his peers because they were each unique individuals. We gave him a uniquely low bonus.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Everything about them makes me suspicious so I go a little overboard. I remember wondering at the time whether Harry or Meghan knew they had fertility problems and they went right to IVF or surrogate immediately.


Wasn't there a pic taken (the paps were not alerted this time) of them leaving a fertility clinic before she was pregnant with Invisibet?  Were they doing IVF or gender selection, or shopping for a surrogate?


----------



## bag-mania

I am not familiar with this actress but she is very pretty. She also claims to be obsessed with Meghan Markle. It goes to show that some people don’t care anything about what Meghan does.









						Alexandra Daddario Shares How Meghan Markle Inspired Her Wedding Look: 'I'm Obsessed with Her'
					

White Lotus star Alexandra Daddario's "something blue" was inspired by Meghan Markle's wedding look. Get all the details




					people.com


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Wasn't there a pic taken (the paps were not alerted this time) of them leaving a fertility clinic before she was pregnant with Invisibet?  Were they doing IVF or gender selection, or shopping for a surrogate?


Yes, TMZ had photos of them outside of a medical building which had a fertility clinic in early December 2020. Since Invisibet was born less than six months later, either 1) Meghan was already pregnant and going for a checkup, 2) Follow up meeting with the pregnant surrogate (do people do that? I have no idea).

One thing is certain, the Lilibet pregnancy existed when Meghan wrote her dramatic Thanksgiving miscarriage article for the New York Times. Many of us were skeptical a miscarriage occurred, but I could totally see if the original attempt at IVF failed and they had to try again.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Yes, TMZ had photos of them outside of a medical building which had a fertility clinic in early December 2020. Since Invisibet was born less than six months later, either 1) Meghan was already pregnant and going for a checkup, 2) Follow up meeting with the pregnant surrogate (do people do that? I have no idea).
> 
> One thing is certain, the Lilibet pregnancy existed when Meghan wrote her dramatic Thanksgiving miscarriage article for the New York Times. Many of us were skeptical a miscarriage occurred, but I could totally see if the original attempt at IVF failed and they had to try again.


I don't believe she had a miscarriage but I believe she needed to keep her name in the news to stay relevant.  Did the timing correspond with a W&K event?


----------



## Jktgal

lanasyogamama said:


> Another minor at error I noticed in the book is that he call Pennsylvania part of New England, which it is not. I think may be a long long time ago Pennsylvania was referred to as a New England colony.


OMG is he really that clueless. Seems very shoddy/almost nonexistent editing.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I don't believe she had a miscarriage but I believe she needed to keep her name in the news to stay relevant.  Did the timing correspond with a W&K event?


Don't think it needed to coincide with any royal event. The brief to Sunshine Sucks is likely just to keep them in the news as frequently as possible. And if nothing is happening, manufacture stories like TQ invited them to visit.


----------



## muddledmint

On Reddit, posters are warning that the kindle unlimited version of revenge is disappearing from their devices, probably because it’s not supposed to be available on KU yet. Place your kindles on airplane mode if you haven’t finished reading it yet!


----------



## 880

I would assume she went off birth control the first chance she got with H (like the first night, well before they announced officially that they were dating) 

i think she kept cradling her tummy bc she thought she was so special, as if she were channeling a  renaissance portrait of Madonna and child.  I also think she felt she had to remind everyone she was pregnant and therefore should get whatever she wanted. Like don’t argue or upset or contradict me bc I’m carrying a future Prince

i am hoping that if they stay married, that he drags her back to the UK, bc honestly why are they here. If they stay here, pls stay far from NY, bc we don’t need the headache.

Or, if they get divorced, it will be bc she found someone less high maintenance (older) and richer, and then hopefully she will settle down and be able to afford a similar house and grounds.


----------



## andrashik

For the ladies that are part of the kilted men alliance


----------



## andrashik

In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda




Her heart roared . Her constant need to be over the top is really annoying. At least tone down a little , and make it more believable


----------



## muddledmint

andrashik said:


> In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda
> View attachment 5578731
> 
> View attachment 5578732
> 
> Her heart roared . Her constant need to be over the top is really annoying. At least tone down a little , and make it more believable


I know Elle is not the Atlantic or anything, but I can’t believe they published this drivel. Ugh it’s so cringey.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Yes, TMZ had photos of them outside of a medical building which had a fertility clinic in early December 2020. Since Invisibet was born less than six months later, either 1) Meghan was already pregnant and going for a checkup, 2) Follow up meeting with the pregnant surrogate (do people do that? I have no idea).
> 
> One thing is certain, the Lilibet pregnancy existed when Meghan wrote her dramatic Thanksgiving miscarriage article for the New York Times. Many of us were skeptical a miscarriage occurred, but I could totally see if the original attempt at IVF failed and they had to try again.


Here are the photos:









						Meghan and Harry Spotted in Beverly Hills - Meghan's Mirror
					

Meghan and Harry were spotted attending an appointment in Beverly Hills. Meghan, carrying a clear pouch containing a toothbrush and a small toothpaste tube, must have been visiting the dentist when she and Harry were spotted looking breezy and California casual. Photos of the couple were...




					www.meghansmirror.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda



By vanishing with her fashion photographer? Also I'll bet money she wasn't even invited. Bower goes to great lenghts explaining how her agent couldn't place her because nobody in the UK had heard of her.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda
> View attachment 5578731
> 
> View attachment 5578732
> 
> Her heart roared . Her constant need to be over the top is really annoying. At least tone down a little , and make it more believable


Is this the trip when allegedly she used kids for a fashion shoot while "doing" her humanitarian work? How many humanitarian trips has she done in total? More or less than 5?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Is this the trip when allegedly she used kids for a fashion shoot while "doing" her humanitarian work? How many humanitarian trips has she done in total? More or less than 5?



She did four in the two years before snagging Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm halfway through the book, wedding is imminent. This woman is unbelievable, and not in a good way.


----------



## duna

Maggie Muggins said:


> Let's put this picture in perspective. The BFA took place Dec 11, 2018 and Archie was born (supposedly) May 6, 2019. That means ZedZed∞ would've been between four and five months pregnant. I know that all pregnancies vary, but by the end of the first trimester (1st pregnancy) my boobies had doubled in size and here she is bump showing, but almost flat chested. Does anyone else recall their pregnancy changes as compared to TW so we can assess this moon bump?


I thought that pic was taken when she was 8/9 months pregnant, if it's only 4/5 months then it's VERY fishy. My first bump didn't show until the second semester.


----------



## duna

xincinsin said:


> Is this the trip when allegedly she used kids for a fashion shoot while "doing" her humanitarian work? How many humanitarian trips has she done in total? More or less than 5?


Yes, the humanitarian trip to build wells in Rwanda. If anyone was unsure of the real reason she went to Uvalde, reading about her trips to Rwanda will clear all doubts. Fancy going on a humanitarian trip with her fashion photographer, clothes, makeup ect...and being photographed with the local kids doing her fashion shoot. This woman is EVIL.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Bower's book editor was totally not worth their money. While I don't think it takes away from the information he undug and compiled, those small mistakes keep adding up and are annoying. Kate wearing AlexandRA McQueen for the wedding?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow. They did not only eliminate Harry's closest friends and plenty of royal relatives from the guest list, they also didn't invite Camilla's children. I have stepsiblings. We are more amicable than close, but I go to their family functions even though it involves travel and it would be a no-brainer to invite them to mine.

Oh, and is anyone surprised Raptor held a speech at her own wedding? Of course she had no family there to do it.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> If you have the time, this video from Tatler [I know, I know] explains the importance of Scotland *now*.  [hint - Russian oligarchs] Wonder why the Dumbartons aren’t moving to their area?  Seems like a smart move if they are looking for $$$.  Apologies to all who live in this beautiful land.




Wow, I'm ahead of the pack at last


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes...for a woman her age who had presumably been on birth control to get pregnant that fast is unusual



It was very convenient, she must have extra special reproductive organs.

I know plenty of women that became mothers late in their (reproductive) life. They all had to have a little help. It's not bad, it's just to help. Meghan's was obviously a miracle pregnancy and birth.

Edited to say: For anyone saying it really doesn't matter, their/her business, it's not, otherwise thee's no difference between A & L being in the line of succession or my neighbour's toddler. 

It's not just about Harry's off-spring. There are a million could-have-been-kings (and queens) born 'on the wrong side of the blanket' (illegitimate) an illegitimate heir has no greater right to inherit as my cat (who is cleverer than H&M combined but just as demanding). 

Either you believe in the whole set-up or you live somewhere else and adopt their laws/rules. Monarchy is all about rulership. They cannot now prove Archie's or Lil's pedigree because they didn't follow the rules (apart from _The Rules: time-tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Righ _book apparently). The children should not be in the line of succession IMO.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Is this the trip when allegedly she used kids for a fashion shoot while "doing" her humanitarian work? How many humanitarian trips has she done in total? More or less than 5?



about the same number as she has done fashion shoots


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bower's book editor was totally not worth their money. While I don't think it takes away from the information he undug and compiled, those small mistakes keep adding up and are annoying. Kate wearing AlexandRA McQueen for the wedding?



Bower and I must have the same autocorrect software


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bower's book editor was totally not worth their money. While I don't think it takes away from the information he undug and compiled, those small mistakes keep adding up and are annoying. Kate wearing AlexandRA McQueen for the wedding?


We should volunteer for Vol 2. Guaranteed excellent team effort.  



papertiger said:


> Bower and I must have the same autocorrect software


OT I hate autocorrect software. Arrogance is built into that coding


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> We should volunteer for Vol 2. Guaranteed excellent team effort.
> 
> 
> OT I hate autocorrect software. Arrogance is built into that coding



For truth (and not just my truth) there is very little in that book we haven't already uncovered on this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

It is interesting that he says his book is in response to the O interview and that he still has more material and “could write another book”.  I think it’s a warning to H; trash your family in your book and I trash you in my next one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> For truth (and not just my truth) there is very little in that book we haven't already uncovered on this thread.



True. But it sometimes adds an extra detail that just makes it worse.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here are the photos:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry Spotted in Beverly Hills - Meghan's Mirror
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry were spotted attending an appointment in Beverly Hills. Meghan, carrying a clear pouch containing a toothbrush and a small toothpaste tube, must have been visiting the dentist when she and Harry were spotted looking breezy and California casual. Photos of the couple were...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansmirror.com


Hang on, I thought this appointment was the one that Hazard claimed was some deeply personal moment. Didn't he accuse the paps of intruding into their post-miscarriage sorrow? And several of us were exclaiming BS because who goes to the gynae in a white linen dress if you just suffered a (very dramatic song and dance routine) miscarriage and your gynae gives you a sample toothbrush and toothpaste to console you.


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> It was very convenient, she must have extra special reproductive organs.
> 
> I know plenty of women that became mothers late in their (reproductive) life. They all had to have a little help. It's not bad, it's just to help. Meghan's was obviously a miracle pregnancy and birth.
> 
> Edited to say: For anyone saying it really doesn't matter, their/her business, it's not, otherwise thee's no difference between A & L being in the line of succession or my neighbour's toddler.
> 
> It's not just about Harry's off-spring. There are a million could-have-been-kings (and queens) born 'on the wrong side of the blanket' (illegitimate) an illegitimate heir has no greater right to inherit as my cat (who is cleverer than H&M combined but just as demanding).
> 
> Either you believe in the whole set-up or you live somewhere else and adopt their laws/rules. Monarchy is all about rulership. They cannot now prove Archie's or Lil's pedigree because they didn't follow the rules (apart from _The Rules: time-tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Righ _book apparently). The children should not be in the line of succession IMO.


----------



## jelliedfeels

purseinsanity said:


> I like to say she Vagazzled him .  My Gynecologist friend said she’s seen quite a lot of vajayjays in her 20+ years of practice, and is quite puzzled by what exactly TW’s has that has Haz ready to try to topple a monarchy


Teeth? 

Legend has it Wallis used to do the ‘Singapore grip’ some kind of Kegels exercise on the fellas which drove them wild. There’s also this rumour she had a crazy grip if you know what I mean   because she was born intersex. I mean who knows. You’d think a prince in a sketchy mens club would have sampled a lot of platters z


CarryOn2020 said:


> If you have the time, this video from Tatler [I know, I know] explains the importance of Scotland *now*.  [hint - Russian oligarchs] Wonder why the Dumbartons aren’t moving to their area?  Seems like a smart move if they are looking for $$$.  Apologies to all who live in this beautiful land.



Scotlands always been an aristocratic place with the lots of money- especially foreign money. The unloved ginger kid of the British Isle is and always has been Northern England. 


andrashik said:


> In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda
> View attachment 5578731
> 
> View attachment 5578732
> 
> Her heart roared . Her constant need to be over the top is really annoying. At least tone down a little , and make it more believable.


I feel so sorry for the Rwandans- I mean does the cruelty ever stop? They’ve already been through one of the most well known genocides of recent years and now they have to put up with every z list wannabe posing with them and eating all their food: 

She’s in bucolic bliss  thump thumping in the back of a van while her gut is saying no? The poor man better get his pants back on and get to a safe distance. 

Yes, the humanitarian trip to build wells in Rwanda. If anyone was unsure of the real reason she went to Uvalde, reading about her trips to Rwanda will clear all doubts. Fancy going on a humanitarian trip with her fashion photographer, clothes, makeup ect...and being photographed with the local kids doing her fashion shoot. This woman is EVIL.
 Lord knows this crunchy stump knows a lot about building wells. Surely enough expertise to make flying her over to do it an efficient use of resources. I assume there are no Rwandan bricklayers and no one knows how to use a shovel. Who am I kidding M didn’t even bother going that. 

It’s such a shame she went to Rwanda one of the most female dominant political societies and she learnt nothing she considers  relevant to her feminism or endless lecturing. It is so tragic that often the people best financed to travel and learn from the world are so unbelievably thick nothing penetrates their skulls.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So we're currently writing the letter to Thomas. A letter who was deliberately crafted to make him look bad (her words, not mine). I'm not a fan of the Markles and their big mouths and their adamant need to get their side of the story out (because really, who cares), but I am still aghast how icecoldly and cruelly she discarded of her own father, and I still think she set him up for this way before the wedding. 

An interesting detail that speaks volumes: he never got a wedding invitation (way before any staged pap pics or his heart attack), and when he mentioned it Raptor said "Oh, it must have been lost in the mail" and that was that. Like, what?

 He should have just given her up for adoption when he still could.


----------



## Sharont2305

"The unloved ginger kid of the British Isle is and always has been Northern England." 
@jelliedfeels i don't understand what you mean by this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So when Knauf first approached Harry about the bullying accusations, he apologized and promised to talk to Raptor if Knauf would not file an official complaint. Is that the behaviour of a man who is absolutely convinced his darling wife has done nothing wrong? I don't think so.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So we're currently writing the letter to Thomas. A letter who was deliberately crafted to make him look bad (her words, not mine). I'm not a fan of the Markles and their big mouths and their adamant need to get their side of the story out (because really, who cares), but I am still aghast how icecoldly and cruelly she discarded of her own father, and I still think she set him up for this way before the wedding.
> 
> An interesting detail that speaks volumes: he never got a wedding invitation (way before any staged pap pics or his heart attack), and when he mentioned it Raptor said "Oh, it must have been lost in the mail" and that was that. Like, what?
> 
> He should have just given her up for adoption when he still could.


It is not only to make Thomas look bad. She wanted to make sure that there was no room for conversation.




Z-list boxed her father in and gaslit him over and over again


----------



## EverSoElusive

Based on the book, Z-list's letter didn't work out as intended. Instead, the letter infuriated and upset Thomas that he went ahead and blab even more. Et voila! Domino effect making things far worse


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True. But it sometimes adds an extra detail that just makes it worse.


And repetition makes it real, if you hear it from LOTS of independent sources, you really start to believe …
and various sources point out missed things in the videos 
the videos are sometimes more damning to me than written accounts,


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So when Knauf first approached Harry about the bullying accusations, he apologized and promised to talk to Raptor if Knauf would not file an official complaint. Is that the behaviour of a man who is absolutely convinced his darling wife has done nothing wrong? I don't think so.


Ummm I have a sticky wicket to deal with personally … agonizing over writing another text/email … 
You never know how the text will sound after the fact, so maybe it is better not putting it in writing ??? phone call ? Chat - face to face ????
OK, maybe that logic is too subtle for JCMH


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> I bet there were years when the boys preferred not to be with dad, and avoided him
> lack of contact was perhaps due to both sides - dad and boys


Also, putting things in perspective, the boys started boarding school very young - 9 years old ish … typical of UK aristocracy, almost unknown in the US where going away to school starts at age 18 for uni/college
C W and H mostly lived apart long before and after Diana died


----------



## Aimee3

I really feel sorry for TW’s father.  Who treats your father that way?  It’s not like he was abusive or stingy.  Quite the opposite.  I don’t blame him anymore for speaking out about her.  He must have been terribly hurt and couldn’t reach her any other way.


----------



## gracekelly

It's pretty obvious that Meghan was thinking 24/7/365 about how to give herself a high profile and to make money and still is.  Everything she did/does was for both of these things.  She reasoned that the higher profile would lead to more income. The problem is that using charity and humanitarian works is so false when you don't do the work and/or are being completely untruthful about it and your heart is no truly in it.    Handing out sandwiches, and  giving out diapers doesn't make you a great humanitarian.  For Meg it was telling the world that she did it, not that she was actually doing it to be a good person.  It was all virtue signaling and still is.  The trip to Uvalde was all about that.  I wonder if she even bought the food for the blood bank or conned it out of the supplier who was going to donate the food in the first place. I can hear her assistant calling the supplier saying that the DoS is going to the blood bank and would be happy to carry the food over there for you so you don't have to deliver it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> I really feel sorry for TW’s father.  Who treats your father that way?  It’s not like he was abusive or stingy.  Quite the opposite.  I don’t blame him anymore for speaking out about her.  He must have been terribly hurt and couldn’t reach her any other way.


I feel sorry for him, but in a limited way.  This family is a train wreck that has been paraded in front of us endlessly and some of the wreck is self inflicted.  Thomas has thrown himself under the train wheel a few times.  Samantha literally rolled up to the palace gate demanding to have them take a letter to Meghan all the while a pap was snapping pictures.  It is all a reality show gone bad.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It's pretty obvious that Meghan was thinking 24/7/365 about how to give herself a high profile and to make money and still is.  Everything she did/does was for both of these things.  She reasoned that the higher profile would lead to more income. The problem is that using charity and humanitarian works is so false when you don't do the work and/or are being completely untruthful about it and your heart is no truly in it.    Handing out sandwiches, and  giving out diapers doesn't make you a great humanitarian.  For Meg it was telling the world that she did it, not that she was actually doing it to be a good person.  It was all virtue signaling and still is.  The trip to Uvalde was all about that.  I wonder if she even bought the food for the blood bank or conned it out of the supplier who was going to donate the food in the first place. I can hear her assistant calling the supplier saying that the DoS is going to the blood bank and would be happy to carry the food over there for you so you don't have to deliver it.


I think the high profile is as important to her as the money - if not more so.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think the high profile is as important to her as the money - if not more so.


Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne said she was a businesswoman first and foremost.   I think MM felt high profile and money were one and the same, or at least the profile led directly into the money.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne said she was a businesswoman first and foremost.   I think MM felt high profile and money were one and the same, or at least the profile led directly into the money.


maybe so but I think we may have to agree to disagree on this....I think her ego and being world famous is huge for her
Admittedly I don't know her so this is just my perception...all the pushing in front of her husband, etc.


----------



## Lounorada

I'm finally up-to-date after catching-up on 60+ pages  This thread moves _fast _when you are away for just a few days!




bellecate said:


> Sugars gone wild indeed!
> View attachment 5439693
> View attachment 5439694





Or more accurately, 'idiots'



Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5538718
> 
> View attachment 5538719
> View attachment 5538720





That perma-smug look on her face 
What does she need the huge _but _empty looking bag for? I'd guess all she had in there was her phone, lip-balm and snacks for her grumpy man-child.
He's _always _messing with his wedding ring.




CarryOn2020 said:


> _Painful year in a painful decade _ Looks like most did not get the memo
> 
> _
> View attachment 5538728
> _
> 
> 
> ETA: very nervous speaker, lots of lip-licking and stumbling over the words.


The tiny audience 






TimeToShop said:


> The guy after him called him, Prince Duke of Wessex









Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this video. The all thing brought to my mind Ingrid Seward's words that Hazz is being '_dragged around like performing sea_l.'
> 
> Soulmate? Poor Hazz! Does he believe this?
> View attachment 5539101
> 
> What work is he talking about?
> View attachment 5539102
> 
> What did he give? Headaches? Is he talking about TW's lemon cakes?
> View attachment 5539103
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry being 'dragged around like performing seal' since meeting Meghan
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has been "dragged around like a performing seal" since meeting Meghan Markle, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk









lanasyogamama said:


> View attachment 5539345



That false tan is so bad. Talk about oompa loompa 
Would love to know which one she uses. Only so I never waste my money on it in the future and for their sales to fall because it's that horrible looking 




charlottawill said:


> She spends a lot of money to look bad. *The jumpsuit is $4790, the BV bag is $3500 and about $1000 for the shoes.*





Such a waste of money because we all can guess that she'll probably never wear any of it again.




lanasyogamama said:


>









charlottawill said:


> It's in here - go to 12:20



Hey Meggy,






charlottawill said:


> View attachment 5572788









V0N1B2 said:


> Another major red flag. Not only did she want to walk herself down the aisle like some kind of orphan, she had no bridesmaids. I understand it isn’t like regular (non-royal) weddings with 2/3/4 Bridesmaids and a few flower girls etc. But she had no Maid/Matron of Honour, maybe 4 of her actual friends at their wedding and not one relative besides her mother? People had to know there was something up with this chick back then. What kind of person has this big fairytale wedding - and a Royal Wedding at that - and doesn’t have her bestest bestest friend standing beside her?
> Who gifts Aquazzura shoes to little children? It’s not like they can ever wear them again, and they probably wouldn’t have even fit them a few months after the wedding.
> 
> I know I wrote it before, but when you start reading the book, it all becomes crystal clear. She was absolutely spoiled rotten and given the world by her father since birth. Told how special and smart and beautiful and precious she is... Her father absolutely ruined that child and turned her into the complete megalomaniac she is today. The second he was of no use to her (when she started to make some money from Suits) he was cast aside like garbage.  Paid to private school, paid for university, paid for her acting lessons, paid for camps, paid for her to go to Europe with Ninaki Priddy and her family, paid for her to live in Buenos Aires, paid for her to fly back there to visit a boyfriend, paid for the last minute flight home when things didn’t go her way down there... She used him and his contacts to better herself, and she’s done it with every man in her life since.  Now she’s got a title for life and the second Harry’s financial taps are turned off, she throw him to the dogs.
> 
> Re: Harry’s security neurosis: I believe its all Meghan. Her issues with needing PRIVACY go way back. She’s the one with the deluded fantasy of being hounded by paparazzi. Harry grew up with the Royal Rota - he was used to having his photo taken at certain events.
> As an aside, is anyone able to find a statement or snippet from an interview from Harry where he speaks of his mother’s death and/or “the flashbulbs taking him right back” before the summer of 2016? Because I believe all these ideas in his head have been planted by his wife.
> 
> They were planning their exit from the Royal Family during their trip to Australia, because it was then that Meghan felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family, so Harry now felt she wasn’t being protected by the Royal Family. When one hears the word protected, we often think of it in security terms, but Meghan felt her image/name/honour should be protected. The RF didn’t do enough to come out publicly and support her. Again - megalomaniac, narcissist, delusions of grandeur, persecution complex... this woman’s got it all. We just call that a crazy ass b!tch where I come from.


Well said!






andrashik said:


> In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda
> View attachment 5578731
> 
> View attachment 5578732
> 
> Her heart roared . Her constant need to be over the top is really annoying. At least tone down a little , and make it more believable






The only thing she is exceptional at being.


----------



## pukasonqo

bellecate said:


> Sugars gone wild indeed!
> View attachment 5439693
> View attachment 5439694


 Queen of Australia?! F$&@ NO!!!!
There are Australians that still support the monarchy but even them would not be impressed by Queen Megsy and King Hazza
Whoever is behind that post needs to
(a) get a life 
(b)  catch up in history 
(c) get her meds reviewed 
(d) all of the above
Where do they find these stans, do they get paid, the more outrageous and spittle covered text the more $$$$ they get?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> I really feel sorry for TW’s father.  Who treats your father that way?  It’s not like he was abusive or stingy.  Quite the opposite.  I don’t blame him anymore for speaking out about her.  He must have been terribly hurt and couldn’t reach her any other way.


I agree in theory. For me, the fuzzy line comes when we find out TomM lied to his daughter and the world about the P&G story. Additionally, he embellished the lie so much so that he calls Linda Ellerbee who had a solid reputation and gets her to repeat the lie, albeit on those inane high school channels. Still, ewww. Then he lies about winning the lottery - again to the whole world.  Ewww. What did Hazzi know and when did he know it?


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, and is anyone surprised Raptor held a speech at her own wedding? Of course she had no family there to do it.


When Thomas was still planning on attending the wedding (having never received a formal invitation) he asked Wallis 2.0 if he could say some words at the reception…the typical father of the bride speech. She said that was not possible  it was her plan all along to give her own speech.


----------



## mellibelly

Ok this mistake is not a spelling error or typo. I think he means the show *Facts of Life*?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dp


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> When Thomas was still planning on attending the wedding (having never received a formal invitation) he asked Wallis 2.0 if he could say some words at the reception…the typical father of the bride speech. She said that was not possible  it was her plan all along to give her own speech.


This wasn’t her first wedding, so maybe she considered it less meaningful and more of a show / _spectacle_ . Not sure how the Royals feel about these _spectacles.  _Charles and Diana, Andi and Sarah, Princess Anne and Mark Phillips - all divorced, lots of money spent.  Seems like the smaller weddings have a higher success rate.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> I agree in theory. For me, the fuzzy line comes when we find out TomM lied to his daughter and the world about the P&G story. Additionally, he embellished the lie so much so that he calls Linda Ellerbee who had a solid reputation and gets her to repeat the lie, albeit on those inane high school channels. Still, ewww. *Then he lies about winning the lottery* - again to the whole world.  Ewww. What did Hazzi know and when did he know it?



He never won the lottery?  For real?  I must have missed hearing this when this came out. I thought that was how he paid for her expensive Northwestern college education, nose jobs, and all the other stuff he bought for her.  But, no?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This wasn’t her first wedding, so maybe she considered it less meaningful and more of a show / _spectacle_ . Not sure how the Royals feel about these _spectacles.  _Charles and Diana, Andi and Sarah, Princess Anne and Mark Phillips - all divorced, lots of money spent.  Seems like the smaller weddings have a higher success rate.


Meghan didn't want to share the spotlight with anyone.  It probably killed her that she had to have the cute children as part of the wedding.  One of my theories as to why she was so mean to Charlotte was that she was hoping that Catherine would pull her from the wedding and George as well.  She reportedly didn't want either of them because their status would take attention away from her.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> He never won the lottery?  For real?  I must have missed hearing this when this came out. I thought that was how he paid for her expensive Northwestern college education, nose jobs, and all the other stuff he bought for her.  But, no?


Tom, Jr. said he made it up when speaking to a reporter.  Not sure why he would say this unless the reporter was wondering how Thomas was supporting Meghan.  Thomas did pay for everything and probably a reason why he was never able to save a dime for his old age and the reason why he thought that when she became famous, some money could come his way.  Meghan did supposedly give him and Doria money and she said she gave him a total of 20K.  He made a snide comment that he was glad she was keeping track after the 100's of thousands he had spent on her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> He never won the lottery?  For real?  I must have missed hearing this when this came out. I thought that was how he paid for her expensive Northwestern college education, nose jobs, and all the other stuff he bought for her.  But, no?


No, he did not win.  Chapter 2, page 23. From the Kindle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## K.D.

andrashik said:


> In 2016 she wrote for Elle that she refused to go to BAFTA because she was "helping" in Rwanda
> View attachment 5578731
> 
> View attachment 5578732
> 
> Her heart roared . Her constant need to be over the top is really annoying. At least tone down a little , and make it more believable








She must've mistaken a newsletter from the jeweller for an invite. This is not my first language, but I had to Google bucolic. Unbelievable indeed.


----------



## gracekelly

I lost my freebee copy of the book as it was pulled by Kindle.  If i had known they were going to do this, I would have kept it open on my Kindle.  At least I finished reading it before they did this.


----------



## gracekelly

K.D. said:


> She must've mistaken a newsletter from the jeweller for an invite. This is not my first language, but I had to Google bucolic. Unbelievable indeed.


I think it is axiomatic that if Meghan says she didn't want to go or couldn't go to some event/function it is because she wasn't invited.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I lost my freebee copy of the book as it was pulled by Kindle.  If i had known they were going to do this, I would have kept it open on my Kindle.  At least I finished reading it before they did this.


The chapter 2, page 23 reference came from my Kindle. So far, mine has not been pulled.  One more oddity in long list of oddities with the disastrous duo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> I'm finally up-to-date after catching-up on 60+ pages  This thread moves _fast _when you are away for just a few days!



Wait, are you suggesting you have a life outside of this tiny corner of the internet, without us?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Then he lies about winning the lottery - again to the whole world.



Why though? Did I miss it or was it never revealed?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sharont2305 said:


> "The unloved ginger kid of the British Isle is and always has been Northern England."
> @jelliedfeels i don't understand what you mean by this.


Well not to get too into politics but just that Northern England Consistently is underfunded and underrepresented as a region given its population and GDP contributions. 


Lounorada said:


> I'm finally up-to-date after catching-up on 60+ pages  This thread moves _fast _when you are away for just a few days!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579032
> 
> Or more accurately, 'idiots'
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579028
> 
> That perma-smug look on her face
> What does she need the huge _but _empty looking bag for? I'd guess all she had in there was her phone, lip-balm and snacks for her grumpy man-child.
> He's _always _messing with his wedding ring.
> 
> 
> 
> The tiny audience
> View attachment 5579033
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579035
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579036
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That false tan is so bad. Talk about oompa loompa
> Would love to know which one she uses. Only so I never waste my money on it in the future and for their sales to fall because it's that horrible looking
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579047
> 
> Such a waste of money because we all can guess that she'll probably never wear any of it again.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579030
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Meggy,
> View attachment 5579063
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579067
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well said!
> View attachment 5579072
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579083
> 
> 
> The only thing she is exceptional at being.



This is a thing of beauty as always! 


Incidentally 
Was just listening to a bit in Revenge about H&W growing up and they were saying they couldn’t find a place in the system for H and I think that’s crazy - you should have time for every child you choose to have- especially if rather than having to do it alone or as a xoue you have an entire staff of people devoted to your service


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm halfway through the book, wedding is imminent. This woman is unbelievable, and not in a good way.


Yes, I always thought it was all her, but Hazz was complicit in this as well.  He demanded that everyone bend over backwards to accommodate her so she wouldn't leave.  If only he knew there was no way in h*ll she was going anywhere once she got her hooks in him


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though? Did I miss it or was it never revealed?


It's in the book.  Tom. Jr. must have told Bower.


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> It is not only to make Thomas look bad. She wanted to make sure that there was no room for conversation.
> 
> View attachment 5579037
> 
> 
> Z-list boxed her father in and gaslit him over and over again


Honestly, when the *Queen* takes part in a video conference with you and advises you to GO TO MEXICO to straighten things out with your father, YOU GO!  Who does this woman think she is??  I was stunned by that passage in the book


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That chick is so not right in the head. princessmeghanmarkle.com after like 2 hours of dating


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Yes, I always thought it was all her, but Hazz was complicit in this as well.  He demanded that everyone bend over backwards to accommodate her so she wouldn't leave.  If only he knew there was no way in h*ll she was going anywhere once she got her hooks in him



He was, but she was a disgusting POS with several loose screws decades before they ever met.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> It's in the book.  Tom. Jr. must have told Bower.



I don't think the book says why he made that up, though.


----------



## Lounorada

andrashik said:


> Regarding reading "negative" stories about themselves, *I wonder if they visited this forum*


If they have visited here or _do _visit here then this is all I have to say to MM and her man-child husband:










And a huge serving of this to the two fools:


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He was, but she was a disgusting POS with several loose screws decades before they ever met.


No question about that - she is a sociopath 

*What Are The Traits Of A Sociopath? *

What are considered sociopathic traits or sociopathic traits? Here are some of the potential signs and traits of a person with antisocial personality disorder:


A lack of empathy for others
Little to no genuine remorse
The manipulation of other people
Lying and deceit
A sense of superiority over others
Little to no regard for right or wrong
The belief that rules do not apply to them
Getting into legal trouble or a little regard for the law
A lack of responsibility or engaging in irresponsible behaviors
Aggression or hostility
The exploitation of other people
Substance use
People with antisocial personality disorder are not monsters, and despite the name of the disorder, it doesn’t mean that someone is antisocial in the way that we typically understand the term. For a person to be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder, they must meet the DSM criteria for the disorder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> It's in the book.  Tom. Jr. must have told Bower.


Did Bower confirm Tom Jr.’s statement? Because I could see Tom Sr. not being forthcoming about a lottery win to his older son if he wasn’t going to give any of the money to him and spent it on himself and his youngest daughter.


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, are you suggesting you have a life outside of this tiny corner of the internet, without us?



Never!



I was unintentionally kept away from the forum  I was away for a few days recently with every intention of keeping up-to-date with everything you ladies were posting about as my entertainment, but the internet connection where I was was pretty much non existent so I had to give up trying to follow all of the posts.
Little did I know there would be so many posts to catch up on in just a few days- y'all were on fire!


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> I think it is axiomatic that if Meghan says she didn't want to go or couldn't go to some event/function it is because she wasn't invited.


This!






QueenofWrapDress said:


> That chick is so not right in the head. princessmeghanmarkle.com after like 2 hours of dating



She is something else, the delusions by her!
JCMH once he realised he was locked on the crazy train by his dArLiNg wife:


----------



## Aimee3

Apparently it’s only around 2 to 20$ a year to register a domain which surprised me, but then again, she’s cheap with her own money, so I guess it’s not that surprising how little it costs.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Did Bower confirm Tom Jr.’s statement? Because I could see Tom Sr. not being forthcoming about a lottery win to his older son if he wasn’t going to give any of the money to him and spent it on himself and his youngest daughter.


I find the whole money topic still puzzling , TM suddenly had too much money , too fast

Book says TM paid like $200k for her college, a big chunk of change , ok, ok, maybe he paid college loans over tome …

TM spent boatloads in a few years ,  he had an apt near studio and a house, camps and trips for her, cosmetic dentistry .. how much does a lighting director earn ???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently some of the contractors who refurbished Frogmore Cottage referred to her as Marie Antoinette.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently it’s only around 2 to 20$ a year to register a domain which surprised me, but then again, she’s cheap with her own money, so I guess it’s not that surprising how little it costs.


The domain name is the tip of the iceberg, the hosting service, coders/web designers/updates wear you out 

and of course, the time/PR team to read all the comments


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Revisiting the suicide saga. Just reading it makes me angry because even though Bower is careful in his wording, it is so clear to me she made it up to manipulate Harry even further. It's possibly the most disgusting thing she's done. I want to throw up at her generous explanation of how she only did not kill herself after all because it would be so unfair to him after losing his mother to now lose another woman "with a baby inside of her". I literally feel phyically repulsed.


----------



## andrashik

They broke the internet alright 








						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle make it to ‘Most Annoying Celebs of 2022’ list
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have managed to land themselves on the Most Annoying Celebs of 2022 list after a whirlwind year of many controversies, reported The Cheat Sheet. According to a Ranker...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh.


----------



## marietouchet

Tom JR invented the lottery story long after the fact, but explanation still is goofy


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.



MORE DIRT !!!!! Yippeeeeeeeee


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Revisiting the suicide saga. Just reading it makes me angry because even though Bower is careful in his wording, it is so clear to me she made it up to manipulate Harry even further. It's possibly the most disgusting thing she's done. I want to throw up at her generous explanation of how she only did not kill herself after all because it would be so unfair to him after losing his mother to now lose another woman "with a baby inside of her". I literally feel phyically repulsed.


she's a piece of work
If it was true, which I don't believe, would it be something to share on TV?  how she cried and he held her?  uugh


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think I'll call it a night without working my way through the outrageous baby shower chapter.


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.




Well the PS to erase years, ethnic features, etc is not cheap


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: the lottery money - wonder if he found some other source [drugs?]  
RE: the suicide - from her soap opera background, this may not have been as awful as it sounds. Just like with the only child comment, she may have meant it figuratively rather than literally.  In any case, disgusting drama. 
RE: Omid’s book - how many ‘_new_’ chapters to the H&M story should we expect? Imo we are way past what is socially acceptable  
RE: domain names - interesting that she is using the Baron/Baroness of Kilkeel. Perhaps she is ready to drop the ducha$$ title?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> Well the PS to erase years, ethnic features, etc is not cheap



What's up with his caterpillar eyebrows, though?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I'll call it a night without working my way through the outrageous baby shower chapter.


Nurturing and nourishing self care is the only to get through this book.  I found the book be quite draining due to its spirit-exhausting lies.  To disconnect from it, I imagine the French way of life - joie de vivre, etc.  It may not always be true, but, golly, the fantasy is awesome.  Take good care 
H&M could use some lessons.

_4. Master The Art Of Discretion_​_French lifestyle’s mantra could be summarized as “Pour vivre heureux, restons cachés” —literally in English: “To live happily, live hidden”. The French do not want to be seen and heard by the world. Indeed, French people do not share every detail of their life with anyone or on social networks. The French usually do not speak or laugh loudly and do not show off about expensive items or money. In the French culture, it’s very vulgar to show off your wealth or to even talk about money (or how expensive the things you own are)._











						I’m French, Here is How to Live The French Lifestyle
					

If you want to know more about the French lifestyle, here are 15 tips to incorporate the French way of life into your daily life.




					leoncechenal.com


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.



He can't write a book by himself?  Always needs a co-author?  Poor Carrie is going to be Markled.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though? Did I miss it or was it never revealed?


Never really revealed as far as I know.  TomM in those interviews with the journalist, imo, he seemed quite pleased with himself. My guess is he enjoys the deceptions and manipulations as much as MM.  Very sick and unhealthy way to live, imo.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nurturing and nourishing self care is the only to get through this book.  I found the book be quite draining due to its spirit-draining lies.  To disconnect from it, I imagine the French way of life - joie de vivre, etc.  It may not always be true, but, golly, the fantasy is awesome.  Take good care
> H&M could use some lessons.
> 
> _4. Master The Art Of Discretion_​_French lifestyle’s mantra could be summarized as “Pour vivre heureux, restons cachés” —literally in English: “To live happily, live hidden”. The French do not want to be seen and heard by the world. Indeed, French people do not share every detail of their life with anyone or on social networks. The French usually do not speak or laugh loudly and do not show off about expensive items or money. In the French culture, it’s very vulgar to show off your wealth or to even talk about money (or how expensive the things you own are)._
> 
> View attachment 5579262
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m French, Here is How to Live The French Lifestyle
> 
> 
> If you want to know more about the French lifestyle, here are 15 tips to incorporate the French way of life into your daily life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> leoncechenal.com


That was the funny line from Le Divorce.  It is mentioned that talking about sex is OK but money is not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nurturing and nourishing self care is the only to get through this book.  I found the book be quite draining due to its spirit-exhausting lies. To disconnect from it, I imagine the French way of life - joie de vivre, etc.  It may not always be true, but, golly, the fantasy is awesome. Take good care
> 
> ​



I'm offsetting the toxic book with watching baking videos and designing my dream kitchen...for when I win the lottery


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.



Dey Street is a division of Harper Collins. The publisher sounds as pretentious as it’s subjects. From their website:

DEY STREET BOOKS is built on the idea that by publishing celebrated and diverse creatives with precision and innovation, we will deliver singular and successful publications. Time and time again readers come to our books for content that educates, inspires and entertains. 

Dey Street, where culture comes to live.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kitchens   especially those seen in Nancy Meyers’ movies:








						It's Not Complicated—How to Get the Nancy Meyers Kitchen of Your Dreams
					

A Nancy Myers kitchen is the heart of the home in all her movies, and they invariably feature large islands, farmhouse sinks, and pendant lighting.




					www.thespruce.com


----------



## bag-mania

As far as the domain names, I don’t think she got any of them except for Sussex Royal. It’s a common practice when somebody/something becomes famous for people to buy up all of the possible domain variations with the hopes of selling it for big $$$$ to the person or company with that name.

I refuse to believe the campaign web domains were created by anyone but one of those hopeful speculators.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That chick is so not right in the head. princessmeghanmarkle.com after like 2 hours of dating





Did anyone else notice this in the comments? I don't remember hearing that someone found a possible birth certificate in Colorado.


----------



## tiktok

Ok maybe there’s a reason Harry is a dimwit. His genes apparently weren’t promising to begin with. I mean, can you be any stupider than Charles? I wonder how many of these stories will appear in Harry’s biography:









						Prince Charles agreed to take £1m from family of  Osama Bin Laden
					

Charles' is understood to have accepted the payment from Bakr bin Laden, head of the family, and his brother Shafiq - both half-brothers of 9/11 mastermind Osama.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> Ok maybe there’s a reason Harry is a dimwit. His genes apparently weren’t promising to begin with. I mean, can you be any stupider than Charles? I wonder how many of these stories will appear in Harry’s biography:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles agreed to take £1m from family of  Osama Bin Laden
> 
> 
> Charles' is understood to have accepted the payment from Bakr bin Laden, head of the family, and his brother Shafiq - both half-brothers of 9/11 mastermind Osama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



To be fair, none of the other Bin Ladins minus one brother is known for religious extremism or terroristic interests, but...yeah. WTH. I didn't know Charles what THAT pressed for money. Maybe he should have told Raptor to cut her clothes budget.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, none of the other Bin Ladins minus one brother is known for religious extremism or terroristic interests, but...yeah. WTH. I didn't know Charles what THAT pressed for money. Maybe he should have told Raptor to cut her clothes budget.


Yes and people don’t realize the bin Laden family is enormous, numbering in the hundreds. By himself Mohammad bin Laden (Osama’s father) fathered 54 children with 20 women. I believe Osama was pretty much disowned by the family in the 90s.

It gives Elon Musk and his father something to aspire to for sure.

That said, nobody is EVER going to say that Prince Charles is known for his wisdom and good judgment.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently some of the contractors who refurbished Frogmore Cottage referred to her as Marie Antoinette.



That's coz they probably asked for sandwiches and she kept giving them stale, leftover elderflower and lemon drizzle cake


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.



"Day Street buys Scobie's next royal bio"

Don't they mean anti-royal bio?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> That was the funny line from Le Divorce.  It is mentioned that talking about sex is OK but money is not.




In Britain: No talk of sex, religion, or politics - (a bit like tPF ) 

 We only talk about the weather  

+

if you're upper-class: and who's related to who 
if you're working-class: also who's related to who 
if you're middle class: property prices/renovations and extensions


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> In Britain: No talk of sex, religion, or politics - (a bit like tPF )
> 
> * We only talk about the weather *
> 
> +
> 
> if you're upper-class: and who's related to who
> if you're working-class: also who's related to who
> if you're middle class: property prices/renovations and extensions


You know what Bob Dylan said:

_You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows._


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Dey Street is a division of Harper Collins. The publisher sounds as pretentious as it’s subjects. From their website:
> 
> DEY STREET BOOKS is built on the idea that by publishing celebrated and diverse creatives with precision and innovation, we will deliver singular and successful publications. Time and time again readers come to our books for content that educates, inspires and entertains.
> 
> Dey Street, where culture comes to live.



"...come to our books..." 

Sounds like Day Street is getting readers mixed up with dogs 





Actually dogs are too clever to read Scooby-doo

Dey Street, where culture a talentless, pointless nobody comes to live


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> You know what Bob Dylan said:
> 
> _You don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows._



This one's for Z-list and HaZZbin


----------



## Annawakes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That chick is so not right in the head. princessmeghanmarkle.com after like 2 hours of dating




Question though.  How would she have known in Nov 2016 to register DuchessofSussex.com?  How would she have known the Queen would bestow Sussex on them?  Even before they were engaged she registered that name…..?


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Question though.  How would she have known in Nov 2016 to register DuchessofSussex.com?  How would she have known the Queen would bestow Sussex on them?  Even before they were engaged she registered that name…..?



I thought that too, but Harry could have been told that's what you'll get if/when you get married.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I thought that too, but Harry could have been told that's what you'll get if/when you get married.


It had been mooted for years that H would get that title on marriage, many articles in press

I distinctly remember this , OK, he gets a title for getting married, not doing work ?


----------



## marietouchet

Just noticed … SCOOBIE has started to enthusiastically dish dirt on Charles, he used to be just pro JCMH, 
Now OS is anti Charles


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: the lottery money - wonder if he found some other source [drugs?]
> RE: the suicide - from her soap opera background, this may not have been as awful as it sounds. Just like with the only child comment, she may have meant it figuratively rather than literally.  In any case, disgusting drama.
> RE: Omid’s book - how many ‘_new_’ chapters to the H&M story should we expect? Imo we are way past what is socially acceptable
> RE: domain names - interesting that she is using the Baron/Baroness of Kilkeel. Perhaps she is ready to drop the ducha$$ title?


Kilkenny is H’s Irish title  (Northern Ireland) just as he is Earl of Dumbarton in Scotland


----------



## marietouchet

The list of dates in the URLS are the years of the US a presidency races, not Senate or House of Representatives


----------



## marietouchet

pukasonqo said:


> Well the PS to erase years, ethnic features, etc is not cheap


It finally came to me … he no longer has the dark circles around his eyes
I could never figure if those were added or he was born with them


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The list of dates in the URLS are the years of the US a presidency races, not Senate or House of Representatives


I hope you are not suggesting that a woman of Meghan’s talents and insight needs to work her way up. No, she must start her life in politics right at the top!


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Question though.  How would she have known in Nov 2016 to register DuchessofSussex.com?  How would she have known the Queen would bestow Sussex on them?  Even before they were engaged she registered that name…..?


Again, we don’t know that she registered them. Anyone can register domain names that they think up. Maybe someone out there got lucky.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I feel sorry for him, but in a limited way.  This family is a train wreck that has been paraded in front of us endlessly and some of the wreck is self inflicted.  Thomas has thrown himself under the train wheel a few times.  Samantha literally rolled up to the palace gate demanding to have them take a letter to Meghan all the while a pap was snapping pictures.  It is all a reality show gone bad.


Having only gotten to her 5th season in SUITS …
On balance, I feel there are SO MANY HOLES in the early story I don’t know who to feel sorry for ..
Where did TM get all the money ? had the author told me the typical salary of a lighting director, I might get it
Where did Doria go when MM was 9-20 ??
MM had expensive opportunities - school, camps - but her parents were gone/working 18 hour days

BUT I do see the recurring theme that she can be all sugar and spice to get what she wants but goes postal if she does not get what it , dramatic change in personality


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Having only gotten to her 5th season in SUITS …
> On balance, I feel there are SO MANY HOLES in the early story I don’t know who to feel sorry for ..
> Where did TM get all the money ? had the author told me the typical salary of a lighting director, I might get it
> Where did Doria go when MM was 9-20 ??
> MM had expensive opportunities - school, camps - but her parents were gone/working 18 hour days


Those are excellent questions that do need to be answered.  If any of the Markleclan tried to offer an answer, I wouldn’t believe their story. Not sure I would believe anyone who tried to defend H&M.  Kinda felt the same way with the Charles and Diana saga. Then, after some time passed, the truth, [not their truth,  the real truth], became apparent. I feel like we are at that point with H&M - all of us have sharp discernment skills. We can figure out the truth.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Just noticed … SCOOBIE has started to enthusiastically dish dirt on Charles, he used to be just pro JCMH,
> Now OS is anti Charles


Hmm, if I schemed like a soap opera villainess and I had a pet flunky named Omid, here’s what I would do. Give Scobie-doo information about Charles (possibly made up) to put in his book. When Harry’s memoir hits at the end of the year it is likely going to cause a fire storm with damaging accusations about Charles and maybe William. Many people will be understandably skeptical and won’t believe it. However, when Scobie’s book comes out next year making similar outlandish claims and more, those who aren’t following Ginge and Cringe like we do could believe the hit job because it has another source to back it up.

Now a genuine Meghan scheme may be even more convoluted but I expect something is going on behind the scenes about this Scobie book. He’s no researcher, he’s a gossip reporter.


----------



## lanasyogamama

How on earth does a woman who can’t figure out how to publish a podcast, something every Yahoo in California seems to do without trouble, think she is going to be president?


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Legend has it Wallis used to do the ‘Singapore grip’ some kind of Kegels exercise on the fellas which drove them wild.


I am ashamed to admit that I had to look that up  



jelliedfeels said:


> It’s such a shame she went to Rwanda one of the most female dominant political societies and she learnt nothing she considers  relevant to her feminism or endless lecturing.


All I got out of her stream-of-consciousness humblebrag was that she spent a lot of time in meetings with Rwandans. Since there was no humblebrag about project successes, I assume she was only there for tea and banana bread, and left after 15 mins.



marietouchet said:


> And repetition makes it real, if you hear it from LOTS of independent sources, you really start to believe …
> and various sources point out missed things in the videos
> the videos are sometimes more damning to me than written accounts,


There is a saying, can't recall if I read it in English or Chinese, that if you hear it from one person, you dismiss it. If you hear it from 2, you start to doubt. The third time you hear it, it becomes fact.



Lounorada said:


> *What does she need the huge but empty looking bag for*? I'd guess all she had in there was her phone, lip-balm and snacks for her grumpy man-child.
> 
> That false tan is so bad. Talk about oompa loompa
> Would love to know which one she uses. Only so I never waste my money on it in the future and for their sales to fall because it's that horrible looking


She needed someplace to hide the prop - that bottle of water that she whips out for the scripted act of mercy.

I was watching a tiktok of a dancer (salsa?) who says it is in the competition rules that they must tan. She was white, but tanned so dark that she looked black. I was amazed  Maybe Methane always does such a bad job and turns orange because she wants to just "hint" that she is biracial when it is advantageous for her.


gracekelly said:


> I think it is axiomatic that if Meghan says she didn't want to go or couldn't go to some event/function it is because she wasn't invited.


Fishing for an invite...



Toby93 said:


> No question about that - she is a sociopath
> 
> *What Are The Traits Of A Sociopath? *
> 
> What are considered sociopathic traits or sociopathic traits? Here are some of the potential signs and traits of a person with antisocial personality disorder:
> 
> 
> A lack of empathy for others
> Little to no genuine remorse
> The manipulation of other people
> Lying and deceit
> A sense of superiority over others
> Little to no regard for right or wrong
> The belief that rules do not apply to them
> Getting into legal trouble or a little regard for the law
> A lack of responsibility or engaging in irresponsible behaviors
> Aggression or hostility
> The exploitation of other people
> Substance use
> People with antisocial personality disorder are not monsters, and despite the name of the disorder, it doesn’t mean that someone is antisocial in the way that we typically understand the term. For a person to be diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder, they must meet the DSM criteria for the disorder.


Thank you! I think I have to review some irritating people I work with...


----------



## 880

lanasyogamama said:


> How on earth does a woman who can’t figure out how to publish a podcast, something every Yahoo in California seems to do without trouble, think she is going to be president?


Because of prior ones


----------



## xincinsin

As someone who has worked in media for a long time, and who brought her kids to the TV studio and pushed them to help with programmes and events for a taste of that life, I was rather disappointed that they found it (a) boring and (b) too demanding. The boring part was the rehearsals and prep time before live events. The demanding part was being on standby/recall for news emergencies. If all Methane got out of her visits to the studio was a hunger to be a diva, she was a shallow child who grew up to be a woman with the depth of a saucer.


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> Apparently it’s only around 2 to 20$ a year to register a domain which surprised me, but then again, she’s cheap with her own money, so I guess it’s not that surprising how little it costs.


Domains are cheap. It's the pointless trademark applications that are super complicated and expensive. And then if you don't actually use the trademark ( like manufacture a Lilibet brand of kiddy clothes), your request to renew is denied.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.



The only way he can provide "unique insight, deep access and exclusive revelations" is if Methane sends briefing notes again.



bag-mania said:


> Dey Street is a division of Harper Collins. The publisher sounds as pretentious as it’s subjects. From their website:
> 
> DEY STREET BOOKS is built on the idea that by publishing celebrated and diverse creatives with precision and innovation, we will deliver singular and successful publications. Time and time again readers come to our books for content that educates, inspires and entertains.
> 
> Dey Street, where culture comes to live.


This sounds awfully Archewellian.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> How on earth does a woman who can’t figure out how to publish a podcast, something every Yahoo in California seems to do without trouble, think she is going to be president?


If she's president, she'll have her minions doing her work for her.

Meanwhile she will be spending most of her time commanding SS what to leak and have the WH Press Secretary defending her "honor" every time someone prints something bad about her.


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's up with his caterpillar eyebrows, though?


Did you notice that Meghan’s eyebrows are starting to look like omid’s? She looked so weird at the UN and with Gloria Steinem and I think it was mostly because of her eyebrows


----------



## EverSoElusive

muddledmint said:


> Did you notice that Meghan’s eyebrows are starting to look like omid’s? She looked so weird at the UN and with Gloria Steinem and I think it was mostly because of her eyebrows


They must be seeing the same plastic surgeon


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> He never won the lottery?  For real?  I must have missed hearing this when this came out. I thought that was how he paid for her expensive Northwestern college education, nose jobs, and all the other stuff he bought for her.  But, no?


All that stuff was likely a product of What She Wants, She Gets. I think the book said her first choice was Princeton and she wasn't accepted? If true, then I doubt she would have budged on her 2nd choice Northwestern. Lucky Princeton didn't accept her. Otherwise her sugars would be having a field day talking about how this was a good omen


----------



## xincinsin

muddledmint said:


> Did you notice that Meghan’s eyebrows are starting to look like omid’s? She looked so weird at the UN and with Gloria Steinem and I think it was mostly because of her eyebrows





EverSoElusive said:


> They must be seeing the same plastic surgeon


Bulk buy discount


----------



## andrashik

bag-mania said:


> Dey Street is a division of Harper Collins. The publisher sounds as pretentious as it’s subjects. From their website:
> 
> DEY STREET BOOKS is built on the idea that by publishing celebrated and diverse creatives with precision and innovation, we will deliver singular and successful publications. Time and time again readers come to our books for content that educates, inspires and entertains.
> 
> Dey Street, where culture comes to live.


Sounds like Claw's mantra


----------



## andrashik

I found out some gossip tea on reddit.
Ladies, do you think this is Marcus Anderson?


----------



## andrashik

And also this.. I know we talked about this but... I am still shocked - all allegedly of course


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

Omg, I skimmed through replies and I found this:


----------



## needlv

andrashik said:


> I found out some gossip tea on reddit.
> Ladies, do you think this is Marcus Anderson?




apparently already disproven as a different friend of Prince Andrew.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, if I schemed like a soap opera villainess and I had a pet flunky named Omid, here’s what I would do. Give Scobie-doo information about Charles (possibly made up) to put in his book. When Harry’s memoir hits at the end of the year it is likely going to cause a fire storm with damaging accusations about Charles and maybe William. Many people will be understandably skeptical and won’t believe it. However, when Scobie’s book comes out next year making similar outlandish claims and more, those who aren’t following Ginge and Cringe like we do could believe the hit job because it has another source to back it up.
> 
> Now a genuine Meghan scheme may be even more convoluted but I expect something is going on behind the scenes about this Scobie book. He’s no researcher, he’s a gossip reporter.


im not so sure.

1. People are not going to buy all the books. Which one of us is going to spend money buying Hazard’s, let alone OSs? H&M”s fans seem have more fun making it up that weighting it up.

2. People want to believe in the monarchy or they don’t care. There are not that many hardline repubs. 

3. Just TMI. Most people, even those that don’t mind the headline gossip, are just overloaded


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> Omg, I skimmed through replies and I found this:




sorry, I don’t understand.

I also don’t have a Twitter account so can’t see replies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Again, we don’t know that she registered them. Anyone can register domain names that they think up. Maybe someone out there got lucky.



I haven't fact-checked, but I blurrily remember someone did check who bought the domains and it was one of her dozen LLCs or something?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> I found out some gossip tea on reddit.
> Ladies, do you think this is Marcus Anderson?




I can't even recognize Andrew from these pictures, but also...in 2001, Anderson was 23 years old and a nobody.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't fact-checked, but I blurrily remember someone did check who bought the domains and it was one of her dozen LLCs or something?


I think that was the Lilibet related domains, all bought before her birth and before Hazard allegedly asked/informed/video-chatted with HMTQ. Those were registered by one of her LLCs. IIRC they also registered some Sussex Royal domains too when the Tiresome Twits were going to merch the name. Not sure if these early domains were bought by her or her henchmen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"The two panellists [Annie Lennox and former Australian prime minister Julia Gillard at a Woman's Day's panel in March 2019 in London] also believed [Raptor]'s declaration that her unborn child, even if it were a boy, was already a feminist. The baby's movements, she was certain, were 'the embryonic kicking of feminism'."

WTFFFFF    How can anyone take that nutjob seriously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Spot on.

"Few understood the Sussexes' definition of privacy. For the couple, privacy did not mean remaining 'secret and unseen'. Rather, it meant enforcing total control over their images and the accompanying narrative. If that strategy upset  the Palace and tore up the royal rule-book, that was a bonus."


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "The two panellists [Annie Lennox and former Australian prime minister Julia Gillard at a Woman's Day's panel in March 2019 in London] also believed [Raptor]'s declaration that her unborn child, even if it were a boy, was already a feminist. The baby's movements, she was certain, were 'the embryonic kicking of feminism'."
> 
> WTFFFFF    How can anyone take that nutjob seriously.


This is


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have 120 pages to go and I'm determined to finish today just so I can give away that book.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have 120 pages to go and I'm determined to finish today just so I can give away that book.


Ha ha I did not buy it, I get to read for free via Kindle Unlimited, to which I already have a subscription.

KU rarely has the latest books, it is curious that it popped up there.

No point in a US hardcopy edition now ? But, the publishers wanted it available to the US audience ASAP


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> im not so sure.
> 
> 1. People are not going to buy all the books. *Which one of us is going to spend money buying Hazard’s, let alone OSs? H&M”s fans seem have more fun making it up that weighting it up.*
> 
> 2. People want to believe in the monarchy or they don’t care. There are not that many hardline repubs.
> 
> 3. Just TMI. Most people, even those that don’t mind the headline gossip, are just overloaded


No offense to Bower but the book about Z-list and Co. was such an energy-suck. They are so exhausting to the point that my head was going to explode. I couldn't even bring myself to read Finding Freebies other than the 2 sample pages. Therefore, it's unlikely that I would buy or read another book about them, doesn't matter who wrote it. Having said that, I'm quite interested to read about William and Kate, if there's a good book about them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> No offense to Bower but the book about Z-list and Co. was such an energy-suck. They are so exhausting to the point that my head was going to explode.



I have read books about war reporting and came out on the other side less drained than after this. These people are unreal (though I still find her way, way worse than petulant Harry. His behaviour reminds me of a defiant child that's been fed a lot of, uh, nonsense. She on the other hand is truly ruthless and evil).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW the hardcover book got pulled from amazon.de as well (because I doubt it sold out within days). It's only available as Kindle edition right now.

But it has 4,5 from 5 stars.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Everything we already knew about Meghan summed up with heaps of evidence. This book leaves you feeling extraordinarily sorry for everyone she’s burnt in her awful life, ripping her way to the top like a toxic wildfire, destroying anyone who gets in her path or doesn’t serve her anymore. Her loving father’s life has been destroyed, and Harry’s family devastated."

I guess.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have read books about war reporting and came out on the other side less drained than after this. These people are unreal (*though I still find her way, way worse *than petulant Harry. His behaviour reminds me of a defiant child that's been fed a lot of, uh, nonsense. *She on the other hand is truly ruthless and evil*).


This, all day. It baffles me that there are still people who would still believe her lies and continue to support her. 

Like most, I was excited that a biracial gal was joining the BRF when the relationship first begun. But when the leopard started showing its spots, I changed my mind - the leopard belonged nowhere but in the wild or in the zoo, NOT a palace. 

Z-list does not possess (at the very least) respect, humility, (actual) compassion and (true) grit to be a good royal, working or not. As said by some of us and some people in the book, Z-list could have used her status to champion good causes but of course she had other plans for herself only. Harry is just a tool, puppet and scapegoat.


----------



## rose60610

I can't believe Meghan has any sugars left. Something is up. Her "supporters" are suspicious. One title can capture her whole existence:

"From Yacht Girl to Bot Girl--How an Olympic Level Social Climber Destroyed Her Fairy Tale Life and Hit Rock Bottom Skid Row in Credibility"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"After several telephone calls with Charles, Harry was told to send his proposals in writing. Harry's message with their proposed statement broadly described the Sussexes' expectations to retain their titles, privileges and income while living in Canada. They would keep Frogmore, enjoy around the clock protection costing the British taxpayer annually about £2.5 million and continue to receive £1.5 million annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall. In exchange, they would occasionally return to Britain but otherwise represent the monarchy from Canada."

I am literally at a loss for words.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "After several telephone calls with Charles, Harry was told to send his proposals in writing. Harry's message with their proposed statement broadly described the Sussexes' expectations to retain their titles, privileges and income while living in Canada. They would keep Frogmore, enjoy around the clock protection costing the British taxpayer annually about £2.5 million and continue to receive £1.5 million annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall. In exchange, they would occasionally return to Britain but otherwise represent the monarchy from Canada."
> 
> I am literally at a loss for words.


You can be guaranteed that *she* wrote up the proposal.  Everything about the whole thing was orchestrated by her and the dimwit went along with it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "After several telephone calls with Charles, Harry was told to send his proposals in writing. Harry's message with their proposed statement broadly described the Sussexes' expectations to retain their titles, privileges and income while living in Canada. They would keep Frogmore, enjoy around the clock protection costing the British taxpayer annually about £2.5 million and continue to receive £1.5 million annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall. In exchange, they would occasionally return to Britain but otherwise represent the monarchy from Canada."
> 
> I am literally at a loss for words.


That was rejected and he was told, no half in, half out. I think that rejection further amplified his anger and resentment towards his family because that was now proof (in his head) that Z-list was right all along i.e. their family was treated differently because she's black, it's all racism.


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> That was rejected and he was told, no half in, half out. I think that rejection further amplified his anger and resentment towards his family because that was now proof (in his head) that Z-list was right all along i.e. their family was treated differently because she's black, it's all racism.


So when Charles said no, he was commanded by TW to go directly to the Queen, you know, because of his _*special relationship*_ with her, and make his demands known.  The Queen told him to work this out with Charles and stop bothering her (ok, I'm paraphrasing )


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Having only gotten to her 5th season in SUITS …
> On balance, I feel there are SO MANY HOLES in the early story I don’t know who to feel sorry for ..
> Where did TM get all the money ? had the author told me the typical salary of a lighting director, I might get it
> Where did Doria go when MM was 9-20 ??
> MM had expensive opportunities - school, camps - but her parents were gone/working 18 hour days
> 
> BUT I do see the recurring theme that she can be all sugar and spice to get what she wants but goes postal if she does not get what it , dramatic change in personality



He could have put a lot of these expenses on credit cards (even school tuition back then), taken out a home equity line of credit (if he ever owned a house), taken out a personal loan, etc., then either paid it back over time or declared bankruptcy.  (Do we know if he ever declared bankruptcy?)


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> So when Charles said no, he was commanded by TW to go directly to the Queen, you know, because of his _*special relationship*_ with her, and make his demands known. The Queen told him to work this out with Charles and stop bothering her (ok, I'm paraphrasing )


Exactly!! I'm glad the Queen always puts him in his place when he tries to go over a certain person's head


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> He could have put a lot of these expenses on credit cards (even school tuition back then), taken out a home equity line of credit (if he ever owned a house), taken out a personal loan, etc., then either paid it back over time or declared bankruptcy.  (Do we know if he ever declared bankruptcy?)


Thomas filed for bankruptcy before. Twice, in fact.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> That was rejected and he was told, no half in, half out.



Yes, but the audacity!


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "The two panellists [Annie Lennox and former Australian prime minister Julia Gillard at a Woman's Day's panel in March 2019 in London] also believed [Raptor]'s declaration that her unborn child, even if it were a boy, was already a feminist. The baby's movements, she was certain, were 'the embryonic kicking of feminism'."
> 
> WTFFFFF    How can anyone take that nutjob seriously.



Do any of you remember the press before Archie was born about how MM and Harry were going to raise their child (and any future children) gender neutral?   There was even speculation that they would choose a gender neutral name, nursery colors, etc.  I guess that was just more PR fluff but it went on for a bit and was just another bandwagon they jumped on temporarily.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> That was rejected and he was told, no half in, half out. I think that rejection further amplified his anger and resentment towards his family because that was now proof (in his head) that Z-list was right all along i.e. their family was treated differently because she's black, it's all racism.


So what exactly was rejected?
They keep: Frogmore, retain titles & privileges, attend a few royal events, receive income from the Duchy? or directly from Charles? or someone, file a large number of lawsuits using Hazz’s royal title and using taxpayer dollars.
If I read this correctly, the only thing rejected was the full-time security.  Imo it _appears_ they won. 

ETA: needed to change the ‘they win’ to ‘it _appears_’.  In reality, we all know the BRF is the winner here.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> That was rejected and he was told, no half in, half out. I think that rejection further amplified his anger and resentment towards his family because that was now proof (in his head) that Z-list was right all along i.e. their family was treated differently because she's black, it's all racism.


I think he has a vacuum in his head and she filled it with nonsense.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> So what exactly was rejected?
> They keep: Frogmore, retain titles & privileges, attend a few royal events, receive income from the Duchy? or directly from Charles? or someone, file a large number of lawsuits using Hazz’s royal title and using taxpayer dollars.
> If I read this correctly, the only thing rejected was the full-time security.  Imo they won. What am I missing?


I guess we're interpreting things differently?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Not sure if I'll get this pasted right, but marklenews1 posted a hilarious pre-Megxit clip of the amazingly hirsute Duchess.
This reminds me of that passing trend about 10 years ago when my niece sported a fringe that covered her eyes. I kept thinking she was going around blind.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but the audacity!


Agreed and I understood what you meant in the original comment   Alas, we both know they are delusional.

I like this quote here, something they both never understood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Not sure if I'll get this pasted right, but marklenews1 posted a hilarious pre-Megxit clip of the amazingly hirsute Duchess.
> This reminds me of that passing trend about 10 years ago when my niece sported a fringe that covered her eyes. I kept thinking she was going around blind.




She is so freaking in love with herself.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "After several telephone calls with Charles, Harry was told to send his proposals in writing. Harry's message with their proposed statement broadly described the Sussexes' expectations to retain their titles, privileges and income while living in Canada. They would keep Frogmore, enjoy around the clock protection costing the British taxpayer annually about £2.5 million and continue to receive £1.5 million annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall. In exchange, they would occasionally return to Britain but otherwise represent the monarchy from Canada."
> 
> I am literally at a loss for words.


He threw chewing gum at the wall and thought it would all stick. What a basic lack of understanding of the system.  Perhaps it was her basic lack of understanding, but he went along with it.  Meghan had the brains to put into action what he wanted. He can suffer the consequences of that.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I think he has a vacuum in his head and she filled it with nonsense.


TBH, I personally feel that Diana's inappropriate emotional dependence on her kids and death damaged Harry very badly and made him fragile. Z-list certainly preys on that and puts that to good use because Harry is susceptible to brainwashing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I guess we're interpreting things differently?


Good point.  Hazzi did lose military ‘roles’, patronages except Invictus.  MM lost her patronages, too.

The Frogmore repay has always been questionable - many believe Charles provided the funds [either Charles gives the money directly or he gives them money for other expenses].  Brand ambassadors - haaaa, to this moment they continue to use those titles [grrrr] and reap the rewards for it.  Hazzi continues to be introduced as “Prince Harry” and MM as Ducha$$.

Still, imo, it _looks_ like they won. Even at the Jubilee service, although seated in the 2nd row, they did waltz down the aisle as if they owned the place and they kept everyone waiting. At Prince Philip’s funeral, he did not follow procedure when he walked in.  In other words, _it appears to some_ that they won. 

ETA: in the interest of clarity, I need to clarify the ‘they win’ with ‘it appears to some’.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I was finishing my lunch while I was screenshotting the book to reply to a few comments here. My husband was like, "Are you reading the royal book?"


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Good point.  Hazzi did lose military ‘roles’, patronages except Invictus.  MM lost her patronages, too.
> 
> The Frogmore repay has always been questionable - many believe Charles provided the funds [either Charles gives the money directly or he gives them money for other expenses].  Brand ambassadors - haaaa, to this moment they continue to use those titles [grrrr] and reap the rewards for it.  Hazzi continues to be introduced as “Prince Harry” and MM as Ducha$$.
> 
> Still, imo, it looks like they won. Even at the Jubilee service, although seated in the 2nd row, they did waltz down the aisle as if they owned the place and they kept everyone waiting.  In other words, they win.


I don't think you're wrong  I absolutely suspect that they are still being funded by Charles.

As for them using the titles and being brand ambassadors, that's Z-list and Co.'s defiance not because the Palace didn't have a clause telling them not to. And because of this, us here in this thread and also a large group out in the world want them to be stripped off the titles completely. 

Their wins, in my opinion, are superficial. At the end of the day, the BRF is still the ultimate winner because now Z-list and Co.'s lies are exposed, and the BRF didn't even have to dirty their hands


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> He threw chewing gum at the wall and thought it would all stick. What a basic lack of understanding of the system.  Perhaps it was her basic lack of understanding, but he went along with it.  *Meghan had the brains to put into action what he wanted. *He can suffer the consequences of that.


Not sure it was brains exactly. She was described by a relative and "sources" as whip-smart, but it's more like animal cunning.

IMO Hazard wanted out because he didn't enjoy the royal grind but had very hazy ideas about how to do it. And since he wasn't showing much promise in the royal or diplomatic work, I believe the BRF would have been perfectly fine with sending him to Botswana or South America or NZ where he could do charity work on their dime. They would also have been able to keep a discreet eye on him to prevent any more public nudity or Nazi cosplay. 

I believe Methane fed him the silly idea of making it big in Hollywood. He would have assumed she knew what she was talking about, being this famous star with connections, while she was banking on his royal status to draw in the deals. He had his father paying all his bills all his life while she had men paying her way all her life. They both told each other what they wanted to hear and believe. Neither seemed to consider they had no talent or skills to make it big in Hollywood. What I don't understand is: talented people can be hired to produce work. It's not like the UnSussexfuls would have a crisis of conscience to claim credit for someone else's hard work. But they didn't even try to fake it till they make it. That really puzzles me.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> I can't believe Meghan has any sugars left. Something is up. Her "supporters" are suspicious. One title can capture her whole existence:
> fi
> "From Yacht Girl to Bot Girl--How an Olympic Level Social Climber Destroyed Her Fairy Tale Life and Hit Rock Bottom Skid Row in Credibility"


with social media these days people believe what they want to believe and can always find validation on the Internet


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> *But they didn't even try to fake it till they make it.* That really puzzles me.


If I was Z-list and Co., I would have continued to attend some events, give some word salad speeches, shake some hands and do some engagement photo ops, while I accumulate more wealth (courtesy of the Duchy of Cornwall) on the side before I bolted, just because I wanted a "private life".


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I don't think you're wrong  I absolutely suspect that they are still being funded by Charles.
> 
> As for them using the titles and being brand ambassadors, that's Z-list and Co.'s defiance not because the Palace didn't have a clause telling them not to. And because of this, us here in this thread and also a large group out in the world want them to be stripped off the titles completely.
> 
> *Their wins, in my opinion, are superficial. *At the end of the day, the BRF is still the ultimate winner because now Z-list and Co.'s lies are exposed, and the BRF didn't even have to dirty their hands


Excellent way to put it. *Superficial* describes them perfectly.  I should correct my posts to say “it _appears_ they they won”.  You are correct, in the end, the BFR wins. Thank you


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent way to put it. *Superficial* describes them perfectly.  I should correct my posts to say “it _appears_ they they won”.  You are correct, in the end, the BFR wins. Thank you


@CarryOn2020 It's not a big deal  

Sometimes we interpret things differently and sometimes people don't get our intended message either, written or spoken. However, I'm certainly glad that we can always agree to disagree and/or clarify and discuss in a respectful manner


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> @CarryOn2020 It's not a big deal
> 
> Sometimes we interpret things differently and sometimes people don't get our intended message either, written or spoken. However, I'm certainly glad that we can always agree to disagree and/or clarify and discuss in a respectful manner


 
Not to sound weird, I’m not sure why, I feel that for the sake of posterity this thread must be correct.  
 Sure, it is a burden for us but it’s for the people who randomly stumble in here - they need _the truth_.  
Let’s go for a coffee or, like Kate, a fun sailing day


----------



## EverSoElusive

Was just looking at IG and there's a picture of actress Laura Linney receiving her star on Walk of Fame a few days ago. Then I come to realize that our fabulous actress of a Ducka$s didn't have one yet. Quelle horror!   Someone better be calling her soon or she'll break plates again. Maybe she can buy herself one


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

I finished the book a few days ago and I liked it.  I have many scattered thoughts from the book & about things mentioned here---this thread is on fire for being so in the know ahead of time!  

First, there is no way Raptor is highly intelligent because she took the opportunity of a lifetime and managed to make it crash & burn.  It would have taken very little effort to spin their lives into gold (let's be honest, their life was already gold!) but she seems to have always *highly* overestimated herself.

It feels like it's similar to her acting conundrum, there's just nothing past her external self.  She thinks she's brilliant but literally never has anything to back it up---even if she says anything of 'substance' she is usually stealing the words & thoughts from someone else.

It actually baffles me that she's done SO poorly with all the advantages & opportunities she's had.  But, she also seems to refuse to take advice from anyone.  In that case, a person is never able to rise above their own innate abilities which, for her, seem to be limited to being superficially charming & manipulating men.

There's just nothing past her facade.

It was a tiring read but not because of the writing.  It was tiring because it's draining to be exposed to her endlessly horrible 'personality' and unrelenting bad behavior.  She does seem more like a wolf with her predatory approach to all aspects of life.

I feel extremely sorry (and a little bit afraid) for the children---anyone with those traits would be such a toxic parent.  Based on her transactional treatment of all others, it seems likely that the children are little more than pawns for her in her own game of life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Was just looking at IG and there's a picture of actress Laura Linney receiving her star on Walk of Fame a few days ago. Then I come to realize that our fabulous actress of a Ducka$s didn't have one yet. Quelle horror!   Someone better be calling her soon or she'll break plates again. Maybe she can buy herself one


Sadly for her, there are rules that must be followed. Additionally, money is involved  

_Each year an average of 200 nominations are submitted to the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce Walk of Fame selection committee. Anyone, including fans, can nominate anyone active in the field of entertainment as long as the nominee or their management approves the nomination. Nominees must have a minimum of five years' experience in the category for which they are nominated and a history of "charitable contributions".[58]Posthumous nominees must have been deceased at least five years. At a meeting each June, the committee selects approximately 20 to 24 celebrities to receive stars on the Walk of Fame. One posthumous award is given each year as well. The nominations of those not selected are rolled over to the following year for reconsideration; those not selected two years in a row are dropped, and must be renominated to receive further consideration. Living recipients must agree to personally attend a presentation ceremony within two years of selection. If the ceremony is not scheduled within two years, a new application must be submitted. A relative of deceased recipients must attend posthumous presentations. Presentation ceremonies are open to the public.

A fee of *$55,000* (as of 2022), payable at time of selection, is collected to pay for the creation and installation of the star, as well as general maintenance of the Walk of Fame. The fee is usually paid by the nominating organization, which may be a fan club, film studio, record company, broadcaster, or other sponsor involved with the prospective honoree. The Starz cable network, for example, paid for Dennis Hopper's star as part of the promotion for its series Crash.









						Hollywood Walk of Fame - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not to sound weird, I’m not sure why, I feel that for the sake of posterity this thread must be correct.
> Sure, it is a burden for us but it’s for the people who randomly stumble in here - they need _the truth_.
> Let’s go for a coffee or, like Kate, a fun sailing day
> View attachment 5579760



Based on previous occurrences, it didn't look like the stans and sugars can handle the truth or any of our more plausible speculations (compared to Z-list's lies). Funny how they start calling us devious   It is quite entertaining watching them.

You mean the Palace didn't take our keys, driver's license, passports etc, to keep us locked up?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent way to put it. *Superficial* describes them perfectly.  I should correct my posts to say “it _appears_ they they won”. You are correct, in the end, the BFR wins. Thank you


The way it is going, everyone loses. I'm sure the Queen would much prefer if her twilight years were peaceful. Instead, she gets nothing but drama from least accomplished grandchild and his mercenary wife.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> "After several telephone calls with Charles, Harry was told to send his proposals in writing. Harry's message with their proposed statement broadly described the Sussexes' expectations to retain their titles, privileges and income while living in Canada. They would keep Frogmore, enjoy around the clock protection costing the British taxpayer annually about £2.5 million and continue to receive £1.5 million annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall. In exchange, they would occasionally return to Britain but otherwise represent the monarchy from Canada."
> 
> I am literally at a loss for words.


Do you read between the lines and get the implication that they were planning to set up their own court in Canada?
The whole proposal is bonkers (Thank you, Harry, I'm loving this word). 
They really believed that their star power was so immense that the BRF would do anything to keep them around.
I wouldn't be surprised if Hazard's memoir described Methane in terms which suggest she is the reincarnation of his mother (despite her being born before Diana died - maybe she will shave a few years off her age to make it seem possible). The Oedipus complex is strong in this one.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sadly for her, there are rules that must be followed. Additionally, money is involved
> 
> _Each year an average of 200 nominations are submitted to the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce Walk of Fame selection committee. Anyone, including fans, can nominate anyone active in the field of entertainment as long as the nominee or their management approves the nomination. Nominees must have a minimum of five years' experience in the category for which they are nominated and a history of "charitable contributions".[58]Posthumous nominees must have been deceased at least five years. At a meeting each June, the committee selects approximately 20 to 24 celebrities to receive stars on the Walk of Fame. One posthumous award is given each year as well. The nominations of those not selected are rolled over to the following year for reconsideration; those not selected two years in a row are dropped, and must be renominated to receive further consideration. Living recipients must agree to personally attend a presentation ceremony within two years of selection. If the ceremony is not scheduled within two years, a new application must be submitted. A relative of deceased recipients must attend posthumous presentations. Presentation ceremonies are open to the public.
> 
> A fee of *$55,000* (as of 2022), payable at time of selection, is collected to pay for the creation and installation of the star, as well as general maintenance of the Walk of Fame. The fee is usually paid by the nominating organization, which may be a fan club, film studio, record company, broadcaster, or other sponsor involved with the prospective honoree. The Starz cable network, for example, paid for Dennis Hopper's star as part of the promotion for its series Crash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood Walk of Fame - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If Z-list can't get one while alive, she will likely instruct her next of kin to get her the once-a-year posthumous award   Because she has a history of charitable contributions e.g. bananas, chips, beanies, unsellable The Bench etc


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "After several telephone calls with Charles, Harry was told to send his proposals in writing. Harry's message with their proposed statement broadly described the Sussexes' expectations to retain their titles, privileges and income while living in Canada. They would keep Frogmore, enjoy around the clock protection costing the British taxpayer annually about £2.5 million and continue to receive £1.5 million annual income from the Duchy of Cornwall. In exchange, they would occasionally return to Britain but otherwise represent the monarchy from Canada."
> 
> I am literally at a loss for words.


Talk about entitled pieces of sh!t!


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Was just looking at IG and there's a picture of actress Laura Linney receiving her star on Walk of Fame a few days ago. Then I come to realize that our fabulous actress of a Ducka$s didn't have one yet. Quelle horror!   Someone better be calling her soon or she'll break plates again. Maybe she can buy herself one


I read that thieves actually steal the stars right off the pavement. Maybe she can steal one - save herself some money.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> The way it is going, everyone loses. I'm sure the Queen would much prefer if her twilight years were peaceful. Instead, she gets nothing but drama from least accomplished grandchild and his mercenary wife.


It is a great disappointment for the Queen. She has ruled for 70 years and done many good things for her country but all that is now constantly overshadowed by Z-list and Co.'s need for drama and self-promotion (yes, Andrew's indiscretions too).


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Not sure if I'll get this pasted right, but marklenews1 posted a hilarious pre-Megxit clip of the amazingly hirsute Duchess.
> This reminds me of that passing trend about 10 years ago when my niece sported a fringe that covered her eyes. I kept thinking she was going around blind.



Boy she loves the attention.  It is reminiscent of The Price is Right.  For the right price, this witch will screw the Devil over and over.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Not sure if I'll get this pasted right, but marklenews1 posted a hilarious pre-Megxit clip of the amazingly hirsute Duchess.
> This reminds me of that passing trend about 10 years ago when my niece sported a fringe that covered her eyes. I kept thinking she was going around blind.



That was not only ridiculous, it was inappropriate  it was like a game show. This is how she envisioned Royal life.  Making an entrance like this every time. 

It reminds me of The Price is Right and  “come on down!”


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> That was not only ridiculous, it was inappropriate  it was like a game show. *This is how she envisioned Royal life.*  Making an entrance like this every time.
> 
> It reminds me of The Price is Right and  “come on down!”


 
You got that right.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Each year an average of 200 nominations are submitted to the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce Walk of Fame selection committee. Anyone, including fans, can nominate anyone active in the field of entertainment as long as the nominee or their management approves the nomination. _



Please, don't give the sugars and stans ideas.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please, don't give the sugars and stans ideas.


It's probably in the works already   We just need to wait for it to be official.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please, don't give the sugars and stans ideas.


If they can rustle up $55k... Shall we keep an eye on the GoFundMe list?
More likely that they will petition the Pope to declare her a living saint; that'll show the CoE who is boss


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> It's probably in the works already   We just need to wait for it to be official.



Look out for the Go Fund Me!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If they can rustle up $55k... Shall we keep an eye on the GoFundMe list?
> More likely that they will petition the Pope to declare her a living saint; that'll show the CoE who is boss



Great minds think alike.


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> If they can rustle up $55k... Shall we keep an eye on the GoFundMe list?
> More likely that they will petition the Pope to declare her a living saint; that'll show the CoE who is boss


 I don’t think he (the Pope) can beatify her as she is not a Catholic
If Hazza wanted to piss Gangan off he could convert to Catholicism but that would also achieve being permanently booted from the line of succession


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oops.





pukasonqo said:


> I don’t think he (the Pope) can beatify her as she is not a Catholic
> If Hazza wanted to piss Gangan off he could convert to Catholicism but that would also achieve being permanently booted from the line of succession


Didn't she attend Catholic school?  Do you not need to be Catholic to attend?  You are absolutely correct though - if Hazz converted it would really put the BRF over the edge


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> I don’t think he (the Pope) can beatify her as she is not a Catholic
> If Hazza wanted to piss Gangan off he could convert to Catholicism but that would also achieve being *permanently booted from the line of succession*


Go for it, Hazzie! 
(No one ever said her stans and sugars were smart.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh, US Weekly takes a turn to the light


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Didn't she attend Catholic school?  *Do you not need to be Catholic to attend?*  You are absolutely correct though - if Hazz converted it would really put the BRF over the edge


No, you don’t.  My daughter attends Catholic school, and she is barely even a Christian


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, US Weekly takes a turn to the light



Good.  I’m so tired of US Weekly and People being paid advertisements for the Kardashians and TW.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> It's probably in the works already   We just need to wait for it to be official.


They might have a GFM for it. Yuck.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> If they can rustle up $55k... Shall we keep an eye on the GoFundMe list?
> More likely that they will petition the Pope to declare her a living saint; that'll show the CoE who is boss


The current Pope is making noises like he might retire.  Maybe MeMe will toss her hat in the ring and proclaim that there should be gender equality.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, well,  here’s some insight into Diana’s mothering.  Just from this article, it kinda explains why Hazz is the way he is. As we have all said, no consequences from day 1.  









						Diana bumped into a dozen male nudists: Bodyguard reveals rebellions
					

Diana told me young Harry and William could be a 'bloody nuisance' in our first encounter, recalls bodyguard KEN WHARFE. That set the tone for their entire working relationship, he writes in a new memoir




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EmilyM11

I'm in the middle of the book and must say...After following this thread from time to time I had impression that M. was shrewed, calculating and scheming woman (something like Joan Collins' Alexis from old Dynasty for those who remember). But now I'm thinking she's just SO NOT SMART (don't want to use more ugly word). She comes across as not so intelligent opportunist (as opposed to scheming and calculating opportunist) who was super lucky to find a not so smart prince. The idea to run for president...OMG.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, US Weekly takes a turn to the light



There are two sides to every story.  True.  Meghan's side and Meghan's side.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> No, you don’t.  My daughter attends Catholic school, and she is barely even a Christian


Lol, got it


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, are you suggesting you have a life outside of this tiny corner of the internet, without us?


My life outside the forums has been interfering greatly with my responsibility to stay caught up on this thread. 98 pages behind.  If only they would have cell coverage in all the places I go.   Next week heading out to the Arctic Ocean and again no cell coverage most of the way, and no JCMH I won't be stopping at  the island of Chunga-Changa. Now to start reading again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Didn't she attend Catholic school?  Do you not need to be Catholic to attend?  You are absolutely correct though - if Hazz converted it would really put the BRF over the edge



I went to a Catholic school and they were open for other denominations. But also, Raptor converted to the Church of England before the wedding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

35 pages to go. I'm struggling. Please ask if I'm ok.


----------



## rose60610

pukasonqo said:


> I don’t think he (the Pope) can beatify her as* she is not a Catholic*
> If Hazza wanted to piss Gangan off he could convert to Catholicism but that would also achieve being permanently booted from the line of succession



Regardless, all Meghan has to do is cry and claim: "Racism!" And the sugars and our hapless media will eat it up.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Didn't she attend Catholic school?  Do you not need to be Catholic to attend?  You are absolutely correct though - if Hazz converted it would really put the BRF over the edge



One good thing is it would kick him out the running running for the throne.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 35 pages to go. I'm struggling. Please ask if I'm ok.


----------



## papertiger

New


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 35 pages to go. I'm struggling. Please ask if I'm ok.


I'll send an ambulance and some champagne


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> Not sure if I'll get this pasted right, but marklenews1 posted a hilarious pre-Megxit clip of the amazingly hirsute Duchess.
> This reminds me of that passing trend about 10 years ago when my niece sported a fringe that covered her eyes. I kept thinking she was going around blind.



That ridiculous walk down, so pleased with herself. It's everything she wanted, people applauding her for being her and she's tossed it all away thinking she deserved even more. What a waste of space she is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5579901


Congrats on finishing the longest book in the history of books [that’s how it feels]. 
While wearing my OdL dress, I  picked a basket lemons from H&M’s tree [haaaa] , then  baked a lemon cake for you   Enjoy!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait...is she sitting there with both of her hands in her lap? No touching of Harry's back or grabbing his arm? Was she under the weather?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...is she sitting there with both of her hands in her lap? No touching of Harry's bag or grabbing his arm? Was she under the weather?


 Merching?


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 35 pages to go. I'm struggling. *Please ask if I'm ok.*



This is priceless!


----------



## marietouchet

They did not try to 


xincinsin said:


> Not sure it was brains exactly. She was described by a relative and "sources" as whip-smart, but it's more like animal cunning.
> 
> IMO Hazard wanted out because he didn't enjoy the royal grind but had very hazy ideas about how to do it. And since he wasn't showing much promise in the royal or diplomatic work, I believe the BRF would have been perfectly fine with sending him to Botswana or South America or NZ where he could do charity work on their dime. They would also have been able to keep a discreet eye on him to prevent any more public nudity or Nazi cosplay.
> 
> I believe Methane fed him the silly idea of making it big in Hollywood. He would have assumed she knew what she was talking about, being this famous star with connections, while she was banking on his royal status to draw in the deals. He had his father paying all his bills all his life while she had men paying her way all her life. They both told each other what they wanted to hear and believe. Neither seemed to consider they had no talent or skills to make it big in Hollywood. What I don't understand is: talented people can be hired to produce work. It's not like the UnSussexfuls would have a crisis of conscience to claim credit for someone else's hard work. But they didn't even try to fake it till they make it. That really puzzles me.


They did not try to fake work … agree
they were too busy ARGUING and throwing shade… collab on Omid dissing her treatment by BRF, the DM litigation, bullying allegations (handled behind the scenes by BRF, but they were at least peripherally involved doing statements ) and all the litigation about security , the squabble over security is ongoing 2 years later - the limos, private planes and chauffeurs are a big deal to both of them

For ex, she wrote a critical 23 page legal apology about forgetting her help for the Omid book , that must have taken the better part of two full weeks of writing, review etc


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


> No, you don’t.  My daughter attends Catholic school, and she is barely even a Christian


Quoting myself, sorry!  In the same vein, my son had to interview for a spot in 9th grade Catholic school.  They asked him to which religion he belongs.  He says, “I’m not really convinced God exists!” 
I was like good God do you have to be so honest every time?!!?  He says he didn’t want to lie to a priest!  
Somehow he still got in.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> New



That female journalist is quite delusional.  Everything to her is just “racism” again.  Give me a break.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm done. Bower is an engaging writer but his subject was so toxic it was not exactly a pleasant read. The negativity radiated from every page. Time for some sort of cleanse.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> A 16 bath mansion that they are undoubtedly struggling to pay for.


I sincerely hope so.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm done. Bower is an engaging writer but his *subject was so toxic *it was not exactly a pleasant read. The negativity radiated from every page. Time for some sort of cleanse.


I'll be honest, because of the very same reason, I generally only have the head space and energy for one thread when I come to TPF. After reading and replying to this thread, I usually head over to IG to look at pictures or I go to Etsy to buy more nail dip powder


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> sorry, I don’t understand.
> 
> I also don’t have a Twitter account so can’t see replies.


Oh, I was referring to the video embedded about Claw's vixen ways and supposedly a tape with her doing a certain vixen thing 

I saw the video with her grand entrance at Albert Hall and I read that she wasn't supposed to go that way..but she changed it..which isn't surprising.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Quoting myself, sorry!  In the same vein, my son had to interview for a spot in 9th grade Catholic school.  They asked him to which religion he belongs.  He says, “I’m not really convinced God exists!”
> I was like good God do you have to be so honest every time?!!?  He says he didn’t want to lie to a priest!
> Somehow he still got in.



It showed not only an honest response, but he was still open to answers and could weigh-up evidence objectively/subjectively. 

Good for that priest having belief in your son


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> That female journalist is quite delusional.  Everything to her is just “racism” again.  Give me a break.



Trisha (Goddard) used to one of those toxic, rubber-neck daytime 'reality' car-crash TV chat shows in the UK (the Jerry Springer variety) then NBC for 2 seasons before it got cancelled.

She may have appeared woke in her 60 Minute interviews, I can assure you she was perfectly hideous to the everyday, normal people she was supposed to be helping on her show.

A couple of years ago after we had a scandal involving a hideous male host, ITV were thinking of bringing her back but Covid must had scuppered that. Personally, I think all those kind of shows look very tired.

She's happy to be controversial because she needs the exposure to resurrect her career and she knows MM and H however hideous are click-bait.









						Why was The Trisha Goddard Show cancelled? Talk show returning to ITV!
					

The morning chat show is reportedly being filmed for a pilot in the UK. So why was The Trisha Goddard Show axed in the first place?




					www.realitytitbit.com


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> Trisha (Goddard) used to one of those toxic, rubber-neck daytime 'reality' car-crash TV chat shows in the UK (the Jerry Springer variety) then NBC for 2 seasons before it got cancelled.
> 
> She may have appeared woke in her 60 Minute interviews, I can assure you she was perfectly hideous to the everyday, normal people she was supposed to be helping on her show.
> 
> A couple of years ago after we had a scandal involving a hideous male host, ITV were thinking of bringing her back but Covid must had scuppered that. Personally, I think all those kind of shows look very tired.
> 
> She's happy to be controversial because she needs the exposure to resurrect her career and she knows MM and H however hideous are click-bait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why was The Trisha Goddard Show cancelled? Talk show returning to ITV!
> 
> 
> The morning chat show is reportedly being filmed for a pilot in the UK. So why was The Trisha Goddard Show axed in the first place?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.realitytitbit.com



I remember her from Playschool here in Oz, we loved that show when the kids were little









						Play School (Australian TV series) - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## needlv

pukasonqo said:


> I remember her from Playschool here in Oz, we loved that show when the kids were little
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Play School (Australian TV series) - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org




yes.  Clearly though she didn’t think through the “male, pale and stale” comment. Its sexist, racist and ageist all in one phrase.  Yikes.

she did come across as slightly crazy.  Maybe she is projecting her own issues onto Mrs Z-list…


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sounds like I don’t need to bother watching the 60 minutes piece.


----------



## calicocat

marietouchet said:


> It finally came to me … he no longer has the dark circles around his eyes
> I could never figure if those were added or he was born with them


I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Sounds like I don’t need to bother watching the 60 minutes piece.



Not if you've read Bower's book. 

And Trish was just brought in for 'balance'. 

And the funny thing is, if the best 60 mins was to find Trish for balance, it really shows there's very little professional Meghan support. Trish was so waaaaaay behind on the sorry saga too which was also revealing, since she's supposed to be a journalist, I don't think she's researched M (or H) for years.


----------



## andrashik

calicocat said:


> I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


I'm always shocked at people's courage( and his) do have these extensive procedures. Complications may appear and I have dark circles, like a panda , but I am too afraid to do something. The side effects I read about are crazy. I know a good dr is important, but I am still scared


----------



## EverSoElusive

calicocat said:


> I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


No wonder he's always harping on the Anglo-Iranian tag. That's because he's spent a ton to make himself look more Anglo than Iranian. To me, plastic Scoobie Doo looks absolutely ridiculous.

I'm not against plastic surgery but when people go overboard with getting work done, it makes me question their mental state.

But hey, whatever floats his boat. It is his money and body, or should I say, face?


----------



## papertiger

More lies are found out


----------



## bag-mania

calicocat said:


> I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


There was nothing wrong with his original face. He looks like a low budget, poorly-made mannequin now.

Maybe he’s an example of someone who is so unhappy inside that he thinks changing himself on the outside will fulfill his dreams/goals.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> More lies are found out



It’s wonderful to see other POC decry TW’s actions.  TW’s constant claim that anyone who doesn’t support her is racist falls on deaf ears in these cases.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> It’s wonderful to see other POC decry TW’s actions.  TW’s constant claim that anyone who doesn’t support her is racist falls on deaf ears in these cases.



PDina is awesome in every way, she sees the wood and thd the trees and doesn't fall for the PR and mob-pleasing marketing BS


----------



## marietouchet

Screenshot of the previous circles around eyes


----------



## kemilia

bellecate said:


> My life outside the forums has been interfering greatly with my responsibility to stay caught up on this thread. 98 pages behind.  If only they would have cell coverage in all the places I go.   Next week heading out to the Arctic Ocean and again no cell coverage most of the way, and no JCMH I won't be stopping at  the island of Chunga-Changa. Now to start reading again.


Safe Trip!


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> Screenshot of the previous circles around eyes
> 
> View attachment 5580263


He looked much more natural with them.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Screenshot of the previous circles around eyes
> 
> View attachment 5580263



He looks like he would melt on a hot day.


----------



## kemilia

needlv said:


> yes.  Clearly though she didn’t think through the “*male, pale and stale*” comment. Its sexist, racist and ageist all in one phrase.  Yikes.
> 
> she did come across as slightly crazy.  Maybe she is projecting her own issues onto Mrs Z-list…


Oh but people like her see themselves as very above it all. 

She came across as pretty darn desperate to get on any sort of television show, I cannot stand people like this--so toxic and harmful, they lurk in the corners waiting for some "name" to slip up.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> That female journalist is quite delusional.  Everything to her is just “racism” again.  Give me a break.


I couldn't watch the whole thing.  the female journalist is seeing Meghan through her own lens


----------



## DoggieBags

calicocat said:


> I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


I think he looked better before all the surgery but that’s jmo


----------



## sdkitty

calicocat said:


> I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


It's a shame what he did to his face


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> She's happy to be controversial because she needs the exposure to resurrect her career and she knows MM and H however hideous are click-bait.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why was The Trisha Goddard Show cancelled? Talk show returning to ITV!
> 
> 
> The morning chat show is reportedly being filmed for a pilot in the UK. So why was The Trisha Goddard Show axed in the first place?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.realitytitbit.com


She just talks about Meg without getting any facts. Pointless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seee, with friends like this, she will be fine. 









						Meghan Markle's BFF Misha Nonoo enjoys a holiday in Greece
					

The British-Bahraini fashion designer, who lives in New York and is known for her eponymous clothing line, took to Instagram to share snaps from her holiday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I couldn't watch the whole thing.  the female journalist is seeing Meghan through her own lens


Same here...I eventually went back and watched to the end, but her hatred of the BRF was sad and pathetic.  She looked like she was grasping for her 5 min of fame, but it looks like she is a "name" already?  Never heard of her


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’d believe this story


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> I think he looked better before all the surgery but that’s jmo


I think he looked much better before he made himself into a deranged version of a *white* man.  I was comparing the pics, and I know nothing about PS, but even his eyebrows have been altered.  Cheeks, chin, eyes, and skin color.  For someone who writes about what a proud WOC the wife is, he sure isn't


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


> I’d believe this story



Looks like she is pretending to be a cook again


----------



## andrashik

lanasyogamama said:


> I’d believe this story



Her sultry gaze sigh..


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I’d believe this story



Oh my gosh - look at this one


----------



## Chanbal

I'm behind on this thread… 
Tom Bower's book paper versions, unless from private sellers, aren't still for sale on Amazon. Though, the book is a #1 Bestseller.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I'm behind on this thread…
> Tom Bower's book paper versions, unless from private sellers, aren't still for sale on Amazon. Though, the book is a #1 Bestseller.
> 
> View attachment 5580382



Welcome back!   

Imo before the book was printed, many of us had read the awful stories [thank you, @CeeJay et al].  What I find more interesting than the book is now people are coming forward with more awful stories.  Nothing appears to be off limits.  The gloves are truly off.  Wowza.


----------



## csshopper

I’m in the US, just checked Amazon and it‘s shown for sale, Hardback and Kindle.

Someone has a sense of humor because the tag above the REVENGE listing is for a book, “The Beginner’s Guide to Raising Chickens. How to Raise a Happy Backyard Flock.”


----------



## lanasyogamama

csshopper said:


> I’m in the US, just checked Amazon and it‘s shown for sale, Hardback and Kindle.
> 
> Someone has a sense of humor because the tag above the REVENGE listing is for a book, “The Beginner’s Guide to Raising Chickens. How to Raise a Happy Backyard Flock.”
> 
> View attachment 5580407


It’s there, but not sold by Amazon, not on prime.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I think he looked much better before he made himself into a deranged version of a *white* man.  I was comparing the pics, and I know nothing about PS, but even his eyebrows have been altered.  Cheeks, chin, eyes, and skin color.  For someone who writes about what a proud WOC the wife is, he sure isn't



Unlike Balla Hadid, I still have the "nose of my ancestors", and unlike Scobie (or M) I didn't have to keep announcing my ethnicity to others every time I introduce myself. I have a British passport, I like in the UK, that makes me British, doesn't matter I look a bit different. Doesn't make me ugly, doesn't make me beautiful, just makes me look different. 

People can see what others are, 999 of 1000 people don't care. If they care then it's their problem. People can be upfront, but why constantly define yourself by what makes you different (I know because it makes someone oh so, so special) - especially when they've spent thousands of ¢£$ conforming to some fantasy in their heads that looks more avatar than classical beauty (Golden Triangle at al). Usually what makes people striking, even memorable, is also what makes them unique. No one has to advertise he/she is unique - especially after buying a RTW nose. If people have a problem with who they are, that's not about beauty. If you have to keep telling everyone how special you are (like referring to yourself as Duchess) maybe you're not so special. 

Like others here, I have no issue with others doing whatever to their face and body, but do it and be happy.

And actually, it's a Western perception people from other cultures want to look like Westerners. Nearly every culture across the globe has different ideas and values attached to beauty and desire - many of those are just as problematical as in the West.


----------



## csshopper

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s there, but not sold by Amazon, not on prime.


 You’re right! Didn’t notice that part of it.

The Chicken book at the top distracted me and the 1000 Ratings. Clicked on the ratings: 5*(70%) and 4*(15%)


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Unlike Balla Hadid, I still have the "nose of my ancestors", and unlike Scobie (or M) I didn't have to keep announcing my ethnicity to others every time I introduce myself. I have a British passport, I like in the UK, that makes me British, doesn't matter I look a bit different. Doesn't make me ugly, doesn't make me beautiful, just makes me look different.
> 
> People can see what others are, 999 of 1000 people don't care. If they care then it's their problem. People can be upfront, but why constantly define yourself by what makes you different (I know because it makes someone oh so, so special) - especially when they've spent thousands of ¢£$ conforming to some fantasy in their heads that looks more avatar than classical beauty (Golden Triangle at al). Usually what makes people striking, even memorable, is also what makes them unique. No one has to advertise he/she is unique - especially after buying a RTW nose. If people have a problem with who they are, that's not about beauty. If you have to keep telling everyone how special you are (like referring to yourself as Duchess) maybe you're not so special.
> 
> Like others here, I have no issue with others doing whatever to their face and body, but do it and be happy.
> 
> And actually, it's a Western perception people from other cultures want to look like Westerners. Nearly every culture across the globe has different ideas and values attached to beauty and desire - many of those are just as problematical as in the West.


I have no problem with anyone wanting to change their features with PS, it's the hypocrisy that annoys me.  Why claim to be "Anglo-Iranian" or "biracial" and then have your looks surgically changed?  To me, it doesn't make sense.  In the book, one of the letters to Thomas Markle from TW thanks him for the "Markle nose".  If she liked it so much, why did she have it changed?  
I don't know anything about Bella Hadid, but I guess all of us have the features of our ancestors.  I was born in the UK and lived there for the first 12 years of my life before moving to Canada.  I have the pale skin of my ancestors and burn easily.  I am not a minority, so I cannot speak of how it feels to grow up looking different from people around you.  There are so many definitions of beauty and it is beyond me why people want to change their appearance so drastically, but it seems hypocritical to have your nose changed and your hair chemically treated to appear like that of a caucasian, and then pronounce yourself as a *proud* WOC.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I have no problem with anyone wanting to change their features with PS, it's the hypocrisy that annoys me.  Why claim to be "Anglo-Iranian" or "biracial" and then have your looks surgically changed?  To me, it doesn't make sense.  In the book, one of the letters to Thomas Markle from TW thanks him for the "Markle nose".  If she liked it so much, why did she have it changed?
> I don't know anything about Bella Hadid, but I guess all of us have the features of our ancestors.  I was born in the UK and lived there for the first 12 years of my life before moving to Canada.  I have the pale skin of my ancestors and burn easily.  I am not a minority, so I cannot speak of how it feels to grow up looking different from people around you.  There are so many definitions of beauty and it is beyond me why people want to change their appearance so drastically, but it seems hypocritical to have your nose changed and your hair chemically treated to appear like that of a caucasian, and then pronounce yourself as a *proud* WOC.



It's one thing to enjoy the joy of freedom (of expression) of hair. It's another to unsaleably modify you face or body IMO.

According to the book Black Style, straightfening black hair in the US before the abolition of slavery denoted someone was a free man or free woman (in the North) . So it's just as valid a hairstyle even historicaly, not hipocritcal. It's about having the choice.

 Once that choice has been made temporarily or permanently though stop blaming others when you made the choice


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we go……let the games begin.  
TeamCambridge.












						Meghan Markle's father Thomas makes first appearance since stroke
					

An exclusive video of Thomas Markle, 77, (pictured) on GB News this evening marks his first public appearance since his stroke in May, which saw him lose his speech.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## tiktok

Interestingly the book is now $21.99 on Kindle (ETA: up from $9.99). Seems like the publisher realized they’re cannibalizing their own sales since everyone will have bought this on Kindle already by the time some US distributor got the guts to finally set the record straight on Saint Markle.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Toby93 said:


> I have no problem with anyone wanting to change their features with PS, it's the hypocrisy that annoys me.  Why claim to be "Anglo-Iranian" or "biracial" and then have your looks surgically changed?  To me, it doesn't make sense.  In the book, one of the letters to Thomas Markle from TW thanks him for the "Markle nose".  If she liked it so much, why did she have it changed?
> I don't know anything about Bella Hadid, but I guess all of us have the features of our ancestors.  I was born in the UK and lived there for the first 12 years of my life before moving to Canada.  I have the pale skin of my ancestors and burn easily.  I am not a minority, so I cannot speak of how it feels to grow up looking different from people around you.  There are so many definitions of beauty and it is beyond me why people want to change their appearance so drastically, but it seems hypocritical to have your nose changed and your hair chemically treated to appear like that of a caucasian, and then pronounce yourself as a *proud* WOC.


I interpreted her comment as a thank you for the plastic surgery.  The Markle nose was not inherited—it was paid for.  IMO


----------



## octopus17

Toby93 said:


> Looks like she is pretending to be a cook again


Song of the Witches: “Double, double toil and trouble”​
(from Macbeth)

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the caldron boil and bake;
Eye of newt and toe of frog,
Wool of bat and tongue of dog,
Adder's fork and blind-worm's sting,
Lizard's leg and howlet's wing,
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.
Cool it with a baboon's blood,
Then the charm is firm and good.

Notes:
Macbeth: IV.i 10-19; 35-38


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is so weirdly awkward. Who does a freaking full pirouette because they initially walked the wrong direction?


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> It's one thing to enjoy the joy of freedom (of expression) of hair. It's another to unsaleably modify you face or body IMO.
> 
> According to the book Black Style, straightfening black hair in the US before the abolition of slavery denoted someone was a free man or free woman (in the North) . So it's just as valid a hairstyle even historicaly, not hipocritcal. It's about having the choice.
> 
> Once that choice has been made temporarily or permanently though stop blaming others when you made the choice


I learn something all the time here!  I did not know about the hair straightening and the connection to slavery.


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I interpreted her comment as a thank you for the plastic surgery.  The Markle nose was not inherited—it was paid for.  IMO


I guess the consensus is she had her nose narrowed - very common in Hollywood.  But I find her profile with the slope not very attractive.  guess either she liked that part or that can't be changed?


----------



## ceemee

Has this been posted? 


I know about the man who opened the door for her & offered his hand to help her down the car. She slapped the hand away. But I didn’t know about the military guy that was supposed to help her with her veil.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Would this be true?


----------



## ceemee

Chanbal said:


> Would this be true?



It’s possible that it’s true. Why would an actress 6th on the call sheet in an unknown show get a spot on the Today’s Show?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Would this be true?



I found something from four years ago that may be full of sh!t but I’m going to throw it out there because it hasn’t been scrubbed from the net yet. Scroll down to read about a so-called dressing room hook up. It isn’t really 404.









						US report: Meghan Markle and Matt Lauer ‘had a secret hook up’
					

The royal wedding is no longer the top topic of discussion after a shock new report about Meghan Markle emerged from the US overnight.




					www.newidea.com.au


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go……let the games begin.
> TeamCambridge.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5580522
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father Thomas makes first appearance since stroke
> 
> 
> An exclusive video of Thomas Markle, 77, (pictured) on GB News this evening marks his first public appearance since his stroke in May, which saw him lose his speech.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It’s very nice that he’s thanking people for their well wishes, but this is too much of a publicity stunt for me.


----------



## Chanbal

Is there anything nice about TW?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go……let the games begin.
> TeamCambridge.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5580522
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's father Thomas makes first appearance since stroke
> 
> 
> An exclusive video of Thomas Markle, 77, (pictured) on GB News this evening marks his first public appearance since his stroke in May, which saw him lose his speech.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thanks @CarryOn2020! This is such a crazy saga. The video below seems to be related to the article.


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> I found something from four years ago that may be full of sh!t but I’m going to throw it out there because it hasn’t been scrubbed from the net yet. Scroll down to read about a so-called dressing room hook up. It isn’t really 404.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US report: Meghan Markle and Matt Lauer ‘had a secret hook up’
> 
> 
> The royal wedding is no longer the top topic of discussion after a shock new report about Meghan Markle emerged from the US overnight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


So the story came from the National enquirer originally?  Hmm… could be true but also could be made up!


----------



## CarryOn2020

ceemee said:


> Has this been posted?
> 
> 
> I know about the man who opened the door for her & offered his hand to help her down the car. She slapped the hand away. But I didn’t know about the military guy that was supposed to help her with her veil.



Had not heard about this the person, but it’s all very believable imo



Chanbal said:


>



_Damp squib _



Chanbal said:


> Would this be true?



It’s been all over twitter today.  Seems like TBower has convinced people it is ok to talk now.  Reminds me of the Wizard of Oz.



Annawakes said:


> It’s very nice that he’s thanking people for their well wishes, but this is too much of a publicity stunt for me.



100%.  Now that we know he himself has lied, the timing of these moves must be questioned.



Chanbal said:


> Thanks @CarryOn2020! This is such a crazy saga. The video below seems to be related to the article.




Rrrrright. He has not seen or read the book, but “Bower did a great job.”   Sheeesh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> So the story came from the National enquirer originally?  Hmm… could be true but also could be made up!


Explains why she was doing a cooking segment on that show when we now know she never cooked.  So fake. So many lies.  Good lesson to be careful what we believe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



Didn't we discuss the above pictures some time ago and conclude that ZedZed was cosplaying Diana?! Here  are some examples.

Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> She was pregnant within a few months of the wedding. Whether it was IVF or surrogate or natural, she wanted that anchor on Harry as quickly as possible.


As a friend of mine calls it, sealing the deal, and ZeeZy wasted no time doing it.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Wasn't there a pic taken (the paps were not alerted this time) of them leaving a fertility clinic before she was pregnant with Invisibet?  Were they doing IVF or gender selection, or shopping for a surrogate?


If it's the pic I'm thinking of, it was a medical building in BH with numerous specialities but they claimed it was a dental appointment.


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


>



I loved it when he made a pause and said " when harry made his...insipirational... speech"


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I found something from four years ago that may be full of sh!t but I’m going to throw it out there because it hasn’t been scrubbed from the net yet. Scroll down to read about a so-called dressing room hook up. It isn’t really 404.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US report: Meghan Markle and Matt Lauer ‘had a secret hook up’
> 
> 
> The royal wedding is no longer the top topic of discussion after a shock new report about Meghan Markle emerged from the US overnight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au



How can anyone tell "undeniable chemistry"? If she's not bullying ordering someone around, she's flirting with them . Most men are flattered.  With men in officialdom/office and most women she does the 'I'm really, really interested in you and what you're saying stare/head nod" a la timeshare closure speech on a 'free' holiday - whatever works best to ingratiate herself.

It's a shame her acting jobs on-camera were never as good.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting interview…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> How can anyone tell "undeniable chemistry"? If she's not bullying ordering someone around, she's flirting with them . Most men are flattered.  With men in officialdom/office and most women she does the 'I'm really, really interested in you and what you're saying stare/head nod" a la timeshare closure speech on a 'free' holiday - whatever works best to ingratiate herself.
> 
> *It's a shame her acting jobs on-camera were never as good.*



Word.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Interesting interview…




"If she gets something better, he will be toast. If she never finds anything better she will reel him in as and when she needs to. That's the modus operandi of people who are very opportunistic, narcisstic and exploitative."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG Lady C. "He's not the brightest star in the constellation."


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> I found something from four years ago that may be full of sh!t but I’m going to throw it out there because it hasn’t been scrubbed from the net yet. Scroll down to read about a so-called dressing room hook up. It isn’t really 404.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> US report: Meghan Markle and Matt Lauer ‘had a secret hook up’
> 
> 
> The royal wedding is no longer the top topic of discussion after a shock new report about Meghan Markle emerged from the US overnight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newidea.com.au


I'm currently watching The Morning Show on Hulu (late to the game I know) and I would not doubt this. And wow, how did this fly past OUR radar (we are slipping people!).


----------



## andrashik

The claw in action


----------



## jennlt

Has this been posted? It's a short video about the 4th of July parade in Jackson Hole, Wyoming that they allegedly attended.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I'm currently watching The Morning Show on Hulu (late to the game I know) and I would not doubt this. And *wow, how did this fly past OUR radar (we are slipping people!).*


It’s all about the timing. This story came out a few months before the wedding and those of us who were here at that time had no clue what a nightmare it would shortly become. Almost everyone actually liked Harry and Meghan then. A hook up story wouldn’t have been believed.

Plus, it was from a tabloid so it might have been disregarded for that reason. To be fair, the mainstream press would never have reported a story like that in a million years, so that would only leave the tabloids to do it.


----------



## Aimee3

andrashik said:


> The claw in action
> View attachment 5580890


I recognize her but wow she’s had a LOT of plastic surgery.  She, Bella Hadis and Scoobie really went under the knife a LOT!


----------



## andrashik

Hmm, if this has been discussed here, I am sorry for spamming. I read that Claw has copied the vogue cover from a book she contributed years ago.









						Meghan Markle's New Vogue Cover Is Already Sparking 'Controversy'
					

The cover shares some similarities with a book the Duchess of Sussex contributed to three years ago.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

Aimee3 said:


> I recognize her but wow she’s had a LOT of plastic surgery.  She, Bella Hadis and Scoobie really went under the knife a LOT!


And I think she wore a wig there


----------



## andrashik

Ladies, are you prepared?
I must buy some popcorn









						Harry and Meghan biographer Omid Scobie says his sequel ‘will have the world talking’
					

Finding Freedom author, recently revealed to have been informed by a briefing from a senior aide, promises follow-up boasting ‘deep access’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There's a senior aide left at the palace still on their side? As if.


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Hmm, if this has been discussed here, I am sorry for spamming. I read that Claw has copied the vogue cover from a book she contributed years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's New Vogue Cover Is Already Sparking 'Controversy'
> 
> 
> The cover shares some similarities with a book the Duchess of Sussex contributed to three years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


I'm surprised she was featured in the book. Was she a game changer back in 2016?


----------



## andral5

andrashik said:


> I'm always shocked at people's courage( and his) do have these extensive procedures. Complications may appear and I have dark circles, like a panda , but I am too afraid to do something. The side effects I read about are crazy. I know a good dr is important, but I am still scared


Panda, racoon... know them so very well, since I was an adolescent  I too am very scared of the possible complications, especially with my "luck" with everything surgical/medical. I am just using makeup. The thing is, with age, the extremely thin skin in that area becomes very wrinkled with any makeup usage, and it shows wrinkles that I don't have when not wearing makeup.


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


> Ladies, are you prepared?
> I must buy some popcorn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan biographer Omid Scobie says his sequel ‘will have the world talking’
> 
> 
> Finding Freedom author, recently revealed to have been informed by a briefing from a senior aide, promises follow-up boasting ‘deep access’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


DEEP ACCESS = MM & JCMH will openly collaborate with OS, instead of rpetening not to do so


----------



## charlottawill

I've read about 120 pages so far, she's about to meet him. It's like eating a delicious but very rich dessert. After a certain amount you have to say that's enough for today. 

So far I'm getting the sense that Bower has grudging admiration for her tenacity.


----------



## andrashik

From reddit


----------



## Redbirdhermes

jennlt said:


> Has this been posted? It's a short video about the 4th of July parade in Jackson Hole, Wyoming that they allegedly attended.



This is not one of Body Language Guy's better videos.   I agree about leaving out any analysis of the child, but he also ignores the security guard that has planted himself firmly between the photographer and the Sussex"s.  You can see the guy's back, arm and wristwatch in a number of the photos.  This explains why the photographer was unable to dash in front of  Meghan and stick the camera under her hat.  Furthermore,  as I read their body language,  H and M are well aware of the photographer and are deliberately looking away.

I'd like to see Body Language Guy give these photos another look, as I feel he whiffed on this one.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> It's one thing to enjoy the joy of freedom (of expression) of hair. It's another to unsaleably modify you face or body IMO.
> 
> According to the book Black Style, straightfening black hair in the US before the abolition of slavery denoted someone was a free man or free woman (in the North) . So it's just as valid a hairstyle even historicaly, not hipocritcal. It's about having the choice.
> 
> Once that choice has been made temporarily or permanently though stop blaming others when you made the choice


ITA.  To me, hair or nails are completely different than surgically altering your face.  I’ve had Brazilian blowouts and Japanese hair straightening done to my hair not because I’m trying to be Brazilian or Japanese, but because my natural extremely thick, curly hair drives me (sorry for plagiarizing Haz) *bonkers.  *I look like a mess in any vacation picture with the slightest bit of humidity because my hair frizzes up and is completely OOC.  A lot of Iranian women in SoCal become blonde as they get older.  I doubt it’s because they’re trying to be white; sometimes one just wants to try something new.


----------



## jennlt

Redbirdhermes said:


> This is not one of Body Language Guy's better videos.   I agree about leaving out any analysis of the child, but he also ignores the security guard that has planted himself firmly between the photographer and the Sussex"s.  You can see the guy's back, arm and wristwatch in a number of the photos.  This explains why the photographer was unable to dash in front of  Meghan and stick the camera under her hat.  Furthermore,  as I read their body language, * H and M are well aware of the photographer and are deliberately looking away.*
> 
> I'd like to see Body Language Guy give these photos another look, as I feel he whiffed on this one.


When has she ever deliberately looked away from a camera? That alone is proof enough it's not her   









						How is it that Meghan Markle always smiles into the camera while others in the photo are looking away at something off camera?
					

Answer (1 of 23): Anytime members of the Royal Family are at an event there are hundreds of photographers lined up along the side of where they will be walking. No matter what direction she looks in she will be looking right down the barrel of somebody’s camera. So are all of the others, even tho...




					www.quora.com


----------



## csshopper

andrashik said:


> The claw in action
> View attachment 5580890


Who’s the male in the picture?

Interesting expression on Doria, not the bland one she usually wears.

Any idea what the caption on the photo refers to?


----------



## A1aGypsy

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  To me, hair or nails are completely different than surgically altering your face.  I’ve had Brazilian blowouts and Japanese hair straightening done to my hair not because I’m trying to be Brazilian or Japanese, but because my natural extremely thick, curly hair drives me (sorry for plagiarizing Haz) *bonkers.  *I look like a mess in any vacation picture with the slightest bit of humidity because my hair frizzes up and is completely OOC.  A lot of Iranian women in SoCal become blonde as they get older.  I doubt it’s because they’re trying to be white; sometimes one just wants to try something new.



Or to not have to run to the colourist every other week.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

jennlt said:


> When has she ever deliberately looked away from a camera? That alone is proof enough it's not her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is it that Meghan Markle always smiles into the camera while others in the photo are looking away at something off camera?
> 
> 
> Answer (1 of 23): Anytime members of the Royal Family are at an event there are hundreds of photographers lined up along the side of where they will be walking. No matter what direction she looks in she will be looking right down the barrel of somebody’s camera. So are all of the others, even tho...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.quora.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5581006
> 
> View attachment 5581007
> 
> View attachment 5581008
> 
> View attachment 5581009




Interesting, but the presence of Archie changes the equation.  Once again, BLG provides only innuendo here.  He can do better.


----------



## jennlt

Redbirdhermes said:


> *Interesting, but the presence of Archie changes the equation*.  Once again, BLG provides only innuendo here.  He can do better.
> 
> View attachment 5581023


Nope


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

More of the same - a heat-seeking missile finding her target


----------



## muddledmint

andrashik said:


> The claw in action
> View attachment 5580890


Sooooo is she pregnant here?


----------



## andrashik

csshopper said:


> Who’s the male in the picture?
> 
> Interesting expression on Doria, not the bland one she usually wears.
> 
> Any idea what the caption on the photo refers to?


I think he is her cousin. And the caption refers to her being pregnant, but I think it's a stretch


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> I think he is her cousin. And the caption refers to her being pregnant, but I think it's a stretch


I don't think she's pregnant there, but that certainly shows the face she was more likely born with.  She looks biracial in that picture.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> When has she ever deliberately looked away from a camera? That alone is proof enough it's not her


I was skeptical of the body double theory, but that point is hard to dispute. And doesn't one of their staffers resemble her? The question for me is what would have been the reason to do a switch. Recovering from cosmetic surgery? Embryo transfer and she had to rest? Inquiring minds here need to know!


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Interesting expression on Doria, not the bland one she usually wears.



If we're to believe what Bower has written about Doria's fondness for weed, she may have been high.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5581027



I do see a resemblance between Archie and the baby in the birthday photo who is supposedly Lilibet. It appears he has dark eyes and she has blue.


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> When has she ever deliberately looked away from a camera? That alone is proof enough it's not her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is it that Meghan Markle always smiles into the camera while others in the photo are looking away at something off camera?
> 
> 
> Answer (1 of 23): Anytime members of the Royal Family are at an event there are hundreds of photographers lined up along the side of where they will be walking. No matter what direction she looks in she will be looking right down the barrel of somebody’s camera. So are all of the others, even tho...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.quora.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5581006
> 
> View attachment 5581007
> 
> View attachment 5581008
> 
> View attachment 5581009




That's the MO and skill of someone who has had the time and inclination to sit in front of a mirror for hours on end and find themselves fascinating  

Models (the fashion kind, not the glamour kind) and performers are usually told not to gaze directly into the lens or at a person in the audience directly (the equivalent live). 

There are only 3 reasons a primate will look at you directly in the eyes, a) to acknowledge you because they know you already (and that's a very brief eye-contact) b) to unnerve/threaten you c) to engage with you sexually (or the promise of = flirting). 

Someone with authority would never do this unless imposing it (authority). I don't know the BRF so we're a) not friends, b) I wouldn't want to be intimidated or flirt with them. Maybe it's appropriate for a Hollywood starlet but it's freaky as f**k from a Royal.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> So far I'm getting the sense that Bower has grudging admiration for her tenacity.


I haven't read the book, but have read many excerpts (and most of it had already been discussed here) and I am in awe of her doggedness, her single mindedness.  She never gave up... she just kept clawing and scraping and charming and networking her way along until she found something to latch on to.


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think she's pregnant there, but that certainly shows the face she was more likely born with.  She looks biracial in that picture.


She looks like 5 months pregnant to me


----------



## lallybelle

She absolutely looks mixed in that picture, compare to now or wedding times when a lot people didn't even realize it until it was brought up over & over.


----------



## Sharont2305

andrashik said:


> The claw in action
> View attachment 5580890


She was attractive once, pre procedures. 
Pregnant?


----------



## bellecate

Love this.


----------



## Toby93

Redbirdhermes said:


> This is not one of Body Language Guy's better videos.   I agree about leaving out any analysis of the child, but he also ignores the security guard that has planted himself firmly between the photographer and the Sussex"s.  You can see the guy's back, arm and wristwatch in a number of the photos.  This explains why the photographer was unable to dash in front of  Meghan and stick the camera under her hat.  Furthermore,  as I read their body language,  H and M are well aware of the photographer and are deliberately looking away.
> 
> I'd like to see Body Language Guy give these photos another look, as I feel he whiffed on this one.


He was very vague and non-committal in this video.  He says it could be a body double but doesn't say  
that he thinks it was.  I am more inclined to think that the *candid* pics were not so candid, and they were manipulated and photoshopped before they were released.  It might actually be her in the pic, but there is NO WAY she is that small of a body frame.  Everything about that pair is fake and photoshopped.

 In the NY pics, she did herself no favours by wearing that black pantsuit.  She looks like a linebacker in it, and it just doesn't jive with the Wyoming pics. The hips, shoulders and butt are not even close to the other pics taken over the last few weeks, including the Jubilee and the polo pics.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> I've read about 120 pages so far, she's about to meet him. It's like eating a delicious but very rich dessert. After a certain amount you have to say that's enough for today.
> 
> So far I'm getting the sense that Bower has grudging admiration for her tenacity.


Falcons, eagles, and owls are birds of prey and may be admired for their hunting skills and flight and attack precision.  Some may think them handsome. Regardless, no one wants one as a pet around anything living.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I do see a resemblance between Archie and the baby in the birthday photo who is supposedly Lilibet. It appears he has dark eyes and she has blue.



Tough to say about the eye color (or the hair color) as the photographer that took baby Lili's photo loves to photoshop.  They could be blue as there are blue eyes on both Harry's side and Meghan's side but no one can be sure until there is an actual candid shot of the baby with no photoshopping.


----------



## Cinderlala

The woman in WY is not her.  The pants on the WY woman are loose when she is crouching down, when one's legs would be the largest.  Vulture's legs cannot ever be that small.  No part of the body of WY woman can belong to the Claw.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> The woman in WY is not her.  The pants on the WY woman are loose when she is crouching down, when one's legs would be the largest.  Vulture's legs cannot ever be that small.  No part of the body of WY woman can belong to the Claw.


and I don't think she'd wear shoes like that


----------



## uhpharm01

Tabloid Honcho Wants Restraining Order Against Meghan Markle's Dad Thomas Markle
					

Thomas Markle is out for revenge -- vowing he'd kill a tabloid owner who he feels wronged him -- and now the man wants a court to step in and force protection.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## sdkitty

uhpharm01 said:


> Tabloid Honcho Wants Restraining Order Against Meghan Markle's Dad Thomas Markle
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle is out for revenge -- vowing he'd kill a tabloid owner who he feels wronged him -- and now the man wants a court to step in and force protection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> and I don't think she'd wear shoes like that


Article from 2019 - the shoes have “special meaning” [of course they do]

_Moving on to her footwear, she finished her look with Brother Vellies Huaraches Flats ($257 - out of stock). While these hand-woven braided leather flats were made in Michoacán, México, the shoe brand was founded with the goal of introducing the rest of the world to traditional African footwear, while also creating and sustaining artisanal jobs within South Africa, Ethiopia, Kenya and Morocco.









						Meghan Markle's $260 casual shoes have a special meaning — and they're already sold out
					

And of course, they're already sold out.




					ca.style.yahoo.com
				



_


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from 2019 - the shoes have “special meaning” [of course they do]
> 
> _Moving on to her footwear, she finished her look with Brother Vellies Huaraches Flats ($257 - out of stock). While these hand-woven braided leather flats were made in Michoacán, México, the shoe brand was founded with the goal of introducing the rest of the world to traditional African footwear, while also creating and sustaining artisanal jobs within South Africa, Ethiopia, Kenya and Morocco.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's $260 casual shoes have a special meaning — and they're already sold out
> 
> 
> And of course, they're already sold out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.style.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


oh


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> oh



That's what TBL guy goes through, same jwewllry and shoes. But it obviously isn't her. She just enjoys feeding us fake news and body doubles.

TBLG can't say yes OR no, he'\s inviting us to speculate. 1. influencers try to get you commenting on the YT vid (because advertisers, sponsors etc like it and 2) legally he could be in trouble if M bluffs it out and sues (which she often does).

The woman in the pic appears half the size of M just before and just after the shot. Same shoes, same jewellery, just 50 pounds lighter. No problem with M at any weight, but she hasn't been that weight for a while - if ever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> She was attractive once, pre procedures.
> Pregnant?



I didn't see it until it was brought up. I do think judging from her face she is probably just a bit chubby there, but the hand placement is definitely weird.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Since the #1 Ducka$s of Her Own Realm is all about sweet nod to nothing, here's one!


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> She was attractive once, pre procedures.
> Pregnant?


I doubt it. I looked closely at the photo. I think the edge of the man's arm in front of her midsection is creating an illusion, especially against the white top. We know she has no waist. I believe that was taken when she was in high school. She was probably a little curvier there than when she embarked upon the aspiring actress diet.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article from 2019 - the shoes have “special meaning” [of course they do]
> 
> _Moving on to her footwear, she finished her look with Brother Vellies Huaraches Flats ($257 - out of stock). While these hand-woven braided leather flats were made in Michoacán, México, the shoe brand was founded with the goal of introducing the rest of the world to traditional African footwear, while also creating and sustaining artisanal jobs within South Africa, Ethiopia, Kenya and Morocco.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's $260 casual shoes have a special meaning — and they're already sold out
> 
> 
> And of course, they're already sold out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ca.style.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So she's wearing traditional Mexican footwear made in Mexico but they had to find a way to connect it to her African "philanthropy". Got it


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> So she's wearing traditional Mexican footwear made in Mexico but they had to find a way to connect it to her African "philanthropy". Got it


Or as they say on W1A,  _brilliant_


----------



## CarryOn2020

uhpharm01 said:


> Tabloid Honcho Wants Restraining Order Against Meghan Markle's Dad Thomas Markle
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle is out for revenge -- vowing he'd kill a tabloid owner who he feels wronged him -- and now the man wants a court to step in and force protection.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



Perhaps this is the _real_ Thomas?  Threatening someone with murder? In 2022?   Wow.


----------



## bag-mania

Not to defend Thomas Markle but I don’t believe for a minute Rayner feels his life is in danger.   

He bases it all on this blustering quote from the Bower book “I got screwed by Rayner and I'm going to find a way to screw him over before I die. I want to tear him down. If they tell me I've got terminal cancer, then I'll kill him because I have nothing to lose."

Thomas doesn’t have terminal cancer. He’s a nearly 80 year old blow hard, stroke patient living in Mexico. Bower interviewed him for the book and he spouted off a bunch of over the top exaggerated statements. Who does that sound like? Rayner is quite safe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Not to defend Thomas Markle but I don’t believe for a minute Rayner feels his life is in danger.
> 
> He bases it all on this blustering quote from the Bower book “I got screwed by Rayner and I'm going to find a way to screw him over before I die. I want to tear him down. If they tell me I've got terminal cancer, then I'll kill him because I have nothing to lose."
> 
> Thomas doesn’t have terminal cancer. He’s a nearly 80 year old blow hard, stroke patient living in Mexico. Bower interviewed him for the book and he spouted off a bunch of over the top exaggerated statements. Who does that sound like? Rayner is quite safe.



I do understand your point. While we all hope this is  bluster from an 80 year old, these threats should be taken seriously imo.  He may not do the killing himself, but he could get someone else to do it. Or his comments may inspire someone to do it. The world is different now, even for ailing 80 year olds.  Wanting to harm others is a sign of mental decline imo.  If an 18 year old said it, what would we do?  It’s time to hold TM  accountable for his statements.  Maybe I am simply tired of his blustering lies.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Not to defend Thomas Markle but I don’t believe for a minute Rayner feels his life is in danger.
> 
> He bases it all on this blustering quote from the Bower book “I got screwed by Rayner and I'm going to find a way to screw him over before I die. I want to tear him down. If they tell me I've got terminal cancer, then I'll kill him because I have nothing to lose."
> 
> Thomas doesn’t have terminal cancer. He’s a nearly 80 year old blow hard, stroke patient living in Mexico. Bower interviewed him for the book and he spouted off a bunch of over the top exaggerated statements. Who does that sound like? Rayner is quite safe.


"Tabloid honcho" told me everything I needed to know.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do understand your point. While we all hope this is  bluster from an 80 year old, these threats should be taken seriously imo.  He may not do the killing himself, but he could get someone else to do it. Or his comments may inspire someone to do it. The world is different now, even for ailing 80 year olds.  Wanting to harm others is a sign of mental decline imo.  If an 18 year old said it, what would we do?  It’s time to hold TM  accountable for his statements.  Maybe I am simply tired of his blustering lies.


I hear you. I wish Thomas would shut up too. However, Rayner being a sleazy guy makes it hard to muster up any sympathy for him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I hear you. I wish Thomas would shut up too. However, Rayner being a sleazy guy makes it hard to muster up any sympathy for him.


Exactly.  Sounds like one sleazy guy threatening another.  Ewwww.  No wonder Hazzi stays away from TM.  Ick, I just defended Hazzi. Bonkers, these people have driven us all bonkers


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Redbirdhermes said:


> This is not one of Body Language Guy's better videos.   I agree about leaving out any analysis of the child, but he also ignores the security guard that has planted himself firmly between the photographer and the Sussex"s.  You can see the guy's back, arm and wristwatch in a number of the photos.  This explains why the photographer was unable to dash in front of  Meghan and stick the camera under her hat.  Furthermore,  as I read their body language,  H and M are well aware of the photographer and are deliberately looking away.
> 
> I'd like to see Body Language Guy give these photos another look, as I feel he whiffed on this one.


Okay, The Body Language Guy apparently did do another video looking at the July 4th photos, and concludes that it is the real Meghan Markle.  This is more of the sort of analysis that I expect from him.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Not to defend Thomas Markle but I don’t believe for a minute Rayner feels his life is in danger.
> 
> He bases it all on this blustering quote from the Bower book “I got screwed by Rayner and I'm going to find a way to screw him over before I die. I want to tear him down. If they tell me I've got terminal cancer, then I'll kill him because I have nothing to lose."
> 
> Thomas doesn’t have terminal cancer. He’s a nearly 80 year old blow hard, stroke patient living in Mexico. Bower interviewed him for the book and he spouted off a bunch of over the top exaggerated statements. Who does that sound like? Rayner is quite safe.


I doubt this guy is really afraid of Thomas


----------



## papertiger




----------



## Annawakes

Couldn’t she have photoshopped herself thinner in the July 4th photos?  Like, shrink her thighs, waist, arms?

I don’t think it’s her but anyway.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I doubt this guy is really afraid of Thomas


He isn’t. He’s the weasel paparazzi who bamboozled Thomas into some of his decisions that caused him to get Markled. Even though Thomas has to own his choice to go along with Rayner, he is understandably bitter about the man. 

From right before the wedding:









						Inside Coleman-Rayner, the Ruthless Paparazzi Who Almost Derailed the Royal Wedding
					

Coleman-Rayner have a reputation for scandalous snapping—their notoriety sealed by their photographs of Thomas Markle Sr. which caused a pre-royal wedding media firestorm.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## mellibelly

I agree with BLG, it’s TW in the July 4th photos. But these are not candids. They are highly manipulated and photoshopped. Remember how she begged Reitmans to photoshop her waist, her feet, etc. and that was when she was a much thinner nobody. This was a fake candid that was shot, edited and posted “anonymously” so we can all talk about how skinny she looks when she resembled a Smeg weeks earlier at the jubilee

I know they are behind the pegging rumors about William and the hashtag. Trying to deflect from their own trending hashtags #meghanisaliar #meghanisabully #princeharryisracist. And they get to kill two birds with one stone by implying William likes being emasculated and Kate is a prude. It’s their projection since everyone knows Harry is emasculated by his mummy wife, HazNoBalls, is a puppet, muppet Handbag. ZZZ the Pee Wife also has a lame sense of humor so I can see her thinking William being pegged by Rose is soooo funny


----------



## Chanbal

no further comments…


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> He was very vague and non-committal in this video.  He says it could be a body double but doesn't say
> that he thinks it was.  I am more inclined to think that the *candid* pics were not so candid, and they were manipulated and photoshopped before they were released.  It might actually be her in the pic, but there is NO WAY she is that small of a body frame.  Everything about that pair is fake and photoshopped.
> 
> In the NY pics, she did herself no favours by wearing that black pantsuit.  She looks like a linebacker in it, and it just doesn't jive with the Wyoming pics. The hips, shoulders and butt are not even close to the other pics taken over the last few weeks, including the Jubilee and the polo pics.
> 
> View attachment 5581073


If it's her, as usual they just concentrated on photoshopping to make her look good. Even the freckles on her arms are gone. Still extremely tickled by how the fluttering flag becomes a nice square shadow.

I'm inclined to believe it is her, if only because IMO she would never loan her precious jewellery to a body double. But definitely staged. You don't have to get through her bodyguard to get pics of her face. My mobile zooms very well from a distance. This was faked.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> no further comments…



What a bunch of nonsense and lies.  I do not believe for one minute that there were 6 security breaches in one year.  There are a lot more rich and famous people in the area and you don't see them leaking info on security breaches.  How stupid do they think we are?  This is all for the benefit of Hazz's lawsuit and his fight for UK security. 

The article even goes as far as to say that this is probably the reason that the pair turned down the invitation to Balmoral.  Seriously???  You don't think that the security for THE QUEEN is adequate on the grounds of Balmoral?  These grifters need more?  They were never invited - end of story


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> when she resembled a Smeg weeks earlier at the jubilee



 Full size or mini?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> no further comments…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

These two sure screw up everything they touch.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> What a bunch of nonsense and lies.  I do not believe for one minute that there were 6 security breaches in one year.  There are a lot more rich and famous people in the area and you don't see them leaking info on security breaches.  How stupid do they think we are?  This is all for the benefit of Hazz's lawsuit and his fight for UK security.
> 
> The article even goes as far as to say that this is probably the reason that the pair turned down the invitation to Balmoral.  Seriously???  You don't think that the security for THE QUEEN is adequate on the grounds of Balmoral?  These grifters need more?  They were never invited - end of story


sorry but I can't be bothered to read a lot of this crap


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> sorry but I can't be bothered to read a lot of this crap


Yep,  there’s 5 minutes of my life I won’t get back.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> What a bunch of nonsense and lies.  I do not believe for one minute that there were 6 security breaches in one year.  There are a lot more rich and famous people in the area and you don't see them leaking info on security breaches.  How stupid do they think we are?  This is all for the benefit of Hazz's lawsuit and his fight for UK security.
> 
> The article even goes as far as to say that this is probably the reason that the pair turned down the invitation to Balmoral.  Seriously???  You don't think that the security for THE QUEEN is adequate on the grounds of Balmoral?  These grifters need more?  They were never invited - end of story





charlottawill said:


>



The BLG puts it in a nice way…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Jayne1

Redbirdhermes said:


> Okay, The Body Language Guy apparently did do another video looking at the July 4th photos, and concludes that it is the real Meghan Markle.  This is more of the sort of analysis that I expect from him.



Wow -- that's some zooming in! 

But do we even care if it's her?


----------



## Toby93

I can barely remember that she was touting something a while back?


----------



## papertiger

Analysing Chapter 32


----------



## needlv

I love the statement “the Monarchy does not exist for him [Harry]”

what a sense of entitlement shown by z list and Harry…. To expect the Queen would bow to their blackmail (Megzit statement) or accept half in and half out arrangement funded by the taxpayers !  

This is why z list won’t run for any political position.  She would have to work doing the stuff she despised in the UK.  You know, meeting the “great unwashed” in nursing homes, schools, cutting ribbons at opening of bridges and community work.

z list wants an ambassador position or something similar where she rubs shoulders with the elites, swans in to red carpet events wearing designer outfits (poorly), word salads her way through fawning media and pays lip service to whatever charity/event/latest cause.

Except her diplomacy skills are lacking.  And you have to be politically connected to get those ambassador positions.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> I love the statement “the Monarchy does not exist for him [Harry]”
> 
> what a sense of entitlement shown by z list and Harry…. To expect the Queen would bow to their blackmail (Megzit statement) or accept half in and half out arrangement funded by the taxpayers !
> 
> This is why z list won’t run for any political position.  She would have to work doing the stuff she despised in the UK.  You know, meeting the “great unwashed” in nursing homes, schools, cutting ribbons at opening of bridges and community work.
> 
> z list wants an ambassador position or something similar where she rubs shoulders with the elites, swans in to red carpet events wearing designer outfits (poorly), word salads her way through fawning media and pays lip service to whatever charity/event/latest cause.
> 
> Except her diplomacy skills are lacking.  And you have to be politically connected to get those ambassador positions.




  agree with all.

Fundamentally M has one fundamental and catastrophic flaw. She wants to be liked/loved/worshipped. 

Politcians and public figures that put themselves into the ring have to to prepared to be despised, argued with, even hated. She's a scaredy-cat  'influencer' (obviously she's not a 'content creator' - coz we'v seen none) with a lop-sided crown, no real life-experience, resilience or purpose. It's love me, love, love me or I'll scream and make you life hell. 

All she is at this point is click-bait - which is why the media continues to cover her (and him). 

All her role models and heroes/heroines are admired, loved and are almost above reproach. Unfortunately, she can't _really_ work out what got them 'there'. As TRG points out, no one is asking Me-again to do anything, even Hazard has few jobs - and she is jealous of those. 

There are influencers who did the whole 'most enviable, popular or relatable girl' schtick and turned that into something, but we're years on now, being pretty and living a dream life only appeals to 10 year olds now.  That's ALL she has at this point, no one wants to be her anymore. Bey, Rhianna are filling the performer/mogul boss-queen roles with receipts falling out their pockets, and Michelle O is still very much alive and Audrey (Hepburn) was unique and has posthumous career as an icon. You cannot be all to everybody, she is nothing to nobody. We just don't need her. 

Her 'brand', for all the money she's poured into it is toxic right now, companies are avoiding and people are turned-off. She cannot accept it, no one wants her on their wall, be her or have her on their team.


----------



## youngster

The "six security breaches" were probably six false alarms from their security system when a gardener or staff member opened a door without entering the proper code.  So, the security stuff is just more PR fluff put out to make them seem more important.  If actually true, which I doubt, that she has escape tunnels and body doubles lol, it's a way to keep Harry on edge all the time and worried about her which garners her attention from him and keeps him in protective mode.


----------



## Annawakes

Ok…..I’ve resisted googling this, but can anyone provide a G rated explanation of….pegging?

It’s like I’m curious but I also don’t want to know.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> If actually true, which I doubt, that she has escape tunnels and body doubles lol, *it's a way to keep Harry on edge all the time and worried about her which garners her attention from him and keeps him in protective mode.*


I believe it. If he’s ever chafing at her control over him it’s an easy way to get him back in line.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> Ok…..I’ve resisted googling this, but can anyone provide a G rated explanation of….pegging?
> 
> It’s like I’m curious but I also don’t want to know.



I'm on my work computer right now so I dare not LOL


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Ok…..I’ve resisted googling this, but can anyone provide a G rated explanation of….pegging?
> 
> It’s like I’m curious but I also don’t want to know.


Um, I’ll take a shot at this.  

It’s when a man likes having a woman wearing a sex toy insert it into him, essentially taking the male role.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Book report time 
Bower is harsh on Diana, but drives the home the idea that the sons were oblivious to her misbehavior, the last sentence is very good


----------



## marietouchet

Book report 2

on privileges given to MM PRIOR to her marriage.  FYI MM and H were living together almost immediately , within 4-5 mos of meeting, she was written out of SUITS and unemployed so moved to London


----------



## marietouchet

Book report 3 
I did not remember, but JCMH was the first to play the race card in his famous statement about 5 mos into the relationship. This was His rubicon, he was antagonizing the press not putting up


----------



## marietouchet

Book report 3a 
on press harassment on how little JCMH and MM tried to quietly deal with press. Awww come on, she should have ditched the necklace


----------



## marietouchet

Book report 4 
Bower is excellent at summarizing the situation in a few sentences


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> Um, I’ll take a shot at this.
> 
> It’s when a man likes having a woman wearing a sex toy insert it into him, essentially taking the male role.


Thank you.  It’s unbelievable that ZeeZy and/or her delusional camp would spread such a rumor.  Of course it was them.  Just too coincidental with the Bower book release.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I believe it. If he’s ever chafing at her control over him it’s an easy way to get him back in line.


She is so deranged a fake kidnapping attempt could be her next move.


----------



## andrashik

marietouchet said:


> Book report 3a
> on press harassment on how little JCMH and MM tried to quietly deal with press. Awww come on, she should have ditched the necklace
> 
> View attachment 5581584


I noticed the last part "according to an admirer"  of course, no one with common sense would side with her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



interesting


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



This has been rumoured from the beginning. What exactly is the connection?  I’m confused.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This has been rumoured from the beginning. What exactly is the connection?  I’m confused.


According to the comments she may have dirt on powerful people, supposedly having been on Epstein's yacht in 2001 when PA was there. There was talk that she might have been called to testify in Virginia Giuffre's case but then PA settled. It's all speculation but it is certainly intriguing.


----------



## tiktok

charlottawill said:


> According to the comments she may have dirt on powerful people, supposedly having been on Epstein's yacht in 2001 when PA was there. There was talk that she might have been called to testify in Virginia Giuffre's case but then PA settled. It's all speculation but it is certainly intriguing.


The words “deep state” in the Instagram post and the fact that she was 18 at the time with a supportive father who paid for her high school and college education at great schools make me think this is a creative invention. She’s an accomplished social climber but connecting her to Epstein especially in those years sounds like a massive stretch.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> If it's her, as usual they just concentrated on photoshopping to make her look good. Even the freckles on her arms are gone. Still extremely tickled by how the fluttering flag becomes a nice square shadow.
> 
> I'm inclined to believe it is her, if only because IMO she would never loan her precious jewellery to a body double. But definitely staged. You don't have to get through her bodyguard to get pics of her face. My mobile zooms very well from a distance. This was faked.


Who's to say they didn't photoshop themselves into the parade?  Explains why hardly anyone else took a single photo of any of them.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> These two sure screw up everything they touch.
> 
> View attachment 5581275
> View attachment 5581276


What's the opposite of the Midas Touch?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Book report time
> Bower is harsh on Diana, but drives the home the idea that the sons were oblivious to her misbehavior, the last sentence is very good
> 
> View attachment 5581575



Somewhere (I'm not opening that book again, ever) he said something along the lines of "Nobody forced Diana to be driven recklessly by a drunk driver without a seatbelt", and I was cheering him on. I don't feel glee or even "Your own fault you're dead" at all, but especially Harry should internalize that very sentence instead of insisting his angelic mother was murdered by the evil paps.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Book report 3
> I did not remember, but JCMH was the first to play the race card in his famous statement about 5 mos into the relationship. This was His rubicon, he was antagonizing the press not putting up
> 
> View attachment 5581583



But thanks to Bower we now know who crafted that statement. Not the eloquent words - that was Knauf - but the message.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> Thank you.  It’s unbelievable that ZeeZy and/or her delusional camp would spread such a rumor.  Of course it was them.  Just too coincidental with the Bower book release.



In a way I was more shocked when they did it with the original Rose rumor, while The Jerkface Family were still working royals. Though this one is way more distasteful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> She is so deranged a fake kidnapping attempt could be her next move.



She's probably mad Jussy Smollet thought of it first. Or wait, he just claimed to be beaten up, did he? She can top that.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Somewhere (I'm not opening that book again, ever) he said something along the lines of "*Nobody forced Diana to be driven recklessly by a drunk driver without a seatbelt*", and I was cheering him on. I don't feel glee or even "Your own fault you're dead" at all, but especially Harry should internalize that very sentence instead of insisting his angelic mother was murdered by the evil paps.


I have to take issue with his statement. She definitely _should have worn her seatbelt_, that's a given. But she had a reasonable expectation of having a sober driver when she got in the car. She had ridden in limos for years and I doubt she ever thought she needed to check the breath of the drivers. That night she was hustled out with Dodi and put in the back of the car. The paparazzi were chasing them and driving recklessly alongside the limo in small cars (and I believe motorcycles) trying to get shots of the inside. Footage of the paps was played a lot in the weeks after the accident. Harry is milking his mother's death for sure, but I can't bring myself to blame Diana. 

There is also the matter of the car involved in the Diana crash. I remember reading years back that it was in poor condition and I found an article about it. Despite experts saying it was not the cause of the crash, it should never have been on the road. 

Diana's limousine 'was a death trap which had been crashed and repaired TWICE before - including being rolled 10 times by a prisoner out on remand'​A chauffeur tried desperately to warn the limousine company that the car Diana was driven in was dangerous - and says the news of the fateful night still haunts him two decades after her death.

Karim Kazi, now a successful businessman, tried to tell the owners of Etoile Limousines that the Mercedes S-280 was 'unpredictable', but was ignored.

Earlier this year, it emerged that the car has been 'totalled' at least once before Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed were passengers in 1997. 

Pascal Rostain, a Paris photographer, told a French radio station that the 'hugely dangerous' car had been stolen and driven into the ground earlier in the year.

'This Ritz car was a wreck. It had crashed before, and been rolled over several times,' he said.

The car was ready to be broken up, but permission was then given to 're-make' it, the photographer claimed.

Now one of the company's former drivers, Mr Kazi, has confirmed this, and said the car had been totalled before then as well.  

Mr Kazi told the Mirror: 'The car's steering was not safe. I started pointing out faults with the Mercedes in early 1997, before Diana died. For me, it was a car that did not work very well. 

He said that he believed the car was 'an accident waiting to happen' after it was rolled 'up to 10 times' at 100mph by a prisoner out on remand and written off by the insurance company.

He added: 'There was something very wrong with it. When the car sped up, it would lose control. There was no dynamic control, it was certainly risky if driven at more than 60km/h (37mph).

'Now that the history of the car has come out, it is clear my fears were correct.' 

Mr Rostain identified Karim earlier this year and said he had told the bosses at the limo company to sell the car.

Eric Bousquet said he bought the €85,000 car new in September 1994 when he was a 'young advertising executive'.

Three months later, in January 1995, a prisoner out on remand stole the car, and took it on a joyride in the Paris suburbs.

Travelling at speeds of up to 100mph in country lanes, the escapee rolled the two tonne Mercedes around a dozen times, so it ended up on its roof in a field.

The car was considered to be a write-off, and according to Mr Bousquet 'the insurance refunded me the price I paid for it, because it was pretty much new, considering it was a destroyed car, non repairable.

The car was condemned as scrap, but finally recovered by a mechanic who repaired it and then resold it to Etoile Limousines.

Neils Siegel, who worked for the company at the time, said he bought the Mercedes for €40,000, but refused to discuss claims that it was not road worthy.

The M6 programme carried out a crash test on the same model of Mercedes, and a technical expert said it 'should not have remained on the road', despite being re-built.

It was 'not reparable' and 'dangerous', the expert added, as he offered a view that was supported by insurance brokers.

The current owner of the Mercedes is Jean-Francois Musa, 58, the former boss of Etoile Limousines.

A Scotland Yard investigation into conspiracy theories about Diana's death, led by former Metropolitan Police commissioner Lord Stevens, reported that experts found no problems with the vehicle.

His report, published in 2006, concluded: 'Both the French and British examinations of the Mercedes have shown that there were no mechanical issues with the car that could have in any way caused or contributed to the crash.' 










						Diana's limousine 'was death trap which had crashed TWICE before'
					

The Mercedes that Diana and Dodi Fayed were driven in the night of their deaths in Paris was 'unpredictable' according to a former chauffeur for the company who warned bosses about the car.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

tiktok said:


> The words “deep state” in the Instagram post and the fact that she was 18 at the time with a supportive father who paid for her high school and college education at great schools make me think this is a creative invention. She’s an accomplished social climber but connecting her to Epstein especially in those years sounds like a massive stretch.


Agreed, but she was 20 not 18 in 2001, and as an ambitious college student she could have been drawn into something that seemed glamorous to her. In terms of experience that's often a big difference in a young woman, and there are always shady characters on the prowl for them. For example, Playboy was (in)famous for having casting calls for Playmates on college campuses. Who knows if she  responded to some call to be eye candy for old men on a yacht on spring or summer break? Again, it's all rumor and conjecture, but there could be some truth to it.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Who's to say they didn't photoshop themselves into the parade?  Explains why hardly anyone else took a single photo of any of them.


IIRC the pictures were taken by two women tourists from VA. I was surprised that no one else did, unless people in Wyoming are just more courteous. Or didn't give a f*ck


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> She is so deranged a fake kidnapping attempt could be her next move.


Don’t give her ideas! 

Also I’ve lost the icons when on my iPhone. Not sure if it’s something I’ve done or???


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> IIRC the pictures were taken by two women tourists from VA. I was surprised that no one else did, unless people in Wyoming are just more courteous. Or didn't give a f*ck


Why were they in Wyoming at all? I know several celebrities have bought huge ranches to use as getaways, but I don't see Harry and Meghan being among them. They don't really want to get away from the celeb lifestyle. If anything, Meghan wants more of it.

Flying Archie (but not Lilibet) to a July 4th parade in Jackson Hole doesn't add up. There's an angle here and I'm just not seeing it.


----------



## bag-mania

Ladies, fair warning that it is Raptor's birthday tomorrow. Don't know what to expect but I'm certain Sunshine Sachs will have it be noted (repeatedly) by the media.


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Book report 2
> 
> on privileges given to MM PRIOR to her marriage.  FYI MM and H were living together almost immediately , within 4-5 mos of meeting, she was written out of SUITS and unemployed so moved to London
> 
> View attachment 5581580





bag-mania said:


> I have to take issue with his statement. She definitely _should have worn her seatbelt_, that's a given. But she had a reasonable expectation of having a sober driver when she got in the car. She had ridden in limos for years and I doubt she ever thought she needed to check the breath of the drivers. That night she was hustled out with Dodi and put in the back of the car. The paparazzi were chasing them and driving recklessly alongside the limo in small cars (and I believe motorcycles) trying to get shots of the inside. Footage of the paps was played a lot in the weeks after the accident. Harry is milking his mother's death for sure, but I can't bring myself to blame Diana.
> 
> There is also the matter of the car involved in the Diana crash. I remember reading years back that it was in poor condition and I found an article about it. Despite experts saying it was not the cause of the crash, it should never have been on the road.
> 
> Diana's limousine 'was a death trap which had been crashed and repaired TWICE before - including being rolled 10 times by a prisoner out on remand'​A chauffeur tried desperately to warn the limousine company that the car Diana was driven in was dangerous - and says the news of the fateful night still haunts him two decades after her death.
> 
> Karim Kazi, now a successful businessman, tried to tell the owners of Etoile Limousines that the Mercedes S-280 was 'unpredictable', but was ignored.
> 
> Earlier this year, it emerged that the car has been 'totalled' at least once before Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed were passengers in 1997.
> 
> Pascal Rostain, a Paris photographer, told a French radio station that the 'hugely dangerous' car had been stolen and driven into the ground earlier in the year.
> 
> 'This Ritz car was a wreck. It had crashed before, and been rolled over several times,' he said.
> 
> The car was ready to be broken up, but permission was then given to 're-make' it, the photographer claimed.
> 
> Now one of the company's former drivers, Mr Kazi, has confirmed this, and said the car had been totalled before then as well.
> 
> Mr Kazi told the Mirror: 'The car's steering was not safe. I started pointing out faults with the Mercedes in early 1997, before Diana died. For me, it was a car that did not work very well.
> 
> He said that he believed the car was 'an accident waiting to happen' after it was rolled 'up to 10 times' at 100mph by a prisoner out on remand and written off by the insurance company.
> 
> He added: 'There was something very wrong with it. When the car sped up, it would lose control. There was no dynamic control, it was certainly risky if driven at more than 60km/h (37mph).
> 
> 'Now that the history of the car has come out, it is clear my fears were correct.'
> 
> Mr Rostain identified Karim earlier this year and said he had told the bosses at the limo company to sell the car.
> 
> Eric Bousquet said he bought the €85,000 car new in September 1994 when he was a 'young advertising executive'.
> 
> Three months later, in January 1995, a prisoner out on remand stole the car, and took it on a joyride in the Paris suburbs.
> 
> Travelling at speeds of up to 100mph in country lanes, the escapee rolled the two tonne Mercedes around a dozen times, so it ended up on its roof in a field.
> 
> The car was considered to be a write-off, and according to Mr Bousquet 'the insurance refunded me the price I paid for it, because it was pretty much new, considering it was a destroyed car, non repairable.
> 
> The car was condemned as scrap, but finally recovered by a mechanic who repaired it and then resold it to Etoile Limousines.
> 
> Neils Siegel, who worked for the company at the time, said he bought the Mercedes for €40,000, but refused to discuss claims that it was not road worthy.
> 
> The M6 programme carried out a crash test on the same model of Mercedes, and a technical expert said it 'should not have remained on the road', despite being re-built.
> 
> It was 'not reparable' and 'dangerous', the expert added, as he offered a view that was supported by insurance brokers.
> 
> The current owner of the Mercedes is Jean-Francois Musa, 58, the former boss of Etoile Limousines.
> 
> A Scotland Yard investigation into conspiracy theories about Diana's death, led by former Metropolitan Police commissioner Lord Stevens, reported that experts found no problems with the vehicle.
> 
> His report, published in 2006, concluded: 'Both the French and British examinations of the Mercedes have shown that there were no mechanical issues with the car that could have in any way caused or contributed to the crash.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana's limousine 'was death trap which had crashed TWICE before'
> 
> 
> The Mercedes that Diana and Dodi Fayed were driven in the night of their deaths in Paris was 'unpredictable' according to a former chauffeur for the company who warned bosses about the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I read the bodyguards book years ago and according to him, Dodi was addicted to drama and loved being chased by the paps.  Diana should have seen through this, but again, she was manipulating the media to make a past boyfriend jealous.  I have a lot of sympathy for Diana, but I do believe she brought a lot of what happened on herself.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I read the bodyguards book years ago and according to him, Dodi was addicted to drama and loved being chased by the paps.  Diana should have seen through this, but again, she was manipulating the media to make a past boyfriend jealous.  I have a lot of sympathy for Diana, but I do believe she brought a lot of what happened on herself.


People forget that Diana had only been dating Dodi for a very short time. He was her rebound fling after Hasnat Khan. They started dating in July and by the end of August they were dead. They were not together all of the time even in those few weeks. I honestly don't think she knew him very well.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Why were they in Wyoming at all? I know several celebrities have bought huge ranches to use as getaways, but I don't see Harry and Meghan being among them. They don't really want to get away from the celeb lifestyle. If anything, Meghan wants more of it.
> 
> Flying Archie (but not Lilibet) to a July 4th parade in Jackson Hole doesn't add up. There's an angle here and I'm just not seeing it.


There was speculation on Twitter that they were guests of a billionaire philanthropist and making a pitch for cash for Archehell. I don't see them living there either.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Somewhere (I'm not opening that book again, ever) he said something along the lines of "Nobody forced Diana to be driven recklessly by a drunk driver without a seatbelt", and I was cheering him on. I don't feel glee or even "Your own fault you're dead" at all, but especially Harry should internalize that very sentence instead of insisting his angelic mother was murdered by the evil paps.


agree totally
she made some mistakes and I don't hold it against her but the paps didn't kill her


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> She's vindictive AF and it's always a lawsuit away. If not a lawsuit, probably a smear campaign by her team and one should be ready to get cancelled! Once again, evil TO THE CORE


H seems to just as fond of lawsuits as his WIFE


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> There was speculation on Twitter that they were guests of a billionaire philanthropist and making a pitch for cash for Archehell. I don't see them living there either.


Was it a Russian oligarch?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

bag-mania said:


> Ladies, fair warning that it is Raptor's birthday tomorrow. Don't know what to expect but I'm certain Sunshine Sachs will have it be noted (repeatedly) by the media.


Well the new cover of People Magaize was just released and it has Kate on the cover with the title "The Making of a Queen" so MM didn't get the people cover for her birthday


----------



## sdkitty

hollieplus2 said:


> Well the new cover of People Magaize was just released and it has Kate on the cover with the title "The Making of a Queen" so MM didn't get the people cover for her birthday


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I have a lot of sympathy for Diana, but I do believe she brought a lot of what happened on herself.


Dodi was a charming playboy and Diana was looking for a fling, nothing more from what I've read. If she had not refused her royal protection detail she might be alive, but she wanted to escape the royal grip as much as possible. Reports that I've read state that she died of a ruptured aorta from hitting a surface in the car, which could have been prevented by a seatbelt.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Was it a Russian oligarch?


That was my first thought, as the very exclusive Amangani resort there was owned by one until recently. This is the one that was mentioned in the rumors:



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hansjörg_Wyss


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> That was my first thought, as the very exclusive Amangani there was owned by one until recently. This is the one that was mentioned in the rumors:


I believe they would take money from absolutely anyone who offered it (as long as they could hide that they did it). It's a good thing they are not privy to national security secrets.


----------



## charlottawill

hollieplus2 said:


> Well the new cover of People Magaize was just released and it has Kate on the cover with the title "The Making of a Queen" so MM didn't get the people cover for her birthday



I'm sure it's a coincidence but the timing is interesting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Dodi was a charming playboy and Diana was looking for a fling, nothing more from what I've read. If she had not refused her royal protection detail she might be alive, but she wanted to escape the royal grip as much as possible. Reports that I've read state that she died of a ruptured aorta from hitting a surface in the car, which could have been prevented by a seatbelt.



The crazy one of her sons once suggested she was murdered because the BRF couldn't stand her dating and possibly marrying a person of colour. I can't remember in which one of his brain-to-mouth-diarrhea-events that was.

ETA: maybe I'm boring, but I don't see the attraction of a playboy at all, especially not on the global stage. I don't want to open the morning newspaper and see pictures of him on his yacht with someone else, or find lipstick on his collar. I prefer other thrills.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Dodi was a charming playboy and Diana was looking for a fling, nothing more from what I've read. If she had not refused her royal protection detail she might be alive, but she wanted to escape the royal grip as much as possible. Reports that I've read state that she died of a ruptured aorta from hitting a surface in the car, which could have been prevented by a seatbelt.


Bower’s book stresses her numerous affairs, with lots of married men


----------



## Tyler_JP

How long before they start an OnlyFans?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The crazy one of her sons once suggested she was murdered because the BRF couldn't stand her dating and possibly marrying a person of colour. I can't remember in which one of his brain-to-mouth-diarrhea-events that was.
> 
> ETA: maybe I'm boring, but I don't see the attraction of a playboy at all, especially not on the global stage. I don't want to open the morning newspaper and see pictures of him on his yacht with someone else, or find lipstick on his collar. I prefer other thrills.



There were all kinds of conspiracy theories after her death, and he absorbed it along the way. As I recall Dodi's father raised the possibility that the BRF was behind it because they didn't want the mother of the heir marrying an Egyptian. Rumors went so far as to suggest that Prince Philip was behind it. It was a tragic accident but that's too boring.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Bower’s book stresses her numerous affairs, with lots of married men


Thank you for your book reports. I was reading over the weekend and haven't picked up again yet.


----------



## Cinderlala

csshopper said:


> She is so deranged a fake kidnapping attempt could be her next move.


Lol, this is so true!  But, anyone slightly reasonable would have to ask themselves a few questions before believing it:
1) Who would want her?
2) Since there's really no money to speak of why would they want her?
3) One more time, who would want her?


Editing to add: Only Ginge would believe it.  And the relentless sugar-bots.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> There were all kinds of conspiracy theories after her death, and he absorbed it along the way.



Yeah, but at nearly 40 I'd expect him to not bring up crazy conspiracies in public. I really do think in a way he stopped developing mentally at 12, and then he has that thing in his ear 24/7 who five months into this relationship forced his press secretary to make a statement comparing her to Diana.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Was it a Russian oligarch?


hmm … their house in Vancouver … it was owned by some Russian oligarch ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Lol, this is so true!  But, anyone slightly reasonable would have to ask themselves a few questions before believing it:
> 1) Who would want her?
> 2) Since there's really no money to speak of why would they want her?
> 3) One more time, who would want her?
> 
> 
> Editing to add: Only Ginge would believe it.  And the relentless sugar-bots.



Seriously. She just needs to be her usual self and they'll offer money to anyone who takes her off their hands.


----------



## mellibelly

purseinsanity said:


> What's the opposite of the Midas Touch?


Sadim Touch, the opposite of Midas. Everything they touches turns to ruin. Or as they say in ZZZ’s previous occupation, Box Office Poison  

Off topic but I miss the emoji we used to have of beating a dead horse. I guess it was in poor taste but man was it funny!


----------



## Helventara

mellibelly said:


> Off topic but I miss the emoji we used to have of beating a dead horse. I guess it was in poor taste but man was it funny!


  I guess it’s manual by typing :b t d h : (without space in between)


----------



## mellibelly

bag-mania said:


> Ladies, fair warning that it is Raptor's birthday tomorrow. Don't know what to expect but I'm certain Sunshine Sachs will have it be noted (repeatedly) by the media.


SS & ZZZ, if you’re reading this (we know you do) let’s check in with the 40X40 women. Did that 40 minute zoom with a celebrity change their lives a year later?!


----------



## mellibelly

BVBookshop said:


>


Where is that?! I can’t find it for the life of me


----------



## Cinderlala

I like the phrase: harbingers of doom.


----------



## Helventara

mellibelly said:


> Where is that?! I can’t find it for the life of me


Sorry I was still editing. You can type it manually : b t d h : (no space between in between)


----------



## mellibelly

Nevermind I found it! I did a search for horse LOL


----------



## pukasonqo

I am surprised she didn’t mention the death of Nichelle Nichols, she is considered a trail blazer for African American women in film and TV: she played a lieutenant, an equal to the motley intergalactic officers in a time when most African American actresses played maids, sultry temptresses or any other stereotyped role
Plus MLK supported and encouraged her when she wanted to give up the role









						What Martin Luther King Jr taught Star Trek actor Nichelle Nichols about representation
					

Nichelle Nichols was about to quit Star Trek in the 1960s when a chance encounter with Martin Luther King Jr changed the course of her life and set an example of representation for black women all over the world.




					www.sbs.com.au


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> People forget that Diana had only been dating Dodi for a very short time. He was her rebound fling after Hasnat Khan. They started dating in July and by the end of August they were dead. They were not together all of the time even in those few weeks. I honestly don't think she knew him very well.


My understanding [and I could be wrong] was that she was using Al Fayed, the father, to annoy Charles and the BRF.  Al Fayed wanted an award and was refused, so he wanted to irritate the BRF, too. He “kindly” offered his villa/yacht/hotel to Diana. He “encouraged” his son, Dodi, to schmooze/court/woo Diana.  Dodi was still seeing an American model during that fateful summer.  She knew about Diana [photos were everywhere] but Diana did not know about her or so we are told.  Yep, a real soap opera.  

Revenge is nothing to be trifled with.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> SS & ZZZ, if you’re reading this (we know you do) let’s check in with the 40X40 women. Did that 40 minute zoom with a celebrity change their lives a year later?!



You mean it happened? 

Nothing happens in the House of Sussex, all talk no action, all project-in-the-pipeline, no content


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> My understanding [and I could be wrong] was that she was using Al Fayed, the father, to annoy Charles and the BRF.  Al Fayed wanted an award and was refused, so he wanted to irritate the BRF, too. He “kindly” offered his villa/yacht/hotel to Diana. He “encouraged” his son, Dodi, to schmooze/court/woo Diana.  Dodi was still seeing an American model during that fateful summer.  She knew about Diana [photos were everywhere] but Diana did not know about her or so we are told.  Yep, a real soap opera.
> 
> Revenge is nothing to be trifled with.



He wanted citizenship, he thought he could buy it, he never got it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Was it a Russian oligarch?


Speculation is it was a Swiss billionaire.  Is that worse than the Russian oligarch?  Inquiring minds need to know  









						Swiss-born billionaire is accused of violating US election law
					

Hansjorg Wyss, who has an estimated net worth of $5.1 billion and in lives in Wyoming, has become a major donor to liberal groups in recent years, but  remains tight-lipped about his citizenship status.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My understanding [and I could be wrong] was that she was using Al Fayed, the father, to annoy Charles and the BRF.  Al Fayed wanted an award and was refused, so he wanted to irritate the BRF, too. He “kindly” offered his villa/yacht/hotel to Diana. He “encouraged” his son, Dodi, to schmooze/court/woo Diana.  Dodi was still seeing an American model during that fateful summer.  She knew about Diana [photos were everywhere] but Diana did not know about her or so we are told.  Yep, a real soap opera.
> 
> Revenge is nothing to be trifled with.


There's no way to know what she was thinking because, to my knowledge, she never discussed her reasons with anyone. There are writers who talked to people who offered their speculation on why she was seeing Dodi, but that isn't the same as getting it from the source. 

Obviously if she had even an inkling that it would cost her her life she would have stayed far from him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> He wanted citizenship, he thought he could buy it, he never got it.


  Thank you. I could not remember if it was an award or citizenship.  
It’s too hot to look it up.  

Something I learned today is that MM was homecoming Queen at her high school.  Not sure we can trust 17 magazine  





__





						See Meghan Markle Wear Her First Tiara as Homecoming Queen in High School
					

She was born for this.




					www.seventeen.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

If I remember correctly, Bower says she paid Sunshine Sucks $7,500 per month in 2013. 

Wow, to me that's a lot,  at least 2 Gucci handbags and couple of Hermes scarves (equivalence makes value real to me ) . 

Then again, I wonder what she's paying them now? She could have had a wardrobe of couture (the kind that gets made to measure not borrowed) rather than drivel all over the web. She could have had security round the clock and holidays on fancy estates, pictured at charity events, she could have had it all, publicity too, instead she gets to twirl her hair and study her nails for whatever  charges.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> IIRC_* the pictures were taken by two women tourists from VA*_. I was surprised that no one else did, unless people in Wyoming are just more courteous. Or didn't give a f*ck


Allegedly


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Ladies, fair warning that it is Raptor's birthday tomorrow. Don't know what to expect but I'm certain Sunshine Sachs will have it be noted (repeatedly) by the media.


Seeing as how they’ve ignored most of the BRF’s birthdays, I hope they don’t wish her anything.  Yes, I’m petty like that.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. I could not remember if it was an award or citizenship.
> It’s too hot to look it up.
> 
> Something I learned today is that MM was homecoming Queen at her high school.  Not sure we can trust 17 magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle Wear Her First Tiara as Homecoming Queen in High School
> 
> 
> She was born for this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.seventeen.com



Of course she was  - maybe, possibly, 

Or maybe she was just looking for a headline featuring "Queen Meghan"


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> There's no way to know what she was thinking because, to my knowledge, she never discussed her reasons with anyone. There are writers who talked to people who offered their speculation on why she was seeing Dodi, but that isn't the same as getting it from the source.
> 
> Obviously if she had even an inkling that it would cost her her life she would have stayed far from him.



She used to stage going out with guys (like Binatone's Gulu Lalvani). 

I honestly don't think she knew what or who she wanted


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. I could not remember if it was an award or citizenship.
> It’s too hot to look it up.
> 
> Something I learned today is that MM was homecoming Queen at her high school.  Not sure we can trust 17 magazine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See Meghan Markle Wear Her First Tiara as Homecoming Queen in High School
> 
> 
> She was born for this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.seventeen.com


Maybe this is why she thinks the monarchy is a contest in which she and Hazy could surpass W&K in popularity with the British people to become king and queen, instead of adhering to some dumb old line of succession.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> There's no way to know what she was thinking because, to my knowledge, she never discussed her reasons with anyone. There are writers who talked to people who offered their speculation on why she was seeing Dodi, but that isn't the same as getting it from the source.
> 
> Obviously if she had even an inkling that it would cost her her life she would have stayed far from him.


I think [again, could be wrong] her astrologist told us that story.   Nevertheless, you’re right. After the accident, it seemed like everyone had a theory and talked to the media.

Two points about that night stand out to me :
1. She was staying at one of the best Parisian hotels. Her flight to London left in the early am.  Dodi talked her into going to his apartment. She knew the paps were out there.  She could have said _no_.  *Instead she went along*.
2. Her bodyguard was with her in the car. He could have insisted she buckle up as he did. He could have insisted she stay at the hotel. *Instead he went along *with the ruse to distract the paps. I am not blaming him, he himself has suffered greatly,  imo it shows how these wealthy people never listen to voices of wisdom. Money does not equal intelligence imo. 

The lesson surely must be never go along. Stay strong and say no.  



papertiger said:


> Of course she was  - maybe, possibly,
> 
> Or maybe she was just looking for a headline featuring "Queen Meghan"



Wait, what?  Would 17 magazine lie to us?  Surely they carefully researched the article.


----------



## papertiger

NY Post:









						Meghan Markle revealed for what she really is — a Kardashian
					

Here comes another blow for the Duke and Duchess of Woke.




					nypost.com


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> NY Post:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revealed for what she really is — a Kardashian
> 
> 
> Here comes another blow for the Duke and Duchess of Woke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



From a commenter:

Amber Heard: "Watch me become famous by skanking my way to the top!" Meghan Markle: "Hold my beer."


----------



## Cinderlala

Buzzard wishes she was a Kardashian.  They have money.  And, whether we like it or not, KimK changed the standards of beauty.  Buzzard would kill for that!

(I've decided that raptors are too magnificent to be used as a descriptor for her so I'm experimenting with others. I think I like Buzzard.)  (Collectively, I may call the pair Buz & Huz.)


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Allegedly


When I first read this I thought it was probably an incomplete sentence and should have gone on to say “who are coincidentally relatives of a Sunshine Sucks staff member.”  There’s just something “off” about this whole thing.

Don’t remember if this was an Instagram comment, or in an Amazon reader’s review, but I thought it was a good one: “MM is spun sugar icing covering up a moldy cake.”


----------



## Hermes Zen

More on M crowned as Homecoming Queen.   Her first and last name misspelled ... 

The delighted star was crowned homecoming queen for the event during half-time at a school American football game in November 1998.
A description of the lavish ceremony, written by pupils in her school yearbook, describes *Meghan’s crowning glory — but spelled her first and last names wrong.*
It says: “The princesses were escorted by our knights, and a red carpet ceremony commenced.
“Last year’s Queen Carla Suarez presented *Megan Markel* with the crown and the entire court processed off the field in classic convertibles.”




> https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowb...owned-by-her-friends-in-school-prom-ceremony/
> 
> First pictures of Prince Harry’s girlfriend Meghan Markle ‘crowned’ by her friends in school prom ceremony​


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> NY Post:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revealed for what she really is — a Kardashian
> 
> 
> Here comes another blow for the Duke and Duchess of Woke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I couldn't have said it better


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> (I've decided that raptors are too magnificent to be used as a descriptor for her so I'm experimenting with others. I think I like Buzzard.)  (Collectively, I may call the pair Buz & Huz.)



Isn't a buzzard a raptor?

But also, I always envision the Jurassic Park raptor, not a bird   (that said, I think the dino was smarter)

I've become attached to Raptor, but I also like Devastator, both the original meaning and the Transformer: "Devastator's primitive psyche is limited to only the thoughts and actions on which all his parts and components can agree, which results in raging bouts of destructive fury."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't a buzzard a raptor?
> 
> But also, I always envision the Jurassic Park raptor, not a bird   (that said, I think the dino was smarter)
> 
> I've become attached to Raptor, but I also like Devastator, both the original meaning and the Transformer: "Devastator's primitive psyche is limited to only the thoughts and actions on which all his parts and components can agree, which *results in raging bouts of destructive fury."*



Add "followed by relentless pouting" and we have Raggedy Rachel all wrapped up!


----------



## Cinderlala

Oh, and the velociraptor was definitely smarter!    And less dramatic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> NY Post:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revealed for what she really is — a Kardashian
> 
> 
> Here comes another blow for the Duke and Duchess of Woke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


This article should be framed. It capsulizes  Bower’s book in a few paragraphs.  A gem!  Thank you 



Cinderlala said:


> Buzzard wishes she was a Kardashian.  They have money.  And, whether we like it or not, KimK changed the standards of beauty.  Buzzard would kill for that!
> 
> (I've decided that raptors are too magnificent to be used as a descriptor for her so I'm experimenting with others. I think I like Buzzard.)  (Collectively, I may call the pair Buz & Huz.)


Not that I am the best person to defend the Kardashian clan, but -  KimK  earned her money *before *she spent it.  Now she is championing the value of education, albeit a watered-down version.  Still, she does not merely talk about doing stuff, she does it.  I do respect that, begrudgingly.  H&M are all talk and lawsuits, that is it.  Ewww, they’ve got the “cheese touch.”









						Cheese Touch
					

The Cheese Touch is a game mainly played at Westmore Middle School during Greg Heffley's first school year. It is the overarching antagonist of Diary of a Wimpy Kid and its movie adaptation and plays as one of the major antagonist in the online book despite it not being an actual character. If...




					diary-of-a-wimpy-kid.fandom.com


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> My understanding [and I could be wrong] was that she was using Al Fayed, the father, to annoy Charles and the BRF.  Al Fayed wanted an award and was refused, so he wanted to irritate the BRF, too. He “kindly” offered his villa/yacht/hotel to Diana. He “encouraged” his son, Dodi, to schmooze/court/woo Diana.  Dodi was still seeing an American model during that fateful summer.  She knew about Diana [photos were everywhere] but Diana did not know about her or so we are told.  Yep, a real soap opera.
> 
> Revenge is nothing to be trifled with.


She was using the Al Fayeds to annoy the RF - 100%!  By the same token, Al Fayed only bought the yacht specifically for Dodi to entice Diana and her boys to vacation with them. 

They were using each other, although I have no doubt that Diana would have ended it in the near future.  Al Fayed was desperate for his son to be in a relationship with Diana so that he could thumb his nose at the RF after they had rejected him (the British establishment and aristocracy) entry into their circle. 

 They denied him a British passport so he struck out at them and exposed them in his fury.  Having his son date the iconic Princess Diana was the ultimate revenge.  Even though they were only together for a short time, their tragic deaths will keep them linked together forever  

Obviously, it fit's Harrys victim status to keep mentioning Diana in order to keep him and his crazy wife relevant.


----------



## Icyjade

papertiger said:


> NY Post:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revealed for what she really is — a Kardashian
> 
> 
> Here comes another blow for the Duke and Duchess of Woke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Hmm… it’s an honor for her to be compared to a Kardashian. Whatever we may make of their (reality) lives, Kim K works darn hard for her fame, money and her body. She is a “pioneer” and I respect her for that. TW seems to just expect things to fall on her lap without doing anything and just seems to be a crummy person who cuts ties with all family (vs the Kardashians).


----------



## Chanbal

On the tunnels … they are disturbed.


----------



## Chanbal

On topic, Hazz is the one on the upper left corner.


----------



## muddledmint

Cinderlala said:


> Buzzard wishes she was a Kardashian.  They have money.  And, whether we like it or not, KimK changed the standards of beauty.  Buzzard would kill for that!
> 
> (I've decided that raptors are too magnificent to be used as a descriptor for her so I'm experimenting with others. I think I like Buzzard.)  (Collectively, I may call the pair Buz & Huz.)


Poor buzzards. It’s an an insult to any creature to be used as Meghan’s nickname. We should use something with no redeeming qualities, like “bedbug”


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I have to take issue with his statement. She definitely _should have worn her seatbelt_, that's a given. But she had a reasonable expectation of having a sober driver when she got in the car. She had ridden in limos for years and I doubt she ever thought she needed to check the breath of the drivers. That night she was hustled out with Dodi and put in the back of the car. The paparazzi were chasing them and driving recklessly alongside the limo in small cars (and I believe motorcycles) trying to get shots of the inside. Footage of the paps was played a lot in the weeks after the accident. Harry is milking his mother's death for sure, but I can't bring myself to blame Diana.
> 
> There is also the matter of the car involved in the Diana crash. I remember reading years back that it was in poor condition and I found an article about it. Despite experts saying it was not the cause of the crash, it should never have been on the road.
> 
> Diana's limousine 'was a death trap which had been crashed and repaired TWICE before - including being rolled 10 times by a prisoner out on remand'​A chauffeur tried desperately to warn the limousine company that the car Diana was driven in was dangerous - and says the news of the fateful night still haunts him two decades after her death.
> 
> Karim Kazi, now a successful businessman, tried to tell the owners of Etoile Limousines that the Mercedes S-280 was 'unpredictable', but was ignored.
> 
> Earlier this year, it emerged that the car has been 'totalled' at least once before Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed were passengers in 1997.
> 
> Pascal Rostain, a Paris photographer, told a French radio station that the 'hugely dangerous' car had been stolen and driven into the ground earlier in the year.
> 
> 'This Ritz car was a wreck. It had crashed before, and been rolled over several times,' he said.
> 
> The car was ready to be broken up, but permission was then given to 're-make' it, the photographer claimed.
> 
> Now one of the company's former drivers, Mr Kazi, has confirmed this, and said the car had been totalled before then as well.
> 
> Mr Kazi told the Mirror: 'The car's steering was not safe. I started pointing out faults with the Mercedes in early 1997, before Diana died. For me, it was a car that did not work very well.
> 
> He said that he believed the car was 'an accident waiting to happen' after it was rolled 'up to 10 times' at 100mph by a prisoner out on remand and written off by the insurance company.
> 
> He added: 'There was something very wrong with it. When the car sped up, it would lose control. There was no dynamic control, it was certainly risky if driven at more than 60km/h (37mph).
> 
> 'Now that the history of the car has come out, it is clear my fears were correct.'
> 
> Mr Rostain identified Karim earlier this year and said he had told the bosses at the limo company to sell the car.
> 
> Eric Bousquet said he bought the €85,000 car new in September 1994 when he was a 'young advertising executive'.
> 
> Three months later, in January 1995, a prisoner out on remand stole the car, and took it on a joyride in the Paris suburbs.
> 
> Travelling at speeds of up to 100mph in country lanes, the escapee rolled the two tonne Mercedes around a dozen times, so it ended up on its roof in a field.
> 
> The car was considered to be a write-off, and according to Mr Bousquet 'the insurance refunded me the price I paid for it, because it was pretty much new, considering it was a destroyed car, non repairable.
> 
> The car was condemned as scrap, but finally recovered by a mechanic who repaired it and then resold it to Etoile Limousines.
> 
> Neils Siegel, who worked for the company at the time, said he bought the Mercedes for €40,000, but refused to discuss claims that it was not road worthy.
> 
> The M6 programme carried out a crash test on the same model of Mercedes, and a technical expert said it 'should not have remained on the road', despite being re-built.
> 
> It was 'not reparable' and 'dangerous', the expert added, as he offered a view that was supported by insurance brokers.
> 
> The current owner of the Mercedes is Jean-Francois Musa, 58, the former boss of Etoile Limousines.
> 
> A Scotland Yard investigation into conspiracy theories about Diana's death, led by former Metropolitan Police commissioner Lord Stevens, reported that experts found no problems with the vehicle.
> 
> His report, published in 2006, concluded: 'Both the French and British examinations of the Mercedes have shown that there were no mechanical issues with the car that could have in any way caused or contributed to the crash.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana's limousine 'was death trap which had crashed TWICE before'
> 
> 
> The Mercedes that Diana and Dodi Fayed were driven in the night of their deaths in Paris was 'unpredictable' according to a former chauffeur for the company who warned bosses about the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The whole saga starts with Diana notifying the paps that she would be in France with a new BF... in order to make the old BF jealous.

We all know celebs can disappear when they want, even Diana. She wanted the paps attention and unfortunately she got it.

Posted this without continuing to read and just saw that Toby93 pretty much said the same thing!


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> Well the PS to erase years, ethnic features, etc is not cheap


It will all be worth it when he finally looks like a WII sports character



jennlt said:


> Teddy Did anyone else notice this in the comments? I don't remember hearing that someone found a possible birth certificate in Colorado.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5579280




It finally came to me … he no longer has the dark circles around his eyes


marietouchet said:


> I could never figure if those were added or he was born with them


I have them too very common with ME people or olive skin in general. Can’t work out what to do with them so just embracing my heritage    



EverSoElusive said:


> They must be seeing the same plastic surgeon


He must be easy to get an appointment as I doubt he has a lot of other clients. It’s just them and Jocelyn Wildestein. 


Chanbal said:


> Would this be true?



I know some people take all-comers but the problem with this idea she slept with everyone is we have to believe everyone would want to sleep with her.

Wouldn’t a person wake up in the morning, see her weave peeking out from the covers and think they are about to be savaged by a giant rat? 

Mh.


QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I dunno, I can see her blackmailing them with a pregnancy+shotgun wedding but this makes no sense for 2 reasons:-
1. There’s already plenty of evidence against Andrew and sweet zilch has been done about it as the royals just used their powers to halt it so why fear her over all the other witnesses?
2. Why would you bring an incriminating witness into your personal association and massively expand her platform by tying her legally to your family? 
I mean, wouldn’t it be easier to get M15 or black ops to spike her cocaine while she’s still some Z list H is banging and then write it off as a tragic overdose? Give H years of tabloid material with his ‘tragic lost love’ story line and patronage of a drug charity. 


bag-mania said:


> I have to take issue with his statement. She definitely _should have worn her seatbelt_, that's a given. But she had a reasonable expectation of having a sober driver when she got in the car. She had ridden in limos for years and I doubt she ever thought she needed to check the breath of the drivers. That night she was hustled out with Dodi and put in the back of the car. The paparazzi were chasing them and driving recklessly alongside the limo in small cars (and I believe motorcycles) trying to get shots of the inside. Footage of the paps was played a lot in the weeks after the accident. Harry is milking his mother's death for sure, but I can't bring myself to blame Diana.
> 
> There is also the matter of the car involved in the Diana crash. I remember reading years back that it was in poor condition and I found an article about it. Despite experts saying it was not the cause of the crash, it should never have been on the road.
> 
> Diana's limousine 'was a death trap which had been crashed and repaired TWICE before - including being rolled 10 times by a prisoner out on remand'​A chauffeur tried desperately to warn the limousine company that the car Diana was driven in was dangerous - and says the news of the fateful night still haunts him two decades after her death.
> 
> Karim Kazi, now a successful businessman, tried to tell the owners of Etoile Limousines that the Mercedes S-280 was 'unpredictable', but was ignored.
> 
> Earlier this year, it emerged that the car has been 'totalled' at least once before Diana and her lover Dodi Fayed were passengers in 1997.
> 
> Pascal Rostain, a Paris photographer, told a French radio station that the 'hugely dangerous' car had been stolen and driven into the ground earlier in the year.
> 
> 'This Ritz car was a wreck. It had crashed before, and been rolled over several times,' he said.
> 
> The car was ready to be broken up, but permission was then given to 're-make' it, the photographer claimed.
> 
> Now one of the company's former drivers, Mr Kazi, has confirmed this, and said the car had been totalled before then as well.
> 
> Mr Kazi told the Mirror: 'The car's steering was not safe. I started pointing out faults with the Mercedes in early 1997, before Diana died. For me, it was a car that did not work very well.
> 
> He said that he believed the car was 'an accident waiting to happen' after it was rolled 'up to 10 times' at 100mph by a prisoner out on remand and written off by the insurance company.
> 
> He added: 'There was something very wrong with it. When the car sped up, it would lose control. There was no dynamic control, it was certainly risky if driven at more than 60km/h (37mph).
> 
> 'Now that the history of the car has come out, it is clear my fears were correct.'
> 
> Mr Rostain identified Karim earlier this year and said he had told the bosses at the limo company to sell the car.
> 
> Eric Bousquet said he bought the €85,000 car new in September 1994 when he was a 'young advertising executive'.
> 
> Three months later, in January 1995, a prisoner out on remand stole the car, and took it on a joyride in the Paris suburbs.
> 
> Travelling at speeds of up to 100mph in country lanes, the escapee rolled the two tonne Mercedes around a dozen times, so it ended up on its roof in a field.
> 
> The car was considered to be a write-off, and according to Mr Bousquet 'the insurance refunded me the price I paid for it, because it was pretty much new, considering it was a destroyed car, non repairable.
> 
> The car was condemned as scrap, but finally recovered by a mechanic who repaired it and then resold it to Etoile Limousines.
> 
> Neils Siegel, who worked for the company at the time, said he bought the Mercedes for €40,000, but refused to discuss claims that it was not road worthy.
> 
> The M6 programme carried out a crash test on the same model of Mercedes, and a technical expert said it 'should not have remained on the road', despite being re-built.
> 
> It was 'not reparable' and 'dangerous', the expert added, as he offered a view that was supported by insurance brokers.
> 
> The current owner of the Mercedes is Jean-Francois Musa, 58, the former boss of Etoile Limousines.
> 
> A Scotland Yard investigation into conspiracy theories about Diana's death, led by former Metropolitan Police commissioner Lord Stevens, reported that experts found no problems with the vehicle.
> 
> His report, published in 2006, concluded: 'Both the French and British examinations of the Mercedes have shown that there were no mechanical issues with the car that could have in any way caused or contributed to the crash.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana's limousine 'was death trap which had crashed TWICE before'
> 
> 
> The Mercedes that Diana and Dodi Fayed were driven in the night of their deaths in Paris was 'unpredictable' according to a former chauffeur for the company who warned bosses about the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yeah I don’t get this idea it’s somehow Di’s fault. It was an accident and no one person’s fault but surely greater responsibility falls on someone driving under the influence which is obviously morally wrong and illegal. 


bag-mania said:


> I believe they would take money from absolutely anyone who offered it (as long as they could hide that they did it). It's a good thing they are not privy to national security secrets.





tiktok said:


> maybe there’s a reason Harry is a dimwit. His genes apparently weren’t promising to begin with. I mean, can you be any stupider than Charles? I wonder how many of these stories will appear in Harry’s biography:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles agreed to take £1m from family of  Osama Bin Laden
> 
> 
> Charles' is understood to have accepted the payment from Bakr bin Laden, head of the family, and his brother Shafiq - both half-brothers of 9/11 mastermind Osama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





bag-mania said:


> Yes and people don’t realize the bin Laden family is enormous, numbering in the hundreds. By himself Mohammad bin Laden (Osama’s father) fathered 54 children with 20 women. I believe Osama was pretty much disowned by the family in the 90s.
> 
> It gives Elon Musk and his father something to aspire to for sure.
> 
> That said, nobody is EVER going to say that Prince Charles is known for his wisdom and good judgment.


Yes unlike Prince Charles who is privy to national secrets and just takes money from other nationalities of Oligarchs and extremely dodgy political families. 

Is the nationality Russian doing all the heavy lifting for moral ambiguity here?


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> I couldn't have said it better
> 
> View attachment 5581951



Well I did say it! 

About 2000 pages ago


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I don’t get this idea it’s somehow Di’s fault. It was an accident and no one person’s fault but surely greater responsibility falls on someone driving under the influence which is obviously morally wrong and illegal.



To be fair he wasn't trying to blame her as much as ridiculing Harry's idea she was murdered, if by paps or the BRF.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> The whole saga starts with Diana notifying the paps that she would be in France with a new BF... in order to make the old BF jealous.
> 
> We all know celebs can disappear when they want, even Diana. She wanted the paps attention and unfortunately she got it.
> 
> Posted this without continuing to read and just saw that Toby93 pretty much said the same thing!



When you think about it they are both on a hiding to nothing:

H will _never_ get his mother back, however hard he cries, all he seems to inherited from her is her gullibility and susceptibility  to paranoia (both of which which contributed to the circumstances of her death IMO)

M will never be good enough for her mum. She was her daddy's little princess without having to try, but she was obviously superfluous to her mother's life. All she inherited from her mother is her ability to run away from real life - and herself (again and again and again.)

Until the TB book, I didn't actually know that M's mother left for 10 years. Lots of you said it, but I just didn't take it in. What does it do to a child when a parent just - leaves? Just leaves YOU. My cat's 11, I've never even put him in a cattery, never left him with strangers. I take him on the train to the other side of the country (and when I had 2 for 10 years, the same thing). Not Doria blaming, who knows what went on in the marriage or what her story is, but I just can't imagine leaving my child - for years. 

No wonder they are so needy. 

I was also amazed ay the $45K fees per year at Northwestern   No wonder you guys in the US set up collage funds early. (It's variable, but International students pay approx half that in the UK, home students less).


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> My understanding [and I could be wrong] was that she was using Al Fayed, the father, to annoy Charles and the BRF.  *Al Fayed wanted an* *award and was refused*, so he wanted to irritate the BRF, too. He “kindly” offered his villa/yacht/hotel to Diana. He “encouraged” his son, Dodi, to schmooze/court/woo Diana. Dodi was still seeing an American model during that fateful summer. She knew about Diana [photos were everywhere] but Diana did not know about her or so we are told. Yep, a real soap opera.
> 
> Revenge is nothing to be trifled with.



Al Fayed also wanted British citizenship and it was also refused.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> He wanted citizenship, he thought he could buy it, he never got it.


Oops, I just posted this before seeing your post


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> It will all be worth it when he finally looks like a WII sports character
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It finally came to me … he no longer has the dark circles around his eyes
> 
> I have them too very common with ME people or olive skin in general. Can’t work out what to do with them so just embracing my heritage
> 
> 
> He must be easy to get an appointment as I doubt he has a lot of other clients. It’s just them and Jocelyn Wildestein.
> 
> I know some people take all-comers but the problem with this idea she slept with everyone is we have to believe everyone would want to sleep with her.
> 
> Wouldn’t a person wake up in the morning, see her weave peeking out from the covers and think they are about to be savaged by a giant rat?
> 
> Mh.
> 
> I dunno, I can see her blackmailing them with a pregnancy+shotgun wedding but this makes no sense for 2 reasons:-
> 1. There’s already plenty of evidence against Andrew and sweet zilch has been done about it as the royals just used their powers to halt it so why fear her over all the other witnesses?
> 2. Why would you bring an incriminating witness into your personal association and massively expand her platform by tying her legally to your family?
> I mean, wouldn’t it be easier to get M15 or black ops to spike her cocaine while she’s still some Z list H is banging and then write it off as a tragic overdose? Give H years of tabloid material with his ‘tragic lost love’ story line and patronage of a drug charity.
> 
> Yeah I don’t get this idea it’s somehow Di’s fault. It was an accident and no one person’s fault but surely greater responsibility falls on someone driving under the influence which is obviously morally wrong and illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes unlike Prince Charles who is privy to national secrets and just takes money from other nationalities of Oligarchs and extremely dodgy political families.
> 
> Is the nationality Russian doing all the heavy lifting for moral ambiguity here?




Russians are always cast as villains  


Russian oligarchs probably have better things to do atm than befriend this couple of nit-wits who have jumped the Royal ship in a pleather dingy with no moral compass.


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> Oops, I just posted this before seeing your post,



 

No worries


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> My cat's 11, I've never even put him in a cattery, never left him with strangers. I take him on the train to the other side of the country (and when I had 2 for 10 years, the same thing). Not Doria blaming, who knows what went on in the marriage or what her story is, but I just can't imagine leaving my child - for years.



Right. I barely left the house for several years when I had my handicapped cat. I would have never left him to go on vacation because he wouldn't have understood (I have no problems leaving a healthy animal, they'll cope just fine). The one time we were seperated for a whole 10 days was when I had to go to the ICU as an emergency.

That said, I do blame parents like Doria and I'm not sorry. I don't care what their story is or how that marriage was going, they're the adult and the child's a child. Deal with your issues appropriately. 

Then again, many people have difficult childhoods (and l do think there are worse things than a doting single parent with sufficient funds) and most don't turn out complete psychos who claw their way to the top not caring how many other people are destroyed on the way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW in the mornings I come here as a treat after my work-out. At this point I wonder if it's too hard earned


----------



## EmilyM11

papertiger said:


> When you think about it they are both on a hiding to nothing:
> 
> H will _never_ get his mother back, however hard he cries, all he seems to inherited from her is her gullibility and susceptibility  to paranoia (both of which which contributed to the circumstances of her death IMO)
> 
> M will never be good enough for her mum. She was her daddy's little princess without having to try, but she was obviously superfluous to her mother's life. All she inherited from her mother is her ability to run away from real life - and herself (again and again and again.)
> 
> Until the TB book, I didn't actually know that M's mother left for 10 years. Lots of you said it, but I just didn't take it in. What does it do to a child when a parent just - leaves? Just leaves YOU. My cat's 11, I've never even put him in a cattery, never left him with strangers. I take him on the train to the other side of the country (and when I had 2 for 10 years, the same thing). Not Doria blaming, who knows what went on in the marriage or what her story is, but I just can't imagine leaving my child - for years.
> 
> No wonder they are so needy.
> 
> I was also amazed ay the $45K fees per year at Northwestern   No wonder you guys in the US set up collage funds early. (It's variable, but International students pay approx half that in the UK, home students less).


It's very interesting and aligning what my counsellor told me. He claimed that being unimportant to a parent (which demonstrates in various ways, eg. through total lack of interest or abandonment) can turn into extreme, damaging crave for being important later in life. That can lead to addictions, very poor relationships, getting attention through playing a victim etc. I'm not a psychologist but she does have a crazy, desperate thirst for attention as if there is a void in her, she can't fill.


----------



## papertiger

EmilyM111 said:


> It's very interesting and aligning what my counsellor told me. He claimed that being unimportant to a parent (which demonstrates in various ways, eg. through total lack of interest or abandonment) can turn into extreme, damaging crave for being important later in life. That can lead to addictions, very poor relationships, getting attention through playing a victim etc. I'm not a psychologist but she does have a crazy, desperate thirst for attention as if there is a void in her, she can't fill.



I think it can either way too. My sister tried to get my father's attention by staying out very late, not coming home or going to school and being 'naughty'. Prob for the same reason, I tried to be perfect in many ways, obtain the highest grades and reach unachievable goals. IMO, extreme behaviours in children (and adults) are often provoked from extreme parental behaviour. 

They both can't fill those voids, it will always be everyone else's fault (whatever happens) they will both never been happy. Even when they get more than anyone else on the planet or get what they say they want. 

Whatever her father gave her growing-up, waaaay over-compensating for her mother not being there, he couldn't bring back her mother. She's got Harry trying to do the same thing IMO. 

Whatever Charles did for Harry, he could never replace Diana. M can try to cos-play and imitate his mother as much as she can but sooner or later she's gonna get sick of it. 

M is also the one that disappears in puff of smoke (history repeating) and H is the one left behind in his relationships. Doesn't bode well for the future.

Sorry to any of you that may have said this like a 1000 x already. The penny just dropped for me, I'm just getting it now


----------



## EmilyM11

My counsellor runs a podcast (in Polish though, so can't recommend) and discusses various movies and tv series as his PhD was in counselling through experiencing movies (or something like that). He discussed once 'Inventing Anna' and whilst admitting her narcissistic behaviours also pointed at how other (narcissistic) people were using Anna for personal gain or/and to experience importance. It's interesting for me as I read similar thing in the Bower's book - when 'new' friends of Meghan (who previously wouldn't bother to acknowledge her pre-Harry) were bathing in her fame and receiving endorsements, follow ups or better deals after partying with M. I actually feel sorry for her in that respect (I know I shouldn't but still).


----------



## EverSoElusive

Currently in a Lyft ride headed to work and the radio DJ is announcing today's birthday (August 4th) and she said:

Happy birthday, Meghan Markle, the *FORMER* *Duchess of Sussex*

Z-list would have been pissed if she heard it


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> The "six security breaches" were probably six false alarms from their security system when a gardener or staff member opened a door without entering the proper code.  So, the security stuff is just more PR fluff put out to make them seem more important.  If actually true, which I doubt, that she has escape tunnels and body doubles lol, it's a way to keep Harry on edge all the time and worried about her which garners her attention from him and keeps him in protective mode.



We got their number on the whole security thing. Let's not even try to join them in one of their psychotic episodes down on funny farm. 

They need 24/7 high level security because:

1. Their paranoia 
2. Their status (as others should perceive)
3. Their status abroad (so state's / countries can pay wherever they go)
4. Harry isn't used to not being protected 24/7
5. M likes to play 'Queen' and Diana in turn
6.  Cos they deserve it 
7.  telling the little people to keep away
8. The £$£$£$£$ it costs 
9.  Coz they deserve it, gd darn it!!!!!
10 The intelligence they can get on all others


----------



## Chanbal

More PR, QE is not off limits…








						Queen snubs Harry: says Charles, William continue Philip's climate legacy
					

In a message to a religious conference, the queen called the environment a cause "close to the heart" of Philip, "carried on" by William and Charles.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Chanbal

The celebrations have started… 









						Meghan Markle's year in fashion as she celebrates 41st birthday
					

Meghan Markle has had a show-stopping year in fashion, from a vaccine equality concert to the Platinum Jubilee celebrations of Queen Elizabeth II.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## papertiger

EmilyM111 said:


> My counsellor runs a podcast (in Polish though, so can't recommend) and discusses various movies and tv series as his PhD was in counselling through experiencing movies (or something like that). He discussed once 'Inventing Anna' and whilst admitting her narcissistic behaviours also pointed at how other (narcissistic) people were using Anna for personal gain or/and to experience importance. It's interesting for me as I read similar thing in the Bower's book - when 'new' friends of Meghan (who previously wouldn't bother to acknowledge her pre-Harry) were bathing in her fame and receiving endorsements, follow ups or better deals after partying with M. I actually feel sorry for her in that respect (I know I shouldn't but still).



It's interesting on the one hand the American dream has been sold as coming from 'nothing' and becoming Mr.Mrs President/ Elon Musk. On the other hand, the real life story of Anna Sorokin's is a hate fest. The tale that you can magically become a billionaire or the most influential person on the planet without losing your mind, soul or your heart in an honest, wholesome way has always been a marketing ploy to me.

There are a million videos of how to look/dress/behave/be like 'old money' on YT. That's without all the self-help vids in-between. Finding oneself (by emulating) metamorphosis (into becoming the best you) and self-help generally involves the impossible promises, the promise of being brilliantly successful, obtaining thin/enviable physique, looking young forever, 'winning friends and influencing people' and never having to work again. 

I agree with your last statement, but that's what M has always wanted. She doesn't mind if and why people are nice to her or feign  respect, so long as they do. She 100% imitates and emulates, projecting emotions outwardly-only on all occasions, why would we even think it possible that she supposes some people actually have genuine feelings, tastes, likes and dislikes concerning others? Everything is calculated for her own advantage, always has been, even with her family. My guess is she expects no less, no more from others, so long as they play the game her way. Don't feel sorry for her. She's where she always wanted to be - for now.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW in the mornings I come here as a treat after my work-out. At this point I wonder if it's too hard earned


Me too! While I use my Nuface device!


----------



## EmilyM11

papertiger said:


> It's interesting on the one hand the American dream has been sold as coming from 'nothing' and becoming Mr.Mrs President/ Elon Musk. On the other hand, the real life story of Anna Sorokin's is a hate fest. The tale that you can magically become a billionaire or the most influential person on the planet without losing your mind, soul or your heart in an honest, wholesome way has always been a marketing ploy to me.
> 
> There are a million videos of how to look/dress/behave/be like 'old money' on YT. That's without all the self-help vids in-between. Finding oneself (by emulating) metamorphosis (into becoming the best you) and self-help generally involves the impossible promises, the promise of being brilliantly successful, obtaining thin/enviable physique, looking young forever, 'winning friends and influencing people' and never having to work again.
> 
> I agree with your last statement, but that's what M has always wanted. She doesn't mind if and why people are nice to her or feign  respect, so long as they do. She 100% imitates and emulates, projecting emotions outwardly-only on all occasions, why would we even think it possible that she supposes some people actually have genuine feelings, tastes, likes and dislikes concerning others? Everything is calculated for her own advantage, always has been, even with her family. My guess is she expects no less, no more from others, so long as they play the game her way. Don't feel sorry for her. She's where she always wanted to be -* for now*.


That's very well said. However, I think she doesn't calculate - at least not the way you described. She's not intelligent, probably it's some instinct. If she calculated, she wouldn't be markling people and would be always ahead of the game - she clearly isn't and people taking advantage of her (mutually I mean) might be a song of the past. Today they have nothing to offer to anyone important.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> I think it can either way too. My sister tried to get my father's attention by staying out very late, not coming home or going to school and being 'naughty'. Prob for the same reason, I tried to be perfect in many ways, obtain the highest grades and reach unachievable goals. IMO, extreme behaviours in children (and adults) are often provoked from extreme parental behaviour.
> 
> They both can't fill those voids, it will always be everyone else's fault (whatever happens) they will both never been happy. Even when they get more than anyone else on the planet or get what they say they want.
> 
> Whatever her father gave her growing-up, waaaay over-compensating for her mother not being there, he couldn't bring back her mother. She's got Harry trying to do the same thing IMO.
> 
> Whatever Charles did for Harry, he could never replace Diana. M can try to cos-play and imitate his mother as much as she can but sooner or later she's gonna get sick of it.
> 
> M is also the one that disappears in puff of smoke (history repeating) and H is the one left behind in his relationships. Doesn't bode well for the future.
> 
> Sorry to any of you that may have said this like a 1000 x already. The penny just dropped for me, I'm just getting it now


Just occurred to me when H said that he and the Queen hve a special relationship and talk about things that they wouldn’t talk about with anyone else, those things might include: 
granny, can we be on the balcony during jubilee
no harry
can we have extra security/cashallowance/invites to balmoreal 
no Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

EmilyM111 said:


> That's very well said. However, I think she doesn't calculate - at least not the way you described. She's not intelligent, probably it's some instinct. If she calculated, she wouldn't be markling people and would be always ahead of the game - she clearly isn't and people taking advantage of her (mutually I mean) might be a song of the past. Today they have nothing to offer to anyone important.



I thought that - until I read TB's book. I think she's intelligent (at least more so that H-dim-wit) but very lazy in many ways. She is only interested in herself - which makes it hard for her to learn about anything outside herself. Self-advancement is her specialist subject though. First-hand accounts in Bower's book, of just how calculating (and expendable) people in her life/career were once she didn't need them anymore or they wouldn't play ball with increasingly 'grey-area' demands. Had her plan to ensnare not worked, she would have moved onto someone/something else. The only thing she doesn't do is negativity. 

When I say lazy, I don't mean she's not capable of doing stuff. I mean She reminds me of one of those students that doesn't read the brief, doesn't answer the brief, doesn't go to any classes, plagiarises the assignment or commissions one, fails the assignment - but them spends every minute of the following 3 weeks writing (and getting his/her parents lawyers)  to every possible person threatening their livelihood, 'proving' how s/he should have been excused/had mit circs/was hard done by/unit badly run blah blah.


----------



## DoggieBags

She seems to be trying to duplicate the perks and trappings of royalty while ignoring all the drudgery that goes along with it without understanding how much all of that costs or how it all works. And I’m sure Harry’s no help since he was never involved in the budgeting process for the entire support infrastructure for the BRF. His aides probably took care of everything. Want a prime table at the hottest restaurant in town, tell an aide to fix it. Transportation, security, property maintenance, all done by employees without any effort on his or her part. People to meet them and whisk them past all the lines at the airports, chauffeur driven car waiting outside without them having to wait, all the local notables gathered there to greet them at various events and on and on. She now has to find all the aides capable of recreating this on her own or maybe she dumps this all on her business manager but she and Harry are now responsible for paying for all of this and they’re actually seeing how much it all actually costs. When they were budgeting what Megxit would actually cost them I wonder how realistic their budget actually was. Or maybe they didn’t budget at all and assumed Prince Charles would continue to pay for everything since they initially offered to be part-time royals. Their income stream doesn’t appear to be anywhere near what they expected but they don’t seem to be willing or able to retrench on their expenses. I’ve said it before but the longer this charade goes on, I wonder more and more who is actually paying for all this?


----------



## papertiger

Please all, esp US citizens take note of TRG  (The Royal Grift) comments (YT) in her critique of Bower's book. Most importantly, C6 'The Cracks'.

I'm sure we have some differences in politics, but s/he is spot-on in her understanding of what protected status could mean regards security.

1. H&M can have access to MI5/6 intelligence ('she' (I don't know whether TRG is a she) says Scotland Yard) but also CIA's in the States and whichever/whosever intelligence elsewhere.
2. The US will have to pay and police the couple's security whilst in the US.
3. MM will have protected person status for life, even if they separate or get a divorce
4. They will have immunity from US justice (think about that, not just financial 'irregularities' but also criminal and civil charges - how do you sue someone that cannot be forced to abide by a court of law?)
5 It can cost up to $28 (2020 Interior International) for their security. In the US that's what you'll pay in your tax. In Canada, that's what you'll pay etc.
6. These won't be PIs and bodyguards, your security, military and police will redeployed to protect them.

I believe Harry must still be on a diplomatic passport otherwise how is he still living in the US (without a Green card, without trips abroad every few moths, without citizenship)? This protected status will make them untouchable as well as unreachable.

The status and privileges  that Harry wants returned to him and his family were never designed for a family that permanent lived overseas.

Edited to say that's $28M not $28 FYI


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> She seems to be trying to duplicate the perks and trappings of royalty while ignoring all the drudgery that goes along with it without understanding how much all of that costs or how it all works. And I’m sure Harry’s no help since he was never involved in the budgeting process for the entire support infrastructure for the BRF. His aides probably took care of everything. Want a prime table at the hottest restaurant in town, tell an aide to fix it. Transportation, security, property maintenance, all done by employees without any effort on his or her part. People to meet them and whisk them past all the lines at the airports, chauffeur driven car waiting outside without them having to wait, all the local notables gathered there to greet them at various events and on and on. She now has to find all the aides capable of recreating this on her own or maybe she dumps this all on her business manager but she and Harry are now responsible for paying for all of this and they’re actually seeing how much it all actually costs. When they were budgeting what Megxit would actually cost them I wonder how realistic their budget actually was. Or maybe they didn’t budget at all and assumed Prince Charles would continue to pay for everything since they initially offered to be part-time royals. Their income stream doesn’t appear to be anywhere near what they expected but they don’t seem to be willing or able to retrench on their expenses. I’ve said it before but the longer this charade goes on, I wonder more and more who is actually paying for all this?



Both of them have never really had to pay for anything out of their own pocket in their lives. It must be a shock that spender, lux and privileges don't come for free.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> My cat's 11, I've never even put him in a cattery, never left him with strangers. I take him on the train to the other side of the country (and when I had 2 for 10 years, the same thing). Not Doria blaming, who knows what went on in the marriage or what her story is, but I just can't imagine leaving my child - for years.


I cat-sit my son's cat and she has a lovely vacation in her second home, with me here a lot more than he is when he's home.  lol


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> Please all, esp US citizens take note of TRG  (The Royal Grift) comments (YT) in her critique of Bower's book. Most importantly, C6 'The Cracks'.
> 
> I'm sure we have some differences in politics, but s/he is spot-on in her understanding of what protected status could mean regards security.
> 
> 1. H&M can have access to MI5/6 intelligence ('she' (I don't know whether TRG is a she) says Scotland Yard) but also CIA's in the States and whichever/whosever intelligence elsewhere.
> 2. The US will have to pay and police the couple's security whilst in the US.
> 3. MM will have protected person status for life, even if they separate or get a divorce
> 4. They will have immunity from US justice (think about that, not just financial 'irregularities' but also criminal charges - how do you sue someone that cannot be forced to abide by a court of law?)
> 5 It can cost up to $28 (2020 Interior International) for their security. In the US that's what you'll pay in your tax. In Canada, that's what you'll pay etc.
> 6. These won't be PIs and bodyguards, your security will redeployed to protect them.
> 
> I believe Harry must still be on a diplomatic passport otherwise how is he still living in the US (without a Green card, without trips abroad every few moths, without citizenship)? This protected status will make them untouchable as well as unreachable.
> 
> The status and privileges  that Harry wants returned to him and his family were never designed for a family that permanent lived overseas.
> 
> Edited to say that's $28M not $28 FYI


I’ve been wondering why Harry is apparently still on a diplomatic passport. But I guess the precedent was set by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor who I assume remained on diplomatic passports at least during his entire life after his abdication. Although in the Duke of Windsor’s case he was a former king whereas Harry is only 6th in line.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I’ve been wondering why Harry is apparently still on a diplomatic passport. But I guess the precedent was set by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor who I assume remained on diplomatic passports at least during his entire life after his abdication. Although in the Duke of Windsor’s case he was a former king whereas Harry is only 6th in line.



I guess no one wants an international incident/embarrassment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

For MM [wonder if she hates being reminded she is *41 *heeheee]


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Please all, esp US citizens take note of TRG  (The Royal Grift) comments (YT) in her critique of Bower's book. Most importantly, C6 'The Cracks'.
> 
> I'm sure we have some differences in politics, but s/he is spot-on in her understanding of what protected status could mean regards security.
> 
> 1. H&M can have access to MI5/6 intelligence ('she' (I don't know whether TRG is a she) says Scotland Yard) but also CIA's in the States and whichever/whosever intelligence elsewhere.
> 2. The US will have to pay and police the couple's security whilst in the US.
> 3. MM will have protected person status for life, even if they separate or get a divorce
> 4. They will have immunity from US justice (think about that, not just financial 'irregularities' but also criminal charges - how do you sue someone that cannot be forced to abide by a court of law?)
> 5 It can cost up to $28 (2020 Interior International) for their security. In the US that's what you'll pay in your tax. In Canada, that's what you'll pay etc.
> 6. These won't be PIs and bodyguards, your security will redeployed to protect them.
> 
> I believe Harry must still be on a diplomatic passport otherwise how is he still living in the US (without a Green card, without trips abroad every few moths, without citizenship)? This protected status will make them untouchable as well as unreachable.
> 
> The status and privileges  that Harry wants returned to him and his family were never designed for a family that permanent lived overseas.
> 
> Edited to say that's $28M not $28 FYI


I said a while ago that the reason he wants protected status is to get access to intelligence, probably for his book.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Me too! While I use my Nuface device!


How do you like it? (the Nuface)


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> Oh, and the velociraptor was definitely smarter!    And less dramatic.


And less cold blooded.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> How do you like it? (the Nuface)


I love it, but you have to use it daily, or close to it.


----------



## charlottawill

I heard a good quote this morning on Today, where the mother of Gabby Petitto was being interviewed about her murder by her abusive boyfriend. Sound familiar? 

"Narcissists rewrite history to escape accountability."


----------



## youngster

pukasonqo said:


> I am surprised she didn’t mention the death of Nichelle Nichols, she is considered a trail blazer for African American women in film and TV: she played a lieutenant, an equal to the motley intergalactic officers in a time when most African American actresses played maids, sultry temptresses or any other stereotyped role
> Plus MLK supported and encouraged her when she wanted to give up the role
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Martin Luther King Jr taught Star Trek actor Nichelle Nichols about representation
> 
> 
> Nichelle Nichols was about to quit Star Trek in the 1960s when a chance encounter with Martin Luther King Jr changed the course of her life and set an example of representation for black women all over the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sbs.com.au



Totally off topic, but I loved Nichelle Nichols.  Watched those Star Trek re-runs endlessly in the 70's.  She was so lovely, a good actress, and a fabulous role model.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Russians are always cast as villains
> 
> 
> *Russian oligarchs probably have better things to do atm than befriend this couple of nit-wits* who have jumped the Royal ship in a pleather dingy with no moral compass.


You would think so. I don't know much about Russian oligarchs. Every individual has their personal motives to do anything though. Who's to say whether there isn't some rich, high status Russian out there who would like to toy with the British Royal Family? Weirder things have happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> You would think so. I don't know much about Russian oligarchs. Every individual has their personal motives to do anything though. Who's to say whether there isn't some rich, high status Russian out there who would like to toy with the British Royal Family? Weirder things have happened.



The same could be said of anyone of any nationality. Not only are these 2 thirsty, but also desperate of money and attention with very little in the way of options left. 

At this point, it should be clear the BRF minus H&M have put a ring of fire around themselves of which the un-hinged cannot cross. These 2 seem to be outside, in exile and estranged. Rich people want to buy their way up the chain of power, not down it.


----------



## purseinsanity

It's 9:34 am California (TW) time and People Magazine hasn't mentioned a word yet that it's her birthday!  Is a new dawn coming?!


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> Until the TB book, I didn't actually know that M's mother left for 10 years. Lots of you said it, but I just didn't take it in. What does it do to a child when a parent just - leaves? Just leaves YOU. My cat's 11, I've never even put him in a cattery, never left him with strangers. I take him on the train to the other side of the country (and when I had 2 for 10 years, the same thing). Not Doria blaming, who knows what went on in the marriage or what her story is, but I just can't imagine leaving my child - for years.
> 
> No wonder they are so needy.


I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.

I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.

I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).

Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms. 

Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
*"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it


----------



## csshopper

The simplest acknowledgment possible, but Prince Charles and Camilla and William and Kate posted a Birthday greeting to Raptor, once again demonstrating their *class*.

That’s the opposite of the *crass* Hazbeen and TW routinely exhibit by deliberately ignoring other family birthdays.

If this sounds contradictory to my first statement so be it, but personally I hope the Queen focuses on remembering her Mum, also born on August 4th and ignores Malignant’s. MM is the root evil of so much of the pain the Queen has had to endure. IMO MM does not deserve to be celebrated by her.

Interesting Raptor’s 40th turned out to have been one of her most significant years as it marked a well documented exposure of the true diabolical nature that drives her actions. So many of the 1000+ reviews on Amazon of Bower’ s book cite the shifting feelings downward towards her as more is revealed. She’s on a slippery slope entering #41. if only it led to oblivion.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> So many of the 1000+ reviews on Amazon of Bower’ s book cite the shifting feelings downward towards her as more is revealed. She’s on a slippery slope entering #41. if only it led to oblivion.


Raptor’s greatest fear should be that her sugars are gradually losing interest in her and moving on to other celebrities. She may always have a small, rabid core of fans who will defend her no matter what. That’s not going to be enough for her though. 

She peaked in popularity the year of the wedding. There’s no place to go from there but down.


----------



## EverSoElusive

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it



OT.... Sorry mods!

@jennlt I'm so sorry to hear about your childhood and abusive elders   It made me cry (yeah I'm sensitive even when watching movies) reading your comment.

You deserved better. I am so glad that you made a better life for yourself and have a husband who's been with you 30+ years. 30+ years is very rare these days so respect! 

While this probably doesn't mean much, I hope you know that I personally enjoy having your company in this thread and you have my personal admiration. You're a strong woman and you're loved


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it



Well, it just goes to show how aware, strong-willed and resilient you are. You are probably more empathetic and caring now, avoiding repeating history. These 2 could learn a lot from someone like you. Their victimhood is the strongest conviction they have, as though nobody else had a difficult upbringing


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it





EverSoElusive said:


> OT.... Sorry mods!
> 
> @jennlt I'm so sorry to hear about your childhood and abusive elders   It made me cry (yeah I'm sensitive even when watching movies) reading your comment.
> 
> You deserved better. I am so glad that you made a better life for yourself and have a husband who's been with you 30+ years. 30+ years is very rare these days so respect!
> 
> While this probably doesn't mean much, I hope you know that I personally enjoy having your company in this thread and you have my personal admiration. You're a strong woman and you're loved


I’m just echoing @EverSoElusive.  I cry at tissue ads and your story made me well up.  Kudos to you for overcoming such a difficult childhood and having such resilience!  The success of your long marriage & your fur babies is proof of how much love you have inside despite missing out of it as a child.  So many of us here have stories that aren’t just rosy and materialistic.  Thank you for having the courage to share yours, and thank you so much for being a part of our community.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> It's 9:34 am California (TW) time and People Magazine hasn't mentioned a word yet that it's her birthday!  Is a new dawn coming?!



It'll be all over People tomorrow . . . the sweet gift that Archie and Lili made her, the beautiful party her husband threw her, the profound advice that she received from some of her oh-so-famous friends, the beautiful birthday cake that Harry personally baked her, and on and on.  Strategic photos to merch the cake and flowers and jewelry and probably even the paint and crayons that the kids used.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> It's 9:34 am California (TW) time and People Magazine hasn't mentioned a word yet that it's her birthday!  Is a new dawn coming?!


It’s the beginning of August. If the monthly payment was late to Sunshine Sachs we may have to wait a little while until the check clears.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> It'll be all over People tomorrow . . . the sweet gift that Archie and Lili made her, the beautiful party her husband threw her, the profound advice that she received from some of her oh-so-famous friends, the beautiful birthday cake that Harry personally baked her, and on and on.  Strategic photos to merch the cake and flowers and jewelry and probably even the paint and crayons that the kids used.


You think it's a good idea to put yourself in the news at the exact same time as the revenge book is out?  Normally one stays quiet and waits for the controversy to blow over, so as not to add to the story.  Like the Kardashians, sans big mouth Khloe.

Won't there be some discussions of the book and her 'look at me' birthday descriptions?


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it


​


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> It'll be all over People tomorrow . . . the sweet gift that Archie and Lili made her, the beautiful party her husband threw her, the profound advice that she received from some of her oh-so-famous friends, the beautiful birthday cake that Harry personally baked her, and on and on.  Strategic photos to merch the cake and flowers and jewelry and probably even the paint and crayons that the kids used.





bag-mania said:


> It’s the beginning of August. If the monthly payment was late to Sunshine Sachs we may have to wait a little while until the check clears.





Jayne1 said:


> You think it's a good idea to put yourself in the news at the exact same time as the revenge book is out?  Normally one stays quiet and waits for the controversy to blow over, so as not to add to the story.  Like the Kardashians, sans big mouth Khloe.
> 
> Won't there be some discussions of the book and her 'look at me' birthday descriptions?


I just had a huge piece of Laderach to celebrate TW's b-day.


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #7
					

On the one year anniversary of a project the alliterate one announced, it would be nice to have a reporter track how many of the 40 celebrit...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## bag-mania

So far she hasn’t completed anything she said she would. Netflix? Spotify? That girl empowerment group? Nada.

She can’t exactly hold other celebrities up to standards she’s incapable of achieving herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Raptor’s greatest fear should be that her sugars are gradually losing interest in her and moving on to other celebrities. She may always have a small, rabid core of fans who will defend her no matter what. That’s not going to be enough for her though.
> 
> She peaked in popularity the year of the wedding. There’s no place to go from there but down.



I have a really had time understanding how anyone could still be her fan and just ignore her rotten core...but then I remember Charles Manson and Ted Bundy had superfans and women who wanted to marry them.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Here’s snippets from the article as of four hours ago …

The Royal Family Instagram, representing the Queen, has yet to share a post for Meghan.

The Clarence House Instagram, representing Camilla and Charles, shared an Instagram Story wishing Meghan a happy birthday (which will disappear after 24 hours) and a permanent tweet. They included a balloon emoji for a touch of casualness but kept the message as simple as it can be: “Happy birthday to The Duchess of Sussex!”

Kate and William also gave Meghan an Instagram Story only rather than a permanent grid post. They also tweeted a tribute to her with the same message, which will stay up on their account. Their shoutout was also about as basic a birthday greeting as possible: “Wishing a happy birthday to The Duchess of Sussex!” 

The royals' birthday messages to Meghan today are their first public statement about her in months. They are concise, civil, and polite—make what you will of that. (For comparison, here's what they did last year: They also primarily did IG stories.)
It's possible that royal sources will discuss what the family did privately to celebrate Meghan's birthday in the coming days, of course. But details directly from the royals themselves aren't all too likely. Never complain, never explain is the family's longtime policy, after all.



> https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...yal-family-meghan-markle-birthday-posts-2022/
> 
> Kate Middleton, Prince William and the Royal Family's Statements on Meghan Markle's 41st Birthday Say a Lot​


----------



## CarryOn2020

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it



My dear kind one, you are not only a survivor, you have conquered so many struggles and have developed  exceptionally strong coping skills. This is so well written that I hope every parent reads it, understands it and looks in the mirror.   With your permission, the Einstein quote is one I would like to borrow for my TPF signature.  Thank you for your words so wisdom, too.


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> OT.... Sorry mods!
> 
> @jennlt I'm so sorry to hear about your childhood and abusive elders   It made me cry (yeah I'm sensitive even when watching movies) reading your comment.
> 
> You deserved better. I am so glad that you made a better life for yourself and have a husband who's been with you 30+ years. 30+ years is very rare these days so respect!
> 
> While this probably doesn't mean much, I hope you know that I personally enjoy having your company in this thread and you have my personal admiration. You're a strong woman and you're loved





papertiger said:


> Well, it just goes to show how aware, strong-willed and resilient you are. You are probably more empathetic and caring now, avoiding repeating history. These 2 could learn a lot from someone like you. Their victimhood is the strongest conviction they have, as though nobody else had a difficult upbringing





purseinsanity said:


> I’m just echoing @EverSoElusive.  I cry at tissue ads and your story made me well up.  Kudos to you for overcoming such a difficult childhood and having such resilience!  The success of your long marriage & your fur babies is proof of how much love you have inside despite missing out of it as a child.  So many of us here have stories that aren’t just rosy and materialistic.  Thank you for having the courage to share yours, and thank you so much for being a part of our community.


 Your kind, supportive words mean the world to me! I am so grateful for this community of wonderful, thoughtful people 

I hope I was able to convey that we all understand H and MM didn't have perfect childhoods and we empathize/sympathize with them but it's time for them to be adults, particularly because they now have children who need good role models as well as the love and support which all children deserve. 

And, of course, we will continue to roast them mercilessly until they figure it out.


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> My dear kind one, you are not only a survivor, you have conquered so many struggles and have developed  exceptionally strong coping skills. This is so well written that I hope every parent reads it, understands it and looks in the mirror.   With your permission, the Einstein quote is one I would like to borrow for my TPF signature.  Thank you for your words so wisdom, too.


Thank you so much, @CarryOn2020 I've loved Einstein's Theory of Happiness from the first moment I heard it and I'm thrilled it resonates with you, too.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> ​


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm saddened to see quite a lot of us had less than stellar childhoods to put it mildly. For the longest time I felt a bit like an outlier because my close childhood friends all came from stable, happy enough homes. With friends I made as an adult it's not really a subject that comes up a lot. 

Incidentally, I just cancelled my mother's surprise birthday dinner because true to herself she whined - more than a week out - how obviously none of HER children would throw her a surprise party like her friend's did. Last year it was "Nobody ever bakes ME a birthday cake" (the year before that the whining started a week out with "If only SOMEONE would bake me a cake"...at that point I had planned it out, bought equipment and ingredients and she really did kill my joy with her childish behaviour)...let's just say the only person in this family who bakes her own cake is me because nobody steps in. The rest of the family has had thoughtfully curated birthday cakes that are usually two-day-productions for YEARS. I'm at the point where I say "Sh*tty behaviour has consequences", and as I had not invited anyone yet I'm pretty much done with party planning.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a really had time understanding how anyone could still be her fan and just ignore her rotten core...but then I remember Charles Manson and Ted Bundy had superfans and women who wanted to marry them.


We have a thread where members are her fans. As near as I can tell they like photos of them and they believe everything H&M's PR puts out there but nothing by anyone else. When you refuse to see what you don't wish to see, then it's easy to be a fan.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maybe it's the angle of both pictures but I've never noticed the resemblance between a young Harry and his cousin James before now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm saddened to see quite a lot of us had less than stellar childhoods to put it mildly. For the longest time I felt a bit like an outlier because my close childhood friends all came from stable, happy enough homes. With friends I made as an adult it's not really a subject that comes up a lot.
> 
> Incidentally, I just cancelled my mother's surprise birthday dinner because true to herself she whined - more than a week out - how obviously none of HER children would throw her a surprise party like her friend's did. Last year it was "Nobody ever bakes ME a birthday cake" (the year before that the whining started a week out with "If only SOMEONE would bake me a cake"...at that point I had planned it out, bought equipment and ingredients and she really did kill my joy with her childish behaviour)...let's just say the only person in this family who bakes her own cake is me because nobody steps in. The rest of the family has had thoughtfully curated birthday cakes that are usually two-day-productions for YEARS. I'm at the point where I say "Sh*tty behaviour has consequences", and as I had not invited anyone yet I'm pretty much done with party planning.


 your quote, too 
Sheesh, post-ish pandemic, people have had plenty of time to readjust themselves and learn proper communication skills imo.  We’ve all been through _enough_. Nothing worse than whiny old people. An entitled 90+ year old is as awful as a wilful child imo.  No matter the age, they are nothing more than attempted joy-stealers. But - we will not let them win. This, too, shall pass. We will rise above it and move forward.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> We have a thread where members are her fans. As near as I can tell they like photos of them and they believe everything H&M's PR puts out there but nothing by anyone else. When you refuse to see what you don't wish to see, then it's easy to be a fan.


I refuse to click on it, but did scroll by, and no one has "appreciated" them since July 21.


----------



## csshopper

jennit and QueenofWrapDress,

I don't know the origin of this, but my Mom, in response to a family situation, would often say, "Living well is the best revenge!"

You two are awesome!


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Totally off topic, but I loved Nichelle Nichols.  Watched those Star Trek re-runs endlessly in the 70's.  She was so lovely, a good actress, and a fabulous role model.


Not at all off topic. She was a class act, and someone ZeeZy would have been wise to emulate. She and Shatner had the first interracial on screen kiss, and that was a huge deal in the 60s. She is someone who probably could have legitimately claimed racism in Hollywood, but she didn't, instead carving out a career and meaningful life for herself.


----------



## bellecate

Happy birthday Raptor!


----------



## mia55

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it



People like you make me believe that there’s still hope in this world.Thanks for
Sharing your inspiring story!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I refuse to click on it, but did scroll by, and no one has "appreciated" them since July 21.


We have a lot more interesting subject matter to cover than they do.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> I can empathize with MM () because my father was absent for most of my childhood and left for good when I was 10. He never asked to see me, never paid child support, never acknowledged my birthday or Christmas. My mother and grandparents were also abusive so there was no one to compensate for the loss of a parent and I never heard the words "I love you" during my childhood.  It's devastating to know that there is a parent out there somewhere who disavows you and literally does not care if you are dead or alive but, ultimately, it speaks volumes about the parent's character as a human being.
> 
> I have a 5 year-old dog who has never been left alone since he joined our family and a 15 year-old dog who has rarely been left home alone. I've never left them with someone else overnight or gone on vacation without them. I would never want them to feel abandoned and their health and happiness is a priority for me.
> 
> I actually cried a few years ago when I called a furniture store because the receptionist mistook my phone number for her daughter's and answered the phone by saying "Hi, honey, how are you?' in such a loving, motherly tone that I had never had the joy to hear. I sound pathetic, really, but it illustrates the point that part of you is always defined by your childhood no matter how much you think you've moved past it. Something seemingly innocuous will trigger you and it can be a struggle to overcome and get back to a healthy frame of mind but it's part of life. Harry obviously has not mastered this but I understand the particular kind of loneliness and emptiness you feel when your mother isn't there for you (either emotionally or physically).
> 
> Unlike H and MM, I don't consider myself a victim. I know there are many people in this world who have endured more pain and trauma than I can imagine. I am a survivor who has built a very good life with my husband of 30+ years. My mother isn't happy for me, she's envious of me. It's just the way it is and I accept that. I am living proof that you can overcome your childhood without becoming pathological. I'm not claiming I'm perfect; just determined to have a life well-lived on my terms.
> 
> Albert Einstein was a very wise and perspicacious man, not just a brilliant mathematician and physicist. I strive to live by his adage,
> *"A calm and modest life brings more happiness than the pursuit of success combined with constant restlessness." *I recommend H and MM take this sage advice to heart. Maybe even plagiarize it


Hugs to you. Love your post, and that quote. Pretty well describes my life. I did not have an easy childhood, though not as bad as yours. My father was a good-natured alcoholic who couldn't hold a job. My mother gave him the boot when I was very young, leaving her to raise four kids on her own, but neither were abusive. From what I've read so far, Doria and Thomas were doomed from the start due to their significant age gap. She was 21 and clearly looking for a good time, while he was mid-thirties and looking to settle down. What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> You think it's a good idea to put yourself in the news at the exact same time as the revenge book is out?  Normally one stays quiet and waits for the controversy to blow over, so as not to add to the story.  Like the Kardashians, sans big mouth Khloe.
> 
> Won't there be some discussions of the book and her 'look at me' birthday descriptions?



Agreed. I believe they're laying low for a while, waiting and hoping for the book attention to blow over, and figuring out how to salvage their "brand". They've got their work cut out.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have a really had time understanding how anyone could still be her fan and just ignore her rotten core...but then I remember Charles Manson and Ted Bundy had superfans and women who wanted to marry them.


She definitely has psychopathic tendencies. People mistakenly believe all psychopaths are violent like the two prime examples you mentioned, but that is not the case.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Hugs to you. Love your post, and that quote. Pretty well describes my life. I did not have an easy childhood, though not as bad as yours. My father was a good-natured alcoholic who couldn't hold a job. My mother gave him the boot when I was very young, leaving her to raise four kids on her own, but neither were abusive. From what I've read so far, Doria and Thomas were doomed from the start due to their significant age gap. She was 21 and clearly looking for a good time, while he was mid-thirties and looking to settle down. What could possibly go wrong?



My grandma had very stable, loving marriage for more than 50 years, but she just recently told me she wouldn't have put up with [add long list of undesirable qualities in a husband, one of them a drinking problem] because "I was better than that. I earned my own money (interestingly, it was my great-grandfather who said "I don't worry about the boy, but the girls need to have an education if hard times come"), and enough of it, I didn't have to put up with anything."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She definitely has psychopathic tendencies. People mistakenly believe all psychopaths are violent like the two prime examples you mentioned, but that is not the case.



And to be honest I find the "silent" ones just as scary, because they manage to blend in so well. For a while at least.


----------



## Gal4Dior

It's Z list's Bday. Shall I send her a copy of the Bench or Revenge? Decisions, decisions....


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My grandma had very stable, loving marriage for more than 50 years, but she just recently told me she wouldn't have put up with [add long list of undesirable qualities in a husband, one of them a drinking problem] because "I was better than that. I earned my own money (interestingly, it was my great-grandfather who said "I don't worry about the boy, but the girls need to have an education if hard times come"), and enough of it, I didn't have to put up with anything."



Watching my mother struggle for years was a strong motivator for me to do well in school.


----------



## charlottawill

Gal4Dior said:


> It's Z list's Bday. Shall I send her a copy of the Bench or Revenge? Decisions, decisions....



Well seeing as how she already has a lifetime supply of The Bench I'd go with Revenge. It would be pretty funny if someone anonymously (The Cambridges ) sent her a copy. Or Bower could really twist the knife and send an autographed copy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gal4Dior said:


> It's Z list's Bday. Shall I send her a copy of the Bench or Revenge? Decisions, decisions....



Are you making her a lemon or an elderflower cake?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Well seeing as how she already has a lifetime supply of The Bench I'd go with Revenge. It would be pretty funny if someone anonymously (The Cambridges ) sent her a copy. Or Bower could really twist the knife and send an autographed copy



That's first class trolling right there. I'd love it.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For the longest time I felt a bit like an outlier because my close childhood friends all came from stable, happy enough homes.


Same. I was one of very few kids from a "broken home" where we lived. And it probably didn't help much that a lot of TV shows in the 60s-70s featured seemingly idyllic families. I desperately wanted to be Marcia Brady when I was 12.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> your quote, too
> Sheesh, post-ish pandemic, people have had plenty of time to readjust themselves and learn proper communication skills imo.  We’ve all been through _enough_. Nothing worse than whiny old people. An entitled 90+ year old is as awful as a wilful child imo. No matter the age, they are nothing more than attempted joy-stealers. But - we will not let them win. This, too, shall pass. We will rise above it and move forward.
> 
> View attachment 5582630


I imagine him thinking "*****, your duchess days are numbered", but I'm sure he's far too much of a gentleman to have such thoughts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Same. I was one of very few kids from a "broken home" where we lived. And it probably didn't help much that a lot of TV shows in the 60s-70s featured seemingly idyllic families. I desperately wanted to be Marcia Brady when I was 12.



I think for me it taught me all the things I don't want in relationships. I don't do disrespectful behaviour, I'm not into infidelity, I'm not putting up with a MIL from hell. I'd rather die lonely than subject myself to this.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Agreed. I believe they're laying low for a while, waiting and hoping for the book attention to blow over, and figuring out how to salvage their "brand". They've got their work cut out.


Well so much for laying low.  Harry has a new lawsuit filed regarding protection,  He is including the Metropolitan Police in this one. What a berk.  

I have come to the conclusion that what Harry really wants, and the local stories about intrusions into his Montecito property are part of, is  protection paid for by the US government. He figures that if he can get it from the UK, he can use it as leverage that to get it from the US. I know The Donald said no, but the idiots in current gov't could say yes.  ugh!  Hopefully, all will tell him to go fly a kite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you making her a lemon or an elderflower cake?


I'd much rather her eat crow, but if I had to decide, a confetti cake from JCMH. Extra dunkin' hines frosting for Queen Foodie, herself.


----------



## gracekelly

Gal4Dior said:


> It's Z list's Bday. Shall I send her a copy of the Bench or Revenge? Decisions, decisions....


I am sending her a stale banana bread, an overdone chicken  with a few boxes of recalled oat milk latte powder.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Well so much for laying low.  Harry has a new lawsuit filed regarding protection,  He is including the Metropolitan Police in this one. What a berk.



Oh my. I sure hope that judge will not be as indulgent as Judge Warby.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> I am sending her a stale banana bread, an overdone chicken  with a few boxes of recalled oat milk latte powder.


Don't forget the sandwiches and Fritos! Oh and a banana with a nice note of birthday wishes!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gal4Dior said:


> Don't forget the sandwiches and Fritos! Oh and a banana with a nice note of birthday wishes!



At this rate we can send a full gift basket.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this rate we can send a full gift basket.


They will soon be poor enough to need one.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Well so much for laying low.  Harry has a new lawsuit filed regarding protection,  He is including the Metropolitan Police in this one. What a berk.
> 
> I have come to the conclusion that what Harry really wants, and the local stories about intrusions into his Montecito property are part of, is  protection paid for by the US government. He figures that if he can get it from the UK, he can use it as leverage that to get it from the US. I know The Donald said no, but the idiots in current gov't could say yes.  ugh!  Hopefully, all will tell him to go fly a kite.


Not on my dime. I don't see any grounds under which could he receive taxpayer funded protection. Unless she was an elected official, god help us. Lots of other private citizens (like Gates and Bezos) surely have faced actual threats but cough up their own money for security. And plenty of celebs have had to deal with stalkers. They are delusional as always.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I love it, but you have to use it daily, or close to it.


Absolutely agree. I was good about using my Nuface almost every day for a year and I was happy with the results. Then Covid happened and I slacked off and stopped using it. Need to get back in the habit again.


----------



## mellibelly

BRF bday wishes are a story that will disappear and they didn’t refer to her by name Nice use of the booing photos ZZZ did a sweet nod to her favorite presidential couple…outfit inspired by Melania, Cheeto spray tan inspired by Donald!


----------



## mellibelly

Oh look another tantrum from the plonker


----------



## lanasyogamama

My book depository order finally arrived! I didn’t cancel the order because I want this book to show strong sales! I’m going to give this copy to my mom and keep reading it on my kindle.


----------



## bag-mania

Has this been posted? Thomas Jr. isn’t quite as talkative to the press and his father and sister but when he does he makes it count.









						Meghan Markle's brother says hostile biographer did a "fantastic" job
					

Tom Bower's book, which has been described as a relentless "400-page long demolition job," said Meghan Markle made Kate Middleton cry.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure it's hostile when you're just telling the truth. It's hostile when you sit on Oprah sprouting lies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

What a contrast...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




Also dishevelled.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> My book depository order finally arrived! I didn’t cancel the order because I want this book to show strong sales! I’m going to give this copy to my mom and keep reading it on my kindle.


Anyone know how well it's selling?


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


>




She looks like a b!tch, but she looks a lot prettier than she has in a long time.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> She looks like a b!tch, but she looks a lot prettier than she has in a long time.


It was a month after their wedding, at the wedding of one of his cousins. She looks lost in that dress, and this shows why you don't wear stilettos all the time.


> https://www.eonline.com/news/944789...oral-dress-at-prince-harry-s-cousin-s-wedding


----------



## CobaltBlu

Cinderlala said:


> Buzzard wishes she was a Kardashian.  They have money.  And, whether we like it or not, KimK changed the standards of beauty.  Buzzard would kill for that!
> 
> (I've decided that raptors are too magnificent to be used as a descriptor for her so I'm experimenting with others. I think I like Buzzard.)  (Collectively, I may call the pair Buz & Huz.)


you are so right my friend!!


----------



## jennlt

mia55 said:


> People like you make me believe that there’s still hope in this world.Thanks for
> Sharing your inspiring story!


I've never thought of my story as inspiring, I've just always thought I was an extremely stubborn person who refused to tolerate a crappy life for a moment longer than necessary lol. Thank you for such an incredible compliment.


charlottawill said:


> Hugs to you. Love your post, and that quote. Pretty well describes my life. I did not have an easy childhood, though not as bad as yours. My father was a good-natured alcoholic who couldn't hold a job. My mother gave him the boot when I was very young, leaving her to raise four kids on her own, but neither were abusive. From what I've read so far, Doria and Thomas were doomed from the start due to their significant age gap. She was 21 and clearly looking for a good time, while he was mid-thirties and looking to settle down. What could possibly go wrong?



MM probably has a cadre of ever-changing nannies for Archie and Lili because I doubt Doria has transformed from an absent mother into a doting grandmother. A leopard doesn't change it's spots.

Thanks so much for your kind words.  It must have been a challenging childhood for you with an alcoholic father and your parents' divorce. I'm glad you made it through and I hope you have the life you always wanted. Hugs to you, too.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

And this is how desperate Meghan fans are.








						Meghan Markle's 41st birthday comes as expectations are at their highest
					

The Duchess of Sussex is turning 41 on August 4, with some fans speculating that her Spotify podcast Archetypes could be released on her birthday.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I am sending her a stale banana bread, an overdone chicken  with a few boxes of recalled oat milk latte powder.


That made me giggle!

So who did wish Meg a HB?  Oprah? Gayle? Serena?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

OK, I took one for the team and spared no expense in purchasing this wonderful fruit platter that I mailed COD to ZedZed for her 41st birthday.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> That made me giggle!
> 
> So who did wish Meg a HB?  Oprah? Gayle? Serena?



I'm sure they all sent private greetings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> BRF bday wishes are a story that will disappear and they didn’t refer to her by name Nice use of the booing photos ZZZ did a sweet nod to her favorite presidential couple…outfit inspired by Melania, Cheeto spray tan inspired by Donald!




So wish they had used this photo - shows her ‘real’ age


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> And this is how desperate Meghan fans are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's 41st birthday comes as expectations are at their highest
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is turning 41 on August 4, with some fans speculating that her Spotify podcast Archetypes could be released on her birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5582704





charlottawill said:


>



Is this a "Do it NOW" look that keeps H under control? If this was taken at a Royal wedding it is screaming her disdain for the family, she is a slovenly mess.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


>



The Duchess of Sussex has been a cash cow for JER.  He SHOULD wish her a happy birthday


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also dishevelled.


And with toilet paper on her head.  Actually appropriate since I think she is a sh*t


----------



## gracekelly

EXCLUSIVE: Inside Martha Stewart's intimate 81st birthday dinner
					

Martha Stewart celebrated her 81st birthday at her estate in Seal Harbor, Maine with her closest pals.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Now this is the way to celebrate a birthday on August 4th.  Meg wanted to be there, but had plans that she and Harry couldn't cancel.  *Right*


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> EXCLUSIVE: Inside Martha Stewart's intimate 81st birthday dinner
> 
> 
> Martha Stewart celebrated her 81st birthday at her estate in Seal Harbor, Maine with her closest pals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now this is the way to celebrate a birthday on August 4th.  Meg wanted to be there, but had plans that she and Harry couldn't cancel.  *Right*


Martha’s Maine house looks like perfection!  Love love Acadia National Park, too.




Swoon!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Martha has such great taste


----------



## Chanbal

Happy b-day from the BLG


----------



## charlottawill

Their flattering stories on Kate suggest to me that People is souring on Scuz and Huz. 

And in case you missed it, this is worth watching:


----------



## Katel

mellibelly said:


> Oh look another tantrum from the *plonker*



Hahahaha plonker


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Is this a "Do it NOW" look that keeps H under control? If this was taken at a Royal wedding it is screaming her disdain for the family, she is a slovenly mess.


It wasn't a Royal wedding, it was Diana's niece's wedding.


----------



## needlv

Um… did anyone not get the slight shade thrown by the BRF in the instagram stories?

it was Insta stories so will disappear in 24 hours.

AND

They both used unflattering photos of the day she was downgraded to the second row then booed by the public.  She looks orange thanks to horrible makeup and the photos of her face are not flattering!

Hilarious!


----------



## needlv

Oooh two for one…. Lol


----------



## needlv

And her family just keeps dishing it out…

Advice from her older brother and happy 41st birthday wishes.


----------



## andrashik

I guess Claw put the sugars to work.
Comments regarding Kate's cover.


----------



## andrashik

And also this ( dog years )


And her bff Jessica didn't even wish her a happy birthday


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> I guess Claw put the sugars to work.
> Comments regarding Kate's cover.



What's utterly funny to me is that these are the same people who completely forget Harry exists when it comes to Raptor and her alleged achievements as if he wasn't the one who made her. But the irony is probably lost on them.


----------



## papertiger

Thanks for all posting YT vids today  

Something's up with my YT and/or broadband, only ads are playing then black-screen. However, all embedded vids work from tPF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

BB is absolutely right, this is ridiculous imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




BLG is funny on any given day, but what's up with Richard Eden? Guy's on fire


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> BB is absolutely right, this is ridiculous imo.




She so is. But also, what an unflattering picture. Which makes me wonder if the social media manager was secretly annoyed.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chanbal said:


> BB is absolutely right, this is ridiculous imo.



I think it's a bit ridiculous to describe a birthday wish as a "promotional tweet".  If the Invictus accounts were being used to promote Meghan's tea, I'd see it as an issue.  I don't think it's a problem to wish a person whose shown up to support the organization a happy birthday.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




But Carrie was a victim. M is not. Long live Carrie.


----------



## MiniMabel

Maggie Muggins said:


> OK, I took one for the team and spared no expense in purchasing this wonderful fruit platter that I mailed COD to ZedZed for her 41st birthday.
> View attachment 5582728



I think the banana skin is particularly appropriate........they have slipped up a few times!


----------



## MiniMabel

papertiger said:


> Please all, esp US citizens take note of TRG  (The Royal Grift) comments (YT) in her critique of Bower's book. Most importantly, C6 'The Cracks'.
> 
> I'm sure we have some differences in politics, but s/he is spot-on in her understanding of what protected status could mean regards security.
> 
> 1. H&M can have access to MI5/6 intelligence ('she' (I don't know whether TRG is a she) says Scotland Yard) but also CIA's in the States and whichever/whosever intelligence elsewhere.
> 2. The US will have to pay and police the couple's security whilst in the US.
> 3. MM will have protected person status for life, even if they separate or get a divorce
> 4. They will have immunity from US justice (think about that, not just financial 'irregularities' but also criminal and civil charges - how do you sue someone that cannot be forced to abide by a court of law?)
> 5 It can cost up to $28 (2020 Interior International) for their security. In the US that's what you'll pay in your tax. In Canada, that's what you'll pay etc.
> 6. These won't be PIs and bodyguards, your security, military and police will redeployed to protect them.
> 
> I believe Harry must still be on a diplomatic passport otherwise how is he still living in the US (without a Green card, without trips abroad every few moths, without citizenship)? This protected status will make them untouchable as well as unreachable.
> 
> The status and privileges  that Harry wants returned to him and his family were never designed for a family that permanent lived overseas.
> 
> Edited to say that's $28M not *$28* FYI



Bit expensive.


----------



## papertiger

MiniMabel said:


> Bit expensive.



*That's $338M* *per annum *that will cost the US or whichever country they're in.

If they do separate things it'll cost even more.


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> I guess Claw put the sugars to work.
> Comments regarding Kate's cover.
> View attachment 5582884


Since Meghan has done absolutely nothing that her fans can brag about, the best they can do is try to tear down all of those above her. The delusion is real.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> I think it's a bit ridiculous to describe a birthday wish as a "promotional tweet".  If the Invictus accounts were being used to promote Meghan's tea, I'd see it as an issue.  I don't think it's a problem to wish a person whose shown up to support the organization a happy birthday.



She hasn't supported them in any meaningful way, she just leeched onto her husband and made it a fashion show as usual.


----------



## Mumotons

Tatler crowns Kate Middleton best dressed star of 2022
					

The Duchess of Cambridge has been named best dressed person of 2022 in a list compiled by Tatler magazine - and some men have even made the top 10 too.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




More plates being thrown in Monteceto ?


----------



## mia55

So the queen never wished Meghan? All the special relationship stories are getting debunked as well?


----------



## zinacef

no birthday wishes or plans or 41 for 41 charity what not in People Mag at all? Check hasn’t cleared yet?


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Um… did anyone not get the slight shade thrown by the BRF in the instagram stories?
> 
> it was Insta stories so will disappear in 24 hours.
> 
> AND
> 
> They both used unflattering photos of the day she was downgraded to the second row then booed by the public.  She looks orange thanks to horrible makeup and the photos of her face are not flattering!
> 
> Hilarious!


The Queen’s IG ignored her altogether


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LizzieBennett

purseinsanity said:


> The Queen’s IG ignored her altogether


I love the Queen!   She always rises above but still manages to convey her thoughts on a situation.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She so is. But also, what an unflattering picture. Which makes me wonder if the social media manager was secretly annoyed.


She looked odd in all those pictures. Her face looked kind of puffy.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> *That's $338M* *per annum *that will cost the US or whichever country they're in.
> 
> If they do separate things it'll cost even more.


There is no way they would ever get taxpayer funded security in the US, unless she became a presidential nominee. I don't even like to type that thought. If members of Congress have had to fight to get greater protection in the wake of Jan. 6, how on earth do these morons think they're entitled? Of course. Entitled is the key word. 



> https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/16/congress-security-spending-482497


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> There is no way they would ever get taxpayer funded security in the US, unless she became a presidential nominee. I don't even like to type that thought. If members of Congress have had to fight to get greater protection in the wake of Jan. 6, how on earth do these morons think they're entitled? Of course. Entitled is the key word.


The US State Department has a security branch that provides security for visiting dignitaries but those are short term visits. I’m not sure what security arrangements the US government makes for longer term visitors like ambassadors and consuls stationed in the US for several years at a time. But if Harry is put on par with for example the UK ambassador to the US, he may end up being provided with some US taxpayer funded security which would really be a massive waste of taxpayer $$


----------



## csshopper

The picture used in the Invictus birthday posting was one taken after they had stopped on their way to Invictus to see the Queen. Speculation was the visit did not go as they had planned. Following it, the barely suppressed fury revealed in Raptor’s expressions, plus the snark comments from her petulant man child husband about people around the Queen, seem to support the opinion the Suckesses had been dealt a Royal reality check.

Moving on to the Jubilee, they were “managed” and margenalized with the Queen having participated in the seating plan. Hazbeen couldn’t overpower the cousins into a seating shuffle and Second Row Royals became a new hashtag.

Somewhere along the line articles appeared challenging Hazbeen’s account of securing the Queen’s giving her blessing to a  great granddaughter named Lilibet.
It was claimed he had slyly omitted which of her names they planned to use, implying it was Elizabeth.

 Not surprisingly perhaps, the request from her parents for a longed for money shot photo of the Queen with their daughter Lilibet was denied.

The world read the Queen was glad Raptor had not attended Prince Phillip’s Memorial Service.

Raptor’s 41st birthday was not acknowledged by the Queen and, in a masterful throwing of shade, Princess Anne in Edinburgh, always described  as being the hardest working Royal, was instead the focus on August 4.

Not linked to the Queen, but deliciously, People magazine hitting newsstands on August 4th is adorned with an eye catching picture of the Duchess of Cambridge, captioned by a teaser of the article: The Making of a Queen. How Kate is shaping her role for the modern world and modeling herself on the reigning Queen: ‘Never complain, never explain’.

 Wow, a not so subtle double gut punch to the Downgraded Douchess of  Montecito: (1) it is Kate, not Raptor, who is modernizing the Monarchy and (2) by graciously not complaining and not explaining Kate makes the vomited word salad litany of perceived slights and mistreatment relentlessly spewed by Raptor even more nauseating.

Maybe the lyric from Bob Dylan’s classic, “The Times They Are a-Changin” is true?


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> The US State Department has a security branch that provides security for visiting dignitaries but those are short term visits. I’m not sure what security arrangements the US government makes for longer term visitors like ambassadors and consuls stationed in the US for several years at a time. But if Harry is put on par with for example the UK ambassador to the US, he may end up being provided with some US taxpayer funded security which would really be a massive waste of taxpayer $$


Oh I get that, under international law the US has the responsibility to protect visiting foreign dignitaries and foreign diplomats living here, and the same is provided for US diplomats when in other countries. But are these clowns now going to claim that they are visiting foreign dignitaries to get taxpayer funded security for an indefinite period because they're cheap and/or broke? I would definitely make my voice heard about that if they go that route. They can't consider themselves US residents or British residents subject to their whims at any given moment.


----------



## WingNut

csshopper said:


> The picture used in the Invictus birthday posting was one taken after they had stopped on their way to Invictus to see the Queen. Speculation was the visit did not go as they had planned. Following it, the barely suppressed fury revealed in Raptor’s expressions, plus the snark comments from her petulant man child husband about people around the Queen, seem to support the opinion the Suckesses had been dealt a Royal reality check.
> 
> Moving on to the Jubilee, they were “managed” and margenalized with the Queen having participated in the seating plan. Hazbeen couldn’t overpower the cousins into a seating shuffle and Second Row Royals became a new hashtag.
> 
> Somewhere along the line articles appeared challenging Hazbeen’s account of securing the Queen’s giving her blessing to a  great granddaughter named Lilibet.
> It was claimed he had slyly omitted which of her names they planned to use, implying it was Elizabeth.
> 
> Not surprisingly perhaps, the request from her parents for a longed for money shot photo of the Queen with their daughter Lilibet was denied.
> 
> The world read the Queen was glad Raptor had not attended Prince Phillip’s Memorial Service.
> 
> Raptor’s 41st birthday was not acknowledged by the Queen and, in a masterful throwing of shade, Princess Anne in Edinburgh, always described  as being the hardest working Royal, was instead the focus on August 4.
> 
> Not linked to the Queen, but deliciously, People magazine hitting newsstands on August 4th is adorned with an eye catching picture of the Duchess of Cambridge, captioned by a teaser of the article: The Making of a Queen. How Kate is shaping her role for the modern world and modeling herself on the reigning Queen: ‘Never complain, never explain’.
> 
> Wow, a not so subtle double gut punch to the Downgraded Douchess of  Montecito: (1) it is Kate, not Raptor, who is modernizing the Monarchy and (2) by graciously not complaining and not explaining Kate makes the vomited word salad litany of perceived slights and mistreatment relentlessly spewed by Raptor even more nauseating.
> 
> Maybe the lyric from Bob Dylan’s classic, “The Times They Are a-Changin” is true?


Brilliantly put!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why would he use a photo of MM kissing her own thumb?
Now, we should call her Princess Meghan??


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooh, he is promoting his NFlix film.


----------



## Aimee3

Can the USA tell them “sorry but you are not “visiting” whatever term you want to use (former royals, dignitaries. ..nobodies?) and we refuse to pay for your security.  If you don’t feel safe, either move out of the USA of pay for security yourselves (cheapskates!).


----------



## andrashik

LizzieBennett said:


> I love the Queen!   She always rises above but still manages to convey her thoughts on a situation.


Nah, she had a "private" zoom call with the Queen


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why would he use a photo of MM kissing her own thumb?
> Now, we should call her Princess Meghan??


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Maybe in the meantime Delfina has read Bower’s book and is viewing things through a ”different lens” as Raptor might say?


----------



## andrashik

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why would he use a photo of MM kissing her own thumb?
> Now, we should call her Princess Meghan??



Endure things??? Like what? Not getting the right shade of a blanket?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


>


It might have "broken a lot of people", but not our devious, calulating, narcissistic Meg.  You need to have a soul to be able to feel things


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Maybe in the meantime Delfina has read Bower’s book and is viewing things through a ”different lens” as Raptor might say?


Delifina is no prize herself.  All I see is her posing for selfies and pics so maybe they have more in common than we think.  She seems a wee bit of a narcissist herself.  As my mother always used to say, if she were chocolate, she would eat herself


----------



## papertiger

I'm not saying a word


----------



## csshopper

The People magazine article. Enjoy! Not a single reference to the downgraded duchess.

please ignore the duplicate at the end, can’t  get it deleted


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> The People magazine article. Enjoy! Not a single reference to the downgraded duchess
> 
> View attachment 5583209
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583213
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583217
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583218
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583219
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583216



The People must be American? Camila will be Queen consort first. I don't care, Kate's fine, but this is so stupid.


----------



## Cinderlala

I love the rainbow pictures of HRM & DoC---so colorful & fun!


----------



## Zen101

andrashik said:


> Endure things??? Like what? Not getting the right shade of a blanket?


Who knows what lies nutmeg has fed him.


----------



## Zen101

csshopper said:


> The People magazine article. Enjoy! Not a single reference to the downgraded duchess.
> 
> please ignore the duplicate at the end, can’t  get it deleted
> 
> View attachment 5583209
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583213
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583217
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583218
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583219
> 
> 
> View attachment 5583216


They didn’t mention M once? That’s good. People magazine readers need a break from Sunshine Sucks propaganda. I’m still surprised People have done this positive cover/article since they’ve been so pro Sussex.


----------



## CarryOn2020

VintageBagsAddict said:


> Who knows what lies nutmeg has fed him.


Since the post is a day late, my guess is he gave this task to an intern.  So, we get things like Princess MM.


----------



## bag-mania

VintageBagsAddict said:


> They didn’t mention M once? That’s good. People magazine readers need a break from Sunshine Sucks propaganda. I’m still surprised People have done this positive cover/article since they’ve been so pro Sussex.


Maybe the management for _People_ read the Bower book.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Can the USA tell them “sorry but you are not “visiting” whatever term you want to use (former royals, dignitaries. ..nobodies?) and we refuse to pay for your security.  If you don’t feel safe, either move out of the USA of pay for security yourselves (cheapskates!).


Or tell them visitors stink after 3 days???


----------



## gracekelly

VintageBagsAddict said:


> They didn’t mention M once? That’s good. People magazine readers need a break from Sunshine Sucks propaganda. I’m still surprised People have done this positive cover/article since they’ve been so pro Sussex.


They need people to buy the magazine and right now, Meghan on the cover is not going to pull readers.  The bean counters control everything in life these days including fashion.


----------



## gracekelly

Royal POLL: Should Harry ‘wind down’ potential royal attacks in memoir
					

PRINCE HARRY might "wind down" the potential royal attacks in his memoir, a royal expert has claimed. Do you think he should? Vote in our poll.




					www.express.co.uk
				




I really side-eye this information.  Is Harry trying to broker a deal?  I won't publish my book if you give me what I want?  I don't think that BP will play this game with him.


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why would he use a photo of MM kissing her own thumb?
> Now, we should call her Princess Meghan??



Princess Meghan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why would he use a photo of MM kissing her own thumb?
> Now, we should call her Princess Meghan??




Like, what exactly? Not getting what Meghan wants? Also Harry surely hides his happiness very well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like, what exactly? Not getting what Meghan wants? Also Harry surely hides his happiness very well.





gracekelly said:


> Royal POLL: Should Harry ‘wind down’ potential royal attacks in memoir
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY might "wind down" the potential royal attacks in his memoir, a royal expert has claimed. Do you think he should? Vote in our poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really side-eye this information.  Is Harry trying to broker a deal?  I won't publish my book if you give me what I want?  I don't think that BP will play this game with him.



Isn't - blackmail - like - illegal?


----------



## Zen101

gracekelly said:


> Royal POLL: Should Harry ‘wind down’ potential royal attacks in memoir
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY might "wind down" the potential royal attacks in his memoir, a royal expert has claimed. Do you think he should? Vote in our poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really side-eye this information.  Is Harry trying to broker a deal?  I won't publish my book if you give me what I want?  I don't think that BP will play this game with him.


I hope BP call his bluff. Let him go ahead and release the book. What is he going to say that could be worse? Call them racists? He’s already done that. Conspiracy theories about the death of his mother? Those have been around since she tragically died in the accident. Camilla? She’s weathered the storm and married Charles for about 17 years now? What is new? Poor Harry? No, I don’t think BP should be scared. I hope they don’t give in because if history has taught us anything, it’s that, one must never appease an aggressor.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Maybe the management for _People_ read the Bower book.



Had not looked at their Wiki bios in a while . I remember hers as harping on her silly feminist tirade about Proctor and Gamble ...  lots of unflattering stuff now, esp, details on lawsuits.









						Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				












						Meghan, Duchess of Sussex - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




And more footnotes than in the Bower book. The best stuff in Bower comes from Thomas Markle, personally interviewed and named by Bower. But, TM has not seen MM since 2016! And many of the Bower sources declined to be named.

Funny how MM has not done anything much in the last 18 mos - Uvalde is an exception, and she did not speak at the UN ... Must have been busy writing H's autobiography. 

IMHO, she has gone radio silent on purpose, Bower + the BP bullying investigation done and she did not get exonerated. I think she is trying to rebrand herself


----------



## LittleStar88

VintageBagsAddict said:


> I hope BP call his bluff. Let him go ahead and release the book. What is he going to say that could be worse? Call them racists? He’s already done that. Conspiracy theories about the death of his mother? Those have been around since she tragically died in the accident. Camilla? She’s weathered the storm and married Charles for about 17 years now? What is new? Poor Harry? No, I don’t think BP should be scared. I hope they don’t give in because if history has taught us anything, it’s that, one must never appease an aggressor.



Yep - let him dig himself deeper. I hope the paycheck is large enough to cover them for a long time. They will continue to lose respect and future opportunities. No one will want to work with them anywhere!


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Endure things??? Like what? Not getting the right shade of a blanket?


Being relegated to a second row royal. I'm sure he equates that with being told to move to the back of the bus


----------



## Luvbolide

Lounorada said:


> This!
> View attachment 5579190
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She is something else, the delusions by her!
> JCMH once he realised he was locked on the crazy train by his dArLiNg wife:
> View attachment 5579203



**Lie-abetes**


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I'm not saying a word



I totally believe it. As a longtime Today viewer I always got a skeevy vibe from him. Whenever Giada DeLaurentis was on with her ample cleavage on display he would just about be slobbering on her, even once while she was pregnant. I'm sure Meghan joined his club. That was long before I knew anything about her, but I will say she actually looks pretty there. She has a much harder look today.

I love the comment about "bonking Rory McElroy". I recall reading that he dumped his fiancé the tennis player because she had turned into a bridezilla, but in reality I think he wasn't ready to give up the life of a single guy on the PGA Tour, which I've heard is pretty wild. And if he thought the ex was high maintenance he was lucky to escape the claw. His wife is a former PGA staffer, she knows what's up.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Yep - let him dig himself deeper. I hope the paycheck is large enough to cover them for a long time. They will continue to lose respect and future opportunities. No one will want to work with them anywhere!



Seriously, H&M should be more careful, they're running out of bargaining chips and their brand is already a whiny mess of negativity and stewed nettles


----------



## Luvbolide

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Revisiting the suicide saga. Just reading it makes me angry because even though Bower is careful in his wording, it is so clear to me she made it up to manipulate Harry even further. It's possibly the most disgusting thing she's done. I want to throw up at her generous explanation of how she only did not kill herself after all because it would be so unfair to him after losing his mother to now lose another woman "with a baby inside of her". I literally feel phyically repulsed.



She is revolting!  Those of us who have dealt with suicide and the aftermath can attest that it is one of the most exquisitely painful things to go through.  I never believed her BS about contemplating suicide, partly because I find it extraordinarily difficult to think that someone who has been through such a situation would not be casually talking about it in the way that she did.  

Plus, I didn’t realize at the time how bad her Lie-abetes is!  Bi**h!!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Royal POLL: Should Harry ‘wind down’ potential royal attacks in memoir
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY might "wind down" the potential royal attacks in his memoir, a royal expert has claimed. Do you think he should? Vote in our poll.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I really side-eye this information.  Is Harry trying to broker a deal?  I won't publish my book if you give me what I want?  I don't think that BP will play this game with him.



Or maybe he has realized with his limited brain power that publishing it could permanently sever his last financial lifeline. I believe if it gets published and it trashes his family, especially Camilla, PC will strip his titles as soon as the Queen passes.


----------



## charlottawill

Luvbolide said:


> She is revolting!  Those of us who have dealt with suicide and the aftermath can attest that it is one of the most exquisitely painful things to go through.  I never believed her BS about contemplating suicide, partly because I find it extraordinarily difficult to think that someone who has been through such a situation would not be casually talking about it in the way that she did.
> 
> Plus, I didn’t realize at the time how bad her Lie-abetes is!  Bi**h!!


It really is offensive to anyone who has been touched by suicide. I am sorry for your loss. I cannot imagine the pain of losing someone this way.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Maybe the management for _People_ read the Bower book.


I think it's a safe bet that one or more editors did and realized they've been backing the wrong horse.


----------



## csshopper

csshopper said:


> The People magazine article. Enjoy! Not a single reference to the downgraded duchess.
> 
> please ignore the duplicate at the end, can’t  get it deleted


Thanks mods. 

For tpf integrity, self reported and asked to have the article deleted after reading the fine print in People magazine that "Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is strictly prohibited."


----------



## Toby93

Luvbolide said:


> She is revolting!  Those of us who have dealt with suicide and the aftermath can attest that it is one of the most exquisitely painful things to go through.  I never believed her BS about contemplating suicide, partly because I find it extraordinarily difficult to think that someone who has been through such a situation would not be casually talking about it in the way that she did.
> 
> Plus, I didn’t realize at the time how bad her Lie-abetes is!  Bi**h!!


TW loves herself too much to even contemplate suicide.  Piers Morgan had it right the first time


----------



## Luvbolide

pukasonqo said:


> Well the PS to erase years, ethnic features, etc is not cheap



So true!  Plus he needs to make as much $$$ as he can while he can.  I have a feeling that when the wheels fall off the Ginge & Cringe bus there won’t be another royal who will speak to him.  So much for a career as a Royal Reporter!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Such a narc trait….


----------



## jennlt

Luvbolide said:


> She is revolting!  Those of us who have dealt with suicide and the aftermath can attest that it is one of the most exquisitely painful things to go through.  I never believed her BS about contemplating suicide, partly because I find it extraordinarily difficult to think that someone who has been through such a situation would not be casually talking about it in the way that she did.
> 
> Plus, I didn’t realize at the time how bad her Lie-abetes is!  Bi**h!!


I'm so sorry for your traumatic loss. I agree with you, the easy, facile manner in which she discussed suicide came across as completely disingenuous.


----------



## jennlt

needlv said:


> Such a narc trait….



Just like she doesn't read social media and the U.S. doesn't have tabloids and she desperately wants privacy. Even her bravado is wearing thin. We all know there's not a single unbroken plate left in Montesh!tshow.


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


>



It’s that broom-riding wind-blown look!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why would he use a photo of MM kissing her own thumb?
> Now, we should call her Princess Meghan??



Why is TP posting birthday wishes and calling her Princess M? Is he still helping her? Why?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Anything from Fergie’s girls?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why is TP posting birthday wishes and calling her Princess M? Is he still helping her? Why?



Promoting his Nflix movie, imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Both Catherine and Bea are on the list - impressive :
looking for MM


----------



## Luvbolide

andrashik said:


> They broke the internet alright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle make it to ‘Most Annoying Celebs of 2022’ list
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have managed to land themselves on the Most Annoying Celebs of 2022 list after a whirlwind year of many controversies, reported The Cheat Sheet. According to a Ranker...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk


At last - an achievement that is soooo well deserved!!


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> Both Catherine and Bea are on the list - impressive :
> looking for MM



It’s like ever since Eugenie associated more closely with the Hazbeens, her star has fallen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

If you think the first slide is bad, just keep swiping.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you think the first slide is bad, just keep swiping.



Wow, the only thing she’s Queen of is Delusions IMO!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you think the first slide is bad, just keep swiping.



“Who is KP to correct” when she’s incorrectly called PM?  Ummm, since they’ve made the rules, dumba$$es!  The BRF made rules for their titles and she’s lucky she has a title at all.  “Ms Strong, Independent Woman” is diddly squat without her pathetic, ball less, ginger husband, who was unfortunately born into said family.


----------



## Luvbolide

EverSoElusive said:


> Was just looking at IG and there's a picture of actress Laura Linney receiving her star on Walk of Fame a few days ago. Then I come to realize that our fabulous actress of a Ducka$s didn't have one yet. Quelle horror!   Someone better be calling her soon or she'll break plates again. Maybe she can buy herself one


I love Laura Linney - she is a great actress.  Years ago I saw her on the stage in NY with Liam Neesin in The Crucible (I think - LOL!). They were fabulous.

MM is sooooo far out of her league as an “actress”.


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> Quoting myself, sorry!  In the same vein, my son had to interview for a spot in 9th grade Catholic school.  They asked him to which religion he belongs.  He says, “I’m not really convinced God exists!”
> I was like good God do you have to be so honest every time?!!?  He says he didn’t want to lie to a priest!
> Somehow he still got in.


Love it !  A kid after my own heart!

Speaking of religion, what about the Sussex kids?  They can’t really be raised in the CoE while living in Montecito.  (At least I think not!) Is there some sort of American equivalent in such cases?  Something else for JCMH to think about - along with his visa status, tax status and who knows what else.  Does he even have a passport or does he just go (I mean fly private) anywhere he wants whenever he wants?  I can’t imagine that either of those two thought about any of this.  But even if they had, I am sure that they think they are faaaaaar above such mundane matters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

calicocat said:


> I was curious - then googled to find out. This transformation must've cost pretty penny to complete:


Holy cow - I would never have recognized him from the “before pic”.  Wonder how much all of that cost…


----------



## papertiger

Luvbolide said:


> Love it !  A kid after my own heart!
> 
> Speaking of religion, what about the Sussex kids?  They can’t really be raised in the CoE while living in Montecito.  (At least I think not!) Is there some sort of American equivalent in such cases?  Something else for JCMH to think about - along with his visa status, tax status and who knows what else.  Does he even have a passport or does he just go (I mean fly private) anywhere he wants whenever he wants?  I can’t imagine that either of those two thought about any of this.  But even if they had, I am sure that they think they are faaaaaar above such mundane matters.



Religion seems to mean very little to H&M, I doubt they even care enough to think about it. M thinks about religion and denominations  the same way as she thinks about politics; whatever suits her. Hazard's grandmother is the head of our church, so he probably thinks CoE is another thing he can take or leave when it suits him. Another reason to chop _all_ of the family out of the #succession to the throne. 

*JCMH has to have a passport.* UK citizens don't usually have another official ID (unless they drive). He will need to take his passport wherever he boards a plane (or whatever the internal regs have in the county he flies in domestically). He certainly needs a passport when traveling abroad. 
Her Majesty the Queen is possibly the only person in the world who does not (need one).


----------



## papertiger

Can't watch normally on YT, so hoping there's a chance here (but I haven't seen yet)


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Wow, the only thing she’s Queen of is Delusions IMO!


One could perhaps add a few more royal titles…  
Queen of Entitlement, Falsehoods, Manipulation, Bullying…


----------



## Chanbal

Queen of Hypocrisy?


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Queen of Hypocrisy?



Wow, nothing she does isn’t staged. Such a fraud.


----------



## papertiger

another one I haven't watched yet


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Can't watch normally on YT, so hoping there's a chance here (but I haven't seen yet)




I love he noticed that both C&C and W&K both sent out Birthday wishes accompanied of pics of M taken at the precise time when she (and H) were being BOOOOED! 

That is elegant, effortless, shade right there!


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you think the first slide is bad, just keep swiping.



I tried Googling him. He’s a computer guy, couldn’t understand the subject matter of much of his posted work. But the word “algorithm“ caught my eye.

With his douchess delusions maybe he‘s one of her bot builders.


----------



## jennlt

csshopper said:


> Thanks mods.
> 
> For tpf integrity, self reported and asked to have the article deleted after reading the fine print in People magazine that "Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is strictly prohibited."


Couldn't you have waited two more minutes? It disappeared while I was in the middle of the article


----------



## jennlt

Looks like the ghostwriter has ghosted them. Or should I say Markled?


----------



## csshopper

jennlt said:


> Couldn't you have waited two more minutes? It disappeared while I was in the middle of the article


Ooops. Check you messages.


----------



## jennlt

csshopper said:


> Ooops. Check you messages.


Thanks, that is so kind of you!


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> Looks like the ghostwriter has ghosted them. Or should I say Markled?




I wouldn't understand them doing another OW interview. I wouldn't understand why she would want to do another either. 

It couldn't have made them that much money, they won't have anything left for H's 'memoir' (which will be filed under fiction) and it made OW look unprofessional.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you think the first slide is bad, just keep swiping.



This makes me want to poop so hard and flush it down the toilet    Everytime I read something from the sugars and stans, the first word that comes to mind is always *DELUSIONAL*.




Luvbolide said:


> I love Laura Linney - she is a great actress.  Years ago I saw her on the stage in NY with Liam Neesin in The Crucible (I think - LOL!). They were fabulous.
> 
> MM is sooooo far out of her league as an “actress”.


Love her in The Big C and Ozark. She can play funny and serious, unlike Z-list who only plays fake Z-list


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Todays chuckle - from Wall Street journal no less 
I remember our chat about the trapeze silhouette in shorts being awkward
I thought of HER polo outfit when I saw this $517 gilded silk blend   With a flashy but formal sheen 
Somehow the crotch look struck me lol


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't understand them doing another OW interview. I wouldn't understand why she would want to do another either.
> 
> It couldn't have made them that much money, they won't have anything left for H's 'memoir' (which will be filed under fiction) and it made OW look unprofessional.


Bower I think suggested they got $1M  , the rights were sold to iTV for 1M pounds
They had shock about security costs then and H was thinking - paltry sum but will increase exposure , AT THAT TIME he had no idea of the collateral damage , not thinking about the long game


needlv said:


> Such a narc trait….



MM does not believe in the first law of holes - if you are in one stop digging
Rather she is likely using an excavator now to help dig out mud to throw at the BRF
Did anyone notice ? Unattributed source claims more dirt on donations to Charles foundation per DM


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Can't watch normally on YT, so hoping there's a chance here (but I haven't seen yet)



In case you miss it , BLG cited long lists of Mm’s BFFS who did not send public bday greetings incl OW


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't understand them doing another OW interview. I wouldn't understand why she would want to do another either.
> 
> It couldn't have made them that much money, they won't have anything left for H's 'memoir' (which will be filed under fiction) and it made OW look unprofessional.


The second screen of the IG post says the ghostwriter left because he couldn't tolerate M's micromanaging anymore and there's proof that the last alleged "visit" to Oprah didn't actually happen, so I think the world is safe from another Fib Fest on tv or in book form for the moment (at least until Scobie's second screed appears). I don't think things are going well for Megalomaniac.

Maybe we should send a belated birthday gift of some British-made dinnerware to her? She can use the shards to make jewelry because she needs a new line of work


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> The second screen of the IG post says the ghostwriter left because he couldn't tolerate M's micromanaging anymore and there's proof that the last alleged "visit" to Oprah didn't actually happen, so I think the world is safe from another Fib Fest on tv or in book form for the moment (at least until Scobie's second screed appears). I don't think things are going well for Megalomaniac.
> 
> Maybe we should send a belated birthday gift of some British-made dinnerware to her? She can use the shards to make jewelry because she needs a new line of work
> 
> View attachment 5583666



Too nice to M's taste


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Bower I think suggested they got $1M  , the rights were sold to iTV for 1M pounds
> They had shock about security costs then and H was thinking - paltry sum but will increase exposure , AT THAT TIME he had no idea of the collateral damage , not thinking about the long game
> 
> MM does not believe in the first law of holes - if you are in one stop digging
> Rather she is likely using an excavator now to help dig out mud to throw at the BRF
> Did anyone notice ? Unattributed source claims more dirt on donations to Charles foundation per DM



That's just it, they never think about the long game. 

An intelligent person in M's (high and faux-mighty) shoes would have thought,  and thanked her lucky stars. Late-30s, had a great life, pretty, thin shots for future docs, hard-smiles/acting/girly career behind her, in the UK, a Duchess and Patron of X Y and Z, have heir & spare, living the dream, looked up to, paid for, pretty dresses and accessories galore,  looked after, wined-dined-banquets, honoured guest everywhere, galas and universal love. Too good for M.


The only people who love her now are the ones that are paid to do so or delusional.


No acting career/prospects (or any friends and left in La-la-wood)
No real charity work (coz security can't be paid for)
No business head (only spin)
No media impresario producer (coz she can only front)
No politics/no backbone


As for H-im H-e's as daft as a brush but twice as thick and dusty, a public speaker with nothing to say and a bad attitude   . H-e'll probably end up working IN security rather than paying for it


----------



## jennlt

The comments are *gold, *y'all


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> That's just it, they never think about the long game.
> 
> An intelligent person in M's (high and faux-mighty) shoes would have thought,  and thanked her lucky stars. Late-30s, had a great life, pretty, thin shots for future docs, hard-smiles/acting/girly career behind her, in the UK, a Duchess and Patron of X Y and Z, have heir & spare, living the dream, looked up to, paid for, pretty dresses and accessories galore,  looked after, wined-dined-banquets, honoured guest everywhere, galas and universal love. Too good for M.
> 
> 
> The only people who love her now are the ones that are paid to do so or delusional.
> 
> 
> No acting career/prospects (or any friends and left in La-la-wood)
> No real charity work (coz security can't be paid for)
> No business head (only spin)
> No media impresario producer (coz she can only front)
> No politics/no backbone
> 
> 
> As for H-im H-e's as daft as a brush but twice as thick and dusty, a public speaker with nothing to say and a bad attitude   . H-e'll probably end up working IN security rather than paying for it



Exactly what I thought.  There are people who can't help but destroy things. No, REALLY, the worst nightmare for them is for everything to be wonderful and perfect, they MUST do something to screw it up. I see this with a few people I know of, they got everything going for them-- financial security, good relationships, etc, but they HAVE to do SOMETHING to damage because what they really love or are addicted to is being able to complain about something or cast themselves as victims in some way. THERE MUST BE DRAMA. 

A seminar speaker once spoke of toxic relationships. When normal people begin to have problems in a relationship they either get resolved or the people break up. Drama addicts, on the other hand, live for drama. They MUST have drama in their lives. They LOVE the problems. These are the people who get into fights, call the cops, then turn on the police! They can't stand somebody trying to fix their situation even though they're the ones who called for help. To me, it's like a heroin addict who realizes heroin is bad but they can't stop. They need what is destroying their lives. Drama addicts must manufacture drama. Instead of ending a toxic relationship, they thrive on it if both are drama addicts. If one finally gets some brains and cuts off the drama addict, the drama addict seeks (trolls) somebody else to suck into a mess so the drama cycle continues.

A perfect life without drama is what normal people appreciate, but drama queens need to destroy. Markle is the perfect example of this. Just look at her relationship history. She's cut off everybody. She had the perfect life, screwed it up, and casts herself as a victim.  When she said "Not many people have asked if I'm OK", I thought maybe they don't ask because she has a staff of servants, riches galore and all the royal perks.  And people are supposed to ask such a person "if they're OK"??????  As far as I'm concerned she a stupid sociopath attention whore beeyach.


----------



## jennlt

rose60610 said:


> Exactly what I thought.  There are people who can't help but destroy things. No, REALLY, the worst nightmare for them is for everything to be wonderful and perfect, they MUST do something to screw it up. I see this with a few people I know of, they got everything going for them-- financial security, good relationships, etc, but they HAVE to do SOMETHING to damage because what they really love or are addicted to is being able to complain about something or cast themselves as victims in some way. THERE MUST BE DRAMA.
> 
> A seminar speaker once spoke of toxic relationships. When normal people begin to have problems in a relationship they either get resolved or the people break up. Drama addicts, on the other hand, live for drama. They MUST have drama in their lives. They LOVE the problems. These are the people who get into fights, call the cops, then turn on the police! They can't stand somebody trying to fix their situation even though they're the ones who called for help. To me, it's like a heroin addict who realizes heroin is bad but they can't stop. They need what is destroying their lives. Drama addicts must manufacture drama. Instead of ending a toxic relationship, they thrive on it if both are drama addicts. If one finally gets some brains and cuts off the drama addict, the drama addict seeks (trolls) somebody else to suck into a mess so the drama cycle continues.
> 
> A perfect life without drama is what normal people appreciate, but drama queens need to destroy. Markle is the perfect example of this. Just look at her relationship history. She's cut off everybody. She had the perfect life, screwed it up, and casts herself as a victim.  When she said "Not many people have asked if I'm OK", I thought maybe they don't ask because she has a staff of servants, riches galore and all the royal perks.  And people are supposed to ask such a person "if they're OK"??????  As far as I'm concerned she a stupid sociopath attention whore beeyach.


Okay, fine. I post (literal) potty humor and then you have to go and be all perceptive and insightful


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> another one I haven't watched yet



This channel has more than one video on wellness and H, I dont remember if this is the one I watched ... but the one I saw was quite factual - no abusive tone - I liked the channel - thumb up


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> That's just it, they never think about the long game.
> 
> An intelligent person in M's (high and faux-mighty) shoes would have thought,  and thanked her lucky stars. Late-30s, had a great life, pretty, thin shots for future docs, hard-smiles/acting/girly career behind her, in the UK, a Duchess and Patron of X Y and Z, have heir & spare, living the dream, looked up to, paid for, pretty dresses and accessories galore,  looked after, wined-dined-banquets, honoured guest everywhere, galas and universal love. Too good for M.
> 
> 
> The only people who love her now are the ones that are paid to do so or delusional.
> 
> 
> No acting career/prospects (or any friends and left in La-la-wood)
> No real charity work (coz security can't be paid for)
> No business head (only spin)
> No media impresario producer (coz she can only front)
> No politics/no backbone
> 
> 
> As for H-im H-e's as daft as a brush but twice as thick and dusty, a public speaker with nothing to say and a bad attitude   . H-e'll probably end up working IN security rather than paying for it


Yes long game is important

Was thinking of Kate, she has been with W for like 20 years, married for over 10
She gets good press these days having EARNED every bit of positive press by learning the ropes
Lest we forget, she and W were criticized early on for not enough work (they were new parents), she has not always gotten wardrobe kudos (she is tall, her RTW skirts were too short, now she has longer skirts - tailored), too much time with Middletons not the BRF (heck we criticize MM for ghosting her family),  but she has learned - she has played the long game - NO WHINING FROM HER

I think a great issue of MM's is she complains/criticized/micromanages everything - and we are tired of hearing her WHINING


----------



## marietouchet

Luvbolide said:


> Holy cow - I would never have recognized him from the “before pic”.  Wonder how much all of that cost…


Hmmm the ears look the same, and I do think it is the same person ... 

Was thinking the whites of the eyes have changed too much ... silly me ... procedures on the eyelids alter the amount the whites (of eyes) show


----------



## bluesparklybox

sdkitty said:


> I wonder why he does this....I googled Anglo Iranian and found nothing except info about an oil company....is he trying to say he's not all Iranian?


I’m behind catching up On this thread so sorry if this has been answered, but he’s saying that Omid is white. Omid presents himself as a ‘person of colour’, but Iranians are considered to be white.


----------



## redney

If I'm reading right TW is taking over writing Hazzbeen's book? OH dear lord, the word salad and lies!


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Bower I think suggested they got $1M  , the rights were sold to iTV for 1M pounds
> They had shock about security costs then and H was thinking - paltry sum but will increase exposure , AT THAT TIME he had no idea of the collateral damage , not thinking about the long game
> 
> MM does not believe in the first law of holes - if you are in one stop digging
> Rather she is likely using an excavator now to help dig out mud to throw at the BRF
> Did anyone notice ? Unattributed source claims more dirt on donations to Charles foundation per DM


You heard it HERE haha

I PREDICT the substantive scandal about H's autobiography will be that it throws shade on Charles' foundations- who else has been leaking all the stuff about the bags of money ???? 
Yes, there will be negativity about Camilla (why should she get to be queen ?? after ghastly comments about baby having ginger curls ), and some new complaint about W ... but the stuff about the foundations is not just personal character attacks 
The foundation thing is important to H&M - who have not yet been able to cash in from Archewell - the foundation/charity thing may be becoming a new HOTSPOT for JCMH (how did the UN allow the auditorium be 90 percent empty?) 
Bower makes it clear that JCMH is seeing Archewell as the vehicle to pay for the private jets for incessant (private image building  trips)  - to ensure their security - so the failure of Archewell to achieve anything is linked to the HOTSPOT topic of security - they cant afford to travel like that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooh, he is promoting his NFlix film.



Umm--why hasn't he cast MM in any of his movies I wonder?


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> If I'm reading right TW is taking over writing Hazzbeen's book? OH dear lord, the word salad and lies!



Word salad _is_ a special technique to bury those lies under a chopped-veil of deliberately misleading, buzz-word, feel-good, virtue-signalling clusters of adjectives that don't add-up to anything of any kind. Academia is full of that crap when unchecked for facts, bias (who paid for the study?) and plagiarism. The more you question it or look for meaning, it deconstructs and then disintegrates into a postmodern mess of fruity 'feelings', flowery 'essences' and pungent 'impactful' narc-splaining.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> You heard it HERE haha
> 
> I PREDICT the substantive scandal about H's autobiography will be that it throws shade on Charles' foundations- who else has been leaking all the stuff about the bags of money ????
> Yes, there will be negativity about Camilla (why should she get to be queen ?? after ghastly comments about baby having ginger curls ), and some new complaint about W ... but the stuff about the foundations is not just personal character attacks
> The foundation thing is important to H&M - who have not yet been able to cash in from Archewell - the foundation/charity thing may be becoming a new HOTSPOT for JCMH (how did the UN allow the auditorium be 90 percent empty?)
> Bower makes it clear that JCMH is seeing Archewell as the vehicle to pay for the private jets for incessant (private image building  trips)  - to ensure their security - so the failure of Archewell to achieve anything is linked to the HOTSPOT topic of security - they cant afford to travel like that



Theirs (Archewell) is NOT a foundation but a public charity. Whole different kettle of fish and they better look to their own (financial records) before sling mud at others.

Could be Harry lets loose on recollections he had as a child on C&C's relationship. TBH, nobody cares anymore. Ancient history.

UN auditorium was empty because no one wanted to go. UN _meetings_ are not open to the public, but the UN HQ is open to the public if you get a pre-booked ticket.  I thought speeches were also open and anyone could have gone, I don't think it was only invited dignitaries or VIPs only. I have a feeling H&M thought it was going to be like picking up their fake-award ceremony, no one there but all cameras range tight-in or close-up and canned applause. Total embarrassment, as was his speech. Even Americans that a open to their agenda and politics must have hated a) being told about their country by an ill educated privileged foreigner on a "This is what I hate" list and b) Hazard speaking on Mandela - of all people.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> This makes me want to poop so hard and flush it down the toilet    Everytime I read something from the sugars and stans, the first word that comes to mind is always *DELUSIONAL*.


Don't take it too seriously.  There's a lot of dumb in the world.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> When you think about it they are both on a hiding to nothing:
> 
> H will _never_ get his mother back, however hard he cries, all he seems to inherited from her is her gullibility and susceptibility  to paranoia (both of which which contributed to the circumstances of her death IMO)
> 
> M will never be good enough for her mum. She was her daddy's little princess without having to try, but she was obviously superfluous to her mother's life. All she inherited from her mother is her ability to run away from real life - and herself (again and again and again.)
> 
> Until the TB book, I didn't actually know that M's mother left for 10 years. Lots of you said it, but I just didn't take it in. What does it do to a child when a parent just - leaves? Just leaves YOU. My cat's 11, I've never even put him in a cattery, never left him with strangers. I take him on the train to the other side of the country (and when I had 2 for 10 years, the same thing). Not Doria blaming, who knows what went on in the marriage or what her story is, but I just can't imagine leaving my child - for years.
> 
> No wonder they are so needy.
> 
> I was also amazed ay the $45K fees per year at Northwestern   No wonder you guys in the US set up collage funds early. (It's variable, but International students pay approx half that in the UK, home students less).


Yes it’s very strange - I’m inclined to think she’s not sadly longing for her mum’s approval and  their obvious photo ops together are political/financially motivated with the certain cold respect of game recognising game. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW in the mornings I come here as a treat after my work-out. At this point I wonder if it's too hard earned


Keep going girl! It gets easier as it becomes a habit and your health is a priceless resource! 


Luvbolide said:


> She is revolting!  Those of us who have dealt with suicide and the aftermath can attest that it is one of the most exquisitely painful things to go through.  I never believed her BS about contemplating suicide, partly because I find it extraordinarily difficult to think that someone who has been through such a situation would not be casually talking about it in the way that she did.
> 
> Plus, I didn’t realize at the time how bad her Lie-abetes is!  Bi**h!!


It’s awful. Of all the horrible **** she’s done it’s definitely among the worst. 

On a wider level, it just reinforces that all representation of mental health issue is not good representation and especially with issues like suicide misleading info and outright lies can be actively harmful. Ironic given H’s sickening campaign on ‘misinformation.’


Chanbal said:


> Why is TP posting birthday wishes and calling her Princess M? Is he still helping her? Why?


He makes melodramas so the people magazine/ girl boss demographic is important cross promotion for him?


QueenofWrapDress said:


> If you think the first slide is bad, just keep swiping.



I wish all black women, if not all women,  ‘endured’ what M did- what a wonderful world that would be. 

I sure wish my in-laws would send my family on luxury international holidays and buy all my designer clothes and accessories for me, how did the poor thing cope   


papertiger said:


> Can't watch normally on YT, so hoping there's a chance here (but I haven't seen yet)



I feel like BLE has lost all credibility since he flip-flipped on that obvious Wyoming fake out. The bodies were so different she would have to have the same skeletal changing tech needed to turn John Travolta into Nick Cage in face/off.


kemilia said:


> Umm--why hasn't he cast MM in any of his movies I wonder?


I was about to say that- from what I’ve seen there’s always a light-skinned sex pot  who can barely get her lines out in his movies - how funny she couldn’t clear that bar.

Thinking about it chances are she wasn’t auditioning for black-led projects as she only wanted to be vanilla cheesecake then.


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> If I'm reading right TW is taking over writing Hazzbeen's book? OH dear lord, the word salad and lies!


If it is true that Moehringer was fired, they've once again shot themselves in the foot. His name on the cover would have given the book some credibility. Without it I think Hazy's "memoir" will end up like The Bench. But she knows everything, so....


----------



## jennlt

Best comment -* "But she loves empty seats, she proved that at Wimbledon!"*


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> If it is true that Moehringer was fired, they've once again shot themselves in the foot. His name on the cover would have given the book some credibility. Without it I think Hazy's "memoir" will end up like The Bench. But she knows everything, so....


Here's the second page of that IG post. It claims the ghostwriter was the one who ghosted them.



Here's the original IG post, too.


----------



## andrashik

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm the ears look the same, and I do think it is the same person ...
> 
> Was thinking the whites of the eyes have changed too much ... silly me ... procedures on the eyelids alter the amount the whites (of eyes) show


His blepharoplasty ( I think he had one) is a mess


----------



## andrashik

redney said:


> If I'm reading right TW is taking over writing Hazzbeen's book? OH dear lord, the word salad and lies!


I wonder how many stories has a person who stayed like one or two years in the RF to fill a book. I don’t know how JCMH isn't tired of her and her constant need to control him


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> I wonder how many stories has a person who stayed like one or two years in the RF to fill a book. I don’t know how JCMH isn't tired of her and her constant need to control him


Since the book is mostly going to be fabricated, I’m sure we’ll find out there was a dramatic event happening every day of those 18 months.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Still flabbergasted by her lack of manners.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> It claims the ghostwriter was the one who ghosted them.


Not at all surprising. They needed him more than he needs them.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Theirs (Archewell) is NOT a foundation but a public charity. Whole different kettle of fish and they better look to their own (financial records) before sling mud at others.
> 
> Could be Harry lets loose on recollections he had as a child on C&C's relationship. TBH, nobody cares anymore. Ancient history.
> 
> UN auditorium was empty because no one wanted to go. UN _meetings_ are not open to the public, but the UN HQ is open to the public if you get a pre-booked ticket.  I thought speeches were also open and anyone could have gone, I don't think it was only invited dignitaries or VIPs only. I have a feeling H&M thought it was going to be like picking up their fake-award ceremony, no one there but all cameras range tight-in or close-up and canned applause. Total embarrassment, as was his speech. Even Americans that a open to their agenda and politics must have hated a) being told about their country by an ill educated privileged foreigner on a "This is what I hate" list and b) Hazard speaking on Mandela - of all people.


I made the mistake of trying to educate myself. First page of archewell  site says “FOUNDATION - a impact-driven global non profit …. (insert word salad that I was unable to copy and paste) “
A non profit does not distribute its profits to officers but can pay them for expenses (private jets and security to UN/NYC) and pay them a salary. 
I think H and M made a visit to a charity in London ? If so, they could bill the foundation for THAT private plane and security too

archewell.com


----------



## MiniMabel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Still flabbergasted by her lack of manners.



Absolutely disgusting behaviour. For a start, the person who offered assistance looked to be an older gentleman (although any age counts) and brushing his hand away like that is truly disgraceful. The shockingly poor manners and attitude is beyond words.  I'll bet that MM never thought those few seconds would be caught on camera, but I'm really glad they were.  She certainly started as she always meant to go on, didn't she? She should be ashamed of herself. I am one of those who knew the moment I saw her that it would all end in tears, just gut instinct that she would never fit in........it hasn't ended yet but the rest of us are in tears........sometimes guffawing at the same time, but more often with anger. What a sorry mess.

I feel for the BRF, and really wish that the titles could be taken away from the Harkles so that they don't keep cashing in on their royal connection. Shameless oiks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I made the mistake of trying to educate myself. First page of archewell  site says “FOUNDATION - a impact-driven global non profit …. (insert word salad that I was unable to copy and paste) “
> A non profit does not distribute its profits to officers but can pay them for expenses (private jets and security to UN/NYC) and pay them a salary.
> I think H and M made a visit to a charity in London ? If so, they could bill the foundation for THAT private plane and security too
> 
> archewell.com



It may sat 'Foundation' but it's registered as a charity.

M&H visiting charities can bill for expenses including any travel and expenses. They can also say they're 'donating' in the form of a loan and not gift.

Most charities (sad to say) exist for the sake of their own existence, not for the headline cause.

Edited to say: In the UK, a foundation, a charitable trust or a charity are similar things. Only by tradition, a foundation or trust usually just deals and grants money, a charity can give out meals, clothes or blankets etc (but not exclusively). That money can be gifted OR it can be a grant or loan.  The US definition is different. I believe Archewell has a public charity status so it's not a private foundation or trust. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/852213963 It is run, and marketed like a private foundation, but it is supposed to be run as a public charity.


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> Here's the second page of that IG post. It claims the ghostwriter was the one who ghosted them.
> 
> View attachment 5583870
> 
> Here's the original IG post, too.



If this is true, why is she the one to fire Moehringer?  The book is supposed to be Harry's memoir, doesn't he have a say?  Ask a silly question and get a silly answer!  Of course not!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>




  

Much respect DIOR!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It may sat 'Foundation' but it's registered as a charity.
> 
> M&H visiting charities can bill for expenses including any travel and expenses. They can also say they're 'donating' in the form of a loan and not gift.
> 
> Most charities (sad to say) exist for the sake of their own existence, not for the headline cause.
> 
> Edited to say: In the UK, a foundation, a charitable trust or a charity are similar things. Only by tradition, a foundation or trust usually just deals and grants money, a charity can give out meals, clothes or blankets etc (but not exclusively). That money can be gifted OR it can be a grant or loan.  The US definition is different. I believe Archewell has a public charity status so it's not a private foundation or trust. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/852213963 It is run, and marketed like a private foundation, but it is supposed to be run as a public charity.


Agree , the word salad on the web site may bear no resemblance to the actual legal entity type


----------



## papertiger

In more detail, posting it here so I can watch it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

MiniMabel said:


> Absolutely disgusting behaviour. For a start, the person who offered assistance looked to be an older gentleman (although any age counts) and brushing his hand away like that is truly disgraceful. The shockingly poor manners and attitude is beyond words.  I'll bet that MM never thought those few seconds would be caught on camera, but I'm really glad they were.  She certainly started as she always meant to go on, didn't she? She should be ashamed of herself. *I am one of those who knew the moment I saw her that it would all end in tears, just gut instinct that she would never fit in........it hasn't ended yet but the rest of us are in tears........sometimes guffawing at the same time, but more often with anger. What a sorry mess.*
> 
> I feel for the BRF, and really wish that the titles could be taken away from the Harkles so that they don't keep cashing in on their royal connection. Shameless oiks.


It's also easier to spot after growing up with a couple of siblings with NPD. Then you recognize it when one of your brothers marries one and when some of your coworkers display the same behaviour.  One can never forget the drama.


----------



## Luvbolide

jennlt said:


> I'm so sorry for your traumatic loss. I agree with you, the easy, facile manner in which she discussed suicide came across as completely disingenuous.


Thank you.  You said it much better than I did!


----------



## Luvbolide

1LV said:


> It’s that broom-riding wind-blown look!


OMG - I have never seen this pic before and I can’t stop laughing!  She is so fond of lawsuits, she should have sued her hairdresser for malpractice!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



And Wallis's waist appears to be half the size of ZeeZy's.


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


>




This article from Nouvelles du Monde (https://www.nouvelles-du-monde.com/...me-voie-erronee-pour-renforcer-la-reputation/) is a hoot - the shade! No wonder they used that picture.  Pardon my (google) translation, pls correct where necessary   

*Meghan Markle's 40 x 40 project dubbed 'wrong way' to 'build reputation'*

Meghan Markle's 40 x 40 project was recently called out for being "misdirected" to "bolster" lost reputation.

 This claim was made by Sky News royal commentator Jonathan Sacerdoti.

 In his last interview with Express, he was quoted saying, “I think there are different approaches for the more affluent or the privileged to help others in life.  This is obviously a problem that I think one has when one has a lot of wealth or privilege.”

 "We see people like Jeff Bezos, for example, and Bill Gates and others who are exceptionally wealthy from the trade or business activity they've engaged in, often from scratch, but not always."

 “And I think they came up with ideas like giving away most of their actual financial wealth when you look at people like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates.”

 "They've made this pledge, this pledge that they'll give up this big chunk of their wealth, and even Lord Ashcroft in the UK has signed that."

There are others who talk about taking steps to “restore the balance” by essentially “giving away” most of their accumulated wealth over their lifetime.

 "Now I think the approach Meghan and Harry are taking doesn't seem to be that, because they're talking quite openly about wanting more money."

“In their minds, it is obvious that they are short of money compared to what they would like.  "But of course, in the minds of many other people, just the $14 million spent on their homes could do so much good to society, so much compassion could be expressed in donations of that size."

 "I don't know how much money they give to charity, they could do it quietly.  If so, I take my hat off to them, it's the best and most selfless way to donate money to charity, so I don't comment on what they do or don't donate,  I just don't know.”

 "But I certainly know it's a clear choice to portray yourself as living a very luxurious lifestyle, to make videos like that, to surround yourself with celebrities to do your so-called acts of compassion, to rally  his celebrity and his wealthy friends try to give the poorest person 40 minutes.”

 Ultimately, “It just seems like a misguided way to try to show compassion and kindness to others.  Some suggest it might be more about boosting their reputation and brands than helping many real people.”


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> I made the mistake of trying to educate myself. First page of archewell  site says “FOUNDATION - a impact-driven global non profit …. (insert word salad that I was unable to copy and paste) “
> A non profit does not distribute its profits to officers but can pay them for expenses (private jets and security to UN/NYC) and pay them a salary.
> I think H and M made a visit to a charity in London ? If so, they could bill the foundation for THAT private plane and security too
> 
> archewell.com



go delete your browser history and cookies.  The site uses tracking software….  So they follow what you browse after you visit their site.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> And Wallis's waist appears to be half the size of ZeeZy's.




the white Dior coat she wore is an exact copy of Wallis ?  Yikes.  (Ps Wallis wore it better)


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Still flabbergasted by her lack of manners.



Isn't she just making sure her shoe isn't caught in her dress?  That's what I thought...


----------



## lallybelle

The first time. After she fixes the shoe area, he tries to take her hand again and she pushes it away.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> go delete your browser history and cookies.  The site uses tracking software….  So they follow what you browse after you visit their site.


Archewell yes , it sure is a cookie bakery , good hint


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> And Wallis's waist appears to be half the size of ZeeZy's.



Taz at YouTube is one, I think , who had the ENDLESS side by side photos of an icon and the MM approximation


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Isn't she just making sure her shoe isn't caught in her dress?  That's what I thought...


Too bad her father or sister or childhood friend Priddy couldn't be there to help her out of the car


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> And Wallis's waist appears to be half the size of ZeeZy's.



Oh no, this is the 2nd post in a row I'm kinda defending Meg. 

Wallis was a stick with a big head, famously having said, "You can never be too rich or too thin" but she was too thin, emaciated really.  She looked great in clothes of course.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> *This makes me want to poop so hard and flush it down the toilet *   Everytime I read something from the sugars and stans, the first word that comes to mind is always *DELUSIONAL*.



OMG, I've never heard that before, but LOLOL!!!!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Todays chuckle - from Wall Street journal no less
> I remember our chat about the trapeze silhouette in shorts being awkward
> I thought of HER polo outfit when I saw this $517 gilded silk blend   With a flashy but formal sheen
> Somehow the crotch look struck me lol
> 
> View attachment 5583647


It looks like the camp counselor had an accident!  TW could've shown them how to pee in the woods effortlessly!


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Not at all surprising. They needed him more than he needs them.


I would think the ghost writer would like to preserve his reputation. He may not want to have his name associated to the Harkles' fantasies.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> OMG, I've never heard that before, but LOLOL!!!!!!


Perhaps I should have been more classy and used the word *constipated* instead


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Isn't she just making sure her shoe isn't caught in her dress?  That's what I thought...



The video is blurry, but I've seen a clearer version. She slaps his hand away.


----------



## papertiger

Final chapters review: Warning, Approx 1 hour and 40 mins


----------



## papertiger

Not in any specific order - which is the way they are coming up on YT :


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The video is blurry, but I've seen a clearer version. She slaps his hand away.


This article is related to the wedding day and about TW being 'very rude' to staff. It's blocked in the US, but I may be able to post it in a couple of days. In the meantime, it's likely available to many of you.









						Meghan had ‘problems’ with wedding dress after being ‘very rude’ to staff
					

Revenge author Tom Bower claims that the Duchess of Sussex was left to fend for herself when she arrived at St George's Chapel on her wedding day after being 'very rude' to an army officer




					www.ok.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is the type of person who'd torture people during the Stanford experiment, because she could and there wouldn't be consequences. Ew.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The video is blurry, but I've seen a clearer version. She slaps his hand away.


So yesterdays news … yawwwnnnnnn
The BLG a has videos full of 5 years of her using hand commands to summon him
compare and contrast to the rest of the BRF , you are not supposed to touch them, Michelle O got into trouble for hugging QEII

I get it these folks meet a lot of people, and the rule is a common sense thing for avoiding germs 
Gene Tierney - actress - famously caught measles from a fan , and GT’s daughter had birth defects


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This article is related to the wedding day and about TW being 'very rude' to staff. It's blocked in the US, but I may be able to post it in a couple of days. In the meantime, it's likely available to many of you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan had ‘problems’ with wedding dress after being ‘very rude’ to staff
> 
> 
> Revenge author Tom Bower claims that the Duchess of Sussex was left to fend for herself when she arrived at St George's Chapel on her wedding day after being 'very rude' to an army officer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk


Somebody had the video of the incident … BLG ? 
in sum, MM was rude to officer at rehearsal so he declined to help her out of car on wedding day


----------



## wisconsin

marietouchet said:


> So yesterdays news … yawwwnnnnnn
> The BLG a has videos full of 5 years of her using hand commands to summon him
> compare and contrast to the rest of the BRF , you are not supposed to touch them, Michelle O got into trouble for hugging QEII
> 
> I get it these folks meet a lot of people, and the rule is a common sense thing for avoiding germs
> Gene Tierney - actress - famously caught measles from a fan , and GT’s daughter had birth defects


She was not yet royal, this was wedding day


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking … 
She can turn IT on and off - she is charming in the Bower book- when it suits her, then morphs into a badgering micromanager
It is a skill , the turn on/off, but she cannot exactly control it , if displeased UGLY MM a kicks in automatically 

Reminds me of Daenaerys , Game of Thrones, in the finale, she went off her rocker, destroyed a whole city out of revenge, then was killed by her lover


----------



## marietouchet

Excellent BLG analysis of her commanding H , she uses gestures to indicate TIME TO GO / BORED awhile H is fully engaged 

Her facial expressions show a crescendoing anger at H who gabs on , doing his job


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> So yesterdays news … yawwwnnnnnn
> The BLG a has videos full of 5 years of her using hand commands to summon him
> compare and contrast to the rest of the BRF , you are not supposed to touch them, Michelle O got into trouble for hugging QEII
> 
> I get it these folks meet a lot of people, and the rule is a common sense thing for avoiding germs
> Gene Tierney - actress - famously caught measles from a fan , and GT’s daughter had birth defects



Pretty sure a footman helping a royal bride out of a car is different to a fan trying to touch their idol, though   

That measle story is sad


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Excellent BLG analysis of her commanding H , she uses gestures to indicate TIME TO GO / BORED awhile H is fully engaged
> 
> Her facial expressions show a crescendoing anger at H who gabs on , doing his job




Ugh, she's disgusting. And also, time and time again I am simply AMAZED by her lack of manners. Who does that?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I didn’t realize she was sleeping with  that Fitzpatrick Irish Hotel guy together exposure to the Rich and famous until now when I read that part of the book


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I didn’t realize she was sleeping with  that Fitzpatrick Irish Hotel guy together exposure to the Rich and famous until now when I read that part of the book



But...but...they were just friends! Officially.


----------



## charlottawill

Apologies if this has been discussed already, but I just read Chapter 23, "Wedding". In it Bower writes that TM says while watching the wedding from his hospital bed that he knew more people in the front two rows in the church than MM did, having worked with them, including George Clooney in "Friends for Life". 

Clooney was in the sitcom "Facts of Life" and then did several guest appearances on "Friends" after he became a star on "ER". It may seem trivial, but imo mistakes like this undermine the credibility of the whole book.

And kudos to those of you who plowed through the book in the first weekend. I can only do a couple of chapters a day.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But...but...they were just friends! Officially.


Friends with benefits unofficially.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> MM was rude to officer at rehearsal so he declined to help her out of car on wedding day


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Thinking …
> She can turn IT on and off - she is charming in the Bower book- when it suits her, then morphs into a badgering micromanager
> It is a skill , the turn on/off, but she cannot exactly control it , if displeased UGLY MM a kicks in automatically
> 
> *Reminds me of Daenaerys* , Game of Thrones, in the finale, she went off her rocker, destroyed a whole city out of revenge, *then was killed by her lover*


Sigh, yes, but Daenaerys’ lover was a good person who upheld morals like his life depended on it.   Sadly, we know TW’s lover (at least this most recent one), doesn’t have that same issue.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, she's disgusting. And also, time and time again I am simply AMAZED by her lack of manners. Who does that?



Who? As we all know, our favorite Duchess of Disaster  .  Manners? The same dimwit who "didn't know about the British Commonwealth" would have us believe she had no clue that the BRF is keen on manners in public. But nooooooo, Duchess Dimwit feels it is her mission to MODERNIZE the BRF in HER version of reality, that the whole world revolves around her, not the family whose history goes back a thousand years.  Geez, Harry, you screwed up big time. Anybody get the impression Harry falls for every single scam call about extended car warranties?  A five minute review of Meghan's background would have revealed that she has torched everything in her path. Red flags? What red flags?  There are sometimes well meaning people who feel a need to "save" somebody (hero complex) who has a ton of baggage and problems and are actually turned on by this fantasy of turning somebody around. They trade a relationship for a science project. Meghan is a science project gone WRONG. Harry is the one who became the guinea pig for his sociopath beayach wife.


----------



## charlottawill

We have not heard from ZeeZy in weeks. Has anyone checked to see if she's OK?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, she's disgusting. And also, time and time again I am simply AMAZED by her lack of manners. *Who does that?*


Someone who believes she’s the most important person in the room.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> This article is related to the wedding day and about TW being 'very rude' to staff. It's blocked in the US, but I may be able to post it in a couple of days. In the meantime, it's likely available to many of you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan had ‘problems’ with wedding dress after being ‘very rude’ to staff
> 
> 
> Revenge author Tom Bower claims that the Duchess of Sussex was left to fend for herself when she arrived at St George's Chapel on her wedding day after being 'very rude' to an army officer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk


M and H are unimportant in the scheme of world issues. But it is worrisome that their ability to block free dissemination of facts, articles, books, etc., are possibly the tip of an iceberg affecting our rights and a free press.  It is frightening to think their minions can do this and determine what we may read or research.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Her facial expressions show a crescendoing anger at H who gabs on , doing his job


And he probably caught hell for it in private. She was never going to be a successful working royal like Anne, Sophie or Kate, nor did she want to be. It was all about the title and money and escaping back to CA with him as soon as she could.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> We have not heard from ZeeZy in weeks. Has anyone checked to see if she's OK?


She’s planning her next move you can be sure of that. We’ve seen her disappear for a few months at a time and then come back in a big way. She is taking time to wait for the dust to settle from the Bower book. Maybe she’s going through it trying to find points that they can sue him over.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Someone who believes she’s the most important person in the room.



Someone who believes she’s the most important person in the room WORLD!!!.


----------



## bag-mania

Lilliesdaughter said:


> M and H are unimportant in the scheme of world issues. But *it is worrisome that their ability to block free dissemination of facts, articles, books, etc., are possibly the tip of an iceberg affecting our rights and a free press. * It is frightening to think their minions can do this and determine what we may read or research.


Yes! Meghan and Harry are merely a joke we can laugh about.

Through them, we have witnessed how the media cherry-picks which interpretation of a story they will choose to present to the public. All of the information we are given about important news goes through the same  subjective process. Keeping some voices under wraps while actively promoting other agendas is a global problem. They have to be trickier about how it is accomplished in countries with free speech.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think for me it taught me all the things I don't want in relationships. I don't do disrespectful behaviour, I'm not into infidelity, I'm not putting up with *a MIL from hell*. I'd rather die lonely than subject myself to this.


I had one of those, but I was "lucky". DH was the doting son who wanted to take care of his mum in her dotage. By the time we moved in with her, she had dementia. Apart from the middle phase when she hallucinated and screamed a lot, she was okay. It was hard for her to hold a grudge and be mean to me when she can't remember what happened 10 minutes ago. Besides, I felt I owed her because she took care of my kids when they were young. She may have been a MIL from hell, but she was a splendid grandma.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> And he probably caught hell for it in private. She was never going to be a successful working royal like Anne, Sophie or Kate, nor did she want to be. It was all about the title and money *and escaping back to CA with him as soon as she could.*



I actually think she thought she was going to be able to bend BP and the family to her will, that they would let her do whatever she wanted because she was popular at first. Then she was shocked when that did not happen.  She's always been able to get her way, or find a way around an obstacle, or barrel through the obstacle. She's probably got a stubborn streak a mile wide and the belief that she's always right.  It's the only way she ended up finally achieving the modest acting success that she did.  Otherwise, she would have given up years prior.  But, as has been said numerous times, she confused being a royal with being an A list celebrity and had no clue about the role of the family and the institution within the UK. I think there are people on this thread who know more about the royal family and what you could do, or not do, than she did.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Excellent BLG analysis of her commanding H , she uses gestures to indicate TIME TO GO / BORED awhile H is fully engaged
> 
> Her facial expressions show a crescendoing anger at H who gabs on , doing his job



I have to confess, I have done this on occasion - usually a nudge - when my husband and I are trying to leave a restaurant or party. He can get overly chatty when he's been drinking and if I didn't intervene we'd never leave. But in this setting her behavior is inappropriate. She needs to remember her place. God forbid her supporters ever heard a comment like that - the response would be "that's so racist!". They will never grasp that she would be absolutely nothing without him. Imagine if ZeeZy had never crossed paths with Violet von Westerholz. I have to wonder if she now regrets setting them up. But then we'd have nothing to talk about


----------



## Annawakes

I look forward to seeing her new face when she reappears.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

Meggie Jong-Un


----------



## 880

xincinsin said:


> I had one of those, but I was "lucky". DH was the doting son who wanted to take care of his mum in her dotage. By the time we moved in with her, she had dementia. Apart from the middle phase when she hallucinated and screamed a lot, she was okay. It was hard for her to hold a grudge and be mean to me when she can't remember what happened 10 minutes ago. Besides, I felt I owed her because she took care of my kids when they were young. She may have been a MIL from hell, but she was a splendid grandma.


Just wanted to say how much I admire you and that I don’t think I could move in. . . .


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## papertiger

Parking this right here:


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


>



  Copied even down to the baggy gloves, which I could not understand when I saw TW wearing them. _NOW_ I get it ...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




I have no idea who that is, but tell it like it is bro.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> We have not heard from ZeeZy in weeks. Has anyone checked to see if she's OK?


Shhhh.  Count your blessings.


----------



## Lodpah

When she’s on vs. off on camera


----------



## charlottawill

Where there's smoke....if that fedora could only talk.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Rarely have I encountered a person where the inner ugliness bursts out of their every seam. At this point I have literally a physical reaction to her face malfunctions.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rarely have I encountered a person where the inner ugliness bursts out of their every seam. At this point I have literally a physical reaction to her face malfunctions.


Yet she managed to literally charm the pants off of him. She's much better actress than anyone gives her credit for, at least when the camera's not rolling.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I have to confess, I have done this on occasion - usually a nudge - when my husband and I are trying to leave a restaurant or party. He can get overly chatty when he's been drinking and if I didn't intervene we'd never leave. But in this setting her behavior is inappropriate. She needs to remember her place. God forbid her supporters ever heard a comment like that - the response would be "that's so racist!". They will never grasp that she would be absolutely nothing without him. Imagine if ZeeZy had never crossed paths with Violet von Westerholz. I have to wonder if she now regrets setting them up. But then we'd have nothing to talk about


BLG shows How MM has repeated the hand commands ad infinitum, and her face expression at the time is typically one of exasperation , gritting teeth


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> Copied even down to the baggy gloves, which I could not understand when I saw TW wearing them. _NOW_ I get it ...


I would love to know her thought process in choosing this outfit. Was it intended as a deliberate f*ck you to the RF?


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> When she’s on vs. off on camera
> 
> View attachment 5584890



Ah, there's nothing like using poor children in Africa to burnish your humanitarian credentials.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> BLG shows How MM has repeated the hand commands ad infinitum, and her face expression at the time is typically one of exasperation , gritting teeth


He's her trained seal.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Parking this right here:



The comment about how the book crisis has brought them together is interesting. It reminds me of how Alec Baldwin doubled down in defense of his wife when it was exposed that she had faked being Spanish. Love is deaf, dumb and blind apparently. Or else their fragile egos can't face the reality that they've been played.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Where there's smoke....if that fedora could only talk.



Lawsuits … Bower gives a good hint as to how he will avoid one ...

His account of Knauf .. the K statement to the court simply quoted chapter and verse from emails, texts with MM, K did not draw conclusions 
B is doing the same in at least the later part of the book, he cites videos, DM, Piers Morgan  extensively, SussexRoyal Twitter and other accounts 

B effectively cites H and MM accounts of same event , emphasizing the differences 
Very crafty


----------



## charlottawill

She really was better suited to be a WAG than a member of the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> M and H are unimportant in the scheme of world issues. But it is worrisome that their ability to block free dissemination of facts, articles, books, etc., are possibly the tip of an iceberg affecting our rights and a free press.  It is frightening to think their minions can do this and determine what we may read or research.


100% agree.  It is indeed worrisome, troubling, disappointing.  If it were only H&M doing this stuff, it would not be as bad. The sad fact is so many in ‘power’ are doing it to promote their personal agendas.  And many people are falling for it.   

Time to turn up the volume:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I have to confess, I have done this on occasion - usually a nudge - when my husband and I are trying to leave a restaurant or party. He can get overly chatty when he's been drinking and if I didn't intervene we'd never leave. But in this setting her behavior is inappropriate. She needs to remember her place. God forbid her supporters ever heard a comment like that - the response would be "that's so racist!". They will never grasp that she would be absolutely nothing without him. Imagine if ZeeZy had never crossed paths with Violet von Westerholz. I have to wonder if she now regrets setting them up. But then we'd have nothing to talk about


Me too. I have had to _educate/train _mine to _read_ my signals. He is a smart and intelligent man, sometimes, though, it felt like the training was not sticking. So glad no one was eavesdropping on us in the car ride home.  Happily, now, he gets it. Whew.


----------



## 880

The fact is, mm would have been better off as one of H‘s ex girlfriends. Then she could have gone on to marry someone older and wealthier. H is clearly just not that bright, and as @charlottawill says, he is doubling down when he should be cutting his losses. I don’t entirely blame her. She’s just doing what she’s always done which is hustle. He should know better. Before the Oprah interview and Netflix, he could have been forgiven without too many repercussions. Post Bower, idk. He will come back to the BRF eventually, just even more diminished.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I actually think she thought she was going to be able to bend BP and the family to her will, that they would let her do whatever she wanted because she was popular at first. Then she was shocked when that did not happen.  She's always been able to get her way, or find a way around an obstacle, or barrel through the obstacle. She's probably got a stubborn streak a mile wide and the belief that she's always right.  It's the only way she ended up finally achieving the modest acting success that she did.  Otherwise, she would have given up years prior.  But, as has been said numerous times, she confused being a royal with being an A list celebrity and had no clue about the role of the family and the institution within the UK. I think there are people on this thread who know more about the royal family and what you could do, or not do, than she did.



No possible way H&M  can win against this lady.   












						Mike Tindall, Lucas Tindall and Princess Anne at Gatcombe Park
					

The former England rugby player, 43, attended the prestigious event, held at the Princess Royal 's estate, alongside his two daughters Mia, eight, and Lena, four, and his one-year-old son Lucas.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Katel

EverSoElusive said:


> Perhaps I should have been more classy and used the word *constipated* instead


No, you are wise to get those *plonkers* out asap!   

p.s. your post made me lol too


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> She really was better suited to be a WAG than a member of the BRF.




That commercial is truly terrible---she couldn't even act sexy, which is really saying something since it seems that's her only trick. (Pun intended.)


----------



## marietouchet

Looking for an update on book publication date, I found an absolute jewel - Forbes is a well respected financial magazine -  THEY would know the correct terminology lol

Archewell … It’s a very broadly-cast not-for-profit/yet-somewhat-commercial media/charity enterprise.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...d-troubles-producing-content/?sh=579d1ad182fc


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Lawsuits … Bower gives a good hint as to how he will avoid one ...
> 
> His account of Knauf .. the K statement to the court simply quoted chapter and verse from emails, texts with MM, K did not draw conclusions
> B is doing the same in at least the later part of the book, he cites videos, DM, Piers Morgan  extensively, SussexRoyal Twitter and other accounts
> 
> B effectively cites H and MM accounts of same event , emphasizing the differences
> Very crafty



In an interview on a UK morning slot (ITV) he implied he is 100% ready for a legal fight should H or M come threatening, he advised M not to even try


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Looking for an update on book publication date, I found an absolute jewel - Forbes is a well respected financial magazine -  THEY would know the correct terminology lol
> 
> Archewell … It’s a very broadly-cast not-for-profit/yet-somewhat-commercial media/charity enterprise.
> 
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...d-troubles-producing-content/?sh=579d1ad182fc


_That the products are resolutely about them — which is to say, that the storylines are charted with a prime, inward focus on the couple — is a given, but that narrative restriction also poses a long range content problem. That problem is this: *There’s a limit, in this day, of how much an audience can tolerate hearing about the works and days of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, no matter how nobly conceived and/or charitably engaged.*_

Yep, after TBower’s book, I am right at my limit.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Looking for an update on book publication date, I found an absolute jewel - Forbes is a well respected financial magazine -  THEY would know the correct terminology lol
> 
> Archewell … It’s a very broadly-cast not-for-profit/yet-somewhat-commercial media/charity enterprise.
> 
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...d-troubles-producing-content/?sh=579d1ad182fc



That's easy, they'll just make their expenses equivalent to all monies paid in.

Expenses can be anything and everything to do with everything, including photographers, staff, wardrobe for trips and promo tours,  spa treatments (basically everything to look good) flights, off-set carbon crap, travel attending boards they're part of even if those entries don't cover, hospitality away from their MacMansion. M only has to take one pic for promo on a holiday and she can bill it as expenses.

Their Archewell is acting as a parent company. Subsidiaries with Archewell Audio and Archewell Productions means they can move money from one pot to the other (pay Archewell Production from Archewell Audio and vice versa).

Towards the end of the year they can 'donate' to 'good causes' in the form of loans with low rates of interest that won't be paid back until the following year.

It just means the'll be  'no-profit' and they'll pay no tax.

Meanwhile everything they do, go and buy will be run through Archewell. Even A's HQ expanses.

Their only problem is to keep the money coming in.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Yet she managed to literally charm the pants off of him. She's much better actress than anyone gives her credit for, at least when the camera's not rolling.


I think her acting talents are only of the X rated kind.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> That's easy, they'll just make their expenses equivalent to all monies paid in.
> 
> Expenses can be anything and everything to do with everything, including photographers, staff, wardrobe for trips and promo tours,  spa treatments (basically everything to look good) flights, off-set carbon crap, travel attending boards they're part of even if those entries don't cover, hospitality away from their MacMansion. M only has to take one pic for promo on a holiday and she can bill it as expenses.
> 
> Their Archewell is acting as a parent company. Subsidiaries with Archewell Audio and Archewell Productions means they can move money from one pot to the other (pay Archewell Production from Archewell Audio and vice versa).
> 
> Towards the end of the year they can 'donate' to 'good causes' in the form of loans with low rates of interest that won't be paid back until the following year.
> 
> It just means the'll be  'no-profit' and they'll pay no tax.
> 
> Meanwhile everything they do, go and buy will be run through Archewell. Even A's HQ expanses.
> 
> Their only problem is to keep the money coming in


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I think her acting talents are only of the X rated kind.



X-rated from the Z-listed


----------



## marietouchet

Money coming in ? That is why I was looking to see if the book is really coming out 
Saw one delightful claim that the well regarded ghostwriter has fired H&M for being impossible to work with  …. We can only hope


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> She’s planning her next move you can be sure of that. *We’ve seen her disappear for a few months at a time and then come back in a big way. *She is taking time to wait for the dust to settle from the Bower book. Maybe she’s going through it trying to find points that they can sue him over.


You mean after her alleged dentist appointments?  I can't wait to see her new pearly whites!


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> She really was better suited to be a WAG than a member of the BRF.



Am I the only person who thinks that this look like soft pørn? Absolutely tacky


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## A1aGypsy

880 said:


> The fact is, mm would have been better off as one of H‘s ex girlfriends. Then she could have gone on to marry someone older and wealthier. H is clearly just not that bright, and as @charlottawill says, he is doubling down when he should be cutting his losses. I don’t entirely blame her. *She’s just doing what she’s always done which is hustle.* He should know better. Before the Oprah interview and Netflix, he could have been forgiven without too many repercussions. Post Bower, idk. He will come back to the BRF eventually, just even more diminished.



Yeeeessss. All of this but especially the bold. The hustler gonna hustle. Those spots don’t change. And I can almost respect that but so few people see it coming.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Katel said:


> No, you are wise to get those *plonkers* out asap!
> 
> *p.s. your post made me lol too *


I'm glad it did! You know what they say, laughter is the best medicine


----------



## papertiger

'Everyone's' getting so excited, coming out the wood-woke-work smelling the coffee saying their eyes are opened. 

You know what makes me laugh? 

We could have written Tom Bower's book for him  

If anyone would like to read through this thread, plus and minus a couple of tweaks, and we practically did.


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> She really was better suited to be a WAG than a member of the BRF.
> If cooking anything for me keep your hands off your hair, keep it from hanging loose over the meat and especially don't lick your greasy thumbs while handling utensils. Who wants a hairy burger for dinner?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


>



Kids can see the devil and avoid it like a plague


----------



## rose60610

I think we can see Meghan as a hustler who hustles, so OK. In general we admire those who hustle in legal manners to better their lots in life.  

I have some difficulty in trying to understand how somebody who lamented over eating at Sizzlers then clawed her way into the inner circle of the BRF felt she could leverage THAT into even greater fame and fortune.  She did not realize one iota whatsoever that the attention she received was 100% due to being associated with Harry and that HIS fame and fortune was 100% due to the BRF.  For Meghan and Harry to throw the BRF under the bus was, in effect, cutting off their own noses to spite their faces. Nobody gives a damn about Meghan Markle as an individual. Harry was an international figure solely due to his heritage. When Harry was complicit with Meghan's inflammatory statements about the BRF he essentially discarded his entire identity, and therefore hers. 

If, indeed, Harry truly believes that his own family are "prisoners", "racist", and "made Meghan suicidal" so be it. Fine. Be a man and stand up for those convictions. 

Then don't try to beg your way into Da-da's Bentley to take you to the church at Granny's Jubilee. Don't wonder why Major Thompson had to babysit your sorry asses at the church. Realize you resort to even hiring camera crews to cemeteries to take advantage of dead people in order to pimp your image. Etcetera. 

They are at rock bottom. These two losers are so effing entitled and delusional that it boggles the mind. Granted, Netflix and Spotify made them great offers. Offers that were largely predicated on their relationship with the BRF. Oops! That's gone! All they got left is thinking of ways to leverage dead Diana. Come on, Meghan, isn't it time for a wreath ceremony at Diana's statue at Kensington? Wear your best ragged jeans or Dior Couture and be sure to drag a camera crew.


----------



## redney

rose60610 said:


> I think we can see Meghan as a hustler who hustles, so OK. In general we admire those who hustle in legal manners to better their lots in life.
> 
> I have some difficulty in trying to understand how somebody who lamented over eating at Sizzlers then clawed her way into the inner circle of the BRF felt she could leverage THAT into even greater fame and fortune.  She did not realize one iota whatsoever that the attention she received was 100% due to being associated with Harry and that HIS fame and fortune was 100% due to the BRF.  For Meghan and Harry to throw the BRF under the bus was, in effect, cutting off their own noses to spite their faces. Nobody gives a damn about Meghan Markle as an individual. Harry was an international figure solely due to his heritage. When Harry was complicit with Meghan's inflammatory statements about the BRF he essentially discarded his entire identity, and therefore hers.
> 
> If, indeed, Harry truly believes that his own family are "prisoners", "racist", and "made Meghan suicidal" so be it. Fine. Be a man and stand up for those convictions.
> 
> Then don't try to beg your way into Da-da's Bentley to take you to the church at Granny's Jubilee. Don't wonder why Major Thompson had to babysit your sorry asses at the church. Realize you resort to even hiring camera crews to cemeteries to take advantage of dead people in order to pimp your image. Etcetera.
> 
> They are at rock bottom. These two losers are so effing entitled and delusional that it boggles the mind. Granted, Netflix and Spotify made them great offers. Offers that were largely predicated on their relationship with the BRF. Oops! That's gone! All they got left is thinking of ways to leverage dead Diana. Come on, Meghan, isn't it time for a wreath ceremony at Diana's statue at Kensington? Wear your best ragged jeans or Dior Couture and be sure to drag a camera crew.


All of this! Bravo!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> I think we can see Meghan as a hustler who hustles, so OK. In general we admire those who hustle in legal manners to better their lots in life.
> 
> I have some difficulty in trying to understand how somebody who lamented over eating at Sizzlers then clawed her way into the inner circle of the BRF felt she could leverage THAT into even greater fame and fortune.  She did not realize one iota whatsoever that the attention she received was 100% due to being associated with Harry and that HIS fame and fortune was 100% due to the BRF.  For Meghan and Harry to throw the BRF under the bus was, in effect, cutting off their own noses to spite their faces. Nobody gives a damn about Meghan Markle as an individual. Harry was an international figure solely due to his heritage. When Harry was complicit with Meghan's inflammatory statements about the BRF he essentially discarded his entire identity, and therefore hers.
> 
> If, indeed, Harry truly believes that his own family are "prisoners", "racist", and "made Meghan suicidal" so be it. Fine. Be a man and stand up for those convictions.
> 
> Then don't try to beg your way into Da-da's Bentley to take you to the church at Granny's Jubilee. Don't wonder why Major Thompson had to babysit your sorry asses at the church. Realize you resort to even hiring camera crews to cemeteries to take advantage of dead people in order to pimp your image. Etcetera.
> 
> They are at rock bottom. These two losers are so effing entitled and delusional that it boggles the mind. Granted, Netflix and Spotify made them great offers. Offers that were largely predicated on their relationship with the BRF. Oops! That's gone! All they got left is thinking of ways to leverage dead Diana. Come on, Meghan, isn't it time for a wreath ceremony at Diana's statue at Kensington? Wear your best ragged jeans or Dior Couture and be sure to drag a camera crew.


I always found her Sizzler Woe-is-me story insulting. I'm an average person earning average income and I loved Sizzler. It was a treat to go there and I never considered myself to be deprived. She is like the snake who opened her jaws wide to swallow an elephant, and got stomped on instead.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I always found her Sizzler Woe-is-me story insulting. I'm an average person earning average income and I loved Sizzler. It was a treat to go there and I never considered myself to be deprived. She is like the snake who opened her jaws wide to swallow an elephant, and got stomped on instead.



I don't know Sizzler, but anyway as kids, didn't we all prefer these type of places and not the proper sit-down restaurants with 4 sets of cutlery and a wine menu that had no ketchup? I'm sure for Harry and Will it would have had the best fun.

She's so up her own A, she can't even make up stories that make sense.


----------



## Jktgal

xincinsin said:


> I always found her Sizzler Woe-is-me story insulting. I'm an average person earning average income and I loved Sizzler. It was a treat to go there and I never considered myself to be deprived. She is like the snake who opened her jaws wide to swallow an elephant, and got stomped on instead.


Sizzler in Asia is luxury.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> I always found her Sizzler Woe-is-me story insulting. I'm an average person earning average income and I loved Sizzler. It was a treat to go there and I never considered myself to be deprived. She is like the snake who opened her jaws wide to swallow an elephant, and got stomped on instead.


At least at Sizzlers you don’t run the risk of seeing her. You know you will be able to dine in peace without her sending her bodyguards over to interrupt your meal to warn you not to take pictures of some body you probably couldn‘t care less about and wouldn’t have even known was in the restaurant if she hadn’t decided to throw her weight around.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> I don't know Sizzler, but anyway as kids, didn't we all prefer these type of places and not the proper sit-down restaurants with 4 sets of cutlery and a wine menu that had *no ketchup*? I'm sure for Harry and Will it would have had the best fun.
> 
> She's so up her own A, she can't even make up stories that make sense.


Agree with your comment but on a lighter note, I've never liked ketchup since I was a kid. Therefore, I didn't care even if non-4 sets of cutlery and wine menu restaurants didn't have ketchup back then    

When I moved to the US (a few years back as an adult), I was and still am disappointed that restaurants have ketchup but not sweet chili sauce, unlike back home.


----------



## Chanbal

A scary story for our UK members. 









						Harry, Meghan could return as ‘no one wants them around' in the US
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry could return to the UK as "no one wants the Sussexes around" in the US, a royal expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG trying to help Hazz with his memoir???


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I think we can see Meghan as a hustler who hustles, so OK. In general we admire those who hustle in legal manners to better their lots in life.
> 
> I have some difficulty in trying to understand how somebody who lamented over eating at Sizzlers then clawed her way into the inner circle of the BRF felt she could leverage THAT into even greater fame and fortune.  She did not realize one iota whatsoever that the attention she received was 100% due to being associated with Harry and that HIS fame and fortune was 100% due to the BRF.  For Meghan and Harry to throw the BRF under the bus was, in effect, cutting off their own noses to spite their faces. Nobody gives a damn about Meghan Markle as an individual. Harry was an international figure solely due to his heritage. When Harry was complicit with Meghan's inflammatory statements about the BRF he essentially discarded his entire identity, and therefore hers.
> 
> If, indeed, Harry truly believes that his own family are "prisoners", "racist", and "made Meghan suicidal" so be it. Fine. Be a man and stand up for those convictions.
> 
> Then don't try to beg your way into Da-da's Bentley to take you to the church at Granny's Jubilee. Don't wonder why Major Thompson had to babysit your sorry asses at the church. Realize you resort to even hiring camera crews to cemeteries to take advantage of dead people in order to pimp your image. Etcetera.
> 
> They are at rock bottom. These two losers are so effing entitled and delusional that it boggles the mind. Granted, Netflix and Spotify made them great offers. Offers that were largely predicated on their relationship with the BRF. Oops! That's gone! All they got left is thinking of ways to leverage dead Diana. Come on, Meghan, isn't it time for a wreath ceremony at Diana's statue at Kensington? Wear your best ragged jeans or Dior Couture and be sure to drag a camera crew.


Agree, read somewhere that a senior royal - Anne , QEII ? - counseled MM a before wedding that it is not about YOU, it is about the JOB


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> A scary story for our UK members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan could return as ‘no one wants them around' in the US
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry could return to the UK as "no one wants the Sussexes around" in the US, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Hmmm one point Bower does make well is that the Sharkle popularity is high in the US, non existent in the UK 
So, they are better off where they are , sadly… would love to see them exit here


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Agree, read somewhere that a senior royal - Anne , QEII ? - counseled MM a before wedding that it is not about YOU, it is about the JOB


Also palace advisors who were trying to teach her the royal ropes and she dismissed them, saying BP was not going to dictate her life.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Agree, read somewhere that a senior royal - Anne , QEII ? - counseled MM a before wedding that it is not about YOU, it is about the JOB


It didn't work with Diana and Fergie. That's why it was reported that Philip didn't like them, they made it about themselves.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> It didn't work with Diana and Fergie. That's why it was reported that Philip didn't like them, they made it about themselves.



In the early years though, Diana did the hard work. She showed up, she did her job, for more than 10+ years.  I'm sure she loved the attention as it was validation when her relationship with Charles was so rocky of course.  

Meghan, though, was a working member of the family for all of 5 minutes.  She hardly worked at all.  There was the wedding, she immediately got pregnant, then a couple of overseas trips (including the infamous one to Africa), then they went on their extended rest/vacation that same Fall, then she goes on maternity leave in 2019, then they're Megexiting in early 2020.   In between all that, she squeezed in a few events that would advance her agenda, like the Disney film premier so she could hang out with the A list and Bob Iger.


----------



## marietouchet

Mm is a hustler OK if she is peddling clothes ….
JCMH peddling pseudo-psychiatry … hmmm ….


----------



## marietouchet

The most egregious event was the shower - see Bower
Every outfit was promoting something.
Gayle and OW were trying to secure interviews since before wedding. Remember ? gayle had the exclusive after A was born - uk press was out in the cold


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Also palace advisors who were trying to teach her the royal ropes and she dismissed them, saying BP was not going to dictate her life.


If I'm not mistaken, that was her attitude when acting too. I remember reading about her arguing with the Suits scriptwriters about her character lines and development.


----------



## Chanbal

TW needs to increase the salary of Sachs ASAP… 









						Meghan Markle and Harry 'dumped' from front cover as Kate takes over
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry could be relegated to the later pages of a prominent US magazine as Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William prepare for their Boston visit, a royal commentator claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

(sorry if this has been posted before)


----------



## lallybelle

I am a little more than halfway through the book now, and true it could almost be from bits & pieces found here...lol. Somethings have even made it into the book that our dear Ceejay told us from her sources.

But I feel like it's so validating. We know that Bower went through a lot of trouble to make sure he was not going to be sued. So all of her behavior cannot be just attributed to "haters" and gossip rags, etc.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> (sorry if this has been posted before)



A look in the mirror would answer the question.

She has miscalculated their importance.

IF Haz had delivered a dynamite speech, it might have resulted in some “sorry I missed seeing him speak” publicity, generating interest for future engagements . But he didn’t, he bombed, on a world wide stage. He scowled, looked like a self indulged fool, spouted his usual platitudes and complaint, and failed to celebrate in any meaningful manner the man who was the purpose of the event.

He did not present himself as someone who corporations/associations/charities 
would be interested in paying to speak on their behalf. To underline it, the strained dynamic between the Harkles as he returned to his seat underlined it all. He pouted. I read he asked her how it went and she told him it could have been better. Mommy2 was not happy with widdle Ginger.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Mm is a hustler OK if she is peddling clothes ….
> JCMH peddling pseudo-psychiatry … hmmm ….


Just call them the Hustlin' Harkles.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> TW needs to increase the salary of Sachs ASAP…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Harry 'dumped' from front cover as Kate takes over
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry could be relegated to the later pages of a prominent US magazine as Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William prepare for their Boston visit, a royal commentator claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


They can only afford the basic plan these days.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> If I'm not mistaken, that was her attitude when acting too. I remember reading about her arguing with the Suits scriptwriters about her character lines and development.


She is an arrogant know-it-all and it is clearly going to be her downfall.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

youngster said:


> In the early years though, Diana did the hard work. She showed up, she did her job, for more than 10+ years.  I'm sure she loved the attention as it was validation when her relationship with Charles was so rocky of course.
> 
> Meghan, though, was a working member of the family for all of 5 minutes.  She hardly worked at all.  There was the wedding, she immediately got pregnant, then a couple of overseas trips (including the infamous one to Africa), then they went on their extended rest/vacation that same Fall, then she goes on maternity leave in 2019, then they're Megexiting in early 2020.   In between all that, she squeezed in a few events that would advance her agenda, like the Disney film premier so she could hang out with the A list and Bob Iger.


Diana did the work in terms of showing up shaking hands, bringing attention to causes, etc.  But the part of the job that she always seemed to ignore, which Phillip did incredibly well, was to make sure the spotlight shone more on Charles than it did on her.  Phillip was so protective of Elizabeth and cooperative in making sure she shone the brightest that I can understand why he of all people was intolerant of any spouse who married into the family and didn't play by those rules.
But Meghan certainly ignored all of that.  Not only did she want to shine as much as Harry, she wanted to outshine William and Kate.  She didn't want to do any of the work, and was determined to turn the entire structure upside down.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wouldn’t the UN folks basically needed to come in during their summer vacation to be at that speech? I can’t see most people doing that unless it was an extremely important speech or meeting.  They should’ve been able to figure that out before accepting the engagement


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> Diana did the work in terms of showing up shaking hands, bringing attention to causes, etc.  But the part of the job that she always seemed to ignore, which Phillip did incredibly well, was to make sure the spotlight shone more on Charles than it did on her.  Phillip was so protective of Elizabeth and cooperative in making sure she shone the brightest that I can understand why he of all people was intolerant of any spouse who married into the family and didn't play by those rules.
> But Meghan certainly ignored all of that.  Not only did she want to shine as much as Harry, she wanted to outshine William and Kate.  She didn't want to do any of the work, and was determined to turn the entire structure upside down.


From a non-American POV, I'd say Methane thought the whole BRF set-up was like a county pageant or a talent show, and she believed that she had the X factor to become top dog.


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Wouldn’t the UN folks basically needed to come in during their summer vacation to be at that speech? I can’t see most people doing that unless it was an extremely important speech or meeting.  They should’ve been able to figure that out before accepting the engagement



Right. But they're so egotistical that they probably thought people would break from their vacations to come see them.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Right. But they're so egotistical that they probably thought people would break from their vacations to come see them.


I wonder if they charged an appearance fee for that speech.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> I wonder if they charged an appearance fee for that speech.


Would that be possible at the UN?


----------



## rose60610

LibbyRuth said:


> But Meghan certainly ignored all of that. Not only did she want to shine as much as Harry, she wanted to outshine William and Kate. She didn't want to do any of the work, and was determined to turn the entire structure upside down.



In her demented and delusional mind, she still thinks she outshines the whole BRF. And it's OUR fault if we don't agree  . Poor Archie and Lilibet. After the Queen passes, I think she'll try to use them in an attempt to reinsert themselves into the BRF. After all, the BRF can't turn away the kiddies from knowing their cousins, right? Meghan is going to twist these efforts to cast herself as a major victim when the BRF doesn't roll out the red carpets for her.


----------



## WingNut

rose60610 said:


> I think we can see Meghan as a hustler who hustles, so OK. In general we admire those who hustle in legal manners to better their lots in life.
> 
> I have some difficulty in trying to understand how somebody who lamented over eating at Sizzlers then clawed her way into the inner circle of the BRF felt she could leverage THAT into even greater fame and fortune.  She did not realize one iota whatsoever that the attention she received was 100% due to being associated with Harry and that HIS fame and fortune was 100% due to the BRF.  For Meghan and Harry to throw the BRF under the bus was, in effect, cutting off their own noses to spite their faces. Nobody gives a damn about Meghan Markle as an individual. Harry was an international figure solely due to his heritage. When Harry was complicit with Meghan's inflammatory statements about the BRF he essentially discarded his entire identity, and therefore hers.
> 
> If, indeed, Harry truly believes that his own family are "prisoners", "racist", and "made Meghan suicidal" so be it. Fine. Be a man and stand up for those convictions.
> 
> Then don't try to beg your way into Da-da's Bentley to take you to the church at Granny's Jubilee. Don't wonder why Major Thompson had to babysit your sorry asses at the church. Realize you resort to even hiring camera crews to cemeteries to take advantage of dead people in order to pimp your image. Etcetera.
> 
> They are at rock bottom. These two losers are so effing entitled and delusional that it boggles the mind. Granted, Netflix and Spotify made them great offers. Offers that were largely predicated on their relationship with the BRF. Oops! That's gone! All they got left is thinking of ways to leverage dead Diana. Come on, Meghan, isn't it time for a wreath ceremony at Diana's statue at Kensington? Wear your best ragged jeans or Dior Couture and be sure to drag a camera crew.


Bravo!!!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm one point Bower does make well is that the Sharkle popularity is high in the US, non existent in the UK
> So, they are better off where they are , sadly… would love to see them exit here



I think they're wearing out their welcome everywhere


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I don't know Sizzler, but anyway as kids, didn't we all prefer these type of places and not the proper sit-down restaurants with 4 sets of cutlery and a wine menu that had no ketchup? I'm sure for Harry and Will it would have had the best fun.
> 
> She's so up her own A, she can't even make up stories that make sense.


I bet we all had a place that the family enjoyed. We had a Howard Johnson’s restaurant that did an all you can eat Friday night fish fry that actually had pretty good fried shrimp and the fries were great. My teen brother consumed mass quantities lol!  There was nothing g wrong with what The Sizzler offered. She just became a snob when it suited her.  In’n Out burger is OK with them now so Meghan,please explain that.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Would that be possible at the UN?


If their appearance was arranged by a 3rd party, supposedly Mandela's widow, it might be possible.


----------



## charlottawill

LibbyRuth said:


> But the part of the job that she always seemed to ignore, which Phillip did incredibly well, was to make sure the spotlight shone more on Charles than it did on her.


I'm not sure she was solely to blame for that. It was only natural for everyone to want see and meet the beautiful young princess instead of her boring husband. It would have been wise for him to recognize her value to the monarchy and let her run with it instead of getting sulky about being upstaged by her at times. You are right that Philip was very good at it, but I believe he also struggled with it early in the marriage and it took some time for him to accept that the Queen was the star of the show.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> (sorry if this has been posted before)



Someone should tell her it is not like the Oscars or Emmys where they pay people to be "seat fillers". I have a feeling if she knew about the low turnout ahead of time she would have tried that.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'm not sure she was solely to blame for that. It was only natural for everyone to want see and meet the beautiful young princess instead of her boring husband. It would have been for him wise to recognize her value to the monarchy and let her run with it instead of getting sulky about being upstaged by her at times. You are right that Philip was very good at it, but I believe he also struggled with it early in the marriage and it took some time for him to accept that the Queen was the star of the show.


On the other hand,  Charles  should have learned to use her popularity to his advantage. I recall President Kennedy doing that with Jackie. I think his father wanted him to go to Gordonstoun to toughen him up and all it did was making him self centered.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> I'm not sure she was solely to blame for that. *It was only natural for everyone to want see and meet the beautiful young princess instead of her boring husband. *It would have been for him wise to recognize her value to the monarchy and let her run with it instead of getting sulky about being upstaged by her at times. You are right that Philip was very good at it, but I believe he also struggled with it early in the marriage and it took some time for him to accept that the Queen was the star of the show.



Spot on! Charles was 32 when he married Diana and everybody knew him since he was a child. In the early 80's it was much more common to marry young, and at 32 Charles was taking forever. Diana was just 20, attractive, and acted very shy which I think endeared her to most people. Charles was also an awkward character with a droll personality, and people saw him dull as a tree stump. Enter Diana who had a wonderful smile and exuded warmth and caring. Any woman was going to outshine Charles unless she crawled under a rock. Chuck is a lot better now, he's grown into his role. Thankfully Will seemed to be a natural right out of the gate. Harry never had any kind of expectations and it shows.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> On the other hand,  Charles  should have learned to use her popularity to his advantage. I recall President Kennedy doing that with Jackie. I think his father wanted him to go to Gordonstoun to toughen him up and all it did was making him self centered.


From everything I've read he was miserable at Gordonstoun and that is why he didn't send W&H there. You are right, there was no pampering at Gordonstoun, so I don't see how that would have made him self-centered. But being catered and kowtowed to all your life because you are the heir certainly would.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> On the other hand,  Charles  should have learned to use her popularity to his advantage. I recall President Kennedy doing that with Jackie. I think his father wanted him to go to Gordonstoun to toughen him up and all it did was making him self centered.


It's an interesting comparison. Although he was pretty much a sex addict, Jack did seem to have genuine love for Jackie. She was aware of some of his affairs and we'll never know whether, had Jack lived, she might have ultimately divorced him after he left office.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Spot on! Charles was 32 when he married Diana and everybody knew him since he was a child. In the early 80's it was much more common to marry young, and at 32 Charles was taking forever. Diana was just 20, attractive, and acted very shy which I think endeared her to most people. Charles was also an awkward character with a droll personality, and people saw him dull as a tree stump. Enter Diana who had a wonderful smile and exuded warmth and caring. Any woman was going to outshine Charles unless she crawled under a rock. Chuck is a lot better now, he's grown into his role. Thankfully Will seemed to be a natural right out of the gate. Harry never had any kind of expectations and it shows.


William and. Catherine have been a team from the start. Big difference


----------



## Jayne1

rose60610 said:


> Spot on! Charles was 32 when he married Diana and everybody knew him since he was a child. In the early 80's it was much more common to marry young, and at 32 Charles was taking forever. Diana was just 20, attractive, and acted very shy which I think endeared her to most people. Charles was also an awkward character with a droll personality, and people saw him dull as a tree stump. Enter Diana who had a wonderful smile and exuded warmth and caring. Any woman was going to outshine Charles unless she crawled under a rock. Chuck is a lot better now, he's grown into his role. Thankfully Will seemed to be a natural right out of the gate. Harry never had any kind of expectations and it shows.


What doesn't work for the BRF is not so much age and beauty, it is letting the public know what they are feeling.

The Queen does not. Camilla is incredibly good at putting aside any ego. Kate shines of course, but we never see ego and just does her job.

Diana and Meg were both manipulative and vindictive with a constant need to feed their public persona... and that is not welcomed in the BRF.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> It's an interesting comparison. Although he was pretty much a sex addict, Jack did seem to have genuine love for Jackie. She was aware of some of his affairs and we'll never know whether, had Jack lived, she might have ultimately divorced him after he left office.


I doubt there would have been a divorce. She liked the status and money. Joe Kennedy knew that and gave her gifts. Ari got fed up with her spending just to spend and was dumping her. Money was always important to her. Her last companion, Maurice Templesman made her all of her real money by investing it wisely. She had a few thing things in common with Meg, but just a few. I don’t believe there are enough to make a real comparison as on the whole, she and her goals were quite different


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I bet we all had a place that the family enjoyed. We had a Howard Johnson’s restaurant that did an all you can eat Friday night fish fry that actually had pretty good fried shrimp and the fries were great. My teen brother consumed mass quantities lol!  There was nothing g wrong with what The Sizzler offered. She just became a snob when it suited her.  In’n Out burger is OK with them now so Meghan,please explain that.


For my family it was McDonald's or Friendly's. Sizzler is for the unwashed masses in the minds of many. Even the cool people in LA go to In-N-Out. Celebrities have been known to go there after awards ceremonies in their red carpet ensembles, so that's why it is OK with ZeeZy.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> From everything I've read he was miserable at Gordonstoun and that is why he didn't send W&H there. You are right, there was no pampering at Gordonstoun, so I don't see how that would have made him self-centered. But being catered and kowtowed to all your life because you are the heir certainly would.


I think he was wallowing in self pity and being a victim when at that school and that is why he became more self centered. He disliked the place, made it known and he still had to stay there.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> What doesn't work for the BRF is not so much age and beauty, it is letting the public know what they are feeling.
> 
> The Queen does not. Camilla is incredibly good at putting aside any ego. Kate shines of course, but we never see ego and just does her job.
> 
> Diana and Meg were both manipulative and vindictive with a constant need to feed their public persona... and that is not welcomed in the BRF.


Do you think that if Charles had tried harder, they would have stayed married?


----------



## LibbyRuth

charlottawill said:


> I'm not sure she was solely to blame for that. It was only natural for everyone to want see and meet the beautiful young princess instead of her boring husband. It would have been wise for him to recognize her value to the monarchy and let her run with it instead of getting sulky about being upstaged by her at times. You are right that Philip was very good at it, but I believe he also struggled with it early in the marriage and it took some time for him to accept that the Queen was the star of the show.


I think there is more of a challenge for women who marry into the family, because there is going to be more to talk about and focus on with them.  A man who marries into the family is not going to get as much attention for his fashion, his new hairstyle etc.  So in that respect, I'd agree that it wasn't all Diana's fault.
That said, I think in Kate, we have an example of how it can be done.  Throughout their marriage I think Kate has worked to make sure that there is still more spotlight on William.  When they do joint appearances, she defers to him.  She limits the number of solo appearances she does.  At times, she has been criticized for not doing enough work - but her not having a ton of appearances ensures there is more focus on William.
But regardless, since this is the Harry and Meghan thread - Meghan was NEVER going to play that game.  Totally agree with rose606010 that in her mind it was all about who had the most x factor and she was certain she could be the star of the family AND transform their old fashioned ways.  I think that in her mind Kate, Sophie and other women in the family would cheer on her willingness to stand up and shake things up.  I think a lot of her sour grapes to this day come from discovering that they were not all sitting around hoping she'd come along and save them.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I doubt there would have been a divorce. She liked the status and money. Joe Kennedy knew that and gave her gifts. Ari got fed up with her spending just to spend and was dumping her. Money was always important to her. Her last companion, Maurice Templesman made her all of her real money by investing it wisely. She had a few thing things in common with Meg, but just a few. I don’t believe there are enough to make a real comparison as on the whole, she and her goals were quite different


IIRC, Jackie had the pedigree that John Kennedy didn't and his father Joe Kennedy wanted for a daughter-in-law/prospective First Lady, but her family lacked the money that the Kennedys had. Some thought she was marrying beneath her station.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Do you think that if Charles had tried harder, they would have stayed married?


I doubt it, since Camilla has always been his true love. Diana had her flaws but she deserved better than to be his wife in name only. Maybe if she had lived and grown wiser with age, as many of us do, she would have found someone who returned her love.


----------



## charlottawill

LibbyRuth said:


> I think there is more of a challenge for women who marry into the family, because there is going to be more to talk about and focus on with them.  A man who marries into the family is not going to get as much attention for his fashion, his new hairstyle etc.  So in that respect, I'd agree that it wasn't all Diana's fault.
> That said, I think in Kate, we have an example of how it can be done.  Throughout their marriage I think Kate has worked to make sure that there is still more spotlight on William.  When they do joint appearances, she defers to him.  She limits the number of solo appearances she does.  At times, she has been criticized for not doing enough work - but her not having a ton of appearances ensures there is more focus on William.
> But regardless, since this is the Harry and Meghan thread - Meghan was NEVER going to play that game.  Totally agree with rose606010 that in her mind it was all about who had the most x factor and she was certain she could be the star of the family AND transform their old fashioned ways.  I think that in her mind Kate, Sophie and other women in the family would cheer on her willingness to stand up and shake things up.  I think a lot of her sour grapes to this day come from discovering that they were not all sitting around hoping she'd come along and save them.


Agree with you, but the big difference with W&K is that they are the same age and knew each other for nearly a decade before they got engaged. That certainly has contributed to the success of their relationship, as opposed to his parents' situation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> At least at Sizzlers you don’t run the risk of seeing her. You know you will be able to dine in peace without her sending her bodyguards over to interrupt your meal to warn you not to take pictures of some body you probably couldn‘t care less about and wouldn’t have even known was in the restaurant if she hadn’t decided to throw her weight around.



I would love to see the patrons of said restaurant to unisono complain to the manager and the manager in turn asking the Harkles to leave. Wouldn't that be great fun. I'm not into being harrassed while eating dinner.


----------



## bag-mania

Isn't it true that Philip had affairs? It's kind of sad that even being Queen doesn't get you a pass on being cheated on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> A scary story for our UK members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan could return as ‘no one wants them around' in the US
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry could return to the UK as "no one wants the Sussexes around" in the US, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Sounds like a problem that would follow them to the UK, though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Do you think that if Charles had tried harder, they would have stayed married?


No, Diana had many good qualities but she had too many self destructive impulses and too many emotional problems.  Even during and after divorce, none of her relationships lasted. Not even the female ones.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She is an arrogant know-it-all and it is clearly going to be her downfall.



It's taken long enough.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I doubt there would have been a divorce. She liked the status and money. Joe Kennedy knew that and gave her gifts. Ari got fed up with her spending just to spend and was dumping her. Money was always important to her. Her last companion, Maurice Templesman made her all of her real money by investing it wisely. She had a few thing things in common with Meg, but just a few. I don’t believe there are enough to make a real comparison as on the whole, she and her goals were quite different


Privacy for one!  A low-key(ish) life while working part time as a consulting book editor.  Are we comparing Diana or Meg to Jackie?  Can't see either wanting anything close to normal.

Maurice Templesman was the best thing that happened to her. They were happy in the end.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Isn't it true that Philip had affairs? It's kind of sad that even being Queen doesn't get you a pass on being cheated on.



I'm not so sure. Theirs was a love match, and he strikes me as a principled man. Also, he had suffered through his childhood because his father was off with his sidepieces leaving his mother to fend for herself.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Isn't it true that Philip had affairs? It's kind of sad that even being Queen doesn't get you a pass on being cheated on.


There were rumors over the years but no substantive proof ever came to light. If he did he and his partners were very discreet.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

LibbyRuth said:


> Diana did the work in terms of showing up shaking hands, bringing attention to causes, etc.  But the part of the job that she always seemed to ignore, which Phillip did incredibly well, was to make sure the spotlight shone more on Charles than it did on her.  Phillip was so protective of Elizabeth and cooperative in making sure she shone the brightest that I can understand why he of all people was intolerant of any spouse who married into the family and didn't play by those rules.
> But Meghan certainly ignored all of that.  Not only did she want to shine as much as Harry, she wanted to outshine William and Kate.  She didn't want to do any of the work, and was determined to turn the entire structure upside down.


Perfectly stated. Your comment could be considered a summary  of M and how and why she was ill suited to join the royal family.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, he had suffered through his childhood because his father was off with his sidepieces leaving his mother to fend for herself.


This is why I was skeptical of the rumors about William. He saw firsthand the emotional pain his mother went through and I found it hard to believe he'd do the same to his wife. Some have said it is a royal prerogative to have a mistress, but that may be outdated today. We can never really know.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure. Theirs was a love match, and he strikes me as a principled man. Also, he had suffered through his childhood because his father was off with his sidepieces leaving his mother to fend for herself.





charlottawill said:


> There were rumors over the years but no substantive proof ever came to light. If he did and his partners were very discreet.


We may never know. It was a different time and back then the press would protect them from scandal.

Here in the US a number of reporters were aware of Kennedy's dalliances at the time but didn't publicly reveal them. That wouldn't come out until many years after his death.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Agree, read somewhere that a senior royal - Anne , QEII ? - counseled MM a before wedding that it is not about YOU, it is about the JOB



M was probably sticking her fingers in her ears at that session and humming to block out anything she didn't want to hear


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> (sorry if this has been posted before)



Tyler Perry was right. The things she endures


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so sure. Theirs was a love match, and he strikes me as a principled man. Also, he had suffered through his childhood because his father was off with his sidepieces leaving his mother to fend for herself.


I thought it was pretty much known that Philip had some side pieces... but as with many in high society, he kept it quiet and was very dedicated to serving the Queen.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Looking for an update on book publication date, I found an absolute jewel - Forbes is a well respected financial magazine -  THEY would know the correct terminology lol
> 
> Archewell … It’s a very broadly-cast not-for-profit/yet-somewhat-commercial media/charity enterprise.
> 
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/guymar...d-troubles-producing-content/?sh=579d1ad182fc


IDK what more he can say about his mother's death
Unless he wants to change his story and say the RF had her killed


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF? He can barely walk straight.

What an extremely sh*tty person you must be to not stop your completely intoxicated with whatever husband from showing up like this to a public event. And that f*cking unhinged grin.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## MiniMabel

Jayne1 said:


> I thought it was pretty much known that Philip had some side pieces... but as with many in high society, he kept it quiet and was very dedicated to serving the Queen.



n/m


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

I remember how in the 80s Wallis and Edward and the abdication was always presented in the media as being an amazing love story. I’m not kidding. What a difference a few decades makes.


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> Tyler Perry was right. The things she endures



I don't think she would have cared about filling seats at the UN had there not been pictures of the auditorium. I sometimes work at or go to these types of events, and very often all that is videoed and pictured are the speaker and presentation.

I can't remember if H had a presentation along with his speech, if he didn't, it's not the UN's fault, because the Sussexes gave very little visual for edited-down highlights (I say highlights advisedly) or follow-up for publicity/posterity. Their laziness is demonstrated once again.

Plus, really bad move from M!

The UN is possibly one organisation she could (have) continued work (or 'work' in her case) - now they will be recoiling from the couple too.


Anybody still thinks M is a good hustler?


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I thought it was pretty much known that Philip had some side pieces... but as with many in high society, he kept it quiet and was very dedicated to serving the Queen.



Paid 'ladies' don't talk. That's partly why they get paid.

 Plus, silence is mutually beneficial  

Hence why no-one has 'yacht girl' on their CV


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I remember how in the 80s Wallis and Edward and the abdication was always presented in the media as being an amazing love story. I’m not kidding. What a difference a few decades makes.



The man who gave up the throne for the woman he loved. I remember hearing about them back in the 70s when I was a kid. It sounded hopelessly romantic then, but nothing is as it seems.


----------



## papertiger

Carrying on the theme:


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> The man who gave up the throne for the woman he loved. I remember hearing about them back in the 70s when I was a kid. It sounded hopelessly romantic then, but nothing is as it seems.


Perception of events changes over time. And I’m not sure our current interpretation of it is accurate either. It’s been 85 years since the abdication.   Nobody who’s written about it in the past 30 years was alive while it was happening, except maybe as a small child. How can we be certain what we believe today is true? We can’t.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Perception of events changes over time. And I’m not sure our current interpretation of it is accurate either. It’s been 85 years since the abdication.   Nobody who’s written about it in the past 30 years was alive while it was happening, except maybe as a small child. How can we be certain what we believe today is true? We can’t.


QE visited him as did Prince Charles.


_Edward suffered from throat cancer in the years leading up to his death, so when Queen Elizabeth II, her husband Prince Philip, and their son Prince Charles paid a visit to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor during a state visit to France in May 1972, he wasn't well enough to properly receive them. Still, the Queen reportedly spent a few private minutes with him that day — and, as is seen in season 3 of The Crown on Netflix, the Duke reportedly rose from his bed to bow to her.

Accounts of this meeting with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor vary, but according to many, it was a somewhat awkward one. The Queen was reportedly not a fan of Wallis, and she grew "annoyed" with her at times. Still, she allegedly greatly appreciated that her uncle put so much effort into paying her the "final courtesy" of bowing._









						The Queen Visited the Duke of Windsor Days Before He Died
					

Queen Elizabeth II visited her estranged uncle Edward VIII, a.k.a. the Duke of Windsor, in France before he died. Here's what really happened that day.




					sg.news.yahoo.com
				




Prince Charles’s account:

_Wilson refers to prince's diary entry, in which Charles describes arriving at the duke's Parisian residence to find a party full of the "most dreadful American guests I have ever seen." Charles added, "*The whole thing seemed so tragic—the existence, the people and the atmosphere—that I was relieved to escape it after 45 minutes."*

The historian believes that Charles likely wrote this with an audience in mind, and would have downplayed any positive experience he might have had. Still, Wilson says, "Never meet you heroes, they say, and how right they are to say it." He adds, "I think he was unsettled by the grand style in which the Windsors lived, maybe he thought they were living in some ordinary town-house in an anonymous Parisian street. I think he was also miffed that there was a party going on when he arrived, whereas he viewed such an historic meeting as something which should stand alone, not dovetailed in with the Windsors' hectic social commitments."_








						Inside Prince Charles's Relationship with the Duke of Windsor
					

The Prince of Wales did in fact visit with his "Uncle David" in Paris.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> IDK what more he can say about his mother's death
> Unless he wants to change his story and say the RF had her killed


LOL …
Bower was convincing when showing how a story by H or M morphed over time, it was never the same. Assuming one version was true, that leaves all the rest as lies.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Prince Charles’s account:
> 
> _Wilson refers to prince's diary entry, in which *Charles describes arriving at the duke's Parisian residence to find a party full of the "most dreadful American guests I have ever seen." Charles added, *"*The whole thing seemed so tragic—the existence, the people and the atmosphere—that I was relieved to escape it after 45 minutes."*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Prince Charles's Relationship with the Duke of Windsor
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales did in fact visit with his "Uncle David" in Paris.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



I had to laugh reading this. Charles was even more of a stuck-up prig back then than I already thought he was.


----------



## marietouchet

Charles was 20ish in 1972 when he saw Windsor and was anxious to leave, I give him a pass for lack of patience

Wonder how Charles’ diary was leaked to press


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> IDK what more he can say about his mother's death
> Unless he wants to change his story and say the RF had her killed


He was a child when his mother died.  Anything he has to say is only his opinion or heresay.  What insightful news can his 13 year old self possibly add to the conversation 25 years on?


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> He was a child when his mother died.  Anything he has to say is only his opinion or heresay.  What insightful news can his 13 year old self possibly add to the conversation 25 years on?


Did Charles train H to keep a diary ?


----------



## lanasyogamama

How long until Spotify has to acknowledge that the podcast isn’t coming out in the summer?


----------



## bag-mania

Not sure whether this book will be released in the US but it is available for pre-order in the UK. The author is the one who made public the Meghan bullying allegations. While the book isn’t about her, I have to think she will be brought up in it since it is about courtiers for the royal family.






						Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations: Amazon.co.uk: Low, Valentine: 9781472290908: Books
					

Buy Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations by Low, Valentine (ISBN: 9781472290908) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.



					www.amazon.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Did Charles train H to keep a diary ?


No Idea.  If he did, then all he can add to the story is how he felt at the time.  Not really earth shattering news, and certainly not what he was paid his large advances for.  A lot of people have trauma when they are young, myself included,  but it is how you move on with your life that matters.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Charles was 20ish in 1972 when he saw Windsor and was anxious to leave, I give him a pass for lack of patience
> 
> Wonder how Charles’ diary was leaked to press



From the article:

_The historian believes that Charles likely wrote this with an audience in mind, and would have downplayed any positive experience he might have had._

Prince Charles knew/knows exactly what he is doing.  He knows how important it is to make these visits public, just in case there were Wallis&Ed sympathisers.  His word choice is particularly meaningful imo.  _Tragic_, indeed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am LOL that Mega thought she could pull off a Carolyn Besette Kennedy slip dress.


----------



## jennlt

lanasyogamama said:


> How long until Spotify has to acknowledge that the podcast isn’t coming out in the summer?



Tick tock...









						Autumnal Equinox 2022: The First Day of Fall
					

In 2022, the autumnal equinox arrives on Thursday, September 22, marking the official first day of fall. Here's everything you should know about the fall equinox—plus our favorite fall facts, folklore, photos, and more!




					www.almanac.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> I am LOL that Mega thought she could pull off a Carolyn Besette Kennedy slip dress.



Or any of CBK’s looks.
What _is _wrong with M?

ETA:  thank you @lanasyogamama.  I missed this part of the book.  Completely shocked MM thought like this. 












						Meghan Markle's Wedding Dress Pays Tribute to Her Style Icon Carolyn Bessette Kennedy
					

But not how we thought it would.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo M is not even a cheap copy of CBK.  Good grief, enough with this so-called  ‘channeling’.  TBower needs to rewrite that chapter.  Sheesh. 










						How Meghan has been channelling Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy's wardrobe
					

Meghan, 36, chose a camel skirt and black polo top for her first official engagement with Prince Harry in Nottingham. The ensemble is strikingly similar to one worn by Carolyn Bessette.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Not sure whether this book will be released in the US but it is available for pre-order in the UK. The author is the one who made public the Meghan bullying allegations. While the book isn’t about her, I have to think she will be brought up in it since it is about courtiers for the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations: Amazon.co.uk: Low, Valentine: 9781472290908: Books
> 
> 
> Buy Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations by Low, Valentine (ISBN: 9781472290908) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.co.uk


Sounds like it would be waaaay more interesting than a whiney diatribe from the emasculated Court Jester, Humbug Hazbeen, as written by TW, possibly in calligraphy, with a footnote on where calligraphic services can be purchased on line through Archwell.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> He was a child when his mother died.  Anything he has to say is only his opinion or heresay.  What insightful news can his 13 year old self possibly add to the conversation 25 years on?


right....what does this person think H has to say that hasn't been said over and over?

quote:
Woven within this book’s narrative will be an account of the death of Diana like no other that any of us have ever read.  unquote

Harry wasn't there when she died.  the only thing he can really talk about is what he went through


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> He was a child when his mother died.  Anything he has to say is only his opinion or heresay.  What insightful news can his 13 year old self possibly add to the conversation 25 years on?



When I was a teen, a former policeman told me it's a crime _not _to report (another) crime. I believed it for years. When I was an adult I found out that was nonsense. 

If H is going to spill some nonsense about that car crash I don't even want to hear about it. He's probably saved some innocuous remark in his stupid head without any evidence. Harry has obviously been scarred for life but he needs to move on.Sadly, tragically, people die in car accidents even day. I lost my father when I was 24, not 13, but I can still empathise. 

I think poor Mohamed Al-Fayed who'd tragically lost his beloved son, deflected any feelings of guilt he had by projecting onto the BRF. He'd put the couple in _that_ car with _that_ driver, if it were me, I'd be sick about it too.  And Diana was not going to marry Dodi, Mohamed A-F just made the most of an awful situation by exploiting it.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo M is not even a cheap copy of CBK.  Good grief, enough with this so-called  ‘channeling’.  TBower needs to rewrite that chapter.  Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan has been channelling Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy's wardrobe
> 
> 
> Meghan, 36, chose a camel skirt and black polo top for her first official engagement with Prince Harry in Nottingham. The ensemble is strikingly similar to one worn by Carolyn Bessette.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


CBK wore ultra plain and simple styles and classics.  How can you compare her style with the overblown and overdesigned capes and side drapes on Meghan's dresses. The frog dress?  Pleeeez!


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> right....what does this person think H has to say that hasn't been said over and over?
> 
> quote:
> Woven within this book’s narrative will be an account of the death of Diana like no other that any of us have ever read.  unquote
> 
> Harry wasn't there when she died.  the only thing he can really talk about is what he went through



Guaranteed pity party.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> When I was a teen, a former policeman told me it's a crime _not _to report (another) crime. I believed it for years. When I was an adult I found out that was nonsense.
> 
> If H is going to spill some nonsense about that car crash I don't even want to hear about it. He's probably saved some innocuous remark in his stupid head without any evidence. Harry has obviously been scarred for life but he needs to move on.Sadly, tragically, people die in car accidents even day. I lost my father when I was 24, not 13, but I can still empathise.
> 
> I think poor Mohamed Al-Fayed who'd tragically lost his beloved son, deflected any feelings of guilt he had by projecting onto the BRF. He'd put the couple in _that_ car with _that_ driver, if it were me, I'd be sick about it too.  And Diana was not going to marry Dodi, Mohamed A-F just made the most of an awful situation by exploiting it.


I agree that Al Fayed has exploited it and because he hates the Royals with a passion.  He hated them before the accident because he was blocked from being a UK citizen and he blamed The Queen.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> How long until Spotify has to acknowledge that the podcast isn’t coming out in the summer?





jennlt said:


> Tick tock...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Autumnal Equinox 2022: The First Day of Fall
> 
> 
> In 2022, the autumnal equinox arrives on Thursday, September 22, marking the official first day of fall. Here's everything you should know about the fall equinox—plus our favorite fall facts, folklore, photos, and more!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.almanac.com



Good god and goddess. Summer is almost over. I've already put out my fall decorations both at home and at work  

My highly uneducated guess is that the podcast is not happening. Spotify must demand for their money back due to breach of contract. If the Grifters won't return it voluntarily then Spotify should put their attorneys who are on retainer to good use. Just sayin'


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> CBK wore ultra plain and simple styles and classics.  How can you compare her style with the overblown and overdesigned capes and side drapes on Meghan's dresses. The frog dress?  Pleeeez!



100% to all of this.
Plus, CBK never wore flashy jewelry, especially in daytime.  Never was into labels.  Mercy, she was old money from CT.  
[not some sleazy, *Zzzzz list*, yacht girl from Hwood.  ]


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% to all of this.
> Plus, CBK never wore flashy jewelry, especially in daytime.  Never was into labels.  Mercy, she was from CT.


You mean CBK didn't merch?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> You mean CBK didn't merch?


Clutching my pearls at the thought.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Clutching my pearls at the thought.


No, you didn't   I just spit my iced tea out at the coffee shop. Thanks for making my night!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Clutching my pearls at the thought.



Wasn't she PR for CK?


----------



## Luvbolide

charlottawill said:


> Also palace advisors who were trying to teach her the royal ropes and she dismissed them, saying BP was not going to dictate her life.



Surprise, surprise, surprise.  Her arrogance and sense of entitlement is off the charts.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> Wasn't she PR for CK?


I also think she was a muse for Narciso Rodriguez but my memory is crappy

i don’t like MM but +1 with @CarryOn2020 and @gracekelly re to Say she was channeling with the beige and black is a big stretch


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> Not sure whether this book will be released in the US but it is available for pre-order in the UK. The author is the one who made public the Meghan bullying allegations. While the book isn’t about her, I have to think she will be brought up in it since it is about courtiers for the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations: Amazon.co.uk: Low, Valentine: 9781472290908: Books
> 
> 
> Buy Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations by Low, Valentine (ISBN: 9781472290908) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.co.uk


Another book kept from American readers. Soon they will publish a new bible for the Yanks called the Gospel According to M and H. That will be available for purchase.


----------



## needlv

lanasyogamama said:


> How long until Spotify has to acknowledge that the podcast isn’t coming out in the summer?


Maybe she meant Summer in Australia, that gives her December- February timeframe! Lol


----------



## mellibelly

Lady C was very upset about the Bower insinuation that Methane was inspired by CBK’s wedding dress. The two dresses are nothing alike. Lady C went to FIT after all. She correctly pointed out Methane’s dress is a bad cover version of Princess Angela of Lichtenstein’s dress, which she designed herself. 











						Did Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress Nod to Princess Angela of Liechtenstein?
					

The gowns are so similar.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% to all of this.
> Plus, CBK never wore flashy jewelry, especially in daytime.  Never was into labels.  Mercy, she was old money from CT.
> [not some sleazy, *Zzzzz list*, yacht girl from Hwood.  ]


CBK did have the “IT” factor imo. 

The CT old money ref makes me think CeeJay would have had something to say!


----------



## mellibelly

And ZZZ has nothing in common with CBK personally or style wise. I have a friend that worked with her at CK in the 90’s and was friends with her. She says while CBK had her own issues and her marriage to John was troubled, she was incredibly private and hated media attention. She was also naturally charismatic and you couldn’t take your eyes off of her. She was not a try hard, she had IT effortlessly.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My mom’s friend was oohing and ahhing over a dog at an outdoor restaurant and didn’t realize until the owners left that it was JFK JR and CBK!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Wasn't she PR for CK?


Yes, yes, CBK did work for CK as a publicist, model, etc.  She was an icon for many in the 90s [still is ]. 
Apologies, initially, I misunderstood your post. 









						A Tailored Combo for Any Age — The Flair Index
					

I never thought I would put Rosie Huntington-Whiteley in one of my posts...and wait for it...there is Kendall Jenner too, alongside my favorite icons such as Carolyn Bessette Kennedy and Kate Hepburn, but it is absolute proof that the combo of a white button-down shirt and khakis (and vice...




					www.theflairindex.com


----------



## Toby93

Omg....the comments


----------



## rose60610

Toby93 said:


> He was a child when his mother died.  Anything he has to say is only his opinion or heresay.  *What insightful news can his 13 year old self possibly add to the conversation 25 years on?*



Oh! Plenty! Because he has Meghan to REMIND him of what to "remember". The more Huckster "remembers", the more $$$$ they can rake in!  Maybe even get another TV interview, you know, to spew "their truth".


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> Totally agree with rose606010 that in her mind it was all about who had the most x factor and she was certain she could be the star of the family AND transform their old fashioned ways.  I think that in her mind Kate, Sophie and other women in the family would cheer on her willingness to stand up and shake things up.  I think a lot of her sour grapes to this day come from discovering that they were not all sitting around *hoping she'd come along and save them.*


 
I agree - completely! We have no clue how Hazard described his family, but if he was already moaning to her pre-marriage about how unhappy he was as the spare, it probably gave birth to the whole "I'm trapped in the BRF", "Oh Harry darling, I'll save you" mentality. And since he thought the rest of his family was "trapped" too, she decided to rescue them and be lauded for it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I'm not sure she was solely to blame for that. It was only natural for everyone to want see and meet the beautiful young princess instead of her boring husband. It would have been wise for him to recognize her value to the monarchy and let her run with it instead of getting sulky about being upstaged by her at times. You are right that Philip was very good at it, but I believe *he also struggled with it early in the marriage *and it took some time for him to accept that the Queen was the star of the show.


I remember reading that he was most upset that his children would not bear his surname, so the Queen changed the surname to MW.


----------



## mellibelly

Wide open chicken legs but all I can think of is rickets!
He looks


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> M was probably sticking her fingers in her ears at that session and humming to block out anything she didn't want to hear


In local terms, it went in one ear and out the other. Even if she heard the advice, it wouldn't have stuck. Flower is special, you know.

Btw, if Doria was always off in Lalaland or physically gone doing her own thing, when did she have the time to nickname her daughter "Flower"? The Sussex PR machine seems to think any royal baby named after a flower must be a sweet nod to Methane.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> CBK wore ultra plain and simple styles and classics.  How can you compare her style with the overblown and overdesigned capes and side drapes on Meghan's dresses. The frog dress?  Pleeeez!


she is like Carolyn in her dreams


----------



## Annawakes

Ugh so tired of seeing those stick legs.


----------



## bag-mania

I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.


I liked her fashion style and her reluctance to hog the spotlight.  Imo she did not marry him to social climb or push an agenda.  Of course, he had his own agenda, she seemed to stay out of the way.  Plus, her clothes *fit*.  Lots of lessons for MM.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Omg....the comments


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.



I thought the hype around her was a bit much. She was a tall thin blonde with classic good looks, but not beautiful imo, who came from a privileged background. People had a fantasy of Camelot 2.0 in the WH. The thing is, the original version with his parents was largely a myth. And if not for the crash they quite possibly would have divorced in a few years. Theirs was not a blissful relationship according to most reports.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I liked her fashion style and her reluctance to hog the spotlight.  Imo she did not marry him to social climb or push an agenda.  Of course, he had his own agenda, she seemed to stay out of the way.  Plus, her clothes *fit*.  Lots of lessons for MM.


I recall reading that a major source of friction in their relationship was that he wanted to go into politics but she did not want the scrutiny of being a politician's wife.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that a major source of friction in their relationship was that he wanted to go into politics but she did not want the scrutiny of being a politician's wife.


Agree with all of that - imo she looked kinda out of it in some of those photos.  Still politics aside, her clothes did fit.   The media tried to turn her into Jackie 2.0 (as they do with many women], but it did not work.  TBower lost me with this one.  In no way is MM a CBK.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Omg....the comments



Or she has a horribly stinky infection "down there", and needs it aired out


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.


I didn't think she was all that and a bag of chips.  She seemed to have effortless, simple chic style, but her eyes photographed spooky or vacant to me sometimes, like she was high.  I have no idea what she was really like in person, but she reminded me of an ice princess...someone who could come off as cold.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.


I didn’t like her either. I didn’t see why she was a fashion icon. She dressed nicely. That was it.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I didn't think she was all that and a bag of chips.  She seemed to have effortless, simple chic style, but her eyes photographed spooky or vacant to me sometimes, like she was high.  I have no idea what she was really like in person, but she reminded me of an ice princess...someone who could come off as cold.


Lots of stories about drug use. Public disagreements.  They were late taking off that night because she couldn’t  decide about her nail polish and insisted on changing it. We all know what happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> Lots of stories about drug use. Public disagreements.  They were late taking off that night because she couldn’t  decide about her nail polish and insisted on changing it. We all know what happened.


I thought they were late taking off because her sister was delayed at work.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> From everything I've read he was miserable at Gordonstoun and that is why he didn't send W&H there. You are right, there was no pampering at Gordonstoun, so I don't see how that would have made him self-centered. But being catered and kowtowed to all your life because you are the heir certainly would.


I think whining about an amazing opportunity like going to Gordonstoun is emblematic of how deeply entitled He is and was. I’m sure he was as much a prisoner there as H was really on the front line. The teachers would’ve been tiptoeing around him from day 1. 


bag-mania said:


> It's an interesting comparison. Although he was pretty much a sex addict, Jack did seem to have genuine love for Jackie. She was aware of some of his affairs and we'll never know whether, had Jack lived, she might have ultimately divorced him after he left office.


A lot of people, especially in high profile marriages, seem to operate on this idea that casual sex is ok provided it doesn’t threaten their position as the spouse & I think she was following that.


Jayne1 said:


> What doesn't work for the BRF is not so much age and beauty, it is letting the public know what they are feeling.
> 
> The Queen does not. Camilla is incredibly good at putting aside any ego. Kate shines of course, but we never see ego and just does her job.
> 
> Diana and Meg were both manipulative and vindictive with a constant need to feed their public persona... and that is not welcomed in the BRF.


 Andrew’s ego and manipulative behaviour seem perfectly welcome though as was the fasc uncle Windsor but it is definitely different rules if you are in the bloodline vs married in. 


charlottawill said:


> For my family it was McDonald's or Friendly's. Sizzler is for the unwashed masses in the minds of many. Even the cool people in LA go to In-N-Out. Celebrities have been known to go there after awards ceremonies in their red carpet ensembles, so that's why it is OK with ZeeZy.


I will say their marketing that convinces people that this is some gourmet trendy stuff is amazing. Same is true of five guys. At British five guys it’s at least £15 for burger and chips in a plastic diner - I mean you could get a decent meal in a nice restaurant for that! 
I suppose they are very much the food equivalent of Meg in that sense- marketed as top of the line gourmet but really just greasy gristle wrapped in plastic.


LibbyRuth said:


> I think there is more of a challenge for women who marry into the family, because there is going to be more to talk about and focus on with them.  A man who marries into the family is not going to get as much attention for his fashion, his new hairstyle etc.  So in that respect, I'd agree that it wasn't all Diana's fault.
> That said, I think in Kate, we have an example of how it can be done.  Throughout their marriage I think Kate has worked to make sure that there is still more spotlight on William.  When they do joint appearances, she defers to him.  She limits the number of solo appearances she does.  At times, she has been criticized for not doing enough work - but her not having a ton of appearances ensures there is more focus on William.
> But regardless, since this is the Harry and Meghan thread - Meghan was NEVER going to play that game.  Totally agree with rose606010 that in her mind it was all about who had the most x factor and she was certain she could be the star of the family AND transform their old fashioned ways.  I think that in her mind Kate, Sophie and other women in the family would cheer on her willingness to stand up and shake things up.  I think a lot of her sour grapes to this day come from discovering that they were not all sitting around hoping she'd come along and save them.


I’d say a big factor is C&D’s relationship existed in the heyday of the paparazzi and the tabloid press and as we have mentioned one is clearly more photogenic than the other. 

In contrast there are relatively few pictures of E&P together and appearance wise the Queen has always looked elegant and friendly whereas I know some people say he was handsome when he was young but Philip has always seemed more Sam the American Eagle than Paul Newman to me.





Another thing that’s not mentioned in W&C’s dynamic is W has always been portrayed as the powerful one in the relationship whereas this was not the case in C&D (or indeed in E&P - as @charlottawill noted- he was kind of a diva in the early days) 

They had the famous break and W waited out getting married to her for years which was a wise decision but the press also made it clear they were in his side and weren’t going to make her the star by ridiculing her for waiting. I think the palace wanted assurance they weren’t going to have another one of their golden egg boys buried beneath the hype about his prettier wife and the press made it clear she would get the team player edit. 


charlottawill said:


> IIRC, Jackie had the pedigree that John Kennedy didn't and his father Joe Kennedy wanted for a daughter-in-law/prospective First Lady, but her family lacked the money that the Kennedys had. Some thought she was marrying beneath her station.


On a related note, I love Grey Gardens and I can see why Jackie wanted to get outta there.


----------



## muddledmint

I’m still only at about 30% through revenge, which is discussing the period after the wedding. Wow, Harry is such a POS, especially to Thomas markle, who doesn’t come off that great either. And if I read about Harry moaning on about “protection” one more time …!!!!! *gnashes teeth* I’m getting a visceral reaction to that word, same as when I hear the word “jab.”


----------



## mellibelly

Came across another ridiculous Bower mistake in chapter 36. When discussing ZZZ’s support of BLM, Bower states Abraham Lincoln owned slaves. NO HE DID NOT. Geez!!

Trying to power through the last of the book tonight. While it affirmed my feelings for ZZZ, it really opened my eyes to what an entitled nitwit Handbag is.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I don't think she would have cared about filling seats at the UN had there not been pictures of the auditorium. I sometimes work at or go to these types of events, and very often all that is videoed and pictured is the speaker and the presentation.
> 
> I can't remember if H had a presentation along with his speech, if he didn't, it's not the UN's fault, because the Sussexes gave very little visual for edited-down highlights (I say highlights advisedly) or follow-up for publicity/posterity. Their laziness is demonstrated one again.
> 
> Plus, really bad move from M!
> 
> The UN is possibly one organisation she could (have) continued work (or 'work' in her case) - now they will be recoiling from the couple too.
> 
> 
> Anybody still thinks M is a good hustler?


Very insightful point. If you are too vapid to be a celeb UN ambassador then….


papertiger said:


> Paid 'ladies' don't talk. That's partly why they get paid.
> 
> Plus, silence is mutually beneficial
> 
> Hence why no-one has 'yacht girl' on their CV


I suppose one would also go through the various indignities of being a courtesan in the hopes of never having to hand out your CV again at the very least too.




CarryOn2020 said:


> QE visited him as did Prince Charles.
> 
> 
> _Edward suffered from throat cancer in the years leading up to his death, so when Queen Elizabeth II, her husband Prince Philip, and their son Prince Charles paid a visit to the Duke and Duchess of Windsor during a state visit to France in May 1972, he wasn't well enough to properly receive them. Still, the Queen reportedly spent a few private minutes with him that day — and, as is seen in season 3 of The Crown on Netflix, the Duke reportedly rose from his bed to bow to her.
> 
> Accounts of this meeting with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor vary, but according to many, it was a somewhat awkward one. The Queen was reportedly not a fan of Wallis, and she grew "annoyed" with her at times. Still, she allegedly greatly appreciated that her uncle put so much effort into paying her the "final courtesy" of bowing._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen Visited the Duke of Windsor Days Before He Died
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth II visited her estranged uncle Edward VIII, a.k.a. the Duke of Windsor, in France before he died. Here's what really happened that day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sg.news.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Charles’s account:
> 
> _Wilson refers to prince's diary entry, in which Charles describes arriving at the duke's Parisian residence to find a party full of the "most dreadful American guests I have ever seen." Charles added, "*The whole thing seemed so tragic—the existence, the people and the atmosphere—that I was relieved to escape it after 45 minutes."*
> 
> The historian believes that Charles likely wrote this with an audience in mind, and would have downplayed any positive experience he might have had. Still, Wilson says, "Never meet you heroes, they say, and how right they are to say it." He adds, "I think he was unsettled by the grand style in which the Windsors lived, maybe he thought they were living in some ordinary town-house in an anonymous Parisian street. I think he was also miffed that there was a party going on when he arrived, whereas he viewed such an historic meeting as something which should stand alone, not dovetailed in with the Windsors' hectic social commitments."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Prince Charles's Relationship with the Duke of Windsor
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales did in fact visit with his "Uncle David" in Paris.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


How ironic in a few decades he’d have some awful American guests all of his own 
I had to laugh reading this. Charles was even more of a stuck-up prig back then than I already thought he was.  
You are right he sounds insufferable. How dare they not consider meeting him to be momentous! 


marietouchet said:


> Charles was 20ish in 1972 when he saw Windsor and was anxious to leave, I give him a pass for lack of patience
> 
> Wonder how Charles’ diary was leaked to press


It was written and edited for publication and circulated by his press department I’m sure. 
It’s totally on brand - while the old heir ‘David’ might be happy with his party lifestyle it makes it clear that Charles the new heir sees his life as tragic  and is going to devote himself to his birth right duty. Ultimately he would choose being royal over ‘love’ and in fact he actually got both in the end. 


lanasyogamama said:


> I am LOL that Mega thought she could pull off a Carolyn Besette Kennedy slip dress.
> 
> View attachment 5585965
> View attachment 5585965


I suppose we can all just be happy we were spared a bronzer stained spaghetti strap at least 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo M is not even a cheap copy of CBK.  Good grief, enough with this so-called  ‘channeling’.  TBower needs to rewrite that chapter.  Sheesh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan has been channelling Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy's wardrobe
> 
> 
> Meghan, 36, chose a camel skirt and black polo top for her first official engagement with Prince Harry in Nottingham. The ensemble is strikingly similar to one worn by Carolyn Bessette.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


From what I can see CBK’s appeal seems to be based on simple clothes, minimal make up and striking natural long hair. 

It’s never going to have the same effect if one is caked in fake tan and make up and hair that has more tracks than a double album. 

To put it simply, M is too fake to pull of a natural look. 


gracekelly said:


> I agree that Al Fayed has exploited it and because he hates the Royals with a passion.  He hated them before the accident because he was blocked from being a UK citizen and he blamed The Queen.


Am I the only one who is on Al-Fayed’s team? He was understandably devastated by losing his son and prior to that Him being rejected for citizenship was total BS - hate preachers and terrorists have citizenship but not the guy running a London  institution- makes no sense. 



mellibelly said:


> Lady C was very upset about the Bower insinuation that Methane was inspired by CBK’s wedding dress. The two dresses are nothing alike. Lady C went to FIT after all. She correctly pointed out Methane’s dress is a bad cover version of Princess Angela of Lichtenstein’s dress, which she designed herself.
> View attachment 5586004
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress Nod to Princess Angela of Liechtenstein?
> 
> 
> The gowns are so similar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


This is the one I’d say it was the obvious rip off of and it makes sense.   Of course she’d never acknowledge it as though she’s not adverse to borrowing a WOC’s looks when it suits her  all the women she vocally pays homage to are the likes of Ivanka and Angelina…..


----------



## muddledmint

mellibelly said:


> Came across another ridiculous Bower mistake in chapter 36. When discussing ZZZ’s support of BLM, Bower states Abraham Lincoln owned slaves. NO HE DID NOT. Geez!!
> 
> Trying to power through the last of the book tonight. While it affirmed my feelings for ZZZ, it really opened my eyes to what an entitled nitwit Handbag is.


I can only stand to read a few pages at a time, and only when I have nothing better to do. Harry really does not come off well in the book. So bitter, dumb, rude, and entitled. What really shocked me was bower’s portrayal of him as being so desperate not to lose meghan. Like she is some great prize! It’s amazing how she sold him the idea that she is the second diana. He is so stupid and yet so arrogant at the same time. He totally deserves the hell that his life must be with her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> CBK did have the “IT” factor imo.
> 
> The CT old money ref makes me think CeeJay would have had something to say!



I remember her telling us early on snippets from her friends who knew Raptor in highschool and people saying to her "Uh sorry, not taking info from random people on the internet", and then it was all in Bower's book and she wasn't here to see it


----------



## jehaga

The two radio guys I listen to on KFI here in LA mentioned that H’s underwear (the pair he lost in Las Vegas) is going up for auction and could potentially fetch up to a million dollars. Eww.

One guy, John, asked which one Harry was and the other guy, Ken, said he was the one on a leash walking on all fours and is basically castrated. They had some really choice words for those two. It was really amusing to hear them talk about HM with good knowledge of the disturbing dynamics of their marriage. HM’s odiferous toxicity is truly potent when two guys whose main foci are local and state politics can come up with so many wicked words to describe them. I wish I had a recording of that little segment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Am I the only one who is on Al-Fayed’s team? He was understandably devastated by losing his son and prior to that Him being rejected for citizenship was total BS - hate preachers and terrorists have citizenship but not the guy running a London  institution- makes no sense.



You are not wrong, but as someone who really dislikes drama I'm not into over-the-top people who can't let go of decade old grudges. I would feel a lot more for him if his personality was different I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

muddledmint said:


> I can only stand to read a few pages at a time, and only when I have nothing better to do.



I really worked hard getting through that book. There wasn't even that much shocking news, but having it piled together like this was oh so draining.

In other news, after going 3+ months without doing my eyebrows I finally slapped on some colour and wax and I'm basically a new person today. Still an exhausted person though.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> Lady C was very upset about the Bower insinuation that Methane was inspired by CBK’s wedding dress. The two dresses are nothing alike. Lady C went to FIT after all. She correctly pointed out Methane’s dress is a bad cover version of Princess Angela of Lichtenstein’s dress, which she designed herself.
> View attachment 5586004
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Meghan Markle’s Wedding Dress Nod to Princess Angela of Liechtenstein?
> 
> 
> The gowns are so similar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Please, she doesn't even acknowledge Angela exists.

I can see how it would be difficult to find wedding dresses that are contemporary and have long sleeves, particularly for Spring/Summer. ATM, most bridal fashion favours no sleeve or strapless corset styles. Givenchy have several wedding gowns in their archive like M's, I think M's was a mix between a couple. 

There's nothing wrong with M's wedding dress except it doesn't fit her properly - and it was completely needless. Totally tasteless person, not the dress.


----------



## Luvbolide

bag-mania said:


> I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.


That makes two of us!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Magpie sure only seemed to find inspo from white ladies, Ivanka, CBK, Angelina.  Just saying.


----------



## EverSoElusive

lanasyogamama said:


> Magpie sure only seemed to find inspo from white ladies, Ivanka, CBK, Angelina.  Just saying.


If we're talking about fashion inspo... That one time she tried to cosplay Michelle O and failed miserably


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Yippee lots of new books coming this fall , see end of post 


'There's a problem' Harry blow as 'truth' set to be 'drowned out' in fresh 'double whammy'










						'There’s a problem' Harry blow as 'truth' set to be 'drowned out' in fresh 'double whammy'
					

PRINCE HARRY'S much-anticipated memoir faces a huge "problem" as his "truth" could be "drowned out" in a bitter blow to the Duke of Sussex, a Royal Family commentator has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Archew*ll seems to have one more source of income, Hazz's undergarments.


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> Archew*ll seems to have one more source of income, Hazz's undergarments.



I think they really need the money:


----------



## Chanbal

Great article! 

Celia W. provides a list of upcoming masterpieces that will be competing with "_Me, Myself and I: A Journey Into Narcissism_" or "_Harry: My Life In Whinges._" 

We'll have a lot to discuss in the upcoming months. 




_The tone has been set by *Tom Bower*, the author of last month’s headline-grabbing *Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors*, and in a fortnight’s time bestselling writer *Catherine Mayer* will publish an *updated version of her Prince Charles biography – Charles: The Heart of a King – promising readers “previously unpublished details” around “Harry and Meghan’s exit”*.

In September, another esteemed journalist will provide new insight into the Duke’s last period of royal life. *Valentine Low* broke the story about the Duchess of Sussex being accused of bullying staff while at Kensington Palace in 2018 (Meghan’s team have always vigorously denied the accusations) and his sources in *Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown* are likely to be impeccable.

In November, comes a double whammy from two well-known royal experts. *Katie Nicholl* will publish a forensic examination of the firm in *The New Royals*, while *Angela Levin* will publish a *biography of the Duchess of Cornwall*. *Again, both are expected to include versions of Megxit and, *given Levin’s criticism of the Sussexes and rumours that Harry’s autobiography (My Journey to Me-Ville) will contain criticism of his stepmother, hers is unlikely to be favourable in their regard…


It’s true that Harry’s ghostwriter, US novelist JR Moehringer, is highly respected and that, as a first-hand account of the prince’s life, *Me, Myself and I: A Journey Into Narcissism* is guaranteed a certain amount of success. But the emphasis on it being a “literary memoir” is concerning, as is the prince’s sell. 

*“I’m writing this not as the prince I was born, but as the man I have become,” *he has said, which is a bit like Mick Jagger promising to tell you exactly how he makes the green juices he relies upon today – oh, but there won’t be any details about the sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll years. *I hate to break it to you, Harry, but the prince part? That’s the sell.

Then there’s the national mood to consider as we head into autumn and the cost-of-living crisis really begins to bite. I can’t talk for other countries, but how many Brits – short on disposable income – will be willing to dig deep in their wallets for Harry: My Life In Whinges?*_



			archive.ph


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Another book kept from American readers. Soon they will publish a new bible for the Yanks called the Gospel According to M and H. That will be available for purchase.



Please don't give them ideas!


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> I think they really need the money:
> View attachment 5586207


$480,000 in credit card debt!   Would this be possible?


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> I can only stand to read a few pages at a time, and only when I have nothing better to do. Harry really does not come off well in the book. So bitter, dumb, rude, and entitled. What really shocked me was bower’s portrayal of him as being so desperate not to lose meghan. Like she is some great prize! It’s amazing how she sold him the idea that she is the second diana. *He is so stupid and yet so arrogant at the same time.* He totally deserves the hell that his life must be with her.


Yep, those two terms often go together…


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree with all of that - imo she looked kinda out of it in some of those photos.


Where do I start? Bessette-Kennedy looked out of it because she was heavily into cocaine, which was still popular in the fashion industry in the 90s. He wanted to have kids, she didn't. Friends reported frequents fights between them.  If they had lived there would almost certainly have been a divorce.

Had tPF existed back then we would have had a very active thread devoted to them. I would say their relationship was more turbulent than H&M's appears to be. If anything I think Carolyn, with her cold, aristocratic shell, was even more messed up. 

From a book that came out about the relationship a few years after they died:

* John once returned to their loft to find Carolyn sprawled on the floor “disheveled and hollow-eyed, snorting cocaine with a gaggle of gay fashionistas,” Klein writes. “Without asking John’s permission, Carolyn gave keys to their loft to some of her friends so they could come and go as they please.”

“You’re a cokehead!” John screamed at her, one of the people present that night told Klein.

Klein also recounts a tale told him by a staffer at George magazine who had dinner with Carolyn one night.

“She made at least a half-dozen trips to the bathroom and came back to the table with white rings around her nostrils,” the staffer is quoted as saying.

“The next morning, John came in and asked me, ‘Why did you keep my wife out so late?’ And I said, ‘A better question, John, is why your wife didn’t want to go home.’ “

* Just before their July 1996 wedding, Carolyn flew into hysterics because she couldn’t get her $40,000 zipperless dress over her head.

The fashion disaster made the bride two hours late for the ceremony. Her tardiness – and her insistence on clomping across the beach in high heels – outraged her sister-in-law Caroline, setting the tone for their future prickly relationship.

* Early in the marriage, “it was clear to friends that Carolyn was cracking under the pressure” from paparazzi and the press, writes Klein.

“She displayed the classic signs of clinical depression . . . A few months after the wedding, she began spending more and more time locked in her apartment, convulsed in crying jags.”

* John and Carolyn fought, and the battles were often violent.

“John told friends that he felt trapped in an abusive relationship,” Klein says.

“One time he had to be rushed to an emergency room for an operation to repair a severed nerve in his right wrist. He tried to dismiss the injury as the result of a stupid household accident, but his friends knew better: They were certain that Carolyn was the culprit.”

* Both had fiery tempers, which ignited at the mention of either’s former paramours.

When Carolyn heard rumors that John was seeing old girlfriend Daryl Hannah, “she flew into a rage,” Klein says.

And John feared his wife was cheating on him with a former boyfriend, Calvin Klein underwear poster boy Michael Bergin.

Bergin’s former manager told Klein that he once encountered Carolyn – who was living with Kennedy but not yet married to him – hiding under the model’s staircase. She was waiting until the coast was clear before heading to his room.

The two “continued a sexual affair” while Carolyn was dating John, the book says.

“Carolyn and I had a very intense love for each other,” Bergin told Klein.

“And I know deep in my heart that she still loved me even after she married John Kennedy. Some things just don’t end.”

During a screaming match in 1999, Carolyn told John she was still sleeping with Bergin. It was a lie, Klein writes, but John believed her.

* In March that year, John – after persuading Carolyn to see a psychiatrist who then put her on anti-depressants – joined her in marriage counseling.

But “nothing worked,” writes Klein.





__





						‘WE’VE BECOME TOTAL STRANGERS . . . I’VE HAD IT WITH HER!’
					

JOHN F. KENNEDY JR.’S beautiful wife, Carolyn, was cocaine-addled, obsessed with an ex-boyfriend and flew into violent rages against her husband, an explosive new book says. The couple had se…




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting comments, I bet this person isn't alone…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _It’s true that Harry’s ghostwriter, US novelist JR Moehringer, is highly respected and that, as a first-hand account of the prince’s life, *Me, Myself and I: A Journey Into Narcissism* is guaranteed a certain amount of success. But the emphasis on it being a “literary memoir” is concerning, as is the prince’s sell. _



That's the title? Whose narcissism is he travelling into, his wife's?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Archew*ll seems to have one more source of income, Hazz's undergarments.



I don't believe they would be a party to this...does Archewell accept donations?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Interesting comments, I bet this person isn't alone…




She mentions the emotional abuse as well.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I must be the only one on this thread who never liked CBK.


she probably didn't have the most beautiful face but I thought her style was gorgeous.....that wedding gown was perfection.  and I was a big fan of him.  together they were a beautiful couple.  were they perfect as far as their relationship?  of course not.  but she had more style in her little finger than M.  To be fair, not sure Meghan actually said she was trying to emulate her or if this was someone speculating.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she probably didn't have the most beautiful face but I thought her style was gorgeous.....that wedding gown was perfection.  and I was a big fan of him.  together they were a beautiful couple.  were they perfect as far as their relationship?  of course not.  but she had more style in her little finger than M.  To be fair, not sure Meghan actually said she was trying to emulate her or if this was someone speculating.


But style isn't everything. I can't believe I'm the only one who remembers all the drama surrounding her. See my post #102,068.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> But style isn't everything. I can't believe I'm the only one who remembers all the drama surrounding her. See my post #102,068.


sorry - I'm not accepting NY Post as fact
and this did start out as reference to Meghan copying her style


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> sorry - I'm not accepting NY Post as fact
> and this did start out as reference to Meghan copying her style


NY Post wasn't the source of the information but they had excerpts from the book. It was from way back in 2003 and there aren't that many other articles left to find online about JFK Jr and CBK these days. I don't know if Meghan copied her style or not, just surprised that CBK is still considered a fashion icon these days. She wasn't a nice person.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> NY Post wasn't the source of the information but they had excerpts from the book. It was from way back in 2003 and there aren't that many other articles left to find online about JFK Jr and CBK these days. I don't know if Meghan copied her style or not, just surprised that CBK is still considered a fashion icon theseI


IDK who this Klein person is but this hasn't been widely accepted as far as I know.  I had heard Carolyn wasn't happy with being in the public eye, being stalked by photogs, etc.  I doubt she was a coke addict but back then, people were doing it a lot I guess.
  Not sure why you don't like them but we can agree to disagree.


----------



## mellibelly

The cocaine use is actually true. NYC fashion industry in the 90’s after all. 

My friend said she and the male model would get into screaming matches at the CK offices. Said she was a very fiery dramatic personality. Funny how that isn’t captured in photos of her, she does appear icey.

Regardless is she was troubled or a nice person, she is still considered a fashion icon for her clean classic minimalist American style. Her style is widely copied now with the 90’s resurgence happening the last several years.


----------



## mellibelly

Last thing about CBK from me because I just finished the Bower book but I always found this story funny. My friend subleased Carolyn’s apartment when she moved in with John. She said C would never cash her rent checks. Months would go buy and the money would still be in her account. She’d say C, are you going to cash my checks?!


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> The cocaine use is actually true. NYC fashion industry in the 90’s after all.
> 
> My friend said she and the male model would get into screaming matches at the CK offices. Said she was a very fiery dramatic personality. Funny how that isn’t captured in photos of her, she does appear icey.
> 
> Regardless is she was troubled or a nice person, she is still considered a fashion icon for her clean classic minimalist American style. Her style is widely copied now with the 90’s resurgence happening the last several years.


As with Diana, I think the tragic circumstances of their deaths caused everyone to gloss over the previous unpleasantness about them.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't believe they would be a party to this...does Archewell accept donations?



It does.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Where do I start? Bessette-Kennedy looked out of it because she was heavily into cocaine, which was still popular in the fashion industry in the 90s. He wanted to have kids, she didn't. Friends reported frequents fights between them.  If they had lived there would almost certainly have been a divorce.
> 
> Had tPF existed back then we would have had a very active thread devoted to them. I would say their relationship was more turbulent than H&M's appears to be. If anything I think Carolyn, with her cold, aristocratic shell, was even more messed up.
> 
> From a book that came out about the relationship a few years after they died:
> 
> * John once returned to their loft to find Carolyn sprawled on the floor “disheveled and hollow-eyed, snorting cocaine with a gaggle of gay fashionistas,” Klein writes. “Without asking John’s permission, Carolyn gave keys to their loft to some of her friends so they could come and go as they please.”
> 
> “You’re a cokehead!” John screamed at her, one of the people present that night told Klein.
> 
> Klein also recounts a tale told him by a staffer at George magazine who had dinner with Carolyn one night.
> 
> “She made at least a half-dozen trips to the bathroom and came back to the table with white rings around her nostrils,” the staffer is quoted as saying.
> 
> “The next morning, John came in and asked me, ‘Why did you keep my wife out so late?’ And I said, ‘A better question, John, is why your wife didn’t want to go home.’ “
> 
> * Just before their July 1996 wedding, Carolyn flew into hysterics because she couldn’t get her $40,000 zipperless dress over her head.
> 
> The fashion disaster made the bride two hours late for the ceremony. Her tardiness – and her insistence on clomping across the beach in high heels – outraged her sister-in-law Caroline, setting the tone for their future prickly relationship.
> 
> * Early in the marriage, “it was clear to friends that Carolyn was cracking under the pressure” from paparazzi and the press, writes Klein.
> 
> “She displayed the classic signs of clinical depression . . . A few months after the wedding, she began spending more and more time locked in her apartment, convulsed in crying jags.”
> 
> * John and Carolyn fought, and the battles were often violent.
> 
> “John told friends that he felt trapped in an abusive relationship,” Klein says.
> 
> “One time he had to be rushed to an emergency room for an operation to repair a severed nerve in his right wrist. He tried to dismiss the injury as the result of a stupid household accident, but his friends knew better: They were certain that Carolyn was the culprit.”
> 
> * Both had fiery tempers, which ignited at the mention of either’s former paramours.
> 
> When Carolyn heard rumors that John was seeing old girlfriend Daryl Hannah, “she flew into a rage,” Klein says.
> 
> And John feared his wife was cheating on him with a former boyfriend, Calvin Klein underwear poster boy Michael Bergin.
> 
> Bergin’s former manager told Klein that he once encountered Carolyn – who was living with Kennedy but not yet married to him – hiding under the model’s staircase. She was waiting until the coast was clear before heading to his room.
> 
> The two “continued a sexual affair” while Carolyn was dating John, the book says.
> 
> “Carolyn and I had a very intense love for each other,” Bergin told Klein.
> 
> “And I know deep in my heart that she still loved me even after she married John Kennedy. Some things just don’t end.”
> 
> During a screaming match in 1999, Carolyn told John she was still sleeping with Bergin. It was a lie, Klein writes, but John believed her.
> 
> * In March that year, John – after persuading Carolyn to see a psychiatrist who then put her on anti-depressants – joined her in marriage counseling.
> 
> But “nothing worked,” writes Klein.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘WE’VE BECOME TOTAL STRANGERS . . . I’VE HAD IT WITH HER!’
> 
> 
> JOHN F. KENNEDY JR.’S beautiful wife, Carolyn, was cocaine-addled, obsessed with an ex-boyfriend and flew into violent rages against her husband, an explosive new book says. The couple had se…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Fairly certain CBK would make AmberH look downright sweet.  TBower, though, has done an excellent job raising everyone’s level of awareness about H&M. Perhaps TBower wrote the book in that exhausting style so that readers would understand how exhausting it is to be around H&M.  Seems like they are the type of people to keep everyone on edge.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> she probably didn't have the most beautiful face but I thought her style was gorgeous.....that wedding gown was perfection.  and I was a big fan of him.  together they were a beautiful couple.  were they perfect as far as their relationship?  of course not.  but she had more style in her little finger than M.  To be fair, not sure Meghan actually said she was trying to emulate her or if this was someone speculating.


IIRC MM put it on her Tig blog, pre-wedding. A few(?) pages back, there’s a link.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> *IDK who this Klein person is *but this hasn't been widely accepted as far as I know.  I had heard Carolyn wasn't happy with being in the public eye, being stalked by photogs, etc.  I doubt she was a coke addict but back then, people were doing it a lot I guess.
> Not sure why you don't like them but we can agree to disagree.


He's a biographer who has been around a while. He has decent credentials as near as I can tell. All the stuff he put in his book came out in the months following the plane crash.

From his Wikipedia:
Edward Klein is the former foreign editor of _Newsweek_ and served as the editor-in-chief of _The New York Times Magazine_ from 1977 to 1987. He frequently contributes to _Vanity Fair_ and _Parade_ and writes a weekly celebrity gossip column in _Parade_ called "Personality Parade" under the pseudonym "Walter Scott." (The Walter Scott pseudonym had originally been used by Lloyd Shearer, who wrote the column from 1958 to 1991.[3]) He also writes books, many of which have been on the New York Times Bestseller list. Additionally, he was the principal for the Business Communications School at The Euclid High School Complex. He was photographed by popular Humans of New York photographer Brandon Stanton, on June 12, 2014, which led to his personal website crashing due to a high volume of visitors.[4] Klein is also a contributor for the _New York Post_.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Last thing about CBK from me because I just finished the Bower book but I always found this story funny. My friend subleased Carolyn’s apartment when she moved in with John. She said C would never cash her rent checks. Months would go buy and the money would still be in her account. She’s say C, are you going to cash my checks?!


Now that's a sign of somebody who never had to worry about money.


----------



## mellibelly

So the last couple chapters of the Bower book irked me. He implied the Harkles had success with the faux royal visit to NY and everything after…that they are loved in America when they’re a laughingstock at this point. I’m hoping Handbag’s book and his forthcoming attack of Charles and Camilla finally pushes the BRF to cut them off. Can he take away the titles when he is king?


----------



## lallybelle

One thing about the book especially toward the end when they came here is I think Bower overestimates their "power" in the US. Sure her stans may fawn over every pic, mention & etc. But really in the grand scheme no one really gives a ****. There was a huge burst after Oprah, due to the racism allegations and people debated on Socials but it really faded out after awhile. Like any of these other appearances (NYC, etc) hit the news and die off before the next news cycle.

Sunshine Sucks may be good at getting them into the press, but no one is eating it up but the Sugars. The rest of the world collectively yawns. Which is why even though the RF was supposedly so horrible they still try and trade on the connection, it's the only thing they have of interest or value.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He's a biographer who has been around a while. He has decent credentials as near as I can tell. All the stuff he put in his book came out in the months following the plane crash.
> 
> From his Wikipedia:
> Edward Klein is the former foreign editor of _Newsweek_ and served as the editor-in-chief of _The New York Times Magazine_ from 1977 to 1987. He frequently contributes to _Vanity Fair_ and _Parade_ and writes a weekly celebrity gossip column in _Parade_ called "Personality Parade" under the pseudonym "Walter Scott." (The Walter Scott pseudonym had originally been used by Lloyd Shearer, who wrote the column from 1958 to 1991.[3]) He also writes books, many of which have been on the New York Times Bestseller list. Additionally, he was the principal for the Business Communications School at The Euclid High School Complex. He was photographed by popular Humans of New York photographer Brandon Stanton, on June 12, 2014, which led to his personal website crashing due to a high volume of visitors.[4] Klein is also a contributor for the _New York Post_.


You’re right.  I had forgotten much of their story.  There was lots of chaos surrounding the couple - the public fights were indeed shocking.  We have not seen any of that with H&M, have we?  Perhaps that will be the last straw.


----------



## Cinderlala

I never understood the fascination with CBK.  I think most tall, thin, wealthy women are considered stylish.  Especially those wearing classic clothing. 

I do remember the pictures of their screaming fights on the sidewalks of NYC.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's the title? Whose narcissism is he travelling into, his wife's?


While narcissism is often linked to TW, I believe Celia W, the author of the title "_Me, Myself and I: A Journey Into Narcissism_", is referring to Hazz's own narcissism.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

I think Buzzard is too concerned about her 'brand' to allow screaming fights in public.  At least right now.

I'd say that's a huge difference between her & CBK---CBK did not need the approval of others.  She was beyond that.  The Claw has nothing other than her image to project so she desperately needs approval from the masses.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> I think Buzzard is too concerned about her 'brand' to allow screaming fights in public.  At least right now.
> 
> I'd say that's a huge difference between her & CBK---CBK did not need the approval of others.  She was beyond that.  The Claw has nothing other than her image to project so she desperately needs approval from the masses.


I don't really imagine H&M having screaming fights...my idea (and of course I don't know) is more like she tells him what to do  and he obeys...maybe he would pout sometimes or turn red


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> So the last couple chapters of the Bower book irked me. He implied the Harkles had success with the faux royal visit to NY and everything after…*that they are loved in America when they’re a laughingstock at this point.* I’m hoping Handbag’s book and his forthcoming attack of Charles and Camilla finally pushes the BRF to cut them off. Can he take away the titles when he is king?


They _are_ still loved in America to some degree. On her birthday I saw a Facebook "Happy birthday" message to Meghan from a local TV station. It had over 2,000 comments and most of them were very positive about her. I could not believe it. It reminded me that there are millions out there who aren't keeping up.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't really imagine H&M having screaming fights...my idea (and of course I don't know) is more like she tells him what to do  and he obeys...maybe he would pout sometimes or turn red


Their relationship does not have a balance of power. She has it all.


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> I don't really imagine H&M having screaming fights...my idea (and of course I don't know) is more like she tells him what to do  and he obeys...maybe he would pout sometimes or turn red


Lol, that's definitely their relationship in public!   I'm pretty sure that's why he drinks.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Their relationship does not have a balance of power. She has it all.


that's our perception....anything is possible...maybe she does have the power but he has tantrums


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> that's our perception....anything is possible...maybe she does have the power but he has tantrums


If they had friends then there would be witnesses. Other than those several weeks with Nacho and pwife, I don’t they’ve had much in the way of interactions with others since landing on this side of the Atlantic.


----------



## papertiger

Only 52 mins


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> But style isn't everything. I can't believe I'm the only one who remembers all the drama surrounding her. See my post #102,068.





Chanbal said:


> While narcissism is often linked to TW, I believe Celia W, the author of the title "_Me, Myself and I: A Journey Into Narcissism_", is referring to Hazz's own narcissism.


Agree 100%


----------



## xincinsin

While prepping lunch, this occurred to me: is Zedzed copying Wallis to project a Great Romance image? Edward is known mainly, true or false, for giving up the throne for Wallis. Perhaps Zedzed wants to cultivate the impression of her and Hazbeen sacrificing oh so much for privacy/the world/their kids/profit. 

Also, and this is a bit of conspiracy theorizing, since the spare inherited the throne after Edward abdicated, are Zedzed and her minions busy damaging the reputation of Charles and William in an effort to turn public opinion against them as worthy of becoming King? Perhaps in her puny and petty mind, she believes that they can be shamed into stepping aside so that her puppet the spare will ascend the throne.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> Lol, that's definitely their relationship in public!   I'm pretty sure that's why he drinks.


does the WIFE allow him to drink?


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


> I think they really need the money:
> View attachment 5586207


At first, the pair was not on the (tabloids on) supermarket shelves, at least when we’ll behaved, they were on the cover of Time
Nowadays, the supermarket is wallpapered with their faces, since their behavior landed them in gossip columns


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> Now that's a sign of somebody who never had to worry about money.


I once worked with a woman like that--she opened her LV epi purse once (and I did not know anything about the bag and thought it was kinda ugly) and there were lots of paychecks just stuffed in it. The payroll department used to contact her a couple of times a year to tell her to "PLEASE deposit your paychecks".  We lived much different lives.


----------



## Katel

gracekelly said:


> CBK wore ultra plain and simple styles and classics.  How can you compare her style with the overblown and overdesigned capes and side drapes on Meghan's dresses. The *frog dress*?  Pleeeez!



frog dress hahahaha


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> CBK wore ultra plain and simple styles and classics.  How can you compare her style with the overblown and overdesigned capes and side drapes on Meghan's dresses. The frog dress?  Pleeeez!





Katel said:


> frog dress hahahaha


I liked very few of Methane's dresses (mainly the ones that actually fit her) but I particularly detest the green monstrosity. I even went to the designer's website just to assure myself that not all her creations are equally horrendous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> I thought they were late taking off because her sister was delayed at work.


Either way, he had just bought a plane that he had not been fully instructed with flying.  Jackie had made him promise not to get a pilot's license and of course it was the first thing he did after she died.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I liked very few of Methane's dresses (mainly the ones that actually fit her) but I particularly detest the green monstrosity. I even went to the designer's website just to assure myself that not all her creations are equally horrendous.


I don't have a picture at my fingertips, but the one style that Meghan looked very good in was a simple sheath. This is a perfect case of finding something that looks good on you and sticking with it.  If you look at Catherine and Camilla, they pretty much do this.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Archew*ll seems to have one more source of income, Hazz's undergarments.



Unless his name is embroidered right in the waistband, I don't believe that the shorts are his.  In any case EWWWWWW!  Not washed after all these years?  Yuck X 1 gazillion.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I didn't think she was all that and a bag of chips.  She seemed to have effortless, simple chic style, but her eyes photographed spooky or vacant to me sometimes, like she was high.  I have no idea what she was really like in person, but she reminded me of an ice princess...someone who could come off as cold.


Not to speak ill of the dead, but there were rumors that she was into cocaine and he wasn't, which led to a lot of fights.

ETA: I'm behind here, didn't see @bag-mania's detailed post about the state of their relationship.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I don't have a picture at my fingertips, but the one style that Meghan looked very good in was a simple sheath. This is a perfect case of finding something that looks good on you and sticking with it.  If you look at Catherine and Camilla, they pretty much do this.


A well cut sheath (in the right size) is flattering on many women and never goes out of style.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> sorry - I'm not accepting NY Post as fact
> and this did start out as reference to Meghan copying her style


It wasn't just the NYP. It was an open secret in NY that they had a tempestuous relationship.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> So the last couple chapters of the Bower book irked me. He implied the Harkles had success with the faux royal visit to NY and everything after…that they are loved in America when they’re a laughingstock at this point. I’m hoping Handbag’s book and his forthcoming attack of Charles and Camilla finally pushes the BRF to cut them off. Can he take away the titles when he is king?



Probably the dukedoms and other lesser titles. He can also take away their HRHs for good (atm discretionary but not used) . 

Charles cannot take away H's Prince title, it's H's birthright.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> It wasn't just the NYP. It was an open secret in NY that they had a tempestuous relationship.


it's one thing to say they had fights, another thing to describe her lying on the floor with coke all over her nostrils.  what's the point in dragging a dead woman?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> It wasn't just the NYP. It was an open secret in NY that they had a tempestuous relationship.


Exactly.  It wasn't pretty.  I find it interesting that Jackie did not really approve of his relationship with the actress Darryl Hannah.  In retrospect, she sounds much better than his choice.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry draws on same memories as William for children's upbringing
					

PRINCE HARRY is drawing on experiences and memories he shares with Prince William for the upbringing of his children Lilibet 'Lili' Diana and Archie Harrison, it has been claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				




I am posting this so we can have a laugh.  Given the current relationship between William and Harry, I wonder if this guy or his editor reads a newspaper.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Where do I start? Bessette-Kennedy looked out of it because she was heavily into cocaine, which was still popular in the fashion industry in the 90s. He wanted to have kids, she didn't. Friends reported frequents fights between them.  If they had lived there would almost certainly have been a divorce.
> 
> Had tPF existed back then we would have had a very active thread devoted to them. I would say their relationship was more turbulent than H&M's appears to be. If anything I think Carolyn, with her cold, aristocratic shell, was even more messed up.
> 
> From a book that came out about the relationship a few years after they died:
> 
> * John once returned to their loft to find Carolyn sprawled on the floor “disheveled and hollow-eyed, snorting cocaine with a gaggle of gay fashionistas,” Klein writes. “Without asking John’s permission, Carolyn gave keys to their loft to some of her friends so they could come and go as they please.”
> 
> “You’re a cokehead!” John screamed at her, one of the people present that night told Klein.
> 
> Klein also recounts a tale told him by a staffer at George magazine who had dinner with Carolyn one night.
> 
> “She made at least a half-dozen trips to the bathroom and came back to the table with white rings around her nostrils,” the staffer is quoted as saying.
> 
> “The next morning, John came in and asked me, ‘Why did you keep my wife out so late?’ And I said, ‘A better question, John, is why your wife didn’t want to go home.’ “
> 
> * Just before their July 1996 wedding, Carolyn flew into hysterics because she couldn’t get her $40,000 zipperless dress over her head.
> 
> The fashion disaster made the bride two hours late for the ceremony. Her tardiness – and her insistence on clomping across the beach in high heels – outraged her sister-in-law Caroline, setting the tone for their future prickly relationship.
> 
> * Early in the marriage, “it was clear to friends that Carolyn was cracking under the pressure” from paparazzi and the press, writes Klein.
> 
> “She displayed the classic signs of clinical depression . . . A few months after the wedding, she began spending more and more time locked in her apartment, convulsed in crying jags.”
> 
> * John and Carolyn fought, and the battles were often violent.
> 
> “John told friends that he felt trapped in an abusive relationship,” Klein says.
> 
> “One time he had to be rushed to an emergency room for an operation to repair a severed nerve in his right wrist. He tried to dismiss the injury as the result of a stupid household accident, but his friends knew better: They were certain that Carolyn was the culprit.”
> 
> * Both had fiery tempers, which ignited at the mention of either’s former paramours.
> 
> When Carolyn heard rumors that John was seeing old girlfriend Daryl Hannah, “she flew into a rage,” Klein says.
> 
> And John feared his wife was cheating on him with a former boyfriend, Calvin Klein underwear poster boy Michael Bergin.
> 
> Bergin’s former manager told Klein that he once encountered Carolyn – who was living with Kennedy but not yet married to him – hiding under the model’s staircase. She was waiting until the coast was clear before heading to his room.
> 
> The two “continued a sexual affair” while Carolyn was dating John, the book says.
> 
> “Carolyn and I had a very intense love for each other,” Bergin told Klein.
> 
> “And I know deep in my heart that she still loved me even after she married John Kennedy. Some things just don’t end.”
> 
> During a screaming match in 1999, Carolyn told John she was still sleeping with Bergin. It was a lie, Klein writes, but John believed her.
> 
> * In March that year, John – after persuading Carolyn to see a psychiatrist who then put her on anti-depressants – joined her in marriage counseling.
> 
> But “nothing worked,” writes Klein.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘WE’VE BECOME TOTAL STRANGERS . . . I’VE HAD IT WITH HER!’
> 
> 
> JOHN F. KENNEDY JR.’S beautiful wife, Carolyn, was cocaine-addled, obsessed with an ex-boyfriend and flew into violent rages against her husband, an explosive new book says. The couple had se…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I recall reading that he was in love with Daryl Hannah but Jackie O didn't approve of her as the wife of an aspiring politician. Daryl Hannah had issues too and had been in a tempestuous relationship with Jackson Browne. He seemed to have a type.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  It wasn't pretty.  I find it interesting that Jackie did not really approve of his relationship with the actress Darryl Hannah.  In retrospect, she sounds much better than his choice.


Just posted about that. I think he wanted to marry her but Jackie didn't view her as suitable given his political aspirations.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Exactly.  It wasn't pretty.  I find it interesting that Jackie did not really approve of his relationship with the actress Darryl Hannah.  In retrospect, she sounds much better than his choice.


I could be misremembering, but I don't think she was much better. She had been in an abusive relationship (so she claimed) with Jackson Browne.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I remember Joan Rivers talking about her daughter Melissa planning a wedding soon after JFK Junior‘s and Melissa said she wanted a slip dress like CBK. Joan told her don’t waste your wedding day wearing a slip! She was probably correct, Melissa would not have pulled it off the way CBK did, very few could.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Charles cannot take away H's Prince title, it's H's birthright.


But with nothing behind the title it is useless.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> it's one thing to say they had fights, another thing to describe her lying on the floor with coke all over her nostrils.  what's the point in dragging a dead woman?


NY Magazine had a story describing her doing all of this.  I think they did it because her family was suing his estate for wrongful death.  Not that they equate, but they wanted to drag her and show she was a troubled person and not a saint.  At the time, there were still enough people who felt that the child of JFK deserved special treatment.  Just reporting this and not making a judgement.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I remember Joan Rivers talking about her daughter Melissa planning a wedding soon after JFK Junior‘s and Melissa said she wanted a slip dress like CBK. Joan told her don’t waste your wedding day wearing a slip! She was probably correct, Melissa would not have pulled it off the way CBK did, very few could.


Mother knows best. I know someone who wore a slip type dress a few years ago and it looked terrible. Her bust was too big, no support, the neckline sagged and she looked a hot mess. I'm sure at some point she'll look back and cringe.  

I would love to hear what Joan would have to say about ZeeZy's wardrobe.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I remember Joan Rivers talking about her daughter Melissa planning a wedding soon after JFK Junior‘s and Melissa said she wanted a slip dress like CBK. Joan told her don’t waste your wedding day wearing a slip! She was probably correct, Melissa would not have pulled it off the way CBK did, very few could.


Joan got a lot of criticism over the extravagant wedding.  She told the critics to buzz off.  She was more descriptive lololol!  

Honestly, I didn't get the slip dress for the wedding.  I also didn't understand why two people brought up as practicing Catholics were married in a Protestant church.  His mother must have had a cow and Rose rolled in her grave.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Mother knows best. I know someone who wore a slip type dress a few years ago and it looked terrible. Her bust was too big, no support, the neckline sagged and she looked a hot mess. I'm sure at some point she'll look back and cringe.
> 
> I would love to hear what Joan would have to say about ZeeZy's wardrobe.


OMG!  You know what Joan would say.  Plus she would do her patented gag.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that he was in love with Daryl Hannah but Jackie O didn't approve of her as the wife of an aspiring politician. Daryl Hannah had issues too and had been in a tempestuous relationship with Jackson Browne. *He seemed to have a type.*


He did indeed, beautiful, blonde and messed up. What their personalities were like and whether they were truly compatible with him was unfortunately a secondary concern.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> He did indeed, beautiful, blonde and messed up. What their personalities were like and whether they were truly compatible with him was unfortunately a secondary concern.


Father, like son?  Marilyn Monroe comes to mind.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I don't have a picture at my fingertips, but the one style that Meghan looked very good in was a simple sheath. This is a perfect case of finding something that looks good on you and sticking with it.  If you look at Catherine and Camilla, they pretty much do this.





charlottawill said:


> A well cut sheath (in the right size) is flattering on many women and never goes out of style.


A simple sheath... too bad she liked to add on to them, like that bondage cape for her outing with TQ, sport bedhead above them, use bad underwear beneath them, and strut with pelvis forward. 


gracekelly said:


> Harry draws on same memories as William for children's upbringing
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is drawing on experiences and memories he shares with Prince William for the upbringing of his children Lilibet 'Lili' Diana and Archie Harrison, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am posting this so we can have a laugh.  Given the current relationship between William and Harry, I wonder if this guy or his editor reads a newspaper.


Every time I go on the Express website, I get distracted by the gardening tips  Today I learnt the best way to prune wisteria...


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> They _are_ still loved in America to some degree. On her birthday I saw a Facebook "Happy birthday" message to Meghan from a local TV station. It had over 2,000 comments and most of them were very positive about her. I could not believe it. It reminded me that there are millions out there who aren't keeping up.


To be fair, there are probably millions who would read this and say we need to get a life.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> To be fair, there are probably millions who would read this and say we need to get a life.


They have a valid point. But we're here now so I have to go with it.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> To be fair, there are probably millions who would read this and say we need to get a life.



Sometimes I think the same, but then I don't have a TV


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Today I learnt the best way to prune wisteria...


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> Just posted about that. I think he wanted to marry her but Jackie didn't view her as suitable given his political aspirations.


I believe Jackie said that Darryl Hannah looked like an unmade bed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Mother knows best. I know someone who wore a slip type dress a few years ago and it looked terrible. Her bust was too big, no support, the neckline sagged and she looked a hot mess. I'm sure at some point she'll look back and cringe.
> 
> I would love to hear what Joan would have to say about ZeeZy's wardrobe.





gracekelly said:


> OMG!  You know what Joan would say.  Plus she would do her patented gag.
> 
> View attachment 5586589


Ugh, I still miss her.  She was fearless


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> While prepping lunch, this occurred to me: is Zedzed copying Wallis to project a Great Romance image? Edward is known mainly, true or false, for giving up the throne for Wallis. Perhaps Zedzed wants to cultivate the impression of her and Hazbeen sacrificing oh so much for privacy/the world/their kids/profit.
> 
> Also, and this is a bit of conspiracy theorizing, since the spare inherited the throne after Edward abdicated, are Zedzed and her minions busy damaging the reputation of Charles and William in an effort to turn public opinion against them as worthy of becoming King? *Perhaps in her puny and petty mind, she believes that they can be shamed into stepping aside so that her puppet the spare will ascend the throne.*


Once the Queen passes, and something happened simultaneously to Charles and William, Parliament would quickly pass a Regency Act to assign a temporary regent to allow George time to reach adulthood. As a precaution, George has probably already been assigned a potential guardian just in case and I'm willing to bet that it isn't Prince Dufus or ZedZed.  

"The* Regency Acts* are Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed at various times, to provide a regent in the event of the reigning monarch being incapacitated or a minor (under the age of 18). Prior to 1937, Regency Acts were passed only when necessary to deal with a specific situation."


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Father, like son?  Marilyn Monroe comes to mind.



I just watched the CNN documentary series about her. It was really interesting, but what struck me is the resemblance between her and Jackie. Maybe JFK had a Madonna/whore complex.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

No idea what this one's about coz I can only watch it once posted here.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> sorry - I'm not accepting NY Post as fact
> and this did start out as reference to Meghan copying her styl





xincinsin said:


> I liked very few of Methane's dresses (mainly the ones that actually fit her) but I particularly detest the green monstrosity. I even went to the designer's website just to assure myself that not all her creations are equally horrendous.


I finally get the green thing - it is by Emilia Wicksted - like the ONLY time, I remember, MM ever wore a dress by a Commonwealth designer - EW is from New Zealand based in London


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Father, like son?  Marilyn Monroe comes to mind.


Oh, his father had sex with all kinds of women. In fact, at least one of them was thought to be a spy! His tragic death means that for decades he was spoken of as if he was a saint. He wasn't but when I was growing up there was absolutely _never_ any criticism of JFK ever. Back then, did any of us know he had an affair with a 19-year-old intern while president?









						How Many Women Did JFK Bed? A Detailed List of the President’s Affairs
					

If I don’t have a lay for three days I get a headache.  So said the 35th President of the United States, as recalled by...




					www.historyhit.com


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that he was in love with Daryl Hannah but Jackie O didn't approve of her as the wife of an aspiring politician. Daryl Hannah had issues too and had been in a tempestuous relationship with Jackson Browne. He seemed to have a type.


I feel bad for Daryl because she came out years later and admitted that she was on the autism spectrum. A lot of the oddness about her behavior and the way she processes things could be explained by that.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Back then, did any of us know he had an affair with a 19-year-old intern while president?



No wonder Bill C idolized him


----------



## bag-mania

I've gone way off topic so I'll get back on track with a _People_ article about how inspiring Harry was to a Ukrainian medic. 

PS. the check to Sunshine Sachs must have cleared.









						Prince Harry 'Inspired' Ukrainian Medic to Keep Fighting After She Was Held Captive by Russian Forces
					

Ukrainian volunteer medic Yulia Paievska said a phone call from Prince Harry inspired her to "continue to fight" after she was captured and tortured by Russian forces




					people.com


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I've gone way off topic so I'll get back on track with a _People_ article about how inspiring Harry was to a Ukrainian medic.
> 
> PS. the check to Sunshine Sachs must have cleared.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Inspired' Ukrainian Medic to Keep Fighting After She Was Held Captive by Russian Forces
> 
> 
> Ukrainian volunteer medic Yulia Paievska said a phone call from Prince Harry inspired her to "continue to fight" after she was captured and tortured by Russian forces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


But I'll bet ZeeZy complained to him that she wasn't mentioned in it.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> But I'll bet ZeeZy complained to him that she wasn't mentioned in it.


Hush now, she's working on her big comeback. I have no idea what it will be, but did I mention it was BIG? Way bigger than anything about Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Hush now, she's working on her big comeback. I have no idea what it will be, but did I mention it was BIG? Way bigger than anything about Harry.



I will be waiting with bated breath


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I finally get the green thing - it is by Emilia Wicksted - like the ONLY time, I remember, MM ever wore a dress by a Commonwealth designer - EW is from New Zealand based in London


The designer's website had that silly cape on a pale blue dress, so it wasn't a bespoke feature for Methane, but I doubt it was tailored for her either. That cape looked like it was strangling her, and the bodice didn't fit well.


----------



## Aminamina

bag-mania said:


> I've gone way off topic so I'll get back on track with a _People_ article about how inspiring Harry was to a Ukrainian medic.
> 
> PS. the check to Sunshine Sachs must have cleared.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Inspired' Ukrainian Medic to Keep Fighting After She Was Held Captive by Russian Forces
> 
> 
> Ukrainian volunteer medic Yulia Paievska said a phone call from Prince Harry inspired her to "continue to fight" after she was captured and tortured by Russian forces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Oh, you wouldn’t believe but it’s been all over the Ukrainian Facebook for the last couple of days. That brave medic, Taira said that Prince Harry called her immediately after her release (in one version and a week later in the other) and “inspired” her to continue fighting(!) and that Invictus family always takes care of its own(now he is The Godfather). I have been a bit busy trying to explain my fellow ukrainian Facebook users what a big full of crap his royal phone call really was…to no avail. Just a small percentage of people are able to analyze information. I have heard the same sugar praise we have all heard before plus that Prince Harry and Meghan supported Ukraine since 2014(lol) and even donated unknowm(lol) sum of money(to whom and when is left unspecified). My point about how ridiculous sounds an inspiration to a woman of such high bravery from a person who can’t go take a pee without multimillion security detail fell on deaf ears.
P.S.: And he didn’t say “Hi, it’s me, JCMH” no, he said “It’s Prince Harry, blah blah blah”


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> I didn’t like her either. I didn’t see why she was a fashion icon. She dressed nicely. That was it.


Just another one of those women who become "famous" and "icons" because of who they married.  We would most likely never have heard of her had she not married JFK jr.  Sound like someone we know...?


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Just another one of those women who become "famous" and "icons" because of who they married.  We would most likely never have heard of her had she not married JFK jr.  Sound like someone we know...?


no...doesn't sound like Meghan to me.  Unlike Meghan, while I'm sure a big part of her attraction to him was his name, she didn't seek the spotlight or try to be a big "star"....she actually wanted privacy


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> I thought they were late taking off because her sister was delayed at work.


I had heard that it was the sister who was late as well.  Could have been a combination of the 2 factors.  It was extremely sad to me that Jackie never wanted him to fly or get his license so he waited until she passed before he did it. 
Edit* Sorry, I just saw that this was posted by GraceKelly earlier


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> no...doesn't sound like Meghan to me.  Unlike Meghan, while I'm sure a big part of her attraction to him was his name, she didn't seek the spotlight or try to be a big "star"....she actually wanted privacy


Lol, yes, but I was just making an observation on how she was portrayed in the media as being a style icon.  It was only because of who she married that we even knew who she was.  Same as Meegain


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> no...doesn't sound like Meghan to me.  Unlike Meghan, while I'm sure a big part of her attraction to him was his name, she didn't seek the spotlight or try to be a big "star"....she actually wanted privacy


I do recall that she hated the intrusion of the media into her life after they married, and that was a source of conflict. JFK Jr. used the media to garner attention for his magazine and other interests. Remember the big launch of his magazine "George"? He was used to it having grown up with it. His mother famously battled "paparazzo" Ron Galella in court for stalking her and her children around the streets of NY. That was the first time I had heard the term. 

So in their case the roles were actually reversed - Hazy hates media attention but ZeeZy welcomes it, as long as it is favorable.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I suppose we can all just be happy we were spared a bronzer stained spaghetti strap at least


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> $480,000 in credit card debt!   Would this be possible?



Sure, if they're charging private jet flights to it.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Last thing about CBK from me because I just finished the Bower book but I always found this story funny. My friend subleased Carolyn’s apartment when she moved in with John. She said C would never cash her rent checks. Months would go buy and the money would still be in her account. She’d say C, are you going to cash my checks?!


It's good to be rich.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I do recall that she hated the intrusion of the media into her life after they married, and that was a source of conflict. JFK Jr. used the media to garner attention for his magazine and other interests. Remember the big launch of his magazine "George"? He was used to it having grown up with it. His mother famously battled "paparazzo" Ron Galella in court for stalking her and her children around the streets of NY. That was the first time I had heard the term.
> 
> So in their case the roles were actually reversed - Hazy hates media attention but ZeeZy welcomes it, as long as it is favorable.


JFK Jr may have courted the media to an extent but I liked that he tried to be pretty normal - riding his bicycle around NY and apparently nice and friendly to people....his mom seemed to have raised him right


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> If they had friends then there would be witnesses. Other than those several weeks with Nacho and pwife, I don’t they’ve had much in the way of interactions with others since landing on this side of the Atlantic.


Other than a dinner with Eugenie and Jack, where have they been seen around Montecito? And we're not counting the fake car ride to Oprah's. It is very strange. It is summer, you'd think they'd be seen around the village with the kids on occasion. They could go out for ice cream and no one would notice unless she called Backgrid. But then they mysteriously show up at a parade in Wyoming.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Other than a dinner with Eugenie and Jack, where have they been seen around Montecito? And we're not counting the fake car ride to Oprah's. It is very strange. It is summer, you'd think they'd be seen around the village with the kids on occasion. They could go out for ice cream and no one would notice unless she called Backgrid. But then they mysteriously show up at a parade in Wyoming.



Hazzie is out there riding his electric bike with his entourage following behind.  









						Prince Harry cycles his bike near his $14m California home
					

Prince Harry appeared relaxed today as he cycled with his security near his California home - days before he is due to travel to the UK to celebrate the Queen's Jubilee with his family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: he even knows the proper signals


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> JFK Jr may have courted the media to an extent but I liked that he tried to be pretty normal - riding his bicycle around NY and apparently nice and friendly to people....his mom seemed to have raised him right


I don't recall hearing anything negative about him, other than being mocked for failing the NY bar exam on his first two tries. He got the looks, his sister got the brains. But he was America's prince. There were more than a few who fantasized about him getting together with Diana after she and Charles split.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> So the last couple chapters of the Bower book irked me. He implied the Harkles had success with the faux royal visit to NY and everything after…*that they are loved in America *when they’re a laughingstock at this point. I’m hoping Handbag’s book and his forthcoming attack of Charles and Camilla finally pushes the BRF to cut them off. Can he take away the titles when he is king?


Who exactly in America loves them besides the woke media?  Most people I know don't give one hoot about them, nor know WTF they are.  The people I know in Santa Barbara that have run into them despise them.  The media likes to shove people down our throats and tell us who we should like.  I think more and more Americans aren't believing a thing the media says any more.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I am posting this so we can have a laugh.  *Given the current relationship between William and Harry,* I wonder if this guy or his editor reads a newspaper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry draws on same memories as William for children's upbringing
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY is drawing on experiences and memories he shares with Prince William for the upbringing of his children Lilibet 'Lili' Diana and Archie Harrison, it has been claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


He is probably reading articles like the one below. TW got a >100k b-day gift from Will and Kate.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Other than a dinner with Eugenie and Jack, where have they been seen around Montecito? And we're not counting the fake car ride to Oprah's. It is very strange. It is summer, you'd think they'd be seen around the village with the kids on occasion. They could go out for ice cream and no one would notice unless she called Backgrid. But then they mysteriously show up at a parade in Wyoming.


To me it proves that Harry and Meghan can be incognito whenever they want to be, the same as other celebrities in LA. I don’t believe for a minute that they are cloistered away at home and never go out. Kind of makes them crying over security issues seem like they are exaggerating, doesn’t it?


----------



## purseinsanity

Cinderlala said:


> I never understood the fascination with CBK.  I think most tall, thin, wealthy women are considered stylish.  Especially those wearing classic clothing.
> 
> I do remember the pictures of their screaming fights on the sidewalks of NYC.


I was fascinated by Jackie Kennedy and the mystique surrounding her.  I was also fascinated by Diana.  Both women I find myself not liking too much the more I find out about them.  People were fascinated by CBK because she married a Kennedy.  She doesn't sound like she was a rose either.  She seems more like a Bergdorf Blonde than anything.  It's like the saying, "Don't meet your heroes" because you'll be grossly disappointed.


----------



## mellibelly

I believe JFK Jr didn’t have security, unlike Hazbeen who no one even recognizes in the US. The thing about being a style icon is you don’t have do anything else but look good in clothes. You can just be married to a handsome son of a president. The Duke of Windsor is known as a style icon after all and he was pretty much a total sh!t person.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Other than a dinner with Eugenie and Jack, where have they been seen around Montecito? And we're not counting the fake car ride to Oprah's. It is very strange. It is summer, you'd think they'd be seen around the village with the kids on occasion. They could go out for ice cream and no one would notice unless she called Backgrid. But then they mysteriously show up at a parade in Wyoming.


Good point , there are no candids only professional shots, well and a third category - the staged candid 
No candids - their security teams told others not to photograph them at dinner in NY or at Wimbledon 
Staged candid eg shot of her dog walking with baby in sling, but her smiling directly at paparazzo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I remember Joan Rivers talking about her daughter Melissa planning a wedding soon after JFK Junior‘s and Melissa said she wanted a slip dress like CBK. Joan told her don’t waste your wedding day wearing a slip! She was probably correct, Melissa would not have pulled it off the way CBK did, very few could.


I miss Joan Rivers!  I'd love to hear her thought's on TW's outfits.


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> I believe JFK Jr didn’t have security, unlike Hazbeen who no one even recognizes in the US.


He and his sister only had SS protection until they were 18, and they were arguably at greater risk than the Harkles. I don't understand who Hazy thinks is after him and his family. I don't know if it is addressed in the book, I'm only up to the chapter right after the wedding, but I do believe ZeeZy has fed his paranoia about potential threats.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Mother knows best. I know someone who wore a slip type dress a few years ago and it looked terrible. Her bust was too big, no support, the neckline sagged and she looked a hot mess. I'm sure at some point she'll look back and cringe.
> *
> I would love to hear what Joan would have to say about ZeeZy's wardrobe.*


Oops just saw your post!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> He is probably reading articles like the one below. TW got a >100k b-day gift from Will and Kate.



French article … hmmm 
Yes does mention the $100k bday prezzie THIS YEAR from W&K !
but then it enumerates pieces of Diana’s jewelry that are already in the MM jewelry chest, ie pieces that went directly to MM, not reserved for eventual grandchild


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I just watched the CNN documentary series about her. It was really interesting, but what struck me is the resemblance between her and Jackie. Maybe JFK had a Madonna/whore complex.
> 
> View attachment 5586612
> View attachment 5586613




Usher's immortal words:  
Want a Lady in the Street but a Freak in the Bed  ​TW tries to play both roles.


----------



## Chanbal

Should we expect one more lawsuit against  UK government to pay for the security of the chickens? 










						Harry and Meghan warned a LION is prowling near $14m Montecito mansion
					

The couple were ordered to lock down their $14.6million mansion in Montecito after sightings of the vicious beast.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

This could be what tripped their alarm on several occasions. 

In case no one told the Dumbasses, cougars and coyotes are routine in CA. Not too smart to put a chicken coop in your yard.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Usher's immortal words:
> Want a Lady in the Street but a Freak in the Bed  ​TW tries to play both roles.



She fails spectacularly on the first count, while the second is likely the secret of her success.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Should we expect one more lawsuit against  UK government to pay for the security of the chickens?
> View attachment 5586667
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warned a LION is prowling near $14m Montecito mansion
> 
> 
> The couple were ordered to lock down their $14.6million mansion in Montecito after sightings of the vicious beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Aren’t mountain lions a protected species?  Surely those who preach about saving the earth would never advocate killing mountain lions, would they?  

Cheers to Joan - funny video in spoiler.  Language & content warning


Spoiler



[\spoiler]


----------



## Cinderlala

Mountain lions are spotted regularly in California and many other western states.  We had one on our property at my childhood home.  I saw it from the living room window.  It was amazing to see.  (Unsurprisingly, our house was in the mountains.)

I suppose it could be quite surprising to someone from elsewhere, though.  

Their chickens are essentially fast food for a mountain lion.


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, this thing was posted in West Hollywood


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Should we expect one more lawsuit against  UK government to pay for the security of the chickens?
> View attachment 5586667
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warned a LION is prowling near $14m Montecito mansion
> 
> 
> The couple were ordered to lock down their $14.6million mansion in Montecito after sightings of the vicious beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


WTF are "hipster" chickens?  Are they from West Hollywood or something??


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Aren’t mountain lions a protected species? Surely those who preach about saving the earth would never advocate killing mountain lions, would they?


Yes. The CA Dept. of Wildlife recommends securing pets and livestock at night because they're on the prowl in many places today. One  can cover a large area in search of food. While it is trendy to keep chickens in your yard, in CA it's like inviting a mountain lion to dinner. Putting a chicken coop on their property shows how clueless the Harkles were about the area they moved to.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> WTF are "hipster" chickens?  Are they from West Hollywood or something??


   In recent years it is trendy for the younger generation to keep chickens in their yards. My niece registered for a Williams Sonoma chicken coop when she got married.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> WTF are "hipster" chickens?  Are they from West Hollywood or something??











						Hipster chicken beards caused by a single gene mutation
					

Now we know how a chicken gets its beard. The same set of genes may also control human hair patterns and how birds of paradise get their showy plumage




					www.newscientist.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> WTF are "hipster" chickens?  Are they from West Hollywood or something??


I think ''royal" chickens would be more appropriate, they live at _The Chateau of Riven Rock. _ 

By the way, the Harkles might be stuck with the 19-toilet mansion for a while…

_The average property price in the area, according to data from realtor.com, has nosedived from $11million (£9million) in May to $5.250m (£4.3million) in July – equating to around a 45 percent drop._









						Meghan and Harry’s mansion could have halved in value as inflation ‘bites gigantic chunk’ out of California market
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's £11million mansion may have almost halved in value as spiralling inflation “bites a gigantic chunk” out of California’s property market, a real estate expert claims




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Mountain lions are spotted regularly in California and many other western states.  We had one on our property at my childhood home.  I saw it from the living room window.  It was amazing to see.  (Unsurprisingly, our house was in the mountains.)
> 
> I suppose it could be quite surprising to someone from elsewhere, though.
> 
> Their chickens are essentially fast food for a mountain lion.


If they have any sense (or their security people do) they'll get rid of the coop. The chickens will attract a mountain lion, but if humans are in the vicinity they'll be a target too. Joggers and hikers have been attacked and killed by them.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> the disheveled African camping tent


I literally lol'd.


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> If they have any sense (or their security people do) they'll get rid of the coop. The chickens will attract a mountain lion, but if humans are in the vicinity they'll be a target too. Joggers and hikers have been attacked and killed by them.


Yes, joggers and hikers are regularly killed by mountain lions, often in Colorado & California.  

Unfortunately for their children, Buz & Huz don't seem to have much sense.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hipster chicken beards caused by a single gene mutation
> 
> 
> Now we know how a chicken gets its beard. The same set of genes may also control human hair patterns and how birds of paradise get their showy plumage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newscientist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5586686


That’s as close to a “Queen” tiara she’s going to get.


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh.





Ah, bless him. He's got the same high dose of delusions as his beloved idol MM. Foolish guy out there thinking people actually want another 'book' full of nonsense from him.



xincinsin said:


> Not sure if I'll get this pasted right, but marklenews1 posted a hilarious pre-Megxit clip of the amazingly hirsute Duchess.
> This reminds me of that passing trend about 10 years ago when my niece sported a fringe that covered her eyes. I kept thinking she was going around blind.



OMG!


I'd forgotten about this appearance. That has to be one of the most awkward, chaotic & uncomfortable entrances to a live event I've ever seen. She seems incapable of interacting with other people in the most basic of ways.




lanasyogamama said:


> I’d believe this story



Plus the way she's looking at him in that video screenshot






jennlt said:


> More of the same - a heat-seeking missile finding her target
> View attachment 5581026


I still can't believe she was out walking with a sleeping baby only half strapped into his carrier. like this  Not only is it dangerous, it looks really uncomfortable for the child to be basically hanging on by one strap under his thigh.  
Creepy delirious look on her face







Chanbal said:


> no further comments…











marietouchet said:


> Book report 2
> 
> on privileges given to MM PRIOR to her marriage.  FYI MM and H were living together almost immediately , within 4-5 mos of meeting, she was written out of SUITS and unemployed so moved to London
> 
> View attachment 5581580









QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



Say what now?






Tyler_JP said:


> How long before they start an OnlyFans?





Hopefully never. Sounds horrifying.




EverSoElusive said:


> Currently in a Lyft ride headed to work and the radio DJ is announcing today's birthday (August 4th) and she said:
> 
> Happy birthday, Meghan Markle, the *FORMER* *Duchess of Sussex*
> 
> Z-list would have been pissed if she heard it










Gal4Dior said:


> It's Z list's Bday. Shall I send her a copy of the Bench or Revenge? Decisions, decisions....





gracekelly said:


> I am sending her a stale banana bread, an overdone chicken  with a few boxes of recalled oat milk latte powder.


That's all too thoughtful. We should send her some belated celebratory mothballs, seeing as she _hates _the smell of them so much.
Might as well make her miserable for her birthday.






charlottawill said:


> We have not heard from ZeeZy in weeks. Has anyone checked to see if she's OK?


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower confirms that CNN withdrew the report at TW's request…


----------



## Chanbal

Sachs is working hard again to compensate for the lack of b-day celebrations by QE, People, Vogue…


----------



## charlottawill

Lounorada said:


> I'd forgotten about this appearance. That has to be one of the most awkward, chaotic & uncomfortable entrances to a live event I've ever seen. She seems incapable of interacting with other people in the most basic of ways.


This is a perfect example of the clash of her LA sensibilities with British ways. It does have a game show or awards show vibe. How mortified must that poor woman have felt getting caught up in ZeeZy's bosom?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> He and his sister only had SS protection until they were 18, and they were arguably at greater risk than the Harkles. I don't understand who Hazy thinks is after him and his family. I don't know if it is addressed in the book, I'm only up to the chapter right after the wedding, but I do believe ZeeZy has fed his paranoia about potential threats.


There was one serious threat mentioned in the book, sorry, don’t remember more, but H does not enter in until late in the book so you have not gone past it … 
The rest of the security issue is about the annoyance of being a known celebrity, remember guards are the ones who chase off autograph seeking fans and take you home after a night of tippling , they also park the car, and open car doors 
Also a recent article on Diana stated she used guards as Nannies/minders/chaperones for the boys  when they were young - say after 6 years old , so, that is what H was used to, he never went out without someone to catch him if he (proverbially) fell


----------



## Chanbal

Who would pay to listen to Hazz? 'Rich dudes' suffering from dementia?? 



_And ahead of the book’s release, royal author Kinsey Schofield believes Harry is trying to “brand himself” as the former US President.

Ms Schofield said: "What I think he’s trying to do is brand himself as a Mark Zuckerberg, Barack ***** — *some guy that can get $100,000 for a speech in Miami to a bunch of rich dudes.*

“*I think he is trying to brand himself as a leader in the United States and will use his book to try to do that.*

“He wanted to try to rewrite his story and to be *this phoenix rising from the ashes*._


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I think ''royal" chickens would be more appropriate, they live at _The Chateau of Riven Rock. _
> 
> By the way, the Harkles might be stuck with the 19-toilet mansion for a while…
> 
> _The average property price in the area, according to data from realtor.com, has nosedived from $11million (£9million) in May to $5.250m (£4.3million) in July – equating to around a 45 percent drop._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s mansion could have halved in value as inflation ‘bites gigantic chunk’ out of California market
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's £11million mansion may have almost halved in value as spiralling inflation “bites a gigantic chunk” out of California’s property market, a real estate expert claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


Ok guys, lets be accurate, it is 14 bathrooms per Bower p 371


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, this thing was posted in West Hollywood
> View attachment 5586679


I’ll improve on this graffiti the next time I’m in weho. Add some devil horns, a unibrow, maybe a moustache. I’m With Stupid and an arrow meant for Handbag over the keep calm text. Some pigeons on her shoulder for the poo on the dress. 

I feel like she paid for this.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Should we expect one more lawsuit against  UK government to pay for the security of the chickens?
> View attachment 5586667
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warned a LION is prowling near $14m Montecito mansion
> 
> 
> The couple were ordered to lock down their $14.6million mansion in Montecito after sightings of the vicious beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh my gosh, SECURITY THREAT

Get real that happens all the time in the California hills , raccoons, coyotes, mountain lions 

It comes with territory


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower confirms that CNN withdrew the report at TW's request…




Claw can demand that anybody retract things that make her look bad all she wants.  Fact is, as far as I'm concerned, most of America sees her as an idiotic lying whiny spoiled-rotten attention whore (but I mean that in a nice way).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

In the interest of accuracy, let’s be clear to Ms. Schofield:  Hazzie is *no* Barack.  Hazzie is *no* phoenix either.  Hazzie is *no* leader.
Hazzie is *not rich *by his own merits either.  It’s all Daddie’s money and connections.  


Chanbal said:


> _“*I think he is trying to brand himself as a leader in the United States and will use his book to try to do that.*
> 
> “He wanted to try to rewrite his story and to be *this phoenix rising from the ashes*._


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> If they have any sense (or their security people do) they'll get rid of the coop. The chickens will attract a mountain lion, but if humans are in the vicinity they'll be a target too. Joggers and hikers have been attacked and killed by them.


My neighbors complain of the raccoons that feed at the bird feeder, their daylilies are eaten by the deer, mice go for bird food too , go for hummingbird feeders 

It has never dawned on anyone to change plants or remove bird feeder


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Ok guys, lets be accurate, it is 14 bathrooms per Bower p 371


As far as I recall, it was listed as having 16 bathrooms (+ 3 additional bathrooms in the guest house). Tom Bower needs an honorary membership here.   In any event, 14, 16, or 19 …plenty of thrones.

_ET learned that Meghan and Harry purchased a nine-bedroom, 19-bathroom home in Montecito, California. The 18,671-square-foot house, which was built in 2003, was purchased June 17 by the couple for $14.6 million._









						Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito Mansion Is Their 'Forever Home'
					

'Finding Freedom' co-author Omid Scobie dishes on the couple's latest move, whom their celebrity neighbors are and more.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Who would pay to listen to Hazz? 'Rich dudes' suffering from dementia??
> 
> 
> 
> _And ahead of the book’s release, royal author Kinsey Schofield believes Harry is trying to “brand himself” as the former US President.
> 
> Ms Schofield said: "What I think he’s trying to do is brand himself as a Mark Zuckerberg, Barack ***** — *some guy that can get $100,000 for a speech in Miami to a bunch of rich dudes.*
> 
> “*I think he is trying to brand himself as a leader in the United States and will use his book to try to do that.*
> 
> “He wanted to try to rewrite his story and to be *this phoenix rising from the ashes*._



I think JP Morgan Chase did pay him $100k for a speech in FL a few years ago before anyone realized how dim he is. After everyone saw how he bombed at the UN, he's dreaming if he thinks he can command that kind of money on a regular basis.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> As far as I recall, it was listed as having 16 bathrooms (+ 3 additional bathrooms in the guest house). Tom Bower needs an honorary membership here.   In any event, 14, 16, or 19 …plenty of thrones.
> 
> _ET learned that Meghan and Harry purchased a nine-bedroom, 19-bathroom home in Montecito, California. The 18,671-square-foot house, which was built in 2003, was purchased June 17 by the couple for $14.6 million._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Prince Harry's Montecito Mansion Is Their 'Forever Home'
> 
> 
> 'Finding Freedom' co-author Omid Scobie dishes on the couple's latest move, whom their celebrity neighbors are and more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


It may become their forever home by default if the market continues to fall and they can't sell it.


----------



## rose60610

Consider this for a moment: Claw LOVES attention. Apart from situations where she invites herself, she isn't seen anywhere. Nobody wants her. Where's Disney after the first voice over? TV? Movies? After the Oprah disaster nobody is knocking on the Harkle door. The UN speech was a disaster. The Ellen Show demonstrated Claw will stoop to anything for attention. Imitating a squirrel? Squatting like a pooping duck? Embarrassing. The BRF has no use for them. Hollywood isn't calling. Town & Country and Vanity Fair have exhausted their vomit inducing articles on them. No other magazines are covering them, are they? Unless Claw "writes" anything for the NYT again, she and Haz aren't welcome anywhere that I can see. So they got books coming out. So what.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Sachs is working hard again to compensate for the lack of b-day celebrations by QE, People, Vogue…



Her special bond requires Super Glue and eyelids, not relationships.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _“He wanted to try to rewrite his story and to be *this phoenix rising from the ashes*._


My phoenixes are all squawking in protest at this copycat/turkey.


marietouchet said:


> Ok guys, lets be accurate, it is 14 bathrooms per Bower p 371


Some had to be sealed up and abandoned after Madam Arsewell clogged them.


rose60610 said:


> Consider this for a moment: Claw LOVES attention. Apart from situations where she invites herself, she isn't seen anywhere. Nobody wants her. Where's Disney after the first voice over? TV? Movies? After the Oprah disaster nobody is knocking on the Harkle door. The UN speech was a disaster. The Ellen Show demonstrated Claw will stoop to anything for attention. Imitating a squirrel? Squatting like a pooping duck? Embarrassing. The BRF has no use for them. Hollywood isn't calling. Town & Country and Vanity Fair have exhausted their vomit inducing articles on them. No other magazines are covering them, are they? Unless Claw "writes" anything for the NYT again, she and Haz aren't welcome anywhere that I can see. So they got books coming out. So what.


Wasn't she supposed to pen a wellness or leadership book as part of that 4-book deal? I'm waiting for Horrid Scobie to let the world know which era his goddess is in. Last we heard, he claimed the terrible twosome were in their Thrive Chapter and Era of Visibility. Can we now hope that they follow Nature's cycle and are in their Fallow Chapter?


----------



## Toby93

rose60610 said:


> Consider this for a moment: Claw LOVES attention. Apart from situations where she invites herself, she isn't seen anywhere. Nobody wants her. Where's Disney after the first voice over? TV? Movies? After the Oprah disaster nobody is knocking on the Harkle door. The UN speech was a disaster. The Ellen Show demonstrated Claw will stoop to anything for attention. Imitating a squirrel? Squatting like a pooping duck? Embarrassing. The BRF has no use for them. Hollywood isn't calling. Town & Country and Vanity Fair have exhausted their vomit inducing articles on them. No other magazines are covering them, are they? Unless Claw "writes" anything for the NYT again, she and Haz aren't welcome anywhere that I can see. So they got books coming out. So what


There doesn't seem to be much that she won't stoop to in order to keep herself in the spotlight.  For a while, Tatler was promoting them constantly, but if the comments were anything to go by, they must have realized it was not doing anything for their sales


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> In the interest of accuracy, let’s be clear to Ms. Schofield:  Hazzie is *no* Barack.  Hazzie is *no* phoenix either.  Hazzie is *no* leader.
> Hazzie is *not rich *by his own merits either.  It’s all Daddie’s money and connections.


Hazz is definitely no Barack.  He is barely educated and was given a pass in school because of who he was.  There are definitely people out there who have the personality and charisma without an education who can hold peoples attention and speak intelligently, but Hazz is not one of them.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I think JP Morgan Chase did pay him $100k for a speech in FL a few years ago before anyone realized how dim he is. After everyone saw how he bombed at the UN, he's dreaming if he thinks he can command that kind of money on a regular basis.


Yep! The figure for that speech was never confirmed, but it might have been from $500,000 to $1 million.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's big-money career may have begun already with a speech for JP Morgan
					

It isn't clear whether the Duke and Duchess were paid — but speaking gigs like this are widely expected to provide them with a post-royal income.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Yep! The figure for that speech was never confirmed, but it might have been from $500,000 to $1 million.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's big-money career may have begun already with a speech for JP Morgan
> 
> 
> It isn't clear whether the Duke and Duchess were paid — but speaking gigs like this are widely expected to provide them with a post-royal income.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.businessinsider.com



It's good money, but only if you have something to say. If all you are going to do is hector people, boast about your wife/mother, and gripe about your family/mental health, then I doubt people are going to pay top dollar.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> It's good money, but only if you have something to say. If all you are going to do is hector people, boast about your wife/mother, and gripe about your family/mental health, then I doubt people are going to pay top dollar.


My husband's employer has a client summit every year with several thousand attendees and there is always a big name keynote speaker. They've had people like the late Colin Powell and Capt. Sullenberger, both of whom my husband said were inspiring and mesmerizing speakers. I can't imagine anyone ever saying that about Hazy. You have to have charisma and real life experiences that people actually want to hear about to be a successful motivational speaker, neither of which the coddled and misunderstood man-child prince possesses.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> There doesn't seem to be much that she won't stoop to in order to keep herself in the spotlight.  For a while, Tatler was promoting them constantly, but if the comments were anything to go by, they must have realized it was not doing anything for their sales


I'm sure ZeeZy was enraged to learn that Tatler named Kate best dressed of 2022, and they listed her occupation as "future queen". Twist that knife!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Lots of stories about drug use. Public disagreements.  They were late taking off that night because she couldn’t  decide about her nail polish and insisted on changing it. We all know what happened.


I miss one day and am pages behind... but this is what I read as well.

She kept having the nail lady change her polish to be a better match for her dress, a kind of mauve-y something, arrived late, they took off when it was getting dark for which he was not qualified to fly... and


----------



## oldbag

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh, SECURITY THREAT
> 
> Get real that happens all the time in the California hills , raccoons, coyotes, mountain lions
> 
> It comes with territory


Yes, it does come with the territory! Their territory. Mountsin lions have lived there long before any humans showed up. You can't ring the dinner bell and then be upset when company shows up. They are not vicious beasts. Mountain lions do what mountain lions do, it's not personal, it's survival.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> My husband's employer has a client summit every year with several thousand attendees and there is always a big name keynote speaker. They've had people like the late Colin Powell and Capt. Sullenberger, both of whom my husband said were inspiring and mesmerizing speakers. I can't imagine anyone ever saying that about Hazy. You have to have charisma and real life experiences that people actually want to hear about to be a successful motivational speaker, neither of which the coddled and misunderstood man-child prince possesses.


Does She-Who-Would-Love-To-Be-Named have such aspirations too? I've seen a few online comments saying that she speaks well, if you disregard all her plagiarism.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I liked very few of Methane's dresses (mainly the ones that actually fit her) but I particularly detest the green monstrosity. I even went to the designer's website just to assure myself that not all her creations are equally horrendous.


I have yet to see a wickstead creation that doesn’t look like it’s come to life and started garrotting it’s wearer.


charlottawill said:


> Mother knows best. I know someone who wore a slip type dress a few years ago and it looked terrible. Her bust was too big, no support, the neckline sagged and she looked a hot mess. I'm sure at some point she'll look back and cringe.
> 
> I would love to hear what Joan would have to say about ZeeZy's wardrobe.


She’d say
“Stop bothering my plastic surgeon. for an appointment! Even hacks have standards!”
It’d be brilliant though. Fingers permanently in the throat.

She was right about the slip dress too


bag-mania said:


> He did indeed, beautiful, blonde and messed up. What their personalities were like and whether they were truly compatible with him was unfortunately a secondary concern.


I mean, moody fashion girls and movie stars are who you expect a spoilt elite playboy to date aren’t they?

It’s a bit more surprising when they marry a narcissistic, dumpy bit-player with feet like a condor.


bag-mania said:


> I've gone way off topic so I'll get back on track with a _People_ article about how inspiring Harry was to a Ukrainian medic.
> 
> PS. the check to Sunshine Sachs must have cleared.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'Inspired' Ukrainian Medic to Keep Fighting After She Was Held Captive by Russian Forces
> 
> 
> Ukrainian volunteer medic Yulia Paievska said a phone call from Prince Harry inspired her to "continue to fight" after she was captured and tortured by Russian forces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com





Aminamina said:


> Oh, you wouldn’t believe but it’s been all over the Ukrainian Facebook for the last couple of days. That brave medic, Taira said that Prince Harry called her immediately after her release (in one version and a week later in the other) and “inspired” her to continue fighting(!) and that Invictus family always takes care of its own(now he is The Godfather). I have been a bit busy trying to explain my fellow ukrainian Facebook users what a big full of crap his royal phone call really was…to no avail. Just a small percentage of people are able to analyze information. I have heard the same sugar praise we have all heard before plus that Prince Harry and Meghan supported Ukraine since 2014(lol) and even donated unknowm(lol) sum of money(to whom and when is left unspecified). My point about how ridiculous sounds an inspiration to a woman of such high bravery from a person who can’t go take a pee without multimillion security detail fell on deaf ears.
> P.S.: And he didn’t say “Hi, it’s me, JCMH” no, he said “It’s Prince Harry, blah blah blah”


Evidently Taira wants to parlay her experiences into some sort of media career and who can blame her- it’s just a shame that she still feels it is necessary to cosy up to a pair of elite toe rags to get ahead in the business when she obviously has considerably more experience, brains and charisma than them combined.


Toby93 said:


> Just another one of those women who become "famous" and "icons" because of who they married.  We would most likely never have heard of her had she not married JFK jr.  Sound like someone we know...?


I was just thinking about how being a famous spouse is much more successful for women than men.

The only man I can think marriage alone has created famous spouse status for is David Furnish though I think J Lo has helped Ben afflek stay relevant now and Nicki minaj definitely helped meek mills’ career but yeah I guess it comes back to women being the more aesthetic/fashionable gender.


Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, this thing was posted in West Hollywood
> View attachment 5586679


Notably white in this portrait so she definitely commissioned it 


charlottawill said:


> In recent years it is trendy for the younger generation to keep chickens in their yards. My niece registered for a Williams Sonoma chicken coop when she got married.


I do like the fresh eggs and knowing the chickens are living nice lives but jeez is it a lot of work and foxes live everywhere.


Chanbal said:


> Sachs is working hard again to compensate for the lack of b-day celebrations by QE, People, Vogue…



She must be giving him her clothes for Madea - explains the fit issues

Oh look here he is in her Chanel inspired suit and some Emilia wickstead throttle-wear






mellibelly said:


> I’ll improve on this graffiti the next time I’m in weho. Add some devil horns, a unibrow, maybe a moustache. I’m With Stupid and an arrow meant for Handbag over the keep calm text. Some pigeons on her shoulder for the poo on the dress.
> 
> I feel like she paid for this.


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure ZeeZy was enraged to learn that Tatler named Kate best dressed of 2022, and they listed her occupation as "future queen". Twist that knife!


Im not 100% sure but I think Princess Beatrice was 11th.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> He and his sister only had SS protection until they were 18, and they were arguably at greater risk than the Harkles. I don't understand who Hazy thinks is after him and his family. I don't know if it is addressed in the book, I'm only up to the chapter right after the wedding, but I do believe ZeeZy has fed his paranoia about potential threats.



Absolutely. The way he is obsessed with her being killed JuSt LiKE hiS moTheR is the result of her being in his ear constanstly. Remember, five months into dating and she forced Knauf to release a statement comparing her to Diana and her hounding by the press.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

oldbag said:


> Yes, it does come with the territory! Their territory. Mountsin lions have lived there long before any humans showed up. You can't ring the dinner bell and then be upset when company shows up. They are not vicious beasts. Mountain lions do what mountain lions do, it's not personal, it's survival.



Right? We're having a growing population of wolves and so far they are protected as an endangered species. There has not been a single incident with a wolf and a human (and I live in an "official wolf area") - in fact I think more people have scary encounters with wild boars - but people complain they kill sheep. I mean, what's a wolf supposed to do, order pizza? Also, there are complaints they eat deer (crazy, hu?), but then the deer eat young trees which is wrong also. Humans are nuts.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely. The way he is obsessed with her being killed JuSt LiKE hiS moTheR is the result of her being in his ear constanstly. Remember, five months into dating and she forced Knauf to release a statement comparing her to Diana and her hounding by the press.


I would have thought that that there was a sign of mental instability. Her fixation on being like Diana is really creepy. But for all we know, Hazard wants to be just like Mummy (Oh Norman....) Two of a Kind.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> My neighbors complain of the raccoons that feed at the bird feeder, their daylilies are eaten by the deer, mice go for bird food too , go for hummingbird feeders
> 
> It has never dawned on anyone to change plants or remove bird feeder



Bird feeders should be hung on the washing line. Water bowls are more important. but the best thing people can do for birds is grow lots of hedging and prickly bushes and not cut down their trees. 

I daren't put bird feeders because I have a cat. I live next to a nature reserve, a golf course and a park. Yesterday I had a young fox on my land in broad daylight, he was so beautiful. We don't often get to see them so close up. We're (humans) are on their land and not the other way round. H&M are stupid for tempting predator mountain lions into their garden, I would be frightened myself if I cam across one, but I really object to the Daily Fail calling a wild animal that needs to hunt for food everyday "vicious". 

In Scotland, lots of our neighbours keep chickens (actually one neighbour has a pony, and of course we are surrounded by roaming sheep who 'mow' the surrounding area for the grouse land and my garden too). 

People who have chickens should learn how to keep chickens before they get them, throwing seed down for them is so stupid, it just invites rats. If you have mountain lions or foxes or other meat eating animals in the area then it's your responsibility to house and secure the chickens properly.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




She's  ing dictator!!!!!!!!!


----------



## andrashik

So... Sunshine sachs dropped them?








						Prince Harry 'wants a clear-out' after latest 'big comeback' fail
					

PRINCE HARRY reportedly wants a "complete clear-out" of his and Meghan Markle's PR team after failure from his recent "big comeback", a royal expert claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## andrashik




----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> I miss one day and am pages behind... but this is what I read as well.
> 
> She kept having the nail lady change her polish to be a better match for her dress, a kind of mauve-y something, arrived late, they took off when it was getting dark for which he was not qualified to fly... and


Hellooooo , duhhh , we have done over 100,000 pages, you cant miss a day … LOL


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


> So... Sunshine sachs dropped them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'wants a clear-out' after latest 'big comeback' fail
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY reportedly wants a "complete clear-out" of his and Meghan Markle's PR team after failure from his recent "big comeback", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Recent stories - HandM are cleaning house and firing their staff, SS dropped them instead, H book will be published, book won’t be published, everybody else definitely will more books out , M is rebranding … 
Yum, pls pass the popcorn


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Recent stories - HandM are cleaning house and firing their staff, SS dropped them instead, H book will be published, book won’t be published, everybody else definitely will more books out , M is rebranding …
> Yum, pls pass the popcorn



Clear as mud, the H&M way of delivering info


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

DoggieBags said:


> I believe Jackie said that Darryl Hannah looked like an unmade bed.


Great description! I have to say MM fits that as well, add in the word "stained" (ducks....)


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> He and his sister only had SS protection until they were 18, and they were arguably at greater risk than the Harkles. I don't understand who Hazy thinks is after him and his family. I don't know if it is addressed in the book, I'm only up to the chapter right after the wedding, but I do believe ZeeZy has fed his paranoia about potential threats.


paranoia may be the right word....he seems obsessed with his mom's death and the papparazzi's involvement in it....didn't he say arount the time of his marriage he feared the same fate would befall his WIFE?  That made no sense to me as the WIFE was suffering from racism, not from being chased by photogs

He's is a messed up man-boy IMO


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> So... *Sunshine sachs dropped them*?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'wants a clear-out' after latest 'big comeback' fail
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY reportedly wants a "complete clear-out" of his and Meghan Markle's PR team after failure from his recent "big comeback", a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Who would pay to listen to Hazz? 'Rich dudes' suffering from dementia??
> 
> 
> 
> _And ahead of the book’s release, royal author Kinsey Schofield believes Harry is trying to “brand himself” as the former US President.
> 
> Ms Schofield said: "What I think he’s trying to do is brand himself as a Mark Zuckerberg, Barack ***** — *some guy that can get $100,000 for a speech in Miami to a bunch of rich dudes.*
> 
> “*I think he is trying to brand himself as a leader in the United States and will use his book to try to do that.*
> 
> “He wanted to try to rewrite his story and to be *this phoenix rising from the ashes*._



sorry for repeating myself but he and his WIFE aren't worthy to shine the former pres's shoes


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Hellooooo , duhhh , we have done over 100,000 pages, you cant miss a day … LOL


I had two long trips, one almost after another. Only I know the work I had to read this thread… There were days my internet connection sucked…


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself but he and his WIFE aren't worthy to shine the former pres's shoes


Hazz and TW know that they no Ob*m* or Zuckerberg, but they don't care as long as their supporters sponsor their extravagant lifestyle imo. TW has already described herself a “_fraud,_” so…


----------



## Chanbal

"_*It's a bit of a mystery what they're doing for the money they've been given by Spotify and Netflix*_"


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Does She-Who-Would-Love-To-Be-Named have such aspirations too? I've seen a few online comments saying that she speaks well, if you disregard all her plagiarism.


Left to her own word salads not a chance. But with speechwriters and teleprompters she may have a future in politics, scary a thought as that may be. Recent history has shown that people with even the most outlandish ideas and lack of experience can get elected.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> paranoia may be the right word....he seems obsessed with his mom's death and the papparazzi's involvement in it....didn't he say arount the time of his marriage he feared the same fate would befall his WIFE?  That made no sense to me as the WIFE was suffering from racism, not from being chased by photogs
> 
> He's is a messed up man-boy IMO


Not sure if he said that BUT I do remember at the time of Megxit, H said something along the lines of - we are having to make do with money from my mom, it is like she knew this (perceived poverty) would happen


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I had two long trips, one almost after another. Only I know the work I had to read this thread… There were days my internet connection sucked…



You get a pass (LOL) for missing days


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Recent stories - HandM are cleaning house and firing their staff, SS dropped them instead, H book will be published, book won’t be published, everybody else definitely will more books out , M is rebranding …
> Yum, pls pass the popcorn


I have no clue what kind of brand they had except for it including some weird definition of compassion that seemed to mean compassion is practiced by others or done with someone else's money, don't expect them to walk the talk. Yes, rebranding sounds like a good idea. They should make it clear that they just want money, lots of money. Simple, direct, concise, TRUTHFUL.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Left to her own word salads not a chance. But with speechwriters and teleprompters she may have a future in politics, scary a thought as that may be. Recent history has shown that people with even the most outlandish ideas and lack of experience can get elected.


She would never get through a debate. She’s great at scheming and planning, she sucks at thinking on her feet.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Not sure if he said that BUT I do remember at the time of Megxit, H said something along the lines of - we are having to make do with money from my mom, it is like she knew this (perceived poverty) would happen


Part of his mighty moan on the OW interview, when he was complaining that the Bank of Dad turned off the tap.
I think a lot of people would like to be poor like he is.


----------



## Katel

She crazy  
The one where MeMeME pulls him away by the arm to another room during a conversation is missing - priceless. (Anyone have that one?)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

Katel said:


> She crazy
> The one where MeMeME pulls him away by the arm to another room during a conversation is missing - priceless. (Anyone have that one?)



Wow. Aside from the c.o.n.s.t.a.n.t. touching ("controlling via contact"....I have an NPD ex that is like that), her holding him back so she can go first is just...mind-blowingly cringe-worthy. Like a puppy that needs to be trained to let the owner go first out the door. This is ridiculous. Shouldn't he go first, because "royal"? Or is she "changing the rules" for her to go first because, screw the royals, she's a woman and therefore deserves precedence in all cases?


----------



## Chanbal

I was wondering what 'fun exercise' the Harkles are doing in California, and a kind soul on twitter clarified…


----------



## CarryOn2020

This was in Aug., 2018 - the difference is shocking imo.
ETA:  yes, yes, the dress is short, the makeup caked on, she does seem hyper,  bit there is no clawing [unless I missed it].


----------



## Chanbal

TW has no original thought…


----------



## Cinderlala

WingNut said:


> Wow. Aside from the c.o.n.s.t.a.n.t. touching ("controlling via contact"....I have an NPD ex that is like that), her holding him back so she can go first is just...mind-blowingly cringe-worthy. Like a puppy that needs to be trained to let the owner go first out the door. This is ridiculous. Shouldn't he go first, because "royal"? Or is she "changing the rules" for her to go first because, screw the royals, she's a woman and therefore deserves precedence in all cases?


She is OUTRAGEOUS!!!  Yes, he should go first as a royal.  Also as the only reason she's there!

So many of those instances show exactly why he (the royal) should go first & it's because there is something to be given to him or for him to do.  She literally disrupts the flow during every encounter.  She really is such a *****.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Katel said:


> She crazy
> The one where MeMeME pulls him away by the arm to another room during a conversation is missing - priceless. (Anyone have that one?)



Queen of Awkwardness is the only title she’ll get.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG makes a valid point.


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> The BLG makes a valid point.



Prince Harry is her "life coach"?


----------



## Chanbal

WingNut said:


> Prince Harry is her "life coach"?


I know…


----------



## Cinderlala

lanasyogamama said:


> Queen of Awkwardness is the only title she’ll get.


  I was once babysitting a group of toddlers when one of the girls dubbed herself "Princess of the Cows" which was quite apt because she really was terrible.  It often crosses my mind re: Buzzard.    (I'm too fond of cows to tarnish them with the link to the Claw, though.)

Along those lines, I'm rethinking my favored nickname for her because buzzards do have a purpose.  A job they actually do.  She is really more like a horrible irritant that you just wish would go away.  Maybe Skeeter would work for her?  It would work with her alleged Rags to Riches origin story.


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> Along those lines, I'm rethinking my favored nickname for her because buzzards do have a purpose.  A job they actually do.  She is really more like a horrible irritant that you just wish would go away.  *Maybe Skeeter would work for her? * It would work with her alleged Rags to Riches origin story.


So a blood-sucking parasite then? One that can cause malaria, Zika, or West Nile virus. I can see that.


----------



## Chanbal

@WingNut
Disclosure: Serena Willi*ams' husband, Alexis Ohan*an is apparently a major investor @ Betterwhatever. BetterWhatever is the company where Harry has a big title with an interesting meaning in Japanese. 











						Why Alexis Ohanian Is Investing In This Career Coaching Startup
					

The Reddit founder led the Grand’s $2.4 million pre-seed round.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was in Aug., 2018 - the difference is shocking imo.
> ETA:  yes, yes, the dress is short, the makeup caked on, she does seem hyper,  bit there is no clawing [unless I missed it].



She looks high on coke as kite here. I know, I know she didn’t  - and that makes it even worse.


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> So a blood-sucking parasite then? One that can cause malaria, Zika, or West Nile virus. I can see that.


  Perfect!


----------



## gracekelly

Katel said:


> She crazy
> The one where MeMeME pulls him away by the arm to another room during a conversation is missing - priceless. (Anyone have that one?)



What is really interesting to me is that when you watch her, she is doing exactly what Catherine and William were doing with George and Charlotte when they were being introduced into royaling.  The little encouragement, hand on the shoulder, to have them step forward and engage with people.  With Meghan, it looks like Harry is an total idiot and she has to tell him what he needs to do.  The fact is that Harry was doing all of this decades before he met her.  How he never corrected her rudeness is amazing to me.  Stepping in front of him, pushing him aside.  All her body language screams that she is the more important person and the assembled are there for her and not for him. It makes your head spin!  The day will come when she won't be invited to the opening of a door and he will be on the other side of it with people who came to see him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Aminamina said:


> She looks high on coke as kite here. I know, I know she didn’t  - and that makes it even worse.


These people compounded her bad behavior by reaching for her hand before reaching for Harry's.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I know…
> 
> View attachment 5587240


Stupider isn't a proper word, but in this case, Harry makes her look stupider.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> These people compounded her bad behavior by reaching for her hand before reaching for Harry's.


They had no choice. She practically threw herself into their arms! If they had snubbed her it would have been all over the news and the press would have labeled them as racists.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I was wondering what 'fun exercise' the Harkles are doing in California, and a kind soul on twitter clarified…



Going by these pictures, I'd say that their fun exercise is taking a dump outside.  Puzzling since they have so many indoor bathrooms. Oh, I get it!  Trying to relive the Botswana experience.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They had no choice. She practically threw herself into their arms! If they had snubbed her it would have been all over the news and the press would have labeled them as racists.


SMH, you're right.


----------



## Annawakes

She likes to edge forward in front of Handbag so that people who are waiting to greet them have no choice but to engage her first.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan Markle health: The Duchess on her hidden illness
					

MEGHAN MARKLE, who turned 41 earlier this week on August 4, is an advocate, not only for humans rights, but for leading a healthy lifestyle. A fan of yoga, meditation and sweet potato fries, you might be surprised to learn that she had a "debilitating", yet hidden, illness.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Here we go.  It's time for the Meghan Markle pity party.  Bower never made mention of this is his book. This is the first I ever read anything about her migraines.  At least she is attempting to live up to our name for her lololol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is repulsive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Meghan Markle health: The Duchess on her hidden illness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE, who turned 41 earlier this week on August 4, is an advocate, not only for humans rights, but for leading a healthy lifestyle. A fan of yoga, meditation and sweet potato fries, you might be surprised to learn that she had a "debilitating", yet hidden, illness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go.  It's time for the Meghan Markle pity party.  Bower never made mention of this is his book. This is the first I ever read anything about her migraines.  At least she is attempting to live up to our name for her lololol!



Migraines you say...it was probably mad cow disease.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I was wondering what 'fun exercise' the Harkles are doing in California, and a kind soul on twitter clarified…





 M obviously prefers superglue to soap in alllllllll their bathrooms.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



very very angry?  this seems to be his persona....he should take a page out of his brother's book and try growing up


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was in Aug., 2018 - the difference is shocking imo.
> ETA:  yes, yes, the dress is short, the makeup caked on, she does seem hyper,  bit there is no clawing [unless I missed it].


How can you tell? Everything is so surface, it's not even skin deep, more like the shine on skin.


gracekelly said:


> These people compounded her bad behavior by reaching for her hand before reaching for Harry's.


But it's not their fault.

In British polite society, one would not embarrass and show-up an ignorant person's faux-pas (as the Queen did herself when she could see M was going to get into the car before her).

That's why Princess Margret was wrong, gauche and remembered to point out young Diana's faux pas when meeting the family, not knowing which order to curtsy, and if at all. The 'done thing' would have been to arrange a lady in waiting (or someone) the following day for a chat on the correct etiquette.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how much this cost? 












						Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
					

The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> How can you tell? Everything is so surface, it's not even skin deep, more like the shine on skin.
> 
> But it's not their fault.
> 
> In British polite society, one would not embarrass and show-up an ignorant person's faux-pas (as the Queen did herself when she could see M was going to get into the car before her).
> 
> That's why Princess Margret was wrong, gauche and remembered to point out young Diana's faux pas when meeting the family, not knowing which order to curtsy, and if at all. The 'done thing' would have been to arrange a lady in waiting (or someone) the following day for a chat on the correct etiquette.


I think I missed or forgot someting.  Meghan cut in front on the queen to get into a car?  Even if she wasn't the queen, you wouldn't do that to you husbands's elderly grandma....that is just plain crazy rude


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I know…
> 
> View attachment 5587240


So Serena is not a good judge of character, and the fact that she is "good friends" with TW only AFTER she was invited to the wedding and shower shows she can be bought.  She was only an acquaintance before the VF article  
Edit: I just saw that someone posted the connection - follow the money....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

To suck it up!?


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> @WingNut
> Disclosure: Serena Willi*ams' husband, Alexis Ohan*an is apparently a major investor @ Betterwhatever. BetterWhatever is the company where Harry has a big title with an interesting meaning in Japanese.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Alexis Ohanian Is Investing In This Career Coaching Startup
> 
> 
> The Reddit founder led the Grand’s $2.4 million pre-seed round.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



You scratch my back and and I'll scratch yours.  And the unwashed masses will not be the wiser


----------



## LizzieBennett

gracekelly said:


> Meghan Markle health: The Duchess on her hidden illness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE, who turned 41 earlier this week on August 4, is an advocate, not only for humans rights, but for leading a healthy lifestyle. A fan of yoga, meditation and sweet potato fries, you might be surprised to learn that she had a "debilitating", yet hidden, illness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go.  It's time for the Meghan Markle pity party.  Bower never made mention of this is his book. This is the first I ever read anything about her migraines.  At least she is attempting to live up to our name for her lololol!



Maybe she wants to replace Serena as the face for Ubrelvy.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Interesting. Thus must be related to the award.... I wonder how much they donated. Team Rubicon is 5-star, I am curious about this relationship.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> *So Serena is not a good judge of character*, and the fact that she is "good friends" with TW only AFTER she was invited to the wedding and shower shows she can be bought. She was only an acquaintance before the VF article
> Edit: *I just saw that someone posted the connection - follow the money....*


Protecting her husband's investment!? She is a business woman…


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I think I missed or forgot someting.  Meghan cut in front on the queen to get into a car?  Even if she wasn't the queen, you wouldn't do that to you husbands's elderly grandma....that is just plain crazy rude



The Queen always sits behind the driver.  
The Queen does not clamber over to the other side of anything aged 92
You would go around the other side of the car so the Queen could get in behind the driver, and first. 









						Flustered Meghan commits commits first royal faux-pas with Queen
					

The pair appeared to share a moment of confusion as Meghan, 36, first offered to let the Queen get in first - before suggesting they switch round.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The Queen always sits behind the driver.
> The Queen does not clamber over to the other side of anything aged 92
> You would go around the other side of the car so the Queen could get in behind the driver, and first.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flustered Meghan commits commits first royal faux-pas with Queen
> 
> 
> The pair appeared to share a moment of confusion as Meghan, 36, first offered to let the Queen get in first - before suggesting they switch round.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


oh, seems awkward but not egregious


----------



## CarryOn2020

LizzieBennett said:


> Maybe she wants to replace Serena as the face for Ubrelvy.


She found her own remedy  

_The Duchess of Sussex confessed that she used to suffer from "debilitating migraines"; they were so bad, that Meghan was even "*hospitalised for them"*. In the candid interview, the mum-of-two – to Archie and Lilibet – said that "acupuncture and Eastern medicine absolute changed [her] life". "I have been a long-time believer in *acupuncture and cupping*," Meghan told The Chalkboard, especially as the practices enabled her to live a "migraine-free" life._


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much this cost?
> View attachment 5587365
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
> 
> 
> The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




H has already cost the UK tax payers £100, 000 for his seeing the Home Office about his security and the case hasn't even started yet.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> oh, seems awkward but not egregious



I beg to differ, but I'm sure the Queen got over it.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

From one of my WOC friends after finishing REVENGE, “She gives new meaning to ’racial equality’, a white Ho and a black Ho all in one package.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much this cost?
> View attachment 5587365
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
> 
> 
> The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Undisclosed?? 
It didn’t happen.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> She found her own remedy
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex confessed that she used to suffer from "debilitating migraines"; they were so bad, that Meghan was even "*hospitalised for them"*. In the candid interview, the mum-of-two – to Archie and Lilibet – said that "acupuncture and Eastern medicine absolute changed [her] life". "I have been a long-time believer in *acupuncture and cupping*," Meghan told The Chalkboard, especially as the practices enabled her to live a "migraine-free" life._



We need a rolling eyes emoji on the 'like' bar


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> So Serena is not a good judge of character, and the fact that she is "good friends" with TW only AFTER she was invited to the wedding and shower shows she can be bought.  She was only an acquaintance before the VF article
> Edit: I just saw that someone posted the connection - follow the money....


Per Bower, MM met SW ca 2014, were they good friends ?  MM did publicize SW by attending two tennis matches , shower was one giant merching extravaganza - SW’s publicists organized it

I did learn from Bower a bit more on the friendship with the Clooneys. hardly knew each other before wedding, Amal attended the shower and gave MM ride home in A’s private jet, George tweeted supporting words during the public fray about the People article on LETTER FROM MM to DADDY. Since then radio silence from the Clooneys on relations with H and M


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Per Bower, MM met SW ca 2014, were they good friends ?  MM did publicize SW by attending two tennis matches , shower was one giant merching extravaganza - SW’s publicists organized it
> 
> I did learn from Bower a bit more on the friendship with the Clooneys. hardly knew each other before wedding, Amal attended the shower and gave MM ride home in A’s private jet, George tweeted supporting words during the public fray about the People article on LETTER FROM MM to DADDY. Since then radio silence from the Clooneys on relations with H and M


Daddy dearest said it best - he knew most of the Hwood folks long before MM did.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Fron 13:10 it gets worse


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Part of his mighty moan on the OW interview, when he was complaining that the Bank of Dad turned off the tap.
> I think a lot of people would like to be poor like he is.


Maybe they'll have to start going to Sizzler.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I beg to differ, but I'm sure the Queen got over it.


the way it was described in that article, it seemed confusing to me....the queen likes to sit behind the driver but no one told Meghan that?


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much this cost?
> View attachment 5587365
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
> 
> 
> The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



At least they won’t be coming to New York this time!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> To suck it up!?




I can honestly say that I have never spoken to either of my grandparents like this.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was in Aug., 2018 - the difference is shocking imo.
> ETA:  yes, yes, the dress is short, the makeup caked on, she does seem hyper,  bit there is no clawing [unless I missed it].



I think at that point, only a few months into the marriage, she was still trying to act appropriately for the RF. But she looks very stiff, forced phony smile and those chicken legs, ugh! The possibility does exist that the hand holding is for his benefit - "Hold onto Mommy's hand Harry dearest and everything will be fine".


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can honestly say that I have never spoken to either of my grandparents like this.


So much for their "special relationship"


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> they way it was described in that article, it seemed confusing to me....the queen likes to sit behind the driver but no one told Meghan that?



If she'd let the Queen go first, sit as is her preference, she would not have had to ask. It would have been clear as to which seat was left. 

Even asking which is the Queen's preference is outrageous. It's not up to M to ask the Queen, she's not the one who is able to grant the favour.  

To illustrate the point: Bower found out that at St Pauls during the Plat Jubilee, Harry had asked the usher “Who told you to tell me where to sit?'  to which the usher replied “Your grandmother". That was the final word. If that was MegZZZZ, she would have answered back or carried on. Harry is impossible but she is beyond help. 

(Bower _Revenge_) https://www.cheatsheet.com/entertai...tion-meghan-markle-got-seats-biographer.html/


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can honestly say that I have never spoken to either of my grandparents like this.



Me neither, and _one_ of them was a piece of work! Now, she and M would have destroyed each other.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> @WingNut
> Disclosure: Serena Willi*ams' husband, Alexis Ohan*an is apparently a major investor @ Betterwhatever. BetterWhatever is the company where Harry has a big title with an interesting meaning in Japanese.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Alexis Ohanian Is Investing In This Career Coaching Startup
> 
> 
> The Reddit founder led the Grand’s $2.4 million pre-seed round.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



I know I'm an old and out of touch boomer, but it never ceases to amaze me how younger generations are finding ways to monetize things that are often common sense (which I know is increasingly less common) and think they've reinvented the wheel. I listen to my husband talk about the money his company spends on things like this to retain workers and keep them happy, and I sometimes wish I was starting out in a career today. I worked in a male dominated field for a decade and I would just go with my colleagues to happy hour and have a *****fest over a few drinks to get it out of our systems.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> TW has no original thought…



It seems like she's even copying KW's expression. Only a little creepy.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I think at that point, only a few months into the marriage, she was still trying to act appropriately for the RF. But she looks very stiff, forced phony smile and those chicken legs, ugh! The possibility does exist that the hand holding is for his benefit - "Hold onto Mommy's hand Harry dearest and everything will be fine".


she can't help having those stick legs but that idea that she's proud of them is ridiculous


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Me neither, and _one_ of them was a piece of work! Now, she and M would have destroyed each other.


When I was 10 I remember casually saying "hell" in front of my cousin and immediately regretting it, thinking she would rat me out to our grandmother. I lived in fear for the remainder of the summer. I cannot imagine saying "Suck it up!"


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she can't help having those stick legs but that idea that she's proud of them is ridiculous


The suit would have looked better if the skirt was a few inches longer.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Maybe they'll have to start going to Sizzler.


 and she can throw a 'Hello (again) Zara' party


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> She literally disrupts the flow during every encounter.


1000%


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> TW has no original thought…



I've said that before


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Going by these pictures, I'd say that their fun exercise is taking a dump outside.  Puzzling since they have so many indoor bathrooms. Oh, I get it!  Trying to relive the Botswana experience.


They can always pitch a tent in their expansive yard to recreate the experience, complete with a prowling mountain lion.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Migraines you say...it was probably mad cow disease.


Mad Cow Meg, add it to the list.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> They can always pitch a tent in their expansive yard to recreate the experience, complete with a prowling mountain lion.


that reminds me - in re the mountain lion - with all their money they could surely build a barn type enclosure for the chickens to go into at night.....most likely they'd be ok outside during the day


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I know I'm an old and out of touch boomer, but it never ceases to amaze me how younger generations are finding ways to monetize things that are often common sense (which I know is increasingly less common) and think they've reinvented the wheel. I listen to my husband talk about the money his company spends on things like this to retain workers and keep them happy, and I sometimes wish I was starting out in a career today. I worked in a male dominated field for a decade and I would just go with my colleagues to happy hour and have a *****fest over a few drinks to get it out of our systems.


I have read that every generation thinks it invented sliced bread. Only later in life do they learn that no matter how they slice bread, it is still bread.  So of course, the smug younger ones believe their way is so much healthier, so much this, so much that.  _The Intern _ with DeNiro and Hathaway was an excellent example of why their way is no healthier than ours. The money involved in today’s world puts a different perspective on everything. Sadly, they still need therapy and they still are not happy. Maybe money is not the answer, maybe playful workplaces are not the answer, maybe McMansions are not the answer, etc.   Maybe the key  really is about love, respect, goodwill? Maybe.

ETA: Maybe H&M will realize that no amount of _rebranding_ can override their lies, manipulations and unpleasant attitudes.  They really do need to live away from the cameras and papers. _Away_ means _away.  _


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> oh, seems awkward but not egregious


Agreed, but I wonder if Meghan was told the protocol and it went in one ear and out the other, like so much else. When in doubt she should have waited and followed the lead of the Queen and the others. She has never been willing to watch, listen and learn, just forging ahead as usual.  And I still think that dress was ridiculous.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, but I wonder if Meghan was told the protocol and it went in one ear and out the other, like so much else. When in doubt she should have waited and followed the lead of the Queen and the others. She has never been willing to watch, listen and learn, just forging ahead as usual.  And I still think that dress was ridiculous.


she certainly isn't shy (in spite of her demure act with Oprah).  I noticed on the video posted above how she entered the room and in a pretty loud voice, greeted the gentleman


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> that reminds me - in re the mountain lion - with all their money they could surely build a barn type enclosure for the chickens to go into at night.....most likely they'd be ok outside during the day


If you look online there are some crazy lavish chicken coops, with both indoor and outdoor living spaces. A few modifications and this one would fit right in with Chateau Monteshitshow


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The BLG makes a valid point.



Distinctive style of tennis aka being twice the size of every other competitor? 
She needs something to do I guess & apparently isn’t particularly worried about looking silly. 



gracekelly said:


> Meghan Markle health: The Duchess on her hidden illness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE, who turned 41 earlier this week on August 4, is an advocate, not only for humans rights, but for leading a healthy lifestyle. A fan of yoga, meditation and sweet potato fries, you might be surprised to learn that she had a "debilitating", yet hidden, illness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go.  It's time for the Meghan Markle pity party.  Bower never made mention of this is his book. This is the first I ever read anything about her migraines.  At least she is attempting to live up to our name for her lololol!


Yes that is nominative determinism at its best. 
I’m inclined to think the shrill piercing sound she might hear is more likely to be her poor shred of conscience fighting for its life though. 


Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much this cost?
> View attachment 5587365
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
> 
> 
> The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



How much did it cost- well Certainly more than they gave. 

I’m amazed she isn’t going to accept it in person though- has Christopher Rogers gone into hiding? Is  Valentino in witness protection? Has MGC joined the Amish? Will no one get this poor Cinderella a £5000000 rag? 


Chanbal said:


> To suck it up!?



I’ve heard the etymology of this is something to do with WW2 pilots but I can’t help thinking it’s probably more likely from what certain people do in discreet areas of soho clubs especially on ‘blind’ dates. 


charlottawill said:


> I know I'm an old and out of touch boomer, but it never ceases to amaze me how younger generations are finding ways to monetize things that are often common sense (which I know is increasingly less common) and think they've reinvented the wheel. I listen to my husband talk about the money his company spends on things like this to retain workers and keep them happy, and I sometimes wish I was starting out in a career today. I worked in a male dominated field for a decade and I would just go with my colleagues to happy hour and have a *****fest over a few drinks to get it out of our systems.


Well the difference is with better up the increasingly drunk colleagues claim to be trained mental health professionals who care about your well-being before relaying everything to your boss and the bar staff keep track of your drinks and tell your insurance company what your monthly consumption is 


CarryOn2020 said:


> She found her own remedy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex confessed that she used to suffer from "debilitating migraines"; they were so bad, that Meghan was even "*hospitalised for them"*. In the candid interview, the mum-of-two – to Archie and Lilibet – said that "acupuncture and Eastern medicine absolute changed [her] life". "I have been a long-time believer in *acupuncture and cupping*," Meghan told The Chalkboard, especially as the practices enabled her to live a "migraine-free" life._


Cupping what? A certain pair of dangly ginger things in a vice-like grip? 

I suppose that would be relaxing for some


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
					

The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





I want to know how much money they gave the Afghans.  Archewell has $75k?   Are they going to make a surprise visit?  She can wear the red dress again.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have read that every generation thinks it invented sliced bread. Only later in life do they learn that no matter how they slice bread, it is still bread.  So of course, the smug younger ones believe their way is so much healthier, so much this, so much that.  _The Intern _ with DeNiro and Hathaway was an excellent example of why their way is no healthier than ours. The money involved in today’s world puts a different perspective on everything. Sadly, they still need therapy and they still are not happy. Maybe money is not the answer, maybe playful workplaces are not the answer, maybe McMansions are not the answer, etc.   Maybe the key  really is about love, respect, goodwill? Maybe.
> 
> ETA: Maybe H&M will realize that no amount of _rebranding_ can override their lies, manipulations and unpleasant attitudes.  They really do need to live away from the cameras and papers. _Away_ means _away.  _


I read an interesting piece this morning about how millennials, the first generation to grow up with social media, are now starting to age out of it and are being mocked by GenZers. What goes around..


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> She found her own remedy
> 
> _The Duchess of Sussex confessed that she used to suffer from "debilitating migraines"; they were so bad, that Meghan was even "*hospitalised for them"*. In the candid interview, the mum-of-two – to Archie and Lilibet – said that "acupuncture and Eastern medicine absolute changed [her] life". "I have been a long-time believer in *acupuncture and cupping*," Meghan told The Chalkboard, especially as the practices enabled her to live a "migraine-free" life._


How do we get rid of the migraines caused by her??


----------



## rose60610

If Claw had migraines so bad, how was she always available for yacht girl assignments, Suits, and Sizzler meals? Sounds like another trumped up "look how I've suffered" lie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> If Claw had migraines so bad, how was she always available for yacht girl assignments, Suits, and Sizzler meals? Sounds like another trumped up "look how I've suffered" lie.



There is _nothing_ Meghan hasn't suffered from, had it worse than anybody else and knows how to treat it.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> How do we get rid of the migraines caused by her??


and who gets hospitalized for a migraine?


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> and who gets hospitalized for a migraine?


Skeeter does...allegedly.


----------



## Cinderlala

rose60610 said:


> If Claw had migraines so bad, how was she always available for yacht girl assignments, Suits, and Sizzler meals? Sounds like another trumped up "look how I've suffered" lie.


Does cocaine help with migraines?  Probably helps with yacht girl life.


----------



## papertiger

Cinderlala said:


> Does cocaine help with migraines?  Probably helps with yacht girl life.



According to Bower H thinks weed cures everything


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> When I was 10 I remember casually saying "hell" in front of my cousin and immediately regretting it, thinking she would rat me out to our grandmother. I lived in fear for the remainder of the summer. I cannot imagine saying "Suck it up!"


ridiculous....but I take everything I read about them with a grain of salt.  It's hard to believe he actually said that.


----------



## Cinderlala

papertiger said:


> According to Bower H thinks weed cures everything


Weed probably helps H live with Skeeter.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> According to Bower H thinks weed cures everything


I don't partake but I do believe it helps with lots of things like insomnia for one and maybe it would help with migraines


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't partake but I do believe it helps with lots of things like insomnia for one and maybe it would help with migraines



Harry must suffer from chronic insomnia then. 

I suffer from migraines (though not too much lately) thank goodness. Usually through not drinking enough water through the day. Waking up with insomnia is a killer, that's the worst.


----------



## papertiger

Bit old but don't know if we had this comment:


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Harry must suffer from chronic insomnia then.
> 
> I suffer from migraines (though not too much lately) thank goodness. Usually through not drinking enough water through the day. Waking up with insomnia is a killer, that's the worst.


yes, I have trouble sleeping sometimes and try to stay in bed as long as possible as I'm afraid if I get up I won't get back to sleep


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much this cost?
> View attachment 5587365
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Archewell Foundation to receive award
> 
> 
> The couple, who will not receive the award in person, are also being thanked for their 'generous' donation, an undisclosed amount, to the Human First Coalition at an event next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wow pigs are flying.  Never thought I’d see the day when ZeeZy would pass up a chance to receive an award IN PERSON.  She really is taking someone’s advice to LAY LOW.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have read that every generation thinks it invented sliced bread. Only later in life do they learn that no matter how they slice bread, it is still bread.  So of course, the smug younger ones believe their way is so much healthier, so much this, so much that.  _*The Intern *_* with DeNiro and Hathaway was an excellent example of why their way is no healthier than ours.* The money involved in today’s world puts a different perspective on everything. Sadly, they still need therapy and they still are not happy. Maybe money is not the answer, maybe playful workplaces are not the answer, maybe McMansions are not the answer, etc.   Maybe the key  really is about love, respect, goodwill? Maybe.
> 
> ETA: Maybe H&M will realize that no amount of _rebranding_ can override their lies, manipulations and unpleasant attitudes.  *They really do need to live away from the cameras and papers. Away means *_*away.* _


I just watched this movie on a flight, very entertaining.  

Agree with the above and they should stay away from the cameras/papers, but they may need to pay that huge CC debt first (allegedly).


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> Wow pigs are flying.  Never thought I’d see the day when ZeeZy would pass up a chance to receive an award IN PERSON.  She really is taking someone’s advice to LAY LOW.


Here's a crazy thought. Maybe she's suffering from...SHAME?!?!


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> Here's a crazy thought. Maybe she's suffering from...SHAME?!?!


I don't think that's possible for her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She would never get through a debate. She’s great at scheming and planning, she sucks at thinking on her feet.


That didn't stop the current President from winning.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I don't partake but I do believe it helps with lots of things like insomnia for one and maybe it would help with migraines


Also great for helping the nausea from chemotherapy and pain management.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> So a blood-sucking parasite then? One that can cause malaria, Zika, or West Nile virus. I can see that.


How about a tsetse fly?  Blood sucking parasites that cause sleeping sickness, even death.

Tsetse fly​








						Tsetse fly - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




CDC:

What happens if a tsetse fly bites you?
A bite by the tsetse fly is often painful and *can develop into a red sore, also called a chancre*. Fever, severe headaches, irritability, extreme fatigue, swollen lymph nodes, and aching muscles and joints are common symptoms of sleeping sickness. Some people develop a skin rash.

I'm getting rashes just by hearing her name too often.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Meghan Markle health: The Duchess on her hidden illness
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE, who turned 41 earlier this week on August 4, is an advocate, not only for humans rights, but for leading a healthy lifestyle. A fan of yoga, meditation and sweet potato fries, you might be surprised to learn that she had a "debilitating", yet hidden, illness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here we go.  It's time for the Meghan Markle pity party.  Bower never made mention of this is his book. This is the first I ever read anything about her migraines.  At least she is attempting to live up to our name for her lololol!


Maybe she can attach herself to the Khloe Kardashian migraine medication ads.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> Here's a* crazy* thought. Maybe she's suffering from...SHAME?!?!


 
Crazy is right. She is shameLESS! She'd throw puppies out of a window if they came between her and a camera.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cinderlala said:


> Does cocaine help with migraines?  Probably helps with yacht girl life.


I would think cocaine could cause headaches.  It raises blood pressure, which can cause headaches.  Maybe TW should lay off the coke and stop self inducing migraines that now everyone else has to pity.


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> Wow pigs are flying.  Never thought I’d see the day when ZeeZy would pass up a chance to receive an award IN PERSON.  She really is taking someone’s advice to LAY LOW.


Maybe no one is offering their private jet.


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> Does cocaine help with migraines?  Probably helps with yacht girl life.


Red wine is a trigger for migraines, but I see a lot of pics with a glass in her hand     As Piers Morgan said last year, I wouldn't believe her if she read the weather report.  Sunshine Sucks most likely came up with a list of media releases to portray her in a sympathetic light.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Here's a crazy thought. Maybe she's suffering from...SHAME?!?!


                       

Surely you jest!!??!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Surely you jest!!??!


I know, they say narcissists don't feel shame, but maybe the sheer weight of the revelations in the book has hit her like a ton of bricks. Time will tell I guess.


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> She likes to edge forward in front of Handbag so that people who are waiting to greet them have no choice but to engage her first.



Samantha Markle wasn't wrong calling her Princess Pushy.


----------



## jennlt

The sugars are after BLG and he is trolling them


----------



## Aimee3

The smell alone would give me a migraine!


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> The sugars are after BLG and he is trolling them



He has been posting about the sugar attack. TW is likely not happy with his videos, I wonder why…


----------



## Chanbal

Sugars, DM, BLG, Lady C… are all waiting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I know, they say narcissists don't feel shame, but maybe the sheer weight of the revelations in the book has hit her like a ton of bricks. Time will tell I guess.


nah....I doubt it
more likely she's angry    .....like her dear husband


----------



## charlottawill

"Snow White Meets Skid Row"


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Maybe they'll have to start going to Sizzler.


They should start looking for "The Face of ... " relationships in more downmarket establishments, seeing that no one upmarket wants the association, and they keep pretending to be close to the "great unwashed".


charlottawill said:


> So much for their "special relationship"


It was probably *especially* bad... 


sdkitty said:


> she certainly isn't shy (in spite of her demure act with Oprah).  I noticed on the video posted above how she entered the room and in a pretty loud voice, greeted the gentleman


She is forward in the most uncomplimentary sense of the word.


----------



## charlottawill

These must be the pictures that Violet von Westerholz referred to when she asked Hazy what he thought of ZeeZy, and she said he responded enthusiastically in very colorful language. Gee I wonder why?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> and who gets hospitalized for a migraine?


I had it just once. And ran out of the prescribed meds on a Sunday when the clinic was closed. I ended up at the A&E. The doctor asked me, "How bad is the migraine?" I moaned: "Just cut off my head."

I suspect she is claiming to suffer from migraines because it's an ailment common enough for many people to identify with her. Better chances of avoiding backlash than her faux OTT account of an alleged miscarriage. Did Diana have any miscarriages? Wondering if she is copycatting anyone or it was just opportunistic plagiarism.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Red wine is a trigger for migraines, but I see a lot of pics with a glass in her hand   As Piers Morgan said last year, I wouldn't believe her if she read the weather report. *Sunshine Sucks most likely came up with a list of media releases to portray her in a sympathetic light.*


Suddenly the image of a bingo card popped up in my mind. The squares filled with predictable events like: "Wears Dior", "Wins another Award", "Sends Food Item to Disaster Zone", "Takes Private Jet", "Goes to New York", "Phones Senators" ...


----------



## rose60610

Me-Me-Me-gan is beyond redemption. 1000% attention whore. And when she butts in front of Harry (she'd might as well have an electronic choke chain on him) she starts spewing idiotic word salad on the poor sops she meets. Protocol? What protocol?  She has zeeeeero idea nobody cares about her, it's only due to the BRF's fame that she clawed her way into. Then she kicked the BRF to the curb. If she were REALLY a feminist, she'd have divorced the man that brought her into the "horrible racist family that made her suicidal". You know, so she could proceed with her acting career  (that she gave up for the love of her life--barf bag anyone?).  Haz must not agree with her since he tried begging his way into better seats at the Jubilee so he could be closer to the "racists" that Meghan oh-so-despises.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> These must be the pictures that Violet von Westerholz referred to when she asked Hazy what he thought of ZeeZy, and she said he responded enthusiastically in very colorful language. Gee I wonder why?




These photos are super old.  That’s her nose from two nose jobs ago!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> the way it was described in that article, it seemed confusing to me....the queen likes to sit behind the driver but no one told Meghan that?



She was told to wear a hat for  that very occasion and sent back "I'd rather not". So there's that. She was told a lot of things and chose to ignore them. Also, why would a grown woman need to be told that the elder (and the monarch!) goes first? It's a no brainer for most civilized people.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> "Snow White Meets Skid Row"




And on her first nose it seems.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I know, they say narcissists don't feel shame, but maybe the sheer weight of the revelations in the book has hit her like a ton of bricks. Time will tell I guess.



It won't be shame. Don't forget she creates her own reality. Most likely, she will feel victimised and indignant.

Those that spoke out publicly or talked to Bower privately will be thought traitors, never be forgiven.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Me-Me-Me-gan is beyond redemption. 1000% attention whore. And when she butts in front of Harry (she'd might as well have an electronic choke chain on him) she starts spewing idiotic word salad on the poor sops she meets. Protocol? What protocol?  She has zeeeeero idea nobody cares about her, it's only due to the BRF's fame that she clawed her way into. Then she kicked the BRF to the curb. If she were REALLY a feminist, she'd have divorced the man that brought her into the "horrible racist family that made her suicidal". You know, so she could proceed with her acting career  (that she gave up for the love of her life--barf bag anyone?).  Haz must not agree with her since he tried begging his way into better seats at the Jubilee so he could be closer to the "racists" that Meghan oh-so-despises.



Harry was told she _should_ continue her acting career. She _decided_ to give it up against their insistence.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I had it just once. And ran out of the prescribed meds on a Sunday when the clinic was closed. I ended up at the A&E. The doctor asked me, "How bad is the migraine?" I moaned: "Just cut off my head."
> 
> I suspect she is claiming to suffer from migraines because it's an ailment common enough for many people to identify with her. Better chances of avoiding backlash than her faux OTT account of an alleged miscarriage. Did Diana have any miscarriages? Wondering if she is copycatting anyone or it was just opportunistic plagiarism.


She certainly said she attempted suicide, including when she was pregnant.









						Princess Diana Said to Attempt Suicide 5 Times
					

British newspapers printed allegations that Princess Diana tried to commit suicide five times in despair over her marriage to Prince Charles, and Buckingham Palace on Sunday blamed a newspaper circulation war for the media frenzy.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## Aminamina

Harry, how long into the marriage your TW has started having severe migraines? Ts Ts Ts


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She certainly said she attempted suicide, including when she was pregnant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana Said to Attempt Suicide 5 Times
> 
> 
> British newspapers printed allegations that Princess Diana tried to commit suicide five times in despair over her marriage to Prince Charles, and Buckingham Palace on Sunday blamed a newspaper circulation war for the media frenzy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com



Now I never believed Raptor was suicidal, she was just manipulating Harry further. I did not know that about Diana, but I'll bet money Raptor did.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I never believed Raptor was suicidal, she was just manipulating Harry further. I did not know that about Diana, but I'll bet money Raptor did.



Didn’t Diana throw herself down a flight of stairs when pregnant w either Will or Hazza?


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Didn’t Diana throw herself down a flight of stairs when pregnant w either Will or Hazza?



Reportedly (see my last post with link from LA Times Archive 1992) and from the Independent:  "Princess Diana reportedly threw herself down the stairs' while she was four months pregnant with Prince William".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> These must be the pictures that Violet von Westerholz referred to when she asked Hazy what he thought of ZeeZy, and she said he responded enthusiastically in very colorful language. Gee I wonder why?



Was this a photoshoot about druggies or was she getting over a hangover?!?! It boggles the mind how someone would want pictures of oneself looking like that. SMH.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m reading the part of the book regarding her fathers invite or non invite.  It’s so confusing.  His name was on the ceremony handout, but they never gave him an official invite.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> She certainly said she attempted suicide, including when she was pregnant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana Said to Attempt Suicide 5 Times
> 
> 
> British newspapers printed allegations that Princess Diana tried to commit suicide five times in despair over her marriage to Prince Charles, and Buckingham Palace on Sunday blamed a newspaper circulation war for the media frenzy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.latimes.com





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I never believed Raptor was suicidal, she was just manipulating Harry further. I did not know that about Diana, but I'll bet money Raptor did.





papertiger said:


> Reportedly (see my last post with link from LA Times Archive 1992) and from the Independent:  "*Princess Diana reportedly threw herself down the stairs' while she was four months pregnant with Prince William*".


Didn't she later deny it? Diana was such a drama queen, that I took everything she said with an entire saltshaker. Besides, I would believe she did it while pregnant with H rather than W because H turned out to be such a dufus. I could also believe that she continued binging and purging while pregnant with H because if so, there can be dire mental and/or physical consequences to the fetus that could be aggravated with H's alleged heavy drinking and drug use.

ETA 'alleged'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m reading the part of the book regarding her fathers invite or non invite.  It’s so confusing.  His name was on the ceremony handout, but they never gave him an official invite.



That just further cements it for the that she never planned to have him there. She just needed to construct her elaborate story as to why he was the a*shole which took a little bit of time. Had he not had the heart attack she'd officially univited him due to his "behaviour". And as annoying as I find him now I feel whatever he did before the wedding was really negligible.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m reading the part of the book regarding her fathers invite or non invite.  It’s so confusing.  His name was on the ceremony handout, but they never gave him an official invite.



So he says. It _is _confusing.

If you look at a) all the the contradictions he's made in the book and in the past, not only we have to take MM's words with a pinch of salt (or just go for the opposite) but also TM's Snr..  Twice he's been very ill just a day or couple of days before he was due to travel (all paid for and arranged) the first with a heart attack before the wedding, and then, a stroke before the Plat Jubilee. Both times perfect illness as excuses for not travelling and then not even being able to speak.

Could be she paid him not to or warned him off coming to the Plat Jubilee. As for the wedding, seems there was a HUGE lack of and confusion in terms of communication. Both Harry and her seemed antagonistic towards TM before the event, and I'm sure there was a kind of embarrassment on M's side that he's just a reg. guy. Whether that's because she told the BRF a pack of lies or just H who knows? To this day, Charles and Tom have never met. To this day, TMK, Harry and Tom Snr. still have not met!

My guess is it's all just too much for him, and either the thought of the whole circus brings about terrible blood pressure surges and stress, or just as debilitating, at the last minute he mentally cannot cope and so feigns illness. And also, there is probably a passive aggressive thought in his head that if Harry (and M) couldn't even be bothered to see him, let alone get to know him before marriage, why put himself out?

My guess is, she absolutely didn't want him there, was dreading his arrival, and manipulated the situation, it worked, he didn't feel particularly welcome. Who wants to go somewhere you're not made to feel wanted. We know when M wants something inothing stops her but the opposite is true too. She could have 'lost' his invite, not passed on messages and/or the whole hoopla with that letter before made him unsure of talking/not talking, being see/not being seen. He is a behind the scenes guy, he sets-up spotlights not steps into one. I think his daughter got exactly the wedding she wanted.

The thing that upsets him are her lies, half-truths and turning him into poor 'white trash' but he's still proud of her. She's a beach, but he'd still like to see his daughter, just perhaps not with millions of people watching.


----------



## Chanbal

Lawsuits of Montecito, this time from the Godmother!











						“The Oprah Effect”: Harpo Sues Oprahdemics Podcast for Using Her Famous Name Without a License
					

Harpo Inc., which owns Oprah's trademarks, is suing Kellie Carter Jackson and Leah Wright Rigueur over their podcast.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> So he says. It _is _confusing.
> 
> If you look at a) all the the contradictions he's made in the book and in the past, not only we have to take MM's words with a pinch of salt (or just go for the opposite) but also TM's Snr..  Twice he's been very ill just a day or couple of days before he was due to travel (all paid for and arranged) the first with a heart attack before the wedding, and then, a stroke before the Plat Jubilee. Both times perfect illness as excuses for not travelling and then not even being able to speak.
> 
> Could be she paid him not to or warned him off coming to the Plat Jubilee. As for the wedding, seems there was a HUGE lack of and confusion in terms of communication. Both Harry and her seemed antagonistic towards TM before the event, and I'm sure there was a kind of embarrassment on M's side that he's just a reg. guy. Whether that's because she told the BRF a pack of lies or just H who knows? To this day, Charles and Tom have never met. To this day, TMK, Harry and Tom Snr. still have not met!
> 
> My guess is it's all just too much for him, and either the thought of the whole circus brings about terrible blood pressure surges and stress, or just as debilitating, at the last minute he mentally cannot cope and so feigns illness. And also, there is probably a passive aggressive thought in his head that if Harry (and M) couldn't even be bothered to see him, let alone get to know him before marriage, why put himself out?
> 
> My guess is, she absolutely didn't want him there, was dreading his arrival, and manipulated the situation, it worked, he didn't feel particularly welcome. Who wants to go somewhere you're not made to feel wanted. We know when M wants something inothing stops her but the opposite is true too. She could have 'lost' his invite, not passed on messages and/or the whole hoopla with that letter before made him unsure of talking/not talking, being see/not being seen. He is a behind the scenes guy, he sets-up spotlights not steps into one. I think his daughter got exactly the wedding she wanted.
> 
> The thing that upsets him is her lies, half-truths and turning him into poor 'white trash' but he's still proud of her. She's a beach, but he'd still like to see his daughter, just perhaps not with millions of people watching.


Totally agree.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

papertiger said:


> So he says. It _is _confusing.
> 
> If you look at a) all the the contradictions he's made in the book and in the past, not only we have to take MM's words with a pinch of salt (or just go for the opposite) but also TM's Snr..  Twice he's been very ill just a day or couple of days before he was due to travel (all paid for and arranged) the first with a heart attack before the wedding, and then, a stroke before the Plat Jubilee. Both times perfect illness as excuses for not travelling and then not even being able to speak.
> 
> Could be she paid him not to or warned him off coming to the Plat Jubilee. As for the wedding, seems there was a HUGE lack of and confusion in terms of communication. Both Harry and her seemed antagonistic towards TM before the event, and I'm sure there was a kind of embarrassment on M's side that he's just a reg. guy. Whether that's because she told the BRF a pack of lies or just H who knows? To this day, Charles and Tom have never met. To this day, TMK, Harry and Tom Snr. still have not met!
> 
> My guess is it's all just too much for him, and either the thought of the whole circus brings about terrible blood pressure surges and stress, or just as debilitating, at the last minute he mentally cannot cope and so feigns illness. And also, there is probably a passive aggressive thought in his head that if Harry (and M) couldn't even be bothered to see him, let alone get to know him before marriage, why put himself out?
> 
> My guess is, she absolutely didn't want him there, was dreading his arrival, and manipulated the situation, it worked, he didn't feel particularly welcome. Who wants to go somewhere you're not made to feel wanted. We know when M wants something inothing stops her but the opposite is true too. She could have 'lost' his invite, not passed on messages and/or the whole hoopla with that letter before made him unsure of talking/not talking, being see/not being seen. He is a behind the scenes guy, he sets-up spotlights not steps into one. I think his daughter got exactly the wedding she wanted.
> 
> The thing that upsets him is her lies, half-truths and turning him into poor 'white trash' but he's still proud of her. She's a beach, but he'd still like to see his daughter, just perhaps not with millions of people watching.



I remember this story about Thomas Markle's wedding clothing.   She did have clothes made for him to wear to the wedding. 








						Thomas Markle's royal wedding suit worn to Ascot
					

The suit that the Duchess of Sussex's father had made for the royal wedding has a new lease of life.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Totally agree.


so is Doria better than a "regular gal"?  He made good money, paid for her expensive education, brought her to Hollywood sets


----------



## Chanbal

The brother may not belong in Buckingham, but might be of help to TW and her podcast. This one is about feet…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> I remember this story about Thomas Markle's wedding clothing.   She did have clothes made for him to wear to the wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle's royal wedding suit worn to Ascot
> 
> 
> The suit that the Duchess of Sussex's father had made for the royal wedding has a new lease of life.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



I mean, she needed it to be plausible that is was his fault, not hers, and she was spending Charles's money anyway.


----------



## lallybelle

I mean, if he is to be believed before any of **** hit the fan so to speak, with the pap pics he was already asking her where his invite was knowing that Doria had received a formal fancy scroll. She made excuses. After that she def didn't want him. It seems all the RF wanted was to clean this up by having him shut his mouth and just show up. They were confused as to all of her excuses why she couldn't just speak to him and explain that he wasn't to court the press.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> so is Doria better than a "regular gal"?  He made good money, paid for her expensive education, brought her to Hollywood sets



I really do think Doria - as the black parent - was more useful to her agenda and also apparently easier to persuade to keep her mouth shut. Though I do think Thomas wouldn't have been so looselipped had he not been so disappointed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how much truth is in this…


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Lawsuits of Montecito, this time from the Godmother!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “The Oprah Effect”: Harpo Sues Oprahdemics Podcast for Using Her Famous Name Without a License
> 
> 
> Harpo Inc., which owns Oprah's trademarks, is suing Kellie Carter Jackson and Leah Wright Rigueur over their podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com




Yet another attempt to silence people, and from the woman who has made billions by exploiting other people's lives and voices.

Oprah, Ophra, Ofra and Orpah are all Anglicised names derived from the Bible's 'Book of Ruth'. One literal meaning is 'one who turned her back' (fairly fitting in this case) as well as Gazelle. Oprah (W) is not the only one in the world, she just thinks she is.

If she wins, any celeb's name in any recognisable form in title of a book or work(s) could be challenged.

More people who never mind their own business exploiting others but when their own MO is studied or challenged they want radio silence.


----------



## Chanbal

Diana should be able to rest in peace. 










						Prince William and Harry 'in the dark' over Diana documentary
					

Insiders told The Telegraph the Duke of Cambridge, 40, and the Duke of Sussex, 37, have not been consulted on the programme, or shown a preview of the piece.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> I remember this story about Thomas Markle's wedding clothing.   She did have clothes made for him to wear to the wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle's royal wedding suit worn to Ascot
> 
> 
> The suit that the Duchess of Sussex's father had made for the royal wedding has a new lease of life.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com



So long as she didn't pay for it personally, what would she care whether he used them or not? To me, that they were made doesn't shed any light on her intentions towards wanting him there.


----------



## marietouchet

The story


papertiger said:


> Yet another attempt to silence people, and from the woman who has made billions by exploiting other people's lives and voices.
> 
> Oprah, Ophra, Ofra and Orpah are all Anglicised names derived from the Bible's 'Book of Ruth'. One literal meaning is 'one who turned her back' (fairly fitting in this case) as well as Gazelle. Oprah (W) is not the only one in the world, she just thinks she is.
> 
> If she wins, any celeb's name in any recognisable form in title of a book or work(s) could be challenged.
> 
> More people who never mind their own business exploiting others but when their own MO is studied or challenged they want radio silence.
> 
> View attachment 5587785


I remember seeing this story in the news, it came from an interview with Oprah herself 

Her mom wanted to name her ORPAH - sic - a Biblical namel, but the name was misspelled on the birth certificate , and it stuck

So, the name was unique at one time


----------



## Chanbal

Murdoch is likely one of the most eligible singles, divorce in California. This arrangement would be ideal for TW… 











						Jerry Hall and Rupert Murdoch file for divorce in California
					

This morning's announcemen came just five weeks after their split became public - but the former couple insist they 'remain good friends'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much truth is in this…



I dont doubt that H wants to explode the monarchy, or that some PR leaked that ... If I were his  PR firm, I would be trying to garner interest in the autobiography with titillating leaks 

The verb explode is subject to interpretation


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> The story
> 
> I remember seeing this story in the news, it came from an interview with Oprah herself
> 
> Her mom wanted to name her ORPAH - sic - a Biblical namel, but the name was misspelled on the birth certificate , and it stuck
> 
> So, the name was unique at one time



Do we have the mother/registrar's word on this, or just Oprah's (who was only a baby at the time). All permutations are possible in the Middle-East, the English is only one translation after all. 

Perhaps, she means the name was unique in the US, which is another thing entirely. Interesting to hear her thoughts on colonialism(?)


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## tiktok

papertiger said:


> Do we have the mother/registrar's word on this, or just Oprah's (who was only a baby at the time). All permutations are possible in the Middle-East, the English is only one translation after all.
> 
> Perhaps, she means the name was unique in the US, which is another thing entirely. Interesting to hear her thoughts on colonialism(?)


In the original biblical Hebrew the word is Ofrah or Ophrah, not Oprah. It means gazelle. So the pronunciation is indeed different and that distinction is meaningful. Whether the name variation came before Oprah was born or her family invented it I don’t know.
I think these podcasters would have a better case if they called their podcast Ophrahdemics, but with Oprahdemics I can see why it could cause confusion in the market and make people think it comes from Oprah. Not a fan of hers after that egregious H&M interview but you can’t deny her name is a brand at this point.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> OMG!  You know what Joan would say.  Plus she would do her patented gag.
> 
> View attachment 5586589


Joan loved the Royal Family; she would have blasted this marriage from one side of the ocean to the other. And then the wardrobe would have gotten another round of special treatment from her. It's funny that the green cocoon has been getting dragged in some stories recently.  

So miss Joan.


----------



## Chanbal

'_If she walked in, you would never say MM is a black woman…,_' I agree with Candace O. on this one. My last contribution before I finish what I'm suppose to do…


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> In the original biblical Hebrew the word is Ofrah or Ophrah, not Oprah. It means gazelle. So the pronunciation is indeed different and that distinction is meaningful. Whether the name variation came before Oprah was born or her family invented it I don’t know.
> I think these podcasters would have a better case if they called their podcast Ophrahdemics, but with Oprahdemics I can see why it could cause confusion in the market and make people think it comes from Oprah. Not a fan of hers after that egregious H&M interview but you can’t deny her name is a brand at this point.


I agree,

but her name is not 'Oprahdemic'

I also find it hilarious that she's suing because of a fairly obscure podcast that people could never possibly stumble upon through word search, and way passed the date of their Tribeca discussion way back in June, only to give Carter Jackson, Wright Rigueur / John Hopkins Uni and Wellesley Collage all the publicity they could ever want, _now_ forever linked to OW on many a wiki/info site. Not sure which Uni 'O' went to but very few academic research output/products actually get read/ref/listened by/to anyone not studying the specialist field.

My only guess can be she's suing them to give them more exposure.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Diana should be able to rest in peace.



As long as Haz and Claw are alive they'll do anything to get money mileage out of Diana, no matter how twisted any of their claims are  or how many wreaths it takes to place on her grave with camera crews in tow.  Diana will never rest in peace as long as Claw has the ability to open her stupid word salad mouth.


----------



## marietouchet

Too funny … Red wine aggravates migraines, remember Tignanello ? AKA THE TIG


LizzieBennett said:


> Maybe she wants to replace Serena as the face for Ubrelv


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I agree,
> 
> but her name is not 'Oprahdemic'
> 
> I also find it hilarious that she's seeing a fairly obscure podcast that people could never possibly stumble upon through word search, and way passed the date of their Tribeca discussion way back in June, only to give Carter Jackson, Wright Rigueur / John Hopkins Uni and Wellesley Collage all the publicity they could ever want, _now_ forever linked to OW on many a wiki/info site. Not sure which Uni 'O' went to but very few academic research output/products actually get read/ref/listened by/to anyone not studying the specialist field.
> 
> My only guess can be she's suing them to give them more exposure.


The Streisand Effect in action!


----------



## papertiger

Posted last week and fairly long, but very good.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now I never believed Raptor was suicidal, she was just manipulating Harry further. I did not know that about Diana, but I'll bet money Raptor did.


Diana never really attempted suicide, but she did tell Andrew Morton that she did.  Those lies have since been disputed.  She said she threw herself down a flight of stairs while pregnant with W, and cut herself with an orange peeler.  Raptor knows just how to manipulate and control Hazz and played the same suicide nonsense that Diana did.  Diana was looking for attention from her husband.  Raptor wanted sympathy from her American audience on Oprah.


----------



## Cinderlala

It seems TW convinced H that there was a real chance she would leave him before the wedding.  It's referenced a couple times in the book that he was desperate not to lose her.  Ha!  As if she was letting go of the BEST thing that should have never happened to her!

Edited to add: That is probably partly why he married her so quickly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RE: Oprah’s name
O’s production company, Harpo, is Oprah spelled backwards.  Clever?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Oprah’s name
> O’s production company, Harpo, is Oprah spelled backwards.  Clever?



I wonder what the Marx Brothers' descendants thought about that


----------



## Stansy

Wait - Hazzi told HMTQ to just suck it up if she did not approve of him marrying TW.

But his Buttercup-Self in his role as trained coach (muhaha) tells people to leave a situation (job/relationship/whatever) if they are unhappy? Isn‘t this just the opposite of sucking it up?


----------



## Cinderlala

Their relationship reminds me of the Julia Roberts movie "Sleeping with the Enemy".  And this bit, from an article in the Armie Hammer thread, seems very similar to how TW operates.  (The article is linked in the post attached below.)

From PageSix referring to Armie Hammer:
“*He quickly grooms you in the relationship*,” she explained. “He kind of captivates you and while being charming, he’s grooming you for these things that are darker and heavier and consuming. When I say consuming, I mean mentally, physically, emotionally, financially, just everything.”

Vucekovich claims Hammer is a “*chameleon” who transforms into “exactly who you need him to be*.”

“He sucks out all the goodness you have left,” she said. “That’s what he did to me. I gave and gave and gave until it hurt.”

“*He makes you feel bad for him, and that’s really scary and keeps you [close to him]*,” she explained.

At one point, Vucekovich found herself *paying for everything, including gas for his truck, because he’s allegedly broke.

“He needs you,” she said. “He actually needs you.”*

“*It’s a full-time job when you’re with him* the way that I was,” she explained. “I was trying to catch my breath the entire time I was with him. You’re drowning in this dark hole trying to stay afloat. There will be *random moments of good that convince you to stay.”*



bisousx said:


> Vucekovich, who spoke following a divorce filing by Hammer’s estranged wife Elizabeth Chambers, tells Page Six that her relationship with the “Call Me by Your Name” actor was not only weird and gross but also emotionally abusive.
> 
> “He enters your life in such a big way  ...  that’s kind of the scary part — how good he is at active manipulation and making you feel like he’s never felt this way about anybody,” Vucekovich, 30, told us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exclusive | Armie Hammer’s ex Courtney Vucekovich: He wanted to 'barbecue and eat' me
> 
> 
> “He quickly grooms you in the relationship,” she claims.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

kemilia said:


> Joan loved the Royal Family; she would have blasted this marriage from one side of the ocean to the other. And then the wardrobe would have gotten another round of special treatment from her. It's funny that the green cocoon has been getting dragged in some stories recently.
> 
> So miss Joan.


Yes, she had a friendship with Charles!


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Oprah’s name
> O’s production company, Harpo, is Oprah spelled backwards.  Clever?



Surprised she didn’t get sued by Harpo Marx’s estate for using his name
Didn’t Kylie Kardashian tried to TM the name Kylie and was stopped by Kylie Minogue?


----------



## Chanbal

Who's counting? 



_According to 2021 accounts, the income for the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge stands at £20.4million.

This was a marked increase on the 2019 figure, which stood at £6.7million.

The Sussexes later founded Archewell at the end of 2020, which is registered in Delaware and has offices based in Beverly Hills.   

*Archewell foundation in the US, which received less than $50,000 in 'gross receipts in 2020*, according to the US Internal Revenue Service._
**​
*








						Prince William and Kate Middleton's charity  income up by £14million
					

Charity Commission figures show that the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge received at total of £19.95 million in donations and legacies, in 2021.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Harry was told she _should_ continue her acting career. She _decided_ to give it up against their insistence.


I know the Queen told her to continue acting, but I have a hard time believing she meant it. Imagine how awkward it would be having ZeeZy appear in anything controversial, given how royals are supposed to avoid controversy. Maybe they used reverse psychology on her as you would with a child. If they told her she must give up acting you know she would have rebelled against palace control.


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> Didn’t Diana throw herself down a flight of stairs when pregnant w either Will or Hazza?


Yes, pretty early on with William as I recall. The honeymoon didn't last very long.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> "Snow White Meets Skid Row"



Different nose too.


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C's videos could be added to a 'Household Chores Guide' as they make some tedious tasks a lot easier. In this one, she discusses Oprah and Gayle King's alleged help to the Harkles on their alleged mission to damage the Royal Family; she sounds mad at times…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Stansy said:


> Wait - Hazzi told HMTQ to just suck it up if she did not approve of him marrying TW.
> 
> But his Buttercup-Self in his role as trained coach (muhaha) tells people to leave a situation (job/relationship/whatever) if they are unhappy? Isn‘t this just the opposite of sucking it up?


I cannot see Hazz ever saying anything close to this to HMTQ.  He may have said it in so many words, but I doubt he would ever be so disrepectful to her (although we know once Raptor got her claws into him, that all changed).


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I know the Queen told her to continue acting, but I have a hard time believing she meant it. Imagine how awkward it would be having ZeeZy appear in anything controversial, given how royals are supposed to avoid controversy. Maybe they used reverse psychology on her as you would with a child. If they told her she must give up acting you know she would have rebelled against palace control.


Maybe they thought she would do something wholesome 



Chanbal said:


> Who's counting?
> View attachment 5588030
> 
> 
> _According to 2021 accounts, the income for the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge stands at £20.4million.
> 
> This was a marked increase on the 2019 figure, which stood at £6.7million.
> 
> The Sussexes later founded Archewell at the end of 2020, which is registered in Delaware and has offices based in Beverly Hills.
> 
> *Archewell foundation in the US, which received less than $50,000 in 'gross receipts in 2020*, according to the US Internal Revenue Service._
> **​
> *https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ocial-twitter_mailonline#article-11102205[/UR*http://[/




Follow the money$$$


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much truth is in this…



aka "Bite the hand that feeds you".


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> *I know the Queen told her to continue acting, but I have a hard time believing she meant it.* Imagine how awkward it would be having ZeeZy appear in anything controversial, given how royals are supposed to avoid controversy. Maybe they used reverse psychology on her as you would with a child. If they told her she must give up acting you know she would have rebelled against palace control.


I think she meant it, she would likely welcome a long distance relationship with TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> aka "Bite the hand that feeds you".


Hazzi wanted to appear like the Big Man to his bride.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Lady C's videos could be added to a 'Household Chores Guide' as they make some tedious tasks a lot easier. In this one, she discusses Oprah and Gayle King's alleged help to the Harkles on their alleged mission to damage the Royal Family; she sounds mad at times…




There were some good things, but the rant at the beginning was off-putting to me.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi wanted to appear like the Big Man to his bride.


correction - his WIFE!


----------



## Chanbal

On Valentine Low's upcoming book…


----------



## Chanbal

The _instant #1 internationally bestselling _will be released in the US on October 4! It will make a great Christmas gift for friends & family…


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Who's counting?
> View attachment 5588030
> 
> 
> _According to 2021 accounts, the income for the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge stands at £20.4million.
> 
> This was a marked increase on the 2019 figure, which stood at £6.7million.
> 
> The Sussexes later founded Archewell at the end of 2020, which is registered in Delaware and has offices based in Beverly Hills.
> 
> *Archewell foundation in the US, which received less than $50,000 in 'gross receipts in 2020*, according to the US Internal Revenue Service._
> **​
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate Middleton's charity  income up by £14million
> 
> 
> Charity Commission figures show that the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge received at total of £19.95 million in donations and legacies, in 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



<50K Wow, that isn't even enough to pay the water and power bill at the Casa.  Not to mention toilet paper.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I know the Queen told her to continue acting, but I have a hard time believing she meant it. Imagine how awkward it would be having ZeeZy appear in anything controversial, given how royals are supposed to avoid controversy. Maybe they used reverse psychology on her as you would with a child. If they told her she must give up acting you know she would have rebelled against palace control.





Chanbal said:


> I think she meant it, she would likely welcome a long distance relationship with TW.



This is just my wildest guess since I'm not exactly wild about Harry  

If the Queen did asked Z-list to continue acting, I think she meant it. Some plausible reasons:


The Queen didn't want to give Z-list any ammunition claiming that she was stopped from earning her own money.
The Queen had foreseen that Z-list would probably not be very interested and/or good at royal engagements.
The Queen probably thought if Z-list could continue her acting career then Z-list would most likely be a happy wife to the SpareSpareSpareSpareSpareSpare.
The Queen also probably thought if Z-list continues acting then maybe she wouldn't feel bored.
The Queen might also be wanting to keep her at arms length like @Chanbal said.
The Queen saw trouble from the day that she heard about Z-list!!!!

But as we all know, nothing is ever good enough for Z-list and Co. It's always a lose-lose situation with them


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> This is just my wildest guess since I'm not exactly wild about Harry
> 
> If the Queen did asked Z-list to continue acting, I think she meant it. Some plausible reasons:
> 
> 
> The Queen didn't want to give Z-list any ammunition claiming that she was stopped from earning her own money.
> The Queen had foreseen that Z-list would probably not be very interested and/or good at royal engagements.
> The Queen probably thought if Z-list could continue her acting career then Z-list would most likely be a happy wife to the SpareSpareSpareSpareSpareSpare.
> The Queen also probably thought if Z-list continues acting then maybe she wouldn't feel bored.
> The Queen might also be wanting to keep her at arms length like @Chanbal said.
> The Queen saw trouble from the day that she heard about Z-list!!!!
> 
> But as we all know, nothing is ever good enough for Z-list and Co. It's always a lose-lose situation with them


Meghan came in gangbusters about how independent she is, so it stands to reason that TQ would not get in the way of her ZZZ list acting career.  Plus Sophie Winkelman who is married to Lord Frederick Windsor, son of Prince Michael of Kent TQ's cousin, has maintained her acting career.  Of course SW can actually act and gets good roles.


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> Meghan came in gangbusters about how independent she is, so it stands to reason that TQ would not get in the way of her ZZZ list acting career.  Plus Sophie Winkelman who is married to Lord Frederick Windsor, son of Prince Michael of Kent TQ's cousin, has maintained her acting career.  Of course SW can actually act and gets good roles.


Yes, Sophie Winkelman had many, many roles as an actress before she married into the family.  In contrast, Zzzeezzzyyy had already been written out of her single lasting role and was wanted by no one.  *No one* was interested in her other than Harry.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> The _instant #1 internationally bestselling _will be released in the US on October 4! It will make a great Christmas gift for friends & family…
> 
> View attachment 5588088


About time!!!


----------



## charlottawill

I wonder if Oprah sent Hazy a copy of this book - he sure could use it.

#1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER

"Our earliest experiences shape our lives far down the road, and What Happened to You? provides powerful scientific and emotional insights into the behavioral patterns so many of us struggle to understand.

Here, Winfrey shares stories from her own past, understanding through experience the vulnerability that comes from facing trauma and adversity at a young age."



> https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/what-happened-to-you-oprah-winfrey/1138411016?ean=9781250223180&st=AFF&2sid=The New York Times_7990613_NA&sourceId=AFFThe New York Times
Click to expand...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> This is just my wildest guess since I'm not exactly wild about Harry
> 
> If the Queen did asked Z-list to continue acting, I think she meant it. Some plausible reasons:
> 
> 
> The Queen didn't want to give Z-list any ammunition claiming that she was stopped from earning her own money.
> The Queen had foreseen that Z-list would probably not be very interested and/or good at royal engagements.
> The Queen probably thought if Z-list could continue her acting career then Z-list would most likely be a happy wife to the SpareSpareSpareSpareSpareSpare.
> The Queen also probably thought if Z-list continues acting then maybe she wouldn't feel bored.
> The Queen might also be wanting to keep her at arms length like @Chanbal said.
> The Queen saw trouble from the day that she heard about Z-list!!!!
> 
> But as we all know, nothing is ever good enough for Z-list and Co. It's always a lose-lose situation with them


I bet QE had access to plenty of info about TW to understand that her Z-list career was approaching the End. Only Hazz couldn't see that…


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I wonder if Oprah sent Hazy a copy of this book - he sure could use it.
> 
> #1 NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER
> 
> "Our earliest experiences shape our lives far down the road, and What Happened to You? provides powerful scientific and emotional insights into the behavioral patterns so many of us struggle to understand.
> 
> Here, Winfrey shares stories from her own past, understanding through experience the vulnerability that comes from facing trauma and adversity at a young age."


She probably did share a copy of the book. It's very professional to share a copy with a colleague, particularly having in consideration that Dr. Hazz is a long time collaborator.


----------



## Chanbal

This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security in Montecito or wherever they live in this country…









						Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
					

The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.

Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
> 
> 
> The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._


"Andrew no longer undertakes official royal duties. *The current day-to-day activities of the disgraced prince are unknown beyond horse riding *and regular visits to the Queen."


----------



## lanasyogamama

Remember in the O interview Meghan said that the BRF said she should continue acting as if it was the most insulting thing in the world.


----------



## csshopper

This is great, a whole new wave of potential buyers to keep it in the news, actually  better than a simultaneous release.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security in Montecito or wherever they live in this country…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
> 
> 
> The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._


Wait, what.  But but but, Andi lives on royal grounds, not in the USA.  Aren’t all royal grounds always  ‘protected’?


----------



## Cinderlala

It makes far more sense to provide protection for a member of the royal family still living in the UK.  It makes no sense to provide long-term protection for someone who has rejected the family and moved an ocean & entire continent away.  Haz & Been should have to pay out of their own pocket for all their own needs, like any other normal person.

Actually, now that I think about it, it's absolutely crazy that 37-year-old Haz thought that "being entirely cut off" financially was something so odd it was worth mentioning during an interview.  What did he think would happen???  The terms of their Sandringham agreement were clear before they left.  (Obviously, I could be mistaken.)


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wait, what.  But but but, Andi lives on royal grounds, not in the USA.  *Aren’t all royal grounds always  ‘protected’?*
> 
> View attachment 5588167


I would think so… 
Can you imagine how much would cost the Harkles' security in the US? From what has been posted online, if they win the case in the UK, they may also be entitled to security paid by the host country.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> I know the Queen told her to continue acting, but I have a hard time believing she meant it. Imagine how awkward it would be having ZeeZy appear in anything controversial, given how royals are supposed to avoid controversy. Maybe they used reverse psychology on her as you would with a child. If they told her she must give up acting you know she would have rebelled against palace control.


I thought it was suggested strongly in some article  that Meghan continue acting to supplement their income
i don’t remember if it was in the Bower book, but there was a blurb about how problematic it is that the BRF institution provides strong financial support to those in the direct line William et al. But.  the further you fall, the less support you can expect. This would be expected even if H and M stayed in the UK and in service. The article stated that this is a problem bc many members of BRF are not equipped to support themselves in the accustomed manner


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security in Montecito or wherever they live in this country…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
> 
> 
> The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._



Buckingham Palace seems to keep shooting the monarchy in the foot with all these questionable decisions re Andrew. Frankly if his worthless a** is protected I see why Harry would raise his entitled head and demand the same.


----------



## Chanbal

I just read that Ellen DeGeneres' ex-girlfriend and Harkles ex-neighbor was in a terrible car crash. She was apparently 'on cocaine,' and may not survive this ordeal. The article is on Spoiler as it is off topic, but it brought to mind the rumors about the use of drugs in the Montecito mansion.



Spoiler: Anne Heche












						Anne Heche 'was on cocaine' when she crashed and remains in a coma
					

Anne Heche 'was on cocaine' when she crashed her car last week, leaving her in a coma and 'extreme critical condition' as friends fear for her life because 'her lungs don't work on their own.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

tiktok said:


> Buckingham Palace seems to keep shooting the monarchy in the foot with all these questionable decisions re Andrew. Frankly if his worthless a** is protected I see why Harry would raise his entitled head and demand the same.


Imo the difference is *location*.  Hazzio lives in the US.  
Andi lives in the UK. If he comes to the US, he will likely be arrested and questioned [if I understand his situation correctly].  Andi also stays in royal residences on royal property, so he has whatever protection those places have.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I just read that Ellen DeGeneres' ex-girlfriend and Harkles ex-neighbor was in a terrible car crash. She was apparently 'on cocaine,' and may not survive this ordeal. The article is on Spoiler as it is off topic, but it brought to mind the rumors about the use of drugs in the Montecito mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Anne Heche
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anne Heche 'was on cocaine' when she crashed and remains in a coma
> 
> 
> Anne Heche 'was on cocaine' when she crashed her car last week, leaving her in a coma and 'extreme critical condition' as friends fear for her life because 'her lungs don't work on their own.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Such a tragic story. Apparently, people (?) knew she had a problem but did not intervene. Ugh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> But.  the further you fall, the less support you can expect. This would be expected even if H and M stayed in the UK and in service.* The article stated that this is a problem bc many members of BRF are not equipped to support themselves in the accustomed manner*


Nothing wrong with getting an education and finding a job…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo the difference is *location*.  Hazzio lives in the US.
> Andi lives in the UK. If he comes to the US, he will likely be arrested and questioned [if I understand his situation correctly].  Andi also stays in royal residences on royal property, so he has whatever protection those places have.


I don't think Andi will be arrested in the US as he settled his case with VG. In addition to the security his location provides, he is entitled to a personal security which costs an additional 2 or 3 million pounds/year to UK taxpayers.  

If Hazz wins his case against the UK, UK taxpayers will pay for his security while there on vacation. However, who pays for his security in the US? 
His security was sponsored by Canadian taxpayers when he was in Canada, I certainly don't want to pay for his security in the US.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Cinderlala said:


> It makes far more sense to provide protection for a member of the royal family still living in the UK.  It makes no sense to provide long-term protection for someone who has rejected the family and moved an ocean & entire continent away.  Haz & Been should have to pay out of their own pocket for all their own needs, like any other normal person.
> 
> Actually, now that I think about it, it's absolutely crazy that 37-year-old Haz thought that "being entirely cut off" financially was something so odd it was worth mentioning during an interview.  What did he think would happen???  The terms of their Sandringham agreement were clear before they left.  (Obviously, I could be mistaken.)


Imagine if they said they would/could provide security of the reside in England?!


----------



## EverSoElusive

880 said:


> *I thought it was suggested strongly in some article  that Meghan continue acting to supplement their income*
> i don’t remember if it was in the Bower book, but there was a blurb about how problematic it is that the BRF institution provides strong financial support to those in the direct line William et al. But.  the further you fall, the less support you can expect. This would be expected even if H and M stayed in the UK and in service. The article stated that this is a problem bc many members of BRF are not equipped to support themselves in the accustomed manner


You're not wrong. From the book's Chapter 18: Spotlight


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I know the Queen told her to continue acting, but I have a hard time believing she meant it. Imagine how awkward it would be having ZeeZy appear in anything controversial, given how royals are supposed to avoid controversy. Maybe they used reverse psychology on her as you would with a child. If they told her she must give up acting you know she would have rebelled against palace control.


I wonder if they made the suggestion before or after her first extravagant purchase: the Ralph & Russo dress which cost upwards of $70k. It was a harbinger of her profligacy. Maybe someone astute pointed out that if she was going to go on in this vein, she should earn her own mad money. If they were okay with her acting, would they have been against her blog? Maybe not the blatant merching, but would she be expected to close down her social media if they had no objection to her acting?



gracekelly said:


> Meghan came in gangbusters about how independent she is, so it stands to reason that TQ would not get in the way of her ZZZ list acting career.  Plus Sophie Winkelman who is married to Lord Frederick Windsor, son of Prince Michael of Kent TQ's cousin, has maintained her acting career.  Of course SW can actually act and gets good roles.


And therein lies the crux of the matter. Continuing to act would expose her lack of talent. I speculate what she told Hazard to get him to skip a vet's event to market her to Disney.


Cinderlala said:


> It makes far more sense to provide protection for a member of the royal family still living in the UK.  It makes no sense to provide long-term protection for someone who has rejected the family and moved an ocean & entire continent away.  Haz & Been should have to pay out of their own pocket for all their own needs, like any other normal person.
> 
> Actually, now that I think about it, it's absolutely crazy that 37-year-old Haz thought that "being entirely cut off" financially was something so odd it was worth mentioning during an interview.  What did he think would happen???  *The terms of their Sandringham agreement were clear before they left. * (Obviously, I could be mistaken.)


In his case, it was likely in one ear and out the other, same as for her. Perhaps they thought that the Summit was hush-hush, so they could push their version as the "t.r.u.t.h".


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo the difference is *location*.  Hazzio lives in the US.
> Andi lives in the UK. If he comes to the US, he will likely be arrested and questioned [if I understand his situation correctly].  Andi also stays in royal residences on royal property, so he has whatever protection those places have.


Didn't RAVEC say that if the Harkles come to the UK, they would get the police protection at whichever level befitted the occasion? So it's the degree of protection that Hazard is freaking out over. They should just get Major Domo Scobie and the Sugar Squats to set up a roster to sleep on their doorstep to prevent the skeletons from bobbing up. They would do it FOC and save them the security cost. Methane can feed them donated sandwiches and crisps, and bananas that she used to practice calligraphy.


----------



## rose60610

The backlash will be vicious if Haz and Claw's security must be paid for by any country. If so, can the definition of "security" be modified? Instead of a team of armed agents, can they all be replaced by, like, one social worker? Surely a social worker is capable of  going up to tables in restaurants and requesting THAT NO ONE TAKE PICTURES OF THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF SUSSEX!  Ooooh, now THAT'S the kind of security these losers love to use, you know, "We fled the BRF for privacy, but, hey, we're in the building and you must know about it". QEII has eight grandchildren. So are all eight of them plus their spouses entitled to all the security Haz believes he should have for free? Haz and Claw not only dumped The Firm, they torched it. Why would they want to accept anything from people that supposedly are racist and drove Claw to want to commit suicide? 

They really need to work on the logic of their idiotic narratives.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She knew there was no interest in hee as an actress, nobody has reached out when Suits was ending.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> You're not wrong. From the book's Chapter 18: Spotlight
> 
> View attachment 5588213
> View attachment 5588214


Having in consideration that TW spent ~1M in clothing, 1.5M was indeed a very small budget per year. 

I can't understand why OW and TP support the Harkles' futility.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Lady C's videos could be added to a 'Household Chores Guide' as they make some tedious tasks a lot easier. In this one, she discusses Oprah and Gayle King's alleged help to the Harkles on their alleged mission to damage the Royal Family; she sounds mad at times…



That's what I do!  Something else and listen at the same time.  It's great!


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> This is great, a whole new wave of potential buyers to keep it in the news, actually  better than a simultaneous release.


Maybe that was the publisher's intention all along.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Remember in the O interview Meghan said that the BRF said she should continue acting as if it was the most insulting thing in the world.


I remember Meg telling O she gave up everything! Including her job... and then minutes later Harry told O that the BRF had the nerve to suggest Meg keep working!

And the great interviewer O didn't ask why the contradiction.


----------



## needlv

EverSoElusive said:


> You're not wrong. From the book's Chapter 18: Spotlight
> 
> View attachment 5588213
> View attachment 5588214



What Bower is implying is that Haz and Z list asked bank of dad for more money above the 1.5m.  Charles said no, supplement it with your own money, by acting jobs.

however all of z lists ideas were how to *monetize* the monarchy, not modernise it, which is prohibited because of ethical considerations.

When they point to Bea or Eugenie having jobs, what they missed was that Bea and Eugenie are not merching everything they do.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I can't understand why OW and TP support the Harkles' futility.


They don't want to have to admit they were conned by the grifter and the clueless plonker. It calls their judgment into question. Remember the saying, "We are judged by the company we keep"?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Such a tragic story. Apparently, people (?) knew she had a problem but did not intervene. Ugh.


She's struggled with mental health issues for a long time. It's sad if even a relatively successful celebrity couldn't get the help she needed.


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> I thought it was suggested strongly in some article  that Meghan continue acting to supplement their income
> i don’t remember if it was in the Bower book, but there was a blurb about how problematic it is that the BRF institution provides strong financial support to those in the direct line William et al. But.  the further you fall, the less support you can expect. This would be expected even if H and M stayed in the UK and in service. The article stated that this is a problem bc many members of BRF are not equipped to support themselves in the accustomed manner


She obviously did not do her homework on the financial workings of the RF before she went after Hazy. It's not all castles, coaches and tiaras if you're on a lower rung of the royal ladder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> the Ralph & Russo dress which cost upwards of $70k.


Which of her many questionable fashion choices was this? How can one dress cost that much? And who in their right mind would pay it? Again, she didn't do her homework. Marrying a member of the BRF is not the same as marrying a Saudi prince or Russian oligarch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Which of her many questionable fashion choices was this? How can one dress cost that much? And who in their right mind would pay it? Again, she didn't do her homework. Marrying a member of the BRF is not the same as marrying a Saudi prince or Russian oligarch.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dangerous???  Noooo, that’s our BLG


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5588241


She was clawing at him back then too


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5588241


I can't believe she actually bought that for $70K - more likely a loaner in exchange for the publicity? When their "love story" first broke I'm sure a lot of designers were clamoring to dress her.


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> I just read that Ellen DeGeneres' ex-girlfriend and Harkles ex-neighbor was in a terrible car crash. She was apparently 'on cocaine,' and may not survive this ordeal. The article is on Spoiler as it is off topic, but it brought to mind the rumors about the use of drugs in the Montecito mansion.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Anne Heche
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anne Heche 'was on cocaine' when she crashed and remains in a coma
> 
> 
> Anne Heche 'was on cocaine' when she crashed her car last week, leaving her in a coma and 'extreme critical condition' as friends fear for her life because 'her lungs don't work on their own.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The Anne Heche accident happened 1.5 miles from where I live. There’s literally an elementary school right there. It’s a miracle she didn’t kill anyone. They are saying she was on fentanyl too and she’s not expected to survive. The Ring video of her car speeding down the street is beyond horrifying


----------



## mellibelly

Chanbal said:


> '_If she walked in, you would never say MM is a black woman…,_' I agree with Candace O. on this one. My last contribution before I finish what I'm suppose to do…



I cannot believe I 100% agreed with a Candace O. rant too  I have to say, she is very pretty in that clip. 

And she is so right about ZZZ being 25% black. Doria is clearly mixed race so ZZZ is a majority white. Hence Merchie and Invisibit look fully white.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> The Anne Heche accident happened 1.5 miles from where I live. There’s literally an elementary school right there. It’s a miracle she didn’t kill anyone. They are saying she was on fentanyl too and she’s not expected to survive. The Ring video of her car speeding down the street is beyond horrifying



*Representatives for actress Anne Heche have said that she has officially been declared brain dead after her fiery car crash in Los Angeles*
*Family for the actress, 53, said she will stay on a ventilator to determine whether any of her remaining viable organs can be donated, per Heche's wishes*
*After that, she is going to be taken off life support and 'she is not expected to survive,' family and friends said in a statement*
*They added that it has 'long been her choice' to be an organ donor, so she will remain technically alive until the check is complete*
*'She will be remembered for her courageous honesty and dearly missed for her light,' they added *









						Anne Heche life support to be turned off: actress declared brain dead
					

Family for the actress, 53, said she will stay on a ventilator to determine whether any of her remaining viable organs can be donated, per Heche's wishes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why on earth would you buy out soneone breeching their contract??? Usually there's penalties for that. Sounds like a great business model for the losers. Grab contract, don't deliver, get more money to be set free.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I can't believe she actually bought that for $70K - more likely a loaner in exchange for the publicity? When their "love story" first broke I'm sure a lot of designers were clamoring to dress her.


Some websites put $100k, so I took the lower end. Pretty sure it's because journalists were all converting into their own currency, so I saw $70k, $99k, $100k...

In any case, Poor Charles probably got stuck with the bill for that and everything else. Did the self-made millionaire ever pay for anything?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why on earth would you buy out soneone breeching their contract??? Usually there's penalties for that. Sounds like a great business model for the losers. Grab contract, don't deliver, get more money to be set free.



My only surprise is that Netflix took so long to give up and stop hoping for a miracle. Methane must have used her forked tongue and her paid agents to do a very convincing song and dance to drag the matter on interminably. Will she now denounce Netflix as racist and misogynistic?


----------



## mellibelly

Producing a tv series or documentary seems like a lot more work than a podcast. I would think Spotify is even more p!ssed than Netflix at this point. Most podcasts put out two episodes a week! They did 30 minutes 2+ years ago! At the height of the pandemic people were podcasting from their bedrooms, closets, over zoom with guests etc. What is their excuse? Only one month left of summer…


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She's struggled with mental health issues for a long time. It's sad if even a relatively successful celebrity couldn't get the help she needed.


Mental health issues certainly exist, but I think many people use that as an excuse to justify their $hitty behavior.  In this case, she tested positive for cocaine and fentanyl.  I feel more badly for the poor woman whose house she destroyed.


----------



## mellibelly

lanasyogamama said:


> She knew there was no interest in hee as an actress, nobody has reached out when Suits was ending.


The only post Suits offer would have been playing herself in the Ginge & Winge Lifetime movie!



charlottawill said:


> She's struggled with mental health issues for a long time. It's sad if even a relatively successful celebrity couldn't get the help she needed.


While she had mental health issues, she was also driving her car at high speeds in a residential neighborhood on the same block as an elementary school high on fentanyl. The vehicle was a deadly weapon. I personally can’t feel sorry for her when she endangered so many lives. To bring this back to ZZZ and HazNoBalls, I don’t buy their mental health struggles, I mean excuses, for not producing content. These 1%’s have incredible mental health resources. War vets could only dream of those resources (at least in the US, I’m not sure how it is elsewhere)


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> Producing a tv series or documentary seems like a lot more work than a podcast. I would think Spotify is even more p!ssed than Netflix at this point. Most podcasts put out two episodes a week! They did 30 minutes 2+ years ago! At the height of the pandemic people were podcasting from their bedrooms, closets, over zoom with guests etc. What is their excuse? Only one month left of summer…


I'm sure they will list a litany of reasons. Both had to go on maternity leave, you know. Gender equality and all that... Then there were all those international issues which required their personal attention. And of course they had to check Spotify's terrible track record with Covid misinfo, because you naturally check these morally uplifting factors AFTER you sign on the dotted line. Zedzed has been so busy, you know, hobnobbing with luminaries like Steinem, doing things that actually MATTER to the world like doing a faux royal tour at NYC, a fashion show at Invictus and promoting the need for breast implants at the Intrepid Museum. And Hazard - how do you expect him to multitask while playing polo and divebombing his gangan's jubilee?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5588241



The stringy hair in the 2nd pic and her grabbing on with both hands...too bad she only has two of them.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why on earth would you buy out soneone breeching their contract??? Usually there's penalties for that. Sounds like a great business model for the losers. Grab contract, don't deliver, get more money to be set free.




So you own the footage of what they have so far.  Use it If you can salvage or for some exec to save face.  

OR there could be termination penalty clauses If you terminate early (usually only applies if you are terminating without a reason, but in this case Netflix could terminate for cause, if they followed proper notice periods)

if I were Netflix I would do a spoof (like Veep) with “the Duchess” diva and the abused staff that work for her.


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> Zedzed has been so busy, you know, hobnobbing with luminaries like Steinem, doing things that actually MATTER to the world like doing a faux royal tour at NYC, a fashion show at Invictus and *promoting the need for breast implants at the Intrepid Museum*.


----------



## csshopper

Some Plastic Man Trivia and a reality check. Scoobie is touting his book in progress as one that "will have the world talking". That may be true, there will certainly be people who will buy it, but I challenge what that "talk" will be, and how long the "talk" will sell.

It is part of their hypocrisy and cluelessness that the Harkles are supposedly trying to model themselves on the O's. Dumb as a post Haz and blinded by her narcissism, Raptor, haven't comprehended, for example, the power of the image that comes from the former prez and his wife annually vacationing with their extended families. His mother-in-law has been an esteemed live in member of their household for years. The Harkles think work by their hack, Scoobie, will polish their image  even as they trash their families because it is their "truth" explaining  how they are victims. In reality, trite word salad packaged as literature by Scoobie Doo doesn't even belong on the same shelf as the well crafted  prose of the O's books.

A comparison:

Today is the 2nd Anniversary of the publication of "Finding Freedom." Yes, it made best seller lists when it first came out and sold well for awhile. However, by January 2021, six months later, there were stories of it being on the reduced price tables in stores. Today, after 24 months of availability it ranks #64,038 on Amazon, with 14,276 reviews. 

Contrast this to MO's book, published November 13, 2018.  It was the highest selling book published in the United States in 2018, setting the record 15 days after its publication, with over 2 million copies sold. The New York Times reported as of November 2020 it had already sold 14 million copies world wide. Sales continue, reviews dated as recently as today are posted on Amazon. After 43 months of availability it ranks #2,789 on Amazon, with 122,659 reviews. Her next book, "The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times," is already available for presale before its November 15 release. Another competitor for Hazbeen. 

I think, I hope people, not counting rabid sugars, are tiring of Raptor's fabricated truths and Hazbeen's whining.  I think, I hope, more people are in tune with MO's messages.

The Suckesses are losers on so many levels and are soooooo tiresome. 
Nothing Scoobie can write will make them any more desirable, in spite of his braying like a jackass that it will.


----------



## Cinderlala

lanasyogamama said:


> She knew there was no interest in hee as an actress, nobody has reached out when Suits was ending.


What's truly amazing is that she's so _______ (fill in the blank) that she failed to capitalize on her (temporary) massive fame to get a single role other aside from the one voiceover.  Hollywood must know more about her than even we do!   



charlottawill said:


> She obviously did not do her homework on the financial workings of the RF before she went after Hazy. It's not all castles, coaches and tiaras if you're on a lower rung of the royal ladder.


I really think she thought she & H would continue the meteoric rise and she would simply be given a seat at the table with world leaders/politicians/A-listers/etc.  She probably also thought that if she wanted to return to acting she would become today's Grace Kelly.  

Delusional.  Seriously, seriously delusional.


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> I thought it was suggested strongly in some article  that Meghan continue acting to supplement their income
> i don’t remember if it was in the Bower book, but there was a blurb about how problematic it is that the BRF institution provides strong financial support to those in the direct line William et al. But.  the further you fall, the less support you can expect. This would be expected even if H and M stayed in the UK and in service. The article stated that this is a problem bc many members of BRF are not equipped to support themselves in the accustomed manner


Bower states that Charles had further cautioned Harry that his shelf life as a SENIOR ROYAL was limited to 10 years ie until the Cambridge kids are grown ie you need to plan for it !


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I'm sure they will list a litany of reasons. Both had to go on maternity leave, you know. Gender equality and all that... Then there were all those international issues which required their personal attention. And of course they had to check Spotify's terrible track record with Covid misinfo, because you naturally check these morally uplifting factors AFTER you sign on the dotted line. Zedzed has been so busy, you know, hobnobbing with luminaries like Steinem, doing things that actually MATTER to the world like doing a faux royal tour at NYC, a fashion show at Invictus and promoting the need for breast implants at the Intrepid Museum. And Hazard - how do you expect him to multitask while playing polo and divebombing his gangan's jubilee?


Hillary and Chelsea have scooped their buddies the Harkles, their podcast will have none other than M's BFF Gloria Steinem 
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/t...ries-sets-star-studded-guest-list-1235180217/ 

That is something that must be new to H, getting scooped by the competition, the BRF has none, they're always news


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Bower states that Charles had further cautioned Harry that his shelf life as a SENIOR ROYAL was limited to 10 years ie until the Cambridge kids are grown ie you need to plan for it !



I still think this is all so dramatic. None of The Queen's extended family is threatened by poverty even if it's only the Windsor cousins. Not sure what Charles is harping on and on about, does he really want to make us believe there won't always be space for the king's son and brother even in a slimmed down monarchy (unless he's a total a*shole trying to push them all into the abyss)? Please. Especially seeing Charles only has two kids anyway.


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still think this is all so dramatic. None of The Queen's extended family is threatened by poverty even if it's only the Windsor cousins. Not sure what Charles is harping on and on about, does he really want to make us believe there won't always be space for the king's son and brother even in a slimmed down monarchy (unless he's a total a*shole trying to push them all into the abyss)? Please. Especially seeing Charles only has two kids anyway.


I think Charles was simply talking about succession.Order of birth still matters with the lions share going to the eldest and his children. In the context of the thread, I think even before Meghan, all of this life, H cultivated his popularity in part bc he had an issue with being the younger. H certainly assumed he should be far above his first cousins in importance. In some cultures, as in Asia, birth order and gender are still factors in terms of family dynamics and traditional obligations.

@Cinderlala, well Ivanka thought the same lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm having a really bad day, but that caption makes me laugh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> I think Charles was simply talking about succession.Order of birth still matters with the lions share going to the eldest and his children. In the context of the thread, I think even before Meghan, all of this life, H had an issue with this. H certainly thinks he is, and should be, far above his first cousins. In some cultures, as in Asia, birth order is still quite important in terms of family dynamics and traditional obligations



The order of succession changed the minute the kids were born, though. Their 18th birthday is really irrelevant in that regards.

Also Charles - with plenty of private funds - has been more than generous. The year the jerks got married he gave them nearly double of what the Cambridges with three children got to help set up two middleaged millionaires.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security in Montecito or wherever they live in this country…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
> 
> 
> The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._



and his wife has suddenly found some change behind the sofa so she can buy a £7M house. Ostensibly, it's investment for her children, but considering her children are adults and hardly struggling and juggling pt jobs and childcare, I don't care about the why but the HOW. The woman pleads broke to her creditors and gets her debt written off for 10% token 'repayment' and she gets to buy a £7M house. Welcome to the House of Windsor. Once you're in you are forever 'in'.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I would think so…
> Can you imagine how much would cost the Harkles' security in the US? From what has been posted online, if they win the case in the UK, they may also be entitled to security paid by the host country.



They will
You'd all better start writing to whoever need writing to - and pronto


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> and his wife has suddenly found some change behind the sofa so she can buy a £7M house. Ostensibly, it's investment for her children, but considering her children are adults and hardly struggling and juggling pt jobs and childcare, I don't care about the why but the HOW. The woman pleads broke to her creditors and gets her debt written off for 10% token 'repayment' and she gets to buy a £7M house. Welcome to the House of Windsor. Once you're in you are forever 'in'.



I'm so cleaning up every nook and cranny today. Maybe I'll find a few millions too.


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> Buckingham Palace seems to keep shooting the monarchy in the foot with all these questionable decisions re Andrew. Frankly if his worthless a** is protected I see why Harry would raise his entitled head and demand the same.



That's partly because the money doesn't have to come out of the existing Sovereign Grant, but is extra. People, normal working people, can't afford their electricity bills, some not even food, but it's OK to protect these unemployed layablouts for millions every year. Bad decision. I will be surprised if Harry doesn't get it too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I remember Meg telling O she gave up everything! Including her job... and then minutes later Harry told O that the BRF had the nerve to suggest Meg keep working!
> 
> And the great interviewer O didn't ask why the contradiction.



I think we need to do a podcast called “Megzdemics'. 

Megzdemics: How to see a glass half-empty whichever way you look at it, even when it's completely full, inspired by the Duchess of Swing-nomics.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lawsuits of Montecito, this time from the Godmother!
I find this a


Chanbal said:


> “The Oprah Effect”: Harpo Sues Oprahdemics Podcast for Using Her Famous Name Without a License
> 
> 
> Harpo Inc., which owns Oprah's trademarks, is suing Kellie Carter Jackson and Leah Wright Rigueur over their podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hollywoodreporter.com



This is such an odd decision. Fan podcasts are essentially free publicity and relevance and why alienate your fan base?

As to the name- Oprah is a recognised variant of Orpah and Hebrew does not translate to English easily so there’s lots of variations. Of course she wasn’t the only Oprah in the world but Madonna and prince and Elvis weren’t the only people named that either but I guess she meant something more like this. 


Chanbal said:


> This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security in Montecito or wherever they live in this country…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
> 
> 
> The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._


Honestly scrap security for the whole lot of them. They are in no physical danger and it is really just there to enforce their importance. Start by burning those stupid furry hats they make people wear in heatwaves.

Such a tragic story. Apparently, people (?) knew she had a problem but did not intervene. Ugh.

It’s sad she died but there is a big limit to what any family can do if an addict doesn’t want to quit. 

I still think this is all so dramatic. None of The Queen's extended family is threatened by poverty even if it's only the Windsor cousins. Not sure what Charles is harping on and on about, does he really want to make us believe there won't always be space for the king's son and brother even in a slimmed down monarchy (unless he's a total a*shole trying to push them all into the abyss)? Please. Especially seeing Charles only has two kids anyway.
Agreed it seems to me to be posturing/ power play on Charles’ part. The royal expenditure is only getting larger and more flagrant as they go on more global trips and buying more vehicles do it- all while handing out self-glorifying eco prizes across the world- laughable. 


papertiger said:


> and his wife has suddenly found some change behind the sofa so she can buy a £7M house. Ostensibly, it's investment for her children, but considering her children are adults and hardly struggling and juggling pt jobs and childcare, I don't care about the why but the HOW. The woman pleads broke to her creditors and gets her debt written off for 10% token 'repayment' and she gets to buy a £7M house. Welcome to the House of Windsor. Once you're in you are forever 'in'.


100% and this is why I think it’s kind of a waste of time feeling sorry for the royals for being betrayed. 

They are still far more concerned with ensuring Harry’s lawn  is maintained and Andrew goes skiing than that their subjects have access to food and healthcare - ‘devoted service’ only dispensed when they are sure their bloodline will be kept in the style to which they are accustomed.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm having a really bad day, but that caption makes me laugh.



The 'funny'  thing about these two pictures are...

The one on the left with Chelsy was at the Diana concert,  10 years after her death and on the day of what would have been her 46th birthday. What could've been a sombre time but was made into,  quite rightly by her sons,  a celebration.

The one on the right,  you'd think was taken at Diana's funeral!


----------



## andrashik

Kate has found her voice! 


I love the subtle dig at VoldeClaw!
I remember reading that Voldemort knew when people were saying his name, maybe Claw is the same


----------



## andrashik

I wonder when they will declare bankruptcy









						Prince Harry memoir pivotal to finances 'Spending money like water!'
					

PRINCE Harry's upcoming bombshell memoir is a vital source of income to his and Meghan Markle's finances, a royal expert claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> I wonder when they will declare bankruptcy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry memoir pivotal to finances 'Spending money like water!'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry's upcoming bombshell memoir is a vital source of income to his and Meghan Markle's finances, a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


If they go bankrupt, they will blame it on the BRF.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> I would think so…
> Can you imagine how much would cost the Harkles' security in the US? From what has been posted online, if they win the case in the UK, they may also be entitled to security paid by the host country.



My guess is the host country would then say that the UK does not have jurisdiction over what happens inside its’ borders.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> My guess is the host country would then say that the UK does not have jurisdiction over what happens inside its’ borders.



If Harry continues to berate and challenge his new 'home' country, he is going to find a lot more US voices challenging his entitlement on all counts. 

I hope he is ready for them. 

M&H have both said they were silenced by the BRF, wait until they hear the uncensored, unmuted voices from US citizens. The US actually has a constitution (unlike the UK). I don't think_ most_ (US) people mind the couple being celebs, if they behave like others and pay for their own security and 'stuff'.  

If Harry continues to berate and challenge his new 'home' country, he is going to find a lot more US voices challenging his entitlement on all counts. 

I hope he is ready for them. 

Harry (2021): 
“I don’t want to start sort of going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one in which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short period of time.

But you can find a loophole in anything. And you can capitalize or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said. I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”

May need to go back to school: 
First Amendment Explained (1791): Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

I hope I have that right, please correct me if I'm wrong, I will be only too happy.


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> Today is the 2nd Anniversary of the publication of "Finding Freedom." Yes, it made best seller lists when it first came out and sold well for awhile.



Maybe this is why the Archewell Foundation has so little money today. Most of it went to purchase copies of "Finding Freedom" to plant it on the best seller lists.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why on earth would you buy out soneone breeching their contract??? Usually there's penalties for that. Sounds like a great business model for the losers. Grab contract, don't deliver, get more money to be set free.



Did anyone else notice this picture on the IG post?! 
It seems that's all TW can produce lately.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still think this is all so dramatic. None of The Queen's extended family is threatened by poverty even if it's only the Windsor cousins. Not sure what Charles is harping on and on about, does he really want to make us believe there won't always be space for the king's son and brother even in a slimmed down monarchy (unless he's a total a*shole trying to push them all into the abyss)? Please. Especially seeing Charles only has two kids anyway.


Agree there is room for more, but maybe the extras won’t get an an MANOLO/DIOR/PRIVATE PLANE budget 
Sophie Wessex does fine with what she has got. I loved the bit where Louise recycled one of Sophie’s hat, nice 
There is evidently only one royal plane left, and the monarch has to share it with Charles et family, and also with Prime Minister, it is not available for a hop to see Elton in Ibiza


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> If Harry continues to berate and challenge his new 'home' country, he is going to find a lot more US voices challenging his entitlement on all counts.
> 
> I hope he is ready for them.
> 
> M&H have both said they were silenced by the BRF, wait until they hear the uncensored, unmuted voices from US citizens. The US actually has a constitution (unlike the UK). I don't think_ most_ (US) people mind the couple being celebs, if they behave like others and pay for their own security and 'stuff'.
> 
> If Harry continues to berate and challenge his new 'home' country, he is going to find a lot more US voices challenging his entitlement on all counts.
> 
> I hope he is ready for them.
> 
> Harry (2021):
> “I don’t want to start sort of going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one in which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short period of time.
> 
> But you can find a loophole in anything. And you can capitalize or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said. I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”
> 
> May need to go back to school:
> First Amendment Explained (1791): Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
> 
> I hope I have that right, please correct me if I'm wrong, I will be only too happy.


I will be one of those loud voices at a local, state, national level if that stupid entitled twat pouts in an attempt  to get US dollars to protect his lazy azz and that of TW. I wish they would just leave, every time they open their mouths they contribute to air pollution.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> I cannot believe I 100% agreed with a Candace O. rant too  I have to say, she is very pretty in that clip.
> 
> And she is so right about ZZZ being 25% black. Doria is clearly mixed race so ZZZ is a majority white. Hence Merchie and Invisibit look fully white.


I didn't know much about Candace O., so I browsed her wikipedia. She seems to have some extreme views… (some seem to have oscillated 180 degrees ). Though, her comments related to TW have been spot on imo. I believe that she was a real victim of racist threats, and had the courage to overcome them. I don't see her using the race or victim cards. I wish that she would mature (moderate) some of her positions, because she seems to have the potential for a great career. I agree with you, she is very pretty.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> They will
> You'd all better start writing to whoever need writing to - and pronto



It would become a huge political issue in the U.S. if that happens.  Nobody here is going to want to pay for the 24/7/365 private armed security for a do-nothing, lecturing British prince to the tune of millions of dollars each year.  If those two are trying to "relaunch their brand" and enhance their popularity in the U.S., this would do the opposite.  It would not be swept under the rug.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still think this is all so dramatic. None of The Queen's extended family is threatened by poverty even if it's only the Windsor cousins. Not sure what Charles is harping on and on about, does he really want to make us believe there won't always be space for the king's son and brother even in a slimmed down monarchy (unless he's a total a*shole trying to push them all into the abyss)? Please. Especially seeing Charles only has two kids anyway.


I believe Charles was referring to the limelight and luxurious lifestyle the Harkles seem to love so much. Of course, they would always have a very comfortable life in the UK.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Sophisticatted said:


> My guess is the host country would then say that the UK does not have jurisdiction over what happens inside its’ borders.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> *If Harry continues to berate and challenge his new 'home' country, he is going to find a lot more US voices challenging his entitlement on all counts.*
> 
> I hope he is ready for them.
> 
> M&H have both said they were silenced by the BRF, wait until they hear the uncensored, unmuted voices from US citizens. The US actually has a constitution (unlike the UK). I don't think_ most_ (US) people mind the couple being celebs, if they behave like others and pay for their own security and 'stuff'.
> 
> *If Harry continues to berate and challenge his new 'home' country, he is going to find a lot more US voices challenging his entitlement on all counts.*
> 
> I hope he is ready for them.
> 
> Harry (2021):
> “I don’t want to start sort of going down the First Amendment route because that’s a huge subject and one in which I don’t understand because I’ve only been here a short period of time.
> 
> But you can find a loophole in anything. And you can capitalize or exploit what’s not said rather than uphold what is said. I’ve got so much I want to say about the First Amendment as I sort of understand it, but it is bonkers.”
> 
> May need to go back to school:
> First Amendment Explained (1791): Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
> 
> I hope I have that right, please correct me if I'm wrong, I will be only too happy.


----------



## rose60610

For all of Andrew's stupidity (and there's a lot) he didn't badmouth The Firm and voluntarily step down. The Harkles stepped down and then torched The Firm. And continue to insist on payouts. Why not? Meghan's dad spent fortunes on her and what thanks did he get? She is fully accustomed to others' paying for her with zero gratitude.  After all, she's the same one who married into the unlimited perks of the BRF and then complained "not many people have asked if I'm OK". This crazy beeyatch and her whiny no-gonads husband are in desperate need of a reality check. For anybody but them to pay for their own security is, well, bonkers.


----------



## WingNut

FYI, take a look at post #51 in the "turned off by a brand" thread, and note how the fact that people are calling out Hasbeen and ZZ on here for their grifting, lying, backstabbing ways is "racist". Funny, because lots of us supported them until we found out how much they were grifting, lying, backstabbing, losers.....

Edit: clarity


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> It makes far more sense to provide protection for a member of the royal family still living in the UK.  It makes no sense to provide long-term protection for someone who has rejected the family and moved an ocean & entire continent away.  Haz & Been should have to pay out of their own pocket for all their own needs, like any other normal person.
> 
> Actually, now that I think about it, it's absolutely crazy that 37-year-old Haz thought that "being entirely cut off" financially was something so odd it was worth mentioning during an interview.  What did he think would happen???  The terms of their Sandringham agreement were clear before they left.  (Obviously, I could be mistaken.)


and when you think about it, were we working people supposed to feel sorry for him for being cut off from his free ride? such an AH


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> She knew there was no interest in hee as an actress, nobody has reached out when Suits was ending.


she was so lucky to snag him when she did


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Some websites put $100k, so I took the lower end. Pretty sure it's because journalists were all converting into their own currency, so I saw $70k, $99k, $100k...
> 
> In any case, Poor Charles probably got stuck with the bill for that and everything else. Did the self-made millionaire ever pay for anything?


Whatever the currency, it's still a ridiculous amount for a dress.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Mental health issues certainly exist, but I think many people use that as an excuse to justify their $hitty behavior.  In this case, she tested positive for cocaine and fentanyl.  I feel more badly for the poor woman whose house she destroyed.


It was nice to see the response to the GoFundMe for the woman and her dogs, raising over $100k. She and her poor elderly dogs must have been traumatized by the crash. If you read Heche's Wikipedia page her family puts the the dysfunction in dysfunctional. It's kind of amazing she had as successful a life and career as she did before whatever happened to cause her to go out this way. It strikes me as a suicide by drugs and crash. I am sorry for her two sons, one is 20 and the other in his teens I believe. 



> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Heche


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This will likely make the Harkles' case on security stronger… I just don't want the US to pay for their security in Montecito or wherever they live in this country…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew to KEEP bodyguards after review of his security detail
> 
> 
> The Executive Committee for the Protection of Royalty and Public Figures assessed the security threat against Andrew but concluded he was still entitled to police bodyguards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Andrew’s security is estimated to cost the public purse between £2million and £3million annually.
> 
> Scotland Yard said it does not comment on the protection of the Royal Family. Buckingham Palace declined to comment and Andrew’s team did not respond._


I don’t get it … Agree this will impact the question for H


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I would think so…
> Can you imagine how much would cost the Harkles' security in the US? From what has been posted online, if they win the case in the UK, they may also be entitled to security paid by the host country.


You are correct, the US may have to pay


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> You are correct, the US may have to pay


I admit I don't ready every word posted here but why would the US have to pay for these grifters' security?  I would highly object to that.  they are private citizens here (oh, she is a private citizen; he's English)


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo the difference is *location*.  Hazzio lives in the US.
> Andi lives in the UK. If he comes to the US, he will likely be arrested and questioned [if I understand his situation correctly].  Andi also stays in royal residences on royal property, so he has whatever protection those places have.


I hope you are correct about the impact of location 
For another thing, Andrew lives next to the Queen , not sure of legal status of his house near Windsor, is it technically part of the Queen’s estate at Windsor? I could see that security might extend to anyone living on the Queen’s property, just a guess


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I admit I don't ready every word posted here but why would the US have to pay for these grifters' security?  I would highly object to that.  they are private citizens here (oh, she is a private citizen; he's English)


If he is afforded the same status as a diplomat international law would require it. Let's hope that doesn't happen.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> it is not available for a hop to see Elton in Ibiza


----------



## tiktok

rose60610 said:


> For all of Andrew's stupidity (and there's a lot) he didn't badmouth The Firm and voluntarily step down. The Harkles stepped down and then torched The Firm. And continue to insist on payouts. Why not? Meghan's dad spent fortunes on her and what thanks did he get? She is fully accustomed to others' paying for her with zero gratitude.  After all, she's the same one who married into the unlimited perks of the BRF and then complained "not many people have asked if I'm OK". This crazy beeyatch and her whiny no-gonads husband are in desperate need of a reality check. For anybody but them to pay for their own security is, well, bonkers.


We’ll have to agree to disagree on that - despite my disdain for the duo I don’t think their Olympic level of entitlement rises to the level of actual (alleged) sexual assault, pedophilia, association with convicted pedophiles etc. (ETA: I mean that both in general as humans and when it comes to the damage to the firm.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

Stansy said:


> I once bought post-it notes that were already printed with „people are so open-minded their brains are falling out“…


Stealing this!


----------



## bellecate

I’ll just leave this here. The difference in H is shocking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The difference in him even from when they were first dating to now is shocking. Which is why I still feel bad for him through all his impossible behaviour. She eats away at his spirit every single day.


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The difference in him even from when they were first dating to now is shocking. Which is why I still feel bad for him through all his impossible behaviour. She eats away at his spirit every single day.


I was just going to say that the picture actually made me sad (well, sort of). He looks lifeless and miserable in pic #2. Sadly, having been married to someone with NPD it was all too recognizable (and therefore my sadness  shred of compassion, even though he is complicit in their nonsense)

Edited for clarity.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The difference in him even from when they were first dating to now is shocking. Which is why I still feel bad for him through all his impossible behaviour. She eats away at his spirit every single day.


I totally agree with you.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I honestly think If Harry were judged to get security due to diplomatic status, that that status would be challenged (he doesn’t actually *do* anything representative of his birthplace *and *he is not a “working royal”) and I think he would be asked to leave the country.  Then the question becomes what happens to the kids.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Worth a look:


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Worth a look:



I saw that the other day. Maybe this is where H's comment about the First Amendment being "Bonkers" comes in to play. He doesn't believe in the Freedom of Speech portion, so any "objective" exposure of HIS lies (ironically: freedom of speech) must be stifled. That's not just shocking it's frightening.

HOW ABOUT YOU DON'T LIE IN THE FIRST PLACE???!?!?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5588241


In that. middle Picture she is hanging on to him for dear life. No escaping Harry. You are stuck


CarryOn2020 said:


> Worth a look:



I would love to know how she got through to a person in a high position and why they listened to her.  Did Sunshine Sachs put the word out to CNN via CNN employees who use SS for PR?  There is always a connection.  Threats that celeb interviews would not be forthcoming? or celeb news?  The fact that she was able to get this done just added to her sense of power and entitlement.  CNN has major egg on its face for bowing down to her.  CNN needs to experience  Cercei's walk of shame.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Worth a look:



I saw this before, it's 1 of 4. The trend is always the same, censure, delete footage that expose lies, have people fired, close threads… OMG, it looks like I'm describing some sort of f*sc*sm.


----------



## Aminamina

Exactly. Back then, we had no idea that she was showing up her prepared butterfly to us….


----------



## Toby93

mellibelly said:


> I cannot believe I 100% agreed with a Candace O. rant too  I have to say, she is very pretty in that clip.
> 
> And she is so right about ZZZ being 25% black. Doria is clearly mixed race so ZZZ is a majority white. Hence Merchie and Invisibit look fully white.


Is Doria mixed race?  In the Tom Bower book, it goes back to her ancestors being slaves and it doesn't mention anything about any other race until Thomas Markle.  He also mentioned how uncommon it was at the time for Thomas to marry a black woman.


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Hillary and Chelsea have scooped their buddies the Harkles, their podcast will have none other than M's BFF Gloria Steinem
> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/t...ries-sets-star-studded-guest-list-1235180217/
> 
> That is something that must be new to H, getting scooped by the competition, the BRF has none, they're always news


And they walked away from the ONLY thing that made them famous - being a part of the BRF.  Without that they are nothing, as they are slowly finding out.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The difference in him even from when they were first dating to now is shocking. Which is why I still feel bad for him through all his impossible behaviour. She eats away at his spirit every single day.


But he chose her. People often chose someone that resembles them and has the same values, principles  etc as partner. I doubt someone like William would have chosen her


----------



## oldbag

Toby93 said:


> She was clawing at him back then too


I'd rather face the Kraken.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Interesting question:


----------



## WingNut

andrashik said:


> But he chose her. People often chose someone that resembles them and has the same values, principles  etc as partner. I doubt someone like William would have chosen her


Quite true, but in my experience, one of the true "gifts" of a narcissist is not only to mirror the victim, but to exploit a person's weaknesses and insecurities in such a way as to make the victim feel "so much better" around the narc, as if they solve all the problems that person has.

Until they no longer do....then you see the face H exhibits in the later picture with M.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> It would become a huge political issue in the U.S. if that happens.  Nobody here is going to want to pay for the 24/7/365 private armed security for a do-nothing, lecturing British prince to the tune of millions of dollars each year.  If those two are trying to "relaunch their brand" and enhance their popularity in the U.S., this would do the opposite.  It would not be swept under the rug.


Especially at a time when millions of hardworking American citizens are struggling to buy groceries and fill their gas tanks while a disgruntled British prince and his social climbing Z list wife live in a mansion with what, 13 bathrooms? I can't keep track.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> For all of Andrew's stupidity (and there's a lot) he didn't badmouth The Firm and voluntarily step down. The Harkles stepped down and then torched The Firm. And continue to insist on payouts. Why not? Meghan's dad spent fortunes on her and what thanks did he get? She is fully accustomed to others' paying for her with zero gratitude.  After all, she's the same one who married into the unlimited perks of the BRF and then complained "not many people have asked if I'm OK". This crazy beeyatch and her whiny no-gonads husband are in desperate need of a reality check. For anybody but them to pay for their own security is, well, bonkers.


And Andrew was smart enough, so to speak, not to be convicted


----------



## Cinderlala

papertiger said:


> Interesting question:



This was interesting!  I hadn't seen those pix of her but that does seem contrary to the laws of physics.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Interesting question:



I do not know about squatting when pregnant - good question ... 

BUT MM &H brought it all upon themselves when there was so much mystery about A's birth. Bower makes it clear - they wanted to give Gayle King an exclusive about the birth - cutting out the rest of the royal reporters. GK and OW had been trying to land the BIG INTERVIEW long before MEGXIT... A's birth was a giant photo op, and M wanted to control the narrative. 

I never would have questioned anything if there had not been such an OBVIOUS RADIO SILENCE. After all, K showed off L six hours after birth, then left, it took 5 min of K's time


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I never understood why they felt the need to lie about her going into labour when Archie had already been born at that point. They lied to their own press people who were miffed to learn they'd been played, and very obviously nobody (as in, the paps) had noticed they'd gone to the hospital. So why not say nothing and then make the announcement the next day or something?


----------



## Cinderlala

After reading the TB book I'm struck by the sad & crazy fact that if she could have booked any British reality series we would have all been spared from this circus.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never understood why they felt the need to lie about her going into labour when Archie had already been born at that point. They lied to their own press people who were miffed to learn they'd been played, and very obviously nobody (as in, the paps) had noticed they'd gone to the hospital. So why not say nothing and then make the announcement the next day or something?


Because their rapacious egos require others be made to look foolish, thus proving THEY are the ones in charge?


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> After reading the TB book I'm struck by the sad & crazy fact that if she could have booked any British reality series we would have all been spared from this circus.


Funny you should mention that. I was just reading a Vanity Fair article about the British show Love Island. I have never watched, only heard about it. Can you imagine if she were on it? But by the time she started hooking Hazy and reeling him in she was a ripe old 35, probably too old for the show's producers.


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> Funny you should mention that. I was just reading a Vanity Fair article about the British show Love Island. I have never watched, only heard about it. Can you imagine if she were on it? But by the time she started hooking Hazy and reeling him in she was a *ripe old 35, probably too old for the show's producers.*


Yes!  Too old & uninteresting to even get a part on a reality show!!  It boggles the mind that H actually believed that she might leave him before the wedding.


----------



## Chanbal

Isn't Earthshot Will's baby?  It looks like the Harkles didn't get an invite this year.


----------



## 880

Chanbal said:


> Isn't Earthshot Will's baby?  It looks like the Harkles didn't get an invite this year.



+1 Global Citizen’s choice of Will and Kate


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> +1 Global Citizen’s choice of Will and Kate


I agree, but what a missed opportunity! They are no Freddie Mercury, but they could still perform at the event. TW could read her book to the audience and Hazz could complement that with one of his therapy sessions. I see star potential here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I agree, but what a missed opportunity! They are no Freddie Mercury, but they could still perform at the event. TW could read her book to the audience and Hazz could complement that with one of his therapy sessions. I see star potential here.
> 
> View attachment 5588799
> View attachment 5588796


100% certain no one, not one person, would sit through that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

Yes, EarthShot is Will's organization.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% certain no one, not one person, would sit through that


Sounds like something that would violate the Geneva Convention.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never understood why they felt the need to lie about her going into labour when Archie had already been born at that point. They lied to their own press people who were miffed to learn they'd been played, and very obviously nobody (as in, the paps) had noticed they'd gone to the hospital. So why not say nothing and then make the announcement the next day or something?


It's all about control. She takes it to absurd levels.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Toby93 said:


> Is Doria mixed race?  In the Tom Bower book, it goes back to her ancestors being slaves and it doesn't mention anything about any other race until Thomas Markle.  He also mentioned how uncommon it was at the time for Thomas to marry a black woman.


To answer your question, most American blacks whose heritage extends back to the slave era are mixed race.  White owners often fathered children with their female slaves.  The offspring were considered to be black and slaves as well.  Only one of the many, many reasons slavery had to be abolished.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Isn't Earthshot Will's baby?  It looks like the Harkles didn't get an invite this year.



Chopra was invited to the Harkle wedding, I think


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Chopra was invited to the Harkle wedding, I think


She attended, but ZeeZy did not return the favor when Chopra married Nick Jonas, due to being seven months pregnant and advised not to fly to India for the multi day bash. It has been rumored to be the reason for their falling out.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> It boggles the mind that H actually believed that she might leave him before the wedding.


Maybe he now wishes she had.


----------



## bag-mania

This article makes the case that it was appropriate for Tyler Perry to call Meghan a princess.









						Meghan Markle won't lose her princess title, royal experts say
					

Meghan Markle became a Princess of the UK upon her marriage to Prince Harry in 2018. This won't change since the royal title is Harry's birthright.



					www.insider.com


----------



## shiba

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5586667
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan warned a LION is prowling near $14m Montecito mansion
> 
> 
> The couple were ordered to lock down their $14.6million mansion in Montecito after sightings of the vicious beast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Mountain lion AKA Cougar in these parts - what a miss for a great headline....


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




This is her rebranding push…. Again.  If she can get the moniker “Princess Meghan” working, she can then merch to her hearts content because she isn’t merching using her title.

Seriously, she is an empty person.  All she wants is fame and money.  The greed is disgusting.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> This is her rebranding push…. Again.  If she can get the moniker “Princess Meghan” working, she can then merch to her hearts content because she isn’t merching using her title.
> 
> Seriously, she is an empty person.  All she wants is fame and money.  The greed is disgusting.


Wasn't this one of the internet domains snapped up early in their relationship?


----------



## csshopper

But, technically isn’t she “Princess Henry of Wales.”?  Not very feminist, since it makes very clear the source of power is only due to him.


----------



## rose60610

WingNut said:


> FYI, take a look at post #51 in the "turned off by a brand" thread, and note how the fact that people are calling out Hasbeen and ZZ on here for their grifting, lying, backstabbing ways is "racist". Funny, because lots of us supported them until we found out how much they were grifting, lying, backstabbing, losers.....
> 
> Edit: clarity



Racist? Really?  Then I'd like to ask the accusers if it's *EVER POSSIBLE WHATSOEVER* to question any POC's actions without being accused of being racist. *Ever? Ever? Ever? Ever? Ever?* 

THEN I'd like to ask what they think of, oh, say, Candace Owens. Or SCOTUS Clarence Thomas. Or Condoleezza Rice. Or Dr. Ben Carson.  If anyone says anything disparaging about any or all of them, then do I get to say that they are *RACIST RACIST RACIST? * 

Give me a FGDB.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> But, technically isn’t she “Princess Henry of Wales.”?  Not very feminist, since it makes very clear the source of power is only due to him.


Diana wasn't Princess Di, but it got into common parlance. So that's what they are aiming for. If enough people repeat it, it becomes accepted. The sugars are already calling her Queen and her daughter Empress.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In today’s culture imo titles like this do not stick.  Disney children grow up and reject that sort of pretentious labelling.  Similar to putting hearts over the letter ‘i’ - best to be avoided.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Worth a look:



I remember posting a link to that CNN story on this thread when it first appeared after the O interview. It was the first US mainstream media piece calling out discrepancies. A couple of days later the link didn’t work and the clip was gone


Toby93 said:


> Is Doria mixed race?  In the Tom Bower book, it goes back to her ancestors being slaves and it doesn't mention anything about any other race until Thomas Markle.  He also mentioned how uncommon it was at the time for Thomas to marry a black woman.





Redbirdhermes said:


> To answer your question, most American blacks whose heritage extends back to the slave era are mixed race.  White owners often fathered children with their female slaves.  The offspring were considered to be black and slaves as well.  Only one of the many, many reasons slavery had to be abolished.


Thank you @Redbirdhermes for answering this.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Diana wasn't Princess Di, but it got into common parlance. So that's what they are aiming for. If enough people repeat it, it becomes accepted. The sugars are already calling her Queen and her daughter Empress.


Good grief! The ignorance is staggering!  “Empress  Lilibet”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Lodpah

TW is not a narcissist, I believe she’s a psychopath. Well I’m get getting that impression from the book so far.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Good grief! The ignorance is staggering!  “Empress  Lilibet”


I shall never forget the sugar who posted about how aggrieved she was that the media was referring to her idol as Meghan Markle. She thundered about how insulting that was. According to her, "Meghan Markle" ceased to exist once the woman was married, upon which her name became "Duchess". You can't make this up.


----------



## 880

WingNut said:


> FYI, take a look at post #51 in the "turned off by a brand" thread, and note how the fact that people are calling out Hasbeen and ZZ on here for their grifting, lying, backstabbing ways is "racist". Funny, because lots of us supported them until we found out how much they were grifting, lying, backstabbing, losers.....
> 
> Edit: clarity


i agree 100%. I wrote about it (at great length lol) in the Fashion Racism thread, link below. I personally don’t think racism oe microaggresions have anything to do with why posts on this thread indicate such distaste for M. I don’t see the fact that this thread has serious issues with her actions as racist, simply bc she grew up mostly white and now is trying to identify with a marginalized group in order to appear more PC. If anything, perhaps the world gives M less of a pass bc she’s a woman. But then, get in line; we’ve all experienced that

 Before Harry married, the world did give him a pass (re his nazi costume; his psychological issues; his apparent school failures, his history with prostitutes or strippers; Vegas; his sheer stupidity and tantrums, etc) solely due to the fact that he grew up as a charming spare, very white, privileged BRF boy prince. The world was just blinded by his manufactured charm as his former girlfriends even gave very generalized benign statements (I didn’t even thing the one that he needed therapy was so bad) . I’m one of the posters here who think he’s worse than she is, bc she’s a common hustler, and he should have known better. If any of the girls of the BRF acted in that way, the world wouls not have been as forgiving. they would have been slut shamed to death. In fact waity katie was maligned for years (and it’s not like this was the 1950s)





__





						The Atlantic: Fashion’s Racism and Classism Are Finally Out of Style
					

https://www.purseblog.com/louis-vuitton/virgil-ablohs-last-bags-for-louis-vuitton-just-debuted-in-paris/ For those who haven’t seen this article yet I thought I would post it here. I also thought that I would read some of the comments and some are disturbing to me.  I am saddened by the comments...




					forum.purseblog.com
				




Seeing the post below, I almost want to read the National inquirer lol


----------



## Chanbal

Hate is such an awful word. I think QE simply dislikes TW. In any event, the non-existent tabloids in the US are having a feast with the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



there is more…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> there is more…



And now we know why they were in WY.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It is possible that all of this BRF drama is really a distraction.  From what I don’t know, but W&K&H&M have provided lots of soap opera type drama with everyone playing their assigned roles.  Imo it is becoming increasingly stale.


----------



## andrashik

She prepared in advance


----------



## Lodpah

She’s also a professional gaslighter.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> This article makes the case that it was appropriate for Tyler Perry to call Meghan a princess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle won't lose her princess title, royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle became a Princess of the UK upon her marriage to Prince Harry in 2018. This won't change since the royal title is Harry's birthright.
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



We already know that, you don't have to be a Royal expert. 

Meghan experts claim she was always a princess, and it sound (from the book) that her father agrees. Total Cali princess. 

Anyway 'Princess Henry' wouldn't have the same ring 'The Duchess of Sussex'. And whatever they'd be called rightly or wrongly, they'd have to rebrand. 

If their titles would be taken away, the BRF could issue a statement saying Prince Harry and Princess Henry of Wales, and that's what she would be called in the UK.

BTW, since the book, there are literally hundreds of neg H&M vids. So many channels. They've obviously been seen as fair game now the lies have been spotlighted. I would say the 'tipping point' has been reached.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Good grief! The ignorance is staggering!  *“Empress * Lilibet”


These the the same people who call the Commonwealth (voluntary members) colonialist?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She attended, but ZeeZy did not return the favor when Chopra married Nick Jonas, due to being seven months pregnant and advised not to fly to India for the multi day bash. It has been rumored to be the reason for their falling out.



That might be one of the very rare times I side with her. I would not fly to a multi-day party in a hot country 12 hours away while seven months pregnant either, and if true that's pretty self-centered of Priyanka.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> This article makes the case that it was appropriate for Tyler Perry to call Meghan a princess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle won't lose her princess title, royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle became a Princess of the UK upon her marriage to Prince Harry in 2018. This won't change since the royal title is Harry's birthright.
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



They mean HIS princely title, no?


----------



## wisconsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That might be one of the very rare times I side with her. I would not fly to a multi-day party in a hot country 12 hours away while seven months pregnant either, and if true that's pretty self-centered of Priyanka.


12; more like 18 hours away. That’s really petty of Priyanka.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> She attended, but ZeeZy did not return the favor when Chopra married Nick Jonas, due to being seven months pregnant and advised not to fly to India for the multi day bash.* It has been rumored to be the reason for their falling out.*





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That might be one of the very rare times I side with her. I would not fly to a multi-day party in a hot country 12 hours away while seven months pregnant either, and if true that's pretty self-centered of Priyanka.





wisconsin said:


> 12; more like 18 hours away. That’s really petty of Priyanka.


I don't know Priyanka, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is another reason behind the alleged falling out.

I'm still having a hard time with @andrashik's last post. TW, Hazz, and some of their supporters seem to be very mentally ill people. 

I read on another site that TW's PR is working to establish her as princess M in the US, and that Tyler P's message, the recent CNN video explaining titles… are all part of this campaign. The apparent power of some futile people is simply frightening.

Tom Bower confirmed many of the rumors circulating on the internet, and I hope he continues his investigative work.


----------



## papertiger

There'll be a new book out called _The Courtiers_ (Full title: *Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who broke the bullying story)* by Valentine Low. 

I think all eyes will be on this one to see if any light can be shed on the abuse of power she wielded and the abuse of power that protected her. 

He was the journalist that broke the story on M's bullying at the Palace (and the Palace's cover-up).





__





						Loading…
					





					www.waterstones.com
				




Synopsis (from the Waterstones link above):

*The gripping account of how the Royal family really operates from the man who has spent years watching the public face the Royal family chooses to present to the world in his role as Royal correspondent for The Times. Valentine Low asks the important questions: who really runs the show and, as we head towards a new monarch's reign, what will happen next?*

Throughout history, the British monarchy has relied on its courtiers - the trusted advisers in the King or Queen's inner circle - to ensure its survival as a family, an ancient institution, and a pillar of the constitution.

Today, as ever, a vast team of people hidden from view steers the royal family's path between public duty and private life. The Queen, after a remarkable 70 years of service, is entering the final seasons of her reign without her husband Philip to guide her. Meanwhile, Charles seeks to define what his future as King will be, with his court wielding ever greater influence as he plans for his imminent accession.

The question of who is entrusted to guide the royals has never been more vital, and yet the task those courtiers face has never been more challenging. With a cloud hanging over Prince Andrew as well as Harry and Meghan's departure from royal life, the complex relationship between modern courtiers and royal principals has been exposed to global scrutiny. William and Kate - equipped with a very 21st century approach to press and public relations - now hold the responsibility of making an ancient institution relevant for the decades to come.

_Courtiers_ reveals an ever-changing system of complex characters, shifting values and ideas over what the future of the institution should be. This is the story of how the monarchy really works, at a pivotal moment in its history.
_Publisher: Headline Publishing Group
ISBN: 9781472290908_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I almost feel bad for Charles. It's either The Queen or the Cambridges, nobody ever considers him.


----------



## marietouchet

Redbirdhermes said:


> To answer your question, most American blacks whose heritage extends back to the slave era are mixed race.  White owners often fathered children with their female slaves.  The offspring were considered to be black and slaves as well.  Only one of the many, many reasons slavery had to be abolished.





Cinderlala said:


> Yes, EarthShot is Will's organization.


One theory is that the H autobiography is timed for the end of the year, to diminish the Earthshot prize award ceremony, attended by W & K


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> There'll be a new book out called _The Courtiers_ (Full title: *Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who broke the bullying story)* by Valentine Low.
> 
> I think all eyes will be on this one to see if any light can be shed on the abuse of power she wielded and the abuse of power that protected her.
> 
> He was the journalist that broke the story on M's bullying at the Palace (and the Palace's cover-up).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.waterstones.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synopsis (from the Waterstones link above):
> 
> *The gripping account of how the Royal family really operates from the man who has spent years watching the public face the Royal family chooses to present to the world in his role as Royal correspondent for The Times. Valentine Low asks the important questions: who really runs the show and, as we head towards a new monarch's reign, what will happen next?*
> 
> Throughout history, the British monarchy has relied on its courtiers - the trusted advisers in the King or Queen's inner circle - to ensure its survival as a family, an ancient institution, and a pillar of the constitution.
> 
> Today, as ever, a vast team of people hidden from view steers the royal family's path between public duty and private life. The Queen, after a remarkable 70 years of service, is entering the final seasons of her reign without her husband Philip to guide her. Meanwhile, Charles seeks to define what his future as King will be, with his court wielding ever greater influence as he plans for his imminent accession.
> 
> The question of who is entrusted to guide the royals has never been more vital, and yet the task those courtiers face has never been more challenging. With a cloud hanging over Prince Andrew as well as Harry and Meghan's departure from royal life, the complex relationship between modern courtiers and royal principals has been exposed to global scrutiny. William and Kate - equipped with a very 21st century approach to press and public relations - now hold the responsibility of making an ancient institution relevant for the decades to come.
> 
> _Courtiers_ reveals an ever-changing system of complex characters, shifting values and ideas over what the future of the institution should be. This is the story of how the monarchy really works, at a pivotal moment in its history.
> _Publisher: Headline Publishing Group
> ISBN: 9781472290908_


Bower was very good at showing the effect of Geidt, the QEII secretary who resigned concurrent with MM probs, the new book will be interesting, Low is a real reporter


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> There'll be a new book out called _The Courtiers_ (Full title: *Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who broke the bullying story)* by Valentine Low.
> 
> I think all eyes will be on this one to see if any light can be shed on the abuse of power she wielded and the abuse of power that protected her.
> 
> He was the journalist that broke the story on M's bullying at the Palace (and the Palace's cover-up).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.waterstones.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synopsis (from the Waterstones link above):
> 
> *The gripping account of how the Royal family really operates from the man who has spent years watching the public face the Royal family chooses to present to the world in his role as Royal correspondent for The Times. Valentine Low asks the important questions: who really runs the show and, as we head towards a new monarch's reign, what will happen next?*
> 
> Throughout history, the British monarchy has relied on its courtiers - the trusted advisers in the King or Queen's inner circle - to ensure its survival as a family, an ancient institution, and a pillar of the constitution.
> 
> Today, as ever, a vast team of people hidden from view steers the royal family's path between public duty and private life. The Queen, after a remarkable 70 years of service, is entering the final seasons of her reign without her husband Philip to guide her. Meanwhile, Charles seeks to define what his future as King will be, with his court wielding ever greater influence as he plans for his imminent accession.
> 
> The question of who is entrusted to guide the royals has never been more vital, and yet the task those courtiers face has never been more challenging. With a cloud hanging over Prince Andrew as well as Harry and Meghan's departure from royal life, the complex relationship between modern courtiers and royal principals has been exposed to global scrutiny. William and Kate - equipped with a very 21st century approach to press and public relations - now hold the responsibility of making an ancient institution relevant for the decades to come.
> 
> _Courtiers_ reveals an ever-changing system of complex characters, shifting values and ideas over what the future of the institution should be. This is the story of how the monarchy really works, at a pivotal moment in its history.
> _Publisher: Headline Publishing Group
> ISBN: 9781472290908_



I'd like to think that after the BRF's experience with Claw The Snake, they will be extra careful about whom they bring into their circle.  Hopefully they're aware of those who attempt to ingratiate themselves into an advisor type of position only to promote some organization's selfish agenda. While Charles' personality is kinda dull, I don't think he's a stupid person and is wise enough to seek counsel of those who genuinely want the Crown to succeed. I'd like to think that QEII has trained/taught William and Charles about the positives and pitfalls of the position. IMO people see William as taking his responsibilities seriously while Harry was just the spare goofball who never grew up. Kate was heavily criticized for a couple of years after they married but was smart enough to slog through it all with a smile, playing the L-O-N-G game. Kate really got blasted, while Claw's coverage was 99% fawning and favorable at the beginning. We all had hopes for Harry, like he was finally growing up as a man and no longer Diana's little boy. Claw felt there was more to gain by infantilizing him all over again and casting themselves as the ultimate victims in need of Da-da's financial support. Come on, Claw, Retread Bride, you weren't 21 when you married Haz, and you made a few millions from Suits. Knock off "The Firm is racist because they cut off our allowance" crap after you threw them under the bus.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Diana wasn't Princess Di, but it got into common parlance. So that's what they are aiming for. If enough people repeat it, it becomes accepted. The sugars are already calling her Queen and her daughter Empress.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I'd like to think that after the BRF's experience with Claw The Snake, they will be extra careful about whom they bring into their circle.  Hopefully they're aware of those who attempt to ingratiate themselves into an advisor type of position only to promote some organization's selfish agenda. While Charles' personality is kinda dull, I don't think he's a stupid person and is wise enough to seek counsel of those who genuinely want the Crown to succeed. I'd like to think that QEII has trained/taught William and Charles about the positives and pitfalls of the position. IMO people see William as taking his responsibilities seriously while Harry was just the spare goofball who never grew up. Kate was heavily criticized for a couple of years after they married but was smart enough to slog through it all with a smile, playing the L-O-N-G game. Kate really got blasted, while Claw's coverage was 99% fawning and favorable at the beginning. We all had hopes for Harry, like he was finally growing up as a man and no longer Diana's little boy. Claw felt there was more to gain by infantilizing him all over again and casting themselves as the ultimate victims in need of Da-da's financial support. Come on, Claw, Retread Bride, you weren't 21 when you married Haz, and you made a few millions from Suits. Knock off "The Firm is racist because they cut off our allowance" crap after you threw them under the bus.



I hope they will see sense but I don't have much faith in the BRF either.  Harry will be forever their Blue-eyed-blooded son after all. IMO, it's a total mess, and the British people who pay their 'wages' last on their respective lists. _All _of them, only care about survival.

M is a proven bully (if reports are correct, then H has been too re Tiara-gate). H&M have been _impossible_ task masters to their staff. They gas-light the public with not only their misinformation and lies, but also preach to _us _about 'misinformation'. They rally their troops sugars supporters who believe in (un)reality TV. Samantha Markle has been the victim of not only their lies but full-on hate. I do not agree with Sam M about a lot of things, least of all about policing the Net, but wow, can you imagine living with MS and having to deal with such a sister who denies your very existence because she _feels_ like it. 

Most BS celebs spout is rubbish, and who cares, they can fib, embellish, filter, use PS, and turn back the clock all they want, but when someone literally bold-face lies like M and H do, even contradicting each _other's_ recollections (reported 'suicide-saga') it's dangerous. I fear for H's mental health a lot more than he does! I know we often have some fun here, but boy, in all seriousness, there is something terrifying going on with both of them. 

On a day when the author Salman Rushdie has been literally stabbed in the back for writing a book, a work of fiction, and now fights for his life and JK Rowling receives death threats one a daily basis, I despair about the right to challenge _anything,_ let alone MISINFORMATION. They will not be satisfied until the Internet is silenced save for they propaganda and have an Emperor and Empress of Willy-Wonker's-Willy-Woke-World, ruling by fear and radio-hopping silence.

“*The love of liberty is the love of others*; *the love of power is the love of ourselves.*” William Hazlitt  (1778 - 1830)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF? I was always of the opinion she was really pregnant with Archie, though I couldn't explain the belly malfunctions, but...WTF?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? I was always of the opinion she was really pregnant with Archie, though I couldn't explain the belly malfunctions, but...WTF?




Asking those that have been pregnant:

Can that just be breathing? 

Anyone:

Are Moon Bumps even inflatable/deflatable?


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> There'll be a new book out called _The Courtiers_ (Full title: *Courtiers: The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who broke the bullying story)* by Valentine Low.
> 
> I think all eyes will be on this one to see if any light can be shed on the abuse of power she wielded and the abuse of power that protected her.
> 
> He was the journalist that broke the story on M's bullying at the Palace (and the Palace's cover-up).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.waterstones.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Synopsis (from the Waterstones link above):
> 
> *The gripping account of how the Royal family really operates from the man who has spent years watching the public face the Royal family chooses to present to the world in his role as Royal correspondent for The Times. Valentine Low asks the important questions: who really runs the show and, as we head towards a new monarch's reign, what will happen next?*
> 
> Throughout history, the British monarchy has relied on its courtiers - the trusted advisers in the King or Queen's inner circle - to ensure its survival as a family, an ancient institution, and a pillar of the constitution.
> 
> Today, as ever, a vast team of people hidden from view steers the royal family's path between public duty and private life. The Queen, after a remarkable 70 years of service, is entering the final seasons of her reign without her husband Philip to guide her. Meanwhile, Charles seeks to define what his future as King will be, with his court wielding ever greater influence as he plans for his imminent accession.
> 
> The question of who is entrusted to guide the royals has never been more vital, and yet the task those courtiers face has never been more challenging. With a cloud hanging over Prince Andrew as well as Harry and Meghan's departure from royal life, the complex relationship between modern courtiers and royal principals has been exposed to global scrutiny. William and Kate - equipped with a very 21st century approach to press and public relations - now hold the responsibility of making an ancient institution relevant for the decades to come.
> 
> _Courtiers_ reveals an ever-changing system of complex characters, shifting values and ideas over what the future of the institution should be. This is the story of how the monarchy really works, at a pivotal moment in its history.
> _Publisher: Headline Publishing Group
> ISBN: 9781472290908_


Guessing the Courtiers are ”The Grey Suits” maligned by Hazbeen?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Asking those that have been pregnant:
> 
> Can that just be breathing?
> 
> Anyone:
> 
> Are Moon Bumps even inflatable/deflatable?


That looks really weird. I don't see the deflation that they are talking about. The movement of her blouse is around breast level, rather than bump level. Was this outdoors? Could it be the breeze causing the thin blouse fabric to flutter?

I actually googled moon bumps. The ones made from silicon are filled with foam and don't deflate. Ali Express promised to sell customers fake pregnancy bellies with "some extra wobbling for dramatic effect". Maybe that's what she bought.


----------



## Helventara

Ali Express! …. My husband’s favourite, where he finds all sorts of useful and useless things    Should’ve known that one can buy moon bump there.


xincinsin said:


> That looks really weird. I don't see the deflation that they are talking about. The movement of her blouse is around breast level, rather than bump level. Was this outdoors? Could it be the breeze causing the thin blouse fabric to flutter?
> 
> I actually googled moon bumps. The ones made from silicon are filled with foam and don't deflate. Ali Express promised to sell customers fake pregnancy bellies with "some extra wobbling for dramatic effect". Maybe that's what she bou


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? I was always of the opinion she was really pregnant with Archie, though I couldn't explain the belly malfunctions, but...WTF?



They leave themselves open to speculation when they try to manipulate everything around them.  Maybe the reason they didn't tell the truth when she went into labor and waited 3 days to show the baby was because it took that long for the surrogate to deliver and hand the baby over?  They have told so many huge lies, that I no longer believe anything they put out there.


----------



## Chanbal

I was reading an article about Anne H (spoiler), and found a potential link between Degeneres and TW. I wonder if Montecito attracts this type of residents.   







Spoiler: Money-hungry












						Anne Heche dead at 53: How her life fell apart after Ellen DeGeneres affair
					

Anne Heche was one of Hollywood’s hottest young actresses before her high-profile relationship with Ellen DeGeneres overshadowed her blossoming career, dooming her to become tabloid fodder fo…




					nypost.com


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I'd like to think that after the BRF's experience with Claw The Snake, they will be extra careful about whom they bring into their circle.  Hopefully they're aware of those who attempt to ingratiate themselves into an advisor type of position only to promote some organization's selfish agenda. While Charles' personality is kinda dull, I don't think he's a stupid person and is wise enough to seek counsel of those who genuinely want the Crown to succeed. I'd like to think that QEII has trained/taught William and Charles about the positives and pitfalls of the position. IMO people see William as taking his responsibilities seriously while Harry was just the spare goofball who never grew up. Kate was heavily criticized for a couple of years after they married but was smart enough to slog through it all with a smile, playing the L-O-N-G game. Kate really got blasted, while Claw's coverage was 99% fawning and favorable at the beginning. We all had hopes for Harry, like he was finally growing up as a man and no longer Diana's little boy. Claw felt there was more to gain by infantilizing him all over again and casting themselves as the ultimate victims in need of Da-da's financial support. Come on, Claw, Retread Bride, you weren't 21 when you married Haz, and you made a few millions from Suits. Knock off "The Firm is racist because they cut off our allowance" crap after you threw them under the bus.


I think they were being careful in this case, but there is not much a parent can do in general if child is heck bent on marrying, and H went at warp speed
And in this case in particular, the BRF did not want the collateral damage of seeming opposed to a POC, and MM blabbed it all to Vanity Fair/press so early on …. WE ARE IN LOVE …
The monarch is supposed to sanction the match (so that groom can remain in line of succession) if I remember, but did H care? After all he was 5th in line when he met MM, and later fell to 6
I wonder if the family required a prenup ? Are those permitted/usual in the UK ?   That would not have stopped H, but might have stopped M …



Chanbal said:


> I was reading an article about Anne H (spoiler), and found a potential link between Degeneres and TW. I wonder if Montecito attracts this type of residents.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5589369
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Money-hungry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anne Heche dead at 53: How her life fell apart after Ellen DeGeneres affair
> 
> 
> Anne Heche was one of Hollywood’s hottest young actresses before her high-profile relationship with Ellen DeGeneres overshadowed her blossoming career, dooming her to become tabloid fodder fo…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Montecito has always been for the VERY rich, not the (merely) rich 
It is too far from LA or SF to be an easy commute, it is for folks who can afford to take a private plane to get somewhere 
It is a great place if you seek quiet solitude and acreage,  but not exactly convenient



papertiger said:


> Asking those that have been pregnant:
> 
> Can that just be breathing?
> 
> Anyone:
> 
> Are Moon Bumps even inflatable/deflatable?


Babies do kick but IMHO the photos are either from slightly different angles or photoshopped 
I don’t perceive a massive different between the too
Some non bumps do NOT deflate/inflate


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I was reading an article about Anne H (spoiler), and found a potential link between Degeneres and TW. I wonder if Montecito attracts this type of residents.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5589369
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Money-hungry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anne Heche dead at 53: How her life fell apart after Ellen DeGeneres affair
> 
> 
> Anne Heche was one of Hollywood’s hottest young actresses before her high-profile relationship with Ellen DeGeneres overshadowed her blossoming career, dooming her to become tabloid fodder fo…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



My guess is Monteshito is similar to every other ‘rich people’ enclave. The really “very rich” money folks are quiet which is why the area may not appeal to Hwood types - they crave the attention.  In most of these enclaves, there are the basic 3 categories: wealthiest, wealthy and aspirationals.  For the wealthiest crowd, staff does all the shopping, cleaning, etc. The wealthiest residents are rarely seen, rarely interact with the public [unless it is for a publicity promo], rarely available.  Remember the polo games in June - very few spectators attended, even tho it was free and NachoF was playing .  Imo it was significant that Rob Lowe moved out around the time H&M moved in 

ETA:  A glimpse: Here is a court case that involves a well respected, Chicago real estate agent who bought a place in Monteshito.  The text describes the damage from the 2017 Thomas fire. It sounds awful.





						Malkin v. Fed. Ins. Co., 562 F. Supp. 3d 854 | Casetext Search + Citator
					

Read Malkin v. Fed. Ins. Co., 562 F. Supp. 3d 854, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database



					casetext.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> *Asking those that have been pregnant:
> 
> Can that just be breathing?*
> 
> Anyone:
> 
> Are Moon Bumps even inflatable/deflatable?


Not coming to ZedZed's defense here. We have two boys. I was very skinny and showed early with both pregnancies. Some times, I could almost swear he was doing somersaults as my abdomen visibly moved up and down in rhythm with baby's jiggling. It was the weirdest sensation ever.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> This article makes the case that it was appropriate for Tyler Perry to call Meghan a princess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle won't lose her princess title, royal experts say
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle became a Princess of the UK upon her marriage to Prince Harry in 2018. This won't change since the royal title is Harry's birthright.
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com


He can call her Gorgonzola feet for all I care. 
Titles are a load of **** the only royalty earning their bucks are drag queens, and you’d think Tyler Perry would know that. 
@queenofthewrapdress
I almost feel bad for Charles. It's either The Queen or the Cambridges, nobody ever considers him.
He’s a modest man with much to ne modest about…

Although, alas, I don’t think he’s even very modest 


papertiger said:


> Asking those that have been pregnant:
> 
> Can that just be breathing?
> 
> Anyone:
> 
> Are Moon Bumps even inflatable/deflatable?


I’m inclined to think it’s neither and it’s just the wind rustling her clothes. Even when my babies kicked hard it didn’t move my clothes around (they don’t breathe in womb - they get oxygen from the umbilical cord.). I would be surprised if moon bumps inflated. I thought they were a moulded memory foam cushion sort of thing. 
I don’t think it’s an incriminating clip tbh. Now that weird shot where her bump is hanging to her thighs in the purple body con- that is harder to understand. 

Also you were spot on about the Royal nepotism gravy express


----------



## jelliedfeels

Slightly OT but Partly because I am blessed with the jonas brothers not being that big here and partly because why would I give a damn anyway I keep forgetting who Priyanka chopra is and keep thinking we’re talking about Priyanka from Rupaul’s Drag Race Canada- who I far prefer anyway 


She’d have worn a better outfit to the wedding too.


----------



## mellibelly

Zeezy wishes


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF? I was always of the opinion she was really pregnant with Archie, though I couldn't explain the belly malfunctions, but...WTF?



That's pretty subtle, if anything.  Could just be the baby kicking, causing it to move.


----------



## Toby93

I finished reading the Tom Bower book and now I have moved on to "The American Duchess", a book on Wallis Simpson.  I just noticed a passage when the palace and its advisors were deciding what Edward and Wallis would be called once he abdicated.  I never knew that Sussex was considered before they settled on Windsor.  Do you think maybe the Queen has a sense of humor


----------



## Lodpah

Toby93 said:


> I finished reading the Tom Bower book and now I have moved on to "The American Duchess", a book on Wallis Simpson.  I just noticed a passage when the palace and its advisors were deciding what Edward and Wallis would be called once he abdicated.  I never knew that Sussex was considered before they settled on Windsor.  Do you think maybe the Queen has a sense of humor
> 
> View attachment 5589466


Oh I absolutely think so. She put them at Frogmore where WS is buried. They rode in the limo that WS was transported in, I can’t remember for which whether he funeral. The Queen can have a wicked sense of humor.


----------



## Lodpah

mellibelly said:


> I cannot believe I 100% agreed with a Candace O. rant too  I have to say, she is very pretty in that clip.
> 
> And she is so right about ZZZ being 25% black. Doria is clearly mixed race so ZZZ is a majority white. Hence Merchie and Invisibit look fully white.


Candace O is married to a genteel British man worth millions. Eve is married to a billionaire.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Babies do kick but IMHO the photos are either from slightly different angles or photoshopped
> I don’t perceive a massive different between the too
> Some non bumps do NOT deflate/inflate


I watched the video and it looked like the bump deflated in front of our eyes.  She noticed something because she kept looking down and checking it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> can you imagine living with MS and having to deal with such a sister who denies your very existence because she _feels_ like it.


Actually my extended family is filled with individuals like this. I personally don’t really think about the moon bump ( I assume the BRF had the ways an means to figure parentage out. I don’t think about the markle family dynamics either. Everyone has crazy family. I just wish that they would go back to the UK and get shuffled into their appropriate place. The kids would be there when they get divorced and Meghan lands back in LA. I do not want public funding of their security and I’m tired of the totally unqualified or ignorant going into politics


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> aka "Bite the hand that feeds you".


Where on earth did this clown get the idea that he could in any way be on the level of the O’s?  Between the two of them, the O’s have 4 Ivy League degrees, he was a popular two-term *****, and both of the O’s are very charismatic.  (I get that many do not like them, but many do.). Harry has minimal education, no job history, minimal charisma and the only “hook” he has to attract attention is to publicly trash  members of his family.  That is going to get really old really fast.  I guess old JCMH inherited a big dose of arrogance and delusion that runs in his family after all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Luvbolide said:


> Where on earth did this clown get the idea that he could in any way be on the level of the O’s?  Between the two of them, the O’s have 4 Ivy League degrees, he was a popular two-term *****, and both of the O’s are very charismatic.  (I get that many do not like them, but many do.). Harry has minimal education, no job history, minimal charisma and the only “hook” he has to attract attention is to publicly trash  members of his family.  That is going to get really old really fast.  I guess old JCMH inherited a big dose of arrogance and delusion that runs in his family after all.


Okaaay, the censors are not my friend   google is our friend  

From 2017, https://www.gq.com/story/barack-*****-and-prince-harry-interview

_Prince Harry of Wales, fifth in line to the British crown but first in line to our hearts, scored a sweet gig over the holidays as a fill-in host on BBC Radio 4's Todayprogram. (Ugh, people with connections.) And as revealed in a teaser released on Sunday, he booked quite the guest to headline his stint—longtime friend and noted fellow viral video enthusiast Barack *****.

It's genuinely difficult to decide which of the participants in this interview, recorded in September while the two men were attending the Invictus Games, manages to come off as more charming, and I mean that in the most complimentary way possible. President ***** asks if he'll have to talk quickly for the radio, warning his host that he is generally a slow speaker, and that the format might therefore be less suitable for his particular skill set. "Not at all," Harry responds charitably. "If you start using long pauses between answers," he adds, "you're probably going to get this face," adopting the stern, hawk-eyed expression of a very serious newsman who has no time for evasive politician answers. (*****'s follow-up inquiry as to whether he should adopt a British accent went notably unaddressed.) Later, after Harry cops to being nervous, ***** responds by offering to interview him instead, resulting in some delighted, bashful chuckling on both sides.

Anyway, allow this clip serve as your periodic reminder of what it was like to have a President of the United States capable of interactions with other human beings that didn't embarrass the entire country. It also constitutes strong evidence that whoever is in charge of planning Prince Harry's bachelor party would be wise to make room for one more invitee—and for his Secret Service contingent._


—
https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...-barack-*****-meghan-markle-royal-family-news
— from 2015
https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2015/06/prince-harry-michelle-*****-meeting-tea


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the VFair article [link posted above], June, 2018 - when the press kissed up to him.  In retrospect, it is kinda sickening.

_Harry would be a great blogger, we think. He’s got this air of mystery about him in a what-goes-on-behind-palace-doors kind of way; he’s got a sense of humor; and he’s got access (the man text messages with Kate Middleton—one blog post with a screenshot of emoji sent by the Duchess and he’d bring down the Internet).

He could join a British football team.

Or an American football team.

Or a whatever-this-horse-sport-is-called team. (We kid . . . we obviously know its called horseball.)

Frankly, the man could just become a model, if he wanted. This is some verifiable posingright here.

But if he’d rather a career that doesn’t require daily trips to the gym and a carb-free diet, evidence shows he’d make an excellent goat-whisperer. (“No, I’m not offended by the question, goat: Kate smells like cotton candy laced with cinnamon.”)

HE COULD BE A DOG BREEDER! (Side note: if you haven’t printed this photo out and silk-screened it onto a cape, which you are now going to wear wherever you go, then you are decidedly not us.)

He could join a dance troupe. (The Button-Down Brigade? The Collared-Shirt Crew? The Gingham-Fabric Gang?)

We imagine—just based on, you know, nothing in particular—that he’d make an excellent bartender.

Or he could get into motivational speaking.

You_ _know, maybe he doesn’t need a job. Maybe what would make Prince Harry happiest is if he just threw his phone in a lake, packed a few essentials in a backpack, and journeyed up to the North Pole, where no one would take his picture, or link him romantically to starlets, or otherwise pressure him to be an exemplar of good citizenry. Look at his face in this shot. The dude is blissful._


----------



## 880

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the VFair article [link posted above], June, 2018 - when the press kissed up to him.  In retrospect, it is kinda sickening.
> 
> _Harry would be a great blogger, we think. He’s got this air of mystery about him in a what-goes-on-behind-palace-doors kind of way; he’s got a sense of humor; and he’s got access (the man text messages with Kate Middleton—one blog post with a screenshot of emoji sent by the Duchess and he’d bring down the Internet).
> 
> He could join a British football team.
> 
> Or an American football team.
> 
> Or a whatever-this-horse-sport-is-called team. (We kid . . . we obviously know its called horseball.)
> 
> Frankly, the man could just become a model, if he wanted. This is some verifiable posingright here.
> 
> But if he’d rather a career that doesn’t require daily trips to the gym and a carb-free diet, evidence shows he’d make an excellent goat-whisperer. (“No, I’m not offended by the question, goat: Kate smells like cotton candy laced with cinnamon.”)
> 
> HE COULD BE A DOG BREEDER! (Side note: if you haven’t printed this photo out and silk-screened it onto a cape, which you are now going to wear wherever you go, then you are decidedly not us.)
> 
> He could join a dance troupe. (The Button-Down Brigade? The Collared-Shirt Crew? The Gingham-Fabric Gang?)
> 
> We imagine—just based on, you know, nothing in particular—that he’d make an excellent bartender.
> 
> Or he could get into motivational speaking.
> 
> You_ _know, maybe he doesn’t need a job. Maybe what would make Prince Harry happiest is if he just threw his phone in a lake, packed a few essentials in a backpack, and journeyed up to the North Pole, where no one would take his picture, or link him romantically to starlets, or otherwise pressure him to be an exemplar of good citizenry. Look at his face in this shot. The dude is blissful._


SOMEone else posted that we really need a rolling eye emoticon


----------



## Cosmopolitan

880 said:


> SOMEone else posted that we really need a rolling eye emoticon


Already available


: rolleyes :


----------



## 880

Cosmopolitan said:


> Already available
> 
> 
> : rolleyes :
> 
> View attachment 5589538


Thank you so much


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *Montecito has always been for the VERY rich, not the (merely) rich*
> It is too far from LA or SF to be an easy commute, it is for folks who can afford to take a private plane to get somewhere
> It is a great place if you seek quiet solitude and acreage,  but not exactly convenient
> 
> 
> Babies do kick but IMHO the photos are either from slightly different angles or photoshopped
> I don’t perceive a massive different between the too
> Some non bumps do NOT deflate/inflate





CarryOn2020 said:


> *My guess is Monteshito is similar to every other ‘rich people’ enclave.* The really “very rich” money folks are quiet which is why the area may not appeal to Hwood types - they crave the attention. In most of these enclaves, there are the basic 3 categories: wealthiest, wealthy and aspirationals. For the wealthiest crowd, staff does all the shopping, cleaning, etc. The wealthiest residents are rarely seen, rarely interact with the public [unless it is for a publicity promo], rarely available. Remember the polo games in June - very few spectators attended, even tho it was free and NachoF was playing . Imo it was significant that Rob Lowe moved out around the time H&M moved in
> 
> ETA:  A glimpse: Here is a court case that involves a well respected, Chicago real estate agent who bought a place in Monteshito.  The text describes the damage from the 2017 Thomas fire. It sounds awful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Malkin v. Fed. Ins. Co., 562 F. Supp. 3d 854 | Casetext Search + Citator
> 
> 
> Read Malkin v. Fed. Ins. Co., 562 F. Supp. 3d 854, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
> 
> 
> 
> casetext.com


I meant immensely greedy people with questionable value.


----------



## Chanbal

This article on Marie Claire was apparently removed after its publication, it shows now as page not found when clicking on its link (1st link). 
However, someone @LA provided a cache link (see 2nd link before it also disappears).







			https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-credibility__trashed-792465
		










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'credibility' is 'dripping away' claims royal expert | Marie Claire
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are often top of the headlines. Whether it is regarding the upcoming release of the Duke of Sussex's memoir, to claims they




					webcache.googleusercontent.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I meant immensely greedy people with questionable value.


Imo the ‘greedy people’  fit in perfectly with the ‘aspirational’ crowd.  Always more more more


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the VFair article [link posted above], June, 2018 - when the press kissed up to him.  In retrospect, it is kinda sickening.
> 
> _Harry would be a great blogger, we think. He’s got this air of mystery about him in a what-goes-on-behind-palace-doors kind of way; he’s got a sense of humor; and he’s got access (the man text messages with Kate Middleton—one blog post with a screenshot of emoji sent by the Duchess and he’d bring down the Internet).
> 
> He could join a British football team.
> 
> Or an American football team.
> 
> Or a whatever-this-horse-sport-is-called team. (We kid . . . we obviously know its called horseball.)
> 
> Frankly, the man could just become a model, if he wanted. This is some verifiable posingright here.
> 
> But if he’d rather a career that doesn’t require daily trips to the gym and a carb-free diet, evidence shows he’d make an excellent goat-whisperer. (“No, I’m not offended by the question, goat: Kate smells like cotton candy laced with cinnamon.”)
> 
> HE COULD BE A DOG BREEDER! (Side note: if you haven’t printed this photo out and silk-screened it onto a cape, which you are now going to wear wherever you go, then you are decidedly not us.)
> 
> He could join a dance troupe. (The Button-Down Brigade? The Collared-Shirt Crew? The Gingham-Fabric Gang?)
> 
> We imagine—just based on, you know, nothing in particular—that he’d make an excellent bartender.
> 
> Or he could get into motivational speaking.
> 
> You_ _know, maybe he doesn’t need a job. Maybe what would make Prince Harry happiest is if he just threw his phone in a lake, packed a few essentials in a backpack, and journeyed up to the North Pole, where no one would take his picture, or link him romantically to starlets, or otherwise pressure him to be an exemplar of good citizenry. Look at his face in this shot. The dude is blissful._


I don't like current version Harry, and I do think the palace minders made excuses and covered up for him in the past. However, I think his behaviour pattern is, unfortunately, quite common. He is more follower than leader, and that makes him susceptible to influence.

I've had subordinates who were hardworking in my team because our whole team tends to be very responsible workers who go the extra mile. When one of them was transferred due to a company restructure, her new boss used the "do minimum" and "offload work to others" strategy. My ex-subordinate totally changed. And I can understand the appeal of a boss who constantly says "why should we do it? I'll make someone else do it". Same salary but less work, why not?

Pre-Zed Harry's main influence was his family, for good or bad. He did his share of royal duties even if he didn't really enjoy it. His close friends were known more for boozing and having a good time but certainly weren't portrayed as nasty as far as I can tell. In fact, based on the chatter of Harry's previous dating life, his friends seemed the generous types as compared with his Scrooge behaviour.

Zedzed offered him alternatives. She has no compunction against sponging off others or plagiarism. And I believe that after their initial surge of popularity, she sold him a bridge based on "Your family needs us more than we need them" and "we can make it big on our own". Do I blame her for this? No. Please see parable of the scorpion and the frog. Her MO worked in the past, so no reason why she would not continue using it. Her mistake was thinking that her new husband was independently wealthy and his flow of funds was secure. Why wouldn't Harry let her convince him? Do less work, be far from his minders, and yet live in style. No one ever told him that there is no such thing as a free lunch because he has been enjoying a buffet all his life. No one expected him to spurn the buffet and yet expect free food delivery for the rest of his life.

Frankly, they would be irrelevant to my life if they would stop preaching. I would respect them if they walked their incessant talk. They are not saints. None of us are. But they are frauds.


----------



## Chanbal

How will TW take the news? 









						Queen tipped for BAFTA after beloved Paddington sketch - ‘Best newcomer prize!’
					

THE QUEEN has been tipped for a BAFTA following her brief appearance in a beloved sketch with Paddington Bear for the Platinum Jubilee.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


> Already available
> 
> 
> : rolleyes :
> 
> View attachment 5589538


We meant on the instant 'like' bar (bottom-right of others' posts)


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This article on Marie Claire was apparently removed after its publication, it shows now as page not found when clicking on its link (1st link).
> However, someone @LA provided a cache link (see 2nd link before it also disappears).
> View attachment 5589566
> 
> View attachment 5589567
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-credibility__trashed-792465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'credibility' is 'dripping away' claims royal expert | Marie Claire
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are often top of the headlines. Whether it is regarding the upcoming release of the Duke of Sussex's memoir, to claims they
> 
> 
> 
> 
> webcache.googleusercontent.com



Fuller version article: Thanks Maisie  


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s ‘credibility’ is ‘dripping away’ claims royal expert​




MAISIE BOVINGDON13/08/2022 8:56 AM 

Credit: Samir Hussein / Getty






New Barbie of the Queen by Mattel 



The pair have come under fire once again, as royal commentator, Daisy Cousens, believes author Tom bower’s “bombshell” book titled Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, as well as Harry’s comments in a recent speech at the UN, has tarnished his “credibility.”

Writing for Sky News Australia, Daisy shared her thoughts: “Every one of Bower’s claims is facilitating the steady dripping away of Harry and Meghan’s credibility. In the court of public opinion, it’s the monarchy that will ultimately be vindicated.”

In Harry’s speech at the UN Daisy expressed the 37-year-old royal was “lamenting a ‘global assault’ on democracy and freedom”, and proceeded to address “transformative measures” needed to avoid climate change, which was “not up for debate.”
In her criticism of Harry – who has son Archie and daughter Lilibet with wife Meghan Markle – Daisy shared: “A sentiment that, needless to say, embodies neither democracy nor freedom.”
Harry and Meghan have not only been slated for their “credibility” depleting, but in recent weeks they have been branded “insignificant”, and allegedly have been given a cruel nickname by their neighbours, since they quit the royal family and called time on their royal duties in 2020.

Speaking previously, broadcaster and author, Jonathan Dimbleby, told The Times: “He’s entering a sort of vortex in which they will become less and less significant as a couple. As she gets older, as he gets older, they will matter less because the celebrity on which they trade will become less valuable.”
To add into the mix, the couple have also previously been dubbed the “least popular royals”,  after a survey carried out by YouGov has found the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s popularity is at a record low.
Can they ever catch a break?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I wonder if the family required a prenup ? Are those permitted/usual in the UK ?



Apparently prenups aren't enforceable in an UK court.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently prenups aren't enforceable in an UK court.


Yes but there are always family trusts to make $ and assets untouchable.


----------



## papertiger

Added comment:


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Harry and Meghan have not only been slated for their “credibility” depleting, but in recent weeks they have been branded “insignificant”, and *allegedly have been given a cruel nickname by their neighbours*, since they quit the royal family and called time on their royal duties in 2020.
> 
> Speaking previously, broadcaster and author, Jonathan Dimbleby, told The Times: “He’s entering a sort of vortex in which they will become less and less significant as a couple. As she gets older, as he gets older, they will matter less because the celebrity on which they trade will become less valuable.”
> To add into the mix, the couple have also previously been dubbed the “least popular royals”,  after a survey carried out by YouGov has found the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s popularity is at a record low.
> Can they ever catch a break?


Thanks for posting the entire article. Do we know what the nickname is?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting the entire article. Do we know what the nickname is?


Princess of Montecito, according to this previous post. More sarcastic than cruel.




__





						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

I miss having the previous/next arrows  up at the top of the column. Never realized how much I used it until it was gone.  While her publicist is trying to put a positive spin on it, I somehow doubt the neighbors are calling her “princess of Montecito” in a kind way...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## Chanbal

Luvbolide said:


> *Where on earth did this clown get the idea that he could in any way be on the level of the O’s? * Between the two of them, the O’s have 4 Ivy League degrees, he was a popular two-term *****, and both of the O’s are very charismatic.  (I get that many do not like them, but many do.). Harry has minimal education, no job history, minimal charisma and the only “hook” he has to attract attention is to publicly trash  members of his family.  That is going to get really old really fast.  I guess old JCMH inherited a big dose of arrogance and delusion that runs in his family after all.


TW


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Here, so I can watch (it's not so new) "less relevant every day"


----------



## jennlt




----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I don't like current version Harry, and I do think the palace minders made excuses and covered up for him in the past. However, I think his behaviour pattern is, unfortunately, quite common. He is more follower than leader, and that makes him susceptible to influence.
> 
> I've had subordinates who were hardworking in my team because our whole team tends to be very responsible workers who go the extra mile. When one of them was transferred due to a company restructure, her new boss used the "do minimum" and "offload work to others" strategy. My ex-subordinate totally changed. And I can understand the appeal of a boss who constantly says "why should we do it? I'll make someone else do it". Same salary but less work, why not?
> 
> Pre-Zed Harry's main influence was his family, for good or bad. He did his share of royal duties even if he didn't really enjoy it. His close friends were known more for boozing and having a good time but certainly weren't portrayed as nasty as far as I can tell. In fact, based on the chatter of Harry's previous dating life, his friends seemed the generous types as compared with his Scrooge behaviour.
> 
> Zedzed offered him alternatives. She has no compunction against sponging off others or plagiarism. And I believe that after their initial surge of popularity, she sold him a bridge based on "Your family needs us more than we need them" and "we can make it big on our own". Do I blame her for this? No. Please see parable of the scorpion and the frog. Her MO worked in the past, so no reason why she would not continue using it. Her mistake was thinking that her new husband was independently wealthy and his flow of funds was secure. Why wouldn't Harry let her convince him? Do less work, be far from his minders, and yet live in style. No one ever told him that there is no such thing as a free lunch because he has been enjoying a buffet all his life. No one expected him to spurn the buffet and yet expect free food delivery for the rest of his life.
> 
> Frankly, they would be irrelevant to my life if they would stop preaching. I would respect them if they walked their incessant talk. They are not saints. None of us are. But they are frauds.



Agreed 100%.  And this is GREAT writing!


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> I watched the video and it looked like the bump deflated in front of our eyes.  She noticed something because she kept looking down and checking it.


And we know she checks on her hidden mics a lot ….


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> Yes but there are always family trusts to make $ and assets untouchable.


Interesting thing , California is a community property state , the partner gets half of anything earned after the couple got together


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Interesting thing , California is a community property state , the partner gets half of anything earned after the couple got together


How would that work if, as we surmise, all their money/earnings are funnelled through their network of companies? If they challenge each other over the division of assets, they would have to lay bare how their earnings and expenses are managed.


----------



## 880

xincinsin said:


> Zedzed offered him alternatives. She has no compunction against sponging off others or plagiarism. And I believe that after their initial surge of popularity, she sold him a bridge based on "Your family needs us more than we need them" and "we can make it big on our own". Do I blame her for this? No. Please see parable of the scorpion and the frog. Her MO worked in the past, so no reason why she would not continue using it. Her mistake was thinking that her new husband was independently wealthy and his flow of funds was secure. Why wouldn't Harry let her convince him? Do less work, be far from his minders, and yet live in style. No one ever told him that there is no such thing as a free lunch because he has been enjoying a buffet all his life. No one expected him to spurn the buffet and yet expect free food delivery for the rest of his life.


100% love this point! 


papertiger said:


> We meant on the instant 'like' bar (bottom-right of others' posts)


yes I did too; but, I didn’t even noticed the rolled eye one available for posts bc it’s so cute Lol


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


>



Wow she's as orange there as TFG she hates. Step away from the fake tanner.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Wow she's as orange there as TFG she hates. Step away from the fake tanner.


It’s really bad!!


----------



## papertiger

A must see!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

In their own little world?!


----------



## sdkitty

if he's doing this because he's obsessed, it's a pity.  if he's doing it for the money, shame on him.  probably a bit of both



Newsletter Preferences

View In Browser







​


 






_Welcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday._

*Prince Harry “intensely focused” on Diana’s final hours*

Prince Harry is reportedly researching the final hours of his mother Princess Diana’s life for his forthcoming memoir.

The _Sun_ reports that “official judicial sources in Paris” have revealed that Harry’s researchers have been in touch, seeking information about the car crash in the Pont d’Alma, Paris, that killed Diana on August 31, 1997.

One source, who was involved in the original crash investigation, told the _Sun_: “There have been approaches which suggest Prince Harry is intensely focused on getting more information about his mother’s death. There are plenty of people in France who recall the night of the accident. It’s only normal that Diana’s son should want to learn more about it for his book.”

The _Sun_ said it had reached out to Harry for comment.

In the run-up to the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death, all eyes are returning to the car crash that killed her—and, inevitably, all the conflicting theories about what caused it, and her death. Was it, as the official 2008 verdict had it, a combination of the paparazzi in pursuit and negligent driving of chauffeur Henri Paul, or is there any merit to the many conspiracy theories that proliferated afterwards?






An ex-bodyguard of Princess Diana, Lee Sansum, tells the _Sun_ that he and other guards had drawn straws to accompany bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones that day. (Rees-Jones, now 54, was the only survivor of the crash.)

“When I learned they were not wearing seatbelts in the crash I understood why they didn’t survive,” Sansum, nicknamed ‘Rambo’ by Diana, told the paper. “That shouldn’t have happened. It was standard practice for the family to wear seatbelts. It was an order sent down from the boss, Dodi’s dad Mohamed Al-Fayed. Dodi, in particular, hated wearing seatbelts and I always insisted on it.”

Sansum had acted as a bodyguard for Diana and Dodi in St. Tropez that summer. “She had been happy on that holiday,” Sansum told the _Sun_. “But I had seen her in tears too, when she learned of the murder of her friend, the fashion designer Gianni Versace. She confided in me her own fears that she might one day be assassinated. She asked if I thought his murder outside his home was a professional killing. I thought it was. Then she said something that always stayed with me —‘Do you think they’ll do that to me?’ She was shaking and it was clear from her tone that she really thought that they might, whoever ‘they’ might be.

“I spent some time reassuring her that no one was going to try to kill her and she was safe with us, but she definitely thought there was a risk that one day she might be assassinated.”





Diana also told Sansum she wanted to live with Dodi in America. “She didn’t want to, but that was the only place she felt people weren’t having a go at her. It was probably her way of keeping sane, to get some respite.”

Her plan had influenced Harry to live with Meghan in California, Sansum believes. “This trauma happened when the building blocks for life were being formulated. His mother saw America as a place of sanctuary. He will be drawing on his experiences from then.”

Sansum said one day in the U.K. on a counter-surveillance drive near the Al-Fayed home in Surrey he saw an ex-SAS colleague now working in the Special Reconnaissance Unit. “We were generally followed by MI5 but this was the first time we had seen a Special Forces guy. We thought, ‘They’ve upped their game’.

“A witness driving a car traveling in front of the Mercedes in Paris on the night of the crash told the inquest that he saw a high-powered motorbike overtake the car just seconds before the crash. Another witness traveling in the opposite direction saw a second motorbike swerve to avoid smoke and wreckage then carry on out of the tunnel without stopping. The riders of those bikes were never found—and that is no coincidence,” Sansum said.

“I believe that security officers following Diana, possibly British or a combined British–French team, may have either inadvertently caused the crash or were in close proximity to the car when it happened. If it was known that MI6 operatives were right by the Mercedes at the critical moment, a lot of people would have blamed them for it, and that would have been a huge scandal.”

Meanwhile, a new documentary, airing August 21 in the U.K., will analyze the circumstances of the crash anew. Henry Singer, executive producer of _Investigating Diana: Death in Paris_, told The _Sun_: “We hope it will lay to rest the conspiracy theories.” Officers from the French Brigade Criminelle and London’s Metropolitan Police will appear.

*Prince Andrew movie “feeding frenzy”*

Prince Andrew, who accepted the perks of his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein even when Epstein had been convicted of a child sexual offense, who claims he never met Virginia Giuffre but paid her millions of dollars to settle her claims he raped her, is whining about plans to dramatize the incredible interview that finally exposed him as an arrogant fool.

Andrew’s camp is lobbying against plans to make not one but two films about the extraordinary _Newsnight_ interview which saw him proclaim his real problem was being “too honorable” and inviting Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein to the queen’s country house for a “straightforward shooting weekend.”





Andrew appears to be miffed that people still want to talk about his demise, following the revelation that interviewer Emily Maitlis is working on a film of the interview she conducted. It has previously been revealed that producer Sam McAlister’s account of the interview is being made into a film called _Scoop_. The _Sunday Times_ said that Maitlis, 51, is working on a “three-part miniseries for a leading streaming service.”

Royal sources tell the _Sunday Times_ today that the projects amounted to a “feeding frenzy.”

A source close to the duke told the _Times_ and The Daily Beast: “This latest exploitation for financial gain of a book and now a film of what was, and remains, a very difficult time for the family, is unwelcome. Not least as the account of events leading up to and around the interview appear to have elements of dramatic license.”

Is Andrew accusing other people of lying? Is Andrew really trying to suggest that it is, actually, the media who are to blame for the “very difficult time” endured by the queen and Andrew’s ex-wife and kids as a result of his own disgraceful conduct?

*Harry’s phone call inspired Ukrainian medic*

A Ukrainian paramedic who was tortured by Russian soldiers after being captured while trying to save the lives of victims of the Mariupol theatre bombing in March has said that a phone call from Prince Harry has helped “inspire” her to return to work.

Yulia Paievska, 53, a member of Team Ukraine for the Invictus Games, founded a volunteer ambulance corps named Tayra’s Angels. She is reported to have saved 500 Ukrainian soldiers in the Donbas and was awarded the title Hero of Ukraine by the state.

She was released in June, after enduring months of threats, torture and deprivation. She said that Harry called her a week later.

“He simply inspired me to continue to fight,” Paievska told the _Telegraph_.

“He said that he supports Ukraine and all of us,” she said, and that “the Invictus Games family always takes care of its members.”

She said she was “afraid” to return to the war but added, “There are more important things than our fear and our emotions.”

*Prince William’s “powerful” advice on grief*

When Prince William visited the home of Deborah James, an inspirational bowel cancer campaigner who died in June, he gave her children some “powerful advice” derived from his experience of losing his own mother.

In an interview with the _Times_, James’ husband, Sebastien Bowen, recalled William’s visit, which occurred before her death.

He said: “There was the time I opened the door to Prince William, who had come to give Deborah a damehood. He felt like a friend but he was the future king. That was bizarre. He was so relaxed; he came and sat down in the garden and had champagne with the family. Deborah had a glass of champagne, a glass of wine and a glass of sherry in front of her. She hadn’t been allowed a drink for months and the first thing William said was, ‘I’m glad to see you are triple parked.’ That was an immediate ice-breaker. He’s obviously been through similar grief with the loss of his mother so he gave powerful advice to the children that will stay with them for ever.”

He also recounted what happened when he received a phone call from the Prime Minister’s office telling him Deborah was to be made a dame.

“I had a call from Number 10 [Downing Street] the day before. They explained the formal way to tell her, and I was so nervous she thought something terrible must have happened. She looked at me and said, ‘I’m about to die. What else could possibly go wrong?’”


 


Advertisement








​

​



 






*This week in royal history*

Happy birthday to the Royalist’s favorite royal, Princess Anne. She turns 72 on August 15, and is a standout royal for any number of reasons, but mainly for just swimming against the tides of celebrity, fashion, and flashbulbs so resolutely for so many years. Is she unpleasant-rude, or don’t suffer-fools-gladly brisk? Who knows. But get out those “Naff off!” T-shirts to celebrate now.

*Unanswered questions*

Prepare for a wave of coverage of Diana’s car crash—and what caused it—as the 25th anniversary of her death approaches. The mystery of the queen’s health intensifies, as Buckingham Palace continues to manage as decorously as possible Her Majesty’s maladies and wellness.






 








​


​


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


>




Yeah, only that the others look like 7yo and she claims to have a degree in International Studies.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> A must see!



Thanks! That was excellent! He really has turned into her puppet.  He walks, talks and sits when she says he should, he is mouthing her words, and he has turned himself into the victim that only she understands. Meghan has turned around his entire thought process.  If he ever considered the feelings and actions of others in the past, he is so about himself now and what he feels and thinks that it is no longer possible for him to do that.  

I watched the HBO The Princess documentary.  I think that Diana was very self centered, and craved attention even more than she admitted to herself, but she did seem genuine when it came to her humanitarian work.  Much of this may be the result of her mother leaving the family when she was six.  She had to take more care of herself emotionally because of the loss and became more needy.  It also helped her to care about the problems of others.  Harry is missing that from his personality now, if it was ever there.   

Eventually there will be a clash between two people who are so self centered.    Given what is written in Bower's book, coupled with Harry's stance of being the victim, he may turn on her as victimizing him.  Where the two children stand in all of this is the question.  They are the collateral damage of these two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow. I didn't know Diana was that paranoid. I can definitely see now why Harry is  the way he is (and thanks to the universe the heir to the throne coped much, much better). 

Also, I'm sure when Diana died I did see the pictures of the car in the news, but the destruction is horrible.


----------



## gracekelly

On one hand, I understand Harry wanting to know more about the crash, but the fact is that it won't bring her back.  One thing it will do is bring his mother up for more criticism on her choice of a person to have a fling with. More speculation on her possible downward spiral.  It was an ignominious death as well as a tragic one.

One thing that struck me is that Catherine has just as many pap pictures out there as Diana did back in the day.  How come there isn't the feeding frenzy that was seen with Diana.  I don't read about Catherine thinking her life is endangered or infringed upon by all the photographers.  How much of it was sought by Diana, especially when she she notified them where she would be.  As a person pointed out, she was wealthy enough to have her own home gym instead of going to the gym and having the paps waiting for her outside and making it hard for her to leave.  The opinion was that this is what Diana wanted and it was all about being noticed.  Meghan certainly has that gene herself.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. I didn't know Diana was that paranoid. I can definitely see now why Harry is  the way he is (and thanks to the universe the heir to the throne coped much, much better).
> 
> Also, I'm sure when Diana died I did see the pictures of the car in the news, but the destruction is horrible.


Diana was a drama queen. This played into her need for attention.  She didn't need to dismiss her RPM if she was that paranoid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> How much of it was sought by Diana, especially when she she notified them where she would be.  As a person pointed out, she was wealthy enough to have her own home gym instead of going to the gym and having the paps waiting for her outside and making it hard for her to leave.



I don't know, my mother has a home gym (obviously not with all the stuff a real gym has) but still prefers to go to the actual gym a few times a week because she enjoys the company and a chat after her work-out. Now me, I would probably never leave the house if I didn't have to and I am oh so happy I discovered free Youtube work-outs because I hate most people most of the time.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, my mother has a home gym (obviously not with all the stuff a real gym has) but still prefers to go to the actual gym a few times a week because she enjoys the company and a chat after her work-out. Now me, I would probably never leave the house if I didn't have to and I am oh so happy I discovered free Youtube work-outs because I hate most people most of the time.


Yep, same     I am very happy at home, enjoying my own company.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, my mother has a home gym (obviously not with all the stuff a real gym has) but still prefers to go to the actual gym a few times a week because she enjoys the company and a chat after her work-out.* Now me, I would probably never leave the house if I didn't have to and I am oh so happy I discovered free Youtube work-outs because I hate most people most of the time.*


We are kindred spirits because I like staying home, but I don't really hate people even though I do prefer animals instead. When I told someone the very same a few weeks ago, they looked at me as if I were crazy. Maybe I am crazy, but my chocolate lab loves me unconditionally and never tires when I rattle on. To tell the truth, hubby also puts up with me. 
PS I could never be like Dufus or ZedZed always looking for the cameras.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> On one hand, I understand Harry wanting to know more about the crash, but the fact is that it won't bring her back.  One thing it will do is bring his mother up for more criticism on her choice of a person to have a fling with. More speculation on her possible downward spiral.  It was an ignominious death as well as a tragic one.
> 
> One thing that struck me is that Catherine has just as many pap pictures out there as Diana did back in the day.  How come there isn't the feeding frenzy that was seen with Diana.  I don't read about Catherine thinking her life is endangered or infringed upon by all the photographers.  How much of it was sought by Diana, especially when she she notified them where she would be.  As a person pointed out, she was wealthy enough to have her own home gym instead of going to the gym and having the paps waiting for her outside and making it hard for her to leave.  The opinion was that this is what Diana wanted and it was all about being noticed.  Meghan certainly has that gene herself.


The death of Diana has been investigated and discussed ad nauseam.  He can only be doing this to make money for his tell all book.  Does he really think after 25 years that any investigator at the scene will suddenly remember vital information that he forgot to reveal to anyone else.  Or that they were withholding information until just the right moment when her son questioned them?  

The conspiracy route has been explored extensively by Dodi's father, a man with a LOT more money and resources than Hazz and he came up empty handed. If he wants to pursue the fact that Special Forces were at the scene and were chasing the car, so what?  It doesn't change anything and the drunk driver was still speeding and caused the accident through arrogance and stupidity.  None of this brings his mother back, and there comes a point where you have to let go and get on with your life.  Unfortunately for Hazz, his wife/mother/controller will not allow him to move on as this is a cash cow


----------



## Stansy

mellibelly said:


>



Elle Woods in „Legally Blonde“ comes to mind: „How are you? You look so…. Orange.“


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> A must see!



seems about right


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Trolls trying to shut down BLG now

Push for censorship is real:


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> Trolls trying to shut down BLG now
> 
> Push for censorship is real:



Sad thing is TW could care less about them and won’t give them the time of day.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5590070



It's all so much garbage and page filler. Always consider the source. Her presidential aspirations are a joke. People voted for TFG because he was able to convince them that his business success would translate well to the WH. Like him or not, it worked. What comparable thing does she have to run on? Her letter to P&G?


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Sad thing is TW could care less about them and won’t give them the time of day.


Isn't it? These peabrains need to learn about something called free speech. As long as it he is clear that what he says is only his opinion they need to suck it up and shut up. Oy vey I've had enough today with the world full of idiots!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, my mother has a home gym (obviously not with all the stuff a real gym has) but still prefers to go to the actual gym a few times a week because she enjoys the company and a chat after her work-out. Now me, I would probably never leave the house if I didn't have to and I am oh so happy I discovered free Youtube work-outs because I hate most people most of the time.


I’m also someone that prefers solitude to dealing with others, though I do at times like to sit back and people watch (from a distance).


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> It's all so much garbage and page filler. Always consider the source. Her presidential aspirations are a joke. People voted for TFG because he was able to convince them that his business success would translate well to the WH. Like him or not, it worked. What comparable thing does she have to run on? Her letter to P&G?


Perhaps she thinks being P*T*S would be like how she allegedly treated her KP staff, i.e., come up with grandiose ideas over dinner and demand that her team realizes them by breakfast.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> It's all so much garbage and page filler. Always consider the source. Her presidential aspirations are a joke. People voted for TFG because he was able to convince them that his business success would translate well to the WH. Like him or not, it worked. What comparable thing does she have to run on? *Her letter to P&G? *


The letter story that we now know was a lie - thank you, TBower


----------



## CarryOn2020

Can they really make Hazzi a commoner?  Asking for a friend 
[watching this now, she sounds more tinny and pompous than when she was on Suits - ick].


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Can they really make Hazzi a commoner?  Asking for a friend
> [watching this now, she sounds more tinny and pompous than when she was on Suits - ick].



They told Hazz and TW that they couldn’t use HRH, but didn’t take the titles away (yet) They actually took HRH away from Andrew.  He will always be a prince, but he is a person non grata now.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> This article on Marie Claire was apparently removed after its publication, it shows now as page not found when clicking on its link (1st link).
> However, someone @LA provided a cache link (see 2nd link before it also disappears).
> View attachment 5589566
> 
> View attachment 5589567
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/prince-harry-meghan-markle-credibility__trashed-792465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'credibility' is 'dripping away' claims royal expert | Marie Claire
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are often top of the headlines. Whether it is regarding the upcoming release of the Duke of Sussex's memoir, to claims they
> 
> 
> 
> 
> webcache.googleusercontent.com



The power of Sunshine Sachs working their butts off for Meg?


----------



## lallybelle

Wait....so she did know why Archie wasn't named Prince at birth and that he would be after Charles? She just straight up lied about that they were going to just change it so he wouldn't be? OOF. My recollection was that she just played ignorant to the rules in the first place figuring us "dumb americans" wouldn't  know the monarchy's rules. My bad, recollections do indeed vary. To me this makes her sound worse.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> if he's doing this because he's obsessed, it's a pity.  if he's doing it for the money, shame on him.  probably a bit of both
> ​
> ​
> 
> Newsletter Preferences
> 
> View In Browser
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> _Welcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday._
> 
> *Prince Harry “intensely focused” on Diana’s final hours*
> 
> Prince Harry is reportedly researching the final hours of his mother Princess Diana’s life for his forthcoming memoir.
> 
> The _Sun_ reports that “official judicial sources in Paris” have revealed that Harry’s researchers have been in touch, seeking information about the car crash in the Pont d’Alma, Paris, that killed Diana on August 31, 1997.
> 
> One source, who was involved in the original crash investigation, told the _Sun_: “There have been approaches which suggest Prince Harry is intensely focused on getting more information about his mother’s death. There are plenty of people in France who recall the night of the accident. It’s only normal that Diana’s son should want to learn more about it for his book.”
> 
> The _Sun_ said it had reached out to Harry for comment.
> 
> In the run-up to the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death, all eyes are returning to the car crash that killed her—and, inevitably, all the conflicting theories about what caused it, and her death. Was it, as the official 2008 verdict had it, a combination of the paparazzi in pursuit and negligent driving of chauffeur Henri Paul, or is there any merit to the many conspiracy theories that proliferated afterwards?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> An ex-bodyguard of Princess Diana, Lee Sansum, tells the _Sun_ that he and other guards had drawn straws to accompany bodyguard Trevor Rees-Jones that day. (Rees-Jones, now 54, was the only survivor of the crash.)
> 
> “When I learned they were not wearing seatbelts in the crash I understood why they didn’t survive,” Sansum, nicknamed ‘Rambo’ by Diana, told the paper. “That shouldn’t have happened. It was standard practice for the family to wear seatbelts. It was an order sent down from the boss, Dodi’s dad Mohamed Al-Fayed. Dodi, in particular, hated wearing seatbelts and I always insisted on it.”
> 
> Sansum had acted as a bodyguard for Diana and Dodi in St. Tropez that summer. “She had been happy on that holiday,” Sansum told the _Sun_. “But I had seen her in tears too, when she learned of the murder of her friend, the fashion designer Gianni Versace. She confided in me her own fears that she might one day be assassinated. She asked if I thought his murder outside his home was a professional killing. I thought it was. Then she said something that always stayed with me —‘Do you think they’ll do that to me?’ She was shaking and it was clear from her tone that she really thought that they might, whoever ‘they’ might be.
> 
> “I spent some time reassuring her that no one was going to try to kill her and she was safe with us, but she definitely thought there was a risk that one day she might be assassinated.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana also told Sansum she wanted to live with Dodi in America. “She didn’t want to, but that was the only place she felt people weren’t having a go at her. It was probably her way of keeping sane, to get some respite.”
> 
> Her plan had influenced Harry to live with Meghan in California, Sansum believes. “This trauma happened when the building blocks for life were being formulated. His mother saw America as a place of sanctuary. He will be drawing on his experiences from then.”
> 
> Sansum said one day in the U.K. on a counter-surveillance drive near the Al-Fayed home in Surrey he saw an ex-SAS colleague now working in the Special Reconnaissance Unit. “We were generally followed by MI5 but this was the first time we had seen a Special Forces guy. We thought, ‘They’ve upped their game’.
> 
> “A witness driving a car traveling in front of the Mercedes in Paris on the night of the crash told the inquest that he saw a high-powered motorbike overtake the car just seconds before the crash. Another witness traveling in the opposite direction saw a second motorbike swerve to avoid smoke and wreckage then carry on out of the tunnel without stopping. The riders of those bikes were never found—and that is no coincidence,” Sansum said.
> 
> “I believe that security officers following Diana, possibly British or a combined British–French team, may have either inadvertently caused the crash or were in close proximity to the car when it happened. If it was known that MI6 operatives were right by the Mercedes at the critical moment, a lot of people would have blamed them for it, and that would have been a huge scandal.”
> 
> Meanwhile, a new documentary, airing August 21 in the U.K., will analyze the circumstances of the crash anew. Henry Singer, executive producer of _Investigating Diana: Death in Paris_, told The _Sun_: “We hope it will lay to rest the conspiracy theories.” Officers from the French Brigade Criminelle and London’s Metropolitan Police will appear.
> 
> *Prince Andrew movie “feeding frenzy”*
> 
> Prince Andrew, who accepted the perks of his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein even when Epstein had been convicted of a child sexual offense, who claims he never met Virginia Giuffre but paid her millions of dollars to settle her claims he raped her, is whining about plans to dramatize the incredible interview that finally exposed him as an arrogant fool.
> 
> Andrew’s camp is lobbying against plans to make not one but two films about the extraordinary _Newsnight_ interview which saw him proclaim his real problem was being “too honorable” and inviting Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein to the queen’s country house for a “straightforward shooting weekend.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew appears to be miffed that people still want to talk about his demise, following the revelation that interviewer Emily Maitlis is working on a film of the interview she conducted. It has previously been revealed that producer Sam McAlister’s account of the interview is being made into a film called _Scoop_. The _Sunday Times_ said that Maitlis, 51, is working on a “three-part miniseries for a leading streaming service.”
> 
> Royal sources tell the _Sunday Times_ today that the projects amounted to a “feeding frenzy.”
> 
> A source close to the duke told the _Times_ and The Daily Beast: “This latest exploitation for financial gain of a book and now a film of what was, and remains, a very difficult time for the family, is unwelcome. Not least as the account of events leading up to and around the interview appear to have elements of dramatic license.”
> 
> Is Andrew accusing other people of lying? Is Andrew really trying to suggest that it is, actually, the media who are to blame for the “very difficult time” endured by the queen and Andrew’s ex-wife and kids as a result of his own disgraceful conduct?
> 
> *Harry’s phone call inspired Ukrainian medic*
> 
> A Ukrainian paramedic who was tortured by Russian soldiers after being captured while trying to save the lives of victims of the Mariupol theatre bombing in March has said that a phone call from Prince Harry has helped “inspire” her to return to work.
> 
> Yulia Paievska, 53, a member of Team Ukraine for the Invictus Games, founded a volunteer ambulance corps named Tayra’s Angels. She is reported to have saved 500 Ukrainian soldiers in the Donbas and was awarded the title Hero of Ukraine by the state.
> 
> She was released in June, after enduring months of threats, torture and deprivation. She said that Harry called her a week later.
> 
> “He simply inspired me to continue to fight,” Paievska told the _Telegraph_.
> 
> “He said that he supports Ukraine and all of us,” she said, and that “the Invictus Games family always takes care of its members.”
> 
> She said she was “afraid” to return to the war but added, “There are more important things than our fear and our emotions.”
> 
> *Prince William’s “powerful” advice on grief*
> 
> When Prince William visited the home of Deborah James, an inspirational bowel cancer campaigner who died in June, he gave her children some “powerful advice” derived from his experience of losing his own mother.
> 
> In an interview with the _Times_, James’ husband, Sebastien Bowen, recalled William’s visit, which occurred before her death.
> 
> He said: “There was the time I opened the door to Prince William, who had come to give Deborah a damehood. He felt like a friend but he was the future king. That was bizarre. He was so relaxed; he came and sat down in the garden and had champagne with the family. Deborah had a glass of champagne, a glass of wine and a glass of sherry in front of her. She hadn’t been allowed a drink for months and the first thing William said was, ‘I’m glad to see you are triple parked.’ That was an immediate ice-breaker. He’s obviously been through similar grief with the loss of his mother so he gave powerful advice to the children that will stay with them for ever.”
> 
> He also recounted what happened when he received a phone call from the Prime Minister’s office telling him Deborah was to be made a dame.
> 
> “I had a call from Number 10 [Downing Street] the day before. They explained the formal way to tell her, and I was so nervous she thought something terrible must have happened. She looked at me and said, ‘I’m about to die. What else could possibly go wrong?’”
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> Advertisement
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> *This week in royal history*
> 
> Happy birthday to the Royalist’s favorite royal, Princess Anne. She turns 72 on August 15, and is a standout royal for any number of reasons, but mainly for just swimming against the tides of celebrity, fashion, and flashbulbs so resolutely for so many years. Is she unpleasant-rude, or don’t suffer-fools-gladly brisk? Who knows. But get out those “Naff off!” T-shirts to celebrate now.
> 
> *Unanswered questions*
> 
> Prepare for a wave of coverage of Diana’s car crash—and what caused it—as the 25th anniversary of her death approaches. The mystery of the queen’s health intensifies, as Buckingham Palace continues to manage as decorously as possible Her Majesty’s maladies and wellness.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> ​
> ​


I've said this before - apparently he wants security so he can gain access to intelligence and I assumed it was for his book.  Now we can assume he is doing detective work that Dodi's father did not have access to. 

What he seems to be implying, if the above article is factual, is that his own family is responsible. No?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I've said this before - apparently he wants security so he can gain access to intelligence and I assumed it was for his book.  Now we can assume he is doing detective work that Dodi's father did not have access to.
> 
> What he seems to be implying, if the above article is factual, is that his own family is responsible. No?


Wonder if Al Fayed is helping the disastrous duo with their finances, etc.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> They told Hazz and TW that they couldn’t use HRH, but didn’t take the titles away (yet) They actually took HRH away from Andrew.  He will always be a prince, but he is a person non grata now.


Somebody enlighten me: what's the difference between having and using HRH as compared to having but not being able to use HRH?

Didn't Diana lose her HRH after the divorce? All I can recall was that she would have to curtsey to her own children.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Somebody enlighten me: what's the difference between having and using HRH as compared to having but not being able to use HRH?
> 
> Didn't Diana lose her HRH after the divorce? All I can recall was that she would have to curtsey to her own children.


Yes, Diana fought to keep HRH but it was taken away in the divorce. There is a hierarchy within the royal family and British aristocracy which dictates who is senior to whom and who curtsies to whom. 

The way TW pushes her way in front of Hazz and even the Queen is disgusting. She is cheap and all the titles in the world won’t give her any class.

The wording after they made their announcement that they were stepping down, “the couple is no longer “royal”.  They retain their HRH but the titles are held in abeyance and they are to refrain from using them.  
That policy also extends to their “brand”.  They were told that they can’t declare that you don’t want to be royal, and then market yourselves as royal.

Which is exactly what they did anyway.


----------



## rose60610

Just the other day I predicted that all Haz and Claw have left is digging up dead Diana for profit and gain. 

I agree with:


Jayne1 said:


> What he seems to be implying, if the above article is factual, is that his own family is responsible. No?



Exactly.  At the Jubilee they reaped what they had sown. They know they're toxic with the BRF, especially since Granny didn't roll out the red carpet and give the big photo op with Lilibet that they could have made a fortune on, at least a good four months worth of living expenses and a case of Tignanello to boot. 

So...as long as they've burnt the bridge and have nothing to lose, might as well blame the BRF for killing Diana. After all, HARRY HAS INVESTIGATED!  And he's available for interviews!!!!  My next prediction: Harry will go on the interview circuit with all the morning talkshows, and anybody else with a (paying) camera. After the exclusive, of course, which the networks will auction. Claw is giving him acting lessons on how to sniffle and cry at precisely the best money shot moments.  I have every confidence that they will try to make Diana's death into their own miniseries. Why not? They already have vast experience going to cemeteries to exploit dead people, as we know all too well. Maybe those were just dry runs for the Diana's Final Resting Place episode. Cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Harry and Mega want to live in different places ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> The wording after they made their announcement that they were stepping down, “the couple is no longer “royal”.  They retain their HRH but the titles are held in abeyance and they are to refrain from using them.



HRH is not a title but a style (how to adress someone).


----------



## papertiger

For background: This is from years ago, but if you want to get to know the 'real' Harry, watch this



I don't condone his life/lifestyle pre-Megs, and I know the type he used to be friends with very well - nothing is taken seriously (never mind progressive, think regressive) but he must be is a fish out of water in Cali.

Good to know he has always been a hot-head, with tempestuous toddler tantrums when life doesn't go perfectly.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Somebody enlighten me: what's the difference between having and using HRH as compared to having but not being able to use HRH?
> 
> Didn't Diana lose her HRH after the divorce? All I can recall was that she would have to curtsey to her own children.



Basically, it takes them off the top-table and into the second tier (a physical manifestation would be looking at H&M's the St Pauls seating arrangement). I don't think they would have been seated there if still HRH.

It's more a factor towards a change of protocol for others that affect not only the BRF, but everyone around them. When you'd meet H you would say "Your Royal Highness" if introduced or if addressed, now you'd 'just' say "Your Grace".

^ That's only the change and outward/public display, but the things he's involved with and kept out of have also changed. The thing he will hate the most is it lets all his ol' gossipy friends (who only ever talk about each other) know that he's _slipped_ down the pole. He's second rank now (it's always about working your way up up up in that set, even inside the BRF). Like being suspended from school, sounds great, time off, not going to school, but then you're left out the plays, the fun things, and the what's going on - the real drama, and knowing you'll have to make up for the work later and work twice as hard (if not excluded permanently).


----------



## LittleStar88

Harry, Meghan announce surprise return to U.K. in September — Newsweek
					

August 15, 2022




					apple.news


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Harry, Meghan announce surprise return to U.K. in September — Newsweek
> 
> 
> August 15, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Someone's getting desperate, hu?


----------



## carmen56

I hope they are greeted with another loud chorus of boos when they arrive.  They really are not welcome here.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Harry, Meghan announce surprise return to U.K. in September — Newsweek
> 
> 
> August 15, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



Can't read it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Can't read it



"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have announced a surprise visit to the U.K. and Germany in early September to undertake a round of charity engagements.

The four-day trip will include two visits to organizations in Britain, marking the couple's first return to the country since the Platinum Jubilee celebrations for Queen Elizabeth II in June.

A spokesperson for the couple confirmed on Monday that: "Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are delighted to visit with several charities close to their hearts in early September."

The couple's visit to Europe will take place from September 5 to 8 and include stays in the U.K. and Germany where Harry's 2023 Invictus Games are being staged in Dusseldorf.

The tour will begin in the British city of Manchester on September 5 for the One Young World 2022 summit. The organization, which focusses on fostering and mentoring young people to become empowered leaders in their communities, has a close association with Meghan which pre-dates her marriage to Harry.

Meghan served as a Counsellor in One Young World Summits in 2014 in Dublin, 2016 in Ottawa and also attended the opening ceremony of the summit held in London in 2019.

The second engagement of the tour will take place in Dusseldorf on September 6 to mark the one year way-point to the 2023 Invictus Games which will be held in the city.

Both Harry and Meghan have attended the games since their relationship became public in 2016, most recently visiting The Netherlands for the 2022 events in April.

The final charity visit of the tour is scheduled back in Britain on September 8 with a visit to the WellChild Awards 2022. The awards celebrate the inspirational journeys and achievements of seriously ill children and young people across the U.K. Harry and Meghan attended the awards in person in 2018 and 2019.

It is not yet known whether the couple will travel to Europe with their two children; Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1.

_This is a developing story."_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wasn't WellChild Awards where Harry cried on stage about fatherhood of a healthy child to parents of children who are seriously ill or dying?


----------



## needlv

Meanwhile, the UK


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Meanwhile, the UK




Meghan and Harry, the Duke and Duchess? When even a UK organisation can't get right who's the important one 

But also, finally someone lets her speak!

ETA: I remember the event that picture was taken. She bossed him around like an unruly puppy while being oh so important.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't WellChild Awards where Harry cried on stage about fatherhood of a healthy child to parents of children who are seriously ill or dying?


Wasn't it also the one where he feared for his life as he was hotly pursued by paps as he left ... allegedly, of course.

Will he try to get police protection in the UK and Germany? They are really trying to globetrot, aren't they? If Germany gives them protection equivalent to that of an IPP, it will bolster their case that they deserve police protection EVERYWHERE. On a totally irrelevant note, I'm trying to grow tomatoes


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seriously?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> On a totally irrelevant note, I'm trying to grow tomatoes



How does it go? We're drowning in tomatoes. We've also had luck with lettuce, cucumbers and courgettes, and...living in a German low mountain range, I have an abundance of eggplant. You know, this tropical fruit we planted as an experiment


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan and Harry, the Duke and Duchess? When even a UK organisation can't get right who's the important one
> 
> But also, finally someone lets her speak!
> 
> ETA: I remember the event that picture was taken. She bossed him around like an unruly puppy while being oh so important.



He was a mummy's boy, so maybe he likes it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> He was a mummy's boy, so maybe he likes it.



It would be beneficial to keep it to their own four walls instead of ridiculing him in public, though.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously?
> 
> View attachment 5590278



Can't they Zoom from Cali anyway? 

Last time I Zoomed it was available worldwide


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would be beneficial to keep it to their own four walls instead of ridiculing him in public, though.



We would all be grateful. 

The only thing that would be more embarrassing is if he was in his gimp outfit and she was leading him around on a leash


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How does it go? We're drowning in tomatoes. We've also had luck with lettuce, cucumbers and courgettes, and...living in a German low mountain range, I have an abundance of eggplant. You know, this tropical fruit we planted as an experiment


Not very well. I don't have a green thumb. Plants bloom and fruit despite me, not because they thrive under my care. I'm trying to grow black cherry tomatoes, from a range of seed packs which feature plants suitable for the tropics.

My last seed pack was great: balsams (impatiens balsamina) which merrily sprouted and blossomed. They fill two corners in the garden now. A "no failure" plant.


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone's getting desperate, hu?


It is your chance QueenofWrapDress to say hello and get their autograph!!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have announced a surprise visit to the U.K. and Germany in early September to undertake a round of charity engagements.
> 
> The four-day trip will include two visits to organizations in Britain, marking the couple's first return to the country since the Platinum Jubilee celebrations for Queen Elizabeth II in June.
> 
> A spokesperson for the couple confirmed on Monday that: "Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are delighted to visit with several charities close to their hearts in early September."
> 
> The couple's visit to Europe will take place from September 5 to 8 and include stays in the U.K. and Germany where Harry's 2023 Invictus Games are being staged in Dusseldorf.
> 
> The tour will begin in the British city of Manchester on September 5 for the One Young World 2022 summit. The organization, which focusses on fostering and mentoring young people to become empowered leaders in their communities, has a close association with Meghan which pre-dates her marriage to Harry.
> 
> Meghan served as a Counsellor in One Young World Summits in 2014 in Dublin, 2016 in Ottawa and also attended the opening ceremony of the summit held in London in 2019.
> 
> The second engagement of the tour will take place in Dusseldorf on September 6 to mark the one year way-point to the 2023 Invictus Games which will be held in the city.
> 
> Both Harry and Meghan have attended the games since their relationship became public in 2016, most recently visiting The Netherlands for the 2022 events in April.
> 
> The final charity visit of the tour is scheduled back in Britain on September 8 with a visit to the WellChild Awards 2022. The awards celebrate the inspirational journeys and achievements of seriously ill children and young people across the U.K. Harry and Meghan attended the awards in person in 2018 and 2019.
> 
> It is not yet known whether the couple will travel to Europe with their two children; Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1.
> 
> _This is a developing story."_


How is it a "surprise" if they're announcing it?


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> For background: This is from years ago, but if you want to get to know the 'real' Harry, watch this
> 
> 
> 
> I don't condone his life/lifestyle pre-Megs, and I know the type he used to be friends with very well - nothing is taken seriously (never mind progressive, think regressive) but he must be is a fish out of water in Cali.
> 
> Good to know he has always been a hot-head, with tempestuous toddler tantrums when life doesn't go perfectly.



Fascinating.  Thank you for posting.  I actually watched the whole thing since TW wasn't mentioned!  
My take away points:
1. Harry has always been a spoiled brat (not shocking)
2. Harry is not that smart (you don't say!)
3. Harry acts first then thinks later (Hmmmm, sounds familiar)
4. Harry has always had a temper and lashes out when he doesn't get his way.
5. Harry is insecure.
6. Harry doesn't like being second and likes attention, and will do anything to get it.
7. The BRF have always had concerns about Harry.  QEII saw similarities between Harry and Uncle Andy and wanted Charles to rein Harry in.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously?
> 
> View attachment 5590278


A "Special" Zoom call?    If I want to talk to my nephews and niece on FaceTime (they're still young so don't have their own phones), I simply call my brother or SIL and ask to speak to them.  Those little kids are in tons of activities as well as school, but it doesn't take moving mountains to talk to my own brother's kids if that's what I want to do.    Seeing as how Archie and Invisibet never leave their house, how hard is it to wrangle them up?  Give me a break.


----------



## Annawakes

People who claim that kids will do a zoom call for any significant period of time have probably never actually tried to do one. 

The call keeps their interest for a matter of seconds, maybe minutes for the older kids. They’re not into sitting around and talking to a face on the screen.  They want to play!


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> People who claim that kids will do a zoom call for any significant period of time have probably never actually tried to do one.
> 
> The call keeps their interest for a matter of seconds, maybe minutes for the older kids. *They’re not into sitting around and talking to a face on the screen.  They want to play!*


LOL so true!  My 2 year old nephew (after flashing me a toothy smile and saying hi) usually spends the rest of the time trying to hit the "red button" and hang up on me.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> People who claim that kids will do a zoom call for any significant period of time have probably never actually tried to do one.
> 
> The call keeps their interest for a matter of seconds, maybe minutes for the older kids. They’re not into sitting around and talking to a face on the screen.  They want to play!



Not just kids. I've done meetings by Zoom (and TEAMS et al) and all anyone, child or adult, ever wants to do after 5 mins, is play


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> HRH is not a title but a style (how to adress someone).


I just copied and pasted that part from an article   It might just be a style, but it certainly means a lot to a lot of people.
 I wonder if TW is willing to give the titles up to run for politics?  She made a big deal of (all the while professing that the titles mean nothing to _*her*_) Archie not being given a title, so if she gave them up, would the kids lose theirs?


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meghan and Harry, the Duke and Duchess? When even a UK organisation can't get right who's the important one
> 
> But also, finally someone lets her speak!
> 
> ETA: I remember the event that picture was taken. She bossed him around like an unruly puppy while being oh so important.


Again, still using the titles, while no longer a royal


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I just copied and pasted that part from an article   It might just be a style, but it certainly means a lot to a lot of people.
> I wonder if TW is willing to give the titles up to run for politics?  She made a big deal of (all the while professing that the titles mean nothing to _*her*_) Archie not being given a title, so if she gave them up, would the kids lose theirs?



No,  because the kids have their title because of their father. Just as their mother.


----------



## bag-mania

An ex-stripper in Las Vegas is auctioning Harry’s undies.   









						Prince Harry's Underwear from Naked Las Vegas Party Scores $250k Bid
					

Prince Harry's underwear from his infamous nude romp in Las Vegas sees auction bidding reach $250,000.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Chanbal

Visit with several charities… A ton of money will be spent to make some people look useful.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> An ex-stripper in Las Vegas is auctioning Harry’s undies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's Underwear from Naked Las Vegas Party Scores $250k Bid
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's underwear from his infamous nude romp in Las Vegas sees auction bidding reach $250,000.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


250K for Hazz's undies?


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Visit with several charities… A ton of money will be spent to make some people look useful.



How thoughtful of them to announce it in advance so the Brits have time to let the tomatoes go rotten before throwing


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I've said this before - apparently he wants security so he can gain access to intelligence and I assumed it was for his book.  Now we can assume he is doing detective work that Dodi's father did not have access to.
> 
> What he seems to be implying, if the above article is factual, is that his own family is responsible. No?


if he is trying to prove that his family had his mother killed, thats despicable and ridiculous.....but I take all stories about H&M with a grain of salt


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> How thoughtful of them to announce it in advance so *the Brits have time to let the tomatoes go rotten before throwing  *


I can't blame the Brits if they do… They could perhaps use a few rotten eggs too.


----------



## bellecate

*WARNING*  These pictures
Came across these a few days ago. Yikers!


----------



## Aimee3

Eewwwww!!!


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> *WARNING* These pictures
> Came across these a few days ago. Yikers!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590409
> View attachment 5590410
> View attachment 5590411
> View attachment 5590412


looks like porn...what is that last pic of her with the guy?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> looks like porn...what is that last pic of her with the guy?


It claims to be her with Markus Anderson. These days photos are tampered with and adjusted so much I don't think we can believe them as evidence either way.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Ewwwwww....must wash eyes with bleach


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bellecate said:


> *WARNING*  These pictures
> Came across these a few days ago. Yikers!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590409
> View attachment 5590410
> View attachment 5590411
> View attachment 5590412


Oh my.  Truth will out.  Looks like a mug shot was included.  These indicate how successful the scrubbing pre marriage was.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> How would that work if, as we surmise, all their money/earnings are funnelled through their network of companies? If they challenge each other over the division of assets, they would have to lay bare how their earnings and expenses are managed.


IMHO, at the moment the companies are not worth much, expenses get channeled in there, and income has barely covered that 
The issue would be allocation of house (who gets house and who pays mortgage) , alimony and child support in amounts worthy of the children of the 6th in line, that can run into big bucks, millions per year , that is sooo California 
H probably does not have enough income to cover the recurring amounts that will be requested 

Fergie complained that as ex of the spare heir that she got inadequate support


----------



## MiniMabel

bag-mania said:


> It claims to be her with Markus Anderson. These days photos are tampered with and adjusted so much I don't think we can believe them as evidence either way.


If it's real, who's taking the photos?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> For background: This is from years ago, but if you want to get to know the 'real' Harry, watch this
> 
> 
> 
> I don't condone his life/lifestyle pre-Megs, and I know the type he used to be friends with very well - nothing is taken seriously (never mind progressive, think regressive) but he must be is a fish out of water in Cali.
> 
> Good to know he has always been a hot-head, with tempestuous toddler tantrums when life doesn't go perfectly.



Interesting video. I wonder if Hazz's apparent love for Africa has to do with his first trip there. Prince Charles took him to Africa (without Will) after his mother's death, and he became the 'center of attention' during that particular trip.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> For background: This is from years ago, but if you want to get to know the 'real' Harry, watch this
> 
> 
> 
> I don't condone his life/lifestyle pre-Megs, and I know the type he used to be friends with very well - nothing is taken seriously (never mind progressive, think regressive) but he must be is a fish out of water in Cali.
> 
> Good to know he has always been a hot-head, with tempestuous toddler tantrums when life doesn't go perfectly.



I hope it's true that he loves children.  If we here are right about the WIFE, his kids are going to need his love


----------



## youngster

I guess they need more material for their reality show so they organize a quick trip to the UK and Germany with cameras in tow.  Lots of pics of them getting in and out of vehicles most likely, some news stories on them (probably mostly speculation on whether they'll see the Queen, Will, Charles, etc. while they are there).  Who will be paying for their security, I wonder?   It will be very interesting to see whether they do meet with any of the family while they are in the UK or if everyone's calendars are already, unfortunately,  booked up.   If Eugenie is in London, I bet she is seen with them though.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


>



I wonder if Meg is thrilled she is included with this group.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I wonder if Meg is thrilled she is included with this group.



Well, she is on the 'throne' in the middle so I bet she's happy-dancing


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> How is it a "surprise" if they're announcing it?


ha...my thought exactly


----------



## rose60610

So they plan a "surprise" to UK and Germany for charities. Hmm. Wonder if they plan to see the fam. Or will the fam be "too busy". My guess they'll state that their schedules are arranged far in advance (and they probably are) so, unfortunately, they won't be able to squeeze in any Haz/Claw visits. This will give Claw further ammunition to claim that the BRF is racist. You know, if everybody isn't dropping everything in order to worship Claw in person.  If the cousins need to get to know each other SO BAD, then why did the Harkles leave the UK? Oh, that's right, they thought they'd become instant billionaires. Since that didn't work, the BRF is to blame, not themselves. Question: Did they beg (demand) that these charities invite them so they'd have an excuse to visit? If charity work was soooo important to these frauds, why don't they just send a big fat check instead of spewing tons of private jet carbon to haul their worthless arses over there?  How much money is Claw spending this time on ill-fitting outfits? Did Claw make a deal with clothes designers for these suspicious "charities visits" for her to merch some clothes?  NOTHING she does is out of kindness.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> So they plan a "surprise" to UK and Germany for charities. Hmm. Wonder if they plan to see the fam. Or will the fam be "too busy". My guess they'll state that their schedules are arranged far in advance (and they probably are) so, unfortunately, they won't be able to squeeze in any Haz/Claw visits. This will give Claw further ammunition to claim that the BRF is racist. You know, if everybody isn't dropping everything in order to worship Claw in person.  If the cousins need to get to know each other SO BAD, then why did the Harkles leave the UK? Oh, that's right, they thought they'd become instant billionaires. Since that didn't work, the BRF is to blame, not themselves. Question: Did they beg (demand) that these charities invite them so they'd have an excuse to visit? If charity work was soooo important to these frauds, why don't they just send a big fat check instead of spewing tons of private jet carbon to haul their worthless arses over there?  How much money is Claw spending this time on ill-fitting outfits? Did Claw make a deal with clothes designers for these suspicious "charities visits" for her to merch some clothes?  NOTHING she does is out of kindness.



Let's face it, H&M just need more footage of charity supporters along with rent-a-mob fawning and applauding so they can show 'cheering crowds' and a 'warm welcome' in Europe (esp. the UK).

Booing crowds don't look good for their 'award winning' brand. Not good for the optics and future investors donators.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> So they plan a "surprise" to UK and Germany for charities. Hmm. Wonder if they plan to see the fam. Or will the fam be "too busy". My guess they'll state that their schedules are arranged far in advance (and they probably are) so, unfortunately, they won't be able to squeeze in any Haz/Claw visits. This will give Claw further ammunition to claim that the BRF is racist. You know, if everybody isn't dropping everything in order to worship Claw in person.  If the cousins need to get to know each other SO BAD, then why did the Harkles leave the UK? Oh, that's right, they thought they'd become instant billionaires. Since that didn't work, the BRF is to blame, not themselves. Question: Did they beg (demand) that these charities invite them so they'd have an excuse to visit? If charity work was soooo important to these frauds, why don't they just send a big fat check instead of spewing tons of private jet carbon to haul their worthless arses over there?  How much money is Claw spending this time on ill-fitting outfits? Did Claw make a deal with clothes designers for these suspicious "charities visits" for her to merch some clothes?  NOTHING she does is out of kindness.


yes, I've yet to see any info on them giving a significant chartible donation

as far as who they will see, there was another story saying they will see the queen but don't know about charles and william


----------



## bag-mania

Hmm, we have a zillion charities right here in the US. Do none of those want Harry and Meghan's kind of high profile "help?" Or is this all a ruse so they can travel abroad again and have someone else foot the bill?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> *WARNING*  These pictures
> Came across these a few days ago. Yikers!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590409
> View attachment 5590410
> View attachment 5590411
> View attachment 5590412



Y'all know how much I dislike this woman, but I do have a hard time believing there's porn footage with Marcus Anderson out there.


----------



## Cinderlala

This trip is outrageous.  Clearly, it's their answer to the Tom Bowers book and a desperate attempt to grab the limelight & control the narrative again.  There are SO many charities they could 'benefit' just in California but those don't put them on the global stage.  It infuriates me that all their photo-ops are masked as charity!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I hope it's true that he loves children.  If we here are right about the WIFE, his kids are going to need his love



Remember when she read that picture book to Archie? All he wanted to do was get away and get to Harry who was out of shot. I can believe if someone spends time with the kids it's him.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Remember when she read that picture book to Archie? All he wanted to do was get away and get to Harry who was out of shot. I can believe if someone spends time with the kids it's him.


I don't really know what kind of mother she is.  maybe she's a great mom.  but I doubt it.  so I hope harry is loving, playful and attentive to those kids


----------



## Lodpah

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Oh my.  Truth will out.  Looks like a mug shot was included.  These indicate how successful the scrubbing pre marriage was.


Are they releasing scrubbed pictures?


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Y'all know how much I dislike this woman, but I do have a hard time believing there's porn footage with Marcus Anderson out there.


It does seem unlikely.

But, I'd be willing to bet that there's footage of all yacht girls out there because that's the type of thing yacht guys would be into.  Ick.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Remember when she read that picture book to Archie? All he wanted to do was get away and get to Harry who was out of shot. I can believe if someone spends time with the kids it's him.


Was it Harry who was out of the shot or was it a nanny? All I remember was that he kept trying to crawl away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Was it Harry who was out of the shot or was it a nanny? All I remember was that he kept trying to crawl away.



I might be wrong but I do think he spoke from the side or behind the camera, that's how we knew it was him.


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, we have a zillion charities right here in the US. Do none of those want Harry and Meghan's kind of high profile "help?" Or is this all a ruse so they can travel abroad again and have someone else foot the bill?


Haha! I was just writing the same thing as you posted this!  And it's obviously a ruse so they can have another faux-royal tour.  Again.  And to travel abroad again and have someone else foot the bill.  And so they can control the narrative.


----------



## Cinderlala

It's a surprise trip because it's a surprise to them, too.   

 has worked hard on this response to the book.  Classic misdirection PR.


----------



## bag-mania

Wonder which of their kids they will take with them, because you know damn well they aren't taking both!

I joke!! They aren't taking either one. They want to have fun on their vacation and they won't want those needy little bundles around.


----------



## Cinderlala

I don't want to help them or   but it would be a PR coup if they took both kids & allowed the public to see the children doing normal things.  (Now I want a check from Skeeter because I just gave them an incredible tip for amazing PR.)


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> It claims to be her with Markus Anderson. These days photos are tampered with and adjusted so much I don't think we can believe them as evidence either way.


And the Harkles are the worst offenders for photo manipulation


----------



## kemilia

Cinderlala said:


> I don't want to help them or   but it would be a PR coup if they took both kids & allowed the public to see the children doing normal things.  (Now I want a check from Skeeter because I just gave them an incredible tip for amazing PR.)


This trip, imo, is for N*fx footage as mentioned above. Also a "surprise" trip to wherever the TQ is residing--they still need that pic of Invisibet with her great-gran--this is such a transparent effort it's sad. 

And once again it won't happen unless TQ wants it to happen (no matter how crafty H&M think they are).


----------



## Aimee3

kemilia said:


> This trip, imo, is for N*fx footage as mentioned above. Also a "surprise" trip to wherever the TQ is residing--they still need that pic of Invisibet with her great-gran--this is such a transparent effort it's sad.
> 
> And once again it won't happen unless TQ wants it to happen (no matter how crafty H&M think they are).


I wouldn’t put it past them to just photoshop the Queen into the photo of Lilbet, assuming she’s actually real.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Could this trip have anything to do with spending a day or two in England for tax or residency purposes?


----------



## bag-mania

Let's say it is for Netflix footage. Who is going to want to watch a show about that? There is already plenty of footage of them getting in and out of limos and walking into buildings. There is already footage of them giving hypocritical speeches. A show like that sounds about as interesting as watching paint dry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Y'all know how much I dislike this woman, but I do have a hard time believing there's porn footage with Marcus Anderson out there.



I'm inclined to agree with you.  But in the U.S. we've crossed all lines in terms of not needing ANY proof to in attempts to destroy somebody. Anybody can make up the most disgusting and far fetched rumors and the media (the big players, not just the no-name loser websites) run with it. Then the media love to play the game of "well, if you AREN'T guilty of xyz, then YOU prove it".  Approval ratings for our media are in the gutter.  And rightly so. Since photoshop and similar tech are out there, anything can be made to look like anything. But the media don't even need doctored pictures, manufactured rumors will suffice.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CentralTimeZone

bag-mania said:


> Let's say it is for Netflix footage. Who is going to want to watch a show about that? There is already plenty of footage of them getting in and out of limos and walking into buildings. There is already footage of them giving hypocritical speeches. A show like that sounds about as interesting as watching paint dry.


I really think they are wising up to the fact that they aren't going to make it in the US so they are working on getting back to the UK, part time. If they can get IPP status back they can basically set up a rival court in the UK.


----------



## Stansy

Oh man - I went to Düsseldorf earlier this year for the Hermès sale, I know the way   
unfortunately I will be on a business trip beginning of September, otherwise I would have gone to D‘dorf and given them my best boohh!


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #1
					

The charities being visited next month by the alliterate one and her husband already have shooting schedules provided to them by a streaming...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Let's say it is for Netflix footage. Who is going to want to watch a show about that? There is already plenty of footage of them getting in and out of limos and walking into buildings. There is already footage of them giving hypocritical speeches. A show like that sounds about as interesting as watching paint dry.


Actually, my daughter had Senior Parking Spot Painting recently and it was quite fun even while the paint dried.  I find that much more fascinating than these two.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


>




It'd be a miracle if they don't use this visit to promote their books. Whores gotta hustle. 2% of their time dedicated to charities and 98% of their time promoting themselves and telling us how hard they work on behalf of everyone else. They're such compassionate people.    And you can bet every one of her outfits will have links to where they can be bought.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might be wrong but I do think he spoke from the side or behind the camera, that's how we knew it was him.


I remember it as Hazbeen, he said something and Archie kind of lurched in that direction. There was an instant of a mask slip when she seemed impatient with his squirming and then very quickly recovered. I noticed it at the time, but we didn't yet have so many photos of her nasty breaking through her facade, that I kind of glossed over it.

The other thing I remember from that photo shoot was thinking she was a clueless mother to try and engage a baby his age with a book showing very stylized drawings of animals and no color to stimulate his vision.  Did think even then, is she getting a kick back for reading this particular book?


----------



## Cinderlala

kemilia said:


> This trip, imo, is for N*fx footage as mentioned above. Also a "surprise" trip to wherever the TQ is residing--they still *need that pic of Invisibet with her great-gran--this is such a transparent effort it's sad.*
> 
> And once again it won't happen unless TQ wants it to happen (no matter how crafty H&M think they are).


That would be even worse!  I hope TQ refuses to meet with this conniving duo.


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> I really think they are wising up to the fact that they aren't going to make it in the US so they are working on getting back to the UK, part time. If they can get IPP status back they can basically set up a rival court in the UK.


They are desperate to be shown in a philanthropic light. They created those Archewell Productions and Archewell Audio shell companies that haven't produced squat in two years.

I don't think they want to go back to the UK. They would be expected to do something there and they sure aren't going to work if they can stay here and get away with doing nothing while still getting attention and money (from somewhere).


----------



## Cinderlala

csshopper said:


> I remember it as Hazbeen, he said something and Archie kind of lurched in that direction. There was an instant of a mask slip when she seemed impatient with his squirming and then very quickly recovered. I noticed it at the time, but we didn't yet have so many photos of her nasty breaking through her facade, that I kind of glossed over it.
> 
> The other thing I remember from that photo shoot was thinking she was a clueless mother to try and engage a baby his age with a book showing very stylized drawings of animals and no color to stimulate his vision.  Did think even then, is she getting a kick back for reading this particular book?


Interesting.  I don't think she has a maternal bone in her body.  The children are props to her, bait to keep H with her, and a guaranteed source of income for her.

She never even holds Archie in a natural way---it's always like he's an object rather than her precious child.  To be fair, there are not that many images of her with her children.  (Another very strange thing for most mothers.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Interesting.  I don't think she has a maternal bone in her body.  The children are props to her, bait to keep H with her, and a guaranteed source of income for her.
> 
> She never even holds Archie in a natural way---it's always like he's an object rather than her precious child.  To be fair, there are not that many images of her with her children.  (Another very strange thing for most mothers.)



I think her worst public parenting moment was when they took Archie to meet Desmond Tutu. He didn't react like she wanted him to, and not only did her face slip for a moment, in the video footage you can see she dug her fingertips into his chest. Who does this. She was lucky he didn't start crying.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think her worst public parenting moment was when they took Archie to meet Desmond Tutu. He didn't react like she wanted him to, and not only did her face slip for a moment, *in the video footage you can see she dug her fingertips into his chest.* Who does this. She was lucky he didn't start crying.


Archie became accustomed to "the claw" from infancy. He knows nothing else.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> Hmm, we have a zillion charities right here in the US. Do none of those want Harry and Meghan's kind of high profile "help?" Or is this all a ruse so they can travel abroad again and have someone else foot the bill?


But those are dear to their hearts


----------



## Chanbal

It's possible this is the organization sponsoring their trip.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Another one cashing in on the 25th anniversary of her death. Hasn't he made enough money off his countless other books? 



> https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/59801849-diana-william-and-harry


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Lodpah said:


> Are they releasing scrubbed pictures?


I do not know the source and I understand some members doubt as to their veracity.  But I also wonder if previously controlled sources feel empowered or free to post what they have.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

So they are finally beginning to realize nobody wants to pay them tens of millions of dollars a year to travel around the world and talk about doing good works (not actually _doing_ good works). Took them long enough


----------



## Chanbal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I do not know the source and I understand some members doubt as to their veracity.  *But I also wonder if previously controlled sources feel empowered or free to post what they have.*


Yep!


----------



## Cinderlala

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I do not know the source and I understand some members doubt as to their veracity.  But I also wonder if previously controlled sources feel empowered or free to post what they have.


I would imagine you are right.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> For background: This is from years ago, but if you want to get to know the 'real' Harry, watch this
> 
> 
> 
> I don't condone his life/lifestyle pre-Megs, and I know the type he used to be friends with very well - nothing is taken seriously (never mind progressive, think regressive) but he must be is a fish out of water in Cali.
> 
> Good to know he has always been a hot-head, with tempestuous toddler tantrums when life doesn't go perfectly.



What I find interesting is how it is mentioned that he really stuck with his close boyhood friends and it was doubtful that he had other friends from "the other side of the tracks"  These would be the same friends that were texting eachother after the shooting weekend and couldn't understand what Harry was doing with Meghan. To this group Meghan would have been from the other side of the tracks.  Not because of her race, but because she did not grow up in the privileged  milieu that they did.  At Eton and university, these boys/men would have mixed with wealthy people from other cultures.  They shared interests, went skiing at the same place, summered at the same places and knew all the same people etc.  So I think it was more socio-economic.  Would they make off color remarks?  I'm sure they would, but that is not what Meghan was about.  She wanted to remove Harry from these people, period.  Isolate him and remove his support network.  Why he allowed her to do this is a mystery.  He is alone without friends or family.


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> Haha! I was just writing the same thing as you posted this!  And it's obviously a ruse so they can have another faux-royal tour.  Again.  And to travel abroad again and have someone else foot the bill.  And so they can control the narrative.


Yep.  They wouldn't pay a dime and the Netflix cameras will pay the rest.

Isn't The Queen still at Balmoral in early September?  Are they going to try to make a side trip there?

I doubt that they are bringing the children on a quick trip like this.  

Does Harry think that he will be getting his security by then?  I don't see him getting a thing and this trip has nothing royal about it.  Meghan will merch more inappropriate clothes.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Yep.  They wouldn't pay a dime and the Netflix cameras will pay the rest.
> 
> Isn't The Queen still at Balmoral in early September?  Are they going to try to make a side trip there?
> 
> I doubt that they are bringing the children on a quick trip like this.
> 
> Does Harry think that he will be getting his security by then?  I don't see him getting a thing and this trip has nothing royal about it.  Meghan will merch more inappropriate clothes.



He may still have security.

The Home Office has said security is on a case by case basis (in other words how much he gets is dependant on what he's doing, where and with whom) not full-on, all the time, just because Duke and Duchess of Lies are in the UK.

Interesting The Duchess is giving a keynote speech on gender equality. Why did she accept the Duchess title when a a Duchess title is worth less than a Duke's? The reason why a Duchess in her own right cannot bestow the title of Duke to her husband is because Duchess is below that of Duke (in the same way the Queen could not make Prince Phillip a King.

Duke​The highest and most important nobility rank in all four peerages of the British Isles is Duke, the name of which comes from the Latin _dux_, meaning leader. The female equivalent is Duchess, a title bestowed on a woman who holds the title in her own right, as well as one who is the wife of a Duke. *If the woman is the title holder, her husband would not receive any title.* from https://www.highlandtitles.com/blog/nobility/


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



Hmmm I thought at one time they had abandoned all participation in UK charities … this sounds like this is trying to increase their UK profile prior to book release


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Yep.  They wouldn't pay a dime and the Netflix cameras will pay the rest.
> 
> Isn't The Queen still at Balmoral in early September?  Are they going to try to make a side trip there?
> 
> I doubt that they are bringing the children on a quick trip like this.
> 
> Does Harry think that he will be getting his security by then?  I don't see him getting a thing and this trip has nothing royal about it.  Meghan will merch more inappropriate clothes.


Well there was some sort of security compromise for the jubilee, I guess that remains in force? Not that H&M abided by it exactly, with windows rolled down !?!
And Andrew was recently confirmed as getting full security ! I thought he lost his HRH ? 
I fail to see the logic in any of it … Beats me


----------



## Chanbal

I've revised my 'Guidelines for Donations':


Unless it's a copy of Tom Bower's book, my donations go to charities that do not sponsor the alleged Harkles' luxurious/extravagant demands.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Fuller version article: Thanks Maisie
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s ‘credibility’ is ‘dripping away’ claims royal expert​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAISIE BOVINGDON13/08/2022 8:56 AM
> 
> Credit: Samir Hussein / Getty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Barbie of the Queen by Mattel
> 
> 
> 
> The pair have come under fire once again, as royal commentator, Daisy Cousens, believes author Tom bower’s “bombshell” book titled Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the war between the Windsors, as well as Harry’s comments in a recent speech at the UN, has tarnished his “credibility.”
> 
> Writing for Sky News Australia, Daisy shared her thoughts: “Every one of Bower’s claims is facilitating the steady dripping away of Harry and Meghan’s credibility. In the court of public opinion, it’s the monarchy that will ultimately be vindicated.”
> 
> In Harry’s speech at the UN Daisy expressed the 37-year-old royal was “lamenting a ‘global assault’ on democracy and freedom”, and proceeded to address “transformative measures” needed to avoid climate change, which was “not up for debate.”
> In her criticism of Harry – who has son Archie and daughter Lilibet with wife Meghan Markle – Daisy shared: “A sentiment that, needless to say, embodies neither democracy nor freedom.”
> Harry and Meghan have not only been slated for their “credibility” depleting, but in recent weeks they have been branded “insignificant”, and allegedly have been given a cruel nickname by their neighbours, since they quit the royal family and called time on their royal duties in 2020.
> 
> Speaking previously, broadcaster and author, Jonathan Dimbleby, told The Times: “He’s entering a sort of vortex in which they will become less and less significant as a couple. As she gets older, as he gets older, they will matter less because the celebrity on which they trade will become less valuable.”
> To add into the mix, the couple have also previously been dubbed the “least popular royals”,  after a survey carried out by YouGov has found the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s popularity is at a record low.
> Can they ever catch a break?


I wish they could represent  more of a compromise view occasionally- both H&M and the royals are making a dog’s breakfast of it - I can’t stand any of them lol 


mellibelly said:


>



The descriptions  that spring to mind:- 

She looks like a coal tar soap with stray hairs trapped in it. 

She looks like an 80s bodybuilder’s armpit. 

She’s a proud woman of colour- Pantone 166 goldfish orange.



lallybelle said:


> Wait....so she did know why Archie wasn't named Prince at birth and that he would be after Charles? She just straight up lied about that they were going to just change it so he wouldn't be? OOF. My recollection was that she just played ignorant to the rules in the first place figuring us "dumb americans" wouldn't  know the monarchy's rules. My bad, recollections do indeed vary. To me this makes her sound worse.


Yes 100% she was lying when she said it was an exception made because of his race. Harry also bare face lies about his dad cutting him off financially when there’s already published records of the duchy paying H after he left even if we ignore that most people with millions in inheritance tax free aren’t penniless. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if Al Fayed is helping the disastrous duo with their finances, etc.


I think Al Fayed’s moved on as much as anyone could. Certainly his dynamic has changed with royals. 

As to the money, I think the call is coming from inside the house, do we really think they could get this U.K. charity gig or indeed keep throwing money at invictus without royal approval? 


papertiger said:


> For background: This is from years ago, but if you want to get to know the 'real' Harry, watch this
> 
> 
> 
> I don't condone his life/lifestyle pre-Megs, and I know the type he used to be friends with very well - nothing is taken seriously (never mind progressive, think regressive) but he must be is a fish out of water in Cali.
> 
> Good to know he has always been a hot-head, with tempestuous toddler tantrums when life doesn't go perfectly.



Indeed, I will say I’ve met a couple of men like H in my time and they do have the unflinching belief that they are at home and beloved wherever they go so perhaps he is the new cherished king of Summerisle.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Y'all know how much I dislike this woman, but I do have a hard time believing there's porn footage with Marcus Anderson out there.


Given her habit of copying Kim Kardashian- I have a hard time believing she wouldn’t have sold it to vivid but then they only buy sextapes with at least one famous person in them


----------



## csshopper

bellecate said:


> What you asked for: "sexy"  What you got: "icky"  She should come with a Warning placard around her neck: "Hazardous Area: Enter At Your Own Risk."


----------



## gracekelly

I wonder if there will be people, who as a matter of principle, will no longer donate to a charity that is giving them an award.  I know that I am that petty lolololol!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Maybe Meg was trying out orange in preparation for Halloween.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if there will be people, who as a matter of principle, will no longer donate to a charity that is giving them an award.  I know that I am that petty lolololol!



Why are charities winning awards anyway? 

Why don't they just get on and do charitable deeds?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Why are charities winning awards anyway?
> 
> *Why don't they just get on and do charitable deeds?*


That required effort and/or money.  Two lazy cheap gits.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I do not know the source and I understand some members doubt as to their veracity.  But I also wonder if previously controlled sources feel empowered or free to post what they have.


I looked the two women who posted up on line and neither are trying to hide. I think you're right, maybe it's the influence of Tom Bower's book?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if there will be people, who as a matter of principle, will no longer donate to a charity that is giving them an award.  I know that I am that petty lolololol!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I've revised my 'Guidelines for Donations':
> 
> 
> Unless it's a copy of Tom Bower's book, my donations go to charities that do not sponsor the alleged Harkles' luxurious/extravagant demands.




We all need to check our donations (including clothes and time or whatever) are not going to these fake charities.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> It'd be a miracle if they don't use this visit to promote their books. Whores gotta hustle.* 2% of their time dedicated to charities and 98% of their time promoting themselves and telling us how hard they work on behalf of everyone else. *They're such compassionate people.    And you can bet every one of her outfits will have links to where they can be bought.


Aren't we being optimistic?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I do not know the source and I understand some members doubt as to their veracity.  But I also wonder if previously controlled sources feel empowered or free to post what they have.


Tbf, I have seen all photos, except MA’s, before. I question if they were ever _scrubbed_.  Keep in mind that she did some really ZZZZ list ‘movies’, so she has lots of low budget photos.


----------



## marietouchet

I had to make a list to keep track of the HRHS

1. H&M have HRH can’t use it
2. Andrew has it, but can’t use it publicly , see below
3. Edwards children, James and Louise, have their HRHs, don’t currently use them, but can decide to use them when they are 18, per interview with Sophie. Sophie does not expect them to choose to use them.









						Prince Andrew: Who is he and what titles is he losing?
					

Prince Andrew has settled a civil sexual assault case brought against him in the US



					www.bbc.com
				




what does all that mean ??? I don’t know but L & J were front row at the Jubilee service, H&M were at the end of the second row, Zara and Mike had better seats, and A was MIA
Dont ask me who curtsies to whom …

Will the Sharkles be called HRHs when in the UK ? Stay tuned, popcorn please


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if there will be people, who as a matter of principle, will no longer donate to a charity that is giving them an award.  I know that I am that petty lolololol!


As we learn about how certain stars funnel the donated money, imo we should all be careful about donating to Hwood charities.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> We all need to check our donations (including clothes and time or whatever) are not going to these fake charities.


Absolutely! Observing how the Harkles operate made me more cautious when making donations.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Maybe Meg was trying out orange in preparation for Halloween.


Trying for "class" she pulled up the Hermes Color Chart.

 Potiron "pumpkin"? Capucine "Nasturtium"? Orange Poppy? Terre Battue (I vote for this one, she does look like "Trodden Earth"). Or maybe Sanguine, "bloodthirsty." Or even Pain d'espice, "Gingerbreadspice."

But lacking "class" it was no help.

edited to add: This picture is from one of the websites sources of her porn pics.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I had to make a list to keep track of the HRHS
> 
> 1. H&M have HRH can’t use it
> 2. Andrew has it, but can’t use it publicly , see below
> 3. Edwards children, James and Louise, have their HRHs, don’t currently use them, but can decide to use them when they are 18, per interview with Sophie. Sophie does not expect them to choose to use them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew: Who is he and what titles is he losing?
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew has settled a civil sexual assault case brought against him in the US
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what does all that mean ??? I don’t know but L & J we’re front row at the Jubilee service, H&M were at the end of the second row, Zara and Mike had better seats, and A was MIA
> Dont ask me who curtsies to whom …
> 
> Will the Sharkles be called HRHs when in the UK ? Stay tuned, popcorn please


Actually, H&M were _middle_ of the 2nd row.  The middle is the worst spot imo.


----------



## 1LV

To say I’m not a fan of TW would be an understatement, but I 100% do not believe the porn pics are legit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shock!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder which “rent the runway” designer she will choose for this Nflix tour 
Will Nflix change the _Booooo’s_ to cheers?  We have  heard all of the _boo’s_ so if Nflix changes it, their credibility drops to zero.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> What I find interesting is how it is mentioned that he really stuck with his close boyhood friends and it was doubtful that he had other friends from "the other side of the tracks"  These would be the same friends that were texting eachother after the shooting weekend and couldn't understand what Harry was doing with Meghan. To this group Meghan would have been from the other side of the tracks.  Not because of her race, but because she did not grow up in the privileged  milieu that they did.  At Eton and university, these boys/men would have mixed with wealthy people from other cultures.  They shared interests, went skiing at the same place, summered at the same places and knew all the same people etc.  So I think it was more socio-economic.  Would they make off color remarks?  I'm sure they would, but that is not what Meghan was about.  She wanted to remove Harry from these people, period.  Isolate him and remove his support network.  Why he allowed her to do this is a mystery.  He is alone without friends or family.


I doubt he is completely alone. Remember he went on a very public bike ride with one of those friends. He played polo with NachoF.  I’m guessing he socializes much more than the media tells us.   Just my opinion.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## needlv

So… they are trying to do the half in half out without the Queens approval?

I love how fast the Cambridges said “we’re busy”


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> I can't blame the Brits if they do… They could perhaps use a few rotten eggs too.



you never know. She may roll down her car window again when she’s back in London to give them an easier target! I mean Harry sues the British government to give them 24/7 security whenever they are back in the UK because he fears for his family’s safety in lawless London but she rolls down the bulletproof window of their government security provided car to make herself an easier target for those deranged killers hiding behind every bush. The sheer idiocy of that couple is mind boggling.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Aren't we being optimistic?






Chanbal said:


> Absolutely! Observing how the Harkles operate made me more cautious when making donations.



Girl, you are cracking me up with the gifs today!!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



Panel 2 suggests a 2-3 week visit, so far, the published itinerary is four days long total, in the Uk, go to Germany, then back to the UK , all in 4 days 

I wonder if the tight itinerary is to deliberately not allow for time to visit much of anyone, QEII has engagements around that time


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Trying for "class" she pulled up the Hermes Color Chart.
> 
> Potiron "pumpkin"? Capucine "Nasturtium"? Orange Poppy? Terre Battue (I vote for this one, she does look like "Trodden Earth"). Or maybe Sanguine, "bloodthirsty." Or even Pain d'espice, "Gingerbreadspice."
> 
> But lacking "class" it was no help.
> 
> edited to add: This picture is from one of the websites sources of her porn pics.
> 
> View attachment 5590620


I thought she had the tooth veneers at a young age per Bower, them seem absent here
Dont remember the age when  the beauty mark was removed


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## kemilia

rose60610 said:


> It'd be a miracle if they don't use this visit to promote their books. Whores gotta hustle. 2% of their time dedicated to charities and 98% of their time promoting themselves and telling us how hard they work on behalf of everyone else. They're such compassionate people.    And you can bet every one of her outfits will have links to where they can be bought.





rose60610 said:


> It'd be a "miracle if they don't use this visit to promote their books. Whores gotta hustle. 2% of their time dedicated to charities and 98% of their time promoting themselves and telling us how hard they work on behalf of everyone else. They're such compassionateWe people.    And you can bet every one of her outfits will have links to where they can be bought.


Well this "surprise" trip explains why TW has been missing in action recently--probably spending lots o' time in the "dentist" chair. I don't think her recent nose photo'd well at the Jubilee. Just IMO, of course.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> As we learn about how certain stars funnel the donated money, imo we should all be careful about donating to Hwood charities.


You can Google for the story today about Leonardo DiCaprio giving money via the dark web to some shady climate control org
I don’t know about that but the man cruises the world on superyachts, must look up the carbon footprint thereof


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

The poor thing, denied a tiara....


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



I think the Sep UK trips are to provide photos for the autobiography , but they are not getting the money shot with LilI and QEII
If the trip is indeed as as short as 4-5 days, the kids will stay home or crash from jet lag
After all, Bower covered the Jubilee, and published spectacularly shortly afterwards , so, they can get new photos in the biog


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Trying for "class" she pulled up the Hermes Color Chart.
> 
> Potiron "pumpkin"? Capucine "Nasturtium"? Orange Poppy? Terre Battue (I vote for this one, she does look like "Trodden Earth"). Or maybe Sanguine, "bloodthirsty." Or even Pain d'espice, "Gingerbreadspice."
> 
> But lacking "class" it was no help.
> 
> edited to add: This picture is from one of the websites sources of her porn pics.
> 
> View attachment 5590620


I think she was trying to copy, per usual,  Here is a lipstick by MAC called Morange.
Maybe this was merching? lololol!


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder which “rent the runway” designer she will choose for this Nflix tour
> Will Nflix change the _Booooo’s_ to cheers?  We have  heard all of the _boo’s_ so if Nflix changes it, their credibility drops to zero.
> 
> View attachment 5590635


She hasn’t run afoul of Chanel, but tweed is not exactly her thing, nor is pink 
Stella McC was part of 40/40 
And MM always wanted to be the face of Ralph Lauren


----------



## Chanbal

S. informs that T(young)W didn't write Hazz's book and she is shocked… 



*Meghan Markle** was reportedly left in “shock” by some of the intimate details about Prince Harry ’s life, which have been laid bare in the **royal’s upcoming memoir.*

*The claims were made by a source close to the pair amid an ongoing scramble for publishers to get the book out and on shelves ahead of the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping rush in the United States.*

The explosive memoir will, as per the Duke of Sussex’s own admission, touch upon the "experiences, adventures, losses and life lessons that have helped shape him" over the past four decades of his life.

It is thought this deeper look at his own history and the moments that shaped him will teach the royal’s wife a lot more about him than she had originally known.

*A source close to the couple also revealed that Harry had given his ghostwriter JR Moehringer - a Pulitzer Prize-winning author - access to unseen documents as they "spent months going through his private photo album, journals, emails and so forth" to piece together a complete picture of his life so far*.

The source said: *"This narrative that Meghan essentially stood over Harry as he wrote the book is way off the mark."*

Speaking to HeatWorld, they then continued: "It naturally brought up some extremely raw feelings and surprise anecdotes, many of which came as a huge shock to Meghan when she read through the manuscript.”

*Some of these shocks relate specifically to stories about Harry’s relationships in the past, including his turbulent on/off again relationship with socialite **Chelsy Davy.*

During the couple’s romantic time together, the young Prince was frequently seen flouting royal protocol as he engaged in very public displays of affection with the Zimbabwean student.

Harry also dated actress Cressida Bonas for two years between 2012 and 2014, before finally settling down with Meghan.

While the contents of the memoir is still a mystery, it seems unlikely that his former relationships will escape the cut, as his long term romances have obviously shaped him to become the man he is today.

Yet this could make for some awkward reading for Meghan, revealed the insider.
They added: “Harry didn’t want to brush over his past romances, so Chelsy and Cressida are going to find it tough.

“But there are tons of other revelations about his partying and some of the terrible choices he made that are tough to sugar-coat, to say the least.”

Despite some of the revelations however, the insider was adamant that *it wouldn’t rock the young couple too much*, as they admitted: “Meghan knows Harry had a very lively past – she wouldn’t have found him nearly as appealing if he hadn’t lived life to the full.”









						Meghan Markle felt ‘raw’ reading Harry’s memoir - ‘it’s painful,’ says expert
					

Meghan Markle was reportedly left feeling 'raw' after learning some of the more private details about her husband Prince Harry's life, as he prepares to release his memoir later this year




					www.ok.co.uk
				




Well opinions may vary!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I think she was trying to copy, per usual,  Here is a lipstick by MAC called Morange.
> Maybe this was merching? lololol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590661


I was loving terre battue but morange is even better .
In French, morange sounds like a dead angel …









						Slang Define: What is Morange? - meaning and definition
					

Morange - 1.  To be more orange; to be vibrantly orange Those drapes are morange. See orange, more, color, fruit, milver 2.  Person of Maori or Pacific Island descent w




					slangdefine.org


----------



## kemilia

Cinderlala said:


> Interesting.  I don't think she has a maternal bone in her body.  The children are props to her, bait to keep H with her, and a guaranteed source of income for her.
> 
> She never even holds Archie in a natural way---it's always like he's an object rather than her precious child.  To be fair, there are not that many images of her with her children.  (Another very strange thing for most mothers.)


When she was pictured at some polo thing wearing a gawd-awful Mumu (I you are gonna wear Mumu--do it proud--have it be fun--not an army green droopy "BUT IT IS DESIGNER" mess) and Archie was basically hanging off her for dear life.  But I did not comment about it since we all were STILL trying to be ok with the H&M thing. But I knew something was off. I knew ...

Now, I also do not have a maternal bone in my body BUT I do know how to hold and cradle a child (lots of babysitting experience). And babies are the best, btw. Just have them exit the room when the walking starts.


----------



## Chanbal

Fla. judge sets trial date in Samantha Markle’s defamation suit against Meghan
					

Samantha Markle claims her half-sister caused her emotional stress by claiming she was raised as an only child during a 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey.




					nypost.com


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> S. informs that T(young)W didn't write Hazz's book and she is shocked…
> 
> View attachment 5590660
> 
> *Meghan Markle** was reportedly left in “shock” by some of the intimate details about Prince Harry ’s life, which have been laid bare in the **royal’s upcoming memoir.*
> 
> *The claims were made by a source close to the pair amid an ongoing scramble for publishers to get the book out and on shelves ahead of the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping rush in the United States.*
> 
> The explosive memoir will, as per the Duke of Sussex’s own admission, touch upon the "experiences, adventures, losses and life lessons that have helped shape him" over the past four decades of his life.
> 
> It is thought this deeper look at his own history and the moments that shaped him will teach the royal’s wife a lot more about him than she had originally known.
> 
> *A source close to the couple also revealed that Harry had given his ghostwriter JR Moehringer - a Pulitzer Prize-winning author - access to unseen documents as they "spent months going through his private photo album, journals, emails and so forth" to piece together a complete picture of his life so far*.
> 
> The source said: *"This narrative that Meghan essentially stood over Harry as he wrote the book is way off the mark."*
> 
> Speaking to HeatWorld, they then continued: "It naturally brought up some extremely raw feelings and surprise anecdotes, many of which came as a huge shock to Meghan when she read through the manuscript.”
> 
> *Some of these shocks relate specifically to stories about Harry’s relationships in the past, including his turbulent on/off again relationship with socialite **Chelsy Davy.*
> 
> During the couple’s romantic time together, the young Prince was frequently seen flouting royal protocol as he engaged in very public displays of affection with the Zimbabwean student.
> 
> Harry also dated actress Cressida Bonas for two years between 2012 and 2014, before finally settling down with Meghan.
> 
> While the contents of the memoir is still a mystery, it seems unlikely that his former relationships will escape the cut, as his long term romances have obviously shaped him to become the man he is today.
> 
> Yet this could make for some awkward reading for Meghan, revealed the insider.
> They added: “Harry didn’t want to brush over his past romances, so Chelsy and Cressida are going to find it tough.
> 
> “But there are tons of other revelations about his partying and some of the terrible choices he made that are tough to sugar-coat, to say the least.”
> 
> Despite some of the revelations however, the insider was adamant that *it wouldn’t rock the young couple too much*, as they admitted: “Meghan knows Harry had a very lively past – she wouldn’t have found him nearly as appealing if he hadn’t lived life to the full.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle felt ‘raw’ reading Harry’s memoir - ‘it’s painful,’ says expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was reportedly left feeling 'raw' after learning some of the more private details about her husband Prince Harry's life, as he prepares to release his memoir later this year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well opinions may vary!



Unseen documents?  You mean he actually kept things and managed to tote them around from UK to Canada to Tyler Perry's house to Montecito?  Did he pick them up from storage at the Frog Cot?  I really don't believe a thing he says.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> She hasn’t run afoul of Chanel, but tweed is not exactly her thing, nor is pink
> Stella McC was part of 40/40
> And MM always wanted to be the face of Ralph Lauren


Chanel doesn't need her. They're certainly not going to give her any freebies. And she can forget RL too: 

"The minimum requirements in order to become a Ralph Lauren model or a model for Ralph Lauren are an almost perfect body (or a perfect body if you have one) along with a *minimum height of 5 feet 8 inches.* In general (there are always exceptions) you will need your breasts to have a maximum cup size of “C” along with *stats that are very close to 34 bust, 24 waist, and 34 hips. *There are other requirements and stats involved, but these are the minimum physical requirements that a model will generally need to have in order to become a Ralph Lauren model."

I'm sure RL would be happy to dress Kate


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> When she was pictured at some polo thing wearing a gawd-awful Mumu (I you are gonna wear Mumu--do it proud--have it be fun--not an army green droopy "BUT IT IS DESIGNER" mess) and Archie was basically hanging off her for dear life.  But I did not comment about it since we all were STILL trying to be ok with the H&M thing. But I knew something was off. I knew ...
> 
> Now, I also do not have a maternal bone in my body BUT I do know how to hold and cradle a child (lots of babysitting experience). And babies are the best, btw. Just have them exit the room when the walking starts.


More importantly, what was she doing dragging a newborn off to polo?


----------



## Chanbal

Harry wrote a journal…


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> More importantly, what was she doing dragging a newborn off to polo?


Yet when he's a three year old he's nowhere to be seen.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Unseen documents?*  You mean he actually kept things and managed to tote them around from UK to Canada to Tyler Perry's house to Montecito?  Did he pick them up from storage at the Frog Cot? I really don't believe a thing he says.


They were unseen until provided by TW?!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Harry wrote a journal…




Imo For Chels and Cressida’s sake, he needs to tread very carefully before saying anything [positive or negative] about them.  They can file lawsuits, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Girl, you are cracking me up with the gifs today!!


This is for you @lanasyogamama 

A potential motto for Hazz and JR Moehr*nger after the book release.


----------



## Yanca

It really boggles my mind that Charities still give them a platform, Like the ones they are visiting in UK in Sept.  Aside from the media interest and the people reactions, what has the  Duo  done for this charity? aside from word salads, thoughts, wishes and prayers?  Have they really given anything tangible? We know their PR publishes all the " donations" they give- snacks, bagels, coffee cards, sandwiches, hats.. and I have not read anything that they have given to this Charity? or maybe I missed it.  The wife will be talking and handing out awards?  The wife will just use this opportunity to gain more attention, to  model her outfits for merching,  while cosplaying as Royals and acting good and benevolent.  IF this is for their Netflix, the  Charity is okay with this?  This charity is all for children , correct? ? I maybe just a little cynical and jaded when it comes to these two ex royals, but all they have done so far is  in guise of  public service it to make themselves look good, so that they could further their personal ambitions. Nothing wrong with that if helping really is their goal, but it seems unlikely. I hope this Charity will get something out from them, so that more children will be helped.


----------



## Icyjade

Ok I saw this pic and the ugly Dior back flap now makes sense.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Let's say it is for Netflix footage. Who is going to want to watch a show about that? There is already plenty of footage of them getting in and out of limos and walking into buildings. There is already footage of them giving hypocritical speeches. A show like that sounds about as interesting as watching paint dry.


The editors can splice and insert the way they do on those reality housewife shows with montages to make things seem exiting when nothing really happens, use manipulative editing, add emotional music, a reaction shot... but footage of them giving hypocritical speeches as you said, is just not interesting. And that's all it will be.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Trying for "class" she pulled up the Hermes Color Chart.
> 
> Potiron "pumpkin"? Capucine "Nasturtium"? Orange Poppy? Terre Battue (I vote for this one, she does look like "Trodden Earth"). Or maybe Sanguine, "bloodthirsty." Or even Pain d'espice, "Gingerbreadspice."
> 
> But lacking "class" it was no help.
> 
> edited to add: This picture is from one of the websites sources of her porn pics.
> 
> View attachment 5590620


She makes Elphaba from Wicked look absolutely gorgeous with green skin.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> S. informs that T(young)W didn't write Hazz's book and she is shocked…
> 
> View attachment 5590660
> 
> *Meghan Markle** was reportedly left in “shock” by some of the intimate details about Prince Harry ’s life, which have been laid bare in the **royal’s upcoming memoir.*
> 
> *The claims were made by a source close to the pair amid an ongoing scramble for publishers to get the book out and on shelves ahead of the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping rush in the United States.*
> 
> The explosive memoir will, as per the Duke of Sussex’s own admission, touch upon the "experiences, adventures, losses and life lessons that have helped shape him" over the past four decades of his life.
> 
> It is thought this deeper look at his own history and the moments that shaped him will teach the royal’s wife a lot more about him than she had originally known.
> 
> *A source close to the couple also revealed that Harry had given his ghostwriter JR Moehringer - a Pulitzer Prize-winning author - access to unseen documents as they "spent months going through his private photo album, journals, emails and so forth" to piece together a complete picture of his life so far*.
> 
> The source said: *"This narrative that Meghan essentially stood over Harry as he wrote the book is way off the mark."*
> 
> Speaking to HeatWorld, they then continued: "It naturally brought up some extremely raw feelings and surprise anecdotes, many of which came as a huge shock to Meghan when she read through the manuscript.”
> 
> *Some of these shocks relate specifically to stories about Harry’s relationships in the past, including his turbulent on/off again relationship with socialite **Chelsy Davy.*
> 
> During the couple’s romantic time together, the young Prince was frequently seen flouting royal protocol as he engaged in very public displays of affection with the Zimbabwean student.
> 
> Harry also dated actress Cressida Bonas for two years between 2012 and 2014, before finally settling down with Meghan.
> 
> While the contents of the memoir is still a mystery, it seems unlikely that his former relationships will escape the cut, as his long term romances have obviously shaped him to become the man he is today.
> 
> Yet this could make for some awkward reading for Meghan, revealed the insider.
> They added: “Harry didn’t want to brush over his past romances, so Chelsy and Cressida are going to find it tough.
> 
> “But there are tons of other revelations about his partying and some of the terrible choices he made that are tough to sugar-coat, to say the least.”
> 
> Despite some of the revelations however, the insider was adamant that *it wouldn’t rock the young couple too much*, as they admitted: “Meghan knows Harry had a very lively past – she wouldn’t have found him nearly as appealing if he hadn’t lived life to the full.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle felt ‘raw’ reading Harry’s memoir - ‘it’s painful,’ says expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was reportedly left feeling 'raw' after learning some of the more private details about her husband Prince Harry's life, as he prepares to release his memoir later this year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well opinions may vary!



I'm confused. I thought she was telling Haz what happened in his life?   You know, since she "never" googled him or anything, but still knows everything.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Harry wrote a journal…



Haz knows how to write???


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo For Chels and Cressida’s sake, he needs to tread very carefully before saying anything [positive or negative] about them.  They can file lawsuits, too.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590692


A gentleman doesn't kiss and tell. But I guess that goes out the window when you're strapped for cash and you married a golddigger.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Haz knows how to write???



Harry's memoir, left to his own devices:

"I am Harry. Bad men killed my Mummy. My father married a mean lady. My big brother is a jerk and gets all the attention. I like to play polo with my best bud Nacho. I hate books. I married a hot Amerikan chick who does things my English girlfriends didn't. She likes to tell me what to do. I like it. The End."


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Haz knows how to write???


Sample Journal entry from Haz in his own words: “I waz in the costoom shop and sawe one dat had a red croz on it so got it. Butt it terned out to bee sumthing elze and my Gran waz mad.”


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo For Chels and Cressida’s sake, he needs to tread very carefully before saying anything [positive or negative] about them.  They can file lawsuits, too.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590692


Or worse....they can tell "their truth" just as easily


----------



## Redbirdhermes

papertiger said:


> Trolls trying to shut down BLG now
> 
> Push for censorship is real:



Watching this video tonight, and totally cracked up when BLG answers the trolls, "I'm a soldier from the future and I'm here to prevent President Markle from happening."


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Harry's memoir, left to his own devices:
> 
> "I am Harry. Bad men killed my Mummy. My father married a mean lady. My big brother is a jerk and gets all the attention. I like to play polo with my best bud Nacho. I hate books. I married a hot Amerikan chick who does things my English girlfriends didn't. She likes to tell me what to do. I like it. The End."


And it’s a more interesting read than what the real one will be like.


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean pointed out the Sunshine Sucks folks blew another one.

The date selected for the Harkles‘ hyped triumphant return in September is the day the Queen will be meeting with the newly elected Prime Minister and that will be the front page news.

In not quite these words Neil suggests the Suckesses’ PR team start paying attention to how things are done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Harry's memoir, left to his own devices:
> 
> "I am Harry. Bad men killed my Mummy. My father married a mean lady. My big brother is a jerk and gets all the attention. I like to play polo with my best bud Nacho. I hate books. I married a hot Amerikan chick who does things my English girlfriends didn't. She likes to tell me what to do. I like it. The End."


LOL
in a nutshell


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> S. informs that T(young)W didn't write Hazz's book and she is shocked…
> 
> View attachment 5590660
> 
> *Meghan Markle** was reportedly left in “shock” by some of the intimate details about Prince Harry ’s life, which have been laid bare in the **royal’s upcoming memoir.*
> 
> *The claims were made by a source close to the pair amid an ongoing scramble for publishers to get the book out and on shelves ahead of the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping rush in the United States.*
> 
> The explosive memoir will, as per the Duke of Sussex’s own admission, touch upon the "experiences, adventures, losses and life lessons that have helped shape him" over the past four decades of his life.
> 
> It is thought this deeper look at his own history and the moments that shaped him will teach the royal’s wife a lot more about him than she had originally known.
> 
> *A source close to the couple also revealed that Harry had given his ghostwriter JR Moehringer - a Pulitzer Prize-winning author - access to unseen documents as they "spent months going through his private photo album, journals, emails and so forth" to piece together a complete picture of his life so far*.
> 
> The source said: *"This narrative that Meghan essentially stood over Harry as he wrote the book is way off the mark."*
> 
> Speaking to HeatWorld, they then continued: "It naturally brought up some extremely raw feelings and surprise anecdotes, many of which came as a huge shock to Meghan when she read through the manuscript.”
> 
> *Some of these shocks relate specifically to stories about Harry’s relationships in the past, including his turbulent on/off again relationship with socialite **Chelsy Davy.*
> 
> During the couple’s romantic time together, the young Prince was frequently seen flouting royal protocol as he engaged in very public displays of affection with the Zimbabwean student.
> 
> Harry also dated actress Cressida Bonas for two years between 2012 and 2014, before finally settling down with Meghan.
> 
> While the contents of the memoir is still a mystery, it seems unlikely that his former relationships will escape the cut, as his long term romances have obviously shaped him to become the man he is today.
> 
> Yet this could make for some awkward reading for Meghan, revealed the insider.
> They added: “Harry didn’t want to brush over his past romances, so Chelsy and Cressida are going to find it tough.
> 
> “But there are tons of other revelations about his partying and some of the terrible choices he made that are tough to sugar-coat, to say the least.”
> 
> Despite some of the revelations however, the insider was adamant that *it wouldn’t rock the young couple too much*, as they admitted: “Meghan knows Harry had a very lively past – she wouldn’t have found him nearly as appealing if he hadn’t lived life to the full.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle felt ‘raw’ reading Harry’s memoir - ‘it’s painful,’ says expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was reportedly left feeling 'raw' after learning some of the more private details about her husband Prince Harry's life, as he prepares to release his memoir later this year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well opinions may vary!



Can they stop saying "a source close to the couple" and just say Omid Scobie?
And the "young couple" made me  
If Methane felt raw, it probably means she just had a full body exfoliation during her spa.

And it sure sounds like they are going to say mean things about his ex-gfs and his mates, probably call them bad influences from which Saint MM rescued him. There were rumours last year that his mates were going to spill the beans if he turned on them.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> *And it sure sounds like they are going to say mean things about his ex-gfs and his mates, probably call them bad influences from which Saint MM rescued him.* There were rumours last year that his mates were going to spill the beans if he turned on them.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

'Clock is ticking' for Meghan and Harry as Netflix patience tested
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are being warned that Netflix's patience is being "severely tested" as an important deadline looms.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5590873
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Clock is ticking' for Meghan and Harry as Netflix patience tested
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are being warned that Netflix's patience is being "severely tested" as an important deadline looms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk




Thats why the charity announcements.  They need more Netflix content and both are thirsty for fame and money.

I find it gross that charities pay for celebrities first class airfares, hotels e
and other demands (see TomBowers book with MM’s Rwanda trip… it’s just awful).

And since MM hasn’t changed, which charity is picking up the $$$ for their visit?


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5590873
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Clock is ticking' for Meghan and Harry as Netflix patience tested
> 
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are being warned that Netflix's patience is being "severely tested" as an important deadline looms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Poorly written title - Meg and H sent Netfl*x warning as patience severely tested sounds like _they_ sent a warning to Netfl*x.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

Ouch….


----------



## xincinsin

1LV said:


> To say I’m not a fan of TW would be an understatement, but I 100% do not believe the porn pics are legit.


Same here. I think the porn pics are doctored. 

Was she ever a yacht girl? I am undecided. I think if she was offered a yacht trip to be company for rich guys, she would not refuse because she is a social climber and would see it as an opportunity to network. I think she would do that on dry land too, hence the photos of her sitting on that old man's lap. And I believe she was pretty decor for Soho House to keep around.  But I don't see any of this as her primary occupation. She made enough to live on, and when she didn't, she had people she could sponge off. She was never in desperate straits.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *I think the Sep UK trips are to provide photos for the autobiography* , but they are not getting the money shot with LilI and QEII
> If the trip is indeed as as short as 4-5 days, the kids will stay home or crash from jet lag
> After all, Bower covered the Jubilee, and published spectacularly shortly afterwards , so, they can get new photos in the biog


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Poorly written title - Meg and H sent Netfl*x warning as patience severely tested sounds like _they_ sent a warning to Netfl*x.


Snicker... The young couple challenged the streaming giant and declared, "If you make any more demands for us to produce programmes, we will go on strike!"


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Harry wrote a journal…



He’s raw? 
Just use some Vaseline already   


Yanca said:


> It really boggles my mind that Charities still give them a platform, Like the ones they are visiting in UK in Sept.  Aside from the media interest and the people reactions, what has the  Duo  done for this charity? aside from word salads, thoughts, wishes and prayers?  Have they really given anything tangible? We know their PR publishes all the " donations" they give- snacks, bagels, coffee cards, sandwiches, hats.. and I have not read anything that they have given to this Charity? or maybe I missed it.  The wife will be talking and handing out awards?  The wife will just use this opportunity to gain more attention, to  model her outfits for merching,  while cosplaying as Royals and acting good and benevolent.  IF this is for their Netflix, the  Charity is okay with this?  This charity is all for children , correct? ? I maybe just a little cynical and jaded when it comes to these two ex royals, but all they have done so far is  in guise of  public service it to make themselves look good, so that they could further their personal ambitions. Nothing wrong with that if helping really is their goal, but it seems unlikely. I hope this Charity will get something out from them, so that more children will be helped.


I think the charities are doing it under the duress of fulfilling their obligations for royal patronage and it’s all a cynical tax write off anyway. It would explain why they are holding it in a dump like Manchester they would just be happy for the publicity 


Icyjade said:


> Ok I saw this pic and the ugly Dior back flap now makes sense.
> 
> View attachment 5590724
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590725


Indeed I hope everyone is looking forward to a candid hour and a half of muffled hymns, heels clacking on cobblestones and h picking his nose.

Side note but this is actually a nice khaki dress and I usually hate that colour.


purseinsanity said:


> She makes Elphaba from Wicked look absolutely gorgeous with green skin.


Alfalfa has a less clockable wig line too.

She also started the tendrils- I never noticed this before:




Redbirdhermes said:


> Watching this video tonight, and totally cracked up when BLG answers the trolls, "I'm a soldier from the future and I'm here to prevent President Markle from happening."


I love the idea the latest T-series are cod-science YouTubers with pocket squares.


----------



## Helventara

charlottawill said:


> Harry's memoir, left to his own devices:
> 
> "I am Harry. Bad men killed my Mummy. My father married a mean lady. My big brother is a jerk and gets all the attention. I like to play polo with my best bud Nacho. I hate books. I married a hot Amerikan chick who does things my English girlfriends didn't. She likes to tell me what to do. I like it. The End."


I feel I need to give this post more laughs. Since I can only do it once on the post, here it is:      Brilliant!


----------



## muddledmint

xincinsin said:


> Same here. I think the porn pics are doctored.
> 
> Was she ever a yacht girl? I am undecided. I think if she was offered a yacht trip to be company for rich guys, she would not refuse because she is a social climber and would see it as an opportunity to network. I think she would do that on dry land too, hence the photos of her sitting on that old man's lap. And I believe she was pretty decor for Soho House to keep around.  But I don't see any of this as her primary occupation. She made enough to live on, and when she didn't, she had people she could sponge off. She was never in desperate straits.


I have a hard time believing the yacht girl stuff too. She’s a social climber with a very inflated opinion of herself. She found being a suitcase girl humiliating and didn’t go to those parties with the other suitcase girls. I don’t think she would stoop to being a glorified call girl. But that’s just my feeling, who knows.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Absolutely! Observing how the Harkles operate made me more cautious when making donations.




I was going to give to a charity lonely last week, their title and bylines are good, can't argue with them, but when I read their site it was so vague and general. I gave the money to the PDSA instead that runs vets and services for sick animals that belong to people who can't pay normal vet's bills. I think a lot of these new charities are set-up like the Harkel-HaZ-bin-liedons.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I had to make a list to keep track of the HRHS
> 
> 1. H&M have HRH can’t use it
> 2. Andrew has it, but can’t use it publicly , see below
> 3. Edwards children, James and Louise, have their HRHs, don’t currently use them, but can decide to use them when they are 18, per interview with Sophie. Sophie does not expect them to choose to use them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew: Who is he and what titles is he losing?
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew has settled a civil sexual assault case brought against him in the US
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what does all that mean ??? I don’t know but L & J were front row at the Jubilee service, H&M were at the end of the second row, Zara and Mike had better seats, and A was MIA
> Dont ask me who curtsies to whom …
> 
> Will the Sharkles be called HRHs when in the UK ? Stay tuned, popcorn please



No, no HRHs when visiting the UK


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Harry wrote a journal…




He's just gonna rehash the Truman show script, poor little Princey-wincey.

One thing's for sure, his wife knows how to merch and stick to her script.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> The poor thing, denied a tiara....




It still cracks me up that she put out she didn't care for tiaras and such, but ASKED for one. She is like a defiant child. Don't want to allow me? I didn't want it anyway.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> S. informs that T(young)W didn't write Hazz's book and she is shocked…
> 
> View attachment 5590660
> 
> 
> 
> [...]
> 
> Despite some of the revelations however, the insider was adamant that *it wouldn’t rock the young couple too much*, as they admitted: “Meghan knows Harry had a very lively past – she wouldn’t have found him nearly as appealing if he hadn’t lived life to the full.”



Not guttural?

Also, at which point cease two middle-aged people who've been married for four years with two kids to be a young couple?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think she was trying to copy, per usual,  Here is a lipstick by MAC called Morange.
> Maybe this was merching? lololol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5590661



I happen to love that one (I look better in orange than in true red).


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Quite right! 

Why should someone who bullies a 3 y o child be promoting a children's charity?


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> S. informs that T(young)W didn't write Hazz's book and she is shocked…
> 
> View attachment 5590660
> 
> *Meghan Markle** was reportedly left in “shock” by some of the intimate details about Prince Harry ’s life, which have been laid bare in the **royal’s upcoming memoir.*
> 
> *The claims were made by a source close to the pair amid an ongoing scramble for publishers to get the book out and on shelves ahead of the Thanksgiving and Christmas shopping rush in the United States.*
> 
> The explosive memoir will, as per the Duke of Sussex’s own admission, touch upon the "experiences, adventures, losses and life lessons that have helped shape him" over the past four decades of his life.
> 
> It is thought this deeper look at his own history and the moments that shaped him will teach the royal’s wife a lot more about him than she had originally known.
> 
> *A source close to the couple also revealed that Harry had given his ghostwriter JR Moehringer - a Pulitzer Prize-winning author - access to unseen documents as they "spent months going through his private photo album, journals, emails and so forth" to piece together a complete picture of his life so far*.
> 
> The source said: *"This narrative that Meghan essentially stood over Harry as he wrote the book is way off the mark."*
> 
> Speaking to HeatWorld, they then continued: "It naturally brought up some extremely raw feelings and surprise anecdotes, many of which came as a huge shock to Meghan when she read through the manuscript.”
> 
> *Some of these shocks relate specifically to stories about Harry’s relationships in the past, including his turbulent on/off again relationship with socialite **Chelsy Davy.*
> 
> During the couple’s romantic time together, the young Prince was frequently seen flouting royal protocol as he engaged in very public displays of affection with the Zimbabwean student.
> 
> Harry also dated actress Cressida Bonas for two years between 2012 and 2014, before finally settling down with Meghan.
> 
> While the contents of the memoir is still a mystery, it seems unlikely that his former relationships will escape the cut, as his long term romances have obviously shaped him to become the man he is today.
> 
> Yet this could make for some awkward reading for Meghan, revealed the insider.
> They added: “Harry didn’t want to brush over his past romances, so Chelsy and Cressida are going to find it tough.
> 
> “But there are tons of other revelations about his partying and some of the terrible choices he made that are tough to sugar-coat, to say the least.”
> 
> Despite some of the revelations however, the insider was adamant that *it wouldn’t rock the young couple too much*, as they admitted: “Meghan knows Harry had a very lively past – she wouldn’t have found him nearly as appealing if he hadn’t lived life to the full.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle felt ‘raw’ reading Harry’s memoir - ‘it’s painful,’ says expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was reportedly left feeling 'raw' after learning some of the more private details about her husband Prince Harry's life, as he prepares to release his memoir later this year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well opinions may vary!



This article screams “Sales pitch” and not an original, too (TW’s idea?)


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> He’s raw?
> Just use some Vaseline already
> 
> I think the charities are doing it under the duress of fulfilling their obligations for royal patronage and it’s all a cynical tax write off anyway. It would explain why they are holding it in a dump like Manchester they would just be happy for the publicity
> 
> Indeed I hope everyone is looking forward to a candid hour and a half of muffled hymns, heels clacking on cobblestones and h picking his nose.
> 
> Side note but this is actually a nice khaki dress and I usually hate that colour.
> 
> Alfalfa has a less clockable wig line too.
> 
> She also started the tendrils- I never noticed this before:
> View attachment 5590907
> 
> 
> I love the idea the latest T-series are cod-science YouTubers with pocket squares.



H&M and  -sucks  are so 'pro-active' they just don't know when to stop  take measure and do some honest graft.

They were obviously going to the I-games in Germany and thought they'd make the most of the trip (prob going to incite issues regarding security in the UK for his battle for full-time security around the world) but mostly to annoy the British people and the BRF (half-in/half-out). 

Basically, these gruesome two-some are just wind-up merchants.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not guttural?
> 
> Also, at which point cease two middle-aged people who've been married for four years with two kids to be a young couple?



 They believe it, so we're made to believe it.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Same here. I think the porn pics are doctored.
> 
> Was she ever a yacht girl? I am undecided. I think if she was offered a yacht trip to be company for rich guys, she would not refuse because she is a social climber and would see it as an opportunity to network. I think she would do that on dry land too, hence the photos of her sitting on that old man's lap. And I believe she was pretty decor for Soho House to keep around.  But I don't see any of this as her primary occupation. She made enough to live on, and when she didn't, she had people she could sponge off. She was never in desperate straits.


I was thinking more courtesane than yg - did she accept cash ? did she meet the right folks and go places - yup

PS courtesanes studied for years to hone their appeal , that kinda fits this case, she worked at it, learning about Tignanello and cooking


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Unseen documents?  You mean he actually kept things and managed to tote them around from UK to Canada to Tyler Perry's house to Montecito?  Did he pick them up from storage at the Frog Cot?  I really don't believe a thing he says.


No not documents in the sense of epistles, sentences... just electronic hodge podge miscellania. 
Texts, emails, videos, phone calls maybe. Responses from others.

 I am thinking the paradigm of the Hunter B laptop - various file types, I havent seen a Word document from HB yet. Piles of HB movies


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I was going to give to a charity lonely last week, their title and bylines are good, can't argue with them, but when I read their site it was so vague and general. I gave the money to the PDSA instead that runs vets and services for sick animals that belong to people who can't pay normal vet's bills. I think a lot of these new charities are set-up like the Harkel-HaZ-bin-liedons.


If the intention is to attract attention to the charities, it seems to be working! I'm not very familiar with the charities that sponsor the Harkles, but the association works as a red flag for me.


----------



## Chanbal

To TPF detectives, why isn't TW listed as speaker (yet)?
CNN-Don Lemon is on the list.









						Summit 2022 - Speakers | One Young World
					






					www.oneyoungworld.com


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> If the intention is to attract attention to the charities, it seems to be working! I'm not very familiar with the charities that sponsor the Harkles, but the association works as a red flag for me.



Did they count the almost 5k in scholarships as charitable grants ??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> If the intention is to attract attention to the charities, it seems to be working! I'm not very familiar with the charities that sponsor the Harkles, but the association works as a red flag for me.




O.M.G


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo For Chels and Cressida’s sake, *he needs to tread very carefully before saying anything [positive or negative] about them*.  They can file lawsuits, too.


Absolutely!  They also may have kept "journals" too and can spill a whole lot of information about his life, behavior, actions, language, etc., while they were with him.  They probably have photos and video too.  If I were one of the two of them, I'd already have a lawyer hired and have him/her communicate with Harry's people about that, that in no way is he to reveal embarrassing or personal details about their time together, unless he'd like the same back.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh dear, QE may join the Cambridges and miss the Harkles' visit to the UK. Camilla? 










						Queen set to miss Harry and Meghan's return and STAY in Scotland
					

THE QUEEN may not be able to meet in person Meghan Markle and Prince Harry during their short trip to the UK next month.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Haz better be really careful with what he publishes.

Chelsey has a law degree and was, for several years, employed as a trainee solicitor at a London firm. She also has a degree in Economics. She quit the law firm in 2014 and is now a businesswoman with a jewelry company and a luxury travel company.

She seems an intelligent, accomplished woman, who had sense enough to jettison Haz. Raptor was a huge downgrade in his life.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers M fixed an article's title on Page Six…


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not guttural?
> 
> Also, at which point cease two middle-aged people who've been married for four years with two kids to be a young couple?



And the hair, or rather the increasing lack of hair should be a good hint whenever he looks at the mirror too.


----------



## CobaltBlu

ONE YOUNG WORLD LIMITED - Charity 1147298
					

Charity details for ONE YOUNG WORLD LIMITED - Charity 1147298




					register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk
				




hmmmm


----------



## bag-mania

muddledmint said:


> I have a hard time believing the yacht girl stuff too. She’s a social climber with a very inflated opinion of herself. She found being a suitcase girl humiliating and didn’t go to those parties with the other suitcase girls. *I don’t think she would stoop to being a glorified call girl.* But that’s just my feeling, who knows.


The only way I’d believe it is if she got something she _really_ wanted out of it. Like I could totally see her being a casting couch girl if it meant getting a career-making starring role in a movie. (Obviously she never got that opportunity.)


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> Oh dear, QE may join the Cambridges and miss the Harkles' visit to the UK. Camilla?
> View attachment 5591169
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen set to miss Harry and Meghan's return and STAY in Scotland
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN may not be able to meet in person Meghan Markle and Prince Harry during their short trip to the UK next month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I'm sure HMTQ is being advised to avoid these two..with their photo op's and hidden mic's


----------



## Cinderlala

papertiger said:


> H&M and  -sucks  are so 'pro-active' they just don't know when to stop  take measure and do some honest graft.
> 
> They were obviously going to the I-games in Germany and thought they'd make the most of the trip (prob going to incite issues regarding security in the UK for his battle for full-time security around the world) but mostly to annoy the British people and the BRF (half-in/half-out).
> 
> Basically, *these gruesome two-some are just wind-up merchants*.


Since Skeeter cannot win affection she has decided to become the world's biggest troll.


----------



## Cinderlala

Love that a statement has been issued about TQ's location so Haz & Been can't even try to pretend there was a meeting with her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Cinderlala said:


> Love that a statement has been issued about TQ's location so Haz & Been can't even try to pretend there was a meeting with her.


Absolutely, otherwise we would be hearing about the secret meeting with both kids where granny shared all her deepest secrets.


----------



## muddledmint

bag-mania said:


> The only way I’d believe it is if she got something she _really_ wanted out of it. Like I could totally see her being a casting couch girl if it meant getting a career-making starring role in a movie. (Obviously she never got that opportunity.)


That I can believe! Didn’t bower hint at something like that in the book or am I dreaming?


----------



## Cinderlala

Being a yacht girl was probably less about money and more about access.  She has clawed her way up by selecting people who could be useful to her.  Lots of men with money & influence around yacht girls.


----------



## bag-mania

muddledmint said:


> That I can believe! Didn’t bower hint at something like that in the book or am I dreaming?


If he did I must have missed it. Which is certainly possible given the sheer volume of Meghan audacity in that book.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> Being a yacht girl was probably less about money and more about access.  She has clawed her way up by selecting people who could be useful to her.  Lots of men with money & influence around yacht girls.


True but yacht girls are for having fun with, not for marrying or helping their careers. The men may be rich and powerful but that doesn’t mean they  were sober enough to recognize which bikini-clad beauty they were with last month.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> True but yacht girls are for having fun with, not for marrying or helping their careers. The men may be rich and powerful but that doesn’t mean they  were sober enough to recognize which bikini-clad beauty they were with last month.



Marrying is one thing. Plenty of paid GF/mistresses are found that way. Not just on yachts either, plenty of holiday villas, chalets and parties are packed with them too.

All one needs for a certain 'lifestyle' is he money to pay for it. 

I also have to add, I don't judge the women. What's clear is that it's not something can brag about if they try to go down a different path later on.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Marrying is one thing. Plenty of paid GF/mistresses are found that way. Not just on yachts either, plenty of holiday villas, chalets and parties are packed with them too.
> 
> All one needs for a certain 'lifestyle' is he money to pay for it.
> 
> I also have to add, I don't judge the women. What's clear is that it's not something can brag about if they try to go down a different path later on.


You are correct. I don’t see Meghan ever being satisfied being the kept woman though. She has always aspired for more and believed she’d get more. And she did.


----------



## Stansy

Re Meghan‘s alleged shock reading Harry‘s memoir: I guess she was shocked to see in writing that H is stupid, boring and not the cash cow she had envisioned.

And trashing (because this is what he or rather MM will do) ex-girlfriends is really the lowest of low.


----------



## papertiger

New one from Lady C. Long but quite informative:


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> True but yacht girls are for having fun with, not for marrying or helping their careers. The men may be rich and powerful but that doesn’t mean they  were sober enough to recognize which bikini-clad beauty they were with last month.


One has to start somewhere.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> New one from Lady C. Long but quite informative:



From one of the commenters:

_This is the real reason that they want the IPP status.  She wants *diplomatic immunity and protection from prosecution* in her shady dealings.   This would be motivation for some of these rich businessmen with shady dealings of their own to keep themselves in her good graces - to protect future and profitable criminal activities under her name?  Anybody want to bet?_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Run Harry, run.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> From one of the commenters:
> 
> _This is the real reason that they want the IPP status.  She wants *diplomatic immunity and protection from prosecution* in her shady dealings.   This would be motivation for some of these rich businessmen with shady dealings of their own to keep themselves in her good graces - to protect future and profitable criminal activities under her name?  Anybody want to bet?_



We've already said as much.

This must never happen because a) we'd never know when he/she/they_ should_ have been prosecuted b)_* if*_ it ever came to light, they dodged an IRS investigation and/or various other criminal/civll prosecutions the BRF would look (even more) shady and c) it would give him diplomatic status when he is not employed to represent the UK abroad in any way and/or a British diplomat.

He doesn't work for us (UK). Why should we pay for him? Why should we make others pay for him?


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can see her being a yacht girl because she would be convinced that if she could get in front of these powerful men, they could never resist her and would fall deeply in love.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> If he did I must have missed it. Which is certainly possible given the sheer volume of Meghan audacity in that book.


I saw someone on Facebook saying how the bullying rumors could never be true because the TRF is so racist, and I felt like commenting that even if you took away all those stories there are a million other stories about Zz that proves she is a terrible person.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Absolutely, otherwise we would be hearing about the secret meeting with both kids where granny shared all her deepest secrets.


and asked H for his advice


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw someone on Facebook saying how the bullying rumors could never be true because the TRF is so racist, and I felt like commenting that even if you took away all those stories there are a million other stories about Zz that proves she is a terrible person.


The indication of someone who has absolutely nothing to back up her claims is when the racist finger pointing starts.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> To TPF detectives, why isn't TW listed as speaker (yet)?
> CNN-Don Lemon is on the list.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Summit 2022 - Speakers | One Young World
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oneyoungworld.com



I searched on Sussex and found this


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I searched on Sussex and found this
> 
> View attachment 5591385


So, which evening gown will she wear?  A Wallis copy?  Or Kate?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, which evening gown will she wear?  A Wallis copy?  Or Kate?


maybe the Duchess needs to wear a tiara
Really - if they are so hateful toward his family, why are they using these titles? Oh -  I know - this is all they really have


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps something like this?













						Wallis Simpson’s Most Iconic Style Moments
					

The fashion legacy of the Wallis Simpson is coming to the big screen, with Cate Blanchett reportedly set to play her




					www.vogue.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps something like this?
> 
> View attachment 5591413
> View attachment 5591418
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wallis Simpson’s Most Iconic Style Moments
> 
> 
> The fashion legacy of the Wallis Simpson is coming to the big screen, with Cate Blanchett reportedly set to play her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.co.uk



Cate Blanchett seems like a good choice. I'll see it just for the clothes.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Cate Blanchett seems like a good choice. I'll see it just for the clothes.


Cate Blanchett will be perfect....as much as I like her, she can sometimes have that hard look like Wallis.  and of course she's a great actress


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> If the intention is to attract attention to the charities, it seems to be working! I'm not very familiar with the charities that sponsor the Harkles, but the association works as a red flag for me.



But, but, it's "close to their heart"


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I searched on Sussex and found this
> 
> View attachment 5591385


People dissatisfied with the Harkles' visit have been posting comments responding to the charities' announcements…


----------



## Chanbal

Stansy said:


> Re Meghan‘s alleged shock reading Harry‘s memoir: I guess she was shocked to see in writing that H is stupid, boring and *not the cash cow she had envisioned*.
> 
> And trashing (because this is what he or rather MM will do) ex-girlfriends is really the lowest of low.


The stupid and boring were reassuring to TW imo, but I agree with you on the cash cow comment.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, which evening gown will she wear?  A Wallis copy?  Or Kate?


Whatever she chooses will certainly be fit for a…


----------



## Annawakes

My humble thoughts:

1. I don’t think ZeeZy was a true yacht girl.  In her mind she was destined for huge things.  She wouldn’t have jeopardized her future by putting herself in compromising situations.  Also I agree that she never really wanted for money.  I can see her wanting to mingle and hobnob with the social elite, but I can also see her looking down on “those yacht girls” because she is soooooo much better than them.

2. Completely agree they’re doing another fake tour to get footage.  I just can’t believe anyone still even cares what they do anymore.

3. Guys do not write in journals.  To say Harry has a journal is as believable as the kids having a zoom call with the Cambridge kids.


----------



## Chanbal

This charity should update its page as it's full of inaccuracies imo. She is best known as TW, the infamous letter written with the help of the father didn't get any replies…


----------



## Chanbal

Someone found Wallis's Valentino dress…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This charity should update its page as it's full of inaccuracies imo. She is best known as TW, the infamous letter written with the help of the father didn't get any replies…
> View attachment 5591471


Amy Jessup, Fringe - okaaay, I looked it up









						10 TV Characters Who Just Disappeared
					

Why bother writing out a character when they can just vanish.




					whatculture.com
				










Fox
The first episode of Fringe's second season started with a pretty shocking twist. Main character Olivia Dunham travelled back from an alternate dimension, only to be flung through the windshield of her car and knocked into a coma. 
-
Amy Jessup, played by Meghan Markle, was then introduced and was seemingly her replacement. Jessup was a junior agent at the FBI who began investigating the Fringe division. Her investigation led to her coming in contact with Peter Bishop and they teamed up to stop a shapeshifter from killing Olivia. The episode ended with Amy looking through the Fringe team's old case files and noting down similarities between them and verses from the Bible, clearly hinting at some kind of big storyline to come.
Only then it didn't. Olivia woke up, went back to being the main character and neither Amy Jessup nor the events of the show being linked to the Bible were ever mentioned again. No explanation was ever given as to why this entire plotline was abandoned.
*What (Probably) Happened To Her: *Much like that one friend who keeps clogging up your Facebook feed with links to articles about how [INSERT CELEBRITY HERE] is the Antichrist, the rest of the Fringe team probably just ignored Amy's messages and blocked her.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> If the intention is to attract attention to the charities, it seems to be working! I'm not very familiar with the charities that sponsor the Harkles, but the association works as a red flag for me.



68k pounds on computer costs? Makes me suspect that their company wide computer upgrade was charged to the event.


----------



## xincinsin

Dupe


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> To TPF detectives, why isn't TW listed as speaker (yet)?


It's a surprise...  


bag-mania said:


> You are correct. I don’t see Meghan ever being satisfied being the kept woman though. She has always aspired for more and believed she’d get more. And she did.


She always aspired for more and believed she *deserved* more.


CarryOn2020 said:


> From one of the commenters:
> 
> _This is the real reason that they want the IPP status.  She wants *diplomatic immunity and protection from prosecution* in her shady dealings.   This would be motivation for some of these rich businessmen with shady dealings of their own to keep themselves in her good graces - to protect future and profitable criminal activities under her name?  Anybody want to bet?_


Will that really happen? I must reread the IPP section of my country's international agreement. Also, if this is their underlying intention, then it means they are planning nefarious activity. I thought they were just trying to offload security costs and boost their self-importance to secure more deals.


Chanbal said:


> This charity should update its page as it's full of inaccuracies imo. She is best known as TW, the infamous letter written with the help of the father didn't get any replies…
> View attachment 5591471


One embassy internship in 2002 and she is touted as always involved in politics?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

muddledmint said:


> I have a hard time believing the yacht girl stuff too. She’s a social climber with a very inflated opinion of herself. She found being a suitcase girl humiliating and didn’t go to those parties with the other suitcase girls. I don’t think she would stoop to being a glorified call girl. But that’s just my feeling, who knows.



Considering how Claw has treated her own father after all he's done for her, and banished her whole family (except for Doria), the accusations she hurled against the BRF, even getting Harry to side with her and destroy the ties with his own family, THERE IS NOTHING I would put past her.  Using people is something loves to do and excels at.  Not saying there's proof of anything, but based on facts of what she has done, IMO being yacht girl and/or part time call girl for her would be nothing. Look at all the lies she's told and how hungry for a dollar she STILL IS. We have members of Congress who say "sex work is still work" and nothing to be ashamed of.  Stormy Daniels was a hero of the Woke, at least until her sidekick Avenatti was prosecuted for fraud, extortion, and theft.


----------



## marietouchet

Bingo !
Looking  up what organization grants IPP status , it is a UN Convention , that is why he bothered to speak to an empty room 






						Protection of Diplomats Convention - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> It's a surprise...
> 
> She always aspired for more and believed she *deserved* more.
> 
> Will that really happen? I must reread the IPP section of my country's international agreement. Also, if this is their underlying intention, then it means they are planning nefarious activity. I thought they were just trying to offload security costs and boost their self-importance to secure more deals.
> 
> One embassy internship in 2002 and she is touted as always involved in politics?


A quick read of the abuses sends chills down my spine.   Hope the decision is absolutely not.  





__





						Diplomatic immunity - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## xincinsin

Unless the Dook and Douchess declare the Chateau of Riven Rock their own country and try to get the US to recognize it, it is unlikely that the UK are going to declare them as diplomats for their country. Which of course brings us back to the mystery of Hazard's passport and status in the US. He is earning income on US soil, does he pay tax?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Unless the Dook and Douchess declare the Chateau of Riven Rock their own country and try to get the US to recognize it, it is unlikely that the UK are going to declare them as diplomats for their country. Which of course brings us back to the mystery of Hazard's passport and status in the US. He is earning income on US soil, does he pay tax?


Guessing he has some kind of special ‘royal’ immunity.

Article in spoiler  from 2021 -
https://www.natlawreview.com/articl...seek-us-permanent-residency-or-us-citizenship
​


Spoiler



Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship​Tuesday, April 13, 2021
Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by speculation. This does not affect Meghan or Archie as they are U.S citizens. Also, Prince Harry is no longer a member of the British royal family. A new report to _The Times_ noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told _The Times_ that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”

*Potential Visa Option*​Among the many other ways in which Prince Harry can get a visa to live and work in the U.S., one lucrative option would be to have an O-1 visa. A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.

For Prince Harry to seek an O-1 visa, he must be sponsored by an organization that plans to work with him and identify the fields where he excels. Initially, an O-1 visa is approved for three years; thereafter it must be renewed every year. It will not be hard for Prince Harry to prove extraordinary ability given his philanthropic activities — the founding of the Invictus Games can certainly get him an O-1 visa.

*Prince Harry’s Immigration Status*​There is a lot of speculation surrounding Prince Harry’s current immigration status. He has stayed too long to be on a B-2 visitor’s visa or through the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), through which a traveler cannot stay in the U.S. for more than 90 days. Additionally, there was speculation that Prince Harry would be issued a diplomatic visa, Although, there are no confirmed sources on this speculation.

*U.S. Citizenship in Question*​If Prince Harry decides to become a U.S. citizen, he will be forced to expressly renounce any title or order of nobility he holds before he acquires U.S. citizenship, according to the Immigration and Nationalization Act. But although the Queen has stripped Prince Harry and Meghan of many honorary military appointments and royal patronages, they remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, at the least. In addition, acquiring U.S. citizenship could potentially lead to Prince Harry having to pay worldwide taxes.
[\spoiler]


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing he has some kind of special ‘royal’ immunity.
> 
> Article in spoiler  from 2021 -
> https://www.natlawreview.com/articl...seek-us-permanent-residency-or-us-citizenship
> ​
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship​Tuesday, April 13, 2021
> Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by speculation. This does not affect Meghan or Archie as they are U.S citizens. Also, Prince Harry is no longer a member of the British royal family. A new report to _The Times_ noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told _The Times_ that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”
> 
> *Potential Visa Option*​Among the many other ways in which Prince Harry can get a visa to live and work in the U.S., one lucrative option would be to have an O-1 visa. A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.
> 
> For Prince Harry to seek an O-1 visa, he must be sponsored by an organization that plans to work with him and identify the fields where he excels. Initially, an O-1 visa is approved for three years; thereafter it must be renewed every year. It will not be hard for Prince Harry to prove extraordinary ability given his philanthropic activities — the founding of the Invictus Games can certainly get him an O-1 visa.
> 
> *Prince Harry’s Immigration Status*​There is a lot of speculation surrounding Prince Harry’s current immigration status. He has stayed too long to be on a B-2 visitor’s visa or through the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), through which a traveler cannot stay in the U.S. for more than 90 days. Additionally, there was speculation that Prince Harry would be issued a diplomatic visa, Although, there are no confirmed sources on this speculation.
> 
> *U.S. Citizenship in Question*​If Prince Harry decides to become a U.S. citizen, he will be forced to expressly renounce any title or order of nobility he holds before he acquires U.S. citizenship, according to the Immigration and Nationalization Act. But although the Queen has stripped Prince Harry and Meghan of many honorary military appointments and royal patronages, they remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, at the least. In addition, acquiring U.S. citizenship could potentially lead to Prince Harry having to pay worldwide taxes.
> [\spoiler]


The article says Archie is a US citizen. So does he have dual nationality since he was born in the UK to one British parent and one American parent?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The article says Archie is a US citizen. So does he have dual nationality since he was born in the UK to one British parent and one American parent?


Yes, it seems both kids have dual.  Not sure if they pay UK or US taxes  






						Is Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Daughter Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor an American or British Citizen?
					

There are a couple of options open for the next member of the royal family.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_The couple's first child, Archie, was born in the U.K. on May 6, 2019, carries dual-citizenship, and as neither Harry nor Meghan have publicly renounced their citizenships in recent months, it seems that Lili will have equal claim as an American and a Brit as well._


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> The article says Archie is a US citizen. So does he have dual nationality since he was born in the UK to one British parent and one American parent?


I am not sure how it works in the US, but I have dual citizenship- I had to apply for Canadian citizenship and sit the exam.  I was born in the UK, so theoretically my children can obtain UK citizenship because I am a British national but they would have to apply.  Would Archie automatically be a US citizen because his mother is, or would someone have to apply on his behalf?


----------



## Redbirdhermes

xincinsin said:


> The article says Archie is a US citizen. So does he have dual nationality since he was born in the UK to one British parent and one American parent?


My BIL is a US citizen married to a Swede and living in Sweden.  When each of their sons was born in Sweden, my BIL went to the US Embassy and applied for US citizenship for them.  So, both of his sons have dual citizenship, Sweden and US.  I expect that Meagan made sure to obtain US citizenship for her children.


----------



## andrashik

Of course they don't plan to visit 








						Harry and Meghan 'don't plan to see William and Kate' during UK visit
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will travel from their home in California to support 'several charities close to their hearts' but are said to have no plans to see the Cambridges.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## muddledmint

rose60610 said:


> Considering how Claw has treated her own father after all he's done for her, and banished her whole family (except for Doria), the accusations she hurled against the BRF, even getting Harry to side with her and destroy the ties with his own family, THERE IS NOTHING I would put past her.  Using people is something loves to do and excels at.  Not saying there's proof of anything, but based on facts of what she has done, IMO being yacht girl and/or part time call girl for her would be nothing. Look at all the lies she's told and how hungry for a dollar she STILL IS. We have members of Congress who say "sex work is still work" and nothing to be ashamed of.  Stormy Daniels was a hero of the Woke, at least until her sidekick Avenatti was prosecuted for fraud, extortion, and theft.


Yes, to be fair, most of the times I thought there’s no way this or that story about meghan could be true, it has to be a malicious fake rumor …. it all turned out to be true! She is beyond what any normal person could imagine. I don’t understand how she has no shame. I mean all that acting out, throwing temper tantrums, bullying staff, disrespecting the royals etc. It is truly incredible and yet seems to be all true!!! So I guess in that regard, anything is possible, including her being a prostitute.


----------



## andrashik

Twitter is upset about the OneChild news and look and behold


----------



## csshopper

Her mother taught her to “not give away the milk for free”. So who knows how far that went. In a way it fits her pattern, use someone to get what she wants, then move on. I can see her using men she thought would advance her career.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Honestly I don’t care for all this whoring speculation because I think it is playing into her hands. She can point to the bad porn photoshops and claim it’s misogynist and stereotyping a black woman as a brainless sex object. Plenty of women have been unfairly branded with these labels and we all know M loves to co-opt someone else’s struggle.

I think it’s unlikely she’s ever had to do too much to be honest. The entirely of her life has been relying on her family and friends to give her unearned positions of power and influence and facilitate her entitled demands and I don’t see why we need to extrapolate beyond the obvious that she’s manipulative and lucky and that Daddy, Trev, Harry and The British taxpayer are more than enough sugar daddies for anyone.

Frankly, I’d respect her more if she had sucked a few sausages because that’s at least work but she’s just is and always has been a privileged princess who has the nerve to steal the narrative of the underdog.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

jelliedfeels said:


> Honestly I don’t care for all this whoring speculation because I think it is playing into her hands. She can point to the bad porn photoshops and claim it’s misogynist and stereotyping a black woman as a brainless sex object. Plenty of women have been unfairly branded with these labels and we all know M loves to co-opt someone else’s struggle.
> 
> I think it’s unlikely she’s ever had to do too much to be honest. The entirely of her life has been relying on her family and friends to give her unearned positions of power and influence and facilitate her entitled demands and I don’t see why we need to extrapolate beyond the obvious that she’s manipulative and lucky and that Daddy, Trev, Harry and The British taxpayer are more than enough sugar daddies for anyone.
> 
> Frankly, I’d respect her more if she had sucked a few sausages because that’s at least work but she’s just is and always has been a privileged princess who has the nerve to steal the narrative of the underdog.


Sausages  , omg. I will never look at them the same way


----------



## xincinsin

Some sugars are claiming that Netflix and Spotify gave the Harkles a pass due to COVID and all their personal affairs. They say the Harkles do not have to produce any programmes for the first 2 years of the contracts. They also keep repeating "Princess Meghan", so they are really pushing that narrative now.


----------



## creme fraiche

sdkitty said:


> Cate Blanchett will be perfect....as much as I like her, she can sometimes have that hard look like Wallis.  and of course she's a great actress


I think Holly Hunter would be a perfect fit.  She is an amazing actress and has the body to inhabit the DoW's persona.


----------



## jelliedfeels

andrashik said:


> Sausages  , omg. I will never look at them the same way





Sorry. If no one around you eats  hotdogs like this hopefully it’ll soon be forgotten.


On the latest U.K. visit, I had rather hoped we were coming to an end of these incredibly obvious, ineffective, self-aggrandising, money wasting and environmentally destructive global photo-ops (and that goes for Boston and the Caribbean too).

My conspiracy hat   is telling me they might have to move to some more sophisticated PR tactics now. I wonder whether all these obviously photoshopped porny images might be coming from ☀️ and La source herself because they discredit those who discredit her in the eyes of people who don’t care. We, the reasonable objectors are all of the same mind and we are the bad guys who don’t stop at obvious lies about this wonderful couple.  

We’ve seen similar tactics from the royals too IMHO with the very unnecessary public announcement they won’t be meeting H&M - (why waste taxpayer money having them over for the jubilee one might wonder) they are implicitly the black sheep but they won’t say it outright just distance themselves but not do anything definite as they still want to keep all the sheep in the fold. 

They clearly realise these people are bad news for their popularity and given most people I’ve spoken to think the jubilee was a waste of money and don’t care about Earth shot they could do with a panto villain to look better by comparison. My other conspiracy hat thinks that is definitely what happened with Carribean  tour- all these bizarre claims that the people of the Caribbean wanted independence for Megz sake were (IMHO) put out there to turn America, especially White America, against the idea of independence when you’d think as citizens of a republic formerly controlled by Britain  there would be a mutual sympathy.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> View attachment 5591871
> 
> Sorry. If no one around you eats  hotdogs like this hopefully it’ll soon be forgotten.
> 
> 
> On the latest U.K. visit, I had rather hoped we were coming to an end of these incredibly obvious, ineffective, self-aggrandising, money wasting and environmentally destructive global photo-ops (and that goes for Boston and the Caribbean too).
> 
> My conspiracy hat   is telling me they might have to move to some more sophisticated PR tactics now. I wonder whether all these obviously photoshopped porny images might be coming from ☀️ and La source herself because they discredit those who discredit her in the eyes of people who don’t care. We, the reasonable objectors are all of the same mind and we are the bad guys who don’t stop at obvious lies about this wonderful couple.
> 
> We’ve seen similar tactics from the royals too IMHO with the very unnecessary public announcement they won’t be meeting H&M - (why waste taxpayer money having them over for the jubilee one might wonder) they are implicitly the black sheep but they won’t say it outright just distance themselves but not do anything definite as they still want to keep all the sheep in the fold.
> 
> They clearly realise these people are bad news for their popularity and given most people I’ve spoken to think the jubilee was a waste of money and don’t care about Earth shot they could do with a panto villain to look better by comparison. My other conspiracy hat thinks that is definitely what happened with Carribean  tour- all these bizarre claims that the people of the Caribbean wanted independence for Megz sake were (IMHO) put out there to turn America, especially White America, against the idea of independence when you’d think as citizens of a republic formerly controlled by Britain  there would be a mutual sympathy.



I think the BRF now issue preemptive strikes against the couple, because previously they were always either caught on the back-foot, forced to either issuing rebuttals denying claims QEII had done/had X Y Z with them, or letting 'misinformation' go with grace only for it to be forever on record as _the _truth (than 'their' truth = lies).


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I think the BRF now issue preemptive strikes against the couple, because previously they were always either caught on the back-foot, forced to either issuing rebuttals denying claims QEII had done/had X Y Z with them, or letting 'misinformation' go with grace only for it to be forever on record as _the _truth (than 'their' truth = lies).


Yes, the family have been forced to come in late too many times to contradict some claim of theirs. They’ve learned they need to get ahead of it.


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing he has some kind of special ‘royal’ immunity.
> 
> Article in spoiler  from 2021 -
> https://www.natlawreview.com/articl...seek-us-permanent-residency-or-us-citizenship
> ​
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Will Not Seek U.S. Permanent Residency or U.S. Citizenship​Tuesday, April 13, 2021
> Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, is currently residing in Los Angeles, with his wife, Meghan Markle, and son, Archie. The British-born Prince Harry’s U.S. immigration status is surrounded by speculation. This does not affect Meghan or Archie as they are U.S citizens. Also, Prince Harry is no longer a member of the British royal family. A new report to _The Times_ noted that though Prince Harry is eligible to immediately become a U.S. permanent resident and subsequently a U.S. citizen, he will not pursue permanent residency and citizenship in the United States. A royal source told _The Times_ that “the Duke has not made an application for dual citizenship, and I don’t think he will apply for a green card at any point.”
> 
> *Potential Visa Option*​Among the many other ways in which Prince Harry can get a visa to live and work in the U.S., one lucrative option would be to have an O-1 visa. A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.
> 
> For Prince Harry to seek an O-1 visa, he must be sponsored by an organization that plans to work with him and identify the fields where he excels. Initially, an O-1 visa is approved for three years; thereafter it must be renewed every year. It will not be hard for Prince Harry to prove extraordinary ability given his philanthropic activities — the founding of the Invictus Games can certainly get him an O-1 visa.
> 
> *Prince Harry’s Immigration Status*​There is a lot of speculation surrounding Prince Harry’s current immigration status. He has stayed too long to be on a B-2 visitor’s visa or through the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), through which a traveler cannot stay in the U.S. for more than 90 days. Additionally, there was speculation that Prince Harry would be issued a diplomatic visa, Although, there are no confirmed sources on this speculation.
> 
> *U.S. Citizenship in Question*​If Prince Harry decides to become a U.S. citizen, he will be forced to expressly renounce any title or order of nobility he holds before he acquires U.S. citizenship, according to the Immigration and Nationalization Act. But although the Queen has stripped Prince Harry and Meghan of many honorary military appointments and royal patronages, they remain the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, at the least. In addition, acquiring U.S. citizenship could potentially lead to Prince Harry having to pay worldwide taxes.
> [\spoiler]


*A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.*

Achievement of what now? Whining, grifting, blaming, throwing people under the bus?


----------



## Chanbal

WingNut said:


> *A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.*
> 
> Achievement of what now? Whining, grifting, blaming, throwing people under the bus?


This describes Hazz to a t.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Oh dear, QE may join the Cambridges and miss the Harkles' visit to the UK. Camilla?
> View attachment 5591169
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen set to miss Harry and Meghan's return and STAY in Scotland
> 
> 
> THE QUEEN may not be able to meet in person Meghan Markle and Prince Harry during their short trip to the UK next month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk





TC1 said:


> I'm sure HMTQ is being advised to avoid these two..with their photo op's and hidden mic's


HMTQ usually spends August to October at Balmoral Castle as part of her holidays/vacation. She often invites family members to join her and these visits are scheduled so that HM can visit with various members of her family throughout her stay. The Cambridges may be on that schedule, but that doesn't preclude other members from having being slated to visit with HM at well. Throughout her reign, she has also invited dignitaries to spend time at Balmoral. This year she might have to interrupt her holidays to greet the new PM at BP after s/he is chosen. BTW, the gates are well guarded to deter any uninvited guest(s) from intruding on her quietude.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Some sugars are claiming that Netflix and Spotify gave the Harkles a pass due to COVID and all their personal affairs. They say the Harkles do not have to produce any programmes for the first 2 years of the contracts. They also keep repeating "Princess Meghan", so they are really pushing that narrative now.



So the sugars have possession of these contracts but nobody else?  How impressive  !  All the CYA narratives/excuses can't save these idiots. Did everybody's Netflix/Spotify contracts give them an out for Covid?


----------



## rose60610

jelliedfeels said:


> Honestly I don’t care for all this whoring speculation because I think it is playing into her hands. She can point to the bad porn photoshops and claim it’s misogynist and stereotyping a black woman as a brainless sex object. Plenty of women have been unfairly branded with these labels and we all know M loves to co-opt someone else’s struggle.
> 
> I think it’s unlikely she’s ever had to do too much to be honest. The entirely of her life has been relying on her family and friends to give her unearned positions of power and influence and facilitate her entitled demands and I don’t see why we need to extrapolate beyond the obvious that she’s manipulative and lucky and that Daddy, Trev, Harry and The British taxpayer are more than enough sugar daddies for anyone.
> 
> Frankly, I’d respect her more if she had sucked a few sausages because that’s at least work but she’s just is and always has been a privileged princess who has the nerve to steal the narrative of the underdog.



I see what you're saying. I can also easily see her utilizing casting couch tactics on yachts with wealthy men. Since we've entered an age where major media outlets report outlandish rumors as headline hard news facts, it appears slander and libel are fair game for anybody. Including for our precious "not many people have asked me if I'm OK" duchess. Her sausage skills may have been upgraded on our favorite idiot prince. She reeled him in somehow after the Inskip Jamaican wedding where Haz wasn't thrilled to see her.  In her sick beeyatch mind, the world revolves around her no matter what.  When she deliberately butted in front of the Queen several times (there is YouTube footage) I thought "OK, all bets are off with her."  I PUT NOTHING PAST HER.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Yahoo Sports!? Isn't  S doing its work? 


_According to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's representatives, within the next few weeks the couple will make a trip to the UK to visit charities and associations. "Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are delighted to visit with several charities close to their hearts in early September," their spokesperson said. 

Over on social media, the couple's announcement was not exactly embraced with open arms. Some people accused them of making the visit for the sake of their show. "Smacks of desperation! 'We hate the UK and how dare they not fund our security, the British public and the British media are racists, our family is racist…' But guess what they will come to the UK because they need footage for Netflix!" wrote @things_royal. 

"Let me correct the headline; Henry and wife need more content for Netflix so will visit UK to attend 'charity' event, despite claiming it's not safe to do so without royal protection," agreed Kaz Humphries. _









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Called "Hypocrites" Over Controversial UK Trip
					

When Prince Harry and Meghan Markle decided to leave the UK for America and forfeit their roles as working members of the Royal Family, their popularity in the country plummeted. Now that rumors are swirling about what members of the Royal Family will be targeted in Prince Harry's upcoming...




					sports.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

Another interesting headline, this time from NYP 











						Meghan Markle ‘bitter’ about failure to ‘create woke royal family,’ expert claims
					

“They are people who are very determined to show that their way is the best way,” Angela Levin said of the Sussexes.




					nypost.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


>



I know I’m lowering the tone of this thread a lot lately but I’m cracking up at “I am coming” in big letters behind dirty Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> I know I’m lowering the tone of this thread a lot lately but I’m cracking up at “I am coming” in big letters behind dirty Harry


I love a lowered tone!


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> The article says Archie is a US citizen. So does he have dual nationality since he was born in the UK to one British parent and one American parent?


We have always assumed that A has dual nationality - he is eligible for US citizenship
Conversely, I assumed that L has dual citizenship, she was born in the US and I assume she is eligible for UK citizenship ?


----------



## Redbirdhermes

WingNut said:


> *A non-immigrant visa for people with “extraordinary ability or achievement.” The O-1 is often applied for by individuals who can showcase a very high level of accomplishment in their field.*



Harry established and is involved with the Invictus games, which is arguably his greatest accomplishment as an adult.  I'm thinking he did get an O-1 visa and furthermore,  the reports that he is planning to spend six months per year in the UK may actually be visa and/or tax related.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Some sugars are claiming that Netflix and Spotify gave the Harkles a pass due to COVID and all their personal affairs. They say the Harkles do not have to produce any programmes for the first 2 years of the contracts. They also keep repeating "Princess Meghan", so they are really pushing that narrative now.


ROTFL ... 
A two year pass ... I want one ...


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


> Sausages  , omg. I will never look at them the same way


Recently watching several Easter European police dramas, one was set in the Czech Republic shortly after WWI
A dapper policeman, finicky about his clothes and handle bar moustache
He was eating a sausage - picked it up in his hands, dipped in mustard and took a big bite

I thought that was odd, until i noticed the same in videos from other sausage-loving countries eg Germany/Austria
I guess that is not so odd after all. It takes a very sharp knife to cut off a bite without getting splashed with grease
Might be a sausage-eating pro technique !


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I PUT NOTHING PAST HER.


But wait, there's more...There were comments on Twitter yesterday saying that "sources" claim after her father goes she is going to "reveal" that he abused her for years as a child, and he won't be around to defend himself against the accusations. She will claim this as the reason she refused when PC pushed for her to visit him before the wedding, and also why she didn't invite him to the wedding. It sounded perfectly plausible for her.


----------



## charlottawill

Oh the desperation...and the kiss of death for a lot of marriages:


----------



## Annawakes

I’m rolling my eyes so hard at this renewal of vows thing.  Scraping the bottom of the barrel for content eh?


----------



## charlottawill

Those soft porn pics? Hmmm.....


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, it seems both kids have dual.  *Not sure if they pay UK or US taxes*


If you have U.S. source income, you pay U.S. taxes, regardless of your citizenship status.  The IRS will pursue people to the ends of the earth if they generate income on U.S. soil or from U.S. sources and do not declare it.  This is one thing the IRS is very good at.  The individual states are good at collecting what is owed to them too. Possibly the reason their first and only paid speech was in Florida as Florida has no state income tax. Otherwise, any state where they give a paid speech is going to see that as income generated in that state and want their piece. Not that they have found anyone interested in paying them to speak after that first effort in Florida.

They have an extremely complicated tax situation overall, what with Harry being a non-citizen, Meghan being a citizen, income from various sources including perhaps foreign trusts and Diana's estate, some amount of income received from this father via the Duchy of Cornwall perhaps, residency in a high tax state that also levies its own state income tax, income possibly from various other states, running a foundation with (so far) unknown sources of funding, etc. They are paying their accountants a boat load of money, that I can state with confidence.


----------



## duna

Jayne1 said:


> What doesn't work for the BRF is not so much age and beauty, it is letting the public know what they are feeling.
> 
> The Queen does not. Camilla is incredibly good at putting aside any ego. Kate shines of course, but we never see ego and just does her job.
> 
> Diana and Meg were both manipulative and vindictive with a constant need to feed their public persona... and that is not welcomed in the BRF.


I mostly agree but I think between Diana and Meghan there's a chasm: Diana was genuine and caring towards others and that's why she was so popular, while M is just me, me, me!


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I mostly agree but I think between Diana and Meghan there's a chasm: Diana was genuine and caring towards others and that's why she was so popular, while M is just me, me, me!


Another difference - in terms of work output
Diana was married for about 15 years - a long time - she contributed for a long time
M has been married for 4 years, she has not done much in those 4 years - partly due to COVID (I cut her some slack here), not much of a track record


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> We have always assumed that A has dual nationality - he is eligible for US citizenship
> Conversely, I assumed that L has dual citizenship, she was born in the US and I assume she is eligible for UK citizenship ?



She has to live here to apply


----------



## andrashik

Maybe they can attend the same school as the Cambridges


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> She has to live here to apply


I *think* she may get it automatically (lilibet) ...  if indeed she exists. 
https://www.gov.uk/apply-citizenship-british-parent/born-on-or-after-1-july-2006 

These people are really living on the edge with the IRS.   
If Harry has the I-O visa, he can only be paid by the organization that sponsored him; and the visa is good for three years, though is extentable.  Who knows what his status actually is.  But if he is earning $ in the US, I am sure both IRS and INS have their eye on him.


----------



## Toby93

Redbirdhermes said:


> Harry established and is involved with the Invictus games, which is arguably his greatest accomplishment as an adult.  I'm thinking he did get an O-1 visa and furthermore,  the reports that he is planning to spend six months per year in the UK may actually be visa and/or tax related.


I doubt that dimwit Hazz actually established this on his own.  He was still with the Firm at this point and I'm sure the palace saw an opportunity to present him as more than a floundering spoilt playboy, and ran with it.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Those soft porn pics? Hmmm.....



Was this part of her audition for yacht girl?


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> I *think* she may get it automatically (lilibet) ...  if indeed she exists.
> https://www.gov.uk/apply-citizenship-british-parent/born-on-or-after-1-july-2006
> 
> These people are really living on the edge with the IRS.
> If Harry has the I-O visa, he can only be paid by the organization that sponsored him; and the visa is good for three years, though is extentable.  Who knows what his status actually is.  But if he is earning $ in the US, I am sure both IRS and INS have their eye on him.



I'm not sure if Lilli would get it automatically if she was born in another country and one of her parents is not a British Citizen.

Whatever our legal system, I'm sure she will be waved through anyway though. Unfortunately, I doubt they will even ask for a birth certificate.  The BRF including Hazard don't seem to have to abide the rules like the rest of us that pay for them (like have to tell the truth in a court of law)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> But wait, there's more...There were comments on Twitter yesterday saying that "sources" claim after her father goes she is going to "reveal" that he abused her for years as a child, and he won't be around to defend himself against the accusations. She will claim this as the reason she refused when PC pushed for her to visit him before the wedding, and also why she didn't invite him to the wedding. It sounded perfectly plausible for her.



When Lady C wrote the book on them she was contacted by "sources" claiming just this (the CSA, not that they wanted to keep it hush until after his death). She said it smelled extremely fishy and she thinks it's another lie to make her the victim and she absolutely didn't fall for it, but was stunned how ruthless and disgusting one can be.


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5592048
> 
> Maybe they can attend the same school as the Cambridges


And where would mom be living?  The UK?  Don’t think so.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I'm not sure if Lilli would get it automatically if she was born in another country and one of her parents is not a British Citizen.
> 
> Whatever our legal system, I'm sure she will be waved through anyway though. Unfortunately, I doubt they will even ask for a birth certificate.  The BRF including Hazard don't seem to have to abide the rules like the rest of us that pay for them (like have to tell the truth in a court of law)


They would have to go to the British Consulate and register her birth.  They would have had to do the same for Archie at the US Consulate in UK.  I wonder if they were so sloppy that they did neither for either of them.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When Lady C wrote the book on them she was contacted by "sources" claiming just this. She said it smelled extremely fishy and she thinks it's another lie to make her the victim and she absolutely didn't fall for it, but was stunned how ruthless and disgusting one can be.


You know that Samantha and Thom, JR would be all over this.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I'm not sure if Lilli would get it automatically if she was born in another country and one of her parents is not a British Citizen.
> 
> Whatever our legal system, I'm sure she will be waved through anyway though. Unfortunately, I doubt they will even ask for a birth certificate.  The BRF including Hazard don't seem to have to abide the rules like the rest of us that pay for them (like have to tell the truth in a court of law)


The only UK resident who doesn’t need a passport is The Queen. Everyone else does.


----------



## LizzieBennett

charlottawill said:


> I'm not sure she was solely to blame for that. It was only natural for everyone to want see and meet the beautiful young princess instead of her boring husband. It would have been wise for him to recognize her value to the monarchy and let her run with it instead of getting sulky about being upstaged by her at times. You are right that Philip was very good at it, but I believe he also struggled with it early in the marriage and it took some time for him to accept that the Queen was the star of the show.


I always thought Prince Phillip had more of an issue with finding an identity in the family when he had to give up a very promising naval career much earlier than he anticipated.   He never seemed like the person that wanted the spotlight on him to me.   But that’s just my opinion.

I also think in one sense MM is very like Diana…..both want the spotlight on them.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

CobaltBlu said:


> I *think* she may get it automatically (lilibet) ...  if indeed she exists.
> https://www.gov.uk/apply-citizenship-british-parent/born-on-or-after-1-july-2006





papertiger said:


> I'm not sure if Lilli would get it automatically if she was born in another country and one of her parents is not a British Citizen.



From the link in the first quote--




In other words, Lili is automatically a British citizen because she was born outside the UK after July 1, 2006, her father was a British citizen at the time of her birth, and he is eligible to pass on his citizenship to her because he was born in the UK.

I am pretty sure that Lili exists since the BRF website has her listed in the line of succession.  One would think that they checked first.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> She has to live here to apply


That might explain the rumors about 6 mos a year at Frogmore Cottage


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> I *think* she may get it automatically (lilibet) ...  if indeed she exists.
> https://www.gov.uk/apply-citizenship-british-parent/born-on-or-after-1-july-2006
> 
> These people are really living on the edge with the IRS.
> If Harry has the I-O visa, he can only be paid by the organization that sponsored him; and the visa is good for three years, though is extentable.  Who knows what his status actually is.  But if he is earning $ in the US, I am sure both IRS and INS have their eye on him.


And, I am sure he is a whiz at income taxes … He may have signed to divert his income in a tax friendly way, not realizing what the implications are for community property (who really earned the income? Himself or a foundation?)
Tax laws here are impossible to understand (much less pay), and it is different at the federal and state levels. There may be more than one state involved since they incorporated in Delaware and live in California. Do we really know where Archewell is located ? It could a third state …


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> The only UK resident who doesn’t need a passport is The Queen. Everyone else does.



The Queen is the only one who doesn't need one to travel. 

Plenty in the UK are citizens and don't have a passport, they would only need one when they travel, hey can always show a driver's licence if they need to show ID (we don't have specific ID cards)


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> That might explain the rumors about 6 mos a year at Frogmore Cottage



Own/rent property and live are two different things. Meg would be supposedly take a citizenship test too (Life in the UK Test) if she wants dual nationality. 

From https://www.gov.uk/apply-citizenship-indefinite-leave-to-remain

You must have lived in the UK for *at least 5 years* before the date of your application

and prove you intend to live in the UK

Time you’ve spent outside the UK​You should *not *have:


spent more than 450 days outside the UK during the 5 years before your application
spent more than 90 days outside the UK in the last 12 months


From https://www.gov.uk/british-citizenship :

If you’ve applied for citizenship, you’ll need permission to stay in the UK until you’re granted citizenship. Your permission needs to last until you have had your citizenship ceremony.

If you’re married to or in a civil partnership with a British citizen​To apply as the spouse or civil partner of a British citizen you must have lived in the UK for the last 3 years.

You’ll_ *also*_ need to have either:


indefinite leave to remain (ILR)
settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme

-------------
I checked and* Lili* should be able to automatically become a British citizen because she was born after 1 July, 2006 to a British parent (in this case H). If she was not Henry Windor's (his name is not on the birth cert.) nor officially adopted by him, it could be tricky. Again, they'll just wave her through whatever, we won't have to worry about (whichever baby they say is) Lil.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> From the link in the first quote--
> 
> View attachment 5592118
> 
> 
> In other words, Lili is automatically a British citizen because she was born outside the UK after July 1, 2006, her father was a British citizen at the time of her birth, and he is eligible to pass on his citizenship to her because he was born in the UK.
> 
> I am pretty sure that Lili exists since the BRF website has her listed in the line of succession.  One would think that they checked first.



Why would you think they'd check? How would they? See baby, tick?


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I’m rolling my eyes so hard at this renewal of vows thing.  Scraping the bottom of the barrel for content eh?


Nothing screams “my marriage is hanging by a thread” like renewing vows before the 5th anniversary.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Nothing screams “my marriage is hanging by a thread” like renewing vows before the 5th anniversary.



So _so_ true!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Nothing screams “my marriage is hanging by a thread” like renewing vows before the 5th anniversary.



I feel even 5 years is early. But also, the idea of ONE wedding that isn't an elopement gives me anxiety, I really wouldn't want to be put through it again.


----------



## Lodpah

Just wanted to let you all know that dog and puppy videos still have millions more views than these two heel-catchers.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

papertiger said:


> Why would you think they'd check? How would they? See baby, tick?


The birth certificate and an attending physician's statement should be fairly easy to obtain.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Nothing screams “my marriage is hanging by a thread” like renewing vows before the 5th anniversary.


This would be the third time??  No matter how many times she pushes him into it, he will still eventually leave


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel even 5 years is early. But also, the idea of ONE wedding that isn't an elopement gives me anxiety, I really wouldn't want to be put through it again.



So long as they're paying for it themselves (this time)


----------



## Chanbal

Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?   



“_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*

We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.

“*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Geez. Someone needs to tell those people to tone it down a notch to be at least somewhat believable.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._



They need  2nd honeymoon already?  

He landed an American for his soulmate who will hang clutch her British title until her dying breath.

Gosh I hope they do the wedding three days early, just like the other one and then their glamourous wedding can be another circus.


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._



Did Jackson Hole relocate????  Or am I geographically confused?


----------



## sdkitty

wonder if this is something Harry was planning to use 

*Hidden Note: Princess Di Predicted Her Own Car-Crash Death*

*By Marlow Stern*

See an exclusive clip from the new Discovery+ docuseries “The Diana Investigations” about the infamous “Mishcon Note,” in which Lady Di worried she would die in a car accident.


----------



## Chanbal

What is Hazz doing in Mozambique?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> What is Hazz doing in Mozambique?



without the WIFE?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> You know that Samantha and Thom, JR would be all over this.


Of course, but how could they disprove her claim? It would be "she said, he said", and if the "he" is dead, well...

Often when there is abuse occurring within a family, there are family members who are oblivious to what is going on. I want to be very clear, I'm not saying it happened, just that if ZeeZy stoops to this disgusting tactic it would be difficult for them to disprove.


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> What is Hazz doing in Mozambique?



handing out "small prizes" but not as a member of the BRF...now just for attention


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Of course, but how could they disprove her claim? It would be "she said, he said", and if the "he" is dead, well...
> 
> Often when there is abuse occurring within a family, there are family members who are oblivious to what is going on. I want to be very clear, I'm not saying it happened, just that if ZeeZy stoops to this disgusting tactic it would be difficult for them to disprove.


I don't know if it's true that she plans to do this but if she does and it is a lie, that would be absolutely evil


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Maybe they can attend the same school as the Cambridges



I doubt the school would have them.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> without the WIFE?


She is likely busy with the wedding preparation.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> So long as they're paying for it themselves (this time)


You mean Netflix is paying for it.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._



And to think someone got paid to write that garbage.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> And to think someone got paid to write that garbage.


Doria as the only family member.  Sounds like wedding redux to me.


----------



## bag-mania

DL Harper said:


> Did Jackson Hole relocate????  Or am I geographically confused?


You can’t expect “the source” to be familiar with American geography.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>



When was the last time Charles had an actual documented face-to-face meeting with Harry? I think it was before Philip died, possibly before Megxit.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I still don't understand why it's so hard to get rid of them when they are the ones not fulfilling their contract.


----------



## bag-mania

Netflix had no trouble canceling production of Meghan’s Pearl cartoon because they knew it would suck. 

Up to this point Netflix has been trying to recover something of their investment, if only to save face. There was supposed to be an Invictus show completed earlier this year, which will probably be dull, but at least it should be almost finished.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't understand why it's so hard to get rid of them when they are the ones not fulfilling their contract.



It's so disgusting that they use their mental health as the excuse for not fulfilling their contractual obligations. Kick the lazy grifters to the curb already.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> But wait, there's more...There were comments on Twitter yesterday saying that "sources" claim after her father goes she is going to "reveal" that he abused her for years as a child, and he won't be around to defend himself against the accusations. She will claim this as the reason she refused when PC pushed for her to visit him before the wedding, and also why she didn't invite him to the wedding. It sounded perfectly plausible for her.


If this turns out to be true it would be disgusting on her part beyond words. I don’t believe it and it shows how vile she is to use this for publicity.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> What is Hazz doing in Mozambique?




He looks rather happy … traveling the world without TW by himself.


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> I’m rolling my eyes so hard at this renewal of vows thing.  Scraping the bottom of the barrel for content eh?


Pure desperation. My husband and I have been married for over 35 years. We've never felt the need for a "vow renewal".


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> If this turns out to be true it would be disgusting on her part beyond words. I don’t believe it and it shows how vile she is to use this for publicity.


It's just ugly gossip right now, but I wouldn't put it past her if she thinks she can make money or win sympathy off of it.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._



Jackson Hole is not in Idaho. It’s in Montana.


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> He looks rather happy … traveling the world without TW by himself.


Maybe there's some truth to the rumor that they will start dividing their time between two places, and apart from each other.


----------



## LittleStar88

bellecate said:


> Jackson Hole is not in Idaho. It’s in Montana.



It’s actually Wyoming


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> It’s actually Wyoming


I thought she was being sarcastic.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Jackson Hole is not in Idaho. It’s in Montana.


Well @bag-mania addressed that very well. The intern @Netfl*x or whoever wrote the piece has likely limited knowledge of US geography. I wonder if Scoobie knows where Jackson Hole, Wyoming is…


----------



## Chanbal

Spoiler: Rated R


----------



## Chanbal

Rumore: Montecito, Major Johnny, private jets… Prince William to speak at the UN.


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> It’s actually Wyoming


 Can’t believe I wrote out Montana. I was saying in my head Wyoming.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._



Wow.  
-The McMansion is not glamorous and rural enough for this sham show. Haaaa, they want to make a larger footprint on our country. So typical of this BRF.  Go away, Hazzzi. You’re a bore.
-Doria is ok to attend, again?  Snore.
-“they’ll write their own vows”?? Nah, MM will churn out another word salad. Snore. 
-second honeymoon?  They surely will pay for this one unless Foster puts up the cash.  Snore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Can Hazzi name the capitals of any of our states?  Can she?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> -*second honeymoon?  They surely will pay for this one unless Foster puts up the cash*.  Snore.
> 
> View attachment 5592509



Maybe not,  if it's part of the reality show aka docuseries…


----------



## mellibelly

charlottawill said:


> Those soft porn pics? Hmmm.....





charlottawill said:


>



This is 1000% why I believe the yacht girl rumors. Remember, Bower said how disgusted Corey was with her when they were dating. C was relieved when she left him for the ball-less wonder. 

Does anyone else remember the  topless photos of ZZZ online before the engagement? I know because I saw them and they were scrubbed from the internet when H confirmed they were dating. Back when she was a nobody and hinting she was dating H with the matching bracelets, the initial necklace, the banana photo… I  googled her because who TF was she and the photos came up. They looked like they came from the same trip as the sprawled on a bench photo above. It was clearly a set of vacation selfies or maybe a friend took them. But they were amateur iPhone photos where she was wearing just a bikini bottom and trying to look sexy. It was clearly her with the no waist figure we all know and post implant removal boobs…sort of a deflated flat chested look. The BRF probably scrubbed them from the web. They were not cute


----------



## needlv

mellibelly said:


> This is 1000% why I believe the yacht girl rumors. Remember, Bower said how disgusted Corey was with her when they were dating. C was relieved when she left him for the ball-less wonder.
> 
> Does anyone else remember the  topless photos of ZZZ online before the engagement? I know because I saw them and they were scrubbed from the internet when H confirmed they were dating. Back when she was a nobody and hinting she was dating H with the matching bracelets, the initial necklace, the banana photo… I  googled her because who TF was she and the photos came up. They looked like they came from the same trip as the sprawled on a bench photo above. It was clearly a set of vacation selfies or maybe a friend took them. But they were amateur iPhone photos where she was wearing just a bikini bottom and trying to look sexy. It was clearly her with the no waist figure we all know and post implant removal boobs…sort of a deflated flat chested look. The BRF probably scrubbed them from the web. They were not cute



I think the bench photos with her topless were real.

but the two videos… they look fake.  Her face has been put on someone else’s body.  Remember her hands have that weird double jointed thumb (you see when she holds Archie or Lilibux as babies).  Wrong hands in those clips.

not to suggest there aren’t real clips of her out there somewhere….  I’m sure there could be.


----------



## mellibelly

I do think that short video @charlottawill posted is real. The “porn” ones from earlier are not. The topless photos I saw back in 2016 were definitely real.


----------



## mellibelly

Guys I took one for the team and found them yuckity yuck my eyes


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Guys I took one for the team and found them yuckity yuck my eyes


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Who wrote the script for this cheap comedy? TW? A 1st year intern @ Netfl*x?
> 
> View attachment 5592326
> 
> “_*Meghan’s mum Doria will be on the list, but she’ll be the only family member*. *Then there will be a handful of their close US friends* – like Katherine and David [Foster], Janina [Gavankar], possibly Priyanka and Nick Jonas – *but, obviously, it’ll all depend on their schedules. *There’ll be roles for the kids and* they’ll write their own vows. The grand plan is to turn it into a big family vacation that will also serve as a second honeymoon.”*
> 
> We’re told the couple are shunning their luxury mansion as the venue, and instead opting for somewhere more rural, though equally glamorous, naturally.
> 
> “*The more Harry sees of the beautiful corners of the States, *such as Jackson Hole in Idaho and the islands off the coast of Florida and Maine, *the more his mind’s blown by what a beautiful country it is and how he’s hit the jackpot by landing an American for his soulmate*,” says the source._



Didn't Omid Plastic start off by working for Heat? Maybe he wrote this in a return to his roots  Sounds like his style.


----------



## CobaltBlu

bellecate said:


> Can’t believe I wrote out Montana. I was saying in my head Wyoming.


I do that all the time. There’s something about these two words that twists me up.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> But wait, there's more...There were comments on Twitter yesterday saying that "sources" claim after her father goes she is going to "reveal" that he abused her for years as a child, and he won't be around to defend himself against the accusations. She will claim this as the reason she refused when PC pushed for her to visit him before the wedding, and also why she didn't invite him to the wedding. It sounded perfectly plausible for her.


She is bound to pen a memoir sooner rather than later. I wonder what reason she will give for cutting off her entire family sans mother. I think she claimed that she took care of one grandma till the old lady passed away, but that was proved false as it overlapped with her time in Canada. Is she going to claim that the entire Raglan clan was toxic, because that is how her sugars are justifying her denial of the Markles and saying she has every right to cut off her toxic relatives.


----------



## mellibelly

She wants to be our next president


----------



## xincinsin

mellibelly said:


> She wants to be our next president
> View attachment 5592572


They can caption it: "I have NOTHING to hide"


----------



## cdtracing

mellibelly said:


> She wants to be our next president
> View attachment 5592572


----------



## papertiger

Can't see this on the news so perhaps jumped the gun


----------



## papertiger

People are writing where the couple should be sent in the comments  Feeling sorry for the people of South Africa, Greenland and  Tristan de Cunha


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> Well @bag-mania addressed that very well. The intern @Netfl*x or whoever wrote the piece has likely limited knowledge of US geography. I wonder if Scoobie knows where Jackson Hole, Wyoming is…



A perfect gif, Thank You! I need to rewatch this brilliant of a comedy))


----------



## Aminamina

xincinsin said:


> They can caption it: "I have NOTHING to hide"


So as my vice-president candidate!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> People are writing where the couple should be sent in the comments  Feeling sorry for the people of South Africa, Greenland and  Tristan de Cunha



I'm going to regret my words, but they should be contained in the UK and/or US. The world doesn't need another pandemic.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

nvm


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles' stans and their minister of propaganda are allegedly trying to jeopardize Will's upcoming visits to the US…


----------



## Chanbal

Prince William put duty ahead of family after Megxit, ex-aide claims
					

Speaking on a forthcoming Channel 4 documentary, The Real Windsors: A Very Modern Prince?, Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton said Prince William, 40, never wavers from what is right.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

mellibelly said:


> She wants to be our next president
> View attachment 5592572


She sure wasn't a stay at home wallflower, was she.  She really got around, never stopping on her quest to further herself.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> They can caption it: "I have NOTHING to hide"


    Brilliant!


----------



## rose60610

I don't know why Meghan bothers with wanting to be Prez when what she already believes the world revolves around HER. When she detects that it doesn't she trots out to a cemetery with camera crew to remind us all how pious and compassionate she is. Then, there, the world worships her all over again. In her sick mind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_The Duke of Sussex made a surprise solo three-day visit to  Mozambique this week - as he prepares to return to the UK for a whirlwind trip next month. 

Prince Harry, 37, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in Californiahaving stepped back from royal duty,  stayed at luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge for three days.

A source told MailOnline Harry flew to Heathrow on Sunday, where he changed to a connecting flight to Johannesburg. 

According to Instagram page @moz_paparazzi, the royal father-of-two took walks looking at tourist attractions in the region with friends, and spoke with the  President of the Tourism Association in the area, Yassin Amuji.

The royal appeared not to have been joined by his wife Meghan Markle, 41, or his children Archie, three, or Lilibet, one, on the trip. 

While the reason behind his trip hasn't been revealed, one of the Duke's main projects is Travalyst - an organisation which aims to make the tourism industry more sustainable make it easier for travellers to make eco-friendly choices. _
_Prince Harry makes surprise three-day solo visit to Mozambique where he was spotted visiting a luxury beach resort - ahead of his return to the UK with Meghan Markle next month_​
*Duke of Sussex, 37, surprised royal fans with a visit to  Mozambique this week*
*Prince Harry stayed in Vilankulo for three days and visited tourist sites *
*The father-of-two stayed at luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge *
*A source told MailOnline Harry flew to Heathrow in London on Sunday*
*The Duke then changed to a connecting flight to Johannesburg *
*Comes after news he and wife Meghan Markle will travel to Europe in September *
_








						Prince Harry makes surprise three-day solo visit to Mozambique
					

Prince Harry, 37, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California having stepped back from royal duty,  stayed at Vilanculos Beach Lodge.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## bag-mania

I'm comfortable in the knowledge that Meghan doesn't really want to get into politics. She just wants the attention she gets by putting it out there that she _might be interested_ in getting into politics.

Because let's face it, she isn't willing or capable of putting in the work required. As she has proven time and again, she shows interest and then she drops project after project, never seeing any of them through (other than landing Harry, of course).


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> I don't know why Meghan bothers with wanting to be Prez when what she already believes the world revolves around HER. When she detects that it doesn't she trots out to a cemetery with camera crew to remind us all how pious and compassionate she is. Then, there, the world worships her all over again. In her sick mind.



She doesn't really want to run for the presidency.   She wants everyone talking about her running for President.  

She might want to be a senator.  There are, of course, some great senators who work very hard and are actually influential and get things done. She would not be that kind of senator. She'd show up in DC occasionally for a vote, go on all the talk shows to lament about how something must be done about this or that, and make a few word salad speeches.  Still, I doubt she'd even win an election for senator.  There are numerous California politicians who have spent decades preparing for a run at the Senate and they aren't going to just walk away and let her take the next open seat from California without a fight.  Can you imagine her discussing farm policy, water policy, and immigration in one of the debates with people who have studied and worked on these issues for years? Lord, I'd pay money to see that.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I'm comfortable in the knowledge that Meghan doesn't really want to get into politics.* She just wants the attention she gets by putting it out there that she _might be interested_ in getting into politics.
> 
> *Because let's face it, she isn't willing or capable of putting in the work required.* As she has proven time and again, she shows interest and then she drops project after project, never seeing any of them through (other than landing Harry, of course).


I wish I could share your optimism @bag-mania, but I believe TW would love to get into politics and have the work done by Sucks, Scoobie et al.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Duke of Sussex made a surprise solo three-day visit to  Mozambique this week - as he prepares to return to the UK for a whirlwind trip next month.
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in Californiahaving stepped back from royal duty,  stayed at luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge for three days.
> 
> A source told MailOnline Harry flew to Heathrow on Sunday, where he changed to a connecting flight to Johannesburg.
> 
> According to Instagram page @moz_paparazzi, the royal father-of-two took walks looking at tourist attractions in the region with friends, and spoke with the  President of the Tourism Association in the area, Yassin Amuji.
> 
> The royal appeared not to have been joined by his wife Meghan Markle, 41, or his children Archie, three, or Lilibet, one, on the trip.
> 
> While the reason behind his trip hasn't been revealed, one of the Duke's main projects is Travalyst - an organisation which aims to make the tourism industry more sustainable make it easier for travellers to make eco-friendly choices. _
> _Prince Harry makes surprise three-day solo visit to Mozambique where he was spotted visiting a luxury beach resort - ahead of his return to the UK with Meghan Markle next month_​
> *Duke of Sussex, 37, surprised royal fans with a visit to  Mozambique this week*
> *Prince Harry stayed in Vilankulo for three days and visited tourist sites *
> *The father-of-two stayed at luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge *
> *A source told MailOnline Harry flew to Heathrow in London on Sunday*
> *The Duke then changed to a connecting flight to Johannesburg *
> *Comes after news he and wife Meghan Markle will travel to Europe in September *
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise three-day solo visit to Mozambique
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California having stepped back from royal duty,  stayed at Vilanculos Beach Lodge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



From Prince to > cheap freebie influencer, but at least we know who paid for his visit and why he was asked to go:


_Prince Harry stayed in Vilankulo for three days and *visited tourist sites *_
_The father-of-two stayed at *luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge* _


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> Oh the desperation...and the kiss of death for a lot of marriages:



AKA Doubling down.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

1LV said:


> AKA Doubling down.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Starts at about 3:00…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> She is likely busy with the wedding preparation.



that's evil and hilarious


charlottawill said:


> Pure desperation. My husband and I have been married for over 35 years. We've never felt the need for a "vow renewal".


Heidi Klum did it (I think annually) and look where her marriage is


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> This is 1000% why I believe the yacht girl rumors. Remember, Bower said how disgusted Corey was with her when they were dating. C was relieved when she left him for the ball-less wonder.
> 
> Does anyone else remember the  topless photos of ZZZ online before the engagement? I know because I saw them and they were scrubbed from the internet when H confirmed they were dating. Back when she was a nobody and hinting she was dating H with the matching bracelets, the initial necklace, the banana photo… I  googled her because who TF was she and the photos came up. They looked like they came from the same trip as the sprawled on a bench photo above. It was clearly a set of vacation selfies or maybe a friend took them. But they were amateur iPhone photos where she was wearing just a bikini bottom and trying to look sexy. It was clearly her with the no waist figure we all know and post implant removal boobs…sort of a deflated flat chested look. The BRF probably scrubbed them from the web. They were not cute


trying to be sexy sounds about right to me


----------



## bag-mania

This is kind of confusing. It says that Harry is either in Africa now or has recently been there. But then 90% of the article talks about his past visits to Africa. What’s the deal?









						Prince Harry Makes Surprise Visit to Africa to Host U.S. Officials Touring Wildlife Areas
					

Prince Harry traveled to Africa for a surprise visit in his role as as President of African Parks to welcome U.S. officials, conservationists and philanthropists as they tour wildlife areas




					people.com


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> AKA Doubling down.



I read 'dumbing down', I guess they've already done that


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> I read 'dumbing down', I guess they've already done that


That too.


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> *trying to be sexy* sounds about right to me


 ^ This times 1000!  I think wifey really wants people to think she's super sexy and has 'special skills' that enabled her to claw her way to the top(?) but I really doubt that's true.  She has loads of confidence, which is great, but her only real skill is her ability to manipulate others.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> From Prince to > cheap freebie influencer, but at least we know who paid for his visit and why he was asked to go:
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry stayed in Vilankulo for three days and *visited tourist sites *_
> _The father-of-two stayed at *luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge* _


Let’s face it, he needed a break from living in a place with perfect climate and the luxury of 16 bathrooms.


----------



## Dizzydame

sdkitty said:


> trying to be sexy sounds about right to me


That could explain why the Queen was glaring daggers at her during the wedding!  We all noticed it and it just isn't like her.


----------



## Dizzydame

Patati said:


> I saw a picture of Harry a while back where he looked sooo much like PC


I was idly flicking through MSN a couple of months ago and found a photograph of Harry in uniform complete with beard and uniform and another of Prince Philip again with beard and uniform although Navy not Army, and they were so alike.  I wish I had saved the photos as the resemblance was glaringly obvious.


----------



## bellecate

Dizzydame said:


> I was idly flicking through MSN a couple of months ago and found a photograph of Harry in uniform complete with beard and uniform and another of Prince Philip again with beard and uniform although Navy not Army, and they were so alike.  I wish I had saved the photos as the resemblance was glaringly obvious.


----------



## Toby93

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5592845


That picture looks manipulated to me, as if someone has taken Prince Phillip and a pic of Harry and “morphed” them.  Looks more like Harry than Phillip.  The more nonsense I see from Harry, the more I start to question if he really is Hewitts son.  Hewitt turned out to be turncoat, writing books and trying to sell his letters from Diana for £10 mill.  He is certainly acting more like Hewitt than anyone in the BRF .


----------



## gracekelly

So Harry has a new career as a tour guide in Mozambique. He is escorting a group of Congressional members. I guess he learned how to be a paid escort from his wife. Money is tight and he needs the work.   As Doria said, “don’t give away the milk for free:”.  Bonkers, eh?


U.S. United States Congressional Delegation Visits Mozambique​apofeed
August 18th 2022
Africa
Partner Press Releases









 From August 16-17, six members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives visited the Republic of Mozambique to deepen the U.S.-Mozambique relationship in the areas of peace and security, democracy, environmental conservation, business, and health.


Deepening their relationships so  Mozambique can promote tourism and get money from the US to combat terrorism


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Dizzydame said:


> That could explain why the Queen was glaring daggers at her during the wedding!  We all noticed it and it just isn't like her.


Absolutely. I'm sure she knew all about ZeeZy's sordid past, but she also knew the best course of action was to let Hazy hang himself. Better to let the public think the RF was enthusiastic about the marriage instead of forbidding it and risk being called racist, although they were anyway. It didn't take long for ZeeZy's true colors to come to light. I feel sorry for TQ having to deal with this drama in her final years, but it seems she's taking it in stride and going about her life surrounded by those who really matter to her. And in comparison: 



> https://people.com/royals/queen-eli...on-kate-middleton-prince-william-wedding-day/


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> That picture looks manipulated to me, as if someone has taken Prince Phillip and a pic of Harry and “morphed” them.  Looks more like Harry than Phillip.  The more nonsense I see from Harry, the more I start to question if he really is Hewitts son.  Hewitt turned out to be turncoat, writing books and trying to sell his letters from Diana for £10 mill.  He is certainly acting more like Hewitt than anyone in the BRF .
> 
> View attachment 5592863


Except it is documented that Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 1986. Harry was born in 1984. He's Charles' kid, even if he doesn't look like him (which is a good thing!).


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Except it is documented that Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 1986. Harry was born in 1984. He's Charles' kid, even if he doesn't look like him (which is a good thing!).


I think Harry has features from both the Windsor and Spencer sides. Hewitt just happens to have a similar generic British look, like he could have stepped out of Downton Abbey or similar.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Harry has Phillips nose


----------



## charlottawill

Dizzydame said:


> I was idly flicking through MSN a couple of months ago and found a photograph of Harry in uniform complete with beard and uniform and another of Prince Philip again with beard and uniform although Navy not Army, and they were so alike.  I wish I had saved the photos as the resemblance was glaringly obvious.


I have seen those too, and the family resemblance is clear.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> What is Hazz doing in Mozambique?



Trying to stay relevant.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Why do they say a "packed schedule of Royal engagements"??  They're NOT Royal any more!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Pure desperation. My husband and I have been married for over 35 years. We've never felt the need for a "vow renewal".


We've been together for 26, married for 22.  My husband inquired about doing a vow renewal in Santorini during our 10th Anniversary trip.  We found out it would be US $25K just to say vows in front of a priest on top of a cliff with no frills (beautiful views of course).  We're either cheap or sensible, but DH said forget it, LOL.
I feel like vow renewals are often the kiss of death (on Real Housewives especially), as are tattooing the name of your SO.  After a drunken night for our fifth anniversary, DH came up with the brilliant idea of tattooing each other's name on our ring fingers.  Drunk as I was, I still had the common sense to say HELL NO!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Can Hazzi name the capitals of any of our states?  Can she?


I'm sure she knows California starts with a "C".  (Haz probably thinks it starts with a "K".)


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> So Harry has a new career as a tour guide in Mozambique. He is escorting a group of Congressional members. I guess he learned how to be a paid escort from his wife. Money is tight and he needs the work.   As Doria said, “don’t give away the milk for free:”.  Bonkers, eh?
> 
> 
> U.S. United States Congressional Delegation Visits Mozambique​apofeed
> August 18th 2022
> Africa
> Partner Press Releases
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From August 16-17, six members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives visited the Republic of Mozambique to deepen the U.S.-Mozambique relationship in the areas of peace and security, democracy, environmental conservation, business, and health.
> 
> 
> Deepening their relationships so  Mozambique can promote tourism and get money from the US to combat terrorism


I’ve read a few articles about this trip but none mention Harry…where did you read he was escorting them?


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Except it is documented that Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 1986. Harry was born in 1984. He's Charles' kid, even if he doesn't look like him (which is a good thing!).


I know it has been documented, and I am just making an observation.  Diana’s bodyguard said that he couldn’t be Hazzs father because *Diana told him so*.  Diana had a lot to lose if it turned out to be true, but in quite a few earlier biographies it said that Diana was petrified and couldn’t be sure.  When you see how easy it is for TW to scrub history, how difficult would it be for the BRF to make it all go away?  I’m sure he was not the first lover that Diana had and he certainly wasn’t the last.


CobaltBlu said:


> Harry has Phillips nose
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5592866
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t see Harry’s nose, Haz has more of a ski slope - much like TW.  William has Diana’s features and her nose.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> Guys I took one for the team and found them yuckity yuck my eyes


No pictures, it didn't happen


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> She wants to be our next president
> View attachment 5592572


Oh crap I really should scroll ahead before commenting!  My eyes!  My eyes!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The Duke of Sussex made a surprise solo three-day visit to  Mozambique this week - as he prepares to return to the UK for a whirlwind trip next month.
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in Californiahaving stepped back from royal duty,  stayed at luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge for three days.
> 
> A source told MailOnline Harry flew to Heathrow on Sunday, where he changed to a connecting flight to Johannesburg.
> 
> According to Instagram page @moz_paparazzi, the royal father-of-two took walks looking at tourist attractions in the region with friends, and spoke with the  President of the Tourism Association in the area, Yassin Amuji.
> 
> The royal appeared not to have been joined by his wife Meghan Markle, 41, or his children Archie, three, or Lilibet, one, on the trip.
> 
> While the reason behind his trip hasn't been revealed, one of the Duke's main projects is Travalyst - an organisation which aims to make the tourism industry more sustainable make it easier for travellers to make eco-friendly choices. _
> _Prince Harry makes surprise three-day solo visit to Mozambique where he was spotted visiting a luxury beach resort - ahead of his return to the UK with Meghan Markle next month_​
> *Duke of Sussex, 37, surprised royal fans with a visit to  Mozambique this week*
> *Prince Harry stayed in Vilankulo for three days and visited tourist sites *
> *The father-of-two stayed at luxury resort of Vilanculos Beach Lodge *
> *A source told MailOnline Harry flew to Heathrow in London on Sunday*
> *The Duke then changed to a connecting flight to Johannesburg *
> *Comes after news he and wife Meghan Markle will travel to Europe in September *
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise three-day solo visit to Mozambique
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, 37, who is currently living in his $14 million mansion in California having stepped back from royal duty,  stayed at Vilanculos Beach Lodge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


LOLOL all these "surprise" visits.  I suppose if they announced them, people would run away with fair warning!


----------



## lulu212121

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’ve read a few articles about this trip but none mention Harry…where did you read he was escorting them?


She provided links. This story is on page 3.
ETA It's also in the Dailymail link that @CarryOn2020 posted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## K.D.

I feel the thread has gone full circle in the last 6871 pages to go back to discussing Harry's parentage


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

K.D. said:


> I feel the thread has gone full circle in the last 6871 pages to go back to discussing Harry's parentage



I don't get it, I totally see parts of Charles, Charles Spencer and Philip in him. Maybe even The Queen around the eyes. He doesn't look like a clone of either, but it's still there.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lulu212121 said:


> She provided links. This story is on page 3.
> ETA It's also in the Dailymail link that @CarryOn2020 posted.



Here is the story in the link but I can't find a mention of Harry...maybe I am missing something obvious...?


From August 16-17, six members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives visited the Republic of Mozambique to deepen the U.S.-Mozambique relationship in the areas of peace and security, democracy, environmental conservation, business, and health.

In Maputo, the delegation met with Mozambique Prime Minister Adriano Maleiane, Foreign Minister Veronica Macamo, and the Legislative Assembly, including Assembly Vice President Helder Injojo. During those meetings, officials discussed the growing U.S.-Mozambique partnership. Topics ranged from environmental conservation and climate change to stabilization and peace.

“This bi-partisan congressional delegation visit to Mozambique is yet another example of the multi-dimensional U.S.-Mozambique friendship and partnership, which spans decades,” said U.S. Ambassador to Mozambique Peter H. Vrooman.

“It was great to discuss cooperation on economic development, countering violent extremism, and international conservation with our partners in Mozambique,” said Senator Christopher Coons (D-DE).  “Mozambique is at the forefront of the U.S. Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa.”

On August 16, the delegation visited the Bazaruto Archipelago National Park in Vilankulo, Inhambane province where they met with leaders in Mozambique’s wildlife conservation efforts – ANAC, African Parks, Marine Megafauna Foundation, and the Greg Carr Foundation – and community leaders invested in protecting the unique maritime ecosystem.  Under the co-management of African Parks and the Government of Mozambique, Bazaruto Park has become another example of how effective park management can improve the livelihoods of local communities, preserve critical reserves while attracting tourists and increasing jobs, and safeguard biodiversity.

Protecting wildlife, improving natural resource management, and promoting community involvement in conservation efforts in and around protected areas are critical components of the broader U.S. Government assistance in Mozambique. In close collaboration with the Government of Mozambique, the United States provides more than $500 million in annual assistance to help Mozambicans build a healthier, more ********ic, more secure, and more prosperous county for all.

Led by Senator Coons of the Senate Appropriations Committee, other delegation members include Senator Robert Portman (R-OH), Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Senator Gary Peters (D-MI), Senate Armed Services Committee; Representative David Joyce (R-OH-14), House Appropriations Committee; Representative Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA-06), House Armed Services Committee; and Representative David Price, (D-NC-04), House Appropriations Committee. Also, part of the delegation was Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) CEO Alice Albright.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL all these "surprise" visits.  I suppose if they announced them, people would run away with fair warning!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

K.D. said:


> I feel the thread has gone full circle in the last 6871 pages to go back to discussing Harry's parentage


Sorry - I was making an observation on his behavior which is more similar to Hewitt than William or Charles


----------



## charlottawill

It appears he has learned well from TW how to "embellish" his version of events.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



He heard “American Politicians“ and probably commandeered a private jet, maybe Tyler Perry’s, to get to Africa for access to them so he could plug Meghan as a fellow politico. It was a bipartisan group, but I think she would sell herself to any party in an attempt to get elected. Ethics, morality, transparency, are a foreign language to her.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Harry has Phillips nose
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5592866


H and his WIFE both have sloping noses (in profile).  Philips looks straight to me


----------



## CobaltBlu

sdkitty said:


> H and his WIFE both have sloping noses (in profile).  Philips looks straight to me


it was more in the nostrils that it struck me as similar to Philip....


----------



## CarryOn2020

It is all for Nflix, trying to _look_ important.   The US officials are risking a lot by getting involved with him imo.  So, why didn’t MM go with him?  Hmmmm.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> it was more in the nostrils that it struck me as similar to Philip....


oh
I was just scrolling up and looking for the pic of philip again.  there's a pic of harry and william together.  william has a very straight nose.  not sure where harry got that sloped one


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> it was more in the nostrils that it struck me as similar to Philip....


The teeth look to be the same as Phillip’s.  Of course, photos can be altered. 
The fact remains his personality is most definitely not Prince Philip’s, it seems closer to Diana’s petulant behavior.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The teeth look to be the same as Phillip’s.  Of course, photos can be altered.
> The fact remains his personality is most definitely not Prince Philip’s, it seems closer to Diana’s petulant behavior.


maybe she was somewhat petulant but she had other charms.....a real warmth.  he is just and angry boy these days


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> He heard “American Politicians“ and probably commandeered a private jet, maybe Tyler Perry’s, to get to Africa for access to them so he could plug Meghan as a fellow politico. It was a bipartisan group, but I think she would sell herself to any party in an attempt to get elected. Ethics, morality, transparency, are a foreign language to her.


I read somewhere he used BA to get to Africa (changing flights in London). I believe TW wouldn't have a problem to sell herself to any party.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The teeth look to be the same as Phillip’s.  Of course, photos can be altered.
> The fact remains his personality is most definitely not Prince Philip’s, it seems closer to Diana’s petulant behavior.


Philip was a handsome man, Hazz is not imo.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is all for Nflix, trying to _look_ important.   The US officials are risking a lot by getting involved with him imo.  So, why didn’t MM go with him?  Hmmmm.


She’s seems to have kept a low(ish) profile since the Bower book.  Maybe she decided this would be a good time to sit down and shut up for the time being.


----------



## lulu212121

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Here is the story in the link but I can't find a mention of Harry...maybe I am missing something obvious...?
> 
> 
> From August 16-17, six members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives visited the Republic of Mozambique to deepen the U.S.-Mozambique relationship in the areas of peace and security, democracy, environmental conservation, business, and health.
> 
> In Maputo, the delegation met with Mozambique Prime Minister Adriano Maleiane, Foreign Minister Veronica Macamo, and the Legislative Assembly, including Assembly Vice President Helder Injojo. During those meetings, officials discussed the growing U.S.-Mozambique partnership. Topics ranged from environmental conservation and climate change to stabilization and peace.
> 
> “This bi-partisan congressional delegation visit to Mozambique is yet another example of the multi-dimensional U.S.-Mozambique friendship and partnership, which spans decades,” said U.S. Ambassador to Mozambique Peter H. Vrooman.
> 
> “It was great to discuss cooperation on economic development, countering violent extremism, and international conservation with our partners in Mozambique,” said Senator Christopher Coons (D-DE).  “Mozambique is at the forefront of the U.S. Strategy for Sub-Saharan Africa.”
> 
> On August 16, the delegation visited the Bazaruto Archipelago National Park in Vilankulo, Inhambane province where they met with leaders in Mozambique’s wildlife conservation efforts – ANAC, African Parks, Marine Megafauna Foundation, and the Greg Carr Foundation – and community leaders invested in protecting the unique maritime ecosystem.  Under the co-management of African Parks and the Government of Mozambique, Bazaruto Park has become another example of how effective park management can improve the livelihoods of local communities, preserve critical reserves while attracting tourists and increasing jobs, and safeguard biodiversity.
> 
> Protecting wildlife, improving natural resource management, and promoting community involvement in conservation efforts in and around protected areas are critical components of the broader U.S. Government assistance in Mozambique. In close collaboration with the Government of Mozambique, the United States provides more than $500 million in annual assistance to help Mozambicans build a healthier, more ********ic, more secure, and more prosperous county for all.
> 
> Led by Senator Coons of the Senate Appropriations Committee, other delegation members include Senator Robert Portman (R-OH), Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Senator Gary Peters (D-MI), Senate Armed Services Committee; Representative David Joyce (R-OH-14), House Appropriations Committee; Representative Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA-06), House Armed Services Committee; and Representative David Price, (D-NC-04), House Appropriations Committee. Also, part of the delegation was Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) CEO Alice Albright.


The Independent says he co-hosting and welcoming a group of US officials.
prince-harry-mozambique-meghan-markle-b2147843.html


----------



## Chanbal

He must have scared the people there with his surprise…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Philip was a handsome man, Hazz is not imo.


Philip was very handsome when he was young and blonde IMO
Harry was cute but his behavior since meeting WIFE has ruined that


----------



## youngster

lulu212121 said:


> The Independent says he co-hosting and welcoming a group of US officials.
> prince-harry-mozambique-meghan-markle-b2147843.html



So, Harry shows up in Mozambique to say "Hi, I flew all the way from California to welcome you to Africa".  

Does this make any sense to anyone?  I guess it is all for Netflix, trying to make something out of nothing.
How much did it cost for him to fly across the world just to "welcome" a bi-partisan congressional delegation? 
How much carbon was emitted for that flight and for his security to join him?


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> She’s seems to have kept a low(ish) profile since the Bower book.  Maybe she decided this would be a good time to sit down and shut up for the time being.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, Harry shows up in Mozambique to say "Hi, I flew all the way from California to welcome you to Africa".
> 
> Does this make any sense to anyone?  I guess it is all for Netflix, trying to make something out of nothing.
> How much did it cost for him to fly across the world just to "welcome" a bi-partisan congressional delegation?
> How much carbon was emitted for that flight and for his security to join him?


Politicians are whores.  They never found a camera that they didn't like unless they were going to be pictured  in a compromising position or in handcuffs.  They were probably more than happy to be filmed by Netflix.  I think the Congressional tour was planned and Harry managed to hop on.  How he found out about it is a question.  Perhaps the Parks people told them to contact Harry or someone at the UN told him about it.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5592993


Yeah, but it's kind of like when your kids were little, out of your sight, being too quiet and up to no good.


----------



## Dizzydame

purseinsanity said:


> We've been together for 26, married for 22.  My husband inquired about doing a vow renewal in Santorini during our 10th Anniversary trip.  We found out it would be US $25K just to say vows in front of a priest on top of a cliff with no frills (beautiful views of course).  We're either cheap or sensible, but DH said forget it, LOL.
> I feel like vow renewals are often the kiss of death (on Real Housewives especially), as are tattooing the name of your SO.  After a drunken night for our fifth anniversary, DH came up with the brilliant idea of tattooing each other's name on our ring fingers.  Drunk as I was, I still had the common sense to say HELL NO!


We have been married for 57 years and do not feel the need to renew vows either.  When we go to a wedding, as the bride and groom are making their vows we just hold hands and smile ... just to remember.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Sorry - I was making an observation on his behavior which is more similar to Hewitt than William or Charles


I’m not sure we can say that with complete conviction. As direct heirs Charles and William have been protected and 100% provided for since birth. The strength of their characters has never been tested to see how they would handle truly adverse situations. For all we know they could’ve behaved as bad as Harry (or Andy!) had they been born the “spares” or not been born Royal at all.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure we can say that with complete conviction. As direct heirs Charles and William have been protected and 100% provided for since birth. The strength of their characters has never been tested to see how they would handle truly adverse situations. For all we know they could’ve behaved as bad as Harry (or Andy!) had they been born the “spares” or not been born Royal at all.


No, you are right.  We will never know, although I don't think that leaving the BRF and moving to a $14 million dollar mansion is exactly an adverse situation.  I do believe he is a weak man, much like his great uncle Edward and easily manipulated.  
I just happened to be reading an article on Hewitt and read that on top of betraying Diana with his book, he also tried to sell her letters to him.  I see parallels with Hazz, betraying his own family on Oprah, and their desperation for money.


----------



## charlottawill

K.D. said:


> I feel the thread has gone full circle in the last 6871 pages to go back to discussing Harry's parentage


To borrow from the Grateful Dead, what a long strange trip it's been.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think this trip is just for his “special status” for US residency.  Since he is here either on a diplomatic visa or for his “job”, he was acting as a “diplomat” and as a “travel something or other”.  I also wouldn’t be surprised if the BRF pulled some strings to help make this happen.  Him losing status means he returns to them.  Then either TW comes with, or there is a battle that ver the kids, and they don’t want to have to deal with any of that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Dizzydame said:


> When we go to a wedding, as the bride and groom are making their vows we just hold hands and smile ... just to remember.


That's really lovely.


----------



## Jayne1

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5592845


I never liked comparing men with beards and hats and saying they look alike.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Sophisticatted said:


> I think this trip is just for his “special status” for US residency.  Since he is here either on a diplomatic visa or for his “job”, he was acting as a “diplomat” and as a “travel something or other”.  I also wouldn’t be surprised if the BRF pulled some strings to help make this happen.  Him losing status means he returns to them.  Then either TW comes with, or there is a battle that ver the kids, and they don’t want to have to deal with any of that.


Interesting point. Certainly plausible.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> So, Harry shows up in Mozambique to say "Hi, I flew all the way from California to welcome you to Africa".
> 
> Does this make any sense to anyone?  I guess it is all for Netflix, trying to make something out of nothing.
> How much did it cost for him to fly across the world just to "welcome" a bi-partisan congressional delegation?
> How much carbon was emitted for that flight and for his security to join him?


It makes no sense and if this is for Netfl*x, it will not be riveting content either.


----------



## mellibelly

Has this been posted? The nerve!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> It makes no sense and if this is for Netfl*x, it will not be riveting content either.


Imo none of this Nflix docudrama will be riveting.  It will be a complete snorefest. Seriously, who wants to devote time to their nonsense?

TikTok has numerous ‘life lessons’ and ‘at home’ videos. They are upbeat, short and sweet.
Is there really a market for this kind of ‘at home with the Cranks” show? [other than the sugars, of course].



_In May, it was reported that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were filming an "at-home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style" docuseries for Netflix, and they have indeed been spotted trailed by a camera crew during official events.








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix Docuseries Is Apparently Being Timed With 'The Crown'
					

"Netflix wants to make sure they get in there and don’t get scooped” by Prince Harry’s memoir."




					www.marieclaire.com
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Such an inspiration! Congrats to Lady Louise  









						Lady Louise Windsor, 18, earns £6.83 an hour working summer job
					

The 18-year-old daughter of Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex has been earning £6.63 per hour this summer since finishing her A-levels in June, working several days a week in a garden centre.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Has this been posted? The nerve!!!



All the senators victims of TW's phone calls should receive a copy of Tom Bower's book as compensation for their pain and suffering.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Imo none of this Nflix docudrama will be riveting.  It will be a complete snorefest. Seriously, who wants to devote time to their nonsense?*
> 
> TikTok has numerous ‘life lessons’ and ‘at home’ videos. They are upbeat, short and sweet.
> Is there really a market for this kind of ‘at home with the Cranks” show? [other than the sugars, of course].
> 
> View attachment 5593087
> 
> _In May, it was reported that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were filming an "at-home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style" docuseries for Netflix, and they have indeed been spotted trailed by a camera crew during official events.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix Docuseries Is Apparently Being Timed With 'The Crown'
> 
> 
> "Netflix wants to make sure they get in there and don’t get scooped” by Prince Harry’s memoir."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Hazz endured a 24h-30h flight to be forgotten by the US Embassy press release…


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> Has this been posted? The nerve!!!



Yes, I remember this from last year, maybe longer ago than that. File it under “Meghan dabbling at being an advocate.”

All she wanted was for the press to publicize her for making the calls. She couldn’t care less about the senators’ time or their private phone numbers. As always it was a stunt to get attention. She hasn’t said a peep about the topic since then.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Poor Hazz endured a 24h-30h flight to be forgotten by the US Embassy press release…



Well, it says right there the US provides $500 million in assistance annually to Mozambique. How much has Archewell given to help the African parks and the wildlife Harry loves so much?

Harry can sit his scrawny azz down.


----------



## Hermes Zen

cdtracing said:


>


LOVE your corvette! Oops sorry off topic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's so freaking rude on so many levels.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Well, it says right there the US provides $500 million in assistance annually to Mozambique. How much has Archewell given to help the African parks and the wildlife Harry loves so much?
> 
> Harry can sit his scrawny azz down.


Good point @bag-mania, but I wonder if Hazz has a different question. How much can Archewhatever and/or Travelcollect get from the $500M?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## zen1965

gracekelly said:


> oPoliticians are whores.  They never found a camera that they didn't like unless they were going to be pictured  in a compromising position or in handcuffs.  They were probably more than happy to be filmed by Netflix.  I think the Congressional tour was planned and Harry managed to hop on.  How he found out about it is a question.  Perhaps the Parks people told them to contact Harry or someone at the UN told him about it


Apparently, the Crongressional tour visited a wildlife area / national park managed or supported by Afrikan Parks. Since Harry is president/ figurehead of Afrikan Parks, a major international NGO in wildlife conservation which is active in numerous African countries, Harry is most likely informed of all high-profile visits and has his pick to join in his capacity as president of AP. Quite simple.
He was not part of the US delegation and thus is not mentioned die the embassy‘s bulletin.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’m so annoyed by H being there to be a ‘Tour guide’ it just smacks of colonialism to me. Mozambique needs the posh white boy with half a brain to speak for them because they don’t understand conservation. Someone get this ******* a pith helmet - how any sugar thinks this idiot couple empower black people is beyond me. 


bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure we can say that with complete conviction. As direct heirs Charles and William have been protected and 100% provided for since birth. The strength of their characters has never been tested to see how they would handle truly adverse situations. For all we know they could’ve behaved as bad as Harry (or Andy!) had they been born the “spares” or not been born Royal at all.


Indeed We don’t really get to see the unfiltered side of C and W a lot and when we do, ie accepting bribes, it doesn’t tend to be very positive. 


Toby93 said:


> No, you are right.  We will never know, although I don't think that leaving the BRF and moving to a $14 million dollar mansion is exactly an adverse situation.  I do believe he is a weak man, much like his great uncle Edward and easily manipulated.
> I just happened to be reading an article on Hewitt and read that on top of betraying Diana with his book, he also tried to sell her letters to him.  I see parallels with Hazz, betraying his own family on Oprah, and their desperation for money.


I agree the spares never deal with anything remotely adverse - they are pampered too. All over the world daughters have to put up with being second rate to sons so I’m not exactly sympathetic that the poor little diddums H&A   have to put up with a smaller palace and fewer fanfares. 


Jayne1 said:


> I never liked comparing men with beards and hats and saying they look alike.


They are dead ringers for abe Lincoln and Lee Marvin too   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't get it, I totally see parts of Charles, Charles Spencer and Philip in him. Maybe even The Queen around the eyes. He doesn't look like a clone of either, but it's still there.


Agree, on a practical note they must have checked- I mean if Maury can afford all those DNA tests the BRF certainly can get one or two.


I think H and his wife both look like QE for what it’s worth but the Windsors are a very small gene pool so it’s not surprising they all look alike (and his wife has access to a competent taxidermist to fine tune that resemblance.)


----------



## gracekelly

zen1965 said:


> Apparently, the Crongressional tour visited a wildlife area / national park managed or supported by Afrikan Parks. Since Harry is president/ figurehead of Afrikan Parks, a major international NGO in wildlife conservation which is active in numerous African countries, Harry is most likely informed of all high-profile visits and has his pick to join in his capacity as president of AP. Quite simple.
> He was not part of the US delegation and thus is not mentioned die the embassy‘s bulletin.


So Harry finds a way to show up and be filmed with those that matter.  The editing will make him look like  an important persona and a player on the world scene, which is all he is interested in at this point.   I just don’t believe that he really cares about anything  other than himself and how he interacts and is viewed by the world. The best thing I can say about him is that he has a lot of chutzpah. His wife is no different so it’s a match made in heaven until it’s not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He is in the back, with a walkie /talkie device on his shoulder.  Too funny.
Sure, I realize he has a ‘right’ to be there, but…this smacks of Nflix needing content.  Surely other delegations have visited and he did not make ‘surprise visits’ to play the host.


Prince Harry, seen standing at the back, visited the beachside town of Vilankulos in Mozambique. (Twitter/USEmbassyMaputo)









						Prince Harry makes secret visit to Africa without Meghan
					

Prince Harry travelled to the African country in his role as president of the African Parks Network, which ...




					honey.nine.com.au


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is in the back, with a walkie /talkie device on his shoulder.  Too funny.
> Sure, I realize he has a ‘right’ to be there, but…this smacks of Nflix needing content.  Surely other delegations have visited and he did not make ‘surprise visits’ to play the host.
> View attachment 5593168
> 
> Prince Harry, seen standing at the back, visited the beachside town of Vilankulos in Mozambique. (Twitter/USEmbassyMaputo)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes secret visit to Africa without Meghan
> 
> 
> Prince Harry travelled to the African country in his role as president of the African Parks Network, which ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> honey.nine.com.au


Where is his security?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Where is his security?



He doesn't need it in Mozambique apparently, only in the UK 

What no speeches in Mozambique? Stats indicate child marriage (under 18) is at at almost 53% the last time the UN bothered to check https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/en/countries/africa/mozambique#3

Perhaps H was checking if the many (UN's) CEDAW recommendations from 2007 have been carried out, including diabolical gender inequality against women and girls, perhaps he or Princess-Prez Meghan would like to use these in her next 'speech'  https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/-/media/files/un women/vaw/country report/africa/mozambique/mozambique cedaw co.pdf?vs=1429 and had not improved 2011 https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/-/media/files/un women/vaw/country report/africa/mozambique/mozambique cedaw co.pdf?vs=1429.


----------



## papertiger

Maybe he just wanted a break? BLG also questions H's questioning security


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Princess-Prez Meghan


Perhaps we should shorten it all to P: princess, president, polo-wife, pee. Such a multifunctional letter of the alphabet


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Maybe he just wanted a break? BLG also questions H's questioning security




Can't blame him!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps we should shorten it all to P: princess, president, polo-wife, pee. Such a multifunctional letter of the alphabet


 
Praptor.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps we should shorten it all to P: princess, president, polo-wife, pee. Such a multifunctional letter of the alphabet



You forgot pump-pump


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Praptor.



P-Rap has a nice ring to it, just like T-Rex.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> It's just ugly gossip right now, but I wouldn't put it past her if she thinks she can make money or win sympathy off of it.





bag-mania said:


> Except it is documented that Diana didn't meet James Hewitt until 1986. Harry was born in 1984. *He's Charles' kid, even if he doesn't look like him (which is a good thing!).*


Actually I find that the older Harry gets the more he looks like Charles, while William is totally Spencer. Also Philip was much more handsome than any of them.


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps we should shorten it all to P: princess, president, polo-wife, pee. Such a multifunctional letter of the alphabet





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Praptor





papertiger said:


> You forgot pump-pump


You ladies are on a roll!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Whatever. One was never in love and the other one looks like a hostage most of the time.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Whatever. One was never in love and the other one looks like a hostage most of the time.



Nothing to do with truth or falsity. Maybe they really are in love.

But having to declare everlasting love all the time is so cringe, like a bad dime-store romance.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Nothing to do with truth or falsity. Maybe they really are in love.
> 
> But having to declare everlasting love all the time is so cringe, like a bad dime-store romance.



Sure, everything's possible. If you ask me, she was in love with the opportunity, the clout and the money, not the guy. I do think he was truly smitten with her even though I don't understand the reason, but at this point he's probably had one or the other sobering experience.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, everything's possible. If you ask me, she was in love with the opportunity, the clout and the money, not the guy. I do think he was truly smitten with her even though I don't understand the reason, but at this point he's probably had one or the other sobering experience.



She made him fall in-love with his fantasy woman = Di2.  

I don't believe she has a single personality, it's whatever works for advancement and in her favour. 

As I said before but in another context, their biggest issues are: He can_not_ act/cover his feelings, she can_not_ stop acting and posing - but not very well. Both of them are actually not cut out to be credible public figures.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Whatever. One was never in love and the other one looks like a hostage most of the time.



In all fairness, Angela, we have been told so much - 6,876 pages of stuff.  Most of it, lies. 
 Maybe it is time for them to stop telling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She made him fall in-love with his fantasy woman = Di2.
> 
> I don't believe she has a single personality, it's whatever works for advancement and in her favour.
> 
> As I said before but in another context, their biggest issues are: He can_not_ act/cover his feelings, she can_not_ stop acting and posing - but not very well. Both of them are actually not cut out to be credible public figures.



All of this so much.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> She made him fall in-love with his fantasy woman = Di2.
> 
> *I don't believe she has a single personality, it's whatever works for advancement and in her favour.*
> 
> As I said before but in another context, their biggest issues are: He can_not_ act/cover his feelings, she can_not_ stop acting and posing - but not very well. Both of them are actually not cut out to be credible public figures.


Someday, some psychiatrist/psychologist will write a play or movie called, "The Many Faces of Meghan" to rival that of The Three Faces of Eve and we won't even have to see it to understand the plot because we could all get together and write the story ourselves or we could just send this thread to the author as silent partners/contributors.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


>



We went alone to Mozambique per BLG


----------



## marietouchet

Lots of rumors - divorce, relocation … IMHO
1. Their lack of income is starting to sting
2. Their complicated tax situation is a bear , lots of tax bills from various orgs eg US fed, UK , CA etc, property tax , and the bills for the accountants … It takes a lot of manpower to file an LLC return saying $0 income for a foundation, and they have like 13 LLCs of them , all of which require tax returns 
3. Residency status is complicated and that relates to how much tax is due to whom 
I think upcoming actions will relate to their financial status eg any residency at Frogmore


----------



## Chanbal

n/m


----------



## Chanbal

Today's headlines…










						Prince Harry accused of staging drama at WellChild Awards
					

Ahead of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's UK visit, online criticism against the US-based couple has intensified.Apart from other activities, the Duke of Sussex would address the WellChild Awards...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## Chanbal

Where is Hazz's picture?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

More lies?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Has this been posted? The nerve!!!



It looks like Valentine appreciated the news…


----------



## 1LV

“Harry makes secret trip to Africa without Meghan…” .  Makes it sound as though he decided to sneak off without her.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Lots of rumors - divorce, relocation … IMHO
> 1. Their lack of income is starting to sting
> 2. Their complicated tax situation is a bear , lots of tax bills from various orgs eg US fed, UK , CA etc, property tax , and the bills for the accountants … It takes a lot of manpower to file an LLC return saying $0 income for a foundation, and they have like 13 LLCs of them , all of which require tax returns
> 3. Residency status is complicated and that relates to how much tax is due to whom
> I think upcoming actions will relate to their financial status eg any residency at Frogmore


I once heard that financial issues are the number one reason for divorce, not infidelity as many would assume.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo none of this Nflix docudrama will be riveting.  It will be a complete snorefest. Seriously, who wants to devote time to their nonsense?
> 
> TikTok has numerous ‘life lessons’ and ‘at home’ videos. They are upbeat, short and sweet.
> Is there really a market for this kind of ‘at home with the Cranks” show? [other than the sugars, of course].
> 
> View attachment 5593087
> 
> _In May, it was reported that Meghan Markle and Prince Harry were filming an "at-home with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex-style" docuseries for Netflix, and they have indeed been spotted trailed by a camera crew during official events.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix Docuseries Is Apparently Being Timed With 'The Crown'
> 
> 
> "Netflix wants to make sure they get in there and don’t get scooped” by Prince Harry’s memoir."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


who cares?
I'm beginning to wish I'd never heard of the WIFE
Last night I happened upon an HBO show about Diana - The Princess.  It was kinda boring.  We've already heard about her marriage ad nauseum.  I say this as somewhat of a fan.  I was pretty much captivated by all the goings on with her funeral.  but there's nothing new here.  
IDK how Brits feel about it but I'm thinking the expiration on Harry's free ride (using his mother) is coming up.


----------



## charlottawill

This morning on Today they did a glowing report on Harry's and William's travels, but of course no mention that they are not speaking. Par for the course. I guess their goal is to keep things light after the hard news in the first half hour.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> who cares?
> I'm beginning to wish I'd never heard of the WIFE
> Last night I happened upon an HBO show about Diana - The Princess.  It was kinda boring.  We've already heard about her marriage ad nauseum.  I say this as somewhat of a fan.  I was pretty much captivated by all the goings on with her funeral.  but there's nothing new here.
> *IDK how Brits feel about it but I'm thinking the expiration on Harry's free ride (using his mother) is coming up.*



I would say it's past it sell-by date.

I remember when Diana died. It was a shock. I remember more about the funeral made it hard for me to get to a gig.

That statue is awful. A flower meadow would have been so much more in keeping and so full of life and hope.

I was sorry she was so young and passed in such a horrible way. She was doing good works and I think she would have become a good society charity hostess in the future. But my whole childhood was full of the papers talking nonsense about Chas and Di ad nauseam, plus I was a reg baby-sitter to the children to one of her reported beaus (actually a decoy) so always had to be so careful. She _was _a drama queen before any other kind of queen. She constantly asked favours and put others at risk, Dodi (who was a film producer and not just a 'playboy' as reported) and Di were not going to get married, he was another she used. Sadly, people die in car accidents every day (I'm so nervous about traveling by car) not putting your seat belt on does not help.

You cannot ask anyone to get over their mother's death at such a young age, but looking for a scape-goat will not help the pain. It was a combination of things that led to that terrible accident, pre-meditated murder had nothing to do with it.


----------



## Chanbal

On the '_quasi-royal_' couple…




_Behind palace walls, the mood is one of weary resignation. While any irritation is being carefully tempered by an unwillingness to pour fuel on the fire, one source, a former Buckingham Palace staffer, told The Daily Beast: “*The chutzpah of those two is unreal. Their proposal for being hybrid working royals was comprehensively rejected [at the Sandringham Summit], but it looks like they are just going ahead and doing it anyway*…”

“*To the casual observer, especially overseas and even more especially in America, this will look like Harry and Meghan are back doing royal jobs*, especially given that one of the gigs Harry is doing is the WellChild awards for sick children, which he always used to do when he actually was a working royal. *It will be incredibly high-profile.* *They will be all over the media, and you won’t be able to put a cigarette paper between what Harry and Meghan are doing and what Will and Kate are doing. It’s a calculated provocation on their part.* They are seriously pushing their luck and risking the wrath of the queen…”

*But for Harry and Meghan, this visit seems to be very much about blurring the line between their royal and non-royal lives.* Their argument—that they are simply helping worthy causes—echoes their rebuff to the queen when she said, announcing their departure form frontline royal life: “Following conversations with the Duke, the queen has written confirming that in stepping away from the work of the royal family it is not possible to continue with the responsibilities and duties that come with a life of public service.”

Harry and Meghan issued a statement in response which concluded, “*We can all live a life of service. Service is universal*.”_









						Harry and Meghan ‘Risking Wrath of Queen’ With U.K. Tour
					

Observers say Harry and Meghan’s upcoming U.K. tour is a “calculated provocation”—testing how much attention they still command in Britain. The palace, predictably, is not happy.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> More lies?



I read some of the comments and was horrified by some stuff she supposedly did to classmates or fellow sorority members 
But, I’m not sure if those things are backed by proven facts


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



He needs to forge a presence that does not rely on his mother or wife


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> I read some of the comments and was horrified by some stuff she supposedly did to classmates or fellow sorority members
> But, I’m not sure if those things are backed by proven facts


The alleged sorority behavior was hazing - but no one has come through to substantiate the account


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> I read some of the comments and was horrified by some stuff she supposedly did to classmates or fellow sorority members
> But, I’m not sure if those things are backed by proven facts



If they were verified _and_ corroborated they'd be in Bower's book. I wouldn't know why M's uncle wouldn't want to his niece to shine, there was obviously something there but TB couldn't get his comments first-hand. And why would anyone want to stick their neck out and get even more involved in their sordid lie-fest and continuous drama?


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> The alleged sorority behavior was hazing - but no one has come through to substantiate the account



Prob sorority has some kind of code.


----------



## youngster

So, they show up at a couple of events including these Well Child Awards in the UK, trying to show that they are still royals and can command some attention and because Netflix needs content. Sure, for one 24 hour news cycle, they'll appear in the tabloids and be the subject of some talk on the morning shows and Scoobie will tweet how beloved they are.

I think the reception they receive at these events will be the most interesting part of this trip.  How comfortable or uncomfortable do they look?  Will there be repeats of the awkwardness of the UN speech?  I'm sure their hosts will receive them politely, that's just the British way, but is their reception by everyone else lukewarm at best?  Are they heckled when seen in public or are they going to keep away from the general public for just that reason?  Will any of Harry's relatives attend any of these events or be seen with them?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> So, they show up at a couple of events including these Well Child Awards in the UK, trying to show that they are still royals and can command some attention and because Netflix needs content. Sure, for one 24 hour news cycle, they'll appear in the tabloids and be the subject of some talk on the morning shows and Scoobie will tweet how beloved they are.
> 
> I think the reception they receive at these events will be the most interesting part of this trip.  How comfortable or uncomfortable do they look?  Will there be repeats of the awkwardness of the UN speech?  I'm sure their hosts will receive them politely, that's just the British way, but is their reception by everyone else lukewarm at best?  Are they heckled when seen in public or are they going to keep away from the general public for just that reason?  Will any of Harry's relatives attend any of these events or be seen with them?


And who is going to provide their much needed security if they are not representing the RF?


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> As I said before but in another context, their biggest issues are: He can_not_ act/cover his feelings, she can_not_ stop acting and posing - but not very well.


Almost humorous when you think about it! Very Jack Sprat.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> So Harry finds a way to show up and be filmed with those that matter.  The editing will make him look like  an important persona and a player on the world scene, which is all he is interested in at this point.   I just don’t believe that he really cares about anything  other than himself and how he interacts and is viewed by the world. The best thing I can say about him is that he has a lot of chutzpah. His wife is no different so it’s a match made in heaven until it’s not.


Don’t forget his memoir. This trip and Harry’s contributions will probably be exaggerated into a whole chapter.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Prob sorority has some kind of code.



I mean code of silence


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> So, they show up at a couple of events including these Well Child Awards in the UK, trying to show that they are still royals and can command some attention and because Netflix needs content. Sure, for one 24 hour news cycle, they'll appear in the tabloids and be the subject of some talk on the morning shows and Scoobie will tweet how beloved they are.
> 
> I think the reception they receive at these events will be the most interesting part of this trip.  How comfortable or uncomfortable do they look?  Will there be repeats of the awkwardness of the UN speech?  I'm sure their hosts will receive them politely, that's just the British way, but is their reception by everyone else lukewarm at best?  Are they heckled when seen in public or are they going to keep away from the general public for just that reason?  Will any of Harry's relatives attend any of these events or be seen with them?



Well Child awards is having some uncomfortable scrutiny itself, hardly a charity at all beyond the actual award ceremony. Total PR swizzle.

As someone already wrote, they will use a rent-a-mob for all front-row-ing and lining-up outside making sure any boos are drowned-out. 

Don't forget they tried to swing it their reception at St. Pauls was warm welcoming when clear boos could be heard and no one wanted to engage with either beyon polite greeting'.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> And who is going to provide their much needed security if they are not representing the RF?


it's kind of ironic....this z-list actress lands a prince and now they seem to be losing relevance fast


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> *If they were verified and corroborated they'd be in Bower's book. *I wouldn't know why M's uncle wouldn't want to his niece to shine, there was obviously something there but TB couldn't get his comments first-hand. And why would anyone want to stick their neck out and get even more involved in their sordid lie-fest and continuous drama?



I recall Tom Bower advising TW to connect with her family as they know a lot of damaging information about her and could start talking. I don't think that information is in Tom Bower's book as he likely got it off the record.

Tom Bower should try to convince some of his sources to go on record imo.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Prob sorority has some kind of code.


Sororities and fraternities ALL have codes, but, are known for harmful acts
The misbehavior MM was accused of (at sorority) would be a crime under any jurisdiction , if proven


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I mean code of silence


Code of silence , not per se, in my sorority …
But, people naturally cover up misbehavior , and/or fail to report, no one wants to be part of a scandal/crime


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> it's kind of ironic....this z-list actress lands a prince and now they seem to be losing relevance fast


Fast … hmmm … it has taken four years of marriage to get this far down


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> He needs to forge a presence that does not rely on his mother or wife


Exactly. The pictures in the People video say it all. It is so old that it has become sad an pathetic. The public has reached the point where it is thinking, _OK, we get it you were a child when she died, you want to continue her good works and your wife is piggybacking on that, but it’s time to move on and show us something _


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Code of silence , not per se, in my sorority …
> But, people naturally cover up misbehavior , and/or fail to report, no one wants to be part of a scandal/crime


Plus the story of what she allegedly did was pretty heinous. You wouldn’t want it spread around or people thinking that this sorority was a bunch of mean girls.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Don’t forget his memoir. This trip and Harry’s contributions will probably be exaggerated into a whole chapter.


He’ll get a whole 10 minutes of Great White Father saving the poor MozambiquIans in the Netflix film.  What would Africa do without the ministrations of Harry?


----------



## Chanbal

This is real and the items can be purchased on this delusional site…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Dizzydame said:


> We have been married for 57 years and do not feel the need to renew vows either.  When we go to a wedding, as the bride and groom are making their vows we just hold hands and smile ... just to remember.


That is just so darn sweet!


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> This is real and the items can be purchased on this delusional site…
> View attachment 5593480


Seems the barf bags haven't been released yet???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

FB comment under an article about Harry's Mozambique trip. Ouch.


----------



## zen1965

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m so annoyed by H being there to be a ‘Tour guide’ it just smacks of colonialism to me. Mozambique needs the posh white boy with half a brain to speak for them because they don’t understand conservation. Someone get this ******* a pith helmet - how any sugar thinks this idiot couple empower black people is beyond me


I usually agree with your posts but in this instance I think things work a little differently. Of course, Mozambicans do not need H to educate them on conservation. What Mozambique needs is money / funding to operate its wildlife areas because when it comes to government funding the country‘s priorities are probably … different (whatever the official line may be). This is where donors, NGOs foundations etc come into place - without them the situation would be dire. When a significant donor like the US visits this is not just an opportunity for the Mozambican government to pledge for further funding but also for international NGOs like AP to demonstrate what they have already done and to raise funds. No way H numbnuts acted as any kind of a tour guide, this was surely done by the park chef, APs country director, Mozambican wildlife officials and the like. Yet, seems AP thought it useful to have H there to underline to the US delegation how highly they are regarded as well as to do a little fundraising. Or - alternative scenario - H insisted to be there and the local AP guys are pulling their hair out in despair because organising a visit of such caliber as a Congressional delegation is a hell of a job in a country with very limited resources, crappy infrastructure etc. (Speaking from experience as I live in another African country). Never mind having H and his demands there.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Prob sorority has some kind of code.


They do, but typically sorority pledging activities are tame compared to what goes on in fraternities.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> So, they show up at a couple of events including these Well Child Awards in the UK, trying to show that they are still royals and can command some attention and because Netflix needs content. Sure, for one 24 hour news cycle, they'll appear in the tabloids and be the subject of some talk on the morning shows and Scoobie will tweet how beloved they are.
> 
> I think the reception they receive at these events will be the most interesting part of this trip.  How comfortable or uncomfortable do they look?  Will there be repeats of the awkwardness of the UN speech?  I'm sure their hosts will receive them politely, that's just the British way, but is their reception by everyone else lukewarm at best?  Are they heckled when seen in public or are they going to keep away from the general public for just that reason?  Will any of Harry's relatives attend any of these events or be seen with them?


I anticipate a lukewarm reception and the only relative they see will be Eugenie and her husband.


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> They do, but typically sorority pledging activities are tame compared to what goes on in fraternities.


If this actually happened, the police should have been called and charges filed.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Plus the story of what she allegedly did was pretty heinous. You wouldn’t want it spread around or people thinking that this sorority was a bunch of mean girls.


I didn't read it, do I want to know? 

ETA: Nevermind...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

...


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> I read some of the comments and was horrified by some stuff she supposedly did to classmates or fellow sorority members
> But, I’m not sure if those things are backed by proven facts


I read them, that's horrible if true. Things were kept more hushed when I was a student, but still I've never heard of anything like that for sorority hazing. Nothing can be kept quiet today. If she thinks life under the royal microscope is bad, wait till she tries to run for office.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Plus the story of what she allegedly did was pretty heinous. You wouldn’t want it spread around or people thinking that this sorority was a bunch of mean girls.


I read the comments. I would think Bower would have been able to dig up any college dirt on her if it existed. But that video makes a pretty good case about her not graduating. It's interesting, if she refers to Northwestern as her alma mater she's technically not lying. Alma mater can either mean a school you attended OR graduated from according to Merriam Webster. If she calls herself an alumna she's lying if she didn't graduate. So listen closely..


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I read the comments. I would think Bower would have been able to dig up any college dirt on her if it existed. But that video makes a pretty good case about her not graduating. It's interesting, if she refers to Northwestern as her alma mater she's technically not lying. Alma mater can either mean a school you attended OR graduated from according to Merriam Webster. If she calls herself an alumna she's lying if she didn't graduate. So listen closely..


I subscribe to a genealogy service ... anybody can... it is amazing what I have found about my family .. high school photos, college photos, yearbooks are all available online 
If there were any truth to her not graduating, someone would have trotted out the graduation lists by now. 
Heck, there are sorority archives and surely somebody willing to search them to make a buck.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I read the comments. *I would think Bower would have been able to dig up any college dirt on her if it existed. *But that video makes a pretty good case about her not graduating. It's interesting, if she refers to Northwestern as her alma mater she's technically not lying. Alma mater can either mean a school you attended OR graduated from according to Merriam Webster. If she calls herself an alumna she's lying if she didn't graduate. So listen closely..


He could dig up college dirt but I don't think he tried. He had so much material to write about her once she hit adulthood that anything bad she did when she was under 21 could be left out.


----------



## marietouchet

Another article on security - H has it on official royal work or if staying with queen or father .H does not get it for his “commercial ventures “
Is staying at FC - at/near Windsor - same as staying with Queen ? 
Are his stops some sort of royal charities ? 
what if he mixes royal/business/pleasure in trip ?
Good grief , this is ridiculous


----------



## Cinderlala

Would someone please tell me what happened at the sorority?   I can't currently watch the video.  (But, I totally understand if it's terrible & no one wants to post it.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I subscribe to a genealogy service ... anybody can... it is amazing what I have found about my family .. high school photos, college photos, yearbooks are all available online
> If there were any truth to her not graduating, someone would have trotted out the graduation lists by now.
> Heck, there are sorority archives and surely somebody willing to search them to make a buck.


I read somewhere that her picture is not in yearbook of 2003. When looking for that information, I came across the freshman yearbook on eb*y. The seller accepts offers. 




In any event, I found the info about her portrait not being featured in the graduation yearbook:








__





						Markle gets A+ from old NU friends - North
					





					digitaledition.chicagotribune.com


----------



## Cinderlala

Cinderlala said:


> Would someone please tell me what happened at the sorority?   I can't currently watch the video.  (But, I totally understand if it's terrible & no one wants to post it.)


Thank you so much to the kind thread member for PMing me the info!  Now I know.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that her picture is not in yearbook of 2003. When looking for that information, I came across the freshman yearbook on eb*y. The seller accepts offers.
> 
> View attachment 5593612
> 
> 
> In any event, I found the info about her portrait not being featured in the graduation yearbook:
> 
> View attachment 5593615
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Markle gets A+ from old NU friends - North
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> digitaledition.chicagotribune.com


Does that mean she was a few credits short and had to take a summer course?  Some universities allow you to participate in the graduation if you are a few credits short.  The son of a friend did that at U of Arizona. Still, yearbook pictures are taken well in advance and usually in the fall of senior year.  There is a picture of her and her mother at graduation.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Still, yearbook pictures are taken well in advance and usually in the fall of senior year.


At my university it was completely optional to have your photo taken for the yearbook, so I don't think her absence from hers means anything.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> At my university it was completely optional to have your photo taken for the yearbook, so I don't think her absence from hers means anything.



I didn't even go to my graduation. I had them send my degree via mail.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even go to my graduation. I had them send my degree via mail.


Haha same here, mainly because I graduated in midyear not the spring.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> And who is going to provide their much needed security if they are not representing the RF?


The charity, I'm sure.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Does that mean she was a few credits short and had to take a summer course?*  Some universities allow you to participate in the graduation if you are a few credits short.  The son of a friend did that at U of Arizona. Still, yearbook pictures are taken well in advance and usually in the fall of senior year.  *There is a picture of her and her mother at graduation.*


It's possible that she didn't graduate from Northwestern University in 2003. The video posted today by @papertiger (#103,141), brought to my mind the lack of her picture in the yearbook. The video seems to claim that she doesn't follow the strict dress code required by Northwestern in the graduation picture that circulates online. 


charlottawill said:


> At my university it was completely optional to have your photo taken for the yearbook, so I don't think her absence from hers means anything.


Would TW miss a photo-Op?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Would TW miss a photo-Op?


Good point.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Cinderlala said:


> Thank you so much to the kind thread member for PMing me the info!  Now I know.


Do you mind sharing it with me via PM?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It's possible that she didn't graduate from Northwestern University in 2003. The video posted today by @papertiger (#103,141), brought to my mind the lack of her picture in the yearbook. The video seems to claim that she doesn't follow the strict dress code required by Northwestern in the graduation picture that circulates online.
> 
> Would TW miss a photo-Op?


And if we are really into conspiracies, there is the 3 year ambiguity about her year of birth, she could be 3 years older …


----------



## cdtracing

Hermes Zen said:


> LOVE your corvette! Oops sorry off topic.


Thanks.


----------



## bag-mania

WTF the media is insane. This is a _Newsweek_ editorial by a Somali female boxer. She talks about her life, her sport, her challenges. It is not about Meghan Markle. Meghan was barely mentioned in the article, perhaps two sentences. Yet the headline _Newsweek_ gave it is all about _her_.









						Ramla Ali: 'Working With Meghan Markle Changed My Life'
					

Fighting in Saudi Arabia's first ever female boxing match will be my hardest test and so important outside of the ring.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> And if we are really into conspiracies, there is the 3 year ambiguity about her year of birth, she could be 3 years older …


Everything is possible, there are so many falsehoods linked to TW. Tough, her father has confirmed her age, so she is probably 41.

There is something awkward about her time @ Northwestern University, the sudden internship in Argentina...  Unless Tom Bower shares the remaining information he has collected, we may never get answers to several questions.



bag-mania said:


> WTF the media is insane. This is a _Newsweek_ editorial by a Somali female boxer. She talks about her life, her sport, her challenges. It is not about Meghan Markle. Meghan was barely mentioned in the article, perhaps two sentences. Yet the headline _Newsweek_ gave it is all about _her_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ramla Ali: 'Working With Meghan Markle Changed My Life'
> 
> 
> Fighting in Saudi Arabia's first ever female boxing match will be my hardest test and so important outside of the ring.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


PR is working hard to make her look relevant. The money to pay for her luxurious lifestyle depends on that.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> WTF the media is insane. This is a _Newsweek_ editorial by a Somali female boxer. She talks about her life, her sport, her challenges. It is not about Meghan Markle. Meghan was barely mentioned in the article, perhaps two sentences. Yet the headline _Newsweek_ gave it is all about _her_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ramla Ali: 'Working With Meghan Markle Changed My Life'
> 
> 
> Fighting in Saudi Arabia's first ever female boxing match will be my hardest test and so important outside of the ring.
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Newsweek doesn't have much credibility left now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Do you mind sharing it with me via PM?


Use these key words: sorority northwestern markle glue


----------



## rose60610

Not hard to believe Claw was a mean girl in college. Even though she loves playing the victim. Hmm


----------



## CarryOn2020

This article from 2017 is all about MM’s sorority life.  Oh yes, it confirms she was a “fun girl” as well as a recruiter (!!) for the sorority.   The rumors of the alleged hazing are all over the internet, no confirmation though.
ETA: key words in the article are “social climbing” imo.  Happily, most of us are not social climbers. 



_And while the prince partied with his exclusive group of pals, Meghan was at college mixing with members of her own posh pack.
Hers was an all-female society, called the Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority, with a *reputation for hard partying and social climbing*.
Current KKG member Melania Hidalgo told the Sunday Mirror that Meghan had been a popular member of the student body.

She said: “We’re intelligent hot messes. The thing we all have in common is that we’re all very driven, ambitious and passionate.

“Meghan was the recruitment chair of the sorority during her time here.

“She was in charge of bringing in new girls – you have to be a very friendly and outgoing person for that role.

“I lived in the house for a year and it’s a very fun experience, you end up becoming friends with people you never thought you’d mix with.


			https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/meghan-markles-sorority-picture-2003-1160645
		

_


----------



## Gimmethebag

One of the female associates at my husband’s firm was a KKG and confirmed M was not… nice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another photo from the article :




Does she look fun?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another DesignDisrupted photo - the hair  






VF article from 2017








						Meghan Markle Is Already Receiving Royal Coverage from the Press
					

The actress just returned from a trip with World Vision Canada, and it’s being reported on in extremely beneficent terms.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

The comments


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> He must have scared the people there with his surprise…



I'd be more scared of seeing him than the wild African animals.  THOSE I'd LOVE to see again!


----------



## csshopper

From the Chicago Tribune newspaper prior to the wedding. Maybe it was printed with all the spacing so we could "read between the lines." This is definitely not the reaction one might have expected from her sorority chapter or the National office.

"The royal wedding is a highly anticipated one, but members of Markle’s Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority on the Northwestern campus in Evanston don’t want to talk about it.

Markle lived in the KKG house, located off Orrington Avenue in Evanston, and served as the sorority’s recruitment chairwoman during her time on the Evanston campus.

Sorority house mother Jean Murray said the chapter members on the Evanston campus voted shortly after announcement of the royal engagement that they would not hold celebratory events for Markle.

“It was a chapter vote. They want to respect her right to privacy,” Murray said.

Representatives from KKG’s national offices in Columbus, Ohio, didn’t have much to say either.

“We are not coordinating media interviews at this time,” said Kappa spokeswoman Lucy First Gerlach. “Kappa Kappa Gamma sends our best wishes to our sister, Meghan Markle, and Prince Harry for a lifetime of happiness together. We hope Meghan remembers her something blue (and blue) on her special day!”


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Everything is possible, there are so many falsehoods linked to TW. Tough, her father has confirmed her age, so she is probably 41.
> 
> There is something awkward about her time @ Northwestern University, the sudden internship in Argentina...  Unless Tom Bower shares the remaining information he has collected, we may never get answers to several questions.
> 
> 
> PR is working hard to make her look relevant. The money to pay for her luxurious lifestyle depends on that.


Maybe her "internship" was to conceal a secret pregnancy.    Hence her sudden disappearance from Northwestern.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe her "internship" was to conceal a secret pregnancy.    Hence her sudden disappearance from Northwestern.


Or a potential suspension after a possible glue incident… allegedly.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another DesignDisrupted photo - the hair
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VF article from 2017
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is Already Receiving Royal Coverage from the Press
> 
> 
> The actress just returned from a trip with World Vision Canada, and it’s being reported on in extremely beneficent terms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



I actually think she looks nice there ^ there's no POSE for the camera






This one has me stumped though. I would like to see Gloria (Steinem) and M discuss the semiotics of this 'little number' as well as M is wearing and young women buying into Hef-iology considering the documented ritualised abuse many of the Bunnies had to endure in the clubs and worse at the mansion.


----------



## pukasonqo

She looks quite pretty in both pics
I remember girls wearing tops w the playboy bunny and never understanding why will you choose that logo…


----------



## andrashik




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wasn't it said Raptor refused any carpet after she couldn't get red, though?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't it said Raptor refused any carpet after she couldn't get red, though?



Oh well, she did it to herself then. 

Can't imagine the hem of the dress after the ceremony   no wonder she had to change for the reception.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Oh well, she did it to herself then.
> 
> Can't imagine the hem of the dress after the ceremony   no wonder she had to change for the reception.



Naw, it was the racist BRF!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Remember, Steinem was an actual bunny.  She worked at the club for 2 weeks, gathered enough material to write an expose and started the conversation about objectifying women. MM? No idea.









						May 1, 1963: Gloria Steinem Published “A Bunny’s Tale” and Started a National Conversation About Objectifying Women
					

Written in the form of a diary, Steinem revealed in vivid detail the humiliating experience of a Playboy Bunny.




					www.mylifetime.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

andrashik said:


>



So, the BRF knew!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Remember, Steinem was an actual bunny.  She worked at the club for 2 weeks, gathered enough material to write an expose and started the conversation about objectifying women. MM? No idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> May 1, 1963: Gloria Steinem Published “A Bunny’s Tale” and Started a National Conversation About Objectifying Women
> 
> 
> Written in the form of a diary, Steinem revealed in vivid detail the humiliating experience of a Playboy Bunny.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mylifetime.com



Exactly my point! GS' 1963 'work experience'

*How could a 'feminist' wear that logo 'loud and proud' on her chest?* It's a business logo for a company that sees women as fluffy, play things front of house, and menial servants behind. Even Bunnies that were proud of their time with Playboy, told the press they were fined (demerited) for many strange things, including 'bad posture' ex-bunny . Can't deny many women enjoyed themselves through the years as part of the entertainment industry disguised as waitresses bunnies, and the advantages it gave to the few thought pretty and young enough to work in those establishments, but basically, Playboy supports the man-made hierarchy of women in terms of a certain type of fashionable (and Western) beauty where brains and and (non man-pleasing) skills do NOT count.

  I think I answered my own question. M is all front, getting in and ahead with the rich, famous party people, wherever the power and photo-ops are, and if you have to wear bunny ears and tail to do it, keep smiling, whatever it takes. She's not about changing the world, she's about getting in with the haves so she can have more of the world for herself.Even if she was never a 'yacht girl' (and you'd have to be brave or stupid to survive that life) she certainly has the mentality of one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Exactly my point! GS' 1963 'work experience'
> 
> *How could a 'feminist' wear that logo 'loud and proud' on her chest?* It's a business logo for a company that sees women as fluffy, play things front of house, and menial servants behind. Even Bunnies that were proud of their time with Playboy, told the press they were fined (demerited) for many strange things, including 'bad posture' ex-bunny . Can't deny many women enjoyed themselves through the years as part of the entertainment industry disguised as waitresses bunnies, and the advantages it gave to the few thought pretty and young enough to work in those establishments, but basically, Playboy supports the man-made hierarchy of women in terms of a certain type of fashionable (and Western) beauty where brains and and (non man-pleasing) skills do NOT count.
> 
> I think I answered my own question. M is all front, getting in and ahead with the rich, famous party people, wherever the power and photo-ops are, and if you have to wear bunny ears and tail to do it, keep smiling, whatever it takes. She's not about changing the world, she's about getting in with the haves so she can have more of the world for herself.Even if she was never a 'yacht girl' (and you'd have to be brave or stupid to survive that life) she certainly has the mentality of one.


100% agree.  GS did it for her expose on the life of the ‘bunnies’ which has some redeeming value.  She got the insider info and made the world aware of the awful conditions. She was the original MeToo.   

MM? No idea.   I thought that kind of fashion went out of style in the 60/70s, long before MM was born.  It saddens me to see young women wear the Playboy shirts.  As we know, MM likes to play the sex card. This is what made her Suits character and her cheesy Lifetime movies so one-dimensional and cringe-y to watch. Imo.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Everything is possible, there are so many falsehoods linked to TW. Tough, her father has confirmed her age, so she is probably 41.
> 
> There is something awkward about her time @ Northwestern University, the sudden internship in Argentina...  Unless Tom Bower shares the remaining information he has collected, we may never get answers to several questions.
> 
> 
> PR is working hard to make her look relevant. The money to pay for her luxurious lifestyle depends on that.


I think it was the TB book, that said that H used to fly first class for personal stuff, eg trips to Toronto , bodyguards in tow - them surely in steerage lol
I don’t think private planes were his norm pre MM. He took a lot of BRF trips, but there are only so many BRF planes to go around, so, he likely did first class on solo BRF trips


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Exactly my point! GS' 1963 'work experience'
> 
> *How could a 'feminist' wear that logo 'loud and proud' on her chest?* It's a business logo for a company that sees women as fluffy, play things front of house, and menial servants behind. Even Bunnies that were proud of their time with Playboy, told the press they were fined (demerited) for many strange things, including 'bad posture' ex-bunny . Can't deny many women enjoyed themselves through the years as part of the entertainment industry disguised as waitresses bunnies, and the advantages it gave to the few thought pretty and young enough to work in those establishments, but basically, Playboy supports the man-made hierarchy of women in terms of a certain type of fashionable (and Western) beauty where brains and and (non man-pleasing) skills do NOT count.
> 
> I think I answered my own question. M is all front, getting in and ahead with the rich, famous party people, wherever the power and photo-ops are, and if you have to wear bunny ears and tail to do it, keep smiling, whatever it takes. She's not about changing the world, she's about getting in with the haves so she can have more of the world for herself.Even if she was never a 'yacht girl' (and you'd have to be brave or stupid to survive that life) she certainly has the mentality of one.


Steinem wrote a great book on her time as a bunny , Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions - one of the best book titles ever
i throughly enjoyed the book years ago. She was one of the first to expose the sexism of the Playboy empire, so, I am give Her a pass for that employer
I don’t remember the book as being preachy, just insightful


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that her picture is not in yearbook of 2003. When looking for that information, I came across the freshman yearbook on eb*y. The seller accepts offers.
> 
> View attachment 5593612
> 
> 
> In any event, I found the info about her portrait not being featured in the graduation yearbook:
> 
> View attachment 5593615
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Markle gets A+ from old NU friends - North
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> digitaledition.chicagotribune.com


That is MM’s pig book Lol 

My uni had eeveryone send in snaps for a book of photos of the incoming class. Everyone else sent in their formal high school yearbook photos. I went to a lycee, we had no formal photos so I sent in a candid and was mortified that my photo did not match

The men on campus used the book to select from amongst the freshman class, thus the name, pig book

Times have changed


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Everything is possible, there are so many falsehoods linked to TW. Tough, her father has confirmed her age, so she is probably 41.
> 
> There is something awkward about her time @ Northwestern University, the sudden internship in Argentina...  Unless Tom Bower shares the remaining information he has collected, we may never get answers to several questions.
> 
> 
> PR is working hard to make her look relevant. The money to pay for her luxurious lifestyle depends on that.


Agree dad confirmed her birthdate to Bower, and her age is 41 currently

The year year discrepancy came from an inexact anecdote from Samantha - I give Sam a pass , it is hard to be exact as an author. You can write a boring book with anecdotes like “on 31 August 1990, I did blah blah “ or say “thirty five years ago I did“ , well 1990 is not exactly 35 years ago.. 

Bower, for the most part, tried not to give exact dates, but did give events in the correct chronological order


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


>



Wow, they change carpet as a function of rank …

well maybe Windsor has only blue, while St Paul’s (bigger venue) has the red one 

And MM had to be content with Windsor


----------



## Chanbal

N/M


----------



## Chanbal

Today's news about His Majesty, the King…










						Prince Harry hailed as 'leader not follower' during low-key trip
					

PRINCE HARRY has been praised as a "leader, not a follower" by some of his fans as new details from his recent low-key trip overseas emerged.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The release date of one more book for TPF Reading Club:


----------



## Chanbal

We still do not have a release date for this novel:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> At my university it was completely optional to have your photo taken for the yearbook, so I don't think her absence from hers means anything.


you think she would intentionally not have her photo there?  doesn't seem like her


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments



wow....talk about gushing....you couldn't buy this kind of publicity


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> Wow, they change carpet as a function of rank …
> 
> well maybe Windsor has only blue, while St Paul’s (bigger venue) has the red one
> 
> And MM had to be content with Windsor


William and Kate were mar


marietouchet said:


> Wow, they change carpet as a function of rank …
> 
> well maybe Windsor has only blue, while St Paul’s (bigger venue) has the red one
> 
> And MM had to be content with Windsor


The Queen was married in Westminster Abbey as were William and Kate,  not St. Paul's.

Oops,  I don't know what happened,  the double quote....


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> Oh well, she did it to herself then.
> 
> Can't imagine the hem of the dress after the ceremony   no wonder she had to change for the reception.



That's exactly what I thought when looking at that photo.  That white gown dragged across that floor ugh. It would have been quite the dusty mess.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>






The ultimate insult - and so well put


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> wow....talk about gushing....you couldn't buy this kind of publicity



Perhaps she did


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Perhaps she did


or maybe she asked them for a favor.  they certainly went to bat for her


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Heads Together didn't fit their victim narrative. But it's such a gaping hole in the OW interview that it makes Oprah and her production team look abysmally ignorant and the whole interview terribly staged. If O really does a Part 2 with them, I would be looking out for contradictions with Part 1 since Methane seems to suffer from a dreadful sporadic but convenient memory loss and a predilection for retcon.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> wow....talk about gushing....you couldn't buy this kind of publicity


Did these women think they were going to be invited to the wedding?


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The men on campus used the book to select from amongst the freshman class, thus the name, pig book


The birth of Facebook at Harvard was the modern version of that. Men can be such delightful creatures.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> And MM had to be content with Windsor


Couldn't pick her tiara or carpet color, the poor dear. What a bunch of racists her in-laws are.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> That's exactly what I thought when looking at that photo.  That white gown dragged across that floor ugh. It would have been quite the dusty mess.


I'm sure the whole church was cleaned very well before the wedding, but even nobodies like me had a runner in the church, something white and satiny as I recall.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


>



I'm not sure that's a real quote...?



			https://www.mind.org.uk/news-campaigns/news/mind-responds-to-the-duchess-of-sussex-meghan-markles-interview/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> or maybe she asked them for a favor.  they certainly went to bat for her


Sisters gonna stick together.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure the whole church was cleaned very well before the wedding, but even nobodies like me had a runner in the church, something white and satiny as I recall.


She wanted air freshener spritzed all over.

I was looking at pics of their current house and came across this article.








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: Take a look at their bomb new house – Film Daily
					

Do you want to look inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's cushy new mansion? Discover the latest news about the royal couple's new home.




					filmdaily.co
				



Apart from claiming that they bought it at a steep discount because the house has bad history, the article also boasts bad maths: the Harkles paid a third up front, took a mortgage on a third... Errr, we are missing a third...


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> She wanted air freshener spritzed all over.


I do recall that. She didn't like the "musty" smell of the centuries old church. 

"Of course Miss Markle, we'll get a few hundred Glade Plug-ins for you".


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


>



At this point it's clear she lied and I am glad that all the people/organisations are coming forward with the facts


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm not sure that's a real quote...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mind.org.uk


Probably a sarcastic parody, but it embodies the sentiment of a lot of people who wondered why a proponent of mental health suddenly had no clue how to get help for his allegedly suicidal wife.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Probably a sarcastic parody, but it embodies the sentiment of a lot of people who wondered why a proponent of mental health suddenly had no clue how to get help for his allegedly suicidal wife.


right
neither of them were capable of picking up the phone and calling to make an appointment for her...she had to go to HR for help....guess they think we (the public watching Oprah) were born yesterday


----------



## lallybelle

That's what I tried telling some of the supporters online at the time of the Oprah interview. He had a damn Charity/Organization that was dedicated to mental Health FFS! The whole she was suicidal and she had to turn to some unknown HR person to get help, that wouldn't help her was probably the easiest of her crap to debunk. I mean COME ON.


----------



## xincinsin

lallybelle said:


> That's what I tried telling some of the supporters online at the time to the Oprah interview. He had a damn Charity/Organization that was dedicated to mental Health FFS! The whole she was suicidal and she had to turn to some unknown HR person to get help, that wouldn't help her was probably the easiest of her crap to debunk. I mean COME ON.


Plus she supposedly got effective therapy help for Harry, but was unable to find help for herself.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> I think it was the TB book, that said that H used to fly first class for personal stuff, eg trips to Toronto , bodyguards in tow - them surely in steerage lol
> I don’t think private planes were his norm pre MM. He took a lot of BRF trips, but there are only so many BRF planes to go around, so, he likely did first class on solo BRF trips


As with so many other things, she has probably convinced him that private jets are safer for their family.


----------



## Aimee3

I remember the PIG book.  Every freshman was terrified their photo would look horrible and it would follow them for the 4 years they’d be at school.  Your whole social life would be based upon that photo.  Ours also had our home town, current address at school, phone number, and IIRC, also what subject our major was in.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Today's news about His Majesty, the King…
> View attachment 5593972
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hailed as 'leader not follower' during low-key trip
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has been praised as a "leader, not a follower" by some of his fans as new details from his recent low-key trip overseas emerged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



What, pray tell, exactly is he leading??


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Couldn't pick her tiara or carpet color, the poor dear. What a bunch of racists her in-laws are.


If I were the blue carpet, I'd start a discussion with Oprah about the fact that the TW was so colorist against me in favor of red.  What a beeyotch!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Sisters gonna stick together.


Only certain sisters that can be helpful.  TW certainly doesn't stick together with Samantha.


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> What, pray tell, exactly is he leading??



He is leading the blind


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> What, pray tell, exactly is he leading??





Chanbal said:


> Today's news about His Majesty, the King…
> View attachment 5593972
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry hailed as 'leader not follower' during low-key trip
> 
> 
> PRINCE HARRY has been praised as a "leader, not a follower" by some of his fans as new details from his recent low-key trip overseas emerged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Oh dear low key trips in the future ? What will we chat about ? How will I get my popcorn fix ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

The saga continues to this day.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> she had to go to HR for help....guess they think we (the public watching Oprah) were born yesterday


Well, they knew Oprah was dumb enough to not question it.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Well, they knew Oprah was dumb enough to not question it.


I don't think she's dumb (and you're probably being sarcastic here).  She was basically doing a promo for them, not a hard news interview - not even close


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> The saga continues to this day.



But we always knew Diana was a liar or just had her own variation of the truth. (That's what H found so attractive in Meg? She also has her own made-up facts.)

Hewitt, to stay out of trouble, went along with things, just like when Diana told him she was fine with him writing a book. Especially because the book would be so flattering.

Anyway, who knows, it's so old news by now and H isn't part of the BRF, so who cares.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I don't think she's dumb (and you're probably being sarcastic here).  She was basically doing a promo for them, not a hard news interview - not even close


Well, obviously not dumb, but dumb to Meg's agenda. And I will never look at O the same again. I thought better of her.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> But we always knew Diana was a liar or just had her own variation of the truth. (That's what H found so attractive in Meg? She also has her own made-up facts. )
> 
> Hewitt, to stay out of trouble, went along with things, just like when Diana told him she was fine with him writing a book. Especially because the book would be so flattering.
> 
> Anyway, who knows, it's so old news by now and H isn't part of the BRF, so who cares.


I'm not saying if I believe he is Hewitt's son or not, but if he isn't, he has given a ton of grief to people that he is not blood related to except for William.  Even if he isn't blood, he was treated his entire life that he was and he turned on just about all of them.  He is still ungrateful.


----------



## andrashik

pukasonqo said:


> He is leading the blind


And the b*lless men ( figuratively)


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Well, obviously not dumb, but dumb to Meg's agenda. And I will never look at O the same again. I thought better of her.


I did too, but it was much longer ago than the interview. My opinion started to change about her about 10+ years ago.  There comes a point where all famous people begin to believe everything their toadies tell them and they lose sight of reality and think they are omniscient.  I think that is what happened with her.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> She wanted air freshener spritzed all over.
> 
> I was looking at pics of their current house and came across this article.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle: Take a look at their bomb new house – Film Daily
> 
> 
> Do you want to look inside Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's cushy new mansion? Discover the latest news about the royal couple's new home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> filmdaily.co
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apart from claiming that they bought it at a steep discount because the house has bad history, the article also boasts bad maths: the Harkles paid a third up front, took a mortgage on a third... Errr, we are missing a third...


So, they lost a third, they were busy consulting with THOUGHT LEADERS , what the heck ??? Well, the article is maybe two years old, and they have not produced a good thought yet


----------



## Sophisticatted

O probably has her own agenda.  Possibly political, as she’s dabbled there before (and there were rumors that she felt she didn’t receive enough recognition and gratitude after the fact).

The Manchurian Candidate comes to mind with the Harkles (ETA, in general, not just with O).  Puppets and puppet strings.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I did too, but it was much longer ago than the interview. My opinion started to change about her about 10+ years ago.  There comes a point where all famous people begin to believe everything their toadies tell them and they lose sight of reality and think they are omniscient.  I think that is what happened with her.


My opinion started to change decades ago as well,  but this Meg interview gave me a reason to vocalize it. lol


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #1
					

There is a reporter for a British tabloid who told her editors she knew that the ginger haired one was going to Africa. Her editors laughed ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> I'm not saying if I believe he is Hewitt's son or not, but if he isn't, he has given a ton of grief to people that he is not blood related to except for William.  Even if he isn't blood, he was treated his entire life that he was and he turned on just about all of them.  He is still ungrateful.


For any of you who may know the answer....let's just say a PUBLIZIED paternity test proves that H is Hewitt's son (or at least not Charles' or any other Royals son), would that technically/legally take away H's birth title of Prince and all that goes with it?  Security, ToadHouse, $$ from Charles, etc.  And by default, MeeMee P's "Princess" or Duchess of Sussex title?


----------



## Chanbal

Valentine Low's book is apparently released in the US only in June 2023, so they may have time… 



_Royal expert Kinsey Schofield has claimed the trip may not help the strained royal relations.

Host of the To Di For podcast, Kinsey told the Daily Star: “*Senior royals are likely not thrilled with today’s announcement."*

She continued: "When the Sussexes vaguely accused a member of the royal family with being racist, started suing British media, sued the Government, and moved out of the country - monarchists were left feeling betrayed."

Harry and Meghan reunited with the Royal Family at the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations earlier this year, which Kinsey believes was handled well by the pair.

She said: “I thought their behaviour during the Queen's Platinum Jubilee was superb. They were respectful and stayed under the radar.”

The royal expert believes the couple have many “opportunities in America”.


She went on: *“There is so much opportunity for them in America.

“Why are they not capitalizing on the fact that Americans haven't been hit with Tom Bower or Valentine Low's allegations yet?*

"I think their reputation has really taken a hit in the UK thanks to Bower's book - Revenge: Meghan Harry and the war between the Windsors - and *the Sussexes have been suspiciously silent*._









						'Senior royals not thrilled' at Harry and Meghan's UK visit, says royal expert
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning to visit the UK in September, but a royal expert claims that "senior royals aren’t thrilled" about the couple’s visit




					www.ok.co.uk


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> The saga continues to this day.




Damn, Harry really does look like Hewitt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> The saga continues to this day.



LOL this always reminds me of "Is Khloe Kardashian OJ's daughter or not?"  They even did a KUWTK episode on it years ago.  If you want to put it to bed, do a damn paternity test.  If I were Charles, I'd practically demand one.  If Haz isn't his, but Charles was cuckolded into raising him, it'd be a great way to get rid of his #6 position and titles!


----------



## Annawakes

I wish they would just do a DNA test already.  I think the reason why it hasn’t happened is because everyone is afraid of what the results would be.  

It surely would be ironic if the DNA tests showed he isn’t born “princely” and thus ZeeZy didn’t actually marry a “prince”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Valentine Low's book is apparently released in the US only in June 2023, so they may have time…
> View attachment 5594435
> 
> 
> _Royal expert Kinsey Schofield has claimed the trip may not help the strained royal relations.
> 
> Host of the To Di For podcast, Kinsey told the Daily Star: “*Senior royals are likely not thrilled with today’s announcement."*
> 
> She continued: "When the Sussexes vaguely accused a member of the royal family with being racist, started suing British media, sued the Government, and moved out of the country - monarchists were left feeling betrayed."
> 
> Harry and Meghan reunited with the Royal Family at the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations earlier this year, which Kinsey believes was handled well by the pair.
> 
> She said: “I thought their behaviour during the Queen's Platinum Jubilee was superb. They were respectful and stayed under the radar.”
> 
> The royal expert believes the couple have many “opportunities in America”.
> 
> 
> She went on: *“There is so much opportunity for them in America.
> 
> “Why are they not capitalizing on the fact that Americans haven't been hit with Tom Bower or Valentine Low's allegations yet?*
> 
> "I think their reputation has really taken a hit in the UK thanks to Bower's book - Revenge: Meghan Harry and the war between the Windsors - and *the Sussexes have been suspiciously silent*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Senior royals not thrilled' at Harry and Meghan's UK visit, says royal expert
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are planning to visit the UK in September, but a royal expert claims that "senior royals aren’t thrilled" about the couple’s visit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ok.co.uk


Beg to differ with this “royal expert”.  She is *wrong.  *There is less-than-zero opportunity for them here.  They have been exposed as liars, charlatans, grifters, and numerous other negatives.  Sure sure, there is a place for the “DebbieDowners”, it isn’t here.




ETA: googled this Kinsey Schofeld - clearly has an agenda to promote. Ick


			https://mobile.twitter.com/kinseyschofield?lang=en


----------



## Annawakes

PS If he was so mentally disturbed by being the spare (the jealousy etc), I can’t even imagine his mental health if he were to discover he wasn’t even born a prince.  Yikes.  And that’s why I think the DNA test hasn’t happened (or maybe it has and we just don’t know about it)


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> I wish they would just do a DNA test already.  I think the reason why it hasn’t happened is because everyone is afraid of what the results would be.
> 
> It surely would be ironic if the DNA tests showed he isn’t born “princely” and thus ZeeZy didn’t actually marry a “prince”


That would be such sweet revenge!  Then his only link to the throne would be William (haha!) and they would no longer be "just a plane crash away"!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> PS If he was so mentally disturbed by being the spare (the jealousy etc), I can’t even imagine his mental health if he were to discover he wasn’t even born a prince.  Yikes.  And that’s why I think the DNA test hasn’t happened (or maybe it has and we just don’t know about it)


But he hates them anyway. As long as he is his mother's son, he shouldn't care.

I know, he would lose all the insane privileges he was born with...


----------



## needlv

Well, the one thing we can thank H and M for, is that I now carefully scrutinise the charities I give to.  I always hated the Facebook giving and used to give to charities directly, but now I carefully review how much each charity’s expenses are.  If it’s more than 30%, I’ll direct my $ elsewhere.

Oneworld looks like a grift.  I went to charity navigator and saw their expenses vs how many staff are on over 100k GBP, and realised immediately that it was another “charity” where people help themselves first over others.

pass.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't know. It does give you pause.


----------



## papertiger

DL Harper said:


> For any of you who may know the answer....let's just say a PUBLIZIED paternity test proves that H is Hewitt's son (or at least not Charles' or any other Royals son), would that technically/legally take away H's birth title of Prince and all that goes with it?  Security, ToadHouse, $$ from Charles, etc.  And by default, MeeMee P's "Princess" or Duchess of Sussex title?



It would bring the bloodline into question and iif proven would take away his HRH Prince's title strictly speaking (because not only would not be QE2's grandson but also illegitimate). Charles would never do that though, it would all be hushed-up.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Well, the one thing we can thank H and M for, is that I now carefully scrutinise the charities I give to.  I always hated the Facebook giving and used to give to charities directly, but now I carefully review how much each charity’s expenses are.  If it’s more than 30%, I’ll direct my $ elsewhere.
> 
> Oneworld looks like a grift.  I went to charity navigator and saw their expenses vs how many staff are on over 100k GBP, and realised immediately that it was another “charity” where people help themselves first over others.
> 
> pass.



Me too.

I didn't give through Farfetch the other day. Actually, I'm sick of being prompted to give money to charity through department stores and businesses all together, it's like they think we would never think of giving to charity without them prompting us. How good of them to virtue-signal on my behalf without them giving a penny.

What Ache-well does is just as bad, it collects on our behalves and then it'll decide who and what to give to later - after the couple's expenses of course.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. It does give you pause.




Can't see pic


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> PS If he was so mentally disturbed by being the spare (the jealousy etc), I can’t even imagine his mental health if he were to discover he wasn’t even born a prince.  Yikes.  And that’s why I think the DNA test hasn’t happened (or maybe it has and we just don’t know about it)



I wouldn't want someone who has on more than one occasion admitted to being in a fragile state of mind, giving advice to future heads of state or having a leadership role in the military or health practitioner/management.

Since he has declared himself not well and she has admitted to being suicidal to the point of threatening her baby's life.  I hope they have some 24/7 qualified (verifiable) care - for any children that may be living with them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who would have guessed!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who would have guessed!




If true, it actually makes me have even less respect for Haz-bin (I could have never guessed I'd have any for the past years). Things not going well and according to plan - must be the _other _person.

If Harry'd had a backbone in the first place and said to M, 'marry me and _you_ join _my_ family, live as we live, do what we do or go', things would have been different. Believe me, she would have shut-up and toe- the-line rather than give-up the opportunity of a Disney lifetime. But no, he bought that whole Truman Show crap she's been feeding him, like " Oh H, there's a big outside world out there, and it's ours for the taking" (doing my best Disney princess voice here  ).

He's acted like a teen in his 30s, tantrum-rebellion is not cute in a grown-up man.

I blame_ him_ totally, from the time they met, with his upbringing, up to him to see through the charlatans, climbers and hangers-on like M. All he had to do was knuckle-down, grow-up and do some graft.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DL Harper said:


> For any of you who may know the answer....let's just say a PUBLIZIED paternity test proves that H is Hewitt's son (or at least not Charles' or any other Royals son), would that technically/legally take away H's birth title of Prince and all that goes with it?  Security, ToadHouse, $$ from Charles, etc.  And by default, MeeMee P's "Princess" or Duchess of Sussex title?



I would think so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It would bring the bloodline into question and iif proven would take away his HRH Prince's title strictly speaking (because not only would not be QE2's grandson but also illegitimate). Charles would never do that though, it would all be hushed-up.



But his hand would be forced if like OP stated the results were made public. Which honestly I don't wish on anyone, not even to spite Raptor. It would be horrible for any family involved.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Can't see pic


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Can't see pic


Well,  this seems to confirm what we thought all along,  I. E. That she WAS a yacht girl!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But his hand would be forced if like OP stated the results were made public. Which honestly I don't wish on anyone, not even to spite Raptor. It would be horrible for any family involved.



Nerissa and Katherine Bowes-Lyon (first cousins to the Queen Mother) were put in (1941) and never came out of a facility. The Queen's (Hidden) Cousins were locked-up in a sanatarium their whole life and would have never even been heard about until a Channel 4 doc was made 2011. 


Prince John (son of George V, uncle to QE2) an epileptic, was not paraded with his brothers (at one time #5 in line) and conveniently forgotten about by history (buried at Sandringham) 

If the BRF don't want things known, you won't know, you won't even know that you don't know. 

However, even knowing all this, whatever Harry writes in his/her 'memoir', I wouldn't believe a word.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5594778



 

Which brings back Uncle Andy's connection


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Which brings back Uncle Andy's connection



I really need a disgusted face in the reactions.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> If true, it actually makes me have even less respect for Haz-bin (I could have never guessed I'd have any for the past years). Things not going well and according to plan - must be the _other _person.
> 
> If Harry'd had a backbone in the first place and said to M, 'marry me and _you_ join _my_ family, live as we live, do what we do or go', things would have been different. Believe me, she would have shut-up and toe- the-line rather than give-up the opportunity of a Disney lifetime. But no, he bought that whole Truman Show crap she's been feeding him, like " Oh H, there's a big outside world out there, and it's ours for the taking" (doing my best Disney princess voice here  ).
> 
> He's acted like a teen in his 30s, tantrum-rebellion is not cute in a grown-up man.
> 
> I blame_ him_ totally, from the time they met, with his upbringing, up to him to see through the charlatans, climbers and hangers-on like M. All he had to do was knuckle-down, grow-up and do some graft.



Nope.  She would have shut up for a little while but the narc in her couldn’t get over that she would always be the side show in the BRF team, not on the same level as Kate.

she wanted fame and money.  After realising the royal family has everything in trusts (and not readily accessible cash for her to spend), she tried to monetize the monarchy by merching.  She thought she could turn up to the fun stuff (trooping of the colour etc), skip the rainy day opening of old peoples homes and make a fortune merching outfits, jewellery and everything else.

when told “no”, she just accelerated her plans to leave by telling H that W must be jealous of their popularity and “they could make billions” by leaving and merching.  The Half-in and half out manifesto shows how arrogant and entitled they truly were.

BOTH threw the BRF under the bus in that Oprah interview.  And both are equally to blame for the spite and nastiness that occurred.  Whilst Philip was dying.

H made his bed, let him lie in it.


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> Nerissa and Katherine Bowes-Lyon (first cousins to the Queen Mother) were put in (1941) and never came out of a facility. The Queen's (Hidden) Cousins were locked-up in a sanatarium their whole life and would have never even been heard about until a Channel 4 doc was made 2011.
> 
> 
> Prince John (son of George V, uncle to QE2) an epileptic, was not paraded with his brothers (at one time #5 in line) and conveniently forgotten about by history (buried at Sandringham)
> 
> If the BRF don't want things known, you won't know, you won't even know that you don't know.
> 
> However, even knowing all this, whatever Harry writes in his/her 'memoir', I wouldn't believe a word.



I think these incidents happened in a more deferential time though. I think RF have huge sway over the press, but if the press have something explosive, then it’s gonna come out.


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> I think these incidents happened in a more deferential time though. I think RF have huge sway over the press, but if the press have something explosive, then it’s gonna come out.



I hope so. 

Nothing would be better for the UK than H (and descendants) to be removed for the # of succession


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Well, the one thing we can thank H and M for, is that I now carefully scrutinise the charities I give to.  I always hated the Facebook giving and used to give to charities directly, but now I carefully review how much each charity’s expenses are.  If it’s more than 30%, I’ll direct my $ elsewhere.
> 
> Oneworld looks like a grift.  I went to charity navigator and saw their expenses vs how many staff are on over 100k GBP, and realised immediately that it was another “charity” where people help themselves first over others.
> 
> pass.


The Harkel's 'arrangements' are making me more cynical. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. It does give you pause.




Not sure what is more shocking. Counseling in what? Leader of what?


----------



## Annawakes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But his hand would be forced if like OP stated the results were made public. Which honestly I don't wish on anyone, not even to spite Raptor. It would be horrible for any family involved.


Yes, totally agree.  This is why the question will forever remain answered….for us at least….because of what might ensue.  Even though it’s as simple as a dna test.


----------



## Chanbal

*The star of the new Game of Thrones prequel is fabulous: a surly, narcissistic, spoilt second son.* He is shown riding dragons, shagging lovelies who look like Kourtney Kardashian and petulantly calling summits. He gets super-frustrated because, like most second sons, he’s often laughed at and ignored.

Halfway through one of his spectacular freak-outs — clubbing a peace messenger half to death with his own helmet — I thought: *“Who does Daemon Targaryen remind me of, if not Prince Harry?”* The sulking, the dyspepsia, the environmentally unfriendly mode of transport. Every time I look at Matt Smith’s scowling face in _House of the Dragon_, I think of three words: alternative royal tour.

_*Like Daemon, Harry faces a terrible problem: what will he do with his life? *He can sit in California, dolefully ordering commemorative wreaths from the local florist to lay in a plastic Hollywood cemetery as part of some faux Remembrance Day cosplay, or updating the now rarely updated Archewell website. But that’s not very interesting, is it? So he’s decided to come back and try to reclaim the only thing he has ever known: royal life.

*What have we done to deserve this?*
We’re told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be returning to this country in September to “visit with several charities” in London and Manchester. Meghan will give a keynote speech on “equality” while, I’m assuming, fiercely mouthing “TEETH” and “SMILES” at her husband from the sidelines. *I’m sure there’ll be many photo opportunities and a £50,000 wardrobe made entirely of silk and cashmere, while we are lectured about the value of “humility” and “racial justice” and told how “committed” they are to “serving humanity” at the One Young World summit. She might even manage a tantrum about security in a covered market. My advice to any journalist is simple: just make sure you ask her if she’s OK.

They probably aren’t calling it an “alternative royal tour”, but what else is it? *During the Wars of the Roses — incidentally, the source material for Game of Thrones — a rival court was set up every other decade. *What is Harry, if not a pretender? *He has always behaved as if he were a medieval princeling. Just look at the peasants he wanted lining the route to his wedding: 1,500 lucky plebs. And *the language he uses, telling us the Queen needs “protecting”. This is sexism 1389.*

The only difference is that rather than armies of mercenaries, *he uses armies of spokespeople who create press releases and blog posts.* *Every other hour there is some lickspittle slingshotting some spin around our ears about the brilliance of House Harry*. You can just imagine the multitudes of scrofulous, fawning press officers telling him it’s fine to feed the journalists to the dragons, when they’re the ones who should be roasted for using the words “visit with”.

Will the public love it? I’ll bet my tiara they will. If there is one thing we’ve learnt from the past six years, it is that we now value style over content, royal soap opera over pomp and circumstance. Anyone who ever clapped Greta Thunberg will love Harry’s drivelling, content-free obsession with himself. It will pack conference halls.

As for Meghan, if she can pretend she is working royalty and that nothing ever happened, she will. *There is our truth, the collective truth, and then, as we know, there is the Sussexes’ “truth”, and never the twain shall meet. It is what happens when you get two self-obsessed golden bog-havers who think they can do whatever they want.*

The problem with all this, of course, is that the current royal family spend a huge amount of time emphasising duty, diligence, service and grace. While Harry is whirlybirding into Manchester to participate in some sub-Trudeau globalist balls — “four transformative days of panels” — his cousin, Lady Louise Windsor, has been working in a garden centre for £6.83 an hour, the minimum wage. What’s interesting is that this modest, likeable young woman, who looks as if she can take or leave being part of the royal family, strikes me as much more of a role model than anyone you’d catch around Meghan or at one of her ambitious, empty summits.

As someone who seems happy to simply hold down a job, she is the true royal rebel — unlike Harry and Meghan, who think anything that doesn’t involve a photoshoot is, like, what. What, exactly, do these two stand for, except hair and make-up and a morass of badly expressed ideas that show no self-awareness whatsoever?

I know what will happen next: more staged visits. More appearances here. More droning on about Africa. Opening stores and cinemas and commercial enterprises that will have them, like M&M’s World or some Lego thing or a restaurant that reflects their “values”.

Perhaps they will set up an alternative honours system in which there is nothing so gendered as knighthoods, just “recognition”, as Meghan will call it, for people who’ve been “authentic” and “their true selves”._



			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Royal family 'kept in the dark over contents of Prince Harry's memoir'
					

The contents of Prince Harry's forthcoming tell-all memoir still remain a mystery, including to the Royal family who will get to read the book at the same time as the public.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5594848
> 
> 
> *The star of the new Game of Thrones prequel is fabulous: a surly, narcissistic, spoilt second son.* He is shown riding dragons, shagging lovelies who look like Kourtney Kardashian and petulantly calling summits. He gets super-frustrated because, like most second sons, he’s often laughed at and ignored.
> 
> Halfway through one of his spectacular freak-outs — clubbing a peace messenger half to death with his own helmet — I thought: *“Who does Daemon Targaryen remind me of, if not Prince Harry?”* The sulking, the dyspepsia, the environmentally unfriendly mode of transport. Every time I look at Matt Smith’s scowling face in _House of the Dragon_, I think of three words: alternative royal tour.
> 
> _*Like Daemon, Harry faces a terrible problem: what will he do with his life? *He can sit in California, dolefully ordering commemorative wreaths from the local florist to lay in a plastic Hollywood cemetery as part of some faux Remembrance Day cosplay, or updating the now rarely updated Archewell website. But that’s not very interesting, is it? So he’s decided to come back and try to reclaim the only thing he has ever known: royal life.
> 
> *What have we done to deserve this?*
> We’re told the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be returning to this country in September to “visit with several charities” in London and Manchester. Meghan will give a keynote speech on “equality” while, I’m assuming, fiercely mouthing “TEETH” and “SMILES” at her husband from the sidelines. *I’m sure there’ll be many photo opportunities and a £50,000 wardrobe made entirely of silk and cashmere, while we are lectured about the value of “humility” and “racial justice” and told how “committed” they are to “serving humanity” at the One Young World summit. She might even manage a tantrum about security in a covered market. My advice to any journalist is simple: just make sure you ask her if she’s OK.
> 
> They probably aren’t calling it an “alternative royal tour”, but what else is it? *During the Wars of the Roses — incidentally, the source material for Game of Thrones — a rival court was set up every other decade. *What is Harry, if not a pretender? *He has always behaved as if he were a medieval princeling. Just look at the peasants he wanted lining the route to his wedding: 1,500 lucky plebs. And *the language he uses, telling us the Queen needs “protecting”. This is sexism 1389.*
> 
> The only difference is that rather than armies of mercenaries, *he uses armies of spokespeople who create press releases and blog posts.* *Every other hour there is some lickspittle slingshotting some spin around our ears about the brilliance of House Harry*. You can just imagine the multitudes of scrofulous, fawning press officers telling him it’s fine to feed the journalists to the dragons, when they’re the ones who should be roasted for using the words “visit with”.
> 
> Will the public love it? I’ll bet my tiara they will. If there is one thing we’ve learnt from the past six years, it is that we now value style over content, royal soap opera over pomp and circumstance. Anyone who ever clapped Greta Thunberg will love Harry’s drivelling, content-free obsession with himself. It will pack conference halls.
> 
> As for Meghan, if she can pretend she is working royalty and that nothing ever happened, she will. *There is our truth, the collective truth, and then, as we know, there is the Sussexes’ “truth”, and never the twain shall meet. It is what happens when you get two self-obsessed golden bog-havers who think they can do whatever they want.*
> 
> The problem with all this, of course, is that the current royal family spend a huge amount of time emphasising duty, diligence, service and grace. While Harry is whirlybirding into Manchester to participate in some sub-Trudeau globalist balls — “four transformative days of panels” — his cousin, Lady Louise Windsor, has been working in a garden centre for £6.83 an hour, the minimum wage. What’s interesting is that this modest, likeable young woman, who looks as if she can take or leave being part of the royal family, strikes me as much more of a role model than anyone you’d catch around Meghan or at one of her ambitious, empty summits.
> 
> As someone who seems happy to simply hold down a job, she is the true royal rebel — unlike Harry and Meghan, who think anything that doesn’t involve a photoshoot is, like, what. What, exactly, do these two stand for, except hair and make-up and a morass of badly expressed ideas that show no self-awareness whatsoever?
> 
> I know what will happen next: more staged visits. More appearances here. More droning on about Africa. Opening stores and cinemas and commercial enterprises that will have them, like M&M’s World or some Lego thing or a restaurant that reflects their “values”.
> 
> Perhaps they will set up an alternative honours system in which there is nothing so gendered as knighthoods, just “recognition”, as Meghan will call it, for people who’ve been “authentic” and “their true selves”._
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Perhaps they will set up an alternate honors system … where have you been ??? LOL Done and dusted …
Remember the award that H&M got (NAACP maybe, I remember her one shoulder cobalt blue formal that matched the stage backdrop , I remember important stuff )
Well, they got that award for sponsoring some competition that hands out another award …
Awards breed awards


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5594849
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal family 'kept in the dark over contents of Prince Harry's memoir'
> 
> 
> The contents of Prince Harry's forthcoming tell-all memoir still remain a mystery, including to the Royal family who will get to read the book at the same time as the public.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My bet, you heard it here, LOL, my prediction , and I have NEVER been wrong (except a lot of the time … )
I predict a Beyonce kind of drop, like new music that appears suddenly out of the ether one day , along with photos of ladies on horses. Wasn’t Lady Godiva a damsel in distress ? It would be a new look for MM to copy
I think they may eschew the hard copy versions of the book, for the most part , similar to Bower book US launch on Kindle Unlimited 
That gives them flexibility in issue date, and ability to add last minute content from Sep trips to Europe


----------



## Chanbal

_Some are surprised that Penguin appears prepared to risk its reputation by publishing a book likely to contain highly subjective allegations.
However, royal aides shrewdly note they will be acutely aware that the Royal family would never sue one of its own.
While it is common practice for the purposes of accuracy to run certain allegations by those involved in advance of publication, in this case the risks are considered small.
There is also no legal obligation to offer a right of reply.
*It is believed that any publicity* will be kept to a minimum and* will be largely focused on the US market.*
A television appearance with a friendly network or an interview in a glossy magazine such as Vanity Fair are thought possible._


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really need a disgusted face in the reactions.


Just quote the article in question and post something like this:


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Well, obviously not dumb, but dumb to Meg's agenda. And I will never look at O the same again. I thought better of





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. It does give you pause.



I find it hard to believe that Harry took off without the WIFE's permission


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. It does give you pause.



Is the pic verified? No wish to defend TW but the three women on the right seem a bit out of scale to me.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Is the pic verified? No wish to defend TW but the three women on the right seem a bit out of scale to me.


Even if everyone looked perfect we can’t be sure it hasn’t been tampered with. We live in an age where photography cannot be trusted. The photo is an intriguing clue but isn’t definitive evidence.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5594778


The same hat that MM wore to Wimbledon


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The same hat that MM wore to Wimbledon


Is it the same top? I think it is fake because there isn’t a place for Meghan’s body. Guessing the first five women are really there and Meghan and the blonde on the far right were inserted later.


----------



## Handbag1234

purseinsanity said:


> LOL this always reminds me of "Is Khloe Kardashian OJ's daughter or not?"  They even did a KUWTK episode on it years ago.  If you want to put it to bed, do a damn paternity test.  If I were Charles, I'd practically demand one.  If Haz isn't his, but Charles was cuckolded into raising him, it'd be a great way to get rid of his #6 position and titles!


I was told by a colleague who once lived on the royal estate and who’s husband was senior in the royal household during the time of the Harry paternity rumours. She said they’d done paternity tests and Harry is Charles’ son. Diana’s brother has red hair. Whether this is true or not who knows!!!


----------



## sdkitty

Handbag1234 said:


> I was told by a colleague who once lived on the royal estate and who’s husband was senior in the royal household during the time of the Harry paternity rumours. She said they’d done paternity tests and Harry is Charles’ son. Diana’s brother has red hair. Whether this is true or not who knows!!!


I thought the rumors about Harry's paternity had been put to bed long ago - whether by the timing of her affair or other means


----------



## Sferics

papertiger said:


> The ultimate insult - and so well put


What did this tweet say?


----------



## youngster

So, Harry gets his $20 million from this book, its published around Christmas, and then what?

Maybe he manages not to offend the Queen but saves his vitriol for Charles, Camilla, other relatives, and William.  OK. So, he gets his 15 more minutes of publicity followed by Antarctic silence from BP (or another "recollections greatly vary" type statement). Then what?  Is he miraculously going to start producing significant original content for Spotify and Netflix? Will he be any better or more interesting as a speaker than he was in Florida or the UN? Will people start throwing money at his foundation right as we head into recession?  Is this book going to launch him, a British prince, into the upper echelon of Hollywood, DC and NYC as some sort of unelected, non-citizen "thought leader" with American companies just lining up to toss him millions?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Halfway through one of his spectacular freak-outs — clubbing a peace messenger half to death with his own helmet — I thought: *“Who does Daemon Targaryen remind me of, if not Prince Harry?”* The sulking, the dyspepsia, the environmentally unfriendly mode of transport. Every time I look at Matt Smith’s scowling face in _House of the Dragon_, I think of three words: alternative royal tour.



Loved the article, but...dragons are environmentally unfriendly? Don't they run on bio fuel or something?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Some are surprised that Penguin appears prepared to risk its reputation by publishing a book likely to contain highly subjective allegations.
> However, royal aides shrewdly note they will be acutely aware that the Royal family would never sue one of its own.
> While it is common practice for the purposes of accuracy to run certain allegations by those involved in advance of publication, in this case the risks are considered small._



I don't know. William seems a little exasperated with his brother and co. lately, and in particular with Raptor trying to smear Kate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handbag1234 said:


> I was told by a colleague who once lived on the royal estate and who’s husband was senior in the royal household during the time of the Harry paternity rumours. She said they’d done paternity tests and Harry is Charles’ son. Diana’s brother has red hair. Whether this is true or not who knows!!!



It makes completely sense to me. I just can't see Diana being that reckless, especially that early on in the marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Did we do this already?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And The Queen doesn't strike me a petty person at all.


----------



## CobaltBlu

This amused me


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> I hope so.
> 
> Nothing would be better for the UK than H (and descendants) to be removed for the # of succession



Honestly I just think they need to sink into oblivion. Live a quiet life. I think if the place of succession was taken from them it would just be something else to whine about....

Incidentally I see duke of Edinburgh so clearly in Harry, looks wise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> If true, it actually makes me have even less respect for Haz-bin (I could have never guessed I'd have any for the past years). Things not going well and according to plan - must be the _other _person.
> 
> If Harry'd had a backbone in the first place and said to M, 'marry me and _you_ join _my_ family, live as we live, do what we do or go', things would have been different. Believe me, she would have shut-up and toe- the-line rather than give-up the opportunity of a Disney lifetime. But no, he bought that whole Truman Show crap she's been feeding him, like " Oh H, there's a big outside world out there, and it's ours for the taking" (doing my best Disney princess voice here  ).
> 
> He's acted like a teen in his 30s, tantrum-rebellion is not cute in a grown-up man.
> 
> I blame_ him_ totally, from the time they met, with his upbringing, up to him to see through the charlatans, climbers and hangers-on like M. All he had to do was knuckle-down, grow-up and do some graft.


So, this split will be similar to Charles and Diana?  It drags on for months in the public eye, at the top of every website, lots of solo photos released, blah blah blah.  Finally QE steps in and says _enough. _Imo in today’s world a long good-bye will be disastrous for the BRF, especially from this dastardly duo. Best to get this over asap.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, this split will be similar to Charles and Diana?  It drags on for months in the public eye, at the top of every website, lots of solo photos released, blah blah blah.  Finally QE steps in and says _enough. _Imo in today’s world a long good-bye will be disastrous for the BRF, especially from this dastardly duo. Best to get this over asap.



Who cares what they do, though. They are no working royals, they live in California. The heir to the throne and his wife cheating on each other right there in London is something else.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It makes completely sense to me. I just can't see Diana being that reckless, especially that early on in the marriage.


Yes, I don’t see it either. The trouble with dead famous people is unsubstantiated claims can be made about them without any fear of repercussions to the individual making them. She’s been gone for over 25 years and the longer it’s been, the more outrageous the accusations become.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mikimoto007 said:


> Honestly I just think they need to sink into oblivion. Live a quiet life. I think if the place of succession was taken from them it would just be something else to whine about....
> 
> Incidentally I see duke of Edinburgh so clearly in Harry, looks wise.


Imo Hazzi lacks the gravitas and strong features that the Duke’s face had, but there are similarities. He looks very much like his Spencer cousins. 

George Edmund McCorquodale












						Why People Think Prince Charles Isn't Harry's Real Dad
					

Everything you need to know about the speculation that James Hewitt is secretly Prince Harry's real father.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who cares what they do, though. They are no working royals, they live in California. The heir to the throne and his wife cheating on each other right there in London is something else.


They still receive mega-bucks from Charles, they continue to dominate headlines, they still lecture, write books, etc.  Imo people do pay attention, if only to watch how this half-in/half-out spectacle works.  Just wait until the coronation - does Hazz have a role?  Since he is a duke, I think he does [I could be wrong]. Maybe he will opt out ?


----------



## kemilia

Annawakes said:


> I wish they would just do a DNA test already.  I think the reason why it hasn’t happened is because everyone is afraid of what the results would be.
> 
> It surely would be ironic if the DNA tests showed he isn’t born “princely” and thus ZeeZy didn’t actually marry a “prince”


My opinion: a dna test was done at some point--the resemblance to Hewitt could not be missed. 

Also I remember reading Charles made some negative comment over H being a redhead when he was born but Charles Spencer is a redhead, so anything is possible. 

But the clincher for me was when the line of succession was changed to suddenly include females pushing H further down the ladder. If H is not C's blood, the Palace will never own up to it--too much scandal--let sleeping dogs lie--W produced 3 healthy children (and who knows--maybe more someday). Any foofery the Palace comes up with to say H is C's son is just that (imo).

The totally giant cherry on this Sundae scenario would be TW would be basically a nothing. (ah, I can wish).

All of this is just IMO.


----------



## sdkitty

mikimoto007 said:


> Honestly I just think they need to sink into oblivion. Live a quiet life. I think if the place of succession was taken from them it would just be something else to whine about....
> 
> Incidentally I see duke of Edinburgh so clearly in Harry, looks wise.


the only way she will live a quiet life is if she has no choice in the matter....no one is interested


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> Did we do this already?



_While it may seem like a snub, royal reporter Emily Nash clarified that there's a specific reason behind the omission. "For anyone wondering why Meghan is not described as 'most trusty and well-beloved' like Kate was, it's because that term is only used for citizens of Britain or the Queen's overseas Realms," she tweeted. "Meghan is not yet a British citizen." Fair enough!_






						The Hidden Meaning Behind the Queen’s Consent for the Royal Wedding
					

It looks a lot different than Prince William and Kate Middleton's.




					www.goodhousekeeping.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> Also I remember reading Charles made some negative comment over H being a redhead when he was born but Charles Spencer is a redhead, so anything is possible.



Wasn't this because red hair is considered unattractive, though? He also moaned that Harry wasn't a girl which I feel is slightly cruel to tell your wife after she just went through labour.


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> Also I remember reading Charles made some negative comment over H being a redhead when he was born but Charles Spencer is a redhead, so anything is possible.


Charles also expressed his disappointment over the baby not being a girl. He’s the one who determined that. He has mellowed some in his old age but he was an @ss when he was younger!

@QueenofWrapDress, I just noticed you said the same thing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Charles also expressed his disappointment over the baby not being a girl. He’s the one who determined that. He has mellowed some in his old age but he was an @ss when he was younger!



Honestly...remember how downright sulky he was in the engagement interview? Whom does that remind us of?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> Honestly I just think they need to sink into oblivion. Live a quiet life. I think if the place of succession was taken from them it would just be something else to whine about....
> 
> Incidentally I see duke of Edinburgh so clearly in Harry, looks wise.



Sorry, but we can't have succession without bloodline. Otherwise I, or one of QE2's Shetland ponies could equally apply.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *Even if everyone looked perfect we can’t be sure it hasn’t been tampered with.* We live in an age where photography cannot be trusted. The photo is an intriguing clue but isn’t definitive evidence.


I think it's stupid and unfair to tamper with pictures. 

Tom Bower did an excellent job with his book. The videos that circulate on the internet, the way her father talked about her joining the Soho H, and that he didn't want to address certain questions because she is his daughter and he loves her…. They are already very informative imo.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't this because red hair is considered unattractive, though? He also moaned that Harry wasn't a girl which I feel is slightly cruel to tell your wife after she just went through labour.



Half my family had/has red hair, I think it's beautiful


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Half my family had/has red hair, I think it's beautiful



So do I! But I feel we're a minority.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> _Some are surprised that Penguin appears prepared to risk its reputation by publishing a book likely to contain highly subjective allegations.
> However, royal aides shrewdly note they will be acutely aware that the Royal family would never sue one of its own.
> While it is common practice for the purposes of accuracy to run certain allegations by those involved in advance of publication, in this case the risks are considered small.
> There is also no legal obligation to offer a right of reply.
> *It is believed that any publicity* will be kept to a minimum and* will be largely focused on the US market.*
> A television appearance with a friendly network or an interview in a glossy magazine such as Vanity Fair are thought possible._




I'm sure the BRF will get a curtesy copy as is the custom. If the BRF really want it stopped, it will be stopped.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I thought the rumors about Harry's paternity had been put to bed long ago - whether by the timing of her affair or other means


I think Charles is the father, but some rumors may help to generate interest in his book.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly...remember how downright sulky he was in the engagement interview? Whom does that remind us of?


Exactly. That’s why it’s hilarious anytime somebody speculates that Harry isn’t his child. They may not look alike but they sure sulk alike. 

I’d say Charles has been on one long sulk ever since the Oprah interview. I don’t believe he is had a face-to-face with his son since well before then.


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> I actually think she looks nice there ^ there's no POSE for the camera
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5593877
> 
> 
> This one has me stumped though. I would like to see Gloria (Steinem) and M discuss the semiotics of this 'little number' as well as M is wearing and young women buying into Hef-iology considering the documented ritualised abuse many of the Bunnies had to endure in the clubs and worse at the mansion.



A feminist wearing a Playboy tank?  Not surprising. Then she marries a man for riches and a title. And still calls herself a feminist. She's just a hypocritical dope.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Sorry, but we can't have succession without bloodline. Otherwise I, or *one of QE2's Shetland ponies* could equally apply.


I think a Pony Queen would be awesome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Exactly. That’s why it’s hilarious anytime somebody speculates that Harry isn’t his child. They may not look alike but they sure sulk alike.
> 
> I’d say Charles has been on one long sulk ever since the Oprah interview. I don’t believe he is had a face-to-face with his son since well before then.



Though I'm Team Charles here. He can sulk at the Harkles all he wants, I just wish he'd cut them off for good.


----------



## Chanbal

Sucks, Netfl*x, Scoobie… will likely work hard, so we in the US will buy his VIP 'host duties' story.










						Prince Harry mocked for 'host duties' during visit to Mozambique
					

Prince Harry mocked for 'host duties' during visit to Mozambique




					www.geo.tv


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Though I'm Team Charles here. He can sulk at the Harkles all he wants, I just wish he'd cut them off for good.


I wish that too but I don’t believe it will happen. It would require more backbone than he possesses. Frankly, I feel like Charles has been hiding in the background all this time trying to remain unnoticed and it worked. Nobody is asking why the hell Charles doesn’t get his son in line? Harry has so little respect for his father that he doesn’t care what he says or does.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I think a Pony Queen would be awesome.
> 
> View attachment 5594986





My favourite neigh-bour is a grey Shetland pony, and she is wiser and eminently more regal than Haz-bin too. I say we change the rules and #2-11 inlines to be Shetland ponies and Welsh corgis.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> My favourite neigh-bour is a grey Shetland pony, and she is wiser and eminently more regal than Haz-bin too. I say we change the rules and #2-11 inlines to be Shetland ponies and Welsh corgis.



Lucky you. I used to live in a very quiet area, but lately my neighbours include a freaking church that rings its bells on Sundays at 6 a.m., a guy that likes to blast music all day all summer with every window open, a new baby that cries a lot and generally too many children. I didn't move BTW, they just ganged up on me.


----------



## charlottawill

Handbag1234 said:


> I was told by a colleague who once lived on the royal estate and who’s husband was senior in the royal household during the time of the Harry paternity rumours. She said they’d done paternity tests and Harry is Charles’ son. Diana’s brother has red hair. Whether this is true or not who knows!!!


I have to believe if there was a chance that Hewitt was his father they would have dealt with it promptly due to the succession issue. What if something had happened to William a decade ago and it left Harry next in line after PC? I'll bet a DNA test was done a long time ago but they're not about to share it with the Daily Mail.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Best to get this over asap.


But you know with her it will be a knock down drag out fight to get every last dime she can out of them.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't this because red hair is considered unattractive, though? He also moaned that Harry wasn't a girl which I feel is slightly cruel to tell your wife after she just went through labour.


I recall reading that Diana felt the marriage was over when Charles seemed indifferent at Harry's birth, having hoped for a daughter, and left to play polo with his friends.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Sucks, Netfl*x, Scoobie… will likely work hard, so we in the US will buy his VIP 'host duties' story.
> View attachment 5595002
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry mocked for 'host duties' during visit to Mozambique
> 
> 
> Prince Harry mocked for 'host duties' during visit to Mozambique
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv


Walmart is very excited to send Harry a job application. He can host VIP tours of the wellness section.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that Diana felt the marriage was over when Charles seemed indifferent at Harry's birth, having hoped for a daughter, and left to play polo with his friends.



I happen to like old Charles and I feel for anyone stuck in an unhappy marriage, but geez, young Charles was a jerk.


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Did we do this already?



Was the difference in wording for K and M due to M not being a UK citizen ?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I happen to like old Charles and I feel for anyone stuck in an unhappy marriage, but geez, young Charles was a jerk.


I like old Charles better than when he was young. He was awful. Nobody talks about Charles much.

Maybe that’s because the press doesn’t focus on him in favor of the younger generation. He may not be cheating on his wife anymore but accepting giant bags of cash doesn’t look any better IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

True. But he's a cute grandpa


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He also moaned that Harry wasn't a girl which I feel is slightly cruel to tell your wife after she just went through labour.


Diana was not one for always telling the truth and I often wonder if Charles was so insensitive, in this case.  After all, having a male, even if just the spare, is considered a good thing.

The more I read about Diana, the more she wanted the world's love... and sympathy.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I recall reading that Diana felt the marriage was over when Charles seemed indifferent at Harry's birth, having hoped for a daughter, and left to play polo with his friends.


I recall Diana saying that the time around H's birth was the happiest... so who knows!


----------



## muddledmint

charlottawill said:


> I have to believe if there was a chance that Hewitt was his father they would have dealt with it promptly due to the succession issue. What if something had happened to William a decade ago and it left Harry next in line after PC? I'll bet a DNA test was done a long time ago but they're not about to share it with the Daily Mail.


I wish this old rumor would be put to bed once and for all. It’s soooooo obvious that Harry is prince Charles’s son. He looks exactly like the Windsor side of the family from the close set eyes, the stick outy ears, the nose, the ruddy cheeks, everything! He looks more like that side than William does. William looks like Diana, Harry looks like Charles and the queen. He looks nothing like that other guy except for the hair color.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo Hazzi lacks the gravitas and strong features that the Duke’s face had, but there are similarities. He looks very much like his Spencer cousins.
> 
> George Edmund McCorquodale
> View attachment 5594957
> View attachment 5594958
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why People Think Prince Charles Isn't Harry's Real Dad
> 
> 
> Everything you need to know about the speculation that James Hewitt is secretly Prince Harry's real father.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com



@muddledmint  I did try earlier today


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I like old Charles better than when he was young. He was awful. Nobody talks about Charles much.
> 
> Maybe that’s because the press doesn’t focus on him in favor of the younger generation. He may not be cheating on his wife anymore but accepting giant bags of cash doesn’t look any better IMO.



I think the problem was Charles was born old, at a time of psychedelic drugs, prog-rock and then Charlie's Angels, Charles looked and sounded sounded grey and stuffy, out of step with his peers and the times. He suits the age is now much better.


----------



## Handbag1234

charlottawill said:


> I have to believe if there was a chance that Hewitt was his father they would have dealt with it promptly due to the succession issue. What if something had happened to William a decade ago and it left Harry next in line after PC? I'll bet a DNA test was done a long time ago but they're not about to share it with the Daily Mail.


Exactly. I'm inclined to believe my ex colleague, due to the succession issues you mentioned. As this was a time before social media, people talked more freely. She was a great source of some very interesting stories! It was like a real life Downton Abbey with the servants all gossiping.


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> Sorry, but we can't have succession without bloodline. Otherwise I, or one of QE2's Shetland ponies could equally apply.


Yes, of course it's about bloodline but I think if something like this happened it would just give them more publicity. It wouldn't reflect well on the royal family at all.


----------



## mikimoto007

charlottawill said:


> I have to believe if there was a chance that Hewitt was his father they would have dealt with it promptly due to the succession issue. What if something had happened to William a decade ago and it left Harry next in line after PC? I'll bet a DNA test was done a long time ago but they're not about to share it with the Daily Mail.



I mean...this is the British Royal family. They hate conflict, they hate controversy, they hate notoriety. They're experts at sticking their heads in the samd and hoping that things will go away and I think that's served them well in previous generations - never complain,never explain. Its precisely because of the succession issue they wouldn't have dealt with it. 

I can't see any DNA test ever being done-too much risk if it ever got out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

I remember reading both Charles and Diana wanted a girl for child #2.
A girl would be easier.
Raise her to marry in her social circle.
A 2nd boy would have no chance to be raised to take the monarchy and would flounder in his life as he could never have a real career or inherit the lot like his older brother.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> _While it may seem like a snub, royal reporter Emily Nash clarified that there's a specific reason behind the omission. "For anyone wondering why Meghan is not described as 'most trusty and well-beloved' like Kate was, it's because that term is only used for citizens of Britain or the Queen's overseas Realms," she tweeted. "Meghan is not yet a British citizen." Fair enough!_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Hidden Meaning Behind the Queen’s Consent for the Royal Wedding
> 
> 
> It looks a lot different than Prince William and Kate Middleton's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.goodhousekeeping.com


Well then the Q should’ve changed the rules for our ZeeZy.  Simple enough!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady C on what ruined the relationship between the Cambridges and the Sussexes. If you find out, please do tell, I have deadlines today and can't watch right now.


----------



## Chanbal

ce=shar


----------



## Chanbal

Her name being mentioned for such position is already a big and sad joke by itself imo.




_He told Express.co.uk: "*Meghan Markle is clearly quite delusional if she thinks she could end up as President of the United States…*

"Meghan Markle would be a spectacular failure as a presidential contender and would not be a serious contender…

Mr Gardiner warned if Meghan did decide to run for the US presidency, she would be viewed by Americans as a "*joke candidate*" because of how highly unqualified she is for the job.

The foreign policy expert added: *"*She would have zero chance of becoming US President as she has zero qualifications for the job…

*Last month, an insider said to be close to the 41-year-old said Meghan is "convinced she’d be a huge success in politics and is taking it incredibly seriously,* adding: *"She’s convinced there’s a huge opportunity here and is looking to run in the 2028 elections…*_


https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...te-house-politics-********s-midterm-elections


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> ce=shar



The optics of this charitable extraganza organization are bad, too many questionable players

Compare to H’s recent trip to Africa where he interfaced on a small scale with charities, much less of an optics issue 

I have started believing that simpler/smaller is better for charitable organizations


----------



## Chanbal

In lieu of gifts, please donate $$$$ to Archewhatever and smile for the cameras, you are on Netfl*x… Did I read this right?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I think the problem was Charles was born old, at a time of psychedelic drugs, prog-rock and then Charlie's Angels, Charles looked and sounded sounded grey and stuffy, out of step with his peers and the times. He suits the age is now much better.


but wasn't Charles somewhat of a playboy, dating lots of attractive women, in spite of not being good looking or cool?  (just because he was a prince)


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> but wasn't Charles somewhat of a playboy, dating lots of attractive women, in spite of not being good looking or cool?  (just because he was a prince)



I think the tabloids played that up. As we know it was all wishful thinking, he only had eyes for one lady - Camila


----------



## 880

Chanbal said:


> Her name being mentioned for such position is already a big and sad joke by itself imo.
> 
> View attachment 5595448
> 
> 
> _He told Express.co.uk: "*Meghan Markle is clearly quite delusional if she thinks she could end up as President of the United States…*
> 
> "Meghan Markle would be a spectacular failure as a presidential contender and would not be a serious contender…
> 
> Mr Gardiner warned if Meghan did decide to run for the US presidency, she would be viewed by Americans as a "*joke candidate*" because of how highly unqualified she is for the job.
> 
> The foreign policy expert added: *"*She would have zero chance of becoming US President as she has zero qualifications for the job…
> 
> *Last month, an insider said to be close to the 41-year-old said Meghan is "convinced she’d be a huge success in politics and is taking it incredibly seriously,* adding: *"She’s convinced there’s a huge opportunity here and is looking to run in the 2028 elections…*_
> 
> 
> https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...te-house-politics-********s-midterm-elections


Yes agree, but sadly the US has elected totally unqualified joke candidates before


----------



## mikimoto007

gelbergirl said:


> I remember reading both Charles and Diana wanted a girl for child #2.
> A girl would be easier.
> Raise her to marry in her social circle.
> A 2nd boy would have no chance to be raised to take the monarchy and would flounder in his life as he could never have a real career or inherit the lot like his older brother.



I don't think a girl would be any easier. It would have been the same same story. Princess Margaret seemed to have similar issues to Harry in terms of finding a place.


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> I think the tabloids played that up. As we know it was all wishful thinking, he only had eyes for one lady - Camila


Should have gone to Specsavers!


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I think the tabloids played that up. As we know it was all wishful thinking, he only had eyes for one lady - Camila


Charles spent a number of years sowing his wild oats and he was considered a playboy by some standards. I remember jokes on TV about him dating around. Thanks to helpful web sites like "Who Dated Who" we can see who he was involved with in the 70s, including those who he wasn't with long enough to be considered a relationship.   

Prince Charles has been in relationships with Susan George (1978 - 1979), Davina Sheffield (1974 - 1976), Dale Tryon (1974 - 1985), Lady Jane Wellesley (1973 - 1974), Janet Jenkins (1970 - 1992), Cindy Buxton (1969 - 1972) and Lucia Santa Cruz (1968 - 1970).

Prince Charles has had encounters with Anna Wallace (1980), Helga Wagner (1980), Sabrina Guinness (1979), Jane Ward (1979), Caroline Longman, Fiona Watson (model) (1977), Lady Camilla Fane, Lady Sarah McCorquodale (1977), Eva O'Neill (1975), Laura Watkins (1974), Lady Georgiana Russell, Lady Cecil Kerr, Sibylla Dorman, Lady Angela Nevill, Lady Jane Grosvenor, Rosie Clifton, Lady Caroline Percy and Lady Bettina Lindsay.




			https://www.whosdatedwho.com/dating/prince-charles


----------



## sdkitty

mikimoto007 said:


> I don't think a girl would be any easier. It would have been the same same story. Princess Margaret seemed to have similar issues to Harry in terms of finding a place.


but in that case it was two girls....I think maybe if the heir to the throne was the boy and the eldest, I girl might feel less competitive with him than a boy would


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> I think the problem was Charles was born old, at a time of psychedelic drugs, prog-rock and then Charlie's Angels, Charles looked and sounded sounded grey and stuffy, out of step with his peers and the times. He suits the age is now much better.


Somehow, I don't believe that Charles and Anne grew up like the rest of us as their upbringing was most likely left to nannies and courtiers while their parents were busy with their duties. There were happy family photos, scenes and videos, but IMO those were choreographed. After HMTQ's favourite son, sweet baby Andrew was born, C & A were further ignored. It could be why they often appeared to scowl during photoshoots. I seem to recall an overall  attitude (not on TPF) that both never smiled, but then some people never smile.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

I watched most of the Lady CC video with a lovely cup of tea.  Per Lady CC, both William and Kate have Meghan's measure and know Harry is complicit. They recognize players and operators. William (and Kate's) relationship with Harry is altered beyond recognition. It's never going to be the same ever again. 

Harry has kept Frogmore cottage for tax purposes and so Harry can remain a Counsellor of State.  Per Lady CC, Harry and Meghan are trying to create their own half-in/half-out. They've had their "royal platform" taken away so they are trying to create one anyway.  They are going to the UK to pretend they are still royals and reaffirm their royal status. They'll let the BRF have the UK and the Commonwealth and they think they'll be "the royals" everywhere else in the world.  But they'll still push their way into the UK when possible and use the British public (or the Germans or anyone else) to reaffirm and enhance their royal status (and earning capacity) when convenient.  It's why Harry went to Mozambique last week.

She also said more will come out in the future, she won't violate confidences or invade people's privacy at this point, but there will be more that will eventually come out about how Harry and Meghan's behavior has impacted the health of "elderly family members".  (I assume she is talking about Prince Philip and the Queen.)  She also said when this further information comes out, it will finish them as it is so lacking in basic decency. 

Lady CC said Diana was helped towards self destruction by people like Martin Bashir who lied to her and enhanced her paranoia and led to that infamous interview.  Nobody lied to Harry and Meghan. They made their own choices the whole way and decided to do that Oprah interview all on their own.  Nobody influenced Harry and Meghan but Harry and Meghan. 

There is lots going on behind the scenes that the public is not aware of but the family is constrained by numerous factors.  They are considered "great nuisances" but "most people in the know" do not consider them to be all that dangerous as they are basically "*screw up merchants*".  Everything they do exposes their transparent need for attention, affirmation and ever increasing wealth and stature.

Btw, Lady CC still looking amazing with those earrings and necklace and, is that a hat or a headband? Fab.


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> Yes agree, but sadly the US has elected totally unqualified joke candidates before


Yes, it's why I take TW's circus a little more seriously than it deserves.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Yes, it's why I take TW's circus a little more seriously than it deserves.


I just can't...but I know what you mean


----------



## Chanbal

Tourre is right about the PR creations…


----------



## csshopper

I don’t understand how residency in Royal real estate is determined, so a question: could the Queen, or whoever is the decision maker, if not her, nullify the Frogmore lease thus keeping the Suckesses at a distance?  Is Harry guaranteed lodging? Could it be something remote in Scotland for the Dumbartons? 

Hmmm, that sparks another question: could they be stripped of the Sussex title and only allowed to use “Earl and Countess of Dumbarton?” with apologies to all the lovely people of Scotland.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I watched most of the Lady CC video with a lovely cup of tea.  Per Lady CC, both William and Kate have Meghan's measure and know Harry is complicit. They recognize players and operators. William (and Kate's) relationship with Harry is altered beyond recognition. It's never going to be the same ever again.
> 
> Harry has kept Frogmore cottage for tax purposes and so Harry can remain a Counsellor of State.  Per Lady CC, Harry and Meghan are trying to create their own half-in/half-out. They've had their "royal platform" taken away so they are trying to create one anyway.  They are going to the UK to pretend they are still royals and reaffirm their royal status. They'll let the BRF have the UK and the Commonwealth and they think they'll be "the royals" everywhere else in the world.  But they'll still push their way into the UK when possible and use the British public (or the Germans or anyone else) to reaffirm and enhance their royal status (and earning capacity) when convenient.  It's why Harry went to Mozambique last week.
> 
> She also said more will come out in the future, she won't violate confidences or invade people's privacy at this point, but there will be more that will eventually come out about how Harry and Meghan's behavior has impacted the health of "elderly family members".  (I assume she is talking about Prince Philip and the Queen.)  She also said when this further information comes out, it will finish them as it is so lacking in basic decency.
> 
> Lady CC said Diana was helped towards self destruction by people like Martin Bashir who lied to her and enhanced her paranoia and led to that infamous interview.  Nobody lied to Harry and Meghan. They made their own choices the whole way and decided to do that Oprah interview all on their own.  Nobody influenced Harry and Meghan but Harry and Meghan.
> 
> There is lots going on behind the scenes that the public is not aware of but the family is constrained by numerous factors.  They are considered "great nuisances" but "most people in the know" do not consider them to be all that dangerous as they are basically "*screw up merchants*".  Everything they do exposes their transparent need for attention, affirmation and ever increasing wealth and stature.
> 
> Btw, Lady CC still looking amazing with those earrings and necklace and, is that a hat or a headband? Fab.


Haven’t listened so thanks for the recap. The only thing that I can think of that would impact the health of an elderly person is a yelling screaming tirade directed at them.   I could see Harry doing this as I don’t beieve that he has been totally respectful 100% of the time towards either grandparent. PP might have been more shocked by this and saddened than TQ. PP was a man who lived by doing his duty and Harry certainly wasn’t doing his.  Harry could have been threatening them with ruination if he wasnt allowed to marry Meghan. I don’t think he would have had to resort to this unless he was told what had been discovered about her past and character. I could see her prepping him for this by telling him that they would do this to prevent the marriage.

 The expression on TQ’s face during the ceremony told the world that things were not right. I thought it had to do with the whiteness of the dress and the veil, but now .Ithink it was deeper.   She knew that things would be rocky and that is why she tried extra hard to make it a smoother entry for Meghani to royal life. What she didn’t know because they were hiding  it was that they never intended to stay.  The gloves were softer back when they announced they were leaving. The boxing gloves came out with the funeral and they are fully on now as evidenced by the treatment received during the Jubilee.   They love him, but they don’t trust him.  What they think about  Meghan is probably so awful that they don’t want to talk about it.

Curious,  all that jewelry that Lady CC wears….does some of it look fake?


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> I don’t understand how residency in Royal real estate is determined, so a question: could the Queen, or whoever is the decision maker, if not her, nullify the Frogmore lease thus keeping the Suckesses at a distance?  Is Harry guaranteed lodging? Could it be something remote in Scotland for the Dumbartons?
> 
> Hmmm, that sparks another question: could they be stripped of the Sussex title and only allowed to use “Earl and Countess of Dumbarton?” with apologies to all the lovely people of Scotland.


All the titles are tied together I suspect. If removed, I think he would just use Prince.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Tourre is right about the PR creations…



It has been front and center from the beginning that JR Moerhinger  is the ghost writer.  Who believes that Harry wrote  it?


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower confirms that CNN withdrew the report at TW's request…



Oh CNN...







Chanbal said:


> Who would pay to listen to Hazz? 'Rich dudes' suffering from dementia??
> 
> 
> _And ahead of the book’s release, royal author Kinsey Schofield believes Harry is trying to “brand himself” as the former US President.
> 
> Ms Schofield said: "What I think he’s trying to do is brand himself as a Mark Zuckerberg, Barack ***** — *some guy that can get $100,000 for a speech in Miami to a bunch of rich dudes.*
> 
> “*I think he is trying to brand himself as a leader in the United States and will use his book to try to do that.*
> 
> “He wanted to try to rewrite his story and to be *this phoenix rising from the ashes*._



_*"Prince Harry trying to ‘brand himself as Barack O.bama"*_



The delusions!!!!





Chanbal said:


> I know…
> 
> View attachment 5587240


JCMH is her life coach??! He solves all of her life's problems??!!!



Wonder how much Serena got paid to say that? 




charlottawill said:


> "Snow White Meets Skid Row"





These pictures are so bad 
The squatting on the floor, the dirty/dusty feet, dreadful outfit styling, her painfully-trying-to-be-sExY poses & facial expressions. Dreadful.
She is one of those women who has zero ability to be 'sexy' (she's too arrogant and awkward) yet in her mind she desperately thinks she is the most effortlessly sexy woman to have ever graced the planet earth. Which is laughable, especially when you see these pictures 





andrashik said:


> I wonder when they will declare bankruptcy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry memoir pivotal to finances 'Spending money like water!'
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry's upcoming bombshell memoir is a vital source of income to his and Meghan Markle's finances, a royal expert claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Their bank statements would be so entertaining to look at.









andrashik said:


> She prepared in advance
> View attachment 5588960





What the actual f**k?! Absolutely crazy. I would 100% believe it was MM behind this.





LittleStar88 said:


> Harry, Meghan announce surprise return to U.K. in September — Newsweek
> 
> 
> August 15, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news










lanasyogamama said:


> Could this trip have anything to do with spending a day or two in England for tax or residency purposes?











CarryOn2020 said:


>



What a clown.


God that clip remains to be vomit inducing. He's such a fraud.
The snort/laugh out loud during a serious speech at a serious event, then trying to switch to pretend crying taught to him by his talentless z-list actress wife with zero tears once he realizes how inappropriate he is.
Ugh. More fool the woman behind him coming over to comfort him, girl, sit down 






andrashik said:


> View attachment 5592048
> 
> Maybe they can attend the same school as the Cambridges





Never gonna happen.






QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. It does give you pause.





Both horrified and grabbing the popcorn at the same time.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Curious, all that jewelry that Lady CC wears….does some of it look fake?



I wondered that too!  But, I like to imagine her sitting in her lovely home wearing the real stuff.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Yes, it's why I take TW's circus a little more seriously than it deserves.


Anyone can run for any elected office as long as they are citizens, meet the residency requirements and in the case of President, born in the US. Let her run. We all need a laugh. She wouldn’t collect enough money to pay for the printing  of a campaign poster. We all know that running for political office is a money pit


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It has been front and center from the beginning that JR Moerhinger  is the ghost writer.  Who believes that Harry wrote  it?


Harry write a book on his own?  Ha....he had trouble getting through school didn't he?


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I wondered that too!  But, I like to imagine her sitting in her lovely home wearing the real stuff.


Some of it reminds me of the jewelry that a friend bought for his wife. It was quantity over quality. Instead of one really good piece he would buy an entire parure. She had one of emeralds that had awful stones. His poor wife wore it all to make him happy. She really didn’t like any of it


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Tourre is right about the PR creations…



Nearly all celebrity autobiographies are written (or at least co-written) by someone else. How many actors, musicians, and athletes are decent writers? Almost none.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I wondered that too!  But, I like to imagine her sitting in her lovely home wearing the real stuff.



  Costume not fake


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Nearly all celebrity autobiographies are written (or at least co-written) by someone else. How many actors, musicians, and athletes are decent writers? Almost none.


A gazillion years ago I took a sculpting class with a woman who was a ghostwriter. She also wrote jokes for Phyllis Diller. Lol!  When she was asked for whom she wrote, she refused to answer. She said that by the end of the process, she thought they were all asshoes and didn’t want to be associated with them. Can’t wait for a comment from Moerhinger.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Costume not fake


Tomaaaato, not tomato. Potaaaato not potato


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Nearly all celebrity autobiographies are written (or at least co-written) by someone else. How many actors, musicians, and athletes are decent writers? Almost none.



You are so right.  Good writing is hard work and requires actual writing talent.  It's why we haven't seen these two producing successful content for Spotify or Netflix after more than 2 years. Neither of them are writers or content creators.

What is obvious is that they've spread themselves too thin and have almost guaranteed that they will not be successful at anything.  Trying to produce a weekly podcast, producing significant content for Netflix, giving speeches on the circuit, writing children's books or a memoir, raising money and running a foundation, being the "Chief Impact Officer" of several companies . . . I've probably left a few things out that they are attempting.  Any one of those items would be one massive full time job all on its own, if you took it seriously, and even if you employed others to do most of the heavy lifting.  Try doing all of those, plus having some involvement with their 2 young children, and it's a recipe for being unsuccessful at everything.  Neither of them have the talent, skills or career experience to tackle all of these high profile, difficult projects all at once.  I wonder if anyone at Netflix or Spotify even thought to ask how their project, for which they are paying millions, would be prioritized with the other dozen things they were said to be working on?


----------



## LizzieBennett

gracekelly said:


> Haven’t listened so thanks for the recap. The only thing that I can think of that would impact the health of an elderly person is a yelling screaming tirade directed at them.   I could see Harry doing this as I don’t beieve that he has been totally respectful 100% of the time towards either grandparent. PP might have been more shocked by this and saddened than TQ. PP was a man who lived by doing his duty and Harry certainly wasn’t doing his.  Harry could have been threatening them with ruination if he wasnt allowed to marry Meghan. I don’t think he would have had to resort to this unless he was told what had been discovered about her past and character. I could see her prepping him for this by telling him that they would do this to prevent the marriage.
> 
> The expression on TQ’s face during the ceremony told the world that things were not right. I thought it had to do with the whiteness of the dress and the veil, but now .Ithink it was deeper.   She knew that things would be rocky and that is why she tried extra hard to make it a smoother entry for Meghani to royal life. What she didn’t know because they were hiding  it was that they never intended to stay.  The gloves were softer back when they announced they were leaving. The boxing gloves came out with the funeral and they are fully on now as evidenced by the treatment received during the Jubilee.   They love him, but they don’t trust him.  What they think about  Meghan is probably so awful that they don’t want to talk about it.
> 
> Curious,  all that jewelry that Lady CC wears….does some of it look fake?



I would think that the stress they have put QE under because of their actions would have a detrimental effect on her health.   While I dislike MM, I think Prince Harry is totally at fault for their actions.    I don’t buy that he’s been manipulated and bullied.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> You are so right.  Good writing is hard work and requires actual writing talent.  It's why we haven't seen these two producing successful content for Spotify or Netflix after more than 2 years. Neither of them are writers or content creators.
> 
> What is obvious is that they've spread themselves too thin and have almost guaranteed that they will not be successful at anything.  Trying to produce a weekly podcast, producing significant content for Netflix, giving speeches on the circuit, writing children's books or a memoir, raising money and running a foundation, being the "Chief Impact Officer" of several companies . . . I've probably left a few things out that they are attempting.  Any one of those items would be one massive full time job all on its own, if you took it seriously, and even if you employed others to do most of the heavy lifting.  Try doing all of those, plus having some involvement with their 2 young children, and it's a recipe for being unsuccessful at everything.  Neither of them have the talent, skills or career experience to tackle all of these high profile, difficult projects all at once.  I wonder if anyone at Netflix or Spotify even thought to ask how their project, for which they are paying millions, would be prioritized with the other dozen things they were said to be working on?



They can't even do things when it's not even them that actually does them, H&M are useless in every way.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Anyone can run for any elected office as long as they are citizens, meet the residency requirements and in the case of President, born in the US. Let her run. We all need a laugh. She wouldn’t collect enough money to pay for the printing  of a campaign poster. We all know that running for political office is a money pit



It will be good for her to get called out for always using her British title too


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> What is obvious is that they've spread themselves too thin and have almost guaranteed that they will not be successful at anything.  Trying to produce a weekly podcast, producing significant content for Netflix, giving speeches on the circuit, writing children's books or a memoir, raising money and running a foundation, being the "Chief Impact Officer" of several companies . . . I've probably left a few things out that they are attempting.  Any one of those items would be one massive full time job all on its own, if you took it seriously, and even if you employed others to do most of the heavy lifting.  Try doing all of those, plus having some involvement with their 2 young children, and it's a recipe for being unsuccessful at everything.  Neither of them have the talent, skills or career experience to tackle all of these high profile, difficult projects all at once.  I wonder if anyone at Netflix or Spotify even thought to ask how their project, for which they are paying millions, would be prioritized with the other dozen things they were said to be working on?


They are both talentless and they keep trying multiple things to conceal the fact that they really have nothing to offer. Podcasts? They need content. TV production? Same thing, lack of content. The speeches? After the initial novelty, nobody is asking anymore (how embarrassing for them.) They were given millions at sign-on and have likely frittered away the cash and have absolutely nothing to show for it.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Tourre is right about the PR creations…



I think there is A TRUTH to the idea that H did not write the memoir , have heard it was all dictated/videotaped/recorded and the ghostwriter who actually put pen to paper


----------



## Chanbal

This can't be real  I wonder if all these photos are fakes.


EDIT: The photo of QE with the pony must be a fake. The question is, are the other photos real? They wouldn't do such thing, or they would? What was Tom Bower's comment about a "shawl"?


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> This can't be real  What was Tom Bower's comment about a "shawl"? I wonder if all these photos are fake.




Is it not possible that the Queen and PP went from the horse show to meet the baby or vice versa so that's why they are wearing the same clothes?
ETA:  Apparently, its the pony photo that was faked using the photo from the meeting with the baby. Jeez.  Don't people have better things to do lol.  Harry and MM are awful all on their own.  No extraordinary efforts required.


----------



## CarryOn2020

While Hazzi is away -


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Doria's alive!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another odd thing about this photo is Hazzie’s pants - what is going on there?


----------



## Toby93

I've never seen this pic,  but it definitely looks like a photoshop of TW.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another odd thing about this photo is Hazzie’s pants - what is going on there?
> 
> View attachment 5595748


I've seen that before and wondered what was going on.  Looks photoshopped and with this pair, nothing surprises me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Is it not possible that the Queen and PP went from the horse show to meet the baby or vice versa so that's why they are wearing the same clothes?


Except the Queen and Prince Philip are in the exact same pose in both photos. The one with the foal is fake.

Why are people doing this? It's not like Harry and Meghan aren't doing enough to criticize on their own.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> While Hazzi is away -



Queen Doria and King Archie....the delusion is strong with these sugars


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Queen Doria and King Archie....the delusion is strong with these sugars


Can’t get past JustJuliette’s horrible grammar.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another odd thing about this photo is Hazzie’s pants - what is going on there?
> 
> View attachment 5595748





Toby93 said:


> I've never seen this pic,  but it definitely looks like a photoshop of TW.



It looks like that both photos have been tampered with.
#1- Hazz's pants  I'm starting to think that whoever released the photo of QE with the pony is trying to make a point.
#2 Hazz in summer clothes and TW ready for a snow storm…


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another odd thing about this photo is Hazzie’s pants - what is going on there?
> 
> View attachment 5595748


Something else weird about this photo just jumped out at me. Notice how PP, the queen, Doria, and MM all have crisp edges around them vs. the background, and Hazzy's is more diffused, especially around the hair. Actually most of him is fuzzier. Now that could be attributed to focus, as Hazzy is farthest in the background, but Doria is as far back as he is. Also, this kind of still photography would have an aperture setting to make sure all the relevant subjects were in focus. Unless Hazz isn't considered relevant here .

The above points and the fact that MM and TQ are front and center and Hazzy is in the background makes me wonder how cobbled together this photo is. How was it originally published?


----------



## bag-mania

WingNut said:


> Something else weird about this photo just jumped out at me. Notice how PP, the queen, Doria, and MM all have crisp edges around them vs. the background, and Hazzy's is more diffused, especially around the hair. Actually most of him is fuzzier. Now that could be attributed to focus, as Hazzy is farthest in the background, but Doria is as far back as he is. Also, this kind of still photography would have an aperture setting to make sure all the relevant subjects were in focus. Unless Hazz isn't considered relevant here .
> 
> The above points and the fact that MM and TQ are front and center and Hazzy is in the background makes me wonder how cobbled together this photo is. How was it originally published?


I think everyone was in focus in the original. How it has been tampered with since then depends on the agenda of the individual who is posting it.

This is how it appeared on the GMA web site three years ago.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Queen Doria and King Archie....the delusion is strong with these sugars





bag-mania said:


> Can’t get past JustJuliette’s horrible grammar.


 Do you think the Harkles are outsourcing their stan services? Poor JustJuliette, she could be underpaid.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I think everyone was in focus in the original. How it has been tampered with since then depends on the agenda of the individual who is posting it.
> 
> This is how it appeared on the GMA web site three years ago.
> 
> View attachment 5595754


More convincing without Hazz's pants…


----------



## Redbirdhermes

youngster said:


> Is it not possible that the Queen and PP went from the horse show to meet the baby or vice versa so that's why they are wearing the same clothes?


Here are photos from the Royal Horse Show which the Queen attended before meeting Archie that day.  It looks like it was raining which would indicate that the foal photo was faked.









						No One Looks Happier Sitting in the Rain Than Queen Elizabeth at a Horse Show
					

Her Majesty took in some equestrian entertainment before meeting her newest great-grandson.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

WingNut said:


> Something else weird about this photo just jumped out at me. Notice how PP, the queen, Doria, and MM all have crisp edges around them vs. the background, and Hazzy's is more diffused, especially around the hair. Actually most of him is fuzzier. Now that could be attributed to focus, as Hazzy is farthest in the background, but Doria is as far back as he is. Also, this kind of still photography would have an aperture setting to make sure all the relevant subjects were in focus. Unless Hazz isn't considered relevant here .
> 
> The above points and the fact that MM and TQ are front and center and Hazzy is in the background makes me wonder how cobbled together this photo is. How was it originally published?


I followed the links on T&C’s website:








						Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip Meet Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor in New Photo
					

The monarch looks ecstatic to met her new great-grandchild.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## youngster

Redbirdhermes said:


> Here are photos from the Royal Horse Show which the Queen attended before meeting Archie that day.  It looks like it was raining which would indicate that the foal photo was faked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No One Looks Happier Sitting in the Rain Than Queen Elizabeth at a Horse Show
> 
> 
> Her Majesty took in some equestrian entertainment before meeting her newest great-grandson.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Yes, I subsequently saw that the pic with the foal was the one faked.  As @bag-mania said, who does this kind of thing?  Their behavior speaks for itself all on its own, no need for extraordinary measures.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Queen Doria and King Archie....the delusion is strong with these sugars


Gosh, Arxi looks huge.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> but in that case it was two girls....I think maybe if the heir to the throne was the boy and the eldest, I girl might feel less competitive with him than a boy would


It will be interesting to see what happens with the Cambridge kids in the coming years. Let's hope they turn out relatively "normal" and avoid becoming tabloid fodder.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I followed the links on T&C’s website:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip Meet Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor in New Photo
> 
> 
> The monarch looks ecstatic to met her new great-grandchild.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


The problematic pants are on their sussexroyal, so would this be an official fake photo?


----------



## Chanbal

Redbirdhermes said:


> Here are photos from the Royal Horse Show which the Queen attended before meeting Archie that day.  It looks like it was raining which would indicate that the foal photo was faked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No One Looks Happier Sitting in the Rain Than Queen Elizabeth at a Horse Show
> 
> 
> Her Majesty took in some equestrian entertainment before meeting her newest great-grandson.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


The foal photo seems to be an obvious fake, but I'm starting to think that the other photo has also been tampered with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I've never seen this pic,  but it definitely looks like a photoshop of TW.



A looks too small for his age? Hmmm


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The problematic pants are on their sussexroyal, so would this be an official fake photo?
> View attachment 5595775


Excellent trouser sleuthing


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I think everyone was in focus in the original. How it has been tampered with since then depends on the agenda of the individual who is posting it.
> 
> This is how it appeared on the GMA web site three years ago.
> 
> View attachment 5595754


The famous scoop by Gayle King - the first photo of A - newest BRF member, by an American news reporter
GK and OW had worked on MM for years to get the scoop and the interview


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The problematic pants are on their sussexroyal, so would this be an official fake photo?
> View attachment 5595775


The wording of this Sussexroyal post is odd, arrogant, misleading.  “The Duke of Edinburgh and The Duchess’ mother…”


----------



## lanasyogamama

I finally finished that dang book. Boy, are they nasty.


----------



## mikimoto007

sdkitty said:


> but in that case it was two girls....I think maybe if the heir to the throne was the boy and the eldest, I girl might feel less competitive with him than a boy would



Interesting, hadn't thought about the gender dynamic.


The British media loves the whole one good kid, one bad kid narrative in the royal family, and I don't think they did that with Charles and Anne- maybe because the genders were different.


----------



## mikimoto007

CarryOn2020 said:


> The wording of this Sussexroyal post is odd, arrogant, misleading.  “The Duke of Edinburgh and The Duchess’ mother…”
> View attachment 5595785



Yeah...like why not word it about meeting great grandparents....weird.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> The wording of this Sussexroyal post is odd, arrogant, misleading.  “The Duke of Edinburgh and The Duchess’ mother…”
> View attachment 5595785


Would you believe this is Hannah from Ted Lasso?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The wording of this Sussexroyal post is odd, arrogant, misleading.  “The Duke of Edinburgh and The Duchess’ mother…”
> View attachment 5595785


Agreed, it should have read "the Duchess's mother, Doria Ragland". In the absence of a title they should have used her name. But they don't understand rules of etiquette.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, it should have read "the Duchess's mother, Doria Ragland". In the absence of a title they should have used her name. But they don't understand rules of etiquette.


That would be better. I was thinking it should be for the sake of accuracy  “The Duke of Edinburgh and the The Duchess of Sussex’s mother, Doria Ragland”.  The way it was written makes it seem like The Duke of E is the husband of MM.  Possibly it is a subtle attempt to humiliate QE and Prince Phillip. Most inappropriate and unnecessary imo.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I was thinking it should be for the sake of accuracy “The Duke of Edinburgh and the The Duchess of Sussex’s mother, Doria Ragland”. The way it was written makes it seem like The Duke of E is the husband of MM.


I didn't even consider that, but it could be taken that way.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I finally finished that dang book. Boy, are they nasty.


It's slow going for me, I can do 1-2 chapters in bed before I fall asleep. Nothing really new to me so far, I'm just glad he put it all together with painstaking and seemingly litigation proof research for the world to read.


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> A looks too small for his age? Hmmm


This photo is fake.  MM is wearing the outfit from the day she was papped in Canada carrying Archie badly in the baby carrier and walking the two dogs - yet some how finding the pap’s camera and looking straight at it.  The police guards were following her.  Remember that?

somone has taken one of those photos and shoved it in an airport scene.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I finally finished that dang book. Boy, are they nasty.



I felt literally dirty from all the nastiness after finishing it. I went on to have a long shower. Though I still feel she is genuinely evil while Harry is mostly spoiled and petulant and childish and not that bright.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mikimoto007 said:


> The British media loves the whole one good kid, one bad kid narrative in the royal family, and I don't think they did that with Charles and Anne- maybe because the genders were different.



Maybe because Andrew filled the bad boy role perfectly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> TW ready for a snow storm…


Thank you! This was June in SB or LA. And if that's a Vancouver pic, isn't the baby Archie?  How dumb does she think people are?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This does make a whole lot of sense.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> That would be better. I was thinking it should be for the sake of accuracy  “The Duke of Edinburgh and the The Duchess of Sussex’s mother, Doria Ragland”.  The way it was written makes it seem like The Duke of E is the husband of MM.  Possibly it is a subtle attempt to humiliate QE and Prince Phillip. Most inappropriate and unnecessary imo.


Duke of Edinburg and Ms. Ragl*nd would have been OK… I guess since QE didn't make Dor*a a countess, she had to use duchess's mother. 










						Meghan Markle Allegedly Furious At Queen For Not Giving Doria Ragland A Countess Title
					

Meghan Markle wanted her mom, Doria Ragland to have a royal title but Queen Elizabeth allegedly refused to grant her wish.




					www.entertaintimes.com


----------



## Chanbal

News from Africa!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Annawakes

Just to say I’m so tired of all things about Diana.  I just want them all to move on.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> News from Africa!



piggybacking


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Just to say I’m so tired of all things about Diana.  I just want them all to move on.


It is just rehashing everything that everyone already knows.  There is nothing new here.  I will say that watching her in action in that documentary has only lowered my opinion of her more.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> I don’t understand how residency in Royal real estate is determined, so a question: could the Queen, or whoever is the decision maker, if not her, nullify the Frogmore lease thus keeping the Suckesses at a distance?  Is Harry guaranteed lodging? Could it be something remote in Scotland for the Dumbartons?
> 
> Hmmm, that sparks another question: could they be stripped of the Sussex title and only allowed to use “Earl and Countess of Dumbarton?” with apologies to all the lovely people of Scotland.


I'm not sure if the titles can be separately removed, but they can can be separately used. Dufus can be called Duke of Sussex during royal events in England and possibly abroad. He would be referred to as Earl of Dumbarton when attending royal events in Scotland and Baron Kilkeel for royal events in Northern Ireland. To answer your question, IMO, HM could theoretically ship him to Scotland on some permanent assignment where he would always be referred to as Earl of Dumbarton.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


>



Don't they mean grandsons, and not sons?


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> piggybacking


He's pimping for TW, just like he did when he used an official function to lobby Disney for her to do a Voice over. 

Plus the Congressional delegation gives a potential broader base of contact beyond Californians. 

I can almost hear the conversations, "My wife is also very  interested in XYZ, can I have your number so she could call you?"


----------



## Toby93




----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I think a Pony Queen would be awesome.
> 
> View attachment 5594986


She'd certainly work harder than faux princess TW


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Walmart is very excited to send Harry a job application. He can host VIP tours of the wellness section.


He could be a greeter!  Wouldn't that be bonkers


----------



## purseinsanity

gelbergirl said:


> I remember reading both Charles and Diana wanted a girl for child #2.
> A girl would be easier.
> Raise her to marry in her social circle.
> A 2nd boy would have no chance to be raised to take the monarchy and would flounder in his life as he could never have a real career or inherit the lot like his older brother.


Boy, I wish it had been a girl as well!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> but in that case it was two girls....I think maybe if the heir to the throne was the boy and the eldest, I girl might feel less competitive with him than a boy would


Like Anne.  She seems the most sensible and hard working of the bunch!


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Don't they mean grandsons, and not sons?


Yes. It’s impossible to take anything “GB News” says as a media source seriously after such an egregious error. If they can make such a huge mistake why should we think anything else they say is correct?


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> He's pimping for TW, just like he did when he used an official function to lobby Disney for her to do a Voice over.
> 
> Plus the Congressional delegation gives a potential broader base of contact beyond Californians.
> 
> I can almost hear the conversations, "My wife is also very  interested in XYZ, can I have your number so she could call you?"


Right! 'My wife is interested in running for President.  Can she depend upon your support?"


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Don't they mean grandsons, and not sons?


I think she meant Diana's sons.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think he would have had to resort to this unless he was told what had been discovered about her past and character. I could see her prepping him for this by telling him that they would do this to prevent the marriage.


Definitely her MO to tell prospective bfs that she led a hard life and had to do unsavoury jobs to make ends meet. It awakens no end of saviour complex and the doors to the vault.


gracekelly said:


> Curious,  all that jewelry that Lady CC wears….does some of it look fake?


I think she follows the Coco Chanel path for faux bijoux.


gracekelly said:


> It has been front and center from the beginning that JR Moerhinger  is the ghost writer.  Who believes that Harry wrote  it?


The same ninnies who are still claiming that Methane is pure as an angel and has changed the world for the better.


gracekelly said:


> Anyone can run for any elected office as long as they are citizens, meet the residency requirements and in the case of President, born in the US. Let her run. We all need a laugh. She wouldn’t collect enough money to pay for the printing  of a campaign poster. We all know that running for political office is a money pit


If she ran and had the money to do it, the press would be digging into her finances. Also, she has been running her con job so far with a tight circle of willing stooges and co-conspirators like Horrid Scoobie, Sunshine Sucks and Doria. They all benefit from her manipulations. A political campaign requires more people and runs a higher risk of exposure, especially since she is fond of hiring women who appear to look similar and have the same inclinations. So Stepford Wives ...


----------



## Chanbal

One more article on Hazz's important mission in Africa, but someone may have forgotten to inform the American delegation.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Duke of Edinburg and Ms. Ragl*nd would have been OK… I guess since QE didn't make Dor*a a countess, she had to use duchess's mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Allegedly Furious At Queen For Not Giving Doria Ragland A Countess Title
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wanted her mom, Doria Ragland to have a royal title but Queen Elizabeth allegedly refused to grant her wish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


That is beyond delusional.


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> Just to say I’m so tired of all things about Diana.  I just want them all to move on.


I think the creators of new Diana programs figure there's a whole new generation who will watch given the popularity of The Crown.  Doubtful imo.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> It is just rehashing everything that everyone already knows.  There is nothing new here.  I will say that watching her in action in that documentary has only lowered my opinion of her more.


She was put on a pedestal at a very young age, but she was human. I would not want to live life under the microscope like she did.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Don't they mean grandsons, and not sons?


I wondered about that too, but then I thought she may have been referencing Diana.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> "he would always be referred to as Earl of Dumbarton."


If only.....


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> My wife


My wife, the Countess of Chutzpah.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Queen Doria and King Archie....the delusion is strong with these sugars


Why exactly is Doria suddenly a Queen????????????????????


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



The Queen's sons "William and Harry"??  Huh?  Do anyone proofread what they write?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Don't they mean grandsons, and not sons?


Oops just saw this!


----------



## Annawakes

purseinsanity said:


> The Queen's sons "William and Harry"??  Huh?  Do anyone proofread what they write?


Haha.  Charles is such a non entity that he doesn’t even exist anymore.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Why exactly is Doria suddenly a Queen????????????????????


It is ‘sugar world’, pure fantasy.  Much worse than Disney world


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I think the creators of new Diana programs figure there's a whole new generation who will watch given the popularity of The Crown.  Doubtful imo.


If the young ones watch HBO’s The Princess, they will get an earful and an eyeful [Diana loved the low low cut dresses, especially post-divorce].  She was no saint, more manipulative than MM, had multiple mental health issues [bulimia, attempted suicide 5 times!], embarrassed her family, disloyal, etc.  Charles was a piece of work, too.  The comments from the royal reporters are almost verbatim what we hear today_.  “plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose “_








						"The more things change, the more they stay the same…"
					

Presently, there's a jobs boom in photonics and semiconductor market. Why not see what opportunities are out there for you.



					www.enigmapeople.com


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

There is absolutely no evidence that Harry gave tours to diplomats is there?

In his capacity as the president of Africa Parks, a South Africa-based organization that manages national parks around the continent, the prince showed a group of diplomats and dignitaries around a series of national parks and nature reserves.








						Inside Prince Harry’s Whirlwind National Parks Tour of Southern Africa
					

As a part of his role as president of Africa Parks, the prince met with diplomats and visited nature preserves in Rwanda and Mozambique this month.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## muddledmint

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doria's alive!



Her eyebrows!!! Looking more and more like scobie!

And that is not her natural hair. Her childhood photos show hair with a tighter spiral curl. Didn’t bower say she has keratin treatments? Her hair is chemically straightened now and she just curled it for this staged “screenshot. It almost looks crimped.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> The Queen's sons "William and Harry"??  Huh?  Do anyone proofread what they write?


Angela is talking about Diana and the new documentary about her. She says that we should have compassion for the queen and her two sons, 'her' refers to Diana.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> One more article on Hazz's important mission in Africa, but someone may have forgotten to inform the American delegation.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5595865



This is starting to sound like those Reddit threads where u/throwawaybride writes to say that a clingy obnoxious friend has invited themselves to join in their honeymoon with the reason: "You booked a suite, so you don't mind if I take the other bedroom, right? And three can eat as cheaply as two! Win-win!"


purseinsanity said:


> The Queen's sons "William and Harry"??  Huh?  Do anyone proofread what they write?


When my MIL was in the middle phase of dementia, she often identified my sons as hers. Is it mental decline or poor proofreading that we are dealing with?


----------



## CobaltBlu

These two are ruining Diana for me.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> These two are ruining Diana for me.


They are destroying Diana's image imo. Will must be very sad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Is MM mad at her kid? Her mom?  Arxie looks huge as does Doria which we all know is a lie.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> While Hazzi is away -



Someone commenting on the AkuaAfriyie tweet said JustJuliette has already deleted her tweet.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> A gazillion years ago I took a sculpting class with a woman who was a ghostwriter. She also wrote jokes for Phyllis Diller. Lol!  When she was asked for whom she wrote, she refused to answer. She said that by the end of the process, she thought they were all asshoes and didn’t want to be associated with them. Can’t wait for a comment from Moerhinger.


A gazillion years ago, I met the woman who wrote Barbara Walter's book about how to talk to anyone about practically anything. lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Some people are intrigued by Hazz's presence in their country.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Some people are intrigued by Hazz's presence in their country.



Oh my, we are practically demure in our comments compared to their scathing remarks!


----------



## duna

needlv said:


> This photo is fake.  MM is wearing the outfit from the day she was papped in Canada carrying Archie badly in the baby carrier and walking the two dogs - yet some how finding the pap’s camera and looking straight at it.  The police guards were following her.  Remember that?
> 
> somone has taken one of those photos and shoved it in an airport scene.


Also the baby she's carrying is not a 1 yearold...


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> Also the baby she's carrying is not a 1 yearold...


Almost carrying' more like


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> He doesn't need it in Mozambique apparently, only in the UK
> 
> What no speeches in Mozambique? Stats indicate child marriage (under 18) is at at almost 53% the last time the UN bothered to check https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/en/countries/africa/mozambique#3
> 
> Perhaps H was checking if the many (UN's) CEDAW recommendations from 2007 have been carried out, including diabolical gender inequality against women and girls, perhaps he or Princess-Prez Meghan would like to use these in her next 'speech'  https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/-/media/files/un women/vaw/country report/africa/mozambique/mozambique cedaw co.pdf?vs=1429 and had not improved 2011 https://evaw-global-database.unwomen.org/-/media/files/un women/vaw/country report/africa/mozambique/mozambique cedaw co.pdf?vs=1429.


Agreed, the silence is deafening. Not surprised they don’t want to say something when they might get answered back though.
I usually agree with your posts but in this instance I think things work a little differently. Of course, Mozambicans do not need H to educate them on conservation. What Mozambique needs is money / funding to operate its wildlife areas because when it comes to government funding the country‘s priorities are probably … different (whatever the official line may be). This is where donors, NGOs foundations etc come into place - without them the situation would be dire. When a significant donor like the US visits this is not just an opportunity for the Mozambican government to pledge for further funding but also for international NGOs like AP to demonstrate what they have already done and to raise funds. No way H numbnuts acted as any kind of a tour guide, this was surely done by the park chef, APs country director, Mozambican wildlife officials and the like. Yet, seems AP thought it useful to have H there to underline to the US delegation how highly they are regarded as well as to do a little fundraising. Or - alternative scenario - H insisted to be there and the local AP guys are pulling their hair out in despair because organising a visit of such caliber as a Congressional delegation is a hell of a job in a country with very limited resources, crappy infrastructure etc. (Speaking from experience as I live in another African country). Never mind having H and his demands there.
I agree, I just don’t think it’s going to get any better with H on top of the pile - it’s in his interests to keep himself as the saviour and beyond his competency to actually fix anything. 


pukasonqo said:


> She looks quite pretty in both pics
> I remember girls wearing tops w the playboy bunny and never understanding why will you choose that logo…


The worst was the playboy stationery line marketed at schoolgirls - disgusting.   


papertiger said:


> Exactly my point! GS' 1963 'work experience'
> 
> *How could a 'feminist' wear that logo 'loud and proud' on her chest?* It's a business logo for a company that sees women as fluffy, play things front of house, and menial servants behind. Even Bunnies that were proud of their time with Playboy, told the press they were fined (demerited) for many strange things, including 'bad posture' ex-bunny . Can't deny many women enjoyed themselves through the years as part of the entertainment industry disguised as waitresses bunnies, and the advantages it gave to the few thought pretty and young enough to work in those establishments, but basically, Playboy supports the man-made hierarchy of women in terms of a certain type of fashionable (and Western) beauty where brains and and (non man-pleasing) skills do NOT count.
> 
> I think I answered my own question. M is all front, getting in and ahead with the rich, famous party people, wherever the power and photo-ops are, and if you have to wear bunny ears and tail to do it, keep smiling, whatever it takes. She's not about changing the world, she's about getting in with the haves so she can have more of the world for herself.Even if she was never a 'yacht girl' (and you'd have to be brave or stupid to survive that life) she certainly has the mentality of one.


I agree she is too lazy and too weak-spirited to be a sex worker IMHO I wouldn’t say it’s an easy job. Now being a  daddy’s girl who pays your way in…


CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree.  GS did it for her expose on the life of the ‘bunnies’ which has some redeeming value.  She got the insider info and made the world aware of the awful conditions. She was the original MeToo.
> 
> MM? No idea.   I thought that kind of fashion went out of style in the 60/70s, long before MM was born.  It saddens me to see young women wear the Playboy shirts.  As we know, MM likes to play the sex card. This is what made her Suits character and her cheesy Lifetime movies so one-dimensional and cringe-y to watch. Imo.


It’s just another role for her and she was better suited for vacuous sex pot 


sdkitty said:


> you think she would intentionally not have her photo there?  doesn't seem like her


Must have been between noses. 


xincinsin said:


> Definitely her MO to tell prospective bfs that she led a hard life and had to do unsavoury jobs to make ends meet. It awakens no end of saviour complex and the doors to the vault.
> 
> I think she follows the Coco Chanel path for faux bijoux.
> 
> The same ninnies who are still claiming that Methane is pure as an angel and has changed the world for the better.
> 
> If she ran and had the money to do it, the press would be digging into her finances. Also, she has been running her con job so far with a tight circle of willing stooges and co-conspirators like Horrid Scoobie, Sunshine Sucks and Doria. They all benefit from her manipulations. A political campaign requires more people and runs a higher risk of exposure, especially since she is fond of hiring women who appear to look similar and have the same inclinations. So Stepford Wives ...


I thought coco only sold faux bijoux and wore verdura herself   


muddledmint said:


> Her eyebrows!!! Looking more and more like scobie!
> 
> And that is not her natural hair. Her childhood photos show hair with a tighter spiral curl. Didn’t bower say she has keratin treatments? Her hair is chemically straightened now and she just curled it for this staged “screenshot. It almost looks crimped.


So IMHO, her natural hair is straightened but it’s probably only a few inches long and all the inches of greasy tendrils we see is a weave attached to her actual hair - so to make it curly it’s a simple matter of having a curly textured weave sewn in by a hair stylist. Unless she actually wears a true wig in which case it’s even easier to switch them 

Her  face and those awful square bracket eyebrows look so like mr scooby it’s crazy 


CobaltBlu said:


> These two are ruining Diana for me.


I agree, all this focusing on her death and her mental struggles deprived her of her agency and is the least important thing about her. She did a lot of influential things in her life and that’s what important.

Some people are intrigued by Hazz's presence in their country.



Chanbal said:


>



I don’t blame them it’s such a slap in the face for him to be given a position he has no qualifications for in a continent he doesn’t even live in.

That and he does look like drunk tintin in that safari suit which probably isn’t helping the colonial vibes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Hee eyes look so different and not good in the zoom call pics.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Some more tea.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Hee eyes look so different and not good in the zoom call pics.


Her face is also much slimmer than during her recent Jubilee trip.
So, is it a badly focussed camera or the pics were all manipulated?

Also, if she was doing a Zoom interview for Archetypes, wouldn't she have been all dolled up, or at least look professional? Sure, it's a podcast, but her interviewee could see her and I doubt she would go au naturel in that situation. Unless it was an interview with someone who has seen her with bedhead before, like Janina?


----------



## Annawakes

Arxie looks like a 10 year old.  ??????


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some more tea.



Maybe Megsy doesn't understand the concept of inviting family and friends to your wedding?


----------



## charlottawill

"It could be the perfect opportunity for a get-together with Granny". The Today show doesn't seem to want to give up on the William and Harry reunion narrative.   



> https://www.today.com/popculture/prince-william-kate-middleton-move-windsor-rcna44182


----------



## Chanbal

I'll wait for DM's description of it.


----------



## Chanbal

Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
Boring… 



_'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *

'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis. 

'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'

Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.

'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.

'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'

Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.

'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.

'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'

*Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*

Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'

*Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'

The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.

As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'

Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.

Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'

She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'

The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._










						Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
					

Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> That and he does look like drunk tintin in that safari suit which probably isn’t helping the colonial vibes.


I am going to use that visual for Tour Guide Harry.


----------



## Chanbal

From what I read, TW starts her podcast with the detergent story, the one that was corrected by her father in Tom Bower's book. She also talks about an alleged fire in Archie's bedroom during the South Africa tour, the heater caught on fire and there was no smoke detector.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
> Boring…
> 
> View attachment 5596060
> 
> _'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *
> 
> 'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis.
> 
> 'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'
> 
> Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.
> 
> 'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.
> 
> 'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'
> 
> Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.
> 
> 'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.
> 
> 'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'
> 
> *Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*
> 
> Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'
> 
> *Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'
> 
> The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.
> 
> As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'
> 
> Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.
> 
> Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'
> 
> She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'
> 
> The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
> 
> 
> Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



More moaning   


Someone please buy this woman a dictionary "unfeel" is not only hard, it's impossible because it's a a 'thing', it's not even a word. Move on dear, move...on....move...on


----------



## Cinderlala

I'm amazed it took her so long to make a podcast saying exactly what she always says about everything.  Poor, poor victim. 

I'd also be really surprised if any professional tennis player has ever gotten any negative response about being ambitious---it's literally what you need to win.

Ugh, I dread having to hear more about her from her horrid podcasts.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> From what I read, TW starts her podcast with the detergent story, the one that was corrected by her father in Tom Bower's book. She also talks about an alleged fire in Archie's bedroom during the South Africa tour, the heater caught on fire and there was no smoke detector.




She used to have what could be Munchausen's syndrome (re. tales of suicide and mental anguish) for effect and sympathy (my heart goes out to people who actually suffer from the real thing - suicidal thoughts not MuS). Then we have H is PTSD/genetically/gen. traumatised, we now going to have Archie-in-danger reports.

If she carries on with fabrications, this could be very dangerous, she could be moving towards Munchausen's syndrome by proxy, creating more than stories in the future.


----------



## gracekelly

The pity party  Tough honey.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
> Boring…
> 
> View attachment 5596060
> 
> _'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *
> 
> 'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis.
> 
> 'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'
> 
> Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.
> 
> 'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.
> 
> 'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'
> 
> Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.
> 
> 'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.
> 
> 'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'
> 
> *Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*
> 
> Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'
> 
> *Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'
> 
> The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.
> 
> As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'
> 
> Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.
> 
> Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'
> 
> She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'
> 
> The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
> 
> 
> Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


B O R I N G


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225

Her next podcast guest is suppose to be Mariah Carey


----------



## youngster

Cinderlala said:


> I'm amazed it took her so long to make a podcast saying exactly what she always says about everything.  Poor, poor victim.
> 
> *I'd also be really surprised if any professional tennis player has ever gotten any negative response about being ambitious---it's literally what you need to win*.
> 
> Ugh, I dread having to hear more about her from her horrid podcasts.



Agreed. Ambition is also a requirement for any actor and pretty much anything anybody ever does.  Ambition gets us out of bed in the morning no matter your gender.

Also, what she says is bizarre:
_*So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband. And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some.*_

So, she wasn't ever made to feel "the negative connotation behind the word ambitious" _*until she started dating Harry*._  That is, until she was around 35 years old and it was in the context of her personal life, dating someone from a royal family with a very high profile, so not about work or career at all.  Instead, she laments being criticized for her "ambition" in pursuing a man so that she could fulfill a millennia old stereotype of women marrying for money and status, all while bemoaning that she faced this criticism because she's a woman.  

Does no one tell her how idiotic she sounds?


----------



## WingNut

charlottawill said:


> That is beyond delusional.





Chanbal said:


> Duke of Edinburg and Ms. Ragl*nd would have been OK… I guess since QE didn't make Dor*a a countess, she had to use duchess's mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Allegedly Furious At Queen For Not Giving Doria Ragland A Countess Title
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wanted her mom, Doria Ragland to have a royal title but Queen Elizabeth allegedly refused to grant her wish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com


Ugh. If said titles "can be purchased" why doesn't MM just buy one for Doria herself?


----------



## Aimee3

Are we to believe this fire in Archie’s room story?  I can’t imagine her not milking that story for all it’s worth.  Hard to fathom her keeping quiet this long about it.


----------



## Annawakes

Chanbal said:


> Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
> Boring…
> 
> View attachment 5596060
> 
> _'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *
> 
> 'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis.
> 
> 'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'
> 
> Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.
> 
> 'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.
> 
> 'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'
> 
> Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.
> 
> 'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.
> 
> 'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'
> 
> *Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*
> 
> Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'
> 
> *Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'
> 
> The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.
> 
> As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'
> 
> Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.
> 
> Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'
> 
> She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'
> 
> The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
> 
> 
> Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


And OF COURSE she makes the podcast about HERSELF.  How SHE has been misunderstood, mischaracterized.  Is it even possible for her NOT to talk about herself.


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> I'd also be really surprised if any professional tennis player has ever gotten any negative response about being ambitious---it's literally what you need to win.


Serena has been at the top of her sport for many years and has a net worth of $260 million. It's hard to think of a woman less likely to be presenting the dilemma of being "held back."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Also, if she was doing a Zoom interview for Archetypes, wouldn't she have been all dolled up, or at least look professional? Sure, it's a podcast, but her interviewee could see her and I doubt she would go au naturel in that situation. Unless it was an interview with someone who has seen her with bedhead before, like Janina?



One thought I had only just now: she would know who leaked it. As if both a business and a private contact would risk that.


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
> Boring…
> 
> View attachment 5596060
> 
> _'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *
> 
> 'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis.
> 
> 'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'
> 
> Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.
> 
> 'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.
> 
> 'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'
> 
> Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.
> 
> 'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.
> 
> 'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'
> 
> *Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*
> 
> Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'
> 
> *Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'
> 
> The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.
> 
> As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'
> 
> Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.
> 
> Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'
> 
> She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'
> 
> The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
> 
> 
> Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ugh. There is no instant emoticon that suffices as a response to this. She makes every failed attempt at <insert intended accomplishment> about her being stifled/held back/treated unjustly. I'm ambitious, I don't have any of her issues. If I fail it's my own damned fault. If she's not getting what she wants it's because of her own damned ineptitude, it is not on others. Just being the same gender as her makes me want to vomit.


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



sorry but I've just lost some respect for Serena


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *



Welcome to the world, MM.  How can a divorced 40 year not know this stuff?  She acts like she invented sliced bread. Perhaps the sheltered private school world does not prepare one for the *real* world?  Or is she simply dim?

ETA: There was a time when women were supposed to be ‘ladies’ and stay at home. The career choices were nursing and teaching. Just watch an old Leaver It To Beaver or Donna Reed. Competing against males was frowned upon.  The 60s changed that.  

RE: Serena - in the past she has said that she and her sister were held back due to skin color.  She has stories of being boo’ed at expensive country club places, but her father refused to let her quit.  She really did change the game and people’s attitudes.  Sad and disappointing that she has become part of MM show.


----------



## xincinsin

I'll give her credit for finally putting out a podcast. I don't know if I can bring myself to listen to it or her future podcasts if it's true that she is going to make it all about herself and her groundbreaking role as the international eternal victim.


----------



## duna

"MEGHAN: MY PAIN" .....here we go again She's the pain....in the a**e!!!!


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Welcome to the world, MM. How can a divorced 40 year not know this stuff? She acts like she invented sliced bread. Perhaps the sheltered private school world does not prepare one for the *real* world? Or is she simply dim?



What makes it really idiotic is that she's not complaining about being criticized for ambition over her job or career, _*but for dating Harry*_.  Apparently, this was a worthwhile ambition to her, dating "up" in an effort to marry wealth and status.   

And, while I didn't read everything written about her at the time, I thought she received universally excellent press when she was dating Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> *I'll give her credit for finally putting out a podcast.* I don't know if I can bring myself to listen to it or her future podcasts if it's true that she is going to make it all about herself and her groundbreaking role as the international eternal victim.


It has been almost exactly two years since they took Spotify’s money. Maybe there was something in the fine print of the contract nullifying it if they didn’t produce a show in that timeframe.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Agreed. Ambition is also a requirement for any actor and pretty much anything anybody ever does.  Ambition gets us out of bed in the morning no matter your gender.
> 
> Also, what she says is bizarre:
> _*So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband. And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some.*_
> 
> So, she wasn't ever made to feel "the negative connotation behind the word ambitious" _*until she started dating Harry*._  That is, until she was around 35 years old and it was in the context of her personal life, dating someone from a royal family with a very high profile, so not about work or career at all.  Instead, she laments being criticized for her "ambition" in pursuing a man so that she could fulfill a millennia old stereotype of women marrying for money and status, all while bemoaning that she faced this criticism because she's a woman.
> 
> Does no one tell her how idiotic she sounds?



At least she _admits_ it was ambition that drove her to marry-harry-in-a-hurry


----------



## carmen56

Aimee3 said:


> Are we to believe this fire in Archie’s room story?  I can’t imagine her not milking that story for all it’s worth.  Hard to fathom her keeping quiet this long about it.


 
Fancy letting him play with matches!  Frankly, I don’t believe a word of it.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> At least she _admits_ it was ambition that drove her to marry-harry-in-a-hurry


She means her ambition to be a hard-working, benevolent philanthropist and general do-gooder. Not her ambition to become instantly rich and famous through marriage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> What makes it really idiotic is that she's not complaining about being criticized for ambition over her job or career, _*but for dating Harry*_. Apparently, this was a worthwhile ambition to her, dating "up" in an effort to marry wealth and status.


Is she using the correct word?  Sounds like she is confusing social climbing with ambition.


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> Fancy letting him play with matches!  Frankly, I don’t believe a word of it.


Oh it would have been played all over the world for months if it had really happened. Pure fiction!


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Oh it would have been played all over the world for months if it had really happened. Pure fiction!


Now that the horrible secret fire has been revealed, Hazard will amend his security review to demand that the police detail has to be augmented with a personal fire truck to follow them around.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Serena has been at the top of her sport for many years and has a net worth of $260 million. It's hard to think of a woman less likely to be presenting the dilemma of being "held back."


Serena and Venus were on top from the beginning of their careers. Richard held them back when they could have played on the Junior Circuit.   

Really a fire?  It took years to mention it and Harry never said a word. I don’t believe it.

Whining is the best she can come up with?  Her next guest is Mariah Carey.  When did Mariah have a problem? She had Tommy Mattola supporting her and no one in the music business would dare go against him.   I want to know what she is whining about.

If this is the response to the Bower book, it is a fail.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It has been almost exactly two years since they took Spotify’s money. Maybe there was something in the fine print of the contract nullifying it if they didn’t produce a show in that timeframe.


You make a good point!


papertiger said:


> At least she _admits_ it was ambition that drove her to marry-harry-in-a-hurry


You make a good point!

Everybody makes good points!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> She means her ambition to be a hard-working, benevolent philanthropist and general do-gooder. Not her ambition to become instantly rich and famous through marriage.



She should learn to communicate better, besides, who was interviewing who here? 

It's the Me-again strokey strokey, Me-again show


----------



## CarryOn2020

There was a fire but the baby was not in the room.  DramaDramaDrama. From the DM:

_Meghan Markle has revealed how her son Archie narrowly escaped a fire that erupted in his bedroom during the Sussexes' tour of South Africa .

Speaking in the first episode of her Archetypes podcast, which was released today, the Duchess, 41, said the boy's nanny had taken the four-and-a-half month old downstairs with her when she went to get a snack. 

It was then, while she and Prince Harry were at an engagement, that the heater in his bedroom went ablaze, setting the nursery on fire.

Meghan revealed: 'In that amount of time that she went downstairs, the heater in the nursery caught on fire. There was no smoke detector. Someone happened to just smell smoke down the hallway, went in, fire extinguished. He was supposed to be sleeping in there.'

The former Suits star told how they had dropped their young son at the housing unit they were staying in for a sleep straight after arriving on their official tour, with Meghan and Harry leaving to carry out a visit to the Nyanga township, where she delivered a speech.

'There was this moment where I'm standing on a tree stump and I'm giving this speech to women and girls, and we finish the engagement, we get in the car and they say there's been a fire at the residence. What? There's been a fire in the baby's room,' she said.

Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Really a fire?  It took years to mention it and Harry never said a word. I don’t believe it.





xincinsin said:


> Now that the horrible secret fire has been revealed, Hazard will amend his security review to demand that the police detail has to be augmented with a personal fire truck to follow them around.


Harry doesn’t know about the fire yet. Meghan better call him and tell him about it so that their stories line up.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> What makes it really idiotic is that she's not complaining about being criticized for ambition over her job or career, _*but for dating Harry*_.  Apparently, this was a worthwhile ambition to her, dating "up" in an effort to marry wealth and status.
> 
> And, while I didn't read everything written about her at the time, I thought she received universally excellent press when she was dating Harry.


She did. Everyone was supporting her. What a short memory she has.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Harry doesn’t know about the fire yet. Meghan better call him and tell him about it so that their stories line up.


Maybe she is confusing a lit  candle with a fire


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'_


And we’re supposed to believe she wouldn’t spill this in all that time they spent with Oprah going over their travails?  

How delusional do Meghan fans have to be to buy into the bullsh!t she feeds them?


----------



## Helventara

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'


For someone who is supposed to connect with 'normal' people, this is so tone deaf. What would other mothers with job commitments do?  Ensure that the kid is in good hands then do your jobs. What a silly story to tell if the aim is to gather sympathy.
ETA: some mothers are not so lucky. Some can only sit there and shake and be in tears AT THEIR WORKPLACE while their baby is in danger or else they lose their jobs. She drives me mad


----------



## gracekelly

Funny there should be a heater in any room. In all the SA pictures people look as if the are sweating. Granted a baby needs to be kept warm, but a heater?


----------



## zen1965

Annawakes said:


> And OF COURSE she makes the podcast about HERSELF.  How SHE has been misunderstood, mischaracterized.  Is it even possible for her NOT to talk about herself.


1000% my thoughts.


----------



## Cinderlala

Annawakes said:


> And OF COURSE she makes the podcast about HERSELF.  How SHE has been misunderstood, mischaracterized.  Is it even possible for her NOT to talk about herself.


What else does she know?  She even managed to make the "fire" story all about herself, not the actual baby.  

I don't think she's capable of caring about anyone who is not transactionally useful to her at that moment.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Funny there should be a heater in any room. In all the SA pictures people look as if the are sweating. Granted a baby needs to be kept warm, but a heater?


It’s wrong to point that out. You are stifling Meghan’s creativity!! That’s a form of bullying!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm surprised Raptor knows the words "silence" and "dignity". Maybe they don't mean what she thinks they mean.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm surprised Raptor knows the words "silence" and "dignity". Maybe they don't mean what she thinks they mean.









She knows neither.


----------



## Cinderlala

Cannot imagine why Mariah Carey (or anyone) would agree to be part of this circus.


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> Cannot imagine why Mariah Carey (or anyone) would agree to be part of this circus.


Are they all Sunshine Sachs clients? One hand washes the other?

I can see what Serena got out of it. The articles are plugging that Meghan was wearing clothes and jewelry from Serena’s fashion line.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'_



The stiff-lipped Brits wer in tears over an accident that didn't really happen?

I lived through an actual housefire with an exploded appliance that sent one family member to the hospital for smoke inhalation and left the room the fire was in completely destroyed (renovation costs exceeded 25000 bucks as they had to open up walls and ceiling) and the rest of the house covered in soot. I am positive nobody cried, we just collected the pets, went outside and waited for the firefighters.

With her stupid logic - "He was supposed to sleep in there!" But he wasn't, thank your lucky stars - we all could say we could have been at the Twin Towers at 9/11.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone's being BRUTALLY honest. I can feel the burn from here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But he wasn't, thank your lucky stars - we all could say we could have been at the Twin Towers at 9/11.


Excellent post. Thank you for saying what the rest of the world is thinking.   
Looks like it is always going to be _poor, pitiful MM _merching someone else’s stuff.


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle says "We had to leave our baby" after fire in Archie's room
					

The Duchess of Sussex had some veiled criticism of the palace in her new 'Archetypes' podcast: "What do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement?"




					www.newsweek.com
				




_"And we came back. And of course, as a mother, you go, Oh, my God, what? Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense.'_


----------



## bag-mania

So a quick Google of Meghan shows that most of the media is focused on the alleged fire. How horrible of the Royal handlers to force them to go to another engagement!

Who is buying it?


----------



## Chanbal

I'm becoming a fan of DM.   

'I was ready to turn off when I heard the soap ad story YET AGAIN': Meghan Markle listeners 'yawn' as she wheels out well-worn anecdote about campaigning against sexist soap advert when she was eleven for podcast​
*First episode of Meghan Markle's Archetypes podcast has finally been released*
*She again told the story of how she fought Procter & Gamble's soap ad at age 11*
*The Duchess said that experience changed 'how I saw my place in the world'*
*Social media slammed Markle for telling the 'yawn' inducing tale 'yet again'*
*








						Meghan Markle sparks 'yawns' by kicking off podcast with soap ad story
					

Social media users hit out at Meghan Markle for touting, yet again, how she challenged a major American consumer goods company over its 'sexist' dish soap advert at just 11 years old.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _"And we came back. And of course, as a mother, you go, Oh, my God, what? Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? *I said, 'This doesn't make any sense.'*_



This seems to be one of her favourite comebacks. Yet, most of the things she complains about do indeed make sense to everyone else.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I'm becoming a fan of DM.
> 
> 'I was ready to turn off when I heard the soap ad story YET AGAIN': Meghan Markle listeners 'yawn' as she wheels out well-worn anecdote about campaigning against sexist soap advert when she was eleven for podcast​
> *First episode of Meghan Markle's Archetypes podcast has finally been released*
> *She again told the story of how she fought Procter & Gamble's soap ad at age 11*
> *The Duchess said that experience changed 'how I saw my place in the world'*
> *Social media slammed Markle for telling the 'yawn' inducing tale 'yet again'*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sparks 'yawns' by kicking off podcast with soap ad story
> 
> 
> Social media users hit out at Meghan Markle for touting, yet again, how she challenged a major American consumer goods company over its 'sexist' dish soap advert at just 11 years old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



I'm happy to see that even without the added bit of info that it was mostly made up people start to get impatient with her constant self-adulation.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'



Here is King George and Queen Elizabeth standing in the wreckage of a portion of Buckingham Palace after it was bombed by the Germans in 1940.  Four members of the household were injured and one would later die of their injuries.  Wonder how Meghan would have reacted to that?  Probably would have fled to Canada with a huge military escort.



Queen Elizabeth at the time said: _* 'I am glad we have been bombed. It makes me feel I can look the East-End in the face'.* _


----------



## bag-mania

Apparently she says at the beginning that there will be 12 episodes of the podcast. Managing listener expectations in case anyone believed she could stick with a project for longer than a few months.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm happy to see that even without the added bit of info that it was mostly made up people start to get impatient with her constant self-adulation.


The comment below is good, but I don't feel sorry for Serena W. She knows very well that she is supporting TW, and whatever it means.


----------



## 1LV

purseinsanity said:


> What, pray tell, exactly is he leading??


The blind?


----------



## 1LV

pukasonqo said:


> He is leading the blind


Well shoot.  I didn’t see this before posting the same thing.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Apparently she says at the beginning that there will be 12 episodes of the podcast. Managing listener expectations in case anyone believed she could stick with a project for longer than a few months.


12 episodes!? It might take her 24 years…


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Apparently she says at the beginning that there will be 12 episodes of the podcast. Managing listener expectations in case anyone believed she could stick with a project for longer than a few months.



12 episodes?  That's what Spotify paid millions for?


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> 12 episodes?  That's what Spotify paid millions for?


Who knows? This is what she’s willing to give. If she had done only one podcast a month she would have already fulfilled her obligation a year ago.


----------



## Chanbal

It must have been a cold day in South Africa…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Was it cold when they were in Africa?  Maybe she got confused and meant the air conditioner (almost) caught fire?  A baby’s room is supposed to be on the cool side and not warm!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please go to slide 2. What exactly is wrong with her? And WTH does Serena see in her?


----------



## Chanbal

The word 'almost' is not needed… 










						Meghan Markle’s Archetypes podcast review — almost entirely preposterous
					

The first episode of the Duchess of Sussex’s series, focusing on the tennis star Serena Williams, is packed with tinkly music and vapid chat




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




_*The podcast is a tastefully soundtracked parade of banalities, absurdities and self-aggrandising Californian platitudes. *The effect of all the tinkly music and vapid conversation is to make you feel you’ve been locked in the relaxation room of a wellness spa with an unusually self-involved yoga instructor. Even those sympathetic to Meghan’s plight (and I had once thought I might be one of those people) will find that the full hour of an episode of Archetypes will put them in the mood of Paul Dacre composing an unusually grumpy Daily Mail front page.

*The podcast starts with ten lavish minutes of hackneyed introductory burbling in which Prince Harry is at one point heard in the background mumbling something about “vibes*” (one of his more coherent recent public announcements). *The only enjoyable bit involves Meghan seeming to have a dig at the royal family. *The theme of the first episode is ambition, she says. She had never “imagined there to be a negative connotation behind the word ‘ambitious’ until I started dating my now husband”. It was only then that she learnt that “*according to some . . . ambition is a terrible, terrible thing for a woman”. Presumably she can’t have been told this by the unimpeachably woke Harry. It must have been another royal . . . well, she’s not naming names*…_

*Meghan suggests that Williams’s experiences of playing professional tennis while raising a child may be analogous to her own time as a member of the royal family.*_ She recalls that on a trip to South Africa, a heater caught fire in baby Archie’s bedroom (luckily he was downstairs) but that in spite of the shock, “We had to go out and do another official engagement.”

The conversation ends with Meghan announcing that “I want to hold a space for you as a guest to define yourself”. This turns out to involve asking Williams to describe herself in three words. She is then dismissed. “Ugh, I am so deeply proud of her,” the duchess says.

*The listener’s overwhelming sense is of futility and irritation. *It’s been two years since Meghan and Harry signed an $18 million deal with the streaming platform Spotify. This is only the second episode they’ve produced for it (their previous effort was a slightly less grating waffle about the “power of connection”). *The executives at Spotify must be wondering whether they have spent their money entirely wisely*._


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Maybe she is confusing a lit  candle with a fire


Funny!

Mariah Carey is her next guest? Two me-me-mes talking to each other, trying to outdo their difficult bullied childhoods.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Funny!
> 
> Mariah Carey is her next guest? Two me-me-mes talking to each other, trying to outdo their difficult bullied childhoods.


Good thing they will both have microphones otherwise a fight would break out over who has it.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please go to slide 2. What exactly is wrong with her?* And WTH does Serena see in her?*


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> Here is King George and Queen Elizabeth standing in the wreckage of a portion of Buckingham Palace after it was bombed by the Germans in 1940.  Four members of the household were injured and one would later die of their injuries.  Wonder how Meghan would have reacted to that?  Probably would have fled to Canada with a huge military escort.
> 
> View attachment 5596175
> 
> Queen Elizabeth at the time said: _* 'I am glad we have been bombed. It makes me feel I can look the East-End in the face'.* _


I was just thinking of this. I'm sure if Zedzee was around then, she would have heroically found finger paints and painted the Union Jack in the wrong colours, while calling Wallis her bestie and alleging BRF ill-treatment of their respective invertebrates.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It must have been a cold day in South Africa…



Didn’t she say it was put out with an extinguisher? If it happened at all (a big IF), it was a great big nothing and firefighters were not called because it was insignificant and quickly handled by staff.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I read earlier today thatSerena's networth is estimated at a quarter billion. How much money does a human need? If she suddenly falls poor she has a wealthy husband to fall back on.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> There was a fire but the baby was not in the room.  DramaDramaDrama. From the DM:
> 
> 
> Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'[/I]


OMGeeeee did she really say that?????  Lolololllllll.  Oh poor you!  Don’t you all see how noble she is???

I have doubts this fire story is even real.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Didn’t she say it was put out with an extinguisher? If it happened at all (a big IF), it was a great big nothing and firefighters were not called because it was insignificant and quickly handled by staff.


Of course, it was put out with an extinguisher. The heater was a must, the temperature was apparently high in South Africa during their visit.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please go to slide 2. What exactly is wrong with her? *And WTH does Serena see in her?*



My assumption is that the friendship is ALL business. Meghan's exposure helped with her fashion launch. From three years ago (pre-Megxit):

Last October, the 37-year-old tennis pro’s pal Meghan Markle was spotted in the S by Serena “Boss” blazer — which, of course, promptly sold out — and according to Williams, the high-profile placement resulted in her raising her already-high standards for her clothing line.

“Listen, if we’re giving our stuff to Meghan, it has to be the highest quality that we can get,” the 23-time Grand Slam champ told Business of Fashion. “So, that’s what I tell our team internally: ‘We have to make sure it’s super high quality that, you know, is fit for a royal princess!’”

Williams took a similar approach when it came time to plan the 37-year-old Duchess of Sussex’s baby shower at the Mark Hotel in NYC in February. “Planning something like that takes a lot of effort. I’m a perfectionist, so I’m like, ‘Let’s make it perfect.'”









						Serena Williams: My clothing line must meet Meghan Markle’s standards
					

“That’s what I tell our team internally: ‘We have to make sure it’s super high quality that, you know, is fit for a royal princess!’”




					pagesix.com


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *The listener’s overwhelming sense is of futility and irritation. *It’s been two years since Meghan and Harry signed an $18 million deal with the streaming platform Spotify. This is only the second episode they’ve produced for it (their previous effort was a slightly less grating waffle about the “power of connection”). *The executives at Spotify must be wondering whether they have spent their money entirely wisely*.



She may really come to regret signing with Spotify, no matter how many millions they were paid.  What she's revealed is that she's not clever, not witty, not particularly charming, but vapid and silly and not capable of producing something with wide commercial appeal despite 2+ years, millions of dollars and access to professional writing and producing talent.  It's very damaging to their future prospects in Hollywood, which they didn't have much at this point anyway.


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> "MEGHAN: MY PAIN" .....here we go again She's the pain....in the a**e!!!!



They should rebrand as Ache-well


----------



## CobaltBlu

Toby93 said:


> I've never seen this pic,  but it definitely looks like a photoshop of TW.



Here is the original from Daily Mail Jan 2020.  They flipped it for the photoshop project.








						Meghan beams while carrying Archie and walking dogs in Vancouver
					

Meghan was followed by  royal protection officers as she strolled through the Horth Hill Regional Park near the opulent £10million [$14million] Vancouver Island mansion they live in.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Her face is also much slimmer than during her recent Jubilee trip.
> So, is it a badly focussed camera or the pics were all manipulated?
> 
> Also, if she was doing a Zoom interview for Archetypes, wouldn't she have been all dolled up, or at least look professional? Sure, it's a podcast, but her interviewee could see her and I doubt she would go au naturel in that situation. Unless it was an interview with someone who has seen her with bedhead before, like Janina?


*Everything* that gets leaked to the press from this sociopath is altered, manipulated of photoshopped.  Honestly, it's getting really old, really quickly.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Are they all Sunshine Sachs clients? One hand washes the other?
> 
> I can see what Serena got out of it. The articles are plugging that Meghan was wearing clothes and jewelry from Serena’s fashion line.



It's getting all very incestuous looking to me. 

Venture capitalist Alexis Ohanian invests in career coaching and is an advocate for parental leave (not that I'm against so long there  is equivalent non-parental leave available equally) 2020 he was interviewed by Me-Aghain https://time.com/5901381/alexis-ohanian-meghan-markle-building-better-tech/

Harry life-coaches Serena https://www.insider.com/serena-williams-says-prince-harry-is-her-life-coach-2022-2

Me-Aghain interviews Me-Aghain Serena W for her first Ache-(not)well podcrash 2022

Me-Aghain merches Serena Williams new clothing line 2022


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I'm becoming a fan of DM.
> 
> 'I was ready to turn off when I heard the soap ad story YET AGAIN': Meghan Markle listeners 'yawn' as she wheels out well-worn anecdote about campaigning against sexist soap advert when she was eleven for podcast​
> *First episode of Meghan Markle's Archetypes podcast has finally been released*
> *She again told the story of how she fought Procter & Gamble's soap ad at age 11*
> *The Duchess said that experience changed 'how I saw my place in the world'*
> *Social media slammed Markle for telling the 'yawn' inducing tale 'yet again'*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle sparks 'yawns' by kicking off podcast with soap ad story
> 
> 
> Social media users hit out at Meghan Markle for touting, yet again, how she challenged a major American consumer goods company over its 'sexist' dish soap advert at just 11 years old.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> There was a fire but the baby was not in the room.  DramaDramaDrama. From the DM:
> 
> _Meghan Markle has revealed how her son Archie narrowly escaped a fire that erupted in his bedroom during the Sussexes' tour of South Africa .
> 
> Speaking in the first episode of her Archetypes podcast, which was released today, the Duchess, 41, said the boy's nanny had taken the four-and-a-half month old downstairs with her when she went to get a snack.
> 
> It was then, while she and Prince Harry were at an engagement, that the heater in his bedroom went ablaze, setting the nursery on fire.
> 
> Meghan revealed: 'In that amount of time that she went downstairs, the heater in the nursery caught on fire. There was no smoke detector. Someone happened to just smell smoke down the hallway, went in, fire extinguished. He was supposed to be sleeping in there.'
> 
> The former Suits star told how they had dropped their young son at the housing unit they were staying in for a sleep straight after arriving on their official tour, with Meghan and Harry leaving to carry out a visit to the Nyanga township, where she delivered a speech.
> 
> 'There was this moment where I'm standing on a tree stump and I'm giving this speech to women and girls, and we finish the engagement, we get in the car and they say there's been a fire at the residence. What? There's been a fire in the baby's room,' she said.
> 
> Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'_


Why would there be a heater in the room, in SA in the summer?  Every pic I've seen of them there, she is sleeveless.  I would think it would be too hot, if anything?

Edit: Sorry, just noticed that gracekelly posted the same thing


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> 12 episodes!? It might take her 24 years…



and at least 12 desperate 'friends' with stuff to merch & flog (merch & flog, great name for H&M's next company)


----------



## bag-mania

The _New York Times_ isn't allowing comments on their article about the podcast. Probably doesn't want to have to pay someone to remove the negative comments that will be posted all night long.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Now that the horrible secret fire has been revealed, Hazard will amend his security review to demand that the police detail has to be augmented with a personal fire truck to follow them around.


Omg, hilarious!


----------



## Jayne1

A heater in the summer?  A heater in a baby's room? A plugged in heater left unattended by a nanny?

If true, although we know it's probably not - fire that woman!


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Why would there be a heater in the room, in SA in the summer?  Every pic I've seen of them there, she is sleeveless.  I would think it would be too hot, if anything?


Now you just stop saying things that make sense. Logic has no place in a discussion about Meghan.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> A heater in the summer?  A heater in a baby's room? A plugged in heater left unattended by a nanny?
> 
> If true, although we know it's probably not - fire that woman!


Why not just bully her until she resigns? (Saves on the paperwork)


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Now you just stop saying things that make sense. Logic has no place in a discussion about Meghan.


Lol, sorry.  What was I thinking


----------



## marietouchet

1. I thought podcasts starring guests were supposed to be about the guest, not the host
2. did anyone else notice ? A was left in the care of an African nanny, nothing wrong with that, but a person not well known by the family ? Did H&M leave him with a stranger??? Who was supposed to care for A while M was at work ? What was the plan ? Was there a plan to care for A?
3. She wanted to stop the tour and leave … wow, a popular leitmotif … flounce off to US Open in moment of pique, leave garden party, leave UK, leave jubilee
4. A was not in room with fire, he was in kitchen with nanny snacking. Who was in the bedroom and why ?

Just a big fat wow on podcast, the summary by DM is awesome


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It must have been a cold day in South Africa…



Excellent detective work on house


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> So a quick Google of Meghan shows that most of the media is focused on the alleged fire. How horrible of the Royal handlers to force them to go to another engagement!
> 
> Who is buying it?


"Everyone is in tears, everyone's shaken".  Seriously?  Was the kid in the room, was he harmed in any way at all, or was she just thinking of what *could* have happened to her meal ticket?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Excellent detective work on house


Why would she tell such a blatant lie, and not think she would get called on it?  Wasn't it bad enough with all the lies on Oprah, or is this just who she is?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Melocoton

As a hard-working woman with ambition, I am forever offended by her drivel.  SS must be making money off of these two baffoons, right?


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> It has been almost exactly two years since they took Spotify’s money. Maybe there was something in the fine print of the contract nullifying it if they didn’t produce a show in that timeframe.



I'd bet money this is true.  Two year contract deadline is approaching and Spotify listened to it and realized this was as good as they were going to get from them. Otherwise, why release this in the dog days of summer when pretty much everyone is on vacation or dropping kids off at university or getting younger kids ready to go back to school (in the U.S.)


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Why would she tell such a blatant lie, and not think she would get called on it?  Wasn't it bad enough with all the lies on Oprah, or is this just who she is?


She is counting on having an accommodating press to report her "truth" exactly as she says it. They always have before. Does anyone really believe the media is upset that she lies? The average person who doesn't follow Harry and Meghan is going to see in multiple media sources' headlines that there was a fire in Archie's room. That is going to get lots of clicks for their web sites.


----------



## charlottawill

Chloe302225 said:


>



"Will you be listening to Meghan's new podcast?"  

Hell no. I'd rather pull my eyelashes out one by one.


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!

Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
Meet Meghan Markle!

In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.

Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "

"I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.









						Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
					

Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes




					people.com


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Are we to believe this fire in Archie’s room story?  I can’t imagine her not milking that story for all it’s worth.  Hard to fathom her keeping quiet this long about it.


I guess she had to save everything she could to fill the podcast. And given her reputation I'm sure anyone involved in their SA stay had to sign an NDA.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sad and disappointing that she has become part of MM show.


Maybe ZeeZy begged her out of desperation and she couldn't say no.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Funny there should be a heater in any room. In all the SA pictures people look as if the are sweating. Granted a baby needs to be kept warm, but a heater?


That was my first thought.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Why would she think that anyone wants to know "the real me".  Who cares?  She was a second rate actress on a cable show.  She married to become famous and now she thinks she has suddenly become interesting?  I love that The Times in the UK called it preposterous!


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> "future prospects in Hollywood"


Hahaha that's a good one. With each passing public appearance/speech they reveal themselves to be boring, unoriginal and desperate.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> It's getting all very incestuous looking to me.


Pardon the vulgar expression, but I think the term you're looking for is circle jerk.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Yes ZeeZy, everyone now sees you for the insufferable twat that you really are.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Pardon the vulgar expression, but I think the term you're looking for is circle jerk.



Thanks, I didn't know that one!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Thanks, I didn't know that one!


Don't let anyone say this thread is not educational


----------



## csshopper

Why in h*** doesn’t someone in a real news organization call the Embassy for a statement: 1. If it happened and 2. If it did, what was the damage?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Blech!


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'll give her credit for finally putting out a podcast. I don't know if I can bring myself to listen to it or her future podcasts if it's true that she is going to make it all about herself and her groundbreaking role as the international eternal victim.


I won't listen to her regardless


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Who would that be?:

The Riddler who uses made-up words in word-salad-sundaes?

The Joker who lies for giggles and takes delight in the misfortune of others?

Catty woman who is a mean girl?

Penguin, cunning and forever plotting with heart of ice?

Two-faced, outwardly wholesome and confident, inside (self)-pitifully desperate to be liked


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I found y'all a spot-on summary of the podcast.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> "Everyone is in tears, everyone's shaken".  Seriously?  Was the kid in the room, was he harmed in any way at all, or was she just thinking of what *could* have happened to her meal ticket?


She said A was in kitchen snacking with nanny, not in bedroom


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I found y'all a spot-on summary of the podcast.



P&G story - proof positive she is one of those people who has to have the last word, after all, last heard of the story was from dad via Bower, so, the MM riposte was inevitable 
Let her have her silly say and maybe the topic will go away 
We can only hope that Hillary will weigh in on her side


----------



## TC1

marietouchet said:


> She said A was in kitchen snacking with nanny, not in bedroom


Wasn't he a newborn? What the heck was he snacking on


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Why would she tell such a blatant lie, and not think she would get called on it?  Wasn't it bad enough with all the lies on Oprah, or is this just who she is?


Piers M famously said  he did not believe a word that she said in the OW interview, and everyone fact checked that TV show


----------



## marietouchet

TC1 said:


> Wasn't he a newborn? What the heck was he snacking on


I should have written more completely, the nanny went for a snack (not in the bedroom) with A in a baby sling, probably asleep


----------



## marietouchet

excerpts from Dm summary of podcast

“Archie's then nanny, named only as Lauren - a Zimbabwean who liked to tie him on her back with a mud cloth - had taken him downstairs with her instead while she went to get a snack, just as the heater in the nursery caught fire.
Meghan said: 'In that amount of time that she went downstairs, the heater in the nursery caught on fire. There was no smoke detector. Someone happened to just smell smoke down the hallway, went in, fire extinguished. He was supposed to be sleeping in there.' “

Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast











						Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
					

Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.




					mol.im


----------



## tiktok

So traumatic to go on a royal engagement when your baby wasn’t even close to the actual fire and was at no danger whatsoever. It must have been a huge fire at that to escape the media attention. Also so difficult to get over this when you have probably 20 people around to help. Unlike normal working moms who have it so much easier with a screaming baby in their arms trying to put off a fire when a towel catches fire in the kitchen because they’re doing 5 things at once and have to get to a work call or they’ll get fired. No comparison of the emotional abuse Meghan had to go through in the hands of the evil royals. 
It’s like this woman isn’t even on the same planet as normal people.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It's getting all very incestuous looking to me.
> 
> Venture capitalist Alexis Ohanian invests in career coaching and is an advocate for parental leave (*not that I'm against so long there  is equivalent non-parental leave available equally*) 2020 he was interviewed by Me-Aghain https://time.com/5901381/alexis-ohanian-meghan-markle-building-better-tech/



Why though? Equity, not equality, but also, at least in Germany it's the working generation who pays for the older generation's retirement. Childless people still benefit from that without having contributed to that new generation, so I feel it's fine when people who do can have parental leave.


----------



## bag-mania

She’s got us analyzing her podcast as though there was a fire. There wasn’t a fire, not even a tiny one that lasted 10 seconds. I can say that with 100% conviction because she would have been milking the tale for the past three years and it would have been a featured chapter in _Finding Freedom_ if she had thought it up earlier it actually happened.


----------



## marietouchet

And she kept the fire secret for 3 years … kinda like she told no one but H of her suicidal thoughts until 2 years later at interview


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Why would she think that anyone wants to know "the real me".  Who cares?  She was a second rate actress on a cable show.  She married to become famous and now she thinks she has suddenly become interesting?  I love that The Times in the UK called it preposterous!


Yep!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *Piers M* famously said  he did not believe a word that she said in the OW interview, and everyone fact checked that TV show


Here are his comments on the new topic, they provide a good summary!


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Why would she think that anyone wants to know "the real me".  Who cares?  She was a second rate actress on a cable show.  She married to become famous and now she thinks she has suddenly become interesting?  I love that The Times in the UK called it preposterous!


The real Meghan through the lens of the media that she obsessively controls.  OK so this means that she has been a total phony prior to the podcast?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Who would that be?:
> 
> The Riddler who uses made-up words in word-salad-sundaes?
> 
> The Joker who lies for giggles and takes delight in the misfortune of others?
> 
> Catty woman who is a mean girl?
> 
> Penguin, cunning and forever plotting with heart of ice?
> 
> Two-faced, outwardly wholesome and confident, inside (self)-pitifully desperate to be liked
> 
> View attachment 5596282


Seriously.  This woman is an A.S.S.


----------



## mikimoto007

I’m bewildered by this Fire thing. Maybe because I don’t have kids? But Archie wasn’t harmed. He was nowhere near the fire. He has people who are going to look after him. Why would they take the rest of the day off? Especially when it isn5 a standard engagement it’s a royal tour.

Honestly, I wanted to hear more Serena and less Meghan in the podcast. Meghan talks like she’s getting paid by the word. Everything is so dramatic.


----------



## Chanbal

_
*It’s fair to speculate that the head honchos at Spotify might be wondering if their company got enough bang for its buck following its reported $25 million multi-year deal *with Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

*Never fear, Meghan has now launched ‘Archetypes’ – maybe the couple spent a year or so coming up with the brilliant name.* Harry has been shoved into the background, natch, so that Meghan can concentrate on talking about herself – sorry, Mr S meant to say, ‘on the labels that try to hold women back.’ Labels don’t try to do anything, of course, they are labels. But we should never let common sense get in the way of rich women talking about female empowerment.

We should never let common sense get in the way of rich women talking about female empowerment
The first guest is Serena Williams, but tennis enthusiasts who tune in might be a bit disappointed. *The show is in fact all about Meghan, since it takes 11 minutes for Serena to barely get a word in edgeways.

Meghan starts by trotting out her favourite story from her childhood.*In case you have been lucky enough not hear it, let Steerpike sum up: 11-year-old Meghan was ‘furious’ when she saw a Procter & Gamble commercial that advertised its dishwashing soap solely to women, wrote to the most powerful people she could think of, including then First Lady Hillary *******, and managed to get the ad pulled.

Meghan calls the experience an ‘awakening to the millions of ways, big and small, that our society tries to box women in, to hold women back, to tell women who and what they should and can be.’ *Steerpike was reminded of Tom Bower’s latest book, Revenge, which claims that parts of this story were not right – and that Meghan’s claims that Hilary ******* and Proctor & Gamble wrote letters of reply were ‘invented by an adoring father.’*

Markle added that she has ‘never lost touch with that reality, and in the last few years, my desire to do something about it has grown. My 11-year-old voice has also gotten a little more confident — maybe a little louder.’ *She has a little chuckle in her voice, which isn’t irritating at all.*

Prince Harry is allowed to talk, just. He crashes the interview at the beginning like an embarrassing dad trying to get down with the kids, or perhaps an over enthusiastic bachelor uncle, telling Serena ‘I like what you've done with your hair! That's a great vibe.’ ‘Thanks, my love,’ says Meghan, as she tunes him out.

*Towards the end of what Steerpike should be polite and call an interview,* Meghan discusses the importance of level-headed decision making. She says, in reference to Serena’s recent decision to retire from tennis, ‘I think both of us really know that sometimes the right decision isn’t the easiest decision. It takes a lot of counsel and support to make the choice.’ *As someone who announced her departure from the British monarchy on Instagram, before discussing with the Queen first, she knows of what she speaks.*It’s her truth, remember.

*On and on it goes. Steerpike must admit that he struggled to force himself to listen.* Meghan asks such zingers as ‘is there anything you want to say to all the people that love you?’ Then they discuss each other’s ‘growth’ and ‘dimensionality – you can be all of those things, that’s part of being a fully fledged human being’. In conclusion, Meghan says ‘The notion of ambition comes with many judgments and nuances, especially if you’re a woman.’

*It's hard to believe that it took 28 people, including eight executive producers, to make the episode – plus Meghan herself, who is also listed as an 'executive producer' in the credits. *_*Sussex fans (apparently there still are plenty) shouldn’t get too excited about the new series. If the couple’s last Spotify podcast is anything to go by, this is all they’re going to get.*









						Meghan’s Archetypes podcast is really all about her
					

It’s fair to speculate that the head honchos at Spotify might be wondering if their company got enough bang for its buck following its reported $25 million multi-year deal with Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. It’s been 611 days since Spotify announced the agreement. But until...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

They are all in summer attire, but there was a heater in Arch*e's room because  Sorry, I’m drawing a blank.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Some people are intrigued by Hazz's presence in their country.



Haznoballs


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



Did she get a chin implant?


----------



## csshopper

Meeeegain + Spotify =‘s Hazbeen + the UN.

An equation proving they are both  narcissistic vapid presenters.

Barely re tossed word salad and the dressing is getting rancid with age.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> They are all in summer attire, but there was a heater in Arch*e's room because  Sorry, I’m drawing a blank.



I would like to hear a response from the High Commissioner's Residence staff.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Here are his comments on the new topic, they provide a good summary!



To clarify my ambiguous remark, every supposed fact in the interview was examined in a DM article and many (most?) facts were found To be inaccurate, incorrect, wrong  etc Piers was right


----------



## Annawakes

I can’t even imagine Catherine saying anything remotely similar to….”this is the real me.”


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> There was a fire but the baby was not in the room.  DramaDramaDrama. From the DM:
> 
> _Meghan Markle has revealed how her son Archie narrowly escaped a fire that erupted in his bedroom during the Sussexes' tour of South Africa .
> 
> Speaking in the first episode of her Archetypes podcast, which was released today, the Duchess, 41, said the boy's nanny had taken the four-and-a-half month old downstairs with her when she went to get a snack.
> 
> It was then, while she and Prince Harry were at an engagement, that the heater in his bedroom went ablaze, setting the nursery on fire.
> 
> Meghan revealed: 'In that amount of time that she went downstairs, the heater in the nursery caught on fire. There was no smoke detector. Someone happened to just smell smoke down the hallway, went in, fire extinguished. He was supposed to be sleeping in there.'
> 
> The former Suits star told how they had dropped their young son at the housing unit they were staying in for a sleep straight after arriving on their official tour, with Meghan and Harry leaving to carry out a visit to the Nyanga township, where she delivered a speech.
> 
> 'There was this moment where I'm standing on a tree stump and I'm giving this speech to women and girls, and we finish the engagement, we get in the car and they say there's been a fire at the residence. What? There's been a fire in the baby's room,' she said.
> 
> Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'_



Don’t know if this has been posted yet, I’m many pages behind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5596305
> 
> 
> _*It’s fair to speculate that the head honchos at Spotify might be wondering if their company got enough bang for its buck following its reported $25 million multi-year deal *with Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> *Never fear, Meghan has now launched ‘Archetypes’ – maybe the couple spent a year or so coming up with the brilliant name.* Harry has been shoved into the background, natch, so that Meghan can concentrate on talking about herself – sorry, Mr S meant to say, ‘on the labels that try to hold women back.’ Labels don’t try to do anything, of course, they are labels. But we should never let common sense get in the way of rich women talking about female empowerment.
> 
> We should never let common sense get in the way of rich women talking about female empowerment
> The first guest is Serena Williams, but tennis enthusiasts who tune in might be a bit disappointed. *The show is in fact all about Meghan, since it takes 11 minutes for Serena to barely get a word in edgeways.
> 
> Meghan starts by trotting out her favourite story from her childhood.*In case you have been lucky enough not hear it, let Steerpike sum up: 11-year-old Meghan was ‘furious’ when she saw a Procter & Gamble commercial that advertised its dishwashing soap solely to women, wrote to the most powerful people she could think of, including then First Lady Hillary *******, and managed to get the ad pulled.
> 
> Meghan calls the experience an ‘awakening to the millions of ways, big and small, that our society tries to box women in, to hold women back, to tell women who and what they should and can be.’ *Steerpike was reminded of Tom Bower’s latest book, Revenge, which claims that parts of this story were not right – and that Meghan’s claims that Hilary ******* and Proctor & Gamble wrote letters of reply were ‘invented by an adoring father.’*
> 
> Markle added that she has ‘never lost touch with that reality, and in the last few years, my desire to do something about it has grown. My 11-year-old voice has also gotten a little more confident — maybe a little louder.’ *She has a little chuckle in her voice, which isn’t irritating at all.*
> 
> Prince Harry is allowed to talk, just. He crashes the interview at the beginning like an embarrassing dad trying to get down with the kids, or perhaps an over enthusiastic bachelor uncle, telling Serena ‘I like what you've done with your hair! That's a great vibe.’ ‘Thanks, my love,’ says Meghan, as she tunes him out.
> 
> *Towards the end of what Steerpike should be polite and call an interview,* Meghan discusses the importance of level-headed decision making. She says, in reference to Serena’s recent decision to retire from tennis, ‘I think both of us really know that sometimes the right decision isn’t the easiest decision. It takes a lot of counsel and support to make the choice.’ *As someone who announced her departure from the British monarchy on Instagram, before discussing with the Queen first, she knows of what she speaks.*It’s her truth, remember.
> 
> *On and on it goes. Steerpike must admit that he struggled to force himself to listen.* Meghan asks such zingers as ‘is there anything you want to say to all the people that love you?’ Then they discuss each other’s ‘growth’ and ‘dimensionality – you can be all of those things, that’s part of being a fully fledged human being’. In conclusion, Meghan says ‘The notion of ambition comes with many judgments and nuances, especially if you’re a woman.’
> 
> *It's hard to believe that it took 28 people, including eight executive producers, to make the episode – plus Meghan herself, who is also listed as an 'executive producer' in the credits. *_*Sussex fans (apparently there still are plenty) shouldn’t get too excited about the new series. If the couple’s last Spotify podcast is anything to go by, this is all they’re going to get.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s Archetypes podcast is really all about her
> 
> 
> It’s fair to speculate that the head honchos at Spotify might be wondering if their company got enough bang for its buck following its reported $25 million multi-year deal with Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. It’s been 611 days since Spotify announced the agreement. But until...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


28 people, holy cow !! To do one podcast …

Failed to find anything on the staff size of the Joe Rogan show, for example, for comparison. his is like the biggest one of all these days. JR has a producer that he values, and there seems to be very little editing (censoring, manipulation ) of the 3 hr chats, so, post production is lean and mean. Highlights - short snippets - are cut and appear on YouTube, but these are not manipulated to change the content
JR guests are always in the JR studio
No tinkly music or obvious hair and makeup

I refuse to listen to the MM podcast, was Serena in the same studio as MM, or was it long distance ? Did it seem edited ?


----------



## Cinderlala

12 episodes?!  Who could handle listening to Skeeter 12 times???????


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, we know who is funding the disastrous duo - Alexis Ohanian and Serena.  Ohanian’s billions are  from Reddit and Serena’s are from endorsements via tennis [she did work hard for her money].  Always follow the money.  Choose wisely when giving your money away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: Is that the Wimbledon US Open outfit?  Haaaaa, SW used an old photo.  








						NEW YORK, NY - September 7 : Anna Wintour, Oracene Price, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex watch the Women's Singles Finals match between Serena Williams vs Bianca Andressscu on Arthur Ashe Stadium during the 2019 US Open Tennis Tournament at the UST
					

Download this stock image: NEW YORK, NY - September 7 : Anna Wintour, Oracene Price, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex watch the Women's Singles Finals match between Serena Williams vs Bianca Andressscu on Arthur Ashe Stadium during the 2019 US Open Tennis Tournament at the USTA Billie Jean King...




					www.alamy.com
				












						Serena Williams promotes appearance on Meghan Markle' podcast episode
					

The tennis player, 40, shared a black-and-white snap which saw her cosy up to Meghan, 41, who looked chic in a coat which she layered over a denim outfit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Who would that be?:
> 
> The Riddler who uses made-up words in word-salad-sundaes?
> 
> The Joker who lies for giggles and takes delight in the misfortune of others?
> 
> Catty woman who is a mean girl?
> 
> Penguin, cunning and forever plotting with heart of ice?
> 
> Two-faced, outwardly wholesome and confident, inside (self)-pitifully desperate to be liked
> 
> View attachment 5596282


Talia Al Ghul: beauty outside, treachery inside, and stole Batman's sperm to create a useful baby


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> Duke of Edinburg and Ms. Ragl*nd would have been OK… I guess since QE didn't make Dor*a a countess, she had to use duchess's mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Allegedly Furious At Queen For Not Giving Doria Ragland A Countess Title
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle wanted her mom, Doria Ragland to have a royal title but Queen Elizabeth allegedly refused to grant her wish.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.entertaintimes.com









Chanbal said:


> One more article on Hazz's important mission in Africa, but someone may have forgotten to inform the American delegation.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5595865


@Chanbal  you are forgetting that JCMH is trying to brand himself as the new Barack Ob.ama
I couldn't even type that without laughing to myself...







bag-mania said:


> *There is absolutely no evidence that Harry gave tours to diplomats is there?*










Chanbal said:


> Some people are intrigued by Hazz's presence in their country.


I see no lies!








Chanbal said:


> Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
> Boring…
> 
> View attachment 5596060
> 
> _'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *
> 
> 'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis.
> 
> 'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'
> 
> Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.
> 
> 'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.
> 
> 'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'
> 
> Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.
> 
> 'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.
> 
> 'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'
> 
> *Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*
> 
> Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'
> 
> *Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'
> 
> The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.
> 
> As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'
> 
> Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.
> 
> Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'
> 
> She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'
> 
> The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
> 
> 
> Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk











QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm surprised Raptor knows the words "silence" and "dignity". Maybe they don't mean what she thinks they mean.



_"silence with dignity"_  wtf is that supposed to be?


She doesn't' know how to be silent, not even for a minute and she hasn't got an ounce of dignity.
Lawd, this woman loves to preach the gospel of bullsh*t.





bag-mania said:


> So a quick Google of Meghan shows that most of the media is focused on the alleged fire. How horrible of the Royal handlers to force them to go to another engagement!
> 
> *Who is buying it?*


The only fire I believe in- MM's pant's on fire for all the lies she tells.







Chanbal said:


> It must have been a cold day in South Africa…



I do love investigative findings...







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please go to slide 2. What exactly is wrong with her? And WTH does Serena see in her?



Wow!


That was a great chance for Serena to call MM out on her disgusting and problematic attitude, but no, why would she bother. 
Just carry on pretending everyone else is the problem. The problematic one could _never _be your mixed race friend who is so light-skinned she could pass for Caucasian in acting jobs and has never faced any hardship in life _ever _because she lived a privileged life where her parents (mostly father) paid for everything she wanted/needed until the day he wasn't needed anymore.
She clearly was disgusted to think people believed she was from Compton, it's beneath her. Stuck-up, judgemental b*tch. I would love nothing more than to see someone catch her by surprise, go off-script and call her her out for what she is in the middle of recording one of the podcrash.




papertiger said:


> It's getting all very incestuous looking to me.
> 
> Venture capitalist Alexis Ohanian invests in career coaching and is an advocate for parental leave (not that I'm against so long there  is equivalent non-parental leave available equally) 2020 he was interviewed by Me-Aghain https://time.com/5901381/alexis-ohanian-meghan-markle-building-better-tech/
> 
> Harry life-coaches Serena https://www.insider.com/serena-williams-says-prince-harry-is-her-life-coach-2022-2
> 
> Me-Aghain interviews Me-Aghain Serena W for her first Ache-(not)well podcrash 2022
> 
> Me-Aghain merches Serena Williams new clothing line 2022


'Podcrash'
   
That's a good one @papertiger, I'm gonna use that from now on!




bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



_'unfiltered'_



We have all been subjected to see and know far too much about the _real _MM over the last few years. We want less, not more.
Girl, we are not stupid. We know this podcrash version of you will be as contrived and insufferable as all your other versions of yourself are. Not to mention festering with lies and bullsh*t.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM [because who can remember what she wore when]:

*Pre fire:*


_Fun: Harry and Meghan watch dancers as they leave the Nyanga Township in Cape Town, South Africa. Meanwhile, back at home, Archie's bedroom was on fire, she revealed today_

*Post fire:*


_Awful: Meghan spoke of her frustration that she immediately had to do another official engagement after the fire (pictured doing so with Harry later the same day)_


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> Don’t know if this has been posted yet, I’m many pages behind.
> View attachment 5596350


It looks tons better than Casa Monteshitsto


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I'll take this as confirmation that the me who blabbered to Oprah was fake.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I'll take this as confirmation that the me who blabbered to Oprah was fake.


That was the “me” before she reinvented herself. Because she’s always in a state of metamorphosis, like a big moth.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That was the “me” before she reinvented herself. Because she’s always in a state of metamorphosis, like a big moth.


Figuratively and literally.  What is with the lengthened face?  The chin?

So it is OK for Serena to show her little girl, but Archie has to have his face covered?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> So it is OK for Serena to show her little girl, but Archie has to have his face covered?


Serena must be able to afford her own security and she doesn’t need to sell photos of her kid to the press.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5596358
> 
> 
> ETA: Is that the Wimbledon US Open outfit? Haaaaa, SW used an old photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NEW YORK, NY - September 7 : Anna Wintour, Oracene Price, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex watch the Women's Singles Finals match between Serena Williams vs Bianca Andressscu on Arthur Ashe Stadium during the 2019 US Open Tennis Tournament at the UST
> 
> 
> Download this stock image: NEW YORK, NY - September 7 : Anna Wintour, Oracene Price, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex watch the Women's Singles Finals match between Serena Williams vs Bianca Andressscu on Arthur Ashe Stadium during the 2019 US Open Tennis Tournament at the USTA Billie Jean King...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.alamy.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serena Williams promotes appearance on Meghan Markle' podcast episode
> 
> 
> The tennis player, 40, shared a black-and-white snap which saw her cosy up to Meghan, 41, who looked chic in a coat which she layered over a denim outfit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Daughter is now 4 years old, looks two in photo, so, yes, that would seem to be a two year old photo


----------



## mellibelly

River listened so we don’t have to. His Harry impression is hilarious btw


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## mellibelly

Merching clothing on an effing PODCAST


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> Here it is! There is a difference between ambition and ruthless greed! Again, accusing "some…"
> Boring…
> 
> View attachment 5596060
> 
> _'So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband.* And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some. *
> 
> 'So since I felt the negativity behind it, It's really hard to unfeel it. I can't unsee it either in the millions of girls and women who make themselves smaller, so much smaller on a regular basis.
> 
> 'So I wanted to talk to someone who embodies the spirit of ambition to see how she thinks about the word and the connotation, and how the other many labels that affect all women have affected her too.'
> 
> Speaking to Williams, Meghan also said: 'In our friendship when you have to see things that are mischaracterising of me, but you experience behind closed doors the pain that I'm going through.
> 
> 'What I think is so interesting is that even though that's on a world stage, I don't know if that feels much different for any woman. If you're in a small town and you see someone saying something about your best friend that is just completely untrue, how that feels.
> 
> 'The thought of these, like, Archetypes, but it's the kind of stuff you and I talk about so much, these boxes and these labels – the things that we both have been called and witnessed each other being called.'
> 
> Meghan added: 'As you heard in my chat with my dear friend, the notion of ambition come with many judgements and nuances – especially for women.
> 
> 'The misconception that if you're an ambitious woman you have an agenda, you must be calculating or selfish or aggressive, or a climber.
> 
> 'And that if you're that fierce or strong, or brave then you soemehow deserve whatever gets thrown at you – however disproportionate or unfair it may be, and even when it's more than most could endure. Most men, most anyone…'
> 
> *Harry also makes an appearance in the episode*, with Meghan saying: '*You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in.'*
> 
> Meghan and Williams greet Harry with 'Hello' in British accents, with Harry telling Williams: 'I like what you've done with your hair. That's a great vibe.'
> 
> *Williams replies: 'Thank you. Good to see you too as always, I miss you guys.'
> 
> The duke responds 'Well come and see us', with Meghan saying they will make a plan.
> 
> As Harry leaves, Meghan remarks: 'Thanks my love.'
> 
> Williams also revealed Harry helped her with the decision to retire* from tennis long before it was announced, spending around an hour discussing the issue with her.
> 
> Meghan, who quit the monarchy as a senior working royal, said: 'I think, you know, I think both of us, or the three of us, really know that sometimes the right decision isn't the easiest decision.'
> 
> She told Williams: 'It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes.'
> 
> The Archewell Foundation announced earlier this year that the couple's Spotify podcast would finally debut this summer – 18 months after inking the lucrative deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle finally releases first episode of her podcast
> 
> 
> Entitled The Misconception of Ambition with Serena Williams, Meghan spoke to the tennis star about double standards women face when they are labelled 'ambitious'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Where oh where is the instant vomit on the “like” bar? No words. Feel nauseous.


WingNut said:


> Ugh. There is no instant emoticon that suffices as a response to this. She makes every failed attempt at <insert intended accomplishment> about her being stifled/held back/treated unjustly. I'm ambitious, I don't have any of her issues. If I fail it's my own damned fault. If she's not getting what she wants it's because of her own damned ineptitude, it is not on others. Just being the same gender as her makes me want to vomit.
> 
> View attachment 5596124


Yes … winners don’t listen to the gnat-buzz of the (inevitable) haters, they simply swat them away. She gives new meaning to “vacuous.”


----------



## mellibelly

Ambition is not an archetype. Neither is Diva, her next episode with Mariah Carey according to River. This bish thinks she can just make up words to be archetypes. These aren’t Freudian archetypes. I read Caroline Myss’ books and a common archetype for example is The Prostitute. It can be used for any gender. As in, Harry embodies The Prostitute archetype (HE DOES)


----------



## needlv

Blind Item #3
					

The alliterate one and her husband are flying in an entire production team from the US because the ones they wanted to hire in the UK are "b...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				



Blind Item #3​
The alliterate one and her husband are flying in an entire production team from the US because the ones they wanted to hire in the UK are "booked." There is one scene set for a charity which has a small auditorium. Apparently our couple are going to receive a very long standing ovation which can be shot from many different angles. There was talk of a change of clothes too, so it would look as if it happened at multiple stops.


----------



## CarryOn2020

After the reviews of this Spotify podcast, Nflix should be afraid, very afraid.


----------



## xincinsin

"_This doesn't make any sense." _Raspberry Award-winning sentence that joins_ "I was such a fraud." _as the defining MM character traits_._


marietouchet said:


> The famous scoop by Gayle King - the first photo of A - newest BRF member, by an American news reporter
> GK and OW had worked on MM for years to get the scoop and the interview


Wonder if $$$ was involved or some form of quid pro quo. Assistance to generate brouhaha and mansions when MM "fled captivity"? She would not have given away free milk.


mikimoto007 said:


> Honestly, I wanted to hear more Serena and less Meghan in the podcast. *Meghan talks like she’s getting paid by the word.* Everything is so dramatic.


Hold over from her acting days? Her many years as an extra would have taught her that bit parts with a line in the script paid better than bit parts with no words.


xincinsin said:


> Talia Al Ghul: beauty outside, treachery inside, and stole Batman's sperm to create a useful baby


Sorry, I've changed my mind. Talia was a whiz with the sword and she was rich in her own right. There was a traitorous character appropriately called Jezebel Jet who seduced and betrayed Batman. Very similar to Methane in many ways.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this the ghoul, Talia?  MM wishes she had that body  













						Talia al Ghul - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> I should have written more completely, the nanny went for a snack (not in the bedroom) with A in a baby sling, probably asleep


That's all one could want in a nanny. 

Going for a snack and dribbling food on the baby in a sling, while leaving a plugged-in unattended portable electric heater in the room, probably near combustable materials such as bedding (why else would it catch fire.)

Of course all this is baloney, but it sure doesn't say much about Meg's knowledge of what to look for in a baby sitter.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Lack of options?


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Torre didn't like MeMe's podcast


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like Torre didn't like MeMe's podcast



Yes, there has always been a _nasty_ vibe with H&M.


----------



## Yanca

I refused to click on any articles about MM and Hazza anymore, I don't engage on twitter when it's about them posted by Bias media that does not report on facts & just gushing  blindly about them, and with this Spotify I will Not listen since it will be on the news, whether we look for it or not. Less interaction and engagements is better , because the wife thrives for attention .  It seemed that this podcast is going to be all about Me me Megain in guise of having guests but really it's just another platform for her to spew lies, take swipe at the Royal Family that afforded her this platform , take a  dig at  the Royal aides, and labeled those who don't praise them and  blindly followed and adore them as haters. I don't want to call any body a liar,  but  now I tend to agree with Piers Morgan- it's getting harder and harder to believe even a single iota thing she says- maybe there's a tinge of truth  on some of it but most must  be very heavily edited. Just like the "fire" in SA, how come it's not written by the media? when MM wants something leaked she always uses someone, whether its Scoobie, or one of her squad or " friends"  -it will get out.  I don't have any beef with her but it's irritating to see her act so good and sweet, while always low key attacking others. She seemed so conniving & contrived.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



I realize she was not quite five months postpartum, but that dress is just awful. How can one person with access to designers and stylists make so many fashion mistakes?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

I have yet to find anyone who thought it good, or even just ok?


----------



## needlv

Apparently it was 92F/ 32C on the day Archie’s room heater had a fire.  Why would the heater be on?  With those temps we usually strip the babies down to a singlet to keep them cool so they dont overheat.

And no Smoke alarms in the fancy accommodations in South Africa?  No, don’t buy that either.

this story sounds exaggerated (at best) or another one of her lies (most likely)


----------



## CarryOn2020

RemouladeSauce is right. This could be a fun guessing game. 12 poddies = 12 cosplays
#1 goes to Angelina


----------



## mellibelly

The caption


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I have yet to find anyone who thought it good, or even just ok?



Kate just keeps on smiling, rising above the nonsense, such a pretty lady. 
Remember H&M are second row middles.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> RemouladeSauce is right. This could be a fun guessing game. 12 poddies = 12 cosplays
> #1 goes to Angelina



Zeezy looks rode hard and put away wet here 

It also looks like one of those cameras that show all your sun damage


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of the commenters  

_Imagine you have a baby. You call him Dave. And then you turn Dave into a brand called Davewell and into a podcast called Davetypes. Bit weird, isn’t it_


----------



## mellibelly

mellibelly said:


> Ambition is not an archetype. Neither is Diva, her next episode with Mariah Carey according to River. This bish thinks she can just make up words to be archetypes. These aren’t Freudian archetypes. I read Caroline Myss’ books and a common archetype for example is The Prostitute. It can be used for any gender. As in, Harry embodies The Prostitute archetype (HE DOES)


Typo I need to correct…I meant *Jungian* archetypes, not Freudian. My therapist had me read those archetype books haha. I bet Nutmeg has never seen a therapist or mental health professional. She’s too narcissistic to think she would benefit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Zeezy looks rode hard and put away wet here
> 
> It also looks like one of those cameras that show all your sun damage


Imagine what poddy #12 will look like


----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG nails it:


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## carmen56

I hope someone will pick up the phone and fact check 'the fire' story with the Ambassador's residence.  The lies trip so easily off her tongue, it beggars belief that she doesn't even think people might check her 'truth.'.


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## mellibelly

In her latest video Lady C says Givenchy contacted her last year and told her about TW bullying Charlotte during the dress fittings. Givenchy were appalled and told Lady C exactly what went down. Lady C does not lie so it’s confirmed: the monster bullied a 3 year old!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

She begins speaking about Charlotte at the 29 minute mark


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> In her latest video Lady C says Givenchy contacted her last year and told her about TW bullying Charlotte during the dress fittings. Givenchy were appalled and told Lady C exactly what went down. Lady C does not lie so it’s confirmed: the monster bullied a 3 year old!


Plus the death stare she gave Charlotte at the altar, the body language guy did a frame by frame analysis and caught the slip. The Mulroney kids were beamed at.
Sneaky  despicable beech from the start.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


> Her next podcast guest is suppose to be Mariah Carey






mariah-carey-i-dont-know-her-02.gif


----------



## purseinsanity

Annawakes said:


> And OF COURSE she makes the podcast about HERSELF.  How SHE has been misunderstood, mischaracterized.  Is it even possible for her NOT to talk about herself.


She’s got that in common with Oprah.


----------



## jelliedfeels

She’s seriously trying to convince us the help set their home on fire to try and kill them?

This really is a _Rebecca_ rip off!




youngster said:


> Also, what she says is bizarre:
> _*So I don't ever remember personally feeling the negative connotation behind the word ambitious, until I started dating my now husband. And apparently ambition is a terrible, terrible thing.* *For a woman that is, according to some.*_
> 
> So, she wasn't ever made to feel "the negative connotation behind the word ambitious" _*until she started dating Harry*._  That is, until she was around 35 years old and it was in the context of her personal life, dating someone from a royal family with a very high profile, so not about work or career at all.  Instead, she laments being criticized for her "ambition" in pursuing a man so that she could fulfill a millennia old stereotype of women marrying for money and status, all while bemoaning that she faced this criticism because she's a woman.
> 
> Does no one tell her how idiotic she sounds?


Yes she really dropped the ball on this she admitted out loud her ambition was to be a gold digger and that’s when people  turned against her.


bag-mania said:


> Serena has been at the top of her sport for many years and has a net worth of $260 million. It's hard to think of a woman less likely to be presenting the dilemma of being "held back."


I don’t get it at all. Serena has achieved lots of things why is she dwelling on some racist people decades in the past? I guess she thinks it’s relatable and will sell her merchandise - a lot of these celebs are trying to convince us they are persecuted and tortured atm. What’s wrong with just talking about what you are good at?

:


CarryOn2020 said:


> _Meghan Markle has revealed how her son Archie narrowly escaped a fire that erupted in his bedroom during the Sussexes' tour of South Africa .
> 
> Speaking in the first episode of her Archetypes podcast, which was released today, the Duchess, 41, said the boy's nanny had taken the four-and-a-half month old downstairs with her when she went to get a snack.
> 
> It was then, while she and Prince Harry were at an engagement, that the heater in his bedroom went ablaze, setting the nursery on fire.
> 
> Meghan revealed: 'In that amount of time that she went downstairs, the heater in the nursery caught on fire. There was no smoke detector. Someone happened to just smell smoke down the hallway, went in, fire extinguished. He was supposed to be sleeping in there.'
> 
> The former Suits star told how they had dropped their young son at the housing unit they were staying in for a sleep straight after arriving on their official tour, with Meghan and Harry leaving to carry out a visit to the Nyanga township, where she delivered a speech.
> 
> 'There was this moment where I'm standing on a tree stump and I'm giving this speech to women and girls, and we finish the engagement, we get in the car and they say there's been a fire at the residence. What? There's been a fire in the baby's room,' she said.
> 
> Meghan added: 'We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'.'_


So she had a heater on in South Africa? In a ‘housing unit’ aka a palatial mansion (very like wallis calling the Carribean governors house the shack). Then the nurse, who Megs just has to mention the nationality of and thus heavily imply her race, went to get a snack the first chance she got. Then incompetent staff hadn’t fitted any basic safety equipment - in a mansion by a baby’s room-  and there was a fire immediately.

Suurrrree. 

Tell us again how Megsy was meant to push the royals into the modern age and sweep away the racist and classist stereotyping.


----------



## purseinsanity

Melocoton said:


> As a hard-working woman with ambition, I am forever offended by her drivel.  SS must be making money off of these two baffoons, right?


TW seems to think "ruthless" is the same as "ambitious".


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> River listened so we don’t have to. His Harry impression is hilarious btw



LOL, it's comical she's wearing a wife beater in this picture.  We all know she is TW beating Haz to death!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> TW seems to think "ruthless" is the same as "ambitious".


And confusing a_mbitious_ with _aggressive.   _Most social climbers have a mean, aggressive streak. 
As Lady C says, loving people know how to love and it shows on their faces.  H&M’s angst overrides all the Botox and fillers.  Hope the Palace disowns them soon. 



purseinsanity said:


> LOL, it's comical she's wearing a wife beater in this picture.  We all know she is TW beating Haz to death!


This, 100%.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I realize she was not quite five months postpartum, but that dress is just awful. How can one person with access to designers and stylists make so many fashion mistakes?


Part figure, part deportment & part attitude, IMHO. Despite claims by her stooges that she was a super model, she doesn't have a great figure, dresses badly for the figure she does have, and struts with a weird wide-legged stance. I am sure her Daddy Dearest would have paid for etiquette and deportment classes, so she probably didn't care what the teacher said as she knew better.


----------



## purseinsanity

I think at this point, we can call TW a _*pathological liar*_.  Interesting that it’s a symptom of narcissism:

Pathological lying is a symptom of various personality disorders, including *antisocial, narcissistic, and histrionic personality disorders*. Other conditions, such as borderline personality disorder, may also lead to frequent lies, but the lies themselves are not considered pathological.Nov 23, 2020


https://www.webmd.com › signs-lying
​


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Don’t know if this has been posted yet, I’m many pages behind.
> View attachment 5596350



That "housing-unit" beats her nouveau riche crib in the hills


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bet Serena is nervous about how to be successful in something other than tennis and that’s why she’s willing to promote herself on this nonsense show. 

Housing unit is sooooo offensive.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though? Equity, not equality, but also, at least in Germany it's the working generation who pays for the older generation's retirement. Childless people still benefit from that without having contributed to that new generation, so I feel it's fine when people who do can have parental leave.



If that is true, childless people should be able to use their potential future offsprings carbon omission which is worked out per capita.

It used to be people were told that the taxes paid-in would pay for *their *retirement (National *Insurance*) now we're told we don't pay taxes for ourselves but our parents? That's a great marketing ploy on behalf of Gen Z. Who pays for student loans who don't get remunerated? Who pays for public schools and the first 18 years of public services for children?

Some working people don't have parents, does that mean a rebate? My mother paid her own way and no one can find an NHS dentist for adults (in a healthcare system I'm also paying for with taxes) I go privately, can I get a rebate too?

All or nothing, fair share for everyone with choice. If a man (sorry, person without XX) can get parental leave why shouldn't a woman get time-off in her lifetime?

However, I am in agreement with H&M that men (or people with a Y or parents to XXs that give birth) should have the right to parental leave, because in the job market women (people who have the potential to reproduce - if known) of working age are seen as potential extra liability and can be discriminated against. Plus, men (or whatever) should have the chance to bond with their children.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




O.M.G she is a joke by herself, we don't even have to use satire

In her words:
me ME _ME_, *MYSELF* and I!!!


----------



## papertiger

Chloe302225 said:


>




I thought podcasts were supposed to be audio-only. 

Why do we have to see her at all?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mellibelly said:


> In her latest video Lady C says Givenchy contacted her last year and told her about TW bullying Charlotte during the dress fittings. Givenchy were appalled and told Lady C exactly what went down. Lady C does not lie so it’s confirmed: the monster bullied a 3 year old!



WTFFFF. Also very telling Givenchy went that far.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> Ambition is not an archetype. Neither is Diva, her next episode with Mariah Carey according to River. This bish thinks she can just make up words to be archetypes. These aren’t Freudian archetypes. I read Caroline Myss’ books and a common archetype for example is The Prostitute. It can be used for any gender. As in, *Harry embodies The Prostitute archetype (HE DOES)*


I have to check out The Prostitute, Harry le Hoar haz a nice ring, thanks XXX


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the commenters
> 
> _Imagine you have a baby. You call him Dave. And then you turn Dave into a brand called Davewell and into a podcast called Davetypes. Bit weird, isn’t it_



Bravo! 

There you have it


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> Typo I need to correct…I meant *Jungian* archetypes, not Freudian. My therapist had me read those archetype books haha. I bet Nutmeg has never seen a therapist or mental health professional. She’s too narcissistic to think she would benefit.



There should be 12 (if I remember correctly  ) still, as you observed Diva was certainly not one of them. I'm actually wondering if M went to school let alone university (double-major   )

Diva comes from the divine - and _Diva Assoluta_ is the highest rank of female opera singer possible; please call me diva anytime you like  .

Freud had his types too, he used them as diagnostic tools and provided a shorthand of reaction to a type of infant-care narrative. Not labelling or diagnosing anyone but phallic- aggressive suits M when she is alone, but she presents as a classic-hysteric, and anal- expulsive suits Haz-been-&-gone.

*Phallic Aggressive*
Vain, aggressive, and self-centered, you are preoccupied with matters of power and dominance. Metaphorically, your personality style may be described as the five-year-old who discovered that his genitals were able to provide him with a sense of pleasure, and who was immensely proud to have made this discovery. Flaunting his genitals to the world and believing himself to be special because of them, the five-year-old you did not learn to associate achievement with effort, thinking instead that achievement was something that followed passively from one's intrinsic magnificence. As a result, the adult you has an easy time convincing himself that he is superior to others and often feels entitled to special treatment, even though you may have developed little in the way of actual skills to act as a foundation for your affected superiority.

Additionally, the five-year-old you mistook the pleasurable sensations that his genitals were able to provide for the very reason for having genitals, knowing nothing about their wider reproductive purposes. In the same way, the adult you is often confused with regards to his own thoughts and motivations, steering mindlessly towards praise and gratification, while ignoring the wider questions of fairness and reciprocity. Since in your mind, success depends on intrinsic magnificence, and not on conscious effort, you are wont to believe that any criticism of you, or denial of gratification that you feel entitled to, is really is a denial of your intrinsic worth and a mean-spirited attempt to take it away - a castration attempt, as it were. Hence, the adult you tends to lose all sense of proportion when criticized, overreacting and responding in full force to even the mildest of criticisms.

*Classic Hysteric*
Having a strong need for attention and affection, you are not one to sit idly by, hoping that these things will come to you of their own accord. Instead you actively crave center stage and seek the notice of those around you through a series of attention-grabbing behaviors such as dramatized emotions, sexualized conduct and clothing, witty and eccentric manners, and so on. Notoriously fickle and flighty, you often find yourself chasing the latest colorful image that has presented itself to your imagination instead of working out the implications of a topic in detail. (By the time someone engages you on the nitty-gritty, you have already moved on to another topic.) Metaphorically, your personality style may be likened to a teenage girl whose uterus is twisting and turning, first to the one side, then to the other, causing emotional turmoil as it craves impregnation from the outside while at the same time resisting any definite commitment to it. In the same way, your actual personality is both sexually flirtatious and expressively overdramatic as a means of capturing people's attention. 
While your spontaneous amiability may sometimes lead people to think that you are either propositioning them or their new best friend, the reality is that for you, these enticing behaviors are not necessarily meant as anything but ways of getting them to notice you and care.

*Anal Expulsive: *
Being temperamentally careless and messy, your personal relationships are intense but unstable. You also have a habit of shifting back and forth between over-idealizing and derogating the people in your life. Restless and having a strong need for stimulation, you may sometimes act recklessly just to "keep things feeling fresh," thereby exposing yourself and others to danger and hurt in the process. Your erratic emotional life leads you to experience intense ups and downs and may cause you to confuse sex with intimacy as it all blurs together in your mind-blowingly fast-paced life. Metaphorically, your personality style may be described as the toddler who did not see the point of potty training and resisted it, instead defecating whenever he felt like it. Because you never learned to reign in your urges in toddlerhood, you are incapable of moderating your search for adventure and excitement in adulthood. Hence you may leap from project to project and partner to partner, always pining for instant success instead of staying with a single prospect for the long haul and bringing it to success by "holding it in" until fruition.


----------



## MiniMabel

papertiger said:


> I hope so.
> 
> Nothing would be better for the UK than H (and descendants) to be removed for the # of succession


I would like to see a DNA test done, and the results made public. It's truly ridiculous that the question of his paternity is still unclear after nearly 40 years.  It does make one wonder because if a test has been done and showed Charles as his father, why not put the rumours to rest once and for all?

Of course, it would be tragic, for JCMH in particular, if he's not Charles' son but it is in the public interest because the UK taxpayers should not have shouldered his expenses.  That may sound harsh but what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong. Too, it's a difficult situation for Charles but he's not blameless. JCMH is a multi-millionaire, whilst many people in the UK (and around the world) are below the poverty line and cannot afford enough to eat and to heat their homes, dying because of that. He'll never go without the basics (and luxuries) of life.  His mother left him a fortune, plus there were huge amounts of money from other family members. Not that money would compensate for the knowledge of changed circumstances of his birth but he can still forge a path of doing good, perhaps, or perhaps not considering H&M's plummeting popularity and Me-again's (potential) past as a yacht-girl which I think basically equates to prostitution? One notes that H&M have been uncharacteristically silent after the release of TB's book.

Old sins cast long shadows.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> I hope someone will pick up the phone and fact check 'the fire' story with the Ambassador's residence.  The lies trip so easily off her tongue, it beggars belief that she doesn't even think people might check her 'truth.'.



So long as it gets people talking (about her) she doesn't actually care  

Interesting strategy.

I guess it's been used by the nutty, snake-oil-selling rag press forever. Very strange to want to be a known liar though, I guess like any cheap wannabe, her aim is fame, her objective monetising 'breaking the Internet'.


----------



## papertiger

2 from Sky

Royal Outcast pays the Vicim Card 




"totally self-obsessed"


----------



## Sharont2305

The Queen "I carried on with my duties after a huge devastating fire caused millions of pounds of damage to my home because that is what we do" 
She didn't actually say this but you know this is exactly what she did after the Windsor Castle fire.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> Bravo!
> 
> There you have it


When Archie grows up, he will want to change his name

Question: I thought that the BRF knew M and H were going to leave before the wedding?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They are not wrong.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> When Archie grows up, he will want to change his name
> 
> Question: I thought that the BRF knew M and H were going to leave before the wedding?



I don't think the BRF knew, but H&M must have planned for it.


----------



## papertiger

"a third-rate hustler struck lucky"  

Forget the beginning unless you're from the UK. Starts to get on points around 14min-in with Lady Louise


----------



## regnews

There was no fire only a smoking heater and staff unplugged it..... Drama queen


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I realize she was not quite five months postpartum, but that dress is just awful. How can one person with access to designers and stylists make so many fashion mistakes?


She made a point of not doing designer for that trip and reusing dresses- I give her a pass in Africa - but the red formal in NY - flop


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> She made a point of not doing designer for that trip and reusing dresses- I give her a pass in Africa - but the red formal in NY - flop


Designer or not I think she looks like an unmade bed, and to me that comes across as disrespectful to the people she is visiting. Like they weren't important enough to take the trouble to look presentable for. You can buy well-fitting clothes that are not designer, and no one knows what you're wearing unless you announce it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

So now Serena considers her a dear friend? I can't keep up anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Designer or not I think she looks like an unmade bed, and to me that comes across as disrespectful to the people she is visiting. Like they weren't important enough to take the trouble to look presentable for. You can buy well-fitting clothes that are not designer, and no one knows what you're wearing unless you announce it.



The most disrespectful outfit was her mosque get-up. The naked arms, the rag she called a scarf, the wildly flowing, apparently uncombed hair. That whole thing was a big fat middlefinger.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> She made a point of not doing designer for that trip and reusing dresses- I give her a pass in Africa - but the red formal in NY - flop



She also took off her engagement ring. Honestly, I found it insulting, not considerate. Especially not in the wake of "Nobody has asked me if I'm ok."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> So now Serena considers her a dear friend? I can't keep up anymore.




Serena is full of it.

Do y'all know the story of how she met her husband? They were at a café and she went up to him to tell him he couldn't sit where he was sitting because she needed her space. I don't know about you, that wouldn't have endeared her to me at all. Maybe Raptor and her are more alike than we think, though Serena obviously has talent and work ethics.


----------



## Jktgal

regnews said:


> View attachment 5596554
> 
> 
> There was no fire only a smoking heater and staff unplugged it..... Drama queen


don't you know that smoke FEELS like fire....


----------



## Aimee3

I have never heard the expression “housing unit” before.  Is it a common term in the uK?


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> So now Serena considers her a dear friend? I can't keep up anymore.



Doesn't TW use the expression "my dear friend" in the podcast?  Did they mutually agree on this term of endearment?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The most disrespectful outfit was her mosque get-up. The naked arms, the rag she called a scarf, the wildly flowing, apparently uncombed hair. That whole thing was a big fat middlefinger.


Agree totally inappropriate


----------



## Toby93

Ok, I have not listened, and will not listen to her drivel, but others have and are shocked at the level of narcissism.  They obviously have not been keeping up with this forum


----------



## papertiger

Aimee3 said:


> I have never heard the expression “housing unit” before.  Is it a common term in the uK?



No.

A housing unit is something that a council, builder or town planner will talk about to individualise a single unit for a person or persons within a much bigger plan/scheme when the 'unit' is an unspecified, in proposal, planning stages. 

Meghan's not from the UK, she just can't speak English (US or British versions) as her use of 'unfeel' demonstrates. She makes things up as she goes along, just like her memory.


----------



## MiniMabel

I just can't stand the word salad! The drivel MM spouts truly is preposterously insulting! My head feels like it's going to explode!


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Ok, I have not listened, and will not listen to her drivel, but others have and are shocked at the level of narcissism.  They obviously have not been keeping up with this forum




The exaggeration of her feelings must be traumatising to anyone who has actually experienced real trauma.

This whole hokum started when therapists and health professionals started saying that emotional and verbal abuse is equal to sexual and physical abuse and everything is relative. It was a commercial ploy to widen the appeal of therapy, now everyone's parents and employers are equally offensive whether someone is physically assaulted, had to be hospitalised, or has been 'subjected' to the incorrect pronoun on one occasion by mistake.


----------



## WingNut

papertiger said:


> There should be 12 (if I remember correctly  ) still, as you observed Diva was certainly not one of them. I'm actually wondering if M went to school let alone university (double-major   )
> 
> Diva comes from the divine - and _Diva Assoluta_ is the highest rank of female opera singer possible; please call me diva anytime you like  .
> 
> Freud had his types too, he used them as diagnostic tools and provided a shorthand of reaction to a type of infant-care narrative. Not labelling or diagnosing anyone but phallic- aggressive suits M when she is alone, but she presents as a classic-hysteric, and anal- expulsive suits Haz-been-&-gone.
> 
> *Phallic Aggressive*
> Vain, aggressive, and self-centered, you are preoccupied with matters of power and dominance. Metaphorically, your personality style may be described as the five-year-old who discovered that his genitals were able to provide him with a sense of pleasure, and who was immensely proud to have made this discovery. Flaunting his genitals to the world and believing himself to be special because of them, the five-year-old you did not learn to associate achievement with effort, thinking instead that achievement was something that followed passively from one's intrinsic magnificence. As a result, the adult you has an easy time convincing himself that he is superior to others and often feels entitled to special treatment, even though you may have developed little in the way of actual skills to act as a foundation for your affected superiority.
> 
> Additionally, the five-year-old you mistook the pleasurable sensations that his genitals were able to provide for the very reason for having genitals, knowing nothing about their wider reproductive purposes. In the same way, the adult you is often confused with regards to his own thoughts and motivations, steering mindlessly towards praise and gratification, while ignoring the wider questions of fairness and reciprocity. Since in your mind, success depends on intrinsic magnificence, and not on conscious effort, you are wont to believe that any criticism of you, or denial of gratification that you feel entitled to, is really is a denial of your intrinsic worth and a mean-spirited attempt to take it away - a castration attempt, as it were. Hence, the adult you tends to lose all sense of proportion when criticized, overreacting and responding in full force to even the mildest of criticisms.
> 
> *Classic Hysteric*
> Having a strong need for attention and affection, you are not one to sit idly by, hoping that these things will come to you of their own accord. Instead you actively crave center stage and seek the notice of those around you through a series of attention-grabbing behaviors such as dramatized emotions, sexualized conduct and clothing, witty and eccentric manners, and so on. Notoriously fickle and flighty, you often find yourself chasing the latest colorful image that has presented itself to your imagination instead of working out the implications of a topic in detail. (By the time someone engages you on the nitty-gritty, you have already moved on to another topic.) Metaphorically, your personality style may be likened to a teenage girl whose uterus is twisting and turning, first to the one side, then to the other, causing emotional turmoil as it craves impregnation from the outside while at the same time resisting any definite commitment to it. In the same way, your actual personality is both sexually flirtatious and expressively overdramatic as a means of capturing people's attention.
> While your spontaneous amiability may sometimes lead people to think that you are either propositioning them or their new best friend, the reality is that for you, these enticing behaviors are not necessarily meant as anything but ways of getting them to notice you and care.
> 
> *Anal Expulsive: *
> Being temperamentally careless and messy, your personal relationships are intense but unstable. You also have a habit of shifting back and forth between over-idealizing and derogating the people in your life. Restless and having a strong need for stimulation, you may sometimes act recklessly just to "keep things feeling fresh," thereby exposing yourself and others to danger and hurt in the process. Your erratic emotional life leads you to experience intense ups and downs and may cause you to confuse sex with intimacy as it all blurs together in your mind-blowingly fast-paced life. Metaphorically, your personality style may be described as the toddler who did not see the point of potty training and resisted it, instead defecating whenever he felt like it. Because you never learned to reign in your urges in toddlerhood, you are incapable of moderating your search for adventure and excitement in adulthood. Hence you may leap from project to project and partner to partner, always pining for instant success instead of staying with a single prospect for the long haul and bringing it to success by "holding it in" until fruition.


This is awesome, and fascinatingly true!


----------



## Redbirdhermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Serena is full of it.
> 
> Do y'all know the story of how she met her husband? They were at a café and she went up to him to tell him he couldn't sit where he was sitting because she needed her space. I don't know about you, that wouldn't have endeared her to me at all. Maybe Raptor and her are more alike than we think, though Serena obviously has talent and work ethics.


Not quite the story that Serena and Alexis tell.  He was hungover and missed breakfast at the hotel in Rome, so went to the pool area where they were still serving.   It was a big area with lots of empty tables, and he parks himself next to the only group there.  One of Serena's companions pipes up and says,  trying to get him to move, there was a rat under that table.  Alexis cheerfully replies that he is from NYC and is not afraid of rats.  Serena then strikes up a conversation with him about how he's not afraid of rats, and finds out that he is in Rome for a conference.   She asks how the speakers are, and he says he is a speaker.   Serena now knows he is good-looking, cheerful,  and accomplished.   And, at some point he finally figures out who these people are.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Serena is full of it.
> 
> Do y'all know the story of how she met her husband? They were at a café and she went up to him to tell him he couldn't sit where he was sitting because she needed her space. I don't know about you, that wouldn't have endeared her to me at all. Maybe Raptor and her are more alike than we think, though Serena obviously has talent and work ethics.


So Alexis Ohanian must be attracted to dominating women too


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> I just can't stand the word salad! The drivel MM spouts truly is preposterously insulting! My head feels like it's going to explode!


If I had a nickel for every time she uses the word "lens" I could buy a Birkin....if Hermes would let me.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> No.
> 
> A housing unit is something that a council, builder or town planner will talk about to individualise a single unit for a person or persons within a much bigger plan/scheme when the 'unit' is an unspecified, in proposal, planning stages.
> 
> Meghan's not from the UK, she just can't speak English (US or British versions) as her use of 'unfeel' demonstrates. She makes things up as she goes along, just like her memory.


It makes me think of public housing. It seems condescending and passive aggressive. "The residence" would have been more appropriate. It's nicer than their tacky mansion anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Ok, I have not listened, and will not listen to her drivel, but others have and are shocked at the level of narcissism.  They obviously have not been keeping up with this forum



My 2 cents: 

There is a transcript of the podcast circulating on the net. I tried to read it with an open mind, but it's so uninspiring. So much stupidity and self-serving condensed in ~1h. It's embarrassing to have these people talking about women's issues.

I admire SW for her tennis achievements, and I wish she would be grateful for them and use her name, money and talent to advance worthy causes. She downgraded herself with her participation on that podcast about me, me, and I.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> It makes me think of public housing. It seems condescending and passive aggressive. "The residence" would have been more appropriate. It's nicer than their tacky mansion anyway.



Meghan's mind is colonialist by nature not construct. She should be ashamed but she doesn't know the meaning of the word or feeling of shame. .


----------



## 1LV

Cinderlala said:


> 12 episodes?!  Who could handle listening to Skeeter 12 times???????


“Skeeter”. . . My favorite yet.  Never fails to make me smile.  High five, Cinderlala.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> If I had a nickel for every time she uses the word "lens" I could buy a Birkin....if Hermes would let me.



She uses a lot of words that indicate she can think objectively and feel subjectively, unfortunately MegatronZZZ only has one speed and one depth of logic and awareness, and that is unilateral Me-aghainZZZ'-POV.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> So now Serena considers her a dear friend? I can't keep up anymore.



I doubt she is anyone's dear friend


----------



## charlottawill

"Today" is finally catching on....



> https://www.today.com/video/meghan-...pes-podcast-with-serena-williams-146881093599


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> If I had a nickel for every time she uses the word "lens" I could buy a Birkin....if Hermes would let me.


Beyoncé says Birkins are out now.


----------



## lanasyogamama

“Dear friend” is the newest overused expression.


----------



## Chanbal

_Meghan Markle would have known that the 'show must go on' and her engagements had to continue after a 'fire' broke out in her son Archie's room in South Africa where he was meant to be sleeping, a royal expert said today.

Archie, then four months old, was not in the room in Cape Town when a heater started to smoke - but the incident left the Duchess of Sussex 'shaken' and 'in tears', she told tennis star Serena Williams in her new podcast.

Others are understood to recall the incident which took place on September 23, 2019 - *and while they do not remember there actually being a fire, the heater was certainly smoking and was unplugged and dealt with.

There would undoubtedly have been an expectation for Harry and Meghan to go on with their engagements after months of planning on the ground – but as senior royals, the couple would have had the final say on continuing.*_









						Royal expert says 'show must go on' after fire in Archie's room
					

Archie, then four months old, was not in the room in Cape Town when the heater began to smoke - but the incident left the Duchess of Sussex 'shaken' and 'in tears'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

She is not made for working life…


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> I wonder what Meghan we've been seeing up to now. It's alll about MEEEEEE!!
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect 'the Real Me' on New Podcast: 'I'm Just Excited to Be Myself'​
> Meet Meghan Markle!
> 
> In a promo for her new Spotify podcast Archetypes, which debuted on the platform Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex shared what her listeners will hear.
> 
> Sitting on a couch in front of a microphone, Meghan says, "People should expect the real me in this, and probably the me that they've never gotten to know — certainly not in the past few years, where everything is through the lens of the media as opposed to, 'Hey, it's me.' "
> 
> "I'm just excited to be myself and talk and be unfiltered and...yeah, it's fun," she adds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says Listeners Can Expect the Real Me in New Podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she's "just excited to be myself" in a promo for her new Spotify podcast, Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


The tragedy! Imagine being stiffled, erm... I mean silenced for a whole *3%* of your life.
I don’t know how she managed to get through those TWO WHOLE YEARS!!! 
She’s so brave. I mean, the courage. Really.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> 2 from Sky
> 
> Royal Outcast pays the Vicim Card
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "totally self-obsessed"



Thanks for posting this, the 2nd video is brilliant imo!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this, the 2nd video is brilliant imo!


Her talking about the "experiencing the pain that I'm going through" behind closed doors was just cringeworthy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> So Alexis Ohanian must be attracted to dominating women too


Perhaps dominating women with money  



charlottawill said:


> So now Serena considers her a dear friend? I can't keep up anymore.



This photo is from the US Open in 2019.  Serena is using an old photo to promote this podcast.  Can’t make this stuff up.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> It makes me think of public housing. It seems condescending and passive aggressive. "The residence" would have been more appropriate. It's nicer than their tacky mansion anyway.



This is what I thought when I heard she used the term "housing unit", that it was some kind of public housing facility which made no sense.  Of course, they stayed in a gorgeous mansion that looks so much more elegant than their own home.

The whole "fire" story shows her complete lack of understanding of her former role and a lack of respect for her hosts.  I would never embarrass my host or the host country by discussing such a minor event, nobody was hurt, the baby wasn't even in the room, it was a smoking heater that they unplugged, problem solved. The drama, always the drama, with this woman.  I can only imagine the Queen, PC, Will, and the rest of the family just rolling their eyes at this latest story.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps dominating women with money
> 
> 
> This photo is from the US Open in 2019.  Serena is using an old photo to promote this podcast.  Can’t make this stuff up.


Because that's the only photo she could dig up of her and her dear friend


----------



## CarryOn2020

MartyrMeghan


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## AbbytheBT

Aimee3 said:


> I have never heard the expression “housing unit” before.  Is it a common term in the uK?


In the Western U.S. - where Meghan is from, “housing unit” conjures up visions of: Migrant worker housing, separate staff quarters, barracks, dorms, section 8 (public housing), multi-family dwellings, military compounds, even assisted living facilities for the elderly. 

All of it devoid of anything but the basics, and meant to imply minimal shelter and facilities.  When I first heard that description, I actually envisioned a small, (but safe) military compound or modest foreign service temporary quarters.

Ohh - just little ole me - a regular govt worker. NOT!

Having worked here in the US and abroad with real Dip Corps personnel - both appointed and civil service from various countries, I sense that she imagines herself in this realm. But clearly lacking in any diplomatic skill, training, self-knowledge or allegiance to her “employer”.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> "Today" is finally catching on....


really?  doesn't really seem negative to me


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> This is what I thought when I heard she used the term "housing unit", that it was some kind of public housing facility which made no sense.  Of course, they stayed in a gorgeous mansion that looks so much more elegant than their own home.
> 
> The whole "fire" story shows her complete lack of understanding of her former role and a lack of respect for her hosts.  I would never embarrass my host or the host country by discussing such a minor event, nobody was hurt, the baby wasn't even in the room, it was a smoking heater that they unplugged, problem solved. _*The drama, always the drama, with this woman. *_ I can only imagine the Queen, PC, Will, and the rest of the family just rolling their eyes at this latest story.


Rather than show gratitude for their hosts capable handling of a _potentially_ dangerous situation, she chooses to criticize and play the victim card.  As always, it rings hollow. Most people of privilege know _not_ to complain. Royals, in particular, know _not_ to complain.


----------



## sdkitty

adopting a dog always makes for positive press








						Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Rescued A Beagle And Her Name Will Make You Sing
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have added a third dog, a 7-year-old beagle, to their family, the LA Times reported.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bag-mania

adopting a dog always makes for positive press


sdkitty said:


> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Rescued A Beagle And Her Name Will Make You Sing
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have added a third dog, a 7-year-old beagle, to their family, the LA Times reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


I was just coming on to post that.

She is back to her go-to publicity move. Is this her answer to Bowers book? Bring on more rescue dogs! I wonder what happened to Gus, last decade’s rescue beagle.






						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Adopted a Rescue Beagle Named Mamma Mia
					

There's a new four-legged member of the Sussex family!




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps dominating women with money
> 
> 
> This photo is from the US Open in 2019.  Serena is using an old photo to promote this podcast.  Can’t make this stuff up.


Alexis has a net worth of 70 mill, he doesn't need her money


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> Alexis has a net worth of 70 mill, he doesn't need her money


agree, he doesn’t _need_ it, but it is nice to have it, no?

Tennis greats often have a difficult time post tennis.  Chris Evert and Martina have done well so expectations are high for SW.  If it turns out that she and MM are closer than we know, things may not go well.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> agree, he doesn’t _need_ it, but it is nice to have it, no?


Mehh..if anything he may have been attracted to her fame. But they named their daughter after HIM, so..


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> adopting a dog always makes for positive press
> 
> I was just coming on to post that.
> 
> She is back to her go-to publicity move. Is this her answer to Bowers book? Bring on more rescue dogs! I wonder what happened to Gus, last decade’s rescue beagle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Adopted a Rescue Beagle Named Mamma Mia
> 
> 
> There's a new four-legged member of the Sussex family!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I'm sure they have people to care for the dogs...I guess whatever the motive, they did rescue


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> adopting a dog always makes for positive press
> 
> I was just coming on to post that.
> 
> She is back to her go-to publicity move. Is this her answer to Bowers book? Bring on more rescue dogs! I wonder what happened to Gus, last decade’s rescue beagle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Adopted a Rescue Beagle Named Mamma Mia
> 
> 
> There's a new four-legged member of the Sussex family!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I wonder if this womans cell number was available to everyone or if M used her duchess title to obtain it


----------



## Toby93

Good times


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if this womans cell number was available to everyone or if M used her duchess title to obtain it


You have to laugh at Meghan’s  assumption that she would be immediately recognized. This is my favorite part of the story:

"She calls on my cell with no Caller ID and says, 'Hey Shannon, this is Meghan.' We talked for 30 minutes, and I thought, 'Is this Megan Fox?'"


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure they have people to care for the dogs...I guess whatever the motive, they did rescue


It’s nice they rescued an older dog but will they actually keep her and love her? Look at what happened to Bogart. Where is Gus these days?


----------



## purseinsanity

regnews said:


> View attachment 5596554
> 
> 
> There was no fire only a smoking heater and staff unplugged it..... Drama queen


I suppose this is yet another case of "Recollections may vary".


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> If I had a nickel for every time she uses the word "lens" I could buy a Birkin....if Hermes would let me.


Let's make it a drinking game!
Actually, let's not.  I would chug the whole bottle the first time just to pass out and not hear another word out of her.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> really?  doesn't really seem negative to me


The only negative thing I heard in that was Me-Gain's voice.


----------



## LittleStar88

purseinsanity said:


> I suppose this is yet another case of "Recollections may vary".



Right?! This woman seriously exists in her own reality. Smoking heater was a non-issue all this time. So insignificant that no one heard anything about it until she decides to make it a thing. Always exaggerating for her own personal gain and when it suits her.

It amazes me that she has the balls to complain about how hard life is for her now with her big paychecks, life of leisure, big mansion… While the rest of the country (and much of the world) struggles just to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table. She has zero awareness for anyone other than herself and she is just so obnoxious about it.

As for the beagle adoption, I LOL’d that the person had no idea who she really was for so far into the conversation and thought it was Meghan Fox  The bright side to her adopting the beagle is knowing that there’s likely staff to care for the dog so no need to worry about Meghan running it over or ignoring it. That little cutie will have a life much better than where it came from.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’s nice they rescued an older dog but will they actually keep her and love her? Look at what happened to Bogart. Where is Gus these days?


well if we want to be cynical and think they did this for the publicity, then hopefully someone in the household will give the dog care and attention....it seemed nice that harry asked about the dog's toy but that could have been rehearsed


----------



## gracekelly

My husband’s comment about the fire was to express surprise that she is only talking about it now  He said it doesn’t make sense and if it was that bad we would have heard about it at the time. I had to tell him that the baby wasn’t even in the room when it occurred.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> adopting a dog always makes for positive press
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, Prince Harry Rescued A Beagle And Her Name Will Make You Sing
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have added a third dog, a 7-year-old beagle, to their family, the LA Times reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com





bag-mania said:


> adopting a dog always makes for positive press
> 
> I was just coming on to post that.
> 
> She is back to her go-to publicity move. Is this her answer to Bowers book? Bring on more rescue dogs! I wonder what happened to Gus, last decade’s rescue beagle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Have Adopted a Rescue Beagle Named Mamma Mia
> 
> 
> There's a new four-legged member of the Sussex family!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


It's disgusting that they sent this story to news outlets.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this, the 2nd video is brilliant imo!


I got part-way through the second video and thought "what a load of old codswallop!".


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Has this been posted?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> The exaggeration of her feelings must be traumatising to anyone who has actually experienced real trauma.
> 
> This whole hokum started when therapists and health professionals started saying that emotional and verbal abuse is equal to sexual and physical abuse and everything is relative. It was a commercial ploy to widen the appeal of therapy, now everyone's parents and employers are equally offensive whether someone is physically assaulted, had to be hospitalised, or has been 'subjected' to the incorrect pronoun on one occasion by mistake.


I second this 1000%. Once I said to my daughter who was going through a difficult period that it helps to remember there are always others worse off. It was intended to be supportive but she nearly took my head off. Her therapist gave her that nonsense that her feelings are just as valid and important as anyone else's. Oy.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> I got part-way through the second video and thought "what a load of old codswallop!".



Same here, but I love that the Aussies have seen through her for a long time.


----------



## K.D.

Was reading on Reddit and came across a thread on r/all, What Brit at the moment needs to go away for a while? Lo and behold...


----------



## rose60610

If this "fire" actually occurred, it'd have made headlines around the world. It's just another lie she's pulling out of her *ss to get attention. Why didn't she tell Oprah about it? Because she didn't want to upset the BRF?  

And her "pain"?  Um, when I think of "pain" I don't think of somebody who clawed their way into the BRF, got a 50 million dollar wedding, private jet travel, perks and servants galore, designer wardrobes, etc then blast the family that gave all that to you. My empathy and admiration are reserved for people who bust their humps to make a living or are at least grateful for the help they've gotten in life. 

Her "pain"?  Well, she dumped the BRF, is living in a 14 million dollar mansion in Montecito, and has had a couple of years to "heal". But NO! She's in PAIN!  The only "pain" she deals with is being a pain in the *ss.  If Spotify is this stupid to pay her a fortune for her garbage, then it's made up of gullible idiots.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mellibelly said:


> The caption



Same pointy chin and smug face and evil to the core.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> You have to laugh at Meghan’s  assumption that she would be immediately recognized. This is my favorite part of the story:
> 
> "She calls on my cell with no Caller ID and says, 'Hey Shannon, this is Meghan.' We talked for 30 minutes, and I thought, 'Is this Megan Fox?'"



I have one relative who calls without Caller ID as well because oh so important. I know it's them most of the time but I refuse to call back unless they left a message


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> This is what I thought when I heard she used the term "housing unit", that it was some kind of public housing facility which made no sense. Of course, they stayed in a gorgeous mansion that looks so much more elegant than their own home.


I took "housing unit" as a slight, whether intentional or she just does it so much she isn't aware of it, but she also called it "the residence". Who knows how her mind works?


----------



## CobaltBlu

She is just so very extra.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, the account name


----------



## Kiradris

I won't listen to it, but I'm genuinely curious as to how her episode with Mariah Carey is going to go.  I can't imagine Mariah being okay with Meghan talking over her and pivoting to her own grievances when she's supposed to be be putting her guests at the center of each episode.  On the other hand, celebrities have been disappointing me in scores by their willingness to bend the knee to this shrew in public (*cough* Tyler Perry), so who knows.

Margaret Cho may be another interesting one in that she is a nasty piece of work like MM, and the two might have a super bonding experience over their shared love of spreading toxicity.  But again, I'll wait for River to hopefully do another one of his amazing reenactments on youtube instead of giving them ratings.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have one relative who calls without Caller ID as well because oh so important. I know it's them most of the time but I refuse to call back unless they left a message


My neighbour does the same,  she is 92 though so she's forgiven.


----------



## charlottawill

Kiradris said:


> I won't listen to it, but I'm genuinely curious as to how her episode with Mariah Carey is going to go.  I can't imagine Mariah being okay with Meghan talking over her and pivoting to her own grievances when she's supposed to be be putting her guests at the center of each episode.  On the other hand, celebrities have been disappointing me in scores by their willingness to bend the knee to this shrew in public (*cough* Tyler Perry), so who knows.
> 
> Margaret Cho may be another interesting one in that she is a nasty piece of work like MM, and the two might have a super bonding experience over their shared love of spreading toxicity.  But again, I'll wait for River to hopefully do another one of his amazing reenactments on youtube instead of giving them ratings.



Maybe after the negative press for the first episode she and others will wise up and back out.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> really?  doesn't really seem negative to me


Not so much negative as more factual than the woman who usually does the royal report from in front of BP. It is the first time I've heard mention on Today of the estrangement between W&H.


----------



## Kiradris

charlottawill said:


> Maybe after the negative press for the first episode she and others will wise up and back out.


I think they are already recorded at this point, the best her producers could do is take the feedback in stride and edit them as best they can to reduce Meghan's air time (not that she'd allow that, but still).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A quick question for y'all. If your home - that also happens to have a somewhat fire-sensitive roof - burns to the point parts of it collapse...wouldn't that be the sign for you to install smoke detectors? Just throwing that out there.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> MartyrMeghan




She is beyond tiresome. I hope Spotify finally cancels their contract after this garbage.


----------



## 1LV

CobaltBlu said:


> She is just so very extra.
> 
> View attachment 5596744


Anyone missing a lamp shade?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A quick question for y'all. If your home - that also happens to have a somewhat fire-sensitive roof - burns to the point parts of it collapse...wouldn't that be the sign for you to install smoke detectors? Just throwing that out there.


That's a very reasonable question but laws vary from country to country. I would guess that given the importance of the residence that there are smoke detectors present along with things like an alarm system.


----------



## mellibelly

She brought up the space heater story to bring the focus back to herself after Serena spoke about her baby daughter breaking her wrist and Serena only getting 30 minutes of sleep before playing in a grand slam match. It just proves how she’ll do anything to get out of work, even work as cushy as shaking some hands at an event. No wonder it took 2 years and 26 people to produce this crap podcast! She’s incapable of any job other than a D list supporting cable actress. Much ambition


----------



## andrashik

rose60610 said:


> If this "fire" actually occurred, it'd have made headlines around the world. It's just another lie she's pulling out of her *ss to get attention. Why didn't she tell Oprah about it? Because she didn't want to upset the BRF?
> 
> And her "pain"?  Um, when I think of "pain" I don't think of somebody who clawed their way into the BRF, got a 50 million dollar wedding, private jet travel, perks and servants galore, designer wardrobes, etc then blast the family that gave all that to you. My empathy and admiration are reserved for people who bust their humps to make a living or are at least grateful for the help they've gotten in life.
> 
> Her "pain"?  Well, she dumped the BRF, is living in a 14 million dollar mansion in Montecito, and has had a couple of years to "heal". But NO! She's in PAIN!  The only "pain" she deals with is being a pain in the *ss.  If Spotify is this stupid to pay her a fortune for her garbage, then it's made up of gullible idiots.


Yeah, Spotify should have invested the money donated ( to HM) in a better app. Lately it has a lot of bugs


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> She brought up the space heater story to bring the focus back to herself after Serena spoke about her baby daughter breaking her wrist and Serena only getting 30 minutes of sleep before playing in a grand slam match.



I cannot stand people who do that. "That happened to you? Well listen to what happened to me...".


----------



## mellibelly

Kiradris said:


> I'll wait for River to hopefully do another one of his amazing reenactments on youtube instead of giving them ratings.


The River reenactment was so funny I watched it twice. He really read her for filth didn’t he? If he covers every single episode it’ll make the whole stupid podcast worth it


----------



## charlottawill

There is a story on my TV right now about the Harkles adopting the dog, a beagle they named Mamma Mia Markle. A rep from the LA rescue says Markle saw a story on the news about beagles being rescued from a testing lab and contacted them to adopt one. Rep says the dog ran right up to H&M when they got there. A match made in heaven apparently. Not that it had anything to do with Bower's book release.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> She brought up the space heater story to bring the focus back to herself after Serena spoke about her baby daughter breaking her wrist and Serena only getting 30 minutes of sleep before playing in a grand slam match. It just proves how she’ll do anything to get out of work, even work as cushy as shaking some hands at an event. No wonder it took 2 years and 26 people to produce this crap podcast! She’s incapable of any job other than a D list supporting cable actress. Much ambition


Isn't it considered bad manners to try to one-up your guest? She has to always be the focus of attention.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A quick question for y'all. If your home - that also happens to have a somewhat fire-sensitive roof - burns to the point parts of it collapse...wouldn't that be the sign for you to install smoke detectors? Just throwing that out there.



Most insurers _insist_ on smoke and heat detectors in most houses/flats/apartments


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> Anyone missing a lamp shade?



Yes, but mine wouldn't be banged-up, squashed, and f.ugly


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> There is a story on my TV right now about the Harkles adopting the dog, a beagle they named Mamma Mia Markle. A rep from the LA rescue says Markle saw a story on the news about beagles being rescued from a testing lab and contacted them to adopt one. Rep says the dog ran right up to H&M when they got there. A match made in heaven apparently. Not that it had anything to do with Bower's book release.


I thought the dog was already named Mamma Mia by the rescue people. She was one of the 4,000 beagles rescued from the Envigo breeding plant in Cumberland, VA. If any good comes of this story perhaps other people will want to adopt one of the beagles which otherwise might have ended up in a laboratory.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I cannot stand people who do that. "That happened to you? Well listen to what happened to me...".



Someone must have told her reciprocal 'sharing' was a demonstration of empathy   Unfortunately, the narc in her has to make it a competitive sport.

In this case Serena doesn't have to prove herself in sport and let the narc win. S' baby was actually hurt and she pushed herself to go to work and win with only 30 mins sleep - that's the show must go on attitude the BRF demonstrates. Good for Serena, shame your 'dear friend' didn't actually listen and doesn't have that famous American work ethic.


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well.
> 
> View attachment 5596749


That article says 1999, not 2019. I doubt Meghan went THAT far back for a story


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> That article says 1999, not 2019. I doubt Meghan went THAT far back for a story


Someone probably told her about it when they were staying there and she filed it away for future reference. Would not put it past her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> That article says 1999, not 2019. I doubt Meghan went THAT far back for a story



Fair enough, but I still find it interesting that the whole thing nearly burned down and Raptor wants to tell us there are no smoke detectors or other security measures.


----------



## TC1

charlottawill said:


> Someone probably told her about it when they were staying there and she filed it away for future reference. Would not put it past her.


Yeah, but the person who tweeted it didn't even notice the article was 20 years old? Come on now


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> Yeah, but the person who tweeted it didn't even notice the article was 20 years old? Come on now


They may have and drawn the same conclusion I did, that she heard the story while staying there and it inspired her tale of trauma. Pathological liars are very good at weaving stories drawn on the experiences of others.


----------



## andrashik




----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I second this 1000%. Once I said to my daughter who was going through a difficult period that it helps to remember there are always others worse off. It was intended to be supportive but she nearly took my head off. Her therapist gave her that nonsense that her feelings are just as valid and important as anyone else's. Oy.


Part of the problem is there are so many "therapists", and many are not actually qualified (ButterUp anyone?).  I really feel like the US takes things to such extremes.  Whether it's cancel culture, MeToo movement, diets, plastic surgeries, etc., etc., etc., now mental health.  Again, I know that are MANY people with serious mental illnesses and I am not referring to them.  Those people truly do need help; however, there are so many quacks now that encourage antidepressants and anti anxiety meds, even marijuana for teens for "stress".  WTAF.  Feeling down, stressed at times, anxiety in certain situations is a PART OF LIFE.  One MUST learn how to deal with these things and cope.  Mental health is such a catch phrase that it's become a cop out to avoid living.  

I saw a 13 year old who weighed almost 300 lbs and had high blood pressure and was pre diabetic (not because she had Type I Diabetes but because of obesity) who was smoking "medical marijuana" before it was legalized in CA.  I asked her mother WTF she was on it for (I wondered if the mother was helping herself to it as well), and she replied, "For her weight.  She doesn't want to eat without it."    I told her I don't think under eating is her problem, but her hypertension and diabetes would kill her earlier than she should, and whatever doctor actually prescribed it for her "under eating" should be reported to the medical board.    I also felt the mother should be thrown in jail, but that's neither here nor there.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> I thought the dog was already named Mamma Mia by the rescue people. She was one of the 4,000 beagles rescued from the Envigo breeding plant in Cumberland, VA. If any good comes of this story perhaps other people will want to adopt one of the beagles which otherwise might have ended up in a laboratory.



ONCE AGAIN she has to glom onto a news story to be relevant. Why couldn't she adopt a dog from a plain pound? 

And, when somebody publicizes that they "RESCUED" a dog, it's usually code for "we know we're unpopular so this is just a suck up maneuver to make stupid people think we're great".  If you're a celebrity and rescue an animal, great, but shoving the fact in people's faces is a publicity stunt. Can't she do anything and just STFU about it?


----------



## Toby93

Kiradris said:


> I won't listen to it, but I'm genuinely curious as to how her episode with Mariah Carey is going to go.  I can't imagine Mariah being okay with Meghan talking over her and pivoting to her own grievances when she's supposed to be be putting her guests at the center of each episode.  On the other hand, celebrities have been disappointing me in scores by their willingness to bend the knee to this shrew in public (*cough* Tyler Perry), so who knows.
> 
> Margaret Cho may be another interesting one in that she is a nasty piece of work like MM, and the two might have a super bonding experience over their shared love of spreading toxicity.  But again, I'll wait for River to hopefully do another one of his amazing reenactments on youtube instead of giving them ratings.


I had Spot*fy, but cancelled last spring after I heard that the gruesome twosome were paid all that money for a podcast.  I mentioned this to my daughter, so she signed up for the free month.  She got 3 minutes into it, and had to shut it off  I told her if she is going to listen to it then she should do it in 5 min intervals. 

I'm also curious to see what Mariah Carey says.  She is quite a diva, so I wonder if TW lovebombing her, like she did to SW will work?  I saw the video a few pages back and it was quite nauseating to hear the 2 of them complimenting each other  I know I won't have to listen to it as there will be plenty to see right here.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> ONCE AGAIN she has to glom onto a news story to be relevant. Why couldn't she adopt a dog from a plain pound?
> 
> And, when somebody publicizes that they "RESCUED" a dog, it's usually code for "we know we're unpopular so this is just a suck up maneuver to make stupid people think we're great".  If you're a celebrity and rescue an animal, great, but shoving the fact in people's faces is a publicity stunt. Can't she do anything and just STFU about it?


yes, I think you nailed it....she can do this pretty easily and some staff person will feed and care for the dog....she and H get the good press


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Part of the problem is there are so many "therapists", and many are not actually qualified (ButterUp anyone?).  I really feel like the US takes things to such extremes.  Whether it's cancel culture, MeToo movement, diets, plastic surgeries, etc., etc., etc., now mental health.  Again, I know that are MANY people with serious mental illnesses and I am not referring to them.  Those people truly do need help; however, there are so many quacks now that encourage antidepressants and anti anxiety meds, even marijuana for teens for "stress".  WTAF.  Feeling down, stressed at times, anxiety in certain situations is a PART OF LIFE.  One MUST learn how to deal with these things and cope.  Mental health is such a catch phrase that it's become a cop out to avoid living.
> 
> I saw a 13 year old who weighed almost 300 lbs and had high blood pressure and was pre diabetic (not because she had Type I Diabetes but because of obesity) who was smoking "medical marijuana" before it was legalized in CA.  I asked her mother WTF she was on it for (I wondered if the mother was helping herself to it as well), and she replied, "For her weight.  She doesn't want to eat without it."    I told her I don't think under eating is her problem, but her hypertension and diabetes would kill her earlier than she should, and whatever doctor actually prescribed it for her "under eating" should be reported to the medical board.    I also felt the mother should be thrown in jail, but that's neither here nor there.



Sadly, I am seeing the next generation of children/young adults being conditioned to accept medicalisation (and labels) for many different reasons,  it makes each child and parent feel special. Special, it's not their fault they're not perfect or gifted or 'normal' it's because they have to cope with something special. It used to be everyone hated to be normal, now normal is far too boring, and worse still it doesn't require a lifetime of drugs and treatment. I do not mean to take away from all kinds of real learning diverse kids and adults, there are amazing natural compensations for so-called disabilities, some just need a clear strategy and/or coping mechanisms. Medicine, stringent diets, on-going therapy, long-term legalised drug-taking or even surgery should be last resorts.

That is why Harry is pushing mental health programmes and Alexis Ohanian is investing in them. They are a huge and growing market. They are normalising abnormality.

Normal adults would do well to do a bit of introspection, do a course, go on a retreat or take a spa weekend now and again, you don't have to sign-up to accepting there's something wrong with you before you do them.

First you convince a lot of people they are (mentally) ill, even if they are the downs of fife, how else can you sell them (mental) health?

Snake-oil.

Edited to say: Actually, this is gas-lighting on a grand scale 
​


----------



## gracekelly

Cosmopolitan said:


> Has this been posted?



Either he is negotiating with the family or someone is afraid of a lawsuit.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Sadly, I am seeing the next generation of children/young adults being conditioned to accept medicalisation (and labels) for many different reasons,  it makes each child and parent feel special. Special, it's not their fault they're not perfect or gifted or 'normal' it's because they have to cope with something special. It used to be everyone hated to be normal, now normal is far too boring, and worse still it doesn't require a lifetime of drugs and treatment. I do not mean to take away from all kinds of real learning diverse kids and adults, there are amazing natural compensations for so-called disabilities, some just need a clear strategy and/or coping mechanisms. Medicine, stringent diets, on-going therapy, long-term legalised drug-taking or even surgery should be last resorts.
> 
> That is why Harry is pushing mental health programmes and Alexis Ohanian is investing in them. They are a huge and growing market. They are normalising abnormality.
> 
> Normal adults would do well to do a bit of introspection, do a course, go on a retreat or take a spa weekend now and again, you don't have to sign-up to accepting there's something wrong with you before you do them.
> 
> First you convince a lot of people they are (mentally) ill, even if they are the downs of fife, how else can you sell them (mental) health?
> 
> Snake-oil.
> 
> Edited to say: Actually, this is gas-lighting on a grand scale
> ​


Society is edging closer to Brave New World.  Everyone will be medicated and if you refuse, you will be an outlier.   You know the expression _there's an app for that?_  Welcome to _there is a medication for that._


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


>



No one asked him if he’s ok?!!?


----------



## mellibelly

Everyone “in tears and shaken” from a smoking space heater…how much do you want to bet it was the bullied staff afraid to tell Meggie Jong-il about the malfunctioning small appliance?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> ONCE AGAIN she has to glom onto a news story to be relevant. Why couldn't she adopt a dog from a plain pound?
> 
> And, when somebody publicizes that they "RESCUED" a dog, it's usually code for "we know we're unpopular so this is just a suck up maneuver to make stupid people think we're great".  If you're a celebrity and rescue an animal, great, but shoving the fact in people's faces is a publicity stunt. Can't she do anything and just STFU about it?


You mean do a good deed without telling the press? What’s the point!?


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> Either he is negotiating with the family or someone is afraid of a lawsuit.


Or maybe H&M need more time to "create" context since the ghost writer bailed??  Ya know, make it up as you go!!


----------



## rose60610

Well, you know, she said that she "loves rescuing things", hence the chickens and dogs. For every animal she's rescued, she's burnt ten bridges.  So she sure doesn't care about maintaining any relationships after she thinks she can do better. She destroys them after she's moved on. It isn't enough for her to simply move on and be friends, she thinks she has to torch them so people will side with HER instead of those who supported her.  It's like she got blasted for leaving the BRF so she had to invent inflammatory things about them to say "See, I'm lucky to have escaped. But Haz was still begging Daddy to ride in his Bently to the Jublilee event at church and nobody let us sit in the aisle".


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> There is a story on my TV right now about the Harkles adopting the dog, a beagle they named Mamma Mia Markle. A rep from the LA rescue says Markle saw a story on the news about beagles being rescued from a testing lab and contacted them to adopt one. Rep says the dog ran right up to H&M when they got there. A match made in heaven apparently. Not that it had anything to do with Bower's book release.


Adopt a dog; disown a Dad. He has the same soulful eyes from his look in recent pictures, maybe if he had droopier ears she could have adopted him instead?


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Well, you know, she said that she "loves rescuing things", hence the chickens and dogs. For every animal she's rescued, she's burnt ten bridges.  So she sure doesn't care about maintaining any relationships after she thinks she can do better. She destroys them after she's moved on. It isn't enough for her to simply move on and be friends, she thinks she has to torch them so people will side with HER instead of those who supported her.  It's like she got blasted for leaving the BRF so she had to invent inflammatory things about them to say "See, I'm lucky to have escaped. But Haz was still begging Daddy to ride in his Bently to the Jublilee event at church and nobody let us sit in the aisle".


Poor Mamma Mia. She’s 7, that’s two years older than Bogart was when Meghan said that he was “too old” to bring to the UK. I’m worried she may quietly disappear in the next year or two, never to be spoken of again.


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> Everyone “in tears and shaken” from a smoking space heater…how much do you want to bet it was the bullied staff afraid to tell Meggie Jong-il about the malfunctioning small appliance?


And she thinks she can be President of the United States, but can't handle the "trauma" of hearing about, not even experiencing, a malfunctioning space heater quickly disabled.  REALLLLLLLY?


----------



## Chanbal

Cosmopolitan said:


> Has this been posted?



_"Prince Harry’s hotly anticipated memoir may be pushed back to 2023, according to publishing sources."_

This could be a publicity stunt. What they call ‘_truth bombs_’ must to be released at the right time to maximize profits. 

_"The renegade prince’s book was due to be released in time for the holidays — the hottest time of the year for book sales — and would have gone head to head with Michelle *****’s latest book, “*The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times*,” out November 15"_. 

The right time to release his book may not be at the same time of MO's book. In Hazz's case, it's the darkness & ignorance he and TW seem to carry.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> _"Prince Harry’s hotly anticipated memoir may be pushed back to 2023, according to publishing sources."_
> 
> This could be a publicity stunt. What they call ‘_truth bombs_’ must to be released at the right time to maximize profits.
> 
> _"The renegade prince’s book was due to be released in time for the holidays — the hottest time of the year for book sales — and would have gone head to head with Michelle *****’s latest book, “*The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times*,” out November 15"_.
> 
> The right time to release his book may not be at the same time of MO's book. In Hazz's case, it's the darkness & ignorance he and TW seem to carry.


It’s presumptuous of them to imply that Harry and Michelle ***** will compete for the same reader. Very different audiences.   

No, there’s something wrong with the book and it needs more work or more vetting, or BOTH.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Either he is negotiating with the family or someone is afraid of a lawsuit.


I'm sure he is afraid to slam the door shut permanently in the event their financial pursuits all bomb and he has to crawl back to PC. In a piece on Today about the Cambridge's move they mentioned the close proximity of Frogmore Cottage to their new home. I shudder to think that the Sussexes would move back and then try to get their kids in the same school as the Cambridge kids. But then I remind myself that ZeeZy will never willingly move back. If Harry insisted on it, which is unlikely as long as she can keep him under her thumb, that would be the end of the marriage. She wanted to marry an Englishman with money, a title was a bonus, but she never intended to settle there permanently. Hazy's friends were right in questioning his judgment.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Poor Mamma Mia. She’s 7, that’s two years older than Bogart was when Meghan said that he was “too old” to bring to the UK. I’m worried she may quietly disappear in the next year or two, never to be spoken of again.


Let's hope a staffer will prevent that from happening.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Poor Mamma Mia. She’s 7, that’s two years older than Bogart was when Meghan said that he was “too old” to bring to the UK. I’m worried she may quietly disappear in the next year or two, never to be spoken of again.



PLUS, since this beagle was part of a program for lab experiment dogs , it must have some issues that would take a very sympathetic person to understand. And the only time Claw shows sympathy is when she's on camera, faking it. Poor dog!


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> There is a story on my TV right now about the Harkles adopting the dog, a beagle they named Mamma Mia Markle. A rep from the LA rescue says Markle saw a story on the news about beagles being rescued from a testing lab and contacted them to adopt one. Rep says the dog ran right up to H&M when they got there.


Just one more thing for the help to do.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It’s presumptuous of them to imply that Harry and Michelle ***** will compete for the same reader. Very different audiences.
> 
> No, there’s something wrong with the book and it needs more work or more vetting, or BOTH.


The light of one book can overshadow the other one. TW wouldn't tolerate that.   The possibilities are endless. The authors could still be in the blackmail negotiation phase, the lawyers didn't approve the book yet, lack of content and the publisher wants more info… From what I understood, the quality of the book is irrelevant for him to collect the $25M from the publisher.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Just one more thing for the help to do.


I'm sure some of them would rather have to deal with the dog than with her.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The light of one book can overshadow the other one. TW wouldn't tolerate that.   The possibilities are endless. The authors could still be in the blackmail negotiation phase, the lawyers didn't approve the book yet, lack of content and the publisher wants more info… From what I understood, the quality of the book is irrelevant for him to collect the $25M from the publisher.


Does the publisher leave themselves open to lawsuits if Harry’s book slanders people?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> It’s presumptuous of them to imply that Harry and Michelle ***** will compete for the same reader. *Very different audiences.*
> 
> No, there’s something wrong with the book and it needs more work or more vetting, or BOTH.


Yep.  One has an audience of literate people, the other will need him to do a book on tape.  Except I don't think he can read well out loud himself, so he'll have to keep his words small.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure some of them would rather have to deal with the dog than with her.


Any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, swipe for your daily dose of complete insanity.


----------



## Chanbal

The picture of TW, Dor*a and Arch*e was possibly taken when TW was talking to her troops.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Does the publisher leave themselves open to lawsuits if Harry’s book slanders people?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #1
					

I haven't listened to the new podcast by the alliterate one so can't comment on it other than 28 people working on a 57 minute episode is in...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  One has an audience of literate people, the other will need him to do a book on tape.  Except I don't think he can read well out loud himself, so he'll have to keep his words small.


But, but, but, he has potential help from in house reader with Disney experience, TW who can do everything.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, swipe for your daily dose of complete insanity.



I'm not seeing any of the pics you post.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

I just did a Google search of top Spotify podcasts.  Will Number 2 be good enough?


----------



## charlottawill

Well here's one of the many people who won't be listening...


----------



## needlv

So if you want a laugh this blogger has a breakdown of MM’s podcast and H’s trip to Rwanda.









						[Double Bill] – Royal Round-Up: 24th August
					

Hello again!– And now for something a little more current, as promised! Let’s take a look at the royal ‘highlights’ from the last week…. The Cambridges move to Berkshi…




					thecrownsofbritain.com
				




My favourite part:

_She then went on to moan about how utterly shocking it was that she was expected to work after hearing the terrible news that a bit of smoke came out of a wire and her baby was nowhere near at the time._
….

_Meghan dearest, I’ve had a parent spent large swathes of time on a ventilator over the last 3 years, not knowing day to day if she was going to live or die (which is quite a distraction, would you believe), amidst a million other personal issues, and I was still expected to hold down a full-time job, working 9+ hours a day. *And you’re upset because you couldn’t go home and put your feet up because nothinghappened*?

B**ch, try working in corporate – even if *you *die, they’ll still expect you to show up_.


----------



## Chanbal

Redbirdhermes said:


> I just did a Google search of top Spotify podcasts.  Will Number 2 be good enough?
> 
> View attachment 5596876


#2 is excellent, but not achieved with my contribution.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> _"Prince Harry’s hotly anticipated memoir may be pushed back to 2023, according to publishing sources."_
> 
> This could be a publicity stunt. What they call ‘_truth bombs_’ must to be released at the right time to maximize profits.
> 
> _"The renegade prince’s book was due to be released in time for the holidays — the hottest time of the year for book sales — and would have gone head to head with Michelle *****’s latest book, “*The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times*,” out November 15"_.
> 
> The right time to release his book may not be at the same time of MO's book. In Hazz's case, it's the darkness & ignorance he and TW seem to carry.


Book date delayed ? Maybe … 
There are supposed to be 12 podcasts. Does anyone know how often they will release ?
At a week apart, that is still like 3 months when MM will be the talk of the town for her truth bombs
The book won’t come out til podcast finishes ?

Curious, how long was the Serena podcast ? Anyone know how long the Chelsea - Hillary podcasts are ? Curious how much material is there after edit8ng


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5596853
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> I haven't listened to the new podcast by the alliterate one so can't comment on it other than 28 people working on a 57 minute episode is in...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


answer to my question - podcast was 57 min, 2-3 hrs per day seems to be the norm for what I might listen to


----------



## marietouchet

Looked up if smoke detectors are used in Africa … Africa is a growing market for them, ie they are not currently used everywhere in Africa


----------



## youngster

Redbirdhermes said:


> I just did a Google search of top Spotify podcasts.  Will Number 2 be good enough?
> 
> View attachment 5596876



I have no doubt that her first few episodes will be high on Spotify's charts.  Spotify is giving it a big push because they have to recover some of their money and people will be genuinely curious. Will a substantial audience come back though and listen week after week?  What happens when she runs through her entire A-list of friends to appear? I guess she only has to come up with 12 guests since there are only going to be 12 episodes.  There is no way that 12 episodes justifies the millions Spotify spent.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I have no doubt that her first few episodes will be high on Spotify's charts.  Spotify is giving it a big push because they have to recover some of their money and people will be genuinely curious. Will a substantial audience come back though and listen week after week?  What happens when she runs through her entire A-list of friends to appear? I guess she only has to come up with 12 guests since there are only going to be 12 episodes.  There is no way that 12 episodes justifies the millions Spotify spent.


Aalso Hillary and Chelsea are starting this week, quickly noted a YouTube review thereof that said  the show was cringe worthy


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps the negative reviews of the poddy have delayed Hazzie’s book.  Maybe he wrote about the fire-that-did-not-happen-because-alert-staff-unplugged-the-heater.  She stole his thunder


----------



## Redbirdhermes

youngster said:


> I have no doubt that her first few episodes will be high on Spotify's charts.  Spotify is giving it a big push because they have to recover some of their money and people will be genuinely curious. Will a substantial audience come back though and listen week after week?  What happens when she runs through her entire A-list of friends to appear? I guess she only has to come up with 12 guests since there are only going to be 12 episodes.  There is no way that 12 episodes justifies the millions Spotify spent.


It will be interesting to see the ratings of future episodes.  I’m a huge Serena Williams fan and I can’t be bothered to join Spotify even for her.  Heck, my own daughter has had a podcast for the past five years (now up to Episode 44), and I gave up on hers somewhere around Episode 5.  The target audience will probably be Meghan fans, but without good content her ratings will drop.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be warned, Hazzi. This could be you.  Check your book carefully.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love love Tourre’s honesty:


----------



## youngster

Redbirdhermes said:


> It will be interesting to see the ratings of future episodes.  I’m a huge Serena Williams fan and I can’t be bothered to join Spotify even for her.  Heck, my own daughter has had a podcast for the past five years (now up to Episode 44), and I gave up on hers somewhere around Episode 5.  The target audience will probably be Meghan fans, but without good content her ratings will drop.



I agree, people will tune in for an episode or two out of curiosity but if they find it a waste of time, they won't be back.  Also, to some extent, the ratings are almost immaterial if the movers and shakers in Hollywood, DC and NYC listen to this and decide that the "real Meghan" is vapid and talentless.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love Tourre’s honesty:



I used to like the NYT.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m convinced that the breakdown of  listeners of Achetypes is about 25% Meghan fans, 25% Meghan haters who want to make fun of her, and 50% various members of the media who know they’ll get clicks from both groups for anything they put out with her name in the headline.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

(~98% is really funny, sorry for the other ~2%)


----------



## Chanbal

One more…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

rose60610 said:


> PLUS, since this beagle was part of a program for lab experiment dogs , it must have some issues that would take a very sympathetic person to understand. And the only time Claw shows sympathy is when she's on camera, faking it. Poor dog!


Exactly.  I have volunteered for a rescue for 5 years and have had numerous foster dogs in my home.  The poor dogs that have not been socialized early on, take a long time to warm up to people.  It takes months for them to decompress and relax.

 I don't know how long these dogs have rescued from the lab, but it's doubtful that they would have an interest in any toy, never mind a favorite.  I don't believe the "Harry ran back for a toy" story.  As usual with this pair, everything is fabricated. (To tug at the heartstrings  )


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Redbirdhermes said:


> I just did a Google search of top Spotify podcasts.  Will Number 2 be good enough?
> 
> View attachment 5596876


I checked the Archetypes Spotify rankings in a few other countries.  It is also #2 in Great Britain, #4 in Australia, but is #1 in Canada.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Check the ratings in a week, a month.  Doubt this poddycast will be that high.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Exactly.  I have volunteered for a rescue for 5 years and have had numerous foster dogs in my home.  The poor dogs that have not been socialized early on, take a long time to warm up to people.  It takes months for them to decompress and relax.
> 
> I don't know how long these dogs have rescued from the lab, but it's doubtful that they would have an interest in any toy, never mind a favorite.  I don't believe the "Harry ran back for a toy" story.  As usual with this pair, everything is fabricated. (To tug at the heartstrings  )


That’s what worries me. It sounds like this particular dog was being used for breeding and has lived her whole life in a kennel. One would expect that she is not housebroken and has never been treated like a pet. She will need lots of love and patience to help her settle in to a completely different environment.


----------



## xincinsin

.


charlottawill said:


> So Alexis Ohanian must be attracted to dominating women too


No wonder Zedzed flashed her thighs at him at the tennis match.


Toby93 said:


> Because that's the only photo she could dig up of her and her dear friend


The only non-specific phoyo that they hoped no one could date.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well.
> 
> View attachment 5596749


Perhaps like the 3 day earlier marriage, they were there incognito 3 months earlier. And if they weren't, well, she has no issue embroidering tales from 3 years ago (Kate made me cry) or even 3 decades ago (my letter to P&G changed the world).


Kiradris said:


> I think they are already recorded at this point, the best her producers could do is take the feedback in stride and edit them as best they can to reduce Meghan's air time (not that she'd allow that, but still).


She is the star, you know. Her guests are all there to worship her.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't recall to have seen this one here yet.


----------



## Yanca

Megan keep saying this is me "unfiltered" like we would like her and adore her without the lens of the media, When she is always given favorable  optics by US based media because of the climate  of fear of being " cancelled" by the police mob. We see you Megain, and your fakeness  and that  is why you are not like. It's hypocrisy to the highest level to suggest that the Royal Family filtered her and " censor" what she has to say and do, as written by her mouthpiece Scobie- for sure by her edict- well Megain everybody has to have a filter, us peasants, regular folks and Politicians- it's laughable coming from her- who controls every aspect of her image- from her announcement drops, her back grid photos releases, her PR companies- she expects us to believe that in her podcast we will discover the  real her? The real Her is what the people that worked for her experienced- and she is " filtering their voices" with her NDAs and threats of lawsuits. The real her is what she does to her family and to the people that helped her that she no longer has use for- discarded and destroyed.
Her woe is me and bad for me I still have to do engagement when the heater malfunction while my child is not there's and he is safe is not relatable - especially to us common folks_do we have the privilege of telling our managers, can I not come today? my child almost had an accident but he is okay - but the "optics" can you just tell our patients our customers  & maybe they will understand?- She is tone deaf. She always has to settle score, she really thinks she is at par with Serena W who is the GOAT in Tennis and has accomplished so much.  I know that life is fair but I truly hope that Megain gets what she dished out and gets what she deserves.


----------



## Chanbal

Her minister of propaganda is working hard again…


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> Exactly.  I have volunteered for a rescue for 5 years and have had numerous foster dogs in my home.  The poor dogs that have not been socialized early on, take a long time to warm up to people.  It takes months for them to decompress and relax.
> 
> I don't know how long these dogs have rescued from the lab, but it's doubtful that they would have an interest in any toy, never mind a favorite.  I don't believe the "Harry ran back for a toy" story.  As usual with this pair, everything is fabricated. (To tug at the heartstrings  )



Maybe he got inspiration from this story?









						Rescue Beagle Loves Her First Toy So Much She Won't Even Put It Down To Eat
					

She's loving her new life so much.




					www.thedodo.com


----------



## Cocolo

I read on a British site, that each Cathedral, chapel etc has its own color runner. The chapel didn't have one in the color she wanted.  And Meghan opted instead for the bare marble floor.

Ignore this.  I was reading a few pages back, and thought the convo was current.  Oopsie.


----------



## Jayne1

So why is H's book on hold?

Still blackmailing his family and they won't budge?  Waiting for a death in the family?  Doesn't want to compete with other Christmas books coming out?  Lawyers getting nervous?


----------



## wisconsin

O


----------



## charlottawill

Redbirdhermes said:


> I just did a Google search of top Spotify podcasts.  Will Number 2 be good enough?
> 
> View attachment 5596876



#1 and #2 only serve to confirm my decision to avoid podcasts at all costs.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> So why is H's book on hold?



Probably because he said something so viciously outlandish that The Firm is responding to. Do I need proof? Why? The major media players never need proof to blurt out anything against their sacred cows.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Looked up if smoke detectors are used in Africa … Africa is a growing market for them, ie they are not currently used everywhere in Africa


But I have to believe detectors/alarms/sprinklers were present in the residence where they stayed, especially if it was rebuilt after a previous fire and it is occupied by a government official.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> _"Prince Harry’s hotly anticipated memoir may be pushed back to 2023, according to publishing sources."_
> 
> This could be a publicity stunt. What they call ‘_truth bombs_’ must to be released at the right time to maximize profits.
> 
> _"The renegade prince’s book was due to be released in time for the holidays — the hottest time of the year for book sales — and would have gone head to head with Michelle *****’s latest book, “*The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times*,” out November 15"_.
> 
> The right time to release his book may not be at the same time of MO's book. In Hazz's case, it's the darkness & ignorance he and TW seem to carry.


My Memwar by Prins Harry, Dook of Susex

I was born Sep 15, 1984.  Heres me as a cute litl boy.



Me with my famly: Daddy, Me, Willy & my Mommy



My mommy, she luvd me best, but she was kild by very bad peepal. She’s now an anjl and looks over me from above but shes done with Wil cuz he duzn’t need her anymoor.



Met this prostitoot cald Megan. She peed in the woods to make me fall in luv with her. I did. Thats me and her here. She swore we wood do grate things if I marrid her. So I did.



Here we are as a copal on our wedding day. The minut I sed I do she put a chane round my nek and yankd on it to make me do things.



She yankd and yankd til I couldnt say no.



She made me hate my famly cuz she sed the hole famly is racist xsep me.



Stay tooned cuz I wil write agan wen TW tells me what to write.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> (~98% is really funny, sorry for the other ~2%)




The female host is hilarious!  Thanks for sharing this!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> But I have to believe detectors/alarms/sprinklers were present in the residence where they stayed, especially if it was rebuilt after a previous fire and it is occupied by a government official.


However you look at it, the host/home owner/occupant has been insulted.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> My Memwar by Prins Harry, Dook of Susex
> 
> I was born Sep 15, 1984.  Heres me as a cute litl boy.
> View attachment 5597016
> 
> 
> Me with my famly: Daddy, Me, Willy & my Mommy
> View attachment 5597017
> 
> 
> My mommy, she luvd me best, but she was kild by very bad peepal. She’s now an anjl and looks over me from above but shes done with Wil cuz he duzn’t need her anymoor.
> View attachment 5597028
> 
> 
> Met this prostitoot cald Megan. She peed in the woods to make me fall in luv with her. I did. Thats me and her here. She swore we wood do grate things if I marrid her. So I did.
> View attachment 5597030
> 
> 
> Here we are as a copal on our wedding day. The minut I sed I do she put a chane round my nek and yankd on it to make me do things.
> View attachment 5597031
> 
> 
> She yankd and yankd til I couldnt say no.
> View attachment 5597032
> 
> 
> She made me hate my famly cuz she sed the hole famly is racist xsep me.
> View attachment 5597034
> 
> 
> Stay tooned cuz I wil write agan wen TW tells me what to write.


So heppy yuz wrot  dis.  Wuv it lotts. Thanx


----------



## zen1965

Toby93 said:


> Why would there be a heater in the room, in SA in the summer?  Every pic I've seen of them there, she is sleeveless.  I would think it would be too hot, if anything?
> 
> Edit: Sorry, just noticed that gracekelly posted the same thing


Which month did they visit SA? Was it September? Days would be spring-like with somewhat chilly nights.


marietouchet said:


> Looked up if smoke detectors are used in Africa … Africa is a growing market for them, ie they are not currently used everywhere in Africa


Africa or South Africa? 
Africa is a large continent with almost 50 countries. In light of its diversity and significant GDP spreads I would take generalising statements with a pinch of salt. South Africa is the 2nd riches country of the continent. On top of this, the High Commissioner‘s residence would adhere to UK standards.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Yep.  One has an audience of literate people, the other will need him to do a book on tape.  Except I don't think he can read well out loud himself, so he'll have to keep his words small.


He might not understand the words that the ghostwriter used.


charlottawill said:


>



Maybe her spokes-stooge Omid will call it reverse racism and denounce Africans for not supporting Supreme Leader Harry.


youngster said:


> I have no doubt that her first few episodes will be high on Spotify's charts.  Spotify is giving it a big push because they have to recover some of their money and people will be genuinely curious. Will a substantial audience come back though and listen week after week?  What happens when she runs through her entire A-list of friends to appear? I guess she only has to come up with 12 guests since there are only going to be 12 episodes.  There is no way that 12 episodes justifies the millions Spotify spent.


They needed to safeguard the first tranche of their payment. But subsequent tranches of media production contracts are usually tied to product delivery, so will Spotify come up with more advance $$$ or are they smart enough to cut their losses? 


Chanbal said:


> Her minister of propaganda is working hard again…



My doctor always enquires about bowel movements. Perhaps her P now includes Poo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not seeing any of the pics you post.



I had that very same problem a while ago with all embedded Instagram posts. It resolved itself so I still don't know what caused it. I found two ways around: use another browser and click the post to open it in another window, but it was super annoying.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I woke up to a German headline saying "[Raptor] and Harry: The Queen Agrees to the Divorce". 

Now I don't believe it's come up just yet, but I am positive she'd be overjoyed if Harry came to her with this very request.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I woke up to a German headline saying "[Raptor] and Harry: The Queen Agrees to the Divorce".
> 
> Now I don't believe it's come up just yet, but I am positive she'd be overjoyed if Harry came to her with this very request.


The way they blithely disrespect her, I'd have a hard time believing they would seek her approval for anything. And after the Lilibet debacle, TQ would have a dim view of any request from them, even if it was for a divorce.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> The way they blithely disrespect her, I'd have a hard time believing they would seek her approval for anything. And after the Lilibet debacle, TQ would have a dim view of any request from them, even if it was for a divorce.



The thing is, if Harry has one brain cell left he will know he'll need his family's support to manage said divorce.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure he is afraid to slam the door shut permanently in the event their financial pursuits all bomb and he has to crawl back to PC. In a piece on Today about the Cambridge's move they mentioned the close proximity of Frogmore Cottage to their new home. I shudder to think that the Sussexes would move back and then try to get their kids in the same school as the Cambridge kids. But then I remind myself that ZeeZy will never willingly move back. If Harry insisted on it, which is unlikely as long as she can keep him under her thumb, that would be the end of the marriage. She wanted to marry an Englishman with money, a title was a bonus, but she never intended to settle there permanently. Hazy's friends were right in questioning his judgment.



Good point. 

She came over to the UK to marry an Englishman. 

Did not occur to her that Englishmen usually live in England?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> (~98% is really funny, sorry for the other ~2%)




"If Spotify were smart they'd tape in front of a live audience and charge people to get out"  !

"FREE HARRY!"


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Good point.
> 
> She came over to the UK to marry an Englishman.
> 
> Did not occur to her that Englishmen usually live in England?


I wonder why she was deadset on finding a rich Englishman. Lots of rich men in the US and no culture clash. Why target Englishmen? We didn't read about her going to the Middle East or Asia or Russia to find a rich guy there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I wonder why she was deadset on finding a rich Englishman. Lots of rich men in the US and no culture clash. Why target Englishmen? We didn't read about her going to the Middle East or Asia or Russia to find a rich guy there.



I'm dying to know that as well. Always struck me as odd.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> I checked the Archetypes Spotify rankings in a few other countries.  It is also #2 in Great Britain, #4 in Australia, but is #1 in Canada.



Does it not occur to you that 'rankings' don't have to be _the_ truth, just companies' truth?

There are NO legal obligations to be factual in any company's_ own_ charts be truthful in "most popular' in your 'select by' function. It's all MARKETING my sweet children  

They are right up there with awards as a pay for loyal support, paid-for, or promotion for chasing non-recouped expenses. 

Most laws only govern hard advertising and using figures unfairly in comparisons to other companies (UK law)
It's is a well known tactic, right up there with 'sold out' when it hasn't arrived yet (but sign-up for notification) 'Limited Offer' (get orders in before EOM) etc.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I wonder why she was deadset on finding a rich Englishman. Lots of rich men in the US and no culture clash. Why target Englishmen? We didn't read about her going to the Middle East or Asia or Russia to find a rich guy there.


It's just a fantasy cliché 

But:
1. They speak English 
2. She knows Englishmen will not have heard of _Suits_ and she brag to them she's a actress/star. She thinks she'll look more attractive/exotic/special here.
3. She came over for an actor, footballer or pop-star. Though not all our footballers (soccer stars) are British, the ones that are have a well publicised WAG lifestyle. British actors often move/work transatlantically. 
4. Like Madonna, she probably thought she was going to live at Gosford Park and be at endless parties. 
5. Like #2, she prob thought she could get work here (again for an actor English is paramount) 
6. Some Americans think Britain looks quaint (then they live in the newest building they can find to live in).

7. To move in society and work her way up to a Prince. 

She really does have *AMBITION *


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Check the ratings in a week, a month.  Doubt this poddycast will be that high.
> 
> View attachment 5596940



Copying image!


----------



## marietouchet

zen1965 said:


> Which month did they visit SA? Was it September? Days would be spring-like with somewhat chilly nights.
> 
> Africa or South Africa?
> Africa is a large continent with almost 50 countries. In light of its diversity and significant GDP spreads I would take generalising statements with a pinch of salt. South Africa is the 2nd riches country of the continent. On top of this, the High Commissioner‘s residence would adhere to UK standards.


The marketing info was for the continent as a whole , I could find nothing on South Africa per se or on the residence


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, if Harry has one brain cell left he will know he'll need his family's support to manage said divorce.


We don't know everything he has said to them and whether they can get past it. If I were in his family I'd find it impossible to fully trust him again. Family squabbles are ugly anyway, but this one was deliberately made public using the media with several nasty accusations. 

He's too proud to go to them and say "So sorry I called you racists on TV. I was angry because you wouldn't give me all the money I wanted."


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Good point.
> 
> She came over to the UK to marry an Englishman.
> 
> *Did not occur to her that Englishmen usually live in England?*


----------



## jennlt

"She has the power to bore people to tears"


----------



## xincinsin

jennlt said:


> "She has the power to bore people to tears"



I'm errrrrr... impressed. Maybe there is a market for a reading of The Stench on constant loop for the insomniac among us?


----------



## Chanbal

It's all synchronized PR imo. Arch*e had a (bogus?) 'life threatening episode' in South Africa and Hazz is now on a South Africa related (photo-Op?) fundraising…


----------



## Chanbal

_It’s “unfiltered”. It’s “groundbreaking”. *It’s… the most self-congratulatory 57 minutes of audio you’ll hear all year.* If you’ve missed the online brouhaha surrounding the first episode of Meghan Markle’s long-awaited podcast, Archetypes, buckle up._










						Meghan Markle’s podcast is navel-gazing, bumper-sticker feminism – I expected more
					

As the duchess of Sussex finally releases her ‘Archetypes’ podcast on Spotify, Olivia Petter examines whether her feminism has a place in 2022




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I woke up to a German headline saying "[Raptor] and Harry: The Queen Agrees to the Divorce".
> 
> Now I don't believe it's come up just yet, but I am positive she'd be overjoyed if Harry came to her with this very request.


It seems the German tabloids fabricate more stories than the US or UK. It would be funny though, as I predicted five years and two kids. They're getting close.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love Tourre’s honesty:




Hazy: “I like what you’ve done with your hair, that’s a great vibe,” he said to Ms. Williams, presumably via video call. 

I remember when the NYT was a bastion of journalistic integrity.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

jennlt said:


> "She has the power to bore people to tears"



This had me howling with laughter.   

“Serena … allowed herself to be convinced by Meghan to come on the podcast.  Serena is generous to a fault.  I suppose if Serena returned for another episode, that would make it a double fault.”


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I agree, people will tune in for an episode or two out of curiosity but if they find it a waste of time, they won't be back.  Also, to some extent, the ratings are almost immaterial if the movers and shakers in Hollywood, DC and NYC listen to this and decide that the "real Meghan" is vapid and talentless.


I have a feeling they've already made their minds up about her.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It's all synchronized PR imo. Arch*e had a (bogus?) 'life threatening episode' in South Africa and Hazz is now on a South Africa related (photo-Op?) fundraising…



Because nothing screams “I want to help poor, vulnerable children” like a rousing game of polo! Harry is all about charity as long as he can have a great time doing it. He just gives and gives!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Because nothing screams “I want to help poor, vulnerable children” like a rousing game of polo! Harry is all about charity as long as he can have a great time doing it. He just gives and gives!



He doesn't have the funds to do anything of real significance. Whether you like her or not, Oprah put her money where her mouth is. 



> https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...or-girls-in-south-africa-idUKL023073220070102


----------



## bag-mania

Spotify is claiming that Meghan’s podcast is #1 in the US and UK.

What a world we live in!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Spotify is claiming that Meghan’s podcast is #1 in the US and UK.
> 
> What a world we live in!


But … what makes money is downloads, not just listens 
And the first day is full of listeners not downloaders


----------



## Chanbal

Excellent remarks imo.


----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5597249
> 
> _It’s “unfiltered”. It’s “groundbreaking”. *It’s… the most self-congratulatory 57 minutes of audio you’ll hear all year.* If you’ve missed the online brouhaha surrounding the first episode of Meghan Markle’s long-awaited podcast, Archetypes, buckle up._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s podcast is navel-gazing, bumper-sticker feminism – I expected more
> 
> 
> As the duchess of Sussex finally releases her ‘Archetypes’ podcast on Spotify, Olivia Petter examines whether her feminism has a place in 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk


That was silly of the writer to have ever expected more...


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I'm errrrrr... impressed. Maybe there is a market for a reading of The Stench on constant loop for the insomniac among us?



No, because her grating "I'm too sexy" voice and use of  garbled word-salad 'language' is so annoying it will wind you up and make you go back to the kitchen and smash plates


----------



## papertiger

piperdog said:


> That was silly of the writer to have ever expected more...



I agree, obviously the journalist hasn't done any homework on the toxic-twosome for the past 4 years


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It's all synchronized PR imo. Arch*e had a (bogus?) 'life threatening episode' in South Africa and Hazz is now on a South Africa related (photo-Op?) fundraising…




Brilliant! Genius! 

I must remember to dedicate my next trip to Gucci to the Ukrainian war effort


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Spotify is claiming that Meghan’s podcast is #1 in the US and UK.
> 
> What a world we live in!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't fully tell if the DM is trying to appear sympathetic or 1st class trolling, but I'm leaning towards the latter.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't fully tell if the DM is trying to appear sympathetic or 1st class trolling, but I'm leaning towards the latter.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5597295


A pregnant woman was tired. Do tell. She is sooo strong and brave!

Seriously, anything with her name in the headline makes the company money. They don’t care if the people clicking on it love her or hate her. It’s all the same to them $$$$.


----------



## V0N1B2

Redbirdhermes said:


> I checked the Archetypes Spotify rankings in a few other countries.  It is also #2 in Great Britain, #4 in Australia, but is #1 in Canada.


I’m pretty sure Spittin’ Chiclets is the number one podcast in Canada.
Just sayin’


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> But I have to believe detectors/alarms/sprinklers were present in the residence where they stayed, especially if it was rebuilt after a previous fire and it is occupied by a government official.


Of course there were...it appears at this point that she no longer cares that her obvious lies are caught out, as long as it keeps her in the news.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't fully tell if the DM is trying to appear sympathetic or 1st class trolling, but I'm leaning towards the latter.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5597295


Yet her sister in law,  you know,  the one who will be a genuine Queen (Consort) had HG twice for definite and possibly a third bout and didn't moan once!


----------



## zen1965

marietouchet said:


> The marketing info was for the continent as a whole , I could find nothing on South Africa per se or on the residence


No offense to you personally, of course, yet having lived in three African countries it is one of my pet peeves that many people and publications refer to Africa as if it was a monolithic country, not a diverse continent with many different peoples, cultures, and languages.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Helventara

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-electric-car-Range-Rover-drops-polo-kit.html

I should also paste it on the other thread  but with adulatory title: Eco concious Prince Harry arrives in electric Audi. Or,  prince Harry will play Polo in Aspen.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, if Harry has one brain cell left he will know he'll need his family's support to manage said divorce.


She has too much on him to get a divorce. All those secrets... the mysterious births for one. He can't leave her without her blackmailing him and looking even more untrustworthy than he is now.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> She has too much on him to get a divorce. All those secrets... the mysterious births for one. He can't leave her without her blackmailing him and looking even more untrustworthy than he is now.


He has a lot of dirt on her as well. All those lies. She would destroy him though because she still has most of the press in her pocket. The knee jerk reaction of the media (in the US at least) is to side with her.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> He has a lot of dirt on her as well. All those lies. She would destroy him though because she still has most of the press in her pocket. The knee jerk reaction of the media (in the US at least) is to side with her.


True, but they have too much on each other to spill it, don't you think?


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> True, but they have too much on each other to spill it, don't you think?


If they were rational people, yes. But these two? If the marriage imploded Meghan would immediately go to the press and play the victim card. She was abused! She gave up everything for him! Harry would be left flat-footed and stumbling. Alone and friendless because he had alienated everyone else.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> Brilliant! Genius!
> 
> I must remember to dedicate my next trip to Gucci to the Ukrainian war effort



Thank you for this!  I'm still laughing!


----------



## DL Harper

Helventara said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-electric-car-Range-Rover-drops-polo-kit.html
> 
> I should also paste it on the other thread  but with adulatory title: Eco concious Prince Harry arrives in electric Audi. Or,  prince Harry will play Polo in Aspen.
> 
> View attachment 5597319


Forgetting your Polo gear when the entire purpose of the trip is to.....play polo?  Maybe the same as forgetting a swimsuit for a beach vacation or leaving your kayak behind when headed out for a kayaking trip??? Really???


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t believe those podcast rankings.  Who came up with them anyway?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF?


----------



## Lounorada

mellibelly said:


> River listened so we don’t have to. His Harry impression is hilarious btw





That re-cap was hilarious, never heard of this River person before but if they do a re-cap of each podcrash episode I'll definitely be tuning in! The part in the video from around 21.20 min - 22.50 min had me in stitches 
Thanks for sharing @mellibelly




mellibelly said:


>



What I imagine JCMH & MM's reaction to this persons valid and well-said post will be:







papertiger said:


> I thought podcasts were supposed to be audio-only.
> 
> *Why do we have to see her at all?*









charlottawill said:


> So now Serena considers her a dear friend? I can't keep up anymore.





I don't buy this 'friendship' at all. Sounds more like a PR arrangement and the 'dear friend' mention sounds like something MM would insist that someone calls her 





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Serena is full of it.
> 
> Do y'all know the story of how she met her husband? They were at a café and she went up to him to tell him he couldn't sit where he was sitting because she needed her space. I don't know about you, that wouldn't have endeared her to me at all. Maybe Raptor and her are more alike than we think, though Serena obviously has talent and work ethics.


Wow!


She sounds... delightful.




MiniMabel said:


> I just can't stand the word salad! The drivel MM spouts truly is preposterously insulting! My head feels like it's going to explode!


Agreed! Then it's like this when you try and _read _the drivel she speaks:







Chanbal said:


> The picture of TW, Dor*a and Arch*e was possibly taken when TW was talking to her troops.



It 'breaks her heart' the TWs trust was violated this way?


First of all, TW didn't consider any member of the RF's trust when she violated them left right and center with all her lies, jealousy and vicious spite since the day she took the spare hostage up until present day (and especially during the Oprah interview-sh*t-show).
Second of all, there are far more serious and important issues in the world right now to be 'breaking your heart' and sparking such a response on twitter than a crazy stan taking screenshots of a zoom call with their narcissistic cult-like leader and sharing it in the media. Sit down and shut up, you foolish woman. 




Chanbal said:


> Her minister of propaganda is working hard again…



Oh FFS!!! Scoobie  his constant lies and b*tchiness makes my blood boil


1. She was NEVER silenced by the iNsTiTuTiOn.
2. She NEVER lost her voice. In fact she hasn't shut TF up since she married the spare.
3. NO ONE followed her before meeting JCMH. She owes every ounce of her 'fame' to her husband & his family.
4. What 'movement' would this be? For an eternal victim mentality that specializes in the areas of wokeness and feminism? If so, then f*ck off please, you'll do far more damage than good.


----------



## charlottawill

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5597260
> 
> That re-cap was hilarious, never heard of this River person before but if they do a re-cap of each podcrash episode I'll definitely be tuning in! The part in the video from around 21.20 min - 22.50 min had me in stitches
> Thanks for sharing @mellibelly
> 
> 
> 
> What I imagine JCMH & MM's reaction to this persons valid and well-said post will be:
> 
> View attachment 5597275
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5597282
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5597289
> 
> I don't buy this 'friendship' at all. Sounds more like a PR arrangement and the 'dear friend' mention sounds like something MM would insist that someone calls her
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow!
> View attachment 5597292
> 
> She sounds... delightful.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed! Then it's like this when you try and _read _the drivel she speaks:
> View attachment 5597296
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It 'breaks her heart' the TWs trust was violated this way?
> View attachment 5597299
> 
> First of all, TW didn't consider any member of the RF's trust when she violated them left right and center with all her lies, jealousy and vicious spite since the day she took the spare hostage up until present day (and especially during the Oprah interview-sh*t-show).
> Second of all, there are far more serious and important issues in the world right now to be 'breaking your heart' and sparking such a response on twitter than a crazy stan taking screenshots of a zoom call with their narcissistic cult-like leader and sharing it in the media. Sit down and shut up, you foolish woman.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh FFS!!! Scoobie  his constant lies and b*tchiness makes my blood boil
> View attachment 5597310
> 
> 1. She was NEVER silenced by the iNsTiTuTiOn.
> 2. She NEVER lost her voice. In fact she hasn't shut TF up since she married the spare.
> 3. NO ONE followed her before meeting JCMH. She owes every ounce of her 'fame' to her husband & his family.
> 4. What 'movement' would this be? For an eternal victim mentality that specializes in the areas of wokeness and feminism? If so, then f*ck off please, you'll do far more damage than good.
> View attachment 5597352



Your GIF game is unparalleled


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Good point.
> 
> She came over to the UK to marry an Englishman.
> 
> Did not occur to her that Englishmen usually live in England?



Maybe this is what she had in mind 



>


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I don’t believe those podcast rankings.  Who came up with them anyway?


Spotify? Who else would know?

Maybe it’s true or maybe they are trying to justify all the money they gave her.


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> I don’t believe those podcast rankings.  Who came up with them anyway?


Kinda like The New York Times best seller list. Manipulated.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Yet her sister in law,  you know,  the one who will be a genuine Queen (Consort) had HG twice for definite and possibly a third bout and didn't moan once!



And she had to be hospitalized the first time around. For real, not make believe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> She has too much on him to get a divorce. All those secrets... the mysterious births for one. He can't leave her without her blackmailing him and looking even more untrustworthy than he is now.



I don't know. Revealing those kids are not eligible for the line of succession will hurt her more than him.


----------



## charlottawill

Helventara said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-electric-car-Range-Rover-drops-polo-kit.html
> 
> I should also paste it on the other thread  but with adulatory title: Eco concious Prince Harry arrives in electric Audi. Or,  prince Harry will play Polo in Aspen.
> 
> View attachment 5597319



If this doesn't scream clueless privilege then I don't know what does. And how stupid do you have to be to leave for the airport heading to a polo tournament and forget your gear?


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. Revealing those kids are not eligible for the line of succession will hurt her more than him.


Okay... good point.  lol


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> If this doesn't scream clueless privilege then I don't know what does. And how stupid do you have to be to leave for the airport heading to a polo tournament and forget your gear?


Well, now let’s give him a break. He only became responsible for doing his own packing fairly recently. For the first 35 years of his life he had a staff to do all that for him. The concept of planning for a trip is new to him.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> If the marriage imploded Meghan would immediately go to the press and play the victim card. She was abused! She gave up everything for him!



At the rate she's going her credibility will be shot by then. She was pretty much a nobody before she hooked him and owes everything she has right now to him. The BRF will cut some kind of deal to be rid of her. The world will see him for the dim bulb that he is. He will go off into relative exile and commiserate with Uncle Andy, playing polo and drinking too much. She'll become the new Luann de Lesseps. The only question I have is, who will get the kids?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Good point.
> 
> She came over to the UK to marry an Englishman.
> 
> Did not occur to her that Englishmen usually live in England?


Nope. Meghan is like the Borg. Resistance is futile so she figured she would get her way and he would agree to move to the US.


----------



## charlottawill

DL Harper said:


> Forgetting your Polo gear when the entire purpose of the trip is to.....play polo?  Maybe the same as forgetting a swimsuit for a beach vacation or leaving your kayak behind when headed out for a kayaking trip??? Really???


My husband takes frequent golf trips. The planning and packing starts weeks ahead of time. I'm sure he'll get a good laugh out of this.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Well, now let’s give him a break. He only became responsible for doing his own packing fairly recently. For the first 35 years of his life he had a staff to do all that for him. The concept of planning for a trip is new to him.


He doesn’t wear fresh socks and/or underwear anyway so he really didn’t forget that.

Maybe his thoughts about the trip were not on polo at all


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> At the rate she's going her credibility will be shot by then. She was pretty much a nobody before she hooked him and owes everything she has right now to him. The BRF will cut some kind of deal to be rid of her. The world will see him for the dim bulb that he is. He will go off into relative exile and commiserate with Uncle Andy, playing polo and drinking too much. She'll become the new Luann de Lesseps. The only question I have is, who will get the kids?


I don’t know about that. There are still so many people who wholeheartedly support her. The more she is criticized, the more they double down on believing her every word.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> At the rate she's going her credibility will be shot by then. She was pretty much a nobody before she hooked him and owes everything she has right now to him. The BRF will cut some kind of deal to be rid of her. The world will see him for the dim bulb that he is. He will go off into relative exile and commiserate with Uncle Andy, playing polo and drinking too much. She'll become the new Luann de Lesseps. The only question I have is, who will get the kids?



Please, let it be him/the BRF with their nannies and cousins and fun activities. I really fear for those kids being completely and utterly at the mercy of a mother like this.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know about that. There are still so many people who wholeheartedly support her. The more she is criticized, the more they double down on believing her every word.


That is true about the sugars on the whole, but now some are seeing the light   There has been no improvement in public opinion of her and unless a miracle heads her way, otherwise opinions will continue to head downhill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

New look? 












						Prince Harry wins charity polo tournament in Colorado
					

Prince Harry won his latest polo game - a charity tournament in Colorado - after scoring an impressive five goals.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Helventara said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-electric-car-Range-Rover-drops-polo-kit.html
> 
> I should also paste it on the other thread  but with adulatory title: Eco concious Prince Harry arrives in electric Audi. Or,  prince Harry will play Polo in Aspen.
> 
> View attachment 5597319



 This sums it up:

"Let me get this correct... a polo player goes to the private jet to be flown to a polo game but forgot his polo gear?? Seriously, you can't make this stuff up, he really is a complete idiot. No wonder Markle pounced on him so fast."

Or was he so distracted because they had a huge blowup about him jetting off again and leaving her with the kids? Hmmmm...


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I wonder why she was deadset on finding a rich Englishman. Lots of rich men in the US and no culture clash. Why target Englishmen? We didn't read about her going to the Middle East or Asia or Russia to find a rich guy there.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm dying to know that as well. Always struck me as odd.


Meghan really isn't that complicated. Why she wanted rich is self-evident. She likes British accents and it probably seemed classier and a little more exotic than just a plain 'ol American guy.  

She didn't want to have to learn a new language or adapt to another culture that was too different from what she already knew. If she had hooked a British businessman or actor she might have settled in to England fine. Adapting to all of the rules and restrictions of the Royal Family was more than she was willing to tolerate.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> New look?
> 
> View attachment 5597404
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wins charity polo tournament in Colorado
> 
> 
> Prince Harry won his latest polo game - a charity tournament in Colorado - after scoring an impressive five goals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Solo to Africa, now Aspen?  And ZeeZy missing out on seeing her "pwife". Hmmm......


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> New look?
> 
> View attachment 5597404
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wins charity polo tournament in Colorado
> 
> 
> Prince Harry won his latest polo game - a charity tournament in Colorado - after scoring an impressive five goals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hey, it's Nacho and P-wife! Why doesn't Nacho look happy? Nacho usually looks happy.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> If they were rational people, yes. But these two? If the marriage imploded Meghan would immediately go to the press and play the victim card. She was abused! She gave up everything for him! Harry would be left flat-footed and stumbling. *Alone and friendless because he had alienated everyone else.*


 maybe Andrew could help him


----------



## jennlt

BLG explains why narcissists use old news stories (eg. July 1999 fire at the British High Commissioner's residence) to weave their narrative.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF?




I totally knew it


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Adapting to all of the rules and restrictions of the Royal Family was more than she was willing to tolerate.



Her arrogance in assuming the monarchy needed modernizing (by her) was her downfall. I believe that much of the appeal of the monarchy lies in that it represents for many Britain's long and rich history, tradition, and stability in an ever changing world. I don't recall anyone clamoring for an overhaul of the monarchy before she arrived.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I totally knew it



And he's suing for taxpayer funded security because their lives are at risk?? GMAFB


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> At the rate she's going her credibility will be shot by then. She was pretty much a nobody before she hooked him and owes everything she has right now to him. The BRF will cut some kind of deal to be rid of her. The world will see him for the dim bulb that he is. He will go off into relative exile and commiserate with Uncle Andy, playing polo and drinking too much. She'll become the new Luann de Lesseps. *The only question I have is, who will get the kids?*



Sorry to say, same way as the 'rescued' dogs presumably  She also let her father go to the dogs and her sister the wolves, what and why would she care about the children?


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Sorry to say, same way as the 'rescued' dogs presumably  She also let her father go to the dogs and her sister the wolves, what and why would she care about the children?



It would be ironic if they divorce, he gets the kids, moves back to Frogmore and they go to school with their cousins. Might be the best thing that could happen to them, but I don't see her giving up her meal tickets for another eighteen years or so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I totally knew it



Why did nobody stop this completely insane person? 

The more I learn about her being impossible the more I wonder...was she really able to hold it together until the wedding, or were red flags popping up right and left?


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> If this doesn't scream clueless privilege then I don't know what does. And how stupid do you have to be to leave for the airport heading to a polo tournament and forget your gear?



Not his fault that Jeeves wasn’t around to dress him, pack his gear and send him off (Hazza is no Bertie Wooster who is quite a funny character)


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> It would be ironic if they divorce, he gets the kids, moves back to Frogmore and they go to school with their cousins. Might be the best thing that could happen to them, but I don't see her giving up her meal tickets for another eighteen years or so.



True, she'll hold onto them spite everyone else, including the children/cabbage patch dolls. 

There's a lot more to this whole story though, and Harry will know at least some of it. She's a fraud and he's a stooge, shame for any kids they may have.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Sorry to say, same way as the 'rescued' dogs presumably  She also let her father go to the dogs and her sister the wolves, what and why would she care about the children?



She doesn't care about them like a normal parent would. She cares about them as tools to manipulate and blackmail Harry and to get as much money out of the BRF as she possibly can.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why did nobody stop this completely insane person?
> 
> The more I learn about her being impossible the more I wonder...was she really able to hold it together until the wedding, or were red flags popping up right and left?



Some guys love girls like that, especially ones that have had everyone eating out of their hands their whole lives. Probably made him feel like Mr. Fix-it for a while, her knight in shining armour


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Not his fault that Jeeves wasn’t around to dress him, pack his gear and send him off (Hazza is no Bertie Wooster who is quite a funny character)



At least Bertie was happy-go-lucky, Hazzer is moody-gone-lately


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Just like old times. ZeeZy's absence here speaks volumes. Time will tell.


----------



## charlottawill

The squad is as clueless as he is. Does it not occur to these nitwits why he looks happy and peaceful?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I totally knew it


So the “there was no smoke alarm (in the governor’s residence) “ was also a back handed swipe at being put up there not in 5 star hotel


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> So the “there was no smoke alarm (in the governor’s residence) “ was also a back handed swipe at being put up there not in 5 star hotel



...with a floor to herself no doubt.


----------



## marietouchet

Helventara said:


> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-electric-car-Range-Rover-drops-polo-kit.html
> 
> I should also paste it on the other thread  but with adulatory title: Eco concious Prince Harry arrives in electric Audi. Or,  prince Harry will play Polo in Aspen.
> 
> View attachment 5597319


What the plane did not wait for the string of polo ponies to arrive and be seated ?


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> So the “there was no smoke alarm (in the governor’s residence) “ was also a back handed swipe at being put up there not in 5 star hotel



Another of her mistaken ideas about what life as a royal would be like. Royals are always hosted at the official residence of some dignitary at the location they are visiting. It is easier to secure than a hotel.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Does the publisher leave themselves open to lawsuits if Harry’s book slanders people?


wounldn't it me nice if they were the defendants in a suit for a change?  but the RF won't stoop to that


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I woke up to a German headline saying "[Raptor] and Harry: The Queen Agrees to the Divorce".
> 
> Now I don't believe it's come up just yet, but I am positive *she'd be overjoyed* if Harry came to her with this very request.



Who wouldn't be overjoyed?!?!  Only Skeeter!  That would make it even harder for her to get income.  She might have to go back to yacht-girling.   (Might be a bit long in the tooth to be a yacht girl.)


----------



## Chanbal

DL Harper said:


> *Forgetting your Polo gear when the entire purpose of the trip is to..*...play polo?  Maybe the same as forgetting a swimsuit for a beach vacation or leaving your kayak behind when headed out for a kayaking trip??? Really???


He seems to be very forgetful. In this article from March 2022, he forgets to flush.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please, let it be him/the BRF with their nannies and cousins and fun activities. I really fear for those kids being completely and utterly at the mercy of a mother like this.


Didn't Doria disappear for years?  She wasn't much of a mother either, although we don't know is she is a sociopathic narcissist *yet*


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I totally knew it


I don't even know what to think of this.  She picks up and leaves and goes to a hotel?  how reliable is this information?  Did she make up the heater story as an excuse for leaving the residence?  Not telling anyone where she was going?  Did she take the baby?


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> This sums it up:
> 
> "Let me get this correct... a polo player goes to the private jet to be flown to a polo game but forgot his polo gear?? Seriously, you can't make this stuff up, he really is a complete idiot. No wonder Markle pounced on him so fast."
> 
> Or was he so distracted because they had a huge blowup about him jetting off again and *leaving her with the kids? Hmmmm...*


Leaving her with the kids   As if she spends any time with them.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> He seems to be very forgetful. In this article from March 2022, he forgets to flush.
> 
> View attachment 5597450
> View attachment 5597452
> View attachment 5597456


Aside from having the attention span of a flea, he may be easily frazzled and get hot under the collar.  If they had a dust up prior to his leaving it might account for it, but what about the 10 gazillion assistants?  Surely there must have been someone with half a brain who wondered where the polo gear was.  The most important item would be his boots.  i would think that everything else could be found once he got there.


----------



## charlottawill

You mean to tell me she doesn't know about electrical adapters? And of course shifts blame for her son's "near death experience".


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

Toby93 said:


> Didn't Doria disappear for years?  She wasn't much of a mother either, although we don't know is she is a *sociopathic narcissist* *yet*


Coincidentally, I've just read 2 books that both dealt with sociopathic/psychopathic narcissists and the similarities to TW are seriously alarming.

One of the books was a non-fiction account of children of that type of mother. (Though this mother added extreme sadism to the mix.)  She possessed an unbelievable amount of control over everyone she sucked into her world.  Absolutely bizarre and disconcerting to see how much freedom and independent thought she was able to strip away from every victim.  She was very much about changing the narrative of reality.


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


>



Priceless!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Delfina apparently misses Pwife.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


>



As if she wasn't enough of a monster.

'Delusions of grandeur' doesn't even begin to cover her multitude of...issues.


----------



## Cinderlala

Wasn't Ginge supposed to be part of the podcrash???  Presumably, he would be the bigger draw since we already know everything she's ever thought, said, or done.


----------



## jennlt




----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Wasn't Ginge supposed to be part of the podcrash???  Presumably, he would be the bigger draw since we already know everything she's ever thought, said, or done.


Have you heard him speak?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


>



The ginormous green signs say Meghan , no Duchess or Sussex or Markle

They also say LISTEN FREE, so Spotify is after subscriptions - the proverbial cow - while giving away the milk for free


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> Have you heard him speak?


  I'd rather listen to his UN speech on repeat for days than listen to TW talk about her imagined victimhood yet again.


----------



## papertiger

Cinderlala said:


> I'd rather listen to his UN speech on repeat for days than listen to TW talk about her imagined victimhood yet again.



Luckily I have some noise cancelation headphones so I can 'listen' to anything and stay sane


----------



## V0N1B2

charlottawill said:


> You mean to tell me she doesn't know about electrical adapters? And of course shifts blame for her son's "near death experience".



I’m curious to know exactly which date this alleged fire happened. 
The average temperature in Cape Town for the 10-day span of their tour was 24.6C (76.2F). One of the days reached a high of 36C/96F. 

Reminds me of the time I went to Baffin Island in January and just packed some tshirts and flippyfloppies


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Aside from having the attention span of a flea, he may be easily frazzled and get hot under the collar.  If they had a dust up prior to his leaving it might account for it, but what about the 10 gazillion assistants?  Surely there must have been someone with half a brain who wondered where the polo gear was.  The most important item would be his boots.  i would think that everything else could be found once he got there.


Or he did not get the call from Nacho until late in the day.  He could be a substitute for someone else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

V0N1B2 said:


> I’m curious to know exactly which date this alleged fire happened.
> The average temperature in Cape Town for the 10-day span of their tour was 24.6C (76.2F). One of the days reached a high of 36C/96F.
> 
> Reminds me of the time I went to Baffin Island in January and just packed some tshirts and flippyfloppies


It was on Day 1 of their tour.
Just like when Di and Chas landed in Australia, baby William was whisked away so they could work.  The switch here is that MM was whisked away to work. Did she change her clothes from the flight?


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


> Your GIF game is unparalleled





Thanks lovely!  I aim to entertain 




bag-mania said:


> I don’t know about that. There are still so many people who wholeheartedly support her. The more she is criticized, the more they double down on believing her every word.


Me judging all of them:







charlottawill said:


>









charlottawill said:


>





Just a big ol' waste of someone's money.




jennlt said:


>


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

jennlt said:


>



One of Becky’s tweets , see above , suggests that H’s real quest is for IPP status, not protection. IPP status would protect him and his book against lawsuits?
Resolution of the IPP status / security issue could be a justIfication for delay in book date


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> One of Becky’s tweets , see above , suggests that H’s real quest is for IPP status, not protection. IPP status would protect him and his book against lawsuits?
> Resolution of the IPP status / security issue could be a justIfication for delay in book date


If granted, this will make the BRF look like one of the worst RF’s in the world.  Charles needs to squelch this nonsense.


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> I'd rather listen to his UN speech on repeat for days than listen to TW talk about her imagined victimhood yet again.


Geez, don’t make me choose.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Well, now let’s give him a break. He only became responsible for doing his own packing fairly recently. For the first 35 years of his life he had a staff to do all that for him. The concept of planning for a trip is new to him.


Remember how Zedzee bragged that he was impressed by her packing skills? If she was in Diana's place when that aide forgot the tiara, there would have been a meltdown to rival Vesuvius, and not the launch of a fashion craze.


charlottawill said:


> Or was he so distracted because they had a huge blowup about him jetting off again and leaving her with the kids? Hmmmm...


Not in a million years would I believe she actually takes care of the kids. Didn't one of her stooges describe the idyllic life at Casa Monteshitshow as Hazard taking care of the kids while Zedzee schemes in the home office? At least, I hope Hazard loves the kids, and Doria and her spawn are not teaching them about milk and generational trauma.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> The ginormous green signs say Meghan , no Duchess or Sussex or Markle
> 
> They also say LISTEN FREE, so Spotify is after subscriptions - the proverbial cow - while giving away the milk for free


Many pages ago, someone noted that she was aiming to join the one-name stars, to achieve status like Beyonce.


marietouchet said:


> One of Becky’s tweets , see above , suggests that H’s real quest is for IPP status, not protection. IPP status would protect him and his book against lawsuits?
> Resolution of the IPP status / security issue could be a justIfication for delay in book date


Not that I think the UK would grant the Harkles IPP status for them to gallivant globally at someone else's cost, but even if they did, wouldn't those slandered go after the publisher?


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean says Megalomaniac wanted MO as her first guest, but MO declined. Serena was second choice. He pointed out the affection and respect the O’s have for the Queen as a reason.

Interesting placement of the ads on buildings, high enough to discourage graffiti that might have altered her photo.

They might have analyzed a little better, however, Megalomaniac posed standing spread legged on a corner, she could be mistaken for someone soliciting.


----------



## marietouchet

Ok, I have lost it …. 
H went to Africa two (?) weeks ago ..
Now he is flying private, with specially delivered green bag, to Sentebale polo match to see Nacho 

two trips to Africa? One ? He must have flown back home? In about two weeks ??? Maybe three weeks
what have I got wrong?


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Many pages ago, someone noted that she was aiming to join the one-name stars, to achieve status like Beyonce.
> 
> Not that I think the UK would grant the Harkles IPP status for them to gallivant globally at someone else's cost, but even if they did, wouldn't those slandered go after the publisher?


I prefer the one word apellation to the hypocrisy of the title, BUTTTTTT it is as if she knows she won’t be a Sussex/Mountbatten- Windsor forever …

Not sure IPP status would prevent lawsuits against publisher, just thought the tweet was amusing gossip, as ever this couple thinks about ME not anyone else

And yes, as I suspected, 28 people is a lot for a podcast, everyone on YouTube has noticed that


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't fully tell if the DM is trying to appear sympathetic or 1st class trolling, but I'm leaning towards the latter.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5597295


Ooooh you and only ever other woman that's ever been pregnant!    Stupid dumba$$.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If granted, this will make the BRF look like one of the worst RF’s in the world.  *Charles needs to squelch this nonsense.*


Charles has done absolutely nothing since this all started. We can’t hold our breath waiting for him to grow a pair.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Ok, I have lost it ….
> H went to Africa two (?) weeks ago ..
> Now he is flying private, with specially delivered green bag, to Sentebale polo match to see Nacho
> 
> two trips to Africa? One ? He must have flown back home? In about two weeks ??? Maybe three weeks
> what have I got wrong?



Yes, you are correct afaik.  One trip to Africa, now off to Colo.  Hazzi sets the example for all eco-warriors  

*The jet belongs to multi-millionaire US businessman Marc Ganzi, who is a close friend of the Royal Family and a polo enthusiast*
*








						Prince Harry arrives for private jet flight in an electric car
					

The Duke of Sussex had got on the $9million Bombardier to head to  a polo event in Aspen on Wednesday. But staff had to retrieve his kit in a gas-guzzling Range Rover after he forgot to pack it.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> If this doesn't scream clueless privilege then I don't know what does. And *how stupid do you have to be to leave for the airport heading to a polo tournament and forget your gear?*


I'm going to guess this is a rhetorical question.  We are referring to HazNoBalls.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Charles has done absolutely nothing since this all started. We can’t hold our breath waiting for him to grow a pair.


So very true. Perhaps a massive drop in polls will wake him up? Surely it will get William’s attention.  Charles needs to pay attention to this - it will be a game changer.  People are fed up with this nonsense from these 2 liars.  

Fwiw, The Spotify numbers can be easily manipulated. I have read they count the bots, too.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


>



Interesting comment


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of the commenters - great question:
_Also to be fair I feel like if a British person married into a high profile highly public American family and started acting like this-the backlash would be far far worse because US press and consumers are far more brutal.

ETA: _Brooklyn Beckham is one to watch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the commenters - great question:
> _Also to be fair I feel like if a British person married into a high profile highly public American family and started acting like this-the backlash would be far far worse because US press and consumers are far more brutal.
> 
> ETA: _Brooklyn Beckham is one to watch.



It depends. Meghan wears her WOC status like a shield. The mainstream US media will not be overtly critical of her. The worst they may do is report exactly what she says and allow for the individual to interpret it, hopefully correctly.


----------



## bag-mania

Oh gag… this article should’ve come with a warning. 

Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!​*The Duke of Sussex popped in to say hello to Serena Williams, who joined the Duchess for the debut episode of *_*Archetypes*_​
The Duchess of Sussex sat down with friend Serena Williams for a personal conversation about ambition on the first-ever episode of _Archetypes_, but Prince Harry popped in to say hello to the tennis superstar before their chat got underway.

"Hi!" Meghan says. "You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in."

Meghan and Serena then both greet Prince Harry in faux British accents, causing them to laugh.

"I like what you've done with your hair! That's a great vibe," Harry tells Serena.

"Thank you," she replies. "Good to see you too, as always. I miss you guys!"

"Well, come and see us!" Prince Harry says.

Before taking off, Prince Harry tells the women to "Have fun!"

"Thanks, my love," Meghan says, revealing her sweet nickname for her husband.









						Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!
					

Meghan Markle showed off her British accent when husband Prince Harry crashed the debut episode of her Archetypes podcast




					people.com


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It depends. Meghan wears her WOC status like a shield. The mainstream US media will not be overtly critical of her. The worst they may do is report exactly what she says and allow for the individual to interpret it, hopefully correctly.


I am hoping that her need to be the victimized WOC will stem the wave of the Meghademic. I doubt that she will get much sympathy if she goes somewhere that has 99% POC.


bag-mania said:


> Oh gag… this article should’ve come with a warning.
> 
> Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!​*The Duke of Sussex popped in to say hello to Serena Williams, who joined the Duchess for the debut episode of *_*Archetypes*_​
> The Duchess of Sussex sat down with friend Serena Williams for a personal conversation about ambition on the first-ever episode of _Archetypes_, but Prince Harry popped in to say hello to the tennis superstar before their chat got underway.
> 
> "Hi!" Meghan says. "You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in."
> 
> Meghan and Serena then both greet Prince Harry in faux British accents, causing them to laugh.
> 
> "I like what you've done with your hair! That's a great vibe," Harry tells Serena.
> 
> "Thank you," she replies. "Good to see you too, as always. I miss you guys!"
> 
> "Well, come and see us!" Prince Harry says.
> 
> Before taking off, Prince Harry tells the women to "Have fun!"
> 
> "Thanks, my love," Meghan says, revealing her sweet nickname for her husband.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle showed off her British accent when husband Prince Harry crashed the debut episode of her Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Yucky-poo! But I thought her sweet nickname for him was "H". Sooooooo, 40x40 had the Melissa person in faux-British headgear and a faux-British cuppa tea. Now we have Serena with faux-British accent. Methane is really intent on taking the Mickey out of the British people. She is one of those bullies who make unkind comments and, when confronted, claims it was just a joke.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Oh gag… this article should’ve come with a warning.
> 
> Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!​*The Duke of Sussex popped in to say hello to Serena Williams, who joined the Duchess for the debut episode of *_*Archetypes*_​
> The Duchess of Sussex sat down with friend Serena Williams for a personal conversation about ambition on the first-ever episode of _Archetypes_, but Prince Harry popped in to say hello to the tennis superstar before their chat got underway.
> 
> "Hi!" Meghan says. "You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in."
> 
> Meghan and Serena then both greet Prince Harry in faux British accents, causing them to laugh.
> 
> "I like what you've done with your hair! That's a great vibe," Harry tells Serena.
> 
> "Thank you," she replies. "Good to see you too, as always. I miss you guys!"
> 
> "Well, come and see us!" Prince Harry says.
> 
> Before taking off, Prince Harry tells the women to "Have fun!"
> 
> "Thanks, my love," Meghan says, revealing her sweet nickname for her husband.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle showed off her British accent when husband Prince Harry crashed the debut episode of her Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


It's "funny" how he has to "crash" everything she does (this, the juggling with Melissa M)...you know, to remind everyone of the ONLY reason she has any recognition at all!


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


>




At least we know where _some_ of the money went


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


>



Snickering. One of the comments pointed out that their *global* campaign covered 3 cities in North America. I'm so glad that I'm not part of her world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone did the hard work so we don't have to.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone did the hard work so we don't have to.



274 instances of "I" and "me" in 57 mins.
That means she said something self-referential every 12 or 13 seconds, about 5 times every minute.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> 274 instances of "I" and "me" in 57 mins.
> That means she said something self-referential every 12 or 13 seconds, about 5 times every minute.



It's official then, she should really change her name to Me-again 




mememememememememememememememememememememememememememem!!!!!


----------



## papertiger

I notice for the promotion they are using her first name moniker 'Meghan' title rather her Duchess one. 

All about the clicks, all about the search engines, all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> And yes, as I suspected, 28 people is a lot for a podcast, everyone on YouTube has noticed that



I can say we ran a very successful video format with millions of views on roundabout ten people, and three of them did the same job part time. If a team of 28 professionals can't make you look good, maybe you should take the hint.


----------



## xincinsin

Much jubilation as media proclaims Zedzed's podcast has dethroned Rogan's on "international charts". Is "international" same as Zedzed's "global"?









						Meghan Markle's 'Archetypes' Podcast Tops Spotify Charts Around the World
					

Meghan Markle said she was "excited to be myself" on her new podcast Archetypes




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _ETA: _Brooklyn Beckham is one to watch.



What has he done? Besides somewhat abandoning his parents because there's beef with his wife.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m sure he’s not worried.  He does 12 hours of content in 4 days, not two years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m sure he’s not worried.  He does 12 hours of content in 4 days, not two years.


Zedzed reminds me of that office narc who tried to convince our boss that although he did very little, his very little is of such high quality that it was better than anything the rest of us mass-producers could achieve. She was not convinced.


----------



## papertiger

ME-AGAIN


----------



## Chanbal

Does this sound like blackmail?


----------



## Mumotons

Prince Harry 'slammed the phone down' on William during heated call
					

The explosive claims are contained in an documentary by BFM TV - the most popular TV news outlet in France - called 'Red Line: William and Harry, the enemy brothers'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Does this sound like blackmail?




Shouldn't that be '_*Harry's*_*-*truth bombs'?


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> Does this sound like blackmail?



Maybe it's a PR ploy to create interest in the book since he's been a one-trick pony of victimhood for the last several years. They need the public to think there will be something new and juicy in there to incentivize people to buy it.


----------



## Mumotons

Harry pays tribute to Diana ahead of 25th anniversary of her death
					

Prince Harry made the moving remarks during a charity polo match benefitting his charity Sentebale. He was joined by his close friend Nacho Figueras, and his wife Delfina at the event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> Prince Harry 'slammed the phone down' on William during heated call
> 
> 
> The explosive claims are contained in an documentary by BFM TV - the most popular TV news outlet in France - called 'Red Line: William and Harry, the enemy brothers'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Thanks for posting this article. William needs to stay away from his brother for at least the next 1000 years imo. 

"*Prince Harry*_* 'slammed the phone down' on Prince William after being confronted with witness statements portraying Meghan Markle as a vicious bully of female staff*, a new French documentary claims.

In turn, William – 'who already didn't like his sister-in-law very much' – became so angry at his brother's insistence on protecting his wife from criticism that he jumped in a car 'towards Kensington Palace to go and confront Prince Harry'.

BFM TV displays emails - disclosed as part of the Duchess of Sussex's privacy claim against the Mail on Sunday - in an investigative documentary series called 'Red Line: William and Harry, the enemy brothers'.

It claims that traumatised staff resigned from the Royal Household and set up a WhatsApp group called '*The Sussex Survivors' Club*'.

The series firmly blames '_*The behaviour of Meghan for being at the heart of the break-up between William and Harry.'*


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> Maybe it's a PR ploy to create interest in the book since he's been a one-trick pony of victimhood for the last several years. They need the public to think there will be something new and juicy in there to incentivize people to buy it.


It's probably that and perhaps unfinished 'negotiations' with the BRF. They can still do a lot of damage with their 'falsehoods,' truth.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> It's probably that and perhaps unfinished 'negotiations' with the BRF. They can still do a lot of damage with their 'falsehoods,' truth.



Oh, yes, I absolutely agree he's using this as leverage to get what he wants. Making the threat public applies even more pressure to the BRF and subtly disparages them without disclosing any actual facts. He's revealed himself to be an absolutely odious man-child.


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle's CT 'fire scare': Why SA tweeps feel 'insulted'...
					

'Shockingly arrogant': Tweeps, particularly South Africans - are annoyed at Meghan Markle's version of events during her Cape Town stay.




					www.thesouthafrican.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## LittleStar88

I’ll be listening to some Joe Rogan today to help dethrone this nonsense…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ll be listening to some Joe Rogan today to help dethrone this nonsense…



Keep fighting the good fight!


----------



## bag-mania

According to Forbes their deal with Spotify was for three years. They are nearly two years in from signing before they got their sh!t together enough to release the first podcast. If they only produce 12 episodes of Archetypes they will make about $1.5 million for each. That is nuts and isn’t something Spotify should be bragging about. 

$18 million. That’s how much Markle and Prince Harry’s exclusive three-year podcast deal with Spotify is estimated to be worth. They signed the contract in December, 2020, just seven months after Spotify signed a multiyear deal with Rogan, reported to be more than $100 million, although unnamed sources told the _New York Times_ it could be as high as $200 million.








						Meghan Markle’s ‘Archetypes’ Podcast Unseats Joe Rogan For Top Spot On Spotify
					

Markle’s “Archetypes” podcast also took the top spot in Spotify’s podcast charts in Australia, Canada, Ireland and the United Kingdom.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Keep fighting the good fight!


Listening To a Lex Frdiman podcast on game theory , his guest is a world class poker expert, am hanging on every word even though I don’t play poker
The math and psychology of poker is fascinating, space heaters a lot less so
And BTW the expert is a woman, Liv Boeree, a strong, ambitious woman


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> One of Becky’s tweets , see above , suggests that H’s real quest is for IPP status, not protection. IPP status would protect him and his book against lawsuits?
> Resolution of the IPP status / security issue could be a justIfication for delay in book date


What does IPP stand for? International Professional PITA?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Oh gag… this article should’ve come with a warning.
> 
> Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!​*The Duke of Sussex popped in to say hello to Serena Williams, who joined the Duchess for the debut episode of *_*Archetypes*_​
> The Duchess of Sussex sat down with friend Serena Williams for a personal conversation about ambition on the first-ever episode of _Archetypes_, but Prince Harry popped in to say hello to the tennis superstar before their chat got underway.
> 
> "Hi!" Meghan says. "You wanna come say hi? Look who just popped in."
> 
> Meghan and Serena then both greet Prince Harry in faux British accents, causing them to laugh.
> 
> "I like what you've done with your hair! That's a great vibe," Harry tells Serena.
> 
> "Thank you," she replies. "Good to see you too, as always. I miss you guys!"
> 
> "Well, come and see us!" Prince Harry says.
> 
> Before taking off, Prince Harry tells the women to "Have fun!"
> 
> "Thanks, my love," Meghan says, revealing her sweet nickname for her husband.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Crashes Meghan Markle's First Podcast Episode — and She Does a British Accent!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle showed off her British accent when husband Prince Harry crashed the debut episode of her Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



Terminal banality will be the cause of death of this podcrash


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> _'_*The behaviour of Meghan for being at the heart of the break-up between William and Harry.'*


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> What does IPP stand for? International Professional PITA?


Internationally Protected Persons - but PITA is far more fitting


----------



## xincinsin

The tagline for Archetypes is "Don't believe the type"  
It sounds very .... brainchild of Z-lister ...


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Internationally Protected persons


I know, just kidding. I like my definition better.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I know, just kidding. I like my definition better.



It's like I tell my young'ns, irony is very tricky in writing 

BTW, even if ME-again and Half-wit get IPP status, it is very doubtful they would be able to use their immunity for criminal activity (non-payment of taxes, dodging Sam's truth-bullet court case etc) even though, that's basically what they want to use it for - get out and stay out of jail card forever and a day - because it will be up-to the British Government whether WE waive their diplomatic immunity, not the dasaster-duo. If the Gov think they are acting against the country's interests with impunity and bringing it into disrepute internationally, H&M can still find themselves being prosecuted and/or held to account.


----------



## Icyjade

Mumotons said:


> Prince Harry 'slammed the phone down' on William during heated call
> 
> 
> The explosive claims are contained in an documentary by BFM TV - the most popular TV news outlet in France - called 'Red Line: William and Harry, the enemy brothers'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



If they don’t sue, you know it’s true…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone p*ssed off South Africans.


----------



## Chanbal

I believe this is the full version of a clip posted earlier. (I apologize if it is a double post)


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> The tagline for Archetypes is "Don't believe the type"
> It sounds very .... brainchild of Z-lister ...



Sounds very 80’s/90’s familiar… Not a single original bone in her body


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> As if she wasn't enough of a monster.
> 
> 'Delusions of grandeur' doesn't even begin to cover her multitude of...issues.


I don't get it....are these real billboards?  in what city?


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> I don't get it....are these real billboards?  in what city?


Most of these look like NYC.  I didn't look too closely so others will need to chime in if there are other cities as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Cinderlala said:


> Most of these look like NYC.  I didn't look too closely so others will need to chime in if there are other cities as well.


Read a few pages back on this thread the billboards are in NYC, LA, Toronto.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> What does IPP stand for? International Professional PITA?


Impotent Programmed Puppet?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> They might have analyzed a little better, however, Megalomaniac posed standing spread legged on a corner, *she could be mistaken for someone soliciting*.


IMO, it's no mistake, she learned that pose long ago during her yacht girl days and when 'soliciting' for acting jobs.


----------



## gracekelly

Re Harry’s book.

Either negotiation, or fear of law suits   I dont think William or. Charles  are in any mood to negotiate. Hopefully they believe that the longer it takes to publish, the less impact Harry’s stories will have. Time is on their side as more debunking of lies comes out. Let’s see what the French documentary  has to reveal.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> Most of these look like NYC.  I didn't look too closely so others will need to chime in if there are other cities as well.


delusions of grandeur indeed...wow


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone p*ssed off South Africans.



She dug her own grave. This shows how dim-witted she is. Her lies and fantasies are finally catching up and more people see the real Claw.


----------



## Stansy

Jayne1 said:


> That's all one could want in a nanny.
> 
> Going for a snack and dribbling food on the baby in a sling, while leaving a plugged-in unattended portable electric heater in the room, probably near combustable materials such as bedding (why else would it catch fire.)
> 
> Of course all this is baloney, but it sure doesn't say much about Meg's knowledge of what to look for in a baby sitter.


Oh, my take on it was quite opposite: give that woman a raise as she and her appetite saved Arkie from his fate of dying in a fire


----------



## CentralTimeZone

andrashik said:


> She dug her own grave. This shows how dim-witted she is. Her lies and fantasies are finally catching up and more people see the real Claw.


Or...these "threats" will just help their security and IPP status claims.


----------



## Sophisticatted

One of the things that stuck out for me with the promo pics was that all the girls in the group shots were braless and wearing wife beaters.   It’s not a good look.


----------



## Kiradris

Didn't this beech take the FSO exam and have machinations of going into diplomatic work??!  What an utter fail that would have been, she manages to denigrate every single country she visits.


----------



## charlottawill

No words....


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

"Fokof"


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> delusions of grandeur indeed...wow



She now considers herself to be in the same league as KK since they have both been on billboards in TS. A dubious accomplishment imo.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> She now considers herself to be in the same league as KK since they have both been on billboards in TS. A dubious accomplishment imo.


what an accomplishment

You couldn't get less royal if you tried
Just her, no Harry, right?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> She now considers herself to be in the same league as KK since they have both been on billboards in TS. A dubious accomplishment imo.



Her PR strategy is very similar to KK's. 

It's designed that even people that post negatively are clicking, gaining engagement credit and breeding notoriety


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what an accomplishment
> 
> You couldn't get less royal if you tried
> Just her, no Harry, right?



Harry who?


----------



## andrashik

charlottawill said:


> No words....



I feel pity for all the sugars. They are living in a fantasy world.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> No words....



I agree   Meghan’s heart is pure. Purely mean and selfish and her heart purely loves only herself


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> I feel pity for all the sugars. They are living in a fantasy world.


It is life on another planet in another solar system far far away.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Her PR strategy is very similar to KK's.
> 
> It's designed that even people that post negatively are clicking, gaining engagement credit and breeding notoriety


are we sure this is real?  I Googled and found nothing about it


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> I feel pity for all the sugars. They are living in a fantasy world.


Don’t feel sorry for them. They are busy feasting on the word salad, oblivious to the hypocrisy and falsehoods that belie her empty platitudes.


----------



## Cinderlala

Sophisticatted said:


> One of the things that stuck out for me with the promo pics was that all the girls in the group shots were braless and wearing wife beaters.   It’s not a good look.


Right??  She looks...rough.


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s a game we can play. We already know the guests for the first two podcasts. Any guesses on who the other 10 influential women she will talk over interview will be?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> What does IPP stand for? International Professional PITA?


Internationally Protected Person - Wiki can explain technicalities but basically a VIP so important he is protected by every country, no matter where he goes


----------



## marietouchet

Cinderlala said:


> Most of these look like NYC.  I didn't look too closely so others will need to chime in if there are other cities as well.


One was def NYC - Empire State bldg is in background, Toronto was another


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> are we sure this is real?  I Googled and found nothing about it



Yup, classic 

Can't get on the 'best dressed list' go for the 'worst dressed awards', whatever you have to do to get column inches and pics. M does not care so long she is headlines, that's why the lies are so bold and even pretty easy to rebut. After it was proven she lied about P&G letter and campaign, she comes out with it again. Just a sh*t stirrer.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Yup, classic
> 
> Can't get on the 'best dressed list' go for the 'worst dressed awards', whatever you have to do to get column inches and pics. M does not care so long she is headlines, that's why the lies are so bold and even pretty easy to rebut. After it was proven she lied about P&G letter and campaign, she comes out with it again. Just a sh*t stirrer.


I'm asking about the big billboards....


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What has he done? Besides somewhat abandoning his parents because there's beef with his wife.


As far as I know, he is one of the few British men who have married an American.  [Chris Martin, too.]  Let’s see if he complains.  Are there any British women marrying American millionaires who are complaining?


----------



## Lodpah

Read somewhere that TW mentioning a fire on her SA trip was akin to a political no no, especially in her capacity. Puts the UG in a bad light. Oh well, she lies as she breathes.

I don’t believe the Spotify ranking. She’s so desperate or her team is so desperate to make her relevant they’ll do anything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lallybelle

Oh man. South Africans on Twitter are going IN. #VoetsekMeghan


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I agree   Meghan’s heart is pure. Purely mean and selfish and her heart purely loves only herself



Megatron has a  ????


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> Megatron has a  ????


Caution: Object is smaller than it appears


----------



## Chanbal

More billboards…


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Megatron has a  ????


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> are we sure this is real?  I Googled and found nothing about it


I thought it was photoshopped?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> More billboards…



Will they post her semi-nudes?  Ya kno, to prove she is a feminist.


----------



## Chanbal

Would this work as a charitable donation?


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #2
					

The alliterate one's lapdog reporter is trying to worm his way back into her good graces by writing piece after piece praising her to the mo...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## pukasonqo

LittleStar88 said:


> Sounds very 80’s/90’s familiar… Not a single original bone in her body
> 
> View attachment 5597867



Well, she is certainly making herself into a public enemy
It worked in South Africa


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Megatron has a  ????



Nope, still can't find it


----------



## marietouchet

deketed


----------



## wisconsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> As far as I know, he is one of the few British men who have married an American.  [Chris Martin, too.]  Let’s see if he complains.  Are there any British women marrying American millionaires who are complaining?


I hate to say it and certainly not my opinion but it seems now American women are viewed differently from American men and Meghan has not helped


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Sounds very 80’s/90’s familiar… Not a single original bone in her body
> 
> View attachment 5597867





pukasonqo said:


> Well, she is certainly making herself into a public enemy
> It worked in South Africa


you guys are on the same frequency


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Internationally Protected Person - Wiki can explain technicalities but basically a VIP so important he is protected by every country, no matter where he goes


If they believe that describes them then they are really and truly delusional.


----------



## charlottawill

ICYMI:









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Adopt a Senior Rescue Dog
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, and their two young children, have added a beagle to their family.




					www.etonline.com
				




The comment by the shelter owner about thinking she was Megan Fox at first


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ll be listening to some Joe Rogan today to help dethrone this nonsense…


Talk about taking one for the team. Godspeed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ew. Angela suddenly seems like a pretty unpleasant person.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Here’s a game we can play. We already know the guests for the first two podcasts. Any guesses on who the other 10 influential women she will talk over interview will be?



What does she care, it's all about her anyway

1.Meghan and dear, dear friend (coz MO wasn't biting)
2 Meghan and whatshername singer
3 Meghan and rich guest
4 Meghan and slightly less rich guest
5 Meghan and guest
6 Me-again and rich male 'feminist' guest
7 Me-me-me-again and whoever
8 Me-me-me-again and someone
9 Me-me-me-again and someone who looks like me (but not quite as pretty)
10 Me-me-me-again and - who cares anyway


----------



## charlottawill

What, no pics of the Harkles and their new family member in observance of International Dog Day? Shocker!


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> She looks...rough.


She is rough. You can put all the lipstick you want on a pig but it's still a pig. 

ETA: No offense to pigs, who are supposedly quite intelligent.


----------



## charlottawill

To use one of my husband's favorite vulgar expressions, sounds like she's really sh*t the bed this time. And I'm here for it.


----------



## Chanbal

wisconsin said:


> I hate to say it and certainly not my opinion but it seems now American women are viewed differently from American men and Meghan has not helped


People like TW delay progress, and this makes me .


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I thought it was photoshopped?


seems that way


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Some people just can't accept the fact that she is a compulsive liar


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ew. Angela suddenly seems like a pretty unpleasant person.



I would give Angela a pass - typical dry English humor - brilliant is a classic word used with sarcasm, it perhaps does not traqnslate well to US humor


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I would give Angela a pass - typical dry English humor - brilliant is a classic word used with sarcasm, it perhaps does not traqnslate well to US humor



I do feel though that if there's a chance you come out looking like a nasty piece of work you should maybe abstain from your supposedly dry wit. Like, I would totally post that, but knowing the internet and its inhabitants I'd probably have posted "Not." or something with it. I hope you are right and I just misread her intentions, but she has never struck me as particularly sarcastic before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Some people just can't accept the fact that she is a compulsive liar




I don't think I've ever encountered anyone who lies that much and so often and repeatedly, even if publicly convicted.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> People like TW delay progress, and this makes me .



I agree. 

She doesn't make it easy to talk about women's rights in any meaningful way because she's made the subject an international joke. We do NOT need Princess Pushy to remind us of OUR challenges.  

It's like Mattel bringing out 'Feminist Barbie' dressed in a beige 'going-to-work' suit, pussy bow blouse + heels and a placard that reads 'Barbie for President'. It's not about feminism, it's not about women, it's about _selling_ feminism to girls before they realise it's not something that can be bought easily, married into, or written on a banana, only fought for. When that fight comes along - you better not have signed an NDA or be working for/married to a narc. 

Dejavu (2019)


----------



## Toby93




----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>


----------



## CarryOn2020

@Toby93 











						Olivier Giroud Arsenal GIF - Olivier Giroud Arsenal Goal - Discover & Share GIFs
					

Click to view the GIF




					tenor.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> @Toby93
> View attachment 5598057
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olivier Giroud Arsenal GIF - Olivier Giroud Arsenal Goal - Discover & Share GIFs
> 
> 
> Click to view the GIF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tenor.com



That actually looks more like someone she should have married instead of Hazy.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think I've ever encountered anyone who lies that much and so often and repeatedly, even if publicly convicted.


But that's the problem.  Has anyone contradicted her in an interview?  Has she been challenged in any way?  Of course she can tell stories, Sunshine Sachs bots (and most fans are bots) will quickly defend her.


----------



## Cinderlala

wisconsin said:


> I hate to say it and certainly not my opinion but it seems now American women are viewed differently from American men and Meghan has not helped


I'd prefer it if she stopped speaking "as a woman" altogether.  Let's add "as a mom" to that as well.  

On behalf of women and moms everywhere, keep your word salads to yourself.


----------



## Annawakes

Oh yes I want to hear all about her first husband!  And whatever Trevor has to say.  Pleaaasssee!!  It will keep us entertained for weeks and weeks.


----------



## muddledmint

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5598018
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #2
> 
> 
> The alliterate one's lapdog reporter is trying to worm his way back into her good graces by writing piece after piece praising her to the mo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


If this is true, that is so sad.


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> More billboards…



I almost thought it was real until I saw this tweet...


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> To use one of my husband's favorite vulgar expressions, sounds like she's really sh*t the bed this time. And I'm here for it.











						Update: #VoetsekMeghan is trending on Twitter - here's why
					

It looks like Piers Morgan isn't Meghan Markle's only critic since the release of her new Spotify podcast series entitled Archetypes on Tuesday. She's gained equally as many – if not more – haters.



					www.capetownetc.com
				




Voetsek means go away lol!  She stupidly opened a real can of worms.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



I would so love this to be true.


----------



## gracekelly

muddledmint said:


> If this is true, that is so sad.


Omit made his bed of nails and now he has to sleep in it.  In his parent's basement with the pay toilet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Omid Scobie article yesterday (I won’t post the link as I don’t want to give him clicks) had this interesting statement

_Uncensored and unbothered, Meghan, like Harry, has managed to create a healthier and happier existence *since being shown the door *after the couple's half in, half out proposal was rejected."_

Shown the door?  I thought they flounced off on their terms!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>




"lets be frank if a man has to pick between meg n nacho a sane man would pick nacho"    

"He sure is happy when he's away from her"

"Every day, I thank god William is the first born"


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Omid Scobie article yesterday (I won’t post the link as I don’t want to give him clicks) had this interesting statement
> 
> _Uncensored and unbothered, Meghan, like Harry, has managed to create a healthier and happier existence *since being shown the door *after the couple's half in, half out proposal was rejected."_
> 
> Shown the door?  I thought they flounced off on their terms!


Scobie got confused between what actually happened vs. what he wrote happened in _Finding Freedom_.

Love the Cary Grant GIF.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Omid Scobie article yesterday (I won’t post the link as I don’t want to give him clicks) had this interesting statement
> 
> _Uncensored and unbothered, Meghan, like Harry, has managed to create a healthier and happier existence *since being shown the door *after the couple's half in, half out proposal was rejected."_
> 
> Shown the door?  I thought they flounced off on their terms!


Talk about a Freudian slip!  Let's see if Omit can get out of this one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> _Uncensored and unbothered, Meghan, like Harry, has managed to create a healthier and happier existence *since being shown the door *after the couple's half in, half out proposal was rejected."_
> 
> Shown the door?  I thought they flounced off on their terms!


Revisionist history?

Consider that Serena’s first match in the US Open [possibly her last tournament] is on Monday.  She has all this podcast-noise in her head now. With a ‘friend’ like MM, who needs enemies?  Serena will need hours in the hyperbaric chamber to get rid of this negativity.


----------



## charlottawill

What is he on?   Or just living his best life without the ball and chain?  



Reminds me of this:


----------



## Lodpah

lallybelle said:


> Oh man. South Africans on Twitter are going IN. #VoetsekMeghan


Let’s see: she’s alienated the BRF, his  friends, Australia and now Hazz’s beloved Africa. What does it take for the sugars to see she’s crazy? She’s destroying every thing he has loved (maybe) until he’s a torn man. Yawn! At this point he’s so stupid he deserves  her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> What is he on?   Or just living his best life without the ball and chain?



The royal glow is gone.

ETA: to his? credit, he did score 5 goals and his team did win. Hope all the proceeds go to Sentebale.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lallybelle said:


> Oh man. South Africans on Twitter are going IN. #VoetsekMeghan


They can take a number and get in line. We’ve added about 50 pages since the pod aired. LSA is on fire, too.  People are mad


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The royal glow is gone.


Not saying that he isn't, but if anything would make me believe that Charles is not his father, it would be his overall demeanor self-entitlement and nastiness.  Harry never had a royal glow.  There was a nono-second when he seemed OK and likable, but that turned out to be an aberration.  I think he found his match with MM.  I sure hope the 3rd marriage story is true, because if it is, I just know she lied to him and never told him.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>



Is this taking off anywhere other than social media? Because I haven’t seen anything in a normal web search to indicate she’s facing the least bit of criticism.


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Is this taking off anywhere other than social media? Because I haven’t seen anything in a normal web search to indicate she’s facing the least bit of criticism.


Patience, dear one, patience.  Lots going on in the world right now.  It *will* change.  Karma’s got H&M’s number.


----------



## Kiradris

bag-mania said:


> Is this taking off anywhere other than social media? Because I haven’t seen anything in a normal web search to indicate she’s facing the least bit of criticism.


UK news outlets have published scathing reviews of her podcast, and I think Australian media has been pretty harsh as well.  
You will never in a million years read a negative word about her in American press though, they’re coddling her and turning a blind eye.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kiradris said:


> UK news outlets have published scathing reviews of her podcast, and I think Australian media has been pretty harsh as well.
> You will never in a million years read a negative word about her in American press though, they’re coddling her and turning a blind eye.


Imo that is because the US press is beholden to certain [ahem] people.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> What is he on?   Or just living his best life without the ball and chain?
> 
> 
> 
> Reminds me of this:



Bottom picture: The so-called smile doesn't look real and if the eyes are the window to the soul, his soul is in deep doodoo.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Patience, dear one, patience.  Lots going on in the world right now.  It *will* change.  Karma’s got H&M’s number.


This 100%. Just adding "and Karma can be a bi!ch!"


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope all the proceeds go to Sentebale.



I fear it will somehow get funneled through one of their many business entities.


----------



## needlv

Um… not sure I believe this (read and then click on the right to see the last bits).


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> are we sure this is real?  I Googled and found nothing about it


I'm googling too.

This link claims a digital billboard went up in Australia.








						Royals, Obamas and the End of the $100M Vanity Deal
					

Starting in 2018, streaming cash rained on the world's two most famous couples. The challenge? Neither had ever produced any Hollywood content




					theankler.com
				




Otherwise the main sources of the billboard images are from twitter feeds run by her serfs. One tweet praised her as taking over the world. Another claimed Spotify paid for the billboards.








						Myra's tweet - "Billboards for Meghan’s #archetypes podcast have appeared in New York, Los Angeles and Canada  " - Trendsmap
					

Detailed Tweet Analytics for Myra's tweet - #meghanmarkle, meghan




					www.trendsmap.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thought he was smarter than this.  Someone should inquire how he feels about her lies 

_A close friend of Meghan Markle says she 'means well' with her new podcast and has lauded her efforts to 'attack' important subjects. 

Nacho Figueras, an Argentine polo player who works as an ambassador for Prince Harry 's charity Sentebale, heaped praise on the Duchess of Sussex following the launch of her long-awaited Archetypes podcast. 

The debut episode featuring tennis superstar Serena Williams as a special guest was released on Spotify on Tuesday morning, and has since risen to the top of the service's streaming charts. 

Topics discussed by the pair included female empowerment and ambition, which they both related to events from throughout their lives.

Speaking at a charity polo match in Aspen, Colorado, on Thursday, which was not attended by the duchess herself, her pal Figueras said: "She is always there, they have two very young children. She's also working very hard on her podcast that I want to congratulate her on.

"Sometimes the team has to divide to go on duty. That's the only reason she's not here, but she's always here in spirit."
"I think that she means well, she really wants to empower women and attack certain subjects that I think are important."

The polo player added that he wishes her the best in producing the podcast, and said he knew that she "cares about making the world a better place."

But not everyone has shared the Sussex family friend's rapturous response to the new series, which followed the signing of a multi-million pound deal with Spotify last year.

Responding to Meghan's claims in the episode that she was unduly criticised for having too much ambition when she first started dating Harry, royal commentator Kinsey Schofield suggested she had in fact “won the lottery” when she married the prince and is now using the podcast to “settle scores”. 


Another rebuttal came from her half-sister Samantha Markle, who said her suggestion that she was first "empowered" by nuns at school ignored the fact that her dad Thomas had paid for her to attend the institution.

It comes after Meghan promised listeners she was going to “be myself and talk and be unfiltered” prompting fears in royal circles she may reveal more about life as she saw it in the monarchy. 

The first episode of the podcast saw Meghan reveal how her and Prince Harry’s son Archie narrowly escaped a fire in his bedroom when he was meant to be sleeping, during the Sussex's tour of South Africa.

In the 57-minute-long podcast episode, the duchess tells of how Archie's then nanny, named only as Lauren, had taken the four and a half month old with her downstairs instead while she went to get a snack when, meanwhile, the heater in the nursery caught fire. 

Meghan said: "We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'."








						Meghan Markle 'means well and is working hard on podcast', insists friend
					

Meghan Markle's close friend has praised the US-based royal for 'attacking' important issues on her new podcast, and has insisted she 'means well' following a divided response to the first episode




					www.mirror.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone p*ssed off South Africans.



Voetsek = “Get lost! Go away!”


----------



## Redbirdhermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Consider that Serena’s first match in the US Open [possibly her last tournament] is on Monday.  She has all this podcast-noise in her head now. With a ‘friend’ like MM, who needs enemies?  Serena will need hours in the hyperbaric chamber to get rid of this negativity.


Serena survived that horrible incident at the Oscars where the leading actor of the movie about her life ruined the occasion for her and everyone else.  She will survive the negative reviews for this podcast.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Redbirdhermes said:


> Serena survived that horrible incident at the Oscars where the leading actor of the movie about her life ruined the occasion for her and everyone else.  She will survive the negative reviews for this podcast.


Oh, she most certainly will survive,  will she win her elusive 24th trophy?  The thing about tennis is it is mostly a mental game as well as a young person’s game. If the ball comes to SW, she can hit it like no one else, running after it is getting harder for her. Age and injuries have slowed her down a bit. This podcast is nothing but a distraction that she did not need.  Yes, she has proven herself again and again, imo, she is a GOAT.  I really want her to win this 24th title.  Only my opinion. 

According to the podcast, she only had about 30 mins of sleep before she played the 2018 French Open. While in Paris, her daughter broke her arm and they had a long wait at the hospital. Serena said she felt guilty about leaving her daughter to play tennis. She eventually lost the tournament and injured herself. 
More here: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/meghan-markle-means-well-working-27837146


----------



## bag-mania

Kiradris said:


> UK news outlets have published scathing reviews of her podcast, and I think Australian media has been pretty harsh as well.
> *You will never in a million years read a negative word about her in American press though, they’re coddling her and turning a blind eye.*


Unfortunately this is true. Every topic Meghan pretends to address like it was an original viewpoint has already been mainstream for years. She takes no risks herself but tries to take credit for “trailblazing” that was done by others before her.

The US media loves that kind of conformity from a celebrity.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thought he was smarter than this.  Someone should inquire how he feels about her lies
> 
> _A close friend of Meghan Markle says she 'means well' with her new podcast and has lauded her efforts to 'attack' important subjects.
> 
> Nacho Figueras, an Argentine polo player who works as an ambassador for Prince Harry 's charity Sentebale, heaped praise on the Duchess of Sussex following the launch of her long-awaited Archetypes podcast.
> 
> The debut episode featuring tennis superstar Serena Williams as a special guest was released on Spotify on Tuesday morning, and has since risen to the top of the service's streaming charts.
> 
> Topics discussed by the pair included female empowerment and ambition, which they both related to events from throughout their lives.
> 
> Speaking at a charity polo match in Aspen, Colorado, on Thursday, which was not attended by the duchess herself, her pal Figueras said: "She is always there, they have two very young children. She's also working very hard on her podcast that I want to congratulate her on.
> 
> "Sometimes the team has to divide to go on duty. That's the only reason she's not here, but she's always here in spirit."
> "I think that she means well, she really wants to empower women and attack certain subjects that I think are important."
> 
> The polo player added that he wishes her the best in producing the podcast, and said he knew that she "cares about making the world a better place."
> 
> But not everyone has shared the Sussex family friend's rapturous response to the new series, which followed the signing of a multi-million pound deal with Spotify last year.
> 
> Responding to Meghan's claims in the episode that she was unduly criticised for having too much ambition when she first started dating Harry, royal commentator Kinsey Schofield suggested she had in fact “won the lottery” when she married the prince and is now using the podcast to “settle scores”.
> 
> 
> Another rebuttal came from her half-sister Samantha Markle, who said her suggestion that she was first "empowered" by nuns at school ignored the fact that her dad Thomas had paid for her to attend the institution.
> 
> It comes after Meghan promised listeners she was going to “be myself and talk and be unfiltered” prompting fears in royal circles she may reveal more about life as she saw it in the monarchy.
> 
> The first episode of the podcast saw Meghan reveal how her and Prince Harry’s son Archie narrowly escaped a fire in his bedroom when he was meant to be sleeping, during the Sussex's tour of South Africa.
> 
> In the 57-minute-long podcast episode, the duchess tells of how Archie's then nanny, named only as Lauren, had taken the four and a half month old with her downstairs instead while she went to get a snack when, meanwhile, the heater in the nursery caught fire.
> 
> Meghan said: "We came back. And, of course, as a mother, you go, 'Oh, my God, what?' Everyone's in tears, everyone's shaken. And what do we have to do? Go out and do another official engagement? I said, 'This doesn't make any sense'."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle 'means well and is working hard on podcast', insists friend
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's close friend has praised the US-based royal for 'attacking' important issues on her new podcast, and has insisted she 'means well' following a divided response to the first episode
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I wonder if it secretly annoys Nacho that the press harass him with questions about Harry and Meghan’s marrriage. Nobody was interviewing him once the Santa Barbara polo season ended and he left.

Or was it Harry who asked him to say nice things about Meghan to the press?


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Um… not sure I believe this (read and then click on the right to see the last bits).



I don’t believe it’s true but I would think it was hilarious if it was.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Um… not sure I believe this (read and then click on the right to see the last bits).



If the above is true…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if it secretly annoys Nacho that the press harass him with questions about Harry and Meghan’s marrriage. Nobody was interviewing him once the Santa Barbara polo season ended and he left.
> 
> *Or was it Harry who asked him to say nice things about Meghan to the press?*


The article was likely entirely written by TW's PR team, and Nacho just signed at the bottom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Kiradris

bag-mania said:


> Unfortunately this is true. Every topic Meghan pretends to address like it was an original viewpoint has already been mainstream for years. She takes no risks herself but tries to take credit for “trailblazing” that was done by others before her.
> 
> The US media loves that kind of conformity from a celebrity.


This is another thing that annoyed me about her podcast.  Her "feminism" is very much stuck in the 90's, probably even earlier.  No one outside of those maybe in fundie communities is going to say that ambition in a woman is a bad thing.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Unfortunately this is true. Every topic Meghan pretends to address like it was an original viewpoint has already been mainstream for years. *She takes no risks herself but tries to take credit for “trailblazing” that was done by others before her.*
> 
> The US media loves that kind of conformity from a celebrity.


----------



## needlv

It’s interesting to me that they are splitting their brands.

MM’s podcast is named just after her, and Hazbeen barely rates a mention.  Notice she didn’t try to slap her title on it either.

PH’s book… allegedly written without MM’s assistance…


----------



## Redbirdhermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, she most certainly will survive,  will she win her elusive 24th trophy?  The thing about tennis is it is mostly a mental game as well as a young person’s game. If the ball comes to SW, she can hit it like no one else, running after it is getting harder for her. Age and injuries have slowed her down a bit. This podcast is nothing but a distraction that she did not need.  Yes, she has proven herself again and again, imo, she is a GOAT.  I really want her to win this 24th title.  Only my opinion.
> 
> According to the podcast, she only had about 30 mins of sleep before she played the 2018 French Open. While in Paris, her daughter broke her arm and they had a long wait at the hospital. Serena said she felt guilty about leaving her daughter to play tennis. She eventually lost the tournament and injured herself.
> More here: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/meghan-markle-means-well-working-27837146


Serena rang the opening bell at the New York Stock Exchange this morning.  I hope she does well in the US Open, but this amazing woman is moving forward in any case.









						Serena Williams Boldly Takes the First Step in Her New Career Post Tennis as $111 Million Venture Fund Makes It Big at New York Stock Exchange
					

After announcing her retirement, Serena Williams recently visited the New York Stock Exchange, where she received a massive honor.




					www.essentiallysports.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Not there yet! 



_*In fact, the only person who seems to be being pushed around here is Meghan’s husband: the Queen’s grandson, without whom the minor TV actress would not have a global platform for her self-pitying grievances.*_









						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: I feel sorry for Harry
					

AMANDA PLATELL: Much derision has been heaped on Meghan and Harry's new '£18 million' Spotify podcast. But the most notable thing was Harry's near-absence from the show.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

A new title for TW, courtesy of the Washington Post! 

_*Pity Meghan Markle*, Duchess of Sussex. The launch of her new podcast, "Archetypes", generated buzz less for her conversation with her friend, soon-to-retire tennis great Serena Williams, than for yet another story about Markle’s unhappy experiences as a working royal._



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/26/meghan-markle-podcast-trauma-limits/


----------



## mellibelly

Billboard up in Paris


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> It’s interesting to me that they are splitting their brands.
> 
> MM’s podcast is named just after her, and Hazbeen barely rates a mention.  Notice she didn’t try to slap her title on it either.
> 
> PH’s book… allegedly written without MM’s assistance…



My guess is they're splitting brands because they're splitting up. I believe the rumors. She's been so clingy all along and now he's showing up solo in SA and Aspen? It's not a coincidence. The UN visit may have been the breaking point.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> Billboard up in Paris
> View attachment 5598210



*Merci beaucoup, la France  *


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> My guess is they're splitting brands because they're splitting up. I believe the rumors. She's been so clingy all along and now he's showing up solo in SA and Aspen? It's not a coincidence. The UN visit may have been the breaking point.


That is the visit where Hazzi gave a “speech” to honor Mandela, right?  The same Mandela who served as President of SA, right?  I could go on, but I won’t.  Was she so mad that no one showed up that she went scorched earth on SA?  Unreal how dim H&M are.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is the visit where Hazzi gave a “speech” to honor Mandela, right?  The same Mandela who served as President of SA, right?  I could go on, but I won’t.  Was she so mad that no one showed up that she went scorched earth on SA?  Unreal how dim H&M are.


That is a possibility. She is very petty and this is her clapback


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Revisionist history?


She's a victim.


----------



## charlottawill

My head hurts...


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> My head hurts...



WHUT?  Quick!  Get some vinaigrette and drown this salad!


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Billboard up in Paris
> View attachment 5598210





CarryOn2020 said:


> *Merci beaucoup, la France *


The Chicks of Montecito!


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> WHUT?  Quick!  Get some vinaigrette and drown this salad!


That salad will give you E.coli.


----------



## Cinderlala

How great would it be if those billboards were actually in those cities??


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> She's a victim.


Her pants are on fire.  


gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5598094


----------



## Chanbal

Social media reacts to Meghan Markle podcast | Bona Magazine
					

Meghan Markle has been trending in South Africa following her podcast where Twitter feel she misrepresented the nation. Meghan's podcast Archetype dropped %%




					www.bona.co.za


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> That salad will give you E.coli.


Spewing from both end, no doubt.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Social media reacts to Meghan Markle podcast | Bona Magazine
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been trending in South Africa following her podcast where Twitter feel she misrepresented the nation. Meghan's podcast Archetype dropped %%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bona.co.za



That looks like a charming residence and with lovely gardens. Her comments were shameful. I recall looking at the pictures and videos of this trip, and the people of SA were lovely and welcoming and certainly did not deserve this slap in the face.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Too far, simply too far.  Hope they get boo’ed wherever they go.


----------



## mellibelly

HG Tudor’s channel was taken down from YouTube. He was the narcissist exposing the narcissism of TW. I don’t get how this nobody, z lister, no talent hack has the power to get people fired, silenced and “take away their voice”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Clearly, he struggles with the grammar.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> HG Tudor’s channel was taken down from YouTube. He was the narcissist exposing the narcissism of TW. I don’t get how this nobody, z lister, no talent hack has the power to get people fired, silenced and “take away their voice”


She has powerful friends who, apparently, did not realize she had offended and deeply hurt an entire continent.   
Or - did Spotify think the podcast would cause this much furor and released it anyway?  Interesting, if true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> That looks like a charming residence and with lovely gardens. Her comments were shameful. I recall looking at the pictures and videos of this trip, and the people of SA were lovely and welcoming and certainly did not deserve this slap in the face.


Particularly egregious and with flaming hypocrisy, since her “I am here as a woman of color, I am here as your sister, I am here with you and for you”  is how she presented herself.

 They have every right to be scathing in response to her snarky reference to the Governor General’s mansion  as a “housing unit”, not being respectful of the  cultural significance of the nanny’s baby sling for Archie, and completely misrepresenting the heater malfunction. 

Kudos to the South Africans! I don’t think Sunshine Sucks has a big enough broom to sweep this under a carpet. That tribe of Archwell Audio lackeys posed on the street corner with her and the 28 staff  of Spotify have been made to look foolish and incompetent. In aaaalllll the time it took to produce this crap, no one checked the content. If they let her run amok, it’s on them, total unprofessionalism.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> Social media reacts to Meghan Markle podcast | Bona Magazine
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been trending in South Africa following her podcast where Twitter feel she misrepresented the nation. Meghan's podcast Archetype dropped %%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bona.co.za




She should be happy, finally she is trending


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Isn't it so that Harry can only be divorced in the UK, though? But somehow the Zoom with Doria and Archie would now make sense.

Also, "will fight for sole custody but doesn't want it/like the kids"...just what we've been saying, hu?

Please Harry, go get help. Your family might never trust you again, but they will do what they can to make the outcome better for you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

In the comments: divorce not imminent due to financial reasons (apparently he's set to get another portion of inheritance at 40 and the longer the marriage the bigger the settlement), Doria on SS's payroll  (someone said the one thing they don't find believable is that Doria is actually worried...after reading Bower's book I do think she's an ice queen. Someone answered she's paid by SS/Raptor to play her role as loving, supportive mother).


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has powerful friends who, apparently, did not realize she had offended and deeply hurt an entire continent.
> Or - did Spotify think the podcast would cause this much furor and released it anyway?  Interesting, if true.



Even I doubt M or her PR realises how offensive she is. _This_ time she's PO the wrong people. 'Optically' (dear dear M) this is not a good look.

She is sooooooo US/Western-centric, she doesn't even think of the people in SA or anywhere else in Africa really exist, she probably thinks the rest of the world outside LA is a film set and we are all just extras in her epic tragic movie. 

Z-list and her whiter-than-white housebound have proved themselves to be totally racist. I'm so pleased _she_'s being called-out for her 'Karen-ness' privilege at last, because I am_ so_ sick of her woe-is-me-faux-wokeness. So glad a few more people have woke-en-up at last.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Even I doubt M or her PR realises how offensive she is.



I understand how she would lack any self-awareness, but her PR? Aren't these people paid to analyze, think ahead etc.?


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Particularly egregious and with flaming hypocrisy, since her “I am here as a woman of color, I am here as your sister, I am here with you and for you”  is how she presented herself.
> 
> They have every right to be scathing in response to her snarky reference to the Governor General’s mansion  as a “housing unit”, not being respectful of the  cultural significance of the nanny’s baby sling for Archie, and completely misrepresenting the heater malfunction.
> 
> Kudos to the South Africans! I don’t think Sunshine Sucks has a big enough broom to sweep this under a carpet. That tribe of Archwell Audio lackeys posed on the street corner with her and the 28 staff  of Spotify have been made to look foolish and incompetent. In aaaalllll the time it took to produce this crap, no one checked the content. If they let her run amok, it’s on them, total unprofessionalism.



And she said she didn't want to wave her engagement ring in their faces  

Where does she think in the world the biggest and most famous diamond mines are located?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I understand how she would lack and self-awareness, but her PR? Aren't these people paid to analyze, think ahead etc.?



I'm sure she works from a script. The whole thing sounded rehearsed beforehand. All interview questions are sent to guests pre-production.

This a person who had the Palace read her letter and go through every word let's not forget. Coz, wow, she is just so important. Nothing is off-the-cuff IMO.


----------



## zen1965

Katel said:


> Voetsek = “Get lost! Go away!”


Used as slang the connotation is even harsher as in „f@ck @ff“

(OT: my first post as O.G. )


----------



## Stansy

papertiger said:


> And she said she didn't want to wave her engagement ring in their faces
> 
> Where does she think in the world the biggest and most famous diamond mines are located?


She was just happy for yet another occasion where she did not have to wear the ring she so obviously despised to have it altered (multiple times even? I have lost track).


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> And she said she didn't want to wave her engagement ring in their faces
> 
> Where does she think in the world the biggest and most famous diamond mines are located?


Do you really think she knows that? She doesn't even know countries' flags


----------



## marietouchet

Wall st journal reading list on the last American duchess 



Selected by Andrew Lownie, the author, most recently, of “Traitor King: The Scandalous Exile of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.”










						Five Best: Books on the Duke and Duchess of Windsor
					

Selected by Andrew Lownie, the author, most recently, of ‘Traitor King: The Scandalous Exile of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.’




					www.wsj.com


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> And she said she didn't want to wave her engagement ring in their faces
> 
> Where does she think in the world the biggest and most famous diamond mines are located?


Leaving ring home allowed her to have it redone


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> Do you really think she knows that? She doesn't even know countries' flags



Exactly, nothing registers with her except if it/he/she is useful for advancement


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> That looks like a charming residence and with lovely gardens. Her comments were shameful. I recall looking at the pictures and videos of this trip, and the people of SA were lovely and welcoming and certainly did not deserve this slap in the face.


It looks like a beautiful mansion. It certainly doesn't look like the pic from wikipedia, which illustrates a 'housing unit…' 










						Housing unit - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

DM and the lovely headlines about TW.   










						South Africans hit out at Meghan after she told of 'fire'
					

Archie, then four months old, was not in the room in Cape Town when a heater started to smoke - but the incident left the Duchess of Sussex 'shaken' and 'in tears', she revealed in her new podcast.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I'm googling too.
> 
> This link claims a digital billboard went up in Australia.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royals, Obamas and the End of the $100M Vanity Deal
> 
> 
> Starting in 2018, streaming cash rained on the world's two most famous couples. The challenge? Neither had ever produced any Hollywood content
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theankler.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Otherwise the main sources of the billboard images are from twitter feeds run by her serfs. One tweet praised her as taking over the world. Another claimed Spotify paid for the billboards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Myra's tweet - "Billboards for Meghan’s #archetypes podcast have appeared in New York, Los Angeles and Canada  " - Trendsmap
> 
> 
> Detailed Tweet Analytics for Myra's tweet - #meghanmarkle, meghan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.trendsmap.com


that Ankler article is interesting....I gather her first podcast did well...wonder if people will listen in the future.  When I listen to an interview I want to hear about the person being interviewed and their work - not the interviewer.  I stopped listening to Marc Maron for that reason.  He had interesting guests but he always makes it about him, how he has so much in common with the guest, etc.  I prefer Terry Gross.  She does her homework and alwasy asks great questions.

What about that pic of Michelle with the long hair.  she looks good - wonder if that's her real hair.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> *HG Tudor’s channel was taken down from YouTube.* He was the narcissist exposing the narcissism of TW. I don’t get how this nobody, z lister, no talent hack has the power to get people fired, silenced and “take away their voice”





CarryOn2020 said:


> *She has powerful friends who, apparently, did not realize she had offended and deeply hurt an entire continent.*
> Or - did Spotify think the podcast would cause this much furor and released it anyway?  Interesting, if true.


The fact that 'these friends' have the power to censor others is of big concern. I think the 'supportive friends' know very well what she is and they may not be better than her.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> "have been made to look foolish and incompetent."


They ARE foolish and incompetent for getting into bed with her, so to speak


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In the comments: divorce not imminent due to financial reasons (apparently he's set to get another portion of inheritance at 40 and the longer the marriage the bigger the settlement), Doria on SS's payroll  (someone said the one thing they don't find believable is that Doria is actually worried...after reading Bower's book I do think she's an ice queen. Someone answered she's paid by SS/Raptor to play her role as loving, supportive mother).


But even with the next installment of his inheritance I don't believe he has the means in the long term to support her in the manner to which she thinks she is entitled. She wants billions, not mere millions. And she's obviously not going to earn it on her own.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder when is the BLG turn to be silenced…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Social media reacts to Meghan Markle podcast | Bona Magazine
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has been trending in South Africa following her podcast where Twitter feel she misrepresented the nation. Meghan's podcast Archetype dropped %%
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bona.co.za



Yet this morning on CNN they were reporting that her pod crash had knocked Joe Rogan out of first place. The US media seems to want to turn a blind eye to who she really is.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder when is the BLG turn to be silenced…




"How come “Stepford Wife” is not a label, which she’s adamantly against?" 

Because she's the Queen of Hypocrisy.


----------



## bellecate

zen1965 said:


> Used as slang the connotation is even harsher as in „f@ck @ff“
> 
> (OT: my first post as O.G. )


Congrats on your OG status.


----------



## bag-mania

mellibelly said:


> HG Tudor’s channel was taken down from YouTube. He was the narcissist exposing the narcissism of TW. *I don’t get how this nobody, z lister, no talent hack has the power to get people fired, silenced and “take away their voice”*


One word: lawyers


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I understand how she would lack any self-awareness, but her PR? Aren't these people paid to analyze, think ahead etc.?


Do you think she listens to them? I’m sure they advise her and then she does as she damn well pleases.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Yet this morning on CNN they were reporting that her pod crash had knocked Joe Rogan out of first place. The US media seems to want to turn a blind eye to who she really is.


CNN doesn’t care what Meghan does as long as her views align with theirs. It’s more important to them to try to make Joe Rogan look like he’s losing popularity than to worry about an actress who lies (which isn’t unusual).


----------



## youngster

Kiradris said:


> UK news outlets have published scathing reviews of her podcast, and I think Australian media has been pretty harsh as well.
> You will never in a million years read a negative word about her in American press though, they’re coddling her and turning a blind eye.



It's because the U.S. press considers MM and Harry celebrities, not important public figures.  Celebrities here always get fluffy, fawning, print-their-press-releases-word-for-word treatment, until they behave badly in some very public way and then the press turns and goes after them with a vengeance.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


>




Princess Anne was also almost abducted at gun point while driving back to BP at the age of 23.  Her bodyguard was shot. It must have been massively traumatic and yet we don't hear her going on and on about it for years and years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Princess Anne was also almost abducted at gun point while driving back to BP at the age of 23.  Her bodyguard was shot. It must have been massively traumatic and yet we don't hear her going on and on about it for years and years.


I didn’t know that. Anne is made of sterner stuff.

Meghan, on the other hand, makes every single situation out to be the most traumatic event anyone ever had to endure. Doesn’t seem like her fans will ever catch on.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know that. Anne is made of sterner stuff.
> 
> Meghan, on the other hand, makes every single situation out to be the most traumatic event anyone ever had to endure. Doesn’t seem like her fans will ever catch on.


Yep, her attacker yelled at her to get out of the car, and she replied "not bloody likely"   Gotta love Anne!


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> It's because the U.S. press considers MM and Harry celebrities, not important public figures.  Celebrities here always get fluffy, fawning, print-their-press-releases-word-for-word treatment, until they behave badly in some very public way and then the press turns and goes after them with a vengeance.


Here's a good interview with Diana's longtime secretary Patrick Jephson. His perspective on the difference between royalty and celebrity re the Harkles is interesting. Starts around 3:00. 



>


----------



## Toby93




----------



## youngster

This is such a great article on Spotify and Netflix and the two big glamour deals signed by both the former first couple (the O's) and MM/Harry.  Thanks to @xincinsin for linking it originally.  https://theankler.com/p/royals-obamas-and-the-end-of-the/comments?triedSigningIn=true

Here are some interesting excerpts:
But at both Netflix and Spotify, whose stocks are down 67 percent and 69.5 percent from their highs, respectively, it’s hard not to wonder if these and other VIP deals were more reckless than fearless in hindsight. Four years into its podcast spree, Spotify has only housed one bonafide hit that’s exclusive to its platform: _The Joe Rogan Experience_. Many of those other splashy headline-making deals have failed to produce the amount of content that would justify their hefty pay days (*Kim Kardashian*) — if they even exist at all anymore ..... More, podcasting accounted for just 7 percent of total listening hours in the first quarter of 2022, and 2 percent of revenue last year.

As for Archewell, it has yet to establish itself as a real player in Hollywood, in part because it has yet to define what it is setting out to do. Sources say this stems from Markle, someone who always carefully curated her brand through Instagram posts and her erstwhile blog _The Tig _— a _Goop_-like aspirational toolkit touting Henri Bendel doggie bowls, and sustainable crew socks “that plant trees” — but who now finds herself trying to define what her post-Royal, post-working-actress brand actually is. 

“She’s terrified of making a decision because she’s so concerned about her image, and so they can’t pull the trigger on anything,” says a source who has spoken with Archewell about its content strategy. “She wants to be seen as this world leader but they don’t have any strong ideas.”

*Yet Harry and Meghan’s unrelenting cavalcade of non-Hollywood ambitions and interests affects output.* A few weeks after the frantic, all-hands meeting over _Pearl_, Markle abruptly took off for Uvalde, Texas, to pay her respects to the victims of the elementary school shooting. A week later, she and Harry attended the Queen’s Jubilee (where that photo with the Queen never took place). Meanwhile, Harry is busy playing polo and organizing tournaments in Montecito, where he plays for the Los Padres Polo Team. He’s regularly featured in Instagram pics with pal/teammate Nacho Figueras. There was also that five-month paternity leave in June of 2021 after the birth of daughter Lilibet. Upcoming engagements include a trip to England next month for events in Manchester and London. And Harry just returned from a mini tour of Africa.  “There’s no sense of urgency” at the company, notes one of the Archewell sources.

Tina Brown is quoted in this article as saying:
“I think the Sussexes are beginning to realize the mirage of ‘entertainment deals,’ which are wildly difficult to deliver on as everyone in Hollywood knows. It’s much, much easier to be a Royal, which offers perennial Status without much requirement for Quo. *Watch for the pivot in a year or two*, when the Sussexes feel the calling to return to the U.K. to serve Harry’s country and rejoin the balcony lineup for which front-page coverage is assured.” 

Netflix and Spotify are not losing quite as much money off high-priced deals that aren’t launching the next_ Bridgerton_ than it might appear. At Netflix, producer fees that companies accrue on a series, say, are applied as a charge against their overall guarantee. In other words, no one is getting a $100 million check upfront, whatever the optics are. And at Spotify, payouts are triggered by hitting benchmarks. Sure there are stipends and overhead money, but neither Netflix nor Spotify is as much in the hole for their VIP deals than one might assume.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know that. Anne is made of sterner stuff.
> 
> Meghan, on the other hand, makes every single situation out to be the most traumatic event anyone ever had to endure. Doesn’t seem like her fans will ever catch on.



Here is an article on the attempted abduction of Princess Anne on her way back to BP from a charity event.  Her husband at the time, Captain Mark Phillips was with her:








						The Bloody Attempt to Kidnap a British Princess
					

Remembering the failed plot undertaken by a lone gunman




					www.smithsonianmag.com


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Here is an article on the attempted abduction of Princess Anne on her way back to BP from a charity event.  Her husband at the time, Captain Mark Phillips was with her:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bloody Attempt to Kidnap a British Princess
> 
> 
> Remembering the failed plot undertaken by a lone gunman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.smithsonianmag.com



Great article from a great magazine, thanks. I remember when it happened. It was quite shocking for the time. Love this quote from the Queen to one of Anne's rescuers: “The medal is from the Queen of England, the thank you is from Anne’s mother.”


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> This is such a great article on Spotify and Netflix and the two big glamour deals signed by both the former first couple (the O's) and MM/Harry.  Thanks to @xincinsin for linking it originally.  https://theankler.com/p/royals-obamas-and-the-end-of-the/comments?triedSigningIn=true
> 
> Here are some interesting excerpts:
> But at both Netflix and Spotify, whose stocks are down 67 percent and 69.5 percent from their highs, respectively, it’s hard not to wonder if these and other VIP deals were more reckless than fearless in hindsight. Four years into its podcast spree, Spotify has only housed one bonafide hit that’s exclusive to its platform: _The Joe Rogan Experience_. Many of those other splashy headline-making deals have failed to produce the amount of content that would justify their hefty pay days (*Kim Kardashian*) — if they even exist at all anymore ..... More, podcasting accounted for just 7 percent of total listening hours in the first quarter of 2022, and 2 percent of revenue last year.
> 
> As for Archewell, it has yet to establish itself as a real player in Hollywood, in part because it has yet to define what it is setting out to do. Sources say this stems from Markle, someone who always carefully curated her brand through Instagram posts and her erstwhile blog _The Tig _— a _Goop_-like aspirational toolkit touting Henri Bendel doggie bowls, and sustainable crew socks “that plant trees” — but who now finds herself trying to define what her post-Royal, post-working-actress brand actually is.
> 
> “She’s terrified of making a decision because she’s so concerned about her image, and so they can’t pull the trigger on anything,” says a source who has spoken with Archewell about its content strategy. “She wants to be seen as this world leader but they don’t have any strong ideas.”
> 
> *Yet Harry and Meghan’s unrelenting cavalcade of non-Hollywood ambitions and interests affects output.* A few weeks after the frantic, all-hands meeting over _Pearl_, Markle abruptly took off for Uvalde, Texas, to pay her respects to the victims of the elementary school shooting. A week later, she and Harry attended the Queen’s Jubilee (where that photo with the Queen never took place). Meanwhile, Harry is busy playing polo and organizing tournaments in Montecito, where he plays for the Los Padres Polo Team. He’s regularly featured in Instagram pics with pal/teammate *Nacho Figueras*. There was also that five-month paternity leave in June of 2021 after the birth of daughter *Lilibet*. Upcoming engagements include a trip to England next month for events in Manchester and London. And Harry just returned from a mini tour of Africa.  “There’s no sense of urgency” at the company, notes one of the Archewell sources.
> 
> Tina Brown is quoted in this article as saying:
> “I think the Sussexes are beginning to realize the mirage of ‘entertainment deals,’ which are wildly difficult to deliver on as everyone in Hollywood knows. It’s much, much easier to be a Royal, which offers perennial Status without much requirement for Quo. *Watch for the pivot in a year or two*, when the Sussexes feel the calling to return to the U.K. to serve Harry’s country and rejoin the balcony lineup for which front-page coverage is assured.”
> 
> Netflix and Spotify are not losing quite as much money off high-priced deals that aren’t launching the next_ Bridgerton_ than it might appear. At Netflix, producer fees that companies accrue on a series, say, are applied as a charge against their overall guarantee. In other words, no one is getting a $100 million check upfront, whatever the optics are. And at Spotify, payouts are triggered by hitting benchmarks. Sure there are stipends and overhead money, but neither Netflix nor Spotify is as much in the hole for their VIP deals than one might assume.


I agree with Brown's statement that entertainment deals are harder to deliver on than being a royal, but I just don't see the Harkles, particularly MM, returning to the royal fold. Not that they would want her back anyway. She will always be a pot stirring drama queen, and that is antithetical to being a successful working royal.


----------



## youngster

This is likely why Harry's book may be delayed. He's wrestling with how much he can trash his family to increase book sales and settle perceived scores, versus needing to not be completely cut off by the family so that a return is maybe possible.  (I don't think it is. Charles is seriously hurt and William is never going to trust him again and Meghan doesn't ever want to go back.)  He may finally have figured out that this Hollywood thing isn't quite as easy as Meghan said it would be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder when is the BLG turn to be silenced…




Kate REALLY rubs her the wrong way, doesn't she. At this point it's slightly pathetic.


----------



## Cinderlala

Stepford wife could be a harsher accusation if the Royals weren't serving a QUEEN.  I seriously cannot fathom how Skeeter thinks she is such an amazing feminist compared to, arguably, the *most significant woman in the last century*!  A woman who became a MECHANIC while she was a PRINCESS!!  A woman whose sense of duty and WORK ETHIC is *incredible*.  

Seriously, TW is a delusional half-wit.


----------



## bag-mania

From the article above I think we can see why it’s being spread far and wide by Sunshine Sachs that Meghan hit #1 on Spotify. High ranking means lots more $$$$$.

“And at Spotify, payouts are triggered by hitting benchmarks.”


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> And at Spotify, payouts are triggered by hitting benchmarks.



It would be interesting to know what benchmarks Spotify prioritizes.  Hitting #1 or #2 on release is good but staying power on the rankings chart is more important perhaps?  How many weeks in a row does she stay in the top maybe?   How many people actually listened to the entire thing all the way through?  Did it drive traffic to advertisers?  Did people who signed up for free and listened to her first podcast then sign up for a regular paying subscription? (This would be big I'd think.)  Is there an increase in listeners for episodes 2, 3, 4, etc., so that momentum is built or do listeners drop off by the time episodes 8 or 9 roll around?

She's going to get some listeners because people are curious about her.  I don't think they'll be all that impressed after listening through a few episodes where she talks mostly about herself and its mostly she and other wealthy, famous women complaining about how hard life has been for them.  

And, by the way, what on earth does any of this podcast nonsense do to help anyone other than Meghan and her bank account?  Oh yes, I'm sure millions of women are now inspired to be more "ambitious" and strive to marry wealth and status and exploit their husband's families.  So awesome that we have Meghan around to educate us all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said, CamillaT

_*Look children, the more the couple have slagged off the Windsors, the less popular they have become!*

Meghan’s latest podcast couldn’t be a better archetype, pardon the pun, of the law of diminishing returns, either. It is a theory in economics that predicts that, after some optimal level of capacity is reached, adding an additional factor of production will actually result in smaller increases in output.
But isn’t there a simpler way to put it? *The more the Sussexes speak, the less likely we are to listen. *That’s something even a primary pupil can understand.
I appreciate that there are a multi-million reasons why they keep on coming up with this stuff. Meghan’s 60-minute me-fest is currently top of the Spotify charts. But the trouble with word salad is that it does tend to give most people indigestion.










						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph
				



_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Time for people to understand how truly offensive MM’s words are - 











						All You need To know about the Mali Mudcloth
					

Find out everything you need to know about the history and making of the Mali Mudcloth. This ancient fabric is sure to make a statement in your home. Cuddle up in this ancient artwork.




					www.thulatula.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

*"As for Archewell, it has yet to establish itself as a real player in Hollywood,* in part because it has yet to define what it is setting out to do. Sources say this stems from Markle, someone who always carefully curated her brand through Instagram posts and her erstwhile blog _The Tig _— a _Goop_-like aspirational toolkit touting Henri Bendel doggie bowls, and sustainable crew socks “that plant trees” — but who now finds herself trying to define what her post-Royal, post-working-actress brand actually is."

I thought Archewell was supposed to be a charity for humanitarian projects?  When did it become a Hollywood player?


----------



## marietouchet

Another rehash of the Diana/Morton book information. If you had forgotten - Diana did audio tapes for Morton who was essentially the ghostwriter of HER autobiography. No wonder H is doing his own autobiography.

This article helped me see the similarity of Diana and H issues. He inherited some of her most unflattering traits eg mental health









						Diana in her own searing words, 25 years after the princess's death
					

ANDREW MORTON: Turning on my tape recorder, I listened with mounting astonishment to the unmistakable voice of Princess Diana, pouring out a tale of woe in a rapid stream of consciousness.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Aminamina

Toby93 said:


> *"As for Archewell, it has yet to establish itself as a real player in Hollywood,* in part because it has yet to define what it is setting out to do. Sources say this stems from Markle, someone who always carefully curated her brand through Instagram posts and her erstwhile blog _The Tig _— a _Goop_-like aspirational toolkit touting Henri Bendel doggie bowls, and sustainable crew socks “that plant trees” — but who now finds herself trying to define what her post-Royal, post-working-actress brand actually is."
> 
> I thought Archewell was supposed to be a charity for humanitarian projects?  When did it become a Hollywood player?


Yeah, but everyone is seeing it through: money, money, money.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> No words....



If you "take after" someone who is unrelated to you, I'd think you'd have to have actually met them and learned from them.  Considering Diana died 20 years before they met, how exactly does TW "take after her MIL"??


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> More billboards…



Her face mirrors the Phantom.  Only thing that would've been more appropriate is if it had mirrored Wicked!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do feel though that if there's a chance you come out looking like a nasty piece of work you should maybe abstain from your supposedly dry wit. Like, I would totally post that, but knowing the internet and its inhabitants I'd probably have posted "Not." or something with it. I hope you are right and I just misread her intentions, but she has never struck me as particularly sarcastic before.


What was she responding to?  The original tweet is gone.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> What is he on?   Or just living his best life without the ball and chain?
> 
> 
> 
> Reminds me of this:



The picture definition of twat (not the vulgar definition, the other one).


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> Voetsek = “Get lost! Go away!”


I want to know how they say F off in SA.  Votsek is way too polite.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



I'm happy some people are finally opening their eyes.  Supporting someone just because of her skin color didn't work out so well, did it? 
Better late than never.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for people to understand how truly offensive MM’s words are -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All You need To know about the Mali Mudcloth
> 
> 
> Find out everything you need to know about the history and making of the Mali Mudcloth. This ancient fabric is sure to make a statement in your home. Cuddle up in this ancient artwork.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thulatula.com




I wouldn't say as much offensive (mud cloth is called mud cloth because it's coloured with river mud in an artisanal process) as once again completely, utterly, embarassingly ignorant  - but the South Africans are offended, and that's what matters.

I wonder what the sugars are saying because it's really hard to accuse black Africans of racism against a whitepassing American.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> What was she responding to?  The original tweet is gone.



The guy suggested that if people can't pay their energy bills come fall to just cross the channel to France, return on a dinghy and get themselves set up in a free hotel room with three meals a day. So some nasty anti-refugee sh*t.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kate REALLY rubs her the wrong way, doesn't she. At this point it's slightly pathetic.



Pure jealousy. She'd skin her and wear her if she could. We've seen the pictures of her making googly eyes at W. She settled for the spare but it's not the ticket to world domination and riches that she thought was her due. I'm sure the more the public loves Kate the more she hates her. The best thing the RF could do is pay her off to stay out of Britain and out of the Cambridge's lives.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Stepford wife could be a harsher accusation if the Royals weren't serving a QUEEN.  I seriously cannot fathom how Skeeter thinks she is such an amazing feminist compared to, arguably, the *most significant woman in the last century*!  A woman who became a MECHANIC while she was a PRINCESS!!  A woman whose sense of duty and WORK ETHIC is *incredible*.
> 
> Seriously, TW is a delusional half-wit.



Nah, Handbag is the the half-wit, she's a pathological liar and raging narcissist. She's the far more dangerous of the two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Nah, Handbag is the the half-wit, she's a pathological liar and raging narcissist. She's the far more dangerous of the two.



She's also...escalating.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I want to know how they say F off in SA.  Votsek is way too polite.


I saw "Fokoff" in someone's tweet. It may be one of those universal things.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I thought Archewell was supposed to be a charity for humanitarian projects?  *When did it become a Hollywood player?*


Two of the three parts of Archewell are devoted to entertainment, Archewell Productions and Archewell Audio. Archewell Foundation is a vague part of the web site that has no known purpose other than they sometimes distribute small quantities of sandwiches to volunteers.

Speaking of Archewell, I just visited that website. The home page is now a big photo of of MEGHAN celebrating her podcast.


----------



## marietouchet

Just a guess but I bet … the staff of 28 is going over the podcasts that are recorded but not broadcast … editing required ?
MM certainly outdid herself on being non PC in talking of her trip to Africa


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Two of the three parts of Archewell are devoted to entertainment, Archewell Productions and Archewell Audio. Archewell Foundation is a vague part of the web site that has no known purpose other than they sometimes distribute small quantities of sandwiches to volunteers.
> 
> Speaking of Archewell, I just visited that website. The home page is now a big photo of of MEGHAN celebrating her podcast.


Clean out your browser and cookies, Archewell is known for tracking everyone’s stuff


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> What does she care, it's all about her anyway
> 
> 1.Meghan and dear, dear friend (coz MO wasn't biting)
> 2 Meghan and whatshername singer
> 3 Meghan and rich guest
> 4 Meghan and slightly less rich guest
> 5 Meghan and guest
> 6 Me-again and rich male 'feminist' guest
> 7 Me-me-me-again and whoever
> 8 Me-me-me-again and someone
> 9 Me-me-me-again and someone who looks like me (but not quite as pretty)
> 10 Me-me-me-again and - who cares anyway


I won't listen...I do use spotify but I'm not curious in the least about her drivel.  I heard the first one she did with H and it was just a bunch of sound bites from celebs.  they got me that time by putting on at the top of my list on the phone but won't do it again


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really love spending time with you all, but I sometimes feel I need a break from these impossible people. I have enough nutjobs in real life (though weeding through them right now)


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> Nah, Handbag is the the half-wit, she's a pathological liar and raging narcissist. She's the far more dangerous of the two


True.


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> HG Tudor’s channel was taken down from YouTube. He was the narcissist exposing the narcissism of TW. I don’t get how this nobody, z lister, no talent hack has the power to get people fired, silenced and “take away their voice”


He was reading portions of the book and doing so prevents Bower from selling a book to the person listening.  It was done without permission so it I think it was copyright infringement.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of Archewell, I just visited that website. *The home page is now a big photo of of MEGHAN celebrating her podcast.*


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Even I doubt M or her PR realises how offensive she is. _This_ time she's PO the wrong people. 'Optically' (dear dear M) this is not a good look.
> 
> She is sooooooo US/Western-centric, she doesn't even think of the people in SA or anywhere else in Africa really exist, she probably thinks the rest of the world outside LA is a film set and we are all just extras in her epic tragic movie.
> 
> Z-list and her whiter-than-white housebound have proved themselves to be totally racist. I'm so pleased _she_'s being called-out for her 'Karen-ness' privilege at last, because I am_ so_ sick of her woe-is-me-faux-wokeness. So glad a few more people have woke-en-up at last.


This is being the ugly American who travels.  US travelers started getting this rep in the late 50-60's  They were not sophisticated travelers and didn't understand that the whole world isn't just like their little section of the planet and they acted boorish. Meghan is acting like this as well and she traveled to enough places and in Africa to know better.


----------



## zen1965

bellecate said:


> Congrats on your OG status.


Thank you!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Another rehash of the Diana/Morton book information. If you had forgotten - Diana did audio tapes for Morton who was essentially the ghostwriter of HER autobiography. No wonder H is doing his own autobiography.
> 
> This article helped me see the similarity of Diana and H issues. He inherited some of her most unflattering traits eg mental health
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana in her own searing words, 25 years after the princess's death
> 
> 
> ANDREW MORTON: Turning on my tape recorder, I listened with mounting astonishment to the unmistakable voice of Princess Diana, pouring out a tale of woe in a rapid stream of consciousness.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Morton just trying to cash in.  Not surprised by this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG people, I found Raptor's motto.

From Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: "If there's anything more important than my ego, I want it caught and shot now." 

Too bad Raptor rolls off the tongue way easier than Zaphod Beeblebrox.


----------



## jennlt

In case anyone has 55 minutes of spare time...


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Morton just trying to cash in.  Not surprised by this.


Her own son cashes in on her constantly, so at this point, I can't blame Morton for trying!


----------



## Katel

purseinsanity said:


> I want to know how they say F off in SA.  Votsek is way too polite.



Scroll down - it’s F off in Namibia (and elsewhere) - @zen1965 pointed out hahaha 






						Urban Dictionary: Voetsek
					

Afrikaans for 'Get lost'. (Not a swear word! but rather crude like English 'bog off') Used a lost by Anglo Africans. (Means litreally in Afrikans, 'Tie your feet up'. I.e. 'Stop following me'.)




					www.urbandictionary.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really love spending time with you all, but I sometimes feel I need a break from these impossible people. I have enough nutjobs in real life (though weeding through them right now)


That is the purpose of this thread, vent a little, breathe a little, get over the grains of sand in your own oyster shell


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> This is being the ugly American who travels.  US travelers started getting this rep in the late 50-60's  They were not sophisticated travelers and didn't understand that the whole world isn't just like their little section of the planet and they acted boorish. Meghan is acting like this as well and she traveled to enough places and in Africa to know better.


A few trips abroad does not do the trick … 
Listening to a podcast on crusing ( a metaphor for MM) , if the cruise starts and stops in A and B , you will never see those cities, you have to get off the boat, take an extra day, explore
I grew up amidst three cultures / languages, and have never ceased to learn more about each of three, despite belonging to each of each of them , I might get there someday


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh -


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Podcast released on Aug. 23. 
Today is Aug. 27.  
5 days, still no apology. 
Wow.


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> In case anyone has 55 minutes of spare time...



Perfect timing, I need to fold clothes tomorrow.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for people to understand how truly offensive MM’s words are -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All You need To know about the Mali Mudcloth
> 
> 
> Find out everything you need to know about the history and making of the Mali Mudcloth. This ancient fabric is sure to make a statement in your home. Cuddle up in this ancient artwork.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thulatula.com



The attached article says that Indonesian batik patterns were incorporated into mudcloth designs at a later stage. I carried my babies in a sling using a length of Indonesian batik. I did a side-carry while my domestic helper did it front, side, back according to her needs. I doubt Zedzee used the sling at all.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Interesting point!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

In retrospect, it is possible that ZedZed wrote JCMH's UN address to ensure his failure? Then she dissed Africa hoping that Dufus would become persona non grata like herself by association? IMO she's wicked enough to try to destroy all his chances of ever returning there, knowing how much he loves Africa. I'm not a fan of Dufus, but if true, I can't condone TW's behaviour towards her own husband.


----------



## miss_chiff

Chanbal said:


> Interesting point!



Interesting…the women on the bottom left is Terry Wood (again). She was one of the producers on the Oprah interview, used to be with Netflix, and now with Archtypes.


----------



## calicocat

charlottawill said:


>



Had my hubs drive me round downtown Toronto earlier today to check out the digital banner on top of the Eaton's Centre. Basically Archetype's is part of a -/+ 5-second rotation of Spotify-featured podcasters on the digital billboard - didn't manage to take pics since her segment wasn't even back on rotation within the 10 minutes I was there. Funny that the segments for the new McDonald's sandwich, DAZN, a cruise advert and a few more Spotify speakers either lasted a little bit longer/rotated more often than hers


----------



## bag-mania

Hoping someone can explain this to me. Archetypes has one single episode and it is currently #1 on Spotify. I see today that Archewell Audio is also #30 on Spotify. They haven’t done anything other than that preview commercial two Christmases ago. So what is holding the #30 position?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Hoping someone can explain this to me. Archetypes has one single episode and it is currently #1 on Spotify. I see today that Archewell Audio is also #30 on Spotify. They haven’t done anything other than that preview commercial two Christmases ago. So what is holding the #30 position?
> 
> View attachment 5598728



I don’t know about that, looks like Ed Sheeran, friend of Hazzie’s,  is number 1 for the month of Aug.  Did he promote MM’s podcast?    It is such a smarmy business/world. 

_This list contains the most-streamed artists on the audio streaming platform Spotify. As of August 2022, Ed Sheeran has the most monthly listeners on Spotify for a male artist, and Dua Lipa has the most monthly listeners on Spotify for a female artist. Sheeran is the most-followed male artist, and Ariana Grande is the most-followed female artist. Since 2013, Spotify has published a yearly list of its most-streamed artists, which has been topped by Drake a record three times (2015, 2016 and 2018).






						List of most-streamed artists on Spotify - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> More billboards…



Wonder where this photo is from. Is she wearing a slave collar and leash?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I don’t know about that, looks like Ed Sheeran, friend of Hazzie’s,  is number 1 for the month of Aug.  Did he promote MM’s podcast?    It is such a smarmy business/world.
> 
> _This list contains the most-streamed artists on the audio streaming platform Spotify. As of August 2022, Ed Sheeran has the most monthly listeners on Spotify for a male artist, and Dua Lipa has the most monthly listeners on Spotify for a female artist. Sheeran is the most-followed male artist, and Ariana Grande is the most-followed female artist. Since 2013, Spotify has published a yearly list of its most-streamed artists, which has been topped by Drake a record three times (2015, 2016 and 2018).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> List of most-streamed artists on Spotify - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


There’s separate rankings on Spotify, one for music and another one for podcasts. I would hope Sheeran earned his spot. Here is the rankings of podcasts.





__





						Spotify : United States of America : Top Podcasts Podcast Charts - Top Podcasts
					

View 50 top podcasts from Spotify : United States of America : Top Podcasts and view historical chart positions. Updated daily.



					chartable.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



@bellecate quoted marklenews1 saying something about this way back in the thread. 





						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

Apologies for mentioning this yet again — if the BRF had handled this from Day1, we would not be here discussing it.  It's true, but then hindsight is 20/20. I don't think anyone expected the (allegedly) sweet divorcee actress/orphan to become Megusa (almost typed Godzilla) or the swift...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> There’s separate rankings on Spotify, one for music and another one for podcasts. I would hope Sheeran earned his spot. Here is the rankings of podcasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify : United States of America : Top Podcasts Podcast Charts - Top Podcasts
> 
> 
> View 50 top podcasts from Spotify : United States of America : Top Podcasts and view historical chart positions. Updated daily.
> 
> 
> 
> chartable.com


Still, I gotta wonder about a quid pro quo between Ed and the Harkles.  Too coincidental imo.


----------



## lallybelle

Bots. Her stans are using bots to stream.


----------



## charro

Maggie Muggins said:


> In retrospect, it is possible that ZedZed wrote JCMH's UN address to ensure his failure? Then she dissed Africa hoping that Dufus would become persona non grata like herself by association? IMO she's wicked enough to try to destroy all his chances of ever returning there, knowing how much he loves Africa. I'm not a fan of Dufus, but if true, I can't condone TW's behaviour towards her own husband.


Narcs are evil &wicked. They derive joy out of destroying & terrorizing the ones closest to them. The more they humiliate & hurt the more they are totally elated over what they have caused. If you call them out on it  It is your fault because you made them do this to you. They will use every type of abuse physical, mental, emotional etc... They are not happy unless someone suffers. The more suffering the better as far as they are concerned. I know of what I speak, I am a victim of more than 1 narc.


----------



## charro

xincinsin said:


> Wonder where this photo is from. Is she wearing a slave collar and leash?


Yes she is. A dog collar & leash


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Hoping someone can explain this to me. Archetypes has one single episode and it is currently #1 on Spotify. I see today that Archewell Audio is also #30 on Spotify. They haven’t done anything other than that preview commercial two Christmases ago. So what is holding the #30 position?
> 
> View attachment 5598728


The only thing I can think of is the teaser for Archetypes.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


>



I think she tried this last year as well.  Or offered some sort of speech/ greeting.  Goodness knows recollections may vary as there are so many attempts to get in any door—I could be mistaken.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Still, I gotta wonder about a quid pro quo between Ed and the Harkles.  Too coincidental imo.


While I have no clue how Spotify does it’s rankings I think we’ve got to give Ed Sheeran credit where it is due. He’s always done very well there. Although according to this, Drake has him beat overall. I don’t think any artist has the power/authority to improve someone else’s rankings.









						Top 1000 most streamed artists ever on Spotify - updated live
					

This list features the 1000 most streamed artists of all-time on Spotify. Someone is missing? Just search for him on our tool and he'll be instantly added!




					chartmasters.org


----------



## Toby93

lallybelle said:


> Bots. Her stans are using bots to stream.


But there's no money for spotify if the stans are using bots?  The only reason spotify exists is to make money, so what happens in the following weeks when it gets lots of listens, but no $$$$?


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> In retrospect, it is possible that ZedZed wrote JCMH's UN address to ensure his failure? Then she dissed Africa hoping that Dufus would become persona non grata like herself by association? IMO she's wicked enough to try to destroy all his chances of ever returning there, knowing how much he loves Africa. I'm not a fan of Dufus, but if true, I can't condone TW's behaviour towards her own husband.


It's very possible that Hazz's failure was welcome to TW, but her 'tone deaf' comments about SA were pure stupidity on her part imo.  


bag-mania said:


> *Hoping someone can explain this to me.* Archetypes has one single episode and it is currently #1 on Spotify. I see today that Archewell Audio is also #30 on Spotify. They haven’t done anything other than that preview commercial two Christmases ago. So what is holding the #30 position?
> 
> View attachment 5598728


@bag-mania I bet you know the answer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The divorce rumours are certainly getting louder. But also, I'm not sure how much control the author has over publication date 

Plus: so he isn't as dead set in getting his truth out? Starting to wonder whose idea it was.


----------



## Chanbal

This is a screenshot because I don't want to click on ****. We had Nacho praising Hazz, and now we have Nacho's wife… Why are the Nachos doing this? Free publicity?


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The divorce rumours are certainly getting louder. But also, I'm not sure how much control the author has over publication date
> 
> Plus: so he isn't as dead set in getting his truth out? Starting to wonder whose idea it was.




plus the book would be far more interesting if it spills about  some of his more explosive marriage moments… and asking for a divorce.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to click on ****. We had Nacho praising Hazz, and now we have Nacho's wife… Why are the Nachos doing this? Free publicity?
> 
> View attachment 5598737


Yes, it is weird to have the BFFs announce to the public that this couple is oh-so-happy.  It could be the _kiss of death_.  Imo.

ETA:  Hazzie’s polo pals - They include a lady  








						Prince Harry's polo pals - International rugby player and model
					

Prince Harry's charity polo team won the Sentebale Polo Cup on Thursday in aid of the Duke's charity helping children in Africa affected by HIV/AIDS. But who are his teammates?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> The attached article says that Indonesian batik patterns were incorporated into mudcloth designs at a later stage. I carried my babies in a sling using a length of Indonesian batik. I did a side-carry while my domestic helper did it front, side, back according to her needs. I doubt Zedzee used the sling at all.


ZZ used a 'high tech' baby carrier and the kid slipped. Imagine if she used the sling  

I am always amazed at how Indonesian women carry their wriggling babies in one of those while they work, do chores, or just rocking the babies to sleep. And no one had their babies slipping out uncontrollably like ZZ despite using a single piece of long cloth.




Bonus:  Indonesian man is also skilled. And look at the size of the toddler. ZZ needs to learn before insulting other cultures.


----------



## Helventara

calicocat said:


> Had my hubs drive me round downtown Toronto earlier today to check out the digital banner on top of the Eaton's Centre. Basically Archetype's is part of a -/+ 5-second rotation of Spotify-featured podcasters on the digital billboard - didn't manage to take pics since her segment wasn't even back on rotation within the 10 minutes I was there. Funny that the segments for the new McDonald's sandwich, DAZN, a cruise advert and a few more Spotify speakers either lasted a little bit longer/rotated more often than hers


Waah, thanks for doing this. I wonder then how long the photographer stood here to take that one shot


----------



## xincinsin

Helventara said:


> ZZ used a 'high tech' baby carrier and the kid slipped. Imagine if she used the sling
> 
> I am always amazed at how Indonesian women carry their wriggling babies in one of those while they work, do chores, or just rocking the babies to sleep. And no one had their babies slipping out uncontrollably like ZZ despite using a single piece of long cloth.
> 
> View attachment 5598769
> 
> 
> Bonus:  Indonesian man is also skilled. And look at the size of the toddler. ZZ needs to learn before insulting other cultures.
> 
> View attachment 5598770


Yep, I carried my babies like this guy. The helper working for a neighbour tied the cloth another way, twisting it around her chest. She showed me the method but I couldn't get the hang of it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really love spending time with you all, but I sometimes feel I need a break from these impossible people. I have enough nutjobs in real life (though weeding through them right now)


I agree, they take up too much space in my head that they don’t deserve.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, I didn't know either. She is right, she is such a fraud.


----------



## zen1965

calicocat said:


> Had my hubs drive me round downtown Toronto earlier today to check out the digital banner on top of the Eaton's Centre. Basically Archetype's is part of a -/+ 5-second rotation of Spotify-featured podcasters on the digital billboard - didn't manage to take pics since her segment wasn't even back on rotation within the 10 minutes I was there. Funny that the segments for the new McDonald's sandwich, DAZN, a cruise advert and a few more Spotify speakers either lasted a little bit longer/rotated more often than hers


Thank you for putting this in perspective!
(OT: Raisin is one of my favourite colours.)


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know either. She is right, she is such a fraud.



That bit in the circle says Factchecking by Nicole Pasulka. I wonder if she was told to factcheck the guests only, or has Zedzee gone into the realm of "you can't factcheck me because only I know what happened"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Not the first time she allegedly tried that either.

Just reminding us that Kate is the Wimbledon patron and Raptor would happily kill her if she could get away with it.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know either. She is right, she is such a fraud.




I'm not going to be counting skin-tone quotas, even though we should hold M for the same type of prejudiced observations she pushes with this agenda. For me it's one of the most stupid of cancel-culture's obsessions and part of apartheid-worthy segregation. People should be employed on their standard of past work, not skin colour. Too many working on such a silly podcrash and that's there is all to say. 

Had it been the other way round, people would be saying POC are doing all the hard-work behind the scenes and whites are taking all the glory as stars.


----------



## papertiger

calicocat said:


> Had my hubs drive me round downtown Toronto earlier today to check out the digital banner on top of the Eaton's Centre. Basically Archetype's is part of a -/+ 5-second rotation of Spotify-featured podcasters on the digital billboard - didn't manage to take pics since her segment wasn't even back on rotation within the 10 minutes I was there. Funny that the segments for the new McDonald's sandwich, DAZN, a cruise advert and a few more Spotify speakers either lasted a little bit longer/rotated more often than hers



Thanks for your observation and research   Big shift of perception.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> That bit in the circle says Factchecking by Nicole Pasulka. I wonder if she was told to factcheck the guests only, or has Zedzee gone into the realm of "you can't factcheck me because only I know what happened"?



Reminds me of a job I used to have a Sat girl in a very exclusive Maison (I ran up and down stairs, usually between atelier and vendeuse/client and watched the floor, _not_ a PA/secretary) :

Backroom:
8.00:
Boss: "I'm in my office, but if anyone calls this morning I'm OUT."

11:00:
Me: "Lady So&so called at 09:30, I said you'd call back this afternoon"
Boss: "Why didn't put Lady S through?"
Me: "You told me to tell everyone you were out this morning"
Boss: "USE YOUR HEAD G I R L, as if I would be OUT for Lady So&so!!!"

M reminds so much of that entitled, ridiculous, 'read-my-mind' stuff. She certainly wouldn't want anyone factchecking her.


----------



## papertiger

BLG on the case


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> BLG on the case




That chap looks a bit like Noah Wyle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'm not going to be counting skin-tone quotas, even though we should hold M for the same type of prejudiced observations she pushes with this agenda.



I think what gets me more is that all the guests are POC. Not because there's inherently something wrong with that, but look at that host - whitepassing, dates exclusively white men, erased what little black features she had, called herself Caucasian for most of her life. She is such a disgusting opportunist.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> That chap looks a bit like Noah Wyle.



I had to look him up. 

I have to be honest, it's hard to keep up with M's shenanigans, so much PR, consultants and social climbing. Shame she never put as much thought and time into her actual acting.

I think M and JR have similar look, he was certainly was her photographer - and reportedly not the only one helping out on The Tig. Does M ever do anything but order others around?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I have to be honest, it's hard to keep up with M's shenanigans, so much PR, consultants and social climbing. *Shame she never put as much thought and time into her actual acting.*



She's Schrödinger's actress. She can't act to save her life, but boy can she act when it's to lure in her victims.


----------



## DoggieBags

jennlt said:


> In case anyone has 55 minutes of spare time...



Lady C mentioned that one of her sources told her that TW’s podcast generated 10,000 views in the first 10 hours after it was released. And you have to figure a good number of the first 10,000 views were from journalists who intended to report on her debut Podcast. To put that number in context, this Reuters article stated that Joe Rogan’s podcasts that typically run anywhere from over an hour to 3 hours long generate somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 million views.








						Joe Rogan row puts cost of Spotify podcasts under investor microscope
					

Spotify investors will focus on how much its 'Netflix for audio' strategy is costing the streaming service when it reports fourth-quarter results on Wednesday against the backdrop of several angry high-profile artists withdrawing their tracks.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Icyjade

Helventara said:


> Bonus: Indonesian man is also skilled. And look at the size of the toddler. ZZ needs to learn before insulting other cultures.


I know how to use that… it’s actually quite handy when you just want something light instead of lugging a contraption around. Once the kid is heavy though it can be a killer on the shoulder.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The divorce rumours are certainly getting louder. But also, I'm not sure how much control the author has over publication date
> 
> Plus: so he isn't as dead set in getting his truth out? Starting to wonder whose idea it was.



Saw that and the rumors make sense, separate work these days. He does book (?), polo, and goes to Africa - where A nearly died !!!!  She is podcasting and rumored to be in LA
yes she made a cameo at UN, he made a cameo on podcast
it is as if they divided up things - she gets Spotify/8 producers, he gets to cope with Netflix/Invictus/new season of The Crown - where D dies


----------



## marietouchet

Helventara said:


> ZZ used a 'high tech' baby carrier and the kid slipped. Imagine if she used the sling
> 
> I am always amazed at how Indonesian women carry their wriggling babies in one of those while they work, do chores, or just rocking the babies to sleep. And no one had their babies slipping out uncontrollably like ZZ despite using a single piece of long cloth.
> 
> View attachment 5598769
> 
> 
> Bonus:  Indonesian man is also skilled. And look at the size of the toddler. ZZ needs to learn before insulting other cultures.
> 
> View attachment 5598770


The baby slings are hard to put on without help


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hey ZedZed, looks like racist Charles is involved with issues that were once close to your hypocritical heart except you would let others do the leg work while claiming ownership of the organizations involved.


*Prince Charles has edited an edition of British black newspaper The Voice to mark its 40th anniversary.*

Founded in 1982, it is the only newspaper in the UK that predominantly covers black issues and culture.
The royal said he was "so touched" to be asked, saying the paper had "become an institution" over the years.
Clarence House said Prince Charles's edit celebrates some of the achievements of the black community over the last four decades.
Published next week, the issue features interviews with Luther star Idris Elba, who tells how a Prince's Trust grant at the age of 16 "opened doors that changed my life", and Booker Prize-winning author Bernardine Evaristo, who reflects on her career and her role as president of the Royal Society of Literature.
*It also features an interview with Baroness Lawrence, mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, who talks about a new partnership between the Stephen Lawrence Day Foundation and The Prince's Foundation.*

*Lester Holloway, The Voice's editor, said: "Our readers may be surprised at the parallels between the issues which The Voice has campaigned on for four decades and the work the Prince of Wales has been involved in over the same period, often behind the scenes.
"In past decades these causes were once scorned and ridiculed, but today they are widely acknowledged."
Mr Holloway added that "all the research tells us how far we have to go to be a truly equal society".
"The Prince has an awareness of this, and that in itself is a reason to be hopeful," he added.*









						Prince Charles guest edits special edition of The Voice
					

The issue features interviews with Idris Elba, Bernadine Evaristo and Baroness Lawrence.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Charles can still surprise us. That's lovely.


----------



## papertiger

Did we have this?:

They asked for 'charity' donations from the parents at the school when it was going to Ache-well 

"Read the room" Megs:


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## lallybelle

Toby93 said:


> But there's no money for spotify if the stans are using bots?  The only reason spotify exists is to make money, so what happens in the following weeks when it gets lots of listens, but no $$$$?


Who knows how much they know or care about the bots, at least for now. The she's#1 promo is what they hope attracts to any following episodes and new subs.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charles can still surprise us. That's lovely.


If Hazz and TW are not enough to cause a huge headache. If these people would care for the monarchy/UK more than they care for themselves, they wouldn't be asking this imo.

"_Charles rejected the plea by Prince Andrew’s daughters to give their dad a way back to royal life, telling them: “There’s no chance._”

_*The future king, 73, is said to remain “resolute” that the Queen’s decision to strip Andrew of his royal roles and use of the HRH title must not be reversed,* sources say.

*He held a summit with Princesses Beatrice, 34, and Eugenie, 32, over tea and biscuits at his home* on the Birkhall Estate in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, The Sun on Sunday understands.

Just days earlier, Duke of York Andrew, 62, had a “business meeting” with Charles at the same venue to argue his case._

Charles heard all three out but their pleas “fell on deaf ears”.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

One more article about the Archetypos (it's not a typo ).









						Help, I’ve been seduced by Meghan Markle’s podcast
					

Meghan Markle, if she was minded to, could easily corner the erotic ASMR market – that weird bit of the internet in which women breathily relate fictitious experiences with their mouths too close to the microphone for the gratification of lonely nerds everywhere.It’s impossible to listen to her...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> This is a screenshot because I don't want to click on ****. We had Nacho praising Hazz, and now we have Nacho's wife… Why are the Nachos doing this? Free publicity?
> 
> View attachment 5598737


I cannot figure out what the polo couple are getting out of it. They don’t appear to be working an angle. They have plenty of their own money and they don’t need publicity for what they do.

It keeps coming back to either Nacho is a kind but rather dumb man who is being used by them for positive press. OR Nacho knows exactly what is going on with Harry and he is being a super loyal friend who is going above and beyond to try to support him.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think it is one of two things: either Harry still wants to please TW and asked his friends to say nice things about her OR they know divorce is imminent (and that Harry is using these trips to plan and put a legal strategy in place) and are saying nice things about TW to throw her off the scent.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> Reminds me of a job I used to have a Sat girl in a very exclusive Maison (I ran up and down stairs, usually between atelier and vendeuse/client and watched the floor, _not_ a PA/secretary) :
> 
> Backroom:
> 8.00:
> Boss: "I'm in my office, but if anyone calls this morning I'm OUT."
> 
> 11:00:
> Me: "Lady So&so called at 09:30, I said you'd call back this afternoon"
> Boss: "Why didn't put Lady S through?"
> Me: "You told me to tell everyone you were out this morning"
> Boss: "USE YOUR HEAD G I R L, as if I would be OUT for Lady So&so!!!"
> 
> M reminds so much of that entitled, ridiculous, 'read-my-mind' stuff. She certainly wouldn't want anyone factchecking her.


The summer out of high school, DH had a job in the office of a well known real estate mogul. He was told to call his boss at home with any messages that came in, and that is how he inadvertently outed the existence of the mogul’s girlfriend to his wife who answered the phone.

I clicked on one of the links posted above by @Chanbal (Harry’s grey suit link )and read the comments. One comment said M alleged she was forced to shake hands with poor people a week after Archie was diagnosed with a heat rash. (And was traumatized and in therapy as a result). OY


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Wow…




Nice try ZeeZy, but the public now sees you for who you really are - "..more noses than Michael Jackson.."


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> One more article about the Archetypos (it's not a typo ).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Help, I’ve been seduced by Meghan Markle’s podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, if she was minded to, could easily corner the erotic ASMR market – that weird bit of the internet in which women breathily relate fictitious experiences with their mouths too close to the microphone for the gratification of lonely nerds everywhere.It’s impossible to listen to her...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk



I had to Google ASMR...and it's nothing NSFW. The things I learn here. But sorry, she's not going to seduce me. 



> https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/consumer-insights/consumer-trends/asmr-videos-youtube-trend/


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> The summer out of high school, DH had a job in the office of a well known real estate mogul. He was told to call his boss at home with any messages that came in, and that is how he inadvertently outed the existence of the mogul’s girlfriend to his wife who answered the phone.
> 
> I clicked on one of the links posted above by @Chanbal (Harry’s grey suit link )and read the comments. One comment said M alleged she was forced to shake hands with poor people a week after Archie was diagnosed with a heat rash. (And was traumatized and in therapy as a result). OY



Oops  

On Megs, that's rich coming from someone who said she was going to end her baby's life whilst still in the womb by killing herself whilst pregnant.


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> (And was traumatized and in therapy as a result). OY



It was said sarcastically:


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> There’s separate rankings on Spotify, one for music and another one for podcasts. I would hope Sheeran earned his spot. Here is the rankings of podcasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spotify : United States of America : Top Podcasts Podcast Charts - Top Podcasts
> 
> 
> View 50 top podcasts from Spotify : United States of America : Top Podcasts and view historical chart positions. Updated daily.
> 
> 
> 
> chartable.com


I wonder how she got that ranking.  Did Spotify do some advertising thing to generate listeners?  Other than us here, I didn't think that many people cared about her one way or the other.  I know she has her stans but not enough to make her the number 1 podcast.


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> It was said sarcastically:



Thats a relief ! Thank you for thr correction


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I agree, they take up too much space in my head that they don’t deserve.


but you forget about them as soon as you're off the PF?


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> Thats a relief ! Thank you for thr correction


----------



## papertiger

A must see, it'll make you laugh and raise your eyebrows (again).


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I wonder how she got that ranking.  Did Spotify do some advertising thing to generate listeners?  Other than us here, I didn't think that many people cared about her one way or the other.  I know she has her stans but not enough to make her the number 1 podcast.


I’ve actually wasted time thinking about this very thing.   

Even factoring in my own biases and giving her the benefit of the doubt, I don’t see how it was possible. I cannot find a legitimate number listed online anywhere for Meghan’s listeners. Love him or hate him, Joe Rogan gets an average of 11 million listeners per podcast and he puts out about three or four every week. How in hell could  Meghan’s single little 57 minute podcast skyrocket to #1 within hours on the very first day it came out? Have millions of sugars been hitting refresh on Spotify every few minutes all summer waiting for it to drop?

No, something stinks about their  ranking system. Maybe it’s like the New York Times best seller list and can be bought.


----------



## Toby93

"To make her point in this first podcast, she is joined by her friend, the tennis legend Serena Williams. Meghan, it must be said, seems keen to the point of insecurity that we know the extent to which she and Serena are close, referencing at every opportunity how they are in endless contact, how she knew Serena was going to retire before the rest of the world found out and how often she comes by the house. She refers to her more than once as ‘my girl’."

I get that TW is eager to have everyone know that Williams is her friend, but I don't understand why Williams is buying into this drivel?  She certainly doesn't need TW, so is it all about merching, and business and networking?  The more you read about the connections of these people, the more disgusted I am about how we are being played for $$$$


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> "To make her point in this first podcast, she is joined by her friend, the tennis legend Serena Williams. Meghan, it must be said, seems keen to the point of insecurity that we know the extent to which she and Serena are close, referencing at every opportunity how they are in endless contact, how she knew Serena was going to retire before the rest of the world found out and how often she comes by the house. She refers to her more than once as ‘my girl’."
> 
> I get that TW is eager to have everyone know that Williams is her friend, but I don't understand why Williams is buying into this drivel?  She certainly doesn't need TW, so is it all about merching, and business and networking?  The more you read about the connections of these people, the more disgusted I am about how we are being played for $$$$


they're not getting any of my money


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

I think my eyes just rolled into the back of my head.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I think my eyes just rolled into the back of my head.
> 
> View attachment 5599030


did she say on the podcast that H helped her with the decision?  uugh


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> did she say on the podcast that H helped her with the decision?  uugh


I don’t know. It’s bad enough I’m reading about it I certainly don’t want to listen to her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know. It’s bad enough I’m reading about it I certainly don’t want to listen to her.


me either...I think I read that she said that


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I think my eyes just rolled into the back of my head.
> 
> View attachment 5599030


But isn't he her mental health coach?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> "To make her point in this first podcast, she is joined by her friend, the tennis legend Serena Williams. Meghan, it must be said, seems keen to the point of insecurity that we know the extent to which she and Serena are close, referencing at every opportunity how they are in endless contact, how she knew Serena was going to retire before the rest of the world found out and *how often she comes by the house*. She refers to her more than once as ‘my girl’."



Doesn't Serena live in Florida?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Podcast released on Aug. 23.
> Today is Aug. 27.
> 5 days, still no apology.
> Wow.


I wouldn't hold my breath.  It ain't coming.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doesn't Serena live in Florida?


She has multiple residences, but that's her primary, presumably for tax reasons like so many other wealthy people. She and her husband also have a home in Beverly Hills, but I don't envision her swinging by Monteshitshow on a regular basis. 

At this point I don't think ZeeZy knows the difference between her lies and reality.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She has multiple residences, but that's her primary, presumably for tax reasons like so many other wealthy people. She and her husband also have a home in Beverly Hills, but I don't envision her swinging by Monteshitshow on a regular basis.



I live literally 6 minutes from my bff whom I've known since 5th grade. We sometimes go weeks without seeing each other because life's busy and a few messages or a quick phonecall on the commute is more achievable though we try to go out for breakfast once a month. But sure, a professional athlete and businesswoman has all the time in the world to hang out with someone who's basically unemployed and bored.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> She has multiple residences, but that's her primary, presumably for tax reasons like so many other wealthy people. She and her husband also have a home in Beverly Hills, but I don't envision her swinging by Monteshitshow on a regular basis.
> 
> At this point I don't think ZeeZy knows the difference between her lies and reality.


She drops by "virtually". 

I don't think Zedzee sees lies as lies. It's all subjective reality to her. Alternative truth, her truth, whatchamacallit.

I'm expecting more of her past to surface. There is no way someone like her, who used, abused and treated people like refuse on her way up, would not have left behind a traceable trail of destruction. And it would also not surprise me if her plastic drummer doll stirred up the violent faction of her fans to rampage in her honour. Pass the popcorn.


----------



## Cinderlala

charro said:


> *Narcs are evil &wicked. They derive joy out of destroying & terrorizing the ones closest to them. The more they humiliate & hurt the more they are totally elated over what they have caused. If you call them out on it  It is your fault because you made them do this to you. They will use every type of abuse physical, mental, emotional etc... They are not happy unless someone suffers. The more suffering the better as far as they are concerned.* I know of what I speak, I am a victim of more than 1 narc.


I am sorry you've been victimized by such horrible people @charro .


xincinsin said:


> *I don't think Zedzee sees lies as lies*. It's all subjective reality to her. Alternative truth, her truth, whatchamacallit.


Both of these posts are EXACTLY what the mother was like in the non-fiction book I just read.  The woman was literally baffled when there were consequences for her actions.  She did nothing but lie.  (Other than abuse, torture, and terrorize everyone around her.)

The name of the book is If You Tell.  Fair warning, it is a gruesome story. But it's an important book because the mother will be released from prison soon and society needs to know the danger she presents.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I think my eyes just rolled into the back of my head.
> 
> View attachment 5599030


Would the above sound like a PR poop leakage?


----------



## Chanbal

The provided info is enough without clicking on the Hello link…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> did she say on the podcast that H helped her with the decision?  uugh


I'm sure he thought sharing his decision making process as the spare looking to quit royal life would be so helpful to the GOAT of women's tennis in making her decision to retire.  Apples to oranges.

I would not be at all surprised if the pod crash was scripted and Serena just went along with it because of their husbands' business partnership.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The provided info is enough without clicking on the Hello link…



I made the mistake of clicking. Can't believe someone gets paid to write that crap, but ZeeZy and her fans eat it up.


----------



## Mendocino

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know that. Anne is made of sterner stuff.
> 
> Meghan, on the other hand, makes every single situation out to be the most traumatic event anyone ever had to endure. Doesn’t seem like her fans will ever catch on.


Yep! I read that Mark (her husband) had her by one arm and the kidnapper had her by the other, trying to drag her out of the car. She allegedly told the kidnapper "Not bloody likely!".


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I cannot figure out what the polo couple are getting out of it. They don’t appear to be working an angle. They have plenty of their own money and they don’t need publicity for what they do.
> 
> It keeps coming back to either Nacho is a kind but rather dumb man who is being used by them for positive press. OR Nacho knows exactly what is going on with Harry and he is being a super loyal friend who is going above and beyond to try to support him.


Nacho seems to win polo tournaments with H on his team, it does seem like H is a good player
And H is good publicity for polo , big draw, don’t know if that matters, polo ponies are expensive 
it is like high school basketball, you pick some nasty girl for the team because she scores …


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I live literally 6 minutes from my bff whom I've known since 5th grade. We sometimes go weeks without seeing each other because life's busy and a few messages or a quick phonecall on the commute is more achievable though we try to go out for breakfast once a month. But sure, a professional athlete and businesswoman has all the time in the world to hang out with someone who's basically unemployed and bored.



I am spending next weekend with a friend of 50 years, we met in 7th grade. We usually see each other once a year, but because of COVID I haven't seen her in person in three years. Genuine friendships stand the test of time, unlike some people who drop friends when they're no longer useful.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Nacho seems to win polo tournaments with H on his team, it does seem like H is a good player
> And H is good publicity for polo , big draw, don’t know if that matters, polo ponies are expensive
> it is like high school basketball, you pick some nasty girl for the team because she scores …


From what I can tell Nacho is like the Michael Jordan of polo. He travels around the world as a sort of ambassador of the sport and people come to watch him play. Harry must be a decent player but he’s a celebrity player. In a lot of those Santa Barbara outings, Harry would score once whereas Nacho would score 5 times in a game. Harry isn’t keeping polo ponies in the US so he’s borrowing them from Nacho or others.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Would the above sound like a PR poop leakage?
> View attachment 5599078



Wonder if she keeps some in every one of the 16 bathrooms since she spews a lot of $hit?


----------



## Toby93

The South Africans REALLY don't like her


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> The South Africans REALLY don't like her



I am twenty years older than she is and my feet don't look like that. But I don't wear heels either. That's what years of wearing those Aquazurra heels has done to her feet.


----------



## Annawakes

Ew


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I had to Google ASMR...and it's nothing NSFW. The things I learn here. But sorry, she's not going to seduce me.


No, me either.  When I first heard her podcrash [credit to @papertiger], I thought is she was using ASMR to lure listeners. Her voice certainly had a very different tone than in the past. The audio guys figured out how to remove the unpleasant nasal quality.  Years ago,  “The Good Fight” had a character who used the ‘asmr strategy’.   Imo it proves nothing about H&M is real - it really is smoke and mirrors.


----------



## bag-mania

Ugh, guys I’m going to request that from now on we treat Meghan’s bunions, hammertoes, and whatever else she’s got going there as if they were spoilers. Cover ‘em up. I was eating dinner!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Nacho seems to win polo tournaments with H on his team, it does seem like H is a good player
> And H is good publicity for polo , big draw, don’t know if that matters, polo ponies are expensive
> it is like high school basketball, you pick some nasty girl for the team because she scores …



But are you all over her boyfriend whom everyone else hates? That's the flabbergasting point, not that Nacho is fond of Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I wonder how she got that ranking.  Did Spotify do some advertising thing to generate listeners?  Other than us here, I didn't think that many people cared about her one way or the other.  I know she has her stans but not enough to make her the number 1 podcast.


This, 100%.  We must continue to question everything about the charlatans. Manipulating people and data is ‘their thing.’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> The South Africans REALLY don't like her




That should come with a trigger warning. A lot of people are not into feet at all.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> "To make her point in this first podcast, she is joined by her friend, the tennis legend Serena Williams. Meghan, it must be said, seems keen to the point of insecurity that we know the extent to which she and Serena are close, referencing at every opportunity how they are in endless contact, how she knew Serena was going to retire before the rest of the world found out and how often she comes by the house. She refers to her more than once as ‘my girl’."
> 
> I get that TW is eager to have everyone know that Williams is her friend, but I don't understand why Williams is buying into this drivel?  She certainly doesn't need TW, so *is it all about merching, and business and networking?* The more you read about the connections of these people, the more disgusted I am about how we are being played for $$$$


Yes, yes, yes.  Imo it is about Serena’s husband, too.  With his Reddit background, he certainly knows how to get upvotes. Pair his world with the Oprah-world and the sky’s the limit. As we have seen repeatedly, some people will do anything to get inside the royal enclosure. Yes, it is disgusting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> but you forget about them as soon as you're off the PF?


Except for when they curse my newsfeed. Blech!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Nacho seems to win polo tournaments with H on his team, it does seem like H is a good player
> And H is good publicity for polo , big draw, don’t know if that matters, polo ponies are expensive
> it is like high school basketball, you pick some nasty girl for the team because she scores …


The dinner crowd:



Imo the polo people want to encourage the sport in the US because, ya kno, the royals are coming.  Of course, there are good reasons why this sport of kings has not taken off over here and in other countries.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> From what I can tell Nacho is like the Michael Jordan of polo. He travels around the world as a sort of ambassador of the sport and people come to watch him play. Harry must be a decent player but he’s a celebrity player. In a lot of those Santa Barbara outings, Harry would score once whereas Nacho would score 5 times in a game. Harry isn’t keeping polo ponies in the US so he’s borrowing them from Nacho or others.


He is often called the “David Beckham” of polo.

ETA: 


He sounds like a genuinely caring man with a heart of gold [perhaps I should take a break]:








						Nacho Figueras discusses his role as an ambassador at Sentebale ISPS...
					

Nacho Figueras discusses his role as an ambassador at Sentebale ISPS Handa Polo Cup 2022 at the Aspen Valley Polo Club on August 25, 2022 in Aspen, Colorado.



					www.gettyimages.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzie’s comments at the dinner for Sentebale:









						Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex speaks about the charitable work of...
					

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex speaks about the charitable work of Sentebale during Sentebale ISPS Handa Polo Cup 2022 at the Aspen Valley Polo Club on August 25, 2022 in Aspen, Colorado.



					www.gettyimages.com
				




All videos from the event:





						Pictures and Photos - Getty Images
					

View and license  pictures & news photos from Getty Images.



					www.gettyimages.com


----------



## Toby93

Is there anything that the claw does not manipulate to elevate herself?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I think my eyes just rolled into the back of my head.
> 
> View attachment 5599030


Did her husband think it was a good idea for her to be on the podcast?  Serena doesn't need Meghan.  It is totally the other way around. Very disappointing.  She is letting herself be used by MM and will regret it.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> A must see, it'll make you laugh and raise your eyebrows (again).



I almost didn't click because I can't stand watching or listening to TW's irritating actions or voice, but the fact it was silent except for bubbled thoughts made me LOL!


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Did her husband think it was a good idea for her to be on the podcast?  Serena doesn't need Meghan.  It is totally the other way around. Very disappointing.  She is letting herself be used by MM and will regret it.


My thoughts exactly, but I am sure there is a mutual benefit for them   It makes me think a lot less of Serena since she is such a bad judge of character.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I almost didn't click because I can't stand watching or listening to TW's irritating actions or voice, but the fact it was silent except for bubbled thoughts made me LOL!


So she wore the hair to match her espadrilles.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the article that the Sussex helped her with a decision to retire is insulting and i wonder if Serena realizes this.  When a top athlete retires, there are many reasons and the team behind the athlete weighs the pros and cons.  It is also interesting that Serena still hasn't made up her mind despite what the Sussex and/or podcast want you to think.









						Serena Williams STILL isn't sure U.S. Open will be her last tournament
					

Serena, 40,  spoke with Today hosts Dylan Dreyer and Sheinelle Jones about her upcoming retirement at 'A Conversation with Champions' event on Thursday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





_Not so fast! Serena Williams says she STILL isn't sure that the U.S. Open will be her last tennis tournament as she prepares to compete in her first Grand Slam since announcing plans to retire_


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The dinner crowd:
> 
> 
> 
> Imo the polo people want to encourage the sport in the US because, ya kno, the royals are coming.  Of course, there are good reasons why this sport of kings has not taken off over here and in other countries.



How did ZeeZy miss out on the opportunity to wear an ill-fitting designer outfit and rub elbows with a lot of wealthy people in Aspen? 
My money is on he told her she couldn't go, they had a huge fight and so he forgot his polo gear. Seems like the most logical conclusion don't you think?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think the article that the Sussex helped her with a decision to retire is insulting and i wonder if Serena realizes this.  When a top athlete retires, there are many reasons and the team behind the athlete weighs the pros and cons.  It is also interesting that Serena still hasn't made up her mind despite what the Sussex and/or podcast want you to think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serena Williams STILL isn't sure U.S. Open will be her last tournament
> 
> 
> Serena, 40,  spoke with Today hosts Dylan Dreyer and Sheinelle Jones about her upcoming retirement at 'A Conversation with Champions' event on Thursday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Not so fast! Serena Williams says she STILL isn't sure that the U.S. Open will be her last tennis tournament as she prepares to compete in her first Grand Slam since announcing plans to retire_



I think it all depends on how she does. So much for the reason to retire is wanting to have another child. I guess if you're a top athlete it's hard to walk away. See also: Tom Brady.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> My thoughts exactly, but I am sure there is a mutual benefit for them   It makes me think a lot less of Serena since she is such a bad judge of character.


Whisper: it’s her husband driving this connection.


----------



## Jayne1

lallybelle said:


> Bots. Her stans are using bots to stream.


I'm convinced Sunshine Sachs is responsible for the stans and therefore the bots.


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> plus the book would be far more interesting if it spills about  some of his more explosive marriage moments… and asking for a divorce.


I've said before, I can't se them divorcing, they have too much on each other... but if they are separating, I can also see him _not _wanting to publish a book that will keep him from getting back with his family because what can he do without his family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

I've said before, I can't se them divorcing, they have too much on each other... but if they are separating, I can also see him _not _wanting to publish a book that will keep him from getting back with his family because what can he do without his family.
I agree, they won’t divorce.  They’ll go for a _half in/half-out_ option.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> :sh
> 
> I agree, they won’t divorce.  They’ll go for a _half in/half-out_ option.


The mental image... Eww

But yes, I think the transactional elements of their marriage will keep them together. At the moment, they have more to lose if they split. If nothing else, they will lose that vocal bunch of stans who think they are a match made in heaven. And if another man wants her, he's going to be inheriting a lot of baggage.


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> I cannot figure out what the polo couple are getting out of it. They don’t appear to be working an angle. They have plenty of their own money and they don’t need publicity for what they do.
> 
> It keeps coming back to either Nacho is a kind but rather dumb man who is being used by them for positive press. OR Nacho knows exactly what is going on with Harry and he is being a super loyal friend who is going above and beyond to try to support him.





Sophisticatted said:


> I think it is one of two things: either Harry still wants to please TW and asked his friends to say nice things about her OR they know divorce is imminent (and that Harry is using these trips to plan and put a legal strategy in place) and are saying nice things about TW to throw her off the scent.



Or they are on Me Me Pee Pee’s propaganda payroll?



bag-mania said:


> … No, something stinks about their  ranking system. *Maybe it’s like the New York Times best seller list and can be bought.*


This must be it - can anyone confirm?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The mental image... Eww
> 
> But yes, I think the transactional elements of their marriage will keep them together. At the moment, they have more to lose if they split. If nothing else, they will lose that vocal bunch of stans who think they are a match made in heaven. And if another man wants her, he's going to be inheriting a lot of baggage.


Imo they knew exactly what image they were creating when they suggested it.  It has been gross from day 1.  After all this time, it is still difficult for me to understand why QE/Charles/W continue to allow H&M  to have the title and the CoS.  Could they be any more disrespectful?  My opinion only.

ETA: Apologies for being so vocal.  I’m just so very disappointed with the BRF.


----------



## Mumotons

Katel said:


> Or they are on Me Me Pee Pee’s propaganda payroll?
> 
> 
> This must be it - can anyone confirm?


https://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2020/10/how-to-know-if-your-spotify-account-has-been-botted.html 
This would be a good way to see if it has been manipulated.


----------



## Mumotons

Spotify is still showing arch villain as number1 in Australia but I honestly cannot see why as I haven’t see it mentioned on social media anywhere , no one I know has mentioned her  and in fact the only place I saw it discussed was as a object of ridicule on the morning shows


----------



## CarryOn2020

12 week war??????  Noooo. 









						Royals Expert Claims Meghan Markle's Podcast Has A Hidden Motive - The List
					

Meghan Markle's podcast, which tackles labels that women receive, is No. 1 on Spotify, but a royals expert claims Meghan Markle's podcast has a hidden motive.




					www.thelist.com
				



_Meghan Markle's podcast is No. 1 on Spotify, beating out "The Joe Rogan Experience," for the top pod in the United States. Variety reported that "Archetypes" not only holds the tops spot in the U.S., but in Canada, Ireland, Australia, the UK, and New Zealand as well. On Spotify, "Archetypes" is described as a podcast that will "investigate, dissect, and subvert the labels that try to hold women back." On the first episode of "Archetypes," Markle claims, "We're going to live inside and rip apart the boxes women have been placed into for generations." In other words, Markle did not come to play.

According to royal editor Omid Scobie, "[T]he outraged reaction from the British press and world of royal commentators" only proves the point of the podcast, which is to call out the stereotypes about women. Scobie notes that despite publishing no less than 16 stories about it, The Daily Mail called Markle's podcast "pathetic" and "'yawn'-worthy." In fact, the British media slammed "Archetypes" almost immediately. James Marriot of The Times called it a "tastefully soundtracked parade of banalities, absurdities and self-aggrandizing Californian platitudes."

The premiere episode of "Archetypes" features Markle's friend Serena Williams, and the Duchess of Sussex notes, "It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes." But one royal expert claims Markle's podcast has a hidden motive.

Royal expert Duncan Larcombe said the Meghan Markle's podcast "*was the opening salvo in Meghan's 12-week war*" on the royal family. Larcombe told The Daily Beast, "It has the potential to be even more damaging than the Oprah interview because it is Meghan, in her own words, on her own show, doing exactly what she wants, and the fact is she took the first opportunity to plunge the knife in." Larcombe notes that it doesn't matter who is a guest on "Archetypes," "Meghan has star power, and this was all about Meghan being Meghan."

Tom Sykes, the royalist correspondent for The Daily Beast, believes The Duchess of Sussex's podcast might be a lead-in for Prince Harry's memoir that royals are nervous about. The final episode of the pod will be around November 10, close to the date of Harry's book launch. However, Page Six reported that the launch of the tell-all memoir by the Duke of Sussex might move to 2023. A source told the outlet, "I have heard that Harry has some truth bombs in his book that he is debating on whether to include or not." It seems there is never a dull moment with the royal family._
_BY CALLIE MCGUIRE/AUG. 28, 2022 4:09 PM EDT_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they knew exactly what image they were creating when they suggested it.  It has been gross from day 1.  After all this time, it is still difficult for me to understand why QE/Charles/W continue to allow H&M  to have the title and the CoS.  Could they be any more disrespectful?  My opinion only.
> 
> ETA: Apologies for being so vocal.  I’m just so very disappointed with the BRF.


I deem it a family thing. No matter how rotten a son or daughter is, the family will be loathe to cut ties. It takes a lot of determination for the average person to harden the heart. I don't think the BRF will ever cut Hazmat off unless he does something truly unforgivable: like if one of their nutcase stans tries to commit arson as they frequently agitate about, and he cheers them on. The prince of dense might do it. Unfortunately, Methane is currently a package deal with the dense one. I think she will be anti-BRF all her life because how dare they deny her all the riches and indolence she deserves!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> 12 week war??????  Noooo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royals Expert Claims Meghan Markle's Podcast Has A Hidden Motive - The List
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's podcast, which tackles labels that women receive, is No. 1 on Spotify, but a royals expert claims Meghan Markle's podcast has a hidden motive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Meghan Markle's podcast is No. 1 on Spotify, beating out "The Joe Rogan Experience," for the top pod in the United States. Variety reported that "Archetypes" not only holds the tops spot in the U.S., but in Canada, Ireland, Australia, the UK, and New Zealand as well. On Spotify, "Archetypes" is described as a podcast that will "investigate, dissect, and subvert the labels that try to hold women back." On the first episode of "Archetypes," Markle claims, "We're going to live inside and rip apart the boxes women have been placed into for generations." In other words, Markle did not come to play.
> 
> According to royal editor Omid Scobie, "[T]he outraged reaction from the British press and world of royal commentators" only proves the point of the podcast, which is to call out the stereotypes about women. Scobie notes that despite publishing no less than 16 stories about it, The Daily Mail called Markle's podcast "pathetic" and "'yawn'-worthy." In fact, the British media slammed "Archetypes" almost immediately. James Marriot of The Times called it a "tastefully soundtracked parade of banalities, absurdities and self-aggrandizing Californian platitudes."
> 
> The premiere episode of "Archetypes" features Markle's friend Serena Williams, and the Duchess of Sussex notes, "It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes." But one royal expert claims Markle's podcast has a hidden motive.
> 
> Royal expert Duncan Larcombe said the Meghan Markle's podcast "*was the opening salvo in Meghan's 12-week war*" on the royal family. Larcombe told The Daily Beast, "It has the potential to be even more damaging than the Oprah interview because it is Meghan, in her own words, on her own show, doing exactly what she wants, and the fact is she took the first opportunity to plunge the knife in." Larcombe notes that it doesn't matter who is a guest on "Archetypes," "Meghan has star power, and this was all about Meghan being Meghan."
> 
> Tom Sykes, the royalist correspondent for The Daily Beast, believes The Duchess of Sussex's podcast might be a lead-in for Prince Harry's memoir that royals are nervous about. The final episode of the pod will be around November 10, close to the date of Harry's book launch. However, Page Six reported that the launch of the tell-all memoir by the Duke of Sussex might move to 2023. A source told the outlet, "I have heard that Harry has some truth bombs in his book that he is debating on whether to include or not." It seems there is never a dull moment with the royal family._
> _BY CALLIE MCGUIRE/AUG. 28, 2022 4:09 PM EDT_


So funny that even Plastic Pal says the podcast is about stereotypes, but never do they find it mindbending that Zedzee hijacked Archetype to subvert it to mean Stereotype. Poor Archie - lots of tweets suggesting that he should be renamed Stereo.


----------



## csshopper

It's been announced Serena has invited 100 special friends to the US Open. After the love fest of the podcast it would assumed MEMEME will be among the group, if she is, she will probably be pissed to share the spotlight with 99 others.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> How did ZeeZy miss out on the opportunity to wear an ill-fitting designer outfit and rub elbows with a lot of wealthy people in Aspen?
> My money is on he told her she couldn't go, they had a huge fight and so he forgot his polo gear. Seems like the most logical conclusion don't you think?


I’m not sure. It sounds like Harry may have gone directly from his Africa trip to Colorado. The polo match was a fundraiser for the Sentebale charity, which Harry is the patron for and Nacho is an ambassador for. So does this count as Harry doing some royal duties? Is it something he’s doing on his own?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I think it all depends on how she does. So much for the reason to retire is wanting to have another child. I guess if you're a top athlete it's hard to walk away. *See also: Tom Brady.*


Yeah and something has been going on with Tom Brady. His skipping part of the pre-season for “personal reasons” is a mystery. I was half expecting a divorce announcement but then he came back.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well, well - VLow tells it like it is


----------



## CarryOn2020

One more -


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, well - VLow tells it like it is



Much as I would like the report to be published and suck the wind out of the Harkle sails, I fear that She and her delusional vindictive fans will just claim it's all lies and, worse, they will threaten the victims of her bullying.


----------



## xincinsin

Laughter galore on marklenews1: the film crew who recorded Hazard spewing word salad at Sentebale is called Mayonnaise Productions - very appropriate.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, me either.  When I first heard her podcrash [credit to @papertiger], I thought is she was using ASMR to lure listeners. Her voice certainly had a very different tone than in the past. The audio guys figured out how to remove the unpleasant nasal quality.  Years ago,  “The Good Fight” had a character who used the ‘asmr strategy’.   Imo it proves nothing about H&M is real - it really is smoke and mirrors.


Her voice has the opposite effect of ASMR on me. I can’t even hear snippets of her speaking without scrambling to turn off the sound.

Now for more ASMR type content I’m a big fan of Japanese cat grooming videos  Random I know (and I’m a dog person) but these just hit the spot LOL


----------



## mellibelly

Pearl, the horror origin story 
Not related to Zeezy but how ironic. Coming to a theatre near you in September. Pearl the tv show coming never!


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time for people to understand how truly offensive MM’s words are -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All You need To know about the Mali Mudcloth
> 
> 
> Find out everything you need to know about the history and making of the Mali Mudcloth. This ancient fabric is sure to make a statement in your home. Cuddle up in this ancient artwork.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thulatula.com



She's the racist,  if anybody is....


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> 12 week war??????  Noooo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royals Expert Claims Meghan Markle's Podcast Has A Hidden Motive - The List
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's podcast, which tackles labels that women receive, is No. 1 on Spotify, but a royals expert claims Meghan Markle's podcast has a hidden motive.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Meghan Markle's podcast is No. 1 on Spotify, beating out "The Joe Rogan Experience," for the top pod in the United States. Variety reported that "Archetypes" not only holds the tops spot in the U.S., but in Canada, Ireland, Australia, the UK, and New Zealand as well. On Spotify, "Archetypes" is described as a podcast that will "investigate, dissect, and subvert the labels that try to hold women back." On the first episode of "Archetypes," Markle claims, "We're going to live inside and rip apart the boxes women have been placed into for generations." In other words, Markle did not come to play.
> 
> According to royal editor Omid Scobie, "[T]he outraged reaction from the British press and world of royal commentators" only proves the point of the podcast, which is to call out the stereotypes about women. Scobie notes that despite publishing no less than 16 stories about it, The Daily Mail called Markle's podcast "pathetic" and "'yawn'-worthy." In fact, the British media slammed "Archetypes" almost immediately. James Marriot of The Times called it a "tastefully soundtracked parade of banalities, absurdities and self-aggrandizing Californian platitudes."
> 
> The premiere episode of "Archetypes" features Markle's friend Serena Williams, and the Duchess of Sussex notes, "It takes a lot of courage, I think, too, to stop something in many ways than to keep going sometimes." But one royal expert claims Markle's podcast has a hidden motive.
> 
> Royal expert Duncan Larcombe said the Meghan Markle's podcast "*was the opening salvo in Meghan's 12-week war*" on the royal family. Larcombe told The Daily Beast, "It has the potential to be even more damaging than the Oprah interview because it is Meghan, in her own words, on her own show, doing exactly what she wants, and the fact is she took the first opportunity to plunge the knife in." Larcombe notes that it doesn't matter who is a guest on "Archetypes," "Meghan has star power, and this was all about Meghan being Meghan."
> 
> Tom Sykes, the royalist correspondent for The Daily Beast, believes The Duchess of Sussex's podcast might be a lead-in for Prince Harry's memoir that royals are nervous about. The final episode of the pod will be around November 10, close to the date of Harry's book launch. However, Page Six reported that the launch of the tell-all memoir by the Duke of Sussex might move to 2023. A source told the outlet, "I have heard that Harry has some truth bombs in his book that he is debating on whether to include or not." It seems there is never a dull moment with the royal family._
> _BY CALLIE MCGUIRE/AUG. 28, 2022 4:09 PM EDT_



Good, maybe the BRF will be forced to act and stop muttering between bites of their cucumber sandwiches on porcelain. 

Unfortunately, I don't think Her Majesty is well, so this whole pile of crap is not at a good time for thinking clearly. Not that Harry cares, she's only his grandmother when it's handy for ops and privileges


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Good, maybe the BRF will be forced to act and stop muttering between bites of their cucumber sandwiches on porcelain.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't think Her Majesty is well, so this whole pile of crap is not at a good time for thinking clearly. Not that Harry cares, she's only his grandmother when it's handy for ops and privileges


Should just freeze them out. If this was described on the AITA threads, everyone would be telling them to cut contact. Zedzee is emboldened by their ignoring her dubious ways and is actually believing her own PR. #voetsekMeghan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Unfortunately, I don't think Her Majesty is well, so this whole pile of crap is not at a good time for thinking clearly. Not that Harry cares, she's only his grandmother when it's handy for ops and privileges



I've seen the rumours pop up here and there as well. I mean, the woman is almost 100, but I was also the one pretending Philip came home from the hospital because he was better and doing it so well I was honestly shocked when he had the audacity to die. 

Harry should be ashamed of himself making her last years so difficult.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Should just freeze them out. If this was described on the AITA threads, everyone would be telling them to cut contact. Zedzee is emboldened by their ignoring her dubious ways and is actually believing her own PR. #voetsekMeghan



Most importantly, freeze all funds and revoke any grace and favour properties. Let Megs stay at some crap Hotel like the Shard when/if they  come to London

IMO, they are still portraying themselves as half in, half out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Most importantly, freeze all funds and revoke any grace and favour properties. Let Megs stay at some crap Hotel like the Shard when/if they  come to London
> 
> IMO, they are still portraying themselves as half in, half out



As he already whined on Oprah how he was cut off, why not.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Most importantly, freeze all funds and revoke any grace and favour properties. Let Megs stay at some crap Hotel like the Shard when/if they  come to London
> 
> IMO, they are still portraying themselves as half in, half out


Yes they are..  announcing they are going back to the UK for their charities, swanning back for the jubilee as if nothing had happened etc. This is their half in and out… except they don’t have security or a trooping balcony appearance!

 (oh but how glorious was it when they were shown where they were seated… then booed on the way out.)







I fear for the Queen.  Her funeral is going to be a circus with those two clowns in attendance.  Maybe the seating arrangement should be the same as the jubilee - Harry and M being “second row royals”, fenced in by others so they can’t jump in the procession early.


----------



## needlv

Hilarious tweet….


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my.


----------



## carmen56

She’s a one trick pony, the RF is the only thing she’s got to talk about.  Maybe I’m thick but I just don’t get where all her spite, hate and vitriol against the RF comes from.  She was only a member for five minutes!  Is it because they didn’t bend to her will and make her top dog and Queen of the World?  Time for the RF to cut them off permanently and ignore all the rants.  The press and all types of media should also ignore them and deprive them of the oxygen of publicity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



That is gag inducing. From the comments, which are largely negative:

 "You are not a self made woman. You are a yachting girl who simply relocated her wares to land instead of water."


----------



## marietouchet

Podcast analysis - about 50 min long, she said I 200 times
that is FOUR times a minute !!!! 
I can’t make up 60sec of drivel that has the word I in it FOUR times


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> And if another man wants her, he's going to be inheriting a lot of baggage.


Plus, if H remarries, I pity the poor woman who has to deal with M as his ex wife.


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> if H remarries


That's a big if


----------



## LittleStar88

The way she goes on and on and on complaining about her 15 minutes as a working member of the BRF… it would be like me complaining endlessly about a job I had for a hot minute and hated… Just move da fuk on from it, lady! 

But she can’t…. Because she’s got nothing else to trade on. 

Also, nice to see that Tyra Banks School of Smizing still being put to good work.


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> She’s a one trick pony, the RF is the only thing she’s got to talk about.  Maybe I’m thick but I just *don’t get where all her spite, hate and vitriol against the RF comes from. * She was only a member for five minutes!  Is it because they didn’t bend to her will and make her top dog and Queen of the World?  Time for the RF to cut them off permanently and ignore all the rants.  The press and all types of media should also ignore them and deprive them of the oxygen of publicity.


It’s because they expected her to respect the hierarchy and follow the rules. She couldn’t do it. To my knowledge she has never worked in a conventional job where she reported to someone higher than herself. In her acting career everything she did was for herself. She didn’t have to worry about anything except how it directly concerned her. That suited her narcissist nature just fine.

How dare those royals want her to act as support for others! Outrageous. She wants to be the focus.


----------



## Helventara

That 'Princess' is firstly incorrect. Secondly, it came about by marrying into a 'racist' family.  Why does she keep on repeating this narrative ?!! (Yes, yes, I know the answer  )
ETA much much later:  It’s also amazing that all those comes from her directly. No more hearsay. So all the reports that she’s delusional are ACTUALLY true. She confirms.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> It’s because they expected her to respect the hierarchy and follow the rules. She couldn’t do it. To my knowledge she has never worked in a conventional job where she reported to someone higher than herself. In her acting career everything she did was for herself. She didn’t have to worry about anything except how it directly concerned her. That suited her narcissist nature just fine.
> 
> How dare those royals want her to act as support for others! Outrageous. She wants to be the focus.


Is it because they expected her to follow the rules?  Or is it because she has figured out it works?  She picked up steam in the Oprah interview, and discovered she gets a lot of attention if she talks about what big bad meanies the RF was to her.  Meghan is giving what she thinks will get her cheers. Springsteen has to sing Born to Run, Meghan has to tell stories of being picked on by a bunch of bullies in crowns.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is seriously losing her grip on reality and completely misjudging her importance (or rather, lack thereof).


----------



## bag-mania

LibbyRuth said:


> Is it because they expected her to follow the rules?  Or is it because she has figured out it works?  She picked up steam in the Oprah interview, and discovered she gets a lot of attention if she talks about what big bad meanies the RF was to her.  Meghan is giving what she thinks will get her cheers. Springsteen has to sing Born to Run, Meghan has to tell stories of being picked on by a bunch of bullies in crowns.


There wouldn’t have been an Oprah interview if she had been able to handle working within the royal structure. I think she came right in expecting to be able to do whatever she wanted and then she got pissed fast when she found out she couldn’t. She got Harry out because nobody is going to tell our narc what to do!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Her face on that cover pic.  My eyes hurt from rolling.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is seriously losing her grip on reality and completely misjudging her importance (or rather, lack thereof).



We have to blame the sugars for giving her a platform to continue deluding herself (and that includes the sugars in the media). As much as her lies disgust us, there are still too many who buy into her nonsense and that keeps her motivated.


----------



## LibbyRuth

bag-mania said:


> There wouldn’t have been an Oprah interview if she had been able to handle working within the royal structure. I think she came right in expecting to be able to do whatever she wanted and then she got pissed fast when she found out she couldn’t. She got Harry out because nobody is going to tell our narc what to do!


I agree with this completely.  That said, she didn't really make ripping apart the BRF a brand until the Oprah interview. I think she couldn't handle it, but still wanted the fame attached to it.  The Oprah interview affirmed her path to having the fame, and she's going to milk it for every ounce she can.


----------



## marietouchet

LibbyRuth said:


> I agree with this completely.  That said, she didn't really make ripping apart the BRF a brand until the Oprah interview. I think she couldn't handle it, but still wanted the fame attached to it.  The Oprah interview affirmed her path to having the fame, and she's going to milk it for every ounce she can.


Excellent analysis - she has made ripping apart the BRF into a brand.


----------



## Silverplume

lanasyogamama said:


> Her face on that cover pic.  My eyes hurt from rolling.


My first thought was, oh, look, _somebody_ FINALLY lent some emeralds to Megz!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suncatcher

Seems like Meghan is establishing her own platform which lends some credibility to the divorce rumours.


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> One more article about the Archetypos (it's not a typo ).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Help, I’ve been seduced by Meghan Markle’s podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, if she was minded to, could easily corner the erotic ASMR market – that weird bit of the internet in which women breathily relate fictitious experiences with their mouths too close to the microphone for the gratification of lonely nerds everywhere.It’s impossible to listen to her...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


I know I'm late to catch up but...

The way the author wrote this makes me think he lives in his parents' basement and doesn't get out much.....


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



The above sample is enough and I'm not clicking on this piece of ****
Here are more photos from the Cut article that are circulating on the net, the bucket is provided as a courtesy.


----------



## mellibelly

1. Her house is ugly
2. She’s a f*cking bore per usual 
3. No one ever called her whiter than white ginger son the N word
4. She needs serious mental help. The compulsive lying is insane.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Of course not, TW is a


----------



## Chanbal

I'm with Piers on this one!


----------



## bag-mania

If there is a divorce I bet she could easily milk 10 more years of sympathy and attention out of it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is seriously losing her grip on reality and completely misjudging her importance (or rather, lack thereof).



This isn't directed at you @QueenofWrapDress  but at the bull-crap love story that ZedZed is trying to peddle. I've learned a long time ago that when someone tries too hard to convince people that they are so much in luv, it ain't necessarily so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Of course not, TW is a




Says the woman who is the epitome of petty. Also, has she forgiven her own father yet?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I'm with Piers on this one!




That's also a really unflattering picture.


----------



## bag-mania

The Cut is a fashion site which tries to portray itself as enlightened and trendy. Naturally they would put Meghan on their pedestal. She is as preachy and pretentious while being superficial as they are.


----------



## Chanbal

@Tourre's words of wisdom…


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> If there is a divorce I bet she could easily milk 10 more years of sympathy and attention out of it.


The divorce rumors are possibly leaked by the Harkles just to keep them on the news. They will still be milking their Romeo and Juliet story for some more time imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Says the woman who cannot be in polite company whatsoever.

Me and Harry? Isn't it "Harry and I"?

But also, can she please stop writing those cheap romance novels. I am feeling sick from all that fake sugar.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



Honestly,  I wish H and her had met and married in the States and not bothered even setting foot in the UK.  They're both toxic.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW someone said in the comments she pushes the love story so much, maybe the divorce rumours aren't true.

Actually it makes me think there is indeed trouble in paradise and it might be Harry who's on his way to checking out.


----------



## gracekelly

The article is a desperate attempt to show what a success she has been and how they achieved what they wanted as a couple. Work of fiction. The lies keep coming and they all will be found out.   She doesn’t know how to stop and the clapback keeps coming making her look more foolish.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Honestly,  I wish H and her had met and married in the States and not bothered even setting foot in the UK.  They're both toxic.


That would have saved you money lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, the new plan is to ‘lovebomb’ us with syrup-y, cringey, sweet nonsense articles.  
All I can say is VoetsekH&M


----------



## CobaltBlu

I slogged through the entire article and loved this the most:


> Finding a house to start their new life wasn’t easy, Meghan tells me. “We were looking in this area” — she’s referring to Montecito, the tony beachside hamlet north of Los Angeles — “and this house kept popping up online in searches.” At first, they’d resisted going to visit. “We didn’t have jobs, so we just were not going to come and see this house. It wasn’t possible. It’s like when I was younger and you’re window shopping — it’s like, _I don’t want to go and look at all the things that I can’t afford. That doesn’t feel good._” *How utterly humbled we all are when confronted with a depressingly aspirational Zillow hunt.*



And this


> And then, quickly and decisively, as if it were my idea, the conversation ends. Meghan sets a harvest basket in my arms: a cornucopia of fruit and vegetables from their garden and a jar of jam from the Lili Bunny Garden + Larder (she had the labels made on Etsy). She smiles and waves as I make my way out the door, *wondering if somehow I’d missed everything she was trying to say.*



But the part that stuck with me the most is that she implies she still has a lot more to say, and never signed anything saying she had to keep quiet. It was a not-so-veiled thread, for sure.


----------



## jennalovesbags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Says the woman who cannot be in polite company whatsoever.
> 
> Me and Harry? Isn't it "Harry and I"?
> 
> But also, can she please stop writing those cheap romance novels. I am feeling sick from all that fake sugar.



No, Harry and I is not grammatically correct. "Harry and me" would be preferred though.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The above sample is enough and I'm not clicking on this piece of ****
> Here are more photos from the Cut article that are circulating on the net, the bucket is provided as a courtesy.
> 
> View attachment 5599601
> 
> View attachment 5599602



she's trying for sexy again...showing off those legs


----------



## CobaltBlu




----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> The divorce news are possibly leaked by the Harkles just to keep them on the news. They will still be milking their Romeo and Juliet story for some more time imo.


But what stopped the feuding amongst families was the mutual funeral. Romeo and Juliet had no happy ending, just a sort of cease fire amongst the survivors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> I slogged through the entire article and loved this the most:
> 
> 
> And this
> 
> 
> But the part that stuck with me the most is that she implies she still has a lot more to say, and never signed anything saying she had to keep quiet. It was a not-so-veiled thread, for sure.



I didn't read the article besides the snippets posted online, but it does not sound as if the writer completely took the bait, or?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> The above sample is enough and I'm not clicking on this piece of ****
> Here are more photos from the Cut article that are circulating on the net, the bucket is provided as a courtesy.
> 
> View attachment 5599601
> 
> View attachment 5599602



I think she was waiting for these types of pics and being on the cover hahaha. Finally she has landed on one so she should shut up


----------



## CarryOn2020

**


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> Of course not, TW is a



Typical. Of course he is the innocent and blameless * rolls eyes *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Once again showing how dim they really are. Hazzi only has his title, ‘royal’ status, etc., through his father.  Give it up, Hazzie.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Says the woman who cannot be in polite company whatsoever.
> 
> Me and Harry? Isn't it "Harry and I"?
> 
> But also, can she please stop writing those cheap romance novels. I am feeling sick from all that fake sugar.




Where are her manners then?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> **




Typeface says so much 

and more filler than my back wall - and my house is 200 years old (at least)


----------



## marietouchet

There are no words for THE CUT article ... she has not forgiven anything - despite her words to the contrary, she is not over anything ...


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't read the article besides the snippets posted online, but it does not sound as if the writer completely took the bait, *or*?


The article was written by someone @Sucks, allegedly.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.



They probably didn't have the funds to sponsor the cover!?


----------



## marietouchet

Per THE CUT other "princes, princesses, dukes" have the privileges that the Sharkles wanted ...Who is that?
Who are the senior royals that make money and are half in/half out ?
I fail to think of anyone with that deal ...
There are really very few princes, princesses, dukes ...
Princess Michael writes books, is pushy but not a senior royal


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## LittleStar88

I’d like to know what kind of reality she is existing in… This article is one giant eye roll. 

Who called her kids the N word??

“Why would I give the very people that are calling my children the N-word a photo of my child before I can share it with the people that love my child?” she asks, still ruffled. “You tell me how that makes sense and then I’ll play that game.”


And what’s with the gutteral noises and moaning (again)?! Is she a zombie?

“Though she has been media trained and then royal-media trained and sometimes converses like she has a tiny_ Bachelor _producer in her brain directing what she says (at one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: “She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning”), at this stage, post-royal, there’s no need for her to hold back.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> And what’s with the gutteral noises and moaning (again)?! Is she a zombie?
> 
> “Though she has been media trained and then royal-media trained and sometimes converses like she has a tiny_ Bachelor _producer in her brain directing what she says (at one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: “She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning”), at this stage, post-royal, there’s no need for her to hold back.”



You don't understand. She's giving birth to something grand.

Seriously, at this point I think she should be hospitalized for her own (and Harry's) good. She is batsh*t crazy and people need to stop catering to her.

Can you imagine being that poor writer watching her moan and make guttural noises? WTF!


----------



## CarryOn2020

FYI, world:  Americans are speaking up now.  Serena, Charles, William: shut this sh!tstorm down. 

'Every time she opens her mouth it is to badmouth the royals': Americans slam Meghan Markle after her 'latest vanity PR' and brand her a 'fantasist' after she compared herself to Nelson Mandela​
*Meghan has been hit with a backlash after another bombshell interview with The Cut magazine*
*Americans have branded her 'latest vanity PR' project as 'shameless' and say she needs to 'move on' from the royals*
*The Duchess of Sussex, 41, was also branded as 'sickening' after 'comparing herself' to Nelson Mandela*
*She claims in the interview that she was told by a South African that people 'danced in the street' when she married Harry - like when Mandela was freed  *









						Americans slam Meghan Markle after her 'latest vanity PR'
					

Americans have branded her latest comments as 'sickening', claiming that she is 'so out of touch'. She has also been slammed for 'using her title' to keep 'trashing the institution' who gave her it.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The contrast is stark. Note how the important one doesn't have to cling to her husband's title.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 'Every time she opens her mouth it is to badmouth the royals': Americans slam Meghan Markle after her 'latest vanity PR' and brand her a 'fantasist' after she compared herself to Nelson Mandela​



She did what? She is starting to scare me.


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The contrast is stark. Note how the important one doesn't have to cling to her husband's title.



Hard to be class act, when you are a class clown! trying so hard to be class act and it would have been so easy for Crazy if she just dial it down, down, down, down, down


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She did what? She is starting to scare me.



Let people compare you to someone like Nelson Mandela , not you saying it is... Nice people don't have to tell people they are nice, only @ssholes do that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



The earrings?  What’s up with those?


----------



## LizzieBennett

CobaltBlu said:


> I slogged through the entire article and loved this the most:
> 
> 
> And this
> 
> 
> But the part that stuck with me the most is that she implies she still has a lot more to say, and never signed anything saying she had to keep quiet. It was a not-so-veiled thread, for sure.


Or she is looking for money to keep quiet.


----------



## Sharont2305

Going back to the article, real Royals don't do online searches for houses.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> But the part that stuck with me the most is that she implies she still has a lot more to say, and never signed anything saying she had to keep quiet.


Oh yes, MM, go on, tell us more.  
Each time she talks, the BRF lawyers celebrate


----------



## MiniMabel

CarryOn2020 said:


> The earrings?  What’s up with those?


Agreed. Hopefully something out of a cracker! 

I'd like to know more about them; MM does not deserve earrings like those if they are real gems, even on loan.


----------



## csshopper

The writer says, “now that she’s post Royal.”  PUULEEZE  will the RF take action and make this a statement of fact.

This is her FU  to the Royals for the Jubilee seating that isolated them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> Agreed. Hopefully something out of a cracker!
> 
> I'd like to know more about them; MM does not deserve earrings like those if they are real gems, even on loan.


To my eye, they look crooked.  Maybe they are purposefully uneven.  Kinda makes it look Frankenstein-ish. Imo.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chloe302225 said:


>




Too bad one of them is so rotten to the core that she is indeed very ugly inside. Sometimes the mask sleeps and you can even see it.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Aimee3

I don’t know how to post it but someone on Instagram inserted an “N” in between the the “u” and “t” of <<The Cut>> so it read 
<<the Cu@t>>.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> **



ZedZed what are you trying to prove with your blank or cruel looking eyes? That you are devoid of any humanity? You have already proven how greedy, envious, jealous, devious, vengeful and hateful (please add more) you really are, with both adults and children. You and Dufus are more alike than you realize; you both seem to have empty souls.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> *And what’s with the gutteral noises and moaning (again)?*! Is she a zombie?
> 
> “Though she has been media trained and then royal-media trained and sometimes converses like she has a tiny_ Bachelor _producer in her brain directing what she says (at one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: “She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning”), at this stage, post-royal, there’s no need for her to hold back.”



Meghan must got hold of the wrong _When Harry Met_ script before leaving the house


----------



## bellecate

Not sure if this has been posted yet as I’m 17 pages behind.


----------



## calicocat

Chloe302225 said:


>



The Ethereal Goddess in McQueen vs The Evil Queen in Torch & Bury; I mean Tory Burch


----------



## marietouchet

Gen Colin Powell had a saying - get mad, then get over it 
Brilliant words from a brilliant man


----------



## marietouchet

Omid doing clean up on aisle 4
Meghan Markle says Prince Harry told her he 'lost' his father Charles
https://mol.im/a/11157379


----------



## Stansy

marietouchet said:


> Gen Colin Powell had a saying - get mad, then get over it
> Brilliant words from a brilliant man


She is too dim to get Colin Powell or Ivana *****: „Don‘t get angry, get everything“


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s the info from The Cut - 

*On Meghan: *Cover: *Tory Burch* Colorblock Tulle Dress, available at toryburch.com. *Lanvin* Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, available at select Lanvin Boutiques. From top: (1) *Tory Burch* Colorblock Tulle Dress, available at toryburch.com. *Lanvin* Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, available at select Lanvin Boutiques. (2) *Bottega Veneta*dress, available at bottegaveneta.com. *Mikimoto* 8” Akoya cultured pearl strand featuring 9x8.5mm A+ Akoya cultured pearls with a Mikimoto signature clasp in 18K white gold, available at mikimotoamerica.com. *Mateo* 14k yellow gold Bypass Hoops with diamonds, available at mateonewyork.com. (3) *Chanel Fantasy* Tweed Dress, available at select Chanel boutiques nationwide. *Manolo Blahnik* BB-Black Suede Pump, available at manoloblahnik.com. *Sophie Buhai* Everyday Pearl Earrings, available at SophieBuhai.com. (4) *Proenza Schouler* Off-White Bi-Stretch Crepe Cinched Jacket and Crepe Pant, similar styles available at proenzaschouler.com. *Manolo Blahnik* BB-White Nappa Leather Pump, available at manoloblahnik.com. *Mateo *14k Yellow Gold Large Half Moon Earrings with Diamonds, available at mateonewyork.com.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uhm Omid, that is NOT what she said. Quote in second slide.

What is it with him...does she allow him to lick her high heels once in a while?


----------



## CarryOn2020

What MM wore - From ToryB’s resort 2023 collection:











						Introducing Resort 2023 | Tory Daily
					

An invitation for individuality and experimentation — the core of American sportswear. — Tory




					www.toryburch.com


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> What MM wore - From ToryB’s resort 2023 collection:
> 
> View attachment 5599717
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Introducing Resort 2023 | Tory Daily
> 
> 
> An invitation for individuality and experimentation — the core of American sportswear. — Tory
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.toryburch.com



Better on the model 

and @CarryOn2020  "*Lanvin* Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, available at select Lanvin Boutiques." She's still after those pesky emeralds but only ended up with glass. 

It'll be the story of her life if she's not careful. Not all fairytales have a happy ending


----------



## charlottawill

Helventara said:


> View attachment 5599545
> 
> That 'Princess' is firstly incorrect. Secondly, it came about by marrying into a 'racist' family.  Why does she keep on repeating this narrative ?!! (Yes, yes, I know the answer  )
> ETA much much later:  It’s also amazing that all those comes from her directly. No more hearsay. So all the reports that she’s delusional are ACTUALLY true. She confirms.


Not to defend her, but she is technically a princess by marriage, Princess Henry, if she chooses to use it. Since she's not a princess by birth like Princess Charlotte or Eugenie and Bea, Princess Meghan is incorrect, as was Princess Diana, but everyone used it anyway.


----------



## CobaltBlu

LittleStar88 said:


> I’d like to know what kind of reality she is existing in… This article is one giant eye roll.
> 
> Who called her kids the N word??
> 
> “Why would I give the very people that are calling my children the N-word a photo of my child before I can share it with the people that love my child?” she asks, still ruffled. “You tell me how that makes sense and then I’ll play that game.”
> 
> 
> And what’s with the gutteral noises and moaning (again)?! Is she a zombie?
> 
> “Though she has been media trained and then royal-media trained and sometimes converses like she has a tiny_ Bachelor _producer in her brain directing what she says (at one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: *“She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning”), *at this stage, post-royal, there’s no need for her to hold back.”


yea, what was that all about?  I tried to imagine it but in my head it sounded like a bear coming out of hibernation


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more -



She's saying, "Get me off this island. I loved the attention and unless a person makes special arrangements at a very specific time, on a very specific day in July and August... and pay the rather high admission fee, my subjects can't commemorate me from up close."

That's what she's saying with that light beam.


----------



## CobaltBlu

MiniMabel said:


> Agreed. Hopefully something out of a cracker!
> 
> I'd like to know more about them; MM does not deserve earrings like those if they are real gems, even on loan.


I think they are Lanvin; this says thats what shes wearing on the cover: 

*On Meghan: *_Cover: _*Tory Burch*_ Colorblock Tulle Dress, _available at toryburch.com. *Lanvin*_ Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, _available at select Lanvin Boutiques._ From top: (1) _*Tory Burch*_ Colorblock Tulle Dress, _available at toryburch.com. *Lanvin*_ Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, _available at select Lanvin Boutiques. _(2) _*Bottega Veneta*_ dress, _available at bottegaveneta.com. *Mikimoto*_ 8” Akoya cultured pearl strand featuring 9x8.5mm A+ Akoya cultured pearls with a Mikimoto signature clasp in 18K white gold, _available at mikimotoamerica.com. *Mateo*_ 14k yellow gold Bypass Hoops with diamonds, _available at mateonewyork.com._ (3) _*Chanel Fantasy*_ Tweed Dress, _available at select Chanel boutiques nationwide. *Manolo Blahnik*_ BB-Black Suede Pump, _available at manoloblahnik.com. *Sophie Buhai*_ Everyday Pearl Earrings, _available at SophieBuhai.com. _(4) _*Proenza Schouler*_ Off-White Bi-Stretch Crepe Cinched Jacket and Crepe Pant, _similar styles available at proenzaschouler.com. *Manolo Blahnik*_ BB-White Nappa Leather Pump, _available at manoloblahnik.com. *Mateo *_14k Yellow Gold Large Half Moon Earrings with Diamonds, _available at mateonewyork.com.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I’d like to know what kind of reality she is existing in… This article is one giant eye roll.
> 
> Who called her kids the N word??
> 
> “Why would I give the very people that are calling my children the N-word a photo of my child before I can share it with the people that love my child?” she asks, still ruffled. “You tell me how that makes sense and then I’ll play that game.”
> 
> 
> And what’s with the gutteral noises and moaning (again)?! Is she a zombie?
> 
> “Though she has been media trained and then royal-media trained and sometimes converses like she has a tiny_ Bachelor _producer in her brain directing what she says (at one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: “She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning”), at this stage, post-royal, there’s no need for her to hold back.”


someone is calling Meghan's kids the N word? (allegedly).


----------



## marietouchet

Worst bit in THE CUT
A cannot go to school in Uk, since M would be followed by 40 paparazzi on school run
This is DIRECTLY in response to recent on Cambridge kids - W will drive the 3 to school in the fall
Why is it too hard for M but W will do it ???

The 1-2 punch of the podcast and article … this is vengeance not some awkward choice of words, deliberate


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> Going back to the article, real Royals don't do online searches for houses.


They also don’t reality at the reason the house kept popping up was because nobody wanted it.  


Aimee3 said:


> I don’t know how to post it but someone on Instagram inserted an “N” in between the the “u” and “t” of <<The Cut>> so it read
> <<the Cu@t>>.


I saw that picture but was afraid to post it here!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> someone is calling Meghan's kids the N word? (allegedly).



I don't believe it for a minute. She is referring to Archie and her drama surrounding his birth and who was allowed to take his picture. You bet if someone had called him that we'd have heard of it a million times by now, at the very least on Oprah. Her crazy lying brain is just a smidge away from short circuiting.


----------



## marietouchet

ROTFL 

Writer behind Meghan Markle's latest interview is also a SEX writer
https://mol.im/a/11157507


----------



## Aminamina

Aimee3 said:


> I don’t know how to post it but someone on Instagram inserted an “N” in between the the “u” and “t” of <<The Cut>> so it read
> <<the Cu@t>>.


Speaking of which, this interview reminded me of the scene from “La Grande Bellezza”! Sorry, there are only English subtitles.


----------



## Silverplume

So…_*not*_ real emeralds, not even on loan, and Megz is still a thirsty poseur. The CUT’s stylist must’ve read about M running off with the shoes from the Reitman’s commercial.


----------



## EmilyM11

marietouchet said:


> Worst bit in THE CUT
> A cannot go to school in Uk, since M would be followed by 40 paparazzi on school run
> This is DIRECTLY in response to recent on Cambridge kids - W will drive the 3 to school in the fall
> *Why is it too hard for M but W will do it ???*


Because OBVIOUSLY she’s more important than him


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5599624


Nothing like cosplaying your dead mother-in-law (who you never met) on the week of the 25th anniversary of her death. Make it about you, Meghan, make it ALLLLL about you!


----------



## Lodpah

S


Chloe302225 said:


>



Shades of Jada Pinkett. Wow! She’s insane, like Insane in the Membrane. That’s a line from a song.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> S
> 
> Shades of Jada Pinkett. Wow! She’s insane, like Insane in the Membrane. That’s a line from a song.


Thank you for this afternoon’s ear worm.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's also a really unflattering picture.


That's what I thought too, very unflattering picture.  Surprised SS and she approved it.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Victoria Jackson's make-up line is made by Guthy-Renker and conveniently, she is married to Bill Guthy.









						Infomercial Pioneer Bill Guthy Pays Nearly $23 Million for Duo of Slick L.A. Homes
					

While they’re still trying to sell a contemporary Sunset Strip house that previously belonged to Kendall Jenner — and though they already own an enormous estate in Beverly Hills, plus a verit…




					www.dirt.com


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Uhm Omid, that is NOT what she said.* Quote in second slide.
> 
> What is it with him...does she allow him to lick her high heels once in a while?



Sorry @QueenofWrapDress, but  Scoobie is right imo. It may not be what TW said, but it's what she meant! TW does't want to lose Hazz's father aka Ch$rl$s.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> That's what I thought too, very unflattering picture.  Surprised SS and she approved it.


And this has to be the best of the lot and that’s after touch-ups and Photoshop work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



Hmmm....she left The Firm behind?  More like The Firm kicked both of them in the behind and booted them out.  This absolutely has to be the case IMO because there would not be the continued vitriol from the two of them against their family if not the case.   Hell hath no fury like  Harry  and Meghan scorned.  

Hopefully, the world will recognize how ungrateful they are and form opinions accordingly.


----------



## youngster

_The fashion publication reported today that  Meghan listed a 'handful of princes and princesses and dukes who have the very arrangement they wanted', although none of these royals are named in the article. Speaking to New York-based features writer Allison P Davis, Meghan said: 'That, for whatever reason, is not something that we were allowed to do, e*ven though several other members of the family do that exact thing.'  *Asked 'Why do you think that is?', she simply replied: 'Why do you think that is?', with the interviewer Ms Davis saying that she said this 'right back with a side-eye that suggests I should understand without having to be told'._

Amazing that none of these "journalists" ever ask a decent follow up question.  How about asking Meghan who are these other members of the family that do exactly what you and Harry wanted to do?  Name them, please.  Instead, the interviewer asks, why do you think that is?  Come on, it's such an obvious question.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't think of anyone who doesn't do the work, expects all the funds and to be invited to all glamorous occasions, merches the royal title and can't keep their mouth shut to be honest. But that's just me.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> I cannot figure out what the polo couple are getting out of it. They don’t appear to be working an angle. They have plenty of their own money and they don’t need publicity for what they do.
> 
> It keeps coming back to either Nacho is a kind but rather dumb man who is being used by them for positive press. OR Nacho knows exactly what is going on with Harry and he is being a super loyal friend who is going above and beyond to try to support him.


I think they are getting a lot of recognition from it. Had any of us here ever heard of Nacho or his wife before he started using Harry for publicity. Perhaps also brings in some money people from when H ran in the Royal Polo circle.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers scored again, such an appropriate emoji for this…


----------



## charlottawill

Suncatcher said:


> Seems like Meghan is establishing her own platform which lends some credibility to the divorce rumours.


Or separation at least, as someone said earlier. PC and Diana were separated for a number of years before they divorced.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> _The fashion publication reported today that  Meghan listed a 'handful of princes and princesses and dukes who have the very arrangement they wanted', although none of these royals are named in the article. Speaking to New York-based features writer Allison P Davis, Meghan said: 'That, for whatever reason, is not something that we were allowed to do, e*ven though several other members of the family do that exact thing.'  *Asked 'Why do you think that is?', she simply replied: 'Why do you think that is?', with the interviewer Ms Davis saying that she said this 'right back with a side-eye that suggests I should understand without having to be told'._
> 
> Amazing that none of these "journalists" ever ask a decent follow up question.  How about asking Meghan who are these other members of the family that do exactly what you and Harry wanted to do?  Name them, please.  Instead, the interviewer asks, why do you think that is?  Come on, it's such an obvious question.


I believe she is harping on Prince and Princess Michael of Kent regarding this.  The Kents do not carry out royal duties and they do not receive any money from the privy purse. They have to work and Princess M has been pretty industrious over the years  So the bottom line is that the Kents can not be compared to the Harkles.  They don't even get their grace and favor flat anymore and had to pay rent until they moved.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> If there is a divorce I bet she could easily milk 10 more years of sympathy and attention out of it.


Unfortunately.


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> That's what I thought too, very unflattering picture.  Surprised SS and she approved it.


I think in her mind she looks like Zoe Kravitz.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't think of anyone who doesn't do the work, expects all the funds and to be invited to all glamorous occasions, merches the royal title and can't keep their mouth shut to be honest. But that's just me.


If she is pointing at Zara or Peter, she has no case.  They have no titles and receive no allowance from the privy purse.  Of course they get business because of who they are and who they are related to, but that is something that is not spoken about on the surface.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't think of anyone who doesn't do the work, expects all the funds and to be invited to all glamorous occasions, merches the royal title and can't keep their mouth shut to be honest. But that's just me.


She is truly loathsome. I can't wait for karma to slap her in the face.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> That's what I thought too, very unflattering picture.  Surprised SS and she approved it.


I actually don't think that picture is bad.  I like it better than the one with her toothpick legs sticking out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait...so I still refuse to just read the da*n piece, but I read a comments section on FB and while comparing herself to Mandela she apparently said people in South Africa were dancing in the streets when she gave birth? This woman is literally sick in the head. How can Harry live with this?

Comment section is full of South Africans saying she is full of it and that never happened.


----------



## gracekelly

Blind Item #12
					

Granted, I just skimmed through it a few minutes ago, but when exactly did this UK schooling take place that she had to navigate the press w...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				





The comments are pretty good.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I think in her mind she looks like Zoe Kravitz.



Only that ZK is actually stunningly beautiful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait...so I still refuse to just read the da*n piece, but I read a comments section on FB and while comparing herself to Mandela she apparently said people in South Africa were dancing in the streets when she gave birth? This woman is literally sick in the head. How can Harry live with this?
> 
> Comment section is full of South Africans saying she is full of it and that never happened.


again - such delusions of grandeur.....with the way she acts, I find it hard to believe her sorority sisters liked her so much.  guess she put on a good act for them


----------



## Chanbal

_It seems that the last two years of interviews, podcasts and media briefings actually count as Meghan keeping shtum. *Towards the end of a 6,500-word interview with the Cut, *which covers the duchess’s views on the monarchy, the British press and racism*, she says that she ‘never had to sign anything that restricts her from talking,’ adding ‘I can talk about my whole experience and make a choice not to’.* At this point, Mr S doesn’t know whether this is an attempt at satire or if Meghan genuinely believes her ‘truth’. 

The interview, titled ‘*Meghan of Montecito*’, comes less than a week after her Archetypes podcast with Serena Williams (in which listeners might have hoped that she could have spoken a little less). *Maybe Meghan decided that an hour of uninterrupted self-endorsement wasn’t enough, *dedicating at least a day to the feature-length interview and photoshoot*.* 

At one point, she claimed that during a visit to the Lion King premiere in London, a cast member from South Africa pulled her aside: ‘He looked at me, and he’s just like light [sic?]. He said, “*I just need you to know: When you married into this family, we rejoiced in the streets the same we did when Mandela was freed from prison*”.’ Seems legit. 

Another bizarre section sees homeless people used as a learning experience for Meghan’s son Archie. *They take the interviewer for a drive* (not at all pre-meditated, Mr S is sure) where *Meghan then ‘reaches into the trunk and produces a brand-new black backpack and hands it to her security detail to give to an unhoused man on the corner.’* Meghan claims that they are* ‘teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes. *They made kits to pass out with water and peanut-butter crackers and granola bars.’ Steerpike wonders if Meghan couldn’t have instead offered one of her nine bedrooms from her Montecito estate. 

*And what's Harry been up to?* According to the interview, not much. He's spent a fair amount of his time doing DIY around their home as well as ‘fixing sprinklers’ for their LA neighbours. The interviewer described the prince as ‘exasperated’ when talking about ‘fixing pipes’ in their Montecito mansion. __Perhaps it’s another learning experience for Archie: some people are born princes but end up as glorified handymen._
https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/steerpike








						Meghan’s Mandela moment
					

Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, has given an interview and photo shoot the the New York magazine section, The Cut.




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> again - such delusions of grandeur.....with the way she acts, I find it hard to believe her sorority sisters liked her so much.  guess she put on a good act for them


Maybe they didn't.  I was of the opinion that she was rushed because she was biracial. They wanted to show they were woke.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5599797
> 
> 
> _It seems that the last two years of interviews, podcasts and media briefings actually count as Meghan keeping shtum. *Towards the end of a 6,500-word interview with the Cut, *which covers the duchess’s views on the monarchy, the British press and racism*, she says that she ‘never had to sign anything that restricts her from talking,’ adding ‘I can talk about my whole experience and make a choice not to’.* At this point, Mr S doesn’t know whether this is an attempt at satire or if Meghan genuinely believes her ‘truth’.
> 
> The interview, titled ‘*Meghan of Montecito*’, comes less than a week after her Archetypes podcast with Serena Williams (in which listeners might have hoped that she could have spoken a little less). *Maybe Meghan decided that an hour of uninterrupted self-endorsement wasn’t enough, *dedicating at least a day to the feature-length interview and photoshoot*.*
> 
> At one point, she claimed that during a visit to the Lion King premiere in London, a cast member from South Africa pulled her aside: ‘He looked at me, and he’s just like light [sic?]. He said, “*I just need you to know: When you married into this family, we rejoiced in the streets the same we did when Mandela was freed from prison*”.’ Seems legit.
> 
> Another bizarre section sees homeless people used as a learning experience for Meghan’s son Archie. *They take the interviewer for a drive* (not at all pre-meditated, Mr S is sure) where *Meghan then ‘reaches into the trunk and produces a brand-new black backpack and hands it to her security detail to give to an unhoused man on the corner.’* Meghan claims that they are* ‘teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes. *They made kits to pass out with water and peanut-butter crackers and granola bars.’ Steerpike wonders if Meghan couldn’t have instead offered one of her nine bedrooms from her Montecito estate.
> 
> *And what's Harry been up to?* According to the interview, not much. He's spent a fair amount of his time doing DIY around their home as well as ‘fixing sprinklers’ for their LA neighbours. The interviewer described the prince as ‘exasperated’ when talking about ‘fixing pipes’ in their Montecito mansion. __Perhaps it’s another learning experience for Archie: some people are born princes but end up as glorified handymen._
> https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/steerpike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s Mandela moment
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, has given an interview and photo shoot the the New York magazine section, The Cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


Harry fixing sprinklers and pipes.  On what planet?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Harry fixing sprinklers and pipes.  *On what planet?*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I have a new pet. For the past three nights a moth has come sit on my arm, leg or keyboard for hours. It is not fazed at all when I type or move. When I want to close the laptop or go to sleep I put it aside which seems to annoy it slightly, but it will be there the next evening. What gives?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Another bizarre section sees homeless people used as a learning experience for Meghan’s son Archie. *They take the interviewer for a drive* (not at all pre-meditated, Mr S is sure) where *Meghan then ‘reaches into the trunk and produces a brand-new black backpack and hands it to her security detail to give to an unhoused man on the corner.’* Meghan claims that they are* ‘teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes. *They made kits to pass out with water and peanut-butter crackers and granola bars.’ Steerpike wonders if Meghan couldn’t have instead offered one of her nine bedrooms from her Montecito estate. _



She is repulsive. I have no words.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> someone is calling Meghan's kids the N word? (allegedly).


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> S
> 
> Shades of Jada Pinkett. Wow! She’s insane, like Insane in the Membrane. That’s a line from a song.


Just wait til someone comments on her hair, her husband will punch out the speaker


----------



## papertiger

Sorry it's from the Mail 









						DAN WOOTTON: Meghan's latest tirade should be final straw for Harry
					

DAN WOOTTON: There comes a moment in every toxic relationship where friends and family of the wronged party must put their own grievances aside to save their loved one from a life of misery.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I think they are getting a lot of recognition from it. Had any of us here ever heard of Nacho or his wife before he started using Harry for publicity. Perhaps also brings in some money people from when H ran in the Royal Polo circle.


I never knew Nacho by name but I remember seeing his photos when he was the hot Ralph Lauren Polo model in the displays at Macy’s and other stores for years.


----------



## charlottawill

scarlet555 said:


> Hard to be class act, when you are a class clown! trying so hard to be class act and it would have been so easy for Crazy if she just dial it down, down, down, down, down



We knew she'd come out swinging after Bower's book. She thinks this is her triumphant return? She only continues to embarrass herself and further tarnish the RF. I wonder how much of this is getting through to TQ? I know in the past she read a lot of papers, but I hope her family and staff is keeping this sordid mess from her.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the info from The Cut -
> 
> *On Meghan: *Cover: *Tory Burch* Colorblock Tulle Dress, available at toryburch.com. *Lanvin* Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, available at select Lanvin Boutiques. From top: (1) *Tory Burch* Colorblock Tulle Dress, available at toryburch.com. *Lanvin* Brass & Green Strass Melodie Earrings, available at select Lanvin Boutiques. (2) *Bottega Veneta*dress, available at bottegaveneta.com. *Mikimoto* 8” Akoya cultured pearl strand featuring 9x8.5mm A+ Akoya cultured pearls with a Mikimoto signature clasp in 18K white gold, available at mikimotoamerica.com. *Mateo* 14k yellow gold Bypass Hoops with diamonds, available at mateonewyork.com. (3) *Chanel Fantasy* Tweed Dress, available at select Chanel boutiques nationwide. *Manolo Blahnik* BB-Black Suede Pump, available at manoloblahnik.com. *Sophie Buhai* Everyday Pearl Earrings, available at SophieBuhai.com. (4) *Proenza Schouler* Off-White Bi-Stretch Crepe Cinched Jacket and Crepe Pant, similar styles available at proenzaschouler.com. *Manolo Blahnik* BB-White Nappa Leather Pump, available at manoloblahnik.com. *Mateo *14k Yellow Gold Large Half Moon Earrings with Diamonds, available at mateonewyork.com.


Did someone take inventory after the shoot was over?


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


>




As much as I personally would love the Queen or Prince Charles to come out and tell her off publicly and respond to her statements, I think the family is right to keep silent and ignore her.  She wants them to respond. She wants the drama, the transatlantic back and forth that would make headlines and probably not just headlines in the tabloids.  What she said today is in a magazine that nobody reads and makes some noise in the tabloids and the twitter-verse for 24 hours or so and then disappears.  I only knew about it because I read this thread.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5599624


Omg…..Someone wrote in the comments that the magazine name has a letter missing.   I’m dying here 
Edit:  Sorry, I'm so far behind in reading and it's already been posted.  Still hilarious!


----------



## Hermes Zen

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5599624


  Even her eyebrows are shaped the same!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Sorry it's from the Mail
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Meghan's latest tirade should be final straw for Harry
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: There comes a moment in every toxic relationship where friends and family of the wronged party must put their own grievances aside to save their loved one from a life of misery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Get Harry, get the children, deal with the nutjob later. That would be my MO. But what can you do if the main victim is still steadfast in his support for the villain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> As much as I personally would love the Queen or Prince Charles to come out and tell her off publicly and respond to her statements, I think the family is right to keep silent and ignore her.  She wants them to respond. She wants the drama, the transatlantic back and forth that would make headlines and probably not just headlines in the tabloids.  What she said today is in a magazine that nobody reads and makes some noise in the tabloids and the twitter-verse for 24 hours or so and then disappears.  I only knew about it because I read this thread.



So true. In German we say "to let someone starve at a long arm". Still, I do think funds need to be cut and wills changed, and please someone make arrangements for the unlikely case Harry could end up regent for an underage king.


----------



## Chanbal

archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seems that was what all of the FB comments were referring to (as in, didn't happen). Not sure why someone brought up her giving birth in the same context.


----------



## Chanbal

…And the writer seems to be an expert! 

"_*The writer of the interview, Allison P Davis*, recounted how in one exchange Meghan dictated how the noises she was making should be interpreted. Davis wrote: “*At one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: ‘She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning.*’_ ” (Source: The Times)











						Writer behind Meghan Markle's latest interview is also a SEX writer
					

Allison P. Davis, from California, stole the hearts of Harry and Meghan fans when she wrote about their love story in Meghan's latest interview. Allison is known for her sex-focused writing.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mrs.Z

Chanbal said:


> Piers scored again, such an appropriate emoji for this…



This is Cringe…..horrible pose and soooo contrived


----------



## pukasonqo

Meghan reminds me of someone I went to uni with here in Australia
The Aboriginal gene is recessive which was used as an advantage against Aboriginals, a way of deleting them
My classmate was a lily white redhead, never mentioned being Aboriginal until he got in trouble in a clinical placement     and threatened to sue the university for racism and homophobia (you cannot made this up!) if he was not allowed to sail through and lawyers were involved 
There was no racism or homophobia, he made an error that could have had consequences for all involved
But MM is similar to him, the race card gets played and we are meant to believe anything she says or be labelled racists
I miss the times when you could challenges someone based on their actions and words without race being part of it
Funnily enough, me a Latina (very mixed race) gets confused w Aboriginal  many times here in Oz which has showed me how even in a country considered “easy going” the way we treat minorities is appalling


----------



## LizzieBennett

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Get Harry, get the children, deal with the nutjob later. That would be my MO. But what can you do if the main victim is still steadfast in his support for the villain.


Sorry, but I respectfully disagree.    Harry is not a victim and he’s as much villain as she is.  More so in my opinion.  I can’t forget how he treated his grandfather and how horrible and disrespectful he’s been to the Queen, his grandmother.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Says the woman who cannot be in polite company whatsoever.
> 
> Me and Harry? Isn't it "Harry and I"?
> 
> But also, can she please stop writing those cheap romance novels. I am feeling sick from all that fake sugar.



The fact that she herself has appallingly bad manners is lost on her.  Who pushes their way to front, or doesn't wait for THE QUEEN to get in the car first?  Pushy, pushy, pushy, yet she is hypocritical enough to say they are all about manners.   Completely delusional


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LizzieBennett said:


> Sorry, but I respectfully disagree.    Harry is not a victim and he’s as much villain as she is.  More so in my opinion.  I can’t forget how he treated his grandfather and how horrible and disrespectful he’s been to the Queen, his grandmother.



You can disagree, half of the contributors to this thread do. I still think she's a manipulative, narcisstic abuser who will destroy him.

But I completely agree regarding his treatment of his grandparents.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## bag-mania

LizzieBennett said:


> Sorry, but I respectfully disagree.    Harry is not a victim and he’s as much villain as she is.  More so in my opinion.  I can’t forget how he treated his grandfather and how horrible and disrespectful he’s been to the Queen, his grandmother.


I agree. We get carried away with Meghan’s shenanigans but Harry must be held accountable for his part. Meghan isn’t something bad that happened to Harry. He has shown us who he truly is and he’s angry, entitled and vindictive.


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> I slogged through the entire article and loved this the most:
> 
> 
> And this
> 
> 
> But the part that stuck with me the most is that she implies she still has a lot more to say, and never signed anything saying she had to keep quiet. It was a not-so-veiled thread, for sure.


Which is why she probably has all her employees and staff sign an NDA.  The hypocrisy is deafening.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I agree. We get carried away with Meghan’s shenanigans but Harry must be held accountable for his part. Meghan isn’t something bad that happened to Harry. He has shown us who he truly is and he’s angry, entitled and vindictive.



But you can be a jerk and still be a victim. Nobody - and that includes me - is saying he is not to blame for his misbehaviour or that she causes all of it. I am saying she is the malicious narc who sucks him dry. She has emasculated, infantilized and isolated him while playing with his deepest fears (loss of his mother) and continues to do so.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> @Tourre's words of wisdom…
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599612



Except that he didn’t lose his dad, he tossed him away. Big difference.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But you can be a jerk and still be a victim. Nobody - and that includes me - is saying he is not to blame for his misbehaviour or that she causes all of it. I am saying she is the malicious narc who sucks him dry. She has emasculated, infantilized and isolated him while playing with his deepest fears (loss of his mother) and continues to do so.


I don't disagree with you but then again he might have been very immature without any help from her....she just used it to her advantage


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But you can be a jerk and still be a victim. Nobody - and that includes me - is saying he is not to blame for his misbehaviour or that she causes all of it. I am saying she is the malicious narc who sucks him dry. She has emasculated, infantilized and isolated him while playing with his deepest fears (loss of his mother) and continues to do so.


He turned his back on nearly everyone in his life. Can you call someone a victim who so willingly gave himself over? He isn’t mentally impaired (that we know of), he has free will and made deliberate choices.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He turned his back on nearly everyone in his life. Can you call someone a victim who so willingly gave himself over? He isn’t mentally impaired (that we know of), he has free will and made deliberate choices.


he isn't mentally impaired? 
He acts like an angry boy much of the time.  and the way he has gone one about his WIFE from day one always makes me feel like he is saying "see I'm a man; I have a WIFE"


----------



## bellecate

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5599624


She just  can’t help herself can she.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> he isn't mentally impaired?
> He acts like an angry boy much of the time.  and the way he has gone one about his WIFE from day one always makes me feel like he is saying "see I'm a man; I have a WIFE"


Bad behavior shouldn’t be written off as mental problems. He’s a jerk.


----------



## mellibelly

calicocat said:


> The Ethereal Goddess in McQueen vs The Evil Queen in Torch & Bury; I mean Tory Burch


Givenchy and Oscar de la Renta don’t want to give her new clothes so she’s fallen to Tory Burch. Perfectly acceptable to us common people but remember she only wanted Dior bathrobes before 


sdkitty said:


> he isn't mentally impaired?
> He acts like an angry boy much of the time.  and the way he has gone one about his WIFE from day one always makes me feel like he is saying "see I'm a man; I have a WIFE"


Yep, probably why he’s also fixing sprinklers and pipes. Gotta feel like a man after he’s been castrated by the wife.


----------



## charlottawill

Mrs.Z said:


> This is Cringe…..horrible pose and soooo contrived


Gotta show off the toothpicks at every opportunity, but note that her monster feet were cut from the shot.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't think of anyone who doesn't do the work, expects all the funds and to be invited to all glamorous occasions, merches the royal title and can't keep their mouth shut to be honest. But that's just me.


What TW is saying is, that after the backlash over £2.4 million in taxpayer renovations to Frogmore, the evil tabloids had the audacity to criticize their spending so she decided to merch the Sussex Royal brand with mugs, hats, etc to earn their "own" money


----------



## marietouchet

The tsunami has started … secondary articles in US, Vanity Fair summarizing podcast and the CUT … yowza this is so nasty 
One headline - Forgiveness is important 
Another - MM does not want H to lose his father


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> He turned his back on nearly everyone in his life. Can you call someone a victim who so willingly gave himself over? He isn’t mentally impaired (that we know of), he has free will and made deliberate choices.


He may not be mentally impaired, but it is well known that he is not very bright. He was emotionally immature when they met, which likely contributed to the failure of his previous relationships, and she is a master manipulator. She knew all the right buttons to push. Unless he's been living under a rock I would not be surprised if it's finally dawning on him that he has been used big time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Bad behavior shouldn’t be written off as mental problems. He’s a jerk.


he's a case of arrested devlopment IMO


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> He may not be mentally impaired, but it is well known that he is not very bright. He was emotionally immature when they met, which likely contributed to the failure of his previous relationships, and she is a master manipulator. She knew all the right buttons to push. Unless he's been living under a rock I would not be surprised if it's finally dawning on him that he has been used big time.


maybe the man-boy will get made at her....but then again, maybe if he does she will use whatever tricks she's used in the past to rope him back in


----------



## DoggieBags

Chloe302225 said:


>



My eye sight must be even worse than I thought. I didn’t realize this was a dress until I saw the picture on the right. When I first saw Meghan’s picture from the Cut article I wondered why she wanted to be photographed with a bath towel wrapped around her


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5599797
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Another bizarre section sees homeless people used as a learning experience for Meghan’s son Archie. *They take the interviewer for a drive* (not at all pre-meditated, Mr S is sure) where *Meghan then ‘reaches into the trunk and produces a brand-new black backpack and hands it to her security detail to give to an unhoused man on the corner.’* Meghan claims that they are* ‘teaching Archie that some people live in big houses, some in small, and that some are in between homes. *They made kits to pass out with water and peanut-butter crackers and granola bars.’ Steerpike wonders if Meghan couldn’t have instead offered one of her nine bedrooms from her Montecito estate. _
> 
> 
> https://www.spectator.co.uk/writer/steerpike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s Mandela moment
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, has given an interview and photo shoot the the New York magazine section, The Cut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


Wow, she actually made this "journalist" drive around with her to show what a philanthropist she is. Seems a bit suspect, when everyone knows that Diana did the same thing in the streets of London, except she handed out cash, and didn't have her "security detail" do it for her.  Really, a backpack?  What about the sanwiches and doritos?  What a true humanitarian she is.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The tsunami has started … secondary articles in US, Vanity Fair summarizing podcast and the CUT … yowza this is so nasty
> One headline - Forgiveness is important
> Another - MM does not want H to lose his father



Has she reached out to her own yet? 

Silly me, I forgot he's not wealthy and the future K of E.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> My eye sight must be even worse than I thought. I didn’t realize this was a dress until I saw the picture on the right. When I first saw Meghan’s picture from the Cut article I wondered why she wanted to be photographed with a bath towel wrapped around her


another "sexy" pose....she's using the duchess title but not acting like a royal


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Harry fixing sprinklers and pipes.  On what planet?


Oh, how the mighty have fallen


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry fixing sprinklers and pipes.  On what planet?


I didn't hear that either...would he know how?


----------



## Toby93

Hermes Zen said:


> Even her eyebrows are shaped the same!


Sorry, as much as she tries, Diana was a blue-blooded English aristocrat and she is a classless delusional grifter.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Wow, she actually made this "journalist" drive around with her to show what a philanthropist she is


It's one thing if you happen upon a homeless person and offer assistance, but to go out in search of them to use as a learning experience/photo op is sickening.


----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this has already been posted....what a bunch of crap...she's still healing....talking about forgiveness but not connecting with her father








						Meghan Markle Says She's 'Still Healing' In One Of Her Most Candid Interviews Yet
					

“It’s interesting, I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking,” the Duchess of Sussex said in a wide-ranging interview.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> He may not be mentally impaired, but it is well known that he is not very bright. He was emotionally immature when they met, which likely contributed to the failure of his previous relationships, and she is a master manipulator. She knew all the right buttons to push. Unless he's been living under a rock I would not be surprised if it's finally dawning on him that he has been used big time.


Oh, she’s smarter and can play him like a violin for sure but that doesn’t make me feel sorry for him. We watched him sit there like a lump and listen to her lies to Oprah. They probably had to do multiple takes to get just the right reaction. He was complicit and made his grandfather’s last days unpleasant and he has been causing grief to the rest of the family ever since. So screw him! If he’s unhappy he deserves it.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


>




Chanel?  I thought that she was wearing a towel wrap.


	

		
			
		

		
	
 (photo: courtesy of Walmart)


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> It's one thing if you happen upon a homeless person and offer assistance, but to go out in search of them *to use as *a learning experience/*photo op is sickening*.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I didn't hear that either...would he know how?


I have fixed sprinklers and done some plumbing over the years, but even I would never go near something that was falling part.  The plumbers love people who try because it always ends in disaster.  I can't imagine Harry ever getting his hands dirty. Ever.  Period.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have fixed sprinklers and done some plumbing over the years, but even I would never go near something that was falling part.  The plumbers love people who try because it always ends in disaster.  I can't imagine Harry ever getting his hands dirty. Ever.  Period.


I don't know where this info comes from.  He did serve in the military so I suppose it's possible getting his hands dirty might make him feel manly.  but I doubt he'd know how to fix plumbing


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> My eye sight must be even worse than I thought. I didn’t realize this was a dress until I saw the picture on the right. When I first saw Meghan’s picture from the Cut article I wondered why she wanted to be photographed with a bath towel wrapped around her


haha, I thought the same. I wonder what Karl would say if he saw that picture.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> haha, I thought the same. I wonder what Karl would say if he saw that picture.


"she's so hot"?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Chanel?  I thought that she was wearing a towel wrap.
> View attachment 5599849
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (photo: courtesy of Walmart)


Another designer brand that Meghan does no justice.  It looks like she is wearing a blanket.


----------



## mellibelly

Toby93 said:


> Wow, she actually made this "journalist" drive around with her to show what a philanthropist she is. Seems a bit suspect, when everyone knows that Diana did the same thing in the streets of London, except she handed out cash, and didn't have her "security detail" do it for her.  Really, a backpack?  What about the sanwiches and doritos?  What a true humanitarian she is.


Peanut butter crackers and bottled water. They sell those gross peanut butter crackers in gas stations. Just like the Uvalde flowers, the donuts and Fritos, she gives cheap, low quality trash food and gifts to the poors. She couldn’t even hand it to the man herself. What a garbage person she is.


----------



## mellibelly

The Chanel knit dress is hideous even on the model. Funny, maybe that’s all they would let her borrow LOL.


----------



## youngster

I wonder how all their recent behavior looks to Hollywood and those executives at Spotify and Netflix?  Meghan has time to pose for photos and give interviews and drive around L.A. handing out backpacks and Harry apparently has time to play polo all over the country and putter around with the plumbing and fly to Africa but they don't have time to actually produce any meaningful content. I doubt a few podcast episodes was what either Spotify or Netflix was expecting after 2.5 years.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> haha, I thought the same. I wonder what Karl would say if he saw that picture.


Karl wouldn't let her wear his clothes.  Karl would never put up with the BS that she dishes out.  He spoke straight from the hip.  His one liners are legendary. This is for you Meg.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't know where this info comes from.  He did serve in the military so I suppose it's possible getting his hands dirty might make him feel manly.  but I doubt he'd know how to fix plumbing


Harry's idea of fixing plumbing is flushing the toilet and turning the water faucet off.


----------



## gracekelly

mellibelly said:


> Peanut butter crackers and bottled water. They sell those gross peanut butter crackers in gas stations. Just like the Uvalde flowers, the donuts and Fritos, *she gives cheap,* low quality trash food and gifts to the poors. She couldn’t even hand it to the man herself. What a garbage person she is.



See my Karl Lagerfeld post lololol!


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> Peanut butter crackers and bottled water. They sell those gross peanut butter crackers in gas stations. Just like the Uvalde flowers, the donuts and Fritos, she gives cheap, low quality trash food and gifts to the poors. She couldn’t even hand it to the man herself. What a garbage person she is.


I'm still trying to figure out why she would put the crackers inside of a backpack.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I wonder how all their recent behavior looks to Hollywood and those executives at Spotify and Netflix?  Meghan has time to pose for photos and give interviews and drive around L.A. handing out backpacks and Harry apparently has time to play polo all over the country and putter around with the plumbing and fly to Africa but they don't have time to actually produce any meaningful content. I doubt a few podcast episodes was what either Spotify or Netflix was expecting after 2.5 years.



Wanna bet all of it will turn up in the show?


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I wonder how all their recent behavior looks to Hollywood and those executives at Spotify and Netflix?  Meghan has time to pose for photos and give interviews and drive around L.A. handing out backpacks and Harry apparently has time to play polo all over the country and putter around with the plumbing and fly to Africa but they don't have time to actually produce any meaningful content. I doubt a few podcast episodes was what either Spotify or Netflix was expecting after 2.5 years.


maybe she will come up with more podcasts now
I won't be listening


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I'm still trying to figure out why she would put the crackers inside of a backpack.



well, a homeless person might find a backpack useful but I still want to know where are the financial donations from their foundation?  sandwiches?  crackers?  and they're living in a huge mansion


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> Peanut butter crackers and bottled water. They sell those gross peanut butter crackers in gas stations. Just like the Uvalde flowers, the donuts and Fritos, she gives cheap, low quality trash food and gifts to the poors. She couldn’t even hand it to the man herself. What a garbage person she is.



If you're going to do it ZeeZy, at least do it right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Harry's idea of fixing plumbing is flushing the toilet and turning the water faucet off.


Flushing? Is he already doing that? 


	

		
			
		

		
	
 (source: The Star Magazine, March 2022)


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh.



I agree with the comment that if divorced, she's nothing....a former z-list actress


----------



## Annawakes

gracekelly said:


> Harry's idea of fixing plumbing is flushing the toilet and turning the water faucet off.


And he doesn’t even flush the toilet does he?  If I remember there was some news a while back where he was said to be a total slob.  Not even flushing the toilet.  So the idea of him fixing plumbing is just total fabrication to me.

Edited to add:  see Chanbal’s post above with source reference )))


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I never knew Nacho by name but I remember seeing his photos when he was the hot Ralph Lauren Polo model in the displays at Macy’s and other stores for years.


Just to clarify, is this one of adverts?


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Wanna bet all of it will turn up in the show?



I bet it does, all of it.  The problem for Meghan is that she won't let any show portray her as anything other than her version of perfection. Meghan the Saint handing out backpacks to the poor and showing up in Uvalde. Her marriage to Harry too has to be shown as their perfect, fairytale love story.  They'll show us the intertwined palm trees in their backyard and she'll read badly written poems he's written her and point out how she sees their initials in the clouds. All of which will make for mind-numbing, boring reality docu-series TV.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just to clarify, is this one of adverts?
> 
> View attachment 5599872


yes


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I bet it does, all of it.  The problem for Meghan is that she won't let any show portray her as anything other than her version of perfection. Meghan the Saint handing out backpacks to the poor and showing up in Uvalde. Her marriage to Harry too has to be shown as their perfect, fairytale love story.  They'll show us the intertwined palm trees in their backyard and she'll read badly written poems he's written her and point out how she sees their initials in the clouds. All of which will make for mind-numbing, boring reality docu-series TV.


Meghan is sending you big hugs because you totally get her!


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> And he doesn’t even flush the toilet does he?  If I remember there was some news a while back where he was said to be a total slob.  Not even flushing the toilet.  So the idea of him fixing plumbing is just total fabrication to me.
> 
> Edited to add:  see Chanbal’s post above with source reference )))


well, it would save water....assuming we're talking about just number one


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, *a homeless person might find a backpack useful *but I still want to know where are the financial donations from their foundation?  sandwiches?  crackers?  and they're living in a huge mansion


It sounds too thoughtful for TW.


----------



## Chanbal

Part 2 (@ ~3:00)


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> Amazing that none of these "journalists" ever ask a decent follow up question.  How about asking Meghan who are these other members of the family that do exactly what you and Harry wanted to do?  Name them, please.  Instead, the interviewer asks, why do you think that is?  Come on, it's such an obvious question.


A huge pet peeve - not challenging them or asking a followup question.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the Harkles' output of information is making Angela very tired.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> A huge pet peeve - not challenging them or asking a followup question.


maybe she won't agree to any interviewes unless they promise only softball questions


Chanbal said:


> It looks like the Harkles' output of information is making Angela very tired.



that's the worst pic I've seen of her


----------



## Toby93

I actually had a look and it is possible


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just to clarify, is this one of adverts?
> 
> View attachment 5599872


Why as a matter of fact it is. Here are a few more from over the years, purely for illustrative purposes to show aspects of his career of course!


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Harry's idea of fixing plumbing is flushing the toilet and turning the water faucet off.


And according to some of his former staff, even flushing was too much of an effort.  No one wanted to clean his bathroom


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> maybe she won't agree to any interviewes unless they promise only softball questions


Yes, or like Beyonce, who only answers her own questions by email... this is Meg's version.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> well, a homeless person might find a backpack useful but I still want to know where are the financial donations from their foundation?  sandwiches?  crackers?  and they're living in a huge mansion


I'm sure it all gets charged to Archwell - she wouldn't pay for anything herself.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Why as a matter of fact it is. Here are a few more from over the years, purely for illustrative purposes to show aspects of his career of course!
> 
> View attachment 5599903
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599905
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599906


My gosh, he was/is a very attractive manly man, even in RL clothes   No wonder Hazzi is attracted to him.  From his Aspen interview, he sounded like a down-to-earth guy, not condescending, not cloying, just a really nice guy.  Maybe he can be a positive influence on Hazz.  NF has looks, brains, personality, character [father of 4 kids] = far better than royal, imo.

_ETA: "He's like a magical god," said Girls' star Andrew Rannells, after watching Figueras play earlier this month at the Veuve Clicquot Polo Classic. "Particularly when you see him on the horse, you're like 'How is that a man, and I'm a man?  How are we the same species?'"  From an old article:










						How Nacho Figueras Became the Most Famous Polo Player in the World
					

He's the David Beckham of his sport.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_


----------



## Cinderlala

bellecate said:


> I think they are getting a lot of recognition from it. Had any of us here ever heard of Nacho or his wife before he started using Harry for publicity. Perhaps also brings in some money people from when H ran in the Royal Polo circle.


Oddly enough, I had heard of Nacho and knew he was a polo player & the RL model.  Ages ago, too!  I don't typically know who people are so I don't know how I learned about him.


DoggieBags said:


> My eye sight must be even worse than I thought. I didn’t realize this was a dress until I saw the picture on the right. When I first saw Meghan’s picture from the Cut article I wondered why she wanted to be photographed with a bath towel wrapped around her





Chanbal said:


> Chanel?  I thought that she was wearing a towel wrap.
> View attachment 5599849
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (photo: courtesy of Walmart)


  I thought she was trying to be edgy and emerging from some egg-like thing.  I had no idea that was a dress.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My gosh, he was/is a very attractive manly man, even in RL clothes   No wonder Hazzi is attracted to him.  From his Aspen interview, he sounded like a down-to-earth guy, not condescending, not cloying, just a really nice guy.  Maybe he can be a positive influence on Hazz.  NF has looks, brains, personality, character [father of 5 kids] = far better than royal, imo.
> 
> _ETA: "He's like a magical god," said Girls' star Andrew Rannells, after watching Figueras play earlier this month at the Veuve Clicquot Polo Classic. "Particularly when you see him on the horse, you're like 'How is that a man, and I'm a man?  How are we the same species?'"  From an old article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Nacho Figueras Became the Most Famous Polo Player in the World
> 
> 
> He's the David Beckham of his sport.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Not just a pretty face. He had the foresight to plan. He started some business ventures so he’s prepared for when he is too old to play polo or model.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Not just a pretty face. He had the foresight to plan. He started some business ventures so he’s prepared for when he is too old to play polo or model.


My mistake - he has 4 kids, not 5, plus a lovely wife.  Something H&M could strive for, no?


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I'm sure it all gets charged to Archwell - she wouldn't pay for anything herself.


right
but I'm asking about substantial money donations...not sandwiches


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Why as a matter of fact it is. Here are a few more from over the years, purely for illustrative purposes to show aspects of his career of course!
> 
> View attachment 5599903
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599905
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599906


The 2nd photo: the ad for Polo Blue - reminds me of Pierce Brosnan in his Remington Steel days.


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> The 2nd photo: the ad for Polo Blue - reminds me of Pierce Brosnan in his Remington Steel days.


Pierce Brosnan


----------



## Cinderlala

Wifey has made so many huge mistakes---I've just realized that she's managed to alienate FOUR generations of current & future monarchs.  SO dumb!!  Everyone knows the BRF wins by simple endurance. Even Fergie is tucked up amongst the fold again.  

There is no way TW is actually intelligent.  Manipulative, yes. Smart, no.  She will be screeching about the injustice she's experienced forever but that does not inspire perennial demand.  

I wonder how soon she'll rep Weight Watchers???


----------



## xincinsin

Did Zedzee get work done on her face? The instagrammers commenting on The Cut say she had a "fox eye" job and trimmed her nose further.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Get Harry, get the children, deal with the nutjob later. That would be my MO. But what can you do if the main victim is still steadfast in his support for the villain.




This makes a lot of sense.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So true. In German we say "to let someone starve at a long arm". Still, I do think funds need to be cut and wills changed, and please someone make arrangements for the unlikely case Harry could end up regent for an underage king.


My mom from the UK always says....just give them enough rope and they will hang themselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The 2nd photo: the ad for Polo Blue - reminds me of Pierce Brosnan in his Remington Steel days.


My TV crush in the ‘80s.   

No wonder I’m inclined to cut Nacho some slack. I hope he’s just a nice guy and that we don’t find out he’s like them.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> right
> but I'm asking about substantial money donations...not sandwiches


Sorry..misread your question.  I was thinking that the backpacks and contents are all charged to Archwell.  I don't think they are getting a lot of donations.  Someone posted that they had less than $50,000 donated last year.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> The 2nd photo: the ad for Polo Blue - reminds me of Pierce Brosnan in his Remington Steel days.


I'm probably alone here, but Nacho is no Pierce Brosnan…


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Sorry..misread your question.  I was thinking that the backpacks and contents are all charged to Archwell.  I don't think they are getting a lot of donations.  Someone posted that they had less than $50,000 donated last year.


I'm speculating that they get a lot of donations-in-kind: free flights on private planes, boxes of veg, etc. 
The lack of mention of $ value every time they give money is suspicious for its absence. If they gave a princely sum (sorry, couldn't resist  ), they would be bragging about it.


----------



## Mumotons

Toby93 said:


> My mom from the UK always says....just give them enough rope and they will hang themselves.


Yep, and they certainly are ‍♀️


----------



## Mumotons

Well I’m not going to disagree 








						Natalie Barr: Meghan Markle a 'tosser' for Nelson Mandela comparison
					

Sunrise host Natalie Barr has labelled Meghan Markle a 'tosser' in an extraordinary on-air rant after the duchess compared herself to Nelson Mandela in a new interview




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DL Harper

Cinderlala said:


> Wifey has made so many huge mistakes---I've just realized that she's managed to alienate FOUR generations of current & future monarchs.  SO dumb!!  Everyone knows the BRF wins by simple endurance. Even Fergie is tucked up amongst the fold again.
> 
> There is no way TW is actually intelligent.  Manipulative, yes. Smart, no.  She will be screeching about the injustice she's experienced forever but that does not inspire perennial demand.
> 
> I wonder how soon she'll rep Weight Watch


Re: WW - If OW is really smart - NEVER!!


----------



## Mumotons

And another slating from the Aussies…









						Meghan Markle, The Cut: Karl Stefanovic slams 'tone-deaf' interview
					

Stefanovic, 48, who has never been shy to criticise Meghan, scoffed incredulously at Markle's claims while speaking to Nine's London correspondent Tracy Vo




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Sorry..misread your question.  I was thinking that the backpacks and contents are all charged to Archwell.  I don't think they are getting a lot of donations.  Someone posted that they had less than $50,000 donated last year.


are you referring to donations they received?  or that they gave?
they are rich, living the life in their mansion....I don't think Bill Gates relies on donations
I want to see H&M donote money from their pockets to causes
At this point, they are a couple of poseurs....and I don't anticipate that will change


----------



## Chanbal

One more praising video.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



What a delusional psycho.  Who wrote that crap?  Some sentences aren't sentences.  3 minutes of my life reading that $hit that I'll never get back.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I'm probably alone here, but Nacho is no Pierce Brosnan…



It doesn’t have to be a competition. I can appreciate both.


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> And another slating from the Aussies…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, The Cut: Karl Stefanovic slams 'tone-deaf' interview
> 
> 
> Stefanovic, 48, who has never been shy to criticise Meghan, scoffed incredulously at Markle's claims while speaking to Nine's London correspondent Tracy Vo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The video…


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Of course not, TW is a



She's preaching forgiveness???  All she does is spat at things the BRF allegedly did.  
HazNoBalls as usual, nothing is ever his fault.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## mellibelly

Meanwhile the Harkles sent peanut butter crackers and $10 Starbucks gift cards


----------



## CarryOn2020

Those earrings look like bolts, very Frankenstein-ish, imo


----------



## Chanbal

More from the Aussies…

Edit: The video has been deleted. I just realized that apart of the comments on Hazz, the video has also other comments that may not be suitable for this thread. (Prince Harry wants to be prince 'without any responsibilities': Douglas Murray)


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> ROTFL
> 
> Writer behind Meghan Markle's latest interview is also a SEX writer
> https://mol.im/a/11157507


Makes sense.  He probably interviewed her on a yacht before.  
Also explains why the article sounds like a cheap romance novel.  I expected Fabio on the front cover!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those earrings look like bolts, very Frankenstein-ish, imo
> 
> View attachment 5599998


Or Shrek-ish


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> Vacuous Vacant Ignorant Peabrains





Katel said:


> Where oh where is the instant vomit on the “like” bar? No words. Feel nauseous.
> 
> Yes … winners don’t listen to the gnat-buzz of the (inevitable) haters, they simply swat them away. She gives new meaning to “vacuous.”



Hi and welcome Tourre and hrhfacts!  We love you guys.








I agree - she looks, as @QueenofWrapDress said, “batsh!t crazy.” She is racing frantically down the highway of no-return. Not well upstairs at all. She’s got a Norman in “Psycho” look.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's also a really unflattering picture.



This is too sick for words.


CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5599624






One is an ethereal dream, the other looks like a pumpkin with a rotten blackened stem above (very fitting), her face a fakey attempt at cool (but instead looking either crazy or gassy).


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chloe302225 said:


>



This is SOOO not royal like it or lady like with her legs parted open sitting there!  What a yacht-girl beeeeach weeeench! Oh my, where’s my bp pills.


----------



## Toby93

Yikes, those are some gnarly feet.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> are you referring to donations they received?  or that they gave?
> they are rich, living the life in their mansion....I don't think Bill Gates relies on donations
> I want to see H&M donote money from their pockets to causes
> At this point, they are a couple of poseurs....and I don't anticipate that will change


Less than $50,000 donated by others to their *foundation* is what I have read.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Omg…..Someone wrote in the comments that the magazine name has a letter missing.   I’m dying here
> Edit:  Sorry, I'm so far behind in reading and it's already been posted.  Still hilarious!


A poster on another site called the magazine The Twunt.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Makes sense.  He probably interviewed her on a yacht before.
> Also explains why the article sounds like a cheap romance novel.  I expected Fabio on the front cover!


The interviewer is a woman. Allegedly, she uses Tinder to find lots of men to do sexual research and she is writing a book about horniness.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> My TV crush in the ‘80s.
> 
> No wonder I’m inclined to cut Nacho some slack. I hope he’s just a nice guy and that we don’t find out he’s like them.





Chanbal said:


> I'm probably alone here, but Nacho is no Pierce Brosnan…






bag-mania said:


> It doesn’t have to be a competition. I can appreciate both.


Not the 007 phase, but earlier. The Nachos pic reminded me of this:


----------



## xincinsin

This makes me feel shallow because I don't dislike Zedzee for her looks, but I can't help but notice something odd. If you look at the cover photo on The Cut, and you draw a line from her hair parting to her chin, why is her nose crooked (tilted left) and her upper lip distorted (skewed right)? Too much Photoshop? I didn't notice this imbalance previously.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> This makes me feel shallow because I don't dislike Zedzee for her looks, but I can't help but notice something odd. If you look at the cover photo on The Cut, and you draw a line from her hair parting to her chin, why is her nose crooked (tilted left) and her upper lip distorted (skewed right)? Too much Photoshop? I didn't notice this imbalance previously.


I read somewhere she is trying for the Kendall Jenner almond eye look.  Maybe she wants to remove that “wicked stare” look she gives.



Toby93 said:


> Yikes, those are some gnarly feet.
> 
> View attachment 5600016



Did she remove her pinky toes????  No wonder she walks awkwardly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

This looks like a mug shot for a crazy psycho shifty conman bank robber thief  … maybe she’s ready for her next act - in a nice orange prison jumpsuit.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read somewhere she is trying for the Kendall Jenner almond eye look.  Maybe she wants to remove that *wicked stare *look she gives.
> Did she remove her pinky toes????  No wonder she walks awkwardly.


Yes! Wicked stare.
Did they photoshop out her pinky toes? Oh my gosh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> Yes! Wicked stare.
> Did they photoshop out her pinky toes? Oh my gosh.


Some women have those toes removed so they can wear narrow shoes.  It is never a good idea to do that because we need our toes for balance.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting comments about suitcase girl #40.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read somewhere she is trying for the Kendall Jenner almond eye look.  Maybe she wants to remove that “wicked stare” look she gives.
> 
> 
> 
> Did she remove her pinky toes????  No wonder she walks awkwardly.


I think she is going for the sophisticated exotic  look and slightly Eurasian. Changing her ethnicity again.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Not the 007 phase, but earlier. The Nachos pic reminded me of this:
> View attachment 5600027


The Remington Steele Pierce Brosnan. My husband and I loved that show.


----------



## Chanbal

A must read! 












						Toddler and tiara: Meghan Markle STILL throwing tantrums about royal family
					

Lest anyone remain in doubt, Meghan Markle’s latest interview makes one thing clear: This woman has nothing to say.




					nypost.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Seize this moment, Charles.  They have left themselves exposed.  Use it, the world will love you for it. 
All the best to you and the Queen


----------



## mellibelly

First thought when seeing this hideous piece of furniture was that it looked an awful lot like an old fashioned wood toilet. The stench of the wench on the bench taking a dump wrapped in a Chanel dog blanket


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> This makes me feel shallow because I don't dislike Zedzee for her looks, but I can't help but notice something odd. If you look at the cover photo on The Cut, and you draw a line from her hair parting to her chin, why is her nose crooked (tilted left) and her upper lip distorted (skewed right)? Too much Photoshop? I didn't notice this imbalance previously.


Yes she has too many nose jobs.  Her left nostril (as we look at it, so her right) is wider distance than her right.  And her nose isn’t straight.


----------



## mellibelly

From Reddit


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

lanasyogamama said:


> Beyoncé says Birkins are out now.


She did - that was a very coco Chanel’s depression era fur lined trench coat moment. Can’t help notice she hasn’t donated them to charity or anything now she prefers affordable black brands so alas Birkins aren’t going for a tenner on eBay yet   


DoggieBags said:


> Lady C mentioned that one of her sources told her that TW’s podcast generated 10,000 views in the first 10 hours after it was released. And you have to figure a good number of the first 10,000 views were from journalists who intended to report on her debut Podcast. To put that number in context, this Reuters article stated that Joe Rogan’s podcasts that typically run anywhere from over an hour to 3 hours long generate somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 million views.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Joe Rogan row puts cost of Spotify podcasts under investor microscope
> 
> 
> Spotify investors will focus on how much its 'Netflix for audio' strategy is costing the streaming service when it reports fourth-quarter results on Wednesday against the backdrop of several angry high-profile artists withdrawing their tracks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


I don’t listen to Rogan but I know he’s not afraid of controversial guests and discussion and that’s what sells. To me a podcast is dead of all the charm that makes the genre special when it becomes full of ads and trotting out canned, polished PC opinions like any mainstream news commentary show or article. No one wants a corporate lecture on why celebrities really suffer the most of all. 



charlottawill said:


> I had to Google ASMR...and it's nothing NSFW. The things I learn here. But sorry, she's not going to seduce me.


it’s not a sex thing at all (I mean I’m sure one could find a pervert or two  if you look hard enough but that’s true of everything) I listen to rain sounds all the time when music is too distracting. 


Toby93 said:


> My thoughts exactly, but I am sure there is a mutual benefit for them   It makes me think a lot less of Serena since she is such a bad judge of character.


M is undoubtedly in love bomb mode and Serena, (no stranger to excessive flattery) is probably getting the *** licking of her life 

If anyone is doubting whether Serena can be manipulated into bad decisions by those around her I present exhibit A:






gracekelly said:


> I think the article that the Sussex helped her with a decision to retire is insulting and i wonder if Serena realizes this.  When a top athlete retires, there are many reasons and the team behind the athlete weighs the pros and cons.  It is also interesting that Serena still hasn't made up her mind despite what the Sussex and/or podcast want you to think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serena Williams STILL isn't sure U.S. Open will be her last tournament
> 
> 
> Serena, 40,  spoke with Today hosts Dylan Dreyer and Sheinelle Jones about her upcoming retirement at 'A Conversation with Champions' event on Thursday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Not so fast! Serena Williams says she STILL isn't sure that the U.S. Open will be her last tennis tournament as she prepares to compete in her first Grand Slam since announcing plans to retire_


I feel like this is getting to Cher/Tyson fury levels. 



Jayne1 said:


> Yes, or like Beyonce, who only answers her own questions by email... this is Meg's version.


I imagine Bey gets her team to answer from set answers for her. Can’t imagine M ever forgoing the opportunity for sweet attention. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> My mistake - he has 4 kids, not 5, plus a lovely wife.  Something H&M could strive for, no?


Lord don’t tempt them though I can’t imagine getting into bed with M has the same appeal now given how much she’s changed from the mincing yoga sylph of the courtship. 


xincinsin said:


> Did Zedzee get work done on her face? The instagrammers commenting on The Cut say she had a "fox eye" job and trimmed her nose further.


Is the pope Catholic lol. 

Her filler work is so bad though I’m starting to wonder if she goes to a sausage factory and lies down on the conveyor belt. 

I also think to save Money she got her fox eye done by a taxidermist who specialised in stuffing actual foxes. 
Not the 007 phase, but earlier. The Nachos pic reminded me of this:


xincinsin said:


> View attachment 5600027


I mean we’re only human. Him and Tim Dalton were sooo handsome as Bond. Craig was a total downgrade for me but it’s so hard to find actors as good looking as them now it’s all pinhead posh boys and famous people’s talentless kids.


xincinsin said:


> This makes me feel shallow because I don't dislike Zedzee for her looks, but I can't help but notice something odd. If you look at the cover photo on The Cut, and you draw a line from her hair parting to her chin, why is her nose crooked (tilted left) and her upper lip distorted (skewed right)? Too much Photoshop? I didn't notice this imbalance previously.


It’s the fillers moving around her face and really bad photoshop trying to make the unnatural look symmetrical. Her eyebrows look like they were probably photoshopped out then drawn on and her lips have doubled in size in the photoshop - she has skinny villainous lips in reality. If this is the best they can do wow. 


Bad fillers and too many fillers do a lot of damage though just look at Linda evangelista now - unrecognisable.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



This is so silly. Were they afraid that if they ran with the story and only used her one name, people would think she is some other Meghan?


----------



## Mumotons




----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Except that he didn’t lose his dad, he tossed him away. Big difference.


As did she.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTFFF. They drag the child into their psychosis. Or should I say she does because this doesn't sound like Harry at all. Swipe for 2nd slide.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Harry's idea of fixing plumbing is flushing the toilet and turning the water faucet off.


Or just not flushing.  Which I read he doesn't do.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> @Tourre's words of wisdom…
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599612



LOVE, LOVE Tourre


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Three royal reporters, one opinion.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. They drag the child into their psychosis. Or should I say she does because this doesn't sound like Harry at all.



She "lets the sun beam down into her pores"? The writing is so bad...


----------



## xincinsin

Second Row Harry and Back Cover Meghan - what a pair!


----------



## xincinsin

I am not able to get over how cringey the writing is. Even the crummy romance novels my friends pigged out on in their teens were better than this. And the gratuitous use of the word "like"


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Except that he didn’t lose his dad, he tossed him away. Big difference.



Can I get this right. 

Is Thomas Markle dead, did she lose his address? 

What does she mean she "lost" her father?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I am not able to get over how cringey the writing is. Even the crummy romance novels my friends pigged out on in their teens were better than this. And the gratuitous use of the word "like"
> View attachment 5600119


How can one look into her soul if she's soul less??  

I'm starting to think TW wrote it herself and slapped a pseudonym on it.  With all her plagiarism, she probably stole the sex author's name since that's probably the only kind of books she reads to "bone up" on new advances in the yachting world.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Can I get this right.
> 
> Is Thomas Markle dead, did she lose his address?
> 
> What does she mean she "lost" her father?


 Didn't she claim that it was unreasonable of TQ & PC to ask her to visit her father in person before the wedding? Because she doesn't know her way to his house in Mexico, it was alleged.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, or like Beyonce, who only answers her own questions by email... this is Meg's version.



It's very common. 

On the journalists' side they know it's only going to be puff-piece but the clicks will be worth it. 

Selling your soul never comes cheap


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> My TV crush in the ‘80s.
> 
> No wonder I’m inclined to cut Nacho some slack. I hope he’s just a nice guy and that we don’t find out he’s like them.



There's 'nice' and then there's daft as a brush. However pretty the brush, making too much noise.

He should stick to his day job(s)


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. They drag the child into their psychosis. Or should I say she does because this doesn't sound like Harry at all. Swipe for 2nd slide.




I didn't understand a word of it TBH, like most of her word salad it just means nothing.

You can get free English grammar tools on the Net these days, even my software underlines things that are 'iffy' (obviously I choose to override the system on the occasional blue underlined word or two in favour of my 'poetry' ). She must think that green and blue underlinings page after page _en bloc_ mean she's nailing it A*.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I didn't understand a word of it TBH, like most of her word salad it just means nothing.
> 
> You can get free English grammar tools on the Net these days, even my software underlines things that are 'iffy' (obviously I choose to override the system on the occasional blue underlined word or two in favour of my 'poetry' . She must think that green and blue underlinings page after page _en bloc_ mean she's nailing it A*.


Some bootlicker probably praised it as her writing as "stream of consciousness". And I know now of what her speech pattern reminds me: Valley Girl!

From Urban Dictionary:
1) A girl that comes from the San Fernando Valley that can be very prepy, rich, and usually spolied. *Says like*, omg, jk or kk *a lot in sentences*, and loves shopping in the mall.

2) *Wears clothes which are usualy situated for the winter, even when its in the middle of summer. *(it doesn't bother them)


----------



## Mumotons

Meghan Markle's claim about Archie nursery fire confirmed by 'source'
					

The insider, believed to be close to the Duchess of Sussex and was attached to her security detail during the 10-day tour in 2019, said he personally saw the 'severely melted' heater.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




No longer accepting comments on this either ‍♀️


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Some bootlicker probably praised it as her writing as "stream of consciousness". And I know now of what her speech pattern reminds me: Valley Girl!
> 
> From Urban Dictionary:
> 1) A girl that comes from the San Fernando Valley that can be very prepy, rich, and usually spolied. *Says like*, omg, jk or kk *a lot in sentences*, and loves shopping in the mall.
> 
> 2) *Wears clothes which are usualy situated for the winter, even when its in the middle of summer. *(it doesn't bother them)



MegZZZZ is _totally_ a Valley Girl Princess 

Have a blast


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle's claim about Archie nursery fire confirmed by 'source'
> 
> 
> The insider, believed to be close to the Duchess of Sussex and was attached to her security detail during the 10-day tour in 2019, said he personally saw the 'severely melted' heater.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No longer accepting comments on this either ‍♀️



That's a very confused "witness"


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. They drag the child into their psychosis. Or should I say she does because this doesn't sound like Harry at all. Swipe for 2nd slide.



This word salad is so over the top that will feed us for the rest of the year


----------



## xincinsin

From Toddler & Tiara: 
_“I think forgiveness is really important,” Meghan says, adding that she has “a lot to say until I don’t. Sometimes, as they say, the silent part is still part of the song.”

Meghan Markle, two very weary nations beg you: Please. Be that silent part._
Hear, hear!


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> he isn't mentally impaired?
> He acts like an angry boy much of the time.  and the way he has gone one about his WIFE from day one always makes me feel like he is saying "see I'm a man; I have a WIFE"



I honestly think they are BOTH mentally impaired, in different ways but they both need medical help. I mean it!


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> That's a very confused "witness"


Extremely. He doesn't seem to know what is going on half the time. And after the "royals" decided not to live at the "housing unit", he seems to not know or care where they moved to, although he claims his main purpose was to escort TW from Point A to Point B.


----------



## needlv

Um… none of the photos of Z-list show her wearing her wedding and engagement ring.

so is she hunting for the next victim husband?


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> From Toddler & Tiara:
> _“I think forgiveness is really important,” Meghan says, adding that she has “a lot to say until I don’t. Sometimes, as they say, the silent part is still part of the song.”
> 
> Meghan Markle, two very weary nations beg you: Please. Be that silent part._
> Hear, hear!


True forgiveness requires repentance.

I am yet to see any repentance from MM or H


----------



## Mumotons

papertiger said:


> That's a very confused "witness"


Exactly, his story changes and then he says they were moved somewhere else but doesn’t know where even though he says he was part of the security detail!! Do we think this is melting Scobie ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Um… none of the photos of Z-list show her wearing her wedding and engagement ring.
> 
> so is she hunting for the next victim husband?



Oh wow. The last time she did this she had to make sure Harry would leave his complete life behind and board that plane.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> True forgiveness requires repentance.
> 
> I am yet to see any repentance from MM or H


I'm 1000% certain she is waiting for TQ to repent and seek her forgiveness (and offer her the Crown Jewels & a couple of palaces as well as open the faucet that leads to the Coutts account).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. The last time she did this she had to make sure Harry would leave his complete life behind and board that plane.



And she devalues Haznobrains again.  She acts like he’s the maintenance man fixing pipes… rather than a Prince.

She already had him juggling like a clown out the window of her failed 40x40 project.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow. The last time she did this she had to make sure Harry would leave his complete life behind and board that plane.



No divorce or rumblings gonna happen *before* the GRAND "love story" docu-poop-pump series gonna come out


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> I didn't understand a word of it TBH, like most of her word salad it just means nothing.
> 
> You can get free English grammar tools on the Net these days, even my software underlines things that are 'iffy' (obviously I choose to override the system on the occasional blue underlined word or two in favour of my 'poetry' ). She must think that green and blue underlinings page after page _en bloc_ mean* she's nailing it A*.*



I'm heavily influenced by MegZZ today and quoting myself  . 

Of course M-VallyZ is Type A + 

not eaZZy for a Z-lister around for 5 minutes to have the potential of a super-brand that can overshadow the BRF.

Did she mention DIANA? 

Image borrowed for BLG (his highlight, my loop)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My eyes are strained from rolling.


----------



## Mumotons

It’s not her day 








						Meghan Markle interview: Reaction from global media and TV networks
					

A TV network in France said the Sussexes 'continue to monetise the image of the royal family', while an Italian publication said Meghan was 'posing like a real diva'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv




----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



I like this Twitter account's sarcasm. Please post more (I have so far refused to get a Twitter acct...)


----------



## andrashik

xincinsin said:


> I am not able to get over how cringey the writing is. Even the crummy romance novels my friends pigged out on in their teens were better than this. And the gratuitous use of the word "like"
> View attachment 5600119


Even my guilty pleasure book ( it involves soul mates and faeries) it's better than this nonsense


----------



## mikimoto007

I have to say, I love the images with the article  I think Meghan looks great.

The continual attacks on the royal family though....is this a healthy person to you? Is this someone living her best life? Why wouldn't you just move on and focus on the future? There's so much bitterness there for people who breach wellness. 

This article is probably the this intriguing and insightful thing she's done since Oprah. 

Bombs I noticed:
1. There are other members of the royal family who have the deal that Meghan and Harry wanted.....they don't name them in the article, but who is she referring to here? Is it Prince Michael of Kent?
2. Not being able to do drop offs and pick ups......and implying William and Kate are bad parents....utterly bizarre. We know William and Kate do drop offs and we don't see paparazzi pictures every day -very seldom in fact.
3. What she says about forgiveness and then the threat that there's a lot she could say.....I can't believe she would spell out a threat so clearly.


There's a  lot to unpack..


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Yikes, those are some gnarly feet.
> 
> View attachment 5600016





QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. They drag the child into their psychosis. Or should I say she does because this doesn't sound like Harry at all. Swipe for 2nd slide.




Everything, I mean EVERYTHING she does is utterly repetitive, from barefoot photos to fairytale commentary in interviews and writings, that rivals stories written by Charles Perrault and Grimm Brothers. She's repulsive


----------



## bubablu

OMG, I had to google the meaning of that word, I'm dead!









						Natalie Barr: Meghan Markle a 'tosser' for Nelson Mandela comparison
					

Sunrise host Natalie Barr has labelled Meghan Markle a 'tosser' in an extraordinary on-air rant after the duchess compared herself to Nelson Mandela in a new interview




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

mikimoto007 said:


> I have to say, I love the images with the article  I think Meghan looks great.
> 
> The continual attacks on the royal family though....is this a healthy person to you? Is this someone living her best life? Why wouldn't you just move on and focus on the future? There's so much bitterness there for people who breach wellness.
> 
> This article is probably the this intriguing and insightful thing she's done since Oprah.
> 
> Bombs I noticed:
> 1. There are other members of the royal family who have the deal that Meghan and Harry wanted.....they don't name them in the article, but who is she referring to here? Is it Prince Michael of Kent?
> 2. Not being able to do drop offs and pick ups......and implying William and Kate are bad parents....utterly bizarre. We know William and Kate do drop offs and we don't see paparazzi pictures every day -very seldom in fact.
> 3. What she says about forgiveness and then the threat that there's a lot she could say.....I can't believe she would spell out a threat so clearly.
> 
> 
> There's a  lot to unpack..


She would be a lot more likable if she stopped whining and actually helped those causes supposedly close to her heart. They were in a good position financially even without funds from Bank of Dad. She could have done a great job if they didn't splurge on an extravagant lifestyle. Most people we call local heroes which help in their communities do not have millions. Even if all she donated was her time and her image, it would still be better than the PR show she runs now.

And Bomb #1: she likes to infer and then not name names. It is infuriating because the innuendo causes speculation and rumours. It also shows her true nature as a petty bully and mean girl.


----------



## lanasyogamama

DoggieBags said:


> My eye sight must be even worse than I thought. I didn’t realize this was a dress until I saw the picture on the right. When I first saw Meghan’s picture from the Cut article I wondered why she wanted to be photographed with a bath towel wrapped around her


Her back looks so…circular in that picture. 



bag-mania said:


> Why as a matter of fact it is. Here are a few more from over the years, purely for illustrative purposes to show aspects of his career of course!
> 
> View attachment 5599903
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599905
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599906


I always assumed he was just a model!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Some people think the author was trolling Zeddy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

mikimoto007 said:


> I have to say, I love the images with the article  I think Meghan looks great.
> 
> The continual attacks on the royal family though....is this a healthy person to you? Is this someone living her best life? Why wouldn't you just move on and focus on the future? There's so much bitterness there for people who breach wellness.
> 
> This article is probably the this intriguing and insightful thing she's done since Oprah.
> 
> Bombs I noticed:
> 1. There are other members of the royal family who have the deal that Meghan and Harry wanted.....they don't name them in the article, but who is she referring to here? Is it Prince Michael of Kent?
> 2. Not being able to do drop offs and pick ups......and implying William and Kate are bad parents....utterly bizarre. We know William and Kate do drop offs and we don't see paparazzi pictures every day -very seldom in fact.
> 3. What she says about forgiveness and then the threat that there's a lot she could say.....I can't believe she would spell out a threat so clearly.
> 
> 
> There's a  lot to unpack..


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> She would be a lot more likable if she stopped whining and actually helped those causes supposedly close to her heart. They were in a good position financially even without funds from Bank of Dad. She could have done a great job if they didn't splurge on an extravagant lifestyle. Most people we call local heroes which help in their communities do not have millions. Even if all she donated was her time and her image, it would still be better than the PR show she runs now.
> 
> And Bomb #1: she likes to infer and then not name names. It is infuriating because the innuendo causes speculation and rumours. It also shows her true nature as a petty bully and mean girl.


Agree the eternal innuendo-ing, I am sick of that 
You decline to name the offender, yet, by doing so, you somewhat imply the offense was committed by many, not just one


----------



## marietouchet

Interesting timing

1. Where has H been in the last 10 days as his wife discusses HIS family ? It is as if he lets his wife tell his story/fight his battles , wuss? Or big strategy?
2. Big hoopla in press before next trip to UK, the hoopla will guarantee that 200 paparazzi will follow them everywhere
It is as if the hoopla were timed to guarantee incidents during the trip, in support of their security angst
She is making it WORSE …

There is a term for the disorder by which people exaggerate/deliberately stoke their problems


----------



## LibbyRuth

I listened to the first episode of the podcast yesterday.  I credit Serena Williams for pulling me through it.  Meghan could not pretend authentic if she decided to try - she's too busy trying to dictate how people respond to her.  She's like a terribly written novel that keeps on telling you two characters are in love, but fails to ever convey that feeling of love.  I realized my biggest problem with Meghan is that she comes across like she believes everyone around her is stupid, and will therefore accept anything she says as truth.  I don't take well to people who think I'm that stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## xincinsin

I don't know if the writer was trolling her. I would assume not since she would run the risk of the Madam of Monteshitshow silencing her. But some of the mental images are ... I can't unsee them.

The Harkles joined at the bottom like conjoined twins 
And the mini pigs  I hope they have healthy appetites and contribute to the stench. Perhaps the Harkles learnt their Gutteral (TM) responses from the piggies.


----------



## papertiger

This is very good IMO, calling her out on her _new_ lies. "Meghan comes-off as increasingly mad"


----------



## youngster

I think the writer is trolling her, though the writing is also pretty bad so maybe the writer doesn't recognize that Meghan is coming off like a twit.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I don't know if the writer was trolling her. I would assume not since she would run the risk of the Madam of Monteshitshow silencing her. But some of the mental images are ... I can't unsee them.
> 
> The Harkles joined at the bottom like conjoined twins
> And the mini pigs  I hope they have healthy appetites and contribute to the stench. Perhaps the Harkles learnt their Gutteral (TM) responses from the piggies.



You forgot H&M are like salt and pepper and go everywhere together 




L'Object Image ref and link


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh, good grief, MM, get over yourself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> This is very good IMO, calling her out on her _new_ lies. "Meghan comes of as increasingly mad"




She does. I've thought she's been escalating for a while.


----------



## youngster

*From the Maureen Callahan article "Toddler and Tiara":*
_“At one point in our conversation,” writes Allison P. Davis, “instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: ‘She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning.’ ”

*This might be the single most insane thing I’ve ever read in a celebrity profile. Truly, it’s Charlie Kaufman-esque: Meghan evincing such pain that she’s non-verbal, yet verbalizing why she’s ostensibly non-verbal to her profiler, who Meghan says should tell us that Meghan doesn’t know what she’s feeling because Meghan told her, in Meghan’s own words, that there are no words for it.*_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Hmmm....she left The Firm behind?  *More like The Firm kicked both of them in the behind and booted them out. * This absolutely has to be the case IMO because there would not be the continued vitriol from the two of them against their family if not the case.   *Hell hath no fury like  Harry  and Meghan scorned. *
> 
> Hopefully, the world will recognize how ungrateful they are and form opinions accordingly.


This! They tried to negotiate a 'half in & half out' to pursue their own personal interests. Chicken sh!t ZedZed fled to Canada leaving Dufus to work out a favourable deal for them, that never materialized because HM said, "NO!" while demoting them to non-working royals. Then as you pointed out, the proverbial sh!t hit the fan when they defied the BRF with the use of the Royal Sussex Brand and the OW interview and so on.

If I were HM, C or W, I would probably never forgive them, never trust them again nor fully, if at all, accept them back into the family.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Buckle up, buttercups. We are in for a rough ride.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Buckle up, buttercups. We are in for a rough ride.



I’m sad Mindy is going on her pod.  I’ve always felt a connection with her because my mom worked with her mom at a hospital in Boston many years ago and were good pals.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I'm heavily influenced by MegZZ today and quoting myself  .
> 
> Of course M-VallyZ is Type A +
> 
> not eaZZy for a Z-lister around for 5 minutes to have the potential of a super-brand that can overshadow the BRF.
> 
> Did she mention DIANA?
> 
> Image borrowed for BLG (his highlight, my loop)
> 
> View attachment 5600146


Thanks for posting this gem, I think I fell asleep during this part. The BLG and others are doing an excellent job reading/reporting on this article. From what I understood, the BLG will continue to report on their masterpieces, podcasts, reality shows…, so there is no need to click on *** to satisfy curiosity. The more clicks the Harkles buy/get, the more money will be allocate to promote what Maureen Callahan describes so well: 

"_Lest anyone remain in doubt, Meghan Markle’s latest interview makes one thing clear: *This woman has nothing to say.

She has nothing to offer, no original thoughts or guiding philosophy, no earthly reason to be taking so much money from, and so much space in, the mainstream media she so clearly despises."*
_








						Toddler and tiara: Meghan Markle STILL throwing tantrums about royal family
					

Lest anyone remain in doubt, Meghan Markle’s latest interview makes one thing clear: This woman has nothing to say.




					nypost.com


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> This is very good IMO, calling her out on her _new_ lies. "Meghan comes-off as increasingly mad"




"Professional moaner"  Something she picked up during her yacht girl days?  

I think it's safe to say she won't be visiting Australia any time soon.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She does. I've thought she's been escalating for a while.



Not that they would ever go public about it, but I wonder how psychiatrists would react to her recent ramblings.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did she remove her pinky toes????  No wonder she walks awkwardly.


Shades of Cinderella's stepsisters. Whatever it takes to be a princess!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I honestly think they are BOTH mentally impaired, in different ways but they both need medical help. I mean it!


If we're being serious, I think he could possibly benefit from medical help.  If she's a narcissist, I don't think that can be fixed.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Less than $50,000 donated by others to their *foundation* is what I have read.
> 
> View attachment 5600020
> 
> 
> View attachment 5600021


a foundation doesn't have to receive donations from outside.  I worked for a foundation which was funded by the owners.  I wouldn't expect the "royals" to be fund raising.  I would expect them to be giving away their own money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> _*This might be the single most insane thing I’ve ever read in a celebrity profile. Truly, it’s Charlie Kaufman-esque: Meghan evincing such pain that she’s non-verbal, yet verbalizing why she’s ostensibly non-verbal to her profiler, who Meghan says should tell us that Meghan doesn’t know what she’s feeling because Meghan told her, in Meghan’s own words, that there are no words for it.*_



It is utterly bizarre.


----------



## marietouchet

Just thinking ... this is like toxic stuff
MM says she was treated as black only after starting to date H, which highly suggests that she was treated fine in the US and Canada - before H - but things went south when she became associated with the UK


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> a foundation doesn't have to receive donations from outside.  I worked for a foundation which was funded by the owners.  I wouldn't expect the "royals" to be fund raising.  I would expect them to be giving away their own money.



The royals might. The grifters...not bloody likely.


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> If we're being serious, I think he could possibly benefit from medical help.  If she's a narcissist, I don't think that can be fixed.


Narcissistic personality dissorder, NPD, is definately a mental health condition and can be treated, I'm not saying she would change drastically but it might help. But the problem is that most of these people don't acknowledge they have a problem.


----------



## Chanbal

The fan club keeps on growing… "_Sandilands, 52, had little sympathy for the American-born royal, scoffing: 'She needs to get over it. *She's an imbecile*!_" 









						Kyle Sandilands brands Meghan Markle an 'IMBECILE'
					

The former Suits actress, 41, accused journalists of calling her son Archie the 'N-word' as she explained why she hated the royal protocol that required her to share family photos with the UK tabloids




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

They dropped the Mariah Carey podcast?
Painful to read this excerpt.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The fan club keeps on growing… "_Sandilands, 52, had little sympathy for the American-born royal, scoffing: 'She needs to get over it. *She's an imbecile*!_"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kyle Sandilands brands Meghan Markle an 'IMBECILE'
> 
> 
> The former Suits actress, 41, accused journalists of calling her son Archie the 'N-word' as she explained why she hated the royal protocol that required her to share family photos with the UK tabloids
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Moron has been one of my favorite words, but I think I am moving over to imbecile


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> They dropped the Mariah Carey podcast?
> Painful to read this excerpt.



Imbeciles.  Drivel.

How can Mindy Kaling even want to be part of this?  She is a very intelligent woman.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> …And the writer seems to be an expert!
> 
> "_*The writer of the interview, Allison P Davis*, recounted how in one exchange Meghan dictated how the noises she was making should be interpreted. Davis wrote: “*At one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: ‘She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning.*’_ ” (Source: The Times)
> 
> View attachment 5599804
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Writer behind Meghan Markle's latest interview is also a SEX writer
> 
> 
> Allison P. Davis, from California, stole the hearts of Harry and Meghan fans when she wrote about their love story in Meghan's latest interview. Allison is known for her sex-focused writing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Isn't obvious she's possessed and needs an exorcism?!  Being an actress, even though just z-list, she would know that's what happens in the movies.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The royals might. The grifters...not bloody likely.


then what is Archwell?  Oh, never mind - guess it's a front - pretending to be philanthropists


----------



## Chanbal

The Duchess of Sussex called on the superstar singer to support her Archetypes show after her friend Serena Williams appeared last week. This week's episode is called: '*The Duality of Diva',* where Meghan herself was branded a diva by Ms Carey and the duchess admitted she went into 'quiet revolt'/









						Meghan Markle releases Mariah Carey Archetypes podcast on Spotify
					

The Duchess of Sussex made the claim during her interview with Mariah Carey in the second episode of her Archetypes Spotify podcast, part of Meghan and Harry's £18million deal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5600266
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex called on the superstar singer to support her Archetypes show after her friend Serena Williams appeared last week. This week's episode is called: '*The Duality of Diva',* where Meghan herself was branded a diva by Ms Carey and the duchess admitted she went into 'quiet revolt'/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle releases Mariah Carey Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex made the claim during her interview with Mariah Carey in the second episode of her Archetypes Spotify podcast, part of Meghan and Harry's £18million deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



again - it's about Meghan....I won't listen, not matter who she has as a guest


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> They dropped the Mariah Carey podcast?
> Painful to read this excerpt.



I bet it will rank #1 again if only because people want to see just how bad it is.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Isn't obvious she's possessed and needs an exorcism?!  Being an actress, even though just z-list, she would know that's what happens in the movies.


That is some Pazuzu-level sh!t going on with those guttural growls.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> They dropped the Mariah Carey podcast?
> Painful to read this excerpt.






bag-mania said:


> I bet it will rank #1 again if only because people want to see just how bad it is.


Yes, the transcript is already available… (see spoiler)



Spoiler: Transcript - #2






			https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Archetypes_Ep2-_DIVA_8.29-1.pdf


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## scarlet555

my goodness... who is drinking her kool aid?  Mariah Carey... what's up???!!!  Girl you famous enough already... don't need Oprah, and less of all this Crazy.   Unbelievable...

 Crazy not being liked by the royals...  lots of reasons...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I bet it will rank #1 again if only because people want to see just how bad it is.


I won't listen...matter of principle but also not interested


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> Narcissistic personality dissorder, NPD, is definately a mental health condition and can be treated, I'm not saying she would change drastically but it might help. But the problem is that most of these people don't acknowledge they have a problem.


problem?  she has gone from a somewhat privileged but basically middle class background to this grand life and being a household name.....I'm sure she doesn't see it as a problem (in spite of all her whining)


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Yes, the transcript is already available… (see spoiler)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Transcript - #2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Archetypes_Ep2-_DIVA_8.29-1.pdf


Clarification please on the verb DROP
They DROPPED podcast ie they got rid of it , it vanished
OR, 
M just DROPPED a new podcast, ie it is now available 

I think the podcast came out and vanished on the same day , in which case both meanings are appropriate 

Except the transcript is still around , the latter is another YOWZA DIVA-esque moment for MM


----------



## Chanbal

Side by side comparison…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## cat1234

I listened.   Couldn’t help it.   Main takeaway is her outrage at being called out on her own divaness.   She can barely recover until she reframes it as an aspirational word based on her perfect appearance, rather than the condemnation of her behavior it appears to be.  Also believe MC shades her on her age very slyly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Clarification please on the verb DROP
> They DROPPED podcast ie they got rid of it , it vanished
> OR,
> M just DROPPED a new podcast, ie it is now available
> 
> I think the podcast came out and vanished on the same day , in which case both meanings are appropriate
> 
> Except the transcript is still around , the latter is another YOWZA DIVA-esque moment for MM



I think it's coming out tomorrow?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> They dropped the Mariah Carey podcast?
> Painful to read this excerpt.



There is supposedly a VOICEOVER by MM for this part of the podcast where MM chooses to interpret/clarify the diva comment as a complement about her wardrobe, rather than a dig
She tells us what to think about MC’s words 
Please someone, take one for the team, listen to the actual podcast, I am dying for more, Mariah’s tone of voice , for ex


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> He may not be mentally impaired, but it is well known that *he is not very bright.* He was emotionally immature when they met, which likely contributed to the failure of his previous relationships, and she is a master manipulator. *She knew all the right buttons to push.* Unless he's been living under a rock I would not be surprised if it's finally dawning on him that he has been used big time.


He's had a mean streak from childhood and used to ride his tricycle into people on purpose while laughing. Yes, he's not very bright and is also weak-willed hence the alleged booze and drug use that could account for his temper tantrums. Meanwhile scheming ZedZed knew exactly how to manipulate him with a little pat, push, pull or yank while playing the victim and taking advantage of his vindictive nature to strike against the BRF. IMO, many will find him complicit with TW, but in reality he may not have acted so spitefully against his family without TW's manipulations.


----------



## marietouchet

MM is cleaning up on aisle 4, even before the podcast comes out, it is all about her fabulousness

Mariah Carey calls Meghan Markle a 'diva' in new Archetypes podcast
https://mol.im/a/11160539


----------



## jennlt

Twinsies!


----------



## cat1234

marietouchet said:


> There is supposedly a VOICEOVER by MM for this part of the podcast where MM chooses to interpret/clarify the diva comment as a complement about her wardrobe, rather than a dig
> She tells us what to think about MC’s words
> Please someone, take one for the team, listen to the actual podcast, I am dying for more, Mariah’s tone of voice , for ex


Mariah was firmly checking her initially.   Meghan was so flustered by this it turned awkward fast.  Mariah immediately and gracefully soothed Meghan’s ego by assuring her she was a diva because of her beauty and clothing.
Meghan goes back to this in a lengthy monologue at the end of the podcast.   She is reiterating the fact she is only a diva because of her aspirational appearance.  She is so painfully insecure.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



I don't like her but calling it "America's verdict" is a stretch IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




If we don't count, say, genocide initiators and the like she might just be the sickest person on the planet. Her whole behaviour is pathological.


----------



## sdkitty

is it just me or does she not look like herself in the Insta video?








						Meghan Markle Tells Mariah Carey About When She Was First Treated Like A 'Black Woman'
					

"Up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman," the Duchess of Sussex said. "And things really shifted."




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> is it just me or does she not look like herself in the Insta video?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Tells Mariah Carey About When She Was First Treated Like A 'Black Woman'
> 
> 
> "Up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman," the Duchess of Sussex said. "And things really shifted."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Who knows what she did the night before, maybe it's becoming harder for her to shift back into her human form and make it believable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5600266
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex called on the superstar singer to support her Archetypes show after her friend Serena Williams appeared last week. This week's episode is called: '*The Duality of Diva',* where Meghan herself was branded a diva by Ms Carey and the duchess admitted she went into 'quiet revolt'/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle releases Mariah Carey Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex made the claim during her interview with Mariah Carey in the second episode of her Archetypes Spotify podcast, part of Meghan and Harry's £18million deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Duality of Diva?  Oh no, honey, there is no duality. Maria threw the shade and MM doesn’t get it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> is it just me or does she not look like herself in the Insta video?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Tells Mariah Carey About When She Was First Treated Like A 'Black Woman'
> 
> 
> "Up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman," the Duchess of Sussex said. "And things really shifted."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


She never looks the same twice!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The comments, oh, the comments make us look like _fangirls_  








						Meghan Markle on the Struggle of ‘Not Being Able to Afford’ Her $14M Mansion
					

In a new interview, Meghan Markle opens up about how she and Prince Harry were initially not able to afford their $14 million home in Montecito after stepping..




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Yes, the transcript is already available… (see spoiler)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Transcript - #2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Archetypes_Ep2-_DIVA_8.29-1.pdf


I understand now why it takes two dozen people to make these. They have to find enough people to write and edit this dreck. I bet they get burned out quickly.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments, oh, the comments make us look like _fangirls_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle on the Struggle of ‘Not Being Able to Afford’ Her $14M Mansion
> 
> 
> In a new interview, Meghan Markle opens up about how she and Prince Harry were initially not able to afford their $14 million home in Montecito after stepping..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Haha! I was going to post this, but got distracted by the comments of the fans…


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Um… none of the photos of Z-list show her wearing her wedding and engagement ring.
> 
> so is she hunting for the next victim husband?


Not necessarily.  I think she wants to go out on her own in terms of her career.


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan is on her way to becoming a podcast sensation but not for the reasons she thought. Still, any publicity is good publicity, right?


----------



## cat1234

I need to look away.  There is entirely too much unfiltered Meghan out in the world this week.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




Calmly, seriously and clearly said, thank you sir!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> There is supposedly a VOICEOVER by MM for this part of the podcast where MM chooses to interpret/clarify the diva comment as a complement about her wardrobe, rather than a dig
> She tells us what to think about MC’s words
> Please someone, take one for the team, listen to the actual podcast, I am dying for more, Mariah’s tone of voice , for ex



I'll be busy filing my nails tomorrow, plus, you know I only care what both divas are wearing


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> The Harkles joined at the bottom like conjoined twins


Apparently this is the tree. Notice how it is growing apart.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So this is why Raptor chose The Cut...besides none of the glossier magazines wanting her. Swipe for the whole story.


----------



## youngster

Getting back to the magazine interview, I wonder if Meghan realizes how much damage she's done to herself.  Not just the Mandela comparison but how loopy and foolish she sounds. People in the media, in the know, in NYC and Hollywood are taking note, if they hadn't before that she's not talented or clever or even interesting.  Tina Brown is definitely well connected and she said, watch for the pivot (by Harry and Meghan) in a year or two back to the UK. She clearly expects them to be unsuccessful in their producing endeavors and in carving out some sort of media empire.  Maybe it's why Meghan never names names or is intentionally vague with her statements when she does speak.  The back up plan, with at least some time spent back to the UK, has to be kept in place.  Just in case, even if they know they are generally despised in the UK.


----------



## jennlt

I guess she didn't make *the cut* this time.

*Such Good Friends! Serena Williams DIDN'T INVITE Meghan To US Open Despite Having 100 Tickets*


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Meghan is on her way to becoming a podcast sensation but not for the reasons she thought. Still, any publicity is good publicity, right?



If her creative output get's any worse...




She makes the adage of so bad it's good look tame, nothing is as funny as someone acting straight and being so hilariously funny, joke's on her, publicity or none.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Getting back to the magazine interview, I wonder if Meghan realizes how much damage she's done to herself.  Not just the Mandela comparison but how loopy and foolish she sounds. People in the media, in the know, in NYC and Hollywood are taking note, if they hadn't before that she's not talented or clever or even interesting.  Tina Brown is definitely well connected and she said, watch for the pivot (by Harry and Meghan) in a year or two back to the UK. She clearly expects them to be unsuccessful in their producing endeavors and in carving out some sort of media empire.  Maybe it's why Meghan never names names or is intentionally vague with her statements when she does speak.  The back up plan, with at least some time spent back to the UK, has to be kept in place.  Just in case, even if they know they are generally despised in the UK.



She would have been blind-sided by the "housing unit" lies upsetting so many South Africans. They were not ripe to receive her Mandela comparisons on her (earlier given) interview that was released soon after. Own goal and huge gaff *#VoetsekMeghan*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Meghan is on her way to becoming a podcast sensation but not for the reasons she thought. Still, any publicity is good publicity, right?



I'm starting to think that Allison P Davis deserves an award. Her article about TW is a brilliant journalistic piece  imo.


----------



## papertiger

"Maybe some counselling is required here"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> I guess she didn't make *the cut* this time.
> 
> *Such Good Friends! Serena Williams DIDN'T INVITE Meghan To US Open Despite Having 100 Tickets*




Everyone gets that wrong. Raptor declined because there's more important things in the world than watching tennis.


----------



## Cinderlala

The fact that THE Diva shaded Skeeter for being a diva is HILARIOUS!!!!!!  So, we've finally found the one person who is willing to stand up to her, Mariah Carey.    Great job, MC!!!

(Admittedly, she did walk it back but it was enough to throw TW off balance & caused her to attempt a rewrite of the narrative after the interview ended.)


----------



## Cinderlala

marietouchet said:


> Agree the eternal innuendo-ing, I am sick of that
> *You decline to name the offender, yet, by doing so, you somewhat imply the offense was committed by many, not just one*


Which is exactly her intention.


Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to think that Allison P Davis deserves an award. Her article about TW is a brilliant journalistic piece  imo.


I think you're right---it sounds like the author knows it's all ridiculous & is calling her out the best she can while passing the acceptability test from  .  I'm just surprised TW didn't notice.


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> The fact that THE Diva shaded Skeeter for being a diva is HILARIOUS!!!!!!  So, we've finally found the one person who is willing to stand up to her, Mariah Carey.    Great job, MC!!!
> 
> (Admittedly, she did walk it back but it was enough to throw TW off balance & caused her to attempt a rewrite of the narrative after the interview ended.)


When you want to have the last word you add on a postscript after the guest is gone.


----------



## Chanbal

Cinderlala said:


> Which is exactly her intention.
> 
> I think you're right---it sounds like the author knows it's all ridiculous & is calling her out the best she can while passing the acceptability test from  . * I'm just surprised TW didn't notice.*


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Everyone gets that wrong. Raptor declined because there's more important things in the world than watching tennis.



Yeah, a televised US Open attended by hundreds of A-list celebrities including Tiger Woods and Bill Cl!nton is soooo not her scene  









						Serena Williams' Famous Friends Invaded Stadium For 100th U.S. Open Win!
					

See all of Serena Williams' famous friends who were there to cheer the tennis pro on during her 100th U.S. Open win!




					finance.yahoo.com


----------



## Cinderlala

Don't get me wrong, I don't consider Diva to be a pejorative term for Mariah Carey.  She has earned the right to be however she wants to be, IMO.  I just think it's hilarious that she knows "the look" which is actually when Skeeter's mask slips.  Also hilarious that Skeeter is so unhappy to be called a diva.


----------



## bubablu

xincinsin said:


> They dropped the Mariah Carey podcast?
> Painful to read this excerpt.



We really need the vomit reaction, at least for this thread. I simply imagine her voice reading this  and


----------



## Cinderlala

I also find it amusing that TW seems to believe she has friends.  Most sane individuals would understand when one is not invited ANYWHERE by ANYONE one does not really have friends.


----------



## Chanbal

How Meghan lost America
					

The Duchess is giving increasingly outspoken interviews, but is that because the people of the US and its media have lost interest?




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## bubablu

papertiger said:


> "Maybe some counselling is required here"



Yesss! I wanted to post this one also! I started laughing loudly when I heard this!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> That's a very confused "witness"


i wonder how much they paid him to "remember" all of this


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bubablu

BTW I want to start a new thread: 
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread Appreciation thread​I came here for the purses, remained for the LOL. (Sorry for my English, it's a little late here. Not been a native speaker is the reason why I don't post a lot, but sure I like this place : )


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle's claim about Archie nursery fire confirmed by 'source'
> 
> 
> The insider, believed to be close to the Duchess of Sussex and was attached to her security detail during the 10-day tour in 2019, said he personally saw the 'severely melted' heater.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No longer accepting comments on this either ‍♀️


How long do they expect sane people to believe the term close source when it applies to these two?  A close source is that person reflecting back at you when you look in the mirror, Meg.  Omit has screwed it up so much lately that he is in danger of being Markled and will lose his spokesflack status.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5600492
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan lost America
> 
> 
> The Duchess is giving increasingly outspoken interviews, but is that because the people of the US and its media have lost interest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk



Can’t lose something she *never ever had. * As @CeeJay said, over here she was always *zzzzzlist *and unpleasant (aka, mean).


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5600492
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan lost America
> 
> 
> The Duchess is giving increasingly outspoken interviews, but is that because the people of the US and its media have lost interest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk




Can't read it for 2 weeks (when I'm back at work). Behind a paywall.


----------



## youngster

*@papertiger *
Here are some of the best parts from "How Meghan Lost America":

_With a podcast to promote amid talk of her star "waning" in the US, there is a growing sense that the only way the Duchess can get noticed these days is by continuing to wage war against the Windsors.  Even the left-leaning Washington Post recently published an editorial headlined: “To succeed in media, Meghan Markle needs to leave royal trauma behind.”

But as one US TV insider explained: “Meghan is sort of regarded as tabloid fodder these days. I wouldn’t say her popularity has waned but her star draw has. She was riding on the cusp of being the Duchess, but a lot of their projects have failed and some of the lustre has gone. It would be unfair to say she’s not popular but we are doing less on her. We are more likely to do something on William and Kate now.”

According to another source who works for one of the big American networks: “People get the US wrong. They think they are obsessed with Meghan and Diana *but it’s the Queen* they are really obsessed with.  When it touches on criticising the monarchy – that has been quite damaging. *People here have sort of been asking themselves: ‘Would you do that to your in-laws?’”*

There are increasing signs of fatigue over stories about the Sussexes’ time in Britain. In July, another survey found that just a quarter (25 per cent) of Americans were “very or fairly interested” in reading Harry’s forthcoming autobiography, compared to 14 per cent of Britons who said the same.  The poll found that more than half of Americans (51 per cent) had no interest at all, compared to two thirds of Brits.  “There’s actually a bit of snobbery about Meghan now in the US because she’s become a celebrity story rather than a news one,” said one journalist who works for an American media company.

“She’s not being taken seriously by Washington at all. She’s not Michelle ***** – she doesn’t have that pedigree so where does she fit in?”

The fact that the couple have not felt able to completely turn their backs on Britain – despite their continual criticism of its media and an ongoing row over their Home Office security – *further supports the theory that their US profile is still largely dictated by their UK coverage. And it’s the profile that pays the bills.*_


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Apparently this is the tree. Notice how it is growing apart.
> 
> View attachment 5600433



It reminds me of her legs.


----------



## youngster

Maybe the UK press shouldn't rise to the bait and should take a page from the royal family and ignore her and not give her the coverage that she so desperately wants.  But, I understand too, the need to clap back when she says such stupid things, equating herself to Mandela, or that the press would be taking pictures every time she dropped one of the children at school.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> I'm just surprised TW didn't notice.


Because she is humorless and takes herself far too seriously.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> *@papertiger *
> Here are some of the best parts from "How Meghan Lost America":
> 
> _With a podcast to promote amid talk of her star "waning" in the US, there is a growing sense that the only way the Duchess can get noticed these days is by continuing to wage war against the Windsors.  Even the left-leaning Washington Post recently published an editorial headlined: “To succeed in media, Meghan Markle needs to leave royal trauma behind.”
> 
> But as one US TV insider explained: “Meghan is sort of regarded as tabloid fodder these days. I wouldn’t say her popularity has waned but her star draw has. She was riding on the cusp of being the Duchess, but a lot of their projects have failed and some of the lustre has gone. It would be unfair to say she’s not popular but we are doing less on her. We are more likely to do something on William and Kate now.”
> 
> According to another source who works for one of the big American networks: “People get the US wrong. They think they are obsessed with Meghan and Diana *but it’s the Queen* they are really obsessed with.  When it touches on criticising the monarchy – that has been quite damaging. *People here have sort of been asking themselves: ‘Would you do that to your in-laws?’”*
> 
> There are increasing signs of fatigue over stories about the Sussexes’ time in Britain. In July, another survey found that just a quarter (25 per cent) of Americans were “very or fairly interested” in reading Harry’s forthcoming autobiography, compared to 14 per cent of Britons who said the same.  The poll found that more than half of Americans (51 per cent) had no interest at all, compared to two thirds of Brits.  “There’s actually a bit of snobbery about Meghan now in the US because she’s become a celebrity story rather than a news one,” said one journalist who works for an American media company.
> 
> “She’s not being taken seriously by Washington at all. She’s not Michelle ***** – she doesn’t have that pedigree so where does she fit in?”
> 
> The fact that the couple have not felt able to completely turn their backs on Britain – despite their continual criticism of its media and an ongoing row over their Home Office security – *further supports the theory that their US profile is still largely dictated by their UK coverage. And it’s the profile that pays the bills.*_



Thank you

She doesn't appreciate that the Queen is very much appreciated in the US (as elsewhere) and its people respect respect.

Image Etsy 




In preparation for tomorrow, celebrating the Divine in all of us


----------



## CarryOn2020

Morgan Freeman has a point -


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> _But as one US TV insider explained: “Meghan is sort of regarded as tabloid fodder these days. I wouldn’t say her popularity has waned but her star draw has. She was riding on the cusp of being the Duchess, but a lot of their projects have failed and some of the lustre has gone. It would be unfair to say she’s not popular but we are doing less on her. *We are more likely to do something on William and Kate now.”*_



Ouch. That's probably the worst thing you can tell her. Kate is her personal She who shall not be named.



youngster said:


> _According to another source who works for one of the big American networks: “People get the US wrong. They think they are obsessed with Meghan and Diana *but it’s the Queen* they are really obsessed with.  When it touches on criticising the monarchy – that has been quite damaging. *People here have sort of been asking themselves: ‘Would you do that to your in-laws?’”*_



I mean, she also underestimated how absolutely fond the Os are of The Queen.



youngster said:


> _“She’s not being taken seriously by Washington at all. She’s not Michelle ***** – she doesn’t have that pedigree so where does she fit in?”_



Hear hear. Now if that could become the mainstream opinion of them I can die happy.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> Thank you
> 
> She doesn't appreciate that the Queen is very much appreciated in the US (as elsewhere) and its people respect respect.



You'd think the massive success of the Jubilee and the enormous happy crowds that turned out for the Queen would have given her pause.  Apparently not though. She really is just not very smart.  First law of holes: stop digging.


----------



## CarryOn2020

His hair


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another day, another tantrum over [wait for it] security


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another day, another tantrum over [wait for it] security


----------



## CarryOn2020

A comment - I wonder the same thing. 
_Andrew is son of the monarch. Andrew didn't move out of the country.  Fergie in all her faults, NEVER compared to this. Andrew is probably wondering why these 2 r still on RF websites._


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> His hair




He also looks sleep-deprived

Maybe he's relegated to living in a box in the basement and only allowed to come out for his pop-up cameos or roll-out-a-Price-Prince-housebound

Credit the Lancashire Post


----------



## youngster

Andrew, for all his considerable faults, is living on the grounds of Windsor Castle which is already protected 24/7 so he isn't adding to the cost of security.  How dim is Harry?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> He also looks sleep-deprived
> 
> Maybe he's relegated to living in a box in the basement and only allowed to come out for his pop-up cameos or roll-out-a-Price-Prince-houseband
> 
> Credit the Lancashire Post
> 
> View attachment 5600547


The Jack-in-the-box is cuter than Harry. This is what Harry’s “impromptu” popping in to the Serena podcast last week looked like.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Andrew, for all his considerable faults, is living on the grounds of *Windsor Castle* which is already protected 24/7 so he isn't adding to the cost of security.  How dim is Harry?



Not sure the security is just so strangers can't get in, but not a bad open-prison for Andrew. Bigger than the 'housing unit' Harry's locked-up in Montecito, and Andrew's allowed to live upstairs whereas Harry's definitely been relegated to the cellar.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The Jack-in-the-box is cuter than Harry. This is what Harry’s “impromptu” popping in to the Serena podcast last week looked like.



Harry pops into all her broadcasts, juggling on M's 40th, cracking jokes with Serena, fixing sprinklers at the makeup artist's place. 

Tomorrow, he'll pop-up as 'room-service' and bring in the martinis, pills and caviar blinis


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have not completely figured out who that person is, but apparently some kind of celebrity news reporter who goes inkognito on Twitter?


----------



## LizzieBennett

youngster said:


> Andrew, for all his considerable faults, is living on the grounds of Windsor Castle which is already protected 24/7 so he isn't adding to the cost of security.  How dim is Harry?


Didn’t Andrew have a stalker?   I think that’s true but I may be mistaken.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Harry pops into all her broadcasts, juggling on M's 40th, cracking jokes with Serena, fixing sprinklers at the makeup artist's place.
> 
> Tomorrow, he'll pop-up as 'room-service' and bring in the martinis, pills and caviar blinis


what?  H was supposedly fixing sprinklers at someone else's house?


----------



## Chanbal

Hilaria?







						Blind Item #1
					

At first, I wasn't sure what they would have in common, but now, if I think about it, the fact that the alliterate one and the significant o...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## papertiger

LizzieBennett said:


> Didn’t Andrew have a stalker?   I think that’s true but I may be mistaken.



 

Spanish lady said he was her fiancé and had a lunch appointment. 

Could just have been Meghan putting on an accent tho


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what?  H was supposedly fixing sprinklers at someone else's house?



  Meghan said it so it must be true


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hilaria?
> View attachment 5600563
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> At first, I wasn't sure what they would have in common, but now, if I think about it, the fact that the alliterate one and the significant o...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Someone's going to have to help me unravel this one


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Can't read it for 2 weeks (when I'm back at work). Behind a paywall.


Here it is!


			archive.ph


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hilaria?
> View attachment 5600563
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #1
> 
> 
> At first, I wasn't sure what they would have in common, but now, if I think about it, the fact that the alliterate one and the significant o...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



That comment though 

"They are both parasites who have nearly drained their respective hosts. Probably conferring about finding the Next."


----------



## Chanbal

A different version of this has already been posted here, but the TMZ title is good!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Someone's going to have to help me unravel this one
> 
> View attachment 5600565





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That comment though
> 
> "They are both parasites who have nearly drained their respective hosts. Probably conferring about finding the Next."


@QueenofWrapDress did it! 
Hilaria and TW seem to be on texting basis with each other.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Thank you
> 
> She doesn't appreciate that the Queen is very much appreciated in the US (as elsewhere) and its people respect respect.
> 
> Image Etsy
> 
> View attachment 5600515
> 
> 
> In preparation for tomorrow, celebrating the Divine in all of us


Even if people in the US don't _love_ TQ, they respect her enormously and insulting her is not in any way acceptable.  Everyone knows that when she leaves, it will be a huge void.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Someone's going to have to help me unravel this one
> 
> View attachment 5600565


I said a long time ago that ZeeZy and Hilarious had a lot in common, but for that very reason they could never be friends.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Andrew, for all his considerable faults, is living on the grounds of Windsor Castle which is already protected 24/7 so he isn't adding to the cost of security.  How dim is Harry?


At this point, Harry just wants to be a thorn that continues to prick and draw blood. After this is settled, he will come up with something else.  If it is another lawsuit, I hope the courts throw it out as he is wasting taxpayer money.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I said a long time ago that ZeeZy and Hilarious had a lot in common, but for that very reason they could never be friends.


Not real friends, no. But phony, show biz, kiss-the-air-next-to-their-cheek friends? Sure!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress did it!
> Hilaria and TW seem to be on texting basis with each other.



Dear me!


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


>


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That comment though
> 
> "They are both parasites who have nearly drained their respective hosts. Probably conferring about finding the Next."



Are we still talking about on Earth now or do I have to Zoom Elon?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> At this point, Harry just wants to be a thorn that continues to prick and draw blood. After this is settled, he will come up with something else.  If it is another lawsuit, I hope the courts throw it out as he is wasting taxpayer money.


Hmmm, _prick_ is the perfect word


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmm, _prick_ is the perfect word



And less asterisks needed than T****R


----------



## bag-mania

Maybe Hilaria will be on one of the future podcasts. What _Archetype_ is appropriate for Mrs. Baldwin? Gold digger? Octomom? Fraud?

It would be fun to see how Meghan chimes in to one-up her.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jenayb

charlottawill said:


>




Sorry if I missed it, and clearly I did, but M bullied... Charlotte? What? Details?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So she did indeed keep a journal (see slide 2). I'm not too worried though, she was a working royal for a hot mimute and they never trusted her, so I'd be sursprised if she was in on any big, scandalous secret. Of course that has never kept her from just making up lies as she goes along.


----------



## Cinderlala

Rach has no secrets to expose---she's already said everything and absolutely nothing.  Over and over and over again.


----------



## Chanbal

The Cut article was brilliant, what can I say?  


_So today’s starter for ten is: *who are we talking about in the same breath as the Duchess of Sussex? Mother Teresa? Right idea, but not quite. It’s Nelson Mandela.*

I know! *The similarities are uncanny between an actress who married well and a man who spent a large portion of his life as a political prisoner before eventually becoming one of the most revered, loved and inspirational leaders the world has ever seen.* But in today’s bombshell interview with New York magazine’s The Cut website, Meghan told of how someone or other said to her that the day she married into the royal family they were dancing in the streets in South Africa, just like when Mandela was released. Of course they were. *Here are 18 other new things we learnt in Meghan’s latest interview, some of which may even be true. *_(see link )



			archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jenaywins said:


> Sorry if I missed it, and clearly I did, but M bullied... Charlotte? What? Details?



It was rumoured that she mistreated her during the bridesmaid fittings leading up to the wedding. A few weeks ago Lady C - who is eccentric but usually well informed and very keen on not being sued - brought it up in one of her videos. She said someone from Givenchy (!) called her and confirmed it.


----------



## Cinderlala

jenaywins said:


> Sorry if I missed it, and clearly I did, but M bullied... Charlotte? What? Details?


According to sources at the bridesmaids' fittings, she was horrible to Charlotte.  She also glared at her during the wedding---there's a BLG video about it.  She's insane.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Rach has no secrets to expose---she's already said everything and absolutely nothing.  Over and over and over again.



But now that it's sunk in I can't get over her openly threatening the BRF during the interview by saying there is no NDA and she has stories to tell and loves to talk.

Like, at this point I'd be murderous if it was me.


----------



## Chanbal

Cinderlala said:


> Rach has no secrets to expose---*she's already said everything* and absolutely nothing.  Over and over and over again.


I wouldn't count on that.


----------



## djfmn

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5600492
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Meghan lost America
> 
> 
> The Duchess is giving increasingly outspoken interviews, but is that because the people of the US and its media have lost interest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk



Any chance you can post this article I can never read anything in the telegraph and the articles are usually very well written. 
Thanks


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So she did indeed keep a journal (see slide 2). I'm not too worried though, she was a working royal for a hot minute and they never trusted her, so I'd be sursprised if she was in on any big, scandalois secret. Of course that has never kept her from just making up lies as she goes along.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was rumoured that she mistreated her during the bridesmaid fitting leading up to the wedding. A few weeks ago Lady C - who is eccentric but usually well informed and very keen on not being sued - brought it up in one of her videos. She said someone from Givenchy (!) called and confirmed it.


I posted at the same time again.  

There is actual footage of her glaring at poor, adorable, little Charlotte, though.


----------



## Mumotons

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she did indeed keep a journal (see slide 2). I'm not too worried though, she was a working royal for a hot mimute and they never trusted her, so I'd be sursprised if she was in on any big, scandalois secret. Of course that has never kept her from just making up lies as she goes along.



She really is trying to blackmail them isn’t she ? In broad daylight too, the ‍♀️. She keeps showing the world ho low and disgusting she is then she is going to have the same amount of friends as she does credibility…..a big fat zero


----------



## Chanbal

djfmn said:


> Any chance you can post this article I can never read anything in the telegraph and the articles are usually very well written.
> Thanks


See link


			archive.ph


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Hilaria will be on one of the future podcasts. What _Archetype_ is appropriate for Mrs. Baldwin? Gold digger? Octomom? Fraud?
> 
> It would be fun to see how Meghan chimes in to one-up her.



Maybe she was Andrew's stalker? Didn't se have a 'Spanish' accent at one point?


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But now that it's sunk in I can't get over her openly threatening the BRF during the interview by saying there is no NDA and she has stories to tell and loves to talk.
> 
> Like, at this point I'd be murdeous if it was me.


Right?!  Except, the BRF has dealt with A LOT of drama over the years so they are probably far less concerned than she'd like them to be about her.  She's really just an annoyance---like a tiny bug flying around one's face.  Tiny bugs are not long-lived and the monarchy is VERY old.  She's a grain of sand on an endless beach.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> I posted at the same time again.
> 
> There is actual footage of her glaring at poor, adorable, little Charlotte, though.



Just...how. A 3yo toddler. And to think she hates her so much she can't control her freaking face during her own freaking wedding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Right?!  Except, the BRF has dealt with A LOT of drama over the years so they are probably far less concerned than she'd like them to be about her.  She's really just an annoyance---like a tiny bug flying around one's face.  Tiny bugs are not long-lived and the monarchy is VERY old.  She's a grain of sand on an endless beach.



But the audacity!


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Extremely. He doesn't seem to know what is going on half the time. And after the "royals" decided not to live at the "housing unit", he seems to not know or care where they moved to, although he claims his main purpose was to escort TW from Point A to Point B.


So he didn't know where "Point A" was after they moved??


needlv said:


> And she devalues Haznobrains again.  She acts like he’s the maintenance man fixing pipes… rather than a Prince.
> 
> She already had him juggling like a clown out the window of her failed 40x40 project.


It looks like Harry now has a walk-on part on the Meghan show.  Is he so dim that he doesn't realise this?  He had 30 sec on *her* podcast, and 2 lines in *her* interview. Juggling outside a window? What a sad ending to one of the most popular royals. Be careful what you wish for.....


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


> No words....










needlv said:


> Omid Scobie article yesterday (I won’t post the link as I don’t want to give him clicks) had this interesting statement
> 
> _Uncensored and *unbothered, Meghan, like Harry,** has managed to create a healthier and happier existence **since being shown the door *after the couple's half in, half out proposal was rejected."_
> 
> Shown the door?  I thought they flounced off on their terms!



Really?


You're telling twisted lies again Scoobie.
Bothered. They are both _permanently _bothered, it's pretty much their default setting in life.
Also, they threw a tantrum and LEFT their roles in the RF after they made ridiculous demands and didn't get their own way like spoilt, petulant overgrown children.
The last word I would use to describe their existence is 'happy'. They both, particularly JCMH seem miserable and very angry to me.





charlottawill said:


> My head hurts...










charlottawill said:


> But isn't he her mental health coach?










Helventara said:


> View attachment 5599545





From the extensive evidence we have seen in the past, kids unknown to her are usually scared, disinterested or wary of her.
As if they'd know who some annoying, attention-seeking woman in her 40's is, unless she goes around dressed in a costume of some character from a popular kids tv show to get attention 
She's delusional. I'm surprised she can keep her head up straight with the weight of that huge ego she has.




bag-mania said:


> If there is a divorce *I bet she could easily milk 10 more years of sympathy and attention out of it.*










CarryOn2020 said:


> **



So creepy.







Chloe302225 said:


>





Of course.
She's so predictable. I know the styling is different, but the setting/pose is so copied.





bellecate said:


> Not sure if this has been posted yet as I’m 17 pages behind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5599713










Chloe302225 said:


>



Such an unflattering picture. I have always found her to be quite unattractive and this picture definitely doesn't help.
Why does she always seem to favour this harsh style of photography that looks like it's trying to show up all the sun damage on her skin? It's not a good look.
Also, she's fond of turtlenecks but someone needs to inform her they don't suit her. Her neck isn't long enough and her face shape is all wrong for it to look flattering. She ends up looking like her face is bursting out from the top of a tight neck cast.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. They drag the child into their psychosis. Or should I say she does because this doesn't sound like Harry at all. Swipe for 2nd slide.






Also: 'My love'








lanasyogamama said:


> Some people think the author was trolling Zeddy.
> 
> View attachment 5600187
> 
> 
> View attachment 5600188
> 
> View attachment 5600189


----------



## jenayb

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...how. A 3yo toddler. And to think she hates her so much she can't control her freaking face during her own freaking wedding.



I just watched a few videos and read about the fittings.. you are right. How utterly disgusting.


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> I honestly think they are BOTH mentally impaired, in different ways but they both need medical help. I mean it!


The one field of medicine they (especially TW) really need help from is Psychiatry.  She doesn’t need a Pulmonologist because she’s full of hot air and talks non stop (“until she doesn’t”?  WTF will that be, someone please tell me!).
She doesn’t need an OBGYN because she’s already so fertile and knows all about women’s health .
She’s obviously seen a Plastic Surgeon more times than any of us can count.
She may have had her skin lightened with her Dermatologist.
She already had a Urologist remove Haz’s balls.
She doesn’t need a Family Practitioner or Pediatrician because I think we all know she doesn’t give a rat’s a$$ about her family or those hired kids.
She’s already had a Pathologist inspect all the bodies she’s cast aside.
She doesn’t need a Cardiologist because she has no heart.
No Neurologist needed either because she has nerves of steel to keep lying through her fake teeth.  
I think her feet are beyond any help an Orthopedist could do.  I take it back though, because she could actually use  another field…a Gastroenterologist, as she has a LOT of $hit AND has verbal diarrhea.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> So he didn't know where "Point A" was after they moved??
> 
> It looks like Harry now has a walk-on part on the Meghan show.  Is he so dim that he doesn't realise this?  He had 30 sec on *her* podcast, and 2 lines in *her* interview. Juggling outside a window? What a sad ending to one of the most popular royals. *Be careful what you wish for.....*



You mean his wish he was half-in half out? That one's in the bag box


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> This word salad is so over the top that will feed us for the rest of the year


That word salad is likely made with lettuce infested with E. coli that would give us all diarrhea for the year.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she did indeed keep a journal (see slide 2). I'm not too worried though, she was a working royal for a hot mimute and they never trusted her, so I'd be sursprised if she was in on any big, scandalous secret. Of course that has never kept her from just making up lies as she goes along.


So, another [huge] lie exposed.


----------



## charlottawill

jenaywins said:


> I just watched a few videos and read about the fittings.. you are right. How utterly disgusting.


I hope Charlotte has the last laugh in about twenty years when ZeeZy has been relegated to the dust bin of history while she is a popular and respected young royal.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Not that they would ever go public about it, but I wonder how psychiatrists would react to her recent ramblings.


I can actually picture her in a straight jacket in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...how. A 3yo toddler. And to think she hates her so much she can't control her freaking face during her own freaking wedding.


Right?!  She's unhinged.  The signs have been there from the beginning.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> But the audacity!


She is nothing if not audacious.  She has nothing else.  (Other than vindictive, malicious, pathologically jealous, insecure, manipulative, controlling, calculating---I guess she has a lot of things!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> There is supposedly a VOICEOVER by MM for this part of the podcast where MM chooses to interpret/clarify the diva comment as a complement about her wardrobe, rather than a dig
> She tells us what to think about MC’s words
> *Please someone, take one for the team, listen to the actual podcas*t, I am dying for more, Mariah’s tone of voice , for ex


I love you my friend, but no way in hell.


----------



## Mumotons

I’m actually wondering if the divorce rumours are true and the threats are aimed more at Harry as much as the RF, she is going to want a huge amount of lolly when the split does happen


----------



## zinacef

great post! very creative!


----------



## purseinsanity

cat1234 said:


> I need to look away.  There is entirely too much unfiltered Meghan out in the world this week.


I agree with you.  Just reading her name & quotes repeatedly is giving me hives and my Zyrtec isn’t working any more!


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> a foundation doesn't have to receive donations from outside.  I worked for a foundation which was funded by the owners.  I wouldn't expect the "royals" to be fund raising.  I would expect them to be giving away their own money.


Sorry to be beating a dead horse here, as we know that the Sussexes would never give away any of their own money.  Giving donations is what us little people do.  As a comparison, which I am sure drives her mad, the Cambridges have raised over £20 million pounds for their charitable foundation. Given that Archwell has raised less than $50,000, I'd say thats a clear win for the Cambridges 


sdkitty said:


> a foundation doesn't have to receive donations from outside.  I worked for a foundation which was funded by the owners.  I wouldn't expect the "royals" to be fund raising.  I would expect them to be giving away their own money.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Morgan Freemam really is God, not just in the movies


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> i wonder how much they paid him to "remember" all of this


Two lemon olive oil cakes and some stale packets of whatever drink she was promoting a few years ago.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> then what is Archwell?  Oh, never mind - guess it's a front - pretending to be philanthropists


Yep, that was sort of my point  Nothing they do is transparent, it's all cloaked in secrecy and deviousness.  Isn't that the reason they registered a lot of their businesses in Delaware, where they don't have to disclose anything?  Even the trademarking of names and websites was done underhandedly and before she even had the ring on her finger, and then before she (supposedly) gave birth.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have not completely figured out who that person is, but apparently some kind of celebrity news reporter who goes inkognito on Twitter?



Enough with the matters being dealt privately nonsense.  Put them in the place already…in the chicken coop!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I can actually picture her in a straight jacket in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.


Perhaps a full length version of this nightmare?


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Spanish lady said he was her fiancé and had a lunch appointment.
> 
> Could just have been Meghan putting on an accent tho


It might have been Hilarious Baldwin!


----------



## charlottawill

Mumotons said:


> I’m actually wondering if the divorce rumours are true and the threats are aimed more at Harry as much as the RF, she is going to want a huge amount of lolly when the split does happen



At this point I believe the divorce is a when not an if.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cinderlala said:


> Right?!  Except, the BRF has dealt with A LOT of drama over the years so they are probably far less concerned than she'd like them to be about her.  She's really just an annoyance---like a tiny bug flying around one's face.  Tiny bugs are not long-lived and the monarchy is VERY old.  *She's a grain of sand on an endless beach.*


I wish the BRF would stick her in a giant oyster shell so at least she’d become Pearl that way


----------



## tiktok

Toby93 said:


> So he didn't know where "Point A" was after they moved??
> 
> It looks like Harry now has a walk-on part on the Meghan show.  Is he so dim that he doesn't realise this?  He had 30 sec on *her* podcast, and 2 lines in *her* interview. Juggling outside a window? What a sad ending to one of the most popular royals. Be careful what you wish for.....





charlottawill said:


> At this point I believe the divorce is a when not an if.



I’m just waiting to hear how the divorce is entirely the royal family’s fault and a result of racism against the mixed race Black Princess of Perfection.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...how. A 3yo toddler. And to think she hates her so much she can't control her freaking face during her own freaking wedding.


Because she sucks as an actress!


----------



## CobaltBlu

So, if you are Oprah, what do you think about Meghan's comment about Nelson Mandela?
Discuss.


----------



## Cinderlala

Mumotons said:


> I’m actually wondering if the divorce rumours are true and the threats are aimed more at Harry as much as the RF, she is going to want a huge amount of lolly when the split does happen


This is SO Rach, of course this is what is going on!!  She'll keep H quite a bit longer than he'd like & he won't get away easily.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> It reminds me of her legs.


Hahahaha.... nailed it


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress did it!
> Hilaria and TW seem to be on texting basis with each other.



In Spanglish?


----------



## bag-mania

Here are other topics for her remaining episodes. From The Cut:

The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ***** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and Slut (Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”) 
She has lined up a murderers’ row of guests: Constance Wu, Issa Rae, Lisa Ling, Margaret Cho, and Ziwe. (I’ll let you guess who aligns with which archetype.)


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Perhaps a full length version of this nightmare?
> 
> View attachment 5600606


Yes, but I'd recommend one that covers up her mouth too.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think this whole thing is really sad. I am entertained by the posts here, and watching Meghans antics are a diversion that passes the time and makes me feel grateful that I am not completely insane. Phew.

But....In the context of the monarchy, it is very sad. We are all looking at the sunset of Elizabeth's reign, and whether you despise the monarchy or love it, the fact of the matter is that QEII has been a steady presence for several generations and when she moves along it will be a huge loss. My US-born mother admired her, and she passed at 98 a few years back. Elizabeth is an icon, she is one of the few leaders on earth who has done their job, whether you like the job or not, almost flawlessly.

Whether you agree with her job description or not, she but on a nice brooch, grabbed her sweet little handbag and sensible shoes, and got up every morning and did it.

I am sure she is not losing sleep over this, and in fact after reading an article (posted in her thread here) about her close circle of friends she is probably OK.

But his nonsense of Harry and Meghan is absolutely the opposite of what should be happening now. Changes in the structure and function of the monarchy are to come, which they should. But this noisy ridiculous Meghan and Harry circus is DIStracting, and DEtracting from what should be the peaceful quiet last years of a woman who literally embodies duty, loyalty, discretion and more.

Meghan is absolutely the opposite, and it feels as if they were to be in the same room the universe would implode. I know there have been many missteps in the history of the monarchy, and these continue to this day (yes, i am looking at you Andrew, geesh), not to mention policies that have left many countries struggling and even broken. These problems largely proceed Elizabeth and in the end, it wasn't her job to fix them, though she probably could have had it been on her shoulders to do so.

But on a personal level, Elizabeth deserves to er....finish out her term.... with our eyes and hearts focused on her and her legacy, not this ridiculous nasty poser and her busted up plumber palm tree prince. I know Meghan will be a blip someday when compared with HMQEII (as if) but the timing here is so troubling.

Its like she is crash-landing a van full of nasty clowns into a retirement celebration and it's just awful.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress did it!
> Hilaria and TW seem to be on texting basis with each other.


Didn't Hilaria have children by surrogate?  Maybe that's where TW got her info?


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she did indeed keep a journal (see slide 2). I'm not too worried though, she was a working royal for a hot mimute and they never trusted her, so I'd be sursprised if she was in on any big, scandalous secret. Of course that has never kept her from just making up lies as she goes along.



The only secrets she would have any knowledge of, would be the secrets (lies) that Hazz confided in her.  It would be so like her to throw it back in his face, so bigger fool him for sharing anything with her


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It reminds me of her legs.


Post of the day!
You literally made me snort Diet Coke through my nose I laughed so hard.  (It was quite short lived, because DC burns!)


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


>



I love that the newspapers keep using that awful picture of her - where just for a second, her true nature comes out.


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> This is SO Rach, of course this is what is going on!!  She'll keep H quite a bit longer than he'd like & he won't get away easily.


And I doubt she will be mailing the rings back to him


----------



## Mumotons

CobaltBlu said:


> So, if you are Oprah, what do you think about Meghan's comment about Nelson Mandela?
> Discuss.


Damn you didn’t give me that headliner….or the fire !!! I thought we were friends !


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



I think it would be hilarious if the powers that be (?UK Visas and Immigration) detained her at the airport and then sent her back without attending the One Young World meeting. Payback can be a bi!ch.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Just speculating. Could this be a "brilliant" SS PR strategy gone wrong?

1. Speech at the Mandela UN event to butter up South Africans and Mandela fans.  
2. Mention South Africa in her podcast to remind the people there (her "sisters") that she has been there. 
3. Compare her wedding favourably to Mandela's release from prison in the Cut interview. 

Looks like the plan was to build up popular momentum so that people would forever associate her image positively with Mandela's. Except Hazard did a poor job of the speech and she bungled the podcast. But the PR juggernaut was already in motion. #voetsekMeghan happened and the ridiculous interview was published. 

The best-laid plans of mice and men...


----------



## djfmn

Chanbal said:


> See link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Thanks I appreciate this.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> Didn't Hilaria have children by surrogate?  Maybe that's where TW got her info?


I think Meg did it first.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> I think this whole thing is really sad. I am entertained by the posts here, and watching Meghans antics are a diversion that passes the time and makes me feel grateful that I am not completely insane. Phew.
> 
> But....In the context of the monarchy, it is very sad. We are all looking at the sunset of Elizabeth's reign, and whether you despise the monarchy or love it, the fact of the matter is that QEII has been a steady presence for several generations and when she moves along it will be a huge loss. My US-born mother admired her, and she passed at 98 a few years back. Elizabeth is an icon, she is one of the few leaders on earth who has done their job, whether you like the job or not, almost flawlessly.
> 
> Whether you agree with her job description or not, she but on a nice brooch, grabbed her sweet little handbag and sensible shoes, and got up every morning and did it.
> 
> I am sure she is not losing sleep over this, and in fact after reading an article (posted in her thread here) about her close circle of friends she is probably OK.
> 
> But his nonsense of Harry and Meghan is absolutely the opposite of what should be happening now. Changes in the structure and function of the monarchy are to come, which they should. But this noisy ridiculous Meghan and Harry circus is DIStracting, and DEtracting from what should be the peaceful quiet last years of a woman who literally embodies duty, loyalty, discretion and more.
> 
> Meghan is absolutely the opposite, and it feels as if they were to be in the same room the universe would implode. I know there have been many missteps in the history of the monarchy, and these continue to this day (yes, i am looking at you Andrew, geesh), not to mention policies that have left many countries struggling and even broken. These problems largely proceed Elizabeth and in the end, it wasn't her job to fix them, though she probably could have had it been on her shoulders to do so.
> 
> But on a personal level, Elizabeth deserves to er....finish out her term.... with our eyes and hearts focused on her and her legacy, not this ridiculous nasty poser and her busted up plumber palm tree prince. I know Meghan will be a blip someday when compared with HMQEII (as if) but the timing here is so troubling.
> 
> Its like she is crash-landing a van full of nasty clowns into a retirement celebration and it's just awful.


Points well taken.  That said, rest assured, the Queen always wins.  My guess is the BRF strategy is to let H&M self-destruct which they are doing quite well now that they are talking. The UN was a fail, Hazzie’s SA trip looked like a bust and a snub, not sure how much was raised for Sentebale but the stands were not crowded, Monteshito is falling apart [plumbing issues], the podcrashes are awful. The more MM talks, the worse she makes it for herself. The BRF lawyers love these podcrashes. Same way Diana  and Fergie sunk their own ships when they talked, MM is following a similar plan.  They’ve already got her on numerous lies. The_ coup de grace _will be when she admits surrogacy [which they already know the answer to].  Patience, the truth will come out.  My opinion of course.

ETA: sure, sure, she loves her grandson but let’s look at how she has handled Andrew. She has more or less sidelined him. Yes, she let C & W take the credit, so what. She does not need the credit for knowing what to do.  She’s watched how Hazzi has behaved these last few years. Undoubtedly she is not impressed with someone who has disrespected his own country [ same as the Duke of Windsor did].  She is letting Hazzie unravel on his own.  My guess is she is resting comfortably with a clear conscience.  Long live QE.


----------



## lalame

Oh boy. And I was doing so well avoiding M+H news (other than her style sightings, which I still enjoy). 

I didn't listen to the podcasts but I did read the article. So cringe. I want to like her but whenever she does these she comes across so unaware and entitled. I can't believe she would tell that Nelson Mandela anecdote... did that really happen? If it did, you don't share it because a self-aware person realizes it's hyperbolic flattery. It gives me Mrs Elton vibes from 1996 Emma... "I do not profess to be an expert in the field of fashion though my friends say I have quite the eye." I do not wish them ill but do wish they would get distance from all this royal family stuff for their own mental health. At this point I'm just waiting for the announcement of a Megxit musical to come next!


----------



## CobaltBlu

lalame said:


> Oh boy. And I was doing so well avoiding M+H news (other than her style sightings, which I still enjoy).
> 
> I didn't listen to the podcasts but I did read the article. So cringe. I want to like her but whenever she does these she comes across so unaware and entitled. I can't believe she would tell that Nelson Mandela anecdote... did that really happen? If it did, you don't share it because a self-aware person realizes it's hyperbolic flattery. It gives me Mrs Elton vibes from 1996 Emma... "I do not profess to be an expert in the field of fashion though my friends say I have quite the eye." I do not wish them ill but do wish they would get distance from all this royal family stuff for their own mental health. At this point I'm just waiting for the announcement of *a Megxit musical to come next!*


Genius


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’m sure others have figured out the three people who complained about the ‘gray men’ were Diana, Sarah and MM.  The  people who have never complained about the ‘gray men’ are Anne, Camilla, Kate and Sophie.  Incidentally they have never overshadowed QE either.   My point is - it is indeed possible to work successfully with the ‘gray men’.  QE has been doing it for 70 years.


----------



## miss_chiff

HarryMarkle website posted a link to a page he created to document #voetsekmeghan Twitter comments that are suspected to be manipulated/removed. 








						#VoetsekMeghan ~The South African Trending Hashtag
					

South Africans voiced their outrage at TW insulting them, but then Twitter seemed to silence them




					voetsekmeghan.substack.com


----------



## lalame

I scrolled back to see some chatter about the article. FWIW I actually really enjoyed the article. The writer has a certain style that may not be up everyone's alley but I think she painted a very realist portrait of Meghan, down to the "like"s. And I absolutely think this woman was annoyed by her.


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> I think this whole thing is really sad. I am entertained by the posts here, and watching Meghans antics are a diversion that passes the time and makes me feel grateful that I am not completely insane. Phew.
> 
> But....In the context of the monarchy, it is very sad. We are all looking at the sunset of Elizabeth's reign, and whether you despise the monarchy or love it, the fact of the matter is that QEII has been a steady presence for several generations and when she moves along it will be a huge loss. My US-born mother admired her, and she passed at 98 a few years back. Elizabeth is an icon, she is one of the few leaders on earth who has done their job, whether you like the job or not, almost flawlessly.
> 
> Whether you agree with her job description or not, she but on a nice brooch, grabbed her sweet little handbag and sensible shoes, and got up every morning and did it.
> 
> I am sure she is not losing sleep over this, and in fact after reading an article (posted in her thread here) about her close circle of friends she is probably OK.
> 
> But his nonsense of Harry and Meghan is absolutely the opposite of what should be happening now. Changes in the structure and function of the monarchy are to come, which they should. But this noisy ridiculous Meghan and Harry circus is DIStracting, and DEtracting from what should be the peaceful quiet last years of a woman who literally embodies duty, loyalty, discretion and more.
> 
> Meghan is absolutely the opposite, and it feels as if they were to be in the same room the universe would implode. I know there have been many missteps in the history of the monarchy, and these continue to this day (yes, i am looking at you Andrew, geesh), not to mention policies that have left many countries struggling and even broken. These problems largely proceed Elizabeth and in the end, it wasn't her job to fix them, though she probably could have had it been on her shoulders to do so.
> 
> But on a personal level, Elizabeth deserves to er....finish out her term.... with our eyes and hearts focused on her and her legacy, not this ridiculous nasty poser and her busted up plumber palm tree prince. I know Meghan will be a blip someday when compared with HMQEII (as if) but the timing here is so troubling.
> 
> Its like she is crash-landing a van full of nasty clowns into a retirement celebration and it's just awful.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

lalame said:


> Oh boy. And I was doing so well avoiding M+H news (other than her style sightings, which I still enjoy).
> 
> I didn't listen to the podcasts but I did read the article. So cringe. I want to like her but whenever she does these she comes across so unaware and entitled. I can't believe she would tell that Nelson Mandela anecdote... did that really happen? If it did, you don't share it because a self-aware person realizes it's hyperbolic flattery. It gives me Mrs Elton vibes from 1996 Emma... "I do not profess to be an expert in the field of fashion though my friends say I have quite the eye." *I do not wish them ill but do wish they would get distance from all this royal family stuff for their own mental health. *At this point I'm just waiting for the announcement of a Megxit musical to come next!





lalame said:


> I scrolled back to see some chatter about the article. FWIW I actually really enjoyed the article. The writer has a certain style that may not be up everyone's alley but I think she painted a very realist portrait of Meghan, down to the "like"s. And I absolutely think this woman was annoyed by her.



The Cut article brought you back to this thread, I think it's a brilliant one. 

Nobody wishes the Harkles ill imo. However, I'm more concerned with the mental health of their victims than I am with theirs.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

A good article! 











						The narcissism of Meghan Markle
					

I’ve read some batty celebrity profiles in my time. But that piece about Meghan Markle in the Cut takes the biscuit. It is almost unbelievably preposterous. It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which Ms Markle is now kween...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

The compacted version of the new interview…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has this been posted?  I am not a meta-data professional, so all I can do is look at the speaker’s rather compelling ‘evidence’.  Curious to know if this analysis is correct?   It is misleading stunts like this though that cause the Harkles to be ridiculed and strongly disliked.  Imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did the PR money run out?


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> It might have been Hilarious Baldwin!


purseinsanity,

LOL I can hardly keep up with you today, gasping with laughing at a post and barely catch my breath before reading the next one.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> purseinsanity,
> 
> LOL I can hardly keep up with you today, gasping with laughing at a post and barely catch my breath before reading the next one.


----------



## Mumotons

Oh Lordy, I’ve been learning French and this phrase came up today… so apt for memememe


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But now that it's sunk in I can't get over her openly threatening the BRF during the interview by saying there is no NDA and she has stories to tell and loves to talk.
> 
> Like, at this point I'd be murderous if it was me.


I am with you. We cannot trust media 100%, truths are usually somewhere in between, bla bla bla but this time, it’s straight from HER OWN mouth. Besides wondering how can one be so simplistic, how can others sympathise with her?


----------



## mellibelly

This bish is loco

Trigger warning: if you want to hear the snippet of MC calling her a diva followed by Maggot’s voiceover explanation of what MC *really* meant click play.


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> I’m actually wondering if the divorce rumours are true and the threats are aimed more at Harry as much as the RF, she is going to want a huge amount of lolly when the split does happen



She can want what she likes, Harry's grandma has her coat of arms on all the doors of our courtrooms, she owns his only official residence in the UK (not theirs, as M stated in her latest Me-view) and his money is in a trust. She hasn't even got a tiara of her own 

She can keep the housing unit and toilet block.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> So, if you are Oprah, what do you think about Meghan's comment about Nelson Mandela?
> Discuss.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Just speculating. Could this be a "brilliant" SS PR strategy gone wrong?
> 
> 1. Speech at the Mandela UN event to butter up South Africans and Mandela fans.
> 2. Mention South Africa in her podcast to remind the people there (her "sisters") that she has been there.
> 3. Compare her wedding favourably to Mandela's release from prison in the Cut interview.
> 
> Looks like the plan was to build up popular momentum so that people would forever associate her image positively with Mandela's. Except Hazard did a poor job of the speech and she bungled the podcast. But the PR juggernaut was already in motion. #voetsekMeghan happened and the ridiculous interview was published.
> 
> The best-laid plans of mice and men...



Basically, Mandela is the name of the only black person outside the US she and her PR people know. So not a strategy just ignorance.

Meghan is also another person who doesn't know that Africa, Asia and Europe are not countries. She talks to Harry about the Truman Show, but he's not the only one that grew-up in a bubble.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> The only secrets she would have any knowledge of, would be the secrets (lies) that Hazz confided in her.  It would be so like her to throw it back in his face, so bigger fool him for sharing anything with her



That's still only Harry-say then, and she proves she only ever half-listens. 

How can you listen to anything or anyone if your mind is always on yourself and what you're dying to to say next?


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think it would be hilarious if the powers that be (?UK Visas and Immigration) detained her at the airport and then sent her back without attending the One Young World meeting. Payback can be a bi!ch.



No worries, the queues are so long at the airports, all they would have to do is make her wait in-line with the 'little people' and she' will have missed the show


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

miss_chiff said:


> HarryMarkle website posted a link to a page he created to document #voetsekmeghan Twitter comments that are suspected to be manipulated/removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #VoetsekMeghan ~The South African Trending Hashtag
> 
> 
> South Africans voiced their outrage at TW insulting them, but then Twitter seemed to silence them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> voetsekmeghan.substack.com



Never mind, she'll find out about SA opinion when 'bravely' goes to visit them again 

What I hope we learn reading this thread is all decisions are commercial, if Twitter want to silence a nation, that's OK, if the BRF request you personally don't use their name to promote your your mate's tatty jewellery - outrage, outage and verbal abuse through your digital bot-armiy. I don't believe in segregation or hate, those that do should never let the word Mandela pass their lips.


----------



## Aminamina

The tide’s turning? From the Ukrainian FB reaction to the Cut interview:”Markle is a diagnosis “, “It’s so easy to spit onto something grand - the faceless scum will get some money by associating” etc. It’s like reading our thread translated)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?  I am not a meta-data professional, so all I can do is look at the speaker’s rather compelling ‘evidence’.  Curious to know if this analysis is correct?   It is misleading stunts like this though that cause the Harkles to be ridiculed and strongly disliked.  Imo.




She's so good, great sleuthing!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> The tide’s turning? From the Ukrainian FB reaction to the Cut interview:*”Markle is a diagnosis “*, “It’s so easy to spit onto something grand - the faceless scum will get some money by associating” etc. It’s like reading our thread translated)



I snorted out my tea, that's brilliant.


----------



## xincinsin

Aminamina said:


> The tide’s turning? From the Ukrainian FB reaction to the Cut interview:”Markle is a diagnosis “, “It’s so easy to spit onto something grand - the faceless scum will get some money by associating” etc. It’s like reading our thread translated)





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I snorted out my tea, that's brilliant.


Markle is already a verb in the Urban Dictionary. Now she can be a noun too! 
(the sugars added an alternative complimentary meaning  )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe now is the time to stop being a jerk and reign in your a*shole wife, Harry.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Mariah is great. I’m one of her big defenders because I think she got such a rough deal from the press from the start and she’s grown and become an articulate critic of the industry.

I mean the most egregious thing to me is when she left her codependent and abusive relationship with Tommy Motola she got blacklisted and the media tried to play out that doing the best thing for her personally was a bad career move. 

MC gets a lot  of the cultural zeitgeist of casual sexism that still hangs around certain people. She never got the recognition for writing, arranging and performing her own pop hits the way say Elton John, Michael Jackson  or Taylor Swift would.
This bish is loco


mellibelly said:


> Trigger warning: if you want to hear the snippet of MC calling her a diva followed by Maggot’s voiceover explanation of what MC *really* meant click play.



it goes to show how painfully thick M is that the entire concept of her show is supposed to be exploring how labels can be demeaning and yet how nevertheless successful women can construct a complex identity even from misogynistic stereotypes and the moment MC draws an apt comparison in their media personas M freaks out. 

I mean it goes without it saying she wasn’t fangirling Mariah at all she was condescending to her and happily applying all the well worn tripes about MC to her and when  Mariah caught her out on her bull**** she handled it badly lol, 

Also lets be real MC has the talent and the hard work  to back up being demanding and she’s a beautiful proud biracial woman. She’s everything M thinks she is but isn’t.


----------



## Mumotons

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe now is the time to stop being a jerk and reign in your a*shole wife, Harry.



I agree, Harry is a **** if Her Majesty goes in the next few months, I suggest he and the nasty piece of poop he married stay well away from the UK, because the Boos will be recorded and played all across the world.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Mumotons said:


> I agree, Harry is a **** if Her Majesty goes in the next few months, I suggest he and the nasty piece of poop he married stay well away from the UK, because the Boos will be recorded and played all across the world.


If people gathered for the funeral services of such an incredible and amazing woman chose such an occasion to boo her grandson and his wife, it would say a hell of a lot more about them than it would the grandson and his wife.  Truly, that would be the lowest of the low moments.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> If people gathered for the funeral services of such an incredible and amazing woman chose such an occasion to boo her grandson and his wife, it would say a hell of a lot more about them than it would the grandson and his wife.  Truly, that would be the lowest of the low moments.



They won't boo because they randomly dislike them, but because of what they put that very woman through in her last years and months. Which is very appropriate I feel, and I'm not usually a...loud person.


----------



## lanasyogamama

miss_chiff said:


> HarryMarkle website posted a link to a page he created to document #voetsekmeghan Twitter comments that are suspected to be manipulated/removed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #VoetsekMeghan ~The South African Trending Hashtag
> 
> 
> South Africans voiced their outrage at TW insulting them, but then Twitter seemed to silence them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> voetsekmeghan.substack.com


Is #voetsekmeghan racist? Just checking. She’s such a loser.


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> If people gathered for the funeral services of such an incredible and amazing woman chose such an occasion to boo her grandson and his wife, it would say a hell of a lot more about them than it would the grandson and his wife.  Truly, that would be the lowest of the low moments.


I have to disagree. I think it would show their righteous fury against a pair of ingrates. If they kept silent, the troublesome two would think they have the upper hand. They would preen and make it all about them - not that they wouldn't try it anyway. There is no right way to deal with arrogant people who are eternal poseurs and victims. It's going to be lose-lose for everyone if they show up. I think the palace will put them into the 3rd row centre seats to keep trouble to a minimum.

And I believe they would start even more lies about their interaction with TQ the moment she leaves the mortal coil. After all, Hazard has already told bald-faced lies about video-calling her and how he is keeping her safe. They do like to prey on the dead: Diana, Philip, Mandela, assorted graveyards and memorials.


----------



## LizzieBennett

LibbyRuth said:


> If people gathered for the funeral services of such an incredible and amazing woman chose such an occasion to boo her grandson and his wife, it would say a hell of a lot more about them than it would the grandson and his wife.  Truly, that would be the lowest of the low moments.


I agree.   Regardless of anyone’s feelings regarding these H&M, that would be incredibly disrespectful to such an amazing woman and would once again take the focus off of her and her achievements.    I would hope that people could put aside personal feelings to honor HM.  That would truly be the lowest of low moments If not.


----------



## charlottawill

It's always good to start the day with a laugh....


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

xincinsin said:


> I have to disagree. I think it would show their righteous fury against a pair of ingrates. If they kept silent, the troublesome two would think they have the upper hand. They would preen and make it all about them - not that they wouldn't try it anyway. There is no right way to deal with arrogant people who are eternal poseurs and victims. It's going to be lose-lose for everyone if they show up. I think the palace will put them into the 3rd row centre seats to keep trouble to a minimum.
> 
> And I believe they would start even more lies about their interaction with TQ the moment she leaves the mortal coil. After all, Hazard has already told bald-faced lies about video-calling her and how he is keeping her safe. They do like to prey on the dead: Diana, Philip, Mandela, assorted graveyards and memorials.


 
As I see it, anyone who turns out for a funeral service is there to support those who are grieving, and it goes in circles.  The closer an individual is to the deceased, the more people have the job of supporting them. Children are the inner circle, then grandchildren, then cousins/nieces/nephews, friends and devoted staff, etc.  I don't believe that there is anything about the history of Charles, Anne, Andrew, or Edward that would lead them to boo their son / nephew.  Therefore, anyone who did is a circle further out than the Queens grandchildren and therefore is there to support.
Further, booing would make it all about the people booing - which means the people who did it would be engaging in the kind of behavior you're objecting to Harry and Meghan displaying before they ever display it.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> It's always good to start the day with a laugh....



I recognize those teeth!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



Hmm the annoying makeup look - the eyes, devious looking 
She had a similar devious eye look on Oprah 
More black shadow and eyeliner means - WATCH OUT TRUTH BOMBS COMING


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


>



Agree she weaponized the recent podcasts/ articles, golly, what will happen next week in the UK ? They were booed at Jubilee
MM supposedly cleaned out Frogmore Cottage on Jubilee trip, but , they are not really going to London/Windsor anyway, so they may skip FC in favor of 5 star accommodations with smoke detectors
We know QEII is at Balmoral and will see next PM, so, not a lot of room in her agenda to see H&M, who are not going to Scotland anyway.  But, gee whiz, the Queen is not well, they should stick the kids in the extra seats on private plane so they can see Gan-Gan


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> As I see it, anyone who turns out for a funeral service is there to support those who are grieving, and it goes in circles.  The closer an individual is to the deceased, the more people have the job of supporting them. Children are the inner circle, then grandchildren, then cousins/nieces/nephews, friends and devoted staff, etc.  I don't believe that there is anything about the history of Charles, Anne, Andrew, or Edward that would lead them to boo their son / nephew.  Therefore, anyone who did is a circle further out than the Queens grandchildren and therefore is there to support.
> Further, booing would make it all about the people booing - which means the people who did it would be engaging in the kind of behavior you're objecting to Harry and Meghan displaying before they ever display it.


You have a point. The BRF wouldn't engage in any booing, nor would the courtiers or outer circle of relatives and friends. They would be frosty but polite, and very very distant to avoid anything they say being misquoted.

So long as there is no fashion parade or Netflix camera, and Harry doesn't do that fancy footwork that he did at Philip's funeral, people (meaning the public) would ignore them. It would also depend on how many truth bombs and threats they issue from now till the sad day.

I do hope Omid and SS lay off the sweet nods and there is no press release about a meaningful wreath.


----------



## charlottawill

"...that mad Markle woman..."


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think f H&M don’t get on the group bus for The Queen’s funeral, they will find themselves left behind.  Or their very special personal automobile will get rerouted by its highly trained and trusted driver.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Official funeral plans for QE2 include vigils by her four children,  her four grandsons and her four granddaughters.   Historically there have been two Vigils of the Princes, for King George V and for Queen Mother Elizabeth.   I expect everyone will play their part, and it will remain a most solemn and respectful occasion.


----------



## 1LV

Cinderlala said:


> The fact that THE Diva shaded Skeeter for being a diva is HILARIOUS!!!!!!  So, we've finally found the one person who is willing to stand up to her, Mariah Carey.    Great job, MC!!!
> 
> (Admittedly, she did walk it back but it was enough to throw TW off balance & caused her to attempt a rewrite of the narrative after the interview ended.)


_Skeeter_… there it is again!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The compacted version of the new interview…



My favorite part: "This piece was the product of angry sex between cringe and cheesy."


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> Spanish lady said he was her fiancé and had a lunch appointment.
> 
> Could just have been Meghan putting on an accent tho


When just one laughing emoji isn’t enough!


----------



## 1LV

charlottawill said:


> I said a long time ago that ZeeZy and Hilarious had a lot in common, but for that very reason they could never be friends.


Ditto for her and Forty-five.


----------



## Chanbal

*Very little in the way of thoughtfulness is to be expected from a couple who, in March 2021, gave an inflammatory interview to Oprah when Prince Philip was seriously ill in hospital…*

_“She has taken a hardship and turned it into content,” observes the interviewer. It’s phrased like a compliment, but it really isn’t. Everything is content to Meghan, the life of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex now being a wholly-owned subsidiary of Netflix.

*Prince Harry, meanwhile, is increasingly relegated to a sweet bit-part. Think Buttons in Cinderella. Sometimes, Meghan’s husband is glimpsed juggling through a window or he is allowed to say a few lines which burnish the legend of his incredibly modest yet somehow vain and self-obsessed wife*.

What I would find troubling about this interview if I were Prince Charles or Prince William are the hints of emotional manipulation. *Meghan points out, more than once, that nothing constrains her from speaking out *– whether on her new, top-rating podcast, Archetypes, or in the wider media – *about what she considers her dreadful treatment at the hands of the Windsors*. “But it takes a lot of effort to forgive. I’ve really made an active effort, especially knowing that I can say anything,” she says, her voice full of meaning.
*Until now, the Palace has confined itself to the exquisitely lethal “recollections may vary” when responding to Meghan and Harry’s hurtful accusations. How much longer can that Keep ‘Em Sweet strategy go on? It isn’t working.* For all her mushy yogic musings about forgiveness, *the Duchess is a world-class grudge-bearer who has ostracised her own father and now it looks like poor Prince Charles is getting the same treatment*.

*I have been told by a reliable source that Harry is homesick in LA, but can’t own up to the mistakes he’s made for fear of upsetting his wife.*
It looks like the Sussexes won’t see Harry’s father, William and his family or the Queen during their visit to the UK next week. In effect, we have a quasi-Royal tour with the couple now snubbing (or being snubbed by?) the very institution from which they derive their power and celebrity. *It’s bizarre. And damaging to the monarchy.

Clearly, it’s time the Sussexes lost their royal titles whose privileges they enjoy without the accompanying responsibilities and restraints. But who in the Firm will have the courage to take on Meghan and her truth*__?_





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

About being a diva…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> "...that mad Markle woman..."




Geez, the sugars and their low IQ.



But Raptor sat in a journalistic meeting and heard what was said? (not that I believe it was ever said, I just can't with their non-existant logic)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

1LV said:


> _Skeeter_… there it is again!



Where does that come from? I only know Skeeter from The Help


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does that come from? I only know Skeeter from The Help


It's a nickname for mosquito. You know, a parasitic blood-sucker.   

Sometimes in the south it's a nickname for a boy.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does that come from? I only know Skeeter from The Help


Wasn't the gossip hack with poison pen in Harry Potter called Rita Skeeter?


----------



## xincinsin

Let's take a few seconds from our banter to celebrate achieving 7000 pages


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Oh gosh, they are good…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> About being a diva…



I've never been a fan of her but this is good. She referred to OS as ZeeZy's stenographer?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has this been posted?  I am not a meta-data professional, so all I can do is look at the speaker’s rather compelling ‘evidence’.  Curious to know if this analysis is correct?   It is misleading stunts like this though that cause the Harkles to be ridiculed and strongly disliked.  Imo.



That woman is brilliant!

So why did H pretend to go to Africa exactly?


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't the gossip hack with poison pen in Harry Potter called Rita Skeeter?


Yes, although oddly she could turn herself into a beetle not a mosquito.


----------



## papertiger

Mandala's grandson tells it like he finds it 









						Nelson Mandela's grandson tells Meghan Markle to 'pull up her sleeves'
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 41, used a US magazine interview to suggest her marriage to Prince Harry sparked celebrations in South Africa reminiscent of the release of the anti-apartheid leader.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It's a nickname for mosquito. You know, a parasitic blood-sucker.
> 
> Sometimes in the south it's a nickname for a boy.



I think of this song that I remember my father singing when I was a small child. Maybe it will be ZeeZy's song in the near future.


----------



## Toby93

Boy she's had a lot of work done on her face - especially her eyes. 
Edit - Sorry this has been posted already.


----------



## Chanbal

These videos are good…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh, they are good…




The Aussies are relentless. And it is glorious


----------



## CobaltBlu

Apart from all of this; at the heart of it who at Spotify thought _Meghan Talking to Mariah About DIVA-ing_ was good content for a larger audience? I mean, what?  The ambition thing made slightly more sense but only a nano-fraction, but this Diva concept .... who besides a handful of people has to cope with the Diva title and all of its complexity?  Seriously?  I feel like its performance art. A parody perhaps. It really should be a musical.


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does that come from? I only know Skeeter from The Help


It reminded me of a clueless girl I knew in high school who was called Skeeter because she was all arms and legs, and never knew when to shut up.  Always ”buzzing around” and aggravating everyone.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like TW is entertaining many…   

Meghan Markle uses 17th interview this week to complain the media won’t leave her alone​
_Addressing this morning’s first press conference, Prince Harry’s wife complained the media simply will not leave her alone before calling the event to a close because she had a photoshoot scheduled at eleven.

Grabbing a passing reporter by the collar, Markle refused to let him leave until he had listened a a two-hour tearful story about how intrusive the media can be and how she just never gets a moment to herself.

“It was heartbreaking,” reporter Simon Williams told us. “I was watching television last night when she crawled out from behind my sofa and begged me to leave her alone.

“She demanded I take several photographs showing how unhappy she is and immediately mail them to Rolling Stone for a major expose about press harassment.

“I mean, it’s nice to have some copy to file, but I wish she wouldn’t climb up the tree outside my bedroom window and demand I give her some peace and quiet when I’m trying to sleep at 3am.”_










						Meghan Markle uses 17th interview this week to complain the media won't leave her alone
					

"I just wish the media would give me some peace", the royal beauty told the latest in a long line of interviewers.




					newsthump.com


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> About being a diva…



Omg...I laughed so hard at this


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DP


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh, why did I click.


----------



## Toby93

Uh-oh


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



Maybe she gambled that no one would ever be able to trace her starstruck SA actor to verify or disprove her story.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




Colour me surprised. But also, how polite he is.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> Apart from all of this; at the heart of it who at Spotify thought _Meghan Talking to Maria About DIVA-ing_ was good content for a larger audience? I mean, what?  The ambition thing made slightly more sense but only a nano-fraction, but this Diva concept .... who besides a handful of people has to cope with the Diva title and all of its complexity?  Seriously?  I feel like its performance art. A parody perhaps. It really should be a musical.



The reason why she chose to to a podcrash on Diva was because she booked Mariah, not the other way round.

1. Secure celeb
2. Choose theme for content.
3. Talk about ME-AGAIN

I can't even remember what the archetype was for Serena now and it was a nano-second ago


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Colour me surprised. But also, how polite he is.



Makes me seriously wonder about her sanity  

Maybe she had a dream   and just got a little confused


----------



## CobaltBlu

This is interesting, particularly when he talks about Montecito as a prison of their own making. Analysis starts at 7.40 approximately. 
The Hawaiian shirt is a nice touch.  

"victim-themed media products" perfect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Makes me seriously wonder about her sanity



Not for the first time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Random thought: isn't it curious the one time Kensington Palace broke their rule of "Never complain, never explain" to state Raptor didn't make Kate cry has now been exposed as a blatant lie? As in, indeed did she make Kate cry and she has a very unhealthy hatred for a small child?

I wonder whose idea that was. I think Tom Bower gives us an idea telling the tales of a nobody who pushed Jason Knauf to say things he didn't want to say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sly and humble


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> This is interesting, particularly when he talks about Montecito as a prison of their own making. Analysis starts at 7.40 approximately.
> The Hawaiian shirt is a nice touch.
> 
> "victim-themed media products" perfect.




"The more Meghan talks, the better the Royal Family looks"


----------



## Katel

CobaltBlu said:


> This is interesting, particularly when he talks about Montecito as a prison of their own making. Analysis starts at 7.40 approximately.
> The Hawaiian shirt is a nice touch.
> 
> "victim-themed media products" perfect.





papertiger said:


> "The more Meghan talks, the better the Royal Family looks"


“Her viewers are the victims.”


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Uh-oh



He's a gentleman and being polite.  Glad he set the record straight.


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Makes me seriously wonder about her sanity
> 
> Maybe she had a dream   and just got a little confused


It goes back to something I said a long time ago.. The truth is whatever Meghan says it is.  If you don't like it, you are wrong and a racist.  I hope there is a good medication for people with grand delusions, because she really needs it.


----------



## piperdog

Toby93 said:


> Uh-oh



There's an inconvenient truth for Meghan.  It will be interesting to see if there's any follow-up correction in the media that breathlessly (and mindlessly) reported on the article, or this will just be ignored?  

Doesn't he realize that there is ONLY "her truth" and that he should have been honored to be given a place in it?


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Uh-oh



He is being a gentleman, but 'faux pas'?


----------



## Toby93

I see a LOT of traits on this list


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Makes me seriously wonder about her sanity
> 
> *Maybe she had a dream*   and just got a little confused


Don't give her ideas, or she may compare herself to MLKJr on the next podcast.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> "The more Meghan talks, the better the Royal Family looks"


And she may become famous, but not in the sense that she'd expect. 

New dictionaries may add the following entry: Markle is the verb to Markle defined as to ghost or dispose of people once one has no use for them. The term is based on Meghan Markle, a zed-list actress, who discarded people after using them to her own advantage. Ex. John Doe markled his family after securing a hefty loan from his parents.

New medical books and journals may add 'Markle' as a description of Narcissism so that the two terms may eventually become interchangeable. 
Doctor to intern: "We have a new client with the Markle Syndrome."


----------



## Lodpah

Poor MM. I’m sure the sugars will start a GFM. These types of titles will certainly turn people off and make her look vain. So many people struggling trying just to stay afloat. Talk about being out of touch. I think the media right now are trolling them in subtle headlines.









						Meghan Markle on the Struggle of ‘Not Being Able to Afford’ Her $14M Mansion
					

In a new interview, Meghan Markle opens up about how she and Prince Harry were initially not able to afford their $14 million home in Montecito after stepping..




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There was one for their mortgage! It was given up after nobody wanted to donate.


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any guesses? 







						Blind Item #5
					

One of the 40 people who agreed to help the alliterate one in her 40th birthday project was a very very frequent guest of the billionaire pe...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this tina brown piece has been posted already
I would say it's more pro-william than pro-harry
Diana would not have been happy with what has gone down



_Welcome to this special mid-week edition of the Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday._



​

*Tina Brown: lunch with Diana just before she died*

The month before she died, Princess Diana was stuck between two worlds: excited for her post-royal future, while all too aware of being hounded by the press in the present.

On the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death, Tina Brown, author of _The Diana Chronicles_ and _The Palace Papers_—and founding editor in chief of The Daily Beast—recalled a lunch she had with Diana in New York in July 1997 at The Four Seasons, with Anna Wintour.

“Diana was really on top form and in many ways in her stride in a pale green suit with those amazing supermodel legs and incredibly limpid blue eyes,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “She was absolutely stunning in real life, and so much taller than you thought. She talked about two things. She was really excited about starting to do documentaries about her causes, and for that to fund her humanitarian work. In some ways, it was a foreshadow of Harry and Meghan’s plan 25 years ago, with the one major difference that Diana didn’t see any profit in it. She was doing it as a charitable venture.”

Diana, said Brown, also talked about how much she hated August, with sons Harry and William away at Balmoral. She was looking for somewhere to stay. Brown recalled, “I said, ‘Surely everyone wants you to stay with them.’ And she said ‘No, having me to stay means you have the press rummaging around in dustbins and paparazzi helicopters flying overhead. It’s a misery. It’s very hard to have me to stay. This is the reality of my life.’ That struck me as poignant.

Obviously she was lonely, and looking for somewhere safe to be.”

“The reason she with was with Dodi (Fayed, her then-partner) on that boat that summer was, as she said at our lunch, ‘He has all the toys,’ by which she meant he had helicopters, boats, and bodyguards. Going to stay with Dodi meant being safe from all that intrusion, but of course on that awful night the opposite was true.”

Early in the morning of Aug. 31, 1997, Brown recalled she had been woken at her home on Long Island by the news media, delivering news of Diana’s death.

“Like most people, I was stunned. I had seen the images from the night before of Diana arriving in Paris with Dodi in the middle of what looked like a typical glamorous summer holiday. It was inconceivable, unbelievable, that she was dead.”

Diana, said Brown, would be “very unhappy” that her two sons remain estranged. “She never questioned that William would be king. It was her most ardent desire he would become king. She was never anti-monarchy in that regard. She had differences with the royal family—her biggest difference was that her husband wasn’t in love with her, he was in love with someone else. But she never thought for one minute that William would not be the future king, and that Harry would always be there to support him. She would not be happy with how things are.”

People say to Brown that Diana would have been pleased that Harry had walked away from the royals, “but Diana would not have been pleased how Harry had been cut off from the family.”

How would Diana have felt about Meghan Markle? “Diana was very protective of her boys,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “She would have been very, very protective of Harry and I believe very anxious about this direction they’ve taken. I think she would have felt Meghan was steering Harry in a direction that was not good for Harry. I don’t think Diana would have been the great fan of Meghan that Meghan herself might perhaps imagine.”



​

However, Brown thinks Diana would have been “thrilled” when Harry met Meghan, “and that her son was happy. She would have been delighted, supportive and thrilled someone of mixed race was joining the royal family because Diana was so inclusive.

“It’s very difficult to know how fragile Harry would have been if his mother hadn’t died. He was obviously utterly traumatized by her death. But the Spencers are a fairly turbulent family. Other members of that family, including Diana herself, have not been without their fragilities and neuroses. Harry may have inherited that Spencer turbulence. It’s always about drama in the Spencer family. With Harry, it could just be the genes speaking.”

Brown believes that, had Diana lived, she would have become an even bigger global celebrity and humanitarian powerhouse.

“She kept Kensington Palace as her base. Unlike Harry and Meghan she understood having the power base of monarchy was enormously important. Today, I believe she would have had billions of followers on Instagram, and used that to the max. By now, her charitable foundation would have been as big as Bill Gates’. She began that global humanitarian celebrity outreach that we went on to see with the Clooneys and Bono. She’s a real forerunner of that. It’s very tragic to know that didn’t happen.”

Her influence on the monarchy remains intense.

“The scorched earth left by Diana still smolders,” Brown said. “For the first ten years after her death, the royals were still destabilized by the catastrophes surrounding Diana—from her divorce, the damage to Charles, the car crash, the effect on the boys. The rise of Kate (Middleton) and William have done a great deal to reduce that dark dust, and decrease the Diana decibel.



​

“But with what Harry and Meghan have said and done, the next season of _The Crown_ (which will focus on events leading up to and after Diana’s death) and Harry’s memoir will resurface a particular agony for Charles. The queen was re-stabilized after the death of Diana, whereas Charles has continually battled to end those ghosts. The rehabilitation of Camilla’s image has been utterly successful, but she lives in dread of Harry’s book. In some ways, Diana’s ghost still rattles at the gate.”

How the royal family does or not mark Diana’s death is in William and Harry’s hands, said Brown. Both have said that while they don’t want to forget their mother and her significance, they want to move on from all the talk of her death, and the “endless reopening of old wounds, the way she died, and the agony of it all,” as Brown put it. “In terms of the wider monarchy, for Charles it is his ex-wife. This is not going to be considered the kind of anniversary they mark. They see it more now as a private issue.”

For Brown, the crash that killed Diana was no conspiracy, but the result of “a drunk driver, and had Diana worn a seatbelt I think she would have been alive today. There was no police driver alongside them. And they were being chased by the paparazzi. It was a terrible accident. I don’t think there was anything criminal about it.”

Why does Diana still endure as such a resonant icon? “Diana’s life was cut short at a moment she was at the prime of her beauty,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “We met her first at a blushing teenager. We followed her life. She shared her vulnerability with us. There are elements of the classic fairytale about her life, and her story will go on being told again and again.” 

_—Tim Teeman_

*Harry’s feud with William extends to claiming mom’s legacy*

Of all the images associated with Princess Diana’s death, the most haunting remains the sight of her two children, William, then 15, and Harry, 12, walking solemnly behind her coffin.

While the world may have wanted to believe that their mother’s death would bind them together forever, there is little denying that, on the 25th anniversary of her death, the brothers’ naked contempt for each other is now so intense that it would pain any parent.

Some might therefore say, given that context, that it is odd how Harry, in particular, has sought to regularly invoke his mother’s legacy as justification for the way he and Meghan Markle left the royal family—and even claimed he is in receipt of otherworldly spirit guidance and assistance from her.

Harry has made no secret of the fact that being made to participate in that very public way in the funeral remains a major source of his resentment against his family. He previously said that walking behind her coffin aged 12 was something no child “should be asked to do,” and once again revived the trauma of that day in his AppleTV show about mental health, _The Me You Can’t See_.



​

“For me the thing I remember the most was the sound of the horses’ hooves going along the Mall,” Harry told his co-host Oprah Winfrey.

“It was like I was outside of my body and just walking along doing what was expected of me. (I was) showing one-tenth of the emotion that everybody else was showing: This was my mum—you never even met her.”

He has also claimed that his mother would have approved of his exit from the royal family and subsequent media interviews, telling Winfrey: “I’ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”

Harry also told Winfrey that he believed his mother had left him a large amount of money because she could foresee that he would one day need it to escape royal life.

He said: “I've got what my mum left me, and, without that, we would not have been able to do this… So, you know, touching back on what you asked me, what my mum would think of this, I think she saw it coming. And I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process.”

In an interview with James Corden, Harry added: “I have no doubt my mum would be incredibly proud of me, living the life she wanted for herself. I know she’s incredibly proud of me... she has helped me get here. I have never felt her presence more than in the past year. I wish she could have met Meghan, I wish she was around for Archie.”

Earlier this year Harry told Hoda Kotb: “It is almost as though she has done her bit with my brother [Prince William], and now she is very much helping me… and now she is helping me set up. He’s got his kids and I’ve got my kids. The circumstances are obviously different, but I feel her presence in almost everything that I do now, but definitely more so in the last two years than ever before, without question.” 

_—Tom Sykes_

*French medic recalls his “last moments” with Diana*

Dr. Frederic Mailliez, the French doctor who tried to help Diana as she lay critically injured in the moments after the crash, has recalled that night in a new interview with the Associated Press.

“I realize my name will always be attached to this tragic night,” Mailliez, who was on his way home from a party, told the AP. “I feel a little bit responsible for her last moments.”

“I walked toward the wreckage. I opened the door, and I looked inside,” he recalled, seeing “four people, two of them were apparently dead, no reaction, no breathing, and the two others, on the right side, were living but in severe condition. The front passenger was screaming, he was breathing. He could wait a few minutes. And the female passenger, the young lady, was on her knees on the floor of the Mercedes, she had her head down. She had difficulty to breathe. She needed quick assistance.”

“She was unconscious,” he continued. “Thanks to my respiratory bag (...) she regained a little bit more energy, but she couldn’t say anything.”

“I know it’s surprising, but I didn’t recognize Princess Diana,” Mailliez told the AP. “I was in the car on the rear seat giving assistance. I realized she was very beautiful, but my attention was so focused on what I had to do to save her life, I didn’t have time to think, who was this woman. Someone behind me told me the victims spoke English, so I began to speak English, saying I was a doctor and I called the ambulance,” he said. “I tried to comfort her.”

The emergency services soon arrived, and Diana was taken to hospital.

“It was a massive shock to learn that she was Princess Diana, and that she died,” Mailliez said. He asked himself: “Did I do everything I could to save her? Did I do correctly my job?... I checked with my medical professors and I checked with police investigators,” he added. All agreed he had done all he could.


 


Advertisement









​

​



 






*What if she had lived?*

Imagine: What would Princess Diana be doing now, at the age of 61?
She would be in her prime, serving the world wherever she could, probably at this moment in Ukraine, helping war-orphaned children.

She would have 500 million followers on Instagram. Her fan base would range from boomers to Gen Z.

She was the first truly global celebrity and, had she lived, she would be far more mature about how to handle that level of celebrity, how to leverage her singular human qualities of connection and hope into programs that delivered.





The unhappy mess of her marriage to Charles would be ancient and boring history, her escape from the toxic orbit of the Windsors complete, and Harry and William would never have fallen out, for want of a mother’s guidance and love. The parental bond was too strong.

Oddly enough, Queen Elizabeth would likely have found it easier to deal with Diana alive than with her ghost, a constant ethereal presence offering a lens through which the family never looks good, and with whom there is no mediation. Diana’s spectacular personality had no equal and the monarch’s strength has always been in not being spectacular. They would have come to terms, each holding their own very different territory, and the queen’s family would have fallen into line – except, perhaps, Charles, who is never happy being eclipsed.

Yes, it is imaginary. But this trajectory has an origin story that is not.

Diana had three months to live when Tony Blair, then Britain’s new prime minister, realized her extraordinary public popularity and decided to enlist her in his ambitious plans to modernize the country.

Blair’s “new” Labour Party swept to power on May 1, 1997, with a landslide victory. A few weeks later, he invited Diana and her sons to Chequers, the prime minister’s official country retreat, to explore what part she might play in promoting his ideas.



​

Sooner than many people, Blair and his spinmeister, Alastair Campbell had grasped an essential point about Diana’s power (and value to them): She had become a one-person third force to the British people, a focus for the aspirations and hopes of millions who felt that neither the political class nor the monarchy were able to know and inspire the best of the country’s qualities.

The meeting went well. Diana offered her ideas in a series of letters that followed. Campbell noted later in his diary that Diana would be a real asset, “a big part of ‘New Britain.’”

When Blair got word from Paris of Diana’s death he presciently told Campbell: “People will be in a state of real shock. There will be grief that you would not get for anyone else. If the Queen died there would be huge sadness and respect but this will lead to an outpouring of grief. This will confirm her as a real icon.”

You can see just how true that was in the last minutes of the new HBO documentary, _The Princess_.

It was the loss of an irreplaceable national asset. Unlike the Windsors, Diana’s ancestry was deeply British. The Spencers could be traced back to 1478 and were intertwined with the Churchills. People sensed that quality in her. It was authentic, and not in any sense the xenophobic Little England dementia that led to Brexit.

Had she lived, she would surely have been a powerful voice against Brexit— possibly even a decisive one. As she showed with her campaign to clear land mines in former war zones that were killing and maiming children, she was global in her concerns and her activism.

In fact, by now she would have been long established as one of those rare people who transcends nationality to become a true citizen of the world, like Nelson Mandela—they met just months before she died and the rapport was instantaneous. 

_—Clive Irving_

*The main players, 25 years on*

*Princes William and Harry*: The grief-stricken brothers of 1997 remain, as adults, locked in a long-running feud. Both sought to channel their mother’s legacy in their own ways, even if Harry has been the more explicit of the two (see above). While Harry has become more voluble about his mother in recent years, William has gone in the opposite direction, and only speaks about his mother occasionally and in a circumspect manner. William has definitively joined the establishment but his mother would not disapprove; she was, ultimately, a monarchist and very much wanted him to be king (just with Harry by his side).

*Prince Charles*: Diana’s ex-husband’s popularity has slowly recovered after the PR disaster of the Diana years. It could be argued that the death of his first wife probably enabled him to marry Camilla. Even if a wedding had eventually happened, it’s certainly hard to imagine the queen naming Camilla a future queen if she had survived. The next series of _The Crown_, featuring the end of his and Diana’s marriage and her death, and Harry’s memoir may yet spell more agony for him.





*Queen Elizabeth*: It is often casually written that the queen has never put a foot wrong in her long reign, but, at the risk of facing treason charges, it has to be acknowledged that she handled the death of Diana abysmally; so abysmally, in fact, that for a few days it seemed possible the monarchy could actually fall. In the end, however, she came good, and her live speech, after a week of chaos remains a masterclass in ship-steadying.

It began: “Since last Sunday's dreadful news we have seen, throughout Britain and around the world, an overwhelming expression of sadness at Diana’s death. We have all been trying in our different ways to cope. It is not easy to express a sense of loss, since the initial shock is often succeeded by a mixture of other feelings: disbelief, incomprehension, anger - and concern for those who remain...”

Since then, Queen Elizabeth has battled through multiple family crises, and despite health concerns of her own, emphatically stole the show at her own Platinum Jubilee in June. Today, on the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death, the queen stole the headlines, with the confirmation announcement that—due to her own health concerns—she will appoint Britain’s new Prime Minister next week at Balmoral.

*Earl Spencer*: Charles Spencer, Diana’s younger brother, delivered a memorable funeral eulogy which tore into the royal establishment and declared her “the most hunted person of the modern age” and pledged he and her “blood family” would protect William and Harry. Spencer lives on and manages the Althorp estate, the Spencers’ ancestral seat in Northamptonshire, where Diana is buried. He has seven children, including one, Lady Charlotte Diana, by his third wife, Karen, whom he married in 2011.

*Hasnat Khan*: Diana dated the heart surgeon Hasnat Khan for two years and nicknamed him “Mr Wonderful.” He now lives in Essex, England, and, according to the _Daily Mail_, does humanitarian work in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia and Pakistan. The seriousness of their relationship is evidenced by the fact that Diana secretly met his family. According to her friend Jemima Khan’s 2013 _Vanity Fair _article this was “to discuss the possibility of marriage.”

*Trevor Rees-Jones*: The only survivor of the car crash that killed Diana, Trevor Rees-Jones, now known as Trevor Rees spent weeks in a coma and had every bone in his face broken by the crash. Rees, 54, was recently photographed by British tabloid the _Sun_ waiting for his family (he has a wife and two children) in Shropshire, England, as they did their shopping.

As The Daily Beast reported, scars are still visible on his face.

He reportedly “earned a fortune as security director” for oil firm Halliburton, and is now head of security for drug company AstraZeneca, the _Sun_ says.

A source was quoted by the _Sun_ as saying: “Trevor is living a peaceful life. The enormity of what happened that night is still with him and the scars are visible. His life is quiet and uneventful now. He certainly doesn’t court publicity or speak much about it. He’s tried to move on and get on with his life.”

*Mohamed Al-Fayed: *the Egyptian-born father of Diana’s last boyfriend, Dodi, who was also killed in the Paris car crash, still lives at his estate in Oxted, Surrey, where Dodi’s remains are interred in a private mausoleum. He is 93. He spent many years after Diana’s death accusing the Duke of Edinburgh and the British security services of having orchestrated the crash that killed his son and Diana, saying they could not accept Diana marrying a Muslim. He has four other children with his Finnish wife Heini Wathén, whom he married in 1985, some of whom are said to be feuding over his estimated $1billion+ fortune.





*Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes*: Lady Jane and Lady Sarah both flew to Paris with Charles to escort Diana’s body home, but Diana’s sisters have maintained a much lower profile than their brother since Diana’s death. Lady Sarah, who once dated Charles, and her husband Neil have three children and live a quiet, rural existence exemplified by the fact that she became the first female master of the Belvoir Hunt in May 2010. Lady Jane is married to Robert Fellowes, a former private secretary to the queen. She read the lesson at Harry’s wedding.

*James Hewitt*: The playwright Jon Conway who collaborated with Hewitt—who had an affair with Diana—to write Conway’s play _Truth Lies Diana _told The Daily Beast: “James is living a frugal, but peaceful and quiet life in Exeter with his very aged mother. He remains unfairly castigated by most of the very media who printed their own untruths and made fortunes out of him, but derided him for the one occasion he tried to tell his own story. James has never published the letters he was accused of peddling and never publicly told his version of what actually happened. How he could have done with that kind of money now!

“Having suffered two major illnesses over recent years, when I last spoke to him in June this year he just wants to stay out of the media spotlight and not stir up any controversy. In Harry’s upcoming ‘tell-all’ book, it will be interesting if he pays thanks to the man who helped raise him and his older brother. For many years in their young lives, the princes often saw more of James than they did of Charles.

“I got to know James quite well over a couple of years. It is clear how his gracious charm would have captivated Diana and that they made each other happy for many years is certainly true. Few relationships end well, but James has paid a huge price.

“Probably what hurt him most was that as a third generation soldier in his family, he was drummed out of the service. As my play _Truth Lies Diana_ quoted, his commanding officer told him, ‘Charles is your brother officer. It is an outrage to have an affair with the wife of another officer.’

“James’ pithy and cavalier reply was: ‘Perhaps you should tell Charles that too, as he is shagging his brother officer Parker Bowles’ wife!‘” 

_—Tom Sykes_

*Diana, Princess of Wales, NOT The Princess of Wales*

In 1997, when Princess Diana died, I was working at the London newspaper the _Evening Standard_ (Tom Sykes writes). It was my first job, and I clearly remember my amazement that among the most intense “bollockings” that journalists were receiving in those bizarre days (made even more bizarre for us, as our office was on Kensington High Street, a few hundred yards from Kensington Palace) were about what they called Diana in the paper.

The royals have so many different names and nicknames that you can often happily revolve between three or four of them before you hit what is known in journalistic circles as the “knobbly monster” moment. A “knobbly monster” is tabloid newsroom slang for that tricky fourth or fifth reference in copy to your subject, when you’ve already used the obvious words for it, and you end up calling, for example, a large vegetable something daft like a knobbly monster.

The problem was that people kept referring to her as “The Princess of Wales” (her title when she was married to Charles) rather than “Diana, Princess of Wales”, the new style invented for her after her divorce, when she had been stripped of her HRH, a move which the queen was said to have considered ill-advised, but that Charles apparently insisted on. William is reported to have told his mother: “Don’t worry, Mummy, I will give it back to you one day when I am king.”





There was even a short-lived notion of posthumously restoring her HRH: Buckingham Palace were said to have consulted the Spencer family on the issue on the Royal Train which conveyed the Spencers, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry to Northamptonshire for the Princess’s burial service.
The Spencers, apparently, declined the offer.

_Evening Standard_ editor Max Hastings was adamant that we refer to her correctly as Diana, Princess of Wales.

“If we can’t get her name right, why should the readers trust us about anything else?” he would fume, as he flung down yet another copy of the newspaper on the newsdesk with the offending phrase, “The Princess of Wales” circled in blue felt tip pen and an unlucky reporter (often me) preparing to feel his wrath.
It seemed such a trifling matter in the context of what was going on.

It was only years later that I truly understood the real point of her new name; the palace downgraded her title to try and make her less influential, powerful and important.

It didn’t work.





Twenty-five years later, the effort to obscure the memory of her influence is still ongoing. Witness, for example, Prince William’s demand that the BBC _Panorama_ interview with her never be shown again (to which the BBC has shamefully agreed) on the basis of his objections over Martin Bashir’s trickery, or the fact that there is no official commemoration of her death today in the U.K.

The royal establishment is still doing everything it can to airbrush her out of history—and still failing to achieve it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sly and humble




Just went to the supermarket. The Sun has a better headline 

Couldn't see all of it because someone's head was in the way but H&M pic under *something* "*...Delusional"*


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if alternates with the beagle for the pillow…  

*The Strange Way Meghan And Harry Work Together In Their Home*

_"During an interview with The Cut, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, revealed that *they work from the same home office at their California home — and even sit side-by-side at one large desk*. "'Most people that I know and many of my family, they aren't able to work and live together,'" *Harry said*, per Newsweek. "'It's actually really weird because it'd seem like a lot of pressure. *But it just feels natural and normal*.'"_









						The Strange Way Meghan And Harry Work Together In Their Home - The List
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a life for themselves in sunny California. It turns out the royals have an interesting work-from-home setup.




					www.thelist.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if alternates with the beagle for the pillow…
> 
> *The Strange Way Meghan And Harry Work Together In Their Home*
> 
> _"During an interview with The Cut, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, revealed that *they work from the same home office at their California home — and even sit side-by-side at one large desk*. "'Most people that I know and many of my family, they aren't able to work and live together,'" *Harry said*, per Newsweek. "'It's actually really weird because it'd seem like a lot of pressure. *But it just feels natural and normal*.'"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Strange Way Meghan And Harry Work Together In Their Home - The List
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have made a life for themselves in sunny California. It turns out the royals have an interesting work-from-home setup.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5601206


what BS


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Everything is a dig to you, honey.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Doctor to intern: "We have a new client with the Markle Syndrome."


Intern to Doctor: "She's filling-in the paperwork, and asking why there's only a title box for Mr. Mz and Mrs. and Duchess, Princess and Countess are missing, 
Doctor to Intern: "Which one does she want to add?
Intern to Doctor: "All of them"


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Everything is a dig to you, honey.
> 
> View attachment 5601211


DIVA was the keyword for the show, it was AMBITION with Serena 
How could MM be so silly to think her guest would not point the DIVA finger at her?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> DIVA was the keyword for the show, it was AMBITION with Serena
> How could MM be so silly to think her guest would not point the DIVA finger at her?



I mean...is it the silliest thing she has done? But yes, I find her reaction worrisome and not normal.


----------



## CobaltBlu

marietouchet said:


> DIVA was the keyword for the show, it was AMBITION with Serena
> How could MM be so silly to think her guest would not point the DIVA finger at her?


This.  It was bound to come up. She is really tone-deaf. LOL @ DIVA Finger.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> DIVA was the keyword for the show, it was AMBITION with Serena
> How could MM be so silly to think her guest would not point the DIVA finger at her?


by talking about it, she is trying to get more mileage out of the podcast....constant self-promotion


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> DIVA was the keyword for the show, it was AMBITION with Serena
> How could MM be so silly to think her guest would not point the DIVA finger at her?



How is 'ambition' an archetype????  !!!!


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> This.  It was bound to come up. She is really tone-deaf. LOL @ DIVA Finger.



 _This _is a diva

and singing to another (goddess) no less


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Just went to the supermarket. The Sun has a better headline
> 
> Couldn't see all of it because someone's head was in the way but H&M pic under *something* "*...Delusional"*



Quoting myself - just because I can 

Here you go:


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I would say it's more pro-william than pro-harry
> Diana would not have been happy with what has gone down
> ​
> ​
> 
> _Welcome to this special mid-week edition of the Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday._
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> *Tina Brown: lunch with Diana just before she died*
> 
> The month before she died, Princess Diana was stuck between two worlds: excited for her post-royal future, while all too aware of being hounded by the press in the present.
> 
> On the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death, Tina Brown, author of _The Diana Chronicles_ and _The Palace Papers_—and founding editor in chief of The Daily Beast—recalled a lunch she had with Diana in New York in July 1997 at The Four Seasons, with Anna Wintour.
> 
> “Diana was really on top form and in many ways in her stride in a pale green suit with those amazing supermodel legs and incredibly limpid blue eyes,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “She was absolutely stunning in real life, and so much taller than you thought. She talked about two things. She was really excited about starting to do documentaries about her causes, and for that to fund her humanitarian work. In some ways, it was a foreshadow of Harry and Meghan’s plan 25 years ago, with the one major difference that Diana didn’t see any profit in it. She was doing it as a charitable venture.”
> 
> Diana, said Brown, also talked about how much she hated August, with sons Harry and William away at Balmoral. She was looking for somewhere to stay. Brown recalled, “I said, ‘Surely everyone wants you to stay with them.’ And she said ‘No, having me to stay means you have the press rummaging around in dustbins and paparazzi helicopters flying overhead. It’s a misery. It’s very hard to have me to stay. This is the reality of my life.’ That struck me as poignant.
> 
> Obviously she was lonely, and looking for somewhere safe to be.”
> 
> “The reason she with was with Dodi (Fayed, her then-partner) on that boat that summer was, as she said at our lunch, ‘He has all the toys,’ by which she meant he had helicopters, boats, and bodyguards. Going to stay with Dodi meant being safe from all that intrusion, but of course on that awful night the opposite was true.”
> 
> Early in the morning of Aug. 31, 1997, Brown recalled she had been woken at her home on Long Island by the news media, delivering news of Diana’s death.
> 
> “Like most people, I was stunned. I had seen the images from the night before of Diana arriving in Paris with Dodi in the middle of what looked like a typical glamorous summer holiday. It was inconceivable, unbelievable, that she was dead.”
> 
> Diana, said Brown, would be “very unhappy” that her two sons remain estranged. “She never questioned that William would be king. It was her most ardent desire he would become king. She was never anti-monarchy in that regard. She had differences with the royal family—her biggest difference was that her husband wasn’t in love with her, he was in love with someone else. But she never thought for one minute that William would not be the future king, and that Harry would always be there to support him. She would not be happy with how things are.”
> 
> People say to Brown that Diana would have been pleased that Harry had walked away from the royals, “but Diana would not have been pleased how Harry had been cut off from the family.”
> 
> How would Diana have felt about Meghan Markle? “Diana was very protective of her boys,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “She would have been very, very protective of Harry and I believe very anxious about this direction they’ve taken. I think she would have felt Meghan was steering Harry in a direction that was not good for Harry. I don’t think Diana would have been the great fan of Meghan that Meghan herself might perhaps imagine.”
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> However, Brown thinks Diana would have been “thrilled” when Harry met Meghan, “and that her son was happy. She would have been delighted, supportive and thrilled someone of mixed race was joining the royal family because Diana was so inclusive.
> 
> “It’s very difficult to know how fragile Harry would have been if his mother hadn’t died. He was obviously utterly traumatized by her death. But the Spencers are a fairly turbulent family. Other members of that family, including Diana herself, have not been without their fragilities and neuroses. Harry may have inherited that Spencer turbulence. It’s always about drama in the Spencer family. With Harry, it could just be the genes speaking.”
> 
> Brown believes that, had Diana lived, she would have become an even bigger global celebrity and humanitarian powerhouse.
> 
> “She kept Kensington Palace as her base. Unlike Harry and Meghan she understood having the power base of monarchy was enormously important. Today, I believe she would have had billions of followers on Instagram, and used that to the max. By now, her charitable foundation would have been as big as Bill Gates’. She began that global humanitarian celebrity outreach that we went on to see with the Clooneys and Bono. She’s a real forerunner of that. It’s very tragic to know that didn’t happen.”
> 
> Her influence on the monarchy remains intense.
> 
> “The scorched earth left by Diana still smolders,” Brown said. “For the first ten years after her death, the royals were still destabilized by the catastrophes surrounding Diana—from her divorce, the damage to Charles, the car crash, the effect on the boys. The rise of Kate (Middleton) and William have done a great deal to reduce that dark dust, and decrease the Diana decibel.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> “But with what Harry and Meghan have said and done, the next season of _The Crown_ (which will focus on events leading up to and after Diana’s death) and Harry’s memoir will resurface a particular agony for Charles. The queen was re-stabilized after the death of Diana, whereas Charles has continually battled to end those ghosts. The rehabilitation of Camilla’s image has been utterly successful, but she lives in dread of Harry’s book. In some ways, Diana’s ghost still rattles at the gate.”
> 
> How the royal family does or not mark Diana’s death is in William and Harry’s hands, said Brown. Both have said that while they don’t want to forget their mother and her significance, they want to move on from all the talk of her death, and the “endless reopening of old wounds, the way she died, and the agony of it all,” as Brown put it. “In terms of the wider monarchy, for Charles it is his ex-wife. This is not going to be considered the kind of anniversary they mark. They see it more now as a private issue.”
> 
> For Brown, the crash that killed Diana was no conspiracy, but the result of “a drunk driver, and had Diana worn a seatbelt I think she would have been alive today. There was no police driver alongside them. And they were being chased by the paparazzi. It was a terrible accident. I don’t think there was anything criminal about it.”
> 
> Why does Diana still endure as such a resonant icon? “Diana’s life was cut short at a moment she was at the prime of her beauty,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “We met her first at a blushing teenager. We followed her life. She shared her vulnerability with us. There are elements of the classic fairytale about her life, and her story will go on being told again and again.”
> 
> _—Tim Teeman_
> 
> *Harry’s feud with William extends to claiming mom’s legacy*
> 
> Of all the images associated with Princess Diana’s death, the most haunting remains the sight of her two children, William, then 15, and Harry, 12, walking solemnly behind her coffin.
> 
> While the world may have wanted to believe that their mother’s death would bind them together forever, there is little denying that, on the 25th anniversary of her death, the brothers’ naked contempt for each other is now so intense that it would pain any parent.
> 
> Some might therefore say, given that context, that it is odd how Harry, in particular, has sought to regularly invoke his mother’s legacy as justification for the way he and Meghan Markle left the royal family—and even claimed he is in receipt of otherworldly spirit guidance and assistance from her.
> 
> Harry has made no secret of the fact that being made to participate in that very public way in the funeral remains a major source of his resentment against his family. He previously said that walking behind her coffin aged 12 was something no child “should be asked to do,” and once again revived the trauma of that day in his AppleTV show about mental health, _The Me You Can’t See_.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> “For me the thing I remember the most was the sound of the horses’ hooves going along the Mall,” Harry told his co-host Oprah Winfrey.
> 
> “It was like I was outside of my body and just walking along doing what was expected of me. (I was) showing one-tenth of the emotion that everybody else was showing: This was my mum—you never even met her.”
> 
> He has also claimed that his mother would have approved of his exit from the royal family and subsequent media interviews, telling Winfrey: “I’ve got a hell of a lot of my mum in me. The only way to free yourself and break out is to tell the truth.”
> 
> Harry also told Winfrey that he believed his mother had left him a large amount of money because she could foresee that he would one day need it to escape royal life.
> 
> He said: “I've got what my mum left me, and, without that, we would not have been able to do this… So, you know, touching back on what you asked me, what my mum would think of this, I think she saw it coming. And I certainly felt her presence throughout this whole process.”
> 
> In an interview with James Corden, Harry added: “I have no doubt my mum would be incredibly proud of me, living the life she wanted for herself. I know she’s incredibly proud of me... she has helped me get here. I have never felt her presence more than in the past year. I wish she could have met Meghan, I wish she was around for Archie.”
> 
> Earlier this year Harry told Hoda Kotb: “It is almost as though she has done her bit with my brother [Prince William], and now she is very much helping me… and now she is helping me set up. He’s got his kids and I’ve got my kids. The circumstances are obviously different, but I feel her presence in almost everything that I do now, but definitely more so in the last two years than ever before, without question.”
> 
> _—Tom Sykes_
> 
> *French medic recalls his “last moments” with Diana*
> 
> Dr. Frederic Mailliez, the French doctor who tried to help Diana as she lay critically injured in the moments after the crash, has recalled that night in a new interview with the Associated Press.
> 
> “I realize my name will always be attached to this tragic night,” Mailliez, who was on his way home from a party, told the AP. “I feel a little bit responsible for her last moments.”
> 
> “I walked toward the wreckage. I opened the door, and I looked inside,” he recalled, seeing “four people, two of them were apparently dead, no reaction, no breathing, and the two others, on the right side, were living but in severe condition. The front passenger was screaming, he was breathing. He could wait a few minutes. And the female passenger, the young lady, was on her knees on the floor of the Mercedes, she had her head down. She had difficulty to breathe. She needed quick assistance.”
> 
> “She was unconscious,” he continued. “Thanks to my respiratory bag (...) she regained a little bit more energy, but she couldn’t say anything.”
> 
> “I know it’s surprising, but I didn’t recognize Princess Diana,” Mailliez told the AP. “I was in the car on the rear seat giving assistance. I realized she was very beautiful, but my attention was so focused on what I had to do to save her life, I didn’t have time to think, who was this woman. Someone behind me told me the victims spoke English, so I began to speak English, saying I was a doctor and I called the ambulance,” he said. “I tried to comfort her.”
> 
> The emergency services soon arrived, and Diana was taken to hospital.
> 
> “It was a massive shock to learn that she was Princess Diana, and that she died,” Mailliez said. He asked himself: “Did I do everything I could to save her? Did I do correctly my job?... I checked with my medical professors and I checked with police investigators,” he added. All agreed he had done all he could.
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> Advertisement
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> *What if she had lived?*
> 
> Imagine: What would Princess Diana be doing now, at the age of 61?
> She would be in her prime, serving the world wherever she could, probably at this moment in Ukraine, helping war-orphaned children.
> 
> She would have 500 million followers on Instagram. Her fan base would range from boomers to Gen Z.
> 
> She was the first truly global celebrity and, had she lived, she would be far more mature about how to handle that level of celebrity, how to leverage her singular human qualities of connection and hope into programs that delivered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The unhappy mess of her marriage to Charles would be ancient and boring history, her escape from the toxic orbit of the Windsors complete, and Harry and William would never have fallen out, for want of a mother’s guidance and love. The parental bond was too strong.
> 
> Oddly enough, Queen Elizabeth would likely have found it easier to deal with Diana alive than with her ghost, a constant ethereal presence offering a lens through which the family never looks good, and with whom there is no mediation. Diana’s spectacular personality had no equal and the monarch’s strength has always been in not being spectacular. They would have come to terms, each holding their own very different territory, and the queen’s family would have fallen into line – except, perhaps, Charles, who is never happy being eclipsed.
> 
> Yes, it is imaginary. But this trajectory has an origin story that is not.
> 
> Diana had three months to live when Tony Blair, then Britain’s new prime minister, realized her extraordinary public popularity and decided to enlist her in his ambitious plans to modernize the country.
> 
> Blair’s “new” Labour Party swept to power on May 1, 1997, with a landslide victory. A few weeks later, he invited Diana and her sons to Chequers, the prime minister’s official country retreat, to explore what part she might play in promoting his ideas.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> 
> Sooner than many people, Blair and his spinmeister, Alastair Campbell had grasped an essential point about Diana’s power (and value to them): She had become a one-person third force to the British people, a focus for the aspirations and hopes of millions who felt that neither the political class nor the monarchy were able to know and inspire the best of the country’s qualities.
> 
> The meeting went well. Diana offered her ideas in a series of letters that followed. Campbell noted later in his diary that Diana would be a real asset, “a big part of ‘New Britain.’”
> 
> When Blair got word from Paris of Diana’s death he presciently told Campbell: “People will be in a state of real shock. There will be grief that you would not get for anyone else. If the Queen died there would be huge sadness and respect but this will lead to an outpouring of grief. This will confirm her as a real icon.”
> 
> You can see just how true that was in the last minutes of the new HBO documentary, _The Princess_.
> 
> It was the loss of an irreplaceable national asset. Unlike the Windsors, Diana’s ancestry was deeply British. The Spencers could be traced back to 1478 and were intertwined with the Churchills. People sensed that quality in her. It was authentic, and not in any sense the xenophobic Little England dementia that led to Brexit.
> 
> Had she lived, she would surely have been a powerful voice against Brexit— possibly even a decisive one. As she showed with her campaign to clear land mines in former war zones that were killing and maiming children, she was global in her concerns and her activism.
> 
> In fact, by now she would have been long established as one of those rare people who transcends nationality to become a true citizen of the world, like Nelson Mandela—they met just months before she died and the rapport was instantaneous.
> 
> _—Clive Irving_
> 
> *The main players, 25 years on*
> 
> *Princes William and Harry*: The grief-stricken brothers of 1997 remain, as adults, locked in a long-running feud. Both sought to channel their mother’s legacy in their own ways, even if Harry has been the more explicit of the two (see above). While Harry has become more voluble about his mother in recent years, William has gone in the opposite direction, and only speaks about his mother occasionally and in a circumspect manner. William has definitively joined the establishment but his mother would not disapprove; she was, ultimately, a monarchist and very much wanted him to be king (just with Harry by his side).
> 
> *Prince Charles*: Diana’s ex-husband’s popularity has slowly recovered after the PR disaster of the Diana years. It could be argued that the death of his first wife probably enabled him to marry Camilla. Even if a wedding had eventually happened, it’s certainly hard to imagine the queen naming Camilla a future queen if she had survived. The next series of _The Crown_, featuring the end of his and Diana’s marriage and her death, and Harry’s memoir may yet spell more agony for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Queen Elizabeth*: It is often casually written that the queen has never put a foot wrong in her long reign, but, at the risk of facing treason charges, it has to be acknowledged that she handled the death of Diana abysmally; so abysmally, in fact, that for a few days it seemed possible the monarchy could actually fall. In the end, however, she came good, and her live speech, after a week of chaos remains a masterclass in ship-steadying.
> 
> It began: “Since last Sunday's dreadful news we have seen, throughout Britain and around the world, an overwhelming expression of sadness at Diana’s death. We have all been trying in our different ways to cope. It is not easy to express a sense of loss, since the initial shock is often succeeded by a mixture of other feelings: disbelief, incomprehension, anger - and concern for those who remain...”
> 
> Since then, Queen Elizabeth has battled through multiple family crises, and despite health concerns of her own, emphatically stole the show at her own Platinum Jubilee in June. Today, on the 25th anniversary of Diana’s death, the queen stole the headlines, with the confirmation announcement that—due to her own health concerns—she will appoint Britain’s new Prime Minister next week at Balmoral.
> 
> *Earl Spencer*: Charles Spencer, Diana’s younger brother, delivered a memorable funeral eulogy which tore into the royal establishment and declared her “the most hunted person of the modern age” and pledged he and her “blood family” would protect William and Harry. Spencer lives on and manages the Althorp estate, the Spencers’ ancestral seat in Northamptonshire, where Diana is buried. He has seven children, including one, Lady Charlotte Diana, by his third wife, Karen, whom he married in 2011.
> 
> *Hasnat Khan*: Diana dated the heart surgeon Hasnat Khan for two years and nicknamed him “Mr Wonderful.” He now lives in Essex, England, and, according to the _Daily Mail_, does humanitarian work in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia and Pakistan. The seriousness of their relationship is evidenced by the fact that Diana secretly met his family. According to her friend Jemima Khan’s 2013 _Vanity Fair _article this was “to discuss the possibility of marriage.”
> 
> *Trevor Rees-Jones*: The only survivor of the car crash that killed Diana, Trevor Rees-Jones, now known as Trevor Rees spent weeks in a coma and had every bone in his face broken by the crash. Rees, 54, was recently photographed by British tabloid the _Sun_ waiting for his family (he has a wife and two children) in Shropshire, England, as they did their shopping.
> 
> As The Daily Beast reported, scars are still visible on his face.
> 
> He reportedly “earned a fortune as security director” for oil firm Halliburton, and is now head of security for drug company AstraZeneca, the _Sun_ says.
> 
> A source was quoted by the _Sun_ as saying: “Trevor is living a peaceful life. The enormity of what happened that night is still with him and the scars are visible. His life is quiet and uneventful now. He certainly doesn’t court publicity or speak much about it. He’s tried to move on and get on with his life.”
> 
> *Mohamed Al-Fayed: *the Egyptian-born father of Diana’s last boyfriend, Dodi, who was also killed in the Paris car crash, still lives at his estate in Oxted, Surrey, where Dodi’s remains are interred in a private mausoleum. He is 93. He spent many years after Diana’s death accusing the Duke of Edinburgh and the British security services of having orchestrated the crash that killed his son and Diana, saying they could not accept Diana marrying a Muslim. He has four other children with his Finnish wife Heini Wathén, whom he married in 1985, some of whom are said to be feuding over his estimated $1billion+ fortune.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes*: Lady Jane and Lady Sarah both flew to Paris with Charles to escort Diana’s body home, but Diana’s sisters have maintained a much lower profile than their brother since Diana’s death. Lady Sarah, who once dated Charles, and her husband Neil have three children and live a quiet, rural existence exemplified by the fact that she became the first female master of the Belvoir Hunt in May 2010. Lady Jane is married to Robert Fellowes, a former private secretary to the queen. She read the lesson at Harry’s wedding.
> 
> *James Hewitt*: The playwright Jon Conway who collaborated with Hewitt—who had an affair with Diana—to write Conway’s play _Truth Lies Diana _told The Daily Beast: “James is living a frugal, but peaceful and quiet life in Exeter with his very aged mother. He remains unfairly castigated by most of the very media who printed their own untruths and made fortunes out of him, but derided him for the one occasion he tried to tell his own story. James has never published the letters he was accused of peddling and never publicly told his version of what actually happened. How he could have done with that kind of money now!
> 
> “Having suffered two major illnesses over recent years, when I last spoke to him in June this year he just wants to stay out of the media spotlight and not stir up any controversy. In Harry’s upcoming ‘tell-all’ book, it will be interesting if he pays thanks to the man who helped raise him and his older brother. For many years in their young lives, the princes often saw more of James than they did of Charles.
> 
> “I got to know James quite well over a couple of years. It is clear how his gracious charm would have captivated Diana and that they made each other happy for many years is certainly true. Few relationships end well, but James has paid a huge price.
> 
> “Probably what hurt him most was that as a third generation soldier in his family, he was drummed out of the service. As my play _Truth Lies Diana_ quoted, his commanding officer told him, ‘Charles is your brother officer. It is an outrage to have an affair with the wife of another officer.’
> 
> “James’ pithy and cavalier reply was: ‘Perhaps you should tell Charles that too, as he is shagging his brother officer Parker Bowles’ wife!‘”
> 
> _—Tom Sykes_
> 
> *Diana, Princess of Wales, NOT The Princess of Wales*
> 
> In 1997, when Princess Diana died, I was working at the London newspaper the _Evening Standard_ (Tom Sykes writes). It was my first job, and I clearly remember my amazement that among the most intense “bollockings” that journalists were receiving in those bizarre days (made even more bizarre for us, as our office was on Kensington High Street, a few hundred yards from Kensington Palace) were about what they called Diana in the paper.
> 
> The royals have so many different names and nicknames that you can often happily revolve between three or four of them before you hit what is known in journalistic circles as the “knobbly monster” moment. A “knobbly monster” is tabloid newsroom slang for that tricky fourth or fifth reference in copy to your subject, when you’ve already used the obvious words for it, and you end up calling, for example, a large vegetable something daft like a knobbly monster.
> 
> The problem was that people kept referring to her as “The Princess of Wales” (her title when she was married to Charles) rather than “Diana, Princess of Wales”, the new style invented for her after her divorce, when she had been stripped of her HRH, a move which the queen was said to have considered ill-advised, but that Charles apparently insisted on. William is reported to have told his mother: “Don’t worry, Mummy, I will give it back to you one day when I am king.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There was even a short-lived notion of posthumously restoring her HRH: Buckingham Palace were said to have consulted the Spencer family on the issue on the Royal Train which conveyed the Spencers, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry to Northamptonshire for the Princess’s burial service.
> The Spencers, apparently, declined the offer.
> 
> _Evening Standard_ editor Max Hastings was adamant that we refer to her correctly as Diana, Princess of Wales.
> 
> “If we can’t get her name right, why should the readers trust us about anything else?” he would fume, as he flung down yet another copy of the newspaper on the newsdesk with the offending phrase, “The Princess of Wales” circled in blue felt tip pen and an unlucky reporter (often me) preparing to feel his wrath.
> It seemed such a trifling matter in the context of what was going on.
> 
> It was only years later that I truly understood the real point of her new name; the palace downgraded her title to try and make her less influential, powerful and important.
> 
> It didn’t work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twenty-five years later, the effort to obscure the memory of her influence is still ongoing. Witness, for example, Prince William’s demand that the BBC _Panorama_ interview with her never be shown again (to which the BBC has shamefully agreed) on the basis of his objections over Martin Bashir’s trickery, or the fact that there is no official commemoration of her death today in the U.K.
> 
> The royal establishment is still doing everything it can to airbrush her out of history—and still failing to achieve it.
> 
> 
> 
> ​
> ​
> 
> ​


If Diana were alive today, TW wouldn't have had a chance with Hazz imo. TW is a mother's worst nightmare… 

I agree with this,  “_Diana was very protective of her boys,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “She would have been very, very protective of Harry and I believe very anxious about this direction they’ve taken. *I think she would have felt Meghan was steering Harry in a direction that was not good for Harry.* *I don’t think Diana would have been the great fan of Meghan *that Meghan herself might perhaps imagine_.”

Though, she would likely be very pleased with Kate.


----------



## WingNut

papertiger said:


> _This _is a diva
> 
> and singing to another (goddess) no less



I literally am listening to this over and over.....


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Intern to Doctor: "She's filling-in the paperwork, and asking why there's only a title box for Mr. Mz and Mrs. and Duchess, Princess and Countess are missing,
> Doctor to Intern: "Which one does she want to add?
> Intern to Doctor: "All of them"


Sorry, but you're missing…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo MM is misusing  the term ‘diva’.  Usually, it is not a compliment to be called ‘diva’ in an industry.  Not sure when it became ok for a host to insult a highly accomplished guest as MM tried to do.

My levels of fame - it’s a fluid list with no lengthy definitions. Your list will vary.
*Legend* - Elvis, the Beatles, Ray Charles, B.B. King, Stevie Wonder, Tina Turner, Sidney Poitier, Audrey Hepburn, Katherine Hepburn, Queen and Queen Elizabeth, etc.
*Icon* - Streisand, Diana Ross, Meryl Streep, Judy Dench, Maria Carey (more No.1 hits in the US except the Beatles), Lady Gaga, Aretha, Gladys Knight, Loretta Young (actress from the 50s), etc.
*Diva, prima Donna *-  [typically, a negative term] unlikely to reach icon status because she is way too difficult to work with - many opera stars such as Beverly Sills & Maria Callas, Beyoncé, Cher, Madonna, Adele, Celine Dion, Whitney Houston, Donna Summer, Katie Perry, Taylor Swift, etc.
*Star, pop star, Drama Queen, *itch* - [typically  a negative term] -  it’s a long list- imo MM fits here
*Household name* - [neutral term] zillions
*15 mins of fame* - [typically, a negative term] many athletes, one hit wonders


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> How is 'ambition' an archetype????  !!!!


It isn't, but they needed to come up with an archetype to assign to Serena since that is the theme of the show. She's an athlete so therefore she has ambition, get it?  

12 women, 12 archetypes. It is such a loose concept to begin with that it is no wonder it doesn't pass the "does it make any sense?" test.


----------



## papertiger

WingNut said:


> I literally am listening to this over and over.....



Me too, let us all celebrate_ La Diva _Mariah or Maria

_

_


----------



## Lodpah

First it was when Prince Phillip was dying they were bashing the BRF and now HMTQ is not in good health, she’s going full tilt. People will remember this and hopefully both of them will be persona non grata on the world stage. World leaders do respect the Queen. They go to her. The twit who was a Zlist performer is just that.


----------



## Lodpah

piperdog said:


> There's an inconvenient truth for Meghan.  It will be interesting to see if there's any follow-up correction in the media that breathlessly (and mindlessly) reported on the article, or this will just be ignored?
> 
> Doesn't he realize that there is ONLY "her truth" and that he should have been honored to be given a place in it?


Like someone said let’s see how she reshapes this comment. I guess sugars will say he’s racist?


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo MM is misusing  the term ‘diva’.  Usually, it is not a compliment to be called ‘diva’ in an industry.  Not sure when it became ok for a host to insult a highly accomplished guest as MM tried to do.
> 
> My levels of fame - it’s a fluid list with no lengthy definitions. Your list will vary.
> *Legend* - Elvis, the Beatles, Audrey Hepburn, Katherine Hepburn, Queen and Queen Elizabeth, etc.
> *Icon* - Streisand, Diana Ross, Meryl Streep, Judy Dench, Maria Carey (more No.1 hits in the US except the Beatles), Lady Gaga, Aretha, Loretta Young (actress from the 50s), etc.
> *Diva, prima Donna *-  [typically, a negative term] unlikely to reach icon status because she is way too difficult to work with - many opera stars such as Beverly Sills & Maria Callas, Beyoncé, Cher, Madonna, Adele, Celine Dion, Whitney Houston, Donna Summer, Katie Perry, Taylor Swift, etc.
> *Star, pop star, Drama Queen, *itch* - [typically  a negative term] -  it’s a long list- imo MM fits here
> *Household name* - [neutral term] zillions
> *15 mins of fame* - [typically, a negative term] many athletes, one hit wonders


And then there is the ‘celebrity’ list - A list, B list … zzzzz list 
This is a solid summary, imo:








						Learn The Difference between A-list, B-list, C-list and D-list Actors & Celebrities
					

“A-list” actors are exceptionally successful, their notoriety extends beyond the silver screen, and their name guarantees a box office hit. Some “A-list” actors include: Will Smith, Brad Pitt, Leon…




					worldwidevitalpr.wordpress.com


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> These videos are good…



I love these videos.  Thank you @Chanbal for always posting great videos and articles for us!

I've heard MC and MM's conversation a couple times now and I can't help thinking in the back of my mind is MM has a sense of glee in her voice that MC (love MC BTW) is calling her a diva.  MM is saying who me who me a diva?  LOL  MM adding her comment at the end of how she felt, b@llsh!t, when she's probably thinking OMG this is great!  The podcast is going to get lots of listeners because MC (Queen of diva's - Remember I'm a fan so don't hit me for saying this) is calling me a diva and they will want to listen to us go back and forth.  IMO MM is happy and imagining $$$$$ signs in her narcissistic head.  

I'm still catching up so apologies if someone else already posted the same thoughts.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo MM is misusing  the term ‘diva’.  Usually, it is not a compliment to be called ‘diva’ in an industry.  Not sure when it became ok for a host to insult a highly accomplished guest as MM tried to do.
> 
> My levels of fame - it’s a fluid list with no lengthy definitions. Your list will vary.
> *Legend* - Elvis, the Beatles, Audrey Hepburn, Katherine Hepburn, Queen and Queen Elizabeth, etc.
> *Icon* - Streisand, Diana Ross, Meryl Streep, Judy Dench, Maria Carey (more No.1 hits in the US except the Beatles), Lady Gaga, Aretha, Loretta Young (actress from the 50s), etc.
> *Diva, prima Donna *-  [typically, a negative term] unlikely to reach icon status because she is way too difficult to work with - many opera stars such as Beverly Sills & Maria Callas, Beyoncé, Cher, Madonna, Adele, Celine Dion, Whitney Houston, Donna Summer, Katie Perry, Taylor Swift, etc.
> *Star, pop star, Drama Queen, *itch* - [typically  a negative term] -  it’s a long list- imo MM fits here
> *Household name* - [neutral term] zillions
> *15 mins of fame* - [typically, a negative term] many athletes, one hit wonders


no Diana?  I belive she became an icon with her early death


----------



## mellibelly

I haven’t watched yet but here’s River’s recap of the Mariah podcast. Sorry if this is crude, but in a previous video he says Skeeter’s oil slicked severely parted hair is exactly how Wallis Simpson wore her minge


----------



## catlover46

Lodpah said:


> First it was when Prince Phillip was dying they were bashing the BRF and now HMTQ is not in good health, she’s going full tilt. People will remember this and hopefully both of them will be persona non grata on the world stage. World leaders do respect the Queen. They go to her. The twit who was a Zlist performer is just that.


Harry is going to have a lot of regrets down the road. 

Also if the Queen is too ill to travel, is she going to be at Balmoral permanently now? JMO she’s a lot worse than they are letting on. 








						Queen will receive Boris Johnson and next prime minister at Balmoral
					

The Queen will receive Boris Johnson next Tuesday at Balmoral before an audience with the new prime minister, Buckingham Palace confirmed today.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> I love these videos.  Thank you @Chanbal for always posting great videos and articles for us!
> 
> I've heard MC and MM's conversation a couple times now and I can't help thinking in the back of my mind is MM has a sense of glee in her voice that MC (love MC BTW) is calling her a diva.  MM is saying who me who me a diva?  LOL  MM adding her comment at the end of how she felt, b@llsh!t, when she's probably thinking OMG this is great!  The podcast is going to get lots of listeners because MC (Queen of diva's - Remember I'm a fan so don't hit me for saying this) is calling me a diva and they will want to listen to us go back and forth.  IMO MM is happy and imagining $$$$$ signs in her narcissistic head.
> 
> I'm still catching up so apologies if someone else already posted the same thoughts.


You are welcome. One more for you…


----------



## Chanbal

And one more from the BLG…


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this tina brown piece has been posted already
> I would say it's more pro-william than pro-harry
> Diana would not have been happy with what has gone down
> 
> ​





WingNut said:


> I literally am listening to this over and over.....


I love Maria Callas.  I think I have read every biography on her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> no Diana?  I belive she became an icon with her early death


I decided to refrain from adding the royals because, ya kno, they are not like us [haaaa].  But ,  I’m not sure I’d put Diana as an icon. I’m not even sure I’d put the BRF as a iconic royal family.  Yes, they are well known now, but Czar Nicholas may have been better known. I don’ t know, I’ll have to think about it.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> And one more from the BLG…



As usual he made lots of good points. I fully expect Meghan to continue to try to lead her guests. She won't be able to help herself. The guests will likely politely agree with her because she's not going to make any controversial statements.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Boy she's had a lot of work done on her face - especially her eyes.
> Edit - Sorry this has been posted already.
> 
> View attachment 5601040



No amount of plastic surgery can get rid of the crazy behind the eyes.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I think a diva is always widely recognized as extremely talented, but difficult.  Mags is missing the talented part.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I decided to refrain from adding the royals because, ya kno, they are not like us [haaaa].  But ,  I’m not sure I’d put Diana as an icon. I’m not even sure I’d put the BRF as a iconic royal family.  Yes, they are well known now, but Czar Nicholas may have been better known. I don’ t know, I’ll have to think about it.


you're entitled to your opinion of course but diana was famous worldwide and her funeral was a big deal here in the US (never mind England where the people lined the streets, etc.)
I don't think you can discount her


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> you're entitled to your opinion of course but diana was famous worldwide and her funeral was a big deal here in the US (never mind England where the people lined the streets, etc.)
> I don't think you can discount her


Absolutely.  I do think she is iconic globally, her picture still sells magazines 25 years after her death.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I do think she is iconic globally, her picture still sells magazines 25 years after her death.


this is why her son and his WIFE are always invoking her name


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> "And she may become famous..."


(In)famous seems more like it.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> DIVA was the keyword for the show, it was AMBITION with Serena
> How could MM be so silly to think her guest would not point the DIVA finger at her?


Here are two definitions from the Oxford Dictionary - apply as you see fit   

a famous female singer of popular music.
"a pop diva"
a self-important person who is temperamental and difficult to please (typically used of a woman).
"she is much more the dedicated maverick than the petulant diva"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> If Diana were alive today, TW wouldn't have had a chance with Hazz imo. TW is a mother's worst nightmare…
> 
> I agree with this,  “_Diana was very protective of her boys,” Brown told The Daily Beast. “She would have been very, very protective of Harry and I believe very anxious about this direction they’ve taken. *I think she would have felt Meghan was steering Harry in a direction that was not good for Harry.* *I don’t think Diana would have been the great fan of Meghan *that Meghan herself might perhaps imagine_.”
> 
> Though, she would likely be very pleased with Kate.




Can these people really not see how impossible she is, or are they just doing it on purpose as some kind of general revenge? At this point I find it hard to believe anyone could be so dull.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can these people really not see how impossible she is, or are they just doing it on purpose as some kind of general revenge? At this point I find it hard to believe anyone could be so dull.


they're seeing what they want to see


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> Also if the Queen is too ill to travel, is she going to be at Balmoral permanently now? JMO she’s a lot worse than they are letting on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen will receive Boris Johnson and next prime minister at Balmoral
> 
> 
> The Queen will receive Boris Johnson next Tuesday at Balmoral before an audience with the new prime minister, Buckingham Palace confirmed today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's probably harder on her to go to London for a short period of time and return to Balmoral than stay put and go back to Windsor for the winter.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can these people really not see how impossible she is, or are they just doing it on purpose as some kind of general revenge? At this point I find it hard to believe anyone could be so dull.


Who is he (and the rest of them) kidding? She has spent the better part of her life embracing the white half of her heritage. She pulled the poor attacked black woman when it suited her agenda. If she wanted to embrace her black heritage she would have joined a black sorority at Northwestern. Instead, she joined one that is as white as they come, and I'm sure the reason her sisters thought she was so nice was because she went out of her way to fit in with them.


----------



## Cinderlala

I bet the glued-eyelid sorority sister did not think she was all that nice.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> you're entitled to your opinion of course but diana was famous worldwide and her funeral was a big deal here in the US (never mind England where the people lined the streets, etc.)
> I don't think you can discount her


I absolutely think Diana is an icon.

Per the Cambridge dictionary:

"a very famous person or thing considered as representing a set of beliefs or a way of life"

From the day she and Charles got engaged until the day she died she was the most photographed woman in the world. I'd say that's icon status.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> you're entitled to your opinion of course but diana was famous worldwide and her funeral was a big deal here in the US (never mind England where the people lined the streets, etc.)
> I don't think you can discount her



Absolutely agree, all options are on the table.  Perhaps we can create a list for royals.  What categories would you include - in the royal world, what qualities make for a top notch royal?  QE always emphasizes devotion to country and duty [afaik].  How far back should we go - Czars? Ancient times?  I’m open to any and all suggestions.  Imo Princess Grace must be included and H&M excluded because they are not ‘working’ royals.

Again, my list was to show MC is an icon, not a diva. MM is a drama queen, not a diva.  Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> It looks like TW is entertaining many…
> 
> Meghan Markle uses 17th interview this week to complain the media won’t leave her alone​
> _Addressing this morning’s first press conference, Prince Harry’s wife complained the media simply will not leave her alone before calling the event to a close because she had a photoshoot scheduled at eleven.
> 
> Grabbing a passing reporter by the collar, Markle refused to let him leave until he had listened a a two-hour tearful story about how intrusive the media can be and how she just never gets a moment to herself.
> 
> “It was heartbreaking,” reporter Simon Williams told us. “I was watching television last night when she crawled out from behind my sofa and begged me to leave her alone.
> 
> “She demanded I take several photographs showing how unhappy she is and immediately mail them to Rolling Stone for a major expose about press harassment._


I know this is a joke and all, but Diana kind of did that.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> I bet the glued-eyelid sorority sister did not think she was all that nice.


Much as I dislike her I take that story with a very large grain of salt.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely agree, all options are on the table.  Perhaps we can create a list for royals.  What categories would you include - in the royal world, what qualities make for a top notch royal?  QE always emphasizes devotion to country and duty [afaik].  How far back should we go - Czars? Ancient times?  I’m open to any and all suggestions.  Imo Princess Grace must be included and H&M excluded because they are not ‘working’ royals.


Princess Grace is the very definition of an icon.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can these people really not see how impossible she is, or are they just doing it on purpose as some kind of general revenge? At this point I find it hard to believe anyone could be so dull.


Yep! I wish Don L wouldn't support this. I read somewhere that he is a client of Sucks…


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's probably harder on her to go to London for a short period of time and return to Balmoral than stay put and go back to Windsor for the winter.


Windsor might not be the healthiest place for QE in September.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this tina brown piece has been posted already
> I would say it's more pro-william than pro-harry
> Diana would not have been happy with what has gone down
> ​
> ​
> 
> *What if she had lived?*
> 
> Imagine: What would Princess Diana be doing now, at the age of 61?
> She would be in her prime, serving the world wherever she could, probably at this moment in Ukraine, helping war-orphaned children.
> 
> She would have 500 million followers on Instagram. Her fan base would range from boomers to Gen Z.
> 
> She was the first truly global celebrity and, had she lived, she would be far more mature about how to handle that level of celebrity, how to leverage her singular human qualities of connection and hope into programs that delivered.
> 
> ​
> 
> The unhappy mess of her marriage to Charles would be ancient and boring history, her escape from the toxic orbit of the Windsors complete, and Harry and William would never have fallen out, for want of a mother’s guidance and love. The parental bond was too strong.
> 
> Oddly enough, Queen Elizabeth would likely have found it easier to deal with Diana alive than with her ghost, a constant ethereal presence offering a lens through which the family never looks good, and with whom there is no mediation. Diana’s spectacular personality had no equal and the monarch’s strength has always been in not being spectacular. They would have come to terms, each holding their own very different territory, and the queen’s family would have fallen into line – except, perhaps, Charles, who is never happy being eclipsed.
> 
> Yes, it is imaginary. But this trajectory has an origin story that is not.
> 
> Diana had three months to live when Tony Blair, then Britain’s new prime minister, realized her extraordinary public popularity and decided to enlist her in his ambitious plans to modernize the country.
> 
> Blair’s “new” Labour Party swept to power on May 1, 1997, with a landslide victory. A few weeks later, he invited Diana and her sons to Chequers, the prime minister’s official country retreat, to explore what part she might play in promoting his ideas.
> 
> ​
> 
> Sooner than many people, Blair and his spinmeister, Alastair Campbell had grasped an essential point about Diana’s power (and value to them): She had become a one-person third force to the British people, a focus for the aspirations and hopes of millions who felt that neither the political class nor the monarchy were able to know and inspire the best of the country’s qualities.
> 
> The meeting went well. Diana offered her ideas in a series of letters that followed. Campbell noted later in his diary that Diana would be a real asset, “a big part of ‘New Britain.’”
> 
> When Blair got word from Paris of Diana’s death he presciently told Campbell: “People will be in a state of real shock. There will be grief that you would not get for anyone else. If the Queen died there would be huge sadness and respect but this will lead to an outpouring of grief. This will confirm her as a real icon.”
> 
> You can see just how true that was in the last minutes of the new HBO documentary, _The Princess_.
> 
> It was the loss of an irreplaceable national asset. Unlike the Windsors, Diana’s ancestry was deeply British. The Spencers could be traced back to 1478 and were intertwined with the Churchills. People sensed that quality in her. It was authentic, and not in any sense the xenophobic Little England dementia that led to Brexit.
> 
> Had she lived, she would surely have been a powerful voice against Brexit— possibly even a decisive one. As she showed with her campaign to clear land mines in former war zones that were killing and maiming children, she was global in her concerns and her activism.
> 
> In fact, by now she would have been long established as one of those rare people who transcends nationality to become a true citizen of the world, like Nelson Mandela—they met just months before she died and the rapport was instantaneous.
> 
> _—Clive Irving_
> 
> *The main players, 25 years on*
> 
> *Princes William and Harry*: The grief-stricken brothers of 1997 remain, as adults, locked in a long-running feud. Both sought to channel their mother’s legacy in their own ways, even if Harry has been the more explicit of the two (see above). While Harry has become more voluble about his mother in recent years, William has gone in the opposite direction, and only speaks about his mother occasionally and in a circumspect manner. William has definitively joined the establishment but his mother would not disapprove; she was, ultimately, a monarchist and very much wanted him to be king (just with Harry by his side).
> 
> *Prince Charles*: Diana’s ex-husband’s popularity has slowly recovered after the PR disaster of the Diana years. It could be argued that the death of his first wife probably enabled him to marry Camilla. Even if a wedding had eventually happened, it’s certainly hard to imagine the queen naming Camilla a future queen if she had survived. The next series of _The Crown_, featuring the end of his and Diana’s marriage and her death, and Harry’s memoir may yet spell more agony for him.
> 
> ​


I liked the 'where are they nows'... but for Tina Brown to believe that Diana had no where to go in August is stupid. 

She had many rich and well connected friends, in fact they were all rich and well connected and she could disappear if she wanted. Just don't tell your favourite paps where you are! She secretly met Kahn's family, didn't she.

"Going to stay with Dodi meant being safe from all that intrusion, but of course on that awful night the opposite was true.”  I think not!  She called them to let them know where she would be and posed so sadly on that diving board, just for the paps.

Good article though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just Tourre having some fun.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

catlover46 said:


> Harry is going to have a lot of regrets down the road.
> 
> *Also if the Queen is too ill to travel, is she going to be at Balmoral permanently now? *JMO she’s a lot worse than they are letting on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen will receive Boris Johnson and next prime minister at Balmoral
> 
> 
> The Queen will receive Boris Johnson next Tuesday at Balmoral before an audience with the new prime minister, Buckingham Palace confirmed today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



HM generally arrives at Balmoral Castle at the end of July and stays until the beginning of October. It's her holiday/vacation time that she likes to spend with family members. In fact, she is interrupting her down time to greet the new PM, who can probably tolerate a trip from London to Scotland more easily than HM would if she had travel to London and back to Balmoral.  I believe HM has earned the right to pamper herself during the last years of her life. I see no reason why she can't perform her duties from Balmoral except perhaps to attend the State opening of Parliament to deliver the speech from the throne aka the Queen's Speech. In comparison, Queen Victoria had her PMs running around to meet her wherever she was even while on state visits.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

I really do feel so sorry for HMTQ.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


>



Caught in A lie?  Too many lies to count


----------



## CobaltBlu

So she wrote all these important things in her journal for her own protection (??) and then tra-la-la-ed out of Frogmore and left it behind? With her pants and stuff?

Ok.  Sure. Fine. Whatever.

Also, wouldn't her precious pants and stuff already have been "packed up" since Eugenie was living there? MM makes it sound like it was left as it was like a shrine to her with everything was as she left it. Gee, that must have been awkward for Eugenie. 








						Princess Eugenie's idyllic home she's vacated for Prince Harry and Meghan's visit - photos
					

Inside Princess Eugenie’s house Frogmore Cottage where Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are staying while they visit UK for Queen's Platinum Jubilee




					www.hellomagazine.com
				











						Princess Eugenie gives unprecedented looks inside royal home
					

Princess Eugenie house: The Queen's granddaughter is currently living in Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's UK home, Frogmore Cottage – look inside.




					www.hellomagazine.com
				






> Another insider, who said the journal was kept the whole time when she was a royal, also added: 'Harry and Meghan were told to ignore social media and newspapers but sometimes staff would say to them, 'so sorry about what was written the other day', and she would hit the roof. She wrote it all in her diary as an insurance policy.
> 
> 'If it ever saw the light of day it would surely be dynamite. By the sounds of it, this journal was rediscovered this summer, boxed up and shipped back to Montecito.'


(from the daily mail article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...g-daily-journal-raising-fears-bombshells.html)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I really do feel so sorry for HMTQ.




At least Wallis had manners and could dress.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just Tourre having some fun.



Let's see if NF is right on this one, "…_but in America too, people beginning to wake up… these 2 self-obsessed,  hypocrites, liars are in the end going to be ignored by everybody…_"


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I liked the 'where are they nows'... but for Tina Brown to believe that Diana had no where to go in August is stupid.
> 
> She had many rich and well connected friends, in fact they were all rich and well connected and she could disappear if she wanted. Just don't tell your favourite paps where you are! She secretly met Kahn's family, didn't she.
> 
> "Going to stay with Dodi meant being safe from all that intrusion, but of course on that awful night the opposite was true.”  I think not!  She called them to let them know where she would be and posed so sadly on that diving board, just for the paps.
> 
> Good article though.



Diana played the media like a fiddle. She makes Meghan look like an amateur in comparison. Unfortunately for her, Martin Bashir turned the tables on her in what would be a fatal _coup de grace_. I think if she would have lived, Diana and Charles would have had their heads bashed together by QE2, not divorced just lived separate lives and no one would have been the wiser. Diana, seemed to enjoy her privileges (including play-aways with playboys) and status far too much to trade it in for a life of a NY socialite. 

At the end of the day, even though Diana could be a selfish PITA, she also genuinely felt for people that seemed unlovable or forgotten about, she also know how to enjoy herself and that also meant embracing her inner-diva. MegZZZZZZZZZ-list is just a selfish PITA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I really do feel so sorry for HMTQ.




Unfortunately. it feels like we're all lumbered with Meghan (and Harry)


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Let's see if NF is right on this one, "…_but in America too, people beginning to wake up… these 2 self-obsessed,  hypocrites, liars are in the end going to be ignored by everybody…_"




For once I agree with him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think if she would have lived, Diana and Charles would have had their heads bashed together by QE2, not divorced just lived separate lives and no one would have been the wiser.



But weren't they already divorced by the time she died? How would that have worked out?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But weren't they already divorced by the time she died? How would that have worked out?



Sorry, I meant if Bashir hadn't interfered. 

He told her Charles was having an affair with the (beloved) nanny besides a lot of other things that played into her paranoia.


----------



## Chanbal

Her sources of inspiration? 












						Sarah Vine's scorching verdict on Meghan's 6,400-word masterclass in manipulation
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

On that BBC interview with Bashir how it was obtained and the fallout that provoked the divorce:









						Princess Diana interview: What did Martin Bashir and the BBC do?
					

The BBC covered up Diana interview failings, a report into the 1995 Panorama interview finds.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




From the link above:

"Princes William and Harry have spoke of the hurt caused by the interview.
Prince William said Diana "was failed not just by a rogue reporter, but by leaders at the BBC who looked the other way rather than asking the tough questions". He said the interview made a "major contribution to making my parents' relationship worse".
Prince Harry said the "ripple effect of a culture of exploitation and unethical practices" ultimately took his mother's life."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So messed up. I'm not up to date, did it have consequences for Bashir's career? He basically broke every journalistic ethics there are.

Speaking of messed up, I can't imagine how much energy it must take to keep fueling that hatred she has for this family. I've been very wronged in my life to the point it had actual consequences to my future plans and I absolutely do not spend my days adding and adding negative feelings. Her insides must be the human (or not so human  ) equivalent of a black hole.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least Wallis had manners and could dress.


And I don't believe she ever went to the press to badmouth the royals.  She was dignified to the end.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> And I don't believe she ever went to the press to badmouth the royals.  She was dignified to the end.


Ok, I am slow …finally figured it out … MM is trying to channel Wallis , Duchess of Windsor
Yes W was an incredible fashionista, and the jewels but … nothing else … very shallow actually
Why would anyone want to mimic Wallis ? The American duchess maligned by the BRF ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

@Toby93 I have wanted to click the link in your signature for ages but I am literally scared. Are there gruesome pictures and stories or is it just a petition? I don't handle animal cruelty well.


----------



## Chanbal

Not 1, but 2… 









						Mystery as TWO Lion King stars deny speaking to Meghan at premiere
					

TWO Lion King stars have denied speaking to Meghan Markle during the 2019 London Premiere of the live-action film.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Ok, I am slow …finally figured it out … MM is trying to channel Wallis , Duchess of Windsor
> Yes W was an incredible fashionista, and the jewels but … nothing else … very shallow actually
> Why would anyone want to mimic Wallis ? The American duchess maligned by the BRF ?


Wallis had great taste and style esp in jewelry but she was far from beautiful IMO....don't know if Meghan would want to emulate her


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> On that BBC interview with Bashir how it was obtained and the fallout that provoked the divorce:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana interview: What did Martin Bashir and the BBC do?
> 
> 
> The BBC covered up Diana interview failings, a report into the 1995 Panorama interview finds.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the link above:
> 
> "Princes William and Harry have spoke of the hurt caused by the interview.
> Prince William said Diana "was failed not just by a rogue reporter, but by leaders at the BBC who looked the other way rather than asking the tough questions". He said the interview made a "major contribution to making my parents' relationship worse".
> Prince Harry said the "ripple effect of a culture of exploitation and unethical practices" ultimately took his mother's life."


The Earl’s comments:


It was wrong to suggest he had refused to
help his sister or had failed to protect her
from Martin Bashir and concealed
evidence of the latter's deception. We did
not intend to suggest that the Earl was to
blame for his sister's death. We apologise
to the Earl and have agreed to pay his costs
as well as make a payment to him which
he will donate to charity.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Wallis had great taste and style esp in jewelry but she was far from beautiful IMO....don't know if Meghan would want to emulate her


I thought Wallis had the reputation of having amazing skills in the bedroom, better than a courtesan. Maybe that’s what Meghan admired.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Toby93 I have wanted to click the link in your signature for ages but I am literally scared. Are there gruesome pictures and stories or is it just a petition? I don't handle animal cruelty well.


I had forgotten about that signature   It's a charity that I donate to monthly to advocate for the end of fur-farming.  It is also sponsored by the Lush Company.  I am a huge animal lover and try to stand up for animal rights wherever I can.  No pics, just information in the link, but it does state the facts so maybe don't click if you are easily upset.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Diana played the media like a fiddle. She makes Meghan look like an amateur in comparison. Unfortunately for her, Martin Bashir turned the tables on her in what would be a fatal _coup de grace_. I think if she would have lived, Diana and Charles would have had their heads bashed together by QE2, not divorced just lived separate lives and no one would have been the wiser. Diana, seemed to enjoy her privileges (including play-aways with playboys) and status far too much to trade it in for a life of a NY socialite.
> 
> At the end of the day, even though Diana could be a selfish PITA, she also genuinely felt for people that seemed unlovable or forgotten about, she also know how to enjoy herself and that also meant embracing her inner-diva. MegZZZZZZZZZ-list is just a selfish PITA.



In spite of her issues I believe Diana was a decent person. MM is not.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> At the end of the day, even though Diana could be a selfish PITA, she also genuinely felt for people that seemed unlovable or forgotten about, she also know how to enjoy herself and that also meant embracing her inner-diva. MegZZZZZZZZZ-list is just a selfish PITA.


Diana felt for the unlovable, but only for the paps.  All her friends (and she had many over the years although she often fell out with them) were rich, talented, connected and well established.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Sorry, I meant if Bashir hadn't interfered.
> 
> He told her Charles was having an affair with the (beloved) nanny besides a lot of other things that played into her paranoia.



I think they would have divorced anyway. Charles was determined to be with Camilla.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I had forgotten about that signature   It's a charity that I donate to monthly to advocate for the end of fur-farming.  It is also sponsored by the Lush Company.  I am a huge animal lover and try to stand up for animal rights wherever I can.  No pics, just information in the link, but it does state the facts so maybe don't click if you are easily upset.



That sounds like such a worthy cause.


----------



## Chanbal

My 2 cents on TW vs WS 


sdkitty said:


> Wallis had great taste and style esp in jewelry but *she was far from beautiful IMO*....don't know if Meghan would want to emulate her


TW has that in common with WS.



bag-mania said:


> I thought *Wallis had the reputation of having amazing skills in the bedroom,* better than a courtesan. Maybe that’s what Meghan admired.


TW may have that in common with WS. 



Toby93 said:


> And *I don't believe she ever went to the press to badmouth the royals*.  She was dignified to the end.


TW certainly doesn't have that in common with WS.


----------



## lalame

I don't think anyone has brought this up but don't you think it's so pompous the way her podcast has framed each episode like "two women sharing their common experience on this topic." The focus is not on the guest, it's like a conversation about how their experiences relate... and that type of conversation is fine except I'm just not seeing the comparison between her and Compton-to-Grand Slam champion Serena on the topic of ambition. Or her and world renowned songstress Mariah on the topic of being a diva. Would you listen to a podcast where "lalame and Elon Musk discuss the trappings of wealth in their lives?" lol


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Ok, I am slow …finally figured it out … MM is trying to channel Wallis , Duchess of Windsor
> Yes W was an incredible fashionista, and the jewels but … nothing else … very shallow actually
> *Why would anyone want to mimic Wallis ? The American duchess maligned by the BRF ?*


I think ZedZed Megaliar wants to replicate Wallis' life. Her marriage to Edward caused a major scandal that forced Edward to abdicate. The bi!ch is trying to cause as much trouble for the RF as revenge for some perceive offence or insult. Sometimes when I'm bored, I wonder if she is so deluded as to believe that she can destroy the entire BRF's reputation in the hopes that they (HM,C,W) will all have to abdicate in turn and the British will then beg Dufus to take the throne and she will then become THEE QUEEN.


----------



## Chanbal

Great Question! (Allison P. Davis was brilliant. I wonder if she is a member here. )


_As the Mail reported yesterday, *the New York Post’s front page marked Meghan’s latest media foray with the headline ‘Toddler And Tiara: Spoiled princess Meghan STILL whining about royal family’*.

More significantly, the venerable *Washington Post cautioned her that ‘to succeed in the media, [she] needs to leave royal traumas behind’*. And one U.S. TV insider claimed *‘some of the lustre’ has gone*.

Indeed, *a milestone moment in the Sussexes’ relationship with the U.S. may well prove to be that interview with The Cut.*

It was intensely revealing — and not, principally, for Meghan’s outrageous and occasionally risible headline-stealing comments, such as the astonishing claim that her joining the Royal Family had been a moment of international jubilation comparable to the release of Nelson Mandela.

Even more surprising, *the interview was, in fact, quite negative about her*.

The Cut is part of New York Magazine, which is about as woke as you get in the mainstream U.S. media — a fact that no doubt weighed heavily in the Sussex camp’s decision to grant its journalist an audience._

*And yet the undercurrent of disapproval in the 6,400-word piece — by African-American feature writer Allison P. Davis — was hard to miss.*


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Another day, another tantrum over [wait for it] security



OMG, he's off again...









bag-mania said:


> Here are other topics for her remaining episodes. From The Cut:
> 
> The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like *Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ****** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and *Slut *(Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”)
> She has lined up a murderers’ row of guests: Constance Wu, Issa Rae, Lisa Ling, Margaret Cho, and Ziwe. (I’ll let you guess who aligns with which archetype.)





1. WTF! How are these 'archetypes'?
2. Seriously, these are the titles that they are going to be having discussions about? I thought this was someone taking the p*ss and being sarcastic!
3. She can't say the word b*tch... is this b*tch for real!?
So, saying the word b*tch make her uncomfortable, but being involved in trying to tear a family apart, lying, bullying, manipulating, scheming, and generally being a b*tch comes all too easy for her and probably helps her sleep well at night , I guess. Interesting. The more we learn 




Chanbal said:


> A good article!
> View attachment 5600748
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The narcissism of Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> I’ve read some batty celebrity profiles in my time. But that piece about Meghan Markle in the Cut takes the biscuit. It is almost unbelievably preposterous. It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which Ms Markle is now kween...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


More articles like this in the media, please!






QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did the PR money run out?



Awkward






Aminamina said:


> The tide’s turning? From the Ukrainian FB reaction to the Cut interview:”Markle is a diagnosis “, “It’s so easy to spit onto something grand - the faceless scum will get some money by associating” etc. It’s like reading our thread translated)


*”Markle is a diagnosis“*
So accurate!






xincinsin said:


> Let's take a few seconds from our banter to celebrate achieving 7000 pages











Toby93 said:


> Uh-oh



Hilarious! TW doesn't seem to understand that if you're gonna constantly lie, then you actually need to be good at it.
This is getting gooooood! More exposing the lies please!






mellibelly said:


> I haven’t watched yet but here’s River’s recap of the Mariah podcast. Sorry if this is crude, but in a previous video he says Skeeter’s oil slicked severely parted hair is exactly how Wallis Simpson wore her minge



So funny! Parts that made me laugh out loud...

River referring to TW as_ 'Pariah Scary'_ 

_'Mariah meets the pariah'_ 

_'Think about what backwards Barbies are tuning in for this gong show'_ 

Thanks for posting @mellibelly


----------



## CarryOn2020

MC today = icon!


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Here are other topics for her remaining episodes. From The Cut:
> 
> The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ***** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and Slut (Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”)
> She has lined up a murderers’ row of guests: Constance Wu, Issa Rae, Lisa Ling, Margaret Cho, and Ziwe. (I’ll let you guess who aligns with which archetype.)


Is she only interviewing WOC, are there not any accomplished white women worthy of her podcast (or am I not allowed to ask that question)?


----------



## tiktok

Toby93 said:


> Is she only interviewing WOC, are there not any accomplished white women worthy of her podcast (or am I not allowed to ask that question)?



I think it’s legit to highlight women of color; her podcast, she can choose that as a theme. The issue is she only highlights one woman of color…


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> No further comments



In case she hadn't noticed, the BRF do not mark the anniversary of Diana's death, and for obvious reaons, neither does PC.  It is left up to her boy's to remember it in their own way.  This is a huge slap in the face only to her husband.  Trouble in paradise?  Methinks they protest too much about how in love they are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> No further comments



_Insiders add that they expect Markle to lean even more into Diana’s legacy. 

“Meghan thinks this is a winning formula. She has given up on trying to win the support of the Brits. Now, she is focused exclusively on America," our sources tell us.


_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

> I think it’s legit to highlight women of color; her podcast, she can choose that as a theme. The issue is she only highlights one woman of color…


Yes, I understand that she can interview only women of color if she chooses, but the podcast is supposed to be about breaking down the stereotypes of *women* that hold them back. She never mentioned anything about it being stereotypes that hold WOC back.

Considering she mostly associated with white women before Hazz, but now all of a sudden she is this proud WOC?  Jessica Mulroney comes to mind, along with all the other discarded friends she used on her way to an introduction to Hazz.

Forgive me as I am rambling now, but for a woman who went through the first 36 years of her life identifying as white, it is super hypocritical to be able to just switch to being black and cozy up to the black community to rally round her and defend her lies.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Is she only interviewing WOC, are there not any accomplished white women worthy of her podcast (or am I not allowed to ask that question)?


We only know eight of the 12 women chosen, so I suppose there’s still a chance she could talk to a white woman.

Don’t know what archetype/stereotype she would be assigned by the show, maybe Karen?


----------



## Toby93

So they can't find this mythical SA who told her this whopper.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## muddledmint

Toby93 said:


> Yes, I understand that she can interview only women of color if she chooses, but the podcast is supposed to be about breaking down the stereotypes of *women* that hold them back. She never mentioned anything about it being stereotypes that hold WOC back.
> 
> Considering she mostly associated with white women before Hazz, but now all of a sudden she is this proud WOC?  Jessica Mulroney comes to mind, along with all the other discarded friends she used on her way to an introduction to Hazz.
> 
> Forgive me as I am rambling now, but for a woman who went through the first 36 years of her life identifying as white, it is super hypocritical to be able to just switch to being black and cozy up to the black community to rally round her and defend her lies.


Being black is the only thing going for her right now, and she’s screwing that up too. 

She only started leaning into her black identity when she realized that it gave her some credibility with the woke/humanitarian crowd and that she can wield the race card as a weapon against her enemies. Liberal media outlets, especially in the US, blindly take her side because she fits into a liberal woke narrative (superficially) and/or are afraid of criticizing her for fear of being cancelled as racist. 

WOC took her at face value initially and supported her because they thought they could identify with her and that she represented them. But people are now waking up to her lies. Especially since she keeps making super obvious and absurd ones like that whopper of a story about being compared to Mandela by a South African. Her liberal media support is starting to erode too. She cannot keep up this fake, hypocritical, humanitarian facade because her true self cannot be contained no matter how much she tries to control her image through sunshine Sachs.


----------



## lalame

I don't know if it makes a difference or means anything but fyi the writer of that Cut article is black herself. I'm guessing that's why there have been no accusations of unfair treatment levied at her yet for the article.


----------



## Lodpah

TW is like a person who won the lottery and slowly pisses it away. Everyone (the whorish media who write glowingly of her, yeah I’m looking at you Yahoo, because of being paid) are her friends until one day, it’s all gone. Harry, that is. 

She’s batshit crazy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don Lemon asking the questions.  40 year old woman discovers what it’s like to be a “black woman”.  Hmmm


----------



## xincinsin

This thread is bad for my advertising profile. After our discussion of her gnarly feet several pages ago, I keep getting ads for bunion aids. Time to clean up the cookies 

Lion King: maybe they will now claim that it was a lowly member of the cast, which made the "memory" even more precious to her because you know how much she identifies with the common man ...


----------



## mellibelly

I apologize in advance if what I’m about to write is controversial. I’m the same age as Skeeter. I’m born and raised in Southern California and I’m also biracial (half Caucasian). I actually lived down the street from Immaculate Fart, sorry, Heart, for several years. If anything, being mixed race is more inclusive. I could move between racial cliques because I was mixed raced. My best friends growing up were not fully white or were mixed…all different races from myself. I was never “othered”.  Doria is a born and bred American as was Thomas Markle. Imagine if your mother was born in a foreign country and English was her 3rd language. I was spelling basic English words for my mom and helping her translate my whole life. Culturally my home life was not all American (like Maggots was) but I don’t bish and moan that I was treated like an Other. What planet is she living on?! Southern California is not 1950’s Bible Belt. POC are the norm. Yet she has to be the perpetual victim.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I'm mixed raced. Lived in So Cal for over 30 yrs as an adult. Never felt a victim or out of place.  To be honest I am like M who no one knew I was mixed race. Look totally caucasian. The only time I had been called names was when I was a child and I shared my race proudly. I'm much older than M so the times changed from when I was a child. As you all said numerous times here, M is using the race card now to her advantage.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don Lemon asking the questions.  40 year old woman discovers what it’s like to be a “black woman”.  Hmmm



 “As a thirty something woman” WRONG
No one treated this racially ambiguous white passing person like a black woman (whatever that means) The same way no journalist called her Casper the friendly ghost white Ginger kids the N word! Pathological liar! I’m expecting her to claim to be 1/64 Cherokee princess and therefore Native American at this point


----------



## mellibelly

There’s a level of crazy I don’t want to understand. It’s why I can’t watch documentaries from the perspective of the serial killer. I don’t need to get in the mind of Ted Bundy, thank you very much. I’ve reached that point with TW.


----------



## muddledmint

mellibelly said:


> I apologize in advance if what I’m about to write is controversial. I’m the same age as Skeeter. I’m born and raised in Southern California and I’m also biracial (half Caucasian). I actually lived down the street from Immaculate Fart, sorry, Heart, for several years. If anything, being mixed race is more inclusive. I could move between racial cliques because I was mixed raced. My best friends growing up were not fully white or were mixed…all different races from myself. I was never “othered”.  Doria is a born and bred American as was Thomas Markle. Imagine if your mother was born in a foreign country and English was her 3rd language. I was spelling basic English words for my mom and helping her translate my whole life. Culturally my home life was not all American (like Maggots was) but I don’t bish and moan that I was treated like an Other. What planet is she living on?! Southern California is not 1950’s Bible Belt. POC are the norm. Yet she has to be the perpetual victim.


Exactly. She grew up privileged and experienced little or no discrimination. She even admits this in her Mariah podcast when she says she was never treated like a black woman until she married Harry!

In the book, bower says she never discussed being biracial or experiencing racial discrimination until she started trying to become a humanitarian (which she only got into because her acting career was stalling and she needed to raise her profile).

She moans about it now (gutterally *gag*) because:

1. She literally has nothing else to talk about when she gives speeches. No other way to connect or find common ground with the poors. Because she lives such a hard scrabble life in montecito wearing thousands of dollars worth of (fugly) clothes each day. And she has accomplished almost nothing in terms of humanitarian work other than giving useless speeches and posing for photos in charities. So yeah, nothing else to talk about.
2. She has to be the victim so that Harry feels that he needs to protect her. Also to gain sympathy from other white savior elites.
3. As I said above, she needs to play the race card to punish anyone who dares to criticize her. It’s her most powerful defense. So far it’s worked a charm but we’ll see how long that lasts!
4. Would she have ANY supporters if she were not half black? Imagine if she were 100% white. She would have been crucified and cancelled a long time ago.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I think they would have divorced anyway. Charles was determined to be with Camilla.



He was already with Camilla, it would just gone on with the same mistress arrangement IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

mellibelly said:


> I haven’t watched yet but here’s River’s recap of the Mariah podcast. Sorry if this is crude, but in a previous video he says Skeeter’s oil slicked severely parted hair is exactly how Wallis Simpson wore her minge



Watched this and laughed out loud more than once!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So messed up. I'm not up to date, did it have consequences for Bashir's career? He basically broke every journalistic ethics there are.
> 
> *Speaking of messed up, I can't imagine how much energy it must take to keep fueling that hatred she has for this family.* I've been very wronged in my life to the point it had actual consequences to my future plans and I absolutely do not spend my days adding and adding negative feelings. Her insides must be the human (or not so human  ) equivalent of a black hole.



I don't think she considers the human aspect - for all her touchy-feely talk. She has devoted herself full-time to becoming and being a brand and therefore all her concerns, stratagem and decisions are commercial. Everything personal is just hyperbole and/or acting.


----------



## mellibelly

csshopper said:


> Watched this and laughed out loud more than once!


At the 28:45 minute mark when he says “she’s f*ckin nuts!” I have watched multiple times


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> Being black is the only thing going for her right now, and she’s screwing that up too.
> 
> She only started leaning into her black identity when she realized that it gave her some credibility with the woke/humanitarian crowd and that she can wield the race card as a weapon against her enemies. Liberal media outlets, especially in the US, blindly take her side because she fits into a liberal woke narrative (superficially) and/or are afraid of criticizing her for fear of being cancelled as racist.
> 
> WOC took her at face value initially and supported her because they thought they could identify with her and that she represented them. But people are now waking up to her lies. Especially since she keeps making super obvious and absurd ones like that whopper of a story about being compared to Mandela by a South African. Her liberal media support is starting to erode too. She cannot keep up this fake, hypocritical, humanitarian facade because her true self cannot be contained no matter how much she tries to control her image through sunshine Sachs.



All decisions are commercial, all actions are narc.
She's actually her own worst enemy - same with Harry.
Together they are_ folie a deux _not just twice the narc-power x 2 but off the scale


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> We only know eight of the 12 women chosen, so I suppose there’s still a chance she could talk to a white woman.
> 
> Don’t know what archetype/stereotype she would be assigned by the show, maybe Karen?



Perhaps she can interview herself for that one. Biggest 'Karen' of them all. 

Who else would compare themselves to Mandela, not once but on the front cover of HER book, and has been trying to justify and capitalise on it ever since.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> So they can't find this mythical SA who told her this whopper.




Obviously she didn't speak to the lowly African artists. Raptor was busy cozying up to Beyoncé, Pharrell and the Disney boss.


----------



## papertiger

mellibelly said:


> At the 28:45 minute mark when he says “she’s f*ckin nuts!” I have watched multiple times



"We'll show her the difference between a DIVA and a hungry beaver!"  

Have you noticed how Tudor and Lady C now do the same M-voice and sarcastic laugh


----------



## Helventara

papertiger said:


> Diana played the media like a fiddle. She makes Meghan look like an amateur in comparison. Unfortunately for her, Martin Bashir turned the tables on her in what would be a fatal _coup de grace_. I think if she would have lived, Diana and Charles would have had their heads bashed together by QE2, not divorced just lived separate lives and no one would have been the wiser. Diana, seemed to enjoy her privileges (including play-aways with playboys) and status far too much to trade it in for a life of a NY socialite.
> 
> At the end of the day, even though Diana could be a selfish PITA, she also genuinely felt for people that seemed unlovable or forgotten about, she also know how to enjoy herself and that also meant embracing her inner-diva. MegZZZZZZZZZ-list is just a selfish PITA.


Sorry if this is OOT but I've been curious about this for a long time and since we are playing 'what ifs', I throw the question: do ppl think William could end up with Kate if Diana were alive?  Would she think of the Middleton as to common, too low class? I credit that family also for how William turns out to be.

Not to mention that she was a bit too attached to William.

I imagine Harry may not be in this much trouble now if Diana were alive but Wills probably would lose out.


----------



## muddledmint

papertiger said:


> Perhaps she can interview herself for that one. Biggest 'Karen' of them all.
> 
> Who else would compare themselves to Mandela, not once but on the front cover of HER book, and has been trying to justify and capitalise on it ever since.


She is such a Karen. Suing the newspaper for publishing the letter, getting piers Morgan fired for criticizing her … and on and on.


----------



## muddledmint

Helventara said:


> Sorry if this is OOT but I've been curious about this for a long time and since we are playing 'what ifs', I throw the question: do ppl think William could end up with Kate if Diana were alive?  Would she think of the Middleton as to common, too low class? I credit that family also for how William turns out to be.
> 
> Not to mention that she was a bit too attached to William.
> 
> I imagine Harry may not be in this much trouble now if Diana were alive but Wills probably would lose out.


Was Diana a snob? She was many things but I never got the sense that she was a snob.


----------



## Helventara

muddledmint said:


> Was Diana a snob? She was many things but I never got the sense that she was a snob.


Maybe not but it seems that aristocracy and classes were (or still are) very much alive in Britain.
ETA: maybe I should clarify. People can be kind to others, inclusive even to those beneath them, etc but when it comes to joining the family, suddenly these people become unsuitable for many reasons.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> I'm mixed raced. Lived in So Cal for over 30 yrs as an adult. Never felt a victim or out of place.  To be honest I am like M who no one knew I was mixed race. Look totally caucasian. The only time I had been called names was when I was a child and I shared my race proudly. I'm much older than M so the times changed from when I was a child. As you all said numerous times here, M is using the race card now to her advantage.



Similar to you, my ethnicity is passed as just 'exotic' now, although when I was growing-up I was asked where I came from 10 times a day from everyone (white, foreign _and_ ethnic-minorities - usually just ice-breaker stuff). I am not black and I am not white, but then I am not from the US. Identity politics is the McDonald's franchise of education. In Norway, like a lot of other countries the indigenous people are an (often disadvantaged) ethnic minority, they also look white. Identity politics does not like nuance and does not travel well. It is a new form of colonisation.

Identity politics, subjective and essentialist, ends-up with Meghan, because in the end all you can (and are allowed to) talk about is yourself. M has to make-up her experiences because she has identified and been treated as privileged all her life (which she has admitted to in her 'diva' podcrash). I do not blame her for 'passing' or not stating (I would never bring-up my ethnicity with friends or at work unless asked directly - get to know me first).

The mainstreaming and fashionability of identity politics happened around the same time as she got married, identifying with (and parading) her mother around that time coincided with the 'fashion', people treated her as black for the first time (also on Diva) because it was the first time she presented herself as such, this is why people say she plays the race card - because she did and does. It is not possible for most black people to 'play' at all. It's not easy to be black/WOC/ethnic minority/foreign in any western country (she wants to try living in some other countries in Europe -  ). It wasn't because she married Harry, it was because it was the first time she came 'out'. Since she came 'out' globally, I think she is trying to find a new her, and looks to many successful WOC for clues. She has a new and interesting angle as a WOC that can pass - with a voice. That would have been my podcrash idea for M, 'Mixed-race - a Journey'. It could have been as subjective or high-brow as she wanted, interviews or none.

She wants privileged status _and_ hang with the cool kids - that's the problem, she wants it all.


----------



## papertiger

Helventara said:


> Sorry if this is OOT but I've been curious about this for a long time and since we are playing 'what ifs', I throw the question: do ppl think William could end up with Kate if Diana were alive?  Would she think of the Middleton as to common, too low class? I credit that family also for how William turns out to be.
> 
> Not to mention that she was a bit too attached to William.
> 
> I imagine Harry may not be in this much trouble now if Diana were alive but Wills probably would lose out.



No, I think she would have found Kate a bit 'boring' and K wouldn't have been so easy to manipulate as others in her life, but I think she would have trusted Will's decision.

According to sources, William fancied Kate like mad, he was just a bit young at the time to be thinking about settling down.

Harry would have done well with a sensible girl like Catherine, I think he tried to find her in M. (IMO) H idealised his brother's marriage and happiness. Again, I _my_ opinion, I actually think he should have gone for a more fun-loving and light-hearted person, Harry is pressured (by M) to take himself far too seriously, and for someone who's a bit dim that's not a good look because he has no way of articulating debates or political issues, and it certainly not making him (look) happy.


----------



## needlv

Helventara said:


> Sorry if this is OOT but I've been curious about this for a long time and since we are playing 'what ifs', I throw the question: do ppl think William could end up with Kate if Diana were alive?  Would she think of the Middleton as to common, too low class? I credit that family also for how William turns out to be.
> 
> Not to mention that she was a bit too attached to William.
> 
> I imagine Harry may not be in this much trouble now if Diana were alive but Wills probably would lose out.



We all know Diana had mental health issues.  I think Diana would have been jealous of Catherine. Diana did have a jealous streak - firing a favoured nanny, calling endlessly lovers and teasing/harassing the wives, using the press for her own ends etc.  she was a humanitarian, but not perfect.  

 Catherine has modelled herself on the Queen, has made a few mistakes, but otherwise has shown what it takes to be Royal.

Because Catherine is pretty, thin and dresses appropriately, I think the media would have run comparisons and Diana which would have played on Diana’s mental health and strained the relationship.  Diana  may have meddled.

All speculation of course!


----------



## Mumotons

Harry and Meghan to return to the UK after latest broadside at royals
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are returning to the UK for the first time since the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations in early June.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



The couple are returning to the UK for the first time since the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in early June with Meghan declaring this week that she has upset the Royal Family's dynamic 'just by existing' as experts claimed there is a 'cold war' between the Windsors and the Sussexes.

This is what’s been nighling at me, how MM complains that the RF have a problem with her existing. Wtf does she think she is doing to Catherine ? Whenever she gets a chance she puts the boot in; ‘stepford wife’, Kate made me cry….
MM really is a piece of work


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suzie

mellibelly said:


> I haven’t watched yet but here’s River’s recap of the Mariah podcast. Sorry if this is crude, but in a previous video he says Skeeter’s oil slicked severely parted hair is exactly how Wallis Simpson wore her minge



That was hilarious!


----------



## Aimee3

Suzie said:


> That was hilarious!


Yikes!  I had to look that word up.  What we learning this thread!!!!


----------



## Suzie

The funniest thing I saw on twitter, how they added a letter to the CUT magazine!! I am probably not allowed to post a pic but I thought it was so true.


----------



## needlv




----------



## xincinsin

Mumotons said:


> Harry and Meghan to return to the UK after latest broadside at royals
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are returning to the UK for the first time since the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations in early June.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The couple are returning to the UK for the first time since the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations in early June with Meghan declaring this week that she has upset the Royal Family's dynamic 'just by existing' as experts claimed there is a 'cold war' between the Windsors and the Sussexes.
> 
> This is what’s been nighling at me, how MM complains that the RF have a problem with her existing. Wtf does she think she is doing to Catherine ? Whenever she gets a chance she puts the boot in; ‘stepford wife’, Kate made me cry….
> MM really is a piece of work


Zedzee doesn't give herself enough credit. At the rate she is annoying people with her saintly pretensions, a lot of people and entire countries are going to have a problem with her yapping mouth existence. I need to stuff her into a mental oubliette.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> No, I think she would have found Kate a bit 'boring' and K wouldn't have been so easy to manipulate as others in her life, but I think she would have trusted Will's decision.
> 
> According to sources, William fancied Kate like mad, he was just a bit young at the time to be thinking about settling down.
> 
> Harry would have done well with a sensible girl like Katherine, I think he tried to find her in M. (IMO)* H idealised his brother's marriage and happiness. *Again, I _my_ opinion, I actually think he should have gone for a more fun-loving and light-hearted person, Harry is pressured (by M) to take himself far too seriously, and for someone who's a bit dim that's not a good look because he has no way of articulating debates or political issues, and it certainly not making him (look) happy.


This is exactly what Harry's issue is!  For years, Harry has always said that he wanted a family and to be settled like William.  Once he was in his 30s, he must have started to get a bit desperate, seeing how his previous girlfriends all bailed on him. All TW did was google him, look at his past and stroke his ego.  it's very sad that his brother, to whom he was so close, tried to warn him to slow down but was shut out.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Perhaps she can interview herself for that one. Biggest 'Karen' of them all.
> 
> Who else would compare themselves to Mandela, not once but on the front cover of HER book, and has been trying to justify and capitalise on it ever since.


I’m hoping she is saving Narcissist to be her own archetype episode.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I’m hoping she is saving Narcissist to be her own archetype episode.



She can interview herself, perfect


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Here are other topics for her remaining episodes. From The Cut:
> 
> The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ***** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and Slut (Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”)
> She has lined up a murderers’ row of guests: Constance Wu, Issa Rae, Lisa Ling, Margaret Cho, and Ziwe. (I’ll let you guess who aligns with which archetype.)


I'm sorry to hear that such reputible people want to be on her podcast.  Not sure what you mean by murderers' row.  Perhaps all of them have a book to sell or something.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I think this whole thing is really sad. I am entertained by the posts here, and watching Meghans antics are a diversion that passes the time and makes me feel grateful that I am not completely insane. Phew.
> 
> But....In the context of the monarchy, it is very sad. We are all looking at the sunset of Elizabeth's reign, and whether you despise the monarchy or love it, the fact of the matter is that QEII has been a steady presence for several generations and when she moves along it will be a huge loss. My US-born mother admired her, and she passed at 98 a few years back. Elizabeth is an icon, she is one of the few leaders on earth who has done their job, whether you like the job or not, almost flawlessly.
> 
> Whether you agree with her job description or not, she but on a nice brooch, grabbed her sweet little handbag and sensible shoes, and got up every morning and did it.
> 
> I am sure she is not losing sleep over this, and in fact after reading an article (posted in her thread here) about her close circle of friends she is probably OK.
> 
> But his nonsense of Harry and Meghan is absolutely the opposite of what should be happening now. Changes in the structure and function of the monarchy are to come, which they should. But this noisy ridiculous Meghan and Harry circus is DIStracting, and DEtracting from what should be the peaceful quiet last years of a woman who literally embodies duty, loyalty, discretion and more.
> 
> Meghan is absolutely the opposite, and it feels as if they were to be in the same room the universe would implode. I know there have been many missteps in the history of the monarchy, and these continue to this day (yes, i am looking at you Andrew, geesh), not to mention policies that have left many countries struggling and even broken. These problems largely proceed Elizabeth and in the end, it wasn't her job to fix them, though she probably could have had it been on her shoulders to do so.
> 
> But on a personal level, Elizabeth deserves to er....finish out her term.... with our eyes and hearts focused on her and her legacy, not this ridiculous nasty poser and her busted up plumber palm tree prince. I know Meghan will be a blip someday when compared with HMQEII (as if) but the timing here is so troubling.
> 
> Its like she is crash-landing a van full of nasty clowns into a retirement celebration and it's just awful.


well said and let's not forget TQ became a mechanic during the war - literally got her hands dirty.  I know there are others who know a lot more about her but this stands out in my mind


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Here are other topics for her remaining episodes. From The Cut:
> 
> The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ***** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and Slut (Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”)
> She has lined up a murderers’ row of guests: Constance Wu, Issa Rae, Lisa Ling, Margaret Cho, and Ziwe. (I’ll let you guess who aligns with which archetype.)



I don't know any of the others


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I don't know any of the others


mostly actors....Lisa Ling is a TV journalist - serious, not an entertainment reporter


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don Lemon asking the questions.  40 year old woman discovers what it’s like to be a “black woman”.  Hmmm



I wonder if Don L. got the memo.


----------



## Toby93

I was looking back over older posts on this thread, and I could have sworn that someone had posted the whole article from The Cut on here a few days ago?  I know I read the entire article, but can't remember where I saw it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Don L. got the memo.



well, she is actually admitting that in spite of having  a black mother, she didn't experience any racism until she was in her late 30's....that's something
As far as Mariah, the first time I recall reading about her what I remember was that she had a father (I think) who was middle eastern - nothing else about race.  maybe this wasn't her doing - more her PR people?

edit to say - surely she would have seen racism directed toward her mother?  so even if she avoided it directly for the most part she should have been well aware


----------



## marietouchet

mellibelly said:


> “As a thirty something woman” WRONG
> No one treated this racially ambiguous white passing person like a black woman (whatever that means) The same way no journalist called her Casper the friendly ghost white Ginger kids the N word! Pathological liar! I’m expecting her to claim to be 1/64 Cherokee princess and therefore Native American at this point


That bit about 1/64 , wicked , well done


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm sorry to hear that such reputible people want to be on her podcast.  *Not sure what you mean by murderers' row.*  Perhaps all of them have a book to sell or something.


That paragraph was from The Cut article. But the term murderers’ row goes back to the New York Yankees team in the late 1920s that was so packed with talent they were considered almost unbeatable. So the author is saying all of Meghan’s guests are at the top of their fields. That’s debatable.


----------



## Chanbal

mellibelly said:


> I apologize in advance if what I’m about to write is controversial. I’m the same age as Skeeter. I’m born and raised in Southern California and I’m also biracial (half Caucasian). I actually lived down the street from Immaculate Fart, sorry, Heart, for several years. If anything, being mixed race is more inclusive. I could move between racial cliques because I was mixed raced. My best friends growing up were not fully white or were mixed…all different races from myself. I was never “othered”.  Doria is a born and bred American as was Thomas Markle. Imagine if your mother was born in a foreign country and English was her 3rd language. I was spelling basic English words for my mom and helping her translate my whole life. Culturally my home life was not all American (like Maggots was) but I don’t bish and moan that I was treated like an Other. What planet is she living on?! Southern California is not 1950’s Bible Belt. POC are the norm. Yet she has to be the perpetual victim.





Hermes Zen said:


> I'm mixed raced. Lived in So Cal for over 30 yrs as an adult. Never felt a victim or out of place.  To be honest I am like M who no one knew I was mixed race. Look totally caucasian. The only time I had been called names was when I was a child and I shared my race proudly. I'm much older than M so the times changed from when I was a child. As you all said numerous times here, M is using the race card now to her advantage.


Thanks for sharing this.  Quoting Morgan Freeman, “_Making race a bigger issue than it is, is the problem we have._” 





Spoiler: Morgan Freeman and Don Lemon


----------



## CobaltBlu

So Meghan and the Palm Tree Pumber Prince are headed out this week… should be soooo interesting to see her reception. Will he bring his tool box and plumbers tape?


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> I apologize in advance if what I’m about to write is controversial. I’m the same age as Skeeter. I’m born and raised in Southern California and I’m also biracial (half Caucasian). I actually lived down the street from Immaculate Fart, sorry, Heart, for several years. If anything, being mixed race is more inclusive. I could move between racial cliques because I was mixed raced. My best friends growing up were not fully white or were mixed…all different races from myself. I was never “othered”.  Doria is a born and bred American as was Thomas Markle. Imagine if your mother was born in a foreign country and English was her 3rd language. I was spelling basic English words for my mom and helping her translate my whole life. Culturally my home life was not all American (like Maggots was) but I don’t bish and moan that I was treated like an Other. What planet is she living on?! Southern California is not 1950’s Bible Belt. POC are the norm. Yet she has to be the perpetual victim.


Far be it from me to deny what you're saying as I'm white.  But maybe you're younger and times have changed.  I recall witnessing some very nasty treatment of a friend who was brown-skinned (Persian) in So Cal.   There was no doubt what it was about.  One time an apt mgr - older white European - who was usually friendly to me got very aggressive when I was with this woman.
This was over 20 years ago.  I'm sure racism still exists but maybe it's covered up a bit more.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least Wallis had manners and could dress.


Yes, Wallis kept out of trouble although she did like the Queen Mother rumour.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Far be it from me to deny what you're saying as I'm white.  But maybe you're younger and times have changed.  I recall witnessing some very nasty treatment of a friend who was brown-skinned (Persian) in So Cal.   There was no doubt what it was about.  One time an apt mgr - older white European - who was usually friendly to me got very aggressive when I was with this woman.
> This was over 20 years ago.  *I'm sure racism still exists but maybe it's covered up a bit more.*


I agree with you that unfortunately racism still exists. We still have many ignorant people in this world, and people like TW are major promoters of racism imo. We need more Morgan Freemans…


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> He was already with Camilla, it would just gone on with the same mistress arrangement IMO


Yes, I read that Camilla was fine with being the girlfriend.  She had a great life, supported (including financially) by Charles.  She loved the country and her horses and they had friends.

Now she has to work as a senior royal, which she does very well, but I don't think it was a goal of hers.


----------



## Chanbal

South African Lion King composer ‘does not remember’ discussing Nelson Mandela with Meghan
					

Lebo M told the Telegraph he only spoke to Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex at the premiere for 'less than a minute'




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> Watched this and laughed out loud more than once!


Comment about this youtuber... he (?) is a bit pretentious, with an attitude of moral superiority. Is his content worth it?


----------



## mellibelly

sdkitty said:


> Far be it from me to deny what you're saying as I'm white.  But maybe you're younger and times have changed.  I recall witnessing some very nasty treatment of a friend who was brown-skinned (Persian) in So Cal.   There was no doubt what it was about.  One time an apt mgr - older white European - who was usually friendly to me got very aggressive when I was with this woman.
> This was over 20 years ago.  I'm sure racism still exists but maybe it's covered up a bit more.


Oh I’m not saying racism doesn’t exist. I’m 42 btw. Perhaps your friend experienced that racism 20 years ago because 9/11 had recently happened and there was a lot of terrible treatment directed at middle eastern people. That’s horrible, I’m so sorry for your friend. But when Maggot casually trots out another lie about newspapers calling her kids the n word I get ragey. When the entire royal family gets labeled racist because someone discussed the skin color or was it hair color of future children…that’s not racism. There are 10 more episodes of this dumb podcast and I’m expecting many more porky pies (I love that phrase from you Brits )


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> well, she is actually admitting that in spite of having  a black mother, she didn't experience any racism until she was in her late 30's....that's something
> As far as Mariah, the first time I recall reading about her what I remember was that she had a father (I think) who was middle eastern - nothing else about race.  maybe this wasn't her doing - more her PR people?
> 
> edit to say - surely she would have seen racism directed toward her mother?  so even if she avoided it directly for the most part she should have been well aware


Mariah’s dad was black and Mariah definitely dealt with a lot of race issues as a kid.  Nobody could help her with her hair, her white mom didn’t really try, and when her black cousins did try, it was a different texture than their own and they ended up damaging it. 

She said that’s why she was so obsessed with Derek Jeter when she met him, because she had literally never met anyone before that had an Irish mother and a black father. If I recall both their fathers were Dominican but I’m not 100% sure. 

Her book is so great.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I bet Hairy got some big bill for some sort of repair at their enormous mansion and was super sticker shocked because he had literally never seen a bill before.


----------



## Chanbal

https://www.kidspot.com.au/lifestyle/entertainment/opinion-ffs-meghan-now-youve-only-got-yourself-to-blame-for-the-hate/news-story/296c261f01afa536e505a61e963f74e5?utm_campaign=EditorialSB&utm_source=Kidspot&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_content=SocialBakers&fbclid=IwAR13O6OD3UmV7m8LRrk4bhqGKyYbE14BKAmkSG4LlwEaVFZ17eA9KKwBqmo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Toby93 said:


> Is she only interviewing WOC, are there not any accomplished white women worthy of her podcast (or am I not allowed to ask that question)?


I noticed this aswell: not only white women, but women from all different ethnicities.....


----------



## CobaltBlu

I sometimes think about that conversation about the possible hair color of Archwellie, and I am certainly not defending any racist comments... I wasnt there and I dont know what went on. Meghan has proven to be an unreliable narrator, that is for sure. 

When my daughter found out was pregnant with her biracial child, we ALL had a similar conversation, the entire rainbow of parents and grandparents, donor family too.  EVERYONE wondered aloud via FT, would it have curly hair like its dad and two grandpas, maybe green eyes like its dad, olive skin like yours truly, or pale with blue eyes like its other grandma, or maybe be dark like its donor dad (a family friend) and his African American father's family. Would it be a boy or girl, would it be missing its wisdom teeth like my lucky daughter, and so on. Left handed maybe like great grandma? Boy or girl, maybe even twins.....

it was just a conversation about the genetic grab bag. 

I am not saying it was necessarily what the tone was with the Windsors but it certainly is possible to have a conversation about what a mixed race baby is going to look like without it being racist. 

And yes, My darling 2-year old grandson represents the entire family from head to toe!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5601784
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.kidspot.com.au/lifestyle/entertainment/opinion-ffs-meghan-now-youve-only-got-yourself-to-blame-for-the-hate/news-story/296c261f01afa536e505a61e963f74e5?utm_campaign=EditorialSB&utm_source=Kidspot&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_content=SocialBakers&fbclid=IwAR13O6OD3UmV7m8LRrk4bhqGKyYbE14BKAmkSG4LlwEaVFZ17eA9KKwBqmo




I was reading and reading and waiting for the reason........It never came. So basically, NW doesn't think the Duchess of Duke St is so much like _her_ anymore so she'll stop defending Meghan? What?

She was into Meghan because she was like her, and like her, and like_ her_

Now she's decided she's no longer like her anymore 

She was OK with Royalty so long as it meant a Black Prince Lording it over others, or M's blood messed-up the linage or what? Excuse me, what does that mean? I thought all blood was red, unless it was blue. People's politics is all messed-up.

But she's _not_ OK with Harry playing polo so she's not defending M anymore. Harry should be playing - basket ball, base ball? What?

Another narc if you ask me (I know, no one did)

MegZzzzzz deserves friends like this.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I was looking back over older posts on this thread, and I could have sworn that someone had posted the whole article from The Cut on here a few days ago?  I know I read the entire article, but can't remember where I saw it?




BLG went over it verbatim, his vid is on here.


----------



## Chanbal

A kind soul is attempting to help TW…  They were both interviewed by OW and Mariah has a clear picture of them in her mind. 
​_How do Markle and Mandela compare?_​_Dates_​_*Mandela:* born July 18, 1918 in Mvezo, Eastern Cape, South Africa - Died 5 December 5, 2013
*Markle: *born August 4, 1981 in Canoga Park, Los Angeles, USA_
_Education_​_*Mandela: *University of Fort Hare, and University of Witwatersrand, Law
*Markle: *Northwestern University school of communication, BA in theatre and international politics_
_Royal connections_​_*Mandela: *born into the Thembo royal family, Mvezo
*Markle: *married into British royal family_
_Legal dramas_​_*Mandela: *co-founded a paramilitary wing of the ANC, arrested in 1962 and sentenced to life imprisonment for conspiracy to overthrow the state
*Markle: *successfully sued Associated Newspapers over a letter she sent to her father, also starred in Suits, a US legal drama_
_Years in prison_​_*Mandela: *27 in literal prison
*Markle: *0 years in literal prison, several years in metaphorical prison of British Royal Family_
_Podcasts hosted_​_*Mandela:* 0
*Markle:* 1, Archetypes_
_Lifestyle platforms_​_*Mandela:* 0
*Markle:* 1, The Tig, now defunct, a “hub for the discerning palate”_
_Time spent on islands_​_*Mandela: *18 years on Robben Island, sleeping on the floor, using a bucket as a toilet and breaking rocks in a quarry
*Markle: *6 weeks on Vancouver Island post-wedding while she and Harry decided where to live_
_Selected awards_​_*Mandela:* more than 240 awards and honours, including the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize
*Markle: *NAACP President’s Award 2022, Teen Choice style award (nominated)_
_Culinary preferences_​_*Mandela:* Samp and Beans, oxtail stew
*Markle:* sushi, kale chips _
_Interviewed by Oprah Winfrey_​_*Mandela: *yes
*Markle:* yes_
_Favourite music_​_*Mandela: *Tchaikovsky, Handel
*Markle: *Crystal Fighters, Dragonette_
_Literature_​_*Mandela: *Long Walk to Freedom, a 630 page memoir 
*Markle:* Finding Freedom, a biography about the Sussexes’ flight to California, plus The Bench, a children’s book inspired by a poem she wrote for Harry on Father’s Day_
_Property_​_*Mandela:* Mandela House, a red-brick bungalow in Soweto, Johannesburg, with bullet holes in the walls and scorch marks from Molotov cocktails
*Markle: *$14.65million, 18,000sq ft mansion in Montecito, "the kind of big that startles you into remembering that unimaginable wealth is actually someone's daily reality," according to The Cut's writer, Allison P. Davis_
_Views on forgiveness_​_*Mandela:* "Forgiveness liberates the soul, it removes fear. That's why it's such a powerful weapon.”
*Markle:* "I think forgiveness is really important. It takes a lot more energy to not forgive, but it takes a lot of effort to forgive. I’ve really made an active effort, especially knowing that I can say anything.”_
_Relationship with the Spice Girls_​_*Mandela: *cordial, posed for a picture with them and Prince Charles, said it was one of the greatest days of his life
*Markle: *only invited Posh, Baby and Ginger to her wedding, but neither of the Mels_
_What Mariah Carey (subject of the latest Archetypes podcast) thinks of them_​_*Mandela:* “He looked like a King. He looked like a father. I was with him for just a moment, but what an incredibly powerful moment. I leaned down to hug him and in that brief embrace I felt the energy of an ancient ancestry and of the future, of struggles and sacrifice, of unshakeable faith and vision - of revolutionary love.”
(From The Meaning of Mariah Carey by Mariah Carey)
*Markle:* “You give us diva moments sometimes Meghan.”_



			archive.ph


----------



## Toby93

duna said:


> I noticed this aswell: not only white women, but women from all different ethnicities.....


I do see from the guest list that there are a few Asian women and Mindy Kaling is East Asian, but no white so far....


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> I was reading and reading and waiting for the reason........It never came. So basically, NW doesn't think the Duchess of Duke St is so much like _her_ anymore so she'll stop defending Meghan? What?
> 
> She was into Meghan because she was like her, and like her, and like_ her_
> 
> Now she's decided she's no longer like her anymore
> 
> She was OK with Royalty so long as it meant a Black Prince Lording it over others, or M's blood messed-up the linage or what? Excuse me, what does that mean? I thought all blood was red, unless it was blue. People's politics is all messed-up.
> 
> But she's _not_ OK with Harry playing polo so she's not defending M anymore. Harry should be playing - basket ball, base ball? What?
> 
> Another narc if you ask me (I know, no one did)
> 
> MegZzzzzz deserves friends like this.


yea, i didnt really get why she picked polo as the reason.  Its not like he gave up a career in something other than prince-ing to play polo instead. Plus he is learning to do plumbing stuff, so what's her beef?  There were many worse things in the article, really.


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> I sometimes think about that conversation about the possible hair color of Archwellie, and I am certainly not defending any racist comments... I wasnt there and I dont know what went on. Meghan has proven to be an unreliable narrator, that is for sure.
> 
> When my daughter found out was pregnant with her biracial child, we ALL had a similar conversation, the entire rainbow of parents and grandparents, donor family too.  EVERYONE wondered aloud via FT, would it have curly hair like its dad and two grandpas, maybe green eyes like its dad, olive skin like yours truly, or pale with blue eyes like its other grandma, or maybe be dark like its donor dad (a family friend) and his African American father's family. Would it be a boy or girl, would it be missing its wisdom teeth like my lucky daughter, and so on. Left handed maybe like great grandma? Boy or girl, maybe even twins.....
> 
> it was just a conversation about the genetic grab bag.
> 
> I am not saying it was necessarily what the tone was with the Windsors but it certainly is possible to have a conversation about what a mixed race baby is going to look like without it being racist.
> 
> And yes, My darling 2-year old grandson represents the entire family from head to toe!


Just going by what was said on Oprah, TW said there were *several* conversations about the "colour" of the baby and made it sound as if it was taking place *while* she was pregnant.  When Harry came out, he implied that it took place in *the beginning*, meaning before they were even married and said it was *a* *conversation*.  They couldn't even get their lies straight before going on national TV.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Just going by what was said on Oprah, TW said there were *several* conversations about the "colour" of the baby and made it sound as if it was taking place *while* she was pregnant.  When Harry came out, he implied that it took place in *the beginning*, meaning before they were even married and said it was *a* *conversation*.  They couldn't even get their lies straight before going on national TV.



Nor on M's threats to attempt suicide, one minute it was morning, the next before a show.

Seriously, these 2 should never commit a Crime together, they can't get their stories straight.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Toby93 said:


> I really do feel so sorry for HMTQ.



And the pic looks of Wallis has a dress full of monkeys holding…wait for it…BANANAS!!!


----------



## Toby93

Well this is just wrong  How much did SS pay to get this on the front page.  Is William the future king not also Diana's son?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I was reading and reading and waiting for the reason........It never came. So basically, NW doesn't think the Duchess of Duke St is so much like _her_ anymore so she'll stop defending Meghan? What?
> 
> She was into Meghan because she was like her, and like her, and like_ her_
> 
> Now she's decided she's no longer like her anymore
> 
> She was OK with Royalty so long as it meant a Black Prince Lording it over others, or M's blood messed-up the linage or what? Excuse me, what does that mean? I thought all blood was red, unless it was blue. People's politics is all messed-up.
> 
> But she's _not_ OK with Harry playing polo so she's not defending M anymore. Harry should be playing - basket ball, base ball? What?
> 
> Another narc if you ask me (I know, no one did)
> 
> MegZzzzzz deserves friends like this.


It's a rather convoluted article. I think NW is trying to convey that she has finally realized about TW and Hazz's apparent ambition of establishing a US royal family and becoming queen and king consort, respectively (not a devotion to noble causes).

"_It was these words after the headline, Meghan of Montecito: "She's left the Firm behind. Harry's found a polo team in Santa Barbara. The kids are doing great."
…
Yes. That message is clear right at the start of the story. 'I have a husband whose found a new tribe at the Santa Barbara Horsey Play Club because we have money and status…_'"


----------



## muddledmint

Toby93 said:


> Well this is just wrong  How much did SS pay to get this on the front page.  Is William the future king not also Diana's son?



That photo looks like a caricature!


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> I noticed this aswell: not only white women, but women from all different ethnicities.....


there are at least two Asian women


----------



## zen1965

xincinsin said:


> This thread is bad for my advertising profile. After our discussion of her gnarly feet several pages ago, I keep getting ads for bunion aids. Time to clean up the cookies
> 
> Lion King: maybe they will now claim that it was a lowly member of the cast, which made the "memory" even more precious to her because you know how much she identifies with the common man ...


It surely was a sweet nod to her relatability…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

mellibelly said:


> Oh I’m not saying racism doesn’t exist. I’m 42 btw. Perhaps your friend experienced that racism 20 years ago because 9/11 had recently happened and there was a lot of terrible treatment directed at middle eastern people. That’s horrible, I’m so sorry for your friend. But when Maggot casually trots out another lie about newspapers calling her kids the n word I get ragey. When the entire royal family gets labeled racist because someone discussed the skin color or was it hair color of future children…that’s not racism. There are 10 more episodes of this dumb podcast and I’m expecting many more porky pies (I love that phrase from you Brits )


just to clarify, this was before 9/11....IDK if these people thought she was middle eastern or just that she had dark skin.

in re what you said about the RF being accused of racism because someone allegedly speculated about the baby's potential skin color - my own sister implied there was a problem when I said her newborn grandchild was brown.  the baby's mother is Latino and brown.  she said some people on the text might be offended.  why?  there is nothing wrong with being brown.  but I shut up after that.  didn't want to get into an argument with 7 other people involved.


----------



## Chanbal

She can't… she wants $$$$ Allegedly.


----------



## Annawakes

I highly highly highly doubt that the Q is telling ZeeZy anything, let alone “begging her to please stop lying”.


----------



## Chanbal

Who is going to believe that she left her 'precious journal' @Frogmore for all these years? 



_*PR guru and brand expert Mark Borkowski said he expects Meghan to use the trip to gain publicity. *He told MailOnline: 'This remains a Cold War between houses still in conflict. To those outside looking in, it appears that Meghan is constantly looking to intersect the news agenda'.

*He said that a portrait of Meghan that was remarkably similar to one of Harry's mother was 'was perfectly timed at a time the world was remembering Diana' on the 25th anniversary of her death this week.*

Mr Borkowski said: 'It appears she [Meghan] is a modern celebrity that is defined by her media profile. This is a pedantic explanation to suggest that the visit will be one that will be in the full glare of the media, she will be using every occasion to regenerate her narrative. It’s a new form of photosynthesis - converting media energy to extract the nutrients for continued brand fame'.

*Yesterday it emerged that Meghan found her journal at Frogmore during the Jubilee celebrations where they were not invited onto the Buckingham Palace balcony.* The discovery will raise fears that she could publish her account of royal life before they emigrated. Harry's own memoirs are already underway. 

_


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> just to clarify, this was before 9/11....IDK if these people thought she was middle eastern or just that she had dark skin.
> 
> in re what you said about the RF being accused of racism because someone allegedly speculated about the baby's potential skin color - my own sister implied there was a problem when I said her newborn grandchild was brown.  the baby's mother is Latino and brown.  she said some people on the text might be offended.  why?  there is nothing wrong with being brown.  but I shut up after that.  didn't want to get into an argument with 7 other people involved.


My long time hair stylist is a Mexican American male.   We were having a conversation about something and he referred to me as a white girl. He quickly became embarrassed after he said it and began to apologize. I laughed and asked what was the problem as he was stating the obvious.  It wasn’t until that moment that I realized that he was separating brown people from white people. in all my years living in California I never thought of Latins as being brown people. To me Latins were just people. Period.  Meghan Markle could have blue skin, she would still be an obnoxious narcissist  I’m with Morgan Freeman and tired of talking about race.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> Who is going to believe that she left her 'precious journal' @Frogmore for all these years?
> 
> 
> 
> _*PR guru and brand expert Mark Borkowski said he expects Meghan to use the trip to gain publicity. *He told MailOnline: 'This remains a Cold War between houses still in conflict. To those outside looking in, it appears that Meghan is constantly looking to intersect the news agenda'.
> 
> *He said that a portrait of Meghan that was remarkably similar to one of Harry's mother was 'was perfectly timed at a time the world was remembering Diana' on the 25th anniversary of her death this week.*
> 
> Mr Borkowski said: 'It appears she [Meghan] is a modern celebrity that is defined by her media profile. This is a pedantic explanation to suggest that the visit will be one that will be in the full glare of the media, she will be using every occasion to regenerate her narrative. It’s a new form of photosynthesis - converting media energy to extract the nutrients for continued brand fame'.
> 
> *Yesterday it emerged that Meghan found her journal at Frogmore during the Jubilee celebrations where they were not invited onto the Buckingham Palace balcony.* The discovery will raise fears that she could publish her account of royal life before they emigrated. Harry's own memoirs are already underway.
> View attachment 5601836
> _



This is getting out of hand on her part. She’s been out longer than in. I doubt that HMTQ spent that much time with them. Every family, well most, when they are together talk openly and say things that we don’t want to hear sometimes but most people don’t go running around and complaining about it. I might complain vocally to a sibling or parent but that is where it belongs, in that circle. Not everthing that is said at family gatherings is earth shattering. 

WTF?


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> “As a thirty something woman” WRONG
> No one treated this racially ambiguous white passing person like a black woman (whatever that means) The same way no journalist called her Casper the friendly ghost white Ginger kids the N word! Pathological liar! I’m expecting her to claim to be 1/64 Cherokee princess and therefore Native American at this point


If claiming she was part indigenous was advantageous to her you can be sure she'd do it. Maybe she trotted that out in Wyoming.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Who is going to believe that she left her 'precious journal' @Frogmore for all these years?
> 
> 
> 
> _*PR guru and brand expert Mark Borkowski said he expects Meghan to use the trip to gain publicity. *He told MailOnline: 'This remains a Cold War between houses still in conflict. To those outside looking in, it appears that Meghan is constantly looking to intersect the news agenda'.
> 
> *He said that a portrait of Meghan that was remarkably similar to one of Harry's mother was 'was perfectly timed at a time the world was remembering Diana' on the 25th anniversary of her death this week.*
> 
> Mr Borkowski said: 'It appears she [Meghan] is a modern celebrity that is defined by her media profile. This is a pedantic explanation to suggest that the visit will be one that will be in the full glare of the media, she will be using every occasion to regenerate her narrative. It’s a new form of photosynthesis - converting media energy to extract the nutrients for continued brand fame'.
> 
> *Yesterday it emerged that Meghan found her journal at Frogmore during the Jubilee celebrations where they were not invited onto the Buckingham Palace balcony.* The discovery will raise fears that she could publish her account of royal life before they emigrated. Harry's own memoirs are already underway.
> View attachment 5601836
> _



Some nights, I have trouble getting to sleep. I’m hoping that Meghan’s journal of revealing royal family gossip will be good bedtime reading and put me right to sleep.  Considering that the journal is documenting things that happened years ago, it should be very stale, and unexciting reading. Please don’t make me wait.  I need more unexcitement from you.


----------



## Toby93

muddledmint said:


> That photo looks like a caricature!


And more hair photoshopped in


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> This is getting out of hand on her part. She’s been out longer than in. I doubt that HMTQ spent that much time with them. Every family, well most, when they are together talk openly and say things that we don’t want to hear sometimes but most people don’t go running around and complaining about it. I might complain vocally to a sibling or parent but that is where it belongs, in that circle. Not everthing that is said at family gatherings is earth shattering.
> 
> WTF?


I think it will reveal that TQ likes jelly sandwiches with her tea.  But wait!  The palace has already leaked that in the past few days. Foiled again by granny, Meg!


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> There’s a level of crazy I don’t want to understand. It’s why I can’t watch documentaries from the perspective of the serial killer. I don’t need to get in the mind of Ted Bundy, thank you very much. I’ve reached that point with TW.


It's exhausting. I'm glad I have a guest this weekend to take a breather from Maleficent Markle's insanity. 

But I will miss everyone's witty and insightful commentary. Have a relaxing weekend and stay cool!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> He was already with Camilla, it would just gone on with the same mistress arrangement IMO


I think he wanted to make an honest woman out of her  She's proven to be a credit to the RF. That wouldn't have been possible if she was his mistress.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> And more hair photoshopped in


Her hair extensions remind me of long shaggy bathroom rugs popular in the 70’s.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Some nights, I have trouble getting to sleep. I’m hoping that Meghan’s journal of revealing royal family gossip will be good bedtime reading and put me right to sleep.  Considering that the journal is documenting things that happened years ago, it should be very stale, and unexciting reading. Please don’t make me wait.  I need more unexcitement from you.


I hate to say it, but Revenge is having the same effect. A chapter a night does the trick. I do applaud his effort though.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> She can't… she wants $$$$ Allegedly.
> View attachment 5601830


You know that's a work of fiction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> If claiming she was part indigenous was advantageous to her you can be sure she'd do it. Maybe she trotted that out in Wyoming.


At one time that was the thing to do. It was well before genetic testing. Every actor/actress found out that they were 164th.  Native American   Even The Sopranss storyline made fun of with some guy claiming to have NA ancestry so he could obtain a casino license.  Tony kept calling him Chief in a derisive tone of voice.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Well this is just wrong  How much did SS pay to get this on the front page.  Is William the future king not also Diana's son?



I saw this in the checkout line. It is one of those individual celebrity magazine and it is called Prince Harry. It’s a single issue for stans.


----------



## Lodpah

duna said:


> I noticed this aswell: not only white women, but women from all different ethnicities.....


This! I think she is malicious in picking out her guests-MC cause of her diva status but the wife makes it out to be a bad thing. Serena Williams? I think SW is Uber talented but I don’t think she’s that bright to be taken in by these two fools. 

With the economy it is are young people really paying 3K to hear them speak? That’s the price of a nice handbag that will last quite a long time but to spend it on these two fools to hear them speak? What a waste of money. A 5th grader could enlighten them more than these two grifters.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Nor on M's threats to attempt suicide, one minute it was morning, the next before a show.
> 
> Seriously, these 2 should never commit a Crime together, they can't get their stories straight.


Add mouthpiece  Scoobie Dooo and they are a MEMEME, Scoobie, Hazbeen version of  the “Three Stooges” with apologies to Moe, Larry, and Curly. 

The Three Stooges  were a slapstick comedy team decades ago. 

Each had a set role in their routines: Moe was quick to anger, Larry the middle Stooge was described as “the reactor between the other two”, and Curly the childlike dimwit.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Spanish lady said he was her fiancé and had a lunch appointment.
> 
> Could just have been Meghan putting on an accent tho


I don’t think she could pull off that level of acting - even given how fake H’s accent is.


bag-mania said:


> Here are other topics for her remaining episodes. From The Cut:
> 
> The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ***** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and Slut (Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”)
> She has lined up a murderers’ row of guests: Constance Wu, Issa Rae, Lisa Ling, Margaret Cho, and Ziwe. (I’ll let you guess who aligns with which archetype.)


Given Margaret Cho’s comedy revolves around Asian stereotypes I am sure her episode will be an agonising hour of her fruitlessly volleying punchlines at the wall of M’s personality and then M dying of an aneurism when Margaret dares to suggest M might also have grown up with people of colour. 



papertiger said:


> _This _is a diva
> 
> and singing to another (goddess) no less



Beautiful, 

It does need to be said that it’s Mariah’s point that diva is such a loaded term but words like auteur or entrepreneur or even star aren’t. 


lalame said:


> I don't think anyone has brought this up but don't you think it's so pompous the way her podcast has framed each episode like "two women sharing their common experience on this topic." The focus is not on the guest, it's like a conversation about how their experiences relate... and that type of conversation is fine except I'm just not seeing the comparison between her and Compton-to-Grand Slam champion Serena on the topic of ambition. Or her and world renowned songstress Mariah on the topic of being a diva. Would you listen to a podcast where "lalame and Elon Musk discuss the trappings of wealth in their lives?" lol


You do yourself a disservice I’m sure you and Elon would be way more entertaining   


muddledmint said:


> Exactly. She grew up privileged and experienced little or no discrimination. She even admits this in her Mariah podcast when she says she was never treated like a black woman until she married Harry!
> 
> In the book, bower says she never discussed being biracial or experiencing racial discrimination until she started trying to become a humanitarian (which she only got into because her acting career was stalling and she needed to raise her profile).
> 
> She moans about it now (gutterally *gag*) because:
> 
> 1. She literally has nothing else to talk about when she gives speeches. No other way to connect or find common ground with the poors. Because she lives such a hard scrabble life in montecito wearing thousands of dollars worth of (fugly) clothes each day. And she has accomplished almost nothing in terms of humanitarian work other than giving useless speeches and posing for photos in charities. So yeah, nothing else to talk about.
> 2. She has to be the victim so that Harry feels that he needs to protect her. Also to gain sympathy from other white savior elites.
> 3. As I said above, she needs to play the race card to punish anyone who dares to criticize her. It’s her most powerful defense. So far it’s worked a charm but we’ll see how long that lasts!
> 4. Would she have ANY supporters if she were not half black? Imagine if she were 100% white. She would have been crucified and cancelled a long time ago.


I don’t think so actually- sure being a POC is a nice flourish for her and it is certainly fashionable but being connected with the royals is a lifelong pass to the kid gloves treatment in the media and will always attract flunkies. 


papertiger said:


> "We'll show her the difference between a DIVA and a hungry beaver!"
> 
> Have you noticed how Tudor and Lady C now do the same M-voice and sarcastic laugh


Who do you think is copying who?
I get the feeling Lady C was doing a merry jig the week Tudor’s channel went down. 


Helventara said:


> Maybe not but it seems that aristocracy and classes were (or still are) very much alive in Britain.
> ETA: maybe I should clarify. People can be kind to others, inclusive even to those beneath them, etc but when it comes to joining the family, suddenly these people become unsuitable for many reasons.


My speculation is that Diana was good at PR so she would recognise that marrying the heir outside the aristocracy and marrying him to someone very photogenic was one of the only good press moves the BRF managed in the last 20 years. 


Toby93 said:


> I do see from the guest list that there are a few Asian women and Mindy Kaling is East Asian, but no white so far....


I don’t really care if she doesn’t have any white people but I can’t help wondering if Hil Dog or her daughter might be the top secret mayonnaise representation.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> *Who do you think is copying who?
> I get the feeling Lady C was doing a merry jig the week Tudor’s channel went down.*



  Good question.

Unfortunately, I haven't watched much of Tudor to know for sure. I know Lady C much more from this thread. 

They are both strong characters and highly entertaining from I _have_ seen. I would presume Lady C because he seems like a natural mimic, but I am happy to be corrected.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> You know that's a work of fiction.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> there are at least two Asian women


I stand corrected.  Apparently she will be interviewing Victoria Jackson, another dear friend.


----------



## Chanbal

Speaking of Lady C, here is her opinion on Diana…


----------



## Katel

mellibelly said:


> I haven’t watched yet but here’s River’s recap of the Mariah podcast. Sorry if this is crude, but in a previous video he says Skeeter’s oil slicked severely parted hair is exactly how Wallis Simpson wore her minge






csshopper said:


> Watched this and laughed out loud more than once!





mellibelly said:


> At the 28:45 minute mark when he says “she’s f*ckin nuts!” I have watched multiple times





papertiger said:


> "We'll show her the difference between a DIVA and a hungry beaver!"
> 
> Have you noticed how Tudor and Lady C now do the same M-voice and sarcastic laugh


At ~36:45   
“The windmills of her mind are like haunted ghost town echo chambers with rats running around in the corners digging into piles of droppings and cobwebs.”


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I stand corrected.  Apparently she will be interviewing Victoria Jackson, another dear friend.


I wonder if VJ is reactivating her infomercials?  Back in the day, she had Victoria Principal shilling for her. Is she going to use Meg or are we getting a makeup line from her?  VJ used be a simple makeup artist living in Sherman Oaks/Studio City.  Now she is married to Bill Guthy who lends his private jet to them so carbon emissions can increase. 

This podcast would have more meaning, and with a different title, it she interviewed women who are of very distinct ethnic backgrounds struggling to get their product out there.  A woman wearing a hijab is going to have trouble selling to a white suburban housewife, even if that housewife is desperately in need of the product and wants it.  Overcoming appearance prejudice and being authentic and not hiring a politically correct spokesperson would make for an interesting series.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is so f*cking rude. Why are people still wanting to work with her when she turns around and badmouths them the minute they don't fawn over her?


----------



## Chanbal

One more interesting article.   


_Meghan, for her part, is making it clear that *she now directs the Sussex show* – and the old ‘Firm’ are just going to have to wince and bear it. Last week, she launched ‘Archetypes’, a podcast from the ‘audio’ division at Archewell, the Sussexes’ new-fangled company – or ‘start-up’, as she calls it…

But* the podcast i*sn’t just about online engagements, mega-rich celebrities or even imparting cod-spiritual wisdoms. It’s about exacting royal revenge on the House of Windsor and the British establishment. *According to Harry’s biographer Duncan Larcombe, the start of Archetypes is merely ‘the opening salvo’ in Meghan’s ‘12-week war’ on the royal family*….

*Where is Harry in all this? The Duke seems to have been relegated to a subservient role in Meghan’s media blitz,* which is funny given their shared emphasis on gender equality. *In the podcast, he appears for about 15 seconds.* He is allowed to compliment Serena on her hair – ‘great vibe’ – and then shuffles off, not to be heard again. *‘Thanks, my love,’ says Meghan, with the sort of tenderness a Taliban warlord might reserve for his prettiest wife.

In the Cut piece, Harry pops up again in genial handy-hubby mode.* ‘We’re fixing all these things, the pipes,’ he says, talking about his massive new house. *He then slavishly relates a story about how he reassured his wife, after an exhausting photo-shoot, that she can be ‘a mom’ and ‘a model’.* Later, we learn he fixed a neighbour’s sprinkler…

*Meghan and Harry are cooking up something, *though, and Netflix has been tight-lipped about what it is. A spokesman for the couple has said that they will not be ‘taking part in any reality shows’. But *this week Meghan confirmed that she was working with the award-winning director Liz Garbus. ‘The piece of my life I haven’t been able to share, that people haven’t been able to see, is our love story,’* she says. *God help us all*…

After ‘Megxit’ (Harry says that term is misogynistic), *Meghan and Harry no doubt intended to conquer Hollywood. They seem to have failed, which might explain in part why they are heading back to Britain determined to reinvent themselves once again*.

‘Love always wins,’ Meghan and Harry are both fond of saying. Yet *they seem increasingly spiteful.* For them, victory means the monarchy has to lose._









						Drama queens: the return of Meghan and Harry | The Spectator
					

We’ve all spent months bracing ourselves for what our leaders assure us will be a dreadful winter. As the weather turns, we can look forward to ruinous energy bills, runaway inflation, collapsing health services, strikes, blackouts, more strikes, violent crime, and perhaps even – why not? – a...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so f*cking rude. Why are people still wanting to work with her when she turns around and badmouths them the minute they don't fawn over her?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5601952


Meg, have you ever heard of the expression it takes one to know one?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> At 36:45
> “*The windmills* *of* her *your mind* are like haunted ghost town echo chambers with rats running around in the corners digging into piles of droppings and cobwebs.”


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> One more interesting article.
> View attachment 5601956
> 
> _Meghan, for her part, is making it clear that *she now directs the Sussex show* – and the old ‘Firm’ are just going to have to wince and bear it. Last week, she launched ‘Archetypes’, a podcast from the ‘audio’ division at Archewell, the Sussexes’ new-fangled company – or ‘start-up’, as she calls it…
> 
> But* the podcast i*sn’t just about online engagements, mega-rich celebrities or even imparting cod-spiritual wisdoms. It’s about exacting royal revenge on the House of Windsor and the British establishment. *According to Harry’s biographer Duncan Larcombe, the start of Archetypes is merely ‘the opening salvo’ in Meghan’s ‘12-week war’ on the royal family*….
> 
> *Where is Harry in all this? The Duke seems to have been relegated to a subservient role in Meghan’s media blitz,* which is funny given their shared emphasis on gender equality. *In the podcast, he appears for about 15 seconds.* He is allowed to compliment Serena on her hair – ‘great vibe’ – and then shuffles off, not to be heard again. *‘Thanks, my love,’ says Meghan, with the sort of tenderness a Taliban warlord might reserve for his prettiest wife.
> 
> In the Cut piece, Harry pops up again in genial handy-hubby mode.* ‘We’re fixing all these things, the pipes,’ he says, talking about his massive new house. *He then slavishly relates a story about how he reassured his wife, after an exhausting photo-shoot, that she can be ‘a mom’ and ‘a model’.* Later, we learn he fixed a neighbour’s sprinkler…
> 
> *Meghan and Harry are cooking up something, *though, and Netflix has been tight-lipped about what it is. A spokesman for the couple has said that they will not be ‘taking part in any reality shows’. But *this week Meghan confirmed that she was working with the award-winning director Liz Garbus. ‘The piece of my life I haven’t been able to share, that people haven’t been able to see, is our love story,’* she says. *God help us all*…
> 
> After ‘Megxit’ (Harry says that term is misogynistic), *Meghan and Harry no doubt intended to conquer Hollywood. They seem to have failed, which might explain in part why they are heading back to Britain determined to reinvent themselves once again*.
> 
> ‘Love always wins,’ Meghan and Harry are both fond of saying. Yet *they seem increasingly spiteful.* For them, victory means the monarchy has to lose._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Drama queens: the return of Meghan and Harry | The Spectator
> 
> 
> We’ve all spent months bracing ourselves for what our leaders assure us will be a dreadful winter. As the weather turns, we can look forward to ruinous energy bills, runaway inflation, collapsing health services, strikes, blackouts, more strikes, violent crime, and perhaps even – why not? – a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk



So when we use the nickname for Harry of Hazznonuts, we are accurately supporting  what this man has written for The Spectator?  So Freddy, you are saying that Harry is a manipulated putz, a puppet, who is smacked down by his wife?  A man with no free will?  Freddy, are you a member of tPF?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Stuff is getting real now


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>


If you are going to share that song you’ve got to give me some classic Steve McQueen to look at while I’m listening to it. Here you go.


----------



## muddledmint

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stuff is getting real now



Who is this very a list person???


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I stand corrected.  Apparently she will be interviewing Victoria Jackson, another dear friend.


haven't heard much about her for a while


----------



## 880

I don’t think the BRF has anything to worry about re the upcoming books or podcasts etc. 

H cannot get over the fact that he’s not number 2 anymore. 

I also don’t think the queen is losing any sleep over H or his children. She has other grandchildren and great grandchildren


----------



## Toby93

880 said:


> I don’t think the BRF has anything to worry about re the upcoming books or podcasts etc.
> 
> H cannot get over the fact that he’s not number 2 anymore.
> 
> *I also don’t think the queen is losing any sleep over H or his children. She has other grandchildren and great grandchildren*


Exactly.  Real royals who are willing to step up and be a part of "The Firm" and put the work in.  They may have the big house in California, but that's all it is. It's not a real palace or castle and they are nothing but second row faux royals.  Not quite the same cachet as being an actual part of the Royal Family.

I think that has a lot to do with why she continually lashes out at the BRF, because deep down she knows that they saw/see her for what she really is and it drives her nuts  (That, and the fact that without the connection, she is nothing and has nothing remotely interesting to say)


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I wonder if VJ is reactivating her infomercials?  Back in the day, she had Victoria Principal shilling for her. Is she going to use Meg or are we getting a makeup line from her?  VJ used be a simple makeup artist living in Sherman Oaks/Studio City.  Now she is married to Bill Guthy who lends his private jet to them so carbon emissions can increase.
> 
> This podcast would have more meaning, and with a different title, it she interviewed women who are of very distinct ethnic backgrounds struggling to get their product out there.  A woman wearing a hijab is going to have trouble selling to a white suburban housewife, even if that housewife is desperately in need of the product and wants it.  Overcoming appearance prejudice and being authentic and not hiring a politically correct spokesperson would make for an interesting series.


oh - I thought it was Victoria Jackson the actress


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> If you are going to share that song you’ve got to give me some classic Steve McQueen to look at while I’m listening to it. Here you go.



It happens that I love the song.


----------



## gracekelly

muddledmint said:


> Who is this very a list person???


A list person?  A flack for SS?  A housewife of NYC? lol!  Nobody puts Bethenny in the corner.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sting’s version:


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> A list person?  A flack for SS?  A housewife of NYC? lol!  Nobody puts Bethenny in the corner.


Several suggestions in the comments - GKing, Ellen, etc.


----------



## V0N1B2

mellibelly said:


> “As a thirty something woman” WRONG
> No one treated this racially ambiguous white passing person like a black woman (whatever that means) The same way no journalist called her Casper the friendly ghost white Ginger kids the N word! Pathological liar! I’m expecting her to claim to be 1/64 Cherokee princess and therefore Native American at this point


Doll…. She’s Maltese, don’t you remember? She went there and cosplayed an old(er) Maltese woman complete with Ghonnella (Faldetta). 
Remember? Then her dad was like, b!tch what?  There’s no one from Malta in our family…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

V0N1B2 said:


> Doll…. She’s Maltese, don’t you remember? She went there and cosplayed an old(er) Maltese woman complete with Ghonnella (Faldetta).
> Remember? Then her dad was like, b!tch what?  There’s no one from Malta in our family…
> 
> View attachment 5601991



Also, as soon as she was there she abandoned the mission she made the magazine pay for.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stuff is getting real now



Who is this A-list person? Are there any guesses?  (I wish we could get Ceejay's input on this one.  )

"_Bethenny - who previously spoke out to blast Meghan in a tweet posted in March 2021, shortly before the Sussexes' explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey - also revealed that *she 'had a very A-list person* call her' after she aired her thoughts on the Duchess of Sussex, *asking her to 'take down what she said'*… 

But, she says, *the unnamed A-lister who called her to plead Meghan and Harry's case insisted that the couple was suffering much more than anyone realized*. 

'I had a very A-list person call me when I commented on Meghan Markle before the Oprah interview and said to me: "*Can you please take down what you said, they can barely stand up in Frogmore Cottage and they can't afford their security,*"' Bethenny recalled_.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Stuff is getting real now



Wow - she doesn't pull any punches!  I love that the article continues:

*"Could it be that Americans are waking up to the fact there may be little more to the Sussexes than their seemingly bottomless well of grievance about their treatment in the UK?"*


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Wow - she doesn't pull any punches!  I love that the article continues:
> 
> *"Could it be that Americans are waking up to the fact there may be little more to the Sussexes than their seemingly bottomless well of grievance about their treatment in the UK?"*


I wonder if the $1M budget for clothes wasn't enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _'I had a very A-list person call me when I commented on Meghan Markle before the Oprah interview and said to me: "*Can you please take down what you said, they can barely stand up in Frogmore Cottage and they can't afford their security,*"' Bethenny recalled_.




OMFG. The newly renovated millions of pounds home is not inhabitable. Give me a f*cking break.

(BTW the one where Harry apparently knocked his head on the doorways a few times - now that I think of it, it shows, hu? - was Nottingham Cottage. Because, you know, it was built in the 1600s. And I've never heard him complain it wasn't good enough until the spoiled Californian moved in there.)


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. The newly renovated millions of pounds home is not inhabitable. Give me a f*cking break.
> 
> (BTW the one where Harry apparently knocked his head on the doorways a few times - now that I think of it, it shows, hu? - was Nottingham Cottage. Because, you know, it was built in the 1600s. And I've never heard him complain it wasn't good enough until the spoiled Californian moved in there.)


It's a lot prettier than the palace of the many toilets imo.   










						Frogmore Cottage pictured days before Harry and Meghan due to return
					

The Sussexes recently renewed their lease on the property in Windsor, in an unexpected move that sparked speculation that they may have plans for more frequent visits to the UK in future.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder why they always show the backside. The front is WAY cuter.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Don Lemon’s thoughts are getting lots of attention.

_'But [...] she is coming from is a place of privilege where she did not have to deal with racism until she married a white man. And she’s got all this criticism and all this attention,' Lemon continued._

1. Trevor is white.
2. Is this why MM is so angry with the BRF?  At the wedding, they _pushed_ her African American roots [the preacher, the choir, her mother sitting by herself, etc.] when in the past her _privilege_ had shielded her.  Of course, she really cannot express these thoughts publicly. 










						Don Lemon says he is 'shocked' by Meghan Markle's race admission
					

Meghan's comments came during her interview with Mariah Carey in the second episode of her Archetypes Spotify podcast, part of Meghan and Harry's $21m deal with the streaming giant.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2. Is this why MM is so angry with the BRF?  At the wedding, they _pushed_ her African American roots [the preacher, the choir, her mother sitting by herself, etc.] when in the past her _privilege_ had shielded her.  Of course, she really cannot express these thoughts publicly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don Lemon says he is 'shocked' by Meghan Markle's race admission
> 
> 
> Meghan's comments came during her interview with Mariah Carey in the second episode of her Archetypes Spotify podcast, part of Meghan and Harry's $21m deal with the streaming giant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Weren't the preacher and the choir what she asked for, and wasn't she the one not inviting one more relative though?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, as soon as she was there she abandoned the mission she made the magazine pay for.


She turned Rwanda into a fashion shoot didn't she? She tells people what they want to hear so she gets what she wants and then she does whatever is on her own agenda. She did the same thing with Harry.  Marry him and make herself a global brand.   If these people get burned twice, then shame on them.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Weren't the preacher and the choir what she asked for, and wasn't she the one not inviting one more relative though?


Charles selected the choir and the cleric.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Charles selected the choir and the cleric.



Yes, but I seem to remember at her request but don't take my word for it. I can see him booking the choir as a surprise, but why a cleric from another denomination without being nudged? In fact, even if nudged it's a bit weird. She converted after all.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. The newly renovated millions of pounds home is not inhabitable. Give me a f*cking break.
> 
> (BTW the one where Harry apparently knocked his head on the doorways a few times - now that I think of it, it shows, hu? - was Nottingham Cottage. Because, you know, it was built in the 1600s. And I've never heard him complain it wasn't good enough until the spoiled Californian moved in there.)


She lived in a modest house in Toronto when she met Hazz.  She had to meet him secretly at Jessica Mulroneys house since she was still living with her boyfriend Cory.  Maybe she is going to be interviewing herself when she gets to the archetype of slut?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but I seem to remember at her request but don't take my word for it. I can see him booking the choir as a surprise, but why a cleric from another denomination without being nudged? In fact, even if nudged it's a bit weird. She converted after all.



Bishop Michael Curry is the presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in the US.  CofE and Episcopal are virtually the same.  He gave the sermon, but did not perform the marriage.

_The Most Rev. Michael Bruce Curry is Presiding Bishop and Primate of The Episcopal Church.  He is the Chief Pastor and serves as President and Chief Executive Officer, and as Chair of the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church.

Presiding Bishop Curry was installed as the 27th Presiding Bishop and Primate of The Episcopal Church on November 1, 2015.  He was elected to a nine-year term and confirmed at the 78th General Convention of The Episcopal Church in Salt Lake City, UT, on June 27, 2015. _


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> She turned Rwanda into a fashion shoot didn't she? She tells people what they want to hear so she gets what she wants and then she does whatever is on her own agenda. She did the same thing with Harry.  *Marry him and make herself a global brand. *  If these people get burned twice, then shame on them.


That could be her Faustian bargain. She never thought it would backfire in the way it has.   TBower by exposing so many of her lies really messed up ‘the global brand plan’.  Imo the H&M story has been odd from day 1.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Don Lemon’s thoughts are getting lots of attention.
> 
> _'But [...] she is coming from is a place of privilege where she did not have to deal with racism until she married a white man. And she’s got all this criticism and all this attention,' Lemon continued._
> 
> 1. Trevor is white.
> 2. Is this why MM is so angry with the BRF?  At the wedding, they _pushed_ her African American roots [the preacher, the choir, her mother sitting by herself, etc.] when in the past her _privilege_ had shielded her.  Of course, she really cannot express these thoughts publicly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don Lemon says he is 'shocked' by Meghan Markle's race admission
> 
> 
> Meghan's comments came during her interview with Mariah Carey in the second episode of her Archetypes Spotify podcast, part of Meghan and Harry's $21m deal with the streaming giant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Don L is not alone. It looks like the number of shocked people keeps increasing… 












						Meghan Markle Is 'Trying to Mess Up The Royal Family' Says Diana Designer
					

The designer of Princess Diana's wedding dress, David Emanuel, accused Meghan of "driving everybody nuts" in a recent television interview.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> She lived in a modest house in Toronto when she met Hazz.  She had to meet him secretly at Jessica Mulroneys house since she was still living with her boyfriend Cory.  Maybe she is going to be interviewing herself when she gets to *the archetype of slut?*
> 
> View attachment 5602021


Oh that is the elephant in the room.  
Surely there will be a podcast regarding ambition and sleeping with multiple men to get what you want.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> She lived in a modest house in Toronto when she met Hazz.  She had to meet him secretly at Jessica Mulroneys house since she was still living with her boyfriend Cory.  Maybe she is going to be interviewing herself when she gets to the archetype of slut?



I really wonder what she told Harry. I wouldn't date someone who was sneaking around and cheating on their live-in girlfriend because it demonstrates effectively what kind of character - or lack thereof - that person has.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Don L is not alone. It looks like the number of shocked people keeps increasing…
> 
> View attachment 5602023
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is 'Trying to Mess Up The Royal Family' Says Diana Designer
> 
> 
> The designer of Princess Diana's wedding dress, David Emanuel, accused Meghan of "driving everybody nuts" in a recent television interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I shouldn't laugh at this, but it's funny.  She is a one woman wrecking crew.  A bulldozer.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really wonder what she told Harry. I wouldn't date someone who was sneaking around and cheating on their live-in girlfriend because it demonstrates effectively what kind of character - or lack thereof - that person has.


Hmmm...my house is being painted...fumigated....water leak.....the list is endless.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> That could be her Faustian bargain. She never thought it would backfire in the way it has.   TBower by exposing so many of her lies really messed up ‘the global brand plan’.  Imo the H&M story has been odd from day 1.


i have to give her credit for one thing, she doesn't stop trying.  I do draw that the line at hurtful and mean behavior.  Too bad that energy couldn't be channeled to better use.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Charles selected the choir and the cleric.


Charles selected the choir but it was TW (and Hazz?) "_who invited Bishop Curry to speak_" at their wedding. 









						Royal wedding preacher: Who is Michael Curry?
					

Bishop Curry captured the world's attention with a fiery address at the royal wedding.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Weren't the preacher and the choir what she asked for, and wasn't she the one not inviting one more relative though?


No - Prince Charles organised the choir









						'Prince Charles Invited Us': Black Choir Who Sang at Meghan Markle's Wedding Defend Prince Harry's Father
					

Founder and conductor of The Kingdom's Choir, Karen Gibson recently revealed that it is hard for them to believe that Prince Charles can be a racist.




					www.news18.com
				




edit - we are all posting the same thing!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Charles selected the choir but it was TW (and Hazz?) "_who invited Bishop Curry to speak_" at their wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal wedding preacher: Who is Michael Curry?
> 
> 
> Bishop Curry captured the world's attention with a fiery address at the royal wedding.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


I just looked this up.  It is very vague about who actually  invited him.  I find that odd, but many did not like  the tone (it is thought to have been inappropriate) and length of his sermon (I thought it was too long) so maybe it is a question of distancing at this point.


----------



## youngster

So, I had time and listened to the entire Lady C video so you don't need to!  Her thoughts on Diana:   
Diana had genuine warmth, genuine kindness, and genuine feeling for people. She made huge mistakes and could be extremely self-important and narcissistic at times but wasn't a full blown narcissist, rather her behavior was born from deep insecurities that were a product of her difficult and volatile childhood. 

Diana was very proud that William was going to be King. (Apparently Martin Bashir managed to convince Diana that the Queen was going to abdicate and that William had a chance to leap frog Charles and become King. Diana believed she could be appointed Regent for William at one point.  So, detachment from reality is apparently something that she and Harry have in common.)

At the time of her death, Diana was really on the outs with the British establishment, not just the royal family.  She was a pariah and there was no way back for her ever.  Lady C had contact with Diana and Diana fed her information in the 90's. Lady C said she refused to use the information as she knew it was untrue and unfair towards Charles. Diana started mending fences in the UK in the last 15 or so months of her life but had a long way to go.  So, she was looking abroad, looking to America where she was adored, and was planning to move to California, despite the fact that William and Harry were only 15 and 13, respectively.  She planned to leave them behind and didn't think of that as abandoning them.  (Will and Harry only saw Diana 2 weeks the summer that she died; they both decided to spend the time with Charles and other family members rather than her.)

Lady C's friends said Dodi was absolutely charming, well mannered and sweet. He was an "adorer" and Diana liked being adored.  His father was incredibly rich and Diana loved the wealth and opulence of the billionaire lifestyle.  (Lady C said that marriage was definitely a possibility and Mohammad Fayed would have set up and funded her charity and was buying them a house in L.A.)  Diana would not have made a good wife though to anyone other than someone who was looking for a trophy wife.  (A marriage to Hasnat Khan would have been a disaster.  He was a hard working doctor and from an elite Pakistani family who would not have allowed him to marry Diana.)   

Lady C says the day she died in Paris, Diana had tipped the press off as to where she was going to be.  She was trying to impress Dodi with how important and pursued she was and she enjoyed the attention.  It was a terrible accident that took her life. No great conspiracy, just several unfortunate events that occurred one after another.  (She goes into great detail of the mechanics of the accident in case anyone is interested.)

What would Diana's life be like today? Lady C said she would be the Zsa Zsa Gabor of the royal family. (Her words!)  She would have married Dodi.  He had nothing to do but love and adore Diana which she would have loved.  (She thinks Diana suffered from borderline personality issues, maybe not full blown BPD, but aspects of it though she was working towards a healthier approach towards relationships and life.)  She would have been a big star as Lady Diana Fayed but not as big a star as Diana, Princess of Wales. Lady C thinks the BRF would have been thrilled if Dodi had taken Diana off their hands.  She likely would have reduced her charity work to just her own charity.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> i have to give her credit for one thing, she doesn't stop trying.  I do draw that the line at hurtful and mean behavior.  Too bad that energy couldn't be channeled to better use.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I just looked this up.  It is very vague about who actually  invited him.  I find that odd, but many did not like  the tone (it is thought to have been inappropriate) and length of his sermon (I thought it was too long) so maybe it is a question of distancing at this point.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5602041



Good find.  Who told them about Curry in the first place, I wonder.  Neither of them strike me as being that knowledgeable about clerics.


----------



## muddledmint

CarryOn2020 said:


> Several suggestions in the comments - GKing, Ellen, etc.


Based on how she humiliated meghan on her show, I don’t think Ellen is the one. She clearly does not like or respect meghan.

Is gayle king an a lister? I feel like she is only sort of famous and only because of her association with Oprah. I definitely wouldn’t call her “very” a lister. 

Maybe Oprah or George Clooney? Both seem to have markled meghan now, but maybe this was back when they were still supporting her.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, I had time and listened to the entire Lady C video so you don't need to!  Her thoughts on Diana:
> Diana had genuine warmth, genuine kindness, and genuine feeling for people. She made huge mistakes and could be extremely self-important and narcissistic at times but wasn't a full blown narcissist, rather her behavior was born from deep insecurities that were a product of her difficult and volatile childhood.
> 
> Diana was very proud that William was going to be King. (Apparently Martin Bashir managed to convince Diana that the Queen was going to abdicate and that William had a chance to leap frog Charles and become King. Diana believed she could be appointed Regent for William at one point.  So, detachment from reality is apparently something that she and Harry have in common.)
> 
> At the time of her death, Diana was really on the outs with the British establishment, not just the royal family.  She was a pariah and there was no way back for her ever.  Lady C had contact with Diana and Diana fed her information in the 90's. Lady C said she refused to use the information as she knew it was untrue and unfair towards Charles. Diana started mending fences in the UK in the last 15 or so months of her life but had a long way to go.  So, she was looking abroad, looking to America where she was adored, and was planning to move to California, despite the fact that William and Harry were only 15 and 13, respectively.  She planned to leave them behind and didn't think of that as abandoning them.  (Will and Harry only saw Diana 2 weeks the summer that she died; they both decided to spend the time with Charles and other family members rather than her.)
> 
> Lady C's friends said Dodi was absolutely charming, well mannered and sweet. He was an "adorer" and Diana liked being adored.  His father was incredibly rich and Diana loved the wealth and opulence of the billionaire lifestyle.  (Lady C said that marriage was definitely a possibility and Mohammad Fayed would have set up and funded her charity and was buying them a house in L.A.)  Diana would not have made a good wife though to anyone other than someone who was looking for a trophy wife.  (A marriage to Hasnat Khan would have been a disaster.  He was a hard working doctor and from an elite Pakistani family who would not have allowed him to marry Diana.)
> 
> Lady C says the day she died in Paris, Diana had tipped the press off as to where she was going to be.  She was trying to impress Dodi with how important and pursued she was and she enjoyed the attention.  It was a terrible accident that took her life. No great conspiracy, just several unfortunate events that occurred one after another.  (She goes into great detail of the mechanics of the accident in case anyone is interested.)
> 
> What would Diana's life be like today? Lady C said she would be the Zsa Zsa Gabor of the royal family. (Her words!)  She would have married Dodi.  He had nothing to do but love and adore Diana which she would have loved.  (She thinks Diana suffered from borderline personality issues, maybe not full blown BPD, but aspects of it though she was working towards a healthier approach towards relationships and life.)  She would have been a big star as Lady Diana Fayed but not as big a star as Diana, Princess of Wales. Lady C thinks the BRF would have been thrilled if Dodi had taken Diana off their hands.  She likely would have reduced her charity work to just her own charity.


Hmmmm.  I used to have Lady CC on my take with a mountain of salt list.  I took her off of it when the MM thing started.  After reading you summary, (thank you!) I have to put her back on it.  If you believe Bower, Mohammed Fayed was a rather sinister manipulator and I don't think it would have worked out well for Diana in any manner shape or form.  If she couldn't deliver what he wanted, he would discard her.  I think Diana was smart enough to realize that having Princess of Wales attached to her name was more important in the end despite all of Fayed's money.  I don't think the family would have been happy with a marriage to Dodi at all.  Too much hinky stuff with him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Scobie is not biased at all…. Lol


----------



## gracekelly

muddledmint said:


> Based on how she humiliated meghan on her show, I don’t think Ellen is the one. She clearly does not like or respect meghan.
> 
> Is gayle king an a lister? I feel like she is only sort of famous and only because of her association with Oprah. I definitely wouldn’t call her “very” a lister.
> 
> Maybe Oprah or George Clooney? Both seem to have markled meghan now, but maybe this was back when they were still supporting her.


I see Oprah sending word via Gayle to Frankel. Oprah will always keep her options open regarding Meg so she can get the end of the marriage interview.   At this point, if George listens to his wife, he won't touch Meghan with a barge pole.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe one of the ‘truthbombs’ in Hazzie’s book concerns this farce of a romance, marriage, etc. Who better to carry off a lie than an Hwood actress?  In the past, she has said she can play any role except no one counted on her being so zzzz list. Once QE passes, it all gets exposed.    Ok, taking off my tinfoil hat now.  MM’s comments about race to MC are odd imo.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> So, I had time and listened to the entire Lady C video so you don't need to!  Her thoughts on Diana:
> Diana had genuine warmth, genuine kindness, and genuine feeling for people. She made huge mistakes and could be extremely self-important and narcissistic at times but wasn't a full blown narcissist, rather her behavior was born from deep insecurities that were a product of her difficult and volatile childhood.
> 
> Diana was very proud that William was going to be King. (Apparently Martin Bashir managed to convince Diana that the Queen was going to abdicate and that William had a chance to leap frog Charles and become King. Diana believed she could be appointed Regent for William at one point.  So, detachment from reality is apparently something that she and Harry have in common.)
> 
> At the time of her death, Diana was really on the outs with the British establishment, not just the royal family.  She was a pariah and there was no way back for her ever.  Lady C had contact with Diana and Diana fed her information in the 90's. Lady C said she refused to use the information as she knew it was untrue and unfair towards Charles. Diana started mending fences in the UK in the last 15 or so months of her life but had a long way to go.  So, she was looking abroad, looking to America where she was adored, and was planning to move to California, despite the fact that William and Harry were only 15 and 13, respectively.  She planned to leave them behind and didn't think of that as abandoning them.  (Will and Harry only saw Diana 2 weeks the summer that she died; they both decided to spend the time with Charles and other family members rather than her.)
> 
> Lady C's friends said Dodi was absolutely charming, well mannered and sweet. He was an "adorer" and Diana liked being adored.  His father was incredibly rich and Diana loved the wealth and opulence of the billionaire lifestyle.  (Lady C said that marriage was definitely a possibility and Mohammad Fayed would have set up and funded her charity and was buying them a house in L.A.)  Diana would not have made a good wife though to anyone other than someone who was looking for a trophy wife.  (A marriage to Hasnat Khan would have been a disaster.  He was a hard working doctor and from an elite Pakistani family who would not have allowed him to marry Diana.)
> 
> Lady C says the day she died in Paris, Diana had tipped the press off as to where she was going to be.  She was trying to impress Dodi with how important and pursued she was and she enjoyed the attention.  It was a terrible accident that took her life. No great conspiracy, just several unfortunate events that occurred one after another.  (She goes into great detail of the mechanics of the accident in case anyone is interested.)
> 
> What would Diana's life be like today? Lady C said she would be the Zsa Zsa Gabor of the royal family. (Her words!)  She would have married Dodi.  He had nothing to do but love and adore Diana which she would have loved.  (She thinks Diana suffered from borderline personality issues, maybe not full blown BPD, but aspects of it though she was working towards a healthier approach towards relationships and life.)  She would have been a big star as Lady Diana Fayed but not as big a star as Diana, Princess of Wales. Lady C thinks the BRF would have been thrilled if Dodi had taken Diana off their hands.  She likely would have reduced her charity work to just her own charity.


While you missed Lady C's equestrian comparison of Diana and TW (_a fine race horse_ vs _a broken down donkey_), you did an excellent job. Thank you!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Good find.  Who told them about Curry in the first place, I wonder.  Neither of them strike me as being that knowledgeable about clerics.


Google search using selected keywords? Oops, TW doesn't Google…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Scobie is not biased at all…. Lol




Wait...is Scobie saying he doesn't want to defend Raptor? What happened? Did she break his little heart?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Very revealing, imo.  
_Markle, who has a Black mother and white father, remarked that she was never treated as a “Black woman” until she married Prince Harry in 2017. “*If there’s any time in my life that it’s been more focused on my race, it’s only once I started dating my husband*,” she explained. “Then I started to understand what it was like to be treated like a Black woman. Because up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman.”_








						Meghan Markle Told Mariah Carey What Caused Her To Be Treated As A "Black Woman"
					

On the second episode of her new 'Archetypes' podcast, Meghan Markle told Mariah Carey that she was never treated as a "Black woman" until she married Prince Harry.




					www.bustle.com


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Hmmmm.  I used to have Lady CC on my take with a mountain of salt list.  I took her off of it when the MM thing started.  After reading you summary, (thank you!) I have to put her back on it.  If you believe Bower, Mohammed Fayed was a rather sinister manipulator and I don't think it would have worked out well for Diana in any manner shape or form.  If she couldn't deliver what he wanted, he would discard her.  I think Diana was smart enough to realize that having Princess of Wales attached to her name was more important in the end despite all of Fayed's money.  I don't think the family would have been happy with a marriage to Dodi at all.  Too much hinky stuff with him.


Yeah, a big ‘ol mountain of salt for sure. Lady C doesn’t have any special insight into Diana’s mind and she is far from unbiased when it comes to the royals. Diana had only been seeing Dodi for a couple of months and she was having fun with him. I don’t believe for a minute she was about to jump into another marriage with a man she barely knew. If nothing else she had learned that brutal lesson when she was 19.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really wonder what she told Harry. I wouldn't date someone who was sneaking around and cheating on their live-in girlfriend because it demonstrates effectively what kind of character - or lack thereof - that person has.


We will never know what Harry knows, or didn't know, but I think he would be oblivious because he would be so used to getting his own way and people stepping aside for him.  Both of his previous girlfriends did not have anything great to say about him.  One said he was selfish to point of her having to arrange and purchase her own plane ticket to travel with him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, a big ‘ol mountain of salt for sure. Lady C doesn’t have any special insight into Diana’s mind and she is far from unbiased when it comes to the royals. Diana had only been seeing Dodi for a couple of months and she was having fun with him. I don’t believe for a minute she was about to jump into another marriage with a man she barely knew. If nothing else she had learned that brutal lesson when she was 19.


Plus he was engaged to another woman at the time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really wonder what she told Harry. I wouldn't date someone who was sneaking around and cheating on their live-in girlfriend because it demonstrates effectively what kind of character - or lack thereof - that person has.


I wonder what Hazzi told her.  He was no saint.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plus he was engaged to another woman at the time.


Bower said Dodi had the girl stashed on the yacht they had and Mohammed bought another to use with Diana. Wow.  Like buying  yacht is like buying a bottle of wine. hahahahaha!  More likely  he rented it.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> While you missed Lady C's equestrian comparison of Diana and TW (_a fine race horse_ vs _a broken down donkey_), you did an excellent job. Thank you!



To quote another poster: Rode hard and put away wet. The donkey that is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I wonder what Hazzi told her.  He was no saint.



Well, he was most certainly not living with someone else. Plus I'm pretty sure nothing would have deterred her.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plus he was engaged to another woman at the time.


In a lot of ways everyone’s lives were like a soap opera back then. The internet makes it harder to get away with stuff like that these days.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, a big ‘ol mountain of salt for sure. Lady C doesn’t have any special insight into Diana’s mind and she is far from unbiased when it comes to the royals. Diana had only been seeing Dodi for a couple of months and she was having fun with him. I don’t believe for a minute she was about to jump into another marriage with a man she barely knew. If nothing else she had learned that brutal lesson when she was 19.


I had forgotten most of the back story with Dodi, but I truly believe there was not a chance Diana would every have married him.  She was using him to make Hasnat Kahn jealous, and that relationship would never have worked either.

 Dodi was summoned by his father to the yacht (which was purchased AFTER Diana accepted his invitation to vacation with her boys) and had to lie to his fiance (sound familar?) to join Diana with her vacation already in progress.

 The whole thing was set up by Fayed to get back at the BRF.  He saw an opportunity and jumped on it and trotted out Dodi in the chance that he could snag the most famous royal in the world and the mother of the future king.  

Once the pictures hit the newspapers, his fiance went to press, acting like the jilted lover and most likely got a settlement out of it.  Dodi was a well known playboy, spoiled beyond belief and dabbled in cocaine.  I believe Diana knew exactly what was going on, but thought she could use them in order to get to Khan.  

Now that I think about it, it does sound a lot like the situation Harry is in now.  TW and Dodi both dumped the person they were with in order to go after the bigger prize.


----------



## Chanbal

_Meghan Markle’s truth and the truth never seem to line up, broadcaster Esther Krakue says._


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Speaking of Lady C, here is her opinion on Diana…



Thank you for this.

I started to fall asleep because her videos are so long, but it was very interesting nevertheless. 

It's really the first time I've heard that Diana would have married Dodi and moved to CA.  We used to hear that from fans with an agenda and also his family, but Lady C seems to think she knows.

Anyway, worth a listen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, he was most certainly not living with someone else. Plus I'm pretty sure nothing would have deterred her.


Most likely, neither one has changed his/her behavior.  Could a ‘truthbomb’ be waiting for the ‘right’ moment?




Chanbal said:


> Breaking News #TomBowerToldtheTruth is coming to #America with his #TombowerRevenge book. He has *NEW chapters*. Also there is going to be a *spin off book on #MeghanMarkle* more #MeghanMarkleExposed



  
Things are getting wild


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think Lady C is mostly spot-on with the Harkles and seems well-informed about the royals, but her new take on Diana does not sound very believable overall.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It's a lot prettier than the palace of the many toilets imo.
> View attachment 5602003
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frogmore Cottage pictured days before Harry and Meghan due to return
> 
> 
> The Sussexes recently renewed their lease on the property in Windsor, in an unexpected move that sparked speculation that they may have plans for more frequent visits to the UK in future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They do not deserve this “housing unit” as she describes anything less than Buckingham Palace where she, the delusional wife,  believes she deserves to live. Cancel the Frogmore lease and send them packing.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> She lived in a modest house in Toronto when she met Hazz.  She had to meet him secretly at Jessica Mulroneys house since she was still living with her boyfriend Cory.  Maybe she is going to be interviewing herself when she gets to the archetype of slut?
> 
> View attachment 5602021


That's the back of the house.  The front is not even as nice but it sold in 2018 for 1.6 million because housing prices in Toronto are insane.


youngster said:


> So, I had time and listened to the entire Lady C video so you don't need to!  Her thoughts on Diana:
> Diana had genuine warmth, genuine kindness, and genuine feeling for people. She made huge mistakes and could be extremely self-important and narcissistic at times but wasn't a full blown narcissist, rather her behavior was born from deep insecurities that were a product of her difficult and volatile childhood.


Lady C also said that Diana twisted the truth that she was abandoned by her mother.  In fact, it was her father that managed to get custody away from her. Diana liked playing the victim.  Sound familiar?


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> I just looked this up.  It is very vague about who actually  invited him.  I find that odd, but many did not like  the tone (it is thought to have been inappropriate) and length of his sermon (I thought it was too long) so maybe it is a question of distancing at this point.


I did not watch the wedding, but I saw bits and pieces on the news over the next few days.  I found the 20 min "gospel" preacher very odd and out of place for the English chapel that she was getting married in.  

It seemed to me that it was a bit OTT and everyone in the chapel seemed awkward and confused.  Same for the choir.  I love hearing gospel choirs, but it just seemed like everything was contrived and I was surprised to hear that it was Charles who had arranged all of that. 

 She certainly didn't have anything like that at her first wedding.  My impression was that she was using the race card already and throwing at the royal family. The poor queen looked so uncomfortable.


----------



## Jayne1

And who in the world is this A list celebrity.  Must be Oprah, although I think she's fallen off that pedestal.

Oprah has a huge agenda, especially at the time and seemed determined to make Meg her cause célèbre.


----------



## NYC Chicky

South African Lion King composer ‘does not remember’ discussing Nelson Mandela with Meghan
					

Lebo M told the Telegraph he only spoke to Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex at the premiere for 'less than a minute'




					t.co
				




Basically recollections may differ


----------



## Chanbal

Massive porkies…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> My impression was that she was using the race card already and throwing at the royal family. The poor queen looked so uncomfortable.


That is what I thought until yesterday. Since she said to MC that race had never been an issue for her prior to dating Hazzi,  my impression is some of the BRF encouraged [wanted] her to play that card. Perhaps that was her _ticket_ into the marriage.  Charles looked quite pleased with himself. Camilla, too, had her best smile on. Sure, that could be for other reasons, but  what if a bargain had been worked out?   Much better than anyone here, they knew Hazzi had serious issues.




QE looks scared, imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> It seemed to me that it was a bit OTT and everyone in the chapel seemed awkward and confused.  Same for the choir.  I love hearing gospel choirs, but it just seemed like everything was contrived and I was surprised to hear that it was Charles who had arranged all of that.
> 
> She certainly didn't have anything like that at her first wedding.


Trevor is Jewish and vowed to give her the family she never had. I think Meg was white for that wedding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Massive porkies…



These lies make the BRF celebrate.


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> Trevor is Jewish and vowed to give her the family she never had. *I think Meg was white for that wedding*


Lol, I'm sure she was.  Wasn't that the one where they were handing out marijuana at the reception?  It's so sad to see how she is living now since she has always been used to opulence.  It's no wonder she complains every chance she gets


----------



## Toby93

Another negative article from a US magazine.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think Lady C is mostly spot-on with the Harkles and seems well-informed about the royals, but her new take on Diana does not sound very believable overall.


Even Lady C’s ginge and cringe info may not be entirely accurate but we let it slide because she is entertaining. I think the old bird’s so full of herself she blurts out whatever pops in her head these days. She is certainly wallowing in self-importance and loving her social media popularity.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> TW is like a person who won the lottery and *slowly pisses it away*. Everyone (the whorish media who write glowingly of her, yeah I’m looking at you Yahoo, because of being paid) are her friends until one day, it’s all gone. Harry, that is.
> 
> She’s batshit crazy.



I respectfully disagree.  I'm actually amazed at the speed at which she managed to take herself from her pinnacle of being a member of the BRF to being someone who's trying to actually explain the "absurdity" of Mariah Carey calling her a diva.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> I apologize in advance if what I’m about to write is controversial. I’m the same age as Skeeter. I’m born and raised in Southern California and I’m also biracial (half Caucasian). I actually lived down the street from Immaculate Fart, sorry, Heart, for several years. If anything, being mixed race is more inclusive. I could move between racial cliques because I was mixed raced. My best friends growing up were not fully white or were mixed…all different races from myself. I was never “othered”.  Doria is a born and bred American as was Thomas Markle. Imagine if your mother was born in a foreign country and English was her 3rd language. I was spelling basic English words for my mom and helping her translate my whole life. Culturally my home life was not all American (like Maggots was) but I don’t bish and moan that I was treated like an Other. What planet is she living on?! Southern California is not 1950’s Bible Belt. POC are the norm. Yet she has to be the perpetual victim.


Thank you so much for your post.  My children are also biracial and are proud of both their "halves".  They've never been ostracized by either race.  Granted, they do look slightly more Caucasian, but unlike TW, my children correct anyone who dares say they're white.
I think this constant race issue is being created more by schools and media than anything.  Like Morgan Freeman said, don't call me a black man, call me a man.
My son called me the other day, completed irritated by his overly woke POLITICAL SCIENCE College class.
Some examples of questions:  What do you call a dark skinned white man?  What do you call a light skinned black man?
My son was confused.  He had no idea if actual terms (normal or derogatory) exist for these situations.  At 20, obviously he can see someone's skin color, but he doesn't think, "What's that white/black/Asian/Hispanic guy doing?"  It's more, "WTH is that guy doing?"  His answer to "What do you call a dark skinned white man?" was  "A guy with a great tan."  
He said he quickly learned on his quizzes not to answer with what made sense, but with what was the most woke answer possible, even if the answer was absolutely ridiculous.  Example:  An Arab looking guy (before 9/11) tries to bring a gun onto the plane.  The crew stops him saying you can't bring a gun onto the plane.  My son said he thought, duh, makes sense.  This quickly turned into "Why did the crew not let him bring a gun onto the plane?" with 3 answers my son said made sense, such as, "It's not safe", "He could use it as a weapon", etc., but the right answer was "Because the crew was racist".
It basically boiled down to White man = BAD, Racist, Ignorant, and every POC = Oppressed, suffering, and victimized.
This is what crap I'm actually paying thousands of dollars for him to be forced to take in college.  It's disgusting.


----------



## purseinsanity

mellibelly said:


> “As a thirty something woman” WRONG
> No one treated this racially ambiguous white passing person like a black woman (whatever that means) The same way no journalist called her Casper the friendly ghost white Ginger kids the N word! Pathological liar!* I’m expecting her to claim to be 1/64 Cherokee princess and therefore Native American at this point*



Please don't give her any ideas


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is she here ?


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> She can interview herself, perfect


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Even Lady C’s ginge and cringe info may not be entirely accurate but we let it slide because she is entertaining. I think the old bird’s so full of herself she blurts out whatever pops in her head these days. She is certainly wallowing in self-importance and loving her social media popularity.


I watched that video and got the sense she was friendly with Dodi's father and was told another side to the story.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is what I thought until yesterday. Since she said to MC that race had never been an issue for her prior to dating Hazzi,  my impression is some of the BRF encouraged [wanted] her to play that card. Perhaps that was her _ticket_ into the marriage.  Charles looked quite pleased with himself. Camilla, too, had her best smile on. Sure, that could be for other reasons, but  what if a bargain had been worked out?   Much better than anyone here, they knew Hazzi had serious issues.
> 
> View attachment 5602100
> 
> 
> QE looks scared, imo.
> View attachment 5602101


While I believe the BRF would have happily welcomed a WOC into the family, I don't think they were pleased with TW. 

I recall to have read somewhere (Tom Bower's book?) that Hazz 'forced' the family to accept TW as his future wife or they would play one of their favorite cards. 

I believe Charles and Camilla were just trying to make the best out of the situation. QE's face is very revealing. Charles was likely a little more optimistic…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> Exactly.  Real royals who are willing to step up and be a part of "The Firm" and put the work in.  They may have the big house in California, but that's all it is. It's not a real palace or castle and they are nothing but second row faux royals.  Not quite the same cachet as being an actual part of the Royal Family.
> 
> *I think that has a lot to do with why she continually lashes out at the BRF, because deep down she knows that they saw/see her for what she really is and it drives her nuts  *(That, and the fact that without the connection, she is nothing and has nothing remotely interesting to say)


She can be so thickheaded (obstinate) while being so thin-skinned (easily offended).


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## muddledmint

Toby93 said:


> Another negative article from a US magazine.



B list is generous


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is what I thought until yesterday. Since she said to MC that race had never been an issue for her prior to dating Hazzi,  my impression is some of the BRF encouraged [wanted] her to play that card. Perhaps that was her _ticket_ into the marriage.  Charles looked quite pleased with himself. Camilla, too, had her best smile on. Sure, that could be for other reasons, but  what if a bargain had been worked out?   Much better than anyone here, they knew Hazzi had serious issues.
> 
> View attachment 5602100
> 
> 
> QE looks scared, imo.
> View attachment 5602101


I think she looks upset and PP knows it given the way he is looking at her. There is something about her expression that looks like she is sorry that things went as far as they did and if she could stop it, she would. She knows the poop  is going to hit the fan.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> At one time that was the thing to do. It was well before genetic testing. Every actor/actress found out that they were 164th.  Native American   Even The Sopranss storyline made fun of with some guy claiming to have NA ancestry so he could obtain a casino license.  Tony kept calling him Chief in a derisive tone of voice.


One of our glorious US politicians also tried claiming to be Native American until the tribes to which she claimed to belong came right out and said she wasn't.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> I stand corrected.  Apparently she will be interviewing Victoria Jackson, another dear friend.


Does she have any regular friends?  Or are they all "dear friends"?


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Does she have any regular friends?  Or are they all "dear friends"?


She has lots of dear friends who have been with her since the beginning - 2018  Says a lot about those friends who are associates only because of who she married.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really wonder what she told Harry. I wouldn't date someone who was sneaking around and cheating on their live-in girlfriend because it demonstrates effectively what kind of character - or lack thereof - that person has.


Maybe that her one toilet overflowed and was under repair due to all her $hit?

Helped justify the 16 bathrooms later??


----------



## Cinderlala

Chanbal said:


> While I believe the BRF would have happily welcomed a WOC into the family, I don't think they were pleased with TW.
> 
> I recall to have read somewhere (Tom Bower's book?) that Hazz 'forced' the family to accept TW as his future wife or they would play one of their favorite cards.



According to the information below, the BRF has already welcomed a POC into the family.  Perhaps Ginge & Cringe felt this wedding didn't count for some reason??  Idk.  The bride was much farther down the LoS, so maybe that was it.   

From reddit at r/SaintMeghanMarkle:

In 2004 Gary Lewis (Maori/NZ) married into the Royal Family, to Lady Davina Windsor (born 10th in line), daughter of D&D of Gloucester who are still working royals (Queen's first cousin)..Sadly they divorced after 14yrs with no public drama, cries of racism or moaning about unacceptance.​





i.imgur.com/KH8Mik...

relationships


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> I watched that video and got the sense she was friendly with Dodi's father and was told another side to the story.


I haven’t watched this one yet but I’ve seen a number of Lady C’s other videos. I don’t give her that much credibility no matter how amusing she can be. She has made a living writing books about the royals but her own personal life is kind of out there to say the least. For anyone who doesn’t know, due to a genital defect she was raised as a boy and she was given male hormones as a child. She was badly bullied at the all-boys school she attended. When she was an adult she had corrective surgery and started living her life as a female. She married her husband only five days after meeting him and she was divorced within a year. She later adopted twin boys.

She’s had a fascinating life to be sure. But I don’t think that qualifies her for us to take 100% seriously as she judges Diana, the Queen, or even Meghan. Take her for what she is, simple entertainment. She has some real information but I think she embellishes a hell of a lot.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I haven’t watched this one yet but I’ve seen a number of Lady C’s other videos. I don’t give her that much credibility no matter how amusing she can be. She has made a living writing books about the royals but her own personal life is kind of out there to say the least. For anyone who doesn’t know, due to a genital defect she was raised as a boy and she was given male hormones as a child. She was badly bullied at the all-boys school she attended. When she was an adult she had corrective surgery and started living her life as a female. She married her husband only five days after meeting him and she was divorced within a year. She later adopted twin boys.
> 
> She’s had a fascinating life to be sure. But I don’t think that qualifies her for us to take 100% seriously as she judges Diana, the Queen, or even Meghan. Take her for what she is, simple entertainment. She has some real information but I think she embellishes a hell of a lot.


I'll take your word for it.  I appreciate everyone posting her videos, but for some reason, I can't sit through them.  They're way too long.  Maybe I have ADHD.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Charles selected the choir and the cleric.


The cleric was from the US, right? I remember some article about how he talked and talked way longer than expected. Didn't watch the wedding, so never knew if that was true or if the article was written by someone with a lack of patience.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I'll take your word for it.  I appreciate everyone posting her videos, but for some reason, I can't sit through them.  They're way too long.  Maybe I have ADHD.


No, I’m with you. I made myself sit through several of the Meghan and Harry videos early on but I haven’t been able to watch one for months. She really gets on my nerves now.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I haven’t watched this one yet but I’ve seen a number of Lady C’s other videos. I don’t give her that much credibility no matter how amusing she can be. She has made a living writing books about the royals but her own personal life is kind of out there to say the least. For anyone who doesn’t know, due to a genital defect she was raised as a boy and she was given male hormones as a child. She was badly bullied at the all-boys school she attended. When she was an adult she had corrective surgery and started living her life as a female. She married her husband only five days after meeting him and she was divorced within a year. She later adopted twin boys.
> 
> She’s had a fascinating life to be sure. But I don’t think that qualifies her for us to take 100% seriously as she judges Diana, the Queen, or even Meghan. Take her for what she is, simple entertainment. She has some real information but I think she embellishes a hell of a lot.


Her ex husband, Lord Colin Campbell has nothing good to say about her, and is not pleased that she uses the title.  She wrote a tell all book about Princess Diana in the early 90s and Lord Campbell apologized to Prince Charles when they were at the same event.

I'm not sure how much access she has to the Royal family, as I don't think anyone close to them would be willing to talk to her.  

As you mentioned, she is strictly for entertainment and loves to imply that she knows things for a fact because of her ex husbands title.  I also can't stand listening to her, there is just something about her that grates on my nerves.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> She can interview herself, perfect





purseinsanity said:


>


----------



## Toby93

The tide seems to be turning on Ms. Markle


----------



## needlv

Crowns of Britain blogger is back with a hilarious take on the podcasting etc 









						Royal round up: 1st September
					

Hello everyone– it’s time for another royal round up! Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I’m back from my spa break which ended up being slightly more boozy and heavier th…




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel




----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Does she have any regular friends?  Or are they all "dear friends"?


Maybe it's that other definition of "dear" - the one that costs a lot of $$$$


bag-mania said:


> She’s had a fascinating life to be sure. But I don’t think that qualifies her for us to take 100% seriously as she judges Diana, the Queen, or even Meghan. Take her for what she is, simple entertainment. *She has some real information but I think she embellishes a hell of a lot.*


Embellishes carefully so that she doesn't get sued, I'd imagine.


----------



## Katel

needlv said:


> Crowns of Britain blogger is back with a hilarious take on the podcasting etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round up: 1st September
> 
> 
> Hello everyone– it’s time for another royal round up! Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I’m back from my spa break which ended up being slightly more boozy and heavier th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com



OMG TU - this is hysterical!^^




Welcome, COB! 





Hahahaha riddled with bunions 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			











 wait - sex tape?


----------



## muddledmint

purseinsanity said:


> I'll take your word for it.  I appreciate everyone posting her videos, but for some reason, I can't sit through them.  They're way too long.  Maybe I have ADHD.


Same! I’m willing to read long articles but I can’t stand watching people blather on in videos. I can read faster than they can talk! I hate YouTube


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


>



Great.  With that title all I can think of is Vikings .
No clue who she is, but her eye color is really pretty.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Thank you so much for your post.  My children are also biracial and are proud of both their "halves".  They've never been ostracized by either race.  Granted, they do look slightly more Caucasian, but unlike TW, my children correct anyone who dares say they're white.
> I think this constant race issue is being created more by schools and media than anything.  Like Morgan Freeman said, don't call me a black man, call me a man.
> My son called me the other day, completed irritated by his overly woke POLITICAL SCIENCE College class.
> Some examples of questions:  What do you call a dark skinned white man?  What do you call a light skinned black man?
> My son was confused.  He had no idea if actual terms (normal or derogatory) exist for these situations.  At 20, obviously he can see someone's skin color, but he doesn't think, "What's that white/black/Asian/Hispanic guy doing?"  It's more, "WTH is that guy doing?"  His answer to "What do you call a dark skinned white man?" was  "A guy with a great tan."
> He said he quickly learned on his quizzes not to answer with what made sense, but with what was the most woke answer possible, even if the answer was absolutely ridiculous.  Example:  An Arab looking guy (before 9/11) tries to bring a gun onto the plane.  The crew stops him saying you can't bring a gun onto the plane.  My son said he thought, duh, makes sense.  This quickly turned into "Why did the crew not let him bring a gun onto the plane?" with 3 answers my son said made sense, such as, "It's not safe", "He could use it as a weapon", etc., but the right answer was "Because the crew was racist".
> It basically boiled down to White man = BAD, Racist, Ignorant, and every POC = Oppressed, suffering, and victimized.
> This is what crap I'm actually paying thousands of dollars for him to be forced to take in college.  It's disgusting.


We need to add a face-palm to our response choices.

One of my proudest moments was when my DS was invited to a classmate's 9th birthday party: we got to the door and the birthday boy, Indian by race, hugged my son, unmistakably Chinese, and called him "Brother". 

One of my thought-provoking moments was when I was in my teens and a classmate who was a minority race explained to me why she cheerfully greeted schoolmates of her race. I had remarked: Wow, you have a lot of friends amongst our schoolmates. She said she was so happy to see anyone of her race that she greeted them even if she didn't know them (just factual: about 5% of the school population was kids of her race). I belong to the majority race so I'd never seen it from her POV before.


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> OMG TU - this is hysterical!^^
> 
> View attachment 5602258
> 
> 
> Welcome, COB!
> 
> 
> View attachment 5602259
> 
> 
> Hahahaha riddled with bunions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wait - sex tape?


This was a delight to read!  Thank you for sharing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aw. Did Mommy tell Harry exactly what to say?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is she here ?
> View attachment 5602174




I think we're safe. She is not funny or ironic or original whatsoever, qualities most of our contributors possess.


----------



## mellibelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is she here ?
> View attachment 5602174



Did you forget the appreciation thread with the lone poster?!


----------



## mellibelly

This comment from a Leilani of Barbados video


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think we're safe. She is not funny or ironic or original whatsoever, qualities most of our contributors possess.


Hmmm, I'd guess she was more likely in the appreciation thread, where she posts pictures of herself incessantly.    
If she is here, I think she may be one of the few I've already put on ignore.


----------



## purseinsanity

purseinsanity said:


>


For those of you unfamiliar with Stuart Smalley, here is one of my favorite SNL skits (reminds me of TW, who makes her pod casts about her):


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: that princess shtick. It's absolutely coming from her and not from Harry as for Harry it's probably second nature that his dukedom ranks higher than the princely title.

And BTW if you don't hear from me it's because the beginner's ab workout I innocently tried today was lethal.


----------



## purseinsanity

About that princess thing they're now shoving down our throats, could it be because their Sussex titles are getting stripped, and she's going to be "Just call me Princess Henry"?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I'll take your word for it.  I appreciate everyone posting her videos, but for some reason, I can't sit through them.  They're way too long.  Maybe I have ADHD.



No, you just have better things to do. 

I put them on when I'm doing the washing up or to cover-up DH's piano playing (finger exercises for as long as Lady C can go on)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very revealing, imo.
> _Markle, who has a Black mother and white father, remarked that she was never treated as a “Black woman” until she married Prince Harry in 2017. “*If there’s any time in my life that it’s been more focused on my race, it’s only once I started dating my husband*,” she explained. “Then I started to understand what it was like to be treated like a Black woman. Because up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Told Mariah Carey What Caused Her To Be Treated As A "Black Woman"
> 
> 
> On the second episode of her new 'Archetypes' podcast, Meghan Markle told Mariah Carey that she was never treated as a "Black woman" until she married Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com



I thought they got married *May '18* - ?

or is another wedding they had with the fairies attending, at the bottom of the garden grotto,  making wishes by throwing gold coins in a well and blowing kisses to the little people with wings?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Yeah, a big ‘ol mountain of salt for sure. Lady C doesn’t have any special insight into Diana’s mind and she is far from unbiased when it comes to the royals. Diana had only been seeing Dodi for a couple of months and she was having fun with him. I don’t believe for a minute she was about to jump into another marriage with a man she barely knew. If nothing else she had learned that brutal lesson when she was 19.



She wasn't going to marry Dodi, end of. 

Diana was actually into daddy figures and not playboys, Dodi liked lots of women.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I had forgotten most of the back story with Dodi, but I truly believe there was not a chance Diana would every have married him.  She was using him to make Hasnat Kahn jealous, and that relationship would never have worked either.
> 
> Dodi was summoned by his father to the yacht (which was purchased AFTER Diana accepted his invitation to vacation with her boys) and had to lie to his fiance (sound familar?) to join Diana with her vacation already in progress.
> 
> The whole thing was set up by Fayed to get back at the BRF.  He saw an opportunity and jumped on it and trotted out Dodi in the chance that he could snag the most famous royal in the world and the mother of the future king.
> 
> Once the pictures hit the newspapers, his fiance went to press, acting like the jilted lover and most likely got a settlement out of it.  Dodi was a well known playboy, spoiled beyond belief and dabbled in cocaine.  I believe Diana knew exactly what was going on, but thought she could use them in order to get to Khan.
> 
> Now that I think about it, it does sound a lot like the situation Harry is in now.  TW and Dodi both dumped the person they were with in order to go after the bigger prize.



I agree with most of what you say, but all unmarried men-around-town were called playboys and most of the twits around London took coke. Totally spoiled, but he did work unlike TW, he was a film producer (even in the loosest sense). 

Fayed snr. was a player too, also liked pretty young girls, some very young. 

Harry needs to know which side his on and be careful who he gets into bed with.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I did not watch the wedding, but I saw bits and pieces on the news over the next few days.  I found the 20 min "gospel" preacher very odd and out of place for the English chapel that she was getting married in.
> 
> It seemed to me that it was a bit OTT and everyone in the chapel seemed awkward and confused.  Same for the choir.  I love hearing gospel choirs, but it just seemed like everything was contrived and I was surprised to hear that it was Charles who had arranged all of that.
> 
> She certainly didn't have anything like that at her first wedding.  My impression was that she was using the race card already and throwing at the royal family. The poor queen looked so uncomfortable.



From someone who went to a Catholic school, married a Jewish man and then became CoE why all the religious fervour anyway? 

More racism from M, she went straight for the stereotype(s) to align herself. Theme-park identity


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Trevor is Jewish and vowed to give her the family she never had. I think Meg was white for that wedding.



Jews are not white, they are whatever the main society allows/tells them to be. 

Meg is whatever is convenient - for her.


----------



## WingNut

needlv said:


> Crowns of Britain blogger is back with a hilarious take on the podcasting etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round up: 1st September
> 
> 
> Hello everyone– it’s time for another royal round up! Hope you’re all having a good week so far! I’m back from my spa break which ended up being slightly more boozy and heavier th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com



That summary was GOLD!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Speaking of TrevTrev,  According to Wikipedia, _Following his divorce from Markle, Engelson dated Bethenny Frankel of The Real Housewives of New York City. According to Frankel, their romantic relationship subsequently devolved into a business one._

Bethany may *know* stuff.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Who is this A-list person? Are there any guesses?  (I wish we could get Ceejay's input on this one.  )
> 
> "_Bethenny - who previously spoke out to blast Meghan in a tweet posted in March 2021, shortly before the Sussexes' explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey - also revealed that *she 'had a very A-list person* call her' after she aired her thoughts on the Duchess of Sussex, *asking her to 'take down what she said'*…
> 
> But, she says, *the unnamed A-lister who called her to plead Meghan and Harry's case insisted that the couple was suffering much more than anyone realized*.
> 
> 'I had a very A-list person call me when I commented on Meghan Markle before the Oprah interview and said to me: "*Can you please take down what you said, they can barely stand up in Frogmore Cottage and they can't afford their security,*"' Bethenny recalled_.



Of course it’s Oprah herself- I imagine there’s big crossover in the bravo and Oprah audiences and she explicitly says it’s before it aired so she didn’t want Beth turning off potential viewers.


needlv said:


> Scobie is not biased at all…. Lol



Scobie trying to convince us he’s turning down work rather than not getting any wink


CarryOn2020 said:


> Very revealing, imo.
> _Markle, who has a Black mother and white father, remarked that she was never treated as a “Black woman” until she married Prince Harry in 2017. “*If there’s any time in my life that it’s been more focused on my race, it’s only once I started dating my husband*,” she explained. “Then I started to understand what it was like to be treated like a Black woman. Because up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Told Mariah Carey What Caused Her To Be Treated As A "Black Woman"
> 
> 
> On the second episode of her new 'Archetypes' podcast, Meghan Markle told Mariah Carey that she was never treated as a "Black woman" until she married Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com


I look forward to hearing from all the Black women on the thread which Givenchy dress they chose and how they like their diamonds and their historic home given to them by the British public- the way she steals other people’s stories is unbelievable.


----------



## needlv

purseinsanity said:


> About that princess thing they're now shoving down our throats, could it be because their Sussex titles are getting stripped, and she's going to be "Just call me Princess Henry"?



I think it’s two things - an attempt at rebranding AND knowing that when Charles becomes King, Catherine will become Princess of Wales and there will be a huge press splash about Catherine being the new ”Peoples Princess”

knowing how insanely jealous she is of Kate, she is trying to get “Princess Meghan“ as a brand in USA - amd since it’s not her true title she can merch it and enrich herself.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Looking at this, something really stuck out. They quoted her saying that she was never asked to sign anything that restricted her from talking YET didn't she made everyone think that she was overall *SILENCED*? This witch does not have her lies straight. Only delusional fans will keep buying her snake oil


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> I think it’s two things - an attempt at rebranding AND knowing that when Charles becomes King, Catherine will become Princess of Wales and there will be a huge press splash about Catherine being the new ”Peoples Princess”
> 
> knowing how insanely jealous she is of Kate, *she is trying to get “Princess Meghan“ as a brand in USA* - amd since it’s not her true title she can merch it and enrich herself.


IIRC it or something like it was in the list of domains already in her claw? PrincessMeghanMarkle.com?


----------



## CarryOn2020

mellibelly said:


> This comment from a Leilani of Barbados video
> View attachment 5602314


Ah, yes, Channel 1.  Some history - in the 80s/90s, schools needed to modernize their classrooms. Sadly, there was no money.  TVs and VCRs were seen as the future. So, channel 1 said it would install tv/vcr’s in every classroom for free if and only if the schools agreed to play its news program every day. It was a cheap version of MTV news. Contracts were signed, a few actors posing as teens became stars, very few high school students paid attention to it, maybe the tweens were into it.  Time passed, computers turned out to be the really modern way to educate the young and schools were stuck with outdated equipment.  Removing the old equipment proved to be much more expensive than the schools thought. Schools learned a valuable lesson - _free_ is never free.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

papertiger said:


> Jews are not white, they are whatever the main society allows/tells them to be.
> 
> Meg is whatever is convenient - for her.


Inappropriate and inaccurate generalization regarding Jews.  As with many religions— but you are referring to race which is an old nasty trope.


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Inappropriate and inaccurate generalization regarding Jews.  As with many religions— but you are referring to race which is an old nasty trope.



ethnic minority doesn’t have to mean race or colour, at least in my country. There is only one race, the human race. Meghan can of course call herself what she likes, that’s a privilege that not all have.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Embellishes carefully so that she doesn't get sued, I'd imagine.


Not sure about that. From Lady Campbell’s Wikipedia page:

In The Independent, reviewing Campbell's The Royal Marriages, Barber had described her pleasure in encountering "*an author so exhilaratingly untrammelled by any fear (or knowledge?) of the libel laws. Nothing is beyond her", concluding "either (Campbell) is the greatest gossip since Pepys or she is a complete fabulist: one can only read it and gawp... Lady Colin Campbell never bothers her head with anything so tedious as verification"*


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I thought they got married *May '18* - ?
> 
> or is another wedding they had with the fairies attending, at the bottom of the garden grotto,  making wishes by throwing gold coins in a well and blowing kisses to the little people with wings?


Now don’t go exposing blatant errors in the article. The author is outraged on Meghan’s behalf. Facts are irrelevant.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And not even a good one.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Now don’t go exposing blatant errors in the article. The author is outraged on Meghan’s behalf. Facts are irrelevant.


H&M can have as many weddings as they like so long as I don’t have to pay for them 

i thank the goddess William and Kate have 3 children. at this point I’d like all 3 to get married in their late teens/early 20s and have at least 3 more each of their own


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And not even a good one.




iTA, not even an entertaining entertainer. Not even a good host, MC had to put M at ease, not the other way


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Not sure about that. From Lady Campbell’s Wikipedia page:
> 
> In The Independent, reviewing Campbell's The Royal Marriages, Barber had described her pleasure in encountering "*an author so exhilaratingly untrammelled by any fear (or knowledge?) of the libel laws. Nothing is beyond her", concluding "either (Campbell) is the greatest gossip since Pepys or she is a complete fabulist: one can only read it and gawp... Lady Colin Campbell never bothers her head with anything so tedious as verification"*


At least she is entertaining


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> H&M can have as many weddings as they like so long as I don’t have to pay for them
> 
> i thank the goddess William and Kate have 3 children. at this point I’d like all 3 to get married in their late teens/early 20s and have at least 3 more each of their own


At this point, I wish Kate could talk William into trying once more, and having twins or triplets.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who is protecting them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Her ex husband, Lord Colin Campbell has nothing good to say about her, and is not pleased that she uses the title.


I can understand that. She was only married to him about 14 months, 48 years ago and she’s still clinging to the title. That’s one thing she’s not likely to criticize Meghan about.


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



Another possibility---She could still be trolling MM---Megain didn't seem to like being called a diva...


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



Could Mariah have genuinely liked her? Or could this be a show of support for a fellow WOC so she doesn’t face criticism?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I can understand that. She was only married to him about 14 months, 48 years ago and she’s still clinging to the title. That’s one thing she’s not likely to criticize Meghan about.


As far as I recall, she explains that she stopped using the title after the divorce, but media outlets kept referring to her as Lady CC. At one point, she gave up correcting them, embraced the title, and moved forward with it.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> As far as I recall, she explains that she stopped using the title after the divorce, but media outlets kept referring to her as Lady CC. At one point, she gave up correcting them, embraced the title, and moved forward with it.



Oh, of course. The media made her use it.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Could Mariah have genuinely liked her? Or could this be a show of support for a fellow WOC so she doesn’t face criticism?


I wonder if she was contacted by the mysterious A-list person…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> ethnic minority doesn’t have to mean race or colour, at least in my country. There is only one race, the human race. Meghan can of course call herself what she likes, that’s a privilege that not all have.


Love the words - there is only ONE race, the human race ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if she was contacted by the mysterious A-list person…



Spotify wants higher ratings. This podcrash  is low.

I don’t see her on this list  https://chartable.com/charts/chartable/podcast-global-all-podcasts-reach









						How IS Meghan Markle at the top of Spotify?
					

MailOnline can reveal that while Archetypes is ranked as the 'Top Podcast' in the US and the UK - the first two shows with Mariah Carey and Serena Williams are as low as 25 in the 'Top Episodes' rankings.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oh, of course. The media made her use it.
> 
> View attachment 5602431


From what I understood, she brought the money and he brought the title into their marriage. So he kept the money after the divorce, she probably felt like keeping the title… I particularly don't care. She is highly entertaining when I have to do boring tasks like folding clothes or organizing my closet.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Spotify wants higher ratings. This podcrash  is low.
> 
> I don’t see her on this list  https://chartable.com/charts/chartable/podcast-global-all-podcasts-reach
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How IS Meghan Markle at the top of Spotify?
> 
> 
> MailOnline can reveal that while Archetypes is ranked as the 'Top Podcast' in the US and the UK - the first two shows with Mariah Carey and Serena Williams are as low as 25 in the 'Top Episodes' rankings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's good that people are questioning the (fudged?) numbers, and their archenemy (aka DM) is keeping a track…


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It's good that people are questioning the (fudged?) numbers, and their archenemy (aka DM) is keeping a track…



Bots bots bots - lotsa bots
The reason that the purchase of Twitter is in litigation


----------



## Chanbal

I feel sorry for Charles, but he needs to take care of this. I would start be revoking the Frogmore lease agreement. 



_The friend told The Daily Beast: “*Charles adores Harry, and would like nothing better than to get the relationship sorted.* But a meeting next week is unlikely. Everything was already on hold until they saw what was in Harry’s book, but if *Meghan is actively threatening to reveal further secrets, and telling interviewers, ‘I haven’t signed anything, I can say anything I want,’* then it’s not surprising they are being frozen out.”

The couple’s decision to visit the U.K. on a quasi-royal tour next week has been greeted with irritation behind the walls of Buckingham Palace. While outsiders may simply see the couple as altruistically giving their time to support causes that are, as they say, “close to their hearts,” crown loyalists and their critics argue that *the couple is provocatively treading on the territory of the actual royal family*._


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw. Did Mommy tell Harry exactly what to say?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Inappropriate and inaccurate generalization regarding Jews.  As with many religions— but you are referring to race which is an old nasty trope.


I took papertiger’s comment to mean that Jews are not necessarily safe within a society just because they are often pale skinned and that ‘whiteness’ as a euphemism for socially acceptable can be a shifting category.

This is true of a lot of light skinned religious and cultural minorities and it does serve to suggest the term ‘people of colour’ can be quite reductive at times. 

As M is a philistine completely without culture or loyalty she can easily shift between the categories as fashion dictates. 



kipp said:


> Another possibility---She could still be trolling MM---Megain didn't seem to like being called a diva...


I agree that Mariah is the queen of passive aggressive zingers (another reason to love her) so I read this comment with a giant wink.

Ie ‘I’m so glad M condescended to allow me to compliment her by saying we are similar in sharing a loaded term she prescribed to me and invited me on to discuss.’

I mean the sarcasm would probably be clearer if the term M gave the songbird was ‘golddigger’ or ‘liar’ or ‘cheap’ but I think we got it for the most part.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> No - Prince Charles organised the choir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Prince Charles Invited Us': Black Choir Who Sang at Meghan Markle's Wedding Defend Prince Harry's Father
> 
> 
> Founder and conductor of The Kingdom's Choir, Karen Gibson recently revealed that it is hard for them to believe that Prince Charles can be a racist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news18.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit - we are all posting the same thing!


I would think Charles would have talked to the bride and groom before finalizing those arrangements


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Could Mariah have genuinely liked her? Or could this be a show of support for a fellow WOC so she doesn’t face criticism?


I think Mariah is being genuine. When has she ever wanted to be controversial?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I see Oprah sending word via Gayle to Frankel. Oprah will always keep her options open regarding Meg so she can get the end of the marriage interview.   At this point, if George listens to his wife, he won't touch Meghan with a barge pole.


I thought of Anna Wintour....this is an old article








						What Anna Wintour Really Thinks About Meghan Markle
					

The 'Vogue' editor-in-chief also revealed her thoughts on Markle's Givenchy wedding dress.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## Jayne1

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Inappropriate and inaccurate generalization regarding Jews.  As with many religions— but you are referring to race which is an old nasty trope.


The comment did shock me a bit.

I meant that Meg became black when it suited her brand, as we have discussed here many times.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

purseinsanity said:


> My son called me the other day, completed irritated by his overly woke POLITICAL SCIENCE College class.
> Example:  An Arab looking guy (before 9/11) tries to bring a gun onto the plane.  The crew stops him saying you can't bring a gun onto the plane.  My son said he thought, duh, makes sense.  This quickly turned into "*Why did the crew not let him bring a gun onto the plane?*" with 3 answers my son said made sense, such as, "It's not safe", "He could use it as a weapon", etc., but the right answer was "*Because the crew was racist*".
> It basically boiled down to White man = BAD, Racist, Ignorant, and every POC = Oppressed, suffering, and victimized.
> This is what crap I'm actually paying thousands of dollars for him to be forced to take in college.  It's disgusting.


Wait...what?!? That was the actual correct answer??? What school is this?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I can understand that. She was only married to him about 14 months, 48 years ago and she’s still clinging to the title. That’s one thing she’s not likely to criticize Meghan about.


She seems to know so many people though. I think a lot of what she 'hears' is genuine... no?


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> For those of you unfamiliar with Stuart Smalley, here is one of my favorite SNL skits (reminds me of TW, who makes her pod casts about her):



I loved Stuart Smalley!  One of my favourite skits  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my.



She got a lot of feedback on that tweet - overwhelmingly negative!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

She married "the spare" so technically, she's Fergie


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Toby93 said:


> She got a lot of feedback on that tweet - overwhelmingly negative!



To be fair not really overwhelmingly negative...I mean she wasn't ratioed or anything even close...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Quote from @Toby93  "She married "the spare" so technically, she's Fergie    "
Fergie does a lot of merching and may be quite silly and stupid, but it doesn't begin to compare to the damage ZedZed Megaliar is trying to inflict on the RF. Despite all her many faults Fergie never maligned HM nor tried to destroy the BRF like TW is doing and she's been quoted as saying that HM is the most forgiving person she knows.


----------



## Toby93

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> To be fair not really overwhelmingly negative...I mean she wasn't ratioed or anything even close...
> 
> View attachment 5602552


I could only read the first 20 or so, but they were not good.  I'm not sure what you mean by ratioed, but I did go back and look a bit further and I see about 10% positive, so that to me would be overwhelming.  Mariah has had her own issues in the past, but she earned her success and she is very talented.  I guess if you count social climbing and ghosting as a talent, then Megsy is Mariahs equal


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> She seems to know so many people though. I think a lot of what she 'hears' is genuine... no?


I can’t prove it of course but I get the sense she weaves truth and fiction fairly equally throughout her books and her videos. If the reader/viewer can confirm that one thing she says is true then they’re more likely to automatically believe the rest of it.

Case in point, she wrote a book about the Queen’s marriage a few years ago. She knew she would never get sued by the Queen so it was safe for her to do. I don’t imagine she found many people willing to comment on that subject to her, do you? If she’s willing to make up embellishments about the Queen’s sex life, she’s certainly capable of making up new “revelations” about Diana, which I’m convinced she has. The key is she puts in just enough truth where people give her the benefit of the doubt. I don’t believe all her crap about Meghan either and I’m inclined to believe she’s capable of almost anything!

Here an article about her when the book about the queen came out.









						Royal biographer slams new book on the Queen's marriage
					

Lady Colin Campbell, the 68-year-old daughter of a Jamaican merchant, is certainly no aristocrat, and she proves it by her latest outrage in her tasteless and vulgar book about the Queen and Prince Philip.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Could Mariah have genuinely liked her? Or could this be a show of support for a fellow WOC so she doesn’t face criticism?


Just sounds like your average thanks for having me note and maximising her own diva status


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I thought of Anna Wintour....this is an old article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Anna Wintour Really Thinks About Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> The 'Vogue' editor-in-chief also revealed her thoughts on Markle's Givenchy wedding dress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Total azz kissing by AW.  Azz kissing of Givenchy so she isn’t Markled out of future fashion shows.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It's good that people are questioning the (fudged?) numbers, and their archenemy (aka DM) is keeping a track…



I mean please, at this point I‘dneed evidence Spotify, Netflix and the rest DON’T always fix their ratings to suit themselves.

Even the BBC fix the ratings by automatically running a programme/agenda  they’re pushing straight after the one I chose to watch. How else they gonna justify BBC3 when no one voluntarily watches it. Even if I click it off they’ve already chalked up one more view. YouTube does the same.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I can’t prove it of course but I get the sense she weaves truth and fiction fairly equally throughout her books and her videos. If the reader/viewer can confirm that one thing she says is true then they’re more likely to automatically believe the rest of it.
> 
> Case in point, she wrote a book about the Queen’s marriage a few years ago. She knew she would never get sued by the Queen so it was safe for her to do. I don’t imagine she found many people willing to comment on that subject to her, do you? If she’s willing to make up embellishments about the Queen’s sex life, she’s certainly capable of making up new “revelations” about Diana, which I’m convinced she has. The key is she puts in just enough truth where people give her the benefit of the doubt. I don’t believe all her crap about Meghan either and I’m inclined to believe she’s capable of almost anything!
> 
> Here an article about her when the book about the queen came out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal biographer slams new book on the Queen's marriage
> 
> 
> Lady Colin Campbell, the 68-year-old daughter of a Jamaican merchant, is certainly no aristocrat, and she proves it by her latest outrage in her tasteless and vulgar book about the Queen and Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Changing my boatload of salt to entire shipment of salt.  Lacy CC has turned back into a person who believes their own hype and she needs to get over herself. The fact that she has used that title for all these decades makes her no better than Meghan merching her Sussex title.   Her exhusband hated her beyond words.


Not to mention the poor taste of publishing this now with The Queen fading away.   Rather despicable. Hello Meghan!


----------



## sdkitty

muddledmint said:


> Same! I’m willing to read long articles but I can’t stand watching people blather on in videos. I can read faster than they can talk! I hate YouTube


I haven't even been looking at the body language guys videos...he's preaching to the choir here


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I haven't even been looking at the body language guys videos...he's preaching to the choir here


I feel the same. LadyCC and River drive me nuts


----------



## gracekelly

Guys, there is a rason why Vlad doesn’t want politics, religion and race. discussed.  Things get complicated, feelings hurt and we go off topic.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> She married "the spare" so technically, she's Fergie



Wallis keeps looking better. She maintained her dignity, didn’t have scandals and remained married to that simp of a man. She made her bed and she slept in it, however fitfully.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Wallis keeps looking better. She maintained her dignity, didn’t have scandals and remained married to that simp of a man. She made her bed and she slept in it, however fitfully.


well, she had lots of gorgeous jewelry to keep her warm


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Not to mention the poor taste of publishing this now with The Queen fading away.   Rather despicable. Hello Meghan!


That book was published in 2018, right after Harry and Meghan married. But I can’t imagine the Queen was happy when she learned about it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Her exhusband hated her beyond words.



He also beat her while still married. Lady C is eccentric and a little bit crazy (and yes, that book on The Queen's marriage was in extremely poor taste), but Lord Colin Campbell is most definitely not a nice man.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, she had lots of gorgeous jewelry to keep her warm


It’s interesting that for a man who was very cheap, he really splurged out on the jewelry, and he had good taste. Her style was very simple and elegant so she never looked overdressed when wearing it.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He also beat her while still married. Lady C is eccentric and a little bit crazy (and yes, that book on The Queen's marriage was in extremely poor taste), but Lord Colin Campbell is most definitely not a nice man.


Yes, he didn’t sound like it, but he had a right to not appreciate her using his title.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yes, he didn’t sound like it, but he had a right to not appreciate her using his title.



Had he though. It's part of British law that a divorced wife of a peer can keep using the title. Would I? Most certainly not. But if you don't want an ex-wife you hate sporting your title maybe don't get married after 5 days to someone random.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He also beat her while still married. Lady C is eccentric and a little bit crazy (and yes, that book on The Queen's marriage was in extremely poor taste), but Lord Colin Campbell is most definitely not a nice man.


And that’s why you get to know a man longer than 5 days before you get married. That tells me she’s always been batty and it isn’t something that has happened due to age.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> And that’s why you get to know a man longer than 5 days before you get married. That tells me she’s always been batty and it isn’t something that has happened due to age.



Can't disagree with that!


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Had he though. It's part of British law that a divorced wife of a peer can keep using the title. Would I? Most certainly not. But if you don't want an ex-wife you hate sporting your title maybe don't get married after 5 days to someone random.


And---apparently, one can purchase a title like Lord or Lady (?maybe from Scotland?).  An ad for this just came up on my IG feed. LOL!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> And---apparently, one can purchase a title like Lord or Lady (?maybe from Scotland?).  An ad for this just came up on my IG feed. LOL!



Yes, together with a squarefoot of land


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It’s interesting that for a man who was very cheap, he really splurged out on the jewelry, and he had good taste. Her style was very simple and elegant so she never looked overdressed when wearing it.


Well, at least he got his priorities right.

I read that he was also a fashion icon of the 1920s and beyond. A little too fashion forward for British taste, Harry doesn’t seem to have inherited that from his great uncle.


----------



## papertiger

kipp said:


> And---apparently, one can purchase a title like Lord or Lady (?maybe from Scotland?).  An ad for this just came up on my IG feed. LOL!


Not just from Scotland.

These tend to be without land or property attache. Mostl, they were mothballed because of a lack of an heir or because the land was sold off.

not sure one can sit in the House of Lords though, I’d have to check


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Changing my boatload of salt to entire shipment of salt.  Lacy CC has turned back into a person who believes their own hype and she needs to get over herself. The fact that she has used that title for all these decades makes her no better than Meghan merching her Sussex title.   Her exhusband hated her beyond words.
> 
> 
> Not to mention the poor taste of publishing this now with The Queen fading away.   Rather despicable. Hello Meghan!


This exactly ^^^^ I read the book "Diana in Private" and she really makes it sound as though she thoroughly researched and verified all her facts.  I then looked HER up, and was shocked.  I assumed by her title as the author that she actually did have access to the royals, but what a load of nonsense.

I feel sorry for her ex-husband as she has been nothing but a major embarrassment to him for years, and absolutely exploits the title shamelessly.   She has a lot more in common with TW than she cares to let on


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Not just from Scotland.
> 
> These tend to be without land or property attache. Mostl, they were mothballed because of a lack of an heir or because the land was sold off.
> 
> not sure one can sit in the House of Lords though, I’d have to check



according to this bought titles are just decorative 









						Welcome to Fake Titles - Fake Titles
					

The Site that Lifts the Lid I will put it very simply, “You cannot purchase a genuine British title, with one exception, the feudal title of a Scottish baron; and certainly cannot buy a peerage title”. Scottish Feudal Baronies fetch a mighty price; the Barony of MacDonald was up for sale at over...




					www.faketitles.com


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Changing my boatload of salt to entire shipment of salt.  Lacy CC has turned back into a person who believes their own hype and she needs to get over herself. The fact that she has used that title for all these decades makes her no better than Meghan merching her Sussex title.   Her exhusband hated her beyond words.
> 
> 
> Not to mention the poor taste of publishing this now with The Queen fading away.   Rather despicable. Hello Meghan!


My 2 cents:

Lady C is a colorful character, no doubts.   I think she has access to a certain level of information, which she probably exaggerates during her entertaining videos. One should never take whatever she tells on those videos as gospel. 

I'm not familiar with the book she wrote years ago on QE, so I can't comment on it. I was introduced to Lady C via this thread and I also browsed the book she wrote on TW. As far as I recall, most of the information she provided on that book has been confirmed by Tom Bower.

I don't think it's fair to compare her to TW. I think her getting a title was more like a commercial transaction.  From what I understood, the ex husband had a title and no money, she had the money. The ex husband kept the money she brought into the marriage, and she kept the title.   It seems that she remains close to the ex-husband's family and doesn't badmouth them.

From what I read, Charles had to pay for TW's expenses and sponsor her many demands. In return, she is trying to make money at the expenses of destroying the husband's family. Moreover, she is continuously forcing herself into our lives and cluttering the news with her self-serving stories. I came across this thread after being so annoyed by the many ridiculous headlines and the rest is history.

In the past, the only time I paid attention to gossip was during beach vacations, and never enough to comment on it. Thanks to TW, I'm almost a royal commentator. Ok, to be fair to TW, my life has also changed and I have now free time that I didn't have before. Also, I do enjoy the members of this thread. Cheers!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It’s interesting that for a man who was very cheap, he really splurged out on the jewelry, and he had good taste. Her style was very simple and elegant so she never looked overdressed when wearing it.


and I think he designed a lot of it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Could Mariah have genuinely liked her? *Or could this be a show of support for a fellow WOC so she doesn’t face criticism*?


Why, if you're a WOC can't you criticize another WOC?  I'm more a WOC than TW who's been "biracial" and identified as white forever until it was convenient for her to be black.
I don't understand these "rules" where you have to blindly support someone else just because they're the same race/religion/gender/etc.  I'm a woman, and there are many women who are utter beeyotches that I would never support.  Bringing it back to TW.


----------



## Katel

purseinsanity said:


> This was a delight to read!  Thank you for sharing!


You are so kind, all credit to @needlv


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Wait...what?!? That was the actual correct answer??? What school is this?


DM'ed you.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Why, if you're a WOC can't you criticize another WOC?  I'm more a WOC than TW who's been "biracial" and identified as white forever until it was convenient for her to be black.
> I don't understand these "rules" where you have to blindly support someone else just because they're the same race/religion/gender/etc.  I'm a woman, and there are many women who are utter beeyotches that I would never support.  Bringing it back to TW.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Cinderlala

From what I've read, Wallis was a very shallow and mean woman.  Rude to QE's mother, rude about QE's father, rather rude about QE.  She had horrible nicknames for all of them.  Spoke horribly about them to others, perhaps not directly to the press, but still.  She was thin, so she wore clothing well, but I don't see her as a woman with dignity.

W&E also complained endlessly about their luxurious lifestyle paid for by the BRF.  She does have that in common with TW.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Had he though. It's part of British law that a divorced wife of a peer can keep using the title. Would I? Most certainly not. But if you don't want an ex-wife you hate sporting your title maybe don't get married after 5 days to someone random.


She was using it for commercial purposes.  Sophie Winkleman acts under her own name and not as Lady Frederic Windsor, however, her MIL uses Princess Michael so there you go lol!


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



He may try, but it won't work.  BP had no blame in her death.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> And that’s why you get to know a man longer than 5 days before you get married. That tells me she’s always been batty and it isn’t something that has happened due to age.


Yep.  He he had known her longer than 5 days, then he would have known that she had physical issues related to her female anatomy and he wouldn't have been in for such a shock.  He thought she hoodwinked him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> She was using it for commercial purposes.  Sophie Winkleman acts under her own name and not as Lady Frederic Windsor, however, her MIL uses Princess Michael so there you go lol!



That said, Princess Michael had her own title before marriage. Her family tree bears some of the oldest and most noble German, Austrian and Hungarian families.


----------



## Cinderlala

Toby93 said:


> She married "the spare" so technically, she's Fergie



Fergie without any of the fun.  

I think someone mentioned they felt H should have married someone fun who wouldn't have expected him to take everything so seriously and I think Andrew & Fergie did have fun together.  Clearly, there were MANY issues but I think they did enjoy spending time together at one point.  (Unlike Charles & Diana.)


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> Yep.  He he had known her longer than 5 days, then he would have known that she had physical issues related to her female anatomy and he wouldn't have been in for such a shock.  He thought she hoodwinked him.


This all sounds so sad.


----------



## Chanbal

A 'for-profit feminist'? 


_
But considering the toxicity, I am not surprised that the *Duke and Duchess of Sussex, trapped inside what appears to be a lifestyle magazine in California*, have cast off any pretence at reality, and *are acting like Goop salespeople with content to share for money.* (They will say content, I am certain of it. Words are too real for them). I want to be kind: I don’t mind the Goop bit. Rich people are so awful, we must be allowed to laugh at them, and here is good material.

If they want to wrap themselves in cashmere neutrals and wear loafers without socks and talk nonsense all day, that is up to them. *But I must admit an error.  When they left, I genuinely believed they wanted a small house and a private life.* I thought he might become a tree surgeon or a lumberjack and she a lawyer or maybe something in healthcare: for some reason I can see her with a hypodermic needle. I must have been mad. Of course, if they must work, they want to be what they would call creatives, like Jez in Peep Show, who won’t do any job that isn’t “in the media”. That is the part I mind: the part they call content. (In fact, the lifestyle is the content. If only they weren’t too proud for reality TV!) I mind their posing as serious political activists. Vanity is a constant in human nature, but it must only be allowed to extend so far.

*A progressive duke and duchess is a nonsense, and it always will be.* *Be a duke or be a progressive activist. You can’t be both: if you try, you betray both your selves, and that is greedy.* A duke is an ambassador from - and hopefully an argument for, if feudalism is your thing - inherited wealth and inherited power. That is what it is: to call it something else is first self-deception and then a wider deception. I hoped they would give up their titles if the causes they espouse are so meaningful to them. That would be meaningful too. But they can’t. They need them, and that makes them seem so fragile in their Californian palace.

I understand the fragility: I will always believe that, in his early life, we tortured Prince Harry with attention he never wanted, or merited.  But pain, by itself, has no wider meaning or purpose. It is just pain, attaching itself to anything it can find.

And that, unfortunately, is feminism and environmentalism. We have Meghan babbling about feminism on her Spotify podcast. I wouldn’t wish to interfere with anyone’s healing – and I do not doubt that she has suffered – *but you cannot talk about feminism with any authority without talking about class.* *You cannot talk about environmentalism without talking about class.  And so, from vanity, they are taking up valuable space for serious political discourse by more serious people, and that is the worst of all worlds*._





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Fergie without any of the fun.
> 
> I think someone mentioned they felt H should have married someone fun who wouldn't have expected him to take everything so seriously and I think Andrew & Fergie did have fun together.  Clearly, there were MANY issues but I think they did enjoy spending time together at one point.  (Unlike Charles & Diana.)



I mean, they still seem to enjoy each other's company 20+ years after their divorce. I don't fully understand their relationship.

As for Harry, I really think more than someone fun he'd have needed someone who could calm his inner demons instead of inciting them.


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> From what I've read, Wallis was a very shallow and mean woman.  Rude to QE's mother, rude about QE's father, rather rude about QE.  She had horrible nicknames for all of them.  Spoke horribly about them to others, perhaps not directly to the press, but still.  She was thin, so she wore clothing well, but I don't see her as a woman with dignity.
> 
> W&E also complained endlessly about their luxurious lifestyle paid for by the BRF.  She does have that in common with TW.


Behind closed doors she had plenty to say about the Windsors, but in public she knew to cool it.  Wallis managed to get into the top tier of British society before she met David, so she must have had some smarts.  She certainly had charm.  It was said that she ran an impeccable home and was a consummate hostess.  She may not have cooked the food herself, but it was said that she knew exactly how it should be cooked and taste.  I think this showed her upbringing in the South as a proper young lady.  Some of her later behavior might not have been so proper, but she managed quite well.  I believe the story that she really did not want him to give up the throne and she didn't want to be Queen and really didn't want to get married.  I believe that Camilla would have been fine leaving things as they were as well.    Meghan is nothing like these women.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they still seem to enjoy each other's company 20+ years after their divorce. I don't fully understand their relationship.
> 
> *As for Harry, I really think more than someone fun he'd have needed someone who could calm his inner demons instead of inciting them.*


This.


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> This all sounds so sad.


Considering how really nasty it became between the two of the later, it is really sad.


----------



## bag-mania

Cinderlala said:


> Fergie without any of the fun.
> 
> I think someone mentioned they felt H should have married someone fun who wouldn't have expected him to take everything so seriously and I think Andrew & Fergie did have fun together.  Clearly, there were MANY issues but *I think they did enjoy spending time together at one point. * (Unlike Charles & Diana.)


They still get along pretty well. She stays in his house when she’s in the UK. Now granted, it’s probably a large house and they might not interact much or maybe they do. We have no way of knowing.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, Princess Michael had her own title before marriage. Her family tree bears some of the oldest and most noble German, Austrian and Hungarian families.


So she keeps reminding us


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> So she keeps reminding us


Yep.  The Queen said that Christine was grander than any of them lololol!


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I can’t prove it of course but I get the sense she weaves truth and fiction fairly equally throughout her books and her videos. If the reader/viewer can confirm that one thing she says is true then they’re more likely to automatically believe the rest of it.
> 
> Case in point, she wrote a book about the Queen’s marriage a few years ago. She knew she would never get sued by the Queen so it was safe for her to do. I don’t imagine she found many people willing to comment on that subject to her, do you? If she’s willing to make up embellishments about the Queen’s sex life, she’s certainly capable of making up new “revelations” about Diana, which I’m convinced she has. The key is she puts in just enough truth where people give her the benefit of the doubt. I don’t believe all her crap about Meghan either and I’m inclined to believe she’s capable of almost anything!
> 
> Here an article about her when the book about the queen came out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal biographer slams new book on the Queen's marriage
> 
> 
> Lady Colin Campbell, the 68-year-old daughter of a Jamaican merchant, is certainly no aristocrat, and she proves it by her latest outrage in her tasteless and vulgar book about the Queen and Prince Philip.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


From the article you linked to:

"In this she alleged that the Queen Mother was the illegitimate daughter of the Earl and Countess of Strathmore’s French cook, Marguerite Rodiere, producing no evidence in support of her claim beyond the fact that Elizabeth’s third Christian name was Marguerite."

Lady C did not start that rumour. That's been gossiped about since Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was born. 
In fact, Wallis joked about it all the time too and anyone in the know understood why she called the Queen Mum the cook's daughter.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Behind closed doors she had plenty to say about the Windsors, but in public she knew to cool it.  Wallis managed to get into the top tier of British society before she met David, so she must have had some smarts.  She certainly had charm.  It was said that she ran an impeccable home and was a consummate hostess.  She may not have cooked the food herself, but it was said that she knew exactly how it should be cooked and taste.  I think this showed her upbringing in the South as a proper young lady.  Some of her later behavior might not have been so proper, but she managed quite well.  I believe the story that she really did not want him to give up the throne and she didn't want to be Queen and really didn't want to get married.  I believe that Camilla would have been fine leaving things as they were as well.    Meghan is nothing like these women.


I agree, I just finished reading yet another biography on Wallis, and I think she definitely lost control of the situation quickly and found herself trapped.  The king had an unnatural obsession with her and when she tried to back out, he said he would only track her down.  

I know in later years, they became socialites, going from party to party where they were the guests of honour, but really, quite a sad and meaningless life.  The Queen mother always blamed her for her husbands early death and never forgave them.  They were not welcome in the UK and Wallis was denied HRH.  

Through it all, it was David (Edward), who continually badgered the King to give HRH to Wallis.  She herself may have spoken about the royal family at home, but she kept a dignified silence in public.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> I feel the same. LadyCC and River drive me nuts


I think sanctimonious River is far worse.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> From the article you linked to:
> 
> "In this she alleged that the Queen Mother was the illegitimate daughter of the Earl and Countess of Strathmore’s French cook, Marguerite Rodiere, producing no evidence in support of her claim beyond the fact that Elizabeth’s third Christian name was Marguerite."
> 
> Lady C did not start that rumour. That's been gossiped about since Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was born.
> In fact, Wallis joked about it all the time too and anyone in the know understood why she called the Queen Mum the cook's daughter.


But again, she's supposedly writing a tell-all and she doesn't have any facts to back up what she's claiming. She'll repeat rumors that even she doesn't believe if they are scandalous enough and it will get her more attention and book sales. That's her schtick. She's fun to listen to but she isn't entirely honest. 

Even the tabloids think she goes too far. Here's one about her Queen Mother book, among revelations in it were that the Queen and her sister were the result of artificial insemination because it was known that the Queen Mother didn't like sex. I mean how can we take that seriously?   









						The 'truth' about Queen's birth, by royal storyteller: But latest claims are pure fiction, say critics
					

Lady Colin Campbell told a press conference in London that the monarch's mother (pictured with the Queen as a baby) 'preferred not to partake in certain aspects of marital life'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I agree, I just finished reading yet another biography on Wallis, and I think she definitely lost control of the situation quickly and found herself trapped.  The king had an unnatural obsession with her and when she tried to back out, he said he would only track her down.
> 
> I know in later years, they became socialites, going from party to party where they were the guests of honour, but really, quite a sad and meaningless life.  The Queen mother always blamed her for her husbands early death and never forgave them.  They were not welcome in the UK and Wallis was denied HRH.
> 
> Through it all, it was David (Edward), who continually badgered the King to give HRH to Wallis.  She herself may have spoken about the royal family at home, but she kept a dignified silence in public.


We can only dream of a sad and meaningless life like that. Some people don’t know how good they got it. Both of them traitors, no jobs, and then leading a life of quiet opulence in Paris. Good customers of Cartier, Hermes and Chanel HC, nothing but the best for W. Apart from Harry being far from a King, H&M have all their sense of entitlement and more.

Edward thought all would be forgiven and wanted a high powered job, he was frozen out. I think it will take Haz a long time too, eventually the penny will drop. He’s not even a spare any longe, he’ll be put out to grass.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> We can only dream of a sad and meaningless life like that. Some people don’t know how good they got it. Both of them traitors, no jobs, and then leading a life of quiet opulence in Paris. Good customers of Cartier, Hermes and Chanel HC, nothing but the best for W. Apart from Harry being far from a King, H&M have all their sense of entitlement and more.
> 
> Edward thought all would be forgiven and wanted a high powered job, he was frozen out. I think it will take Haz a long time too, eventually the penny will drop. He’s not even a spare any longe, he’ll be put out to grass.


Yes, Edward was in touch with Churchill and the King for a job but it took a while for them to realize they were persons non grata. 

I read that he thought he would step down, leave the country for a while and then return to his beloved Fort Belvadere.  He didn't realize that when he left, he would never get to return. 

In fairness, he always said that he and his brother had a gentlemans agreement that he could return once everything calmed down, but he was deceived.  I'm sure the Queen mother had a lot to do with that.

They are both buried at Frogmore.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Yes, Edward was in touch with Churchill and the King for a job but it took a while for them to realize they were persons non grata.
> 
> I read that he thought he would step down, leave the country for a while and then return to his beloved Fort Belvadere.  He didn't realize that when he left, he would never get to return.
> 
> In fairness, he always said that he and his brother had a gentlemans agreement that he could return once everything calmed down, but he was deceived.  I'm sure the Queen mother had a lot to do with that.
> 
> They are both buried at Frogmore.


and edward was a Nazi sympathizer, I think, which wouldn't have helped


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Wallis keeps looking better. She maintained her dignity, didn’t have scandals and remained married to that simp of a man. She made her bed and she slept in it, however fitfully.


I can't forget I read somewhere that she was basically his dominatrix....wonder if the younger version of this couple has that in common with them


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> and edward was a Nazi sympathizer, I think, which wouldn't have helped


He was a weak man, and it was good that he stepped down.  I am not sure if all that was said about him is true, but he did accept an invitation by Hitler to Germany after his wedding.  Whether he was a sympathizer, or not a good judge or character is undecided.

 A lot of biographies say that he was desperate to show Wallis how important or relevant he still was, and no other state visits were forthcoming.  There were no courtiers anymore to advise him not to go, and this was before the war.  Germany rolled out the red carpet for them and treated them like royalty, and he spoke fluent German as it was a huge part of the BRF history.

 A very sad part of history, but it suited the BRF and gave them more reasons to keep him out of England.  His poor judgement led to him being sent to the Bahamas for 5 years during the war to keep him out of trouble.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> He was a weak man, and it was good that he stepped down.  I am not sure if all that was said about him is true, but he did accept an invitation by Hitler to Germany after his wedding.  Whether he was a sympathizer, or not a good judge or character is undecided.
> 
> A lot of biographies say that he was desperate to show Wallis how important or relevant he still was, and no other state visits were forthcoming.  There were no courtiers anymore to advise him not to go, and this was before the war.  Germany rolled out the red carpet for them and treated them like royalty, and he spoke fluent German as it was a huge part of the BRF history.
> 
> A very sad part of history, but it suited the BRF and gave them more reasons to keep him out of England.  His poor judgement led to him being sent to the Bahamas for 5 years during the war to keep him out of trouble.


poor judgement at best


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

M’s week summed up 









						PLATELL'S PEOPLE: The week the world woke up to Meghan the martyr
					

AMANDA PLATELL: Judging by the reaction to it, the interview with The Cut seems to mark the moment when much of the planet has finally turned against Meghan.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> I think Mariah is being genuine. When has she ever wanted to be controversial?


Hmmm being an over the top diva is a complement ? Really, think about it 
And for a person claiming to be a philanthropist 

Just saw the latest Beyoncé promo for Tiffany’s , it did its job and CAUGHT MY EYE , was thinking how none of the clothes or SHOES are wearable IRL, the shoot was très DIVA but perfect for selling jewelry , diff vibe than the philanthropist green feminist etc one promoted by MM

DIVA-esque is not good for many job descriptions


----------



## needlv

Katel said:


> You are so kind, all credit to @needlv


Aww!  Thanks!

And now for another laugh…


----------



## jennlt

BLG has a 12 minute video explaining that streaming farms and stock prices are the secrets to her podcrash "success"


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm being an over the top diva is a complement ? Really, think about it
> And for a person claiming to be a philanthropist
> 
> Just saw the latest Beyoncé promo for Tiffany’s , it did its job and CAUGHT MY EYE , was thinking how none of the clothes or SHOES are wearable IRL, the shoot was très DIVA but perfect for selling jewelry , diff vibe than the philanthropist green feminist etc one promoted by MM
> 
> DIVA-esque is not good for many job descriptions


Well, I still think it’s funny a real diva (song goddess) calling MdZ out as Diva in the histrionic version of the word.

Coz boy, if ever was there a ’mirror mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?’ diva, it’s that woman, she’s the personification of the insult, in her case it fits.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> They still get along pretty well. She stays in his house when she’s in the UK. Now granted, it’s probably a large house and they might not interact much or maybe they do. We have no way of knowing.


Does Fergie not live in the UK?  I thought she lived in his house (it's a very big house) and has for years.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Just saw the latest Beyoncé promo for Tiffany’s , it did its job and CAUGHT MY EYE , was thinking how none of the clothes or SHOES are wearable IRL, the shoot was très DIVA but perfect for selling jewelry , diff vibe than the philanthropist green feminist etc one promoted by MM
> 
> DIVA-esque is not good for many job descriptions


Okay, so Bey is considered a diva and people adore her and think she kind, sweet and charitable (secretly, since we have no proof, but they say she is) as well as gorgeous and dressing expensively over the top.  She can advertise for Tiffany wearing blood diamonds and people still idolize her and call her the queen.

Diva-esque seems to be what Meg is going for.


----------



## CarryOn2020

With zzzzlist talent and a most unpleasant personality, the best MM can hope for is DramaQueen.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> BLG has a 12 minute video explaining that streaming farms and stock prices are the secrets to her podcrash "success"



The Duchess of Shade and Shenanigans.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Does Fergie not live in the UK?  I thought she lived in his house (it's a very big house) and has for years.


She may now but for at least a few years in the last decade she lived in a Swiss ski chalet that she and Andrew owned together. She had residency there but would come back to see the girls. When the Epstein scandal blew up they had to sell the chalet because they were low on cash and had missed payments on it. I remember thinking it was odd at the time that she lived there but I guess she really liked it.


----------



## csshopper

Body Language Guy now has his own Spotify podcast.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> She may now but for at least a few years in the last decade she lived in a Swiss ski chalet that she and Andrew owned together. She had residency there but would come back to see the girls. When the Epstein scandal blew up they had to sell the chalet because they were low on cash and had missed payments on it. I remember thinking it was odd at the time that she lived there but I guess she really liked it.


There is a lot of speculation as to where she got the money to buy this new house after claiming poverty?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> There is a lot of speculation as to where she got the money to buy this new house after claiming poverty?
> 
> View attachment 5603025


Yes, this purchase has received lots of negative press. [ Probably why Andi will be kept off the balcony. ]

_Following the news that Sarah, Duchess of York, purchased a £5 million new home in Mayfair, *French socialite Isabelle de Rouvre is outraged. *

Sarah and Prince Andrew purchased de Rouvre's Swiss chalet in Verbier in 2014, and the Yorks never finished paying her. In 2020, she brought legal proceedings against the royal couple, claiming they owed her £6.8 million. In 2021, the parties settled for £3.4 million.  
"I understood they didn’t have the money and believed [Prince Andrew] would be going to prison in America so I thought it best to get what I could," de Rouvre told the Sunday Times. "I am outraged that I am now told she has spent millions on another property. It is just incredible and the whole story unbelievable. It is a dirty story as far as I am concerned. I thought they didn't have a penny."_









						French Socialite Says Prince Andrew and Fergie Misled Her About Their Finances
					

The Yorks bought Isabelle de Rouvre's Swiss chalet in 2014, and failed to pay off their debts.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> There is a lot of speculation as to where she got the money to buy this new house after claiming poverty?
> 
> View attachment 5603025


The guy she bought the house from seems like an interesting and insanely rich character. 









						The party-loving DJ 'who sold Sarah Ferguson her £3m Belgravia home'
					

Sebastian Macdonald-Hall is a Millfield-educated real estate consultant and son of property tycoon Caspar Macdonald-Hall, whose family fortune is estimated to be £954m in The Sunday Times Rich List.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

_For newly released figures disclose that the Invictus Games Foundation’s income fell last year.

According to the accounts filed at Companies House, income dipped by almost a third, from £1.77 million in 2020 to £1.24 million in 2021.

And that fall came despite the charity receiving 40 per cent of its fee from Netflix for Heart Of Invictus, the Duke of Sussex’s forthcoming documentary about the Invictus Games, which he established in 2014 to help wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women._


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

One more contradiction… Why is Oprah silent?  Or has she been silenced?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Do we think the disastrous duo have arrived in the UK?  Monday is the first day of this _tour_.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oooh, my, Bethenny is like a soothing balm, she is saying out loud what we’ve been saying for a long time.


_Frankel also recently unleashed a tirade against Meghan Markle, accusing her of being '*sanctimonious*' and '*self-important*' while insisting that she needs to stop publicly blasting the royal family and 'let it go.' 

She held nothing back as she spoke out about her thoughts on Meghan's recent bombshell interview with The Cut and her newly-released Spotify podcast during her own iHeart podcast Just B. 

Despite conceding that she had faced flack in the past for airing her opinions about Meghan, 41, Bethenny said she felt as though she couldn't ignore the controversies surrounding the Duchess of Sussex because it's something that everyone is talking about and 'has an opinion about.'

Describing the mother-of-two as a 'polarizing' person, Bethenny went on to address why the tides of public opinion seem to have very much turned against Meghan in recent months. 

'The bottom line is I don't think people like Meghan Markle because I think *she talks down to other people, I think she's sanctimonious,*' the former Bravo star stated. 

'I think *there's this subtext of elevation. She's up there, we're down here.'*

Bethenny went on to accuse Meghan of having a high-and-mighty opinion of herself, suggesting that the former Suits star believes she 'just has institutional knowledge on life and has experienced more than any of us.'

Comparing her to the women who appeared alongside her in the Real Housewives franchise, Bethenny continued: 'She's very self-important. She's very much like a Housewife in that she can't stop talking about the very thing that she wants to be irrelevant.

'If she were on the show, the producers would say, "Stop talking about security and the state of Frogmore Cottage. It's not relatable. Most people don't have a security detail so while that may be a real concern for you, it's not something that is going to play to this audience."'

The ex-Housewives star also accused Meghan of trying to 'mimic' Princess Diana in the way that she positions herself publicly, saying: 'I think there's a non-relatable factor in the way that we're being spoken to. 

'In that poised, orchestrated elegance, in that mimicking of Diana, in that Caroline Kennedy-style intentional, very natural, very slow speech. Being aghast at the word "diva". Who are you relating to?'








						Bethenny Frankel takes swipe at Kardashians for  photoshop
					

Bethenny Frankel minced no words as she spoke candidly about her feelings toward the Kardashians and their flagrant photoshop use, calling it 'irresponsible' and 'reckless.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I mean please, at this point I‘dneed evidence Spotify, Netflix and the rest DON’T always fix their ratings to suit themselves.
> 
> Even the BBC fix the ratings by automatically running a programme/agenda  they’re pushing straight after the one I chose to watch. How else they gonna justify BBC3 when no one voluntarily watches it. Even if I click it off they’ve already chalked up one more view. YouTube does the same.


I don’t watch the bbc anymore because this whiplash scheduling was driving me nuts. Badly researched trendy documentaries following twee craft shows and very little in between.


needlv said:


>



Whoever this account is she is hilarious - someone give her a job in. SNL or the like already 


Chanbal said:


>



Agreed Will has definitely let the mask slip now but I’d say his star power was already seriously damaged by how embarrassing red table is (not to mention Jada bragging about cheating on him to his face) and the Oscar was his chance to reinvent himself…. Oops 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooh, my, Bethenny is like a soothing balm, she is saying out loud what we’ve been saying for a long time.
> 
> 
> _Frankel also recently unleashed a tirade against Meghan Markle, accusing her of being '*sanctimonious*' and '*self-important*' while insisting that she needs to stop publicly blasting the royal family and 'let it go.'
> 
> She held nothing back as she spoke out about her thoughts on Meghan's recent bombshell interview with The Cut and her newly-released Spotify podcast during her own iHeart podcast Just B.
> 
> Despite conceding that she had faced flack in the past for airing her opinions about Meghan, 41, Bethenny said she felt as though she couldn't ignore the controversies surrounding the Duchess of Sussex because it's something that everyone is talking about and 'has an opinion about.'
> 
> Describing the mother-of-two as a 'polarizing' person, Bethenny went on to address why the tides of public opinion seem to have very much turned against Meghan in recent months.
> 
> 'The bottom line is I don't think people like Meghan Markle because I think *she talks down to other people, I think she's sanctimonious,*' the former Bravo star stated.
> 
> 'I think *there's this subtext of elevation. She's up there, we're down here.'*
> 
> Bethenny went on to accuse Meghan of having a high-and-mighty opinion of herself, suggesting that the former Suits star believes she 'just has institutional knowledge on life and has experienced more than any of us.'
> 
> Comparing her to the women who appeared alongside her in the Real Housewives franchise, Bethenny continued: 'She's very self-important. She's very much like a Housewife in that she can't stop talking about the very thing that she wants to be irrelevant.
> 
> 'If she were on the show, the producers would say, "Stop talking about security and the state of Frogmore Cottage. It's not relatable. Most people don't have a security detail so while that may be a real concern for you, it's not something that is going to play to this audience."'
> 
> The ex-Housewives star also accused Meghan of trying to 'mimic' Princess Diana in the way that she positions herself publicly, saying: 'I think there's a non-relatable factor in the way that we're being spoken to.
> 
> 'In that poised, orchestrated elegance, in that mimicking of Diana, in that Caroline Kennedy-style intentional, very natural, very slow speech. Being aghast at the word "diva". Who are you relating to?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel takes swipe at Kardashians for  photoshop
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel minced no words as she spoke candidly about her feelings toward the Kardashians and their flagrant photoshop use, calling it 'irresponsible' and 'reckless.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Beth was the verbal assassin of RHONY though sometimes it got a little cruel watching her eviscerate a softball like Carol Radizwill felt a bit much but if she’d been there she’d have kept last season Dorinda in line.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm being an over the top diva is a complement ? Really, think about it
> And for a person claiming to be a philanthropist
> 
> Just saw the latest Beyoncé promo for Tiffany’s , it did its job and CAUGHT MY EYE , was thinking how none of the clothes or SHOES are wearable IRL, the shoot was très DIVA but perfect for selling jewelry , diff vibe than the philanthropist green feminist etc one promoted by MM
> 
> DIVA-esque is not good for many job descriptions


That’s the problem with the podrash series.

M doesn’t want a discussion or enquiry,   Megzzzz decided, she knows best, the woman is a know it all dictator. Diva = BAD (bad in a bad way  ) Megzibaby is not exactly an intellectual, she gets hurt by words far too easily. She’s always looking to get hurt.


Diva can be insult, but it can also be a compliment, and you can turn a insult into a compliment if you own it. First rule of the playground . Joan Collins made a fortune playing and owning ‘b*tch’. 

IMO, Mariah was expecting a discussion. Bless Marian’s heart ❤️

I think that’s why I didn’t get ‘ambition’ with Serena, I don’t think Serena has for one minute thought of ambition as anything but a force for good. 

Bey, Mimi, Lady G, Shirley Bassey, Maria C are all Divas. M can only be blinded by their divinity.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Just sounds like your average thanks for having me note and maximising her own diva status


I agree. Maybe Mariah doesn't know the exact meaning of "diva": it's the latin feminin word of "devine" (divino) which means god and goddess. Now it's used for VERY talented ladies, like huge film stars, singers like Callas or, nowadays Mariah, Madonna and the like. People who have a HUGE talent in the arts. WHAT, pray, has TW achieved??? F**K all!!! I'm inclined to think that Mariah was being sarcastic and meant it in a derogatory way: TW certainly behaves like a diva but is light years away from being one!


----------



## Aminamina

Toby93 said:


> This exactly ^^^^ I read the book "Diana in Private" and she really makes it sound as though she thoroughly researched and verified all her facts.  I then looked HER up, and was shocked.  I assumed by her title as the author that she actually did have access to the royals, but what a load of nonsense.
> 
> I feel sorry for her ex-husband as she has been nothing but a major embarrassment to him for years, and absolutely exploits the title shamelessly.   She has a lot more in common with TW than she cares to let on


And thus, it might be quite valuable for us to know her POV re TW ))


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I agree. Maybe Mariah doesn't know the exact meaning of "diva": it's the latin feminin word of "devine" (divino) which means god and goddess. Now it's used for VERY talented ladies, like huge film stars, singers like Callas or, nowadays Mariah, Madonna and the like. People who have a HUGE talent in the arts. WHAT, pray, has TW achieved??? F**K all!!! I'm inclined to think that Mariah was being sarcastic and meant it in a derogatory way: TW certainly behaves like a diva but is light years away from being one!



agreed,

Mariah should know the meaning of the word diva though (as used for singers) wasn’t her mother an opera singer and singing teacher.


----------



## duna

Jayne1 said:


> From the article you linked to:
> 
> "In this she alleged that the Queen Mother was the illegitimate daughter of the Earl and Countess of Strathmore’s French cook, Marguerite Rodiere, producing no evidence in support of her claim beyond the fact that Elizabeth’s third Christian name was Marguerite."
> 
> Lady C did not start that rumour. That's been gossiped about since Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon was born.
> In fact, Wallis joked about it all the time too and anyone in the know understood why she called the Queen Mum the cook's daughter.



This makes me giggle: I didn't know that the Queen Mum was said to be illegitimate, but my English grandfather always called the Queen Mum, the Queen and Princess Margaret "the cook and the housemaids"! Yes he was a bit of a snob but had a great sense of humour!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> _For newly released figures disclose that the Invictus Games Foundation’s income fell last year.
> 
> According to the accounts filed at Companies House, income dipped by almost a third, from £1.77 million in 2020 to £1.24 million in 2021.
> 
> And that fall came despite the charity receiving 40 per cent of its fee from Netflix for Heart Of Invictus, the Duke of Sussex’s forthcoming documentary about the Invictus Games, which he established in 2014 to help wounded, injured and sick servicemen and women._



450k pounds, a lot of money, wonder who paid? Archewell does not have that much in the foundation… I guess some of the Netflix millions ( are we sure they really got $100m?) paid for that via Archewell

But the probs of the rich …well, was reading that Brooklyn Beckhams FIL is paying for his green card, not dad, ok, there are filing fees, thousands ??? … does BB not have that kind of pocket change ? 
Oh I get it … Who did they PAY OFF for the green card ? 
meanwhile Posh and Becks cruise on their 10m yacht


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> This makes me giggle: I didn't know that the Queen Mum was said to be illegitimate, but my English grandfather always called the Queen Mum, the Queen and Princess Margaret "the cook and the housemaids"! Yes he was a bit of a snob but had a great sense of humour!


Well, the Queen Mum was only a Lady before marriage, and from the (gasp!) Scottish (not English aristocracy), up til the women marrying the heir to the throne had always been princesses from “ruling” houses 

There was a lot of snobbery about that, Queen Victoria had so many children to marry off she relaxed the rules here and there accepting a few from morganatic lines (collateral Branches, lower in the pecking order)

The joke when QEII married Philip was that he was more royal than she, both of his parents were royals but only one of hers was born royal

But, the Queen Mum proved her mettle esp in WWII, and was such an asset and look at how her daughter turned out


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> That’s the problem with the podrash series.
> 
> M doesn’t want a discussion or enquiry,   Megzzzz decided, she knows best, the woman is a know it all dictator. Diva = BAD (bad in a bad way  ) Megzibaby is not exactly an intellectual, she gets hurt by words far too easily. She’s always looking to get hurt.
> 
> 
> Diva can be insult, but it can also be a compliment, and you can turn a insult into a compliment if you own it. First rule of the playground . Joan Collins made a fortune playing and owning ‘b*tch’.
> 
> IMO, Mariah was expecting a discussion. Bless Marian’s heart ❤️
> 
> I think that’s why I didn’t get ‘ambition’ with Serena, I don’t think Serena has for one minute thought of ambition as anything but a force for good.
> 
> Bey, Mimi, Lady G, Shirley Bassey, Maria C are all Divas. M can only be blinded by their divinity.


Based on the 2 podcasts, MM is trying to put herself in the same league as Mariah and Serena, hmmm
M and S are at the top of their disciplines, have been for 20 years
Wonderful article in the Wall St Journal today  about Serena, and the impact she has had


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Well, the Queen Mum was only a Lady before marriage, and from the (gasp!) Scottish (not English aristocracy), up til the women marrying the heir to the throne had always been princesses from “ruling” houses



When they got married he wasn't the heir to the throne, though.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

2019 video showing ZedZed Megaliar and her arrogance:

*"32 Times The Royal Family Refused Meghan's Unreasonable Demands"*
​


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Interesting.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



This enquiring mind wonders if it will be ghost-edited by ZedZed Megaliar.


----------



## kipp

Not sure if this has already been posted: 








						Drama queens: the return of Meghan and Harry | The Spectator
					

We’ve all spent months bracing ourselves for what our leaders assure us will be a dreadful winter. As the weather turns, we can look forward to ruinous energy bills, runaway inflation, collapsing health services, strikes, blackouts, more strikes, violent crime, and perhaps even – why not? – a...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Bethenny went on to accuse Meghan of having a high-and-mighty opinion of herself, suggesting that the former Suits star believes she 'just has institutional knowledge on life and has experienced more than any of us.'…
> 'If she were on the show, the producers would say, "*Stop talking about security and the state of Frogmore Cottage. It's not relatable. Most people don't have a security detail *so while that may be a real concern for you, it's not something that is going to play to this audience."'
> 
> The ex-Housewives star also accused Meghan of trying to 'mimic' Princess Diana in the way that she positions herself publicly, saying: 'I think there's a non-relatable factor in the way that we're being spoken to.
> 
> 'In that poised, orchestrated elegance, in that mimicking of Diana, in that Caroline Kennedy-style intentional, very natural, very slow speech. Being aghast at the word "diva". Who are you relating to?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel takes swipe at Kardashians for  photoshop
> 
> 
> Bethenny Frankel minced no words as she spoke candidly about her feelings toward the Kardashians and their flagrant photoshop use, calling it 'irresponsible' and 'reckless.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Bethenny misses the point here, big time! The security detail members moonlight as Personal Shoppers (or the other way around!?). So much modesty from TW!


----------



## Toby93

This article comes from a former fan.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Alex Dale, the author of the essay, (in @Chanbal post above) who sounded so pro ZedZed, had me going until I read this paragraph.
She takes me through to a shady courtyard. ‘The energy was so bad in this space until we rechannelled it,’ she sighs. *She points to the small, scrotum-sized jar on a pedestal in the center of the space*. *‘H’s input. He wanted to lose any masculinity that was toxic, neuter it*. 

ETA: Sorry @Chanbal I clicked on 'quote' but, I forgot to insert it into my post.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> This article comes from a former fan.



Nice comments! Is OW the A-list person who silenced Bethenny? Is OW still involved with TW's business ventures? 



	

		
			
		

		
	
 (from Evans Einstein, posted by @Toby93)


----------



## Chanbal

UK members, your guests seem to have arrived…








						Are Harry and Meghan already back in the UK after flying commercial?
					

The couple touched down on UK soil on Saturday morning after flying commercial, Hello! reports, adding they appeared to be without their children Archie and Lillibet.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> UK members, your guests seem to have arrived…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan already back in the UK after flying commercial?
> 
> 
> The couple touched down on UK soil on Saturday morning after flying commercial, Hello! reports, adding they appeared to be without their children Archie and Lillibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



No kids?  Interesting.  
Flew commercial?


----------



## TC1

For a couple who left the BRF to go live a quiet, private life and raise their children...I see 0/3 of these being accomplished. MM is okay leaving the kids behind? not worried about any nannies snacking and the housing unit ablaze?


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Alex Dale, the author of the essay, (in @Chanbal post above) who sounded so pro ZedZed, had me going until I read this paragraph.
> She takes me through to a shady courtyard. ‘The energy was so bad in this space until we rechannelled it,’ she sighs. *She points to the small, scrotum-sized jar on a pedestal in the center of the space*. *‘H’s input. He wanted to lose any masculinity that was toxic, neuter it*.
> 
> ETA: Sorry @Chanbal I clicked on 'quote' but, I forgot to insert it into my post.


they're ridiculous


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

duna said:


> I agree. Maybe Mariah doesn't know the exact meaning of "diva": it's the latin feminin word of "devine" (divino) which means god and goddess. Now it's used for VERY talented ladies, like huge film stars, singers like Callas or, nowadays Mariah, Madonna and the like. People who have a HUGE talent in the arts. WHAT, pray, has TW achieved??? F**K all!!! I'm inclined to think that Mariah was being sarcastic and meant it in a derogatory way: TW certainly behaves like a diva but is light years away from being one!


I’m sure Mariah has had enough time to look it up over the years.

Her point is as far as I see it, that M is happy to invite these women to talk to her and to label them but she gets all jumpy like the label is beneath herself.

An analogy would be; I am 18 stone and I invite my guest who is also 18 stone onto a podcast to discuss the positive and negative feminist connotations of the term ‘big girl’
At one point my guest says ‘you and me as big girls..’
and I suddenly cut her off with a ‘hey, hey I AM NOT a big girl. YOU are the big girl here.’

Even if she had always loved being called a big girl before she would know the implication is that I see big girl as a negative and I see myself as different and superior to her.

That’s what this whole show is about M is just explaining ad nauseous why other women can be put in boxes but she is just such a special unicorn that won’t fly for her.


----------



## Stansy

Maggie Muggins said:


> 2019 video showing ZedZed Megaliar and her arrogance:
> 
> *"32 Times The Royal Family Refused Meghan's Unreasonable Demands"*
> ​



Sooo, the tiara she wore was only a replica? This is hilarious! Poor boo, of course she must be whining about this injustice publicly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Stansy said:


> Sooo, the tiara she wore was only a replica? This is hilarious! Poor boo, of course she must be whining about this injustice publicly.



Yeah, I really don't believe that one.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Alex Dale, the author of the essay, (in @Chanbal post above) who sounded so pro ZedZed, had me going until I read this paragraph.
> She takes me through to a shady courtyard. ‘The energy was so bad in this space until we rechannelled it,’ she sighs. *She points to the small, scrotum-sized jar on a pedestal in the center of the space*. *‘H’s input. He wanted to lose any masculinity that was toxic, neuter it*.
> 
> ETA: Sorry @Chanbal I clicked on 'quote' but, I forgot to insert it into my post.


Scrotum size jar. First time I ever heard that description. Did it have little side handles that looked like testes?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I really don't believe that one.


That is curious. Even if a replica, that wasn’t t whipped up i a week. Why would they have made it?  Rather unlikely that the real one could be stolen.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sending Happy Labor Day weekend wishes to those celebrating.  Enjoy!    To make it on topic ... wonder what H & M are doing?


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Sending Happy Labor Day weekend wishes to those celebrating.  Enjoy!    To make it on topic ... wonder what H & M are doing?


plotting their next move to stay relevant?


----------



## redney

Hermes Zen said:


> Sending Happy Labor Day weekend wishes to those celebrating.  Enjoy!    To make it on topic ... wonder what H & M are doing?


Working, er I mean grifting  - just arrived in the UK this morning


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Sending Happy Labor Day weekend wishes to those celebrating.  Enjoy!    To make it on topic ... wonder what H & M are doing?


No doubt having a pool party and BBQ with 100 of their nearest and dearest.  Reality check. The pool has turned into a swamp because the motor and/or filter died.  The   bottled gas for the BBQ ran out.  They are desperately looking around to see who they can get a free meal off of because the kids are sick of frozen mac and cheese and In 'n Out burgers.  Oh and Lilibet keeps asking for  English breakfast tea and  jam and butty sandwiches like Gan Gan.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> Working, er I mean grifting  - just arrived in the UK this morning


Looking for more cheap clothing left behind along with some pages from the journal.


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Sending Happy Labor Day weekend wishes to those celebrating.  Enjoy!    To make it on topic ... wonder what H & M are doing?


They made sure to get out of town over Labor Day, because since they don't labor, they don't celebrate it.  Bonkers, i know.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They made sure to get out of town over Labor Day, because since they don't labor, they don't celebrate it.  Bonkers, i know.


yes, since we're so bonkers, why doesn't H go back where he came from?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Gayle King Reveals That Oprah Did Not Help Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Move Into Tyler Perry’s House: ‘Oprah Didn't Hook That Up’
					

Gayle King said her best friend Oprah Winfrey did not facilitate Prince Harry and Meghan Markle moving into Tyler Perry’s house.




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## needlv




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5603427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King Reveals That Oprah Did Not Help Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Move Into Tyler Perry’s House: ‘Oprah Didn't Hook That Up’
> 
> 
> Gayle King said her best friend Oprah Winfrey did not facilitate Prince Harry and Meghan Markle moving into Tyler Perry’s house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



that's interesting....I would say prior to her marriage, M didn't "know people" on that level. and H wasn't really hooked into the Hollywood crowd.
 but who knows what happened with that


----------



## Chanbal

She is good…


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan didn’t lose me – she threw me under the bus, says dad
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


>




Yes you could take away just the Duke and Duchess titles and leave them with Earl and Countess if Dumbarton.  More difficult to merch! Lol


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Scrotum size jar. First time I ever heard that description. Did it have little side handles that looked like testes?


With ZedZed that's quite possible. While reading the article and knowing how much Megaliar has emasculated Dufus, I could visualize a tiny jar on a pedestal in the middle of the courtyard to remind Dufus who is in charge. Then I wondered if the enshrinement happened before or after Lilypad was born.


----------



## needlv

_


			archive.ph
		

_​Meghan’s Mandela mystery proves that the Queen was right​Some recollections may vary – as the Duchess of Sussex is now finding out

After the Duchess of Sussex gave that extraordinary interview to Oprah Winfrey about the misery of life in the Royal family, the Queen responded with a phrase of great delicacy and tact. “Some recollections,” said a statement issued by Buckingham Palace, “may vary.” 
At the time, I don’t suppose the Duchess agreed. But perhaps now she can finally see the wisdom of Her Majesty’s words.
On Monday, an American magazine published an interview in which the Duchess revealed she’d once been paid the most moving compliment. In 2019, while she was attending the London premiere of the remake of The Lion King, a South African member of its cast told her: “When you married into [the Royal] family, we rejoiced in the streets the same we did when Mandela was freed from prison.”
What a lovely thing to say. The only trouble is, no one seems to know who said it. Dr John Kani, who voiced the part of Rafiki the mandrill, says that he was the only South African member of the cast, that he’s never met the Duchess, and that in South Africa her wedding was viewed as “no big deal”. The only other South African involved in the film, he says, was a composer named Lebo M. Mr M, meanwhile, says he did meet the Duchess. But he doesn’t recall talking about Nelson Mandela.

How puzzling. Still, I’m sure there’s a perfectly innocent explanation. There must be some other, as yet unidentified, person who paid the Duchess that unique and unforgettable tribute. I certainly wouldn’t dream of suggesting that she made the story up. As we know, she places great value on speaking her truth.
At any rate, I do feel for her. Because there is now a grave risk that heartless jokers will start paying her ludicrously extravagant compliments, purely to see whether she’ll repeat them to the media.
If so, I dread to think what her next interview will be like.
“I was speaking to this wonderful guy from England, and he said: ‘Forget Mandela. You’re like Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Gary Lineker all rolled into one.’ To be mentioned in the same breath as those four amazing activists was just so humbling. Jesus is someone whose work I’ve always admired, and if I can achieve even half of what he did, I’ll really feel I’ve made a difference.”


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5603427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King Reveals That Oprah Did Not Help Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Move Into Tyler Perry’s House: ‘Oprah Didn't Hook That Up’
> 
> 
> Gayle King said her best friend Oprah Winfrey did not facilitate Prince Harry and Meghan Markle moving into Tyler Perry’s house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



I wonder if O put this out there via Gayle to disance herself from the grifters


----------



## purseinsanity

Hermes Zen said:


> Sending Happy Labor Day weekend wishes to those celebrating.  Enjoy!    To make it on topic ... wonder what H & M are doing?


If it's to be a Happy Labor Day weekend, it means not giving a $hit what they're doing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yes.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5603427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gayle King Reveals That Oprah Did Not Help Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Move Into Tyler Perry’s House: ‘Oprah Didn't Hook That Up’
> 
> 
> Gayle King said her best friend Oprah Winfrey did not facilitate Prince Harry and Meghan Markle moving into Tyler Perry’s house.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com



OMG!  Oprah running as fast as her little legs will carry her away from the Harkles!


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> With ZedZed that's quite possible. While reading the article and knowing how much Megaliar has emasculated Dufus, I could visualize a tiny jar on a pedestal in the middle of the courtyard to remind Dufus who is in charge. Then I wondered if the enshrinement happened before or after Lilypad was born.


It happened after the eggs were fertilized and the embryos frozen.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if O put this out there via Gayle to disance herself from the grifters


Of course she did.   I could understand how they were hooked up with David Foster via the Maloney connection  to get the mansion at Vancouver.  There is no way that they would have been hooked up with TP without the Oprah connection. If MM knew TP, she would have invited him to the wedding.

Oprah to Gayle on the phone re the Harkles :  That ship be sinkin'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shush, Hazzi.



For reference:


----------



## needlv




----------



## bag-mania

_Variety_ posted an article saying that Archetypes was the #1 podcast again last week in 7 countries, the U.S., Canada, U.K., Ireland, India, Australia, and New Zealand. I find that impossible to believe. Who are all these people who want to listen to her? 

At least they posted this update today.

[*UPDATE:* As of Friday, Sept. 2, “Archetypes” had dropped to No. 2 in the U.S., where “The Joe Rogan Experience” reclaimed the top spot, and in India, where “The Ranveer Show” was No. 1.]


----------



## Chanbal

_she is nauseating_… _this guy is gona realize eventual, wow I did lose my father for this_…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CoconutDonut

Chanbal said:


> About being a diva…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

What will she wear?  Pressure is on now!
Calling Major Johnny Thompson?


----------



## CarryOn2020

DM is triggered  

The ill-fitting red dress lives forever:








						Are William and Kate about to steal Harry and Meghan's US crown?
					

At the United Nations General Assembly, William will have the world's attention as he meets the city's former mayor and billionaire philanthropist Mike Bloomberg to promote Earthshot.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





TM has always had a way with words 
'Meghan didn't lose me, I am not lost... she DUMPED me': Thomas Markle hits out at Duchess of Sussex's magazine claims - and accuses her of showing NO compassion to the ailing Queen as she 'constantly throws the Royal Family under the bus'​








						Thomas Markle hits out at Duchess of Sussex claims she 'lost him'
					

Thomas Markle's comments came after Meghan appeared to say that Prince Harry had spoken of a breakdown in relations with Prince Charles following his move to the US.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love love the Pink Floyd reference:









						SARAH VINE: Come on, Harry, kiss and make up if only for your own sake
					

SARAH VINE: Prince Harry has exchanged a walk-on part in history for a leading role in a cage.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




 - lyrics in spoiler


Spoiler



So, so you think you can tell
Heaven from hell?
Blue skies from pain?
Can you tell a green field
From a cold steel rail?
A smile from a veil?
Do you think you can tell?
Did they get you to trade
Your heroes for ghosts?
Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze?
Cold comfort for change?
Did you exchange
A walk-on part in the war
For a leading role in a cage?


 “ *We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year*"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What will she wear?  Pressure is on now!
> Calling Major Johnny Thompson?


Here he is…








						Major Johnny GIF - Major Johnny Military - Discover & Share GIFs
					

Click to view the GIF




					tenor.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love the Pink Floyd reference:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Come on, Harry, kiss and make up if only for your own sake
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Prince Harry has exchanged a walk-on part in history for a leading role in a cage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - lyrics in spoiler
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So, so you think you can tell
> Heaven from hell?
> Blue skies from pain?
> Can you tell a green field
> From a cold steel rail?
> A smile from a veil?
> Do you think you can tell?
> Did they get you to trade
> Your heroes for ghosts?
> Hot ashes for trees?
> Hot air for a cool breeze?
> Cold comfort for change?
> Did you exchange
> A walk-on part in the war
> For a leading role in a cage?
> 
> 
> “ *We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year*"




Sarah Vines's article, wow!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article! 










						Cool reception to Meghan media blitz suggests US not yet sold on former royals
					

Response to podcast series and magazine profile met with barb that duke and duchess are ‘taking a hardship and turning it into content’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the Harkles read the newspapers while in the UK










						Strip Harry & Meghan's titles for poisoning the last years of the Queen's life
					

HISTORY will be made this week as the longest-serving monarch in British history appoints her 15th Prime Minister. The mind reels at the procession of PMs who have come and gone in that 70-year rei…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Sarah Vines's article, wow!
> 
> View attachment 5603579



Add Tyler Perry to the list.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Add Tyler Perry to the list.


Not the BLG…


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones suffering from insomnia


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Colour me surprised. But also, how polite he is.


That delicate "faux pas" - as classy as "recollections may vary". I feel like a boor: I'd have just said "woman lies like a rug".


sdkitty said:


> I wonder if O put this out there via Gayle to disance herself from the grifters


Oprah and GK had two years to deny she was the go-between. That story has been percolating ever since the UnSussexfuls "fled" their gilded cottage. How strange that they should start denying it now


----------



## CarryOn2020

Then what happened?


_After their step back as working members of the royal family in January 2020, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were allowed to keep their titles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. But, according to OK!, “since the pair have continued to use the titles whilst shading the royal family in multiple public interviews, Queen Elizabeth may take away the denominations for good.”

Apparently high-ranking individuals within The Firm—the working arm of the royal family—are telling Her Majesty to remove their titles, likely citing media appearances like Meghan’s recent cover of The Cut—where she goes by Meghan, the Duchess on the cover and, in the article, is critical of the royal family.

“The highest levels of The Firm are telling the Queen that she needs to banish Prince Harry and Meghan Markle once and for all,” a palace insider told the outlet, adding that Prince William is the one leading the push. (!)








						The Queen Is Apparently Being Encouraged to Strip the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of Those Royal Titles
					

Any guesses who is allegedly leading the charge here?




					www.marieclaire.com
				



_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




It's only funny if you blend out that it's probably not that far from the truth.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> UK members, your guests seem to have arrived…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are Harry and Meghan already back in the UK after flying commercial?
> 
> 
> The couple touched down on UK soil on Saturday morning after flying commercial, Hello! reports, adding they appeared to be without their children Archie and Lillibet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I have my troops posted outside my door. My cat has orders too.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I really don't believe that one.


There are replicas made of all the royal jewels. Some of them are very old.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> yes, since we're so bonkers, why doesn't H go back where he came from?


We’ll take him back but you have to keep her. Deal or no deal?


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


>



That is very close to Farfetch offers, 20% off everything full-price, except what’s in my basket.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love the Pink Floyd reference:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Come on, Harry, kiss and make up if only for your own sake
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Prince Harry has exchanged a walk-on part in history for a leading role in a cage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - lyrics in spoiler
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> So, so you think you can tell
> Heaven from hell?
> Blue skies from pain?
> Can you tell a green field
> From a cold steel rail?
> A smile from a veil?
> Do you think you can tell?
> Did they get you to trade
> Your heroes for ghosts?
> Hot ashes for trees?
> Hot air for a cool breeze?
> Cold comfort for change?
> Did you exchange
> A walk-on part in the war
> For a leading role in a cage?
> 
> 
> “ *We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year*"




thanks for the British music, I give you an American anthem the British are all singing today 



At first I was afraid, I was petrified
Kept thinking I could never live without you by my side
But then I spent so many nights thinking how you did me wrong
And I grew strong
And I learned how to get along
And so you're back
From outer space
I just walked in to find you here with that sad look upon your face
I should have changed that stupid lock, I should have made you leave your key
If I'd known for just one second you'd be back to bother me
Go on now, go, walk out the door
Just turn around now
'Cause you're not welcome anymore
Weren't you the one who tried to hurt me with goodbye?
You think I'd crumble?
You think I'd lay down and die?
Oh no, not I, I will survive
Oh, as long as I know how to love, I know I'll stay alive
I've got all my life to live
And I've got all my love to give and I'll survive
I will survive, hey, hey
It took all the strength I had not to fall apart
Kept trying hard to mend the pieces of my broken heart
And I spent oh-so many nights just feeling sorry for myself
I used to cry
But now I hold my head up high and you see me
Somebody new
I'm not that chained-up little person still in love with you
And so you felt like dropping in and just expect me to be free
Well, now I'm saving all my lovin' for someone who's loving me
Go on now, go, walk out the door
Just turn around now
'Cause you're not welcome anymore
Weren't you the one who tried to break me with goodbye?
You think I'd crumble?
You think I'd lay down and die?
Oh no, not I, I will survive
Oh, as long as I know how to love, I know I'll stay alive
I've got all my life to live
And I've got all my love to give and I'll survive
I will survive
Oh
Go on now, go, walk out the door
Just turn around now
'Cause you're not welcome anymore
Weren't you the one who tried to break me with goodbye?
You think I'd crumble?
You think I'd lay down and die?
Oh no, not I, I will survive
Oh, as long as I know how to love, I know I'll stay alive
I've got all my life to live
And I've got all my love to give and I'll survive
I will survive
I will survive


----------



## CarryOn2020

Last Thursday, SoHo London handed out awards.  MA was there.  Wonder if he still is  












						Stanley Tucci and his wife Felicity Blunt attend the Soho House Awards
					

Stanley Tucci and his wife, Felicity Blunt, attended the Soho House Awards in London on Thursday. The 61-year-old performer and his spouse stayed close while posing for a set of photos.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> thanks for the British music, I give you an American anthem the British are all singing today
> 
> 
> 
> At first I was afraid, I was petrified
> Kept thinking I could never live without you by my side
> But then I spent so many nights thinking how you did me wrong
> And I grew strong
> And I learned how to get along
> And so you're back
> From outer space
> I just walked in to find you here with that sad look upon your face
> I should have changed that stupid lock, I should have made you leave your key
> If I'd known for just one second you'd be back to bother me
> Go on now, go, walk out the door
> Just turn around now
> 'Cause you're not welcome anymore
> Weren't you the one who tried to hurt me with goodbye?
> You think I'd crumble?
> You think I'd lay down and die?
> Oh no, not I, I will survive
> Oh, as long as I know how to love, I know I'll stay alive
> I've got all my life to live
> And I've got all my love to give and I'll survive
> I will survive, hey, hey
> It took all the strength I had not to fall apart
> Kept trying hard to mend the pieces of my broken heart
> And I spent oh-so many nights just feeling sorry for myself
> I used to cry
> But now I hold my head up high and you see me
> Somebody new
> I'm not that chained-up little person still in love with you
> And so you felt like dropping in and just expect me to be free
> Well, now I'm saving all my lovin' for someone who's loving me
> Go on now, go, walk out the door
> Just turn around now
> 'Cause you're not welcome anymore
> Weren't you the one who tried to break me with goodbye?
> You think I'd crumble?
> You think I'd lay down and die?
> Oh no, not I, I will survive
> Oh, as long as I know how to love, I know I'll stay alive
> I've got all my life to live
> And I've got all my love to give and I'll survive
> I will survive
> Oh
> Go on now, go, walk out the door
> Just turn around now
> 'Cause you're not welcome anymore
> Weren't you the one who tried to break me with goodbye?
> You think I'd crumble?
> You think I'd lay down and die?
> Oh no, not I, I will survive
> Oh, as long as I know how to love, I know I'll stay alive
> I've got all my life to live
> And I've got all my love to give and I'll survive
> I will survive
> I will survive



The UK will not just survive; it will *thrive *


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the Harkles read the newspapers while in the UK
> View attachment 5603581
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Strip Harry & Meghan's titles for poisoning the last years of the Queen's life
> 
> 
> HISTORY will be made this week as the longest-serving monarch in British history appoints her 15th Prime Minister. The mind reels at the procession of PMs who have come and gone in that 70-year rei…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



I laughed out loud at this article.

"As the UK announces its new PM, Meghan — 41 — will be delivering the keynote address to a global summit of youth leaders in Manchester. *The Meghans then jet to Germany* for an Invictus Games ceremony before returning to London on Thursday for the WellChild Awards. There are no plans to see Harry’s brother, father or grandmother.

Because Harry and Meghan are now bitterly estranged from the Royal Family — and yet, bizarrely, still very much a part of it. Indeed, their lucrative brand is built upon the magic dust of royalty. And slagging it off.

But now even America grows bored of mouthy* Meghan and her ginger glove puppet*. Her assertion that her wedding to Harry was celebrated like the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa has had even gullible Yanks weeping with derisive laughter."


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> We’ll take him back but you have to keep her. Deal or no deal?


that's a hard one...might be ok if she'd go live her private life
Of course that would have to be involuntary


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> We’ll take him back but you have to keep her. Deal or no deal?



We would like Paddington Bear, too.


----------



## jennlt

"She made the worst of a good situation" No argument there


----------



## Chanbal

_None of which is to say that celebrities shouldn’t use their power to promote good causes.

*It is just that if we bind activism and celebrity together, we may end up with too many Meghans – do-nothing celebrities who depend on activist causes to maintain their fame*, creating the ultimate non-virtuous circle._









						Is it okay to switch sides in the Megxit wars? Asking for a friend
					

With sadness, many of us have moved to the same side of the dispute as Piers Morgan – never a comfortable position to find oneself in.




					www.theage.com.au


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I have my troops posted outside my door. My cat has orders too.


I hope you will be happy that I asked …
Do you have enough security ?

Should I send Major Johnny over ?


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> "She made the worst of a good situation" No argument there



interesting....the white coat/coatdress appears to be almost a direct copy of Wallis....esp considering the wearing of gloves, which is unusual these days....does M sit around looking through old photos of Wallis and Diana and having clothing made to look like what they wore?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. German magazine titles "Insider Reveals: George Clooney's wife Amal doesn't invite [Raptor] anymore".

It is news to us? Not really, but I find it interesting that that's a headline now.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. German magazine titles "Insider Reveals: George Clooney's wife Amal doesn't invite [Raptor] anymore".
> 
> It is news to us? Not really, but I find it interesting that that's a headline now.


I hope this is true....one is a woman of accomplishment, the other's big accomplishment is marrying a royal idiot


----------



## Chanbal

This is going to be costly… I wonder who pays for it.


_Prince Harry__ and Meghan Markle's battle over security whilst in the UK continues this week as it is revealed they will have to use their own bodyguards during a trip to Manchester on Monday._


----------



## sdkitty

​


 






_Welcome to this week’s edition of Royalist, The Daily Beast’s newsletter for all things royal and Royal Family. Subscribe here to get it in your inbox every Sunday._

*Harry and Meghan’s ‘nuclear bombs’ take their toll on queen*

The relentless attacks on the royal family by Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are taking their toll on Queen Elizabeth; a source who knows her well describes them to the _Sunday Times_ as “nuclear bombs.” Prince Charles, a friend says, is “completely bewildered” by Harry’s behavior towards him.

The couple is in Britain this week to attend a youth summit in Manchester on Monday and the WellChild awards in London on Thursday; they will also travel to Germany.

A royal source spoke out to the _Times_ in the wake of Meghan’s headline-causing interview with _The Cut_: “It is hard to see how what they’re doing would equate to the values of the queen, who has never encouraged people to discuss deeply personal family relationships in public.” The monarch, a source who knows her well says, “doesn’t want to be on tenterhooks all the time, waiting to see what the next nuclear bomb will be—that will take its toll.”

Although Meghan’s camp disputed the much-discussed quote about Harry “losing” his father, Charles’s friends tell the_ Times_ the jibes continue to be “painful” for him, particularly after spending time with Harry, Meghan and his grandchildren, Archie and Lilibet, during the Platinum Jubilee in June, which Charles saw as a “minor act of reparation,” according to one friend, after the Sussexes’ explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey last year.

The friend told the _Times_: “For two years, there has been a steady stream of really challenging things said about a man who cannot [publicly] defend himself by a couple he obviously loves and misses. That is incredibly difficult on a personal level. He is completely bewildered by why his son, whom he loves deeply, feels this is the way to go about managing family relationships.”

A royal source, said: “Everyone hoped they (Harry and Meghan) would go off to be financially independent, pursue their philanthropic endeavors and be happy—and that in going their own way, they might no longer feel the need to rail against the system as much as they still do. But then the star power of them requires an association with the royal family, and the fuel on those flames is the family discord.”

Meghan claimed a South African cast member of _The Lion King _told her at the 2019 London premiere of a film version of the musical: “When you married into this family, we rejoiced in the streets the same as we did when Mandela was freed from prison.” This has been widely disputed, and has also been met with disbelief at the palace. “The whole thing is just staggering,” said a royal source. “Nelson Mandela? Who’s next, Gandhi? There are simply no words for the delusion and tragedy of it all.”

A source who knows the Sussexes questions why Meghan “is constantly looking back at how awful it was to briefly be a royal. What does success look like, is it a number in the bank? Is it that they’ve killed off the monarchy?” Another Palace source told the _Times_: “Ultimately they are bashing the institution that has put them in the position they’re in, the longevity of that strategy is not sustainable.”

*No questions!*

It’s certainly going to be a hectic week for Harry and Meghan. However, they will do their best to avoid any scrutiny by the press in the wake of Meghan’s interview with _The Cut_ which saw that infamous Nelson Mandela comparison referenced above.

And, giving a unique twist to the concept of the press conference, Harry is to appear at one on Tuesday, but will disappear before any of the assembled press can actually ask a question. Harry will instead “deliver remarks” to the press at a meeting on Tuesday and then scuttle, as he helps launch the run-up to the 2023 Invictus Games, his Paralympic-style event for wounded veterans, the _Telegraph_ reports.

The couple is unlikely to receive anything other than adulation once inside the doors of their headline engagements—the WellChild awards and the One Young World summit—but don’t be surprised if they avail of discreet entrance and exit arrangements to avoid being booed by an enraged British public on the street. Harry is locked in an ongoing battle with the British state over his security arrangements, saying that he should be entitled to automatic police protection in the U.K., but a spokesperson for Greater Manchester Police told MailOnline that the Monday event, at least, is being “privately secured.”



​

*The ongoing pity of Thomas Markle*

Thomas Markle, who collaborated with a paparazzi photographer to stage photographs of himself for profit, rarely loses a chance to attack his daughter. This weekend, Meghan’s dad, who suffered a stroke earlier this year which prevented him visiting the U.K. for the queen’s jubilee, is fanning the flames of his grievances in yet another interview with the _Mail on Sunday_. In response to Meghan’s claim that she “lost” him as a by-product of her troubles wit the royals, he told the _Mail on Sunday__,_ “She didn’t ‘lose’ me, she dumped me. I am not lost. She knows where to find me. My number hasn't changed. I would love to hear from my daughter and meet my son-in-law and my grandkids for the first time.”

In her interview Meghan also said: “I think forgiveness is really important. It takes a lot more energy to not forgive. But it takes a lot of effort to forgive.”

Thomas responds to this, “If she really believes in forgiveness, then why can’t she forgive me? I have apologized to her multiple times for any hurt and pain I might have caused her. I love my daughter. She talks about forgiveness, so why not start with her own family? What about forgiving me?”

*New William and Kate found*

_The Crown_ has found its Kate and William. Kate Middleton will be played by Meg Bellamy and William by Ed McVey, _Deadline_ reported this week. Both submitted self-taped auditions as part of a public casting call. Bellamy, the _Telegraph_ reports, is a former head girl of her state school St Crispin’s, and previously worked as a dressed-up character at a theme park. We feel Kate would admire both these facts. _Deadline_ reports that McVey, playing Prince William, has firearms and snowboarding knowledge. Is this a sign we should prepare for lots of noisy pheasant-shooting scenes?



​

*The queen’s health*

Where exactly we stand with regard to the queen’s heath may become clearer this week; on Tuesday she will perform the key constitutional duty of inviting a new prime minister to form a government, and photographs of this ceremony are customarily released. It’s happening in Scotland, where the queen lives for the summer, after the queen abandoned plans to travel to London to do the job in a concession to her mobility issues. On Saturday the queen was a no-show for the Braemar Highland games. A source told The Daily Beast the decision to cancel her appearance there was made “for the queen’s comfort.” Charles took her place.


 


Advertisement









​

​



 


*This week in royal history*





September 6 marks the 25th anniversary of the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales, at which Elton John sang, and her brother Earl Spencer delivered a stirring address. The hearse carrying her coffin was showered with flowers thrown by onlookers as it left London on its way to her final resting place at the Spencer ancestral home, Althorp.

*Unanswered questions*

Will Harry and Meghan _really_ not see any royals on their trip to Britain, especially as William and Kate are, quite literally, just down the road? What a sad indictment of all parties that would be, as less than 400 yards separates their new home Adelaide Cottage from Frogmore Cottage. Kate was spotted driving out of her new abode earlier this week. Go one, someone. Take round a cup of sugar.






 








​


----------



## Cinderlala

papertiger said:


> We’ll take him back but you have to keep her. Deal or no deal?


 No deal---I'll take briefcase number 23.     Fingers crossed for forced exile for Skeeter!  Perhaps to South Africa, where she would get the welcome she deserves.


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> We’ll take him back but you have to keep her. Deal or no deal?



I should think H would need extensive de-programming if he got away from raptor (the dinosaur variety, not the bird).


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> This is going to be costly… I wonder who pays for it.
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry__ and Meghan Markle's battle over security whilst in the UK continues this week as it is revealed they will have to use their own bodyguards during a trip to Manchester on Monday._




...The Duke and Duchess of *Suffolk....O*ops, naughty Daily Mail


----------



## xincinsin

I'm feeling stupid. What does it mean that "they can barely stand up in Frogmore"?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I hope this is true....one is a woman of accomplishment, the other's big accomplishment is marrying a royal idiot


I love that comparison with Grace Kelly that has Hazard described as Zedzee's acting trophy. 

There was a recent article describing Zedzee as Hazard's trophy wife. Caused me a lot of cognitive dissonance


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if O put this out there via Gayle to disance herself from the grifters


so basically this implies that Tyler reached out to Meegain without knowing her personally
Regardless of how this came about he was very generous to the grifters
.....as far as what Gayle said, there is no context.  was this asked of her in an interview?  usually she would be interviewing, not being the subject of an interview.  odd


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I'm feeling stupid. What does it mean that "they can barely stand up in Frogmore"?



Quite literally low ceilings. But it's a mistake, the building with the low ceilings is Nottingham Cottage. Still enough to stand upright, but Harry is said to have banged his head on the doorways a few times though he seemed perfectly happy with his apartment before Raptor came along. How this is a problem for Raptor who's like a foot shorter I don't know.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Quite literally low ceilings. But it's a mistake, the building with the low ceilings is Nottingham Cottage. Still enough to stand upright, but Harry is said to have banged his head on the doorways a few times though he seemed perfectly happy with his apartment before Raptor came along. How this is a problem for Raptor who's like a foot shorter I don't know.


right, I think she's average height, maybe 5'6 at most


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I hope you will be happy that I asked …
> Do you have enough security ?
> 
> Should I send Major Johnny over ?


Whatever my security, whatever time of day, whatever the reason, please send Major Johnny over - whatever.


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> The UK will not just survive; it will *thrive *


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> that's a hard one...might be ok if she'd go live her private life
> Of course that would have to be involuntary



involuntary? Will that include a straight jacket ?

M will never go back in her box, she’s on a ****-mission


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This is going to be costly… I wonder who pays for it.
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry__ and Meghan Markle's battle over security whilst in the UK continues this week as it is revealed they will have to use their own bodyguards during a trip to Manchester on Monday._



Their disconnect with RL is so telling: _Now the couple face relying on their own security staff and event organisers to keep them safe at a One Young World event they will attend in Manchester tomorrow_

Most regular folk rely on themselves for most things. Hazard was coddled most of his life and definitely resents that he has to pay his bills now. And Zedzee has been and still is living off the men in her life. I'm wondering who they will be trying to strike a deal with next. How long can they mine their victimhood for content? Will Hazard try to spin his mental deficiency into a longrunning series? Will Zedzee become the next guru for the cosplay community?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> involuntary? Will that include a straight jacket ?
> 
> M will never go back in her box, she’s on a ****-mission


yes, a mission to be a superstar


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Quite literally low ceilings. But it's a mistake, the building with the low ceilings is Nottingham Cottage. Still enough to stand upright, but Harry is said to have banged his head on the doorways a few times though he seemed perfectly happy with his apartment before Raptor came along. How this is a problem for Raptor who's like a foot shorter I don't know.





sdkitty said:


> right, I think she's average height, maybe 5'6 at most


I think the false ceiling to conceal the toilet pipes drops the ceiling height by a foot


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> interesting....the white coat/coatdress appears to be almost a direct copy of Wallis....esp considering the wearing of gloves, which is unusual these days....does M sit around looking through old photos of Wallis and Diana and having clothing made to look like what they wore?


What else has she got to do?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> What else has she got to do?


if this is true, then I wonder what motivates her.  diana was beloved and stylish.  Wallis wan't popular but was a style icon I guess.  If she fancies herself as a fashion leader, I think she's barking up the wrong tree.  I'll fitting clothing, toothpick legs and a funny waistline don't work for that


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Their disconnect with RL is so telling: _Now the couple face relying on their own security staff and event organisers to keep them safe at a One Young World event they will attend in Manchester tomorrow_
> 
> Most regular folk rely on themselves for most things. Hazard was coddled most of his life and definitely resents that he has to pay his bills now. And Zedzee has been and still is living off the men in her life. I'm wondering who they will be trying to strike a deal with next. How long can they mine their victimhood for content? Will Hazard try to spin his mental deficiency into a longrunning series? Will Zedzee become the next guru for the cosplay community?


Can you imagine the first time he was ever sent a bill in his own name:

1. What is this? 
2. So, who do I send it to?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> if this is true, then I wonder what motivates her.  diana was beloved and stylish.  Wallis wan't popular but was a style icon I guess.  If she fancies herself as a fashion leader, I think she's barking up the wrong tree.  I'll fitting clothing, toothpick legs and a funny waistline don't work for that



1. MegZ thinks she’s gorgeous. The most gorgeous of all. 
2. In MegZ universe, Wallis must be some sort of American-marries British royalty role-model, and the not the Nazi loving, professional mistress she factually was.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Can you imagine the first time he was ever sent a bill in his own name:
> 
> 1. What is this?
> 2. So, who do I send it to?



Us royals don't carry cash!

(I've heard Kate does occasionally, but maybe that's because she's a faux royal)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> 1. MegZ thinks she’s gorgeous. The most gorgeous of all.



She really does. I hope she didn't forget to send her dad a thank you note for the teeth and nose.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Newsweek tale about a beagle, with totally extraneous last sentence about the Harkles. And the sole comment is none too complimentary.








						Internet in tears as dad realizes surprise puppy birthday gift is for him
					

"The most precious thing I've seen today," wrote one TikTok user.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Can you imagine the first time he was ever sent a bill in his own name:
> 
> 1. What is this?
> 2. So, who do I send it to?


I have encountered colleagues like that. They filed the invoices. And when irate vendors demanded payment, they "innocently" said they thought the bills were just FYI.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the Netfl*x crew will be barred from entering Windsor (Frogmore). 





Spoiler: If true, perfectly suited to each other!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She really does. I hope she didn't forget to send her dad a thank you note for the teeth and nose.


a lot of pics I'm seeing lately she seems to resemble her mom more than in earlier years
Not saying there's anything wrong with that, just sayin


----------



## mellibelly

xincinsin said:


> Newsweek tale about a beagle, with totally extraneous last sentence about the Harkles. And the sole comment is none too complimentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Internet in tears as dad realizes surprise puppy birthday gift is for him
> 
> 
> "The most precious thing I've seen today," wrote one TikTok user.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


There’s a second comment now. “I wonder if the dog flew private?” LMAO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> a lot of pics I'm seeing lately she seems to resemble her mom more than in earlier years
> Not saying there's anything wrong with that, just sayin



I was referring to her surgically/medically corrected nose and teeth, not what she naturally had.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Newsweek tale about a beagle, with totally extraneous last sentence about the Harkles. And the sole comment is none too complimentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Internet in tears as dad realizes surprise puppy birthday gift is for him
> 
> 
> "The most precious thing I've seen today," wrote one TikTok user.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


It is so damn annoying that articles that have nothing to do with them find a way to insert them in. I blame the media web sites desperate for those clicks. The last thing I want to see in a “feel good” story is a Meghan and Harry anecdote shoe-horned in.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was referring to her surgically/medically corrected nose and teeth, not what she naturally had.


of course 
duh


----------



## marietouchet

Ver


papertiger said:


> Whatever my security, whatever time of day, whatever the reason, please send Major Johnny over - whatever.


on his way … kilt required

saw photos of Anne, Camilla and Charles at Braemar, all color coordinated in red, khaki, the colors of the Rothesay tartan on his kilt, thumb way up for the outfits

scroll down for photos at Braemar

Prince Charles finds Harry and Meghan's royal family jibes 'painful'
https://mol.im/a/11178205


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I laughed out loud at this article.
> 
> But now even America grows bored of mouthy* Meghan and her ginger glove puppet*. Her assertion that her wedding to Harry was celebrated like the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa has had even gullible Yanks weeping with derisive laughter."


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> This is going to be costly… I wonder who pays for it.
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry__ and Meghan Markle's battle over security whilst in the UK continues this week as it is revealed they will have to use their own bodyguards during a trip to Manchester on Monday._



Since all their publicity stunts staged for their current UK trip are presumably for more Netflix content, maybe Netflix is picking up the tab for their trip including their security?


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Ver
> 
> on his way … kilt required
> 
> saw photos of Anne, Camilla and Charles at Braemar, all color coordinated in red, khaki, the colors of the Rothesay tartan on his kilt, thumb way up for the outfits
> 
> scroll down for photos at Braemar
> 
> Prince Charles finds Harry and Meghan's royal family jibes 'painful'
> https://mol.im/a/11178205


Dear Prince Charles:

As Michael Corleone reminded us frequently, it’s business and not personal. I tell you this to assuage your hurt feelings.

Best Wishes,
A Friend

P.S. Nah, he’s a little sh*thead and so is she.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> Since all their publicity stunts staged for their current UK trip are presumably for more Netflix content, maybe Netflix is picking up the tab for their trip including their security?


Yes.  I am wondering if the film crew is still banned from filming on Windsor property.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Dear Prince Charles:
> 
> As Michael Corleone reminded us frequently, it’s business and not personal. I tell you this to assuage your hurt feelings.
> 
> Best Wishes,
> A Friend
> 
> P.S. Nah, he’s a little sh*thead and so is she.



I honestly doubt anyone is doubling over in pain over Raptor. It's Harry they are worried about and hurt by his treason. She is merely an annoyance.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt anyone is doubling over in pain over Raptor. It's Harry they are worried about and hurt by his treason. She is merely an annoyance.


they could be very annoyed - angry - at her....depending on their temperament.  I doubt the queen is losing sleep over this crap


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt anyone is doubling over in pain over Raptor. It's Harry they are worried about and hurt by his treason. She is merely an annoyance.


She’s worse in a way because she blatantly makes things up.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> they could be very annoyed - angry - at her....depending on their temperament.  I doubt the queen is losing sleep over this crap


I tend to agree about TQ, but I think she doesn’t want the titles removed while she is still alive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> She’s worse in a way because she blatantly makes things up.



She absolutely is worse than him, it's just that the person near and dear to them is Harry.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> I tend to agree about TQ, but I think she doesn’t want the titles removed while she is still alive.


But would Charles have the balls to remove their titles when he is king? He’s never struck me as a particularly strong character.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> But would Charles have the balls to remove their titles when he is king? He’s never struck me as a particularly strong character.



Difficult to say, but he also seemed sulky and easily slighted when younger. Maybe if they provoke him enough. Then again, as much as I'd like to see karma kick Raptor in the face...if that was my son/brother I'd want to leave a way out for him, and cutting him off so completely is probably not the way to go.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Difficult to say, but he also seemed sulky and easily slighted when younger. *Maybe if they provoke him enough.* Then again, as much as I'd like to see karma kick Raptor in the face...if that was my son/brother I'd want to leave a way out for him, and cutting him off so completely is probably not the way to go.


OW's interview, APD's article… what else does he need?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> I laughed out loud at this article.
> 
> "As the UK announces its new PM, Meghan — 41 — will be delivering the keynote address to a global summit of youth leaders in Manchester. *The Meghans then jet to Germany* for an Invictus Games ceremony before returning to London on Thursday for the WellChild Awards. There are no plans to see Harry’s brother, father or grandmother.
> 
> Because Harry and Meghan are now bitterly estranged from the Royal Family — and yet, bizarrely, still very much a part of it. Indeed, their lucrative brand is built upon the magic dust of royalty. And slagging it off.
> 
> But now even America grows bored of mouthy* Meghan and her ginger glove puppet*. Her assertion that her wedding to Harry was celebrated like the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa has had even gullible Yanks weeping with derisive laughter."


I resent that!  I’m a Yank but not gullible!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Why would they agree to that? What can they bring to the table? They are highly controversial and have no money, at this point I'd tell them to stuff it if they come with their impossible demands.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would they agree to that? What can they bring to the table? They are highly controversial and have no money, at this point I'd tell them to stuff it if they come with their impossible demands.


Another group/charity that the Harkles have tainted.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Difficult to say, but he also seemed sulky and easily slighted when younger. Maybe if they provoke him enough. Then again, as much as I'd like to see karma kick Raptor in the face...if that was my son/brother I'd want to leave a way out for him, and cutting him off so completely is probably not the way to go.


It could work for or against Charles.  If he wants them out, he could look in control. The against would be the unrelenting reaction from Harry and his using the media about it every 5 minutes.  If Charles is ready to withstand that onslaught, then he might do it.  William is his greatest ally in this and he isn't afraid to push it.  I think William wants the Harry problem well over and done with by the time he ascends the throne.  

A third factor is if the new PM is interested in this problem at all.


----------



## carmen56

DoggieBags said:


> But would Charles have the balls to remove their titles when he is king? He’s never struck me as a particularly strong character.



I wouldn’t bank on Charles doing anything, he is weak willed and without backbone.  William is a different kettle of fish, I think he has an inner core of steel and wouldn’t hesitate to strip the Harkles of their titles etc.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Why would they agree to that?* What can they bring to the table? They are highly controversial and have no money, at this point I'd tell them to stuff it if they come with their impossible demands.


It's ridiculous! Nobody seems to have the courage to stand up to the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

They profess to hate The Firm, but Harry and Meghan’s UK trip feels oddly like a royal tour
					

But there’s one major difference - with limited public and press access, you’ll have to tune into Netflix for the full story of their visit




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				








__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It could work for or against Charles.  If he wants them out, he could look in control. The against would be the unrelenting reaction from Harry and his using the media about it every 5 minutes.  If Charles is ready to withstand that onslaught, then he might do it.  William is his greatest ally in this and he isn't afraid to push it.  I think William wants the Harry problem well over and done with by the time he ascends the throne.
> 
> A third factor is if the new PM is interested in this problem at all.


deleted


----------



## Chanbal

One may think that the invitation came without the promise of a wire transfer…  Is Charles playing a game here…



*Prince Charles has extended an open invite to his estranged son Prince Harry despite hurtful revelations by the Duchess of Sussex that their relationship was “lost*_”…

But another close friend of the heir told how despite any apparent friction in their relationship, *it is Charles who has once again tried to bring his son back into the fold.*

The palace insider said: “He (Charles) hasn’t wavered, despite the attacks which seem to be coming with increased vigour.

“*The Prince of Wales reiterated his invitation for Harry and Meghan, and the whole family if they wished, to come and stay with him this summer while he is at his home on the Balmoral estate*.

“He (Charles) thought it might be a good opportunity for everyone to take stock and relax, but the invitation was declined, as it has been before. Nevertheless it remains_.”


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> One may think that the invitation came without the promise of a wire transfer…  Is Charles playing a game here…
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Charles has extended an open invite to his estranged son Prince Harry despite hurtful revelations by the Duchess of Sussex that their relationship was “lost*_”…
> 
> But another close friend of the heir told how despite any apparent friction in their relationship, *it is Charles who has once again tried to bring his son back into the fold.*
> 
> The palace insider said: “He (Charles) hasn’t wavered, despite the attacks which seem to be coming with increased vigour.
> 
> “*The Prince of Wales reiterated his invitation for Harry and Meghan, and the whole family if they wished, to come and stay with him this summer while he is at his home on the Balmoral estate*.
> 
> “He (Charles) thought it might be a good opportunity for everyone to take stock and relax, but the invitation was declined, as it has been before. Nevertheless it remains_.”



but is this true?  who knows?  it could have been put out there by the Harkles so they look like they're in control


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just as QE has silenced Andi, I still believe Charles can silence Hazzi.  Just as doors opened for Andi because he is the Queen’s son, those same doors plus more will open for H&M. Charles has an enormous amount of leverage, especially behind the scenes. By now, it ought to be clear to one and all that H&M are indeed using those titles and, most likely, making many promises for future deals.  Remember Hazz continues to be listed on the royal website.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just as QE has silenced Andi, I still believe Charles can silence Hazzi.  Just as doors opened for Andi because he is the Queen’s son, those same doors plus more will open for H&M. Charles has an enormous amount of leverage, especially behind the scenes. By now, it ought to be clear to one and all that H&M are indeed using those titles and, most likely, making many promises for future deals.  Remember Hazz continues to be listed on the royal website.


Not so sure he can shut his son up.  If he isn't giving him money anymore, what can he do to him to shut him up? Do you think business opportunities will vanish?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She absolutely is worse than him, it's just that the person near and dear to them is Harry.


I don’t think Harry has been near and dear to the family for many months. They couldn’t have expected much from Meghan, they didn’t know her.

But Harry? Imagine having a family member who you thought you were close to suddenly expressing such loathing and disdain about you and what you represent. It would hurt at first but in time it would infuriate. Harry has destroyed his relationships with most of his family. I don’t see them taking him completely back into the fold, even if there is a divorce.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Not so sure he can shut his son up.  If he isn't giving him money anymore, what can he do to him to shut him up? Do you think business opportunities will vanish?


Just brainstorming some ideas, Charles could/should:
— Remove all references to H&M on royal website. Stop any charity or business from using H&M’s titles [ouch].  One or two lawsuits against those companies is all it would take. Sure, H&M will cry to the media, but that didn’t work with O and it really won’t work now. Entitled arseholes wanting more more more - it doesn’t sell well in today’s world.
— Kick H&M out of Frogmore and any other royal property
— Change the will - remove Hazz from receiving any and all money, land, property, etc.  Charles may not be able to change Diana’s will, but William can get his aunts and uncle to change it, especially since Hazz does not live in the UK.  Where there is $$$, there is leverage.
— Remove Hazi and his line from LoS and CoS
— Prevent him from attending QE’s funeral and the subsequent coronation and every other royal function
— Release all the files on H&M
Surely, there are lots of behind-the-scenes stuff the BRF can do. They are far more powerful than these mouthy two.  As sensitive as Charles may be, he proved with Diana and others that he can throw shade better than most.  Charles needs to do whatever it takes to make it clear that Hazz is _persona non grata. _

If there is no change in Hazzie’s status, business opportunities will always exist.  Some of those will be shady, some legit.  Other non-working royals have no problem getting lucrative deals - for example, Zara, Peter, Princess Michael, etc.  

As always, my opinion only.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> I resent that!  I’m a Yank but not gullible!!!


I think most American's are not that gullible, but even if any did believe all her lies on Oprah, it would seem that they are starting to see right though her now.  Of course, we all saw through her on this site a lot sooner  
All of her interviews on TV and print are directed at a US audience as she know most Americans do not know that much about British royalty.  She is counting on that fact, but it looks to have backfired with this last interview.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just as QE has silenced Andi, I still believe Charles can silence Hazzi.  Just as doors opened for Andi because he is the Queen’s son, those same doors plus more will open for H&M. Charles has an enormous amount of leverage, especially behind the scenes. By now, it ought to be clear to one and all that H&M are indeed using those titles and, most likely, making many promises for future deals.  Remember Hazz continues to be listed on the royal website.


Andrew must still be on the QEII payroll since we have not heard of a deal for his autobiography


----------



## marietouchet

Will the Mindy Kaling podcast come out during the trip to Europe ?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> One may think that the invitation came without the promise of a wire transfer…  Is Charles playing a game here…
> 
> 
> 
> *Prince Charles has extended an open invite to his estranged son Prince Harry despite hurtful revelations by the Duchess of Sussex that their relationship was “lost*_”…
> 
> But another close friend of the heir told how despite any apparent friction in their relationship, *it is Charles who has once again tried to bring his son back into the fold.*
> 
> The palace insider said: “He (Charles) hasn’t wavered, despite the attacks which seem to be coming with increased vigour.
> 
> “*The Prince of Wales reiterated his invitation for Harry and Meghan, and the whole family if they wished, to come and stay with him this summer while he is at his home on the Balmoral estate*.
> 
> “He (Charles) thought it might be a good opportunity for everyone to take stock and relax, but the invitation was declined, as it has been before. Nevertheless it remains_.”



Where are they really staying? Must have flown into London? And it takes a bit to get to Manchester
I could see going directly to Manchester from Heathrow, bypassing Windsor and the Cambridges entirely , it is a tight itinerary 
I don’t doubt Charles invited them to Balmoral, but it a bit out of the way, they probably engineered the tight itinerary to avoid seeing relatives


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Andrew must still be on the QEII payroll since we have not heard of a deal for his autobiography


Exactly. He has been silenced, very effectively if I may so.  Is he still making deals with shady people?  I doubt it.  
Imo QE and Edo have been a  stabilizing influence on the Yorks.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Will the Mindy Kaling podcast come out during the trip to Europe ?


Probably. If they follow the releases of the last two episodes it should drop on Tuesday.


----------



## marietouchet

I thought we would have been out of truth bombs by now, ok, how many times can they whine about their families?
M certainly managed to offend South Africa twice in the space of one week, heater and Mandela stories, amazing 
Extraordinary this … can’t wait to see what happens in Europe , new venues to offend


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Harry has been near and dear to the family for many months. They couldn’t have expected much from Meghan, they didn’t know her.
> 
> But Harry? Imagine having a family member who you thought you were close to suddenly expressing such loathing and disdain about you and what you represent. It would hurt at first but in time it would infuriate. Harry has destroyed his relationships with most of his family. *I don’t see them taking him completely back into the fold, even if there is a divorce.*



Me neither, but I think they'd rather offer him support than see her eat him alive. Doesn't mean they'll trust him and welcome him back as a working royal.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> — Change the will - remove Hazz from receiving any and all money, land, property, etc.  Charles may not be able to change Diana’s will, but William can get his aunts and uncle to change it, especially since Hazz does not live in the UK.  Where there is $$$, there is leverage.



I'm confused. What point is there in having a will when someone else can change it post mortem?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm confused. What point is there in having a will when someone else can change it post mortem?


I guess the idea is the deceased does get to express his/her wishes _at that point in time. _As time passes, situations change.  Most likely, the deceased would change his/her wishes, too.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just brainstorming some ideas, Charles could/should:
> — Remove all references to H&M on royal website. Stop any charity or business from using H&M’s titles [ouch].  One or two lawsuits against those companies is all it would take. Sure, H&M will cry to the media, but that didn’t work with O and it really won’t work now. Entitled arseholes wanting more more more - it doesn’t sell well in today’s world.
> — Kick H&M out of Frogmore and any other royal property
> — Change the will - remove Hazz from receiving any and all money, land, property, etc.  Charles may not be able to change Diana’s will, but William can get his aunts and uncle to change it, especially since Hazz does not live in the UK.  Where there is $$$, there is leverage.
> — Remove Hazi and his line from LoS and CoS
> — Prevent him from attending QE’s funeral and the subsequent coronation and every other royal function
> — Release all the files on H&M
> Surely, there are lots of behind-the-scenes stuff the BRF can do. They are far more powerful than these mouthy two.  As sensitive as Charles may be, he proved with Diana and others that he can throw shade better than most.  Charles needs to do whatever it takes to make it clear that Hazz is _persona non grata. _
> 
> If there is no change in Hazzie’s status, business opportunities will always exist.  Some of those will be shady, some legit.  Other non-working royals have no problem getting lucrative deals - for example, Zara, Peter, Princess Michael, etc.
> 
> As always, my opinion only.


I like the idea of revoking the lease on Frog Cot..  Removing him from the website.  The biggest threat is if they have really really bad dirt on her that would be really embarrassing.  That could shut him up if he doesn't want the mother of his child revealed to be a _________fill in the blank.  Keeping him from any and all royal functions, but he has to beat the Harkles time wise because they always announce that they decided not to go.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I guess the idea is the deceased does get to express his/her wishes _at that point in time. _As time passes, situations change.  Most likely, the deceased would change his/her wishes, too.



That's not how a will works unless conditions are put in there to begin with.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not how a will works unless conditions are put in there to begin with.


In theory, I agree.  However, it has been done.  Now, with more grandkids added, surely Diana would want them included?

_A Princess’s wishes… overridden_​_In December of 1997, Diana’s mother and sister went to court and obtained a “variation order,” permitting them to distribute the princess’s estate differently from how she’d specified: Under the variation order:_

_The two princes would not receive their shares of Diana’s estate until the age of 30 (although they would begin receiving income distributions at age 25)._
_Instead of splitting 25 percent of Princess Diana’s jewels and possessions, each of the godchildren would receive a single memento, chosen by the executors. And none of that would happen until the younger prince, Harry, turned 30 in 2014._
_Fast forward to 2014_​_In 2014, Prince Harry received his share of his mother’s estate (two years earlier, Prince William had received his). During the intervening 17 years following the variation order, 150 items from Princess Diana’s possessions were traveling the world as part of an exhibition put together by Princess Diana’s brother, Earl Spencer. Proceeds from the exhibition (admissions and such) raised more than $2 million.

Diana’s family say the proceeds went to a charitable fund created in Diana’s memory. Since Princess Diana was highly charitable during her lifetime, one could argue that her wishes weren’t entirely trounced.

What remains a mystery is why Diana’s family ignored her wishes. What would Diana have said? How do Prince William and Prince Harry feel about the way their mom’s wishes were disregarded? All we know right now is that Prince William, Prince Harry, and their respective families still find ways to honor Diana’s life.








						The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
					

Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.




					www.rd.com
				



_








						Can you change a will after someone’s died?
					

If you’re the person looking after a loved one’s will (the executor) or you’re due to inherit something, you might be wondering whether the will is set in stone.




					farewill.com


----------



## bag-mania

Diana’s estate has been completely disbursed at this point, hasn’t it? It’s been 25 years and her children are both grown men and inherited.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not how a will works unless conditions are put in there to begin with.


The executors of Diana’s will were her mother and one of her sisters. They went to court to get a “variation order”. Under Diana’s original will, she wanted the distribution of her personal possessions to take into account any letters of wishes she may have written after her will was signed. She wrote a letter of wishes the day after her will was signed stating her desire that all her jewelry and 3/4 of her personal property would go to her sons and the other 1/4 would be divided amongst her 17 godchildren. The 2 executors were successful in getting the 1/4 portion allocated to her 17 godchildren changed by the court. They apparently were allowed to reduce the bequest to 1 memento of minimal value to each godchild.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Diana’s estate has been completely disbursed at this point, hasn’t it? It’s been 25 years and her children are both grown men and inherited.


Was any of it put in a fund to earn interest or something ?  Idk the details of her will.  Now, as a Spencer, does Hazzi have any money or property coming his way?  My guess is no, but I have no idea the terms and conditions of any inheritance or the UK laws.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Andrew must still be on the QEII payroll since we have not heard of a deal for his autobiography


Randy Andy may not be a nice person, but he seems to love his mother. I don't think he would entertain an autobiography or memoir that would potentially hurt QE.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> The executors of Diana’s will were her mother and one of her sisters. They went to court to get a “variation order”. Under Diana’s original will, she wanted the distribution of her personal possessions to take into account any letters of wishes she may have written after her will was signed. She wrote a letter of wishes the day after her will was signed stating her desire that all her jewelry and 3/4 of her personal property would go to her sons and the other 1/4 would be divided amongst her 17 godchildren. The 2 executors were successful in getting the 1/4 portion allocated to her 17 godchildren changed by the court. They apparently were allowed to reduce the bequest to 1 memento of minimal value to each godchild.



But there's a difference between obtaining a court order the minute the will is signed or deciding 25 years later you might be able to read Diana's mind, include new grandchildren or exclude a son because his wife is a nutjob.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was any of it put in a fund to earn interest or something ?  Idk the details of her will.  Now, as a Spencer, does Hazzi have any money or property coming his way?  My guess is no, but I have no idea the terms and conditions of any inheritance or the UK laws.



I don't think so. Not only is he not a Spencer but a Windsor, even if he was the majority of the property goes to the heir as to not split up the estate. Which is why Charles Spencer owns several tiaras without ever wearing them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Randy Andy may not be a nice person, but he seems to love his mother. I don't think he would entertain an autobiography or memoir that would potentially hurt QE.



Plus, why? He might not love his current position, but he's still living comfortably off his family and can expect to do so for the rest of his life is he keeps quiet and behaves. 

It's the greedy ones who have to resort to desperate measures.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was any of it put in a fund to earn interest or something ?  Idk the details of her will.  Now, as a Spencer, does Hazzi have any money or property coming his way?  My guess is no, but I have no idea the terms and conditions of any inheritance or the UK laws.


I would expect that the financial assets (I.e. stocks, bonds, cash) would have been given to a qualified investments manager to handle since neither son would receive their inheritance until they were much older. Harry was 12 and william was 15 when Diana died and under the terms of the will after the executors got the court to approve some changes, they wouldn’t receive the principal until they hit 30. If she had any real estate, any net rental income earned by the properties would presumably be added to the funds under management by their investments manger.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> but is this true?  who knows?  it could have been put out there by the Harkles so they look like they're in control


Who knows? Charles loves his son and he may want to give him all possible chances before having a more drastic approach. Give Hazz enough rope…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm confused. What point is there in having a will when someone else can change it post mortem?





CarryOn2020 said:


> I guess the idea is the deceased does get to express his/her wishes _at that point in time. _As time passes, situations change.  Most likely, the deceased would change his/her wishes, too.


I'm not sure Diana's siblings can change her will??  Especially 25 years later?  Charles can certainly change his own and knock Haz out of it, but I think whatever Diana wished at the time is what stays.  (Wealthy) Families fight over wills for years after someone has died, and courts can change what's distributed to a point, but not sure someone else can just go in and change a dead person's words.  I'm no lawyer though.


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


>





Interesting! Hopefully it's true.





Toby93 said:


> Well this is just wrong  How much did SS pay to get this on the front page.  Is William the future king not also Diana's son?





Firstly- That's an ugly picture of him. Eww. I don't like violence, but he has a face that deserves a punch.
Secondly- this type of sh*t makes my blood boil.
The fact that Hairy acts like he was Diana's only child, that he was the _only one_ devastated and traumatized by his mothers death and constantly uses her death to further his war against the media and monetize from it- as if his BROTHER William doesn't have feelings, thoughts of his own, boundaries of his that are crossed/abused or unhealed trauma that can come to the surface from time to time. 
None of William's feelings/thoughts/boundaries/ possible trauma matters, as long as precious Hairy the Duke of Selfishness gets to spout his unfiltered ramblings, lies and vitriol- that's the only thing that matters. NOT.
Hey Princess Hairy. why don't you show some basic respect to your older brother because you seem to forget that you _shared _a mother, you didn't own her. She wasn't your possession and her name is not something you can or should be exploiting. 
Shame on you.
Also, the fact that some very biased media outlets, like the one shown, also present him as if he was Diana's only child is utterly disgusting and insensitive.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so f*cking rude. Why are people still wanting to work with her when she turns around and badmouths them the minute they don't fawn over her?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5601952





Oh FFS. MC was stating facts to you and that 'nonsense' she must have read about you was obviously truthful and not some biased candyfloss-sweet article about you from one of your approved, a$$ kissing jOuRnAlIsTs. 
The truth hurts b*tch. 







Chanbal said:


> It's a lot prettier than the palace of the many toilets imo.
> View attachment 5602003
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Frogmore Cottage pictured days before Harry and Meghan due to return
> 
> 
> The Sussexes recently renewed their lease on the property in Windsor, in an unexpected move that sparked speculation that they may have plans for more frequent visits to the UK in future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





I still think that house looks like a creepy old haunted hospital.





mellibelly said:


> This comment from a Leilani of Barbados video
> View attachment 5602314


Well, well, well... people are finally starting to speak out against the Duchess of Delusions. 







Toby93 said:


> I laughed out loud at this article.
> 
> "As the UK announces its new PM, Meghan — 41 — will be delivering the keynote address to a global summit of youth leaders in Manchester. *The Meghans then jet to Germany* for an Invictus Games ceremony before returning to London on Thursday for the WellChild Awards. There are no plans to see Harry’s brother, father or grandmother.
> 
> Because Harry and Meghan are now bitterly estranged from the Royal Family — and yet, bizarrely, still very much a part of it. Indeed, their lucrative brand is built upon the magic dust of royalty. And slagging it off.
> 
> But now even America grows bored of mouthy* Meghan and her ginger glove puppet*. Her assertion that her wedding to Harry was celebrated like the release of Nelson Mandela in South Africa has had even gullible Yanks weeping with derisive laughter."


*'The Meghans'*







Chanbal said:


> This is going to be costly… I wonder who pays for it.
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry__ and Meghan Markle's battle over security whilst in the UK continues this week as it is revealed they will have to use their own bodyguards during a trip to Manchester on Monday._












Chanbal said:


>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> Firstly- That's an ugly picture of him. Eww. I don't like violence, but he has a face that deserves a punch.
> Secondly- this type of sh*t makes my blood boil.
> The fact that Hairy acts like he was Diana's only child, that he was the _only one_ devastated and traumatized by his mothers death and constantly uses her death to further his war against the media and monetize from it- as if his BROTHER William doesn't have feelings, thoughts of his own, boundaries of his that are crossed/abused or unhealed trauma that can come to the surface from time to time.
> None of William's feelings/thoughts/boundaries/ possible trauma matters, as long as precious Hairy the Duke of Selfishness gets to spout his unfiltered ramblings, lies and vitriol- that's the only thing that matters. NOT.
> Hey Princess Hairy. why don't you show some basic respect to your older brother because you seem to forget that you _shared _a mother, you didn't own her. She wasn't your possession and her name is not something you can or should be exploiting.
> Shame on you.
> Also, the fact that some very biased media outlets, like the one shown, also present him as if he was Diana's only child is utterly disgusting and insensitive.



This so much. As an oldest child sidelined by a dramatic, selfish younger sibling for most of my life I really feel for William.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I resent that!  I’m a Yank but not gullible!!!


I had a_ guttural_ reaction to being called gullible  (To borrow a phrase from the Wench of Word Salad)


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not sure Diana's siblings can change her will??  Especially 25 years later?  Charles can certainly change his own and knock Haz out of it, but I think whatever Diana wished at the time is what stays.  (Wealthy) Families fight over wills for years after someone has died, and courts can change what's distributed to a point, but not sure someone else can just go in and change a dead person's words.  I'm no lawyer though.


They already changed it.








						The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
					

Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.




					www.rd.com


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Not so sure he can shut his son up.*  If he isn't giving him money anymore, what can he do to him to shut him up? Do you think business opportunities will vanish?


The best thing Charles can do is not giving Hazz more money and stick to his plan of slimming down the monarchy. He should also revoke (or not renew) the Frogmore lease, I wouldn't risk having TW so close to Will's family.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

It's possible, TW or Hazz never achieved anything great… 



*But with Meghan, I think there's something profound going on here, something *_*I've seen with some of my patients.*

A few years ago I worked for a charity and in order to fund this I worked a few days a week in a private clinic. *Many of my patients were eye-wateringly wealthy, with some even flying in on their private jets just for the appointment*.

*They had a life of unparalleled privilege.* *Yet as I talked to them, there were some who seemed to feel maligned and injured, slighted and upset*. They were extraordinarily sensitive and at pains to paint themselves as the victim at nearly every opportunity they had.

It was quite bizarre and in sharp contrast to the poor, disenfranchised patients I saw at the charity, who seemed to just accept their lot, do the best they could and get on with things.

*It took a while for me to realise that it was precisely their privilege and the pressure that this brought that made those wealthy patients so quick to play the victim card.

They had great privilege but, unless they also achieved great things, they would always been seen as a failure. Perversely, their privilege was like a millstone round their neck.*

The problem was that no one had any sympathy for this. I would have people in their 20s and 30s who were children of the rich and famous trying to convince me they were one of life's victims, rather than having been handed a golden ticket — through no real merit or talent of their own — that few could have imagined.

*They had a toxic, noxious combination of self-entitlement and over-inflated self-esteem that resulted in a bitterness and bewilderment that not everything always went their way.*

Rather than sucking this up as life, they used this as evidence that they were the real victims. *And the key thing I realised was that the sense of victimhood was a perfect way of absolving themselves of life's problems.*
_
*It meant they always had a ready-made excuse for why things were going wrong, or hadn't worked out how they wanted. It was always someone else's fault; there was always someone else to blame.*


----------



## gracekelly

@Lounorada  Girl you got me with _the place looks like a creepy old hospital    _Yep, has me thinking of the movies Psycho, Shutter Island and anything from Hammer House of Horrors.


----------



## Chanbal

'D-grade celebrities' Harry and Meghan 'not welcome' in UK anymore
					

Today host Karl Stefanovic took aim at Meghan Markle once again on Monday, following reports her endless jibes at the Royal Family are taking a toll on the Queen




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's possible, TW or Hazz never achieved anything great…
> 
> 
> 
> *But with Meghan, I think there's something profound going on here, something *_*I've seen with some of my patients.*
> 
> A few years ago I worked for a charity and in order to fund this I worked a few days a week in a private clinic. *Many of my patients were eye-wateringly wealthy, with some even flying in on their private jets just for the appointment*.
> 
> *They had a life of unparalleled privilege.* *Yet as I talked to them, there were some who seemed to feel maligned and injured, slighted and upset*. They were extraordinarily sensitive and at pains to paint themselves as the victim at nearly every opportunity they had.
> 
> It was quite bizarre and in sharp contrast to the poor, disenfranchised patients I saw at the charity, who seemed to just accept their lot, do the best they could and get on with things.
> 
> *It took a while for me to realise that it was precisely their privilege and the pressure that this brought that made those wealthy patients so quick to play the victim card.
> 
> They had great privilege but, unless they also achieved great things, they would always been seen as a failure. Perversely, their privilege was like a millstone round their neck.*
> 
> The problem was that no one had any sympathy for this. I would have people in their 20s and 30s who were children of the rich and famous trying to convince me they were one of life's victims, rather than having been handed a golden ticket — through no real merit or talent of their own — that few could have imagined.
> 
> *They had a toxic, noxious combination of self-entitlement and over-inflated self-esteem that resulted in a bitterness and bewilderment that not everything always went their way.*
> 
> Rather than sucking this up as life, they used this as evidence that they were the real victims. *And the key thing I realised was that the sense of victimhood was a perfect way of absolving themselves of life's problems.*_
> 
> *It meant they always had a ready-made excuse for why things were going wrong, or hadn't worked out how they wanted. It was always someone else's fault; there was always someone else to blame.*




Imo the Real Housewives franchises feeds this victim narrative.  Bethenny said something similar.  It is a sign of maturity when someone takes his/her share of responsibility for the mess we are in.  Most realize this in their teens and 20s. Alcohol, weed, other drugs, ineffective role models can delay this. Imo that is what happened with H&M. 

_The prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for higher cognitive functions such as planning, decision-making, judgment and reasoning, develops and matures most rapidly during early adolescence and into the early 20s.










						Maturity (psychological) - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


>



And Tedros who cozies up to the Harkles


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> I still think that house looks like a creepy old haunted hospital.





gracekelly said:


> @Lounorada  Girl you got me with _the place looks like a creepy old hospital    _Yep, has me thinking of the movies Psycho, Shutter Island and anything from Hammer House of Horrors.


Love white houses with simple lines, but you may be onto something…


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> @Lounorada  Girl you got me with _the place looks like a creepy old hospital    _Yep, has me thinking of the movies Psycho, Shutter Island and anything from Hammer House of Horrors.


Perhaps  Wallis&Ed are haunting the place


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> They already changed it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
> 
> 
> Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rd.com


It seems the main things they changed was the age William and Haz would receive their trusts (25 to30, which is probably smart to do, especially in Haz's case) and changed what was going to the godchildren.  They didn't take away the bulk of what was going to her own children.  I wonder if it was allowed since it didn't involve her own children's actual inheritance?  Things that make you go hmmm.  Also why you choose the executor of your will wisely, because there are many that "dabble" in funds not meant for them, or change things to what they think are best.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> Was any of it put in a fund to earn interest or something ?  Idk the details of her will.  Now, as a Spencer, does Hazzi have any money or property coming his way?  My guess is no, but I have no idea the terms and conditions of any inheritance or the UK laws.


In the O interview H said they were living on his inheritance from his mother as soon as C "cut them off entirely."  I believe he inherited approximately $20,000,000 (actually pounds but I don't know where to find that symbol) from Diana.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Zedzee's (lack of a) command of the English language results in weird gaffes. Was her college education a joke? Was her degree purchased? When she claims that they upset the dynamic of the hierarchy "just by existing", all I can think of is how some of us call her Raptor and how Jurassic Park defied Nature to re-create dinos. She is branding herself an aberration.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## jelliedfeels

Has anyone watched Spencer? I did this weekend and I loved it.



CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly. He has been silenced, very effectively if I may so.  Is he still making deals with shady people?  I doubt it.
> Imo QE and Edo have been a  stabilizing influence on the Yorks.


Why would A stop doing whatever he wants to do? It’s not like he’s ever going to be punished for it. They press stopped reporting on the York family because it doesn’t sell and they’ve obviously been told the royals won’t play with them if they keep bringing up the embarrassment. 

Our only hope is the viagra stops working. 

My own speculation is the Queen is so senile at this point she cannot connect Andrew with the news stories about him and maybe she even thinks Andrew is a 6 year old boy or whatever therefore it’s like talking to a brick wall.  Of course the palace wouldn’t admit such a thing as it’s a threat to her authority. There’s no shame in ill-health but they are always very loath to admit it- they wouldn’t even say Philip was at death’s door when it was obvious on sight so conceding the queen might be unable to continue her position would be very taboo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Has anyone watched Spencer? I did this weekend and I loved it.
> 
> 
> Why would A stop doing whatever he wants to do? It’s not like he’s ever going to be punished for it. They press stopped reporting on the York family because it doesn’t sell and they’ve obviously been told the royals won’t play with them if they keep bringing up the embarrassment.
> 
> Our only hope is the viagra stops working.
> 
> My own speculation is the Queen is so senile at this point she cannot connect Andrew with the news stories about him and maybe she even thinks Andrew is a 6 year old boy or whatever therefore it’s like talking to a brick wall.  Of course the palace wouldn’t admit such a thing as it’s a threat to her authority. There’s no shame in ill-health but they are always very loath to admit it- they wouldn’t even say Philip was at death’s door when it was obvious on sight so conceding the queen might be unable to continue her position would be very taboo.


Isn’t he ‘placed’ in Scotland now? He cannot appear on the balcony or attend most royal functions [did he attend PlatJub?  I really don’t remember.]. He supposedly caught grief from Charles, etc. for escorting QE at Prince Phillip’s memorial service.  Is he still on the royal website?  Imo he has been sidelined, more or less. He has been seen driving new cars and riding the horses, so maybe that is ok.

Article from April, 2022:








						The Queen thinks Prince Andrew is innocent to allow him to escort her
					

Speaking on True Royalty TV's The Royal Beat, Vanity Fair's Royal Editor Katie Nicholl, said the Queen knew what she was doing and deliberately wanted to show that she is still in charge.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Randy Andy may not be a nice person, but he seems to love his mother. I don't think he would entertain an autobiography or memoir that would potentially hurt QE.



He’s just doing what’s most practical to him he can live in a royal palace, eat truffles and go skiing if he stays in the fold so why lift a finger?

I reckon he’d pack her off like Boxer if he thought it was his best chance of making money, however, he’s got pretty good evidence he’s not popular and his book and brand will not sell to anyone. Remember Fergie got knocked back and he’s older and more scandalous now. I mean who would want to financially support a suspected rapist? (Other than the taxpayer forced to do so because he’s someone’s son.) 



purseinsanity said:


> It seems the main things they changed was the age William and Haz would receive their trusts (25 to30, which is probably smart to do, especially in Haz's case) and changed what was going to the godchildren.  They didn't take away the bulk of what was going to her own children.  I wonder if it was allowed since it didn't involve her own children's actual inheritance?  Things that make you go hmmm.  Also why you choose the executor of your will wisely, because there are many that "dabble" in funds not meant for them, or change things to what they think are best.


I don’t think anyone has the power to divert money that’s going to a royal or back into the crown.lord knows they need it.

I do think it’s very mean-spirited they took the inheritances off the godchildren the Spencers can’t be that short of money if they can go to court to rip these kids off. 


The flip side of cutting the Sussexes off would be the BRF would have to give up on the endless news cycle about them and all the positive publicity they get from basically doing nothing and they might be struggling to see what other good news stories they have at this point.

Kate is the MVP as she’s very photogenic but she doesn’t really go viral. The queen was a  great seller in her day but now is too old to keep generating stories. Charles is tedious. Will is bald and hamstrung by being second fiddle to his boring dad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> He’s just doing what’s most practical to him he can live in a royal palace, eat truffles and go skiing if he stays in the fold so why lift a finger?


why o why couldn’t H&M stay in the palace, eat the truffles, go skiing?  It seems so simple.
MM has 10 more podcrashes to go.  The BRF may decide the endless news cycles would be easier to handle if they were in control?


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was referring to her surgically/medically corrected nose and teeth, not what she naturally had.


Her teeth may have improved but her nose... not so much, her original one was better IMO.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Yes.  I am wondering if the film crew is still banned from filming on Windsor property.


Yes


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt anyone is doubling over in pain over Raptor. It's Harry they are worried about and hurt by his treason. She is merely an annoyance.


It’s about time they were angry at Harry, he’s not a teenager, but would probably do him good to understand there are consequences to his actions.  He obviously never got any comeuppance in his life.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> She’s worse in a way because she blatantly makes things up.



she blatantly is a fantasist, a LIAR, her South African stories, her BRF stories,  lies, lies lies, either exaggerated out of proportion or beginning to end. 

She even puts other people in the firing line so they have to explain themselves, the Archbishop of Cant., any SA actor that was part of the Lion King, staff at the Commissioner”s. She puts others in impossible positions and she just does NOT care.

How is it that she just gets away with talking about some SA actor at  a premiere? How would it be if someone called her ‘an American actress‘ without bothering using/remembering her name. How rude. Neither her or H can name names, because none of these things happened.

MegZ never stops. Her truth is not so much HER truth as fiction remakes, she even wrote a scripted episode for that anonymous Lion King actor, direct speech. 

I wish the media would stop writing ‘truth bombs’ and ‘secrets’ they are just lies. when she gets caught-out in her lies through literal evidence,  she just says she can’t remember. ‘That’ letter court-case verdict should overturned and tried again. MM does not know what telling the truth means. 

At first it was feigned paranoid delusion to impress H, then I thought it was calculated PR, now I think she is off her head.  Harry has obviously joined her in her crazed world. They both need to know there are consequences for their actions


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I tend to agree about TQ, but I think she doesn’t want the titles removed while she is still alive.


She can’t remove the titles alone, Parliament must request.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just as QE has silenced Andi, I still believe Charles can silence Hazzi.  Just as doors opened for Andi because he is the Queen’s son, those same doors plus more will open for H&M. Charles has an enormous amount of leverage, especially behind the scenes. By now, it ought to be clear to one and all that H&M are indeed using those titles and, most likely, making many promises for future deals.  Remember Hazz continues to be listed on the royal website.


Lots of dirt has been found on PC lately, especially finance and donations.

If I was Charles, I’d be glad the Royal story space is all going to the grifters‘ lies


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Where are they really staying? Must have flown into London? And it takes a bit to get to Manchester
> I could see going directly to Manchester from Heathrow, bypassing Windsor and the Cambridges entirely , it is a tight itinerary
> I don’t doubt Charles invited them to Balmoral, but it a bit out of the way, they probably engineered the tight itinerary to avoid seeing relatives


Why can’t they fly to Manchester?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It’s about time they were angry at Harry, he’s not a teenager, but would probably do him good to understand there are consequences to his actions.  He obviously never got any comeuppance in his life.



I don't disagree. I just know I'd not want my brother to suffer a mental breakdown at the hand of a malignant narcissist and not help in some way however angry. But yes, it's time to acquaintance him with the discipline he apparently lacked while growing up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Lots of dirt has been found on PC lately, especially finance and donations.
> 
> If I Charles, I’d be glad the Royal story space is all going to the grifters‘ lies



Kind of disappointing.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> In theory, I agree.  However, it has been done.  Now, with more grandkids added, surely Diana would want them included?
> 
> _A Princess’s wishes… overridden_​_In December of 1997, Diana’s mother and sister went to court and obtained a “variation order,” permitting them to distribute the princess’s estate differently from how she’d specified: Under the variation order:_
> 
> _The two princes would not receive their shares of Diana’s estate until the age of 30 (although they would begin receiving income distributions at age 25)._
> _Instead of splitting 25 percent of Princess Diana’s jewels and possessions, each of the godchildren would receive a single memento, chosen by the executors. And none of that would happen until the younger prince, Harry, turned 30 in 2014._
> _Fast forward to 2014_​_In 2014, Prince Harry received his share of his mother’s estate (two years earlier, Prince William had received his). During the intervening 17 years following the variation order, 150 items from Princess Diana’s possessions were traveling the world as part of an exhibition put together by Princess Diana’s brother, Earl Spencer. Proceeds from the exhibition (admissions and such) raised more than $2 million.
> 
> Diana’s family say the proceeds went to a charitable fund created in Diana’s memory. Since Princess Diana was highly charitable during her lifetime, one could argue that her wishes weren’t entirely trounced.
> 
> What remains a mystery is why Diana’s family ignored her wishes. What would Diana have said? How do Prince William and Prince Harry feel about the way their mom’s wishes were disregarded? All we know right now is that Prince William, Prince Harry, and their respective families still find ways to honor Diana’s life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
> 
> 
> Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rd.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you change a will after someone’s died?
> 
> 
> If you’re the person looking after a loved one’s will (the executor) or you’re due to inherit something, you might be wondering whether the will is set in stone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> farewill.com


There will also be trustees of the trust


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Love white houses with simple lines, but you may be onto something…
> 
> View attachment 5603965



I’ll take it!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't disagree. I just know I'd not want my brother to suffer a mental breakdown at the hand of a malignant narcissist and not help in some way however angry. But yes, it's time to acquaintance him with the discipline he apparently lacked while growing up.


It does sound like H needs long stay hospital treatment far from the maddening crowd, work on his anger issues, masculinity issues, mummy issues, grief issues, abandonment issues, daddy issues, paranoia, toxic relationships, work on boundaries, narcissistic behaviour and knowing the difference between mental health and mental illness, truth and lies


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> It’s about time they were angry at Harry, he’s not a teenager, but would probably do him good to understand there are consequences to his actions.  He obviously never got any comeuppance in his life.


The speed with which he fell in with Zedzee's machinations makes me think that maybe he was a bird of the same feather. Any attempt to curb his wild ways likely went:

Prince Charles: Harry, you can't go streaking in Vegas...
Haznoballs: You don't care about me! It's your fault that Mommy is dead! I'm suffering here! I'm tearing my clothes off because you don't love me .....

Gan Gan: Harry dear, it's not right to call your fellow soldiers by those racial slurs. That's not how we behave...
Haznoballs: If Mommy didn't marry into this family, she would still be alive! So what if I call them those names?! It's everyone's fault that I lost my mommy...

Bet you Frogmore that he pulled out the Mommy card the way that Zedzee pulls out the racial card.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not how a will works unless conditions are put in there to begin with.


This. My late mother made her will in 1997, she died in 2018, a lot of things had changed in over 20 years, values of properties and things like that, but that was her will and that's how things went. This was in England by the way.


----------



## Sunshine247365

Cinderlala said:


> No deal---I'll take briefcase number 23.     Fingers crossed for forced exile for Skeeter!  Perhaps to South Africa, where she would get the welcome she deserves.


No thanks, we don't want her!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here we go -









						The Sussexes return: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry pictured in the UK
					

The couple were spotted being swept out of the grounds of Windsor Castle, where they are staying in their grace-and-favour home, Frogmore Cottage.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Danger?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes return: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry pictured in the UK
> 
> 
> The couple were spotted being swept out of the grounds of Windsor Castle, where they are staying in their grace-and-favour home, Frogmore Cottage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5604157


Interesting choice of words: the couple were spotted being swept out...
Not sweeping out, but swept out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Interesting choice of words: the couple were spotted being swept out...
> Not sweeping out, but swept out.


Happily, they were able to stop the car and pose for photos.  Looks like they’ve sprayed themselves with Argan oil or something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It's kind of bold to be staying in Frogmore but refusing to see anyone. Then again it's also bold to show face in the UK after their behaviour.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m shocked she hadn’t announced her memoir yet. You KNOW that’s coming.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m shocked she hadn’t announced her memoir yet. You KNOW that’s coming.


 600 Days of Royal Incarceration or something.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Whoa, people are saying the author of the article was suspended.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wow. I thought she walked the fine line perfectly. Are they now blaming her Raptor is completely unlikeable and batshit crazy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> What will she wear?  Pressure is on now!
> Calling Major Johnny Thompson?


A straitjacket would look absolutely divine on ZedZed Megaliar.


----------



## marietouchet

deleted, duplicate post


----------



## bubablu

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5604182


Whoa, please put a warning on photos like that, some of us have delicate stomachs! (the yellow t-shirt smile it's fun)


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Why can’t they fly to Manchester?


They flew COMMERCIAL and not a lot of choice for flights US - Manchester
They don’t have their private plane to jump around


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> This. My late mother made her will in 1997, she died in 2018, a lot of things had changed in over 20 years, values of properties and things like that, but that was her will and that's how things went. This was in England by the way.


And Diana died at an unexpected age, I think her will predated her marriage ? And before her divorce when she got her money 
I do remember that the legal variation mostly had to do with disposition of THINGS to the godchildren. How do you value lamps, furniture, clothes? Is one dress worth more than another … headaches


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5604180











						The Surprising Royal Who Is Said To Be Pushing For Harry And Meghan To Lose Their Titles - The List
					

A royal family member is said to be pushing for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to be stripped of their titles once and for all.




					www.thelist.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5604182


Are you #%^*+ kidding me?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here we go -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sussexes return: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry pictured in the UK
> 
> 
> The couple were spotted being swept out of the grounds of Windsor Castle, where they are staying in their grace-and-favour home, Frogmore Cottage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5604157


Glad they mentioned their home was Grace and Favour, M made out it was theirs. Not that she would know what that means or care!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Happily, they were able to stop the car and pose for photos.  Looks like they’ve sprayed themselves with Argan oil or something.


Post-poo drops appear to have 3 different oils for a fresh citrusy fragrance.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Whoa, people are saying the author of the article was suspended.





The thought that Allison P Davis might have been suspended or fired is making me very upset. I hope someone helps her finding a new job asap, she writes very well. I wonder if Piers Morgan has already this info.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Interesting choice of words: the couple were spotted being swept out...
> Not sweeping out, but swept out.


They definitely seem to be enjoying all the drama they're causing


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> A straitjacket would look absolutely divine on ZedZed Megaliar.



So long as it was made by Givency and paid for on her behalf.

That caped ivory number (when pictured with the Queen) could be repurposed, just lengthen and tighten the cape.


----------



## Toby93

Looks like she has been heavy handed with the self tanner today


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Who knows? Charles loves his son and he may want to give him all possible chances before having a more drastic approach. Give Hazz enough rope…


Charles may have a soft spot for his son due to his mother's death, the divorce, etc.  But that may wear thin.  The Harry he loved seems to have morphed into a nasty angry litigious beast of a man


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> They flew COMMERCIAL and not a lot of choice for flights US - Manchester
> They don’t have their private plane to jump around


The BLG has posted that they didn't fly commercial.  Wonder what he found out?


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Looks like she has been heavy handed with the self tanner today



And her top color does not match the trousers and wear a belt or remove the belt loops please  … but they are taking TRAIN a la Cambridges

and wrinkles … I give them a pass, their seatbelts were on, supposedly BRF does like the wrinkles from belts, plus, security says it is harder to get them out of car in an emergency (!?), ie reasons Diana never learned to fasten up
I am sure they will change


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> The BLG has posted that they didn't fly commercial.  Wonder what he found out?


Ohhhhh noooo , my internet source, that I can’t find was WRONG ??? 
thankfully this is a gossip thread, MM has taught us facts don’t count


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> They already changed it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Secret Changes to Princess Diana’s Will…Against Her Wishes
> 
> 
> Poor Princess Diana...she endured an unhappy marriage and died young in a tragic car crash, then members of her own family disregarded her final wishes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rd.com


I don't see the changes they made as being that significant.  Cutting back on what Diana wanted given to the godchildren seems a bit mean spirited.  Harry inherits about $12 million.  That's not really much considering their lifestyle - huge home, staff, security.  Of course it must be invested but these days the only way to make anything is with risk.  there is no safe place to get interest on your money.  If they are smart, the would have a good investment advisor looking after that money.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The spiked heels are so dumb for a travel day.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Where are they really staying? Must have flown into London? And it takes a bit to get to Manchester
> I could see going directly to Manchester from Heathrow, bypassing Windsor and the Cambridges entirely , it is a tight itinerary
> *I don’t doubt Charles invited them to Balmoral,* but it a bit out of the way, they probably engineered the tight itinerary to avoid seeing relatives


Somehow I don't see Charles or anyone else inviting this despicable pair to Balmoral because it would be like allowing two rabid dogs access to HMTQ who is presently residing at Balmoral.


----------



## MiniMabel

jelliedfeels said:


> Has anyone watched Spencer? I did this weekend and I loved it.
> 
> 
> Why would A stop doing whatever he wants to do? It’s not like he’s ever going to be punished for it. They press stopped reporting on the York family because it doesn’t sell and they’ve obviously been told the royals won’t play with them if they keep bringing up the embarrassment.
> 
> Our only hope is the viagra stops working.
> 
> *My own speculation is the Queen is so senile at this point* she cannot connect Andrew with the news stories about him and maybe she even thinks Andrew is a 6 year old boy or whatever therefore it’s like talking to a brick wall.  Of course the palace wouldn’t admit such a thing as it’s a threat to her authority. There’s no shame in ill-health but they are always very loath to admit it- they wouldn’t even say Philip was at death’s door when it was obvious on sight so conceding the queen might be unable to continue her position would be very taboo.


I think not. QEII is still as sharp as a tack. Reduced mobility is not reduced mental capacity or capability.

If she was "so senile" it would not be possible for her to meet the new UK Prime Minister at Balmoral tomorrow morning which she is doing.


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> The thought that Allison P Davis might have been suspended or fired is making me very upset. I hope someone helps her finding a new job asap, she writes very well. I wonder if Piers Morgan has already this info.



I have tagged him  maybe he will see


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> This. My late mother made her will in 1997, she died in 2018, a lot of things had changed in over 20 years, values of properties and things like that, but that was her will and that's how things went. This was in England by the way.


Right.  A will could contain things that don't exist anymore at the time of the person's death.  But executing the will and then changing it 25 years later doesn't seem right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5604182


ugly bald head, very wrinkled trousers on her, very fake hair


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> And Diana died at an unexpected age, I think her will predated her marriage ?



If it mentioned her sons probably not.


----------



## MiniMabel

jelliedfeels said:


> He’s just doing what’s most practical to him he can live in a royal palace, eat truffles and go skiing if he stays in the fold so why lift a finger?
> 
> I reckon he’d pack her off like Boxer if he thought it was his best chance of making money, however, he’s got pretty good evidence he’s not popular and his book and brand will not sell to anyone. Remember Fergie got knocked back and he’s older and more scandalous now. I mean who would want to financially support a suspected rapist? (Other than the taxpayer forced to do so because he’s someone’s son.)
> 
> 
> I don’t think anyone has the power to divert money that’s going to a royal or back into the crown.lord knows they need it.
> 
> I do think it’s very mean-spirited they took the inheritances off the godchildren the Spencers can’t be that short of money if they can go to court to rip these kids off.
> 
> 
> The flip side of cutting the Sussexes off would be the BRF would have to give up on the endless news cycle about them and all the positive publicity they get from basically doing nothing and they might be struggling to see what other good news stories they have at this point.
> 
> Kate is the MVP as she’s very photogenic but she doesn’t really go viral. The queen was a  great seller in her day but now is too old to keep generating stories. Charles is tedious. Will is bald and hamstrung by being second fiddle to his boring dad.


I think your comments in the last two paragraphs are very mean. It's incorrect to say that they basically do nothing.  Charles, in particular, has been involved with environmental issues for decades and it's only now that his hard work is being appreciated. Prince Philip (RIP) set up, decades ago, the Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme which has helped countless young people onto a productive path in life. William is heavily involved with the Earthshot project which, again, is about the environment and therefore working towards a better future for all of us, especially children. Catherine is involved in early learning projects which, again, is for children who are the future of the country. Anne is one of the hardest working Royals with engagements almost constantly. These are a small number of examples.  In addition, they do the "boring" and unglamorous appointments which The Harkles (Me-again, specifically) do not wish to do. 

William may be balding but so are a lot of men, is that a reflection on the person?  That's just genetics and nothing to do with character.  

Catherine is very popular and well-liked and, in my view, she does go viral.  Witness, for example, the premiere of the James Bond movie recently where she wore that stunning gold gown. She lit a fire in the press! 

More importantly, they are human beings just like us.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Looks like she has been heavy handed with the self tanner today




Commercial flight? Taking the train? Are we now going a step further in pretending to care for the environment or what is that shtick about?


----------



## MiniMabel

Toby93 said:


> Looks like she has been heavy handed with the self tanner today



LOL the lady looking at her phone and doesn't even notice the Harkles pass by!  It's beyond me why they think they need armed security!!


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, TW is not lucky with her timing again…


----------



## jelliedfeels

MiniMabel said:


> I think not. QEII is still as sharp as a tack. Reduced mobility is not reduced mental capacity or capability.
> 
> If she was "so senile" it would not be possible for her to meet the new UK Prime Minister at Balmoral tomorrow morning which she is doing.


This is just speculation on my part but realistically none of us know for certain. I think she’s very mobile and as you say one doesn’t necessarily indicate the other anyway.  I can’t help wondering if the lack of public appearances, public speaking, lack of any resolutions on the family issues do point to some issues with senility and what’s wrong with that anyway? It’s not meant to be a criticism of her  - though of course I am very critical of the existence of BRF for other reasons. 

I don’t think any kind of dementia would be a big problem for a purely ceremonial handover. 
She essentially has to sit in her lounge then I imagine she and Truss will exchange a few pleasantries and that’ll be about it. 


MiniMabel said:


> I think your comments in the last two paragraphs are very mean. It's incorrect to say that they basically do nothing.  Charles, in particular, has been involved with environmental issues for decades and it's only now that his hard work is being appreciated. Prince Philip (RIP) set up, decades ago, the Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme which has helped countless young people onto a productive path in life. William is heavily involved with the Earthshot project which, again, is about the environment and therefore working towards a better future for all of us, especially children. Catherine is involved in early learning projects which, again, is for children who are the future of the country. Anne is one of the hardest working Royals with engagements almost constantly. These are a small number of examples.  In addition, they do the "boring" and unglamorous appointments which The Harkles (Me-again, specifically) do not wish to do.
> 
> William may be balding but so are a lot of men, is that a reflection on the person?  That's just genetics and nothing to do with character.
> 
> Catherine is very popular and well-liked and, in my view, she does go viral.  Witness, for example, the premiere of the James Bond movie recently where she wore that stunning gold gown. She lit a fire in the press!
> 
> More importantly, they are human beings just like us.


I don’t think my comments are mean I’m just evaluating their job performances in a different way to you. 

I said doing nothing specifically about press interest and generating positive PR and I think it’s a fair assessment. The Will is bald was a joke but it does reflect the reality that he was once a young media darling who the British public don’t seem at all interested in anymore. If I went around the street asking People what they thought of earth shot I would bet good money most people think it’s greenwashing a family who maintain multiple residences, multiple aircraft and unimaginable wealth and preaching to the choir. 


They are obviously human beings but I’m coming from the perspective of - if I had a job where I was in the richest family in the country, with a talented team to fulfil my projects, a talented press team to promote my image and my relative is the head of the state religion would I think what they were doing was a good or even average job in serving my people and I would conclude no. I think any given teacher or nurse does more for the British public than the whole family put together.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> This is just speculation on my part but realistically none of us know for certain. I think she’s very mobile and as you say one doesn’t necessarily indicate the other anyway.  I can’t help wondering if the lack of public appearances, public speaking, lack of any resolutions on the family issues do point to some issues with senility and what’s wrong with that anyway? It’s not meant to be a criticism of her  - though of course I am very critical of the existence of BRF for other reasons.
> 
> I don’t think any kind of dementia would be a big problem for a purely ceremonial handover.
> She essentially has to sit in her lounge then I imagine she and Truss will exchange a few pleasantries and that’ll be about it.
> 
> I don’t think my comments are mean I’m just evaluating their job performances in a different way to you.
> 
> I said doing nothing specifically about press interest and generating positive PR and I think it’s a fair assessment. The Will is bald was a joke but it does reflect the reality that he was once a young media darling who the British public don’t seem at all interested in anymore. If I went around the street asking People what they thought of earth shot I would bet good money most people think it’s greenwashing a family who maintain multiple residences, multiple aircraft and unimaginable wealth and preaching to the choir.
> 
> 
> They are obviously human beings but I’m coming from the perspective of - if I had a job where I was in the richest family in the country, with a talented team to fulfil my projects, a talented press team to promote my image and my relative is the head of the state religion would I think what they were doing was a good or even average job in serving my people and I would conclude no. I think any given teacher or nurse does more for the British public than the whole family put together.


just because the queen is in her 90's doesn't necessarily mean she has dementia....If she did, I think the reins would be handed over to Charles....I don't know if the Brits are very interested in Will (maybe some brits can weigh in here) but I'm impressed with him and his beautiful wife and kids


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> Looks like she has been heavy handed with the self tanner today



This weave will probably give me nightmares. Please drag queens of canal street do her a solid and pull off that ghastly pony tail! Then it can fulfil its destiny as a bar rag. 

She looks like some polluted beach where bladder wrack (see below) is growing off a bald and blotchy rock and some inconsiderate ******* has littered a load of musty tarp and greasy plastic wrap around it. 



lanasyogamama said:


> The spiked heels are so dumb for a travel day.


good for kicking the conductor though. 
“Fetch us new anti-Macassars! These two have soaked through already. 
Look just rinse it under the tap and I’m sure the ginger Rogaine will come right out”


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> I think your comments in the last two paragraphs are very mean. It's incorrect to say that they basically do nothing.  Charles, in particular, has been involved with environmental issues for decades and it's only now that his hard work is being appreciated. Prince Philip (RIP) set up, decades ago, the Duke of Edinburgh's Award scheme which has helped countless young people onto a productive path in life. William is heavily involved with the Earthshot project which, again, is about the environment and therefore working towards a better future for all of us, especially children. Catherine is involved in early learning projects which, again, is for children who are the future of the country. Anne is one of the hardest working Royals with engagements almost constantly. These are a small number of examples.  In addition, they do the "boring" and unglamorous appointments which The Harkles (Me-again, specifically) do not wish to do.
> 
> William may be balding but so are a lot of men, is that a reflection on the person?  That's just genetics and nothing to do with character.
> 
> Catherine is very popular and well-liked and, in my view, she does go viral.  Witness, for example, the premiere of the James Bond movie recently where she wore that stunning gold gown. She lit a fire in the press!
> 
> More importantly, they are human beings just like us.



Very mean?  Imo  this is saying royal life is a much cushier life than most of us experience.  There is no worry about paying the rent,  repairing the cars,  shopping for groceries, etc.  For a royal or anyone to complain about such a privileged lifestyle, that is the height of ingratitude.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> This weave will probably give me nightmares. Please drag queens of canal street do her a solid and pull off that ghastly pony tail! Then it can fulfil its destiny as a bar rag.
> 
> She looks like some polluted beach where bladder wrack (see below) is growing off a bald and blotchy rock and some inconsiderate ******* has littered a load of musty tarp and greasy plastic wrap around it.
> 
> 
> good for kicking the conductor though.
> “Fetch us new anti-Macassars! These two have soaked through already.
> Look just rinse it under the tap and I’m sure the ginger Rogaine will come right out”
> View attachment 5604316


Those pants   The wavy seam on her backside is bizarre.  Shocking a professional seamstress would let leave the shop.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> just because the queen is in her 90's doesn't necessarily mean she has dementia....If she did, I think the reins would be handed over to Charles....I don't know if the Brits are very interested in Will (maybe some brits can weigh in here) but I'm impressed with him and his beautiful wife and kids


I don’t know - I think it wouldn’t be- this is my speculation but they seem very restrained  about talking  about any kind of illness. 

Ultimately it’s a very difficult conversation- if someone is theoretically destined to rule can anyone take the leadership role from them? The last time it happened the king voluntarily conceded but if it is dubious that consent can be given then what. I dunno. It’s just an idea I was pondering given I feel they’ve been a bit shifty around QE lately.


----------



## LizzieBennett

jelliedfeels said:


> I don’t know - I think it wouldn’t be- this is my speculation but they seem very restrained  about talking  about any kind of illness.
> 
> Ultimately it’s a very difficult conversation- if someone is theoretically destined to rule can anyone take the leadership role from them? The last time it happened the king voluntarily conceded but if it is dubious that consent can be given then what. I dunno. It’s just an idea I was pondering given I feel they’ve been a bit shifty around QE lately.


It’s possible you are correct regarding the Queen having dementia, but given the amount of weight she seems to have lost over the past year I wonder if it’s physical and not neurological.


----------



## Jayne1

MiniMabel said:


> William may be balding but so are a lot of men, is that a reflection on the person?  That's just genetics and nothing to do with character.


Agree.  William could get a transplant like almost every Hollywood actor who still has his hairline, but why would a future king do so.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those pants   The wavy seam on her backside is bizarre.


I noticed that immediately.  Looks like she had them altered to fit her bum better but it wasn't a well done alteration.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

More gossip… 


marietouchet said:


> Ohhhhh noooo , my internet source, that I can’t find was WRONG ???
> thankfully* this is a gossip thread,* MM has taught us facts don’t count













						Royal Rumors Claim Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Supposedly Clashing After PR Disasters, Apparently Desperate For Cash
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain controversial figures that can’t go a week without appearing on a tabloid’s cover. The two are dogged by foul stories of destitution and PR mishaps. Let’s look into some recent rumors about the renegade royals. Prince Harry Wants To Go Home According to Life…




					okdaily.net


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I noticed that immediately.  Looks like she had them altered to fit her bum better but it wasn't a well done alteration.


I thought the same about the alteration.  Maybe she did it herself, no professional would let the goof walk out the door.  No idea how that sort of thing happens.  Yes, it was the first thing I saw, too.  Bizarre.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought the same about the alteration.  *Maybe she did it herself*, no professional would let the goof walk out the door.  No idea how that sort of thing happens.  Yes, it was the first thing I saw, too.  Bizarre.




I wonder if the security guard is also moonlighting as tailor…


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those pants   The wavy seam on her backside is bizarre.  Shocking a professional seamstress would let leave the shop.
> View attachment 5604342


The ‘security guard’ is the most neatly dressed of the lot. Yellow shirt guy is second.


----------



## bisbee

I am surprised that with all of the major complaints and criticisms launched at MM the seam of her pants on her ass is the focus of several comments.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## lanasyogamama

I swear she doesn’t care what the clothes look like as long as they’re expensive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisbee said:


> I am surprised that with all of the major complaints and criticisms launched at MM the seam of her pants on her ass is the focus of several comments.



We can multitask.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## Chanbal

bisbee said:


> I am surprised that with all of the major complaints and criticisms launched at MM the seam of her pants on her ass is the focus of several comments.


You make a good point.


----------



## sdkitty

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5604403
> View attachment 5604404



basking in the attention they got from the RF while trashing them at the same time.  Shame


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought the same about the alteration.  Maybe she did it herself, no professional would let the goof walk out the door.  No idea how that sort of thing happens.  Yes, it was the first thing I saw, too.  Bizarre.


her clothes never fit properly. So all the professionals who have had any part in dressing TW consistently turn a blind eye to how poorly her expensive clothes look on her. The bespoke Dior outfit she wore to the church during the Jubilee weekend fit her back side even worse than these pants. I’m amazed Dior let her walk out the door of the atelier looking like that and then put a picture of her in that ill fitting outfit on the Dior instagram account. But apparently TW still manages to sell clothes. One of my SAs said that several of her clients complained that the white oversized Valentino suit TW wore to the Invictus Games sold out right after TW was photographed wearing it. That suit was a truly dreadful look on her from the rear view but that didn’t stop people from asking their SAs to get them that suit only to be told it was completely sold out.


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any comments on TW's speech, people are waiting…


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> It does sound like H needs long stay hospital treatment far from the maddening crowd, work on his anger issues, masculinity issues, mummy issues, grief issues, abandonment issues, daddy issues, paranoia, toxic relationships, work on boundaries, narcissistic behaviour and knowing the difference between mental health and mental illness, truth and lies





xincinsin said:


> The speed with which he fell in with Zedzee's machinations makes me think that maybe he was a bird of the same feather. Any attempt to curb his wild ways likely went:
> 
> Prince Charles: Harry, you can't go streaking in Vegas...
> Haznoballs: You don't care about me! It's your fault that Mommy is dead! I'm suffering here! I'm tearing my clothes off because you don't love me .....
> 
> Gan Gan: Harry dear, it's not right to call your fellow soldiers by those racial slurs. That's not how we behave...
> Haznoballs: If Mommy didn't marry into this family, she would still be alive! So what if I call them those names?! It's everyone's fault that I lost my mommy...
> 
> Bet you Frogmore that he pulled out the Mommy card the way that Zedzee pulls out the racial card.


I think Dufus was an indulged little brat from a very young age acting up in public and most likely in private and when people laughed at his antics it only served to reinforce his negative behaviour.


----------



## Toby93

Wow - just when you thought she had overdid with the tanner, she goes a step further


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Wow - just when you thought she had overdid with the tanner, she goes a step further



Hollywood Montecito


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We can multitask.


If you read some of my posts you'll see I can't


----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5604403
> View attachment 5604404




Kim K wants her outfit back 
And her hair


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Kim K wants her outfit back
> And her hair



Sorry, update:

Kim K had second thoughts, says M can keep the outfit


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> her clothes never fit properly. So all the professionals who have had any part in dressing TW consistently turn a blind eye to how poorly her expensive clothes look on her. The bespoke Dior outfit she wore to the church during the Jubilee weekend fit her back side even worse than these pants. I’m amazed Dior let her walk out the door of the atelier looking like that and then put a picture of her in that ill fitting outfit on the Dior instagram account. But apparently TW still manages to sell clothes. One of my SAs said that several of her clients complained that the white oversized Valentino suit TW wore to the Invictus Games sold out right after TW was photographed wearing it. That suit was a truly dreadful look on her from the rear view but that didn’t stop people from asking their SAs to get them that suit only to be told it was completely sold out.


Does this woman not have any mirrors in any of her 16 bathrooms?  I wonder why she thinks that the tucked in shirt with no jacket is a good look from behind?  If I stepped out of the house and knew that I was going to be photographed constantly, I would make da*m sure I wore something flattering from ALL angles.  Maybe in her mind, she looks great since this is not the first time she has worn this particular look.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Wow - just when you thought she had overdid with the tanner, she goes a step further



Eyes on the camera, per usual.


----------



## Handbag1234

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5604403
> View attachment 5604404



 That head to toe Scarlett outfit and matching shoes is giving me Prince vibes. (More purple rain than HRH) is she trying to be regal? Is she saving the purple crushed velvet for later?


----------



## charlottawill

A few days away from here and I'm lost. Reminds me of the anxiety I felt when I was a student, missed school days due to illness and had to catch up on schoolwork. But this is more fun 

Yikes they are a hot mess. They drove a short distance from Frogmore to the train and look that rumpled? They must have slept in the clothes from their flight. 

SS may have been behind the firing of The Cut writer, but I doubt they have the power to get the ever growing number of British and Aussie TV people/journalists who are wise to her BS fired. 

The handholding as they're walking up to the stage - ugh - "I'm scared Mommy, hold my hand". 

I hope the Cambridges don't cave into visiting with them simply out of fear of being accused of being the ones not willing to reconcile.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> she blatantly is a fantasist, a LIAR, her South African stories, her BRF stories,  lies, lies lies, either exaggerated out of proportion or beginning to end.
> 
> She even puts other people in the firing line so they have to explain themselves, the Archbishop of Cant., any SA actor that was part of the Lion King, staff at the Commissioner”s. She puts others in impossible positions and she just does NOT care.
> 
> How is it that she just gets away with talking about some SA actor at  a premiere? How would it be if someone called her ‘an American actress‘ without bothering using/remembering her name. How rude. Neither her or H can name names, because none of these things happened.
> 
> MegZ never stops. Her truth is not so much HER truth as fiction remakes, she even wrote a scripted episode for that anonymous Lion King actor, direct speech.
> 
> I wish the media would stop writing ‘truth bombs’ and ‘secrets’ they are just lies. when she gets caught-out in her lies through literal evidence,  she just says she can’t remember. ‘That’ letter court-case verdict should overturned and tried again. MM does not know what telling the truth means.
> 
> At first it was feigned paranoid delusion to impress H, then I thought it was calculated PR, now I think she is off her head.  Harry has obviously joined her in her crazed world. They both need to know there are consequences for their actions


The fact that she is putting another person on the spot is such an excellent point!  The poor person fingered has to get over being stunned and then respond.  It is almost as if she is gaslighting them as well.  You start to question your memory of something that took place years ago.

There is a term confabulation.  This term is usually applied to people suffering from dementia or severe memory loss.  It involves the person making up a story that they believe to be the truth based upon whatever sliver of memory they have of the incident.  The person is not lying in the true sense and believes that they are telling the truth.  Unless Meghan is suffering from early onset Alzheimer's, I can't account for her coming up with these stories and believing or telling them as truths.  If she keeps coming up with the Ronnie Reagan go-to line of "I can't recall" or I forget, then she needs some cognitive testing.

_From dictionary.com
the replacement of a gap in a person's memory by a falsification that he or she believes to be true:_


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> She can’t remove the titles alone, Parliament must request.


I know, but if she doesn't want it, they won't do it out of respect for her at this point in her life.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The Surprising Royal Who Is Said To Be Pushing For Harry And Meghan To Lose Their Titles - The List
> 
> 
> A royal family member is said to be pushing for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to be stripped of their titles once and for all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com


It's not so hard to avoid.  I never see my next door neighbors and we live a lot closer lol!

Why was Frog Cot called a grace and favor?  They are supposed to be paying rent.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't see the changes they made as being that significant.  Cutting back on what Diana wanted given to the godchildren seems a bit mean spirited.  Harry inherits about $12 million.  That's not really much considering their lifestyle - huge home, staff, security.  Of course it must be invested but these days the only way to make anything is with risk.  there is no safe place to get interest on your money.  If they are smart, the would have a good investment advisor looking after that money.


This isn't unusual at all.  People sometimes have grandiose ideas of what their net worth will be when they die or their investments may not have the same value as they did at the time the will was written.  This happened with a grandfather and the executor made a change to bequests by using a percentage formula so it was done fairly when there was a reduction of money to all named.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Commercial flight? Taking the train? Are we now going a step further in pretending to care for the environment or what is that shtick about?


Wonder if Harry booked the entire carriage as he did the last time he took a train in the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

There is an article on DM with "red alert" on the title, I suppose it refers to TW's choice of outfit. I didn't click on it because I was afraid of upsetting my stomach… The Harkles 'perceived' as role models! Then I came across the headline below. The 82yo gentleman was given a 3 year road ban, do they expect that his eyesight will improve when he turns 85?  Something is very wrong with our world. Sorry for the rant…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those pants   The wavy seam on her backside is bizarre.  Shocking a professional seamstress would let leave the shop.
> View attachment 5604342


If they are running out of money as one article states, maybe she bought the pants from the discount rack at Target. Sure looks like it.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> I swear she doesn’t care what the clothes look like as long as they’re expensive.


You totally summed that up.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those pants   The wavy seam on her backside is bizarre.  Shocking a professional seamstress would let leave the shop.
> View attachment 5604342


That's a giveaway that they're not designer. If they were good quality they wouldn't be puckered like that. Maybe she's been reduced to shopping H&M. Seems appropriate, no?


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> If they are running out of money as one article states, maybe she bought the pants from the discount rack at Target. Sure looks like it.


Haha just posted similar.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I swear she doesn’t care what the clothes look like as long as they’re expensive.


Those trousers do not look expensive with the back puckered like that.


----------



## pukasonqo

NM


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It's not so hard to avoid.  I never see my next door neighbors and we live a lot closer lol!
> 
> Why was Frog Cot called a grace and favor?  They are supposed to be paying rent.


I believe rent payment on grace and favor houses is relatively recent. It's probably way below market prices.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This isn't unusual at all.  People sometimes have grandiose ideas of what their net worth will be when they die or their investments may not have the same value as they did at the time the will was written.  This happened with a grandfather and the executor made a change to bequests by using a percentage formula so it was done fairly when there was a reduction of money to all named.


agree...my husband's mother made a will long before she died....the assets remaining at the time of her death were different from when the will was written.  but in the case of diana, she died and the will was executed 25 years ago.  and it is being changed now?


----------



## carmen56

sdkitty said:


> just because the queen is in her 90's doesn't necessarily mean she has dementia....If she did, I think the reins would be handed over to Charles....I don't know if the Brits are very interested in Will (maybe some brits can weigh in here) but I'm impressed with him and his beautiful wife and kids



I’m a Brit and I would be delighted if the crown passed to William and Catherine rather than Charles and that woman.  The death of the Queen fills me with dread, I hope she goes on for a few more years yet.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> agree...my husband's mother made a will long before she died....the assets remaining at the time of her death were different from when the will was written.  but in the case of diana, she died and the will was executed 25 years ago.  and it is being changed now?


No, the changes were made shortly after her death from what I've read.


----------



## charlottawill

carmen56 said:


> I’m a Brit and I would be delighted if the crown passed to William and Catherine rather than Charles and that woman.  The death of the Queen fills me with dread, I hope she goes on for a few more years yet.


I doubt that will ever happen, but I have a feeling William could be King at a much younger age than his father. Charles does not look healthy to me.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Those pants   The wavy seam on her backside is bizarre.  Shocking a professional seamstress would let leave the shop.
> View attachment 5604342


I don't care if a designer name is attached to these pants.  They look cheap and they fit cheap.  I doubt that a seamstress went near them as none of her clothing fits.  The lady in red outfit is something that she finally learned, i.e., one color head to toe makes you look taller and thinner.  She wanted to be noticed, per usual, so red was the choice.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I believe rent payment on grace and favor houses is relatively recent. It's probably way below market prices.


Grace and favor residences used to be free eg to the cousins of QEII, the Kent’s and Gloucesters
About 15-20 years ago, the residents started to be charged rent, supposedly a market rate … but what is the going rate to live at Kensington Palace?
Pss Michael made it known that they would need to economize, fewer dinners out in London,and write more books, I don’t remember an interview on the topic, but it became common knowledge 
The Gloucester’s sold their pile in the country but kept their large flat at KP, later moved to a smaller flat when their children were grown


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> If they are running out of money as one article states, maybe she bought the pants from the discount rack at Target. Sure looks like it.


Reminds me of a pair of pants I bought when first married and had little money.  The pants were cheap cheap cheap and they looked cheap cheap cheap.  I wore them a couple of times and threw them into the garbage.  Like that line in the Woody Allen movie Midnight in Paris, cheap is cheap.









						- Nice. - Cheap is cheap.
					

Midnight in Paris (2011) clip with quote - Nice. - Cheap is cheap.     Yarn is the best search for video clips by quote.     Find the exact moment in a TV show, movie, or music video you want to share.     Easily move forward or backward to get to the perfect clip.




					getyarn.io


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Haha just posted similar.


Great minds... as the saying goes, but we must not brag because we'll be called a couple of ZedZeds.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The Gloucester’s sold their pile in the country but kept their large flat at KP, later moved to a smaller flat when their children were grown


Some royals really are like us


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



No, you can't make me watch it!!!!


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> If they are running out of money as one article states, maybe she bought the pants from the discount rack at Target. Sure looks like it.


I am thinking the beige and red outfits were last minute choices, last week, she decided to pick something without the Diva vibe of the green cape dress or red formal


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> I don't care if a designer name is attached to these pants.  They look cheap and they fit cheap.  I doubt that a seamstress went near them as none of her clothing fits.  The lady in red outfit is something that she finally learned, i.e., one color head to toe makes you look taller and thinner.  She wanted to be noticed, per usual, so red was the choice.


I think red is a good color on her. She could have done without the dangling ties but it’s not the worst thing I’ve seen her wear.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> The fact that she is putting another person on the spot is such an excellent point!  The poor person fingered has to get over being stunned and then respond.  It is almost as if she is gaslighting them as well.  You start to question your memory of something that took place years ago.
> 
> There is a term confabulation.  This term is usually applied to people suffering from dementia or severe memory loss.  It involves the person making up a story that they believe to be the truth based upon whatever sliver of memory they have of the incident.  The person is not lying in the true sense and believes that they are telling the truth.  Unless Meghan is suffering from early onset Alzheimer's, I can't account for her coming up with these stories and believing or telling them as truths.  If she keeps coming up with the Ronnie Reagan go-to line of "I can't recall" or I forget, then she needs some cognitive testing.
> 
> _From dictionary.com
> the replacement of a gap in a person's memory by a falsification that he or she believes to be true:_


It’s easier to prove something happened than prove something didn’t happen. M is really banking no one will say a word in denial, or as you say, wonder at their own recollections- how about that for gaslighting? Nuts or malicious, take your pic.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> her clothes never fit properly. So all the professionals who have had any part in dressing TW consistently turn a blind eye to how poorly her expensive clothes look on her. The bespoke Dior outfit she wore to the church during the Jubilee weekend fit her back side even worse than these pants. I’m amazed Dior let her walk out the door of the atelier looking like that and then put a picture of her in that ill fitting outfit on the Dior instagram account. But apparently TW still manages to sell clothes. One of my SAs said that several of her clients complained that the white oversized Valentino suit TW wore to the Invictus Games sold out right after TW was photographed wearing it. That suit was a truly dreadful look on her from the rear view but that didn’t stop people from asking their SAs to get them that suit only to be told it was completely sold out.


Lot of people out there with lots of money and no taste


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't disagree. I just know *I'd not want my brother to suffer a mental breakdown at the hand of a malignant narcissist and not help in some way however angry. *But yes, it's time to acquaintance him with the discipline he apparently lacked while growing up.


I don’t think William sees it that way. Remember he had conversations with Harry that we’ll never know about. He may see Harry as being an active participant, not a victim. What’s more he may be right.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


>



That huge smile was plastered firmly on her face. Painful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seems they were well received.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It's not so hard to avoid.  I never see my next door neighbors and we live a lot closer lol!
> 
> Why was Frog Cot called a grace and favor?  They are supposed to be paying rent.


there are different types of grace and favour properties, I would personally like a private apartment in Hampton Court Palace, and get the gardens to myself after all the public leave. These are places you could ever go in let alone live in ordinarily.

the rent is peanuts on these crown properties to what it should be, plus, it gets looked after for those peanuts.

whilst you and I wait for the plumber or builder, praying and hoping they do a good job, these properties get the best and all taken care of.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> It’s easier to prove something happened than prove something didn’t happen. M is really banking no one will say a word in denial, or as you say, wonder at their own recollections- how about that for gaslighting? Nuts or malicious, take your pic.


Meghan is counting on a high percentage of the media never calling her out on her lies. In the US most of them  report only what she says and nothing more. She is a celebrity here and journalists generally don’t bother to investigate celebrities unless it is over something political.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>



Nothing wrong with looking ME (plenty of diversity there too BTW)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> @Lounorada  Girl you got me with _the place looks like a creepy old hospital    _Yep, has me thinking of the movies *Psycho, Shutter Island and anything from Hammer House of Horrors.*





Chanbal said:


> Love white houses with simple lines, but you may be onto something…
> 
> View attachment 5603965


Yes! It would be a great location for a horror movie.


Maybe they could rent it out to tv/movie production companies, earn some cash they desperately need 





Chanbal said:


>





Never mind before, I have a feeling that W won't want to meet Princess Hairy _after _the 'memoir' or better put- 'Lie-more' book release.





Chanbal said:


>



_*'Frogmore Housing Unit'*_







QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's kind of bold to be staying in Frogmore but refusing to see anyone. *Then again it's also bold to show face in the UK after their behaviour.*










Toby93 said:


> Looks like she has been heavy handed with the self tanner today





Dreadful outfit. The colour of the top does _not _go with the colour of the pants.
Imagine wearing pants that crease so easily, while you are travelling and will be sitting for long periods of time.
She's clueless.
Also, the two pretentious fools got the train from London to Manchester?!






Chanbal said:


> More gossip…
> 
> View attachment 5604356
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal Rumors Claim Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Supposedly Clashing After PR Disasters, Apparently Desperate For Cash
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle remain controversial figures that can’t go a week without appearing on a tabloid’s cover. The two are dogged by foul stories of destitution and PR mishaps. Let’s look into some recent rumors about the renegade royals. Prince Harry Wants To Go Home According to Life…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okdaily.net


_'Desperate for cash'_  Yet they prance around with this kind of attitude:


Idiots.




lanasyogamama said:


> I swear she doesn’t care what the clothes look like as long as they’re expensive.





Exactly! That's all that matters to her.





Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5604403
> View attachment 5604404





Another wrinkly, unflattering, ill-fitting outfit. What a surprise... said no one ever.





Chanbal said:


>





Painful. I was nosey so listened to a few seconds. She sounds different to what I remember and really reminded me of Julia Roberts to listen to, it's like she's trying hard to sound like Julia. Weird.


----------



## Chanbal

Good for Germany!










						Sussexes to be protected by privately funded bodyguards in Dusseldorf
					

EXCLUSIVE: The Sussexes will be protected by a privately hired team of bodyguards that they have paid for themselves during their day-long visit to Düsseldorf on Tuesday




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The woman is effing trolling us. So good to be back in the UK, hu?


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I think red is a good color on her. She could have done without the dangling ties but it’s not the worst thing I’ve seen her wear.


If she weren't such an unlikeable person I'd be more inclined to say she looks nice. I will say she has lost weight since last year's NY debacle, confirming in my mind that she used the coats during that trip to camouflage her weight.


----------



## charlottawill

Lounorada said:


> it's like she's trying hard to sound like Julia. Weird.


She's always trying to be someone else. She has no identity of her own. She has to assume that of others, whether it's her outfit or what she says and does.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Nothing wrong with looking ME (plenty of diversity there too BTW)


I agree, there is nothing wrong with looking ME.  It was just a twitter post that is calling out her heavy self tanner.  There are so many posts today saying the same thing.  It's very off putting, especially since she was just quoted on CNN saying she was never treated like a black woman until she started dating Hazz   Just why?


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


>



him scowling, her with the smug cheshire cat face


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The woman is effing trolling us. So good to be back in the UK, hu?



I can't watch


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

Comment of the day:

"She's dressed ready for the tomatoes"


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


>



why does he look so miserable?  not happy with what he signed up for?  can't the WIFE teach him how to smile?


----------



## charlottawill

I'm pretty sure this has something to do with it Kev:


----------



## Chanbal

Some progress here, there are a couple of lines without being highlighted!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Good for Germany!
> View attachment 5604533
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sussexes to be protected by privately funded bodyguards in Dusseldorf
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: The Sussexes will be protected by a privately hired team of bodyguards that they have paid for themselves during their day-long visit to Düsseldorf on Tuesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Harry you dummkopf!  What did you expect?  Now leave!  Schnell! Voetsek Harkles!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> why does he look so miserable?  not happy with what he signed up for?  can't the WIFE teach him how to smile?


The obvious answer is because he is miserable. He's not good at hiding his feelings. Quite a different Harry than when he's with Nacho and his polo buddies.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Some progress here, there are a couple of lines without being highlighted!



I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 

Thanks for listening!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> The obvious answer is because he is miserable. He's not good at hiding his feelings. Quite a different Harry than when he's with Nacho and his polo buddies.


Zero poker face.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
> 
> Thanks for listening!


Thanks for listening to me!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Some progress here, there are a couple of lines without being highlighted!



Looks like the the same speech she always makes


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>





ETA: I would have gone with "Fifteen Shades of Spray"


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> ETA: I would have gone with "Fifteen Shades of Spray"



When Meghan’s brand of foundation comes out they can use that image to help customers pick their shade.


----------



## Chanbal

CW doesn't sound happy, I wonder why…


We spent the weekend – if not the past weeks and months – waiting for this speech. *How would she strike the right note in these perilous times, we wondered?* One that was both realistic and optimistic. One that would manage to bring together our fractured country and give the nation what it has long craved: a sense of leadership. One that would banish the cobwebs built up over the course of this scorching, limbo-tastic summer and promise us a brighter dawn?
Yes, a lot was riding on Meghan Markle’s keynote speech at the One Young World Summit in Manchester, and *it was with bated breath that young leaders from more than 190 countries gathered to hear the 41-year-old former Suits actress’s words of wisdom.* Because unlike Liz Truss, who a few hours earlier channelled her inner DHL woman in her prime ministerial acceptance speech and vowed to “deliver, deliver, deliver” on energy, the cost of living crisis and other (peripheral) challenges faced by the country, Meghan knew that what was foremost in our minds as we teeter on the edge of a global recession was… gender equality. *Let’s not forget that the Duchess of Sussex has been working tirelessly on the Greater Good since she was old enough to write (a letter to Procter & Gamble about a sexist advert, rolled out as proof of her innate superiority at any given opportunity).*

As *our self-anointed moral arbiter* took her place behind the podium, you might as well have handed her a shovel, sat back… and watched as she dug herself in deeper with every sentence.

If there is one word every public figure would do well to look up at this precise point in history, it’s self-awareness. The underrated and long forgotten ability first to know where you (and your litany of First World woes and joys) stand in relation to everyone else, and then to tailor your actions and pronouncements accordingly. Self-awareness is particularly useful when visiting another country, as William and Kate are set to prove in December when they head to the US for their first official visit in eight years.

“Roll out the royal red carpet!” clamour the US press, as excitement ramps up about the Cambridges’ trip to the second annual Earthshot Prize awards ceremony in Boston, where they will give speeches about the (again, lesser) issue of saving the planet.

The event is set to act as a springboard, we’re told, for a larger trip that will take them “across America in service of their various charities”, and over the weekend British news outlets all posed variations on the same question: “*Are William and Kate about to steal Harry and Meghan’s US crown?*”
As someone who has divided her time between the UK and the US for the past 15 years and spent a proportionate amount of time in nail parlours from New York to LA, I’d like to think I’m well-placed to answer this. Like British bus-stops, you see, nail parlours will tell you everything you need to know about a country’s consciousness.
It’s because of the chatter overheard as I agonised over whether to have my talons painted in Big Apple Red or Bubble Bath that I knew ***** would win in 2016. Because of that chatter (remember that unlike here, US nail salons are populated by every demographic, male and female, aged four to 100), that I know how folk really feel about foreign policy, economic policy, Kim Kardashian’s latest love split, the prospect of ***** in 2024, Ron DeSantis and the increasingly popular Gavin Newsom.
*So I can tell you this with some confidence: you can’t dethrone a couple who were never enthroned to begin with.*
I don’t need official stats to corroborate the national perception of Meghan, summed up by a New York Post headline last week as a “toddler in a tiara”, or a recent poll to confirm that “Kate is now twice as popular with the American public as Meghan”. As they flicked through their copies of US Weekly, real, manicured Americans have been telling me that for years. 
*Disrespecting the Queen – who is adored to a touching degree Stateside – was the Sussexes’ first mistake. 
That Oprah interview – with its carefully choreographed dig at Kate – the second.* Y*et 18 months on, as they bring their alternative royal circus to Britain and continue to stir up division wherever they go, the Sussexes still don’t seem to have understood that their narrative is failing them.* That by ditching their royal statuses and then airing their dirty laundry in public, they have disqualified themselves from every lofty, glossy position once available to them – certainly the A-list they so desperately want to be a part of.
What have the Cambridges done, meanwhile? They’ve kept their heads down, they’ve kept their dignity and they’ve kept their credibility. So that US crown? It’s William and Kate’s for the taking.









						Kate is America’s favourite princess now – not Meghan
					

The Cambridges have kept their heads down and kept their dignity, while the Sussexes have lost their grip on the US




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				







__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



Semi related, I saw this in a shop this weekend and said "I can't escape them!"


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



She wanted to make her teeth look whiter so she darkened her skin.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Some progress here, there are a couple of lines without being highlighted!



It is all about her time with OYW, not about the organization, it’s goals and dreams


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> She wanted to make her teeth look whiter so she darkened her skin.


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


>



Is it ever not about her?  One time. Name one time.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Some progress here, there are a couple of lines without being highlighted!



Was there ever any doubt?  She doesn't know how to talk about anything else but herself


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
> 
> Thanks for listening!


Give her credit, no truth bombs !


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Give her credit, no truth bombs !


She used the last ones on the Cut article. You need to give her some time to get more.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


>



From that twitter "Queen Rania 52 is naturel [_sic_] beauty" 

Well, not a natural beauty, come on... 

I watched Meg's speech.  She seems to be going for a new tactic.  Golly gee, who me? I can't believe I'm here, I'm so grateful.  Another


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> A few days away from here and I'm lost. Reminds me of the anxiety I felt when I was a student, missed school days due to illness and had to catch up on schoolwork. But this is more fun
> 
> *Yikes they are a hot mess. They drove a short distance from Frogmore to the train and look that rumpled? *They must have slept in the clothes from their flight.
> 
> SS may have been behind the firing of The Cut writer, but I doubt they have the power to get the ever growing number of British and Aussie TV people/journalists who are wise to her BS fired.
> 
> The handholding as they're walking up to the stage - ugh - "I'm scared Mommy, hold my hand".
> 
> I hope the Cambridges don't cave into visiting with them simply out of fear of being accused of being the ones not willing to reconcile.


Welcome back!
Quick update: she wore pants with a *puckered butt*  , his white shirt was *not long enough to be tucked in properly. *
Imo she went with the dark tan setting on the spray machine because oneChild represents the global community.  Interesting to note how quickly Hazzie’s fake smile faded. He leaves froggie cottage grinning like a goober. After one train ride and entering the event, he’s all frownie face.  Guessing the drugs wore off or does reality really bite?


----------



## youngster

Good grief, she's a boring speaker and what a bunch of drivel.
_You are the future. I was once just like you.  I was not sure I belonged.  Now, I belong.  I was once just like you. Lots of heavy lifting ahead. I've got a great life now. I got married and I'm a mom. You are the future.




_


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Love love the *“now husband”* reference.  Perfection!  Counting the minutes until he becomes my “then husband”.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> *No, you can't make me watch it!!!!*


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo she went with the* dark tan setting* on the spray machine because oneChild represents the global community.  *Interesting to note how quickly Hazzie’s fake smile faded. *He leaves froggie cottage grinning like a goober. After one train ride and entering the event, he’s all frownie face.  Guessing the drugs wore off or does reality really bite?


Orange tan! Below is an useful article in case TW's advisors read here. Hazz needs a few more acting lessons. From what I read about his school time, he is not a fast learner.


*Four tricks to clean up fake tan disasters*
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/beauty-hair/a27446/four-tricks-clean-up-fake-tan-disaster/


----------



## Katel

bisbee said:


> I am surprised that with all of the major complaints and criticisms launched at MM the seam of her pants on her ass is the focus of several comments.



Perhaps it’s because “the seam of her pants on her ass” is a fitting metaphor of MeeMeePeePeeZeeZee right now (no pun intended ).



Toby93 said:


> Wow - just when you thought she had overdid with the tanner, she goes a step further




But lest we not forget - she’s BLACK, you know - truly *BLACK*!


----------



## Chanbal

Way to go Janet! 


_*A woman who gave her name as Janet (pictured), accused Meghan of being a 'liar and a hypocrite' *The woman, who was wearing a T-shirt bearing a skeletal hand clutching money and a quote from the duchess, said: 'The Queen has been on the throne for 70 years and she's had to put up with all this trouble. Meghan has used every card she can – racism, mental health, feminism. She's not a feminist, she's just a hypocrite.'

_@CarryOn2020 Here is when TW reminded Hazz to smile, allegedly. 









						Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
					

Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Faking it for Nflix or is it true love?




Delicate question:  do the red pants have butt puckering?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Faking it for Nflix or is it true love?
> 
> View attachment 5604639
> 
> 
> Delicate question:  do the red pants have butt puckering?


True love! Hazz is even pointing at the camera.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> I thought the same about the alteration.  Maybe she did it herself, no professional would let the goof walk out the door.  No idea how that sort of thing happens.  Yes, it was the first thing I saw, too.  Bizarre.


Hahaha yes, had the same thought … since no one can do anything properly except She Who Must Do Everything (), maybe she did a quick running stitch on her azz while seated on the plane.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Excellent job, Manchester!  We are proud of you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gasp.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the author means the seasonal (Halloween) section of the store.  










						Everything Meghan says 'sounds like a decorative plaque in TK Maxx', says expert
					

EXCLUSIVE: Meghan took to the stage at the One Young World summit in Manchester to give a rousing speech to the young leaders of the world, but one expert wasn't impressed




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Way to go Janet!
> View attachment 5604643
> 
> _*A woman who gave her name as Janet (pictured), accused Meghan of being a 'liar and a hypocrite' *The woman, who was wearing a T-shirt bearing a skeletal hand clutching money and a quote from the duchess, said: 'The Queen has been on the throne for 70 years and she's had to put up with all this trouble. Meghan has used every card she can – racism, mental health, feminism. She's not a feminist, she's just a hypocrite.'
> _


_
Her t-shirt. OMG. Dying 
Which one of you is it? C’mon… _


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> _Her t-shirt. OMG. Dying
> Which one of you is it? C’mon… _


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gasp.
> 
> View attachment 5604649



I bet DM will buy the second picture.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I bet DM will buy the second picture.


Serious question,  why are her pants doing that?  Is it her undergarments?  I’ve never seen anything like that, but, tbf I do not look at other women’s butts.


----------



## Chanbal

The question in the mind of many of us.   










						Who the f*** does Meghan think she is after the vile manure she's flung at UK?
					

MEGHAN Markle is back in Britain, fronting a summit about equality and poverty. I’ve no idea what she actually said in her opening address in Manchester last night because I don’t care – and nor sh…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Serious question,  why are her pants doing that?  Is it her undergarments?  I’ve never seen anything like that, but, tbf I do not look at other women’s butts.


I have no idea. The long loose pants together with high heel shoes are likely to give the illusion that she is slimmer and taller than what she really is.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Germany is ready for the Harkles arrival!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Throwback to TB’s Revenge - how TW became connected to OneChild


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very mean?  Imo  this is saying royal life is a much cushier life than most of us experience.  There is no worry about paying the rent,  repairing the cars,  shopping for groceries, etc.  For a royal or anyone to complain about such a privileged lifestyle, that is the height of ingratitude.


ITA. It does make you wonder what exactly Zedzee was expecting if this privileged lifestyle was not enough for her. After "giving up" her life as a Hollywood star, supermodel and revered humanitarian who has saved the world (and women) countless times, I guess marrying into the BRF was a letdown  She even lost her name and has to contend with being called Princess Henry, rather than being known as Her Exalted Goddess, Princess Flower of California, Empress of the TransAtlantic First Class Cabin - which is her birthright.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Cinderlala

Wow, that red outfit is terrible. The words of Dorothy Parker immediately sprung to mind--"What fresh Hell is this?"  She looks like a Flaming Hot Cheeto.


----------



## Chanbal

Cinderlala said:


> Wow, that red outfit is terrible. The words of Dorothy Parker immediately sprung to mind--"What fresh Hell is this?"  She looks like a* Flaming Hot Cheeto*.


Fire extinguisher came to mind…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> If she weren't such an unlikeable person I'd be more inclined to say she looks nice. I will say she has lost weight since last year's NY debacle, confirming in my mind that she used the coats during that trip to camouflage her weight recording devices.



fixed it for you 



sdkitty said:


> him scowling, her with the smug cheshire cat face



nervous, suspicious and angry … he knows he’s put his foot in it.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Faking it for Nflix or is it true love?
> 
> View attachment 5604639
> 
> 
> Delicate question:  do the red pants have butt puckering?


The cameras were running. “This is sooo entertaining! We’re having such fun!”


----------



## Chanbal

*Harry and Meghan sat in the front row, smiling and clapping*_ as the various representatives processed and the crowd cheered. *Harry looked characteristically furious. Meghan had her best ‘interested’ smile on* as the music segued into Aretha Franklin’s Respect. The American flagbearer waved encouragingly in her direction. Everyone stood up and did a bit of slightly awkward dad-dancing.

First up, *a brief but heartfelt speech from the chair of the organisation, former Irish President Mary Robinson, quoting Nelson Mandela.* *Oh dear, had she not been briefed on the Duchess’s little recent faux pas *– when Meghan claimed that her marriage to Prince Harry sparked scenes of joy in South Africa comparable to those on show when Mandela was released from prison? Next, Sir Bob Geldof himself. A big cheer when he mentioned Manchester’s mayor Andy Burnham, as well as the obligatory f-bomb and a dig at Boris Johnson.

*And then it was Meghan’s turn.* *Poised, smiling, she took to the podium to tell the audience all about... Meghan.* About how she has been with the organisation since 2014, about how humbled (tick), in awe (tick), nervous (tick) she felt about being in such incredible company.

Why, she even saved her little paper place-card that had her name on it, such was her disbelief. She was so nervous, doubted herself so much. Was she even good enough to be there (shy giggle, conspiratorial smile)?

*As for gender equality, she didn’t mention it once.* But no matter. She was grateful, she was humble, her pantsuit was awesome. It ended with a short fanfare, followed by Harry hastily ushering her toward the exit, pausing briefly for a few selfies._









						SARAH VINE: You're just talking about yourself, Meghan
					

SARAH VINE: And then it was Meghan's turn. Poised, smiling, she took to the podium to tell the audience all about... Meghan.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

We know she has to be reading the reviews on her speeches. Why does she keep making the same mistakes? Sure, she’s completely self-absorbed but she’s not totally stupid. Can she not see how she’s not saying anything of substance?


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gasp.
> 
> View attachment 5604649



Looks like she's got pucker butt there too or it's her thong showing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5604668
> 
> _*And then it was Meghan’s turn.* *Poised, smiling, she took to the podium to tell the audience all about... Meghan.* About how she has been with the organisation since 2014, about how humbled (tick), in awe (tick), nervous (tick) she felt about being in such incredible company.
> 
> Why, she even saved her little paper place-card that had her name on it, such was her disbelief. She was so nervous, doubted herself so much. Was she even good enough to be there (shy giggle, conspiratorial smile)?_


Based on TBower’s story about her first OneChild Summit in 2014,  this seems plausible.  She most likely could not believe her luck, wonder if she  met Boris Becker, a keynoter.  Of course, while she left out the specifics of how she manipulated her way in, TBower tells us.  Seems like she was looking for a freebie ticket to Dublin to see her love, Rory.   Such dedication.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Hermes Zen said:


> Looks like she's got pucker butt there too or it's her thong showing.


Well, maybe. But I’m looking at her Lucifer face in that shot more.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Looks like she's got pucker butt there too or it's her thong showing.


PuckerButtPants [PBP] could be the next huge thing


----------



## sdkitty

Hermes Zen said:


> Looks like she's got pucker butt there too or it's her thong showing.


I think Harry would much rather be at the pub or on the polo field....but this is their "life of service"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ouch - those pesky facts:

_she referenced herself 54 times during seven-minute gender equality talk - which contained just ONE fleeting anecdote about women_​_








						Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
					

Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA: not aging well  

_


----------



## charlottawill

OMG Cillian Murphy's reaction to Harry is priceless - wait for it    My husband and I are Peaky Blinders fans.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Wow - just when you thought she had overdid with the tanner, she goes a step further



She needs to make it look fake, so that you don't forget she is actually lily(livered) white. 


youngster said:


> Good grief, she's a boring speaker and what a bunch of drivel.
> _You are the future. I was once just like you.  I was not sure I belonged.  Now, I belong.  I was once just like you. Lots of heavy lifting ahead. I've got a great life now. I got married and I'm a mom. You are the future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Sigh! If she has a great life now, why would she be complaining every chance she gets?


bag-mania said:


> We know she has to be reading the reviews on her speeches. Why does she keep making the same mistakes? Sure, she’s completely self-absorbed but she’s not totally stupid. Can she not see how she’s not saying anything of substance?


If she says something of substance, like how the South Africans compare her with Mandela, she will invite scrutiny. Best to stick to self-obsessed fluff filled with how she feels, she thinks, she hopes, she wants. If her Mandela tales were better received, she would probably claim that Mandela's widow wanted to adopt her into the family because, you know, she wanted to give the poor victim the family she never had.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I bet DM will buy the second picture.


Hmm...that face looks familiar...oh yes, The Omen...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Serious question,  why are her pants doing that?  Is it her undergarments?  I’ve never seen anything like that, but, tbf I do not look at other women’s butts.


Poor fit or lack of tailoring. I don't actively look but I do notice these things.



Chanbal said:


> I have no idea. The long loose pants together with high heel shoes are likely to give the illusion that she is slimmer and taller than what she really is.


I'll bet she has been starving herself for the past year thinking she could look more like Kate. Hence the towering stilettos and very long pants. Kate lives rent free in her head.



Chanbal said:


> Germany is ready for the Harkles arrival!



"Fahrt"  Please excuse my inner ten year old boy.



xincinsin said:


> "Empress of the TransAtlantic First Class Cabin"


I'm dead 



EverSoElusive said:


> Long lost father and daughter of fake tans and lie tellers
> 
> View attachment 5604671


"Who wore it better?"

I wanted to post this earlier but was afraid it would be considered political.



bag-mania said:


> but she’s not totally stupid.


Maybe we've overestimated her.



Hermes Zen said:


> Looks like she's got pucker butt there too or it's her thong showing.


Wasn't there a jacket over it? She should have kept it on. Maybe she now thinks she has a great butt in addition to fabulous legs 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch - those pesky facts:
> 
> _she referenced herself 54 times during seven-minute gender equality talk - which contained just ONE fleeting anecdote about women_​_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: not aging well
> View attachment 5604680
> _


The mother in me almost feels sorry for him. Almost.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charro

charlottawill said:


> Wasn't there a jacket over it? She should have kept it on. Maybe she now thinks she has a great butt in addition to fabulous legs


Don't forget in the past she has listed supermodel on her cv's


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch - those pesky facts:
> 
> _she referenced herself 54 times during seven-minute gender equality talk - which contained just ONE fleeting anecdote about women_​_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: not aging well
> View attachment 5604680
> _



TW's speech was in a language that is apparently well understood by the event hosts.  













						Meg gives 7min speech about HERSELF in 1st UK speech since quitting royal life
					

MEGHAN gave a seven-minute speech “all about me, me, me” last night in her first address in the UK since stepping down from royal duties two years ago.  The Duchess of Sussex told the One Youn…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> TW's speech was in a language that is apparently well understood by the event hosts.
> 
> View attachment 5604729
> 
> View attachment 5604727
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meg gives 7min speech about HERSELF in 1st UK speech since quitting royal life
> 
> 
> MEGHAN gave a seven-minute speech “all about me, me, me” last night in her first address in the UK since stepping down from royal duties two years ago.  The Duchess of Sussex told the One Youn…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Imo she owes the world an explanation for wearing those pucker butt pants, especially after last fall’s NYC epic fail.  The world needs to know what is wrong with their mirrors.  Oh, wait, maybe she smashed them all when she gained weight.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> We know she has to be reading the reviews on her speeches. Why does she keep making the same mistakes? Sure, she’s completely self-absorbed but she’s not totally stupid. Can she not see how she’s not saying anything of substance?


Come on @ bag-mania! TW cut 10 'Mes' and 5 'Is' from her first version, and for substance she mentioned 'you' at least twice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Weird, this is just weird that a charity does this:


----------



## CarryOn2020

We live in a distorted world where words have no meaning:


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> PuckerButtPants [PBP] could be the next huge thing


Very fashionable for "_P Wives_"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Weird, this is just weird that a charity does this:



Disgusting. All in name of charity the reality show.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Handbag1234 said:


> That head to toe Scarlett outfit and matching shoes is giving me Prince vibes. (More purple rain than HRH) is she trying to be regal? Is she saving the purple crushed velvet for later?


I see Prince but I think the hair, the surgery, the 80s cut on the trousers, the red  is giving me MJ

Only M has re- vitiligo.


----------



## RJY

xincinsin said:


> She needs to make it look fake, so that you don't forget she is actually lily(livered) white.
> 
> Sigh! If she has a great life now, why would she be complaining every chance she gets?
> 
> If she says something of substance, like how the South Africans compare her with Mandela, she will invite scrutiny. Best to stick to self-obsessed fluff filled with how she feels, she thinks, she hopes, she wants. If her Mandela tales were better received, she would probably claim that Mandela's widow wanted to adopt her into the family because, you know, she wanted to give the poor victim the family she never had.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Throwback to 2019:


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch - those pesky facts:
> 
> _she referenced herself 54 times during seven-minute gender equality talk - which contained just ONE fleeting anecdote about women_​_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: not aging well
> View attachment 5604680
> _


She looks Northern Indian here  

At this point, the whole world knows that she's half black. Is there a need for her to overdo her spray tan trying to look darker than she actually is? The orange tan doesn't make her look black. It makes her look ridiculous  When does she ever really identify with black people other than in her pesky and nauseating self-praise speeches?




charlottawill said:


> "Who wore it better?"
> 
> I wanted to post this earlier but was afraid it would be considered political.


I sure hope it's not considered political if we're not discussing politics other than laughing at oompa loompa style tan


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I'll bet she has been starving herself for the past year *thinking she could look more like Kate. Hence the towering stilettos and very long pants. *Kate lives rent free in her head.


That's the first thing that came to mind when I saw the outfit. It feels very Kate-esque, specifically reminds me of this outfit below.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> ETA: I would have gone with "Fifteen Shades of Spray"



I understand that Don Lemon is shocked by some of TW's observations.  I wonder if the above pictures would be of help to him.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I have no idea. The long loose pants together with high heel shoes are likely to give the illusion that she is slimmer and taller than what she really is.


For some reason it’s not working


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The mother in me almost feels sorry for him. Almost.


The only reason I feel sorry him here is because I know he’s had to listen to it 57 times before


----------



## muddledmint

gracekelly said:


> Reminds me of a pair of pants I bought when first married and had little money.  The pants were cheap cheap cheap and they looked cheap cheap cheap.  I wore them a couple of times and threw them into the garbage.  Like that line in the Woody Allen movie Midnight in Paris, cheap is cheap.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Nice. - Cheap is cheap.
> 
> 
> Midnight in Paris (2011) clip with quote - Nice. - Cheap is cheap.     Yarn is the best search for video clips by quote.     Find the exact moment in a TV show, movie, or music video you want to share.     Easily move forward or backward to get to the perfect clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> getyarn.io


They totally remind me of pants I got from h&m when I was in college and needed cheap business casual clothes to wear to an internship!


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


>



To attract her next husband?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles "Duchess [Raptor]: her Long List of Lies".

I guess people are finally catching on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Germany is ready for the Harkles arrival!




Uh. Technically BILD is the daily newspaper with the highest circulation, but it is basically just a very problematic gossip rag that has its own definition of journalistic integrity. I would rather pull a tooth out than read it to be honest.


----------



## carmen56

Chanbal said:


> I have no idea. The long loose pants together with high heel shoes are likely to give the illusion that she is slimmer and taller than what she really is.


She just ends up looking a mess.  If those camel pants are designer she should ask for her money back, the creasing in the fabric is awful.


----------



## papertiger

muddledmint said:


> They totally remind me of pants I got from h&m when I was in college and needed cheap business casual clothes to wear to an internship!



I think I bought the same ones!  

The worst crime is the cheap shine  on those trousers (rather than sheen from pure wool or wool/silk mix) they're also all the colour focus  - That's why our eyes are drawn to the flaws.

and then the colour (on her) - she's a high-contrast, cool-tone woman (which is why she can pull-off (a bit of) emerald, white and black) but obviously_ insists_ on dressing like a a strongly warm-tone (nothing to do with makeup/ethnicity/fake-tan). She could have done a black tux with a ruby-red blouse (not that scarlet) and looked fab.

I would also put her in a just-under-the-knee skirt so not everything is hanging from the outline of her square torso.  Her dressing head to toe in one unfortunate colour makes her look larger than she is,_ not_ slimmer or taller, because she's just a block of solid colour. Not that I care to make her look better  .

The only 'colours' she can do that with is white OR black because in their own way, they are already a strong contrast to her hair and eyes, or  in the case of black, contrasting her skin tone (but match her hair and and dark eyes).

Rich, warm caramel, camels and beige are NOT her friends. Obviously she must have read they look expensive (back of a cornflakes packet?)

True glamour is knowing what suits us. That's why Queen Rania usually looks good and always like herself, even KK - unmistakable, and why M will always be a wannabe someone else.

She faked-it till she made it, pure luck (may as well give speeches on "How I won at Roulette") Unfortunately, she can't stop faking everything, Fake to the last.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> That's the first thing that came to mind when I saw the outfit. It feels very Kate-esque, specifically reminds me of this outfit below.
> 
> View attachment 5604759



Notice how we are drawn to Kate's slim waist, the slimmest part of her, notice her the vertical created by bow that balances the width of her shoulders but focuses the eye to the centre of the body. Notice how the thin fabric (of the silk) falls,  The texture of these flows garments suit her frame. Nothing to do with her hight, proportion and silhouette is all. The scarf tied high with flowing points keeps the belt/waistband from cutting her in two.

M's silhouette from last night is straight-up-and-down, like a scarlet block, all wide from the shoulders and accentuated further by wrapping the scarf of the blouse around the neck (one of the things women do sometimes in more religious communities, to make their necks not only more covered but deliberately, and hence the comparisons to Queen Rania (IMO)). A blouse is often flimsy, M has a more muscular physique (as do I) such 'femininity' actually makes us look _more_ 'butch' (one more word for M's podcrash perhaps?). Same with her daytime shiny 'flowy' trousers that reveal every lump and bump. Even Kate's trousers are heavier so they drape (and are a darker colour) M needs heavier weight materials, stronger lines, contrasting lengths simple strong layers, stop dressing the person she is not and will never be.

*Edit: VIEWSFLASH:

Scarlet outfit is a jumpsuit, just saw a full-length  , I hope she didn't pay for it (LOL - silly me, of course she didn't).*

DM has some truly hideous pics of the couple (purposely chosen I'm sure) claw-manoeuvres on H, Miss World expressions, no my truths, the real truth, I have receipts,I wanted to show you all but the pics made my computer crash


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh. Technically BILD is the daily newspaper with the highest circulation, but it is basically just a very problematic gossip rag that has its own definition of journalistic integrity. I would rather pull a tooth out than read it to be honest.



Is this a that or that option? Coz next Thurs I'm having an extraction, so if this is an actual option I would ask my MIL to send me BILT instead.  Grasping at straws


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> I am thinking the beige and red outfits were last minute choices, last week, she decided to pick something without the Diva vibe of the green cape dress or red formal



I  read somewhere that the red outfit is Valentino....


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I  read somewhere that the red outfit is Valentino....



Just because it's designer...just coz it's expensive 

Actually I don't mind so long as she keeps away from Gucci and YSL


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Just because it's designer...just coz it's expensive
> 
> Actually I don't mind so long as she keeps away from Gucci and YSL


You're right. Since Valentino retired the brand has gone down, down ,down


----------



## marietouchet

She untied the pussy bow to hide the wrinkled trousers, well the whole outfit is a wrinkled mess, bad choice of fabric




Shot of trousers
Meghan and Harry head to Dusseldorf for Invictus Games event
https://mol.im/a/11184035

Not Valentino
Dazzling Duchess! Meghan piles on the jewellery at One World Summit
https://mol.im/a/11184257


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> She untied the pussy bow to hide the wrinkled trousers, well the whole outfit is a wrinkled mess, bad choice of fabric
> 
> View attachment 5604860
> 
> 
> Shot of trousers
> Meghan and Harry head to Dusseldorf for Invictus Games event
> https://mol.im/a/11184035
> 
> Not Valentino
> Dazzling Duchess! Meghan piles on the jewellery at One World Summit
> https://mol.im/a/11184257


The close-up photos in that last link really show the awful fake tan. I have a lot of ethnic Indian friends and she looks so faux when I compare her dipdye complexion with the glow on my pals.


----------



## zinacef

Why are her pants always wrinkled? Is it material used? if It is Valentino, or any designers it would seem that material will not be that wrinkly, considering the price not unless it‘s a linen blend , don’t know much about different cloths here


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Genie27

marietouchet said:


> She untied the pussy bow to hide the wrinkled trousers, well the whole outfit is a wrinkled mess, bad choice of fabric
> 
> View attachment 5604860
> 
> 
> Shot of trousers
> Meghan and Harry head to Dusseldorf for Invictus Games event
> https://mol.im/a/11184035
> 
> Not Valentino
> Dazzling Duchess! Meghan piles on the jewellery at One World Summit
> https://mol.im/a/11184257


The sleeves!!!!! No friggin way has any seamstress touched this Schmatta IRL to make it fit


----------



## Genie27

papertiger said:


> and then the colour (on her) - she's a high-contrast, cool-tone woman (which is why she can pull-off (a bit of) emerald, white and black) but obviously_ insists_ on dressing like a a strongly warm-tone (nothing to do with makeup/ethnicity/fake-tan). She could have done a black tux with a ruby-red blouse (not that scarlet) and looked fab.
> 
> I would also put her in a just-under-the-knee skirt so not everything is hanging from the outline of her square torso. Her dressing head to toe in one unfortunate colour makes her look larger than she is,_ not_ slimmer or taller, because she's just a block of solid colour. Not that I care to make her look better  .
> 
> The only 'colours' she can do that with is white OR black because in their own way, they are already a strong contrast to her hair and eyes, or in the case of black, contrasting her skin tone (but match her hair and and dark eyes).
> 
> Rich, warm caramel, camels and beige are NOT her friends. Obviously she must have read they look expensive (back of a cornflakes packet?)


So true about her dressing in warm tones instead of cool. All that drab olive/khaki/rust instead of clear cool navy/ecru. 

I have very similar tones and the only way I was able to wear camel/taupes was when I shifted my hair colour from black to dark browns. A minor shift in hair colour, but a complete shift in clothing shades I could/couldn’t wear.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch - those pesky facts:
> 
> _she referenced herself 54 times during seven-minute gender equality talk - which contained just ONE fleeting anecdote about women_​_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: not aging well
> View attachment 5604680
> _


Jesus that face don’t match that neck. So weird she doesn’t get her fake tan done professionally- does she think they would grass on her blackfishing? She dressed as a parody of Manchester with that tan, scraped pony and gold doorknockers - was she auditioning for the role of ‘tart’ for coronation street.

It sounds like the speech was a load of crap she made up last minute- what a surprise 


Chanbal said:


> There is an article on DM with "red alert" on the title, I suppose it refers to TW's choice of outfit. I didn't click on it because I was afraid of upsetting my stomach… The Harkles 'perceived' as role models! Then I came across the headline below. The 82yo gentleman was given a 3 year road ban, do they expect that his eyesight will improve when he turns 85?  Something is very wrong with our world. Sorry for the rant…
> 
> View attachment 5604434


I think he’s have to retake his test to regain his license and it sounds like he’d fail it but it is tragic that someone had to die for this man for it to be recognised he’s no longer responsible behind the wheel.



charlottawill said:


> OMG Cillian Murphy's reaction to Harry is priceless - wait for it    My husband and I are Peaky Blinders fans.



I swear he is one of the most beautiful men alive.

He’s also very proudlyIrish and he starred in The Wind That Shakes The Barley so I suspect he might not feel that reverent towards the Royal family. 


papertiger said:


> I think I bought the same ones!
> 
> The worst crime is the cheap shine  on those trousers (rather than sheen from pure wool or wool/silk mix) they're also all the colour focus  - That's why our eyes are drawn to the flaws.
> 
> and then the colour (on her) - she's a high-contrast, cool-tone woman (which is why she can pull-off (a bit of) emerald, white and black) but obviously_ insists_ on dressing like a a strongly warm-tone (nothing to do with makeup/ethnicity/fake-tan). She could have done a black tux with a ruby-red blouse (not that scarlet) and looked fab.
> 
> I would also put her in a just-under-the-knee skirt so not everything is hanging from the outline of her square torso.  Her dressing head to toe in one unfortunate colour makes her look larger than she is,_ not_ slimmer or taller, because she's just a block of solid colour. Not that I care to make her look better  .
> 
> The only 'colours' she can do that with is white OR black because in their own way, they are already a strong contrast to her hair and eyes, or  in the case of black, contrasting her skin tone (but match her hair and and dark eyes).
> 
> Rich, warm caramel, camels and beige are NOT her friends. Obviously she must have read they look expensive (back of a cornflakes packet?)
> 
> True glamour is knowing what suits us. That's why Queen Rania usually looks good and always like herself, even KK - unmistakable, and why M will always be a wannabe someone else.
> 
> She faked-it till she made it, pure luck (may as well give speeches on "How I won at Roulette") Unfortunately, she can't stop faking everything, Fake to the last.


Your advice is so good I hope she does read this thread


----------



## duna

I did a search and the red outfit appears to be Another Tomorrow (never heard of it) not Valentino.... Phew!


----------



## kipp

If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I  read somewhere that the red outfit is Valentino....


Let Valentino enjoy his retirement in peace.


----------



## Chanbal

High heels on boats?


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Jesus that face don’t match that neck. So weird she doesn’t get her fake tan done professionally- does she think they would grass on her blackfishing? She dressed as a parody of Manchester with that tan, scraped pony and gold doorknockers - was she auditioning for the role of ‘tart’ for coronation street.
> 
> It sounds like the speech was a load of crap she made up last minute- what a surprise
> 
> I think he’s have to retake his test to regain his license and it sounds like he’d fail it but it is tragic that someone had to die for this man for it to be recognised he’s no longer responsible behind the wheel.
> 
> 
> I swear he is one of the most beautiful men alive.
> 
> He’s also very proudlyIrish and he starred in The Wind That Shakes The Barley so I suspect he might not feel that reverent towards the Royal family.
> 
> Your advice is so good I hope she does read this thread



Cillian Murphy is so beautiful. Terrible taste in music, but so, so beautiful and an amazing actor.

If Major Johnny Thompson can't make my security detail, just send Cillian Murphy and poetry 

And, anyone who gets H, totally non-plussed and unimpressed, has a high EQ too

Did you see the way I got back to topic there ?


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I did a search and the red outfit appears to be Another Tomorrow (never heard of it) not Valentino.... Phew!



Getting my wedding dress (actually an off-white, matte-crepe 2-piece) out of the charity pile 

TFFT


----------



## Chanbal

Yes, she is!


----------



## Chanbal

"Ambition" for Serena Williams, SW wouldn't be what she is without a ton of it. 
"Diva" for Mariah Carey, a well deserved 'title' that MC proudly wears.
"Ugly Duckling" for Mindy Kaling, is TW insinuating that MK is ugly? 











						Meghan Markle says she was an 'ugly duckling' in new podcast episode
					

The latest episode of the Archetypes podcast, featuring The Office star Mindy Kaling, saw the Duchess of Sussex, 41, admit that she didn't consider herself beautiful while growing up.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

kipp said:


> If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!



Both photos look weird. 

The one on the left: the double-chin reappeared?

The one of the right with striped shirt: she is doing that crone posture again, which makes me check for the basket of tainted apples.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> Both photos look weird.
> 
> The one on the left: the double-chin reappeared?
> 
> *The one of the right with striped shirt: she is doing that crone posture again, which makes me check for the basket of tainted apples.*



 Dead at that comment!

Was coming in to say she has the elderly lady hunchback look. Your comment is a zillion times better!


----------



## LittleStar88

This top is so unflattering. Looks like her boobs slid down to her belly button.

You need a super lean and lithe figure to pull off this kind of top, and smaller the boobs the better.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> That's the first thing that came to mind when I saw the outfit. It feels very Kate-esque, specifically reminds me of this outfit below.
> 
> View attachment 5604759


I'm sure she doesn't have pucker butt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What is wrong with her face there? Botox?


----------



## redney

It's all so boring and predictable now. She talks about herself, he talks about his mother and his WIFE. She wears god-awful clothing that doesn't fit properly, he scowls and fidgets with his jacket and tie. Is there a yawn emoji?


----------



## Chanbal

On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"



_'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks. 

'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.

She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*

Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.

She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._


----------



## charlottawill

muddledmint said:


> They totally remind me of pants I got from h&m when I was in college and needed cheap business casual clothes to wear to an internship!


I think most of us have been there when starting out in the business world. She seeks the spotlight, so you think she'd pay more attention to the look and fit of her clothing. I know I would if I were constantly being photographed.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> "Ambition" for Serena Williams, SW wouldn't be what she is without a ton of it.
> "Diva" for Mariah Carey, a well deserved 'title' that MC proudly wears.
> "Ugly Duckling" for Mindy Kaling, is TW insinuating that MK is ugly?
> 
> View attachment 5604925
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she was an 'ugly duckling' in new podcast episode
> 
> 
> The latest episode of the Archetypes podcast, featuring The Office star Mindy Kaling, saw the Duchess of Sussex, 41, admit that she didn't consider herself beautiful while growing up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


All that mutual admiration - did no one recall that Zedzee the Ugly Duckling did not grow up to be a swan? She had a lot of artificial bits added along the way: veneers, boob job, reverse boob job, nose jobs, hair straighteners, fillers etc etc. She is trying to imply with her description of her nerdy childhood that she is like that stereotypical secretary who removes her glasses and shakes loose her bun, and voila! transforms into a ravishing beauty.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Not Valentino


But she sure looks like him


----------



## charlottawill

Genie27 said:


> The sleeves!!!!! No friggin way has any seamstress touched this Schmatta IRL to make it fit


Maybe because it's a loaner.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I swear he is one of the most beautiful men alive.



Agreed.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> High heels on boats?



I’ve only watched Below Deck and I know that’s a big no no!!


LittleStar88 said:


> This top is so unflattering. Looks like her boobs slid down to her belly button.
> 
> You need a super lean and lithe figure to pull off this kind of top, and smaller the boobs the better.
> 
> View attachment 5604945


She got to pull out her beloved strapless bra!


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!



Enough of the baggy saggy draggy pants. And her expression on the right looks frightening from that angle


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> This top is so unflattering. Looks like her boobs slid down to her belly button.
> 
> You need a super lean and lithe figure to pull off this kind of top, and smaller the boobs the better.
> 
> View attachment 5604945


It would probably look great on Kate, but I doubt she'd wear it in public.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with her face there? Botox?


Maybe not. In one of the pics taken as they're leaving her speech her forehead is wrinkled. I thought that wasn't possible with Botox.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> The one of the right with striped shirt: she is doing that crone posture again, which makes me check for the basket of tainted apples.



My first reaction to the one on the right:


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> High heels on boats?




She must feel right at home.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Disgusting. All in name of charity the reality show.


It will look soooo impressive on the Nflix reality show


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charro said:


> Don't forget in the past she has listed supermodel on her cv's


you're kidding, right?


----------



## Cinderlala

kipp said:


> If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!



The top is giving me yacht girl vibes.


----------



## csshopper

The Suckess pandering in Germany as if they there on an official Royal visit, is disheartening and extremly disappointing.

Maybe whoever pulled this sheetshow together can find an available Bavarian castle for them to occupy?


----------



## Toby93

kipp said:


> If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!



As I mentioned before, does she not have any mirrors?  As others have said before, she dresses for the figure she THINKS she has, not the one she actually does.  Lets face it, she has a stumpy torso and it is only exaggerated with a bit of weight gain.  She could have worn a beautiful blazer and it would have looked great.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> She wanted to make her teeth look whiter so she darkened her skin.


...And look as "black" as possible to keep highlighting how "racist" all Brits are.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gasp.
> 
> View attachment 5604649



Is that a thong I see?  Being eaten up by her butt?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> High heels on boats?




Harry's about 6'/6'. 1. I reckon without her heels she's a foot shorter. Not 5.5


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Is that a thong I see?  Being eaten up by her butt?



Unfortunately


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


> On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"
> 
> 
> 
> _'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks.
> 
> 'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.
> 
> She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*
> 
> Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.
> 
> She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._



Jesus H. Christ.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> you're kidding, right?



Sadly no. Sadly not?  Either way, she did claim that.


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> This top is so unflattering. Looks like her boobs slid down to her belly button.
> 
> You need a super lean and lithe figure to pull off this kind of top, and smaller the boobs the better.
> 
> View attachment 5604945


Hahaha...I'm glad you said it.  I was thinking the same thing.  It's one of my super weird things that my eye automatically goes to.  Having been big busted and knowing that as we age, they don't stay "up", I had a reduction years ago and now they are exactly where they should be.  I don't think she is big busted, but this top does her no favours.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"
> 
> 
> 
> _'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks.
> 
> 'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.
> 
> She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*
> 
> Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.
> 
> She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._




More victim stories.  Victim, victim, victim.  Should we feel sorry for her? 
 Nooooo, just like Hazzi, she still chooses to spit venom and vile at the world.  They will say and do anything for a buck.


----------



## Suncatcher

All the holding hands is so cringey and unprofessional.


----------



## AbbytheBT

Chanbal said:


> On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"
> 
> 
> 
> _'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks.
> 
> 'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.
> 
> She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*
> 
> Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.
> 
> She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._



Mmmm- Looking forward to the comments from her (Catholic) school classmates .  Having raised two daughters in the all-girl Catholic HS system, I am having trouble with 1) her insistence that friendships were all about her looks and 2) religious education on the sacrament of marriage was focused on designing a dream dress.
And I seriously doubt she was the “smart one” in any academic context. I have three generations of family educated in this system and most of the “smart ones” went on to remarkable pursuits in academia, medicine, law, athletics, business, and art (shout out to Greta Gerwig ).
It isn’t a perfect system by any means, but this constant dig at her privileged education - that requires significant resources from the parents - is sooooooo irritating


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Harry's about 6'/6'. 1. I reckon without her heels she's a foot shorter. Not 5.5


I would clock him at 6’1” and Mega at 5’3”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> Hahaha...I'm glad you said it.  I was thinking the same thing.  It's one of my super weird things that my eye automatically goes to.  Having been big busted and knowing that as we age, they don't stay "up", I had a reduction years ago and now they are exactly where they should be  I don't think she is big busted, but this top does her no favours.



I’ve tried on this kind of top before and in fairness it made my boobs look like they were down to my waistline   

It’s an extremely difficult top to pull off and i imagine from the back it emphasizes her broad shoulders.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What?  *He* is talking about respect?  Wow.

Prince Harry says 'showing respect and appreciation is as important as experiencing respect and appreciation' in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games event (but tech difficulties cut his speech and he doesn't answer ANY questions)​
*Harry and Meghan in Dusseldorf for the launch of the Invictus Games 2023, the Paralympic-style event*
*Duke of Sussex gave a speech - including greeting in German - and Meghan posed for selfie after selfie*
*A cruise along the Rhine on the £13m Rhein Galaxie vessel followed, as their European tour continues*
*The pair were treated like visiting heads of state despite being private citizens, according to German cops*
*Roadblocks were set up on their route from the airport to allow their convoy and security free passage*
*








						Prince Harry in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games
					

The Duke of Sussex appeared to be in a playful mood as he appeared on stage at the Merkur-Spiel arena in Dusselfdorf today as part of an event to mark preparations for the 2023 Invictus Games.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"
> 
> 
> 
> _'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks.
> 
> 'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.
> 
> She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*
> 
> Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.
> 
> She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._



She was the "_*smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever".  *_Is she really touting how intelligent she is?  All her actions so far how shown how dumb she is and she steals others thoughts, looks, even WORDS, to try to make herself seem more intelligent.  

This is one insecure jacka$$ trying to fish for compliments constantly.  And Kaling was "shocked"??  Give me a break!  Very few of us are naturally beautiful in our teen years.  Most of us grow out of it.  In TW's case, she bought her way out of it.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Hahaha...I'm glad you said it.  I was thinking the same thing.  It's one of my super weird things that my eye automatically goes to.  Having been big busted and knowing that as we age, they don't stay "up", I had a reduction years ago and now they are exactly where they should be.  I don't think she is big busted, but this top does her no favours.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  *He* is talking about respect?  Wow.
> 
> Prince Harry says 'showing respect and appreciation is as important as experiencing respect and appreciation' in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games event (but tech difficulties cut his speech and he doesn't answer ANY questions)​
> *Harry and Meghan in Dusseldorf for the launch of the Invictus Games 2023, the Paralympic-style event*
> *Duke of Sussex gave a speech - including greeting in German - and Meghan posed for selfie after selfie*
> *A cruise along the Rhine on the £13m Rhein Galaxie vessel followed, as their European tour continues*
> *The pair were treated like visiting heads of state despite being private citizens, according to German cops*
> *Roadblocks were set up on their route from the airport to allow their convoy and security free passage*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex appeared to be in a playful mood as he appeared on stage at the Merkur-Spiel arena in Dusselfdorf today as part of an event to mark preparations for the 2023 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


He wouldn't know what respect was if it bit him in the a$$.


----------



## rose60610

I've come to the sad conclusion that Meghan dresses terribly because she likes to look terrible. Is this her strategy: by dressing terribly it makes people click on articles and photos--then she gets money for the clicks? Her pants are so oversized they look like they're going to fall off, there are so many wrinkles in her clothes she looks like she slept in them for three days, the styles she chooses are NOT flattering, etc.  Her hair looks terrible 98% of the time. She's a loser!


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> I've come to the sad conclusion that Meghan dresses terribly because she likes to look terrible. Is this her strategy: by dressing terribly it makes people click on articles and photos--then she gets money for the clicks? Her pants are so oversized they look like they're going to fall off, there are so many wrinkles in her clothes she looks like she slept in them for three days, the styles she chooses are NOT flattering, etc.  Her hair looks terrible 98% of the time. She's a loser!



Her pants hem is too long. It looks like she is growing out of the ground.

She needs a style intervention.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"
> 
> 
> 
> _'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks.
> 
> 'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.
> 
> She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*
> 
> Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.
> 
> She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._



She is so desperate to talk about herself that she chameleons her way into being part of every show’s topic. Can’t wait till she does the episode on sluts.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Her pants hem is too long. It looks like she is growing out of the ground.
> 
> She needs a style intervention.
> 
> View attachment 5605004


Hot mess.  The tank makes her look like she's slouching and she looks like she's sweaty from hot flashes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I've come to the sad conclusion that Meghan dresses terribly because she likes to look terrible. Is this her strategy: by dressing terribly it makes people click on articles and photos--then she gets money for the clicks? Her pants are so oversized they look like they're going to fall off, there are so many wrinkles in her clothes she looks like she slept in them for three days, the styles she chooses are NOT flattering, etc.  Her hair looks terrible 98% of the time. She's a loser!


Perhaps she is using the wide leg pants to hide her wide stance?  Most women just wear dresses.


----------



## marietouchet

zinacef said:


> Why are her pants always wrinkled? Is it material used? if It is Valentino, or any designers it would seem that material will not be that wrinkly, considering the price not unless it‘s a linen blend , don’t know much about different cloths here


Wrinkles are a major reason the BRF ladies favor longer A-line skirts , not trousers
But of course jackets cover a multitude of sins - and she has none


purseinsanity said:


> She was the "_*smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever".  *_Is she really touting how intelligent she is?  All her actions so far how shown how dumb she is and she steals others thoughts, looks, even WORDS, to try to make herself seem more intelligent.
> 
> This is one insecure jacka$$ trying to fish for compliments constantly.  And Kaling was "shocked"??  Give me a break!  Very few of us are naturally beautiful in our teen years.  Most of us grow out of it.  In TW's case, she bought her way out of it.


full discolosure, did not listen to podcast, read excerpts which hardly mentioned Mindy … it was as if Mindy was trying to get out of there without saying anything


----------



## marietouchet

the beige outfit - Germany and red - OYW 
MM was paid to wear both , merching  opportunity


----------



## LittleStar88

And then this unfortunate photo…


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I've come to the sad conclusion that Meghan dresses terribly because she likes to look terrible. Is this her strategy: by dressing terribly it makes people click on articles and photos--then she gets money for the clicks? Her pants are so oversized they look like they're going to fall off, there are so many wrinkles in her clothes she looks like she slept in them for three days, the styles she chooses are NOT flattering, etc.  Her hair looks terrible 98% of the time. She's a loser!


Hmm there is another possibility, she just does not SEE that she looks bad, body dysmorphia, she is fixated on one thing - typically fixing a flaw, and she ignores all the rest of the look


----------



## CarryOn2020

Still not aging well imo -


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

AbbytheBT said:


> Mmmm- Looking forward to the comments from her (Catholic) school classmates .  Having raised two daughters in the all-girl Catholic HS system, I am having trouble with 1) her insistence that friendships were all about her looks and 2) religious education on the sacrament of marriage was focused on designing a dream dress.
> And I seriously doubt she was the “smart one” in any academic context. I have three generations of family educated in this system and most of the “smart ones” went on to remarkable pursuits in academia, medicine, law, athletics, business, and art (shout out to Greta Gerwig ).
> It isn’t a perfect system by any means, but this constant dig at her privileged education - that requires significant resources from the parents - is sooooooo irritating


She did such a good through job offending South Africa last week, she had to move on, yes, her parochial school education is this week’s topic
Seriously, dream weddings at parochial school ?


----------



## CobaltBlu

What a mess.


----------



## CobaltBlu

marietouchet said:


> She did such a good through job offending South Africa last week, she had to move on, yes, her parochial school education is this week’s topic
> Seriously, dream weddings at parochial school ?


I went to all girls Catholic School and no such nonsense ever was part of the curriculum.  That was the 70s.  Ridiculous.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Besides the fact I have serious doubts anyone said that, ever...you're right, honey. He didn't choose you, he was bagged by a skilled hunter before he knew it.


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ve tried on this kind of top before and in fairness it made my boobs look like they were down to my waistline
> 
> It’s an extremely difficult top to pull off and i imagine from the back it emphasizes her broad shoulders.


She was able to pull this look off at the wedding, but her shape has definitely changed and it's not tucked in.  Honestly, she needs to stop with this, it just doesn't suit her shape


----------



## purseinsanity

Dazzling Duchess! Meghan piles on the jewellery at One World Summit
					

Meghan Markle, 41, who is known for her love of highly sentimental jewellery with symbolic meanings, opted to wear a set of new jewels from Tabayer in Manchester.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




She's trying to look like my cousins.  Except they're brown, not orange.


----------



## csshopper

NM


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> She was the "_*smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever".  *_Is she really touting how intelligent she is?  All her actions so far how shown how dumb she is and she steals others thoughts, looks, even WORDS, to try to make herself seem more intelligent.
> 
> This is one insecure jacka$$ trying to fish for compliments constantly.  And Kaling was "shocked"??  Give me a break!  Very few of us are naturally beautiful in our teen years.  Most of us grow out of it.  In TW's case, she bought her way out of it.


Yep, definitely bought her way out, and I'm sure her daddy paid for the ps on her nose. I wonder how much that would have cost, along with all the other procedures to get her a part on TV?  It's really pitiful the way she promotes herself as a self made woman, feminist and all that garbage.  TM must have spent an absolute fortune on this ungrateful witch, between the surgeries and schooling and she just discarded him.


----------



## Toby93

Something looks really off with her face here


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


> I went to all girls Catholic School and no such nonsense ever was part of the curriculum.  That was the 70s.  Ridiculous.


My kids went in the 2000 - 2012 era, and one was at an all girls school, and there was absolutely no such thing in the curriculum.


----------



## rose60610

How many are potted plant rent-a-crowd people to clap for her and hand her flowers? Probably paid for by the Archewell Foundation.


----------



## lulu212121

AbbytheBT said:


> Mmmm- Looking forward to the comments from her (Catholic) school classmates .  Having raised two daughters in the all-girl Catholic HS system, I am having trouble with 1) her insistence that friendships were all about her looks and 2) religious education on the sacrament of marriage was focused on designing a dream dress.
> And I seriously doubt she was the “smart one” in any academic context. I have three generations of family educated in this system and most of the “smart ones” went on to remarkable pursuits in academia, medicine, law, athletics, business, and art (shout out to Greta Gerwig ).
> It isn’t a perfect system by any means, but this constant dig at her privileged education - that requires significant resources from the parents - is sooooooo irritating





CobaltBlu said:


> I went to all girls Catholic School and no such nonsense ever was part of the curriculum.  That was the 70s.  Ridiculous.


I went to one as well throughout the 80s and 90. Never was that ever discussed! She should have read more, she is not well spoken at all. She can not convey her messages well.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the fact I have serious doubts anyone said that, ever...you're right, honey. He didn't choose you, he was bagged by a skilled hunter before he knew it.
> 
> View attachment 5605031


eta, I didn't click on the article. I misread the headline. 
She's so delusional.


----------



## bag-mania

AbbytheBT said:


> Mmmm- Looking forward to the comments from her (Catholic) school classmates .  Having raised two daughters in the all-girl Catholic HS system, I am having trouble with 1) *her insistence that friendships were all about her looks *and 2) religious education on the sacrament of marriage was focused on designing a dream dress.
> And I seriously doubt she was the “smart one” in any academic context. I have three generations of family educated in this system and most of the “smart ones” went on to remarkable pursuits in academia, medicine, law, athletics, business, and art (shout out to Greta Gerwig ).
> It isn’t a perfect system by any means, but this constant dig at her privileged education - that requires significant resources from the parents - is sooooooo irritating


I have no trouble believing Meghan chose her school friends based on looks, wealth, and usefulness to her. Not necessarily in that order.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> you're kidding, right?


I almost choked to death eating my wings while reading this comment about her claiming to be a supermodel   If I'm no longer liking comments or posting, that's probably why.

Either way, thank you for keeping me entertained during my lunch break


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> The top is giving me yacht girl vibes.



What I'd like to know is, did the Harkles or their team arrange (demand?) the cruise or was it a subtle dig at her past by the hosts?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

Toby93 said:


> She was able to pull this look off at the wedding, but her shape has definitely changed and it's not tucked in.  Honestly, she needs to stop with this, it just doesn't suit her shape
> 
> View attachment 5605033



I LOVED that dress - 1000 times better than her first dress. But a few years, a few pounds and a couple of kids later, she can’t pull this off, definitely not when it’s so much tighter than the loose fabric of the wedding dress. Frankly maybe 0.1% of 40 year old women could, so why would you even try when there are so many other good options.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I would clock him at 6’1” and Mega at 5’3”.


I looked it up, she is supposedly 5'6".


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> She was able to pull this look off at the wedding, but her shape has definitely changed and it's not tucked in.  Honestly, she needs to stop with this, it just doesn't suit her shape
> 
> View attachment 5605033


It was also lined and a less clingy fabric. She did look good in it. See, I can say something nice about her!


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> She was the "_*smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever".  *_Is she really touting how intelligent she is?  All her actions so far how shown how dumb she is and she steals others thoughts, looks, even WORDS, to try to make herself seem more intelligent.
> 
> This is one insecure jacka$$ trying to fish for compliments constantly.  And Kaling was "shocked"??  Give me a break!  Very few of us are naturally beautiful in our teen years.  Most of us grow out of it.  In TW's case, she bought her way out of it.



I will have you know I was _fabulous_ in my teen years, it's just afterwards the magic wore off


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I looked it up, she is supposedly 5'6".



Is that the magic 'my truth' ruler?

She wears 5-6" heels and yet is sill t least 1/2 a foot shorter than Harry. I'm not a maths genius but that does not add-up.

Unless Harry's also in heels


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> Enough of the baggy saggy draggy pants. And her expression on the right looks frightening from that angle


The stripey shirt one was at Wimbledon when she actually behaved herself and walked BEHIND Catherine.


----------



## redney

rose60610 said:


> How many are potted plant rent-a-crowd people to clap for her and hand her flowers? Probably paid for by the Archewell Foundation.


Or Netflix!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmm there is another possibility, she just does not SEE that she looks bad, body dysmorphia, she is fixated on one thing - typically fixing a flaw, and she ignores all the rest of the look



I think it's very hard to look at ourselves dispassionately and objectively, but you are probably correct. 

Stylists usually take a picture of an outfit from all angles (on the person). It's not just real life it has to look good in but on camera too. She obviously thinks she's the best judge, she's wrong.


----------



## rose60610

She refuses to acknowledge that she isn't stick thin like she was on her wedding day and often dressed in clothes that Charles paid hundreds of thousands for.  She still dresses as though she thinks she's underweight and 19 years old. Some models have the height and figure to look even thinner in oversized clothes. Claw has neither just looks like a tree stump playing dress up.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> How many are potted plant rent-a-crowd people to clap for her and hand her flowers? Probably paid for by the Archewell Foundation.



That's very probable (no joke). The other charity's main reason for existing is just to do that, pay for those that want to attend their events and can't afford to.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I will have you know I was _fabulous_ in my teen years, it's just afterwards the magic wore off


I stand corrected.  Except I disagree...you still got that magic!


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Something looks really off with her face here
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605073



On one of the comments: 
I don't feel sorry for Trev. He's a grown man and needs to fight his own battles, but I commend his own stand on privacy.

I'd just be thinking, "thank goodness her claws are off me" if I was him - let her keep the gold if that's all she wanted.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Is that the magic 'my truth' ruler?
> 
> She wears 5-6" heels and yet is sill t least 1/2 a foot shorter than Harry. I'm not a maths genius but that does not add-up.
> 
> Unless Harry's also in heels


Yep, I don't believe Harry is 6'6".  TW is maybe 5'3" or 5'4 at best, which explains why she looks so short now that she has gained weight.  It is much more difficult to hide weight gain when you are shorter.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I've come to the sad conclusion that Meghan dresses terribly because she likes to look terrible. Is this her strategy: by dressing terribly it makes people click on articles and photos--then she gets money for the clicks? Her pants are so oversized they look like they're going to fall off, there are so many wrinkles in her clothes she looks like she slept in them for three days, the styles she chooses are NOT flattering, etc.  Her hair looks terrible 98% of the time. She's a loser!


I believe part of it is her raised in CA fashion aesthetic. She probably thinks her more relaxed styles look better than Kate's tailored and classic styles, which I'm sure she thinks are frumpy. There is a pricey CA brand, the name of which escapes me at the moment, and I was reminded of her recently while thumbing through one of their catalogs. Which I threw in the recycling


----------



## redney

Toby93 said:


> Yep, I don't believe Harry is 6'6".  TW is maybe 5'3" or 5'4 at best, which explains why she looks so short now that she has gained weight.  It is much more difficult to hide weight gain when you are shorter.


No, the other poster guessed his height was 6', [or] 6'1" (it confused me at first, too)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Not sure if this has been posted yet as I’m still 36 pages behind. As a Canadian taxpayer I never agreed to sending $15 million to what is sure looking like a big scam.


----------



## Debbini

LittleStar88 said:


> Her pants hem is too long. It looks like she is growing out of the ground.
> 
> She needs a style intervention.
> 
> View attachment 5605004


And could she stand up straight, for once?!!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> On one of the comments:
> I don't feel sorry for Trev. He's a grown man and needs to fight his own battles, but I commend his own stand on privacy.
> 
> I'd just be thinking, "thank goodness her claws are off me" if I was him - let her keep the gold if that's all she wanted.



But I agree with the commenter, it is tacky to wear jewelry from a previous relationship.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> It is much more difficult to hide weight gain when you are shorter.



Don't remind me.


----------



## rose60610

If Harry is 6'6", then William is 7'2".  I read Harry is 6'1" and William is 6'3".  Claw believes she's 5'11" and 118 pounds with an IQ of 160. She's her own biggest fan. 



Debbini said:


> And could she stand up straight, for once?!!



She thinks she's either in a power stance with her hand on her hip or cutesy when she slouches. She can't make up her mind to pretend she's a leader or act like a child that goes into victim mode when she gets criticized.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> But I agree with the commenter, it is tacky to wear jewelry from a previous relationship.



Her name is MegZ 'Tacky' Markle


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> What I'd like to know is, did the Harkles or their team arrange (demand?) the cruise or was it a subtle dig at her past by the hosts?


As much as we wish it was a dig, it is likely a gift. 

Of course Edward and Wallis were showered with freebies in their day. They are only following in the footsteps of their predecessors.


----------



## charlottawill

Debbini said:


> And could she stand up straight, for once?!!



Shocking, but I have noticed sometimes Kate too will look a little round backed when meeting people. I think it is unavoidable when you are tall and trying to make eye contact with shorter people. MM's reportedly 5'6" (per Brit tabs, who got it from one of her past CVs, so maybe a grain of salt is warranted) and with her heels around 5'10'. They claim Harry is 6'2" and William is 6'3", making him the tallest royal. The Cambridge kids could pass Mom and Dad.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I stand corrected.  Except I disagree...you still got that magic!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Is that the magic 'my truth' ruler?
> 
> She wears 5-6" heels and yet is sill t least 1/2 a foot shorter than Harry. I'm not a maths genius but that does not add-up.
> 
> Unless Harry's also in heels



I'll take a magic ruler, a magic mirror and a magic scale please.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I'll take a magic ruler, a magic mirror and a magic scale please.



I think we should patent immediately, delusion only works on a few, MegZ and HaZZ will be first to steal those ideas to merch


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Harry's about 6'/6'. 1. I reckon without her heels she's a foot shorter. Not 5.5



Clarify 

The above says 

Harry is around 6 foot to 6.1 (six foot 1 inch) *not 6'6" (*unless whilst *wearing MegZ' heels)*


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> I would clock him at 6’1” and Mega at 5’3”.


agree about harry...I think she is average height maybe 5'5 max


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> What I'd like to know is, did the Harkles or their team arrange (demand?) the cruise or was it a subtle dig at her past by the hosts?



It's a pretty typical thing to do. If you go backwards from Düsseldorf (Cologne - Bonn - Königswinter - Koblenz), a bit after Bonn starts the Middle Rhine which is some type of UNESCO heritage site and stunningly beautiful. Lots of companies rent out ships for their annual company excursion, charity events or for important business partners. In fact, as a student I was working at an event similar to Invictus and they offered rides as evening entertainment for the participants.


----------



## lanasyogamama

papertiger said:


> Is that the magic 'my truth' ruler?
> 
> She wears 5-6" heels and yet is sill t least 1/2 a foot shorter than Harry. I'm not a maths genius but that does not add-up.
> 
> Unless Harry's also in heels


That reminds me of my mom.  She’s been clinging to telling people that she’s 5”4’ forever.  A few years ago, the hospital called me to confirm some pre-op info and said she was 5 foot, one half inch! I said “you better not tell her that!”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> I went to all girls Catholic School and no such nonsense ever was part of the curriculum.  That was the 70s.  Ridiculous.


The nuns at DH’ s school had rulers …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I'll take a magic ruler, a magic mirror and a magic scale please.



I just want a magic coin purse.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Clarify
> 
> The above says
> 
> Harry is around 6 foot to 6.1 (six foot 1 inch) *not 6'6" (*unless whilst *wearing MegZ' heels)*


Lol, I guess I read that incorrectly.


----------



## marietouchet

bellecate said:


> Not sure if this has been posted yet as I’m still 36 pages behind. As a Canadian taxpayer I never agreed to sending $15 million to what is sure looking like a big scam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605099


I read that JCMH paid Invictus 450k ($? £?) for the privilege of filiming
And of course the UK govt paid 1M£ so JCMH could found the games

and the leader of a recent cause celebre go-fund-me , I dare not name it, has been indicted for channeling the money to buy cars and houses


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> That reminds me of my mom.  She’s been clinging to telling people that she’s 5”4’ forever.  A few years ago, the hospital called me to confirm some pre-op info and said she was 5 foot, one half inch! I said “you better not tell her that!”


I was always measured at 5'4" without shoes on at all my doctors visits growing up, but I swear, I've started shrinking!  My daughter is 5'3" now and DH says we look the same height.  Maybe your mama was at one point and shrank?  I think TW is like pro athletes, claiming she's taller than she actually is.  My brother is the only man I've met who is painfully accurate about his height: "5' 11 11/12".  I always ask him why he doesn't just say he's 6'.  He says he doesn't because he isn't!


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I read that JCMH paid Invictus 450k ($? £?) for the privilege of filiming
> And of course the UK govt paid 1M£ so JCMH could found the games


Let's play a game: name one thing this couple has earned simply on merit, and hasn't paid for to get honors, accolades, awards, and one thing they've actually contributed to without making it about themselves.
Ready?  Set?  Go!


----------



## oldbag

purseinsanity said:


> I was always measured at 5'4" without shoes on at all my doctors visits growing up, but I swear, I've started shrinking!  My daughter is 5'3" now and DH says we look the same height.  Maybe your mama was at one point and shrank?  I think TW is like pro athletes, claiming she's taller than she actually is.  My brother is the only man I've met who is painfully accurate about his height: "5' 11 11/12".  I always ask him why he doesn't just say he's 6'.  He says he doesn't because he isn't!


My mom went from 5'6" to about 5'2" at the most in her elder years. She suffered from osteoporosis. I am considered elderly now and I went from 5'7" to almost 5'5" (that's my story and I'm sticking to it ). My problem is a back problem I have suffered from for 50 years or so. I cannot stand real straight anymore.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> But she sure looks like him
> 
> View attachment 5604953


Valentino adored the sun. It looked terrible in later life, quite dried up and leathery.  He's a bit younger here.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> ...And look as "black" as possible to keep highlighting how "racist" all Brits are.


Yet, she had to be 1000% sure her kids would be pale and red haired when she told Oprah the BRF was concerned about the children's colouring.


----------



## Toby93

Looks like Mindy was actually in the same room with TW for this podcast.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> *The pair were treated like visiting heads of state despite being private citizens, according to German cops*
> 
> *Roadblocks were set up on their route from the airport to allow their convoy and security free passage*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex appeared to be in a playful mood as he appeared on stage at the Merkur-Spiel arena in Dusselfdorf today as part of an event to mark preparations for the 2023 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Germany rolled out the red carpet for Wallis and the Duke too.  lol


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> Can you imagine the first time he was ever sent a bill in his own name:
> 
> 1. What is this?
> 2. So, who do I send it to?


More like who do I send it to to have ‘them’ pay it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> She refuses to acknowledge that she isn't stick thin like she was on her wedding day and often dressed in clothes that Charles paid hundreds of thousands for.  *She still dresses as though she thinks she's underweight and 19 years old.* Some models have the height and figure to look even thinner in oversized clothes. Claw has neither just looks like a tree stump playing dress up.


I do understand your point and completely agree.  Let’s remember, she was not 19 at her wedding.

Also, here is her mom from the other day. Are they competing?


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Looks like Mindy was actually in the same room with TW for this podcast.



The last two podcasts had themes - AMBITION and DIVA. I was wondering if this third one had an UGLY DUCKLING theme but Mindy was not having any of it


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Germany rolled out the red carpet for Wallis and the Duke too.  lol


Well, they were Nazi sympathizers...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do understand your point and completely agree.  Let’s remember, she was not 19 at her wedding.
> 
> Also, here is her mom from the other day. Are they competing?
> 
> View attachment 5605137


She's alive!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The last two podcasts had themes - AMBITION and DIVA. I was wondering if this third one had an UGLY DUCKLING theme but Mindy was not having any of it


Different levels of victimhood imo.  Tbh, I do not know of any ‘feminists’ talking like this. They try to encourage the young. Most young people tune out when the old folks talk about their glory days.  Something she may want to keep in mind.

ETA:  he said it best:


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> But I agree with the commenter, it is tacky to wear jewelry from a previous relationship.


This is the bracelet that goes on/off with a screwdriver…  maybe she lost hers


----------



## charro

Katel said:


> Hahaha yes, had the same thought … since no one can do anything properly except She Who Must Do Everything (), maybe she did a quick running stitch on her azz while seated on the plane.


Or this was done purposely by someone bc she can't see her own butt. I doubt she knows how to thread a needle


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  *He* is talking about respect?  Wow.
> 
> Prince Harry says 'showing respect and appreciation is as important as experiencing respect and appreciation' in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games event (but tech difficulties cut his speech and he doesn't answer ANY questions)​
> *Harry and Meghan in Dusseldorf for the launch of the Invictus Games 2023, the Paralympic-style event*
> *Duke of Sussex gave a speech - including greeting in German - and Meghan posed for selfie after selfie*
> *A cruise along the Rhine on the £13m Rhein Galaxie vessel followed, as their European tour continues*
> *The pair were treated like visiting heads of state despite being private citizens, according to German cops*
> *Roadblocks were set up on their route from the airport to allow their convoy and security free passage*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex appeared to be in a playful mood as he appeared on stage at the Merkur-Spiel arena in Dusselfdorf today as part of an event to mark preparations for the 2023 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Red carpet, flowers..? Ridiculous. Netfl*x and whoever is behind the Harkles spare no expense. 
I wonder if they are also cashing in on a certain anti-Brexit sentiment that still exists in parts of Europe. It's time for Tom Bower to do a book tour.


----------



## purseinsanity

I sucked it up and went to the "Appreciation" thread.  Not really clear what's offered there that's special that isn't posted by the same couple posters in the MM "Style" (or lack of) thread?


----------



## charro

papertiger said:


> Looks like the the same speech she always makes


The only change she would make is to add more me references


----------



## CarryOn2020

Weird


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> She was the "_*smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever".  *_Is she really touting how intelligent she is?  All her actions so far how shown how dumb she is and she steals others thoughts, looks, even WORDS, to try to make herself seem more intelligent.
> 
> This is one insecure jacka$$ trying to fish for compliments constantly.  And Kaling was "shocked"??  Give me a break!  Very few of us are naturally beautiful in our teen years.  Most of us grow out of it.  In TW's case, she bought her way out of it.


People often mistake opportunism with intelligence.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Weird




No wonder she doesn't want people taking photos of her in restaurants. They might compare to the photoshopped photos and wonder if she was the same person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not ready for the world stage:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Eco-warriors.   Does anyone still believe it, even now?


----------



## Redbirdhermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do understand your point and completely agree.  Let’s remember, she was not 19 at her wedding.
> 
> Also, here is her mom from the other day. Are they competing?
> 
> View attachment 5605137


I’m pretty sure that Doria isn’t dressing for the paps.  This reminds me of when Meghan and Harry were still dating and the paps snapped a photo of Doria taking out the trash, and the British tabloids were trying to identify her t-shirt and gym shorts so people could copy the look.  (As if anyone cared.). The closest they could come were some similar shorts from Target.  My bet is that hers were decades old.  I laughed and laughed at the absurdity of the tabloids.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> *I've come to the sad conclusion that Meghan dresses terribly because she likes to look terrible. *Is this her strategy: by dressing terribly it makes people click on articles and photos--then she gets money for the clicks? Her pants are so oversized they look like they're going to fall off, there are so many wrinkles in her clothes she looks like she slept in them for three days, the styles she chooses are NOT flattering, etc.  Her hair looks terrible 98% of the time. She's a loser!


I don't care how she looks, but I'm tempted to go against the current here. The red fire extinguisher ensemble makes her look slimmer and taller, it gives her a certain wow effect. Can you imagine her wearing the dress below and flats?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Weird



X marks the spot!  The spot where she was dropped on her head as a baby and lost all common sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do understand your point and completely agree.  Let’s remember, she was not 19 at her wedding.
> 
> Also, here is her mom from the other day. Are they competing?
> 
> View attachment 5605137


Is that a tattoo of flowers on Doria’s arm? Surely that is a “sweet nod” to Meghan. I’m surprised the press hasn’t told us so ad nauseam.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> She is so desperate to talk about herself that she chameleons her way into being part of every show’s topic. *Can’t wait till she does the episode on sluts.*


I will reinstall Spotify for that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She copied JLaw’s outfit!!!!



ETA:  the outfit works on Jlaw because she is 32, MM is 41.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Something looks really off with her face here
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605073



Do you mean her genuine smile?


----------



## bag-mania

So what exactly was the archetype supposed to be this week? Being single?

Her topics might have been relevant 40+ years ago but today it’s retreading material that has already been discussed many, many times before her.


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> More like who do I send it to to have ‘them’ pay it.



Sorry, I thought that would go without saying


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> *How many are potted plant rent-a-crowd people *to clap for her and hand her flowers? *Probably paid for by the Archewell Foundation.*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't care how she looks, but I'm tempted to go against the current here. The red fire extinguisher ensemble makes her look slimmer and taller, it gives her a certain wow effect. Can you imagine her wearing the dress below and flats?
> 
> View attachment 5605198



You are correct.  Usually she doesn’t look _that_ bad. She is buying high end fashion, usually. But - almost always there is something off, off in a very noticeable way.  Wrinkles, puckering, dragging the floor, etc.  I know I know, dressing for the world knowing that every angle will be photographed, I know it is indeed difficult.  It’s diet, it’s stylists, it’s lighting, it’s the unknown factor. Not everyone can make it look easy which is why we marvel those who do. Kate, Princess Anne, Etc.  Edo has done an admirable job of restyling Bea. Maybe she will share her secrets with us.  Still, H&M are choosing this life, so they should put in the necessary effort.  Imo.


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do understand your point and completely agree.  Let’s remember, she was not 19 at her wedding.
> 
> Also, here is her mom from the other day. Are they competing?
> 
> View attachment 5605137


Did Doria get engaged or remarried?  See her with a ring.  I wondered since earlier in the year when I read an article about her and a boyfriend.  Maybe why Doria has been out of sight for awhile.  Wonder how M treats her new step-dad if this is true.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I have no trouble believing Meghan chose her school friends based on looks, wealth, and usefulness to her. Not necessarily in that order.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I looked it up, she is supposedly 5'6".


With heels?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's a pretty typical thing to do. If you go backwards from Düsseldorf (Cologne - Bonn - Königswinter - Koblenz), a bit after Bonn starts the Middle Rhine which is some type of UNESCO heritage site and stunningly beautiful. Lots of companies rent out ships for their annual company excursion, charity events or for important business partners. In fact, as a student I was working at an event similar to Invictus and they offered rides as evening entertainment for the participants.
> 
> View attachment 5605112



It sounds lovely. I haven't gotten to Germany yet but I hope to. My husband has been to Dusseldorf in December and he said it was beautiful.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The nuns at DH’ s school had rulers …



Those were the days...


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do understand your point and completely agree.  Let’s remember, she was not 19 at her wedding.
> 
> Also, here is her mom from the other day. Are they competing?
> 
> View attachment 5605137



Can't judge, it's been brutally hot in CA with little relief in sight. It's a balmy 95 in LA right now, down from 104 on Sunday.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> This is the bracelet that goes on/off with a screwdriver…  maybe she lost hers



I'm sure a replacement is available from Cartier.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Is that a tattoo of flowers on Doria’s arm? Surely that is a “sweet nod” to Meghan. I’m surprised the press hasn’t told us so ad nauseam.


It is a large flower tattoo, new, supposedly


----------



## marietouchet

Hermes Zen said:


> Did Doria get engaged or remarried?  See her with a ring.  I wondered since earlier in the year when I read an article about her and a boyfriend.  Maybe why Doria has been out of sight for awhile.  Wonder how M treats her new step-dad if this is true.


photo snapped in LA, D is not taking care of grandkids while mum and dad are away. We keep wondering what she does..


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Weird




Sunlight is very unforgiving. Where's her big black polo hat?


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Can't judge, it's been brutally hot in CA with little relief in sight. It's a balmy 95 in LA right now, down from 104 on Sunday.


One thing to wear the tanks while walking the dog, answering Vogue’s questions while playing putt-putt, grocery shopping, etc.  On the world stage?   Meeting dignitaries? Idk, seems a bit much imo.  Easy enough to put on a cute jacket and eliminate the criticism.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> photo snapped in LA, D is not taking care of grandkids while mum and dad are away. We keep wondering what she does..


Seems to me that she tries to stay away from the toxic two.  I would, too.


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Did Doria get engaged or remarried?  See her with a ring.  I wondered since earlier in the year when I read an article about her and a boyfriend.  Maybe why Doria has been out of sight for awhile.  *Wonder how M treats her new step-dad if this is true.*


That is making the assumption that she has met the man. Unless he is famous or useful, Meghan doesn’t have time for that.


----------



## lanasyogamama

purseinsanity said:


> I was always measured at 5'4" without shoes on at all my doctors visits growing up, but I swear, I've started shrinking!  My daughter is 5'3" now and DH says we look the same height.  Maybe your mama was at one point and shrank?  I think TW is like pro athletes, claiming she's taller than she actually is.  My brother is the only man I've met who is painfully accurate about his height: "5' 11 11/12".  I always ask him why he doesn't just say he's 6'.  He says he doesn't because he isn't!


Yes, I think she measured 5’4” on a very lucky day and is sticking with it, aging and gravity be damned!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not ready for the world stage:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605182



Those pants fit her better in the back, but that belt shouldn't hang like that. And the top just seems too bare for the occasion. Again, I think this is a very LA look.


----------



## MiniMabel

LittleStar88 said:


> And then this unfortunate photo…
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605018


Huge amount of sun damage. In ten years' time she'll look 70. I never understand, in this time of climate change where the sun is so strong, why people don't cover up their skin or at last wear a hat to protect their face.  Once the skin is damaged in the dermis level, it's damaged beyond repair. 

On a side note, it looks as is she's missing a tooth.....unfortunate positioning of the shadow from her nose!


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> It is a large flower tattoo, new, supposedly


I'm not much of a fan of tatts, esp on an "older" woman


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I don't care how she looks, but I'm tempted to go against the current here. The red fire extinguisher ensemble makes her look slimmer and taller, it gives her a certain wow effect. Can you imagine her wearing the dress below and flats?
> 
> View attachment 5605198



She rarely seems to get the outfit right for the occasion. The red outfit isn't terrible, but it says "look at me" when their appearance and her speech are supposed to be about others.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Germany rolled out the red carpet for Wallis and the Duke too.  lol


It seems that Wallis and Edward had a writing pal in Germany at that time.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I don't care how she looks, but I'm tempted to go against the current here. The red fire extinguisher ensemble makes her look slimmer and taller, it gives her a certain wow effect. Can you imagine her wearing the dress below and flats?
> 
> View attachment 5605198



She's lost weight. That dress might actually look OK now, but I still think it's too short. So many beautiful dresses to be had that would have been more appropriate than both outfits so far. Just my opinion, I love dresses but don't have many occasions to wear them.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> She rarely seems to get the outfit right for the occasion. The red outfit isn't terrible, but it says "look at me" when their appearance and her speech are supposed to be about others.


right...you can't get any brighter or more "look at me" than head-to-toe bright red


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> She copied JLaw’s outfit!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  the outfit works on Jlaw because she is 32, MM is 41.




And it is appropriate for the occasion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems to me that she tries to stay away from the toxic two.  I would, too.


Wasn't she just in a video clip with Megs and Archie from Montecito while he was in Africa that was "accidentally" released?


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Lol, I guess I read that incorrectly.



My experience with men is that if they say they're just under 6' they round-up, but if they're over 6'3 they actually come down. DH is actually 6", that is fact, and I am amazed how many men stand next to DH and swear they're 6' - and I'm thinking - "only if you're standing in a hole". 

I had a very beautiful bf who swore he was 6'.3, since I had had a bf of 6'.5 earlier, I knew he'd shaved at least an inch off of his height, he had to stoop every time we had to stand on the Tube (London). 

MegZ heels are not only her (un)comfort blanket, she's addicted to them, and since we can't see them under 'flowing' trousers, this just screams try-hard to me. I love ladies who can wear heels (I can't very well over 3.5") but they are not the right heel to wear under flares. Seems very suspicious.


----------



## Chanbal

Redbirdhermes said:


> *I’m pretty sure that Doria isn’t dressing for the paps.  *This reminds me of when Meghan and Harry were still dating and the paps snapped a photo of Doria taking out the trash, and the British tabloids were trying to identify her t-shirt and gym shorts so people could copy the look.  (As if anyone cared.). The closest they could come were some similar shorts from Target.  My bet is that hers were decades old.  I laughed and laughed at the absurdity of the tabloids.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Yes, I think she measured 5’4” on a very lucky day and is sticking with it, aging and gravity be damned!


It's like my husband being in denial that he is no longer 6'. His doctor told him 5'11.5" a few years ago and he got huffy. It's a guy thing I guess.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Let's play a game: name one thing this couple has earned simply on merit, and hasn't paid for to get honors, accolades, awards, and one thing they've actually contributed to without making it about themselves.
> Ready?  Set?  Go!


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Germany rolled out the red carpet for Wallis and the Duke too.  lol



No comment


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> She rarely seems to get the outfit right for the occasion. The red outfit isn't terrible, but it says "*look at me*" when their appearance and her speech are supposed to be about others.


She dressed for her speech!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> My experience with men is that if they say they're just under 6' they round-up, but if they're over 6'3 they actually come down. DH is actually 6", that is fact, and I am amazed how many men stand next to DH and swear they're 6' - and I'm thinking - "only if you're standing in a hole".
> 
> I had a very beautiful bf who swore he was 6'.3, since I had had a bf of 6'.5 earlier, I knew he'd shaved at least an inch off of his height, he had to stoop every time we had to stand on the Tube (London).
> 
> MegZ heels are not only her (un)comfort blanket, she's addicted to them, and since we can't see them under 'flowing' trousers, this just screams try-hard to me. I love ladies who can wear heels (I can't very well over 3.5") but they are not the right heel to wear under flares. Seems very suspicious.



If she wore flats with those voluminous pants she would look dumpy and stumpy. You have to either be tall or wear heels with pants like that. I speak from experience


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> X marks the spot!  The spot where she was dropped on her head as a baby and lost all common sense.



Everyone has a vein there, I recently saw it in a photo of Angelina Jolie, but I've never seen a "X" like that.


----------



## Chanbal

Someone is afraid that he forgets to take his pills. Seriously, this is beyond ridiculous!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I'm not much of a fan of tatts, esp on an "older" woman



One day all tattoos will be on older women. They don't come off in the wash


----------



## CobaltBlu

> I was always a little bit of a loner and really shy and didn’t know where I fit in,” she said. “And so I just became, I was like, ‘Okay, well then I’ll become the *president* of the Multicultural Club and the *president* of sophomore class and the *president* of this *and French club*.’ And by doing that, I had meetings at lunchtime. So I didn’t have to worry about who I would sit with or what I would do because I was always so busy.”



If you were a sad and lonely ugly duckling, would you really say this?  Are we to believe she was president of 4 clubs?  
This would be really hard to do if every day after school (for TEN YEARS) she was on the set with her dad
.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> If she wore flats with those voluminous pants she would look dumpy and stumpy. You have to either be tall or wear heels with pants like that. I speak from experience


Maybe the universe is telling her not to wear this trend.  As many have said, she should what flatters her body, not what the trend is. Besides, she has plenty of other clothes that would look just fine now that she has lost weight. New wardrobes are so passé.
_I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes._
Henry David Thoreau








						Are trends no longer in fashion?
					

In a world currently disrupted by a global pandemic and facing a climate crisis, do consumers still feel influenced by what is considered 'in'?




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> If she wore flats with those voluminous pants she would look dumpy and stumpy. You have to either be tall or wear heels with pants like that. I speak from experience



They needs platforms or wedges. It's part of _la ligne_, end of. Not spiky, spindly heels like she wears.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> They needs platforms or wedges. It's part of _la ligne_, end of. Not spiky, spindly heels like she wears.



As has been said, stilettos seem to be her security blanket. She wore them with the infamous O dress for a backyard interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Everyone has a vein there, I recently saw it in a photo of Angelina Jolie, but I've never seen a "X" like that.


I get a vein in my forehead in photos when I’m very nervous.  It’s in all my wedding pics.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's not how a will works unless conditions are put in there to begin with.


Speaking from Canada and having just gone through this, if a family member doesn’t like the will of a parent and they have the money to take it to court the judge can change the wishes of the deceased for what is considered legal reasons. But really boils down to if they don’t consider it fair. Crazy.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I get a vein in my forehead in photos when I’m very nervous.  It’s in all my wedding pics.



I used to get it a bit when working out.

Couldn't they PS or airbrush it out the pics? Nobodies pictures are perfect without touch-ups (unless that's the way they want them).


----------



## Chanbal

If the security detail could talk! 
The overboard arrangements in Europe are likely to compensate Hazz for the fiasco of his Mandela speech. Neflix failed to contract a decent audience and there were too many empty seats.


----------



## Chanbal

I can't remember much of it, but entertaining while looking for a pair of missing jeans…


----------



## marietouchet

Did anyone else notice … the other Harry (Styles) got more coverage today than JCMH 
Lets see HS wears Gucci, feuds with costar, was bad in new movie directed by his inamorata, and maybe spit on Chris Pine


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


>









Chanbal said:


> Way to go Janet!
> View attachment 5604643
> 
> _*A woman who gave her name as Janet (pictured), accused Meghan of being a 'liar and a hypocrite' *The woman, who was wearing a T-shirt bearing a skeletal hand clutching money and a quote from the duchess, said: 'The Queen has been on the throne for 70 years and she's had to put up with all this trouble. Meghan has used every card she can – racism, mental health, feminism. She's not a feminist, she's just a hypocrite.'
> View attachment 5604644
> _@CarryOn2020 Here is when TW reminded Hazz to smile, allegedly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal expert says Meghan made One Young World speech 'all about her'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle gave a speech focused on 'me, me, me' at the One Young World summit. She made at least 54 references to herself during the seven-minute talk.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Go Janet!






CarryOn2020 said:


> *Faking it for Nflix or is it true love?*
> 
> View attachment 5604639










CarryOn2020 said:


> Weird, this is just weird that a charity does this:



Such a disgrace.


WhyTF are they being treated like visiting heads of state?! I don't understand the reasoning for that! It's wrong on so many levels.




LittleStar88 said:


> This top is so unflattering. Looks like her boobs slid down to her belly button.
> 
> You need a super lean and lithe figure to pull off this kind of top, and smaller the boobs the better.
> 
> View attachment 5604945


Those pants 







CarryOn2020 said:


> What?  *He* is talking about respect?  Wow.
> 
> Prince Harry says 'showing respect and appreciation is as important as experiencing respect and appreciation' in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games event (but tech difficulties cut his speech and he doesn't answer ANY questions)​
> *Harry and Meghan in Dusseldorf for the launch of the Invictus Games 2023, the Paralympic-style event*
> *Duke of Sussex gave a speech - including greeting in German - and Meghan posed for selfie after selfie*
> *A cruise along the Rhine on the £13m Rhein Galaxie vessel followed, as their European tour continues*
> *The pair were treated like visiting heads of state despite being private citizens, according to German cops*
> *Roadblocks were set up on their route from the airport to allow their convoy and security free passage*
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry in first post-Megxit press conference at Invictus Games
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex appeared to be in a playful mood as he appeared on stage at the Merkur-Spiel arena in Dusselfdorf today as part of an event to mark preparations for the 2023 Invictus Games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Oh Hairy...


Also, roadblocks for their convoy/security??! What batsh*t crazy planet are these two living on?







LittleStar88 said:


> Her pants hem is too long. It looks like she is growing out of the ground.
> 
> She needs a style intervention.
> 
> View attachment 5605004





LittleStar88 said:


> And then this unfortunate photo…
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605018





CarryOn2020 said:


> Still not aging well imo -
> 
> View attachment 5605020





Maybe she's trying to _modernise the oompa loompa_ characters?


----------



## bag-mania

The press can’t help themselves. This one goes on about how Harry was “riddled with anxiety and awkwardness” while Meghan “radiated confidence.” Could they take it a step further and examine whether their two conditions are connected? 









						A Body-Language Expert Says Prince Harry Was “Riddled With Signals of Anxiety and Awkwardness” During Meghan Markle’s Speech Yesterday
					

Don’t worry, Meghan had his back!




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The press can’t help themselves. This one goes on about how Harry was “riddled with anxiety and awkwardness” while Meghan “radiated confidence.” Could they take it a step further and examine whether their two conditions are connected?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Body-Language Expert Says Prince Harry Was “Riddled With Signals of Anxiety and Awkwardness” During Meghan Markle’s Speech Yesterday
> 
> 
> Don’t worry, Meghan had his back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


For a guy who has been doing this sort of thing forever, he is riddled with performance anxiety.  They appear to be very competitive as evidenced by her annoyance at not being included at the UN speech.  She probably gave the keynote as an assuagement.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is good…


----------



## needlv

High waisted pants should not be worn by her.  She looks like…


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> High waisted pants should not be worn by her.  She looks like…


That’s an insult to Urkel.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

Let's give the benefit of the doubt to Germany… The red carpet was likely ordered/paid for by Sucks/Netfl*x. If not, Germany could indeed keep them, "Danke und veil Gluck"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> But I agree with the commenter, it is tacky to wear jewelry from a previous relationship.


Wonder what else she scammed out of previous men-in-her-life. Or women. I'm sure she is an equal-opportunity gender-equality scammer.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

I read somewhere a very good comment about the red carpet in Germany. The official British Royal website still lists the Harkles among official royals, so countries just follow whatever protocols they have to deal with them.

I also read that Charles could be providing some support for their security (one of the bodyguards seemed familiar from other royal events). The people in the UK deserve a clear position from the BRF on the Harkles' mess imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

More boo’s


----------



## CarryOn2020

Needs to be investigated imo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Harry feels lucky to have married me, Meghan claims
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk
				




_She says: ‘When I started dating my husband and we became engaged everyone was like, “Oh my god, you are so lucky he chose you,” [cue a segment of wedding music and a clip of a television voiceover from their nuptials] and at a certain point, when you have heard this a million times over, you think, “I chose him too”.

‘But thankfully I have a partner who was countering that narrative for me going, “They’ve got it all wrong, *I’m lucky because you chose me”.*_

Aren’t we lucky.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> More boo’s



This sums things up perfectly:


----------



## CarryOn2020

He looks trappped imo


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> This sums things up perfectly:




Still on the red carpet…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry feels lucky to have married me, Meghan claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _She says: ‘When I started dating my husband and we became engaged everyone was like, “Oh my god, you are so lucky he chose you,” [cue a segment of wedding music and a clip of a television voiceover from their nuptials] and at a certain point, when you have heard this a million times over, you think, “I chose him too”.
> 
> ‘But thankfully I have a partner who was countering that narrative for me going, “They’ve got it all wrong, *I’m lucky because you chose me”.*_
> 
> Aren’t we lucky.
> View attachment 5605384


Plagiarism?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Plagiarism?






Why don’t I feel lucky?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> He looks trappped imo




And let's not forget, he has said he feels sorry for his father and brother being trapped as royals.

Don't they look miserable?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> He looks trappped imo




"Woko Ono"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> "Woko Ono"



He looks like he is going to throw up.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Sunlight is very unforgiving. Where's her big black polo hat?


That's what I was going to say. Brutal.


----------



## oldbag

gracekelly said:


> He looks like he is going to throw up.


Cripes, my life is not a barrel of laughs and it has not been easy but next to this twit, I'm a shoe in for the Miss Congeniality award. At least I am aware of all my blessings.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm not much of a fan of tatts, esp on an "older" woman


I kinda agree.  The problem is, people who love a lot of tattoos, love to show them off and that means we see a lot of skin.  Bare arms, bare legs, bare backs, they want to display the artwork and I want them to cover up.  lol


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> If the security detail could talk!
> The overboard arrangements in Europe are likely to compensate Hazz for the fiasco of his Mandela speech. Neflix failed to contract a decent audience and there were too many empty seats.




Security is paid not to speak


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The press can’t help themselves. This one goes on about how Harry was “riddled with anxiety and awkwardness” while Meghan “radiated confidence.” Could they take it a step further and examine whether their two conditions are connected?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Body-Language Expert Says Prince Harry Was “Riddled With Signals of Anxiety and Awkwardness” During Meghan Markle’s Speech Yesterday
> 
> 
> Don’t worry, Meghan had his back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com



She's also riding high because she thinks her podcrashes were good   

Classic case of believing one's own PR, delusion knows no bounds.


----------



## rose60610

Her arms must be broken from patting herself on the back over and over and....  

I was just watching an old Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry movie in where he's getting shot at by a scumbag serial killer, then Dirty Harry shoots him in the shoulder and the scumbag is like "You shot me! You hurt me! How could you!".  And then here in Illinois the newspaper marked an anniversary of a mother (a surgical nurse divorcing her doctor husband) who killed her three kids over 20 years ago. She tried to "kill herself" repeatedly over the years and now wants out of prison. She thinks she deserves to be let out of her life sentence since she "suffered from depression". You gotta wonder...she was a high level nurse married to a doctor....and she didn't "succeed" in "killing herself"???? Like she didn't know how many pills it'd take? Or how deep to slash herself?  Seems she loves the attention from the quasi suicide attempts and really believes she should be let out of her life sentence despite killing her kids. 

*NARCISSISTS!!!! *

No, of course Markle didn't jar off anybody, but the way she destroys relationships and still whines about how we should all feel sorry for her after what SHE did and said despite all the riches/perks she got from the BRF--IMO she fits the same profile as the most effed up narcissistic people out there. Watch your back Duke of Sussex!


----------



## needlv

Crowns of Britain blogger is back…. It’s hilarious as always!









						Royal round-up: 6th September
					

Well hello all — hope you had a good weekend, a good week so far and welcome to the next royal round up! I cannot believe the first week of September is already through! Almost time to put up…




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Her arms must be broken from patting herself on the back over and over and....
> 
> I was just watching an old Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry movie in where he's getting shot at by a scumbag serial killer, then Dirty Harry shoots him in the shoulder and the scumbag is like "You shot me! You hurt me! How could you!".  And then here in Illinois the newspaper marked an anniversary of a mother (a surgical nurse divorcing her doctor husband) who killed her three kids over 20 years ago. She tried to "kill herself" repeatedly over the years and now wants out of prison. She thinks she deserves to be let out of her life sentence since she "suffered from depression". You gotta wonder...she was a high level nurse married to a doctor....and she didn't "succeed" in "killing herself"???? Like she didn't know how many pills it'd take? Or how deep to slash herself?  Seems she loves the attention from the quasi suicide attempts and really believes she should be let out of her life sentence despite killing her kids.
> 
> *NARCISSISTS!!!! *
> 
> No, of course Markle didn't jar off anybody, but the way she destroys relationships and still whines about how we should all feel sorry for her after what SHE did and said despite all the riches/perks she got from the BRF--IMO she fits the same profile as the most effed up narcissistic people out there. Watch your back Duke of Sussex!



She’s a victim victim victim, just like when she was a lil girl.



needlv said:


> Crowns of Britain blogger is back…. It’s hilarious as always!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round-up: 6th September
> 
> 
> Well hello all — hope you had a good weekend, a good week so far and welcome to the next royal round up! I cannot believe the first week of September is already through! Almost time to put up…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com


Love love this!  See this photo - this is her _lil girl, help me, I’m a victim_ pose.  Most men know better than to fall for that nonsense., especially from a nearly 40 yr old divorcee.  Then there is  Hazzi, twisting himself into a pretzel.









— She said, squeezing herself into a leather dress; pushing her rack up and gurning for the cameras at a premiere

ETA:  We should remember this gem from _The Cut 

Though she has been media trained and then royal-media trained and sometimes converses like she has a tiny Bachelor producer in her brain directing what she says (at one point in our conversation, instead of answering a question, she will suggest how I might transcribe the noises she’s making: *“She’s making these guttural sounds, and I can’t quite articulate what it is she’s feeling in that moment because she has no word for it; she’s just moaning”*), at this stage, post-royal, there’s no need for her to hold back. 
_
*She did what, mate?*


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> My experience with men is that if they say they're just under 6' they round-up, but if they're over 6'3 they actually come down. DH is actually 6", that is fact, and I am amazed how many men stand next to DH and swear they're 6' - and I'm thinking - "only if you're standing in a hole".
> 
> I had a very beautiful bf who swore he was 6'.3, since I had had a bf of 6'.5 earlier, I knew he'd shaved at least an inch off of his height, he had to stoop every time we had to stand on the Tube (London).
> 
> MegZ heels are not only her (un)comfort blanket, she's addicted to them, and since we can't see them under 'flowing' trousers, this just screams try-hard to me. I love ladies who can wear heels (I can't very well over 3.5") but they are not the right heel to wear under flares. Seems very suspicious.


So true.  My best friend in training was actually a man who was 6’5”.  Someone asked him what his height was and he responded 6’3”.  I gave him a side eye and later said I thought you said you were 6’5”??  He says, I am, but 6’3” already makes me sound like a freak, can you imagine if I said 6’5”??!


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


>


Brilliant!!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> I get a vein in my forehead in photos when I’m very nervous.  It’s in all my wedding pics.


Me too.  When I was really thin, it would be more pronounced when I was angry.  My younger sister once drew a fake vein on her forehead.  She thought she was hysterical.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> He looks trappped imo



Bzzzzzz
Bzzzzzz
Arrrrgh
Wooooo


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Shocking, but I have noticed sometimes Kate too will look a little round backed when meeting people. I think it is unavoidable when you are tall and trying to make eye contact with shorter people. MM's reportedly 5'6" (per Brit tabs, who got it from one of her past CVs, so maybe a grain of salt is warranted) and with her heels around 5'10'. They claim Harry is 6'2" and William is 6'3", making him the tallest royal. The Cambridge kids could pass Mom and Dad.


IIRC Hazmat used lifts when he attended the unveiling of his mommy's statue. There were comments that he was suddenly taller than his brother. Growth hormones?


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Bzzzzzz
> Bzzzzzz
> Arrrrgh
> Wooooo



This and Emojis must be the equivalent to Ms gutteral sounds. M can interpret any way she wants


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> He looks trappped imo



He looks resentful to me: Why is that guy getting the attention? Mommy Meghan says we are more important!



purseinsanity said:


> Me too.  When I was really thin, it would be more pronounced when I was angry.  My younger sister once drew a fake vein on her forehead.  She thought she was hysterical.


And here I was thinking all these years that authors were just being fanciful when they described people becoming so angry that a vein throbbed in their forehead. Anime artists too...


----------



## jelliedfeels

duna said:


> I did a search and the red outfit appears to be Another Tomorrow (never heard of it) not Valentino.... Phew!


Even the brand name sounds like a Michael Jackson song!

Honestly she’d have been more on topic if she’d gone on stage and quoted MJ lyrics-  Shamone! 




kipp said:


> If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!



Lordy lord 


papertiger said:


> Cillian Murphy is so beautiful. Terrible taste in music, but so, so beautiful and an amazing actor.
> 
> If Major Johnny Thompson can't make my security detail, just send Cillian Murphy and poetry
> 
> And, anyone who gets H, totally non-plussed and unimpressed, has a high EQ too
> 
> Did you see the way I got back to topic there ?


I will never forgive Chris Nolan for making his character wear a mask most of the movie- though there is something about that mask’s expression that reminds me of H 


LittleStar88 said:


> This top is so unflattering. Looks like her boobs slid down to her belly button.
> 
> You need a super lean and lithe figure to pull off this kind of top, and smaller the boobs the better.
> 
> View attachment 5604945


Her face has gone crazy. What’s going on with those lips? Why is she so puffy? 


Chanbal said:


> On the "lonely childhood": "_Recollections may Vary_"
> 
> 
> 
> _'Were you not the pretty one growing up?' a shocked Kaling asks.
> 
> 'No, oh God, no!' responds Markle, adding: '*Ugly duckling*'.
> 
> She clarified that her looks might have been considered unconventionally beautiful, saying *she had 'massive frizzy, curly hair and a huge gap in my teeth*. *I was the smart, one forever and ever and ever and ever *- and then I sort of grew up.*'*
> 
> Prince Harry's wife explained that while at school at the Hollywood Schoolhouse and, later, all-girls Catholic school, Immaculate Heart, in Los Angeles *she struggled to fit in with her peers*.
> 
> She explains: *'I never had anyone to sit with at lunch.* I was always a *little bit of a loner and really shy *and didn't know where I fit in._



This is just furthering the stereotype that valley girls are stupid- I mean imagine if M really was the smart one 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the fact I have serious doubts anyone said that, ever...you're right, honey. He didn't choose you, he was bagged by a skilled hunter before he knew it.
> 
> View attachment 5605031


Well to be fair, I don’t think anyone is congratulating Harry for bagging her… 


Toby93 said:


> Looks like Mindy was actually in the same room with TW for this podcast.



WAS an ugly duckling? 

I’m amazed more people aren’t making fun of the ‘unconventionally beautiful’ cut in- she can’t even commit to claiming she was ugly for a few seconds. 
It goes without saying she’s nothing of the sort - someone like Grace Jones or Karen Elson is unconventionally beautiful with strong features and a unique aesthetic - M spent thousands on that face and she’s still as plain as an empty flan case. 

Mindy isn’t well known here at all. Is this going to be two whiners in search of a sucker? 




marietouchet said:


> This is the bracelet that goes on/off with a screwdriver…  maybe she lost hers


My guess is she deposited it inside Trev when he last dared to disagree with her. He always had a startled expression. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Weird



Hey! she got that scar when she confronted Voldemort and saved the world…..


oh ok when she met Voldemort on zoom to get his skincare tips and surgeon’s name but it’s basically the same thing. 


She even stole his claw move!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles "Me, me, me: [Raptor] Annoys With Narcisstic Appearance".

ETA: sorry, Austrian!


----------



## xincinsin

One of the comments on marklenews1 captured the spirit of the podcrashes exquisitely:

_*It’s the ME show , starring ME , produced by ME , directed by ME . 
But enough about ME , let’s hear about you , What do you think of ME ??*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

British Vogue declares it - long, baggy pants are in  for 2021.









						So Long Low-Risers! This Is The Trouser Shape Of SS21
					

So long abs! Next season’s trouser shape comes loose, louche and low on the planking threshold




					www.vogue.co.uk


----------



## kubik

This isn't a piece of gossip but I just discovered this thread and reading some of the posts have been entertainingl. But I wanna ask some questions and I hope you guys will oblige me. What does TW mean? Is it... "trigger warning"? I seriously can't keep up with the names bestowed to MM. I only know of Me-again and Megaliar. What other nicknames does she have?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> British Vogue declares it - long, baggy pants are in  for 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So Long Low-Risers! This Is The Trouser Shape Of SS21
> 
> 
> So long abs! Next season’s trouser shape comes loose, louche and low on the planking threshold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.co.uk


What I call Palazzo pants, slacks loose jeans and flares have been doing the rounds for a while at least in U.K. - pick any high street chain  and there’s far more loose fits than skinny cuts - as per usual British vogue is VERY behind the curve.

NB All the 20 somethings I see are wearing either very 80s neutral slacks with a belt or those elasticated jersey flared yoga pants which require you to be stick thin and eccentric.

The problem, as papertiger calls it, is they are hard to wear with flats and since most young women don’t seem to like heels anymore (and who can blame them) so I don’t think it’ll become ubiquitous the way skinny jeans were 10 years ago.

Speaking of which, like a lot of apple shapes, m would look better in a skinnier cut of pant.

@kubik TW is one of the nicknames we have applied to ‘that woman’ or ‘the witch’ aka Harry’s wife but I suppose we might need a trigger warning with some of this pair’s antics


----------



## xincinsin

kubik said:


> This isn't a piece of gossip but I just discovered this thread and reading some of the posts have been entertainingl. But I wanna ask some questions and I hope you guys will oblige me. What does TW mean? Is it... "trigger warning"? I seriously can't keep up with the names bestowed to MM. I only know of Me-again and Megaliar. What other nicknames does she have?


The Wife is its blandest meaning, but we encourage creativity and not being silenced and speaking our truth


----------



## kubik

xincinsin said:


> The Wife is its blandest meaning, but we encourage creativity and not being silenced and speaking our truth


Ehhhhhh???? It truly is bland... I assumed it was something juicy and wicked tbh  
Perhaps Triggering Woman might suit as well because my mom and I get hyper-huffy whenever we see a video or article of her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harry feels lucky to have married me, Meghan claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _She says: ‘When I started dating my husband and we became engaged everyone was like, “Oh my god, you are so lucky he chose you,” [cue a segment of wedding music and a clip of a television voiceover from their nuptials] and at a certain point, when you have heard this a million times over, you think, “I chose him too”.
> 
> ‘But thankfully I have a partner who was countering that narrative for me going, “They’ve got it all wrong, *I’m lucky because you chose me”.*_
> 
> Aren’t we lucky.
> View attachment 5605384



I'm sure at this point he's had time to reconsider.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This sums things up perfectly:




Inappropriate is her middle name.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> British Vogue declares it - long, baggy pants are in  for 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So Long Low-Risers! This Is The Trouser Shape Of SS21
> 
> 
> So long abs! Next season’s trouser shape comes loose, louche and low on the planking threshold
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.co.uk



 Aren't we nearly in 2023 though.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aren't we nearly in 2023 though.


She is showing her vintage


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> This is good…



An Italian newspaper today said she looked good in the red outfit (  ) but her speech was terrible! I wouldn't watch it for love or money, but  I believe it, lol!


----------



## muddledmint

jelliedfeels said:


> What I call Palazzo pants, slacks loose jeans and flares have been doing the rounds for a while at least in U.K. - pick any high street chain  and there’s far more loose fits than skinny cuts - as per usual British vogue is VERY behind the curve.
> 
> NB All the 20 somethings I see are wearing either very 80s neutral slacks with a belt or those elasticated jersey flared yoga pants which require you to be stick thin and eccentric.
> 
> The problem, as papertiger calls it, is they are hard to wear with flats and since most young women don’t seem to like heels anymore (and who can blame them) so I don’t think it’ll become ubiquitous the way skinny jeans were 10 years ago.
> 
> Speaking of which, like a lot of apple shapes, m would look better in a skinnier cut of pant.
> 
> @kubik TW is one of the nicknames we have applied to ‘that woman’ or ‘the witch’ aka Harry’s wife but I suppose we might need a trigger warning with some of this pair’s antics


I’m glad to hear that younger people aren’t into heels! Actually, whenever I see Meghan’s stilettos with her skinny pale ankles, I think they make her look so old and dowdy! She has good legs for flats, I don’t know why she insists on stilettos all the damn time, even when they’re clearly inappropriate for the setting. Even with her huge pants, she would look more chic with chunky heels. The contrast of the spiky heels with all that baggy fabric is not flattering.

Editing to add: skinny apples look good in skinny pants, but chubby apples can look like mike wazowski from monster’s inc if they’re not careful!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> More boo’s



Did they not scream racism already or have SS spin something to that effect?  




xincinsin said:


> IIRC Hazmat used lifts when he attended the unveiling of his mommy's statue. There were comments that he was suddenly taller than his brother. Growth hormones?


Or knee lengthening surgery?


----------



## lanasyogamama

She just cannot control those arms!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere a very good comment about the red carpet in Germany. The official British Royal website still lists the Harkles among official royals, so countries just follow whatever protocols they have to deal with them.
> 
> I also read that Charles could be providing some support for their security (one of the bodyguards seemed familiar from other royal events). The people in the UK deserve a clear position from the BRF on the Harkles' mess imo.


rather like the games in the Netherlands, the King appeared but not the Queen, so some deference to the games themselves but not full royal treatment 
I don’t think the German chancellor saw them in Düsseldorf and the carpet etc can be seen as deference to the games and veterans


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Did they not scream racism already or have SS spin something to that effect?
> 
> 
> 
> Or knee lengthening surgery?


Oh dear … coincidence ?? 
The acronym for Sunshine Sachs beings to mind a nasty organization from Germany’s past


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

EverSoElusive said:


> Did they not scream racism already or have SS spin something to that effect?
> 
> 
> 
> Or knee lengthening surgery?



SS???


----------



## Sophisticatted

kubik said:


> Ehhhhhh???? It truly is bland... I assumed it was something juicy and wicked tbh
> Perhaps Triggering Woman might suit as well because my mom and I get hyper-huffy whenever we see a video or article of her



To further clarify, it’s from an article where the author threw some shade by referring to her as The Wife instead of using her name.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> She just cannot control those arms!



OMG....H stepped in front of her


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> OMG....H stepped in front of her



Haha and she looks super antsy about it!


----------



## Annawakes

That tank top and baggy pants looks like something Rosie Huntington Whitely would wear and look killer in it. **No one**can look like her!


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Haha and she looks super antsy about it!


of course...he will be getting a scolding about that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> To further clarify, it’s from an article where the author threw some shade by referring to her as The Wife instead of using her name.


I used to do translation or closed captioning for TV drama. I used The Wife and my supervisor changed it. English was his native language. He said the sarcasm in using The Wife was not understood in Asia.


----------



## Chanbal

kubik said:


> This isn't a piece of gossip but I just discovered this thread and reading some of the posts have been entertainingl. But I wanna ask some questions and I hope you guys will oblige me. What does TW mean? Is it... "trigger warning"? I seriously can't keep up with the names bestowed to MM. I only know of Me-again and Megaliar. What other nicknames does she have?


Welcome to the funniest gossip thread. 
TW- the wife
One of my favorites is Pump Pump; Hazz makes her_ 'heart_ go _pump_-_pump_'.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> of course...he will be getting a scolding about that


He’ll probably enjoy his punishment.


----------



## Chanbal

muddledmint said:


> *3) I’m glad to hear that younger people aren’t into heels!* Actually, whenever I see Meghan’s stilettos with her skinny pale ankles, I think they make her look so old and dowdy! *1) She has good legs *for flats, I don’t know why she insists on stilettos all the damn time, even when they’re clearly inappropriate for the setting. Even with her huge pants, she would look more chic with chunky heels. The contrast of the spiky heels with all that baggy fabric is not flattering.
> Editing to add: *2)* skinny apples look good in skinny pants, but chubby apples can look like mike wazowski from monster’s inc if they’re not careful!


1) If she wears dresses or skirts, I agree that flats are perhaps better than stilettos for her. (Disclosure: I'm not a fashion consultant, I'm barely graduating as a royal commentator )
2) It can be difficult to find the perfect outfit for her body type and convey the image
she wants to portrait, the powerful DIVA, allegedly.
Only a relatively few lucky people have Kate's body type (not including myself in that group). I think TW did OK with the red fire extinguisher outfit. It gave her the presence she needed for the event. Look at me, I'm here!
3) I'm happy that younger people are saying no to heels. I stopped wearing them several years ago, they hurt my feet just by looking at them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Here are some photos from the Rosie Huntington Whitely style thread (from 2021).  I think Zeezy thinks she has the same figure.  Btw, RHW is 5’9”.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

redney said:


> It's all so boring and predictable now. She talks about herself, he talks about his mother and his WIFE. She wears god-awful clothing that doesn't fit properly, he scowls and fidgets with his jacket and tie. *Is there a yawn emoji? *


Here's a GIF that will do the same Enjoy.


----------



## kubik

Chanbal said:


> Welcome to the funniest gossip thread.
> TW- the wife
> One of my favorites is Pump Pump; Hazz makes her_ 'heart_ go _pump_-_pump_'.


LOL it truly is the funniest! Is there an antithesis version where the avid supporters gather, praise, defend, and worship the Duke & Duchess of Delusions?

"Heart goes pump pump" sounds awfully familiar...


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I swear, I've started shrinking!


It is a sad reality of aging.


----------



## MiniMabel

kubik said:


> LOL it truly is the funniest! Is there an antithesis version where the avid supporters gather, praise, defend, and worship the Duke & Duchess of Delusions?
> 
> "Heart goes pump pump" sounds awfully familiar...


There is this one:-

harry-and-meghan-appreciation-thread.1052003


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> She's also riding high because she thinks her podcrashes were good
> 
> Classic case of believing one's own PR, delusion knows no bounds.


The thing is, she has managed to change the narrative.

The other week it was the Bower book and what a miserable cow she is and now all everyone can talk about is her podcast, her clothes, her speeches, her huge smile, her travels...


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> Welcome to the funniest gossip thread.
> TW- the wife
> One of my favorites is Pump Pump; Hazz makes her_ 'heart_ go _pump_-_pump_'.


I never understood that statement. I mean in the normal course of bodily functions her heart would have to keep going pump-pump or she’d be dead.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_But let’s not dwell on this. Let’s get back to the platitudes. The wannabe young leaders gathered in Manchester are the future. And the present. If they just cast off all self-doubt and really truly believe in themselves they can change the world. *They just need to marry a Prince first.*_


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


>



She loves *red

*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seeee, we are all besties.


----------



## charlottawill

kubik said:


> What other nicknames does she have?


How much time do you have? 

Generally, TW stands for The Wife, but we're also fond of the The Witch.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> She just cannot control those arms!




The physical resemblance is striking.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Constipated


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> The thing is, she has managed to change the narrative.
> 
> The other week it was the Bower book and what a miserable cow she is and now all everyone can talk about is her podcast, her clothes, her speeches, her huge smile, her travels...


True, but what is it really accomplishing? The fact is, thanks to all of the above more and more people are now seeing her for the miserable cow that she is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> _But let’s not dwell on this. Let’s get back to the platitudes. The wannabe young leaders gathered in Manchester are the future. And the present. If they just cast off all self-doubt and really truly believe in themselves they can change the world. *They just need to marry a Prince first.*_



Ok, I did this math in my head, so I am off by a bit. Read that there were 54 references to self in 7 min OYW  speech, that is one every 7 seconds or so, I could not do that if I tried ...


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I never understood that statement. I mean in the normal course of bodily functions her heart would have to keep going pump-pump or she’d be dead.


I believe the correct wording would have been "thump thump" :

"(of a person's heart or pulse) beat or pulsate strongly, typically because of fear or excitement."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Besides the fact I have serious doubts anyone said that, ever...you're right, honey. He didn't choose you, he was bagged by a skilled hunter before he knew it.
> 
> View attachment 5605031


Terrible photo of ZedZed with a fake smile and in spite of the light being reflected in her left eye, she has emotionless eyes. This inquiring mind wants to know if she is possessed and if this how she hypnotized Dufus?!


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> How much time do you have?
> 
> Generally, TW stands for The Wife, but we're also fond of the The Witch.


@Maggie Muggins made a valiant effort to keep track of all the nicknames posted on this thread. Perhaps she could re post her last version? There were some really creative ones on her list.


----------



## kubik

MiniMabel said:


> There is this one:-
> 
> harry-and-meghan-appreciation-thread.1052003


YIKES! Imma nope outta that place


----------



## kubik

charlottawill said:


> How much time do you have?
> 
> Generally, TW stands for The Wife, but we're also fond of the The Witch.


The Witch is definitely a good one!

Uh-oh.. is the nickname list as thick as a dictionary?


----------



## bag-mania

How long is this trip supposed to be? Guess they left the kids home with nannies.


----------



## Chloe302225

bag-mania said:


> How long is this trip supposed to be? Guess they left the kids home with nannies.



I think today is the last day. They have the WellChild Awards tonight and then they go home


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure how reliable this one is (staying in Soho house? Stuff forwarded to Tyler Perry?), but it sure is fun to read.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wake me when the hurly-burly’s done


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lanasyogamama

A new nickname for the last!


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I never understood that statement. I mean in the normal course of bodily functions her heart would have to keep going pump-pump or she’d be dead.



Both M and H make me feel uncomfortable, literally a squirm


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> The thing is, she has managed to change the narrative.
> 
> The other week it was the Bower book and what a miserable cow she is and now all everyone can talk about is her podcast, her clothes, her speeches, her huge smile, her travels...



The focus changes, not the narrative. 

Bower wrote she's a fake miserable ×××. No change there. 

The narrative for her is always NE ME ME. She's just drunk on the sound of her own voice

I also think the more miserable H is the more she likes it. How can you smile when your partner looks so unhappy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I also think the more miserable H is the more she likes it. How can you smile when your partner looks so unhappy?



I've thought about this many times. Sick.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> The physical resemblance is striking.


I’d way rather hang out with SpongeBob.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I also think the more miserable H is the more she likes it. How can you smile when your partner looks so unhappy?


Harry’s feelings are irrelevant so long as Meghan gets the attention she craves. She keeps him angry at his family and totally dependent on her. Her control over him must be absolute.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if she will sit on a diving board on the yacht and look sad.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Babydoll Chanel said:


> SS???


Sunshine Sachs - PR firm.




sdkitty said:


> OMG....H stepped in front of her


They will be trashing whatever accommodation they are in because of a nasty fight concerning this incident  




CarryOn2020 said:


>



Constipated  




Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if she will sit on a diving board on the yacht and look sad.


She will. She is trying to replicate Diana's every move. Give it time


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Sunshine Sachs - PR firm.
> 
> 
> 
> They will be trashing whatever accommodation they are in because of a nasty fight concerning this incident
> 
> 
> 
> Constipated
> 
> 
> 
> She will. She is trying to replicate Diana's every move. Give it time


I realize she is his WIFE.  But nevertheless I find it a bit ironic that he is the royal; she is the former suitcase model/z-list actress and she appears to dominate him.  But he did step in front of her.  I guess he forgot the rules and she didn't have time to push in front of him.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure how reliable this one is (staying in Soho house? Stuff forwarded to Tyler Perry?), but it sure is fun to read.



This is entirely plausible. She leaves the kids home and stays at SH hoping to recreate the "magic" of when they first met. Hallmarks of a relationship in trouble imo. And isn't Eugenie and her family living at Frogmore?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I guess he forgot the rules


If I'm not mistaken he's just following the royal protocol he was raised with. She is in fact supposed to walk behind him. 

Whenever I see William step out of a car and Kate comes around from the other side to meet him, I always think "Why didn't he help her out of the car?", and then remember they're just following protocol.


----------



## Lodpah

lanasyogamama said:


> NVM I forgot what I was going to say.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> If I'm not mistaken he's just following the royal protocol he was raised with. She is in fact supposed to walk behind him.
> 
> Whenever I see William step out of a car and Kate comes around from the other side to meet him, I always think "Why didn't he help her out of the car?", and then remember they're just following protocol.


there are royal rules and then there are WIFE's rules   she doesn't care about protocol and I doubt she is going to change that now


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> there are royal rules and then there are WIFE's rules   she doesn't care about protocol and I doubt she is going to change that now


Looking at that pic made me wonder if he said to himself "Enough is enough" and decided to go ahead of her, and that is why she was flailing around.


----------



## charlottawill

"NVM I forgot what I was going to say."

Welcome to my life


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> This is entirely plausible. She leaves the kids home and stays at SH hoping to recreate the "magic" of when they first met. Hallmarks of a relationship in trouble imo. *And isn't Eugenie and her family living at Frogmore?*


No, they moved out over the summer. They now spend part of their time at Nottingham Cottage in Kensington Palace and the rest of their time in Portugal, where her husband has a job.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers Morgan & Maureen Callahan…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Piers Morgan & Maureen Callahan…




The Queen looks so much more happy and relaxed these days than she did there. Gee I wonder why?


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> "NVM I forgot what I was going to say."
> 
> Welcome to my life


Don't worry, I had a training development day and didn't read we had to do a presentation


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225

Sorry, their last day is tomorrow. Wishful thinking on my part.


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> Haha and she looks super antsy about it!


She is literally twitching to get in front of him. She's an unhinged feminist when her handbag strays.


----------



## Jayne1

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if she will sit on a diving board on the yacht and look sad.


Or sit on a bench in front of the Taj Mahal  and look lonely because her husband is giving a speech not far away.


----------



## sdkitty

as a person who was painfully shy as a kid, I resent this.....she says because she was shy and had no one to sit with at lunch she became president of a bunch of groups.  yeah, right.  and mindy goes right along with it.  uugh.

anyone who has experienced being truly shy will know this is beyond ridiculous

clearly she has fixed the teeth and the curly hair that were so torturous









						Meghan Markle Reveals She Was A 'Loner' And 'Really Shy' Growing Up
					

The Duchess of Sussex added that she was an "ugly duckling" in her early years.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> as a person who was painfully shy as a kid, I resent this.....she says because she was shy and had no one to sit with at lunch she became president of a bunch of groups.  yeah, right.  and mindy goes right along with it.  uugh.
> 
> anyone who has experienced being truly shy will know this is beyond ridiculous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reveals She Was A 'Loner' And 'Really Shy' Growing Up
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex added that she was an "ugly duckling" in her early years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



OMG yes. I was painfully shy up until my mid-20s. Still the thought of e.g. giving a speech makes me sweat. While I had tons of friends (probably wasn't as ugly as Raptor?) you bet I was not presiding over anything voluntarily (I'm also to this day a huge introvert who just doesn't want to be around people all the time).


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG yes. I was painfully shy up until my mid-20s. Still the thought of e.g. giving a speech makes me sweat. While I had tons of friends (probably wasn't as ugly as Raptor?) you bet I was not presiding over anything voluntarily (I'm also to this day a huge introvert who just doesn't want to be around people all the time).


I literally was unable to do the required oral report in front of the class at about age 12.  I froze and spoke so softly no one heard me. for me to run for president of anything would have been virtually impossible.  Poor Meghan had naturally curly hair.  now she is wearing hair someone else grew.  all fixed.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I literally was unable to do the required oral report in front of the class at about age 12.  I froze and spoke so softly no one heard me. for me to run for president of anything would have been virtually impossible.


Same here. Anything requiring standing in front of the class was cause for high anxiety. I somehow doubt that's ever been a problem for her.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> as a person who was painfully shy as a kid, I resent this.....she says because she was shy and had no one to sit with at lunch she became president of a bunch of groups.  yeah, right.  and mindy goes right along with it.  uugh.
> 
> anyone who has experienced being truly shy will know this is beyond ridiculous
> 
> clearly she has fixed the teeth and the curly hair that were so torturous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reveals She Was A 'Loner' And 'Really Shy' Growing Up
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex added that she was an "ugly duckling" in her early years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Mindy going along ... I give Mindy a pass

I am guessing ...  but it feels like the theme of the show was overcoming the hardships of being an ugly duckling, Mindy was supposed to chime in about overcoming hair hardships, but Mindy did not go there
Mindy let MM do all the talking and Mindy came off classy, instead of taking part in a whine fest

I am dying to know what the theme of the Margaret Cho show will be ... what does MM have in common with MC? MC is a rather outspoken comic, who pulls no punches


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I did an internship in my early 20s abroad and I very nearly travelled back home the very first day after I was informed I was working at the local business fair for a full week. Which they regretted bitterly because then they had to hire a security guy for a few weeks because every weirdo that city had showed up at our office


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Mindy going along ... I give Mindy a pass
> 
> I am guessing ...  but it feels like the theme of the show was overcoming the hardships of being an ugly duckling, Mindy was supposed to chime in about overcoming hair hardships, but Mindy did not go there
> Mindy let MM do all the talking and Mindy came off classy, instead of taking part in a whine fest
> 
> I am dying to know what the theme of the Margaret Cho show will be ... what does MM have in common with MC? MC is a rather outspoken comic, who pulls no punches


I didn't listen either and will not ever


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I didn't listen either and will not ever


Yer, I’m not clicking her podcrashes, there’s enough comment and captions on YT and other platforms   to know every in, out and me me me without rewarding her.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> The thing is, she has managed to change the narrative.
> 
> The other week it was the Bower book and what a miserable cow she is and now all everyone can talk about is her podcast, her clothes, her speeches, her huge smile, her travels...


The only thing that she changed is that now she actually put out something she worked on.  Of course the world had to have a long wait.


marietouchet said:


> Mindy going along ... I give Mindy a pass
> 
> I am guessing ...  but it feels like the theme of the show was overcoming the hardships of being an ugly duckling, Mindy was supposed to chime in about overcoming hair hardships, but Mindy did not go there
> Mindy let MM do all the talking and Mindy came off classy, instead of taking part in a whine fest
> 
> I am dying to know what the theme of the Margaret Cho show will be ... what does MM have in common with MC? MC is a rather outspoken comic, who pulls no punches


MC is going to talk about how men body shamed her, and made it hard for her to succeed in comedy because of her ethnicity/race, that they didn't think she was attractive and later, sexual orientation.    So Meghan will jump on the race issue, that she was ambitious and she was an ugly ducking.  She has already spoken about 2 out of 3.  If anyone could give Meghan a hard time it would be MC.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Yer, I’m not clicking her podcrashes, there’s enough comment and captions on YT and other platforms   to know every in, out and me me me without rewarding her.


I can't stand listening to her or watching her.  The same arm and hand movements all the time. Fake smile. Fake everything.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I can't stand listening to her or watching her.  The same arm and hand movements all the time. Fake smile. Fake everything.



On the rare occasion I watch a video I mute it because I can't stand to hear her speak.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




OMG that is effing brilliant and probably accurate. Who is she?? Looks like her (but prettier) and sounds like her too. Amazing.


----------



## rose60610

Since Claw is so full of crap why does she even need guests on her podcasts? All she does is talk about herself, her favorite topic! And brags how hard she had it, how's she's overcome everything, THE STRUGGLES!, her "stalking and capturing choosing Harry" and seeing herself as a leader of women and mentor to teens.   She just can't STFU!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



This is so good @QueenofWrapDress. She made Hazz a very happy man.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is so good @QueenofWrapDress. She made Hazz a very happy man.




Counterpoint:


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Mumotons

Meghan claims son Archie could not attend school in Britain
					

William and Kate have been able to undertake the school run routinely since George was two without a single photo of their children published in this country (The Cambridges pictured on Wednesday)




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The boos are really loud here…


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> Meghan claims son Archie could not attend school in Britain
> 
> 
> William and Kate have been able to undertake the school run routinely since George was two without a single photo of their children published in this country (The Cambridges pictured on Wednesday)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That article on the Cut is a true masterpiece. I hope the author is OK…


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Counterpoint:



This one is for you.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The boos here are really loud here…



She will hear it as "Woohoo!"


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> She will hear it as "Woohoo!"


She'll make sure Netflix edits out the boos and replaces them with full crowd cheers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And one more country that's not a fan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This one is for you.



Just look at them running that gauntlet of paparazzi.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kubik said:


> This isn't a piece of gossip but I just discovered this thread and reading some of the posts have been entertainingl. But I wanna ask some questions and I hope you guys will oblige me. What does TW mean? Is it... "trigger warning"? I seriously can't keep up with the names bestowed to MM. I only know of Me-again and Megaliar. What other nicknames does she have?


Hi and welcome to the best gossip thread on the Net. I kept 'The List' of nicknames that members posted on this thread as a lark, but once the entire collection was posted on Page 5500 Post #82,488, I deleted my copy.
If you have a bit of spare time here's the link to the page. Just keep scrolling down the page to reach it.





						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## charlottawill

Well at least their hosts knew how to dress for the occasion. I assume she doesn't get that her outfit is disrespectful.



ETA: I'm sure this will really piss her off.


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> The thing is, she has managed to change the narrative.
> 
> The other week it was the Bower book and what a miserable cow she is and now all everyone can talk about is her podcast, her clothes, her speeches, her huge smile, her travels...


But the book was only released in the UK.  The US pays very little attention to anything that's not IN the US. ( present company excluded   )  The Bower book is now about to be released in the US soon along with Bower doing the press interviews.  That will hopefully change the narrative again


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> I believe the correct wording would have been "thump thump" :
> 
> "(of a person's heart or pulse) beat or pulsate strongly, typically because of fear or excitement."


I think what she really meant he makes her heart go ca-ching, ca-ching $$$$


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> I never understood that statement. I mean in the normal course of bodily functions her heart would have to keep going pump-pump or she’d be dead.


I believe TW used 'pump pump' knowing full well there were vulgar  connotations attached to it in the Urban Dictionary as she has often used words and phraseology that can also be interpreted differently in that dictionary.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I believe TW used 'pump pump' knowing full well there were vulgar  connotations attached to it in the Urban Dictionary as she has often used words and phraseology that can also be interpreted differently in that dictionary.


In a children's book??


----------



## charlottawill

I just heard on NBC News that the Queen canceled a virtual meeting with her advisors today on doctor's orders after her meeting with Liz Truss yesterday. I hope she is resting comfortably


----------



## marietouchet

Accountability …
Some article said that JCMH wants accountability from W, in order to repair their relationship
Accountability for what ? A summary of the bullying enquiry, resolution of the claim of racism in the BRF , MM getting silenced by courtiers, no mental health help from HR …
I thought all of that had been all saucered and blown - none of those claims have stood up


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Well at least their hosts knew how to dress for the occasion. I assume she doesn't get that her outfit is disrespectful.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: I'm sure this will really piss her off.



They finally found a subject that might be within the Harkles' expertise (they have about 16 or 19 of them).


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> In a children's book??


Here!








						Meghan says Harry & Archie 'make my heart go pump-pump' in audio version of book
					

MEGHAN Markle can be heard saying Prince Harry and son Archie “make my heart go pump-pump” in the audio version of her new book. The Bench hit shelves across the UK today, with an accom…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says Harry & Archie 'make my heart go pump-pump' in audio version of book
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle can be heard saying Prince Harry and son Archie “make my heart go pump-pump” in the audio version of her new book. The Bench hit shelves across the UK today, with an accom…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com



Oh I know it's in the book, but I meant would she intentionally put a double entendre in a children's book. Unless she was targeting parents. 

And I had to consult Urban Dictionary.   It's official, I'm old.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## justwatchin

charlottawill said:


> Well at least their hosts knew how to dress for the occasion. I assume she doesn't get that her outfit is disrespectful.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: I'm sure this will really piss her off.



And of course they’re holding hands


----------



## justwatchin

charlottawill said:


> If I'm not mistaken he's just following the royal protocol he was raised with. She is in fact supposed to walk behind him.
> 
> Whenever I see William step out of a car and Kate comes around from the other side to meet him, I always think "Why didn't he help her out of the car?", and then remember they're just following protocol.


I guarantee she wasn’t following any protocol. More than likely she was struggling to move with her voluminous slacks and heels. She needs to just wear some leggings and sneakers so she can move faster than him. We know she needs to be the center of attention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Oh I know it's in the book, but* I meant would she intentionally put a double entendre in a children's book.* Unless she was targeting parents.
> 
> And I had to consult Urban Dictionary.   It's official, I'm old.


I don't know. I recall to have read that they had fun using the Urban Dictionary. Independent of whatever meaning 'pump pump' might have in the UD, it sounds so vulgar.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I don't know. I recall to have read that they had fun using the Urban Dictionary. Independent of whatever meaning 'pump pump' might have in the UD, it sounds so vulgar.


Oh it's for sure vulgar, if you read the variations of it. If you have to resort to vulgarity to get parents to buy your children's book you're doing it wrong.


----------



## Cinderlala

Chanbal said:


>



Poor Germans!  I couldn't bring myself to watch the video because I've already endured more of Woko Ono than anyone would desire but how bored does H look?!  Like he'd rather poke his eye out than have to hear it all again.  

Can you imagine having to live with her?!?!??  I'd literally hide all the time.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Poor Germans!  I couldn't bring myself to watch the video because I've already endured more of Woko Ono than anyone would desire but how bored does H look?!  Like he'd rather poke his eye out than have to hear it all again.
> 
> Can you imagine having to live with her?!?!??  I'd literally hide all the time.



He made his bed...William tried to warn him. And didn't Prince Philip tell him "You step out with actresses, you don't marry them," or was advice to someone else?


----------



## DoggieBags

Cinderlala said:


> Poor Germans!  I couldn't bring myself to watch the video because I've already endured more of Woko Ono than anyone would desire but how bored does H look?!  Like he'd rather poke his eye out than have to hear it all again.
> 
> Can you imagine having to live with her?!?!??  I'd literally hide all the time.


Well H is not exactly a mental giant. Who knows, maybe he still thinks her word salad is impressive.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> ETA: *I'm sure this will really piss her off.*



And someone called her the Duchess of the porta potty


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Well H is not exactly a mental giant. Who knows, maybe he still thinks her word salad is impressive.


Judging from his expressions when she speaks I'd say no.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> From a
> 
> 
> And someone called her the Duchess of the porta potty


The list is endless.


----------



## Cinderlala

Maggie Muggins said:


> From a
> 
> 
> And someone called her the Duchess of the porta potty


Princess Portaloo


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, indeed, boom.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Oh it's for sure vulgar, if you read the variations of it. If you have to resort to vulgarity to get parents to buy your children's book you're doing it wrong.


I became aware of of the UD many posts ago, when we were discussing the Harkles use of it. I believe a favorite of the Harkles was/is 'roast chicken.' I don't remember its meaning anymore, but it was rather vulgar.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> From a
> 
> 
> And someone called her the Duchess of the porta potty



Well, since poo pours from her mouth … Sounds appropriate.


----------



## Chanbal

Cinderlala said:


> Poor Germans!  I couldn't bring myself to watch the video because I've already endured more of Woko Ono than anyone would desire but how bored does H look?!  Like he'd rather poke his eye out than have to hear it all again.
> 
> Can you imagine having to live with her?!?!??  I'd literally hide all the time.


Click on the clip, I don't think you will regret.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kate teaching the world how to get your glow on.  No oily looks here. H&M should take notes.


----------



## Cinderlala

Chanbal said:


> Click on the clip, I don't think you will regret.


You were right   That's how all news should cover her---like the teacher's voice in Peanuts.  

Woko is totally in her bizarro-world element & H isn't even pretending to care anymore.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Oh I know it's in the book, but I meant would she intentionally put a double entendre in a children's book. Unless she was targeting parents.
> 
> And I had to consult Urban Dictionary.   It's official, I'm old.


Who had ever heard that expression before ZedZed's book?   She can be so deceiving and conniving!


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> Kate teaching the world how to get your glow on.  No oily looks here. H&M should take notes.



She's so fabulous!


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Well at least their hosts knew how to dress for the occasion. I assume she doesn't get that her outfit is disrespectful.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: I'm sure this will really piss her off.



Notice how she positions herself with her right shoulder behind him. Is this because she knows her shoulders are weirdly wide?  especially when compared to her hips?  It could explain why she prefers the side view photos


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



The suit looks better on Sophie than on the model imo. Do you think TW will appreciate this side-by-side comparison? I hope the photographer is OK.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Kate teaching the world how to get your glow on.  No oily looks here. H&M should take notes.



When you think that she had so many resources available to her in the UK… And she claims to be "_the smart one forever and ever and ever and ever…_"


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how she positions herself with her right shoulder behind him. Is this because she knows her shoulders are weirdly wide?  especially when compared to her hips?  It could explain why she prefers the side view photos
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605932


Are halter tops a fashion hack for people with wide shoulders? Charlene of Monaco, ex Olympic swimmer, has wide shoulders and often wore halter tops in formal gowns


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


>



Same as they are waiting on QE’s call, Prince Charles’s call,  several billionaires, ad nauseam 
Enjoy the wait.


----------



## Chanbal

_“However, it is unlikely that they will be used by all three families at once due to the animosity. If [any of them] do plan on using the gardens, then they will need to be scheduled through private secretaries and security. The Yorks’ diary secretary will have to liaise with the Cambridges’ secretary and coordinate schedules with the Sussex secretary.”

And William can squash the others’ garden walk, it seems.

“There is very much a hierarchy — with William and Kate at the top — and they don’t get along with either of the others,” the palace insider added._









						Windsor staff ‘in hysterics’ to avoid Harry, William or Andrew run-ins
					

Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle have made a brief return to Frogmore Cottage, but royal employees have gone to great lengths to make sure the couple don’t run into Prince William or Princ…




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Are halter tops a fashion hack for people with wide shoulders? Charlene of Monaco, ex Olympic swimmer, has wide shoulders and often wore halter tops in formal gowns


True, Charlene’s shoulders are wide, probably from all of her swimming.  Her hips look to be in proportion to the shoulders imo. Maybe because she had a well defined waist.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The suit looks better on Sophie than on the model imo. Do you think TW will appreciate this side-by-side comparison? I hope the photographer is OK.
> 
> View attachment 5605929
> View attachment 5605933


I think she just takes things out of the box and puts them on 10 minutes prior to leaving.  That has to be the reason why nothing ever fits.  She must believe that she is a perfect size whatever and things will be perfect.  Not.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Same as they are waiting on QE’s call, Prince Charles’s call,  several billionaires, ad nauseam
> *Enjoy the wait.*


It will be a long one!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Very classy and appropriate.  Why can't TW wear something like this?  Granted, it wouldn't give us near as much fun having a laugh at her expense for the total lack of taste and class, but honestly   If I was her and had an ounce of self awareness,I would wear nothing but this!  It works beautifully for Kate, but as we all know, it's a competition in her mind, which she is losing badly.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry is a grown man, allegedly…


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5605938
> 
> _“However, it is unlikely that they will be used by all three families at once due to the animosity. If [any of them] do plan on using the gardens, then they will need to be scheduled through private secretaries and security. The Yorks’ diary secretary will have to liaise with the Cambridges’ secretary and coordinate schedules with the Sussex secretary.”
> 
> And William can squash the others’ garden walk, it seems.
> 
> “There is very much a hierarchy — with William and Kate at the top — and they don’t get along with either of the others,” the palace insider added._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windsor staff ‘in hysterics’ to avoid Harry, William or Andrew run-ins
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle have made a brief return to Frogmore Cottage, but royal employees have gone to great lengths to make sure the couple don’t run into Prince William or Princ…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Poor Will and Kate. Can you imagine having these four as neighbors? Ugh.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Are halter tops a fashion hack for people with wide shoulders? Charlene of Monaco, ex Olympic swimmer, has wide shoulders and often wore halter tops in formal gowns


I would think they'd call attention to broad shoulders as ZeeZy demonstrates, but Charlene does look good in halter gowns. I don't think I have particularly broad shoulders and I wore a halter top gown for my daughter's wedding. I tried it on as a whim, and it was flattering, comfortable and covered my sun damaged décolletage. People still tell me how beautiful the dress looked on me. I'll stop now, I'm starting to sound like her


----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


>



If the Invictus games were supposedly founded by Harry then why do I always see her front and center, blabbing away? I am no shrinking violet but I would never steal the limelight and attention that would belong to my husband in the same situation. How did the games ever manage to survive the years before he met his nightmare?


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Very classy and appropriate.  Why can't TW wear something like this?  Granted, it wouldn't give us near as much fun having a laugh at her expense for the total lack of taste and class, but honestly   If I was her and had an ounce of self awareness,I would wear nothing but this!  It works beautifully for Kate, but as we all know, it's a competition in her mind, which she is losing badly.



I believe ZeeZy thinks the royal women are frumpy and she is the fashion forward one.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


>



You kind of have to feel a bit sorry for Scoobie Do     They probably demanded that he post something positive for them, but he has so little to work with that he has to try tearing down the Cambridges.


----------



## Toby93

I wonder when this changed?  Can't she let him have one thing for himself?  It was supposed to be "their" podcast, but now it's just her


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> You kind of have to feel a bit sorry for Scoobie Do     They probably demanded that he post something positive for them, but he has so little to work with that he has to try tearing down the Cambridges.


IMO he is helping promote the notion that the Harkles are blameless for the current frigid atmosphere. It's everyone else's fault and the apologies are overdue. Everyone owes them an apology, including his family, her family, her ex-friends, his ex-buddies, all those people who alleged she bullied them, probably includes us because we don't appreciate and applaud how amazing she is. Typical narc behaviour.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I wonder when this changed?  Can't she let him have one thing for himself?  It was supposed to be "their" podcast, but now it's just her



Well, at least she achieved her ambition of being the Face of something at last


----------



## lanasyogamama

The more I think about it, that outfit is really inappropriate. I think she was trying to recreate her second wedding dress look.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure how reliable this one is (staying in Soho house? Stuff forwarded to Tyler Perry?), but it sure is fun to read.



Hmm, how much credence should we give this? The desire for freebies? Check.
The delusion that couture houses will give her designer freebies? Check.
The sticky fingers? Check.

But would anyone loan her expensive baubles? The most expensive recent item I can recall is the Cartier she wore in the Netherlands. Even if that Juste un Clou was a loaner, it wasn't the top tier model. If she was conning those smaller jewellers, then it would be just sad since she aimed for those with woman empowerment mission statements.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> I wonder when this changed?  *Can't she let him have one thing for himself? * It was supposed to be "their" podcast, but now it's just her




This is sad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I wonder when this changed?  Can't she let him have one thing for himself?  It was supposed to be "their" podcast, but now it's just her



The other day I saw a post that listed the board of directors for IG - most are billionaires [not ones I’m familiar with] and CEOs. It’s things like this that make me think Charles is a very powerful man and,yes, he indeed is supporting Hazzi.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> IMO he is helping promote the notion that the Harkles are blameless for the current frigid atmosphere. It's everyone else's fault and the apologies are overdue. Everyone owes them an apology, including his family, her family, her ex-friends, his ex-buddies, all those people who alleged she bullied them, probably includes us because we don't appreciate and applaud how amazing she is. Typical narc behaviour.


No argument here.  Just making an observation and trying to understand why he would post such a bizarre comment.  Agreed, he is a slimy character and deserves all the ridicule that he receives.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> The more I think about it, that outfit is really inappropriate. I think she was trying to recreate her second wedding dress look.


And copy JLaw and Emily Collins.  Maybe it’s a Hwood wife look?









						Jennifer Lawrence Answers Vogue's 73 Questions
					

The actor Lawrence most admires is Meryl Streep, and she's got a doozy of a Robert DeNiro wedding story—but you'll have to hear that one for yourself.Director: Joe SabiaDirector of Photography: Jess DunlapEditor: Evan AllanSenior Producer, Vogue: Jordin Rocchi1st AC: Paola Oliveros2nd AC: Haitao...




					www.vogue.com


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> No argument here.  Just making an observation and trying to understand why he would post such a bizarre comment.  Agreed, he is a slimy character and deserves all the ridicule that he receives.


I'm wondering why he remains hitched to her crappy boat. The sugars remain spellbound, but I believe he is in it for the fame and $$. He kind of reminds me of that creepy roommate that the poet John Keats had when he was dying. The guy behaved like he was Keat's SO and even bought the grave plot next door so that they could be buried together.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> No argument here.  Just making an observation and trying to understand why he would post such a bizarre comment.  Agreed, he is a slimy character and deserves all the ridicule that he receives.


He needs/wants clicks ($$$). H&M need/want drama and clicks ($$$).


----------



## CarryOn2020

_“Harry is particularly keen on spending more time in the UK,” said the palace insider. “He wants his children to be part of the royal family’s legacy.”









						Windsor staff ‘in hysterics’ to avoid Harry, William or Andrew run-ins
					

Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle have made a brief return to Frogmore Cottage, but royal employees have gone to great lengths to make sure the couple don’t run into Prince William or Princ…




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how she positions herself with her right shoulder behind him. Is this because she knows her shoulders are weirdly wide?  especially when compared to her hips?  It could explain why she prefers the side view photos
> 
> 
> View attachment 5605932


I thought wide shoulders were an asset.  Wish I had them.

Also Meg must like hers because she tends to wear shoulder revealing tops.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _“Harry is particularly keen on spending more time in the UK,” said the palace insider. “He wants his children to be part of the royal family’s legacy.”_



Translation: all of their ventures have bombed and he needs help from the Bank of Dad. So much for financial independence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I thought wide shoulders were an asset.  Wish I had them.
> 
> Also Meg must like hers because she tends to wear shoulder revealing tops.


Imo they are for those women who have a waist.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This concerns me, too.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

One more - laugh for the night


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how she positions herself with her right shoulder behind him. Is this because she knows her shoulders are weirdly wide?  especially when compared to her hips?  It could explain why she prefers the side view photos



Any good ventriloquist knows to keep her right hand behind the puppet’s back so she can make the mouth move when it is time for her dummy to talk.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I wonder when this changed?  *Can't she let him have one thing for himself? * It was supposed to be "their" podcast, but now it's just her



No, no she can not. They are a _team_ except for those times she decides she must have something for herself, like the podcast.


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle could face legal repercussions from the royal family
					

Her claims have been perceived as a threat.




					www.nowtolove.com.au


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> No, no she can not. They are a _team_ except for those times she decides she must have something for herself, like the podcast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> I never understood that statement. I mean in the normal course of bodily functions her heart would have to keep going pump-pump or she’d be dead.


She's pretty heartless, so maybe hers jump starts at the sight of potential money?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> She loves *red
> 
> *



Sofa King annoyed at myself for hitting play and listening to the endless word salad.  Oh God, shoot me!


----------



## kubik

Maggie Muggins said:


> Hi and welcome to the best gossip thread on the Net. I kept 'The List' of nicknames that members posted on this thread as a lark, but once the entire collection was posted on Page 5500 Post #82,488, I deleted my copy.
> If you have a bit of spare time here's the link to the page. Just keep scrolling down the page to reach it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
> 
> 
> Hi! A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc…. :tender:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


OMGGGG LOLOLOL This had me in fits! Haznoballs, Megnochio and Montebozos! All the names are pure gold! You guys are truly creative and hilarious HAHhHAHa Thank you thank you for sharing the Fartkles's special list of names


----------



## xincinsin

oldbag said:


> If the Invictus games were supposedly founded by Harry then why do I always see her front and center, blabbing away? I am no shrinking violet but I would never steal the limelight and attention that would belong to my husband in the same situation. How did the games ever manage to survive the years before he met his nightmare?


Just speculating: documentaries usually need a voiceover. I watch any docu that says David Attenborough voiced it. And who do we know has an Invictus docu in the works and a wife who thinks she is a whiz at voice-overs?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more - laugh for the night



Can't watch it


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Sofa King annoyed at myself for hitting play and listening to the endless word salad.  Oh God, shoot me!


You're going to have to go on a week's juice fast and listen to some seriously HEAVY rock for a month to get that smoochy, breathy, vomit-inducing torment out your head, 

She's like Nightmare on Elm St in porno-heels and a WAG-wig

  Turn it up and don't eat any solids, repeat


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Just speculating: documentaries usually need a voiceover. I watch any docu that says David Attenborough voiced it. And *who do we know has an Invictus docu in the works and a wife who thinks she is a whiz at voice-overs?*



*Please Gd NO!


 *



SCREAM along Harry

Lyrics

Finished with my woman 'cause
She couldn't help me with my mind
People think I'm insane because
I am frowning all the time
All day long I think of things
But nothing seems to satisfy
Think I'll lose my mind
If I don't find something to pacify
Can you help me
Occupy my brain?
Oh yeah
I need someone to show me
The things in life that I can't find
I can't see the things that make
True happiness, I must be blind
Make a joke and I will sigh
And you will laugh and I will cry
Happiness I cannot feel
And love to me is so unreal
And so as you hear these words
Telling you now of my state
I tell you to enjoy life
I wish I could but it's too late


----------



## jelliedfeels

muddledmint said:


> I’m glad to hear that younger people aren’t into heels! Actually, whenever I see Meghan’s stilettos with her skinny pale ankles, I think they make her look so old and dowdy! She has good legs for flats, I don’t know why she insists on stilettos all the damn time, even when they’re clearly inappropriate for the setting. Even with her huge pants, she would look more chic with chunky heels. The contrast of the spiky heels with all that baggy fabric is not flattering.
> 
> Editing to add: skinny apples look good in skinny pants, but chubby apples can look like mike wazowski from monster’s inc if they’re not careful!


Yes the decline of heels is a noted trend. We can see it in how CL and other designers have started bringing out more and more trainers and flats. I think they will always have their fans and they are very sexy but I think people are realising they aren’t really that office appropriate if they just make it difficult to move about. 

I agree she’d look a bit cheap in a legging. A straight leg at a pinch or a dress. Honestly she just needs wardrobe of nice simple dresses as she’s short, square and has extremely busy hair. The neutral shift  dress era of the 00s was her friend. Leave separates for the fashionistas.



kubik said:


> The Witch is definitely a good one!
> 
> Uh-oh.. is the nickname list as thick as a dictionary?


It did occur to me that TW could also be terrible wig which would be my top pet peeve of her terrible style. The thickness is so completely wrong it hangs like it’s greasy and tangled. 


sdkitty said:


> as a person who was painfully shy as a kid, I resent this.....she says because she was shy and had no one to sit with at lunch she became president of a bunch of groups.  yeah, right.  and mindy goes right along with it.  uugh.
> 
> anyone who has experienced being truly shy will know this is beyond ridiculous
> 
> clearly she has fixed the teeth and the curly hair that were so torturous
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reveals She Was A 'Loner' And 'Really Shy' Growing Up
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex added that she was an "ugly duckling" in her early years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Yes indeed little black and biracial girls everywhere remember your champion TW says your natural textures are frizzy and ugly and you’ve got to buy a straight weave to finally catch a prince’s eye.    


marietouchet said:


> Mindy going along ... I give Mindy a pass
> 
> I am guessing ...  but it feels like the theme of the show was overcoming the hardships of being an ugly duckling, Mindy was supposed to chime in about overcoming hair hardships, but Mindy did not go there
> Mindy let MM do all the talking and Mindy came off classy, instead of taking part in a whine fest
> 
> I am dying to know what the theme of the Margaret Cho show will be ... what does MM have in common with MC? MC is a rather outspoken comic, who pulls no punches


Going off Cho’s stand up I’d say this may be the sex tips episode  


charlottawill said:


> She will hear it as "Woohoo!"







marietouchet said:


> Are halter tops a fashion hack for people with wide shoulders? Charlene of Monaco, ex Olympic swimmer, has wide shoulders and often wore halter tops in formal gowns


I think the crucial thing is you need to have a pert or flat bust to keep the line streamlined. I have big boobs that hang a little lower than I’d like so I’d avoid them like the plague and I think TW has a similar problem (though they ain’t that big lol)


Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5605938
> 
> _“However, it is unlikely that they will be used by all three families at once due to the animosity. If [any of them] do plan on using the gardens, then they will need to be scheduled through private secretaries and security. The Yorks’ diary secretary will have to liaise with the Cambridges’ secretary and coordinate schedules with the Sussex secretary.”
> 
> And William can squash the others’ garden walk, it seems.
> 
> “There is very much a hierarchy — with William and Kate at the top — and they don’t get along with either of the others,” the palace insider added._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windsor staff ‘in hysterics’ to avoid Harry, William or Andrew run-ins
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle have made a brief return to Frogmore Cottage, but royal employees have gone to great lengths to make sure the couple don’t run into Prince William or Princ…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I’ve got no sympathy for the pillow fluffers of perverts and shysters- QE need pull the plug on the stragglers already - stop wasting our money.


----------



## jelliedfeels

On the podcast-
It goes without saying the word and notion of spinsters and old maids has already been reclaimed and was by Agatha Christie’s time when she created the proud spinster, mastermind  and fave of the thread Miss Marple.



Also, M complaining about the nuns teaching about marriage- (if that even happened) isn’t it perfectly in line with what a Catholic school would be teaching as (correct me if I’m wrong catholics of the thread) they believe the end goal of romantic relationships should be monogamous, lifelong marriage. Though of course this isn’t for everyone as the very presence of nuns suggests.

Not surprised that lesson went over the head of the two-timing, gold-digging professional divorcee though


----------



## Sharont2305

And here's his cousin, the future Earl Spencer. I wonder what the Spencer cousins think of all this?


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> _“Harry is particularly keen on spending more time in the UK,” said the palace insider. “He wants his children to be part of the royal family’s legacy.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windsor staff ‘in hysterics’ to avoid Harry, William or Andrew run-ins
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and wife Meghan Markle have made a brief return to Frogmore Cottage, but royal employees have gone to great lengths to make sure the couple don’t run into Prince William or Princ…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


He might need to actually bring the children for them to be part of the royal family's legacy.  Not sure TW will allow all three of her hostages victims meal tickets "loved ones" in the UK at once.  They might escape!


----------



## Lodpah

I have to say something. The petulant one is really trying everything she can to rile up the hand that made her famous or infamous. I think the BRF really needs to do something and strip them of titles before she continues to lie. How can someone have so much negative things to say when she wasn’t there long.

The BRF is just letting her and her douchbag ride them. Well one thing for sure the old moneyed folks and those heavy hitters in Hollywood can see how toxic she is. WTF is their problem? Why is the BRF allowing this awful thing to continue? Forget Harry. He’s too far in her cornhole to see straight.
He’s also really stupid and dumb. Does he not care about his family? I guess not.

She really does possess the seven deadly sins (and him too):

*pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth*

Maybe it is time for HMTQ to hand the reins to Charles or MI5 and MI6 to release whatever damning portfolio they have on her. At this point she’s just an empty shell spouting off forgiveness, compassion, etc. which I believe she’s making a mockery out of people saying these things and the sad part are the pet who believe her.

She’s really sick like in evil  sick and demonic in her quest to destroy her leashed pet’s family. She’s got serious hate in her.

And those people she gets on her podcast? She picked them out by category. Poor Mindy Kaling or not. She chose her for her topic on ugly women. Yeah she’s manipulative like that.


----------



## Lodpah

Anyone wanna bet she sends Kate nasty emails? But Kate is too classy and follows the don't explain, don't complain thing. I totally see her doing that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Anyone wanna bet she sends Kate nasty emails? But Kate is too classy and follows the don't explain, don't complain thing. I totally see her doing that.



Naw, she prefers to plant cruel rumours in the press even after the first one was tracked back to her.


----------



## zinacef

papertiger said:


> *Please Gd NO!
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> SCREAM along Harry
> 
> Lyrics
> 
> Finished with my woman 'cause
> She couldn't help me with my mind
> People think I'm insane because
> I am frowning all the time
> All day long I think of things
> But nothing seems to satisfy
> Think I'll lose my mind
> If I don't find something to pacify
> Can you help me
> Occupy my brain?
> Oh yeah
> I need someone to show me
> The things in life that I can't find
> I can't see the things that make
> True happiness, I must be blind
> Make a joke and I will sigh
> And you will laugh and I will cry
> Happiness I cannot feel
> And love to me is so unreal
> And so as you hear these words
> Telling you now of my state
> I tell you to enjoy life
> I wish I could but it's too late



thanks for posting this ! Actually a big fan of Ozzie —- haven’t seen this video and his daughter looks like him - Kelly!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

zinacef said:


> thanks for posting this ! Actually a big fan of Ozzie —- haven’t seen this video and his daughter looks like him - Kelly!



Me too, wonderful voice


----------



## Mumotons

The Queen is being 'kept under medical supervision at Balmoral'
					

Her Majesty's immediate family members have all been informed about the downturn, her spokesman said, leading to her two heirs - Charles and William - going to her bedside this morning.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just read some breaking news The Queen's doctors are worried and Charles, Camilla and William are on their way to Balmoral but "The Queen is feeling fine". Yeah right, three family members are rushing to Scotland because the tea up there is better or what?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Comfortable". You can make a dying person comfortable as well, so why do they think this would be reassuring.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## calicocat

If Ginge and Cringe dare to say anything me-me-me-woe-is-me after this statement about TQ's health, think it's high time to strip them off their BRF-related privileges. Enough is enough.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh please. If that stupid cow has any decency (I know, I know) she'll let Harry go and leave that ailing woman alone.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm very sad for QE, I hope she recovers.
TW should be barred from seeing QE. She never visited her own sick father…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am slightly panicking.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh please. If that stupid cow *has any decency* (I know, I know) she'll let Harry go and leave that ailing woman alone.


You know that she doesn't. However, I hope Charles, Will, or someone else will prevent her from seeing QE. Andy do something decent this time for a change.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am slightly panicking.



So am I, and since all TQ's children are going up to Balmoral  also William and Kate, and it appears also the Dumbartons I just hope they keep TW away from HM.


----------



## DrDior

There is going to be one helluva an ugly scene up there.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles' news outlets seem to have been ready…



@QueenofWrapDress (their propaganda started…)


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> So am I, and since all TQ's children are going up to Balmoral  also William and Kate, and it appears also the Dumbartons I just hope they keep TW away from HM.


I don't think Catherine is going, children's first day of school. I don't think Sophie has either. 
Me again is going to love this, only in law there apart from Camilla. It'll be "she dearly held my hand" ****. 
Keep her AWAY!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe y'all have been right and Harry deserves this demon spawn who makes his life miserable. I just can't.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Cosmopolitan said:


>



he couldn't make it to see his grandfather before his death but now he's going and bring the WIFE....will likely create stress for everyone


----------



## justwatchin

duna said:


> So am I, and since all TQ's children are going up to Balmoral  also William and Kate, and it appears also the Dumbartons I just hope they keep TW away from HM.


Agree and I would hope that Harry grows a pair and keeps her away as well.  l can see her using this as more content for Netflix.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m so angry she’s going while Kate stays home.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh, this is awful.  









						The Queen is being 'kept under medical supervision at Balmoral'
					

Her Majesty's immediate family members have all been informed about the downturn, her spokesman said, leading to her two heirs - Charles and William - going to her bedside this morning.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> he couldn't make it to see his grandfather before his death but now he's going and bring the WIFE....will likely create stress for everyone



If they try to bring a Netflix crew I hope someone kicks them out. The losers including Netflix, not just Netflix.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If they try to bring a Netflix crew I hope someone kicks them out. The losers including Netflix, not just Netflix.


absolutely.....they couldn't be that stupid


----------



## CarryOn2020

Princess Anne is there now. 









						All four of The Queen’s children arrive at Balmoral to be by Her Majesty’s side
					

All four of The Queen’s children have travelled to Balmoral Castle to be by The Queen’s side. The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall were confirmed to have arrived at Balmoral …




					royalcentral.co.uk
				



_All four of The Queen’s children have travelled to Balmoral Castle to be by The Queen’s side.

The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall were confirmed to have arrived at Balmoral by Clarence House following the news that Her Majesty had been placed under medical supervision.

Kensington Palace similarly confirmed that Prince William had made the journey to be with his grandmother.

Princess Anne was already in Scotland undertaking engagements, with Prince Andrew and Prince Edward making the trip from England.

In what is a hugely poignant and sombre moment, there is a sense of inevitability surrounding the events at Balmoral Castle, with most of Her Majesty’s immediate family present at her Scottish home.
_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> he couldn't make it to see his grandfather before his death but now he's going and bring the WIFE....will likely create stress for everyone



I cannot believe this thing shows her face not only in the UK but with the family she's been trashing for years. Her brain is not wired correctly. And I truly wish someone would forget their utter politeness and tell her to f*ck off.


----------



## TimeToShop

I’m an American and this news has me in tears. I can’t imagine how you subjects of the crown are dealing.

Being kept comfortable sounds like they may have started giving HMTQ morphine or similar. That is what was done when my mother passed.

As much as I can’t stand Harry I do hope he is able to say goodbye, as long as he’s kind. Yes he’s been terrible to her the past couple of years but she is his granny.

Surely there is no way that goldigger will get close to her. Hopefully she’ll be kept in a room far from the queen with minders so she doesn’t steal anything.

With the whole family together I could see tempers flaring but I hope not. Maybe this will be a wake up call for Harry.

That said, I’d like to be a fly on the wall when they see TW - especially Camilla.

Edited to add I’d like to see TW‘s face when Anne walks into the room.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I remember their last visit.  Harry was allowed to see The Queen but had to see his father first.  TW was served tea in a room with 4 guards watching her.  I imagine they would do something similar in this case.

ETA: considering William’s stance on Harry, Harry might get TW treatment, too.  He might be let in the building, but not let near anyone else.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TimeToShop said:


> I’m an American and this news has me in tears. I can’t imagine how you subjects of the crown are dealing.
> 
> Being kept comfortable sounds like they may have started giving HMTQ morphine or similar. That is what was done when my mother passed.
> 
> As much as I can’t stand Harry I do hope he is able to say goodbye, as long as he’s kind. Yes he’s been terrible to her the past couple of years but she is his granny.
> 
> Surely there is no way that goldigger will get close to her. Hopefully she’ll be kept in a room far from the queen with minders so she doesn’t steal anything.
> 
> With the whole family together I could see tempers flaring but I hope not. Maybe this will be a wake up call for Harry.
> 
> That said, I’d like to be a fly on the wall when they see TW - especially Camilla.
> 
> Edited to add I’d like to see TW‘s face when Anne walks into the room.


I feel reassured that Anne is there. She knows what to do.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I cannot believe this thing shows her face not only in the UK but with the family she's been trashing for years. Her brain is not wired correctly. And I truly wish someone would forget their utter politeness and tell her to f*ck off.


She is probably salivating at the thought of being married to (almost) Number 5 and absolutely gleeful at her good luck in being in the UK at what she would consider a fortuitous time of worldwide press coverage.

The rest of us are thinking that H & MM and Andrew have hastened her ill health and don't deserve a place at her bedside.


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> I’m an American and this news has me in tears. I can’t imagine how you subjects of the crown are dealing.
> 
> Being kept comfortable sounds like they may have started giving HMTQ morphine or similar. That is what was done when my mother passed.
> 
> As much as I can’t stand Harry I do hope he is able to say goodbye, as long as he’s kind. Yes he’s been terrible to her the past couple of years but she is his granny.
> 
> Surely there is no way that goldigger will get close to her. Hopefully she’ll be kept in a room far from the queen with minders so she doesn’t steal anything.
> 
> With the whole family together I could see tempers flaring but I hope not. Maybe this will be a wake up call for Harry.
> 
> That said, I’d like to be a fly on the wall when they see TW - especially Camilla.
> 
> Edited to add I’d like to see TW‘s face when Anne walks into the room.


I would expect they will be polite but cool toward her....they're not going to make a scene. and hopefully she won't be allowed into the room with the queen


----------



## LizzieBennett

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think Catherine is going, children's first day of school. I don't think Sophie has either.
> Me again is going to love this, only in law there apart from Camilla. It'll be "she dearly held my hand" ****.
> Keep her AWAY!


 I hope Anne rips into her!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think Catherine is going, children's first day of school. I don't think Sophie has either.
> Me again is going to love this, only in law there apart from Camilla. It'll be "she dearly held my hand" ****.
> Keep her AWAY!


Kate has her parents and people to help with the kids. I hope she is not going to be used as an example to justify preventing TW to see QE. Kate deserves to say goodbye to QE imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


>



He needn't bother!!!!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am slightly panicking.




Not good


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I would expect they will be polite but cool toward her....they're not going to make a scene. and hopefully she won't be allowed into the room with the queen


TW shouldn't be allowed in the house. The Firm should install her free of charge in the most luxurious hotel in the area while Hazz visits his grandmother (if QE wants to see him).


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> absolutely.....they couldn't be that stupid



erm?


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Major will be there, right?  
Undoubtedly the Scottish Guards will handle this.


----------



## nautilia

They better not make her last days about them. Imagine the outrage if they so much as breathe wrong right now. This is about The Queen, not them. It's about the family that have served her and been loyal, but loyal isn't a word in H&M's vocabulary. I pray for Her and the rest of the family. This is going to be hard, so, so hard on everyone.


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> I’m an American and this news has me in tears. I can’t imagine how you subjects of the crown are dealing.
> 
> Being kept comfortable sounds like they may have started giving HMTQ morphine or similar. That is what was done when my mother passed.
> 
> As much as I can’t stand Harry I do hope he is able to say goodbye, as long as he’s kind. Yes he’s been terrible to her the past couple of years but she is his granny.
> 
> Surely there is no way that goldigger will get close to her. Hopefully she’ll be kept in a room far from the queen with minders so she doesn’t steal anything.
> 
> With the whole family together I could see tempers flaring but I hope not. Maybe this will be a wake up call for Harry.
> 
> That said, I’d like to be a fly on the wall when they see TW - especially Camilla.
> 
> Edited to add I’d like to see TW‘s face when Anne walks into the room.



He is not kind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BBC.com live reporting  


			https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-62834633


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Handbag1234

I’m really cross that TW and Hazz are in the country. So can rush up to see QEll. That will finish her off. Netflix execs much be thrilled. Looks like Hazz may deliver after all. What a s*it show.


----------



## Chanbal

I read that William and Catherine have arrived to Balmoral.


----------



## Handbag1234

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I cannot believe this thing shows her face not only in the UK but with the family she's been trashing for years. Her brain is not wired correctly. And I truly wish someone would forget their utter politeness and tell her to f*ck off.


Totally agree. She can leave her title behind too.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I cannot believe this thing shows her face not only in the UK but with the family she's been trashing for years. Her brain is not wired correctly. And I truly wish someone would forget their utter politeness and tell her to f*ck off.


I wonder if there's a chance the two grifters won't make it in time


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I read that William and Catherine have arrived to Balmoral.



The guards are outside Balmoral.  Imo The Cambridge children should be there, too.  Everyone needs to be in a safe, secure and caring place.


----------



## carmen56

DrDior said:


> There is going to be one helluva an ugly scene up there.



Hopefully not in front of Her Maj.  Harry going up I can understand, but how Raptor has the brass neck to show her face, I don’t know.  Probably want to find out what they get in the will.  Nothing hopefully!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The guards are outside Balmoral.  Imo The Cambridge children should be there, too.  Everyone needs to be in a safe, secure and caring place.


those kids are pretty young....maybe better off staying home


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Here we go again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't even know what to do with myself. I should probably log off and not refresh all kinds of news sites every few minutes but then I feel I need to stay in the loop.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Kate has her parents and people to help with the kids. I hope she is not going to be used as an example to justify preventing TW to see QE. Kate deserves to say goodbye to QE imo.


I agree,she absolutely does. I read she wasn't going because of the children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> those kids are pretty young....maybe better off staying home


Safety and security are a real concern imo.  



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even know what to do with myself. I should probably log off and not refresh all kinds of news sites every few minutes but then I feel I need to stay in the loop.


Me too.  This feels awful.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even know what to do with myself. I should probably log off and not refresh all kinds of news sites every few minutes but then I feel I need to stay in the loop.



Same. I’m waffling between doom scrolling and trying to distract myself with chores around the house. 

TW does not deserve to be there. That horrible wench.


----------



## calicocat

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here we go again.
> 
> View attachment 5606222


FFS Harkles!! You're stooping to the lowest of low if you even thought of benefiting from/monetizing this! 

But part of me is actually hoping for them to do it since it would legitimise the reason for permanently banning/stripping them of their titles/privileges, and for everyone to cancel them for life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

calicocat said:


> FFS Harkles!! You're stooping to the lowest of low if you even thought of benefiting from/monetizing this!
> 
> But part of me is actually hoping for them to do it since it would legitimise the reason for permanently banning/stripping them of their titles/privileges, and for everyone to cancel them for life.


My guess is this W article was written earlier. The publication couldn’t stop the press.  MM should regret mouthing off, Hazzi too.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> TW shouldn't be allowed in the house. The Firm should install her free of charge in the most luxurious hotel in the area while Hazz visits his grandmother (if QE wants to see him).


No hotel necessary. A place outside the gates in  a plastic poncho.  This is a time for family.


----------



## sdkitty

Lilliesdaughter said:


> No hotel necessary. A place outside the gates in  a plastic poncho.  This is a time for family.


really...she and her stupid husband have tried to ruin that family....they (esp her) have no business there now


----------



## Sharont2305

There is a plane arriving in Aberdeen Airport in about 10 mins reportedly carrying 7 members of the Royal family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> There is a plane arriving in Aberdeen Airport in about 10 mins reportedly carrying 7 members of the Royal family.



I'm going to cry.


----------



## tannim44

The royal family is showing how class and grace are done in this moment.  Let the Harkles show up, their incessant bashing and badmouthing of the family will only make the Harkles look even worse.


----------



## andrashik

jelliedfeels said:


> On the podcast-
> It goes without saying the word and notion of spinsters and old maids has already been reclaimed and was by Agatha Christie’s time when she created the proud spinster, mastermind  and fave of the thread Miss Marple.
> View attachment 5606096
> 
> 
> Also, M complaining about the nuns teaching about marriage- (if that even happened) isn’t it perfectly in line with what a Catholic school would be teaching as (correct me if I’m wrong catholics of the thread) they believe the end goal of romantic relationships should be monogamous, lifelong marriage. Though of course this isn’t for everyone as the very presence of nuns suggests.
> 
> Not surprised that lesson went over the head of the two-timing, gold-digging professional divorcee though


I am catholic, but didn't go to a catholic school. I have received guidance for the communion and I don't remember about a strict teaching about marriage. Maybe some counseling about what you said: monogamous lifelong marriage.
In my city, a catholic can remarry in the church so they aren't as strict as they once were. Of course it depends.


----------



## xincinsin

nautilia said:


> They better not make her last days about them. Imagine the outrage if they so much as breathe wrong right now. This is about The Queen, not them. It's about the family that have served her and been loyal, but loyal isn't a word in H&M's vocabulary. I pray for Her and the rest of the family. This is going to be hard, so, so hard on everyone.


Sorry to say that I'm certain Methane will make it all about her.


carmen56 said:


> Hopefully not in front of Her Maj.  Harry going up I can understand, but how Raptor has the brass neck to show her face, I don’t know.  Probably want to find out what they get in the will.  Nothing hopefully!


If she behaves badly (who am I kidding? She never behaves well.), I do hope she gets sealed into a room till the funeral is over. And if she tries to barge in, well, I'm sure someone could accidentally slug her. She is due a nose job anyway.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> There is a plane arriving in Aberdeen Airport in about 10 mins reportedly carrying 7 members of the Royal family.


I didn't see this coming.  I did think when Philip died she might go soon after but recently with her slowing down but also meeting the new PM, I thought she'd be ok for a while longer.


----------



## Handbag1234

xincinsin said:


> Sorry to say that I'm certain Methane will make it all about her.
> 
> If she behaves badly (who am I kidding? She never behaves well.), I do hope she gets sealed into a room till the funeral is over. And if she tries to barge in, well, I'm sure someone could accidentally slug her. She is due a nose job anyway.


She is probably on the phone to Dior now planning her funeral outfit. Zero compassion and it’s all about her


----------



## Sharont2305

Catherine has been seen doing the school run.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm going to cry.


To my British friends here and those of you who respect and admire and love  the Queen, my heart is filled with sadness at this time. Elizabeth I has been exemplary and I believe the world is shedding tears and vicariously embracing her subjects. We shall not see her like again.  She will remain a Queen for the ages.


----------



## Chanbal

BBC announced that Hazz&TW landed @ Balmoral.

It looks like they arrived ahead of the Duke of Cambridge.

Edit: BBC just corrected previous info, and it's William on the plane that just landed @Balmoral, not the **** of Montecito.
Sophie and Edward have also arrived- same flight as Will.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> BBC announced that Hazz&TW landed @ Balmoral.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> BBC announced that Hazz&TW landed @ Balmoral.
> 
> It looks like they arrived ahead of the Duke of Cambridge.


he has a hulluva nerve bringing her there


----------



## Kaka_bobo

I am sick to the stomach right now, JCMH and his wife should be in the London towers, and no where close to Balmoral.

I hope if the Queen is leaving us, the Nasty duo gets stripped of everything right there and then.

So fuming and sad at the same time.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> he has a hulluva nerve bringing her there



Really, I don't think it could have been avoided.  If Harry was told to come alone, MM would say she was frozen out and not treated well, etc.  This way, they can stick her in a room and put Zara or Eugenie with her and serve tea.


----------



## Sharont2305

It's William, Andrew, Edward and Sophie


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Anyone wanna bet she sends Kate nasty emails? But Kate is too classy and follows the don't explain, don't complain thing. I totally see her doing that.


Kate would designate them as spam.


----------



## Sharont2305

BBC doesn't know if Harry has arrived.


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Comfortable". You can make a dying person comfortable as well, so why do they think this would be reassuring.





Do you think they mean it to be reassuring or to start preparing people? That is how I read it.


----------



## TimeToShop

Am watching the coverage of the plane that’s just landed at Aberdeen. It’s William, Andy, Edward and Sophie, and someone they didn’t know. No H&M.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> TW shouldn't be allowed in the house. The Firm should install her free of charge in the most luxurious hotel in the area while Hazz visits his grandmother (if QE wants to see him).


It would only give her more to complain about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


>





sdkitty said:


> he has a hulluva nerve bringing her there





Sharont2305 said:


> BBC doesn't know if Harry has arrived.


BBC corrected their news, it was Will, Edward and Sophie that landed @Balmoral. They are now on their way to the Castle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It would only give her more to complain about.



Maybe now is not the time to appease the terrorist, though.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> It would only give her more to complain about.


Who cares! At least TW would be complaining about a fact and not a falsehood, which is positive imo.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m so angry she’s going while Kate stays home.


I doubt TW will be allowed to see the Queen. Kate knows she has earned the love and respect of the Queen over the years. TW will never have that, or the Lilibet pic.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

sdkitty said:


> he has a hulluva nerve bringing her there



yeah, how dare he bring his wife and the mother of his children to say bye to his grandmother? The rat


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Chanbal said:


> BBC corrected their news, it was Will, Edward and Sophie that landed @Balmoral. They are now on their way to the Castle.


Thank you for the updates.   Having been to Scotland in 2019, I know that the nearest airport to Balmoral is Aberdeen,  and it is over an hours drive to Balmoral itself.   The highway is narrow and winds, so it will be still some time before they reach her side.  Unless they go by helicopter,  of course.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I doubt TW will be allowed to see the Queen. Kate knows she has earned the love and respect of the Queen over the years. TW will never have that, or the Lilibet pic.



Which is kind  of sad for the child, all thanks to her idiotic parents.


----------



## charlottawill

LizzieBennett said:


> I hope Anne rips into her!


Too much class for that, but I wouldn't rule it out in the future.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Babydoll Chanel said:


> yeah, how dare he bring his wife and the mother of his children to say bye to his grandmother? The rat



I'm usually very patient with the sugars that lose their way and end up here, but: not today, satan.


----------



## TimeToShop

Am in the US. BBC World News has live coverage if you care to watch. I need to get up and get going but just can’ turn it off.


----------



## gelbergirl




----------



## Babydoll Chanel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm usually very patient with the sugars that lose their way and end up here, but: not today, satan.



what is a 'sugar'?


----------



## wisconsin

Babydoll Chanel said:


> yeah, how dare he bring his wife and the mother of his children to say bye to his grandmother? The rat


Yes and such a sweet, loving soul his wife is.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh please. If that stupid cow has any decency (I know, I know) she'll let Harry go and leave that ailing woman alone.


She doesn’t. This is Netflix gold. Can you imagine how many years she would milk a deathbed visit?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Babydoll Chanel said:


> what is a 'sugar'?



A rabid Meghan fan who for some reason cannot understand why her behaviour doesn't exactly endear her us. If you need explaining why we don't think she needs to say goodbye to a woman she has tormented and badmouthed for the past few years - even when her husband was dying. Harry's grandfather BTW, but he couldn't go see him because he was on Oprah trashing his family - I don't know what to say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Everyone @BBC is wearing black.


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A rabid Meghan fan who for some reason cannot understand why her behaviour doesn't exactly endear her us. If you need explaining why we don't think she needs to say goodbye to a woman she has tormented and badmouthed for the past few years I don't know what to say.



I... am not a fan? Nor a hater.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> absolutely.....they couldn't be that stupid


Yes they could.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> She doesn’t. This is Netflix gold. Can you imagine how many years she would milk a deathbed visit?



Which is why I don't think MM will be allowed anywhere near the Queen.  A drawing room 3 floors away and on the opposite side of the Queen's bedroom perhaps, with a pot of tea.


----------



## LizzieBennett

Sharont2305 said:


> It's William, Andrew, Edward and Sophie


I hoped Lady Sarah Chatto would be able to go.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Which is why I don't think MM will be allowed anywhere near the Queen.  A drawing room 3 floors away and on the opposite side of the Queen's bedroom perhaps, with a pot of tea.


I can see Harry making a big stink if she is not allowed in. I hope Major Jonny and his associates are nearby.


----------



## gracekelly

Hypocrites shouldn’t be allowed near her. William will be there shortly and will handle it.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry making a big stink if she is not allowed in. I hope Major Jonny and his associates are nearby.


Let him   crocodile tears from those two.


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


> BBC announced that Hazz&TW landed @ Balmoral.
> 
> It looks like they arrived ahead of the Duke of Cambridge.
> 
> Edit: BBC just corrected previous info, and it's William on the plane that just landed @Balmoral, not the **** of Montecito.
> Sophie and Edward have also arrived- same flight as Will.


Yes Wills, Edward, Sophie and Andrew arrived together at Aberdeen Airport and got into cars for Balmoral. No helicopters as the weather is bad. Balmoral is about 40/50 miles from Aberdeen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry making a big stink if she is not allowed in. I hope Major Jonny and his associates are nearby.



I can see it going both ways. Maybe that's the point where he'll tell her to shut up and take several seats...he seemed impatient at times with her in Germany. Who knows.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> BBC corrected their news, it was Will, Edward and Sophie that landed @Balmoral. They are now on their way to the Castle.


I know.


----------



## Chanbal

@Sharont2305 your info was correct. This might be a good sign, hopefully!


----------



## TimeToShop




----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry making a big stink if she is not allowed in. I hope Major Jonny and his associates are nearby.



I think it will depend on what the Queen's wishes are, if she is conscious and able to communicate.  If she is unconscious, she probably prepared for that too, and there is a list of who would be allowed to see her and sit by her bedside and they'll stick with that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


>




You are not helping, Nikki.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> It's William, Andrew, Edward and Sophie


Oops, I just posted the same thing! I've been glued to the TV for the last 2 hours


----------



## Sharont2305

TimeToShop said:


>



Now, that has broken me.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even know what to do with myself. I should probably log off and not refresh all kinds of news sites every few minutes but then I feel I need to stay in the loop.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can see it going both ways. Maybe that's the point where he'll tell her to shut up and take several seats...he seemed impatient at times with her in Germany. Who knows.


He doesn’t strike me as someone who handles stress well. He’ll have his worried, protective family on one side and his wife nudging him on the other. It could get explosive. Hope they all keep it together for her sake.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm going to cry.


I just keep crying.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He doesn’t strike me as someone who handles stress well. He’ll have his worried, protective family on one side and his wife nudging him on the other. It could get explosive. Hope they all keep it together for her sake.


She may be shopping now. Based on what we’ve seen of her clothes so far, she needs appropriate clothing.  Surely she knows not to show up in tank tops.


----------



## duna

I think it's crazy that TW will be there and not Kate.... I really hope she joins them at Balmoral, she has much more right to be there than The Witch!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> She may be shopping now. Based on what we’ve seen of her clothes so far, she needs appropriate clothing.  Surely she knows not to show up in tank tops.


Well…
We don’t know what she has in her batch of designer freebies. She’s bound to have something at least somewhat appropriate.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Now, that has broken me.


Me too!

I'm afraid this is why Catherine is at Windsor. They didn't want to treat TW differently…


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Hopefully not in front of Her Maj.  Harry going up I can understand, but how Raptor has the brass neck to show her face, I don’t know.  Probably want to find out what they get in the will.  Nothing hopefully!



Hopefully, less than nothing


----------



## Cosmopolitan

No Meghan after all


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Me too!
> 
> I'm afraid this is why Catherine is at Windsor.



BBC have just confirmed this too. Thank God!


----------



## kemilia

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m so angry she’s going while Kate stays home.


Kate's not desperate for Net**x money.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> @Sharont2305 your info was correct. This might be a good sign, hopefully!



The children are old enough to understand that she is ill  and could die. I was most impressed with how Louis had a relationship with her even at this young age. He will have a hard time. Sad that when starting a new school and meeting new friends they should have to deal with this as well.  I think it’s possible that Catherine will fly up later with the children.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Now, that has broken me.


Big hugs Sharon.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Me too!
> 
> I'm afraid this is why Catherine is at Windsor. They didn't want to treat TW differently…




Why though? Raptor is the wife of the former spare. Kate is the future queen and soon to be Princess of Wales. In an institution like the BRF you are bound to treat some family members differently than others. Also, IIRC Kate didn't go on Oprah trashing the family while Philip was dying or had a podcast that's just a vehicle to bash the family some more.

But wise choice to leave Raptor behind.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> BBC have just confirmed this too. Thank God!


Yes. Even he should be kept as far as possible. Like in the doorway


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The children are old enough to understand that she is ill  and could die. I was most impressed with how Louis had a relationship with her even at this young age. He will have a hard time. Sad that when starting a new school and meeting new friends they should have to deal with this as well.  I think it’s possible that Catherine will fly up later with the children.


I agree with you but I think Catherine will go up alone, and not disrupt the childrens routine. They only started at the new school today.


----------



## Sina08

BBC just said that Harry is traveling alone, MM not going to Balmoral.

ETA: didn’t see the posts that already mentioned this info.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> soon to be Princess of Wales.


Goodness, that's just hit me too!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> Me too!
> 
> I'm afraid this is why Catherine is at Windsor. They didn't want to treat TW differently…



In my opinion, this is the time for the royal family to be brave and say yes Kate is different than Megan. Kate has years of dedicated service and loyalty under her belt and Meghan has years of false accusations.


----------



## Cinderlala

This is so awful for the Royal Family.   I love the Queen.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Now, that has broken me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This may be premature. Apologies, if so. 
It seems that if the worst has happened, they will come back to Windsor. So it may be wise for the wives and grandkids to stay put. 









						Where will the Queen be buried when she dies? Details of Her Majesty's final resting place
					

It's not a day we royal fans want to think about. But we share the all important details on where the Queen will be buried when the sad occasion comes.




					www.goodto.com


----------



## K.D.

As this is anonymous, I just heard from someone close to me she has already passed away and operation London Bridge has started. I am shocked.


----------



## TimeToShop

Sharont2305 said:


> Now, that has broken me.


I’m sorry. I just thought it was a lovely sentiment


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> In my opinion, this is the time for the royal family to be brave and say yes Kate is different than Megan. Kate has years of dedicated service and loyalty under her belt and Meghan has years of false accusations.


I think at this point some family members could be openly hostile to either of them or both. This is the time when tempers flare and things are said.


----------



## gracekelly

K.D. said:


> As this is anonymous, I just heard from someone close to me she has already passed away and operation London Bridge has started. I am shocked.


That occurred to me as well.


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> I’m sorry. I just thought it was a lovely sentiment


We all think it. We just don’t want to say it or face it.


----------



## TimeToShop

K.D. said:


> As this is anonymous, I just heard from someone close to me she has already passed away and operation London Bridge has started. I am shocked.


If that is true, will there be an announcement at 6:00 pm London time? I think I read somewhere that that’s how it will be announced.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Laila619

Babydoll Chanel said:


> yeah, how dare he bring his wife and the mother of his children to say bye to his grandmother? The rat


The wife has sh*t all over his grandmother and his family, brought strife to them, and most certainly does NOT deserve to be there. Harry should be smart enough to intuit that her presence would not be welcome by anyone there.


----------



## Sharont2305

TimeToShop said:


> I’m sorry. I just thought it was a lovely sentiment


Don't apologise, it is a lovely sentiment, it's beautiful actually.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

K.D. said:


> As this is anonymous, I just heard from someone close to me she has already passed away and operation London Bridge has started. I am shocked.



Several commentators have said that and gave pointers as to why. Me, I'm going from "It's serious but she can be fine, old people have hick-ups" to "She already passed and they are just stringing us along for now".


----------



## TimeToShop

The BBC anchors were speculating why TW wasn’t going with Harry. They surmised she may not have been that welcome


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> The BBC anchors were speculating why TW wasn’t going with Harry. They surmised she may not have been that welcome



How surprising. Not.


----------



## TimeToShop

Sharont2305 said:


> Don't apologise, it is a lovely sentiment, it's beautiful actually.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Several commentators have said that and gave pointers as to why. Me, I'm going from "It's serious but she can be fine, old people have hick-ups" and "She already passed and they are just stringing us along for now".


Imo they are getting everything ready for a seamless transition of power. 
The historic significance of this cannot be minimized. This is huge.

ETA: BBC made the point that it is odd or curious that she did not need to go to the hospital.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Now, that has broken me.


that gave me chills


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Several commentators have said that and gave pointers as to why. Me, I'm going from "It's serious but she can be fine, old people have hick-ups" to "She already passed and they are just stringing us along for now".



"Resting but comfortable" is the official line


----------



## elvisfan4life

So Harry has found some backbone ? bit late in the day he should be ashamed he threw the invite to Balmoral this summer back in the Queens face he should be turned away at the gates


----------



## papertiger

BBC


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5606290
> 
> BBC


Why alone? Why not go with the others?   Interesting that he makes this choice.


----------



## Cinderlala

bellecate said:


> I just keep crying.


+1


----------



## K.D.

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why alone? Why not go with the others?   Interesting that he makes this choice.


Probably a different direct flight from Germany?


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why alone? Why not go with the others?   Interesting that he makes this choice.



William, Edward, Sophie may not have wanted to travel with him.  It may have been their choice.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

K.D. said:


> Probably a different direct flight from Germany?



Harry and TW are back in the UK. They were supposed to go to a charitable event tonight in London before going back to the U.S.


----------



## bellecate

Cinderlala said:


> +1


----------



## elvisfan4life

Cinderlala said:


> +1


Me too -it’s the end of an era —stoic to the last , service above all but several horrible family members have ruined her last years and brought this decline on -I pray she is comfortable and in no pain


----------



## bellecate

youngster said:


> Harry and TW are back in the UK. They were supposed to go to a charitable event tonight in London before going back to the U.S.


Here’s hoping that wretch of a woman doesn’t go and attend that event and give a speech as if she’s speaking for the family and making it all about her.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Sharont2305 said:


> I agree with you but I think Catherine will go up alone, and not disrupt the childrens routine. They only started at the new school today.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Several commentators have said that and gave pointers as to why. Me, I'm going from "It's serious but she can be fine, old people have hick-ups" to "She already passed and they are just stringing us along for now".


I presume they are waiting for all immediate family to have a few private moments with her and Charles before the announcement. This is a family after all.  It is also possible she is on life support temporarily.  It is a sad day regardless.  To quote Anderson Cooper a few moments ago, “She is England.”


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> "Resting but comfortable" is the official line


Sounds like end of life care no medical intervention just keeping her comfortable and pain free


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> So Harry has found some backbone ? bit late in the day he should be ashamed he threw the invite to Balmoral this summer back in the Queens face he should be turned away at the gates


Did Harry find his backbone or did she let him off his leash? Remember as pushy as she can be, she isn’t particularly courageous. There’s no way in hell she would want to go into that lion’s den and face the others. Besides, she will just make up a story about how close she was to the Queen later.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bellecate said:


> Here’s hoping that wretch of a woman doesn’t go and attend that event and give a speech as if she’s speaking for the family and making it all about her.


Oh but she will what a martyr not wanting to let the charity down when her heart is breaking


----------



## Zen101

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5606290
> 
> BBC


I’m glad Meg is not going. She didn’t visit her own dad when he was sick before her wedding and recently when Thomas fell sick before the jubilee. She doesn’t deserve to show up at the Queen’s bedside and pretend to care after all the stress she has caused when she doesn’t even care about her dad, her own flesh and blood. In the meantime, she’s probably sitting down somewhere writing a nauseous statement to be released if/when her majesty passes.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why alone? Why not go with the others?   Interesting that he makes this choice.


The choice might have been made for him! Impressive picture.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Did Harry find his backbone or did she let him off his leash? Remember as pushy as she can be, she isn’t particularly courageous. There’s no way in hell she would want to go into that lion’s den and face the others. Besides, she will just make up a story about how close she was to the Queen later.


Hazz alone, those were the orders imo.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Did Harry find his backbone or did she let him off his leash? Remember as pushy as she can be, she isn’t particularly courageous. There’s no way in hell she would want to go into that lion’s den and face the others. Besides, she will just make up a story about how close she was to the Queen later.


I suspect…. This is a family matter and she has made it clear she is not interested in participating in that dynamic. In short: Not Welcome.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hazz alone, those were the orders imo.



Agreed. I think they said, if you bring her, you won't be allowed in


----------



## Winterfell5

Harry is just spineless!  He allowed his wife to cause such a major rift/breakup in his family, especially heartbreaking for the Queen in the last years of her life.  He should be banned from Balmoral during this sad time.  I only hope that one day Harry will wake up and see the mess that Meghan has created.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why alone? Why not go with the others?   Interesting that he makes this choice.



persona non grata is a difficult person to be


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Why though?* Raptor is the wife of the former spare. Kate is the future queen and soon to be Princess of Wales. In an institution like the BRF you are bound to treat some family members differently than others. Also, IIRC Kate didn't go on Oprah trashing the family while Philip was dying or had a podcast that's just a vehicle to bash the family some more.
> 
> But wise choice to leave Raptor behind.


I agree, why? I hope it's not the case, and Kate will eventually go to Balmoral.


----------



## jehaga

How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes? She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.


----------



## TimeToShop

I would like to think that Anne, being told the 2 were on their way, said, “H*ll no! That mattress actress won’t be let through the gates. Harry can come but he needs to get his own ride. He’ll have a full pat down on arrival and his phone will be confiscated.“


----------



## Redbirdhermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why alone? Why not go with the others?   Interesting that he makes this choice.


Isn't it possible that they don't want the next two adults in succession after Charles traveling together?  Also another reason to keep Cambridge children safe at home.


----------



## Zen101

jehaga said:


> How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes? She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.


It’s not petty at all. I feel the same way but she’ll shamelessly be there.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jehaga said:


> How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes? She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.


I hope if she goes, she sits in the back row.


----------



## Chanbal

jehaga said:


> *How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes?* She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.


Not petty, you are just expressing the wishes of many of us.


----------



## TimeToShop

jehaga said:


> How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes? She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.



You know she will be weeping and wailing. Going on about how she lost the only grandmother she ever had. They were so close, don’t you know, would chat every Sunday.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Me too!
> 
> I'm afraid this is why Catherine is at Windsor. They didn't want to treat TW differently…



The three Cambridge children will go to Balmoral with their mother as required, no question of that


----------



## gelbergirl

William is a good egg to drive his Uncles and Aunt into Balmoral


----------



## gelbergirl

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope if she goes, she sits in the back row.



I suspect the same seating as the church service for the the Jubilee.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they are getting everything ready for a seamless transition of power.
> The historic significance of this cannot be minimized. This is huge.
> 
> ETA: BBC made the point that it is odd or curious that she did not need to go to the hospital.


 No doubt that have have had medical equipment on hand at every royal residence for a long time. Possibly TQ did not want extreme intervention at the end of her life and wanted things to progress naturally.


----------



## youngster

gelbergirl said:


> I suspect the same seating as the church service for the the Jubilee.



And on this occasion, if the Sussex's conveniently "miss" the royal bus, hopefully they won't be humored and allowed to take a separate car and make a separate entrance into the church as they did at Prince Philip's memorial service the Jubilee Service.  Arrive on time, walk in with your other family members, take your assigned seats with your cousins, the end.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Did Harry find his backbone or did she let him off his leash? Remember as pushy as she can be, she isn’t particularly courageous. There’s no way in hell she would want to go into that lion’s den and face the others. Besides, she will just make up a story about how close she was to the Queen later.


He was told not to bring her. If he is seething about it, then he is a bigger idiot than imagined.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> The three Cambridge children will go to Balmoral with their mother as required, no question of that


I honestly don't think the children will go. I think Catherine will but for what purpose do the great children go.
So far, I haven't heard anything about the other grandchildren, Peter, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and James going up there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> And on this occasion, if the Sussex's conveniently "miss" the royal bus, hopefully they won't be humored and allowed to take a separate car and make a separate entrance into the church as they did at Prince Philip's memorial service.  Arrive on time, walk in with your other family members, take your assigned seats with your cousins, the end.


That was the Commonwealth Service, they didn't attend Prince Philip's memorial service.


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> William is a good egg to drive his Uncles and Aunt into Balmoral


Some people feel better when they are doing something.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> That was the Commonwealth Service, they didn't attend Prince Philip's memorial service.


I believe @youngster is referring to the Jubilee service when they arrived late


----------



## Rouge H

I never gave a rats arse about these two incredibly warped minded two full of themselves human beings. One day they will wonder, did
all the crap they pulled have an effect on her majesty’s health?


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I honestly don't think the children will go. I think Catherine will but for what purpose do the great children go.
> So far, I haven't heard anything about the other grandchildren, Peter, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and James going up there.


I think George, as an heir, might be taken there if she is still with us.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I believe @youngster is referring to the Jubilee service when they arrived late


Yes, your right. Thank you.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Did Harry find his backbone or did she let him off his leash? Remember as pushy as she can be, she isn’t particularly courageous. There’s no way in hell she would want to go into that lion’s den and face the others. Besides, she will just make up a story about how close she was to the Queen later.


You are right - she trashed the family on Oprah, and then sent Harry back alone for Phillips funeral.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I honestly don't think the children will go. I think Catherine will but for what purpose do the children go.
> So far, I haven't heard anything about the other grandchildren, Peter, Zara, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise and James going up there.


I agree. Seeing their great-grandmother so ill might be frightening to young children. There’s no purpose in putting them through that. Besides, everyone deserves to have peace in their final hours. A nonstop parade of relatives through her bedroom isn’t necessary. Let her rest.


----------



## gracekelly

Rouge H said:


> I never gave a rats arse about these two incredibly warped minded two full of themselves human beings. One day they will wonder, did
> all the crap they pulled have an effect on her majesty’s health?


It didn’t help, but it didn’t hasten her end.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> I agree. Seeing their great-grandmother so ill might be frightening to young children. There’s no purpose in putting them through that. Besides, everyone deserves to have peace in their final hours. A nonstop parade of relatives through her bedroom isn’t necessary. Let her rest.


Also, where does it end, she has many great grandchildren.


----------



## TimeToShop

Around 15:50 she says they Queen has passed from bone cancer. Edit to add: waiting for Harry to show up before making the announcement


----------



## CarryOn2020

Redbirdhermes said:


> Isn't it possible that they don't want the next two adults in succession after Charles traveling together?  Also another reason to keep Cambridge children safe at home.


It’s also possible they need all the Counsellors of State there.
_The current Counsellors of State are The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Cambridge, The Duke of Sussex and The Duke of York_


----------



## gracekelly

That was one of the points of summering at Balmoral, as I understand it. Invite family to see her so we don’t know for sure how many extended family members have already been there.


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> Around 15:50 she says they Queen has passed from bone cancer. Edit to add: waiting for Harry to show up before making the announcement



Rushing it Lady CC. You couldn’t wait?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> Around 15:50 she says they Queen has passed from bone cancer. Edit to add: waiting for Harry to show up before making the announcement




Yeah, not a fan. Leave the announcement to the family. WTF Lady C.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon. 



Spoiler: The Posts



*Today's posts*:




*Previous post* in support of TW:


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Chanbal said:


> One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Posts
> 
> 
> 
> *Today's posts*:
> View attachment 5606340
> 
> View attachment 5606343
> 
> *Previous post* in support of TW:
> View attachment 5606338


should report that to Carnegie Mellon.
People get fired and cancelled for much lesser tweets.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Posts
> 
> 
> 
> *Today's posts*:
> View attachment 5606340
> 
> View attachment 5606343
> 
> *Previous post* in support of TW:
> View attachment 5606338



Wow… What a piece of work


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Posts
> 
> 
> 
> *Today's posts*:
> View attachment 5606340
> 
> View attachment 5606343
> 
> *Previous post* in support of TW:
> View attachment 5606338



WTF. I hope heads will roll.


----------



## Zen101

So sad.


----------



## queennadine

Rebecca English just tweeted about HM’s passing. RIP.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Chanbal

It's official now. So very sad!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A major German newspaper reports The Queen has passed. I have not cross-checked yet.

ETA: I guess I am late. So sad.


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A major German newspaper reports The Queen has passed. I have not cross-checked yet.


BBC has said so


----------



## Sina08

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A major German newspaper reports The Queen has passed. I have not cross-checked yet.


BBC just confirmed.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Just heard - heartbroken


----------



## purseinsanity

Queen Elizabeth II Dead: British Monarch Dies at 96
					

Queen Elizabeth II has died at age 96 after serving as the longest-reigning British monarch in history — details




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## Toby93

Unbelievably sad.  She has been the only monarch I had known in my lifetime.  Such a stable force, and she never wavered in her duty to the country.  I am more upset than I thought I would be.  Actually crying, and hope she did not suffer.  I can't believe how good she looked a few days ago when she received the new PM. She still had that sparkle in her eyes.


----------



## Rouge H




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Posts
> 
> 
> 
> *Today's posts*:
> View attachment 5606340
> 
> View attachment 5606343
> 
> *Previous post* in support of TW:
> View attachment 5606338


Even Jeff Bezos retweeted with a WTF?


----------



## justwatchin

So sad. She was such a respected and loved queen.
 I feel like she stayed just long enough to perform one more duty of welcoming the new Prime Minister. No one could ever deny the role she had was carried out to perfection and without complaint.


----------



## TimeToShop

From the jubilee but a lovely picture.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF. I hope heads will roll.


Another one who doesn't know how to read the  room.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Rushing it Lady CC. You couldn’t wait?


She’s not going to start to have class now.


----------



## Sophisticatted

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry making a big stink if she is not allowed in. I hope Major Jonny and his associates are nearby.



He made a big stink about being stuck in the middle of the second row on the far side of the church.  It still didn’t change anything.


----------



## bag-mania

Kaka_bobo said:


> should report that to Carnegie Mellon.
> People get fired and cancelled for much lesser tweets.


It depends who you say that kind of thing about. At a university they might be fine with it, probably give her a raise and tenure.


----------



## purseinsanity

This was before the Queen's passing was announced:









						Meghan Markle Not Traveling With Prince Harry to See the Queen
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will join Prince William and Prince Charles by Queen Elizabeth II’s side amid her health concerns — read more




					www.usmagazine.com


----------



## gracekelly

God rest The Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

They are speculating she may have passed away a few hours before it was announced. She may not have seen any of her family.


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t think that they arrived in time.   She was already gone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> They are speculating she may have passed away a few hours before it was announced. She may not have seen any of her family.



As was thinking that as the announcement said "this afternoon". I'm glad Anne was supposedly with her.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> They are speculating she may have passed away a few hours before it was announced. She may not have seen any of her family.


Oh I hope not


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> From the jubilee but a lovely picture.




Love, but I'm so soppy


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think that they arrived in time.   She was already gone.


I think they knew before flying up, absolutely. Hope Charles and Anne were with her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I did something I never do and left an angry comment at Lady C's video. I really hope someone will take on that nutjob professor.


----------



## Vlad

TimeToShop said:


> Around 15:50 she says they Queen has passed from bone cancer. Edit to add: waiting for Harry to show up before making the announcement




No idea who this woman is, but this video is so pathetically self-serving and attention seeking.


----------



## purseinsanity

Kaka_bobo said:


> should report that to Carnegie Mellon.
> People get fired and cancelled for much lesser tweets.


As a POC, she'll get a pass.  That's the US we now live in.


----------



## Chanbal

Absolutely!


----------



## purseinsanity

VintageBagsAddict said:


> So sad.



The King and Queen Consort"

I got a sudden wave of realization and chills reading that.


----------



## opensesame

Chanbal said:


> One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Posts
> 
> 
> 
> *Today's posts*:
> View attachment 5606340
> 
> View attachment 5606343
> 
> *Previous post* in support of TW:
> View attachment 5606338



I genuinely can’t believe she is a professor. Maybe she got hacked? Students have to be careful taking her classes; I have no idea what she teaches in her classes.


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> Unbelievably sad.  She has been the only monarch I had known in my lifetime.  Such a stable force, and she never wavered in her duty to the country.  I am more upset than I thought I would be.  Actually crying, and hope she did not suffer.  I can't believe how good she looked a few days ago when she received the new PM. She still had that sparkle in her eyes.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think that they arrived in time.   She was already gone.


I think Charles and Anne were already in Scotland, so I hope they at least got to see her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm really, really sad. I'm glad we kept each other's company waiting for the ghastly news.


----------



## Vlad

Chanbal said:


> One of TW's supporters has posted a couple of frightening posts. Screenshots can be seen in spoiler. I'm beyond shocked, particularly having in consideration these are from an associate professor @ Carnegie Mellon.



Sheesh, that lady is angry.

Leave it to narcissists everywhere to make QE's passing about themselves.


----------



## csshopper

The photo posted  on line showing a rainbow breaking through storm clouds over the Queen Victoria Memorial at Buckingham Palace today is breathtaking . One Queen welcoming another?

Hard to type through tears, learning she had bone cancer was staggering. Another example of her indomitable spirit, “mobility issues” is the consummate understatement. To the end she personified “Keep calm and carry on.” RIP


----------



## Chanbal

opensesame said:


> I genuinely can’t believe she is a professor. Maybe she got hacked? Students have to be careful taking her classes; I have no idea what she teaches in her classes.


I don't think she has been hacked, see spoiler.



Spoiler: Associate Professor


----------



## kipp

It’s so incredibly sad.  We are in London now and were at the Royal Opera House awaiting the opening night performance when the news announced—-the performance canceled consequently.  
Surreal and just so sad.  An inspiration and true leader.  May she Rest In Peace and Power.


----------



## TimeToShop

csshopper said:


> The photo posted  on line showing a rainbow breaking through storm clouds over the Queen Victoria Memorial at Buckingham Palace today is breathtaking . One Queen welcoming another?
> 
> Hard to type through tears, learning she had bone cancer was staggering. Another example of her indomitable spirit, “mobility issues” is the consummate understatement. To the end she personified “Keep calm and carry on.” RIP



It is somehow calming


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure why her hostile opinion of The Queen would make Raptor's bulliying of staff somehow better, but maybe it's a good thing I can't follow her disturbed logic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Rest In Peace Beloved Queen Elizabeth.

God welcomes you saying “Well done Good and Faithful Servant.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Poor Charles. He was already a mess when his father died. However old you are you always stay your parents' child.


----------



## Sina08

TimeToShop said:


> Around 15:50 she says they Queen has passed from bone cancer. Edit to add: waiting for Harry to show up before making the announcement



Not sure it’s cancer. Could it be osteoporosis? She says one of two bone diseases, the less painful one. 


gracekelly said:


> I don’t think that they arrived in time.   She was already gone.


Lady CC says at 14:37. William et al. weren’t even on their way at that time were they?


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> It is somehow calming




OK, _now_ I'm crying  beautiful

We have an alternative people's anthem



For all of us 

Lyrics

When you walk through a storm
Hold your head up high
And don't be afraid of the dark
At the end of a storm
There's a golden sky
And the sweet silver song of a lark
Walk on through the wind
Walk on through the rain
For your dreams be tossed and blown
Walk on, walk on
With hope in your heart
And you'll never walk alone
You'll never walk alone
Walk on, walk on
With hope in your heart
And you'll never walk alone
You'll never walk alone


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor Charles. He was already a mess when his father died. However old you are you always stay your parents' child.


As much as people don't like Charles, that's what I was thinking too.  His voice broke speaking of Prince Phillip.  Can't imagine how he and the rest of the family are feeling.  In one sense, they're lucky to have had her this long, but it's never enough time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> As much as people don't like Charles, that's what I was thinking too.  His voice broke speaking of Prince Phillip.  Can't imagine how he and the rest of the family are feeling.  In one sense, they're lucky to have had her this long, but it's never enough time.



We only have my grandmother left and we're dreading the day.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm really, really sad. I'm glad we kept each other's company waiting for the ghastly news.


It really is the end of an era. She was such a constant presence on the world scene.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> It really is the end of an era. She was such a constant presence on the world scene.



Right, and the world is such a scary, unstable place right now.


----------



## sparklebunny

Lodpah said:


> It really is the end of an era. She was such a constant presence on the world scene.


It is. I’m not British but she was an institution. I wonder if Philip’s passing last year accelerated her decline; very sad. Much respect to her and may she rest in peace. ❤️


----------



## TimeToShop

I shall miss her smile and the twinkle in her eyes. And her handbags. Before we knew she kept a marmalade sandwich in it, I always thought she carried handkerchiefs and hard candies.

There is comfort in knowing she’s reunited with PP.


----------



## sparklebunny

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right, and the world is such a scary, unstable place right now.


Yes, I’m sad that her final years has seen such significantly worrying world events and shakeups within her own family.


----------



## TimeToShop

BBC is saying Harry is just now arriving at Balmoral. Just able to get there now? Told not to arrive until now?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> BBC is saying Harry is just now arriving at Balmoral. Just able to get there now? Told not to arrive until now?



Geez, at this rate was he coming by bike? Or maybe there was a temper tantrum.


----------



## Lodpah

TimeToShop said:


> BBC is saying Harry is just now arriving at Balmoral. Just able to get there now? Told not to arrive until now?


To make sure TW is not there to press the her dagger and elbow Harry out?

I believe the death of HMTQ is also the end of TW’s popularity or whatever you call it. Any clap back from her and even now she will be utterly reviled cause in most people’s mind she and her handbag did not let the Queen have a peaceful last days, since PP passed.


----------



## Cinderlala

Lodpah said:


> *I believe the death of HMTQ is also the end of TW’s popularity* or whatever you call it. Any clap back from her and even now she will be utterly reviled cause in most people’s mind she and her handbag did not let the Queen have a peaceful last days, since PP passed.


Here's hoping.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> To make sure TW is not there to press the her dagger and elbow Harry out?
> 
> I believe the death of HMTQ is also the end of TW’s popularity or whatever you call it. Any clap back from her and even now she will be utterly reviled cause in most people’s mind she and her handbag did not let the Queen have a peaceful last days, since PP passed.


And forever remembered in her super-trendy tank top and extremely baggy pants
Good lesson to remember to dress like a professional, even if it makes one look like a fuddy-duddy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He'll be Charles III.


----------



## Sharont2305

Harry's arrived.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He'll be Charles III.



According to the DM,  King Charles has a busy  10 days and beyond:


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM:


----------



## Toby93

If there was any doubt what a vile character he actually is.....


----------



## sdkitty

jehaga said:


> How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes? She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.


I agree and may I say love your avatar


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> 
> View attachment 5606387



Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was thinking...how inconvenient the troublemakers didn't bring the kids, because now it will be at least 10 days until they can be reunited. Unless Harry wants to make a transatlantic flight three times in 10 days.


----------



## TimeToShop

There will be 10 days of mourning. Be interesting to see what H & TW will do. They do supposedly have 2 kids in CA. Perhaps that will be her excuse to not attend. Surely she knows she’s not wanted, not that she cares. She may not have the guts to show up and face the music, i.e. Anne and Sophie. However, I can’t imagine she will pass up the opportunity to weep and wail in front of the world. Of course she’ll wear an inappropriate and ill fitting outfit.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> 
> View attachment 5606387


Think Harry, think! Was it worth it? Was your wife’s greed, lust for fame and fortune worth it? Don’t let her and Netflix use this sad morning history to make it about her. Think Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> If there was any doubt what a vile character he actually is.....




WTFFF Scobie. Going after a toddler is low even for him. Also if I was William I'd be so tempted to end his pathetic little career NOW.


----------



## Sharont2305

TimeToShop said:


> There will be 10 days of mourning. Be interesting to see what H & TW will do. They do supposedly have 2 kids in CA. Perhaps that will be her excuse to not attend. Surely she knows she’s not wanted, not that she cares. She may not have the guts to show up and face the music, i.e. Anne and Sophie. However, I can’t imagine she will pass up the opportunity to weep and wail in front of the world. Of course she’ll wear an inappropriate and ill fitting outfit.


I hope she decides to go home. She's not wanted here.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF. I hope heads will roll.



No heads will roll.  Such is the state of most major universities.  Think about that as you send your well adjusted young ones off to uni.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TC1

Sina08 said:


> Not sure it’s cancer. Could it be osteoporosis? She says one of two bone diseases, the less painful one.
> 
> Lady CC says at 14:37. William et al. weren’t even on their way at that time were they?


Who even needs to speculate on a cause of death? Disgusting. She was 96 years old for crying out loud...just leave it be..that Lady CC is as bad as Omid with this


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope she decides to go home. She's not wanted here.


If she comes back here, she needs to find a quiet corner, sit down and be quiet.  No more word salads, no more pompous complaints about the BRF, no more swanning about the US.  No, just no.


----------



## TimeToShop

One more and now I’m done. Need some quiet time to think about today.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.


Yeah I’m upset but no, in my opinion, he’s full of gladness thus the tears and counting 50 ways that Netflix and he and TW will benefit. Yes, I’m full of sarcasm but what they put the Dear Queen through, is nothing short of malice.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Yeah I’m upset but no, in my opinion, he’s full of gladness thus the tears and counting 50 ways that Netflix and he and TW will benefit. Yes, I’m full of sarcasm but what they put the Dear Queen through, is nothing short of malice.


Or he realizes he will not be welcomed in King Charles’s slimmed-down monarchy.  When did he last speak to his dear old dad?


----------



## justwatchin

TimeToShop said:


> There will be 10 days of mourning. Be interesting to see what H & TW will do. They do supposedly have 2 kids in CA. Perhaps that will be her excuse to not attend. Surely she knows she’s not wanted, not that she cares. She may not have the guts to show up and face the music, i.e. Anne and Sophie. However, I can’t imagine she will pass up the opportunity to weep and wail in front of the world. Of course she’ll wear an inappropriate and ill fitting outfit.


Considering she’s done nothing but bleat continuously for 2 years of how badly the royal family allegedly treated her, she would look even more foolish to show up at the funeral.


----------



## scarlet555

only an abhorrent looser would insert themselves where they are not needed!  Have some class and dignity, what a  crazy annoying person that Mrs Harry Gingerhead is.


----------



## mellibelly

What a very sad day. I teared up at work watching the live coverage. The Wench is probably secretly thrilled her kids are now prince/princess


----------



## scarlet555

justwatchin said:


> Considering she’s done nothing but bleat continuously for 2 years of how badly the royal family allegedly treated her, she would look even more foolish to show up at the funeral.


she will show up, she is a psycho, that much is obvious... her fans protecting her?  bots... like Amber Heard.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.



I don't feel the least bit bad for Harry.  He's nothing more than an entitled piece of crap who made the last years of his grandparents lives filled with distress.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.



You're the sweetest person. They are only tears for himself, he could have been with her so much more but he chose to TORMENT his loving, doting grandma, Queen and Colonel in Chief from a put-U-up housing unit with the toilet block and pooper-scooper-Zed-Zed


----------



## Aimee3

Haznoballs can fly private here and there and everywhere but couldn’t fly private to get to his grandmother in time?  Selfish pr**k.


----------



## Sina08

I have to say I couldn’t care less about the British or any other Monarchy or Kings and Queens, yet Queen Elisabeth II. was such a constant in the history of modern Britain and our world. Her passing truly marks the end of an era. We live in such fast paced times with so many changes and uncertainties. I think Britain would have profited massively if she had lived a few more years. As Prince Philip, she was one of the last representatives of a long gone world, I can’t even imagine what that must have been like. Our present world and the world she was born into couldn’t be further apart, yet she was loved and respected by so many generations of people around the globe. I can’t think of any other living representative of a country that enjoys this level of respect and acceptance. She will be remembered as a great historical figure, may she rest in peace.


----------



## bag-mania

Saying King Charles is going to take some getting used to.


----------



## rose60610

And what's going to be in the forthcoming book? Surely it's full of "poor me and poor us" crap. That won't endear him to the new King and Queen Consort. If there was ever a time for Claw the STFU it's NOW and at least until the funeral is over. But she won't be able to help herself. Whose kids will she be trying to "shush" for a funeral photo op? You know that if she's at the funeral she'll be smiling like a psycho straight into the cameras then wiping a fake tear seconds later.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

scarlet555 said:


> she will show up, she is a psycho, that much is obvious... her fans protecting her?  bots... like Amber Heard.



She makes makes AH look sane, sweet and light


----------



## youngster

mellibelly said:


> What a very sad day. I teared up at work watching the live coverage. The Wench is probably secretly thrilled her kids are now prince/princess



I don't think this is automatic.  Prince Andrew had to ask for the titles to be given to Eugenie and Bea and that was 30 years ago when Andrew was in favor and appeared to be doing well and had had a successful military career.  Prince Edward's children do not have the prince/princess title so I'm not sure Harry's children will get it.


----------



## papertiger

TC1 said:


> Who even needs to speculate on a cause of death? Disgusting. She was 96 years old for crying out loud...just leave it be..that Lady CC is as bad as Omid with this



They're all after the clicks ####££££$$$$


----------



## leeann

bag-mania said:


> Saying King Charles is going to take some getting used to.


Might he change his name to something else?


----------



## gracekelly

Sina08 said:


> Not sure it’s cancer. Could it be osteoporosis? She says one of two bone diseases, the less painful one.
> 
> Lady CC says at 14:37. William et al. weren’t even on their way at that time were they?


This was incredibly crude and cruel of Lady CC to post this information.  It really was not her place and she should have left it to proper channels.  Years ago I didn't like her and for a while I did, and now I am back to my original opinion of her.  DH thinks it could have been multiple myeloma, but who knows.  I don't think it will ever be revealed.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I don't think this is automatic.  Prince Andrew had to ask for the titles to be given to Eugenie and Bea and that was 30 years ago when Andrew was in favor and appeared to be doing well and had had a successful military career.  Prince Edward's children do not have the prince/princess title so I'm not sure Harry's children will get it.



It would be a very unpopular decision


----------



## papertiger

leeann said:


> Might he change his name to something else?



Nope, he's sticking


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> This was incredibly crude and cruel of Lady CC to post this information.  It really was not her place and she should have left it to proper channels.  Years ago I didn't like her and for a while I did, and now I am back to my original opinion of her.  DH thinks it could have been multiple myeloma, but who knows.  I don't think it will ever be revealed.



She just wanted us to know she has inside sources - silly woman


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> Considering she’s done nothing but bleat continuously for 2 years of how badly the royal family allegedly treated her, she would look even more foolish to show up at the funeral.



Maybe she'll wear the red jumpsuit - otherwise how will we know where she is in among he sea of black


----------



## justwatchin

scarlet555 said:


> she will show up, she is a psycho, that much is obvious... her fans protecting her?  bots... like Amber Heard.


Sadly, you’re probably right. She’ll say this was the opportunity for her to “forgive” ugh……..


----------



## lanasyogamama

Isn’t this the big tipping point he’s been waiting for? The kids are Prince and Princess now and he can publish his tell all book.


----------



## Sina08

TC1 said:


> Who even needs to speculate on a cause of death? Disgusting. She was 96 years old for crying out loud...just leave it be..that Lady CC is as bad as Omid with this


Totally agree, it’s in such bad taste.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or he realizes he will not be welcomed in King Charles’s slimmed-down monarchy.  When did he last speak to his dear old dad?


I am waiting for the moment that Harry as to bow to Charles as the King and Camilla as the Queen Consort.  The bow to Camilla should be an epic moment and will kill him.


----------



## Chanbal

*Prince Harry did not make it to Balmoral in time to see his late grandmother Queen Elizabeth II Thursday before she died.*
_
The Post has learned that Harry is now at the Scottish castle without his wife, Meghan Markle, but did not get to say a final goodbye. It appears much of his family also didn’t make it in time.

*The Duchess of Sussex’s reps had previously said she would be heading to Scotland with her husband to see the late Queen, but later said plans changed because of the “fluid” situation. *

Insiders emphasized there was nothing nefarious in her decision to not go to Balmoral.
_
*She and Harry were already in the UK, staying at their old home, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, when news broke of the Queen’s condition.*









						Prince Harry arrives too late to say goodbye to Queen Elizabeth
					

Prince Harry was among the last of the Queen Elizabeth’s close relatives to make it to Scotland.




					nypost.com


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I don't think this is automatic.  Prince Andrew had to ask for the titles to be given to Eugenie and Bea and that was 30 years ago when Andrew was in favor and appeared to be doing well and had had a successful military career.  Prince Edward's children do not have the prince/princess title so I'm not sure Harry's children will get it.


I think before William can be called The Prince of Wales he has to be invested by The King.  I recall watching Charles investiture ceremony on TV way back when.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.


At least he had the sense to leave TW behind.  We don't know if he was told or if he made the decision himself, but thank goodness.  The family does not need any drama today.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> She just wanted us to know she has inside sources - silly woman


The chambermaid and the cook's assistant.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I am waiting for the moment that Harry as to bow to Charles as the King and Camilla as the Queen Consort.  The bow to Camilla should be an epic moment and will kill him.


Didn't he have to bow to them anyway? At least in public.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I think *before William can be called The Prince of Wales he has to be invested by The King*.  I recall watching Charles investiture ceremony on TV way back when.


Yes, it's also what I understood. He is now the Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I don't think this is automatic.  Prince Andrew had to ask for the titles to be given to Eugenie and Bea and that was 30 years ago when Andrew was in favor and appeared to be doing well and had had a successful military career.  Prince Edward's children do not have the prince/princess title so I'm not sure Harry's children will get it.



They do, their parents just chose to not use them until both turn 18. The only untitled grandchildren are Anne's.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If he has any tears, it is tears of fears.  He is facing the King of England, the heir to the King, and 2 Dukes.  All of whom he has criticized in the harshest manner.  Good luck, Hazzi.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> This was incredibly crude and cruel of Lady CC to post this information.  It really was not her place and she should have left it to proper channels.  Years ago I didn't like her and for a while I did, and now I am back to my original opinion of her.  DH thinks it could have been multiple myeloma, but who knows.  I don't think it will ever be revealed.



I bonded with Lady C over our mutual dislike, but this was so out there I don't think I can recover from it.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I think before William can be called The Prince of Wales he has to be invested by The King.  I recall watching Charles investiture ceremony on TV way back when.


A few miles from where I live. My dad did some work there during the setting up of it all, he's hated Lord Snowdon since then as he told my dad off for walking on the grass


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or he realizes he will not be welcomed in King Charles’s slimmed-down monarchy.  When did he last speak to his dear old dad?


Do you think that if the Queen has been sick for a while, that Harry was informed?  That would make it all worse to think that he let TW go ahead and print that magazine article and trash HMTQ in her podcast


----------



## Lodpah

I read somewhere that during these next 10 days and as leaders of the world start arriving all focus will be on the events. I do have confidence that the media will focus on this rather than a footnote actress. These details have been planned to the minute. So no worries it’s only the garbage tabloids and Omidick will be pandering to the sugars. So TW can squat, pee on the streets, widen her stance or whatever to get attention, the focus will be in the events happening.


----------



## charlottawill

We knew it was coming but it is still so sad. The end of an era, there will never be another like her. 

I'm watching NBC, they're showing H arriving alone at Balmoral


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Didn't he have to bow to them anyway? At least in public.


Yes, but to give them the first bow in front of all the family would be so humiliating lol!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry did not make it to Balmoral in time to see his late grandmother Queen Elizabeth II Thursday before she died.*
> 
> _The Post has learned that Harry is now at the Scottish castle without his wife, Meghan Markle, but did not get to say a final goodbye. It appears much of his family also didn’t make it in time.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex’s reps had previously said she would be heading to Scotland with her husband to see the late Queen, but later said plans changed because of the “fluid” situation. *
> 
> Insiders emphasized there was nothing nefarious in her decision to not go to Balmoral._
> 
> *She and Harry were already in the UK, staying at their old home, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, when news broke of the Queen’s condition.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry arrives too late to say goodbye to Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was among the last of the Queen Elizabeth’s close relatives to make it to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Fluid situation or fluid retention?

How less fluid can a situation be when someone dies and the next 10 days has already been meticulously planned to the minute.

I guess it's all the same to her. So long as 'whateverZZZ' puts her name and picture on the front page along with the Queen's death. 

SHE IS SHAMELESS


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.


He's still human, he's just made regrettable choices. It wasn't long ago that he was supposedly one of her favorites.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Yes, it's also what I understood. He is now the Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge.


Hoping Charles makes Edward the Duke of Edinburgh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sina08

lanasyogamama said:


> Isn’t this the big tipping point he’s been waiting for? The kids are Prince and Princess now and he can publish his tell all book.


Don’t know about the tipping point, but the Queen’s declining health might have actually been the reason for postponing? So H could reposition himself and the content of his book if necessary?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Saying King Charles is going to take some getting used to.





Chanbal said:


> *Prince Harry did not make it to Balmoral in time to see his late grandmother Queen Elizabeth II Thursday before she died.*
> 
> _The Post has learned that Harry is now at the Scottish castle without his wife, Meghan Markle, but did not get to say a final goodbye. It appears much of his family also didn’t make it in time.
> 
> *The Duchess of Sussex’s reps had previously said she would be heading to Scotland with her husband to see the late Queen, but later said plans changed because of the “fluid” situation. *
> 
> Insiders emphasized there was nothing nefarious in her decision to not go to Balmoral._
> 
> *She and Harry were already in the UK, staying at their old home, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, when news broke of the Queen’s condition.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry arrives too late to say goodbye to Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was among the last of the Queen Elizabeth’s close relatives to make it to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Hazbeen was just down the road from William and Andrew on the grounds at Windsor, but was evidently not offered a ride to Balmoral on the plane with the senior Royals. And the beech and her minions can spin it until they drop over dizzy, but I bet he was told TW was NOT invited.

 Maybe, please, this is a new page in dealing with the Suckesses.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> At least he had the sense to leave TW behind.  We don't know if he was told or if he made the decision himself, but thank goodness.  *The family does not need any drama today.*



The _country_ does need any more drama today


----------



## Laila619

I’m irrationally angry that these two losers fortuitously happen to be in the UK and are being talked about during this sad time. How do they seemingly always land on their feet? It’s infuriating. You know they will somehow spin it that the Queen saw her “dear grandson” and his “beloved wife” one last time and then she was able to die in peace. I hope King Charles puts an end to their antics.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> She just wanted us to know she has inside sources - silly woman


And how sad is that?  There are staff inside Balmoral that are running to her with gossip and secrets.   Very shady.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he has any tears, it is tears of fears.  He is facing the King of England, the heir to the King, and 2 Dukes.  All of whom he has criticized in the harshest manner.  Good luck, Hazzi.


If I was King, I would send a dragon to visit the two of them and say "Dracarys!"  That would take care of that!


----------



## jelliedfeels

It is very sad. I do think one of the Queen’s kids was with her at the end as it seems like they knew she was seriously ill.

 I think the press knew too- the guardian had some article up about the protocol for the queen’s funeral this morning which seemed a bit presumptuous and there had been something off about the coverage recently. 

I imagine TW will ‘go back to the kids’ and probably try and make a big fuss about it further down the line. Could be wrong though as they love drama. 

On a happier note, this might torpedo interest in H’s book. 
I can just see his editing team scrambling to rewrite his whining into something more complimentary.


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> He's still human, he's just made regrettable choices. It wasn't long ago that he was supposedly one of her favorites.


And now he's forever lost any chance to regain her favor. More fool him.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> And how sad is that?  There are staff inside Balmoral that are running to her with gossip and secrets.   Very shady.


A buck is a buck.  She pays them.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I didn't see this coming.  I did think when Philip died she might go soon after but recently with her slowing down but also meeting the new PM, I thought she'd be ok for a while longer.


I think the prospect of the Jubilee kept her going. She may have been ill for longer than anyone realizes. I've known people who died of cancer but didn't tell anyone beforehand. I hope her passing was peaceful, and she is reunited with the love of her life.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I think the prospect of the Jubilee kept her going. She may have been ill for longer than anyone realizes. I've known people who died of cancer but didn't tell anyone beforehand. I hope her passing was peaceful, and she is reunited with the love of her life.


Strength of will is powerful and I agree that she hung on for the Jubilee.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I can't express the immense saddness. Our British friends are here visiting. Much love and appreciation for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth. Condolences to all.


----------



## Chanbal

Not surprising, the frightening Twitter posts have now been deleted. This is one of the reasons I posted screen shots of them on a previous post. They have been replaced by a milder one, which apparently she has also deleted (see spoiler).



Spoiler: One more


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

TimeToShop said:


> One more and now I’m done. Need some quiet time to think about today.



Oh my.  Gives one hope that there is a divine plan after all. Rest In Peace


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Strength of will is powerful and I agree that she hung on for the Jubilee.


I’m glad she did.  Sure, she set milestones for herself, but also for the rest of us.  Doubtful we will see another reigning monarch going for 70 years.  I know some have seen a coronation before, but I haven’t - this will be one more historic occasion we’ve lived through.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry's arrived.


Oh, joy.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he wiping tears? I feel a little bad for him. But I'm still angry.


You have a much kinder heart than I.  Wiping tears?  He's probably wiping sweat off his brow at the thought of seeing his racist, awful, horrible family on such a day when he and TW were to be shining in their charity glory tonight.  How dare the Queen die on their special day!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Strength of will is powerful and I agree that she hung on for the Jubilee.


I think she also hung on to appoint her new PM. It agrees with her sense of duty and love for her country.


----------



## charlottawill

TimeToShop said:


> I’m sorry. I just thought it was a lovely sentiment


It really is, thank you for sharing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM:




Yep, your dad wants a word. Oops, strike that - the King of England and his heir and 2 royal dukes want a word.
Ta ta.

ETA:  wonder if he feels _*trapped*_


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> A buck is a buck.  She pays them.


Yep, I don't think she knows anyone of any standing that would feed her information.  The British aristocracy know exactly who and what she is, and how any info would be used.  It does appear now that there are "moles" in the royal household with no moral compass whatsoever that are on her payroll.  I was never a fan, but she definitely crossed a line today.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Not surprising, the frightening Twitter posts have now been deleted. This is one of the reasons I posted screen shots of them on a previous post. They have been replaced by a milder one, which apparently she has also deleted (see spoiler).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: One more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5606451


She had that post up along with the other one.  It was reported and was taken down, but they are letting the other one go


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo they are getting everything ready for a seamless transition of power.
> The historic significance of this cannot be minimized. This is huge.
> 
> ETA: BBC made the point that it is odd or curious that she did not need to go to the hospital.



I read years ago that her funeral arraignments were "in the can". 

NBC's chief foreign correspondent said it is the first time in British history that there is a new monarch and PM at the same time. 

My guess is that she has been ill for some time and decided she wanted to pass away peacefully at Balmoral. They don't have to publicize her health issues.

I'm just glad she made it through the Jubilee. It was such a success and she looked so happy. 

Sorry if I'm repeating anything, had an appointment and trying to get caught up. 

King Charles sounds so strange...


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> You have a much kinder heart than I.  Wiping tears?  He's probably wiping sweat off his brow at the thought of seeing his racist, awful, horrible family on such a day when he and TW were to be shining in their charity glory tonight.  How dare the Queen die on their special day!


I totally agree.  I think they might have asked him to take the plane with them and he said no because he didn't want to sit there and be stared at and not spoken to.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

purseinsanity said:


> You have a much kinder heart than I.  Wiping tears?  He's probably wiping sweat off his brow at the thought of seeing his racist, awful, horrible family on such a day when he and TW were to be shining in their charity glory tonight.  How dare the Queen die on their special day!



That was my take, as well.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Do you think that if the Queen has been sick for a while, that Harry was informed?  That would make it all worse to think that he let TW go ahead and print that magazine article and trash HMTQ in her podcast


Do you think he needed to be informed?  We are not members of the BRF here (as far as I know!), and we all could see she wasn't doing well.  He just didn't give a damn.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Do you think that if the Queen has been sick for a while, that Harry was informed?  *That would make it all worse to think that he let TW go ahead and print that magazine article and trash HMTQ in her podcast *


Who says Harry _lets her_ do anything? That implies Harry has some sort of sway or authority over her. Nothing could be further from the truth.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> If I was King, I would send a dragon to visit the two of them and say "Dracarys!"  That would take care of that!


There’s an available “housing unit” known as the Tower of London where they could spend 10 days, up above all the peons. 

She’s probably busy trying to get a freebie designer black dress. Actually any old sack would do. In the same building with the elegantly Royal Duchess of Cambridge (remember the photo of her shot through the car window at PP’s service dressed and veiled in black?) TW will never look any better than a 
guttersnipe in comparison.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think due to the wearing of the wires, he was kept separate and probably strip searched (or at least patted down) before allowing to travel there (and delayed time-wise, William wants nothing to do with him these days).


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> 
> View attachment 5606456
> 
> 
> Yep, your dad wants a word. Oops, strike that - the King of England and his heir and 2 royal dukes want a word.
> Ta ta.
> 
> ETA:  wonder if he feels _*trapped*_


For a guy who usually looks like a slob, he is already dressed for a funeral.  Dark suite, black tie and white shirt.  He was told that she was gone before he ever left Frog Cot.  One of these days we will see some footage of him dressed like this learning of her death.  Thanks in advance, Netflix.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sina08

gracekelly said:


> This was incredibly crude and cruel of Lady CC to post this information.  It really was not her place and she should have left it to proper channels.  Years ago I didn't like her and for a while I did, and now I am back to my original opinion of her.  DH thinks it could have been multiple myeloma, but who knows.  I don't think it will ever be revealed.


Some people just don’t know when to stop. Same as H&M.
I think at 96 years old it hardly matters if or that they reveal it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I totally agree.  I think they might have asked him to take the plane with them and he said no because he didn't want to sit there and be stared at and not spoken to.


Ooooh, I’m guessing he is being stared at as we type.  He has no Nflix, no MM,  most likely no phone - just the King of England and his heir and 2 royal dukes staring at him.  No words, just hard stares.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> There’s an available “housing unit” known as the Tower of London where they could spend 10 days, up above all the peons.
> 
> She’s probably busy trying to get a freebie designer black dress. Actually any old sack would do. In the same building with the elegantly Royal Duchess of Cambridge (remember the photo of her shot through the car window at PP’s service dressed and veiled in black?) TW will never look any better than a
> guttersnipe in comparison.


Big black dress with cape to hide the mike equipment and a big hat, but no veil because she wouldn't be recognized by the paps if covered up.


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> Do you think he needed to be informed?  We are not members of the BRF here (as far as I know!), and we all could see she wasn't doing well.  He just didn't give a damn.


that's you thinking Harry has a clue
he is not the least normal


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> 
> View attachment 5606456
> 
> 
> Yep, your dad wants a word. Oops, strike that - the King of England and his heir and 2 royal dukes want a word.
> Ta ta.
> 
> ETA:  wonder if he feels _*trapped*_


I wish we had a middle finger emoji!

Has anyone asked him if "he's okay"??


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Not surprising, the frightening Twitter posts have now been deleted. This is one of the reasons I posted screen shots of them on a previous post. They have been replaced by a milder one, which apparently she has also deleted (see spoiler).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: One more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5606451



Let me guess: she has a "Hate has no home here" sign on her lawn. Clearly she and other pot stirrers like her must twist a world event into some diatribe about themselves. I wish she hadn't deleted her first tweets. Let the world know how she really is and how slobbering woke Carnegie Mellon is to have her on staff. If she doesn't get fired for those tweets then I hope major donors cut off Carnegie Mellon.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Not surprising, the frightening Twitter posts have now been deleted. This is one of the reasons I posted screen shots of them on a previous post. They have been replaced by a milder one, which apparently she has also deleted (see spoiler).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: One more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5606451


She is free to speak her mind. By posting it on social media, she has invited the world to judge her for her opinions accordingly. That is what she gets to deal with for expressing her hate/rage publicly.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> It didn’t help, but it didn’t hasten her end.


She looked at peace in her recent public appearances. That's all that matters imo.


----------



## Sophisticatted

It was also stated before The Queen passed that Charles considered TW’s recent claims of not signing an NDA “a threat” and would be dealing with her accordingly.  

As far as Harry’s kids are concerned, apparently Charles already told them privately (pre Oprah interview) that he would not be bestowing Prince/Princess titles on them.  I wouldn’t be surprised, when things settle down, if Charles revokes the titles.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> She had that post up along with the other one.  It was reported and was taken down, but they are letting that one go


I think it has also been deleted. She had also a couple of rather vulgar responses to other people, which I wouldn't expect to see from an educator.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Big black dress with cape to hide the mike equipment and a big hat, but no veil because she wouldn't be recognized by the paps if covered up.





Meghan Markle in a traditional Maltese cloak called a ghonnella, pictured during a trip to Malta in 2015. (Picture: Daily Mail)



			https://www.iol.co.za/lifestyle/style-beauty/look-meghan-the-hooded-beauty-18329823


----------



## CobaltBlu

csshopper said:


> There’s an available “housing unit” known as the Tower of London where they could spend 10 days, up above all the peons.
> 
> She’s probably busy trying to get a freebie designer black dress. Actually any old sack would do. In the same building with the elegantly Royal Duchess of Cambridge (remember the photo of her shot through the car window at PP’s service dressed and veiled in black?) TW will never look any better than a
> guttersnipe in comparison.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Even Jeff Bezos retweeted with a WTF?


I didn't want to look but wow! I know, free speech, but I think she should be fired.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It depends who you say that kind of thing about. At a university they might be fine with it, probably give her a raise and tenure.


CM is private and I think pretty conservative. It may not go over well with influential (deep pocketed) alumni.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Do you think he needed to be informed?  We are not members of the BRF here (as far as I know!), and we all could see she wasn't doing well.  He just didn't give a damn.


True enough.  He didn't care that the Oprah interview was aired as his grandfather lay dying


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5606468


MM is probably scrutinizing this look right now.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> She looked at peace in her recent public appearances. That's all that matters imo.


I have been watching the BBC and thinking how fortunate we are to have the abundant photos and films of an extraordinary life. This is a gift for future generations and a remarkable source in a world which relies on pictorial records rather than the written word.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5606468


Every detail in this photo is major l.o.v.e.  The veil, the mask, the earrings, the necklace, the eyes -


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> There’s an available “housing unit” known as the Tower of London where they could spend 10 days, up above all the peons.
> 
> She’s probably busy trying to get a freebie designer black dress. Actually any old sack would do. In the same building with the elegantly Royal Duchess of Cambridge (remember the photo of her shot through the car window at PP’s service dressed and veiled in black?) TW will never look any better than a
> guttersnipe in comparison.



That means MegZit be here for 10 days. I hope they have someone to guard this 'roving reporter', she's not safe to be left anywhere Royal for 10 days.


Send for Major Johnny Thompson!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> That means MegZit be here for 10 days. I hope they have someone to guard this 'roving reporter', she's not safe to be left anywhere Royal for 10 days.
> 
> 
> Send for Major Johnny Thompson!!!!


Maybe the King will send them to Cali - ya kno, to be with [aka, train] the fake kids who have never been seen interacting with real people in a public setting.


----------



## Toby93

Sophisticatted said:


> It was also stated before The Queen passed that Charles considered TW’s recent claims of not signing an NDA “a threat” and would be dealing with her accordingly.
> 
> As far as Harry’s kids are concerned, apparently Charles already told them privately (pre Oprah interview) that he would not be bestowing Prince/Princess titles on them.  I wouldn’t be surprised, when things settle down, if Charles revokes the titles.


Maybe that was why TW made a point of saying on the interview how her kids were not given titles because of their race.  Maybe she was already told?


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> That means MegZit be here for 10 days. I hope they have someone to guard this 'roving reporter', she's not safe to be left anywhere Royal for 10 days.
> 
> 
> Send for Major Johnny Thompson!!!!


Do you think she will be able to leave the invisible kids in CA for that long?  This gives her a perfect excuse to bow out and leave the BRF to grieve by themselves.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> They are speculating she may have passed away a few hours before it was announced. She may not have seen any of her family.


She may have been on morphine, hence the "resting comfortably". From what I've been told by someone who had firsthand knowledge with her mother, the pain of bone cancer is awful. I hope at least Angela Kelly and devoted aides were with her.


----------



## Kevinaxx

^saw that on a friend’s story.

—

Sad day.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Do you think she will be able to leave the invisible kids in CA for that long?  *This gives her a perfect excuse to bow out and leave the BRF to grieve by themselves.*



Please  

Bye


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Every detail in this photo is major l.o.v.e.  The veil, the mask, the earrings, the necklace, the eyes -



It is iconic.


----------



## charlottawill

opensesame said:


> I genuinely can’t believe she is a professor. Maybe she got hacked? Students have to be careful taking her classes; I have no idea what she teaches in her classes.


Welcome to academia in the US today.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Every detail in this photo is major l.o.v.e.  The veil, the mask, the earrings, the necklace, the eyes -


Regarding clothing choices, it is not too soon to say that in a world of drab and predictable sartorial choices, we will miss the constant variety of color and the hats and the brooches.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Welcome to academia in the US today.



and exported to a university near you (globally)

Remind me who the colonialists are NOW?


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> It really is the end of an era. She was such a constant presence on the world scene.


I don't think there are many, if any, here who were alive when she wasn't the Queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Ugh turned on ABC and they had Scoobie on blabbering away.  Seriously, ABC that’s who you had to talk about the Queen??? And he managed to slip in something about Harry.


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Regarding clothing choices, it is not too soon to say that in a world of drab and predictable sartorial choices, we will miss the constant variety of color and the hats and the brooches.



Her beautiful and very high-Modern (Andrew) Grima broaches, her iconic Launer bags...


----------



## CobaltBlu

Aimee3 said:


> Ugh turned on ABC and they had Scoobie on blabbering away.  Seriously, ABC that’s who you had to talk about the Queen??? And he managed to slip in something about Harry.


right? how irritating. I have limited news access and am pretty stuck with ABC at the moment.


----------



## lanasyogamama

.


----------



## charlottawill

TimeToShop said:


> You know she will be weeping and wailing. Going on about how she lost the only grandmother she ever had. They were so close, don’t you know, would chat every Sunday.


I don't think so, at least not while the events occur. Maybe afterward. If we thought they were reigned in at the Jubilee that will pale in comparison to their minders for this.


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> right? how irritating. I have limited news access and am pretty stuck with ABC at the moment.


I don't watch ABC, but NBC and CNN seem to have decent commentators. NBC's chief foreign correspondent Keir Simmons was fighting emotions earlier today. Also a teary Jenna Bush Hager on Today, who just happened to be in Scotland to meet with C&C and interview her about her reading initiatives. What timing


----------



## gracekelly

Kevinaxx said:


> View attachment 5606482
> 
> 
> ^saw that on a friend’s story.
> 
> —
> 
> Sad day.


Plus wasn't Meg waiting for an apology from TQ? She will never get one because The Queen goes to Heaven and Meg will go to.... the Outer Darkness.  (I am borrowing that term from the Church of Latter Day Saints because I think it is even better than saying Hell)


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> Ugh turned on ABC and they had Scoobie on blabbering away.  Seriously, ABC that’s who you had to talk about the Queen??? And he managed to slip in something about Harry.


Omit just Markled an entire network!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Her beautiful and very high-Modern (Andrew) Grima broaches, her iconic Launer bags...


She has plenty of young female family members, so I imagine quite a few of these items will be passed down. I hope whatever goes to Lilibet cannot be accessed by her mother.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m very glad to hear that the titles aren’t a rubber stamp.


----------



## 1LV

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope if she goes, she sits in the back row.


… two streets over.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Plus wasn't Meg waiting for an apology from TQ?


I think it was Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges. To say she wanted an apology from the Queen would be a bridge too far.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She has plenty of young female family members, so I imagine quite a few of these items will be passed down. I hope whatever goes to Lilibet cannot be accessed by her mother.


If AK has a say, nothing will be sent to CA.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised, when things settle down, if Charles revokes the titles.


Oh how I hope so! She is nothing without that title.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> If AK has a say, nothing will be sent to CA.


I was thinking of items bequeathed in her will. The Queen was too good a person to ignore Lilibet, whatever her true feelings regarding MM might have been. But let's hope it is held in royal custody until she is an adult. I know it won't happen but it would truly be poetic justice for the Queen to bequeath the tiara that MM demanded for the wedding to Lilibet when she is 21.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

I was part way through a post earlier when my husband saw the news.
 I was speculating that travel arrangements were most likely made first for the senior Royals ( and Andy) and as a priority (excluding Harry and the other wider family grandchildren - as per the pecking order at the jubilee) Hence his solo travel. It was however reported that 7 members had travelled to Scotland but no photos confirm this. ( Zara, Bea and Peter?) 

I am amazed at the strength of character and fortitude that the Queen was able to discharge her duties on Tuesday given how gravely ill we now know she was. That's the embodiment of service, of courage, of duty. 

I do hope this is a big wake up call for both of H&M


----------



## millivanilli

jehaga said:


> How petty am I to wish that MM does not attend any of the ceremonies that are to follow after the Queen passes? She's so disgusting and not worthy to be present in these historical events. She will think all eyes are on her and that everyone is there for her.


na, even I am not very thrilled by the MM show yet to come.


----------



## charlottawill

Laila619 said:


> I’m irrationally angry that these two losers fortuitously happen to be in the UK and are being talked about during this sad time. How do they seemingly always land on their feet? It’s infuriating. You know they will somehow spin it that the Queen saw her “dear grandson” and his “beloved wife” one last time and then she was able to die in peace. I hope King Charles puts an end to their antics.



Maybe we should make this a Harkle free zone for a bit out of respect for the Queen.


----------



## csshopper

Wonder if the originally under the radar overnight hospital stay last October 21st was to do bone scans and any other testing that required equipment not available outside a hospital? Only thinking of it in terms of something that would be very much a part of her dedication to service “as long as I am able.” Keep the focus on the job, not her health. Deal with it as something relatable to millions of aging people, “mobility issues” lessening distracting minute scrutiny of every move in the past 11 months.

Thinking about the blowhard proclamation from the h y p o c r i t i c a l Hazbeen the other day, about  “Showing respect..” makes me ill.


----------



## andrashik

Assuming she had bone cancer, how heartless Harry can be to not visit her and be near her in her final days..What makes the whole thing even more despicable is that nutjob's constant berating of the institution the Queen represents.. they are truly detestable. Scoobie is right there with them.

May the Queen rest in peace.


----------



## charlottawill

RAINDANCE said:


> I am amazed at the strength of character and fortitude that the Queen was able to discharge her duties on Tuesday given how gravely ill we now know she was. That's the embodiment of service, of courage, of duty.


She was not about to miss meeting her 15th and final PM. What an amazing woman.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

charlottawill said:


> I don't think there are many, if any, here who were alive when she wasn't the Queen.


Probably not on tpf. My father has been in tears as at 91 he remembers the death of her father The King and never thought he’d live to see The Queen pass away too


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> That means MegZit be here for 10 days. I hope they have someone to guard this 'roving reporter', she's not safe to be left anywhere Royal for 10 days.
> 
> 
> Send for Major Johnny Thompson!!!!



Johnny appeared in a few of the bits and pieces of the Queen shown by the BBC.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I don't think this is automatic.  Prince Andrew had to ask for the titles to be given to Eugenie and Bea and that was 30 years ago when Andrew was in favor and appeared to be doing well and had had a successful military career.  Prince Edward's children do not have the prince/princess title so I'm not sure Harry's children will get it.


And why should they get the titles if their parents chose to step back from royal life? I hope KC strips the Harkles' at an appropriate time.


----------



## Chanbal

@bag-mania, @charlottawill et al. you can find the response of Carnegie Mellon in the Spoiler.



Spoiler: wow


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If she comes back here, she needs to find a quiet corner, sit down and be quiet.  No more word salads, no more pompous complaints about the BRF, no more swanning about the US.  No, just no.


Wishful thinking unfortunately.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania, @charlottawill et al. you can find the answer of Carnegie Mellon in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow



I did see it, thanks. No excuse for publicly posting something like that. But such is social media.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I was thinking of items bequeathed in her will. The Queen was too good a person to ignore Lilibet, whatever her true feelings regarding MM might have been. But let's hope it is held in royal custody until she is an adult. I know it won't happen but it would truly be poetic justice for the Queen to bequeath the tiara that MM demanded for the wedding to Lilibet when she is 21.



That tiara will go straight to Charles.


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Oh my.  Gives one hope that there is a divine plan after all. Rest In Peace


That will become an iconic photo.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That tiara will go straight to Charles.


But I don't think it's a good look for him


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Oh my.  Gives one hope that there is a divine plan after all. Rest In Peace


I'm not crying you're crying.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania, @charlottawill et al. you can find the response of Carnegie Mellon in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow




OMG that woman is even more dramatic than Raptor. Torture and kill her like most in-laws do? Girl, get back on your meds. Also the university's answer is a bit lukewarm, isn't it. I'd like to see they fired her in due time, like tomorrow. I don't know where that idea that hate speech is somehow covered by the right to free speech comes from.


----------



## Sina08

RAINDANCE said:


> I am amazed at the strength of character and fortitude that the Queen was able to discharge her duties on Tuesday given how gravely ill we now know she was. That's the embodiment of service, of courage, of duty.
> 
> I do hope this is a big wake up call for both of H&M


Gives M’s whining about working after the non-event in SA (Archie and the heater) a whole other dimension, doesn’t it?


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Assuming she had bone cancer, how heartless Harry can be to not visit her and be near her in her final days


Maybe he wasn't told for precisely the reason that the Harkles would have milked it. And it is not uncommon for people with end stage cancer to keep it to themselves. She may not have wanted anyone's pity. She looked happy and peaceful in her last public appearances, and I'm sure those closest to her made sure she was comfortable at the end.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Bone cancer is rough, my father had it.  I remember driving him to the doctor and he would cringe at the smallest bump in the road, and I would feel so terrible.


----------



## charlottawill

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Probably not on tpf. My father has been in tears as at 91 he remembers the death of her father The King and never thought he’d live to see The Queen pass away too


Aww, I hope you are able to give him a hug.


----------



## millivanilli

charlottawill said:


> I'm not crying you're crying.


I am not crying. There was something in my eyes.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania, @charlottawill et al. you can find the response of Carnegie Mellon in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow




Thank you for posting. Regardless, I'm a little tired of "Bla, bla, bla doesn't represent us bla bla bla" and then it's all forgotten and forgiven and nothing happens to the offender. When others have been fired for MUCH LESS, her a** needs to go. Sadly, she'd likely be picked up in no time by Berkeley, Princeton or Yale.


----------



## charlottawill

carmen56 said:


> Johnny appeared in a few of the bits and pieces of the Queen shown by the BBC.


He must be heartbroken. And I'll bet he's not going to be shopping a memoir anytime soon.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I was thinking of items bequeathed in her will. The Queen was too good a person to ignore Lilibet, whatever her true feelings regarding MM might have been. But let's hope it is held in royal custody until she is an adult. I know it won't happen but it would truly be poetic justice for the Queen to bequeath the tiara that MM demanded for the wedding to Lilibet when she is 21.



Most of the big jewels belong to the Crown. They stay with the Crown.


----------



## charlottawill

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Oh my.  Gives one hope that there is a divine plan after all. Rest In Peace



Coincidence? I think not...


----------



## Gal4Dior

I do find it very fitting that TW had her likely "last" chance to redeem herself in front of Netflix with this "tour," only to be completely overshadowed by the death of HMTQ. With the country in mourning for 10 days, even her recent "successes" are already forgotten. TW must be breaking things left and right alone at Frogmore. She'll probably scold the Ginge for leaving her behind when he may actually be genuinely broken inside due to gan gan's death. Maybe Prince No Ballz will finally see TW for who she really is.


----------



## tenshix

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania, @charlottawill et al. you can find the response of Carnegie Mellon in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow




I can’t stand the drama this woman is trying to stir up with words that are simply untrue. Exaggeration of this level is just BEYOND and I get why she’s a supporter of MM now, birds of a feather.

Also it’s incredibly rude all the other things she said earlier and wishing agony and painful death on another person. The Queen doesn’t deserve any of the hate she’s spewing. It’s absolutely hateful and makes her no better than the colonizers. I hope that Anya woman eventually finds peace in her life.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Most of the big jewels belong to the Crown. They stay with the Crown.


I know, it's just a fun thought.


----------



## charlottawill

Should have put on the waterproof mascara today....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## opensesame

charlottawill said:


> Welcome to academia in the US today.



I’m literally blown away (in a bad way) by her comments. I’ve met some nasty (racist, etc) people in academia (supposed to be neutral, right? Nah) in the US, but none so outspoken in an extreme way.


----------



## charlottawill

opensesame said:


> I’m literally blown away (in a bad way) by her comments. I’ve met some nasty (racist, etc) people in academia (supposed to be neutral, right? Nah) in the US, but none so outspoken in an extreme way.


There will be repercussions. I'm confident it won't sit well with a lot of influential alumni.


----------



## charlottawill

I'm not a religious person but this gives me pause....


----------



## CobaltBlu

Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  As son of the King aren't there expectations for him? 

Now that his father is King, will Harry grow the heck up finally?  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes. 

I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm not a religious person but this gives me pause....



that is amazing but the thing that brought a tear to my eye was the the post somewhere above where Philip is waiting for her


----------



## tenshix

charlottawill said:


> I'm not a religious person but this gives me pause....



A very beautiful and symbolic way of a peaceful passing. She was a very devout woman and I’d like to think this was how she was picked up into Heaven. Rest In Peace Queen Elizabeth


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CobaltBlu said:


> Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  As son of the King aren't there expectations for him?
> 
> Now that his father is King, will Harry grow the heck up finally?  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes.
> 
> I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.


I suspect he’ll behave like the rebel royal just as Princess Margaret did given that his brother is in line to the throne not him.


----------



## charlottawill

NVM


----------



## Chanbal

There are some interesting points here with a small reference to Hazz


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> that is amazing but the thing that brought a tear to my eye was the the post somewhere above where Philip is waiting for her


Someone on Twitter said it is her rainbow bridge to him


----------



## rose60610

CobaltBlu said:


> Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  As son of the King aren't there expectations for him?
> 
> Now that his father is King, *will Harry grow the heck up finally?*  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes.
> 
> I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.



When Haz & Claw wanted out they knew Philip and TQ were very elderly. Out is out, especially when they tell Oprah the BRF is trapped, racist, mean and drove Meghan to suicidal thoughts. Soooooo, I'd think that bridge is pretty well burned to ashes. If they try to muscle into Charles' coronation or walk in front of William at the funeral I'd hope Major Johnny or a whole crew from MI6 would snare them.


----------



## gracekelly

opensesame said:


> I’m literally blown away (in a bad way) by her comments. I’ve met some nasty (racist, etc) people in academia (supposed to be neutral, right? Nah) in the US, but none so outspoken in an extreme way.


If this woman wanted attention, she got it.  Some of the negative feelings over this will come back at her in very subtle ways. It won't be forgotten.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That tiara will go straight to Charles.


Won’t all the jewelry stay locked in the closet on UK soil?  Camilla would have first choice, then Kate, then Charlotte, maybe Sofie?  Doubt any of it will be seen on US soil.


----------



## DoggieBags

scarlet555 said:


> that's you thinking Harry has a clue
> he is not the least normal


He may have been more interested in what she left him in her will.


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


> Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  As son of the King aren't there expectations for him?
> 
> Now that his father is King, will Harry grow the heck up finally?  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes.
> 
> I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.



On the other hand, KCIII may have no patience with Harry and his antics. He's not a frail 96 year old mourning the loss of a spouse.  He may lay down the law, cut off financial support for real (as the Duchy of Cornwall now goes to William), and tell Harry he's not going to tolerate his or his wife's behavior, that their titles are on the line and he's going to be removed as Counsellor of State.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> When Haz & Claw wanted out they knew Philip and TQ were very elderly. Out is out, especially when they tell Oprah the BRF is trapped, racist, mean and drove Meghan to suicidal thoughts. Soooooo, I'd think that bridge is pretty well burned to ashes. If they try to muscle into Charles' coronation or walk in front of William at the funeral I'd hope Major Johnny or a whole crew from MI6 would snare them.


If the Sussex thought that they were being handled during the Jubilee. wait until the coronation.  The security will be so tight for many reasons.  Heads of state and monarchs from the planet will be there and everything tightly controlled.  If the Sussex try anything, they will be shut down and not in a nice way like they were with the usher at St. Paul's.  There will be military and police all over the place.  No showing up late and pushing and shoving and solo walks down the aisle.  This is where and when you go and if you don't like it, stay home.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Every detail in this photo is major l.o.v.e.  The veil, the mask, the earrings, the necklace, the eyes -


Wanna bet that you know who will try to copy and fail miserably?


----------



## CobaltBlu

youngster said:


> On the other hand, KCIII may have no patience with Harry and his antics. He's not a frail 96 year old mourning the loss of a spouse.  He may lay down the law, cut off financial support for real (as the Duchy of Cornwall now goes to William), and tell Harry he's not going to tolerate his or his wife's behavior, that their titles are on the line and he's going to be removed as Counsellor of State.


Hope so....  I hope it doesnt get messy.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> He may have been more interested in what she left him in her will.


She didn't leave him anything.  Maybe a memento, but no money.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> On the other hand, KCIII may have no patience with Harry and his antics. He's not a frail 96 year old mourning the loss of a spouse.  He may lay down the law, cut off financial support for real (as the Duchy of Cornwall now goes to William), and tell Harry he's not going to tolerate his or his wife's behavior, that their titles are on the line and he's going to be removed as Counsellor of State.


We can only hope.....


----------



## Debbini

rose60610 said:


> Let me guess: she has a "Hate has no home here" sign on her lawn. Clearly she and other pot stirrers like her must twist a world event into some diatribe about themselves. I wish she hadn't deleted her first tweets. Let the world know how she really is and how slobbering woke Carnegie Mellon is to have her on staff. If she doesn't get fired for those tweets then I hope major donors cut off Carnegie Mellon.


I sent screenshots of all her tweets to the University.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF Scobie. Going after a toddler is low even for him. Also if I was William I'd be so tempted to end his pathetic little career NOW.


There’s a biblical saying what goes around comes around. I have Uber faith that it comes to fruition. Nastiness and ugliness of the heart make miserable people and they do pay for it in their soul, one way or another.


charlottawill said:


> There will be repercussions. I'm confident it won't sit well with a lot of influential alumni.


my father went to that school. It was all about positive thinking. You’re right it is not going to sit well with alumnis and donors.


----------



## CobaltBlu

So since scobie is on ABC who is hanging out with Meghan?  The Plumber Prince is in Balmoral.


----------



## mellibelly

charlottawill said:


> There will be repercussions. I'm confident it won't sit well with a lot of influential alumni.


I feel gross even reposting this. Part of the exchange on twitter as reported by the NY Post:

In followups to her initial post elsewhere, the Carnegie Mellon professor defended her tweet in explicit terms. After one Twitter user wrote “Ewww you stink,” Anya responded: “You mean like your p-ssy?”

This vile person teaches at the university level She shouldn't have a job by this time tomorrow. That free expression tweet from Carnegie Mellon isn't enough. I don't know anything about that school, but now my association with them is this foul human being.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  As son of the King aren't there expectations for him?
> 
> Now that his father is King, will Harry grow the heck up finally?  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes.
> 
> I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.


I have the feeling that the media will not give the Sussex any play during this time.  They won't play the game of letting them insert themselves into what is a very somber family and national occasion.  The media is pretty annoyed with MM as it is, so they will do nothing to help her look good.  I think they both will be firmly told by the gray men that if they can't do exactly what they are told to do, then don't show up.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> So since scobie is on ABC who is hanging out with Meghan?  The Plumber Prince is in Balmoral.


Maybe Markus is available for a roast chicken dinner.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I wish we had a middle finger emoji!
> 
> Has anyone asked him if "he's okay"??


Would this GIF help?


----------



## mellibelly

Lodpah said:


> There’s a biblical saying what goes around comes around. I have Uber faith that it comes to fruition. Nastiness and ugliness of the heart make miserable people and they do pay for it in their soul, one way or another.


The nastiness and ugliness of his heart is reflected in his repulsive appearance. Seriously, I have to avert my eyes whenever his picture is shown. How is he getting screen time on ABC when he has a face for radio And I don't feel bad for judging his appearance, he wasn't born that way. He CHOSE that hideous, creepy face with plastic surgery.


----------



## needlv

Gal4Dior said:


> I do find it very fitting that TW had her likely "last" chance to redeem herself in front of Netflix with this "tour," only to be completely overshadowed by the death of HMTQ. With the country in mourning for 10 days, even her recent "successes" are already forgotten. TW must be breaking things left and right alone at Frogmore. She'll probably scold the Ginge for leaving her behind when he may actually be genuinely broken inside due to gan gan's death. Maybe Prince No Ballz will finally see TW for who she really is.



MM is a schemer.  She will use the Coronation to Boost her brand and royal connection.  I’m waiting for another press release about a wreath, her outfit or anything else inappropriate and about MM.

I hope they have the same seating arrangement that they did for the jubilee.  No one wants to see a photo of Will and Catherine having to be seated anywhere near Haznoballs and his gold-digging, vacuous  wife.

although if they seat everyone by order, Haz and MM get to sit next to Andrew.  So maybe seat them across the aisle - not near the Senior Royals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> So since scobie is on ABC who is hanging out with Meghan?  The Plumber Prince is in Balmoral.


Markus Anderson - @gracekelly just saw your post He is my first guess, too.
2nd guess = Edward Enninful
3rd guess = Elton?  Anyone who wants the inside scoop before the world finds out, such as Nflix


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I don't think there are many, if any, here who were alive when she wasn't the Queen.


I was 5 when HM was crowned and now I wish I could remember it.


----------



## gelbergirl

I see Harry attending that Coronation alone, no MM.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Debbini said:


> I sent screenshots of all her tweets to the University.


She should be fired immediately. There should be no doubt in their minds about it..


----------



## Addicted to bags

This is a lovely story about the queen. 









						What Queen Elizabeth said when asked 'have you ever met the queen?' — Reuters
					

The story of how Queen Elizabeth handled an encounter with an American hiker who did not recognise her, recounted by a former bodyguard who was with her that day, revealed the fun-loving side of her personality that the public rarely saw.




					apple.news


----------



## Gal4Dior

needlv said:


> MM is a schemer.  She will use the Coronation to Boost her brand and royal connection.  I’m waiting for another press release about a wreath, her outfit or anything else inappropriate and about MM.
> 
> I hope they have the same seating arrangement that they did for the jubilee.  No one wants to see a photo of Will and Catherine having to be seated anywhere near Haznoballs and his gold-digging, vacuous  wife.
> 
> although if they seat everyone by order, Haz and MM get to sit next to Andrew.  So maybe seat them across the aisle - not near the Senior Royals.


She may try, but her HMTQ is the true star and a dead monarch who has sacrificed 70 years of her life to service is the true (and rightful) star for a while. 

I would think Haznoballs would rethink the release of his tell-all memoir. He needs to learn not to bite the hand that feeds you. As for TW, she will soon run out of stories about her brief "stint" at the Firm. You can only grouse about the same issues for so long before you'll be tuned out.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Should have put on the waterproof mascara today....



Can't look at this photo without tears in my eyes. So much courage and dignity…


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Should have put on the waterproof mascara today....


charlottawill said:


>



Look at the Queen’s blue hands in this photo.  You can see that she is dying.  What an incredibly fierce woman, serving her people until the very end.


----------



## Lodpah

The beautiful tribute by former President O and his wife is so touching compared to the vile accusations of TW. Now let’s see who is best to be believed? TW needs to tread carefully in throwing daggers at the Queen. She’s done, in my opinion, except to the hard core haters like that professor. There’s more love than hate!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Redbirdhermes said:


> Should have put on the waterproof mascara today....
> 
> Look at the Queen’s blue hands in this photo.  You can see that she is dying.  What an incredibly fierce woman, serving her people until the very end.


Love that she continued to wear her wedding ring.


----------



## papertiger

LVlvoe_bug said:


> She should be fired immediately. There should be no doubt in their minds about it..



It certainly brings the University's name in disrepute


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That tiara will go straight to Charles.





charlottawill said:


> But I don't think it's a good look for him


Oh, I don't know for sure, but maybe Charles would've looked better wearing the Vladimir Emerald Tiara, the one ZedZed presumably requested demanded for her wedding 


instead of this one during his Prince of Wales investiture.


----------



## Chanbal

DM is reporting on some of TW's supporters. This is the TW's legacy imo. Carnegie Mellon needs to do more. 

_The 'anti racist' professor has faced allegations of racism in the past for the words she has used online - and *in one instance, the Foundational Black American organization created a petition to get her removed from Carnegie Mellon University*._









						Twitter pulls vile tweet by woke professor mocking the dying Queen
					

Uju Anya is a teacher and associate professor  at the Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - and stirred outrage after her vicious tweet about ailing Her Majesty.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Woke liberals waste no time attacking Queen mere hours after her death
					

Opinion writers from The New York Times, New York Magazine and Atlantic all celebrated the queen's death on Thursday, saying she was an 'oppressor' - with one vowing to dance on her grave.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Redbirdhermes said:


> Should have put on the waterproof mascara today....
> 
> Look at the Queen’s blue hands in this photo.  You can see that she is dying.  What an incredibly fierce woman, serving her people until the very end.



There were comments about that on Tuesday. It was concerning, and now we know why. She got up from her deathbed to fulfill her last duty as the Queen.


----------



## charlottawill

Instead of talking about the you know who's, let's do something to commemorate the Queen's reign. I thought it would be fun to post an image of her from the year you were born. I'll go first. I know it's large but I think it's really beautiful.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

_By law, Counsellors of State include the Sovereign's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who are over the age of 21._



			https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state
		


Can they amend the law?  Let Edward do it instead of Sussex.


----------



## needlv

It didn’t take them long to release a statem,ent.  Don’t click on the link as they collect your info.  Urgh.









						Archewell | Shared Purpose. Global Action.
					

Founded by The Duke & Duchess of Sussex, Archewell unleashes the power of compassion to drive change through non-profit work & creative activations.




					archewell.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> It didn’t take them long to release a statem,ent.  Don’t click on the link as they collect your info.  Urgh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell | Shared Purpose. Global Action.
> 
> 
> Founded by The Duke & Duchess of Sussex, Archewell unleashes the power of compassion to drive change through non-profit work & creative activations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


They couldn’t find a photo???? Not one???  




One of the commenters - my thoughts, too:






Miz Beaverhausen, Duchess of Soho
*A post as cold as TW's soul. I wonder if she did that without #6's approval?*


----------



## needlv

Well, doesn’t the Queens passing mean William is in control of the money that Charles was managing?  (Charles manages the money the Queen was in charge of).  Ooh, that has just cheered me up - the thought of Haz having to ask William for $.


----------



## Debbini

The year I was born. Beautiful~


----------



## tenshix

charlottawill said:


> Instead of talking about the you know who's, let's do something to commemorate the Queen's reign. I thought it would be fun to post an image of her from the year you were born. I'll go first. I know it's large but I think it's really beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5606603





Debbini said:


> The year I was born. Beautiful~
> 
> View attachment 5606614



Could we also cross post all these lovely photos of HMTQ to her own thread?   I don’t want to lose track amidst the other convos happening.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hear that, H&M?  _stoicism, hard work, the dedication to duty, the love for the country - _perhaps you need to begin using the Oxford Dictionary [rather than that other one]


----------



## Kaka_bobo

charlottawill said:


> Instead of talking about the you know who's, let's do something to commemorate the Queen's reign. I thought it would be fun to post an image of her from the year you were born. I'll go first. I know it's large but I think it's really beautiful.





Her Majesty visiting the city I was born in on the year I was born


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> If there was any doubt what a vile character he actually is.....



This is so loathsome that I cannot believe he is right in the head. And it also implies that he sees himself as a leader of the Sucky Squats. Toady!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not sure the dates are accurate, but the tiaras are spectacular on this beautiful lady


----------



## sparklebunny

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love that she continued to wear her wedding ring.


I noticed the glint of her ring on the other hand. She remained devoted to her late husband till the very end.


----------



## xincinsin

I'm on the other side of the world. Just woke up to the sad news.
RIP Queen E II 
Yesterday was my birthday, and now it shall always be mingled in my mind with the passing of an era and the farewell to a devoted monarch whose profile was on the local currency at my birth.


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


>




Really? The Duke of York?? I’m surprised to see that along with Sussex.
why not Anne


----------



## youngster

needlv said:


> Well, doesn’t the Queens passing mean William is in control of the money that Charles was managing?  (Charles manages the money the Queen was in charge of).  Ooh, that has just cheered me up - the thought of Haz having to ask William for $.



The Duchy of Cornwall will now pass from Charles to William. It produces a substantial amount of income, some of which was used by Charles to support both William and Harry and their households. It will be very interesting to see if Will continues to send his brother money from the Duchy. I rather doubt it.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

papertiger said:


> It certainly brings the University's name in disrepute


Most definitely. I don’t know anything about this university and I already think poorly of them. Their response to the tweets was disappointing. In my opinion what she said goes far beyond free speech as their defense regardless if she used her own social media account. People know who she is and she is still a representative of the university. I’ve heard of people getting fired for saying or posting bad things on their own social media account , this should be no different. Just like football players who get into trouble on their off time that are released from teams. She owes the royal family an apology.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

gelbergirl said:


> Really? The Duke of York?? I’m surprised to see that along with Sussex.
> why not Anne



If I were Charles, I'd replace Andrew and Harry with Anne and Edward. I'd do it soon too.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> It didn’t take them long to release a statem,ent.  Don’t click on the link as they collect your info.  Urgh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archewell | Shared Purpose. Global Action.
> 
> 
> Founded by The Duke & Duchess of Sussex, Archewell unleashes the power of compassion to drive change through non-profit work & creative activations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archewell.com


Suggestion: sometimes it's better to provide a screenshot instead of a link (no accidental clicks).
Below is a comparison with the one from VB.

I read somewhere that TW has a podcast ready in case QE would pass away. I was not able to confirm the source (it's supposed to be one of the Blind Items). Allegedly…


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> Really? The Duke of York?? I’m surprised to see that along with Sussex.
> why not Anne


_By law, Counsellors of State include the Sovereign's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who are over the age of 21._

https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> If I were Charles, I'd replace Andrew and Harry with Anne and Edward. I'd do it soon too.


_By law, Counsellors of State include the Sovereign's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who are over the age of 21._

https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state


----------



## sparklebunny

charlottawill said:


> Instead of talking about the you know who's, let's do something to commemorate the Queen's reign. I thought it would be fun to post an image of her from the year you were born. I'll go first. I know it's large but I think it's really beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5606603





Here’s mine—she’s shaking hands with Frank Sinatra.


----------



## bellecate

lanasyogamama said:


> Bone cancer is rough, my father had it.  I remember driving him to the doctor and he would cringe at the smallest bump in the road, and I would feel so terrible.


I pray it wasn’t bone cancer, osteosarcoma that her Majesty had. I’m so sorry your father has it. Horrid disease, it invades so many other parts of the body and as you say is extremely painful. We lost a son in his early 20’s to Osteosarcoma.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My year is somewhere in this group - right now I feel like a 100 year old  









						100 Photos of Queen Elizabeth That Capture Her Exceptional Life
					






					www.popsugar.com


----------



## sparklebunny

bellecate said:


> I pray it wasn’t bone cancer, osteosarcoma that her Majesty had. I’m so sorry your father has it. Horrid disease, it invades so many other parts of the body and as you say is extremely painful. We lost a son in his early 20’s to Osteosarcoma.


I’m extremely sorry for your loss.


----------



## papertiger

I think we should place all place all tributes to the Queen here:https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/rip-hm-the-queen-elizabeth-ii-1926-2022.1042079/page-70

If we have them in this thread they will be lost in among Z-List and HaZ-bin, whereas people will go to that thread for many years to come to look at the tributes, pictures and comments


----------



## Toby93

Someone posted that the line of succession has been updated already.....


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> _By law, Counsellors of State include the Sovereign's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who are over the age of 21._
> 
> https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state



ok. Clearly it’s not a popularity contest.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> _By law, Counsellors of State include the Sovereign's spouse and the next four people in the line of succession who are over the age of 21._
> 
> https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state



So, unless they change the law, the UK is stuck with Harry as a Counsellor of State for a long, long time. Assuming Charles lives many years, the Counsellors would eventually be Camilla, Will, George, Charlotte and Louis, once all 3 Cambridge kids turn 21. That would finally knock Harry off the list. 

But then he might make it back on as a Counsellor, once William becomes king and the Counsellors would be Kate, the 3 Cambridge kids, assuming they are all over 21, and Harry. Ugh. They should seriously think about changing the law lol.


----------



## Toby93

I wonder if this is true?


----------



## tiktok

LVlvoe_bug said:


> ld be no different. Just like football players who get into trouble on their off time that are released from teams. She owes the royal



The fact that this institution thinks an adult who expresses themselves in this vile way and clearly lacks basic judgment and manners is someone they expect to educate others tells you everything you need to know about the institution and its values. I don't care what her race is or what her professional qualifications are, no educator should speak the way she did. She has full freedom of speech as a private citizen, but a university should uphold some standards when it comes to allowing hate speech by their professors.


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Instead of talking about the you know who's, let's do something to commemorate the Queen's reign. I thought it would be fun to post an image of her from the year you were born. I'll go first. I know it's large but I think it's really beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5606603


I’ll put one in her own thread. I love this idea. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> They couldn’t find a photo???? Not one???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the commenters - my thoughts, too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Miz Beaverhausen, Duchess of Soho
> *A post as cold as TW's soul. I wonder if she did that without #6's approval?*



That’s it? Seriously?


bellecate said:


> I pray it wasn’t bone cancer, osteosarcoma that her Majesty had. I’m so sorry your father has it. Horrid disease, it invades so many other parts of the body and as you say is extremely painful. We lost a son in his early 20’s to Osteosarcoma.


I am so sorry for your loss.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Taken the year I was born.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Maybe she'll wear the red jumpsuit - otherwise how will we know where she is in among he sea of black


You will be able to spot her because she will bare her extremely bronzed shoulders. Every camera and drone will see the metallic reflection.


Chanbal said:


> _*The Duchess of Sussex’s reps had previously said she would be heading to Scotland with her husband to see the late Queen, but later said plans changed because of the “fluid” situation. *
> 
> Insiders emphasized there was nothing nefarious in her decision to not go to Balmoral._
> 
> *She and Harry were already in the UK, staying at their old home, Frogmore Cottage in Windsor, when news broke of the Queen’s condition.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry arrives too late to say goodbye to Queen Elizabeth
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was among the last of the Queen Elizabeth’s close relatives to make it to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


The fluid situation probably means she thought QE was faking it, because Zedzee would totally fake death for sympathy points (re: mystery over-dramatic singing miscarriage).


gracekelly said:


> I think before William can be called The Prince of Wales he has to be invested by The King.  I recall watching Charles investiture ceremony on TV way back when.


That will be after everything is settled. No point rushing it.


Toby93 said:


> Do you think that if the Queen has been sick for a while, that Harry was informed?  That would make it all worse to think that he let TW go ahead and print that magazine article and trash HMTQ in her podcast


If he knew and he told Zedzee, that unhinged creature would probably see it as encouragement to act out. Bullies like to zero in on the vulnerable.


csshopper said:


> *She’s probably busy trying to get a freebie designer black dress. *Actually any old sack would do. In the same building with the elegantly Royal Duchess of Cambridge (remember the photo of her shot through the car window at PP’s service dressed and veiled in black?) TW will never look any better than a
> guttersnipe in comparison.


I can totally believe this.


charlottawill said:


> I think it was Charles, Camilla and the Cambridges. To say she wanted an apology from the Queen would be a bridge too far.


Nah, she wanted the Fountain of Wealth from Charles, acknowledgement that she is the greatest from TQ(RIP) and for everyone else to step aside so that she can be the next monarch. Anything less would be racist.


charlottawill said:


> But I don't think it's a good look for him


Mike Tindall could pull off a tiara!


----------



## Chanbal

Bezos, you deserve a thank you!



Spoiler: Bezos


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #9
					

Talk about selling secrets, this royal will be doing that shortly once he gets cut off.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## octopus17

I thought Harry looked gutted in the car approaching Balmoral and said so to DH. 
DH brought me up short and said he's too late, he and his family were given an open invitation in August to come and stay which he snubbed and he's going to have to live with it...


----------



## Chanbal

I think Kate's decision to stay behind was to facilitate the absence of TW. This wouldn't be the 1st time that Kate helps with a delicate situation. 










						Meghan Markle's absence in Scotland likely due to Kate Middleton's decision to stay behind, expert says
					

Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton did not travel with Prince Harry and Prince William to Scotland to be with Queen Elizabeth II before she passed away on Thursday.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## oldbag

Well, I was born during the reign of George VI, but I still consider the Queen to have been my lifelong queen even though I am not English, just a hopeless anglophile.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Someone posted that the line of succession has been updated already.....
> 
> View attachment 5606629


Isn’t it an age thing?  When they turn 18, they can take the title unless the King bestows it sooner, right?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG that woman is even more dramatic than Raptor. Torture and kill her like most in-laws do? Girl, get back on your meds. Also the university's answer is a bit lukewarm, isn't it. I'd like to see they fired her in due time, like tomorrow. I don't know where that idea that hate speech is somehow covered by the right to free speech comes from.


There is certainly a double standard in academia. They would not be so tolerant if someone else said similar things about somebody they liked.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I think Kate's decision to stay behind was to facilitate the absence of TW. This wouldn't be the 1st time that Kate helps with a delicate situation.
> View attachment 5606638
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's absence in Scotland likely due to Kate Middleton's decision to stay behind, expert says
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton did not travel with Prince Harry and Prince William to Scotland to be with Queen Elizabeth II before she passed away on Thursday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com



Imo it makes sense for Kate to have stayed.  Staying means she can take care of her children, get everyone’s clothes prepped [remember they recently moved] and work with the palace to prepare for the services.  She is also moving up a position to Princess of Wales, so she is a busy lady.  I doubt her decision has anything to do with the Never-Do-Well’s.  I do believe MM stayed because she did not pack for Scotland [has she ever been there?].  Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## lanasyogamama

He may have been gutted, or thinking about all those other family members traveling together while he sits totally alone.


----------



## purseinsanity

I refused to watch any American news channels because I didn't need or want to hear about how Haz and TW are "coping" and the stupid, incessant biases.  I went straight to BBC.  They did a lovely photo gallery of the Queen's life and the last picture before her portrait at the end of the montage was one of her with Catherine, both beaming.  Loved it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania, @charlottawill et al. you can find the response of Carnegie Mellon in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: wow



Good.  Now do what multiple other institutions did to non POCs and just fire her and cancel her, no other questions asked.  No, I'm not Caucasian.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That tiara will go straight to Charles.





charlottawill said:


> But I don't think it's a good look for him


Whether it's a good look or not, I'd be very careful of what gets passed to Invisibet.  Her "mother" IMO would have to problem taking it for her personal use.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Whether it's a good look or not, I'd be very careful of what gets passed to Invisibet.  Her "mother" IMO would have to problem taking it for her personal use.


Nothing will leave the UK.  Ever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  *As son of the King* aren't there expectations for him?
> 
> *Now that his father is King*, will Harry grow the heck up finally?  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes.
> 
> I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.


Are you referring to the same father TW claimed Haz "lost" just a few mere days ago?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Good.  Now do what multiple other institutions did to non POCs and just fire her and cancel her, no other questions asked.  No, I'm not Caucasian.


There are moments in history that show the tide has turned.  I believe we are living in one now. 
Someone with that level of hate, even if posted on a ‘personal’ page, is seriously disturbed.  Imagine if a teenager posted that. We know those sort of posts represent a seriously disturbed person.  We cannot excuse that stuff any more if we want a better world.


----------



## tenshix

CarryOn2020 said:


> There are moments in history that show the tide has turned.  I believe we are living in one now.
> Someone with that level of hate, even if posted on a ‘personal’ page, is seriously disturbed.  Imagine if a teenager posted that. We know those sort of posts represent a seriously disturbed person.  We cannot excuse that stuff any more if we want a better world.


I completely agree. There is a difference with being honest & outspoken of one’s opinion (free speech) versus being vile & hateful with malicious intent. Not to mention gross exaggeration & dramatization of reality. I hope she gets the help she needs.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Whether it's a good look or not, I'd be very careful of what gets passed to Invisibet.  Her "mother" IMO would have to problem taking it for her personal use.


Lilibet is going to be raised as a shallow valley girl. Everything about her heritage will seem foreign and strange to her.


----------



## mellibelly

This made me tear up all over again. Scroll through for the Queen with her dogs over the years


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> Gosh, reading the accounts of what is going on in the next few days, not to mention the Coronation and so many things in the future for King Charles III, it seems Harry is either going to have to show up or be disappeared entirely; if he is there, will TW Be there too? She will need a babysitter and a security pat-down if so. What is going to happen now?  As son of the King aren't there expectations for him?
> 
> Now that his father is King, will Harry grow the heck up finally?  I am afraid these sussexes will really draw the focus away from the transition and the early years of the reign of the new King.  Yikes.
> 
> I have a lot of apprehension about the upcoming days and weeks.


Oh, sure, they and their squad will try.   But,  they will be drowned out by the majesty of a coronation.  Watch QE’s coronation.  It is a meaningful, solemn, religious, majestic ceremony, rich in meaning and significance. It is not merely pomp and circumstance.  We will see that in action soon.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> DM is reporting on some of TW's supporters. This is the TW's legacy imo. Carnegie Mellon needs to do more.
> 
> _The 'anti racist' professor has faced allegations of racism in the past for the words she has used online - and *in one instance, the Foundational Black American organization created a petition to get her removed from Carnegie Mellon University*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter pulls vile tweet by woke professor mocking the dying Queen
> 
> 
> Uju Anya is a teacher and associate professor  at the Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - and stirred outrage after her vicious tweet about ailing Her Majesty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woke liberals waste no time attacking Queen mere hours after her death
> 
> 
> Opinion writers from The New York Times, New York Magazine and Atlantic all celebrated the queen's death on Thursday, saying she was an 'oppressor' - with one vowing to dance on her grave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


These crazed individuals, in their fanaticism about their fanatical stances, clearly show what is wrong with the US today.  Having lived here for over 40 years, it breaks my heart.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Get rid of Haz and Andy!  Replace them with Anne and Edward if there's any sense in the world.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Well, doesn’t the Queens passing mean William is in control of the money that Charles was managing?  (Charles manages the money the Queen was in charge of).  Ooh, that has just cheered me up - the thought of Haz having to ask William for $.


Duchy of Cornwall I believe?  William is now Duke of Cornwall.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Get rid of Haz and Andy!  Replace them with Anne and Edward if there's any sense in the world.


Except there is a pesky law that says the CoS includes the sovereign’s spouse and the next 4 in line.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> These crazed individuals, in their fanaticism about their fanatical stances, clearly show what is wrong with the US today.  Having lived here for over 40 years, it breaks my heart.


I'm with you, it also breaks my heart. These are 'so called' educators. Instead of promoting tolerance and common sense, they spread racism and hate…


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Get rid of Haz and Andy!  Replace them with Anne and Edward if there's any sense in the world.


You got my vote!


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> He may have been gutted, or thinking about all those other family members traveling together while he sits totally alone.


I believe he's "gutted" more because he has to face the father he "lost" and the brother he's bashed, who will now be in charge of any money that may or may not go to him.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Except there is a pesky law that says the CoS includes the sovereign’s spouse and the next 4 in line.


I know.  Wishful thinking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> You got my vote!


But  there’s a law:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

…











						Her happy, final summer in Balmoral that brimmed with thoughts of Philip
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

Cornflower Blue said:


> I thought Harry looked gutted in the car approaching Balmoral and said so to DH.


Maybe scared he has to face his family who he has badmouthed for years.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Won’t all the jewelry stay locked in the closet on UK soil?  Camilla would have first choice, then Kate, then Charlotte, maybe Sofie?  Doubt any of it will be seen on US soil.


I believe she had private pieces separate from the Crown Jewels that she could distribute as she saw fit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I believe he's "gutted" more because he has to face the father he "lost" and the brother he's bashed, who will now be in charge of any money that may or may not go to him.


I believe he is terrified. 
 It’s one thing to mouth off to 2 women [not from your country] while sitting in their garden. 
It is another to face 4 *men* [ raised by Prince Phillip] who are devoted to their Queen and their country.  Undoubtedly they will be standing in one of those palace rooms with very high ceilings that has a haunting echo.  No tea will be served. No biscuits. Temperature set to freezing.  The hard stares and silence will cause the weak to crumble. Hazzi is weak.  If those 4 men show up in full uniform or with the guards standing behind them,  well,  good luck, Haz.  Look again at the determination on their faces.  They were born for this moment. They know it. They sense it.  Yes, they are mournful but they are also on the same page. They will protect their monarchy. At all costs.  They are not to be trifled with.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5606690
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her happy, final summer in Balmoral that brimmed with thoughts of Philip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk



In watching all the coverage today it really struck me how much she had declined in less than two years. I saw a clip of her 2020 Christmas message and the difference was shocking. I think it was a combination of Philip's passing, the ongoing family drama and whatever was ailing her physically. May she Rest In Peace with Philip at her side again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I believe she had private pieces separate from the Crown Jewels that she could distribute as she saw fit.


I believe they stay on UK soil.  Nada will come to the US. Ever.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> I believe he is terrified.
> It’s one thing to mouth off to 2 women [not from your country] while sitting in their garden.
> It is another to face 4 *men* [ raised by Prince Phillip] who are devoted to their Queen and their country.  Undoubtedly they will be standing in one of those palace rooms with very high ceilings that has a haunting echo.  No tea will be served. No biscuits.
> 
> View attachment 5606691


No tea will be served. No biscuits. No Meg to hang on to like a stuffed teddy bear.  He's on his own!


----------



## charlottawill

mellibelly said:


> I feel gross even reposting this. Part of the exchange on twitter as reported by the NY Post:
> 
> In followups to her initial post elsewhere, the Carnegie Mellon professor defended her tweet in explicit terms. After one Twitter user wrote “Ewww you stink,” Anya responded: “You mean like your p-ssy?”
> 
> This vile person teaches at the university level She shouldn't have a job by this time tomorrow. That free expression tweet from Carnegie Mellon isn't enough. I don't know anything about that school, but now my association with them is this foul human being.



She is a black mark on an otherwise prestigious institution. Oh wait, that's probably considered racist   

They may not be able to fire her but her career there, and hopefully at other universities, will be derailed.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> No tea will be served. No biscuits. No Meg to hang on to like a stuffed teddy bear.  He's on his own!


Maybe it will be the long overdue wakeup call that he needs.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Oh, I don't know for sure, but maybe Charles would've looked better wearing the Vladimir Emerald Tiara, the one ZedZed presumably requested demanded for her wedding
> View attachment 5606583
> 
> instead of this one during his Prince of Wales investiture.
> View attachment 5606579


I remember seeing the investiture while I was visiting my grandmother, and complaining about the TV time it was taking up.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I remember seeing the investiture while I was visiting my grandmother, and complaining about the TV time it was taking up.


I remember not liking the Queen's hat.  It was very of the time but not attractive.  lol


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I believe he is terrified.
> It’s one thing to mouth off to 2 women [not from your country] while sitting in their garden.
> It is another to face 4 *men* [ raised by Prince Phillip] who are devoted to their Queen and their country.  Undoubtedly they will be standing in one of those palace rooms with very high ceilings that has a haunting echo.  No tea will be served. No biscuits. Temperature set to freezing.  The hard stares and silence will cause the weak to crumble. Hazzi is weak.  If those 4 men show up in full uniform or with the guards standing behind them,  well,  good luck, Haz.  Look again at the determination on their faces.  They were born for this moment. They know it. They sense it.  Yes, they are mournful but they are also on the same page. They will protect their monarchy. At all costs.  They are not to be trifled with.
> 
> View attachment 5606691


It was nice that Will drove Andy, despite opposing his return as a working royal. Hazz was able to surpass Randy Andy, he didn't even get a ride to Balmoral with the rest of the family.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Not sure the dates are accurate, but the tiaras are spectacular on this beautiful lady
> View attachment 5606617


 Gorgeous tiaras that ZedZed Megaliar will never get her grubby hands on.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Are you referring to the same father TW claimed Haz "lost" just a few mere days ago?


Yep the same guy who was trapped as well. Harry is going to have to tap dance his way out of lots of previous statements. The thing is he isn’t smart enough.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It was nice that Will drove Andy, despite opposing his return as a working royal. Hazz was able to surpass Randy Andy, he didn't even get a ride to Balmoral with the rest of the family.


No one has ever doubted Andrew’s devotion to his mother. I was not one who thought that his helping her into the church at his father’s memorial was wrong. TQ was clearly letting the world know her feelings about her son as was her right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Gorgeous tiaras that ZedZed Megaliar will never get her grubby hands on.


She must be guttural about it, as well as inarticulately moaning and groaning. Wonder how long before her plastic pal will write about her close and special relationship with QE (sweet nods all the way), and those video calls because the Douchess can just call any time she likes.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

youngster said:


> So, unless they change the law, the UK is stuck with Harry as a Counsellor of State for a long, long time. Assuming Charles lives many years, the Counsellors would eventually be Camilla, Will, George, Charlotte and Louis, once all 3 Cambridge kids turn 21. That would finally knock Harry off the list.
> 
> But then he might make it back on as a Counsellor, once William becomes king and the Counsellors would be Kate, the 3 Cambridge kids, assuming they are all over 21, and Harry. Ugh. They should seriously think about changing the law lol.


I'm sure the law isn't set in stone and can be amended through letters patent by the monarch so let's give Charles a chance to get started. Also a CoS must be a British Citizen with a UK residence and must reside there a portion of the year. It would be a good time to clip Dufus' wings so he's stuck in USA for a very long time and thereby losing his CoS role.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It was nice that Will drove Andy, despite opposing his return as a working royal. Hazz was able to surpass Randy Andy, he didn't even get a ride to Balmoral with the rest of the family.


If nothing else, Andrew is loyal to the family. William knows Andy didn’t have a hidden microphone in his clothes recording his every word for Netflix.


----------



## megs0927

charlottawill said:


> Coincidence? I think not...




I can’t get over the rainbow pictures. When my grandmother died we were blessed with the same. Such a gift to those grieving


----------



## xincinsin

I was holding up well until I saw these:


----------



## bag-mania

Let the speculations begin.   









						Prince Harry, Meghan's Kids Get Titles Now, But King Charles Can Change That
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are about to find out exactly where they stand with his father, because the new King Charles III has a big decision to make about the couple's 2 children.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bellecate said:


> I pray it wasn’t bone cancer, osteosarcoma that her Majesty had. I’m so sorry your father has it. Horrid disease, it invades so many other parts of the body and as you say is extremely painful. We lost a son in his early 20’s to Osteosarcoma.


I’m so very sorry for your heartbreaking loss


----------



## rose60610

Debbini said:


> I sent screenshots of all her tweets to the University.



*THANK YOU!!!!!!!! *


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> My year is somewhere in this group - right now I feel like a 100 year old
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 100 Photos of Queen Elizabeth That Capture Her Exceptional Life
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.popsugar.com


Great photos, but it was somewhat jarring to get to the end of that and see the cover of The Cut with Whatzername.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Let the speculations begin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan's Kids Get Titles Now, But King Charles Can Change That
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are about to find out exactly where they stand with his father, because the new King Charles III has a big decision to make about the couple's 2 children.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Do they automatically get the titles? Any HRH?
Can't imagine how TW and her underlings will spin this.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Insiders emphasized there was nothing nefarious in her decision to not go to Balmoral.



I call BS. I doubt it was "her decision". More likely he was told not to bring her.


----------



## charro

xincinsin said:


> You will be able to spot her because she will bare her extremely bronzed shoulders. Every camera and drone will see the metallic reflection.
> 
> The fluid situation probably means she thought QE was faking it, because Zedzee would totally fake death for sympathy points (re: mystery over-dramatic singing miscarriage).
> 
> That will be after everything is settled. No point rushing it.
> 
> If he knew and he told Zedzee, that unhinged creature would probably see it as encouragement to act out. Bullies like to zero in on the vulnerable.
> 
> I can totally believe this.
> 
> Nah, she wanted the Fountain of Wealth from Charles, acknowledgement that she is the greatest from TQ(RIP) and for everyone else to step aside so that she can be the next monarch. Anything less would be racist.
> 
> Mike Tindall could pull off a tiara!


He wears fascinators well


----------



## csshopper

Debbini said:


> I sent screenshots of all her tweets to the University.





CarryOn2020 said:


> There are moments in history that show the tide has turned.  I believe we are living in one now.
> Someone with that level of hate, even if posted on a ‘personal’ page, is seriously disturbed.  Imagine if a teenager posted that. We know those sort of posts represent a seriously disturbed person.  We cannot excuse that stuff any more if we want a better world.


Yes to all you said.

And, Harry Windsor should be sat down, hard, on a chair and made to read aloud, so he’s sure to hear it, every vile nasty hatemongering word said by these people about his Gran. And then have it pointed out to him in single syllable words so he can be made to clearly understand how his vile nasty wife encourages this with her lies, insinuation, distortions. I skimmed their vomit, but i think i recall one referenced TW and Diana. At some point he has to draw a line, retrieve his balls and man up.


----------



## bellecate

Just came across this, and it got me.


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> Do they automatically get the titles? Any HRH?
> Can't imagine how TW and her underlings will spin this.



Giving them titles makes no sense with them living and growing up in Southern California.  Baby Lili wasn't even born in the UK.  They are in the top 10 of the succession but they are about as British as I am, which is to say not at all.  I don't see how Charles can justify it with them living overseas, being raised overseas, and being completely disconnected from the UK.

ETA:  But, I also think it makes sense in the greater context of a slimmed down monarchy.  The prince/princess titles go to the children of the future monarch but stop there.  So, this rule would apply to any children of Prince Louis' as well one day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly

QEll is a feminist icon. Meanwhile, so called “feminist” the Wench claims to be one while being propped up her whole life by men. She slags off her husband’s matriarchal-led family, a woman who out-ruled Queen Elizabeth l & Queen Victoria (talk about revolutionary women!), a contemporary of Winston Churchill FFS, who’s husband had to give up his career for his wife’s duty.  How the F do you marry into this and think it needs “modernizing” by a Z list yacht girl**. 
*middle aged wannabe *

And Haznoballs saying his father and brother are trapped. Does trapped mean serving your country and a cause bigger than yourself? They are “trapped” because they can’t pursue their own personal celebrity and monetize/become influencers/merchers? I hope this is the final nail in the gruesome twosome’s coffin and they s*d off.


----------



## xincinsin

My local newspaper published a nice obit for QE (source: Reuters), and I appreciate that they mentioned her sense of humour. She definitely did NOT spend her 70 years on the throne talking about herself and wallowing in self-pity.








						Elizabeth, the queen who moved with a changing world
					

Queen Elizabeth reigned longer than any other British monarch and helped steer the institution into the modern world.  Read more at straitstimes.com.




					www.straitstimes.com
				



And no matter how my parents' generation agitated for independence, they were respectful of the Queen. I myself live in a house that once was inhabited by soldiers from the British army. My childhood novels were bought from the secondhand bookstores which snapped up all the paperbacks sold by the soldiers heading home after their stint here.








						Highlights of Queen Elizabeth's 3 visits to Singapore
					

Singapore played host to Queen Elizabeth three times in 1972, 1989 and 2006.  Read more at straitstimes.com.




					www.straitstimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Anna Wintour told MM “no!”


----------



## CarryOn2020

dp


----------



## Lodpah

I think the two should have the children brought over to meet their cousins. After all it’s a long 10 days that Handbag has to go through.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> That means MegZit be here for 10 days. I hope they have someone to guard this 'roving reporter', she's not safe to be left anywhere Royal for 10 days.
> 
> 
> Send for Major Johnny Thompson!!!!


You manage to find the silver lining in everything! 


Toby93 said:


> Maybe that was why TW made a point of saying on the interview how her kids were not given titles because of their race.  Maybe she was already told?


I think probably as he’s been talking about slimming down for several years- god knows if it’ll happen though. 


Chanbal said:


> DM is reporting on some of TW's supporters. This is the TW's legacy imo. Carnegie Mellon needs to do more.
> 
> _The 'anti racist' professor has faced allegations of racism in the past for the words she has used online - and *in one instance, the Foundational Black American organization created a petition to get her removed from Carnegie Mellon University*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Twitter pulls vile tweet by woke professor mocking the dying Queen
> 
> 
> Uju Anya is a teacher and associate professor  at the Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - and stirred outrage after her vicious tweet about ailing Her Majesty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Woke liberals waste no time attacking Queen mere hours after her death
> 
> 
> Opinion writers from The New York Times, New York Magazine and Atlantic all celebrated the queen's death on Thursday, saying she was an 'oppressor' - with one vowing to dance on her grave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Maybe I’m in the minority here but the DM reporting this as international news and organisations trying to get this woman fired for a few mean-spirited tweets about a public figure is a complete overreaction. People feel very strongly about heads of state as they should because it’s a serious issue. 

 Also the flip side of this is more nuanced anti-royal and/or post-colonialist view of the Queen’s legacy wouldn’t see the light of day in the DM so the media are really the ones pushing the dual narrative of either super-positive panegyric or personal attack. 


gelbergirl said:


> Really? The Duke of York?? I’m surprised to see that along with Sussex.
> why not Anne


If this list of figures is true Charles 3 has truly fumbled the pass day one. Honestly I think he needs to seriously consider changing that up. 

 I have always thought  he has an unfortunate choice of name for a king incidentally.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> The Duchy of Cornwall will now pass from Charles to William. It produces a substantial amount of income, some of which was used by Charles to support both William and Harry and their households. It will be very interesting to see if Will continues to send his brother money from the Duchy. I rather doubt it.


Yes, and Harry has been too thick to realise that all this time, it's William he needed to be nice to.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> They couldn’t find a photo???? Not one???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the commenters - my thoughts, too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Miz Beaverhausen, Duchess of Soho
> *A post as cold as TW's soul. I wonder if she did that without #6's approval?*



I mean it’s really tacky but on the plus side at  least it looks like we were spared the ghastly purple prose like they tried to put out when Philip died. We won’t be hearing how the queen just loved grilling chicken wings and pounding a few lagers with her best friend Wiggy and the invisible kids.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bellecate said:


> I pray it wasn’t bone cancer, osteosarcoma that her Majesty had. I’m so sorry your father has it. Horrid disease, it invades so many other parts of the body and as you say is extremely painful. We lost a son in his early 20’s to Osteosarcoma.


That’s awful. I am so sorry for your loss. I can’t imagine. You are a very kind person in your concern for the queen. I am sure she had excellent palliative care and tbh I think Lady Colin was just being dramatic for clicks.


----------



## Handbag1234

I suspect over the coming days Charles will be asking Harry if he’s in or out. I’m sure there is a way back if he wants it. But with the Kings vision for a slimmed down monarchy, he won’t want to risk those two chancers taking further swipes at the Firm. The recent trip to UK and their constant PR and digs at the Firm will prove to be ill advised and terrible timing. They’ve shown their hand. I personally think they’re finished. No one will be interested in them now. The cash will dry up too. I wouldn’t be that surprised though if they do a total u turn and announce they are central to driving forward a new era and a modern monarchy. However William may veto this. Very telling that Harry wasn’t on plane with other royals but Andrew was as the Queens son.


----------



## tiktok

Handbag1234 said:


> I suspect over the coming days Charles will be asking Harry if he’s in or out. I’m sure there is a way back if he wants it. But with the Kings vision for a slimmed down monarchy, he won’t want to risk those two chancers taking further swipes at the Firm. The recent trip to UK and their constant PR and digs at the Firm will prove to be ill advised and terrible timing. They’ve shown their hand. I personally think they’re finished. No one will be interested in them now. The cash will dry up too. I wouldn’t be that surprised though if they do a total u turn and announce they are central to driving forward a new era and a modern monarchy. However William may veto this. Very telling that Harry wasn’t on plane with other royals but Andrew was as the Queens son.


There’s no way she’s returning to the UK where she’s largely disdained if not despised, or that he’s giving up $20M+ for his book. They love themselves too much to see themselves as anything other than G*d’s gift to humanity.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CarryOn2020 said:


> I believe he is terrified.
> It’s one thing to mouth off to 2 women [not from your country] while sitting in their garden.
> It is another to face 4 *men* [ raised by Prince Phillip] who are devoted to their Queen and their country.  Undoubtedly they will be standing in one of those palace rooms with very high ceilings that has a haunting echo.  No tea will be served. No biscuits. Temperature set to freezing.  The hard stares and silence will cause the weak to crumble. Hazzi is weak.  If those 4 men show up in full uniform or with the guards standing behind them,  well,  good luck, Haz.  Look again at the determination on their faces.  They were born for this moment. They know it. They sense it.  Yes, they are mournful but they are also on the same page. They will protect their monarchy. At all costs.  They are not to be trifled with.
> 
> View attachment 5606691


I’d be more frightened to face Princess Royal, Anne!


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Maybe I’m in the minority here but the DM reporting this as international news and organisations trying to get this woman fired for a few mean-spirited tweets about a public figure is a complete overreaction. People feel very strongly about heads of state as they should because it’s a serious issue.
> 
> Also the flip side of this is more nuanced anti-royal and/or post-colonialist view of the Queen’s legacy wouldn’t see the light of day in the DM so the media are really the ones pushing the dual narrative of either super-positive panegyric or personal attack.


I thought at first that she was spouting cruelty because someone stepped on her toes, maybe asked her if she was sad that the Queen had passed away. But after reading that she has a history of racist remarks, I'm wondering if she treats anyone and everyone not of her race badly.

I'd say any country with a history of physical or cultural empire-building would be guilty of what we now term as "crimes against humanity". It is not particular to the British.


----------



## Handbag1234

tiktok said:


> There’s no way she’s returning to the UK where she’s largely disdained if not despised, or that he’s giving up $20M+ for his book. They love themselves too much to see themselves as anything other than G*d’s gift to humanity.


Yes good point I forgot that she won’t want to live in UK. 

I really hope the $20m book deal is dead in water now. He can’t turn it in a tribute to Queen can he? No one surely will buy a kiss and tell now?


----------



## Handbag1234

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I’d be more frightened to face Princess Royal, Anne!


Totally agree. Charles flanked by Anne and William would be a terrifying prospect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

I’m such a huge dog lover and I saw an article questioning who will take care of the Queen’s dogs. I hope those two ingrates don’t get one of them. I know this post is probably irrelevant but I get anxious when dogs are involved.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Mods please could  all the nice posts about the Queen be removed from this vile thread and posted in the memorial one ? - no posting on this vile couple for the 10 days of mourning would be appropriate can it be locked ?


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Handbag1234 said:


> Totally agree. Charles flanked by Anne and William would be a terrifying prospect.


Mind you I think Andrew, with his fierce love of his mother and despite his ‘wrong doings’ could definitely give Harry a piece of his mind and be safe in the knowledge that his words would be given as purely family not part of the establishment so could be a bit more ‘fruity’ with less consequence


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> I’m such a huge dog lover and I saw an article questioning who will take care of the Queen’s dogs. I hope those two ingrates don’t get one of them. I know this post is probably irrelevant but I get anxious when dogs are involved.


DM says Andrew will take them most likely.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

I actually think Anne will step up as head of the family in private.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> On the other hand, KCIII may have no patience with Harry and his antics. He's not a frail 96 year old mourning the loss of a spouse.  He may lay down the law, cut off financial support for real (as the Duchy of Cornwall now goes to William), and tell Harry he's not going to tolerate his or his wife's behavior, that their titles are on the line and he's going to be removed as Counsellor of State.



One can dream.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it makes sense for Kate to have stayed.  Staying means she can take care of her children, get everyone’s clothes prepped [remember they recently moved] and work with the palace to prepare for the services.  She is also moving up a position to Princess of Wales, so she is a busy lady.  I doubt her decision has anything to do with the Never-Do-Well’s.  I do believe MM stayed because she did not pack for Scotland [has she ever been there?].  Nothing more, nothing less.



IMO

M didn't go to Scotland because Harry was told she's not going to Scotland. 

Kate probably stayed behind because she was asked if she wouldn't mind. They used the kids as an excuse, but they have a nanny,. That way, MegZZ cannot complain 'everyone' is there but her, and the haters can't use it to point out M is treated differently.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> Should have put on the waterproof mascara today....
> 
> Look at the Queen’s blue hands in this photo.  You can see that she is dying.  What an incredibly fierce woman, serving her people until the very end.



Obviously we know now how poorly she was, but a massive bruise like this may look ugly but mean nothing. Lots of elderly people are on blood thinners, and it takes next to no impact to be left with bruises like this.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Mods please could  all the nice posts about the Queen be removed from this vile thread and posted in the memorial one ? - no posting on this vile couple for the 10 days of mourning would be appropriate can it be locked ?



I agree, but someone would have report each one separately as OT


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I thought at first that she was spouting cruelty because someone stepped on her toes, maybe asked her if she was sad that the Queen had passed away. But after reading that she has a history of racist remarks, I'm wondering if she treats anyone and everyone not of her race badly.
> 
> I'd say any country with a history of physical or cultural empire-building would be guilty of what we now term as "crimes against humanity". It is not particular to the British.


It’s not racist though- she doesn’t like the queen because of her powerful position not because she was white and the man she’d crowed over the death of was also black. If she’d said it about white people or white Brits (and you do see those kinds of comments) then I think it’s racist and that kind of casual racism often goes unchecked but that’s not what she was saying.

It is certainly not peculiar to the British and if anything British society is more sensitive in acknowledging their colonial history than many other nations and powers but the BRF  are fairly rare examples of families that are given enormous wealth and influence over nations gained through colonialism purely through the accident of their birth and it’s retained within their family.

Conversely, while countries like the USA benefit from colonialism the power of their elites is much more diffused amongst its players and of course any American can be President (in theory at least.)

Add on- to clarify I do think wishing death on anyone is both cruel and futile and ultimately those kinds of comments do more harm than good. 

However, when I read the article about the woke liberals and included among them were perfectly rational critiques such as the reference Maya Jasanoff’s essay which they decry as hate speech and I think the mask has slipped a little. 








						Opinion | Mourn the Queen, Not Her Empire
					

She helped obscure a bloody history of decolonization whose proportions and legacies have yet to be adequately acknowledged.




					www.nytimes.com
				




Some organisations and individuals use hate speech as an excuse to silence opinions they don’t like and that’s true of H&M and the Daily Mail. 


Chanbal said:


> Bezos, you deserve a thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Bezos



I dunno if Bezos has much of a leg to stand on when it comes to making people’s lives better.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

They’ve said that Harry has already left Balmoral - he didn’t stay long!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Isn’t it an age thing?  When they turn 18, they can take the title unless the King bestows it sooner, right?



No. The Wessexes handled it like this with her children, but they do possess the title, they just don't use it.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

It’s been announced that a period of Royal Mourning will take place from now until 7 days after the state funeral so let’s see if these two can at least keep their mouths shut until for that duration!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dp


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Maybe scared he has to face his family who he has badmouthed for years.



It's going to be one thing acting like a spoilt teen moaning about his dad, it's going to be _much_ harder to badmouth the King (and/or Queen Consort)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I’d be more frightened to face Princess Royal, Anne!



The British upper-classes don't have words, not even looks.

They just freeze you out. It's like you don't exist. And you won't.

Gen Z did not invent cancel culture


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> The British upper-classes don't have words, not even give looks.
> 
> They just freeze you out. It's like you don't exist. And you won't.
> 
> Gen Z did to invent cancel culture


True but I bet in this case there have definitely been some words!!  I very much doubt Prince Philip had nothing to say


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> True but I bet in this case there have definitely been some words!!  I very much doubt Prince Philip had nothing to say



I think words have already been had with the gruesome toothsome twosome. I think that's why they left. They did not listen. 

That performative trip to Balmoral suggests Harry is estranged. 

How can they even talk to him or even in front of him when everything gets back to her and then is exploited. Even if he's not wearing a wire, he is a spy on the inside. They can't lock him in the Tower, but they can lock him out.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> I think words have already been had with the gruesome toothsome twosome. I think that's why they left. They did not listen.
> 
> That performative trip to Balmoral suggests Harry is estranged.
> 
> How can they even talk to him or even in front of him when everything gets back to her and then is exploited. Even if he's not wearing a wire, he is a spy on the inside. They can't lock him in the Tower, but they can lock him out.


I agree. He must feel very lonely but he’s bought it on himself.


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I agree. He must feel very lonely but he’s bought it on himself.



He must have been told, he wasn't sleep-walking for 2 years +. 

Dim and relentlessly angry is not a good combo in any man.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> In watching all the coverage today it really struck me how much she had declined in less than two years. I saw a clip of her 2020 Christmas message and the difference was shocking. I think it was a combination of Philip's passing, the ongoing family drama and whatever was ailing her physically. May she Rest In Peace with Philip at her side again.



When I saw her sitting there at his funeral all alone that was the first time I thought of her as old and frail. I might have cried a little.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF HB. Apparently someone told whoever put up the original to read the room.


----------



## bubablu

Ali-bagpuss said:


> They’ve said that Harry has already left Balmoral - he didn’t stay long!


Last to arrive, first to leave. I mean, it's pretty obvious he's not welcome.


----------



## Handbag1234

bubablu said:


> Last to arrive, first to leave. I mean, it's pretty obvious he's not welcome.


Totally. If you leave any firm, you are told to clear your desk and you're escorted off the premises. The Firm are no different. I agree with other posters. Moaning about your father is one thing, but moaning about the King and head of state is another. Even the two grifters were soooo careful to not to criticise the Queen or Prince Philip. They might think twice about  complaining about Charles or Camilla now. I'm sure Charles and William held back out of respect for the Queen, but now they can do what they want.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s not racist though- she doesn’t like the queen because of her powerful position not because she was white and the man she’d crowed over the death of was also black. If she’d said it about white people or white Brits (and you do see those kinds of comments) then I think it’s racist and that kind of casual racism often goes unchecked but that’s not what she was saying.
> 
> It is certainly not peculiar to the British and if anything British society is more sensitive in acknowledging their colonial history than many other nations and powers but the BRF  are fairly rare examples of families that are given enormous wealth and influence over nations gained through colonialism purely through the accident of their birth and it’s retained within their family.
> 
> Conversely, while countries like the USA benefit from colonialism the power of their elites is much more diffused amongst its players and of course any American can be President (in theory at least.)
> 
> Add on- to clarify I do think wishing death on anyone is both cruel and futile and ultimately those kinds of comments do more harm than good.
> 
> However, when I read the article about the woke liberals and included among them were perfectly rational critiques such as the reference Maya Jasanoff’s essay which they decry as hate speech and I think the mask has slipped a little.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Mourn the Queen, Not Her Empire
> 
> 
> She helped obscure a bloody history of decolonization whose proportions and legacies have yet to be adequately acknowledged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some organisations and individuals use hate speech as an excuse to silence opinions they don’t like and that’s true of H&M and the Daily Mail.
> 
> I dunno if Bezos has much of a leg to stand on when it comes to making people’s lives better.


Thank you. I didn't delve into her past remarks as she seemed to be quite vulgar. And bashing a dead woman is indeed futile and cowardly.

It will be a challenge for Dork and Disgust to stay quiet. And will this impact the pre-rec podcasts? It's a given that she would have slipped some nasty remarks into every episode.


----------



## missfiggy

I'm wondering how Meghan is going to spin this so it's all about her.


----------



## xincinsin

Handbag1234 said:


> I really hope the $20m book deal is dead in water now. He can’t turn it in* a tribute to Queen *can he? No one surely will buy a kiss and tell now?


Even if he could, would it be believable after they spent so much lung power deriding his family? All those fake tears are captured for posterity.


----------



## carmen56

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I’d be more frightened to face Princess Royal, Anne!



Oh, to have been a fly on the wall at Balmoral last night!  I hope Princess Anne let Harry have both barrels, he deserves it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I'd say any country with a history of physical or cultural empire-building would be guilty of what we now term as "crimes against humanity". It is not particular to the British.



There's this British woman with roots I think in Tunisia who is super annoying as well because she just won't shut up about the evil empire - I'm all for criticizing injustice and cruelty, but a) do it in a constructive way instead of just harping on and on about it and b) please stop acting as if the current UK government conquered India. Also, I'm always like "And? You're not saying anything new." Isn't it common knowledge what the Brits, Belgians, Germans did in their colonies, and do you personally know anyone who approves? 

Now, not only do I wonder why she would want to be a part of this by applying for citizenship, I also wonder why for some reason these people never bring up Islamic conquests. Those were not done with kind words only, and there are plenty of them. 

Oh, and also she regularly tells non-Arabs to shut up about Arab topics. I have a master's degree in Islamic Studies, I'll talk about things I have a grip on all day if I please, thank you very much. Can you imagine the outcry if a Brit or German told someone brown to sit down and shut up?


----------



## gelbergirl

tiktok said:


> There’s no way she’s returning to the UK where she’s largely disdained if not despised, or that he’s giving up $20M+ for his book. They love themselves too much to see themselves as anything other than G*d’s gift to humanity.



I wonder if Charles could offer Harry much much more than $20M+ in return for coming back with the caveat that she stays where she is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Mods please could  all the nice posts about the Queen be removed from this vile thread and posted in the memorial one ? - no posting on this vile couple for the 10 days of mourning would be appropriate can it be locked ?



Are you deciding for a bunch of people what they can post about? If you think that's the best way to honour The Queen you can choose to stay away for the mourning period.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I actually think Anne will step up as head of the family in private.



Isn't Charles the head of the family though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> IMO
> 
> M didn't go to Scotland because Harry was told she's not going to Scotland.
> 
> Kate probably stayed behind because she was asked if she wouldn't mind. They used the kids as an excuse, but they have a nanny,. That way, MegZZ cannot complain 'everyone' is there but her, and the haters can't use it to point out M is treated differently.



I just don't get this stupid appeasement of the terrorists. Kate is not Raptor and they are not equal and this is how the BRF rolls, deal with it.

That said, I can see Kate staying behind for no ulterior motive if The Queen already passed. She wasn't needed to talk about the next steps immediately.


----------



## Sharont2305

missfiggy said:


> I'm wondering how Meghan is going to spin this so it's all about her.


"My darling H, my husband was very selfless. He rushed back to ME to help ME with MY grief"


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get this stupid appeasement of the terrorists. Kate is not Raptor and they are not equal and this is how the BRF rolls, deal with it.
> 
> That said, I can see Kate staying behind for no ulterior motive if The Queen already passed. She wasn't needed to talk about the next steps immediately.



I think the traveling up to Balmoral was ruse to stall everyone and everything until they could a) all say goodbye in private and b) get everything behind the scenes ready for the 'front of house'


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't Charles the head of the family though.


Yes, sorry I didn’t express my thoughts very well. He is but obviously he’ll be concentrating on the crown and pageantry, I think Anne will be the mum of the family.


----------



## periogirl28

papertiger said:


> The British upper-classes don't have words, not even give looks.
> 
> They just freeze you out. It's like you don't exist. And you won't.
> 
> Gen Z did not invent cancel culture


I love that they invented the Cut Direct.


----------



## LizzieBennett

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get this stupid appeasement of the terrorists. Kate is not Raptor and they are not equal and this is how the BRF rolls, deal with it.
> 
> That said, I can see Kate staying behind for no ulterior motive if The Queen already passed. She wasn't needed to talk about the next steps immediately.


I think Catherine stayed behind because of the children.


----------



## bubablu

missfiggy said:


> I'm wondering how Meghan is going to spin this so it's all about her.


"Hi, now H is n.5!"


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> "My darling H, my husband was very selfless. He rushed back to ME to help ME with MY grief"


Didn't they use that script already? After the unveiling of the statue, IIRC. The story was that Hazard rushed back to Cali to comfort TW because her uncle died. You know, the uncle whom she ghosted.


----------



## mikimoto007

bag-mania said:


> It’s presumptuous of them to imply that Harry and Michelle ***** will compete for the same reader. Very different audiences.
> 
> No, there’s something wrong with the book and it needs more work or more vetting, or BOTH.





LizzieBennett said:


> I think Catherine stayed behind because of the children.


I think she stayed behind because there were enough people going up. It makes more sense for another grandchild to go instead of her, given the size of the family.


----------



## xincinsin

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if Charles could offer Harry much much more than $20M+ in return for coming back with the caveat that she stays where she is.


That would be throwing good money after bad.

What's the point in bringing him back to the fold when no one will trust him? And so long as she has the meal tickets, he will never be free from her.


----------



## mikimoto007

I wonder if they’ll send for the kids now or if Meghan will return to California…I can’t see her missing out.


----------



## CobaltBlu

mikimoto007 said:


> I wonder if they’ll send for the kids now or if Meghan will return to California…I can’t see her missing out.


By now she has probably been told in no uncertain terms what to do. Is my guess.


----------



## Debbini

CobaltBlu said:


> By now she has probably been told in no uncertain terms what to do. Is my guess.


And I hope that is "go home."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

His Majesty The King sounds all wrong   And no, I'm no Charles hater.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Debbini said:


> And I hope that is "go home."


On the other hand they may want her where they can keep an eye on her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> On the other hand they may want her where they can keep an eye on her.



I like to think that at this time she is mere background noise.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This one made me smile:


----------



## DoggieBags

CobaltBlu said:


> By now she has probably been told in no uncertain terms what to do. Is my guess.


Telling her what to do and her actually doing it are 2 not necessarily compatible things. And I doubt they will be able to shut her up during the mourning period. She and her wretched mouthpiece Scoobie Doo will be working to make it all about her


----------



## lanasyogamama

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm sure the law isn't set in stone and can be amended through letters patent by the monarch so let's give Charles a chance to get started. Also a CoS must be a British Citizen with a UK residence and must reside there a portion of the year. It would be a good time to clip Dufus' wings so he's stuck in USA for a very long time and thereby losing his CoS role.


I feel like nobody is talking about this piece anymore.  That H doesn’t live in England and that is a requirement. 


xincinsin said:


> I thought at first that she was spouting cruelty because someone stepped on her toes, maybe asked her if she was sad that the Queen had passed away. But after reading that she has a history of racist remarks, I'm wondering if she treats anyone and everyone not of her race badly.
> 
> I'd say any country with a history of physical or cultural empire-building would be guilty of what we now term as "crimes against humanity". It is not particular to the British.


I wonder what she’s like in person. My daughter was just telling me about a girl in her school who is so awful to people online but doesn’t say a word in person.


----------



## piperdog

CobaltBlu said:


> On the other hand they may want her where they can keep an eye on her.


My hope is that since they were already in the 'bubble' of the Firm, there will be little to no opportunity for Harkle shenanigans. If they had been home in CA this week with no adult supervision, I can't even imagine what they would have been doing/saying with the full Nflix crew capturing every self-serving moment.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> His Majesty The King sounds all wrong   And no, I'm no Charles hater.


We have to get used to it. There will be three kings after the queen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Even Fergie did so much better than the jerks.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think the traveling up to Balmoral was ruse to stall everyone and everything until they could a) all say goodbye in private and b) get everything behind the scenes ready for the 'front of house'


Evidently, William Andrew and the Wessexes got there after the queen’s passing , Harry too but he came separately


----------



## Toby93

This is the Queen in the year I was born


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Hopefully, less than nothing





Aimee3 said:


> Haznoballs can fly private here and there and everywhere but couldn’t fly private to get to his grandmother in time?  Selfish pr**k.


I'm sure William, Edward, Sophie and Andrew didn't want him on their plane. Good for them!


----------



## Toby93

Lodpah said:


> I think the two should have the children brought over to meet their cousins. After all it’s a long 10 days that Handbag has to go through.


The problem is, no one wants to spend any time with them, because everything they say is repeated either on TV or in interviews.


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean it’s really tacky but on the plus side at  least it looks like we were spared the ghastly purple prose like they tried to put out when Philip died. *We won’t be hearing how the queen just loved grilling chicken wings and pounding a few lagers with her best friend Wiggy and the invisible kids.*


Give it a few days. There will be… something.

They were taken by surprise and the staff had to hustle to get a message up quickly. I’m sure a heaping bowl of word salad is forthcoming.


----------



## Toby93

Handbag1234 said:


> Yes good point I forgot that she won’t want to live in UK.
> 
> I really hope the $20m book deal is dead in water now. He can’t turn it in a tribute to Queen can he? No one surely will buy a kiss and tell now?


I wonder how that works - I know he would get an advance, but would he not get the remainder of the money until its published?  Does it depend on the sales?  Who would want to read it now?  That's probably the first thing that TW thought of when the Queen passed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously we know now how poorly she was, but a massive bruise like this may look ugly but mean nothing. Lots of elderly people are on blood thinners, and it takes next to no impact to be left with bruises like this.


I was going to say that. Also, if she needed an IV for any reason it could cause bruising like that in an elderly person.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF HB. Apparently someone told whoever put up the original to read the room.



There are many Meghan fans in the media.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously we know now how poorly she was, but a massive bruise like this may look ugly but mean nothing. Lots of elderly people are on blood thinners, and it takes next to no impact to be left with bruises like this.


This is exactly what my grandmothers hands looked liked quite often.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s not racist though- she doesn’t like the queen because of her powerful position not because she was white and the man she’d crowed over the death of was also black. If she’d said it about white people or white Brits (and you do see those kinds of comments) then I think it’s racist and that kind of casual racism often goes unchecked but that’s not what she was saying.
> 
> It is certainly not peculiar to the British and if anything British society is more sensitive in acknowledging their colonial history than many other nations and powers but the BRF  are fairly rare examples of families that are given enormous wealth and influence over nations gained through colonialism purely through the accident of their birth and it’s retained within their family.
> 
> Conversely, while countries like the USA benefit from colonialism the power of their elites is much more diffused amongst its players and of course any American can be President (in theory at least.)
> 
> Add on- to clarify I do think wishing death on anyone is both cruel and futile and ultimately those kinds of comments do more harm than good.
> 
> However, when I read the article about the woke liberals and included among them were perfectly rational critiques such as the reference Maya Jasanoff’s essay which they decry as hate speech and I think the mask has slipped a little.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion | Mourn the Queen, Not Her Empire
> 
> 
> She helped obscure a bloody history of decolonization whose proportions and legacies have yet to be adequately acknowledged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some organisations and individuals use hate speech as an excuse to silence opinions they don’t like and that’s true of H&M and the Daily Mail.
> 
> I dunno if Bezos has much of a leg to stand on when it comes to making people’s lives better.


Before you decide on the racist status of the Carnegie Mellon's woman, I recommend you to read her posts on Twitter in addition to the ones she has deleted (some screenshots of those posts can be found in spoilers). Her vulgarity and lack of tolerance aren't what is expected from a scholar, not in my book. I don't know how this narrow minded person was promoted to assoc prof, and I'm concerned for her students. 

I don't particularly like Bezos and took me several years to finally subscribe to Prime, but I recognize that Amaz*n has facilitated the lives of many of us. Amaz*n played an important role for many families during Covid… If Bezos decides to put his weight behind anti-hate speech, I thank him for that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's this British woman with roots I think in Tunisia who is super annoying as well because she just won't shut up about the evil empire - I'm all for criticizing injustice and cruelty, but a) do it in a constructive way instead of just harping on and on about it and b) please stop acting as if the current UK government conquered India. Also, I'm always like "And? You're not saying anything new." Isn't it common knowledge what the Brits, Belgians, Germans did in their colonies, and do you personally know anyone who approves?
> 
> Now, not only do I wonder why she would want to be a part of this by applying for citizenship, I also wonder why for some reason these people never bring up Islamic conquests. Those were not done with kind words only, and there are plenty of them.
> 
> Oh, and also she regularly tells non-Arabs to shut up about Arab topics. I have a master's degree in Islamic Studies, I'll talk about things I have a grip on all day if I please, thank you very much. Can you imagine the outcry if a Brit or German told someone brown to sit down and shut up?


Agreed, discussing past colonialism is only really effective a) you acknowledge the reality of modern day slavery and are doing what you can to avoid supporting it and speak out against it. 
And b) if you are talking to the powerful and recognise the class dynamic throughout history. Hence why I think the BRF and our government are valid targets of criticism whereas IMO lecturing the random descendants of British, Irish, Slav etc peasants on their responsibility for the transatlantic slave trade is stupid at best precisely because they were even less enfranchised than we are today and none of us alone have the power to stop modern day trafficking or enslavement in cobalt mining or diamond mining or sweatshops or nail bars and recognising many buildings in Dubai were built using indentured servitude and the exploitation of women in places like Mauritania. 
There is still so much to do before we can say even the one issue of Slavery is a thing of the past. 

A lot of people don’t even know the Arab slave trade existed so that’s not surprising. 

To bring it back to H&M this is why bringing one POC into the fold isn’t helpful in of itself unless she or the family have any ideas or intent on tackling wider issues.


Toby93 said:


> This is the Queen in the year I was born
> 
> View attachment 5606953


Is that Edward? What a cute baby.


----------



## Chanbal

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if Charles could offer Harry much much more than $20M+ in return for coming back with the caveat that she stays where she is.


Would you trust Hazz or TW? 
People commonly say things like "blackmailers will never stop demanding money from you," but I'm not sure if this would apply here.


----------



## csshopper

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I’d be more frightened to face Princess Royal, Anne!


Anne and Sophie as a tag team would unhinge him. Sophie has shown mastery of “the hard stare”, TW couldn’t handle it and had to turn away.


----------



## sdkitty

I have a bit of good news.  Last night I was watching Watch What Happens Live.  The guests were Regina Hall, an actress and WOC, and Amy Sedaris, actress/comedian/writer.  Andy Cohen was playing one of his games.  He said if you would do this thing, then honk.  One of the things he listed was "listen to Meghan Markle's podcast"
Both guest just sat there - no interest.  Could it be that Americans are catching on to her or gettting bored with her?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Anne and Sophie as a tag team would unhinge him. Sophie has shown mastery of “the hard stare”, TW couldn’t handle it and had to turn away.



Agree, the thing is: these people are all mourning right now. We saw how genuinely sad they were when Philip passed (remember that interview where Sophie welled up?). They should not have to deal with the troublemakers right now in this period of grief and transition.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> His Majesty The King sounds all wrong   And no, I'm no Charles hater.


We are just so used to saying Her Majesty for 70 years, but for hundreds of years before her, it was only kings.  I agree, it will take some getting used to.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Agree, the thing is: these people are all mourning right now. We saw how genuinely sad they were when Philip passed (remember that interview where Sophie welled up?). They should not have to deal with the troublemakers right now in this period of grief and transition.


Harry is stil the son of the king and the WIFE is his wife.  They can't be shut out but the could be relegated to a less significant "seat", right?


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Evidently, William Andrew and the Wessexes got there after the queen’s passing , Harry too but he came separately


I read a comment (I believe in Blind Gossip) that Hazz was supposed to travel with the rest of the family, but he got very delayed. The delay was apparently caused by a discussion with TW. So Will et al. decided not to wait any longer… While all this would justify why the family arrived relatively late, it is just a rumor at this point.


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> Telling her what to do and her actually doing it are 2 not necessarily compatible things. And I doubt they will be able to shut her up during the mourning period. She and her wretched mouthpiece Scoobie Doo will be working to make it all about her


I was watching a documentary that was put together for the Queen last night, and Scoobie Doo was one of the commentators   Why on earth would they want to hear from him?  They looked to have put several documentaries together and updated it today.  I was relieved that he didn't mention the gruesome twosome - must have taken a lot of restraint on his part, or maybe it was just edited out.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I was watching a documentary that was put together for the Queen last night, and Scoobie Doo was one of the commentators   Why on earth would they want to hear from him?  They looked to have put several documentaries together and updated it today.  I was relieved that he didn't mention the gruesome twosome - must have taken a lot of restraint on his part, or maybe it was just edited out.


on ABC?  I watched part of that and thought the same thing about Scoobie.  I didn't watch the whole thing due to all the commercials and also every channel was covering the queen.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Agreed, discussing past colonialism is only really effective a) you acknowledge the reality of modern day slavery and are doing what you can to avoid supporting it and speak out against it.
> And b) if you are talking to the powerful and recognise the class dynamic throughout history. Hence why I think the BRF and our government are valid targets of criticism whereas IMO lecturing the random descendants of British, Irish, Slav etc peasants on their responsibility for the transatlantic slave trade is stupid at best precisely because they were even less enfranchised than we are today and none of us alone have the power to stop modern day trafficking or enslavement in cobalt mining or diamond mining or sweatshops or nail bars and recognising many buildings in Dubai were built using indentured servitude and the exploitation of women in places like Mauritania.
> There is still so much to do before we can say even the one issue of Slavery is a thing of the past.
> 
> A lot of people don’t even know the Arab slave trade existed so that’s not surprising.
> 
> To bring it back to H&M this is why bringing one POC into the fold isn’t helpful in of itself unless she or the family have any ideas or intent on tackling wider issues.
> 
> Is that Edward? What a cute baby.



One of the reasons why there was no need to import slaves to the UK was because the working poor were treated like forced labour. Our leasehold system is a hangover from when the aristocracy owned the ground under your house and feet even if you paid for the building which would be returned to the 'rightful' owner after the lease expired. A Duke still owns half my garden and the mining rights under my house. The mill-workers and miners were tied into internal, circular economies that only profited owners (often aristocracy)  where their wages were paid through the landlords of the company taverns and pubs and encouraged to drink. They paid rent to their employers who also owned their general stores. Apart from casual labour, mine workers were often paid once a year after they racked up bills through credit in the mine-owned stores. The aristocracy often owned whole villages that only existed to support the Lord and his family.

Obviously this woman has not read the history of the industrial revolution, child labour laws, religious intolerance in England, the highland clearances in Scotland, the banning of the Welsh language, or the Irish potato famine.

Why does she think so many British and Irish immigrants went to the States 

Hers was a hateful, ignorant, opportunist rant fuelled by self-appointed authority and subjective rhetoric, nothing to do with contemplative scholastic activity. As we say in my culture, do as you would be done by, be careful what you wish for/on others. Unfortunately, like M, it's also made her a celebrity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

Chanbal said:


> I read a comment (I believe in Blind Gossip) that Hazz was supposed to travel with the rest of the family, but he got very delayed. The delay was apparently caused by a discussion with TW. So Will et al. decided not to wait any longer… While all this would justify why the family arrived relatively late, it is just a rumor at this point.


I can totally see this. 

The Queen the year I was born. HAHAH. I am old!


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> I wonder if Charles could offer Harry much much more than $20M+ in return for coming back with the caveat that she stays where she is.


Why would he? In the Oprah interview Meghan pretty much identified Charles as the “racist” who asked about the baby’s skin color. Harry sat there in silence condemning his family to the world. Why the hell would Charles want to take someone like that back into the fold? 

Blood may be thicker than water but there comes a point where you stop exposing your back and giving your enemy a target for the knife.


----------



## Chanbal

Why did Meghan's plan to join Harry at Balmoral change suddenly?
					

A spokesman for Harry and Meghan announced yesterday that she would fly to Balmoral with her husband yesterday, but their plans changed suddenly after Kate was spotted in Windsor.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> on ABC?  I watched part of that and thought the same thing about Scoobie.  I didn't watch the whole thing due to all the commercials and also every channel was covering the queen.


I think it was ABC, but same as you, there were so many channels with something about the Queen that I was jumping around a bit.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I like to think that at this time she is mere background noise.


I bet she’s been on the phone constantly with her publicists since yesterday planning her strategy.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Why would he? In the Oprah interview Meghan pretty much identified Charles as the “racist” who asked about the baby’s skin color. Harry sat there in silence condemning his family to the world. Why the hell would Charles want to take someone like that back into the fold?
> 
> Blood may be thicker than water but there comes a point where you stop exposing your back and giving your enemy a target for the knife.



More likely £20K to stay away and keep his mouth shut.


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> I bet she’s been on the phone constantly with her publicists since yesterday planning her strategy.


She should be on the phone with US here at PF. We could give her much better advice.

I would start with: Dont talk. Lay Low. Be Quiet.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5607007
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why did Meghan's plan to join Harry at Balmoral change suddenly?
> 
> 
> A spokesman for Harry and Meghan announced yesterday that she would fly to Balmoral with her husband yesterday, but their plans changed suddenly after Kate was spotted in Windsor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Her mind was obviously changed for her. Do you really think MegZZ would waste a photo-op

She is a coward though. Her 'magic' only works on easily manipulated dim-wits.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> She should be on the phone with US here at PF. We could give her much better advice.
> 
> I would start with: *Dont talk. Lay Low. Be Quiet.*



That would be the polite version


----------



## csshopper

If a Suckesses dust up delayed the family’s departure, causing them to not be bedside with Charles and Anne when the Queen died, they will never be forgiven.

The  Suckesses snub of a gracious invitation by the Queen to have visited Balmoral this summer will hopefully haunt them and often be referred to when their selfish behavior is discussed. I know there were questions about the invitation, but I think she probably did offer it, especially as she knew her health was failing.


----------



## TimeToShop

Chanbal said:


> I read a comment (I believe in Blind Gossip) that Hazz was supposed to travel with the rest of the family, but he got very delayed. The delay was apparently caused by a discussion with TW. So Will et al. decided not to wait any longer… While all this would justify why the family arrived relatively late, it is just a rumor at this point.



I hope that’s not true. They knew time was of the essence and shouldn’t have cut him any slack. I’m sure she was b**tching and moaning that she should go too. That he didn’t just tell her that he’s going, she’s not, and then high tail it to the airport is so telling of his lack of backbone and/or fear of her.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> More likely £20K to stay away and keep his mouth shut.


Like most blackmailers, Harry and Meghan would soon be back demanding more.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Like most blackmailers, Harry and Meghan would soon be back demanding more.



100%


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> One of the reasons why there was no need to import slaves to the UK was because he working poor were treated like forced labour. Our lease-hold system is a hangover from when the aristocracy owned the ground under your house and feet even if you paid for the building which would be returned to the 'rightful' owner after the lease expired. A Duke still owns half my garden and the mining rights under my house. The mill-workers and miners were tied into internal, circular economies that only profited owners (often aristocracy)  where their wages were paid through the landlords of the company taverns and pubs, they paid rent to their employers who also owned their general stores. Apart from casual labour, mine workers were often paid once a year after they racked up bills through credit in the mine-owned stores. The aristocracy often owned whole villages that only existed to support the Lord and his family.
> 
> Obviously this woman has not read the history of the industrial revolution, child labour laws, religious intolerance in England, the highland clearances in Scotland, the banning of the Welsh language, or the Irish potato famine.
> 
> Why does she think so many British and Irish immigrants went to the States
> 
> Hers was a hateful, ignorant, opportunist rant fuelled by self-appointed authority and subjective rhetoric, nothing to do with contemplative scholastic activity. As we say in my culture, do as you would be done by, be careful what you wish for/on others. Unfortunately, like M, it's also made her a celebrity.


It's interesting that one of the many documentaries on the Queen last night made a point of saying the Queen loathed celebrity.  They showed several instances where the opportunity was there for her to partake in a "stunt", but she smiled and walked away. 

During a tour of the Guinness distillery, she was poured and offered a pint, but she merely looked at it and went on with the tour. 

Same thing for a tour of a production company.  It had something to do with Game of Thrones and there was a weird throne made of some kind of thorns.  She was encouraged to sit on it as a photo op. Nope - she smiled and walked away. 

I wonder if this was put in the documentary for TWs benefit.  She obviously knows nothing BUT celebrity and craves the attention.  She could have learned so much from HMTQ, but of course, she knew everything already


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> If a Suckesses dust up delayed the family’s departure, causing them to not be bedside with Charles and Anne when the Queen died, they will never be forgiven.
> 
> The  Suckesses snub of a gracious invitation by the Queen to have visited Balmoral this summer will hopefully haunt them and often be referred to when their selfish behavior is discussed. I know there were questions about the invitation, but I think she probably did offer it, especially as she knew her health was failing.



It'll only haunt them if the can't write/talk about it £¢£¢£¢$$$$$


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> Agreed, discussing past colonialism is only really effective a) you acknowledge the reality of modern day slavery and are doing what you can to avoid supporting it and speak out against it.
> And b) if you are talking to the powerful and recognise the class dynamic throughout history. Hence why I think the BRF and our government are valid targets of criticism whereas IMO lecturing the random descendants of British, Irish, Slav etc peasants on their responsibility for the transatlantic slave trade is stupid at best precisely because they were even less enfranchised than we are today and none of us alone have the power to stop modern day trafficking or enslavement in cobalt mining or diamond mining or sweatshops or nail bars and recognising many buildings in Dubai were built using indentured servitude and the exploitation of women in places like Mauritania.
> There is still so much to do before we can say even the one issue of Slavery is a thing of the past.
> 
> A lot of people don’t even know the Arab slave trade existed so that’s not surprising.
> 
> To bring it back to H&M this is why bringing one POC into the fold isn’t helpful in of itself unless she or the family have any ideas or intent on tackling wider issues.
> 
> Is that Edward? What a cute baby.


I think it's Edward?  I just googled the year I was born and this came up, but I think it's a bit off   Edward is a bit older than me.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> If a Suckesses dust up delayed the family’s departure, causing them to not be bedside with Charles and Anne when the Queen died, they will never be forgiven.
> 
> The  Suckesses snub of a gracious invitation by the Queen to have visited Balmoral this summer will hopefully haunt them and often be referred to when their selfish behavior is discussed. I know there were questions about the invitation, but I think she probably did offer it, especially as she knew her health was failing.


I don't understand your comment.   Harry wasn't travelling with the rest of the family?  so why would they be delayed by whatever he was doing?


----------



## piperdog

duna said:


> I'm sure William, Edward, Sophie and Andrew didn't want him on their plane. Good for them!


A flight on his own would also have been a good opportunity to shoot some footage for Nflix. I wouldn't be surprised if he spent the time en route with a film crew capturing every sigh, pensive look out the window, and carefully scripted banality and fabrication.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand your comment.   Harry wasn't travelling with the rest of the family?  so why would they be delayed by whatever he was doing?



Someone earlier said he was supposed to go with them but due to lenghty discussions with Raptor was so late they just left without him. 

That said, I do think when everyone rushed up to Scotland she had already passed.


----------



## DoggieBags

Toby93 said:


> I wonder how that works - I know he would get an advance, but would he not get the remainder of the money until its published?  Does it depend on the sales?  Who would want to read it now?  That's probably the first thing that TW thought of when the Queen passed


Publishers give Advances to authors that are considered highly desirable. Authors can either be celebrity first time authors like ex-presidents or authors with a proven track record like JK Rowling after her first Harry Potter books were ginormous best sellers. The author gets a book royalty which is x percent of the price at which each of his / books sold. This percentage is negotiated in the book contract the author signs with the publisher before the book is published. The book royalties generated by the book sales are deducted from the advance the author received and only after the advance is fully covered by the royalties does the author receive any future book royalties. So if the author got a $100 advance, the author only starts to receive additional money from the publisher for book royalties earned after the $100 advance is covered. If the book never sells enough to cover the initial advance, the author still keeps the advance and is not required to refund any of it to the publisher. the only time an author would have to return an advance is if he / she did not meet their contractual obligation I.e. hand the publisher a manuscript along the lines covered by the contract. Advances usually are not paid in one lump sum at the signing of the contract. The advances are usually paid in increments for certain mile stones achieved Such as when the author submits a complete manuscript approved by the publisher, etc. so when the say Harry got a $20 million advance, we don’t know how much of the $20 million he’s actually received so far.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think Andrew, Edward, and William got there after she passed; they landed at 4 and it was an hour away. They must have known when they finally arrived at and were en route to Balmoral that it was too late, by less than an hour. It was also WAY too late when Harry actually took off. 

HM passed at 4:30, though the news came later at 6:30. He didnt even leave till 7, he must have known around 4:30 like the rest ot the family, I am guessing. Someone must have had a call go to him.

I was looking at some pictures of Harry with his grandmother and I am sure even a sap like Harry is reflecting on what he lost.

He really was extraordinarily late for the gathering, and he could have been with her if he had had a brain in his head.









						Prince William was 'too late', Queen had passed before family reached Balmoral
					

Queen death was announced by Buckingham Palace on September 2021




					www.geo.tv


----------



## Sophisticatted

I doubt William & Co. had any intention of delaying for Harry.  Harry *might* have been allowed on the plane if he could get there on time, but I’m sure the plane left when it was supposed to.  I doubt Harry would have been in the same car, sat between the Wessexes.  

I do believe TW threw a hissy fit, and probably thought she could manipulate the situation by manipulating Harry.  I’m sure it backfired.  Harry’s traveling alone and much later than everyone else only emphasizes how “outside” of the royal sphere he really is.  He is NOT a “part of history” the way the rest of the of the family is.  And his wife even less so.  It’s obvious that she will never be able to say that she “was there”.  She will never be able to give an inside scoop on what it was like.  

The pics of Kate, IMO, make it impossible for her to say she was excluded due to racism (or whatever).  It takes away her “situational victimhood”.  I doubt it quieted her.  Probably, the plane took off while she was loudly and lengthily lamenting and she shut right up and made Harry go by any means necessary so that at least ONE of them could say they were there.  Their business model pretty much depends upon it.


----------



## TimeToShop

Watching BBC just now. Liz Truss was shown arriving at BP. She was met by Major Johnny. He was looking fine!


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> Watching BBC just now. Liz Truss was shown arriving at BP. She was met by Major Johnny. He was looking fine!


someone on CNN last night pointed out that the queen's first PM, Churchill, was born 100 years before the new PM....what a span


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand your comment.   Harry wasn't travelling with the rest of the family?  so why would they be delayed by whatever he was doing?


If I read correctly in an earlier post, he was supposed to fly with the family, but delayed so long due to changing plans with Meghan, the family couldn’t wait any longer and departed. They would have been summoned with great urgency, one article said at the point the statement was issued about her being under medical care, the doctors gave her only hours to live.


----------



## DoggieBags

TimeToShop said:


> Watching BBC just now. Liz Truss was shown arriving at BP. She was met by Major Johnny. He was looking fine!


Since major Johnny was Prince Charles Equerry I imagine we will see much more of the Major in the coverage of King Charles.


----------



## TimeToShop

People are not having her nonsense. TW would be well advised to lie low for a long time.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## justwatchin

CNN, which is a cr@p news source had headline that H & M’s mysterious children will become prince and princess. I only scanned the article as I could see it started referencing TW and her never to go away Oprah interview.

So is this true or to be decided?


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Publishers give Advances to authors that are considered highly desirable. Authors can either be celebrity first time authors like ex-presidents or authors with a proven track record like JK Rowling after her first Harry Potter books were ginormous best sellers. The author gets a book royalty which is x percent of the price at which each of his / books sold. This percentage is negotiated in the book contract the author signs with the publisher before the book is published. The book royalties generated by the book sales are deducted from the advance the author received and only after the advance is fully covered by the royalties does the author receive any future book royalties. So if the author got a $100 advance, the author only starts to receive additional money from the publisher for book royalties earned after the $100 advance is covered. If the book never sells enough to cover the initial advance, the author still keeps the advance and is not required to refund any of it to the publisher. the only time an author would have to return an advance is if he / she did not meet their contractual obligation I.e. hand the publisher a manuscript along the lines covered by the contract. Advances usually are not paid in one lump sum at the signing of the contract. The advances are usually paid in increments for certain mile stones achieved Such as when the author submits a complete manuscript approved by the publisher, etc. so when the say Harry got a $20 million advance, we don’t know how much of the $20 million he’s actually received so far.



Plus if he doesn't submit a manuscript OR it is not of sufficient quality he will have defaulted on his contract.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

csshopper said:


> If a Suckesses dust up delayed the family’s departure, causing them to not be bedside with Charles and Anne when the Queen died, they will never be forgiven.
> 
> The  Suckesses snub of a gracious invitation by the Queen to have visited Balmoral this summer will hopefully haunt them and often be referred to when their selfish behavior is discussed. I know there were questions about the invitation, but I think she probably did offer it, especially as she knew her health was failing.


Yes, and this why I said he is really heartless. I think it will haunt him but for claw..not a chance. She doesn't have a conscience


----------



## bag-mania

The morons who write for TMZ are playing it their way. Note their use of the word “disinvited” when the really should’ve said “uninvited.” They are implying that she was once welcome which isn’t true.









						Meghan Markle Disinvited from Seeing Queen Elizabeth in Final Hours
					

Prince Harry traveled solo to see his grandmother as she was dying, and that wasn't on accident ... Meghan Markle reportedly did not get an invite to be by her side.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## CobaltBlu

TimeToShop said:


> Watching BBC just now. Liz Truss was shown arriving at BP. She was met by Major Johnny. He was looking fine!


I put screen cap in his thread


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> The morons who write for TMZ are playing it their way. Note their use of the word “disinvited” when the really should’ve said “uninvited.” They are implying that she was once welcome which isn’t true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Disinvited from Seeing Queen Elizabeth in Final Hours
> 
> 
> Prince Harry traveled solo to see his grandmother as she was dying, and that wasn't on accident ... Meghan Markle reportedly did not get an invite to be by her side.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Also it’s incorrect that he traveled as she was dying.  She was already with Philip at least two hours before he left London.


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> More likely £20K to stay away and keep his mouth shut.


I'd prefer H get a good, swift kick in the arse with a $2K pair of made to order John Lobb loafers


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry and Meghan tread delicate path after Queen's death​








						Prince Harry and Meghan tread delicate path after Queen's death
					

Harry was the last to arrive at Balmoral Castle on Thursday and the first to depart on Friday.




					torontosun.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The morons who write for TMZ are playing it their way. Note their use of the word “disinvited” when the really should’ve said “uninvited.” They are implying that she was once welcome which isn’t true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Disinvited from Seeing Queen Elizabeth in Final Hours
> 
> 
> Prince Harry traveled solo to see his grandmother as she was dying, and that wasn't on accident ... Meghan Markle reportedly did not get an invite to be by her side.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I don't think they really know who made it in time before she died


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I don't think they really know who made it in time before she died



Agree, it's all speculation at this point.  The most credible report I read this morning was that Anne and Charles were with her when she died as they were both already in Scotland. Edward, Sophie, Andrew and Will were on their way but didn't make it in time as she deteriorated so rapidly.  Harry was, of course, even further behind them so he definitely didn't make it.


----------



## Chanbal

_Even as her health faded this summer, and in the shadow of Prince Harry's forthcoming memoir, Her Majesty reportedly extended an invitation to the couple to visit her in Balmoral. It was not taken up.

At the Platinum Jubilee in June she appeared to be determined not to allow the fractious relations between Prince Harry and his brother Prince William to play any part, receiving Harry at Windsor and meeting for the first time her great-granddaughter – and namesake – Lilibet….

It had been suggested, even hoped perhaps, by several royal insiders that the Queen's passing might help to mend the rift between Harry and the rest of his family, however early signs indicate that this may never happen. 

The Duke of Sussex traveled alone to Balmoral Castle on Thursday - and arrived in Scotland 15 minutes after the news of Her Majesty's passing was announced to the world. It is understood he was still in the air and by himself when the announcement was made. 

His grief over the news was etched across his face when he stepped off his Cessna plane and into a waiting car.  

However, on Friday morning, he also became the first member of the family to leave Scotland, having departed his late grandmother's beloved summer retreat approximately 12 hours after he arrived in order to return to London, where he is expected to reunite with his wife Meghan - who made an eleventh-hour decision not to join her husband on the trip to Balmoral. 

*The question that now lingers in the wake of the Queen's death is whether the door will be forever shut to Harry and Meghan - having been propped open by Her Majesty for so long, even in the final weeks of her life. 

It remains unclear whether the members of King Charles III's so-called 'slimmed-down' Monarchy - which includes Harry's brother Prince William, his wife Kate Middleton, and the Queen's long-time confidante Sophie Wessex - and will have the same unwavering patience*. _


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Agree, it's all speculation at this point.  The most credible report I read this morning was that Anne and Charles were with her when she died as they were both already in Scotland. Edward, Sophie, Andrew and Will were on their way but didn't make it in time as she deteriorated so rapidly.  Harry was, of course, even further behind them so he definitely didn't make it.


hopefully at least Anne was there....and Phillip was waiting for her


----------



## Prada Prince

justwatchin said:


> CNN, which is a cr@p news source had headline that H & M’s mysterious children will become prince and princess. I only scanned the article as I could see it started referencing TW and her never to go away Oprah interview.
> 
> So is this true or to be decided?


It's true as a matter of law for now unless and until Charles decides to amend protocol by issuing Letters Patent that amend their rights to the title.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't think they really know who made it in time before she died


They don’t they just want to stir up their readers who are likely predominantly Meghan fans.


----------



## rose60610

I'd imagine Claw is fuming about how she was denied a photo of the two Lilibets. That cha-ching cash register just slammed shut. She's probably wailing to Netflix in faux grief with excuses to extend the contract. Netflix is going to want insider info at the funeral and Claw will fight tooth and nail to get it. She might even bring the kids to force the cameras on her them. She's going to want photos of them being bounced on grandad King Charles III's knee as if he won't have enough to deal with. Must deliver for Netflix!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get this stupid appeasement of the terrorists. Kate is not Raptor and they are not equal and this is how the BRF rolls, deal with it.
> 
> That said, I can see Kate staying behind for no ulterior motive if The Queen already passed. She wasn't needed to talk about the next steps immediately.


Let's face it, much of this thread is a comparison between Catherine and ZedZed with Megzie this and that vs Kate that and this. I believe in this instance it has nothing to do with either. Charles & Camilla were already at Balmoral so when HM's condition worsened, her four children and William and possibly Dufus were told to get there asap. It's better for the children that Catherine as a concerned and caring mother stayed home to hug and console her children when HM's demise became public knowledge. In the end the Despicable Duo became inconsequential as Dufus was too late and ZedZed was persona no grata.


----------



## csshopper

There can be a plus in the Suckesses stay in London: they are going to be gobsmacked I think by the outpouring of support being shown King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla. H and M will find it impossible to ignore. It will be in their face. Their narcissistic view of the world would not have expected this.

Hazbeen: Last to arrive, within 13 hours, first to leave. Not a good image running home to be clutched by the claw.

And, when there is time in the future, I believe the loathsome post by the sewer dwelling Scoobie Doo Doo, in which he said “personally I think he (Prince Louis) is a secret supporter of H&M and he has handed us on a plate a stick to beat his mother with, the next time she goes about her early learning project“ will be dealt with in some way, we may never know how, by William, heir to the throne.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> There can be a plus in the Suckesses stay in London: they are going to be gobsmacked I think by the outpouring of support being shown King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla. H and M will find it impossible to ignore. It will be in their face. Their narcissistic view of the world would not have expected this.
> 
> Hazbeen: Last to arrive, within 13 hours, first to leave. Not a good image running home to be clutched by the claw.
> 
> And, when there is time in the future, I believe the loathsome post by the sewer dwelling Scoobie Doo Doo, in which he said “personally I think he (Prince Louis) is a secret supporter of H&M and he has handed us on a plate a stick to beat his mother with, the next time she goes about her early learning project“ will be dealt with in some way, we may never know how, by William, heir to the throne.


that scoobie thing is beyond despicable


----------



## lallybelle

OH ****, the SHADE in Charles' speech. Best of luck overseas Harkles.


----------



## Toby93

lallybelle said:


> OH ****, the SHADE in Charles' speech. Best of luck overseas Harkles.


I just heard that - a 2 second mention


----------



## Toby93

Charles just said that William gets everything and good luck to the Hazbeens overseas


----------



## Kiradris

Charles' address was fantastic.  He made it very clear that Harry and Megan will have no role whatsoever in the new monarchy.

His love for his wife brings me to tears.  He and Camilla have a beautiful partnership, one that William and Catherine parallel.  The monarchy is in wonderful hands.


----------



## Chanbal

lallybelle said:


> OH ****, the SHADE in Charles' speech. Best of luck overseas Harkles.


I just came here for the feedback. A very brief mention without referring to them as duke and…


----------



## csshopper

Prada Prince said:


> It's true as a matter of law for now unless and until Charles decides to amend protocol by issuing Letters Patent that amend their rights to the title.


Prada Prince, welcome here! Always enjoy your posts on the H forum.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> There can be a plus in the Suckesses stay in London: they are going to be gobsmacked I think by the outpouring of support being shown King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla. H and M will find it impossible to ignore. It will be in their face. Their narcissistic view of the world would not have expected this.



I saw footage of Charles and Camilla arriving at BP and shaking hands with the crowd. Everyone was warm towards them, one woman grabbed Charles and kissed his cheek.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> I'd imagine Claw is fuming about how she was denied a photo of the two Lilibets. That cha-ching cash register just slammed shut. She's probably wailing to Netflix in faux grief with excuses to extend the contract. Netflix is going to want insider info at the funeral and Claw will fight tooth and nail to get it. She might even bring the kids to force the cameras on her them. She's going to want photos of them being bounced on grandad King Charles III's knee as if he won't have enough to deal with. Must deliver for Netflix!


There were rumours that Zedzee wanted her handbag to bring a Netflix crew with him to Balmoral, rumours which purportedly emerged from the Sussex team. And one comment said that even if the rumours were not true, it is telling that some people would believe Zedzee to be capable of such an action. Let's see how she behaves during this period of mourning and if she craves the spotlight enough to grab attention for herself.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Chanbal said:


> I just came here for the feedback. A very brief mention without referring to them as duke and…


Yes, just Harry and Meghan. Almost an afterthought. LOL.

Frogmore will need to a thorough cleaning after TW loses her $hit over the course of the next 10 days and beyond.

Can't wait for the coronation.

Bye bye Hazbeens!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have not watched the speech yet, but I am kind of surprised. Maybe Charles has more of a backbone than we all thought. 

Over on the Charles thread you can see how the loss is hard on him


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that didn't have a chance to watch…


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> It's interesting that one of the many documentaries on the Queen last night made a point of saying the Queen loathed celebrity.  They showed several instances where the opportunity was there for her to partake in a "stunt", but she smiled and walked away.
> 
> During a tour of the Guinness distillery, she was poured and offered a pint, but she merely looked at it and went on with the tour.
> 
> Same thing for a tour of a production company.  It had something to do with Game of Thrones and there was a weird throne made of some kind of thorns.  She was encouraged to sit on it as a photo op. Nope - she smiled and walked away.
> 
> I wonder if this was put in the documentary for TWs benefit.  She obviously knows nothing BUT celebrity and craves the attention.  She could have learned so much from HMTQ, but of course, she knew everything already


I've said this before - that's why Diana and Fergie's behaviour was frowned upon.  They acted like celebrities.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

His speech was lovely and I’m glad he mentioned Harry and his puppet master - he took the high ground and now nothing bad can be said about him ‘leaving them out’ etc. Mic Drop!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Jayne1 said:


> I've said this before - that's why Diana and Fergie's behaviour was frowned upon.  They acted like celebrities.


Exactly. Behaviour not befitting a royal.


----------



## youngster

lallybelle said:


> OH ****, the SHADE in Charles' speech. Best of luck overseas Harkles.



I was driving while listening to his speech and just laughed and laughed when I heard this.  The _SHADE_!  Well done, Charles.
Yes, he's still my son and I love him.  But, no use of titles, just plain ol' Harry and MM, best of luck as you "build your life overseas" and are not at all part of life here in the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

Bezos is going to sell many plates to be shipped directly to Montecito, Soho H, Frogmore, and whatever airline company …


----------



## Jayne1

Re: Charles. Why do all the links send me to twitter.

Is there no where else I can watch this, other than giving twitter more clicks.  Off to goggle...


----------



## xincinsin

Ali-bagpuss said:


> His speech was lovely and I’m glad he mentioned Harry and his puppet master - he took the high ground and now nothing bad can be said about him ‘leaving them out’ etc. Mic Drop!


He wished them well in their endeavours overseas. That's going to be hard to spin negatively in that "have my cake and eat it too" manner that the Harkles adopt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Watched the speech, bawling again, good thing it's the weekend and too bad I don't drink. I think he did well.

I'm also positive it eats up Raptor from the inside that the woman she hates most in this world is now the Princess of Wales for real.


----------



## Zen101

King Charles has surprised me with his speech (in a good way). That “overseas” comment was brilliant. Charles has definitely read the room when it comes to those two traitors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Re: Charles. Why do all the links send me to twitter.
> 
> Is there no where else I can watch this, other than giving twitter more clicks.  Off to goggle...



I watched it on Youtube.


----------



## bag-mania

Sounds like a “don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out” kind of message.


----------



## papertiger

What I heard:

I will never abdicate, I will die King

My wife will be my Queen 

William will takeover responsibilities from Charles 

William will be PoW and Catherine his Princess 

Harry and TW   see you at Christmas - or never


----------



## Aminamina




----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Jayne1 said:


> Re: Charles. Why do all the links send me to twitter.
> 
> Is there no where else I can watch this, other than giving twitter more clicks.  Off to goggle...


Perhaps try the BBC or CNN.  They will have reruns or online repeats I believe.


----------



## redney

Jayne1 said:


> Re: Charles. Why do all the links send me to twitter.
> 
> Is there no where else I can watch this, other than giving twitter more clicks.  Off to goggle...


I watched on PBS online: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/...o-britain-and-the-commonwealth-as-new-monarch


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I will never abdicate, I will die King
> My wife will be my Queen
> William*, his heir,* will takeover responsibilities from Charles
> William will be PoW and Catherine his Princess
> Harry and TW   see you at Christmas - or never


Thanks, perfect summary! I just made a minor addition to it.


----------



## Jayne1

redney said:


> I watched on PBS online: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/...o-britain-and-the-commonwealth-as-new-monarch


I just watched there too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> What I heard:
> 
> I will never abdicate, I will die King
> 
> My wife will be my Queen
> 
> William will takeover responsibilities from Charles
> 
> William will be PoW and Catherine his Princess
> 
> Harry and TW   see you at Christmas - or never


Spot on!


----------



## csshopper

Does this mean Frogmore will be vacant?
Will JCMH need to update his US residence status?
Impact on the Security lawsuit since they probably will not be frequent visitors?
Are we forever stuck with them in California? UGH!

OR, and consider the couple involved,

Will they be so pissed at their diminished roles, they will return and reside in Frogmore out of spite to be visibly, vocally irritants? She who has to have her own way will not go quietly.

edited to add: 
TW might claim they are returning for the benefit of Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet and she as a loving mother thinks they should know their heritage. $$$$$


----------



## Handbag1234

TW will be fuming. Kate got Diana’s ring and now PoW too. It’s gone horribly wrong for TW. She’s back to Z list.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Aminamina said:


>



This is perfect


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Thanks, perfect summary! I just made a minor addition to it.



and I forgot that he declared himself devoted to his Church


----------



## Lodpah

Lol being referred to by just Harry and Meghan and overseas is priceless. I swear the Brits totally know how to shade without batting an eye. The BRF’s speechwriters are top notch.

There’s your trouble Handbag, your minder who completely turned you from a prince to a frog but in this instance she still is smarter than you.


----------



## csshopper

I’m not on Twitter so can’t post,  but was able to see two from today by the Body Language Guy before getting blocked. Both worth a look.

1. Interesting analysis of possible significance of why KCIII’s speech was 9 minutes long.

2. Fun clip/comment of the PM and Major Johnny meeting. Any excuse to view him is a good one.


----------



## Katel

papertiger said:


> I think words have already been had with the gruesome toothsome twosome. I think that's why they left. They did not listen.
> 
> *That performative trip to Balmoral suggests Harry is estranged.*
> 
> How can they even talk to him or even in front of him when everything gets back to her and then is exploited. Even if he's not wearing a wire, he is a spy on the inside. They can't lock him in the Tower, but they can lock him out.


Yes. And I believe they announced before he had arrived and he heard enroute? If true, that is the freeze - maybe that’s why he was holding his head in his hands.


----------



## CarryOn2020

King Charles was born for this moment, carried off the awkward part with grace and aplomb. 
I must say he looks good in black, really good.  Long live King Charles!


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that didn't have a chance to watch…




I can’t imagine how difficult it must have been for him to deliver this speech without getting weepy. Loss of his mother, taking on the role as King that he’s waited so long for… He must be feeling all the feels… This was a good speech.


----------



## jennlt

BLG works fast. Almost as fast as King Charles lol


----------



## Lodpah

Handbag1234 said:


> TW will be fuming. Kate got Diana’s ring and now PoW too. It’s gone horribly wrong for TW. She’s back to Z list.


Fuming? By now her hair is wild, weaves coming unglued, eyes darker than midnight, fire coming out of her mouth and probably viewing Handbag as a loser. Dishes won’t cut it this time. It’s time to bring out her arsenal - venomous and deadly to all who dare stand in her way.


----------



## Lodpah

csshopper said:


> I’m not on Twitter so can’t post,  but was able to see two from today by the Body Language Guy before getting blocked. Both worth a look.
> 
> 1. Interesting analysis of possible significance of why KCIII’s speech was 9 minutes long.
> 
> 2. Fun clip/comment of the PM and Major Johnny meeting. Any excuse to view him is a good one.


Ooh! What analysis? I’d like to read it.


----------



## jennlt

Lodpah said:


> Ooh! What analysis? I’d like to read it.


Here it is


----------



## Lodpah

jennlt said:


> Here it is



Thanks. Yes numbers are very important in biblical studies too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tannim44

I would give Netflix more of my money to see the footage of TW's face when she found out that Catherine is the Princess of Wales.  If Netflix didn't get that footage, everyone involved in that deal should be fired immediately.


----------



## papertiger

Tells it like it is 

“How does he deal with his wayward son and the cable actress Meghan Markle?“

“Strip them of their titles”


----------



## LemonDrop

I stumbled across this thread and can't figure anything out. So many initials, and nicknames and such.


----------



## CobaltBlu

so Archie and Lilibet are Prince and Princess of Sussex unless Charles removes those titles…..does Meghan theoretically have to curtsy to them now?


----------



## Sina08

Lodpah said:


> Lol being referred to by just Harry and Meghan and overseas is priceless. I swear the Brits totally know how to shade without batting an eye. The BRF’s speechwriters are top notch.
> 
> There’s your trouble Handbag, your minder who completely turned you from a prince to a frog but in this instance she still is smarter than you.


Oh, that’s what I like the most about Brits! Loved how Lascelles’ deadly digs were always wrapped so politely in The Crown. It’s really creative, I rewatch his scenes on Youtube all the time. Wish I was that quick witted and imaginative when dishing out.


----------



## gelbergirl

csshopper said:


> I’m not on Twitter so can’t post,  but was able to see two from today by the Body Language Guy before getting blocked. Both worth a look.
> 
> 1. Interesting analysis of possible significance of why KCIII’s speech was 9 minutes long.
> 
> 2. Fun clip/comment of the PM and Major Johnny meeting. Any excuse to view him is a good one.



I'll check it out !


----------



## Kiradris

CobaltBlu said:


> so Archie and Lilibet are Prince and Princess of Sussex unless Charles removes those titles…..does Meghan theoretically have to curtsy to them now?


I don't know about that, but she is 100% the type to insist that everyone in their orbit (teachers, classmates, nannies) refer to them as Prince or Princess.  I bet some poor little Montecito preschool teacher is going to have a lecture on curtsying to these two.


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> so Archie and Lilibet are Prince and Princess of Sussex unless Charles removes those titles…..does Meghan theoretically have to curtsy to them now?


One can only hope ...


----------



## marietouchet

Queen Margrethe of Denmark had her golden jubilee scheduled for next and it is curtailed due to the death of QEII. 

Anyone taking bets on the Margaret Cho issue of podcast - comes out next week ?


----------



## Aimee3

Kiradris said:


> I don't know about that, but she is 100% the type to insist that everyone in their orbit (teachers, classmates, nannies) refer to them as Prince or Princess.  I bet some poor little Montecito preschool teacher is going to have a lecture on curtsying to these two.


CeeJay would definitely have had something to say about that!  IIRC she always said titles are meaningless and we don’t have them in the USA so NO curtsies allowed!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Queen Margrethe of Denmark had her golden jubilee scheduled for next and it is curtailed due to the death of QEII.
> 
> Anyone taking bets on the Margaret Cho issue of podcast - comes out next week ?



She wrote a lovey condolence note as well.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Ali-bagpuss said:


> His speech was lovely and I’m glad he mentioned Harry and his puppet master - he took the high ground and now nothing bad can be said about him ‘leaving them out’ etc. Mic Drop!



I've never heard "And, don't let the door hit your a** on the way out" used in such an adroit manner before.


----------



## TimeToShop

I bet she’s fuming! It did also say they were planning on delaying the next podcrash.
——

Meghan Markle was booked to go on Jimmy Fallon’s show as part of her latest PR salvo — but will now be preparing for Queen Elizabeth’s funeral, sources told Page Six.

The Duchess of Sussex was booked on NBC’s “The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon” for Tuesday, Sept. 20, as she and husband Prince Harry were due to be in New York City for the 77th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 77).

“Meghan was due on Fallon,” a source told Page Six. “I don’t even know what she was going to talk about, but that’s obviously canceled now.”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, I would have loved to see that (not really). She wouldn't have been able to keep up with his quick wit.


----------



## LittleStar88

Their timing for everything since the day they left has been the absolute worst. What bad luck they seem to consistently have.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TimeToShop

LittleStar88 said:


> Their timing for everything since the day they left has been the absolute worst. What bad luck they seem to consistently have.



Karma is a b**ch!


----------



## youngster

She's fortunate it was cancelled as it would have been embarrassing even though I'm sure she's had a life goal of being on the Tonight Show.  Jimmy Fallon is a nice guy and he would have tried to help her but she's not quick and not funny and nobody watching the Tonight Show is interested in being lectured on "ambition" or "this-weeks-podcast-topic".  It would probably devolve into a conversation about Harry and whether a prince knows how to do laundry or change a diaper.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I would have loved to see that (not really). She wouldn't have been able to keep up with his quick wit.


Yeah but he would have tried to make her look good.


----------



## bubablu

In this exact moment Kate could actually hear the smashing plates in Frogmore just opening the window. Isn't a relaxing tought?


----------



## Sina08

LittleStar88 said:


> Their timing for everything since the day they left has been the absolute worst. What bad luck they seem to consistently have.


Absolutely! 
And they probably thought they are on a roll right now with all the recent engagements, the podcast, the interview etc. The Queen’s death brought everything to a halt and I bet M is not amused.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

What I can’t help thinking is that Meghan is so desperate to ‘be like Diana’ but I’m pretty sure Diana would much prefer and indeed love Catherine.


----------



## gelbergirl

Any word from Claw yet?
What is she doing?  They'll be there another week.


----------



## Jayne1

LemonDrop said:


> I stumbled across this thread and can't figure anything out. So many initials, and nicknames and such.


Yeah, it's a bit much and I'm here all the time.  lol

I liked that in his speech, King Charles wanted to express his love to Harry and Meg as the build their lives overseas..._ and left out their titles. _

We can only hope.


----------



## TimeToShop

gelbergirl said:


> Any word from Claw yet?
> What is she doing?  They'll be there another week.



You’d think she’d be going back to CA and either taking care of/or getting her children. Although if nannies are their main caretakers perhaps they don’t miss their parents.


----------



## redney

TimeToShop said:


> You’d think she’d be going back to CA and either taking care of/or getting her children. Although if nannies are their main caretakers perhaps they don’t miss their parents.


She might be huffing and flouncing back to CA but it's not for the sake of the invisikids.


----------



## zinacef

gelbergirl said:


> Any word from Claw yet?
> What is she doing?  They'll be there another week.


sifting through her cosplay diana catalogue looking for outfit inspo, having spray tan replenish, texting Haz , having keratin hair treatment , idk what that is really , mad as hell as she can’t really be out having pics done with her dark glasses.


----------



## bubablu

Jayne1 said:


> Yeah, it's a bit much and I'm here all the time.  lol



Yes, it's like reading War and peace with all the patronymics and the nicknames: I had the Wikipedia page open all the time for the who's who.


----------



## sdkitty

lallybelle said:


> OH ****, the SHADE in Charles' speech. Best of luck overseas Harkles.


a lot of people seemed to think it was just nice that he included mention of Harry


----------



## BittyMonkey

OK, stupid question for those of you saying TW is livid about Catherine's new title. Did she _really_ think that there was any question as to who would be Princess of Wales? I mean it's not like it's an audition...


----------



## Chloe302225

An interesting read on why Archie and Lilibet  wouldn't be getting HRH's and why that would of upset TW enough to bring it up on her Oprah interview. It seems that the title isn't expressly retroactive, meaning it is not automatic that the title would be given.









						From Berkshire to Buckingham
					

Jane Barr's monthly newsletter with commentary on Kate, Meghan, and the British royals. Click to read From Berkshire to Buckingham, by Jane Barr, a Substack publication with thousands of readers.




					fromberkshiretobuckingham.substack.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

BittyMonkey said:


> OK, stupid question for those of you saying TW is livid about Catherine's new title. Did she _really_ think that there was any question as to who would be Princess of Wales? I mean it's not like it's an audition...


IMO it's the title "Princess" (even though a Duchess is higher, technically), the attention/media coverage, comparisons to Diana, and further elevation of Kate's status in the BRF that is getting TW's goat.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> a lot of people seemed to think it was just nice that he included mention of Harry


It's amazing how they can see his comments as a positive.  They really are clueless


----------



## lulu212121

youngster said:


> She's fortunate it was cancelled as it would have been embarrassing even though I'm sure she's had a life goal of being on the Tonight Show.  Jimmy Fallon is a nice guy and he would have tried to help her but she's not quick and not funny and nobody watching the Tonight Show is interested in being lectured on "ambition" or "this-weeks-podcast-topic".  It would probably devolve into a conversation about Harry and whether a prince knows how to do laundry or change a diaper.


Jimmy Fallon is fortunate, too.


----------



## Gal4Dior

lulu212121 said:


> Jimmy Fallon is fortunate, too.


So am I. I am due in NYC - made reservations months ago - at the same time. The presence of TW would have ruined my vacation. Didn't figure out it was the UN General Assembly time until I booked my hotel.


----------



## tenshix

Toby93 said:


> It's amazing how they can see his comments as a positive.  They really are clueless
> 
> View attachment 5607346


I don’t support them but IMO KCIII’s comment here was both from the heart and clever. I think he truly does love his son Harry but is drawing the boundaries by not mentioning titles or duties. A father’s love can be separate from their “work”. I believe he will always love his son as his child no matter what.


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> a lot of people seemed to think it was just nice that he included mention of Harry


even my nice, sweet elderly mother at 88 was pleased he made it clear that Haz and Claw know where they stand in this 9 minute speech & that King Charles knows and he let us all know.


----------



## Helventara

It seems that ZZ wanted to go to Balmoral but was forbidden. The noise is getting louder about a 'change of plan'.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eft-incredulous-Meghan-said-way-Balmoral.html


----------



## CarryOn2020

BittyMonkey said:


> OK, stupid question for those of you saying TW is livid about Catherine's new title. Did she _really_ think that there was any question as to who would be Princess of Wales? I mean it's not like it's an audition...


She actually thought she and Hazz could be queen and king, so imo it is likely she thought she and Hazz would get the Duchy of Cornwall, PoWales, etc.  Based on their past actions, they want anything connected to money.  The idea that they may not get any money must be frightening to her.


----------



## muddledmint

CobaltBlu said:


> so Archie and Lilibet are Prince and Princess of Sussex unless Charles removes those titles…..does Meghan theoretically have to curtsy to them now?


Not “of sussex.” Maybe prince Archie and princess lilibet. Ugh, I hate their stupid nicknames as full names names. 

I don’t know about the curtsying but as blood royals, don’t the kids technically rank above meghan? I remember reading that Kate had to curtsy to Beatrice and Eugenie in formal situations because they outranked her as blood princesses. But probably not anymore since the elevation of Kate to princess of Wales and wife of the heir.


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> IMO it's the title "Princess" (even though a Duchess is higher, technically), the attention/media coverage, comparisons to Diana, and further elevation of Kate's status in the BRF that is getting TW's goat.


Being geeky here 
Princess (eg Beatrice) is not always higher (it’s complicated … does a curtsy count as higher or order of presence in a ceremony ?)
IMHO the BRF is going to a merit based system … I do so hope Pss Anne is recognized …. Please ….


----------



## marietouchet

muddledmint said:


> Not “of sussex.” Maybe prince Archie and princess lilibet. Ugh, I hate their stupid nicknames as full names names.
> 
> I don’t know about the curtsying but as blood royals, don’t the kids technically rank above meghan? I remember reading that Kate had to curtsy to Beatrice and Eugenie in formal situations because they outranked her as blood princesses. But probably not anymore since the elevation of Kate to princess of Wales and wife of the heir.


does anyone else think … I bet Lilibet changes her name ( never uses Lilibet per se )  when older , she will go for Lili as her father has been Harry - not Henry - like forever


----------



## gelbergirl

muddledmint said:


> Not “of sussex.” Maybe prince Archie and princess lilibet. Ugh, I hate their stupid nicknames as full names names.
> 
> I don’t know about the curtsying but as blood royals, don’t the kids technically rank above meghan? I remember reading that Kate had to curtsy to Beatrice and Eugenie in formal situations because they outranked her as blood princesses. But probably not anymore since the elevation of Kate to princess of Wales and wife of the heir.



yeah Diana had to curtsy to many and then it switched immediately on 7/29/1981


----------



## marietouchet

gelbergirl said:


> yeah Diana had to curtsy to many and then it switched immediately on 7/29/1981


The whole system is context dependent …
in the US no one knows or cares
in the UK, every one notices
But Lili and Archie have hardly even been in the UK …


----------



## nyshopaholic

Is Camilla in charge of the tiaras now as Queen Consort? If so, TW will definitely never wear another one from the Royal Family again. She may make JCMH buy her one of her very own…


----------



## melissatrv

I hope Charles strips M&H of their titles ASAP.  Not just "they can't use them but still have them" but completely revoked and Harry and his children removed from the line of succession.  Nothing against the kids but as long as they are in the LOS it always gives Megan a royal connection even after her and H divorce.  Honestly, I don't know why this was not done after the 1 year mark of their "finding freedom" in the US


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, Queen Camilla will handle the tiaras.  Iirc AngelaK has indicated she will retire.


----------



## Toby93

lulu212121 said:


> Jimmy Fallon is fortunate, too.


Didn't she learn anything after Ellen?


----------



## muddledmint

marietouchet said:


> Being geeky here
> Princess (eg Beatrice) is not always higher (it’s complicated … does a curtsy count as higher or order of presence in a ceremony ?)
> IMHO the BRF is going to a merit based system … I do so hope Pss Anne is recognized …. Please ….


I’m no expert, but I believe you curtsy or are curtsied to based upon rank. The order of entering events and where you sit/stand is not strictly based upon rank. But usually for important events, Kate would be with William, and William outranks B and E, so William and Kate would walk in together ahead of B and E. 

Kate is obviously more important and integral to the royal family even before she became princess of wales, but technically outranked by blood granddaughters to the Queen because her standing was dependent on William. So previously, when the Queen was still alive, when Kate was by herself, she had to curtsy to B and E, but when she was with William, they had to curtsy to her. At least that is what I recall reading. Very weird rules, to an American.


----------



## melissatrv

I think the BRF tolerates Harry on a the same level that they tolerated Edward VIII.  He attends events that they really cannot eject him from like his grandmother's funeral, but has no prominent role. Now if only they treated MM the same way they treated Wallis


----------



## Toby93

Yesterday it changed to Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Cornwall.  Now it changed again!


----------



## CobaltBlu

melissatrv said:


> I think the BRF tolerates Harry on a the same level that they tolerated Edward VIII.  He attends events that they really cannot eject him from like his grandmother's funeral, but has no prominent role. Now if only they treated MM the same way they treated Wallis


Good point. But Edward was solidly effectively banished, which is a good template for what should happen with the Prince and the Duchess of Netflix.  Edward and Wallis never openly spoke out against the monarchy, either.


----------



## lanasyogamama

nyshopaholic said:


> Is Camilla in charge of the tiaras now as Queen Consort? If so, TW will definitely never wear another one from the Royal Family again. She may make JCMH buy her one of her very own…


That article is like a university research paper!! 


Toby93 said:


> Didn't she learn anything after Ellen?


She never learns or thinks ahead.


----------



## bubablu

nyshopaholic said:


> Is Camilla in charge of the tiaras now as Queen Consort? If so, TW will definitely never wear another one from the Royal Family again. She may make JCMH buy her one of her very own…


Yes, but I think she will lack of real events to wear it to.


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> Good point. But Edward was solidly effectively banished, which is a good template for what should happen with the Prince and the Duchess of Netflix.  Edward and Wallis never openly spoke out against the monarchy, either.


Exactly!  They may have privately expressed their displeasure at the BRF, but Edward was a monarchist and desperately wanted to return to England.  He respected the crown and the Queen.

It's so unbelievably sad the way Harry has turned his back on his family and his birthright and heritage.  What kind of a person does that?


----------



## melissatrv

Toby93 said:


> Yesterday it changed to Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Cornwall.  Now it changed again!



So glad William's title has changed.  Always liked referring to him as Prince instead of a Duke.   Plus Kate really embodies what little girls think of as a Princess.


----------



## csshopper

Question, does the Princess of Wales have to curtsy to the blood Princesses, Eugenie and Beatrice? If I remember the protocol as Duchess of Cambridge Catherine did.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Question, does the Princess of Wales have to curtsy to the blood Princesses, Eugenie and Beatrice? If I remember the protocol as Duchess of Cambridge Catherine did.


When William is in the room Catherine out ranks them.  If he isn't, I don't know what will happen since they are blood Princesses.  I know I read a long time ago that the Yorkies said that they wouldn't curtsy to her if he wasn't there and Catherine on her end *would not *curtsy to them so it is a draw.  That was a while ago and the dynamic is different.

ETA  missed putting in a really important word!


----------



## Miss Liz

Toby93 said:


> Exactly!  They may have privately expressed their displeasure at the BRF, but Edward was a monarchist and desperately wanted to return to England.  He respected the crown and the Queen.
> 
> It's so unbelievably sad the way Harry has turned his back on his family and his birthright and heritage.  What kind of a person does that?


And as far as Meghan is concerned I cannot imagine the privilege of having QEII take you under her wing and reacting as TW has done and continued to this day. They are both entirely lacking in the dignity and grace that Her Majesty embodied. So sad. It could have gone so very differently, and so much more to their benefit (since that is their endgame anyway).


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> She's fortunate it was cancelled as it would have been embarrassing even though I'm sure she's had a life goal of being on the Tonight Show.  Jimmy Fallon is a nice guy and he would have tried to help her but she's not quick and not funny and nobody watching the Tonight Show is interested in being lectured on "ambition" or "this-weeks-podcast-topic".  It would probably devolve into a conversation about Harry and whether a prince knows how to do laundry or change a diaper.


JF would have tried to engage her in some stupid stunt just like Ellen.  Would she have risen to the bait after the last time?  Who knows?  She has no spontaneous wit and doesn't think fast on her feet so i don't see her being a good guest.  This was all set up as the big PR push for the podcasts.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Yeah, it's a bit much and I'm here all the time.  lol
> 
> I liked that in his speech, King Charles wanted to express his love to Harry and Meg as the build their lives overseas..._ and left out their titles. _
> 
> We can only hope.


Yep.  no titles and going overseas.  To me overseas always mean going to Asia lol!  Harry and Meg want to be rulers and King and Queen.  Chunga Changa is still available.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

BittyMonkey said:


> OK, stupid question for those of you saying TW is livid about Catherine's new title. Did she _really_ think that there was any question as to who would be Princess of Wales? I mean it's not like it's an audition...


The sugar stans think it is an election lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Speaking of bowing - no wonder he looked p!ssed when he left Balmoral

Prince Harry will now have to bow to Camilla — despite their tensions​_“It would be the protocol to bow to the new king and Queen,” Majesty managing editor Joe Little told Page Six Friday. “Whether that happened under such circumstances [on Thursday or Friday morning] is debatable, but any time the royal family meets the new king and queen, the done thing would be to bow or curtsy to them.”

Asked what William and Harry would now call their father, Little said: “It would still be Pa. The Queen and Prince Philip were Ma and Pa to their children; whatever William and Harry called Charles and Camilla yesterday, they will call them that today.”

Harry was the first of the royal family to leave Balmoral early Friday on a British Airways flight back to London, where he was set to be reunited with wife Meghan Markle at their Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage. He was seen leaving around 8:20 a.m. UK time.

Sources told Page Six that he will stay in the UK for the next 10 days until the Queen’s state funeral, widely believed to be scheduled for Monday, Sept. 19.

The prince will celebrate his 38th birthday on Sept. 15.








						Prince Harry will now have to bow to Camilla — despite their tensions
					

The prince will also be expected to bow when he sees his own father, King Charles III.




					pagesix.com
				



_


----------



## scarlet555

melissatrv said:


> So glad William's title has changed.  Always liked referring to him as Prince instead of a Duke.   Plus Kate really embodies what little girls think of as a Princess.


Imagine Cringe’s face at the thought of this!  If walls could talk…


----------



## muddledmint

gracekelly said:


> When William is in the room Catherine out ranks them.  If he isn't, I don't know what will happen since they are blood Princesses.  I know I read a long time ago that the Yorkies said that they wouldn't curtsy to her if he wasn't there and Catherine on her end would curtsy to them so it is a draw.  That was a while ago and the dynamic is different.


I’m not really very impressed by the York family in general. The princesses seem nice enough, but does anyone really find them interesting or relevant to the royal family? I think it is smart for Charles and William to “slim” the royal family to just the essentials. I understand the traditions and protocols that dictate things like rank and curtsying but it seems silly and demeaning to me. I don’t think the royal family would lose anything by cutting out those practices entirely. Except for Meghan. She can curtsy to everyone, forever!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> JF would have tried to engage her in some stupid stunt just like Ellen.  Would she have risen to the bait after the last time?  Who knows?  She has no spontaneous wit and doesn't think fast on her feet so i don't see her being a good guest.  This was all set up as the big PR push for the podcasts.


She‘d probably go into her stupid giggly flirty ingenue bit, thrust her boobs, grab for his forearm. Her “I am so cute and clever if I can manipulate a Prince I can manipulate any man“ routine. Except when she tried it at the polo match with inserting herself in hefting the trophy and made an azz of herself again. She has no self awareness.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

melissatrv said:


> I think the BRF tolerates Harry on a the same level that they tolerated Edward VIII.  He attends events that they really cannot eject him from like his grandmother's funeral, but has no prominent role. Now if only they treated MM the same way they treated Wallis


I do hope the men and Anne  wear their uniforms when appropriate from now on with no further consideration to those stripped of their positions.


----------



## Toby93

Wow - she really does think her status has elevated   Trashes the family, yet updates when it she thinks it furthers her agenda.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> She‘d probably go into her stupid giggly flirty ingenue bit, thrust her boobs, grab for his forearm. Her “I am so cute and clever if I can manipulate a Prince I can manipulate any man“ routine. Except when she tried it at the polo match with inserting herself in hefting the trophy and made an azz of herself again. She has no self awareness.


When she tried the flirt routine it was with a much younger man.  It is always sad when a woman doesn't realize that she is no longer tantalizing to 19-25 year old men.  Let's send her a memo on it, shall we?


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Wow - she really does think her status has elevated   Trashes the family, yet updates when it she thinks it furthers her agenda.
> 
> View attachment 5607418


Yep bigging her self up.


----------



## needlv

Off topic but if you want to see Major Johnny…


----------



## pukasonqo

NVM


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Their timing for everything since the day they left has been the absolute worst. What bad luck they seem to consistently have.


It’s not bad luck, it’s just that karma is a b*tch


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> Karma is a b**ch!



You got there first


----------



## papertiger

lulu212121 said:


> Jimmy Fallon is fortunate, too.


Yup, dodged a bullet (train)


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Helventara said:


> It seems that ZZ wanted to go to Balmoral but was forbidden. The noise is getting louder about a 'change of plan'.
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eft-incredulous-Meghan-said-way-Balmoral.html


Love the pic the Daily Mail used to illustrate that story. Queen’s expression is priceless. 









						Palace 'incredulous' when Meghan said she was on her way to Balmoral
					

The initial decision in itself, that both Sussexes would travel, was seen as wholly inappropriate, according to palace insiders, for one very simple reason: this was a private, family moment.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> She actually thought she and Hazz could be queen and king, so imo it is likely she thought she and Hazz would get the Duchy of Cornwall, PoWales, etc.  Based on their past actions, they want anything connected to money.  The idea that they may not get any money must be frightening to her.


Well then she is as dim as he is.

Perhaps if she’d read British history book rather than the world’s most eligible bachelors in Cosmopolitan shed understand


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> Off topic but if you want to see Major Johnny…



Oh dear.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Oh dear.


My DH wants to know if he ever wears pants.  I think there is a video of him in combat gear.  Don't think combat kilt would be a good idea.


----------



## lulu212121

papertiger said:


> Well then she is as dim as he is.
> 
> Perhaps if she’d read British history book rather than the world’s most eligible bachelors in Cosmopolitan shed understand


I truly think she thought she could. I still think she planted that idea in Harry's head to get permission to start his own court. I'm sure the idea was to get the popularity vote of the people and push out Prince William.


----------



## muddledmint

Cosmopolitan said:


> Love the pic the Daily Mail used to illustrate that story. Queen’s expression is priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace 'incredulous' when Meghan said she was on her way to Balmoral
> 
> 
> The initial decision in itself, that both Sussexes would travel, was seen as wholly inappropriate, according to palace insiders, for one very simple reason: this was a private, family moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607433


Meghan looks all smug but the Queen is looking at the claw and wondering wtf is wrong with Harry to get hooked by THAT


----------



## oldbag

Cosmopolitan said:


> Love the pic the Daily Mail used to illustrate that story. Queen’s expression is priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace 'incredulous' when Meghan said she was on her way to Balmoral
> 
> 
> The initial decision in itself, that both Sussexes would travel, was seen as wholly inappropriate, according to palace insiders, for one very simple reason: this was a private, family moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607433


I see Malificent had her horns restyled for a balcony appearance.


----------



## gracekelly

I heard an anecdote about QEII this morning that was very funny and interesting because she was a normal human being with likes and dislikes like everyone.  Apparently at some point in time she was semi-ordered by the PM at the time to invite Nicolae Ceaușescu. who was then the President of Romania to stay at the palace.  The part of the anecdote that was interesting is that she resisted the idea, but had to acquiesce and later confided to an aide that he was a "nasty little man."  I wonder what she really thought of Meghan Markle?  She had to have an opinion and no doubt the only person who probably knew what she really  thought was her husband. Possibly Angela Kelly given her involvement with tiaragate. Oh to have been a fly on the wall...  

So what did TQ really think?


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> I heard an anecdote about QEII this morning that was very funny and interesting because she was a normal human being with likes and dislikes like everyone.  Apparently at some point in time she was semi-ordered by the PM at the time to invite Nicolae Ceaușescu. who was then the President of Romania to stay at the palace.  The part of the anecdote that was interesting is that she resisted the idea, but had to acquiesce and later confided to an aide that he was a "nasty little man."  I wonder what she really thought of Meghan Markle?  She had to have an opinion and no doubt the only person who probably knew what she really  thought was her husband. Possibly Angela Kelly given her involvement with tiaragate. Oh to have been a fly on the wall...
> 
> So what did TQ really think?


According to Tom Bower, the Queen said “thank goodness Meghan isn’t coming”.  That says it all really!


----------



## gracekelly

Harry pushing back against Meghan's bid to quit Frogmore, expert claim
					

MEGHAN MARKLE and Prince Harry are arguing over their UK residence and whether they should move out of their Frogmore residence, a royal commentator claimed.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Oh fun!  She doesn't want to stay at Frog Cot! Afraid of proximity to Kate and William.  She wants to move to a hotel.  Harry is too cheap to do that Meg.  Suck it up!   W&K don't want to see you anymore than you want to see them.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> According to Tom Bower, the Queen said “thank goodness Meghan isn’t coming”.  That says it all really!


And King Charles may decide the exact same! Voetsek Meghan!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> My DH wants to know if he ever wears pants.  I think there is a video of him in combat gear.  Don't think combat kilt would be a good idea.


He’s in a suit while on duty with the King and Queen Consort in front of the Palace while they viewed the tributes and met the public. Just a glimpse of him, handsome suited as well as kilted.


----------



## gracekelly

More crockery breakage on the Windsor Estate.  Note to Kate, do not lend plates to anyone coming over from Frog Cot if you every want to see them whole again.









						12 times Kate Middleton channeled Princess Diana’s royal style
					

Princess Diana and her daughter-in-law Kate Middleton are regarded as style icons. However, there are many instances in which Kate has channeled the People's Princess in her own stylish looks.




					pagesix.com


----------



## purly

Do you suppose the children will get titles if Harry divorces Meghan? I think he should put his children first here.


----------



## gracekelly

purly said:


> Do you suppose the children will get titles if Harry divorces Meghan? I think he should put his children first here.


If they live in the US why would they need them as US citizens.  If they live in the UK they can use Lady and Lord because they already have those titles.  They won't be given Prince and Princess by King Charles.


----------



## purly

gracekelly said:


> If they live in the US why would they need them as US citizens.  If they live in the UK they can use Lady and Lord because they already have those titles.  They won't be given Prince and Princess by King Charles.



If he divorces her, I suspect he would be welcomed back and they would be welcomed into the family. It's not their fault that all of this happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

When a 37-year-old man-child finally realizes that he fu%ked his whole life for a two-faced bi1ch.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> One of the reasons why there was no need to import slaves to the UK was because the working poor were treated like forced labour. Our leasehold system is a hangover from when the aristocracy owned the ground under your house and feet even if you paid for the building which would be returned to the 'rightful' owner after the lease expired. A Duke still owns half my garden and the mining rights under my house. The mill-workers and miners were tied into internal, circular economies that only profited owners (often aristocracy)  where their wages were paid through the landlords of the company taverns and pubs and encouraged to drink. They paid rent to their employers who also owned their general stores. Apart from casual labour, mine workers were often paid once a year after they racked up bills through credit in the mine-owned stores. The aristocracy often owned whole villages that only existed to support the Lord and his family.
> 
> Obviously this woman has not read the history of the industrial revolution, child labour laws, religious intolerance in England, the highland clearances in Scotland, the banning of the Welsh language, or the Irish potato famine.
> 
> Why does she think so many British and Irish immigrants went to the States
> 
> Hers was a hateful, ignorant, opportunist rant fuelled by self-appointed authority and subjective rhetoric, nothing to do with contemplative scholastic activity. As we say in my culture, do as you would be done by, be careful what you wish for/on others. Unfortunately, like M, it's also made her a celebrity.


Mods please delete if offensive to anyone.
My problem with the woke culture in America is that Americans seem to think that Black Americans had a monopoly on being subjected to slavery, which is simply not true.  Many races/religions have been subjected to this, including my own, yet all you hear about is the problem in the US with their history of slavery.  Slaves have been used for hundreds of years, and it's never been okay, but it was just done.  Times change.  Thinking changes.  Hopefully we improve, but modern day slavery still exists.


----------



## gracekelly

purly said:


> If he divorces her, I suspect he would be welcomed back and they would be welcomed into the family. It's not their fault that all of this happened.


I think Markle will go all Angelina Jolie on Harry and those kids will never get to spend time with their relatives and barely with their father.  Unless he buys those kids outright that is what will happen.  You are not dealing with a normal reasonable woman.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> If a Suckesses dust up delayed the family’s departure, causing them to not be bedside with Charles and Anne when the Queen died, they will never be forgiven.
> 
> The  Suckesses snub of a gracious invitation by the Queen to have visited Balmoral this summer will hopefully haunt them and often be referred to when their selfish behavior is discussed. I know there were questions about the invitation, but I think she probably did offer it, especially as she knew her health was failing.


I'm amazed about how many "delays" the Sucksasses constantly cause.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> When a 37-year-old man-child finally realizes that he fu%ked his whole life for a two-faced bi1ch.
> View attachment 5607479


Harry is thinking about what he is going to say when he gets back to Windsor and interrogated by his handler.  Harreee, you got so 'splaining to do.


----------



## purly

gracekelly said:


> I think Markle will go all Angelina Jolie on Harry and those kids will never get to spend time with their relatives and barely with their father.  Unless he buys those kids outright that is what will happen.  You are not dealing with a normal reasonable woman.



Doesn't it depend on where the divorce happens? I don't know the legal stuff here, but I don't see any reason that he should not be awarded full custody in the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm amazed about how many "delays" the Sucksasses constantly cause.


All deliberate.  Many people have discovered that the way to get attention is to delay.  It doesn't matter what it is as long as there is a delay and people are waiting for them or talking about them.


----------



## gracekelly

purly said:


> Doesn't it depend on where the divorce happens? I don't know the legal stuff here, but I don't see any reason that he should not be awarded full custody in the UK.


I suggest you start at thread about this and people more knowledgeable about divorce and custody arrangements can chime in.



			https://forum.purseblog.com/forums/relationships-family-and-parenting.115/


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> All deliberate.  Many people have discovered that the way to get attention is to delay.  It doesn't matter what it is as long as there is a delay and people are waiting for them or talking about them.





purseinsanity said:


> I'm amazed about how many "delays" the Sucksasses constantly cause.


H&M get away with this juvenile behavior because no one stops them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

nyshopaholic said:


> Is Camilla in charge of the tiaras now as Queen Consort? If so, TW will definitely never wear another one from the Royal Family again. She may make JCMH buy her one of her very own…


Everything in the vaults belongs to the Monarch so technically it belongs to Charles, but he'll most likely let Camilla handle it. She'll hire a trustworthy person, someone like Angela Kelly to oversee the vaults and who will consult her before lending anything valuable to anyone.


----------



## A bottle of Red

it has to be tough for harry and William to see Camilla as queen consort with their father as king, and not their own beloved mother. 
Prob brings up a lot of buried feelings


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking of bowing - no wonder he looked p!ssed when he left Balmoral
> 
> Prince Harry will now have to bow to Camilla — despite their tensions​_“It would be the protocol to bow to the new king and Queen,” Majesty managing editor Joe Little told Page Six Friday. “Whether that happened under such circumstances [on Thursday or Friday morning] is debatable, but any time the royal family meets the new king and queen, the done thing would be to bow or curtsy to them.”
> 
> Asked what William and Harry would now call their father, Little said: “It would still be Pa. The Queen and Prince Philip were Ma and Pa to their children; whatever William and Harry called Charles and Camilla yesterday, they will call them that today.”
> 
> Harry was the first of the royal family to leave Balmoral early Friday on a British Airways flight back to London, where he was set to be reunited with wife Meghan Markle at their Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage. He was seen leaving around 8:20 a.m. UK time.
> 
> Sources told Page Six that he will stay in the UK for the next 10 days until the Queen’s state funeral, widely believed to be scheduled for Monday, Sept. 19.
> 
> The prince will celebrate his 38th birthday on Sept. 15.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will now have to bow to Camilla — despite their tensions
> 
> 
> The prince will also be expected to bow when he sees his own father, King Charles III.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I don't understand why it's such a big deal for Harry since all the other royals will have to bow to Camilla as well including William and Catherine.


----------



## Zen101

gracekelly said:


> I think Markle will go all Angelina Jolie on Harry and those kids will never get to spend time with their relatives and barely with their father.  Unless he buys those kids outright that is what will happen.  You are not dealing with a normal reasonable woman.


Meg will have to be careful on how she’ll handle any custody arrangement set by a court if they were ever to divorce. She’ll have to follow what a court decides will be in the best interest of their children. Otherwise, she could end up losing primary custody of the kids to Harry like the lengthy, drawn out, nasty court battle between Kelly Rutherford and her ex husband, that lasted for years. The father was awarded full custody in the end and the children reside with him in Monaco. Rutherford has visitation rights.
ETA: Meg won’t just get to keep the kids because she’s the mother. Neither is Angelina. Even if she drags it for years. The courts will look at everything.


----------



## needlv

purly said:


> Do you suppose the children will get titles if Harry divorces Meghan? I think he should put his children first here.


King Charles has said for years that he wanted a slimmed down monarchy.  PH would have been told (repeatedly) that his kids don’t get prince/princess titles.  If KCIII hasn’t already done so, the “letters patent” will be amended (if they need to be as I read somewhere it’s not retrospective… no idea whether that is correct).

Note that the official BRF website only has the kids down as Master Archie and miss lilibet.  But the POW title has already been updated for Prince William on Twitter etc.









						Succession
					

The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.




					www.royal.uk
				



The line of Succession​SOVEREIGN

1. The Duke of Cambridge

2. Prince George of Cambridge

3. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge

4. Prince Louis of Cambridge

5. The Duke of Sussex

6. Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor

7. Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I would have loved to see that (not really). She wouldn't have been able to keep up with his quick wit.


She would try to seduce him with her eyes and try to have a fashion oops like flashing a nipple.  She's got nothing else.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

A bottle of Red said:


> it has to be tough for harry and William to see Camilla as queen consort with their father as king, and not their own beloved mother.
> Prob brings up a lot of buried feelings


But she does such a good job and we never see her emotional and reckless, very much like the Queen.

William is smart enough to see that.  And she makes his father so happy.

Harry, well, that's another story.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't understand what why it's such a big deal for Harry since all the other royals will have to bow to Camilla as well including William and Catherine.


He is immature, thinks he can undo the basic principles of monarchy. The rest of the BRF realized it when Charles married Camilla.


----------



## Jayne1

needlv said:


> King Charles has said for years that he wanted a slimmed down monarchy.  PH would have been told (repeatedly) that his kids don’t get prince/princess titles.  If KCIII hasn’t already done so, the “letters patent” will be amended (if they need to be as I read somewhere it’s not retrospective… no idea whether that is correct).
> 
> Note that the official BRF website only has the kids down as Master Archie and miss lilibet.  But the POW title has already been updated for Prince William.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The line of Succession​SOVEREIGN
> 
> 1. The Duke of Cambridge
> 
> 2. Prince George of Cambridge
> 
> 3. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
> 
> 4. Prince Louis of Cambridge
> 
> 5. The Duke of Sussex
> 
> 6. Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> 7. Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor


I'm still too dumb to understand why a Miss Lilibet comes before Anne, the daughter of the late Queen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> She would try to seduce him with her eyes and try to have a fashion oops like flashing a nipple.  She's got nothing else.


Google MM and Craig Ferguson. He interviewed her in 2013.


----------



## Vintage Leather

nyshopaholic said:


> Is Camilla in charge of the tiaras now as Queen Consort? If so, TW will definitely never wear another one from the Royal Family again. She may make JCMH buy her one of her very own…


It’s complicated.

Some jewels are the property of the monarch and automatically go from monarch to monarch. Like Queen Victoria’s Diamond collet necklace

 Anything received as a gift while doing royal duties belongs to the crown, like the Kenyan Flame Lily and the Waddle brooches.  

 Anything received as a wedding gift is her personal property to do with as she will. For example, the massive Williamson pink diamond and the Nizam necklace is per personal property. 

Things given as a personal gift, like the Grima brooches, are her personal property also. 

As for the rest? There’s not a lot of knowledge about what belongs to whom because royal wills are closed.  

That being said, anything left from Monarch to Monarch (anything King Charles inherits) is not taxed. Anything left to other relatives is subject to estate taxes. 

So, odds are in favor that Camilla will be the Keeper of Tiaras, with smaller bequests left to the children and grandchildren


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> He is immature, thinks he can undo the basic principles of monarchy. The rest of the BRF realized it when Charles married Camilla.


Yes! Plus his anger makes it impossible for him to forgive anyone and yet he would expect everyone to forgive and forget if he decided to return to the fold. I can see him trying to barge in and wanting to pick up where he left off before marrying ZedZed with total impunity.


----------



## tenshix

Vintage Leather said:


> It’s complicated.
> 
> Some jewels are the property of the monarch and automatically go from monarch to monarch. Like Queen Victoria’s Diamond collet necklace
> 
> Anything received as a gift while doing royal duties belongs to the crown, like the Kenyan Flame Lily and the Waddle brooches.
> 
> Anything received as a wedding gift is her personal property to do with as she will. For example, the massive Williamson pink diamond and the Nizam necklace is per personal property.
> 
> Things given as a personal gift, like the Grima brooches, are her personal property also.
> 
> As for the rest? There’s not a lot of knowledge about what belongs to whom because royal wills are closed.
> 
> That being said, anything left from Monarch to Monarch (anything King Charles inherits) is not taxed. Anything left to other relatives is subject to estate taxes.
> 
> So, odds are in favor that Camilla will be the Keeper of Tiaras, with smaller bequests left to the children and grandchildren


I wonder who will inherit TQ’s favorite 3-row pearl necklace. Even thought it’s not the most expensive item I would feel like it’s the most precious & sentimental because it’s the one she wore most often besides her wedding rings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does this mean H&M walk with another group? 
[FYI: I am posting this question here because it concerns H&M.]

_*Senior members *of the family are expected to follow behind – as they did for the funeral of Princess Diana and the Duke of Edinburgh.








						How the Queen helped plan her own state funeral
					

The Queen will have the first state funeral for more than half a century at Westminster Abbey on Monday, September 19. The nation will come to a halt for the ceremony in nine days' time.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## muddledmint

A bottle of Red said:


> it has to be tough for harry and William to see Camilla as queen consort with their father as king, and not their own beloved mother.
> Prob brings up a lot of buried feelings


Well yes, but not really tougher than it is for the other millions of people who have similar family drama with infidelity and step parents. Like get over it already, Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tenshix said:


> I wonder who will inherit TQ’s favorite 3-row pearl necklace. Even thought it’s not the most expensive item I would feel like it’s the most precious & sentimental because it’s the one she wore most often besides her wedding rings.


Imo -  Lady Louise.


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still too dumb to understand why a Miss Lilibet comes before Anne, the daughter of the late Queen.



its the first born of the king that gets everything.  Then their first born and so on.  It shuffles everyone further down the line.


----------



## Vintage Leather

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still too dumb to understand why a Miss Lilibet comes before Anne, the daughter of the late Queen.


The law that allowed girls and boys equal rights to inherit was not backdated. So it only applied to William’s children going forward


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does this mean H&M walk with another group?
> [FYI: I am posting this question here because it concerns H&M.]
> 
> _*Senior members *of the family are expected to follow behind – as they did for the funeral of Princess Diana and the Duke of Edinburgh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Queen helped plan her own state funeral
> 
> 
> The Queen will have the first state funeral for more than half a century at Westminster Abbey on Monday, September 19. The nation will come to a halt for the ceremony in nine days' time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



But Harry was walking behind at PP funeral.  Remember when he skipped out of his place for “Optics”?  They put Peter between William and H and H stepped in front.


----------



## Vintage Leather

tenshix said:


> I wonder who will inherit TQ’s favorite 3-row pearl necklace. Even thought it’s not the most expensive item I would feel like it’s the most precious & sentimental because it’s the one she wore most often besides her wedding rings.


She actually owns three three-Pearl necklaces with diamond clasps. One was a gift from her parents. One was a gift from the Emir of Qatar in ‘53. If I remember the rumors, that one might have been remade into a three stand and it started out as a 4 or a 6. One of the bloggers I follow had a detailed history but I read it over ten years ago. The third was a reproduction of the first that she had made because she was afraid of wearing out the first.

I suspect the trio will be broken up, but who will get which, I don’t know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still too dumb to understand why a Miss Lilibet comes before Anne, the daughter of the late Queen.


Edit: started to answer then saw others had already answered.








						Girls equal in British throne succession
					

Sons and daughters of any future British monarch will have equal right to the throne, after Commonwealth leaders agreed to change succession laws.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## purly

I wonder what the theoretical royal line would have looked like if girls had always been equal.


----------



## purseinsanity

Cosmopolitan said:


> Love the pic the Daily Mail used to illustrate that story. Queen’s expression is priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace 'incredulous' when Meghan said she was on her way to Balmoral
> 
> 
> The initial decision in itself, that both Sussexes would travel, was seen as wholly inappropriate, according to palace insiders, for one very simple reason: this was a private, family moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607433


Can’t blame them!  I was shocked she was even thinking of going.  Utterly shameless.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Google MM and Craig Ferguson. He interviewed her in 2013.


That’s exactly what I was referring to  Her behavior was repulsive then, and beyond words now.


----------



## purseinsanity

purly said:


> I wonder what the theoretical royal line would have looked like if girls had always been equal.


We will never know.  It’s like those teen books from the 80s or the movie Sliding Doors.  Each little decision can change an outcome so profoundly!


----------



## purly

purly said:


> I wonder what the theoretical royal line would have looked like if girls had always been equal.



Just now, I went back to the first king of England and traced his family according to firstborns, ignoring gender, and discovered that if the gender rule had never existed, the current monarch would be Irène de Nicolaÿ, daughter of Nathalie Laetitia Jeanne Yvonne Marie Murat, princesse Murat and Robert Marie Pie Benoit de Nicolaÿ.


----------



## purly

purseinsanity said:


> We will never know.  It’s like those teen books from the 80s or the movie Sliding Doors.  Each little decision can change an outcome so profoundly!



Oh, good point.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CobaltBlu said:


> Good point. But Edward was solidly effectively banished, which is a good template for what should happen with the Prince and the Duchess of Netflix.  Edward and Wallis never openly spoke out against the monarchy, either.


And he really regretted becoming a ‘nobody’ which I believe Harry will too.


----------



## purseinsanity

purly said:


> Just now, I went back to the first king of England and traced his family according to firstborns, ignoring gender, and discovered that if the gender rule had never existed, the current monarch would be Irène de Nicolaÿ, daughter of Nathalie Laetitia Jeanne Yvonne Marie Murat, princesse Murat and Robert Marie Pie Benoit de Nicolaÿ.


You’re amazing for doing that!  I feel very ignorant, because I have no idea who that is!


----------



## purly

purseinsanity said:


> You’re amazing for doing that!  I feel very ignorant, because I have no idea who that is!



I was wrong! She died in 2007. Now it would be Comtesse Louise de Nicolay.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Toby93 said:


> Exactly!  They may have privately expressed their displeasure at the BRF, but Edward was a monarchist and desperately wanted to return to England.  He respected the crown and the Queen.
> 
> It's so unbelievably sad the way Harry has turned his back on his family and his birthright and heritage.  What kind of a person does that?


SHE Has totally manipulated him and exploited his insecurities and heartbreak over his mother. Magnifying the thoughts that it was the royal family as opposed to the press that played a part in her death and that, just as Diana presented herself as misunderstood, lonely and suicidal SHE has tried to portray herself in that way too just trying to confirm to him his family are bad. However, what she didn’t plan on was that the world would not fall at her feet and turn their backs on the family like they did Diana! If anybody has badly impacted his mental health it’s her! 

Essentially she just wanted the level of fame that Diana had and what better was than marry one of her sons!


----------



## needlv

Well, I do believe H and MM’s recent PR pushes have been for nothing… and I am really enjoying watching their plans go down in flames.

All that PR about MM being just like Diana 
MM threatening the BRF in the Cut - because she didnt sign an NDA
MM remembering about a journal she kept at Frogmore (another threat about selling secrets)
The well child charity event where she would no doubt wear something illfitting but still be acting like quasi royals - cancelled.


In one sentence, KCIII shut it all down.  Didn’t use their titles, just referenced his love and they are building their life *overseas.*

They are OUT.

I can’t wait to see the seating etc.  I hope it’s going to be another show of how far OUT those two really are.

And the press has already started the Diana and Catherine comparisons… MM must have no plates left to throw.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> One of the reasons why there was no need to import slaves to the UK was because the working poor were treated like forced labour. Our leasehold system is a hangover from when the aristocracy owned the ground under your house and feet even if you paid for the building which would be returned to the 'rightful' owner after the lease expired. A Duke still owns half my garden and the mining rights under my house. The mill-workers and miners were tied into internal, circular economies that only profited owners (often aristocracy)  where their wages were paid through the landlords of the company taverns and pubs and encouraged to drink. They paid rent to their employers who also owned their general stores. Apart from casual labour, mine workers were often paid once a year after they racked up bills through credit in the mine-owned stores. The aristocracy often owned whole villages that only existed to support the Lord and his family.
> 
> Obviously this woman has not read the history of the industrial revolution, child labour laws, religious intolerance in England, the highland clearances in Scotland, the banning of the Welsh language, or the Irish potato famine.
> 
> Why does she think so many British and Irish immigrants went to the States
> 
> Hers was a hateful, ignorant, opportunist rant fuelled by self-appointed authority and subjective rhetoric, nothing to do with contemplative scholastic activity. As we say in my culture, do as you would be done by, be careful what you wish for/on others. Unfortunately, like M, it's also made her a celebrity.


I know you probably aren’t referring to Afua Hirsch but this sounds straight out of that spoilt, disingenuous public school girl’s playbook. She was the definition of race grifter before we met Megz.


Toby93 said:


> During a tour of the Guinness distillery, she was poured and offered a pint, but she merely looked at it and went on with the tour.


It wouldn’t have been boozy enough for her - gin and dubonnet or nothing.


TimeToShop said:


> Watching BBC just now. Liz Truss was shown arriving at BP. She was met by Major Johnny. He was looking fine!


Silver lining.

I do really pity the queen her last photo on earth is with Liz Truss.



Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5607093
> 
> _Even as her health faded this summer, and in the shadow of Prince Harry's forthcoming memoir, Her Majesty reportedly extended an invitation to the couple to visit her in Balmoral. It was not taken up.
> 
> At the Platinum Jubilee in June she appeared to be determined not to allow the fractious relations between Prince Harry and his brother Prince William to play any part, receiving Harry at Windsor and meeting for the first time her great-granddaughter – and namesake – Lilibet….
> 
> It had been suggested, even hoped perhaps, by several royal insiders that the Queen's passing might help to mend the rift between Harry and the rest of his family, however early signs indicate that this may never happen.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex traveled alone to Balmoral Castle on Thursday - and arrived in Scotland 15 minutes after the news of Her Majesty's passing was announced to the world. It is understood he was still in the air and by himself when the announcement was made.
> 
> His grief over the news was etched across his face when he stepped off his Cessna plane and into a waiting car.
> 
> However, on Friday morning, he also became the first member of the family to leave Scotland, having departed his late grandmother's beloved summer retreat approximately 12 hours after he arrived in order to return to London, where he is expected to reunite with his wife Meghan - who made an eleventh-hour decision not to join her husband on the trip to Balmoral.
> 
> *The question that now lingers in the wake of the Queen's death is whether the door will be forever shut to Harry and Meghan - having been propped open by Her Majesty for so long, even in the final weeks of her life.
> 
> It remains unclear whether the members of King Charles III's so-called 'slimmed-down' Monarchy - which includes Harry's brother Prince William, his wife Kate Middleton, and the Queen's long-time confidante Sophie Wessex - and will have the same unwavering patience*. _



Time to get the monarchy on a strict diet, Charles, no overstuffed sausage, ginger cake or orange tart.


marietouchet said:


> Queen Margrethe of Denmark had her golden jubilee scheduled for next and it is curtailed due to the death of QEII.
> 
> Anyone taking bets on the Margaret Cho issue of podcast - comes out next week ?


I think Margaret Cho’s team will also be keen to get it delayed. It’d be very bad and unfair PR if she got flack for doing her normal hard R material.


gelbergirl said:


> Any word from Claw yet?
> What is she doing?  They'll be there another week.


Thank god someone is asking how she is  


BittyMonkey said:


> OK, stupid question for those of you saying TW is livid about Catherine's new title. Did she _really_ think that there was any question as to who would be Princess of Wales? I mean it's not like it's an audition...


I agree I think she wanted as much attention and good press as possible but I don’t think she’s dumb enough to think it’d change who inherits. Even she’d realise if it was a popularity contest we’d have King David (Attenborough), Queen Emma (Thompson) and Prince Harry (Styles)


gracekelly said:


> When she tried the flirt routine it was with a much younger man.  It is always sad when a woman doesn't realize that she is no longer tantalizing to 19-25 year old men.  Let's send her a memo on it, shall we?


Some women don’t need to worry about getting too old but they have a lot more going for them than ZZ topless




gracekelly said:


> Nicolae Ceaușescu


Well at least she’d agree he wore hats better than M




needlv said:


> King Charles has said for years that he wanted a slimmed down monarchy.  PH would have been told (repeatedly) that his kids don’t get prince/princess titles.  If KCIII hasn’t already done so, the “letters patent” will be amended (if they need to be as I read somewhere it’s not retrospective… no idea whether that is correct).
> 
> Note that the official BRF website only has the kids down as Master Archie and miss lilibet.  But the POW title has already been updated for Prince William on Twitter etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The line of Succession​SOVEREIGN
> 
> 1. The Duke of Cambridge
> 
> 2. Prince George of Cambridge
> 
> 3. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
> 
> 4. Prince Louis of Cambridge
> 
> 5. The Duke of Sussex
> 
> 6. Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> 7. Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor


Why does H and his brood even need to be in the line at all? I thought they left. More of this half in half out crap. I say in the highly unlikely and tragic incident that Will and all his children predecease Charles then end the line as there’s no viable heir- it’s been done before. But as I say that’s so unlikely. It just gives that awful smug pair something to gloat about they didn’t earn.


----------



## Lodpah

Ali-bagpuss said:


> SHE Has totally manipulated him and exploited his insecurities and heartbreak over his mother. Magnifying the thoughts that it was the royal family as opposed to the press that played a part in her death and that, just as Diana presented herself as misunderstood, lonely and suicidal SHE has tried to portray herself in that way too just trying to confirm to him his family are bad. However, what she didn’t plan on was that the world would not fall at her feet and turn their backs on the family like they did Diana! If anybody has badly impacted his mental health it’s her!
> 
> Essentially she just wanted the level of fame that Diana had and what better was than marry one of her sons!


Spot on. I’m reading the tributes from A list musicians from Mick Jagger to Elton John, Harry Styles even stopping his concerto pay tribute to her. TW can’t stop the love pouring out for her. They all say the same thing how caring the Queen was. I’m of the mind that TW is really going to be persona non grata or at the very least she will be reviled if she even tries to malign the Queen. Of course, except for the haters which traced back to the TW.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Harsh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The only thing she has going for her, hu?


----------



## andrashik

__





						Blind Item #7
					

Speaking of the alliterate one, her husband could have made it in time, but the hours long fight between the pair kept him from being there....




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				




At this point...he must see what a nasty person she is.
I also read that Charles was the one who banned Claw from Balmoral


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The only thing she has going for her, hu?



Wth is an “American member of the BRF” ??   She pulls _this, _at _this _time?  Kick her out asap. 
I say that as an American citizen.
 If the media had any intelligence [as if], this is how they should write about her - Meghan, an “American member of the BRF”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

redney said:


> IMO it's the title "Princess" (even though a Duchess is higher, technically), the attention/media coverage, comparisons to Diana, and further elevation of Kate's status in the BRF that is getting TW's goat.



The Prince/Princess of Wales title ranks higher than the dukedom. The dukedom ranks higher than the princely title William was born into.


----------



## carmen56

andrashik said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #7
> 
> 
> Speaking of the alliterate one, her husband could have made it in time, but the hours long fight between the pair kept him from being there....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this point...he must see what a nasty person she is.
> I also read that Charles was the one who banned Claw from Balmoral



Hopefully Charles has found his backbone at last!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BittyMonkey said:


> OK, stupid question for those of you saying TW is livid about Catherine's new title. Did she _really_ think that there was any question as to who would be Princess of Wales? I mean it's not like it's an audition...



Even if she was well aware - and how could she not? - her jealousy of Kate is so apparent it's sick. So it doesn't really matter if she knew da*n well, she'll still be livid just because she takes everything personal, can't be happy for others and has special beef with Kate because for some reason she thinks she deserves the same or better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Mods please delete if offensive to anyone.
> My problem with the woke culture in America is that Americans seem to think that Black Americans had a monopoly on being subjected to slavery, which is simply not true.  Many races/religions have been subjected to this, including my own, yet all you hear about is the problem in the US with their history of slavery.  Slaves have been used for hundreds of years, and it's never been okay, but it was just done.  Times change.  Thinking changes.  Hopefully we improve, but modern day slavery still exists.



It's not the Suffering Olympics, but I do find it curious that it is never part of the discussion how many Native Americans were enslaved, especially in the Caribbean to plant and harvest sugar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still too dumb to understand why a Miss Lilibet comes before Anne, the daughter of the late Queen.



Because until Charlotte war born males came before females. The child is the daughter of the king's son. Anne ranks below both her younger brothers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vintage Leather said:


> She actually owns three three-Pearl necklaces with diamond clasps. One was a gift from her parents. One was a gift from the Emir of Qatar in ‘53. If I remember the rumors, that one might have been remade into a three stand and it started out as a 4 or a 6. One of the bloggers I follow had a detailed history but I read it over ten years ago. The third was a reproduction of the first that she had made because she was afraid of wearing out the first.
> 
> I suspect the trio will be broken up, but who will get which, I don’t know.



She also owns two seperate necklaces that are always worn together. It was a wedding present from her father IIRC.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purly said:


> I was wrong! She died in 2007. Now it would be Comtesse Louise de Nicolay.



Plot twist: maybe not because if women had been equal that would have changed their marriage prospects.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I'm still too dumb to understand why a Miss Lilibet comes before Anne, the daughter of the late Queen.



The law was only recently changed, before that, girls/women were not automatically inline equally. Not at all unless there were no boys/men. Applied, Anne should be where Andrew is but ruling was not applied retrospectively 

It happened  before Charlotte was born, so she is before Louis as her age suggests.


----------



## Sina08

A bottle of Red said:


> it has to be tough for harry and William to see Camilla as queen consort with their father as king, and not their own beloved mother.
> Prob brings up a lot of buried feelings


This is probably hard for a 12 and 15-year-old. But as a grownup you see things differently, you realize how complicated relationships can be, that the world isn’t just black and white, that there are lots of grey areas and you come to terms with things. Especially when the woman in question seems to make your father happy and takes the job that comes with it seriously. I think W is that grownup who can handle all that. He’s also very aware of his position and duty, whereas H not so much.


----------



## papertiger

Not to blow my own bugle but the PR stuff that “M decided“ MegZ decided nothing, Harry was TOLD, “tell TW, you’re travelling alone”










						King Charles 'told' Prince Harry not to bring Meghan to Balmoral
					

Amid the personal family tragedy on Thursday, when the Queen died at the age of 96, a small domestic drama was playing out involving the Duke and Duchess of Sussex .




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Good for him. Nobody needed any added drama on the scene.


----------



## gelbergirl

papertiger said:


> Not to blow my own bugle but the PR stuff that “M decided“ MegZ decided nothing, Harry was TOLD, “tell TW, you’re travelling alone”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles 'told' Prince Harry not to bring Meghan to Balmoral
> 
> 
> Amid the personal family tragedy on Thursday, when the Queen died at the age of 96, a small domestic drama was playing out involving the Duke and Duchess of Sussex .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



King Charles III is my kinda King.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

needlv said:


> King Charles has said for years that he wanted a slimmed down monarchy.  PH would have been told (repeatedly) that his kids don’t get prince/princess titles.  If KCIII hasn’t already done so, the “letters patent” will be amended (if they need to be as I read somewhere it’s not retrospective… no idea whether that is correct).
> 
> Note that the official BRF website only has the kids down as Master Archie and miss lilibet.  But the POW title has already been updated for Prince William on Twitter etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The line of Succession​SOVEREIGN
> 
> 1. The Duke of Cambridge
> 
> 2. Prince George of Cambridge
> 
> 3. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
> 
> 4. Prince Louis of Cambridge
> 
> 5. The Duke of Sussex
> 
> 6. Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor
> 
> 7. Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor


No they are now Prince of wales princess of wales etc and the kids are Prince George of Wales etc


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> No they are now Prince of wales princess of wales etc and the kids are Prince George of Wales etc



Right, but I think they updated the LoS immediately before Charles declared William Prince of Wales. I'm sure they'll have updated it by now. Similarly, Kate's and William's Insta went from "Duke and Duchess of Cornwall & Cambridge" to "Prince and Princess of Wales" within hours. It's been quite a ride.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## bubablu

Feel free to use your BICYCLE, if you want to come here.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right, but I think they updated the LoS immediately before Charles declared William Prince of Wales. I'm sure they'll have updated it by now. Similarly, Kate's and William's Insta went from "Duke and Duchess of Cornwall & Cambridge" to "Prince and Princess of Wales" within hours. It's been quite a ride.


Here it is updated on the official website.  Note Archie and lili have not changed.









						Succession
					

The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.




					www.royal.uk
				



The line of Succession​SOVEREIGN

1. The Prince of Wales

2. Prince George of Wales

3. Princess Charlotte of Wales

4. Prince Louis of Wales

5. The Duke of Sussex

6. Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor

7. Miss Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor


----------



## CarryOn2020

bubablu said:


> Feel free to use your BICYCLE, if you want to come here.


He must be crying in his beer.  Why on earth would anyone not want to be apart of history?  All he had to do was smile, shake a few hands, listen to a few speeches and leave.


----------



## xincinsin

A bottle of Red said:


> it has to be tough for harry and William to see Camilla as queen consort with their father as king, and not their own beloved mother.
> Prob brings up a lot of buried feelings


They have had years to get to grips with it. But, as Harry keeps telling the world, he never got over his mommy's death, so I'm pretty sure unless his grandmother's death has forced some growing up, he is going to be telling all interviewers that he was traumatized by the sight of Camilla as Queen Consort. He will ignore the fact that with the divorce, Diana would never be Queen Consort even if she were alive now, not even if Charles stayed single.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Google MM and Craig Ferguson. He interviewed her in 2013.


That wiggly see-my-pert-bosom interview ...


needlv said:


> But Harry was walking behind at PP funeral.  Remember when he skipped out of his place for “Optics”?  They put Peter between William and H and H stepped in front.


That was so disrespectful. I hope he behaves better this time. If he plans to milk the event for footage, then I'd rather he and Zedzee be disrespectful from their toilets in Monteshitshow.


----------



## needlv

MM does not like being told NO


----------



## needlv




----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607663




told you so, 

1. MegZZ not welcome, 
2 you can’t be trusted/we can’t talk in front of you
3. we don’t want pictures of us together at this time to be commercially exploited. 
4. if people know you were not with us, you can’t makeup what was supposedly said, coz everyone knows you were not there to hear.
5 You will follow protocol 
6. I will be/am King and you will obey  

they used Kate as ‘you can’t use that argument’ before it could even be brought up.

Harry honey, you should have done your own history homework. if you knew anything about your family (or chess) rather than default to your ‘inner child’, you would know be careful who you threaten to take down, and never to threaten the Queen or King too early, those moves are the most well known, practiced, studied tactically, and everyone in the United Kingdom (and well beyond). Check mate.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> They have had years to get to grips with it. But, as Harry keeps telling the world, he never got over his mommy's death, so I'm pretty sure unless his grandmother's death has forced some growing up, he is going to be telling all interviewers that he was traumatized by the sight of Camilla as Queen Consort. He will ignore the fact that with the divorce, Diana would never be Queen Consort even if she were alive now, not even if Charles stayed single.
> 
> That wiggly see-my-pert-bosom interview ...
> 
> That was so disrespectful. I hope he behaves better this time. If he plans to milk the event for footage, then I'd rather he and Zedzee be disrespectful from their toilets in Monteshitshow.



good point 


Montishitshow = brilliant


----------



## kipp

needlv said:


> [/QUOTE
> 
> “her brand”
> That’s what everything has been about since day 1.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course they are thinking of _her brand_. Of course they are.  Dimwits.
This is a once in a lifetime experience. Sheesh.


----------



## bubablu

CarryOn2020 said:


> He must be crying in his beer.  Why on earth would anyone not want to be apart of history?  All he had to do was smile, shake a few hands, listen to a few speeches and leave.


For the life of me I cannot understand these two. They must be really, really stupid to think leaving the firm was a good idea. I mean, if you go back to January 2020 in this thread, you can see all the comments were unanimous (even pre covid): blood bath. And they were obviously right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

Cosmopolitan said:


> Love the pic the Daily Mail used to illustrate that story. Queen’s expression is priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace 'incredulous' when Meghan said she was on her way to Balmoral
> 
> 
> The initial decision in itself, that both Sussexes would travel, was seen as wholly inappropriate, according to palace insiders, for one very simple reason: this was a private, family moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607433


I am appalled at the disgusting smug look on ZZs face here....The higher you elevate yourself, the harder the fall.


----------



## CarryOn2020

We know why  

_Why Prince Harry didn't attend the ceremony_​_The short answer is Prince Harry is not a member of the council and it is unknown whether he ever received an invitation.

The Privy Council is comprised of all the cabinet ministers and a number of junior ministers who advise the monarch, according to the official royal website. Those positions are appointed by the reigning monarch and being a member of the council comes with the title of "Right Honourable."

The current members were all appointed by Queen Elizabeth. There are more than 700 members on the list.

Kim Hjelmgaard, a world affairs correspondent at USA TODAY, said in an interview with TODAY that it is possible Prince Harry was once on the list, but has since been removed.

“It could be that he was taken off for one reason or another,” he said, alluding to when the queen stripped Prince Harry of his honorary titles but allowed he and his wife to keep their titles of Prince, Duke of Sussex and Duchess of Sussex, respectively.








						Why Prince Harry Didn't Attend King Charles' Accession Ceremony
					

The death of Queen Elizabeth II has set into motion protocols that have not been seen for more than 70 years. Here's why Prince Harry wasn't there but Prince William was.




					news.yahoo.com
				



_


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Can’t blame them!  I was shocked she was even thinking of going.  Utterly shameless.


"Amid the personal family tragedy on Thursday, a small *domestic drama* was playing out.

Unsurprisingly, it involved the Duke and Duchess of Sussex."

Anyone on this forum could have guessed that this is exactly what would have happened


----------



## bubablu

She managed to take a flight to Uvalde to lay flowers, but she couldn't get her crew to Balmoral to salute her darling grandma in law. Sure she was fuming.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> That’s exactly what I was referring to  Her behavior was repulsive then, and beyond words now.


However, we do have to acknowledge that it is typical casting couch starlet behaviour. She was working with the little that she had to climb her way up. It's a pity that once she scaled the social ladder, she became the serpent that tried to swallow an elephanr.


Ali-bagpuss said:


> SHE Has totally manipulated him and exploited his insecurities and heartbreak over his mother. Magnifying the thoughts that it was the royal family as opposed to the press that played a part in her death and that, just as Diana presented herself as misunderstood, lonely and suicidal SHE has tried to portray herself in that way too just trying to confirm to him his family are bad. However, what she didn’t plan on was that the world would not fall at her feet and turn their backs on the family like they did Diana! If anybody has badly impacted his mental health it’s her!
> 
> Essentially she just wanted the level of fame that Diana had and what better was than marry one of her sons!


She always did like to take shortcuts.


jelliedfeels said:


> Time to get the monarchy on a strict diet, Charles, no overstuffed sausage, ginger cake or orange tart.


Thank goodness I'd finished my soup 
Ah yes, orange tart is such a good description. But may I suggest ginger fool instead  


CarryOn2020 said:


> Wth is an “American member of the BRF” ??   She pulls _this, _at _this _time?  Kick her out asap.
> I say that as an American citizen.
> If the media had any intelligence [as if], this is how they should write about her - Meghan, an “American member of the BRF”


Sounds like a club for the bratty risque flirts.


----------



## Sophisticatted

One thing I find interesting from the Daliy Mail article, is that the plan was for The Queen’s death to be announced *ONE MINUTE BEFORE* H’s plane was *scheduled* to land.  Due to delays, it happened while he was still in air.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607663




Gosh Charles is a better man than I would be. "It isn't right" is so understated and polite instead of "Nobody wants to see that lying psycho b*tch". Love.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> He must be crying in his beer.  Why on earth would anyone not want to be apart of history?  All he had to do was smile, shake a few hands, listen to a few speeches and leave.



Because he was tRapPEd or at least his wife told him so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> MM does not like being told NO




Funny how the first thing I said when it was said he was late - and half in jest! - that maybe there was a tantrum. Honestly, if my spouse threw a fit over my dying grandmother I'd strongly consider a divorce even if my marriage was generally better than this dysfunctional sh*t show.


----------



## DoggieBags

From the outside looking in, I always thought that his grandmother up to the very end kept the light on in the hope Harry would want to find his way back. She invited H and his family to spend some time with her at Balmoral this summer and he refused her invitation. That was the last in a series of olive branches she extended to H after he moved to CA. Now seeing reports about H not being offered a seat on the plane with William, Andrew, Edward, and Sophie when they were rushing to get to the Queen on that last day, H being told not to bring Meghan, H arriving at Balmoral alone hours after everyone else and leaving alone hours before anyone else, and H not in the room during the Accession Ceremony for his father today, I wonder if the welcome light has now been turned off. He’s not a member of the Privy Council but could have received a special invitation to attend if Charles had wanted him there. Or maybe Charles invited him and he chose not to attend. But with the Queen gone, I wonder if the BRF stance on H & M has hardened significantly.


----------



## Toby93

I laughed out loud at this one.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> told you so,
> 
> 1. MegZZ not welcome,
> 2 you can’t be trusted/we can’t talk in front of you
> 3. we don’t want pictures of us together at this time to be commercially exploited.
> 4. if people know you were not with us, you can’t makeup what was supposedly said, coz everyone knows you were not there to hear.
> 5 You will follow protocol
> 6. I will be/am King and you will obey
> 
> they used Kate as ‘you can’t use that argument’ before it could even be brought up.
> 
> Harry honey, you should have done your own history homework. if you knew anything about your family (or chess) rather than default to your ‘inner child’, you would know be careful who you threaten to take down, and never to threaten the Queen or King too early, those moves are the most well known, practiced, studied tactically, and everyone in the United Kingdom (and well beyond). Check mate.



This is genius but also so sad if you think about it. Of course it's all Harry's own fault, but still sad he escalated it to that point.

Also: I am starting to think we might have underestimated Charles. I am carefully impressed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bubablu said:


> For the life of me I cannot understand these two. They must be really, really stupid to think leaving the firm was a good idea. I mean, if you go back to January 2020 in this thread, you can see all the comments were unanimous (even pre covid): blood bath. And they were obviously right.



Why oh why did Harry not consult us. Some of us also saw through Raptor earlier than others.


----------



## Chloe302225

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why oh why did Harry not consult us. Some of us also saw through Raptor earlier than others.



Why didn't he even listen to his brother when he said to take it slow? Maybe give William a chance to show him what absolutely horrible decision he was making.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>



That's BTW Jan Böhmermann, a German comedian who does really mean satire. He should do a piece on the troublesome two


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

Is she out of her mind...? 





Yeah, great idea, trash the King, see what happens... And what is this about Oprah being determined to attend the funeral..?


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

pomeline said:


> Is she out of her mind...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, great idea, trash the King, see what happens... And what is this about Oprah being determined to attend the funeral..?



This is when I wish the royals had as much power as historical kings and queens - off with their heads!! 
I appreciate freedoms of speech etc but I really do think that things like this shouldn’t be allowed. I guess it’s not treason as he’s not their king but it really does annoy me.


----------



## xincinsin

pomeline said:


> Is she out of her mind...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, great idea, trash the King, see what happens... And what is this about Oprah being determined to attend the funeral..?



If this is true, then she truly exceeds expectations. What is she going to lie about this time? "Three days before the Queen passed away, we spoke on the phone and she told me that she wished I could ascend the throne after her. It was just between the two of us. I was in the backyard with the chickens. No one else knows this."


----------



## BittyMonkey

Nowhere in there is Oprah's response. Maybe she picked up the phone and is yelling in Oprah's general direction. I'm suspicious since it says TW "cleared her calendar." No she didn't. She never would have. She got dropped from things so now she is angry and looking for revenge and wants to use Oprah to do it.

I've never liked Oprah - going back to the days of her show when she got some poor atheist in the spotlight and the topic was belief in God. The guest asserted they didn't believe in God, and Oprah snarkily said, "Do you believe in LOOOOVVVEEE?" The person was like WTF, yes, and she said, "Then you believe in God, sit down."

Ok, sister. Not only does that not make sense, but thanks for letting us all know that Oprah will always be about Oprah. I am thinking if Oprah decides to allow MM to slam the King then Oprah will be shooting her own self in the foot (and elsewhere important).

Of course I could be totally wrong and these two Narcs decided to merge together into a giant Voltron of suck.


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why oh why did Harry not consult us. Some of us also saw through Raptor earlier than others.


For me the exact moment was when she said ORGANIC in the engagement interview, I'm Italian but that word sounded so fake to me, like are you talking about a fruit juice or what? "So for both of us, it was just a really authentic and organic way to get to know each other."
Also, really authentic sounds to me like "believe me", as per a famous Jon Steward's sketch: nobody says believe me (or really authentic, in our case) unless they are lying.


----------



## tiktok

pomeline said:


> Is she out of her mind...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, great idea, trash the King, see what happens... And what is this about Oprah being determined to attend the funeral..?




I highly doubt that. At best it’s a scare tactic towards Charles, at worst just wishful thinking on TW’s part.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Ugggghhhh trash talking to Oprah is how you get disinherited from the wealthiest family in the world… 

Her kids are too little to know what’s going on but come their 30’s, they are going to be hella bitter for how easy their lives could have been if their mother could have just minded her own business and not lash out at family members in the press.


----------



## xincinsin

Zedzee will be mightily peeved if she doesn't get a starring role during the mourning period. It would be the perfect opportunity for her to demonstrate her cry-on-demand skills.
Also wondering which couture house is going to give in and provide an ill-fitting black halterneck pant suit for the suffering young mother.


----------



## kipp

Is she out of her mind?  Yes!!! But we knew this ages ago!!!


----------



## TimeToShop

Harry’s birthday is next Thursday, the 15th. He obviously can’t be seen out and about partying with any friends he may still have. Any family party would no doubt be sparsely attended and very awkward. Maybe TW can make him one of her famous cakes and they can celebrate with the Netfl*x crew.


----------



## Sharont2305

I've a feeling she won't go to the funeral. 'Something' will happen that she 'needs' to go back to America.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Sharont2305 said:


> I've a feeling she won't go to the funeral. 'Something' will happen that she 'needs' to go back to America.


Let’s hope so!


----------



## kemilia

needlv said:


> Off topic but if you want to see Major Johnny…



Ahhh ...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I've a feeling she won't go to the funeral. 'Something' will happen that she 'needs' to go back to America.



She will be dearly missed. Said no one ever.


----------



## csshopper

nm


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Handbag1234

If any of the Oprah stuff is true, then TW has lost the plot. It won’t end well for her. As for the note to Charles, unless it is a heartfelt full apology, and condolences it is utterly unforgivable. The poor man has just lost his mother with the world watching.


----------



## LittleStar88

If the Oprah thing is true, TW is a gross human being. 

I feel like the next 6 months will be very interesting. We will see her true character. And if Harry has any any balls left if things go really sideways.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handbag1234 said:


> If any of the Oprah stuff is true, then TW has lost the plot. It won’t end well for her. As for the note to Charles, unless it is a heartfelt full apology, and condolences it is utterly unforgivable. The poor man has just lost his mother with the world watching.



Wait, what note?


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> I've a feeling she won't go to the funeral. 'Something' will happen that she 'needs' to go back to America.



I’m totally feeling like she will be there come hell or high water. She may go back to the US for a minute, then return for the actual event. 

She won’t miss a chance to parade around at a high-profile event. Everything about her and her future income relies on her BRF connection. She NEEDS to be there for the photo opportunities.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Not to blow my own bugle but the PR stuff that “M decided“ MegZ decided nothing, Harry was TOLD, “tell TW, you’re travelling alone”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles 'told' Prince Harry not to bring Meghan to Balmoral
> 
> 
> Amid the personal family tragedy on Thursday, when the Queen died at the age of 96, a small domestic drama was playing out involving the Duke and Duchess of Sussex .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The basic concept that Haz must be told not to bring his scheming, forked tongue, opportunistic wife to something to personal and somber to the family, shows just how dumb he is.   I think the pictures of him looking “somber” are more because it _might_ be sinking in just how bad of a position he and TW are in with the BRF.

When I was young, if I had really made my mother mad about something, I stayed out of her sight, more for my imagined threat to my life and bodily harm than anything.  

My children on the other hand?  Sometimes they’d make me so angry I would literally lock myself in a room, closet, bathroom, etc., just to get away and calm myself down.  They’d follow me, knocking on the door, “Mama?  Mama? Are you in there?!”  
I remember thinking, are these children idiots?  Do they not realize how upset I am?! 
Looking back, it was very endearing for that behavior from young children.
From an adult?  Not so much.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m totally feeling like she will be there come hell or high water. She may go back to the US for a minute, then return for the actual event.
> 
> She won’t miss a chance to parade around at a high-profile event. Everything about her and her future income relies on her BRF connection. She NEEDS to be there for the photo opportunities.



But maybe the BRF will sideline her so much that she will leave anyway. We know she doesn't act like an adult and has temper tantrums worthy of a 3yo toddler.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> What I heard:
> 
> I will never abdicate, I will die King
> 
> My wife will be my Queen
> 
> William will takeover responsibilities from Charles
> 
> William will be PoW and Catherine his Princess
> 
> Harry and TW   see you at Christmas - or never


Harry made his own choice so IDK what else he could have said.  We hope you come to your senses, dear son?
Now I guess the full reality of being "the spare" has hit him....so maybe he thinks he did the right thing by leaving.  IDK.  I don't think he's that smart.  and the WIFE is obviously crafty but maybe not super intelligent either.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> told you so,
> 
> 1. MegZZ not welcome,
> 2 you can’t be trusted/we can’t talk in front of you
> 3. we don’t want pictures of us together at this time to be commercially exploited.
> 4. if people know you were not with us, you can’t makeup what was supposedly said, coz everyone knows you were not there to hear.
> 5 You will follow protocol
> 6. I will be/am King and you will obey
> 
> they used Kate as ‘you can’t use that argument’ before it could even be brought up.
> 
> Harry honey, you should have done your own history homework. if you knew anything about your family (or chess) rather than default to your ‘inner child’, you would know be careful who you threaten to take down, and never to threaten the Queen or King too early, those moves are the most well known, practiced, studied tactically, and everyone in the United Kingdom (and well beyond). Check mate.







__





						Loading…
					





					laughingsquid.com


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But maybe the BRF will sideline her so much that she will leave anyway. We know she doesn't act like an adult and has temper tantrums worthy of a 3yo toddler.



They definitely won’t have front row seats! 

Why wasn’t Harry at the Confirmation ceremony today? I can’t find any info on that. I can assume, but just not seeing any commentary.


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> They definitely won’t have front row seats!
> 
> Why wasn’t Harry at the Confirmation ceremony today? I can’t find any info on that. I can assume, but just not seeing any commentary.



He may not be a member of the Privy Council.  I read some speculation that this is one of the positions that may have been taken when he gave up his senior royal status.  Or, could be he was never a member. Maybe our Brit friends know.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> The basic concept that Haz must be told not to bring his scheming, forked tongue, opportunistic wife to something to personal and somber to the family, shows just how dumb he is.   I think the pictures of him looking “somber” are more because it _might_ be sinking in just how bad of a position he and TW are in with the BRF.
> 
> When I was young, if I had really made my mother mad about something, I stayed out of her sight, more for my imagined threat to my life and bodily harm than anything.
> 
> My children on the other hand?  Sometimes they’d make me so angry I would literally lock myself in a room, closet, bathroom, etc., just to get away and calm myself down.  They’d follow me, knocking on the door, “Mama?  Mama? Are you in there?!”
> I remember thinking, are these children idiots?  Do they not realize how upset I am?!
> Looking back, it was very endearing for that behavior from young children.
> From an adult?  Not so much.



As you say, Harry is not a child _now_. He is practically middle-aged.

Even as a kid, if I PO my father I would be running to the bathroom and lock myself in (only room with a lock).

I don't have any children, but I've taught young adults, if a student annoys me, you wouldn't know it. I often just repeat myself again and again in the same tone of voice till they know they are not going to get another answer whatever they say or however they say it. When it matters to them to have 'just a 5 minute word' or extra time for an assignment days/weeks/years later - I will be busy/rules are rules. That's kind of the British way.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> They definitely won’t have front row seats!
> 
> Why wasn’t Harry at the Confirmation ceremony today? I can’t find any info on that. I can assume, but just not seeing any commentary.



They don't have to be there


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> laughingsquid.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607789


----------



## xincinsin

Yes, I hope this happened too. And Philip at the top of the stairs.


----------



## Sharont2305

Over to you Harry, or M with her word salad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What is wrong with me, I'm bawling again. William found beautiful words.

And yes, Harry's children will never have what William's children had, in fact they won't even be close to their grandfather. All because Harry just had to marry this demon in its human form that won't stop her spree of destruction because if she can't have what she thinks she deserves nobody shall. If her behaviour in the wake of The Queen's passing didn't give him pause nothing will.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Yes, I hope this happened too. And Philip at the top of the stairs.
> View attachment 5607822


I was talking a Scottish woman the other day and we both hoped she had her beloved dogs with her at the end


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> This is when I wish the royals had as much power as historical kings and queens - off with their heads!!
> I appreciate freedoms of speech etc but I really do think that things like this shouldn’t be allowed. I guess it’s not treason as he’s not their king but it really does annoy me.



I wouldn't wish that.

I should imagine that _if _it is true (who knows?) it'll be curtains for her in a different way, social-suicide.

Read the room MegZZZ,the writing on the wall says 'silence is golden, talk is cheap'


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> Harry’s birthday is next Thursday, the 15th. He obviously can’t be seen out and about partying with any friends he may still have. Any family party would no doubt be sparsely attended and very awkward. Maybe TW can make him one of her famous cakes and they can celebrate with the Netfl*x crew.



Even a smiling pic or PR-spiel is going to look bad optically


----------



## Sophisticatted

Since Harry has been invisible since he left Balmoral.  My guess is either he was told he could be invited but NOT the wife, forcing him to choose, OR he has not been invited to anything.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What is wrong with me, I'm bawling again. William found beautiful words.
> 
> And yes, Harry's children will never have what William's children had, in fact they won't even be close to their grandfather. All because Harry just had to marry this demon in its human form that won't stop her spree of destruction because if she can't have what she thinks she deserves nobody shall. If her behaviour in the wake of The Queen's passing didn't give him pause nothing will.


ok, guess I'm not keeping up
what behavior in the wake of TQ's passing?  I was thinking she stayed away from Balmoral, which is good, right?  is she putting out tweets or messages via that twerp with the PS - scoobie?


----------



## Toby93

WingNut said:


> I am appalled at the disgusting smug look on ZZs face here....The higher you elevate yourself, the harder the fall.


We should have noticed how often the mask slipped.  I had never seen this pic before, but it's just a nasty, nasty look on her face


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> We should have noticed how often the mask slipped.  I had never seen this pic before, but it's just a nasty, nasty look on her face
> 
> View attachment 5607827


her outfit looks better than usual though


----------



## Handbag1234

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, what note?


TW allegedly sent a note to Charles at Balmoral. Hazz was not consulted and didn’t know about it. 

All rumour at this point


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> ok, guess I'm not keeping up
> what behavior in the wake of TQ's passing?  I was thinking she stayed away from Balmoral, which is good, right?  is she putting out tweets or messages via that twerp with the PS - scoobie?



Several sources have come forward saying she made Harry deliberately late by throwing an epic tantrum when she learned she wasn't going. They are speaking of 1+ hour of yelling, shouting and threatening to fly out to the US.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handbag1234 said:


> TW allegedly sent a note to Charles at Balmoral. Hazz was not consulted and didn’t know about it.
> 
> All rumour at this point



Wow. Even if it was harmless, doing so without consulting Harry is so respectless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> We should have noticed how often the mask slipped.  I had never seen this pic before, but it's just a nasty, nasty look on her face
> 
> View attachment 5607827



She really like the too long pants.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of the Sussex children, over on the Queen thread there are so many pictures of the royal cousins leaning on each other during these trying times. They will have none of that and it's so unfair to them.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sophisticatted said:


> Since Harry has been invisible since he left Balmoral.  My guess is either he was told he could be invited but NOT the wife, forcing him to choose, OR he has not been invited to anything.


As I understand it Harry is not a privy council member so he would not have been eligible for that part of the mornings proceedings. Dukes of Kent,  Gloucester, price michael and various of their families were at St James Palace at 11 for the reading of the declaration so he would have been eligible to attend that, but that's not the same as being invited to do so, or welcome. More noticeable is his absence from the family gathering in Balmoral, where his married cousins seem to be managing fine without being surgically attached to a spouse. As I understand it the Queen's coffin is there for a few private family  days (and for staff ) and we as a nation move to ceremonial processions and lying in state from tomorrow.


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> Well then she is as dim as he is.
> 
> Perhaps if she’d read British history book rather than the world’s most eligible bachelors in Cosmopolitan shed understand


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> More noticeable is his absence from the family gathering in Balmoral, where his married cousins seem to be managing fine without being surgically attached to a spouse.



And in three cases, very young children.


----------



## LittleStar88

RAINDANCE said:


> As I understand it Harry is not a privy council member so he would not have been eligible for that part of the mornings proceedings. Dukes of Kent,  Gloucester, price michael and various of their families were at St James Palace at 11 for the reading of the declaration so he would have been eligible to attend that, but that's not the same as being invited to do so, or welcome. More noticeable is his absence from the family gathering in Balmoral, where his married cousins seem to be managing fine without being surgically attached to a spouse. As I understand it the Queen's coffin is there for a few private family  days (and for staff ) and we as a nation move to ceremonial processions and lying in state from tomorrow.



Thank you!

I’m very surprised he didn’t make the service with the rest of the family. I can’t wait to hear what the gossip is behind that. Though I imagine it had a lot to do with TW, either she refused to go and therefore Harry also stayed behind, or she wasn’t welcome so Harry stayed behind as well. I wouldn’t think they would refuse his presence alone.

For someone so concerned about the Queen having the right people around her and being her special confidant (  ), he sure isn’t presenting as a good representation of those statements.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> If the Oprah thing is true, TW is a gross human being.
> 
> I feel like the next 6 months will be very interesting. *We will see her true character.* And if Harry has any any balls left if things go really sideways.


I think she's already made it abundantly clear.


----------



## bubablu

uh, they are out at Windsor, go check the dm live!


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

William, Kate, Harry AND Meghan are together now at Windsor looking at the flowers


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Funny how the first thing I said when it was said he was late - and half in jest! - that maybe there was a tantrum. Honestly, if my spouse threw a fit over my dying grandmother I'd strongly consider a divorce even if my marriage was generally better than this dysfunctional sh*t show.


100% I don't understand how can he tolerate this kind of toxic behaviour. How can a person be so abhorrent, to throw a fit and shout when her husband is at his lowest and when he had the chance to see his grandmother for the last time.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss




----------



## Ali-bagpuss




----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Over to you Harry, or M with her word salad.



Beautifully said William   
Shows you don't have to rush to be the first to offer condolences, and saying something heartfelt is much more important.  I love that he points out that Catherine knew her for 20 years, that his children got to spend quality time with the Queen, and that he will support his father THE KING, in any way that he can.  Drives the point home two fold; he actually means it, and it shows what a dolt his brother is, slamming the family and the institution at every turn.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Sorry the photos aren’t great!

I wish she could hear the commentary - “The Prince & Princess of Wales, Prince Harry and Meghan”! 

Haha just plain old Meghan!


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I’m very surprised he didn’t make the service with the rest of the family. I can’t wait to hear what the gossip is behind that. Though I imagine it had a lot to do with TW, either she refused to go and therefore Harry also stayed behind, or she wasn’t welcome so Harry stayed behind as well. I wouldn’t think they would refuse his presence alone.
> 
> For someone so concerned about the Queen having the right people around her and being her special confidant (  ), he sure isn’t presenting as a good representation of those statements.



I think it's a case of - if he (and/or she) don't have to be here they are not on the list. 

They were already humiliated in having sit in their given seats at the Plat Job ceremony at St Pauls, can ou imagine turning up and there're no seats at all. Even if they let you in, what would you do, be awkwardly seated squashed #9 next to 'Mr. Nobody' back row, stand at the back, walk around? Seriously, order is everything.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> We should have noticed how often the mask slipped.  I had never seen this pic before, but it's just a nasty, nasty look on her face
> 
> View attachment 5607827



I think they look good here, if a bit Hollywood over-PSd


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of the Sussex children, over on the Queen thread there are so many pictures of the royal cousins leaning on each other during these trying times. They will have none of that and it's so unfair to them.


“*The sins of the father are to be laid upon the children.*”

- Willam Shakespeare


----------



## CobaltBlu

Unconfirmed gossip alert:  I read on twitter (https://twitter.com/isource_news) that Doria was not seen walking the dogs this morning but she WAS seen leaving her house with luggage.


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> William, Kate, Harry AND Meghan are together now at Windsor looking at the flowers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607846



It's not a SHOW without ZZ


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> As I understand it Harry is not a privy council member so he would not have been eligible for that part of the mornings proceedings. Dukes of Kent,  Gloucester, price michael and various of their families were at St James Palace at 11 for the reading of the declaration so he would have been eligible to attend that, but that's not the same as being invited to do so, or welcome. More noticeable is his absence from the family gathering in Balmoral, where his married cousins seem to be managing fine without being surgically attached to a spouse. As I understand it the Queen's coffin is there for a few private family  days (and for staff ) and we as a nation move to ceremonial processions and lying in state from tomorrow.


He's literally missing out on history.  Especially poignant that not only is it part of world history, but his own family's history.  Oh what a poor choice he made in picking a mate.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't wish that.
> 
> I should imagine that _if _it is true (who knows?) it'll be curtains for her in a different way, social-suicide.
> 
> Read the room MegZZZ,the writing on the wall says 'silence is golden, talk is cheap'


Well no obviously I don’t actually mean off with their heads but I do wish she could be silenced.


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Well no obviously I don’t actually mean off with their heads but *I do wish she could be silenced.*



That's what she keeps complaining about.

I've never heard her shut-up


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> Unconfirmed gossip alert:  I read on twitter (https://twitter.com/isource_news) that Doria was not seen walking the dogs this morning but she WAS seen leaving her house with luggage.



She's probably taking the children for a photo op.  The great revelation so they can try to overshadow the funeral.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> That's what she keeps complaining about.
> 
> I've never heard her shut-up


It’s quite telling watching them out and about with the public now, people are putting their hands out to Harry and not her, she’s having to put her hand out for people to shake. You can see them thinking ‘I wish we stood on the other side of the road and we would have William and Kate instead’. And as usual she’s constantly grabbing hold of him.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> It’s quite telling watching them out and about with the public now, people are putting their hands out to Harry and not her, she’s having to put her hand out for people to shake. You can see them thinking ‘I wish we stood on the other side of the road and we would have William and Kate instead’. And as usual she’s constantly grabbing hold of him.



Desperation emanates from her like a scent


----------



## papertiger

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607866
> View attachment 5607867




That picture doesn't scream "reunite" to me


----------



## melissatrv

Toby93 said:


> Wow - she really does think her status has elevated   Trashes the family, yet updates when it she thinks it furthers her agenda.
> 
> View attachment 5607418


She priobably made the change herself or Scooby Doo


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Desperation emanates from her like a scent _foul stench_.


In the spirit of @CeeJay I corrected it for you!


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> That picture doesn't scream "reunite" to me


I really, really would like at least William and Harry to reconcile


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> In the spirit of @CeeJay I corrected it for you!



I can tell you something, if I was down there today and she came up to me, I wouldn't hold my hand out, or make a noise (out of respect) but I would turn my back.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I really, really would like at least William and Harry to reconcile



The way I see it, Harry needs to do the all the running.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> I can tell you something, if I was down there today and she came up to me, I wouldn't hold my hand out, or make a noise (out of respect) but I would turn my back.


I’d give her the Paddington hard stare….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around. 
Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.


----------



## melissatrv

needlv said:


> King Charles has said for years that he wanted a slimmed down monarchy.  PH would have been told (repeatedly) that his kids don’t get prince/princess titles.  If KCIII hasn’t already done so, the “letters patent” will be amended (if they need to be as I read somewhere it’s not retrospective… no idea whether that is correct).
> 
> Note that the official BRF website only has the kids down as Master Archie and miss lilibet.  But the POW title has already been updated for Prince William on Twitter etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession
> 
> 
> The succession to the throne is regulated not only through descent, but also by Parliamentary statute. The order of succession is the sequence of members of the Royal Family in the order in which they stand in line to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The line of Succession​SOVEREIGN
> 
> 1. The Duke of Cambridge
> 
> 2. Prince George of Cambridge
> 
> 3. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge
> 
> 4. Prince Louis of Cambridge


Since thus far, the BRF has not seen fit to remove their titles (this is a such a no-brainer) and these parasites from the line of succession, I wish Kate would have 6 more children and push them out of the top 10


----------



## justwatchin

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607866
> View attachment 5607867



I was going to say this must be awkward for H&M but he’s clueless and she is planning her next move. They have both been trash talking the royal family for years so why pretend now? We see you and you’re not fooling anyone.


----------



## TC1

Looks like she got a spray tan and had time to practice her "wounded" face


----------



## justwatchin

CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.



I think she’s using H as a barrier because she was in too close proximity to William.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.




That one was because William kept moving away from her every time she tried to sneak 'in shot'. I can even see it from William's back he is seething, uncomfortable being anywhere near her, he HATES her,. She went to H for reassurance and put H between herself and William. 

The 'reunited' togetherness is camera-only, I don't think the brothers will be friends again until she's no longer a problem. That was _very_ uncomfortable viewing, and I don't even like her.


----------



## lulu212121

I think its cruel to force the people to show respect to H and tw after all the nasty things said and done. They can look at the flowers and condolences, no need to "greet" the people.


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> That one was because William kept moving away from her every time she tried to sneak 'in shot'. I can even see it from William's back he is seething, uncomfortable being anywhere near her, he HATES her,. She went to H for reassurance and put H between herself and William.
> 
> The 'reunited' togetherness is camera-only, I don't think the brothers will be friends again until she's no longer a problem. That was _very_ uncomfortable viewing, and I don't even like her.


Totally agree. It was cringeworthy.  Also, she cannot keep her hands off her hair.  
So much awkwardness crammed into such a short video.


----------



## Sharont2305

CobaltBlu said:


> Totally agree. It was cringeworthy.  Also, she cannot keep her hands off her hair.
> So much awkwardness crammed into such a short video.


You should've watched it live, it was worse.


----------



## papertiger

melissatrv said:


> Since thus far, the BRF has not seen fit to remove their titles (this is a such a no-brainer) and these parasites from the line of succession, I wish Kate would have 6 more children and push them out of the top 10



Removal of titles can only be done through Parliament recommendation re  Racheal Maskell's Bill (Removal of Titles Bill)

Lady C is not a fan. I suspect because she wants to be sure to hang on to her own


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> However, we do have to acknowledge that it is typical casting couch starlet behaviour. She was working with the little that she had to climb her way up. It's a pity that once she scaled the social ladder, she became the serpent that tried to swallow an elephanr.
> 
> She always did like to take shortcuts.
> 
> Thank goodness I'd finished my soup
> Ah yes, orange tart is such a good description. But may I suggest ginger fool instead
> 
> Sounds like a club for the bratty risque flirts.


You are right of course, something particularly thick and sloppy is especially appropriate for the gremlin husband. 


CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.



She’s so scruffy she looks like she nipped out to buy cigs hungover.

That weave is clinging on by a thread - I feel like if someone pushed _her_ back to move her along it’d fall right off. 
Again you can see her bra through her dress. Does she buy a size 0 or something?


----------



## Blyen

I've watched a bit,and most people were looking at each other and either tried to suppress a giggle,or looked at her like she grew another head.
She wasn't welcome and they let her know, albeit politely.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Bye Meghan


----------



## elvisfan4life

The coverage focused on the gruesome twosome and ignored the heir and Princess of wales unbelievable


----------



## TimeToShop

Ali-bagpuss said:


> It’s quite telling watching them out and about with the public now, people are putting their hands out to Harry and not her, she’s having to put her hand out for people to shake. You can see them thinking ‘I wish we stood on the other side of the road and we would have William and Kate instead’. And as usual she’s constantly grabbing hold of him.



I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> That one was because *William kept moving away from her every time she tried to sneak 'in shot'*. I can even see it from William's back he is seething, uncomfortable being anywhere near her, he HATES her,. She went to H for reassurance and put H between herself and William.
> 
> The 'reunited' togetherness is camera-only, I don't think the brothers will be friends again until she's no longer a problem. That was _very_ uncomfortable viewing, and I don't even like her.


Pretty obvious the way she kept edging closer to him and he kept edging away.


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> Removal of titles can only be done through Parliament recommendation re  Racheal Maskell's Bill (Removal of Titles Bill)
> 
> Lady C is not a fan. I suspect because she wants to be sure to hang on to her own



And I am very certain the BRF would never court it because there is a huge risk that it might turn into a full “abolish the monarchy” debate.

(Tangent: I note MM is wearing hose)


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I’d give her the Paddington hard stare….



I'm never going to look at a Paddington and not be a bit sad actually. 

Wrong thread, but I think that Plat Jubilee sketch was QEII deliberately leaving us something. 

Going to go and cry now - and I can tell you I haven't cried since my mother passed away four years ago. Terrible funeral drama then too - another soap opera


----------



## lishukha

Cosmopolitan said:


> Bye Meghan



Gosh she’s so freaking awkward and out of place. Why was she facing the other way different from everyone else?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Pretty obvious the way she kept edging closer to him and he kept edging away.



But she never back down, she did it again and again, she is greedier than she is clueless. All about posterity, getting her 'frame time' with the future King


----------



## gelbergirl

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607866
> View attachment 5607867




SO it was William and Kate who invited Susexes.  
I tell you, every time there is a wedding or funeral - these Royals know how to put on a show.


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> I'm never going to look at a Paddington and not be a bit sad actually.
> 
> Wrong thread, but I think that Plat Jubilee sketch was QEII deliberately leaving us something.
> 
> Going to go and cry now - and I can tell you I haven't cried since my mother passed away four years ago. Terrible funeral drama then too - another soap opera



I’m so sorry. I hope you have found some peace in the following years.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> I'm never going to look at a Paddington and not be a bit sad actually.
> 
> Wrong thread, but I think that Plat Jubilee sketch was QEII deliberately leaving us something.
> 
> Going to go and cry now - and I can tell you I haven't cried since my mother passed away four years ago. Terrible funeral drama then too - another soap opera


I’m sorry


----------



## TimeToShop

lishukha said:


> Gosh she’s so freaking awkward and out of place. Why was she facing the other way different from everyone else?



She was looking for a camera.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

gelbergirl said:


> SO it was William and Kate who invited Susexes.
> I tell you, every time there is a wedding or funeral - these Royals know how to put on a show.


----------



## papertiger

lishukha said:


> Gosh she’s so freaking awkward and out of place. Why was she facing the other way different from everyone else?



She wants us to think they drugged and dragged her there. 

That was the behaviour of a person who looked like she's never been to Earth before.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> We should have noticed how often the mask slipped.  I had never seen this pic before, but it's just a nasty, nasty look on her face
> 
> View attachment 5607827


Are we sure this isn't a production still from Supernatural?


----------



## Toby93

TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


There is too much that has been said by the gruesome twosome to be mended.  That was all for the sake of Charles, but those 2 will hop on a plane as soon as the funeral is over and it will be business as usual.  Book deal, interviews, spotify and netflix.


----------



## purseinsanity

justwatchin said:


> I was going to say this must be awkward for H&M but he’s clueless and she is planning her next move. They have both been trash talking the royal family for years so why pretend now? We see you and you’re not fooling anyone.


I don't know how William and Kate tolerated being in the same car.  Shows William's character that he invited them.  I'd have been nervous having the witch behind my wife.  She could've been stabbed in the back, not just figuratively this time.


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> The coverage focused on the gruesome twosome and ignored the heir and Princess of wales unbelievable


Here in Canada, it was the opposite on CNN  Almost the whole hour was on William and Catharine and about 5 min coverage of the other 2.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> The law was only recently changed, before that, girls/women were not automatically inline equally. Not at all unless there were no boys/men. Applied, Anne should be where Andrew is but ruling was not applied retrospectively
> 
> It happened  before Charlotte was born, so she is before Louis as her age suggests.


Is it accurate that since his kids were born while Charles was still prince, they did not meet the criteria to be prince and princess and it doesn’t work retroactively, now that he is King.

I can see Meg calling her surrogate as we speak, planning a 3rd child... who would be a prince or princess because they meet the criteria now.

Correct, or not?


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


I saw William introducing her to some gentleman after they got out of the crowd.  She actually held back for once, probably out of nervousness.  Catherine looks composed and TW is clinging on to Haz like no tomorrow.  It seemed like William spoke to Haz a few times, even TW.  I didn't see the two wives interact at all.


----------



## lishukha

papertiger said:


> She wants us to think they drugged and dragged her there.
> 
> That was the behaviour of a person who looked like she's never been to Earth before.


Lol she really acted like it was first day on earth. That look of confusion…


----------



## Sophisticatted

CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.




It looks like she’s trying to get close to William.  He moves away as soon as he finishes talking to a spectator.  Then, I imagine he mutters something under his breath (like “stay with Harry”/“do NOT stand next to me”) because she then goes and drags Harry over to stand by Will.  Then she is on the outside, but closest to the cameras.  I noticed most cameras are zooming in on Will and Kate, they seem to want to keep her out of frame as much as possible.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> her outfit looks better than usual though


Looks like an old pic and a different weight


----------



## papertiger

@jelliedfeels

"She’s so scruffy, she looks like she nipped out to buy cigs hungover."

We have to give her some credit, I was surprised she wasn't in scarlet, a pageant tiara/wand, or pyjamas


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cosmopolitan said:


> Bye Meghan



Harry’s wife it’s gonna fall off! Yours isn’t growing out of your head   

Honestly if someone had grabbed and bobble or a clip and stuck it in a ponytail as soon as she got close enough then I think they would deserve an automatic damehood/knighthood. 

I will say I would find doing something like this very difficult- it’s hard to respectfully acknowledge the grief of others when you are trying to understand the loss yourself. Not that I think M or even H feels that. 

She’s so gross she’s trying to cuddle him like a horny teenager going to prom. No one believes you 2 are desperately in love still sweetie.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

I watched the last 10 minutes or so of the walkabout on CNN in the US and the announcers were gushing about this being the start of a reconciliation.   I also spotted Getty photographer Chris Jackson there, so hoping for some nice photos of everyone.   It does seem kind of William to invite his brother and SIL for this appearance.


----------



## latetothe game

L


----------



## Sophisticatted

purseinsanity said:


> I saw William introducing her to some gentleman after they got out of the crowd.  She actually held back for once, probably out of nervousness.  Catherine looks composed and TW is clinging on to Haz like no tomorrow.  It seemed like William spoke to Haz a few times, even TW.  I didn't see the two wives interact at all.


Maybe that was the security person responsible for dragging her out if she steps out of line again!  LOL!


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Totally agree. It was cringeworthy.  Also, she cannot keep her hands off her hair.
> So much awkwardness crammed into such a short video.


you mean her extensions...some woman took years to grow that "wig"


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Is it accurate that since his kids were born while Charles was still prince, they did not meet the criteria to be prince and princess and it doesn’t work retroactively, now that he is King.
> 
> I can see Meg calling her surrogate as we speak, planning a 3rd child... who would be a prince or princess because they meet the criteria now.
> 
> Correct, or not?



First statement is correct. Normally, they would be given titles and we would see this on the line of succession list. As @QueenofWrapDress pointed out PoW titles were added already since that they didn't change #6 & #7 is a strong indicator. 

Charles is King he can make up the rules now.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> The coverage focused on the gruesome twosome and ignored the heir and Princess of wales unbelievable


I thought it was the other way around actually.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I almost feel sorry for her here.  She had no idea what to do.


----------



## papertiger

lishukha said:


> Lol she really acted like it was first day on earth. That look of confusion…



Faked though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607866
> View attachment 5607867



FINALLY!  Netflix gets some footage!  They must be overjoyed.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Harry’s wife it’s gonna fall off! Yours isn’t growing out of your head
> 
> Honestly if someone had grabbed and bobble or a clip and stuck it in a ponytail as soon as she got close enough then I think they would deserve an automatic damehood/knighthood.
> 
> I will say I would find doing something like this very difficult- it’s hard to respectfully acknowledge the grief of others when you are trying to understand the loss yourself. Not that I think M or even H feels that.
> 
> She’s so gross she’s trying to cuddle him like a horny teenager going to prom. No one believes you 2 are desperately in love still sweetie.



H is thinking about the crowd "but she was _my_ grandmother"  

That boy needs to get a grip!


----------



## jelliedfeels

lulu212121 said:


> I think its cruel to force the people to show respect to H and tw after all the nasty things said and done. They can look at the flowers and condolences, no need to "greet" the people.


I agree especially because at a solemn occasion like this the crowd is unlikely to have any rotten tomatoes. 


CobaltBlu said:


> I almost feel sorry for her here.  She had no idea what to do.



Just speculating but I’m wondering if he’s trying to remind H of after their mother’s death and trigger some guilt. Not sure that’ll work


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.



Commentators say what they're told to. 

We're not stupid.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


Exactly what my husband and I said. The crowds on her side of the road were taking photos of Kate and ignoring her. 

I personally do wish for a reconciliation but not for her, just the brothers.


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> And I am very certain the BRF would never court it because there is a huge risk that it might turn into a full “abolish the monarchy” debate.
> 
> (Tangent: I note MM is wearing hose)



Someone probably had to go and buy her a pair


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> Commentators say what they're told to.
> 
> We're not stupid.


I think they’re trying to put a nice spin on it and obviously it’s more obvious if they’re nice about her and she bites back!


----------



## purseinsanity

A1aGypsy said:


> And I am very certain the BRF would never court it because there is a huge risk that it might turn into a full “abolish the monarchy” debate.
> 
> *(Tangent: I note MM is wearing hose)*


That was what I noted too!  Thought OMG she's actually wearing hose!??!  Was she told to?


----------



## papertiger

A1aGypsy said:


> I’m so sorry. I hope you have found some peace in the following years.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> That was what I noted too!  Thought OMG she's actually wearing hose!??!  Was she told to?



Yes


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Yes, I hope this happened too. And Philip at the top of the stairs.
> View attachment 5607822


Ok, I give up. I can't take these pictures anymore.


----------



## Debbini

CobaltBlu said:


> On the other hand they may want her where they can keep an eye on her.


True that!


CobaltBlu said:


> Unconfirmed gossip alert:  I read on twitter (https://twitter.com/isource_news) that Doria was not seen walking the dogs this morning but she WAS seen leaving her house with luggage.



Help her cope with what??!!!!


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> Ok, I give up. I can't take these pictures anymore.



I know, I can't look at corgis or Paddington bear atm


----------



## purseinsanity

Debbini said:


> True that!
> 
> Help her cope with what??!!!!


Her devastation at the great grand mama that she was SOCLOSE to is gone.

Nah, it's all the negative press she's getting when it was supposed to be glowing.  Damn the Queen for dying at the worst time!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Sharont2305 said:


> Over to you Harry, or M with her word salad.



Beautiful statement indicative of love and respect and gratitude. Would that we all, in whatever walk of life, could be remembered this way by our grandchildren.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Yes


Well either that or they ran out of wood stain  at the tan shop


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Handbag1234 said:


> TW allegedly sent a note to Charles at Balmoral. Hazz was not consulted and didn’t know about it.
> 
> All rumour at this point


If so, it was in her bad imitation of calligraphy.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Well either that or they ran out of wood stain  at the tan shop



She's obsessed


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ali-bagpuss said:


> William, Kate, Harry AND Meghan are together now at Windsor looking at the flowers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5607846



I don't understand any of this. I am flabbergasted William and Kate would agree to this, and I shouldn't be so shocked that thing has no problem holding her lying face into the next camera. WTFFF. 

I guess Harry found her tantrum endearing and is not planning to get rid of her anytime soon.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Several sources have come forward saying she made Harry deliberately late by throwing an epic tantrum when she learned she wasn't going. They are speaking of 1+ hour of yelling, shouting and threatening to fly out to the US.



I wouldn't have stopped her


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Yes, I hope this happened too. And Philip at the top of the stairs.
> View attachment 5607822



I really hope for QEII and others (like me) there are animals in heaven. All my fur friends were already angels.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5607866
> View attachment 5607867




What, no manic grin? I wonder if she had to be told to pretend to look sad.


----------



## chaneljewel

Was shocked to see creepy M in stockings!   Interesting too that the crowd didn’t interact with her unless she reached out to them.  They were better with H.  I’m sure the people want W and H to reconcile but don’t care about the horrible M.  It’s hard to forget the terrible terrible words she spewed about the family.  She’s probably seething beneath all of this since she’s NOT the center of attention.  She’s also probably very jealous that her daughter is now a princess and she’s just a commoner.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand any of this. I am flabbergasted William and Kate would agree to this, and I shouldn't be so shocked that thing has no problem holding her lying face into the next camera. WTFFF.
> 
> I guess Harry found her tantrum endearing and is not planning to get rid of her anytime soon.



The higher W &K rise above their pettiness, the lower H & M look.


----------



## elvisfan4life

TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


What were you watching?  people were cuddling her and fawning over her fake grief !!!


----------



## VickyB

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Mind you I think Andrew, with his fierce love of his mother and despite his ‘wrong doings’ could definitely give Harry a piece of his mind and be safe in the knowledge that his words would be given as purely family not part of the establishment so could be a bit more ‘fruity’ with less consequence


Mispost.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Faked though


Exactly - she loves being the centre of attention.  She doesn't have a shy or humble bone in her body.  Everytime she handed the flowers to the minders, she put her hand on her heart.  It was nauseating


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> I'm never going to look at a Paddington and not be a bit sad actually.
> 
> Wrong thread, but I think that Plat Jubilee sketch was QEII deliberately leaving us something.
> 
> Going to go and cry now - and I can tell you I haven't cried since my mother passed away four years ago. Terrible funeral drama then too - another soap opera


Sending hugs


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Sending hugs



and in return


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> What were you watching?  people were cuddling her and fawning over her fake grief !!!


I saw someone ask if they could hug her and she said yes. It lasted at least 10 seconds.  So fake.  Had to get one over on the Princess of Wales - look how much more tactile I am, not stuffy like you


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

I wonder if today was a “test” to see how TW would behave in order to determine where her placement will be at the funeral.


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> I saw William introducing her to some gentleman after they got out of the crowd.  She actually held back for once, probably out of nervousness.  Catherine looks composed and TW is clinging on to Haz like no tomorrow.  It seemed like William spoke to Haz a few times, even TW.  I didn't see the two wives interact at all.


For gentleman read minder - do as you are told don’t step out of line


----------



## elvisfan4life

lishukha said:


> Lol she really acted like it was first day on earth. That look of confusion…


Her acting is poor I think she was trying to convey overwhelming grief and shock


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I really, really would like at least William and Harry to reconcile



Oh, me too. After the divorce and deprogramming.


----------



## VickyB

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I actually think Anne will step up as head of the family in private.


I really hope this happens. The Princess Royal is such a hard working no nonsense royal. She is the son Prince Phillip never had. I am sure one word or look from her stops Andrew, Charles and Edward and all the rest of them in their tracks. I am sure that she also has no problem putting things into perspective for them.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought it was the other way around actually.


Not on UK tv


----------



## elvisfan4life

VickyB said:


> I really hope this happens. The Princess Royal is such a hard working no nonsense royal. She is the son Prince Phillip never had. I am sure one word or look from her stops Andrew, Charles and Edward and all the rest of them in their tracks. I am sure that she also has no problem putting things into perspective for them.


I think Anne will gracefully retire now and enjoy her grandchildren


----------



## VickyB

bellecate said:


> Just came across this, and it got me.
> View attachment 5606754


This just set me on a fresh crying jag.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The 'reunited' togetherness is camera-only, I don't think the brothers will be friends again until she's no longer a problem.



I love how you worded that. And I understand William completely.


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Not on UK tv


I'm in Wales and was watching the BBC.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I'm never going to look at a Paddington and not be a bit sad actually.
> 
> Wrong thread, but I think that Plat Jubilee sketch was QEII deliberately leaving us something.
> 
> Going to go and cry now - and I can tell you I haven't cried since my mother passed away four years ago. Terrible funeral drama then too - another soap opera



Sending you a virtual hug. 

I feel like an idiot crying the 3rd day over a woman I didn't even know when I'm not usually a crier. Both Philip's and her passing were exceptionally hard on me.


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> I saw someone ask if they could hug her and she said yes. It lasted at least 10 seconds.  So fake.  Had to get one over on the Princess of Wales - look how much more tactile I am, not stuffy like you


I don’t care if Meghan is faking it or not.  I don't care if she’s enjoying the attention or not.  
She’s being choreographed into behaving respectfully and for the sake of the Queen I’m happy to see it.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I'd speculate that H+M might have been wary for the reception they would get from the crowd, certainly we saw at the Jubilee service that some people on the reciving line declined to shake hands with them.
IMO It is an indication of the character and maturity of the new P&POW that they asked H&M to join them this afternoon. I'd say NOTHING has been forgiven, rather Will and Kate are not petty or childish and are not going to let H&M overshadow the events of the next few weeks.
I don't think anyone could have forseen that H&M would be in the UK when the Queen died but I'd put money on it that there were very recent updates to the plans to ensure very tight control of this pair under "Operation London Bridge"
I think the fact that they (Meghan) briefed the media on their plans to go to Scotland and not through the Palace was not only an insulting breach of protocol but down right rude.
Just to add I am sick of seeing her paw Harry and with the handholding at serious and professional events. It's insulting to everyone and infantalising to Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I really hope for QEII and others (like me) there are animals in heaven. All my fur friends were already angels.



I am not religious at all, but I firmly hold onto the belief I'll see my little cat soulmate again.


----------



## gelbergirl

VickyB said:


> I really hope this happens. The Princess Royal is such a hard working no nonsense royal. *She is the son Prince Phillip never had.* I am sure one word or look from her stops Andrew, Charles and Edward and all the rest of them in their tracks. I am sure that she also has no problem putting things into perspective for them.



LOL.  You're right though.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mellibelly




----------



## Lodpah

Well that’s lovely they’re all together. I’m sure this will generate lots of material for the next podcast of the ugliness of what was said, per TW. That constant hand holding tho and the bewildered look she has on her face, Priceless. Probably the greatest role she ever had to do. She deserves an Oscar. Pure and innocent and very smacks of a young, grieving girl. GOTCHA!!


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand any of this. I am flabbergasted William and Kate would agree to this, and I shouldn't be so shocked that thing has no problem holding her lying face into the next camera. WTFFF.
> 
> I guess Harry found her tantrum endearing and is not planning to get rid of her anytime soon.


I am flabbergasted that TW would agree to this.  It's official - that woman has b@lls of steel. 

She obviously has no conscience, after making the statement last week that she can say whatever she wants and the British press called her children a derogatory word. 

I do wonder what Catherine is thinking when she sees her, knowing she lied about who made who cry, and bullied her 3 year old daughter.

Any normal person would be mortified to have to be in the same room with the people you trashed, but apparently not Meggzy.  

Just wow.

Edit:  I just realized that she most likely agreed to do this for the superb footage for Netflix.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I really hope for QEII and others (like me) there are animals in heaven. All my fur friends were already angels.


I wholeheartedly believe that they are.  Most animals deserve to be there more than many humans.


----------



## purseinsanity

Pessie said:


> I don’t care if Meghan is faking it or not.  I don't care if she’s enjoying the attention or not.
> She’s being choreographed into behaving respectfully and for the sake of the Queen I’m happy to see it.


I'd rather she was choreographed out of it altogether!


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> Well that’s lovely they’re all together. I’m sure this will generate lots of material for the next podcast of the ugliness of what was said, per TW. That constant hand holding tho and the bewildered look she has on her face, Priceless. Probably the greatest role she ever had to do. She deserves an Oscar. Pure and innocent and very smacks of a young, grieving girl. GOTCHA!!


She's going to spin it into William offered profuse apologies about his highly offensive behavior the past few years, and Haz and she rose above and decided to take their invitation at the last minute.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if today was a “test” to see how TW would behave in order to determine where her placement will be at the funeral.


I would love to see their bluff called. Either seated in a side aisle surrounded by military men front and side , because of the security risk,  or Harry not asked to walk because of the memories of his mother. Both unlikely but idle musings on my part.

Re the procession behind the coffin, I'd like to see it as follows - 
King Charles and Prince William together at the front
Then Anne, and Andrew 
then Edward with James and or Louise then Harry with Peter Phillips
Then Sir Tim and Lord Linley

Having lost both my parents in the last 8 years I can honestly say I felt one of the most respectful and honouring acts we did was to walk behind their coffins.


----------



## Aminamina

I hope this “brotherly reunion” is nothing more then the Operation Antidote. Like a sacrifice in chess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I do wonder what Catherine is thinking when she sees her, knowing she lied about who made who cry, and bullied her 3 year old daughter.



And invented the Rose Hanbury rumour out of spite (even before leaving the BRF!).


----------



## kemilia

purseinsanity said:


> In the spirit of @CeeJay I corrected it for you!


I was gonna say "stink" but your words are much better.


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


Body language.  MM was terrified.  No interaction. They were ordered to do this by King Charles.  Kate looks like she is going through the motions.   KC knew that if the Sussex showed up just the two of them they might get booed and taunted.  Putting them with W&K avoided that.  This is also a case of KC telling the new P&P of Wales just gut it out  and the thorns will be gone in a few days.


----------



## gracekelly

lishukha said:


> Gosh she’s so freaking awkward and out of place. Why was she facing the other way different from everyone else?


Pathetic.  She wanted to run away and hide.  She couldn't even do this properly.


----------



## gracekelly

I hope someone in the crowd yelled VOETSEK MEGHAN at her.


----------



## kemilia

CobaltBlu said:


> Totally agree. It was cringeworthy.  Also, she cannot keep her hands off her hair.
> So much awkwardness crammed into such a short video.


IMO, her hair has always been her "soother"--she plays with it when uncomfortable, she's done that from the beginning of this relationship. He twirls his ring, she messes with her hair (or whoever's hair it is).


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And invented the Rose Hanbury rumour out of spite (even before leaving the BRF!).


Oh, I forgot about that


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Several sources have come forward saying she made Harry deliberately late by throwing an epic tantrum when she learned she wasn't going. They are speaking of 1+ hour of yelling, shouting and threatening to fly out to the US


Major Johnny should have put her on the plane.


----------



## kemilia

CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.



Kate can't move away fast enough--she is zooming!


----------



## Toby93

Just watching this "spectacle" again.  She just can't help herself, making it a performance with the hip swaying


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> Kate can't move away fast enough--she is zooming!


Catherine knows that any kindness shown to the witch will be tweaked into t_hey are best friends now. _ She has no use for MM.


----------



## Lodpah

BBC didn’t mention her name in their caption.


----------



## bubablu

Toby93 said:


> I saw someone ask if they could hug her and she said yes. It lasted at least 10 seconds.  So fake.  Had to get one over on the Princess of Wales - look how much more tactile I am, not stuffy like you


And speaking of hugs, please do not forget this beautiful moment at 0:06


----------



## youngster

My first thought at seeing the video of Will and Kate with Harry and MM, Meghan looks so awkward and uncomfortable and just very subdued.  Like some of you said, as if this was her first day on the planet or something.
ETA:  And, what was her awkward waving at the end of the walk about?  Will and Kate start to wave and she seems to think, oh, I have to wave, what is a wave, how do I wave? Very awkward and strange.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Toby93 said:


> Just watching this "spectacle" again.  She just can't help herself, making it a performance with the hip swaying



Ooh haha her face said it all


----------



## csshopper

elvisfan4life said:


> What were you watching?  people were cuddling her and fawning over her fake grief !!!


I was watching an 8 minute video and saw her being ignored by some people in the front row, if there was a handshake she usuallly initiated it and there was more coverage of the Prince and Princess of Wales than of the other pair. Must depend on which group is recording.


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> Just watching this "spectacle" again.  She just can't help herself, making it a performance with the hip swaying




That's amazing video.  Most of those people look unenthusiastic to say the least, to shake her hand.  Look at their expressions after she moves on.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I saw someone ask if they could hug her and she said yes. It lasted at least 10 seconds.  So fake.  Had to get one over on the Princess of Wales - look how much more tactile I am, not stuffy like you


A planted stan like in Dusseldorf?


Sophisticatted said:


> I wonder if today was a “test” to see how TW would behave in order to determine where her placement will be at the funeral.


If it was, I do hope she failed.


elvisfan4life said:


> Her acting is poor I think she was trying to convey overwhelming grief and shock


Narcs have no empathy. She probably needs to watch a few movies to figure out the expression required.


youngster said:


> My first thought at seeing the video of Will and Kate with Harry and MM, Meghan looks so awkward and uncomfortable and just very subdued.  Like some of you said, as if this was her first day on the planet or something.


She can't act to save her life.


Toby93 said:


> Just watching this "spectacle" again.  She just can't help herself, making it a performance with the *hip swaying*



It's the bunions...


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Major Johnny should have put her on the plane.


She doesn’t deserve him. The man who empties the trash bins would be the most appropriate escort.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## redney

Toby93 said:


> Just watching this "spectacle" again.  She just can't help herself, making it a performance with the hip swaying



Send the 2nd video to Netflix!


----------



## Blyen

redney said:


> Send the 2nd video to Netflix!


I tagged them on Twitter


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kate, Kate, Kate - you inspire all of us.  No one comes close.  Grace, poise, dignity, elegance and all the best qualities.
Thank you, a balm for these troubled times. 

ETA:  ooops, wrong thread.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> A planted stan like in Dusseldorf?
> 
> If it was, I do hope she failed.
> 
> Narcs have no empathy. She probably needs to watch a few movies to figure out the expression required.
> 
> She can't act to save her life.
> 
> It's the bunions...


LOVED the group of ladies along the fence who stiffed her, from their looks at each other and a subtle nudge, a string of friends I bet. Thought as I watched it, “any tpf reps in this group?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
You really can see a spark of who she really is here...


----------



## TimeToShop

elvisfan4life said:


> What were you watching?  people were cuddling her and fawning over her fake grief !!!



I saw very few people stick out their hands. Some did rather halfheartedly. One woman in front pointedly looked at her and kept her hands down. Absolutely nothing like the crowd was for William.


----------



## xincinsin

Do you think this is a PR crisis for her and damaging for her brand because in all her plots, she was expecting to be safely esconced in Monteshitshow where she could spin the narrative as she wished? She must be cursing that the Queen passed away now while she is on a once in the blue moon trip across the pond, and she is caught up in Operation London Bridge. If she stays, she is under scrutiny. If she hikes off home, it would look odd. Maybe Doria is bringing reinforcements to give Dumbo and D*psh*t their ring of steel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...



*She* wants to keep the flowers so *she* can take them to wherever *she* thinks they should go.  
*She* still doesn’t get it.  Go away, MM, just go away.


----------



## redney

CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
> You really can see a spark of who she really is here...



Mask slip!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Major Johnny should have put her on the plane.


Please, please not our Major Johnny as she would enjoy it too much. Let it be a big hairy ape of guy instead to scare the sh!t out of her.


----------



## Toby93

Hand on heart again, look how humble I am     Love this pic!


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> *She* wants to keep the flowers so *she* can take them to wherever *she* thinks they should go.
> *She* still doesn’t get it.  Go away, MM, just go away.


These are MY flowers. They gave them to ME! ME! ME!


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Do you think this is a PR crisis for her and damaging for her brand because in all her plots, she was expecting to be safely esconced in Monteshitshow where she could spin the narrative as she wished? She must be cursing that the Queen passed away now while she is on a once in the blue moon trip across the pond, and she is caught up in Operation London Bridge. If she stays, she is under scrutiny. If she hikes off home, it would look odd. Maybe Doria is bringing reinforcements to give Dumbo and D*psh*t their ring of steel.


Queen Elizabeth put up with Wallis at the DukeofWindsor’s funeral, so this is QE leading from beyond.  QE showed Kate how to get through these awkward moments with a truly horrid woman. Well done, Kate.   Kate’s grace makes MM look even more horrid.


----------



## youngster

Can't wait for the lip readers and others to figure out what was said during that exchange with the staff person.  She does look like she's about to rip his head off and then realizes there is a camera.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> Mask slip!


She wanted to keep the flowers and pretend that they were for her and not The Queen.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Queen Elizabeth put up with Wallis at the DukeofWindsor’s funeral, so this is QE leading from beyond.  QE showed Kate how to get through these awkward moments with a truly horrid woman. Well done, Kate.   Kate’s grace makes MM look even more horrid.


Yes, but....I think that Catherine has more in common at this moment in time with the Queen Mum who greatly disliked Wallis. OK, she hated her.    Catherine will never warm up to Meghan.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> Can't wait for the lip readers and others to figure out what was said during that exchange with the staff person.  She does look like she's about to rip his head off and then realizes there is a camera.


Her scraggly hair looks even worse when seen upclose. With all her resources, if she still appears with such dreadful hair and clothes, it must be true that she is her own stylist.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Can't wait for the lip readers and others to figure out what was said during that exchange with the staff person.  She does look like she's about to rip his head off and then realizes there is a camera.


He wanted to take the flowers and she wanted to keep them. You can imagine how she told him to bugger off.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I am flabbergasted that TW would agree to this.  It's official - that woman has b@lls of steel.
> 
> She obviously has no conscience, after making the statement last week that she can say whatever she wants and the British press called her children a derogatory word.
> 
> I do wonder what Catherine is thinking when she sees her, knowing she lied about who made who cry, and bullied her 3 year old daughter.
> 
> Any normal person would be mortified to have to be in the same room with the people you trashed, but apparently not Meggzy.
> 
> Just wow.
> 
> Edit:  I just realized that she most likely agreed to do this for the superb footage for Netflix.


I would imagine Katherine is uncomfortable to be around her to say the least.  She will maintain her composure but will probably not engage with the claw if she can help it


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> These are MY flowers. They gave them to ME! ME! ME!


It does remind me of that moment when QEII was viewing the flowers for Diana, and a little girl in the crowd gave her a bouquet and TQ asked her if the girl wanted her to put them with the tributes, and the little girl said no, that they were for Her Maj.  So sweet.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> She doesn’t deserve him. The man who empties the trash bins would be the most appropriate escort.


please don't insult the trash man....all work deserves respect


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I didn't even know I was capable of such immense dislike for a random stranger. She is disgusting.


----------



## LittleStar88

CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
> You really can see a spark of who she really is here...




Good lord. She was throwing major attitude. Yikes.

Can’t wait for BLG’s input.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> LOVED the group of ladies along the fence who stiffed her, from their looks at each other and a subtle nudge, a string of friends I bet. Thought as I watched it, “any tpf reps in this group?


Yes that was great.  They were laughing at her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
> You really can see a spark of who she really is here...




She looks like she's telling him to f*ck off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This fits here, right?












						The Duke of Windsor Spent His Final Days in Exile, Living in Paris with Wallis Simpson
					

Simpson attended his funeral England, alongside the royal family.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yes, but....I think that Catherine has more in common at this moment in time with the Queen Mum who greatly disliked Wallis. OK, she hated her.    Catherine will never warm up to Meghan.


who would warm up to a person who trashed them in front of millions of viewers


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> He wanted to take the flowers and she wanted to keep them. You can imagine how she told him to bugger off.


Strategic move? If she is holding flowers, she won't have to stick out her hand and risk being spurned.


----------



## CobaltBlu

CarryOn2020 said:


> Queen Elizabeth put up with Wallis at the DukeofWindsor’s funeral, so this is QE leading from beyond.  QE showed Kate how to get through these awkward moments with a truly horrid woman. Well done, Kate.   Kate’s grace makes MM look even more horrid.






Body Language guy would love it.  Wallis' brooch game is strong tho...  no lie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Yes that was great.  They were laughing at her.


What else could they do?  She is such a fraud, by her own admission.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Hand on heart again, look how humble I am     Love this pic!




So condescending and patronizing. The stupid hand on heart, the stupid turtle head (forward out of the shell). Ew.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Yes, but....I think that Catherine has more in common at this moment in time with the Queen Mum who greatly disliked Wallis. OK, she hated her.    *Catherine will never warm up to Meghan.*


Why would she?  I'm sure she tried at the beginning, but if some witch tormented my 3 year old daughter and spewed lies about me on an international forum, I'd be done forever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> please don't insult the trash man....all work deserves respect


Especially during the pandemic when they weren't coming around all the time!  Made it very clear how important every job is, even those that may seem menial.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Redbirdhermes said:


> I watched the last 10 minutes or so of the walkabout on CNN in the US and the announcers were gushing about this being the start of a reconciliation.   I also spotted Getty photographer Chris Jackson there, so hoping for some nice photos of everyone.   It does seem kind of William to invite his brother and SIL for this appearance.


Chris Jackson's photos.  The one with the pink balloon heart is stunning.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Why would she?  I'm sure she tried at the beginning, but if some witch tormented my 3 year old daughter and spewed lies about me on an international forum, I'd be done forever.


Agree.  Catherine knows living well is the best revenge. Let the _foreigners_ stumble along, hunch over, look like poseurs.
Real royals know how to step up.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Good lord. She was throwing major attitude. Yikes.
> 
> Can’t wait for BLG’s input.


"I told you to keep your a$$ over there, so learn to listen, but thank you for listening to me."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Redbirdhermes said:


> Chris Jackson's photos.
> 
> View attachment 5608034
> View attachment 5608035


Hazzi looks like such a pretender now.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even know I was capable of such i*mmense dislike for a random stranger. She is disgusting.*


So this is the one true thing that the sugars say about us on this thread.  Pretty funny when you think about it


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi looks like such a pretender now.


Gee, isn't he having an anxiety flashback to the time when he had to view the flowers for his mother?  Light bulbs clicking etc.


----------



## Sharont2305

If looks could kill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Gee, isn't he having an anxiety flashback to the time when he had to view the flowers for his mother?  Light bulbs clicking etc.


That is what he wants us to believe. He thinks we feel sorry for him. He looks shady and greedy.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> If looks could kill.
> 
> View attachment 5608044


I think she looks terrified of what Catherine might say or do.  The fact is that C. would say and do nothing, which for Meghan is even worse because it make her imagination run rampant.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even know I was capable of such immense dislike for a random stranger. She is disgusting.


Exactly this


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is what he wants us to believe. He thinks we feel sorry for him. He looks shady and greedy.


I think he is still contemplating what a sh*t show his life his turned into.


----------



## Mendocino

CarryOn2020 said:


> King Charles was born for this moment, carried off the awkward part with grace and aplomb.
> I must say he looks good in black, really good.  Long live King Charles!


He's always classically and elegantly attired, just like his father.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even know I was capable of such immense dislike for a random stranger. She is disgusting.





gracekelly said:


> So this is the one true thing that the sugars say about us on this thread.  Pretty funny when you think about it


I'd still immensely dislike her if she wasn't a random stranger. In fact, based on my personal bias against narcs due to having worked with several, I'd confidently assert that my dislike would reach record levels.


----------



## bubablu

CarryOn2020 said:


> That is what he wants us to believe. He thinks we feel sorry for him. He looks shady and greedy.


I dislike him more than her. She's crazy nuts, but it is all his fault.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

In this video you can see more of the flower situation and she is absolutely lost and almost panicky looking at everyone for cues of what to do. 









						Prince William's instructions to Kate Middleton, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during joint outing
					

As his first engagement under his new role and title, Prince William took the lead during the walkabout at Windsor Castle on Saturday




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> Hand on heart again, look how humble I am     Love this pic!



Thank you for posting this. I needed a good laugh after so many tears


----------



## bubablu

CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
> You really can see a spark of who she really is here...



No acting here, really bad to see. As I always though, it is not true that is always good to be yourself, when you are like that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_In his first address to the nation as King, Charles said he wished to ‘express my love for Harry and Meghan as they continue to *build their lives overseas’.*
_
A friendly reminder.  They will be leaving.  Yes, yes, keyword = overseas.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> This fits here, right?
> 
> View attachment 5608031
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Windsor Spent His Final Days in Exile, Living in Paris with Wallis Simpson
> 
> 
> Simpson attended his funeral England, alongside the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Personally, I would like to see her wear this. The Maltese Ghonnella  as a tribute to that *ahem* Maltese heritage.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _In his first address to the nation as King, Charles said he wished to ‘express my love for Harry and Meghan as they continue to *build their lives overseas’.*_
> 
> A friendly reminder.  They will be leaving.  Yes, yes, keyword = overseas.


Here is the boat.  Now scoot.


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> In this video you can see more of the flower situation and she is absolutely lost and almost panicky looking at everyone for cues of what to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William's instructions to Kate Middleton, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during joint outing
> 
> 
> As his first engagement under his new role and title, Prince William took the lead during the walkabout at Windsor Castle on Saturday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Traveling again and with limited time to watch news, so thank you all for the great posts. 

Very generous of William and Kate to walk with TW. I hope they will not regret.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> In this video you can see more of the flower situation and she is absolutely lost and almost panicky looking at everyone for cues of what to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William's instructions to Kate Middleton, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during joint outing
> 
> 
> As his first engagement under his new role and title, Prince William took the lead during the walkabout at Windsor Castle on Saturday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


 Tw is out of her league. Way out.  Her awkwardness is upsetting to watch. 

Catherine knew what we all needed.  Her grace shows us how we can get through this grief.  She is a balm to our frazzled nerves.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Thank you for posting this. I needed a good laugh after so many tears


She took the words of condolence from this woman personally.  What nerve.


----------



## LittleStar88

Not even mentioned


----------



## Blyen

I have to admit it,I can't stand her,but I still think she's beautiful.
It's sad that she only seem to be beautiful on the outside, though.


----------



## Toby93

Redbirdhermes said:


> Chris Jackson's photos.  The one with the pink balloon heart is stunning.
> 
> View attachment 5608034
> View attachment 5608035


Made sure she had Diana's watch on for everyone to see


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Traveling again and with limited time to watch news, so thank you all for the great posts.
> 
> Very generous of William and Kate to walk with TW. I hope they will not regret.


We miss you   

W&K are playing the long game. The King has spoken - H&M’s life is _overseas_. QE showed the family how to maneuver in these awkward situations, so W&K are showing manners-in-action.  No regrets.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> If looks could kill.
> 
> View attachment 5608044


TW should avoid wearing black tights.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Blyen said:


> I have to admit it,I can't stand her,but I still think she's beautiful.
> It's sad that she only seem to be beautiful on the outside, though.


Imo MM is Hwood beauty. Catherine is royal beauty.  Huge difference.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

OMG - 45 minutes!


----------



## CobaltBlu

Blyen said:


> I have to admit it,I can't stand her,but I still think she's beautiful.
> It's sad that she only seem to be beautiful on the outside, though.


I agree. When she is not all bronzed and when she is wearing appropriate clothes that fit she can look beautiful.


----------



## Blyen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo MM is Hwood beauty. Catherine is royal beauty.  Huge difference.


Yeah,both beautiful,but Catherine shines in a way Meghan can never achieve. She's genuine and it shows.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting title of this article on The Times!



_In an unexpected show of unity, William, Harry, Kate and Meghan emerged from a car behind the gates of Windsor Castle and walked to meet cheering crowds and view the flowers left outside.

Harry placed a hand on his wife’s back as they looked at the tributes. As the group walked down the Long Walk there were dozens of shouts of “Harry” and “Meghan”. Well-wishers passed the couples bouquets of tulips and single red roses.



			archive.ph
		

_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even know I was capable of such immense dislike for a random stranger. She is disgusting.


She's a stranger as far as we've never met her, but we all know to be a gargantuan fraud on the inside and outside.


----------



## carmen56

purseinsanity said:


> I don't know how William and Kate tolerated being in the same car.  Shows William's character that he invited them.  I'd have been nervous having the witch behind my wife.  She could've been stabbed in the back, not just figuratively this time.



William being the bigger person by inviting the Harkles.  Did Raptor curtsey to Kate in her new role as Princess of Wales?


----------



## luckylove

Toby93 said:


> Hand on heart again, look how humble I am     Love this pic!




... and what is with the strange orange spray tan? Everything about this woman is fake... Agree this photo is priceless!


----------



## Chanbal

Blyen said:


> I have to admit it,I can't stand her,but I still think she's beautiful.
> It's sad that she only seem to be beautiful on the outside, though.


Sorry but plastic surgery doesn't work inside yet.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG - 45 minutes!




I just can't deal with these two still thinking they are calling the shots and negotiating. Shut up, stand where you're told, don't fuss.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

carmen56 said:


> William being the bigger person by inviting the Harkles.  Did Raptor curtsey to Kate in her new role as Princess of Wales?



That was probably what took 45 mins to negotiate


----------



## scarlet555

I am sure Nutmeg and ginger head couldn’t wait for the last min invite.

After all, what do they have  left after Mariah Carey crushed Nutmeg by my calling Nutmeg a diva…on her own podcast  !! Had to listen to that dig multiple times.  It was too funny.


----------



## gracekelly

Tweet​See new Tweets
Conversation​



Robert Jobson
@theroyaleditor
Royal Rota copy: Banita Ranow, 28, among the crowd on the Long Walk, said she heard Kate tell children next to her about what her youngest son Louis had said about the Queen’s death. She said Kate told the children: “Louis said at least Grannie is with great grandpa now


----------



## carmen56

And look, Harry, minimal security!  Blows his ridiculous court case out of the water.


----------



## Toby93

It's hard to find a post anywhere that's favourable...


----------



## gracekelly

I wondered how little Louis would take this and he is more mature than I thought.  I thought it fascinating and amazing that he had such a deep relationship with her as evidenced by their interactions on the balcony at Jubilee.  His parents are to be applauded at how this all was handled for one so young.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

What on earth can there have been that needed negotiating ???
W to H We're going outside, are you coming, get a suit/black dress on, we'll pick you up in 10, I'm driving.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Am I right in thinking that William put out a heartfelt, poignant and personal statement about the death of The Queen, his grannie, but Harry, who was supposed to be very close to his grannies just had a statement on ‘the company website’ saying “In memory of …” ‍♀️


----------



## gracekelly

RAINDANCE said:


> What on earth can there have been that needed negotiating ???
> W to H We're going outside, are you coming, get a suit/black dress on, we'll pick you up in 10, I'm driving.


Harry might have wanted to walk alongside William and that was not going to happen.  As a matter of protocol, Harry walks behind now more than ever.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I bet some of the diehard royal fans who live locally to Windsor and have regularly attended events and waited to see and meet the Queen had met the Queen more times than Meghan did in total.


----------



## redney

Could it be TW had some sort of fit, just to cause attention and delay the walkabout? I wouldn't put it past her.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Harry might have wanted to walk alongside William and that was not going to happen.  As a matter of protocol, Harry walks behind now more than ever.



Oh, I didn't notice this, I'll have to go back and look at the video again.


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> I bet some of the diehard royal fans who live locally to Windsor and have regularly attended events and waited to see and meet the Queen had met the Queen more times than Meghan did in total.


I think I've seen the Queen more than she has.


----------



## youngster

RAINDANCE said:


> I bet some of the diehard royal fans who live locally to Windsor and have regularly attended events and waited to see and meet the Queen had met the Queen more times than Meghan did in total.



I wondered about this too last night.  I doubt Meghan met the Queen more than 25 or 30 times.  I think they did one engagement together, where it was just the Queen and MM. (That might have been the one where Meghan refused to wear a hat despite being told to wear a hat and her hair ended up being blown all over the place.)


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> Could it be TW had some sort of fit, just to cause attention and delay the walkabout? I wouldn't put it past her.


She was told to wear a bra and black hosiery.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I think I've seen the Queen more than she has.


I have no doubts!  Plus you saw Catherine more as well, didn't you?


----------



## RAINDANCE

youngster said:


> Oh, I didn't notice this, I'll have to go back and look at the video again.


Me too.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I wondered about this too last night.  I doubt Meghan met the Queen more than 25 or 30 times.  I think they did one engagement together, where it was just the Queen and MM. (That might have been the one where Meghan refused to wear a hat despite being told to wear a hat and her hair ended up being blown all over the place.)


More like 10 I bet


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> She was told to wear a bra and black hosiery.


And taught to not smile stupidly.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I have no doubts!  Plus you saw Catherine more as well, didn't you?


I have, most definitely.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> What on earth can there have been that needed negotiating ???
> W to H We're going outside, are you coming, get a suit/black dress on, we'll pick you up in 10, I'm driving.


 MM needs to know:  Who stands next to whom?  Who opens my car door? Who gets out of the car first?  Which side of the road do we walk down?  Who takes the flowers?  Whom do I look at?  What exactly do I say? Do I give autographs? Selfies?  Why can’t I stand next to William? Catherine?  Aren’t we all equals?  Is Kate wearing her hair down or up?  Do I need a hat? A brooch? I need a checklist asap. Blah blah.

She has no knowledge or understanding of proper protocol.  Such an embarrassment. 

Catherine continues to give a master class in manners, grace, elegance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Harry might have wanted to walk alongside William and that was not going to happen.  As a matter of protocol, Harry walks behind now more than ever.


Notice when they are leaving:
- Catherine opens her own door - no drama, just class.  Catherine moves gracefully and purposefully.
- MM moves awkwardly, not knowing where to look.  Seems like she called for Hazz to open her door.
- Hazzi delays getting in the car by walking over to open MM’s door and by sticking his hand out so a few people will shake it.  No one was offering their hand. William was already in the car.  Hazzi is such a sleeze.

Queen Elizabeth always moved with purpose, not rushing but not lingering. Her hands never flailed and floundered about.  Her feet planted firmly on the ground, completely assured which direction she was going.  Catherine echoes that as do several other royal ladies, except Eug, Sarah and the dreadful American who appear clumsy and unsure.


----------



## Toby93

Sorry, but this just broke my heart.


Edit : This is from 2002 - when the Queen Mother passed away.


----------



## youngster

Oh gosh, that is just so poignant. Her dogs.  I am sure one of the members of the family will give them a wonderful home but still they'll miss her.


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> IMO, her hair has always been her "soother"--she plays with it when uncomfortable, she's done that from the beginning of this relationship. He twirls his ring, she messes with her hair (or whoever's hair it is).


Are you saying Thant a 41 year old woman wears a comfort blanket on her head?


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> Sorry, but this just broke my heart.



I know what you mean, but that's an old photo. The gentleman in front is Backstairs Billy (William Tallon) a member of the Queen Mother's staff. He died in 2007.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Sorry, but this just broke my heart.



And you had to show me corgis


----------



## redney

nm


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> please don't insult the trash man....all work deserves respect


A poorly phrased comment on my part meant to be a statement about her being more appropriately escorted in a refuse vehicle. The driver we esteem.

We have had the same driver on our pick up route for several years. One week on our designated day he saw me cramming garden clippings into the can and noted as he dumped it that it looked like I had more to do in the front yard. I did. An hour later I heard the truck approaching from the opposite end of the street, he had doubled back to empty the can a second time for me. Asked his name and called the City department to commend him to his Supervisor for his thoughtful customer service. 

Jim the Trash Man is a 10. Raptor is  0.


----------



## Toby93

Sharont2305 said:


> I know what you mean, but that's an old photo. The gentleman in front is Backstairs Billy (William Tallon) a member of the Queen Mother's staff. He died in 2007.


I didn't know this was an old pic, but it still hurts my heart.  I know she still had dogs  but not sure how many.  
Edit:  This is from 2002 when the Queen mother passed away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> A poorly phrased comment on my part meant to be a statement about her being more appropriately escorted in a refuse vehicle. The driver we esteem.
> 
> We have had the same driver on our pick up route for several years. One week on our designated day he saw me cramming garden clippings into the can and noted as he dumped it that it looked like I had more to do in the front yard. I did. An hour later I heard the truck approaching from the opposite end of the street, he had doubled back to empty the can a second time for me. Asked his name and called the City department to commend him to his Supervisor for his thoughtful customer service.
> 
> Jim the Trash Man is a 10. Raptor is  0.


I knew what you meant. H&M do not deserve the limo or the Rover,  they should walk.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I knew what you meant. H&M do not deserve the limo or the Rover,  they should walk.


I thought it was established a while ago that this was their transportation.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> A poorly phrased comment on my part meant to be a statement about her being more appropriately escorted in a refuse vehicle. The driver we esteem.
> 
> We have had the same driver on our pick up route for several years. One week on our designated day he saw me cramming garden clippings into the can and noted as he dumped it that it looked like I had more to do in the front yard. I did. An hour later I heard the truck approaching from the opposite end of the street, he had doubled back to empty the can a second time for me. Asked his name and called the City department to commend him to his Supervisor for his thoughtful customer service.
> 
> Jim the Trash Man is a 10. Raptor is  0.


I'm reminded of a story about a well known American who I won't name
  His son was questioning his tipping of the housekeeping staff at a hotel.  He strongly chastised the son, telling him "those people work Hard"


youngster said:


> Oh gosh, that is just so poignant. Her dogs.  I am sure one of the members of the family will give them a wonderful home but still they'll miss her.


I was thinking that staff (who hopefully love them) would look after them.  But if a family member takes them, that would be nice.  Is Ann an animal lover?


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> If looks could kill.
> 
> View attachment 5608044



Dynasty and Succession got nothin‘ on this lineup


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I think she looks terrified of what Catherine might say or do.  The fact is that C. would say and do nothing, which for Meghan is even worse because it make her imagination run rampant.



She makes everything up anyway.
Never join people in their mad world, enough to stay sane in the real one


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I think he is still contemplating what a sh*t show his life his turned into.



Sadly, for all her scheming, lies and ME-ing she still has a great life IMO.

she could have had it made though, quite right. MegZ has nowhere to hide now, that’s true, everyone knows she’s a ***


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> She makes everything up anyway.
> Never join people in their mad world, enough to stay sane in the real one


Some of the best advice I ever got was similar...  when someone is taking a train to crazy town, don't buy a ticket and join them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watch the lady in the navy top - she delicately but firmly refuses the handshake.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

gracekelly said:


> I thought it was established a while ago that this was their transportation.
> 
> View attachment 5608076


Now you’re just being cruel to a beautiful splitscreen ❤️ (Even though they’re not very nice to drive and break down a lot so it would be fitting)


----------



## gracekelly

If this is true, it shoots my theory out the window that it was KC who ordered this.


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> If this is true, it shoots my theory out the window that it was KC who ordered this.
> 
> View attachment 5608085



Not sure I understand why William would not like this.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _In his first address to the nation as King, Charles said he wished to ‘express my love for Harry and Meghan as they continue to *build their lives overseas’.*_
> 
> A friendly reminder.  They will be leaving.  Yes, yes, keyword = overseas.


----------



## redney

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch the lady in the navy top - she delicately but firmly refuses the handshake.



See Harry in the background, chatting away and having his photo taken. TW passes people holding phones and no one takes her photo.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> TW should avoid wearing black tights.


She’s tried, believe me she’s tried


----------



## gracekelly

How the King ordered sons to reunite for the sake of late grandmother
					

KATE MANSEY: To the astonishment of crowds who were expecting only William and Kate, both couples emerged from a black Audi late to gasps, then murmurs of approval - followed by cheers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Back to standing by my theory about KC ordering this lol!


----------



## redney

gracekelly said:


> Not sure I understand why William would not like this.


My guess is William didn't trust the dastardly duo to conduct themselves appropriately with the public if solo.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> We miss you
> 
> W&K are playing the long game. The King has spoken - H&M’s life is _overseas_. QE showed the family how to maneuver in these awkward situations, so W&K are showing manners-in-action.  No regrets.


Exactly 

anyone who thinks this is some kind of random act of kindness is mistaken. This is part of a carefully stage by stage campaign strategy.


----------



## Suncatcher

the media talk about them reuniting and put a positive spin on it. There is no positive spin here. Doubt anything has changed other than the PoW just doing the right thing.


----------



## Toby93

Nothing that we have not already said here.


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Could it be TW had some sort of fit, just to cause attention and delay the walkabout? I wouldn't put it past her.


It can’t take 45 mins to put on a pair of tights


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> Sadly, for all her schemin, lies and ME-ing she still has a great life IMO


 Yeah, she has a Prince of the UK acting as her doorman.  Wonder if that's what he had in mind for his future back in January 2020. 

More seriously though, although he has behaved terribly, inexcusably badly towards the UK and his family over the last 2plus, nearly 3 years, I have some concerns that if things continue on a downward trajectory for them, (in their commercial endeavors, in their marriage, in their relationship with the BRF,  in their overseas stature, status and credibility) Harry could be very vulnerable to serious mental health instabilities. For all his Better Up "stuff" and Californis therapy speak, I don't hear or see an emotially mature and stable adult, one that has the inner resources to deal with great personal disappointments or difficulties.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> Yeah, she has a Prince of the UK acting as her doorman.  Wonder if that's what he had in mind for his future back in January 2020.
> 
> More seriously though, although he has behaved terribly, inexcusably badly towards the UK and his family over the last 2plus, nearly 3 years, I have some concerns that if things continue on a downward trajectory for them, (in their commercial endeavors, in their marriage, in their relationship with the BRF,  in their overseas stature, status and credibility) Harry could be very vulnerable to serious mental health instabilities. For all his Better Up "stuff" and Californis therapy speak, I don't hear or see an emotially mature and stable adult, one that has the inner resources to deal with great personal disappointments or difficulties.



I think she needs to officially issue an apology to all the people of the UK.

it is our Queen on behalf of the British people that gave her the title of Duchess that she happily rents to the highest bidder.

To cast aspersions over such a diverse and loyal people, to throw their good wishes, warm welcome and culture back in their faces is despicable, she has proved herself to be a racist. 

I wish her and her H well in their life overseas


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> Yeah, she has a Prince of the UK acting as her doorman.  Wonder if that's what he had in mind for his future back in January 2020.
> 
> More seriously though, although he has behaved terribly, inexcusably badly towards the UK and his family over the last 2plus, nearly 3 years, I have some concerns that if things continue on a downward trajectory for them, (in their commercial endeavors, in their marriage, in their relationship with the BRF,  in their overseas stature, status and credibility) Harry could be very vulnerable to serious mental health instabilities. For all his Better Up "stuff" and Californis therapy speak, I don't hear or see an emotially mature and stable adult, one that has the inner resources to deal with great personal disappointments or difficulties.


Agree, he does not have the inner resources. He is an emotionally stunted man, not even an adult.  Sure, he may be a prince by accident of birth, but he has no authority, no money, no Palace, few staff, etc.  William is the Prince of Wales, the next King, very wealthy, with a beautiful wife who stands on her own two feet in complete confidence. He commands at the wave of a hand.  Clearly H&M are rattled here.  BLG has taught us well.


----------



## pomeline

I must admit I felt sick seeing the images of them walking together as "Fab Four" again. I even got a bit angry thinking this better be no "olive branch" and they'd be crawling back now that people are vulnerable and prone to forgiveness for the sake of their shared loss. But maybe it's not that simple. Let's face it, the BRF are stuck with the Sussexes for the next ten days (unless they decide to dash off to the U.S. because their kids' bedroom might be on fire or some such). This is using whatsherface's weapons against her, lovebombing, to make it obvious to the public they absolutely mean no harm for the "much loved" Sussexes. What can they do after such PR move? Run to Oprah and tell her they were shunned and kept away from the whole funeral proceedings and family bonding? It would sound nuts. They will eventually but when they do, there will be justified cause to take away the titles. If they would quietly do it now, it would seem cruel in the eyes of many. If Harry chooses to publish his book, he will also seem like a vindictive, heartless monster - and the titles go bye-bye. William is not dumb but he might have to make this up for Kate. She was not happy.


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> If this is true, it shoots my theory out the window that it was KC who ordered this.
> 
> View attachment 5608085


Why would H and M risk a walkabout themselves?  They are at risk of being booed like they were at the jubilee.

And the woman in the navy top who snubs MM and refuses to shake her hand - you are my hero.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo MM is Hwood beauty. Catherine is royal beauty.  Huge difference.


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't think TW is any Hollywood beauty either.  She's pretty, but surgically enhanced, a la the Kardashians.  Kylie was hardly a raving beauty and it wasn't some miracle puberty either.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Not even mentioned
> 
> View attachment 5608054


There are two things Brits do better than anyone:

1) Pomp and Circumstance
2) Throw Shade


----------



## RAINDANCE

gracekelly said:


> Not sure I understand why William would not like this.


Various reasons I would guess, including H&M trying to get outside first for some +ve media coverage and image damage control (and to upstage W&K ) but also, if true, because AGAIN H&M are briefing the media via their own sources,  rather than adhering to the official BRF protocols. I would imagine that the timing of the walk abouts will have been done to ensure that there was no overlap with the Royals at Balmoral.

 H&M have now done this twice, if this blind is true. I would believe M is perfectly capable of tipping off  a tame US  reporter without telling Harry but I am incredulous that H&M would think that was OK at this time.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Personally, I would like to see her wear this. The Maltese Ghonnella  as a tribute to that *ahem* Maltese heritage.
> 
> View attachment 5608051











						Unseen pictures of Meghan Markle show her exploring Maltese ancestry
					

MEGHAN Markle took a trip to the island of Malta to explore her heritage a year before she met Prince Harry – including trying on traditional headdresses. Never-before-seen photos show a relaxed an…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> I must admit I felt sick seeing the images of them walking together as "Fab Four" again. I even got a bit angry thinking this better be no "olive branch" and they'd be crawling back now that people are vulnerable and prone to forgiveness for the sake of their shared loss. But maybe it's not that simple. Let's face it, the BRF are stuck with the Sussexes for the next ten days (unless they decide to dash off to the U.S. because their kids' bedroom might be on fire or some such). This is using whatsherface's weapons against her, lovebombing, to make it obvious to the public they absolutely mean no harm for the "much loved" Sussexes. What can they do after such PR move? Run to Oprah and tell her they were shunned and kept away from the whole funeral proceedings and family bonding? It would sound nuts. They will eventually but when they do, there will be justified cause to take away the titles. If they would quietly do it now, it would seem cruel in the eyes of many. If Harry chooses to publish his book, he will also seem like a vindictive, heartless monster - and the titles go bye-bye. William is not dumb but he might have to make this up for Kate. She was not happy.


King Charles made it clear - H&M are now the BRF’s tools [there’s another word to use, rhymes with riches, but I am trying to respect Catherine’s kindness].  Notice how they stayed several paces behind W&K.  Humph. They have been told. William is now their banker. He has a very busy schedule so do not expect the bank to be opening soon.  Happy sailing.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I've a feeling she won't go to the funeral. 'Something' will happen that she 'needs' to go back to America.


I don’t know. That’s a lot of attention she would be giving up if she goes back. Doesn’t sound like Meghan to me.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Yes, I hope this happened too. And Philip at the top of the stairs.
> View attachment 5607822


Aw, I hope all of her beloved horses and ponies were cantering up to her too!


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know. That’s a lot of attention she would be giving up if she goes back. Doesn’t sound like Meghan to me.


But currently it seems she is under careful watch and control during any public appearances. Any missteps and she'll be out. Any "attention" she'll receive is muted and secondary to the senior members of the BRF, and this is not the type of attention she wants. She's probably seething inside so I wouldn't put it past her to use the invisikids in CA as an excuse to leave.


----------



## CobaltBlu

My guess is those formerly invisible kids are on the way now and if she gets her way she will be making every effort to "utilize them" in a way that would make Kris Jenner proud and our heads spin.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> But currently it seems she is under careful watch and control during any public appearances. Any missteps and she'll be out. Any "attention" she'll receive is muted and secondary to the senior members of the BRF, and this is not the type of attention she wants. She's probably seething inside so I wouldn't put it past her to use the invisikids in CA as an excuse to leave.


I don’t expect any dignity from her. This funeral could lead to another Oprah interview about how she has been silenced.


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> But currently it seems she is under careful watch and control during any public appearances. Any missteps and she'll be out. Any "attention" she'll receive is muted and secondary to the senior members of the BRF, and this is not the type of attention she wants. She's probably seething inside so I wouldn't put it past her to use the invisikids in CA as an excuse to leave.


Do send word to them to contact @gracekelly. She has arranged their transportation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I don’t expect any dignity from her. This funeral could lead to another Oprah interview about how she has been silenced.


Go ahead. Do it.  Whine away.  They are truly meaningless.  They did not get a promotion, they won’t get money or land or houses or cars or much of anything.  Cast off - literally and figuratively.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch the lady in the navy top - she delicately but firmly refuses the handshake.



And gives a side eye to her companion, then shakes her head in disbelief!  Love her!


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> If this is true, it shoots my theory out the window that it was KC who ordered this.
> 
> View attachment 5608085


If this is true, Haz and TW are more delusional than I thought!  Which is saying a lot, since I think they're utter whack jobs to begin with!


----------



## CarryOn2020

is the media finally waking up?  









						Kate Middleton and William make appearance with Harry and Meghan
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle appeared to barely interact with Prince William and Kate Middleton during the  joint outing in Windsor this evening.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> It can’t take 45 mins to put on a pair of tights


Maybe she ran a few in her frustrated state of not getting a solo walkabout and had to have someone run out to borrow one from Catherine?


----------



## purseinsanity

How the King ordered sons to reunite for the sake of late grandmother
					

KATE MANSEY: To the astonishment of crowds who were expecting only William and Kate, both couples emerged from a black Audi late to gasps, then murmurs of approval - followed by cheers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Always staring at Kate.  Psychopath.


----------



## youngster

Can you imagine the drive over in the car? Ugh.  Very awkward and uncomfortable potentially, though Will and Kate and even Harry are trained to put people at ease.

What would they talk about? On the drive over, I could see Will taking charge and recapping what they're going to do.  But, what about after, on the way back? Do we talk about the weather?  How Granny would be so happy to see all the lovely tributes?  I could see Kate stepping in and saying oh, tell us about the children, and then letting Harry yap away until they deposited them back at Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## Jayne1

Someone had to run out and buy her a black dress and tights, I assume.  

Did she specify to dress the way Kate was dressing, of course, how would they know, but they are dressed similarly.


----------



## Aimee3

But whoever bought that black dress actually got one that fit her!!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> How the King ordered sons to reunite for the sake of late grandmother
> 
> 
> KATE MANSEY: To the astonishment of crowds who were expecting only William and Kate, both couples emerged from a black Audi late to gasps, then murmurs of approval - followed by cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always staring at Kate.  Psychopath.
> 
> View attachment 5608106


Mm is eyeballing the future Queen, but Catherine glides onward.

Yes, MM’s dress fits better.  Still, Catherine looks regal with her perfect posture and AudreyHepburn figure.


----------



## needlv

Snapping at staff caught on camera?


----------



## jenayb

purseinsanity said:


> How the King ordered sons to reunite for the sake of late grandmother
> 
> 
> KATE MANSEY: To the astonishment of crowds who were expecting only William and Kate, both couples emerged from a black Audi late to gasps, then murmurs of approval - followed by cheers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always staring at Kate.  Psychopath.
> 
> View attachment 5608106



I'm sorry... I literally hate her face.


----------



## rhyvin

Has anyone seen this? The color difference in her hair is much more noticeable (second photo)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is it me or did she get lip filler?


----------



## pomeline

youngster said:


> Can you imagine the drive over in the car? Ugh.  Very awkward and uncomfortable potentially, though Will and Kate and even Harry are trained to put people at ease.
> 
> What would they talk about? On the drive over, I could see Will taking charge and recapping what they're going to do.  But, what about after, on the way back? Do we talk about the weather?  How Granny would be so happy to see all the lovely tributes?  I could see Kate stepping in and saying oh, tell us about the children, and then letting Harry yap away until they deposited them back at Frogmore Cottage.



Most likely: "What's that you said...? I can't hear you from the front seat..." I can see both couples talking amongst themselves but not being able to actually converse over the engine noise + the radio. "Sorry, we just have to hear the news/weather/this song..."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

Was this posted ?
If she hates them so much, why ? always referring to herself as Duchess… pathetic


----------



## BlueCherry

My sister loathes Meghan, as do I, but I’m giggling at the texts she just sent me …


----------



## DoggieBags

Sharont2305 said:


> If looks could kill.
> 
> View attachment 5608044


maybe I’m reading too much into this one photo but TW looks nervous to me. Maybe she was wondering if she would get booed?


----------



## piperdog

CarryOn2020 said:


> MM needs to know:  Who stands next to whom?  Who opens my car door? Who gets out of the car first?  Which side of the road do we walk down?  Who takes the flowers?  Whom do I look at?  What exactly do I say? Do I give autographs? Selfies?  Why can’t I stand next to William? Catherine?  Aren’t we all equals?  Is Kate wearing her hair down or up?  Do I need a hat? A brooch? I need a checklist asap. Blah blah.
> 
> She has no knowledge or understanding of proper protocol.  Such an embarrassment.
> 
> Catherine continues to give a master class in manners, grace, elegance.


Or were the negotiations were over the Netflix crew? Because really, that's all she'd care about


----------



## lanasyogamama

DoggieBags said:


> maybe I’m reading too much into this one photo but TW looks nervous to me. Maybe she was wondering if she would get booed?


I agree. She looks terrified.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> maybe I’m reading too much into this one photo but TW looks nervous to me. Maybe she was wondering if she would get booed?


I think it’s the concerned look of a narcissist who is not in control. She is like a fish out of water and she doesn’t know how she can get the upper hand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Is it me or did she get lip filler?


I have been thinking the same thing all day. No one said anything so I thought maybe it’s just me who sees it.  Thank you.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have been thinking the same thing all day. No one said anything so I thought maybe it’s just me who sees it.  Thank you.


She has had so much PS and fillers, so this doesn't surprise me at all.  She is LA born and bred and worships Hollywood.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She can never manage what to do with her arms.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Do you think this is a PR crisis for her and damaging for her brand because in all her plots, she was expecting to be safely esconced in Monteshitshow where she could spin the narrative as she wished? She must be cursing that the Queen passed away now while she is on a once in the blue moon trip across the pond, and she is caught up in Operation London Bridge. If she stays, she is under scrutiny. If she hikes off home, it would look odd. Maybe Doria is bringing reinforcements to give Dumbo and D*psh*t their ring of steel.


What you said rings true. If she had been home when it happened she would have had her publicists and staff right there to assist her in getting her the kind of press coverage she wants. She’s probably having trouble connecting with a Backgrid pap to get photos of herself looking mournful for example.


----------



## xincinsin

piperdog said:


> Or were the negotiations were over the Netflix crew? Because really, that's all she'd care about


Or the bodyguards? That's what he would be concerned about for his court case.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> Can't wait for the lip readers and others to figure out what was said during that exchange with the staff person.  She does look like she's about to rip his head off and then realizes there is a camera.


BLG has probably been awake for 48 hours straight working feverishly on the recent photos and videos.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> BLG has probably been awake for 48 hours straight working feverishly on the recent photos and videos.


And Lady C


----------



## xincinsin

This Aussie website naively thinks the Asswell page was a touching tribute. 


			https://www.kidspot.com.au/lifestyle/entertainment/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-touching-social-media-tribute-to-the-queen/news-story/85764ea57c17854a610c28ea5836ded4


----------



## Chanbal

@bag-mania you were right!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

I used to watch CNN…


----------



## ccbaggirl89

lanasyogamama said:


> She can never manage what to do with her arms.



This is kind of painful to watch--so awkward.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Exactly
> 
> anyone who thinks this is some kind of random act of kindness is mistaken. This is part of a carefully stage by stage campaign strategy.





papertiger said:


> Exactly
> 
> anyone who thinks this is some kind of random act of kindness is mistaken. This is part of a carefully stage by stage campaign strategy.


If Hazbeen had ever paid attention in school, or at least listened to family history he would know machinations have been part of British history for centuries.  Contrasted to the bloated ego upstarts at Sunshine Sucks with its mere 31 year history in comparison, my money is on the RF handling things long range.

If SS is smart they will shut their client down for now. If she pulls an Oprah, as rumored, she will potentially unleash a buying spree of the Bower’s book, on Amazon for pre order and being released in about 3 weeks in the US on October 4th when people who aren’t really knowledgeable about her get curious. The more who read and learn, the more she will sag I think. I have read in two different articles the US edition has new chapters, but haven’t found any confirmation or details.


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> She can never manage what to do with her arms.



She's always flailing them around then crosses them when she doesn't know what else to do.


----------



## Katel

Bye Oprah









						Oprah Sells $14 Million Montecito Estate to Jennifer Aniston
					

The high-stakes game of real estate Monopoly continues in Montecito, where celebrity home flippers like Ellen DeGeneres and Adam Levine have earned second fortunes via buying and selling some of th…




					www.dirt.com
				




ETA: she still has properties there - perhaps these two gits will stay best buds.


----------



## CarryOn2020

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This is kind of painful to watch--so awkward.


Perhaps Mm is telling them that someone refused to shake her hand and was mean to her


----------



## purseinsanity

ccbaggirl89 said:


> This is kind of painful to watch--so awkward.


Look confused, half turn, semi wave to no one, play with your hair, turn back, wave, start crossing your arms, change your mind, and wave.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I used to watch CNN…



There may be a little bit of hope in the future for CNN. They have a new boss who has begun cleaning house and letting certain employees go who were so hopelessly biased that they couldn’t give the news straight (about more important subjects than Harry and Meghan). It’s possible there will be more firings to come.


----------



## TimeToShop

Is she pregnant? Was that the 45 min discussion, she needed to keep her hands off her belly and her mouth shut?


----------



## TimeToShop




----------



## Gal4Dior

TimeToShop said:


>



Lol! If true, wouldn’t Ginge and Cringe, once again, go against their original statement they so carefully crafted after meeting with Jane Goodall, that they were only having 2 children in the interest of global climate change??


----------



## bag-mania

Gal4Dior said:


> Lol! If true, wouldn’t Ginge and Cringe, once again, go against their original statement they so carefully crafted after meeting with Jane Goodall, *that they were only having 2 children in the interest of global climate change??*


Maybe they can exploit a loophole that the number of children doesn’t count when you use different surrogates.


----------



## TimeToShop

Gal4Dior said:


> Lol! If true, wouldn’t Ginge and Cringe, once again, go against their original statement they so carefully crafted after meeting with Jane Goodall, that they were only having 2 children in the interest of global climate change??



They’ve put so much cr*p out there that they probably don’t remember what they’ve said.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I also had a feeling she might be  pregnant.  They can always say it was a “happy accident”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


>



Leading to another miscarriage caused by the stress and dismay of the Queen’s passing?


----------



## jenayb

lanasyogamama said:


> She can never manage what to do with her arms.



She quite literally does not know how to act.


----------



## Lodpah

Lay-off the coke you two!


----------



## Icyjade

Was this already posted?









						Royals faced mysterious hour-long delay as they raced to be with dying Queen
					

SENIOR royals faced a mysterious hour-long delay as they raced to be with the dying Queen. Their RAF jet is at the centre of a riddle as it took off for Balmoral at 2.39pm on Thursday — but had bee…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




if the Harkles caused the delay, and thereby depriving the other senior royals from being with the Queen in time, they cannot be forgiven


----------



## Grande Latte




----------



## Gal4Dior

purseinsanity said:


> Leading to another miscarriage caused by the stress and dismay of the Queen’s passing?


If she doesn’t miscarry, I’m sure it will be named Charles. Does Charles have a nickname? Perhaps TW can capitalize on that? 

If you hate the monarchy, don’t name your own kids after those in the monarchy. Always talking out of two sides of their mouths, these ones.


----------



## Gal4Dior

jenaywins said:


> She quite literally does not know how to act.


I guess some things never change. Haha!


----------



## purseinsanity

Icyjade said:


> Was this already posted?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royals faced mysterious hour-long delay as they raced to be with dying Queen
> 
> 
> SENIOR royals faced a mysterious hour-long delay as they raced to be with the dying Queen. Their RAF jet is at the centre of a riddle as it took off for Balmoral at 2.39pm on Thursday — but had bee…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if the Harkles caused the delay, and thereby depriving the other senior royals from being with the Queen in time, they cannot be forgiven


Article states they wanted Haz on a different flight to avert a “Constitutional crisis” in case it went down killing both William and Haz.  Ummmm…are they forgetting William now has three heirs of his own, all in line ahead of HeWithNoBalls?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps Mm is telling them that someone refused to shake her hand and was mean to her


And no one is asking if she is okay. The sheer nerve of them expecting her to play second fiddle to the Queen!


----------



## youngster

She isn't pregnant. That midsection is all her from the first two kiddos.  She just wants talk about the possibility. Also probably scripted into their Netflix show, the surprise pregnancy that turns out to be false. Oh, the heartache!


----------



## lishukha

youngster said:


> She isn't pregnant. That midsection is all her from the first two kiddos.  She just wants talk about the possibility. Also probably scripted into their Netflix show, the surprise pregnancy that turns out to be false. Oh, the heartache!


I was thinking the same. She is not slim to begin with and maybe she binged eat the last few days for having the spotlight taken away from her…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> @bag-mania you were right!



Poor BLG. He devoted well over two hours to the footage. I skipped along in 10 minute increments to pick up on the highlights and I’m glad I did because of this little nugget.   

Harry and Meghan had about one hour notice before the meeting with William and Catherine. Not enough time to prepare her make up. Check out these side-by-side photos. The ones on the left were from today, the ones on the right are from the Invictus Games five days ago. Notice anything odd? This is what BLG calls the 15 shades of Meghan.


----------



## pixiejenna

I also thought she is pregnant. It could be because it’s such a poorly fitted dress.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Poor BLG. He devoted well over two hours to the footage. I skipped along in 10 minute increments to pick up on the highlights and I’m glad I did because of this little nugget.
> 
> Harry and Meghan had about one hour notice before the meeting with William and Catherine. Not enough time to prepare her make up. Check out these side-by-side photos. The ones on the left were from today, the ones on the right are from the Invictus Games five days ago. Notice anything odd? This is what BLG calls the 15 shades of Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 5608205
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608206


Oh look!  She's not Middle Eastern/East Indian/Ethiopian any more!


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Poor BLG. He devoted well over two hours to the footage. I skipped along in 10 minute increments to pick up on the highlights and I’m glad I did because of this little nugget.
> 
> Harry and Meghan had about one hour notice before the meeting with William and Catherine. Not enough time to prepare her make up. Check out these side-by-side photos. The ones on the left were from today, the ones on the right are from the Invictus Games five days ago. Notice anything odd? This is what BLG calls the 15 shades of Meghan.
> 
> View attachment 5608205
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608206


Saw a comment that her chest size also drastically reduced when comparing the black dress of today with the halter neck top in Germany. Miracle strapless bra was in the wash?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Article states they wanted Haz on a different flight to avert a “Constitutional crisis” in case it went down killing both William and Haz.  Ummmm…are they forgetting William now has three heirs of his own, all in line ahead of HeWithNoBalls?


Hazz as the heir would be the end of the monarchy imo.

The Sun is publishing some weird articles, I wonder why. 

Here is one about TW's sympathy for William and the strong bond…

_"When she turns her head in William and Kate’s direction here, and to William in particular, her facial expression suggests a display of sympathy for her brother-in-law as well as her husband."

"The newly titled Prince of Wales and Prince Harry's bond was seen as strong as ever as they entered Windsor Castle side by side."_









						Meghan Markle reveals support for Kate and William with telling gesture
					

THE four arrived together to greet members of the public mourning the loss of Her Majesty The Queen. The Princess and Prince of Wales were joined by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Windsor Castle…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Saw a comment that her chest size also drastically reduced when comparing the black dress of today with the halter neck top in Germany. Miracle strapless bra was in the wash?


Ever the chameleon. She’ll turn herself into whatever she thinks will gain her the most attention.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> _*"The newly titled Prince of Wales and Prince Harry's bond was seen as strong as ever as they entered Windsor Castle side by side."*_


Sure, if you're blind it certainly was.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> "When she turns her head in William and Kate’s direction here, and to William in particular, her facial expression suggests a display of sympathy for her brother-in-law as well as her husband."


When she turns her in head in Kate’s direction, she sends lustful vibes paired with the roast chicken. Yes, _that_ roast chicken.




bag-mania said:


> Ever the chameleon. She’ll turn herself into whatever she thinks will gain her the most attention.


She’s a shape shifter


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Article states they wanted Haz on a different flight to avert a “Constitutional crisis” in case it went down killing both William and Haz.  Ummmm…are they forgetting William now has three heirs of his own, all in line ahead of HeWithNoBalls?


Imagine this scenario………..
This article is code for they wanted Haz on a different flight so they could listen to MI6’s H&M tapes in privacy.  The Balmoral meeting was limited to QE’s children [Anne, too] and 1 heir.  Then, they all were briefed on QE’s _secret files_.  Oh, yes, _the secret files. _None of the files could be opened until QE passed away.  Now they all know.  Cue the spooky music.


Reality:  Hazzi got told.  Shape up or get out.  Here is some of what MI6 has on Tw. Now, pack up. You leave at dawn


----------



## rose60610

It must have killed her to have to walk behind Kate. Did she curtsey to the new Prince and Princess of Wales?


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> It must have killed her to have to walk behind Kate. Did she curtsey to the new Prince and Princess of Wales?


You bet she did. So did Hazz.  This time it was done off camera.  The public will see it soon enough.
KingCharles and his squaddies [heehee] are in charge.

ETA: did you see how furious he got over the damn pens?  He is serious about his job.  He expects everyone around him to be just as serious.  He has not come to play.  His reign is just beginning.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> @jelliedfeels
> 
> "She’s so scruffy, she looks like she nipped out to buy cigs hungover."
> 
> We have to give her some credit, I was surprised she wasn't in scarlet, a pageant tiara/wand, or pyjamas


Black is very slimming so she probably couldn’t pass that up. You are right 


Toby93 said:


> Just watching this "spectacle" again.  She just can't help herself, making it a performance with the hip swaying



That woman in blue’s face is dead on hilarious. There’s also a brunette lady who puts her sunglasses on to ignore her straight before. 

The woman with pigtails looked more like the royal with her smile and handshake. I also can’t help notice they are only filming Wiggy from the back- I assume she won’t let a live broadcast camera too close to her face or we’d be able to see what she actually looks like….. no wonder the crowd are all laughing at her. 


She doesn’t deserve him. The man who empties the trash bins would be the most appropriate escort.
Let’s not devalue a hardworking man. I feel like my choice would be either Ponzi or Amber heard …. Actually the best would be TW’s dad just so she can hear the crowd cheering louder for him than her. 


CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
> You really can see a spark of who she really is here...



You just know that he was seconds away from one of these…


She looks lovely and not fake at all in any way


Toby93 said:


> Hand on heart again, look how humble I am     Love this pic!



She looks like she’s asking to take a bite out of that baby… childcatcher vibes. 

If I were her I wouldn’t draw attention to that hand cos it’s streaky as bacon.

I can’t decide whether her tan looks worse when she’s standing next to the black person she pretends to be or the pale white person she’s much closer to in skin tone but lord is it rough.


----------



## mellibelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And invented the Rose Hanbury rumour out of spite (even before leaving the BRF!).


Let’s not forget the Prince William pegging rumor too!


rhyvin said:


> Has anyone seen this? The color difference in her hair is much more noticeable (second photo)



The stain on her dress above her left armpit  what a sloppy mess she is.

This comment was posted in the clip of Lady C on the news show. Seems believable?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## littlemisskeira

After bashing the BRF on Oprah for the world to see, these 2 have the cheek to appear with the heir to the throne, representing the BRF? No moral compass at all... and in fact, i'm inclined to say they are simply shameless... 

If Oprah allows these 2 to appear on her show again after this, it just shows she is a hypocrite like them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> Hand on heart again, look how humble I am     Love this pic!



‘Can I borrow that thing  for a minute? I want to start a surprise baby rumour. Look the fake tan won’t hurt him at all! Oh it’s barely in his eyes….. Give him back you racist! God you Brits sure hate children of colour. I never have problems renting people’s kids in LA!’


Blyen said:


> I have to admit it,I can't stand her,but I still think she's beautiful.
> It's sad that she only seem to be beautiful on the outside, though.


Really? Beauty is subjective I guess. I thought she was plain at the engagement and she’s made bad choices since. 

The British aren’t considered a beautiful nation but I think every woman in the line was better looking than M without dear daddy photoshop. 


rhyvin said:


> Has anyone seen this? The color difference in her hair is much more noticeable (second photo)



Well sometimes you can’t get Brazilian Remy in black and you have to make do with some coarse Synthetic stuff with a red tinge. 
This would be especially true if she had to get a new weave in Europe rather than Cali. 

Personally, I’d love to see her try some different textures colours and cuts - I mean she’d probably look much better in something less dated and 00s. 


scarlet555 said:


> Was this posted ?
> If she hates them so much, why ? always referring to herself as Duchess… pathetic



Well the difference, Megs, is your story didn’t actually happen 


BlueCherry said:


> My sister loathes Meghan, as do I, but I’m giggling at the texts she just sent me …
> 
> View attachment 5608149
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608150


Those ankles. For some reason I thought of this…. 




Gal4Dior said:


> Lol! If true, wouldn’t Ginge and Cringe, once again, go against their original statement they so carefully crafted after meeting with Jane Goodall, that they were only having 2 children in the interest of global climate change??


They may have promised that but they are just sooooo in looooovveee…. We wouldn’t understand.


xincinsin said:


> Saw a comment that her chest size also drastically reduced when comparing the black dress of today with the halter neck top in Germany. Miracle strapless bra was in the wash?


Maybe they were 45mins late cos she wanted to go get some chicken fillets. 


Chanbal said:


> Hazz as the heir would be the end of the monarchy imo.
> 
> The Sun is publishing some weird articles, I wonder why.
> 
> Here is one about TW's sympathy for William and the strong bond…
> 
> _"When she turns her head in William and Kate’s direction here, and to William in particular, her facial expression suggests a display of sympathy for her brother-in-law as well as her husband."
> 
> "The newly titled Prince of Wales and Prince Harry's bond was seen as strong as ever as they entered Windsor Castle side by side."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals support for Kate and William with telling gesture
> 
> 
> THE four arrived together to greet members of the public mourning the loss of Her Majesty The Queen. The Princess and Prince of Wales were joined by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Windsor Castle…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


It’s just the scattergun approach. If everyone is doing negative articles put out a positive one to try and get clicks rather than competing. 


bag-mania said:


> Ever the chameleon. She’ll turn herself into whatever she thinks will gain her the most attention.


Alas I wish she were a chameleon because she’s so bad at blending into places she’d have got eaten long ago. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> When she turns her in head in Kate’s direction, she sends lustful vibes paired with the roast chicken. Yes, _that_ roast chicken.
> 
> 
> 
> She’s a shape shifter


Wait are you saying she’s trying to seduce Kate too? Now that would be some intense hate sex!

It makes sense, actually, of course a ‘progressive intellectual’ like M would think her irrepressible sex appeal and boundless charm works on all genders and orientations. All those women in line probably fancied her too much to shake her hand too.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> Here is the boat.  Now scoot.
> 
> View attachment 5608052


Titanic would do


----------



## elvisfan4life

Gi


Chanbal said:


> Traveling again and with limited time to watch news, so thank you all for the great posts.
> 
> Very generous of William and Kate to walk with TW. I hope they will not regret.


I predict it will only be a few days after the official mourning ends before she reverts to her usual disgrace


----------



## VickyB

purseinsanity said:


> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't think TW is any Hollywood beauty either.  She's pretty, but surgically enhanced, a la the Kardashians.  Kylie was hardly a raving beauty and it wasn't some miracle puberty either.


1st head transplant.  can’t believe PMK hasn’t filed for the patent yet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

DoggieBags said:


> maybe I’m reading too much into this one photo but TW looks nervous to me. Maybe she was wondering if she would get booed?


Too much respect for the Queen during the mourning period - when 7 days are up after the funeral she should get the hell out and not come back ever


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumor is Oprah is coming over. She and MM have been chatting daily, allegedly. Is the BRF handing out _tickets? _to the funeral?  Please do not allow this to be a celebrity spectacle. Nothing about the invisiKids. Anyone know? Anyone?


----------



## CarryOn2020

6 days apart?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> If this is true, it shoots my theory out the window that it was KC who ordered this.
> 
> View attachment 5608085



Their audacity knows no bounds.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Not sure I understand why William would not like this.



They left The Firm. It's not their place to prance around and greet people.

ETA: even if they were still part of the firm, it's not the place of minor royals to prance around and greet people without consulting anyone.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Inappropriate short-sleeved black dress? Isn't it protocol that the royals travel with a set of sombre attire? I recall reading about this SOP which was started when TQ's father died unexpectedly and she was caught unprepared because she was on a royal visit to Kenya. In fact, many heads of government practice this. 

I guess if you are faux royal, you take short cuts, especially if your wardrobe was geared towards three days of flashing fake tan shoulders and chicken legs, and your main accessories are the bracelet from your ex and a shipping container of bronzer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't think TW is any Hollywood beauty either.  She's pretty, but surgically enhanced, a la the Kardashians.  Kylie was hardly a raving beauty and it wasn't some miracle puberty either.



That said, while Kylie looks nothing like her former self her face looks naturally beautiful now, not surgically enhanced (something that can't be said about her Barbie hips that start too high  ).


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That said, while Kylie looks nothing like her former self her face looks naturally beautiful now, not surgically enhanced (something that can't be said about her Barbie hips that start too high  ).


Well, she had a good surgeon, because that is definitely not the face she was born to have


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> She isn't pregnant. That midsection is all her from the first two kiddos.  She just wants talk about the possibility. Also probably scripted into their Netflix show, the surprise pregnancy that turns out to be false. Oh, the heartache!



My thought exactly. I thought she looked bloated, but she has looked the same way all summer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumor is Oprah is coming over. She and MM have been chatting daily, allegedly. Is the BRF handing out _tickets? _to the funeral?  Please do not allow this to be a celebrity spectacle. Nothing about the invisiKids. Anyone know? Anyone?



For events like this, press needs to be accredited, you can't just show up. Wouldn't it be fun if Oprah's request got lost.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Inappropriate short-sleeved black dress? Isn't it protocol that the royals travel with a set of sombre attire? I recall reading about this SOP which was started when TQ's father died unexpectedly and she was caught unprepared because she was on a royal visit to Kenya. In fact, many heads of government practice this.
> 
> I guess if you are faux royal, you take short cuts, especially if your wardrobe was geared towards three days of flashing fake tan shoulders and chicken legs, and your main accessories are the bracelet from your ex and a shipping container of bronzer.



When has she ever shied away from being inappropriate? She has worn much more inappropriate stuff, I doubt she lost sleep over the short sleeves.

But so suggest someone stole her shoes  OMG the drama.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Well, she had a good surgeon, because that is definitely not the face she was born to have



That's what I was trying to say. He knows when to stop.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For events like this, press needs to be accredited, you can't just show up. Wouldn't it be fun if Oprah's request got lost.



As in, they don't HAVE to approve you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As in, they don't HAVE to approve you.


Thank goodness. The American media is well known for being crisis-chasers. I am hoping for a funeral service similar to Prince Phillip’s, but I could be wrong. I, as well as many others, have never seen a burial for a monarch. This will be something.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank goodness. The American media is well known for being crisis-chasers. I am hoping for a funeral service similar to Prince Phillip’s, but I could be wrong. I, as well as many others, have never seen a burial for a monarch. This will be something.


Google  Churchills funeral the last state funeral in the Uk this will be bigger


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumor is Oprah is coming over. She and MM have been chatting daily, allegedly. Is the BRF handing out _tickets? _to the funeral?  Please do not allow this to be a celebrity spectacle. Nothing about the invisiKids. Anyone know? Anyone?


The gruesome two can’t  invite anyone to the state funeral they have nothing to do but wait to be invited and turn up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

As if. I'm sure the grifter is hyper aware, waiting for Charles to act.


----------



## charro

Chanbal said:


> Hazz as the heir would be the end of the monarchy imo.
> 
> The Sun is publishing some weird articles, I wonder why.
> 
> Here is one about TW's sympathy for William and the strong bond…
> 
> _"When she turns her head in William and Kate’s direction here, and to William in particular, her facial expression suggests a display of sympathy for her brother-in-law as well as her husband."
> 
> "The newly titled Prince of Wales and Prince Harry's bond was seen as strong as ever as they entered Windsor Castle side by side."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals support for Kate and William with telling gesture
> 
> 
> THE four arrived together to greet members of the public mourning the loss of Her Majesty The Queen. The Princess and Prince of Wales were joined by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Windsor Castle…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I call ********


----------



## gelbergirl

CarryOn2020 said:


> You bet she did. So did Hazz.  This time it was done off camera.  The public will see it soon enough.
> KingCharles and his squaddies [heehee] are in charge.
> 
> ETA: did you see how furious he got over the damn pens?  He is serious about his job.  He expects everyone around him to be just as serious.  He has not come to play.  His reign is just beginning.
> View attachment 5608214



I just watched the pen drama on YouTube with funny music.
I seems to be a funny situation in a small space with short time.
Left hand, right hand, fountain pen - The Perfect Storm!


----------



## Sferics

rose60610 said:


> If Harry is 6'6", then William is 7'2".  I read Harry is 6'1" and William is 6'3".  Claw believes she's 5'11" and 118 pounds with an IQ of 160. She's her own biggest fan.
> 
> 
> 
> She thinks she's either in a power stance with her hand on her hip or cutesy when she slouches. She can't make up her mind to pretend she's a leader or act like a child that goes into victim mode when she gets criticized.


I think, what can be found on the internet is quite accurate
Piece of work 1,68m/5"6 
her toy 1,86m/6"1 
Kate 1,75m/5"9 
William 1,91m/6"3


----------



## Traminer

elvisfan4life said:


> The gruesome two can’t  invite anyone to the state funeral they have nothing to do but wait to be invited and turn up


No Oprah at that funeral, please!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> I just watched the pen drama on YouTube with funny music.
> I seems to be a funny situation in a small space with short time.
> Left hand, right hand, fountain pen - The Perfect Storm!



His face showed such strong emotion.  At times like this, it’s always the little things that break us.
TBF, he did recover very quickly and moved on perfectly.  He will be a great King. As the Queen had her hat and her Launer, I wonder what he will have.


----------



## Traminer

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumor is Oprah is coming over. She and MM have been chatting daily, allegedly. Is the BRF handing out _tickets? _to the funeral?  Please do not allow this to be a celebrity spectacle. Nothing about the invisiKids. Anyone know? Anyone?


Oprah at that funeral is not a good idea.


----------



## xincinsin

TimeToShop said:


>



Some of the comments on the blind item say she was holding the flowers upside down and letting them drag on the ground. One person speculated she was hanging on to them to create an Uvalde moment, so that photogs could capture her laying flowers for TQ. I hope not: that would really be insensitive and an attention hog.

Just went over to the QEII thread and started crying: someone left a marmalade sandwich among the flowers, labelled "For Later".


----------



## xincinsin

elvisfan4life said:


> Google  Churchills funeral the last state funeral in the Uk this will be bigger


Thatcher didn't get a state funeral?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Just went over to the QEII thread and started crying: someone left a marmalade sandwich among the flowers, labelled "For Later".



That hit me right in the stomach as well.


----------



## Icyjade

I’ve been fascinated by the different shading along her arms/hands… I guess when there is only an hour to prep there isn’t time to apply the layers of tan?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Harry, use your chance and get rid of her. Oh my.

Also, getting ready for hours? What for exactly, a private family function nobody was going to film?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sferics said:


> I think, what can be found on the internet is quite accurate
> Piece of work 1,68m/5"6
> her toy 1,86m/6"1
> Kate 1,75m/5"9
> William 1,91m/6"3


 Kate at 5'9" is correct I believe. I am 5'10.5 so just over 5'10 but not 5'11 and it is a pet hate of mine when people exaggerate their height. I have a few LK Bennet dresses that are a good inch plus shorter on me than Kate. People always say it must be so easy to get clothes but it's a nightmare, even more so in the last 10 years when the major retailers in the UK seem to have readjusted the average height of UK women down an inch or so in the sizing standards. 

Meghan is 5'4" max. If we take it that Kate is 5'9, with 3 inch heels she is 6ft and so photos showing her just shorter than Harry at 6'1 would confirm this to be correct. If Kate were my height she would be same height as Harry in 3 inch heels ( this is where I confess that during my years with KPMG as often the only senior woman on a team I took full advantage of that height and had a wardrobe full of heels LOL !) Draw a line from top of Meghan head to Harry's face. In 4 inch heels she comes to the bottom of his nose. Average distance between top of a persons head to the tip of their nose is 5 inches or there about so she is 5'8" in 4 inch heels so 5'4 inches.

( I should have had a career in measuring things, like a surveyor, not accountancy LOL )


----------



## Pessie

RAINDANCE said:


> Kate at 5'9" is correct I believe. I am 5'10.5 so just over 5'10 but not 5'11 and it is a pet hate of mine when people exaggerate their height. I have a few LK Bennet dresses that are a good inch plus shorter on me than Kate. People always say it must be so easy to get clothes but it's a nightmare, even more so in the last 10 years when the major retailers in the UK seem to have readjusted the average height of UK women down an inch or so in the sizing standards.
> 
> Meghan is 5'4" max. If we take it that Kate is 5'9, with 3 inch heels she is 6ft and so photos showing her just shorter than Harry at 6'1 would confirm this to be correct. If Kate were my height she would be same height as Harry in 3 inch heels ( this is where I confess that during my years with KPMG as often the only senior woman on a team I took full advantage of that height and had a wardrobe full of heels LOL !) Draw a line from top of Meghan head to Harry's face. In 4 inch heels she comes to the bottom of his nose. Average distance between top of a persons head to the tip of their nose is 5 inches or there about so she is 5'8" in 4 inch heels so 5'4 inches.
> 
> ( I should have had a career in measuring things, like a surveyor, not accountancy LOL )


I’m 5’6” and I can tell she’s a lot shorter than me. I think she’s about 5’3” max.  Even in those scruffy heels she was a lot shorter than Harry yesterday.  And she doesn’t gain any inches in the stumpy neck department either.
But hey ho, is there anything about herself that Meghan has left unembellished?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> I’m 5’6” and I can tell she’s a lot shorter than me. I think she’s about 5’3” max.  Even in those scruffy heels she was a lot shorter than Harry yesterday.  And she doesn’t gain any inches in the stumpy neck department either.
> But hey ho, is there anything about herself that Meghan has left unembellished?



I just don't get it. I couldn't care less if I'm 5'5" o 5'6".


----------



## elvisfan4life

Traminer said:


> No Oprah at that funeral, please!


Can’t imagine the people in charge of the funeral would dream of inviting her she may be rich but here she is a rich nobody


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> It must have killed her to have to walk behind Kate. Did she curtsey to the new Prince and Princess of Wales?



Wonder if she’ll ditch the next disrespectful sniping podcasts or look like an even bigger 2-face ***Z


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get it. I couldn't care less if I'm 5'5" o 5'6".


Narcissists lie about everything, they can’t help themselves.  Every little tiny point of self advancement is calibrated and fought for.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Titanic would do



That ship‘s sailed - unfortunately


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just don't get it. I couldn't care less if I'm 5'5" o 5'6".



Life is all about being the prettiest, thinnest, tallest, smartest, most popular and perfect girl/bog in the class.

Especially if you are standing next to Kate.

I can’t believe you don’t know that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Life is all about being the prettiest, thinnest, tallest, smartest, most popular and perfect girl/bog in the class.
> 
> Especially if you are standing next to Kate.
> 
> I can’t believe you don’t know that



My bad! That said, most people would look short and fat next to Kate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Bwahahaha...German magazine just now: "Duchess [Raptor]: What Happened to her Face?"


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Life is all about being the prettiest, thinnest, tallest, smartest, most popular and perfect girl/bog in the class.
> 
> Especially if you are standing next to Kate.
> 
> I can’t believe you don’t know that



Sorry boy, not bog.

I really hate my iPad


----------



## pukasonqo

RAINDANCE said:


> Kate at 5'9" is correct I believe. I am 5'10.5 so just over 5'10 but not 5'11 and it is a pet hate of mine when people exaggerate their height. I have a few LK Bennet dresses that are a good inch plus shorter on me than Kate. People always say it must be so easy to get clothes but it's a nightmare, even more so in the last 10 years when the major retailers in the UK seem to have readjusted the average height of UK women down an inch or so in the sizing standards.
> 
> Meghan is 5'4" max. If we take it that Kate is 5'9, with 3 inch heels she is 6ft and so photos showing her just shorter than Harry at 6'1 would confirm this to be correct. If Kate were my height she would be same height as Harry in 3 inch heels ( this is where I confess that during my years with KPMG as often the only senior woman on a team I took full advantage of that height and had a wardrobe full of heels LOL !) Draw a line from top of Meghan head to Harry's face. In 4 inch heels she comes to the bottom of his nose. Average distance between top of a persons head to the tip of their nose is 5 inches or there about so she is 5'8" in 4 inch heels so 5'4 inches.
> 
> ( I should have had a career in measuring things, like a surveyor, not accountancy LOL )


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry, use your chance and get rid of her. Oh my.
> 
> Also, *getting ready for hours*? What for exactly, a private family function nobody was going to film?



If this is true, then the other story that she didn't have enough time to get ready to go view the flowers seems suspect. Surely her reapplied tan should last a couple of days? And she had those couple of days to get a black dress. Was the problem due to her wanting it designer and FOC?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My bad! That said, most people would look short and fat next to Kate.



The late Queen was not tall. My superstar ballet teacher was tiny. 

Some women have presence and command a room, whatever their height or visage, 

and looking awkward and bored, and grab-grabbing your man every 3 secs does not add up to appearing impressive, it diminishes.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My bad! That said, most people would look short and fat next to Kate.


Very true, but she makes it so obvious she’s obsessed about it, it’s easy (and irresistible) to poke fun at her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

No words, there are no words!


----------



## papertiger

I’m still behind so perhaps someone has already posted this, but anyway




Comment of note on how the dastardly duo have threatened the Queen, the BRF constantly and relentlessly, and yet they show up and pretend they care.

I could also add, they both badmouthed London (trigger for H) and the entire people of the UK for years, why pretend?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> If this is true, then the other story that she didn't have enough time to get ready to go view the flowers seems suspect. Surely her reapplied tan should last a couple of days? And she had those couple of days to get a black dress. Was the problem due to her wanting it designer and FOC?


Imo The problem was she wanted to know exactly what Kate was wearing so they could be _samesies, _just like in jr. high school and her sorority. Apparently, something happened to her shoes. Did someone hide her shoes? Who knows. It is always going to be drama with the gruesome 2. Unless they get sent away 

ETA:  it does look like she had swollen lips, so maybe she was waiting for the fillers to settle in.


----------



## andrashik

Oh uh oh, look at her finger ( second slide)


----------



## Sina08

CarryOn2020 said:


> No words, there are no words!



We really need a facepalm-emoji


----------



## andrashik




----------



## regnews

.


----------



## Pessie

Sina08 said:


> We really need a facepalm-emoji


He really had to fight her for them didn’t he? She wanted pictures of her + flowers for her PR


andrashik said:


> View attachment 5608338


“Meghan was bright orange” hehehe


----------



## Chanbal

Believable!


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower, brilliant (as usual)!]
Charles can't offer an olive branch because he has done nothing wrong, but…
there is no doubt that the Harkles are a time bomb in Charles's rein. They are uncontrolled and Charles is losing game against …
My 2 cents: Charles should invite Tom Bower as one of his counselors.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> He really had to fight her for them didn’t he? She wanted pictures of her + flowers for her PR
> 
> “Meghan was bright orange” hehehe



Exactly what I thought, she wants the flowers in all pics of her, not exactly sure why, they’re not for her.

Guess the BRF can’t trust her with jewels, silver, alone in a palace, OR even a bunch Queens tribute flowers


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower, brilliant (as usual)!]
> Charles can't offer an olive brunch because he has done nothing wrong, but…
> there is no doubt that the Harkles are a time bomb in Charles's rein. They are uncontrolled and Charles is losing game against …
> My 2 cents: Charles should invite Tom Bower as one of his counselors.





They cut at the end when he’d just started speaking about M&H sadly,  but TB basically thinks, the hidious pair are out of control, will get worse as are dependant on sensationalising the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Exactly what I thought, she wants the flowers in all pics of her, not exactly sure why, they’re not for her.
> 
> Guess the BRF can’t trust her with jewels, silver, alone in a palace, OR even a bunch Queens tribute flowers


My guess - she considers herself an expert flower arranger.  This lil detail from her baby shower may have been forgotten. Plus, Doria’s nickname for her is flower and Doria recently was photographed with a floral tattoo on her forearm.

_One of the fun activities that the Duchess of Sussex took part in, alongside close friends including Amal Clooney, Serena Williams, and Abigail Spencer, was *flower-arranging*. The lesson was led by Lewis Miller, whose Instagram is filled with jaw-dropping flower arrangements.









						Meghan Donated Her Baby Shower Flowers to Charity & the Photos Are Stunning
					

The American Cancer Society and Ronald McDonald House shared the sweetest photos.




					www.harpersbazaar.com
				



_


----------



## duna

purseinsanity said:


> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't think TW is any Hollywood beauty either.  She's pretty, but surgically enhanced, a la the Kardashians.  Kylie was hardly a raving beauty and it wasn't some miracle puberty either.


I totally agree. Besides the fact that, although not particularly pretty, Kilie was much better before she messed up her face. I'm probably biased as I hate every kind of esthetic procedure, unless one has had a bad accident.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Exactly what I thought, she wants the flowers in all pics of her, not exactly sure why, they’re not for her.
> 
> Guess the BRF can’t trust her with jewels, silver, alone in a palace, OR even a bunch Queens tribute flowers


Random picture editors in the US won’t be bothered about the details will they.  Only ever thinking about her brand image, and how she looks.


----------



## Sina08

Pessie said:


> He really had to fight her for them didn’t he? She wanted pictures of her + flowers for her PR
> 
> “Meghan was bright orange” hehehe


That woman is just cray-cray. God knows what she was thinking to achieve by holding on to flowers that aren’t even meant for her. Everything about her appearance today was just plain awkward.


----------



## Suncatcher

I read that it was never intended that M come along on the walk. It was supposed to be just W, C and H. Hence BBC banner only noting the 3 names. This would be in line with how the spouses of Beatrice and Eugenie did not show up yesterday for the walk done at Balmoral. She barged her way in hence the 45 min delay. This now makes more sense to me. She is a horrid person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Suncatcher said:


> I read that it was never intended that M come along on the walk. It was supposed to be just W, C and H. Hence BBC banner only noting the 3 names. This would be in line with how the spouses of Beatrice and Eugenie did not show up yesterday for the walk done at Balmoral. She barged her way in hence the 45 min delay. This now makes more sense to me. She is a horrid person.


If that is true Harry hasn’t an ounce of respect or shame I really hope these two leave and never return after the funeral - ifCharles wants to visit them overseas in his private time that’s his problem but as monarch he should say enough is enough they are exiled and not welcome


----------



## Suncatcher

elvisfan4life said:


> If that is true Harry hasn’t an ounce of respect or shame I really hope these two leave and never return after the funeral - ifCharles wants to visit them overseas in his private time that’s his problem but as monarch he should say enough is enough they are exiled and not welcome


Agreed!


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> She wanted to keep the flowers and pretend that they were for her and not The Queen.


Can you imagine the faces of staff at FrogCott when she waltzes in with a bouquet wrapped with a black ribbon and a card saying "Rest in Peace" exclaiming "Look what the public brought to ME!". Even if they explained to her the flowers were for the queen, she'll still be running to the media crying "the Brits wished for my death!"


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess - she considers herself an expert flower arranger.  This lil detail from her baby shower may have been forgotten. Plus, Doria’s nickname for her is flower and Doria recently was photographed with a floral tattoo on her forearm.
> 
> _One of the fun activities that the Duchess of Sussex took part in, alongside close friends including Amal Clooney, Serena Williams, and Abigail Spencer, was *flower-arranging*. The lesson was led by Lewis Miller, whose Instagram is filled with jaw-dropping flower arrangements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Donated Her Baby Shower Flowers to Charity & the Photos Are Stunning
> 
> 
> The American Cancer Society and Ronald McDonald House shared the sweetest photos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Believable!
> View attachment 5608209


I’m sure she will be fury unleashed when she’s back on home turf, and there’ll be no shortage of money grabbers happy to give her air time for her lies and little grievances either. 

However there comes a point when it gets repetitive and boring and utterly predictable, even if you’re one of those people that enjoys believing her stuff.  Even sensationalism is subject to the law of diminishing returns IMO.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> They cut at the end when he’d just started speaking about M&H sadly,  but TB basically thinks, the hidious pair are out of control, will get worse as are dependant on sensationalising the BRF.


Olive branch, not brunch (freudian slip   )

Yes! The BRF shouldn't add more fuel to an already uncontrolled fire imo.


----------



## Chanbal

_Kate is sharp, knows where the cameras are…. *she is everything that TW desperately would love to be*_.


----------



## rose60610

How could Meghan's shoes supposedly gone missing (stolen?) when they're surrounded by so much SECURITY!  Or will the shoe mystery be accompanied by a tale of woe like "See, they got it in for me!".  Well, Kudos to whoever supplied Claw's black dress, it actually fit. Palace tailors can wield needles and thread in a hurry. She wasn't her usual gloaty self working the line, people were giving her the side eye.


----------



## Helventara

papertiger said:


> I’m still behind so perhaps someone has already posted this, but anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Comment of note on how the dastardly duo have threatened the Queen, the BRF constantly and relentlessly, and yet they show up and pretend they care.
> 
> I could also add, they both badmouthed London (trigger for H) and the entire people of the UK for years, why pretend?



The other thread talks about how brave she was to attend, how it must be nerve-wrecking for her to be under so much scrutiny, damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t, etc. 

How can people not see that it’s exactly the shameless badmouthing, cruel accusations and relentless threats that make them unwelcome?  SMH.


----------



## Chanbal

Does he say royal trashy wife?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Does he say royal trashy wife?



On Dan Wooton
What, when you’ve a tell-all book coming out just before Christmas that’s going to drag your family and country through the mud?


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I don't think TW is any Hollywood beauty either.  She's pretty, but surgically enhanced, a la the Kardashians.  Kylie was hardly a raving beauty and it wasn't some miracle puberty either.


I don't find Meghan beautiful.  Maybe I'm that biased against her.  She isn't ugly (outside) but not what I'd call beautiful or "stunning" either.  She has an ok figure but not tall and model-like as Diana was an Kate is.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> How could Meghan's shoes supposedly gone missing (stolen?) when they're surrounded by so much SECURITY!  Or will the shoe mystery be accompanied by a tale of woe like "See, they got it in for me!".  *Well, Kudos to whoever supplied Claw's black dress, it actually fit. Palace tailors can wield needles and thread in a hurry.* She wasn't her usual gloaty self working the line, people were giving her the side eye.


It was easy, they had kept the model…


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Does he say royal trashy wife?



“Royal trashing” I think


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Does he say royal trashy wife?




I think he said Royal trashing wife, but I like royal trashy much better


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sina08

I’m just rewatching random episodes of Little Britain and came to realize how much Daffyd Thomas, the only gay in the village, and MM have in common.
Daffyd always goes on and on about the hardships of being gay in a narrow-minded and intolerant community, although the villagers don’t care about his homosexuality at all and openly support him. Needless to say that he isn’t really gay but craves the attention and loves to complain.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Well, she had a good surgeon, because that is definitely not the face she was born to have


I am no fan of the Kardashians, and couldn't tell you which one is which, but wow - that's a lot of surgery.  Lips, chin, cheeks, nose


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For events like this, press needs to be accredited, you can't just show up. Wouldn't it be fun if Oprah's request got lost.


I'm not even sure why Oprah would be invited?  Princess Diana had a lot of celebrities at her funeral, but she had celebrity friends.  Oprah is no friend to the Queen.  Not after THAT interview


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I am no fan of the Kardashians, and couldn't tell you which one is which, but wow - that's a lot of surgery.  Lips, chin, cheeks, nose



I happen to like them, but NONE of them has their original face (including Kris), it's just that some are on the more tragic end (Khloe) and some had well done work and knew when to stop (Kourtney and Kendall).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I'm not even sure why Oprah would be invited?  Princess Diana had a lot of celebrities at her funeral, but she had celebrity friends.  Oprah is no friend to the Queen.  Not after THAT interview



I'm sure she's not, but she could get accredited as foreign press. That's not invitation based, you apply for it, but the nice thing is, they don't have to approve you only because you want to attend.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't find Meghan beautiful.  Maybe I'm that biased against her.  She isn't ugly (outside) but not what I'd call beautiful or "stunning" either.  She has an ok figure but not tall and model-like as Diana was an Kate is.



I don't find Meghan beautiful because she's not  

Kate's not beautiful either, I also wouldn't care if she were plus size and short as a donut, she has emotional intelligence and knows how to put the other person first when she's with them, and people find that very attractive including me.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As if. I'm sure the grifter is hyper aware, waiting for Charles to act.
> 
> View attachment 5608300


I find it scary how photos of her sometimes show her with pure black eyes, like those possessed by the alien oil in X Files. It's likely too much mascara and eye liner, and a tendency to dip her head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I find it scary how photos of her sometimes show her with pure black eyes, like those possessed by the alien oil in X Files. It's likely too much mascara and eye liner, and a tendency to dip her head.



I like to think it's her true self showing.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> I don't find Meghan beautiful because she's not
> 
> Kate's not beautiful either, I also wouldn't care if she were plus size and short as a donut, she has emotional intelligence and knows how to put the other person first when she's with them, and people find that very attractive including me.


Most of the time we don’t know what Meg looks like because there are few truly candid shots of her.  She’s usually posing for the camera and the photos they put out on SM are heavily filtered and touched up.  Her face looks different every time we see her.
Kate isn’t classically beautiful but she has some great features and an expressive face.  She’s comfortable in her own skin, which shows.  Meghan isn’t.  I wonder if Meghan ever relaxes tbh, she seems constantly twitchy and agitating for attention.


----------



## oldbag

Wa,


xincinsin said:


> Thatcher didn't get a state funeral?


There were people standing along the funeral route carring signs which said "ding dong the witch is dead"


----------



## Jayne1

Katel said:


> Bye Oprah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah Sells $14 Million Montecito Estate to Jennifer Aniston
> 
> 
> The high-stakes game of real estate Monopoly continues in Montecito, where celebrity home flippers like Ellen DeGeneres and Adam Levine have earned second fortunes via buying and selling some of th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dirt.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: she still has properties there - perhaps these two gits will stay best buds.


The humungous estate is still there and where she lives.

Seems like Oprah flipped something to Aniston who will probably do the same in a year or two.


----------



## Bonosbabe

Chanbal said:


> Does he say royal trashy wife?



He said “Royal tasting wife”. That she is!


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I find it scary how photos of her sometimes show her with pure black eyes, like those possessed by the alien oil in X Files. It's likely too much mascara and eye liner, and a tendency to dip her head.



MegZ does a classic mistake for small eyes (mine are too but narrowly-slanted, hers are small and round). Outlining in heavy black (all skin tones) only makes them look more beady. If you want make eyes look bigger lighten the area and then use shadow to crate depth just outside the widest points, then mascara/lashes to only he top lashes. She also has very dark eyes, so when she uses so much black, we see the makeup, not her eyes. 

I've worked with MUAs for years and years, and IMO the best thing is to work with the shape of eye you have already. Embrace your 'flaws', that's the way to change fashion. 

I will have you all know my narrow-slanted 'foxy' eyes are tres a la mode atm   women are paying a fortune for an eye-shape like mine. I still reminder when a MUA said to me (I had to interview someone on camera) "what am I supposed to do with those?" Got him back!


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Most of the time we don’t know what Meg looks like because there are few truly candid shots of her.  She’s usually posing for the camera and the photos they put out on SM are heavily filtered and touched up.  Her face looks different every time we see her.
> Kate isn’t classically beautiful but she has some great features and an expressive face.  She’s comfortable in her own skin, which shows.  Meghan isn’t.  I wonder if Meghan ever relaxes tbh, she seems constantly twitchy and agitating for attention.



MegZ is purely makeup.

Maybe there's actually nothing behind the facade, I think that's what she's so scared of.

Reminds of how girls and women did a lot of their makeup looks 10 years ago. Some very questionable makeup tutorials pushing product through advertorial. Very old fashioned now.


----------



## Sophisticatted

If the Oprah rumor is true, I imagine she will be set up in a hotel room and film an “exclusive interview” with TW and maybe H.  I hope it’s not true.  If it is, I hope it gets shut down somehow.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> If the Oprah rumor is true, I imagine she will be set up in a hotel room and film an “exclusive interview” with TW and maybe H.  I hope it’s not true.  If it is, I hope it gets shut down somehow.



It can't be 'shut down' it's just more media coverage, but yes, it is a set-up. 

ITA,_ if_ it happens, it will be non-BRF, but a Oprrah X Harkles' hookup. 

_*If*_ that's what happens, Way to sell your granny, even at her own funeral. Harry's so classy.


----------



## papertiger

There was a CNN reporter yesterday who reporting on the four, said that Harry and Meghan got out the car, went walk about and "the other royals"


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> If the Oprah rumor is true, I imagine she will be set up in a hotel room and film an “exclusive interview” with TW and maybe H.  I hope it’s not true.  If it is, I hope it gets shut down somehow.


If it happens, it will be the final nail in the coffin for the Harkles. They will be shut out from everything. And knowing Zedzee's addiction to the limelight and her need to front everything, Handbag will be absent for most of it, brought in at the end to bleat about how his love rescued him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I will have you all know my narrow-slanted 'foxy' eyes are tres a la mode atm   women are paying a fortune for an eye-shape like mine. I still reminder when a MUA said to me (I had to interview someone on camera) "what am I supposed to do with those?" Got him back!



That's kind of extremely rude from the MUA, isn't it.

I remember when fox eyes became all the rage and suddenly were racist...I was so confused because that's my eyeshape too (I have pretty ethnic features but nobody ever notices because I am super fair with light eyes and medium hair) and I've done my "occasion wear" m/u like this for ages. 

Does anyone follow Paris based MUA Andreea Ali? She did doll eyes on one eye (round with lashes that are longer in the middle) and siren eyes (the new fox eye...elongated with lashes only on the outer corner) on the other eye and it was really fascinating to see. Oh, and there's yet another trend, sleepy eyes. I don't know about you, I look tired enough on my own within 2 hours of being up and going


----------



## marietouchet

IMHO  A lot happened behind the scenes, about the trip to the UK, invite to Balmoral - which was initially turned down,
But how could H&M have been oblivious to the health of the Queen ?
There were lots of calls that we dont know about...

All we know for certain is what KC3 said "Harry and Meghan", no ducal titles, no mention of Lili & Archie

It is not about H&M for the next week, they will be told which minibus to hop on for the service at the Abbey

AND all the woke hoopla about imperial colonial issues will distract from H&M


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> There was a CNN reporter yesterday who reporting on the four, said that Harry and Meghan got out the car, went walk about and "the other royals"


That is on the CNN reporter, a spontaneous gaffe ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was reading some comments over on Instagram, apparently Raptor's behaviour during the walkabout was so erratic and weird several people wondered if she was heavily drugged (pretty evenly divided between illegal drugs and medication).


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> There was a CNN reporter yesterday who reporting on the four, said that Harry and Meghan got out the car, went walk about and "the other royals"


Does this imply CNN is supporting the creation of a royal court in the US, headed by the Queen of Lies? They can have her. #voetsekMeghan


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For events like this, press needs to be accredited, you can't just show up. Wouldn't it be fun if Oprah's request got lost.


Contrary to her personal opinion, Oprah is not press. She is an entertainer.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Does this imply CNN is supporting the creation of a royal court in the US, headed by the Queen of Lies? They can have her. #voetsekMeghan


We dont know if this reporter was US or UK based
A UK reporter would not neglect the Wales' in favor of the Sharkles
A US reporter might not have a clue ...


----------



## March786

purseinsanity said:


> Oh look!  She's not Middle Eastern/East Indian/Ethiopian any more!


lol just read your Ben Franklin quote after your post!


----------



## bag-mania

jenaywins said:


> She quite literally does not know how to act.


It’s because she never bothered to learn all of the protocol and she’s forgotten what little she did learn.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> We dont know if this reporter was US or UK based
> A UK reporter would not neglect the Wales' in favor of the Sharkles
> *A US reporter might not have a clue ...*



This is the 2nd most important couple in the UK right now, if you miss this, you're kind of a bad reporter even if not UK based.


----------



## marietouchet

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Contrary to her personal opinion, Oprah is not press. She is an entertainer.


Got to thinking back to the H&M wedding where Oprah first appeared openly as a first rate BUDDY of the Harkles ... You dont invite reporters to your wedding ... they dont get seats in the church
If  I remember, that was also  the wedding with the Baptist (?) minister (who went on for 12 minutes not the allotted 5 minutes) and a gospel choir 
I did not think anything at the time, but hey, her parents were married in a Buddhist ceremony and she went to Catholic school... not like MM has an long term connection with gospel/Baptist ... where did that come from ??? 
MM had a sudden interest in lots of friends/stuff to which she had no previous connection


----------



## BittyMonkey

I guess Oprah really doesn't care how she is perceived at this point. Seems like she thinks she made all of her money and so no longer considers her reputation. Maybe I'm just too old, but I really don't get why some of these drama llamas don't care what they look like. They sound like dysfunctioning cymbal monkeys to me.

"I have given you my soul; leave me my name" - H. Miller


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Redbirdhermes

marietouchet said:


> We dont know if this reporter was US or UK based
> A UK reporter would not neglect the Wales' in favor of the Sharkles
> A US reporter might not have a clue ...


US reporters are making all kinds of errors,  which the vast majority of the US audience will never catch.  I did cringe at "Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth", but I'm sure I missed lots of others.  As one CNN anchor put it, we got rid of that stuff 250 years ago.


----------



## Winterfell5

oldbag said:


> Wa,
> 
> There were people standing along the funeral route carring signs which said "ding dong the witch is dead"


Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.


----------



## Jayne1

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.


Agree - one or two didn't want to shake hands but most people were smiling when she approached.


----------



## Sharont2305

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.


No, @oldbag meant Thatchers funeral.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.



She was talking about Margaret Thatcher's funeral.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.


The poster was referring to the last UK state funeral of the former PM Margaret Thatcher some years ago.


----------



## xincinsin

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.





Jayne1 said:


> Agree - one or two didn't want to shake hands but most people were smiling when she approached.


I think she was referring to Thatcher's funeral.


----------



## bubablu

marietouchet said:


> IMHO  A lot happened behind the scenes, about the trip to the UK, invite to Balmoral - which was initially turned down,
> But how could H&M have been oblivious to the health of the Queen ?
> There were lots of calls that we dont know about...
> 
> All we know for certain is what KC3 said "Harry and Meghan", no ducal titles, no mention of Lili & Archie
> 
> It is not about H&M for the next week, they will be told which minibus to hop on for the service at the Abbey
> 
> AND all the woke hoopla about imperial colonial issues will distract from H&M


I didn't immediately understood KC3, in my mind was something like R2-D2. Lol.


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was reading some comments over on Instagram, apparently Raptor's behaviour during the walkabout was so erratic and weird several people wondered if she was heavily drugged (pretty evenly divided between illegal drugs and medication).


So do we think they needed the 45 mins delay to sober up then ?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Was the short sleeve dress considered inappropriate? I’m not sure her arms could handle being contained by sleeves.


----------



## xincinsin

Redbirdhermes said:


> I
> US reporters are making all kinds of errors,  which the vast majority of the US audience will never catch.  I did cringe at "Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth", but I'm sure I missed lots of others.  As one CNN anchor put it, we got rid of that stuff 250 years ago.


It's the insidious demise of background research, and it applies to media worldwide. The chief editor of the newsroom at the company where I work told the reporters once that he would rather be 2nd or 3rd to report on an  event than compete to be first and end up having to apologise for fake or error-filled news. They got criticised for being slower than social media which reported on every rumour that birthed, but at least they didn't get anything wrong.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Thatcher didn't get a state funeral?


She had a ceremonial funeral apparently same as Prince Philip (not quite as fancy as state funeral). I’m of the opinion she did nothing to merit such an honour but we will leave it at that.


Icyjade said:


> I’ve been fascinated by the different shading along her arms/hands… I guess when there is only an hour to prep there isn’t time to apply the layers of tan?
> 
> View attachment 5608308
> View attachment 5608309
> View attachment 5608310
> View attachment 5608311










andrashik said:


> Oh uh oh, look at her finger ( second slide)



What’s the implication here? 
Are we to assume Haz is limping due to a French tip embedded somewhere?


CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess - she considers herself an expert flower arranger.  This lil detail from her baby shower may have been forgotten. Plus, Doria’s nickname for her is flower and Doria recently was photographed with a floral tattoo on her forearm.
> 
> _One of the fun activities that the Duchess of Sussex took part in, alongside close friends including Amal Clooney, Serena Williams, and Abigail Spencer, was *flower-arranging*. The lesson was led by Lewis Miller, whose Instagram is filled with jaw-dropping flower arrangements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Donated Her Baby Shower Flowers to Charity & the Photos Are Stunning
> 
> 
> The American Cancer Society and Ronald McDonald House shared the sweetest photos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Ah yeah nothing like making a news story about donating your trash to charity to show your kind spirit. The signs were there from the beginning


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Wonder if she’ll ditch the next disrespectful sniping podcasts or look like an even bigger 2-face ***Z


I heard they are delaying this week’s episode but I don’t know if it will resume next week or not. Maybe some of them will need some editing. 

Her publicity momentum has been stalled for sure.


----------



## AbbytheBT

Looking at the very dark hose and shoes brings memories of funerals as a youngster when the aunties always seemed to have a black sweater to cover our shoulders and arms and hose for our bare legs - I kid you not! 

I can’t imagine that clothing from yesterday originally in her kit - lol - I bet her “favorite” black shoes were inappropriate Altuzarras with side cuts and ankle ties.


----------



## Sina08

marietouchet said:


> IMHO  A lot happened behind the scenes, about the trip to the UK, invite to Balmoral - which was initially turned down,
> But how could H&M have been oblivious to the health of the Queen ?
> There were lots of calls that we dont know about...


I guess they brushed away any warning regarding the Queen’s declining health as mere exaggeration or even a lie (as probably with PP). They think the BRF are playing games to prevent them from continuing their shenanigans, just because that’s the way they’re conducting themselves. But the truth is, despite everything that went on between them and the BRF, they were informed both times and both times they didn’t bother to see their dying elders even though there would have been enough time and opportunity. In a way those two are their own worst enemy, they can’t be helped.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Winterfell5

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was reading some comments over on Instagram, apparently Raptor's behaviour during the walkabout was so erratic and weird several people wondered if she was heavily drugged (pretty evenly divided between illegal drugs and medication).


OMG!  Now you’re bringing in “illegal drugs and medication?”  Believe me, I am no fan of H and M and find their behavior reprehensible.  I watched the entire walkabout live and didn’t see any of M’s behavior that would support your weird unfounded allegations.  Constructive criticism is one thing, but made up nonsense is over the top.  Many of the comments on this thread are just plain ridiculous!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't find Meghan beautiful.  Maybe I'm that biased against her.  She isn't ugly (outside) but not what I'd call beautiful or "stunning" either.  She has an ok figure but not tall and model-like as Diana was an Kate is.


She’s pretty but she isn’t anything special. There are thousands like her in California alone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Winterfell5 said:


> OMG!  Now you’re bringing in “illegal drugs and medication?”  Believe me, I am no fan of H and M and find their behavior reprehensible.  I watched the entire walkabout live and didn’t see any of M’s behavior that would support your weird unfounded allegations.  Constructive criticism is one thing, but made up nonsense is over the top.  Many of the comments on this thread are just plain ridiculous!



If you read carefully you'll see that I didn't bring up anything but merely reported what people on Instagram were commenting. Which is not quite the same. So I'd be glad if you could omit your...unfounded allegations.


----------



## Pessie

Some people don’t so much “stumble over” this thread as judgementally stalk it IMO.   All the same, if you don’t like someone’s comments just put them on your ignore list.  There are a few people here whose comments I don’t like to read, so I switch them off - much less stressy that way.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> We dont know if this reporter was US or UK based
> A UK reporter would not neglect the Wales' in favor of the Sharkles
> A US reporter might not have a clue ...


US. I will try to find it when I get home


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Does this imply CNN is supporting the creation of a royal court in the US, headed by the Queen of Lies? They can have her. #voetsekMeghan


Good Lord, NO!     

Perish the thought! I want to reassure all non-US members that our media views Harry and Meghan as celebrities. The CNN reporter believes the story Harry and Meghan told about leaving because it wasn’t safe… (insert lies told during the Oprah interview) …etc. 

You are never going to see Americans curtsy to Meghan. Well, possibly the most obsessed stans but they would be doing it in a fangirl way, certainly not as a sign of respect.


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> The poster was referring to the last UK state funeral of the former PM Margaret Thatcher some years ago.


Thatcher didn’t have a state funeral. Winston Churchill did.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> I hope someone in the crowd yelled VOETSEK MEGHAN at her.


I would hope not. I think people have more respect for the Queen than to do anything like that on such an occasion.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Thatcher didn’t have a state funeral. Winston Churchill did.


would that be due to Churchill's war efforts?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> That is on the CNN reporter, a spontaneous gaffe ?


The coverage today of the procession to Holyrood House was kind of annoying too.  The commentator kept calling Princess Anne "the Princesss Royale", and that it was taking place in Edinboro     Can't they do the least bit of research on pronounciation?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Lodpah said:


> Lay-off the coke you two!


Hmm, buy Pepsi instead.


----------



## Toby93

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Contrary to her personal opinion, Oprah is not press. She is an entertainer.


I thought the same thing, but everyone seems to think she is some sort of hard hitting journalist/interviewer   I believe she started out as a local news reporter.


----------



## Toby93

Looks like this made the headlines


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


> Was the short sleeve dress considered inappropriate? I’m not sure her arms could handle being contained by sleeves.


I don't know about it being inappropriate.  Sophie had a short sleeved black dress on today at Holyrood.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I thought the same thing, but everyone seems to think she is some sort of hard hitting journalist/interviewer   I believe she started out as a local news reporter.



I don't disagree but I don't think it matters all that much in the context of getting accredited. But who knows if that's what she really wants...my guess is that she's more after the, uh, intimate interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

andrashik said:


> Oh uh oh, look at her finger ( second slide)



Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.

Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> US. I will try to find it when I get home


I saw it attributed to a CNN report


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471


Cut her finger on the edge of a smashed plate?

Slammed a glass down during a tantrum and sliced it on broken glass?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471


attempted suicide via prick on finger?


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sharont2305 said:


> Thatcher didn’t have a state funeral. Winston Churchill did.


Thanks, I was not 100% sure if it was a full state. DH watched the proceedings from a roof top nearby and said it was quite impressive though will be nothing in comparison to Monday.


----------



## Icyjade

Are these weaves?



Her skin condition looks bad….


----------



## octopus17

bag-mania said:


> h, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?


Bitten by a corgi?


----------



## xincinsin

I remember she has been seen with bandages on her fingers before. There was a comment then that she picks at her nails - possibly due to anxiety?


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Cut her finger on the edge of a smashed plate?
> 
> Slammed a glass down during a tantrum and sliced it on broken glass?


A dramatic scene gone wrong by a so-so actress who underestimated her props, I like it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> attempted suicide via prick on finger?


If we go back to our witchcraft/voodoo theory, maybe she needed to do more blood magic to regain full control over Harry. 

Wonder where HIS bandage is?


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> That is on the CNN reporter, a spontaneous gaffe ?



I'm betting he didn't know what to call them. If we were being very generous, we could say they have changed their titles twice in the last few days.

Alot of fashion youtubers avoid saying French names/words because they're too nervous to pronounce them (and if you hear some of them try you would die laughing)



QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's kind of extremely rude from the MUA, isn't it.
> 
> I remember when fox eyes became all the rage and suddenly were racist...I was so confused because that's my eyeshape too (I have pretty ethnic features but nobody ever notices because I am super fair with light eyes and medium hair) and I've done my "occasion wear" m/u like this for ages.
> 
> Does anyone follow Paris based MUA Andreea Ali? She did doll eyes on one eye (round with lashes that are longer in the middle) and siren eyes (the new fox eye...elongated with lashes only on the outer corner) on the other eye and it was really fascinating to see. Oh, and there's yet another trend, sleepy eyes. I don't know about you, I look tired enough on my own within 2 hours of being up and going



Well hello foxy-eyed sister 

I will check that MUA out, sounds fab (I'm liking Isamaya Ffrench (sic) atm - she's quite alt-urban


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Toby93 said:


> I don't know about it being inappropriate.  Sophie had a short sleeved black dress on today at Holyrood.



Adding a visual of the family at Holyrood today.


----------



## bag-mania

Cornflower Blue said:


> Bitten by a corgi?


I have met a few temperamental corgis.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471



I'll go with something mundane. I somehow hit my finger on the wall while turning around a few weeks ago and instead of just breaking off at the dead part the nail tore way down into living flesh which a) bled b) hurt badly and c) took ages to grow out.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

Sina08 said:


> I guess they brushed away any warning regarding the Queen’s declining health as mere exaggeration or even a lie (as probably with PP). They think the BRF are playing games to prevent them from continuing their shenanigans, just because that’s the way they’re conducting themselves. But the truth is, despite everything that went on between them and the BRF, they were informed both times and both times they didn’t bother to see their dying elders even though there would have been enough time and opportunity. In a way those two are their own worst enemy, they can’t be helped.


It may have also been keeping H&M deliberately out of the loop regarding her health. Neither of them could be discreet and TW would file it away for further use/ammo.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll go with something mundane. I somehow hit my finger on the wall while turning around a few weeks ago and instead of just breaking off at the dead part the nail tore way down into living flesh which a) bled b) hurt badly and c) took ages to grow out.


Oh ouch! That’s painful just reading about it.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> It may have also been keeping H&M deliberately out of the loop regarding her health. Neither of them could be discreet and TW would file it away for further use/ammo.


I’m sure they were not being kept informed. Communication between Harry and his family seems to be minimal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I will check that MUA out, sounds fab (I'm liking Isamaya Ffrench (sic) atm - she's quite alt-urban



I search out people with a pleasant personality as I have a hard time sitting through a tutorial when I don't like the person. I'm so happy one half of my original MUA love (the Chapman sisters who went by Pixiwoo) just came back to Youtube after years. 

Andreea Ali also posts the most gorgeous Insta stories from Paris...walking her stunning neighbourhood, buying pastries, eating exquisite lunches. I'm there for it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Saw a comment that her chest size also drastically reduced when comparing the black dress of today with the halter neck top in Germany. Miracle strapless bra was in the wash?


By any chance do you mean the miracle padded strapless bra?


----------



## Sina08

justwatchin said:


> It may have also been keeping H&M deliberately out of the loop regarding her health. Neither of them could be discreet and TW would file it away for further use/ammo.


That’s also quite possible. Although with PP they must have known, since he had a long hospital stay which the media reported about.


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> It may have also been keeping H&M deliberately out of the loop regarding her health. Neither of them could be discreet and TW would file it away for further use/ammo.



Ye it was


----------



## carmen56

lanasyogamama said:


> Was the short sleeve dress considered inappropriate? I’m not sure her arms could handle being contained by sleeves.


Sophie Wessex was wearing a short sleeved dress when HM’s coffin arrived at Holyrood this afternoon.


----------



## oldbag

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.


The negative signs were for the funeral of Margaret Thather.


----------



## oldbag

oldbag said:


> The negative signs were for the funeral of Margaret Thather.


Margaret Thatcher


----------



## lanasyogamama

purly said:


> I was wrong! She died in 2007. Now it would be Comtesse Louise de Nicolay.


I wonder if she knows that she would have been the monarch of things had been different. 


bag-mania said:


> I’m sure they were not being kept informed. Communication between Harry and his family seems to be minimal.


Well didn’t he ring her up all the time? She could have told him she wasn’t well.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

carmen56 said:


> Sophie Wessex was wearing a short sleeved dress when HM’s coffin arrived at Holyrood this afternoon.


Yes, this would indicate that a short-sleeved dress is not inappropriate.


----------



## xincinsin

justwatchin said:


> It may have also been keeping H&M deliberately out of the loop regarding her health. Neither of them could be discreet and TW would file it away for further use/ammo.


Maybe that's why there was talk that both TQ and Charles invited them over. Final attempts to see Hazard again. Reconciliation would have been a vain hope, but a simple visit was likely deemed possible, even though after the last brief visit, Hazard promptly blabbed and lied to that US TV interviewer.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure they were not being kept informed. Communication between Harry and his family seems to be minimal.



If Harry had accepted the invitation to Balmoral (if they were indeed invited), they could have seen for themselves how she was doing and would have had the opportunity to spend a day or two or three with her.  William and Kate did go in August with their children and were there for several days and I'm sure are grateful that they were able to spend that time with her.  For Harry though, he's just got another item to add to his list of things he'll deeply regret one day.


----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> Sophie Wessex was wearing a short sleeved dress when HM’s coffin arrived at Holyrood this afternoon.


Maybe the comparison was with Kate who wore long sleeves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purly

Redbirdhermes said:


> Yes, this would indicate that a short-sleeved dress is not inappropriate.
> 
> View attachment 5608532



I think it's only sleeveless dresses that are inappropriate.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471


She injured her finger and tore off her nail when she was tearing off her wedding rings to fling at Harry.  Then came her shoe and she broke the heel off.


----------



## redney

I'm so late to commenting about something said pages ago but have just caught up! Wasn't one of the "stories" about the walkabout was that PW or KC caught wind of the Dastardly Duo's plans to do their own walkabout and KC ordered PW to step in to do a joint walkabout? If that's the case, why would TW cry she didn't have enough time to get ready for the joint walkabout if she and Hazzbeen were already planning their own? Same with the "stolen shoes" claim.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> I'm so late to commenting about something said pages ago but have just caught up! Wasn't one of the "stories" about the walkabout was that PW or KC caught wind of the Dastardly Duo's plans to do their own walkabout and KC ordered PW to step in to do a joint walkabout? If that's the case, why would TW cry she didn't have enough time to get ready for the joint walkabout if she and Hazzbeen were already planning their own? Same with the "stolen shoes" claim.


The shoes were stolen?  The dog ate my homework or the dog died.  Seriously?  I still say she threw the shoes at Harry and broke a heel off!


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> MM does not like being told NO





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Several sources have come forward saying she made Harry deliberately late by throwing an epic tantrum when she learned she wasn't going. They are speaking of 1+ hour of yelling, shouting and threatening to fly out to the US.


If this is true (something I find 100% believable), then:


Toxic. Toxic. Toxic.





RAINDANCE said:


> More noticeable is his absence from the family gathering in Balmoral, where his married cousins seem to be managing fine without being surgically attached to a spouse.





RAINDANCE said:


> Just to add I am sick of seeing her paw Harry and with the handholding at serious and professional events. It's insulting to everyone and infantalising to Harry.





The constant hand-holding, pawing at each other and fidgeting is so inappropriate. You never see any of the other royal grandchildren behaving like that in public with their spouses/partners.
It doesn't make you look like a couple 'in love', it makes you look very insecure by constantly using excessive public displays of affection as a way to convince people of your compatibility and love for each other. I'm not buying it.
Any couple I have known in my own life to carry on the way they do, are no longer together after short-lived relationships and even short-lived marriages. All would have been very toxic separations too.




CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. *You can tell she's bored to tears.*





elvisfan4life said:


> Her acting is poor I think she was trying to convey overwhelming grief and shock


She looked so bored.
But the thing that annoyed my watching the live coverage of them doing the walkabout was all the people sympathizing, handing her flowers and her repeating ' thank you' over and over with the fake sad face, when all she has done since their 'exit' was talk sh*t about the RF and try to drag them into their sh*tshow all the while using those royal titles given to her to further herself in the world.
MM (JCMH too) showed no respect, not even an ounce of decency to QE2 or PP during their declining health before their deaths, causing unnecessary stress and hurt to the family. Between the mess they have created and everything they have said and done against the RF (and to be honest she was around for such little time she barely could have even known them) it was unbelievable to think of her swanning around yesterday accepting people's sympathy and condolences for her/their loss.
Hell to the no, she can f*ck right off. She had no right to be there, it even rubs me the wrong way that JCMH was doing the same.
William is a good person to have invited them along because I tell you if I was him, there's no way I'd have agreed to that! No way would you be disrespecting my grandmother and her family and expecting to come back into the fold like nothing happened and butter wouldn't melt.





papertiger said:


> That one was because William kept moving away from her every time she tried to sneak 'in shot'. I can even see it from William's back he is seething, uncomfortable being anywhere near her, he HATES her,. She went to H for reassurance and put H between herself and William.
> 
> The 'reunited' togetherness is camera-only, I don't think the brothers will be friends again until she's no longer a problem. That was _very_ uncomfortable viewing, and I don't even like her.





TimeToShop said:


> I am watching too. Yes, no one wants to touch her. The commentators though, saying how nice that they’re together. How it shows there’s a mending of hard feelings. That’s not what I saw. They didn’t interact with each other. Didn’t even look at each other. There didn’t seem to be any warmth between them.


Totally agree with both of you. They didn't look 'reunited' to me; you could have cut the tension with a knife, I would guess.





Toby93 said:


>



Most pictures of Wallis S give me the creeps for some reason, but in this one she looks terrifying 




CobaltBlu said:


> Did she accidentally throw a curtsey to this staffer (William and Kate's PR person, Lee Thompson)?
> She looks like she is about to go off on him and then remembers the camera. In the comments it seems to be about the flowers...
> You really can see a spark of who she really is here...





Throwing attitude out in public? She's slipping up.
What is her problem that she just can't seem to be told what to do even when it's for her own good or someone is trying to help her?




CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi looks like such a pretender now.


Totally. from the live coverage it's like he didn't even try to make an effort, while everyone else was bending down even crouching on the floor to be able to read some of the messages, he seemed to remain standing the whole time looking p*ssed off. I doubt he could read small writing on notes on the floor while standing up?  Get involved FTLOG! He looked like a sulking teenger, that he'd rather be anywhere else than showing gratitude to the public by representing the RF and his deceased beloved grandmother.
He and his wife are insufferable.




CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG - 45 minutes!





45 minutes for negotiations?!! WTF!?




bag-mania said:


> I think it’s the concerned look of a narcissist who is not in control. She is like a fish out of water and she doesn’t know how she can get the upper hand.





You hit the nail on the head!




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry, use your chance and get rid of her. Oh my.
> 
> Also, getting ready for hours? What for exactly, a private family function nobody was going to film?





Also, in relation to the dress she wore yesterday being 'inappropriate' and her shoes 'disappearing'. I would say the dress was the most appropriate thing she has ever worn during a royal-related appearance. Sophie, Countess of Wessex had a very similar dress on today in Edinburgh.
As for the shoes disappearing- ridiculous. Perpetual victim strikes again 




Suncatcher said:


> I read that it was never intended that M come along on the walk. It was supposed to be just W, C and H. Hence BBC banner only noting the 3 names. This would be in line with how the spouses of Beatrice and Eugenie did not show up yesterday for the walk done at Balmoral. She barged her way in hence the 45 min delay. This now makes more sense to me. She is a horrid person.


My thoughts exactly. None of the other grandchildren brought their spouses along yesterday at the gates of Balmoral.
The 45mins delay was probably waiting for TW to get herself ready once she got herself included in the walkabout in Windsor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Maybe the comparison was with Kate who wore long sleeves.



May I also add that nobody critized her, it was her own PR and fan base that cried about how she was left with that inappropriate dress that embarrassed her.


----------



## melissatrv

I think the ex-fab four walkabout just shows that Charles does not have the gonads to strip their titles.  After everyone noticed he omitted their titles during the speech, he was probably counseled by an advisor to stage the walkabout so it looks like H&M are still part of the family.  Thinking about this some more, there is probably concern about people thinking Harry and his children being removed from the Line of Succession would spark racism accusations.  I don't think they will risk it.  

A guy I work with was in the military with Harry when he lived in the UK and met him several times, said he was a nice guy.  However, I asked him his thoughts on the Queen's death and he said he was "absolutely devestated".  Asked if Harry should still have his titles he thinks not since he has done everything in his power to distance himself from the royal family.  Also added that he needs to keep his mouth shut and stop publicly badmouthing the family.


----------



## xincinsin

redney said:


> I'm so late to commenting about something said pages ago but have just caught up! Wasn't one of the "stories" about the walkabout was that PW or KC caught wind of the Dastardly Duo's plans to do their own walkabout and KC ordered PW to step in to do a joint walkabout? If that's the case, why would TW cry she didn't have enough time to get ready for the joint walkabout if she and Hazzbeen were already planning their own? Same with the "stolen shoes" claim.


I thought about that too. Maybe it was a timing difference? Perhaps they planned their walk for 3 hours later, and so she was "unprepared" to go earlier but couldn't say No without a good reason. I do wish she had done her silly messy bun. What was the point of repeatedly gathering her hair and then draping it over one shoulder? The windswept look of grief only works in movies.


----------



## chaneljewel

I’m so tired of these “fans” of the wicked witch M talking about her touchy love for H and how wonderful they are together.   She’s a narcissist and doesn’t deserve to be around the RF during this sad time.  The realty will hit once the funeral is over and KC is able to make decisions about the family. H is his son, but sometimes you just have to let that toxic behavior suffer some consequence.  Both H and wicked witch M are ridden with toxic jealousy towards the rest of the RF.  Dump them!!!


----------



## Pessie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would hope not. I think people have more respect for the Queen than to do anything like that on such an occasion.


Honey, if Meghan had showed any respect for the Queen and Prince Philip she wouldn’t have needed to worry about the crowds reaction to her.  As it is she was making passive aggressive statements and coded threats about a diary and NDA as recently as a few days ago, and we all know the Oprah interview took place while Philip was dying.  She and Harry looked shamefaced yesterday.  As they should.  They’re a disgrace.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> She and Harry looked shamefaced yesterday.  As they should.  They’re a disgrace.



I'm not sure she's capable of such a feeling. She completely lacks any self-awareness.


----------



## gracekelly

I am wondering where Harry was during the Ascension ceremony.  The other relatives and cousins of The Queen were in the courtyard at St. James' Palace to hear the reading of the proclamation. BTS, that was a really nice ceremony.   The Kents, Gloucesters, Lady Helen Taylor.  Harry was home watching it on TV?  I understand that he would not have been with KC and PofW, but surely he should have been somewhere.

Harry is a man trapped by the vacillating mood swings of his wife.  He should put her on a plane back to the US.  Easy to say she needs to go home to the kids.

 If the timeline is correct, and the plane waited an hour for him, thereby making the others unable to see TQ alive  at the very end, then he will never be forgiven for that.  He should have walked out the door no matter what she was screaming at him. 

 It is obvious that neither of them are trusted.  Even though I think that KC wanted the positive vibe of happy family, I also think that they did not want them to do a walk about on their own.  There was no telling how they would use it and if a camera wouldn't be taking pictures.  With the Wales present, it was easier to control that situation and photographers.  I don't think that Netflix can't use footage of the PoW unless he okays it, and he is in all the shots.  All they can use is what everyone is seeing on TV, print and internet.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure she's capable of such a feeling. She completely lacks any self-awareness.


True, but she knows enough to be scared and think she was terrified yesterday.


----------



## redney

Pessie said:


> Honey, if Meghan had showed any respect for the Queen and Prince Philip she wouldn’t have needed to worry about the crowds reaction to her.  As it is she was making passive aggressive statements and coded threats about a diary and NDA as recently as a few days ago, and we all know the Oprah interview took place while Philip was dying.  She and Harry looked shamefaced yesterday.  As they should.  They’re a disgrace.


Exactly this. They are disgraceful and disgraced. They themselves trashed the Queen, KC, PW, KM since leaving the UK and continuously up through the present. They knew Philip's grave health yet the Oprah interview still aired. They destroyed any trust left with BRF members due to their Netflix relationship. Allegedly they rejected the Queen's invitation to come to Balmoral this summer, and even whilst in the UK last week for their engagements, didn't make any plans to see her. They essentially sh*t on the BRF and the people of the UK. The boos they received at Jubilee and relegation to 2nd row were brought upon by themselves and any discomfort or shame they may now feel is 100% warranted through their own actions.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> She injured her finger and tore off her nail when she was tearing off her wedding rings to fling at Harry.  Then came her shoe and she broke the heel off.


But then she rushed over to pick up her expensive rings again because she wasn’t _that_ mad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Pessie said:


> Honey, if Meghan had showed any respect for the Queen and Prince Philip she wouldn’t have needed to worry about the crowds reaction to her.  As it is she was making passive aggressive statements and coded threats about a diary and NDA as recently as a few days ago, and we all know the Oprah interview took place while Philip was dying.  She and Harry looked shamefaced yesterday.  As they should.  They’re a disgrace.


This isn't about Meghan it's about the Queen. And what she would have wanted. Thank goodness most people will understand and honor her memory.


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> If this is true (something I find 100% believable), then:
> View attachment 5608466
> 
> Toxic. Toxic. Toxic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608467
> 
> The constant hand-holding, pawing at each other and fidgeting is so inappropriate. You never see any of the other royal grandchildren behaving like that in public with their spouses/partners.
> It doesn't make you look like a couple 'in love', it makes you look very insecure by constantly using excessive public displays of affection as a way to convince people of your compatibility and love for each other. I'm not buying it.
> Any couple I have known in my own life to carry on the way they do, are no longer together after short-lived relationships and even short-lived marriages. All would have been very toxic separations too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She looked so bored.
> But the thing that annoyed my watching the live coverage of them doing the walkabout was all the people sympathizing, handing her flowers and her repeating ' thank you' over and over with the fake sad face, when all she has done since their 'exit' was talk sh*t about the RF and try to drag them into their sh*tshow all the while using those royal titles given to her to further herself in the world.
> MM (JCMH too) showed no respect, not even an ounce of decency to QE2 or PP during their declining health before their deaths, causing unnecessary stress and hurt to the family. Between the mess they have created and everything they have said and done against the RF (and to be honest she was around for such little time she barely could have even known them) it was unbelievable to think of her swanning around yesterday accepting people's sympathy and condolences for her/their loss.
> Hell to the no, she can f*ck right off. She had no right to be there, it even rubs me the wrong way that JCMH was doing the same.
> William is a good person to have invited them along because I tell you if I was him, there's no way I'd have agreed to that! No way would you be disrespecting my grandmother and her family and expecting to come back into the fold like nothing happened and butter wouldn't melt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totally agree with both of you. They didn't look 'reunited' to me; you could have cut the tension with a knife, I would guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most pictures of Wallis S give me the creeps for some reason, but in this one she looks terrifying
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608488
> 
> Throwing attitude out in public? She's slipping up.
> What is her problem that she just can't seem to be told what to do even when it's for her own good or someone is trying to help her?
> 
> 
> 
> Totally. from the live coverage it's like he didn't even try to make an effort, while everyone else was bending down even crouching on the floor to be able to read some of the messages, he seemed to remain standing the whole time looking p*ssed off. I doubt he could read small writing on notes on the floor while standing up?  Get involved FTLOG! He looked like a sulking teenger, that he'd rather be anywhere else than showing gratitude to the public by representing the RF and his deceased beloved grandmother.
> He and his wife are insufferable.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608506
> 
> 45 minutes for negotiations?!! WTF!?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608530
> 
> You hit the nail on the head!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608533
> 
> Also, in relation to the dress she wore yesterday being 'inappropriate' and her shoes 'disappearing'. I would say the dress was the most appropriate thing she has ever worn during a royal-related appearance. Sophie, Countess of Wessex had a very similar dress on today in Edinburgh.
> As for the shoes disappearing- ridiculous. Perpetual victim strikes again
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts exactly. None of the other grandchildren brought their spouses along yesterday at the gates of Balmoral.
> The 45mins delay was probably waiting for TW to get herself ready once she got herself included in the walkabout in Windsor.


Also read that she was not supposed to go and it was to be just Harry.  Maybe the negotiation was that she wanted to go and that was what the delay was over and her getting ready.  In fact there is the possibility that it was just to be the two brothers and no wives at all.


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Are these weaves?
> View attachment 5608472
> 
> 
> Her skin condition looks bad….
> View attachment 5608473


I've never actually seen a weave IRL. 
Sigh! I'm going to be peering surreptitiously at other women's hair now. The last time this happened was when I discovered people with curls could get their hair straightened! I have very very straight hair, so it was a revelation to me. Cue surreptitious peering at other ladies with straight hair till I could differentiate natural straight vs straightened.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

*sigh* How did it get from this to now? So sad.


----------



## CobaltBlu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll go with something mundane. I somehow hit my finger on the wall while turning around a few weeks ago and instead of just breaking off at the dead part the nail tore way down into living flesh which a) bled b) hurt badly and c) took ages to grow out.


Hhah, this is what I thought too, i just broke one very low and had to wear a bandage as well. Although @gracekelly paints an amusing picture of flying shoes and rings!


----------



## Pessie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> This isn't about Meghan it's about the Queen. And what she would have wanted. Thank goodness most people will understand and honor her memory.


Well the Queen said “thank goodness Meghan isn’t coming” 
Harry and Meghan didn’t deserve the politeness shown them yesterday.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> *Exactly what I thought, she wants the flowers in all pics of her, not exactly sure why, they’re not for her.*
> 
> Guess the BRF can’t trust her with jewels, silver, alone in a palace, OR even a bunch Queens tribute flowers


The Duplicitous Witch wants to be photographed or filmed laying the flowers down to appear as if it were her 'own contribution' to Queen Elizabeth.


----------



## djfmn

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure they were not being kept informed. Communication between Harry and his family seems to be minimal.


This is just my personal opinion.  Photos posted of the Queen in the last year show the huge decline in her health. Had it been my grandmother I would have made every effort to spend time with her. To me she was not looking well especially in the last 3 months. Not spending time with her is something Harry will have to live with for the rest of his life. Not sure he is wise or mature enough to realize this. He seems to be so wrapped up in being vindictive and bitter. The writer William James said "Three things in human life are important. The first is to be kind. The second is to be kind. And the third is to be kind.” This is lost on both Harry and Meghan.


justwatchin said:


> It may have also been keeping H&M deliberately out of the loop regarding her health. Neither of them could be discreet and TW would file it away for further use/am


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

djfmn said:


> This is just my personal opinion.  Photos posted of the Queen in the last year show the huge decline in her health. Had it been my grandmother I would have made every effort to spend time with her. To me she was not looking well especially in the last 3 months. Not spending time with her is something Harry will have to live with for the rest of his life. Not sure he is wise or mature enough to realize this. He seems to be so wrapped up in being vindictive and bitter. The writer William James said "Three things in human life are important. The first is to be kind. The second is to be kind. And the third is to be kind.” This is lost on both Harry and Meghan.



I agree. She shrank in front of our eyes, especially after Philip was gone.


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> Well the Queen said “thank goodness Meghan isn’t coming”
> Harry and Meghan didn’t deserve the politeness shown them yesterday.


To working with  TQ"s recollections may vary...I'd say thank goodness Meghan isn't coming has variable meanings as well.  As the SNL ladies would say, talk  amongst yourselves.


----------



## purseinsanity

Traminer said:


> No Oprah at that funeral, please!


I can't imagine a planet on where the "journalist" that facilitated a snake to spew lies about the BRF would be invited to the funeral of the Queen.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry, use your chance and get rid of her. Oh my.
> 
> Also, getting ready for hours? What for exactly, a private family function nobody was going to film?



As usual, making everything about ME.


----------



## lulu212121

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> This isn't about Meghan it's about the *Queen. And what she would have wanted.* Thank goodness most people will understand and honor her memory.


Just like last year when H and tw were doing an interview with Oprah as Price Phillip was dying? What the Queen would have wanted, you say? I don't understand the constant defense of these two.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Pessie said:


> Well the Queen said “thank goodness Meghan isn’t coming”
> Harry and Meghan didn’t deserve the politeness shown them yesterday.


We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't believe the Queen would have wanted people shouting obscenities at this moment. Just doesn't seem to be her style, Honey


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> *This isn't about Meghan it's about the Queen.* And what she would have wanted. Thank goodness most people will understand and honor her memory.


Like her or loathe her, this is what we should bear in mind. 
And we really need a face-palm emoji when she tries to make it about herself. Let go of the flowers!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> Oh uh oh, look at her finger ( second slide)



When you break glasses and dishes, you must be careful not to injure yourself.


----------



## redney

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't believe the Queen would have wanted people shouting obscenities at this moment. Just doesn't seem to be her style, Honey


I am glad people didn't vocalize their dislike of MM and Harry out of respect for the Queen, but instead turned away silently to avoid Meghan's presence and handshake. The Queen would have approved of this, I think.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Exactly what I thought, she wants the flowers in all pics of her, not exactly sure why, they’re not for her.
> 
> *Guess the BRF can’t trust her with jewels, silver, alone in a palace, OR even a bunch Queens tribute flowers*


NO one can trust her, period.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

lulu212121 said:


> Just like last year when H and tw were doing an interview with Oprah as Price Phillip was dying? What the Queen would have wanted, you say? I don't understand the constant defense of these two.


Who is defending anyone??? This is about THE QUEEN. Do you honestly believe Her Majesty would have wanted people to behave the way you are suggesting? There is nothing in her actions to suggest that would have been okay with her. Ever. And especially now she deserves all the attention and respect focused on her and her memory.


----------



## lulu212121

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Who is defending anyone??? This is about THE QUEEN. Do you honestly believe Her Majesty would have wanted people to behave the way you are suggesting? There is nothing in her actions to suggest that would have been okay with her. Ever. And especially now she deserves all the attention and respect focused on her and her memory.


No! I don't believe Her Majesty would have wanted "so called" loved ones giving an Oprah interview bad mouthing and telling lies about the Royal Family.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> It was easy, they had kept the model…



There's no way The Duchess of Windsor's dress would fit The Claw.  Not body shaming, simply stating the truth, ma'am.


----------



## Sina08

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not sure she's capable of such a feeling. She completely lacks any self-awareness.


Agree. Also, they seem more angry/annoyed than anything else, that their whole program for the coming days and weeks is affected by this untimely event. She was riding a planned out PR-wave and suddenly the wind died.


----------



## csshopper

chaneljewel said:


> I’m so tired of these “fans” of the wicked witch M talking about her touchy love for H and how wonderful they are together.   She’s a narcissist and doesn’t deserve to be around the RF during this sad time.  The realty will hit once the funeral is over and KC is able to make decisions about the family. H is his son, but sometimes you just have to let that toxic behavior suffer some consequence.  Both H and wicked witch M are ridden with toxic jealousy towards the rest of the RF.  Dump them!!!


Charles has said he wants to continue to reign as his Mama did. It must have hurt her deeply, but she took care of Andrew’s removal and loss of patronages. Charles needs to demonstrate the same steely resolve in dealing with his son and complete the work started earlier in Megxit. Strip the titles.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I find it scary how photos of her sometimes show her with pure black eyes, like those possessed by the alien oil in X Files. It's likely too much mascara and eye liner, and a tendency to dip her head.


It's like on the show Supernatural, where the demon's eyes go black to indicate they're actually a demon in human form.


----------



## Sharont2305

lulu212121 said:


> No! I don't believe Her Majesty would have wanted "so called" loved ones giving an Oprah interview bad mouthing and telling lies about the Royal Family.


You forgot to add whilst her beloved husband was dying.


----------



## Pessie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't believe the Queen would have wanted people shouting obscenities at this moment. Just doesn't seem to be her style, Honey


I didn’t suggest they should have shouted obscenities.  You're making a false argument.  I said Harry and Meghan didn't deserve the good manners shown to them.  Everyone behaves better than Harry and Meghan do.


----------



## gelbergirl

Sina08 said:


> Agree. Also, they seem more angry/annoyed than anything else, that their whole program for the coming days and weeks is affected by this untimely event. She was riding a planned out PR-wave and suddenly the wind died.



Exactly.  Her entire MO is to shut people out.
This display of feeling and comforting is foreign to a narcissist.  
She can not even comprehend the loyalty the people have for Queen Elizabeth and the Queen's longevity of service.


----------



## redney

Sina08 said:


> Agree. Also, they seem more angry/annoyed than anything else, that their whole program for the coming days and weeks is affected by this untimely event. She was riding a planned out PR-wave and suddenly the wind died.


This. Just last week there was article on The Cut, the buzz (good and bad) over the podcasts, the speeches and appearances and related photos and publicity up through this week. Now, all press coverage is completely out of her control and not focused solely on her.


----------



## Sharont2305

Oops, I think we've all forgotten the most important thing concerning these last few days. 
Has anyone thought to ask M if she's okay?


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> If this is true (something I find 100% believable), then:
> View attachment 5608466
> 
> Toxic. Toxic. Toxic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608467
> 
> The constant hand-holding, pawing at each other and fidgeting is so inappropriate. You never see any of the other royal grandchildren behaving like that in public with their spouses/partners.
> It doesn't make you look like a couple 'in love', it makes you look very insecure by constantly using excessive public displays of affection as a way to convince people of your compatibility and love for each other. I'm not buying it.
> Any couple I have known in my own life to carry on the way they do, are no longer together after short-lived relationships and even short-lived marriages. All would have been very toxic separations too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She looked so bored.
> But the thing that annoyed my watching the live coverage of them doing the walkabout was all the people sympathizing, handing her flowers and her repeating ' thank you' over and over with the fake sad face, when all she has done since their 'exit' was talk sh*t about the RF and try to drag them into their sh*tshow all the while using those royal titles given to her to further herself in the world.
> MM (JCMH too) showed no respect, not even an ounce of decency to QE2 or PP during their declining health before their deaths, causing unnecessary stress and hurt to the family. Between the mess they have created and everything they have said and done against the RF (and to be honest she was around for such little time she barely could have even known them) it was unbelievable to think of her swanning around yesterday accepting people's sympathy and condolences for her/their loss.
> Hell to the no, she can f*ck right off. She had no right to be there, it even rubs me the wrong way that JCMH was doing the same.
> William is a good person to have invited them along because I tell you if I was him, there's no way I'd have agreed to that! No way would you be disrespecting my grandmother and her family and expecting to come back into the fold like nothing happened and butter wouldn't melt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Totally agree with both of you. They didn't look 'reunited' to me; you could have cut the tension with a knife, I would guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most pictures of Wallis S give me the creeps for some reason, but in this one she looks terrifying
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608488
> 
> Throwing attitude out in public? She's slipping up.
> What is her problem that she just can't seem to be told what to do even when it's for her own good or someone is trying to help her?
> 
> 
> 
> Totally. from the live coverage it's like he didn't even try to make an effort, while everyone else was bending down even crouching on the floor to be able to read some of the messages, he seemed to remain standing the whole time looking p*ssed off. I doubt he could read small writing on notes on the floor while standing up?  Get involved FTLOG! He looked like a sulking teenger, that he'd rather be anywhere else than showing gratitude to the public by representing the RF and his deceased beloved grandmother.
> He and his wife are insufferable.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608506
> 
> 45 minutes for negotiations?!! WTF!?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608530
> 
> You hit the nail on the head!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5608533
> 
> Also, in relation to the dress she wore yesterday being 'inappropriate' and her shoes 'disappearing'. I would say the dress was the most appropriate thing she has ever worn during a royal-related appearance. Sophie, Countess of Wessex had a very similar dress on today in Edinburgh.
> As for the shoes disappearing- ridiculous. Perpetual victim strikes again
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts exactly. None of the other grandchildren brought their spouses along yesterday at the gates of Balmoral.
> The 45mins delay was probably waiting for TW to get herself ready once she got herself included in the walkabout in Windsor.


yes, the constant touching, hand holding and esp her steering him around is just so annoying.  wouldn't it be great if some day at a public event he got mad and yanked away from her claw?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Sina08 said:


> Agree. Also, they seem more angry/annoyed than anything else, that their whole program for the coming days and weeks is affected by this untimely event. She was riding a planned out PR-wave and suddenly the wind died.


She is so unhinged I can actually imagine her screeching at Hazbeen, “How dare your grandmother do this to us! WE had plans.”


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I've never actually seen a weave IRL.
> Sigh! I'm going to be peering surreptitiously at other women's hair now. The last time this happened was when I discovered people with curls could get their hair straightened! I have very very straight hair, so it was a revelation to me. Cue surreptitious peering at other ladies with straight hair till I could differentiate natural straight vs straightened.


extensions are super common where we live....lots of women with fake long hair like Meghan


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> yes, the constant touching, hand holding and esp her steering him around is just so annoying.  wouldn't it be great if some day at a public event he got mad and yanked away from her claw?


He looked visibly annoyed and removed his hand and arm from her grip a few times at the UN.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> yes, the constant touching, hand holding and esp her steering him around is just so annoying.  wouldn't it be great if some day at a public event he got mad and yanked away from her claw?


The steering him around annoys me the most. My God, he's done this all his life, he knows what to do.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> I hope someone in the crowd yelled VOETSEK MEGHAN at her.





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would hope not. I think people have more respect for the Queen than to do anything like that on such an occasion.





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> This isn't about Meghan it's about the Queen. And what she would have wanted. Thank goodness most people will understand and honor her memory.





Pessie said:


> I didn’t suggest they should have shouted obscenities.  You're making a false argument.  I said Harry and Meghan didn't deserve the good manners shown to them.  Everyone behaves better than Harry and Meghan do.


Um...that's literally all I was posting about...how is that a false argument? 

I never defended H & M, or their behavior. All I said was the Queen would not have wanted anyone to shout at them. That's it.

I honestly can't understand why you are arguing with me


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> He looked visibly annoyed and removed his hand and arm from her grip a few times at the UN.


I want a dramatic reaction that's reported all over the media


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471


LOLOL this cracked me up!  Hate to break it to you TW, but if you're trying to "self injure" yourself, slicing your finger won't do it.  Is she going to claim another suicide attempt by hurting the little piggy that had no roast beef?


----------



## Kevinaxx

sdkitty said:


> extensions are super common where we live....lots of women with fake long hair like Meghan


I’ve seen fake hair on the ground multiple times and I’ve always wondered if there was a cat fight or just a mad dash and the owner just never noticed. 

In a way, raptor is in a tough position.  If she doesn’t go people would say something. If she goes, there’s just no way she can without causing any kind of noise because 1) she can’t help herself and 2) because of everything she’s done up to now and no doubt the behavior will continue because of 1.


----------



## Sina08

csshopper said:


> She is so unhinged I can actually imagine her screeching at Hazbeen, “How dare your grandmother do this to us! WE had plans.”


Well, I bet she takes it at least a little bit personally.


----------



## Sina08

gelbergirl said:


> Exactly.  Her entire MO is to shut people out.
> This display of feeling and comforting is foreign to a narcissist.
> She can not even comprehend the loyalty the people have for Queen Elizabeth and the Queen's longevity of service.


If she had understood the reason for this loyalty and the Queen’s dedication to lifelong service, we wouldn’t be discussing her in this way right now.


----------



## xincinsin

Kevinaxx said:


> In a way, raptor is in a tough position.  If she doesn’t go people would say something. If she goes, there’s just no way she can without causing any kind of noise because 1) she can’t help herself and 2) because of everything she’s done up to now and no doubt the behavior will continue because of 1.


Painted herself into a corner


----------



## pixiejenna

djfmn said:


> This is just my personal opinion.  Photos posted of the Queen in the last year show the huge decline in her health. Had it been my grandmother I would have made every effort to spend time with her. To me she was not looking well especially in the last 3 months. Not spending time with her is something Harry will have to live with for the rest of his life. Not sure he is wise or mature enough to realize this. He seems to be so wrapped up in being vindictive and bitter. The writer William James said "Three things in human life are important. The first is to be kind. The second is to be kind. And the third is to be kind.” This is lost on both Harry and Meghan.



This! Even here on TPF many posters (many of whom are not British or under their realm and are just fans of the monarchy) noted how frail QE was looking in her pictures, worried about her health. Harry someone who is a close family member should be able to see the major decline in her physical health. Sadly I think it boils down to he just doesn’t care. I know people will want to blame Megan for this but at the end of the day this is his choice. I don’t know if he’ll regret it because he can’t seem to look past himself and his immediate family. Everything else doesn’t even seem to register on his radar.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> would that be due to Churchill's war efforts?


Yes I think so- certainly not for his skills as a painter 


bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471


So my guess is either:
Trapped in safe door while trying to go through family jewels
Or
As I said an acrylic tip is currently wedged in Harry’s….


Icyjade said:


> Are these weaves?
> View attachment 5608472
> 
> 
> Her skin condition looks bad….
> View attachment 5608473


So not a hairdresser but as I’m always complaining about her hair I’ll give you my opinion of what is going on in tendril town. 

The wisps of baby hairs you can see in front are M’s hair. It’s very common to grow your front baby hairs out if you habitually wear weaves or wigs in your natural colour as you can blend the real and fake hair together and cover the join. That is what is happening here. Notice how they are stuck flat and backwards. Now this photo isn’t great quality but you can see her hair looks thicker, straighter and darker behind those baby hairs? That’s because it’s the fake hair. It is hard to see but it looks like it starts at a slightly different place and has a different incline then you would expect natural hair to fall but the dead give away is the hair she chooses to wear itself- it’s a much redder toned dark brown  than her baby hairs and it is so thick and straight whereas her actual hair is clearly quite fine and curly.
So how do can you add a weave?
by either- 1. sewing a thin mesh onto your natural hair then you sew the fake hair onto the mesh.

Or
2. Some people also sew the fake hair straight onto their real hair.

As you can see some people are really good at this and their joins are invisible. Another big part of doing a good job is picking a style of hair extension that will sit comfortably on your head rather than dragging it down or giving you a helmet head. Part of the reason M’s hair bugs me so much is because it would be so easy to improve it if she’d just listen to someone else (like say a competent hair stylist) rather than trying to drag on her 20s and thus the horror of 00s weaves  ad infinitum. (The variety and quality of hair extensions and weaves has astronomically improved in the last 20years and they’ve gotten so much cheaper although Europe still doesn’t have as much choice as the USA Every time I go to USA I always want to go and admire the hair shops  

NB- this works  if you have a thicker and curlier texture of hair. I believe M has straightened curly hair so she would go the above route

If you have straight hair you would probably apply your extensions using the microbond/gluing/sew in route.
So Catherine wears extensions and they would add these by just lifting up and clipping off the top layers of hair and then sticking strips of hair to the scalp line using one of the techniques above and then covering it with the top layers. Add on - I believe  you can also us these Methods with Afro/curly hair textures so there is a chance M wears extensions applied like this but IMHO I think more likely it’s a weave going from the photos. 

Now if you have a true wig (it’s like a skull cap with hair ready sewn onto it) then you are gluing it to your skin or just sitting it on your head- no weaving/sewing required. Wigs have come a long way too from synthetic hard fronts to virgin hair lace fronts.

None of these styles last forever because there’s a lot of friction acting on the hair and also over time the method of attaching the hair loosens. Also  you’ve got to let your scalp breathe from all that extra weight and heat.

Now to put on my amateur dermatologist cap and go to town on the skincare 


xincinsin said:


> I've never actually seen a weave IRL.
> Sigh! I'm going to be peering surreptitiously at other women's hair now. The last time this happened was when I discovered people with curls could get their hair straightened! I have very very straight hair, so it was a revelation to me. Cue surreptitious peering at other ladies with straight hair till I could differentiate natural straight vs straightened.


I remember watching a destiny’s child video and asking my mum how the girls could get their hair in so many styles and my mum went ‘they are wigs of course’
It blew my mind and  started my obsession with wigs and hair tech then was nowhere near what it is now.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Ah, yes. The bandaged RING finger.
> 
> Okay, ladies, let’s hear your theories regarding the alleged injury. Simple accidental cut? Infected hangnail? Attempted self-harm (but not too bad because narcissists won’t actually hurt themselves)?
> 
> View attachment 5608471



Bandaged to cover callous from patting herself on the back? To evoke pity--it's a severe injury you know, look how she sacrifices to be there out of respect for the BRF   . Paper cut from her latest press release bragging how generous she is but not wanting any credit because she loves her privacy.


----------



## bag-mania

Uh, it was no mystery, _Newsweek_. Unfortunately, the US press is still bending over backwards to shower Meghan with sympathy. I don’t pretend to understand it other than that they believe every lie Meghan has ever told.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> extensions are super common where we live....lots of women with fake long hair like Meghan


I remember an article by Zendaya explaining the difference between the types of hair additions - wigs, extensions , tracks , weaves - I could not find the exact original article but she is knowledgeable 

 








						Zendaya Is Here to Teach You the Difference Between Hair Extensions, Weaves and Wigs
					

Zendaya explains the difference between different hair pieces




					people.com


----------



## Sferics

Icyjade said:


> Are these weaves?
> View attachment 5608472
> 
> 
> Her skin condition looks bad….
> View attachment 5608473




As far as I like to bash her, but this is what skin actually looks like without filters. 
We should get used to it (again). 
For our own good.


----------



## papertiger

pixiejenna said:


> This! Even here on TPF many posters (many of whom are not British or under their realm and are just fans of the monarchy) noted how frail QE was looking in her pictures, worried about her health. Harry someone who is a close family member should be able to see the major decline in her physical health. Sadly I think it boils down to he just doesn’t care. I know people will want to blame Megan for this but at the end of the day this is his choice. I don’t know if he’ll regret it because he can’t seem to look past himself and his immediate family. Everything else doesn’t even seem to register on his radar.



That they both go on about caring and kindness is just bannannaaannaas. Harry's grandmother disappears before his eyes, Me-aghain's father is ill, just a short ride from Monteshitshow and she doesn't care,. Harry and MegZ are both horrible people.


----------



## Lodpah

I see it this way (replying to how they should be treated based on respect to the Queen). Their public appearances will always be based on something. Don’t do it cause out of respect for the charity, person, ad nauseam, so they get a free pass EVERY SINGLE TIME. This round and round will never end and they get to display their faux grief or whatever and get away with it.

Let the people do what they want to do. Cheer, boo, whatever. I mean if they need real time and real life on how people gauge them then I don’t think people should be silenced. It just emboldens them in their sick minds that they are the most important people in the world. 

I would not boo but I certainly would turn my back as a sign of protest and not just for them, that’s anyone who I don’t feel particularly endeared too or who has crossed the line.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Oops, I think we've all forgotten the most important thing concerning these last few days.
> Has anyone thought to ask M if she's okay?


Lots of us have been asking “what’s wrong with her”. 
Isn’t that the same?


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I remember an article by Zendaya explaining the difference between the types of hair additions - wigs, extensions , tracks , weaves - I could not find the exact original article but she is knowledgeable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zendaya Is Here to Teach You the Difference Between Hair Extensions, Weaves and Wigs
> 
> 
> Zendaya explains the difference between different hair pieces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com




It's quite common for so many, I don't know why all the fuss. 

She has veneers, false lashes and hair, fake tan, PS and fillers, but if she was real inside, none of that would matter


----------



## Lodpah

Sharont2305 said:


> The steering him around annoys me the most. My God, he's done this all his life, he knows what to do.


It’s for show I think. The harder you convey your “love and unity” in public the harder it is in private. Lol I hold my 89 year old aunty’s hand all the time and she walks really, really slow but there’s a reason for it. My husband’s hands, nah, only on long walks and when sightseeing or when the mood hits to just grab his hand. With my handbag on one side and his hands in my other hands I tend to get a little irritated and claustrophobic and can’t walk straight.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It's quite common for so many, I don't know why all the fuss.
> 
> She has veneers, false lashes and hair, fake tan, PS and fillers, but if she was real inside, none of that would matter


Was at hairdresser, saw another client - teenager - with her own long hair getting a balayage, it took forever to color her hair 
I have no patience for all that monthly maintenance despite the popularity 
Her hair looked amazing when done


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> I see it this way (replying to how they should be treated based on respect to the Queen). Their public appearances will always be based on something. Don’t do it cause out of respect for the charity, person, ad nauseam, so they get a free pass EVERY SINGLE TIME. This round and round will never end and they get to display their faux grief or whatever and get away with it.
> 
> Let the people do what they want to do. Cheer, boo, whatever. I mean if they need real time and real life on how people gauge them then I don’t think people should be silenced. It just emboldens them in their sick minds that they are the most important people in the world.
> 
> I would not boo but I certainly would turn my back as a sign of protest and not just for them, that’s anyone who I don’t feel particularly endeared too or who has crossed the line.


I would put a big smile on my face, stick out my hand and say "time to go home."


----------



## pixiejenna

Sharont2305 said:


> The steering him around annoys me the most. My God, he's done this all his life, he knows what to do.



He knows what to do but she doesn’t that’s why she clings to him.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I would put a big smile on my face, stick out my hand and say "time to go home."


You're sooo polite, lol


----------



## gracekelly

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle may fly Archie and Lilibet to the UK
					

According to The Telegraph, the Sussexes are now trying to work out whether Meghan's mother Doria Ragland, 66, and the children should fly out to the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Oh pleeeez.  So if her mom can't go, then the royals are being racist?  It would made far more sense for Meghan to go home and come back again. She should have left today.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> You're sooo polite, lol


I would prefer to say voetsek, Meghan but she would think I was saying something in a foreign language like _nice to see you._


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle may fly Archie and Lilibet to the UK
> 
> 
> According to The Telegraph, the Sussexes are now trying to work out whether Meghan's mother Doria Ragland, 66, and the children should fly out to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh pleeeez.  So if her mom can't go, then the royals are being racist?  It would made far more sense for Meghan to go home and come back again. She should have left today.


So the 41-year-old who tries to convince everyone she’s independent and strong needs her mommy to come out and support her? Give me a break.

Because I’m sure not buying that she can’t bear to be away from her kids. She was happy to leave them behind when it meant doing promotional visits in Germany and being on the Tonight Show.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Was at hairdresser, saw another client - teenager - with her own long hair getting a balayage, it took forever to color her hair
> I have no patience for all that monthly maintenance despite the popularity
> Her hair looked amazing when done



I had that done when I was at Uni, I think I liked it for 10 minutes. Couldn’t wait for it to grow out again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> When you break glasses and dishes, you must be careful not to injure yourself.


Omg
That is hilarious-
All the good china
GONE!


----------



## purseinsanity

Kevinaxx said:


> I’ve seen fake hair on the ground multiple times and I’ve always wondered if there was a cat fight or just a mad dash and the owner just never noticed.
> 
> In a way, raptor is in a tough position.  If she doesn’t go people would say something. If she goes, there’s just no way she can without causing any kind of noise because 1) she can’t help herself and 2) because of everything she’s done up to now and no doubt the behavior will continue because of 1.


She's dug herself into a hole.
Painted herself into a corner.
Plus whatever other cliche that means you've screwed yourself.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Painted herself into a corner


Oops!  Just saw your post!  Great minds, LOL.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So the 41-year-old who tries to convince everyone she’s independent and strong needs her mommy to come out and support her? Give me a break.
> 
> Because I’m sure not buying that she can’t bear to be away from her kids. She was happy to leave them behind when it meant doing promotional visits in Germany and being on the Tonight Show.


what BS
little toddlers at a funeral?  why?  for a photo op?  they would have even less of an idea how to behave then their mother.
I'm also not buying that she can't stand to be away from her kids
These two are sickening


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> what BS
> little toddlers at a funeral?  why?  for a photo op?  they would have even less of an idea how to behave then their mother.
> I'm also not buying that she can't stand to be away from her kids
> These two are sickening


I’m hoping that it is all media fabrication. Given things she’s done in the past, however, you never know.


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> It’s for show I think. The harder you convey your “love and unity” in public the harder it is in private. Lol I hold my 89 year old aunty’s hand all the time and she walks really, really slow but there’s a reason for it. My husband’s hands, nah, only on long walks and when sightseeing or when the mood hits to just grab his hand. With my handbag on one side and his hands in my other hands I tend to get a little irritated and claustrophobic and can’t walk straight.


ITA.  My mother is blind and although she walks with a cane, one of us always holds her hand or has her grab our arm for support and direction.  My son instinctively grabs her hand any time he's with her, which completely melts her heart.  DH and I have been together for 26 years.  We rarely hold hands (and we take a lot of walks), except maybe occasionally on a date night.  Holding hands doesn't prove or disprove the quantity of love one has for another.  TW does it more for her own insecurities and to manipulate her human handbag than anything.


----------



## youngster

Seats are going to be at a serious premium for the funeral.  There is the immediate family which is large all on its own with the Queen's 4 children, their children and possibly some of the older great-grandchildren plus the Queen's cousins of which there are many.  Then all those heads of state, presidents and prime ministers, other kings and queens and princes and princesses, the Queen's long time friends and ladies-in-waiting, etc.  I doubt Doria will make the cut, even if she wanted to be there, which I highly doubt.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> what BS
> little toddlers at a funeral?  why?  for a photo op?  they would have even less of an idea how to behave then their mother.
> I'm also not buying that she can't stand to be away from her kids
> These two are sickening


 If the kids were brought to the UK they wouldn't attend the very formal state funeral, just as the other very young children wouldn't (Zara's, Bea's, Eugenie's children plus probably Charlotte and Louis, and even George). Why would there be exceptions for Harry's young children?


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> I see it this way (replying to how they should be treated based on respect to the Queen). Their public appearances will always be based on something. Don’t do it cause out of respect for the charity, person, ad nauseam, so they get a free pass EVERY SINGLE TIME. This round and round will never end and they get to display their faux grief or whatever and get away with it.
> 
> Let the people do what they want to do. Cheer, boo, whatever. I mean if they need real time and real life on how people gauge them then I don’t think people should be silenced. It just emboldens them in their sick minds that they are the most important people in the world.
> 
> I would not boo but I certainly would turn my back as a sign of protest and not just for them, that’s anyone who I don’t feel particularly endeared too or who has crossed the line.


I agree.  While it might be disrespectful to the Queen to boo, I think we all know that people would be booing them, and not the Queen.  They're walking around collecting flowers, which apparently she wasn't supposed to do, and it's not the Queen's funeral.  God forbid, I wouldn't want anyone in the crowd to "be silenced"!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> So the 41-year-old who tries to convince everyone she’s independent and strong needs her mommy to come out and support her? Give me a break.
> 
> Because I’m sure not buying that she can’t bear to be away from her kids. She was happy to leave them behind when it meant doing promotional visits in Germany and being on the Tonight Show.



It ain’t about the mom, it ain’t about the kids. It’s about the photo op

Never mind our Late Queen’s funeral and country“s and the Commonwealths grief, it‘s gonna be ALL about the pics of the faux-grieving couple and our introduction to their cabbage patch kids

I can just hear the CNN reporter now, “there‘s Harry and Meghan, their children Archie and Lilibet, and the OTHER r o y. a l s”

Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle may fly Archie and Lilibet to the UK
> 
> 
> According to The Telegraph, the Sussexes are now trying to work out whether Meghan's mother Doria Ragland, 66, and the children should fly out to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh pleeeez.  So if her mom can't go, then the royals are being racist?  It would made far more sense for Meghan to go home and come back again. She should have left today.


As I said before, it'll be a photo op for the newly rented kids to overshadow the funeral.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> It ain’t about the mom, it ain’t about the kids. It’s about the photo op
> 
> Never mind our Late Queen’s funeral and country“s and the Commonwealths grief, it‘s gonna be ALL about the pics of the faux-grieving couple and our introduction to their cabbage patch kids
> 
> I can just hear the CNN reporter now, “there‘s Harry and Meghan, their children Archie and Lilibet, and the OTHER r o y. a l s”
> 
> Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already


she apparently wants to have her cake and eat it.  trash talk the family and at the same time take advantage of the high profile they have given her
Disgusting


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> she apparently wants to have her cake and eat it.  trash talk the family and at the same time take advantage of the high profile they have given her
> Disgusting



King Charles said they were going to make their life overseas, no time like the present


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> As I said before, it'll be a photo op for the newly rented kids to overshadow the funeral.


Thing is showing the kids will be an indicator into H&M’s parenting style.  Will they carry the kids? Make them walk?  Will the kids interact with others?  My guess is H&M will not want the judgement.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> It ain’t about the mom, it ain’t about the kids. It’s about the photo op
> 
> Never mind our Late Queen’s funeral and country“s and the Commonwealths grief, it‘s gonna be ALL about the pics of the faux-grieving couple and our introduction to their cabbage patch kids
> 
> I can just hear the CNN reporter now, “there‘s Harry and Meghan, their children Archie and Lilibet, and the OTHER r o y. a l s”
> 
> Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already


And pretty unfair on the kids??


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> It ain’t about the mom, it ain’t about the kids. It’s about the photo op
> 
> Never mind our Late Queen’s funeral and country“s and the Commonwealths grief, it‘s gonna be ALL about the pics of the faux-grieving couple and our introduction to their cabbage patch kids
> 
> I can just hear the CNN reporter now, “there‘s Harry and Meghan, their children Archie and Lilibet, and the OTHER r o y. a l s”
> 
> Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already


She had 10 days and could have gone home for 5-6 and returned easily.  She doesn't want to leave Harry alone because she is afraid that he will stray off the reservation and he might talk to his family, not that they want to talk to him.  Her need to control him is overwhelming, hence the fights about going to Balmoral and to the walkabout.  She is terrified of what he might do without her.


----------



## purseinsanity

New Episodes of Meghan Markle's 'Archetypes' Podcast Being Held Following Queen Elizabeth's Death​Two days after it debuted in August, Meghan Markle's podcast hit number one in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada​By
Shafiq Najib

Meghan Markle's podcast is hitting the pause button.

In light of Queen Elizabeth's death, PEOPLE understands that _Archetypes_, which debuted last month, is being held this week, and it's uncertain when it will resume.

Meghan, 41, and her husband Prince Harry first announced a "multi-year partnership" between Spotify and their production company Archewell Audio in 2020. According to a previously shared press release, _Archetypes_ intends to "investigate the labels that try to hold women back."

Speaking with historians and experts, Meghan will also "uncover the origin of these stereotypes and have uncensored conversations with women who know all too well how these typecasts shape narratives," the release continued.






KIRSTY O'CONNOR/WPA-POOL/MEGA
Meghan Markle's Biggest Revelations in Her 'Archetypes' Podcast

On Aug. 23, the Duchess of Sussex released the first episode of _Archetypes_, titling the conversation, "The Misconceptions of Ambition."

Featuring Serena Williams as a guest, the friends discussed the double standard society sets for women who chase their dreams, and Meghan revealed that a fire broke out in son Archie's nursery during the Sussex family's royal tour of Africa in 2019.

Two days after it dropped, _Archetypes_ became the number one podcast in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada on Spotify's international charts.

Mariah Carey was a featured guest on the second episode of Archetypes, titled "The Duality of Diva," where they discussed today's negative connotations of the word "diva" and being biracial.

Meanwhile, the third and latest episode of the podcast, titled "The Stigma of the Singleton with Mindy Kaling," saw Meghan and Kaling, 43, recall what they were like in high school — with the Duchess of Sussex describing herself as an "ugly duckling."

On Saturday, two days after the announcement of the Queen's passing, Meghan joined her husband, Prince Harry, and in-laws Prince William and Kate Middleton for a surprise walkabout at Windsor Castle.

Dressed in black, the foursome spoke with onlookers and toured the emotional tributes left for the late monarch, who died Thursday at age 96.



LOL I bet it is.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> And pretty unfair on the kids??


Very unfair to the kids. Travelling halfway round the world, big circus, to an occasion they wont remember and will be recorded anyway. She was their great gran who they saw once or never.


----------



## papertiger

Even the speculation, made it all about them and her AGAIN


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's quite common for so many, I don't know why all the fuss.
> 
> She has veneers, false lashes and hair, fake tan, PS and fillers, but if she was real inside, none of that would matter


Agree in principle but I will say all the stuff you mentioned is great for making a person happy when done well….
But when it’s consistently done badly by someone who we are always told is rich enough to have a top glam squad, then it’s just frustrating to watch.

For me, I do find it weird she has so many narcissistic behaviours but seems to have such a dated grooming routine but I do wonder if it’s about trying to recapture her 20s which were in the era of the bad spray tan, the flat nude lip, the spidery lash and the very heavy thick extension.


----------



## lanasyogamama

#MeghanMarkleGoHome is trending on Twitter


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> Agree in principle but I will say all the stuff you mentioned is great for making a person happy when done well….
> But when it’s consistently done badly by someone who we are always told is rich enough to have a top glam squad, then it’s just frustrating to watch.
> 
> For me, I do find it weird she has so many narcissistic behaviours but seems to have such a dated grooming routine but I do wonder if it’s about trying to recapture her 20s which were in the era of the bad spray tan, the flat nude lip, the spidery lash and the very heavy thick extension.


I’ve heard a lot of women get stuck in that trap of sticking with the era of hair and makeup where they thought they looked best.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  My mother is blind and although she walks with a cane, one of us always holds her hand or has her grab our arm for support and direction.  My son instinctively grabs her hand any time he's with her, which completely melts her heart.  DH and I have been together for 26 years.  We rarely hold hands (and we take a lot of walks), except maybe occasionally on a date night.  Holding hands doesn't prove or disprove the quantity of love one has for another.  TW does it more for her own insecurities and to manipulate her human handbag than anything.


Whenever I see her attach herself to him, it looks so cloying and suffocating.  Everything is done for the cameras.  Someone posted earlier that they know a few couples like that and they are no longer together.  I have to agree, and I wonder how long they will last.  

It has already been posted that staff in the royal household placed their bets on 5 years


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> I’ve heard a lot of women get stuck in that trap of sticking with the era of hair and makeup where they thought they looked best.



Again, nothing wrong with that if it suited you in the first place.

I’ll own up, apart from the times I made change and do something fashionable with my hair and HATED it, I’ve always had my hair just long and wavy, and that was since childhood.

It’s all my own though


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> She had 10 days and could have gone home for 5-6 and returned easily.  She doesn't want to leave Harry alone because she is afraid that he will stray off the reservation and he might talk to his family, not that they want to talk to him.  Her need to control him is overwhelming, hence the fights about going to Balmoral and to the walkabout.  She is terrified of what he might do without her.


I wonder why?  She already has the 2 meal tickets and is set for life.  After reading the Bower book, I find it very difficult to believe she actually loves him, she has no use for him in any of HER ventures.  

She is milking the titles for all they are worth, but if they are taken away and he leaves, then she has nothing.  Is this why?


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes I think so- certainly not for his skills as a painter
> 
> So my guess is either:
> Trapped in safe door while trying to go through family jewels
> Or
> As I said an acrylic tip is currently wedged in Harry’s….
> 
> So not a hairdresser but as I’m always complaining about her hair I’ll give you my opinion of what is going on in tendril town.
> 
> The wisps of baby hairs you can see in front are M’s hair. It’s very common to grow your front baby hairs out if you habitually wear weaves or wigs in your natural colour as you can blend the real and fake hair together and cover the join. That is what is happening here. Notice how they are stuck flat and backwards. Now this photo isn’t great quality but you can see her hair looks thicker, straighter and darker behind those baby hairs? That’s because it’s the fake hair. It is hard to see but it looks like it starts at a slightly different place and has a different incline then you would expect natural hair to fall but the dead give away is the hair she chooses to wear itself- it’s a much redder toned dark brown  than her baby hairs and it is so thick and straight whereas her actual hair is clearly quite fine and curly.
> So how do can you add a weave?
> by either- 1. sewing a thin mesh onto your natural hair then you sew the fake hair onto the mesh.
> 
> Or
> 2. Some people also sew the fake hair straight onto their real hair.
> 
> As you can see some people are really good at this and their joins are invisible. Another big part of doing a good job is picking a style of hair extension that will sit comfortably on your head rather than dragging it down or giving you a helmet head. Part of the reason M’s hair bugs me so much is because it would be so easy to improve it if she’d just listen to someone else (like say a competent hair stylist) rather than trying to drag on her 20s and thus the horror of 00s weaves  ad infinitum. (The variety and quality of hair extensions and weaves has astronomically improved in the last 20years and they’ve gotten so much cheaper although Europe still doesn’t have as much choice as the USA Every time I go to USA I always want to go and admire the hair shops
> 
> NB- this works  if you have a thicker and curlier texture of hair. I believe M has straightened curly hair so she would go the above route
> 
> If you have straight hair you would probably apply your extensions using the microbond/gluing/sew in route.
> So Catherine wears extensions and they would add these by just lifting up and clipping off the top layers of hair and then sticking strips of hair to the scalp line using one of the techniques above and then covering it with the top layers. Add on - I believe  you can also us these Methods with Afro/curly hair textures so there is a chance M wears extensions applied like this but IMHO I think more likely it’s a weave going from the photos.
> 
> Now if you have a true wig (it’s like a skull cap with hair ready sewn onto it) then you are gluing it to your skin or just sitting it on your head- no weaving/sewing required. Wigs have come a long way too from synthetic hard fronts to virgin hair lace fronts.
> 
> None of these styles last forever because there’s a lot of friction acting on the hair and also over time the method of attaching the hair loosens. Also  you’ve got to let your scalp breathe from all that extra weight and heat.
> 
> Now to put on my amateur dermatologist cap and go to town on the skincare
> 
> I remember watching a destiny’s child video and asking my mum how the girls could get their hair in so many styles and my mum went ‘they are wigs of course’
> It blew my mind and  started my obsession with wigs and hair tech then was nowhere near what it is now.



I know nothing about wigs and weaves, but do you really believe that Catherine uses extensions?  She has always had the most beautiful thick hair, even when she and William were pictured together in Uni.


----------



## Sina08

lanasyogamama said:


> I’ve heard a lot of women get stuck in that trap of sticking with the era of hair and makeup where they thought they looked best.


Guess for some it’s just a routine they never gave up. I got two cousins and one aunt suffering from this inexplicable condition. It is not a pretty sight, yet you can’t say anything.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Again, nothing wrong with that if it suited you in the first place.
> 
> I’ll own up, apart from the times I made change and do something fashionable with my hair and HATED it, I’ve always had my hair just long and wavy, and that was since childhood.
> 
> It’s all my own though


Everyone always wants what they don't have     My hair is straight and I have spent 40 years trying to make it wavy.  Even through the trend for hair to be pin straight, I never wanted my hair to be straight.  I go to the hairdresser who is in her early 30s and she always takes the straightener to get it almost spiky straight.  I don't think it suits me and as soon as I get home, I give it a bit of a wave


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why?  She already has the 2 meal tickets and is set for life.  After reading the Bower book, I find it very difficult to believe she actually loves him, she has no use for him in any of HER ventures.
> 
> She is milking the titles for all they are worth, but if they are taken away and he leaves, then she has nothing.  Is this why?


She must have the spotlight.  She realizes this is the brightest spotlight she has had in years. She will not leave it willingly.
It seems that Oprah is the same way.  She, Gayle, CBS, etc. crave the spotlight. Let’s see if they give up those private jets.


Toby93 said:


> I know nothing about wigs and weaves, but do you really believe that Catherine uses extensions?  She has always had the most beautiful thick hair, even when she and William were pictured together in Uni.


No, I think her hair is natural.  Thick hair runs in her family.  That said, I am not an expert.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> Again, nothing wrong with that if it suited you in the first place.
> 
> I’ll own up, apart from the times I made change and do something fashionable with my hair and HATED it, I’ve always had my hair just long and wavy, and that was since childhood.
> 
> It’s all my own though


I agree, for me, when I grow my hair then get fed up of it I revert to my hairstyle of the 90s when I was in my 20s.....Demi Moore in Ghost. It still suits me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

purseinsanity said:


> New Episodes of Meghan Markle's 'Archetypes' Podcast Being Held Following Queen Elizabeth's Death​Two days after it debuted in August, Meghan Markle's podcast hit number one in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada​By
> Shafiq Najib
> 
> Meghan Markle's podcast is hitting the pause button.
> 
> In light of Queen Elizabeth's death, PEOPLE understands that _Archetypes_, which debuted last month, is being held this week, and it's uncertain when it will resume.
> 
> Meghan, 41, and her husband Prince Harry first announced a "multi-year partnership" between Spotify and their production company Archewell Audio in 2020. According to a previously shared press release, _Archetypes_ intends to "investigate the labels that try to hold women back."
> 
> Speaking with historians and experts, Meghan will also "uncover the origin of these stereotypes and have uncensored conversations with women who know all too well how these typecasts shape narratives," the release continued.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KIRSTY O'CONNOR/WPA-POOL/MEGA
> Meghan Markle's Biggest Revelations in Her 'Archetypes' Podcast
> 
> On Aug. 23, the Duchess of Sussex released the first episode of _Archetypes_, titling the conversation, "The Misconceptions of Ambition."
> 
> Featuring Serena Williams as a guest, the friends discussed the double standard society sets for women who chase their dreams, and Meghan revealed that a fire broke out in son Archie's nursery during the Sussex family's royal tour of Africa in 2019.
> 
> Two days after it dropped, _Archetypes_ became the number one podcast in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Canada on Spotify's international charts.
> 
> Mariah Carey was a featured guest on the second episode of Archetypes, titled "The Duality of Diva," where they discussed today's negative connotations of the word "diva" and being biracial.
> 
> Meanwhile, the third and latest episode of the podcast, titled "The Stigma of the Singleton with Mindy Kaling," saw Meghan and Kaling, 43, recall what they were like in high school — with the Duchess of Sussex describing herself as an "ugly duckling."
> 
> On Saturday, two days after the announcement of the Queen's passing, Meghan joined her husband, Prince Harry, and in-laws Prince William and Kate Middleton for a surprise walkabout at Windsor Castle.
> 
> Dressed in black, the foursome spoke with onlookers and toured the emotional tributes left for the late monarch, who died Thursday at age 96.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL I bet it is.


She makes it look like these flowers were for her! Damn! walking the line clutching it tight until one of the assistants took it from her—embarrassing.


----------



## pomeline

So... Is it really confirmed Doria is on her way to UK? With the kids? I don't know why they would bring the kids, it's not like they really miss them and I can't figure out how they could use them for PR either. Ok so teary walks looking at flowers maybe but I don't see them bringing the kids to the funeral. And why Doria? She isn't exactly nanny material. God I sound harsh but I guess I'm turning into a cynic with all that I've read over the years.

P.S. Can I just say how envious I am seeing how vibrant and witty the conversation here is on the royal topics..? I used to be on another discussion forum about royals (we were not Sussex stans) until it was suddenly closed down by the admin. We set up another one but there's only a couple of us now and since we don't want Meghan fanatics in to bash us, we don't really advertise our forum so it's... pretty dead there. But hey, anyone wants to talk more about it, PM me by all means.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why?  She already has the 2 meal tickets and is set for life.  After reading the Bower book, I find it very difficult to believe she actually loves him, she has no use for him in any of HER ventures.
> 
> She is milking the titles for all they are worth, but if they are taken away and he leaves, then she has nothing.  Is this why?


I think for someone like her, no matter what she has, it’s never enough.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> There's no way The Duchess of Windsor's dress would fit The Claw.  Not body shaming, simply stating the truth, ma'am.


the white Wallis outfit for the jubilee, I did not get it at first
When MM left the cathedral, she was wearing the 8 in gloves that she carried in, we had a chat here as to the significance of the  gloves … why not wear them in ? Why tote them in ?
Well, the original white Wallis outfit had the same gloves, exact same length, that length was popular in the 1950s, it is hard to find today as ladies do not wear 3/4 length jackets anymore
The MM gloves gave away her inspiration , a clear steal from Wallis
And odd/ grating choice of outfit as Wallis was not beloved by the BRF


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sferics said:


> As far as I like to bash her, but this is what skin actually looks like without filters.
> We should get used to it (again).
> For our own good.



My skin most definitely does not look like this. And I'm not even talking about the wrinkles - those are partly genetics - but the massive sun damage. Which can be avoided with, well, sunscreen.

ETA: admittedly, if I didn't dislike her so much and if her nasty stans wouldn't have made such a fuss how she is older than Kate but looks younger (I really don't think so) I wouldn't sit there and look at her face with magnifying glasses. Her skin is not her main problem, it's the nasty personality.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> what BS
> little toddlers at a funeral?  why?  for a photo op?  they would have even less of an idea how to behave then their mother.
> I'm also not buying that she can't stand to be away from her kids
> These two are sickening


Just looked for photos of the 1952 funeral of King George VI, Charles would have been about 4 and Anne maybe 2, well I failed to find any photos of them at all
A and L are about the same ages and A and C were in 1952
No invite for them 

George on the other hand, might make a cameo …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Was at hairdresser, saw another client - teenager - with her own long hair getting a balayage, it took forever to color her hair
> I have no patience for all that monthly maintenance despite the popularity
> Her hair looked amazing when done



Right? I am keeping my natural colour only because I know I can't be bothered to go to the hairdresser every month. I'd prefer it darker or redder if I wasn't so lazy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle may fly Archie and Lilibet to the UK
> 
> 
> According to The Telegraph, the Sussexes are now trying to work out whether Meghan's mother Doria Ragland, 66, and the children should fly out to the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh pleeeez.  So if her mom can't go, then the royals are being racist?  It would made far more sense for Meghan to go home and come back again. She should have left today.



It gets tedious. Has any of us seen the Middletons make a fuss and push their way into the front seat in the past 10 years? (that said, I'm positive it's not Doria's fault)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already



At this point it's pretty safe to say nobody likes her either.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Just looked for photos of the 1952 funeral of King George VI, Charles would have been about 4 and Anne maybe 2, well I failed to find any photos of them at all
> A and L are about the same ages and A and C were in 1952
> No invite for them
> 
> George on the other hand, might make a cameo …


again, maybe I'm biased but it seems a lot different to me to have a child who knew the queen and who lives locally be there....maybe they wouldn't understand everything but bringing a very young child from overseas?  makes no sense.  then again, is this report true or just more made-up stuff?


----------



## Sophisticatted

It wouldn’t surprise me if she tried to take the kids to “pay their respects” to their great grandmother by publicly visiting the coffin (after alerting all US news media).  It’s the last chance for the two Lilibets to be in the same room together.  Roll eyes.

ETA: I doubt the kids would be allowed at the funeral, a very large, very serious, highly televised event.  KC3 & Co. do not want that kind of drama and negative attention grabbing tactics that an antsy toddler/preschooler might act out.

Louis at a Jubilee concert s one thing.  Archie, Lilli, et al at a funeral is quite different.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I’ll own up, apart from the times I made change and do something fashionable with my hair and HATED it, I’ve always had my hair just long and wavy, and that was since childhood.



Same. At this point, I just waltz in and don't even discuss anything, just trim it and keep the overall shape. Maybe it's boring but I know I won't hate it 20 mins out of the appointment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> It ain’t about the mom, it ain’t about the kids. It’s about the photo op
> 
> Never mind our Late Queen’s funeral and country“s and the Commonwealths grief, it‘s gonna be ALL about the pics of the faux-grieving couple and our introduction to their cabbage patch kids
> 
> I can just hear the CNN reporter now, “there‘s Harry and Meghan, their children Archie and Lilibet, and the OTHER r o y. a l s”
> 
> Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already


   
They and all the US media need to leave asap.  This is so embarrassing, distracting and inappropriate.


----------



## redney

Wasn't Doria photographed recently walking her dogs in LA? How is she taking care of the kids, as the DM claims? is there a roll eyes emoji?


----------



## csshopper

Warning Meghan: yesterday it was only a preview, The Prince and Princess of Wales.

 The next time it will be the entire extended family you have to face.

Cold politeness deep enough to freeze your b**bs. A loving family united against your horrid treatment of them, especially the Queen, Prince Phillip, and King Charles’s III.

You flailed around yesterday like a marionette with broken strings. Take the hint, you are out of your depth here and don’t belong. Go home. You will not be missed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> They and all the US media need to leave asap.  This is so embarrassing, distracting and inappropriate.



I think the the world’s media will be here whatever, but TweedleDum and TweedleZee turn everything into a circus and the media can’t help bait those the clickity, clic—clicks, 

Even we, hands up, contribute to this


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661


Saw that another site.  Is it a diabetes device?
I couldn’t get past the hair. Frizzy and looks to be lightened?  Is that because Kate went lighter?  Mercy, H&M need to leave.


----------



## papertiger

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661



You can stuff on fleeBay like that now


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Saw that another site.  Is it a diabetes device?
> I couldn’t get past the hair. Frizzy and looks to be lightened?  Is that because Kate went lighter?  Mercy, H&M need to leave.


TBLG pointed out Hazbeen fiddling with his jacket pocket .


----------



## Lodpah

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661


That looks like a recording device. If it is how low can a person get to monetize grief? I’m sure we will have receipts about the convo in the car ride. Where is GB’s intelligence at? Asleep at the wheel?


----------



## redney

All very interesting. It was reported they were planning their own walkabout with a US camera crew in tow until PW caught wind of it and stopped it by "inviting" them to join him and Kate, perhaps they were both mic'd up and decided to keep the mics/recording devices running.


----------



## gracekelly

Will someone at BP please wake up and see that these two can not be trusted?  Send them overseas!


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> I think the the world’s media will be here whatever, but TweedleDum and TweedleZee turn everything into a circus and the media can’t help bait those the clickity, clic—clicks,
> 
> Even we, hands up, contribute to this



Both of them need to be swept for devices before and after leaving the house


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> TBLG pointed out Hazbeen fiddling with his jacket pocket .



and couldn’t stop fiddling


----------



## BlueCherry

And a grubby stain to match the trampy shoes …


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maybe these devices will mysteriously get lost, just like her shoes.


----------



## redney

Sophisticatted said:


> Maybe these devices will mysteriously get lost, just like her shoes.


Let's hope so! Can't believe they'd ever have the gall to publicly release any recordings of any event related to the Queen's death and funeral.


----------



## Lounorada

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661


Interesting. When I was watching the walkabout live on tv, I thought I noticed something similar under her dress on her _back _(near where the hook/clasp on a bra is, slightly to the right) while she was standing shaking people hands, but then she moved a certain way and it seemed to disappear. Which was odd because if it was just the way the fabric gathered then it was unnatural looking, fabric is soft it wouldn't form a sharp, straight line, boxy shape. 
Hmmm... you never know with these too. They seem desperate IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if the rumours of big money problems are true, hence why they are desperate to give Netflix what they want/need. They need the money!


----------



## redney

Lounorada said:


> Interesting. When I was watching the walkabout live on tv, I thought I noticed something similar under her dress on her _back _(near where the hook/clasp on a bra is, slightly to the right) while she was standing shaking people hands, but then she moved a certain way and it seemed to disappear. Which was odd because if it was just the way the fabric gathered then it was unnatural looking, fabric is soft it wouldn't form a sharp, straight line, boxy shape.
> Hmmm... you never know with these too. They seem desperate IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if the rumours of big money problems are true, hence why they are desperate to give Netflix what they want/need. They need the money!


If they released any recordings that were secretly made, they may get Netflix's money but they can likely kiss their titles and any sort of ties to the BRF good bye.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Both of them need to be swept for devices before and after leaving the house


Surely the BRF’s security [MI6?]  is recording their phone calls, conversation, etc.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> yes, the constant touching, hand holding and esp her steering him around is just so annoying.  wouldn't it be great if some day at a public event he got mad and yanked away from her claw?


Yes, it's almost like taking a walk with your dog on a leash. "Sit. Wait. Walk. Left. Right. Pat on the back. Good Boy. Here's your treat."


----------



## AbbytheBT

BlueCherry said:


> And a grubby stain to match the trampy shoes …
> 
> View attachment 5608663


maybe a mic on her left side would explain her constant ”side hair” move ?


----------



## marietouchet

THAT finger 









						Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Are Seen Together At Windsor Castle Amid Family Controversy
					

The couple was seen after it was revealed that King Charles had ordered that Meghan Markle shouldn't see the queen before she passed away




					www.shownews.today


----------



## Lounorada

redney said:


> If they released any recordings that were secretly made, they may get Netflix's money but I'd bet it would be the end of their titles and any sort of ties to the BRF.


Very true. Maybe they wouldn't release the recordings outright, but more so use the info recorded as some sort of blackmail or threat to get what they want from the RF? Or is that too far-fetched?
I keep forgetting that they are just an innocent couple seeking a better life for themselves who are very much in love, currently grieving and supporting each other... they wouldn't be capable of these unspeakable things, surely?


They're capable of anything!


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, it's almost like taking a walk with your dog on a leash. "Sit. Wait. Walk. Left. Right. Pat on the back. Good Boy. Here's your treat."


LOL!


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> THAT finger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle And Prince Harry Are Seen Together At Windsor Castle Amid Family Controversy
> 
> 
> The couple was seen after it was revealed that King Charles had ordered that Meghan Markle shouldn't see the queen before she passed away
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.shownews.today


Again don't know how accurate this is but I would love to think that Charles for once, forbid, Harry to do something inappropriate


----------



## redney

Lounorada said:


> Very true. Maybe they wouldn't release the recordings outright, but more so use the info recorded as some sort of blackmail or threat to get what they want from the RF? Or is that too far-fetched?
> I keep forgetting that they are just an innocent couple seeking a better life for themselves who are very much in love, currently grieving and supporting each other... they wouldn't be capable of these unspeakable things, surely?
> View attachment 5608702
> 
> They're capable of anything!


Agree they are capable of anything but so is King Charles (i.e. strip their titles)


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> If they released any recordings that were secretly made, they may get Netflix's money but they can likely kiss their titles and any sort of ties to the BRF good bye.


If they are recording private conversations all week look for a complete overhaul of Harry’s memoir to include them. Either that or Meghan will use them herself in an interview.


----------



## bubablu

Toby93 said:


> It has already been posted that staff in the royal household placed their bets on 5 years


Some ladies here bet the same long time ago, we just have to wait with some popcorns.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> If they are recording private conversations all week look for a complete overhaul of Harry’s memoir to include them. Either that or Meghan will use them herself in an interview.


What is the law in the UK regarding recording conversations? Do you need the consent of all parties to the conversation before you can make the contents of a recording of that conversation public ? Or can one party to the conversation use the recording without anyone else’s consent?


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> Agree they are capable of anything but so is King Charles (i.e. strip their titles)


Yes, KingCharles is a man on a mission. Love love that he is taking action. Best to stay out of his way. 
Hazzi did not get a new title, no wealthy Duchy, no mention of an inheritance, no new palace, etc.  Things can only get removed now.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Agree they are capable of anything but so is King Charles (i.e. strip their titles)


here's an entertaining thought.  IF (and that's a big if) the queen was so fond of Harry and now she's not around to protect him and IF Charles and Camilla (and Will and Kate) are sickened enough about H&M's horrid behavior, maybe some real consequences could occur


----------



## pomeline

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661



I asked Mr Pom to take a look and he said right away "oh yeah, that's a recording device alright". He was wondering though why on earth are they using such visible ones when there are more inconspicuous ones available.

I hope the security is in on them. They have to be, right...?


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> What is the law in the UK regarding recording conversations? Do you need the consent of all parties to the conversation before you can make the contents of a recording of that conversation public ? Or can one party to the conversation use the recording without anyone else’s co


If someone has made threats against the King, it is a security problem.  Recordings = protection.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bubablu

Re: the kids in UK. I see nobody is thinking that she just miss them! LOL


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> I asked Mr Pom to take a look and he said right away "oh yeah, that's a recording device alright". He was wondering though why on earth are they using such visible ones when there are more inconspicuous ones available.
> 
> I hope the security is in on them. They have to be, right...?


She only had 45 mins to dress.


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> Re: the kids in UK. I see nobody is thinking that she just miss them! LOL


nope


----------



## pomeline

I think I'm going to be sick... 



Have you heard the latest Oprah rumour...? It cannot be true because it's just idiotic. The word is she is planning to stage a rival service in London for all those VIPs who weren't invited and is scouting for a suitable church. Well I hope Meghan is invited and attends that one instead of the real thing!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"Thank you for supporting the family, we appreciate it"? I'm going to throw up. Also she glows so orange she looks radioactive.

Serious question: do these people not consume media outside of TikTok or how come they find it beautiful inside and out to trash the family you married into, WHILE THE PATRIARCH AND MATRIARCH ARE DYING?


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661


Photoshopped, seen that photo elsewhere without mic at waist or white stain at shoulder


----------



## sdkitty

pomeline said:


> I think I'm going to be sick...


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "Thank you for supporting the family, we appreciate it"? I'm going to throw up. Also she glows so orange she looks radioactive.
> 
> Serious question: do these people not consume media outside of TikTok or how come they find it beautiful inside and out to trash the family you married into, WHILE THE PATRIARCH AND MATRIARCH ARE DYING?



How dare she talk in the name of the family?!  I'm not liking this at all.


----------



## purseinsanity

pomeline said:


> I think I'm going to be sick...
> 
> 
> 
> Have you heard the latest Oprah rumour...? It cannot be true because it's just idiotic. The word is she is planning to stage a rival service in London for all those VIPs who weren't invited and is scouting for a suitable church. Well I hope Meghan is invited and attends that one instead of the real thing!



A rival service?  For the woman who was the head of the family she wants to take down?  Even I can't believe that one.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She only had 45 mins to dress.


5 min to put on the pantyhose, dress and shoes  and 40 to adjust the mike and the battery pack.


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> If they released any recordings that were secretly made, they may get Netflix's money but they can likely kiss their titles and any sort of ties to the BRF good bye.


I have a simple explanation for the purported mics … not trying to spy on anyone for nefarious purposes, but rather recording what happened - for fodder for the book - since HandM maybe have bad memories , can’t remember a thing …

of course, a recording of the LION KING chatter about the Mandela-sized joy at their wedding, that would have come out if it ever existed


----------



## bellecate

CobaltBlu said:


> She absolutely drives him around like a buggy. It is SUPER WEIRD how she hangs all over him and pushes him around.
> Different video below. You can tell she's bored to tears.



She’s going for pictures with Prince William and them in the same shot.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> What is the law in the UK regarding recording conversations? Do you need the consent of all parties to the conversation before you can make the contents of a recording of that conversation public ? Or can one party to the conversation use the recording without anyone else’s consent?


I don’t know anything about UK law. They wouldn’t need to play the actual recordings. They could use them as reference for the book and say they remembered it, for example. In reality they make up so many wild stories, I think they will stick with that tried and true method.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> She’s going for pictures with Prince William and them in the same shot.


this is being spun as some sort of reconciliation but I think Will was just trying to be decent - and maybe Charles told him to do it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> She's dug herself into a hole.
> Painted herself into a corner.
> Plus whatever other cliche that means you've screwed yourself.


Oh I love this game.    Please, please may I join with these?
Fell into quicksand.
Fell into an abandoned well.
Fell into an abandoned mineshaft.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

Well now I'm not sure about mics but I wouldn't be surprised if they were wearing them. In any case, what's happening here?




"Is your mic on, Haz?"
"Check, check, 1, 2..."
"What _is_ that rumble?!"

Any of these scenarios can be true really.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Wasn’t Megan upset being offered only Frogmore Cottage as their UK residence? 

I saw that William and Kate will be moving into Windsor Castle as soon as the kids are ready for it…


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> 5 min to put on the pantyhose, dress and shoes  and 40 to adjust the mike and the battery pack.



How long did it take her to lie on the floor kicking and screaming like a three-year-old with a tantrum yelling she won't be wearing no pantyhose?


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Oh I love this game.    Please, please may I join with these?
> Fell into quicksand.
> Fell into an abandoned well.
> Fell into an abandoned mineshaft.


My Gram had one years ago: “She told so many lies her tongue knotted up.”


----------



## pomeline

Gimmethebag said:


> Wasn’t Megan upset being offered only Frogmore Cottage as their UK residence?
> 
> I saw that William and Kate will be moving into Windsor Castle as soon as the kids are ready for it…


She was. First she wanted to move in Windsor Castle, then she wanted Frogmore House. You can bet she will be trying for Adelaide Cottage super hard even though she doesn't even want to stay in the UK.


----------



## purseinsanity

pomeline said:


> Well now I'm not sure about mics but I wouldn't be surprised if they were wearing them. In any case, what's happening here?
> 
> View attachment 5608716
> 
> 
> "Is your mic on, Haz?"
> "Check, check, 1, 2..."
> "What _is_ that rumble?!"
> 
> Any of these scenarios can be true really.


Haz: "Do my pants look wet in the back?"
TW: "HAZ!  I know we're amongst a bunch of flowers, but it's not the wilderness.  You can't pee here.  Where's your diaper?"


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely the BRF’s security [MI6?]  is recording their phone calls, conversation, etc.


If they should be recording anyone it’s them, they are a menace


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gimmethebag said:


> Wasn’t Megan upset being offered only Frogmore Cottage as their UK residence?
> 
> I saw that William and Kate will be moving into Windsor Castle as soon as the kids are ready for it…



Yeah, they first asked for an apartment at Windsor Castle knowing very well only The Queen and Philip lived there, and when that request was denied they wanted Frogmore HOUSE which is way bigger and much more beautiful, their reasoning being they needed the extra space because they also wanted to set up their own court. Both of these requests were nipped in the bud and they ended up in Frogmore Cottage sans court. Though I feel if someone gives you a free house that gets renovated for 2 millions at no cost to you that's still pretty generous, but that's just me. 

It really broke their necks that for some reason they thought they were equal to William and Kate and deserved the same if not better. Though I feel this must have come from her as Harry grew up knowing who played the 2nd fiddle.


----------



## Toby93

redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661


I see she found the camera again, even in her grief


----------



## bag-mania

pomeline said:


> Well now I'm not sure about mics but I wouldn't be surprised if they were wearing them. In any case, what's happening here?
> 
> View attachment 5608716
> 
> 
> "Is your mic on, Haz?"
> "Check, check, 1, 2..."
> "What _is_ that rumble?!"
> 
> Any of these scenarios can be true really.


She’s feeling his baby bump. Oh wait, that’s supposed to be him feeling hers. 

They’re a little off their game but they’ll be back on track after they have decided what this week’s script is going to be.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> What is the law in the UK regarding recording conversations? Do you need the consent of all parties to the conversation before you can make the contents of a recording of that conversation public ? Or can one party to the conversation use the recording without anyone else’s consent?


You need consent of all parties 

I think they need the recordings to back up their ‘memories/,memoirs


----------



## Toby93

pomeline said:


> I asked Mr Pom to take a look and he said right away "oh yeah, that's a recording device alright". He was wondering though why on earth are they using such visible ones when there are more inconspicuous ones available.
> 
> I hope the security is in on them. They have to be, right...?


And why would she wear a dress where it so clearly shows through.  A loose fitting dress would have been much easier?


----------



## Bonosbabe

Bonosbabe said:


> He said “Royal tasting wife”. That she is!


WOW! I just realized I can't bloody spell....I meant "TRASHING" 

Oh well, at least I provided some comic relief.


----------



## pomeline

Toby93 said:


> And why would she wear a dress where it so clearly shows through.  A loose fitting dress would have been much easier?



It did show through that white Wallis coat. That said, it is possible the pic with the visible device is photoshopped but we would have to see other photos and video footage. I haven't seen any certain evidence she was wearing a wire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Now that's an interesting take and it does make sense. I think someone here said it a few days ago, "What if she has dirt on HIM?" Still, how stupid is she. She really thinks she can win a battle with the BRF? They are only keeping mum because of Harry right now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

pomeline said:


> I asked Mr Pom to take a look and he said right away "oh yeah, that's a recording device alright". He was wondering though why on earth are they using such visible ones when there are more inconspicuous ones available.
> 
> I hope the security is in on them. They have to be, right...?



DH is in broadcasting, mostly live, he thinks so too.

Fiddling with a shirt button, collar or jacket lapel is also a sign. 

So, in a crowd like that in the open air, the mic would pic up too much ambient sound to make sense. What these 2 would be recording would be in the car, in confined spaces, close proximity, away from the crowds. A mic on her hip is not going to be effective at picking up what a 6’3” man is saying with his back to her, but it could pick up something in the car. It wont Be great at picking up her own voice either.

If Harry is wearing a lapel mic, it’s to record what he says - only maybe would you hear the other person is they were near. A little mic in a lapel is uni-directional, what M looks to be wearing is more ambient.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I didn't read in full before posting. Not the first time someone alleges she is physically violent, but that Trevor detail was new to me. What a piece of work she is.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know anything about UK law. They wouldn’t need to play the actual recordings. They could use them as reference for the book and say they remembered it, for example. In reality they make up so many wild stories, I think they will stick with that tried and true method.



That’s what I think.

Why bother with the truth when lies still get you hugs in the crowd? (naive girl but very Christian of her)


----------



## VickyB

Wonder if The Queen left Harry any money in her will?


----------



## bag-mania

William and Kate are on to them and their listening devices as was proven during the statue unveiling last year. I bet there was no conversation in that car that had any deeper substance than commenting on the state of the weather.


----------



## papertiger

VickyB said:


> Wonder if The Queen left Harry any money in her will?



You‘re not the only one wondering, there are at least another 2 people who are tossing and turning at at night thinking about it


----------



## pomeline

papertiger said:


> DH is in broadcasting, mostly live, he thinks so too.
> 
> Fiddling with a shirt button, collar or jacket lapel is also a sign.
> 
> So, in a crowd like that in the open air, the mic would pic up too much ambient sound to make sense. What these 2 would be recording would be in the car, in confined spaces, close proximity, away from the crowds. A mic on her hip is not going to be effective at picking up what a 6’3” man is saying with his back to her, but it could pick up something in the car. It wont Be great at picking up her own voice either.
> 
> If Harry is wearing a lapel mic, it’s to record what he says - only maybe would you hear the other person is they were near. A little mic in a lapel is uni-directional, what M looks to be wearing is more ambient.


This is what my hubby said too, not effective in a crowd. But they were driven there and back by William and that's the kind of private stuff they would want. Luckily W&C are not stupid.


----------



## Toby93

VickyB said:


> Wonder if The Queen left Harry any money in her will?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Debbini

bag-mania said:


> William and Kate are on to them and their listening devices as was proven during the statue unveiling last year. I bet there was no conversation in that car that had any deeper substance than commenting on the state of the weather.


----------



## Suncatcher

bag-mania said:


> William and Kate are on to them and their listening devices as was proven during the statue unveiling last year. I bet there was no conversation in that car that had any deeper substance than commenting on the state of the weather.


And I will bet it was silence so thick you could cut it with a knife.


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> And I will bet it was silence so thick you could cut it with a knife.


Certainly it was a tense ride for all.


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean, (who was interviewed yesterday stating King Charles should strip the Titles), reported on his broadcast today the Sussexes did not try any sneaky end run on the Royals about their appearances yesterday at Windsor. 

He said Harry’s PR Team contacted whoever in the RF needed to be asked, and requested permission for he and TW to go out as a couple to look at the tributes to the Queen and talk with people gathered. This was transmitted to Willam, who then offered the 4 of them doing it together.

 NS is clear about the snarky things the Sussexes have done, the lies etc, but stressed in this instance respect for protocol was shown.


----------



## Chanbal

He is looking down, because he is trying to find the Harkles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean, (who was interviewed yesterday stating King Charles should strip the Titles), reported on his broadcast today the Sussexes did not try any sneaky end run on the Royals about their appearances yesterday at Windsor.
> 
> He said Harry’s PR Team contacted whoever in the RF needed to be asked, and requested permission for he and TW to go out as a couple to look at the tributes to the Queen and talk with people gathered. This was transmitted to Willam, who then offered the 4 of them doing it together.
> 
> NS is clear about the snarky things the Sussexes have done, the lies etc, but stressed in this instance respect for protocol was shown.


NS has only got part of it.  Harry asked for permission to take a camera crew with him. That was transmitted to William who then invited them so no camera crew and they would behave.  William didn't count on the mikes though.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean, (who was interviewed yesterday stating King Charles should strip the Titles), reported on his broadcast today the Sussexes did not try any sneaky end run on the Royals about their appearances yesterday at Windsor.
> 
> He said Harry’s PR Team contacted whoever in the RF needed to be asked, and requested permission for he and TW to go out as a couple to look at the tributes to the Queen and talk with people gathered. This was transmitted to Willam, who then offered the 4 of them doing it together.
> 
> NS is clear about the snarky things the Sussexes have done, the lies etc, but stressed in this instance respect for protocol was shown.


Angela added a minor detail like a US TV station to Neil's story.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG got the memo…


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't read in full before posting. Not the first time someone alleges she is physically violent, but that Trevor detail was new to me. What a piece of work she is.


Oh there’s stuff out there that every other word out of her mouth is the F word but that’s beside the point.


----------



## Lodpah

https://www.kidspot.com.au/lifestyle/entertainment/video-of-meghan-and-harry-back-in-the-uk-shows-how-badly-things-have-changed/news-story/24726cc1f4b843bce3d4fae1bac2a51d?amp


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> NS has only got part of it.  Harry asked for permission to take a camera crew with him. That was transmitted to William who then invited them so no camera crew and they would behave.  William didn't count on the mikes though.


That makes sense. William is going to be formidable against them as he should be.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Oh I love this game.    Please, please may I join with these?
> Fell into quicksand.
> Fell into an abandoned well.
> Fell into an abandoned mineshaft.


She does not know the first law of holes - when you are in one, stop digging


----------



## marietouchet

Gimmethebag said:


> Wasn’t Megan upset being offered only Frogmore Cottage as their UK residence?
> 
> I saw that William and Kate will be moving into Windsor Castle as soon as the kids are ready for it…


Four years ago, MM and H were supposed to get large flat at Kensington Palace, but wanted their privacy instead, haha


----------



## Lodpah

I just thought about this. Most leaders of the world will soon be arriving to honor Queen Elizabeth. Each country will bring their security and it will be very intense (each country will be showing how intense their security measures are to protect their leaders, like who has a bigger ____ if you will) so I doubt TW will be able to get away with her little Easy Bake, Target or Amazon recording device.  This will be interesting. Security will be so tight, like ultra tight. Just turn on a little transistor radio or dial someone while next to someone you think is wired with a recording device and it will pick up the signal by beeping (turn blue tooth on). They will be exposed. They're such amateurs and think that they are so much smarter than the intelligence agencies. I do believe they could be perceived as "threats" to His Majesty's Government, family or not.  Such a comedic duo lol.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I would love to see that.


----------



## bellecate

Winterfell5 said:


> OMG!  Now you’re bringing in “illegal drugs and medication?”  Believe me, I am no fan of H and M and find their behavior reprehensible.  I watched the entire walkabout live and didn’t see any of M’s behavior that would support your weird unfounded allegations.  Constructive criticism is one thing, but made up nonsense is over the top.  Many of the comments on this thread are just plain ridiculous!


I did see some of TW behaviour that could be attributed to illegal/prescribed drug use having had to deal with some people with those kinds of problems. Opinions may vary.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *sigh* How did it get from this to now? So sad.



He married a miserable wretch that told him he was trapped and not happy living his good life. He then saw her peeing in the woods, said that’s what’s missing in my life and quickly married her. They then went off to live in bliss filled misery and spent their lives trying to make happy Royals as miserable as themselves.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> And pretty unfair on the kids??


ITA. Hope this rumour is not true.


jelliedfeels said:


> Agree in principle but I will say all the stuff you mentioned is great for making a person happy when done well….
> But when it’s consistently done badly by someone who we are always told is rich enough to have a top glam squad, then it’s just frustrating to watch.
> 
> For me, I do find it weird she has so many narcissistic behaviours but seems to have such a dated grooming routine but I do wonder if it’s about trying to recapture her 20s which were in the era of the bad spray tan, the flat nude lip, the spidery lash and the very heavy thick extension.


I think it's because she believes she knows best. One of my office narcs turned up with a horrendous new hairdo. When the boss told him that it was inappropriate for his job role in public relations, he accused her of being jealous of his trendiness. 


zinacef said:


> She makes it look like these flowers were for her! Damn! walking the line clutching it tight until one of the assistants took it from her—embarrassing.


Sad when someone fights the dead for their flowers.


lanasyogamama said:


> I think for someone like her, no matter what she has, it’s never enough.


Typical narc behaviour


redney said:


> Has this been posted here yet? A few folks on Twitter pointed out a suspicious lump (mic equipment?) under her dress.
> View attachment 5608661





Sophisticatted said:


> Maybe these devices will mysteriously get lost, just like her shoes.


I don't know if it was Photoshopped but I had a major Mission Impossible moment.
Mic pack at waist? Check.
Battery pack strapped to inner thigh? Check.
Wire under hose seam running down to hidden antenna in stilettos? ... 
Where are her shoes?!!!
D*MN! It will take 30mins to reroute the wire upwards and hide the antenna in her hair. She'll have to flip the hair if we don't receive a clear signal.
 


Chanbal said:


>



Very restrained of them to merely say she is not a nice person.


----------



## bag-mania

Dare we hope _Vogue_ has finally seen the light? This headline from yesterday shows at least one of their writers isn’t indulging Meghan by tagging her Duchess title on everything.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Dare we hope _Vogue_ has finally seen the light? This headline from yesterday shows at least one of their writers isn’t indulging Meghan by tagging her Duchess title on everything.
> 
> View attachment 5608797


She usually has SS call and request a redo. Let’s see if it happens.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

csshopper said:


> My Gram had one years ago: “She told so many lies her tongue knotted up.”


Bit off her nose to spite her face. 
Shot herself in the foot.


----------



## VickyB

marietouchet said:


> Four years ago, MM and H were supposed to get large flat at Kensington Palace, but wanted their privacy instead, haha


They had the perfect platform for all the do gooding they wanted to do. If do gooding was their true calling and desire, then why all of a sudden was it all about money and privacy? Makes no sense. It was clearly all about money for her from the get go. Stupid Harry probably didn't understand that.


----------



## xincinsin

VickyB said:


> They had the perfect platform for all the do gooding they wanted to do. If do gooding was their true calling and desire, then why all of a sudden was it all about money and privacy? Makes no sense. It was clearly all about money for her from the get go. Stupid Harry probably didn't understand that.


Very sure she thought Hazard was independently wealthy and she would lead a life of excess the moment the ring was on her finger. By the time she realized that his income was dependent on the Bank of Dad and trust funds managed by his elders, and she was expected to "earn a living" in the Firm, the only avenue left for her was to flounce off and declare herself a victim. I'm puzzled though, in her frantic pursuit to snare the golden goose, didn't she ever do a lick of research into what the BRF does? I know she claims naivete but I doubt that was true - she wasn't a sweet young thing fresh out of finishing school. Or did she really think (like a typical narc) that she was exempt from it all? I just can't get over her self-sabotage.


----------



## carmen56

redney said:


> All very interesting. It was reported they were planning their own walkabout with a US camera crew in tow until PW caught wind of it and stopped it by "inviting" them to join him and Kate, perhaps they were both mic'd up and decided to keep the mics/recording devices running.



Not true, apparently, according to today's Daily Mail.


----------



## redney

carmen56 said:


> Not true, apparently, according to today's Daily Mail.


No idea what was in the DM, but here's what's been widely discussed






						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle thread
					

Neil Sean, (who was interviewed yesterday stating King Charles should strip the Titles), reported on his broadcast today the Sussexes did not try any sneaky end run on the Royals about their appearances yesterday at Windsor.  He said Harry’s PR Team contacted whoever in the RF needed to be...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## xincinsin

The corgis acted better than Methane.








						Daniel Craig pays tribute to Her Majesty The Queen
					

The world saw a more spirited side to the monarch when she made a cameo appearance in Danny Boyle's opening ceremony for the Olympic Games.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## carmen56

VickyB said:


> Wonder if The Queen left Harry any money in her will?


Why do you think they're hanging around until after the funeral and mourning period ends?


----------



## CarryOn2020

carmen56 said:


> Why do you think they're hanging around until after the funeral and mourning period ends?


_I could be wrong,_ I _thought_ all of the Queen’s assets would transfer to the King. This is to avoid a hefty tax bill.  Doubt there is any cash involved, unless the King decides to distribute something.  I _think_ the King can distribute trinkets as per the Queen’s wishes.  All of the former Prince Charles’s assets [the Duchy, etc.] went to William.  

So, imo the lesson here is we should make nice with the ones who control the purse strings if we expect to be included. 
How stupid Hazzi must be.


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> It ain’t about the mom, it ain’t about the kids. It’s about the photo op
> 
> Never mind our Late Queen’s funeral and country“s and the Commonwealths grief, it‘s gonna be ALL about the pics of the faux-grieving couple and our introduction to their cabbage patch kids
> 
> I can just hear the CNN reporter now, “there‘s Harry and Meghan, their children Archie and Lilibet, and the OTHER r o y. a l s”
> 
> Actually, I think she should go home to her invisikids. she doesn’t know anybody, she doesn’t like anybody, not in the family and not the British. just GO AWAY already


The other royals the ones who live in real castles and will be kings those ones


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> Will someone at BP please wake up and see that these two can not be trusted?  Send them overseas!


The word is exile


----------



## Sina08

xincinsin said:


> Very sure she thought Hazard was independently wealthy and she would lead a life of excess the moment the ring was on her finger. By the time she realized that his income was dependent on the Bank of Dad and trust funds managed by his elders, and she was expected to "earn a living" in the Firm, the only avenue left for her was to flounce off and declare herself a victim. I'm puzzled though, in her frantic pursuit to snare the golden goose, didn't she ever do a lick of research into what the BRF does? I know she claims naivete but I doubt that was true - she wasn't a sweet young thing fresh out of finishing school. Or did she really think (like a typical narc) that she was exempt from it all? I just can't get over her self-sabotage.


All this, plus she wanted to be the one in charge. It just doesn’t sit right with her, when she can’t control everyone and everything around her. To abide by the BRF’s rules, being only a small part in a much bigger institution, the accountability part, not being able to use all the wealth, power and influence to her own advantage and as freely as she thought she could. She just didn’t get it and still doesn’t. Her awkwardness at the walkabout just showed that. She doesn’t understand what’s going on and therefore looks totally out of place.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watching this video from this angle, MM looks to be hiding behind a security guard, playing with her hair, then walks over and gets the hug.  She is clearly not ready for service. She needs to go home.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watching this video from this angle, MM looks to be hiding behind a security guard, playing with her hair, then walks over and gets the hug.  She is clearly not ready for service. She needs to go home.



I really need a barf bag for all that fakery. How about you tend to your sick father too?


----------



## jblended

Coming in a little late but I've just seen that Lady C made the announcement on her channel before BP did. I'm fuming! 
Is there no integrity or respect to be found at all these days? To break protocol for the sake of social media clicks, likes and, let's not kid ourselves, lots of money, is absolutely disgusting behaviour. 
My unpopular opinion is that I despise all these commentary channels. All the people exploiting their royal connections (however tenuous or outdated) for social media fame are unethical vultures. I felt the same about Paul Burrell back when he was selling his stories to anyone who would listen. That includes all the royal/body language "experts" quick to exploit the H&M drama for their monetary gain. 
However, this one action by Lady C takes the absolute cake. I hope there's some form of consequence she will face for it, but I've not seen anything mentioned about it. At the very least, I hope she has lost her following because she does not deserve a platform after that stunt, imo. There is no greater act of disrespect that I can imagine; although Meagain trying to get a photo op of her laying _other people's _flowers at the gates comes a close second. *What a narc! *

Harry has to live with the fact that he _chose_ not to see either grandparent when they were near the end. I hope it eats him up inside every day. There was absolutely no reason for him not to see them, given their respective ages and the fact that they adored him until his captor wife soiled the relationship. I wish they'd both bugger off already. I know he has every right to be at the funeral and I believe he will grieve sincerely, but *her*...I have no words and hate that there will be headlines about her presence, her flowers, some story about her "personal" connection or a "private conversation" in the final hours that nobody knew about...you can see the PR machine working already.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> I know nothing about wigs and weaves, but do you really believe that Catherine uses extensions?  She has always had the most beautiful thick hair, even when she and William were pictured together in Uni.


I thought it was common knowledge she wore them sometimes. Just look at these photos:-


In the middle photo her hair is falling at a different incline and is much more voluminous up top. This was the popular style with extensions at the time. I think she might put a bit of volume in her bun styles too with a clip in but that’s just a guess- those are harder to see.
Here’s a photo of her at uni vs later too


Again you see there’s more volume on the scalp in the right photo and the hair is thicker and the hair in the under layers looks like a slightly different weight in this one two. Sure you can blowdry volume into your hair but not that much. Nowadays extensions have changed and they don’t have to have that much of a visible volume in the upper scalp and the fashion is to go for smaller tracks of finer hair now microbonded rather than sewn in and they are much harder to see - that big voluminous mane was the it do of the time though and it’s what M is still going for but not getting right.

I want to be clear that I am not pointing out someone wears extensions or fake hair as a criticism or saying it shouldn’t be done in x circles. To me, hairwork is body art and like any artform there’s skill to it and there’s nothing wrong with critiquing and comparing application and styling.  I can be a little mean to M about her weave because I think it needs improvement not because she shouldn’t wear one.

So to further express what I mean about poor application here’s some photos from the walkabout:


First things first, look at the condition of those tips. A track of hair can’t get conditioning oil from the scalp so they get far more damaged by heat treatments and daily friction.
If it’s starting to frazzle like that and stand up on its own cut off a few inches or start again! Honestly, I wouldn’t be seen dead with that hair.


This is from some time ago obviously but just to illustrate - the yellow line is where her head and hairline logically ends. The  extra length at the back is provided by the volume of the track sewn to the back of her head. I have been saying ad nauseum the thickness of hair she uses is completely wrong for her head and it’s most visible at the back in side views.



Look at how the hair at the back does NOT look like it’s falling in line with the hair on top of her head at all.
You can also see that the curly ends fall at different lengths - obviously this is to give the illusion of layered hair but it also is a dead giveaway that some extensions/tracks are sewn higher up in the hair thus making them shorter. Personally, I would iron out the shorter curls or use straight tracks higher up and only have curls at the bottom as I think it looks really dated and fake. Or hey, maybe even dispense with the bottom curls and the Kate cosplay once and for all 


Her style favours a big thick scalp of hair but look at how it’s sitting. It looks loose to me like the threads holding it to her head are losing tension. It needs fixing.


Incidentally this is something else M has in common with Wallis as she clearly loved a wig with a lot of scalp volume.
Just look at Wallis in this hardfront compared to her usual tight bun-



Thank you for coming to my ted talk 


pomeline said:


> I asked Mr Pom to take a look and he said right away "oh yeah, that's a recording device alright". He was wondering though why on earth are they using such visible ones when there are more inconspicuous ones available.
> 
> I hope the security is in on them. They have to be, right...?


I mean it could just be a good old fashioned threat.
“Look what I’m wearing- you better be nice to me or else”


pomeline said:


> I think I'm going to be sick...
> 
> 
> 
> Have you heard the latest Oprah rumour...? It cannot be true because it's just idiotic. The word is she is planning to stage a rival service in London for all those VIPs who weren't invited and is scouting for a suitable church. Well I hope Meghan is invited and attends that one instead of the real thing!



I agree a vomit emoji would come in here.

She’s such a great actress she definitely convinced us she didn’t already know that girl was called Imelka after she hired her - Meryl Streep could never 

I will say I admire their restraint that they haven’t yet put out a storyline that dear Imelka is an Ukrainian refugee and she was dragging herself through the gunfire in the one desperate hope she would finally get to see this true beauty and ask if she’s ok.


papertiger said:


> DH is in broadcasting, mostly live, he thinks so too.
> 
> Fiddling with a shirt button, collar or jacket lapel is also a sign.
> 
> So, in a crowd like that in the open air, the mic would pic up too much ambient sound to make sense. What these 2 would be recording would be in the car, in confined spaces, close proximity, away from the crowds. A mic on her hip is not going to be effective at picking up what a 6’3” man is saying with his back to her, but it could pick up something in the car. It wont Be great at picking up her own voice either.
> 
> If Harry is wearing a lapel mic, it’s to record what he says - only maybe would you hear the other person is they were near. A little mic in a lapel is uni-directional, what M looks to be wearing is more ambient.


She’s clearly hoping the 6’3 man will want to get closer to her hips - her being so beautiful and all.


VickyB said:


> Wonder if The Queen left Harry any money in her will?


The million dollar question indeed!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

csshopper said:


> Neil Sean, (who was interviewed yesterday stating King Charles should strip the Titles), reported on his broadcast today the Sussexes did not try any sneaky end run on the Royals about their appearances yesterday at Windsor.
> 
> He said Harry’s PR Team contacted whoever in the RF needed to be asked, and requested permission for he and TW to go out as a couple to look at the tributes to the Queen and talk with people gathered. This was transmitted to Willam, who then offered the 4 of them doing it together.
> 
> NS is clear about the snarky things the Sussexes have done, the lies etc, but stressed in this instance respect for protocol was shown.


I am inclined to believe this. I despise the man Harry has become but, he knows protocol and he genuinely loved his gran, he will not stray at this time. I think he will be doing everything by the book this week. His father is now the King and there are too many protocols/people around him for him to go rogue. He will toe the line and be respectful.
When he gets back to the US, however... we'll have to brace ourselves. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Watching this video from this angle, MM looks to be hiding behind a security guard, playing with her hair, then walks over and gets the hug. She is clearly not ready for service. She needs to go home.


Ugh. It's all so disingenuous!


----------



## Pessie

jblended said:


> Coming in a little late but I've just seen that Lady C made the announcement on her channel before BP did. I'm fuming!
> Is there no integrity or respect to be found at all these days? To break protocol for the sake of social media clicks, likes and, let's not kid ourselves, lots of money, is absolutely disgusting behaviour.
> My unpopular opinion is that I despise all these commentary channels. All the people exploiting their royal connections (however tenuous or outdated) for social media fame are unethical vultures. I felt the same about Paul Burrell back when he was selling his stories to anyone who would listen. That includes all the royal/body language "experts" quick to exploit the H&M drama for their monetary gain.
> However, this one action by Lady C takes the absolute cake. I hope there's some form of consequence she will face for it, but I've not seen anything mentioned about it. At the very least, I hope she has lost her following because she does not deserve a platform after that stunt, imo. There is no greater act of disrespect that I can imagine; although Meagain trying to get a photo op of her laying _other people's _flowers at the gates comes a close second. *What a narc! *
> 
> Harry has to live with the fact that he _chose_ not to see either grandparent when they were near the end. I hope it eats him up inside every day. There was absolutely no reason for him not to see them, given their respective ages and the fact that they adored him until his captor wife soiled the relationship. I wish they'd both bugger off already. I know he has every right to be at the funeral and I believe he will grieve sincerely, but *her*...I have no words and hate that there will be headlines about her presence, her flowers, some story about her "personal" connection or a "private conversation" in the final hours that nobody knew about...you can see the PR machine working already.


I agree about the commentary channels. The BLG used to be interesting when he talked about body language but for a long time now he’s just been repeating gossip and selling rubbish.  Lady C has never had any credibility with me because I don’t see any difference between the way she milks her title from what Meghan’s doing.  She and Campbell separated after a only month of marriage.  They’re all vultures.


----------



## CarryOn2020

- Kate’s hair:  plenty of photos show she wears a hairnet when she does a bun.  As for extensions, no one knows, but so what?  It’s ok, just keep them in shape. Kate makes an effort to look fresh and neat.  Tw, not so much.

- Harry’s PR:  nah, I’m not buying it.  We all see how she behaved and he avoided controlling her.  He knew William was ready to drive off, so he deliberately delays - he slowly opens her door and he even sticks his hand out for people to shake. He knew she wanted flowers because that’s her nickname, her mom recently showed off the tattoo, she did flower arranging at her shower.  Yes, she would have merched them, given as gifts [is that what Op wants?].  No, no, he knew what she would do. He is complicit.  He acts like an entitled, privileged jerk because that is what he is.  Gracious is not a word in his or her vocabulary.
 that KingCharles sends him overseas.  Just my opinion. Ymmv.

- inheritance - nothing more than trinkets that they will sell on eBay. The real money stays on UK shores, so anyone looking for a handout [Op?] can go away.








						Queen Elizabeth II just died. Here’s what will happen to her $500 million fortune
					

The Queen’s fortune is complex because so much of it belongs to the “Royal Firm,” the family's $28 billion business empire.




					fortune.com
				




ETA:  just my opinion, I have attended numerous funerals in my day - 40/50 -  the one thing I detest are the people who swarm around looking/hoping for  a handout. I have seen them up close. They look like hyenas licking their lips after a kill. It is the most disgusting side of humanity. Surely, KingCharles and his family are well aware to be on the lookout for this sort of stuff.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Dare we hope _Vogue_ has finally seen the light? This headline from yesterday shows at least one of their writers isn’t indulging Meghan by tagging her Duchess title on everything.
> 
> View attachment 5608797


As much as I hate the press and others call Catherine Kate Middleton, I love the reference to Meghan Markle, especially when it's tagged as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.


----------



## andrashik

Even animals see through her


----------



## bellecate




----------



## RAINDANCE

Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct. 

(Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900



Too little, too late.  Hazzie’s feeble attempt to atone for yesterday’s horrible ordeal.
Correct me if I am wrong, *none* of the other grandchildrens’ spouses were at the Balmoral walk-about. None.
Not Edo, not Jack, not Mike. None.  William’s wife does get included because she is Princess of Wales, spouse of the heir.


----------



## Lodpah

RAINDANCE said:


> Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct.
> 
> (Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)


Nah, TW wrote it.


----------



## Sharont2305

"Hugged your great grandchildren"

Is he talking generally about all the great grandchildren or his own children? So, his children did come over for the Jubilee and there was a meeting with the Queen?

Compare the above to William's 'My three children have got to spend holidays with her and create memories that will last their whole lives"
Quite the contrast really.


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> Nah, TW wrote it.


No, I think Harry and the courtiers wrote this. It sounds proper.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> "Hugged your great grandchildren"
> 
> Is he talking generally about all the great grandchildren or his own children? So, his children did come over for the Jubilee and there was a meeting with the Queen?
> 
> Compare the above to William's 'My three children have got to spend holidays with her and create memories that will last their whole lives"
> Quite the contrast really.


I don’t think the Queen saw Archie again once they’d moved to California or that she met Lilibet at all. I do believe Harry would’ve liked it to be otherwise, but the kids were being used as a bargaining chip. 
Their other grandfather hasn’t been allowed to see either child.  I don’t understand why that gets airbrushed out of things, it disgusts me.


----------



## justwatchin

RAINDANCE said:


> Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct.
> 
> (Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)


Someone helped him for sure….”darling wife and beloved great grandchildren “ . We know who worded that part.


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> I don’t think the Queen saw Archie again once they’d moved to California or that she met Lilibet at all. I do believe Harry would’ve liked it to be otherwise, but the kids were being used as a bargaining chip.
> Their other grandfather hasn’t been allowed to see either child.  I don’t understand why that gets airbrushed out of things, it disgusts me.


I totally agree with you, she saw Archie a handful of times, if that and Lili not at all.
I don't think Charles has met Lili either.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> I totally agree with you, she saw Archie a handful of times, if that and Lili not at all.
> I don't think Charles has met Lili either.


When we saw the pictures of the Cambridge kids going to their introduction at the new school it struck me that that’s what Harry would’ve envisaged for his children when he married.  To be able to show them off now and then, and have them play with their cousins.  It’s sad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900



Yeah that doesn't sit right with me. Now Philip is her husband, not Harry's grandfather? And he just had to mention the witch and throw in the children who met her once are her great-grandchildren (instead of just "my children" or "our children").


----------



## andrashik

Just why? Why coddle them..


----------



## Sina08

RAINDANCE said:


> Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct.
> 
> (Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)


The sad thing is, even if it was H himself, I’m questioning the sincerity of anything they’re putting out there. It seems everything is said and done with an agenda in mind. They really ruined any reputation they’ve ever had.


----------



## LibbyRuth

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5608914
> 
> Just why? Why coddle them..


Why not?  The funeral is two things - a state function, and a family grieving the loss of their matriarch.  Seems an appropriate time to put things aside for a bit and allow the grievers to grieve properly.


----------



## RAINDANCE

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5608914
> 
> Just why? Why coddle them..


Perhaps because it is a moment in world history and not, for this occasion just a family matter ?
I think KC and PW are going to permit Harry and Andrew to fulfil the roles accorded to them by their birthrights over the coming week* and at the funeral. Nobody wants petty grievances or bad optics about who was in and or out to detract, either this week or in the future. And it may be The Queens wishes that Andrew and Harry are included fully.

But there's a new team in charge at the top and IMO Andrew and Harry will be completely OUT in less than 10 days time.

It is my supposition that the main BRF members knew that The Queen was terminally ill, and that would explain why the dealings with H&M were not more forceful whilst the Queen was still with us. I think Charles and William are going to work as quite a close team and will deal with Harry and his wife more assertively. In fact we have already seen that some of the speculations and rumors in the press have been corrected. ( I refer here to the various stories about the Windsor walkabout) H&M are not going to get away with misleading briefings; incorrect claims and assertions will more likely be swiftly shut down from now on.

I am sick of reading about the "brother's rift" though, as if it is a squabble between them. IIRC H&M walked out on everyone ( abruptly, rudely and self-centeredly) largely because they were not being treated as equal to W&C. I don't see what KC3 or PW have to apologise for?

Edited to add - * expect tributes from Anne, Andrew and Edward next. Looks like the BRF are going to follow official protocols.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I thought it was common knowledge she wore them sometimes. Just look at these photos:-
> View attachment 5608869
> 
> In the middle photo her hair is falling at a different incline and is much more voluminous up top. This was the popular style with extensions at the time. I think she might put a bit of volume in her bun styles too with a clip in but that’s just a guess- those are harder to see.
> Here’s a photo of her at uni vs later too
> View attachment 5608870
> 
> Again you see there’s more volume on the scalp in the right photo and the hair is thicker and the hair in the under layers looks like a slightly different weight in this one two. Sure you can blowdry volume into your hair but not that much. Nowadays extensions have changed and they don’t have to have that much of a visible volume in the upper scalp and the fashion is to go for smaller tracks of finer hair now microbonded rather than sewn in and they are much harder to see - that big voluminous mane was the it do of the time though and it’s what M is still going for but not getting right.
> 
> I want to be clear that I am not pointing out someone wears extensions or fake hair as a criticism or saying it shouldn’t be done in x circles. To me, hairwork is body art and like any artform there’s skill to it and there’s nothing wrong with critiquing and comparing application and styling.  I can be a little mean to M about her weave because I think it needs improvement not because she shouldn’t wear one.
> 
> So to further express what I mean about poor application here’s some photos from the walkabout:
> View attachment 5608877
> 
> First things first, look at the condition of those tips. A track of hair can’t get conditioning oil from the scalp so they get far more damaged by heat treatments and daily friction.
> If it’s starting to frazzle like that and stand up on its own cut off a few inches or start again! Honestly, I wouldn’t be seen dead with that hair.
> View attachment 5608880
> 
> This is from some time ago obviously but just to illustrate - the yellow line is where her head and hairline logically ends. The  extra length at the back is provided by the volume of the track sewn to the back of her head. I have been saying ad nauseum the thickness of hair she uses is completely wrong for her head and it’s most visible at the back in side views.
> View attachment 5608879
> 
> 
> Look at how the hair at the back does NOT look like it’s falling in line with the hair on top of her head at all.
> You can also see that the curly ends fall at different lengths - obviously this is to give the illusion of layered hair but it also is a dead giveaway that some extensions/tracks are sewn higher up in the hair thus making them shorter. Personally, I would iron out the shorter curls or use straight tracks higher up and only have curls at the bottom as I think it looks really dated and fake. Or hey, maybe even dispense with the bottom curls and the Kate cosplay once and for all
> View attachment 5608878
> 
> Her style favours a big thick scalp of hair but look at how it’s sitting. It looks loose to me like the threads holding it to her head are losing tension. It needs fixing.
> 
> 
> Incidentally this is something else M has in common with Wallis as she clearly loved a wig with a lot of scalp volume.
> Just look at Wallis in this hardfront compared to her usual tight bun-
> View attachment 5608875
> 
> 
> Thank you for coming to my ted talk
> 
> I mean it could just be a good old fashioned threat.
> “Look what I’m wearing- you better be nice to me or else”
> 
> I agree a vomit emoji would come in here.
> 
> She’s such a great actress she definitely convinced us she didn’t already know that girl was called Imelka after she hired her - Meryl Streep could never
> 
> I will say I admire their restraint that they haven’t yet put out a storyline that dear Imelka is an Ukrainian refugee and she was dragging herself through the gunfire in the one desperate hope she would finally get to see this true beauty and ask if she’s ok.
> 
> She’s clearly hoping the 6’3 man will want to get closer to her hips - her being so beautiful and all.
> 
> The million dollar question indeed!



Thank you, that was advanced level


----------



## needlv

Hmm… this sounds likely for why there were 45 mins of negotiations prior to the walkabout.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> Too little, too late.  Hazzie’s feeble attempt to atone for yesterday’s horrible ordeal.
> Correct me if I am wrong, *none* of the other grandchildrens’ spouses were at the Balmoral walk-about. None.
> Not Edo, not Jack, not Mike. None.  William’s wife does get included because she is Princess of Wales, spouse of the heir.


His grandparents had no peace from the Sussexes in their last years let’s never forget the upset those two caused - he can say whatever he wants it will never heal the hurt he caused and even on the day of the queens death they prevented close family from being with the dying Queen …. Decorum will be observed by the real royals and the public until the official mourning is over then these two should be finally and irrevocably dealt with or Charles fails at his first test as King and the people will never forget or forgive


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This gives me a little hope. Maybe not all is lost with Harry.

ETA: that was regarding @needlv's posting.


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Charles laying down the law. We did underestimate him!


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charles laying down the law. We did underestimate him!



i want to see the seating plan.  I cannot imagine Catherine wanting to sit anywhere near those vipers.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The BLG got the memo…




interestingly we had 2 posts on human chess either yesterday or the day before.

I think BLG is either one of us or a ‘subscriber‘


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Four years ago, MM and H were supposed to get large flat at Kensington Palace, but wanted their privacy instead, haha



How“s that working out for them?


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Nah, TW wrote it.


No way. She can't write like something so proper, you know, like this is so dull.  
And if she had a hand in it, there would be more than one mention of her, and it would have been signed off with her name first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> He married a miserable wretch that told him he was trapped and not happy living his good life. He then saw her peeing in the woods, said that’s what’s missing in my life and quickly married her. They then went off to live in bliss filled misery and spent their lives trying to make happy Royals as miserable as themselves.



This the synopsis on the back cover of Harry’s book


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> _I could be wrong,_ I _thought_ all of the Queen’s assets would transfer to the King. This is to avoid a hefty tax bill.  Doubt there is any cash involved, unless the King decides to distribute something.  I _think_ the King can distribute trinkets as per the Queen’s wishes.  All of the former Prince Charles’s assets [the Duchy, etc.] went to William.
> 
> So, imo the lesson here is we should make nice with the ones who control the purse strings if we expect to be included.
> How stupid Hazzi must be.



The Queen had personal wealth too


----------



## Icyjade

jelliedfeels said:


> Yes I think so- certainly not for his skills as a painter
> 
> So my guess is either:
> Trapped in safe door while trying to go through family jewels
> Or
> As I said an acrylic tip is currently wedged in Harry’s….
> 
> So not a hairdresser but as I’m always complaining about her hair I’ll give you my opinion of what is going on in tendril town.
> 
> The wisps of baby hairs you can see in front are M’s hair. It’s very common to grow your front baby hairs out if you habitually wear weaves or wigs in your natural colour as you can blend the real and fake hair together and cover the join. That is what is happening here. Notice how they are stuck flat and backwards. Now this photo isn’t great quality but you can see her hair looks thicker, straighter and darker behind those baby hairs? That’s because it’s the fake hair. It is hard to see but it looks like it starts at a slightly different place and has a different incline then you would expect natural hair to fall but the dead give away is the hair she chooses to wear itself- it’s a much redder toned dark brown  than her baby hairs and it is so thick and straight whereas her actual hair is clearly quite fine and curly.
> So how do can you add a weave?
> by either- 1. sewing a thin mesh onto your natural hair then you sew the fake hair onto the mesh.
> 
> Or
> 2. Some people also sew the fake hair straight onto their real hair.
> 
> As you can see some people are really good at this and their joins are invisible. Another big part of doing a good job is picking a style of hair extension that will sit comfortably on your head rather than dragging it down or giving you a helmet head. Part of the reason M’s hair bugs me so much is because it would be so easy to improve it if she’d just listen to someone else (like say a competent hair stylist) rather than trying to drag on her 20s and thus the horror of 00s weaves  ad infinitum. (The variety and quality of hair extensions and weaves has astronomically improved in the last 20years and they’ve gotten so much cheaper although Europe still doesn’t have as much choice as the USA Every time I go to USA I always want to go and admire the hair shops
> 
> NB- this works  if you have a thicker and curlier texture of hair. I believe M has straightened curly hair so she would go the above route
> 
> If you have straight hair you would probably apply your extensions using the microbond/gluing/sew in route.
> So Catherine wears extensions and they would add these by just lifting up and clipping off the top layers of hair and then sticking strips of hair to the scalp line using one of the techniques above and then covering it with the top layers. Add on - I believe  you can also us these Methods with Afro/curly hair textures so there is a chance M wears extensions applied like this but IMHO I think more likely it’s a weave going from the photos.
> 
> Now if you have a true wig (it’s like a skull cap with hair ready sewn onto it) then you are gluing it to your skin or just sitting it on your head- no weaving/sewing required. Wigs have come a long way too from synthetic hard fronts to virgin hair lace fronts.
> 
> None of these styles last forever because there’s a lot of friction acting on the hair and also over time the method of attaching the hair loosens. Also  you’ve got to let your scalp breathe from all that extra weight and heat.
> 
> Now to put on my amateur dermatologist cap and go to town on the skincare
> 
> I remember watching a destiny’s child video and asking my mum how the girls could get their hair in so many styles and my mum went ‘they are wigs of course’
> It blew my mind and  started my obsession with wigs and hair tech then was nowhere near what it is now.



Thanks. I was wondering as am not familiar with fake hair and thought there are better ways to hide the fake hair. 




Sferics said:


> As far as I like to bash her, but this is what skin actually looks like without filters.
> We should get used to it (again).
> For our own good.


I’m older than her and genuinely think that her skin condition is terrible for her age. So much wrinkles. 




jelliedfeels said:


> I thought it was common knowledge she wore them sometimes. Just look at these photos:-
> View attachment 5608869
> 
> In the middle photo her hair is falling at a different incline and is much more voluminous up top. This was the popular style with extensions at the time. I think she might put a bit of volume in her bun styles too with a clip in but that’s just a guess- those are harder to see.
> Here’s a photo of her at uni vs later too
> View attachment 5608870
> 
> Again you see there’s more volume on the scalp in the right photo and the hair is thicker and the hair in the under layers looks like a slightly different weight in this one two. Sure you can blowdry volume into your hair but not that much. Nowadays extensions have changed and they don’t have to have that much of a visible volume in the upper scalp and the fashion is to go for smaller tracks of finer hair now microbonded rather than sewn in and they are much harder to see - that big voluminous mane was the it do of the time though and it’s what M is still going for but not getting right.
> 
> I want to be clear that I am not pointing out someone wears extensions or fake hair as a criticism or saying it shouldn’t be done in x circles. To me, hairwork is body art and like any artform there’s skill to it and there’s nothing wrong with critiquing and comparing application and styling.  I can be a little mean to M about her weave because I think it needs improvement not because she shouldn’t wear one.
> 
> So to further express what I mean about poor application here’s some photos from the walkabout:
> View attachment 5608877
> 
> First things first, look at the condition of those tips. A track of hair can’t get conditioning oil from the scalp so they get far more damaged by heat treatments and daily friction.
> If it’s starting to frazzle like that and stand up on its own cut off a few inches or start again! Honestly, I wouldn’t be seen dead with that hair.
> View attachment 5608880
> 
> This is from some time ago obviously but just to illustrate - the yellow line is where her head and hairline logically ends. The  extra length at the back is provided by the volume of the track sewn to the back of her head. I have been saying ad nauseum the thickness of hair she uses is completely wrong for her head and it’s most visible at the back in side views.
> View attachment 5608879
> 
> 
> Look at how the hair at the back does NOT look like it’s falling in line with the hair on top of her head at all.
> You can also see that the curly ends fall at different lengths - obviously this is to give the illusion of layered hair but it also is a dead giveaway that some extensions/tracks are sewn higher up in the hair thus making them shorter. Personally, I would iron out the shorter curls or use straight tracks higher up and only have curls at the bottom as I think it looks really dated and fake. Or hey, maybe even dispense with the bottom curls and the Kate cosplay once and for all
> View attachment 5608878
> 
> Her style favours a big thick scalp of hair but look at how it’s sitting. It looks loose to me like the threads holding it to her head are losing tension. It needs fixing.
> 
> 
> Incidentally this is something else M has in common with Wallis as she clearly loved a wig with a lot of scalp volume.
> Just look at Wallis in this hardfront compared to her usual tight bun-
> View attachment 5608875
> 
> 
> Thank you for coming to my ted talk
> 
> I mean it could just be a good old fashioned threat.
> “Look what I’m wearing- you better be nice to me or else”
> 
> I agree a vomit emoji would come in here.
> 
> She’s such a great actress she definitely convinced us she didn’t already know that girl was called Imelka after she hired her - Meryl Streep could never
> 
> I will say I admire their restraint that they haven’t yet put out a storyline that dear Imelka is an Ukrainian refugee and she was dragging herself through the gunfire in the one desperate hope she would finally get to see this true beauty and ask if she’s ok.
> 
> She’s clearly hoping the 6’3 man will want to get closer to her hips - her being so beautiful and all.
> 
> The million dollar question indeed!


Wow that’s informative. Thanks.


----------



## Toby93

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900


I am not an English professor, but the grammar here is a bit off.


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> _I could be wrong,_ I _thought_ all of the Queen’s assets would transfer to the King. This is to avoid a hefty tax bill.  Doubt there is any cash involved, unless the King decides to distribute something.  I _think_ the King can distribute trinkets as per the Queen’s wishes.  All of the former Prince Charles’s assets [the Duchy, etc.] went to William.
> 
> So, imo the lesson here is we should *make nice with the ones who control the purse strings if we expect to be included.*
> How stupid Hazzi must be.


Golden Rule 2.0.  He who has the gold makes the rules.


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> Coming in a little late but I've just seen that Lady C made the announcement on her channel before BP did. I'm fuming!
> Is there no integrity or respect to be found at all these days? To break protocol for the sake of social media clicks, likes and, let's not kid ourselves, lots of money, is absolutely disgusting behaviour.
> My unpopular opinion is that I despise all these commentary channels. All the people exploiting their royal connections (however tenuous or outdated) for social media fame are unethical vultures. I felt the same about Paul Burrell back when he was selling his stories to anyone who would listen. That includes all the royal/body language "experts" quick to exploit the H&M drama for their monetary gain.
> However, this one action by Lady C takes the absolute cake. I hope there's some form of consequence she will face for it, but I've not seen anything mentioned about it. At the very least, I hope she has lost her following because she does not deserve a platform after that stunt, imo. There is no greater act of disrespect that I can imagine; although Meagain trying to get a photo op of her laying _other people's _flowers at the gates comes a close second. *What a narc! *
> 
> Harry has to live with the fact that he _chose_ not to see either grandparent when they were near the end. I hope it eats him up inside every day. There was absolutely no reason for him not to see them, given their respective ages and the fact that they adored him until his captor wife soiled the relationship. I wish they'd both bugger off already. I know he has every right to be at the funeral and I believe he will grieve sincerely, but *her*...I have no words and hate that there will be headlines about her presence, her flowers, some story about her "personal" connection or a "private conversation" in the final hours that nobody knew about...you can see the PR machine working already.



Apparently the Guardian and other sources jumped the gun too but walked backwards  (I am quoting Lady C here] she didn’t  announce it from an inside source (allegedly).  

Apparently, the time of the announcement was to confuse Markle et Co  (I read it somewhere else). I’m sure we’ll get to the truth in the future.


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> I am inclined to believe this. I despise the man Harry has become but, he knows protocol and he genuinely loved his gran, he will not stray at this time. I think he will be doing everything by the book this week. His father is now the King and there are too many protocols/people around him for him to go rogue. He will toe the line and be respectful.
> When he gets back to the US, however... we'll have to brace ourselves.
> 
> 
> Ugh. It's all so disingenuous!



The only reason Harry was nice about the Queen was not that she was his grandmother, but *because* she was Queen.

IMO, it felt safe to have a go at his father, stepmother, brother and in-laws because there was a higher power (not that one  )

Now Charles is King it’s actually going to be different and quite difficult for Harry. Commerce doesn’t like accord, it prefers sensational conflicts and drama, but Harry can’t play loyalist and traitor on the public stage at the same time.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I totally agree with you, she saw Archie a handful of times, if that and Lili not at all.
> I don't think Charles has met Lili either.



Has anyone met Lili?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> No way. She can't write like something so proper, you know, like this is so dull.
> And if she had a hand in it, there would be more than one mention of her, and it would have been signed off with her name first.



Now that you mention it...the statement was from Harry, not from Harry and Raptor. Maybe there is hope after all. This is probably the first time in years he put his foot down.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## andrashik

LibbyRuth said:


> Why not?  The funeral is two things - a state function, and a family grieving the loss of their matriarch.  Seems an appropriate time to put things aside for a bit and allow the grievers to grieve properly.


I understand this, but in the first row?


----------



## papertiger

LibbyRuth said:


> Why not?  The funeral is two things - a state function, and a family grieving the loss of their matriarch.  Seems an appropriate time to put things aside for a bit and allow the grievers to grieve properly.



I am plying both sides of the field.

I think you’re right, because it is the right thing to do (and I don’t see another way). the media’s speculation is pushing for it just for photos and clicks, it’s another thing to make us all talk.

On the other hand, if you can’t be bothered to see your grandmother when she was alive, why would you pretend you care. It‘s not like he couldn’t afford the air fair, have to actually go to work or get the sack or even look after the kids - all the things most people have to deal with if a grandparent falls ill the other side of the world.. I looked after my own mother through 3 years of illness and then missed her passing, I still feel guilty.

*This is not Harry’s mother, this is his grandmother. There are plenty of grandchildren, why can’t he just go and sit with them? I’m sure they’re equally upset. *


----------



## Toby93

RAINDANCE said:


> Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct.
> 
> (Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)


I was always under the impression (grade school English) that you never start a sentence with the word "and"?


----------



## lanasyogamama

jelliedfeels said:


> I thought it was common knowledge she wore them sometimes. Just look at these photos:-
> View attachment 5608869
> 
> In the middle photo her hair is falling at a different incline and is much more voluminous up top. This was the popular style with extensions at the time. I think she might put a bit of volume in her bun styles too with a clip in but that’s just a guess- those are harder to see.
> Here’s a photo of her at uni vs later too
> View attachment 5608870
> 
> Again you see there’s more volume on the scalp in the right photo and the hair is thicker and the hair in the under layers looks like a slightly different weight in this one two. Sure you can blowdry volume into your hair but not that much. Nowadays extensions have changed and they don’t have to have that much of a visible volume in the upper scalp and the fashion is to go for smaller tracks of finer hair now microbonded rather than sewn in and they are much harder to see - that big voluminous mane was the it do of the time though and it’s what M is still going for but not getting right.
> 
> I want to be clear that I am not pointing out someone wears extensions or fake hair as a criticism or saying it shouldn’t be done in x circles. To me, hairwork is body art and like any artform there’s skill to it and there’s nothing wrong with critiquing and comparing application and styling.  I can be a little mean to M about her weave because I think it needs improvement not because she shouldn’t wear one.
> 
> So to further express what I mean about poor application here’s some photos from the walkabout:
> View attachment 5608877
> 
> First things first, look at the condition of those tips. A track of hair can’t get conditioning oil from the scalp so they get far more damaged by heat treatments and daily friction.
> If it’s starting to frazzle like that and stand up on its own cut off a few inches or start again! Honestly, I wouldn’t be seen dead with that hair.
> View attachment 5608880
> 
> This is from some time ago obviously but just to illustrate - the yellow line is where her head and hairline logically ends. The  extra length at the back is provided by the volume of the track sewn to the back of her head. I have been saying ad nauseum the thickness of hair she uses is completely wrong for her head and it’s most visible at the back in side views.
> View attachment 5608879
> 
> 
> Look at how the hair at the back does NOT look like it’s falling in line with the hair on top of her head at all.
> You can also see that the curly ends fall at different lengths - obviously this is to give the illusion of layered hair but it also is a dead giveaway that some extensions/tracks are sewn higher up in the hair thus making them shorter. Personally, I would iron out the shorter curls or use straight tracks higher up and only have curls at the bottom as I think it looks really dated and fake. Or hey, maybe even dispense with the bottom curls and the Kate cosplay once and for all
> View attachment 5608878
> 
> Her style favours a big thick scalp of hair but look at how it’s sitting. It looks loose to me like the threads holding it to her head are losing tension. It needs fixing.
> 
> 
> Incidentally this is something else M has in common with Wallis as she clearly loved a wig with a lot of scalp volume.
> Just look at Wallis in this hardfront compared to her usual tight bun-
> View attachment 5608875
> 
> 
> Thank you for coming to my ted talk
> 
> I mean it could just be a good old fashioned threat.
> “Look what I’m wearing- you better be nice to me or else”
> 
> I agree a vomit emoji would come in here.
> 
> She’s such a great actress she definitely convinced us she didn’t already know that girl was called Imelka after she hired her - Meryl Streep could never
> 
> I will say I admire their restraint that they haven’t yet put out a storyline that dear Imelka is an Ukrainian refugee and she was dragging herself through the gunfire in the one desperate hope she would finally get to see this true beauty and ask if she’s ok.
> 
> She’s clearly hoping the 6’3 man will want to get closer to her hips - her being so beautiful and all.
> 
> The million dollar question indeed!


I love knowledgeable people! Thanks for taking the time to explain it all.


----------



## Toby93

Sharont2305 said:


> "Hugged your great grandchildren"
> 
> Is he talking generally about all the great grandchildren or his own children? So, his children did come over for the Jubilee and there was a meeting with the Queen?
> 
> Compare the above to William's 'My three children have got to spend holidays with her and create memories that will last their whole lives"
> Quite the contrast really.


Yep, a 15 minute formal meeting is not quite the same as spending multiple holidays with Gan Gan


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> I am plying both sides of the field.
> 
> I think you’re right, because it is the right thing to do (and I don’t see another way). the media’s speculation is pushing for it just for photos and clicks, it’s another thing to make us all talk.
> 
> On the other hand, if you can’t be bothered to see your grandmother when she was alive, why would you pretend you care. It‘s not like he couldn’t afford the air fair, have to actually go to work or get the sack or even look after the kids - all the things most people have to deal with if a grandparent falls I’ll the other side of the world.. I looked after my own mother through 3 years of illness and then missed her passing, I still feel guilty.
> 
> *This is not Harry’s mother, this is his grandmother. There are plenty of grandchildren, why can’t he just go and sit with them? I’m sure they’re equally upset. *


Exactly! You have said it so beautiful!


----------



## Icyjade

papertiger said:


> if you can’t be bothered to see your grandmother when she was alive, why would you pretend you care. It‘s not like he couldn’t afford the air fair, have to actually go to work or get the sack or even look after the kids - all the things most people have to deal with if a grandparent falls I’ll the other side of the world..



So agree!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I looked after my own mother through 3 years of illness and then missed her passing, I still feel guilty.



I'm so very sorry. We all do the best we can even if it doesn't turn out perfect each time.



papertiger said:


> *This is not Harry’s mother, this is his grandmother. There are plenty of grandchildren, why can’t he just go and sit with them? I’m sure they’re equally upset. *



Right. Almost all of the Balmoral crowd was crying in public. The Wessex children are only teenagers who just lost their grandfather too. And each one of them kept closer contact and gave The Queen less grief than Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I love knowledgeable people! Thanks for taking the time to explain it all.



2nd that. I've been watching that video about sewing in that weave and I'm fascinated by both the process and her skills. I can't even do anything other than a simple braid or my hair tangles and everything is ruined, though I can do French and Dutch braids on others.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watching this video from this angle, MM looks to be hiding behind a security guard, playing with her hair, then walks over and gets the hug.  She is clearly not ready for service. She needs to go home.



If they contacted a US TV station (per Angela's post), they (SS, Nf*x and/or Arch***) have probably arranged for a few sympathizers to be present. How lucky she was to have started her walk with the 'hug' and 'I love you' girls …


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm so very sorry. We all do the best we can even if it doesn't turn out perfect each time.
> 
> 
> 
> Right. Almost all of the Balmoral crowd was crying in public. The Wessex children are only teenagers who just lost their grandfather too. And each one of them kept closer contact and gave The Queen less grief than Harry.



 

Thank you, that means a lot, especially from you, you are much more good hearted and forgiving than me (I would send both Harry and TW on the first rocket to planet Zog)


----------



## andrashik

Icyjade said:


> I’m older than her and genuinely think that her skin condition is terrible for her age. So much wrinkles.


I think her skin looks good. The loss of collagen with age causes the skin to lose its firmness and some wrinkles are expected - especially with her constant fake smiles (mouth and eye wrinkles) and constant angriness ( forehead wrinkles).
Also genetics play a part and also smoking/drinking etc. 

If some wrinkles are thought to be so terrible, I don't know how acne scars/inflammation are considered


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Indeed.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think that the statement coming from just Harry was very telling.
She must be shellshocked every day by what is happening around her and what a bit player she is.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Toby93 said:


> I was always under the impression (grade school English) that you never start a sentence with the word "and"?


Yes, you are correct - in my delight that it wasn't full of word salad and American English ( no offence to anyone intended but H is a Prince of UK!) I didn't spot that. In fact there's another sentence that doesn't make sense in the first paragraph but the tribute is a masterclass compared to the one for his grandfather so I'm giving him some leeway today.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Thank you, that means a lot, especially from you, you are much more good hearted and forgiving than me (I would send both Harry and TW on the first rocket to planet Zog)



I do have my soft spots, but generally I am forgiving until I am not if that makes sense. It takes a lot for me to make the radical cut, but after that, good luck and farewell, I won't look back and I'll have no regrets.

I do have a soft spot for Harry despite his own horrid behaviour only because I've been on the receiving end of narcisstic abuse (I know some contributors are sensitive to the word abuse...I'm absolutely not comparing it to physical violence but don't underestimate the toll it can take) and it took me decades to realize and work through it. Her? If a small planet dropped on her head I wouldn't feel bad for a minute.


----------



## Sina08

CobaltBlu said:


> I think that the statement coming from just Harry was very telling.
> She must be shellshocked every day by what is happening around her and what a bit player she is.


But wasn’t William’s statement also just from him? Seems logical, since they’re the grandsons.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


>



We love to see it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sina08 said:


> But wasn’t William’s statement also just from him? Seems logical, since they’re the grandsons.



Yes, but William also doesn't have a wife that pushes her way into everything. We don't think the fact per se is remarkable as this is apparently how it's done, we find it remarkable that Harry went with it even though we believe she threw yet another tantrum over being left out.

We're talking about a woman who wore red to a military occasion where red was reserved for military people. We're talking about a woman who put her ellbow in his ribs so she could go first and greet someone at an official engagement. We're talking about a woman who after two years of trash talk just publicly said "Thanks for supporting the family, *we* appreciate it." And we're talking about a woman who delayed her husband's travel to see his dying grandmother by picking a fight after learning she was uninvited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

She has a contract with Spotify and, as she said, she didn't sign a NDA, so she will likely exploit the memory of QE.
Charles is wasting his time begging to Hazz. Hazz has no power as soon as he arrives in Montecito. Charles needs to reduce her credibility by removing the titles…

"King Charles III Privately BEGS HARRY To Cancel Meghan’s Spotify Podcast, Fearing She’ll Exploit Queen’s Death"​

_*It's King Charles III's worst nightmare. Meghan Markle is poised to give the royal family’s first interview after the death of Elizabeth II — on her Spotify podcast.*

While the next episode of Markle’s controversial “Archetypes” podcast, due to stream Tuesday, has been postponed, the subsequent broadcast is slated for Sept. 20, the day after the state funeral for the Queen at Westminster Abbey in Central London._


----------



## rose60610

News is reporting there was a lot of criticism of William for not opening Kate's car door but people were slobbering over "Harry's kindness and wonderful manners" for opening Claw's door after the walkabout. 

I thought feminazi's hated men opening doors for them. They love to hammer men who hold open the door at the post office or store for them "I can open my own damned door" bla bla bla. Claw prides herself on being the ultimate feminist. Of course that didn't stop her from being a conniving gold digger.

As for Harry's statement, the parts about "my darling wife" and "hugging her great grandchildren" were forced in there. Harry didn't write it. Claw demanded mention and the real authors of the piece had to do it to shut her up. 

Oh, and the "Thanks for supporting the family, we appreciate it"????? UGH! Claw wasn't exactly supportive when she threw them under the bus with Oprah and Harry said they were all trapped. What a slimy beeyatch. Their presence at this funeral is like having to invite the close relatives you hate to a wedding. Nobody wants them there but etiquette requires that you do.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## CentralTimeZone

rose60610 said:


> News is reporting there was a lot of criticism of William for not opening Kate's car door but people were slobbering over "Harry's kindness and wonderful manners" for opening Claw's door after the walkabout.
> 
> I thought feminazi's hated men opening doors for them. They love to hammer men who hold open the door at the post office or store for them "I can open my own damned door" bla bla bla. Claw prides herself on being the ultimate feminist. Of course that didn't stop her from being a conniving gold digger.
> 
> As for Harry's statement, the parts about "my darling wife" and "hugging her great grandchildren" were forced in there. Harry didn't write it. Claw demanded mention and the real authors of the piece had to do it to shut her up.
> 
> Oh, and the "Thanks for supporting the family, we appreciate it"????? UGH! Claw wasn't exactly supportive when she threw them under the bus with Oprah and Harry said they were all trapped. What a slimy beeyatch. Their presence at this funeral is like having to invite the close relatives you hate to a wedding. Nobody wants them there but etiquette requires that you do.


Maybe just maybe Kate is independent and doesn't need or want to be tended to in public? If William knows this he's not being a lesser husband, he's respecting her wishes.


----------



## elvisfan4life

andrashik said:


> I think her skin looks good. The loss of collagen with age causes the skin to lose its firmness and some wrinkles are expected - especially with her constant fake smiles (mouth and eye wrinkles) and constant angriness ( forehead wrinkles).
> Also genetics play a part and also smoking/drinking etc.
> 
> If some wrinkles are thought to be so terrible, I don't know how acne scars/inflammation are considered


I prefer wrinkles to plastic skin esp on the elderly we age gracefully in the Uk or we did in my day I hate all this fake stuff now


----------



## Icyjade

andrashik said:


> I think her skin looks good. The loss of collagen with age causes the skin to lose its firmness and some wrinkles are expected - especially with her constant fake smiles (mouth and eye wrinkles) and constant angriness ( forehead wrinkles).
> Also genetics play a part and also smoking/drinking etc.
> 
> If some wrinkles are thought to be so terrible, I don't know how acne scars/inflammation are considered



For her age, I think her skin is bad. 

Wrinkles are normal and part of aging, but wrinkles on a younger person isn’t the same as one on an older person. If she is 60 I would think her skin is wonderful. But I thought she is only 41? That’s a lot of lines at that age isn’t it?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


>




Is it fair? Maybe not, but also: those two are not equal. Andrew is The Queen's son. Give it a rest.


----------



## Traminer

Chanbal said:


> She has a contract with Spotify and, as she said, she didn't sign a NDA, so she will likely exploit the memory of QE.


I am not on Spotify, so she cannot molest me.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Sina08 said:


> But wasn’t William’s statement also just from him? Seems logical, since they’re the grandsons.


See below….


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but William also doesn't have a wife that pushes her way into everything. We don't think the fact per se is remarkable as this is apparently how it's done, we find it remarkable that Harry went with it even though we believe she threw yet another tantrum over being left out.
> 
> We're talking about a woman who wore red to a military occasion where red was reserved for military people. We're talking about a woman who put her ellbow in his ribs so she could go first and greet someone at an official engagement. We're talking about a woman who after two years of trash talk just publicly said "Thanks for supporting the family, *we* appreciate it." And we're talking about a woman who delayed her husband's travel to see his dying grandmother by picking a fight after learning she was uninvited.



Nailed it!


----------



## piperdog

Sharont2305 said:


> No, I think Harry and the courtiers wrote this. It sounds proper.


Plus, it didn't even mention Meghan by name. That's a dead giveaway that she had nothing to do with the statement.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> She has a contract with Spotify and, as she said, she didn't sign a NDA, so she will likely exploit the memory of QE.
> Charles is wasting his time begging to Hazz. Hazz has no power as soon as he arrives in Montecito. Charles needs to reduce her credibility by removing the titles…
> 
> "King Charles III Privately BEGS HARRY To Cancel Meghan’s Spotify Podcast, Fearing She’ll Exploit Queen’s Death"​
> 
> _*It's King Charles III's worst nightmare. Meghan Markle is poised to give the royal family’s first interview after the death of Elizabeth II — on her Spotify podcast.*
> 
> While the next episode of Markle’s controversial “Archetypes” podcast, due to stream Tuesday, has been postponed, the subsequent broadcast is slated for Sept. 20, the day after the state funeral for the Queen at Westminster Abbey in Central London._




It may cause Harry to decide which side of the ocean he wants to be on. 

If she won't stop, he may be forced to renounce his title(s) - and she won't like that one little bit


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> News is reporting there was a lot of criticism of William for not opening Kate's car door but people were slobbering over "Harry's kindness and wonderful manners" for opening Claw's door after the walkabout.
> 
> I thought feminazi's hated men opening doors for them. They love to hammer men who hold open the door at the post office or store for them "I can open my own damned door" bla bla bla. Claw prides herself on being the ultimate feminist. Of course that didn't stop her from being a conniving gold digger.
> 
> As for Harry's statement, the parts about "my darling wife" and "hugging her great grandchildren" were forced in there. Harry didn't write it. Claw demanded mention and the real authors of the piece had to do it to shut her up.
> 
> Oh, and the "Thanks for supporting the family, we appreciate it"????? UGH! Claw wasn't exactly supportive when she threw them under the bus with Oprah and Harry said they were all trapped. What a slimy beeyatch. Their presence at this funeral is like having to invite the close relatives you hate to a wedding. Nobody wants them there but etiquette requires that you do.



Didn't anyone see the way he opened the door for TW, he did it so she couldn't even get past his arm! Laugh? I almost cried.

Dead give-away he doesn't do any opening of doors for anyone in his life. Perhaps a door person could teach him, you open a car door from the back so they can actually get in and not have to wait until you get out the way. 


You would think he would know since every door has been opened to him in his life, literally and metaphorically.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bellecate said:


> RAINDANCE said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct.
> 
> (Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)
> 
> 
> 
> Surely you jest.  It was awkward and clumsy and disjointed.  In my opinion.
Click to expand...


----------



## jblended

Chanbal said:


> "King Charles III Privately BEGS HARRY To Cancel Meghan’s Spotify Podcast, Fearing She’ll Exploit Queen’s Death"​


The literal King is not begging Harry for anything. He may instruct, aides may suggest, but there's no "begging". I do wish the press would stop with the histrionics as it only makes the gruesome pair feel more powerful than they are.

I wonder how things will play out now. Even if they cancel the podcast, which is unlikely, there's nothing stopping them from giving interviews or speeches where they milk this narrative (as they did Diana's). How do you wrangle these two?


----------



## 1LV

Harry opening the door for meghan reminded me of the polo trophy being hoisted in front of her face and eventually above her head.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> Now Charles is King it’s actually going to be different and quite difficult for Harry. Commerce doesn’t like accord, it prefers sensational conflicts and drama, but Harry can’t play loyalist and traitor on the public stage at the same time.



I think Harry hoped to get his book published before the Queen passed away. He wouldn't attack the Queen directly in it and likely would save the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, other family members, the staff, etc. He knew the Queen would likely forgive him, was popular enough to ride out any criticism, and was too frail and unlikely to take away his titles and remaining privileges anyway. Now he has to deal with Charles, the King, who is not frail but deeply hurt already.

Harry may still go ahead with the book since he needs the money. But, gosh, how stupid would it be to attack the family in the aftermath of the Queen's death, especially because they did extend an olive branch, they are the ones that tried, they treated them politely and included them both and much has been made of that. The family will be able to say, well we tried and look how we were treated.


----------



## CobaltBlu

youngster said:


> I think Harry hoped to get his book published before the Queen passed away. He wouldn't attack the Queen directly in it and likely would save the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, other family members, the staff, etc. He knew the Queen would likely forgive him, was popular enough to ride out any criticism, and was too frail and unlikely to take away his titles and remaining privileges anyway. Now he has to deal with Charles, the King, who is not frail but deeply hurt already.
> 
> Harry may still go ahead with the book since he needs the money. But, gosh, how stupid would it be to attack the family in the aftermath of the Queen's death, especially because they did extend an olive branch, they are the ones that tried, they treated them politely and included them both and much has been made of that. The family will be able to say, well we tried and look how we were treated.


Harry might not need the money depending on Queen Elizabeth’s will….


----------



## Chanbal

I suspected this from the beginning. It's more than time to stop being afraid of TW. Remove her titles, cut all ties with her, and let her talk alone as much as she wants… 

_"An insider later told OK!Magazine.com that the Royal family asked William's wife, Kate, to politely forego the trip to Balmoral so they could use it as an excuse on why Meghan should not be in attendance."_









						King Charles III Privately BEGS HARRY To Cancel Meghan’s Spotify Podcast, Fearing She’ll Exploit Queen’s Death
					

This marks a fresh battle between King Charles III and his son and daughter-in-law, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.




					radaronline.com


----------



## Sina08

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but William also doesn't have a wife that pushes her way into everything. We don't think the fact per se is remarkable as this is apparently how it's done, we find it remarkable that Harry went with it even though we believe she threw yet another tantrum over being left out.
> 
> We're talking about a woman who wore red to a military occasion where red was reserved for military people. We're talking about a woman who put her ellbow in his ribs so she could go first and greet someone at an official engagement. We're talking about a woman who after two years of trash talk just publicly said "Thanks for supporting the family, *we* appreciate it." And we're talking about a woman who delayed her husband's travel to see his dying grandmother by picking a fight after learning she was uninvited.


I totally get that it’s shocking he didn’t cave and abided by the rules for once. Still wouldn’t give him a medal for that.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

The top banner of @Chanbal’s post was cut off.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I suspected this from the beginning. It's more than time to stop being afraid of TW. Remove her titles, cut all ties with her, and let her talk alone as much as she wants…
> 
> _"An insider later told OK!Magazine.com that the Royal family asked William's wife, Kate, to politely forego the trip to Balmoral so they could use it as an excuse on why Meghan should not be in attendance."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles III Privately BEGS HARRY To Cancel Meghan’s Spotify Podcast, Fearing She’ll Exploit Queen’s Death
> 
> 
> This marks a fresh battle between King Charles III and his son and daughter-in-law, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com



*Told you so!*

I'd do the happy dance, but in this case I am not happy dancing


----------



## Chanbal

TW will not be pleased…

_"Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line"_








						Charlotte 'to get prized Diana heirloom' as she's 'given pick of royal jewels'
					

Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did Harry not know that Charles would be king after the queen died?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tw does not respect hierarchy. A truly horrid person imo


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TW will not be pleased…
> 
> _"Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charlotte 'to get prized Diana heirloom' as she's 'given pick of royal jewels'
> 
> 
> Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Where does this even come from. The Spencer tiara is not part of the "royal jewels". Charlotte is not a Spencer but a Windsor. Diana didn't own it, she borrowed it from her brother. Also, how is it surprising William is now next in line?


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


> Harry might not need the money depending on Queen Elizabeth’s will….



I read that it's likely the vast bulk of the Queen's fortune passes to Charles (who will pass it to William in time) in order to avoid estate taxes.  She does have 4 children ahead of the grandchildren too and her financial priority would probably be Anne, Edward, and Andrew so that they are taken care of and don't have to go to Charles for everything.  For the grandchildren, she'd probably treat them equally, excepting Will of course who wouldn't need money.  But there are 7 grandchildren, if you exclude Will, so the estate could be quite diluted if she left them each millions on top of leaving something substantial each to Anne, Edward, and Andrew.  Then there are the tax implications of all this as well.  So, Harry might get some money from her personal estate but I'd bet more on personal items (which he could sell of course).


----------



## Chanbal

All this to avoid transforming a funeral into a circus. 










						William, Harry, Kate and Meghan will not join today's procession in Edinburgh
					

Instead, the Queen's children will take the lead, with Charles joined by the Princess Royal, Earl of Wessex and Duke of York




					inews.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

All these concessions to appease the single terrorist. I don't blame the family at this trying time, it's just so sad to me.


----------



## papertiger

1LV said:


> Harry opening the door meghan reminded me of the polo trophy being hoisted in front of her face and eventually above her head.



These two are hilarious, their slapstick is spot-on, sadly I don't think it was their intention


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> All this to avoid transforming a funeral into a circus.
> View attachment 5608957
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William, Harry, Kate and Meghan will not join today's procession in Edinburgh
> 
> 
> Instead, the Queen's children will take the lead, with Charles joined by the Princess Royal, Earl of Wessex and Duke of York
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk



I feel sad for William because I am sure that this is something that he would WANT to do (her other grandchildren as well).


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> TW will not be pleased…
> 
> _"Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charlotte 'to get prized Diana heirloom' as she's 'given pick of royal jewels'
> 
> 
> Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk



Can't be the Spencer Tiara they are talking about.

It will go through the Earl's line - or did he sell it? 

I saw it outside a private suite in the Cafe Royal (London)


----------



## BittyMonkey

I swear half the reason I'm following this is to watch the absolute havoc an N wreaks all around them. My father was/is one and while he doesn't have this much influence on public life every single thing she does has a parallel in my own experience.

Everyone hoping for a reconciliation or that she will figure it out hopes in vain. People from 'normal' families where these people aren't the bride at every wedding, the mother to be at every baby shower and the corpse at every funeral just don't understand the abuse --- yes, abuse -- they administer on everyone until that victim cuts them out.

Then when they're finally cut out they sic the flying monkeys on you. In this case, the flying monkeys are the press and her "friends".


----------



## Sophisticatted

papertiger said:


> Can't be the Spencer Tiara they are talking about.
> 
> It will go through the Earl's line - or did he sell it?
> 
> I saw it outside a private suite in the Cafe Royal (London)



Ve heard this rumor more than once, which makes me wonder if he did gift it.  Or perhaps, his offer is to loan it out whenever Charlotte might want it.  However, with a vault full of magnificent tiaras that her dad would one day be in control of, I’m not certain why she would want to borrow it, especially considering she never got the chance to know Diana as her grandmother.

ETA:  I guess time will truly tell.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower, the man! '_The reconciliation is temporary…and they will continue trashing the BRF._'


----------



## DoggieBags

rose60610 said:


> News is reporting there was a lot of criticism of William for not opening Kate's car door but people were slobbering over "Harry's kindness and wonderful manners" for opening Claw's door after the walkabout.
> 
> I thought feminazi's hated men opening doors for them. They love to hammer men who hold open the door at the post office or store for them "I can open my own damned door" bla bla bla. Claw prides herself on being the ultimate feminist. Of course that didn't stop her from being a conniving gold digger.
> 
> As for Harry's statement, the parts about "my darling wife" and "hugging her great grandchildren" were forced in there. Harry didn't write it. Claw demanded mention and the real authors of the piece had to do it to shut her up.
> 
> Oh, and the "Thanks for supporting the family, we appreciate it"????? UGH! Claw wasn't exactly supportive when she threw them under the bus with Oprah and Harry said they were all trapped. What a slimy beeyatch. Their presence at this funeral is like having to invite the close relatives you hate to a wedding. Nobody wants them there but etiquette requires that you do.


I don’t watch many clips of the Royal Family but i recall watching an episode of the great British menu which revolved around a dinner hosted by Prince Charles. charles and Camilla arrived by car. Charles got out and immediately walked into the building leaving Camilla to get out on her own and follow him. Camilla happened to have one foot in a soft cast so was hobbling along. Not once did he stop to help her or look back to see where she was. I thought it was rather churlish behavior on his part but since then I’ve noticed that none of the royals wait for someone to open their car door. The few times I’ve seen princess anne with her husband arriving in a car, I don’t recall her husband ever opening Anne’s car door.  I think the senior royals are trained to focus on the task at hand and the spouses, assuming they are accompanied by their spouses, are not supposed to be a distraction. So the senior royal is busy talking or shaking hands with whoever they are there to meet, not being distracted by their spouses by having to open car doors, helping them up or down stairs etc. this is all part of the senior royal walking ahead of everybody else protocol I thought? just my own observation. I’m not British so maybe I’m not fully understanding all the protocol.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I was always under the impression (grade school English) that you never start a sentence with the word "and"?


I'll forgive the "And" if this piece of writing does not bear the hallmark of Marklespeak: plagiarism. So far, no one has found anything that is a sweet nod, right? Well, apart from the black dress which might be a sweet nod to Mrs Simpson.


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> Ve heard this rumor more than once, which makes me wonder if he did gift it.  Or perhaps, his offer is to loan it out whenever Charlotte might want it.  However, with a vault full of magnificent tiaras that her dad would one day be in control of, I’m not certain why she would want to borrow it, especially considering she never got the chance to know Diana as her grandmother.



It makes me wonder if they've got the tiaras mixed-up.

Maybe Diana had the use of more than one.

Unless the tiara is actively sold--off, it cannot have even been Diana's to give away or decide upon. As the youngest daughter she would have been the _last_ to have been given it - unless she bought it (but then it wouldn't have been loaned to a hotel for a private event).

 Like you mention, it can only be loaned by the _current_ Lady Spencer. The Earl was absolutely aghast against his stepmother selling off things to keep the estate afloat so I can't imagine him selling. He also has plenty of children of his own, they are not Windsors, they are Spencers.

I think the press are muddling


----------



## Toby93

rose60610 said:


> News is reporting there was a lot of criticism of William for not opening Kate's car door but people were slobbering over "Harry's kindness and wonderful manners" for opening Claw's door after the walkabout.
> 
> I thought feminazi's hated men opening doors for them. They love to hammer men who hold open the door at the post office or store for them "I can open my own damned door" bla bla bla. Claw prides herself on being the ultimate feminist. Of course that didn't stop her from being a conniving gold digger.
> 
> As for Harry's statement, the parts about "my darling wife" and "*hugging her great grandchildren*" were forced in there. Harry didn't write it. Claw demanded mention and the real authors of the piece had to do it to shut her up.
> 
> Oh, and the "Thanks for supporting the family, we appreciate it"????? UGH! Claw wasn't exactly supportive when she threw them under the bus with Oprah and Harry said they were all trapped. What a slimy beeyatch. Their presence at this funeral is like having to invite the close relatives you hate to a wedding. Nobody wants them there but etiquette requires that you do.


100% she made him write this.  It should have been written as my hugging "my children", but to make the obvious royal connection, he was forced to write it as "her great-grandchildren"


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I don’t watch many clips of the Royal Family but i recall watching an episode of the great British menu which revolved around a dinner hosted by Prince Charles. charles and Camilla arrived by car. Charles got out and immediately walked into the building leaving Camilla to get out on her own and follow him. Camilla happened to have one foot in a soft cast so was hobbling along. Not once did he stop to help her or look back to see where she was. I thought it was rather churlish behavior on his part but since then I’ve noticed that none of the royals wait for someone to open their car door. The few times I’ve seen princess anne with her husband arriving in a car, I don’t recall her husband ever opening Anne’s car door.  I think the senior royals are trained to focus on the task at hand and the spouses, assuming they are accompanied by their spouses, are not supposed to be a distraction. So the senior royal is busy talking or shaking hands with whoever they are there to meet, not being distracted by their spouses by having to open car doors, helping them up or down stairs etc. this is all part of the senior royal walking ahead of everybody else protocol I thought? just my own observation. I’m not British so maybe I’m not fully understanding all the protocol.



You are correct. 

Harry broke protocol. 

As a proclaimed feminist and not infirm, I'm sure MegZZZZ can open her own car door, I do it all the time. 

Shows Harry is actually off his game and very concerned by her tantrums and their relationship.


----------



## LizzieBennett

DoggieBags said:


> I don’t watch many clips of the Royal Family but i recall watching an episode of the great British menu which revolved around a dinner hosted by Prince Charles. charles and Camilla arrived by car. Charles got out and immediately walked into the building leaving Camilla to get out on her own and follow him. Camilla happened to have one foot in a soft cast so was hobbling along. Not once did he stop to help her or look back to see where she was. I thought it was rather churlish behavior on his part but since then I’ve noticed that none of the royals wait for someone to open their car door. The few times I’ve seen princess anne with her husband arriving in a car, I don’t recall her husband ever opening Anne’s car door.  I think the senior royals are trained to focus on the task at hand and the spouses, assuming they are accompanied by their spouses, are not supposed to be a distraction. So the senior royal is busy talking or shaking hands with whoever they are there to meet, not being distracted by their spouses by having to open car doors, helping them up or down stairs etc. this is all part of the senior royal walking ahead of everybody else protocol I thought? just my own observation. I’m not British so maybe I’m not fully understanding all the protocol.





Chanbal said:


> TW will not be pleased…
> 
> _"Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charlotte 'to get prized Diana heirloom' as she's 'given pick of royal jewels'
> 
> 
> Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Wouldn’t that create a security risk if they did this?  I’d think their protection officers would discourage the practice of opening doors etc but maybe I’m overthinking it.


----------



## DoggieBags

jblended said:


> The literal King is not begging Harry for anything. He may instruct, aides may suggest, but there's no "begging". I do wish the press would stop with the histrionics as it only makes the gruesome pair feel more powerful than they are.
> 
> I wonder how things will play out now. Even if they cancel the podcast, which is unlikely, there's nothing stopping them from giving interviews or speeches where they milk this narrative (as they did Diana's). How do you wrangle these two?


I think this is just more fake stuff planted by TW’s PR to drum up more interest in her Podcasts. If King Charles is trying to silence her then there must be some really juicy stuff that she’s going to reveal (sarcasm on!). Just more nonsense to go along with Spotify manipulating the numbers to say her Podcast is the number one Podcast in multiple regions when the only people actually listening to her Podcasts are some journalists and her sugars.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, KingCharles is a man on a mission. Love love that he is taking action. Best to stay out of his way.
> Hazzi did not get a new title, no wealthy Duchy, no mention of an inheritance, no new palace, etc.  Things can only get removed now.


about time and I hope his wife is helping him keep his backbone


----------



## Toby93

hollieplus2 said:


> Maybe just maybe Kate is independent and doesn't need or want to be tended to in public? If William knows this he's not being a lesser husband, he's respecting her wishes.


William is not afraid of his wife, unlike his cuckolded brother.


----------



## papertiger

LizzieBennett said:


> Wouldn’t that create a security risk if they did this?  I’d think their protection officers would discourage the practice of opening doors etc but maybe I’m overthinking it.



They have staff to open doors if needed. 

I mean, please, all done for effect


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

LizzieBennett said:


> Wouldn’t that create a security risk if they did this?  I’d think their protection officers would discourage the practice of opening doors etc but maybe I’m overthinking it.



Exactly, makes then a soft (still) target if you know they're gong to be hovering around. 

Security always keep 'em moving 

There was a man that threw himself in front of King Charles' car a couple of days ago. KC let them get on with it and the 'show' kept moving - that's the line.


----------



## BittyMonkey

papertiger said:


> You are correct.
> 
> Harry broke protocol.
> 
> As a proclaimed feminist and not infirm, I'm sure MegZZZZ can open her own car door, I do it all the time.
> 
> Shows Harry is actually off his game and very concerned by her tantrums and their relationship.


As long as this whole thing is a Masterclass in narcissism, I need to add something about H's state of mind.

When you live with someone like this, you do everything you can to try and ward off the next explosion. You get into a frame of mind where you become almost a mind reader and are exquisitely sensitive to that person. Because the explosions are more about control than actual anger over a situation, you don't always succeed. But sometimes you do -- and so you get variable reinforcement, the most intractable kind of reinforcement.

I am going to guess that she gets angry about not having him open her door -- likely because this is something massively "in love" couples do. I think Mr. Bitty opened my door on the first few dates but never since, because, well, why. It's performative. So even though he isn't supposed to break protocol in this case, the pushback he would get for deviating is MUCH less than the consequences of her explosion. He likely thinks "this is only a little thing, not a big deal if it will keep her happy."

What he is doing is truly terrible to his family, and he is also trapped in a no-win scenario. Either he faces facts that she is bad for him and dumps her with no guarantee he will ever be forgiven (although I think if he approached KC and said that he is willing to divorce her, lay low, go to therapy, go into exile for a time maybe he might be) or he stays with her as his spirit becomes more and more destroyed. These people are psychic vampires and it is also very possible she dumps him for something better -- although I think her behavior has outed her, and 'something better' may not come along.

I can't hate H too much because I've been him. You want the N to love you -- so so much -- you will do anything. Sometimes they are nice and loving -- which keeps the hope alive. But it's the hope that is ultimately the most destructive. 

If anyone is interested in learning more, Dr. Ramani on YouTube discusses people like MM.


----------



## Chanbal

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/prince-harry-and-meghan-markles-big-plans-for-a-nonroyal-life-have-been-ruined/news-story/08082bc6af70afcf1c55c4569cd4550a


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> TW will not be pleased…
> 
> _"Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charlotte 'to get prized Diana heirloom' as she's 'given pick of royal jewels'
> 
> 
> Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I think this article is nonsense.  The Spencer family has a long and aristocratic lineage which is separate from the royal family.  Diana was loaned the tiara, but it belongs to the Spencer family and it part of the jewels in Althorp.  Why on earth would anyone think that they are going to just give it away?  

At one point, when their relationship was at a low point, the Earl Spencer (Diana's brother) demanded it back for his wife.  It is not leaving the Spencer collection, just as the Spencer's are not getting any of the crown jewels.


----------



## sdkitty

BittyMonkey said:


> As long as this whole thing is a Masterclass in narcissism, I need to add something about H's state of mind.
> 
> When you live with someone like this, you do everything you can to try and ward off the next explosion. You get into a frame of mind where you become almost a mind reader and are exquisitely sensitive to that person. Because the explosions are more about control than actual anger over a situation, you don't always succeed. But sometimes you do -- and so you get variable reinforcement, the most intractable kind of reinforcement.
> 
> I am going to guess that she gets angry about not having him open her door -- likely because this is something massively "in love" couples do. I think Mr. Bitty opened my door on the first few dates but never since, because, well, why. It's performative. So even though he isn't supposed to break protocol in this case, the pushback he would get for deviating is MUCH less than the consequences of her explosion. He likely thinks "this is only a little thing, not a big deal if it will keep her happy."
> 
> What he is doing is truly terrible to his family, and he is also trapped in a no-win scenario. Either he faces facts that she is bad for him and dumps her with no guarantee he will ever be forgiven (although I think if he approached KC and said that he is willing to divorce her, lay low, go to therapy, go into exile for a time maybe he might be) or he stays with her as his spirit becomes more and more destroyed. These people are psychic vampires and it is also very possible she dumps him for something better -- although I think her behavior has outed her, and 'something better' may not come along.
> 
> I can't hate H too much because I've been him. You want the N to love you -- so so much -- you will do anything. Sometimes they are nice and loving -- which keeps the hope alive. But it's the hope that is ultimately the most destructive.
> 
> If anyone is interested in learning more, Dr. Ramani on YouTube discusses people like MM.


you apparently know more about this than I do but I would picture her more likely giving the cold shoulder rather than exploding in rage.....of course I don't know but I do think she is the dominant one


----------



## Toby93

lanasyogamama said:


> Did Harry not know that Charles would be king after the queen died?


I think we are finding out just how dim Harry actually is, and how much the palace did to protect him.  Once he (she) decided to leave, he has done nothing but make a fool of himself.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> They have staff to open doors if needed.
> 
> I mean, please, all done for effect


Yes, the protocol is set up assuming staff will open the doors for the ladies
If you are KING, then it does not look exactly right to be fussing after the consort, you have people for that
It is a system ... 

Would love to know protocol for other heads of state eg German Chancellor, French President etc 

The US President protocol does not count at the moment since the First Lady is constantly fussing about the current president, I doubt 45 opened the door for his wife


----------



## papertiger

BittyMonkey said:


> As long as this whole thing is a Masterclass in narcissism, I need to add something about H's state of mind.
> 
> When you live with someone like this, you do everything you can to try and ward off the next explosion. You get into a frame of mind where you become almost a mind reader and are exquisitely sensitive to that person. Because the explosions are more about control than actual anger over a situation, you don't always succeed. But sometimes you do -- and so you get variable reinforcement, the most intractable kind of reinforcement.
> 
> I am going to guess that she gets angry about not having him open her door -- likely because this is something massively "in love" couples do. I think Mr. Bitty opened my door on the first few dates but never since, because, well, why. It's performative. So even though he isn't supposed to break protocol in this case, the pushback he would get for deviating is MUCH less than the consequences of her explosion. He likely thinks "this is only a little thing, not a big deal if it will keep her happy."
> 
> What he is doing is truly terrible to his family, and he is also trapped in a no-win scenario. Either he faces facts that she is bad for him and dumps her with no guarantee he will ever be forgiven (although I think if he approached KC and said that he is willing to divorce her, lay low, go to therapy, go into exile for a time maybe he might be) or he stays with her as his spirit becomes more and more destroyed. These people are psychic vampires and it is also very possible she dumps him for something better -- although I think her behavior has outed her, and 'something better' may not come along.
> 
> I can't hate H too much because I've been him. You want the N to love you -- so so much -- you will do anything. Sometimes they are nice and loving -- which keeps the hope alive. But it's the hope that is ultimately the most destructive.
> 
> If anyone is interested in learning more, Dr. Ramani on YouTube discusses people like MM.



Wherever and whenever she is not lauded, applauded, and in complete control, she must take out her Narc anxiety on him.


----------



## BittyMonkey

sdkitty said:


> you apparently know more about this than I do but I would picture her more likely giving the cold shoulder rather than exploding in rage.....of course I don't know but I do think she is the dominant one


They don't explode in public, they have a very specific public face, which is why most people don't believe family members who suffer. 

I'm extrapolating - because I see the rage in her face and in what she says. And the delays before events (probably while she gets calmed down and mollified). Of course I can't say anything with 100% certainty.


----------



## papertiger

BittyMonkey said:


> They don't explode in public, they have a very specific public face, which is why most people don't believe family members who suffer.
> 
> I'm extrapolating - because I see the rage in her face and in what she says. And the delays before events (probably while she gets calmed down and mollified). Of course I can't say anything with 100% certainty.



If reports are to be believed. One of those 'private' explosions was at/in front of a three year old child. Someone who was in fact her senior.


----------



## BittyMonkey

papertiger said:


> If reports are to be believed. One of those 'private' explosions was at/in front of a three year old child. Someone who was in fact her senior.


Sometimes they do lose it in public, yes, and the mask slips. People have referenced slippage here a few times. Usually when they are overwhelmed and not in control. Or when they think the victim is beneath them or helpless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BittyMonkey said:


> They don't explode in public, they have a very specific public face, which is why most people don't believe family members who suffer.
> 
> I'm extrapolating - because I see the rage in her face and in what she says. And the delays before events (probably while she gets calmed down and mollified). Of course I can't say anything with 100% certainty.



Thank you. I've been saying it for what feels years to the extent other contributors got impatient with me and my apparent indulgence for Harry. And I don't even blame them because it's hard to believe if you haven't experienced it. I agree with everything you said.


----------



## BittyMonkey

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you. I've been saying it for what feels years to the extent other contributors got impatient with me and my apparent indulgence for Harry. And I don't even blame them because it's hard to believe if you haven't experienced it. I agree with everything you said.


None of this excuses Harry -- I believe people have the responsibility to face reality and do what needs to be done...but I feel okay about having empathy for the quicksand he is in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BittyMonkey said:


> Sometimes they do lose it in public, yes, and the mask slips. People have referenced slippage here a few times. Usually when they are overwhelmed and not in control. Or when they think the victim is beneath them or helpless.



Which then makes sense re: Charlotte. She didn't see her as her senior but just a stupid toddler who to top it all off was there with her nanny - lowly infantry -, not her mother.


----------



## BittyMonkey

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which then makes sense re: Charlotte. She didn't see her as her senior but just a stupid toddler who to top it all off was there with her nanny - lowly infantry -, not her mother.


And she was there as a prop -- to look pretty and perform a perfect role and she...acted like a toddler, and not exactly as she was scripted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which then makes sense re: Charlotte. She didn't see her as her senior but just a stupid toddler who to top it all off was there with her nanny - lowly infantry -, not her mother.



M absolutely, 100% does not get BRF protocol or British tradition


----------



## WingNut

BittyMonkey said:


> As long as this whole thing is a Masterclass in narcissism, I need to add something about H's state of mind.
> 
> When you live with someone like this, you do everything you can to try and ward off the next explosion. You get into a frame of mind where you become almost a mind reader and are exquisitely sensitive to that person. Because the explosions are more about control than actual anger over a situation, you don't always succeed. But sometimes you do -- and so you get variable reinforcement, the most intractable kind of reinforcement.
> 
> I am going to guess that she gets angry about not having him open her door -- likely because this is something massively "in love" couples do. I think Mr. Bitty opened my door on the first few dates but never since, because, well, why. It's performative. So even though he isn't supposed to break protocol in this case, the pushback he would get for deviating is MUCH less than the consequences of her explosion. He likely thinks "this is only a little thing, not a big deal if it will keep her happy."
> 
> What he is doing is truly terrible to his family, and he is also trapped in a no-win scenario. Either he faces facts that she is bad for him and dumps her with no guarantee he will ever be forgiven (although I think if he approached KC and said that he is willing to divorce her, lay low, go to therapy, go into exile for a time maybe he might be) or he stays with her as his spirit becomes more and more destroyed. These people are psychic vampires and it is also very possible she dumps him for something better -- although I think her behavior has outed her, and 'something better' may not come along.
> 
> I can't hate H too much because I've been him. You want the N to love you -- so so much -- you will do anything. Sometimes they are nice and loving -- which keeps the hope alive. But it's the hope that is ultimately the most destructive.
> 
> If anyone is interested in learning more, Dr. Ramani on YouTube discusses people like MM.


I have to applaud this post. As a (former) victim of someone with NPD (my ex), and who also witnessed this behavior and "acquiescence for the sake of peace" with other victims, this sums it up perfectly. It can be spirit-breaking. Hopefully Harry can get his ass out of there, though I'm not sure he is aware of his role in the situation, in which case he's doomed.


----------



## BittyMonkey

papertiger said:


> M absolutely, 100% does not get BRF protocol or British tradition


I think all Americans, if they're going to insist on being part of the BRF need BRF Bootcamp. I don't know, send them to some rural place in Wales or something while they de-Americanize them. Maybe force reporters to go to their own bootcamp so they stop making stupid Americentric statements.

I say this as an American. I think our toxic individualism prevents us from understanding some of these older traditions. I think Old NYC money used to be able to get it. It's not like I think the Gilded Age is what we should be acting like over here, but for heaven's sake if you're going to leave LA for Europe learn something and respect it, people!


----------



## rose60610

lanasyogamama said:


> Did Harry not know that Charles would be king after the queen died?



He did until he met Claw. Claw thought changing the whole order of things would be easy peasy! She was so popular! She smiled! She giggled! She swayed her hips! She slouched like a widdle bitty girlie to be cutesy and giggle giggle some more! She elbowed Harry in the gut to get in front over and over. The whole BRF was supposed to turn a blind eye and let her get her way. SHE was supposed to be Queen! And when they didn't she'd had enough and slammed them as racist. And here we are!


----------



## papertiger

BittyMonkey said:


> None of this excuses Harry -- I believe people have the responsibility to face reality and do what needs to be done...but I feel okay about having empathy for the quicksand he is in.



I do too, I had a very difficult father, but also a compliant mother who could have left him and gone to a safe house or to her parent's.  Instead, she let us live in-danger. It took me many, many years to see that my mother, although a victim, was also culpable as a co-dependant because_ her_ behaviour put her children in danger and she knew it. 

What Harry is doing is playing a very dangerous game, not only for himself but _his_ children and even the rest of his family and any staff. He would not have to go to a piddly safe-house, refuge or bedsit. All he has to do is admit he made a mistake and get his family's help. I have sympathy (not in the incorrect manner of the term re. Brene Brown) but he forced her on his family and had children (however that happened) with her. 

(If reports are to be believed) 45 minutes of tantrum, when the family are really, actually, grieving and have a duty to perform, is enough to tell us this woman should be banned from all future public events/occasions. If Harry cannot see that, I have no sympathy for him either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BittyMonkey said:


> I think all Americans, if they're going to insist on being part of the BRF need BRF Bootcamp. I don't know, send them to some rural place in Wales or something while they de-Americanize them. Maybe force reporters to go to their own bootcamp so they stop making stupid Americentric statements.
> 
> I say this as an American. I think our toxic individualism prevents us from understanding some of these older traditions. I think Old NYC money used to be able to get it. It's not like I think the Gilded Age is what we should be acting like over here, but for heaven's sake if you're going to leave LA for Europe learn something and respect it, people!


Thank you for saying what needs to be said  
I say this as an American - _Tw is an embarrassment. _


----------



## sdkitty

BittyMonkey said:


> I think all Americans, if they're going to insist on being part of the BRF need BRF Bootcamp. I don't know, send them to some rural place in Wales or something while they de-Americanize them. Maybe force reporters to go to their own bootcamp so they stop making stupid Americentric statements.
> 
> I say this as an American. I think our toxic individualism prevents us from understanding some of these older traditions. I think Old NYC money used to be able to get it. It's not like I think the Gilded Age is what we should be acting like over here, but for heaven's sake if you're going to leave LA for Europe learn something and respect it, people!


Princess Grace did her "job" and so did the American who became queen of Jordan.....Harry picked poorly; should have heeded his brother's advice


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> What Harry is doing is playing a very dangerous game, not only for himself but _his_ children and even the rest of his family and any staff. He would not have to go to a piddly safe-house, refuge or bedsit. All he has to do is admit he made a mistake and get his family's help. I have sympathy (not in the incorrect manner of the term re. Brene Brown) but he forced her on his family and had children (however that happened) with her.



I agree. It's one thing if it's just yourself, but when you have tiny humans who rely on you you need to do what's right.


----------



## BittyMonkey

sdkitty said:


> Princess Grace did her "job" and so did the American who became queen of Jordan.....Harry picked poorly; should have heeded his brother's advice


That was a while ago though, I feel like we've really ramped up the cluelessness in the last decade.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> *This is not Harry’s mother, this is his grandmother. There are plenty of grandchildren, why can’t he just go and sit with them? I’m sure they’re equally upset. *


Harry would say because he is the King's son. That would give him entitlement enough.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> She has a contract with Spotify and, as she said, she didn't sign a NDA, so she will likely exploit the memory of QE.
> Charles is wasting his time begging to Hazz. Hazz has no power as soon as he arrives in Montecito. Charles needs to reduce her credibility by removing the titles…
> 
> "King Charles III Privately BEGS HARRY To Cancel Meghan’s Spotify Podcast, Fearing She’ll Exploit Queen’s Death"​
> 
> _*It's King Charles III's worst nightmare. Meghan Markle is poised to give the royal family’s first interview after the death of Elizabeth II — on her Spotify podcast.*
> 
> While the next episode of Markle’s controversial “Archetypes” podcast, due to stream Tuesday, has been postponed, the subsequent broadcast is slated for Sept. 20, the day after the state funeral for the Queen at Westminster Abbey in Central London._



Aren't the Spotify podcasts all mostly finished? Maybe I'm assuming too much but I don't think Meghan is actually doing an episode each week like most podcasters. I figured the interviews with the guests have already been done and the episodes are currently being edited and reworked in post-production by the staff of 20+. Could be wrong about that.


----------



## CobaltBlu

BittyMonkey said:


> I think all Americans, if they're going to insist on being part of the BRF need BRF Bootcamp. I don't know, send them to some rural place in Wales or something while they de-Americanize them. Maybe force reporters to go to their own bootcamp so they stop making stupid Americentric statements.
> 
> I say this as an American. I think our toxic individualism prevents us from understanding some of these older traditions. I think Old NYC money used to be able to get it. It's not like I think the Gilded Age is what we should be acting like over here, but for heaven's sake if you're going to leave LA for Europe learn something and respect it, people!


----------



## NYC Chicky

rose60610 said:


> He did until he met Claw. Claw thought changing the whole order of things would be easy peasy! She was so popular! She smiled! She giggled! She swayed her hips! She slouched like a widdle bitty girlie to be cutesy and giggle giggle some more! She elbowed Harry in the gut to get in front over and over. The whole BRF was supposed to turn a blind eye and let her get her way. SHE was supposed to be Queen! And when they didn't she'd had enough and slammed them as racist. And here we are!


----------



## rose60610

BittyMonkey said:


> *I think all Americans, if they're going to insist on being part of the BRF need BRF Bootcamp. I don't know, send them to some rural place in Wales or something while they de-Americanize them. Maybe force reporters to go to their own bootcamp so they stop making stupid Americentric statements.*
> 
> I say this as an American. *I think our toxic individualism prevents us from understanding some of these older traditions. I think Old NYC money used to be able to get it.* It's not like I think the Gilded Age is what we should be acting like over here, but for heaven's sake if you're going to leave LA for Europe learn something and respect it, people!



This 1000%. "Toxic individualism" to me also translates to "everyone is a victim". I swear there's a push to make everyone see themselves as a victim of SOMETHING. Women and minorities are automatically given victim titles. There's no more pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, and those that bust their butts and became very successful are slammed as toxic capitalists who must "pay their fair share".  Nobody argues with lending support to those who are TRULY disadvantaged, but today being "disadvantaged" can mean somebody looked at you wrong. Individualism is great, it doesn't have to be a mandatory slam against upholding traditions, I think the two can co-exist just fine. But not when the attitude is entirely ME ME ME and don't you dare hurt MY feelings but I can scream, whine, and accuse YOU of anything I want with no consequences because somehow I have rights and you don't.  

And I agree, if you move to another country, it's YOUR job to assimilate and live by ITS laws. Nobody forces you to move someplace. There are a lot of places I wouldn't care to go to. But if I had a job that sent me on assignment to one I'd suck it up, shut up, come back and collect the paycheck. 

Claw thought she was the darling of the BRF and boss them around. She not only needed a BRF Bootcamp, she needs a Common Sense Bootcamp.


----------



## carmen56

youngster said:


> I read that it's likely the vast bulk of the Queen's fortune passes to Charles (who will pass it to William in time) in order to avoid estate taxes.  She does have 4 children ahead of the grandchildren too and her financial priority would probably be Anne, Edward, and Andrew so that they are taken care of and don't have to go to Charles for everything.  For the grandchildren, she'd probably treat them equally, excepting Will of course who wouldn't need money.  But there are 7 grandchildren, if you exclude Will, so the estate could be quite diluted if she left them each millions on top of leaving something substantial each to Anne, Edward, and Andrew.  Then there are the tax implications of all this as well.  So, Harry might get some money from her personal estate but I'd bet more on personal items (which he could sell of course).



Harry can have the bits of dust out of the corners of TQ's coin purse.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tw does not respect hierarchy. A truly horrid person imo


Another, as if we needed one, example of her rapacious ego. H is the veteran, he organized Invictus Games, it’s been his signature role to be its Patron. Not anymore, in the latest meeting of the Invictus planning group in Düsseldorf, it was Raptor seated in the middle, power seat between a slouching hanger on named H and an Interviewer. She was the one featured at the base of the massive focal banner on the wall behind her. She was the one clutching the sheaf of notes. She was the one speaking. H appeared disengaged.

As the BLG pointed out in his analysis, if a picture of this meeting was given to a random group of people with no pre knowledge of the identity of the 3 people in the photograph, and they were told it was a picture of the Invictus Games Founder and Leader, and were asked to identify which person in the photo is the Invictus Games founder, they would identify Raptor.

                  ******Always front and center: MEMEMEME******


----------



## xincinsin

BittyMonkey said:


> As long as this whole thing is a Masterclass in narcissism, I need to add something about H's state of mind.
> 
> When you live with someone like this, you do everything you can to try and ward off the next explosion. You get into a frame of mind where you become almost a mind reader and are exquisitely sensitive to that person. Because the explosions are more about control than actual anger over a situation, you don't always succeed. But sometimes you do -- and so you get variable reinforcement, the most intractable kind of reinforcement.
> 
> I am going to guess that she gets angry about not having him open her door -- likely because this is something massively "in love" couples do. I think Mr. Bitty opened my door on the first few dates but never since, because, well, why. It's performative. So even though he isn't supposed to break protocol in this case, the pushback he would get for deviating is MUCH less than the consequences of her explosion. He likely thinks "this is only a little thing, not a big deal if it will keep her happy."
> 
> What he is doing is truly terrible to his family, and he is also trapped in a no-win scenario. Either he faces facts that she is bad for him and dumps her with no guarantee he will ever be forgiven (although I think if he approached KC and said that he is willing to divorce her, lay low, go to therapy, go into exile for a time maybe he might be) or he stays with her as his spirit becomes more and more destroyed. These people are psychic vampires and it is also very possible she dumps him for something better -- although I think her behavior has outed her, and 'something better' may not come along.
> 
> I can't hate H too much because I've been him. You want the N to love you -- so so much -- you will do anything. Sometimes they are nice and loving -- which keeps the hope alive. But it's the hope that is ultimately the most destructive.
> 
> If anyone is interested in learning more, Dr. Ramani on YouTube discusses people like MM.


Agree! One of my office narcs was a chameleon like Zedzee, showing different faces and personalities according to person and situation. He once painted himself into a corner, and his mask slipped. He screamed at the whole office because his lie was exposed. It was satisfying to watch the jawdrop moment for all those empathetic souls who had believed his tales of victimhood.


----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> Harry can have the bits of dust out of the corners of TQ's coin purse.


Didn't he once say Diana's stardust was falling on her?


----------



## WingNut

rose60610 said:


> This 1000%. "Toxic individualism" to me also translates to "everyone is a victim". I swear there's a push to make everyone see themselves as a victim of SOMETHING. Women and minorities are automatically given victim titles. There's no more pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, and those that bust their butts and became very successful are slammed as toxic capitalists who must "pay their fair share".  Nobody argues with lending support to those who are TRULY disadvantaged, but today being "disadvantaged" can mean somebody looked at you wrong. Individualism is great, it doesn't have to be a mandatory slam against upholding traditions, I think the two can co-exist just fine. But not when the attitude is entirely ME ME ME and don't you dare hurt MY feelings but I can scream, whine, and accuse YOU of anything I want with no consequences because somehow I have rights and you don't.
> 
> And I agree, if you move to another country, it's YOUR job to assimilate and live by ITS laws. Nobody forces you to move someplace. There are a lot of places I wouldn't care to go to. But if I had a job that sent me on assignment to one I'd suck it up, shut up, come back and collect the paycheck.
> 
> Claw thought she was the darling of the BRF and boss them around. She not only needed a BRF Bootcamp, she needs a Common Sense Bootcamp.


SPOT. ON. 
AMEN.
BRAVO.

I get the "you must be at a disadvantage because you're a woman in a man's industry or sport". NO. If I don't accomplish something it's because I failed to do it right, it is NOT someone else's fault. The lack of accountability in this world is appalling, and MM's behavior is a classic example of that playing out. She didn't fail to get what she wanted because of <insert demographic buzzword of the moment>, he failed to achieve her goals of changing the monarchy because it's DEEPLY rooted in tradition, and because her method of influencing change (not that influencing change is wrong, per se) was to charge in and start bullying and manipulating, without learning or due respect for the family and traditions that surround it. THAT alone would cost her credibility, but then to go and blame it on the BRF for not accepting her bullying and manipulations and thus for her to not have achieved her goals is mind-blowing. Seriously, people that don't understand the "dislike" for her need to take a read of some of the very insightful physiological posts from so many of the enlightened members of this thread.


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> Didn't he once say Diana's stardust was falling on her?


He did.  Just the sort of thing you’d expect a bloke to come out with, don’t you think?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Didn't he once say Diana's stardust was falling on her?


See, this is why I call BS on his ‘latest’ epistle, supposedly about the Queen.
He made sure to remind the world that he is the King’s son.  As if.  As if that affords him some kind of privilege, entitlement. Of course, he made sure to include Tw, too.  

ETA: based on his actions and statements, to him the Queen meant a front row seat at any event he wanted to attend, free drinks, free jets, a prominent place on the balcony, everyone bending to his every wish. So sick.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900


Hypocrite


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> No, I think Harry and the courtiers wrote this. It sounds proper.


Just the courtiers after speaking with him. He can’t string three words together.   Hug great grandchildren?   Yes the children of everyone else, but not yours Harry. It took days for this to see the light of day. If he wrote something it would have been out sooner and fewer words.
Granny sorry you died
The End.


----------



## Deleted 698298

gracekelly said:


> Hypocrite


Totally! Let’s have him preach to others what a “compass” she was, yet HE didn’t follow the needle, leave that to the masses. What a douche!
ps. “the moment you met my ’darling wife’ (so hollywood)“ was dictated by Meegain no doubt


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Hypocrite



Don't forget liar


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900




He makes this all about him and his make-believe, (cloud) cookoo family. Are you kidding me?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Has anyone met Lili?


Lili is a concept   Some idea floating around in the ether. TQ had to put on a 3D visor in order to see her or hug either child.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Don't forget liar


Forgive me!  Liar and every other simile


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Just the courtiers after speaking with him. He can’t string three words together.   Hug great grandchildren?   Yes the children of everyone else, but not yours Harry. It took days for this to see the light of day. If he wrote something it would have been out sooner and fewer words.
> Granny sorry you died
> The End.


Granny, sory you died. You didn't wait for me. I wuz going to bring Megs to see u but Daddy wouldn't let me. And Wills let the plane leav witzout me. It's so unfair! Megs sayz they shoud conpainsate us wiv a couple ov castles.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> He makes this all about him and his make-believe, (cloud) cookoo family. Are you kidding me?


Amazing that the statement is just from him. How did he manage to overrule  her demand that it be from both of them?  I know, it is because the courtiers controlled this completely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Granny, sory you died. You didn't wait for me. I wuz going to bring DARLING Megs to see u but Daddy wouldn't let me. And Wills let the plane leav witzout me. It's so unfair! BELOVED Megs sayz they shoud conpainsate us wiv a couple ov castles.



MegZ would have a fit my dear, let me correct  (see upper-case)


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Granny, sory you died. You didn't wait for me. I wuz going to bring Megs to see u but Daddy wouldn't let me. And Wills let the plane leav witzout me. It's so unfair! Megs sayz they shoud conpainsate us wiv a couple ov castles.


P.S.  Say hi to grandpa and sorry I missed seeing him.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Lili is a concept   Some idea floating around in the ether. TQ had to put on a 3D visor in order to see her or hug either child.


Yes, I imagine in the coming years there will be opportunities for toddlers participating in childrens’ acting classes in Los Angeles to be cast as “Lilibet” for royal events and photo shoots.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watching this video from this angle, MM looks to be hiding behind a security guard, playing with her hair, then walks over and gets the hug.  She is clearly not ready for service. She needs to go home.



Not bad acting.  The wounded wife, braving the hostile environment, the nasty family... in order to support her darling husband and pay tribute to the Queen who was so wonderful to her.  Brave, brave Meg.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Not bad acting.  The wounded wife, braving the hostile environment, the nasty family... in order to support her darling husband and pay tribute to the Queen who was so wonderful to her.  Brave, brave Meg.


About 5 seconds in, the look the security guard gives her is priceless.  He has just overheard her say something unpleasant and then he sees her fake side in action. He is truly disgusted.


----------



## WingNut

Good one:


			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/hidden-drama-behind-new-pics-of-meghan-harry-kate-and-will/news-story/00beb5c77ba6248ce1d22514545facc6


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Not bad acting.  The wounded wife, braving the hostile environment, the nasty family... in order to support her darling husband and pay tribute to the Queen who was so wonderful to her.  Brave, brave Meg.



Clever 14 years old, not only forgiving but from average teen to world-hugging superstar in 3 secs. MegZ could take PR-savvy classes from her. I hope she's not a MegZ in the making. Pho2opsRus 

Sorry, I am _very_ cynical today.

I also have worked out why 'these people' blink in such a exerted and exaggerated way, Botox-ic people can't actually communicate non verbally any other way. She looks like she had a ton before her European Grand Tour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> P.S.  Say hi to grandpa and sorry I missed seeing him.



The grandpa who was the boys' most fierce advocate when planning Diana's funeral.


----------



## Toby93

Has anyone heard about Oprah backtracking on last years interview?  Seems to be a lot of noise on Twitter, but I can't find the original statement.  Even the BLG is weighing in on it?


----------



## djfmn

Camilla Tominey wrote an article in the Telegraph saying it is petty that they are not allowing Harry to wear his military uniform and that the public would be upset by this. I responded to her on twitter saying it is not petty it is protocol and the public would not be upset. Unfortunately I am unable to read her article in the Telegraph. If anyone is able to post it here I would really appreciate it.

I was born in a commonwealth country (South Africa) and immigrated to the US 37 years ago. My parents both met the Queen during her visit to SA in 1947 when she said she would dedicate her life to the service of the Commonwealth. They met her again at the Palace in 1970 when my dad an ex serviceman who fought alongside the British in North Africa and Italy during the Second World War was invited to a cocktail party along with other SA ex serviceman known as MOTHS (Member Order of Tin Hats) held at Buckingham Palace. All the servicemen wore suits with their medals (as is protocol) because they were no longer active in the military. The MOTHS was started in SA but was adopted in the UK as well. The Queen visited a Shell Hole which is what the Clubhouse of the MOTHS organization is called in 1947 along with her parents and sister.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

#gohomemeghanmarkle is trending #9 on twitter for me


----------



## redney

Harry is not a working royal and only working royals are permitted to wear their military attire. Same with Andrew. He wore a suit to walk behind the Queen's coffin in Edinburgh, while his siblings - all working royals - wore their military attire. 

While some people may not agree with this protocol, I don't see how this is difficult for anyone to grasp.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone heard about Oprah backtracking on last years interview?  Seems to be a lot of noise on Twitter, but I can't find the original statement.  Even the BLG is weighing in on it?


It’s from her CBS interview this am.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The one that translated to "F*ck off?" So sweet.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.



Wow, shes such a liar.  I remember all the trailers in the build up to the interview, all that were you silent / silenced bs, it was keyed up to be a hugely disruptive attack on the Royal Family.

So she realises she backed the wrong horse and now she’s trying to gaslight her way out of it?  Get lost Oprah.   And to be coming out with it at this time?  Makes me very angry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.



How disingenuous of Oprah. She had no idea it was going to be bombshell interview beforehand? She allowed lie after lie from the gruesome twosome to go unchallenged in that interview. She Looked singularly ignorant about the BRF which I find astonishing from an intelligent woman who has been in the business of interviewing world figures and celebrities for as long as she has.


----------



## Toby93

Pessie said:


> Wow, shes such a liar.  I remember all the trailers in the build up to the interview, all that were you silent / silenced bs, it was keyed up to be a hugely disruptive attack on the Royal Family.
> 
> So she realises she backed the wrong horse and now she’s trying to gaslight her way out of it?  Get lost Oprah.   And to be coming out with it at this time?  Makes me very angry.


Absolutely!  "I don't get involved in other people's families"?  What the heck was that interview about then?.  It was all about someone else's family  
She is definitely trying to make herself look innocent.  Why now?  Is she trying to get in invite to the funeral?


----------



## youngster

So, Oprah is all, oh, I didn't know what they were going to reveal. I just gave them a "platform" to discuss why they left.  I guess that's her excuse for why she didn't ask any good follow up questions. She was unprepared.  She isn't even embarrassed to admit that.  She made her living (and a billion dollars) interviewing people and that's her story.  OK.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone heard about Oprah backtracking on last years interview?  Seems to be a lot of noise on Twitter, but I can't find the original statement.  Even the BLG is weighing in on it?


here ya go


----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.




Love how the dude on the right is NOT having it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

And ANOTHER thing.  Wasn’t that interview rumored to have been rehearsed?  

The only positive of this was s that MAYBE Oprah is not on the way to give TW an exclusive interview.


----------



## TC1

Can Oprah just STFU about this? she doesn't need to weigh in. She's not a journalist...nor close to the BRF (although clearly she wishes she was)


----------



## Deleted 698298

There is nothing like breaking grandma's heart, slandering her family for money and spitting on the work to which she devoted her entire life, and then warming himself in the spotlight after her death. He could have just left a short sweet note…I just can’t with this duo


----------



## AbbytheBT

BittyMonkey said:


> I swear half the reason I'm following this is to watch the absolute havoc an N wreaks all around them. My father was/is one and while he doesn't have this much influence on public life every single thing she does has a parallel in my own experience.
> 
> Everyone hoping for a reconciliation or that she will figure it out hopes in vain. People from 'normal' families where these people aren't the bride at every wedding, the mother to be at every baby shower and the corpse at every funeral just don't understand the abuse --- yes, abuse -- they administer on everyone until that victim cuts them out.
> 
> Then when they're finally cut out they sic the flying monkeys on you. In this case, the flying monkeys are the press and her "friends".


Strangely, I recently found an old diary with entries about my teenage life 50 yrs ago (boys!!) and ongoing drama with my father and his NPD wife. I am grateful for others sharing their stories of how this behavior plays out and acknowledging the reality of co-dependency between the couple no matter the cost to family relationships. 
I do see my father’s weaknesses in Harry - And the NPD behavior from his wife once they got together mirrors TW to a T: isolation from family, Dad worried about “upsetting her”, constant ultimatums, etc. 

And the honest truth is that the “marching orders” from the wife never changed in 45 years of marriage ; Opportunities to spend time with his mother, dear sister, and two daughters was always interrupted by some emergency she had, etc.  When she did show at events like funerals, she clung to him like a little girl, with her gazing at him like her protector. She was just so itty-bitty - lol. Even as a teen I thought that behavior weird. 

I would say the only bright spot is as I grew to adulthood, the wife feigned illness or some other crisis so often to get out of attending major family events where respectful behavior could be expected, that we started to look forward to those baptisms, weddings, funerals to have a good visit with father - Just to be on the “safe side”, He would tell her he was going to some special hobby exhibit in another town to sneek out of the house and change to a suit at my Grandma’s. Pathetic I know, but just relating here that these NPD relationships don’t and won’t ever make sense once their hooks are in and the partner succumbs to the love bombing. The hole is just so deep.


----------



## Pessie

Sophisticatted said:


> And ANOTHER thing.  Wasn’t that interview rumored to have been rehearsed?


Yes, and wasn’t there talk of a follow up using all the unaired footage?


----------



## scarlet555

DoggieBags said:


> How disingenuous of Oprah. She had no idea it was going to be bombshell interview beforehand? She allowed lie after lie from the gruesome twosome to go unchallenged in that interview. She Looked singularly ignorant about the BRF which I find astonishing from an intelligent woman who has been in the business of interviewing world figures and celebrities for as long as she has.


I stopped liking her a very long time ago.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Pessie said:


> Wow, shes such a liar.  I remember all the trailers in the build up to the interview, all that were you silent / silenced bs, it was keyed up to be a hugely disruptive attack on the Royal Family.
> 
> So she realises she backed the wrong horse and now she’s trying to gaslight her way out of it?  Get lost Oprah.   And to be coming out with it at this time?  Makes me very angry.


Maybe she's seen the gossip that MM has spent a whole day on the phone with her and it never happened? One can only hope.

Regardless, get wrecked Oprah.


----------



## scarlet555

Sophisticatted said:


> Sophisticatted said:
> 
> 
> 
> Love how the dude on the right is NOT having it.
Click to expand...


yeah, no one's buying it... it's bs but I like how she thinks we so dumb... it's laughable


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.



If she doesn't get into family business, wth did she do the interview?! I can't stand her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This all makes too much sense for the stans I reckon. Though I'm slightly disappointed Camilla Tominey couldn't think so far.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Sophisticatted said:


> And ANOTHER thing.  Wasn’t that interview rumored to have been rehearsed?
> 
> The only positive of this was s that MAYBE Oprah is not on the way to give TW an exclusive interview.


It was done over two or three days and they came back for reshoots after it became known that Philip wasn’t doing well.


----------



## nyc_hou_mia

Oprah is def backpedaling and it’s not a good look for her. Regardless though HMTQ death has TW losing control from all angles, her head must be spinning.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.



Who me?  Little old me?  All I did was give them a platform to tell their stories to the world. Was I supposed to ask a follow up question when they constantly contradicted themselves? What am I - an experienced interviewer?


----------



## Hermes Zen

Redbirdhermes said:


> Chris Jackson's photos.  The one with the pink balloon heart is stunning.
> 
> View attachment 5608034
> View attachment 5608035


I am so running behind in reading these great posts. I just wanted to jump in and say … LOVE PoW in first photo. Standing tall, strong and regal compared to hazbeen. Jacket buttoned up and looking grand. YOWZA!!


----------



## colourcords

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watching this video from this angle, MM looks to be hiding behind a security guard, playing with her hair, then walks over and gets the hug.  She is clearly not ready for service. She needs to go home.



I have to admit I have been kind of "whatever" about MM this whole time. I'm a fan of TRF but I never really took much of an interest in MM, likely because I didn't particularly like her character (or her acting!) in Suits. Plus, I'm usually a "there's two-sides to every story, everyone deserves a chance, etc.." kinda girl. I must be the only person in the world, but I haven't watched her Oprah interview (no desire) or kept up to date with her life in California. 

BUT. I JUST WATCHED THIS VIDEO and there is now little doubt in my mind that she is NPD. I have a close family member who has NPD, and watching her stone cold eyes gave me shivers and PTSD.

And suddenly I feel so sorry for Harry.


----------



## Toby93

Sophisticatted said:


> And ANOTHER thing.  Wasn’t that interview rumored to have been rehearsed?
> 
> The only positive of this was s that MAYBE Oprah is not on the way to give TW an exclusive interview.


It was rehearsed to death     Even Bower said she knew the questions beforehand and was soooooo prepared with the answers.  She knew when to sigh, when to look sad, when to pretend to think about what she was going to say.  Fake, fake fake.  Unfortunately, the US bought it hook line and sinker.  It took a while for the truth to come out.  

Oprah knows what she did, and how much it hurt the monarchy, so for her to sit there and pretend she didn't know the answers - disgusting.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I was amused to note this difference
Princess Anne (age 72)  - 6 hour car journey yesterday, mile walk today in  warm autumn day in full military uniform, vigil at the coffin again full uniform in Edinburgh (and later in London) as well as today's ceremony.
Meghan (age 41) can't open a car door by herself.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Thank you so much @QueenofWrapDress for posting the article from hrhfacts. The explanation of why Andrew has to wear uniform is obvious when explained. I think the Vigil of the Princes is a beautiful act of love and respect. I can remember it at the Queen Mother's funeral. 

Shame on Omid S. and his stirring.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If H is serious about reconciliation, SS must be fired.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> If H is serious about reconciliation, SS must be fired.



Yes, but I really don't think that's in his hands.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but I really don't think that's in his hands.


100% agree. Unfortunately.


----------



## Toby93

TC1 said:


> Can Oprah just STFU about this? she doesn't need to weigh in. She's not a journalist...nor close to the BRF (although clearly she wishes she was)


Looks to me that she is hoping for an invite


----------



## RAINDANCE

Who would be Oprah's biggest competitor ? 


Just asking in case W&K need to do an interview about Earthshot when they are in the US later in the year.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> It was rehearsed to death     Even Bower said she knew the questions beforehand and was soooooo prepared with the answers.  She knew when to sigh, when to look sad, when to pretend to think about what she was going to say.  Fake, fake fake.  Unfortunately, the US bought it hook line and sinker.  It took a while for the truth to come out.
> 
> Oprah knows what she did, and how much it hurt the monarchy, so for her to sit there and pretend she didn't know the answers - disgusting.



OMG, I have done interviews forever, you always send them questions beforehand. Another liar.

Notice the bigging-up of Oprah x 4 coz they’re all in bed with her 

Oprah and I were just chatting away about our forthcoming SIDNEY POITIER thing PLUG 
Oprah met the Queen yer know 
Oprah didn’t even bring up the Royals - she meets so many people
Oprah did that bombshell interview, and it was a bombshell (TRAVESTY of JOURNALISM]

Oprah and I did the SIDNEY POITER PLUG and repeat 

Please watch To Sir With Love (1967) to see some real US meets (working class) British culture. You will understand a little more on how the class system works in the UK. An African-American shows working class white kids they can dare to dream, they can do better than others expect.

Lulu a we poor Glasgow girl was in the film and sung the title song


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> OMG, I have done interviews forever, you always send them questions beforehand. Another liar.
> 
> Notice the bigging-up of Oprah x 4 coz they’re all in bed with her
> 
> Oprah and I were just chatting away about our forthcoming SIDNEY POITIER thing PLUG
> Oprah met the Queen yer know
> Oprah didn’t even bring up the Royals - she meets so many people
> Oprah did that bombshell interview, and it was a bombshell (TRAVESTY of JOURNALISM]
> 
> Oprah and I did the SIDNEY POITER PLUG and repeat
> 
> Please watch To Sir With Love (1967) to see some real US meets (working class) British culture. You will understand a little more on how the class system works in the UK. An African-American shows working class white kids they can dare to dream, they can do better than others expect.
> 
> Lulu a we poor Glasgow girl was in the film and sung the title song



I love that film, and the song always gets to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

Sorry if this was discussed previously, I was offline for a day and there are like 50 new pages here.  

I was reading that someone stole Megan's shoes that she planned to wear for the walkabout.  Megan had to wear a different pair of shoes than planned.  She believes this was sabotage done to make her look shorter and uncomfortable.  One more thing for her to wine about on her podcast for Harry's book.  I am sure the book will be delayed to include "behind the scenes" in the aftermath of the Queen's passing.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


>



The sad thing is, this is probably _exactly _what she was thinking/feeling while doing the walkabout.







jblended said:


> Coming in a little late but I've just seen that Lady C made the announcement on her channel before BP did. I'm fuming!
> Is there no integrity or respect to be found at all these days? To break protocol for the sake of social media clicks, likes and, let's not kid ourselves, lots of money, is absolutely disgusting behaviour.
> My unpopular opinion is that I despise all these commentary channels. All the people exploiting their royal connections (however tenuous or outdated) for social media fame are unethical vultures. I felt the same about Paul Burrell back when he was selling his stories to anyone who would listen. That includes all the royal/body language "experts" quick to exploit the H&M drama for their monetary gain.
> However, this one action by Lady C takes the absolute cake. I hope there's some form of consequence she will face for it, but I've not seen anything mentioned about it. At the very least, I hope she has lost her following because she does not deserve a platform after that stunt, imo. There is no greater act of disrespect that I can imagine; although Meagain trying to get a photo op of her laying _other people's _flowers at the gates comes a close second. *What a narc! *
> 
> Harry has to live with the fact that he _chose_ not to see either grandparent when they were near the end. I hope it eats him up inside every day. There was absolutely no reason for him not to see them, given their respective ages and the fact that they adored him until his captor wife soiled the relationship. I wish they'd both bugger off already. I know he has every right to be at the funeral and I believe he will grieve sincerely, but *her*...I have no words and hate that there will be headlines about her presence, her flowers, some story about her "personal" connection or a "private conversation" in the final hours that nobody knew about...you can see the PR machine working already.


I totally agree. Well said!







andrashik said:


> View attachment 5608894
> 
> Even animals see through her


 That dog is like:







bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900





I mean, it's an OK statement. It reads a bit cold and empty and what's with all the mentioning of 'meetings/meeting'?
Odd word to use when talking about your grandmother. A colleague? Yes. Grandmother? No.
William's statement was lovely; emotional and warm. You could sense his (and C & the kids)) closeness to and love for the Queen, it was formal but so personal and down to earth at the same time. Reading it actually brought a tear to my eye.





Sina08 said:


> The sad thing is, even if it was H himself, I’m questioning the sincerity of anything they’re putting out there. It seems everything is said and done with an agenda in mind. They really ruined any reputation they’ve ever had.










QueenofWrapDress said:


> Indeed.










QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but William also doesn't have a wife that pushes her way into everything. We don't think the fact per se is remarkable as this is apparently how it's done, we find it remarkable that Harry went with it even though we believe she threw yet another tantrum over being left out.
> 
> We're talking about a woman who wore red to a military occasion where red was reserved for military people. We're talking about a woman who put her ellbow in his ribs so she could go first and greet someone at an official engagement. We're talking about a woman who after two years of trash talk just publicly said "Thanks for supporting the family, *we* appreciate it." And we're talking about a woman who delayed her husband's travel to see his dying grandmother by picking a fight after learning she was uninvited.


When you put it like that...










rose60610 said:


> *News is reporting there was a lot of criticism of William for not opening Kate's car door* but people were slobbering over "Harry's kindness and wonderful manners" for opening Claw's door after the walkabout.





Trust the news outlets to decide what people should be outraged by  I haven't seen any negative comments about W not opening the car door for C. So ridiculous.
Opening a car door for someone is such a dated idea. I'll open my own door thanks; I certainly don't need a man to do it for me.
Only time it's acceptable to open any door for me is when I have my hands full carrying something, the door doesn't open automatically, and I need my hands free to do so. Then I will be thankful, otherwise- back off 





DoggieBags said:


> *I think this is just more fake stuff planted by TW’s PR to drum up more interest in her Podcasts. *If King Charles is trying to silence her then there must be some really juicy stuff that she’s going to reveal (sarcasm on!). Just more nonsense to go along with Spotify manipulating the numbers to say her Podcast is the number one Podcast in multiple regions when the only people actually listening to her Podcasts are some journalists and her sugars.


Exactly!







BittyMonkey said:


> As long as this whole thing is a Masterclass in narcissism, I need to add something about H's state of mind.
> 
> When you live with someone like this, you do everything you can to try and ward off the next explosion. You get into a frame of mind where you become almost a mind reader and are exquisitely sensitive to that person. Because the explosions are more about control than actual anger over a situation, you don't always succeed. But sometimes you do -- and so you get variable reinforcement, the most intractable kind of reinforcement.
> 
> I am going to guess that she gets angry about not having him open her door -- likely because this is something massively "in love" couples do. I think Mr. Bitty opened my door on the first few dates but never since, because, well, why. It's performative. So even though he isn't supposed to break protocol in this case, the pushback he would get for deviating is MUCH less than the consequences of her explosion. He likely thinks "this is only a little thing, not a big deal if it will keep her happy."
> 
> What he is doing is truly terrible to his family, and he is also trapped in a no-win scenario. Either he faces facts that she is bad for him and dumps her with no guarantee he will ever be forgiven (although I think if he approached KC and said that he is willing to divorce her, lay low, go to therapy, go into exile for a time maybe he might be) or he stays with her as his spirit becomes more and more destroyed. These people are psychic vampires and it is also very possible she dumps him for something better -- although I think her behavior has outed her, and 'something better' may not come along.
> 
> I can't hate H too much because I've been him. You want the N to love you -- so so much -- you will do anything. Sometimes they are nice and loving -- which keeps the hope alive. But it's the hope that is ultimately the most destructive.
> 
> If anyone is interested in learning more, Dr. Ramani on YouTube discusses people like MM.


Thanks for sharing your experience and insight on having a family member with NPD  Everything you have said in recent posts was very interesting and insightful, it helps to see another dimension of this situation with H and his part in all of this given the narcissistic woman he married and what she's capable of 




RAINDANCE said:


> I was amused to note this difference
> Princess Anne (age 72)  - 6 hour car journey yesterday, mile walk today in  warm autumn day in full military uniform, vigil at the coffin again full uniform in Edinburgh (and later in London) as well as today's ceremony.
> *Meghan (age 41) can't open a car door by herself.*


In MM's head:


Poor little MM, she doesn't have a clue about the meaning of feminism.


----------



## Toby93

Things are not going well for Oprah today.  I wonder if she regrets ever having anything to do with the toxic two?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh, I'm just so tired of them all. Not my circus, not my monkeys.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Amazing that the statement is just from him. How did he manage to overrule  her demand that it be from both of them?  I know, it is because the courtiers controlled this completely.


but of course he mentioned his "darling wife"


lanasyogamama said:


> If H is serious about reconciliation, SS must be fired.


the only thing she's serious about is self-promotion


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Aren't the Spotify podcasts all mostly finished? Maybe I'm assuming too much but I don't think Meghan is actually doing an episode each week like most podcasters. I figured the interviews with the guests have already been done and the episodes are currently being edited and reworked in post-production by the staff of 20+. Could be wrong about that.



I thought there were 12

2 have been aired - that leaves 10 vitriolic, acid-inducing, craven podcrashes.

That's a lot of bile and hate to go


----------



## Hermes Zen

lanasyogamama said:


> I also had a feeling she might be  pregnant.  They can always say it was a “happy accident”.


Extra $$$$$$’s for M. What a money hungry … bleep!


----------



## Cinderlala

There is nothing wrong with someone opening a door for someone else. Sometimes kindness is just kindness.  I open doors for people all the time.  I do it to be kind.

Don't get me wrong, that's not what happened with H---he knew the wrath he'd face if he failed to serve TW.  Her position as Top-Feminist could be seen to be at odds with the door opening but probably not in her mind.  After all, what's more powerful than forcing a prince to serve you.

I also understand why BRF members don't do it as it would add unnecessary security concerns and delays while they are there to serve the public.  It's also just not really done these days.


----------



## Cinderlala

I think there are still 9 podcasts to be aired.  Serena, Mariah, and Mindy have aired already.  I'm sure they will be edited to reflect the current situation and I doubt the edits will be complete until TW has decided how horribly she is being treated.  (With extra time possibly necessary to come up with more lies.)


----------



## needlv

Toby93 said:


> Things are not going well for Oprah today.  I wonder if she regrets ever having anything to do with the toxic two?




Oprah is back-pedalling because SHE looks bad… no other reason.  Oprah is about Oprah.

Oprah may be trying to get access this week to do some interviews etc and find the door is slammed shut for her in the UK.


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Harry can have the bits of dust out of the corners of TQ's coin purse.



That's funny - coz she never carried cash.

A 2022 pound coin (£1) would be prefect.

One side, a view of the Queen to remind him of her granny/colonel in chief/monarch/head of CoE, the other, the rose of England, thistle of Scotland, leek of Wales and shamrock of N Ireland to remind him of the land he used to belong to and all those that loved him. Altogether a gold coin, base metal, the price of 'freedom' and betrayal.

I just read that back to myself. Move over The Crown, I think I should be writing my own book/film script


----------



## marietouchet

colourcords said:


> I have to admit I have been kind of "whatever" about MM this whole time. I'm a fan of TRF but I never really took much of an interest in MM, likely because I didn't particularly like her character (or her acting!) in Suits. Plus, I'm usually a "there's two-sides to every story, everyone deserves a chance, etc.." kinda girl. I must be the only person in the world, but I haven't watched her Oprah interview (no desire) or kept up to date with her life in California.
> 
> BUT. I JUST WATCHED THIS VIDEO and there is now little doubt in my mind that she is NPD. I have a close family member who has NPD, and watching her stone cold eyes gave me shivers and PTSD.
> 
> And suddenly I feel so sorry for Harry.


Her extensions are obvious in the video - her own hair is just below shoulder level, the longer strands are extentions


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> here ya go



what?  she met the queen and curtsied but not curtsied?  so guess the didn't think she needed to really curtsy?
what's with her hair?  I liked her curly hair (which was supposedly her own)
As far as the bombshell interview, I think she gave them a platform to say whatever they wanted, unchallenged
Oh, and Gayle says Ophrah didn't want to talk about it.  So then why did she?  Did Gayle force her to?

BS
she's trying to cover all the bases
And for the record, I still kinda like her and Gayle.  But don't like them on this subject


----------



## Sophisticatted

RAINDANCE said:


> Who would be Oprah's biggest competitor ?
> 
> 
> Just asking in case W&K need to do an interview about Earthshot when they are in the US later in the year.


That reminds me, before Megxit, there was supposed to be a collaboration between the BRF mental health campaign (Heads Together, I think) and Oprah.  It might have even been announced before the wedding.  Obviously, those plans were dropped.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I thought there were 12
> 
> 2 have been aired - that leaves 10 vitriolic, acid-inducing, craven podcrashes.
> 
> That's a lot of bile and hate to go


Three have been aired, so there are nine remaining for release. Her celebrity guests had to be scheduled weeks/months in advance. I don’t think she can go back and change entire episodes now but they can edit out anything she said that could be offensive given current circumstances.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> Who would be Oprah's biggest competitor ?
> 
> 
> Just asking in case W&K need to do an interview about Earthshot when they are in the US later in the year.


I don't know that O has a direct competitor.  I think 60 Minutes still has a lot of credibility.  and their interviews aren't softball


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't know that O has a direct competitor.  I think 60 Minutes still has a lot of credibility.  and their interviews aren't softball


Babawa Walters would have made Meg cry.  How about Bill Maher? lol!


----------



## V0N1B2

LOL at Oprah backpedaling now. Especially since she spent so much energy hooking them up with the big players. Harry’s interview with Gayle King, the use of Tyler Perry’s house when they escaped Canada with little more than the shirts on their backs… After finding out today that Oprah is the godmother to Tyler Perry’s son, I just don’t believe her when she said she had nothing to do with Tyler offering his home to the two refugees. (not to mention I don’t think David Foster had anything to do with securing the home on Vancouver Island either.)
I don’t even get what Oprah is on about anyway. It’s not like it was a live broadcast. There was an opportunity to edit the program, wasn’t there? Chiiile….

Re: the supposed stolen shoes? I don’t know what happened to her Aquazzuras but the shoes she wore for the walkabout definitely weren’t hers. Suede (looked like to me) high, thick heel pumps? Nuh-uh. That entire ensemble was purchased for her, IMO. Are we to believe she had a pair of very opaque black tights in her bag? Every time she is seen at a function, there is a post on this thread and probably the other two threads here about her. Not this time. Meghan’s Mirror or whomever it is that posts/merches her outfits? Nothing. No info on the dress or the shoes. 

@Pessie glad you’re back, doll. Missed you  

Editing to add:  the car door thing? William outranks his wife. So does Charles. Plain and simple. Meghan expects Harry to walk behind her and open doors for her etc. because she is a woman. Harry outranks her too. This is why he should be introducing himself first, not her bathing in front of him to get there first. You would have thought she’d learnt her lesson when she walked in front of The Queen and got into the car before her. Let that sink in again. The Queen! Got into the car before her then had to scooch over.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Babawa Walters would have made Meg cry.  How about Bill Maher? lol!


I don't think Bill is a fan of theirs...therefore, they won't go near him
Yes, I would be very easy for Barbara to make her cry
Poor Barbara hasn't been heard from in years


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Three have been aired, so there are nine remaining for release. Her celebrity guests had to be scheduled weeks/months in advance. I don’t think she can go back and change entire episodes now but they can edit out anything she said that could be offensive given current circumstances.



3, you're right!!!! Apologies 

They seem so insignificant now, they're all miniaturising andCombiningTogetherIntoMememeMememeMEmemememeMememME

With that staff existing content could be edited, but they wouldn't make much sense. 

If there are 9 left, they're probably all done 

My guess is they will either view existing transcripts and try to veto the most offending lines in the recordings, and then she'll edit-in yak yak yak on me me me and the weather to make for time cut OR if they will all be chucked. 

Depends if they're salvageable and what she wants to do with the rest of her life


----------



## EverSoElusive

The beloved Queen Elizabeth II through the years  Posted on her thread but I'm sure it would be appreciated here too when you guys need a break from Z-list and Co.


----------



## lulu212121

I wonder if any of megains guests are wanting to pull out of her podcrash? I'm sure many can see and read the writing on the wall.

I just know Jimmy Fallon is sooooo relieved that her appearance was cancelled. Whooo weeee did he catch a break!


----------



## Pessie

V0N1B2 said:


> LOL at Oprah backpedaling now. Especially since she spent so much energy hooking them up with the big players. Harry’s interview with Gayle King, the use of Tyler Perry’s house when they escaped Canada with little more than the shirts on their backs… After finding out today that Oprah is the godmother to Tyler Perry’s son, I just don’t believe her when she said she had nothing to do with Tyler offering his home to the two refugees. (not to mention I don’t think David Foster had anything to do with securing the home on Vancouver Island either.)
> I don’t even get what Oprah is on about anyway. It’s not like it was a live broadcast. There was an opportunity to edit the program, wasn’t there? Chiiile….
> 
> Re: the supposed stolen shoes? I don’t know what happened to her Aquazzuras but the shoes she wore for the walkabout definitely weren’t hers. Suede (looked like to me) high, thick heel pumps? Nuh-uh. That entire ensemble was purchased for her, IMO. Are we to believe she had a pair of very opaque black tights in her bag? Every time she is seen at a function, there is a post on this thread and probably the other two threads here about her. Not this time. Meghan’s Mirror or whomever it is that posts/merches her outfits? Nothing. No info on the dress or the shoes.
> 
> @Pessie glad you’re back, doll. Missed you
> 
> Editing to add:  the car door thing? William outranks his wife. So does Charles. Plain and simple. Meghan expects Harry to walk behind her and open doors for her etc. because she is a woman. Harry outranks her too. This is why he should be introducing himself first, not her bathing in front of him to get there first. You would have thought she’d learnt her lesson when she walked in front of The Queen and got into the car before her. Let that sink in again. The Queen! Got into the car before her then had to scooch over.


 
I bet she burned those opaques as soon as they got back….


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> Granny, sory you died. You didn't wait for me. I wuz going to bring Megs to see u but Daddy wouldn't let me. And Wills let the plane leav witzout me. It's so unfair! Megs sayz they shoud conpainsate us wiv a couple ov castles.



Granny, sorry you died can't wait to see how much money I inherit but you could have waited until we got a photo with you and Lilibet it would have made us a fortune therefore my handler is foaming at the mouth furious sad too. As long as we have your and Mummy Diana's memories we can make money by telling people we're devastated that you're gone, we can get T-shirts made and sell those too. My darling wife is good at crying when there's cameras around to really make it look good. We miss you, Granny, now how much did you leave me?


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I bet she burned those opaques as soon as they got back….



Probably took them off in the car


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For events like this, press needs to be accredited, you can't just show up. Wouldn't it be fun if Oprah's request got lost.


Have an awful thought … What if M invites O to Frogmore to film her interview?!?!


----------



## kemilia

pomeline said:


> I asked Mr Pom to take a look and he said right away "oh yeah, that's a recording device alright". He was wondering though why on earth are they using such visible ones when there are more inconspicuous ones available.
> 
> I hope the security is in on them. They have to be, right...?


Could be why she was so adamant about about holding onto those flower bouquets--a good cover up, but very obvious.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't think Bill is a fan of theirs...therefore, they won't go near him
> Yes, I would be very easy for Barbara to make her cry
> Poor Barbara hasn't been heard from in years


Kitty, I was being funny.  Bill would trounce her.


----------



## gracekelly

lulu212121 said:


> I wonder if any of megains guests are wanting to pull out of her podcrash? I'm sure many can see and read the writing on the wall.
> 
> I just know Jimmy Fallon is sooooo relieved that her appearance was cancelled. Whooo weeee did he catch a break!


I bet Jimmy had some good stunt planned.  Probably lined up a dime store tiara for her and wanted her to pretend she was TQ knighting a dog.  She got lucky it cancelled.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Kitty, I was being funny.  Bill would trounce her.


I got that.....had to respond anyway....
I've heard him make fun to the grifters on his show


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I bet Jimmy had some good stunt planned.  Probably lined up a dime store tiara for her and wanted her to pretend she was TQ knighting a dog.  She got lucky it cancelled.


Won’t it be rescheduled? It would be irresistible to get her talking about the funeral and the awkwardness. Then watch the crocodile tears.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Three have been aired, so there are nine remaining for release. Her celebrity guests had to be scheduled weeks/months in advance. I don’t think she can go back and change entire episodes now but they can edit out anything she said that could be offensive given current circumstances.


I wonder if the Meghan camp was tired of each episode being torn apart Word for Word and thought it would be a good excuse to bail out.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did anyone else catch with Gail said at the end of that clip about Oprah saying that “the interview is now over”? It really made me think about the power dynamic in their friendship, and whether it’s really a friendship or if Oprah is the boss and Gail does her bidding.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I wonder if the Meghan camp was tired of each episode being torn apart Word for Word and thought it would be a good excuse to bail out.


I’m going to go out on a limb and say this was Spotify’s decision, not Meghan’s. They don’t want tens of thousands, if not millions, of subscribers canceling over insensitivity.


----------



## papertiger

Hermes Zen said:


> Have an awful thought … What if M invites O to Frogmore to film her interview?!?!


Can’t stop her

But

From my observation, she’s had quite a few HUGE tellings off via husband and perhaps some ‘quiet’ words from others too over the past few days. I think she’s shellshocked (she’ll be claiming PTSD from the trauma soon enough).

Her walk about in front of Buck Pal was just as hazy and confused as anyones could be, she looked drugged. That was after 45 minutes of being told NO. I’m not sure she’s been told NO and had to swallow it in her long life.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Did anyone else catch with Gail said at the end of that clip about Oprah saying that “the interview is now over”? It really made me think about the power dynamic in their friendship, and whether it’s really a friendship or if Oprah is the boss and Gail does her bidding.



I don’t even know who Gail is and it very much sounded like Oprah is her boss


----------



## Katel

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5608914
> 
> Just why? Why coddle them..


Could Harry be petitioning to KC3 / PW a secret rescue from Claw a la Katie Holmes? It was curious how Hairball was on the other side of the world (supposedly) while MeePeeZee was blathering out her podcashes and CNUT article … they appeared very much separate entities …


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I got that.....had to respond anyway....
> I've heard him make fun to the grifters on his show


I have been to a taping of his show.  I have also seen him with one of his girlfriends years ago when staying at the same hotel.  Self entitled )*(*&*^&%^$%##  the way he treated her.  I'm not a fan. If he wanted to, he would leave MM needing heavy medication to calm down.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I don’t even know who Gail is and it very much sounded like Oprah is her boss


Oprah:  Gayle, JUMP!
Gayle:  How high? How often?


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to go out on a limb and say this was Spotify’s decision, not Meghan’s. They don’t want tens of thousands, if not millions, of subscribers canceling over insensitivity.


The annoying thing about that is that she would still get paid if they bail.


----------



## scarlet555

IT's the Queen's funeral why should Nutmeg have any guests at all?  They can come with the public...


----------



## ChampagneandChakras

Debbini said:


> If she doesn't get into family business, wth did she do the interview?! I can't stand her.


What a crock of sh&t. She damn well knew what was gonna be discussed.


----------



## tiktok

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to go out on a limb and say this was Spotify’s decision, not Meghan’s. They don’t want tens of thousands, if not millions, of subscribers canceling over insensitivity.


However they would be super happy to have - and broadcast - the first scoop on the events as soon as all the ceremonies are over.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> I don’t even know who Gail is and it very much sounded like Oprah is her boss


Gayle King is Oprah’s long time BF and was her loyal sidekick on the Oprah Winfrey Show until the show ended. As far as I could tell her role on that show was to cheerlead and stroke Oprah’s ego. She is still editor at large for Oprah’s O magazine. But her main job these days is as an interviewer / reporter co-hosting the morning show on CBS, one of the largest US networks. I wouldn’t characterize anything she does as hard-hitting journalism. I have no idea why but she was the person who introduced JCMH at the JPMorgan client event in Miami, Florida where they brought out JCMH as a surprise guest speaker at the end of the day. That was JCMH’s first paid speaking engagement in the US after Megxit. Someone who attended that event told me TW was there and also said a few introductory words after Gayle. Harry’s speech was described to me as a rambling, disorganized mess centered around his mental health issues caused by the trauma of Diana’s untimely death. JCMH’s surprise inclusion in the list of speakers apparently baffled many of the bank clients since the rest of the speakers including at least one former British PM talked about world events and the changing political landscape and how these changes affected investment opportunities. Gayle King’s presence at that JPMorgan event made me think that Oprah was very much involved in Megxit behind the scenes.


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> The annoying thing about that is that she would still get paid if they bail.


Only if Spotify make the decision 

If she fails to air the remaining she will have failed to deliver 3/4 of her contracted output. That will be in breach of her contractual obligations


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BittyMonkey

gracekelly said:


> I have been to a taping of his show.  I have also saw him with one of his girlfriends years ago when staying at the same hotel.  Self entitled )*(*&*^&%^$%##  the way he treated her.  I'm not a fan. If he wanted to, he would leave MM needing heavy medication to calm down.


I was in an elevator at the Four Seasons once with him. He was really rude to everyone.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Gayle King is Oprah’s long time BF and was her loyal sidekick on the Oprah Winfrey Show until the show ended. As far as I could tell her role on that show was to cheerlead and stroke Oprah’s ego. She is still editor at large for Oprah’s O magazine. But her main job these days is as an interviewer / reporter co-hosting the morning show on CBS, one of the largest US networks. I wouldn’t characterize anything she does as hard-hitting journalism. I have no idea why but she was the person who introduced JCMH at the JPMorgan client event in Miami, Florida where they brought out JCMH as a surprise guest speaker at the end of the day. That was JCMH’s first paid speaking engagement in the US after Megxit. Someone who attended that event told me TW was there and also said a few introductory words after Gayle. Harry’s speech was described to me as a rambling, disorganized mess centered around his mental health issues caused by the trauma of Diana’s untimely death. JCMH’s surprise inclusion in the list of speakers apparently baffled many of the bank clients since the rest of the speakers including at least one former British PM talked about world events and the changing political landscape and how these changes affected investment opportunities. Gayle King’s presence at that JPMorgan event made me think that Oprah was very much involved in Megxit behind the scenes.


Very interesting


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> Only if Spotify make the decision
> 
> If she fails to air the remaining she will have failed to deliver 3/4 of her contracted output. That will be in breach of her contractual obligations


You also don’t know if the 12 podcrashes were enough to satisfy the Spotify contract or if they still need to produce more context to earn the full amount.


----------



## CobaltBlu

V0N1B2 said:


> LOL at Oprah backpedaling now. Especially since she spent so much energy hooking them up with the big players. Harry’s interview with Gayle King, the use of Tyler Perry’s house when they escaped Canada with little more than the shirts on their backs… After finding out today that Oprah is the godmother to Tyler Perry’s son, I just don’t believe her when she said she had nothing to do with Tyler offering his home to the two refugees. (not to mention I don’t think David Foster had anything to do with securing the home on Vancouver Island either.)
> I don’t even get what Oprah is on about anyway. It’s not like it was a live broadcast. There was an opportunity to edit the program, wasn’t there? Chiiile….
> 
> Re: the supposed stolen shoes? I don’t know what happened to her Aquazzuras but the shoes she wore for the walkabout definitely weren’t hers. Suede (looked like to me) high, thick heel pumps? Nuh-uh. That entire ensemble was purchased for her, IMO. Are we to believe she had a pair of very opaque black tights in her bag? Every time she is seen at a function, there is a post on this thread and probably the other two threads here about her. Not this time. Meghan’s Mirror or whomever it is that posts/merches her outfits? Nothing. No info on the dress or the shoes.
> 
> @Pessie glad you’re back, doll. Missed you
> 
> Editing to add:  the car door thing? William outranks his wife. So does Charles. Plain and simple. Meghan expects Harry to walk behind her and open doors for her etc. because she is a woman. Harry outranks her too. This is why he should be introducing himself first, not her bathing in front of him to get there first. You would have thought she’d learnt her lesson when she walked in front of The Queen and got into the car before her. Let that sink in again. The Queen! Got into the car before her then had to scooch over.


So those shoes, I totally agreed with you but then I accidentally found this!  Those ARE her shooze!  First clue was in our very own Royalty Fashion thread but this randomly popped up a page today.
No clue on the dress tho, that I do believe someone left at her door in a sack along with a spare microphone.
EDIT:  Oops, her dress was reported to be Emma Wickstead

Anyway... I live to serve.








						Sarah Flint Jay 100 Black Suede Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps - Meghan Markle's Shoes
					

Shop the Sarah Flint Jay 100 Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps as seen on Meghan Markle



					www.meghansfashion.com


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

I really don’t have anything against Meghan but I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist and treated so bad but yet demands to be included in the family events. Total hypocrisy in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


----------



## papertiger

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I really don’t have anything against Meghan but I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist but yet demands to be included in the family events. Total hypocrisy in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…



Well said!


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.



Take a seat with MegaLiar … you’re not scary, Oprah  … but you are a clown - we see you. 






Sharont2305 said:


> I love that film, and the song always gets to me.



Me too … especially right now


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to go out on a limb and say this was Spotify’s decision, not Meghan’s. They don’t want tens of thousands, if not millions, of subscribers canceling over insensitivity.


I think you are correct.  That want to see how the Harkles shake out during these current events.  if she has really bad press or does something really awful they may be looking for distance.


----------



## gracekelly

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I really don’t have anything against Meghan but I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist and treated so bad but yet demands to be included in the family events. Total hypocrisy in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


The complaints about racism and the family are all they have.  If something goes down this trip, they will use that to complain about as well.  Despite all their claims to be global philanthropists, they have done nothing substantial.  It is all posturing.  It will be interesting if there is a change after the funeral.


----------



## bag-mania

tiktok said:


> However they would be super happy to have - and broadcast - the first scoop on the events as soon as all the ceremonies are over.


True, they are a media outlet after all. They would love to snag the gossip and it would justify all that cash they threw at them. However, I think Netflix would argue that they deserve it more


----------



## Chanbal

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I really don’t have anything against Meghan *but* I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist and treated so bad but yet demands to be included in the family events. *Total hypocrisy* in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


Happy that you have nothing against TW, but you just summarized what many of us have been saying on this thread for the last several months.


----------



## 1LV

CobaltBlu said:


> So those shoes, I totally agreed with you but then I accidentally found this!  Those ARE her shooze!  First clue was in our very own Royalty Fashion thread but this randomly popped up a page today.
> No clue on the dress tho, that I do believe someone left at her door in a sack along with a spare microphone.
> EDIT:  Oops, her dress was reported to be Emma Wickstead
> 
> Anyway... I live to serve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Flint Jay 100 Black Suede Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps - Meghan Markle's Shoes
> 
> 
> Shop the Sarah Flint Jay 100 Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


Those shoes are butt ugly.


----------



## CobaltBlu

1LV said:


> Those shoes are butt ugly.


and super unflattering for her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

1LV said:


> Those shoes are butt ugly.


Truly awful


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have been to a taping of his show.  I have also seen him with one of his girlfriends years ago when staying at the same hotel.  Self entitled )*(*&*^&%^$%##  the way he treated her.  I'm not a fan. If he wanted to, he would leave MM needing heavy medication to calm down.


I don't watch him on a regular basis.....I kinda like that he's independent...doesn't really toe a party line.....I don't find him that funny though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Who's responsible for or allowed to invite guests to QEII's funeral?  Is Harry entitled to "invite" any person? Who decides on the cut off list for those who get to sit inside the cathedral for the funeral mass? Surely Heads of State get their own reserved seats, but the rest? 

Is Claw allowed to invite, say, Oprah? I'd think any invited person has to be OK'd by King Charles III's staff, no?


----------



## gracekelly

1LV said:


> Those shoes are butt ugly.


They really are!  Whoever bought them thought they were doing her a favor.  Thick sturdy heel for a walkabout. Or they were trolling her. lol!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Very interesting


Bower has references to Gayle and Oprah teaming up to try to  secure interviews even before wedding, they eventually succeeded after Megxit


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Who's responsible for or allowed to invite guests to QEII's funeral?  Is Harry entitled to "invite" any person? Who decides on the cut off list for those who get to sit inside the cathedral for the funeral mass? Surely Heads of State get their own reserved seats, but the rest?
> 
> Is Claw allowed to invite, say, Oprah? I'd think any invited person has to be OK'd by King Charles III's staff, no?


The suits make up a list and KC has to approve it.  That's it.  They might be requests.  William might want the Middletons there, though they may be with the children if they aren't present.  Doubt Harry has a say about anything.

I suspect the greater list consisting of heads of state and monarchs etc was made up a long time ago and it is always being revised.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Who's responsible for or allowed to invite guests to QEII's funeral?  Is Harry entitled to "invite" any person? Who decides on the cut off list for those who get to sit inside the cathedral for the funeral mass? Surely Heads of State get their own reserved seats, but the rest?
> 
> Is Claw allowed to invite, say, Oprah? I'd think any invited person has to be OK'd by King Charles III's staff, no?


Google says the Abbey seats 2000, which is not a lot, they filled the seats for the Commonwealth service without (non Commonwealth) foreign dignitaries
So, it seems logical that only the office of the King will be extending invites
So, a big no for Doria and Oprah and Gayle


----------



## Debbini

There is NO way King Charles is going to approve Oprah coming to the funeral. None, nada, zip.


----------



## redney

gracekelly said:


> They really are!  Whoever bought them thought they were doing her a favor.  Thick sturdy heel for a walkabout. Or they were trolling her. lol!


According to that linked site she's worn them on various occasions dating back to 2018!


----------



## DoggieBags

marietouchet said:


> Bower has references to Gayle and Oprah teaming up to eventually secure interviews even before wedding


I don’t watch the morning shows much but I’ve seen Gayle do a few fluff pieces on the Harkles. They’re always very favorable and pretty much spout the SS PR drivel with zero critical thought. If she stops doing friendly pieces on the Harkles then I would assume Oprah had withdrawn her support of the Harkles.


----------



## V0N1B2

CobaltBlu said:


> So those shoes, I totally agreed with you but then I accidentally found this!  Those ARE her shooze!  First clue was in our very own Royalty Fashion thread but this randomly popped up a page today.
> No clue on the dress tho, that I do believe someone left at her door in a sack along with a spare microphone.
> EDIT:  Oops, her dress was reported to be Emma Wickstead
> 
> Anyway... I live to serve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Flint Jay 100 Black Suede Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps - Meghan Markle's Shoes
> 
> 
> Shop the Sarah Flint Jay 100 Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


Really? I’m shocked. They so do not look like anything she would normally wear.  I bet they were gifted and she accidentally on purpose left them behind, like her forgotten diary at Frogbottom Manor. Not that I pay attention to what she wears, but I feel like she didn’t wear them on this recent European tour. Regardless, easier to walk in on the grass and gravel anyway.


----------



## Chanbal

colourcords said:


> I have to admit I have been kind of "whatever" about MM this whole time. I'm a fan of TRF but I never really took much of an interest in MM, likely because I didn't particularly like her character (or her acting!) in Suits. Plus, I'm usually a "there's two-sides to every story, everyone deserves a chance, etc.." kinda girl. I must be the only person in the world, but I haven't watched her Oprah interview (no desire) or kept up to date with her life in California.
> 
> BUT. I JUST WATCHED THIS VIDEO and there is now little doubt in my mind that she is NPD. I have a close family member who has NPD, and watching her stone cold eyes gave me shivers and PTSD.
> 
> And suddenly I feel so sorry for Harry.


The Oprah interview was removed from the internet. However, you may want to read the article by Allison P Davis while it's still available online. It seems the author of the article was appointed by TW to write about her, and she wrote a very interesting piece.



			https://www.thecut.com/article/meghan-markle-profile-interview.html


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I’m going to go out on a limb and say this was Spotify’s decision, not Meghan’s. They don’t want tens of thousands, if not millions, of subscribers canceling over insensitivity.


Spot on .. Spotify made the decision … it is win win
This is a turning point , if M comes out OK, then Spotify will look thoughtful
If M does not fare well, they have done damage limitation


----------



## Sophisticatted

It would be terrible to her for Spotify to ditch the pod crashes, OR edit them, because she wants to have a media presence.  She want HER thoughts and opinions out there.

However, it would also probably be terrible for her if they didn’t because the first few had a decent amount of backlash.  The rest would probably have even more.  It would make the booing after the service during the Jubilee seem very, very tame.


----------



## Sina08

DoggieBags said:


> Gayle King is Oprah’s long time BF and was her loyal sidekick on the Oprah Winfrey Show until the show ended. As far as I could tell her role on that show was to cheerlead and stroke Oprah’s ego. She is still editor at large for Oprah’s O magazine. But her main job these days is as an interviewer / reporter co-hosting the morning show on CBS, one of the largest US networks. I wouldn’t characterize anything she does as hard-hitting journalism. I have no idea why but she was the person who introduced JCMH at the JPMorgan client event in Miami, Florida where they brought out JCMH as a surprise guest speaker at the end of the day. That was JCMH’s first paid speaking engagement in the US after Megxit. Someone who attended that event told me TW was there and also said a few introductory words after Gayle. Harry’s speech was described to me as a rambling, disorganized mess centered around his mental health issues caused by the trauma of Diana’s untimely death. JCMH’s surprise inclusion in the list of speakers apparently baffled many of the bank clients since the rest of the speakers including at least one former British PM talked about world events and the changing political landscape and how these changes affected investment opportunities. Gayle King’s presence at that JPMorgan event made me think that Oprah was very much involved in Megxit behind the scenes.


And we all know how much those banking guys care about mental health 
Reminds me of that one time, a VP from a JPMorgan US office was over in the Frankfurt office, where my now husband was working at the time. One of his colleagues had been brutally assaulted in the subway at night and the whole office was talking about it. The VP said he’s sorry for what happened to the colleague, but if he’s still using public transportation at 30, he just hasn’t made it.


----------



## Lodpah

OMG! I just read from a clinical psychologist who said the reason people are drawn to these stories and are horrified about the brutish behavior of the Toxic duo is because it’s like group therapy as lots of people have dealt with people similar to them. 

I agree. We see narcissistic or psychopaths i our regular lives that it’s nice to see that their behavior is called our, as most people some really calm out those behaviors in real life. The fact that they don’t get consequences, especially from folks like Oprah (who is allegedly in my opinion is being brilliantly played by TW and being made a fool of) and Netflix and Spotify is because money


----------



## Lodpah

DP


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> Probably took them off in the car


I shouldn’t laugh, I’ve done that before on the drive home after a long evening event.


----------



## Helventara

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I really don’t have anything against Meghan but I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist and treated so bad but yet demands to be included in the family events. Total hypocrisy in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


My sentiments exactly. It baffles me when people (ie. The other thread) say we hate MM, we're mean to her, etc because to me it’s just common sense and decency, both of which she lacks. No hate involved. 

 I am really discouraged these days by people and their lack of decency and common sense, as shown by the sugars, to be honest.


----------



## bag-mania

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I really don’t have anything against Meghan but I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist and treated so bad but yet demands to be included in the family events. Total hypocrisy in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


She doesn’t have a conscience. Or empathy. She pretends to have them but it’s obvious she isn’t capable of having the feelings.


----------



## gracekelly

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: At last we see the real Princess Anne
					

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: Don't worry, this isn't going to be another one of those 'The Queen Who Met Me' pieces. Although I did meet her once, at the 150th anniversary of the Journalists' Charity...




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





_Heaven knows she must have been horrified when her late sister-in-law co-operated with Andrew Morton and sat down to spill the beans with the BBC's Martin Bashir.* We can only imagine how appalled she must be at the money-grubbing antics of her ingrate nephew Harry and his ghastly bit-part actress wife.*_


Tell us how you really feel, Richard.  lol!


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> The suits make up a list and KC has to approve it.  That's it.  They might be requests.  *William might want the Middletons there, *though they may be with the children if they aren't present.  Doubt Harry has a say about anything.
> 
> I suspect the greater list consisting of heads of state and monarchs etc was made up a long time ago and it is always being revised.


It would make sense for the Middletons to attend the funeral as they have been supporters of the BRF for several years. However, is TW bringing Doria to the UK?


----------



## Chanbal

Page Six is reporting on the courageous lady in blue.   

“_Lady in blue & others ARE ALL OF US. They refuse to shake hands with Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Netflix,” wrote one person on Twitter, as another added, “This speaks volumes. She needs to go back to California asap. You are truly hated for your disrespect of the UK_.”









						Meghan Markle snubbed by Queen mourner who ignored the duchess’ greeting
					

A trio of women seemingly turned down the chance to shake Markle’s hand during her royal walkabout over the weekend following Queen Elizabeth II’s death.




					pagesix.com


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Helventara said:


> My sentiments exactly. It baffles me when people (ie. The other thread) say we hate MM, we're mean to her, etc because to me it’s just common sense and decency, both of which she lacks. No hate involved.
> 
> I am really discouraged these days by people and their lack of decency and common sense, as shown by the sugars, to be honest.


I would just like an answer to the Meghan fans why this is ok? Why is she taking flowers for someone she barely knew? I don't blame William and Katherine being uncomfortable, how awkward it must have been…


----------



## V0N1B2

The Queen: I am not amused, dear.
Meghan: Look! A camera!









The Queen: Ee by gum Jim, what is she still blathering on about? And didn't my invitation specifically request her to wear a hat?
Meghan: Look! A camera!


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan biographer apologises for blunder over Queen's coffin
					

Omid Scobie, who is known to be close to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, has apologised after mistakenly appearing to suggest that Scotland is not part of the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




You have to read the article to read about the mistakes that Omit makes.  How can any reputable news agency hire him?  He's an uninformed idiot. No, he's a moron and he is Meghan's mouthpiece!  I think she should keep him on because he makes all of them look stupid.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It would make sense for the Middletons to attend the funeral as they have been supporters of the BRF for several years. However, is TW bringing Doria to the UK?


Doubtful.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower: Hazz is insisting to have his book published in November…


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> The annoying thing about that is that she would still get paid if they bail.





papertiger said:


> If she fails to air the remaining she will have failed to deliver 3/4 of her contracted output. That will be in breach of her contractual obligations


The remaining 9 episodes will be released. It is merely a hiatus, not a cancellation.

Spotify says on its web site that the podcast “will be paused during the official mourning period.” It will be back, whether that is right after the funeral or a month from now. Meghan has so much more to lecture us about the labels that hold women back. Gag.


----------



## bellecate

CobaltBlu said:


> So those shoes, I totally agreed with you but then I accidentally found this!  Those ARE her shooze!  First clue was in our very own Royalty Fashion thread but this randomly popped up a page today.
> No clue on the dress tho, that I do believe someone left at her door in a sack along with a spare microphone.
> EDIT:  Oops, her dress was reported to be Emma Wickstead
> 
> Anyway... I live to serve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Flint Jay 100 Black Suede Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps - Meghan Markle's Shoes
> 
> 
> Shop the Sarah Flint Jay 100 Tortoiseshell Heel Pumps as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


They sure looked a thrashed mess on her.


----------



## scarlet555

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I really don’t have anything against Meghan but I don’t understand how shes not  embarrassed to be there after her interview with Oprah. She claimed they were racist and treated so bad but yet demands to be included in the family events. Total hypocrisy in my opinion, you can’t have it both ways. If it was that bad and upsetting she would have cut all ties and her and Harry live their lives in California. But her and Harry keep coming back to the UK and then complaining they are mean to her. She is actually at this point doing it to herself. I don’t understand how she cant see how wrong it  was to be there accepting flowers for someone you called called racist in a national interview. couldn’t Harry just take the flowers? she had not reason or business being there. She can’t let go of the title of a racist organization? She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


No merit to be owned by Nutmeg, that’s obvious it’s been 2 years on her own and nothing to pay the bills, so it’s back to walking behind Princess Kate!


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> And ANOTHER thing.  Wasn’t that interview rumored to have been rehearsed?
> 
> The only positive of this was s that MAYBE Oprah is not on the way to give TW an exclusive interview.


Not only rehearsed but edited for impact. There were unused video clips floating on the internet for some time. Is Oprah trying to pretend naivete or ignorance at this late stage in life? And will she give the Sharkles a second go at a global platform to "set the record straight" and prove to everyone that she couldn't expect the gushing bs?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

V0N1B2 said:


> The Queen: I am not amused, dear.
> Meghan: Look! A camera!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen: Ee by gum Jim, what is she still blathering on about? And didn't my invitation specifically request her to wear a hat?
> Meghan: Look! A camera!
> 
> View attachment 5609324


Did she just push ahead of the Queen to get in the car first?!


----------



## youngster

Yes. Yes, she did.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Lodpah said:


> OMG! I just read from a clinical psychologist who said the reason people are drawn to these stories and are horrified about the brutish behavior of the Toxic duo is because it’s like group therapy as lots of people have dealt with people similar to them.
> 
> I agree. We see narcissistic or psychopaths i our regular lives that it’s nice to see that their behavior is called our, as most people some really calm out those behaviors in real life. The fact that they don’t get consequences, especially from folks like Oprah (who is allegedly in my opinion is being brilliantly played by TW and being made a fool of) and Netflix and Spotify is because money


I assume this psychologist is referring to people like me. More than being horrified, I am happy. I'm happy that people are finally seeing the real damage narcs do. For many many years people who lived with NPD parents or partners were branded as liars or entitled, spoiled or just wrong.

I don't get vicarious enjoyment out of it, it's actually somewhat traumatizing but I think it's a good thing that we're "shining a light" on Ns.


----------



## WingNut

BittyMonkey said:


> I assume this psychologist is referring to people like me. More than being horrified, I am happy. I'm happy that people are finally seeing the real damage narcs do. For many many years people who lived with NPD parents or partners were branded as liars or entitled, spoiled or just wrong.
> 
> I don't get vicarious enjoyment out of it, it's actually somewhat traumatizing but I think it's a good thing that we're "shining a light" on Ns.


Yup…100%. I somehow find this therapeutic.


----------



## justwatchin

youngster said:


> Yes. Yes, she did.


Good grief! Unbelievable!


----------



## Debbini

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower: Hazz is insisting to have his book published in November…



I have this feeling that when the Harkles come back here (ughh) after the funeral, things between them and the RF are going to get really ugly. I actually said a prayer that Harry would go to his father or brother and ask for help getting out of his marriage. Looks like that isn't the way things will go.


----------



## Jayne1

Debbini said:


> I actually said a prayer that Harry would go to his father or brother and ask for help getting out of his marriage. Looks like that isn't the way things will go.


Even if he gets out of his marriage, he can't be trusted anymore.


----------



## xincinsin

melissatrv said:


> Sorry if this was discussed previously, I was offline for a day and there are like 50 new pages here.
> 
> I was reading that someone stole Megan's shoes that she planned to wear for the walkabout.  Megan had to wear a different pair of shoes than planned.  She believes this was sabotage done to make her look shorter and uncomfortable.  One more thing for her to wine about on her podcast for Harry's book.  I am sure the book will be delayed to include "behind the scenes" in the aftermath of the Queen's passing.


Maybe Hazard will use it in his court case: my private security couldn't bring the guns or get the intel they needed to protect my beloved wife's shoes! She probably left them behind in Germany or hurled them into the toilet in a fit of rage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

wisconsin said:


> please vlad tell us how to delete posts made by mistake


What I do -  if the Edit button is available,  highlight all the text, press delete.  It seems to work.  If the Edit button is gone, I’m sunk.


----------



## AbbytheBT

V0N1B2 said:


> The Queen: I am not amused, dear.
> Meghan: Look! A camera!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen: Ee by gum Jim, what is she still blathering on about? And didn't my invitation specifically request her to wear a hat?
> Meghan: Look! A camera!
> 
> View attachment 5609324


Wow - had never seen that footage. TW’s over animated ”chatting” looks so patronizing. Like she thinks HMTQ is a doddering fool and see what a kind and helpful youngster she is? Lol.  And so helpful to all to get herself seated in the car first thing right?


----------



## Gal4Dior

I’m seeing some rumors that TW has either dumped Sunshine Sachs, or the other way around. 

Anyone else seen anything concrete online?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gal4Dior said:


> I’m seeing some rumors that TW has either dumped Sunshine Sachs, or the other way around.
> 
> Anyone else seen anything concrete online?


About time, one got rid of the other. 
If the best any of them could do was to churn out Hazzie’s ‘tribute’, yeah, they are not worth a penny, never have been.  They all seem to be very ignorant/uneducated/unaware/naive of history. H&M are the big losers here. Much worse than Andrew imo. I am glad I never fell for their BS.  Stay strong, we will get through this.


----------



## youngster

justwatchin said:


> Good grief! Unbelievable!



I know, right?  How difficult is it to ask what the protocol is before spending the day with the Queen?  Who enters the building or car first?  Hint: Not you, Meghan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

melissatrv said:


> Sorry if this was discussed previously, I was offline for a day and there are like 50 new pages here.
> 
> I was reading that someone stole Megan's shoes that she planned to wear for the walkabout.  Megan had to wear a different pair of shoes than planned.  She believes this was sabotage done to make her look shorter and uncomfortable.  One more thing for her to wine about on her podcast for Harry's book.  I am sure the book will be delayed to include "behind the scenes" in the aftermath of the Queen's passing.



Yes, I have read the same stuff.  I do not believe any of it.  Tw looked like she had puffy lips and partially dyed hair.  Not sure what she has been doing at FroggieCott, but her lack of preparation shows.
Someone needs to call the ‘wambulance’.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Babawa Walters would have made Meg cry.  How about Bill Maher? lol!


We need H&M to sit for a British interviewer, just as Andrew did.  Tw would walk off in a huff.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> and super unflattering for her.


actually, I thought her legs in the tights looked better than usual....not as good as Kate's but not bad



Debbini said:


> There is NO way King Charles is going to approve Oprah coming to the funeral. None, nada, zip.


I'm sure this was all planned before her death, with her input....no, Harry can't just invite people



Debbini said:


> I have this feeling that when the Harkles come back here (ughh) after the funeral, things between them and the RF are going to get really ugly. I actually said a prayer that Harry would go to his father or brother and ask for help getting out of his marriage. Looks like that isn't the way things will go.


I understand your feelings but I have more important things to pray about.  Harry has made his bed so now he can lie it or get out of it.  Immature though he may be, he's a middle aged man with plenty of resources.  With all that is going in in the world, these grifters are a welcome distraction, not something to pray about or lose sleep over


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> I understand your feelings but I have more important things to pray about.  Harry has made his bed so now he can lie it or get out of it.  Immature though he may be, he's a middle aged man with plenty of resources.  With all that is going in in the world, these grifters are a welcome distraction, not something to pray about or lose sleep over


I don't lose sleep over them, no. I pray for many, many people, it wasn't hard to add one more.


----------



## bag-mania

There are a number of articles about who will be attending the funeral. Members of the media (like Oprah) are not listed among them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> That reminds me, before Megxit, there was supposed to be a collaboration between the BRF mental health campaign (Heads Together, I think) and Oprah.  It might have even been announced before the wedding.  Obviously, those plans were dropped.


My understanding is the collaboration is still in progress. Opr and GK and CBS have an agenda to push.  The backpedaling starts because they realize people are wising up.  One thing people dislike is the hypocrisy.  Opr et al. have a record of missteps, supporting people who lie, etc.  So do H&M.


----------



## V0N1B2

wisconsin said:


> please vlad tell us how to delete posts made by mistake





CarryOn2020 said:


> What I do -  if the Edit button is available,  highlight all the text, press delete.  It seems to work.  If the Edit button is gone, I’m sunk.


Report your (own) post and ask for it to be deleted if you’ve missed the edit timeframe.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Poor Barbara hasn't been heard from in years


She’s in her 90s now. Hopefully her health is good but she is staying out of the public eye.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> The annoying thing about that is that she would still get paid if they bail.


If history is an indicator, it won’t be much.  Diana needed her billionaire BF’s. Sarah had to kiss up to Opr and do those kiddie books.
The BRF is extremely adept at keeping those UK pounds on UK shores. Good on them.


----------



## Chanbal

King Charles Replaces Harry & Meghan With Two Corgis In Line Of Succession
					

LONDON — In his first official royal decree, King Charles has replaced Meghan and Harry in the line of succession with two of the late Queen's corgis.




					babylonbee.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> King Charles Replaces Harry & Meghan With Two Corgis In Line Of Succession
> 
> 
> LONDON — In his first official royal decree, King Charles has replaced Meghan and Harry in the line of succession with two of the late Queen's corgis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> babylonbee.com


King Charles!  Yess, yes, yess. Easy-peasy


----------



## momtok

BittyMonkey said:


> I assume this psychologist is referring to people like me. More than being horrified, I am happy. I'm happy that people are finally seeing the real damage narcs do. *For many many years people who lived with NPD parents or partners were branded as liars or entitled, spoiled or just wrong.*
> 
> I don't get vicarious enjoyment out of it, it's actually somewhat traumatizing but I think it's a good thing that we're "shining a light" on Ns.



Being disbelieved is the absolute, absolute, *absolute* worst.  You get this disconnect in the brain of utter disbelief that *they* don't believe *you*.  My mother was not narcissistic, but I feel a kinship with the topic as she was physically abusive instead. She would often corner me on the sofa or in the bathtub and start throwing fists.  (Hubby thinks she's bipolar, and I also believe she's fueled by latent anger over the circumstances of my birth and my father.)  Around my college years I finally told someone ... a nurse at a nursing home where I worked summers, believe it or not, and I showed her a bruise on my arm.  She actually laughed.  Thought I was joking.  This was long before the days of nurses being "required to report", nor was I a minor anymore.  But I was in utter disbelief that she *didn't* believe me, even with a bruise on my arm.  It's literally a moment of "this does not compute" within the (my) brain.  Told another woman later ... a dental hygienist for whom my mother and I were both patients.  She just kind of pretended that she never heard it, and would still show up when I was at the dentist (but I had purposefully switched to a different hygienist), to chirpily ask me about my mother.  To this day, it still gives me a "this does not compute" sensation in the brain, that she pretends I never told her.

Those few I've told in more recent years actually do believe me ... they have no choice because I have a witness now.  Soon after I married I was home alone one afternoon and my mother stopped by.  She kicked me so hard I had a lump on my shin for half-a-year.  Hubby knew no one else was here that day, and knew darn well I did not fall down any stairs.  So now if I do tell someone, he sets them straight.  He also makes sure that I'm never alone with my mother (even though the woman is almost 90, and quite frankly I could drop her if I needed to), and it's he who does the fluffy "checking in on the phone every other evening and keeping her calm."  .... She has verbally freaked out on occasion as she's become elderly, enough, on two occasions, to scare our daughter.  Nothing physical anymore though.  (Maybe she *does* realize I would be willing to drop her now.)  Yeah, it's a strange world.

But I do feel that kinship.  When people don't believe you, it literally feels "impossible", "surreal", that they would do so.  (Do we have a hug emoticon around here?  It's been so long since I was around.)

Sorry, back to your usually scheduled program.  Learning a lot going back through some of these threads.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> *about time and I hope his wife is helping him keep his backbone*


In an interview years ago Charles said (paraphrasing here) that he had to remain in the background and support HM because even though she was his mother, she was his sovereign and she was in control and he would follow her orders. Since HM has passed, Charles as sovereign now calls the shots and is trying to quietly rein in both Dufus and ZedZed until HM is finally laid to rest. I imagine he will become tougher on the despicable pair once the mourning period is over.


----------



## Hermes Zen

pomeline said:


> So... Is it really confirmed Doria is on her way to UK? With the kids? I don't know why they would bring the kids, it's not like they really miss them and I can't figure out how they could use them for PR either. Ok so teary walks looking at flowers maybe but I don't see them bringing the kids to the funeral. And why Doria? She isn't exactly nanny material. God I sound harsh but I guess I'm turning into a cynic with all that I've read over the years.
> 
> P.S. Can I just say how envious I am seeing how vibrant and witty the conversation here is on the royal topics..? I used to be on another discussion forum about royals (we were not Sussex stans) until it was suddenly closed down by the admin. We set up another one but there's only a couple of us now and since we don't want Meghan fanatics in to bash us, we don't really advertise our forum so it's... pretty dead there. But hey, anyone wants to talk more about it, PM me by all means.


I think M wants those kids with her so she can try to get pics with their grandpapa the KING. King Charles III is one step closer to them in the family line and they missed out getting photos with great-grandmother QE.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, we need the HBO show Succession now more than ever.



ETA: the laugh I needed now- hoping they don’t do that  
Powerful_Material •2 days ago
_Are they going to play boar on the floor? _

bby_redditor •2 days ago
_Boah on the floah_


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> In an interview years ago Charles said (paraphrasing here) that he had to remain in the background and support HM because even though she was his mother, she was his sovereign and she was in control and he would follow her orders. Since HM has passed, Charles as sovereign now calls the shots and is trying to quietly rein in both Dufus and ZedZed until HM is finally laid to rest. I imagine he will become tougher on the despicable pair once the mourning period is over.


I certainly hope so.


----------



## Jayne1

Gal4Dior said:


> I’m seeing some rumors that TW has either dumped Sunshine Sachs, or the other way around.
> 
> Anyone else seen anything concrete online?


Yes, I read that too. Could be money troubles but apparently Meg dumped them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> Just read the tribute from Harry and it is excellent. Really well expressed, serious, somber with a couple of light personal touches and grammatically correct.
> 
> (Could I be mischievous here and suggest he had proper Palace help with the drafting of this one ?)


It sounds like a rehashing of William's.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> TW will not be pleased…
> 
> _"Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charlotte 'to get prized Diana heirloom' as she's 'given pick of royal jewels'
> 
> 
> Princess Diana wore the Spencer Tiara during her wedding to King Charles and it has now been earmarked for her granddaughter Princess Charlotte now that Prince William has become the next in line
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


I thought the Spencer tiara stayed with the Spencer family??


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s from her CBS interview this am.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> That's funny - coz she never carried cash.


I just read that one of the things she always carried in her handbag was a folded bill for the collection plate at church.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Poor Barbara hasn't been heard from in years


She is in her 90s and it has been rumored that she has dementia.


----------



## purseinsanity

If Haz was smart, he'd have a separate bank account for any funds he receives from QE II.  Even in CA, you're entitled to keep your inheritance money as long as it's in an account in only your name.  Once you put them in a joint account, they're community property.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Probably took them off in the car


Ripped them off...


Hermes Zen said:


> Have an awful thought … What if M invites O to Frogmore to film her interview?!?!


She could likely invite O in, but the camera crew? No way they could get in. Maybe Hazard could use his camera phone, and the grainy bad footage would be so "realistic" "documentary" style. Shaking close-ups of her tear-stained mascara-streaked face as she babbles about how she feels trapped and can't go out for a cup of organic coffee...


bag-mania said:


> Won’t it be rescheduled? It would be irresistible to get her talking about the funeral and the awkwardness. Then watch the crocodile tears.


I wait with bated breath


ChampagneandChakras said:


> What a crock of sh&t. She damn well knew what was gonna be discussed.


Only a fool would believe Oprah went into that interview without a clue.


LVlvoe_bug said:


> She would look better to many people if she dropped the title and got achievements on her own merit…


If she had any merit...


rose60610 said:


> Who's responsible for or allowed to invite guests to QEII's funeral?  Is Harry entitled to "invite" any person? Who decides on the cut off list for those who get to sit inside the cathedral for the funeral mass? Surely Heads of State get their own reserved seats, but the rest?
> 
> *Is Claw allowed to invite, say, Oprah? *I'd think any invited person has to be OK'd by King Charles III's staff, no?


No, it's not her funeral except in the reputational sense.


Sophisticatted said:


> It would be terrible to her for Spotify to ditch the pod crashes, OR edit them, because she wants to have a media presence.  She want HER thoughts and opinions out there.
> 
> However, it would also probably be terrible for her if they didn’t because the first few had a decent amount of backlash.  The rest would probably have even more.  It would make the booing after the service during the Jubilee seem very, very tame.


Let her podcrashes be aired. She needs to offend more countries.


----------



## csshopper

Oprah Winfrey is a nasty woman, I’m embarrassed she is a fellow American.

Her statement  “when the dead are buried” she hopes the Suckesses can make peace with the family is so disrespectful to the Queen, so deliberately dehumanizing in tone, I am so angry reading it I can barely type.

”the dead”, this is how she sees fit to refer to Queen Elizabeth, not by name, by title, not even a reference as a Grandmother????  SHAME on her, no class, no respect, and deliberately done I believe.

Further I think Oprah implies, The Queen,  through her handling of Megxit could be the cause of the rift (with her gone they can heal it), which is so outrageous in attempted misdirection it’s vicious. Oprah participated in fueling this rift by her willingness to be complicit in the Suckesses smear campaign of lies and insinuations. It backfired on her. She’s not the Omnipotent Oprah she thinks herself to be, so now we have this cowardly “I didn’t…” approach to try and distance herself. Her mealy mouthed comments are insultingly hypocritical. It explains why she and Raptor are friends, they play from the same skewed script. Oprah uses her supposedly BFF, Gayle, like Megan uses her toady, Omid, to get their bile out to the media. I wish the media would ignore them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5608894
> 
> Even animals see through her


They do say animals are good judges of character 


bellecate said:


> View attachment 5608900


I think this is fine and like anyone could’ve written it but no one apart from those idiot publishers think he has a way with words.  Right now in the U.K. almost every single website has an in memoriam on their homepage so he must’ve been feeling left out.


papertiger said:


> Thank you, that was advanced level





lanasyogamama said:


> I love knowledgeable people! Thanks for taking the time to explain it all.


Thank you for taking the time to read it. I am always happy to go on (and on) about my hobby horses.

In terms of favourite hair on a celebrity it’s probably Nicki Minaj - her Queen era and later hair  is amazing I don’t love some of her personal life but I love to see her creative styles.


This looks like she has neon green hair growing out of her scalp- it’s a masterclass

Beautiful curls and waves



Then this is just amazing



In terms of what I think would suit M- I’d like to see her go shorter and curly. I think it’d help convey that youthful, happy vibe she tries to insist she has-
So here’s Mel B, for example, she’s 47 and I think she looks younger or
same age as Meg and the hair really looks modern and joyful to me. Something like this with brown highlights maybe? Oh and I think she’s need it to sit further front on her forehead than Mel as they have different face shapes.






QueenofWrapDress said:


> 2nd that. I've been watching that video about sewing in that weave and I'm fascinated by both the process and her skills. I can't even do anything other than a simple braid or my hair tangles and everything is ruined, though I can do French and Dutch braids on others.


I know it’s amazing to see the skill to do it so well and to yourself! Granted it’s hard to find a great hairstylist in real life but I find it bizarre that M had one flown in from USA for her wedding and it still looked bad well actually it’s not surprising because she just copies Catherine’s old hair while professing to be new and so different from her.

Catherine’s big curly ends mane was not my favourite but it suited her because she doesn’t have a very expressive face (she’s stoic after all) so big dramatic hair gave her some presence when she was starting out. M tries to wear the same style but as we’ve covered she has way too much drama 


papertiger said:


> Thank you, that means a lot, especially from you, you are much more good hearted and forgiving than me (I would send both Harry and TW on the first rocket to planet Zog)


At least they’d have a chance of being the most liked celebrities there.


Icyjade said:


> For her age, I think her skin is bad.
> 
> Wrinkles are normal and part of aging, but wrinkles on a younger person isn’t the same as one on an older person. If she is 60 I would think her skin is wonderful. But I thought she is only 41? That’s a lot of lines at that age isn’t it?


If anyone is itching to write a mini essay on skincare I would love to read it…

I think her problem is application again - this time it’s the fake tan and foundation - very blotchy, very dry on the skin. She’d brush a lot of it off as freckles but it looks more like make up pigment going patchy to me. I’ve never used fake tan but I’d imagine it’s not great for skin condition long term either.


bag-mania said:


> Yes, I imagine in the coming years there will be opportunities for toddlers participating in childrens’ acting classes in Los Angeles to be cast as “Lilibet” for royal events and photo shoots.


I  picture something straight out of John Waters.
‘If any of those little brats get cute and try to wear hose with their white leather shoes- OUT the door!’



Chanbal said:


> If they contacted a US TV station (per Angela's post), they (SS, Nf*x and/or Arch***) have probably arranged for a few sympathizers to be present. How lucky she was to have started her walk with the 'hug' and 'I love you' girls …



You can bet she had plants all along the walkway. ‘Handsome, wholesome gay couple’, ‘artistic professor’, ‘young biracial woman in a lab coat’, ‘tiny grandma with handknit baby cardigan’ ‘Ukrainian women with sad but hopeful glints in their eyes’ and possibly ‘assorted school kids chanting the sacred name of Megz’ are on retainer from the agency to appear and look overjoyed to see her  at an hours notice.


----------



## Katel

csshopper said:


> Oprah Winfrey is a nasty woman, I’m embarrassed she is a fellow American.
> 
> Her statement  “when the dead are buried” she hopes the Suckesses can make peace with the family is so disrespectful to the Queen, so deliberately dehumanizing in tone, I am so angry reading it I can barely type.
> 
> ”the dead”, this is how she sees fit to refer to Queen Elizabeth, not by name, by title, not even a reference as a Grandmother????  SHAME on her, no class, no respect, and deliberately done I believe.
> 
> Further I think Oprah implies, The Queen,  through her handling of Megxit could be the cause of the rift (with her gone they can heal it), which is so outrageous in attempted misdirection it’s vicious. Oprah participated in fueling this rift by her willingness to be complicit in the Suckesses smear campaign of lies and insinuations. It backfired on her. She’s not the Omnipotent Oprah she thinks herself to be, so now we have this cowardly “I didn’t…” approach to try and distance herself. Her mealy mouthed comments are insultingly hypocritical. It explains why she and Raptor are friends, they play from the same skewed script. Oprah uses her supposedly BFF, Gayle, like Megan uses her toady, Omid, to get their bile out to the media. I wish the media would ignore them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

youngster said:


> So, Oprah is all, oh, I didn't know what they were going to reveal. I just gave them a "platform" to discuss why they left.  I guess that's her excuse for why she didn't ask any good follow up questions. She was unprepared.  She isn't even embarrassed to admit that.  She made her living (and a billion dollars) interviewing people and that's her story.  OK.





Sophisticatted said:


> Love how the dude on the right is NOT having it.


The absolute funniest thing about this is how her BF Gayle is overexplaining how they came to record this footage every other word. ‘I was just interviewing her …for something else… it just came up…. I didn’t interview her just for this….’

For some reason I find the idea that she and Oprah just sit in a room together talking but not facing each other with the camera rolling all the time to be the least unlikely thing about this situation.


----------



## xincinsin

Hermes Zen said:


> I think M wants those kids with her so she can try to get pics with their grandpapa the KING. King Charles III is one step closer to them in the family line and they missed out getting photos with great-grandmother QE.


G*d forbid they are posed next to the coffin in a final attempt to get the Lillibet x 2 money shot.


Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I read that too. Could be money troubles but apparently Meg dumped them.


Well, they did miss achieving the goal she set: Project Queen Meghan.


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> They really are!  Whoever bought them thought they were doing her a favor.  Thick sturdy heel for a walkabout. Or they were trolling her. lol!


Who knows-  not to mention the walk with the black dress is giving-


The dress is ugly but I think every single Emilia Wickstead dress looks like it’s from clearance at TK Maxx and is made out of upholstery polyester so that’s not surprising.


----------



## xincinsin

AbbytheBT said:


> Wow - had never seen that footage. TW’s over animated ”chatting” looks so patronizing. Like she thinks HMTQ is a doddering fool and see what a kind and helpful youngster she is? Lol.  And so helpful to all to get herself seated in the car first thing right?


I am sure she will milk this trip in her sob sob varied recollections. IIRC it was her only solo trip with the Queen. QE2 shared a blanket with her on the train and gave her a gift. The trip is also memorable because...
a) she went in a straitjacket and no hat
b) she exposed swathes of scalp and had haphazard uncombed hair
c) she wouldn't stop talking and gesturing
d) she did a hop skip jump at the car and left the Queen standing as she clambered in first


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> They do say animals are good judges of character
> 
> I think this is fine and like anyone could’ve written it but no one apart from those idiot publishers think he has a way with words.  Right now in the U.K. almost every single website has an in memoriam on their homepage so he must’ve been feeling left out.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for taking the time to read it. I am always happy to go on (and on) about my hobby horses.
> 
> In terms of favourite hair on a celebrity it’s probably Nicki Minaj - her Queen era and later hair  is amazing I don’t love some of her personal life but I love to see her creative styles.
> View attachment 5609411
> 
> This looks like she has neon green hair growing out of her scalp- it’s a masterclass
> 
> Beautiful curls and waves
> View attachment 5609432
> 
> 
> Then this is just amazing
> View attachment 5609412
> 
> 
> In terms of what I think would suit M- I’d like to see her go shorter and curly. I think it’d help convey that youthful, happy vibe she tries to insist she has-
> So here’s Mel B, for example, she’s 47 and I think she looks younger or
> same age as Meg and the hair really looks modern and joyful to me. Something like this with brown highlights maybe? Oh and I think she’s need it to sit further front on her forehead than Mel as they have different face shapes.
> 
> View attachment 5609428
> View attachment 5609427
> 
> 
> I know it’s amazing to see the skill to do it so well and to yourself! Granted it’s hard to find a great hairstylist in real life but I find it bizarre that M had one flown in from USA for her wedding and it still looked bad well actually it’s not surprising because she just copies Catherine’s old hair while professing to be new and so different from her.
> 
> Catherine’s big curly ends mane was not my favourite but it suited her because she doesn’t have a very expressive face (she’s stoic after all) so big dramatic hair gave her some presence when she was starting out. M tries to wear the same style but as we’ve covered she has way too much drama
> 
> At least they’d have a chance of being the most liked celebrities there.
> 
> If anyone is itching to write a mini essay on skincare I would love to read it…
> 
> I think her problem is application again - this time it’s the fake tan and foundation - very blotchy, very dry on the skin. She’d brush a lot of it off as freckles but it looks more like make up pigment going patchy to me. I’ve never used fake tan but I’d imagine it’s not great for skin condition long term either.
> 
> I  picture something straight out of John Waters.
> ‘If any of those little brats get cute and try to wear hose with their white leather shoes- OUT the door!’
> 
> 
> 
> You can bet she had plants all along the walkway. ‘Handsome, wholesome gay couple’, ‘artistic professor’, ‘young biracial woman in a lab coat’, ‘tiny grandma with handknit baby cardigan’ ‘Ukrainian women with sad but hopeful glints in their eyes’ and possibly ‘assorted school kids chanting the sacred name of Megz’ are on retainer from the agency to appear and look overjoyed to see her  at an hours notice.


I L.O.V.E  that neon green hair!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Who's responsible for or allowed to invite guests to QEII's funeral?  Is Harry entitled to "invite" any person? Who decides on the cut off list for those who get to sit inside the cathedral for the funeral mass? Surely Heads of State get their own reserved seats, but the rest?
> 
> Is Claw allowed to invite, say, Oprah? I'd think any invited person has to be OK'd by King Charles III's staff, no?



Every seat will be accounted for.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> Who knows-  not to mention the walk with the black dress is giving-
> View attachment 5609440
> 
> The dress is ugly but I think every single Emilia Wickstead dress looks like it’s from clearance at TK Maxx and is made out of upholstery polyester so that’s not surprising.



Would this be ok?  









						Candice Cape
					

The Candice cape is a statement styling piece for Pre-Fall 2022. Crafted from a weighted quality of taffeta faille, this blue hydrangea floral printed cape elegantly covers the shoulders, with fluted detailing through the front creating a soft feminine shape. Partner this floor sweeping cape...




					emiliawickstead.com


----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> It would be terrible to her for Spotify to ditch the pod crashes, OR edit them, because she wants to have a media presence.  She want HER thoughts and opinions out there.
> 
> However, it would also probably be terrible for her if they didn’t because the first few had a decent amount of backlash.  The rest would probably have even more.  It would make the booing after the service during the Jubilee seem very, very tame.



Between a rock and a hard place.

She put herself there though


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would this be ok?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Candice Cape
> 
> 
> The Candice cape is a statement styling piece for Pre-Fall 2022. Crafted from a weighted quality of taffeta faille, this blue hydrangea floral printed cape elegantly covers the shoulders, with fluted detailing through the front creating a soft feminine shape. Partner this floor sweeping cape...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> emiliawickstead.com


I have seen this in someone’s conservatory I swear!

It’s probably what she’d want to wear.

Polyester dress for over a grand too. 

We talk about positive discrimination on this thread and it works for nationalities too. You honestly cannot convince me she’d be getting these gigs if she was British or American rather than Kiwi.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



Imo too little, too late. 
They need to either go away and stay off our screens OR do a sit-down interview with a respected British journalist.  The lady who did Andrew’s would be fine.  No, the questions must not be sent ahead. Follow-up questions allowed. Yes, H&M will be awful because they are awful and cannot think on the feet [or other end]. We know this, the whole world needs to know it.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> OMG! I just read from a clinical psychologist who said the reason people are drawn to these stories and are horrified about the brutish behavior of the Toxic duo is because it’s like group therapy as lots of people have dealt with people similar to them.
> 
> I agree. We see narcissistic or psychopaths i our regular lives that it’s nice to see that their behavior is called our, as most people some really calm out those behaviors in real life. The fact that they don’t get consequences, especially from folks like Oprah (who is allegedly in my opinion is being brilliantly played by TW and being made a fool of) and Netflix and Spotify is because money



The difference is these 2 are trying t gaslight the entire world.

For business all decisions are commercial, and always. We think Spotify and Netflix = business, but Oprah is Harpo, she is her company, all decisions, words and deeds, strategic manoeuvres and allegiances are based on commercial values too. Not people and not her higher power - just money. The Royal family is quite frankly the same. Whatever plays well, pays well.

MegZ is the same but so darn obvious, there is not person there, just a ruthless taste for money and power. Why she didn’t fit right in with the Royal family is because she was too impatient to play the long game. Fool to herself. She could have had it all and  forever. Even in business she sucks.


----------



## Pessie

csshopper said:


> Oprah Winfrey is a nasty woman, I’m embarrassed she is a fellow American.
> 
> Her statement  “when the dead are buried” she hopes the Suckesses can make peace with the family is so disrespectful to the Queen, so deliberately dehumanizing in tone, I am so angry reading it I can barely type.
> 
> ”the dead”, this is how she sees fit to refer to Queen Elizabeth, not by name, by title, not even a reference as a Grandmother????  SHAME on her, no class, no respect, and deliberately done I believe.
> 
> Further I think Oprah implies, The Queen,  through her handling of Megxit could be the cause of the rift (with her gone they can heal it), which is so outrageous in attempted misdirection it’s vicious. Oprah participated in fueling this rift by her willingness to be complicit in the Suckesses smear campaign of lies and insinuations. It backfired on her. She’s not the Omnipotent Oprah she thinks herself to be, so now we have this cowardly “I didn’t…” approach to try and distance herself. Her mealy mouthed comments are insultingly hypocritical. It explains why she and Raptor are friends, they play from the same skewed script. Oprah uses her supposedly BFF, Gayle, like Megan uses her toady, Omid, to get their bile out to the media. I wish the media would ignore them.


Oprah thinks bring famous and wealthy means she’s a significant person with important things to say, to which we should all take heed.  It’s not so. 
Oprah has no place at the funeral or in the UK at the moment, why on Earth would she be here except to make more money and noise.  She should be quiet and respect the grief being felt here.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



Perhaps they’ll turn on the grifters?  We can hope.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tell us more, Tom


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tourre’s posts - all about the Scobie mess 



			https://twitter.com/TourreBakahai


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tourre’s posts - all about the Scobie mess
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/TourreBakahai


I wonder if Scobie will be the next to feel the impact of Meghan’s boot on his ar*e?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Oprah thinks bring famous and wealthy means she’s a significant person with important things to say, to which we should all take heed.  It’s not so.
> Oprah has no place at the funeral or in the UK at the moment, why on Earth would she be here except to make more money and noise.  She should be quiet and respect the grief being felt here.




Media is always outside. 

Also, the list will have been worked on by the Queen herself before her passing. 

An any formal occasion, but especially something like this (which quite frankly, there hasn't been) will be 

(Royal) family
Heads of other royal families (many related to the Queen)
Heads of Commonwealth countries
Heads of state from many other countries
Dignitaries of other countries (deputising for their Heads)
British aristocrats (not sure about the Spencers)
Ladies in Waiting 
Other good friends of the Queen
Other Buckingham Palace and Windsor long standing staff, including all the palaces and her stables 
Representatives of Parliament speak evenly among major parties
Former Primministers 
High-up civil servants 
Favourites of the Queen
Heads of the Queen's charities 
and so on 

No Oprah, it's not the Oscars or an Elk's convention


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


>



Sorry but I think the BLG’s critique of H’s letter is in poor taste at this time. We have no way of knowing if H is really mourning the passing of his grandmother or not. But given the circumstances, surely we can avoid bashing his letter. Regardless of H’s past actions and whatever actions he may take after the mourning period is over,  I’m giving H the benefit of the doubt and assuming he truly is grieving at this time.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Sorry but I think the BLG’s critique of H’s letter is in poor taste at this time. We have no way of knowing if H is really mourning the passing of his grandmother or not. But given the circumstances, surely we can avoid bashing his letter. Regardless of H’s past actions and whatever actions he may take after the mourning period is over,  I’m giving H the benefit of the doubt and assuming he truly is grieving at this time.



He only says what everyone else is thinking. 

Harry's letter is in poor taste 
Harry's 'letter' is about Harry and his 'beloved' - NOT about the Queen at all
Harry's letter is PR
Harry's letter is a preface for the book he'll be releasing just before Thanksgiving and Christmas
Harry's letter pretends to be private but it's a public record
Harry should have said these things to the Queen while she was still alive. 
Harry only wrote the letter with a lot of help - and it's still a very basic and poor 'letter' 
My local estate agent (realtor?) wrote a better tribute


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> He only says what everyone else is thinking.
> 
> Harry's letter is in poor taste
> Harry's 'letter' is about Harry and his 'beloved' - NOT about the Queen at all
> Harry's letter is PR
> Harry's letter is a preface for the book he'll be releasing just before Thanksgiving and Christmas
> Harry's letter pretends to be private but it's a public record
> Harry should have said these things to the Queen while she was still alive.
> Harry only wrote the letter with a lot of help - and it's still a very basic and poor 'letter'
> My local estate agent (realtor?) wrote a better tribute



I'll go with this. I do think he is genuinely sad (maybe even some regrets? Who knows) but that letter was a PR piece, and a self-centered one at that.

BTW I just read someone pointing out how that whole thing is littered with US spelling and wording (Granny instead of Grannie, hug instead of cuddle are the two examples I can remember). His stupid PR person couldn't even be bothered to sound like him besides the darling wife they stole from Charles referring to Camilla.


----------



## RAINDANCE

IMO Granny with a y would definitely be the most common British spelling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> IMO Granny with a y would definitely be the most common British spelling.



William wrote Grannie, I guess that's where that came from.


----------



## elvisfan4life

csshopper said:


> Oprah Winfrey is a nasty woman, I’m embarrassed she is a fellow American.
> 
> Her statement  “when the dead are buried” she hopes the Suckesses can make peace with the family is so disrespectful to the Queen, so deliberately dehumanizing in tone, I am so angry reading it I can barely type.
> 
> ”the dead”, this is how she sees fit to refer to Queen Elizabeth, not by name, by title, not even a reference as a Grandmother????  SHAME on her, no class, no respect, and deliberately done I believe.
> 
> Further I think Oprah implies, The Queen,  through her handling of Megxit could be the cause of the rift (with her gone they can heal it), which is so outrageous in attempted misdirection it’s vicious. Oprah participated in fueling this rift by her willingness to be complicit in the Suckesses smear campaign of lies and insinuations. It backfired on her. She’s not the Omnipotent Oprah she thinks herself to be, so now we have this cowardly “I didn’t…” approach to try and distance herself. Her mealy mouthed comments are insultingly hypocritical. It explains why she and Raptor are friends, they play from the same skewed script. Oprah uses her supposedly BFF, Gayle, like Megan uses her toady, Omid, to get their bile out to the media. I wish the media would ignore them.


We do ignore OW money with no class


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> IMO Granny with a y would definitely be the most common British spelling.


I'd say so too, but then here in North Wales particularly we'd say Nain and Taid. 

Nain (pronounced nine) - Grandmother
Taid (pronounced tide) - Grandfather


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> William wrote Grannie, I guess that's where that came from.





RAINDANCE said:


> IMO Granny with a y would definitely be the most common British spelling.



Gran
Granny
Grannie
Granma
Grandma 
Grandmama (pronounced grand marmar)
Nan
Nana 
Buba 
Bouba
Babushka 

Are all acceptable because they are pronouns if using a capital/upper case G (or N/B) because they are the name you have your grandma. 

However, William will know what he called his grandmother and how it was spelled because he will have (hand)written cards to her all his life on birthdays, Christmas, thank yous etc. 

IMO Harry either dictated the letter or someone else wrote it and he okayed it.  I am pretty sure William would have written it himself and just had someone check it over.


----------



## chaneljewel

Ter


csshopper said:


> Oprah Winfrey is a nasty woman, I’m embarrassed she is a fellow American.
> 
> Her statement  “when the dead are buried” she hopes the Suckesses can make peace with the family is so disrespectful to the Queen, so deliberately dehumanizing in tone, I am so angry reading it I can barely type.
> 
> ”the dead”, this is how she sees fit to refer to Queen Elizabeth, not by name, by title, not even a reference as a Grandmother????  SHAME on her, no class, no respect, and deliberately done I believe.
> 
> Further I think Oprah implies, The Queen,  through her handling of Megxit could be the cause of the rift (with her gone they can heal it), which is so outrageous in attempted misdirection it’s vicious. Oprah participated in fueling this rift by her willingness to be complicit in the Suckesses smear campaign of lies and insinuations. It backfired on her. She’s not the Omnipotent Oprah she thinks herself to be, so now we have this cowardly “I didn’t…” approach to try and distance herself. Her mealy mouthed comments are insultingly hypocritical. It explains why she and Raptor are friends, they play from the same skewed script. Oprah uses her supposedly BFF, Gayle, like Megan uses her toady, Omid, to get their bile out to the media. I wish the media would ignore them.


I so agree with this.  Oprah is horrible.  She thinks that we care what she says and/or thinks.  No way!   She’s insulting and nothing but a profit seeker.  It IS no wonder why witch M is so attached to her.


----------



## papertiger

chaneljewel said:


> Ter
> 
> I so agree with this.  Oprah is horrible.  She thinks that we care what she says and/or thinks.  No way!   She’s insulting and nothing but a profit seeker.  It IS no wonder why witch M is so attached to her.



It's not entirely Oprah's fault. Meghan chose to tell lies and not her.

Unfortunately, that Oprah did not quiz MegZ, do her job as a supposed journalist shows either a lack of professionalism or a glee  for that bomb(shell) to go off.

Still not as bad as Harry supporting M's barefaced lies even now.

From the Oprah interview to Harry's book is a straight line IMO


----------



## duna

Sophisticatted said:


> It wouldn’t surprise me if she tried to take the kids to “pay their respects” to their great grandmother by publicly visiting the coffin (after alerting all US news media).  It’s the last chance for the two Lilibets to be in the same room together.  Roll eyes.
> 
> ETA: I doubt the kids would be allowed at the funeral, a very large, very serious, highly televised event.  KC3 & Co. do not want that kind of drama and negative attention grabbing tactics that an antsy toddler/preschooler might act out.
> 
> Louis at a Jubilee concert s one thing.  Archie, Lilli, et al at a funeral is quite different.


I'm pretty sure there won't be any kids at all at the funeral.


----------



## Chanbal

It's very possible. Will must have an enormous soft spot for his brother… Happy that Charles seems to be sticking to the script.


----------



## Chanbal

Very unprofessional! Who are these ladies?


----------



## Icyjade

DoggieBags said:


> Sorry but I think the BLG’s critique of H’s letter is in poor taste at this time. We have no way of knowing if H is really mourning the passing of his grandmother or not. But given the circumstances, surely we can avoid bashing his letter. Regardless of H’s past actions and whatever actions he may take after the mourning period is over,  I’m giving H the benefit of the doubt and assuming he truly is grieving at this time.


Actually when I read his letter it reminded me of “service is universal”…

Service is universal:



His latest letter, punctuated with references to “service”:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Cosmopolitan said:


>



I bloody well hope he won't be allowed to wear any uniform!


----------



## Chanbal

One more post on the apparent divorce from SS.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does this even come from. The Spencer tiara is not part of the "royal jewels". Charlotte is not a Spencer but a Windsor. Diana didn't own it, she borrowed it from her brother. Also, how is it surprising William is now next in line?


This.


----------



## Sina08

papertiger said:


> It's not entirely Oprah's fault. Meghan chose to tell lies and not her.
> Still not as bad as Harry supporting M's barefaced lies even now.


That’s what I’m thinking. She’s the one dragging his family through the mud, but he’s actively supporting and participating. That’s way worse than what she’s doing.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder what stays after the deletion of the 'offending sections', me, me, and me together with mine, and I?  

_Meghan Markle’s team is poring over her pre-recorded podcasts to delete any offending sections following the Queen’s death, a royal expert has claimed.

The Duchess of Sussex was due to release the latest in her Archetypes Spotify series on Tuesday, but it has been delayed in the wake of last week’s sad news.

Royal commentator Neil Sean claimed Meghan’s team were now combing through her four remaining podcast episodes that are yet to be released, to ensure they do not upset any grieving members of the Royal Family.

“There’s a lot of work going on behind the scenes on the remaining podcasts,” Mr Sean told his YouTube followers._






__





						Loading…
					





					www.news.com.au


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where does this even come from. The Spencer tiara is not part of the "royal jewels". Charlotte is not a Spencer but a Windsor. Diana didn't own it, she borrowed it from her brother. Also, how is it surprising William is now next in line?





duna said:


> This.


Here is a great article on the Spencer tiara and who gets it.









						Who Will Inherit the Spencer Tiara?
					

It's been a while since I've answered a reader email question here, but I've gotten several questions recently about articles floating around the internet related to a favorite '80s jewel, the Spencer Tiara. What's going




					www.thecourtjeweller.com


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what stays after the deletion of the 'offending sections', me, me, and me together with mine, and I?
> 
> _Meghan Markle’s team is poring over her pre-recorded podcasts to delete any offending sections following the Queen’s death, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was due to release the latest in her Archetypes Spotify series on Tuesday, but it has been delayed in the wake of last week’s sad news.
> 
> Royal commentator Neil Sean claimed Meghan’s team were now combing through her four remaining podcast episodes that are yet to be released, to ensure they do not upset any grieving members of the Royal Family.
> 
> “There’s a lot of work going on behind the scenes on the remaining podcasts,” Mr Sean told his YouTube followers._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


Oh dear, continual barrage of fluff pieces from SS eg about walkabout - see US magazine for ex
Give it a rest MM!


----------



## andrashik

Well well well. Finally people are waking up
Article from daily mail:








						Oprah slammed for comments on Harry, Meghan and Royal Family
					

Harry and Meghan's royal relationship soured further after the Oprah interview in 2021, when they shared a series of accusations, leading some to question why the talk show host was getting involved




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what stays after the deletion of the 'offending sections', me, me, and me together with mine, and I?
> 
> _Meghan Markle’s team is poring over her pre-recorded podcasts to delete any offending sections following the Queen’s death, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was due to release the latest in her Archetypes Spotify series on Tuesday, but it has been delayed in the wake of last week’s sad news.
> 
> Royal commentator Neil Sean claimed Meghan’s team were now combing through her four remaining podcast episodes that are yet to be released, to ensure they do not upset any grieving members of the Royal Family.
> 
> “There’s a lot of work going on behind the scenes on the remaining podcasts,” Mr Sean told his YouTube followers._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


I’m skeptical anyone associated with Raptor is discerning enough to recognize potentially offensive material. Will never happen, but a review by someone from one of the palace offices working with pr would be more appropriate.

The fact this is deemed necessary reveals a lot about the real subversive intent of Raptor’s podcasts. Cleaning these up is a temporary pause, her core is rotten, ultimately she’ll revert back to her “normal” but will think she got away with something. She is never to be trusted.


----------



## colourcords

Chanbal said:


> The Oprah interview was removed from the internet. However, you may want to read the article by Allison P Davis while it's still available online. It seems the author of the article was appointed by TW to write about her, and she wrote a very interesting piece.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.thecut.com/article/meghan-markle-profile-interview.html


thanks for this. It's not particularly flattering to MM. What could she possibly gain by doing that article?


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> _“There’s *a lot of work* going on behind the scenes on the remaining podcasts,” Mr Sean told his YouTube followers._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


That says it all. 

I wonder if they are edited down to 5 minutes once all the offending material is removed.  Hopefully, Spotify has enough of the guest speaker’s words to use as material.  If not, they should call in as many favors as possible for a redo truly featuring the guest speaker on a topic, and not being used as TW’s echo chamber.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> She is in her 90s and it has been rumored that she has dementia.


yes, for her to be totally out of the public eye for so long that seems pretty likely


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> In an interview years ago Charles said (paraphrasing here) that he had to remain in the background and support HM because even though she was his mother, she was his sovereign and she was in control and he would follow her orders. Since HM has passed, Charles as sovereign now calls the shots and is trying to quietly rein in both Dufus and ZedZed until HM is finally laid to rest. I imagine he will become tougher on the despicable pair once the mourning period is over.


we can hope


----------



## Vlad

Chanbal said:


> The Oprah interview was removed from the internet.



_Nothing_ can ever be removed from the Internet, no matter who tries.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Very unprofessional! Who are these ladies?




The host is talk show host Vanessa Feltz who's been around a very long time she's no fool (First at Trinity, Cambridge), Angela Levin is one of Prince Harry's biographers. Don't know who the other one is except someone who thinks M's 12 years old and should be welcomed back into the RF despite doing everything she can to bring them down.

Vanessa did what Oprah _should_ have done to Meghan, played devil's advocate and poked a bit. Vanessa just asked a question and Angela could have and should have just said "No". I don't think being defensive does anyone any favours. 

I think Angela's got over-sensitive, probably has to deal with a lot of sugar & spice, sweet-nod trolls. It's also probably her 16 interview of the day. 

Drama, Drama   Take no notice


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

As much as I want Harry's titles stripped etc, I don't mind him wearing the military unifrom since he did actually serve


----------



## marietouchet

melissatrv said:


> As much as I want Harry's titles stripped etc, I don't mind him wearing the military unifrom since he did actually serve


Is this the issue ? Which uniform?

Harry was a captain when he left the service - one type of uniform. He received honorary positions eg colonel (much higher than captain) of the marines. He was removed as colonel by the Queen. So, he can no longer wear a colonel's uniform, at all. And a captain uniform, is not much at all, he would be outranked by almost everyone else wearing a uniform. And supposed to salute???

Does the same hold for Andrew ? Or, will he wear the uniform under which he last served - not some honorary uniform, of which he was stripped ?
I am unclear about which ceremony will see him in uniform, a relatively small one ? or the funeral itself with thousands (and full regalia for all)

PS the Andrew uniform will be for the final vigil of the princes,  this vigil is limited to the four children of QEII. So, the issue of which uniform for H is a moot point.
I thought there was supposed to be a vigil of the grandchildren? Well, maybe that was cancelled to avoid any hoopla about H.
So, H has gotten much the same treatment as his uncle?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tell us more, Tom



Not sure I believe this one. Harry is not in a position to demand a publication date. Publishers take this stuff seriously as there is a lot of promotional work to do when one of these high-profile celebrity books is released. The publisher paid him for his story, they know how to launch a book, they are calling the shots.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Not sure I believe this one. Harry is not in a position to demand a publication date. Publishers take this stuff seriously as there is a lot of promotional work to do when one of these high-profile celebrity books is released. The publisher paid him for his story, they know how to launch a book, they are calling the shots.



I was thinking that I was never in the position to demand anything from my publisher, but also nobody paid me 20 millions just for who my family is (or gave me a book contract because of that), so maybe it's different for Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> It's not entirely Oprah's fault. Meghan chose to tell lies and not her.
> 
> Unfortunately, that Oprah did not quiz MegZ, do her job as a supposed journalist shows either a lack of professionalism or a glee  for that bomb(shell) to go off.
> 
> Still not as bad as Harry supporting M's barefaced lies even now.
> 
> From the Oprah interview to Harry's book is a straight line IMO


Agreed. If it wasn't Oprah it would have been someone else in the media. They were determined to get "their truth" out there. Oprah was the one who was motivated enough to cultivate a relationship with Meghan to nail the story.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Is this the issue ?
> Harry was a captain when he left the service - one type of uniform. He received honorary positions eg colonel (much higher than captain) of the marines. He was removed as colonel by the Queen. So, he can no longer wear a colonel's uniform, at all. And a captain uniform, is not much at all.
> 
> Does the same hold for Andrew ? Or, will he wear the uniform under which he last served - not some honorary uniform, of which he was stripped ?



Interestingly, Andrew didn't wear a uniform at the Vigil of Princes at St Giles. It was quite noticeable. 

He got a heckler scream at him from the street in Edinburgh, so it's evident he is still in disgrace. I don't know why he wanted to have sex with a girl so young. 

For all that_ still_ get away with inappropriate relationships and consume people with less though than if he/she were an after diner mint, I hope they see him squirm in civilian clothes. For all those that have been abused or coerced, it's good to see at least one person having to make a public (non)display of themselves. 

Harry likewise should 'suffer' the consequences of his actions. He has betrayed his country, no longer serves and he is making plans to badmouth us again before Christmas. Maybe he'll get his Nazi uniform out - just for a 'lark' 

I'm really not in the mood today


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Not sure I believe this one. Harry is not in a position to demand a publication date. Publishers take this stuff seriously as there is a lot of promotional work to do when one of these high-profile celebrity books is released. The publisher paid him for his story, they know how to launch a book, they are calling the shots.



Yes, he has to deliver _and_ he'll have to do the publicity circuit for that money - not just plying polo and juggling


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was thinking that I was never in the position to demand anything from my publisher, but also nobody paid me 20 millions just for who my family is (or gave me a book contract because of that), *so maybe it's different for Harry.*


I don't think it is. Harry knows squat about publishing. I'm sure his contract doesn't give Mr. First-Time Author (with a ghostwriter!) any influence.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. If it wasn't Oprah it would have been someone else in the media. They were determined to get "their truth" out there. Oprah was the one who was motivated enough to cultivate a relationship with Meghan to nail the story.



Oprah loves a good Royal story too. It was obviously set-up from the wedding


----------



## gelbergirl

I can't get the vision of Meghan in tights out of my mind.


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> Is this the issue ? Which uniform?
> 
> Harry was a captain when he left the service - one type of uniform. He received honorary positions eg colonel (much higher than captain) of the marines. He was removed as colonel by the Queen. So, he can no longer wear a colonel's uniform, at all. And a captain uniform, is not much at all, he would be outranked by almost everyone else wearing a uniform. And supposed to salute???
> 
> Does the same hold for Andrew ? Or, will he wear the uniform under which he last served - not some honorary uniform, of which he was stripped ?
> I am unclear about which ceremony will see him in uniform, a relatively small one ? or the funeral itself with thousands (and full regalia for all)


Retired armed forces personnel can no longer wear a uniform; they are no longer serving.  Harry has been stripped of his military patronage so effectively has no uniform to wear, no regiment to support.
 Andrew has been given a special dispensation to wear uniform for the short duration of the second Princes Vigil in London. ( probably no longer than 20 mins as the royal siblings form a guard of honour around the Queen's casket) IIRC Andrew was not actually stripped of his patronage but has stood down. As hrhfacts noted, when that sad time comes Harry will probably be allowed to wear uniform if he partakes in a vigil for his father, KC3

It's clear from other posts and reports that both the late Queen and KC3 were firm on this decision. No dress uniform for non working Royals.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Interestingly, Andrew didn't wear a uniform at the Vigil of Princes at St Giles. It was quite noticeable.
> 
> He got a heckler scream at him from the street in Edinburgh, so it's evident he is still in disgrace. I don't know why he wanted to have sex with a girl so young.
> 
> For all that_ still_ get away with inappropriate relationships and consume people with less though than if he/she were an after diner mint, I hope they see him squirm in civilian clothes. For all those that have been abused or coerced, it's good to see at least one person having to make a public (non)display of themselves.
> 
> Harry likewise should 'suffer' the consequences of his actions. He has betrayed his country, no longer serves and he is making plans to badmouth us again before Christmas. Maybe he'll get his Nazi uniform out - just for a 'lark'
> 
> I'm really not in the mood today


I noticed the lack of uniform for A for the Scottish vigil of the princes, he did stick out

A hypothesis ... 
The honorary military ranks eg Pss Anne, have jurisdiction (not sure of a better word , sorry) over the forces of the UK, and so apply to Scotland,  not just to England
A's last service uniform - not an honorary one - may apply to England, not to Scotland ??? And the first vigil was in Scotland, so, an English uniform was not appropriate ??
Again, just a hypothesis of why no uniform for A in Scotland.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Interestingly, Andrew didn't wear a uniform at the Vigil of Princes at St Giles. It was quite noticeable.
> 
> He got a heckler scream at him from the street in Edinburgh, so it's evident he is still in disgrace. I don't know why he wanted to have sex with a girl so young.
> 
> For all that_ still_ get away with inappropriate relationships and consume people with less though than if he/she were an after diner mint, I hope they see him squirm in civilian clothes. For all those that have been abused or coerced, it's good to see at least one person having to make a public (non)display of themselves.
> 
> Harry likewise should 'suffer' the consequences of his actions. He has betrayed his country, no longer serves and he is making plans to badmouth us again before Christmas. Maybe he'll get his Nazi uniform out - just for a 'lark'
> 
> I'm really not in the mood today


Agreed, Harry wanted out and that’s what he’s got.  Nothing to complain about IMO.  You turn your back on the job, so you don’t get the trappings.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo too little, too late.
> *They need to either go away and stay off our screens* OR do a sit-down interview with a respected British journalist.  The lady who did Andrew’s would be fine.  No, the questions must not be sent ahead. Follow-up questions allowed. Yes, H&M will be awful because they are awful and cannot think on the feet [or other end]. We know this, the whole world needs to know it.


This.  I do not need to hear a single more word out of her or his phony mouths.  Ever.

Ever.

Evermore.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I noticed the lack of uniform for A for the Scottish vigil of the princes, he did stick out
> 
> A hypothesis ...
> The honorary military ranks eg Pss Anne, have jurisdiction (not sure of a better word , sorry) over the forces of the UK, and so apply to Scotland,  not just to England
> A's last service uniform - not an honorary one - may apply to England, not to Scotland ??? And the first vigil was in Scotland, so, an English uniform was not appropriate ??
> Again, just a hypothesis of why no uniform for A in Scotland.



I think he only gets to wear it in 'private' to say goodbye to his mother (and not Her Majesty as the Queen)

Also not sure


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gelbergirl said:


> I can't get the vision of Meghan in tights out of my mind.



Nor can she, she'll be crying over the photos right now


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> We do ignore OW money with no class


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> Agreed, Harry wanted out and that’s what he’s got.  Nothing to complain about IMO.  You turn your back on the job, so you don’t get the trappings.


Except he didn't really want out. He and Meghan originally thought they could be half-in and half-out, where they could enjoy all the status and benefits, but be free to pick and choose how they wanted to serve. It was only when they were told they couldn't have it both ways that they chose to get out. He is still trying to regain some of what was lost.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Nor can she, she'll be crying over the photos right now


That’s what she’s spending time on the phone to Oprah about - “how do you scrub things from the internet??”


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Media is always outside.
> 
> Also, *the list will have been worked on by the Queen herself before her passing.*
> 
> An any formal occasion, but especially something like this (which quite frankly, there hasn't been) will be
> 
> (Royal) family
> Heads of other royal families (many related to the Queen)
> Heads of Commonwealth countries
> Heads of state from many other countries
> Dignitaries of other countries (deputising for their Heads)
> British aristocrats (not sure about the Spencers)
> Ladies in Waiting
> Other good friends of the Queen
> Other Buckingham Palace and Windsor long standing staff, including all the palaces and her stables
> Representatives of Parliament speak evenly among major parties
> Former Primministers
> High-up civil servants
> Favourites of the Queen
> Heads of the Queen's charities
> and so on
> 
> No Oprah, it's not the Oscars or an Elk's convention


Lots of old folks, not just royalty, have a very strong opinion of who should be at their funeral or even who should be informed of their decline/death. My ex-boss's MIL was in her 80s when she had appendicitis. The operation was a success but the patient never recovered. One thing led to another and she had multiple organ failure. Her heart stopped around 5 times - once a day, and she was resuscitated each time. And every time that tough old lady was brought back, she gave further instructions regarding her funeral.


----------



## Chanbal

Vlad said:


> _Nothing_ can ever be removed from the Internet, no matter who tries.


Haha, you are right! It's perhaps a little more difficult to find. Here is one of the sources on the potential attempt to erase the bombshell interview.


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> I noticed the lack of uniform for A for the Scottish vigil of the princes, he did stick out
> 
> A hypothesis ...
> The honorary military ranks eg Pss Anne, have jurisdiction (not sure of a better word , sorry) over the forces of the UK, and so apply to Scotland,  not just to England
> A's last service uniform - not an honorary one - may apply to England, not to Scotland ??? And the first vigil was in Scotland, so, an English uniform was not appropriate ??
> Again, just a hypothesis of why no uniform for A in Scotland.


Whilst different regiments may have historical links to different parts of the United Kingdom and names ( and dress uniform -the kilts for example) which reflect that, HM Armed Forces are for the whole country, ie. the United Kingdoms of EWS&NI


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Oprah loves a good Royal story too. It was obviously set-up from the wedding


Imo Oprah’s Royal issues began with Diana and Op’s failed attempts to get that interview.  So, Op championed Sarah and her _journey_ post divorce. That connection was established in the 80s. Add in the connection with Doria through the Marianne Williamson ‘church’ and, bingo, all the stars magically aligned. Too many coinky-dinks for me. Opr needs to be held accountable for doing a lousy job of interviewing.  H&M need to be held accountable for cooperating and lying. Gayle and CBS need to held accountable for their part in this mess, too.  Did they really believe they would bring down the monarchy?  Did they really hate QE that much?  Ewww. Opr should have stayed retired.  My opinion.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> The host is talk show host Vanessa Feltz who's been around a very long time she's no fool (First at Trinity, Cambridge), Angela Levin is one of Prince Harry's biographers. Don't know who the other one is except someone who thinks M's 12 years old and should be welcomed back into the RF despite doing everything she can to bring them down.
> 
> Vanessa did what Oprah _should_ have done to Meghan, played devil's advocate and poked a bit. Vanessa just asked a question and Angela could have and should have just said "No". I don't think being defensive does anyone any favours.
> 
> I think Angela's got over-sensitive, probably has to deal with a lot of sugar & spice, sweet-nod trolls. It's also probably her 16 interview of the day.
> 
> Drama, Drama   Take no notice


Angele is looking very tired lately, she could have done a much better job. Though, she was a guest and the other ladies sounded very aggressive.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Not sure I believe this one. Harry is not in a position to demand a publication date. Publishers take this stuff seriously as there is a lot of promotional work to do when one of these high-profile celebrity books is released. The publisher paid him for his story, they know how to launch a book, they are calling the shots.


Plus, Michelle O’s book is being released November 15. It will generate lots of publicity and talk show visits etc. Tough competition for Haz.

If he pushes for a release he may be hoping to disrupt the Prince and Princess of Wales visit to Boston for the Earthshot event in December. His jealousy of William, heightened by his father’s public praise of William, must be extreme.


----------



## DoggieBags

Pessie said:


> Agreed, Harry wanted out and that’s what he’s got.  Nothing to complain about IMO.  You turn your back on the job, so you don’t get the trappings.


Well actually he only wanted to be partially out and to cherry-pick the assignments and patronages he and TW wanted to keep. It was the mean BRF presided over by his grandmother who said you’re either all in or all out.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder what stays after the deletion of the 'offending sections', me, me, and me together with mine, and I?
> 
> _Meghan Markle’s team is poring over her pre-recorded podcasts to delete any offending sections following the Queen’s death, a royal expert has claimed.
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex was due to release the latest in her Archetypes Spotify series on Tuesday, but it has been delayed in the wake of last week’s sad news.
> 
> Royal commentator Neil Sean claimed Meghan’s team were now combing through her four remaining podcast episodes that are yet to be released, to ensure they do not upset any grieving members of the Royal Family.
> 
> “There’s a lot of work going on behind the scenes on the remaining podcasts,” Mr Sean told his YouTube followers._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au


LOLOL, so basically she has to start from scratch.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Angele is looking very tired lately, she could have done a much better job. Though, she was a guest and the other ladies sounded very aggressive.



At this point, anyone who just thinks forgive and forget has not followed the story (or the narrative) at _all _


----------



## jblended

Sorry if it's already been posted. Hazza sulking...


> Prince Harry says 'decade of military service not determined by uniform' as Duke to wear morning suit at Queen Elizabeth II's funeral​











						Prince Harry says 'decade of military service not determined by uniform' as Duke to wear morning suit at Queen Elizabeth II's funeral
					

The Duke of Sussex will wear a morning suit during Queen Elizabeth II's funeral on Monday




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> G*d forbid they are posed next to the coffin in a final attempt to get the Lillibet x 2 money shot.


That is what I fear, but I hope the gray suits prevent it from happening.


papertiger said:


> No Oprah, it's not the Oscars


Exactly. I can't imagine why Oprah would think she should be invited to the funeral. Maybe TW thought she could latch on to her by inviting her to the wedding, but funerals are for those who actually had a connection with the deceased.


DoggieBags said:


> he truly is grieving at this time.


Oh I'm sure he is, but he should have considered the consequences of his actions that cast a cloud over his grandmother's final days.  Let him stew in guilt and regret for the rest of his life.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL, so basically she has to start from scratch.



They'll go through the transcripts, then edit out worst offending. 

They maybe left with nothing, so you'd be right


----------



## purseinsanity

gelbergirl said:


> I can't get the vision of Meghan in tights out of my mind.


Sending sage your way to rid you of the impure image!


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> I think he only gets to wear it in 'private' to say goodbye to his mother (and not Her Majesty as the Queen)
> 
> Also not sure


I think the symbolism is that the princes take part in the guard of honour as representatives of the regiments of HM's armed forces which they represent by way of their military patronage.


At one point today I noted 4 additional "guards" who seemed to be wearing garter robes but with a thistle on the emblems on their robes. Over to you @papertiger on that one. I don't know if they were Scottish Garter Knights ? They had the distinctive Garter Knight headgear.


----------



## sdkitty

don't think H&M will like this headline...real ramifications of being heir vs spare.  Of course this comes with great responsibility for William








						Prince William just inherited a 685-year old estate worth $1 billion
					

Royal wills are never made public. That means what happens to much of the Queen's personal wealth following her death last week will remain a family secret.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Pessie

DoggieBags said:


> Well actually he only wanted to be partially out and to cherry-pick the assignments and patronages he and TW wanted to keep. It was the mean BRF presided over by his grandmother who said you’re either all in or all out.


He chose out though.  Still his choice.  I don’t believe that by a process of attrition or nag, nag, nag at his Daddy he should be able to chip away at the consequences of that decision.  He let a lot of servicemen and women down when he stomped off to California.
ETA
I should add I was brought up an RAF kid, I know how much the uniform meant to my dad


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I think the symbolism is that the princes take part in the guard of honour as representatives of the regiments of HM's armed forces which they represent by way of their military patronage.
> 
> 
> At one point today I noted 4 additional "guards" who seemed to be wearing garter robes but with a thistle on the emblems on their robes. Over to you @papertiger on that one. I don't know if they were Scottish Garter Knights ? They had the distinctive Garter Knight headgear.



Were they Order of the Thistle (dark green velvet?)





__





						Loading…
					





					www.royal.uk
				




From the aboce:
The date of the foundation of the Order is not known, although legend has it that it was founded in 809 when King Achaius made an alliance with the Emperor Charlemagne.

It is possible that the Order may have been founded by James III (1488-1513), who was responsible for changes in Royal symbolism in Scotland, including the adoption of the thistle as the Royal plant badge.

James II (James VII of Scotland) established the Order with a statutory foundation under new rules in 1687 - to reward Scottish peers who supported the king's political and religious aims.

The Queen is the Sovereign of the Order, and appointments made to the Order are entirely her personal gift, in recognition of men and women who have held public office or have contributed significantly to national life. Current Knights and Ladies of the Thistle include music teacher and ex-Director of St Mary's Music School in Edinburgh, Lady Marion Fraser, and previous Chief Scout of the United Kingdom, Sir Garth Morrison. In addition to the 16 Knights and Ladies, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Princess Royal, and The Duke of Cambridge –  known in Scotland as The Earl of Strathearn –  have been appointed as Royal Knights of the Thistle.

-------------------

They are connected to St Giles Chapel

The thistle is Scotland's national flower


----------



## purseinsanity

jblended said:


> Sorry if it's already been posted. Hazza sulking...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says 'decade of military service not determined by uniform' as Duke to wear morning suit at Queen Elizabeth II's funeral
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will wear a morning suit during Queen Elizabeth II's funeral on Monday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


He's still making bratty statements!  Like "service is universal" and insinuating the Queen didn't own the word "Royal".
He's never going to learn.  He's a POS...a whiny, bratty, PIA POS.
I, for one, do not feel sorry for him, not one tiny bit.  He made his bed and he can sleep in it.  He deserves TW and I hope they stay together forever, just like the fairy tales she thinks she's in, and make each other's life hell.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> He's still making bratty statements!  Like "service is universal" and insinuating the Queen didn't own the word "Royal".
> He's never going to learn.  He's a POS...a whiny, bratty, PIA POS.
> I, for one, do not feel sorry for him, not one tiny bit.  He made his bed and he can sleep in it.  He deserves TW and I hope they stay together forever, just like the fairy tales she thinks she's in, and make each other's life hell.


this shows poor judgment to say the least


----------



## charlottawill

Vlad said:


> _Nothing_ can ever be removed from the Internet, no matter who tries.


I used to drum this into my kids' heads when they were teenagers. Once it's out there, it's out there forever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the article on the Duchy of Cornwall on the Crown Estate (it's profit is handed over to the government):



> In the last financial year, it generated net profit of almost £313 million ($361 million). From that, the UK Treasury paid the Queen a Sovereign Grant of £86 million ($100 million). That's equivalent to £1.29 ($1.50) per person in the United Kingdom.



I'd say that's still a nice extra income for the UK and maybe puts the Sovereign Grant in perspective.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She’s in her 90s now. Hopefully her health is good but she is staying out of the public eye.


she hasn't participated in the View 25 years anniversary.....not trying to be negative or wish her ill but I think it's likely that she's suffering from dementia.....look at the queen in her 90's - still able to do her job and make public appearances


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I read that too. Could be money troubles but apparently Meg dumped them.


Wouldn't you just love to be a fly on the wall in Frogmore??  The drama and the tantrums!  It sounds like desperation and the chickens are coming home to roost now


----------



## sdkitty

If H had any sense, he'd send the WIFE home with the excuse she needs to be with her kids.  They will be a distraction at the funeral.  Her clinging to him, pulling and pushing
But of course he doesn't tell her what to do


----------



## Toby93




----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I read that too. Could be money troubles but apparently Meg dumped them.



I guess they haven't gotten her (or him) anywhere.

The Harkle's run of bad luck doesn't help. They have terrible timing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## piperdog

purseinsanity said:


> He's still making bratty statements!  Like "service is universal" and insinuating the Queen didn't own the word "Royal".
> He's never going to learn.  He's a POS...a whiny, bratty, PIA POS.
> I, for one, do not feel sorry for him, not one tiny bit.  He made his bed and he can sleep in it.  He deserves TW and I hope they stay together forever, just like the fairy tales she thinks she's in, and make each other's life hell.


I agree with every. single. word in this post! Also, how funny that their statement ends with a scolding reminder to keep focus on the Queen. How exactly do H&M do that by releasing these self-serving statements? You don't see the rest of the family releasing snide little statements like this. 

Maybe Queen Elizabeth's last gift to the world will be that H&M, Scobie&SS (sunshine sucks and/or sussex squad), Oprah & Gayle, and whoever else props them up will be exposed as the lying, grifting, garbage they all are in a way that the rest of the world can no longer choose to ignore.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> Agreed, Harry wanted out and that’s what he’s got.  Nothing to complain about IMO.  You turn your back on the job, so you don’t get the trappings.


Do you think Hazard may have idiotically viewed Charles' funding as an allowance (like other parents give allowances to their kids) and not seen it as tied to his work for the Firm? I know, face-palm, eyes roll, but it has always bothered me as to why he never connected the obvious neon bright dots. Being a working royal gets him a cool million from Daddy. Being financially independent means Daddy can't tell you what you can or cannot do with the million pounds? 


DoggieBags said:


> Well actually he only wanted to be partially out and to *cherry-pick the assignments and patronages* he and TW wanted to keep. It was the mean BRF presided over by his grandmother who said you’re either all in or all out.


Encountered that situation twice from my office narcs. One was my subordinate and he spent an hour trying to convince me that I should accept that he will only do work he enjoys. Everything else I assigned him would not get done.


jblended said:


> Sorry if it's already been posted. Hazza sulking...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry says 'decade of military service not determined by uniform' as Duke to wear morning suit at Queen Elizabeth II's funeral
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex will wear a morning suit during Queen Elizabeth II's funeral on Monday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk


The tone sounds a lot like their outraged remarks about service being universal and the BRF don't own the word "royal". Toddler tantrums.


papertiger said:


> They'll go through the transcripts, then *edit out worst offending.*
> 
> They maybe left with nothing, so you'd be right


Leaving only the mildly offensive and the truculently whined borderline lies. Bring it on, Spotify!


----------



## Toby93




----------



## CobaltBlu

Toby93 said:


>



"nobody consults me about their family business" Oh, OK Oprah.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> "nobody consults me about their family business" Oh, OK Oprah.


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> Do you think Hazard may have idiotically viewed Charles' funding as an allowance (like other parents give allowances to their kids) and not seen it as tied to his work for the Firm? I know, face-palm, eyes roll, but it has always bothered me as to why he never connected the the obvious neon bright dots. Being a working royal gets him a cool million from Daddy. Being financially independent means Daddy can't tell you what you can or cannot do with the million pounds?


I do.  Think they both did!


Toby93 said:


>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Being a working royal gets him a cool million from Daddy. Being financially independent means Daddy can't tell you what you can or cannot do with the million pounds?



I am still completely stunned that by financial independence they meant to not receive the Sovereign Grant anymore - which at that point was something like 5% of their income - but still mooch money off Charles (2 millions per year).

And they said so themselves, we are not making that up.


----------



## kipp

Toby93 said:


>



Absolutely they were told not to bring the children.  It's nonsense that Harry is worried about the traumatic effect of the funeral on his kids, who are waaay too young to be as adversely affected as he was when he was 12 and Diana died.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



False equivalency. Hazard was old enough to be traumatized by his mother's death and funeral. His invisikids have no emotional connection to QEII. And if they are traumatized, it would be because Zedzee keeps shoving them in front of the coffin/palaces/floral tributes/assorted cameras, and using the Claw to position them artfully like infant ikebana. Please keep them in Cali.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> My understanding is the collaboration is still in progress. Opr and GK and CBS have an agenda to push.  The backpedaling starts because they realize people are wising up.  One thing people dislike is the hypocrisy.  Opr et al. have a record of missteps, supporting people who lie, etc.  So do H&M.


not sure I understand....if the collaboration is still in progress, then why would they be distancing themselves?  I know you said people are wising up but still...


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> He's still making bratty statements!  Like "service is universal" and insinuating the Queen didn't own the word "Royal".
> He's never going to learn.  He's a POS...a whiny, bratty, PIA POS.
> I, for one, do not feel sorry for him, not one tiny bit.  He made his bed and he can sleep in it.  He deserves TW and I hope they stay together forever, just like the fairy tales she thinks she's in, and make each other's life hell.


Does he not realize that the military propped him up because of QE?  








						Harry’s claim he received 'no special treatment’ in Army challenged
					

PRINCE HARRY alleged he had "no special treatment" while he was serving in the Army - but his biographer has pointed out how the Queen and Prince Charles did actually pull some strings for him when he was in the military.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think he only gets to wear it in 'private' to say goodbye to his mother (and not Her Majesty as the Queen)
> 
> Also not sure


More I fail to understand …
KC changed out of his military uniform - into his Balmoral kilt - for the vigil, Anne and Edward still had military dress

I noticed the orders sash worn by Charles and Anne was green, Scottish orders? Whilst Edward had a blue sash - English orders ? Edwards has no Scottish orders ???

PS I found it - green is for the Scottish Order of the Thistle , Charles, Anne and William all have it, I don’t know about Edward


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> not sure I understand....if the collaboration is still in progress, then why would they be distancing themselves?  I know you said people are wising up but still...


Are we certain H&M are distancing themselves?  Not sure Opr is distancing herself at all.  She was promoting her movie?, then GK brought up the interview, using the emotionally charged word ‘bombshell’.  Opr then gets in a word salad about family disagreements. That’s how I read it - ymmv. Apple still shows Hazzie’s mental health show on its website. 









						Oprah blasted for defending Meghan, Prince Harry: ‘She started this’
					

“Oprah forgets she started this. Maybe an apology would help with the peacemaking.”




					nypost.com
				



_This is what I think: I think in all families — you know, my father passed recently, this summer — and when all families come together for a common ceremony, the ritual of, you know, burying your dead, there’s an opportunity for peacemaking,” “The Color Purple” actress said.

She went on, “Hopefully, there will be that.”_


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Can he and whatsherface PLEASE SHUT THE F@CK UP for the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Very unprofessional! Who are these ladies?



The one commentator says that Levin accused the Harkles of wanting to bring Netfilx to the Jubilee and that it had been "proven" incorrect?  Wait until the Netflix show gets released.  I don't recall it ever being questioned?  They DID want to record everything to make money in the future.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> More I fail to understand …
> KC changed out of his military uniform - into his Balmoral kilt - for the vigil, Anne and Edward still had military dress
> 
> I noticed the orders sash worn by Charles and Anne was green, Scottish orders? Whilst Edward had a blue sash - English orders ? Edwards has no Scottish orders ???
> 
> PS I found it - green is for the Scottish Order of the Thistle , Charles, Anne and William all have it, I don’t know about Edward



Charles was_ in_ the Navy but was wearing Field Marshal (Army) wearing ceremonial dress (he is also Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the RAF) He was flanked by military from Scots regiments, and the Black Watch walked with the procession.

Anne is Colonel in Chief of X but was wearing an Admiral's uniform(?)

Edward quit basic training after only a few month in the Marines (Royal Navy) so really should have 'stood down' and worn civilian clothes (IMHO) as Andrew did. 

Maybe they represented Army, Navy and RAF???


----------



## gelbergirl

xincinsin said:


> Do you think Hazard may have idiotically viewed Charles' funding as an allowance (like other parents give allowances to their kids) and not seen it as tied to his work for the Firm? I know, face-palm, eyes roll, but it has always bothered me as to why he never connected the obvious neon bright dots. Being a working royal gets him a cool million from Daddy. Being financially independent means Daddy can't tell you what you can or cannot do with the million pounds?
> 
> Encountered that situation twice from my office narcs. *One was my subordinate and he spent an hour trying to convince me that I should accept that he will only do work he enjoys. Everything else I assigned him would not get done.*
> 
> The tone sounds a lot like their outraged remarks about service being universal and the BRF don't own the word "royal". Toddler tantrums.
> 
> Leaving only the mildly offensive and the truculently whined borderline lies. Bring it on, Spotify!


How did this resolve itself? with your subordinates


----------



## Toby93

colourcords said:


> thanks for this. It's not particularly flattering to MM. What could she possibly gain by doing that article?


I think she thought it was supposed to be an article promoting her podcasts, but the author was great in making a fool of her without being too obvious.  Once people starting commenting on that fact, the author appears to have been fired.


----------



## 880

Sina08 said:


> That’s what I’m thinking. She’s the one dragging his family through the mud, but he’s actively supporting and participating. That’s way worse than what she’s doing.


This 100%


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> They'll go through the transcripts, then edit out worst offending.
> 
> They maybe left with nothing, so you'd be right


They had 28 people working on the previous podcasts yet they still ended up sounding ridiculous and vapid and all about her.  Not sure they are the best people to be objective at this point


----------



## Toby93

kipp said:


> Absolutely they were told not to bring the children.  It's nonsense that Harry is worried about the traumatic effect of the funeral on his kids, who are waaay too young to be as adversely affected as he was when he was 12 and Diana died.


They used the clip where her "bump" is swaying back and forth


----------



## Lodpah

DoggieBags said:


> Sorry but I think the BLG’s critique of H’s letter is in poor taste at this time. We have no way of knowing if H is really mourning the passing of his grandmother or not. But given the circumstances, surely we can avoid bashing his letter. Regardless of H’s past actions and whatever actions he may take after the mourning period is over,  I’m giving H the benefit of the doubt and assuming he truly is grieving at this time.


How can one grief with hatred in their heart? He probably loves her but loves his wife’s pure hatred of his family. Like Bob Dylan sang “You gotta Serve Somebody” and we know by his actions he serves the devil, I mean his wife.

He may have regrets but I do believe after the funeral all gloves are off, led by TW. We ain’t seen nothing yet.


----------



## Lodpah

momtok said:


> Being disbelieved is the absolute, absolute, *absolute* worst.  You get this disconnect in the brain of utter disbelief that *they* don't believe *you*.  My mother was not narcissistic, but I feel a kinship with the topic as she was physically abusive instead. She would often corner me on the sofa or in the bathtub and start throwing fists.  (Hubby thinks she's bipolar, and I also believe she's fueled by latent anger over the circumstances of my birth and my father.)  Around my college years I finally told someone ... a nurse at a nursing home where I worked summers, believe it or not, and I showed her a bruise on my arm.  She actually laughed.  Thought I was joking.  This was long before the days of nurses being "required to report", nor was I a minor anymore.  But I was in utter disbelief that she *didn't* believe me, even with a bruise on my arm.  It's literally a moment of "this does not compute" within the (my) brain.  Told another woman later ... a dental hygienist for whom my mother and I were both patients.  She just kind of pretended that she never heard it, and would still show up when I was at the dentist (but I had purposefully switched to a different hygienist), to chirpily ask me about my mother.  To this day, it still gives me a "this does not compute" sensation in the brain, that she pretends I never told her.
> 
> Those few I've told in more recent years actually do believe me ... they have no choice because I have a witness now.  Soon after I married I was home alone one afternoon and my mother stopped by.  She kicked me so hard I had a lump on my shin for half-a-year.  Hubby knew no one else was here that day, and knew darn well I did not fall down any stairs.  So now if I do tell someone, he sets them straight.  He also makes sure that I'm never alone with my mother (even though the woman is almost 90, and quite frankly I could drop her if I needed to), and it's he who does the fluffy "checking in on the phone every other evening and keeping her calm."  .... She has verbally freaked out on occasion as she's become elderly, enough, on two occasions, to scare our daughter.  Nothing physical anymore though.  (Maybe she *does* realize I would be willing to drop her now.)  Yeah, it's a strange world.
> 
> But I do feel that kinship.  When people don't believe you, it literally feels "impossible", "surreal", that they would do so.  (Do we have a hug emoticon around here?  It's been so long since I was around.)
> 
> Sorry, back to your usually scheduled program.  Learning a lot going back through some of these threads.


Thank you for telling your story. It’s powerful.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> He may have regrets but I do believe after the funeral all gloves are off, led by TW. We ain’t seen nothing yet.


I'm not so sure. In photos of TW at the "reunion" walkabout she had a distinctly different look in her eyes, not the usual cold arrogance. More like a glimmer of fear to me. If rumors of a fight with H about her going with him to Balmoral are true, maybe it is finally sinking in that she does not matter much in the grand scheme of the RF, and that in times of grief they will stick together like glue. William has Charles' ear, and I believe after the funeral they will be warned another negative word about the family and the titles and Bank of Dad are gone.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> I'm not so sure. In photos of TW at the "reunion" walkabout she had a distinctly different look in her eyes, not the usual cold arrogance. More like a glimmer of fear to me. If rumors of a fight with H about her going with him to Balmoral are true, maybe it is finally sinking in that she does not matter much in the grand scheme of the RF, and that in times of grief they will stick together like glue. William has Charles' ear, and I believe after the funeral they will be warned another negative word about the family and the titles and Bank of Dad are gone.


Let’s hope so but I think, due to her nature, as have have seen, she can be vindictive as all get out. I think she will go for their throats once she gets back home.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Exactly. I can't imagine why Oprah would think she should be invited to the funeral. Maybe TW thought she could latch on to her by inviting her to the wedding, but funerals are for those who actually had a connection with the deceased.


Do we have any evidence Oprah thought she would be invited? Because it sounds like fabricated BS to me. Sure Meghan lies, Harry lies, Oprah lies, but the press lies most of all.


----------



## xincinsin

gelbergirl said:


> How did this resolve itself? with your subordinates


One was my subordinate. He liked ordering things like plane tickets, but hated paying the bill - he considered that beneath him, a clerk's job (he was a clerk  ). He argued that he should be assigned a subordinate to take over the work he didn't like. He was given counselling, warnings and finally HR stepped in to give the final warning: 3 months to buck up or he would lose his job. He ran to the union to complain of harassment. There was an investigation. The union counselled him. He screamed that the union was unfair. It so happened that there was a retrenchment exercise going on. My boss was a bit of an enabler as well as a soft touch. She added his name to the retrenchment list and he got a big termination payout.

The other was my peer. He was a carbon copy of Zedzee: superficially charming but without much substance. He managed to charm his way into another job before we could start the termination process. Like Zedzee, he was all eager and sweet during probation but showed his true colours once confirmed in the job.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I think she thought it was supposed to be an article promoting her podcasts, but the author was great in making a fool of her without being too obvious.  Once people starting commenting on that fact, the author appears to have been fired.


Doesn’t The Cut have editors? If they thought the article didn’t set the right tone or meet their standards then they shouldn’t have released it. 

It wouldn’t surprise me if SS set up that interview with Meghan and that is why they have been given the heave-ho.


----------



## sdkitty

I just watched The View.  I don't watch regularly these days but anyway.  the grifters' US media fans are still here.  They were all talking about how Charles should mend the relationship of his sons.  Sunny of course is a big Meghan fan and talked about how M wanted to commit suicide when she was in England.  Joy (after saying how beautiful Meghan is, etc.) did say what I've said - if her problem was with the "institution" going to the HR dept for help was not the answer - should have called a psychiatrist.  
Joy is the one member of that group who doesn't worship at M's feet.  Sunny is the most extreme in defending her and after that, Sara.  Whoppi seems to try to stay somewhat neutral.
So  - here in the US - the beat goes on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I just watched The View.  I don't watch regularly these days but anyway.  the grifters' US media fans are still here.  They were all talking about how Charles should mend the relationship of his sons.  Sunny of course is a big Meghan fan and talked about how M wanted to commit suicide when she was in England.  Joy (after saying how beautiful Meghan is, etc.) did say what I've said - if her problem was with the "institution" going to the HR dept for help was not the answer - should have called a psychiatrist.
> Joy is the one member of that group who doesn't worship at M's feet.  Sunny is the most extreme in defending her and after that, Sara.  Whoppi seems to try to stay somewhat neutral.
> So  - here in the US - the beat goes on.


Most Americans still have absolutely no clue why Harry and Meghan are on the outs with the family. Everything they know about them comes from their tale of woe about why they left. So they are confused as to why Charles could possibly be mad at them when clearly they are the wronged party.

My coworker is a sharp, intelligent guy. When the subject of Meghan came up in a meeting last week he couldn’t understand why a few of us didn’t like her. He insisted someone call him and explain it.   

Well, you know who volunteered for that call. After 30 minutes and me holding back so I wouldn’t sound like an insane woman, he is going to look more closely at Meghan’s future actions. I didn’t change his mind but at least he’s open to changing his mind. That’s enough.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Charles was_ in_ the Navy but was wearing Field Marshal (Army) wearing ceremonial dress (he is also Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the RAF) He was flanked by military from Scots regiments, and the Black Watch walked with the procession.
> 
> Anne is Colonel in Chief of X but was wearing an Admiral's uniform(?)
> 
> Edward quit basic training after only a few month in the Marines (Royal Navy) so really should have 'stood down' and worn civilian clothes (IMHO) as Andrew did.
> 
> Maybe they represented Army, Navy and RAF???


Thank you for the info ... I did notice Charles held a Marshal's baton in the procession ... have not seen one of those in eons 

But I had been so distracted and mesmerized by the Scottish Archers ... I had no idea they were still around ... I know their history goes back well past Mary Queen of Scots (who was also Queen of France for a short time) when they spawned a famous regiment of archers in service to the French kings (Auld Alliance), and that regiment existed til Louis XVI - though there were no Scots in it by then, and they no longer carried bows  


I had to look it up, Edward has honorary military positions, so, his uniform likely corresponds to one of them








						Why Prince Edward is wearing military uniform at memorial events for the Queen
					

Edward, who is the Earl of Wessex, joined the Royal Marines after leaving university in 1986




					inews.co.uk
				




Yes, an admiral's uniform for Anne. Didn't Anne get the Colonel in Chief of the Marines ? when position was vacated by H ... 









						Why Princess Anne wears a uniform and her military appointments explained
					

The Princess Royal was pictured in full military uniform during a procession in the Scottish capital on Monday, and will wear it at further ceremonial events this week




					inews.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I just watched The View.  I don't watch regularly these days but anyway.  the grifters' US media fans are still here.  They were all talking about how Charles should mend the relationship of his sons.  Sunny of course is a big Meghan fan and talked about how M wanted to commit suicide when she was in England.  Joy (after saying how beautiful Meghan is, etc.) did say what I've said - if her problem was with the "institution" going to the HR dept for help was not the answer - should have called a psychiatrist.
> Joy is the one member of that group who doesn't worship at M's feet.  Sunny is the most extreme in defending her and after that, Sara.  Whoppi seems to try to stay somewhat neutral.
> So  - here in the US - the beat goes on.


Ugggghhhh the accent should be on the late Queen for now


----------



## purseinsanity

kipp said:


> Absolutely they were told not to bring the children.  It's nonsense that Harry is worried about the traumatic effect of the funeral on his kids, who are waaay too young to be as adversely affected as he was when he was 12 and Diana died.


He's trying to put a positive spin on it "protecting his kids" as a father.    Must've seen the headlines about William trying to keep things as normal as possible for his children.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I just watched The View.  I don't watch regularly these days but anyway.  the grifters' US media fans are still here.  They were all talking about how Charles should mend the relationship of his sons.  Sunny of course is a big Meghan fan and talked about how M wanted to commit suicide when she was in England.  Joy (after saying how beautiful Meghan is, etc.) did say what I've said - if her problem was with the "institution" going to the HR dept for help was not the answer - should have called a psychiatrist.
> Joy is the one member of that group who doesn't worship at M's feet.  Sunny is the most extreme in defending her and after that, Sara.  Whoppi seems to try to stay somewhat neutral.
> So  - here in the US - the beat goes on.



I looked up the ratings for The View and found that they have an audience of approximately 2.2 million.  That's literally about 1.5% of total U.S. households.  That makes them one of the highest rated morning shows on TV in the U.S. but, the bottom line to me, is that is a miniscule audience in context of the total population and total number of households. Their ratings are also in decline as they used to hover closer to 2.5 million.  The days are gone (with the exception of the SuperBowl and other sport events) where half the population would watch the same thing.  I think the show's days are numbered (at least the long time hosts days are numbered) with their declining ratings.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Thank you for the info ... I did notice Charles held a Marshal's baton in the procession ... have not seen one of those in eons
> 
> But I had been so distracted and mesmerized by the Scottish Archers ... I had no idea they were still around ... I know their history goes back well past Mary Queen of Scots (who was also Queen of France for a short time) when they spawned a famous regiment of archers in service to the French kings (Auld Alliance), and that regiment existed til Louis XVI - though there were no Scots in it by then, and they no longer carried bows
> 
> I had to look it up, Edward has honorary military positions, so, his uniform likely corresponds to one of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Edward is wearing military uniform at memorial events for the Queen
> 
> 
> Edward, who is the Earl of Wessex, joined the Royal Marines after leaving university in 1986
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, an admiral's uniform for Anne. Didn't Anne get the Colonel in Chief of the Marines ? when position was vacated by H ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Princess Anne wears a uniform and her military appointments explained
> 
> 
> The Princess Royal was pictured in full military uniform during a procession in the Scottish capital on Monday, and will wear it at further ceremonial events this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk





CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we certain H&M are distancing themselves?  Not sure Opr is distancing herself at all.  She was promoting her movie?, then GK brought up the interview, using the emotionally charged word ‘bombshell’.  Opr then gets in a word salad about family disagreements. That’s how I read it - ymmv. Apple still shows Hazzie’s mental health show on its website.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah blasted for defending Meghan, Prince Harry: ‘She started this’
> 
> 
> “Oprah forgets she started this. Maybe an apology would help with the peacemaking.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _This is what I think: I think in all families — you know, my father passed recently, this summer — and when all families come together for a common ceremony, the ritual of, you know, burying your dead, there’s an opportunity for peacemaking,” “The Color Purple” actress said.
> 
> She went on, “Hopefully, there will be that.”_


I dont get the comment from Oprah at all ... totally inappropriate at this time


----------



## Toby93

.


----------



## youngster

So, the family has gathered at BP to receive the Queen and spend private time with her.  No cameras, no video. At this gathering are the Queen's children, their spouses, her grandchildren and their spouses, along with Princess Margaret's two children.  

I'd think this meeting of the family and Harry and MM might be the most uncomfortable of all.  Just the family and trusted staff, all people who loved the Queen and who are in mourning.  I wonder if they appointed a minder?   Maybe a small rotating group of staff and a couple family members to speak with them and keep them occupied. Maybe Eugenie and Jack. If Meghan looked uncomfortable and awkward the other day with Will and Kate, this meeting would be so much worse.


----------



## Toby93

If she looks like this at the gathering, with her low cut top, she is not going to be too popular


----------



## RAINDANCE

Just regarding those viewing figures for The View at 2.2 Mill. Apparently 5 million tried to log onto Flightradar to track the Queen's flight earlier and crashed the website completely.


----------



## Jayne1

Looks like just a crease, really: 

Meghan Markle sparks theories she wore a microphone to Queen’s memorial​
Just call her Meghan Mic-le.

Critics speculated that Meghan Markle had a secret microphone under her dress while greeting mourners at Windsor Castle on Saturday in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II’s death, but an insider exclusively tells Page Six the accusation is baseless.

“This is insane and actually damaging to her. Of course she was not wearing a mic,” a source close to Markle told Page Six Tuesday.

The questions came after Twitter users spotted a mysterious square-shaped crease in the former “Suits” actress’s dress as she walked beside Prince Harry, Prince William and Kate Middleton to view tributes left for the late Queen.









						Meghan Markle sparks theories she wore a microphone to Queen’s memorial
					

Eagle-eyed spies noticed that there appeared to be a mysterious square object under the Duchess of Sussex’s skirt as she mourned Queen Elizabeth II.




					pagesix.com
				




Several people posted theories as to why Markle, 41, might be wearing a mic pack, with some suggesting she could be gathering material for her Netflix docuseries.


----------



## carmen56

Why is Raptor even there to meet TQs coffin?  I hope her and Harry were frisked for hidden recording equipment before being allowed in.


----------



## bellecate

Cosmopolitan said:


>



My eyes have so far back they now seem to be stuck there.


----------



## Sharont2305

carmen56 said:


> Why is Raptor even there to meet TQs coffin?  I hope her and Harry were frisked for hidden recording equipment before being allowed in.


Because all the spouses of the grandchildren were there. If she wasn't there, that'll be another thing to complain about our 'racist' Royal Family. 

At least she can't perform for the cameras, which is a good thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Thank you for the info ... I did notice Charles held a Marshal's baton in the procession ... have not seen one of those in eons
> 
> But I had been so distracted and mesmerized by the Scottish Archers ... I had no idea they were still around ... I know their history goes back well past Mary Queen of Scots (who was also Queen of France for a short time) when they spawned a famous regiment of archers in service to the French kings (Auld Alliance), and that regiment existed til Louis XVI - though there were no Scots in it by then, and they no longer carried bows
> 
> 
> I had to look it up, Edward has honorary military positions, so, his uniform likely corresponds to one of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Edward is wearing military uniform at memorial events for the Queen
> 
> 
> Edward, who is the Earl of Wessex, joined the Royal Marines after leaving university in 1986
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, an admiral's uniform for Anne. Didn't Anne get the Colonel in Chief of the Marines ? when position was vacated by H ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Princess Anne wears a uniform and her military appointments explained
> 
> 
> The Princess Royal was pictured in full military uniform during a procession in the Scottish capital on Monday, and will wear it at further ceremonial events this week
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk



I think the baton was given to Charles in 2012 (Diamond Jubilee) by the Queen

Lots of connections between the French and the Scotts. (Lots of English and French links too (hence Joan of Arc) but a lots earlier)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> If she looks like this at the gathering, with her low cut top, she is not going to be too popular
> 
> View attachment 5609744



It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. Also I can't with her fake tan.


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Charles is seen waiting for mother's final return to Buckingham Palace
					

The Queen has arrived at Buckingham Palace for the final time, where she is being received by King Charles III and the entire Royal Family including the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




source: Daily Mail


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> At least she can't perform for the cameras, which is a good thing.


Can’t she? That must mean cameras are forbidden because if she sees even one she will be playing to it.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




I don't even understand what is being said here


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also Harry does not look good....again red in the face, puffy, sweaty.


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Can’t she? That must mean cameras are forbidden because if she sees even one she will be playing to it.


No cameras inside the Palace, it's very private, as it should be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I don't even understand what is being said here



As I understood it Oprah has been walking around openly saying she enjoys getting back at the BRF in retaliation of all the interviews they refused to give her.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. Also I can't with her fake tan.


Looking very...Kardashian.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> No cameras inside the Palace, it's very private, as it should be.



I feel so sorry for that family that truly loved her for having to put up with Raptor at this sad and vulnerable moment.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Can’t she? That must mean cameras are forbidden because if she sees even one she will be playing to it.



That's what I read, no cameras, no video, nothing will be released from the family's private gathering.


----------



## lanasyogamama

youngster said:


> So, the family has gathered at BP to receive the Queen and spend private time with her.  No cameras, no video. At this gathering are the Queen's children, their spouses, her grandchildren and their spouses, along with Princess Margaret's two children.
> 
> I'd think this meeting of the family and Harry and MM might be the most uncomfortable of all.  Just the family and trusted staff, all people who loved the Queen and who are in mourning.  I wonder if they appointed a minder?   Maybe a small rotating group of staff and a couple family members to speak with them and keep them occupied. Maybe Eugenie and Jack. If Meghan looked uncomfortable and awkward the other day with Will and Kate, this meeting would be so much worse.


I wonder if Angela Kelly will be there.  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. Also I can't with her fake tan.


The tan is shocking.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. *Also I can't with her fake tan.*


She didn’t have time to apply it on Saturday. She wasn’t going to miss it again.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> If she looks like this at the gathering, with her low cut top, she is not going to be too popular
> 
> View attachment 5609744



She looks like she's going for a night out on the town to see a drag queen act and knees-up down Blackpool Palais, not mourning the Queen of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth at Buckingham Palace


----------



## RAINDANCE

TBH I don't understand why Harry left the Army after only 10 years anyway. If he were to re-enlist now he could easy get another ten plus in. He's been adrift ever since, and it's ten years now if he signed up at 18 and is 38 this week.
I think he's spent most of that time waiting for someone else to work out for him what he wants to do with his life.

For comparison, Prince Andrew served from 1979 to 2001 so 22 years. Sir Tim Laurence did a full career 1079 to 2010 so 31 years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

youngster said:


> So, the family has gathered at BP to receive the Queen and spend private time with her.  No cameras, no video. At this gathering are the Queen's children, their spouses, her grandchildren and their spouses, along with Princess Margaret's two children.
> 
> I'd think this meeting of the family and Harry and MM might be the most uncomfortable of all.  Just the family and trusted staff, all people who loved the Queen and who are in mourning.  I wonder if they appointed a minder?   Maybe a small rotating group of staff and a couple family members to speak with them and keep them occupied. Maybe Eugenie and Jack. If Meghan looked uncomfortable and awkward the other day with Will and Kate, this meeting would be so much worse.


They should be uncomfortable, very uncomfortable after their nasty behaviour since they’ve been married.


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. Also I can't with her fake tan.


So out of place, like a clown.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Harry does not look good....again red in the face, puffy, sweaty.


If he has a shred of decency left it could be he’s terrified what TW will do while there.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> If he has a shred of decency left it could be he’s terrified what TW will do while there.


At least she hasn't sent for her mommy....that could have been uncomfortable for the family to tell her mom isn't included in the family mourning


----------



## MiniMabel

Cinderlala said:


> Looking very...Kardashian.


That is exactly who I thought it was at first quick glance. You're not going to a party, lady, you're attending an incredibly sombre occasion.  

MM has no right to be there. I'm shocked to my core that she has the brass neck to attend this most private and grief-laden gathering. She has verbally abused each and every person there, in one way or another, the BRF as a whole, deliberately, and many times. If I was her, I'd be covered in shame. I feel sick, to be honest.  Harry knows _exactly_ how uncomfortable he is going to feel. I think (hope) the Harkles will be sidelined. Yes, a few polite words here and there but no real inclusion. I honestly can't comprehend their gall.


----------



## papertiger

Meghan and Harry snub a boy with learning difficulties in the crowd



Catherine to the rescue

Also on Oprah OMG


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Charles was_ in_ the Navy but was wearing Field Marshal (Army) wearing ceremonial dress (he is also Admiral of the Fleet and Marshal of the RAF) He was flanked by military from Scots regiments, and the Black Watch walked with the procession.
> 
> Anne is Colonel in Chief of X but was wearing an Admiral's uniform(?)
> 
> Edward quit basic training after only a few month in the Marines (Royal Navy) so really should have 'stood down' and worn civilian clothes (IMHO) as Andrew did.
> 
> Maybe they represented Army, Navy and RAF???


I looked Edward up.

From Wikipedia:
Military appointments[edit]​
October 1986 – January 1987: Officer Cadet, Royal Marines
1 August 2004 – present: Personal Aide-de-Camp to the Sovereign
Honorary military appointments[edit]​

 Canada

2002: Colonel-in-Chief of the Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment
2003: Colonel-in-Chief of the Saskatchewan Dragoons
2005: Colonel-in-Chief of the Prince Edward Island Regiment
2007: Honorary Deputy Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police


 United Kingdom

19 August 2003: Royal Honorary Colonel of the Royal Wessex Yeomanry[111]
2006: Commodore-in-Chief of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary
2007: Royal Colonel of 2nd Battalion, The Rifles
2008: Honorary Air Commodore of Royal Air Force Waddington
1 May 2011: Royal Honorary Colonel of the London Regiment[112]
1 May 2022: London Regiment re-designated as London Guards


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> She looks like she's going for a night out on the town to see a drag queen act and knees-up down Blackpool Palais, not mourning the Queen of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth at Buckingham Palace


She does.  She looks like she’s going to a party.  I can imagine her complaining to Harry she’s bored after 20 mins, and Charles having to send them home….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'm not so sure. In photos of TW at the "reunion" walkabout she had a distinctly different look in her eyes, not the usual cold arrogance. More like a glimmer of fear to me. If rumors of a fight with H about her going with him to Balmoral are true, maybe it is finally sinking in that she does not matter much in the grand scheme of the RF, and that in times of grief they will stick together like glue. William has Charles' ear, and I believe after the funeral they will be warned another negative word about the family and the titles and Bank of Dad are gone.


That look she had is called fear.


----------



## Lounorada

Toby93 said:


> If she looks like this at the gathering, with her low cut top, she is not going to be too popular
> 
> View attachment 5609744







Lawd. Did she apply all of that makeup and bronzer in a dark room without a mirror?
Even when the Kardashians wear heavy makeup and fake tan, they don't _look _as made up as this  They at least wear it well.

I hope their presence didn't make the evening too uncomfortable for the rest of the family. It must have been awkward to say the least.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. Also I can't with her fake tan.


He looks puffy from crying. And maybe drinking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> He looks puffy from crying. And maybe drinking.



That's what I thought as well.


----------



## lanasyogamama

RAINDANCE said:


> TBH I don't understand why Harry left the Army after only 10 years anyway. If he were to re-enlist now he could easy get another ten plus in. He's been adrift ever since, and it's ten years now if he signed up at 18 and is 38 this week.
> I think he's spent most of that time waiting for someone else to work out for him what he wants to do with his life.
> 
> For comparison, Prince Andrew served from 1979 to 2001 so 22 years. Sir Tim Laurence did a full career 1079 to 2010 so 31 years.


Iirc, Harry had gotten to the end of the line in how far he could get promoted and kind of had to retire.


----------



## charlottawill

MiniMabel said:


> That is exactly who I thought it was at first quick glance. You're not going to a party, lady, you're attending an incredibly sombre occasion.
> 
> MM has no right to be there. I'm shocked to my core that she has the brass neck to attend this most private and grief-laden gathering. She has verbally abused each and every person there, in one way or another, the BRF as a whole, deliberately, and many times. If I was her, I'd be covered in shame. I feel sick, to be honest.  Harry knows _exactly_ how uncomfortable he is going to feel. I think (hope) the Harkles will be sidelined. Yes, a few polite words here and there but no real inclusion. I honestly can't comprehend their gall.


I have a feeling they'll be first to leave.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Re Edward.
His first military patronage was not awarded until 2003 so he was not eligible to wear any uniform at the Vigil of the Princes for the late Queen Mother in 2002, and wore mouring suit like his cousin Lord Linley who was never in the Armed Forces. 

I have no problem with Edward wearing dress uniform of the regiments of which he is patron. I believe all the Royals take a great interest in their Regiments, their postings, members and mascots. I think the reality is despite our access to 24-7 media we rarely fully see the routine activities and ceremonies that Royals take part in with their Regiments unless there is special reason for coverage, (eg St. Patrick's day with W+K)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel so sorry for that family that truly loved her for having to put up with Raptor at this sad and vulnerable moment.


Keep Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer​The family knows what they are doing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Keep Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer​The family knows what they are doing.



Still you shouldn't have to play tactical games while mourning.


----------



## gracekelly

Cosmopolitan said:


> Charles is seen waiting for mother's final return to Buckingham Palace
> 
> 
> The Queen has arrived at Buckingham Palace for the final time, where she is being received by King Charles III and the entire Royal Family including the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> source: Daily Mail
> 
> View attachment 5609763


She looks like she is going to a cocktail party.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Meghan and Harry snub a boy with learning difficulties in the crowd
> 
> 
> 
> Catherine to the rescue
> 
> Also on Oprah OMG



Maybe someone will tip off the BLG and he can put together a split screen version showing the ugly Suckesses ignoring this special needs child vs the Wales embracing him. A picture/video is worth a thousand words. It needs to get into circulation.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Meghan and Harry snub a boy with learning difficulties in the crowd
> 
> 
> 
> Catherine to the rescue
> 
> Also on Oprah OMG



What on Earth was she doing on that walkabout?  She’s thrashing her arms about like somebody not right.


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t see her dress. But the makeup?


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5609781
> 
> View attachment 5609792
> 
> Lawd. Did she apply all of that makeup and bronzer in a dark room without a mirror?
> Even when the Kardashians wear heavy makeup and fake tan, they don't _look _as made up as this  They at least wear it well.
> 
> I hope their presence didn't make the evening too uncomfortable for the rest of the family. It must have been awkward to say the least.


I don't think we will ever know since this was a private event.  But I think most of them would try to avoid her as much as possible without being outright rude.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't think we will ever know since this was a private event.  But I think most of them would try to avoid her as much as possible without being outright rude.



Well we know what kind of reception she'll get from Peter Phillips.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Good luck to her. I feel Charles may be at the end of his rope for the day, Anne as well, and have no patience for her shenanigans. 
She hopefully will call an Uber and get out of there ASAP.


----------



## lanasyogamama

My guess is that she’ll cling to Hawwy with both arms, and he will take a couple laps around the room.  Question is whether they dare try to talk to W and K.


----------



## redney

Lounorada said:


> I hope their presence didn't make the evening too uncomfortable for the rest of the family. It must have been awkward to say the least.


I hope the rest of the family was visibly unfazed by these two and paid them zero attention. Tonight is not about the dastardly duo or others' feelings toward them. It is about mourning, honoring, and remembering the Queen, their matriarch.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Good luck to her. I feel Charles may be at the end of his rope for the day, Anne as well, and have no patience for her shenanigans.
> She hopefully will call an Uber and get out of there ASAP.


I hope they keep it together. The last thing they want is to give them any fodder for another interview.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> My guess is that she’ll cling to Hawwy with both arms, and he will take a couple laps around the room.  Question is whether they dare try to talk to W and K.


I imagine something like this:

Harry: How are the kids?

Kate: Fine.

TW (batting false eyelashes furiously): How is the new house?

William: Fine.

Harry: Well, great to see you both, I guess we'll be off now.


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> TBH I don't understand why Harry left the Army after only 10 years anyway. If he were to re-enlist now he could easy get another ten plus in. He's been adrift ever since, and it's ten years now if he signed up at 18 and is 38 this week.
> I think he's spent most of that time waiting for someone else to work out for him what he wants to do with his life.
> 
> For comparison, Prince Andrew served from 1979 to 2001 so 22 years. Sir Tim Laurence did a full career 1079 to 2010 so 31 years.


I read, no idea if this correct … that H left the military - as a Captain - because he was maxed out , he could never get a promotion above captain due to his lack of a university degree 
Lawrence went to Durham university 
Harry went to Sandhurst after Eton , no idea how that counts 
Andrew went to Gordonstoun prior to the Britannia Royal Naval College and rose to the level of captain of a warship - ie in charge of the ship, a prestigious rank
No idea if the BRNC counts as university, but, perhaps rules were different back then , Andrew and Lawrence are a generation older than Harry


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It took me a bit to realize that is actual footage from tonight. WTF is she thinking wearing full-on make-up with smoky eyes and berry lips...can she not for once be appropriate. Also I can't with her fake tan.



He looks like he’s pis*ed as a newt. The only accessory she needs is a lamppost. So inappropriate for the occasion but what else is new.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> Re Edward.
> His first military patronage was not awarded until 2003 so he was not eligible to wear any uniform at the Vigil of the Princes for the late Queen Mother in 2002, and wore mouring suit like his cousin Lord Linley who was never in the Armed Forces.
> 
> I have no problem with Edward wearing dress uniform of the regiments of which he is patron. I believe all the Royals take a great interest in their Regiments, their postings, members and mascots. I think the reality is despite our access to 24-7 media we rarely fully see the routine activities and ceremonies that Royals take part in with their Regiments unless there is special reason for coverage, (eg St. Patrick's day with W+K)


Awesome research, thanks 
I love all these details


----------



## TimeToShop

charlottawill said:


> I imagine something like this:
> 
> Harry: How are the kids?
> 
> Kate: Fine.
> 
> TW (batting false eyelashes furiously): How is the new house?
> 
> William: Fine.
> 
> Harry: Well, great to see you both, I guess we'll be off now.



If they’re smart they’ll sit in the corner and speak when/if they’re spoken to.


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> Re Edward.
> His first military patronage was not awarded until 2003 so he was not eligible to wear any uniform at the Vigil of the Princes for the late Queen Mother in 2002, and wore mouring suit like his cousin Lord Linley who was never in the Armed Forces.
> 
> I have no problem with Edward wearing dress uniform of the regiments of which he is patron. I believe all the Royals take a great interest in their Regiments, their postings, members and mascots. I think the reality is despite our access to 24-7 media we rarely fully see the routine activities and ceremonies that Royals take part in with their Regiments unless there is special reason for coverage, (eg St. Patrick's day with W+K)


Agree, a lot of the military work is behind the scenes, I remember, during COVID, how the Times Court Circular always had virtual meetings and phone calls for the Duke of Gloucester for his military appintments


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I had nearly forgotten Scobie exists.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I think I do recall that, about promotion for Harry but am still unclear why that was an issue? I can't think of any analogies but are we saying you have to leave once you're not going to advance to a higher rank. (Think I'll look this up) 

Re Forces degree qualifications
A good friend of ours enlisted to the RAF at 18 and did an (aircraft)  engineering degree with the RAF after about 6 years but effectively at a military college not a "regular" University iykwim.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had nearly forgotten Scobie exists.


As it should be.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> don't think H&M will like this headline...real ramifications of being heir vs spare.  Of course this comes with great responsibility for William
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William just inherited a 685-year old estate worth $1 billion
> 
> 
> Royal wills are never made public. That means what happens to much of the Queen's personal wealth following her death last week will remain a family secret.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


TW must be having panic attacks at this point.


----------



## bubablu

I'm not even a Kate's or monarchy's fan, but it's just basic manners on how do you present yourself on a somber occasion.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> They used the clip where her "bump" is swaying back and forth



I know we've speculated about her use of moon bumps but what in the holy h3ll is that? I have never seen a real baby bump looking sloshed around if she really carried Archie herself. To all the smarter-than-me ladies who's been pregnant before, did your bumps ever looked like that?  




youngster said:


> So, the family has gathered at BP to receive the Queen and spend private time with her.  No cameras, no video. At this gathering are the Queen's children, their spouses, her grandchildren and their spouses, along with Princess Margaret's two children.
> 
> *I'd think this meeting of the family and Harry and MM might be the most uncomfortable of all.*  Just the family and trusted staff, all people who loved the Queen and who are in mourning.  I wonder if they appointed a minder?   Maybe a small rotating group of staff and a couple family members to speak with them and keep them occupied. Maybe Eugenie and Jack. If Meghan looked uncomfortable and awkward the other day with Will and Kate, this meeting would be so much worse.


My guess is, Z-list would be terrified to be in Anne's presence and would do everything within her power to not be even a feet away from Anne. I hope Z-list has a big fat diaper under her ill-fitting attire because she might just sh!t herself from all the death stares that she's getting.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Saw this picture online. I think this is sound advice for Z-list & Co.


----------



## BlueCherry

Imagine if they put Meghan in the middle


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> did your bumps ever looked like that?


 Hell no. It looks like she has a water balloon under her dress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What will she wear tomorrow, bright red lips and sparkly purple eyeliner?


----------



## gracekelly

bubablu said:


> I'm not even a Kate's or monarchy's fan, but it's just basic manners on how do you present yourself on a somber occasion.
> 
> View attachment 5609846


Maybe TQ left Catherine her three stand pearl necklace?  This one in the picture is just a warm up.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Is whatsherface heading to a Halloween pub crawl as Morticia???
This is an ugly hairstyle....and dun get me started with the glam make up.....wonder how many packs of bronzer she used up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

There will be enough people at this gathering tonight so that William and Catherine should be insulated from these two.  As far as tomorrow goes, I don't like that the DM is putting KC, William and Harry front and center as walking behind the gun carriage.  That is not how it is going to be.  KC will walk with his siblings and William and Harry are behind with their cousins.  It will be just like the walk to St George's for Prince Philip.  I wonder who drew the short straw to ride with Meghan tomorrow.  I am guessing it will be Sophie.  Better dress warmly Meg, because it will be mighty chilly  in that car and Sophie doesn't want to hear your lips flapping.


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> She looks like she is going to a cocktail party.


It looks like the dress she wore to the Hamilton premiere in London. It's very low cut and short and totally inappropriate for a family vigil. Her face is made up like she's ready for a photo shoot. She honestly has NO class and has a complete lack of respect for her "family" she's thrown under the bus to capitalize on. Hmm...sounds like a trend. Where's Thomas BTW? Still down with that stroke. TW is SHAMEFUL.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> There will be enough people at this gathering tonight so that William and Catherine should be insulated from these two.  As far as tomorrow goes, I don't like that the DM is putting KC, William and Harry front and center as walking behind the gun carriage.  That is not how it is going to be.  KC will walk with his siblings and William and Harry are behind with their cousins.  It will be just like the walk to St George's for Prince Philip.  I wonder who drew the short straw to ride with Meghan tomorrow.  I am guessing it will be Sophie.  Better dress warmly Meg, because it will be mighty chilly  in that car and Sophie doesn't want to hear your lips flapping.



Maybe Peter Phillips will walk between them again.  He's the oldest grandchild and was a real favorite of the Queen though she seemed to get along really well with all her grandchildren and they all seemed to adore her.


----------



## csshopper

They will hang out with Eugenie and Jack?


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Hell no. It looks like she has a water balloon under her dress.


That was my first thought too  




QueenofWrapDress said:


> What will she wear tomorrow, bright red lips and sparkly purple eyeliner?



I feel bad for Sophie. Truly, Z-list should be with Eugenie since they are such buddy buddy.


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.






papertiger said:


> I guess they haven't gotten her (or him) anywhere.
> 
> The Harkle's run of bad luck doesn't help. They have terrible timing.



Their greed sweeps out before them and swamps their boat each time.

They’re so delusional  seems like they didn’t believe they were disliked and hated until the platinum jubilee … could it be they finally realize and believe they have more haters than lovers in the world? If so, they’re scrambling to blame someone - anyone but themselves 
“Who’s fault is it? Who’s to blame? I know - our PR! It’s SS’s fault we’re so universally hated! It’s not US!”


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just know she’s trying to make her face look “sad, but sexy” with the parted lips.


----------



## Chanbal

Cosmopolitan said:


> Charles is seen waiting for mother's final return to Buckingham Palace
> 
> 
> The Queen has arrived at Buckingham Palace for the final time, where she is being received by King Charles III and the entire Royal Family including the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> source: Daily Mail
> 
> View attachment 5609763





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Harry does not look good....again red in the face, puffy, sweaty.


TW went overboard on the fake tan this time.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> TW went overboard on the fake tan this time.



Well she needs all the fake tan that she can get since her natural skin is not dark enough for her to keep harping on the fact that she's half black and/or a WOC.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What will she wear tomorrow, bright red lips and sparkly purple eyeliner?



I don't think it's right for TW to be at the funeral of a person that she hurt so much.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## lulu212121

EverSoElusive said:


> I know we've speculated about her use of moon bumps but what in the holy h3ll is that? I have never seen a real baby bump looking sloshed around if she really carried Archie herself. T*o all the smarter-than-me ladies who's been pregnant before, did your bumps ever looked like that? *
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is, Z-list would be terrified to be in Anne's presence and would do everything within her power to not be even a feet away from Anne. I hope Z-list has a big fat diaper under her ill-fitting attire because she might just sh!t herself from all the death stares that she's getting.


NEVER!!! I can't even imagine the sensation if that were to really happen to any heavily pregnant woman. The poor baby would be rocked loose from the placenta. Ack!


----------



## Chanbal

A picture paints a thousand words…


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> I think I do recall that, about promotion for Harry but am still unclear why that was an issue? I can't think of any analogies but are we saying you have to leave once you're not going to advance to a higher rank. (Think I'll look this up)
> 
> Re Forces degree qualifications
> A good friend of ours enlisted to the RAF at 18 and did an (aircraft)  engineering degree with the RAF after about 6 years but effectively at a military college not a "regular" University iykwim.


A friend encouraged his son to stay on in the UK army until he earned the rank of captain, because it sounds better to be Captain Tom not Lieutenant Tom. Then the son could leave the service for a second career

So, I would not say that you HAVE to leave, rather you have maxed out on the benefits , so diminishing returns afterwards 

FYI Rank is never used in the US for ex service people, my neighbor is Mr Charles not Admiral Charles. But, IMHO, rank is often used in The UK - forever?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> She looks like she is going to a cocktail party.


Or a yacht


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> I just know she’s trying to make her face look “sad, but sexy” with the parted lips.


OMG, this is  ... unbelievable... she doesn't even know how to act sad.


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> Good luck to her. I feel Charles may be at the end of his rope for the day, Anne as well, and have no patience for her shenanigans.
> She hopefully will call an Uber and get out of there ASAP.


Ah, but that's exactly what she said she COULDN'T do, that she was trapped in the palace


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> If she looks like this at the gathering, with her low cut top, she is not going to be too popular
> 
> View attachment 5609744



This song comes to mind every time I see someone go overboard with the tanner/bronzer.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> A picture paints a thousand words…



Now, with the bronzer story,  I like meself a good bronzing look too.  But I do it to look slimmer, because I have a huge face....


----------



## Hermes Zen

This just came across my phone. 


King Charles III awaits Queen Elizabeth II's casket with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Buckingham Palace
King Charles III waited with Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and royal family to receive Queen Elizabeth II's casket at Buckingham Palace in London Tuesday









						King Charles III awaits Queen Elizabeth II's casket with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Buckingham Palace — Fox News
					

King Charles III waited with Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and the royal family to receive Queen Elizabeth II's casket at Buckingham Palace in London on Tuesday




					apple.news
				




Disrespectful IMHO H & M not with heads down with King Charles III. Maybe it’s just me.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops


----------



## Chanbal

It's no coincidence imo…


----------



## Toby93

scarlet555 said:


> Now, with the bronzer story,  I like meself a good bronzing look too.  But I do it to look slimmer, because I have a huge face....


Well if she's trying to compete with Catherine and look slimmer, she better slather some more on


----------



## Toby93

Gal4Dior said:


> It looks like the dress she wore to the Hamilton premiere in London. It's very low cut and short and totally inappropriate for a family vigil. Her face is made up like she's ready for a photo shoot. She honestly has NO class and has a complete lack of respect for her "family" she's thrown under the bus to capitalize on. Hmm...sounds like a trend. Where's Thomas BTW? Still down with that stroke. TW is SHAMEFUL.


Every time I see her with all that tanner, I think of an old Seinfeld episode


----------



## Toby93

lulu212121 said:


> NEVER!!! I can't even imagine the sensation if that were to really happen to any heavily pregnant woman. The poor baby would be rocked loose from the placenta. Ack!


Luckily it's not actually a baby  I wonder if they are both responsible for lying to the BRF and that's why he backs up all her lies?  Maybe because he is culpable as well?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I dont get the comment from Oprah at all ... totally inappropriate at this time


The Blind item is exactly what I’ve been saying - Opr  has been attacking the BRF for years.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cinderlala said:


> Looking very...Kardashian.


Very cheap Hwood.


----------



## charlottawill

Hermes Zen said:


> This just came across my phone.
> 
> 
> King Charles III awaits Queen Elizabeth II's casket with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Buckingham Palace
> King Charles III waited with Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and royal family to receive Queen Elizabeth II's casket at Buckingham Palace in London Tuesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles III awaits Queen Elizabeth II's casket with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at Buckingham Palace — Fox News
> 
> 
> King Charles III waited with Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and the royal family to receive Queen Elizabeth II's casket at Buckingham Palace in London on Tuesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Disrespectful IMHO H & M not with heads down with King Charles III. Maybe it’s just me.


She always finds the camera. She does however look much lighter there. Doing her best Morticia Adams imitation.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> TBH I don't understand why Harry left the Army after only 10 years anyway. If he were to re-enlist now he could easy get another ten plus in. He's been adrift ever since, and it's ten years now if he signed up at 18 and is 38 this week.
> I think he's spent most of that time waiting for someone else to work out for him what he wants to do with his life.
> 
> For comparison, Prince Andrew served from 1979 to 2001 so 22 years. Sir Tim Laurence did a full career 1079 to 2010 so 31 years.


Rumors are there were ‘issues’.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lallybelle

Makeup gun set to whore and baked in crisco oil. Fab look there MegZ.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> Well if she's trying to compete with Catherine and look slimmer, she better slather some more on


All the fake tanner and high heels in the world couldn’t accomplish that!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



She's a lot darker than she was the other day at the walkabout!


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> She always finds the camera. She does however look much lighter there. Doing her best Morticia Adams imitation.


Yep, I thought Elvira, but same thing.


----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


> It's no coincidence imo…
> View attachment 5609888



Sadly, this is a taste of what King Charles entire reign will look like if he doesn't get these two in hand. He'll always have these two ghouls lurking behind his back ready to diminish the dignity of an occasion and make it all about themselves. Whether the image is real or photoshopped, the sanctity of what was supposed to be private time for the family has been breached and is being trumpeted by H&M's favored mouthpiece. It's your move, Sir. Please make the right one for your own sake,  that of your other son, and most of all for the sake of the monarchy your Mother has now entrusted to your care.


----------



## Hermes Zen

xincinsin said:


> G*d forbid they are posed next to the coffin in a final attempt to get the Lillibet x 2 money shot.



They better NOT. For photos and bragging rights in interviews and books, I can see M teaching Archie to salute or bow to HM’s coffin like JFK Jr did to his father’s coffin.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Still you shouldn't have to play tactical games while mourning.


Sadly, this is precisely when you must play tactical games.  Opr, H&M think there is power vacuum.  Haaa, they’ll learn. Power is like catnip for H&M because power = $$$$.  Charles and his siblings are well aware of this. They have studied Shakespeare. They know.


----------



## KellyObsessed

I think the photo is photoshopped.   I can see a woman's face to the right of Meghan in the photo. Does anyone know who it is?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kaka_bobo said:


> Is whatsherface heading to a Halloween pub crawl as Morticia???
> This is an ugly hairstyle....and dun get me started with the glam make up.....wonder how many packs of bronzer she used up.


She is going to SoHoHouse with Markus and Omid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Maybe Peter Phillips will walk between them again.  He's the oldest grandchild and was a real favorite of the Queen though she seemed to get along really well with all her grandchildren and they all seemed to adore her.


Major Johnny would be my choice


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Is this Hwood’s idea of _grief-stricken? _


----------



## missfiggy

CarryOn2020 said:


> His face showed such strong emotion.  At times like this, it’s always the little things that break us.
> TBF, he did recover very quickly and moved on perfectly.  He will be a great King. As the Queen had her hat and her Launer, I wonder what he will have.


His hand in his pocket - always and everywhere. Even including during his address to the Parliament.  I hate it - it looks insecure and foppish.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's no coincidence imo…
> View attachment 5609888



Literally, this is how it looks when someone is about to get stabbed in the back.  Hercule Poirot has trained us well.


----------



## Hermes Zen

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Wish there was a worse emoji than an angry face!! Op deserves worse!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

missfiggy said:


> His hand in his pocket - always and everywhere. Even including during his address to the Parliament.  I hate it - it looks insecure and foppish.


Imo it is a deliberate effort to recall old times.  Based on his fastidiousness over the pen, image is everything. 









						Why Napoleon and Other Historical Figures Were Portrayed with One Hand in Their Jackets — GLOBAL YOUNG VOICES
					

The hand-in-waistcoat pose was the practice of placing one hand inside the top garment, to convey calm assurance and elevated character. Although it was first adopted in the 6th century B.C., it became a fad during the 18th and 19th centuries.




					www.globalyoungvoices.com
				



_As Aeschines said in his famous speech named "Against Timarchus" (346 B.C.):_



> _"And so decorous were those public men of old, Pericles, Themistocles, and Aristeides, that to speak with the arm outside the cloak, as we all do nowadays as a matter of course, was regarded then as an ill-mannered thing, and they carefully refrained from doing it. And I can point to a piece of evidence which seems to me very weighty and tangible. I am sure you have all sailed over to Salamis, and have seen the statue of Solon there. You can therefore yourselves bear witness that in the statue that is set up in the Salaminian market-place Solon stands with his arm inside his cloak. Now this is a reminiscence, fellow citizens, and an imitation of the posture of Solon, showing his customary bearing as he used to address the people of Athens."_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

prettyprincess said:


> You know very well there’s racism in this thread. Pretending like there isn’t is extremely problematic. If saying she spray tans to look more like a poc isn’t troubling to you, Idk what to tell you.


I understand why you took offence to the word "whore". It is crass, and even when used humorously, it is problematic. I can see how a lot of people would be upset by it, even if the OP didn't intend for that.

However, I cannot wrap my head around your argument that Meg is not intentionally manipulating her skin colour somehow. I am a mixed-race English woman, and I happen to be the same colour as Meg- her actual colour; i.e. I am white-passing. To see her two entirely different shades as in the pictures posted, merely days apart, confuses the life out of me. I would have to tan all summer to get that much darker. Spray tan also makes little sense as it wouldn't fade so fast. How and why is Meg's skin a different tone merely days apart? It's not an act of racism to notice that this doesn't happen naturally!

Perhaps her makeup artist is heavy-handed sometimes. I think that's the only reasonable explanation I can come to. However, given the very delicate subject of race relations, I think Meg should have a word with her make up team to make sure this isn't a continued pattern. Her shifting skin tone is offensive and problematic in its own way.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> As a POC myself, I don't need to be lectured on racism.  I am capable of observing someone's actions and come up with my own conclusions, and don't need to resort to "racism" as an excuse for everything.  She obviously has darkened her skin.  It's not something we are "saying", it's something anyone who isn't blind can see as plain as day.


Thank you! I’m sure many of us are poc in this thread. I’m one. Not once have I read of anyone posting racist remarks here. It’s the substance of a person we are, I think, commenting on.


----------



## missfiggy

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it is a deliberate effort to recall old times.  Based on his fastidiousness over the pen, image is everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Napoleon and Other Historical Figures Were Portrayed with One Hand in Their Jackets — GLOBAL YOUNG VOICES
> 
> 
> The hand-in-waistcoat pose was the practice of placing one hand inside the top garment, to convey calm assurance and elevated character. Although it was first adopted in the 6th century B.C., it became a fad during the 18th and 19th centuries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalyoungvoices.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _As Aeschines said in his famous speech named "Against Timarchus" (346 B.C.):_
> 
> 
> View attachment 5609984


Nah...all scratching their body lice


----------



## EverSoElusive

Lodpah said:


> Thank you! I’m sure many of us are poc in this thread. I’m one. Not once have I read of anyone posting racist remarks here. It’s the substance of a person we are, I think, commenting on.


Me three, POC here   Agree with @purseinsanity and @Lodpah.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it is a deliberate effort to recall old times.  Based on his fastidiousness over the pen, image is everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Napoleon and Other Historical Figures Were Portrayed with One Hand in Their Jackets — GLOBAL YOUNG VOICES
> 
> 
> The hand-in-waistcoat pose was the practice of placing one hand inside the top garment, to convey calm assurance and elevated character. Although it was first adopted in the 6th century B.C., it became a fad during the 18th and 19th centuries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.globalyoungvoices.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _As Aeschines said in his famous speech named "Against Timarchus" (346 B.C.):_
> 
> 
> View attachment 5609984


Gosh.  Thank you.  You teach us so much.  People have no idea of the level of intelligence of posters on this thread.


----------



## prettyprincess

jblended said:


> I understand why you took offence to the word "whore". It is crass, and even when used humorously, it is problematic. I can see how a lot of people would be upset by it, even if the OP didn't intend for that.
> 
> However, I cannot wrap my head around your argument that Meg is not intentionally manipulating her skin colour somehow. I am a mixed-race English woman, and I happen to be the same colour as Meg- her actual colour; i.e. I am white-passing. To see her two entirely different shades as in the pictures posted, merely days apart, confuses the life out of me. I would have to tan all summer to get that much darker. Spray tan also makes little sense as it wouldn't fade so fast. How and why is Meg's skin a different tone merely days apart? It's not an act of racism to notice that this doesn't happen naturally!
> 
> Perhaps her makeup artist is heavy-handed sometimes. I think that's the only reasonable explanation I can come to. However, given the very delicate subject of race relations, I think Meg should have a word with her make up team to make sure this isn't a continued pattern. Her shifting skin tone is offensive and problematic in its own way.


I didn’t say she wasn’t wearing bronzer or has a spray tan. I see no reason why that would even be an issue, but I would love to hear why you think it is.

The insinuation that she’s solely darkening her skin to appear more black so that she can garner sympathy, is what I find offensive.
She doesn’t have to do that, bc she IS a woc. It’s who she is. 

A lot of the members here don’t see the comments as problematic, bc they don’t want to.


----------



## jblended

prettyprincess said:


> I didn’t say she wasn’t wearing bronzer or has a spray tan. I see no reason why that would even be an issue, but I would love to hear why you think it is.


Sorry, the onus is on you to explain why it's _not_ an issue. We have "cancelled" many a public figure for blackfishing, have we not? There is a good reason for that, as I'm sure you're well aware. 



prettyprincess said:


> The insinuation that she’s solely darkening her skin to appear more black so that she can garner sympathy, is *what I find offensive.*
> She doesn’t have to do that, *bc she IS a woc. It’s who she is.*


I find it offensive that she blatantly lied and said she would not share a photo of her kids because the media called them the N-word. *A blatant lie, that is easily dismissed if you know anything at all about the laws and conduct of this country and its people.*
I guess we're both offended, whilst Meg enjoys the high life. 

She is a WoC who is undermining the very real and serious issue of racial discrimination by making false claims, such as the one I've mentioned, and then seemingly doing everything she can to cause further confusion with her ever shifting skin tone. 
She has a great platform to raise awareness and affect change in this arena. Such a shame that she is too busy feeling sorry for herself to help other people. (and yes, claiming she "was not okay" when standing amongst the poverty-stricken in Africa was her feeling sorry for herself instead of showing empathy for other PoC she was there to serve in her role as Duchess).



prettyprincess said:


> A lot of the members here don’t see the comments as problematic, bc they don’t want to.


I think this runs both ways. A lot of her defenders don't want to see her blatant lies as problematic because they don't want to believe a WoC could abuse that position to push a personal agenda. We all have cognitive biases and the best way to overcome them is with respectful discourse and an open mind to hearing both sides.


----------



## Sophisticatted

CarryOn2020 said:


> Literally, this is how it looks when someone is about to get stabbed in the back.  Hercule Poirot has trained us well.


LOL!  There is another thread, on a different forum, covering various royalty.  Someone has fun captioning photos.  Anyway, there’s a running gag that every time Princess Anne wears gloves, it’s because she’s planning a murder.  Maybe she will be wearing gloves tonight!    After all, there are no cameras permitted!!


----------



## VickyB

Toby93 said:


> If she looks like this at the gathering, with her low cut top, she is not going to be too popular
> 
> View attachment 5609744


She is clueless. No way, no how somebody told her she was dressed and made up appropriately for the family gathering.  WTH with the poofed up lips, gloss, overdone eyes and porn star hair and low cut jacket?


----------



## CarryOn2020

imo this is what this night is about - they brought QE to the gates, then stopped, mission accomplished


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I hope they keep it together. The last thing they want is to give them any fodder for another interview.


No fodder required unfortunately. The proximity alone will put Zedzee's spite into overdrive.


lanasyogamama said:


> I just know she’s trying to make her face look “*sad, but sexy*” with the parted lips.


Cognitive dissonance  


Chanbal said:


>



I keep having this image of her walking into a curtained booth in next to nothing, and turning around as she gets spray-painted.


----------



## tjovanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors are there were ‘issues’.


I heard it was due to some security issues. A tabloid found one of the locations of their camp and published them. Harry decided to step away from duty after that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

tjovanity said:


> I heard it was due to some security issues. A tabloid found one of the locations of their camp and published them. Harry decided to step away from duty after that.


Could be that. Could be other stuff, too.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> It's not entirely Oprah's fault. Meghan chose to tell lies and not her.
> 
> Unfortunately, that Oprah did not quiz MegZ, do her job as a supposed journalist shows either a lack of professionalism or a glee  for that bomb(shell) to go off.
> 
> Still not as bad as Harry supporting M's barefaced lies even now.
> 
> From the Oprah interview to Harry's book is a straight line IMOw


Well I agree she was just following her instinct for what she thought would make news and money  and I can believe she wanted to be associated with royalty but I do think she’s been disappointed and annoyed by how this played out. She now finds out H&M can’t keep their story straight, don’t have any evidence any of this happened and  don’t  have the balls to stay ‘authentically real and independent’ and will try and crawl back for a royal photo op whenever they can. From what I understand of Oprah sucking up to the toxic family you non-contacted using the strength got from her nurturing influence is NOT on brand. 


marietouchet said:


> A friend encouraged his son to stay on in the UK army until he earned the rank of captain, because it sounds better to be Captain Tom not Lieutenant Tom. Then the son could leave the service for a second career
> 
> So, I would not say that you HAVE to leave, rather you have maxed out on the benefits , so diminishing returns afterwards
> 
> FYI Rank is never used in the US for ex service people, my neighbor is Mr Charles not Admiral Charles. But, IMHO, rank is often used in The UK - forever?


You can use your title forever, i believe,  but it’s very old fashioned to do so now. Of course you can put it on any form or CV too. 


Chanbal said:


> It's no coincidence imo…
> View attachment 5609888



This looks really fake to me. Why is there no reflection from the window glass especially if this is taken by a pap lens from outside the gates?

It’s from Scobie? Probably about as real as his lips. 


piperdog said:


> Sadly, this is a taste of what King Charles entire reign will look like if he doesn't get these two in hand. He'll always have these two ghouls lurking behind his back ready to diminish the dignity of an occasion and make it all about themselves. Whether the image is real or photoshopped, the sanctity of what was supposed to be private time for the family has been breached and is being trumpeted by H&M's favored mouthpiece. It's your move, Sir. Please make the right one for your own sake,  that of your other son, and most of all for the sake of the monarchy your Mother has now entrusted to your care.


I agree, he needs to know this is how it will continue to be and cut the cord, I’m of the opinion he is disinclined to do it because he is addicted to the easy positive press he’s gotten from the DM trashing H&M and praising his paternal stoicism and he’s worried the barbs will turn on him next but this is a farce and I think it’s turning a lot more people off than they realise.


----------



## chaneljewel

bubablu said:


> I'm not even a Kate's or monarchy's fan, but it's just basic manners on how do you present yourself on a somber occasion.
> 
> View attachment 5609846


Ahhh.  They both look so sad.   I’m sure Kate was close to the Queen too and misses her terribly.  William spent a lot of time with her and it’s a crushing loss for him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## chaneljewel

EverSoElusive said:


> I know we've speculated about her use of moon bumps but what in the holy h3ll is that? I have never seen a real baby bump looking sloshed around if she really carried Archie herself. To all the smarter-than-me ladies who's been pregnant before, did your bumps ever looked like that?
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is, Z-list would be terrified to be in Anne's presence and would do everything within her power to not be even a feet away from Anne. I hope Z-list has a big fat diaper under her ill-fitting attire because she might just sh!t herself from all the death stares that she's getting.


That just doesn’t look right.  I might have walked like a duck but my baby bump didn’t slosh around.  Interesting!!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

@prettyprincess 

If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.

Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.

The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage). 

Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.

Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish. 

Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.

Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.

After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK. 

The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.

The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion. 

I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.

I'm sure we can agree to disagree 

FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race. 

It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


----------



## jelliedfeels

lallybelle said:


> Makeup gun set to whore and baked in crisco oil. Fab look there MegZ.





A woman of culture I see.


----------



## EverSoElusive

chaneljewel said:


> That just doesn’t look right.  I might have walked like a duck but my baby bump didn’t slosh around.  Interesting!!!


Good to know! You certainly made my night with the "walked like a duck"  comment


----------



## Sharont2305

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


@EverSoElusive This is brilliant, straight and to the point. 
This should be a pinned post at the start of the thread so that anyone who is new can be directed to it when they ask why we hate Meghan.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Oops



I hope they leave it as is.  Let’s hear what she had to say.


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be that. Could be other stuff, too.


Too fond of the liquid refreshments, perhaps ?


----------



## Mumotons

Just wow !


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: Veterans do not wear the uniform.  Hazz willingly chose to give  up his honorary ranks, so he cannot wear those uniforms. If he had kept them, he could wear that uniform. *Andrew’s mother, The Queen, requested that he wear his uniform for The Queen’s Vigil.  *Wearing the medals on a suit is optional, personal preference.

_*Hazzi will not wear the uniforms because his grandmother, The Queen, did not request it.  Let that sink in.*

There are two nonworking members of the royal family: Prince Andrew and Prince Harry. Both are military veterans. Andrew served in the Royal Navy for 22 years and fought in the Falklands War as a helicopter pilot. Harry served in the British Army for 10 years (including two active-duty tours of Afghanistan) and rose to the rank of captain.

There are two very different reasons for their departures from royal life.

Andrew was forced to step back as a working member of the royal family following a disastrous November 2019 BBC interview in which he attempted to defend his longtime friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and deny accusations that he had sexually assaulted one of Epstein’s victims. Andrew was officially stripped of use of his honorary military ranks, patronages, and the use of his “HRH” (His Royal Highness) title in January after the woman sued him for sexual assault in US federal court. (Andrew, who has always maintained his innocence, settled the case for a reportedly multimillion sum.)

Harry and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, (aka Meghan Markle) chose to leave official royal life in January 2020, later saying that the intense (and, they said, racist and unfair) media coverage and lack of support from royal family members and the institution prompted the move. This decision caused them to lose their official royal patronages, use of their “HRH” titles, and, in Harry’s case, *his honorary military ranks *— most notably, his title as captain general of the Royal Marines. (The duke reportedly took this loss with difficulty and even successfully sued the Daily Mail for articles claiming that he had not been in touch with the Royal Marines after he was forced to cede his role as their ceremonial head.)


Buckingham Palace confirmed on Monday that Andrew will join his siblings in military dress — likely his Royal Navy uniform, since he was stripped of his honorary ranks — for the Queen’s final vigil in Westminster Hall “*as a special mark of respect*.” He will wear a morning suit to all the other ceremonies.









						Here’s Why There’s Controversy About Members Of The Royal Family Wearing Military Uniforms To The Queen’s Funeral Events
					

Prince Andrew will wear a military uniform to one royal event. Prince Harry must stick to civilian dress.




					www.buzzfeednews.com
				



_


----------



## jblended

How was it reported that H&M received HMQ's coffin? Whatever PR agency they're using, it's a bit risky to make such a ludicrous claim!

ETA and correction: They have amended the story since but it still lists Harry before the King! 








						King Charles, Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and More Royals Receive the Queen’s Coffin in London - E! Online
					

Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Prince William and more royals received Queen Elizabeth II’s coffin in London on Sept. 13. It will stay at Buckingham Palace until her funeral.




					www.eonline.com
				





> Following a regal send off and transfer from the hearse to a plane, the coffin was received in London by Prince Harry and* Meghan Markle*.* King Charles*,* Prince William *and* Kate Middleton *also arrived to Buckingham Palace to pay their respects.


----------



## andrashik

I don't think this is true, but knowing Claw..I am not surprised anymore


----------



## andrashik

Ladies, have you heard of this?


Apparently the "hacker" is from England


----------



## pukasonqo

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5610068
> 
> I don't think this is true, but knowing Claw..I am not surprised anymore


 How would you prove is discrimination? It is her will and she can do as she wishes w her possessions
Would be interesting if they chose to contest the will based of perceived discrimination 
I am a POC (like many here, in my case an interesting mix of many races) and always identified as such, for me is the actions that speak of the true character of a person and not their skin colour
They might as well say that the children were discriminated against because they are ginger headed


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> A friend encouraged his son to stay on in the UK army until he earned the rank of captain, because it sounds better to be Captain Tom not Lieutenant Tom. Then the son could leave the service for a second career
> 
> So, I would not say that you HAVE to leave, rather you have maxed out on the benefits , so diminishing returns afterwards
> 
> FYI Rank is never used in the US for ex service people, my neighbor is Mr Charles not Admiral Charles. But, IMHO, rank is often used in The UK - forever?



It's complicated as to what rank means as it depends which force they've been in (Navy Captain is higher than Army or Royal Marines) but people can keep their rank after leaving if they reach a certain level. 

I hope I've got this right, the lowest title that people are able to keep in the RAF is Squadron Leader, for the Royal Navy it's Lieutenant Commander (which is 2 lower than Captain in the Navy - but check) for Army and Royal Marines, someone would have to be a Major. 

It's very difficult to rise through the ranks in our forces from Private (squaddie) and make officer. Normally (commissioned) officers are recruited with officer training in mind (and through certain schools) and are officer cadets. Commissioned and non-comms used to be treated totally differently too, I don't know if that still applies.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like another shameful day for the American media. Is this more of Opr’s work? TylerP? 
E news is not a respected organization.  They are info-tainment fluff at its worst.  No one [ok, few people] watches.
Isn’t The Cut part of the NYT corporation?  Not surprising they would make accusations.  Many twitter people were adding the extra letter to that title on the first day it appeared. So, old news?
We know H&M lie, so LA sources can say what they want. They can also be wrong.

This tells me H&M are not getting anything they wanted, so she is fuming. 
Also, H&M will stop at nothing to disrupt The Queen’s funeral.  I do hope the whole world sees them for the losers they are.

ETA: maybe this is as they were leaving.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> Ladies, have you heard of this?
> View attachment 5610069
> 
> Apparently the "hacker" is from England
> 
> View attachment 5610070




So long as no one did it from Scotland, NI or Wales, that's OK  

Only someone from somewhere else would say 'resides in England' (IMO)

Sorry, pet peeve.


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> So long as no one did it from Scotland, NI or Wales, that's OK
> 
> Only someone from somewhere else would say 'resides in England' (IMO)
> 
> Sorry, pet peeve.


To some, England includes Scotland, NI and Wales.
Yes,a pet peeve of mine too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> To some, England includes Scotland, NI and Wales.
> Yes,a pet peeve of mine too.


To the ignorant Americans.   There, I as an American said it because it is true.

ETA: Malcolm Tucker handled it well when he visited Washington DC and someone called him “English”.


----------



## periogirl28

Mumotons said:


> Just wow !
> 
> View attachment 5610065


Honestly why didn't they just shut every curtain. It's so basic.


----------



## Sharont2305

periogirl28 said:


> Honestly why didn't they just shut every curtain. It's so basic.


I was thinking that once the car went through the first arch into the quadrant a screen/barrier should have been put up on the inside/other side of the arch.


----------



## periogirl28

Sharont2305 said:


> I was thinking that once the car went through the first arch into the quadrant a screen/barrier should have been put up on the inside/other side of the arch.


This too. It was a private family event. Can't stress that enough.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: Veterans do not wear the uniform.  Hazz willingly chose to give  up his honorary ranks, so he cannot wear those uniforms. If he had kept them, he could wear that uniform. *Andrew’s mother, The Queen, requested that he wear his uniform for The Queen’s Vigil.  *Wearing the medals on a suit is optional, personal preference.
> 
> _*Hazzi will not wear the uniforms because his grandmother, The Queen, did not request it.  Let that sink in.*
> 
> There are two nonworking members of the royal family: Prince Andrew and Prince Harry. Both are military veterans. Andrew served in the Royal Navy for 22 years and fought in the Falklands War as a helicopter pilot. Harry served in the British Army for 10 years (including two active-duty tours of Afghanistan) and rose to the rank of captain.
> 
> There are two very different reasons for their departures from royal life.
> 
> Andrew was forced to step back as a working member of the royal family following a disastrous November 2019 BBC interview in which he attempted to defend his longtime friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and deny accusations that he had sexually assaulted one of Epstein’s victims. Andrew was officially stripped of use of his honorary military ranks, patronages, and the use of his “HRH” (His Royal Highness) title in January after the woman sued him for sexual assault in US federal court. (Andrew, who has always maintained his innocence, settled the case for a reportedly multimillion sum.)
> 
> Harry and his wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, (aka Meghan Markle) chose to leave official royal life in January 2020, later saying that the intense (and, they said, racist and unfair) media coverage and lack of support from royal family members and the institution prompted the move. This decision caused them to lose their official royal patronages, use of their “HRH” titles, and, in Harry’s case, *his honorary military ranks *— most notably, his title as captain general of the Royal Marines. (The duke reportedly took this loss with difficulty and even successfully sued the Daily Mail for articles claiming that he had not been in touch with the Royal Marines after he was forced to cede his role as their ceremonial head.)
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace confirmed on Monday that Andrew will join his siblings in military dress — likely his Royal Navy uniform, since he was stripped of his honorary ranks — for the Queen’s final vigil in Westminster Hall “*as a special mark of respect*.” He will wear a morning suit to all the other ceremonies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s Why There’s Controversy About Members Of The Royal Family Wearing Military Uniforms To The Queen’s Funeral Events
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew will wear a military uniform to one royal event. Prince Harry must stick to civilian dress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Whatever opinion you have of Prince Andrew - he put his life at risk in the Falklands war same as everyone else there.  No hiding in tent.


andrashik said:


> Ladies, have you heard of this?
> View attachment 5610069
> 
> Apparently the "hacker" is from England
> 
> View attachment 5610070


Probably the first accurate piece of reporting they’ve done


papertiger said:


> So long as no one did it from Scotland, NI or Wales, that's OK
> 
> Only someone from somewhere else would say 'resides in England' (IMO)
> 
> Sorry, pet peeve.


Challenge them to find it on a map….


Sharont2305 said:


> I was thinking that once the car went through the first arch into the quadrant a screen/barrier should have been put up on the inside/other side of the arch.


But why should they have to take such measures just because Meghan cannot behave decently?


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> Whatever opinion you have of Prince Andrew - he put his life at risk in the Falklands war same as everyone else there.  No hiding in tent.
> 
> Probably the first accurate piece of reporting they’ve done
> 
> Challenge them to find it on a map….
> 
> But why should they have to take such measures just because Meghan cannot behave decently?


You're right of course but I think they should have done that anyway.
ETA, I still think that the photo was taken prior to The Queen even arriving near the grounds of BP, and that there should have been a covering directly in front of Charles so that no-one could see in at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oops




Yeah, release them and let the world see what an a*shole she is.


----------



## Lodpah

chaneljewel said:


> That just doesn’t look right.  I might have walked like a duck but my baby bump didn’t slosh around.  Interesting!!!


What pic? Please post as I've been pregnant, ahem, quite a few times. I don't see it anywhere.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




What's wrong with Piers, feeling sentimental suddenly?

I don't have super strong feelings either way (I did however have strong feelings that at Philip's funeral those eligible had to give up the uniforms for the troublemakers), but if he's not eligible he's not eligible.


----------



## Sunshine247365

What's most annoying about these two at the moment is that it feels like there is just no justice or consequences for their years of appalling behaviour - maybe I'm just being a bit unkind but seeing them there front and centre, TW with her smug face still loving that she's getting attention and being included is pretty grating. I understand we want to honour the Queen and there's a time and place for consequences and tough love for these two but it honestly just feels like they just get away with everything time and time again and still get what they want through tantrums, manipulation, threats and playing the victim to the media. I guess my sense of justice just wants to see them experience even just a fraction of the humiliation and criticism they themselves quite happily inflicted on their families over and over again. People who scheme, plot and manipulate the way TW does doesn't deserve to be anywhere near family functions, especially now, and to see her so involved feels like karma is napping. Most normal people would feel mortified and regretful if face to face with family you have bad-mouthed and hurt. These two just stride in and suddenly she's speaking as 'part of the family'. It's just jarring to see this when considering what she was still saying  less than a week ago. Maybe one day their comeuppance will come. Poor William and Kate, imagine having to sit there and grit your teeth, I have so much admiration for their strength of character that they are able to do this and with so much grace.


----------



## gelbergirl

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.



Excellent summary.
I remember the start of this thread and the early times.
In the early days, a friend and I talked about how perfect MM was for Harry.
She was someone with charitable experience and someone from outside the social circle.
I suppose this is how she positioned herself.
Well, let's get back to the thread.


----------



## Lodpah

EverSoElusive said:


> I know we've speculated about her use of moon bumps but what in the holy h3ll is that? I have never seen a real baby bump looking sloshed around if she really carried Archie herself. To all the smarter-than-me ladies who's been pregnant before, did your bumps ever looked like that?
> 
> 
> 
> My guess is, Z-list would be terrified to be in Anne's presence and would do everything within her power to not be even a feet away from Anne. I hope Z-list has a big fat diaper under her ill-fitting attire because she might just sh!t herself from all the death stares that she's getting.


I've been pregnant quite a few times. Your stomach does not slosh around like that, plus you waddle, sort of. Your pregnant belly is firmly set in place and it does not move like a water balloon side to side and you're kind of heavy too as your belly is in front of you. I hope this clears things up.


----------



## gelbergirl

Sunshine247365 said:


> What's most annoying about these two at the moment is that it feels like there is just no justice or consequences for their years of appalling behaviour - maybe I'm just being a bit unkind but seeing them there front and centre, TW with her smug face still loving that she's getting attention and being included is pretty grating. I understand we want to honour the Queen and there's a time and place for consequences and tough love for these two but it honestly just feels like they just get away with everything time and time again and still get what they want through tantrums, manipulation, threats and playing the victim to the media. I guess my sense of justice just wants to see them experience even just a fraction of the humiliation and criticism they themselves quite happily inflicted on their families over and over again. People who scheme, plot and manipulate the way TW does doesn't deserve to be anywhere near family functions, especially now, and to see her so involved feels like karma is napping. Most normal people would feel mortified and regretful if face to face with family you have bad-mouthed and hurt. These two just stride in and suddenly she's speaking as 'part of the family'. It's just jarring to see this when considering what she was still saying  less than a week ago. Maybe one day their comeuppance will come. Poor William and Kate, imagine having to sit there and grit your teeth, I have so much admiration for their strength of character that they are able to do this and with so much grace.



KCIII and William and Kate have decided to take the high road,
with a watchful eye.
That's what I see.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> What pic? Please post as I've been pregnant, ahem, quite a few times. I don't see it anywhere.



@Lodpah here you go:

https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-35327091

ETA: sorry I answered before I saw you already found it.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> @Lodpah here you go:
> 
> https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/prince-harry-and-meghan-markle-thread.679793/post-35327091


Danke.


----------



## needlv

gelbergirl said:


> KCIII and William and Kate have decided to take the high road,
> with a watchful eye.
> That's what I see.


I agree.  And during a time of mourning as well.

I think it’s a wait and see what KCIII does later.  But for now, this is about the Queen.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumor is Oprah is coming over. She and MM have been chatting daily, allegedly. Is the BRF handing out _tickets? _to the funeral?  Please do not allow this to be a celebrity spectacle. Nothing about the invisiKids. Anyone know? Anyone?


I very much doubt Oprah is invited to the funeral. With room for only a certain amount of people in the Cathedral and so many other royals, heads of state, politicians, Lords and Ladies etc I very much doubt they’ll be room for celebrities (although what’s the better Tom Cruise and the Beckham’s are there  they seem to be at everything)


----------



## jelliedfeels

prettyprincess said:


> I didn’t say she wasn’t wearing bronzer or has a spray tan. I see no reason why that would even be an issue, but I would love to hear why you think it is.
> 
> The insinuation that she’s solely darkening her skin to appear more black so that she can garner sympathy, is what I find offensive.
> She doesn’t have to do that, bc she IS a woc. It’s who she is.
> 
> A lot of the members here don’t see the comments as problematic, bc they don’t want to


She’s a woman of colour alright…



I will agree with you she’s not doing it just for sympathy…. She lied about being treated badly by her in-laws because she and her unborn children were ‘too dark’ then she turned up painted a different shade than she was several years ago to try and maximise the visual difference and make the family look bad while they are in mourning- so she has malicious intentions as well.

Standing next to family she was ‘too dark’ for several years ago in daylight



Standing in daylight several days ago



If people want to put on bronzer with a shovel that’s one thing but don’t further negative stereotypes that dark skinned people are unwelcome in Britain if you aren’t a dark skinned person.

Unluckily for her fake tan will never look like melanin and most people see right through her.

Add on - many still consider it offensive for a woman of colour to darken her skin so for many she doesn’t just get a pass on that.  Zoe Saldana was criticised for wearing dark makeup to play Nina Simone. i don’t think anyone thought that was a racist or problematic criticism. Really boundless accusations is all M has left at this point. Well that and ill fitting slacks.


----------



## jblended

jelliedfeels said:


> Standing in daylight several days ago


That baby's expression is cracking. me. up! 
(first time I'm seeing that pic)


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> Just wow !
> 
> View attachment 5610065



Don't just not invite her. Don't invite Harry either and then she won't know when stuff is happening

Do not give this woman an INCH


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Very cheap Hwood.



Hollywood does not have the monopoly on looking cheap. 

And with money, same group look cheaper


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

I keep thinking I’d like to know how Beatrice and Eugenie behave towards her. I can imagine Beatrice should be quite scary.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Winterfell5 said:


> Seriously?  I watched the entire Walkabout live and didn’t see any such signs.  On the contrary, I was quite shocked that people in the crowd were very open and receptive to Harry and Meghan.  Given their history and the Royal rift, this really surprised  me.  I didn’t see any negativity toward them, or that they were treated any differently than Kate and William.


I think there are still a lot of British people who still life Harry and place all the blame on her. He would be welcomed with open arms (by most) if he left her. His sins would be forgiven.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Pessie said:


> Whatever opinion you have of Prince Andrew - he put his life at risk in the Falklands war same as everyone else there.  No hiding in tent.
> 
> Probably the first accurate piece of reporting they’ve done
> 
> Challenge them to find it on a map….
> 
> But why should they have to take such measures just because Meghan cannot behave decently?


There were plenty of rumours that Andrew was a useless liability in the military as well but he’s lucky that more time has elapsed. I think it’s always a bad idea personally- this isn’t the Middle Ages and we don’t need them to lead  troops across a field in a charge. They have to sit around the barracks waiting to get a go in a helicopter or another cool job and  they ARE a target, they always require the officers to be extra careful with them because if a royal did die while in service  their regiment would never hear the last of it whereas at least in the olden days no one batted an eyelid if a second son got bumped off on crusade or during battle no 2133 with France. 

Undoubtedly Andrew is hoping the sight of him in uniform doesn’t trigger memories of his tragic loss in the falklands…. of his ability to sweat. 

I’m glad to hear the hacker is English/British - that means they can get an OBE for services to entertainment. 




papertiger said:


> She looks like she's going for a night out on the town to see a drag queen act and knees-up down Blackpool Palais, not mourning the Queen of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth at Buckingham Palace


 I wish she would go to the former- get some tips on how to dress more refined and understated, Make up tips, hair etc etc


bag-mania said:


> Keep Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer​The family knows what they are doing.


I’ve never understood this maxim - sounds like a recipe for getting stabbed in the back or, at best, never moving on from a bad situation 


papertiger said:


> So long as no one did it from Scotland, NI or Wales, that's OK
> 
> Only someone from somewhere else would say 'resides in England' (IMO)
> 
> Sorry, pet peeve.



I’m inclined to be sympathetic with other nations who get English and British confused.
In a big country like the USA you have enormous physical and cultural  distance between Alaskans and Texans but they know they are all Americans. 
It’s a matter of perspective - to put it another way, how many British people can tell the difference between the Flemish and the Walloons off the top of their head?


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

bag-mania said:


> Good Lord, NO!
> 
> Perish the thought! I want to reassure all non-US members that our media views Harry and Meghan as celebrities. The CNN reporter believes the story Harry and Meghan told about leaving because it wasn’t safe… (insert lies told during the Oprah interview) …etc.
> 
> You are never going to see Americans curtsy to Meghan. Well, possibly the most obsessed stans but they would be doing it in a fangirl way, certainly not as a sign of respect.


Im often curious how she’s viewed in US. Is she believed? The Royal Family are evil racists? Or do as many people see through her?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Im often curious how she’s viewed in US. Is she believed? The Royal Family are evil racists? Or do as many people see through her?


39% popularity




__





						Meghan, Duchess of Sussex popularity & fame | YouGov
					

Meghan, Duchess of Sussex is the 1660th most popular all-time person and the 47th most popular public figure. Explore the latest YouGov polling, survey results and articles about Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.




					today.yougov.com
				




Hazzi - 47% popularity





						Prince Harry popularity & fame | YouGov
					

Prince Harry is the 1004th most popular all-time person and the 14th most popular public figure. Explore the latest YouGov polling, survey results and articles about Prince Harry.




					today.yougov.com


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> Don't just not invite her. Don't invite Harry either and then she won't know when stuff is happening
> 
> Do not give this woman an INCH


I genuinely belive the rest of the senior BRF knew the Queen's condition was terminal quite some time ago, and whilst she was much less visible over the last year, nonetheless it was obvious she was in seriously declining health. I think H&M could not be trusted with that knowledge but were extended opportunities to visit of their own volition and it was hoped they would do so.


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C confirms Angela Levine's post about the US Press being informed that the Harkles were planning their own walkabout. The US Press got in touch with the UK Press for further confirmation/details. The Palace was then contacted by the UK Press…
She used to defend Hazz to a certain extent, not anymore…

@RAINDANCE According to lady C, Hazz knew that QE was very sick. However, he had no apparent plans of visiting her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> There were plenty of rumours that Andrew was a useless liability in the military as well but he’s lucky that more time has elapsed. I think it’s always a bad idea personally- this isn’t the Middle Ages and we don’t need them to lead  troops across a field in a charge. They have to sit around the barracks waiting to get a go in a helicopter or another cool job and  they ARE a target, they always require the officers to be extra careful with them because if a royal did die while in service  their regiment would never hear the last of it whereas at least in the olden days no one batted an eyelid if a second son got bumped off on crusade or during battle no 2133 with France.
> 
> Undoubtedly Andrew is hoping the sight of him in uniform doesn’t trigger memories of his tragic loss in the falklands…. of his ability to sweat.
> 
> I’m glad to hear the hacker is English/British - that means they can get an OBE for services to entertainment.
> 
> 
> 
> I wish she would go to the former- get some tips on how to dress more refined and understated, Make up tips, hair etc etc
> 
> I’ve never understood this maxim - sounds like a recipe for getting stabbed in the back or, at best, never moving on from a bad situation
> 
> 
> I’m inclined to be sympathetic with other nations who get English and British confused.
> In a big country like the USA you have enormous physical and cultural  distance between Alaskans and Texans but they know they are all Americans.
> It’s a matter of perspective - to put it another way, how many British people can tell the difference between the Flemish and the Walloons off the top of their head?



I know what you mean, but we are called the United Kingdom for a reason, there are 4 separate kingdoms.

I don't book a ticket to Florida in the US and tell everyone I'm going Texas

Flemish and Walloons (as far I as know) both live in Belgium. I have a house in Scotland but it doesn't make be a Scott (not according to the people in my village anyway).


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Lady C confirms Angela Levine's post about the US Press being informed that the Harkles were planning their own walkabout. The US Press got in touch with the UK Press for further confirmation/details. The Palace was then contacted by the UK Press…
> She used to defend Hazz to a certain extent, not anymore…
> 
> @RAINDANCE According to lady C, Hazz knew that QE was very sick. However, he had no apparent plans of visiting her.




See, they can't let go, they have to be in control.  They cannot let the plans that have been in place for possibly years just unfold. Goodness help if they are not the centre of things and have no footage.


----------



## Chanbal

KellyObsessed said:


> I think the photo is photoshopped.   I can see a woman's face to the right of Meghan in the photo. Does anyone know who it is?


The photo was posted by the Harkles' minister of propaganda, spokesperson, or whatever he is.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Apparently, for the coffin procession MM will be in the car with Camilla, Catherine and Sophie!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Lady C confirms Angela Levine's post about the US Press being informed that the Harkles were planning their own walkabout. The US Press got in touch with the UK Press for further confirmation/details. The Palace was then contacted by the UK Press…
> She used to defend Hazz to a certain extent, not anymore…
> 
> @RAINDANCE According to lady C, Hazz knew that QE was very sick. However, he had no apparent plans of visiting her.




These two are the lowest of the low. I still stand by saying she is the evil monster, but now is the time to ask for your ***** back, Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s a matter of perspective - to put it another way, how many British people can tell the difference between the Flemish and the Walloons off the top of their head?



Both make great waffles.

Just kidding, the Flemishs' mother tongue is, uh, Flemish (Belgian Dutch), the Walloons' is French, and they originally inhabit different parts of Belgium.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I suppose its some consolation that she be facing backwards


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Apparently, for the coffin procession MM will be in the car with Camilla, Catherine and Sophie!



I understand the why, but she so doesn't deserve to be there.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I understand the why, but she so doesn't deserve to be there.


We can just live in the knowledge that that is going to be the most uncomfortable, slow and painful car journey ever!!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sharont2305 said:


> @EverSoElusive This is brilliant, straight and to the point.
> This should be a pinned post at the start of the thread so that anyone who is new can be directed to it when they ask why we hate Meghan.


Thank you  I've seen us getting called racist many times and I just had to respond for once. We're judged based on the latest comments that some may read and they simply do not get the full picture of the Despicable Duo, as well as us as a community within this thread.




andrashik said:


> Very well written  bravo!
> As all sugars are, I am afraid this user won't even read all of it and just shrug it off and even so, all of you ladies have explained again and again why we don't like her and all the proofs with her antics are laid here in this thread, pages and pages of it.
> There is also a thread for the sugars so the best option is for all of them to moan and cry there. I have noticed that none of us go there and accuse and insult them so kindly do the same here.


Thank you  You're right, it's very unlikely that they will read my comment and/or might just shrug it off. It's long but that's the shortest fairytale turned tragedy summary that I can provide to them.

I've been to the other thread. I don't agree with what's posted but I don't go there to call people names. I just stay out of that thread. That's something that a lot of people should learn, in order to keep this a pleasant place for all to participate in while keeping one's own sanity. 




Mumotons said:


> Just wow !
> 
> View attachment 5610065


If this allegation is true, this will be one of the many disgusting things that they did to make me continue to wonder why some people still choose to support them. Do people not possess logic anymore? What exactly does Scoobie Doo get from being their unofficial mouthpiece that he's such a hardcore fanboy even at this time while The Queen is being mourned?




andrashik said:


> View attachment 5610068
> 
> I don't think this is true, but knowing Claw..I am not surprised anymore





pukasonqo said:


> How would you prove is discrimination? It is her will and she can do as she wishes w her possessions
> Would be interesting if they chose to contest the will based of perceived discrimination
> I am a POC (like many here, in my case an interesting mix of many races) and always identified as such, for me is the actions that speak of the true character of a person and not their skin colour
> They might as well say that the children were discriminated against because they are ginger headed


This brings back memory of an unnecessary and unexpected conversation that I had with my late grandmother on her deathbed. While she was alive but already very close to dying (cancer!), my uncles and aunts were fighting over my grandmother's assets. I think somewhere along the way, they must have individually pestered her asking for a certain things to go to them. Then one day when I was just keeping her company and having a conversation, my grandmother teared up and apologized saying that she didn't have much for me. I told her I wasn't there for her property. I told her when I get older and start working, I can get these things myself. 

Even at that young age, I understood that someone's will is their final wishes. They can choose what to do with what's theirs and it should be left it at that. Is it that hard to comprehend? Why act like vultures?

Anyways, when her will was finally read after my grandmother passed, the large bulk of her assets went to my uncles (in my culture, the males are favored), my mom got some china and jewelries, my siblings and I received nothing and that's fine. What's important to me is that I got to spend her final days with her  Till this day, I'm still a firm believer of working for things myself and do not expect for things to be handed to me.




gelbergirl said:


> Excellent summary.
> I remember the start of this thread and the early times.
> In the early days, a friend and I talked about how perfect MM was for Harry.
> She was someone with charitable experience and someone from outside the social circle.
> I suppose this is how she positioned herself.
> Well, let's get back to the thread.


Thank you  Having read the book, we now know that plenty of things were made up by her and her camp just to recreate her image to seem more wholesome and as though she has a lot in common with The Spare to hook him. But yes, before I know better, I was rooting for them too.




Lodpah said:


> I've been pregnant quite a few times. Your stomach does not slosh around like that, plus you waddle, sort of. Your pregnant belly is firmly set in place and it does not move like a water balloon side to side and you're kind of heavy too as your belly is in front of you. I hope this clears things up.


This is very helpful because I've never been pregnant though I've been around many pregnant women but still wanted to make sure that I wasn't crazy to assume that's something that cannot possibly happen


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ali-bagpuss said:


> We can just live in the knowledge that that is going to be the most uncomfortable, slow and painful car journey ever!!



I'm not so convinced only because she completely lacks any selfconciousness. She won't sit there feeling bad for her behaviour one single minute.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not so convinced only because she completely lacks any selfconciousness. She won't sit there feel bad for her behaviour one single minute.


No she won’t feel bad about her behaviour but she can’t fail to feel the tension towards her I’m sure.


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> I suppose its some consolation that she be facing backwards


I’m thinking they will take 2 cars - by rank.   Cam&Kate in 1, Soph&MM in the other.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's wrong with Piers, feeling sentimental suddenly?
> 
> I don't have super strong feelings either way (I did however have strong feelings that at Philip's funeral those eligible had to give up the uniforms for the troublemakers), but if he's not eligible he's not eligible.


Apparently the Queen requested that Andrew wear his uniforn.  She had 2+ years to request that Harry wear his but didn’t.  That says a lot


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I understand the why, but she so doesn't deserve to be there.


If she’d had any sense at all of the magnitude of the occasion she’d’ve paid her respects to the family and gone back to Lala land to “shield” the kids.  But I think she thought she could spin this into good publicity for herself and her brand profile in the US.  I also think she’s scared of Harry being deprogrammed if left alone with the relatives for any length of time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m thinking they will take 2 cars - by rank.   Cam&Kate in 1, Soph&MM in the other.



Poor Sophie taking one for the team.


----------



## Chanbal

jblended said:


> I understand why you took offence to the word "whore". It is crass, and even when used humorously, it is problematic. I can see how a lot of people would be upset by it, even if the OP didn't intend for that.
> 
> However, I cannot wrap my head around your argument that Meg is not intentionally manipulating her skin colour somehow. I am a mixed-race English woman, and I happen to be the same colour as Meg- her actual colour; i.e. I am white-passing. To see her two entirely different shades as in the pictures posted, merely days apart, confuses the life out of me. I would have to tan all summer to get that much darker. Spray tan also makes little sense as it wouldn't fade so fast. How and why is Meg's skin a different tone merely days apart? It's not an act of racism to notice that this doesn't happen naturally!
> 
> Perhaps her makeup artist is heavy-handed sometimes. I think that's the only reasonable explanation I can come to. However, given the very delicate subject of race relations, I think Meg should have a word with her make up team to make sure this isn't a continued pattern. *Her shifting skin tone is offensive and problematic in its own way.*


Thank you for your great post. I ignored the comments of a 'fake tan' for quite some time, but it's impossible not noticing the drastic difference on her appearance in just a couple of days. The method she uses is irrelevant, but I agree with you that "_her shifting skin tone" _can be_ "offensive and problematic in its own way_". To me, it seems opportunistic as everything the Harkles do.

According to Morgan Freeman "_one of the reasons racism persists in America is that people talk too much about it_," or see racism everywhere imo. Some of us are tall, short, fat, slim, pretty, less pretty …, have blue eyes, brown eyes… and we all belong to the beautiful human race. 





__





						Loading…
					





					www.gwcommonwealth.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Apparently the Queen requested that Andrew wear his uniforn.  She had 2+ years to request that Harry wear his but didn’t.  That says a lot



I don't even think it's some kind of hostility. While he prides himself in being oh so close to her he's just one of eight grandchildren, incidentally not the heir.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m thinking they will take 2 cars - by rank.   Cam&Kate in 1, Soph&MM in the other.


The BBC said 1 car


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor Sophie taking one for the team.


I hope we get a lot of pictures of her icy looks along the way!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I think there are still a lot of British people who still life Harry and place all the blame on her. He would be welcomed with open arms (by most) if he left her. His sins would be forgiven.


Forgiven, maybe a small chance. If it was me, his sins will not be forgiven nor forgotten 




Ali-bagpuss said:


> Im often curious how she’s viewed in US. Is she believed? The Royal Family are evil racists? Or do as many people see through her?


Z-list and Co. still have fans here. The same people also believe her allegations about the BRF being racist. However, public perspective towards them have largely changed in the recent months. More people are now seeing their lies and calling them out.

I'm glad to be part of this thread because the information come from many different sources, which allows me to form better opinions.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even think it's some kind of hostility. While he prides himself in being oh so close to her he's just one of eight grandchildren, incidentally not the heir.


And one that chose to ‘step back’ from royal duties. He may have served but essentially he was just a low level soldier, it was his royal status that made him anything more. He can’t just pick and choose which titles he keeps.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ali-bagpuss said:


> The BBC said 1 car


Well, well, that ruins my theory.  Cam and MM in the same car?  This should be very interesting.

ETA: Cam & MM on the world stage?  Wow.


----------



## mia55

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


 I’m a WOC too and I agree with each and every word you said. I hope they post this message on every page so people can know how this thread shaped up. Kudos to you!!!!


----------



## Pessie

EverSoElusive said:


> However, public perspective towards them have largely changed in the recent months. More people are now seeing their lies and calling them out.


You’re right, but a bigger problem Harry and Meg have is people getting bored with hearing them and switching off to the misery moaning.  I think a big reason she’s still here is that the Queens funeral is of huge international interest.


----------



## MiniMabel

Chanbal said:


> A picture paints a thousand words…




I very much like to think that Catherine is wearing Queen Elizabeth's pearls, the same necklace that QEII is wearing in the adjoining photo.


----------



## mia55

CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like another shameful day for the American media. Is this more of Opr’s work? TylerP?
> E news is not a respected organization.  They are info-tainment fluff at its worst.  No one [ok, few people] watches.
> Isn’t The Cut part of the NYT corporation?  Not surprising they would make accusations.  Many twitter people were adding the extra letter to that title on the first day it appeared. So, old news?
> We know H&M lie, so LA sources can say what they want. They can also be wrong.
> 
> This tells me H&M are not getting anything they wanted, so she is fuming.
> Also, H&M will stop at nothing to disrupt The Queen’s funeral.  I do hope the whole world sees them for the losers they are.
> 
> ETA: maybe this is as they were leaving.




I hope the BRF asked for NDA from these two and the pissed expression is due to that. I girl can hope


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, well, that ruins my theory.  Cam and MM in the same car?  This should be very interesting.
> 
> ETA: Cam & MM on the world stage?  Wow.


All will soon be revealed. The guards are starting their March down to start the proceedings


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> According to Morgan Freeman "_*one of the reasons racism persists in America is that people talk too much about it*_*," or see racism everywhere* imo. Some of us are tall, short, fat, slim, pretty, less pretty …, have blue eyes, brown eyes… and we all belong to the beautiful human race.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gwcommonwealth.com


This is exactly how I feel ever since I moved to the US. Everything is turned into a race thing. It's exhausting and it's also what keeps America divided. I think some Americans feel if they don't put the race sticker on things then they feel like they are betraying their people or not supporting them. 

I'm tired of seeing things like [fill in the blank]-owned. Why does it matter? I'll support a business because it's a good business or I like what they offer. It's not because it's owned by a certain race or gender or whatever else that comes to mind.


----------



## EverSoElusive

mia55 said:


> I’m a WOC too and I agree with each and every word you said. I hope they post this message on every page so people can know how this thread shaped up. Kudos to you!!!!


Thank you  People who are not familiar with this thread definitely need a crash course 




Pessie said:


> You’re right, but a bigger problem Harry and Meg have is people getting bored with hearing them and switching off to the misery moaning.  I think a big reason she’s still here is that the Queens funeral is of huge international interest.


Also, it if wasn't for The Queen's love and kindness, they would have been long gone and not been allowed to be present in BRF events. The Queen certainly tried to repair the relationship between Charles, William and Harry before she passed but Harry and TW did not appreciate any of that. They are now so deep in the hole and with William being in charge of the Duchy, they will go bye bye if William cuts them off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## andrashik

Claw's pet, Scoobie deleted the photo with those two grifters with KCIII


----------



## periogirl28

andrashik said:


> Claw's pet, Scoobie deleted the photo with those two grifters with KCIII


I want a "one eyebrow raised" emoji here. By Sean Connery.


----------



## kipp

andrashik said:


> Claw's pet, Scoobie deleted the photo with those two grifters with KCIII



He and the claw already got what they wanted from that.  Too late…


----------



## Helventara

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


I do not invite senseless arguments or name calling but I do hope @prettyprincess or any other posters who disagree to come back and take the time to have an open dialogue to this very well written post.

Obviously I understand if folks do not want to engage. I just feel it’s a pity that invitation to an open discourse is met with disappearing acts followed by occasional accusations that we are racists/hate ZZ, etc.

Keeping on our own lanes instead of talking and trying to understand is also another way to deepen the misunderstanding.  IMO, of course.

ETA:  I am another WOC who feels at home and not at all offended  in this thread.
ET2: PIN this post on top of our thread, PLEASE .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It's just a fan account, but quite telling who was left out


----------



## jblended

Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.

She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.
It all feels very unfair.
If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.

I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor Sophie taking one for the team.


I would say poor Meg


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
> Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.
> 
> She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.
> It all feels very unfair.
> If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.
> 
> I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.



I agree with everything you said.


----------



## Pessie

jblended said:


> Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
> Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.
> 
> She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.
> It all feels very unfair.
> If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.
> 
> I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.


You put it very well.  The only thing I’d add is that MM didn’t just fail to appreciate British and BRF history and traditions, she despised it all.  It’s been obvious from the beginning that she went out of her way to kick against it.  I think she took pleasure in doing so.  And we’ve all seen how she treats her husband at public events.


----------



## Sharont2305

If she is in a car with three other people, that's good as there will be three witnesses to any nonsense she may leak.


----------



## Helventara

jblended said:


> Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
> Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.
> 
> *She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.*
> It all feels very unfair.
> If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.
> 
> I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.


This!  In fact, her WHOLE royal life to me is unfair. She’s been given a chance to be part of the [insert your superlative] family in the world and thrashed it.
I told my husband, if I were her, I would not be seen in public ever again as I would occupy myself learning about each castle,  historical site, painting, jewel (as far as I am allowed) or whatever. It would be such a privilege and honour.


----------



## marietouchet

bubablu said:


> I would say poor Meg
> 
> View attachment 5610137


It looks like Sophie has a fake tan … well, she does not do that so I am pretty sure that sitting behind the tinted window gives you a fake tan


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> If she is in a car with three other people, that's good as there will be three witnesses to any nonsense she may leak.



But none of them will speak out, so she'll feel safe.


----------



## LittleStar88

jblended said:


> Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
> Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.
> 
> She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.
> It all feels very unfair.
> If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.
> 
> I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.



I agree 100%. I really feel she should be shut out completely. But the family is being “the bigger person” by allowing her to be there and not justifying anything she has said. At the end of the day she just looks like a giant a$$hole.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But none of them will speak out, so she'll feel safe.


But *they'll* know, and I'm fine with that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

The Tower of London has room for 2


----------



## charro

jblended said:


> I understand why you took offence to the word "whore". It is crass, and even when used humorously, it is problematic. I can see how a lot of people would be upset by it, even if the OP didn't intend for that.
> 
> However, I cannot wrap my head around your argument that Meg is not intentionally manipulating her skin colour somehow. I am a mixed-race English woman, and I happen to be the same colour as Meg- her actual colour; i.e. I am white-passing. To see her two entirely different shades as in the pictures posted, merely days apart, confuses the life out of me. I would have to tan all summer to get that much darker. Spray tan also makes little sense as it wouldn't fade so fast. How and why is Meg's skin a different tone merely days apart? It's not an act of racism to notice that this doesn't happen naturally!
> 
> Perhaps her makeup artist is heavy-handed sometimes. I think that's the only reasonable explanation I can come to. However, given the very delicate subject of race relations, I think Meg should have a word with her make up team to make sure this isn't a continued pattern. Her shifting skin tone is offensive and problematic in its own way.


The makeup artist  is not at fault for her shifting skin tones. The colr variations are a result of her direct orders. If she thought she looked too light or dark she would have them correct it.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, well, that ruins my theory.  Cam and MM in the same car?  This should be very interesting.
> 
> ETA: Cam & MM on the world stage?  Wow.


Looks like separate cars


----------



## Jayne1

missfiggy said:


> His hand in his pocket - always and everywhere. Even including during his address to the Parliament.  I hate it - it looks insecure and foppish.


I like it.  He looks calm and in control.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

I think he’ll be regretting that he can’t wear military uniform here


----------



## Sharont2305

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Looks like separate cars


I know, poor Sophie.


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5610068
> 
> I don't think this is true, but knowing Claw..I am not surprised anymore


100% the reason why they're sticking around for the funeral.  They want to know what they got.  WTF is TW "to be satisfied" or not??  It's not her family.  Just because you married into it doesn't mean you have any right to negotiate.  When my FIL died and MIL decided to downsize her home and dispersed many of her valuable things, DH, his brother and sister were involved in deciding who gets what.  DH asked me what I might like, but I had no right to "demand" anything.  I've never trashed my in laws either.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Don't just not invite her. Don't invite Harry either and then she won't know when stuff is happening
> 
> Do not give this woman an INCH


Yep.  If she really arranged that picture, they need to be iced out.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> 100% the reason why they're sticking around for the funeral.  They want to know what they got.  WTF is TW "to be satisfied" or not??  It's not her family.  Just because you married into it doesn't mean you have any right to negotiate.  When my FIL died and MIL decided to downsize her home and dispersed many of her valuable things, DH, his brother and sister were involved in deciding who gets what.  DH asked me what I might like, but I had no right to "demand" anything.  I've never trashed my in laws either.


Well, and H had already "lost" his father, so she should be ghosting the entire BRF by now

Hmmm, by all going in same car, H&M will get better seats - maybe not second row, shucks


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Sharont2305 said:


> I know, poor Sophie.


Maybe she has the heel of her shoe dig into M’s foot!


----------



## Jayne1

tjovanity said:


> I heard it was due to some security issues. A tabloid found one of the locations of their camp and published them. Harry decided to step away from duty after that.


Well, Harry was always protected when it came to actual combat or any danger, wasn't he.  His fellow servicemen said that. He'd be whisked away.  H doesn't know what real life is.


----------



## bubablu

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Looks like separate cars


Camilla and Kate in the first one, as far as I saw.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Must have been hard for Harry not to salute to the Cenotaph like the other ‘military royals’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> 100% the reason why they're sticking around for the funeral.  They want to know what they got.  WTF is TW "to be satisfied" or not??  It's not her family.  Just because you married into it doesn't mean you have any right to negotiate.  When my FIL died and MIL decided to downsize her home and dispersed many of her valuable things, DH, his brother and sister were involved in deciding who gets what.  DH asked me what I might like, but I had no right to "demand" anything.  I've never trashed my in laws either.



But I wouldn't count on the will being opened the day after the funeral. Those things take time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

bubablu said:


> Camilla and Kate in the first one, as far as I saw.


Yeah Sophie and Meghan behind


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610171




That effing smug face.


----------



## zinacef

Ali-bagpuss said:


> The BBC said 1 car


Like who’s driving? they can’t  have TW driving or else they sure will be accused of something, just as how much of consideration they have to give her everytime they have to do something. shes gonna have hives head to toe after this car ride, she forgot that she has to be in the same car, in the same house , in the same family—— at least forever —- for now.


----------



## TimeToShop

Watching Anne in her uniform marching with her brothers, what a bad azz woman.


----------



## piperdog

Poor Sophie. She really is a trooper. 

I also realized why Meghan's full face of makeup last night seemed off. For most of the week, the royal ladies' makeup has been light and understated, which is not only tasteful, but also practical. When you expect to be crying over the loss of a loved one, it makes sense to minimize eye makeup. For my own parents' funerals and related events, I chose not to wear any at all because I knew I'd be crying and didn't want to deal with a mess of a face or risk messing up others' clothes during embraces. 

Megan's heavily madeup face last night was one of a woman who wouldn't be shedding a single tear. I suppose that's her business, but that's why (IMO) it looked especially jarring considering the event they were attending.


----------



## Sophisticatted

They have TW in the best possible place.  Sophie can control her far better than H.  The will be no opening of windows this time!


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## Sharont2305

This must be the first time they've stood next to each other in public without her clawing him


----------



## TimeToShop

The service at Westminster is lovely. The choir is making me well up. It’s early morning here in the US - too early to be crying off my mascara.

There are minimal shots of TW but she has a smug bored look. Probably the lighting but she is still orange, just not as deep.

I don’t see how the rest of the family is keeping it together. They’ve been through so much this past week. They must be exhausted.


----------



## Jayne1

Ali-bagpuss said:


> We can just live in the knowledge that that is going to be the most uncomfortable, slow and painful car journey ever!!


She might just like it.  She's a victim, you know - she can use this later.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Haven’t seen the video, but in the photos and short video of Catherine above, TW looks angry and petulant.  It looks likes she’s agitatedly fiddling with something in her hands in the video.  I imagine she’s being managed and controlled beyond her tolerable limits and a huge narcissistic rage fit will happen as soon as she feels she is able to unleash.


----------



## Sharont2305

Holding hands now, disgraceful.
Loose coat, "Let's start pregnancy rumours"


----------



## sdkitty

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Apparently, for the coffin procession MM will be in the car with Camilla, Catherine and Sophie!


eww...awkward


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Holing hands now, disgraceful.



Please say you are joking. WTFFFFF.


----------



## WingNut

Helventara said:


> I do not invite senseless arguments or name calling but I do hope @prettyprincess or any other posters who disagree to come back and take the time to have an open dialogue to this very well written post.
> 
> Obviously I understand if folks do not want to engage. I just feel it’s a pity that invitation to an open discourse is met with disappearing acts followed by occasional accusations that we are racists/hate ZZ, etc.
> 
> Keeping on our own lanes instead of talking and trying to understand is also another way to deepen the misunderstanding.  IMO, of course.
> 
> ETA:  I am another WOC who feels at home and not at all offended  in this thread.
> ET2: PIN this post on top of our thread, PLEASE .


ITA. Following this thread has been educational and inspiring in so many ways. As a non-POC (let's call me WAF), it's mind-blowing to be called racist just for discussing a skin color or heritage as a matter of fact when it is not intended in any way as discrimination*, because I was brought up with differences being genetic attributes, not that one was better/worse than the other. I was bussed to a de-segregated school in another state when I was 7. I didn't understand de-segregation, because I didn't understand why someone would segregate people...I didn't understand why the difference in skin color mattered. 

*This is in no way to imply that discrimination or racism does not exist, but that calling everything "racism" as an *excuse* dilutes the true meaning and awful effect of it, and undermines those who have suffered as a result.  From everything I have seen and read, TW has not suffered as a result. She seeks to make it an issue and capitalize on it. THAT is the real problem I have with her.

My dream: The ultimate education would be if TW could read these posts, and do some serious introspection. Unfortunately, it is the nature of a narcissist to not recognize and accept a shortcoming, nor be inspired to better oneself as a result.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Sharont2305 said:


> This must be the first time they've stood next to each other in public without her clawing him


Although I saw stepping out of the hall they were holding hands unlike any other royal couple


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Sharont2305 said:


> Holding hands now, disgraceful.
> Loose coat, "Let's start pregnancy rumours"


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## egak

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please say you are joking. WTFFFFF.



I said out loud to myself are you kidding me! Not appropriate.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Holding hands now, disgraceful.
> Loose coat, "Let's start pregnancy rumours"


The first thing I noticed as they were leaving Westminster Hall. Truly DISGRACEFUL!!!


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

duna said:


> The first thing I noticed as they were leaving Westminster Hall. Truly DISGRACEFUL!!!


Upset he may be but wait until you’re in the car like every other person. No respect for protocol


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please say you are joking. WTFFFFF.


After she'd done a passable curtsey, yes


----------



## AbbytheBT

andrashik said:


> Ladies, have you heard of this?
> View attachment 5610069
> 
> Apparently the "hacker" is from England
> 
> View attachment 5610070


Does anyone else feel like this “isource news” is part of a H&M misinformation campaign? Very sophisticated.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sophisticatted said:


> Haven’t seen the video, but in the photos and short video of Catherine above, TW looks angry and petulant.  It looks likes she’s agitatedly fiddling with something in her hands in the video.  I imagine she’s being managed and controlled beyond her tolerable limits and a huge narcissistic rage fit will happen as soon as she feels she is able to unleash.


She looks like she is smirking - just leave go home and stay there and dont ever come back


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Upset he may be but wait until you’re in the car like every other person. No respect for protocol



I don't care. He is not 12. In fact, at 12 he was able to walk on his own.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> She looks like she is smirking - just leave go home and stay there and dont ever come back



I didn't want to say it because I thought maybe I was being extra sensitive, but I thought so as well.


----------



## MiniMabel

Cosmopolitan said:


>



I want to give her a big hug.


----------



## Pessie

They said in the commentary that some of those guardsmen were in Iraq till Friday.  They’ve been rehearsing during the night, and still everything today is immaculate and every uniform is perfect.  
And then there’s Meghan - who can’t for just one single second stop and behave in a solemn manner appropriate to the occasion.


----------



## pomeline

What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.


----------



## momtok

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.





jblended said:


> I understand why you took offence to the word "whore". It is crass, and even when used humorously, it is problematic. I can see how a lot of people would be upset by it, even if the OP didn't intend for that.
> 
> However, I cannot wrap my head around your argument that Meg is not intentionally manipulating her skin colour somehow. I am a mixed-race English woman, and I happen to be the same colour as Meg- her actual colour; i.e. I am white-passing. To see her two entirely different shades as in the pictures posted, merely days apart, confuses the life out of me. I would have to tan all summer to get that much darker. Spray tan also makes little sense as it wouldn't fade so fast. How and why is Meg's skin a different tone merely days apart? It's not an act of racism to notice that this doesn't happen naturally!
> 
> Perhaps her makeup artist is heavy-handed sometimes. I think that's the only reasonable explanation I can come to. However, given the very delicate subject of race relations, I think Meg should have a word with her make up team to make sure this isn't a continued pattern. Her shifting skin tone is offensive and problematic in its own way.



Oh my.  I saw that while crawling into bed last night.  May I add one tiny addendum regarding the use of the word "whore"?  If it's misogynistic to call a **setting on a make-up gun** (or a make-up amount/style) "whore," then what about if you call an actual woman -- a woman *directly* -- a whore?  Isn't that even more misogynistic?  That's exactly what that poster did herself some years back though.  .... "Evelyn is a whore!!" ... It's in a thread about basketball wives, and is a ridiculously easy search using the search box just above.  I mean, I don't like the word either (particularly when thrown at an *actual* woman), and don't usually argue about misogynism, but that does seem pretty hypocritical.

Sorry, I know I'm late.  Back to scheduled program.  Will have my Sky News streaming in a minute.
(Mom of a proud WOC too.)   (And yes, I do have a screencap if the old post disappears.)


----------



## Swanky

Sharont2305 said:


> @EverSoElusive This is brilliant, straight and to the point.
> This should be a pinned post at the start of the thread so that anyone who is new can be directed to it when they ask why we hate Meghan.



Actually, EVERYONE is welcome in this thread and not one opinion represents this thread or the forum.  This is not an anti-Meghan and Harry thread.  EVERYONE needs to get back to just discussing them and not members.  The drama has to stop or we're closing the thread, it's ridiculous tbh....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor Sophie taking one for the team.


I'll bet there was an icy silence in the car. 

I just watched the procession, it was very moving. I always hold my breath when honor guards have to move a coffin. Job well done. 

Shocker, MM was dressed appropriately for a change, but then they had to hold hands leaving the hall.


----------



## MiniMabel

pomeline said:


> What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.


There is not an ounce of sorrow on MM's face. Just superciliousness.

By acute contrast, you can see from the grief on their faces that Catherine and Peter Phillips are devastated beyond words.


----------



## Blyen

Meghan's coat looks very similar to the one she had at Eugenie's wedding.
While she is dressed appropriately,her smug/bored expression is abhorrent, especially given the function she was attending.
Such a stark contrast with the facial expressions of the family.


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m thinking they will take 2 cars - by rank.   Cam&Kate in 1, Soph&MM in the other.


Poor Sophie drew the short straw!  I bet the atmosphere in that car was icy cold.


----------



## MiniMabel

Where is the clip of The Harkles holding hands?  Please can someone post it?  I'm looking through but have missed that one.  Thank you!


----------



## Sharont2305

pomeline said:


> What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.


A tale of two granddaughters in law, one is genuinely devastated and the other, well, is this how I'm supposed to look?


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> They have TW in the best possible place.  Sophie can control her far better than H.  The will be no opening of windows this time!


The driver probably had the child lock on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Swanky said:


> Actually, EVERYONE is welcome in this thread.  This is not an anti-Meghan and Harry thread.  EVERYONE needs to get back to just discussing them and not members.  The drama has to stop or we're closing the thread, it's ridiculous tbh....



I feel this is slightly unfair. You have not seen us being unkind to people who simply have a differing opinion, you have seen us react to people coming here and calling us all kinds of names and unflattering attributes. I don't think we need to sit back and hold out the other cheek. 

I may also add there is a Harry & Meghan appreciation thread and you don't see us going there just to stir the pot.


----------



## CobaltBlu

MiniMabel said:


> Where is the clip of The Harkles holding hands?  Please can someone post it?  I'm looking through but have missed that one.  Thank you!


----------



## Sharont2305

MiniMabel said:


> Where is the clip of The Harkles holding hands?  Please can someone post it?  I'm looking through but have missed that one.  Thank you!


I watched it live on TV, there hasn't been a clip on here.
ETA, posted this as @CobaltBlu posted above.


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> She looks like she is smirking - just leave go home and stay there and dont ever come back


I'm sure she is pissed at having to look at Catherine's back.

ETA: But simultaneously pleased that she is in front of Peter Phillips, who iced her out at the PJ church service.


----------



## Sterntalerli

Toby93 said:


> They used the clip where her "bump" is swaying back and forth



I don’t get it what was with her belly? I see that I looks weird but what exactly was the reason it was swaying? 

Thanks for helping out


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## Swanky

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I feel this is slightly unfair. You have not seen us being unkind to people who simply have a differing opinion, you have seen us react to people coming here and calling us all kinds of names and unflattering attributes. I don't think we need to sit back and hold out the other cheek.
> 
> I may also add there is a Harry & Meghan appreciation thread and you don't see us going there just to stir the pot.



I see both sides, I'm completely unbiased as I don't give a rat's arse about these 2.  
This thread needs to stay on topic, like them or hate them, *no one* should be discussing other members and I highly recommend the Ignore User function. 

Back to topic about Harry and Meghan please.  Drama, off topic, etc. . . will continue to be removed, hopefully it stops instead so no one is banned and the thread remains open.


----------



## carmen56

Sharont2305 said:


> This must be the first time they've stood next to each other in public without her clawing him


They were holding hands on the way out of the Hall.  Inappropriate, IMO.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


>




This makes me so angry. In this case - news for me! - I am solely blaming Harry.


----------



## carmen56

TimeToShop said:


> The service at Westminster is lovely. The choir is making me well up. It’s early morning here in the US - too early to be crying off my mascara.
> 
> There are minimal shots of TW but she has a smug bored look. Probably the lighting but she is still orange, just not as deep.
> 
> I don’t see how the rest of the family is keeping it together. They’ve been through so much this past week. They must be exhausted.


I cried too.  I wondered if Raptor felt ashamed by her actions against the RF, my husband said he doubted it!


----------



## WingNut

carmen56 said:


> They were holding hands on the way out of the Hall.  Inappropriate, IMO.


The hand-holding is their "schtick". "Look at how in-love, supportive, nauseatingly hands-on we are! Eat it, haters!".


----------



## Sterntalerli

CobaltBlu said:


>



New theory: she can’t walk in those heels and needs someone to hold onto  could be the reason why I would reach out.


----------



## charlottawill

Sterntalerli said:


> what exactly was the reason it was swaying?


That's what we'd all like to know. Anyone who has been pregnant knows your belly is rock hard in late stage and doesn't sway like that. And in the end you may see baby parts poking out here and there, but not swaying side to side.


----------



## Sterntalerli

charlottawill said:


> That's what we'd all like to know. Anyone who has been pregnant knows your belly is rock hard in late stage and doesn't sway like that. And in the end you may see baby parts poking out here and there, but not swaying side to side.


Ok. Thanks for clarifying. Never been pregnant 

So the assumption would be a surrogate?


----------



## bag-mania

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Im often curious how she’s viewed in US. Is she believed? The Royal Family are evil racists? Or do as many people see through her?


She is viewed as a celebrity. Most have heard of her but they aren’t actively following what she and Harry are doing. She has a small core of fans/supporters as she does here on the forum. There are also many who see through her, like us.


----------



## charlottawill

Sterntalerli said:


> Ok. Thanks for clarifying. Never been pregnant
> 
> So the assumption would be a surrogate?


It's long been rumored.


----------



## marietouchet

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610171



Yeah, MM got the memo From Angela Kelly, pearls and hair in a neat bun, no tendrils


----------



## youngster

Wow, Meghan has gone overboard with the fillers.  Her face is practically round.  It's much more noticeable when her hair is pulled back and up.


----------



## WingNut

marietouchet said:


> Yeah, MM got the memo From Angela Kelly, pearls and hair in a neat bun, no tendrils


She looks appropriate, from a style perspective.


----------



## DoggieBags

Ali-bagpuss said:


> Im often curious how she’s viewed in US. Is she believed? The Royal Family are evil racists? Or do as many people see through her?


I have no idea how she is viewed by the public at large but my friends all laugh when I mention nuggets of info from this thread. They have zero interest in H&M so the only time they hear about them is when I mention them. They don’t understand why I pay any attention to the awful duo and tbh if not for this thread I would have ignored them as well since I pretty much ignore influencers, most celebrities, reality tv shows and the like. None of this stuff impacts any of the stuff that really matters to me.


----------



## sdkitty

carmen56 said:


> I cried too.  I wondered if Raptor felt ashamed by her actions against the RF, my husband said he doubted it!


she has a helluva nerve being there IMO.  but I'm sure her husband wants here there so....


bag-mania said:


> She is viewed as a celebrity. Most have heard of her but they aren’t actively following what she and Harry are doing. She has a small core of fans/supporters as she does here on the forum. There are also those who see through her, like us.


that's pretty accurate as far as I can tell.....I don't usually talk to people outside the PF about her but I think people know who she is and most don't go beyond that.....I did talk to a Scottish woman who has lived in the US for years and years.  she said she doesn't like Meghan but admits she is beautiful (in her opinion, not mine)
The subject only came up do to the death of TQ


----------



## WingNut

youngster said:


> Wow, Meghan has gone overboard with the fillers.  Her face is practically round.  It's much more noticeable when her hair is pulled back and up.


Or.....she's been crying (because she got TOLD), or she's pregnant.

ETA: ....or she's been drinking a lot....


----------



## elvisfan4life

Sharont2305 said:


> A tale of two granddaughters in law, one is genuinely devastated and the other, well, is this how I'm supposed to look?


For an actress she can’t even act sorrowful a smug smirk is the best she can manage Hollywood isn’t going to be calling any time soon


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

MiniMabel said:


> There is not an ounce of sorrow on MM's face. Just superciliousness.
> 
> By acute contrast, you can see from the grief on their faces that Catherine and Peter Phillips are devastated beyond words.


Perfectly said. I was watching live and thinking what a stark contrast there is between their faces. One is utterly devastated, the other is smirking!

Also, for a woman who wanted to modernize the monarchy and fly the flag of feminism- did she not realize HMQ and the Princess Royal had been there, done that? This week has been a mere taster of what these exemplary women have done in the name of duty and service.

Also, I sobbed throughout. I just couldn't have imagined how much this would hurt me. Seeing the grief etched into the family's faces was too much to bear.


----------



## Cosmopolitan




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sterntalerli said:


> New theory: she can’t walk in those heels and needs someone to hold onto  could be the reason why I would reach out.



That's actually a narrative I've often seem from people more on her side. The thing is...a) she was able to walk in heels pre Harry just fine b) she is still able to walk in heels just fine when he isn't around and c) she could also choose to wear practical shoes like Camilla


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> A tale of two granddaughters in law, one is genuinely devastated and the other, well, is this how I'm supposed to look?


Once a Z list actress, always a Z list actress. Having no soul inside her to draw from, she is incapable of experiencing genuine emotion, and the fall back of trying to act that she has, fails.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yeah, MM got the memo From Angela Kelly, pearls and hair in a neat bun, no tendrils



Now that you say it!


----------



## elvisfan4life

She has been smartened up someone else must have done her hair


----------



## WingNut

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610249
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610251



That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


Oh gosh I really hope so


----------



## TimeToShop

WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.



I hope it is. He’ll have lots of time to reflect when he’s back in CA. I could see him going on a downward spiral - realizing the hurt he caused and the time he missed with her. I’m sure he’ll also miss the status and attention he’s had this past week.


----------



## periogirl28

DH (he who went to a State Dinner) who has lived almost half his life in England and knows his etiquette, just asked me, "Why are they holding hands?". I said they are always thus.


----------



## Sharont2305

WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


Let's hope so.


----------



## Pessie

TimeToShop said:


> I hope it is. He’ll have lots of time to reflect when he’s back in CA. I could see him going on a downward spiral - realizing the hurt he caused and the time he missed with her. I’m sure he’ll also miss the status and attention he’s had this past week.


I’ve been thinking something similar - he’ll be back to staring at 4 walls in Montecito.  I mean what does he do with his time there?


----------



## sdkitty

WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


if that is what he is feeling, I'm sure the WIFE will help him get over it


----------



## WingNut

sdkitty said:


> if that is what he is feeling, I'm sure the WIFE will help him get over it


Sadly I agree with you.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Imo Oprah’s Royal issues began with Diana and Op’s failed attempts to get that interview.*  So, Op championed Sarah and her _journey_ post divorce. That connection was established in the 80s. Add in the connection with Doria through the Marianne Williamson ‘church’ and, bingo, all the stars magically aligned. Too many coinky-dinks for me. Opr needs to be held accountable for doing a lousy job of interviewing.  H&M need to be held accountable for cooperating and lying. Gayle and CBS need to held accountable for their part in this mess, too. * Did they really believe they would bring down the monarchy?*  Did they really hate QE that much?  Ewww. Opr should have stayed retired.  My opinion.


OW is vengeful. I remember saying at the time that the 'interview' was in retaliation for losing the Diana tell-all story. That fiasco should never be called an interview as no serious questions were asked. OW said little except for a few 'WOW' and the famous, "Were you silent or silenced." The Despicable Duo's hate and rancor for the BRF is almost palpable at times. You can see it in their comportment and they're probably egotistical enough to believe they could bring down the Monarchy, but why would OW hate the BRF? Are they richer and more famous than her? They certainly are more respected.
Re Sarah, didn't OW ask her to wear her tiara for the audience? IIRC she replied that it would be inappropriate to do so.

ETA Sorry I'm twenty some pages behind and catching up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


I am not as optimistic. I think he can’t wait to get home.


----------



## xincinsin

Ali-bagpuss said:


> No she won’t feel bad about her behaviour but she can’t fail to feel the tension towards her I’m sure.


She will just put it down to the others being mean to her.


AbbytheBT said:


> Does anyone else feel like this “isource news” is part of a H&M misinformation campaign? Very sophisticated.


Has anyone ever heard of them before?


pomeline said:


> What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.


The face? No, it's the expression of ineffable boredom.


Sterntalerli said:


> I don’t get it what was with her belly? I see that I looks weird but what exactly was the reason it was swaying?
> 
> Thanks for helping out


One theory was optical illusion due to the graphic pattern of the dress fabric. I am not convinced after watching the clip many times. My first pregnancy, my bump was small and round. From the back, I didn't look pregnant. My theory is that Zedzee enhanced her bump with a moonbump to look "more dramatically pregnant", and that's why her bump mysteriously changes size, slips to her knees and around her waist, and seems to deflate/sway.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, is MM now copying Kate with same makeup?   On another site, someone said Hazzi put lifts in shoes so he would be taller than W.   Surely by now they realize these games will backfire on them.


----------



## djfmn

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610249
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610251



The most poignant, powerful and beautiful deep curtsy was done by the Princess Royal  at the Palace of the Holyroodhouse in Scotland on Sunday as the coffin was being brought in. The art to a deep curtsy according to what I read is you keep your back straight and your head bowed as you do the deep curtsy.


----------



## bisbee

MiniMabel said:


> There is not an ounce of sorrow on MM's face. Just superciliousness.
> 
> By acute contrast, you can see from the grief on their faces that Catherine and Peter Phillips are devastated beyond words.


I just don’t see a smirk on MM’s face.  I find it fascinating tha some people can read someone’s mind from a photo of a fleeting expression.

I do, however, think it was inappropriate of Harry and Meghan to hold hands.  I can’t stand couples who find it impossible to walk together without holding hands…any couple.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> OW is vengeful. I remember saying at the time that the 'interview' was in retaliation for losing the Diana tell-all story. That fiasco should never be called an interview as no serious questions were asked. OW said little except for a few 'WOW' and the famous, "Were you silent or silenced." The Despicable Duo's hate and rancor for the BRF is almost palpable at times. You can see it in their comportment and they're probably egotistical enough to believe they could bring down the Monarchy, but why would OW hate the BRF? Are they richer and more famous than her? They certainly are more respected.
> Re Sarah, didn't OW ask her to wear her tiara for the audience? IIRC she replied that it would be inappropriate to do so.
> 
> ETA Sorry I'm twenty some pages behind and catching up.


Agree, OW is all about retaliation, not a pleasant woman. It shows on her face.  
From 2010 VanityFair,
_It also claims that when *Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York,* appeared on Oprah following her 1996 divorce from *Prince Andrew,* Oprah insisted that the Duchess wear a tiara. Prudently, Sarah declined, and, after a bit of friction, was allowed to appear on Oprah with grace and dignity. To, err, plug her tell-all book._

Ow had Sarah do this series. Sad, imo.  Comments tell the story.


----------



## nyc_hou_mia

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610171



Interesting. I thought I read somewhere in this thread that Megan will be with Camilla and Kate in a car. I wonder if the papp photo of them waiting in BP has anything to do with the change?


----------



## nyc_hou_mia

Sharont2305 said:


> This must be the first time they've stood next to each other in public without her clawing him


I thought the same and then when they all were walking out she grabbed on to him again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisbee said:


> I just don’t see a smirk on MM’s face.  I find it fascinating tha some people can read someone’s mind from a photo of a fleeting expression.
> 
> I do, however, think it was inappropriate of Harry and Meghan to hold hands.  I can’t stand couples who find it impossible to walk together without holding hands…any couple.


If she had not copied Kate’s makeup, I might give her a pass.  I always see a smirk on her but this trip I see a swollen/puffy mouth. Has she done something?  Maybe she really is trying to copy JLaw.  Does she look wider or is that because she is standing next to Kate?

Agree about the hand holding.   Rumor is Hazzi wore lifts so he could taller than W 

@nyc_hou_mia  where is the pap photo?  I missed it. Thanks.


----------



## jblended

bisbee said:


> I just don’t see a smirk on MM’s face. I find it fascinating tha some people can read someone’s mind from a photo of a fleeting expression.


It looked like she was smirking the whole time while I was watching it live. More obvious than in the photos.
To your point, the pressure of the moment is immense and maybe she was just overwhelmed. We will never know what was actually passing through her mind.
Similarly, Harry fiddling with the hymn sheet came off really disrespectful as everyone was super emotional, but perhaps that fiddling was his way of coping with his own emotions.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

nyc_hou_mia said:


> Interesting. I thought I read somewhere in this thread that Megan will be with Camilla and Kate in a car. I wonder if the papp photo of them waiting in BP has anything to do with the change?


I dont think there was a change. 
I posted they’d be travelling in the car as the BBC said that but it was my misunderstanding I think


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> It looked like she was smirking the whole time while I was watching it live. More obvious than in the photos.
> To your point, the pressure of the moment is immense and maybe she was just overwhelmed. We will never know what was actually passing through her mind.
> Similarly, Harry fiddling with the hymn sheet came off really disrespectful as everyone was super emotional, but perhaps that fiddling was his way of coping with his own emotions.


I’ll have to watch it again to know for certain, it looked to me that Hazzi did not know the words to The Lord’s Prayer. 

Are they leaving today?  What will they do until Monday?


----------



## nyc_hou_mia

BlueCherry said:


> Imagine if they put Meghan in the middle
> 
> View attachment 5609850





Ali-bagpuss said:


> I dont think there was a change.
> I posted they’d be travelling in the car as the BBC said that but it was my misunderstanding I think


This is what I was talking about.


----------



## nyc_hou_mia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This makes me so angry. In this case - news for me! - I am solely blaming Harry.





CarryOn2020 said:


> If she had not copied Kate’s makeup, I might give her a pass.  I always see a smirk on her but this trip I see a swollen/puffy mouth. Has she done something?  Maybe she really is trying to copy JLaw.  Does she look wider or is that because she is standing next to Kate?
> 
> Agree about the hand holding.   Rumor is Hazzi wore lifts so he could taller than W
> 
> @nyc_hou_mia  where is the pap photo?  I missed it. Thanks.


@CarryOn2020 - @QueenofWrapDress posted the video above


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll have to watch it again to know for certain, it looked to me that Hazzi did not know the words to The Lord’s Prayer.


I'll have to watch it again, too. I was sobbing so I may have gotten it wrong.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they leaving today? What will they do until Monday?


They'll hang around until Monday, for sure. Probably rehearsing their roles/positions on the day, and being briefed on security and protocol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ll have to watch it again to know for certain, it looked to me that Hazzi did not know the words to The Lord’s Prayer.
> 
> Are they leaving today?  What will they do until Monday?


The camera was on him as he said "and forgive us our trespasses" and he didn't look too comfortable.
Hope the BLG does a piece on that.


----------



## duna

djfmn said:


> The most poignant, powerful and beautiful deep curtsy was done by the Princess Royal  at the Palace of the Holyroodhouse in Scotland on Sunday as the coffin was being brought in. The art to a deep curtsy according to what I read is you keep your back straight and your head bowed as you do the deep curtsy.


Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


DM did a lovely article on Lady Louise.  Her curtsy was on point!


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


Absolutely, Catherine just bobbed enough, I thought Ms legs would snap. How long has she been practicing that? A lot since last Thursday I'd say.


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> DM did a lovely article on Lady Louise.  Her curtsy was on point!
> 
> View attachment 5610334


Oh gosh, this picture has set me off again! The grief on their faces!


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, OW is all about retaliation, not a pleasant woman. It shows on her face.
> From 2010 VanityFair,
> _It also claims that when *Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York,* appeared on Oprah following her 1996 divorce from *Prince Andrew,* Oprah insisted that the Duchess wear a tiara. Prudently, Sarah declined, and, after a bit of friction, was allowed to appear on Oprah with grace and dignity. To, err, plug her tell-all book._
> 
> Ow had Sarah do this series. Sad, imo.  Comments tell the story.




I remember this. Of all the foolish, foolish things Sarah did, that show for Oprah's network, Finding Sarah, was probably one of the low points among several low points for her.  No wonder the family will have nothing to do with Oprah, other than dim Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, Catherine just bobbed enough, I thought Ms legs would snap. How long has she been practicing that? A lot since last Thursday I'd say.


She is out of practice. Until this week she was hoping she would never have to do it again.


----------



## andrashik




----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


well, much as I dislike her, I'd say this could be a case of dammed if you dammed if you don't....


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> She is out of practice. Until this week she was hoping she would never have to do it again.


I don't think she curtseyed often when she was here!


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I remember this. Of all the foolish, foolish things Sarah did, that show for Oprah's network, Finding Sarah, was probably one of the low points among several low points for her.  No wonder the family will have nothing to do with Oprah, other than dim Harry.


Sarah has made so many mistakes but I find I can’t be mad at her. She seems like such a broken woman to me.


----------



## DoggieBags

duna said:


> Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


I actually have been pleasantly surprised by TW’s behavior to date. Other than the probably staged picture from Buckingham Palace of them standing behind KC as they waited for the Queen’s coffin to arrive, and the hand holding coming out of Westminster, she hasn’t pushed or shoved in front of H or senior royals, she curtsied at the right moment, and has generally followed the script.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> Absolutely, Catherine just bobbed enough, I thought Ms legs would snap. How long has she been practicing that? A lot since last Thursday I'd say.


Lol, exactly what I was thinking!


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Sarah has made so many mistakes but I find I can’t be mad at her. She seems like such a broken woman to me.



I don't dislike her either, even though she did some pretty stupid things.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> I actually have been pleasantly surprised by TW’s behavior to date. Other than the probably staged picture from Buckingham Palace of them standing behind KC as they waited for the Queen’s coffin to arrive, and the hand holding coming out of Westminster, she hasn’t pushed or shoved in front of H or senior royals, she curtsied at the right moment, and has generally followed the script.


Yes, today was not bad [other than the copy-Kate makeup and hand-holding]. I did get the “I really don’t care” vibe, so “I’ll put minimal effort into my outfit” but it is a funeral.  She doesn’t have any of the stand-out jewelry that Cam&Kate do, so not much to look at.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ann_iowa

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610249
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610251



I watched the program. Would someone please explain the curtsy to me? It seems like MM and Kate’s curtsy are different. I remembered reading somewhere ages ago there is protocol for which leg/foot in front….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazz won’t like this imo:











						Prince Andrew and Harry are excluded from royal salute at procession
					

Andrew and Harry were both banned from saluting during the Queen's coffin procession - while other royals including Charles, William and Anne all performed the gesture.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


Totally agree. His mistakes are flashing before his eyes. The sadness on their faces is the realization that it is going to be very difficult to climb out of the pit that they jumped into. She,  standing behind Kate thinking of how she screwed herself by dissing Kate in a podtrash.  Felt sorry that Kate had TW breathing down her neck.   Watch them try to  stick as close to KC as possible for a photo op they can use.


----------



## piperdog

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz won’t like this imo:
> 
> View attachment 5610370
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Harry are excluded from royal salute at procession
> 
> 
> Andrew and Harry were both banned from saluting during the Queen's coffin procession - while other royals including Charles, William and Anne all performed the gesture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's such a beautiful photo, especially with Princess Anne framed in the middle. It's a shame Prince Edward isn't in the shot, too.


----------



## TC1

Not too much "genetic pain" walking behind the coffin then? I thought he was still reeling from being made to walk behind his mother?


----------



## Toby93

pomeline said:


> What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.


Her face has that smug look, and is so out of place.  She doesn't belong there but will not go home and leave Harry in case his family deprograms him


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Totally agree. His mistakes are flashing before his eyes. The sadness on their faces is the realization that it is going to be very difficult to climb out of the pit that they jumped into. *She,  standing behind Kate thinking of how she screwed herself by dissing Kate in a podtrash.  *Felt sorry that Kate had TW breathing down her neck.   Watch them try to  stick as close to KC as possible for a photo op they can use.


Meghan isn’t thinking that at all. You aren’t thinking like a narcissist. She’s wondering how it is that there are still so many people who prefer Kate over her. “What is wrong with those people? Can’t they tell that I am superior in every way? What can I do to make sure people hate Kate?” Stuff like that.


----------



## piperdog

gracekelly said:


> Totally agree. His mistakes are flashing before his eyes. The sadness on their faces is the realization that it is going to be very difficult to climb out of the pit that they jumped into. She,  standing behind Kate thinking of how she screwed herself by dissing Kate in a podtrash.  Felt sorry that Kate had TW breathing down her neck.   Watch them try to  stick as close to KC as possible for a photo op they can use.


I hope you're right, but I doubt either he or TW are capable of thinking they made any mistakes. More likely, both are tallying up any slights (real or imagined) and adding them to the list of grievances that will result in their next Tableau of Victimhood. To me the only question is will the Harkles next tacky, tone-deaf display be brought to us by Oprah, Netflix, or Spotify? Or maybe in Harry's upcoming book?


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Toby93 said:


> Her face has that smug look, and is so out of place.  She doesn't belong there but will not go home and leave Harry in case his family deprograms him


She looks like her mouth piece Scoobies here...probably BOGO on those fillers.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Her face has that smug look, and is so out of place.  She doesn't belong there but will not go home and leave Harry in case his family deprograms him


Precisely!  If I had  children that young, I would have flown home for at least  three days and then returned. She is afraid to leave the useful idiot for 5 minutes because she doesn’t want any outside influences touching him.   The reality is that his family  will say nothing important to him for fear of it being misused later.   I don’t think Anne or Sophie will speak to him at all. I also  saw at PP’s funeral that Tim Laurence had no use for Harry at all.


----------



## Toby93

Cosmopolitan said:


>



I'm not understanding this post.  Why does she have a stupid grin on her face? It states that she is wearing a Givenchy bespoke coat, and that she wore it before.  Was she pregnant the last time she wore it In the other pic?  Is this supposed to be a (not so) subtle hint?


----------



## WingNut

Toby93 said:


> Her face has that smug look, and is so out of place.  She doesn't belong there but will not go home and leave Harry in case his family deprograms him


I almost see her face as petulant. Like a child that just got reprimanded but doesn't believe they've done anything wrong and is stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the misbehavior. While I see Harry completely devastated by the realization that he a) is screwed, b) threw away any last chance at true meaningful time with his beloved grandmother, something he can NOT recover from, or c) in fear of what TW will do to him when they get home, I see her face as that of someone furiously seething and plotting. Not one ounce of genuine sadness or remorse.  Her face isn't good at hiding its "inside voice"*.....

*which is why she was a crappy actress to begin with


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> For an actress she can’t even act sorrowful a smug smirk is the best she can manage Hollywood isn’t going to be calling any time soon


----------



## bubablu

CarryOn2020 said:


> DM did a lovely article on Lady Louise.  Her curtsy was on point!
> 
> View attachment 5610334


In this foto her face looks really orange, compared to the neck and to the others.


----------



## LibbyRuth

piperdog said:


> I hope you're right, but I doubt either he or TW are capable of thinking they made any mistakes. More likely, both are tallying up any slights (real or imagined) and adding them to the list of grievances that will result in their next Tableau of Victimhood. To me the only question is will the Harkles next tacky, tone-deaf display be brought to us by Oprah, Netflix, or Spotify? Or maybe in Harry's upcoming book?


I do wonder if he's looked at the role Anne has played over the last week and realized that could have been him in relation to his dad.  Anne has not had the life or the role that Charles has, but she had an incredibly close relationship with her mother, and played an important role for serving the crown.  Over the past week while Charles has been busy with King duties, Anne has been the one busy with the emotional roles that matter - being present with her mother in her final hours, and accompanying her casket.  When the time comes to do all of this for Charles, Harry COULD be the one in that role, and he should be.  But he seems to have gotten so wrapped up in the idea that he's not going to be like William that he didn't seem to pay attention to the value of a role like Anne's.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

piperdog said:


> I hope you're right, but I doubt either he or TW are capable of thinking they made any mistakes. More likely, both are tallying up any slights (real or imagined) and adding them to the list of grievances that will result in their next Tableau of Victimhood. To me the only question is will the Harkles next tacky, tone-deaf display be brought to us by Oprah, Netflix, or Spotify? Or maybe in Harry's upcoming book?


Oh I agree with you about them totaling up grievance!  It is their MO for the victim story. My deleted post last night tied victimhood into the makeup. Optics. They are all about it is not it what you do, it is how you are perceived. Perceive  me as a victim and I will  spin it to my advantage.   I can go run to my mouthpiece and have him tell the world about my suffering. Ask me if I am OK, so I can tell the world no one cared to ask.


----------



## Sharont2305

LibbyRuth said:


> I do wonder if he's looked at the role Anne has played over the last week and realized that could have been him in relation to his dad.  Anne has not had the life or the role that Charles has, but she had an incredibly close relationship with her mother, and played an important role for serving the crown.  Over the past week while Charles has been busy with King duties, Anne has been the one busy with the emotional roles that matter - being present with her mother in her final hours, and accompanying her casket.  When the time comes to do all of this for Charles, Harry COULD be the one in that role, and he should be.  But he seems to have gotten so wrapped up in the idea that he's not going to be like William that he didn't seem to pay attention to the value of a role like Anne's.


Wow! I'd not thought of it like that. Absolutely spot on. Excellent post.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I'll bet there was an icy silence in the car.
> 
> I just watched the procession, it was very moving. I always hold my breath when honor guards have to move a coffin. Job well done.
> 
> Shocker, MM was dressed appropriately for a change, but then they had to hold hands leaving the hall.


I saw a photo of Zara leaving with Mike, holding hands


----------



## gracekelly

LibbyRuth said:


> I do wonder if he's looked at the role Anne has played over the last week and realized that could have been him in relation to his dad.  Anne has not had the life or the role that Charles has, but she had an incredibly close relationship with her mother, and played an important role for serving the crown.  Over the past week while Charles has been busy with King duties, Anne has been the one busy with the emotional roles that matter - being present with her mother in her final hours, and accompanying her casket.  When the time comes to do all of this for Charles, Harry COULD be the one in that role, and he should be.  But he seems to have gotten so wrapped up in the idea that he's not going to be like William that he didn't seem to pay attention to the value of a role like Anne's.


Anne has had the most relatable role of all of them. 99% of the time , if there is a daughter, she bears the burden and does everything that Anne did. Been there and done that myself. TQ designated Anne to do certain things because she knew she could do them and handle them emotionally. I expect to see more of this when dealing with her nephew  and his wife.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> I do wonder if he's looked at the role Anne has played over the last week and realized that could have been him in relation to his dad.  Anne has not had the life or the role that Charles has, but she had an incredibly close relationship with her mother, and played an important role for serving the crown.  Over the past week while Charles has been busy with King duties, Anne has been the one busy with the emotional roles that matter - being present with her mother in her final hours, and accompanying her casket.  When the time comes to do all of this for Charles, Harry COULD be the one in that role, and he should be.  But he seems to have gotten so wrapped up in the idea that he's not going to be like William that he didn't seem to pay attention to the value of a role like Anne's.



I never understood that...not only in relation to Charles but also William. It's kind of a lonely position to be in, I'm sure had they not fallen out William would have been happy to have his brother close by and would have found a function for him.


----------



## StylishMD

jblended said:


> Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
> Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.
> 
> She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.
> It all feels very unfair.
> If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.
> 
> I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.


I totally agree with all you’ve said
As Black, British woman I was so excited when she came on the scene. I was a little wary of how some would receive her, being aware of some (let’s say) previous problematic behavior of certain members of the Royal Family 
When they married it was a wonderful occasion which I happily celebrated 
I wholeheartedly feel that todays modern Royals, Prince  William in particular, are so much more enlightened. He is someone that I would really enjoy sitting and having lunch with. I JUST don’t get racist vibes from him. 
  I am just SO disappointed in MM‘s whole wasted opportunity. Really I just don’t understand her whole victim mentality
With the Queen in the sunset of her years, why couldn’t they just waited it out, continued their life in England and wait until passed? While I know she was 96, I think that their behavior broke her heart


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I saw a photo of Zara leaving with Mike, holding hands



But not while still "in formation".


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I'm not understanding this post.  Why does she have a stupid grin on her face? It states that she is wearing a Givenchy bespoke coat, and that she wore it before.  Was she pregnant the last time she wore it In the other pic?  Is this supposed to be a (not so) subtle hint?


She wore a similar coat to Eugenia’s wedding, open at the front, MM supposedly told everyone she was pregnant that day (with Archie) and was roundly criticized for stealing the bride’s spotlight


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> She wore a similar coat to Eugenia’s wedding, open at the front, MM supposedly told everyone she was pregnant that day (with Archie) and was roundly criticized for stealing the bride’s spotlight



It was so obvious. She didn't start showing until weeks later, but I saw her outfit and thought immediately "She's trying to make the press wonder if she's pregnant with that half buttoned coat."


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I saw a photo of Zara leaving with Mike, holding hands


The royals have different rules and they are taught young. There is a great recent clip of Charlotte telling George, “hands at your sides.”  They may look stiff at times, but this is what they do. I hold hands with my DH all the time. We don’t look sloppy and hang on each other and grip for dear life. The Harkles look like they need to keep the other from running away


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I never understood that...not only in relation to Charles but also William. It's kind of a lonely position to be in, I'm sure had they not fallen out William would have been happy to have his brother close by and would have found a function for him.


I always thought pre M, William was very lucky to have Harry as his 'wingman' for his future role as King and that he'd have a prominent role. Not anymore. TW put paid to that.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But I wouldn't count on the will being opened the day after the funeral. Those things take time.


I agree, but who knows how these two think?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The royals have different rules and they are taught young. There is a great recent clip of Charlotte telling George, “hands at your sides.”  They may look stiff at times, but this is what they do. I hold hands with my DH all the time. We don’t look sloppy and hang on each other and grip for dear life. The Harkles look like they need to keep the other from running away


I wonder if this is their way of presenting themselve as young newlyweds who are oh so in love....or maybe they're genuinely co-dependent


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was so obvious. She didn't start showing until weeks later, but I saw her outfit and thought immediately "She's trying to make the press wonder if she's pregnant with that half buttoned coat."


They are hypocritical about using private planes, so why not be the same about a third child?  I don’t think she is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The royals have different rules and they are taught young. There is a great recent clip of Charlotte telling George, “hands at your sides.”  They may look stiff at times, but this is what they do. I hold hands with my DH all the time. We don’t look sloppy and hang on each other and grip for dear life. The Harkles look like they need to keep the other from running away



I find handholding endearing (then again I've never seen anyone be so excessive). But not at work, not at church, and absolutely not at the monarch's funeral.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

jblended said:


> To your point, the pressure of the moment is immense and maybe she was just overwhelmed.


I'm inclined to give her a pass this morning. It must be incredibly emotional to be there. I would be a weepy mess.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if this is their way of presenting themselve as young newlyweds who are oh so in love....or maybe they're genuinely co-dependent


Personally I think they are so miserable over their personal debacle, that this a way to get through the public appearance.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I always thought pre M, William was very lucky to have Harry as his 'wingman' for his future role as King and that he'd have a prominent role. Not anymore. TW put paid to that.



Exactly! 

Plus I've said it a dozen times before...most of the perks with none of the responsibilities? Gimme.


----------



## andrashik

Interesting


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I always thought pre M, William was very lucky to have Harry as his 'wingman' for his future role as King and that he'd have a prominent role. Not anymore. TW put paid to that.


Didn’t we all think that?  Plus that Meghan would be a great help to the monarchy?  Wow!  We got that all wrong!!


----------



## Sophisticatted

Tinfoil hat time:  I believe she was dressed for this event.  The “reworn” items might even be copies made of items she’s worn before so as to not allow this event to become one of her merching spectacles.  Even the earrings may be copies vs. the real thing.  How often does she wear them IRL?  Would she have packed all these things for her original itinerary?  Perhaps they could have been shipped to her, but it seems more like her MO to borrow and merch.  JMO.


----------



## gracekelly

andrashik said:


> Interesting



Lol!  He looks captured!


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It was so obvious. She didn't start showing until weeks later, but I saw her outfit and thought immediately "She's trying to make the press wonder if she's pregnant with that half buttoned coat."


Now that I think of it …. 
Do the BRF ladies ever wear their coats unbuttoned or half buttoned? I can’t think of a single example 
but, it is done all the time in the US


----------



## gracekelly

Sophisticatted said:


> Tinfoil hat time:  I believe she was dressed for this event.  The “reworn” items might even be copies made of items she’s worn before so as to not allow this event to become one of her merching spectacles.  Even the earrings may be copies vs. the real thing.  How often does she wear them IRL?  Would she have packed all these things for her original itinerary?  Perhaps they could have been shipped to her, but it seems more like her MO to borrow and merch.  JMO.


I think shops all over London were called to send clothing for her to try and none of it free. Maybe a seamstress from Windsor was sent over to help


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Personally I think they are so miserable over their personal debacle, that this a way to get through the public appearance.


yes, but they always hold hands....and usually she is putting her hand on his back, pushing and pulling him (which is not to affectionate)
I agree though that for him, he may realize his family isn't happy with him so he's clinging to his lifeline - the WIFE/boss


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Interesting




Well, it was also her who grabbed him. I still think he should have squeezed her hand if he had to in reassurance, then let go. Like the balcony moment when he told her in no uncertain terms to shut up and look ahead.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Didn’t we all think that?  Plus that Meghan would be a great help to the monarchy?  Wow!  We got that all wrong!!



I had my doubts after the engagement interview, but never would I have guessed to which extent.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Now that I think of it ….
> Do the BRF ladies ever wear their coats unbuttoned or half buttoned? I can’t think of a single example
> but, it is done all the time in the US


I wonder if that is part of protocol like the hosiery and a hat.


----------



## andrashik

I have previously posted about a reddit user that apparently has some sources and she/he is popular on the r/SaintMeghanMarkle subreddit and I found this on our dear marklenews1 whom I told about this thread and the cool people here.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I always thought pre M, William was very lucky to have Harry as his 'wingman' for his future role as King and that he'd have a prominent role. Not anymore. TW put paid to that.


Never in a million years would William have suspected that one day Harry would be his biggest problem.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

LibbyRuth said:


> I do wonder if he's looked at the role Anne has played over the last week and realized that could have been him in relation to his dad.  Anne has not had the life or the role that Charles has, but she had an incredibly close relationship with her mother, and played an important role for serving the crown.  Over the past week while Charles has been busy with King duties, Anne has been the one busy with the emotional roles that matter - being present with her mother in her final hours, and accompanying her casket.  When the time comes to do all of this for Charles, Harry COULD be the one in that role, and he should be.  But he seems to have gotten so wrapped up in the idea that he's not going to be like William that he didn't seem to pay attention to the value of a role like Anne's.


Thinking of this I find it very sad that when the time comes that William becomes King, it’s likely that Anne, Andrew and Edward will be in their latter years. Harry should be the support for William as the others have been to Charles and I fear he won’t be. 

The fact that he probably didn’t spend any quality time (and make amends) with either of his grandparents before they passed away should make him think and hopefully change his behaviour towards his family.


----------



## scarlet555

I think William always knew Harry would be trouble, but not this caliber, paired with Nutmeg... that takes everything to another level.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if this is their way of presenting themselve as young newlyweds who are oh so in love....or maybe they're genuinely co-dependent


They are not that young.....


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

scarlet555 said:


> I think William always knew Harry would be trouble, but not this caliber, paired with Nutmeg... that takes everything to another level.


he always was the rebel one because he could be as he didn’t have the pressure of being the heir to the throne but I don’t think anybody thought he would be so vile against a family that he supposedly loved.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz won’t like this imo:
> 
> View attachment 5610370
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Harry are excluded from royal salute at procession
> 
> 
> Andrew and Harry were both banned from saluting during the Queen's coffin procession - while other royals including Charles, William and Anne all performed the gesture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


You don’t salute if you’re wearing civvies


andrashik said:


> I have previously posted about a reddit user that apparently has some sources and she/he is popular on the r/SaintMeghanMarkle subreddit and I found this on our dear marklenews1 whom I told about this thread and the cool people here.



I hope this has some truth in it, but it may be my wishful thinking.  I wouldn't blame them for being icy cool to Meghan - she’s been very cruel


Ali-bagpuss said:


> Thinking of this I find it very sad that when the time comes that William becomes King, it’s likely that Anne, Andrew and Edward will be in their latter years. Harry should be the support for William as the others have been to Charles and I fear he won’t be.
> 
> The fact that he probably didn’t spend any quality time (and make amends) with either of his grandparents before they passed away should make him think and hopefully change his behaviour towards his family.


Hopefully George and Charlotte will be of age by then, and he has Catherine and his cousins.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> I saw a photo of Zara leaving with Mike, holding hands


I think it was a spontaneous loving gesture of support. Zara has looked gutted in pictures and Mike has always been open about his love and respect for the Queen. The Suckesses, on the other hand, pun intended, use it as a theatrical display of supposed adoration for each other. Them holding hands today had nothing to do with the circumstances, it’s an automatic gesture and if had dared to walk hands at sides, she would have clawed him into obedience.


----------



## Pessie

Helventara said:


> This!  In fact, her WHOLE royal life to me is unfair. She’s been given a chance to be part of the [insert your superlative] family in the world and thrashed it.
> I told my husband, if I were her, I would not be seen in public ever again as I would occupy myself learning about each castle,  historical site, painting, jewel (as far as I am allowed) or whatever. It would be such a privilege and honour.


I read that one of things Sophie and the Queen spent time together doing was delving in the archives.  I’d’ve loved to do that!


----------



## scarlet555

when you are with someone crazy, you either divorce them or join them


gracekelly said:


> Lol!  He looks *captured*!


Because he IS...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> I have previously posted about a reddit user that apparently has some sources and she/he is popular on the r/SaintMeghanMarkle subreddit and I found this on our dear marklenews1 whom I told about this thread and the cool people here.




What a POS she is. Also, I doubt ANYTHING is left to her in The Queen's will. If anything is left it will be for Harry. 

We'll see how Charles holds up, but so far I've been posivitely surprised.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Never in a million years would William have suspected that one day Harry would be his biggest problem.


Or vice versa


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> Never in a million years would William have suspected that one day Harry would be his biggest problem.


I thought I read somewhere that they always had a turbulent relationship and H always thought it was unfair he was the spare? Re their relationship, Kate was supposedly the peacemaker even before MM?


----------



## nyc_hou_mia

andrashik said:


> Interesting



I saw a guy on tiktok talk about the green line test and mentioned this whole “thumb control” thing Megan does with Harry.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

880 said:


> I thought I read somewhere that they always had a turbulent relationship and H always thought it was unfair he was the spare? Re their relationship, Kate was supposedly the peacemaker even before MM?


I’m sure it’s a horrible and difficult position to be in but both Prince Andrew and Prince Edward felt the same and had their own issues. He could have dealt with it in a better way. I’m sure he could have made his own position within the family.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> False equivalency. Hazard was old enough to be traumatized by his mother's death and funeral. His invisikids have no emotional connection to QEII.* And if they are traumatized, *it would be because Zedzee keeps shoving them in front of the coffin/palaces/floral tributes/assorted cameras, and using the Claw to position them artfully like infant ikebana. Please keep them in Cali.


If the children really exist, they would be more traumatized being left in the care of nannies while the Despicable Pair trot all over the world for fame and fortune. Makes one wonder if they recognize their parents when they see them and especially with ZedZed's frequent PS.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

nyc_hou_mia said:


> I saw a guy on tiktok talk about the green line test and mentioned this whole “thumb control” thing Megan does with Harry.


Oh please Harry - get yourself out of this toxic relationship


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

MiniMabel said:


> There is not an ounce of sorrow on MM's face. Just superciliousness.
> 
> By acute contrast, you can see from the grief on their faces that Catherine and Peter Phillips are devastated beyond words.


I watched the video and in motion, she did look like she was tearing up.

Of course, with an actress and especially this one, we never know how calculated it is... but she did look sad.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> If the children really exist, they would be more traumatized being left in the care of nannies while the Despicable Pair trot all over the world for fame and fortune. Makes one wonder if they recognize their parents when they see them and especially with ZedZed's frequent PS.


If they have good nannies I think they are better off with them than with this neglectful pair. At least they will be getting their needs met and that’s more than children of self-absorbed parents who cannot afford nannies get.


----------



## rose60610

Claw looks waaaay out of her league at this funeral. Nobody wants her there, everyone knows she's only there due to protocol ONLY, yet IMO she smirks and still tries to be in the camera frames. When KCIII said in his speech the "Harry and Meghan are ....as they continue to build their lives overseas" I wonder if this meant he's going to strip them of their titles. He can't do it before the funeral, but when it's all over and he settles in a bit, I wonder if it will happen. I hope she feels entirely isolated and frozen out for the duration she's in London. I bet she's still fuming at not being able  to bask in the spotlights at the charity event she was going to attend. Watch her go on the talk show tour back in the U.S. to discuss "behind the scenes at The Queen's funeral", she was "part of history" etc.  She's so SICK!!


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz won’t like this imo:
> 
> View attachment 5610370
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew and Harry are excluded from royal salute at procession
> 
> 
> Andrew and Harry were both banned from saluting during the Queen's coffin procession - while other royals including Charles, William and Anne all performed the gesture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Do men and women salute differently?  Anne's palm is down and the men's are outward.


----------



## scarlet555

Jayne1 said:


> I watched the video and in motion, she did look like she was tearing up.
> 
> Of course, with an actress and especially this one, we never know how calculated it is... but she did look sad.


maybe she found out the Queen's will? or her shoes hurt her feet?


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> Claw looks waaaay out of her league at this funeral. Nobody wants her there, everyone knows she's only there due to protocol ONLY, yet IMO she smirks and still tries to be in the camera frames. *When KCIII said in his speech the "Harry and Meghan are ....as they continue to build their lives overseas" I wonder if this meant he's going to strip them of their titles. He can't do it before the funeral, but when it's all over and he settles in a bit, I wonder if it will happen.* I hope she feels entirely isolated and frozen out for the duration she's in London. I bet she's still fuming at not being able  to bask in the spotlights at the charity event she was going to attend. Watch her go on the talk show tour back in the U.S. to discuss "behind the scenes at The Queen's funeral", she was "part of history" etc.  She's so SICK!!



After seeing Charles have a few mini meltdowns over pens and ink the last few days, I can imagine he would blow his top over much of what these two have done already. If they continue their shenanigan, we will see if KCIII is less forgiving than QEII.


----------



## elvisfan4life

rose60610 said:


> Claw looks waaaay out of her league at this funeral. Nobody wants her there, everyone knows she's only there due to protocol ONLY, yet IMO she smirks and still tries to be in the camera frames. When KCIII said in his speech the "Harry and Meghan are ....as they continue to build their lives overseas" I wonder if this meant he's going to strip them of their titles. He can't do it before the funeral, but when it's all over and he settles in a bit, I wonder if it will happen. I hope she feels entirely isolated and frozen out for the duration she's in London. I bet she's still fuming at not being able  to bask in the spotlights at the charity event she was going to attend. Watch her go on the talk show tour back in the U.S. to discuss "behind the scenes at The Queen's funeral", she was "part of history" etc.  She's so SICK!!


You are seriously giving Charles too much credit he was a pain to his own parents for many years and will never cut Harry off


----------



## Pessie

Jayne1 said:


> Do men and women salute differently?  Anne's palm is down and the men's are outward.


I’m not certain but I doubt it.  It’s more likely to be a Service difference.  Anne’s in a naval uniform whereas Charles and William are in RAF uniform.


----------



## csshopper

This picture has bothered me since I first saw it. It was taken by an award winning 30 year photographer from the Evening Standard newspaper. I don’t think he’s a pap, but he got lucky.

I enlarged it and looking at it more carefully I realized why it nagged at me. We focus on Charles, perfectly framed in the center, obviously grieved, then shockingly I think, our eyes move to the most unexpected family members to be featured behind him, the Suckesses, and in our shock, at least in mine for a long time, stop there.

But, if you look behind them, I think that’s where there’s an interesting story.The entire family has been gathered, yet not one additional family member is in the area. The men behind the Duke and Duchess look like grey men in suits getting ready for the arrival. Charles, lost in his grief, may not even realize who is behind him at the moment.

I think H and M may have found themselves in the midst of a deep chill among the family they have savaged. They have separated themselves from the group. TW will have been carefully scoping out the surroundings, radar always looking for the camera, in hope of finding something advantageous. Charles‘ move to the door would have signaled the arrival was near, with no one paying attention they managed to insert themselves as they did. I would be willing to bet the tableau changed, but in that instant they were positioned and whether purposeful or accidental the photographer got a “money shot”.

The fact Scoobie pulled it indicates, I think, that serious pressure was applied somewhere as this was not the optic the RF wanted for history.

Their brazenness will not be forgotten or forgiven especially if it ends up as part of a documentary/reality show about them.

I could be wacky wrong, but the picture is not a true depiction of the event and it bothers me.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Do men and women salute differently?  Anne's palm is down and the men's are outward.


Well spotted, though I do recall Andrew saluting differently. 
Here's a pic I found. 
Army - Navy - RAF


----------



## Jayne1

Pessie said:


> I’m not certain but I doubt it.  It’s more likely to be a Service difference.  Anne’s in a naval uniform whereas Charles and William are in RAF uniform.


That makes much more sense than my dumb thought.  lol


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> Well spotted, though I do recall Andrew saluting differently.
> Here's a pic I found.
> Army - Navy - RAF
> 
> View attachment 5610508


Interesting - thanks!

Meg's stomach was flat during the walk with Kate and Will the other day, so I can't see how she can pretend she is pregnant now with an open coat... ?


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, today was not bad [other than the copy-Kate makeup and hand-holding]. I did get the “I really don’t care” vibe, so “I’ll put minimal effort into my outfit” but it is a funeral.  She doesn’t have any of the stand-out jewelry that Cam&Kate do, so not much to look at.


And, I would say, is highly unlikely to be either loaned or gifted any (jewellry) in the future from her inlaws.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> Interesting - thanks!
> 
> Meg's stomach was flat during the walk with Kate and Will the other day, so I can't see how she can pretend she is pregnant now with an open coat... ?


You're welcome.

It didn't stop her at Eugenie's wedding.


----------



## DoggieBags

Maggie Muggins said:


> If the children really exist, they would be more traumatized being left in the care of nannies while the Despicable Pair trot all over the world for fame and fortune. Makes one wonder if they recognize their parents when they see them and especially with ZedZed's frequent PS.


Both children must exist since they are both listed in the official line of succession. I can’t imagine that the BRF would have included both children if they were not sure of their actual existence


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

Toby93 said:


> I'm not understanding this post.  Why does she have a stupid grin on her face? It states that she is wearing a Givenchy bespoke coat, and that she wore it before.  Was she pregnant the last time she wore it In the other pic?  Is this supposed to be a (not so) subtle hint?


I suspect Meghan does not have extensive black coat wardrobe. She was only part of the BRF long enough to do 2 max remembrance services.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

csshopper said:


> View attachment 5610504
> 
> 
> This picture has bothered me since I first saw it. It was taken by an award winning 30 year photographer from the Evening Standard newspaper. I don’t think he’s a pap, but he got lucky.
> 
> I enlarged it and looking at it more carefully I realized why it nagged at me. We focus on Charles, perfectly framed in the center, obviously grieved, then shockingly I think, our eyes move to the most unexpected family members to be featured behind him, the Suckesses, and in our shock, at least in mine for a long time, stop there.
> 
> But, if you look behind them, I think that’s where there’s an interesting story.The entire family has been gathered, yet not one additional family member is in the area. The men behind the Duke and Duchess look like grey men in suits getting ready for the arrival. Charles, lost in his grief, may not even realize who is behind him at the moment.
> 
> I think H and M may have found themselves in the midst of a deep chill among the family they have savaged. They have separated themselves from the group. TW will have been carefully scoping out the surroundings, radar always looking for the camera, in hope of finding something advantageous. Charles‘ move to the door would have signaled the arrival was near, with no one paying attention they managed to insert themselves as they did. I would be willing to bet the tableau changed, but in that instant they were positioned and whether purposeful or accidental the photographer got a “money shot”.
> 
> The fact Scoobie pulled it indicates, I think, that serious pressure was applied somewhere as this was not the optic the RF wanted for history.
> 
> Their brazenness will not be forgotten or forgiven especially if it ends up as part of a documentary/reality show about them.
> 
> I could be wacky wrong, but the picture is not a true depiction of the event and it bothers me.


They look like cardboard cut outs placed behind the king


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> They are not that young.....


but they want to present as young ....young mother, etc.


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> OW is vengeful. I remember saying at the time that the 'interview' was in retaliation for losing the Diana tell-all story. That fiasco should never be called an interview as no serious questions were asked. OW said little except for a few 'WOW' and the famous, "Were you silent or silenced." The Despicable Duo's hate and rancor for the BRF is almost palpable at times. You can see it in their comportment and they're probably egotistical enough to believe they could bring down the Monarchy, but why would OW hate the BRF? Are they richer and more famous than her? They certainly are more respected.
> Re Sarah, didn't OW ask her to wear her tiara for the audience? IIRC she replied that it would be inappropriate to do so.
> 
> ETA Sorry I'm twenty some pages behind and catching up.


I’m sure her phrase “Were you silent or were you silenced “ was well rehearsed ahead of time. Of course she knew what TW was going to say.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Personally I think they are so miserable over their personal debacle, that this a way to get through the public appearance.


I wonder if she held hands with her prior husbands all the time


----------



## piperdog

Sharont2305 said:


> You're welcome.
> 
> It didn't stop her at Eugenie's wedding.


That's what cued me in to who TW really is. She's the one who can't bear to have another woman be the center of attention, so she purposely creates pregnancy speculation (or even announces) at someone else's wedding. Once I saw that, game over. I imagine for those of us who have dealt with narcissists, there was a similar red flag at some point in their relationship, and suddenly it all made sense.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Th


Jayne1 said:


> Do men and women salute differently?  Anne's palm is down and the men's are outward.


The Royal Navy salute with palm down, Army and RAF salute with palm out.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> It's no coincidence imo…
> View attachment 5609888



HowTF does it look like she's gazing straight down that camera lens, when the picture looks like it was taken from a considerable distance hence the grainy, zoomed-in quality?? How!!!???
This all I see:







Mumotons said:


> Just wow !
> 
> View attachment 5610065


FFS


The Wife:


Absolutely believable that she would have arranged this. Utterly insufferable.




Sunshine247365 said:


> What's most annoying about these two at the moment is that it feels like there is just no justice or consequences for their years of appalling behaviour - maybe I'm just being a bit unkind but seeing them there front and centre, TW with her smug face still loving that she's getting attention and being included is pretty grating. I understand we want to honour the Queen and there's a time and place for consequences and tough love for these two but it honestly just feels like they just get away with everything time and time again and still get what they want through tantrums, manipulation, threats and playing the victim to the media. I guess my sense of justice just wants to see them experience even just a fraction of the humiliation and criticism they themselves quite happily inflicted on their families over and over again. People who scheme, plot and manipulate the way TW does doesn't deserve to be anywhere near family functions, especially now, and to see her so involved feels like karma is napping. Most normal people would feel mortified and regretful if face to face with family you have bad-mouthed and hurt. These two just stride in and suddenly she's speaking as 'part of the family'. It's just jarring to see this when considering what she was still saying  less than a week ago. Maybe one day their comeuppance will come. Poor William and Kate, imagine having to sit there and grit your teeth, I have so much admiration for their strength of character that they are able to do this and with so much grace.





jblended said:


> Up until now, I kind of understood and accepted that Meg would have to be present at the procession. They were already in the UK and she cannot be excluded- she must support her husband at this time, given that Diana's procession has so haunted him.
> Yet, now that the initial proceedings are underway and I am starting to well up at the thought of what is coming, I find myself deeply upset that TW is included.
> 
> She did not have any respect for the rich history and traditions of the BRF, refused to serve the people of this nation, badmouthed the grieving family when PP was on his deathbed...she had no appreciation or understanding, no desire to learn, and yet she gets the highest of honours of being included in the procession at this pivotal moment of private and public mourning on HMQ's final journey.
> It all feels very unfair.
> If her behaviour up until this point is anything to go by, she cannot have any appreciation for the gift of being included here at this moment in history. You could see the Royal Company of Archers were deeply moved as they guarded HMQ in Edinburgh, feeling the weight of that responsibility and the importance of every minute detail. They looked proud to be able to do their duty, in stark contrast to TW who was so quick to shirk hers.
> 
> I never thought I'd be this upset but, here we are.


Well said, both of you and I completely agree with all point that you make!






pomeline said:


> What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.





MM face looks so hard now. She's definitely been messing with fillers, especially in her lips... and very recently. Something about her jawline/chin looks different too.





andrashik said:


> Interesting





How tight of a grip did she have on his hand!? You can see the print of her fingers on his hand where the blood flow was limited I'd guess he was trying to release her grip to try and get the circulation back in his hand.


----------



## andrashik

Pessie said:


> I hope this has some truth in it, but it may be my wishful thinking.  I wouldn't blame them for being icy cool to Meghan - she’s been very cruel


The post also said that she tried to tip the US press about the Queen's death. Such a vile person


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> The post also said that she tried to tip the US press about the Queen's death. Such a vile person



Such a breach of trust. Also, I don't understand it at all. As she couldn't have had it announced in her name, what was she hoping to get out of it?


----------



## RAINDANCE

scarlet555 said:


> I think William always knew Harry would be trouble, but not this caliber, paired with Nutmeg... that takes everything to another level.


I was thinking earlier that theP&POW need to get a professional  expert on NPD on their team of advisors for help in dealing with theses two.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> I thought I read somewhere that they always had a turbulent relationship and H always thought it was unfair he was the spare? Re their relationship, Kate was supposedly the peacemaker even before MM?



I've seen them together (without Kate) at the Shard in London, they were the best of friends 

Harry did _not_ think it was unfair he was the spare, without a direct heir(s) and the entire hierarchy that goes along with that, they'd just be another 2 posh boys from London. 

I don't think Harry found found anything he was very good at and/or had a passion for, that's the problem. 

He wants to be thought of as compassionate and kind, unfortunately he's not. He could have been a good sportsman, unfortunately not good _enough_ (unlike his cousin Zara). He could have been good in the forces, unfortunately not good _enough_ (unlike his grandfather). 

He's just another hooray Henry and he thinks he should be more.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> I've seen them together (without Kate) at the Shard in London, they were the best of friends
> 
> Harry did _not_ think it was unfair he was the spare, without a direct heir(s) and the entire hierarchy that goes along with that, they'd just be another 2 posh boys from London.
> 
> I don't think Harry found found anything he was very good at and/or had a passion for, that's the problem.
> 
> He wants to be thought of as compassionate and kind, unfortunately he's not. He could have been a good sportsman, unfortunately not good _enough_ (unlike his cousin Zara). He could have been good in the forces, unfortunately not good _enough_ (unlike his grandfather).
> 
> He's just another hooray Henry and he thinks he should be more.


Thank you for the correction and the clarification 
now I’m wondering if I could have gotten the idea from the bower book or something else I read


----------



## papertiger

Lounorada said:


> HowTF does it look like she's gazing straight down that camera lens, when the picture looks like it was taken from a considerable distance hence the grainy, zoomed-in quality?? How!!!???
> This all I see:
> View attachment 5610501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FFS
> View attachment 5610507
> 
> The Wife:
> View attachment 5610502
> 
> Absolutely believable that she would have arranged this. Utterly insufferable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well said, both of you and I completely agree with all point that you make!
> View attachment 5610505
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610532
> 
> MM face looks so hard now. She's definitely been messing with fillers, especially in her lips... and very recently. Something about her jawline/chin looks different too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610536
> 
> How tight of a grip did she have on his hand!? You can see the print of her fingers on his hand where the blood flow was limited I'd guess he was trying to release her grip to try and get the circulation back in his hand.



We saw M try to communicate facially the other day on walkabout. 

She has to blink deeply (which looks patronising) or exaggerate other physical movements which makes her look over-theatrical. 

A friend of mine who is a screen (TV/film) director won't pass casting on an anyone who can't move their face naturally, he says that (ironically) it makes them _over_act.


----------



## bag-mania

_People_ will never change. Let’s make it all about Meghan! Got to get those clicks.









						Meghan Markle Wears Earrings Gifted to Her by Queen Elizabeth at London Service
					

Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex subtly signaled a happy memory she had with the Queen Elizabeth through her jewelry choice at the London service on Wednesday




					people.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bisbee

Toby93 said:


>



OMG…this is not a picture of a woman who is laughing.  We don’t know who she was looking at…her expression looks like she is giving a pleasant look to someone.


----------



## Sina08

LittleStar88 said:


> After seeing Charles have a few mini meltdowns over pens and ink the last few days, I can imagine he would blow his top over much of what these two have done already. If they continue their shenanigan, we will see if KCIII is less forgiving than QEII.


Maybe it wasn’t even forgiveness on her part. Maybe she just wanted Charles to deal with it himself when he’s King. H is his son, and god knows she already had her hands full with Andrew.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> Thank you for the correction and the clarification
> now I’m wondering if I could have gotten the idea from the bower book or something else I read



Diana told Jeremy Paxman (we are obviously talking 30 years +) Harry say to William that if he didn't want the throne then he would. 

I'm sure I said something to my mother about wanting to be Kate Moss but I got over it. Just. But I did.


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I suspect Meghan does not have extensive black coat wardrobe. She was only part of the BRF long enough to do 2 max remembrance services.



She had a Gucci short black coat with pearl buttons before she married H

Funny how I remember


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> Diana told Jeremy Paxman (we are obviously talking 30 years +) Harry say to William that if he didn't want the throne then he would.
> 
> I'm sure I said something to my mother about wanting to be Kate Moss but I got over it. Just. But I did.


The same as Princess Margaret said to the Queen and Prince Andrew said to Charles - it’s must be hard being 2nd in line.


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> The same as Princess Margaret said to the Queen and Prince Andrew said to Charles - it’s must be hard being 2nd in line.




I had to laugh imagining Princess Margaret as Queen, OMG. K Andrew and QC Fergie would have been even worse. 

I need to go and wash my mind out 

Interestingly, Anne (second born but out of the running) never wanted it. 

Perhaps being in second line makes you have that feeling when your out by just one number on the Zillion-squillion lottery. It's not competition after all.

It really is just luck _or_ divine right. Either way it's just NO, it's NOT you  .


----------



## Sterntalerli

Maggie Muggins said:


> If the children really exist, they would be more traumatized being left in the care of nannies while the Despicable Pair trot all over the world for fame and fortune. Makes one wonder if they recognize their parents when they see them and especially with ZedZed's frequent PS.


Wait what? Now I’m really confused. 

Didn’t we see pics of the kids already? Did I miss something?


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

papertiger said:


> I had to laugh imagining Princess Margaret as Queen, OMG. K Andrew and QC Fergie would have been even worse.
> 
> I need to go and wash my mind out
> 
> Interestingly, Anne (second born but out of the running) never wanted it.
> 
> Perhaps being in second line makes you have that feeling when your out by just one number on the Zillion-squillion lottery. It's not competition after all.
> 
> It really is just luck _or_ divine right. Either way it's just NO, it's NOT you  .


Anne would make an amazing Queen. 

I suppose it can feel like you’re a bit invisible because the heir is obviously favoured and singled out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Diana told Jeremy Paxman (we are obviously talking 30 years +) Harry say to William that if he didn't want the throne then he would.
> 
> I'm sure I said something to my mother about wanting to be Kate Moss but I got over it. Just. But I did.



I agree. It's both silly and unfair to judge Harry by something he said at age 9 or something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I had to laugh imagining Princess Margaret as Queen, OMG. K Andrew and QC Fergie would have been even worse.
> 
> I need to go and wash my mind out
> 
> Interestingly, Anne (second born but out of the running) never wanted it.
> 
> Perhaps being in second line makes you have that feeling when your out by just one number on the Zillion-squillion lottery. It's not competition after all.
> 
> It really is just luck _or_ divine right. Either way it's just NO, it's NOT you  .



I would very happily live an invisible life in my nice residence financed by my king brother. In fact, having all eyes on me comes pretty close to my personal idea of hell.


----------



## RAINDANCE

bisbee said:


> OMG…this is not a picture of a woman who is laughing.  We don’t know who she was looking at…her expression looks like she is giving a pleasant look to someone.


Was that today ? The hat, fascinator looks navy blue to me. 
Edited to add. Ignore this. I had a long drive today and have tired eyes now.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> A friend of mine who is a screen (TV/film) director won't pass casting on an anyone who can't move their face naturally, he says that (ironically) it makes them _over_act.


Or in Nicole Kidman's case, not move her face at all and let people read their own personal thoughts into it.


papertiger said:


> I don't think Harry found found anything he was very good at and/or had a passion for, that's the problem.
> 
> He wants to be thought of as compassionate and kind, unfortunately he's not. He could have been a good sportsman, unfortunately not good _enough_ (unlike his cousin Zara). He could have been good in the forces, unfortunately not good _enough_ (unlike his grandfather).


I read he never passed the exams to advance in the army.  Is that correct?


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would very happily live an invisible life in my nice residence financed by my king brother. In fact, having all eyes on me comes pretty close to my personal idea of hell.


I read Camilla was happy to live her invisible life in the country, supported emotionally and financially by Charles.


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> I had to laugh imagining Princess Margaret as Queen, OMG. K Andrew and QC Fergie would have been even worse.
> 
> I need to go and wash my mind out
> 
> Interestingly, Anne (second born but out of the running) never wanted it.
> 
> Perhaps being in second line makes you have that feeling when your out by just one number on the Zillion-squillion lottery. It's not competition after all.
> 
> It really is just luck _or_ divine right. Either way it's just NO, it's NOT you  .


I always feel a bit sorry for Prince Karl Phillip of Sweden in this regard. CP Victoria was first born, so heir on her birth. When he came along she got replaced by him as heir. However when they were kids (not sure of their ages exactly) the laws of succession were changed to birth order so he's now #4 (CP Victoria has 2 children)

Prince Karl Phillip sure is a handsome guy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I always feel a bit sorry for Prince Karl Phillip of Sweden in this regard. CP Victoria was first born, so heir on her birth. When he came along she got replaced by him as heir. However when they were kids (not sure of their ages exactly) the laws of succession were changed to birth order so he's now #4 (CP Victoria has 2 children)
> 
> Prince Karl Phillip sure is a handsome guy.



That was a really sh*tty move. Was it the parliament who made the decision? Couldn't they have done it before there was an actual person to de-throne?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Such a breach of trust. Also, I don't understand it at all. As she couldn't have had it announced in her name, what was she hoping to get out of it?


Quid pro quo. She gets a pass or a whitewash for some egregious act in the future. We know there be one, probably many.


----------



## RAINDANCE

It was done in 1979, first European monarchy to adopt absolute premogeniture. She was 2 so her brother must have only been a very small baby.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

I saw it stated somewhere that the King wanted MM involved in walkabouts etc so that Monday was all about the Queen as it should be rather than all about her (which it could have been if it was the first time she’d been seen in public)


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Or in Nicole Kidman's case, not move her face at all and let people read their own personal thoughts into it.
> 
> I read he never passed the exams to advance in the army.  Is that correct?



Archive stuff:



			CNN.com - Prince Harry passes Army test - Sep. 22, 2003


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Archive stuff:
> 
> 
> 
> CNN.com - Prince Harry passes Army test - Sep. 22, 2003


No, I meant he could not advance in his army career because he didn't pass the necessary tests.

For instance, he never became an Army certified helicopter pilot because he didn't pass the training. (William did.) Harry did pass something to be a co-pilot gunner but he didn't want to be a co-pilot.

It's what I read, not sure if it's completely correct.


----------



## Toby93

bisbee said:


> OMG…this is not a picture of a woman who is laughing.  We don’t know who she was looking at…her expression looks like she is giving a pleasant look to someone.


I guess we see things differently.....


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> Thank you for the correction and the clarification
> now I’m wondering if I could have gotten the idea from the bower book or something else I read


I seem to recall reading similar in the book about their brotherly squabbles and Will's temper.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> No, I meant he could not advance in his army career because he didn't pass the necessary tests.
> 
> For instance, he never became an Army certified helicopter pilot because he didn't pass the training. (William did.) Harry did pass something to be a co-pilot gunner but he didn't want to be a co-pilot.
> 
> It's what I read, not sure if it's completely correct.



Rumour has it


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I seem to recall reading similar in the book about their brotherly squabbles and Will's temper.



You would _not _have wanted to come to my house 

Will's temper seems justified in dealing with H. H must have been thoroughly provoking, and still is.

From what I've seen, Herry is the one with the temper and anger management issues


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I guess we see things differently.....


seems like she has a little smile...could be acknowledging someone?  I know this isn't a happy occasion but it's not like she is gaffawing


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> You would _not _have wanted to come to my house
> 
> Will's temper seems justified in dealing with H. H must have been thoroughly provoking, and still is.
> 
> From what I've seen, Herry is the one with the temper and anger management issues



Haha, can relate. I have three brothers, just like Anne.


----------



## Hermes Zen

gracekelly said:


> Precisely!  If I had  children that young, I would have flown home for at least  three days and then returned. She is afraid to leave the useful idiot for 5 minutes because she doesn’t want any outside influences touching him.   The reality is that his family  will say nothing important to him for fear of it being misused later.   I don’t think Anne or Sophie will speak to him at all. I also  saw at PP’s funeral that Tim Laurence had no use for Harry at all.


I can totally see it your way. I can also think that M doesn't want to leave the once in the life time opportunity that she was lucky to be in.  She wants to reflect back (in her head) and talk later to say how she experienced every moment.  She can say this in future interviews, books and to her children how their mummy was there to support their papa and grandpapa.    Hmmm wow why am I thinking like this.  Starting to wonder if I'm a narcissist.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I could not have been away that long when my daughter was young, esp with Dad gone as well.  No way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not only yours, Sophie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cameras magically attract her, don't they.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> She is going to SoHoHouse with Markus and Omid.


Was she carrying a pole on which to demonstrate her yoga prowess to the tune of Rule Britannia?


----------



## Lodpah

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610249
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610250
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610251



I hope Harry is contemplating whether what he and TW have done or will continue to do is worth it. I don’t think so. Cry your crocodile tears Harry you are a wretched, miserable, lying, manipulative and contemptible human being trained by your wife. I hope when this is all over no one will ever believe you and TW again and you both crawl back to your mansion and drink cocktails all day and mourn what you both threw away. What a slap in the face or farce this is both of them trying to act all pious now and grieving. Their hearts are stony thorns.

Your grandma loved you till the end even, in her classy way, tried to say goodbye to you by inviting your family to visit her.

One thing you need to know Harry is that there are spiritual consequences too. The Lord raises and brings down kings. Your grandmother was anointed as you can see by the the length of her reign and one thing you don’t do is harm the anointed and that is why whatever you and your wife tried to do, like the donkey when he spoke to Balaam who was on his way to destroy the King, he was stopped.

I’m not saying HM was perfect, no one is, but she had a purpose to fulfill.

Your endeavors going forward to harm the BRF will not come to fruition, unless He wills it to be and the purpose is done. Yes you will get coverage because you paid for that coverage but that’s all it is.

Remember Ahab and Jezebel and their actions. Jezebel pushing Ahab to buy the vineyard and when Naboth did not want to sell as it was in his family for generations, Jezebel took it violently. Well that’s you and your wife are doing. Nasty people may seem to prosper but in the end . . . well your spirit in you wastes away.

For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Was she carrying a pole on which to demonstrate her yoga prowess to the tune of Rule Britannia?


You’re a bad girl lol


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hermes Zen said:


> Wish there was a worse emoji than an angry face!! Op deserves worse!!!


Enjoy!


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I could not have been away that long when my daughter was young, esp with Dad gone as well.  No way.


Exactly. Why,_ what if the space heater started smoking?_

Was that inappropriate? I can’t tell anymore.


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> Interesting - thanks!
> 
> Meg's stomach was flat during the walk with Kate and Will the other day, so I can't see how she can pretend she is pregnant now with an open coat... ?



Upstaging a wedding with a pregnancy announcement is terrible enough. To play the "hinting-maybe" game at The Queen's service is unforgivable. There's nothing she won't stoop to.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I had to laugh imagining Princess Margaret as Queen, OMG. K Andrew and QC Fergie would have been even worse.
> 
> I need to go and wash my mind out
> 
> Interestingly, Anne (second born but out of the running) never wanted it.
> 
> Perhaps being in second line makes you have that feeling when your out by just one number on the Zillion-squillion lottery. It's not competition after all.
> 
> It really is just luck _or_ divine right. Either way it's just NO, it's NOT you  .


It is a very lonely job, maybe the loneliest in the world.  I do hope he has a strong support system.
During this entire week, when we see the King, he is surrounded by an entourage of men. Are those security agents? Advisers?  When he was PrinceOWales, I do not recall seeing this entourage - did they stay in the background?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Hermes Zen said:


> I can totally see it your way. I can also think that M doesn't want to leave the once in the life time opportunity that she was lucky to be in.  She wants to reflect back (in her head) and talk later to say how she experienced every moment.  She can say this in future interviews, books and to her children how their mummy was there to support their papa and grandpapa.    Hmmm wow why am I thinking like this.  Starting to wonder if I'm a narcissist.


Nah, you're not a narcissist. You were able to think like this because we've learned her behavior in the last few years and can easily speculate or guess what scheming BS she might pull. Pretty much reminds me of my job dealing with some of my awful clients and now I can predict all their tricks before they even try


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Cameras magically attract her, don't they.



LOL
always looking straight into the lens, always always always
she doesn't miss one glance. 
no shame.
who dares challenge her will be called racist... even here  ...


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Do men and women salute differently?  Anne's palm is down and the men's are outward.


It  has to do with the service, diff in navy and army , not diff by gender


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, tomorrow is Hazzie’s bday.  Checkmate, no wonder the King et al. left town.


----------



## marietouchet

880 said:


> I thought I read somewhere that they always had a turbulent relationship and H always thought it was unfair he was the spare? Re their relationship, Kate was supposedly the peacemaker even before MM?


Hmmm BRF relationships as evaluated in the press, is W calmer than H?
I dunno but this had me thinking about other tidbits I have read this week …
Anne was the Queen’s fav child, no, it was Andrew
H was the fav grandchild, no, it was Zara, no it was Peter her first grandchild

I think there were times when any of this was true but these tidbits are not universally true over time
Ex W had his bad days, H did too
The Queen liked Zara at times due to Z’s love of horses, but chose to often invite William to lunch when he was at Eton


----------



## Jayne1

I don't usually give much thought to whether Harry is balding or not, but this close-up got me thinking... I suspect he is using something to grow peach fuzz and keep the balding at bay. 

Which is totally fair, no one likes to lose their hair.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Message to the King - let’s not rush this. Wait to hear the podcasts and wait for Hazzie’s book.  There’s no hurry.

_A source told The Sun: 'Harry and Meghan were worried about the security issue and being prince and princess brings them the right to have certain levels of royal security.

'There have been a lot of talks over the past week. They have been insistent that Archie and Lilibet are prince and princess.

'_*They have been relentless since the Queen died. But they have been left furious that Archie and Lilibet cannot take the title HRH.*
_
'That is the agreement — they can be prince and princess but not HRH because they are not working royals.'








						Harry and Meghan 'angry as Archie and Lilibet will not get HRH titles'
					

Archie, three, and Lilibet, one, are expected to be officially made prince and princess in the near future as Charles has agreed to issue a Letters Patent to grant the titles.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Katel

pomeline said:


> What's happened to her face? Hardly even recognisable compared to her old face. I hate that she is there. She should be nowhere near the place.





Toby93 said:


> Her face has that smug look, and is so out of place.  She doesn't belong there but will not go home and leave Harry in case his family deprograms him





bag-mania said:


> Meghan isn’t thinking that at all. You aren’t thinking like a narcissist. She’s wondering how it is that there are still so many people who prefer Kate over her. “What is wrong with those people? Can’t they tell that I am superior in every way? What can I do to make sure people hate Kate?” Stuff like that.





WingNut said:


> I almost see her face as petulant. Like a child that just got reprimanded but doesn't believe they've done anything wrong and is stubbornly refusing to acknowledge the misbehavior. While I see Harry completely devastated by the realization that he a) is screwed, b) threw away any last chance at true meaningful time with his beloved grandmother, something he can NOT recover from, or c) in fear of what TW will do to him when they get home, I see her face as that of someone furiously seething and plotting. Not one ounce of genuine sadness or remorse.  Her face isn't good at hiding its "inside voice"*.....
> 
> *which is why she was a crappy actress to begin with


Yes, she looks like she’s angry as if she got scolded, is getting the cold shoulder, etc.  “Why are they being so mean to me?? Everyone has been so cruel to me - WHY?? Why has no one has asked ME if I’M OK?!? They are all RACIST!!”


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Didn’t we all think that?  Plus that Meghan would be a great help to the monarchy?  Wow!  We got that all wrong!!


I don't think the BRF thought TW would be of great help to the monarchy. They had probably plenty of  information about her to be concerned.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I don't think the BRF thought TW would be of great help to the monarchy. They had probably plenty of  information about her to be concerned.


They _encouraged_ her to continue the acting career.  Yep, they knew.  
They had all of her telephone conversations where perhaps she bragged about her plans.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Didn’t we all think that?  Plus that Meghan would be a great help to the monarchy?  Wow!  We got that all wrong!!


Remember how we all thought she was a breath of fresh air? Never has the atmosphere turned stale so quickly!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ya kno, Wallis&Ed wanted the HRH title, too.  QE’s father said no.
Hee hee,  once again the BRF gives us a MasterClass in the long game. 
Time to pay attention, the back stabbing and media wars have begun. 

_It was obvious that King George VI was using the denial of the style of HRH for the Duchess as a way to keep both of them out of the country. The Duke had vowed never to return to England unless Wallis was an HRH.








						Wallis Simpson and the fight over the HRH
					

On 27 May 1937, just a few days before Wallis Simpson and the former King Edward VIII were due to be married, a letter arrived from King George VI with “not very good news.” Edward then…




					royalcentral.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


>



It looks like she is mocking someone, very disrespectful.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Anne has had the most relatable role of all of them. 99% of the time , if there is a daughter, she bears the burden and does everything that Anne did. Been there and done that myself. TQ designated Anne to do certain things because she knew she could do them and handle them emotionally. I expect to see more of this when dealing with her nephew  and his wife.


ITA.  There’s no replacing a daughter.  Even if Haz had been with someone (anyone!) else and stayed in the BRF, I think Anne’s role in this funeral would’ve been the same.  She’s her mother’s daughter, and no grandchild, however loved they are, could replace her.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan 'angry as Archie and Lilibet will not get HRH titles'
					

Archie, three, and Lilibet, one, are expected to be officially made prince and princess in the near future as Charles has agreed to issue a Letters Patent to grant the titles.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The key phrase here is *sometime in the future.  *That's nice and vague as in let's see what happens when you leave and what is in your book when it comes out.  Let them be angry and do something really stupid and those kids will see nothing but Mr and Miss.   I don't think that KC likes being told what to do.










						Meghan's new favorite magazine The Cut launches attack King Charles
					

The Cut, the liberal magazine that published an in-depth interview with Meghan Markle, in August, has targeted King Charles in a new piece that was published online on Wednesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The Cut Magazine.  is so disrespectful of a man and family in mourning.  What ax do they have to grind with KC or the royal family?  The connection to Meghan is not going to sit well with BP or KC. The inference is that she chose this magazine for her profile.


----------



## Chanbal

I hope Charles doesn't rush to issue those letters… Yep, why does he want to have his kids trapped?


----------



## Mumotons

CarryOn2020 said:


> Message to the King - let’s not rush this. Wait to hear the podcasts and wait for Hazzie’s book.  There’s no hurry.
> 
> _A source told The Sun: 'Harry and Meghan were worried about the security issue and being prince and princess brings them the right to have certain levels of royal security.
> 
> 'There have been a lot of talks over the past week. They have been insistent that Archie and Lilibet are prince and princess.
> 
> '_*They have been relentless since the Queen died. But they have been left furious that Archie and Lilibet cannot take the title HRH.*
> 
> _'That is the agreement — they can be prince and princess but not HRH because they are not working royals.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'angry as Archie and Lilibet will not get HRH titles'
> 
> 
> Archie, three, and Lilibet, one, are expected to be officially made prince and princess in the near future as Charles has agreed to issue a Letters Patent to grant the titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If this is true, they have actually been hassling King Charles since his mother died a mere few days ago then they are the lowest of the low


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> If this is true, they have actually been hassling King Charles since his mother died a mere few days ago then they are the lowest of the low


I really don't know when this could have been discussed.  I think every minute of the day has been accounted for with KC and Harry was not there for any of them.


----------



## Katel

bisbee said:


> OMG…this is not a picture of a woman who is laughing.  We don’t know who she was looking at…her expression looks like she is giving a pleasant look to someone.



There is not one person there who went from a neutral facial expression to a smile, or even a “pleasant expression” - not one. This isn’t a garden stroll. Everyone is somber, or sad, or minimally, neutral. Out of RESPECT.
 MeMeMe tried a couple times. Then she petulantly fumed. Then she gave a wan fake half smile. 
The point is, at anyone’s funeral - the face is NEUTRAL minimally - out of respect! She is a narcissist - completely self-centered. She ain’t right - she needs serious help.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh my gosh NOW ???? Not the time ….








						Meghan's new favorite magazine The Cut launches attack King Charles
					

The Cut, the liberal magazine that published an in-depth interview with Meghan Markle, in August, has targeted King Charles in a new piece that was published online on Wednesday.




					mol.im


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is a great response…


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, it was also her who grabbed him. I still think he should have squeezed her hand if he had to in reassurance, then let go. Like the balcony moment when he told her in no uncertain terms to shut up and look ahead.


This was after he covered his eyes and looked oh-so-pained.  Other commenters are saying not to buy into his poor-me act. He’s a fake, he’s a liar - yes, even at his grandmother’s funeral.  So is she, by her own admission.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Message to the King - let’s not rush this. Wait to hear the podcasts and wait for Hazzie’s book.  There’s no hurry.
> 
> _A source told The Sun: 'Harry and Meghan were worried about the security issue and being prince and princess brings them the right to have certain levels of royal security.
> 
> 'There have been a lot of talks over the past week. They have been insistent that Archie and Lilibet are prince and princess.
> 
> '_*They have been relentless since the Queen died. But they have been left furious that Archie and Lilibet cannot take the title HRH.*
> 
> _'That is the agreement — they can be prince and princess but not HRH because they are not working royals.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'angry as Archie and Lilibet will not get HRH titles'
> 
> 
> Archie, three, and Lilibet, one, are expected to be officially made prince and princess in the near future as Charles has agreed to issue a Letters Patent to grant the titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



They couldn't even have the decency to wait until after the funeral?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> I guess we see things differently.....


Toby93,
The Body Language Guy did one of his extended analysis today about Raptor’s facial expressions.45 minutes. Briefly, His assessment is smug, sneer, not engaged in the ceremony. He said he has seen pictures of her genuinely sad, this was not the look.

 In the picture where she is outright smiling: he determined by enhancing the image, it was taken while she is in a procession, there was no one to smile at, she was looking at the back of the person in front of her, no contact with anyone on either side. The Duke of Kent was behind her and his distinctive blue sash and his Medals helped identify what was going on. Conclusion: in the midst of one of the most solemn occasions in recent history, Rachel Meghan Markle was looking pleased and smiling to herself. Can’t think of adequate words to describe it. BLG struggled. 

Tomorrow he’s analyzing the picture of the Suckesses behind King Charles at Buckingham Palace. Scobie has taken it down, ditto the Daily Mail, evidently because of questions about possible photoshopping. BLG made the comment he does not think it is, but believes it is a very important photo with ramifications for the future.

Sounds like a “developing story.”


----------



## Chanbal

After what TW did to QE, someone should have had the courage to prevent her from attending the funeral. Why would Charles agree to confer more titles to the Harkle's family? It's a big mistake imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I really don't know when this could have been discussed.  I think every minute of the day has been accounted for with KC and Harry was there for any of them.


She loves emails, zooms, etc.  The demands could have been given to William, courtiers, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> After what TW did to QE, someone should have had the courage to prevent her from attending the funeral. Why would Charles agree to confer more titles to the Harkle's family? It's a big mistake imo.



Finally, someone is saying this out loud. She chose this family. The contradictions, the hypocrisy boggle the mind.  Good on the SunnySachs clients for standing up. Yes, they all look foolish now.  We tried to tell ya, but ya wouldn’t listen. 

_How do you spin this? Curtsying willing & deeply to the woman whose family she lobbed racial accusations at. Optics. Everything is about optics. This picture is priceless. _


----------



## Maggie Muggins

periogirl28 said:


> I want a "one eyebrow raised" emoji here. By Sean Connery.


Y'all are such hard taskmasters! There's hardly any Sean Connery emojis on the net, but try these.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> They couldn't even have the decency to wait until after the funeral?


They are attack dogs who are trying to hit another animal when they are at their weakest.  The thing is the animal being attacked has other members of the immediate family around who know what is going on.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She loves emails, zooms, etc.  The demands could have been given to William, courtiers, etc.


Maybe they were haranguing him last night whilst waiting for the hearse.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Y'all are such hard taskmasters! There's hardly any Sean Connery emojis on the net, but try these.
> 
> View attachment 5610699
> View attachment 5610698


Sorry, but I couldn't resist…


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> They are attack dogs who are trying to hit another animal when they are at their weakest.  The thing is the animal being attacked has other members of the immediate family around who know what is going on.


Plus, the BRF is not at its weakest now. Imo.  They are united, strong and ready to repel any attacks, usually with manners and kindness [killing them softly with kindness]. QE, King Charles, Camilla, Edward, etc. are well versed in Shakespeare.  Hazzi and his Hwood wife should tread carefully.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Sorry, but I couldn't resist…



OMG, Sean? Bond? Wth?  He needed the money, I understand, it is ok [sorta]. Carry on, love. 
Are you talking to me?


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


>



Oh wow - did Sucky Sux drop the Brats (not the other way around)?


----------



## redney

Katel said:


> Oh wow - did Sucky Sux drop the Brats (not the other way around)?


Sounds like it!


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> Y'all are such hard taskmasters! There's hardly any Sean Connery emojis on the net, but try these.
> 
> View attachment 5610699
> View attachment 5610698



I’ll see your Sean Connery and raise you The Rock… The People’s Eyebrow. We smell what TW’s cooking.


----------



## needlv

I don’t believe the Sun newspaper story about the two kids getting prince and Princess but not HRH.

They are probably trolling everyone for reactions.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> They are attack dogs who are trying to hit another animal when they are at their weakest.  The thing is the animal being attacked has other members of the immediate family around who know what is going on.


Yep it’s called the Pack.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


>



This would explain why Tyler Perry tweeted a happy birthday to "Princess Meghan"     He was told to by SS?


----------



## Lodpah

Harry hates the press and his wife lives for the press. Who’s gonna win?


----------



## periogirl28

Maggie Muggins said:


> Y'all are such hard taskmasters! There's hardly any Sean Connery emojis on the net, but try these.
> 
> View attachment 5610699
> View attachment 5610698


You are amazing, it's perfect! Thank you!!


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Toby93,
> The Body Language Guy did one of his extended analysis today about Raptor’s facial expressions.45 minutes. Briefly, His assessment is smug, sneer, not engaged in the ceremony. He said he has seen pictures of her genuinely sad, this was not the look.
> 
> In the picture where she is outright smiling: he determined by enhancing the image, it was taken while she is in a procession, there was no one to smile at, she was looking at the back of the person in front of her, no contact with anyone on either side. The Duke of Kent was behind her and his distinctive blue sash and his Medals helped identify what was going on. Conclusion: in the midst of one of the most solemn occasions in recent history, Rachel Meghan Markle was looking pleased and smiling to herself. Can’t think of adequate words to describe it. BLG struggled.
> 
> Tomorrow he’s analyzing the picture of the Suckesses behind King Charles at Buckingham Palace. Scobie has taken it down, ditto the Daily Mail, evidently because of questions about possible photoshopping. BLG made the comment he does not think it is, but believes it is a very important photo with ramifications for the future.
> 
> Sounds like a “developing story.”


Not one other person had a stupid smile on their face at any time during the very sombre ceremony.  Most of HMTQs immediate family were holding back tears, and their eyes were red.  

I just cannot give her a pass on this one as someone did earlier, and say that maybe she was being "pleasant" to someone.  She was the only one who was pictured smiling.  The only other expression on her face was that of smugness.  

It is infuriating that she is there after all the betrayal.  You just know that the BRF is allowing her to be there so she can't say anything about how awful they were to her.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plus, the BRF is not at its weakest now. Imo.  They are united, strong and ready to repel any attacks, usually with manners and kindness [killing them softly with kindness]. QE, King Charles, Camilla, Edward, etc. are well versed in Shakespeare.  Hazzi and his Hwood wife should tread carefully.


I agree.  Watching the extended family walk today showed a wall of strength.  The Dukes of Kent and Gloucester and Prince Michael of Kent  were there in their uniforms, which you don't always see.   Earl of Snowdon and his sister Lady Sarah Chatto are always included along with all the other younger royals you see all the time.  When together, they are a steel shield around the monarchy principals.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CarryOn2020 said:


> Message to the King - let’s not rush this. Wait to hear the podcasts and wait for Hazzie’s book.  There’s no hurry.
> 
> _A source told The Sun: 'Harry and Meghan were worried about the security issue and being prince and princess brings them the right to have certain levels of royal security.
> 
> 'There have been a lot of talks over the past week. They have been insistent that Archie and Lilibet are prince and princess.
> 
> '_*They have been relentless since the Queen died. But they have been left furious that Archie and Lilibet cannot take the title HRH.*
> 
> _'That is the agreement — they can be prince and princess but not HRH because they are not working royals.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'angry as Archie and Lilibet will not get HRH titles'
> 
> 
> Archie, three, and Lilibet, one, are expected to be officially made prince and princess in the near future as Charles has agreed to issue a Letters Patent to grant the titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Completely opposite to Princess Anne who requested that her children NOT be HRH but is herself one of the hardest bait king royals, and always has been!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wonder if it bothered H&M to be in the 4th row - seems they continue to get pushed back


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


I'd give her a pass. She does drama mama a lot, so exaggerating the curtsey is par for the course. Very much in her nature.


DoggieBags said:


> I actually have been pleasantly surprised by TW’s behavior to date. Other than the probably staged picture from Buckingham Palace of them standing behind KC as they waited for the Queen’s coffin to arrive, and the hand holding coming out of Westminster, she hasn’t pushed or shoved in front of H or senior royals, she curtsied at the right moment, and has generally followed the script.


Crossing my fingers that she won't act up too much. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, today was not bad [other than the copy-Kate makeup and hand-holding]. I did get the “I really don’t care” vibe, so “I’ll put minimal effort into my outfit” but it is a funeral.  She doesn’t have any of the stand-out jewelry that Cam&Kate do, so not much to look at.


It's not going to be very effective Netflix footage if she constantly puts on a grumpy wish-I-were-somewhere-else expression. Still better than sad-but-sexy, I suppose.


----------



## bag-mania

Katel said:


> Oh wow - did Sucky Sux drop the Brats (not the other way around)?


That is far more believable to me.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Anyone know the story to this?


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Not one other person had a stupid smile on their face at any time during the very sombre ceremony.  *Most of HMTQs immediate family were holding back tears, and their eyes were red. *
> 
> I just cannot give her a pass on this one as someone did earlier, and say that maybe she was being "pleasant" to someone.  She was the only one who was pictured smiling.  The only other expression on her face was that of smugness.
> 
> It is infuriating that she is there after all the betrayal.  You just know that the BRF is allowing her to be there so she can't say anything about how awful they were to her.


The difference is the family loved the Queen and Meghan did not. She had to pretend to be grieving like the others when she’s wasn’t feeling it and the mask slipped. 

I don’t think even the most devoted stan could make the case that Meghan is genuinely grieving. How could she? She was not around long enough to know her. Meghan didn’t bother go to her uncle’s funeral and she reportedly had a good relationship with him.


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> Not one other person had a stupid smile on their face at any time during the very sombre ceremony.  Most of HMTQs immediate family were holding back tears, and their eyes were red.
> 
> I just cannot give her a pass on this one as someone did earlier, and say that maybe she was being "pleasant" to someone.  She was the only one who was pictured smiling.  The only other expression on her face was that of smugness.
> 
> It is infuriating that she is there after all the betrayal.  You just know that the BRF is allowing her to be there so she can't say anything about how awful they were to her.


All you said!
Poor Sophie having to ride in the car with her and then stand next to her!
BLG commented on Sophie leaning away from her at the Service, the tension in her body to the extent one hand was clutching her purse at her side and her hand on the other side could be seen clenched in a fist, just visible under her coat sleeve.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Anyone know the story to this?



Yes, we went over it a few weeks back, maybe longer. In an interview Thomas blustered that if he found out he was dying of cancer and he had nothing to lose, he would kill the tabloid owner who tricked him which led to his estrangement with Meghan. It was an empty threat from an 80+-year-old stroke patient in Mexico but the tabloid owner took the opportunity to file a restraining order, thereby getting himself press attention.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> The difference is the family loved the Queen and Meghan did not. She had to pretend to be grieving like the others when she’s wasn’t feeling it and the mask slipped.
> 
> I don’t think even the most devoted stan could make the case that Meghan is genuinely grieving. How could she? She was not around long enough to know her. Meghan didn’t bother go to her uncle’s funeral and she reportedly had a good relationship with him.


Plus they snubbed Sandringham Christmas and Balmoral summer invitations.


----------



## Mendocino

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm BRF relationships as evaluated in the press, is W calmer than H?
> I dunno but this had me thinking about other tidbits I have read this week …
> Anne was the Queen’s fav child, no, it was Andrew
> H was the fav grandchild, no, it was Zara, no it was Peter her first grandchild
> 
> I think there were times when any of this was true but these tidbits are not universally true over time
> Ex W had his bad days, H did too
> The Queen liked Zara at times due to Z’s love of horses, but chose to often invite William to lunch when he was at Eton


Yes. I remember William visiting the Queen when he was at Eton. When I visited Windsor Castle I remember walking down a hall and looking out the window onto a playing field at Eton. He was literally right next door to her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, tomorrow is Hazzie’s bday.  Checkmate, no wonder the King et al. left town.


I noted that this year the BRF did not post any SM messages re 9/11 anniversary due I expect to the royal period of mourning.
Don't expect any social media messages to Harry either.
I read W&K are going to today Sandringham to see the flowers there


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is what a crowd looks like. H&M, take note.
The silent majority steps up


----------



## RAINDANCE

needlv said:


> I don’t believe the Sun newspaper story about the two kids getting prince and Princess but not HRH.
> 
> They are probably trolling everyone for reactions.


The really clever thing would be to use what Ed and Sophie did as the precedent. 
Your kids can use lesser lady and viscount titles they we're entitled to at birth as children of a Duke but no Prince  Princess til 18 (and no HRH)


----------



## RAINDANCE

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is what a crowd looks like. H&M, take note.
> The silent majority steps up



Thank God we Brits know how to queue properly.


----------



## gracekelly

Daily Mail
Harry and Meghan could have an ally in Sophie Wessex who was the 'first member of the family to go see them after the birth of son Archie', source claims​

Whut!  Did this source not see what happened in 2020 at the Commonwealth service. Sophie totally ignored them and was frosty.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Daily Mail
> Harry and Meghan could have an ally in Sophie Wessex who was the 'first member of the family to go see them after the birth of son Archie', source claims​
> 
> Whut!  Did this source not see what happened in 2020 at the Commonwealth service. Sophie totally ignored them and was frosty.


Using  Archie’s birth is a huge stretch. Surely the DM knows it was not Sophie’s choice to ride with Tw. 
The BRF was very friendly and kind to H&M in those early days after Archie’s birth.  Now, they are still kind with lots of layers of frost.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cosmopolitan said:


> View attachment 5610171



I hate the new box formatting on TPF . So hard to delete and rearrange quotes. 

She’s toned down the orange- is she reading this thread?   

I love this thread for entertainment- it’s addictive! 
I don’t care for influencers as it’s all a bit generic. 


WingNut said:


> That is the face of a man for whom the realization, of just how much damage he and TW have done, is finally sinking in.


Well either that or the live footage is going to finally show how big his bald spot is. 


Sophisticatted said:


> Tinfoil hat time:  I believe she was dressed for this event.  The “reworn” items might even be copies made of items she’s worn before so as to not allow this event to become one of her merching spectacles.  Even the earrings may be copies vs. the real thing.  How often does she wear them IRL?  Would she have packed all these things for her original itinerary?  Perhaps they could have been shipped to her, but it seems more like her MO to borrow and merch.  JMO.


I’m 100 sure they lie about all sorts of things on these wardrobe blogs. Especially about ‘repeats’ and owns vs borrows. 


Toby93 said:


> This would explain why Tyler Perry tweeted a happy birthday to "Princess Meghan"     He was told to by SS?


It would - well either that or she lends Medea her old outfits. 

I’d be annoyed because it’s basically negative publicity these days.


----------



## purseinsanity

Pessie said:


> I read that one of things Sophie and the Queen spent time together doing was delving in the archives.  I’d’ve loved to do that!


THIS!  The only thing I was “jealous” about TW marrying into the BRF was the amount of history she’d have private access to!  As a history buff, I would be giddy to see any of this and to have THE QUEEN as your personal tour guide if you were interested?!  OMG blows my mind.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> View attachment 5610504
> 
> 
> This picture has bothered me since I first saw it. It was taken by an award winning 30 year photographer from the Evening Standard newspaper. I don’t think he’s a pap, but he got lucky.
> 
> I enlarged it and looking at it more carefully I realized why it nagged at me. We focus on Charles, perfectly framed in the center, obviously grieved, then shockingly I think, our eyes move to the most unexpected family members to be featured behind him, the Suckesses, and in our shock, at least in mine for a long time, stop there.
> 
> But, if you look behind them, I think that’s where there’s an interesting story.The entire family has been gathered, yet not one additional family member is in the area. The men behind the Duke and Duchess look like grey men in suits getting ready for the arrival. Charles, lost in his grief, may not even realize who is behind him at the moment.
> 
> I think H and M may have found themselves in the midst of a deep chill among the family they have savaged. They have separated themselves from the group. TW will have been carefully scoping out the surroundings, radar always looking for the camera, in hope of finding something advantageous. Charles‘ move to the door would have signaled the arrival was near, with no one paying attention they managed to insert themselves as they did. I would be willing to bet the tableau changed, but in that instant they were positioned and whether purposeful or accidental the photographer got a “money shot”.
> 
> The fact Scoobie pulled it indicates, I think, that serious pressure was applied somewhere as this was not the optic the RF wanted for history.
> 
> Their brazenness will not be forgotten or forgiven especially if it ends up as part of a documentary/reality show about them.
> 
> I could be wacky wrong, but the picture is not a true depiction of the event and it bothers me.


What bothers me about this picture is that TW seems to be looking directly at the camera yet again!


----------



## purseinsanity

Ali-bagpuss said:


> They look like cardboard cut outs placed behind the king


You’re right!
They look like their dummy wax versions at Madame Tussaud’s!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would very happily live an invisible life in my nice residence financed by my king brother. In fact, having all eyes on me comes pretty close to my personal idea of hell.


My daughter asked me recently if I’d want to be a member of the BRF or very rich but unknown.  I told her it’s not even a fair question!  Give me rich and unknown over being in a gilded cage any day of the week!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Nah, you're not a narcissist. You were able to think like this because we've learned her behavior in the last few years and can easily speculate or guess what scheming BS she might pull. Pretty much reminds me of my job dealing with some of my awful clients and now I can predict all their tricks before they even try


A narcissist would never wonder if they’re a narcissist.  They don’t have the self realization to know they have issues.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> The difference is the family loved the Queen and Meghan did not. She had to pretend to be grieving like the others when she’s wasn’t feeling it and the mask slipped.
> 
> I don’t think even the most devoted stan could make the case that Meghan is genuinely grieving. How could she? She was not around long enough to know her. Meghan didn’t bother go to her uncle’s funeral and she reportedly had a good relationship with him.





csshopper said:


> Plus they snubbed Sandringham Christmas and Balmoral summer invitations.


I’d like to know how many times Meghan was actually in company with the Queen.  She was only here a short while, before scooting off to Canada.  She only spent 72 days on royal duty.  They rejected all summer and Christmas holiday invitations from the family.  And I do not believe Meghans zoom fantasies.  It wouldn’t surprise me if it was less than a dozen times.


----------



## CarryOn2020

As Conor Roy says to his errant brother,  “so, your silver spoon wasn’t shiny enough?”  
Reminds me of Hazz.


----------



## jblended

I watched it again. I don't want to be this person but, she looks smug. It's not that she's nervous or under pressure, she just doesn't care that we've lost HMQ.
Everyone is grieving, the family is devastated, random people in the crowd are sobbing, and she looks...smug.

I also can't tell if H is grieving. He looks off but I don't know if it's more anger or shock, because I see grief in everyone's eyes but his.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> I watched it again. I don't want to be this person but, she looks smug. It's not that she's nervous or under pressure, she just doesn't care that we've lost HMQ.
> Everyone is grieving, the family is devastated, random people in the crowd are sobbing, and she looks...smug.
> 
> I also can't tell if H is grieving. He looks off but I don't know if it's more anger or shock, because I see grief in everyone's eyes but his.


Spot on. 
He’s looking all around, as if he is bored. Same for her, except she is doing the vacant stare.  Eyes open but not seeing, not listening either.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Oh my gosh NOW ???? Not the time ….
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan's new favorite magazine The Cut launches attack King Charles
> 
> 
> The Cut, the liberal magazine that published an in-depth interview with Meghan Markle, in August, has targeted King Charles in a new piece that was published online on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


Not that the daily mail has ever characterised Charles as finicky, petulant or immature before  

It’s difficult- yes his mother has died but he’s also become king. When does it become an acceptable time to evaluate the Queen’s reign or Charles’ previous acts?

 Let’s also not ignore the fact the presses are running overtime with positive articles about the Queen, him and his family so it’s not like the royals and their press team have taken a break from the media full stop- isn’t it basic press freedom that a less glowing opinion appear as well? 

I read the article and I think it was a bit of softball to be honest. 

It amazes me that articles will make gestures towards the royal family’s colonialism and the past but never ever mention the family’s support and personal involvement in the U.K. arms trade.  This is something  our new king has done himself and which is probably the most morally reprehensible form of modern colonialism. 

It also makes sense if this magazine is really in bed with H&M that they wouldn’t mention it because of course they want to be in with the family so they can’t really discuss any serious accusations against them - just stick to the fluff about calling a baby dark and keep blackfishing Meghan up. Nothing of the critique - if I can even call it that H&M have offered of the royals is remotely political or relevant - it’s all just personal griping. 

I will say I read the Uju Anya response and while I think her initial tweet put a lot of people off  She did make much more nuanced and relevant criticisms of the late Queen and Britain’s involvement in the Nigerian civil war - so it does strike me as condescending to see the DM put this in the same sphere as Meghan who mainly gripes about crying over dresses several years ago and called an African state mansion a housing unit. 

Then again I thought everyone had decided the cut article was ironic - so maybe they just have a variety of opinions rather than a clear editorial line. Or, dream of dreams, they are a publication that recognises that endless press about H&M and unquestioning puff pieces of the royal family are 2 halves of the same coin.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> THIS!  The only thing I was “jealous” about TW marrying into the BRF was the amount of history she’d have private access to!  As a history buff, I would be giddy to see any of this and to have THE QUEEN as your personal tour guide if you were interested?!  OMG blows my mind.


I know!  I am a sucker for these PBS shows like the recent one on The Boleyns based on actual letters that they wrote.  Can you imagine having access to things like that? Or the clothing archives?  The art collections?  It is endless!  And that noob didn't appreciate any of it and her poor kids will never get near it.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> I know!  I am a sucker for these PBS shows like the recent one on The Boleyns based on actual letters that they wrote.  Can you imagine having access to things like that? Or the clothing archives?  The art collections?  It is endless!  And that noob didn't appreciate any of it and her poor kids will never get near it.


Yes, this!


----------



## gracekelly

The networks have been running endless programs documenting the life of QEII  The old footage is excellent, but it occurred to me to even with the film of her father's funeral, her wedding and coronation and all of her trips abroad, it was the tip of the iceberg compared to what is going on right this minute with the funeral and ascension of King Charles.  The scrutiny that he is receiving is unprecedented and extremely intrusive.  The man can't even get upset about a pen without it becoming the subject of a nasty magazine article.  This is all absurd! Considering everything, the way all of this passing of a great woman  has been handled by the country, the public and the monarchy, it has been  almost total perfection.  Plus what gives total outsiders the right to criticize?  And right now!  Her Majesty hasn't even had her formal funeral yet.  Who called out the dogs?  If I was really paranoid, I'd say it was part of the Harkle Markle PR machine which will stop at nothing to get their point across and what they want. Stories that they are concerned about how much money they are going to get and titles for unseen children! As if we needed more proof that these are selfish tasteless people who will stop at nothing no matter who gets hurt.
Rant over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hillary isn't picky these days, hu?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hillary isn't picky these days, hu?



Hence the miserable, spoilt, sulky face, rather than a genuinely devastated grieving one.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is a very lonely job, maybe the loneliest in the world.  I do hope he has a strong support system.
> During this entire week, when we see the King, he is surrounded by an entourage of men. Are those security agents? Advisers?  When he was PrinceOWales, I do not recall seeing this entourage - did they stay in the background?



Lots of security at this point. 

We even have Celtic (Scottish football club) mocking mocking the Crown and their biggest rivals Rangers singing _Gd Save the King _when uncalled for. Everything very 'emotional' right now.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> Hence the miserable, spoilt, sulky face, rather than a genuinely devastated grieving one.


She must be really pi**ed. Best laid plans and all that…..
I’m sure the self publicity, self aggrandisement bandwagon will pick up steam again as soon as she gets home.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> I always thought pre M, William was very lucky to have Harry as his 'wingman' for his future role as King and that he'd have a prominent role. Not anymore. TW put paid to that.


Me too...
And while I thought "a breath of fresh air" was exaggerating the Markle influence and I did not particularly like her cutesy mannerisms and love for arching her back, neck and head into odd positions, I did not expect her to be a destructive wildfire.


andrashik said:


> I have previously posted about a reddit user that apparently has some sources and she/he is popular on the r/SaintMeghanMarkle subreddit and I found this on our dear marklenews1 whom I told about this thread and the cool people here.



If it was the Queen who said No to half-in/half-out but she also propped open the door for them to return, I suppose Zedzee thought her father-in-law would be easier to deal with. Probably her million pound wardrobe wore out her welcome.


----------



## Sharont2305

Peter Phillips seems to be staring right at her, I wonder what he's thinking?


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I don't usually give much thought to whether Harry is balding or not, but this close-up got me thinking... I suspect he is using something to grow peach fuzz and keep the balding at bay.
> 
> Which is totally fair, no one likes to lose their hair.
> 
> View attachment 5610667



That man has aged 10 years in the last 4


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Peter Phillips seems to be staring right at her, I wonder what he's thinking?
> 
> View attachment 5610808



He looks to be thinking "Don't bother dear"


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> OMG, Sean? Bond? Wth?  He needed the money, I understand, it is ok [sorta]. Carry on, love.
> Are you talking to me?
> 
> View attachment 5610700



I think he'd be OK, he started his professional life as a male model

Anyway, it was Roger Moore that was famous for his eyebrow and 'minimal' acting. 

I think we need a smirk from Daniel Craig TBH. He can still take care of MM and raise an eyebrow


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> That is far more believable to me.


Particularly if bills are not being paid on time.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hillary isn't picky these days, hu?



Oh my god- I called this a while back-  I bet Hil IS one of the podcast guests


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Message to the King - let’s not rush this. Wait to hear the podcasts and wait for Hazzie’s book.  There’s no hurry.
> 
> _A source told The Sun: 'Harry and Meghan were worried about the security issue and being prince and princess brings them the right to have certain levels of royal security.
> 
> 'There have been a lot of talks over the past week. They have been insistent that Archie and Lilibet are prince and princess.
> 
> '_*They have been relentless since the Queen died. But they have been left furious that Archie and Lilibet cannot take the title HRH.*
> 
> _'That is the agreement — they can be prince and princess but not HRH because they are not working royals.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'angry as Archie and Lilibet will not get HRH titles'
> 
> 
> Archie, three, and Lilibet, one, are expected to be officially made prince and princess in the near future as Charles has agreed to issue a Letters Patent to grant the titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I don't know where this "If the are prince and princess they are eligible for security" comes from. Archie was eligible for security living in the UK just fine, as Harry was eligible. Nobody is going to pay for their California security only because the Sussexes forced the titles. 

Plus for a couple who publicly declared Archie was to be a private citizen they sure love the prestige.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> I watched the video and in motion, *she did look like she was tearing up.*
> 
> Of course, with an actress and especially this one, we never know how calculated it is... but she did look sad.


Sorry, every time she has tears, I'm reminded of her boasting that she could cry on demand.


csshopper said:


> View attachment 5610504
> 
> 
> This picture has bothered me since I first saw it. It was taken by an award winning 30 year photographer from the Evening Standard newspaper. I don’t think he’s a pap, but he got lucky.
> 
> I enlarged it and looking at it more carefully I realized why it nagged at me. We focus on Charles, perfectly framed in the center, obviously grieved, then shockingly I think, our eyes move to the most unexpected family members to be featured behind him, the Suckesses, and in our shock, at least in mine for a long time, stop there.
> 
> But, if you look behind them, I think that’s where there’s an interesting story.The entire family has been gathered, yet not one additional family member is in the area. The men behind the Duke and Duchess look like grey men in suits getting ready for the arrival. Charles, lost in his grief, may not even realize who is behind him at the moment.
> 
> I think H and M may have found themselves in the midst of a deep chill among the family they have savaged. They have separated themselves from the group. TW will have been carefully scoping out the surroundings, radar always looking for the camera, in hope of finding something advantageous. Charles‘ move to the door would have signaled the arrival was near, with no one paying attention they managed to insert themselves as they did. I would be willing to bet the tableau changed, but in that instant they were positioned and whether purposeful or accidental the photographer got a “money shot”.
> 
> The fact Scoobie pulled it indicates, I think, that serious pressure was applied somewhere as this was not the optic the RF wanted for history.
> 
> Their brazenness will not be forgotten or forgiven especially if it ends up as part of a documentary/reality show about them.
> 
> I could be wacky wrong, but the picture is not a true depiction of the event and it bothers me.


My first thought was that they scrambled to be first in line after him.


Jayne1 said:


> Interesting - thanks!
> 
> Meg's stomach was flat during the walk with Kate and Will the other day, so I can't see how she can pretend she is pregnant now with an open coat... ?


The first trimester moon bump arrived in the mail.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Such a breach of trust. Also, I don't understand it at all. As she couldn't have had it announced in her name, what was she hoping to get out of it?


A reputation for being able to provide insider info. Maybe she wanted to cultivate more friendly US media.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> The difference is the family loved the Queen and Meghan did not. She had to pretend to be grieving like the others when she’s wasn’t feeling it and the mask slipped.
> 
> I don’t think even the most devoted stan could make the case that Meghan is genuinely grieving. How could she? She was not around long enough to know her. *Meghan didn’t bother go to her uncle’s funeral and she reportedly had a good relationship with him.*


Good point! She didn't bother to attend the funeral of the uncle who helped her, but she seems eager to attend all photo-op events at QE's funeral.


----------



## tenshix

Sharont2305 said:


> Peter Phillips seems to be staring right at her, I wonder what he's thinking?
> 
> View attachment 5610808


I just caught up on the news coverage of the Westminster service and personally was disturbed/bothered that she looked smug/appeared to be smirking most of the time when the camera was on her while everyone else looked somber and upset (as is normal for someone in mourning).

I know she didn’t have the best relationship with HMTQ but to be smug or smirking at the service seems very odd and disrespectful.. Not sure what was going on in her mind. She had a weird uptick on the side of the lip and would have to actively lift those muscles on the face to do that.

The deep bow also seemed disingenuous to me, as if purposely trying to make a point that she hadn’t been disrespectful to TQ. I feel that her presence is particularly offensive & hypocritical throughout this whole process.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Peter Phillips seems to be staring right at her, *I wonder what he's thinking?*
> 
> View attachment 5610808


Let me guess:


----------



## BlueCherry

She is smug because no matter what she does and says she still manages to successfully inveigle herself into any RF event. Many large families, mine included, have at least one truly awful family member which is exacerbated when they acquire an equally awful partner/spouse. But life is a long road with lots of twists and turns and one thing is certain, those eaten up with bitterness are never truly happy.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hillary isn't picky these days, hu?



She planned to speak about ‘troops holding women back’ does podcasts on strong women yet she bashed the Queen! I know the Queen didn’t initially want her job and it was more a case of blood and bad luck but pleeeeaassee .. she had close access to one of the strongest women in the world and she literally threw it away ‍♀️


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Chanbal said:


> Good point! She didn't bother to attend the funeral of the uncle who helped her, but she seems eager to attend all photo-op events at QE's funeral.


To be honest though she’s in a no win situation here because I think we’d all be having a go at her if she WASN’T there too


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> _People_ will never change. Let’s make it all about Meghan! Got to get those clicks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wears Earrings Gifted to Her by Queen Elizabeth at London Service
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex subtly signaled a happy memory she had with the Queen Elizabeth through her jewelry choice at the London service on Wednesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


How would People know those earrings were a gift from TQ unless someone from the Harkle camp clued them in?


papertiger said:


> I had to laugh imagining Princess Margaret as Queen, OMG. K Andrew and QC Fergie would have been even worse.
> 
> I need to go and wash my mind out
> 
> Interestingly, Anne (second born but out of the running) never wanted it.
> 
> Perhaps being in second line makes you have that feeling when your out by just one number on the Zillion-squillion lottery. It's not competition after all.
> 
> It really is just luck _or_ divine right. Either way it's just NO, it's NOT you  .


TQ's father never expected to be King. I'm glad he was because Edward and Wallis were  (and I say this even though I  their jewellery).


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Cameras magically attract her, don't they.



Maybe that's part of the reason why she never made it big as an actress. You're not supposed to break the 4th wall willy nilly.


Chanbal said:


> I hope Charles doesn't rush to issue those letters… Yep, why does he want to have his kids trapped?



It's a money trap.


Chanbal said:


>



"clients publicly support other clients when profitable"
Obviously it wasn't all that profitable.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> How would People know those earrings were a gift from TQ unless someone from the Harkle camp clued them in?
> 
> TQ's father never expected to be King. I'm glad he was because Edward and Wallis were  (and I say this even though I  their jewellery).
> 
> Maybe that's part of the reason why she never made it big as an actress. You're not supposed to break the 4th wall willy nilly.
> 
> It's a money trap.
> 
> "clients publicly support other clients when profitable"
> Obviously it wasn't all that profitable.



 Sorry, emojis not working, but HI 5!


----------



## papertiger

Ali-bagpuss said:


> To be honest though she’s in a no win situation here because I think we’d all be having a go at her if she WASN’T there too



I think I would actually have more respect


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think I would actually have more respect



Same.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I think I would actually have more respect


She would not have been missed.   Not sure Hazzi would have been missed much either, but maybe. 
How can they leave the alleged 2 children under 4 yrs for 2/3 weeks???  How just how?  Brrrr, getting a chill thinking about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> She would not have been missed.   Not sure Hazzi would have been missed much either, but maybe.
> *How can they leave the alleged 2 children under 4 yrs for 2/3 weeks???*  How just how?  Brrrr, getting a chill thinking about it.



Priorities!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

papertiger said:


> I think I would actually have more respect


I would too.


----------



## xincinsin

Ali-bagpuss said:


> To be honest though she’s in a no win situation here because I think we’d all be having a go at her if she WASN’T there too


If she were in her mansion, she could have used the kids as an excuse not to come, released countless leaks about her special bond and closeness to TQ, and sent a tacky wreath with its own press release (I told myself never to use or recommend the florist that sponsored her PP wreath). Different kind of h*ll for the UK and BRF. I think I prefer to have her squirming under the microscope in London.


----------



## needlv

I don’t care about hand holding.  It’s what they always do As a form of control or dependency or whatever.   They don’t follow royal protocol and are minor royals or should I say “Duke and Duchess of Overseas”.

but her PR continuing to churn out this rubbish… give it a break!!!


----------



## Sina08

Chanbal said:


> This is what a crowd looks like. H&M, take note.


I wonder if she finally begins to grasp the magnitude of all this. She probably thought she could take them on because she never understood what she married into and the importance and weight of the whole institution. I mean, the funeral hasn’t even taken place yet, and there’s ceremonial stuff going on every day. The outpour of grief and support, the sheer mass of people on the streets. Heads of state, other Monarchs, politicians, celebrities alike expressing their sympathy. Even a dumb person would get that this is a big deal. May it be dawning on her too?
(I’m sure there won’t be much fuss when she dies one day.)




jblended said:


> I watched it again. I don't want to be this person but, she looks smug. It's not that she's nervous or under pressure, she just doesn't care that we've lost HMQ.
> Everyone is grieving, the family is devastated, random people in the crowd are sobbing, and she looks...smug.
> 
> I also can't tell if H is grieving. He looks off but I don't know if it's more anger or shock, because I see grief in everyone's eyes but his.


100% this.



Chanbal said:


> Good point! She didn't bother to attend the funeral of the uncle who helped her, but she seems eager to attend all photo-op events at QE's funeral.


She can’t be seen at any event that shows her as any less than the great, private-jet-flying former actress and permanent philanthropist with royal title, who’s also rubbing shoulders with Hollywood and Washington at the same time. Being at her uncle’s funeral (a mere mortal and nobody in her world) would clash enormously with the image she’s trying to sell.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Sina08

duna said:


> Did anyone else think that TW's curtsy was "slightly" exaggerated? Me thinks she did it on purpose out of spite!


It almost looked as if she’s kneeling. I guess by going so deep she wanted to show everyone that she’s curtsying the best and loved the Queen the most


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Yes, we went over it a few weeks back, maybe longer. In an interview Thomas blustered that if he found out he was dying of cancer and he had nothing to lose, he would kill the tabloid owner who tricked him which led to his estrangement with Meghan. It was an empty threat from an 80+-year-old stroke patient in Mexico but the tabloid owner took the opportunity to file a restraining order, thereby getting himself press attention.


Oh wow. I vaguely recall reading something to that effect. Thank you for refreshing my memory


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

S


xincinsin said:


> If she were in her mansion, she could have used the kids as an excuse not to come, released countless leaks about her special bond and closeness to TQ, and sent a tacky wreath with its own press release (I told myself never to use or recommend the florist that sponsored her PP wreath). Different kind of h*ll for the UK and BRF. I think I prefer to have her squirming under the microscope in London.


She definitely can’t claim she was ‘left out’


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uhm...apparently Raptor wasn't only a speaker but supposed to get an award. You know, if rumours of me being broke were spiralling I'd really have better things to spend my money on. 

I wonder if they thought in their new role as son and DIL of The Kind they could squeeze more money out of him.


----------



## RAINDANCE

purseinsanity said:


> A narcissist would never wonder if they’re a narcissist.  They don’t have the self realization to know they have issues.


 At the risk of veering slightly off topic - Is it possible for person with NPD to "recover"  so that they can function and behave as a more normal, emotionally well-adjusted person ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Brits, help me out here. I'm looking at afternoon tea menues and what exactly are "fancies" as in "Cakes, pastries and fancies"? I somewhat figured out what savories are (anything savory that's not a sandwich?), but wouldn't you think everything on a 60 pounds per person menu is somewhat fancy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> At the risk of veering slightly off topic - Is it possible for person with NPD to "recover"  so that they can function and behave as a more normal, emotionally well-adjusted person ?



I sometimes watch NPD specialists on Youtube...what they say is a narcissist could be treated to some extent though you'll never cure them fully. BUT the main obstacle here is that the narcissist doesn't want to be cured. Like one of them said "Would you want to be healed from thinking you're the hottest sh*t there is and only deserve the best above everyone else? The narcissist doesn't want to either."


----------



## Mumotons

Sophie embraces well-wisher as she and Edward visit Manchester
					

The tender moment came as Sophie, 57, and her husband Prince Edward, 58, visited Manchester to view the floral tributes in St Ann's Square and meet members of the public.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Brits, help me out here. I'm looking at afternoon tea menues and what exactly are "fancies" as in "Cakes, pastries and fancies"? I somewhat figured out what savories are (anything savory that's not a sandwich?), but wouldn't you think everything on a 60 pounds per person menu is somewhat fancy?


I would have said anything that is not clearly a cake (flour based and baked?) or a pastry (pastry based - filo, puff, sweet shortcake, chou etc) so macarons, glazed or iced biscuit based items, meringues etc.

Others will probably be much more accurate than me on the distinctions - I am not an enthusiastic cook so have very limited experience other than as a consumer !


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Brits, help me out here. I'm looking at afternoon tea menues and what exactly are "fancies" as in "Cakes, pastries and fancies"? I somewhat figured out what savories are (anything savory that's not a sandwich?), but wouldn't you think everything on a 60 pounds per person menu is somewhat fancy?


I'd say fancies were like petit fours, small and delicate eaten with one ore two bites. Like these below. I'd also say macarons, maybe a little pot of cheesecake, again it'll be about 2-3 teaspoonfuls.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> I would have said anything that is not clearly a cake (flour based and baked?) or a pastry (pastry based - filo, puff, sweet shortcake, chou etc) so macarons, glazed or iced biscuit based items, meringues etc.
> 
> Others will probably be much more accurate than me on the distinctions - I am not an enthusiastic cook so have very limited experience other than as a consumer !



Thank you, that makes sense.


----------



## Sharont2305

@QueenofWrapDress 
These are two good examples. Fancies at the top. 
Start at the bottom and work your way up.


----------



## Annawakes

I think she believes that she could charm KC3 like she has done her entire life…charming men to get what she wants.

I really hope KC3 doesn’t fall for it.  It’s too early to tell right now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I'd say fancies were like petit fours, small and delicate eaten with one ore two bites. Like these below. I'd also say macarons, maybe a little pot of cheesecake, again it'll be about 2-3 teaspoonfuls.
> 
> View attachment 5610838



Thank you! I might do a Christmas themed afternoon tea with friends this year...my cancer-struck friend is expected to finish treatment in October, has all kinds of cravings that can't be fulfilled right now (radiation killed her membranes so she can't swallow, and chemo gives her 24/7 sickness for weeks after each course) and she dreams of going to restaurants again, but we really don't think she should haul her nonexistant immune system anywhere with a) tons of people b) no masks c) during not only a pandemic but flu season. So I'm trying to do a few "events" in a safe environment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> @QueenofWrapDress
> These are two good examples. Fancies at the top.
> Start at the bottom and work your way up.
> 
> View attachment 5610839
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610840



Oh I love dessert in tiny glasses. You can have several and not feel guilty


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you! I might do a Christmas themed afternoon tea with friends this year...my cancer-struck friend is expected to finish treatment in October, has all kinds of cravings that can't be fulfilled right now (radiation killed her membranes so she can't swallow, and chemo gives her 24/7 sickness for weeks after each course) and she dreams of going to restaurants again, but we really don't think she should haul her nonexistant immune system anywhere with a) tons of people b) no masks c) during not only a pandemic but flu season. So I'm trying to do a few "events" in a safe environment.


Oh that's lovely, what a kind, loving friend you are. Sending much love to you both.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> I think she believes that she could charm KC3 like she has done her entire life…charming men to get what she wants.
> 
> I really hope KC3 doesn’t fall for it.  It’s too early to tell right now.



I think so too. Not only was she confident in her manipulative skills, Charles was initially fond of her, walked her down the aisle, took care of her mother during the wedding, came up with extra money to set them up in Frogmore Cottage and paid her outrageous wardrobe bill without complaining.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Oh that's lovely, what a kind, loving friend you are. Sending much love to you both.



Thank you   We've been friends since 5th grade. I joke that luckily we sent the 3rd one in our close group to learn something useful for the current situation (in the medical field), but food is where I can shine and give her the restaurant experience she wants. Minus people watching that is.


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> @QueenofWrapDress
> These are two good examples. Fancies at the top.
> Start at the bottom and work your way up.
> 
> View attachment 5610839
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610840


This reminds of the tea we had at the Wolseley last time we were in London. Devine!


----------



## jblended

@QueenofWrapDress We should all be so lucky as to have friends like you. I'm sure that high tea will be glorious for you both! Wishing your best friend a speedy recovery. 


Spoiler



I had the misery of chemo some months ago and they put me on an NG tube after because I had trouble swallowing as I developed some sores in my mouth/throat. Thankfully this did not last long for me, but I am empathetic to your best friend's experience and can tell you sincerely, this is a most wonderful gift that she'll truly be touched by. You're just wonderful for thinking of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I think I softened my stand on the Windsor walkabout. I'm still not fond of giving them any kind of platform, but seeing how everyone is going to multiple events at different parts of the kingdom and the Sussexes are NOT asked to attend I really think they gave them a breadcrumb to shut them up (besides damage control after they learned what they were up to).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> @QueenofWrapDress We should all be so lucky as to have friends like you. I'm sure that high tea will be glorious for you both! Wishing your best friend a speedy recovery.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I had the misery of chemo some months ago and they put me on an NG tube after because I had trouble swallowing as I developed some sores in my mouth/throat. Thankfully this did not last long for me, but I am empathetic to your best friend's experience and can tell you sincerely, this is a most wonderful gift that she'll truly be touched by. You're just wonderful for thinking of it.



I'm so sorry you went through this. I hope you have since recovered. It is so hard to watch.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I think I softened my stand on the Windsor walkabout. I'm still not fond of giving them any kind of platform, but seeing how everyone is going to multiple events at different parts of the kingdom and the Sussexes are NOT asked to attend I really think they gave them a breadcrumb to shut them up (besides damage control after they learned what they were up to).


They're not working Royals so quite rightly have no business to be asked.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

I can’t seem to attach a link to the video (on IG Hellomag page) but is it just me or does Prince Harry look like he’s trying to let go of her hand?


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

He’s squirming, pushing his arm down and fiddling his fingers, looks like he’s desperately trying to get his hand out like a toddler trying to get out of his mum’s grasp.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> I did not expect her to be a destructive wildfire.


A wildfire has a sort of natural, terrifying elegance that is awe-inspiring in its magnitude while MM is more of a dumpster fire ignited by a chemical-laden cigarette thrown into the midst of greasy napkins and faux-food wrappers like Fritos, Cheetos and Doritos


----------



## WingNut

RAINDANCE said:


> At the risk of veering slightly off topic - Is it possible for person with NPD to "recover"  so that they can function and behave as a more normal, emotionally well-adjusted person ?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sometimes watch NPD specialists on Youtube...what they say is a narcissist could be treated to some extent though you'll never cure them fully. BUT the main obstacle here is that the narcissist doesn't want to be cured. Like one of them said "Would you want to be healed from thinking you're the hottest sh*t there is and only deserve the best above everyone else? The narcissist doesn't want to either."


Was about to respond with something similar to what @QueenofWrapDress stated: They might be able to consciously modify their external behavior (if they feel it suits them), but the inherent nature of someone with NPD cannot be re-wired (as per the one marriage counselor who tried to re-wire my ex)

Edit: Fixed wonky multi-quote.


----------



## xincinsin

Ali-bagpuss said:


> She definitely can’t claim she was ‘left out’


She might claim the grey suits forced her to take part even though she was oh so grief-stricken.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uhm...apparently Raptor wasn't only a speaker but supposed to get an award. You know, if rumours of me being broke were spiralling I'd really have better things to spend my money on.
> 
> I wonder if they thought in their new role as son and DIL of The Kind they could squeeze more money out of him.


Which glitzy LA event was this? The award must have been  Sucks' parting gift to her


RAINDANCE said:


> At the risk of veering slightly off topic - Is it possible for person with NPD to "recover"  so that they can function and behave as a more normal, emotionally well-adjusted person ?


I'd say No (emphatically). So-called recovery would require them to accept that they are NOT god's gift to humankind. Never happens. My ex-boss tried to counsel a narc and he was deaf to logic and reason, kept repeating that he didn't understand what she was saying or why he needed to change. My narc subordinate was less eloquent; he told me that he was unique and could not be held to the same standards as his colleagues and peers (mere mortals).


Annawakes said:


> I think she believes that she could charm KC3 like she has done her entire life…charming men to get what she wants.
> 
> I really hope KC3 doesn’t fall for it.  It’s too early to tell right now.


Let's see if she starts making doe eyes and cutesy gestures at C and W.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I think I softened my stand on the Windsor walkabout. I'm still not fond of giving them any kind of platform, but seeing how everyone is going to multiple events at different parts of the kingdom and the Sussexes are NOT asked to attend I really think they gave them a breadcrumb to shut them up (besides damage control after they learned what they were up to).


They were being kind and cautious. If the Harkles were sent out on their own, they might be booed and HazNoBalls would be whining again about his need for a security blanket.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, tomorrow is Hazzie’s bday.  Checkmate, no wonder the King et al. left town.


I hope Meghan had time to call her baker and have her whip up her favorite, an expensive Amalfi lemon and elderflower birthday cake. Yes, I said her favorite, not his.


----------



## charlottawill

Is it really so hard for her to follow royal protocols? They exist for a reason, often security issues. 



> https://pagesix.com/2022/09/12/meghan-markle-has-awkward-exchange-with-aides-over-flowers/


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh my god- I called this a while back-  I bet Hil IS one of the podcast guests


I don't think so. We've already been given the names of 9 of the 12 women and hers wasn't among them. Spotify would be promoting the hell out of it if it was. What could Hillary possibly get out of having her name tied to whatever stereotype Meghan picked to be the flavor-of-the-week?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Glad to know others see the hypocrisy -


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I sometimes watch NPD specialists on Youtube...what they say is a narcissist could be treated to some extent though you'll never cure them fully. BUT the main obstacle here is that the narcissist doesn't want to be cured. Like one of them said "*Would you want to be healed from thinking you're the hottest sh*t there is and only deserve the best above everyone else? *The narcissist doesn't want to either."


When you put it that way.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> @QueenofWrapDress
> These are two good examples. Fancies at the top.
> Start at the bottom and work your way up.
> 
> View attachment 5610839
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610840


Those are beautiful! Although I'd be tempted to start at the top.


----------



## lallybelle

So...People says she was supposed to be on Vanity Fair some Woman Power issue. I guess this is the event with Hilary etc she is missing as Hilary & Chelsea and others were also named (to be  honored etc.) They must be going to have some type of reception with their "award"winners. MegZ cover is scrapped/delayed due to QE's death.


----------



## Annawakes

^^she must be fuming out of her ears about this.


----------



## marietouchet

lallybelle said:


> So...People says she was supposed to be on Vanity Fair some Woman Power issue. I guess this is the event with Hilary etc she is missing as Hilary & Chelsea and others were also named (to be  honored etc.) They must be going to have some type of reception with their "award"winners. MegZ cover is scrapped/delayed due to QE's death.


The flood, the wildfire ... 
Internet is abuzz eg see citation for new THE CUT article about KC 
Everyone is raking up the last 3-4 years, the OW interview, dissecting podcasts and not in a good way 

I cant believe the press cannot wait until Tuesday, at the earliest 
AND YES this does not reflect well on MM - did she personally unleash this Kraken ??


----------



## bag-mania

lallybelle said:


> So...People says she was supposed to be on Vanity Fair some Woman Power issue. I guess this is the event with Hilary etc she is missing as Hilary & Chelsea and others were also named (to be  honored etc.) They must be going to have some type of reception with their "award"winners. MegZ cover is scrapped/delayed due to QE's death.


So it was some kind of award nobody cares about that was created by a magazine to give famous people a plug for their new projects. No big loss other than as an opportunity to schmooze to try to push her podcast as being so IMPORTANT FOR WOMEN.



Annawakes said:


> ^^she must be fuming out of her ears about this.


She shouldn't be. She's gotten 10,000 times more publicity this week than that insignificant award would have given her.


----------



## DoggieBags

lallybelle said:


> So...People says she was supposed to be on Vanity Fair some Woman Power issue. I guess this is the event with Hilary etc she is missing as Hilary & Chelsea and others were also named (to be  honored etc.) They must be going to have some type of reception with their "award"winners. MegZ cover is scrapped/delayed due to QE's death.


How low has vanity fair sunk that they would be willing to put someone on the cover like TW who has accomplished very little in her life other than marry into one of the most famous families in the world and whine about it ad nauseam ever since


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Those are beautiful! Although I'd be tempted to start at the top.


I know, me too. I'm hungry now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> How low has vanity fair sunk that they would be willing to put someone on the cover like TW who has accomplished very little in her life other than marry into one of the most famous families in the world and whine about it ad nauseam ever since


Didn’t VF start the whole romance thing with the Wild About Harry cover?


----------



## marietouchet

There is hope - W and K did Sandringham walkabout without them


----------



## marietouchet

Tuesday at grocery store … 
Oh dear, those diaries are a lose-lose for Kc no matter if she or someone else has them
Well , maybe mi5 got them for the crown  and burned them


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The difference is the family loved the Queen and Meghan did not. She had to pretend to be grieving like the others when she’s wasn’t feeling it and the mask slipped.
> 
> I don’t think even the most devoted stan could make the case that Meghan is genuinely grieving. How could she? She was not around long enough to know her. Meghan didn’t bother go to her uncle’s funeral and she reportedly had a good relationship with him.


she didn't invite her uncle to her wedding either, right?  only Doria....so odd


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Tuesday at grocery store …
> Oh dear, those diaries are a lose-lose for Kc no matter if she or someone else has them
> Well , maybe mi5 got them for the crown  and burned them
> 
> View attachment 5610909


Gotta love the headlines   She has barely been with Hazz for 4 years, and she has spent more time in the US now than she spent in England.  I found the whole journal thing to be nonsense.  She knows nothing about the BRF and she certainly has no secrets to reveal, only more lies.


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> The really clever thing would be to use what Ed and Sophie did as the precedent.
> Your kids can use lesser lady and viscount titles they we're entitled to at birth as children of a Duke but no Prince  Princess til 18 (and no HRH)


excuse my Yank ignorance but I always thought a prince or princess was the child of a king or queen - not the grandchild


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I really don't know when this could have been discussed. I think every minute of the day has been accounted for with KC and Harry was not there for any of them.



I agree, I don't think any of this has been discussed as everyone is focused on the Queen, the upcoming funeral, and their grief. The staff has their hands full with all of that plus the transition to KCIII.  I could see KCIII's staff telling MM and Harry, we'll discuss the titles when things have settled down (if Harry/MM have been so clueless as to even bring up the subject). That will be after Harry's book is published and after the last of MM's podcasts air.  It's one of KCIII's biggest bargaining chips. In any case, MM and Harry aren't senior working royals and their two kids won't ever be either so that's that.  

I also think KCIII should consider telling them he's not going to hand out titles to #6 and #7 until they've spent significant time in the UK, learning their heritage and history, attending school there, maybe even tie it to living in the UK for a period of several years.   It makes no sense to title them if they will be raised in America and are completely disconnected from the UK. An occasional visit to insure Harry's visa or tax status isn't an acceptable alternative.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The networks have been running endless programs documenting the life of QEII  The old footage is excellent, but it occurred to me to even with the film of her father's funeral, her wedding and coronation and all of her trips abroad, it was the tip of the iceberg compared to what is going on right this minute with the funeral and ascension of King Charles.  The scrutiny that he is receiving is unprecedented and extremely intrusive.  The man can't even get upset about a pen without it becoming the subject of a nasty magazine article.  This is all absurd! Considering everything, the way all of this passing of a great woman  has been handled by the country, the public and the monarchy, it has been  almost total perfection.  Plus what gives total outsiders the right to criticize?  And right now!  Her Majesty hasn't even had her formal funeral yet.  Who called out the dogs?  If I was really paranoid, I'd say it was part of the Harkle Markle PR machine which will stop at nothing to get their point across and what they want. Stories that they are concerned about how much money they are going to get and titles for unseen children! As if we needed more proof that these are selfish tasteless people who will stop at nothing no matter who gets hurt.
> Rant over.


I thought the same - media "reporting" that Charles was too bossy with the staff over a pen....really?  I'm all for treating staff well but this isn't news.
And people who can't wait for the queen to be in the ground before bashing her.
If this is part of H&M's "machine" shame on him (and her but esp him)
My DH's sister sued him and she is now dead to us.  Maybe the RF should do the same.  The king's son seems to want to destroy the instution that gave him so so much.


----------



## sdkitty

Sina08 said:


> I wonder if she finally begins to grasp the magnitude of all this. She probably thought she could take them on because she never understood what she married into and the importance and weight of the whole institution. I mean, the funeral hasn’t even taken place yet, and there’s ceremonial stuff going on every day. The outpour of grief and support, the sheer mass of people on the streets. Heads of state, other Monarchs, politicians, celebrities alike expressing their sympathy. Even a dumb person would get that this is a big deal. May it be dawning on her too?
> (I’m sure there won’t be much fuss when she dies one day.)
> 
> 
> 
> 100% this.
> 
> 
> She can’t be seen at any event that shows her as any less than the great, private-jet-flying former actress and permanent philanthropist with royal title, who’s also rubbing shoulders with Hollywood and Washington at the same time. Being at her uncle’s funeral (a mere mortal and nobody in her world) would clash enormously with the image she’s trying to sell.


she gets that it's a big deal.  that's why she's there.  the nannies can care for the kids.  they probably do most of it anyway


----------



## WingNut

marietouchet said:


> Tuesday at grocery store …
> Oh dear, those diaries are a lose-lose for Kc no matter if she or someone else has them
> Well , maybe mi5 got them for the crown  and burned them
> 
> View attachment 5610909


Soooo credible


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Those are beautiful! Although I'd be tempted to start at the top.


I like the sandwiches if I could eat neatly, which I doubt.


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> I like the sandwiches if I could eat neatly, which I doubt.


You would, they're tiny. Lol


----------



## Toby93

My daughter just shared this video with me, so I'm not sure if it has been seen here before


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> How low has vanity fair sunk that they would be willing to put someone on the cover like TW who has accomplished very little in her life other than marry into one of the most famous families in the world and whine about it ad nauseam ever since


I much prefer the former editor of VF


----------



## xincinsin

Mildly amused. One of Zedzee's sugars defending her on a PageSix thread uses the monicker "orangeladyXXXX"  I'm sure it's just an unfortunate coincidence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

jblended said:


> I watched it again. I don't want to be this person but, she looks smug. It's not that she's nervous or under pressure, she just doesn't care that we've lost HMQ.
> Everyone is grieving, the family is devastated, random people in the crowd are sobbing, and she looks...smug.
> 
> I also can't tell if H is grieving. He looks off but I don't know if it's more anger or shock, because I see grief in everyone's eyes but his.


MeMeMe lives in her own bubble. She is in shock by what is happening. All of the ceremony and honor and impact to the world since HM has passed prove to her that Queen Elizabeth (and the entity of the RF) is more important, more admired and respected, than she is. This experience also proves to her that she is not only not important, but even widely hated by Britons (and others). 
She’s having a tilt (perhaps Hairball too) - it’s cogenitive dissonance. She may be trying to figure out how to reel H back in from this.


----------



## WingNut

This just in. Gee, do you think maybe it's not just us on this particular tPF thread that might see through them, and view them for the sh1tty people they really are?








						Pressure builds on Prince Harry as the people of Sussex petition to remove his and Meghan's titles
					

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, face heavy scrutiny and pressure as a petition circulates to remove the couple's royal titles.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> I really hope KC3 doesn’t fall for it.


I doubt it, as long as Camilla is by his side and has his ear. She saw through TW right from the start, politely calling her an "adventuress". If Harry bashes her in the book KC will come down hard on them.


----------



## scarlet555

WingNut said:


> This just in. Gee, do you think maybe it's not just us on this.tPF.thread that might see through them, and view them for the sh1tty people they really are?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pressure builds on Prince Harry as the people of Sussex petition to remove his and Meghan's titles
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, face heavy scrutiny and pressure as a petition circulates to remove the couple's royal titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com


don't tease me foxnews!  where is this petition... is this in England?


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> excuse my Yank ignorance but I always thought a prince or princess was the child of a king or queen - not the grandchild


Only the children and grandchildren of the monarch through the male line are entitled to the title of prince or princess.

The Letters Patent  issued by *King George V in 1917* reads: “The children of any Sovereign of these Realms and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour’. 

The Letters Patent (effectively the Royal Law) was amended to include* all *the children of the eldest son of the eldest son BEFORE Prince George was born.

So children of the Sovereign = Princes Charles, Andrew, Edward and Princess Anne
Children of the Sovereigns SONS = Princes William, Harry, Princess Beatrice and Eugenie. 
The Earl of Wessex children are also technically Princess Louise and Prince James But Edward and Sophie opted for them to use the style of the son ( Viscount)  and daughter ( Lady) of an Earl and to give their children the opportunity to decide for themselves when they reached age 18. (Lady Louise who is now 18 could therefore use the title HRH Princess Louise now  if she so wished.)

Prince of Wales is effectively the equivalent of the Crown Prince in other monarchies ie. the eldest son and heir to the throne = Charles
His eldest Son = William
His eldest son = George

Prior to the birth of Prince George the Letters Patent were amended so that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would hold titles. That was so that if W+K's first child was a girl she would be a princess, given that in the fullness of time she would become the daughter of the King (William).

Have I lost you yet ?

Princess Anne is not a son of the Sovereign so her children are not Prince Peter / Princess Zara and Anne declined any other ducal titles for them, on the quite obvious basis that with each child born to her brothers, she and her children would recede down the line of succession and be required to earn their own living outside the royal family (which they have done).

Harry was a prince by birth as the grandson of the Monarch through the male line, his father POW.

Both of Harry's children, when born, were great grandchildren of the Monarch and so not entitled to the title. 
This is why the lie than Meghan made about Archie not being a prince because of his skin colour was so widely derided - the rules date back to 1917, and would apply to any child of Harry's irrespective of whoever his wife was BECAUSE Harry is NOT the eldest son of the eldest son (and his children will never be the son and daughter of a king.)

I am appalled if the reports are true that H+M have spent this week lobbying for their children to be given the titles, even though under the 1917 Letters Patent, they are eligible, before the Queen has even been buried.


However the fact that the Queen did adjust the 1917 Letters Patent means that the rules are not necessarily set in stone.

As I suggested, the clever thing would be to use Ed and Sophie's example  as the precedent for the grandchildren of the Monarch's other children.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I doubt it, as long as Camilla is by his side and has his ear. She saw through TW right from the start, politely calling her an "adventuress". If Harry bashes her in the book KC will come down hard on them.



Yeah, at this point I don't him see stand by idle while Harry trashes his "darling wife".


----------



## carmen56

Annawakes said:


> I think she believes that she could charm KC3 like she has done her entire life…charming men to get what she wants.
> 
> I really hope KC3 doesn’t fall for it.  It’s too early to tell right now.


I think Camilla would steer Charles right.


----------



## WingNut

scarlet555 said:


> don't tease me foxnews!  where is this petition... is this in England?


I'm in the USA. It came up as a link on my apple news on my phone. Very interesting timing as I was considering how others don't understand the hate, and I don't understand how you cannot understand the hate, if you do the research.

Counterpoint: It's probably much healthier to be unaware of/not understand the dislike (hate is a really strong word), as I'd be much more productive....but, it is kinda like a train wreck.


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> Only the children and grandchildren of the monarch through the male line are entitled to the title of prince or princess.
> 
> The Letters Patent  issued by *King George V in 1917* reads: “The children of any Sovereign of these Realms and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour’.
> 
> The Letters Patent (effectively the Royal Law) was amended to include* all *the children of the eldest son of the eldest son BEFORE Prince George was born.
> 
> So children of the Sovereign = Princes Charles, Andrew, Edward and Princess Anne
> Children of the Sovereigns SONS = Princes William, Harry, Princess Beatrice and Eugenie.
> The Earl of Wessex children are also technically Princess Louise and Prince James But Edward and Sophie opted for them to use the style of the son ( Viscount)  and daughter ( Lady) of an Earl and to give their children the opportunity to decide for themselves when they reached age 18. (Lady Louise who is now 18 could therefore use the title HRH Princess Louise now  if she so wished.)
> 
> Prince of Wales is effectively the equivalent of the Crown Prince in other monarchies ie. the eldest son and heir to the throne = Charles
> His eldest Son = William
> His eldest son = George
> 
> Prior to the birth of Prince George the Letters Patent were amended so that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would hold titles. That was so that if W+K's first child was a girl she would be a princess, given that in the fullness of time she would become the daughter of the King (William).
> 
> Have I lost you yet ?
> 
> Princess Anne is not a son of the Sovereign so her children are not Prince Peter / Princess Zara and Anne declined any other ducal titles for them, on the quite obvious basis that with each child born to her brothers, she and her children would recede down the line of succession and be required to earn their own living outside the royal family (which they have done).
> 
> Harry was a prince by birth as the grandson of the Monarch through the male line, his father POW.
> 
> Both of Harry's children, when born, were great grandchildren of the Monarch and so not entitled to the title.
> This is why the lie than Meghan made about Archie not being a prince because of his skin colour was so widely derided - the rules date back to 1917, and would apply to any child of Harry's irrespective of whoever his wife was BECAUSE Harry is NOT the eldest son of the eldest son (and his children will never be the son and daughter of a king.)
> 
> I am appalled if the reports are true that H+M have spent this week lobbying for their children to be given the titles, even though under the 1917 Letters Patent, they are eligible, before the Queen has even been buried.
> 
> 
> However the fact that the Queen did adjust the 1917 Letters Patent means that the rules are not necessarily set in stone.
> 
> As I suggested, the clever thing would be to use Ed and Sophie's example  as the precedent for the grandchildren of the Monarch's other children.


complicated...thank you


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> As I suggested, the clever thing would be to use Ed and Sophie's example  as the precedent for the grandchildren of the Monarch's other children.



Totally, but a) neither of them is clever and b) Raptor would have the Prince and Princess title embroidered on the chests of these kids' entire wardrobe if she could.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> I agree, I don't think any of this has been discussed as everyone is focused on the Queen, the upcoming funeral, and their grief. The staff has their hands full with all of that plus the transition to KCIII.  I could see KCIII's staff telling MM and Harry, we'll discuss the titles when things have settled down (if Harry/MM have been so clueless as to even bring up the subject). That will be after Harry's book is published and after the last of MM's podcasts air.  It's one of KCIII's biggest bargaining chips. In any case, MM and Harry aren't senior working royals and their two kids won't ever be either so that's that.
> 
> I also think KCIII should consider telling them he's not going to hand out titles to #6 and #7 until they've spent significant time in the UK, learning their heritage and history, attending school there, maybe even tie it to living in the UK for a period of several years.   It makes no sense to title them if they will be raised in America and are completely disconnected from the UK. An occasional visit to insure Harry's visa or tax status isn't an acceptable alternative.



This. I guessing there’s no reason for them to have these titles if they’re not in the environment for it to matter. Having those titles in the US where they are irrelevant and detached from learning and understanding the heritage and meaning makes no sense.

And If Meghan can bad mouth TRF publicly, imagine what those kids will hear about it in private.

These two seem to want their cake and eat it, too. Instead they need to sleep in the bed they made for themselves (and asked for), sans titles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It's kind of sad for the children. So much has been taken away from them already and will be taken away from them by the way their nutjob parents decided to raise them.


----------



## scarlet555

LittleStar88 said:


> This. I guessing there’s no reason for them to have these titles if they’re not in the environment for it to matter. Having those titles in the US where they are irrelevant and detached from learning and understanding the heritage and meaning makes no sense.
> 
> And If Meghan can bad mouth TRF publicly, imagine what those kids will hear about it in private.
> 
> These two seem to want their cake and eat it, too. Instead they need to sleep in the bed they made for themselves (and asked for), sans titles.


the perks of the title include security, and having security makes you look important, and that apparently is very important to her .  Too bad Gingerhead didn't meet that someone who shares his values of the paps, instead he got captured by some crazy nuthead who pretended she doesn't want the title but inside is seething with envy!

but no royal duties, you shouldn't even keep dutch title, birth right or not.  Such hypocrisy and lies from those two.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I really feel that hate is the completely wrong word. 

I think we are collectively so sad and disappointed at the missed opportunities for H+M to contribute to and be a part of national life here in the UK; at spurning being part of something incomparable in the whole world for personal aggrandisements and financial gain and so aghast and angry at the ignorance and disrespect shown, but this is my own view.

_"She was such a disappointment"_ could only be said by a Brit and condense so much into 5 words.

It is a stark contrast to the pride and honour felt and reported by all who were involved in the Jubilee and this week's processions & State funeral and all of the constitutional processes.

Just the historical history and living history on display is mind boggling !


----------



## RAINDANCE

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Totally, but a) neither of them is clever and b) Raptor would have the Prince and Princess title embroidered on the chests of these kids' entire wardrobe if she could.


 I meant it would be the clever thing for KC3 to amend the Letters Patent to; " an elegant solution" as DH would say

Off topic I saw something on a facebook feed recently where a mother was asking what tattoo she should get her 5 year old


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

scarlet555 said:


> the perks of the title include security, and having security makes you look important, and that apparently is very important to her .  Too bad Gingerhead didn't meet that someone who shares his values of the paps, instead he got captured by some crazy nuthead who pretended she doesn't want the title but inside is seething with envy!
> 
> but no royal duties, you shouldn't even keep dutch title, birth right or not.  Such hypocrisy and lies from those two.



Probably also a money thing. There are kids of much more famous and wealthy people than these two who seem to get though life just fine without security in the US.

And as we’ve seen in the media, it’s not the rich and famous offspring who are living in peril, it’s the common folk. School shootings, mass gun violence in public spaces where these two will never patron, AAPI violence… Their kids will have a level of privilege and access to social circles and events that won’t expose them to these things, even without security they will be just fine.

The real harm will come from living with a Narcissist and the mental and emotional toll that comes from it and from not having relationships with any of the family (aside from just Doria). I know because I was raised in this kind of environment. It’s hard to undo that kind of damage.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Totally, but a) neither of them is clever and b) Raptor would have the Prince and Princess title embroidered on the chests of these kids' entire wardrobe if she could.


Why should their children even be given the option to decide whether or not to use the HRH titles? It should not be left up to them to decide because as someone else pointed out, these 2 children will be brought up in America with little understanding or respect for the BRF, it’s traditions, and it’s role in the UK and the Commonwealth. Lady Louise and her brother, on the other hand, have been brought up in the UK and have been steeped in the customs and traditions of the BRF all their lives. They had the huge benefit of growing up watching The Queen, Prince Phillip, and other senior royals, including their parents, perform the daily duties and functions that are a huge part of why an institution that many view as anachronistic still survives today. The only example that the Montecito duo would set for their 2 children is to view their royal titles not as a responsibility and a privilege, but only as something to be monetized and used for maximum personal gain.


----------



## gracekelly

Lady Louise has turned 18, and she is still Lady Louise and not Princess Louise. She’s off to uni so I doubt she is going to make a change now, if ever.

Yes, I can see it now. Archie turns 18 and goes off to register to vote in theUS and when asked his name he says Prince Archie.   Nope!


----------



## Cosmopolitan

Apologies if this was already posted











						Prince William, Prince Harry had dinner together after receiving Queen’s coffin
					

Page Six confirmed that the estranged brothers, as well as Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, attended the family meal inside Buckingham Palace on Tuesday.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would very happily live an invisible life in my nice residence financed by my king brother. In fact, having all eyes on me comes pretty close to my personal idea of hell.


So true, I flinch just thinking about it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you! I might do a Christmas themed afternoon tea with friends this year...my cancer-struck friend is expected to finish treatment in October, has all kinds of cravings that can't be fulfilled right now (radiation killed her membranes so she can't swallow, and chemo gives her 24/7 sickness for weeks after each course) and she dreams of going to restaurants again, but we really don't think she should haul her nonexistant immune system anywhere with a) tons of people b) no masks c) during not only a pandemic but flu season. So I'm trying to do a few "events" in a safe environment.


That’s so sweet of you. Meringues are a must have fancy I’d say but I’m no expert. I know savouries are things like cheese straws.


bag-mania said:


> I don't think so. We've already been given the names of 9 of the 12 women and hers wasn't among them. Spotify would be promoting the hell out of it if it was. What could Hillary possibly get out of having her name tied to whatever stereotype Meghan picked to be the flavor-of-the-week?


Sure I think it’d backfire but I still think it’s going to happen- my reasoning is:-
1. This interview could have been recorded at many points over the last few years - she might have done it right after they signed the contract
2. As much as we hate it, they have gotten big names before Gloria, Serena, Oprah - these all strike me as people Hil likes to be associated with
3. The very fact they are hiding 3 names makes me think they are trying to build suspense - I mean no one was going to lose their minds over an Issa Rae interview whoever that is
4. Dramatic convention is you start strong and end strong
5. It strikes me the award ceremony would have been the perfect time to announce their collaboration
6. It’s extremely obvious M is no stranger to buying awards to give herself somewhere to be - so it was easy for her to arrange a guest appearance with Hilary.
7. As people have noticed she hasn’t identified a single white guest or anyone over the age of 55 yet- I feel like they want to spread as broad an audience net as possible and, well, you don’t get whiter than Hil and she’s in the key boomer demographic

8. Most importantly, the subject matter of the podcast and the language used just really remind me of that Hilary documentary and the book Rodham. I can’t quite shake the idea that she’d find it really appealing.


Toby93 said:


> My daughter just shared this video with me, so I'm not sure if it has been seen here before



No wonder she wanted to ghost him - he knows where the bodies are buried!

Hang on, Trev produced the saw films?
 Thats an enormous franchise - that would make him pretty damn rich wouldn’t it? She really must have thought that hotel guy would marry her.

 I’m wondering if some of the horror fans amongst us aren’t a little disappointed Trev didn’t use his influence to get Meg cast as one of the victims


----------



## csshopper

Cosmopolitan said:


> Apologies if this was already posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William, Prince Harry had dinner together after receiving Queen’s coffin
> 
> 
> Page Six confirmed that the estranged brothers, as well as Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, attended the family meal inside Buckingham Palace on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Only significant if we knew the seating arrangement.


----------



## gracekelly

Cosmopolitan said:


> Apologies if this was already posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William, Prince Harry had dinner together after receiving Queen’s coffin
> 
> 
> Page Six confirmed that the estranged brothers, as well as Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, attended the family meal inside Buckingham Palace on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Family meal with 20 other people sitting on opposite end of the table   Too far to pass the salt.


----------



## youngster




----------



## EverSoElusive

Take a look at this IG clip. They both are the only ones caught blinking so much and it almost seems like they were communicating in Morse code


----------



## csshopper

RAINDANCE said:


> I noted that this year the BRF did not post any SM messages re 9/11 anniversary due I expect to the royal period of mourning.
> Don't expect any social media messages to Harry either.
> I read W&K are going to today Sandringham to see the flowers there


Wasn't there a plan for the Queen to host a joint 40th Birthday Party this past summer for William and Kate? I remember the expected Suckess related questions in the media about will they or won't they be invited? Thinking back, the fact it did not happen might have been a clue to the Queen's health this summer?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Only significant if we knew the seating arrangement.



Harry and Raptor were on the kids' table.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cosmopolitan said:


> Apologies if this was already posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William, Prince Harry had dinner together after receiving Queen’s coffin
> 
> 
> Page Six confirmed that the estranged brothers, as well as Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, attended the family meal inside Buckingham Palace on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Did they sit on opposite ends of a very long table?  Maybe they dined in different rooms?


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> At the risk of veering slightly off topic - Is it possible for person with NPD to "recover"  so that they can function and behave as a more normal, emotionally well-adjusted person ?


Supposedly, narcissism can improve with age or with serious psychotherapy from a "compassionate, understanding" source.  Maybe Haz and ButterCup can help her.  
Nah, she'd try to tell their "experts" that she knows better than them already.


----------



## csshopper

jelliedfeels said:


> Not that the daily mail has ever characterised Charles as finicky, petulant or immature before
> 
> It’s difficult- yes his mother has died but he’s also become king. When does it become an acceptable time to evaluate the Queen’s reign or Charles’ previous acts?
> 
> Let’s also not ignore the fact the presses are running overtime with positive articles about the Queen, him and his family so it’s not like the royals and their press team have taken a break from the media full stop- isn’t it basic press freedom that a less glowing opinion appear as well?
> 
> I read the article and I think it was a bit of softball to be honest.
> 
> It amazes me that articles will make gestures towards the royal family’s colonialism and the past but never ever mention the family’s support and personal involvement in the U.K. arms trade.  This is something  our new king has done himself and which is probably the most morally reprehensible form of modern colonialism.
> 
> It also makes sense if this magazine is really in bed with H&M that they wouldn’t mention it because of course they want to be in with the family so they can’t really discuss any serious accusations against them - just stick to the fluff about calling a baby dark and keep blackfishing Meghan up. Nothing of the critique - if I can even call it that H&M have offered of the royals is remotely political or relevant - it’s all just personal griping.
> 
> I will say I read the Uju Anya response and while I think her initial tweet put a lot of people off  She did make much more nuanced and relevant criticisms of the late Queen and Britain’s involvement in the Nigerian civil war - so it does strike me as condescending to see the DM put this in the same sphere as Meghan who mainly gripes about crying over dresses several years ago and called an African state mansion a housing unit.
> 
> Then again I thought everyone had decided the cut article was ironic - so maybe they just have a variety of opinions rather than a clear editorial line. Or, dream of dreams, they are a publication that recognises that endless press about H&M and unquestioning puff pieces of the royal family are 2 halves of the same coin.


 Not arguing with the many valid points you've made but to me the "Big Fussy Baby" moniker feels like a cheap shot and clickbait.  IMO what we've observed of the man during this extraordinarily trying time for him does not match up to the label they've given him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s so sweet of you. Meringues are a must have fancy I’d say but I’m no expert. I know savouries are things like cheese straws.
> 
> Sure I think it’d backfire but I still think it’s going to happen- my reasoning is:-
> 1. This interview could have been recorded at many points over the last few years - she might have done it right after they signed the contract
> 2. As much as we hate it, they have gotten big names before Gloria, Serena, Oprah - these all strike me as people Hil likes to be associated with
> 3. The very fact they are hiding 3 names makes me think they are trying to build suspense - I mean no one was going to lose their minds over an Issa Rae interview whoever that is
> 4. Dramatic convention is you start strong and end strong
> 5. It strikes me the award ceremony would have been the perfect time to announce their collaboration
> 6. It’s extremely obvious M is no stranger to buying awards to give herself somewhere to be - so it was easy for her to arrange a guest appearance with Hilary.
> 7. As people have noticed she hasn’t identified a single white guest or anyone over the age of 55 yet- I feel like they want to spread as broad an audience net as possible and, well, you don’t get whiter than Hil and she’s in the key boomer demographic
> 
> 8. Most importantly, the subject matter of the podcast and the language used just really remind me of that Hilary documentary and the book Rodham. I can’t quite shake the idea that she’d find it really appealing.
> 
> No wonder she wanted to ghost him - he knows where the bodies are buried!
> 
> Hang on, Trev produced the saw films?
> Thats an enormous franchise - that would make him pretty damn rich wouldn’t it? She really must have thought that hotel guy would marry her.
> 
> I’m wondering if some of the horror fans amongst us aren’t a little disappointed Trev didn’t use his influence to get Meg cast as one of the victims


You make valid points and you may be right. I was hoping that the last three were interesting but lesser known women and that’s why the press ignored them. Your idea sounds like the kind of promotional surprise bang Meghan would want.


----------



## xincinsin

Katel said:


> MeMeMe lives in her own bubble. She is in shock by what is happening. All of the ceremony and honor and impact to the world since HM has passed prove to her that Queen Elizabeth (and the entity of the RF) is more important, more admired and respected, than she is. This experience also proves to her that she is not only not important, but even widely hated by Britons (and others).
> She’s having a tilt (perhaps Hairball too) - it’s cogenitive dissonance. She may be trying to figure out how to reel H back in from this.


Nope, she is wondering what in the world the people see in a doddering old lady when she is so much better and "younger" and more attractive/talented etc. Feeds her victim mentality that she is so under-appreciated. Handbag probably has to keep asking her if she is feeling okay.


----------



## purseinsanity

WingNut said:


> This just in. Gee, do you think maybe it's not just us on this particular tPF thread that might see through them, and view them for the sh1tty people they really are?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pressure builds on Prince Harry as the people of Sussex petition to remove his and Meghan's titles
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, and Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex, face heavy scrutiny and pressure as a petition circulates to remove the couple's royal titles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com


No.  Obviously they, just like us all, are just racist against poor, innocent TW and HazNoBalls.  There is absolutely no other justification for not liking her since she's such a perfect example of womanhood.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Lady Louise has turned 18, and she is still Lady Louise and not Princess Louise. She’s off to uni so I doubt she is going to make a change now, if ever.
> 
> Yes, I can see it now. Archie turns 18 and goes off to register to vote in theUS and when asked his name he says Prince Archie.   Nope!


There is only room for one Prince in the US


----------



## WingNut

Oh man.... 








						Sophie’s choice? How Meghan was left shaken by this car ride: royal expert
					

Royal expert Neil Sean dishes on a car ride that didn't sit too well with Meghan Markle as she and Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, sat together on the way to pay their respects to Queen Elizabeth II.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> I really feel that hate is the completely wrong word.
> 
> I think we are collectively so sad and disappointed at the missed opportunities for H+M to contribute to and be a part of national life here in the UK; at spurning being part of something incomparable in the whole world for personal aggrandisements and financial gain and so aghast and angry at the ignorance and disrespect shown, but this is my own view.
> 
> _"She was such a disappointment"_ could only be said by a Brit and condense so much into 5 words.
> 
> It is a stark contrast to the pride and honour felt and reported by all who were involved in the Jubilee and this week's processions & State funeral and all of the constitutional processes.
> 
> Just the historical history and living history on display is mind boggling !


LOL.  Every time my children would do something idiotic, if they asked me if I was mad, I'd say, "No, I'm not mad, just disappointed" in their behavior.
I recently was running very late to pick up my daughter from school and I was apologizing as I was on my way.  She responded by texting me, "It's ok.  No, I'm not mad, just disappointed."


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Cosmopolitan said:


> Apologies if this was already posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William, Prince Harry had dinner together after receiving Queen’s coffin
> 
> 
> Page Six confirmed that the estranged brothers, as well as Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, attended the family meal inside Buckingham Palace on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


----------



## WingNut

purseinsanity said:


> No.  Obviously they, just like us all, are just racist against poor, innocent TW and HazNoBalls.  There is absolutely no other justification for not liking her since she's such a perfect example of womanhood.


Your signature could not have shown up at a better place!

"_We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."
- Ben Franklin_


----------



## WingNut

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


It would require a LOT of soul-searching, apologies, and forgiveness (in that order). Oh and the elimination of the catalyst of all of the problems...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> My daughter just shared this video with me, so I'm not sure if it has been seen here before



Thanks for sharing, I have not seen it. Interesting.  Of course, we must take everything the Markle family says with a huge grain of salt.  I do have questions:
- Still, is he right about Trev and Saw??? 
- Is he right about the 1% crowd?  He makes it sound like a cult.  
- When was MM in the 1% crowd?  Those are the billionaires, right?
- Is Tom saying she changed when she began Suits?  That seems odd to me because she was not one of the principal actors on that show,  3rd tier at best. IMDB shows how many times she appeared [not one of the leading cast members]. Plus, when she did appear it was for a short time. Her lines were simple.


----------



## bag-mania

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


I would too but I don’t know how it would be possible. Maybe if Harry suddenly grows a pair.


----------



## purseinsanity

WingNut said:


> It would require a LOT of soul-searching, apologies, and forgiveness (in that order). Oh and the elimination of the catalyst of all of the problems...


She really does exemplify why it's so important to choose a partner carefully.  I have personally seen so many close knit families torn apart by horrible people who marry into the family and tear it apart.  It's very sad, but sometimes, some things just can't be put back together.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> - Is Tom saying she changed when she began Suits?  That seems odd to me because she was not one of the principal actors on that show,  3rd tier at best. IMDB shows how many times she appeared [not one of the leading cast members]. Plus, when she did appear it was for a short time. Her lines were simple.



Yes, but it was the furthest she'd ever come in her not so stellar career. Wasn't it shortly after that she decided she didn't need Trevor anymore either?


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Only significant if we knew the seating arrangement.


And how many other members were there in total.


----------



## charlottawill

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


I just don't see it happening if Harry stays with TW given the discord she has already caused. She is who she is, and she is not going to change at this point in life. I doubt William would want her toxic behavior around his family, and if the memoir trashes the family they will be done with Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


> I don’t care about hand holding.  It’s what they always do As a form of control or dependency or whatever.   They don’t follow royal protocol and are minor royals or should I say “Duke and Duchess of Overseas”.
> 
> but her PR continuing to churn out this rubbish… give it a break!!!



Maybe, wildly speculating, she pulled out because she has had a fleeting moment of self realization during her recent experiences having to face the formidable Royals and it has given her a clue she may be out of her league in the group of women mentioned as honorees at the Variety function? Yes, I know that's dubious, but her behavior during the walk around at Windsor the other day showed an insecure woman not able to adjust to situations she did not personally control. And Hawry would not be there to claw for support.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry and Raptor were on the kids' table.


You mean the one in the corner by the kitchen door?


----------



## RAINDANCE

purseinsanity said:


> Supposedly, narcissism can improve with age or with serious psychotherapy from a "compassionate, understanding" source.  Maybe Haz and ButterCup can help her.
> Nah, she'd try to tell their "experts" that she knows better than them already.


A did a quick Google after my question and followed a link to a psychotherapy website which had a article about how difficult it is to treat NPs, often because they turn it around and tell their therapist how to do his or her job !

Quick edit to say that the psychiatrist writing the article reported that he had found that a soft approach was the least effective and in his experience,  it was possible to make better progress by challenging the NP and his/her behavior and responses, esp. when they tried to control the session and issues being addressed.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Maybe, wildly speculating, she pulled out because she has had a *fleeting moment of self realization *during her recent experiences having to face the formidable Royals and it has given her a clue she may be out of her league in the group of women mentioned as honorees at the Variety function? Yes, I know that's dubious, but her behavior during the walk around at Windsor the other day showed an insecure woman not able to adjust to situations she did not personally control. And Hawry would not be there to claw for support.


Impossible.


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> A did a quick Google after my question and followed a link to a psychotherapy website which had a article about how difficult it is to treat NPs, often because they turn it around and tell their therapist how to do his or her job !


Told ja


----------



## TimeToShop

gracekelly said:


> I know!  I am a sucker for these PBS shows like the recent one on The Boleyns based on actual letters that they wrote.  Can you imagine having access to things like that? Or the clothing archives?  The art collections?  It is endless!  And that noob didn't appreciate any of it and her poor kids will never get near it.



I just finished watching that. It was so interesting. Amazing that the letters have survived this long. My biggest takeaway was that HMTQ was a descendant of Mary Boleyn. I had no idea, probably shows my American ignorance. 

Had to check that out and found that Diana was too so William and Harry have a double dose of Boleyn blood.

The opportunity TW had and blew it. To live with and have access to all that history. Even if I disliked my in-laws I sure would have sucked it up to vacation at Balmoral, Sandringham, whatever old house or castle to which I was invited.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


I doubt much would change. William has a full life while Hazz seems to drift.  Their interests and lives are much different now.  Sure, they can be cordial, send birthday cards, care about each other, etc. They do not and can not be forced to _like_ each other.  As always in these situations, one can love the person but dislike the behavior.  Imo most of us here do not hate H&M as people - we don’t know them - we just strongly dislike their behavior.


----------



## Chanbal

Are we celebrating Hazz's b-day today?


----------



## Sharont2305

Speaking of handbags, and no, not Harry this time, did anyone notice this 'sweet nod' to Her Majesty? Two handled, similar style.


----------



## Chanbal

A valid opinion!


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Maybe, wildly speculating, she pulled out because she has had a fleeting moment of self realization during her recent experiences having to face the formidable Royals and it has given her a clue she may be out of her league in the group of women mentioned as honorees at the Variety function? Yes, I know that's dubious, but her behavior during the walk around at Windsor the other day showed an insecure woman not able to adjust to situations she did not personally control. And Hawry would not be there to claw for support.
> 
> You mean the one in the corner by the kitchen door?


Or they called and cancelled her.  Who would want to be the person who made a grieving in-law work so soon after the funeral?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> A valid opinion!



YES! This, 100%.  The world already knows them as liars and complainers, so call their bluff. Let them blab blab. They will soon find out the world has moved on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Speaking of handbags, and no, not Harry this time, did anyone notice this 'sweet nod' to Her Majesty? Two handled, similar style.
> 
> View attachment 5611011


It isn’t a Launer, so it’s a miss imo.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t a Launer, so,it’s a miss imo.


Definitely, but you know what she's like with her sweet nods.


----------



## Freak4Coach

jblended said:


> I watched it again. I don't want to be this person but, she looks smug. It's not that she's nervous or under pressure, she just doesn't care that we've lost HMQ.
> Everyone is grieving, the family is devastated, random people in the crowd are sobbing, and she looks...smug.
> 
> I also can't tell if H is grieving. He looks off but I don't know if it's more anger or shock, because I see grief in everyone's eyes but his.


Lurker stepping in for a sec -
It’s called regret. Regret that he looks like a bigger A$$ than he already did and a lot of regret of what he is not going to get. They both look like pouting toddlers that have been told no. I would be surprised if there hasn’t already been some conversations. And I suspect regret for falling for TW’s illusions of grandeur and being a willing participant in TW’s plots - I mean plans.


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t a Launer, so,it’s a miss imo.


It's Loewe based on the embossing, also very nice. I really liked the one Kate carried.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

WingNut said:


> It's Loewe based on the embossing, also very nice. I really liked the one Kate carried.


Yes, not a British brand.  Does that matter at this point?


----------



## csshopper

jennlt said:


> A wildfire has a sort of natural, terrifying elegance that is awe-inspiring in its magnitude while MM is more of a dumpster fire ignited by a chemical-laden cigarette thrown into the midst of greasy napkins and faux-food wrappers like Fritos, Cheetos and Doritos


I cannot stop laughing. Thank you! It's a refreshing pause to the tears


----------



## CarryOn2020

What?



Did he threaten to leave?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Not invited to the state event - call the wambulance









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and Prince Andrew to miss state event - details
					

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry and Prince Andrew are to miss King Charles III's state event on Sunday. Read more...




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




_Confirming Prince Harry, his wife Meghan and Prince Andrew's absence, a spokesperson from Buckingham Palace confirmed, that "*only working royals will take part*".
It is yet to be revealed what the dress code will be and if tiaras will be required at this special event. The statement read: "The King and The Queen Consort will host Heads of State and Official Overseas Guests at Buckingham Palace ahead of the State Funeral of Her Majesty The Queen. This will be an official state event."_


----------



## Sharont2305

WingNut said:


> It's Loewe based on the embossing, also very nice. I really liked the one Kate carried.


I actually quite like it. 
However, I love the bag Catherine had today at Sandringham.


----------



## kipp

charlottawill said:


> There is only room for one Prince in the US


As someone who lives in Minneapolis, I wholeheartedly agree with this!


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks for sharing, I have not seen it. Interesting.  Of course, we must take everything the Markle family says with a huge grain of salt.  I do have questions:
> - Still, is he right about Trev and Saw???
> - Is he right about the 1% crowd?  He makes it sound like a cult.
> - When was MM in the 1% crowd?  Those are the billionaires, right?
> - Is Tom saying she changed when she began Suits?  That seems odd to me because she was not one of the principal actors on that show,  3rd tier at best. IMDB shows how many times she appeared [not one of the leading cast members]. Plus, when she did appear it was for a short time. Her lines were simple.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610993


I know nothing about the 1% club, but in the Tom Bower book, it says she was making $50,000 per episode. This was after auditioning and getting no parts for years.  I'm sure her father was helping her out until that point, and supporting her financially at least partially.  As soon as she started making serious money, she started Markling people.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I would too but I don’t know how it would be possible. Maybe if Harry suddenly grows a pair.


I don't see it happening as long as TW has a say in it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I know nothing about the 1% club, but in the Tom Bower book, it says she was making $50,000 per episode. This was after auditioning and getting no parts for years.  *I'm sure her father was helping her out until that point, and supporting her financially at least partially. * As soon as she started making serious money, she started Markling people.



Why though, she was married at that point.


----------



## MiniMabel

The website, Change.org, has the petition to remove the Sussex's titles.

Just type in removes sussex titles in the search box.

I've already signed!


----------



## Toby93

Really, they caved and are going to allow him to wear the uniform


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> The website, Change.org, has the petition to remove the Sussex's titles.
> 
> Just type in removes sussex titles in the search box.
> 
> I've already signed!


Hope you have the magic touch.   I signed last summer.  Pfft, nothing happened.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though, she was married at that point.


Lol, I forgot about that part.  So many men that she has used and discarded, I lost track


----------



## Maggie Muggins

The games people play. So tired of the people who can't own their mistakes.
ZedZed
Dufus
Thomas Markle
The Tabloid Owner who interviewed Thomas Markle
Oprah Winfrey
Gayle King 
CBS Network 
Add Others Here

"Games People Play" with lyrics​*Joe South Lyrics*​


Mmm
La-da-da, da-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da-da, da-dee
La-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da-da

Whoa, the games people play now
Every night and every day now
Never meanin' what they say now
Never sayin' what they mean

While they wile away the hours
In their ivory towers
'Til they're covered up with flowers
In the back of a black limousine
Whoa-ah

La-da-da, da-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da da, da-dee
Talkin' 'bout you and me
And the games people play now

Whoa, we make one another cry
Break a heart then we say goodbye
Cross our hearts and we hope to die
That the other was to blame
Whoa-ah

But neither one will ever give in
So we gaze at an eight by ten
Thinkin' 'bout the things that might have been
And it's a dirty rotten shame
Whoa-ah

La-da-da, da-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da da, da-dee
Talkin' 'bout you and me
And the games people play now

Oh, yes
Oh, alright
Oh, yes
C'mon, c'mon, c'mon, c'mon, c'mon

Whoa oh-oh-oh-oh-oh

Now look here
People walkin' up to you
Singin' glory hallelujah, ha-ha
And they try and to sock it to you
In the name of the Lord

They're gonna teach you how to meditate
Read your horoscope, cheat your fate
And furthermore to hell with hate
Come on, get on board
Whoa-ah

La-da-da, da-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da da, da-dee
Talkin' 'bout you and me
And the games people play

Now, wait a minute
Look around tell me what you see?
What's happenin' to you and me?
God grant me the serenity
To just remember who I am
Whoa-ah

'Cause you've given up your sanity
For your pride and your vanity
Turn you back on humanity
Oh, and you don't give a
Da, da, da, da, da

La-da-da, da-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da da, da-dee
I'll keep a-talkin' 'bout you and me, brother
And the games people play now, now

La-da-da, da-da-da, da-da
La-da-da, da-da da, da-dee
Gonna talk 'bout you and me
Oh, and the games people play
I wonder can you come out and play?
Early in the mornin', whoa yes
Talkin' 'bout you and me
And the games people play now


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Brits, help me out here. I'm looking at afternoon tea menues and what exactly are "fancies" as in "Cakes, pastries and fancies"? I somewhat figured out what savories are (anything savory that's not a sandwich?), but wouldn't you think everything on a 60 pounds per person menu is somewhat fancy?



Any titbit that is literally eye candy/savoury. Could be a tiny mousse in a chocolate case or a caramel cream in a tiny Florentine cup etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> Not arguing with the many valid points you've made but to me the "Big Fussy Baby" moniker feels like a cheap shot and clickbait.  IMO what we've observed of the man during this extraordinarily trying time for him does not match up to the label they've given him.


I agree calling him names is on one hand below the belt but on the other it’s very ephemeral with little explanation of more serious issues  and might make most people more sympathetic to him as the casual reader goes ‘oh so he’s short tempered- but not a bad guy’ and he doesn’t have to explain or even recall  his dodgy deals.


bag-mania said:


> You make valid points and you may be right. I was hoping that the last three were interesting but lesser known women and that’s why the press ignored them. Your idea sounds like the kind of promotional surprise bang Meghan would want.


This is not to say it will happen because of course IF Hilary did record an episode with M and now knows it’ll be released after Queen’s funeral  and will bring with it a ton of bad PR Hilary is probably doing everything she can to make sure it never leaves the editing room at all. Megz has already announced she’ll be editing after all…

Another option, for an boomer generation woman might be Oprah herself of course….

The third option is they haven’t managed to record the last three episodes and it’ll end up being M interviewing each of her faces and the ass she talks out of.

TBH I hate the hypocrisy of this whole re-cutting the recordings thing. I tend to think if you have conviction in what you are publishing to the public it shouldn’t matter if the subject is alive or not. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks for sharing, I have not seen it. Interesting.  Of course, we must take everything the Markle family says with a huge grain of salt.  I do have questions:
> - Still, is he right about Trev and Saw???
> - Is he right about the 1% crowd?  He makes it sound like a cult.
> - When was MM in the 1% crowd?  Those are the billionaires, right?
> - Is Tom saying she changed when she began Suits?  That seems odd to me because she was not one of the principal actors on that show,  3rd tier at best. IMDB shows how many times she appeared [not one of the leading cast members]. Plus, when she did appear it was for a short time. Her lines were simple.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610993


This clip seems edited a bit misleadingly but….
The 1% means royal family but Bower and other stories say she started acting queeny long before that - some say Trev and some say suits and some say she’s always been cocky.
Entirely possible he’s worked with someone who worked on Saw and it’s just edited badly.



Sharont2305 said:


> Speaking of handbags, and no, not Harry this time, did anyone notice this 'sweet nod' to Her Majesty? Two handled, similar style.
> 
> View attachment 5611011


It’s a Loewe postal - it looks much better in other colours tbh- I don’t like how Loewe does black. Tan is their metier anyway and they have cute ones with city prints on them in Bicester atm.

You are right it does look like a launer - I hadn’t seen it before,

What bag did Catherine carry?


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hillary isn't picky these days, hu?



Matched pair.


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I would have said anything that is not clearly a cake (flour based and baked?) or a pastry (pastry based - filo, puff, sweet shortcake, chou etc) so macarons, glazed or iced biscuit based items, meringues etc.
> 
> Others will probably be much more accurate than me on the distinctions - I am not an enthusiastic cook so have very limited experience other than as a consumer !



Correct! 

And small and decorative. 

Same as stones, a fancy cut is a heart-shape or a pear and so on; out of the ordinary


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective. 

I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth. 

And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.

I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...

both married men who behave like children 
both were in their positions because of that marriage
neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them 
both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
both complained in Africa about being victims 
both have been accused of merching 
both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals 
both blame the media for being against them 
both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans 
both had some pretty racy photos published
yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other   

Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end? 

In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


----------



## Sharont2305

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree calling him names is on one hand below the belt but on the other it’s very ephemeral with little explanation of more serious issues  and might make most people more sympathetic to him as the casual reader goes ‘oh so he’s short tempered- but not a bad guy’ and he doesn’t have to explain or even recall  his dodgy deals.
> 
> This is not to say it will happen because of course IF Hilary did record an episode with M and now knows it’ll be released after Queen’s funeral  and will bring with it a ton of bad PR Hilary is probably doing everything she can to make sure it never leaves the editing room at all. Megz has already announced she’ll be editing after all…
> 
> Another option, for an boomer generation woman might be Oprah herself of course….
> 
> The third option is they haven’t managed to record the last three episodes and it’ll end up being M interviewing each of her faces and the ass she talks out of.
> 
> TBH I hate the hypocrisy of this whole re-cutting the recordings thing. I tend to think if you have conviction in what you are publishing to the public it shouldn’t matter if the subject is alive or not.
> 
> This clip seems edited a bit misleadingly but….
> The 1% means royal family but Bower and other stories say she started acting queeny long before that - some say Trev and some say suits and some say she’s always been cocky.
> Entirely possible he’s worked with someone who worked on Saw and it’s just edited badly.
> 
> 
> It’s a Loewe postal - it looks much better in other colours tbh- I don’t like how Loewe does black. Tan is their metier anyway and they have cute ones with city prints on them in Bicester atm.
> 
> You are right it does look like a launer - I hadn’t seen it before,
> 
> What bag did Catherine carry?


This, today at Sandringham


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> This is not to say it will happen because of course IF Hilary did record an episode with M and now knows it’ll be released after Queen’s funeral  and will bring with it a ton of bad PR Hilary is probably doing everything she can to make sure it never leaves the editing room at all. Megz has already announced she’ll be editing after all…


Ooo, what if they were planning on recording the episode when they met up for the VF awards show and now that isn't going to happen? Hillary would have a chance to rethink her decision and cancel. If she goes ahead and does it anyway, we'll know how desperate for publicity Hillary is these days.

Then again, no publicity is bad publicity to celebs.


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> This reminds of the tea we had at the Wolseley last time we were in London. Devine!



Glad you had a good experience last time I was there my meal was tasteless. 

London is packed! 

Today I passed two women in Belgravia talking about M. 
One said to the other the equivalent of "What a b*tch!" but _worse_, and the other said "she'll do _all_ the talk shows, she loves to hear herself talk"


----------



## piperdog

CarryOn2020 said:


> What?
> 
> 
> 
> Did he threaten to leave?



Or did he threaten to stay?


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> @QueenofWrapDress We should all be so lucky as to have friends like you. I'm sure that high tea will be glorious for you both! Wishing your best friend a speedy recovery.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I had the misery of chemo some months ago and they put me on an NG tube after because I had trouble swallowing as I developed some sores in my mouth/throat. Thankfully this did not last long for me, but I am empathetic to your best friend's experience and can tell you sincerely, this is a most wonderful gift that she'll truly be touched by. You're just wonderful for thinking of it.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I hope Meghan had time to call her baker and have her whip up her favorite, an expensive Amalfi lemon and elderflower birthday cake. Yes, I said her favorite, not his.



I think I said it before but the only time I want lemon and elderflower anything is in my soap


----------



## Lodpah

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


You’re cool. I’m not angry at her but she is totally wack. Her agenda is to destroy and from what I’ve read about her, her actions anything she does is so sus and the lies she tells it’s hard to know if she’s being truthful.

As soon as she’s in her environment she will go for the jugular vein of the BRF. Not once have I ever seen her say something with gratitude but always preaching and all about her. 

I can see one person ghosting one side of a family but both sides? Too many bodies she had piled up behind her. 

The people who helped her on the way up she has completely left behind but she will meet them in her way down.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> excuse my Yank ignorance but I always thought a prince or princess was the child of a king or queen - not the grandchild



Child or grandchild

I've been to the dentist. I'm answering questions like 30 haven't already answered you. Disregard if I'm the umpteenth.


----------



## CobaltBlu

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


nice post. 

I dont know who is MT though? Drawing a complete blank even though I am sure the answer is obvious.


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


> nice post.
> 
> I dont know who is MT though? Drawing a complete blank even though I am sure the answer is obvious.



At first, I thought @OriginalBalenciaga was referring to Mike Tindall and I thought, but Mike hasn't done any of those things, lol!  But I think it's the former first lady.


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> Only the children and grandchildren of the monarch through the male line are entitled to the title of prince or princess.
> 
> The Letters Patent  issued by *King George V in 1917* reads: “The children of any Sovereign of these Realms and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour’.
> 
> The Letters Patent (effectively the Royal Law) was amended to include* all *the children of the eldest son of the eldest son BEFORE Prince George was born.
> 
> So children of the Sovereign = Princes Charles, Andrew, Edward and Princess Anne
> Children of the Sovereigns SONS = Princes William, Harry, Princess Beatrice and Eugenie.
> The Earl of Wessex children are also technically Princess Louise and Prince James But Edward and Sophie opted for them to use the style of the son ( Viscount)  and daughter ( Lady) of an Earl and to give their children the opportunity to decide for themselves when they reached age 18. (Lady Louise who is now 18 could therefore use the title HRH Princess Louise now  if she so wished.)
> 
> Prince of Wales is effectively the equivalent of the Crown Prince in other monarchies ie. the eldest son and heir to the throne = Charles
> His eldest Son = William
> His eldest son = George
> 
> Prior to the birth of Prince George the Letters Patent were amended so that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would hold titles. That was so that if W+K's first child was a girl she would be a princess, given that in the fullness of time she would become the daughter of the King (William).
> 
> Have I lost you yet ?
> 
> Princess Anne is not a son of the Sovereign so her children are not Prince Peter / Princess Zara and Anne declined any other ducal titles for them, on the quite obvious basis that with each child born to her brothers, she and her children would recede down the line of succession and be required to earn their own living outside the royal family (which they have done).
> 
> Harry was a prince by birth as the grandson of the Monarch through the male line, his father POW.
> 
> Both of Harry's children, when born, were great grandchildren of the Monarch and so not entitled to the title.
> This is why the lie than Meghan made about Archie not being a prince because of his skin colour was so widely derided - the rules date back to 1917, and would apply to any child of Harry's irrespective of whoever his wife was BECAUSE Harry is NOT the eldest son of the eldest son (and his children will never be the son and daughter of a king.)
> 
> I am appalled if the reports are true that H+M have spent this week lobbying for their children to be given the titles, even though under the 1917 Letters Patent, they are eligible, before the Queen has even been buried.
> 
> 
> However the fact that the Queen did adjust the 1917 Letters Patent means that the rules are not necessarily set in stone.
> 
> As I suggested, the clever thing would be to use Ed and Sophie's example  as the precedent for the grandchildren of the Monarch's other children.



Anne was offered titles by the Queen but turned them down


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

MiniMabel said:


> The website, Change.org, has the petition to remove the Sussex's titles.
> 
> Just type in removes sussex titles in the search box.
> 
> I've already signed!


As someone who lives in Sussex I can say that most of the people here would like them (definitely her) to lose the Duchess title too!


----------



## Lodpah

What happened? Yahoo use to kiss the hinds of the infamous duo. Times are a changing. Good read!!









						Sophie’s choice? How Meghan was left shaken by this car ride: royal expert
					

Royal expert Neil Sean dishes on a car ride that didn't sit too well with Meghan Markle as she and Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, sat together on the way to pay their respects to Queen Elizabeth II.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Toby93 said:


> Really, they caved and are going to allow him to wear the uniform



I suspect it was a request of the Queen rather than a demand from him.


----------



## CobaltBlu

youngster said:


> At first, I thought @OriginalBalenciaga was referring to Mike Tindall and I thought, but Mike hasn't done any of those things, lol!  But I think it's the former first lady.


In my head it started as Mother Theresa but... no. 
But you're right, it must be the FFL.  I literally forgot all about her.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Lots of security at this point.


I cannot fathom how security will be provided for some 500 heads of state and dignitaries attending the funeral, but I trust the Brits will have it under control. I don't recall another event of this scope in my lifetime.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Family meal with 20 other people sitting on opposite end of the table   Too far to pass the salt.



Don't forget the pepper too. Presumably the condiments hold hands as they go. Salt and pepper are always passed together, otherwise MegZ will be very annoyed  

I've never heard that before in my life. 

Is that some local LA custom?


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s so sweet of you. Meringues are a must have fancy I’d say but I’m no expert. I know savouries are things like cheese straws.
> 
> Sure I think it’d backfire but I still think it’s going to happen- my reasoning is:-
> 1. This interview could have been recorded at many points over the last few years - she might have done it right after they signed the contract
> 2. As much as we hate it, they have gotten big names before Gloria, Serena, Oprah - these all strike me as people Hil likes to be associated with
> 3. The very fact they are hiding 3 names makes me think they are trying to build suspense - I mean no one was going to lose their minds over an Issa Rae interview whoever that is
> 4. Dramatic convention is you start strong and end strong
> 5. It strikes me the award ceremony would have been the perfect time to announce their collaboration
> 6. It’s extremely obvious M is no stranger to buying awards to give herself somewhere to be - so it was easy for her to arrange a guest appearance with Hilary.
> 7. As people have noticed she hasn’t identified a single white guest or anyone over the age of 55 yet- I feel like they want to spread as broad an audience net as possible and, well, you don’t get whiter than Hil and she’s in the key boomer demographic
> 
> 8. Most importantly, the subject matter of the podcast and the language used just really remind me of that Hilary documentary and the book Rodham. I can’t quite shake the idea that she’d find it really appealing.
> 
> No wonder she wanted to ghost him - he knows where the bodies are buried!
> 
> Hang on, Trev produced the saw films?
> Thats an enormous franchise - that would make him pretty damn rich wouldn’t it? She really must have thought that hotel guy would marry her.
> 
> I’m wondering if some of the horror fans amongst us aren’t a little disappointed Trev didn’t use his influence to get Meg cast as one of the victims


He did that show a while ago. He seemed honest about what he said.


papertiger said:


> Don't forget the pepper too. Presumably the condiments hold hands as they go. Salt and pepper are always passed together, otherwise MegZ will be very annoyed
> 
> I've never heard that before in my life.
> 
> Is that some local LA custom?


Not that I know of.  Actually it is considered bad manners to put salt and pepper on the table because it insults the chef!  The presumption is that your food has been perfectly seasoned before it is served.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> I think he'd be OK, he started his professional life as a male model
> 
> Anyway, it was Roger Moore that was famous for his eyebrow and 'minimal' acting.
> 
> I think we need a smirk from Daniel Craig TBH. He can still take care of MM and raise an eyebrow


Just so y'all know I find that searching for these pictures, icons, emojis, gif takes me away from the sadness in the thread and finding all these beautiful men has a calming effect.   
@papertiger   You can have this sorta smirking Daniel Craig.


         or just enjoy this one 
Daniel Craig


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> What happened? Yahoo use to kiss the hinds of the infamous duo. Times are a changing. Good read!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sophie’s choice? How Meghan was left shaken by this car ride: royal expert
> 
> 
> Royal expert Neil Sean dishes on a car ride that didn't sit too well with Meghan Markle as she and Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, sat together on the way to pay their respects to Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Great shade!  What a chill, I need a shawl.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

youngster said:


> At first, I thought @OriginalBalenciaga was referring to Mike Tindall and I thought, but Mike hasn't done any of those things, lol!  But I think it's the former first lady.





CobaltBlu said:


> In my head it started as Mother Theresa but... no.
> But you're right, it must be the FFL.  I literally forgot all about her.



I wouldn't mind seeing Mike Tindall in a racy photo but I'm not sure about Mother Theresa with a smoky eye and fake tan!


----------



## Lodpah

It just dawned on me she’s making those ‘sad’ and ‘scared’ expressions for more fodder for her attacks in the future.


----------



## lanasyogamama

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


I do think at this point they get criticized for absolutely everything. While I think they made their bed, others have been in that position and have been able to recover over time by truly putting their head down and staying out of the limelight for a very significant amount of time. The problem with these two is that they publicly respond to every single thing that comes out about them, and it just add fuel to the fire. 

They need like a full year of “never complain never explain”. Look at Chrissy Teigan, (sorry, I know that’s spelled wrong) people have totally moved from all the stuff that came out about her.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Lodpah said:


> What happened? Yahoo use to kiss the hinds of the infamous duo. Times are a changing. Good read!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sophie’s choice? How Meghan was left shaken by this car ride: royal expert
> 
> 
> Royal expert Neil Sean dishes on a car ride that didn't sit too well with Meghan Markle as she and Sophie, the Countess of Wessex, sat together on the way to pay their respects to Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


It is a fun read!  I like how Sophie is given her due to recognize how effectively she serves the BRF in a situation like this.  But is the writer taking advantage of the ignorance of many readers when it comes to all things royal - similar to what Meghan and Harry did claiming disgust that their kids did not get titles - when they were not eligible for them at birth?  Camilla and Kate were going to be in a car together as the two highest ranking women.  Sophie and Meghan were put together being recognized as the next two highest ranking.  The article makes it sound like there was picking and choosing. But much to Meghan's dismay when she joined the family, we know rank determines everything.
Am I missing something? Were there higher ranking women who should have been put with either of them instead?


----------



## papertiger

TimeToShop said:


> I just finished watching that. It was so interesting. Amazing that the letters have survived this long. My biggest takeaway was that HMTQ was a descendant of Mary Boleyn. I had no idea, probably shows my American ignorance.
> 
> Had to check that out and found that Diana was too so William and Harry have a double dose of Boleyn blood.
> 
> The opportunity TW had and blew it. To live with and have access to all that history. Even if I disliked my in-laws I sure would have sucked it up to vacation at Balmoral, Sandringham, whatever old house or castle to which I was invited.



All families have history 

Some just get written about more and have bigger houses.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Speaking of handbags, and no, not Harry this time, did anyone notice this 'sweet nod' to Her Majesty? Two handled, similar style.
> 
> View attachment 5611011



It's probably merch 

Certainly not Launer 

These shoes look brand new


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!



Not sure why you'd be persona non grata because nothing you wrote surprised me...you have stated most if it before, just not all in one compact post. And while I personally don't understand how people can acknowledge her behaviour and still not understand why that would bring on strong reactions, I can totally live with someone stating their opinion politely, which you've always done.

But please do tell who MT is?

ETA: someone already revealed it. I must say I don't like her either and have never seen anyone in this thread sing her praises, but to me she isn't as offensive because she isn't so loud. As soon as she stopped being a sh*tty FLOTUS and left the spotlight I didn't give her much thought anymore. Now MM...she hogs the spotlight like there's no tomorrow, at this point it's hard to avoid her even if you want to.

ETA2 because I had to fix a typo anyway: I'm also not anti smoky eyes at all, but there's a place and time for them and the events regarding the funeral of a family member are neither.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> It isn’t a Launer, so it’s a miss imo.



I'm so behind. 

I feel like I'm in a time-warp


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure why you'd be persona non grata because nothing you wrote surprised me...you have stated most if it before, just not all in one compact post. And while I personally don't understand how people can acknowledge her behaviour and still not understand why that would bring on strong reactions, I can totally live with someone stating their opinion politely, which you've always done.
> 
> But please do tell who MT is?


ha
that's what I was wondering too....MT?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> They need like a full year of “never complain never explain”


Agreed, but it's just not in her DNA. Chrissy Teigen probably regained some public sympathy when she recently revealed her pregnancy after losing a baby two years ago.


----------



## Cinderlala

Ali-bagpuss said:


> She planned to speak about ‘troops holding women back’ does podcasts on strong women yet she bashed the Queen! I know the Queen didn’t initially want her job and it was more a case of blood and bad luck but pleeeeaassee .. she had close access to *one of the strongest women in the world* and she literally threw it away ‍♀️


EXACTLY!!!  The fact that people (or TW herself) felt that the BRF would finally have a feminist in it infuriated me!  The Queen is the OG.  She became a MECHANIC and a truck driver during WWII when she was a PRINCESS.  (Plus the millions of other things The Queen did that I can't be bothered to look up right now.)


Ali-bagpuss said:


> To be honest though she’s in a no win situation here because I think we’d all be having a go at her if she WASN’T there too


I don't think anyone would object to her absence.  



RAINDANCE said:


> At the risk of veering slightly off topic - Is it possible for person with NPD to "recover"  so that they can function and behave as a more normal, emotionally well-adjusted person ?


Interestingly, there is an institution in Wisconsin working to study psychopathy to alter the behavior of the individuals diagnosed with it.  Recovery is not possible with psychopathy but a reward-based therapy has been somewhat effective in altering the behavior, even beyond the institutionalized period.  Obviously, psychopathy and npd are not the same but there are many overlapping traits that could conceivably be treated similarly.  The difficulty would be convincing a person with npd to be treated.



Sharont2305 said:


> @QueenofWrapDress
> These are two good examples. Fancies at the top.
> Start at the bottom and work your way up.
> 
> View attachment 5610839
> 
> 
> View attachment 5610840


These pictures are torture for me because going to tea is my FAVORITE thing!!  Torture because I now live about a zillion miles from anywhere I could go to afternoon tea.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Ooo, what if they were planning on recording the episode when they met up for the VF awards show and now that isn't going to happen? Hillary would have a chance to rethink her decision and cancel. If she goes ahead and does it anyway, we'll know how desperate for publicity Hillary is these days.
> 
> Then again, no publicity is bad publicity to celebs.



Was it VF or Forbes? Only because I just read Blake Lively went to a Forbes Women in Power event or something and "announced" her 4th pregnancy by, uh, being visibly pregnant.


----------



## charlottawill

LibbyRuth said:


> It is a fun read!  I like how Sophie is given her due to recognize how effectively she serves the BRF in a situation like this.  But is the writer taking advantage of the ignorance of many readers when it comes to all things royal - similar to what Meghan and Harry did claiming disgust that their kids did not get titles - when they were not eligible for them at birth?  Camilla and Kate were going to be in a car together as the two highest ranking women.  Sophie and Meghan were put together being recognized as the next two highest ranking.  The article makes it sound like there was picking and choosing. But much to Meghan's dismay when she joined the family, we know rank determines everything.
> Am I missing something? Were there higher ranking women who should have been put with either of them instead?


No, I've noticed plenty of inaccuracies and sometimes actual false statements in the press coverage, but as you said they're counting on their readers' lack of royal knowledge to write what they know will sell papers.


----------



## papertiger

WingNut said:


> It's Loewe based on the embossing, also very nice. I really liked the one Kate carried.



I don't think it's Loewe 

This is Loewe's answer to the proper structured handbag (note the price!!!)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> ha
> that's what I was wondering too....MT?



Someone said the former FLOTUS.


----------



## kipp

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


Well, I totally agree that some of the criticisms of Megain and Hazzbeen have been overkill and in the end, I think they backfire and make those criticisms less powerful.  But certainly the duo have in reality done enough damage to warrant plenty of criticism.  

It's also interesting to me that while it appears that a lot of the press criticism comes from more "conservative" political sources, the dastardly duo have been *unifying,* in that people on every side of the political spectrum also dislike what they have done.  I have many friends here in the US who would consider themselves to be quite liberal politically who would feel quite at home on this thread.  And, I was just in London (there when the Queen passed away), and all of my UK friends (and who identify as liberal) feel the same way as I do about these two.


----------



## megs0927

MT stayed under the radar for the most part though.  I don’t think she ever wanted to be FLOTUS where TW wants ALLLLL the attention. I can see the comparison in her younger years but now not so much…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm not editing my former post a third time, so I'll just post a P.S.

For me, all the things @OriginalBalenciaga mentioned others have done as well pale in comparison to what really, really bothers me: the ongoing, vicious badmouthing of family. I have never experienced anyone publicly go for the throat like this, just as I have never seen someone lie like this before with not a care in the world if they are eventually found out or not. I don't find either behaviour normal in even the widest sense.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Ooo, what if they were planning on recording the episode when they met up for the VF awards show and now that isn't going to happen? Hillary would have a chance to rethink her decision and cancel. If she goes ahead and does it anyway, we'll know how desperate for publicity Hillary is these days.
> 
> Then again, no publicity is bad publicity to celebs.


Hillary will never be on the MM podcast, H has her own podcast with Chelsea


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was it VF or Forbes? Only because I just read Blake Lively went to a Forbes Women in Power event or something and "announced" her 4th pregnancy by, uh, being visibly pregnant.


I don't know. It looks like Forbes had a Womens summit today but neither Hillary nor Meghan are listed as being speakers.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I don't think it's Loewe
> 
> This is Loewe's answer to the proper structured handbag (note the price!!!)
> 
> View attachment 5611142


It is the Loewe Postal, no longer available. It does look a lot like the Queen's favored black Launer. 



> https://www.24s.com/en-us/postal-ba...&ranSiteID=QFGLnEolOWg-HAuJMFeVO3A4P97dx4.m4Q


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> All families have history
> 
> Some just get written about more and have bigger houses.



Katharine Hepburn as Eleanor of Aquitaine to Henry II in the Lion in Winter:
*What family doesn't have its ups and downs?*


----------



## Cinderlala

lanasyogamama said:


> I do think at this point they get criticized for absolutely everything. While I think they made their bed, *others have been in that position and have been able to recover over time by truly putting their head down* and staying out of the limelight for a very significant amount of time. The problem with these two is that they publicly respond to every single thing that comes out about them, and it just add fuel to the fire.
> 
> They need like a full year of “never complain never explain”. Look at Chrissy Teigan, (sorry, I know that’s spelled wrong) people have totally moved from all the stuff that came out about her.


The Queen Consort is a perfect example of this.  I don't think I've ever seen such a drastic change in public opinion.  She was not ever mouthy and simply kept to the task at hand.  Which is really all the BRF ever asks of its members, IMO.


----------



## Lodpah

Where’s Fergie? Has she not attended anything?


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Where’s Fergie? Has she not attended anything?


Supposedly flew home from overseas but MIA in the UK


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> The Queen Consort is a perfect example of this.  I don't think I've ever seen such a drastic change in public opinion.  She was not ever mouthy and simply kept to the task at hand.  Which is really all the BRF ever asks of its members, IMO.


yes, I wasn't really a fan as I liked Diana but I've had my mind changed hearing how hard-working she has been and how she has a great down-to-earth personality

also I think Charles went after her more than she did him....so it's not like she aggressively stole someone's husband (I guess - not really sure how it all played out)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Interestingly, there is an institution in Wisconsin working to study psychopathy to alter the behavior of the individuals diagnosed with it.  Recovery is not possible with psychopathy but a reward-based therapy has been somewhat effective in altering the behavior, even beyond the institutionalized period.  Obviously, psychopathy and npd are not the same but there are many overlapping traits that could conceivably be treated similarly.  The difficulty would be convincing a person with npd to be treated.



Years ago I read a lengthy article about children with psychopathy and it was the most chilling thing ever. Like, what are you supposed to do? It's your child, but I would absolutely not keep a child in the house who chopped off the family pet's tail, had a secret pet cemetery where they had buried dozens of neighbourhood cats and bunnies they had killed or was caught pushing their toddler sibling into the pool and sitting on a little chair they brought out so they could watch them drown comfortably. Sorry not sorry.



Cinderlala said:


> These pictures are torture for me because going to tea is my FAVORITE thing!!  Torture because I now live about a zillion miles from anywhere I could go to afternoon tea.



I'd have to google to find out if anyone offers it around here (with around here I mean the next big city). Germans drink coffee as an afternoon snack, not tea (in fact most people who are staunch tea drinkers are more into fruit or herb tea), and a coffee spread is completely different to afternoon tea. At a café you'd order a slice of cake or a pastry, at home depending on what occasion it could go from storebought pastry (now that I write it out, for some reason most people don't make them at home) to a simple homemade cake (think poundcake) or homemade waffles to a whole spread with different buttercream cakes.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> It is the Loewe Postal, no longer available. It does look a lot like the Queen's favored black Launer.



Oh thank you  

Then someone must have lent it to her, that's not an M bag (have we ever seen her carry it before?) and it's not new. Maybe Loewe chucked an old model at her to stop her from taking a sequinned disco clutch 

To me, it doesn't look anything like HM's Launer (she had quite a few different models though the years). The black leather Royale, patent Traviata, a custom and 10s of others.


----------



## DoggieBags

Lodpah said:


> Where’s Fergie? Has she not attended anything?


Fergie’s not a member of the BRF since she and Andrew have been divorced for decades. In addition, Andrew himself is not invited to all the events since he is a non-working royal so there’s even less reason to invite Fergie to any of the events. She’s doing the respectful thing imo and being very low key.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Where’s Fergie? Has she not attended anything?



I wondered the same. She release a nice statement re the Queen and I assumed she will be at the funeral. But I recall that PP hated her for the embarrassment she brought upon the family, so maybe the Queen specifically excluded her per his wishes. Nothing is left to chance in this. We'll see on Monday.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think so too. Not only was she confident in her manipulative skills, Charles was initially fond of her, *walked her down the aisle*, took care of her mother during the wedding, came up with extra money to set them up in Frogmore Cottage and paid her outrageous wardrobe bill without complaining.


It was unplanned but Charles walked her down the last half to stop her making a mockery of the CoE laws. ZedZed wanted to walk solo to offer her pure, sweet and virginal self to her prince at the altar. According to CoE law, as a divorcee she wasn't supposed to wear white (off-white is acceptable) and shoulders need to be covered. Brides must be accompanied to the altar.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Oh thank you
> 
> Then someone must have lent it to her, that's not an M bag (have we ever seen her carry it before?) and it's not new. Maybe Loewe chucked an old model at her to stop her from taking a sequinned disco clutch
> 
> To me, it doesn't look anything like HM's Launer (she had quite a few different models though the years). The black leather Royale, patent Traviata, a custom and 10s of others.



I found it here. I have no idea what this is, maybe one of her merching deals?



> https://www.meghansfashion.com/loewe-postal-black-bag.html


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes, I wasn't really a fan as I liked Diana but I've had my mind changed hearing how hard-working she has been and how she has a great down-to-earth personality
> 
> also I think Charles went after her more than she did him....so it's not like she aggressively stole someone's husband (I guess - not really sure how it all played out)



I am very sensitive to cheating which I don't condone at all to the point where in real life I have refused to meet the sidepiece after they made it official. But I was a child when all the ugliness took place...when I became an adult they got married, and they are still married nearly 20 years later and seem happy. I like Camilla.


----------



## lulu212121

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. *I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT.* Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


 Can you point to those posts? Other than marriage, I don't see the comparison. Sorry. Also, I don't see/read the "rage" here. As far as MM, I don't buy her victim/feminism crap. You can't trash The Queen and call yourself a feminist.


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> I wondered the same. She release a nice statement re the Queen and I assumed she will be at the funeral. But I recall that PP hated her for the embarrassment she brought upon the family, so maybe the Queen specifically excluded her per his wishes. Nothing is left to chance in this. We'll see on Monday.


She has been invited to the funeral- the Queen enjoyed her company even after the divorce and often said she was a wonderful mother to her two girls Philip didn’t even forgive her but the Queen was much more forgiving - let’s face it she had lots of experience - her uncle her sister Andrew Harry why not Fergie


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> It was unplanned but Charles walked her down the last half to stop her making a mockery of the CoE laws. ZedZed wanted to walk solo to offer her pure, sweet and virginal self to her prince at the altar. According to CoE law, as a divorcee she wasn't supposed to wear white (off-white is acceptable) and shoulders need to be covered. Brides must be accompanied to the altar.


I assumed he was just being considerate. At the time I could not believe she didn't have a male friend or relative to escort her, but I now know better.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

papertiger said:


> I don't think it's Loewe
> 
> This is Loewe's answer to the proper structured handbag (note the price!!!)
> 
> View attachment 5611142


I thought it was the Loewe logo on first glimpse but Meghsns bag does seem more rigid than their styles usually are. I had a bit of a flirtation with Loewe many years ago but never took the plunge. I am sure I did read on this forum that the leather on Loewe bags is considered by some as second only in quality to Hermes leathers. Apparently there's a Loewe factory shop in Spain somewhere.


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> Oh thank you
> 
> Then someone must have lent it to her, that's not an M bag (have we ever seen her carry it before?) and it's not new. Maybe Loewe chucked an old model at her to stop her from taking a sequinned disco clutch
> 
> To me, it doesn't look anything like HM's Launer (she had quite a few different models though the years). The black leather Royale, patent Traviata, a custom and 10s of others.


Its really tiny!  NO way to fit a marmalade sandwich in there. While I was geeking out today, I see she has carried it before, maybe she dug it out of a box at frogmore.... not sure it has been seen er...overseas.








						Loewe Postal Bag
					

Meghan first wore this Loewe Postal Bag as she left The Goring Hotel in London, following a reported goodbye lunch for her and Harry’s UK staff in March 2020.




					meghanmaven.com
				




Here's a picture where you can see the logo better


----------



## bubablu

charlottawill said:


> I cannot fathom how security will be provided for some 500 heads of state and dignitaries attending the funeral, but I trust the Brits will have it under control. I don't recall another event of this scope in my lifetime.


Maybe Papa Giovanni Paolo II funeral? Wiki says it "was one of the largest gathering of statesmen and world leaders in history."


----------



## EverSoElusive

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


Hi @OriginalBalenciaga  You are NOT a persona non grata. I thank you and welcome your differing perspective.

I cannot speak for others here but personally, it's nice to be able to have a civil discussion even if we do not agree on the subject matter.

What really gets to me is when members who are not that familiar with the opinion change progression here, pop in for a minute and start calling the regular posters within this thread or people who are not pro-The Wife racist. That is not what I consider a civil discussion. The posters from this thread do not generally comment on the appreciation thread because we do not share their opinions nor do we go there to call our counterparts names.

As for MT, I assume you are referring to the former First Lady. Since this is a Harry and The Wife's thread, I have zero idea if any of the regular posters here are pro-MT. Even if they are pro-MT, we have been warned many times by mods to stay on Harry and The Wife within this thread therefore I never personally noticed pro-MT posts. I'll just say this once since this is not the former First Couple's thread, I note and agree with your observation about the same things that The Wife and the former First Lady have going on. However, some stark contrasts must be noted too:


MT did not cry racism or victim all day everyday
MT did not trash her husband's family or extended family though her husband is not a man of honor in any way, shape or form
MT did not blatantly demand for anything e.g. titles, money, security, special treatment etc. for her son
MT did not just start spray tanning after becoming a First Lady (whereas The Wife used to pass herself as white but as soon as she got married, she started doing that so she could identify as black and call her in-laws racist when she doesn't get her way, as well as to garner support and sympathy from black people)
MT did not have stories planted through unofficial mouthpieces or a hired PR firm everyday but kept quiet mostly, only her husband can't seem to shut his tweet and mouth
MT did not keep her husband from his family
I'm sure there are more things that I have not included but I just got in my husband's car and we're heading out for the night. Sorry to end this post abruptly.

Again, I sincerely appreciate you and your post


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> It just dawned on me she’s making those ‘sad’ and ‘scared’ expressions for more fodder for her attacks in the future.


The same reason why there was heavy bronzer.


----------



## carmen56

For those interested in Kate’s bag today, it’s by Grace Chang.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Katharine Hepburn as Eleanor of Aquitaine to Henry II in the Lion in Winter:
> *What family doesn't have its ups and downs?*


And brothers who don't get on well lol!


----------



## DoggieBags

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


Not sure why you think people would be upset with you for expressing your opinions. Everyone is entitled to express their opinions on the subject of this thread as long as it’s done in a civil manner as you have always done. I assume MT refers to our former FLOTUS. Since I don’t recall seeing her name come up on this thread I’m not sure how one could get the impression that many posters on this thread adore her. I did not care for her for reasons I won’t get into so as to avoid getting into any political discussion. As to TW, I disagree that she is without any power or influence. Her accusations of racism in the BRF have been mentioned in some articles as fanning the flames in some of the Caribbean countries that William and Kate visited earlier this year as part of the Jubilee Tour. The then Duke and Duchess of Cambridge did not receive a particularly warm welcome on that tour and while TW is obviously not the origin of the issues brought up during that tour I do believe she exacerbated the situation. As to TW being in a no win situation at this point, being damned whether she does or not do something, I think she dug that gigantic hole for herself. She’s shown that she will say and do anything to advance herself so everything she does is viewed with suspicion and every action she takes is analyzed through the prism of what’s in it for her. At this point it is difficult to give her the benefit of the doubt. I’m not sure she has a single altruistic bone in her body.
Some of the hyperbole aside, I have learned a lot on this thread about a really astonishing range of subjects.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I assumed he was just being considerate. At the time I could not believe she didn't have a male friend or relative to escort her, but I now know better.


The reason ZedZed didn't want her father in London was so she could walk alone to the altar, a no-no in the CoE. When the BRF realized that ZedZed was breaking all rules, Charles was asked to stop her from completing her solo walk down the aisle and escorted her to the altar.


----------



## LittleStar88

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!



Welcome, and thank you for taking the time to write such a thoughtful post!

I see many have already responded. Just wanted to say hi. And that I adored MM at first. She had SO MUCH potential, and in exchange, with time and patience, could have really done great work had her intentions been good. Then her behavior and hypocrisy led me to feel otherwise. There are many here who started out like me, and grew to see the kind of person she quickly revealed herself to be.

I’m not right wing at all, and do not like the former First Lady MT (I could list many reasons for not liking her!).

Yes, this thread gets intense, but MM inspires that kind of feeling in many who respect and admire the BRF and QEII. 

Welcoming your viewpoint and looking forward to having a fun and enlightening dialogue.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> The reason ZedZed didn't want her father in London was so she could walk alone to the altar, a no-no in the CoE. When the BRF realized that ZedZed was breaking all rules, Charles was asked to stop her from completing her solo walk down the aisle and escorted her to the altar.


And this info did not come out until fairly recently.  We thought he was just being nice.  There was more to it.


----------



## DoggieBags

CobaltBlu said:


> Its really tiny!  NO way to fit a marmalade sandwich in there. While I was geeking out today, I see she has carried it before, maybe she dug it out of a box at frogmore.... not sure it has been seen er...overseas.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loewe Postal Bag
> 
> 
> Meghan first wore this Loewe Postal Bag as she left The Goring Hotel in London, following a reported goodbye lunch for her and Harry’s UK staff in March 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> meghanmaven.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a picture where you can see the logo better
> View attachment 5611149


I have a Loewe Postal bag and it fits a lot for a small bag. It would definitely fit a marmalade sandwich


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I thought it was the Loewe logo on first glimpse but Meghsns bag does seem more rigid than their styles usually are. I had a bit of a flirtation with Loewe many years ago but never took the plunge. I am sure I did read on this forum that the leather on Loewe bags is considered by some as second only in quality to Hermes leathers. Apparently there's a Loewe factory shop in Spain somewhere.



I have plenty of Loewe bags, cases, SLGs, and RTW, but it all predates Jonathan Anderson.

In fact, I carry Loewe every day as the blue suede/leather toiletry bag is in my Evie, one of laptop cases too. I have a Loewe suede coat and an evening dress I wore this Summer. It used to be called the Hermes of Spain (just s Valextra and BV ave been called the same of Italy). I mean its _not _Hermes, but most things in leather are pretty good.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> And this info did not come out until fairly recently.  We thought he was just being nice.  There was more to it.


Actually I've known this for quite some time and I just can't recall where I read it.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I assumed he was just being considerate. At the time I could not believe she didn't have a male friend or relative to escort her, but I now know better.


Lest we forget the context  ... there was all the pre wedding hoopla over her father  - the hoopla that later caused the FAMOUS LETTER - that was the subject of the lawsuit
Anyway, things were cringe worthy messy with Thomas Markle, then he had a cardiac event, and was out of the picture for the wedding
I thought of Charles walking her down the aisle was a win-win, he got to seem like he was welcoming her into the fold, side stepping CoE issues, and how could anyone say that Charles was not an adequate substitute for Thomas - it was an elegant solution to the cringe worthy mess

PS the cringe worthy MM - TM kerfuffle was mucking a 50M pound wedding (one of the numbers that has been advanced...) 
And of course, her other wedding shenanigans - tiara, bridesmaids, dressmakers, tears - came out later


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Meghan wanted the optics of a solo walk down the aisle, one she could later point to as evidence that the family did not like her or want her, that she had no one to walk her down the aisle even after her father bowed out.  She was all by herself, the poor abandoned waif in her custom Givenchy wedding gown. Of course, they stopped that by having Charles walk her down the aisle.


----------



## CobaltBlu

DoggieBags said:


> I have a Loewe Postal bag and it fits a lot for a small bag. It would definitely fit a marmalade sandwich


hahah!  Good to know (also congratulations, thats a sweet bag). 
I just noticed that there is a shoulder strap option! Glad you can carry a sandwich with you if necessary!


----------



## Debbini

carmen56 said:


> For those interested in Kate’s bag today, it’s by Grace Chang.


Not to be rude, it's Grace Han, the love letter bag. ❤️


----------



## DoggieBags




----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I have plenty of Loewe bags, cases, SLGs, and RTW, but it all predates Jonathan Anderson.
> 
> In fact, I carry Loewe every day as the blue suede/leather toiletry bag is in my Evie, one of laptop cases too. I have a Loewe suede coat and an evening dress I wore this Summer. It used to be called the Hermes of Spain (just s Valextra and BV ave been called the same of Italy). I mean its _not _Hermes, but most things in leather are pretty good.


Loewe is very good quality.  The DH and I bought belts and I bought two bags on a trip to Barcelona 30 years ago.  We still wear the belts!  Both were designed so that they are adjustable.  The DH's belt is actually black/brown reversible!  Sorry to say I don't get to wear the bags much, but they are still stylish.  One is a special edition in their classic toast color suede and brown leather. Back then you were buying the "house" and not the designer.


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> nice post.
> 
> I dont know who is MT though? Drawing a complete blank even though I am sure the answer is obvious.


Me too?  Who is MT?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## gracekelly

Debbini said:


> Not to be rude, it's Grace Han, the love letter bag. ❤️


Just went to her site to look.  Very pretty bags.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> A valid opinion!




Since Haz and Claw say that the BRF are "trapped", racist, mean, etc, then WHY would they even want their kids to inherit titles? Isn't that perpetuating all that they say is wrong with the BRF?  These arsewipes do nothing but complain despite being some of the most spoiled people on Earth who have been given untold millions without having to lift a finger. They are an embarrassment.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Jenna might have met KC on one or more previous occasions when her GF and father were Presidents.  

Knowing Markle, she wants to SELL the stories and NO ONE is buying.


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> Just went to her site to look.  Very pretty bags.


Gorgeous!


----------



## A1aGypsy

In fairness, I think Hager would have done well to have been demure on the subject herself.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Since Haz and Claw say that the BRF are "trapped", racist, mean, etc, then *WHY would they even want their kids to inherit titles? *Isn't that perpetuating all that they say is wrong with the BRF?  These arsewipes do nothing but complain despite being some of the most spoiled people on Earth who have been given untold millions without having to lift a finger. They are an embarrassment.


Because they feel entitled to it and want it for future exploitation.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> Jenna might have met KC on one or more previous occasions when her GF and father were Presidents.
> 
> *Knowing Markle, she wants to SELL the stories and NO ONE is buying.*



Let's hope not, but there are plenty of whores who call themselves "journalists" that probably can't wait until Claw returns to the U.S. and will give her a platform to blubber about all her faux pain and sorrow.


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> In fairness, I think Hager would have done well to have been demure on the subject herself.


I don't see the problem.  It will be a matter of public record as to where KC spent his last evening as Prince of Wales.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Jenna might have met KC on one or more previous occasions when her GF and father were Presidents.
> 
> Knowing Markle, she wants to SELL the stories and NO ONE is buying.


Probably needs money to pay her bills.


----------



## RAINDANCE

I see Harry's getting to wear uniform after all and that all 8 of the Queen's grandchildren are doing a vigil together, including Lady Louise and Viscount Severn. 
Personally I think it is the wrong call. It is the law that ex servicemen and women cannot wear uniform once they cease serving. Andrew's exception was at the request of the Queen herself. I can see that it's not treating Harry and Andrew the same but they aren't the same. Andrew is her son.

The optics are I think mixed. It looks like Harry has thrown a hissy fit and Charles has acquiesced but then equal treatment of Harry and Andrew is offsetting.

However, as the expression goes, pick your battles carefully. The wearing of uniform for 15 minutes is not a hill I would die on.

It just terribly distasteful to know that during this week of mourning Harry has been lobbying for this to be changed for him and didn't have the grace, dignity.or maturity to just suck it up and accept what the Queen's wishes were.  (Scobie started the media agitation about unfair treatment) 

(I am also a bit irritated by the fact the Mail keeps on reporting about Harry's decade of service when Andrew did over two decades. It seems a bit unfair that this is being airbrushed)


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Let's hope not, but there are plenty of whores who call themselves "journalists" that probably can't wait until Claw returns to the U.S. and will give her a platform to blubber about all her faux pain and sorrow.


Gosh are you referring to that masterpiece of plastic aka Omit the Brain Scabies?  Yes, Oprah can do a one on one with her.  Jimmy Fallon will do a sketch where he pretends to be one of the honor guards with a bowed head at the casket, with Meg lying on the casket trying to keep a straight face.  Lani will have an interview to post on her site that is gushing and then there will be another photo spread in The Cut.  Can't wait.


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> Where’s Fergie? Has she not attended anything?



I looked this up this morning. She has returned from Venice, posted her heartfelt tribute to the Queen, but has not been included in any of the family activities. She is expected to be at the Funeral however.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Agreed, but it's just not in her DNA. Chrissy Teigen probably regained some public sympathy when she recently revealed her pregnancy after losing a baby two years ago.


Using miscarriage as a means of redemption.  Who else has done that before?


----------



## gracekelly

RAINDANCE said:


> I see Harry's getting to wear uniform after all and that all 8 of the Queen's grandchildren are doing a vigil together, including Lady Louise and Viscount Severn.
> Personally I think it is the wrong call. It is the law that ex servicemen and women cannot wear uniform once they cease serving. Andrew's exception was at the request of the Queen herself. I can see that it's not treating Harry and Andrew the same but they aren't the same. Andrew is her son.
> 
> The optics are I think mixed. It looks like Harry has thrown a hissy fit and Charles has acquiesced but then equal treatment of Harry and Andrew is offsetting.
> 
> However, as the expression goes, pick your battles carefully. The wearing of uniform for 15 minutes is not a hill I would die on.
> 
> It just terribly distasteful to know that during this week of mourning Harry has been lobbying for this to be changed for him and didn't have the grace, dignity.or maturity to just suck it up and accept what the Queen's wishes were.  (Scobie started the media agitation about unfair treatment)
> 
> (I am also a bit irritated by the fact the Mail keeps on reporting about Harry's decade of service when Andrew did over two decades. It seems a bit unfair that this is being airbrushed)


I believe that Andrew still has one military  patronage left.  Harry has none.

Where has Harry been hiding his uniforms I wonder.  Did he keep all of these at Frog Cot? Or are they both being sent daily FedEx boxes of clothing from the casa? Maybe they are in storage at Windsor or BP?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> yes, I wasn't really a fan as I liked Diana but I've had my mind changed hearing how hard-working she has been and how she has a great down-to-earth personality
> 
> also I think Charles went after her more than she did him....so it's not like she aggressively stole someone's husband (I guess - not really sure how it all played out)


I think to be fair, Camilla was with Charles well before Diana and he was obviously in love with her, but not allowed to marry her.  Kind of tragic in a sense.  At least they’re happy now.  As manipulative as Diana was, I feel sad for her.  It’s not a great way to start a marriage, marrying someone that everyone knows is in love with someone else.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I have to wonder with all these things if a single word is true or it's all conjecture and click-bait for those accounts. I'll take it with a grain of salt, myself. If stories do leak at some point, then I'll pay heed.



RAINDANCE said:


> It just terribly distasteful to know that during this week of mourning Harry has been lobbying for this to be changed for him and didn't have the grace, dignity.or maturity to just suck it up and accept what the Queen's wishes were. (Scobie started the media agitation about unfair treatment)


Isn't it just? So disrespectful! Then again, H has form...

@OriginalBalenciaga Several of your posts over the past couple of years (on various threads) have been incredibly informative and have balanced multiple viewpoints with respect and consideration. I always appreciate the perspective you offer and have learned a lot from you.


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> Gosh are you referring to that masterpiece of plastic aka Omit the Brain Scabies?  Yes, Oprah can do a one on one with her.  Jimmy Fallon will do a sketch where he pretends to be one of the honor guards with a bowed head at the casket, with Meg lying on the casket trying to keep a straight face.  Lani will have an interview to post on her site that is gushing and then there will be another photo spread in The Cut.  Can't wait.



And Vogue will do a spread on her black dresses and shoes. Classy  . Ellen could get her to imitate a Beefeater and pall bearer.  Vanity Fair will want HER TRUTH which should include a barf bag in every copy.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I believe that Andrew still has one military  patronage left.  Harry has none.
> 
> Where has Harry been hiding his uniforms I wonder.  Did he keep all of these at Frog Cot? Or are they both being sent daily FedEx boxes of clothing from the casa? Maybe they are in storage at Windsor or BP?


Just a guess, but I think there is probably a team whose job is to take care of all the royals' ceremonial uniforms.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> And Vogue will do a spread on her black dresses and shoes. Classy  . Ellen could get her to imitate a Beefeater and pall bearer.  Vanity Fair will want HER TRUTH which should include a barf bag in every copy.


They will dress her up like a Beefeater and give her an In 'n Out burger as a joke.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and his hissy fits should be a thing of the past after what he pulled at the Commonwealth Service.  That was unforgivable.  He came close to another one at St. Paul's for the Jubilee service.


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> Me too?  Who is MT?


It’s a reference to the former American First Lady - apparently everyone here is big fan.  That’s despite the fact she hasn't been discussed and that those of us that aren’t American couldn’t give a damn about her one way or the other.  So our Queen has died, and the Sussexes have behaved callously, but the focus of this thread is all about American issues of politics and race it seems.  Meghan must be very proud.
Sorry @Toby93 not aimed at you, I’ve just had enough.


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> You would, they're tiny. Lol


If it's two bites, the remaining bits will fall off the bread and on to my fingers, I assure you.


----------



## csshopper

A1aGypsy said:


> In fairness, I think Hager would have done well to have been demure on the subject herself.


I happened to see the segment with her talking about it with her colleagues as she had just returned to the US. She was in Scotland to record a program that had been _booked a year ago_ about Camilla's book club. They had a full team of people and were all set up for the recording. Camilla was having to fly in (don't remember from where) and her BA (note: commercial) flight was delayed. Charles came round and said his "darling wife" was dismayed she was late. Sounded like he was standing in for her at this point and was having a meal with Jenna, her husband, and maybe some staff when he was called away and left immediately by helicopter for Balmoral.

My impression was not one of bragging, but her reflecting on the extraordinary nature of fate, being in that place at that time for something booked a year ago. As a daughter/granddaughter of two former Presidents, she's experienced other similar circumstances.

Edited to add: Her comments about Charles' demeanor were made in relationship to how unexpectedly his Mama's health had declined.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Because they feel entitled to it and want it for future exploitation.



I sense a Disney tie in down the road.  Princess Lilibet?  Such a Disney princess name lol.


----------



## RAINDANCE

purseinsanity said:


> I think to be fair, Camilla was with Charles well before Diana and he was obviously in love with her, but not allowed to marry her.  Kind of tragic in a sense.  At least they’re happy now.  As manipulative as Diana was, I feel sad for her.  It’s not a great way to start a marriage, marrying someone that everyone knows is in love with someone else.


Camilla was obviously upper class and her family connected to the BRF ( I will check this in case I am confusing with Sarah Fergusons family. ) and as we know Camilla knew and dated Charles.

I am of the belief that the late Queen Mother interferred; it was well know that she was quite a snob and had expectations of who was suitable for Charles to marry. I think Camilla was told, probably discreetly but convincingly that she was not suitable wife material and not exactly warned off but dissuaded from thinking their relationship had a future. Camilla of course then went.on to marry Andrew Parker Bowles, who was in fact a former suitor of Princess Anne so they all moved in the same circles.

QEQM wanted Charles to marry either European royalty or a daughter of the aristocracy. Enter a naive, immature Lady Diana  Spencer  youngest daughter of one.of the oldest and noblest families in England and unbeknownst to her set up in an arranged marriage by their grandmothers.
Just IMO


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> In fairness, I think Hager would have done well to have been demure on the subject herself.


It was just a coincidence that her visit with C&C to discuss Camilla's reading initiatives, and their shared love of reading, was scheduled for Thursday afternoon when the announcement about the Queen came. She was visibly emotional while talking about it live from Scotland Thursday morning on the Today show. As the daughter and granddaughter of two past Presidents, she has met members of the RF before. She seems like a warm and caring person, and I don't believe her comments were attention seeking. Just my two cents.


----------



## Jayne1

A1aGypsy said:


> In fairness, I think Hager would have done well to have been demure on the subject herself.


I've said this before, nepotism at its finest.  

Why these people, with very average skills and charm, get prime jobs in the media bypassing those with more intelligence is ridiculous and I can't watch those shows.  Except for AC... he deserves his spot I think.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Using miscarriage as a means of redemption.  Who else has done that before?


Alleged miscarriage. For better or worse, Teigen shared her actual experience on IG from the hospital having to deliver her stillborn son at twenty weeks to help destigmatize miscarriage. No dramatic prose about "cradling my firstborn as I was losing my second".


----------



## Mumotons

Ali-bagpuss said:


> As someone who lives in Sussex I can say that most of the people here would like them (definitely her) to lose the Duchess title too!


I’m from Sussex too, live in Australia now, but all my family and friends are still there. I agree, everyone I have spoken to what the title removed.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Mumotons said:


> I’m from Sussex too, live in Australia now, but all my family and friends are still there. I agree, everyone I have spoken to what the title removed.


Have the Sussexes been there to visit and see the people? I understand that that is part of the job, no?


----------



## Jayne1

RAINDANCE said:


> Camilla was obviously upper class and her family connected to the BRF ( I will check this in case I am confusing with Sarah Fergusons family. ) and as we know Camilla knew and dated Charles.
> 
> I am of the belief that the late Queen Mother interferred; it was well know that she was quite a snob and had expectations of who was suitable for Charles to marry. I think Camilla was told, probably discreetly but convincingly that she was not suitable wife material and not exactly warned off but dissuaded from thinking their relationship had a future. Camilla of course then went.on to marry Andrew Parker Bowles, who was in fact a former suitor of Princess Anne so they all moved in the same circles.
> 
> QEQM wanted Charles to marry either European royalty or a daughter of the aristocracy. Enter a naive, immature Lady Diana  Spencer  youngest daughter of one.of the oldest and noblest families in England and unbeknownst to her set up in an arranged marriage by their grandmothers.
> Just IMO


The Queen Mum was adored and she had the sweetest smile, but from what I read, she was quite a snob as you said, bigoted, pampered beyond out wildest imagination, a spend thrift with a mean streak.

But she lived a good long time, didn't she.


----------



## LittleStar88

CobaltBlu said:


> Have the Sussexes been there to visit and see the people? I understand that that is part of the job, no?



They didn’t stick around long enough for that.


----------



## Jayne1

RAINDANCE said:


> Only the children and grandchildren of the monarch through the male line are entitled to the title of prince or princess.
> 
> The Letters Patent  issued by *King George V in 1917* reads: “The children of any Sovereign of these Realms and the children of the sons of any such Sovereign and the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales shall have and at all times hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness with their titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their respective Christian names or with their other titles of honour’.
> 
> The Letters Patent (effectively the Royal Law) was amended to include* all *the children of the eldest son of the eldest son BEFORE Prince George was born.
> 
> So children of the Sovereign = Princes Charles, Andrew, Edward and Princess Anne
> Children of the Sovereigns SONS = Princes William, Harry, Princess Beatrice and Eugenie.
> The Earl of Wessex children are also technically Princess Louise and Prince James But Edward and Sophie opted for them to use the style of the son ( Viscount)  and daughter ( Lady) of an Earl and to give their children the opportunity to decide for themselves when they reached age 18. (Lady Louise who is now 18 could therefore use the title HRH Princess Louise now  if she so wished.)
> 
> Prince of Wales is effectively the equivalent of the Crown Prince in other monarchies ie. the eldest son and heir to the throne = Charles
> His eldest Son = William
> His eldest son = George
> 
> Prior to the birth of Prince George the Letters Patent were amended so that all the children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would hold titles. That was so that if W+K's first child was a girl she would be a princess, given that in the fullness of time she would become the daughter of the King (William).
> 
> Have I lost you yet ?
> 
> Princess Anne is not a son of the Sovereign so her children are not Prince Peter / Princess Zara and Anne declined any other ducal titles for them, on the quite obvious basis that with each child born to her brothers, she and her children would recede down the line of succession and be required to earn their own living outside the royal family (which they have done).
> 
> Harry was a prince by birth as the grandson of the Monarch through the male line, his father POW.
> 
> Both of Harry's children, when born, were great grandchildren of the Monarch and so not entitled to the title.
> This is why the lie than Meghan made about Archie not being a prince because of his skin colour was so widely derided - the rules date back to 1917, and would apply to any child of Harry's irrespective of whoever his wife was BECAUSE Harry is NOT the eldest son of the eldest son (and his children will never be the son and daughter of a king.)
> 
> I am appalled if the reports are true that H+M have spent this week lobbying for their children to be given the titles, even though under the 1917 Letters Patent, they are eligible, before the Queen has even been buried.
> 
> 
> However the fact that the Queen did adjust the 1917 Letters Patent means that the rules are not necessarily set in stone.
> 
> As I suggested, the clever thing would be to use Ed and Sophie's example  as the precedent for the grandchildren of the Monarch's other children.


I've asked. this before with no answer... if Meg has another child born when Charles is King, the child is automatically a prince or princess, correct?  Or not?


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Using miscarriage as a means of redemption.  Who else has done that before?


And is probably planning to in the near future


----------



## purseinsanity

RAINDANCE said:


> Camilla was obviously upper class and her family connected to the BRF ( I will check this in case I am confusing with Sarah Fergusons family. ) and as we know Camilla knew and dated Charles.
> 
> I am of the belief that the late Queen Mother interferred; it was well know that she was quite a snob and had expectations of who was suitable for Charles to marry. I think Camilla was told, probably discreetly but convincingly that she was not suitable wife material and not exactly warned off but dissuaded from thinking their relationship had a future. Camilla of course then went.on to marry Andrew Parker Bowles, who was in fact a former suitor of Princess Anne so they all moved in the same circles.
> 
> QEQM wanted Charles to marry either European royalty or a daughter of the aristocracy. Enter a naive, immature Lady Diana  Spencer  youngest daughter of one.of the oldest and noblest families in England and unbeknownst to her set up in an arranged marriage by their grandmothers.
> Just IMO


I often hear that Diana’s blood was more noble than Charles.  I never understood why.  I need to do some research!


----------



## Mumotons

CobaltBlu said:


> Have the Sussexes been there to visit and see the people? I understand that that is part of the job, no?


Once in 2018, 4 months after their ‘spectacle’, sorry wedding, and that’s it


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> I've asked. this before with no answer... if Meg has another child born when Charles is King, the child is automatically a prince or princess, correct?  Or not?


Unless Charles changes the Letters Patent before any child is born?


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> I often hear that Diana’s blood was more noble than Charles.  I never understood why.  I need to do some research!


Her lineage is older and can be traced back further than the Royal Family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

@OriginalBalenciaga your post genuinely got me thinking. I’m aware, thanks to all on this thread and to news coverage, of the repeated vituperative allegations made against the Royal Family. Most people quite rightly question the veracity of anything that comes out of her mouth, particularly since the Tom Bower book debunked her lies. 

Can anyone enlighten me with a verifiable story of any altruistic deed undertaken by Meghan Markle?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Dufas and Nacho Parody


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> Have the Sussexes been there to visit and see the people? I understand that that is part of the job, no?


As non-working royals I don't think they're allowed.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> I've said this before, nepotism at its finest.
> 
> Why these people, with very average skills and charm, get prime jobs in the media bypassing those with more intelligence is ridiculous and I can't watch those shows.  Except for AC... he deserves his spot I think.


Who is AC?  Andy Cohen?  Anderson Cooper?  
Same for universities in the US at least.  Two bit actors & wealthy progeny get into Ivy League & other top ranked schools while brilliant kids are trying to claw their way in, simply because the schools get tons of free publicity.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Her lineage is older and can be traced back further than the Royal Family.


I thought the BRF descended from William the Conqueror.  How is any other family older aristocracy wise?


----------



## Toby93

RAINDANCE said:


> Camilla was obviously upper class and her family connected to the BRF ( I will check this in case I am confusing with Sarah Fergusons family. ) and as we know Camilla knew and dated Charles.
> 
> I am of the belief that the late Queen Mother interferred; it was well know that she was quite a snob and had expectations of who was suitable for Charles to marry. I think Camilla was told, probably discreetly but convincingly that she was not suitable wife material and not exactly warned off but dissuaded from thinking their relationship had a future. Camilla of course then went.on to marry Andrew Parker Bowles, who was in fact a former suitor of Princess Anne so they all moved in the same circles.
> 
> QEQM wanted Charles to marry either European royalty or a daughter of the aristocracy. Enter a naive, immature Lady Diana  Spencer  youngest daughter of one.of the oldest and noblest families in England and unbeknownst to her set up in an arranged marriage by their grandmothers.
> Just IMO


Camillas connection to the BRF was that her great great (great?) grandmother was Alice Keppel, who was the mistress of George V.  Camilla apparently brought it up at a dinner with Charles,  telling him about her grandmother and "how about it"


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I've said this before, nepotism at its finest.
> 
> Why these people, with very average skills and charm, get prime jobs in the media bypassing those with more intelligence is ridiculous and I can't watch those shows.  Except for AC... he deserves his spot I think.


I don't disagree, but I think she has grown into her role. I have a child who would kill for her job but doesn't have any connections.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> I thought the BRF descended from William the Conqueror.  How is any other family older aristocracy wise?


I believe the BRF descended from Germany.  During the reign of George V, he changed their last name to Windsor from Saxe Coburg Gotha.  Dianas family can trace their ENGLISH roots back much further than the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower, the man!  Charles should invite TB as one of his advisers.


----------



## Coconuts40

I don't know if this video has been posted yet.
At 20 minutes , The Body Language Guy has an incredible analysis on the video of the girl that hugged MM at the walkabout.  Suggesting MM had an earpiece in her left ear with someone directing her to where the girl was that hugged her.  The girl filming the video was too professional for it to be an amateur filming the hug.  Very compelling and I actually believe he is right! 
This was a total PR stunt!!

Starts at about 20 minutes


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Who is AC?  Andy Cohen?  Anderson Cooper?
> Same for universities in the US at least.  Two bit actors & wealthy progeny get into Ivy League & other top ranked schools while brilliant kids are trying to claw their way in, simply because the schools get tons of free publicity.


And hefty donations from the parents.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I thought the BRF descended from William the Conqueror.  How is any other family older aristocracy wise?


My understanding is that the Spencer line goes further back to W the C more directly, while the Windsor-Mountbatten line got to the monarchy with some detours by marriages with other royal houses.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Jayne1 said:


> I've asked. this before with no answer... if Meg has another child born when Charles is King, the child is automatically a prince or princess, correct?  Or not?


My reading would be that yes baby #3 would qualify under the 1917 rules BUT I saw something earlier that KC3 will make a decision after the period of royal mourning about titles for H&Ms kids so that suggests there is nothing automatic or that there could be changes to the 1917 Letters Patent.  I think the answer is we won't know for sure til KC3 decides what to do about #1 and #2


----------



## bellecate

Cosmopolitan said:


> Apologies if this was already posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William, Prince Harry had dinner together after receiving Queen’s coffin
> 
> 
> Page Six confirmed that the estranged brothers, as well as Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton, attended the family meal inside Buckingham Palace on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



Headline click bait, they didn’t have dinner ‘together’ the family had dinner and they both were in attendance. Who knows if they even exchanged one word together. Hopefully they were seated nowhere near each other, ideally the Markles would have been seated at the childrens table.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harry and Raptor were on the kids' table.


Just read your reply after posting mine. Great minds…..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cosmopolitan

This news broke about six hours ago but not sure it was posted here?


----------



## bellecate

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


How could Prince William ever trust him again. He could never talk to him again about anything except immaterial polite conversation.


----------



## gelbergirl

Cosmopolitan said:


> This news broke about six hours ago but not sure it was posted here?




when is he going to be there, with who else?


----------



## EverSoElusive

BlueCherry said:


> @OriginalBalenciaga your post genuinely got me thinking. I’m aware, thanks to all on this thread and to news coverage, of the repeated vituperative allegations made against the Royal Family. Most people quite rightly question the veracity of anything that comes out of her mouth, particularly since the Tom Bower book debunked her lies.
> 
> Can anyone enlighten me with a verifiable story of any altruistic deed undertaken by Meghan Markle?


Umm... She donated beanies, brought chips and wrote messages on bananas. Does that count?


----------



## tiktok

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


Thanks for taking the time to comment despite thinking you'll be persona non grata.

I would encourage you not to make the mistake of putting everyone on this thread in the same bucket. The fact that some people love MT or write things that could be viewed as racist or any of the things you mentioned doesn't mean every person participating in this thread agrees with everything being said. I myself have cringed many times seeing some things that were written here despite being an active critic of H&M.

I'm as woke as can be based on some people's definitions and live in one of the wokest places on the planet, AND I think that their hypocritical behavior warrants being called out rather than constantly praised. Both could be true at the same time. Whether MT is better or worse is beside the point, though from what I previously said you can guess what I think about the hierarchy.

Meghan may have experienced racism at various stages - I'm not denying her experience and I'm not denying some people who criticize her ARE racist; that's pure statistics. That said, she now makes up stuff like the media calling her children the N-word which no one seems to be able to find evidence for. She made accusations about a senior royal asking about Archie's skin color that didn't even jive with Harry's version of events, not to mention couldn't be verified in any way other than the word of people who have been caught in lies MANY times, including in a court of law. So it's hard not to look at what she does as playing the race card - and actively lying about it - for the sake of getting sympathy and advancing her strange vendetta against the royal family. Not to mention the hypocrisy of keeping the title she received from the so-called racist family (with the imperialist roots etc.) and advertising it everywhere she can, when more senior _working_ royals refer to themselves by their given names.

I do think we got to the unfortunate point where the left-leaning media doesn't dare criticize (or even fact-check) her for fear of being accused of racism. It doesn't mean that the right-wing media has only pure motives when they call her out (we know it doesn't) but unfortunately they're the only ones to do so when it's justified.

I personally have no rage against her or him - I'm both entertained and saddened by this cultural phenomenon that's a completely empty shell, when it could have been so much more. More than anything H&M symbolize the decline of journalism, the disintegration of the fight for equality into click-bait, and the sad lack of critical thinking of people who believe everything they read without questioning it.


----------



## Melocoton

I missed who MT is. Could someone clarify, please? Thank you.
In my mind, it's Mother Theresa, but that isn't right!


----------



## prettyprincess

Melocoton said:


> I missed who MT is. Could someone clarify, please? Thank you.
> In my mind, it's Mother Theresa, but that isn't right!


Me too, Melania ***** maybe??


----------



## Cosmopolitan

gelbergirl said:


> when is he going to be there, with who else?


source: Daily Mail

*“The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex will reportedly join the Queen's six other grandchildren in a special 15 minute vigil at Westminster Hall.

It is believed the eight grandchildren will pay respects to the Queen by standing in silence beside Her Majesty's coffin - in a scene which will mirror the Vigil of the Princes.”*









						William and Harry to stand guard at Queen's coffin in special vigil
					

The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex will join the Queen's six other grandchildren tomorrow in a special 15 minute vigil at Westminster Hall, according to The Mirror.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Royal insiders say 'common sense has prevailed' as Palace give green light for Prince Harry to wear uniform in special vigil at Westminster Hall on Saturday – with Prince Andrew also allowed to don colours alongside siblings on Friday​


----------



## Chanbal

I moved the twitter posts to Spoiler because they are rather 

1) A lady who claims to be a former editor of the Star Magazine, and to have seen TW's driver's license. 



Spoiler: Shallon Lester



r




2) TW on the walkabout…



Spoiler: wobbly


----------



## prettyprincess

prettyprincess said:


> Me too, Melania ***** maybe??


Why did the last name get blocked?


----------



## EverSoElusive

prettyprincess said:


> Why did the last name get blocked?


Political related. O gets blocked too.


----------



## redney

nm


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> As always in these situations, one can love the person but dislike the behavior. * Imo most of us here do not hate H&M as people - we don’t know them - we just strongly dislike their behavior.*


ITA


Sharont2305 said:


> Speaking of handbags, and no, not Harry this time, did anyone notice this 'sweet nod' to Her Majesty? Two handled, similar style.
> 
> View attachment 5611011


I noticed the bag only because in the photo I saw, everyone else was using a clutch.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, not a British brand.  Does that matter at this point?


I was thinking of sending her a floral sarong: a sweet nod to her veeeeerrrry expensive wedding veil and how she conned the Commonwealth with her faux pledge of service. It will also allow her to bare acres of skin and use up her bronzer.


CarryOn2020 said:


> What?
> 
> 
> 
> Did he threaten to leave?



He had his uniform in storage at Frogmore?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Conf_irming Prince Harry, his wife Meghan and Prince Andrew's absence, a spokesperson from Buckingham Palace confirmed, that "*only working royals will take part*".
> It is yet to be revealed what the dress code will be and if tiaras will be required at this special event. The statement read: "The King and The Queen Consort will host Heads of State and *Official Overseas Guests* at Buckingham Palace ahead of the State Funeral of Her Majesty The Queen. This will be an official state event."_


So they are neither working royals nor official overseas guests 
 



Toby93 said:


> I know nothing about the 1% club, but in the Tom Bower book, it says she was making $50,000 per episode. This was after auditioning and getting no parts for years.  *I'm sure her father was helping her out until that point, and supporting her financially at least partially. * As soon as she started making serious money, she started Markling people.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though, she was married at that point.


Because she is an independent feminist who doesn't rely on her husband(s)  
(Fathers and FILs are ripe for the picking)


----------



## prettyprincess

EverSoElusive said:


> Political related. O gets blocked too.


Ah, got it. Thank you!!


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Umm... She donated beanies, brought chips and wrote messages on bananas. Does that count?


You are forgetting the lemon cake that she baked, allegedly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

We should thank the Aussies!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> You are forgetting the lemon cake that she baked, allegedly.


Oh yeah. That!

I can do you one better... Bottled water for coughing lady at UN and then took it back after the lady had a sip


----------



## StylishMD

RAINDANCE said:


> I really feel that hate is the completely wrong word.
> 
> I think we are collectively so sad and disappointed at the missed opportunities for H+M to contribute to and be a part of national life here in the UK; at spurning being part of something incomparable in the whole world for personal aggrandisements and financial gain and so aghast and angry at the ignorance and disrespect shown, but this is my own view.
> 
> _"She was such a disappointment"_ could only be said by a Brit and condense so much into 5 words.
> 
> It is a stark contrast to the pride and honour felt and reported by all who were involved in the Jubilee and this week's processions & State funeral and all of the constitutional processes.
> 
> Just the historical history and living history on display is mind boggling !


@RAINDANCE this sums up how I feel perfectly (Black, British now living in the US but I still follow The Royal Family)


----------



## Chanbal

N/M


----------



## Mumotons




----------



## Chanbal

It looks out of place here (holding hands).


----------



## Toby93

Cosmopolitan said:


> This news broke about six hours ago but not sure it was posted here?



My feeling about this, is that the RF gave in on this point, so they can't go back to the US and complain.  They may be giving them some leeway right now, but after the funeral when they return to Monicito, they won't be tolerating anymore nonsense


----------



## bellecate

Cosmopolitan said:


> source: Daily Mail
> 
> *“The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex will reportedly join the Queen's six other grandchildren in a special 15 minute vigil at Westminster Hall.
> 
> It is believed the eight grandchildren will pay respects to the Queen by standing in silence beside Her Majesty's coffin - in a scene which will mirror the Vigil of the Princes.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William and Harry to stand guard at Queen's coffin in special vigil
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales and the Duke of Sussex will join the Queen's six other grandchildren tomorrow in a special 15 minute vigil at Westminster Hall, according to The Mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal insiders say 'common sense has prevailed' as Palace give green light for Prince Harry to wear uniform in special vigil at Westminster Hall on Saturday – with Prince Andrew also allowed to don colours alongside siblings on Friday​


They just have to keep putting Harry’s name with his brother, Prince William. I wonder why?


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> My feeling about this, is that the RF gave in on this point, so they can't go back to the US and complain.  They may be giving them some leeway right now, but after the funeral when they return to Monicito, they won't be tolerating anymore nonsense



That's what I think.  They didn't exclude them. William was the bigger person and did the walk about with them and Harry (and Andrew) will wear their uniforms which might have even been a request of the Queen for all we know.  Once Monday is over, they head back to California and, if they complain which I expect they will about something, the family can shrug and say they tried.


----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> In my head it started as Mother Theresa but... no.
> But you're right, it must be the FFL.  I literally forgot all about her.


Getting old. I can't even recall FFL's name. I do recall her complaining about having to do the WH Christmas decor and wearing some jacket that said she didn't care.


papertiger said:


> Don't forget the pepper too. Presumably the condiments hold hands as they go. Salt and pepper are always passed together, otherwise MegZ will be very annoyed
> 
> I've never heard that before in my life.
> 
> Is that some local LA custom?


Maybe when she was growing up, her family used novelty salt and pepper shakers that had to be passed together?


----------



## TimeToShop

A bit of levity


----------



## Toby93

I had read somewhere that they had paid people during their faux royal tour (how quickly was all that forgotten!) to be in the crowds to act excited to see them.  This doesn't seem like much of a stretch


----------



## TimeToShop

Toby93 said:


> I had read somewhere that they had paid people during their faux royal tour (how quickly was all that forgotten!) to be in the crowds to act excited to see them.  This doesn't seem like much of a stretch



I was just going to post that. It’s the nose, to me, that makes it seem like the same woman. Wouldn’t be surprised if she was a plant.

Edited to fix a double negative


----------



## CarryOn2020

TimeToShop said:


> I was just going to post that. It’s the nose, to me, that makes it seem like the same woman. Wouldn’t be surprised if she was a plant.
> 
> Edited to fix a double negative


Even if this is a different person, it is _entirely plausible _that H&M would do this. They have lied, manipulated and misled the world in the past. They will continue to do it until the King says _no_. As I said many posts ago, they broke the trust. They continue to rehash the same stories on a daily basis. Many of us are losing interest.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


Thanks for giving your view, @OriginalBalenciaga. I have to protest though: while I intensely dislike Zedzee as she triggers me (I detest narcs), I don't hate her. And I can barely recall the MT you are referring to. I certainly don't adore her, so I don't belong to this group of people who feel ire towards MM and adore MT. 


lanasyogamama said:


> I do think at this point* they get criticized for absolutely everything*. While I think they made their bed, others have been in that position and have been able to recover over time by truly putting their head down and staying out of the limelight for a very significant amount of time. The problem with these two is that they publicly respond to every single thing that comes out about them, and it just add fuel to the fire.
> 
> They need like a full year of “never complain never explain”. Look at Chrissy Teigan, (sorry, I know that’s spelled wrong) people have totally moved from all the stuff that came out about her.


If you sympathise with her, you tend to believe everything or at least give her the benefit of doubt. If you think she is a liar, you doubt everything she says, even if it may be the truth.

They are polarising because they like to pose as experts on mental health, feminism etc. It creates a situation where either you believe what they are spouting or you deride them as hypocrites. And that's just the people who pay attention to them. I believe there is also a huge swathe of the population for whom they are irrelevant. Any surveys that are conducted would tend to be skewed towards polarity.
Survey person: Hi! Would you help answer a short survey about the Duchess of Sussex?
Person in street: Who?
Survey person: Thank you for your time! You are not part of the demographic we need.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

RAINDANCE said:


> Camilla was obviously upper class and her family connected to the BRF ( I will check this in case I am confusing with Sarah Fergusons family. ) and as we know Camilla knew and dated Charles.
> 
> I am of the belief that the late Queen Mother interferred; it was well know that she was quite a snob and had expectations of who was suitable for Charles to marry. I think Camilla was told, probably discreetly but convincingly that she was not suitable wife material and not exactly warned off but dissuaded from thinking their relationship had a future. Camilla of course then went.on to marry Andrew Parker Bowles, who was in fact a former suitor of Princess Anne so they all moved in the same circles.
> 
> QEQM wanted Charles to marry either European royalty or a daughter of the aristocracy. Enter a naive, immature Lady Diana  Spencer  youngest daughter of one.of the oldest and noblest families in England and unbeknownst to her set up in an arranged marriage by their grandmothers.
> Just IMO


People seem to conveniently forget that Charles wasn’t ready to get married at the time he dated Camilla and wouldn’t be for years. He was still young and he was involved in relationships with a number of other women between Camilla and Diana. It wasn’t either/or between those two. 

I’d always heard Camilla was eliminated as a possibility because of the virgin rule.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Toby93 said:


> I had read somewhere that they had paid people during their faux royal tour (how quickly was all that forgotten!) to be in the crowds to act excited to see them.  This doesn't seem like much of a stretch



Good grief!  BLG called it.  Fingered the right woman as a pro, he just didn’t know exactly how Meghan would know who to go to.  But, Meghan already knows her, so it makes sense.  Kudos to BLG.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not editing my former post a third time, so I'll just post a P.S.
> 
> For me, all the things @OriginalBalenciaga mentioned others have done as well pale in comparison to what really, really bothers me: the ongoing, vicious badmouthing of family. I have never experienced anyone publicly go for the throat like this, just as *I have never seen someone lie like this before with not a care in the world if they are eventually found out or not*. I don't find either behaviour normal in even the widest sense.


I still think it's a narc thing. One of my office narcs lied about a conversation with me that never happened, in an email with the boss on copy. She was trying to shove her work over to me. When I called her out, she airily claimed that it was miscommunication. There were no repercussions (except she never got another promotion and it's been going on 10 years) but I never trusted her again for anything and I doubt everything she says.


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> View attachment 5611321


Scobie does nothing unless told to do it by his mistress.  She thinks it and it comes out of his mouth or his fingers typing on a keyboard.


----------



## bag-mania

Coconuts40 said:


> I don't know if this video has been posted yet.
> At 20 minutes , The Body Language Guy has an incredible analysis on the video of the girl that hugged MM at the walkabout.  Suggesting MM had an earpiece in her left ear with someone directing her to where the girl was that hugged her.  The girl filming the video was too professional for it to be an amateur filming the hug.  Very compelling and I actually believe he is right!
> This was a total PR stunt!!
> 
> Starts at about 20 minutes



Just when you think she can’t sink any lower, she limbos her way into the self-promotion basement.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Redbirdhermes said:


> Official funeral plans for QE2 include vigils by her four children,  her four grandsons and her four granddaughters.   Historically there have been two Vigils of the Princes, for King George V and for Queen Mother Elizabeth.   I expect everyone will play their part, and it will remain a most solemn and respectful occasion.


They’ve been talking a lot in the press about the planned vigil of the four children of the late Queen, but as I mentioned before she passed away, official plans included vigils by her grandchildren as well.  I was wondering if the vigils by the grandchildren had been cancelled for some reason, but I’m glad to see that it has just taken time to get the logistics set up.  I’ve been watching a lot on BBC World, and it is amazing how organized everything is.


----------



## Mendocino

TimeToShop said:


> I just finished watching that. It was so interesting. Amazing that the letters have survived this long. My biggest takeaway was that HMTQ was a descendant of Mary Boleyn. I had no idea, probably shows my American ignorance.
> 
> Had to check that out and found that Diana was too so William and Harry have a double dose of Boleyn blood.
> 
> The opportunity TW had and blew it. To live with and have access to all that history. Even if I disliked my in-laws I sure would have sucked it up to vacation at Balmoral, Sandringham, whatever old house or castle to which I was invited.


I think Harry's marriage and the execution of Anne Boleyn were on the same date.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Mendocino said:


> I think Harry's marriage and the execution of Anne Boleyn were on the same date.


Both on May 19, but Harry’s wedding was 482 years later.


----------



## charlottawill

Mendocino said:


> I think Harry's marriage and the execution of Anne Boleyn were on the same date.


Well that is a fascinating tidbit of information, 1536 vs. 2018.


----------



## Straight-Laced

I'm a Boleyn descendent.  I think Diana might be descended from the same Boleyn i.e. Lady Anne Shelton, who was born Anne Boleyn and was aunt to Queen Anne.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> Who is AC?  Andy Cohen?  Anderson Cooper?
> Same for universities in the US at least.  Two bit actors & wealthy progeny get into Ivy League & other top ranked schools while brilliant kids are trying to claw their way in, simply because the schools get tons of free publicity.


Anderson Cooper.  Nepotism, but he's very good at his job. I don't think Andy Cohen's family is famous.


----------



## Gourmetgal

Wow, is this thread some sort of parody of social media conspiracy info war gossip column?  Totally hilarious.  Or is it really hatred?


----------



## scarlet555

^Nutmeg?  Is that you?


----------



## jblended

@OriginalBalenciaga I have taken some time to consider what you said and appreciate the prompt to assess the situation more objectively. Others have already expressed more clearly just how I feel about it all, but as a general note, I wonder what the point is with the "What-about-ism"? Does it help? We're not discussing MT and we're not comparing those women. Just like people want to always bring up Andrew, like it somehow makes what H&M do all right by comparison. It doesn't. They are separate people, all of whom have acted terribly of their own accord, and all of whom we are deeply disappointed in. 

The only time "what about..." comes into play is with Harry, because the pair operate as a unit, and we all know that he is held to the same standard as her. They are both behaving in a terribly dishonourable manner and have insulted the people they are meant to be working in service to, and that is the core issue, not race (unless there is a sense we are being racist against the privileged white man we are criticizing, too).

Further, in relation to the suggestion of racism that gets levelled, perhaps it is another time to consider "what about...", because, what about the many WoC on this thread who should be identifying with Meg and instead feel absolutely betrayed by her false claims? Are our voices unimportant then? 

The discussions never go anywhere because there are extremes at both ends, however I do believe the majority of people are reasonable and are reacting specifically to her words, choices and actions, nothing more. It isn't fair to be accused of judging her unfairly when she is the one who is lobbing one attack after another on the country and its sovereign, judging the people she was meant to be serving as beneath her. 

@xincinsin I am honestly shocked by your stories of narcs in the workplace. Thank you for the snippets you share on them because it is really informative.


----------



## Mendocino

Redbirdhermes said:


> Both on May 19, but Harry’s wedding was 482 years later.


Thank you for checking on that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Straight-Laced

Very nice piece, mostly about TQ, with mention made of "that shameless pair"










						Her Majesty’s queue is the best of Britain
					

The nation's genius for pageantry is matched only by our Olympic endurance in waiting our turn




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				



​Her Majesty’s queue is the best of Britain​The nation's genius for pageantry is matched only by our Olympic endurance in waiting our turn

Still weighing up whether to join that daunting queue as it makes its way to Westminster Hall to pay homage to our beloved late monarch, I am eager for feedback from those who have already made the pilgrimage. Is it worth it?

“She was so calm and powerful,” reported my twenty-three-year-old god-daughter who finally stood in front of Elizabeth the Irreplaceable’s coffin on its catafalque at 1.02am yesterday morning. “Definitely worth the eight-hour wait, but it’s easy to forget how tiring the queue is until you’ve seen her and are walking home.”

Exultant but exhausted, the author Ysenda Maxtone Graham spent yesterday morning in bed with “jelly legs”. She says it took nine hours after joining the queue near London Bridge. There was a false dawn when Ysenda and the new friends she had made thought the line was moving swiftly only to get stuck in “Ordeal by Zig-Zag” in Victoria Tower Gardens where 8,000 kettled people snake up and down, up and down. “Luton Airport seems a cinch by comparison.” Actual dawn was breaking by the time Maxtone Graham walked into the hall and saw the great queen she had revered in life protected in death by statue-still Coldstream Guards. “To be in there was overwhelmingly moving. Utterly beautiful and still.” 

The British genius for pageantry is matched only by Olympic endurance in waiting our turn. Breaking news yesterday that there was a special fast lane for MPs, who have been given four timed tickets for guests, if you please, is the only thing to have dented the wonderful mood of national unity since Her Majesty left us eight days ago. Crowds lining up along the Thames were understandably furious. We can’t abide queue-jumpers. Politicians, who have been shut up  (a blessed relief!) by the passing of an outstanding human who achieved more than they ever will, should step into line with the men, women, even children, who emulate the stoicism their sovereign taught them.

There is a profound simplicity, almost a holiness, to the impulse which is calling thousands to that place, I think. “If Her Majesty did all that for us for seventy years, then we can jolly well put up with a bit of discomfort for her” is the attitude.

“I cannot lead you into battle,” the young Queen told the nation in her first televised Christmas message in 1957, “I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands.”

From every corner of these old islands, members of the Silent Majority converge on the capital, instinctively wanting to repay her devotion, her love. Through the wonders of technology, the BBC has launched a live stream of the lying in state for people unable to travel or queue. It is utterly mesmerising. Every kind of Briton imaginable has shown up. Old, young, prosperous, struggling, soldiers, students, formally-attired, sweat-shirted, families, radiant girls, weeping widows, a perky terrier who would have made instant friends with Her Majesty. Each has a few seconds alone in front of the coffin.

A lad in a hoodie paused awkwardly before bowing his head. Behind him, visibly touched by this act of obeisance in one so young, stood a veteran, the chest of his macintosh bristling with medals. When his turn came, the old soldier took off his beret, put down his walking stick, snapped to attention and saluted.

A weeping lady in a wheelchair sported a squidgy Queen Mother memorial hat. A dashingly handsome man in a spiffy suit dropped to one knee as if proposing to a sweetheart. That one really got to me.

Mothers brought tiny babies so, one day, they could say they were there as the page of history turned. A worker wearing a yellow fluorescent jacket blew a kiss at the coffin and turned briskly away to hide his emotion. Watching people trying not to cry makes you cry.

Next, a tiny Indian woman pressed her upright hands together in prayer and bowed with exquisite grace. The claim by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on _Oprah_ that the British monarchy is racist doesn’t seem to have deterred Britons from every ethnic minority coming to express their sorrow and venerate the memory of the only queen they have ever known, or wanted. (That shameless pair, who caused the monarch such distress in the last 18 months of her life, should count themselves lucky to be included in the ceremonies at all. No wonder our sublime new Princess of Wales, clearly devastated but holding it together wearing the Diamond and Pearl Leaf Brooch which belonged to the Queen, seems hardly able to bear to look at them.)

Many of the thousands coming every hour now to Westminster Hall to pay tribute just shut their eyes, as if taking a picture for the memory. They know we will not see her like again. Watching the live stream late into the night – the gentle courtesy, the respect, the personal loss expanded somehow into a shared feeling of gratitude and hope - is to have one’s faith in the British people restored. Queen Elizabeth II never lost it.

On Monday morning, VIPs, ambassadors, presidents and panjandrums, flunkies in furbelows, global dignitaries and foreign royalty will get out of their limousines and smoothly enter the Abbey for the funeral of the century. No queues. It will be a stirring sight, but the most heartfelt tribute to the peerless lady in the coffin will have already taken place.

They also serve who only stand and wait.


----------



## RueMonge

Straight-Laced said:


> Very nice piece, mostly about TQ, with mention made of "that shameless pair"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her Majesty’s queue is the best of Britain
> 
> 
> The nation's genius for pageantry is matched only by our Olympic endurance in waiting our turn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​Her Majesty’s queue is the best of Britain​The nation's genius for pageantry is matched only by our Olympic endurance in waiting our turn
> 
> Still weighing up whether to join that daunting queue as it makes its way to Westminster Hall to pay homage to our beloved late monarch, I am eager for feedback from those who have already made the pilgrimage. Is it worth it?
> 
> “She was so calm and powerful,” reported my twenty-three-year-old god-daughter who finally stood in front of Elizabeth the Irreplaceable’s coffin on its catafalque at 1.02am yesterday morning. “Definitely worth the eight-hour wait, but it’s easy to forget how tiring the queue is until you’ve seen her and are walking home.”
> 
> Exultant but exhausted, the author Ysenda Maxtone Graham spent yesterday morning in bed with “jelly legs”. She says it took nine hours after joining the queue near London Bridge. There was a false dawn when Ysenda and the new friends she had made thought the line was moving swiftly only to get stuck in “Ordeal by Zig-Zag” in Victoria Tower Gardens where 8,000 kettled people snake up and down, up and down. “Luton Airport seems a cinch by comparison.” Actual dawn was breaking by the time Maxtone Graham walked into the hall and saw the great queen she had revered in life protected in death by statue-still Coldstream Guards. “To be in there was overwhelmingly moving. Utterly beautiful and still.”
> 
> The British genius for pageantry is matched only by Olympic endurance in waiting our turn. Breaking news yesterday that there was a special fast lane for MPs, who have been given four timed tickets for guests, if you please, is the only thing to have dented the wonderful mood of national unity since Her Majesty left us eight days ago. Crowds lining up along the Thames were understandably furious. We can’t abide queue-jumpers. Politicians, who have been shut up  (a blessed relief!) by the passing of an outstanding human who achieved more than they ever will, should step into line with the men, women, even children, who emulate the stoicism their sovereign taught them.
> 
> There is a profound simplicity, almost a holiness, to the impulse which is calling thousands to that place, I think. “If Her Majesty did all that for us for seventy years, then we can jolly well put up with a bit of discomfort for her” is the attitude.
> 
> “I cannot lead you into battle,” the young Queen told the nation in her first televised Christmas message in 1957, “I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands.”
> 
> From every corner of these old islands, members of the Silent Majority converge on the capital, instinctively wanting to repay her devotion, her love. Through the wonders of technology, the BBC has launched a live stream of the lying in state for people unable to travel or queue. It is utterly mesmerising. Every kind of Briton imaginable has shown up. Old, young, prosperous, struggling, soldiers, students, formally-attired, sweat-shirted, families, radiant girls, weeping widows, a perky terrier who would have made instant friends with Her Majesty. Each has a few seconds alone in front of the coffin.
> 
> A lad in a hoodie paused awkwardly before bowing his head. Behind him, visibly touched by this act of obeisance in one so young, stood a veteran, the chest of his macintosh bristling with medals. When his turn came, the old soldier took off his beret, put down his walking stick, snapped to attention and saluted.
> 
> A weeping lady in a wheelchair sported a squidgy Queen Mother memorial hat. A dashingly handsome man in a spiffy suit dropped to one knee as if proposing to a sweetheart. That one really got to me.
> 
> Mothers brought tiny babies so, one day, they could say they were there as the page of history turned. A worker wearing a yellow fluorescent jacket blew a kiss at the coffin and turned briskly away to hide his emotion. Watching people trying not to cry makes you cry.
> 
> Next, a tiny Indian woman pressed her upright hands together in prayer and bowed with exquisite grace. The claim by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex on _Oprah_ that the British monarchy is racist doesn’t seem to have deterred Britons from every ethnic minority coming to express their sorrow and venerate the memory of the only queen they have ever known, or wanted. (That shameless pair, who caused the monarch such distress in the last 18 months of her life, should count themselves lucky to be included in the ceremonies at all. No wonder our sublime new Princess of Wales, clearly devastated but holding it together wearing the Diamond and Pearl Leaf Brooch which belonged to the Queen, seems hardly able to bear to look at them.)
> 
> Many of the thousands coming every hour now to Westminster Hall to pay tribute just shut their eyes, as if taking a picture for the memory. They know we will not see her like again. Watching the live stream late into the night – the gentle courtesy, the respect, the personal loss expanded somehow into a shared feeling of gratitude and hope - is to have one’s faith in the British people restored. Queen Elizabeth II never lost it.
> 
> On Monday morning, VIPs, ambassadors, presidents and panjandrums, flunkies in furbelows, global dignitaries and foreign royalty will get out of their limousines and smoothly enter the Abbey for the funeral of the century. No queues. It will be a stirring sight, but the most heartfelt tribute to the peerless lady in the coffin will have already taken place.
> 
> They also serve who only stand and wait.


I wish I were there!


----------



## Coconuts40

Yup, PR stunt!!!
Unbelievable!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does anyone trust HuffPost?  Not me.  It sounds like Hazzi the brat is at it again.  yawn


----------



## carmen56

Debbini said:


> Not to be rude, it's Grace Han, the love letter bag. ❤️


I stand corrected.


----------



## csshopper

Redbirdhermes said:


> Good grief!  BLG called it.  Fingered the right woman as a pro, he just didn’t know exactly how Meghan would know who to go to.  But, Meghan already knows her, so it makes sense.  Kudos to BLG.


The woman was stationed at the end of the walk about area, near where the car picked them up so she could be more easily spotted. BLG has compelling analysis of the video to indicate Raptor was probably wearing an ear piece (as she did on Ellen's show) and got guidance on how to find her. It's clear on the video she was looking for someone and it looks like when she got the location confirmed she threaded her way through people to get from one side of the driveway to the other side of the driveway and reach out to the woman, ignoring others who had their hands out. BLG also makes clear how the Dusseldorf plant had her phone camera set just so to record the exchange and the audio at max to record it.

Edited to add: I just remembered this part: BLG pointed out most of the rest of the crowd were not even looking at Raptor, they were focused further down line. A man's elbow, the source of interest, is visible in the corner of the video. The others were watching The Prince of Wales, hoping he was coming their way.  If Raptor was aware, it may be why she clung so long to the woman and made such a performance of it.


----------



## rose60610

Coconuts40 said:


> Yup, PR stunt!!!
> Unbelievable!!!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5611426



Staging a potted sugar plant at The Queen's mourning event is more than low. I hope Major Johnny or somebody makes KCIII aware of this. SICK!


----------



## prettyprincess

Gourmetgal said:


> Wow, is this thread some sort of parody of social media conspiracy info war gossip column?  Totally hilarious.  Or is it really hatred?


It’s all of the above.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Love the honesty here:


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> I still think it's a narc thing. One of my office narcs lied about a conversation with me that never happened, in an email with the boss on copy. She was trying to shove her work over to me. When I called her out, she airily claimed that it was miscommunication. There were no repercussions (except she never got another promotion and it's been going on 10 years) but I never trusted her again for anything and I doubt everything she says.


Just wanted to add this, in case anyone thinks I might be condemning her for a one-off incident. She also does this to other people. One of my colleagues was left in tears because she had a meeting with Miss Miscommunication where they negotiated to split the duties for a project. Miss Miscom then wrote an email to the boss to share the good news that my colleague had volunteered to do the entire project solo. She has a silver tongue whereas my colleague is the tongue-tied sort who had never been so brutally backstabbed before, and didn't know how to tell the boss that Miss Miscom LIED.


----------



## xincinsin

Gourmetgal said:


> Wow, is this thread some sort of parody of social media conspiracy info war gossip column?  Totally hilarious.  Or is it really hatred?


Read from Page 1 to figure it out. Not hatred, though. She is the stuff of Reddit threads.


----------



## 880

CobaltBlu said:


> In my head it started as Mother Theresa but... no.
> But you're right, it must be the FFL.  I literally forgot all about her.


+100, I did the same
@OriginalBalenciaga , I found your post very thoughtful.
while I don’t like the liberal bashing, I try to ignore it
im not a fan of Hillary, but I did respect her intelligence.
 I am probably more liberal than most ( at least in my mid fifties age group) on TPF.
@papertiger, hope the dentist was not too bad.
i really like MM’s Loewe postal bag (thanks to @DoggieBags and others who identified it

i hope W will not be allowed back into uniform for the vigil, but I can see both Sides


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

...


----------



## Lodpah

Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet Won’t Be HRHs. Meghan and Harry Are Reportedly Furious.
					

A report suggests the Montecito branch of the royal family is irate that their kids won’t get His and Her Royal Highness titles. Silver lining: They will be prince and princess.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## miss_chiff

*Deleted. Pics came out way too big.


----------



## Cinderlala

It is not political.  It is not partisan.  It is not racism.  It is not hatred.  It's also not complicated, it's personal and entirely based on his/her/their actions.

It's like watching a real-life Emperor's New Clothes situation but we're the only ones who see there are no clothes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mumotons said:


> View attachment 5611321



WTF! Not only was this little sh*t trying to make the BRF look bad - I personally can live much better with "This was the plan all along, exception applies because" than "Harry was banned, whined and tantrumed and the BRF caved".

Omid is a tick. Not useful for anything but spreading diseases.

But also...didn't Harry's team release a statement babbling on about the uniform version of "Service is universal"? So he was in on that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’d always heard Camilla was eliminated as a possibility because of the virgin rule.



Though I am curious how they would know/confirm.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!





880 said:


> +100, I did the same
> @OriginalBalenciaga , I found your post very thoughtful.
> while I don’t like the liberal bashing, I try to ignore it
> im not a fan of Hillary, but I did respect her intelligence.
> I am probably more liberal than most ( at least in my mid fifties age group) on TPF.
> @papertiger, hope the dentist was not too bad.
> i really like MM’s Loewe postal bag (thanks to @DoggieBags and others who identified it
> 
> i hope W will not be allowed back into uniform for the vigil, but I can see both Sides


Reading your post  @OriginalBalenciaga something occurred to me that I’d like to tie to @880 post if you don’t mind and I will try my best to talk about it without going too OT or political.

I think the great irony of the royalty threads on a no-politics forum is that royalty is inherently political and it is right wing (RW). I could go into more why I think this is but I won’t unless you all want to hear it  .

It makes sense then that RW media tend to put out more royal content.

I think ironically one of the best lies going in the press today is that royalty is apolitical because it does help sway people into a RW worldview- it is also a part of the general massive swing to the R across the spectrum we have seen since the late 70s.

I think Toby93 made a great point when they said M and the press has a real habit of making their narrative all about American mores and donkey v elephant when it’s really not relevant. This is also why some posters get a bit irritable when they hear H&M doesn’t matter or has little influence because British royalty is very influential in a number of countries.

While M may call herself an ass (haha) I’d say her and H are RW in real terms and RW of ‘the big tent’ but I identify this as another example of their cynical attempts at branding themselves as something different from the BRF while doing nothing to a) be meaningfully different or b) engage in anything politically.
I would also say that ‘bashing’ people or critiquing or supporting individuals over policy and little discussion as to how different issues can find cross party support is inevitable because this is how politics is going generally - everything is about how a certain figurehead’s identity politics read across the spectrum.
I think this model of politics and media is modelled on royalty - people like the queen and fall in line with what she stood for with little investment in what that actually was- it’s just nice abstract concepts like ‘service’.

Here on the H&M thread we see this figurehead/identity politics too because everything the crappy couple talk about is framed around themselves. Harry cares about mental health because he has problems- truly the self absorption never ceases. In a way because they are so blatant about it it’s a nice way of holding society in a microcosm to talk about the whole.

I think there’s a mix of political perspectives on the thread even given the royalty topics leaning to the RW I myself am certainly a lot more left but for all the reasons we discussed it’s not surprising it skews RW on many issues.

I do also think  sometimes the same stories about H&M come up over and over again because theres not much happening and the posters  just want to talk to each other while staying vaguely on topic.


Cosmopolitan said:


> This news broke about six hours ago but not sure it was posted here?



Jesus I hate to rain on the Charles will be  different parade but I think this is the sound of the capitulating starting up.


Toby93 said:


> I had read somewhere that they had paid people during their faux royal tour (how quickly was all that forgotten!) to be in the crowds to act excited to see them.  This doesn't seem like much of a stretch






Redbirdhermes said:


> Good grief!  BLG called it.  Fingered the right woman as a pro, he just didn’t know exactly how Meghan would know who to go to.  But, Meghan already knows her, so it makes sense.  Kudos to BLG.


Some of us called it too. 
I couldn’t believe for a second someone like M could come out of her internal narrative for long enough to hear an unusual name like Imelka correctly first time round (Well that and girlfriend cannot act for toffee).  I’m waiting for the sweet nod that she’s a Ukrainian refugee.

Also, why do all the coolest posts come up when I’m asleep? I need to get you all on British time


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> People seem to conveniently forget that Charles wasn’t ready to get married at the time he dated Camilla and wouldn’t be for years. He was still young and he was involved in relationships with a number of other women between Camilla and Diana. It wasn’t either/or between those two.
> 
> I’d always heard Camilla was eliminated as a possibility because of the virgin rule.


I read the version that said Camilla was basically told by her father to marry Hubby #1. Not that Charles was ready to marry her then, so there was no big tragic thwarted romance.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I read the version that said Camilla was basically told by her father to marry Hubby #1. Not that Charles was ready to marry her then, so there was no big tragic thwarted romance.


This is why we need books on Camilla’s life.  So many myths, so many rumors, so many half-truths. 
Cam’s family is fascinating in its own right.  Her sister is an interior designer iirc.





						Mark Shand - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Prince Harry WILL be in military uniform “at the King’s request”.

The vigil by the grandchildren will last 15 minutes. The new Prince of Wales will stand at the head of the coffin. Prince Harry will stand at the foot. Both in military uniform. Other grandchildren will be in morning coat or dark formal dress.

Palace source: “the grandchildren, at the King’s invitation, are very keen to pay their respects - just as their parents are doing the evening before”_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I read the version that said Camilla was basically told by her father to marry Hubby #1. Not that Charles was ready to marry her then, so there was no big tragic thwarted romance.



Lady C - fallen from our collective graces, but she apparently ran in the same circles when they all were young and careless - claims Camilla was actually in love with Parker Bowles at the time they got married. I mean, why not. A lot of people have the one that got away and still have happy marriages with someone else.

ETA: He is also a godfather of Zara Philips and he and his former mistress/2nd wife went to Charles's and Camilla's wedding. It really seems like Diana really was the only one not in the know/not ok with their arrangement (not saying this to blame her, I wouldn't have been ok either).


----------



## Pessie

Cinderlala said:


> It is not political.  It is not partisan.  It is not racism.  It is not hatred.  It's also not complicated, it's personal and entirely based on his/her/their actions.
> 
> It's like watching a real-life Emperor's New Clothes situation but we're the only ones who see there are no clothes.


It’s exactly like that.
Narcissism should be a school subject.  I think a lot of people would be helped if it were.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> Glad you had a good experience last time I was there my meal was tasteless.
> 
> London is packed!
> 
> Today I passed two women in Belgravia talking about M.
> One said to the other the equivalent of "What a b*tch!" but _worse_, and the other said "she'll do _all_ the talk shows, she loves to hear herself talk"


I agree with you, tea was great but another time we had dinner at the Wolseley it was nothing special!

Is Freeze already on in London? My DD is coming over in October and she says hotels are fully booked! She'll have to go and stay with my sister, which none of us are too happy to do, lol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> At first, I thought @OriginalBalenciaga was referring to Mike Tindall and I thought, but Mike hasn't done any of those things, lol!  But I think it's the former first lady.


Since I do read other forums about royals, I thought MT referred to Grand Duchess Maria Teresa of Luxembourg.  Completely forgot about the FFL.


----------



## KEG66

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Prince Harry WILL be in military uniform “at the King’s request”.
> 
> The vigil by the grandchildren will last 15 minutes. The new Prince of Wales will stand at the head of the coffin. Prince Harry will stand at the foot. Both in military uniform. Other grandchildren will be in morning coat or dark formal dress.
> 
> Palace source: “the grandchildren, at the King’s invitation, are very keen to pay their respects - just as their parents are doing the evening before”_



Well Harry can’t complain he’s being treated differently to Andrew and at least it will give him 15 mins away from TW  Unless she can’t let go of his hand for that long !


----------



## carmen56

KEG66 said:


> Well Harry can’t complain he’s being treated differently to Andrew and at least it will give him 15 mins away from TW  Unless she can’t let go of his hand for that long !


Her constant mauling of H really grates on my nerves.


----------



## papertiger

duna said:


> I agree with you, tea was great but another time we had dinner at the Wolseley it was nothing special!
> 
> Is Freeze already on in London? My DD is coming over in October and she says hotels are fully booked! She'll have to go and stay with my sister, which none of us are too happy to do, lol!



12-16 Oct (LOL) She could try hotels in Camden or Euston. They are usually a lower level price/quality, but just for staying they are fine and near Regents Park

Rare Book Fair at Saatchi this week. No royalty around let alone HaZ-bin or MegZZZ, one Chelsea Pensioner though


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

miss_chiff said:


> *Deleted. Pics came out way too big.


When you have attached a photo, you can choose to post as a full image or thumbnail. If posted as thumbnail, it can be clicked by other posters to see the larger size image


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Harry and his hissy fits should be a thing of the past after what he pulled at the Commonwealth Service.  That was unforgivable.  He came close to another one at St. Paul's for the Jubilee service.



A lot of servicemen and servicewomen, serving and retired do NOT want Harry to wear a uniform. 

Of course, Harry's needs wants and wishes always come first. The only service he has ever served is himself. 

There are 2 babies and 2 toddlers in the Harkle household. 

What was that about wanting the attention to be on the the Late Queen during this time of mourning?  

I am 'disappointed' in Meghan, but right now I HATE Harry


----------



## BlueCherry

No full images of Meghan’s smug face please. I’m on new medication which is causing me enough nausea


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Just when you think she can’t sink any lower, she limbos her way into the self-promotion basement.


This is the funniest description of all! I've been giggling over it for hours. It's particularly apt because of her tendency to twist her torso and arch her back.


----------



## Chanbal

TimeToShop said:


> A bit of levity


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting view on the Harkles' touching, William's posture…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I find corgis funny looking because of the ears, but I do think dorgis are cute.


----------



## Chanbal

Not the death of QE was enough for the Harkles to follow the protocol…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That lunatic stare! You know whom she remembers me of...have you heard of the Duggars? I think they have a very old, abandoned thread here. They are a fundamentalist Christian family with 19 kids, and many of the women in this cult they are in (they don't believe in education, contraception, women working, and the husband is the head of the family and his word is law) stare at their fiancés and husband when they speak the way Raptor does with Harry. It is extremely unnerving.


----------



## Chanbal

I think this person summarizes the feeling of many, it's a profound dislike for so much greed and hypocrisy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Not the death of QE was enough for the Harkles to follow the protocol…



Hazzi knows Tw is ignorant of how to walk properly. The slowness, the proper pacing, the elegance - she has no idea.   I agree, he is holding her back - literally.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think this person summarizes the feeling of many, it's a profound dislike for so much greed and hypocrisy.




THIS.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I think this person summarizes the feeling of many, it's a profound dislike for so much greed and hypocrisy.



May I suggest they think like The King?  
At H&M’s insistence, The King makes it clear who is in charge.  Brilliant, somewhat effortlessly, and elegantly, The King has shown them and us who is in charge. HeeHee.  If only they had read Shakespeare


----------



## Chanbal

This DM article may cause a difficult time to Hazz.   









						Femail takes a look at The Queen's extensive collection of tiaras
					

The Queen reportedly had access to 50 tiaras stored across a number of collection. Many have fascinating stories to tell. Here, FEMAIL takes a look at some of the most fascinating.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## TimeToShop

Scobie really is a piece of work


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## TimeToShop

And this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just like when he published all but the floor plan of their country home Raptor provided for him.


----------



## Chanbal

TimeToShop said:


> Scobie really is a piece of work



Scobie is the Harkles' loyal servant, he is probably doing his work.


----------



## wisconsin

880 said:


> +100, I did the same
> @OriginalBalenciaga , I found your post very thoughtful.
> while I don’t like the liberal bashing, I try to ignore it
> im not a fan of Hillary, but I did respect her intelligence.
> I am probably more liberal than most ( at least in my mid fifties age group) on TPF.
> @papertiger, hope the dentist was not too bad.
> i really like MM’s Loewe postal bag (thanks to @DoggieBags and others who identified it
> 
> i hope W will not be allowed back into uniform for the vigil, but I can see both Sides


I am very liberal,reaching mid fifties, and a WOC. I don’t like MM and never really cared for MT. But MT is history for now. I do love Hilary and MO. Just saying.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Chanbal said:


> An interesting view on the Harkles' touching, William's posture…



I am definitely not a fan of these two but it seems to me that the hand-holding in this situation (and perhaps in general) is likely done to give MM subtle signals, or Harry, as required by her. Since she hasn't had the benefit of royal training/protocol in these events Harry is likely using the hands to convey signals and help her out. I think they communicate to one another with their hand-holding. The Queen used her handbag, I think they use their hands. William and Kate must do something too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am definitely not a fan of these two but it seems to me that the hand-holding in this situation (and perhaps in general) is likely done to give MM subtle signals, or Harry, as required by her. Since she hasn't had the benefit of royal training/protocol in these events Harry is likely using the hands to convey signals and help her out. I think they communicate to one another with their hand-holding. The Queen used her handbag, I think they use their hands. William and Kate must do something too.



But how come Kate and Sophie are able to walk without being led like a toddler? Neither of them did grow up royal.

Also, Raptor had access to a royal team even before the engagement. She's either a slow learner or maybe she just doesn't want to behave appropriately.


----------



## Sina08

Coconuts40 said:


> I don't know if this video has been posted yet.
> At 20 minutes , The Body Language Guy has an incredible analysis on the video of the girl that hugged MM at the walkabout.  Suggesting MM had an earpiece in her left ear with someone directing her to where the girl was that hugged her.  The girl filming the video was too professional for it to be an amateur filming the hug.  Very compelling and I actually believe he is right!
> This was a total PR stunt!!
> 
> Starts at about 20 minutes



Fell asleep while watching this video and had a very unsettling dream involving TW. I strongly recommend not to watch this stuff before sleep.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This video shows how inept she is at these events.  W&K take their time, reading the cards, etc.  Hazz tries to move slowly, but she continuously moves in front of him, then does the awkward _doe-si-do_ to let him go first.  She mimics W&K’s behavior - William leans over, she does, then he straightens, she does, then he leans over again - hilarious watching her mimic the pros. Hazzi knows what is happening but he cannot stop her.  She knows she is wrong, does it anyway.

Around the 2:50 mark is a good example:


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Though I am curious how they would know/confirm.


Apparently it was known. In the 60s Camilla was having a good time. Found an old article:





__





						The night Camilla lost her virginity - and changed the history of the royals
					

The photographer caught a glint of mischief and a hint of fun in the clear, confident blue eyes of 17-year-old Milla Shand. Indeed, it is said that within just a few days of Millas coming out party, the future Duchess of Cornwall lost her virginity to a rakish young gentleman called Kevin Burke




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## miss_chiff

EverSoElusive said:


> When you have attached a photo, you can choose to post as a full image or thumbnail. If posted as thumbnail, it can be clicked by other posters to see the larger size image


Thank you. That’s the weird part, I clicked on thumbnail and it still came out full size??   I tried editing and double checked that it was thumbnail. I have managed posted thumbnails before. Perhaps I must of missed something in the process or iPhone was having issues.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Some of the “mirroring” is probably trying to get into the same shots as well as seem “in tune” with William. The BLG guy has done videos discussing how compatible couples will “mirror” each other.  I could see her doing this as a subtle form of manipulation, but MOSTLY  see her doing this so her body is always at the same height/level as his knowing that the media is there to take pictures of him.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is why we need books on Camilla’s life.  So many myths, so many rumors, so many half-truths.
> Cam’s family is fascinating in its own right.  Her sister is an interior designer iirc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mark Shand - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org



Agreed. Books about Camilla written by Camilla!  So many  "authors of royals" may not always be accurate.


----------



## littlemisskeira

KEG66 said:


> Well Harry can’t complain he’s being treated differently to Andrew and at least it will give him 15 mins away from TW  Unless she can’t let go of his hand for that long !


Personally I find it un-usual for a married couple to hold hands all the time in public. 
Especially at formal and solemn state / international events.

I do think the hand holding is some sort of power/control thing for her.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Just when you think she can’t sink any lower, she limbos her way into the self-promotion basement.


sorry, I don't have the patience for a 45 minute video....I tend to agree with this guy but I can't help but feel people like him and Piers Morgan are making a living off the very people they so detest....kind of ironic


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But how come Kate and Sophie are able to walk without being led like a toddler? Neither of them did grow up royal.
> 
> Also, Raptor had access to a royal team even before the engagement. She's either a slow learner or maybe she just doesn't want to behave appropriately.


This! 
Catherine and Sophie took measures to learn how to behave, especially when someone senior to you (husband for example) is with you. It takes time but they did it. TW thought she's above rules and protocol and she wasn't going to let anyone tell her what she should do. That is what it boils down to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Scobie is the Harkles' loyal servant, he is probably doing his *The Devil’s* work.



Fixed


----------



## andrashik

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you so much for writing this all out and sharing your perspective.
> 
> I want to begin by making it clear I am not a MM fan. I think she (and Harry) have made a lot of mistakes. But I also believe they are now in a position of being accused of so much (some bordering on ludicrous) they almost can't win. For example, recently there was anger that they might have their children brought to the UK while at the same time they were also criticized for being away from them for so long. There was indignation that they held hands at the service despite photos of Zara Phillips and Mike Tindall doing so as well. And some of the rumors are just beyond all reason...but shared and repeated as if they are absolute truth.
> 
> And in this thread it seems anything other than pure outrage is met with immediate opposition. When I suggested MM would not be shouted at out of deference to the Queen's memory I was accused of trying to defend her, although none of my posts indicated that at all. And multiple POC have posted their distress at some of the micoraggressions and racist tropes but instead of asking for clarity or education posters react by declaring they themselves are not racist. Or worse minimizing or denying racism in general.
> 
> I have noticed there may be a cultural divide at play as well. Snide comments about wokism abound. And many of the links seem to lead to quite conservative sources. I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT. Which I find interesting because I actually think they are more similar than different...
> 
> both married men who behave like children
> both were in their positions because of that marriage
> neither wanted to perform the duties expected of them
> both have a history of plagiarism and misstatements
> both complained in Africa about being victims
> both have been accused of merching
> both started foundations that seem to have no specific goals
> both blame the media for being against them
> both have been seen wearing heavy makeup & spray tans
> both had some pretty racy photos published
> yet one woman elicits extreme ire from the very same people who absolutely adore the other
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?
> 
> In any case I am sure I will be persona non grata as soon as I hit post reply so thank you again for taking the time to explain your thoughts!


If I understand it correctly ( correct me if I am wrong) when did the ladies here ( myself included) just say: oh we are not racist? I am on this thread since they got engaged and most of the ladies here said again and again that it is her behaviour that is disgusting...and throughly explained why they do not like her. They didn't post depthless explanations.

I am not sure why are you comparing MT as other posters have said that most of us are not praising her and also MT is very unalike TW and there are so many posts describing their differences.
I think the comparison between Zara and Mike was already discussed and they did hold hands after the procession( or something similar).

There have been so many posts about TW's principles and behaviour...Tom Bower's book (they didn't sue him) at this point I think it's getting tiring for all of us to explain why we don't like her and it seems that some users don't even read our explanation 

We don't discuss politics and there is a reason why. I do not understand how you made those assumptions, and regardless of it, I don't think it matters as I said above - her behavior isn't the best.

Sure, some posters may have exaggerated with their remarks but this doesn't mean that the whole thread is so vicious and that we are so angry that we will idk..throw tomatoes at her. None of the ladies here were really dissapointed that they weren't booed at the funeral and respected the Queen. Do you think angry people are like this?


----------



## lallybelle

I mean I don't care for Harry anymore, but there's no reason that he should be banned from things Andy is allowed. So since this event will be similar to the event Andrew is wearing a uniform for, then I see no problem.

Buzzfeed had an article about how it was unfair that H&M got dragged for the hand holding when Zara & Mike Tindall did it too. Fair I suppose, but they didn't consider that maybe H&M pictures went worldwide and all over socials while it's highly likely not as many people saw pics of or noticed the other couple. It was just all victim noises.


----------



## jblended

TimeToShop said:


> Scobie really is a piece of work


I have to wonder if he will face consequences for this? There really ought to be something done because it is actually a security risk to keep leaking people's information ahead of time. This is the reason they haven't shared details yet of the exact route to be used on Monday. This moron is playing a very dumb and dangerous game, just to get social media clout.


----------



## Sharont2305

lallybelle said:


> I mean I don't care for Harry anymore, but there's no reason that he should be banned from things Andy is allowed. So since this event will be similar to the event Andrew is wearing a uniform for, then I see no problem.
> 
> Buzzfeed had an article about how it was unfair that H&M got dragged for the hand holding when Zara & Mike Tindall did it too. Fair I suppose, but they didn't consider that maybe H&M pictures went worldwide and all over socials while it's highly likely not as many people saw pics of or noticed the other couple. It was just all victim noises.


From what I recall H&M held hands straight after curtsying and bowing to the coffin and continued to do so walking with the procession. 
Zara and Mike started holding hands either outside the door or just inside.


----------



## Sharont2305

I hope not...


----------



## duna

Sharont2305 said:


> From what I recall H&M held hands straight after curtsying and bowing to the coffin and continued to do so walking with the procession.
> Zara and Mike started holding hands either outside the door or just inside.


This. Also the fact that H&M are ALWAYS seen holding hands, while it's the first time I have seen the Tindall's do it, so I give them a pass.


----------



## redney

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope not...
> 
> View attachment 5611669


Sorry, "senior royal family members", what?  That terrible racist family.....huh.


----------



## lallybelle

Sharont2305 said:


> From what I recall H&M held hands straight after curtsying and bowing to the coffin and continued to do so walking with the procession.
> Zara and Mike started holding hands either outside the door or just inside.


Good points. The article made no attempt to distinguish anything between the 2, just that H&M were being picked on for doing same as Z&M.


----------



## WingNut

littlemisskeira said:


> Personally I find it un-usual for a married couple to hold hands all the time in public.
> Especially at formal and solemn state / international events.
> 
> I do think the hand holding is some sort of power/control thing for her.



It absolutely can be a power/control thing as part of an NPD person's behavior. Especially if you consider how she moved his arm back onto her lap during the UN event, or her thumb over his fingers to keep them down.  I was really enlightened to this when watching my ex with his new wife (backstory: We worked together and often ended up at work functions). We were at a dinner and they sat across from me. As I had completely extricated myself from any emotional tether to him, I could observe objectively.  HE, very touchy-feely, always with his arm around her or holding her hand. SHE, looking to him constantly for approval. His MO was to make sure his "victim" felt that he was the only source of her love (other than the 1 or 2 other "approved" beings in their circle): part of the "love-bombing". I saw in her an earlier, weaker version of myself. It was an oddly objective (on my part, because of my now-emotional disassociation) picture of how the behavior played out.

I see that behavior in her, and Harry is the one constantly being "re-assured" by her that with her around, things will be ok. He himself is such a messed-up individual that the two of them are the perfect partner in this NPD+co-dependant pairing. While it would be good if he could get away, I don't see it as likely. Also if he got away, he'd be aware of and have to live with how much damage he himself has done to the family, which might scare him even more than she does currently.

Edited for clarity


----------



## csshopper

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am definitely not a fan of these two but it seems to me that the hand-holding in this situation (and perhaps in general) is likely done to give MM subtle signals, or Harry, as required by her. Since she hasn't had the benefit of royal training/protocol in these events Harry is likely using the hands to convey signals and help her out. I think they communicate to one another with their hand-holding. The Queen used her handbag, I think they use their hands. William and Kate must do something too.


The Queen assigned her most senior Lady in Waiting to meet with Raptor during the engagement and, in effect, teach her about the protocols practiced by the Royal Family. It was a gesture of love thrown back in her face as Meghan said “no”.
This has been noted through the years and was again included in an article published earlier this week.


----------



## Icyjade

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I am also struck by how many posters who can't abide MM are very pro MT.
> 
> Again I am not a fan, I just find this thread and the rage MM seems to engender confusing. She's hardly in a position of power or influence. But I was recently listening to an interview with George Will and he talked about how anger can actually be addictive. And that people need increasingly intense doses. So maybe it's actually the rage itself that is both the means and the end?



If MT is who I think you are referring to, then I’m confused as I don’t remember people on this thread being pro MT (personally i think she is no saint after the jacket debacle). But yeah, generally I don’t care about MT nor think they are comparable.  

Can’t speak for others, but few public figures (putting aside politicians and despots) have made me feel disgusted enough to feel the need to vent on a public forum. She does (and now him), and that’s why I am here. 

As for TW? Everything that @EverSoElusive said.

I too started off as a supporter and being happy for JCMH when he found someone to settle down with... and the intense dislike for TW only gradually developed after her mask slipped. Am also a POC fwiw.

The fake tan imo is disgusting. I see it as yet another calculated move to use the race card. (MM: if you are reading this, orange isn’t a good shade for you). 

There is a separate appreciation thread for the Harkles if that is where you prefer to hang out. This thread is much more active though. 

Anyone else who is new and wondering why most of the posters feel the way we do… pls read this: 



EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


----------



## Swanky

Going to remind again… this is not an anti-Harry/Meghan thread, all are welcome and you should be discussing them, not members and other threads. 
Like them? Great!! Dislike them? Cool! Lol
Stay on topic please.


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope not...
> 
> View attachment 5611669


May have changed, but I read earlier it included Working Royals only since it is deemed a “state” function. It’s well documented this would not be Scoobie’s first lie so hoping the original statement is true.

Given their despicable photo grabbing shenanigans recently, they should be banned. Although it could be “entertaining” to watch the Malignant one slither around the room to capture as many photos with as many heads of state as possible. 5?   10?  15?   If they are there, “minders” might be tethered to them. Hmmmmm, maybe it will be an opportunity for Johnny sightings.


----------



## jennlt

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope not...
> 
> View attachment 5611669


Here's a rebuttal...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> May have changed, but I read earlier it included Working Royals only since it is deemed a “state” function. It’s well documented this would not be Scoobie’s first lie so hoping the original statement is true.
> 
> Given their despicable photo grabbing shenanigans recently, they should be banned. Although it could be “entertaining” to watch the Malignant one slither around the room to capture as many photos with as many heads of state as possible. 5?   10?  15?   If they are there, “minders” might be tethered to them. Hmmmmm, maybe it will be an opportunity for Johnny sightings.


I'd heard 'working Royals' too. I think it's Scooby Doo stirring the pot again.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I see this week as a bit of a learning experience for H&M.  He gets to see what he left behind, including the protection of his family and their staff (ex. the leak that TW scheduled her own walkabout, was met with the staff saying “Harry did everything right, according to protocol”, and the uniform issue not being due to Harry’s being a pest, but due to “The King’s decision.”)

I also firmly believe that TW is being “handled” a lot this week.  She hasn’t been able to do her own thing in her own way (ex. press leaks and the walkabout, plus it looks like someone is controlling the wardrobe, hair, and makeup for public appearances.)

It’s a taste of what they might come back to, if they decide to return.  I’m guessing a return to the fold would be attractive to Harry and uncomfortable for TW. 

I think they would like Harry to return for a lot of reasons (but with conditions), but would prefer TW stay away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jennlt said:


> Here's a rebuttal...



Some call it _manifesting_, others call it “wag the dog”, others “a stirring the pot”, whatever you call it,  it needs to stop.  There is enough misinformation in the world. No one needs this.  Too bad that Hazz and Tw cannot control their mouthpiece.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> I see this week as a bit of a learning experience for H&M.  He gets to see what he left behind, including the protection of his family and their staff (ex. the leak that TW scheduled her own walkabout, was met with the staff saying “Harry did everything right, according to protocol”, and the uniform issue not being due to Harry’s being a pest, but due to “The King’s decision.”)
> 
> I also firmly believe that TW is being “handled” a lot this week.  She hasn’t been able to do her own thing in her own way (ex. press leaks and the walkabout, plus it looks like someone is controlling the wardrobe, hair, and makeup for public appearances.)
> 
> It’s a taste of what they might come back to, if they decide to return.  I’m guessing a return to the fold would be attractive to Harry and uncomfortable for TW.
> 
> I think they would like Harry to return for a lot of reasons (but with conditions), but would prefer TW stay away.


100% agree.  Thank you. 
The difference between the 2 countries is huge: one is calm, professional, practiced while the other is frantic, bumbling and noisy. Surely Hazz sees this.


----------



## sdkitty

this is nice...david beckham stood in line to pay his respects.....guess Victoria couldn't do it in six inch heels








						David Beckham spotted in queue to see Queen's coffin among droves of mourners
					

TEARFUL David Beckham has joined thousands of mourners in paying his respects to the Queen. The former England captain, 47, was seen looking emotional as he paused at Elizabeth II’s coffin th…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Sophisticatted

The problem with TW (and Scooby Doo and Oprah) is that she believes that what is printed becomes reality.  “Her truth”.  Ugh.  She WANTS to go to that dinner, so she puts it out there.  Putting it out there won’t make it happen.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> sorry, I don't have the patience for a 45 minute video....I tend to agree with this guy but *I can't help but feel people like him and Piers Morgan are making a living off the very people they so detest*....kind of ironic


They are and so is Lady CC. That is our society now, celebrity obsession is a business model.

Of course it works both ways. Everything Omid Scobie has today he owes to his Meghan obsession.


----------



## DoggieBags

I can’t imagine how TW would behave at a state dinner So I really hope the gruesome twosome are not invited. Can you see her pushing and shoving H to be first to shake various foreign heads of state’s / dignitaries hands? It could turn into a rugby scrum


----------



## momtok

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree.  Thank you.
> The difference between the 2 countries is huge: one is calm, professional, practiced while the other is *frantic, bumbling and noisy*. Surely Hazz sees this.


Well, it does depend on where you hang out ... and with whom.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They are and so is Lady CC. That is our society now, celebrity obsession is a business model.


I guess so.....and I guess in the case of Piers he reports on various entertainment news....but ones who are obsessing over one celeb who they are criticizing seem a bit predatory to me....this coming from one who is definitely not a fan of H&M

I guess everyone has to make a living and the H&M gravy train won't last forever....some day people will lose interest in the grifters


----------



## WingNut

sdkitty said:


> I guess so.....and I guess in the case of Piers he reports on various entertainment news....but ones who are obsessing over one celeb who they are criticizing seem a bit predatory to me....this coming from one who is definitely not a fan of H&M
> 
> I guess everyone has to make a living and the H&M gravy train won't last forever....some day people will lose interest in the grifters


The thing about Piers is that he very definitely has it in for them. They (TW and JCMH) had him fired for exposing their lies....

Frankly, I don't blame him.


----------



## Sophisticatted

DoggieBags said:


> I can’t imagine how TW would behave at a state dinner So I really hope the gruesome twosome are not invited. Can you see her pushing and shoving H to be first to shake various foreign heads of state’s / dignitaries hands? It could turn into a rugby scrum


It would be like the Garden Party all over again.  TW acts up and is escorted from the premises.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I guess so.....and I guess in the case of Piers he reports on various entertainment news....but ones who are obsessing over one celeb who they are criticizing seem a bit predatory to me....this coming from one who is definitely not a fan of H&M
> 
> I guess everyone has to make a living and the H&M gravy train won't last forever....some day people will lose interest in the grifters


I don't blame them for going for it. If I could make $$$ over the knowledge of H&M I've gained in this thread over the past five years I might do it. I'm not too proud and there is no dignity in the media anymore anyway.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I don't blame them for going for it. If I could make $$$ over the knowledge of H&M I've gained in this thread over the past five years I might do it. I'm not too proud and there is no dignity in the media anymore anyway.


First, get tpf permission, then print out this thread, edit the repetitive pages and send to publishers. The story tells itself.

H&Tw should take note.  Merching is frowned upon now.  Finally.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lallybelle said:


> I mean I don't care for Harry anymore, but there's no reason that he should be banned from things Andy is allowed. So since this event will be similar to the event Andrew is wearing a uniform for, then I see no problem.



I have no problem with Harry being included as the family member (I even said so earlier in the Wales thread), but also Andrew and Harry are not equal. Andrew is The Queen's son, Harry is one of eight grandchildren.



lallybelle said:


> Buzzfeed had an article about how it was unfair that H&M got dragged for the hand holding when Zara & Mike Tindall did it too. Fair I suppose, but they didn't consider that maybe H&M pictures went worldwide and all over socials while it's highly likely not as many people saw pics of or noticed the other couple. It was just all victim noises.



It truly surprises me how people (not you, the press, the angry stans etc.) choose to not see the difference. Zara and Mike held hands while exiting the church. Those two troublemakers held hands WHILE STILL IN THE PROCESSION moving forward.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some call it _manifesting_, others call it “wag the dog”, others “a stirring the pot”, whatever you call it,  it needs to stop.  There is enough misinformation in the world. No one needs this.  Too bad that Hazz and Tw cannot control their mouthpiece.


I think they are controlling their mouthpiece.


----------



## TC1

RAINDANCE said:


> I see Harry's getting to wear uniform after all and that all 8 of the Queen's grandchildren are doing a vigil together, including Lady Louise and Viscount Severn.
> Personally I think it is the wrong call. It is the law that ex servicemen and women cannot wear uniform once they cease serving. Andrew's exception was at the request of the Queen herself. I can see that it's not treating Harry and Andrew the same but they aren't the same. Andrew is her son.
> 
> The optics are I think mixed. It looks like Harry has thrown a hissy fit and Charles has acquiesced but then equal treatment of Harry and Andrew is offsetting.
> 
> However, as the expression goes, pick your battles carefully. The wearing of uniform for 15 minutes is not a hill I would die on.
> 
> It just terribly distasteful to know that during this week of mourning Harry has been lobbying for this to be changed for him and didn't have the grace, dignity.or maturity to just suck it up and accept what the Queen's wishes were.  (Scobie started the media agitation about unfair treatment)
> 
> (I am also a bit irritated by the fact the Mail keeps on reporting about Harry's decade of service when Andrew did over two decades. It seems a bit unfair that this is being airbrushed)


Okay..Andrew did "two decades" of service. Well..he was also flying and yachting around the world with a sex trafficking pedophile. I understand Harry is a non-working Royal..but there was a real reason behind Andrew being stripped of patronages..etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope not...
> 
> View attachment 5611669



It's been already announced that non-working royals won't be present. At this point I believe Scobie puts out this sh*t to force the BRF's hand. Also, he's starting to annoy me. I wonder if he sleeps with the pair of shoes that were supposedly stolen from Raptor.

ETA: Harry wasn't even present for all state functions and banquets when he was indeed a working royal. Just sayin'.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been already announced that non-working royals won't be present. At this point I believe Scobie puts out this sh*t to force the BRF's hand. Also, he's starting to annoy me. I wonder if he sleeps with the pair of shoes that were supposedly stolen from Raptor.
> 
> ETA: Harry wasn't even present for all state functions and bankets when he was indeed a working royal. Just sayin'.


I don't think Harry has even been to one, ever!


----------



## gelbergirl

Besides Harry and Andrew, who are the other non-working Royals?


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> I think they are controlling their mouthpiece.


Omit is a puppet. He is happy to fulfill that role because he has nothing else.  If he didn't do this, he would be selling mascara at Boots.


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> Besides Harry and Andrew, who are the other non-working Royals?


Technically everyone else. Other grandchildren cousins, uncles, aunts etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I guess so.....and I guess in the case of Piers he reports on various entertainment news....but ones who are obsessing over one celeb who they are criticizing seem a bit predatory to me....this coming from one who is definitely not a fan of H&M



While I agree with many things Piers says, I've also said at least a year ago he and Raptor need go to couple's therapy or something. He definitely needs to let go that she markled him and move on with his life.

Then again, she also tried to ruin his career and I can see how he'd be bitter about that one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some call it _manifesting_, others call it “wag the dog”, others “a stirring the pot”, whatever you call it,  it needs to stop.  There is enough misinformation in the world. No one needs this.  *Too bad that Hazz and Tw cannot control their mouthpiece.*



Oh, I think they do.


----------



## youngster

gelbergirl said:


> Besides Harry and Andrew, who are the other non-working Royals?



Pretty much everyone is a non-working royal except for:
KCIII, Camilla, Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, Prince William and Kate.  It also includes: Prince Richard and his wife, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester.

I don't think the Queen's other cousins (Princess Alexandra, Prince Michael, Prince Edward, Duke of Kent) are considered working royals but I could be completely wrong about that.  What say our British members?  At times I've heard that Princess Alexandra is and, other times, that she is not.  She has carried out lots of engagements throughout the years on behalf of the Queen.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been already announced that non-working royals won't be present. At this point I believe Scobie puts out this sh*t to force the BRF's hand. Also, he's starting to annoy me. I wonder if he sleeps with the pair of shoes that were supposedly stolen from Raptor.
> 
> ETA: Harry wasn't even present for all state functions and bankets when he was indeed a working royal. Just sayin'.


It's just Harry trying to be as equal as William.  He doesn't want to give up on that because without the status, he is nothing.

William and Kate were visiting a military base where Commonwealth troops, who are participating in the funeral,   are being housed.  If Harry had been a working Royal, this is exactly the kind of job he would be given to do. Netflix would have salivated over the film footage.   He is probably annoyed that he wasn't asked.  He doesn't even understand that these troops would have no use for him if he showed up right now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Besides Harry and Andrew, who are the other non-working Royals?



Peter and Zara Phillips, the York sisters, the Wessex children (though I like seeing more of Lady Louise), The Earl of Snowdon and Lady Sarah Chatto. That's immediate family members though, The Queen had several cousins.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Pretty much everyone is a non-working royal except for:
> KCIII, Camilla, Princess Anne, Prince Edward and Sophie, Prince William and Kate.  It also includes: Prince Richard and his wife, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester.
> 
> I don't think the Queen's other cousins (Princess Alexandra, Prince Michael, Prince Edward, Duke of Kent) are considered working royals but I could be completely wrong about that.  What say are British members?  At times I've heard that Princess Alexandra is and, other times, that she is not.  She has carried out lots of engagements throughout the years on behalf of the Queen.


On occasion some of these people have represented TQ.  Bea has done that recently as well.


----------



## gracekelly

Lady Louise is a lovely young woman and the story about her working at the garden center has made her very relatable.   After she finishes Uni, she will probably be seen doing some royaling.  Maybe even whilst she is at Uni.  Her parents are well liked and respected so as a family, they are a huge asset to KC.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> On occasion some of these people have represented TQ.  Bea has done that recently as well.



Yes, a family member could be asked to step in and represent the Queen but not be considered a senior royal.  The list is actually pretty short and is easier to list who is on it, than list who isn't lol.  Andrew fought a losing battle for years to get Bea and Eugenie on that list.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't think Harry has even been to one, ever!


I think he was and seated next  Rose Hanbury.  A certain wife was infuriated and used it start a rumor about her BIL.


----------



## Toby93

Sophisticatted said:


> I see this week as a bit of a learning experience for H&M.  He gets to see what he left behind, including the protection of his family and their staff (ex. the leak that TW scheduled her own walkabout, was met with the staff saying “Harry did everything right, according to protocol”, and the uniform issue not being due to Harry’s being a pest, but due to “The King’s decision.”)
> 
> I also firmly believe that TW is being “handled” a lot this week.  She hasn’t been able to do her own thing in her own way (ex. press leaks and the walkabout, plus it looks like someone is controlling the wardrobe, hair, and makeup for public appearances.)
> 
> It’s a taste of what they might come back to, if they decide to return.  I’m guessing a return to the fold would be attractive to Harry and uncomfortable for TW.
> 
> *I think they would like Harry to return for a lot of reasons (but with conditions), but would prefer TW stay away.*


We all would


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Yes, a family member could be asked to step in and represent the Queen but not be considered a senior royal.  The list is actually pretty short and is easier to list who is on it, than list who isn't lol.  Andrew fought a losing battle for years to get Bea and Eugenie on that list.


He wanted them on the list so TQ could pay them instead of his giving them an allowance out of his allowance lol!


----------



## Debbini

jennlt said:


> Here's a rebuttal...



Scooby-Doo is doing this on purpose to, what....make King Charles feel like he has to now include them?! I don't think this will happen because then Andrew would have to be there, and I don't Think that's going to happen!!


----------



## gracekelly

No doubt that Harry is seeing what he left behind, but he will spin it that it is a restrictive life with too many rules and regs and he is so glad he left.  This will all be whined after the funeral is over and as he whines, deep inside, he will be missing all of it.  Plus if the children don't get the titles, he will say it was a good thing because it is nothing, but a burden.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I think he was and seated next  Rose Hanbury.  A certain wife was infuriated and used it start a rumor about her BIL.


OK, maybe one then, 2017 lol


----------



## Toby93

Apparently the announcement has changed to "members of the royal family"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't understand what's going on right now. AT ALL. Why don't they send over the Vladimir to Frogmore right now.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Toby93 said:


> Apparently the announcement has changed to "members of the royal family"



I presume that they needed lots more bodies to help host all those heads of state.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Prince Harry WILL be in military uniform “at the King’s request”.
> 
> The vigil by the grandchildren will last 15 minutes. The new Prince of Wales will stand at the head of the coffin. Prince Harry will stand at the foot. Both in military uniform. Other grandchildren will be in morning coat or dark formal dress.
> 
> Palace source: “the grandchildren, at the King’s invitation, are very keen to pay their respects - just as their parents are doing the evening before”_



I don't understand why they keep caving over and over.andover.andover.andover again.


----------



## piperdog

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand what's going on right now. AT ALL. Why don't they send over the Vladimir to Frogmore right now.


And make sure the Netflix crew has a front row seat for everything.

I had such high hopes for HMTK with the "Harry and Meghan ... overseas" line, but since then it seems to be nothing but giving in to the tantrums. I have slim hope that I'm wrong and this is just Omid putting crap out there to create pressure for it to come true. If not, then Charles has nobody but himself to blame for his future headaches and heartaches from these two.


----------



## Zen101

Toby93 said:


> Apparently the announcement has changed to "members of the royal family"



Sometimes I wonder if it’s worth defending the royal family. When are they going to grow a spine?


----------



## CobaltBlu

They are making it harder and harder for H&M to sell that they want nothing to do with all the generational pain and being a prisoner in a fishbowl etc. The more those kids participate in this stuff the more ridiculous their interviews seem. 

Let's remember Poor Neglected Harry and Only Child Meghan have left their kids home for quite a while now.... Which was an issue for Harry IIRC.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

piperdog said:


> And make sure the Netflix crew has gets a front row seat for everything.
> 
> I had such high hopes for HMTK with the "Harry and Meghan ... overseas" line, but since then it seems to be nothing but giving in to the tantrums. I have slim hope that I'm wrong and this is just Omid putting crap out there to create pressure for it to come true. If not, then Charles has nobody but himself to blame for his future headaches and heartaches from these two.



The official announcement from Buckingham Palace changed from "working members" to "family members"  

The only acceptable spin would be that the Kents and Gloucesters and Princess Alexandra will be there, but no Raptor.


----------



## LittleStar88

CobaltBlu said:


> They are making it harder and harder for H&M to sell that they want nothing to do with all the generational pain and being a prisoner in a fishbowl etc. The more those kids participate in this stuff the more ridiculous their interviews seem.
> 
> Let's remember Poor Neglected Harry and Only Child Meghan have left their kids home for quite a while now.... Which was an issue for Harry IIRC.



Yes! And if the future Spotify podcasts can’t be re-edited and contain more disparaging remarks about the BRF, it will be a really bad look and she will lose even more credibility.

Not to mention Harry’s book and whatever he might say. Or he has a change of heart, removes any dodgy parts, and it doesn’t get published because it’s rendered boring without the juicy bits.

As for the kids… I really don’t see it as much of an issue. They’re probably enjoying time in a much healthier environment than the usual dysfunction from these two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Blyen

I think this is just to make sure they have nothing they can loudly complain about.
So,if they do,they will just look ridiculous.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some call it _manifesting_, others call it “wag the dog”, others “a stirring the pot”, whatever you call it,  it needs to stop.  There is enough misinformation in the world. No one needs this.  Too bad that Hazz and Tw cannot control their mouthpiece.


IMHO, OS did this deliberately- so that public uproar forces a change
Kind of like the uniform for H seems to have been changed due to the public


gracekelly said:


> On occasion some of these people have represented TQ.  Bea has done that recently as well.


There are several ill-defined ways to group the royals, see below
The big issue is when they all come together. Who gets precedence - front row seats & limo? The suits make it up on a case by case basis IMHO.
H&MM were in the second row for the Jubilee, but seem to get better precedence for the funeral. No one expected MM to be there. Her rank = Queen's wishes? A sudden compromise ???

SENIOR working royals = KC, W, Anne, Edward and spouses , I do think Tim Lawrence counts... I think the SENIOR WORKING ROYAL category was invented to exclude Andrew , H and MM
Working royals = those above & some of the Kents and Gloucesters - they all have patronages
HRHs = the ones above (not Tim), and the Queen's cousins & spouses = Kents and Gloucesters, most children & grandchildren of QEII, Louise and James have HRH but dont use it
Those with HRH but are not supposed to use it - Andrew, Harry, Meghan. Ditto the category of "has HRH but not supposed to use" was invented to exclude Andrew , H and MM
Those who are paid (via Queen's Duchy of Lancaster, not a parliamentary annuity) - Anne, Edward, Andrew (?)
Councillors of State, actually a rigid list by law = those adults who can deputize for the crown ie W, H, Andrew, Beatrice - this list is supposedly under consideration for revision, residence in the UK is supposed criterion - but what about H???
There may be a new category - Prince/Princess but without HRH, a new category to be  invented for Archie & Lili


----------



## Lodpah

Wow! Those two yield so much power over KC. What is going on?


----------



## piperdog

CobaltBlu said:


> They are making it harder and harder for H&M to sell that they want nothing to do with all the generational pain and being a prisoner in a fishbowl etc. The more those kids participate in this stuff the more ridiculous their interviews seem.
> 
> Let's remember Poor Neglected Harry and Only Child Meghan have left their kids home for quite a while now.... Which was an issue for Harry IIRC.


I hope you're right and it will shut down future post-funeral complaining. Unfortunately, this would only work if H&M are held to any kind of standard or expectation of consistency with past statements and actions, which I have no reason to think will occur. Instead, I think they will continue to reap all the benefits of being in the family (e.g., Media coverage, photos, and footage of their participation in the events of these few weeks, faux royal tours, titles to merch for themselves and the kids) WHILE reaping the benefits of their "mistreated, silenced, outsider status" especially their potentially fictional 'tell-alls' about the family including tons of new material the Queen's funeral events.

The real generational trauma here is what Charles has created by allowing Harry to become another Andrew and inflict himself (and his wife) on the rest of the family. 

Again, I REALLLLLY hope I'm wrong about all of this.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this is nice...david beckham stood in line to pay his respects.....guess Victoria couldn't do it in six inch heels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Beckham spotted in queue to see Queen's coffin among droves of mourners
> 
> 
> TEARFUL David Beckham has joined thousands of mourners in paying his respects to the Queen. The former England captain, 47, was seen looking emotional as he paused at Elizabeth II’s coffin th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


I'm going to take a wild guess that he didn't try to elbow and shove his way past others to get to the front either?


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> I'm going to take a wild guess that he didn't try to elbow and shove his way past others to get to the front either?


And if any of the stewards said "Would you like to come this way sir" he would've replied "no thank you, I'll wait like everyone else"


----------



## lanasyogamama

This is all going to embolden them to demand more and more, because they keep getting exactly what they want.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand what's going on right now. AT ALL. Why don't they send over the Vladimir to Frogmore right now.


Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.


----------



## gelbergirl

gracekelly said:


> No doubt that Harry is seeing what he left behind, but he will spin it that it is a restrictive life with too many rules and regs and he is so glad he left.  This will all be whined after the funeral is over and as he whines, deep inside, he will be missing all of it.  Plus if the children don't get the titles, he will say it was a good thing because it is nothing, but a burden





LittleStar88 said:


> Yes! And if the future Spotify podcasts can’t be re-edited and contain more disparaging remarks about the BRF, it will be a really bad look and she will lose even more credibility.
> 
> Not to mention Harry’s book and whatever he might say. Or he has a change of heart, removes any dodgy parts, and it doesn’t get published because it’s rendered boring without the juicy bits.
> 
> As for the kids… I really don’t see it as much of an issue. They’re probably enjoying time in a much healthier environment than the usual dysfunction from these two.



Harry will be on the phone to his publisher & Netflix the second he lifts off from England selling the stories of TQ funeral.


----------



## Zen101

lanasyogamama said:


> This is all going to embolden them to demand more and more, because they keep getting exactly what they want.


My thoughts exactly. Now the traitors know if they get scoobie doo to incite hatred on Twitter by invoking racism, Charles will cave in, hoping that will make whatever the issue go away. It won’t.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Apparently the announcement has changed to "members of the royal family"






QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand what's going on right now. AT ALL. Why don't they send over the Vladimir to Frogmore right now.



If they are inviting "members of the royal family" Z-list and Co, HMTK might as well extend us honorary invites   We're probably better behaved than Z-list and Co. Just sayin'


----------



## Zen101

bag-mania said:


> Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.


It is worrisome.


----------



## Zen101

gelbergirl said:


> Harry will be on the phone to his publisher & Netflix the second he lifts off from England selling the stories of TQ funeral.


Don’t forget Gayle!


----------



## Kaka_bobo

I'm not believing anything until I see it or it comes directly from the Palace.

We've seen this whole week different media trying to control narratives...sickening.


----------



## Cinderlala

I love that David Beckham waited for over 12 hours with everyone else to honor The Queen.  It feels so refreshingly honest to me.

TW and Scoobs are agitators.  Creating drama creates discussion which gives them both more attention.  That is the only thing that matters to TW.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

Kaka_bobo said:


> I'm not believing anything until I see it or it comes directly from the Palace.
> 
> We've seen this whole week different media trying to control narratives...sickening.


Yes to this.  I'll believe whatever I actually see happen but little until then.


----------



## youngster

I think this is part of the family's plan, saying we bent over backwards to heal the rift. Then when MM/Harry stab them in the back again, they can shrug and say we tried, didn't you all see how hard we tried at the funeral.  Harry is still her grandson too and she loved him so she would want Charles to try, at least during this time.


----------



## redney

I'm betting KC changed the attendees to members of the RF before Scabies tweeted it out.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Some call it _manifesting_, others call it “wag the dog”, others “a stirring the pot”, whatever you call it,  it needs to stop.  There is enough misinformation in the world. No one needs this.  *Too bad that Hazz and Tw cannot control their mouthpiece.*


I believe their mouthpiece is well controlled by the Harkles themselves. Though, I wonder how he gets the goodies… They can't brief Jason Knauf, since he is not working for them anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Harry will be on the phone to his publisher & Netflix the second he lifts off from England selling the stories of TQ funeral.



He cannot be that awful, can he?


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I am definitely not a fan of these two but it seems to me that the hand-holding in this situation (and perhaps in general) is likely done to give MM subtle signals, or Harry, as required by her. Since she hasn't had the benefit of royal training/protocol in these events Harry is likely using the hands to convey signals and help her out. I think they communicate to one another with their hand-holding. The Queen used her handbag, I think they use their hands. William and Kate must do something too.



Although, primarily, they are all about the optics. There are many ways of communicating without hand-holding. 

Hand-holding at formal public engagements is a sign of immaturity, co-dependancy and exclusion (of everyone else - which is why you do NOT do it). 

I see the hand-holding as a priority state of 'our truth'. WE ARE IN LOVE and NOTHING WILL TEAR US APART. It also supposed to signify them as a power couple (she's freaked Harry will take precedence). Again, IMO, they have made a bargain with each other they will never be like Charles and Diana, arguing over popularity and precedence. That's why they do. 

It may well be a tool for communication, but that is a secondary function. 

Interesting, I think they have been instructed on this: 









						HOW PUBLIC DISPLAYS OF AFFECTION (PDA) CAN HELP YOU
					

How Power Couples Grow Their Following: Public Display of Affection (PDA) is when a couple publicly kisses, hugs, or shows any sign of physical touch to an uncomfortable amount. This is not the type of PDA you want. Showing off your relationship in a tasteful way will show the world your ability to




					aarondanielfilms.com
				




However, I still believe they are incorrect and their_ advice_ is incorrect. 

PDA in formal settings communicates an immature relationship and an immature view of the public.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand why they keep caving over and over.andover.andover.andover again.


That was my first thought also, but maybe: looking at the huge # of foreign royalty and heads of state who need their egos stroked by at least getting a quick handshake from someone connected to the Queen, they reassessed and decided they indeed need more Royal Family bodies on duty. That goes way beyond the Suckesses, Peter Phillips, Zara and Mike, Beatrice and her elegant husband, Lady Louise, Eugenie and Jack who can hang with their California buddies, Lady Chatto etc.

The other reason for fuller inclusion, maybe, is, speculating, it gives the guests who have links as second cousins once removed, great great granddaughter of, aunt of the husband of etc. a chance that probably doesn't come about too often, to mingle with others of their related bloodline. My mind boggles sometimes when we read about someone and how in some obscure way, to us, they are linked genetically.

Added: Much as I dislike seeing them get exposure, given the Queen's dedication to Family, framing the reception as a Family function makes sense. They are going to be written about whatever happens, at least this removes one possible entry on their Victims List to whine about.


----------



## Chanbal

Cinderlala said:


> I love that David Beckham waited for over 12 hours with everyone else to honor The Queen.  It feels so refreshingly honest to me.
> 
> TW and Scoobs are agitators.  Creating drama creates discussion which gives them both more attention.  That is the only thing that matters to TW.


David Beckham was a great soccer player. Drama is often associate to people that achieved very little in life like the Harkles, allegedly.


----------



## Chanbal

Charles should pay attention to comments like this one imo.


----------



## BlueCherry

bag-mania said:


> Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.


Let’s surmise this appeasement is at the Queens request or it’s KC knowing this is the last time they have to stomach these two. Of course one or both of them will mouth off as soon as they get back, then the RF publicly proved they did all they could. 

All those coming from across the world on Sunday are there solely for the Queen, as family, friends and dignitaries etc. I’m quite sure if they thought being around family was chilly it can only get far, far worse. Not everyone outside Britain is as quintessentially polite as we are


----------



## melissatrv

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I would actually really love the brothers to reconcile


I would also.  But how can you reconcile without trust?  William would be walking on eggshells all the time wondering what Harry plans to include in a tell all or share with MM for her podcast?  Harry broke that trust.  I don't see how he can gain it back.  They may get to a point where they are cordial, but as long as MM is in the picture, I don't see them being as they were before


----------



## KEG66

CobaltBlu said:


> They are making it harder and harder for H&M to sell that they want nothing to do with all the generational pain and being a prisoner in a fishbowl etc. The more those kids participate in this stuff the more ridiculous their interviews seem.
> 
> Let's remember Poor Neglected Harry and Only Child Meghan have left their kids home for quite a while now.... Which was an issue for Harry IIRC.


If it’s true that H&M will be there I wonder if Charles is actually stirring it, this is what you could have had but you threw it back in our faces so bye bye after Monday, enjoy your life overseas. We all know that’s the company TW wants and feels she deserves to be in, but she can’t be bothered by all the other mundane aspects of being a working royal and living in the UK.


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's been already announced that non-working royals won't be present. At this point I believe Scobie puts out this sh*t to force the BRF's hand. Also, he's starting to annoy me. I wonder if _*he sleeps with the pair of shoes that were supposedly stolen from Raptor.*_
> 
> ETA: Harry wasn't even present for all state functions and banquets when he was indeed a working royal. Just sayin'.


You reminded me of…Marla Maples, anyone? Remember, there used to be no name bigger(well, in NY at the least)? I bet no one remembers her…I hope TW will vanish into obscurity just like another DT ex.


----------



## bag-mania

melissatrv said:


> They may get to a point where they are cordial, but as long as MM is in the picture, I don't see them being as they were before


It’s too late no matter what. There’s no excusing Harry’s participation in the public disparaging of his family members. He needs money? Here’s a novel thought, he could get a job, a REAL JOB.


----------



## Lodpah

I wonder if those 2 will be wired? I doubt this will go well with the security of the world leaders. They will catch it if she’s wired. What a spectacle and embarrassment that would be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BittyMonkey

I know Edgar Allen Poe was American and not English, but something something about walling up particularly problematic people in your creepy estate home comes to mind…


----------



## purseinsanity

piperdog said:


> And make sure the Netflix crew has a front row seat for everything.
> 
> I had such high hopes for HMTK with the "Harry and Meghan ... overseas" line, but since then it seems to be nothing but giving in to the tantrums. I have slim hope that I'm wrong and this is just Omid putting crap out there to create pressure for it to come true. *If not, then Charles has nobody but himself to blame for his future headaches and heartaches from these two.*


ITA.  If he's going to keep succumbing to every demand then the BRF deserves whatever Haz and TW dole their way.


----------



## Freak4Coach

Toby93 said:


> Apparently the announcement has changed to "members of the royal family"




It doesn’t say ALL members


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> Harry will be on the phone to his publisher & Netflix the second he lifts off from England selling the stories of TQ funeral.


Absolutely.  He will want to include it in his book.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> this is nice...david beckham stood in line to pay his respects.....guess Victoria couldn't do it in six inch heels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> David Beckham spotted in queue to see Queen's coffin among droves of mourners
> 
> 
> TEARFUL David Beckham has joined thousands of mourners in paying his respects to the Queen. The former England captain, 47, was seen looking emotional as he paused at Elizabeth II’s coffin th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Even if I had the most comfortable shoes on I could not stand in a line for hours on end. My hat is off to all the people who did. I will have to pay my respects from afar.


----------



## calicocat

Imagine TW posing with *****/FLOTUS during the reception for snaps and her 10 versions of the caption for different media outlets


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> I love that David Beckham waited for over 12 hours with everyone else to honor The Queen.  It feels so refreshingly honest to me.
> 
> TW and Scoobs are agitators.  Creating drama creates discussion which gives them both more attention.  That is the only thing that matters to TW.


Unless he says he waited 12 hours, he was given a VIP ticket. Yes, there were VIP tickets for MP's and members of govt.  Can you picture Becks standing on line for 12 hours and the public not hounding him to death for selfies?


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I don't understand why they keep caving over and over.andover.andover.andover again.


To keep the peace, as the Queen would have wanted. Things could be very different two weeks from now.


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> I wonder if those 2 will be wired? I doubt this will go well with the security of the world leaders. They will catch it if she’s wired. What a spectacle and embarrassment that would be.


No way. Too much security. They'd be idiots to even try. I hope Major Johnny is all over them like white on rice.


----------



## RAINDANCE

gracekelly said:


> Unless he says he waited 12 hours, he was given a VIP ticket. Yes, there were VIP tickets for MP's and members of govt.  Can you picture Becks standing on line for 12 hours and the public not hounding him to death for selfies?



Apparently they did and Becks said I'll do photos after I go through, not before. 
He probably needs a bit of good PR at the moment though as he's been getting a lot of critical press recently.


----------



## miss_chiff

gracekelly said:


> Unless he says he waited 12 hours, he was given a VIP ticket. Yes, there were VIP tickets for MP's and members of govt.  Can you picture Becks standing on line for 12 hours and the public not hounding him to death for selfies?











						Fans mob David Beckham in queue to see the Queen lying in state
					

The football star joined the queue about 2am and did not reach the end of the procession until 3.30pm. He wiped a tear from his eye and bowed his head for a solemn moment of silence when he arrived.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

RAINDANCE said:


> Apparently they did and Becks said I'll do photos after I go through, not before.
> He probably needs a bit of good PR at the moment though as he's been getting a lot of critical press recently.


He arrived at 2am so he definitely queued for 12 hours.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Lodpah said:


> Wow! Those two yield so much power over KC. What is going on?





lanasyogamama said:


> This is all going to embolden them to demand more and more, because they keep getting exactly what they want.





bag-mania said:


> Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.



I still believe KC and his family, especially Camilla and Anne and Sophie, have a strategy. They play the long game, and I have said before they have all sat at the foot of the master for decades. As has William. True, they have to cobble it together on the fly, depending on how specific QEII's instructions were. But...  look, in the long run, Harry and Meghan would attract a LOT more attention if they were NOT at the Dinner. At the dinner they can keep an eye on them, you bet Meghan will have a handler nearby. 

Also, after being allowed to wear the uniform, and being included in the events as appropriate, they are effectively being muzzled as to how much they can complain about the RF at this point.  They have done nothing but complain about how they are treated but if you look at the optics now, they have nothing to complain about in regards to how this has played out. Their main commodity has been their victimhood but what can they say now? 

They may be able to salt and pepper themselves back home and talk to the press about private matters, but that will get old and they won't have much in the way of victimhood to sell. 

I have a feeling they are both being managed and the family is working to limit whatever material they can share about their poor treatment.




youngster said:


> I think this is part of the family's plan, saying we bent over backwards to heal the rift. Then when MM/Harry stab them in the back again, they can shrug and say we tried, didn't you all see how hard we tried at the funeral.  Harry is still her grandson too and she loved him so she would want Charles to try, at least during this time.



This.  He could whine about how the Queen would have wanted him there and boo hoo his way through another interview. Not he can't



gracekelly said:


> Unless he says he waited 12 hours, he was given a VIP ticket. Yes, there were VIP tickets for MP's and members of govt.  Can you picture Becks standing on line for 12 hours and the public not hounding him to death for selfies?



He was! He got in line around 2AM. He said it's what his grandfather would have done and that's he did it. He was in the thick of it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

calicocat said:


> Imagine TW posing with *****/FLOTUS during the reception for snaps and her 10 versions of the caption for different media outlets


You mean something like...

TW and XYZ are BFF since forever
TW is leaning on XYZ for comfort because nobody asked her if she's OK
TW and XYZ share similar experiences i.e. feeling like an outsider
TW and XYZ are advocating for grief and bereavement support


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> To keep the peace, as the Queen would have wanted. Things could be very different two weeks from now.


I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Omit is a puppet. He is happy to fulfill that role because he has nothing else.  If he didn't do this, he would be selling mascara at Boots.



He'd be lucky. 

More like selling Botox at a dental implant centre as an add-on


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I'm not holding my breath.



Right. There is just no need to basically offer them the throne just to prove something. They could have been included on a smaller scale and it would still have been too much for a traitorous prince and his z-list wife.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> I still believe KC and his family, especially Camilla and Anne and Sophie, have a strategy. *They play the long game, and I have said before they have all sat at the foot of the master for decades.* As has William. True, they have to cobble it together on the fly, depending on how specific QEII's instructions were. But...  look, in the long run, Harry and Meghan would attract a LOT more attention if they were NOT at the Dinner. At the dinner they can keep an eye on them, you bet Meghan will have a handler nearby.


I truly hope you're right, but this game is taking waaaaaay longer than I thought.  I'm getting bored.  I'm one of those fans, where if my team is playing horrendously and getting crushed, I leave before the fourth quarter.  Easier than dealing with traffic.


----------



## purseinsanity

I'm of the firm belief you don't negotiate with terrorists.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> It's just Harry trying to be as equal as William.  He doesn't want to give up on that because without the status, he is nothing.
> 
> William and Kate were visiting a military base where Commonwealth troops, who are participating in the funeral,   are being housed.  If Harry had been a working Royal, this is exactly the kind of job he would be given to do. Netflix would have salivated over the film footage.   He is probably annoyed that he wasn't asked.  He doesn't even understand that these troops would have no use for him if he showed up right now.



That's the very thing.

Either all media are there or they are not. If Netflix was an official news outlet and not a content creator, it could operate as an independent entity and ask to be present, Harry or no Harry.

A Working Royal can't bring their own (they've been paid for).

A Working Royal can accept state money OR be commercial and work for a company, not both. No half-in, half-out.

A working Royal works for us. Tax payers.

A non-working Royal, actually has to go and find paid employment and be self-sufficient- elsewhere.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I'm of the firm belief you don't negotiate with terrorists.



Exactly, someone who uses your system to gain power, just so they can abolish that system.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't understand what's going on right now. AT ALL. Why don't they send over the Vladimir to Frogmore right now.



Vlad has enough running TPF


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Years ago I read a lengthy article about children with psychopathy and it was the most chilling thing ever. Like, what are you supposed to do? It's your child, but I would absolutely not keep a child in the house who chopped off the family pet's tail, had a secret pet cemetery where they had buried dozens of neighbourhood cats and bunnies they had killed or was caught pushing their toddler sibling into the pool and sitting on a little chair they brought out so they could watch them drown comfortably. Sorry not sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have to google to find out if anyone offers it around here (with around here I mean the next big city). Germans drink coffee as an afternoon snack, not tea (in fact most people who are staunch tea drinkers are more into fruit or herb tea), and a coffee spread is completely different to afternoon tea. At a café you'd order a slice of cake or a pastry, at home depending on what occasion it could go from storebought pastry (now that I write it out, for some reason most people don't make them at home) to a simple homemade cake (think poundcake) or homemade waffles to a whole spread with different buttercream cakes.


Try some of the fancy hotels in Köln or Düsseldorf for a High Tea (I think I remember that you are in NRW?)
I regularly meet with friends for High Tea, and it is such a delight!


----------



## RAINDANCE

It's a long week. And its not over for another 3 days.
Maybe it became apparent that there will be too many guests at the Reception for the Senior BRF personnel. I am hoping plenty of wider family are also invited like the Tindalls, York girls, plus the Kents, Gloucesters and Ogilvys (2 generations)
There must be a ratio of royals to guests for these things and the function is massive.
There are 195 countries in the world and I think only half a dozen are not sending someone; that's an huge number to be entertained and all will want to meet a British Royal. It's going to be hugely demanding and tiring the night before another long and emotionally demanding day.


----------



## Aimee3

Well I sure hope they pat the duo down and X-ray them to make sure they aren’t bringing in recording devices!  I feel sorry for anyone TW will sit next to at that dinner.  Can you imagine having to listen to her word salad and not be able to escape?


----------



## youngster

I think the future depends almost entirely on what Harry says (or does not say) in his upcoming book.  Meghan's podcast, with her little digs is just noise, just more of her usual like that magazine interview.  It does her more long term harm than good as she reveals herself and that person is a self-important bore.

Harry though has a really good writer who is ghostwriting his book.  So, does he still go scorched earth on Charles and Camilla, even after this past week? If he does, he is out.  If he does not, and the book is not cruel, a cautious truce may be achieved, though I don't think anyone in the family will ever trust either of them again.


----------



## Lodpah

RAINDANCE said:


> It's a long week. And its not over for another 3 days.
> Maybe it became apparent that there will be too many guests at the Reception for the Senior BRF personnel. I am hoping plenty of wider family are also invited like the Tindalls, York girls, plus the Kents, Gloucesters and Ogilvys (2 generations)
> There must be a ratio of royals to guests for these things and the function is massive.
> There are 195 countries in the world and I think only half a dozen are not sending someone; that's an huge number to be entertained and all will want to meet a British Royal. It's going to be hugely demanding and tiring the night before another long and emotionally demanding day.


Put her next to the African leaders who she insulted. One on each side.


----------



## DoggieBags

Redbirdhermes said:


> I presume that they needed lots more bodies to help host all those heads of state.


Yes, they may need more bodies so if they bring in the York sisters, Zara Tindall, Peter Phillips and Maybe Lady Sarah Chatto and Viscount Linley, then the argument can be made that they should bring in H&M too. The only problem is while all the others can be counted on to do their jobs and be good hosts, the same cannot be said for TW.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

DoggieBags said:


> Yes, they may need more bodies so if they bring in the York sisters, Zara Tindall, Peter Phillips and Maybe Lady Sarah Chatto and Viscount Linley, then the argument can be made that they should bring in H&M too. The only problem is while all the others can be counted on to do their jobs and be good hosts, the same cannot be said for TW.


Harry is the King's son.  Meghan is his wife.   Charles has a lot on his mind right now so I don't think he is spending nearly as much time as we are worrying about every little possibility.   The easy answer is to give them this chance and expect them to behave.  He'll deal with anything else in the future.


----------



## Helventara

purseinsanity said:


> I truly hope you're right, but this game is taking waaaaaay longer than I thought.  I'm getting bored.  I'm one of those fans, where if my team is playing horrendously and getting crushed, I leave before the fourth quarter.  Easier than dealing with traffic.


I am beginning to feel that my indignation on the BRF's behalf for M&H behaviour are wasted.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

miss_chiff said:


> Fans mob David Beckham in queue to see the Queen lying in state
> 
> 
> The football star joined the queue about 2am and did not reach the end of the procession until 3.30pm. He wiped a tear from his eye and bowed his head for a solemn moment of silence when he arrived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


All power to him!  I like him even more now.  One of my favorite movies is Bend it Like Beckham lol!


----------



## papertiger

Helventara said:


> I am beginning to feel that my indignation on the BRF's behalf for M&H behaviour are wasted.



I think most of us feel that way.


----------



## gracekelly

Redbirdhermes said:


> Harry is the King's son.  Meghan is his wife.   Charles has a lot on his mind right now so I don't think he is spending nearly as much time as we are worrying about every little possibility.   The easy answer is to give them this chance and expect them to behave.  He'll deal with anything else in the future.


She couldn't even act properly at the 70th BD party for KC.  They threw her out.

I certainly can see lots of royals milling about to spread the stardust.  No matter what people say, they are intrigued by members of the Brit Royal family, even the not so important ones.


----------



## Lodpah

Redbirdhermes said:


> Harry is the King's son.  Meghan is his wife.   Charles has a lot on his mind right now so I don't think he is spending nearly as much time as we are worrying about every little possibility.   The easy answer is to give them this chance and expect them to behave.  He'll deal with anything else in the future.


I’m not worrying. David Beckham has showed more respect for the BRF than Harry. I’m just amazed at the two’s continuing lust for stirring trouble. Maybe it’s a good thing KC is busy as it leaves the men in suits to deal with them.


----------



## csshopper

Questions: 

Can she refrain from bulldozing into a group, in order to reach her prey at the center (whoever the power player of the moment is)?

How can she shake hands if she clutching her Handbag's hand?

How many times will she have to use the stroke the back and push movement to make him go in the direction she wants? He always looks like someone awaiting implantation of a wind up key on his back when she does this.

How many times in the length of the event will we see The Claw?

What are the odds her Handbag shows a little gumption and frees himself to be self supporting and independently mobile for at a part of the event?

How long will it take her to zoom in on the B***** for a photo op so she can market herself as a candidate in the future? She must be bereft the O's will not be present.


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> Harry is the King's son.  Meghan is his wife.   Charles has a lot on his mind right now so I don't think he is spending nearly as much time as we are worrying about every little possibility.   The easy answer is to give them this chance and expect them to behave.  He'll deal with anything else in the future.



That's like not worrying about a tooth that needs a filling that will turn in root canal treatment, if not treated then, turning into a tooth extraction to save all the other teeth, maybe even jawbone.

Harry needs dealing with NOW.

Charles should be worrying about the little things, he employs people to help with the big things.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I think most of us feel that way.


I just told the DH that if those kids get those titles, I am out!  Interestingly, he didn't see any problem with them getting the titles.  This is coming from someone staunchly in support of his Irish heritage and no lover of the monarchy, so color me surprised and confuzzled! lol!


----------



## Jayne1

Sharont2305 said:


> He arrived at 2am so he definitely queued for 12 hours.


How does someone, anyone, stand for 12 hours without having to sit down for a bit or go to the bathroom?

Serious question - 12 hours is torture just standing. No?

ETA - I read that 2 celebs well known in the UK just walked right in which the media compared to Beckham who politely waited in line.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I just told the DH that if those kids get those titles, I am out!  Interestingly, he didn't see any problem with them getting the titles.  This is coming from someone staunchly in support of his Irish heritage and no lover of the monarchy, so color me surprised and confuzzled! lol!



You are obviously on the side of justice and reason


----------



## CobaltBlu

Jayne1 said:


> How does someone, anyone, stand for 12 hours without having to sit down for a bit or go to the bathroom?
> 
> Serious question - 12 hours is torture just standing. No?


There are restrooms...I am sure you just ask someone to hold your spot.  
We queued for 7 hours for our first covid vaccine, it was pretty civilized in that way (in Mexico). 
(There were also people selling tamales, which is probably not the case in London.   )









						Details on how and where to join queue to see Queen's coffin
					

Those wanting to see the Queen's coffin could face a five-mile queue and a night spent on the streets. There will be 24-hour facilities open, including toilets and places to buy food




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

Jayne1 said:


> How does someone, anyone, stand for 12 hours without having to sit down for a bit or go to the bathroom?
> 
> Serious question - 12 hours is torture just standing. No?


Apparently it was a wristband system with a number. You could leave the queue for toilet breaks, to get food etc and you rejoin at where you left.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> You are obviously on the side of justice and reason


Yes, I have had to put up with quite a lot ahahahhahahahaha!  He thinks the whole H&M thing has lowered my IQ.


----------



## marietouchet

piperdog said:


> I hope you're right and it will shut down future post-funeral complaining. Unfortunately, this would only work if H&M are held to any kind of standard or expectation of consistency with past statements and actions, which I have no reason to think will occur. Instead, I think they will continue to reap all the benefits of being in the family (e.g., Media coverage, photos, and footage of their participation in the events of these few weeks, faux royal tours, titles to merch for themselves and the kids) WHILE reaping the benefits of their "mistreated, silenced, outsider status" especially their potentially fictional 'tell-alls' about the family including tons of new material the Queen's funeral events.
> 
> The real generational trauma here is what Charles has created by allowing Harry to become another Andrew and inflict himself (and his wife) on the rest of the family.
> 
> Again, I REALLLLLY hope I'm wrong about all of this.


Breathe deep with me .... I hope all will be revealed after the funeral - they can send home H&MM and take their time ...
But now, it is all about showing respect for the Queen, and compromises are required so that the ceremonies are not compromised - to coin a pun
Meanwhile, I dont doubt that H&MM will be kept on a short leash outside of Frogmore Cottage - Major Johnny will be there for the crown


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> There are restrooms...I am sure you just ask someone to hold your spot.
> We queued for 7 hours for our first covid vaccine, it was pretty civilized in that way (in Mexico).
> (There were also people selling tamales, which is probably not the case in London.   )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Details on how and where to join queue to see Queen's coffin
> 
> 
> Those wanting to see the Queen's coffin could face a five-mile queue and a night spent on the streets. There will be 24-hour facilities open, including toilets and places to buy food
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Were margaritas available?


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Breathe deep with me .... I hope all will be revealed after the funeral - they can send home H&MM and take their time ...
> But now, it is all about showing respect for the Queen, and compromises are required so that the ceremonies are not compromised - to coin a pun
> I dont doubt that H&MM will be kept on a short leash outside of Frogmore Cottage - Major Johnny will be there for the crown


I had no idea that we would see as much of Major Johnny as we have.  Not that I am complaining.  He is a very reassuring presence and a reminder of TQ.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> Were margaritas available?


unfortunately no.  But for some reason we got water bottles from the opposing political party with labels on them that said the vaccine should not be politicized.  LOL. Viva Mèxico!


----------



## papertiger




----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


>



I think we all know he answer without listening.  Merch, merch merch, merch.  Apparently she was merching her shoes during the curtsy.  Sharp eyes spotted the brand logo very clearly when she dipped very low and forward.


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> He was! He got in line around 2AM. He said it's what his grandfather would have done and that's he did it. He was in the thick of it.


That is lovely. I don't know too much about him, but he has always seemed like a decent person. 

Semi related, I have to wonder if KC is thinking that he won't see this kind of outpouring of love and respect when he passes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have my thoughts even without watching.

But also, is he now a royal commentator with secret sources? I thought he analyzed body language.


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> Yes, I have had to put up with quite a lot ahahahhahahahaha!  *He thinks the whole H&M think has lowered my IQ*.


  I feel like they've lowered my IQ!


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> He'd be lucky.
> 
> More like selling Botox at a dental implant centre as an add-on



   Almost spit rose on my keyboard. TGIF!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.


hopefully temporary to get through the funeral


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Vlad has enough running TPF


Have you ever wished you could be a fly on the wall at the Dusil dinner table? "Man, those people on the Meghan and Harry thread!"


----------



## Cinderlala

I hope TW is not included in the State function for visiting dignitaries because she should not be allowed another tiara moment.  She also should not be allowed to mingle with world leaders.  Her world should be limited to things like her latest OYW sorts of events.  (Which exist for nothing.)


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Yes, I have had to put up with quite a lot ahahahhahahahaha!  He thinks the whole H&M thing has lowered my IQ.


Lol, my DH just rolls his eyes when I start to talk about them.  That's why I like it here so much


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> I hope TW is not included in the State function for visiting dignitaries because she should not be allowed another tiara moment.  She also should not be allowed to mingle with world leaders.  Her world should be limited to things like her latest OYW sorts of events.  (Which exist for nothing.)


I read that it is not a tiara event, lounge suits for men and women dressed accordingly. Unless it's changed.


----------



## 880

Toby93 said:


> Lol, my DH just rolls his eyes when I start to talk about them.  That's why I like it here so much


Yes this!


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I think the future depends almost entirely on what Harry says (or does not say) in his upcoming book.  Meghan's podcast, with her little digs is just noise, just more of her usual like that magazine interview.  It does her more long term harm than good as she reveals herself and that person is a self-important bore.
> 
> Harry though has a really good writer who is ghostwriting his book.  So, does he still go scorched earth on Charles and Camilla, even after this past week? If he does, he is out.  If he does not, and the book is not cruel, a cautious truce may be achieved, though I don't think anyone in the family will ever trust either of them again.


I thought J.R. Moehringer quit because he got tired of her interference?


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> I read that it is not a tiara event, lounge suits for men and women dressed accordingly. Unless it's changed.


What a shame!  I was so hoping for a mini break in the sadness for some bling therapy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I read that it is not a tiara event, lounge suits for men and women dressed accordingly. Unless it's changed.



Now that I think of it...mourning attire is not just black outfits but also minimal jewelry which might be why.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I thought J.R. Moehringer quit because he got tired of her interference?



I thought that was just a rumor, that he quit. I'm not sure though.  Someone is ghostwriting it, we know that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> What a shame!  I was so hoping for a mini break in the sadness for some bling therapy.



Queen Marghrete of Denmark just celebrated her Golden Jubilee and there were several very blingy occasions with lots of other European royals.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Now that I think of it...mourning attire is not just black outfits but also minimal jewelry which might be why.


Yes, of course.  Blingy events do not go with mourning.

Edited to add:  At least that ensures the lack of a tiara moment for TW.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Were margaritas available?


Maybe G&T, they were TQs faves I think. 

I had a very HEARTY G&T the evening of her passing, and a "God Save the Queen" shoutout here in Chicagoland.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Have you ever wished you could be a fly on the wall at the Dusil dinner table? "Man, those people on the Meghan and Harry thread!"



As a mod I cannot comment 

All I think is 'keep it on topic guys'


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I thought that was just a rumor, that he quit. I'm not sure though.  Someone is ghostwriting it, we know that.


Who knows what is fact or fiction these days? But the book release has been pushed to early 2023 per Page Six:



> https://pagesix.com/2022/09/14/prin...t-of-respect-for-queen-elizabeth-sources-say/


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> I read that it is not a tiara event, lounge suits for men and women dressed accordingly. Unless it's changed.


I can see JCMH throwing one of his tantrums "but M wants to wear a tiara, Daddy, make it happen!"


----------



## youngster

Why was Harry not at the vigil tonight? Charles (looking good but tired), Anne (looking amazing), Andrew, and Edward (looking really good too) all standing vigil.   I saw everyone but Will/Kate and Harry and his wife.  Will and Kate had an appearance earlier today and did one yesterday too, so I understand them missing this since their children are really young, but why did Harry not attend?  The entire family looked to be there with the exception of the youngest children. Camilla, Sophie, Bea, Eugenie, Zara, Peter, plus the Duke of Kent, and numerous other relatives were all in the balcony area.   

Was this already discussed and I missed it?  Harry didn't want to join the extended family?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

littlemisskeira said:


> I do think the hand holding is some sort of power/control thing for her.



I think they're one another's security blanket.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kemilia said:


> I can see JCMH throwing one of his tantrums "but M wants to wear a tiara, Daddy, make it happen!"



Sorry, the tiaras all need to be polished and this will take a while.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> I can see JCMH throwing one of his tantrums "but M wants to wear a tiara, Daddy, make it happen!"



I don't think now would be a good time for him to play the "What M wants, M gets" card with Dad.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry, the tiaras all need to be polished and this will take a while.



Lose the mobile when on silent  

and just be out (or not) when the call comes through on the landline. 

"Sorry, the King has stepped away from his desk. please try again later."


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry, the tiaras all need to be polished and this will take a while.



yes...

...and the replicas too


----------



## Sina08

Cavalier Girl said:


> I think they're one another's security blanket.


By now it’s become their “thing”, the moment they stop, people would start to speculate. Frankly I don’t care what they’re doing but it sure looks ridiculous. Especially that scene in the church. Gaaaawd. How hard can it be to not hold hands while walking side by side in a row with the family. The optics is awful, throws off the symmetry and all. And that I care about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

I just read in the NY Post online that the duo was uninvited to the Sunday dinner with heads of countries etc. It’s now going to be for “working royals” of which they are not.  I hope this is true!


----------



## scarlet555

Aimee3 said:


> I just read in the NY Post online that the duo was uninvited to the Sunday dinner with heads of countries etc. It’s now going to be for “working royals” of which they are not.  I hope this is true!


As it should be!!
Of course I can hear it- nutty calling people all kinds of racist for this !


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I thought J.R. Moehringer quit because he got tired of her interference?


Do we know if he really quit or was that unsubstantiated gossip?


----------



## Nutashha

I also heard that Meghan was also not invited to see queen for the last time!

https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/meghan-stopped-from-visiting-queen-on-deathbed


----------



## bag-mania

Nutashha said:


> I also heard that Meghan was also not invited to see queen for the last time!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/meghan-stopped-from-visiting-queen-on-deathbed
> 
> View attachment 5611979


That makes sense. At that point the Queen was literally on her deathbed and may possibly have already been gone. Meghan had only been a working royal for 18 months and she was not close to her. Would you want someone you barely knew paraded into your bedroom as you were dying?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> That makes sense. At that point the Queen was literally on her deathbed and may possibly have already been gone. Meghan had only been a working royal for 18 months and she was not close to her. Would you want someone you barely knew paraded into your bedroom as you were dying?


If she had  shown up in Balmoral I do not believe Ann, Charles, Camilla, Sophie, Edward, Andrew and William would have let her into the Queen's bedchamber.


----------



## scarlet555

bag-mania said:


> That makes sense. At that point the Queen was literally on her deathbed and may possibly have already been gone. Meghan had only been a working royal for 18 months and she was not close to her. Would you want someone you barely knew paraded into your bedroom as you were dying?


Not to mention what has transpired since the wonderful Oprah interview.  Why would you invite someone who smeared your legacy and continues to do so?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> That makes sense. At that point the Queen was literally on her deathbed and may possibly have already been gone. Meghan had only been a working royal for 18 months and she was not close to her. Would you want someone you barely knew paraded into your bedroom as you were dying?


Just the thought of it makes me angry. She was a thorn in the Queen's side for two years prior to her death. If TW had a shred of decency she'd have stayed in CA with her children.


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> Why was Harry not at the vigil tonight? Charles (looking good but tired), Anne (looking amazing), Andrew, and Edward (looking really good too) all standing vigil.   I saw everyone but Will/Kate and Harry and his wife.  Will and Kate had an appearance earlier today and did one yesterday too, so I understand them missing this since their children are really young, but why did Harry not attend?  The entire family looked to be there with the exception of the youngest children. Camilla, Sophie, Bea, Eugenie, Zara, Peter, plus the Duke of Kent, and numerous other relatives were all in the balcony area.
> 
> Was this already discussed and I missed it?  Harry didn't want to join the extended family?


Only the Queens 4 children, no grandchildren.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Have you guys seen this? P&PoW and Z-list & Co weren't there?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> sorry, I don't have the patience for a 45 minute video....I tend to agree with this guy but I can't help but feel people like him and Piers Morgan are making a living off the very people they so detest....kind of ironic


Nothing but irony everywhere as Zedzee and Handbag are also making a living off the family they profess to despise and pity. I doubt they get it. Irony and black humour were probably concepts which sailed over her head in her drama classes.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Some call it _manifesting_, others call it “wag the dog”, others “a stirring the pot”, whatever you call it,  it needs to stop.  There is enough misinformation in the world. No one needs this.  Too bad that Hazz and Tw cannot control their mouthpiece.


Ironic too that Handbag is on that Aspen commission against misinformation. I see him, his darling and their plastic journo behaving like Lords of Misrule, promoting chaos and greed.


----------



## tenshix

bag-mania said:


> Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.


I think as a father above all it really shows that KC truly loves his son and wants to make it work. During an especially difficult time I think it’s his wish and also would’ve been HMTQ’s wish to have the family together. HMTQ was always very generous in extending invitations to H&M even when she didn’t need/have to. She was always the bigger person in every sense. I do think KC wants H back. It must be difficult as a parent when you want to have a good relationship with your child but their spouse is holding them back, so I understand KC’s decision to appease during this time to honor HMTQ’s passing with peace in the household.

It’s just my wishful thinking but I hope their family finds healing and I hope H can be a better person after all this drama.


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> Only the Queens 4 children, no grandchildren.



The 4 children held the vigil but the grandchildren and the older great grandchildren were there as well in the balcony area.  However, Harry/MM were the only ones missing, other than Will/Kate who had an engagement earlier today.


----------



## Lodpah

Yahoo has really turned its coat. They used to be so TW rahrah team. What happened? SSuuckd revenge? I do think so. Maybe they didn’t split amicably?









						For Meghan and Harry dinner is served, and on the menu is 'revenge': royal expert
					

Royal expert Neil Sean dishes on the latest gossip involving Harry and Meghan and this time the menu was not exactly as described by some in the media.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Lodpah

youngster said:


> The 4 children held the vigil but the grandchildren and the older great grandchildren were there as well in the balcony area.  However, Harry/MM were the only ones missing, other than Will/Kate who had an engagement earlier today.


They’re on speed dial to fashion houses trying to find a flashing, sparkly gown for the dinner tomorrow?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

EverSoElusive said:


> Have you guys seen this? P&PoW and Z-list & Co weren't there?




Yes, this is what I was referring to in an earlier post.  Will/Kate were not there and neither were Harry/MM.  They were the only grandchildren not present but Will/Kate had an appearance earlier today so I can understand them not being there. I'm wondering why Harry skipped it as it was another photo opportunity for him and TW.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> David Beckham was a great soccer player. Drama is often associate to people that achieved very little in life like the Harkles, allegedly.



Pardon the ignorance but who are Holly and Phil? Children of some VIP?


----------



## Chloe302225

xincinsin said:


> Pardon the ignorance but who are Holly and Phil? Children of some VIP?



They are hosts of a very popular morning show in the UK and presenters to various popular shows among other things.


----------



## plumed

TC1 said:


> Okay..Andrew did "two decades" of service. Well..he was also flying and yachting around the world with a sex trafficking pedophile. I understand Harry is a non-working Royal..but there was a real reason behind Andrew being stripped of patronages..etc.





youngster said:


> Yes, a family member could be asked to step in and represent the Queen but not be considered a senior royal.  The list is actually pretty short and is easier to list who is on it, than list who isn't lol.  Andrew fought a losing battle for years to get Bea and Eugenie on that list.


----------



## rhyvin

I’m hoping that KC is using the change in announcements for the state dinner (working royals... family members) as a sort of feint. If he doesn’t incite arguments about them not coming, he won’t be pressured by the harkles Twitter bots and scabies and we can all be pleasantly surprised when they don’t show up.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Yes, I have had to put up with quite a lot ahahahhahahahaha!  He thinks the whole H&M thing has lowered my IQ.


Same here. I've to wait until I'm alone to watch the BLG's videos.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Who knows what is fact or fiction these days? But the book release has been pushed to early 2023 per Page Six:




He is still trying to decide on the _“truth bombs.”_ In other words, he is not done with the negotiations with his father.  


_*Insiders had already said that the hotly anticipated book was set to be held back until early 2023 as Harry worked out precisely which “truth bombs” he wanted to drop.*_


----------



## Chanbal

Nutashha said:


> I also heard that Meghan was also not invited to see queen for the last time!
> 
> https://www.whysoawesomme.com/post/meghan-stopped-from-visiting-queen-on-deathbed
> 
> View attachment 5611979


TW visiting QE on her deathbed, no one deserves such punishment. She should have also been stopped from attending the funeral imo.


----------



## Chanbal

One more 'truth bomb' for Hazz's book. 



_*The confusion over Harry and Meghan’s invitation points to issues with communication between the Californian-based couple and the Royal Family*, according to the Daily Telegraph.

It follows an apparent U-turn over Harry’s right to wear military uniform despite being a non-working royal.

The Palace is understood to have intervened to allow Harry to wear his regalia to a 15-minute vigil at Westminster Hall today.

Harry had previously said he would wear a morning suit to all the funeral events. _


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

I give BP a pass if there has been the occasional miscommunication with the press or family members.  They are dealing with extraordinary events, that they've had to pull together in a matter of days, involving the family, the government, hundreds of heads-of-state, thousands of guests, and a million or more citizens trying to pay their final respects.

It does not shock me that the one family member that no longer has a UK staff is the one having the mix ups or miscommunication issues.  This is the same staff that left his polo gear behind and had to keep the private jet sitting on the runway while it was fetched.


----------



## AB Negative

The Grandchildren will hold vigil at the Queen's casket on Saturday (US TIME) as the Children of the Queen held it today.  Harry will be allowed to wear his military uniform for it as did Andrew today...per the King.  Someone is trying to repair the rift with Harry...does he have the strength to not allow Meghan to screw it up?


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> The 4 children held the vigil but the grandchildren and the older great grandchildren were there as well in the balcony area.  However, Harry/MM were the only ones missing, other than Will/Kate who had an engagement earlier today.


Sorry, I didn't see there was family in the balcony.


----------



## piperdog

marietouchet said:


> Breathe deep with me .... I hope all will be revealed after the funeral - they can send home H&MM and take their time ...
> But now, it is all about showing respect for the Queen, and compromises are required so that the ceremonies are not compromised - to coin a pun
> Meanwhile, I dont doubt that H&MM will be kept on a short leash outside of Frogmore Cottage - Major Johnny will be there for the crown


Thank you. It's good to be reminded that it's nothing to me, either way. The apparent lack of consequences for H&M's actions offends my sense of fairness. However, I need to remember this is an institution based on primogeniture, women only starting to have the same rights as their male siblings or counterparts, and is supposedly derived from the family's Divine Right to rule. Perhaps my sense of fairness needs some recalibrating and doesn't apply here. 

And that all of this is to honor and remember the remarkable life of an amazing woman.

Also, Major Johnny - yay!


----------



## Mumotons

AMANDA PLATEL: Delaying your book's not enough, Harry... just bin it!
					

AMANDA PLATELL: What a brass neck Prince Harry has to talk about peace when he and Meghan so selfishly shattered Prince Philip's and the Queen's last weeks before Philip died by talking to Oprah.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mumotons

I am beginning to follow the school of thought that information is being dropped to see who is the cause of the leaks


----------



## gracekelly

This dinner confusion makes me think of the usual misdirection that the Harkles employ frequently.Did they tell the media that they would be there thinking that it result in embarrassing KCinto an invitation?  If these two could be put on a space ship and sent to Jupiter, things would be quieter. They continue to  push their agenda at the expense of others. Nothing changes with them.


----------



## jblended

youngster said:


> Yes, this is what I was referring to in an earlier post.  Will/Kate were not there and neither were Harry/MM.  They were the only grandchildren not present but Will/Kate had an appearance earlier today so I can understand them not being there. I'm wondering why Harry skipped it as it was another photo opportunity for him and TW.


The grandchildren are holding a vigil tonight. I would expect Kate and Meg to be on the balcony then, as a show of solidarity with their husbands. 


Mumotons said:


> I am beginning to follow the school of thought that information is being dropped to see who is the cause of the leaks


I hadn't considered this but, I'm liking the idea.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

bag-mania said:


> That makes sense. At that point the Queen was literally on her deathbed and may possibly have already been gone. Meghan had only been a working royal for 18 months and she was not close to her. Would you want someone you barely knew paraded into your bedroom as you were dying?



This reminds me of the last week of my husband's life.  He didn't want to see anyone but direct family.  In his obituary, we specified a private memorial would be held at a later date.  You wouldn't believe the number of people who asked to come, even though it was being held at a private club.  I was shocked.  If you knew it was a private service, why on earth would you attempt to intrude.  I was gobsmacked.  My son and DiL were handling the requests for invites, and whereas I was expecting maybe 60 people, it turned into more than 100.  I had chosen a relatively small room at the club that I'd used before for 50 to 60 people, but no way it could handle more than 100, and it was grossly over-crowded.  There was more than enough food, but not enough places to sit. On the one hand, I was horrified, but I tried to appreciate that he was being honored by so many who knew him. 

Mods, if too off topic, please remove.  It's been a stressful week and brought back too many memories.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> How does someone, anyone, stand for 12 hours without having to sit down for a bit or go to the bathroom?
> *
> Serious question - 12 hours is torture just standing. No?*
> 
> ETA - I read that 2 celebs well known in the UK just walked right in which the media compared to Beckham who politely waited in line.


Forget 12 hours, I was amazed that the Queen's children were standing still for 15 minutes at the Queen's vigil!  Charles and Anne aren't exactly young.  I couldn't do it without shifting a bit (back pain).  Hats off to them!


----------



## Cavalier Girl

youngster said:


> Yes, this is what I was referring to in an earlier post.  Will/Kate were not there and neither were Harry/MM.  They were the only grandchildren not present but Will/Kate had an appearance earlier today so I can understand them not being there. I'm wondering why Harry skipped it as it was another photo opportunity for him and TW.



Harry doesn't consider himself a mere grandson of the Queen, he sees himself as the son of the current King.  He has been over the top with his attention seeking his entire life.


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> As it should be!!
> Of course I can hear it- nutty calling people all kinds of racist for this !


LOL, she'll have to explain why it's racist when many other heads of state that will be there are not white!


----------



## Icyjade

bag-mania said:


> Charles has apparently chosen a strategy of appeasement.



Maybe they are taking the high road… can you imagine the greater backlash the Harkles will face when they continue to attack the family that has shown the world this week how the Harkles were welcomed back despite all they have done?

As opposed to giving the Harkles more reasons to attack the RF if they were completely iced out etc…

It’s like giving them a rope to hang themselves on. If so, I approve.

Anyway it’s only a few more years… once George and his siblings grow up, the two will be irrelevant. If JCMH had stayed, he would have been taken care of just like Andrew. But now… *shrugs*


----------



## gracekelly

Cavalier Girl said:


> Harry doesn't consider himself a mere grandson of the Queen, he sees himself as the son of the current King.  He has been over the top with his attention seeking his entire life.


He considers himself the equal of William. That’s always been the problem.


----------



## bag-mania

Turns out the magazine that is honoring her wasn’t _Vanity Fair_ or _Forbes_, but _Variety _the entertainment magazine. Look who else is an honoree, Oprah!









						Meghan Markle's Variety Cover Held After Queen's Death
					

Meghan Markle was chosen by the magazine as one of their Power of Women honorees




					people.com


----------



## Mumotons

Icyjade said:


> Maybe they are taking the high road… can you imagine the greater backlash the Harkles will face when they continue to attack the family that has shown the world this week how the Harkles were welcomed back despite all they have done?
> 
> As opposed to giving the Harkles more reasons to attack the RF if they were completely iced out etc…
> 
> It’s like giving them a rope to hang themselves on. If so, I approve.
> 
> Anyway it’s only a few more years… once George and his siblings grow up, the two will be irrelevant. If JCMH had stayed, he would have been taken care of just like Andrew. But now… *shrugs*


I agree with this, the RF have been more than obliging, especially considering the mud the harmless have been flinging. 
If they go back to the US and vont their attacks I think the sugars will be the only ones with their eyes still closed.


----------



## Hermes Zen

sdkitty said:


> yes, I wasn't really a fan as I liked Diana but I've had my mind changed hearing how hard-working she has been and how she has a great down-to-earth personality
> 
> also I think Charles went after her more than she did him....so it's not like she aggressively stole someone's husband (I guess - not really sure how it all played out)


I'm the same.  Loved D and really wasn't happy with C but my mind has changed over the years too. When I see Camilla I no longer see flames.  Regarding her, saw a vid today and I'm wondering if she's not doing well.  To me appears to have lost weight and her head was shaking a bit.  Anyone else noticed?  Sorry OT.  To bring it back ... Hope M doesn't give MIL a hard time or stress her more.  YOU KNOW M can and will !


----------



## jblended

Hermes Zen said:


> Regarding her, saw a vid today and I'm wondering if she's not doing well. To me appears to have lost weight and her head was shaking a bit. Anyone else noticed?


Apart from her age, the grief, the constant travel and loooong days this past week, I read yesterday that she broke her toe right before HMQ passed. She is doing all these engagements in heels, standing for hours and greeting the crowds- all on a broken toe. It must be extremely painful!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Turns out the magazine that is honoring her wasn’t _Vanity Fair_ or _Forbes_, but _Variety _the entertainment magazine. Look who else is an honoree, Oprah!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Variety Cover Held After Queen's Death
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was chosen by the magazine as one of their Power of Women honorees
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612078


I'm picturing TW in this group (not sure what Olsen is there for either, TBH), and I realize everything I needed to know in life I learned from Sesame Street:


----------



## charlottawill

Good question....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

LOL I don't think they paid for this Time cover:

"A$$hole of the Year:


----------



## gracekelly

jblended said:


> Apart from her age, the grief, the constant travel and loooong days this past week, I read yesterday that she broke her toe right before HMQ passed. She is doing all these engagements in heels, standing for hours and greeting the crowds- all on a broken toe. It must be extremely painful!


Not meaning to offend, but these folks are over 70. This has been very stressful emotionally and physically. They need a real rest.


----------



## jblended

gracekelly said:


> Not meaning to offend, but these folks are over 70. This has been very stressful emotionally and physically. They need a real rest.


Agreed but, there can't be rest until after the funeral (and even then, it's not much of a rest as HMK starts his daily work).
The haste with all these engagements is necessary so people don't feel a void after HMQ and, critically, this is precisely what will keep the monarchy going. It is bigger than any one person, it is an institution and the process chugs along no matter what. Something TW failed to understand.


----------



## Lodpah

purseinsanity said:


> LOL I don't think they paid for this Time cover:
> 
> "A$$hole of the Year:



Wow! They must have pissed off Sunshine Sachs. Is this a real cover?


----------



## Icyjade

Lodpah said:


> Wow! They must have pissed off Sunshine Sachs. Is this a real cover?


Looks like a photoshop


----------



## Icyjade

Why do I think it’s the couple playing games to be invited to mingle with world leaders?









						Harry and Meghan have been 'uninvited to state reception at Palace'
					

It is thought the couple received an invitation to the event, hosted by King Charles and the Queen Consort, earlier in the week. But they are now unlikely to attend after Palace officials intervened.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




For this, I don’t think there should be any bending over. They are not working royals and this is not a family event.


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Chanbal said:


> One more 'truth bomb' for Hazz's book.
> 
> 
> 
> _*The confusion over Harry and Meghan’s invitation points to issues with communication between the Californian-based couple and the Royal Family*, according to the Daily Telegraph.
> 
> It follows an apparent U-turn over Harry’s right to wear military uniform despite being a non-working royal.
> 
> The Palace is understood to have intervened to allow Harry to wear his regalia to a 15-minute vigil at Westminster Hall today.
> 
> Harry had previously said he would wear a morning suit to all the funeral events. _



One would have to be invited in the first place to be "uninvited".
Also that doesn't make sense, if they were going to attend as part of the royal family...why would they be getting an invite? They would be hosts along aside everyone else in the family?

Like if my parents was throwing a big event.....why would I be getting an invitation? I would just get notified I'd be expected to help out LOL


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo this headline is why H&M are despicable.  The palace has not changed its story. H&M leaked they received an invitation.  Unreal.


Harry and Meghan have been ‘uninvited to state reception at Buckingham Palace on Sunday after officials insisted event was for working royals only'​
*The event will be hosted on Sunday by King Charles and the Queen Consort*
*It is thought the couple recieved an invitation to the event earlier in the week*
*However, Harry and Meghan are unlikely to attend after Palace officials insisted the reception was for working royals only, it is understood*









						Harry and Meghan have been 'uninvited to state reception at Palace'
					

It is thought the couple received an invitation to the event, hosted by King Charles and the Queen Consort, earlier in the week. But they are now unlikely to attend after Palace officials intervened.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> No way. Too much security. They'd be *idiots* to even try. I hope Major Johnny is all over them like white on rice.


Proven and fact


youngster said:


> I think the future depends almost entirely on what Harry says (or does not say) in his upcoming book.  Meghan's podcast, with her little digs is just noise, just more of her usual like that magazine interview.  It does her more long term harm than good as she reveals herself and that person is a self-important bore.
> 
> Harry though has a really good writer who is ghostwriting his book.  So, does he still go scorched earth on Charles and Camilla, even after this past week? If he does, he is out.  If he does not, and the book is not cruel, a cautious truce may be achieved, though I don't think anyone in the family will ever trust either of them again.


I'm betting that Handbag will take the coward's route and rely on innuendo and insinuation to cast accusations at his family.


Lodpah said:


> Put her next to the African leaders who she insulted. One on each side.


   
Her Stans will be simpering that it was the bravest thing she has ever done.


csshopper said:


> Questions:
> 
> Can she refrain from bulldozing into a group, in order to reach her prey at the center (whoever the power player of the moment is)?
> 
> How can she shake hands if she clutching her Handbag's hand?
> 
> How many times will she have to use the stroke the back and push movement to make him go in the direction she wants? He always looks like someone awaiting implantation of a wind up key on his back when she does this.
> 
> How many times in the length of the event will we see The Claw?
> 
> What are the odds her Handbag shows a little gumption and frees himself to be self supporting and independently mobile for at a part of the event?
> 
> How long will it take her to zoom in on the B***** for a photo op so she can market herself as a candidate in the future? She must be bereft the O's will not be present.


I'm waiting for her to do the rubber band hands routine again.


Cinderlala said:


> Yes, of course.  Blingy events do not go with mourning.
> 
> Edited to add:  At least that ensures the lack of a tiara moment for TW.


And avoids her flying off to Cali without returning borrowed bling. Yesterday a pair of shoes, today a handful of diamonds.


bag-mania said:


> That makes sense. At that point the Queen was literally on her deathbed and may possibly have already been gone. Meghan had only been a working royal for 18 months and she was not close to her. *Would you want someone you barely knew paraded into your bedroom as you were dying?*


Probably Zedzee would. She barely knew half the people invited to her wedding. Makes total sense that she would merch a funeral, even her own.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Titles for the dolls


----------



## bellecate

youngster said:


> Yes, this is what I was referring to in an earlier post.  Will/Kate were not there and neither were Harry/MM.  They were the only grandchildren not present but Will/Kate had an appearance earlier today so I can understand them not being there. I'm wondering why Harry skipped it as it was another photo opportunity for him and TW.


Perhaps they thought there wouldn’t be enough photo and ‘merching’ opportunities for them to bother showing up.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Have you guys seen this? P&PoW and Z-list & Co weren't there?




I think if they don't want H&M there, W&K volunteer not to be there either because otherwise H&M have a      and no one what's to deal with their    right now


----------



## jblended

charlottawill said:


> No way. Too much security. They'd be idiots to even try. I hope Major Johnny is all over them like white on rice.


The thing is, H doesn't need to try. He grew up in this world and has a ton of info and insight anyway, he doesn't need to get juicy gossip fodder. She'd be the one trying to record or leak details because his "mundane" of mixing with world leaders is her "OMG I've made it" *moment*.
With the kind of security in that place as these dignitaries gather, nothing will ever be recorded by them. If they are in attendance though, they can say discussions were had...that's the thing. How do you muzzle them and teach them discretion after they've proven it's a concept alien to them?
It actually amazes me that H is so indiscreet now, given a lifetime of training that drums that into you, considering the circles he once moved in.


----------



## papertiger

No new news really, except Lady C has decided M's is to blame for everything






"Titanic", "Humpty Dumpty" and other points and posts on here, I want to know which one of you American ladies wrote the long letter to Lady C (starts around 15:00)?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

jblended said:


> It actually amazes me that H is so indiscreet now, given a lifetime of training that drums that into you, considering the circles he once moved in.


Maintaining good habits takes perseverance. Giving in to corruption is easy. And when his wife and her conniving circle have convinced him that peddling gossip and privileged info brings in money which is his birthright, there's nothing holding him back except conscience and moral backbone, which he seems to have little of.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Only the Queens 4 children, no grandchildren.



Everyone else was there. Not standing vigil, but as onlookers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> No new news really, except Lady C has decided M's is to blame for everything



I mean, she is not totally wrong. That said, I haven't forgiven the leaking of The Queen's death and won't consume.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh...I posted a few Insta posts from my phone very early this morning. Can't see them, so I wonder which wrong thread I posted them to


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh...I posted a few Insta posts from my phone very early this morning.  Can't see them, so I wonder which wrong thread I posted them to


I did earlier today.  I was horrified when I checked the name of the thread and found it to be the “Appreciation” thread.  
I have asked Swanky to delete it.  Eeeegads, it is so easy to stumble in the wrong thread.  Off to do a Wordle to stay sharp.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. This is exhausting.

BTW I was wondering...why would you insist to go to functions you know nobody wants you at? Normal, non-psycho people would just decline (that goes more in her direction, after all he is family though troubled).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh geez. Seems like The Cut is Raptor's new best buddy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Translation: it will be postponed until all that noise from that funeral has died down. No pun intended. But also, how much die she pay for that award?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I did earlier today.  I was horrified when I checked the name of the thread and found it to be the “Appreciation” thread.
> I have asked Swanky to delete it.  Eeeegads, it is so easy to stumble in the wrong thread.  Off to do a Wordle to stay sharp.



Oh my, that's even worse. I reposted them and reported the misplaced ones to be deleted too.


----------



## gelbergirl

Cavalier Girl said:


> Harry doesn't consider himself a mere grandson of the Queen, he sees himself as the son of the current King.  He has been over the top with his attention seeking his entire life.



We need to deep dive into this statement.
Meaning, what did Charles and Diana do to put him on this course.


----------



## RAINDANCE

gelbergirl said:


> We need to deep dive into this statement.
> Meaning, what did Charles and Diana do to put him on this course.


It's bug bear of mine that KC gets heavily criticised for his parenting and absences when the reality is that Diana was the primary caregiver and influence on the boys growing up when they were not away at school. Surely she is equally accountable for any delusions of equality that Harry developed growing up ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> It's bug bear of mine that KC gets heavily criticised for his parenting and absences when the reality is that Diana was the primary caregiver and influence on the boys growing up when they were not away at school. Surely she is equally accountable for any delusions of equality that Harry developed growing up ?



I don't know if any of them is to blame or it's just Harry's delusion (I have a sibling like that...always feels shortchanged and treared unfairly though in fact our parents have given in to their demands and whining all heir life instead of putting up firm boundaries), but if they are I just can't see it being Charles. He grew up in the system, he knew exactly the brothers were not equal and couldn't be either for obvious reasons. 

But also...I really have the impression Harry was pretty ok with his position until he picked up the grifter who was in his ear constantly about how they deserved more and better. Just look at that outrageous wedding that had the same budget as the heir's!


----------



## zinacef

purseinsanity said:


> I'm picturing TW in this group (not sure what Olsen is there for either, TBH), and I realize everything I needed to know in life I learned from Sesame Street:



How can I forget this! Thank you for this post!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know if any of them is to blame or it's just Harry's delusion (I have a sibling like that...always feels shortchanged and treared unfairly though in fact our parents have given in to their demands and whining all heir life instead of putting up firm boundaries), but if they are I just can't see it being Charles. He grew up in the system, he knew exactly the brothers were not equal and couldn't be either for obvious reasons.
> 
> But also...I really have the impression Harry was pretty ok with his position until he picked up the grifter who was in his ear constantly about how they deserved more and better. Just look at that outrageous wedding that had the same budget as the heir's!


On the other hand, there is plenty of recorded evidence that Hazz was indeed a behavior problem - from his early days to his school days to his military days.  So, this is really no surprise. Tw did not convince him to trash his family. He seems to relish being the ‘naughty’ boy and attracting the wrong attention. In the past, he got away with it, the media encouraged it, thrived on his _disrupter_ reputation. Now, it is a different story. It is no longer funny to ruin/spoil a beloved monarch’s funeral.  The world turns its back on that sort of behavior.  Imo it is doubtful he will recover completely from these slings and arrows that he and Tw have thrown. 

Wow - King Charles is shaking hands with the mourners standing in line.  Such a brilliant move!  William is there, too.  Wow!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Translation: it will be postponed until all that noise from that funeral has died down. No pun intended. But also, how much die she pay for that award?



Why the heck are they giving her an award? Best Whining? I never figured out why the NAACP gave her one. Some articles bleated that it was a recognition of Archewell's distinguished public service. Like, huh?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## djfmn

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. This is exhausting.
> 
> BTW I was wondering...why would you insist to go to functions you know nobody wants you at? Normal, non-psycho people would just decline (that goes more in her direction, after all he is family though troubled).



It is my understanding that this event is organized by and all invitations are sent by the British foreign office and is hosted by the royal family. The invitations are not sent by the Royal family. I would guess the Palace office/officials work with the British foreign office on the guest list.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> *I give BP a pass if there has been the occasional miscommunication with the press or family members. * They are dealing with extraordinary events, that they've had to pull together in a matter of days, involving the family, the government, hundreds of heads-of-state, thousands of guests, and a million or more citizens trying to pay their final respects.
> 
> It does not shock me that the one family member that no longer has a UK staff is the one having the mix ups or miscommunication issues.  This is the same staff that left his polo gear behind and had to keep the private jet sitting on the runway while it was fetched.


I wonder if the Harkles' spokesperson, Scobie informed that they were invited to put pressure on the Palace to get them a real invitation. I think TW would approve such tactics.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I find it hard to believe they were invited and then uninvited!  We all know they no longer represent the family officially, this is not a “family” event, they don’t belong.  The drama these two create is astounding!  If they ever want to have a relationship with their family they need to drop the PR zoo and Omid Scoobey Doo too!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> I find it hard to believe they were invited and then uninvited!  We all know they no longer represent the family officially, this is not a “family” event, they don’t belong.  The drama these two create is astounding!  If they ever want to have a relationship with their family they need to drop the PR zoo and Omid Scoobey Doo too!


Rumors, simply rumors, from the perpetual victims.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> He considers himself the equal of William. That’s always been the problem.


He could be equal to William, I'm a strong believer that we all have the right and potential to be equal. However, his petty behavior makes him such a small person.


----------



## BlueCherry

If Meghan had any integrity she would endorse her numerous allegations again the Royal Family by returning home instead of feigning grief and loss whilst staring at every camera. Trying to get the iconic Catherine photo no doubt. 

If she had any self awareness she would return home as it could not be more obvious she is mostly not wanted here. 

If she loves her children surely being with them is more important than being here with a family she disrespects. 

Absolutely nothing is more important to this woman than to incite hate, to cause division, antagonise for attention, humiliate her own husband, bully others, to merchandise anything and everything including the death of our beloved Queen. 

The eyes cannot hide feelings at a time like this and all I see is pure unadulterated grief in the Royal Family’s eyes. But not her, she’s just devoid of empathy. 

I bet she is screaming at Harry right now for everything she’s lost by him wanting out of the Royal Family. 

Oh to be a fly on the wall …


----------



## marietouchet

Mrs.Z said:


> I find it hard to believe they were invited and then uninvited!  We all know they no longer represent the family officially, this is not a “family” event, they don’t belong.  The drama these two create is astounding!  If they ever want to have a relationship with their family they need to drop the PR zoo and Omid Scoobey Doo too!


I am not certain they were ever formally invited, we have only the silly contradictory OS reporting on this


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I give BP a pass if there has been the occasional miscommunication with the press or family members.  They are dealing with extraordinary events, that they've had to pull together in a matter of days, involving the family, the government, hundreds of heads-of-state, thousands of guests, and a million or more citizens trying to pay their final respects.
> 
> It does not shock me that the one family member that no longer has a UK staff is the one having the mix ups or miscommunication issues.  This is the same staff that left his polo gear behind and had to keep the private jet sitting on the runway while it was fetched.


Yes and no one knew SHE would be there


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> He considers himself the equal of William. That’s always been the problem.





Chanbal said:


> He could be equal to William, I'm a strong believer that we all have the right and potential to be equal. However, his petty behavior makes him such a small person.


I think I've read before that Diana wanted to bring Handbag up without him feeling inferior to his brother. And I do feel that W & C included him in their ventures.

My take on the problem: Zedzee gaslighted him into believing that as he was so popular, he surpassed his brother and deserved to have more more more. All the narcs I've worked with believed they were special and deserved more. One bragged incessantly that since he was the top student in elementary school, he should be the MVP in our company. Zedzee and Handbag have MVP delusions, hence the need to buy awards to validate their delusion. Have you seen the PR articles describing her as the star of Suits and a highly sought-after actress? My eyebrow rises.


----------



## marietouchet

AB Negative said:


> The Grandchildren will hold vigil at the Queen's casket on Saturday (US TIME) as the Children of the Queen held it today.  Harry will be allowed to wear his military uniform for it as did Andrew today...per the King.  Someone is trying to repair the rift with Harry...does he have the strength to not allow Meghan to screw it up?


IMHO the vigils had all been worked out ahead of time with the Queen, she gave permission for Andrew’s uniform, and that wish is being respected
As to repair the rift…. I don’t see it yet …. I would not read too much into MM’s frigid limo ride with Sophie, the designated minder. Everyone is on autopilot doing the queen’s last wishes
But lots of extemporizing about HER and the OS reports , to minimize any messes


----------



## sdkitty

AB Negative said:


> The Grandchildren will hold vigil at the Queen's casket on Saturday (US TIME) as the Children of the Queen held it today.  Harry will be allowed to wear his military uniform for it as did Andrew today...per the King.  Someone is trying to repair the rift with Harry...does he have the strength to not allow Meghan to screw it up?


I doubt it.  Even if he has certain feelings when he is around his original family, he lives with her and she is his WIFE


----------



## KEG66

BlueCherry said:


> If Meghan had any integrity she would endorse her numerous allegations again the Royal Family by returning home instead of feigning grief and loss whilst staring at every camera. Trying to get the iconic Catherine photo no doubt.
> 
> If she had any self awareness she would return home as it could not be more obvious she is mostly not wanted here.
> 
> If she loves her children surely being with them is more important than being here with a family she disrespects.
> 
> Absolutely nothing is more important to this woman than to incite hate, to cause division, antagonise for attention, humiliate her own husband, bully others, to merchandise anything and everything including the death of our beloved Queen.
> 
> The eyes cannot hide feelings at a time like this and all I see is pure unadulterated grief in the Royal Family’s eyes. But not her, she’s just devoid of empathy.
> 
> I bet she is screaming at Harry right now for everything she’s lost by him wanting out of the Royal Family.
> 
> Oh to be a fly on the wall …


If everything she claimed was true then she would be a hypocrite but we know she is really a liar. 
I really wish they didn’t have to be here and create so many distractions from the mourning of our beloved Queen.
They can’t go back to the USA soon enough imo


----------



## marietouchet

djfmn said:


> It is my understanding that this event is organized by and all invitations are sent by the British foreign office and is hosted by the royal family. The invitations are not sent by the Royal family. I would guess the Palace office/officials work with the British foreign office on the guest list.


There is an opportunity to see Joe and Jill B, MM would never pass that up, MM would leave before having to greet the delegation from New Zealand


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I did earlier today.  I was horrified when I checked the name of the thread and found it to be the “Appreciation” thread.
> I have asked Swanky to delete it.  Eeeegads, it is so easy to stumble in the wrong thread.  Off to do a Wordle to stay sharp.


They won’t thank you for that over there.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Harry as the ONLY spare had a very important role to fill.  Charles is lucky that he had four siblings.  The loss of one as a working royal due to disgrace has less of an impact as the loss of Harry to William. 

Some have speculated that Harry could have played Anne’s role of accompanying the coffin when Charles dies.  I imagine that role will now fall to Camilla, if she outlives Charles.  If not, possibly one of Charles’ siblings or a cousin of William.   If old enough, possibly a Cambridge kid.  It’s sad that it is no longer the immediate thought that it would definitely be Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

As to book revisions … golly that is a tough one 
They took too much money for them to walk away, book unpublished, publisher might sue, and ghostwriter has to be paid his supposed fee of $1M
And as to KC paying to squelch the book, BIG a ticket item , a lot of money , OK a someone paid the settlement fro Andrew 
But the difference is that A’s lawsuit is probably a one time deal , over and done 
Whereas the threat of a book can come back time and again like blackmail , there is always one more interview


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> He could be equal to William, I'm a strong believer that we all have the right and potential to be equal. However, his petty behavior makes him such a small person.


He couldn’t lick Williams boots period !!!!


----------



## bag-mania

BlueCherry said:


> *If Meghan had any integrity she would endorse her numerous allegations again the Royal Family by returning home instead of feigning grief and loss whilst staring at every camera. Trying to get the iconic Catherine photo no doubt.*
> 
> If she had any self awareness she would return home as it could not be more obvious she is mostly not wanted here.
> 
> If she loves her children surely being with them is more important than being here with a family she disrespects.
> 
> Absolutely nothing is more important to this woman than to incite hate, to cause division, antagonise for attention, humiliate her own husband, bully others, to merchandise anything and everything including the death of our beloved Queen.
> 
> The eyes cannot hide feelings at a time like this and all I see is pure unadulterated grief in the Royal Family’s eyes. But not her, she’s just devoid of empathy.
> 
> I bet she is screaming at Harry right now for everything she’s lost by him wanting out of the Royal Family.
> 
> Oh to be a fly on the wall …


She would never do that because this way if the family does anything which is not to her liking she can cry victim, which is what she does best. Imagine the podcasts where she could slip in how sad she was that she tried to reach out with an olive branch and she was slighted in some way.


----------



## BlueCherry

KEG66 said:


> If everything she claimed was true then she would be a hypocrite but we know she is really a liar.
> I really wish they didn’t have to be here and create so many distractions from the mourning of our beloved Queen.
> They can’t go back to the USA soon enough imo


I was chatting with my Mum today, she’s 90 and was chatting about seeing the Queen ascend and her coronation. She mentioned those memorial pull outs that come with Sunday newspapers. I asked if she wanted one and she said she would but not if it had Meghan in it. So sad. 

My Mum is a devout Catholic and always admired the Queens Christian faith. She’s also called Elizabeth , prays for all people and has immense pity for people who are only hurting themselves, like Meghan. Me, no chance


----------



## Toby93

BlueCherry said:


> If Meghan had any integrity she would endorse her numerous allegations again the Royal Family by returning home instead of feigning grief and loss whilst staring at every camera. Trying to get the iconic Catherine photo no doubt.
> 
> If she had any self awareness she would return home as it could not be more obvious she is mostly not wanted here.
> 
> If she loves her children surely being with them is more important than being here with a family she disrespects.
> 
> _*Absolutely nothing is more important to this woman than to incite hate, to cause division, antagonise for attention,*_ humiliate her own husband, bully others, to merchandise anything and everything including the death of our beloved Queen.
> 
> The eyes cannot hide feelings at a time like this and all I see is pure unadulterated grief in the Royal Family’s eyes. But not her, she’s just devoid of empathy.
> 
> I bet she is screaming at Harry right now for everything she’s lost by him wanting out of the Royal Family.
> 
> Oh to be a fly on the wall …


While I believe this is all true, I think it is mostly the almighty dollar, and the weirdly odd need to outdo the Princess of Wales.  She thinks she is achieving this by playing the victim in her interviews.  I believe that quite like Fergie, she soon found out that by marrying someone who is not the heir to the throne, the financial compensation is much less. 

I think that her thought process in stalking a prince was she would have access to unlimited funds and instant super celebrity.  When she found out that there was a limit on how much money and jewels she could actually have, and that she would have to visit nursing homes, and public schools and a lot of decidedly unglamorous events, she started to whisper in Hazz's ear about how they were superstars and could make a fortune with their titles in the US.  

I never did believe the nonsense about wanting to live in Canada as it was just too boring and NOT Hollywood (I live in Canada).  California was always the end game with her and I doubt it took much convincing as his beloved mother had mused about doing the same thing.  Diana would never have left her boys and moved to the US, although it was good PR to use against the BRF at the time.  The Queen would never have let the future heir to the throne live outside the UK and Diana knew that. 

 TW thought she had the same ammunition and popularity as Diana and was stunned when the Queen said "so long, and don't let the door hit your a$$ on the way out" ( I am paraphrasing).  She forgot she was married to #6 and not #1. 

This is when they (she) launched their vicious attack as a vindictive and nasty payback to the BRF.  We are now seeing in real time that the titles and the LoS matter a LOT in the day to day lives of the royals and she was never going to be anything more than the wife of a grandson of the Queen.  

 Now that Charles is King, it will be interesting to see if their attitude changes and they try to ingratiate themselves back into the fold.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh geez. Seems like The Cut is Raptor's new best buddy.



at least they called her by her name - rather than the title she so loves to use


----------



## jblended

Watching the Edward/Sophie walkabout and Edward was quite disengaged as compared to previous ones he has done, and particularly when compared to the one with KC and PoW earlier today. It dawned on me that he's not being cold, he's _exhausted_!
Then I realized what a void H has left. It's the first time I have felt he actually was needed since he left (but unfortunately cannot be called upon to assist).
This would have been one of his duties at this time had they not decided to walk away. He could have lightened the load on the family _significantly_ by doing walkabouts with M, giving his uncles/aunt more time to process their grief and rest in between engagements.
He must see that, too. He must be feeling it now.

Also, BP's PR machine is unrivaled. Whomever is behind these walkabouts is really clever as it's creating precisely the good will KC needs. It's effortlessly done, unlike the bizarre claims and backtracking happening with Scooby doo!


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm sure this photo is haunting Frogmore Cottage right now.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> This dinner confusion makes me think of the usual misdirection that the Harkles employ frequently.Did they tell the media that they would be there thinking that it result in embarrassing KCinto an invitation?  I*f these two could be put on a space ship and sent to Jupiter, things would be quieter.* They continue to  push their agenda at the expense of others. Nothing changes with them.


Send him anywhere but Jupiter, the planet of kings. Send him to Rahu instead since they both seem to live in Lalaland anyway.

According to Hindu astrology,* Rahu* is the head of a devil, who is known as an imaginary planet, but able to give effects according to the position in the horoscope. The Rahu has a good influence upon the Gemini and bad impact on Sagittarius. It is considered the darkest, most cruel and servant of Saturn.


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> *I never did believe the nonsense about wanting to live in Canada as it was just too boring and NOT* *Hollywood* (I live in Canada). California was always the end game with her and I doubt it took much convincing as his beloved mother had mused about doing the same thing. Diana would never have left her boys and moved to the US, although it was good PR to use against the BRF at the time. The Queen would never have let the future heir to the throne live outside the UK and Diana knew that.



If you look back thousands of pages in this thread, there were quite a few posters like you who called the move to Hollywood back in late 2018 and 2019, correctly seeing that she was working towards going back to L.A. and Hollywood with Harry.  I didn't believe this at the time, I really didn't and I posted as such. I couldn't imagine a prince of the UK would decide to pull up and move to L.A., and I'm L.A. born and raised though I don't live there now. I should have factored that she was a typical Hollywood actor.  There are so many of them and they are ruthless when working towards their definition of success.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I find it hard to believe they were invited and then uninvited!  We all know they no longer represent the family officially, this is not a “family” event, they don’t belong.  The drama these two create is astounding!  If they ever want to have a relationship with their family they need to drop the PR zoo and Omid Scoobey Doo too!



Right. I find it completely unbelievable they were actively uninvited to anything unless they were caught filming inside Charles' bedroom or something.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> He could be equal to William, I'm a strong believer that we all have the right and potential to be equal. However, his petty behavior makes him such a small person.


What I meant was that he was never going to King or Prince of Wales. Those two positions  put one in a different category   Harry could have done other things, but that takes effort and he doesn’t want to do  the work you have to put in.   He couldn’t even stick with the military.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He could be equal to William, I'm a strong believer that we all have the right and potential to be equal. However, his petty behavior makes him such a small person.



When we say he can't be equal to William we mean their position within The Firm. He will never be king however his potential. Likewise, I will never be equal to my boss because he owns the company and I don't.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> Absolutely nothing is more important to this woman than to incite hate, to cause division, antagonise for attention, humiliate her own husband, bully others, to merchandise anything and everything including the death of our beloved Queen.



This sounds so harsh but you are so right. She's a human wrecking ball.


----------



## Sharont2305

Why isn't anyone (scooby and the sugars) complaining that H&M aren't at this afternoons event at BP? Is it because the guest list isn't as marketable as tomorrow evenings? I think I've answered my own question tbh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Turns out the magazine that is honoring her wasn’t _Vanity Fair_ or _Forbes_, but _Variety _the entertainment magazine. Look who else is an honoree, Oprah!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Variety Cover Held After Queen's Death
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was chosen by the magazine as one of their Power of Women honorees
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612078


Previously arranged by Sunshine Sachs who may not be her PR company anymore?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Send him anywhere but Jupiter, the planet of kings. Send him to Rahu instead since they both seem to live in Lalaland anyway.
> 
> According to Hindu astrology,* Rahu* is the head of a devil, who is known as an imaginary planet, but able to give effects according to the position in the horoscope. The Rahu has a good influence upon the Gemini and bad impact on Sagittarius. It is considered the darkest, most cruel and servant of Saturn.



Uh, I'm a Gemini. If they are spoiling my good luck that the cruel, dark devil's head brings upon me (how though? That sounds counterintuitive) then I don't want them.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> No new news really, except Lady C has decided M's is to blame for everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> "Titanic", "Humpty Dumpty" *and other points and posts on here, I want to know which one of you American ladies wrote the long letter to Lady C (starts around 15:00)?



Is Lady C a stalker here?!!?  We know BLG is!


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> No new news really, except Lady C has decided M's is to blame for everything
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Titanic", "Humpty Dumpty" and other points and posts on here, I want to know which one of you American ladies wrote the long letter to Lady C (starts around 15:00)?



I don't understand why everyone blames Meg for everything.  They're a team.  If someone doesn't want Meg there, then don't invite Harry either, son of the king or not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> Why isn't anyone (scooby and the sugars) complaining that H&M aren't at this afternoons event at BP? Is it because the guest list isn't as marketable as tomorrow evenings? I think I've answered my own question tbh.


Hazzi is running around London trying to find a tailor for his uniform.  Then, he needs his sleep. Standing for 15 mins will exhaust him.


----------



## lallybelle

The thing is Harry was very popular. He was the "lovable scamp" to William's "serious future heir". They were always so good together at events/appearances and I believe THAT Harry would have been a great help to The RF for it's future.

The thing with MM is, I believe she thought it was the ticket to everlasting cash and celebrity. She found out that being a senior working royal was not all glitz & tiara's. That real royalty wasn't the same as Hollywood royalty. From almost the beginning she showed no respect for tradition and protocol. She thought she now ran the show. She thought wrong...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Is Lady C a stalker here?!!?  We know BLG is!



Hi BLG and Lady C, please wave to us in your next video.


----------



## xincinsin

Has this been posted yet? Howlingly funny.


----------



## purseinsanity

gelbergirl said:


> We need to deep dive into this statement.
> Meaning, what did Charles and Diana do to put him on this course.





RAINDANCE said:


> It's bug bear of mine that KC gets heavily criticised for his parenting and absences when the reality is that Diana was the primary caregiver and influence on the boys growing up when they were not away at school. Surely she is equally accountable for any delusions of equality that Harry developed growing up ?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know if any of them is to blame or it's just Harry's delusion (I have a sibling like that...always feels shortchanged and treated unfairly though in fact our parents have given in to their demands and whining all heir life instead of putting up firm boundaries), but if they are I just can't see it being Charles. He grew up in the system, he knew exactly the brothers were not equal and couldn't be either for obvious reasons.
> 
> But also...I really have the impression Harry was pretty ok with his position until he picked up the grifter who was in his ear constantly about how they deserved more and better. Just look at that outrageous wedding that had the same budget as the heir's!


I agree, not sure if you can blame the parents 100%, especially when there were nannies and educators involved.  It might not be anyone else's fault.  Some people are just "bad eggs".  DH and his older brother are both very hard working, loyal, and will help family and friends out almost to a fault.  The same two parents raised his older sister and she is anything but.  She's entitled and lazy and would probably sell my children for her benefit if she could.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lallybelle said:


> The thing is Harry was very popular. He was the "lovable scamp" to William's "serious future heir". They were always so good together at events/appearances and I believe THAT Harry would have been a great help to The RF for it's future.



This.



lallybelle said:


> The thing with MM is, I believe she thought it was the ticket to everlasting cash and celebrity. She found out that being a senior working royal was not all glitz & tiara's. That real royalty wasn't the same as Hollywood royalty. From almost the beginning she showed no respect for tradition and protocol. She thought she now ran the show. She thought wrong...



I'm sure she found out quickly that for such rich, important people they live rather modestly. I know that sounds silly seeing The Waleses' appartment has 24 rooms or something and Charles owned five or six homes, but you don't see private Kate in outrageously expensive designer clothes or flashy jewelry. I love all things food and watch a lot of foreign programs on Youtube including one about royal chefs. I was so surprised how...simple their meals are even for occasions. One chef recreated a main dish that was part of a birthday party menu for Charles...honestly, I cook more elaborately on any given Sunday.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Has this been posted yet? Howlingly funny.




I didn't post it because it annoys me to no end. How sloppy can you do your freaking work.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> *Why the heck are they giving her an award?* Best Whining? *I never figured out why the NAACP gave her one.* Some articles bleated that it was a recognition of Archewell's distinguished public service. Like, huh?


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *He could be equal to William*, I'm a strong believer that we all have the right and potential to be equal. However, his petty behavior makes him such a small person.


I think poster meant he'll never be equal to William in the line of succession.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if the Harkles' spokesperson, Scobie informed that they were invited to put pressure on the Palace to get them a real invitation. I think TW would approve such tactics.


It's just a deja vu of "The Duke and Duchess are going to Balmoral to be with the Queen right now!"..............


............."Oh oooops, sorry, not TW.  Just the ManChild, she's banned."


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I don't understand why everyone blames Meg for everything.  They're a team.  If someone doesn't want Meg there, then don't invite Harry either, son of the king or not.


maybe because a lot of people think she is the dominant one in the relationship...but I get what you're saying - he is a grown man (at least in terms of his age)

Edit to say - are they a team?  or is she the boss?  IDK but since he acts like a petulant boy and she looks like a dominatrix


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh, I'm a Gemini. If they are spoiling my good luck that the cruel, dark devil's head brings upon me (how though? That sounds counterintuitive) then I don't want them.



Same here (Gemini) I want noting to do with them!


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure she found out quickly that for such rich, important people they live rather modestly. I know that sounds silly seeing The Waleses' appartment has 24 rooms or something and Charles owned five or six homes, but you don't see private Kate in outrageously expensive designer clothes or flashy jewelry. I love all things food and watch a lot of foreign programs on Youtube including one about royal chefs. I was so surprised how...simple their meals are even for occasions. One cef recreated a main dish that was part of a birthday party for Charles...honestly, I cook more elaborately on any given Sunday.


This. They are not being photographed out partying every night at the latest in club or restaurant with celebrities, billionaires and the like. The Queen loved being at her country estates with her horses and corgis, which is as far removed from the glamorous Hollywood scene as one could possibly be. So many of the interviews with the queens former bodyguards, and other staff, mention how she loved to go on hikes and have picnics at Balmoral. For a city girl like TW, she was probably horrified at the thought of hiking around in muddy wellingtons


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Good question....



I've read that Diana spoiled him rotten to compensate for him being #2 and we know what #2 stands for in common speak.

Comments about the tweet.
1."Because Diana left discipline up to the nanny and the protection detail. He found Harry's antics cute"
2."She found them cute, not he. When the protection detail officer resigned, he told the incoming officer, "Good luck. You're going to need it."


----------



## gracekelly

I want a vigil consisting of the women who truly supported The Queen. Camilla, Catherine, Sophie and Anne. I feel they deserve equal time. Of course Anne has done this already, but with the other women, it has a different meaning.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I agree, not sure if you can blame the parents 100%, especially when there were nannies and educators involved.  It might not be anyone else's fault.  Some people are just "bad eggs".  DH and his older brother are both very hard working, loyal, and will help family and friends out almost to a fault.  The same two parents raised his older sister and she is anything but.  She's entitled and lazy and would probably sell my children for her benefit if she could.


We all have one in our families. I have two: one of DH's sisters and a SIL who is a basket case. I smile but don't say much to either of them because they twist your words. The SIL begrudged my MIL the nursing assistance she required in the last years of her life, and "fainted in great agony" during the funeral (made a miraculous recovery after she was chaffeured from the cemetery).


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure she found out quickly that for such rich, important people they live rather modestly. I know that sounds silly seeing The Waleses' appartment has 24 rooms or something and Charles owned five or six homes, but you don't see private Kate in outrageously expensive designer clothes or flashy jewelry. I love all things food and watch a lot of foreign programs on Youtube including one about royal chefs. I was so surprised how...simple their meals are even for occasions. One chef recreated a main dish that was part of a birthday party menu for Charles...honestly, I cook more elaborately on any given Sunday.


I was one of those tickled by stories of her breakfast cereal in tupperware and how she shocked a Saudi prince by driving him around one of her estates. She walked her dogs! I can't help but think Zedzee's dogs are for show.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> I don't understand why everyone blames Meg for everything.  They're a team.  If someone doesn't want Meg there, then don't invite Harry either, son of the king or not.


Even if he was brainwashed at the start, he is now a full-fledged co-conspirator. His betrayal hurts his family more.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I was one of those tickled by stories of her breakfast cereal in tupperware and *how she shocked a Saudi prince by driving him around one of her estates*. She walked her dogs! I can't help but think Zedzee's dogs are for show.



Yes! He finally asked her to please stop talking and concentrate on the mud road ahead, fearing for his life   I think it was in Balmoral, and I just love the implication seeing at that time women were banned from driving in Saudi Arabia.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> His betrayal hurts his family more.



Ain't that the truth. My SIL would simply cease to exist for me, but it would hurt me greatly to lose my brother like this.


----------



## TC1

Can't be "uninvited" to something you were never invited to in the first place. Is that why the press is putting that word in quotations?


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure she found out quickly that for such rich, important people they live rather modestly. I know that sounds silly seeing The Waleses' appartment has 24 rooms or something and Charles owned five or six homes, but you don't see private Kate in outrageously expensive designer clothes or flashy jewelry. I love all things food and watch a lot of foreign programs on Youtube including one about royal chefs. I was so surprised how...simple their meals are even for occasions. One chef recreated a main dish that was part of a birthday party menu for Charles...honestly, I cook more elaborately on any given Sunday.


It is quite well known that the royals do not give expensive gifts for Christmas.  I remember reading somewhere   that they give each other gag gifts.  Definitely not what TW was looking forward to


----------



## CobaltBlu

xincinsin said:


> Has this been posted yet? Howlingly funny.



They fixed it finally but the rest of the article is still full of idiotic statements.  They arent going to be giving tiaras away for heavens sake.


----------



## KEG66

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh, I'm a Gemini. If they are spoiling my good luck that the cruel, dark devil's head brings upon me (how though? That sounds counterintuitive) then I don't want them.


I am too, no thanks !!


----------



## xincinsin

TC1 said:


> Can't be "uninvited" to something you were never invited to in the first place. Is that why the press is putting that word in quotations?


Comment on one of the threads:
_The narrative is changing: they THOUGHT that "naturally" they would be invited, but they were not..._
Maybe it should read "Horrid Scabies thought that naturally his goddess would be invited."
I wonder if he gets paid a stipend for being her mouthpiece and public chaos instigator?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> It is quite well known that the royals do not give expensive gifts for Christmas.  I remember reading somewhere   that they give each other gag gifts.  Definitely not what TW was looking forward to



One year Kate gave Harry a "Bake your own girlfriend" giftset


----------



## Aminamina

I mean, how cheap and nasty on a real life scale they act…Imagine if TW and JCMH had a dream being a part of lets say, Soprano family…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I can't help but think Zedzee's dogs are for show.


I wonder more about the Invisikids. She's probably not a hands-on mom at all. She probably just uses them as prop for photos and videos and then pushes them aside.


----------



## charlottawill

lallybelle said:


> The thing is Harry was very popular. He was the "lovable scamp" to William's "serious future heir". They were always so good together at events/appearances and I believe THAT Harry would have been a great help to The RF for it's future.
> 
> The thing with MM is, I believe she thought it was the ticket to everlasting cash and celebrity. She found out that being a senior working royal was not all glitz & tiara's. That real royalty wasn't the same as Hollywood royalty. From almost the beginning she showed no respect for tradition and protocol. She thought she now ran the show. She thought wrong...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *On the other hand, there is plenty of recorded evidence that Hazz was indeed a behavior problem - from his early days* to his school days to his military days.  So, this is really no surprise. Tw did not convince him to trash his family. He seems to relish being the ‘naughty’ boy and attracting the wrong attention. In the past, he got away with it, the media encouraged it, thrived on his _disrupter_ reputation. Now, it is a different story. It is no longer funny to ruin/spoil a beloved monarch’s funeral.  The world turns its back on that sort of behavior.  Imo it is doubtful he will recover completely from these slings and arrows that he and Tw have thrown.
> 
> Wow - King Charles is shaking hands with the mourners standing in line.  Such a brilliant move!  William is there, too.  Wow!


Do we know how many pictures there are of Dufus sticking his tongue out in public while Diana giggles like a schoolgirl just reinforcing that his antics are appropriate. There is at least one vid of Diana on the balcony holding Dufus with his tongue hanging out. She gives him a serious look but makes no attempt to thwart the behaviour. Most normal parents would've quickly but gently covered his mouth while saying, "Not now Dufus!"


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Has this been posted yet? Howlingly funny.



Is Scoobie now writing for Elle?


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Is Scoobie now writing for Elle?


Either Elle got hacked or the writer was drunk. How does the spare's wife even get to be the Queen Consort if not married to the King? That alone is absurd and illogical.


----------



## gelbergirl

Harry just finished standing vigil with his cousins, and brother the POW


----------



## gelbergirl

in his military uniform.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> Is Scoobie now writing for Elle?


His co-author Carolyn Durand has connections with Elle and Oprah.


----------



## djfmn

Does anyone know what the  Blue sash is that Prince William wore and so did King Charles and Princess Anne and Prince Edward during the vigils. I noticed Prince Harry did not have this blue sash.


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> I wonder more about the Invisikids. She's probably not a hands-on mom at all. She probably just uses them as prop for photos and videos and then pushes them aside.


I agree.  I think Harry is definitely interested in the kids, but wasn’t one of the reasons that TW broke up with  Trevor was because he wanted kids and she didn’t?  What changed?  She realized that she really DID want meal tickets (I meant kids) and is now Mother Earth ?


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Either Elle got hacked or the writer was drunk. How does the spare's wife even get to be the Queen Consort if not married to the King? That alone is absurd and illogical.


It was photoshopped.  I saw the real one on another site.  It says Duke of Cambridge and not Sussex.


----------



## marietouchet

gelbergirl said:


> in his military uniform.


Does anyone recognize the uniform ? W and H wore the same

also W and H did not carry swords, yet Anne had them at both vigils , I think I saw empty sword belts / holders ?Not sure how you say it in English , baudrier in French

Significance to the lack of swords ?

finally, clever that … H was positioned at the back of the coffin, he is not in the shot


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> I agree.  I think Harry is definitely interested in the kids, but wasn’t one of the reasons that TW broke up with  Trevor was because he wanted kids and she didn’t?  What changed?  She realized that she really DID want meal tickets (I meant kids) and is now Mother Earth ?


This 100%. There's not a maternal bone in Z-list. She probably didn't want to go through another self-carried pregnancy with Invisibet, gaining weight and dealing with sickness and fatigue, hence the alleged use of moon bumps and surrogate. Also, the whole "we'll only have 2 kids" was likely Z-list's idea alone because she didn't want to start a zoo in her zen McMansion. I bet if it was up to Harry, he would want to have a bunch of kids. Again, this is just my speculation.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Do we know how many pictures there are of Dufus sticking his tongue out in public while Diana giggles like a schoolgirl just reinforcing that his antics are appropriate. There is at least one vid of Diana on the balcony holding Dufus with his tongue hanging out. She gives him a serious look but makes no attempt to thwart the behaviour. Most normal parents would've quickly but gently covered his mouth while saying, "Not now Dufus!"


I think it was a difficult balancing act for C&D. It must be hard to have to explain to your child that simply by accident of birth order they will never have the same status as their sibling, but they should have raised him with the possibility in mind that he could become the heir in the event of an unforeseen tragedy. At the very least they should have impressed upon him that he would someday play an important role as a confidant and advisor to his brother. Which probably would have happened had TW not sold him on the idea that he (they) deserved equal billing.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> How does the spare's wife even get to be the Queen Consort if not married to the King? That alone is absurd and illogical.


Only by way of some imaginary Shakespearean tragedy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

djfmn said:


> Does anyone know what the  Blue sash is that Prince William wore and so did King Charles and Princess Anne and Prince Edward during the vigils. I noticed Prince Harry did not have this blue sash.


 I was going to say that's the one that denotes you're a real royal ie. HRH but I think that it's actually the Order of the Garter.

It's a complex area and other European Royals have their sashes too - Sweden royalty have a light blue sash.

Orders are generally worn with men’s military uniforms or white tie dress code and with women’s gowns and tiaras.


----------



## Icyjade

djfmn said:


> Does anyone know what the  Blue sash is that Prince William wore and so did King Charles and Princess Anne and Prince Edward during the vigils. I noticed Prince Harry did not have this blue sash.


Is it the Order of the Garter?









						Kate Middleton joins royal family for Garter Day service while Prince Andrew attends in private
					

Members of the royal family have stepped out for the Order of the Garter service on Monday, including Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cornwall and Prince William, while Prince Andrew attended the luncheon and investiture in private – see the best photos




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




The way things are, JCMH probably won’t ever get it in his lifetime.


=====

Anyone else planning to wear pearls on Monday? I have a 3 strand I’m not sure I can swing at work but likely will wear at least studs.


----------



## marietouchet

Blue sash worn by William is the Order of the Garter, he has it as well as his aunts and uncles - who had blue sashes during their vigil in London, Harry does not have the order
KC et Al wore green sashes in Scotland for the Scottish Order of the Thistle


----------



## Maggie Muggins

djfmn said:


> Does anyone know what the  Blue sash is that Prince William wore and so did King Charles and Princess Anne and Prince Edward during the vigils. I noticed Prince Harry did not have this blue sash.


I believe it's The Royal Victorian Order  The Insignia attached to the sash defines the status.


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> finally, clever that … H was positioned at the back of the coffin, he is not in the shot


 As was Andrew in both  Edinburg and London.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> I believe it's The Royal Victorian Order  The Insignia attached to the sash defines the status.


Very similar sash for the RVO and Garter, at least for the men, the RVO
ladies have a stripe down the sides of the sash
hard to see in video, but W wears the garter pin not the RVO insignia

Harry has the RVO order, it was the medal worn at his neck when he was in morning dress this week


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> I think it was a difficult balancing act for C&D. It must be hard to have to explain to your child that simply by accident of birth order they will never have the same status as their sibling, but they should have raised him with the possibility in mind that he could become the heir in the event of an unforeseen tragedy. At the very least they should have impressed upon him that he would someday play an important role as a confidant and advisor to his brother. Which probably would have happened had TW not sold him on the idea that he (they) deserved equal billing.


It's too bad that C&D only had the two children.  It would have been easier on William and Hazz if there were 3 or 4, like the Queen.  I think the jealousy would not be a factor if Hazz had been a girl.  Who knows, at this point, he is a grown man as others have said and he needs to grow up


----------



## Mrs.Z

The story begins to unravel…..









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle discovered they were ‘uninvited’ from reception from press
					

“Harry and Meghan actually got the invitation and no-one has actually told them they are uninvited,” a royal source tells us of the royal mix-up.




					pagesix.com
				




and the initial invitation came from their own delusions of grandeur


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. This is exhausting.
> 
> BTW I was wondering...why would you insist to go to functions you know nobody wants you at? *Normal, non-psycho people would just decline *(that goes more in her direction, after all he is family though troubled).




You answered your own question  .  Claw and Haz are NOT normal nor non-psycho. They'd intrude on anything, they might even announce a pregnancy at somebody else's wedding. Oh wait!


----------



## Toby93

Where on earth do they get these "royal commentators"??  I was just watching CNN and one of their experts stated that William was at the front since he was the eldest out of the grandchildren    Um, Peter Phillips and Zara Tindale are both older than William.

Edit:  Another commentator just said they were in order of succession.


----------



## TimeToShop

Having to interact with commoners


----------



## jblended

Toby93 said:


> Where on earth do they get these "royal commentators"??  I was just watching CNN and one of their experts stated that William was at the front since he was the eldest out of the grandchildren    Um, Peter Phillips and Zara Tindale are both older than William.


Someone mistakenly said KC2 (instead of KC3) several times on Sky News today, as well. I think the reporters are as exhausted as the royals at this point, with all the commentating they're doing over all the engagements!


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Does anyone recognize the uniform ? W and H wore the same
> 
> also W and H did not carry swords, yet Anne had them at both vigils , I think I saw empty sword belts / holders ?Not sure how you say it in English , baudrier in French
> 
> Significance to the lack of swords ?
> 
> finally, clever that … H was positioned at the back of the coffin, he is not in the shot



Just catching up so maybe someone has answered. 

H and A are wearing the last uniforms they earned in the forces.

The others are ceremonial and signify patronage


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> Someone mistakenly said KC2 (instead of KC3) several times on Sky News today, as well. I think the reporters are as exhausted as the royals at this point, with all the commentating they're doing over all the engagements!



At least they didn't call him a King Charles spaniel


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> This. They are not being photographed out partying every night at the latest in club or restaurant with celebrities, billionaires and the like. The Queen loved being at her country estates with her horses and corgis, which is as far removed from the glamorous Hollywood scene as one could possibly be. So many of the interviews with the queens former bodyguards, and other staff, mention how she loved to go on hikes and have picnics at Balmoral. For a city girl like TW, she was probably horrified at the thought of hiking around in muddy wellingtons


someone told me she and the family used to have BBQs at Balmoral, that Philip would cook and TQ would clean up?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

RAINDANCE said:


> I was going to say that's the one that denotes you're a real royal ie. HRH but I think that it's actually the Order of the Garter.
> 
> It's a complex area and other European Royals have their sashes too - Sweden royalty have a light blue sash.
> 
> Orders are generally worn with men’s military uniforms or white tie dress code and with women’s gowns and tiaras.



In (Imperial) Russia the sash was part of an Order (award medal)


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> someone told me she and the family used to have BBQs at Balmoral, that Philip would cook and TQ would clean up?


Yes, it's true.


----------



## MiniMabel

Icyjade said:


> Is it the Order of the Garter?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton joins royal family for Garter Day service while Prince Andrew attends in private
> 
> 
> Members of the royal family have stepped out for the Order of the Garter service on Monday, including Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cornwall and Prince William, while Prince Andrew attended the luncheon and investiture in private – see the best photos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The way things are, JCMH probably won’t ever get it in his lifetime.
> 
> 
> =====
> 
> *Anyone else planning to wear pearls on Monday? I have a 3 strand I’m not sure I can swing at work but likely will wear at least studs.*




I don't have any pearls but, although not a drinker, I shall certainly raise a glass in a toast to our Queen Elizabeth II.


----------



## Toby93

Has anyone seen this video?  He really has been brainwashed to believe that TW is exactly like his mother.


----------



## piperdog

jblended said:


> Someone mistakenly said KC2 (instead of KC3) several times on Sky News today, as well. I think the reporters are as exhausted as the royals at this point, with all the commentating they're doing over all the engagements!


What about poor Omid?!  Think of all the work he's been doing being a "royal source", planting stories, complaining that his planted stories don't come true, getting yelled at because this isn't working, and plotting next steps. He must be exhausted. I'm feeling generous, so I'll draft some tweets for him to explain why Meghan wasn't at the grandchildren's vigil today.

So Omid, where was Meghan during the grandchildren's vigil? 

Possible responses:
- Meghan was secretly conferring with and advising the world leaders already in the UK about various global crises. Expect them all to be sorted and fixed by Monday.
-Meghan and Catherine (Meghan calls her 'K') were bonding over mimosas. K got a little tipsy and confessed that she had always wanted Harry and was so disappointed to be stuck with William.
-Meghan was going through the tiaras and jewelry with Angela Kelly. Her new bestie Angie agreed that Meghan should get all of the tiaras because they look best on her, but unfortunately they have to keep a few for Camilla and Kate.
-Meghan was baking olive oil, lemon, and elderflower cakes to be served at the global leaders' event tomorrow. Meghan will actually be hosting the event, which is why there were these silly mix-ups over invitations.
-Meghan was helping Catherine take care of the Cambridge children. They so love their time with Auntie Megs, and Catherine needed parenting advice from Meghan. 
-Meghan and Catherine were out shopping for things to wear the rest of the week. Catherine knows she can never match Meghan's innate poise and signature style, but there may a makeover in the works for the new PoW! 

And finally:
-As the known favorite of the Queen, Meghan didn't want to detract attention from the other, lesser, grandchildren so she kindly stayed away so they could have their 15 minutes to shine.


----------



## bellecate

lallybelle said:


> The thing is Harry was very popular. He was the "lovable scamp" to William's "serious future heir". They were always so good together at events/appearances and I believe THAT Harry would have been a great help to The RF for it's future.
> 
> The thing with MM is, I believe she thought it was the ticket to everlasting cash and celebrity. She found out that being a senior working royal was not all glitz & tiara's. That real royalty wasn't the same as Hollywood royalty. From almost the beginning she showed no respect for tradition and protocol. She thought she now ran the show. She thought wrong...


Exactly this!


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Wow! They must have pissed off Sunshine Sachs. Is this a real cover?


This is what I am thinking.  Aside from late bill payments, It gets to a point where the firm starts to look so bad that the other clients lose confidence.  I think it was an act of self/firm preservation.  Plus having to deal with these personalities.  Maybe they ran out of people willing to handle the account.


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> Can't be "uninvited" to something you were never invited to in the first place. Is that why the press is putting that word in quotations?


Yep.  I said it last night and I still believe there were not invited.


----------



## RAINDANCE

jblended said:


> Someone mistakenly said KC2 (instead of KC3) several times on Sky News today, as well. I think the reporters are as exhausted as the royals at this point, with all the commentating they're doing over all the engagements!


DH and I watched last night's vigil and as he is familiar with Westminster Hall he commented on the plaque in the floor marking the spot where Charles 1 was sentenced to death in 1649.


----------



## xincinsin

piperdog said:


> What about poor Omid?!  Think of all the work he's been doing being a "royal source", planting stories, complaining that his planted stories don't come true, getting yelled at because this isn't working, and plotting next steps. He must be exhausted. I'm feeling generous, so I'll draft some tweets for him to explain why Meghan wasn't at the grandchildren's vigil today.
> 
> So Omid, where was Meghan during the grandchildren's vigil?
> 
> Possible responses:
> - Meghan was secretly conferring with and advising the world leaders already in the UK about various global crises. Expect them all to be sorted and fixed by Monday.
> -Meghan and Catherine (Meghan calls her 'K') were bonding over mimosas. K got a little tipsy and confessed that she had always wanted Harry and was so disappointed to be stuck with William.
> -Meghan was going through the tiaras and jewelry with Angela Kelly. Her new bestie Angie agreed that Meghan should get all of the tiaras because they look best on her, but unfortunately they have to keep a few for Camilla and Kate.
> -Meghan was baking olive oil, lemon, and elderflower cakes to be served at the global leaders' event tomorrow. Meghan will actually be hosting the event, which is why there were these silly mix-ups over invitations.
> -Meghan was helping Catherine take care of the Cambridge children. They so love their time with Auntie Megs, and Catherine needed parenting advice from Meghan.
> -Meghan and Catherine were out shopping for things to wear the rest of the week. Catherine knows she can never match Meghan's innate poise and signature style, but there may a makeover in the works for the new PoW!
> 
> And finally:
> -As the known favorite of the Queen, Meghan didn't want to detract attention from the other, lesser, grandchildren so she kindly stayed away so they could have their 15 minutes to shine.


 
Re the last suggestion: there is a photoshopped pic of TQ as a ghost clutching the hand of her favourite person Zedzee.
Didn't Handbag say the spirit of his mum was with them? Well, he can add another spectre to his tale now.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One year Kate gave Harry a "Bake your own girlfriend" giftset


This makes me sad, he used to have such a good relationship with Catherine.


----------



## CobaltBlu

There are quite a few videos of the kids when they were young, with their mom, and in several I noticed wee William "taking charge" of Harry.  One in particular with a dog -- around 1:40 in this weird video


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and William wore the Blues and Royals uniform according to the BBC.

Harry, at the vigil,  doesn't have a sad face, he has a mad face.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone seen this video?  He really has been brainwashed to believe that TW is exactly like his mother.




I haven't watched yet, but I'm happy to see there's one more person who is positive the suicide shtick was just another part of the manipulation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

piperdog said:


> What about poor Omid?!  Think of all the work he's been doing being a "royal source", planting stories, complaining that his planted stories don't come true, getting yelled at because this isn't working, and plotting next steps. He must be exhausted. I'm feeling generous, so I'll draft some tweets for him to explain why Meghan wasn't at the grandchildren's vigil today.
> 
> So Omid, where was Meghan during the grandchildren's vigil?
> 
> Possible responses:
> - Meghan was secretly conferring with and advising the world leaders already in the UK about various global crises. Expect them all to be sorted and fixed by Monday.
> -Meghan and Catherine (Meghan calls her 'K') were bonding over mimosas. K got a little tipsy and confessed that she had always wanted Harry and was so disappointed to be stuck with William.
> -Meghan was going through the tiaras and jewelry with Angela Kelly. Her new bestie Angie agreed that Meghan should get all of the tiaras because they look best on her, but unfortunately they have to keep a few for Camilla and Kate.
> -Meghan was baking olive oil, lemon, and elderflower cakes to be served at the global leaders' event tomorrow. Meghan will actually be hosting the event, which is why there were these silly mix-ups over invitations.
> -Meghan was helping Catherine take care of the Cambridge children. They so love their time with Auntie Megs, and Catherine needed parenting advice from Meghan.
> -Meghan and Catherine were out shopping for things to wear the rest of the week. Catherine knows she can never match Meghan's innate poise and signature style, but there may a makeover in the works for the new PoW!
> 
> And finally:
> -As the known favorite of the Queen, Meghan didn't want to detract attention from the other, lesser, grandchildren so she kindly stayed away so they could have their 15 minutes to shine.



This is genius, but how sad is it that similar things have already been brought up by lunatic sugars, Omid himself and fawning media outlets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Icyjade said:


> Anyone else planning to wear pearls on Monday? I have a 3 strand I’m not sure I can swing at work but likely will wear at least studs.


I shall unearth mine ... or string something new this weekend.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone seen this video?  He really has been brainwashed to believe that TW is exactly like his mother.




That would be so maudlin, except he seems to be enjoying, relishing every single detail.

It's OK, Harry, no worries. Just give us up, give it all up "this mindset", go live your life without a backward glance.


----------



## elvisfan4life

MiniMabel said:


> I don't have any pearls but, although not a drinker, I shall certainly raise a glass in a toast to our Queen Elizabeth II.


The UK has sold out of Dubbonet so I think we all are too with gin and a slice of lemon and ice cube


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't watched yet, but I'm happy to see there's one more person who is positive the suicide shtick was just another part of the manipulation.



We just had training on this.

If someone says they are going to imminently take their own life, you immediately call the emergency services.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> What I meant was that he was never going to King or Prince of Wales. Those two positions  put one in a different category   Harry could have done other things, but that takes effort and he doesn’t want to do  the work you have to put in.   He couldn’t even stick with the military.


Yes absolutely, he wasn't the first in line to become king or prince of Wales. However, he had/has so many resources available to him to become a useful and fulfilled person. Instead, he chose to be a jealous parasite.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> We just training on this.
> 
> If someone says they are going to imminently take their own life, you immediately call the emergency services.


And not get them ready with waterproof make-up for a night watching Cirque.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> And not get them ready with waterproof make-up for a night watching Cirque.



Either that, or it never happened my dear


----------



## KEG66

gracekelly said:


> Harry and William wore the Blues and Royals uniform according to the BBC.
> 
> Harry, at the vigil,  doesn't have a sad face, he has a mad face.


Yep I agree and said so to my DH, mad not sad.


----------



## bubablu

I've been away, so Kate and Meghan were not present during the grandchildren vigil?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Either that, or it never happened my dear



Third opinion: it absolutely happened, but the smooth talker talked herself out of the situation and bravely accepted the evening's duty.


----------



## lallybelle

bubablu said:


> I've been away, so Kate and Meghan were not present during the grandchildren vigil?


No. Not visible anyway. The only ones I saw were Sophie & Edward. I'm sure they wanted to be there for their kids as they are quite a bit younger than the other grandchildren.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When we say he can't be equal to William we mean their position within The Firm. He will never be king however his potential. Likewise, I will never be equal to my boss because he owns the company and I don't.


I understood that well. Equality is not an easy subject. I value what people do in life with what is available to them. In other words, if you and your boss do your respective jobs well, you are both equally good.


----------



## Cinderlala

Cavalier Girl said:


> This reminds me of the last week of my husband's life.  He didn't want to see anyone but direct family.  In his obituary, we specified a private memorial would be held at a later date.  You wouldn't believe the number of people who asked to come, even though it was being held at a private club.  I was shocked.  If you knew it was a private service, why on earth would you attempt to intrude.  I was gobsmacked.  My son and DiL were handling the requests for invites, and whereas I was expecting maybe 60 people, it turned into more than 100.  I had chosen a relatively small room at the club that I'd used before for 50 to 60 people, but no way it could handle more than 100, and it was grossly over-crowded.  There was more than enough food, but not enough places to sit. On the one hand, I was horrified, but I tried to appreciate that he was being honored by so many who knew him.
> 
> Mods, if too off topic, please remove.  It's been a stressful week and brought back too many memories.


 I'm so sorry @Cavalier Girl ---that must have been so difficult at such a sad time.  It definitely was a testament to how well-respected he was by so many people.  

It's so hard that this week has taken you back to your previous grief.  I hope the craziness here brings you some comfort.  



Toby93 said:


> I agree.  I think Harry is definitely interested in the kids, but wasn’t one of the reasons that TW broke up with  Trevor was because he wanted kids and she didn’t?  What changed?  She realized that she really DID want meal tickets (I meant kids) and is now Mother Earth ?


Don't be crazy, only Royal children are worthy of ZZ.



xincinsin said:


> I shall unearth mine ... or string something new this weekend.


I'm going to wear pearls and a brooch every day.


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> I shall unearth mine ... or string something new this weekend.


I’m traveling but think I’ll go out this afternoon and get myself some to wear. I’ll call them my Queen’s pearls.


----------



## redney

bubablu said:


> I've been away, so Kate and Meghan were not present during the grandchildren vigil?


No spouses of the grandchildren were in attendance. No Kate, Meghan, Mike, Edo, Jack.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I understood that well. Equality is not an easy subject. I value what people do in life with what is available to them. In other words, if you and your boss do your respective jobs well, you are both equally good.



I agree, Harry could have absolutely been a stellar wingman to William. It really is sad to me that things ended up where they are. Can you imagine if he had just married a sane person who soothed his demons instead of feeding them steroids.


----------



## Jayne1

CobaltBlu said:


> There are quite a few videos of the kids when they were young, with their mom, and in several I noticed wee William "taking charge" of Harry.  One in particular with a dog -- around 1:40 in this weird video



Weird is right.  Standing there to be gawked at.

Did you see Diana looking to see if the camera was directly on her and then giving Harry a bigger hug. She looked beautiful in yellow, I must say.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> What I meant was that he was never going to King or Prince of Wales. Those two positions  put one in a different category   Harry could have done other things, but that takes effort and he doesn’t want to do  the work you have to put in.   *He couldn’t even stick with the military.*


Having been in the military, Dufus should understand hierarchy, rank and status like the commanding officer outranks all his subordinates. If someone asked him to compare it to the royal hierarchy, his eyes would probably go blank as he attempts to respond, "Erm, there's Grannie and then there's me. Grannie loves me best. She will make me king some day. She just forgot to tell Papa and Will."


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> There are quite a few videos of the kids when they were young, with their mom, and in several I noticed wee William "taking charge" of Harry.  One in particular with a dog -- around 1:40 in this weird video



I had never seen that video.  I've seen the pics from the press of Diana and the boys, but this looks like an amateur video maybe?


----------



## Handbag1234

lallybelle said:


> No. Not visible anyway. The only ones I saw were Sophie & Edward. I'm sure they wanted to be there for their kids as they are quite a bit younger than the other grandchildren.


I read that there was a no spouse rule for grandchildren vigil. Not sure if true or not. Edward and Sophie were there, as parents.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of brooches, I've wanted one for ages but never found the right one. Then I fell in love! A beautiful jewelry studded little bird (was it Cartier? Might have been VC&A, my brain is a sieve, but apparently they made a whole zoo during the 1950s and 1960s), vintage, and its tail feathers move! 

Yeah. That things costs the equivalent of an apartment.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> I shall unearth mine ... or string something new this weekend.


I only have a single string, but I am going to wear it on Monday.  The funeral starts at 5am my time


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> Harry and William wore the Blues and Royals uniform according to the BBC.
> 
> Harry, at the vigil,  doesn't have a sad face, he has a mad face.


Of course, H is mad.  H is BEHIND/FOLLOWING W and H's MeMe/mommy isn't clenching/squeezing the life out of his hand.  We must remember - he's the only Royal who had to get and turn in a permission slip in order to participate.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> That would be so maudlin, except he seems to be enjoying, relishing every single detail.
> 
> It's OK, Harry, no worries. Just give us up, give it all up "this mindset", go live your life without a backward glance.


We would all be ok if that's what he did.  Move to the US, no problem, make your own money, no problem, stay out of the public eye, no problem.  

What we all have a problem with is the absolute hypocrisy and fraud, and the feeling that we are all being taken for fools.  They have been in the public eye far more since they left the BRF than they ever were before  

Why the need to trash and exploit your family if all you ever wanted was a quiet life away from the press, whom you so clearly identified as the reason you had to leave?


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Oprah, she must be terribly sad… 


_*The absence of reconciliation may come as a disappointment to Winfrey, a friend of the Sussexes,* who said last week she hoped “burying the dead” would be an “opportunity for peacemaking”.

In informed royal circles, the mood music is that peacemaking is impossible while potential bombs such as Harry’s “intimate and heartfelt” memoirs are still to be detonated. If Meghan’s recent interview with an American magazine is anything to go by, the Sussexes have plenty more to say that William and the royal family will not want to hear.

Meghan said that “just by existing”, she and Harry were “upsetting the hierarchy”, and she revealed that the Sussexes were working on a “historical documentary” to “share” their “love story” for Netflix. “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking . . . I have a lot to say until I don’t,” she said._


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Harry and William wore the Blues and Royals uniform according to the BBC.
> 
> Harry, at the vigil,  doesn't have a sad face, he has a mad face.


He’s mad because his hypocrisy is exposed for the whole world to see..  King Charles won.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of brooches, I've wanted one for ages but never found the right one. Then I fell in love! A beautiful jewelry studded little bird (was it Cartier? Might have been VC&A, my brain is a sieve, but apparently they made a whole zoo during the 1950s and 1960s), vintage, and its tail feathers move!
> 
> Yeah. That things costs the equivalent of an apartment.



1950s & '60s VCA 'novelty' animal brooches 

They did them more recently as 'Lucky Animal' brooches. 









						Lucky Animals - Fauna - Van Cleef & Arpels
					

A joyful, benevolent nature takes center stage in the Lucky Animals® collection, which features a cast of endearing animals. From the sky to the earth, they are a playful nod to the Maison's original menagerie – the "la boutique" collection from the 1950s.




					www.vancleefarpels.com


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I only have a single string, but I am going to wear it on Monday.  The funeral starts at 5am my time



I will wear my grandmother's then. Also a single row. Mine are small 1950s single string, but they are natural pearls.


----------



## gracekelly

Going to state the obvious.  Harry and Meg are making the most of this sad occasion to further their PR.  It doesn't matter whether it is good or bad, it is just PR.  

What I really could do without are several things.  Talk about racism and talk about her not be empowered when still with the royal family.  Just watch the people streaming by at Westminster.  Every ethnicity, race and color associated with the UK has made an appearance.  Would this be happening by people, who waited  for 12+ hours to honor a woman, if they believed she was prejudiced or condoned it?  I have always thought that this was the worst thing that could have been thrown at this  particular family.  It was a cheap shot and it has been pulled out yet again.  Meghan, it you want to bash The Queen, King Charles and the Prince and Princess of Wales, you have to do better.  The strive for wealth and status doesn't fool anyone anywhere.  As far as empowerment is concerned, flights to the US and Canada didn't appear to be impeded and that passport and car key were readily available.  Patronages were bestowed that could have provided a platform for your much self vaunted humanitarianism.  Too bad you ran away at the first opportunity and did essentially nothing.


----------



## rose60610

elvisfan4life said:


> The UK has sold out of Dubbonet so I think we all are too with gin and a slice of lemon and ice cube



Thanks for the Dubonnet reminder, I happen to have an unopened bottle which WILL be opened on Monday!  While wearing pearls!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

It's official, but Hazz got the memo late.

"_*Sunshine Sachs telling us "we no longer work" with the exiled royals*…

Before the tip was published on @houseinhabit, Sunshine Sachs' contact details were listed on Meghan's page. RadarOnline.com can report that the firm has been removed. However, as of this post, Sunshine Sachs is still displayed on Harry's page, despite our confirmation that they no longer represent the duo."_









						Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Dump US-Based PR Firm Who Helped Extract Them From British Royals In Wake Of Queen Elizabeth's Death
					

RadarOnline.com has confirmed the unpopular Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry have severed ties with their United States PR firm, Sunshine Sachs.




					radaronline.com


----------



## KEG66

gracekelly said:


> Going to state the obvious.  Harry and Meg are making the most of this sad occasion to further their PR.  It doesn't matter whether it is good or bad, it is just PR.
> 
> What I really could do without are several things.  Talk about racism and talk about her not be empowered when still with the royal family.  Just watch the people streaming by at Westminster.  Every ethnicity, race and color associated with the UK has made an appearance.  Would this be happening by people, who waited  for 12+ hours to honor a woman, if they believed she was prejudiced or condoned it?  I have always thought that this was the worst thing that could have been thrown at this  particular family.  It was a cheap shot and it has been pulled out yet again.  Meghan, it you want to bash The Queen, King Charles and the Prince and Princess of Wales, you have to do better.  The strive for wealth and status doesn't fool anyone anywhere.  As far as empowerment is concerned, flights to the US and Canada didn't appear to be impeded and that passport and car key were readily available.  Patronages were bestowed that could have provided a platform for your much self vaunted humanitarianism.  Too bad you ran away at the first opportunity and did essentially nothing.


THIS, every word !!


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Thanks for the Dubonnet reminder, I happen to have an unopened bottle which WILL be opened on Monday!  While wearing pearls!



No clutching!


----------



## Lounorada

Coconuts40 said:


> I don't know if this video has been posted yet.
> At 20 minutes , The Body Language Guy has an incredible analysis on the video of the girl that hugged MM at the walkabout.  Suggesting MM had an earpiece in her left ear with someone directing her to where the girl was that hugged her.  The girl filming the video was too professional for it to be an amateur filming the hug.  Very compelling and I actually believe he is right!
> This was a total PR stunt!!
> 
> Starts at about 20 minutes



RE: the girl hugging MM


Not sure I believe the part about MM wearing an earpiece, but I _do _believe the part about that girl who hugged her being hired/arranged to do that. It seemed so staged, and that girl did not look sincere. Either she was a paid actress or an attention-seeking wannabe actress trying to go viral.





EverSoElusive said:


> Umm... She donated beanies, brought chips and wrote messages on bananas. Does that count?


I laughed too hard at this







tiktok said:


> Thanks for taking the time to comment despite thinking you'll be persona non grata.
> 
> I would encourage you not to make the mistake of putting everyone on this thread in the same bucket. The fact that some people love MT or write things that could be viewed as racist or any of the things you mentioned doesn't mean every person participating in this thread agrees with everything being said. I myself have cringed many times seeing some things that were written here despite being an active critic of H&M.
> 
> I'm as woke as can be based on some people's definitions and live in one of the wokest places on the planet, AND I think that their hypocritical behavior warrants being called out rather than constantly praised. Both could be true at the same time. Whether MT is better or worse is beside the point, though from what I previously said you can guess what I think about the hierarchy.
> 
> Meghan may have experienced racism at various stages - I'm not denying her experience and I'm not denying some people who criticize her ARE racist; that's pure statistics. That said, she now makes up stuff like the media calling her children the N-word which no one seems to be able to find evidence for. She made accusations about a senior royal asking about Archie's skin color that didn't even jive with Harry's version of events, not to mention couldn't be verified in any way other than the word of people who have been caught in lies MANY times, including in a court of law. So it's hard not to look at what she does as playing the race card - and actively lying about it - for the sake of getting sympathy and advancing her strange vendetta against the royal family. Not to mention the hypocrisy of keeping the title she received from the so-called racist family (with the imperialist roots etc.) and advertising it everywhere she can, when more senior _working_ royals refer to themselves by their given names.
> 
> I do think we got to the unfortunate point where the left-leaning media doesn't dare criticize (or even fact-check) her for fear of being accused of racism. It doesn't mean that the right-wing media has only pure motives when they call her out (we know it doesn't) but unfortunately they're the only ones to do so when it's justified.
> 
> I personally have no rage against her or him - I'm both entertained and saddened by this cultural phenomenon that's a completely empty shell, when it could have been so much more. More than anything H&M symbolize the decline of journalism, the disintegration of the fight for equality into click-bait, and the sad lack of critical thinking of people who believe everything they read without questioning it.


Well said!







Mumotons said:


> View attachment 5611321





OMG 
Scoobie is the human equivalent of a fruit fly. Irritating, pointless, never goes away, hateful. Pathetic excuse for a human.





Sina08 said:


> *Fell asleep while watching this video and had a very unsettling dream involving TW*. I strongly recommend not to watch this stuff before sleep.





I hope you recovered from this awful experience!






Sharont2305 said:


> I hope not...
> 
> View attachment 5611669


'Senior royal family members, _including TW & JCMH_'?






Mumotons said:


> I am beginning to follow the school of thought that information is being dropped to see who is the cause of the leaks





Very plausible!



gracekelly said:


> This dinner confusion makes me think of the usual misdirection that the Harkles employ frequently.Did they tell the media that they would be there thinking that it result in embarrassing KCinto an invitation?  If these two could be put on a space ship and sent to Jupiter, things would be quieter. They continue to  push their agenda at the expense of others. Nothing changes with them.


Agreed. I don't believe that they were invited to begin with, it's _highly _unlikely. They aren't working royals anymore and frankly I think they would be considered a liability to be mingling and talking with politicians and heads-of-state. They aren't to be trusted as they have shown time and time again that their loyalties do not lie with the R family nor do they have any respect for the institution, so besides the fact they are not working royals, they simply do not have the right to be there.




Mrs.Z said:


> I find it hard to believe they were invited and then uninvited!  We all know they no longer represent the family officially, this is not a “family” event, they don’t belong.  The drama these two create is astounding!  If they ever want to have a relationship with their family they need to drop the PR zoo and Omid Scoobey Doo too!





Totally agree.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh geez. Seems like The Cut is Raptor's new best buddy.



Everything, 'The Cut'. We can send you a very detailed list if you'd like, seeing as you can't be arsed to take off those rose-tinted glasses and do some digging or basic research.







xincinsin said:


> Has this been posted yet? Howlingly funny.



Oh nooo!






Chanbal said:


> It's official, but Hazz got the memo late.
> 
> "_*Sunshine Sachs telling us "we no longer work" with the exiled royals*…
> 
> Before the tip was published on @houseinhabit, Sunshine Sachs' contact details were listed on Meghan's page. RadarOnline.com can report that the firm has been removed. However, as of this post, Sunshine Sachs is still displayed on Harry's page, despite our confirmation that they no longer represent the duo."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Dump US-Based PR Firm Who Helped Extract Them From British Royals In Wake Of Queen Elizabeth's Death
> 
> 
> RadarOnline.com has confirmed the unpopular Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry have severed ties with their United States PR firm, Sunshine Sachs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


----------



## VickyB

Maggie Muggins said:


> Do we know how many pictures there are of Dufus sticking his tongue out in public while Diana giggles like a schoolgirl just reinforcing that his antics are appropriate. There is at least one vid of Diana on the balcony holding Dufus with his tongue hanging out. She gives him a serious look but makes no attempt to thwart the behaviour. Most normal parents would've quickly but gently covered his mouth while saying, "Not now Dufus!"


Agree.  Not that long ago, there was a video of charlotte sticking out her tongue right next to Kate and Kate kinda laughed too.  Don’t recall any scolding.  Kate probably saved that for a reasonable discussion in private.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> And not get them ready with waterproof make-up for a night watching Cirque.


I can remember being in high school, and a classmate spoke about taking his own life.  I went to the guidance counselor and he immediately went to this person and made sure he got the help he needed.  He is married with kids today.  Even at 15, I was able to get the help that TW said she couldn't get.


----------



## VickyB

charlottawill said:


> I think it was a difficult balancing act for C&D. It must be hard to have to explain to your child that simply by accident of birth order they will never have the same status as their sibling, but they should have raised him with the possibility in mind that he could become the heir in the event of an unforeseen tragedy. At the very least they should have impressed upon him that he would someday play an important role as a confidant and advisor to his brother. Which probably would have happened had TW not sold him on the idea that he (they) deserved equal billing.


Agree.  Diana would have instilled this in Harry.


----------



## VickyB

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone seen this video?  He really has been brainwashed to believe that TW is exactly like his mother.



He is a total fool and delusional.


----------



## Chanbal

Does Hazz look a bit full of himself here?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Chanbal said:


> It's official, but Hazz got the memo late.
> 
> "_*Sunshine Sachs telling us "we no longer work" with the exiled royals*…
> 
> Before the tip was published on @houseinhabit, Sunshine Sachs' contact details were listed on Meghan's page. RadarOnline.com can report that the firm has been removed. However, as of this post, Sunshine Sachs is still displayed on Harry's page, despite our confirmation that they no longer represent the duo."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Dump US-Based PR Firm Who Helped Extract Them From British Royals In Wake Of Queen Elizabeth's Death
> 
> 
> RadarOnline.com has confirmed the unpopular Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry have severed ties with their United States PR firm, Sunshine Sachs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


That article stated that Kate is slated to get the 110million$ worth of jewels. Which is ridiculous. First of all, her Will is sealed for 90 years. And, the Queen's personal property (jewels, real estate like Balmoral and Sandringham, horses, cash) can only pass tax free from sovereign to sovereign, and what is the Crown's will obviously stay with the Crown. There will be some bequests (tiny tiaras and other baubles) under the £325,000 cap probably but the bulk is sheltered under the sovereign's tax-free status and must go to Charles, and the Crown property stays with the Crown.  So many stupid articles out there. The Queen was not going to drop a huge tax burden on anyone, that's for sure.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> That would be so maudlin, except he seems to be enjoying, relishing every single detail.
> 
> It's OK, Harry, no worries. Just give us up, give it all up "this mindset", go live your life without a backward glance.


I guess we'd all seen this before but I'd forgotten that he included that diana was chased to her death while she was with a man who wasn't white.  really?  I don't see that.  she was followed by the paps all the time.  and her death was due to having a drunk chauffer and no seatbelt.
as far as him saying the family wouldn't help them.  what did they want?  for the family to stop the paps from writing negative things about his WIFE?  if it was to get medical help, they should have been capable of doing that themselves.  they are grown adults - not early 20's as diana was when she married into the family
boo  f-n hoo

and I believe she declined her normal security.  I'm a fan of Diana but Harry's version of this is so slanted


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone seen this video?  He really has been brainwashed to believe that TW is exactly like his mother.



It's too nauseating to finish. A big load worthy of an award!


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz wants to get litigious with Tom Bower, but TW is not in agreement…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Meghan said that “just by existing”, she and Harry were “upsetting the hierarchy”, and she revealed that the Sussexes were working on a “historical documentary” to “share” their “love story” for Netflix. “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking . . . I have a lot to say until I don’t,” she said._



Who's going to tell the poor thing that for the BRF she is mere background noise? She is really fond of herself and her perceived importance, isn't she.

ETA: Harry has been part of that hierarchy all his life. Not only did he not upset it, that hierarchy CANNOT be changed without all kinds of legal hoops, so what is she blabbering on about? She really thinks she could have seduced Charles into making her Princess of Wales or something


----------



## gracekelly

@Lounorada Meghan had a small square box at her waistline under her dress.  If she was wearing an earpiece, this could have been the battery pack.  Nothing she does surprises me and since the rumor is that she told the US media that she was going for a walkabout, it is fair to think that she arranged something to happen during it.  She has had at least two other stage managed fan encounters, so why should this be different?  That 45 min wait was probably her team figuring out how she could still manage to get this done with William and Kate around.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Harry and William wore the Blues and Royals uniform according to the BBC.
> 
> Harry, at the vigil,  doesn't have a sad face, he has a mad face.


seems the mad face is just who he is since he married the WIFE


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I guess we'd all seen this before but I'd forgotten that he included that diana was chased to her death while she was with a man who wasn't white.  really?  I don't see that.  she was followed by the paps all the time.  and her death was due to having a drunk chauffer and no seatbelt.
> as far as him saying the family wouldn't help them.  what did they want?  for the family to stop the paps from writing negative things about his WIFE?  if it was to get medical help, they should have been capable of doing that themselves.  they are grown adults - not early 20's as diana was when she married into the family
> boo  f-n hoo


Exactly!  He has decided to go with "my mother was chased to death for dating a non white", rather the fact that mother was chased whever she went because she courted the press when it was to her advantage, but then couldn't change the rules.  Dodi was not the first POC that Diana had dated, but he was the one she alerted the press about.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's too nauseating to finish. A big load worthy of an award!
> View attachment 5612572


I'm going to take a stab here, not having watched this, and say he has an Oedipus complex.  Is Meg fulfilling his dream?
Oedipus complex, in psychoanalytic theory, *a desire for sexual involvement with the parent of the opposite sex and a concomitant sense of rivalry with the parent of the same sex*;


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> seems the mad face is just who he is since he married the WIFE


I know I wrote mad, but I think pissed off is a better description.


----------



## Hermes Nuttynut

They were invited to the Buckingham Palace reception by mistake.  Then uninvited.  They found out from the press.   










						Meghan and Harry 'found out they'd been
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex found out they were 'uninvited' to a state reception for world leaders and foreign royals by reading press reports, according to royal sources.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Going to state the obvious.  Harry and Meg are making the most of this sad occasion to further their PR.  It doesn't matter whether it is good or bad, it is just PR.
> 
> What I really could do without are several things.  Talk about racism and talk about her not be empowered when still with the royal family.  Just watch the people streaming by at Westminster.  Every ethnicity, race and color associated with the UK has made an appearance.  Would this be happening by people, who waited  for 12+ hours to honor a woman, if they believed she was prejudiced or condoned it?  I have always thought that this was the worst thing that could have been thrown at this  particular family.  It was a cheap shot and it has been pulled out yet again.  Meghan, it you want to bash The Queen, King Charles and the Prince and Princess of Wales, you have to do better.  The strive for wealth and status doesn't fool anyone anywhere.  As far as empowerment is concerned, flights to the US and Canada didn't appear to be impeded and that passport and car key were readily available.  Patronages were bestowed that could have provided a platform for your much self vaunted humanitarianism.  Too bad you ran away at the first opportunity and did essentially nothing.


It has been commented on a lot in the news over the last few days that there are so many people of different nationalities lining up to pay their respects.  You are right, it was such a cheap shot to throw that accusation at the royal family, knowing full well that they would not lower themselves to defend it.  

She tells Oprah that she told the BRF that she had so much experience with public events and they could just tell her what to do, and she would do it.  I believe she said "use me".   I don't believe this for a minute.  I think her thought process all along was to marry Hazz and then high tail it back to Hollywood.  

After reading the Bower book, she was raised in Hwood and to her, that was the pinnacle of success.  No thought about Hazz being raised as a prince of the realm, and brought up to serve the sovereign .  No, it was all about what she wanted, and continues to be so.  She just lucked out by marrying someone so obviously dim and easily brainwashed.  

You wonder how people are gullible enough to join a cult and defend their captors? That's where Hazz is now.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I know I wrote mad, but I think pissed off is a better description.


mad, pissed, pouty, angry....all fit the "adult" Harry


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> That article stated that Kate is slated to get the 110million$ worth of jewels. Which is ridiculous. First of all, her Will is sealed for 90 years. And, the Queen's personal property (jewels, real estate like Balmoral and Sandringham, horses, cash) can only pass tax free from sovereign to sovereign, and what is the Crown's will obviously stay with the Crown. There will be some bequests (tiny tiaras and other baubles) under the £325,000 cap probably but the bulk is sheltered under the sovereign's tax-free status and must go to Charles, and the Crown property stays with the Crown.  So many stupid articles out there. The Queen was not going to drop a huge tax burden on anyone, that's for sure.


Oh wow, I had missed that part of the article. Instead of inheriting QE's jewelry and having a huge tax burden, Kate may have now official access to the majority of the stunning pieces. She is already wearing a beautiful pair of earrings that belonged to QE..

I wonder if QE updated her will, TW will not be pleased with "nothing of value".  

"_*As RadarOnline.com exclusively reported, the Suits actress will likely get "nothing of value" from the Queen's recently updated will after causing a stir among the family with her Oprah Winfrey interview.* We've learned that *Kate Middleton *is expected to inherit the majority of Elizabeth's 300-piece jewelry collection, worth $110 million._"


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I'm going to take a stab here, not having watched this, and say he has an Oedipus complex.  Is Meg fulfilling his dream?
> Oedipus complex, in psychoanalytic theory, *a desire for sexual involvement with the parent of the opposite sex and a concomitant sense of rivalry with the parent of the same sex*;


that's a theory....she dominates him like a mother...but I don't think Diana was that type of mom...more the type who maybe put her kids in the position of protecting her perhaps

Here's another amteur psych theory - He was angry all along about his spare role and the loss of his mother.  He chose to marry a WOC so he could have another thing to be angry about.  
But to go out in public blaming his family for her alleged suffering......then complain they're not giving him enough money...despicable


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> She tells Oprah that she told the BRF that she had so much experience with public events and they could just tell her what to do, and she would do it.  I believe she said "use me".


I do recall her saying this at the engagement interview. I'm not going to watch it as I cannot stand her voice.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I'm going to take a stab here, not having watched this, and say he has an Oedipus complex.  Is Meg fulfilling his dream?
> Oedipus complex, in psychoanalytic theory, *a desire for sexual involvement with the parent of the opposite sex and a concomitant sense of rivalry with the parent of the same sex*;


Yes, I mentioned a while ago that Dufus married his mother. ZedZed is of course a warped version of Diana even though she might have convinced him that she is her exact reincarnation.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh wow, I had missed that part of the article. Instead of inheriting QE's jewelry and having a huge tax burden, Kate may have now official access to the majority of the stunning pieces. She is already wearing a beautiful pair of earrings that belonged to QE..
> 
> I wonder if QE updated her will, TW will not be pleased with "nothing of value".
> 
> "_*As RadarOnline.com exclusively reported, the Suits actress will likely get "nothing of value" from the Queen's recently updated will after causing a stir among the family with her Oprah Winfrey interview.* We've learned that *Kate Middleton *is expected to inherit the majority of Elizabeth's 300-piece jewelry collection, worth $110 million._"


Causing a stir has nothing to do with her not receiving anything. She hasn't been married into the family for that long, and The Queen has a long list of female grands and great grands to leave personal items to.  If TQ was going to leave a ring to Meghan, it would be something appropriate to fit into  Harry's nose.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that's a theory....she dominates him like a mother...but I don't think Diana was that type of mom...more the type who maybe put her kids in the position of protecting her perhaps
> 
> Here's another amteur psych theory - He was angry all along about his spare role and the loss of his mother.  He chose to marry a WOC so he could have another thing to be angry about.
> But to go out in public blaming his family for her alleged suffering......then complain they're not giving him enough money...despicable


Keyword:  Alleged suffering.  Has anyone proven this? 

As far as money is concerned, I am going to quote  shoe designer Beverly Feldman from long ago who used to have this written on the sole of her shoes.  _Too much is never enough._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I do recall her saying this at the engagement interview. I'm not going to watch it as I cannot stand her voice.



No, that was Oprah where she revealed she wrote a dramatic (others would say, not right in the head) letter saying "Use me as you like". Which makes me feel dirty every time I think about it. During the engagement interview the phrase of the day was "Hit the ground running".


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Keyword:  Alleged suffering.  Has anyone proven this?
> 
> As far as money is concerned, I am going to quote  shoe designer Beverly Feldman from long ago who used to have this written on the sole of her shoes.  _Too much is never enough._


I don't believe she wanted to kill herself but I think he might have believed it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Causing a stir has nothing to do with her not receiving anything. She hasn't been married into the family for that long, and The Queen has a long list of female grands and great grands to leave personal items to.  If TQ was going to leave a ring to Meghan, it would be something appropriate to fit into  Harry's nose.



I mean, I wouldn't expect to inherit anything from my husband's grandmother. If something goes to him that's generous. While my grandmother has given me valuable gifts over the years I know for a fact her will includes only her children, and I don't find that unusual or offensive at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't believe she wanted to kill herself but I think he might have believed it



This.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Does Hazz look a bit full of himself here?



Very well practiced.  Zara in heels.  I think I would sway out of line.

No, I didn't think Harry looked smug, just good at being in a procession.


----------



## bag-mania

VickyB said:


> Agree.  Not that long ago, there was a video of charlotte sticking out her tongue right next to Kate and Kate kinda laughed too.  Don’t recall any scolding.  Kate probably saved that for a reasonable discussion in private.


There is a time and place for everything. There was also criticism of Kate when Louis was acting up recently and she didn’t discipline him. It’s silly to judge the mother’s ability based on news footage which probably represents about .001% of her time with her child. Imagine the outrage if Kate (or Diana) had strongly scolded her child while the cameras were running. There would be talk of abuse and cruelty!


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> There is a time and place for everything. There was also criticism of Kate when Louis was acting up recently and she didn’t discipline him. It’s silly to judge the mother’s ability based on news footage which probably represents about .001% of her time with her child. Imagine the outrage if Kate (or Diana) had strongly scolded her child while the cameras were running. There would be talk of abuse and cruelty!


I'm an unabashed fan of Kate.....I think she seems like a wonderful mom.  the kids seem happy and well adjusted


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Very well practiced.  Zara in heels.  I think I would sway out of line.
> 
> No, I didn't think Harry looked smug, just good at being in a procession.



Yeah I didn't see it either, but I've only seen small tidbits so far. Honestly, my feeling is that as soon he's away from her and in the royal fold his lifelong education as a royal just takes over, and he does the right things and acts appropriately.


----------



## DoggieBags

I’m surprised TW wasn’t at the vigil tonight. That would have been a great photo op for her to merch more stuff.


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> I’m surprised TW wasn’t at the vigil tonight. That would have been a great photo op for her to merch more stuff.


Duhhhh …. I bet that was why she was not there


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> I’m surprised TW wasn’t at the vigil tonight. That would have been a great photo op for her to merch more stuff.


Whatever they are doing we will find out about it in due time. Maybe she is cooking Harry a special belated-birthday dinner. It will be something amazing, way better than any ordinary wife could cook.


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I didn't see it either, but I've only seen small tidbits so far. Honestly, my feeling is that as soon he's away from her and in the royal fold his lifelong education as a royal just takes over, and he does the right things and acts appropriately.


Harry has had lifelong exposure to the laws and rules of primogeniture - not just in his own family but also his classmates at Eton and his social circle etc. It’s not a new concept to him - it’s pretty much the norm. Even a thicko like H would have eventually seen the writing on the wall. 

Are the spares envious and disgruntled? Possibly. Should we lowly working stiffs feel sympathy that they may have it harder than the heir? I can’t.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Genie27 said:


> Harry has had lifelong exposure to the laws and rules of primogeniture - not just in his own family but also his classmates at Eton and his social circle etc. It’s not a new concept to him - it’s pretty much the norm. Even a thicko like H would have eventually seen the writing on the wall.
> 
> Are the spares envious and disgruntled? Possibly. Should we lowly working stiffs feel sympathy that they may have it harder than the heir? I can’t.



I mean, his own son is inheriting the dukedom, not his daughter.


----------



## marietouchet

I hope a bit of humor is not out of place, given the subject of the thread is JCMH rather than  the Queen
I feel humor helps me put JCMH in perspective rather than getting angry over that ingrate …

listening to a YouTube video by Babylon Bee - known for irreverent jokes -    Had a piece on the succession … they listed all the usual heirs … then finally got to the end of the queue , saying MM ( who wears the pants in the marriage) comes before Harry or Andrew, the Duke of Epstein


----------



## Maggie Muggins

VickyB said:


> Agree.  Not that long ago, there was a video of charlotte sticking out her tongue right next to Kate and Kate kinda laughed too.  Don’t recall any scolding.  Kate probably saved that for a reasonable discussion in private.


When I was very young, one of my siblings stuck her tongue out at one of us. Mother gave her such a look and told her, "Your tongue is inside your mouth for a reason so leave it there."  I think I used that same look and verbiage with my two sons when they started the sticking-tongue-out insolence.


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who's going to tell the poor thing that for the BRF she is mere background noise? She is really fond of herself and her perceived importance, isn't she.
> 
> ETA: Harry has been part of that hierarchy all his life. Not only did he not upset it, that hierarchy CANNOT be changed without all kinds of legal hoops, so what is she blabbering on about? She really thinks she could have seduced Charles into making her Princess of Wales or something



I wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t think of trying it. Anything to get ahead. She no doubt believes she’s a Hollywood starlet that no man can refuse.


----------



## TimeToShop

I find this very disrespectful to the PoW. They’re just stirring the pot with Harry’s picture.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

I so love this photo of the vigil by QEII’s 8 grandchildren because I can only see 7


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Whatever they are doing we will find out about it in due time. Maybe she is cooking Harry a special belated-birthday dinner. It will be something amazing, way better than any ordinary wife could cook.


I bet she is making an English specialty called Goodducken. 
Gooducken is an English variant of turducken, replacing turkey with goose. The word turducken combines turkey, duck, and chicken. Wikipedia




Except knowing Meg's penchant for not following the rules, she has put her own special spin on it. Meg's version is be called Sittingducken.  It is a (silly) goose, stuffed with a (sitting) duck which is stuffed with a (clay) pigeon.  For the pudding course, she is serving a (silly)  fool


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CobaltBlu said:


> That article stated that Kate is slated to get the 110million$ worth of jewels. Which is ridiculous. First of all, her Will is sealed for 90 years. And, the Queen's personal property (jewels, real estate like Balmoral and Sandringham, horses, cash) can only pass tax free from sovereign to sovereign, and what is the Crown's will obviously stay with the Crown. There will be some bequests (tiny tiaras and other baubles) under the £325,000 cap probably but the bulk is sheltered under the sovereign's tax-free status and must go to Charles, and the Crown property stays with the Crown.  So many stupid articles out there. The Queen was not going to drop a huge tax burden on anyone, that's for sure.


Who gets away writing all this crap. Most of the tiaras if not all of them are part of the Crown. HMTQ lent some tiaras on a long term basis. Single use tiaras had to be returned to the vaults once the event was over. Grinning from ear to ear as I write that I can imagine Queen Camilla handing out these wonderful gems in the future.


----------



## TimeToShop

Yes!


----------



## miss_chiff

BlueCherry said:


> I so love this photo of the vigil by QEII’s 8 grandchildren because I can only see 7
> 
> View attachment 5612642


Other side of William is Harry.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

TimeToShop said:


> I find this very disrespectful to the PoW. They’re just stirring the pot with Harry’s picture.



I really don't understand what problem you see with this paper.  Sure, the photo is taken from the foot of the casket rather than the head, but then they added William's photo in the circle so you can see his face.  How is this disrespectful?  I think it is a lovely photo.  Please clarify.  Thanks.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

marietouchet said:


> Duhhhh …. I bet that was why she was not there


I’m just surprised that she wasn’t able to get her way on this. They couldn‘t stop her from doing the walkabout so william and Kate ended up doung a joint walkabout with them. She has always struck me as someone who usually finds a way to get what she wants.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> I’m surprised TW wasn’t at the vigil tonight. That would have been a great photo op for her to merch more stuff.


Maybe she was subdued.




ET to remove double image but it won't let me.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles seem to be anticipating their return to the Montecito Kingdom


----------



## marietouchet

Blues and royals uniform, Harry’s uniform lacked the Queen’s cypher and he was devastated when uniform delivered to him by palace 









						Prince Harry ‘humiliated’ after Queen’s initials stripped from his military uniform
					

The Duke of Sussex was wearing his military uniform after his father, King Charles III reversed an earlier decision barring him from donning it.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe she subdued.
> 
> View attachment 5612664
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612665


A beautiful tribute to a member of H's family!


----------



## Lounorada

TimeToShop said:


> I find this very disrespectful to the PoW. They’re just stirring the pot with Harry’s picture.



Total disrespect to William. Disgusting.
Using a picture with the _one _grandchild (JCMH) at the forefront, that showed QEII no love, respect or compassion during the last few years of her life.


----------



## xincinsin

VickyB said:


> Agree.  Not that long ago, there was a video of charlotte sticking out her tongue right next to Kate and Kate kinda laughed too.  Don’t recall any scolding.  Kate probably saved that for a reasonable discussion in private.


Important to note that it didn't happen again in public, whereas Handbag was photographed doing it many times.


Toby93 said:


> I can remember being in high school, and a classmate spoke about taking his own life.  I went to the guidance counselor and he immediately went to this person and made sure he got the help he needed.  He is married with kids today.  Even at 15, I was able to get the help that TW said she couldn't get.


Mental age still 2.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> She really thinks she could have seduced Charles into making her Princess of Wales or something


I'm waiting for the next instance of her greeting a man pelvis-first. She seems to slip into seduction mode involuntarily.


gracekelly said:


> @Lounorada Meghan had a small square box at her waistline under her dress.  If she was wearing an earpiece, this could have been the battery pack.  Nothing she does surprises me and since the rumor is that she told the US media that she was going for a walkabout, it is fair to think that she arranged something to happen during it.  She has had at least two other stage managed fan encounters, so why should this be different?  That 45 min wait was probably her team figuring out how she could still manage to get this done with William and Kate around.


Told my newsroom friends who have been following the funeral reporting about the "fan/stan/sham" who hugged Zedzee and told her that she was beautiful. We were all saying which nutcase goes to pay respects to someone, ends up hugging a virtual stranger and offers not her condolences but a compliment on the huggee's beauty. And aren't the Unsuccessfuls worried about their security? They want rings of steel but wind down windows and hug strangers.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe she was subdued.
> 
> View attachment 5612664
> 
> 
> *ET to remove double image but it won't let me.*
> 
> View attachment 5612665


It's ok.  It looks like you're really driving the point home!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Blues and royals uniform, Harry’s uniform lacked the Queen’s cypher and he was devastated when uniform delivered to him by palace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘humiliated’ after Queen’s initials stripped from his military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was wearing his military uniform after his father, King Charles III reversed an earlier decision barring him from donning it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Maybe that's why he looked so cross to some?


----------



## Chanbal

If this is true…


----------



## Sophisticatted

The Charlotte sticking her tongue out incident(if we are all recalling the same one) involved Catherine’s parents.  Charlotte saw them in the crowd.  Michael stuck his tongue out at her to be silly and she responded by mirroring his actions to be silly back.  That’s why Catherine was laughing.  Of course, the press only caught one side of the exchange.  It wasn’t a good look and hasn’t seemed to happen again (as far as I know).


----------



## Chanbal

More broken dishes @ Frogmore…


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, I mentioned a while ago that Dufus married his mother. ZedZed is of course a warped version of Diana even though she might have convinced him that she is her exact reincarnation.


Bizarro! (Which conveniently has a Z!)


QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, that was Oprah where she revealed she wrote a dramatic (others would say, not right in the head) letter saying "Use me as you like". Which makes me feel dirty every time I think about it. During the engagement interview the phrase of the day was "Hit the ground running".


That letter made me narrow my eyes: like, girl, just do the work, no need to drama mama.
And at no time did she hit the ground running despite that phrase popping up several times in the early days. More like she hit the ground stumbling ass over teakettle, then ran away for maternity leave/vacations/Megxit.


TimeToShop said:


> I wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t think of trying it. Anything to get ahead. She no doubt believes she’s a Hollywood starlet that no man can refuse.


She no doubt believes she’s a Hollywood* superstar* that no man can refuse.


TimeToShop said:


> Yes!



But... but... it's his *birthright*! FOC security, titles etc are all birthright! I can imagine Zedzee at her next interview bashing her racist in-laws again, and claiming that Handbag and the meal tickets were swindled out of their birthright.


Chanbal said:


> If this is true…
> 
> View attachment 5612672


Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
The added 90% fee was likely danger money to compensate for the abuse their staff suffered, the hysterical 24/7 demands, the unquantifiable strings pulled to snag meaningless awards, and the likelihood of company reputation suffering due to association with Nutmeg & Co.

Anyone knows who is their new PR? Or is it going in-house and the Archewoke team is going to handle it?


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Anyone knows who is their new PR? Or is it going in-house and the Archewoke team is going to handle it?


I'm going to guess it's Scabies.  He's well versed in putting out lies like his mistress tells him to.  Besides, he'd probably do it for free as long as he can sniff TW's undies.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

TimeToShop said:


> Yes!



I can't read the newspaper article,  but I'm thinking that this means Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice are out, and Edward and Anne are in.  Which is what makes the most sense, and why Charles will be pushing this through quickly.


----------



## xincinsin

I put my condolences in the virtual book. HMTQ deserves a dignified send-off unmarred by the antics of H&M.


			https://www.royal.uk/send-message-condolence


----------



## bag-mania

CNN is repeating a series about the Royals from 2020. The episode I am watching is quite sympathetic to Meghan and accepting the accusations of racism without question.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> CNN is repeating a series about the Royals from 2020. The episode I am watching is quite sympathetic to Meghan and accepting the accusations of racism without question.


I don’t know if that’s the same one I turned on HBO but I had to turn it off.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe that's why he looked so cross to some?



Makes sense or maybe he was told Charles is moving ahead with changing the rules as to who is a Counsellor of State. If that report is true, Harry is out. So are Andrew and Bea. Anne and Edward and ??? would replace them. Who would the third new counsellor be in that scenario?


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Hmm, maybe that's why she is trying to usurp Invictus. The history of the Games will make it look like she has a long association with it. If she could ride a horse, she'd go after Sentebale next.


Oh yes, I’m surprised we haven’t heard a story already about how she has been a lifelong supporter of the military.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
> The added 90% fee was likely danger money to compensate for the abuse their staff suffered, the hysterical 24/7 demands, the unquantifiable strings pulled to snag meaningless awards, and the likelihood of company reputation suffering due to association with Nutmeg & Co.
> 
> *Anyone knows who is their new PR*? Or is it going in-house and the Archewoke team is going to handle it?


I never understood why on earth a Royal Prince would need a PR firm?  I am probably naive, but TW kept SS after they were married.  It never made any sense for someone who wanted to leave and live a private life, unless of course, she was always planning to return to Hollywood?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe that's why he looked so cross to some?


Pissed off  They gave him the uniform he wanted, but with a twist. Just more fodder for his anger.   Another chapter  for his book.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Maggie Muggins said:


> Who gets away writing all this crap. Most of the tiaras if not all of them are part of the Crown. HMTQ lent some tiaras on a long term basis. Single use tiaras had to be returned to the vaults once the event was over. Grinning from ear to ear as I write that I can imagine Queen Camilla handing out these wonderful gems in the future.


There are several privately owned tiaras. Some were bequests to queen Mary, or purchased by the royal family with their own money, or made fro jewels in their collections.  Either way, whether they are the wins queens private property or the Crowns, they’re staying put.  The Court Jeweler website has a good rundown of which tiaras are personal property and which are not.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

How can anyone take that face seriously?  He looks like a plastic Ken doll 




This is hilarious


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Blues and royals uniform, Harry’s uniform lacked the Queen’s cypher and he was devastated when uniform delivered to him by palace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘humiliated’ after Queen’s initials stripped from his military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was wearing his military uniform after his father, King Charles III reversed an earlier decision barring him from donning it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


So, Hazz did _not_ have ‘his’ uniform in Cali. Doubt he had the medals either.  Many of us have had discussions about this.


lanasyogamama said:


> I don’t know if that’s the same one I turned on HBO but I had to turn it off.


I’m staying with BBC and Sky news. If ITV opens up, I will watch that.  No US media in our house.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Posting this in both threads:
The topic is Meghan and Harry, not other members’ opinions of Meghan and Harry, and particularly not other PF threads about them.  

There is plenty of material to discuss, please stay on course and keep it to the Sussexes.  

Thanks for understanding.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Makes sense or maybe he was told Charles is moving ahead with changing the





Redbirdhermes said:


> I can't read the newspaper article,  but I'm thinking that this means Harry, Andrew, and Beatrice are out, and Edward and Anne are in.  Which is what makes the most sense, and why Charles will be pushing this through quickly.


KC wants people he can trust    Is he able to add people not in the line of sucession?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> This is hilarious



King Charles is smarter.


----------



## BlueCherry

Toby93 said:


> This is hilarious
> 
> How can anyone take that face seriously?  He looks like a plastic Ken doll




Can’t wait to see SS version of their truth when she does


----------



## CobaltBlu

I can’t see the difference in the uniforms.  Are there pictures?  I’ve read so much BS today. I really don’t  believe much of it unless it has palace letterhead at this point.  If it’s true it’s excellent shade but it also could be made up drama.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> This is hilarious
> 
> How can anyone take that face seriously?  He looks like a plastic Ken doll



"She's going to claim it was #SunshineSachs that made them cast the Royals as the "racists" and bullies!"
Won't this prove that the OW interview was scripted since it was  Sucks that put the words in her mouth, told her to weep and look woeful? Does this negate any NDAs if she throws her ex-PR agency under the bus?


----------



## CobaltBlu

It makes her look like an idiot that she would just do what SS said and throw the family under a bus. It’s pretty “dog ate my homework-y” for a grown woman.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> King Charles is smarter.


Sunshine Sachs will squish her like an ant. She turns on them and they will unleash the dogs. None of their clients will have anything to do with them. Bits of nasty gossip will find their way to Page Six and other sites. . Meg is playing with fire


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> It makes her look like an idiot that she would just do what SS said and throw the family under a bus. It’s pretty “dog ate my homework-y” for a grown woman.


So much for the independent, strong powerful woman image. That’s her, what about him?


----------



## Mumotons

bag-mania said:


> xincinsin said:
> 
> 
> 
> "She's going to claim it was #SunshineSachs that made them cast the Royals as the "racists" and bullies!"
> Won't this prove that the OW interview was scripted since it was  Sucks that put the words in her mouth, told her to weep and look woeful? Does this negate any NDAs if she throws her ex-PR agency under the bus?
> 
> 
> 
> She is nuts !! What’s she going to say ? They were forced to say all that bile ? How’s she going to square that with omid and the squad or is she throwing them over a bus?
Click to expand...


----------



## VickyB

xincinsin said:


> I put my condolences in the virtual book. HMTQ deserves a dignified send-off unmarred by the antics of H&M.
> 
> 
> https://www.royal.uk/send-message-condolence


Thanks so much for sharing the link! I signed as well!


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> KC wants people he can trust    Is he able to add people not in the line of sucession?


Looks like they have to change the law in order to skip down the line.  https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state#:~:text=By law, Counsellors of State,over the age of 21.


----------



## BlueCherry

CobaltBlu said:


> I can’t see the difference in the uniforms.  Are there pictures?  I’ve read so much BS today. I really don’t  believe much of it unless it has palace letterhead at this point.  If it’s true it’s excellent shade but it also could be made up drama.


Look closely at the epaulettes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> I can’t see the difference in the uniforms.  Are there pictures?  I’ve read so much BS today. I really don’t  believe much of it unless it has palace letterhead at this point.  If it’s true it’s excellent shade but it also could be made up drama.


I can't find any close-ups of the epaulettes, but they do look different. Difference due to rank, perhaps?


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> I can’t see the difference in the uniforms.  Are there pictures?  I’ve read so much BS today. I really don’t  believe much of it unless it has palace letterhead at this point.  If it’s true it’s excellent shade but it also could be made up drama.


The article said the ER cypher is on the epaulets.  Looking at this photo, it does seem William has the cypher.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> Looks like they have to change the law in order to skip down the line.  https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state#:~:text=By law, Counsellors of State,over the age of 21.


It’s good to be King.  It is his reign. He should set it up however he wants. Imo


----------



## CobaltBlu

His wedding day the epaulettes were different too,  maybe it’s a rank thing.


----------



## CobaltBlu

CarryOn2020 said:


> The article said the ER cypher is on the epaulets.  Looking at this photo, it does seem William has the cypher.
> View attachment 5612733
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612731


Oh I see… good sleuthing. Hard to see the actual ones from today tho.


----------



## CobaltBlu

epaulette-gate!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> epaulette-gate!!


Proving once again that nothing is good enough for the twerps. They make a drama of everything all the time. 
When does their flight leave?

ETA:  now, I need to check Andrew’s epaulettes.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The article said the ER cypher is on the epaulets.  Looking at this photo, it does seem William has the cypher.
> View attachment 5612733
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612731


It looks like a pin. Easy enough to add on.  Someone decided that Harry’s uniform wasn’t going to get it.

Careful what you wish for Harry,it can bite you.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> "She's going to claim it was #SunshineSachs that made them cast the Royals as the "racists" and bullies!"
> Won't this prove that the OW interview was scripted since it was  Sucks that put the words in her mouth, told her to weep and look woeful? Does this negate any NDAs if she throws her ex-PR agency under the bus?


She is a free liberated feminist living in the United States with freedom of speech.  No one “made” her do or say anything. Next she will claim Satan made her do it and she is merely a fallen angel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> She is a free liberated feminist living in the United States with freedom of speech.  No one “made” her do or say anything. Next she will claim Satan made her do it and she is merely a fallen angel.


Oh, come on, she is an actress. She was acting.  She meant none of it. Opr knew that, Hazz knew that.  Why couldn’t the rest of us see that?   




ETA: whoever buys that nonsense should be removed from any position of responsibility.


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> It looks like a pin. Easy enough to add on.  Someone decided that Harry’s uniform wasn’t going to get it.
> 
> Careful what you wish for Harry,it can bite you.


Seems kind of petty to take them off though.  The whole thing is weird to me.  And if someone did take them off I don’t blame him for being pissed.  Acting pissed, that’s another story.

  He just needs to go overseas. For all the reasons.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> His wedding day the epaulettes were different too,  maybe it’s a rank thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612734


Harry was upset that a William had anguillettes on his uniform. Another example of his believing he was William’s equal.  Nope.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> This is hilarious
> 
> View attachment 5612735


"She is SMART"????  Seriously?  She must think everyone else has the IQ of her Hazbag.


----------



## Icyjade

Anyone else noticed that the other grandchildren (Prince William, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie) referred to QE as “Grannie” in their statements vs “Granny” by Hazbeen? 

Guess TW/SS didn’t bother to check with 6 the correct spelling when she drafted the “my darling wife” statement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thought I read somewhere that QE gave all family members Jubilee medals. 












						Prince Harry wears his military uniform for Queen's guard of honour
					

Prince Harry, finally in his military uniform, carried out a sombre guard of honour for the Queen this evening, having previously been denied the chance to wear his military uniform as he publicly mourns.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Hatry was upset that a William had anguillettes on his uniform. Another example of his believing he was William’s equal.  Nope.


I wonder if TW plays this for Haz nightly as inspiration?


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> Seems kind of petty to take them off though.  The whole thing is weird to me.  And if someone did take them off I don’t blame him for being pissed.  Acting pissed, that’s another story.
> 
> He just needs to go overseas. For all the reasons.


He _was_ disrespectful to his boss, so there’s that.


----------



## CobaltBlu




----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Seems kind of petty to take them off though.  The whole thing is weird to me.  And if someone did take them off I don’t blame him for being pissed.  Acting pissed, that’s another story.
> 
> He just needs to go overseas. For all the reasons.


A point was being made. He wanted to play dress up, fine here is the costume for you, but don’t forget that it only for you. to play dress up soldier  You have to give it back because you don’t have the right to wear it.

Just my opinion.  When I thought back to Prince Philip’s funeral  and the uniform controversy then, TQ made the decision for no uniforms to keep the peace. The reality was that everyone should have worn their uniform except Andrew and Harry.  Prince Philip wanted a completely military funeral and that’s what he planned and received. I think it would have been insulting to the armed services participants if A&H had worn their uniforms given that their patronages were removed. Andrew still had one affiliation left, but in light of what had transpired, it still would have been a bad idea for him to wear it. Neither man had acted like an officer and a gentleman and neither deserved the honor of wearing a uniform.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> "She is SMART"????  Seriously?  She must think everyone else has the IQ of her Hazbag.


This fits right in with “her truth:”. If she says it, it must be true.


----------



## CobaltBlu

CarryOn2020 said:


> He _was_ disrespectful to his boss, so there’s that.


Yea I was fine with no uniform for him to be honest.  But I see why he got to, I guess I just can’t imagine *who* would remove those little pins, who had the time, access, etc…. It is just an odd thing bugs I do see why someone would have, for sure.,


----------



## Pessie

CobaltBlu said:


> Seems kind of petty to take them off though.  The whole thing is weird to me.  And if someone did take them off I don’t blame him for being pissed.  Acting pissed, that’s another story.
> 
> He just needs to go overseas. For all the reasons.


The Queen is dead and no longer monarch. 
So unless Harry had access to his old uniform (looks like he didn’t) they’ve had to give him a new one.  No one, no matter who they are, will be issued new uniforms with the old Queens cypher now that Charles is King.
I don’t think it’s spiteful or a snub.  It’s just the correct thing to do.  Eventually all servicemen/women will have a new Charles III cypher, but I doubt it’s ready yet, or it could perhaps be they’re waiting till after the funeral to formally change over.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thought I read somewhere that QE gave all family members Jubilee medals.
> 
> View attachment 5612742
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wears his military uniform for Queen's guard of honour
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, finally in his military uniform, carried out a sombre guard of honour for the Queen this evening, having previously been denied the chance to wear his military uniform as he publicly mourns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I can’t get over his little meany mouth. Three of those medals are commemorative. Even James, Lord Severn wore them and he is only 15


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> I can’t get over his* little meany mouth*. Three of those medals are commemorative. Even James, Lord Severn wore them and he is only 15


Nailed it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> The Queen is dead and no longer monarch.
> *So unless Harry had access to his old uniform (looks like he didn’t) *they’ve had to give him a new one.  No one, no matter who they are, will be issued new uniforms with the old Queens cypher now that Charles is King.
> I don’t think it’s spiteful or a snub.  It’s just the correct thing to do.  Eventually all servicemen/women will have a new Charles III cypher, but I doubt it’s ready yet, or it could perhaps be they’re waiting till after the funeral to formally change over.


This is the intriguing part imo.  It stuns me to think he left so much in the UK


----------



## RAINDANCE

youngster said:


> Makes sense or maybe he was told Charles is moving ahead with changing the rules as to who is a Counsellor of State. If that report is true, Harry is out. So are Andrew and Bea. Anne and Edward and ??? would replace them. Who would the third new counsellor be in that scenario?


The next working royal is the Duke of Gloucester who has been a working Royal for many years
He is about 5 years older than Charles, and would be a very safe pair of hands. Other than him, next is Duke of Kent who is ten years older and looking very frail these days. I think Duke of Kent will retire soon. Neither Kent nor Gloucester do anything like the same number of appointments as Princess Anne but the retirement of either will probably leave patronages unfilled.
These were were plenty of roles and organisations for H&M to have got involved with and take over from the Gloucster & Kent Royals ( I include Princess Alexandra here as she is DOK sister) 
I have been quite vocal here that imo it is untenable that a Counsellor of State is not a full time UK resident.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is the intriguing part imo.  It stuns me to think he left so much in the UK



Yes… that he left his family and royal privileges to become a C (Z?) grade celebrity in the US…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors of divorce are all over tumblr and beyond.  Who knows the truth?


----------



## csshopper

Hermes Nuttynut said:


> They were invited to the Buckingham Palace reception by mistake.  Then uninvited.  They found out from the press.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry 'found out they'd been
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex found out they were 'uninvited' to a state reception for world leaders and foreign royals by reading press reports, according to royal sources.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What they found out, but will never admit to or recognize, is that directing their stooge, Scoobie Doo, to plant an item, is not an action that results in the reaction they planned: they thought the Palace would be embarrassed to tell them "no" and they couldn't attend.


CobaltBlu said:


> It makes her look like an idiot that she would just do what SS said and throw the family under a bus. It’s pretty “dog ate my homework-y” for a grown woman.


Coming from a woman who made an azz of herself  on national television at the drop of a few commands through an earpiece from a bullying Ellen Degeneres this is hilarious.


----------



## K.D.

xincinsin said:


> I put my condolences in the virtual book. HMTQ deserves a dignified send-off unmarred by the antics of H&M.
> 
> 
> https://www.royal.uk/send-message-condolence


Went to the embassy to write in the condolences book. It was quite impressive. There were five staffers in full mourning clothes, white flower arrangements and pictures of the queen on the desks with the books. I fumbled up writing so the Thank in Thank you for your service is a bit of a blob  Oh well, it signals I felt more emotion then TW


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> The article said the ER cypher is on the epaulets.  Looking at this photo, it does seem William has the cypher.
> View attachment 5612733
> 
> 
> View attachment 5612731


Epaulets in the US military denote campaigns that the Corp, Brigade, etc. fought in. I have to look up the British epaulets de notation. French military call them call them Fourragere. I have one as my last command,VII Corps, fought in the WW2 campaign in France. So when a person is assigned to that unit, they get it. It’s a little complicated as lots of units fought in WW2 but the one I got was awarded by the French military. So different colors for campaigns. Not everyone gets them. 

Harry’s ribbons look like the ones everyone gets. He probably excelled in video games ‘in the rear’. Yes, I’m being facetious here. 
​


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> The Queen is dead and no longer monarch.
> So unless Harry had access to his old uniform (looks like he didn’t) they’ve had to give him a new one.  No one, no matter who they are, will be issued new uniforms with the old Queens cypher now that Charles is King.
> I don’t think it’s spiteful or a snub.  It’s just the correct thing to do.  Eventually all servicemen/women will have a new Charles III cypher, but I doubt it’s ready yet, or it could perhaps be they’re waiting till after the funeral to formally change over.


That cypher wasn’t there because Harry was not serving TQ nor is he serving TK. He isn’t serving anyone. The uniform was nothing more than a costume in a play as far as he was concerned.


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors of divorce are all over tumblr and beyond.  Who knows the truth?


If this was the case, I don't believe she would have been allowed to do the walkabout or show her face at all.


----------



## gracekelly

jblended said:


> If this was the case, I don't believe she would have been allowed to do the walkabout or show her face at all.


Many times people put on a united front even when the marriage is in trouble. With these two there would have to be money involved for them to do it if the rumors were true


----------



## Lodpah

BlueCherry said:


> Can’t wait to see SS version of their truth when she does


Will be epic!


----------



## Mendocino

MiniMabel said:


> I don't have any pearls but, although not a drinker, I shall certainly raise a glass in a toast to our Queen Elizabeth II.


This is a wonderful idea! I do have pearl earrings I will look for them tomorrow and order some sparkling apple cider!


----------



## LemonDrop

gracekelly said:


> A point was being made. He wanted to play dress up, fine here is the costume for you, but don’t forget that it only for you. to play dress up soldier  You have to give it back because you don’t have the right to wear it.
> 
> Just my opinion.  When I thought back to Prince Philip’s funeral  and the uniform controversy then, TQ made the decision for no uniforms to keep the peace. The reality was that everyone should have worn their uniform except Andrew and Harry.  Prince Philip wanted a completely military funeral and that’s what he planned and received. I think it would have been insulting to the armed services participants if A&H had worn their uniforms given that their patronages were removed. Andrew still had one affiliation left, but in light of what had transpired, it still would have been a bad idea for him to wear it. Neither man had acted like an officer and a gentleman and neither deserved the honor of wearing a uniform.


Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.


----------



## BlueCherry

gracekelly said:


> I can’t get over his little meany mouth. Three of those medals are commemorative. Even James, Lord Severn wore them and he is only 15



Little meany mouth, that’s what I call a m*nge mouth


----------



## zen1965

piperdog said:


> What about poor Omid?!  Think of all the work he's been doing being a "royal source", planting stories, complaining that his planted stories don't come true, getting yelled at because this isn't working, and plotting next steps. He must be exhausted. I'm feeling generous, so I'll draft some tweets for him to explain why Meghan wasn't at the grandchildren's vigil today.
> 
> So Omid, where was Meghan during the grandchildren's vigil?
> 
> Possible responses:
> - Meghan was secretly conferring with and advising the world leaders already in the UK about various global crises. Expect them all to be sorted and fixed by Monday.
> -Meghan and Catherine (Meghan calls her 'K') were bonding over mimosas. K got a little tipsy and confessed that she had always wanted Harry and was so disappointed to be stuck with William.
> -Meghan was going through the tiaras and jewelry with Angela Kelly. Her new bestie Angie agreed that Meghan should get all of the tiaras because they look best on her, but unfortunately they have to keep a few for Camilla and Kate.
> -Meghan was baking olive oil, lemon, and elderflower cakes to be served at the global leaders' event tomorrow. Meghan will actually be hosting the event, which is why there were these silly mix-ups over invitations.
> -Meghan was helping Catherine take care of the Cambridge children. They so love their time with Auntie Megs, and Catherine needed parenting advice from Meghan.
> -Meghan and Catherine were out shopping for things to wear the rest of the week. Catherine knows she can never match Meghan's innate poise and signature style, but there may a makeover in the works for the new PoW!
> 
> And finally:
> -As the known favorite of the Queen, Meghan didn't want to detract attention from the other, lesser, grandchildren so she kindly stayed away so they could have their 15 minutes to shine.


Brilliant!


----------



## LemonDrop

Harry looks amazing.


----------



## Lodpah

LemonDrop said:


> Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.


Veterans are not allowed to wear their uniforms after service. Only MOH veterans. We can wear our ribbons on our civilian clothes tho.


----------



## Icyjade

LemonDrop said:


> Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.


Because you don’t continue to wear the uniform after you already quit your job. Can you imagine ex-policemen or ex-paramedics wearing their uniforms around?


----------



## LemonDrop

Icyjade said:


> Because you don’t continue to wear the uniform after you already quit your job. Can you imagine ex-policemen or ex-paramedics wearing their uniforms around?


Gotcha I was comparing military veterans in the USA to Military vets there. And you replied with examples of cops and paramedics. I understand you now.


----------



## Pessie

LemonDrop said:


> Harry looks amazing.
> 
> View attachment 5612798


Interesting you should post this, it’s an example of another “special exception“ that was made for Harry. In the UK the only service where the wearing of a full beard is permitted is the navy.  It’s not permitted in the army or RAF.  I think he looks scruffy.


----------



## BlueCherry

LemonDrop said:


> Harry looks amazing.
> 
> View attachment 5612798



Well I’d begrudgingly concede it’s a mildly better look than the bald pate


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LemonDrop

Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> How can anyone take that face seriously?  He looks like a plastic Ken doll



And his injector isn't skilled. That sloped down eyebrows? Happens when you overdo the Botox. Which I only know because I religiously follow two derms as the pandemic has made me quite the skincare fan.



Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5612735



Good luck with this nobody. Not only is not everyone as stupid as you think, I have a strong feeling Charles might be washing his hair that day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazz did _not_ have ‘his’ uniform in Cali. Doubt he had the medals either.  Many of us have had discussions about this.



He wore the medals to their own little Remembrance Day they staged by trampling on the veterans' graves. I doubt the palace would have fedexed them over.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I can’t get over his little meany mouth. Three of those medals are commemorative. Even James, Lord Severn wore them and he is only 15



Viscount Severn. Just like the American Viscountess, her FIL is the Earl of Sandwich.


----------



## Icyjade

LemonDrop said:


> Gotcha I was comparing military veterans in the USA to Military vets there. And you replied with examples of cops and paramedics. I understand you now.



I thought this is well-known and I’ll quote CNN:

*Unlike in the US, where veterans often wear uniforms for special occasions, retired British military personnel are not allowed to wear uniform unless they are in an honorary appointment and had been authorized to wear one. Instead, they wear their military medals pinned to civilian clothes.*









						Why Princes Harry and Andrew aren't wearing military uniforms during the Queen's funeral processions
					

Prince Harry and Prince Andrew might be the only living members of Queen Elizabeth II's immediate family to have served in the military in wartime, but strict royal protocols mandate they will not be wearing a uniform during the monarch's funeral.




					amp.cnn.com
				




I used the example of uniforms in other occupations as I think it’s basic. Like someone no longer working in a fast food restaurant wouldn’t be entitled to wear the uniform, nor airline workers (some of the flight attendant uniforms are gorgeous), etc. 



LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799



Ok, we can agree to disagree… I just see a sulky angry guy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmmm  









						Harry and Meghan's children Archie and Lilibet left at home in America
					

While the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been at the vigil in Westminster Hall this week, Archie, 3 and 15-month-old Lilibet are believed to have remained behind in America.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> The next working royal is the Duke of Gloucester who has been a working Royal for many years
> He is about 5 years older than Charles, and would be a very safe pair of hands. Other than him, next is Duke of Kent who is ten years older and looking very frail these days. I think Duke of Kent will retire soon. Neither Kent nor Gloucester do anything like the same number of appointments as Princess Anne but the retirement of either will probably leave patronages unfilled.
> These were were plenty of roles and organisations for H&M to have got involved with and take over from the Gloucster & Kent Royals ( I include Princess Alexandra here as she is DOK sister)
> I have been quite vocal here that imo it is untenable that a Counsellor of State is not a full time UK resident.



That's what I never got with the discussion about Charles's slimmed down monarchy. I understand the concept, but I always had it in the back of my mind that a whole generation of royals, The Queen's cousins, were about to retire or, frankly, die. Someone has to fill these spots. Maybe not all of them, but some. So to me it would only make sense to e.g. let the York girls be working royals. It won't be another 10 years before George is an adult, and then he'll have barely finished school and go off to university or military academy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mendocino said:


> This is a wonderful idea! I do have pearl earrings I will look for them tomorrow and order some sparkling apple cider!



Is that with or without alcohol? I'm always a little confused, in Germany Cidre is French apple wine, then you can get British fruit ciders which are also somewhat alcoholic, but the cider in the US is just non-clear fresh apple juice?


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Very well practiced.  Zara in heels.  I think I would sway out of line.
> 
> No, I didn't think Harry looked smug, just good at being in a procession.



He certainly looks better without someone clawing, pawing and signalling him all the time


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's what I never got with the discussion about Charles's slimmed down monarchy. I understand the concept, but I always had it in the back of my mind that a whole generation of royals, The Queen's cousins, were about to retire or, frankly, die. Someone has to fill these spots. Maybe not all of them, but some. So to me it would only make sense to e.g. let the York girls be working royals. It won't be another 10 years before George is an adult, and then he'll have barely finished school and go of to university or military academy.



Slimmed down monarchy means slimmed down costs. The issue of $ crops up every so often and having fewer working royals means that costs are contained. I think it’s very much in line with some of the other European monarchies as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LemonDrop said:


> Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.



I don't have a dog in this fight, but basically the UK has a law that veterans are not allowed to wear their uniforms, only active duty soldiers.


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that with or without alcohol? I'm always a little confused, in Germany Cidre is French apple wine, then you can get British fruit ciders which are also somewhat alcoholic, but the cider in the US is just non-clear fresh apple juice?



With! Just a little bit of alcohol and very yummy! 

Something like this with 4.5% alcohol in my part of the world:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> Interesting you should post this, it’s an example of another “special exception“ that was made for Harry. *In the UK the only service where the wearing of a full beard is permitted is the navy. * It’s not permitted in the army or RAF.  I think he looks scruffy.



Oh wow, so many rules I never knew about. I've learned so much in this thread.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> More like she hit the ground stumbling ass over teakettle, then ran away for maternity leave/vacations/Megxit.


Seriously OT but genuine question, why do people call it a tea kettle? It's a kettle, lol. 
Back on top ice, the sooner these go home the better.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have a dog in this fight, but basically the UK has a law that veterans are not allowed to wear their uniforms, only active duty soldiers.


So Hazzi is telling the world he is above the law as well as a hypocrite.  Not good optics imo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. *Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. *I think we got some different standards across the pond.


This reeks of toxic masculinity. Is King Charles any less of a king or a man because he cried as he walked behind his father's coffin? Is masculinity defined by aggressive acts to "protect" grown women (who, for the record, boast that they have a voice and will not be silenced, and therefore can protect themselves)? I'm actually taken aback by the archaic notion of "masculinity" as you've described it.

Also, not entirely sure how he protected either his grandmother or his wife. One he insulted in the press for causing "generational pain" and "trapping him in a cage" just by virtue of being the sovereign, and the other he seemingly didn't help get mental health support for when she was suicidal.
Colour me confused.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> So Hazzi is telling the world he is above the law as well as a hypocrite.  Not good optics imo



It’s another example of misinformation. Basically exploiting the differences between US and UK rules on uniforms to create unnecessary outrage. He is born British. He knows he is no longer entitled.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Slimmed down monarchy means slimmed down costs. The issue of $ crops up every so often and having fewer working royals means that costs are contained. I think it’s very much in line with some of the other European monarchies as well.



Sure, but seven people can't work 24/7. They'll have to massively slim down appearances and patronages, and what's the point of a monarchy that's barely visible anymore?


----------



## xincinsin

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


We can agree to disagree on this. I think his protection of his grandma was lip service.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_As well as establishing his own style, King Charles has for a long time made it known that he intends to “slim down” the monarchy in response to public demand for a more modern institution with lower costs and less ostentation. There was a brief glimpse of what this might mean in 2012 when tabloid newspapers reported simmering resentment among some royals who felt Charles, then Prince of Wales, was pushing them to the margins. This was after the Queen appeared on the balcony of Buckingham Palace for her 60th jubilee with only the future King, his wife Camilla, and sons Prince Harry and Prince William and the latter’s wife Catherine. Typically there would have been a multitude of dukes, duchesses and cousins. “In one version of [a slimmed down monarchy] you have a narrower number of people living off the public purse. He has a vision of that being the direct line of succession rather than all the cousins and aunts,” said a friend of the new king who asked to remain anonymous._





						Subscribe to read | Financial Times
					

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication




					www.ft.com
				






QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but seven people can't work 24/7. They'll have to massively slim down appearances and patronages, and what's the point of a monarchy that's barely visible anymore?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The direct line of succession is William, George, Charlotte, Louis. Now how does that work.

It's fine to cut off dozens of minor royals (that said, when the Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester perish those dukedoms won't even be royal dukedoms anymore as their sons hold neither a princely title nor HRH...as I said, the problem is solving itself organically), but I don't see how you can operate on such a narrow frame.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Whatever they are doing we will find out about it in due time. Maybe she is cooking Harry a special belated-birthday dinner. It will be something amazing, way better than any ordinary wife could cook.



I think that's what's so nauseating about both of them

Can anybody remember what perceived slight someone may have said about your SO Tues, 2 May?
Can anyone remember what you cooked for dinner Thursday 3 weeks ago?

Everything is a PR move.
PR tell clients to be relatable with storytelling, but also to back up key values

Key values H&M
1. WE are in-LOVE
2. WE battle on in the face of HATE
3. WE are LOVED and LOVABLE
4. WE are GOOD
5. WE are RIGHT
6. WE are LOVE

These two want to be seen as a loving, power couple, so we get Mills and Boon clap-trap all the time.

We think that silly rom-coms, daytime soaps and romantic fiction is something that belongs to the kitsch of yesteryear, but if you read al lot of comments from proclaimed young people on YT, they are total idealists when it comes to love or 'love'.

With no experience (or maybe even with some) it is scary how many people really believe in these fairy stories. That's how these two were set-up, even by the Palace. A contemporary multicultural fairytale. Unfortunately, they are both just spoilt rotten 'kids' with a lot in common, they both hate their families and both are users of the same.

If H&M say a single word I would need to see independent, officially recognised, verified evidence that it was true. They obviously wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up at them and bit them in the behind. 

If H or M told be they had a boiled egg for breakfast, I'd need to see the shell and interview the cook.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Hazz did _not_ have ‘his’ uniform in Cali. Doubt he had the medals either.  Many of us have had discussions about this.
> 
> I’m staying with BBC and Sky news. If ITV opens up, I will watch that.  No US media in our house.



One is not allowed to wear a military uniform unless actively serving. They are the property of the regiment. Medals are the property of the person who earned them. Interestingly, 3 of Harry's meals are Jubilee medals, so it makes his row look more impressive. 


Photo Getty 







Harry's medals:
Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order
Operational Service Medal for Afghanistan
Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal
Queen's Daimond Jubilee Meda
Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, so many rules I never knew about. I've learned so much in this thread.


It’s called a Full Set in the navy I believe.  And it’s a proper full beard a la Prince Michael, not a scruffy half in half out one.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> "She's going to claim it was #SunshineSachs that made them cast the Royals as the "racists" and bullies!"
> Won't this prove that the OW interview was scripted since it was  Sucks that put the words in her mouth, told her to weep and look woeful? Does this negate any NDAs if she throws her ex-PR agency under the bus?



What does that say about her?
That she did as she was told by a PR agency? 

What about H's book? 

I don't believe a word. Except perhaps she wants to write about "My Private Audience with the King" who she has no doubt has not been able to get a second with for a week.


----------



## Pessie

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


Comforting to know that when Meg puts the rings in the post Harry will have someone to turn to


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thought I read somewhere that QE gave all family members Jubilee medals.
> 
> View attachment 5612742
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry wears his military uniform for Queen's guard of honour
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, finally in his military uniform, carried out a sombre guard of honour for the Queen this evening, having previously been denied the chance to wear his military uniform as he publicly mourns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Sorry, I still have 5 pages more to catch-up with. 

I shall try to refrain from answering Qs in the morning


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Sorry, I still have 5 pages more to catch-up with.
> 
> I shall try to refrain from answering Qs in the morning



Yeah, I always exitedly start answering postings just to see three pages later numerous people had already answered. But I can't be bothered to first read 10 pages, then go back and add my 2 cents.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> The Queen is dead and no longer monarch.
> So unless Harry had access to his old uniform (looks like he didn’t) they’ve had to give him a new one.  No one, no matter who they are, will be issued new uniforms with the old Queens cypher now that Charles is King.
> I don’t think it’s spiteful or a snub.  It’s just the correct thing to do.  Eventually all servicemen/women will have a new Charles III cypher, but I doubt it’s ready yet, or it could perhaps be they’re waiting till after the funeral to formally change over.



_They_ will have his uniform 

Harry has to ask permission from the King to wear his uniform (same with all ex-service personal, except their uniforms are probably reused for current personnel). 

This is his dress uniform, it gets less use that the regular and field uniforms. It's very well taken care of.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I liked the one he and William wore for his wedding. Purely from a "that looks fancy" viewpoint.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The direct line of succession is William, George, Charlotte, Louis. Now how does that work.
> 
> It's fine to cut off dozens of minor royals (that said, when the Duke of Kent and Duke of Gloucester perish those dukedoms won't even be royal dukedoms anymore as their sons hold neither a princely title nor HRH...as I said, the problem is solving itself organically), but I don't see how you can operate on such a narrow frame.


The second paragraph of the FT article explains that ‘slimmed down’ does not mean simply fewer people on the balcony.  Yes, that is certainly a good visual.  What people are really concerned [if I read it correctly] about is the massive accumulation of wealth by the BRF and how little they pay in taxes, especially the inheritance tax [40%!!].  Most commenters agree royals should be able to make more outside the family than inside it. Theoretically   H&M _should_ have pulled in more $$$. Why didn’t they?

ETA: Anyone with more knowledge of this issue, please correct any errors. I am new to this part of the BRF discussion. I try to stay in the fashion, jewels, and cars world. Also, I do realize this may not be the appropriate time for this discussion.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Epaulets in the US military denote campaigns that the Corp, Brigade, etc. fought in. I have to look up the British epaulets de notation. French military call them call them Fourragere. I have one as my last command,VII Corps, fought in the WW2 campaign in France. So when a person is assigned to that unit, they get it. It’s a little complicated as lots of units fought in WW2 but the one I got was awarded by the French military. So different colors for campaigns. Not everyone gets them.
> 
> Harry’s ribbons look like the ones everyone gets. He probably excelled in video games ‘in the rear’. Yes, I’m being facetious here.
> ​



Interestingly, they do have plenty of battle and combat video game consuls in the mess-rooms for all military personnel, barracks and garrisons. 

Plenty of speculation H didn't get much action in the field. You may be on to something


----------



## CarryOn2020

Heartbroken?  











						Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
					

The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

LemonDrop said:


> Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.



He no longer serves.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I agree, Harry could have absolutely been a stellar wingman to William. It really is sad to me that things ended up where they are. Can you imagine if he had just married a sane person who soothed his demons instead of feeding them steroids.


I agree with you. Watching Harry standing guard in front of his Grannie's coffin, I thought what a shame, he's born for this role, he could have made a great supporting team to William and Kate. If only he hadn't married that psycho.


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heartbroken?
> 
> View attachment 5612841
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I would never have noticed if @CobaltBlu had not pointed it out.  So who in Hazzie’s world leaked it to the media?  If he was so upset, he could just wear his suit.  Is he seeking compensation now?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heartbroken?
> 
> View attachment 5612841
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Harry has a different Colonel in Chief now. 

He better get used to it.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The second paragraph of the FT article explains that ‘slimmed down’ does not mean simply fewer people on the balcony.  Yes, that is certainly a good visual.  What people are really concerned [if I read it correctly] about is the massive accumulation of wealth by the BRF and how little they pay in taxes, especially the inheritance tax [40%!!].  Most commenters agree royals should be able to make more outside the family than inside it. Theoretically   H&M _should_ have pulled in more $$$. Why didn’t they?
> 
> ETA: Anyone with more knowledge of this issue, please correct any errors. I am new to this part of the BRF discussion. I try to stay in the fashion, jewels, and cars world. Also, I do realize this may not be the appropriate time for this discussion.



Many are asking themselves the same question. 

The intention is reduce the number of people known as 'Working Royals' that are funded by taxpayers, protected by security, given accommodation etc. 

The non-working Royals will confusingly have to (find) work. 

However, non-working royals will still be part of the 'members of' brigade. Can still perform non-official ceremonies to personal charities as patron or guest(s) and can still be funded by Working Royals' _private_ income (farms, land, projects etc). My guess is that many charities that were once officially patronised by Working Royals will now find they have the same relationship with a new non-working royal, but they will have to cover some costs. As we have seen from most charities, very little gets to the people/projects they  boast about so this will not be outside the realms of current recognition. 

The definitive meaning of a 'slimmed-down monarchy' will only be known once it's been decided upon. Everything else is pure speculation (we''ve had ten years of deliberation, so hopefully KC III has worked it out by now).


----------



## papertiger

This middle-aged man-child seriously needs to get a life and some real problems to keep him occupied

Prince Harry 'left "heartbroken" after Queen's 'ER' initials were stripped from military uniform he wore to coffin vigil': Duke 'considered wearing morning suit to avoid "humiliation"' after Prince Andrew was allowed to keep royal cypher'​
From:









						Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
					

The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I wonder if he feels he humiliated himself by putting out he'd be happy in a mourning suit and focus should be on the Queen. 

Now he has to come up with some 'victim' reason why he changed his mind and unleashing tantrums on his father into giving him permission to wear his uniform.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> The second paragraph of the FT article explains that ‘slimmed down’ does not mean simply fewer people on the balcony.  Yes, that is certainly a good visual.  What people are really concerned [if I read it correctly] about is the massive accumulation of wealth by the BRF and how little they pay in taxes, especially the inheritance tax [40%!!].  Most commenters agree royals should be able to make more outside the family than inside it. Theoretically   H&M _should_ have pulled in more $$$. Why didn’t they?


Harry was receiving somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 million pounds per year from Prince Charles and I think this was increased to closer to 3 million pounds after he was married. This allowance came from the income Charles received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Charles also used part of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall to give a similar amount to William each year. The cost of H’s security (provided for working members of the BRF) was separate from the allowance Charles gave him. The cost of BRF security is tax payer funded. PR costs would have been part of the general BRF expenses and would not have been focused on or controlled by H&M. The part that is harder to quantify is how much it would take to duplicate the cost of their homes. You can say well they were paying xx in rent for Frogmore, or the suite of rooms at Kensington Palace, etc. but those locations simply can’t be duplicated irl. If you add up the amounts H&M reportedly received from Spotify (potentially worth as much as $25 million), Netflix (potentially worth as much as $100 million), and H’s book deal (potentially worth as much as $20 million), they did pull in way more $$$ than 3 million pounds on an annual basis once they were outside the BRF. However, their lifestyle costs also took a quantum leap with the 16 bathroom Montecito mansion (mortgage, maintenance, insurance, and property taxes), the over the top 24/7 private security (since Harry insists their lives are in constant danger because of who they are), cost of their personal staff (Children’s Nannie’s, H&M’s personal assistants, household staff, etc.), PR costs (SS kept busy churning out non-stop fluff pieces and misinformation and buying phony awards for TW), legal costs (since they are very litigious), travel costs (yes most of this appears to have been footed by various organizations they worked with like The Invictus Games and they have apparently been loaned private planes by various connections but I assume some portion still had to be paid for by H&M). It’s hard to know how much TW’s clothing costs since she presumably is gifted or lent at least some clothing in merchandising deals. But if you believe any of the articles, Prince Charles supposedly paid several hundred thousand pounds (maybe it was around 600,000 pounds?) for TWs clothes for the short time she was a working member of the RF. The clothing was a gift from Charles and separate from the annual allowance he gave them. I assume TW has to buy at least some of her clothes and that not everything is gifted or loaned via merchandising deals. Then factor in that California is one of the most expensive states to live in and has the highest state income tax in the US (you pay a federal income tax which is the same regardless of which state you live in and state and city income taxes which vary wildly depending on what state and city you live in). So even though they’ve pulled in a huge amount in revenue from various deals, their income may not be sufficient to cover their expenses.


----------



## ladyglen

TW for MM what is the origin please


----------



## Straight-Laced

This "un-invitation" must really grind their gears because it's exactly the kind of major royal event they'd want to be at with significant people attending who they want to be seen with. So near, yet so far. What a dreadful shame !! 










						Duke and Duchess of Sussex find ‘new role’ is to be left in the cold
					

Sussexes now enjoy a ‘half in, half out’ version of royal life, exemplified by their ‘un-invitation’ to the ‘state reception of the century’




					www.telegraph.co.uk
				



*Duke and Duchess of Sussex find ‘new role’ is to be left in the cold*

_Sussexes now enjoy a ‘half in, half out’ version of royal life, exemplified by their ‘un-invitation’ to the ‘state reception of the century’_

When they “stepped back” as senior members of the Royal family in January 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dreamed of a “progressive new role” within the monarchy that would see them “work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen”.

What we have witnessed since Queen Elizabeth II’s death is Harry and Meghan being offered a form of “half in, half out” royalty far from the cake-and-eat-it scenario they originally envisaged.

The news that the couple accidentally received an invitation to Sunday night’s “state reception of the century” at Buckingham Palace only to have it rescinded at the last minute shows that they may have a discretionary “in” when it comes to family occasions but where major events involving world leaders are concerned, they are well and truly “out”.

As they have been reunited with the royals to remember Harry’s beloved grandmother this week, a distinction has clearly been drawn between what the “non-working” Sussexes can be involved with as “much loved members of the family” and what their inferior status allows in terms of state set pieces, which is seemingly very little.

King Charles spelled it out in his first speech when he drew the distinction between “our new Prince and Princess of Wales continuing to inspire and lead our national conversations” and Harry and Meghan “continuing to build their lives overseas.”

But failing to feature among the 1,000-strong guest list for one of the biggest palace pow wows in living memory – even though it is being hosted by Harry’s father and stepmother – does rather drive home the reality that they remain very much on the outside looking in. Indeed, even the last minute nature of the “un-invitation” suggests communications between the palace and their former principals aren’t what they used to be.

In denying them the opportunity to rub shoulders with the likes of the US president, and Jacinta Adern, New Zealand’s prime minister, the palace powers-that-be have reasonably decided that there is a time and a place for Harry and Meghan – and it is not at the biggest diplomatic reception ever hosted by a monarch.

As a fellow non-working royal, the Duke of York is unsurprisingly not attending either.

Yet in withdrawing the offer to the Sussexes, the so-called men in grey suits may also have been mindful that the increasingly politicised nature of some of their recent interventions – from encouraging people to vote in America to the Duke’s comments on gun control – may not sit with with the non-partisan nature of the gathering.

The snub will be a blow, however, not only to Harry as fifth-in-line to the throne and the King’s son, but also the Duchess, who – post-Megxit – has tried to reposition herself as global powerhouse, on a par with ... the former First Lady.

Before she married Harry in 2018, the former actress made a lot of her high-level connections, posting a photograph of herself speaking to Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister, on Instagram and forging a close friendship with Jessica Mulroney, daughter–in-law of Trudeau’s predecessor Brian Mulroney.

Having been tipped as a potential future ... presidential nominee, last October, the mother of two, 41, wrote a letter to ... the House Speaker, and... the Senate Majority Leader, advocating for paid family leave. She would therefore have delighted in pressing the flesh with ...

Although Harry did not personally intervene over the decision to ban him from wearing military uniform, claiming he was happy to wear whatever his grandmother had requested – the couple do appear quite put out by the reception rebuff.

A source close to the Sussexes stressed that they had done everything expected of them during the period of mourning and were determined to keep the focus on the late Queen.

“They have done everything as best they could,” the source said. “They have turned up, they have smiled, shaken hands, whatever was asked.”

Yet the harsh reality of royal life is that if your name’s not down on the official House of Windsor team sheet, you’re not coming in.


(edited because names)


----------



## DoggieBags

ladyglen said:


> TW for MM what is the origin please


TW = The Wife


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> Harry has a different Colonel in Chief now.
> 
> He better get used to it.



Lol. Did you notice it said Commander in Chief in his extremely compassionate statement?


----------



## andrashik

Pessie said:


> Comforting to know that when Meg puts the rings in the post Harry will have someone to turn to


Nah. She will keep the rings


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Redbirdhermes

papertiger said:


> Many are asking themselves the same question.
> 
> The intention is reduce the number of people known as 'Working Royals' that are funded by taxpayers, protected by security, given accommodation etc.
> 
> The non-working Royals will confusingly have to (find) work.
> 
> However, non-working royals will still be part of the 'members of' brigade. Can still perform non-official ceremonies to personal charities as patron or guest(s) and can still be funded by Working Royals' _private_ income (farms, land, projects etc). My guess is that many charities that were once officially patronised by Working Royals will now find they have the same relationship with a new non-working royal, but they will have to cover some costs. As we have seen from most charities, very little gets to the people/projects they  boast about so this will not be outside the realms of current recognition.
> 
> The definitive meaning of a 'slimmed-down monarchy' will only be known once it's been decided upon. Everything else is pure speculation (we''ve had ten years of deliberation, so hopefully KC III has worked it out by now).


Interesting discussion about working and non-working Royals.  It seems to me that if you are a non-working Royal in that you aren’t being paid to full time royal, that you should be paid for all special appearances to charities and patronages and such.


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heartbroken?
> 
> View attachment 5612841
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



He chose to quit the family business. There are consequence. He needs to grow up.

Making a fuss again. For what? So that he can add another chapter to his memoir?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heartbroken?
> 
> View attachment 5612841
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Yeah, I don't know. Standing vigil over my grandmother's coffin, the last living grandparent I had, would be enough for me to feel heartbroken. As in, maybe this time the DM is doing Harry wrong.

ETA: or maybe not. Geez.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Prince Harry 'left "heartbroken" after Queen's 'ER' initials were stripped from military uniform he wore to coffin vigil': Duke 'considered wearing morning suit to avoid "humiliation"' after Prince Andrew was allowed to keep royal cypher'​



What happened to "Don't complain, don't explain"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

ladyglen said:


> TW for MM what is the origin please



I think it didn't originate from here...was it Twitter that started calling her The Wife?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Straight-Laced said:


> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex find ‘new role’ is to be left in the cold*



Gosh, that headline (as well as the link saying "H and M learning the monarchy still calls the shots" - saw it while quoting Straight-Laced) is mean, but I laughed.


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> Interesting discussion about working and non-working Royals.  It seems to me that if you are a non-working Royal in that you aren’t being paid to full time royal, that you should be paid for all special appearances to charities and patronages and such.



I'm not so sure if it's a charity. It would be the same discussion when celebs work for charities. Normal people give-up their time and money to help those they consider in need, so I don't see why a non-working royal can't spare a couple of hours a year and permission to lend their name to a charity's headed notepaper. 

Having your name associated with charity has its own rewards too anyway.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also this 



> In denying them the opportunity to rub shoulders with the likes of the US president, and Jacinta Adern, New Zealand’s prime minister, the palace powers-that-be have reasonably decided that there is a time and a place for Harry and Meghan – and it is not at the biggest diplomatic reception ever hosted by a monarch.



That said, I really do feel bad for him. He could have been there. It's what he was raised to do, and then he blew it all over some tantrum and a woman.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Nah. She will keep the rings



Right. I bet Trevor's diamond wasn't that expensive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT, but why are the cones of a fir called pine cone, like the cone of the, well, pine? It seem you can say fir cone, but pine cone is more customary?

(I'm deep in Christmas decorations already. Apparently you can bleach...cones and then they're white and look ethereal.)


----------



## Icyjade

biggest diplomatic reception

This… and again at KC’s coronation… they could have stayed as senior royals. They would have gotten important roles in both events. They chose to quit. Now they should not whine or engineer PR that they are deprived.

If you quit your job, would you expect your ex boss to invite you back for all the office parties and to wear back your old uniform so that you can look good? Normal people won’t right?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> If you quit your job, would you expect your ex boss to invite you back for all the office parties and to wear back your old uniform so that you can look good? Normal people won’t right?



Absolutely, and I'll also demand both my salary and my benefits. Doesn't everyone?


----------



## papertiger

For Harry and non-British interested parties 

From gov.uk


----------



## 1LV

papertiger said:


> *He no longer serves.*


Any purpose.  What.So.Ever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What's the difference between Marines and Army?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

LemonDrop said:


> Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.


We honour our veterans too, you are not allowed to wear uniform after you leave. Ex forces are obviously still allowed to wear their medals and wear a beret of their regiment. Also some wear a blazer with their regimental badge on their breast pocket. 
If you watch the lying in state feed you'll see that, men and women wearing normal clothes with a beret.


----------



## BlueCherry

Within hours of the Queens passing H&M had a tantrum about going to Balmoral. Since then it’s been the Windsor walkabout drama, wearing the uniform drama, HRH titles for their children (free security), allegedly claiming they were invited and uninvited to the state function and now the cypher snub.

We have a family that must fulfil their duty under the most difficult of circumstances with the eyes of the world watching them.

And those two continue to spit the dummy and cause trouble.


----------



## Debbini

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


How did he protect his Gramma? When? Did he protect her during the interview with OW?!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's the difference between Marines and Army?



Mostly different training.

Royal Marines are more adaptable and have trained in different and extreme/difficult terrains and temperatures (desert, mountains, Arctic etc) and their weaponry is more portable, because of this they are often capable of first response. They are also supposed to be trained amphibiously. Obviously the word 'Marine' comes from their navel origins, troops that were able to leave the ship.



From the Royal Marines (official page):
ROLE OF THE ROYAL MARINES​The Royal Marines are the UK's Commando Force and the Royal Navy's own amphibious troops. They are an elite fighting force, optimised for worldwide rapid response and are able to deal with a wide spectrum of threats and security challenges.

Fully integrated with the Royal Navy's amphibious ships, they can be deployed globally without host nation support and projected from the sea to conduct operations on land.

A key component of the Royal Navy's maritime security function, they provide a unique capability and are experts in ship-to-ship operations.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## skyqueen

I think we need a giggle before tomorrow


----------



## Chanbal

Poor TW! All this money in front of her eyes, but none in her pockets…









						Moneyed monarchs: Royal family’s ‘firm’ reportedly worth at least $23B
					

Over the past decade, the royals’ asset wealth — which includes buildings, land, mineral rights, art and other treasures — increased faster than at any other time since the first pieces of th…




					nypost.com


----------



## Sophisticatted

youngster said:


> Makes sense or maybe he was told Charles is moving ahead with changing the rules as to who is a Counsellor of State. If that report is true, Harry is out. So are Andrew and Bea. Anne and Edward and ??? would replace them. Who would the third new counsellor be in that scenario?


Catherine


----------



## Chanbal

If this is true, TW needs those princely ($$$$) titles for the kids.


----------



## andrashik

Oh Scoobie darling...


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the princely titles, Lady C on her last video is asking to help Charles by writing to him…


----------



## Sharont2305

andrashik said:


> Oh Scoobie darling...



Scobie, you've answered your own question in that post, 'for working Royals..' Which bit of those three words do you not understand?


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> Poor TW! All this money in front of her eyes, but none in her pockets…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moneyed monarchs: Royal family’s ‘firm’ reportedly worth at least $23B
> 
> 
> Over the past decade, the royals’ asset wealth — which includes buildings, land, mineral rights, art and other treasures — increased faster than at any other time since the first pieces of th…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com




This makes her so mad I think: _Prince William, 40, also became a billionaire after the death of his grandmother_

No wonder she used to give Prince William this look:


----------



## andrashik

Exiled royals 
Some people are speculating that she wanted full control of the "good" constant pr messages ( through her pet) and this has been in conflict with SS since they know what are they doing( mostly )


----------



## Icyjade

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5612906
> 
> Exiled royals
> Some people are speculating that she wanted full control of the "good" constant pr messages ( through her pet) and this has been in conflict with SS since they know what are they doing( mostly )



Or money issues… scroll to read


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

Sophisticatted said:


> Catherine


 Of course !  I forgot Prince Philip was a Counselor of State and just checked,  Camilla became so automatically as Queen Consort.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I believe the money troubles, I believe she uses the children as pawns, and can I just say I love how people snitch on her to the BRF because they're just so appalled by her behaviour. She has no one to blame but herself, her greed and her overinflated ego.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Uniforms at the Vigil’s:  IMO, it’s one last act of “serving their Queen”.   Can understand the 15 minute exception for this purpose.  

Epaulette-gate: Harry served himself with his selfish decisions and NOT his Queen, and now it’s too late to make amends for that.  

It seems like H&M envisioned big changes in their status once The Queen passed.  Big changes are afoot, alright…


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I believe the money troubles, I believe she uses the children as pawns, and can I just say I love how people snitch on her to the BRF because they're just so appalled by her behaviour. She has no one to blame but herself, her greed and her overinflated ego.



u/SecondhandCoke on Reddit is legit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> It seems like H&M envisioned big changes in their status once The Queen passed.  Big changes are afoot, alright…



Jup. They just didn't think in THAT direction. I must say I am surprised by an apparently steely Charles myself.


----------



## Sophisticatted

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I believe the money troubles, I believe she uses the children as pawns, and can I just say I love how people snitch on her to the BRF because they're just so appalled by her behaviour. She has no one to blame but herself, her greed and her overinflated ego.



I also believe they snitch to curry favor with The King (who has the true money, the true power, and the true worldwide connections).


----------



## DoggieBags

Sophisticatted said:


> I also believe they snitch to curry favor with The King (who has the true money, the true power, and the true worldwide connections).


She didn’t live in the UK long enough to develop many useful connections


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> That cypher wasn’t there because Harry was not serving TQ nor is he serving TK. *He isn’t serving anyone.* The uniform was nothing more than a costume in a play as far as he was concerned.


Isn’t he?


----------



## Debbini

Chanbal said:


>



It boggles my mind that someone can be such a "nasty" human being. She has to be one miserable, unhappy person.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Isn’t he?


The dark side


----------



## purseinsanity

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


I think you might be posting in the wrong thread.    
I'm "across the pond" and many of us have the same standards as the Brits.  
"Protects his Gramma" like a man?  I can't tell if you're pulling our legs to be sarcastic or you mean it.  If you do, can you give one example of how exactly he "protected" the Queen.  The way I see it, he was an utter nightmare to her the last 2 years of her life.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's children Archie and Lilibet left at home in America
> 
> 
> While the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been at the vigil in Westminster Hall this week, Archie, 3 and 15-month-old Lilibet are believed to have remained behind in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They're here, they're there...does anyone really even care??


----------



## CarryOn2020

And where does Major Johnny fit in?


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> And where does Major Johnny fit in?



Anywhere he would like


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What happened to "Don't complain, don't explain"?


His motto is now
"Complain, and complain, then explain why you complain."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> They're here, they're there...does anyone really even care??


Ignoring all the stories about their birth … it is a fact that the children have been zealously shielded/kept from view (black and white blurry photos from the back of the head …) as opposed to the Wales children - one lovely portrait a year
MM said as much - that she did not want to share her children with those who don’t love them , or words to that effect. Those were bitter words 
The effect of all this hiding of the children is that the public has lost interest
Compare also the Non working royal Tindall children - seen frolicking with Mike at Zara’s horse competitions, have we clearly seen Archie at H’s polo matches ?


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> Oh Scoobie darling...



OMFG, Scabies, stop regurgitating the same old crap.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> They're here, they're there...does anyone really even care??


Love the Roy Kent reference 



I agree with those who say H&M have lost the plot with this “tour”.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love the Roy Kent reference
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with those who say H&M have lost the plot with this “tour”.



I've never seen Ted Lasso so I had no idea


----------



## RAINDANCE

It is my view that 99% of the UK and world audience would have not had any clue about the missing cypher or what it meant. I can't believe that the Sussexes themselves would have been so daft as to draw attention to it. 

The Grandchildren's vigil was IMO a piece of fantastic Royal theatre (not to undermine the personal significance for each of them) and will form some of historical images from this week, and in the end, it was the right thing to do, that Harry was in uniform.

It was IMO a very elegant solution to the problem of whether Harry could wear a uniform and not be in contravention of the rules around the wearing of Service uniforms when no longer serving or having an honorary position.

I am inclined to believe the report that William petitioned both the Late Queen and KC3 for Harry to be allowed to wear uniform (presumably after PP's funeral) and was rebuffed by both B House and C House to be most likely true and that the rebuff was on the grounds that the Royal family need to be seen to obey the law/armed forces rules and can't change them to suit themselves. As I said, the absence of the cypher was an elegant and discrete way around this to avoid any potential issues of "holding out" 

(holding out - defintion
 conduct by a person leading another to believe that he possesses an authority that in reality he does not)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooh


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5612906
> 
> Exiled royals
> Some people are speculating that she wanted full control of the "good" constant pr messages ( through her pet) and this has been in conflict with SS since they know what are they doing( mostly )



Wow, that's HUGE.

H&M were obviously pushed, told they would not be Working Royals (under the late Queen) _before_ Megxit. They did not step-down (?)


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh




Was just coming to mention this. For some reason it wasn’t an issue then, but is an issue now?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this has been posted
Harry is insulted that he's not being treated well enough in spite of what he he has done to his family..
This article claims H&M were invited then disinvited to the event tonight
...Meghan is behaving (for now).  Andrew is soon going to be put in his place permanently.  No more protection from mother.



			https://elink.thedailybeast.com/view/62cedb3f34f452c5a80808b3hbhk3.xwu/bef3e75d


----------



## CarryOn2020

I guess we need to call this being King Charles-ed.  
Kinda like markled only much sharper.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh



I may be wrong but I think he was made aide de camp after his wedding?


----------



## RAINDANCE

BlueCherry said:


> I may be wrong but I think he was made aide de camp after his wedding?


Returned to the Crown​​Appointments​
13 October 2018 – 19 February 2021: Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty The Queen (ADC)


----------



## CarryOn2020

RAINDANCE said:


> Returned to the Crown​​Appointments​
> 13 October 2018 – 19 February 2021: Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty The Queen (ADC)


So, he was not entitled to wear it   All of this bs over nothing. Sounds like Tw again.  Or is this Opr?


----------



## BlueCherry

RAINDANCE said:


> Returned to the Crown​​Appointments​
> 13 October 2018 – 19 February 2021: Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty The Queen (ADC)



Sorry, yes returned along with everything else but I thought I saw that he didn’t have them at his wedding and wasn’t bothered 

Those two exhaust me despite my extended bed rest


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I can’t see the difference in the uniforms.  Are there pictures?  I’ve read so much BS today. I really don’t  believe much of it unless it has palace letterhead at this point.  If it’s apptrue it’s excellent shade but it also could be made up drama.


apparently the queen's initials were sewn in and they were removed on Harry's uniform (per Daily Beast article I posted)


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I can't find any close-ups of the epaulettes, but they do look different. Difference due to rank, perhaps?
> View attachment 5612730


of course we don't know what they are feeling but William's face looks sad and calm...Harry looks Angry (as usual)


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, he was not entitled to wear it   All of this bs over nothing. Sounds like Tw again.  Or is this Opr?



Poor woman has nothing to do. No kids, no friends, no family, no real job, no royal events to attend … stuck at Frogmore stirring the pot and RF bashing


----------



## RAINDANCE

Yes, Harry had no proper entitlement. So the absence of the cypher was really, really clever, or would have been if whoever reported he is "heartbroken", had not broadcast his disappointment. Was this Scobie - who else would know - or is it more presumption in the media ?

Andrew however still holds one honorary position as Vice Admiral and so according to the letter of the Law was entitled to wear the insignia. I expect that will go VERY soon, maybe even next week but it's retention may have been deliberately delayed and at the request of the Queen when he was stripped of everything else in January this year. As I noted before I think core family members had know all year that the Late Queen's condition was terminal and she would not be reaching the same age as her late husband or mother.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> apparently the queen's initials were sewn in and they were removed on Harry's uniform (per Daily Beast article I posted)


Seems the DB is wrong


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> apparently the queen's initials were sewn in and they were removed on Harry's uniform (per Daily Beast article I posted)


Sorry dont remember where - DM ? I saw closeups of the epaulettes - the ERII cypher was definitely gone from H's uniform
The cypher is for serving members of the military, which H is not, per article


----------



## marietouchet

RAINDANCE said:


> Yes, Harry had no proper entitlement. So the absence of the cypher was really, really clever, or would have been if whoever reported he is "heartbroken", had not broadcast his disappointment. Was this Scobie - who else would know - or is it more presumption in the media ?
> 
> Andrew however still holds one honorary position as Vice Admiral and so according to the letter of the Law was entitled to wear the insignia. I expect that will go VERY soon, maybe even next week but it's retention may have been deliberately delayed and at the request of the Queen when he was stripped of everything else in January this year. As I noted before I think core family members had know all year that the Late Queen's condition was terminal and she would not be reaching the same age as her late husband or mother.


And Andrew did indeed wear naval uniform. No one thought to look at his epaulettes, but then his case is diff, he still has an honorary position, H does not not

Neither is supposed to wear their last service uniform, just like any other former member of the services, they can wear berets and medals, no uniforms

H wore Blues and Royals uniform, there was surely some great care in selecting the branch of the military - why B&R uniform is OK if H is not currently serving or have honorary rank, but I have failed to find the significance
I would guess that KC was able to make a temporary allowance for H for the B&Rs


----------



## RAINDANCE

BlueCherry said:


> Sorry, yes returned along with everything else but I thought I saw that he didn’t have them at his wedding and wasn’t bothered
> 
> *Those two exhaust me despite my extended bed rest*


Wishing you a speedy recovery.


----------



## Pessie

I’m confused   so he’s shot himself in the epaulettes then?  Or did Scobie jump the gun again and leak another non-truth?  How silly and tired this all is on the eve of the Queens funeral.  Harry and TW should be ashamed.


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> I think you might be posting in the wrong thread.
> I'm "across the pond" and many of us have the same standards as the Brits.
> "Protects his Gramma" like a man?  I can't tell if you're pulling our legs to be sarcastic or you mean it.  If you do, can you give one example of how exactly he "protected" the Queen.  The way I see it, he was an utter nightmare to her the last 2 years of her life.


Williams eyes were steely we couldn’t even see z Harry’s hiding under his hat sulking cos the ER was removed from his shoulder diddums go home


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> Returned to the Crown​​Appointments​
> 13 October 2018 – 19 February 2021: Personal Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty The Queen (ADC)



So he returned the position but thought he'd keep the bling? I have such a hard time believing this only because HARRY GREW UP LIKE THIS. OMG.


----------



## elvisfan4life

BlueCherry said:


> I may be wrong but I think he was made aide de camp after his wedding?


Correct


----------



## RAINDANCE

I suspect Scobie is out of control - he's not done H&M any favours this week at all.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh



Awesome sleuthing


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> I’m confused   so he’s shot himself in the epaulettes then?  Or did Scobie jump the gun again and leak another non-truth?  How silly and tired this all is on the eve of the Queens funeral.  Harry and TW should be ashamed.


Now that the media is calling him “heartbroken”, he must deny it.  Perhaps a statement that he was honored to wear the uniform would suffice [not for me but maybe for others].


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I think you might be posting in the wrong thread.
> I'm "across the pond" and many of us have the same standards as the Brits.
> "Protects his Gramma" like a man?  I can't tell if you're pulling our legs to be sarcastic or you mean it.  If you do, can you give one example of how exactly he "protected" the Queen.  The way I see it, he was an utter nightmare to her the last 2 years of her life.


doncha know he met with her and gave her advice about the people around her?


----------



## youngster

So, Sunshine Sachs is out, that's huge news. Everyone knows that the first thing people do, who are having trouble with their image, is fire their PR firm as if that will fix the problem. I guess we'll have to wait a few days to start hearing why this happened. Was it really just about the money, the $2 million/year the Sussex's could not afford? Were there other reasons?  Did SS dump _them_ perhaps because they were difficult to deal with and would not take advice?   Did TW circumvent them and leak info when she was told not to?  I'm guessing neither party needs bad publicity so they'll be tight lipped over the it.  Maybe there are NDA's in place too. Still, people in the know are going to know why and that info will leak out.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> I’m confused   so he’s shot himself in the epaulettes then?  Or did Scobie jump the gun again and leak another non-truth?  How silly and tired this all is on the eve of the Queens funeral.  Harry and TW should be ashamed.


He should be ashamed of himself causing distraction at his granmother's funeral.  What a fool.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I was just thinking, there’s been a lot of talk of W and K avoiding being photographed with the terrible two, but besides that one grainy picture ogle the steps, it’s also been a long time since there has been a pic with Charles and either of them.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> So, Sunshine Sachs is out, that's huge news. Everyone knows that the first thing people do, who are having trouble with their image, is fire their PR firm as if that will fix the problem. I guess we'll have to wait a few days to start hearing why this happened. Was it really just about the money, the $2 million/year the Sussex's could not afford? Were there other reasons?  Did SS dump _them_ perhaps because they were difficult to deal with and would not take advice?   Did TW circumvent them and leak info when she was told not to?  I'm guessing neither party needs bad publicity so they'll be tight lipped over the it.  Maybe there are NDA's in place too. Still, people in the know are going to know why and that info will leak out.


Suddenly - stories about their finances are all over the place
I believe the stories, they have no real income coming in, and massive expenses, even $1M / yr for PR is a lot if you have no income stream
Dont forget lawyers, 27 production people, house, accountants to do the quarterly  taxes - required even if the income is nil 
They got money up front, but was two years ago, and have produced a handful of podcasts


----------



## Icyjade

Pessie said:


> I’m confused   so he’s shot himself in the epaulettes then?  Or did Scobie jump the gun again and leak another non-truth?  How silly and tired this all is on the eve of the Queens funeral.  Harry and TW should be ashamed.



Maybe it’s to incite sympathy for the Harkles in the US, but unfortunately for them, I think it just pisses off people in UK (and much of the Commonwealth countries that share common systems) who do know the system.

I‘ve come across comments from ex-UK army people who thought he is a brat for wearing the uniform with a beard (as others have commented, service men are supposed to be clean shaven and also QE was known to have preferred the RF men to be clean shaven). 

Ultimately, their PR strategy is a mess. Like no one in their right mind would do this… it is so poorly thought out really. Reeks of TW as assuming she wasn’t in UK long enough to understand the system and how the British would think. So stupid really (along with looking orange).


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> I was just thinking, there’s been a lot of talk of W and K avoiding being photographed with the terrible two, but besides that one grainy picture ogle the steps, it’s also been a long time since there has been a pic with Charles and either of them.


That is a very effective elegant way to shut down the books and truth bombs, H&M have nothing to talk about , no snaps for book 
The only thing they control is access to their children
Hmmm  anyone want to bet there will be a sudden flood of photos of the kids? People magazine cover ?


----------



## carmen56

marietouchet said:


> Ignoring all the stories about their birth … it is a fact that the children have been zealously shielded/kept from view (black and white blurry photos from the back of the head …) as opposed to the Wales children - one lovely portrait a year
> MM said as much - that she did not want to share her children with those who don’t love them , or words to that effect. Those were bitter words
> The effect of all this hiding of the children is that the public has lost interest
> Compare also the Non working royal Tindall children - seen frolicking with Mike at Zara’s horse competitions, have we clearly seen Archie at H’s polo matches ?


How can you love children you’ve never met or set eyes on?  Raptor’s stance on the invisikids reminds me of Michael Jackson draping his kids heads in blankets whenever they went out in public.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> *What does that say about her?
> That she did as she was told by a PR agency?*
> 
> What about H's book?
> 
> I don't believe a word. Except perhaps she wants to write about "My Private Audience with the King" who she has no doubt has not been able to get a second with for a week.


To me, it says that the independent feminist cum pitiful victim was a PR construct, and Zedzee is now trying to mutate again to a more profitable persona.

Another thing I noted was the choice of words used in the headlines of OK magazine (pro-Harkle) and Radar (American media, essentially same article from same source - yoohoo, Omid  ).
_US-based PR firm Who Pulled Them from Royal Life
US-based PR firm Who Helped Extract them from British Royals_
The first implies helplessness, that SS inveigled them to leave the BRF (poor pitiful victims of a con job).
The second implies black ops: SS are like a CIA outfit, agents sent in to smuggle out American hostage Markle like she was Sacoolas. Handbag and Archificial are simply collateral damage.
The Harkles should just write fiction.

Btw, OK is now spinning the narrative that KC is considering giving in to the Harkles' half-in/half-out demand because he wants to been seen as making his own decisions. Say what?


DoggieBags said:


> Harry was receiving somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 million pounds per year from Prince Charles and I think this was increased to closer to 3 million pounds after he was married. This allowance came from the income Charles received from the Duchy of Cornwall. Charles also used part of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall to give a similar amount to William each year. The cost of H’s security (provided for working members of the BRF) was separate from the allowance Charles gave him. The cost of BRF security is tax payer funded. PR costs would have been part of the general BRF expenses and would not have been focused on or controlled by H&M. The part that is harder to quantify is how much it would take to duplicate the cost of their homes. You can say well they were paying xx in rent for Frogmore, or the suite of rooms at Kensington Palace, etc. but those locations simply can’t be duplicated irl. If you add up the amounts H&M reportedly received from Spotify (potentially worth as much as $25 million), Netflix (potentially worth as much as $100 million), and H’s book deal (potentially worth as much as $20 million), they did pull in way more $$$ than 3 million pounds on an annual basis once they were outside the BRF. However, their lifestyle costs also took a quantum leap with the 16 bathroom Montecito mansion (mortgage, maintenance, insurance, and property taxes), the over the top 24/7 private security (since Harry insists their lives are in constant danger because of who they are), cost of their personal staff (Children’s Nannie’s, H&M’s personal assistants, household staff, etc.), PR costs (SS kept busy churning out non-stop fluff pieces and misinformation and buying phony awards for TW), legal costs (since they are very litigious), travel costs (yes most of this appears to have been footed by various organizations they worked with like The Invictus Games and they have apparently been loaned private planes by various connections but I assume some portion still had to be paid for by H&M). It’s hard to know how much TW’s clothing costs since she presumably is gifted or lent at least some clothing in merchandising deals. But if you believe any of the articles, Prince Charles supposedly paid several hundred thousand pounds (maybe it was around 600,000 pounds?) for TWs clothes for the short time she was a working member of the RF. The clothing was a gift from Charles and separate from the annual allowance he gave them. I assume TW has to buy at least some of her clothes and that not everything is gifted or loaned via merchandising deals. Then factor in that California is one of the most expensive states to live in and has the highest state income tax in the US (you pay a federal income tax which is the same regardless of which state you live in and state and city income taxes which vary wildly depending on what state and city you live in). So even though they’ve pulled in a huge amount in revenue from various deals, their income may not be sufficient to cover their expenses.


I'm assuming that Handbag failed maths and TW always had someone else do her taxes, maybe even pay her taxes. So they were noobs regarding the cost of living, especially the luxury standards they expected with a mansion and being waited on hand and foot. And the whining about being cut off definitely indicates they were planning on being financial parasites.


Redbirdhermes said:


> Interesting discussion about working and non-working Royals.  It seems to me that if you are a non-working Royal in that you aren’t being paid to full time royal, that you should be paid for all special appearances to charities and patronages and such.


The Harkles wanted to be financially supported as if they were working royals, but work as if they were non-working royals, and cherry-pick as if they were the monarchs. Why they thought anyone with common sense would accept this deal speaks a lot about their skewed sense of importance.


Icyjade said:


> He chose to quit the family business. There are consequence. He needs to grow up.
> 
> Making a fuss again. For what? So that he can add another chapter to his memoir?


They stole my darling wife's shoes!
They took the cipher off my uniform!
They won't let us go to the party!
Wah! Wah! Wah!
(We really need a face-palm emoji for these toddlers)


----------



## Toby93

jblended said:


> If this was the case, I don't believe she would have been allowed to do the walkabout or show her face at all.


I don't know about that   Charles and Diana did tours for years, long after their marriage was over.   The public just didn't know about it.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Suddenly - stories about their finances are all over the place
> I believe the stories, they have no real income coming in, and massive expenses, even $1M / yr for PR is a lot if you have no income stream
> Dont forget lawyers, 27 production people, house, accountants to do the quarterly  taxes - required even if the income is nil
> They got money up front, but was two years ago, and have produced a handful of podcasts



I know. Even when they win their court cases they are not the massive payouts they were expecting. 

The DM had to pay expenses + £1 damages. 

That's not gonna pay the pool guy/gal 

However, they will be forever OK. Harry will never, ever, ever be allowed to go under. They may however be made to eat up, put up and shut-up though.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> To me, it says that the independent feminist cum pitiful victim was a PR construct, and Zedzee is now trying to mutate again to a more profitable persona.
> 
> Another thing I noted was the choice of words used in the headlines of OK magazine (pro-Harkle) and Radar (American media, essentially same article from same source - yoohoo, Omid  ).
> _US-based PR firm Who Pulled Them from Royal Life
> US-based PR firm Who Helped Extract them from British Royals_
> The first implies helplessness, that SS inveigled them to leave the BRF (poor pitiful victims of a con job).
> The second implies black ops: SS are like a CIA outfit, agents sent in to smuggle out American hostage Markle like she was Sacoolas. Handbag and Archificial are simply collateral damage.
> The Harkles should just write fiction.
> 
> Btw, OK is now spinning the narrative that KC is considering giving in to the Harkles' half-in/half-out demand because he wants to been seen as making his own decisions. Say what?
> 
> I'm assuming that Handbag failed maths and TW always had someone else do her taxes, maybe even pay her taxes. So they were noobs regarding the cost of living, especially the luxury standards they expected with a mansion and being waited on hand and foot. And the whining about being cut off definitely indicates they were planning on being financial parasites.
> 
> The Harkles wanted to be financially supported as if they were working royals, but work as if they were non-working royals, and cherry-pick as if they were the monarchs. Why they thought anyone with common sense would accept this deal speaks a lot about their skewed sense of importance.
> 
> They stole my darling wife's shoes!
> They took the cipher off my uniform!
> They won't let us go to the party!
> Wah! Wah! Wah!
> (We really need a face-palm emoji for these toddlers)



One thing we've learnt from this thread is it's very hard to change your story once out.

Even her own followers would never swallow she's a victim of her own PR.


----------



## RueMonge

Pessie said:


> I’m confused   so he’s shot himself in the epaulettes then?


On the floor I am!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> I'm going to guess it's Scabies.  He's well versed in putting out lies like his mistress tells him to.  *Besides, he'd probably do it for free as long as he can sniff TW's undies. *


First time in a long time that I  while wanting to simultaneously .


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that with or without alcohol? I'm always a little confused, in Germany Cidre is French apple wine, then you can get British fruit ciders which are also somewhat alcoholic, but the cider in the US is just non-clear fresh apple juice?


The sparkling apple cider in Canada is just carbonated apple juice.  I might be able to tolerate that, but anything else at 5 in the morning is not going to work for me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> I’m confused   so he’s shot himself in the epaulettes then?  Or did Scobie jump the gun again and leak another non-truth?  How silly and tired this all is on the eve of the Queens funeral.  Harry and TW should be ashamed.


Also the aiguillettes.   Prince William graciously took his off.  Still the obnoxious child fusses. Note Hazz did not wear the aiguillettes on his wedding day.  In essence, the uniforms were a joke. Unreal. 


Old article: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...nce-william-gold-braid-uniform-royal-wedding/
_Prince William's wings are for flying in the RAF, but he also has the ribbons for the Queen’s Golden Jubilee and The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee. However, he is also wearing the a Garter star since he is a member of the Order of the Garter. Because he is an Aide-de-Camp to The Queen—an honor bestowed upon him in 2013—his shoulder strap bears the Queen's cypher. This is also the reason why he's wearing the golden braids—better known as an aiguillette—across his right shoulder.

According to the Guardian, Queen Victoria was the first monarch to install this small group of personal aides-de-camp. One of the first ones was Prince Louis of Battenberg, Queen Victoria's grandson-in-law. 

In addition to Prince William, his father the Prince of Wales and his grandfather the Duke of Cambridge are also personal Aide-de-Camp to the Queen._


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> One thing we've learnt from this thread is it's very hard to change your story once out.
> 
> Even her own followers would never swallow she's a victim of her own PR.


her true stans will believe whatever she says


----------



## Toby93

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He *walks like a king. Stands like a king*. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


Sorry, I would also have to agree to disagree.  He is not gorgeous, he is scruffy and should not have a beard with that uniform.  He DID NOT protect his grandmother from California, he trashed her and her family while her beloved husband lay dying.  I think that is the height of cowardice, so no he doesn't look like a king, and thank goodness he will never be king.


----------



## youngster

Icyjade said:


> *Ultimately, their PR strategy is a mess. Like no one in their right mind would do this… it is so poorly thought out really.* Reeks of TW as assuming she wasn’t in UK long enough to understand the system and how the British would think. So stupid really (along with looking orange).



This is why I could see SS being the ones to fire the Sussex's, not the other way around.  They wouldn't take SS's advice or, if they did, they would still circumvent it in some way likely due to their need to clap back at everyone.  SS is top notch. They have represented a lot of people, including some terrible people with correspondingly huge PR problems. They'll take the money and do the best they can with what they've got to work with, but the party involved has to take their advice.  But, the Sussex's are in constant PR crisis mode due to some foolish thing one of them said (Archie's room was on fire! Our wedding meant as much as Mandela's release from prison! The First Amendment is bonkers!). It's  not a good look for SS.  

The interview in The Cut magazine could have been the tipping point.  It was supposed to be a puff piece, it was not at all flattering, and she basically threatened the royal family in it.  If I were at SS, I'd be thinking we set up this interview, got the glamorous photos, told her how to answer the questions, and she does that.  SS also would have been advising them to keep their heads down this week, do everything they were told, no complaining, no leaking to Scoobie, and they have not done that. So, yeah, they're done with them.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> I guess we need to call this being King Charles-ed.
> Kinda like markled only much sharper.


Don’t know if this largely unused phrase is uttered outside the US, but I remember  people using the word “chuck“ meaning to throw something away as in “He chucked out all the broken dishes.”

There’s also a dictionary meaning, “to force someone to leave a place or a job, usually because they have done something wrong“.

They got chucked, Royally!


----------



## kipp

Re: SS.  Previously there was an (unverified) report that Megain was behind in paying them, and only after the Spotify podcasts were done and she was paid for that was she able to pay her overdue bills with SS in full.  That was when SS cut them loose.


----------



## csshopper

RAINDANCE said:


> I suspect Scobie is out of control - he's not done H&M any favours this week at all.


The latest Botox injections were bumbled and part of his brain controlling common sense was frozen. Whether the damage is permanent remains to be seen.


----------



## jennlt

BlueCherry said:


> Sorry, yes returned along with everything else but I thought I saw that he didn’t have them at his wedding and wasn’t bothered
> 
> *Those two exhaust me* despite my extended bed rest


Sounds like you have a bad case of Sussexhaustion. We've all had it at one point or another. Wishing you a speedy recovery


----------



## BlueCherry

csshopper said:


> Don’t know if this largely unused phrase is uttered outside the US, but I remember  people using the word “chuck“ meaning to throw something away as in “He chucked out all the broken dishes.”
> 
> There’s also a dictionary meaning, “to force someone to leave a place or a job, usually because they have done something wrong“.
> 
> They got chucked, Royally!



And isn’t Chuck a nickname for Charles in the US. My sisters boss was American and used Chuck


----------



## KEG66

BlueCherry said:


> And isn’t Chuck a nickname for Charles in the US. My sisters boss was American used Chuck


Ladies you are all on fire today !!


----------



## BlueCherry

jennlt said:


> Sounds like you have a bad case of Sussexhaustion. We've all had it at one point or another. Wishing you a speedy recovery



Lol and thanks 

I had a nap and when I woke up my mischievous pup was “half in and half out” of his bed practically grinning at me


----------



## Icyjade

CarryOn2020 said:


> Also the aiguillettes.   Prince William graciously took his off.  Still the obnoxious child fusses. Note Hazz did not wear the aiguillettes on his wedding day.  In essence, the uniforms were a joke. Unreal.
> View attachment 5612970
> 
> Old article: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celeb...nce-william-gold-braid-uniform-royal-wedding/
> _Prince William's wings are for flying in the RAF, but he also has the ribbons for the Queen’s Golden Jubilee and The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee. However, he is also wearing the a Garter star since he is a member of the Order of the Garter. Because he is an Aide-de-Camp to The Queen—an honor bestowed upon him in 2013—his shoulder strap bears the Queen's cypher. This is also the reason why he's wearing the golden braids—better known as an aiguillette—across his right shoulder.
> 
> According to the Guardian, Queen Victoria was the first monarch to install this small group of personal aides-de-camp. One of the first ones was Prince Louis of Battenberg, Queen Victoria's grandson-in-law.
> 
> In addition to Prince William, his father the Prince of Wales and his grandfather the Duke of Cambridge are also personal Aide-de-Camp to the Queen._



Yes, looks like Prince William did bend over for 6 and the brat still complained!

If you see the other vigil by QE kids, all have braids:



Vs at the celebration - braids:



And the vigil - no braids:



And the brat still complains?


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> The sparkling apple cider in Canada is just carbonated apple juice.  I might be able to tolerate that, but anything else at 5 in the morning is not going to work for me


The first time my aunt drank cider, she thought it was apple juice. I understand she was a maudlin drunk


----------



## csshopper

BlueCherry said:


> And isn’t Chuck a nickname for Charles in the US. My sisters boss was American and used Chuck


Yes, thanks for posting. I meant to include it!


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> What does that say about her?
> That she did as she was told by a PR agency?
> 
> What about H's book?
> 
> I don't believe a word. Except perhaps she wants to write about "My Private Audience with the King" who she has no doubt has not been able to get a second with for a week.


She had 18 months to think about what she said on Oprah and reflect on the fallout.  That didn't stop her from pushing ahead and agreeing to an interview last month with The Cut and repeating more lies and adding new ones, plus a threat of revealing more.  Same with her podcasts.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heartbroken?
> 
> View attachment 5612841
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Heartbroken, devastated", really?  Did he give a d@mn that his 95 year old grandmother would be heartbroken or devastated when he sat down with Oprah and humiliated his family?


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> So, Sunshine Sachs is out, that's huge news. Everyone knows that the first thing people do, who are having trouble with their image, is fire their PR firm as if that will fix the problem. I guess we'll have to wait a few days to start hearing why this happened. Was it really just about the money, the $2 million/year the Sussex's could not afford? Were there other reasons?  Did SS dump _them_ perhaps because they were difficult to deal with and would not take advice?   Did TW circumvent them and leak info when she was told not to?  I'm guessing neither party needs bad publicity so they'll be tight lipped over the it.  Maybe there are NDA's in place too. Still, people in the know are going to know why and that info will leak out.


Trading out PR firms isn’t _that_ unusual on the surface. It happens all the time. But with these two? Frankly, I think SS did an amazing job with what they had to work with. They got placement everywhere, for the most inane things. It will be interesting to see which firm they hire to take its place.


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> And isn’t Chuck a nickname for Charles in the US. My sisters boss was American and used Chuck


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Jup. They just didn't think in THAT direction. I must say I am surprised by an apparently steely Charles myself.


Steely Charles, most likely backed by Camilla and William.


RAINDANCE said:


> As I noted before I think core family members had know all year that the Late Queen's condition was terminal and she would not be reaching the same age as her late husband or mother.


I think she died of a combination of old age and a broken heart. I believe she was smiling and at peace in her last few days knowing that she'd soon be with her "strength and stay".



> https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-you-die-of-old-age-more-doctors-are-saying-yes-11663234201





> https://time.com/6195183/losing-loved-one-heart-risk/


“The risk of death after the loss of a loved one is most elevated in the first few weeks and *over the first year,*” he says.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> However, they will be forever OK. Harry will never, ever, ever be allowed to go under. They may however be made to eat up, put up and shut-up though.



But I'd happily see her downsize after the divorce.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. I bet Trevor's diamond wasn't that expensive.


Especially since she had it redone to HER specifications  Thank goodness Catherine has the iconic ring!


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Trading out PR firms isn’t _that_ unusual on the surface. It happens all the time. But with these two? *Frankly, I think SS did an amazing job with what they had to work with. *They got placement everywhere, for the most inane things. It will be interesting to see which firm they hire to take its place.


Much as I have a poor opinion of SS's lack of morals, I have to give them credit for creativity. It takes a high degree of innovative thought to attempt to reframe a money-grubbing talentless failed middle-aged actress as an influential young mother and concerned global citizen. They had to work hard for their money. Too bad she broke the internet for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## BlueCherry

Apparently Harry’s book was going to slate Camilla and Catherine.  

Now he can’t slate his Dad as he’s King, he can’t slate Camilla as she’s Dads wife, he will take her side and she’s in charge according to the DM, he can’t slate Wills as he holds all the Duchy funds and he can’t slate Catherine because she’s Wills wife. He can slate courtiers but they don’t give a toss. 

It’s gonna be a sh1t book


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> The first time my aunt drank cider, she thought it was apple juice. I understand she was a maudlin drunk



I don't usually drink, but I'll have a sip of new wine each fall. That is basically grapejuice that has JUST started its fermentation process...in fact, buy some and drink it over a week and it will taste differently each day. Anyway, it is super sweet and doesn't taste very alcoholic in the beginning, and that's where people completely unterestimate it and get sickly drunk on it. 

Also you need a good base, e.g. a piece of onion tarte or savory cheesecake.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Trading out PR firms isn’t _that_ unusual on the surface. It happens all the time. But with these two? Frankly, I think SS did an amazing job with what they had to work with. They got placement everywhere, for the most inane things. It will be interesting to see which firm they hire to take its place.



They did, there were tons of puff pieces on them all the time but SS still couldn't keep them from shooting themselves in the foot in between.  The next PR firm will have the same problem. It'll be interesting to see if they stick with a U.S. firm.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Trading out PR firms isn’t _that_ unusual on the surface. It happens all the time. But with these two? Frankly, I think SS did an amazing job with what they had to work with. They got placement everywhere, for the most inane things. It will be interesting to see which firm they hire to take its place.



And which firm won't think that money is earned way too hard.


----------



## Toby93

BlueCherry said:


> Within hours of the Queens passing H&M had a tantrum about going to Balmoral. Since then it’s been the Windsor walkabout drama, wearing the uniform drama, HRH titles for their children (free security), allegedly claiming they were invited and uninvited to the state function and now the cypher snub.
> 
> We have a family that must fulfil their duty under the most difficult of circumstances with the eyes of the world watching them.
> 
> And those two continue to spit the dummy and cause trouble.


I wonder how much of what is written is the truth, and how much is just speculation?  I want nothing more for those 2 to get back on a plane and leave the BRF alone, but I do think that a lot of the stuff that is put out there by the press is just for clicks.  Who knows?  

Is Scooby Do really a direct line to TW?  We all know that they have said so many outrageous lies in the past that we all are inclined to believe a lot of what is written.   How does the press know that Hazz was "heartbroken" by the uniform?  How do we know that TW is "livid" about the palace witholding HRH for the kids?  Is any of it true?

These last 4 years, we have become so used to the drama that accompanies these two, that we sort of take each new outburst in stride


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> Apparently Harry’s book was going to slate Camilla and Catherine.



That really hurts my heart. Kate and him were so close. "The sister I never had". Of course that was before "the wife none of us thought could be so psycho".


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I wonder how much of what is written is the truth, and how much is just speculation?  I want nothing more for those 2 to get back on a plane and leave the BRF alone, but I do think that a lot of the stuff that is put out there by the press is just for clicks.  Who knows?
> 
> Is Scooby Do really a direct line to TW?  We all know that they have said so many outrageous lies in the past that we all are inclined to believe a lot of what is written.   *How does the press know that Hazz was "heartbroken" by the uniform?  How do we know that TW is "livid" about the palace witholding HRH for the kids?  Is any of it true?*
> 
> These last 4 years, we have become so used to the drama that accompanies these two, that we sort of take each new outburst in stride


My guess is Tw leaked it.  We know she has done that in the past.


----------



## DoggieBags

BlueCherry said:


> Apparently Harry’s book was going to slate Camilla and Catherine.
> 
> Now he can’t slate his Dad as he’s King, he can’t slate Camilla as she’s Dads wife, he will take her side and she’s in charge according to the DM, he can’t slate Wills as he holds all the Duchy funds and he can’t slate Catherine because she’s Wills wife. He can slate courtiers but they don’t give a toss.
> 
> It’s gonna be a sh1t book


If his book was going to slate Camilla while his Dad controlled the Duchy Funds, I don’t see what would stop him from continuing to slate Catherine now that William controls the Duchy Funds. I can see why he would refrain from slating Camilla now that his Dad is King and she is Queen Consort.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> Apparently Harry’s book was going to slate Camilla and Catherine.
> 
> Now he can’t slate his Dad as he’s King, he can’t slate Camilla as she’s Dads wife, he will take her side and she’s in charge according to the DM, he can’t slate Wills as he holds all the Duchy funds and he can’t slate Catherine because she’s Wills wife. He can slate courtiers but they don’t give a toss.
> 
> It’s gonna be a sh1t book


If he fails as a writer, the bookstores can do a 2-for-1 deal and band his tell-all with The Stench in the bargain bin. 

What will be more interesting is the rest of the deal. Wasn't Book #2 supposed to be released after HMTQ passes away? Well, his timeline has accelerated. 

And TW was supposed to write a tome on wellness? Unless she ditches her victimhood, who will take advice from her on wellness? Can she change it to advice on make-up and hairdo, with chapters on smokey eye, messy bun, extensions & wigs, and bronzer & self-tan options?


----------



## CarryOn2020

As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.

Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​








						'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
					

A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> And where does Major Johnny fit in?


I saw a glimpse of him on TV last night as he showed PM Trudeau into the sitting room for a meeting with KC.  Yummy


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> If his book was going to slate Camilla while his Dad controlled the Duchy Funds, I don’t see what would stop him from continuing to slate Catherine now that William controls the Duchy Funds. I can see why he would refrain from slating Camilla now that his Dad is King and she is Queen Consort.


Hazz is a hypocrite and she is “such a fraud”.


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Ignoring all the stories about their birth … it is a fact that the children have been zealously shielded/kept from view (black and white blurry photos from the back of the head …) as opposed to the Wales children - one lovely portrait a year
> MM said as much - that she did not want to share her children with those who don’t love them , or words to that effect. Those were bitter words
> *The effect of all this hiding of the children is that the public has lost interest*
> Compare also the Non working royal Tindall children - seen frolicking with Mike at Zara’s horse competitions, have we clearly seen Archie at H’s polo matches ?


This is exactly what has happened.  Was her plan to make money from pictures?  I believe that ship has sailed....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> If his book was going to slate Camilla while his Dad controlled the Duchy Funds, I don’t see what would stop him from continuing to slate Catherine now that William controls the Duchy Funds. I can see why he would refrain from slating Camilla now that his Dad is King and she is Queen Consort.



Or maybe that means they really gave up funding him. He thought he had nothing to lose.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If he fails as a writer, the bookstores can do a 2-for-1 deal and band his tell-all with The Stench in the bargain bin.



It's going to be a harsh winter for many. Maybe we can use the package to heat our ovens.


----------



## CarryOn2020

KC III still needs to remove the CoS, the HRH, all the other titles and not invite him to the coronation.  
That could be painful for the attention-seekers.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> They did, there were tons of puff pieces on them all the time but SS still couldn't keep them from shooting themselves in the foot in between.  The next PR firm will have the same problem. It'll be interesting to see if they stick with a U.S. firm.


When you are paying someone for their expertise, listen to them! I suspect too often Meghan did her own thing and didn’t inform the agency beforehand. They were left to incorporate whatever stunt she did with their own plans.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Trading out PR firms isn’t _that_ unusual on the surface. It happens all the time. But with these two? Frankly, I think SS did an amazing job with what they had to work with. They got placement everywhere, for the most inane things. It will be interesting to see which firm they hire to take its place.



not to mention awards for, I dunno   breathing air and er, um sleeping


----------



## BlueCherry

Toby93 said:


> I wonder how much of what is written is the truth, and how much is just speculation?  I want nothing more for those 2 to get back on a plane and leave the BRF alone, but I do think that a lot of the stuff that is put out there by the press is just for clicks.  Who knows?
> 
> Is Scooby Do really a direct line to TW?  We all know that they have said so many outrageous lies in the past that we all are inclined to believe a lot of what is written.   How does the press know that Hazz was "heartbroken" by the uniform?  How do we know that TW is "livid" about the palace witholding HRH for the kids?  Is any of it true?
> 
> These last 4 years, we have become so used to the drama that accompanies these two, that we sort of take each new outburst in stride



This is true, personally the things that have been proven are enough to convince me she’s a horrible person. I tried to ask myself why she gets to me and I think it’s because I compare it to someone potentially abusing my Mum in this manner. How could anyone inflict such pain on someone in their 90’s with a sick husband. 

I think the genuine press are focused on the Queen and the funeral as is just. The gutter press, which I also enjoy for comments mostly, are probably the ones stirring things up. I don’t mind because the more negative publicity they get may help the fans to be more aware of their BS and for those two to disappear into obscurity. 

It is indeed like most horrors, the more we see the more we become immune. 

Then there’s the entertainment factor alongside it all. I never knew I could be so mean about someone


----------



## Aimee3

I bet Sunshine Sacks employees are celebrating like mad now.  They must be thrilled to be rid of these “clients” who were a PIA!


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Well, TBH, I feel excluded from the state banquet too.

However, I have scheduled an appointment with my shower-head and will be engaged in washing my hair now, so even if I get invited I will have consult my diary for a window.

At least now we know why HaZbin and MegZ hung around for so long. Not to mourn the Queen, more to hob-nob with the nobs.


----------



## BlueCherry

DoggieBags said:


> If his book was going to slate Camilla while his Dad controlled the Duchy Funds, I don’t see what would stop him from continuing to slate Catherine now that William controls the Duchy Funds. I can see why he would refrain from slating Camilla now that his Dad is King and she is Queen Consort.


He would have slated Camilla while QEII was alive but not now that Charles is King.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


For operation read world


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> If he fails as a writer, the bookstores can do a 2-for-1 deal and band his tell-all with The Stench in the bargain bin.
> 
> What will be more interesting is the rest of the deal. Wasn't Book #2 supposed to be released after HMTQ passes away? Well, his timeline has accelerated.
> 
> And TW was supposed to write a tome on wellness? Unless she ditches her victimhood, who will take advice from her on wellness? Can she change it to advice on make-up and hairdo, with chapters on smokey eye, messy bun, extensions & wigs, and bronzer & self-tan options?



He will end up like that mouthy butler Burrell who pipes up every time he’s skint.


----------



## elvisfan4life

BlueCherry said:


> He will end up like that mouthy butler Burrell who pipes up every time he’s skint.


Paul Burrell


----------



## BlueCherry

elvisfan4life said:


> Paul Burrell



That’s the one. Bottom feeder.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's *friend*" reminds me of T****'s reported habit of calling NY papers under an assumed name to tip them off about things he wanted publicized. Didn't Hazy refer to the First Amendment as "bonkers"? Hmm...


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I bet Sunshine Sacks employees are celebrating like mad now.  They must be thrilled to be rid of these “clients” who were a PIA!


The employees are likely accustomed to difficult clients but this would have been a test of their fortitude.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I just saw Kate was to greet the First Lady of Ukraine today. TW must be fuming, not being able to be photographed with her and forwarding her nonsense humanitarian title she gave herself.
This gives me so much satisfaction!! Lol!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> When you are paying someone for their expertise, listen to them! I suspect too often Meghan did her own thing and didn’t inform the agency beforehand. They were left to incorporate whatever stunt she did with their own plans.


It must be maddening to be a leader in the PR industry and have to deal with such a demanding loose cannon of a client. Who will want to deal with her now? I can only see some lower tier firm trying to make a name for themselves taking them on.


----------



## Genie27

CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’m sure they can find some far-flung ‘overseas’ outpost that will welcome them with open arms to the Throne



Spoiler



Bench




Sorry first time doing a spoiler and I screwed it up…


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> BlueCherry said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently Harry’s book was going to slate Camilla and Catherine.
> 
> Now he can’t slate his Dad as he’s King, he can’t slate Camilla as she’s Dads wife, he will take her side and she’s in charge according to the DM, he can’t slate Wills as he holds all the Duchy funds and he can’t slate Catherine because she’s Wills wife. He can slate courtiers but they don’t give a toss.
> 
> It’s gonna be a sh1t book
> 
> 
> 
> According to Tom Bower, it has already been published, just waiting for release.  How do you redo a book without costing your publisher a ton of money?
Click to expand...




bag-mania said:


> The first thing that I thought when I heard Her Majesty had died, was how can Hazz release his book now?  She must have been losing her mind, thinking about all the money they were about to lose on book deals and unreleased podcasts


----------



## BlueCherry

Joe ***** has done America proud with the respect he has shown for the Queen. He comes all the way here to give a woman who deserves it a brilliant tribute. Well done Joe! 

And that’s some beast   

Wonder if Meghan is watching on TV like the rest of us


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DP


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Is Scooby Do really a direct line to TW?  We all know that they have said so many outrageous lies in the past that we all are inclined to believe a lot of what is written.   How does the press know that Hazz was "heartbroken" by the uniform?  How do we know that TW is "livid" about the palace witholding HRH for the kids?  Is any of it true?
> 
> These last 4 years, we have become so used to the drama that accompanies these two, that we sort of take each new outburst in stride


IMO Zedzee doesn't connect directly with Horrid most of the time because she needs plausible deniability, especially for the more objectionable statements he makes. Horrid described himself as the Harkles' friend for a short period, so there was personal contact at some point.


CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I believe this friend is Horrid because who else would be so aggrieved on their behalf? Can't think of anything more depressing than inflicting the Harkles on the world leaders.
Handbag: Did you know my darling wife is a leading feminist? She hangs out with Gloria.
VIP: Ah, no, I had no idea.
Handbag: She also does voice-overs.
Zedzee: We're just here to pitch it to you.

Other pro-Harkle mouthpieces like Jack Royston/Newsweek, Yahoo, NAACP, The Cut and TIME - I'm wondering if they or their publishers are paid by SS and, if they are, will the new PR outfit be paying them for fluff pieces and awards too?


----------



## bag-mania

??? That’s odd. None of those quotes are mine even though it says they are.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Icyjade said:


> There is a separate appreciation thread for the Harkles if that is where you prefer to hang out. This thread is much more active though.
> 
> Anyone else who is new and wondering why most of the posters feel the way we do… pls read this:



Sorry @Icyjade I'm just seeing this now! 

As I said I am do not consider myself a fan so happy to hang out wherever I am welcome. 

And again I don't disagree with much of the complaints about MM & Harry, I just believe both can be true...

they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue

they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can question the most ludicrous rumors and unsubstantiated stories 

they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can keep our own dignity and moral compass intact

I agree with this and so wish people could focus on the Queen and just honor her memory right now...


----------



## bag-mania

I see the bozos at the _NYT_ are still defending her tooth and nail. “Why is everyone so mean to her?”









						Lip-Reading and Fashion Criticism: Meghan’s U.K. Trip Under Scrutiny
					

The actions of Meghan, and her husband, Prince Harry, as they mourn the queen have been the subject of biting social commentary — as usual.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> DP



A little bit. 
Their patronages would afforded them a higher rank 

I_ think_ Harry left 'only' a Captain of the RM and Andrew was a Vice Admiral but their patronages would have allowed them to wear higher ranking dress uniforms for the ceremonies. 

I guess it's the only time the 'little boys' get to dress-up with a little glitz. 

And don't forget, pictures last forever.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry @Icyjade I'm just seeing this now!
> 
> As I said I am do not consider myself a fan so happy to hang out wherever I am welcome.
> 
> And again I don't disagree with much of the complaints about MM & Harry, I just believe both can be true...
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can question the most ludicrous rumors and unsubstantiated stories
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can keep our own dignity and moral compass intact
> 
> I agree with this and so wish people could focus on the Queen and just honor her memory right now...




You are welcome here, as is every member 

There is no need to address everybody or anybody and you don't have to justify yourself. 

I totally agree, all of royalty should be focusing on the Queen right now, including H & M


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Toby93 said:


> I wonder how much of what is written is the truth, and how much is just speculation?  I want nothing more for those 2 to get back on a plane and leave the BRF alone, but I do think that a lot of the stuff that is put out there by the press is just for clicks.  Who knows?
> 
> Is Scooby Do really a direct line to TW?  We all know that they have said so many outrageous lies in the past that we all are inclined to believe a lot of what is written.   How does the press know that Hazz was "heartbroken" by the uniform?  How do we know that TW is "livid" about the palace witholding HRH for the kids?  Is any of it true?
> 
> These last 4 years, we have become so used to the drama that accompanies these two, that we sort of take each new outburst in stride



I agree...perhaps because I'm American and we have had such an assault on truth I am kind of obsessed with fact checking everything these days and so many of the most outlandish stories seem to be started and then perpetuated by the tabloids themselves!  



BlueCherry said:


> This is true, personally the things that have been proven are enough to convince me she’s a horrible person. I tried to ask myself why she gets to me and I think it’s because I compare it to someone potentially abusing my Mum in this manner. How could anyone inflict such pain on someone in their 90’s with a sick husband.
> 
> I think the genuine press are focused on the Queen and the funeral as is just. The gutter press, which I also enjoy for comments mostly, are probably the ones stirring things up. I don’t mind because the more negative publicity they get may help the fans to be more aware of their BS and for those two to disappear into obscurity.
> 
> It is indeed like most horrors, the more we see the more we become immune.
> 
> Then there’s the entertainment factor alongside it all. I never knew I could be so mean about someone



And for me it's the opposite...the more unbelievable the rumors the more I doubt everything...for me they would do better to stick with the most objective facts instead of speculation and accusing them of anything and everything at all.




charlottawill said:


> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's *friend*" reminds me of T****'s reported habit of calling NY papers under an assumed name to tip them off about things he wanted publicized. Didn't Hazy refer to the First Amendment as "bonkers"? Hmm...



John Barron!   




bag-mania said:


> I see the bozos at the _NYT_ are still defending her tooth and nail. “Why is everyone so mean to her?”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lip-Reading and Fashion Criticism: Meghan’s U.K. Trip Under Scrutiny
> 
> 
> The actions of Meghan, and her husband, Prince Harry, as they mourn the queen have been the subject of biting social commentary — as usual.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Hmmm I didn't read it that way...I thought it was more along the lines of the tweet I shared...my impression was the author wasn't defending MM as much as criticizing the tabloids...

_"Alas, we’ll never know the truth behind it. We’ll never know, for instance, if the possible rapprochement came about because King Charles III “ordered his warring sons to set aside their ongoing feud,” as The Daily Mail reported on Saturday — or because Prince William unilaterally sent a “bombshell text” to his brother laying out the terms of the proposed joint appearance, as the paper (contradicting itself) reported on Sunday."_


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> I totally agree, *all of royalty* should be focusing on the Queen right now, including H & M




I like it. Very sharp!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jblended said:


> *This reeks of toxic masculinity. Is King Charles any less of a king or a man because he cried as he walked behind his father's coffin? Is masculinity defined by aggressive acts to "protect" grown women (who, for the record, boast that they have a voice and will not be silenced, and therefore can protect themselves)? I'm actually taken aback by the archaic notion of "masculinity" as you've described it.*
> 
> Also, not entirely sure how he protected either his grandmother or his wife. One he insulted in the press for causing "generational pain" and "trapping him in a cage" just by virtue of being the sovereign, and the other he seemingly didn't help get mental health support for when she was suicidal.
> Colour me confused.


This! A lot of people expect men to be the strong silent type like John Wayne or Charles Bronson's movie characters, but life is unpredictable. I knew DH was a sensitive man, he teared up in the DR when our first son was born. Still, I was surprised when he cried at his father's burial, but I also know that he can be very strong and understanding when needed. There shouldn't be any shame or shaming when sincere tears are shed.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> So, Sunshine Sachs is out, that's huge news. Everyone knows that the first thing people do, who are having trouble with their image, is fire their PR firm as if that will fix the problem. I guess we'll have to wait a few days to start hearing why this happened. Was it really just about the money, the $2 million/year the Sussex's could not afford? Were there other reasons?  Did SS dump _them_ perhaps because they were difficult to deal with and would not take advice?   Did TW circumvent them and leak info when she was told not to?  I'm guessing neither party needs bad publicity so they'll be tight lipped over the it.  Maybe there are NDA's in place too. Still, people in the know are going to know why and that info will leak out.


I would think the Harkles weren't the easiest clients of SS, but the main reason for the separation is likely related to payments; $2 million/year is a lot of money for a couple/organization to spend on PR. Keep in mind that their Arch*well Inc seems to have less than $50,000 annual revenue, and the Arch*well Foundation is not even accepting donations via Charity Navigator.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry @Icyjade I'm just seeing this now!
> 
> As I said I am do not consider myself a fan so happy to hang out wherever I am welcome.
> 
> And again I don't disagree with much of the complaints about MM & Harry, I just believe both can be true...
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can question the most ludicrous rumors and unsubstantiated stories
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can keep our own dignity and moral compass intact
> 
> I agree with this and so wish people could focus on the Queen and just honor her memory right now...



I think this is where we disagree: "they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue". I agree with both parts of your sentence, but I disagree that she suffered any racism from the BRF, which she sensationalized in her OW interview. Maybe from Princess Michael but that woman has a history of it and it was, sadly, to be expected from her.

Some in the UK media, not all of it, did go overboard with the Compton remark. I admit I had to look it up because I had no frame of reference. This article, coincidentally, features Allison Davis. And the Compton reference seems culturally complicated. But was Zedzee angered because she felt sl*t-shamed like Felicia or because she was unwilling to be associated with the less savoury aspects of her POC identity?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I would think the Harkles weren't the easiest clients of SS, but the main reason for the separation is likely related to payments; $2 million/year is a lot of money for a couple/organization to spend on PR. Keep in mind that their Arch*well Inc seems to have less than $50,000 annual revenue, and the Arch*well Foundation is not even accepting donations via Charity Navigator.
> 
> View attachment 5613048


Wrong foundation? This says Ashewell.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

xincinsin said:


> I think this is where we disagree: "they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue". I agree with both parts of your sentence, but I disagree that she suffered any racism from the BRF, which she sensationalized in her OW interview. Maybe from Princess Michael but that woman has a history of it and it was, sadly, to be expected from her.
> 
> Some in the UK media, not all of it, did go overboard with the Compton remark. I admit I had to look it up because I had no frame of reference. This article, coincidentally, features Allison Davis. And the Compton reference seems culturally complicated. But was Zedzee angered because she felt sl*t-shamed like Felicia or because she was unwilling to be associated with the less savoury aspects of her POC identity?



Automatically associating someone with gangs, violence, and drug use because of their race is considered to be racism here in the US.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> I think this is where we disagree: "they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue". I agree with both parts of your sentence, but I disagree that she suffered any racism from the BRF, which she sensationalized in her OW interview. Maybe from Princess Michael but that woman has a history of it and it was, sadly, to be expected from her.
> 
> Some in the UK media, not all of it, did go overboard with the Compton remark. I admit I had to look it up because I had no frame of reference. This article, coincidentally, features Allison Davis. And the Compton reference seems culturally complicated. But was Zedzee angered because she felt sl*t-shamed like Felicia or because she was unwilling to be associated with the less savoury aspects of her POC identity?




I kinda cringed over this Compton dialogue re: MM and Serena being from Compton. Interesting that it’s not good enough for MM and MM’s comments about Serena being from there come off as really icky to me.









						Meghan Markle on Serena Williams comparisons:  ‘I’m not from Compton’
					

“By the way, what’s wrong with Compton? My girl Serena’s from there,” the Duchess said.




					nypost.com


----------



## xincinsin

Redbirdhermes said:


> Automatically associating someone with gangs, violence, and drug use because of their race is considered to be racism here in the US.


Thanks! Perhaps I do not feel sensitive about this since at one point, being Chinese was also associated with triads and violence. This is what is called race profiling, right?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. Lady C is not on my good side anymore but this is too good.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

xincinsin said:


> Thanks! Perhaps I do not feel sensitive about this since at one point, being Chinese was also associated with triads and violence. This is what is called race profiling, right?


Perhaps, but I really don't think the British tabloids at that time were actually thinking that she might be a gang member, etc.  I think they were making up juicy stuff to try sell more newspapers.   I think that is still the case with many of the stories cited here.


----------



## Kevinaxx

This picture is so clear for me the difference between someone who is really genuinely grieving vs someone who is there to be seen. 

If you can’t dig deep for any genuine sorrow or sadness then the smart thing to do would be to keep head down, eyes down.


----------



## Lodpah

Straight-Laced said:


> This "un-invitation" must really grind their gears because it's exactly the kind of major royal event they'd want to be at with significant people attending who they want to be seen with. So near, yet so far. What a dreadful shame !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duke and Duchess of Sussex find ‘new role’ is to be left in the cold
> 
> 
> Sussexes now enjoy a ‘half in, half out’ version of royal life, exemplified by their ‘un-invitation’ to the ‘state reception of the century’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.telegraph.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Duke and Duchess of Sussex find ‘new role’ is to be left in the cold*
> 
> _Sussexes now enjoy a ‘half in, half out’ version of royal life, exemplified by their ‘un-invitation’ to the ‘state reception of the century’_
> 
> When they “stepped back” as senior members of the Royal family in January 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex dreamed of a “progressive new role” within the monarchy that would see them “work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen”.
> 
> What we have witnessed since Queen Elizabeth II’s death is Harry and Meghan being offered a form of “half in, half out” royalty far from the cake-and-eat-it scenario they originally envisaged.
> 
> The news that the couple accidentally received an invitation to Sunday night’s “state reception of the century” at Buckingham Palace only to have it rescinded at the last minute shows that they may have a discretionary “in” when it comes to family occasions but where major events involving world leaders are concerned, they are well and truly “out”.
> 
> As they have been reunited with the royals to remember Harry’s beloved grandmother this week, a distinction has clearly been drawn between what the “non-working” Sussexes can be involved with as “much loved members of the family” and what their inferior status allows in terms of state set pieces, which is seemingly very little.
> 
> King Charles spelled it out in his first speech when he drew the distinction between “our new Prince and Princess of Wales continuing to inspire and lead our national conversations” and Harry and Meghan “continuing to build their lives overseas.”
> 
> But failing to feature among the 1,000-strong guest list for one of the biggest palace pow wows in living memory – even though it is being hosted by Harry’s father and stepmother – does rather drive home the reality that they remain very much on the outside looking in. Indeed, even the last minute nature of the “un-invitation” suggests communications between the palace and their former principals aren’t what they used to be.
> 
> In denying them the opportunity to rub shoulders with the likes of the US president, and Jacinta Adern, New Zealand’s prime minister, the palace powers-that-be have reasonably decided that there is a time and a place for Harry and Meghan – and it is not at the biggest diplomatic reception ever hosted by a monarch.
> 
> As a fellow non-working royal, the Duke of York is unsurprisingly not attending either.
> 
> Yet in withdrawing the offer to the Sussexes, the so-called men in grey suits may also have been mindful that the increasingly politicised nature of some of their recent interventions – from encouraging people to vote in America to the Duke’s comments on gun control – may not sit with with the non-partisan nature of the gathering.
> 
> The snub will be a blow, however, not only to Harry as fifth-in-line to the throne and the King’s son, but also the Duchess, who – post-Megxit – has tried to reposition herself as global powerhouse, on a par with ... the former First Lady.
> 
> Before she married Harry in 2018, the former actress made a lot of her high-level connections, posting a photograph of herself speaking to Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister, on Instagram and forging a close friendship with Jessica Mulroney, daughter–in-law of Trudeau’s predecessor Brian Mulroney.
> 
> Having been tipped as a potential future ... presidential nominee, last October, the mother of two, 41, wrote a letter to ... the House Speaker, and... the Senate Majority Leader, advocating for paid family leave. She would therefore have delighted in pressing the flesh with ...
> 
> Although Harry did not personally intervene over the decision to ban him from wearing military uniform, claiming he was happy to wear whatever his grandmother had requested – the couple do appear quite put out by the reception rebuff.
> 
> A source close to the Sussexes stressed that they had done everything expected of them during the period of mourning and were determined to keep the focus on the late Queen.
> 
> “They have done everything as best they could,” the source said. “They have turned up, they have smiled, shaken hands, whatever was asked.”
> 
> Yet the harsh reality of royal life is that if your name’s not down on the official House of Windsor team sheet, you’re not coming in.
> 
> 
> (edited because names)


Nice


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


Huh?  I'll buy stands like a Prince.  He will never get near being King. He protected his grandmother? Well he did in a way by not going to see her at the end and giving her lots of whining aggravation that might have hastened her death even more.  He can protect his wife until the cows come home because after the dumpster fire that she started, she is going to need it.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> IMO Zedzee doesn't connect directly with Horrid most of the time because she needs plausible deniability, especially for the more objectionable statements he makes. Horrid described himself as the Harkles' friend for a short period, so there was personal contact at some point.
> 
> I believe this friend is Horrid because who else would be so aggrieved on their behalf? Can't think of anything more depressing than inflicting the Harkles on the world leaders.
> Handbag: Did you know my darling wife is a leading feminist? She hangs out with Gloria.
> VIP: Ah, no, I had no idea.
> Handbag: She also does voice-overs.
> Zedzee: We're just here to pitch it to you.
> 
> Other pro-Harkle mouthpieces like Jack Royston/Newsweek, Yahoo, NAACP, The Cut and TIME - I'm wondering if they or their publishers are paid by SS and, if they are, will the new PR outfit be paying them for fluff pieces and awards too?


Interesting that the word bonkers is being used.  Gee, where have I heard that before?  Oh right Harry describing freedom of speech in the US.  What a coincidence.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> A little bit.
> Their patronages would afforded them a higher rank
> 
> I_ think_ Harry left 'only' a Captain of the RM and Andrew was a Vice Admiral but their patronages would have allowed them to wear higher ranking dress uniforms for the ceremonies.
> 
> I guess it's the only time the 'little boys' get to dress-up with a little glitz.
> 
> And don't forget, pictures last forever.


Harry, Western Costume wants the uniform back.


----------



## Lodpah

LemonDrop said:


> Hat on. Hat off. That man looks gorgeous. He walks like a king. Stands like a king. Protects his Gramma and his wife like a man. I think we got some different standards across the pond.
> 
> View attachment 5612799


I kinda feel sorry for him here. It’s like the last vestiges of his manhood (if you will) as TW has totally emasculated him socially and individually. This is the only thing he probably feels deeply about and is in control of as it is something he did and went through that gives him a sense of his worth. So as a fellow veteran to another, I’m ok with him wearing it,I guess. The only thing is he should have presented himself in a clean cut manner, shaved  and in complete uniformity with the wearing of the uniform.


----------



## charlottawill

Shocked, I tell you, positively shocked! 

"Victoria Ward, the respected royal correspondent for the Daily Telegraph, made the astonishing claim Sunday, amid a deepening sense that *relations and trust between Harry and the Windsors are at rock bottom*, and that carefully curated presentations of a united front are merely cosmetic."



> https://www.thedailybeast.com/king-...minutes-before-official-announcement?ref=home


----------



## BlueCherry

I read somewhere that the Editor of the NYT is either anti-British, anti-Monarchy or both. I would assume therefore that this publication is simply using H&M and their woes as a weapon for their own agenda. Same with other fervent supporters, it suits their narrative to support them and bolsters their campaigns. They’re all using each other and equally would all drop each other if it suited them to focus differently. Newspaper editors, magazine publishers and indeed heads of TV stations could all take a lesson from the Queen, as an influential person, in how to be neutral and keep your private beliefs exactly that.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> This is why I could see SS being the ones to fire the Sussex's, not the other way around.  They wouldn't take SS's advice or, if they did, they would still circumvent it in some way likely due to their need to clap back at everyone.  SS is top notch. They have represented a lot of people, including some terrible people with correspondingly huge PR problems. They'll take the money and do the best they can with what they've got to work with, but the party involved has to take their advice.  But, the Sussex's are in constant PR crisis mode due to some foolish thing one of them said (Archie's room was on fire! Our wedding meant as much as Mandela's release from prison! The First Amendment is bonkers!). It's  not a good look for SS.
> 
> The interview in The Cut magazine could have been the tipping point.  It was supposed to be a puff piece, it was not at all flattering, and she basically threatened the royal family in it.  If I were at SS, I'd be thinking we set up this interview, got the glamorous photos, told her how to answer the questions, and she does that.  SS also would have been advising them to keep their heads down this week, do everything they were told, no complaining, no leaking to Scoobie, and they have not done that. So, yeah, they're done with them.


Definitively this.  SS received their payment and they washed their hands.  No more kudos from SS clients, no more fake awards being arranged for either of them, no more puff pieces in the media and if that doesn't shut them down, then this will:  blame SS for all the problems and say that they came up with a PR campaign that you signed off on and performed, and all those dirty little secrets will come pouring out.  Slowly and over time.  Instead of the positive PR story over nothing every morning, get ready for the negative PR story over something.  I suggest calling the tent and portapotty company in Chunga Changa because you will be wanting to go there shortly.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Interesting that the word bonkers is being used.  Gee, where have I heard that before?  Oh right Harry describing freedom of speech in the US.  What a coincidence.


Bonkers is a very British expression.


----------



## csshopper

Harry is having a rare experience today. He is being held 100% accountable for his actions and is suffering the consequences.


----------



## gelbergirl

What’s SS stand for exactly?


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> Heartbroken?
> 
> View attachment 5612841
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He probably didn’t earn it. I’m not saying that in the context of he deserves it. I imagine, like in other countries who award medals, like the Meritorious Service medal, it has to be awarded, but you have to have earned it in some exemplary or above and beyond the normal course of duty. Just like airborne soldiers, you earn it if you complete airborne school but you get the extra medal if you were in combat. I’m wondering if PW earned it doing something exemplary. 

We don’t get the specialty medals just merely for attendance. It’s not a trophy for attendance for merely attending.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Shocked, I tell you, positively shocked!
> 
> "Victoria Ward, the respected royal correspondent for the Daily Telegraph, made the astonishing claim Sunday, amid a deepening sense that *relations and trust between Harry and the Windsors are at rock bottom*, and that carefully curated presentations of a united front are merely cosmetic."


Vicky honey, have you been coming here to read


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And his injector isn't skilled. That sloped down eyebrows? Happens when you overdo the Botox. Which I only know because I religiously follow two derms as the pandemic has made me quite the skincare fan.
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck with this nobody. Not only is not everyone as stupid as you think, I have a strong feeling Charles might be washing his hair that day.


Which ones do you follow?


Kevinaxx said:


> This picture is so clear for me the difference between someone who is really genuinely grieving vs someone who is there to be seen.
> 
> If you can’t dig deep for any genuine sorrow or sadness then the smart thing to do would be to keep head down, eyes down.


I had the same thought so many times through this, why can’t she just look down.

Bonkers is a very British expression.

It’s the same expression Harry used on a podcast awhile back.


----------



## BlueCherry

Kevinaxx said:


> This picture is so clear for me the difference between someone who is really genuinely grieving vs someone who is there to be seen.
> 
> If you can’t dig deep for any genuine sorrow or sadness then the smart thing to do would be to keep head down, eyes down.
> 
> View attachment 5613061



I said exactly the same thing to my sister this morning. Kates grief is palpable but Meghan looks devil may care.

I wouldn’t attend the funeral of someone I had accused of the things that Meghan has accused the RF of. At a push I would attend only if I could be of some emotional and practical support to the deceaseds family.

I would categorically not attend the funeral of someone who probably didn’t want me there. Or if the deceased’s family had ongoing issues with me. By being there she has added immense stress to the RF who are all genuinely grieving. I find it exceptionally distasteful.

If I were her I would have put out a suitable statement in light of their differences and then either fly home to the children or stay and support Harry behind firmly closed doors.

She and she alone is taking focus from the Queen at this sad time.


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> What’s SS stand for exactly?


Sunshine Sachs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Harry left this medal back in CA.  It was for most video games played and won during a wartime conflict.


----------



## gracekelly

Kevinaxx said:


> This picture is so clear for me the difference between someone who is really genuinely grieving vs someone who is there to be seen.
> 
> If you can’t dig deep for any genuine sorrow or sadness then the smart thing to do would be to keep head down, eyes down.
> 
> View attachment 5613061


She looks like she could be standing in a line to buy popcorn at the movies.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> He probably didn’t earn it. I’m not saying that in the context of he deserves it. I imagine, like in other countries who award medals, like the Meritorious Service medal, it has to be awarded, but you have to have earned it in some exemplary or above and beyond the normal course of duty. Just like airborne soldiers, you earn it if you complete airborne school but you get the extra medal if you were in combat. I’m wondering if PW earned it doing something exemplary.
> 
> We don’t get the specialty medals just merely for attendance. It’s not a trophy for attendance for merely attending.


They weren't stripped off because they were never pinned on.  Last night a poster showed a close up picture and it was clearly a pin that could be placed on/off. probably for cleaning purposes.  This was a deliberate move to show him who was boss.  Harry was gutted?  He was p*ssed off and it showed on his meany face lol!


----------



## bisbee

BlueCherry said:


> She and she alone is taking focus from the Queen at this sad time.


It seems to me that she is only taking focus from the Queen because the press is reporting on every tiny thing they can and going on and on about her.  If she were being ignored, the focus would go back to the Queen and the working Royals, where it should be.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Let me see if I understand. They excluded themselves from the Firm and moved to Canada/US, and  now they don't want to 'feel excluded'. It's bonkers!


----------



## piperdog

gracekelly said:


> Interesting that the word bonkers is being used.  Gee, where have I heard that before?  Oh right Harry describing freedom of speech in the US.  What a coincidence.


That one jumped out at me, too. Unless it's more-commonly used in the UK, i assumed it was just H pretending to be a third party. Perhaps "just Harry" was being quoted by "Rachel with the Hotmail". 

Can you imagine what a $***show their PR is going to be if they start handling it in-house? Though it would give their unnecessarily large and overqualified staff something to do...


----------



## sdkitty

BlueCherry said:


> Apparently Harry’s book was going to slate Camilla and Catherine.
> 
> Now he can’t slate his Dad as he’s King, he can’t slate Camilla as she’s Dads wife, he will take her side and she’s in charge according to the DM, he can’t slate Wills as he holds all the Duchy funds and he can’t slate Catherine because she’s Wills wife. He can slate courtiers but they don’t give a toss.
> 
> It’s gonna be a sh1t book


slate?  a slang term for slander?


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> slate?  a slang term for slander?


slate - to attack by criticizing, to write or say something is very bad


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> slate?  a slang term for slander?


Criticised severely I'd say.


----------



## gelbergirl

I was just thinking about that reception.
It should be coming to a close soon I’d say.
Big day tomorrow.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> She looks like she could be standing in a line to buy popcorn at the movies.


Impatiently standing in line is what I read in that expression.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Let me see if I understand. They excluded themselves from the Firm and moved to Canada/US, and  now they don't want to 'feel excluded'. It's bonkers!


I hope this give the two grifters a new perspective on their importance in the world...but I doubt it


----------



## BlueCherry

bisbee said:


> It seems to me that she is only taking focus from the Queen because the press is reporting on every tiny thing they can and going on and on about her.  If she were being ignored, the focus would go back to the Queen and the working Royals, where it should be.



If you take the whole post into context things may have been different. The majority of the media are cockroaches but that’s to be expected because it’s how they make their money. Everyone has a job to do however unpleasant. 

Frankly if she had integrated into the family she would have been very popular. If she was as unhappy as she claims, she had the opportunity to go and live the private life she said she wanted. The press would have had little interest. 

But she made terrible, unproven allegations followed by that Oprah interview. While Prince Philip lay dying. This was enough to send the media into the very frenzy that continues to this day.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But I'd happily see her downsize after the divorce.


She can move in with the chickens.


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry @Icyjade I'm just seeing this now!
> 
> As I said I am do not consider myself a fan so happy to hang out wherever I am welcome.
> 
> And again I don't disagree with much of the complaints about MM & Harry, I just believe both can be true...
> 
> *they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can acknowledge racism is an ongoing and important issue*
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can question the most ludicrous rumors and unsubstantiated stories
> 
> they can be fairly criticized for their actions AND we can keep our own dignity and moral compass intact
> 
> *I agree with this and so wish people could focus on the Queen and just honor her memory right now...*



I believe one should be free to post his/her opinions. I agree with you that the coverage of TW and Hazz has been exaggerated, particularly during a time when news should be preferentially honoring QE.

However, the insistence of racism associated to the Harkles is upsetting, when people keep repeating that they dislike their character (not their skin/hair color).

I find the views in "Morgan Freeman Wise About Race" very important, and I think it's counter-productive to see racism everywhere. My 2 cents, of course!





__





						Loading…
					





					www.gwcommonwealth.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They weren't stripped off because they were never pinned on.  Last night a poster showed a close up picture and it was clearly a pin that could be placed on/off. probably for cleaning purposes.  This was a deliberate move to show him who was boss.  Harry was gutted?  He was p*ssed off and it showed on his meany face lol!


apparently he can't control the "meany face"....or doesn't care....or is trying to show how mad he is?
It is the opposite of endearing.  He is in a public space, supposedly honoring his grandmother.  He should learn to be more like her.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> Harry and William wore the Blues and Royals uniform according to the BBC.
> 
> *Harry, at the vigil,  doesn't have a sad face, he has a mad face.*


If he didn't have to walk, stand and look formal for the vigil, he would have been like this:







Toby93 said:


> How can anyone take that face seriously?  He looks like a plastic Ken doll









papertiger said:


> This middle-aged man-child seriously needs to get a life and some real problems to keep him occupied
> 
> Prince Harry 'left "heartbroken" after Queen's 'ER' initials were stripped from military uniform he wore to coffin vigil': Duke 'considered wearing morning suit to avoid "humiliation"' after Prince Andrew was allowed to keep royal cypher'​
> From:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'heartbroken' after 'ER' initials stripped from military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex is understood to have been devastated to find his grandmother's initials had been stripped from the shoulder of his uniform as he held vigil with her grandchildren last night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if he feels he humiliated himself by putting out he'd be happy in a mourning suit and focus should be on the Queen.
> 
> Now he has to come up with some 'victim' reason why he changed his mind and unleashing tantrums on his father into giving him permission to wear his uniform.





Insufferable. He/they will never be happy with anything. Always trying find something to pick apart and complain about.




BlueCherry said:


> Within hours of the Queens passing H&M had a tantrum about going to Balmoral. Since then it’s been the Windsor walkabout drama, wearing the uniform drama, HRH titles for their children (free security), allegedly claiming they were invited and uninvited to the state function and now the cypher snub.
> 
> We have a family that must fulfil their duty under the most difficult of circumstances with the eyes of the world watching them.
> 
> And those two continue to spit the dummy and cause trouble.


MM (& JCMH):






andrashik said:


> Oh Scoobie darling...



Hey Scoobie...


The clue is in your 'update', you fool. Think I'll start calling him Patrice 





andrashik said:


> View attachment 5612906
> 
> Exiled royals
> Some people are speculating that she wanted full control of the "good" constant pr messages ( through her pet) and this has been in conflict with SS since they know what are they doing( mostly )


Ohhhh really?!







purseinsanity said:


> His motto is now
> "Complain, and complain, then explain why you complain."










CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh










jennlt said:


> Sounds like you have a bad case of *Sussexhaustion**.* We've all had it at one point or another. Wishing you a speedy recovery


 







Icyjade said:


> Yes, looks like Prince William did bend over for 6 and the brat still complained!
> 
> If you see the other vigil by QE kids, all have braids:
> View attachment 5612973
> 
> 
> Vs at the celebration - braids:
> View attachment 5612975
> 
> 
> And the vigil - no braids:
> View attachment 5612974
> 
> 
> And the brat still complains?





Oh lawwwddd, William is a good person with great patience and plenty of good manners to be doing these things to please JCMH because if it was me, I would not be entertaining this overgrown man-child- brother or not.
I'm sure W is being asked by someone higher up (like KCIII) but he is really kind to go along with the requests.




charlottawill said:


> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's *friend*" reminds me of T****'s reported habit of calling NY papers under an assumed name to tip them off about things he wanted publicized. Didn't Hazy refer to the First Amendment as "bonkers"? Hmm...


Is the 'friends' name Rachel Sparkle by any chance? Come on MM we all know it's you.







QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. Lady C is not on my good side anymore but this is too good.


----------



## Sharont2305

gelbergirl said:


> I was just thinking about that reception.
> It should be coming to a close soon I’d say.
> Big day tomorrow.


It has finished, I've seen quite a few European Royals at the lying in state.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Wrong foundation? This says Ashewell.


You are right, I apologize for my error. In any event, the right one has also (apparently) <50K annual revenue.


----------



## carmen56

gelbergirl said:


> What’s SS stand for exactly?


Sunshine Sacks, H and M’s PR reps.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's children Archie and Lilibet left at home in America
> 
> 
> While the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been at the vigil in Westminster Hall this week, Archie, 3 and 15-month-old Lilibet are believed to have remained behind in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Of course the kids are left in America and Claw would rather stay in London. They'd might as well just admit they leave their kids with the nanny any ol' time as though they're dropping dogs off at the kennel.


----------



## Chanbal

gelbergirl said:


> What’s SS stand for exactly?


Sunshine Sachs, the Harkles former PR agency.


----------



## Chanbal

Who are the reliable sources that have this information? The Harkles? 

_The Daily Beast was told by a reliable source shortly after 5 p.m. that the queen was dead. British PM Liz Truss was told at 4:30. Charles contacted Harry just minutes before 6:30._









						King Charles Told Prince Harry of Queen Elizabeth’s Death Five Minutes Before Official Announcement
					

The Daily Beast was told by a reliable source shortly after 5 p.m. that the queen was dead. British PM Liz Truss was told at 4:30. Charles contacted Harry just minutes before 6:30.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Of course the kids are left in America and Claw would rather stay in London. They'd might as well just admit they leave their kids with the nanny any ol' time as though they're dropping dogs off at the kennel.


Meghan is so paranoid that she doesn't want the children on British soil.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> To me, it says that the independent feminist cum pitiful victim was a PR construct, and Zedzee is now trying to mutate again to a more profitable persona.
> 
> Another thing I noted was the choice of words used in the headlines of OK magazine (pro-Harkle) and Radar (American media, essentially same article from same source - yoohoo, Omid  ).
> _US-based PR firm Who Pulled Them from Royal Life
> US-based PR firm Who Helped Extract them from British Royals_
> The first implies helplessness, that SS inveigled them to leave the BRF (poor pitiful victims of a con job).
> The second implies black ops: SS are like a CIA outfit, agents sent in to smuggle out American hostage Markle like she was Sacoolas. Handbag and Archificial are simply collateral damage.
> The Harkles should just write fiction.
> 
> Btw, OK is now spinning the narrative that KC is considering giving in to the Harkles' half-in/half-out demand because he wants to been seen as making his own decisions. Say what?
> 
> I'm assuming that Handbag failed maths and TW always had someone else do her taxes, maybe even pay her taxes. So they were noobs regarding the cost of living, especially the luxury standards they expected with a mansion and being waited on hand and foot. And the whining about being cut off definitely indicates they were planning on being financial parasites.
> 
> The Harkles wanted to be financially supported as if they were working royals, but work as if they were non-working royals, and cherry-pick as if they were the monarchs. Why they thought anyone with common sense would accept this deal speaks a lot about their skewed sense of importance.
> 
> They stole my darling wife's shoes!
> They took the cipher off my uniform!
> They won't let us go to the party!
> Wah! Wah! Wah!
> (We really need a face-palm emoji for these toddlers)


Will a multiple face-palm do?


or this one?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> "Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's *friend*" reminds me of T****'s reported habit of calling NY papers under an assumed name to tip them off about things he wanted publicized. Didn't Hazy refer to the First Amendment as "bonkers"? Hmm...



While I don't think Harry called (did DT really do that???) I stumbled upon that "bonkers" as well. Do they have any UK friends left? Maybe it was Omid.


----------



## lulilu

oldbag said:


> *I have a heartfelt wish. A special book should be put together about the Queen and it should not contain the usual photos. It should contain all the illustrations that honor her, from the weeping corgi to her holding hands with Paddington bear as they walk off. All the beautiful little crocheted dolls and figures. All the little momentos her sujects honored her with. Remmembrances from those who loved her, regular citizens of the realm.*


This would be wonderful.  I love all of them and wished I had time to stop and copy all of them.


Chanbal said:


>



I love this.  I saw the original tape.  She has a script she follows. "What's your name?""  "Where are you from?"  "Did it take you a long time to get here?" "Oh my!"  BUT MORE INSULTING, she has the nerve to thank the woman for her sympathy and that it meant so much TO THE FAMILY.  As if she has any claim to such statements after all her evil behavior.  She has not acted like a real member of the RF at any time, unless it was to obtain something for herself.  She is despicable.


marietouchet said:


> Blues and royals uniform, Harry’s uniform lacked the Queen’s cypher and he was devastated when uniform delivered to him by palace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry ‘humiliated’ after Queen’s initials stripped from his military uniform
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was wearing his military uniform after his father, King Charles III reversed an earlier decision barring him from donning it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


So sick of the OTT language -- devastated, etc.  Do they ever have regular thoughts and feelings?  When they barrage us with this language, we care less and less about their feelings.

With re the idea that they stayed to make sure they got their "fair share" of QE's estate is disgusting.  They surely think they are equal to William and Catherine.  I even read somewhere that they wanted the Duchy of Cornwall divided and half given to them.  Can you imagine?  Even if just gossip, they are so horrid and entitled that I believe it could be true.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Shocked, I tell you, positively shocked!
> 
> "Victoria Ward, the respected royal correspondent for the Daily Telegraph, made the astonishing claim Sunday, amid a deepening sense that *relations and trust between Harry and the Windsors are at rock bottom*, and that carefully curated presentations of a united front are merely cosmetic."



That makes me want to cry, and I'm not even joking. It's his own fault obviously, but can you imagine?


----------



## Vintage Leather

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that with or without alcohol? I'm always a little confused, in Germany Cidre is French apple wine, then you can get British fruit ciders which are also somewhat alcoholic, but the cider in the US is just non-clear fresh apple juice?


In the US, Apple Juice is filtered,  pasteurized and occasionally sweetened pressed apples. Apple cider is unfiltered, unsweetened and not pasteurized. 

There are also sparkling ciders, where champagne yeast is added to cider and  it naturally carbonates. It’s usually served as a non-alcoholic champagne 

Cider with alcoholic content is usually called hard cider in the US, and that is a specialty drink and a little harder to find.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Of course the kids are left in America and Claw would rather stay in London. They'd might as well just admit they leave their kids with the nanny any ol' time as though they're dropping dogs off at the kennel.


supposedly her mom is with them but why?  I'm sure they're very used to their nannies

edit - I guess I could give Doria the benefit of the doubt and say maybe she likes being with her grandchildren - even though for whatever reason her daughter spent an awful lot of time with her dad, rather than with her

maybe she couldn't handle the narcissist....or maybe Meghan wanted to be with dad so she could go on TV sets


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Gal4Dior said:


> I just saw Kate was to greet the First Lady of Ukraine today. TW must be fuming, not being able to be photographed with her and forwarding her nonsense humanitarian title she gave herself.
> This gives me so much satisfaction!! Lol!


Yep, the plates are being smashed at Frogmore now


----------



## scarlet555

I don’t understand why spoiled ginger head should even be upset or want to be included?  All that drama, he became a worse nuisance than expected since he met Nutmeg.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457


I literally just started reading this book....500 pages seems like a lot since so much of it is already known.  but have to admit I didn't know Philips mom had mental issues and went around dressed as a nun


----------



## redney

Anyone else wonder if Hazzbeen might have a change of heart about slamming his family, and even attempting to mend fences with them, after being in the UK this last week? Like could he actually have a heart and see how hurtful he and TW have been? I guess the real question is, does he have the balls to stand up to TW and tell her off? I dunno. I would find it really hard to continue on this hateful path after the last week.


----------



## scarlet555

redney said:


> Anyone else wonder if Hazzbeen might have a *change of heart* about slamming his family, and even attempting to mend fences with them, after being in the UK this last week? Like could he actually have a heart and see how hurtful he and TW have been? I guess the real question is, does he have the balls to stand up to TW and tell her off? I dunno. I would find it really hard to continue on this hateful path after the last week.


For Fear not shame or anything


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## gracekelly

George and Charlotte will be there.  Walking in front of the Sussex!  That should go over well with Meg.


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Anyone else wonder if Hazzbeen might have a change of heart about slamming his family, and even attempting to mend fences with them, after being in the UK this last week? Like could he actually have a heart and see how hurtful he and TW have been? I guess the real question is, does he have the balls to stand up to TW and tell her off? I dunno. I would find it really hard to continue on this hateful path after the last week.


If he let it be know that he was angry about the uniform, then I think he's hopeless.  If he can't control his anger at a time like this, I don't think he has it in him to mend fences.....unless at some future time he gets desperate and does it for financial support
Stand up to the WIFE?  I suppose anything is possible but I doubt it.


----------



## youngster

redney said:


> Anyone else wonder if Hazzbeen might have a change of heart about slamming his family, and even attempting to mend fences with them, after being in the UK this last week? Like could he actually have a heart and see how hurtful he and TW have been? I guess the real question is, does he have the balls to stand up to TW and tell her off? I dunno. I would find it really hard to continue on this hateful path after the last week.



Maybe the change in PR firms is indicative of a change in approach?  Wishful thinking, most likely.  They've fully embraced their tale of woe and mistreatment. From their POV, they are the ones who were wronged.  They are the injured parties. They don't see anyone's POV but their own. They likely can't even comprehend why the family would be upset and is continuing to freeze them out.  So, that's likely how they have gotten through this week, basically just focusing on all the nit-picky, perceived wrongs done to them, and there is no mature adult in their life to talk with them and give them good advice.  Too bad Tommy Lascelles isn't around.  He'd have sorted them out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Which ones do you follow?



Dr. Shereene Idriss AKA Pillowtalk Derm (NYC based, very hyper, does a video highlighting a specific active each Saturday morning, has a skincare closet in her weekend home, about to launch her own skincare line, treats Ashley Graham. Pillowtalk Derm stems from her doing Insta Lives in her pyjamas from her bed) and Dr. Samantha Ellis (San Fran area, a bit more chill, does share stuff like what she eats in a day for good nutrition, had a very interesting video on which treatments to do when for an occasion, post routine videos regularly). 

They both are pleasant and personable and I trust their recommendations.

I also sometimes watch Dr. Dre but while the content is good she so very clearly unwell (extremely awkward, eating disorder and a worse hermit than I am) that it's sometimes hard. She posts a video every single day and does weekly Q&As on her Insta where she answers tons of questions, but she also doesn't work as a derm anymore and does Social Media fulltime.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh.


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> I literally just started reading this book....500 pages seems like a lot since so much of it is already known.  but have to admit I didn't know Philips mom had mental issues and went around dressed as a nun



I thought she was in a sisters of charity


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> I thought she was in a sisters of charity


that's not what I got out of it....more like she was eccentric and when Phlip was asked about it, he said it was just practical to wear that outfit


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> that's not what I got out of it....more like she was eccentric and when Phlip was asked about it, he said it was just practical to wear taht outfit



wait...here it is...she founded Christian Sisterhood of Martha and Mary in Greece.
I think Philip was embarrassed about it, then Queen Elizabeth insisted the aging mother come to live with them in Buckingham Palace


----------



## pixiejenna

jblended said:


> If this was the case, I don't believe she would have been allowed to do the walkabout or show her face at all.


 
If he showed up alone that would turn the funeral that should be about Queen Elizabeth all about him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5613234
> View attachment 5613234



Looks like this is in birth order.
Go Princess Royal Go!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisbee said:


> It seems to me that she is only taking focus from the Queen because the press is reporting on every tiny thing they can and going on and on about her.  If she were being ignored, the focus would go back to the Queen and the working Royals, where it should be.



You are not wrong. It's how they make money but I'm sure they could stop being greedy for just one week until the funeral is over. There's plenty of other things to report around said funeral.

ETA: that said, she could also for once act appropriately.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> As it gets closer to dinnertime, their noises will get louder. _No_ is a powerful word.
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's friend says it's 'beyond bonkers' that couple have been 'uninvited' from Palace reception: Couple 'feel excluded' and that the 'majority of the operation' is against them'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Bonkers' Harry and Meghan were 'uninvited' fromPalace reception
> 
> 
> A friend of the couple believes that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and royals attending the Queen's funeral tomorrow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Beyond bonkers"?  Kind of like the First Amendment maybe?  Their "friend" says, eh?  Could that friend have the initials OS and have TW as his mistress with the whip?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I literally just started reading this book....500 pages seems like a lot since so much of it is already known.


I read it on Kindle, which shows the % you've read as you go. I was reading a chapter a night and felt like I was never going to finish it. I brought it along to read in flight last weekend when it said I was at 60%, but I turned the page from where I'd stopped and the next heading said "Acknowledgements", followed by "Notes". So on Kindle the last 40% of the book was devoted to that alone.   

Much of it I already knew, but he filled in a lot of details. There were parts that I skimmed over. To me, the fact that it's been out for two months without a peep from them or their lawyers supports the accuracy of his research.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> If he let it be know that he was angry about the uniform, then I think he's hopeless.  If he can't control his anger at a time like this, I don't think he has it in him to mend fences.....unless at some future time he gets desperate and does it for financial support
> Stand up to the WIFE?  I suppose anything is possible but I doubt it.


I wonder if "his" anger was really his, or something generated and leaked solely by TW, who clearly doesn't have any love at all for his family and what they've all been through. I'm just hoping he could potentially come to his senses and finally say, "you know what? this is my family and I can't take part in your hatred anymore." Wishful thinking. It just makes me so sad to read about his behavior yet there he is, participating in a hugely prominent family & public event for the world.


----------



## gelbergirl

Wait?! Where is Lady Louise and James??


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> I thought she was in a sisters of charity


She did join an order.  It was thought at one point that she suffered from schizophrenia. She was also profoundly deaf and could lip read in several languages.  She also saved Jews during WWll.  She had a strange hard life.


----------



## gracekelly

redney said:


> I wonder if "his" anger was really his, or something generated and leaked solely by TW, who clearly doesn't have any love at all for his family and what they've all been through. I'm just hoping he could potentially come to his senses and finally say, "you know what? this is my family and I can't take part in your hatred anymore." Wishful thinking. It just makes me so sad to read about his behavior yet there he is, participating in a hugely prominent family & public event for the world.


He was big mad.  It was written all over his face.  Little meany mouth.


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> Wait?! Where is Lady Louise and James??


 I keep forgetting that they are grandchildren because of their age.  Perhaps they didn't know how to fit them in or they decided they didn't want to do it.  They did their bit yesterday.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5613234
> View attachment 5613234



I always like to see the kids, but that will be heavy on them.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> George and Charlotte will be there.  Walking in front of the Sussex!  That should go over well with Meg.


A lot of pressure on a 7 year old and 9 year old and a very long day for them if they are attending both the state funeral and the Windsor funeral.


----------



## Sophisticatted

gracekelly said:


> They are not grandchildren of the heir.  George is and heir with Charlotte right behind him in birth order.  I think the way of handing the grandchildren was with the vigil yesterday, which is something that had never been done before.


and Philips and Snowden are probably there to “secure the Harkles” “just in case” since the Kent’s and Gloucesters are a bit too frail to do so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> George and Charlotte will be there.  Walking in front of the Sussex!  That should go over well with Meg.



I hope someone smudges poor Charlotte with sage upon return home. She will probably feel the nasty looks in her back.


----------



## gracekelly

Sophisticatted said:


> and Philips and Snowden are probably there to “secure the Harkles” “just in case” since the Kent’s and Gloucesters are a bit too frail to do so.


Yep, like at the funeral.  Family muscle.


----------



## gelbergirl

DoggieBags said:


> A lot of pressure on a 7 year old and 9 year old and a very long day for them if they are attending both the state funeral and the Windsor funeral.



the 9-year old is the future King so maybe it's better that he goes.
No Louis though!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> George and Charlotte will be there.  Walking in front of the Sussex!  That should go over well with Meg.


She'd better not so much as look cross-eyed at that child.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Who are the reliable sources that have this information? The Harkles?
> 
> _The Daily Beast was told by a reliable source shortly after 5 p.m. that the queen was dead. British PM Liz Truss was told at 4:30. Charles contacted Harry just minutes before 6:30._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles Told Prince Harry of Queen Elizabeth’s Death Five Minutes Before Official Announcement
> 
> 
> The Daily Beast was told by a reliable source shortly after 5 p.m. that the queen was dead. British PM Liz Truss was told at 4:30. Charles contacted Harry just minutes before 6:30.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


No way they'd know this unless leaked by Haz and TW themselves.  Didn't they notify the Queen of their announcement they were half in/half out of the BRF only 10 minutes before they made an official announcement?  Karma is a bigger beeyotch than you, MeGain.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I keep forgetting that they are grandchildren because of their age.  Perhaps they didn't know how to fit them in or they decided they didn't want to do it.  They did their bit yesterday.



There is also no Zara or Bea or Eugenie in the procession.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> A lot of pressure on a 7 year old and 9 year old and a very long day for them if they are attending both the state funeral and the Windsor funeral.


Maybe they asked the children and they said they wanted to go. At their ages this is their first funeral. I’m hoping one or both parents described to them what it would be like and let them decide.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Wait?! Where is Lady Louise and James??



Zara and the York sisters aren't there either. It annoys me to no end that Raptor will be included instead of people who loved The Queen.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Zara and the York sisters aren't there either. It annoys me to no end that Raptor will be included instead of people who loved The Queen.


They aren’t giving them any chance to say they were excluded. They may still say it anyway but no rational person would believe it.


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5613118
> 
> Harry left this medal back in CA.  It was for most video games played and won during a wartime conflict.


*Ouch *


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> A lot of pressure on a 7 year old and 9 year old and a very long day for them if they are attending both the state funeral and the Windsor funeral.


I'm sure their parents talked to them about what was involved and asked if they wanted to participate in honoring their great-Gran. I can't see them being forced into it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dr. Shereene Idriss AKA Pillowtalk Derm (NYC based, very hyper, does a video highlighting a specific active each Saturday morning, has a skincare closet in her weekend home, about to launch her own skincare line, treats Ashley Graham. Pillowtalk Derm stems from her doing Insta Lives in her pyjamas from her bed) and Dr. Samantha Ellis (San Fran area, a bit more chill, does share stuff like what she eats in a day for good nutrition, had a very interesting video on which treatments to do when for an occasion, post routine videos regularly).
> 
> They both are pleasant and personable and I trust their recommendations.
> 
> I also sometimes watch Dr. Dre but while the content is good she so very clearly unwell (extremely awkward, eating disorder and a worse hermit than I am) that it's sometimes hard. She posts a video every single day and does weekly Q&As on her Insta where she answers tons of questions, but she also doesn't work as a derm anymore and does Social Media fulltime.


Thank you! The only one out of the three I was following is Dr. Dray, but like you said, she can be tough to watch. I didn’t know she gave up her medical career, I’m not sure I would recommend that for anyone, even if the money is better in the short term.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I hope someone smudges poor Charlotte with sage upon return home. She will probably feel the nasty looks in her back.


Nanny Maria is Italian.  She'll know what to do.


----------



## Sophisticatted

The kids are to show that the Hazbeens are truly has been and Harry is no longer #2.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Queen thread has an Insta post of Queen Rania. Even she looks more sad than Raptor.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they asked the children and they said they wanted to go. At their ages this is their first funeral. I’m hoping one or both parents described to them what it would be like and let them decide.


It isn't as if there is an open coffin.  I was 12 and my younger brother 9 when my grandmother died and there was an open coffin  I found that scary to see her in it.  To G&C this may be like a long church service.


----------



## charlottawill

gelbergirl said:


> Wait?! Where is Lady Louise and James??


Perhaps they and Zara are emotionally drained and asked to sit this part out. I feel George and Charlotte are a bit young to be in the procession, but maybe they wanted to walk with the adults in honor of their great-Gran.


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5613234
> View attachment 5613234


Where's Zara?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> They aren’t giving them any chance to say they were excluded. They may still say it anyway but no rational person would believe it.



Rationally I know why she is there, but I'm still irrationally irritated. She doesn't deserve to be there. I deal poorly with unfairness.



lanasyogamama said:


> Thank you! The only one out of the three I was following is Dr. Dray, but like you said, she can be tough to watch. I didn’t know she gave up her medical career, I’m not sure I would recommend that for anyone, even if the money is better in the short term.



OMG yes Dr. Dray and not Dr. Dre 



gracekelly said:


> Nanny Maria is Italian.  She'll know what to do.



A sprinkling of holy water will do as well. Anything to get that evil influence off that child she obviously hates.


----------



## gracekelly

I hate to bring this up, but I find it so annoying.  There are stories that are total click bait fake news that the Sussex reunited with the Wales' children.  Passing in the car and rolling down the window for a chat.  I don't believe it and even it true, it doesn't qualify for a reunion.  This is just Sussex PR at work and trying to use William's children for good will.  Disgusting.  They tried this once before and it didn't work.


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> I believe one should be free to post his/her opinions. I agree with you that the coverage of TW and Hazz has been exaggerated, particularly during a time when news should be preferentially honoring QE.
> 
> However, the insistence of racism associated to the Harkles is upsetting, when people keep repeating that they dislike their character (not their skin/hair color).
> 
> I find the views in "Morgan Freeman Wise About Race" very important, and I think it's counter-productive to see racism everywhere. My 2 cents, of course!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gwcommonwealth.com


Thank you for posting this article about Morgan Freeman. I am very familiar with Greenwood Commonwealth paper and of Morgan Freeman. He is indeed an outstanding person, very humble. My husband is actually from this little town.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rationally I know why she is there, but I'm still irrationally irritated. She doesn't deserve to be there. I deal poorly with unfairness.



Snap. I want to watch the funeral without seeing her irritating face spoiling things. I swear I grow horns when I see her anywhere near the Queen. When the ranting subsides I sheepishly blame peri-menopause side effects


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> A lot of pressure on a 7 year old and 9 year old and a very long day for them if they are attending both the state funeral and the Windsor funeral.


I don't think they will go to the Windsor portion.  The nanny will take them home.


----------



## BlueCherry

charlottawill said:


> She'd better not so much as look cross-eyed at that child.



Part of me hopes she is caught doing so as there is every chance of it being captured by cameras. Then everyone can see what an unpleasant person she is.


----------



## gelbergirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rationally I know why she is there, but I'm still irrationally irritated. She doesn't deserve to be there. I deal poorly with unfairness.



You can sleep soundly knowing that even though Anne is far down the line in succession she's placed well ahead of TW and Ginger (even ahead of William/POW who appears to be taking one for the team.)


----------



## gracekelly

Does anyone know if uniforms will be seen again?


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here's the Tina Brown book by the way...publication date is tomorrow. I am not especially fond of the choice of pictures for the cover.
> 
> View attachment 5388457


The cover actually puts me off wanting to read it. She seems to have only given TW a decent photo.

ETA, I don’t know why this came up from such an old thread when I logged in?


----------



## bag-mania

BlueCherry said:


> Part of me hopes she is caught doing so as there is every chance of it being captured by cameras. Then everyone can see what an unpleasant person she is.


I think she has enough sense to behave herself. She knows dozens of cameras will be on them and that the world is watching.


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> Does anyone know if uniforms will be seen again?


Anwsered my own question.

BBC
This means King Charles, the Prince of Wales, the Princess Royal and the Earl of Wessex will wear military dress.
Prince Andrew and the Duke of Sussex will not wear uniform to most events.


----------



## Toby93

BlueCherry said:


> Part of me hopes she is caught doing so as there is every chance of it being captured by cameras. Then everyone can see what an unpleasant person she is.


I hope that William as Catharine are not as petty as I would be, but I would be talking the children into this, just to make sure they walked in front of TW


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Toby93 said:


> I hope that William as Catharine are not as petty as I would be, but I would be talking the children into this, just to make sure they walked in front of TW


My guess is that the kids have been watching events all week, and want to be part of a procession.  This one is relatively short.  And, of course, they are next to their parents.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> The cover actually puts me off wanting to read it. She seems to have only given TW a decent photo.


Authors don’t get to dictate what the book cover looks like, that is up to the publisher. Or maybe the designer who worked on that particular cover is a Meghan fan and chose the photos accordingly.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I literally just started reading this book....500 pages seems like a lot since so much of it is already known.  but have to admit I didn't know Philips mom had mental issues and went around dressed as a nun


I watched an excellent documentary on YouTube a few months ago on his mother, Princess Alice. It was excellent.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

bellecate said:


> The cover actually puts me off wanting to read it. She seems to have only given TW a decent photo.
> 
> ETA, I don’t know why this came up from such an old thread when I logged in?


Yes they look slightly peed off and she looks filtered. She didn’t have that lovely skin at the Windsor walkabout


----------



## Redbirdhermes

bellecate said:


> I watched an excellent documentary on YouTube a few months ago on his mother, Princess Alice. It was excellent.


Princess Alice's story was also covered in an episode of The Crown.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I read it on Kindle, which shows the % you've read as you go. I was reading a chapter a night and felt like I was never going to finish it. I brought it along to read in flight last weekend when it said I was at 60%, but I turned the page from where I'd stopped and the next heading said "Acknowledgements", followed by "Notes". So on Kindle the last 40% of the book was devoted to that alone.
> 
> Much of it I already knew, but he filled in a lot of details. There were parts that I skimmed over. To me, the fact that it's been out for two months without a peep from them or their lawyers supports the accuracy of his research.


are you talking about the tina brown book?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Maybe they asked the children and they said they wanted to go. At their ages this is their first funeral. I’m hoping one or both parents described to them what it would be like and let them decide.


I was thinking if its very long, maybe the children could be taken out before it's over


----------



## Roxannex

bellecate said:


> I watched an excellent documentary on YouTube a few months ago on his mother, Princess Alice. It was excellent.


She was quite a rebel with her grey nun like outfit


----------



## BlueCherry

bag-mania said:


> I think she has enough sense to behave herself. She knows dozens of cameras will be on them and that the world is watching.



True but even a flash of something like that nasty look she gave Doria. It’s hard to hide what you feel … hopefully


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Maybe the change in PR firms is indicative of a change in approach?  Wishful thinking, most likely.  They've fully embraced their tale of woe and mistreatment. From their POV, they are the ones who were wronged.  They are the injured parties. They don't see anyone's POV but their own. They likely can't even comprehend why the family would be upset and is continuing to freeze them out.  So, that's likely how they have gotten through this week, basically just focusing on all the nit-picky, perceived wrongs done to them, and there is no mature adult in their life to talk with them and give them good advice.  Too bad Tommy Lascelles isn't around.  He'd have sorted them out.


well in terms of actual age, they are adults.....


----------



## BlueCherry

Toby93 said:


> I hope that William as Catharine are not as petty as I would be, but I would be talking the children into this, just to make sure they walked in front of TW



I didn’t know I was petty too


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I hope that William as Catharine are not as petty as I would be, but I would be talking the children into this, just to make sure they walked in front of TW


I think it would have been better to place the children in front of the Wales and behind the Wessexes so they are surrounded by people who love them, as they are in an unfamiliar and stressful situation. And not getting dagger eyes in the back from Aunt Acid.


----------



## charlottawill

Redbirdhermes said:


> Princess Alice's story was also covered in an episode of The Crown.


Thank you, I knew I'd seen it somewhere.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aunt Acid  But I agree.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> are you talking about the tina brown book?


No, Revenge. Sorry for my reading fail.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> Maybe the change in PR firms is indicative of a change in approach?  Wishful thinking, most likely.  They've fully embraced their tale of woe and mistreatment. From their POV, they are the ones who were wronged.  They are the injured parties. They don't see anyone's POV but their own. They likely can't even comprehend why the family would be upset and is continuing to freeze them out.  So, that's likely how they have gotten through this week, basically just focusing on all the nit-picky, perceived wrongs done to them, and there is no mature adult in their life to talk with them and give them good advice.  Too bad Tommy Lascelles isn't around.  He'd have sorted them out.


Change in PR firm …
Marklenews - IG - says that MM had not been paying SS for a while, but MM a got a payday from the podcasts, paid SS and SS set her adrift, they have been wanting to do so for some time
So, whoever is doing PR at the moment is a newbie, and seems to toss caution and restraint to the wind eg bonkers for the lack of invite, tears over lack of epaulette cypher, well all of the flaky stuff leaked in the last week


----------



## Lodpah

So has anyone written that they were at the reception on Sunday evening?It’s been quiet as far as reportage in the event.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5613234
> View attachment 5613234


I thought it is the HRH list but Snowden and Peter are on the list and not James and Louise
i am thinking the Kent and Gloucester ladies are not well enough to attend


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Roxannex said:


> She was quite a rebel with her grey nun like outfit


In January 1949, *the princess founded a nursing order of Greek Orthodox nuns*, the Christian Sisterhood of Martha and Mary, modelled after the convent that her aunt, the martyr Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, had founded in Russia in 1909.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I thought it is the HRH list but Snowden and Peter are on the list and not James and Louise
> i am thinking the Kent and Gloucester ladies are not well enough to attend


I get the feeling that they are there because TQ specifically wanted them there.  Lord Snowdon represents her sister Margaret and Peter is the eldest grandchild so he represents all of them.  Kent and Gloucester represent all the cousins.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I think it would have been better to place the children in front of the Wales and behind the Wessexes so they are surrounded by people who love them, as they are in an unfamiliar and stressful situation. *And not getting dagger eyes in the back from Aunt Acid.*


Not to mention their uncle!


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> well in terms of actual age, they are adults.....



Oh, for sure they are adults  chronologically lol. But even in my 40's, I appreciated having older relatives and  friends with more life experience to ask for advice. They have no one, other than Doria and maybe David Foster.   Haven't seen him hanging about much lately though.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Oh, for sure they are adults  chronologically lol. But even in my 40's, I appreciated having older relatives and  friends with more life experience to ask for advice. They have no one, other than Doria and maybe David Foster.   Haven't seen him hanging about much lately though.


David Foster, his second father? Doria, don't give the milk away for free?  Both are busy. He has to change diapers and she is walking her dog.


----------



## Mumotons

Guests arrive for 'reception of the century' at Buckingham Palace
					

Joe ***** has been seen being greeted on the steps of the Palace as he arrives along with President of Ireland Michael D Higgins and the former King and Queen Consort of Spain.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I guess they weren’t invited


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I thought it is the HRH list but Snowden and Peter are on the list and not James and Louise
> i am thinking the Kent and Gloucester ladies are not well enough to attend



What's wrong the with Duchess of Gloucester? She was out and about like a week ago (which I only know from the Royal Fashion person on Insta). The Gloucesters are quite a bit younger than the Kents.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mumotons said:


> Guests arrive for 'reception of the century' at Buckingham Palace
> 
> 
> Joe ***** has been seen being greeted on the steps of the Palace as he arrives along with President of Ireland Michael D Higgins and the former King and Queen Consort of Spain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess they weren’t invited



Play stupid games, win stupid prices.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I thought it is the HRH list but Snowden and Peter are on the list and not James and Louise
> i am thinking the Kent and Gloucester ladies are not well enough to attend


The Duchess of Gloucester was at the reception today so she is fine.  She will be sitting in the pews with other relatives. Probably with the Duchess of Kent and Princess Michael.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> The Duchess of Gloucester was at the reception today so she is fine.  She will be sitting in the pews with other relatives. Probably with the Duchess of Kent and Princess Michael.


Camilla‘s going to be walking with a broken toe. Ouch.


----------



## jennalovesbags

DoggieBags said:


> Camilla‘s going to be walking with a broken toe. Ouch.


I spent seven months with a broken toe. She’s a hero. Heels make it so, so, so much worse.


----------



## Chagall

jblended said:


> I am inclined to believe this. I despise the man Harry has become but, he knows protocol and he genuinely loved his gran, he will not stray at this time. I think he will be doing everything by the book this week. His father is now the King and there are too many protocols/people around him for him to go rogue. He will toe the line and be respectful.
> When he gets back to the US, however... we'll have to brace ourselves.
> 
> 
> Ugh. It's all so disingenuous!


Insofar as Harry genuinely loving his gran, I don’t think so. If he did he wouldn’t have put her through so much stress in her advancing years. He would have made a point of visiting her husband, Prince Phillip, when he was so ill at the end of his life. He would not have trashed the RF when she was in her final days. He would have visited her last summer upon her invitation. Actions do speak so much louder than words.


----------



## Mumotons

Chagall said:


> Insofar as Harry genuinely loving his gran, I don’t think so. If he did he wouldn’t have put her through so much stress in her advancing years. He would have made a point of visiting her husband, Prince Phillip, when he was so ill at the end of his life. He would not have trashed the RF when she was in her final days. He would have visited her last summer upon her invitation. Actions do speak so much louder than words.


This


----------



## charlottawill

I noted this in the order of service. It's amazing that people have to be told. Some people. 

"Members of the Congregation are kindly requested to refrain from using private cameras, video, or sound recording equipment. Please ensure that mobile phones and other electronic devices are switched off."


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's wrong the with Duchess of Gloucester? She was out and about like a week ago (which I only know from the Royal Fashion person on Insta). The Gloucesters are quite a bit younger than the Kents.


I was guessing about her, yes she was out and about, I don’t know about long stamina, this is the list of those walking rather than just sitting in a pew


QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's wrong the with Duchess of Gloucester? She was out and about like a week ago (which I only know from the Royal Fashion person on Insta). The Gloucesters are quite a bit younger than the Kents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> He is still trying to decide on the _“truth bombs.”_ In other words, he is not done with the negotiations with his father.
> 
> 
> _*Insiders had already said that the hotly anticipated book was set to be held back until early 2023 as Harry worked out precisely which “truth bombs” he wanted to drop.*_


Which ones won't cut off any prospects of getting $$$$$. That leaves him with very little unless it's childish truth bombs like "Mommy loved me more than she loved Will".


lulilu said:


> This would be wonderful.  I love all of them and wished I had time to stop and copy all of them.
> 
> I love this.  I saw the original tape.  She has a script she follows. "What's your name?""  "Where are you from?"  "Did it take you a long time to get here?" "Oh my!"  BUT MORE INSULTING, she has the nerve to thank the woman for her sympathy and that it meant so much TO THE FAMILY.  As if she has any claim to such statements after all her evil behavior.  She has not acted like a real member of the RF at any time, unless it was to obtain something for herself.  She is despicable.
> 
> So sick of the OTT language -- devastated, etc.  Do they ever have regular thoughts and feelings?  When they barrage us with this language, we care less and less about their feelings.
> 
> With re the idea that they stayed to make sure they got their "fair share" of QE's estate is disgusting.  They surely think they are equal to William and Catherine.  I even read somewhere that they wanted the Duchy of Cornwall divided and half given to them.  Can you imagine?  Even if just gossip, they are so horrid and entitled that I believe it could be true.


I doubt they would be dumb enough to demand a portion of a duchy, but I wouldn't put it pass them to try to renegotiate the Sandringham terms. They will want what they feel is owed to them.


redney said:


> Anyone else wonder if Hazzbeen might have a change of heart about slamming his family, and even attempting to mend fences with them, after being in the UK this last week? Like could he actually have a heart and see how hurtful he and TW have been? I guess the real question is, does he have the balls to stand up to TW and tell her off? I dunno. I would find it really hard to continue on this hateful path after the last week.


I think he has too much invested in his new family. If he has any enlightenment after this week, I hope he knuckles down to provide for his kids. TW can have a solo public-facing career.


gracekelly said:


> George and Charlotte will be there.  Walking in front of the Sussex!  That should go over well with Meg.


Will she try to shush them to prove she is Aunt Adorable?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Will they hold hands?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Here is the Order of Service



			https://www.westminster-abbey.org/media/15467/order-of-service-the-state-funeral-of-her-majesty-queen-elizabeth-ii.pdf


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> supposedly her mom is with them but why?  I'm sure they're very used to their nannies
> 
> edit - I guess I could give Doria the benefit of the doubt and say maybe she likes being with her grandchildren - even though for whatever reason her daughter spent an awful lot of time with her dad, rather than with her
> 
> maybe she couldn't handle the narcissist....or maybe Meghan wanted to be with dad so she could go on TV sets


Keeping in mind the news about Sunshine-Sucks, is it possible that the Despicable Duo is so short of cash that they had to dismiss the nannies and possibly other staff members and asked Doria to fill in until they get back?


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Definitively this.  SS received their payment and they washed their hands.  No more kudos from SS clients, no more fake awards being arranged for either of them, no more puff pieces in the media and if that doesn't shut them down, then this will:  blame SS for all the problems and say that they came up with a PR campaign that you signed off on and performed, and all those dirty little secrets will come pouring out.  Slowly and over time.  Instead of the positive PR story over nothing every morning, get ready for the negative PR story over something.  I suggest calling the tent and portapotty company in Chunga Changa because you will be wanting to go there shortly.


Who is the next best PR company... anyone know?


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I literally just started reading this book....500 pages seems like a lot since so much of it is already known.  but have to admit I didn't know Philips mom had mental issues and went around dressed as a nun


But a wonderful, kind, charitable lady spending her life doing philanthropic work.

Interesting fact - her son-in-laws fought for Germany and Philip fought with the British Royal Navy.


----------



## A1aGypsy

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure their parents talked to them about what was involved and asked if they wanted to participate in honoring their great-Gran. I can't see them being forced into it.



Succession is important. This is an important moment in history. I would be surprised if they (or Will and Kate) were given the choice. They are heirs first and children second. Far second.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen thread has an Insta post of Queen Rania. Even she looks more sad than Raptor.


Many of them probably met TQ more times than Zedzee had, and enjoyed a far more intelligent conversation.


gracekelly said:


> I hate to bring this up, but I find it so annoying.  There are stories that are total click bait fake news that the Sussex reunited with the Wales' children.  Passing in the car and rolling down the window for a chat.  I don't believe it and even it true, it doesn't qualify for a reunion.  This is just Sussex PR at work and trying to use William's children for good will.  Disgusting.  They tried this once before and it didn't work.


I'm still laughing about the nonsense from several months back that claimed the Wales children send them presents and look up to them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Zwing, Schwing, punch back!









						Palace hits back at claim Prince Harry was 'last-to-know' about Queen
					

A newspaper report said the devastated royal had been the last to know about her passing - and was even told after Prime Minister Liz Truss.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mumotons

CarryOn2020 said:


> Zwing, Schwing, punch back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace hits back at claim Prince Harry was 'last-to-know' about Queen
> 
> 
> A newspaper report said the devastated royal had been the last to know about her passing - and was even told after Prime Minister Liz Truss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It’s bloody disgusting that the RF are having to deal with the toddlers on the eve of HMTQ’s funeral. I’m pretty sure the Sussexes are toast now.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Zwing, Schwing, punch back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Palace hits back at claim Prince Harry was 'last-to-know' about Queen
> 
> 
> A newspaper report said the devastated royal had been the last to know about her passing - and was even told after Prime Minister Liz Truss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Is Harry really so dim?

_“The Mail understands that while it is true that Harry was told shortly before the news became public, *the reason for this was because he was on a flight to Scotland and therefore not contactable*._”


----------



## bag-mania

For those in the US I just finished watching a very good show called “A Tribute to Her Majesty” on BBC America. It was a 90-minute program covering the Queen’s life which will be repeated at 10:30 Eastern time. BBC America will be showing programs about her all night until the funeral begins.


----------



## Lodpah

So shameful. KC, with all the world leaders there, must be embarrassed. Handle it Charles, you’ve got a rogue child and his handler. 

On another note I can’t understand why their children could not have been brought over by the Nannies. 

I’m thinking Doris was brought over to appeal to KC. I’m sure she’s an invited guest to the funeral 
.


----------



## zinacef

Jayne1 said:


> Who is the next best PR company... anyone know?


At this point, nobody really wants to be associated with them. Maybe the people or groups that’s given them awards can help out —for free.


----------



## DoggieBags

Lodpah said:


> So shameful. KC, with all the world leaders there, must be embarrassed. Handle it Charles, you’ve got a rogue child and his handler.
> 
> On another note I can’t understand why their children could not have been brought over by the Nannies.
> 
> I’m thinking Doris was brought over to appeal to KC. I’m sure she’s an invited guest to the funeral
> .


Who said Doria was in the U.K.? And even if she were in the U.K. why would she be invited to the funeral?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

DoggieBags said:


> Who said Doria was in the U.K.? And even if she were in the U.K. why would she be invited to the funeral?


I read she was brought over?


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I read she was brought over?


The press has told so many half truths and bald faced lies this week. I’m disgusted with so many of them (even more than I usually am)!


----------



## DoggieBags

Lodpah said:


> I read she was brought over?


That was a rumor earlier in the week when some thought that H&M wanted their children brought to London. But that rumor was dispelled when someone photographed Doria in Los Angeles on Friday.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.



I feel sorry for the author of the Cut article, she writes very well. I hope some other journal/magazine  gives her a job. Her article is brilliant. It sounds like propaganda pro-TW at first, but when ones reads it more carefully, it does an excellent job exposing TW.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I think she has enough sense to behave herself. She knows dozens of cameras will be on them and that the world is watching.


I think her main issue will be which camera to look into. 


CobaltBlu said:


> Will they hold hands?


I need that face-palm emoji again ...


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Nanny Maria is Italian.  She'll know what to do.


Spanish, and she should know what to do.









						Meet the Cambridges' Royal Nanny, Maria Teresa Turrion Borrallo
					

Here's everything you need to know about the Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and little Louis's caretaker.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Will they hold hands?


Is water wet?


----------



## MrsSlocomb

This tread moves so fast I can't keep up, so I don't know if this was already posted, but she carried a Loewe Postal.  Arrrrghhhh! Loewe is my fav!! Now what am I going to do???


----------



## Chanbal

The Aussies again!








						‘A horrible human’: Meghan Markle has a ‘terrible influence’ over Prince Harry
					

Prince Harry made an “awful mistake” by marrying Meghan Markle and leaving the royal family behind, says Liberal Senator Hollie Hughes.   “I think she’s had a terrible influence over him,” she said.    “She’s just a horrible human.  “They’re awful, revolting people.”




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## Jayne1

Answering my own question as to who they might now use for PR:

The Lede Company, DKC, 42West are considered as good or better than SS.  Let's see who they decide on.


----------



## charlottawill

Mumotons said:


> It’s bloody disgusting that the RF are having to deal with the toddlers on the eve of HMTQ’s funeral. I’m pretty sure the Sussexes are toast now.


The general sentiment of the comments with that article:

"Can he not stop whingeing for five minutes. Its all poor me, me, me. Uniform, uninvited, embroidery, told last. So disrespectful to all of the family who have had to work throughout their grief. The country wants to honour, respect and bid farewell to our lovely Queen. You, Harry, are just not relevant. Safe journey home. RIP our gracious Queen"

I could not agree more. I hope KC comes down hard on him in due course.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> Is Harry really so dim?
> 
> _“The Mail understands that while it is true that Harry was told shortly before the news became public, *the reason for this was because he was on a flight to Scotland and therefore not contactable*._”


But we all knew during the day. The palace was wearing black, the BBC suspended its regular programming. It just wasn't announced until 6 ish p.m.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Mendocino

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that with or without alcohol? I'm always a little confused, in Germany Cidre is French apple wine, then you can get British fruit ciders which are also somewhat alcoholic, but the cider in the US is just non-clear fresh apple juice?


The sparkling apple cider I prefer is carbonated and does not contain alcohol. A brand I like is Martinelli's.

There is also an apple cider that does contain alcohol that I do find quite tasty. A popular brand here in the U.S. is called "Angry Orchard", which is quite easy to find in most grocery stores here.

Then there is also plain apple juice that you can buy that is filtered, which makes it clear. There's also an unfiltered version which leaves it cloudy.


----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> Will they hold hands?





bag-mania said:


> Is water wet?


 You guys are cracking me up 


LittleStar88 said:


> Is Harry really so dim?
> 
> _“The Mail understands that while it is true that Harry was told shortly before the news became public, *the reason for this was because he was on a flight to Scotland and therefore not contactable*._”


Reminds me of when they couldn't contact him when PP passed away. I read that he changed phone numbers and didn't tell his family? A policeman had to go out to the Mansion of Toilets to ring the doorbell?


MrsSlocomb said:


> View attachment 5613353
> 
> This tread moves so fast I can't keep up, so I don't know if this was already posted, but she carried a Loewe Postal.  Arrrrghhhh! Loewe is my fav!! Now what am I going to do???


We will have to be the bigger person and help erase the taint.
_This too shall pass._


Jayne1 said:


> Answering my own question as to who they might now use for PR:
> 
> The Lede Company, DKC, 42West are considered as good or better than SS.  Let's see who they decide on.


Is this a buyer or seller market?
If it's true that they couldn't pay SS, other PR firms may pause to decide if they are worth the risk. 


Mendocino said:


> The sparkling apple cider I prefer is carbonated and does not contain alcohol. A brand I like is Martinelli's.
> 
> There is also an apple cider that does contain alcohol that I do find quite tasty. A popular brand here in the U.S. is called "Angry Orchard", which is quite easy to find in most grocery stores here.
> 
> Then there is also plain apple juice that you can buy that is filtered, which makes it clear. There's also an unfiltered version which leaves it cloudy.


I love Martinelli's! My kids say I'm drinking nostalgia.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## gracekelly

The only PR company  that would want to take them on is one trying to make a name for itself. It is already public knowledge that they don’t pay their bills so they should not expect to get payment to from them. They may just take the cheap way out and hire a person as their press secretary to plant their lies.


----------



## scarlet555

charlottawill said:


>



I hope half the rumors are true… as much as this sound made up, the truth has been weirder… If Nutmeg wasn’t preaching non-sense to the world and pretending to be something she wasn’t, I don’t think anyone would criticize her and her hypocrisy-she’s desperate to be famous and sayslike she doesn’t like the paps … blablabla, such a deceitful human, let’s see how long her charade lasts.  Looks like it’s finally catching up.  Yes, it’s her life and I wouldn’t care to comment but she really is out of turn speaking all the time, commenting on anything and everything while ‘nobody asked’.  Her podcast should be called ‘nobody asked’, because no one did!!!!!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> The Aussies again!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘A horrible human’: Meghan Markle has a ‘terrible influence’ over Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Prince Harry made an “awful mistake” by marrying Meghan Markle and leaving the royal family behind, says Liberal Senator Hollie Hughes.   “I think she’s had a terrible influence over him,” she said.    “She’s just a horrible human.  “They’re awful, revolting people.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au


Love the Aussie Truths.

 Cut right through the bulls**t and don’t mince any words,

 “I just think she’s an awful person.”


----------



## jblended

Now that we're only a few hours away, it is hitting me that she will be there.  She hated the family, insulted them at every turn, and now she is a grief monger amongst them. It feels like the ultimate act of disrespect. I wish they'd been in the US because I think she wouldn't have been invited and the children would've been a handy excuse.

Not feeling great about H being there either. Just remembering that he turned down the invitation to see HMQ days before she passed. 

What on earth have we all seen transpire here over the past few years? It's a soap opera playing out in real life. And for what exactly? Why couldn't they have done what they said they would- just been private and supported charities. KC would have kept their pockets lined all the same, there was no need for the sensationalism.  
Harry watched how Paul Burrell dined out on Diana's name. He saw firsthand how that betrayal deeply hurt the whole family. How could he choose to take that route?


----------



## RAINDANCE

marietouchet said:


> I thought it is the HRH list but Snowden and Peter are on the list and not James and Louise
> i am thinking the Kent and Gloucester ladies are not well enough to attend


No, this is the procession list, 
the ladies will meet their spouses at the entrance to take their seats, ditto Louise and James.


----------



## Mumotons

Kate reveals her son Louis is struggling to understand Queen's death
					

Speaking to Australia's Governor-General at a reception held for Commonwealth dignitaries ahead of the Queen's funeral today, Kate explained Louis is asking  many questions.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Their kids won’t have any memories of time spent with their Great grandparents……..selfish gits to their own children as well as TRF


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> She'd better not so much as look cross-eyed at that child.


I think we're all with Charlotte today.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

DoggieBags said:


> TW = The Wife


I always thought it stood for “The witch”


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Nanny Maria is Italian.  She'll know what to do.


I thought she was Spanish?


----------



## CarryOn2020

article from Aug., 2022

_Borrallo, who is from the Spanish city of Palencia, reportedly joined the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's household in March of that year, when George was just eight months old.








						Meet the Cambridges' Royal Nanny, Maria Teresa Turrion Borrallo
					

Here's everything you need to know about the Prince George, Princess Charlotte, and little Louis's caretaker.




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

It's interestingly manipulative how the Sussex's aggrieved friend (yoohoo, Omid!  ) phrases the despair of the century. Especially that last line I quote below. The scene setting is that it is ridiculous to exclude the twits and that there is something wrong about "uninviting" them if they were indeed invited. But there is actually no logical connection between "bonkers if they're not there" and "Everyone is coming in from around the world to pay respects to the Queen." It's a false correlation that anyone who wants to pay their respects will expect to see the Sussex twits there. If dear friend argued that they are still beloved members of the family and thus should be included, perhaps he has a leg to stand on. But by including that last sentence, it makes it so that the Sussex duo truly want to be the corpse at every funeral.

_It comes as a friend of the Sussex yesterday described the decision to exclude Prince Harry and Meghan Markle from last night's 'reception of the century' at Buckingham Palace as 'beyond bonkers'.
The friend claimed that the Sussexes will feel 'excluded' after they were apparently 'uninvited' to a state event for 1,000 world leaders and foreign royals attending the Queen's funeral.
A friend of the Sussexes told The Sunday Times: 'It is beyond bonkers if they're not there. *Everyone is coming in from around the world to pay their respects to the Queen.*'_

Add to that the "woe is me" scenario where it is the fault of the palace and POW that HazNoBalls feels "excluded" and "uncomfortable". Fishing for an apology? I'm really wondering if ginger twit has been a latent narc all along.
_The source said yesterday that the flip-flopping over uniform and the Buckingham Palace reception could make him feel as if 'the majority of the operation is against you. It's hard — nobody likes to feel like they're being excluded.'
Meanwhile, a source close to Harry said being back in his brother's company again had at times been 'uncomfortable' and 'difficult' this week._


----------



## BlueCherry

Last post of the day but for all of us watching and feeling tense or angry about Meghan Markle being a part of this….

She will go down in history as the most despicable, hypocritical and unwanted attendee of HMQE’s funeral. 

RIP Your Majesty


----------



## papertiger

scarlet555 said:


> I don’t understand why spoiled ginger head should even be upset or want to be included?  All that drama, he became a worse nuisance than expected since he met Nutmeg.



I don't think _he _is (in this case) but why do you think they've hung around? It's not just for the funeral.

I think MegZ either winds up up "_You_ should be there, you know most of them, and I know the rest" (as in we should be there)

or she just speaks through Harry but can't put her name to the announcement - hence when H can't d it she uses "a friend".


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Answering my own question as to who they might now use for PR:
> 
> The Lede Company, DKC, 42West are considered as good or better than SS.  Let's see who they decide on.



Unless they can pay, they won't be working with anyone save an intern doing placement in their sophomore year


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


>




-sad but not  -sad


----------



## xincinsin

Seated in front of the 75 inch screen showing BBC feed and watching Telegraph feed on the laptop.
I will not see an event of this magnitude again this lifetime.
RIP Your Majesty
May flights of angels sing thee to thy rest.


----------



## Lodpah

BlueCherry said:


> Last post of the day but for all of us watching and feeling tense or angry about Meghan Markle being a part of this….
> 
> She will go down in history as the most despicable, hypocritical and unwanted attendee of HMQE’s funeral.
> 
> RIP Your Majesty


 I'm watching. She is just  cog in the wheel. Even as  being part of the BRF she is irrelevant in the big scheme of things.
,


----------



## Lodpah

KC, PW and Harry in  the same car. Hope Harry comes to his senses,


----------



## Lodpah

Sophie and Meg in one car   everyone looking forward but TW looking all around in the car  thinking it's  all for her lol


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> KC, PW and Harry in  the same car. Hope Harry comes to his senses,


I saw only KC and PW exit the first car altho the BBC commentator said H was with them. Harry and Peter P were in the next car, I believe.

Camilla, Kate and the two children entered the Abbey. I haven't spotted Zedzee yet.


----------



## xincinsin

Coffin transferred to gun carriage.



ETA spotted Major Johnny 2 strides behind Hawwy


----------



## catlover46

Meghan’s hat is too informal for a funeral.


----------



## Lodpah

Harry looks irritated as usual. He can't conjure any grief.


----------



## jblended

catlover46 said:


> Meghan’s hat is too informal for a funeral.


I was thinking the same!

Also, William's brow furrowed with grief and Harry behind him, scanning the room left and right- like he's just realizing what he left behind. Regret, not grief. SO weird.


----------



## Lodpah

PW looks about to about to break down


----------



## gelbergirl

Prince George: "Dad who's that man behind us not wearing a uniform?"


----------



## Sharont2305

Lodpah said:


> KC, PW and Harry in  the same car. Hope Harry comes to his senses,


Harry was in second car with Peter Philips


----------



## Handbag1234

Peter Philips and Zara made front row. Hazz and TW second row


----------



## Lodpah

I'm glad BBC is ignoring her, focusing on the  front row.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Good shot of Harry now, with a huuuge candle blocking M. 
A Cape dress, she's a super hero now, is she?


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> Jayne1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Answering my own question as to who they might now use for PR:
> 
> The Lede Company, DKC, 42West are considered as good or better than SS.  Let's see who they decide on.
> 
> 
> 
> If they got the money to pay, notoriety is not it these days. It’s 2 mil or nothing.
Click to expand...


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> I'm glad BBC is ignoring her, focusing on the  front row.



DM too


----------



## zinacef

Sharont2305 said:


> Good shot of Harry now, with a huuuge candle blocking M.
> A Cape dress, she's a super hero now, is she?


Always ! She had some days off, gave her few days to gaze over her Diana Cos-play album, cape is it today


----------



## Lodpah

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry was in second car with Peter Philips


Oh I thought I heard the BBC say he was in the car with his sons,


----------



## Handbag1234

Sharont2305 said:


> Good shot of Harry now, with a huuuge candle blocking M.
> A Cape dress, she's a super hero now, is she?


Maternity cape? I’m awaiting the pregnancy announcement at the Wake tonight.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Oh I thought I heard the BBC say he was in the car with his sons,


They did say that. I counted heads. Nope, error.


----------



## zinacef

gracekelly said:


> The only PR company  that would want to take them on is one trying to make a name for itself. It is already public knowledge that they don’t pay their bills so they should not expect to get payment to from them. They may just take the cheap way out and hire a person as their press secretary to plant their lies.


Equerry , pls excuse my use of this term loosely, Scoobie Doo. Way way waaay cheaper, just give him treats and such and maybe a walk a day in the lovely vila in CA and few visits to her favorite dentist! I’m sure he’ll jump on it.


----------



## Sharont2305

Handbag1234 said:


> Maternity cape? I’m awaiting the pregnancy announcement at the Wake tonight.


I'm waiting for the, and I'm not saying this disrespectfully, "all the trauma caused me to miscarry"


----------



## Sharont2305

Oooh, shade there from the Archbishop of Canterbury.


----------



## Lodpah

I wonder how the tw can face  the Arch of Canterbury Justin Welby knowing she lied about him. Wow it blows  my mind


----------



## papertiger

Handbag1234 said:


> Maternity cape? I’m awaiting the pregnancy announcement at the Wake tonight.





Sharont2305 said:


> I'm waiting for the, and I'm not saying this disrespectfully, "all the trauma caused me to miscarry"



Come on guys, let's not make things up on her behalf 

MegZ is more than capable of doing it for herself QED


----------



## Lodpah

Where did Harry go? NVM


----------



## jblended

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh, shade there from the Archbishop of Canterbury.


I missed this! What did he say?

Every time they pan over them, H & M are looking around or looking at each other (totally disengaged) whilst KC looks so broken right in front of them!


----------



## Lodpah

jblended said:


> I missed this! What did he say?
> 
> Every time they pan over them, H & M are looking around or looking at each other (totally disengaged) whilst KC looks so broken right in front of them!


I noticed that. Probably looking for cameras?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

Lodpah said:


> Where did Harry go? NVM


He's there. They're just not including him in the shot most of the time. You can spot him in the wide shots.


----------



## alismarr

Lodpah said:


> Harry looks irritated as usual. He can't conjure any grief.


He’s perpetually self pitying and obviously full of resentment.
Tough sh.t Hazza, you brought it all on yourself.


----------



## gelbergirl

jblended said:


> I missed this! What did he say?
> 
> Every time they pan over them, H & M are looking around or looking at each other (totally disengaged) whilst KC looks so broken right in front of them!



The Queen's loyalty....how in today's world people will say they will be loyal and are not...they will commit to serve and duty and only when someone like TQ passes do we recognize true loyalty and service.


----------



## jblended

gelbergirl said:


> The Queen's loyalty....how in today's world people will say they will be loyal and are not...they will commit to serve and duty and only when someone like TQ passes do we recognize true loyalty and service.


Thank you! I'm really emotional (more than I thought I would be) and keep missing bits as I'm crying.


----------



## Coconuts40

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh, shade there from the Archbishop of Canterbury.



Yes I caught that as well.  I felt his comment on (paraprashing here) those of greed will be forgotten -was directed towards H and M.


----------



## jblended

Everytime they show a close up of KC, he looks devastated. Right behind him, the clueless Hazbeen, looking bored. Every single time. I'm fuming! Why did he attend if he doesn't care?


----------



## Sharont2305

Coconuts40 said:


> Yes I caught that as well.  I felt his comment on (paraprashing here) those of greed will be forgotten -was directed towards H and M.


Something about "those who cling on to power and privileges will long be forgotten" 

Yes, he did say cling on to, an quite forceful too.


----------



## KEG66

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh, shade there from the Archbishop of Canterbury.


Yes indeed there was


----------



## Coconuts40

Sharont2305 said:


> Something about "those who cling on to power and privileges will long be forgotten"
> 
> Yes, he did say cling on to, an quite forceful too.


Yes thank you that is more precise.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Those who serve “will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are long forgotten”, Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, said in his sermon at the Queen’s funeral.

 









						‘We will meet again’: Christian themes at heart of Welby’s funeral sermon
					

Archbishop of Canterbury’s sermon in Westminster Abbey reflected monarch’s role as head of C of E




					www.theguardian.com
				



_


----------



## Lodpah

Did I just hear someone yell "a-hole hazzie "? During the procession through Central London?


----------



## Toby93

I can't help but wonder if any of this is getting to Hazz?  What he has given up for that woman, and if he still thinks its worth it?  I saw PW just turn his head and salute as he passed the cenotaph which was erected by the Queens grandfather, but Hazz had to look straight ahead with no salute.  This has to affect him?  He loved the military and all the ceremony.


----------



## Lodpah

Toby93 said:


> I can't help but wonder if any of this is getting to Hazz?  What he has given up for that woman, and if he still thinks its worth it?  I saw PW just turn his head and salute as he passed the cenotaph which was erected by the Queens grandfather, but Hazz had to look straight ahead with no salute.  This has to affect him?  He loved the military and all the ceremony.


Hope so. T  W is not there to handle him aka thumb control he is being deprogrammed hopefully


----------



## Sharont2305

I noticed no hand holding as they walked out of the Abbey.


----------



## Lodpah

Good job media for ignoring the  ignorants.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Handbag1234

Frosty in the car Sophie and TW


----------



## gelbergirl

I caught Prince Harry not singing God Save the King.


----------



## Handbag1234

gelbergirl said:


> I caught Prince Harry not singing God Save the King.


I noticed minimal effort at end too


----------



## CarryOn2020

Based on his body language, he is so outta here.  Do the minimum, get the check, leave.


----------



## Coconuts40

I noticed Harry looking around during the funeral ceremony, often with an angry look on his face.  Meghan looked like she was performing.  The royals had such a profound look of sadness on their face.  I could not see any sincere sadness on MM, not once in the past 10 days.

Sometimes you need to walk away from your current life, or experience profound loss in life, to realize what you lost.  I have to wonder if this has taken a toll on Harry.  After all, he must have grown up with selfless duty engrained in his head by his family and his dear grannie QE.

I can't help but feel the Royals have a new sense and strength to carry on their duty, to honour QE with great fortitude.  I don't know how Harry can go back to California back to Netflix movies and podcasts when quite honestly he could have been of such great service alongside his family.


----------



## Icyjade

Coconuts40 said:


> I noticed Harry looking around during the funeral ceremony, often with an angry look on his face.


I wondered if events over the last few days made him realize what he’d given up. That being part of the RF gives him access to far more than he can achieve as a C list celebrity in the US.


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> I wondered if events over the last few days made him realize what he’d given up. That being part of the RF gives him access to far more than he can achieve as a C list *Z-list* celebrity in the US.



Just correcting that for you


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Sorry, not sorry - caught on tape


----------



## jblended

Handbag1234 said:


> Frosty in the car Sophie and TW


Truly a poetic moment, that shot of them in the car!



gelbergirl said:


> I caught Prince Harry not singing God Save the King.


I caught that too. He showed his true colours right there. What a bitter, resentful, petulant brat! I really expected more of him today- more fool me!



Coconuts40 said:


> I can't help but feel the Royals have a new sense and strength to carry on their duty, to honour QE with great fortitude. I don't know how Harry can go back to California back to Netflix movies and podcasts when quite honestly he could have been of such great service alongside his family.


Given the way he has behaved today and his refusal to sing the national anthem to his father, I'd say he will find returning to Cali easy. He has shown his true character and it's shockingly ugly. I'm so disappointed in him; on a basic human level, he has actually shocked me.


----------



## jennalovesbags

While I don't condone their behavior, I do have a hard time with all the talk whether someone looked upset or not. Not only do we all deal with grief differently, but we can't help how our 'resting' face looks. That said, Charles, Andrew, etc are not hiding their emotion at all.


----------



## jblended

jennalovesbags said:


> While I don't condone their behavior, I do have a hard time with all the talk whether someone looked upset or not. Not only do we all deal with grief differently, but we can't help how our 'resting' face looks. That said, Charles, Andrew, etc are not hiding their emotion at all.


That's a fair point. Harry may still be in shock and Meg was crying at the end, so maybe we're not reading their expressions correctly. 
Edit: Looking at the pictures coming out and it's hard to read anything other than anger in Harry's face. Perhaps he's struggling with the memories of his mother's funeral at this time.  

What is undeniable is that he refused to sing the national anthem. I can't imagine why he made that choice. Deeply disrespectful to not only KC, but to HMQ who did her duty until the final day. This is her legacy he's disrespecting now.


----------



## Toby93

jblended said:


> That's a fair point. Harry may still be in shock and Meg was crying at the end, so maybe we're not reading their expressions correctly.
> Edit: Looking at the pictures coming out and it's hard to read anything other than anger in Harry's face. Perhaps he's struggling with the memories of his mother's funeral at this time.
> 
> What is undeniable is that he refused to sing the national anthem. I can't imagine why he made that choice. Deeply disrespectful to not only KC, but to HMQ who did her duty until the final day. This is her legacy he's disrespecting now.


I wouldn't read too much into TW crying.  It's a performance for her.  She bragged about how she can cry on demand.


----------



## xincinsin

I think the twits behaved fairly well today. 
I hope I won't see Meghan's Mirror merching her outfit or any "close friends" leaking complaints and devastation.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Toby93 said:


> I wouldn't read too much into TW crying.  It's a performance for her.  She bragged about how she can cry on demand.


I had a feeling she was going to squeeze out of a tear today


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Gal4Dior

lanasyogamama said:


> I had a feeling she was going to squeeze out of a tear today


Perhaps only because HMTQ’s will was read, and she found out they were getting squat.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh, shade there from the Archbishop of Canterbury.


I noticed it, but I don’t think so - I think he’s a much bigger man than that.


----------



## Icyjade

Random thoughts when I saw her on screen…

- The make up is a tad too much smokey eye. She is attending a funeral not a party in Hollywood. 




- Glad the hat was big enough to hide her face often.
- She should have worn a veil
- She looks so much better after losing weight (note to self to try to lose weight too)
- She looks less orangey today. Then again her neck looks white and her face looks orange. Hmm… 
- As an actress, her acting is pretty bad. She seems smug most of the time As opposed to some others who look genuinely devastated.


----------



## Pessie

I’m glad the cameras kept Harry and Meghan out of shot as much as was practicable and concentrated on the close family and the service.


----------



## alismarr

Toby93 said:


> I can't help but wonder if any of this is getting to Hazz?  What he has given up for that woman, and if he still thinks its worth it?  I saw PW just turn his head and salute as he passed the cenotaph which was erected by the Queens grandfather, but Hazz had to look straight ahead with no salute.  This has to affect him?  He loved the military and all the ceremony.


So he didn’t get to play dressing up? Boo f.....g hoo. He is a petulant man child without the self awareness and grey matter to see what is patently obvious to just about everyone.
I might just add that my comment on dressing up is by no means an insult to our magnificent armed forces. Indeed, my son is one of them and was actually told in November last year that he had been chosen to go to London in the event of the Queen’s death. However, he is on patrol atm so it was not to be.


----------



## Sharont2305

Did she get a BOGOF when purchasing hats? It's the same/similar to the Jubilee hat.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Love the “divide and conquer” aspect of putting the brats in separate cars with their own minders.  LOL


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I'm watching. She is just  cog in the wheel. Even as  being part of the BRF she is irrelevant in the big scheme of things.
> ,


Not even a cog, because cogs help keep the wheel working. She's like an annoying sticker on the wheel that won't come off.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I noticed that. Probably looking for cameras?


Or someone to make up a story about for the book.


----------



## Sharont2305

Sophisticatted said:


> Love the “divide and conquer” aspect of putting the brats in separate cars with their own minders.  LOL


I hope Sophie has fed her a juicy lie to see if it gets leaked.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sorry, not sorry - caught on tape



I've no access to BBC today, so thanks for the clip. TW should have opted for a simpler outfit imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gotta love how H&Tw were seated directly behind the King and Queen.  Absolutely masterful to wrap them in the monarchy. Tell us again how much you hate the monarchy.  Tell us again how you lost your father. Tell us again how many trash-bombs you intend to throw.  Yes, do tell.   Such hypocrites.


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> I caught Prince Harry not singing God Save the King.


Harry is a d!ck and I believe he hates his father.


----------



## bag-mania

Icyjade said:


> I wondered if events over the last few days made him realize what he’d given up. That being part of the RF gives him access to far more than he can achieve as a C list celebrity in the US.


He is immersed in self-pity and his cranky face reflects it. He doesn't think he's done anything wrong.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Kate wearing earrings and necklace from QE, TW is not going to be pleased


----------



## lanasyogamama

How long before TW announces a lawsuit against this candle?


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Good shot of Harry now, with a huuuge candle blocking M.
> A Cape dress, she's a super hero now, is she?


I was thinking more along these lines.


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means…   After seeing @lanasyogamama's post, I understand what it means.


----------



## LittleStar88

Jayne1 said:


> But we all knew during the day. The palace was wearing black, the BBC suspended its regular programming. It just wasn't announced until 6 ish p.m.



If “we” all knew, then he should have too. Unless it was the world’s best-kept secret from him?


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> How long before TW announces a lawsuit against this candle?



Wow, this is perfect!


----------



## charlottawill

I guess this means he'll be applying for US citizenship when he gets "home" to CA? Or should I be more charitable and assume he was fighting back emotion?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Such a freaking mess. As we say in Germany, afterwards you're always smarter.


----------



## Pessie

Sophisticatted said:


> Love the “divide and conquer” aspect of putting the brats in separate cars with their own minders.  LOL


I think Charles has avoided spending any 1:1 time with his deceitful son.  Can’t blame him.


----------



## kipp

Re: not singing God Save the King:  I just can't imagine the cognitive dissonance that Hazzbeen is experiencing, especially today.   On the one hand, he's a victim of Stockholm syndrome with his hostage taking wife (has to do her bidding!), and on the other he realizes what he is missing and could have been a productive part of.  It will be interesting to see what transpires after today...


----------



## Chanbal

Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!



	

		
			
		

		
	
(source: L.A.)


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I guess this means he'll be applying for US citizenship when he gets "home" to CA? Or should I be more charitable and assume he was fighting back emotion?



On not singing God Save the King …
He is used to singing God save the Queen and maybe the word change is difficult
i remember my problems with the Lord’s Prayer, they updated the words when I was in my teens, never got used to that , still say “who art” not “who is“
He should have at least been mouthing the words …


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


Nah, she's watching the bank of dad in law pass to William.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


Meghan.  Left eye.  One tear.  Go.
Her own words, no?


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> I think Charles has avoided spending any 1:1 time with his deceitful son.  Can’t blame him.


Has there been any footage of Charles speaking to Harry or even looked directly at him during the past week?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Icyjade said:


> Random thoughts when I saw her on screen…
> 
> - The make up is a tad too much smokey eye. She is attending a funeral not a party in Hollywood.
> 
> View attachment 5613488
> 
> 
> - Glad the hat was big enough to hide her face often.
> - She should have worn a veil
> - She looks so much better after losing weight (note to self to try to lose weight too)
> - She looks less orangey today. Then again her neck looks white and her face looks orange. Hmm…
> - As an actress, her acting is pretty bad. She seems smug most of the time As opposed to some others who look genuinely devastated.


i saw this article and thought it applies today    Apparently narcissists love funerals. 



			https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrErbGCdChjIjwBZy3rFAx.;_ylu=Y29sbwNiZjEEcG9zAzEEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1663624450/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fnarcissisms.com%2fwhy-narcissists-love-a-funeral%2f/RK=2/RS=bhpzOZg0O1PlyIiJS84M_UTNrDY-


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


Both Camilla and MM were blinking a lot as the gun carriage passed by the standing royals at Wellington Arch. Shocking as it might be, this could be genuine.


----------



## Kevinaxx

^way too informal and not appropriate look imho.

This,


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Answering my own question as to who they might now use for PR:
> 
> The Lede Company, DKC, 42West are considered as good or better than SS.  Let's see who they decide on.


if it's true they were difficult to work for and not good at paying the bill, will they be able to engage another top company?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Such a freaking mess. As we say in Germany, afterwards you're always smarter.



I believe there is a lot of truth in the above statement. For TW's brother to write a letter to the BRF/Hazz alerting them of the risk they were taking by having her join the family is big. I can see
QE, Charles and some other members being hopeful that she would change…


----------



## Sharont2305

We'll soon see what the seating arrangement is for this second service.


----------



## carmen56

It gave me great pleasure to see Raptor having to walk behind Charlotte.


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> Nah, she's watching the bank of dad in law pass to William.


It crossed my mind.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


And why is her face orange, but her neck is white?  Her elbow is even whiter than her neck?


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Did she get a BOGOF when purchasing hats? It's the same/similar to the Jubilee hat.


I think the cape dress is similar to the famous red cape dress formal, worn the night when she was suicidal
Possibly by Emilia Wickstead the designer of our fav green cape dress
I don’t doubt she had another made
She probably has limited choices of designers, but Emilia was already associated with MM


----------



## pomeline

Before we start to believe in genuine sorrow...

Meghan Markle cries at the Queen’s funeral









... let's just remember the woman has admitted her skill to cry on cue:

Meghan Markle admits she can do THIS trick

Meghan video of crying on cue

Oops... Sorry... Should've looked at the previous messages... Well, it can't be repeated enough. I cannot trust her faked emotions because people with sociopathic tendencies don't have genuine emotions. Unless they feel sorry for themselves.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I guess this means he'll be applying for US citizenship when he gets "home" to CA? Or should I be more charitable and assume he was fighting back emotion?




I mean wow! 

If you can't wish your own father a long life and/or the respect of your reigning monarch - there really is no hope.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Both Camilla and MM were blinking a lot as the gun carriage passed by the standing royals at Wellington Arch. Shocking as it might be, this could be genuine.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> And why is her face orange, but her neck is white?  Her elbow is even whiter than her neck?



And the giant highlighter stripe down the front of her nose.

She sure was ready for the camera today!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I think the cape dress is similar to the famous red cape dress formal, worn the night when she was suicidal
> Possibly by Emilia Wickstead the designer of our fav green cape dress
> I don’t doubt she had another made
> She probably has limited choices of designers, but Emilia was already associated with MM



She's obsessed with making capes happen. 

Actually, there are lots of capes on the catwalk for this and next season but, black, full-cape and that hard-line hat didn't really work. The cape needed to be shorter and the hat Modern with a capital M


----------



## youngster

Meghan looks OK, I'm not a fan of that cape dress though.  It's rather shapeless and that hat is mediocre. She goes overboard with the bronzer though.  Her natural skin tone would have been so much better. ETA:  The make up stripe down the nose though? Ugh.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




No comment


----------



## Chanbal

pomeline said:


> Before we start to believe in genuine sorrow...
> 
> Meghan Markle cries at the Queen’s funeral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613507
> 
> 
> ... let's just remember the woman has admitted her skill to cry on cue:
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she can do THIS trick
> 
> Meghan video of crying on cue


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> Before we start to believe in genuine sorrow...
> 
> Meghan Markle cries at the Queen’s funeral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613507
> 
> 
> ... let's just remember the woman has admitted her skill to cry on cue:
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she can do THIS trick
> 
> Meghan video of crying on cue
> 
> Oops... Sorry... Should've looked at the previous messages... Well, it can't be repeated enough. I cannot trust her faked emotions because people with sociopathic tendencies don't have genuine emotions. Unless they feel sorry for themselves.


That's an awful lot of makeup for a funeral.


----------



## pomeline

charlottawill said:


> That's an awful lot of makeup for a funeral.



She couldn't sneak out to a tanning parlour and Frogmore had no more wood stain left.


----------



## Chanbal

TW doesn't look sad at all (towards the end of the clip she seems to be hiding a smile?)…


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> She's obsessed with making capes happen.
> 
> Actually, there are lots of capes on the catwalk for this and next season but, black, full-cape and that hard-line hat didn't really work. The cape needed to be shorter and the hat Modern with a capital M


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> She couldn't sneak out to a tanning parlour and Frogmore had no more wood stain left.


Thank you for making me laugh, as I am tearing up watching the long walk at Windsor.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I used to think TW’s nose was pretty, but now it looks really insane to me.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is good!




			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-candle-conspiracy-theory-emerges-after-viral-gaffe/news-story/843f30100605ae9d50abe22e38656e70?amp


----------



## Kevinaxx

pomeline said:


> Before we start to believe in genuine sorrow...
> 
> Meghan Markle cries at the Queen’s funeral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613507
> 
> 
> ... let's just remember the woman has admitted her skill to cry on cue:
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she can do THIS trick
> 
> Meghan video of crying on cue
> 
> Oops... Sorry... Should've looked at the previous messages... Well, it can't be repeated enough. I cannot trust her faked emotions because people with sociopathic tendencies don't have genuine emotions. Unless they feel sorry for themselves.


Sad part is she THINKS she’s a great actress. The most successful people I know or see stay humble.

That’s part of what makes them successful is the belief that they’re not as great as everyone else thinks they are so they continue to work on/hone in on their craft.

I just can’t believe the ones that fall for that crap.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This is good!
> View attachment 5613511
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-candle-conspiracy-theory-emerges-after-viral-gaffe/news-story/843f30100605ae9d50abe22e38656e70?amp


I guess it's a racist candle


----------



## pandapharm

I think the candle is Diana’s spirit saying she does not approve


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> But we all knew during the day. The palace was wearing black, the BBC suspended its regular programming. It just wasn't announced until 6 ish p.m.



Right. I knew when the palace put out her health was worrisome but she was resting comfortably and family was on their way. Not even because of what they said though why would anyone rush just because of a health scare, but because they said it at all instead of keeping quiet as usual. Then it was just waiting, luckily with lots of lovely members on here.


----------



## TimeToShop

Cue the tear


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mumotons said:


> Kate reveals her son Louis is struggling to understand Queen's death
> 
> 
> Speaking to Australia's Governor-General at a reception held for Commonwealth dignitaries ahead of the Queen's funeral today, Kate explained Louis is asking  many questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their kids won’t have any memories of time spent with their Great grandparents……..selfish gits to their own children as well as TRF



Or their grandparents for that matter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

catlover46 said:


> Meghan’s hat is too informal for a funeral.



Isn't it the same one the wore with her Wallis outfit for the Commonwealth Service?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm waiting for the, and I'm not saying this disrespectfully, "all the trauma caused me to miscarry"



I wouldn't put it past her. That said, she's looked heavier with a slight belly all summer, but it hasn't grown or anything.


----------



## pomeline

TimeToShop said:


> Cue the tear




Funny she should mention left eye as she's squeezing out a tear from precisely her left eye in the photos today. Probably managed to produce it thinking about her own funeral. "Oh, it will be grand like this... people are going to be soooo sad that I've died..."


----------



## Icyjade

I love the candle, and whoever thought of it and had the balls to do it.

Would love to be there to see her reaction when she finds out about the candle.


----------



## Icyjade

This is genuine sorrow


----------



## youngster

pomeline said:


> Funny she should mention left eye as she's squeezing out a tear from precisely her left eye in the photos today. Probably managed to produce it thinking about her own funeral. "Oh, it will be grand like this... people are going to be soooo sad that I've died..."



Oh no, no, people like her? I've known one or two. They think they're going to live forever.  An exception will be made for them.


----------



## LittleStar88

But those gloves…  Got some dishes to do later, I guess?


----------



## Toby93

pomeline said:


> Before we start to believe in genuine sorrow...
> 
> Meghan Markle cries at the Queen’s funeral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613507
> 
> 
> ... let's just remember the woman has admitted her skill to cry on cue:
> 
> Meghan Markle admits she can do THIS trick
> 
> Meghan video of crying on cue
> 
> Oops... Sorry... Should've looked at the previous messages... Well, it can't be repeated enough. I cannot trust her faked emotions because people with sociopathic tendencies don't have genuine emotions. Unless they feel sorry for themselves.


It's a good thing she didn't have white gloves on, or we would have seen the orange tanner


----------



## rose60610

Did anybody see Claw with her hand in her cape pocket in the church as they were leaving? The floppy hat also looks terrible at this event. She's doing all these little digs so people talk about her. Bad attention is better than no attention. She claims that the BRF was so mean to her, so this is her way of getting back. NOBODY wants her there. I hope KC III strips them of their titles this week. ENOUGH!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> Given the way he has behaved today and his refusal to sing the national anthem to his father, I'd say he will find returning to Cali easy. He has shown his true character and it's shockingly ugly. I'm so disappointed in him; on a basic human level, he has actually shocked me.



Are we sure? Not saying you are wrong I'm just so shocked. 

I couldn't watch the funeral live because I had an appointment and I'm only now catching up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> That's a fair point. Harry may still be in shock and Meg was crying at the end, so maybe we're not reading their expressions correctly.



Meg can cry on command, though. I doubt she is capable of having genuine feelings, and she barely knew The Queen.


----------



## TimeToShop

Sophie looks like she’s ready to rip TW a new one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> How long before TW announces a lawsuit against this candle?




That candle should be given a knighthood.


----------



## Sophisticatted

TimeToShop said:


> Sophie looks like she’s ready to rip TW a new one.




Looks like the ladies (plus George) put a “circle of protection” around Charlotte.  TW always has a GULP look on her face when dealing with The Sophie Stare.


----------



## pomeline

Just a quick question... A friend of mine feels sorry for Harry not being able to wear his uniform as he was such a war hero and served in Afghanistan with great personal risk. Anyone remember any tea on how that was in reality, was he on the frontline? How did others view him? I can't find the YouTube account of the veteran who talked about and I am under the impression he was basically just driven and flown around and irritated his mates because he was causing extra work and risk to them. What's the deal with this?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## justwatchin

So let’s recap…she’s spent so much time telling anyone and everyone that will give her a platform(or paycheck) how badly she was treated by the family, but appears at the funeral feigning sorrow? 
Why attend? She could have made an excuse that she was needed for the children.
Can’t wait to see her next move because if she continues to recycle her same comments about the royal family I believe she would be called out and labeled a hypocrite.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I think the cape dress is similar to the famous red cape dress formal, worn the night when she was suicidal
> Possibly by Emilia Wickstead the designer of our fav green cape dress
> I don’t doubt she had another made
> She probably has limited choices of designers, but Emilia was already associated with MM



The night she was allegedly suicidal she wore a navy sequin dress. The red cape dress she wore to a military occasion were red was reserved for, well, military people.


----------



## sdkitty

Kevinaxx said:


> View attachment 5613502
> 
> ^way too informal and not appropriate look imho.
> 
> This,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613500


maybe for once, M realizes she's not a member of the family and shouldn't be wearing a veil


----------



## Handbag1234

rose60610 said:


> Did anybody see Claw with her hand in her cape pocket in the church as they were leaving? The floppy hat also looks terrible at this event. She's doing all these little digs so people talk about her. Bad attention is better than no attention. She claims that the BRF was so mean to her, so this is her way of getting back. NOBODY wants her there. I hope KC III strips them of their titles this week. ENOUGH!


I saw the hands in her pockets but thought I was being nit picking to mention it


----------



## pomeline

justwatchin said:


> So let’s recap…she’s spent so much time telling anyone and everyone that will give her a platform(or paycheck) how badly she was treated by the family, but appears at the funeral feigning sorrow?
> Why attend? She could have made an excuse that she was needed for the children.
> Can’t wait to see her next move because if she continues to recycle her same comments about the royal family I believe she would be called out and labeled a hypocrite.



And then there's Harry, traumatised by flashlights, walking behind the coffin of his mother and wearing suits, walking behind his grandmother's coffin in flashlights wearing a suit. He blamed his grandmother and grandfather of being terrible parents who ruined his father, who also was a terrible father, refused to see both his grandparents before they died and refuses to sing the National Anthem because it asks for long life to his father but is there prancing around demanding to be treated like the heir to the throne and to be able to wear a uniform from his father who he claims is a prisoner like his brother. He then brings his wife along, the same one who wants to bring down monarchy. Why aren't these two already on the plane on their way back and stripped of their titles? And I'm not even mentioning their shady connections and possible leaking of state secrets to foreign powers.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Did anybody see Claw with her hand in her cape pocket in the church as they were leaving?


My first thought would have been checking a recording device, but I'll bet she and Harry were screened for those.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> This is genuine sorrow
> 
> View attachment 5613513



Oh my little Charlotte. I was already crying over her little outfit and her telling George when to bow, but this is heartbreaking.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> Did anybody see Claw with her hand in her cape pocket in the church as they were leaving? The floppy hat also looks terrible at this event. She's doing all these little digs so people talk about her. Bad attention is better than no attention. She claims that the BRF was so mean to her, so this is her way of getting back. NOBODY wants her there. I hope KC III strips them of their titles this week. ENOUGH!


maybe her "mistakes" are just that - lack of judgment, rather than deliberate digs.  What was she going to do with the claw since she couldn't hang on to H?
Actually I could almost sympathize with her lack of knowing how to behave except that is was her own choice not to learn.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I still believe that she is being dressed for these events.  I believe the hat is a rewear (no merching, plus it’s much less nice than the ones the other ladies are wearing, it also hides a lot of her smug face most of the time).  I’m not certain about the dress.  It is shapeless with a very simple neckline (nowhere to hide a mic).  No jewelry other than her earrings.  Sarah, the Duchess of York looked way nicer, much more polished, and with some brooch bling.


----------



## pomeline

Why are they sitting next to the Waleses...? Ewww.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> Why are they sitting next to the Waleses...? Ewww.


My thoughts exactly.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> Why are they sitting next to the Waleses...? Ewww.


So they cannot say they were excluded in any way. I'm glad at least Harry is between Charlotte and TW.


----------



## youngster

pomeline said:


> Why are they sitting next to the Waleses...? Ewww.



Charlotte is sitting next to Harry at least. They didn't sit her next to Meghan.


----------



## Toby93

I was so angry when I saw them being escorted to the front row.  Furious actually.  The unfairness of it all.  Why


----------



## Handbag1234

pomeline said:


> Why are they sitting next to the Waleses...? Ewww.


Is the second service more a family service so more about family order rather ‘working royals’?


----------



## pomeline

charlottawill said:


> So they cannot say they were excluded in any way. I'm glad at least Harry is between Charlotte and TW.



Well I guess you're right... All I'm going to say is it would be most unfortunate if a floor access hatch was positioned right under her seat and malfunctioned during the service. She's seated next to Savannah but I hope they won't team up during the service.


----------



## bag-mania

pomeline said:


> Why are they sitting next to the Waleses...? Ewww.


Because they are both sons of the King. This is one of those situations that cannot be avoided gracefully.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> And why is her face orange, but her neck is white?  Her elbow is even whiter than her neck?


The word "ombre" comes to mind


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The word "ombre" comes to mind


I’d call it “bittersweet” with the emphasis on bitter.


----------



## rose60610

Handbag1234 said:


> I saw the hands in her pockets but thought I was being nit picking to mention it



Maybe it was the only way she could stop herself from grabbing Harry's hand.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I guess it's a racist candle


They’ll say a racist was in charge of the candles. You just wait.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> They’ll say a racist was in charge of the candles. You just wait.


Or in charge of positioning the cameras so that she was blocked from view.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> TW doesn't look sad at all (towards the end of the clip she seems to be hiding a smile?)…



I saw that during the live telecast and thought she was trying to lure the kids into her clutches.


Chanbal said:


>



National Enquirer? High-end reading material? After all, didn't Zedzee say tabloids didn't exist in the US?


----------



## pomeline

bag-mania said:


> They’ll say a racist was in charge of the candles. You just wait.



They have been quiet for so long that there is bound to be some brain fart of an interview blurted out the minute her feet touch the the tarmac at LAX. Oprah is fuming she didn't get to set up her shadow funeral service or turn up herself.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I guess it's a racist candle


It looked orange to me  Must be the dim candlelight of course...


----------



## Handbag1234

I have been told by family member who knows more than me. The Queen always sat in second row in Windsor chapel. As Charles, Anne and Andrew are as first three children of queen. So 2nd row are the premium seats not the front row. Looks like they mixed it up so all the grandchildren had premium seats at one of the two services. Andrew’s children are next to him in second row at Windsor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Just saw KCIII and Camilla get into a car to go to the family internment.  Then, Will, Kate and the children left. Then, Edward, Sophie and their children.  Lady Louise said thank you to the person who held the door open for her. (I like Lady Louise so much!)  Then Harry and MM in a separate car.  They were standing next to, or around Eugenie and Jack.


----------



## Coconuts40

I am touched by the kind gestures KC has made towards Harry and Meghan the past 10 days.  Mentioning them in his first speech, seating them behind him at Westminister Abbey today,  and seating them  front row beside the Prince and Princess of Wales at the Windsor Chapel   Personally I see this as choices as King, but also as a father trying to mend his family.  Considering everything they have said about the RF to bring them down, that shows some serious class and integrity.


----------



## TimeToShop

Dang, I was fine until KCIII teared up at the National Anthem.

I did like how the clergy members cut off H from following the Wales out of the pew.

If only the chauffeur of H&TWs car would talk. Bet he’s getting an earful.

I suppose they will be at the private family service. Too bad, the family should be able to grieve in peace without them.


----------



## justwatchin

pomeline said:


> And then there's Harry, traumatised by flashlights, walking behind the coffin of his mother and wearing suits, walking behind his grandmother's coffin in flashlights wearing a suit. He blamed his grandmother and grandfather of being terrible parents who ruined his father, who also was a terrible father, refused to see both his grandparents before they died and refuses to sing the National Anthem because it asks for long life to his father but is there prancing around demanding to be treated like the heir to the throne and to be able to wear a uniform from his father who he claims is a prisoner like his brother. He then brings his wife along, the same one who wants to bring down monarchy. Why aren't these two already on the plane on their way back and stripped of their titles? And I'm not even mentioning their shady connections and possible leaking of state secrets to foreign powers.


Agree 100%


----------



## Debbini

They should be gone tomorrow. Overseas. (Or here from my view )


----------



## jblended

Chanbal said:


> TW doesn't look sad at all (towards the end of the clip she seems to be hiding a smile?)…


And she was smirking/smiling again when she got into the car with H after the committal. 


TimeToShop said:


> Cue the tear


This is shocking! Thanks for sharing it, I didn't know!


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are we sure? Not saying you are wrong I'm just so shocked.
> 
> I couldn't watch the funeral live because I had an appointment and I'm only now catching up.


Yes! I'm sure the clips will surface soon. They kept going from a wide shot to a close-up, and each time he had his mouth slightly open but wasn't mouthing the words or singing. He wasn't even pretending to. It was really rude!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My comfort blanket is baking. I am still way behind on watching the funeral replay, but I just ordered 25 kg (55 pounds) of flour. I'll do a lot of baking this week.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> Yes! I'm sure the clips will surface soon. They kept going from a wide shot to a close-up, and each time he had his mouth slightly open but wasn't mouthing the words or singing. He wasn't even pretending to. It was really rude!



I could see the corners of her mouth behind that hero candle, she didn't sing either. But it is way, way worse coming from him. I'm disappointed.


----------



## pomeline

jblended said:


> And she was smirking/smiling again when she got into the car with H after the committal.
> 
> This is shocking! Thanks for sharing it, I didn't know!
> 
> Yes! I'm sure the clips will surface soon. They kept going from a wide shot to a close-up, and each time he had his mouth slightly open but wasn't mouthing the words or singing. He wasn't even pretending to. It was really rude!



I saw the smirking and her lips move. I'd love to know what she said as the windows were open at that time. It was probably something rude and unsavoury about how she can't wait to get away from the place. Wonder if they will attend the private burial... although what am I saying, they probably head back to strap the mics and cameras on for that one. "Exclusive content" never seen or something for Netflix.


----------



## TimeToShop

Debbini said:


> They should be gone tomorrow. Overseas. (Or here from my view )



No! We don’t want them back!


----------



## sgj99

I shouldn’t be shocked at her contrived grief and tears.  But I am.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm disappointed.


Me too! I was relieved to see others had noticed and posted. I'll be looking at the clips closely when it's all online because I can't quite believe it.
(also, what on earth are you baking with 25kgs of flour?) 



pomeline said:


> I saw the smirking and her lips move.


Thanks for confirming! I keep second-guessing myself because it feels too crazy to be true. Like, who does this at any funeral, let alone one that is televised? What on earth?!


----------



## pomeline

TimeToShop said:


> No! We don’t want them back!



Could they be sent somewhere by CIII...? Oh right, they're not working for him (thank god). I have proposed they might be offered as test pilots for some space program but no luck yet.


----------



## TimeToShop

pomeline said:


> I saw the smirking and her lips move. I'd love to know what she said as the windows were open at that time. It was probably something rude and unsavoury about how she can't wait to get away from the place. Wonder if they will attend the private burial... although what am I saying, they probably head back to strap the mics and cameras on for that one. "Exclusive content" never seen or something for Netflix.



She was probably asking when were they going to read the will.


----------



## pomeline

jblended said:


> Me too! I was relieved to see others had noticed and posted. I'll be looking at the clips closely when it's all online because I can't quite believe it.
> (also, what on earth are you baking with 25kgs of flour?)
> 
> 
> Thanks for confirming! I keep second-guessing myself because it feels too crazy to be true. Like, who does this at any funeral, let alone one that is televised? What on earth?!



Now we have to wait for the lip readers again to tell us what she said. I also noticed her belly when she sashayed into the car. Was that intentional, like "guess if I'm expecting", remnants of Liliput or just the Markle genes? Because I have a feeling she is so wanting the press to write about her bump.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

sgj99 said:


> I shouldn’t be shocked at her contrived grief and tears.  But I am.


She needs to get her story straight.  Her behaviour is false and contradictory.  I think she thinks we’ve all got goldfish memories.
Anyway I hope theres an overnight flight.


----------



## Sharont2305

I would've loved to hear their conversation between London and Windsor and from the Chapel. 
I can almost hear her in a Scooby Doo villain type voice "I'd have been the star of the show if it wasn't for those pesky kids!"


----------



## scarlet555

Nutmeg so desperate for attention and publicity-it's going to crumble... we see you, we see you clearly and now the world sees you.   With Harry I just can't believe he is THAT dumb, but could be... To betray your family on public television... he deserves nothing...


----------



## scarlet555

Sharont2305 said:


> I would've loved to hear their conversation between London and Windsor and from the Chapel.
> I can almost hear her in a Scooby Doo villain type voice "I'd have been the star of the show if it wasn't for those pesky kids!"


Don't forget the candle...


----------



## BlueCherry

From the rear Meghan looked like she was wearing a bin bag. On a lighter note that photo of Catherine and Charlotte matching reminded me of a photo I took of my Mum and my great niece, her great granddaughter. She calls her Betty instead of Elizabeth and said “I want to dress like Betty”


----------



## TimeToShop

Pessie said:


> She needs to get her story straight.  Her behaviour is false and contradictory.  I think she thinks we’ve all got goldfish memories.
> Anyway I hope theres an overnight flight.



A sense of relief will wash over the land as their flight is in the air. Meanwhile dread and foreboding descend upon America as their plane lands.


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> Nutmeg so desperate for attention and publicity-it's going to crumble... we see you, we see you clearly and now the world sees you.   With Harry I just can't believe he is THAT dumb, but could be... To betray your family on public television... he deserves nothing...


He IS that dumb and he’s also furious with his family. It’s a bad combination.


----------



## Sharont2305

scarlet555 said:


> Don't forget the candle...


Of course, and it was me who initially pointed it out! Lol.


----------



## Sophisticatted

TW looks like a witch from behind.


----------



## LittleStar88

DH and I were watching the service. He looks over at me and says, “I can’t believe he gave up the honor and privilege of this life for that trashy woman”


----------



## youngster

Honestly, from the back, Meghan's dress makes her look like she's on the set of Batman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is the mask slipping?  The Chatto boys look like they’ve heard something. Bea gives the side eye. 











						Princesses Beatrice and Fergie arrive at Westminster Abbey
					

The Duchess of York, 62, sported an all black outfit to pay tribute to the monarch, alongside her daughters Beatrice and Eugenie at Westminster Abbey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

I saw one shot of TRF and Harry was so fidgety compared to everyone else.


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is the mask slipping? The Chatto boys look like they’ve heard something. Bea gives the side eye.


It's not the right thread but, all I see in this pic is the utter grief and devastation in KC's face. He was broken like that at PP's funeral, too. My heart can't take it.


----------



## scarlet555

You can be an @ss, but are you really that far gone?  And if you are that far gone, wacha doing here in the palace/funeral trying to blend in hopelessly   and with the rest of the evil family?  He should have been with the people waiting in line like Beckham, I would have respected him more.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw one shot of TRF and Harry was so fidgety compared to everyone else.


When they were at Windsor Castle waiting for the hearse to arrive? Harry was literally the only one facing sideways and looking around, whilst everyone was standing to attention facing the car approaching.


scarlet555 said:


> He should have been with the people waiting in line like Beckham, I would have respected him more.


THIS! (of course, that would have been an actual security risk but, so much this)


----------



## Debbini

TimeToShop said:


> No! We don’t want them back!


I live here too (US) and I don't want them back....but I think we're Stuck with them?!


----------



## zinacef

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My comfort blanket is baking. I am still way behind on watching the funeral replay, but I just ordered 25 kg (55 pounds) of flour. I'll do a lot of baking this week.


we will be waiting for all the baked goods in our doorsteps— from across the world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> (also, what on earth are you baking with 25kgs of flour?)



I have around 25 to 40 kg at all times (when everyone took up Covid baking I was gleefully looking at my stash because I wasn't worried I'd run out anytime soon), BUT it's different kinds (I usually have the German equivalents of pastry flour, all purpose, bread flour and pizza flour...plus the random bag of rye, wholewheat, high gluten) and as soon as the weather is agreeable I bake two to three times a week: bread, cake on Sundays, waffles, pizza. I also make pasta or dumplings once in a while, and I always make around 25 different kinds of Christmas cookies.

ETA: we just had a beautiful apple harvest, I'll do an apple cake next weekend for sure.


----------



## zinacef

TimeToShop said:


> A sense of relief will wash over the land as their flight is in the air. Meanwhile dread and foreboding descend upon America as their plane lands.


No Sunshine Sachs waiting! Just credit card debt—- and that deadly podcrash!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> Now we have to wait for the lip readers again to tell us what she said. I also noticed her belly when she sashayed into the car. Was that intentional, like "guess if I'm expecting", remnants of Liliput or just the Markle genes? *Because I have a feeling she is so wanting the press to write about her bump.*



I've said all the time she isn't pregnant, she had a slight belly all summer on the polo field (noticable but not growing), but today I thought she was sticking it out or something on purpose, especially in that loose dress. She's been seen in figure hugging clothes during the mourning period and it wasn't that pronounced. What is the nutjob up to.


----------



## TimeToShop

Her inspiration. I couldn’t find a good picture from the back but the cape, the hat, the mask of makeup - The Phantom of the Opera!

https://64.media.tumblr.com/455e60e.../9cd3bee1815e2f35da11e383d3ba7b4ebe9b4cf2.png


----------



## TimeToShop

zinacef said:


> No Sunshine Sachs waiting! Just credit card debt—- and that deadly podcrash!



And 2 kids who may or may not remember them.


----------



## papertiger

pomeline said:


> Just a quick question... A friend of mine feels sorry for Harry not being able to wear his uniform as he was such a war hero and served in Afghanistan with great personal risk. Anyone remember any tea on how that was in reality, was he on the frontline? How did others view him? I can't find the YouTube account of the veteran who talked about and I am under the impression he was basically just driven and flown around and irritated his mates because he was causing extra work and risk to them. What's the deal with this?



Someone may have answered this already. 

No one may wear a military uniform after they have left the service. 

How much he was in the front lines depends on who you ask as "recollections may vary" 

He left the service. That's why he cannot wear his own uniform (like he was given permission for yesterday, as was the Duke of York). Uniforms belong to the military not the person it is issued to. 

Harry was given military patronages by the Queen (a uniformed role at ceremonies like the State Funeral) but then he left the country and could no longer carryout the duties that go with the role. 

Patronages of RAF and the Royal Navy therefore had to be returned. He is no longer eligible to wear those uniforms. 

Harry returned the following military appointments to the Queen feb 2021:


Captain General Royal Marines
Honorary Air Commandant, RAF Honington
Commodore-in-Chief, Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The night she was allegedly suicidal she wore a navy sequin dress. The red cape dress she wore to a military occasion were red was reserved for, well, military people.


Yes thank you for the correction. She never gets it right


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> View attachment 5613561



Channelling Morticia Adams again. Also, Sophie will need a good hot shower after being exposed to her so much this past week.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He IS that dumb and he’s also furious with his family. It’s a bad combination.



Just why? I still don't fully get it.


----------



## BlueCherry

youngster said:


> Just saw KCIII and Camilla get into a car to go to the family internment.  Then, Will, Kate and the children left. Then, Edward, Sophie and their children.  Lady Louise said thank you to the person who held the door open for her. (I like Lady Louise so much!)  Then Harry and MM in a separate car.  They were standing next to, or around Eugenie and Jack.


On ITV Jack looked right at Harry and then looked away. It seems that both him and Eugenie blanked him


----------



## scarlet555

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have around 25 to 40 kg at all times (when everyone took up Covid baking I was gleefully looking at my stash because I wasn't worried I'd run out anytime soon), BUT it's different kinds (I usually have the German equivalents of pastry flour, all purpose, bread flour and pizza flour...plus the random bag of rye, wholewheat, high gluten) and as soon as the weather is agreeable I bake two to three times a week: bread, cake on Sundays, waffles, pizza. I also make pasta or dumplings once in a while, and I always make around 25 different kinds of Christmas cookies.
> 
> ETA: we just had a beautiful apple harvest, I'll do an apple cake next weekend for sure.


Yo!  Sign me up Queen-cookies do well by mail... I'm serious...


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> It looked orange to me  Must be the dim candlelight of course...


It is a CoC , a candle of color


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of the Sophie Wessex death stare!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw one shot of TRF and Harry was so fidgety compared to everyone else.



His face is also once again both sweaty and the colour of his hair. Something is not right.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> TW doesn't look sad at all (towards the end of the clip she seems to be hiding a smile?)…



She's an American.  She hasn't been brought up with the Queen as we have in Canada, even.

She met the woman a few times, she is H's grandmother, but I'd be surprised if she was shown grieving like the ones who knew her so well and were family.


----------



## marietouchet

pomeline said:


> Could they be sent somewhere by CIII...? Oh right, they're not working for him (thank god). I have proposed they might be offered as test pilots for some space program but no luck yet.


Is there an open ambassadorship to Antarctica ?


----------



## TimeToShop

The dirty glove finger. Must have wiped under her eye too hard trying to dry that one tear. Also, I don’t know that she looks pregnant, maybe just paunchy. Yes, I know it a pro TW tweet. She was trending and I wanted to see why.


----------



## scarlet555

jblended said:


> When they were at Windsor Castle waiting for the hearse to arrive? Harry was literally the only one facing sideways and looking around, whilst everyone was standing to attention facing the car approaching.
> 
> THIS! (of course, that would have been an actual security risk but, so much this)


Can you imagine the publicity he would have gotten for taking high ground and meaning everything he has ever said...  But no... spoiled brat c/o to the press he was the last to know, how unfair, how bad they are treating him...   just remember how he was without Nutty... He was nutty too.


----------



## youngster

BlueCherry said:


> On ITV Jack looked right at Harry and then looked away. It seems that both him and Eugenie blanked him



I noticed this too. I was going to mention it, but I watched it live and didn't have time to go back and watch again to verify. But, he did and so did Eugenie. No polite chatting at all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> She's an American.  She hasn't been brought up with the Queen as we have in Canada, even.
> 
> She met the woman a few times, she is H's grandmother, but I'd be surprised if she was shown grieving like the ones who knew her so well and were family.



You are not wrong, but I'm German and I shed real tears of sorrow. Of course I am actually capable of feeling genuine feelings that go beyond rage and self-pity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> The dirty glove finger. Must have wiped under her eye too hard trying to dry that one tear. Also, I don’t know that she looks pregnant, maybe just paunchy. Yes, I know it a pro TW tweet. She was trending and I wanted to see why.




That woman competed with a 3yo girl. That's all we need to know.


----------



## BlueCherry

youngster said:


> I noticed this too. I was going to mention it, but I watched it live and didn't have time to go back and watch again to verify. But, he did and so did Eugenie. No polite chatting at all.


I checked with my sister as well and she confirmed the same. She’s a wonderful person but does shade in the most comical of ways and she has a superb ability to rewind and zoom


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I noticed this too. I was going to mention it, but I watched it live and didn't have time to go back and watch again to verify. But, he did and so did Eugenie. No polite chatting at all.


Excellent catch, all.  Yep, they blanked him.  Wow.









						Royal family leave Windsor Castle following Queen Elizabeth II's committal
					

Royal family leave Windsor Castle following Queen Elizabeth II's committalBBC/Sky




					uk.news.yahoo.com


----------



## pomeline

Note to self: never post on social media about following anything royal and never comment when TW fan comments on anything you said. It'll ruin your day.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> TW looks like a witch from behind.


I'm getting an Aunt Lydia vibe


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That woman competed with a 3yo girl. That's all we need to know.


If I didn't know who she was and saw that photo I'd caption it "The Black Widow". She does not look like a nice person there.


----------



## Sina08

pomeline said:


> Funny she should mention left eye as she's squeezing out a tear from precisely her left eye in the photos today. Probably managed to produce it *thinking about her own funeral. "Oh, it will be grand like this... people are going to be soooo sad that I've died..."*


That’s the thing though, I think absolutely no one will care.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

don’t even try it People mag. I thought you were making a turn for the better.


----------



## pomeline

lanasyogamama said:


> don’t even try it People mag. I thought you were making a turn for the better.
> 
> View attachment 5613639


What "sweet moment"...? The one where Charlotte wants to run to Sophie?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Lodpah

xincinsin said:


> I saw that during the live telecast and thought she was trying to lure the kids into her clutches.
> 
> National Enquirer? High-end reading material? After all, didn't Zedzee say tabloids didn't exist in the US?


I worked for a top notch attorney, one of the best in the US, specializing in First Amendment rights/slander. He told me once that National Enquirer magazine is one magazine that tends to get it right. They don’t get sued much and they usually win their cases. It’s the they frame their words but beneath it is truth. They have much more to lose than other papers. If TW sued them she knows they are ruthless and expose every dirt plus their deep pockets. Their impeccable investigative reporters are very astute. Yeah they do  juicy headlines but they”re still around. They broke the Watergate saga and Yes they have mocking headlines but solid. Someone mentioned dirt coming out about the TW after funeral and I bet NE HAS all the dirt already.


----------



## Jayne1

Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to. 

If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.

On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


----------



## erinrose

Is she touching the Princess of Wales´hand here at 0:42?


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> If I didn't know who she was and saw that photo I'd caption it "The Black Widow". She does not look like a nice person there.


Or indeed anywhere


----------



## elvisfan4life

Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


Oh please just don’t bother


----------



## jblended

Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


I'm not a regular on this thread. I only come in when they've done something to really irritate me, but overall I just ignore them.
I can only speak for myself but, I genuinely like it when people present alternative perspectives. It's easy to get carried away and it's important to be fair in our assessments, so it's good when people speak up and defend them if the criticisms are unfair.
I get so angry with them when they're really out of line, but I do try to be reasonable and will always take a correction if I'm in the wrong. I know from my general interactions on tpf that most are the same way. 

If Meghan was genuinely, sincerely grieving, I don't think she'd be accused of overacting. I can't say for sure if that single tear she shed was acting or real (I didn't previously know that she boasted about being able to cry on cue, which makes me doubt her now).
The reason I'm really questioning her is because she's seen smirking/smiling at the most inappropriate moments. This is a funeral. It's not a nervous smile she's displaying- it looks sinister. That's what I think we're all seeing. That one tear, when the camera was sure to be on her, seems disingenuous when the candid shots show her smiling. You can't defend *that*!

No reason for Harry not to sing the national anthem. William, Anne, heck even Andrew (who does not get along with Charles) all sang and publicly supported our new King. Harry was just plain disrespectful in that moment. It is not only a slight against KC, but also our beloved Queen and everything she stood for.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I worked for a top notch attorney, one of the best in the US, specializing in First Amendment rights/slander. He told me once that National Enquirer magazine is one magazine that tends to get it right. They don’t get sued much and they usually win their cases. It’s the they frame their words but beneath it is truth. They have much more to lose than other papers. If TW sued them she knows they are ruthless and expose every dirt plus their deep pockets. Their impeccable investigative reporters are very astute. Yeah they do  juicy headlines but they”re still around. They broke the Watergate saga and Yes they have mocking headlines but solid. *Someone mentioned dirt coming out about the TW after funeral and I bet NE HAS all the dirt already.*



I'll happily provide fingerfood for all of us (a bit more festive than popcorn).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

erinrose said:


> Is she touching the Princess of Wales´hand here at 0:42?




Yes she is. Good thing the wears gloves. Ew.


----------



## Lodpah

OT about NE but they broke Bill Cosby’s alleged sexual abuses 9 years before it came out plus a bunch of other life changing events for celebrities and public officials:









						17 Times the 'National Enquirer' Broke Real News
					

Over the years, the National Enquirer has earned a reputation for reporting false and inaccurate information, and rightly so. The grocery store tabloid has been sued repeatedly during its run for publishing exaggerated, sensational stories about everything from Cameron Diaz's relationship with...




					www.ranker.com


----------



## DoggieBags

Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


William sang God Save the King. As long as Harry continues to carry a British passport, he should be singing God Save the King. He did not sing it at either the Westminster service or the Windsor Service today. At Westminster he was directly behind Charles so I assume Charles could hear if Harry was singing or not. At Windsor he was in the front row across from Charles and well within Charles’ line of sight so if Charles chose to look in Harry’s direction he would know whether or not Harry was singing. Charles had a lot on his mind today so maybe he wasn’t paying any attention to Harry but Harry’s lack of respect to his Monarch who also happens to be his father was such a slap in the face particularly on such a sad and momentous day for their family and the nation. Harry looked rather disengaged today. We all handle grief differently and maybe this is how he’s handling his grief? But no matter how upset he may be, he needs to show respect to his King. Harry also loves to remin everyone that he served 10 years in the Military. If he’s forgotten that King Charles also happens to be the Commander-in-Chief of the British Armed Forces, then it’s really time for H to give up his British citizenship.


----------



## TimeToShop

Oh good golly. It’s a picture of TW mimicking TQ


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said all the time she isn't pregnant, she had a slight belly all summer on the polo field (noticable but not growing), but today I thought she was sticking it out or something on purpose, especially in that loose dress. She's been seen in figure hugging clothes during the mourning period and it wasn't that pronounced. What is the nutjob up to.


If she announces a pregnancy, then tragically miscarries (again?), she hopes to get the sympathy vote so that people will forget all about the funeral and her bad behaviour.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

DoggieBags said:


> As long as Harry continues to carry a British passport, he should be singing God Save the King.


Even without it. It's more than a citizenship. This is his _father_!
Edit: btw, not disagreeing, just emphasizing. Your explanation is perfection.


----------



## Sharont2305

Debbini said:


> I live here too (US) and I don't want them back....but I think we're Stuck with them?!


Yes you are, and you're welcome to them, lol.


----------



## Toby93

Sophisticatted said:


> TW looks like a witch from behind


----------



## TimeToShop

It explains Sophie’s look. It is after her “tear”. The index finger of her glove is dirty where she dabbed at her eye.


----------



## mikimoto007

I think Meghan looked extremely elegant today, the cape dress was beautiful and I liked the hat. I'd go with a brooch, but Meghan's style is more minimal..

What's the betting they are on the last flight out tonight?


----------



## marietouchet

mikimoto007 said:


> I think Meghan looked extremely elegant today, the cape dress was beautiful and I liked the hat. I'd go with a brooch, but Meghan's style is more minimal..
> 
> What's the betting they are on the last flight out tonight?


Flight time ? She will go asap
KC will ask to talk to H in person -  and without MM, cannot make my mind up whether H will comply and stay or leave with MM


----------



## piperdog

Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


I'll join you in playing devil's advocate. Disclaimer up front that I'm in the US and was working today so I couldn't watch, so apologies if I missed something that's obvious to the rest of you. 
-Meghan looked perfectly appropriate, for Meghan. It's a low bar, but she rarely manages to clear it. Here she did. She looked neat and appropriate. I didn't love the dress, but her hair, makeup, jewelry, and attire were all understated and didn't draw attention. The hat seemed a little shabby compared to the other royal ladies' but I'll give her a pass because, as also shown by Jill *****, we don't do hats in the US. Or, we don't do them well. 
-As for Harry and the national anthem, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was overcome. Unfortunately,  I've been to too many funerals recently and can draw on personal experience. To me, there are some songs that I associate exclusively with Catholic funeral masses. When those songs are sung, it's like a wave of grief from every funeral I've ever been to that included that hymn. It's all I can do to remain upright, keep breathing, and not dissolve into sobs. So I stand like a statue, jaw and fists clenched, willing myself to get through the song. Even lip syncing along is not an option. I'll give Harry a pass that he was hit by the magnitude of what was happening and just froze.
Now, I just feel gross and want to go shower. I really don't like defending them.


----------



## Debbini

piperdog said:


> I'll join you in playing devil's advocate. Disclaimer up front that I'm in the US and was working today so I couldn't watch, so apologies if I missed something that's obvious to the rest of you.
> -Meghan looked perfectly appropriate, for Meghan. It's a low bar, but she rarely manages to clear it. Here she did. She looked neat and appropriate. I didn't love the dress, but her hair, makeup, jewelry, and attire were all understated and didn't draw attention. The hat seemed a little shabby compared to the other royal ladies' but I'll give her a pass because, as also shown by Jill *****, we don't do hats in the US. Or, we don't do them well.
> -As for Harry and the national anthem, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was overcome. Unfortunately,  I've been to too many funerals recently and can draw on personal experience. To me, there are some songs that I associate exclusively with Catholic funeral masses. When those songs are sung, it's like a wave of grief from every funeral I've ever been to that included that hymn. It's all I can do to remain upright, keep breathing, and not dissolve into sobs. So I stand like a statue, jaw and fists clenched, willing myself to get through the song. Even lip syncing along is not an option. I'll give Harry a pass that he was hit by the magnitude of what was happening and just froze.
> Now, I just feel gross and want to go shower. I really don't like defending them.


I agree with hats, we don't do them well.


----------



## rose60610

jblended said:


> The reason I'm really questioning her is because she's seen smirking/smiling at the most inappropriate moments. This is a funeral. It's not a nervous smile she's displaying- it looks sinister.



I saw this too. Smirking! I tried to take it as nervous smiling, especially when she was so out of her element at the walkabout with her arms flying all over the place and clawing Harry. But I think she just wanted to smirk on purpose, like, "see, I don't really care about dead Queen, big whoop".  Nobody wants her there. I have to wonder if Harry is REALLY regretting throwing the family under the bus. And for what? Living in California with chickens and a wife who nobody can stand?


----------



## rose60610

piperdog said:


> Meghan looked perfectly appropriate, for Meghan. It's a low bar, but she rarely manages to clear it.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



A picture is worth a thousand words.  



Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


I agree with you about MM, other than her heavy makeup. And if you look closely, I think he wasn't singing because he was choking back emotion. He will live the rest of his life with regret over his choices. 



erinrose said:


> Is she touching the Princess of Wales´hand here at 0:42?



It appeared to me that she used both hands to gesture to Kate that she'd go first, and Kate looked a little confused. Maybe it was her awkward attempt to avoid a repeat of the seating faux pas at the PJ church service.


----------



## Lodpah

Like many others defending them. That’s great and I really mean it. Me, I’ll wait a bit.


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.


I agree.  There is no way you could compete with Kate as she is perfection, so go with the bag dress


----------



## gracekelly

Bat girl. Broom was missing and I’ll take the hat in ecru please to wear at the beach. She should have gone with the ghonella. No handholding today.  That was refreshing.

So Harry doesn’ t sing God Save The King, and the reason being?  There is a difference  between looking grieved and looking mad. He looked mad.


----------



## TimeToShop

This is sad. The way she scooches over to her mother when H tries to engage her. He could have been the fun uncle, now he’s the creepy one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Funny, they’re not holding hands, no fond look??  Don’t tell me all that’s just for the cameras


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Like many others defending them. That’s great and I really mean it. Me, I’ll wait a bit.


Come sit beside me.  I am waiting for the shoes to drop.  It feels like there are numerous behind the scenes stories - just waiting.


----------



## gracekelly

Poor Sophie drew the short straw again. Brrrh!  The chill in The car!


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Did anyone hear the heavy sigh as he got in the car?


----------



## momtok

Pessie said:


> Funny, they’re not holding hands, no fond look??  Don’t tell me all that’s just for the cameras


 Extremely good catch.


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> Funny, they’re not holding hands, no fond look??  Don’t tell me all that’s just for the cameras


I think they finally stuck to protocol.


----------



## BlueCherry

One or both of Andrews girls left early. They were sitting together in the earlier service. Then Jack clearly and blatantly ignores Harry. Is there a possibility that Harry kicked up a fuss and took the girls seats? Or it could be because he was whining about Andrew being allowed the cypher and not him and this upset Andrews girls.


----------



## momtok

gracekelly said:


> I think they finally stuck to protocol.


Yeah, the one time they thought they *weren't* on display.  Very interesting timing.  Really good catch on @Pessie's part, truly.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Oooh, shade there from the Archbishop of Canterbury.


What happened?  I missed it.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think they finally stuck to protocol.


She took the feedback to heart. She went easier on the bronzer today as well.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jblended said:


> When they were at Windsor Castle waiting for the hearse to arrive? Harry was literally the only one facing sideways and looking around, whilst everyone was standing to attention facing the car approaching.
> 
> THIS! (of course, that would have been an actual security risk but, so much this)


Yes, that’s right. I had to watch a lot of it without the sound on in the background while I worked. 


TimeToShop said:


> This is sad. The way she scooches over to her mother when H tries to engage her. He could have been the fun uncle, now he’s the creepy one.



I kind of wish they had put Kate next to Hawwy so she wouldn’t have had to deal with his weird stare. 


Pessie said:


> Funny, they’re not holding hands, no fond look??  Don’t tell me all that’s just for the cameras


I believe that’s what the body language experts call a “chin jut” coming from her.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5613521
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613522


Sophie is quickly becoming one of my favourites.  And then there’s Charlotte.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BlueCherry said:


> One or both of Andrews girls left early. They were sitting together in the earlier service. Then Jack clearly and blatantly ignores Harry. Is there a possibility that Harry kicked up a fuss and took the girls seats? Or it could be because he was whining about Andrew being allowed the cypher and not him and this upset Andrews girls.


Thinking back, there was that story about EugJack or Bea losing money in an investment that Hazz set up.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Poor Sophie drew the short straw again. Brrrh!  The chill in The car!


Sophie loved the Queen. I'm sure she got a little thrill out of subjecting the woman who made her life difficult in her last years to a supremely uncomfortable car ride.


----------



## Handbag1234

Handbag1234 said:


> I saw the hands in her pockets but thought I was being nit picking to mention it


Hands up, I retract my earlier comment. Didn’t realise she had elbow length gloves on. Don’t think she had pockets at all. Apologies.


mikimoto007 said:


> I think Meghan looked extremely elegant today, the cape dress was beautiful and I liked the hat. I'd go with a brooch, but Meghan's style is more minimal..
> 
> What's the betting they are on the last flight out tonight?


yes I agree, she wasn’t out of line today and looked appropriately dressed for the occasion.  Didn’t love the cape, but it was elegant.  Others like Sarah Fergerson had very heavy make up on, more so than TW. I liked TW hair and make up. 

Big take away from me today was the icy stares from TRF and Harry (appearing to) not sing the last bit of God save the King. He looked like he was struggling. Not sure if grief or anger. Only he knows the thoughts in his head. Next few months could be interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

Aren't Harry and Meghan supposed to be renewing their vows this summer?   I wonder how it’s going?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>



The Douchebag of Sussex looks pi$$ed.


----------



## purseinsanity

jblended said:


> That's a fair point. Harry may still be in shock and *Meg was crying at the end*, so maybe we're not reading their expressions correctly.
> Edit: Looking at the pictures coming out and it's hard to read anything other than anger in Harry's face. Perhaps he's struggling with the memories of his mother's funeral at this time.
> 
> What is undeniable is that he refused to sing the national anthem. I can't imagine why he made that choice. Deeply disrespectful to not only KC, but to HMQ who did her duty until the final day. This is her legacy he's disrespecting now.


I don't believe that for a second.  Didn't she once say she could cry on demand?  Those are nothing but crocodile tears, but she's not fooling many today.


----------



## Pessie

Handbag1234 said:


> Hands up, I retract my earlier comment. Didn’t realise she had elbow length gloves on. Don’t think she had pockets at all. Apologies.
> 
> yes I agree, she wasn’t out of line today and looked appropriately dressed for the occasion.  Didn’t love the cape, but it was elegant.  Others like Sarah Fergerson had very heavy make up on, more so than TW. I liked TW hair and make up.
> 
> Big take away from me today was the icy stares from TRF and Harry (appearing to) not sing the last bit of God save the King. He looked like he was struggling. Not sure if grief or anger. Only he knows the thoughts in his head. Next few months could be interesting.


I thought Meghan looked ok.  I didn’t like the shape of the thing or the strange hat, but it was appropriate.


----------



## csshopper

I, too,cut her some slack at first for dressing more appropriately than I thought she would, and for hanging back a few times.

Then, I saw the one tear brushed away with a black glove for emphasis. Two immediate thoughts: haven’t seen anyone else wearing gloves, and who in heck cries one tear from one eye? Flashed to something I had once read/seen about crying on cue and sure enough, there it was in a post: the one tear trick.

That and the smirk she just cannot contain, took back the slack. It was a performance.


----------



## Winterfell5

lanasyogamama said:


> I saw one shot of TRF and Harry was so fidgety compared to everyone else.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> His face is also once again both sweaty and the colour of his hair. Something is not right.


This is because Harry made his bed and is finding out that lying in it isn’t very comfortable.


----------



## charlottawill

BlueCherry said:


> Did anyone hear the heavy sigh as he got in the car?


I'm telling you, he's an emotional hothead and he was this close to losing it during the first service. He kept blinking, swallowing, clenching his jaw and looking straight ahead. He was focused on doing anything to avoid breaking down. I say this as someone who cries at the drop of a hat. I don't know how I'd get through all those events without being a sobbing mess.


----------



## needlv




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


It's a tear because she's been told Charles has changed several rules, her children will not be prince and princess and Haz is no longer CoS.


----------



## andrashik

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> I always thought it stood for “The witch”


I have like 20 pages to catch up, but I couldn't help myself!


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I, too,cut her some slack at first for dressing more appropriately than I thought she would, and for hanging back a few times.
> 
> Then, I saw the one tear brushed away with a black glove for emphasis. Two immediate thoughts: haven’t seen anyone else wearing gloves, and who in heck cries one tear from one eye? Flashed to something I had once read/seen about crying on cue and sure enough, there it was in a post: the one tear trick.
> 
> That and the smirk she just cannot contain, took back the slack. It was a performance.


Other sites think she was mimicking QE.  Some say it was not a tear, but highlighter.  Whatever it was, she got it all over her glove. Eww.








						Queen Elizabeth Rarely Cries in Public, But 1 Clue Proves She Could Break Down at Prince Philip's Funeral
					

Queen Elizabeth is a pro at hiding her true emotions. But royal followers think she may not hold back her tears at Prince Philip's funeral.




					www.cheatsheet.com


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> And why is her face orange, but her neck is white?  Her elbow is even whiter than her neck?


She's trying to be a human model of an orange creamsicle:


----------



## Toby93

Did anyone else notice this.  This is the second time the RF has done this


----------



## ladyglen

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it the same one the wore with her Wallis outfit for the Commonwealth Service?


Wallis outfit , perfect

when they hooked up I called it:  DoW 2.0


----------



## Sina08

piperdog said:


> I'll join you in playing devil's advocate. Disclaimer up front that I'm in the US and was working today so I couldn't watch, so apologies if I missed something that's obvious to the rest of you.
> -Meghan looked perfectly appropriate, for Meghan. It's a low bar, but she rarely manages to clear it. Here she did. She looked neat and appropriate. I didn't love the dress, but her hair, makeup, jewelry, and attire were all understated and didn't draw attention. The hat seemed a little shabby compared to the other royal ladies' but I'll give her a pass because, as also shown by Jill *****, we don't do hats in the US. Or, we don't do them well.
> -As for Harry and the national anthem, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he was overcome. Unfortunately,  I've been to too many funerals recently and can draw on personal experience. To me, there are some songs that I associate exclusively with Catholic funeral masses. When those songs are sung, it's like a wave of grief from every funeral I've ever been to that included that hymn. It's all I can do to remain upright, keep breathing, and not dissolve into sobs. So I stand like a statue, jaw and fists clenched, willing myself to get through the song. Even lip syncing along is not an option. I'll give Harry a pass that he was hit by the magnitude of what was happening and just froze.
> Now, I just feel gross and want to go shower. I really don't like defending them.


IMO the dress was fairly decent, especially compared to her usual choices. What I didn’t like were the hat and the gloves. Oh, and the heavy eye makeup. But still, it wasn’t a bad look.

Re Harry not singing the National Anthem. I could buy into the being overwhelmed thing, if it hadn’t happened twice. First in Westminster Abbey and then again in St George’s Chapel. That’s one too many for my taste.

ETA: apparently he did sing during the Committal Service in St George’s Chapel, I missed that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WillstarveforLV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it the same one the wore with her Wallis outfit for the Commonwealth Service?


Yes it is.


----------



## Lodpah

WillstarveforLV said:


> Yes it is.


I guess KC cut off clothing allowance? If they are debt no sense wasting 100K on a dress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> No handholding today.  That was refreshing.



I wonder if words were had after the handholding stunt at the pre-funeral event.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent catch, all.  Yep, they blanked him.  Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal family leave Windsor Castle following Queen Elizabeth II's committal
> 
> 
> Royal family leave Windsor Castle following Queen Elizabeth II's committalBBC/Sky
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uk.news.yahoo.com


TW is cradling her arms under her hamburger belly to draw attention to it.


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Anyone else notice when these two are not out on display they aren’t holding hands. Only for the camera?


----------



## purseinsanity

Lodpah said:


> I worked for a top notch attorney, one of the best in the US, specializing in First Amendment rights/slander. He told me once that National Enquirer magazine is one magazine that tends to get it right. They don’t get sued much and they usually win their cases. It’s the they frame their words but beneath it is truth. They have much more to lose than other papers. If TW sued them she knows they are ruthless and expose every dirt plus their deep pockets. Their impeccable investigative reporters are very astute. Yeah they do  juicy headlines but they”re still around. They broke the Watergate saga and Yes they have mocking headlines but solid. Someone mentioned dirt coming out about the TW after funeral and I bet NE HAS all the dirt already.


They broke the John Edwards affair story too.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

marietouchet said:


> I think the cape dress is similar to the famous red cape dress formal, worn the night when she was suicidal
> Possibly by Emilia Wickstead the designer of our fav green cape dress
> I don’t doubt she had another made
> She probably has limited choices of designers, but Emilia was already associated with MM


It was a Stella McCartney dress and she wore exact same in navy blue in 2018. I think she left a bunch of clothes at Frogmore and chose from there. Only jewelry she was wearing was the teeny tiny little pearl earrings the late HMTQ gifted her and the cartier love bracelet from her ex husband Trevor. Even adorable Princess Charlotte was wearing a more significant piece from her great-grandmother. Must of burned her to see everyone wear such elaborate pieces from HMTQ and the rest of the Royal attendees with their significant gems. She was so out of place. Stuck out like a sore thumb.


----------



## rose60610

I read an astute comment: Wallis Simpson got roasted, but if not for her, we'd not have had a Queen Elizabeth II. 

There IS NO benefit from Claw.


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Lodpah said:


> I guess KC cut off clothing allowance? If they are debt no sense wasting 100K on a dress.


Exactly - the dress coat she wore to the vigil was a repeat too. Maybe thinks will buy her more time in paying Sunshine Sachs.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll happily provide fingerfood for all of us (a bit more festive than popcorn).


I'm holding you to that!!  With those 55 lbs of flour, I want some real goodies!  I have no doubt your baking is some of the best!


----------



## Sina08

rose60610 said:


> I read an astute comment: Wallis Simpson got roasted, but if not for her, we'd not have had a Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> There IS NO benefit from Claw.


Actually, I think there is.
It feels like the rest of TRF, especially W&K, benefited a lot. Compared to the disastrous duo they look better than ever.


----------



## purseinsanity

Debbini said:


> I agree with hats, we don't do them well.


Speak for yourself.  I wear a baseball cap like no one's business.


----------



## kemilia

jblended said:


> Everytime they show a close up of KC, he looks devastated. Right behind him, the clueless Hazbeen, looking bored. Every single time. I'm fuming! Why did he attend if he doesn't care?


Netfl!x told him to attend--get some money shots with the grieving fam or else.


----------



## miss_chiff

Meghan Markle smiles warmly at Princess Charlotte after procession
					

Meghan Markle shared a sweet moment with her niece Princess Charlotte outside Wellington Arch following the state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II at Westminster Abbey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Redbirdhermes

rose60610 said:


> I read an astute comment: Wallis Simpson got roasted, but if not for her, we'd not have had a Queen Elizabeth II.
> 
> There IS NO benefit from Claw.


Assuming Edward did not have children,  Elizabeth would still have been Monarch, just 20 years later.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sina08

WillstarveforLV said:


> It was a Stella McCartney dress and she wore exact same in navy blue in 2018. I think she left a bunch of clothes at Frogmore and chose from there. Only jewelry she was wearing was the teeny tiny little pearl earrings the late HMTQ gifted her and the cartier love bracelet from her ex husband Trevor. Even adorable Princess Charlotte was wearing a more significant piece from her great-grandmother. Must of burned her to see everyone wear such elaborate pieces from HMTQ and the rest of the Royal attendees with their significant gems. She was so out of place. Stuck out like a sore thumb.


Her dress could have done with a nice brooch or something. But I guess she didn’t leave anything blingy behind when she left for California Canada.


----------



## Toby93

Has anyone figured out what this was all about?  I was watching live this morning and just after the national anthem, I saw people leaving.  I originally thought that the service was over and they were filing out, but that wasn't the case.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I guess KC cut off clothing allowance? If they are debt no sense wasting 100K on a dress.



No, it's the same hat model in a different colour. Remembrance Service was putty colour and today was black.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone figured out what this was all about?  I was watching live this morning and just after the national anthem, I saw people leaving.  I originally thought that the service was over and they were filing out, but that wasn't the case.




So weird. They looked visibly distressed earlier, why would they leave early? Couldn't be that both babies were teething at the same time.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Toby93 said:


> Has anyone figured out what this was all about?  I was watching live this morning and just after the national anthem, I saw people leaving.  I originally thought that the service was over and they were filing out, but that wasn't the case.




If you look further in the comments they just went to the side to curtesy.


----------



## BlueCherry

Pessie said:


> She needs to get her story straight.  Her behaviour is false and contradictory.  I think she thinks we’ve all got goldfish memories.
> Anyway I hope theres an overnight flight.



I kind of wish she had been invited to the state reception now. She could have mumped a free flight home on Air Force One


----------



## sdkitty

I was disturbed seeing her in the photo with Kate and the kids


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Bat girl. Broom was missing and I’ll take the hat in ecru please to wear at the beach. She should have gone with the ghonella. No handholding today.  That was refreshing.
> 
> So Harry doesn’ t sing God Save The King, and the reason being?  There is a difference  between looking grieved and looking mad. He looked mad.


I just rewatched some of the St Georges's footage and it appears he was singing God Save The King anthem (as was TW). 

He also looked like he was having a hard time keeping it together, maybe he was on some meds? 

I am no H&M fan but that's what I observed, fair is fair (and they have a lot of other cr*p going so something positive is something?).


----------



## Mendocino

xincinsin said:


> I love Martinelli's! My kids say I'm drinking nostalgia.


Ha ha!


----------



## WillstarveforLV

Sina08 said:


> Her dress could have done with a nice brooch or something. But I guess she didn’t leave anything blingy behind when she left for California Canada.


Oh I am sure TRF know better not to "loan" her any gems, after Tom Bower noted in his Revenge book that she would never return any of the Aquazurra shoes for photo shoots!  I think I even spy that even the late Queen's horse Emma, who paid tribute today,  was wearing, possibly one of the Queen's Hermes scarves on top of her saddle - it looks like the same scarf that the late  Queen wore the last time she rode Emma. Further points how HMTQ ensure those close and dear to her had such significant connections and tributes to her - I mean even Emma the horse rose above Markle. I also read that Sophie, Countess of Wessex, had the Lily of the Valley embroidered on her dress as that was the Queen's favourite flower.


----------



## sdkitty

WillstarveforLV said:


> Oh I am sure TRF know better not to "loan" her any gems, after Tom Bower noted in his Revenge book that she would never return any of the Aquazurra shoes for photo shoots!  I think I even spy that even the late Queen's horse Emma, who paid tribute today,  was wearing, possibly one of the Queen's Hermes scarves on top of her saddle - it looks like the same scarf that the late  Queen wore the last time she rode Emma. Further points how HMTQ ensure those close and dear to her had such significant connections and tributes to her - I mean even Emma the horse rose above Markle. I also read that Sophie, Countess of Wessex, had the Lily of the Valley embroidered on her dress as that was the Queen's favourite flower.


and darling Charlotte wore a horeshoe pin for the queen's love or horses


----------



## charlottawill

WillstarveforLV said:


> I also read that Sophie, Countess of Wessex, had the Lily of the Valley embroidered on her dress as that was the Queen's favourite flower.


I loved Sophie's dress. I saw a back view of it and it was so beautiful.


----------



## CobaltBlu

kemilia said:


> I just rewatched some of the St Georges's footage and it appears he was singing God Save The King anthem (as was TW).
> 
> He also looked like he was having a hard time keeping it together, maybe he was on some meds?
> 
> I am no H&M fan but that's what I observed, fair is fair (and they have a lot of other cr*p going so something positive is something?).


I watched sky news and they both were singing at the private ceremony. He looked sad and mad.


----------



## CobaltBlu

WillstarveforLV said:


> Oh I am sure TRF know better not to "loan" her any gems, after Tom Bower noted in his Revenge book that she would never return any of the Aquazurra shoes for photo shoots!  I think I even spy that even the late Queen's horse Emma, who paid tribute today,  was wearing, possibly one of the Queen's Hermes scarves on top of her saddle - it looks like the same scarf that the late  Queen wore the last time she rode Emma. Further points how HMTQ ensure those close and dear to her had such significant connections and tributes to her - I mean even Emma the horse rose above Markle. I also read that Sophie, Countess of Wessex, had the Lily of the Valley embroidered on her dress as that was the Queen's favourite flower.







Wow!!! (I knew about the pony but not the scarf)


----------



## pomeline

xincinsin said:


> The word "ombre" comes to mind


I believe in this case it's pronounced  "oompa".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WillstarveforLV

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5613754
> 
> 
> 
> Wow!!! (I knew about the pony but not the scarf)


I am not sure, this is just my own observation and assumption, there has been no mention of it. However, there was a picture of the last time the late Queen was riding, and it appears as the same scarf she wore on her head and I am also assuming its Hermes but who knows.


----------



## DoggieBags

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5613754
> 
> 
> 
> Wow!!!


I love this pic. You should post this picture of the Queen’s pony in the QEII thread. While I was watching the hearse on the entry road to Windsor, I said to a friend, I wish they had one of The Queen’s horses, tacked up with an empty saddle, walking behind the hearse and then they showed the picture of The Queen’s pony standing to the side as the parade marched by. It was so nice to see one of her ponies, and her 2 Corgis there at the end. I guess the pony might not have been able to deal with the noise and stress if it were actually part of the parade so the way they handled it was a safer way for the pony to participate.


----------



## CobaltBlu

WillstarveforLV said:


> I am not sure, this is just my own observation and assumption, there has been no mention of it. However, there was a picture of the last time the late Queen was riding, and it appears as the same scarf she wore on her head and I am also assuming its Hermes but who knows.


That was her favorite and clearly there is a scarf on Emma’s saddle…maybe we can get an ID from one of our scarfies?


----------



## sdkitty

I read that both Meghan and Camilla are being heavily criticized (on tick tok?).....so - guess it's not racism.  she's in good company


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> What happened?  I missed it.



The Archbishop of Canterbury in his fairly short sermon spoke of the Queen's abundant life and loving service and also said . . .
*But in all cases those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are forgotten."*

Some are interpreting this as a direct shot at Harry.  It may have been but I think it was also a great reminder for all the world leaders and other royals from around the world who were there as well.


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> I read that both Meghan and Camilla are being heavily criticized (on tick tok?).....so - guess it's not racism.  she's in good company


I’m not on tiktok. What are they saying about TW and Camilla?


----------



## Sina08

WillstarveforLV said:


> Oh I am sure TRF know better not to "loan" her any gems, after Tom Bower noted in his Revenge book that she would never return any of the Aquazurra shoes for photo shoots!  I think I even spy that even the late Queen's horse Emma, who paid tribute today,  was wearing, possibly one of the Queen's Hermes scarves on top of her saddle - it looks like the same scarf that the late  Queen wore the last time she rode Emma. Further points how HMTQ ensure those close and dear to her had such significant connections and tributes to her - I mean even Emma the horse rose above Markle. I also read that Sophie, Countess of Wessex, had the Lily of the Valley embroidered on her dress as that was the Queen's favourite flower.


Oh, not for one second have I thought, TRF lent her anything 
But I feel certain, she made sure to take anything of value with her (valuable wedding gifts).
The story about the Queen’s horse should tell M something. Not sure she will get it.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Right now CNN is claiming H and M are the future  of a relevant monarchy.  Who researches their nonsense.  That is not to say KC has an easy road or that the royal family does not have work to do but they cannot believe what they are saying.   Unless they are being paid.  

Lester Holt just did a quick soundbite regarding MM’s honoring QEII by wearing earrings gifted to her. ( which I believe have been rarely worn—they mean so much to her)

I apologize to our British and Commonwealth friends.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> The Archbishop of Canterbury in his fairly short sermon spoke of the Queen's abundant life and loving service and also said . . .
> *But in all cases those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are forgotten."*
> 
> Some are interpreting this as a direct shot at Harry.  It may have been but I think it was also a great reminder for all the world leaders and other royals from around the world who were there as well.


I doubt it was a shot at Harry...I think the queen's idea of being of service was something she started, wasn't done before her reign
Since Charles obviously wont reign for 70-plus years, I wonder what his funeral will be like.  They will probably need to plan it soon just in case something happens.  sorry if this seems cold to bring up

with his record as an environmentalist, etc., maybe he will want someting less grand


----------



## Debbini

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Right now CNN is claiming H and M are the future  of a relevant monarchy.  Who researches their nonsense.  That is not to say KC has an easy road or that the royal family does not have work to do but they cannot believe what they are saying.   Unless they are being paid.
> 
> Lester Holt just did a quick soundbite regarding MM’s honoring QEII by wearing earrings gifted to her. ( which I believe have been rarely worn—they mean so much to her)
> 
> I apologize to our British and Commonwealth friends.


CNN is Always full of


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5613754
> 
> 
> 
> Wow!!! (I knew about the pony but not the scarf)


I am the Hermes scarf authenticator here and sadly don’t recognize the scarf
HMTQ owned many non Hermes scarves
PS Angela Kelly was the first dresser to keep a rigorous record of outfits worn, she would have known and picked the scarf for Emma, just a wonderful touch


----------



## TimeToShop

Debbini said:


> CNN is Always full of



Not just NBC or CNN. My husband and I were watching ABC, David Muir, mainly because my husband missed all the coverage and wanted to see a bit. ABC said the brothers were getting along. Ha! I watched it all in BBC. That first service, William did not acknowledge H when they were lining up to go in even though he, H, was right behind him. There seems to be no love lost between them. Sad but understandable.


----------



## TimeToShop

This and the corgis broke me.


----------



## zinacef

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Right now CNN is claiming H and M are the future  of a relevant monarchy.  Who researches their nonsense.  That is not to say KC has an easy road or that the royal family does not have work to do but they cannot believe what they are saying.   Unless they are being paid.
> 
> Lester Holt just did a quick soundbite regarding MM’s honoring QEII by wearing earrings gifted to her. ( which I believe have been rarely worn—they mean so much to her)
> 
> I apologize to our British and Commonwealth friends


Lester Holt—- what can I say! Always dramatic !


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Speak for yourself.  I wear a baseball cap like no one's business.


My problem with the hat was not color or style but the material being too thin. In several photos light passes through it. Makes it appear cheap, like something from an end-of-season Summer Sale at a Clearance Center. 

I know that sounds picky, but respect for the Queen who valued hats and the historical enormity of this funeral merited the best. Remember one of her first outings with the Queen when she had been told protocol called for a hat and did not wear one? This, to me, felt similar. “I’ll wear one for the world wide cameras, but I don’t want to spend much on it, especially since that nasty man cut off my allowance.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

*Dan Wootton:* now today the Royal family put on a united front with Prince Harry walking in procession alongside his brother Prince William, and sitting behind his father King Charles in Westminster Abbey. But behind the scenes, the period of mourning truce between the Sussexes and the Royal family might already be wavering. Buckingham Palace has furiously hit back at reports that Harry was told of the late Queen's death just five minutes before the public announcement. the daily telegraph reported last night that the Duke of Sussex was the quote, ‘last to know’ about his grandmother's passing and found out an hour after prime minister Liz Truss.

Palace aides were angered by the quote ‘disrespectful’ claims made on the eve of her late Majesty's funeral. A spokesman for the King strongly rebuked the story stressing the public was only informed after every family member had been informed. The telegraph later amended its story to reflect the fact that Harry was not treated differently to other members of the family. He was reportedly told of the late Queen's passing as soon as he became contactable upon landing at Aberdeen airport.

But arguments like this will do nothing to bridge the gap between the Royal family and the Sussexes, especially as it comes after the couple were uninvited from last night's state reception of the century at Buckingham Palace. Well to get his expert analysis, I’m joined now by the renowned biographer Tom Bower, who has most recently authored a tell-all book about Meghan Markle. Tom, despite their unity and grief, uh the gulf between Harry and Meghan and the Royal family; I hate to say it tom. But I don't think it's ever been greater, has it?

*Tom Bower:* well I agree with you absolutely. I thought that the body language of Harry throughout the day uh told volumes. I thought especially as he got into the car after the service at St. George’s in Windsor. He looked really quite angry. And perhaps I’m wrong, but I didn't see him singing gustily God save the King inside Westminster Abbey either. I mean Meghan has got a sort of a pastiche plastic Hollywood smile permanently on. But Harry in my view was not hiding his anger.

And these stories, whether it's about hearing late about the Queen's death, which I doubt. And being stripped of the ER on his uniform. And not being invited to an occasion where really he shouldn't be there. He represents absolutely nobody. He would only be there with Meghan to sow danger and dissent. All come from him. And of course, this is typical Harry and Meghan. It’s all about them.

In the week that we're mourning the death of the Queen, all we get from Harry and Meghan is what about me. Whoa, whoa, whoa, me and me. It’s going to be very bad. And I don't think that Charles has got much time to sort this out. Unlike Phil, I think that he's got to hit the buttons pretty quickly as the new King to sort out Harry and Meghan. To sort out Prince Andrew. Both of those men have got one major problem now. Though with the Queen's departure, there is no one in court who's fighting for them. We’ve got to remember that the Queen purposely tried to include Harry in the Jubilee celebrations. She agreed to see them all. And they were flying to Holland. There’s nobody in the court now who wants to see Harry and Meghan. So they're going to leave Britain feeling pretty pretty isolated.

*Dan Wootton:* and Tom it just feels like it doesn't matter how many concessions King Charles and Prince William make to the Sussexes. They’re never going to be happy. I mean the briefing to the Sunday times at the weekend suggested that Harry was actually so annoyed by this apparent slight over the military uniform, even though he wasn't even meant to be wearing military uniform in the first place. They actually considered throwing a strop and wearing his morning suit. Now he didn't in the end but the most significant thing to me Tom, is that you've got his side singing like a canary to a journalist in the middle of what is meant to be a mourning period focused on Queen Elizabeth II. So if they're doing that in the middle of the mourning period it's going to get much worse isn't it as soon as they're back in Montecito

*Tom Bower:* oh absolutely. And I thought that the whole way in which uh the rest of the Royal family treated Meghan and Harry today showed that they had very little sympathy towards them. And in return, Harry and Meghan looked as if they were quite angry that they weren't being treated with respect they think they deserve. And I agree with you. They’re going to go back to Montecito fuming. And the biography, autobiography will soon be dug out and released.

I think what is interesting is, I would love to have known what Sophie Wessex said to Meghan as they drove in the limousine between Westminster hall and the church. Sophie Wessex is a plain speaking woman. Did she tell Meghan exactly what they all thought of her? The idea that the body language between William and Harry showed reconciliation is in my view nonsense. How on earth can there be reconciliation when Harry and Meghan have said such terrible things about William and his wife? There’s just no grounds for sympathy unless the two of them, the Sussexes, uh apologized.

What I think will be telling is whether the king, the new king, makes their children Prince and Princess after all. Whether he actually acknowledges their rights and titles. Or whether he decides that he's going to cast them out. There’s a lot for the King to do. He has now got to bring the court, his immediate Royal family into order. He’s got to present the new monarchy. The old era is over. The new era now begins. There’s no time to waste. He has now got to get to work to present the monarchy, the modern monarchy. The monarchy we will now have grown over the last week to love more than ever. To reassure us that it's going to be in good hands. And we won't have to see Harry and Andrew parading in our streets ever again.

*Dan Wootton:* Tom, uh Meghan someone who obviously you've spent the last couple of years reporting on. She was very emotional today at the service. Uh was she close to the Queen?

*Tom Bower:* well what's the emotional about that? I mean, when she allegedly touched a tear, or was it an act of a Hollywood actress thinking I better do a gesture to suggest it here. The only person that Meghan I think at the moment is crying for is for herself. Uh certainly not for the Queen. After all she had been pretty rude about her in the Oprah Winfrey interview. Whatever she might have said. The implication was pretty awful.

Uh of course she wasn't close. And you remember from my book, I had this astonishing quote on the eve on the very morning of the Dukes of Edinburgh’s funeral. The Queen said to a very close aide, “thank goodness that Meghan's not coming.” the Queen was a wonderful, wonderful uh agent of emollients. Of emollients, of trying to make good, and settle arguments. But she, of course she had her passions. She could see through Meghan. She knew the damage that the Oprah Winfrey interview did. Uh and she didn't want any grand standing of Prince Philip’s funeral. I thought Meghan today behaved properly. She didn't grandstand. She didn't try to attract attention. The sort of suggestion that she was wiping away a tear, I think it was just a scratch.

*Dan Wootton:* that is the renowned Royal biographer Tom Bower of course, the author of Revenge, uh the must read bestseller about Meghan Markle. And Tom, thank you so much. And thank you for all of your contributions over what has been an incredible uh 12 days. We’ll speak very soon. Tom Bow


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> The Douchebag of Sussex looks pi$$ed.


Sadly, he seems to have a permanent scowl on his face (unless he is with Nachos   )


----------



## Toby93

A1aGypsy said:


> If you look further in the comments they just went to the side to curtesy.


Seems an odd thing to do in the middle of a state funeral.  They made a bit of a fuss and even the Archbishop looked back at them.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Sadly, he seems to have a permanent scowl on his face (unless he is with Nachos   )


He is a man who is disappointed and angry about his life.  If he knows a good shrink, he ought to make an appointment.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Sadly, he seems to have a permanent scowl on his face (unless he is with Nachos   )



He's changed so much since 2016, and not for the better.


----------



## Toby93

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Right now CNN is claiming H and M are the future  of a relevant monarchy.  Who researches their nonsense.  That is not to say KC has an easy road or that the royal family does not have work to do but they cannot believe what they are saying.   Unless they are being paid.
> 
> Lester Holt just did a quick soundbite regarding MM’s honoring QEII by wearing earrings gifted to her. ( which I believe have been rarely worn—they mean so much to her)
> 
> I apologize to our British and Commonwealth friends.


I'm not exactly sure what's going on with CNN lately   There is also one of their commentators saying how beautifully she was dressed today.  Wasn't it the Harkles who had a story pulled before it was aired by CNN about the number of times she lied on Oprah?  If they are no longer represented by SS, who is planting these stories?


----------



## TimeToShop

The family is not playing with those two


----------



## gracekelly

After the 2nd service, did they all go back to Windsor for tea? drinks? etc?  Wonder if the charming duo were there.


----------



## zinacef

TimeToShop said:


> The family is not playing with those two



Seemed like nobody wants to engage with them, it’s like a skit from SNL.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> How long before TW announces a lawsuit against this candle?



That candle sacrificed itself  in service to the Queen 


youngster said:


> The Archbishop of Canterbury in his fairly short sermon spoke of the Queen's abundant life and loving service and also said . . .
> *But in all cases those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are forgotten."*
> 
> Some are interpreting this as a direct shot at Harry.  It may have been but I think it was also a great reminder for all the world leaders and other royals from around the world who were there as well.


As @Pessie said, the Archbishop is a bigger man than that. I am a lesser mortal and would have slipped in a couple of words like "spectacle", "three days" and "nobody knows".


Sina08 said:


> Oh, not for one second have I thought, TRF lent her anything
> But I feel certain, she made sure to take anything of value with her (valuable wedding gifts).
> The story about the Queen’s horse should tell M something. *Not sure she will get it.*


Dealing with the Dimwit and the Dense here.


Lilliesdaughter said:


> Right now CNN is claiming H and M are the future  of a relevant monarchy.  Who researches their nonsense.  That is not to say KC has an easy road or that the royal family does not have work to do but they cannot believe what they are saying.   Unless they are being paid.
> 
> Lester Holt just did a quick soundbite regarding MM’s honoring QEII by wearing earrings gifted to her. ( which I believe have been rarely worn—they mean so much to her)
> 
> I apologize to our British and Commonwealth friends.


The future of the monarchy is to be sad and mad or sad but sexy?


gracekelly said:


> He is a man who is disappointed and angry about his life.  If he knows a good shrink, he ought to make an appointment.


It's probably him doing therapy on himself to justify his Butter Up job.


----------



## csshopper

TimeToShop said:


> The family is not playing with those two



Wow, not even Eugenie and Jack.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Some here are making me stick up for her  and I really don't want to.
> 
> If she were visibly distraught, we would accuse her of overacting. Also, I'm uncomfortable critiquing her funeral attire. It's not a fashion show and no one can compete, or even come close to being as perfect as Kate.
> 
> On another note - is there a reason Harry might not sing the royal anthem, other than being childish and petty?  Do sons or those in line not sing it? I don't think that's it but I'm trying to find a reason for his behaviour.



He is not a son when he sings the National Anthem. It's the the *National *Anthem, you sing it because you're a British subject. Subject to the King. Perhaps, Harry no longer is, which is fine. Bye Harry.

Do the children of the President of the USA not (have to) sing the National Anthem?


----------



## Icyjade

csshopper said:


> Wow, not even Eugenie and Jack.


What did the Harkles do???

I mean for all our speculations and gossips on this thread, I think what we see is the tip of the iceberg right (with the RF trying their best to contain whatever they get up to before it gets to the press). So they must have done something pretty drastic for the Yorks to stomp off the earlier service and blank them after.


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Right now CNN is claiming H and M are the future  of a relevant monarchy.  Who researches their nonsense.  That is not to say KC has an easy road or that the royal family does not have work to do but they cannot believe what they are saying.   Unless they are being paid.
> 
> Lester Holt just did a quick soundbite regarding MM’s honoring QEII by wearing earrings gifted to her. ( which I believe have been rarely worn—they mean so much to her)
> 
> I apologize to our British and Commonwealth friends.



Then CNN are not only idiots, they've been asleep for 3 years


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> What did the Harkles do???
> 
> I mean for all our speculations and gossips on this thread, I think what we see is the tip of the iceberg right (with the RF trying their best to contain whatever they get up to before it gets to the press). So they must have done something pretty drastic for the Yorks to stomp off the earlier service and blank them after.


Caught wearing a wire? A hidden camera in one of his medals?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I am the Hermes scarf authenticator here and sadly don’t recognize the scarf
> HMTQ owned many non Hermes scarves
> PS Angela Kelly was the first dresser to keep a rigorous record of outfits worn, she would have known and picked the scarf for Emma, just a wonderful touch



I wondered if it could be a vintage Henri de Linares, so many of his fell out of favour.  
​


----------



## Debbini

papertiger said:


> Then CNN are not only idiots, they've been asleep for 3 years


Both!


----------



## A1aGypsy

Toby93 said:


> Seems an odd thing to do in the middle of a state funeral.  They made a bit of a fuss and even the Archbishop looked back at them.



I’d assume it was protocol. I cannot see them going rogue.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> He is not a son when he sings the National Anthem. It's the the *National *Anthem, you sing it because you're a British subject. Subject to the King. Perhaps, Harry no longer is, which is fine. Bye Harry.
> 
> Do the children of the President of the USA not (have to) sing the National Anthem?


Well, we sing National Anthem in Canada... and Harry is still a British subject, is he not?

Whatever, he's such a sulker.  I wonder what he is planning with his book now that his family won't budge a single centimetre.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> My problem with the hat was not color or style but the material being too thin. In several photos light passes through it. Makes it appear cheap, like something from an end-of-season Summer Sale at a Clearance Center.
> 
> I know that sounds picky, but respect for the Queen who valued hats and the historical enormity of this funeral merited the best. Remember one of her first outings with the Queen when she had been told protocol called for a hat and did not wear one? This, to me, felt similar. “I’ll wear one for the world wide cameras, but I don’t want to spend much on it, especially since that nasty man cut off my allowance.”



You are correct, it was too thin to fit for the cape-dress. 

The difference between our Late Queen and obviously other members of the family is they are always prepared for such eventualities. QEII learned from her experience when her father sadly passed whilst she was away. 

Obviously MegZ had to rustle-up something in days, miles from home. It was OK, but Kate and Sophie (and Charlotte) were miles ahead in the game. 

I always have a little black suit and a fedora ready. You just never know.


----------



## DoggieBags

The next thing they’ll be leaking will be details of The Queen’s will especially if he doesn’t get what he hopes for or expects in her will. The Queen’s will is kept private so the only way details will get out will be if someone leaks stuff To the press.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *Dan Wootton:* now today the Royal family put on a united front with Prince Harry walking in procession alongside his brother Prince William, and sitting behind his father King Charles in Westminster Abbey. But behind the scenes, the period of mourning truce between the Sussexes and the Royal family might already be wavering. Buckingham Palace has furiously hit back at reports that Harry was told of the late Queen's death just five minutes before the public announcement. the daily telegraph reported last night that the Duke of Sussex was the quote, ‘last to know’ about his grandmother's passing and found out an hour after prime minister Liz Truss.
> 
> Palace aides were angered by the quote ‘disrespectful’ claims made on the eve of her late Majesty's funeral. A spokesman for the King strongly rebuked the story stressing the public was only informed after every family member had been informed. The telegraph later amended its story to reflect the fact that Harry was not treated differently to other members of the family. He was reportedly told of the late Queen's passing as soon as he became contactable upon landing at Aberdeen airport.
> 
> But arguments like this will do nothing to bridge the gap between the Royal family and the Sussexes, especially as it comes after the couple were uninvited from last night's state reception of the century at Buckingham Palace. Well to get his expert analysis, I’m joined now by the renowned biographer Tom Bower, who has most recently authored a tell-all book about Meghan Markle. Tom, despite their unity and grief, uh the gulf between Harry and Meghan and the Royal family; I hate to say it tom. But I don't think it's ever been greater, has it?
> 
> *Tom Bower:* well I agree with you absolutely. I thought that the body language of Harry throughout the day uh told volumes. I thought especially as he got into the car after the service at St. George’s in Windsor. He looked really quite angry. And perhaps I’m wrong, but I didn't see him singing gustily God save the King inside Westminster Abbey either. I mean Meghan has got a sort of a pastiche plastic Hollywood smile permanently on. But Harry in my view was not hiding his anger.
> 
> And these stories, whether it's about hearing late about the Queen's death, which I doubt. And being stripped of the ER on his uniform. And not being invited to an occasion where really he shouldn't be there. He represents absolutely nobody. He would only be there with Meghan to sow danger and dissent. All come from him. And of course, this is typical Harry and Meghan. It’s all about them.
> 
> In the week that we're mourning the death of the Queen, all we get from Harry and Meghan is what about me. Whoa, whoa, whoa, me and me. It’s going to be very bad. And I don't think that Charles has got much time to sort this out. Unlike Phil, I think that he's got to hit the buttons pretty quickly as the new King to sort out Harry and Meghan. To sort out Prince Andrew. Both of those men have got one major problem now. Though with the Queen's departure, there is no one in court who's fighting for them. We’ve got to remember that the Queen purposely tried to include Harry in the Jubilee celebrations. She agreed to see them all. And they were flying to Holland. There’s nobody in the court now who wants to see Harry and Meghan. So they're going to leave Britain feeling pretty pretty isolated.
> 
> *Dan Wootton:* and Tom it just feels like it doesn't matter how many concessions King Charles and Prince William make to the Sussexes. They’re never going to be happy. I mean the briefing to the Sunday times at the weekend suggested that Harry was actually so annoyed by this apparent slight over the military uniform, even though he wasn't even meant to be wearing military uniform in the first place. They actually considered throwing a strop and wearing his morning suit. Now he didn't in the end but the most significant thing to me Tom, is that you've got his side singing like a canary to a journalist in the middle of what is meant to be a mourning period focused on Queen Elizabeth II. So if they're doing that in the middle of the mourning period it's going to get much worse isn't it as soon as they're back in Montecito
> 
> *Tom Bower:* oh absolutely. And I thought that the whole way in which uh the rest of the Royal family treated Meghan and Harry today showed that they had very little sympathy towards them. And in return, Harry and Meghan looked as if they were quite angry that they weren't being treated with respect they think they deserve. And I agree with you. They’re going to go back to Montecito fuming. And the biography, autobiography will soon be dug out and released.
> 
> I think what is interesting is, I would love to have known what Sophie Wessex said to Meghan as they drove in the limousine between Westminster hall and the church. Sophie Wessex is a plain speaking woman. Did she tell Meghan exactly what they all thought of her? The idea that the body language between William and Harry showed reconciliation is in my view nonsense. How on earth can there be reconciliation when Harry and Meghan have said such terrible things about William and his wife? There’s just no grounds for sympathy unless the two of them, the Sussexes, uh apologized.
> 
> What I think will be telling is whether the king, the new king, makes their children Prince and Princess after all. Whether he actually acknowledges their rights and titles. Or whether he decides that he's going to cast them out. There’s a lot for the King to do. He has now got to bring the court, his immediate Royal family into order. He’s got to present the new monarchy. The old era is over. The new era now begins. There’s no time to waste. He has now got to get to work to present the monarchy, the modern monarchy. The monarchy we will now have grown over the last week to love more than ever. To reassure us that it's going to be in good hands. And we won't have to see Harry and Andrew parading in our streets ever again.
> 
> *Dan Wootton:* Tom, uh Meghan someone who obviously you've spent the last couple of years reporting on. She was very emotional today at the service. Uh was she close to the Queen?
> 
> *Tom Bower:* well what's the emotional about that? I mean, when she allegedly touched a tear, or was it an act of a Hollywood actress thinking I better do a gesture to suggest it here. The only person that Meghan I think at the moment is crying for is for herself. Uh certainly not for the Queen. After all she had been pretty rude about her in the Oprah Winfrey interview. Whatever she might have said. The implication was pretty awful.
> 
> Uh of course she wasn't close. And you remember from my book, I had this astonishing quote on the eve on the very morning of the Dukes of Edinburgh’s funeral. The Queen said to a very close aide, “thank goodness that Meghan's not coming.” the Queen was a wonderful, wonderful uh agent of emollients. Of emollients, of trying to make good, and settle arguments. But she, of course she had her passions. She could see through Meghan. She knew the damage that the Oprah Winfrey interview did. Uh and she didn't want any grand standing of Prince Philip’s funeral. I thought Meghan today behaved properly. She didn't grandstand. She didn't try to attract attention. The sort of suggestion that she was wiping away a tear, I think it was just a scratch.
> 
> *Dan Wootton:* that is the renowned Royal biographer Tom Bower of course, the author of Revenge, uh the must read bestseller about Meghan Markle. And Tom, thank you so much. And thank you for all of your contributions over what has been an incredible uh 12 days. We’ll speak very soon. Tom Bow



Thanks for posting this. Tom Bower does an honest job assessing TW and Hazz imo, I trust his opinion.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> You are correct, it was too thin to fit for the cape-dress.
> 
> The difference between our Late Queen and obviously other members of the family is they are always prepared for such eventualities. QEII learned from her experience when her father sadly passed whilst she was away.
> 
> Obviously MegZ had to rustle-up something in days, miles from home. It was OK, but Kate and Sophie (and Charlotte) were miles ahead in the game.
> 
> I always have a little black suit and a fedora ready. You just never know.


TBH, given the age of TQ, many ladies were prepared for this.  I think it was more of a problem to find something for Charlotte.  Not too much black for little girls.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> The next thing they’ll be leaking will be details of The Queen’s will especially if he doesn’t get what he hopes for or expects in her will. The Queen’s will is kept private so the only way details will get out will be if someone leaks stuff To the press.


If he isn't named in the will, why would he be given a copy?


----------



## sgj99

As soon Harry & Megan’s car door closed after the service at St. George’s Cathedral Megan said to Harry:  “Your family is so rude and selfish!  I cried a tear and no one asked me how I was doing, if I’d be okay.  They’re so mean to me!”


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> I'm not exactly sure what's going on with CNN lately   There is also one of their commentators saying how beautifully she was dressed today.  Wasn't it the Harkles who had a story pulled before it was aired by CNN about the number of times she lied on Oprah?  If they are no longer represented by SS, who is planting these stories?


I used to like CNN…


----------



## Chanbal

Is there anything good enough for the Harkles? Second row behind the king seems a prime location to me.


----------



## Chanbal

This is so cute & sweet… (not referring to TW)


----------



## Jayne1

Which of Andrew's girls was friendly with them and did she snub them as well this week?  Why, if they were going out to dinner just a few months ago?


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if the interpretation is correct, but the photo is certainly intriguing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

sgj99 said:


> As soon Harry & Megan’s car door closed after the service at St. George’s Cathedral Megan said to Harry:  “Your family is so rude and selfish!  I cried a tear and no one asked me how I was doing, if I’d be okay.  They’re so mean to me!”


But that's what I'm wondering about.

Meg was on her best behaviour, very unobtrusive this week. (I think anyway.) The photos show her being ostracized. What will she do with this when she gets back to CA? 

I think she can get her fans and the US media to feel very sorry for her. She can use this to further her victimization at the hands of the BRF.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Could Euge and Bea’s movements been a “bat signal” to alert security about something???

Just wild speculation.  It does seem odd.


----------



## Chanbal

_Meanwhile, an actress in the crowd wiped away a tear._









						Photo Blind Item 84 - BLIND GOSSIP
					

SOLVED! [Blind Gossip] This adorable little angel grew up to be one of the most famous women in the world. She is not known for the movies she made nor the songs she sang. She did not become famous by marrying someone famous, constantly talking about herself, or by playing the victim for...




					blindgossip.com


----------



## momtok

Toby93 said:


> I'm not exactly sure what's going on with CNN lately   There is also one of their commentators saying how beautifully she was dressed today.  Wasn't it the Harkles who had a story pulled before it was aired by CNN about the number of times she lied on Oprah?  If they are no longer represented by SS, who is planting these stories?



Re: the last couple pages of CNN talk, and specifically it's coverage of QEII.

CNN is under new ownership very recently though, and they've started making changes.  A few long-time hosts were recently let go, and Don Lemon just got demoted from his 10pm show to a "morning coffee talk-show" guy.  I suspect many people haven't even realized it yet because it's *so* recent.  Some people are trying to spin it as a new and exciting opportunity ... but no, it's a demotion, and it's fine with me because he was pretty much my least favorite.   So a few heads have already rolled, and the implication is that there will be more changes rippling through soon.  This is all very recent, as in, only the last few weeks -- and QEII has pretty much distracted from everything for the last week.  So we shall see.

.... Well, actually, "we" won't see.  CNN used to be my go-to for many years.  Easy to find on our cable listings, used to be more of the philosophy, "this is our news," as opposed to, "this is our opinion".  That has changed more and more over recent years, and I just wanted the actual *news*.  You know ... who did what to whom and why.  And I cannot emphasize that part enough.  Years ago it was a good place to go to find "the news" as opposed to merely the opinions of about two dozen talking heads.  But at this point, *all* of the American news stations seems to be opinions anymore, on both sides of that infamous divide.

 As of a few weeks ago, I intended to wait it out to see how these new changes continued to play out.  It's all *very* recent, and still very much in play.  The demotion on Lemon happened only within a few days before the Queen died, if that.  Might actually have been after she died -- this past week has been a blur.  But then everything switched to QEII, and someone I used to genuinely like -- Amanpour -- just crossed a line for me.  And that genuinely saddened me when it happened.  Wrong place, really, *really* wrong time.  QEII had just died.  No.  Just absolutely no.  Now I'm hearing about these bizarre contortions for these two idiots?  Deep sigh.

  I do believe there are more changes coming ... the new owners have only just begun to make their presence known and I'm sure there are more heads going to roll.  Lemon's demotion came swift and with little warning.  But I won't be around to see these changes progress, not until I start *hearing* that they're back to more balanced news.  I have to be conscious of my actions. ... See this little pic below?  That little digital display?  I am number 3 .  That's a brand-spanking-modern ratings box from "N".  Never saw one myself until a few months ago, but most Americans have heard of "N".  The wires behind our TVs, and hooked to one of hubby's computers, are impressive.  (Put a comic character on TV and my hubby  will stream it loud and proud in his computer room.)  They watch our cable, our Roku input with includes Amazon, Netflix, etc, even any DVDs we play.  It's the eye of Mordor that sees all.  And you will note, that scroll you can see at the bottom of the TV is from Sky News, piped through as an official, bona-fide  Roku channel.  That's why I haven't switched to BBC News despite the advice given here.  I have to make sure that it's a viable input.  And we don't want to have to purchase yet another service until we've checked all options.  (But the eye of Mordor has been seeing Sky News, NOT CNN, I can tell you that.  And it won't see CNN again until I start hearing better things.)

Is it ok, to say something tongue in cheek, but with deference to the Queen?  In the words of a pretty damn great woman, "I pledge to you now, that the entirety of at least my next few months," unless or until I hear better reports, will keep that eye well off of CNN.  "I serve."
(I'm not going to get hit by a lightning bolt for that joke, am I?


----------



## Chanbal

K. Stefanovics will not post on TW's appreciation thread.   









						Queen's funeral: Karl Stefanovic's one-word verdict on Meghan Markle
					

Stefanovic made clear his verdict on Meghan's public display of emotion with just one word - 'apparently' - and it didn't go unnoticed by his co-anchor Allison Langdon




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I am the Hermes scarf authenticator here and sadly don’t recognize the scarf
> HMTQ owned many non Hermes scarves
> PS Angela Kelly was the first dresser to keep a rigorous record of outfits worn, she would have known and picked the scarf for Emma, just a wonderful touch





papertiger said:


> I wondered if it could be a vintage Henri de Linares, so many of his fell out of favour.
> ​


Squinted at various photos of it. The design reminds me of Latham's Chevalerie.


----------



## Suncatcher

The candle just cracked me up. And the tall man who blocked Markle. This had to be intentionally planned. I was surprised she stood so close to the QC and the POW. The air would have been so frigid there.


----------



## Jayne1

momtok said:


> Re: the last couple pages of CNN talk, and specifically it's coverage of QEII.
> 
> CNN is under new ownership very recently though, and they've started making changes.  A few long-time hosts were recently let go, and Don Lemon just got demoted from his 10pm show to a "morning coffee talk-show" guy.  I suspect many people haven't even realized it yet because it's *so* recent.  Some people are trying to spin it as a new and exciting opportunity ... but no, it's a demotion, and it's fine with me because he was pretty much my least favorite.   So a few heads have already rolled, and the implication is that there will be more changes rippling through soon.  This is all very recent, as in, only the last few weeks -- and QEII has pretty much distracted from everything for the last week.  So we shall see.
> 
> .... Well, actually, "we" won't see.  CNN used to be my go-to for many years.  Easy to find on our cable listings, used to be more of the philosophy, "this is our news," as opposed to, "this is our opinion".  That has changed more and more over recent years, and I just wanted the actual *news*.  You know ... who did what to whom and why.  And I cannot emphasize that part enough.  Years ago it was a good place to go to find "the news" as opposed to merely the opinions of about two dozen talking heads.  But at this point, *all* of the American news stations seems to be opinions anymore, on both sides of that infamous divide.
> 
> As of a few weeks ago, I intended to wait it out to see how these new changes continued to play out.  It's all *very* recent, and still very much in play.  The demotion on Lemon happened only within a few days before the Queen died, if that.  Might actually have been after she died -- this past week has been a blur.  But then everything switched to QEII, and someone I used to genuinely like -- Amanpour -- just crossed a line for me.  And that genuinely saddened me when it happened.  Wrong place, really, *really* wrong time.  QEII had just died.  No.  Just absolutely no.  Now I'm hearing about these bizarre contortions for these two idiots?  Deep sigh.
> 
> I do believe there are more changes coming ... the new owners have only just begun to make their presence known and I'm sure there are more heads going to roll.  Lemon's demotion came swift and with little warning.  But I won't be around to see these changes progress, not until I start *hearing* that they're back to more balanced news.  I have to be conscious of my actions. ... See this little pic below?  That little digital display?  I am number 3 .  That's a brand-spanking-modern ratings box from "N".  Never saw one myself until a few months ago, but most Americans have heard of "N".  The wires behind our TVs, and hooked to one of hubby's computers, are impressive.  (Put a comic character on TV and my hubby  will stream it loud and proud in his computer room.)  They watch our cable, our Roku input with includes Amazon, Netflix, etc, even any DVDs we play.  It's the eye of Mordor that sees all.  And you will note, that scroll you can see at the bottom of the TV is from Sky News, piped through as an official, bona-fide  Roku channel.  That's why I haven't switched to BBC News despite the advice given here.  I have to make sure that it's a viable input.  And we don't want to have to purchase yet another service until we've checked all options.  (But the eye of Mordor has been seeing Sky News, NOT CNN, I can tell you that.  And it won't see CNN again until I start hearing better things.)
> 
> Is it ok, to say something tongue in cheek, but with deference to the Queen?  In the words of a pretty damn great woman, "I pledge to you now, that the entirety of at least my next few months," unless or until I hear better reports, will keep that eye well off of CNN.  "I serve."
> (I'm not going to get hit by a lightning bolt for that joke, am I?
> 
> View attachment 5613890


I agree - I like the news to be just the news and not anyone's opinion.

I read that the new owners are thinking that way as well, so maybe it will be back to watching CNN for me.... 

Are H and M back in the states now?  Did they leave immediately after the funeral?


----------



## Chanbal

momtok said:


> Re: the last couple pages of CNN talk, and specifically it's coverage of QEII.
> 
> CNN is under new ownership very recently though, and they've started making changes.  A few long-time hosts were recently let go, and Don Lemon just got demoted from his 10pm show to a "morning coffee talk-show" guy.  I suspect many people haven't even realized it yet because it's *so* recent.  Some people are trying to spin it as a new and exciting opportunity ... but no, it's a demotion, and it's fine with me because he was pretty much my least favorite.   So a few heads have already rolled, and the implication is that there will be more changes rippling through soon.  This is all very recent, as in, only the last few weeks -- and QEII has pretty much distracted from everything for the last week.  So we shall see.
> 
> .... Well, actually, "we" won't see.  CNN used to be my go-to for many years.  Easy to find on our cable listings, used to be more of the philosophy, "this is our news," as opposed to, "this is our opinion".  That has changed more and more over recent years, and I just wanted the actual *news*.  You know ... who did what to whom and why.  And I cannot emphasize that part enough.  Years ago it was a good place to go to find "the news" as opposed to merely the opinions of about two dozen talking heads.  But at this point, *all* of the American news stations seems to be opinions anymore, on both sides of that infamous divide.
> 
> As of a few weeks ago, I intended to wait it out to see how these new changes continued to play out.  It's all *very* recent, and still very much in play.  The demotion on Lemon happened only within a few days before the Queen died, if that.  Might actually have been after she died -- this past week has been a blur.  But then everything switched to QEII, and someone I used to genuinely like -- Amanpour -- just crossed a line for me.  And that genuinely saddened me when it happened.  Wrong place, really, *really* wrong time.  QEII had just died.  No.  Just absolutely no.  Now I'm hearing about these bizarre contortions for these two idiots?  Deep sigh.
> 
> I do believe there are more changes coming ... the new owners have only just begun to make their presence known and I'm sure there are more heads going to roll.  Lemon's demotion came swift and with little warning.  But I won't be around to see these changes progress, not until I start *hearing* that they're back to more balanced news.  I have to be conscious of my actions. ... See this little pic below?  That little digital display?  I am number 3 .  That's a brand-spanking-modern ratings box from "N".  Never saw one myself until a few months ago, but most Americans have heard of "N".  The wires behind our TVs, and hooked to one of hubby's computers, are impressive.  (Put a comic character on TV and my hubby  will stream it loud and proud in his computer room.)  They watch our cable, our Roku input with includes Amazon, Netflix, etc, even any DVDs we play.  It's the eye of Mordor that sees all.  And you will note, that scroll you can see at the bottom of the TV is from Sky News, piped through as an official, bona-fide  Roku channel.  That's why I haven't switched to BBC News despite the advice given here.  I have to make sure that it's a viable input.  And we don't want to have to purchase yet another service until we've checked all options.  (But the eye of Mordor has been seeing Sky News, NOT CNN, I can tell you that.  And it won't see CNN again until I start hearing better things.)
> 
> Is it ok, to say something tongue in cheek, but with deference to the Queen?  In the words of a pretty damn great woman, "I pledge to you now, that the entirety of at least my next few months," unless or until I hear better reports, will keep that eye well off of CNN.  "I serve."
> (I'm not going to get hit by a lightning bolt for that joke, am I?
> 
> View attachment 5613890


Thanks for the info. CNN was also my go-to for several years, and I agree with you that they replaced 'news,' with ' their opinions'. I used to like Don L and Amanpour, but they seem to have changed and not in a good way. Do you know in they are also demoting Anderson Cooper? I still like him.


----------



## Hyacinth

youngster said:


> The Archbishop of Canterbury in his fairly short sermon spoke of the Queen's abundant life and loving service and also said . . .
> *But in all cases those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are forgotten."*
> 
> Some are interpreting this as a direct shot at Harry.  It may have been but I think it was also a great reminder for all the world leaders and other royals from around the world who were there as well.



And maybe even for a few former world leaders who WEREN'T there.


----------



## Chanbal

Hyacinth said:


> And maybe even for a few former world leaders who WEREN'T there.


Each time I see a post from you, it reminds me how I miss Hyacinth.


----------



## momtok

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for the info. CNN was also my go-to for several years, and I agree with you that they replaced 'news,' with ' their opinions'. I used to like Don L and Amanpour, but they seem to have changed and not in a good way. Do you know in they are also demoting Anderson Cooper? I still like him.


I have no idea ... I assure you I have no inside info or anything.  But what I did notice is that those that were removed/let-go, and Lemon's demotion, both happened very suddenly.  So who knows when another change will come.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Suncatcher said:


> The candle just cracked me up. And the tall man who blocked Markle. This had to be intentionally planned. I was surprised *she stood so close to the QC and the POW*. The air would have been so frigid there.


Imo she stands so close in order to make sure she is in the photo.  Desperate for the attention, desperate for the clicks, desperate.


----------



## xincinsin

I know it's said that the Sussexes were denied the money shot of the 2 Lillibets (allegedly). 
Made me wonder: are there any photos of TQ with Archie? I only know of the one where TQ meets the "shawl".


----------



## jenayb

Chanbal said:


> Not sure if the interpretation is correct, but the photo is certainly intriguing.




The way she is showcasing her wedding ring is so telling.  Fingers sprawled et al.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> Each time I see a post from you, it reminds me how I miss Hyacinth.



And just to inject a bit of levity and a tip of the hat to my favorite Britcom, I can imagine how much Hyacinth misses the Queen.


----------



## momtok

Hyacinth said:


> And just to inject a bit of levity and a tip of the hat to my favorite Britcom, I can imagine how much Hyacinth misses the Queen.


Hello old friend from over in Coach.   
Can you imagine Audrey fforbes-Hamilton's reaction?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I read that both Meghan and Camilla are being heavily criticized (on tick tok?).....so - guess it's not racism.  she's in good company


What's Camilla being criticized for??


----------



## Hermes Zen

Maggie Muggins said:


> Maybe she was subdued.
> 
> View attachment 5612664
> 
> 
> ET to remove double image but it won't let me.
> 
> View attachment 5612665


I pledged to not respond with any laughter since the day QE had passed to day after her funeral. I would have waited to tomorrow but had to respond with laughing emoji on this post. Thank you I needed this!!


----------



## Hyacinth

momtok said:


> Hello old friend from over in Coach.
> Can you imagine Audrey fforbes-Hamilton's reaction?




_(Waves)_ Hello Momtok!

Yes, the British upper class has been the inspiration for so many brilliant characters in classic Britcoms. I wonder if the Queen had any special favorites?

I'd love to think of her as a Black Adder fan.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Not sure if the interpretation is correct, but the photo is certainly intriguing.



Notice how the fingers on Raptor’s hand are spaced, her hand literally looks like a claw. She must be frustrated with no one to grab onto.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Then CNN are not only idiots, *they've been asleep for 3 years*


Honestly, it's been much longer than that!


----------



## csshopper

Hyacinth said:


> And just to inject a bit of levity and a tip of the hat to my favorite Britcom, I can imagine how much Hyacinth misses the Queen.


Imagine how Hyacinth would have celebrated the Jubilee.  

To get back on topic, do you think Hazbeen has any shred of humor remaining in his body, unless it’s sparked by his bromance with Nacho?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Not sure if the interpretation is correct, but the photo is certainly intriguing.




I like this version better:


----------



## charlottawill

Amen!


----------



## Katel

TimeToShop said:


> Dang, I was fine until KCIII teared up at the National Anthem.





TimeToShop said:


> *I did like how the clergy members cut off H from following the Wales out of the pew.*
> 
> If only the chauffeur of H&TWs car would talk. Bet he’s getting an earful.
> 
> I suppose they will be at the private family service. Too bad, the family should be able to grieve in peace without them.



Really? I missed that! (Anyone have a clip?  )

KC3 tearing up at the National Anthem was tough. Seeing Charlotte crying, wearing her little horseshoe pearl brooch from Grannie, was devastating. Her Majesty’s pony and corgis. 



pomeline said:


> And then there's Harry, traumatised by flashlights, walking behind the coffin of his mother and wearing suits, walking behind his grandmother's coffin in flashlights wearing a suit. He blamed his grandmother and grandfather of being terrible parents who ruined his father, who also was a terrible father, refused to see both his grandparents before they died and refuses to sing the National Anthem because it asks for long life to his father but is there prancing around demanding to be treated like the heir to the throne and to be able to wear a uniform from his father who he claims is a prisoner like his brother. He then brings his wife along, the same one who wants to bring down monarchy. Why aren't these two already on the plane on their way back and stripped of their titles? And I'm not even mentioning their shady connections and possible leaking of state secrets to foreign powers.


 Hahaha thank you! Please tell us how you really feel


----------



## Katel

kipp said:


> Re: not singing God Save the King:  I just can't imagine the cognitive dissonance that Hazzbeen is experiencing, especially today.   On the one hand, he's a victim of Stockholm syndrome with his hostage taking wife (has to do her bidding!), and on the other he realizes what he is missing and could have been a productive part of.  It will be interesting to see what transpires after today...


Yes, he appears to be in shock and terribly angry. I couldn’t believe he chatted up MeMe past his Grannie on the way to be seated at Windsor … just a casual chat down the lane    


BlueCherry said:


> From the rear Meghan looked like she was wearing a *bin bag*. On a lighter note that photo of Catherine and Charlotte matching reminded me of a photo I took of my Mum and my great niece, her great granddaughter. She calls her Betty instead of Elizabeth and said “I want to dress like Betty”
> 
> View attachment 5613560
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613561
> 
> 
> View attachment 5613563



bin bag yes! hahahaha


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Then CNN are not only idiots, they've been asleep for 3 years


CNN is notoriously woke and left wing


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> I'm telling you, he's an emotional hothead and he was this close to losing it during the first service. He kept blinking, swallowing, clenching his jaw and looking straight ahead. He was focused on doing anything to avoid breaking down. I say this as someone who cries at the drop of a hat. I don't know how I'd get through all those events without being a sobbing mess.


You aren’t a royal you aren’t trained from birth to have a stiff upper lip he has has intensive coaching for nerves and public speaking he wasn’t unable to sing watch this space for this pairs next move


----------



## andrashik

Toby93 said:


> It's a good thing she didn't have white gloves on, or we would have seen the orange tanner


Apologies if this was posted. I am still need to catch up:


I think she intentionally chose black gloves to emphasise her dramatic crying and wiping her tear


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

WillstarveforLV said:


> Oh I am sure TRF know better not to "loan" her any gems, after Tom Bower noted in his Revenge book that she would never return any of the Aquazurra shoes for photo shoots!  I think I even spy that even the late Queen's horse Emma, who paid tribute today,  was wearing, possibly one of the Queen's Hermes scarves on top of her saddle - it looks like the same scarf that the late  Queen wore the last time she rode Emma. Further points how HMTQ ensure those close and dear to her had such significant connections and tributes to her - I mean even Emma the horse rose above Markle. I also read that Sophie, Countess of Wessex, had the Lily of the Valley embroidered on her dress as that was the Queen's favourite flower.


Sophie’s tribute in the embroidery made me cry so understated so heartfelt the Queen was her second mum and she is heartbroken


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> I loved Sophie's dress. I saw a back view of it and it was so beautiful.


----------



## elvisfan4life

youngster said:


> The Archbishop of Canterbury in his fairly short sermon spoke of the Queen's abundant life and loving service and also said . . .
> *But in all cases those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are forgotten."*
> 
> Some are interpreting this as a direct shot at Harry.  It may have been but I think it was also a great reminder for all the world leaders and other royals from around the world who were there as well.


Harry closed his eyes and dropped his head at those words as if he had been stung


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> I doubt it was a shot at Harry...I think the queen's idea of being of service was something she started, wasn't done before her reign
> Since Charles obviously wont reign for 70-plus years, I wonder what his funeral will be like.  They will probably need to plan it soon just in case something happens.  sorry if this seems cold to bring up
> 
> with his record as an environmentalist, etc., maybe he will want someting less grand


Don’t apologise it has been planned for years as operation London Bridge and all the ones before had and as I believe every president is planned as soon as take office


----------



## gracekelly

pomeline said:


> And then there's Harry, traumatised by flashlights, walking behind the coffin of his mother and wearing suits, walking behind his grandmother's coffin in flashlights wearing a suit. He blamed his grandmother and grandfather of being terrible parents who ruined his father, who also was a terrible father, refused to see both his grandparents before they died and refuses to sing the National Anthem because it asks for long life to his father but is there prancing around demanding to be treated like the heir to the throne and to be able to wear a uniform from his father who he claims is a prisoner like his brother. He then brings his wife along, the same one who wants to bring down monarchy. Why aren't these two already on the plane on their way back and stripped of their titles? And I'm not even mentioning their shady connections and possible leaking of state secrets to foreign powers.


Better, why were’t they driven to the airport the moment her death was announced. They are so disrespectful.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> TBH, given the age of TQ, many ladies were prepared for this.  I think it was more of a problem to find something for Charlotte.  Not too much black for little girls.


They have designers to make outfits


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> The Archbishop of Canterbury in his fairly short sermon spoke of the Queen's abundant life and loving service and also said . . .
> *But in all cases those who serve will be loved and remembered when those who cling to power and privileges are forgotten."*
> 
> Some are interpreting this as a direct shot at Harry.  It may have been but I think it was also a great reminder for all the world leaders and other royals from around the world who were there as well.


I replayed the tape and listened to Welby again. I definitely think he was making a point and it included the Harkles as well. I thought it was quite a good sermon.


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> If he isn't named in the will, why would he be given a copy?


Of course he will benefit from the Will Andrew Harry and the lesser royals are always well provided for as will the lessor great grandchildren - Harry bought the house with money left by his great grandmother and his mother


----------



## miss_chiff

Meghan Markle made 'brave' request to King Charles claims royal expert
					

Meghan Markle has allegedly requested a 'one-to-one' meeting with King Charles to heal rifts before her departure to California with  Harry after the Queen's funeral, according to a royal insider.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

elvisfan4life said:


> Of course he will benefit from the Will Andrew Harry and the lesser royals are always well provided for as will the lessor great grandchildren - Harry bought the house with *money left by his great grandmother and his mother*


I always wondered why he took a huge mortgage for that house. I think the money left to him is locked up in trust funds and doled out, so that these lesser royals don't get fleeced till they are penniless.


----------



## purseinsanity

miss_chiff said:


> Meghan Markle made 'brave' request to King Charles claims royal expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has allegedly requested a 'one-to-one' meeting with King Charles to heal rifts before her departure to California with  Harry after the Queen's funeral, according to a royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


In other words, falling to her knees to be for more money?


----------



## xincinsin

miss_chiff said:


> Meghan Markle made 'brave' request to King Charles claims royal expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has allegedly requested a 'one-to-one' meeting with King Charles to heal rifts before her departure to California with  Harry after the Queen's funeral, according to a royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Brave" now joins "sweet nod" and "special bond" as a determining characteristic of her? What a hoot!

It's a letter - to tug at heartstrings?

ETA The Daily Mail article says one always requests an audience with the monarch using a letter. So maybe not the heartstrings this time.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That lunatic stare! You know whom she remembers me of...have you heard of the Duggars? I think they have a very old, abandoned thread here. They are a fundamentalist Christian family with 19 kids, and many of the women in this cult they are in (they don't believe in education, contraception, women working, and the husband is the head of the family and his word is law) stare at their fiancés and husband when they speak the way Raptor does with Harry. It is extremely unnerving.


Going from her podcast and knowledge of international relations M doesn’t believe in educating women either   


bag-mania said:


> Apparently it was known. In the 60s Camilla was having a good time. Found an old article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The night Camilla lost her virginity - and changed the history of the royals
> 
> 
> The photographer caught a glint of mischief and a hint of fun in the clear, confident blue eyes of 17-year-old Milla Shand. Indeed, it is said that within just a few days of Millas coming out party, the future Duchess of Cornwall lost her virginity to a rakish young gentleman called Kevin Burke
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Jesus so cringe - it’s like dog breeding circulars announcing the best studs and litters for the year


lanasyogamama said:


> Thank you! The only one out of the three I was following is Dr. Dray, but like you said, she can be tough to watch. I didn’t know she gave up her medical career, I’m not sure I would recommend that for anyone, even if the money is better in the short term.


I agree it’s hard to watch someone deep in throws of anorexia like that. 



Chanbal said:


> Is that a tear? All those acting lessons sponsored by TM have paid off!
> 
> View attachment 5613498
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source: L.A.)


I want to know why lights are shining out of her nipples 
And why are they almost as shiny as that nose highlight. 

You can bet there was a big orange ring around the cottage bath that morning. 




LittleStar88 said:


> But those gloves…  Got some dishes to do later, I guess?
> 
> View attachment 5613514


She’s never washed dishes in her life 

She looks more like she’s about to get stuck into some krisco kisses 
(for the frankie goes to Hollywood/urban dictionary fans among you.)


WillstarveforLV said:


> It was a Stella McCartney dress and she wore exact same in navy blue in 2018. I think she left a bunch of clothes at Frogmore and chose from there. Only jewelry she was wearing was the teeny tiny little pearl earrings the late HMTQ gifted her and the cartier love bracelet from her ex husband Trevor. Even adorable Princess Charlotte was wearing a more significant piece from her great-grandmother. Must of burned her to see everyone wear such elaborate pieces from HMTQ and the rest of the Royal attendees with their significant gems. She was so out of place. Stuck out like a sore thumb.


Must have made it hard for Eugenia to live there with those dresses sneaking out at night and strangling her like doctor strange’s cape.  


marietouchet said:


> I am the Hermes scarf authenticator here and sadly don’t recognize the scarf
> HMTQ owned many non Hermes scarves
> PS Angela Kelly was the first dresser to keep a rigorous record of outfits worn, she would have known and picked the scarf for Emma, just a wonderful touch


It might be a Cornelia James 


momtok said:


> Re: the last couple pages of CNN talk, and specifically it's coverage of QEII.
> 
> CNN is under new ownership very recently though, and they've started making changes.  A few long-time hosts were recently let go, and Don Lemon just got demoted from his 10pm show to a "morning coffee talk-show" guy.  I suspect many people haven't even realized it yet because it's *so* recent.  Some people are trying to spin it as a new and exciting opportunity ... but no, it's a demotion, and it's fine with me because he was pretty much my least favorite.   So a few heads have already rolled, and the implication is that there will be more changes rippling through soon.  This is all very recent, as in, only the last few weeks -- and QEII has pretty much distracted from everything for the last week.  So we shall see.
> 
> .... Well, actually, "we" won't see.  CNN used to be my go-to for many years.  Easy to find on our cable listings, used to be more of the philosophy, "this is our news," as opposed to, "this is our opinion".  That has changed more and more over recent years, and I just wanted the actual *news*.  You know ... who did what to whom and why.  And I cannot emphasize that part enough.  Years ago it was a good place to go to find "the news" as opposed to merely the opinions of about two dozen talking heads.  But at this point, *all* of the American news stations seems to be opinions anymore, on both sides of that infamous divide.
> 
> As of a few weeks ago, I intended to wait it out to see how these new changes continued to play out.  It's all *very* recent, and still very much in play.  The demotion on Lemon happened only within a few days before the Queen died, if that.  Might actually have been after she died -- this past week has been a blur.  But then everything switched to QEII, and someone I used to genuinely like -- Amanpour -- just crossed a line for me.  And that genuinely saddened me when it happened.  Wrong place, really, *really* wrong time.  QEII had just died.  No.  Just absolutely no.  Now I'm hearing about these bizarre contortions for these two idiots?  Deep sigh.
> 
> I do believe there are more changes coming ... the new owners have only just begun to make their presence known and I'm sure there are more heads going to roll.  Lemon's demotion came swift and with little warning.  But I won't be around to see these changes progress, not until I start *hearing* that they're back to more balanced news.  I have to be conscious of my actions. ... See this little pic below?  That little digital display?  I am number 3 .  That's a brand-spanking-modern ratings box from "N".  Never saw one myself until a few months ago, but most Americans have heard of "N".  The wires behind our TVs, and hooked to one of hubby's computers, are impressive.  (Put a comic character on TV and my hubby  will stream it loud and proud in his computer room.)  They watch our cable, our Roku input with includes Amazon, Netflix, etc, even any DVDs we play.  It's the eye of Mordor that sees all.  And you will note, that scroll you can see at the bottom of the TV is from Sky News, piped through as an official, bona-fide  Roku channel.  That's why I haven't switched to BBC News despite the advice given here.  I have to make sure that it's a viable input.  And we don't want to have to purchase yet another service until we've checked all options.  (But the eye of Mordor has been seeing Sky News, NOT CNN, I can tell you that.  And it won't see CNN again until I start hearing better things.)
> 
> Is it ok, to say something tongue in cheek, but with deference to the Queen?  In the words of a pretty damn great woman, "I pledge to you now, that the entirety of at least my next few months," unless or until I hear better reports, will keep that eye well off of CNN.  "I serve."
> (I'm not going to get hit by a lightning bolt for that joke, am I?
> 
> View attachment 5613890


They know editorialising and star news anchors are the only way to save network cable news but the centre and left historically struggles to find someone consistently popular with the right takes. I’m amazed they can’t read the room enough to not a brainlessly compliment H&M though. It’s not like there’s no clues ️‍♂️ With DM raking it in with their commentary. 


charlottawill said:


> Amen!



I agree in general comparison is the pointless thief of joy but the royals did invite comparison by having TW there and planting her next to the golden family - almost like they want the news coverage


----------



## Katel

Toby93 said:


> I was so angry when I saw them being escorted to the front row.  Furious actually.  The unfairness of it all.  Why


Yes  and this is where he chatted casually to MeMe on their way to be seated at St. George’s 



Debbini said:


> I live here too (US) and I don't want them back....but I think we're Stuck with them?!



Hopefully when they divorce, HazBeen will leave and MeMe will slide into nowhereland.



View attachment 5613655


 We have some TALENTED members, @Toby93 



CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5613754
> 
> 
> 
> Wow!!! (I knew about the pony but not the scarf)




All the bouquets carefully placed on the lawns really got me 



pomeline said:


> I believe in this case it's pronounced  "oompa".


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> Of course he will benefit from the Will Andrew Harry and the lesser royals are always well provided for as will the lessor great grandchildren - Harry bought the house with money left by his great grandmother and his mother


There has never been any proof that he received money from his grandmother. It’s also debatable about who actually owns that house.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> In other words, falling to her knees to be for more money?


She wants to explain why she trashed him and the family. Good luck with that Meg.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

miss_chiff said:


> Meghan Markle made 'brave' request to King Charles claims royal expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has allegedly requested a 'one-to-one' meeting with King Charles to heal rifts before her departure to California with  Harry after the Queen's funeral, according to a royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Let me translate that for you: heal rifts is another expression for making sure the money flow doesn't dry up.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> She wants to explain why she trashed him and the family. Good luck with that Meg.


Oh, to be a fly on the wall for that conversation...

I'm sure if he says No, she will leak the convo to prove how un-okay she is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Oh, to be a fly on the wall for that conversation...
> 
> I'm sure if he says No, she will leak the convo to prove how un-okay she is.


The speculation is she has been proven to be the leaker.  The BRF, especially William, know how to test loyalties.  This photo, mercy.


----------



## BlueCherry

WillstarveforLV said:


> I am not sure, this is just my own observation and assumption, there has been no mention of it. However, there was a picture of the last time the late Queen was riding, and it appears as the same scarf she wore on her head and I am also assuming its Hermes but who knows.


I just saw this and he says the scarf was Hermès


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> The speculation is she has been proven to be the leaker.  The BRF, especially William, know how to test loyalties.  This photo, mercy.




Of course she is the leaker, who else would have anything to gain from this. 

I think the King needs time to rest and grieve not acquiesce to her now public private wishes. 

That photo speaks volumes. For a fleeting second I felt sympathy as I’ve always felt sad to see anyone excluded but it was fleeting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BlueCherry said:


> Of course she is the leaker, who else would have anything to gain from this.
> 
> I think the King needs time to rest and grieve not acquiesce to her now public private wishes.
> 
> That photo speaks volumes. For a fleeting second I felt sympathy as I’ve always felt sad to see anyone excluded but it was fleeting.


Maybe _he_ was caught with recording equipment?  As always, dislike the behavior, love the person.  Whatever H&M were doing, I trust the BRF’s judgment on these matters.  These last 10 days have proven that.  Imo.


----------



## justwatchin

miss_chiff said:


> Meghan Markle made 'brave' request to King Charles claims royal expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has allegedly requested a 'one-to-one' meeting with King Charles to heal rifts before her departure to California with  Harry after the Queen's funeral, according to a royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well, if this is true and being the cynic I am, I am assuming she figured this was the best time to strike when KC is emotionally vulnerable. I think it’s less likely now that he is King and surrounded by family and advisors that she’ll get any private meeting.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe _he_ was caught with recording equipment?  As always, dislike the behavior, love the person.  Whatever H&M were doing, I trust the BRF’s judgment on these matters.  These last 10 days have proven that.  Imo.



I don’t doubt they will have plenty to say when they return. If they don’t I guess the RF do have something on her that the Queen never wanted to be made known. 

It could also have been one snipe or tantrum too many. Sometimes with a toxic family member you snap and have just had enough.


----------



## BlueCherry

justwatchin said:


> Well, if this is true and being the cynic I am, I am assuming she figured this was the best time to strike when KC is emotionally vulnerable. I think it’s less likely now that he is King and surrounded by family and advisors that she’ll get any private meeting.



I can’t believe Camilla, Anne, William or Catherine will allow him to believe any good could come of this either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BlueCherry said:


> I can’t believe Camilla, Anne, William or Catherine will allow him to believe any good could come of this either.


Why make the meeting _private?_ Do I hear Opr whispering in her ear? 
Speak in front of Hazz or go away.


----------



## Mumotons

Royals continue to mourn Queen for a week after saying final goodbyes
					

Her Majesty's long journey to her final resting place began in Balmoral on the day of her death on September 8 and ended last night with her private interment next to Prince Philip.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




The details of last night's private ceremony were even kept secret from most royal aides with the congregation limited to senior royals only. It is not known if it was just the King and his siblings or whether it included grandchildren such as Prince William and Prince Harry. 

If those details leak we will know who from…..


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why make the meeting _private?_ Do I hear Opr whispering in her ear?
> Speak in front of Hazz or go away.



So that if it doesn’t go her way she can lie with impunity … as usual


----------



## BlueCherry

Love these


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> and darling Charlotte wore a horeshoe pin for the queen's love or horses


It was a gift from The Queen.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

KC is on his way to Scotland to grieve.

I guess Meghan didn’t get that pre-flight home meeting after all.


----------



## bag-mania

BlueCherry said:


> KC is on his way to Scotland to grieve.
> 
> I guess Meghan didn’t get that pre-flight home meeting after all.


Aren’t Harry and Meghan already home? I would’ve thought they had a borrowed private jet idling on the runway yesterday waiting for them.


----------



## elvisfan4life

bag-mania said:


> Aren’t Harry and Meghan already home? I would’ve thought they had a borrowed private jet idling on the runway yesterday waiting for them.


She could have gone on her broomstick


----------



## Chanbal

The transportation hasn't been disclosed yet, but it looks like they will go back fuming.  









						Harry and Meghan will go back to Montecito 'fuming' over UK treatment
					

Prospects of reconciliation between the Sussexes and the rest of the Royal Family following the Queen's death appeared short-lived as there was little interaction during the funeral on Monday.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Helventara

bellecate said:


> Anyone else notice when these two are not out on display they aren’t holding hands. Only for the camera?


There was but to be fair, not sure if it was in an appropriate location or context, or not.


----------



## DoggieBags

They’re going to have to hire a new PR firm before they can get fully back up to speed in what appears to have become their raisin d’etre, taking their usual pot shots at the BRF in order to damage it.


----------



## Icyjade

andrashik said:


> Apologies if this was posted. I am still need to catch up:
> View attachment 5614004
> 
> I think she intentionally chose black gloves to emphasise her dramatic crying and wiping her tear


Her crocodile tears really irritated me but I amused myself with the thought that she is crying for marrying the wrong brother and not being the wife of a billionaire now…


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Is there anything good enough for the Harkles? *Second row behind the king seems a prime location to me.*



It is indeed prime location because cameras would have been pointed at KC's direction a lot. With all eyes (cameras) in that direction, that also probably means placing him and Z-list might have been a deliberate move to ensure that it's harder for them to misbehave. However, Harry's psycho wife loves the cameras so she might have looked at the bright side and thought it's time for her to put her acting skills on and that videos and pictures captured by the cameras are proof that she was mistreated by being blocked by Sir Knight Candle


----------



## Chanbal

The candle seems to be here to stay in TW's path.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> The candle seems to be here to stay in TW's path.



We should ship them a box though that could be quite dangerous because she might burn down the house to claim insurance since they are so under the water and need money now


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

_"A stink bomb in a perfumery"_ 
Charles goes to Scotland and all royal engagements are canceled. What people do to avoid bad smells!


----------



## charlottawill

andrashik said:


> Apologies if this was posted. I am still need to catch up:
> View attachment 5614004
> 
> I think she intentionally chose black gloves to emphasise her dramatic crying and wiping her tear


Ew. If you're going to wear five pounds of makeup you can't wipe your face with a gloved hand, whether they're black or white.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Have  they gone yet ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

It will look bad if they don’t, they’ve left the kids for so long.


----------



## orchard

sdkitty said:


> I doubt it was a shot at Harry...I think the queen's idea of being of service was something she started, wasn't done before her reign
> Since Charles obviously wont reign for 70-plus years, I wonder what his funeral will be like.  They will probably need to plan it soon just in case something happens.  sorry if this seems cold to bring up
> 
> with his record as an environmentalist, etc., maybe he will want someting less grand



Royal households have a long history of making detailed plans for when a senior member of the family dies. Each aspect of a royal funeral, and the events which ensue, are precisely planned over many years and updated by royal staff several times annually.

Members of the Royal Family have opted to use the names of prominent bridges across the UK as their death codenames. King Charles III's funeral plan is Operation Menai Bridge for which planning will now commence.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> There has never been any proof that he received money from his grandmother. It’s also debatable about who actually owns that house.


STory that the Queen Mum left 5M pounds to each of her great grand kinds incl H
Another story is that the QM died with large debts discharged by QEII


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Oh, to be a fly on the wall for that conversation...
> 
> I'm sure if he says No, she will leak the convo to prove how un-okay she is.


KC has cleverly gone to Scotland, he will let things percolate forget a while


----------



## DL Harper

miss_chiff said:


> Meghan Markle made 'brave' request to King Charles claims royal expert
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has allegedly requested a 'one-to-one' meeting with King Charles to heal rifts before her departure to California with  Harry after the Queen's funeral, according to a royal insider.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


A one-on-one between KCIII & MM should be as PRIVATE as the interview MM&H had with OW and the podcasts.  Right!!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speak in front of Hazz or go away.


Unless she plans to trash him too. "Poor Harry, his mental state has really been worrying me in recent months. A public reconciliation with you would be so helpful to him. And you know, for the sake of your grandchildren". She will never not be manipulative.


----------



## needlv

I saw someone on another thread classify MM’s look as ”the younger mistress at the funeral of her lover, having just found out she isn’t getting the life insurance or anything else from the estate.”







I was half Expecting some type of Dynasty type drama at the funeral.  But she was well behaved, her dress was conservative enough and she did wear less bronzer than usual…


----------



## Mumotons

TW being bold as brass at the funeral reminded me of Scarlett O’Hara in Gone with the Wind


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

justwatchin said:


> Well, if this is true and being the cynic I am, I am assuming she figured this was the best time to strike when KC is emotionally vulnerable. I think it’s less likely now that he is King and surrounded by family and advisors that she’ll get any private meeting.



Charles might be washing his hair...extensively.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Helventara said:


> There was but to be fair, not sure if it was in an appropriate location or context, or not.




Are they for real. I was happy when someone said they didn't hold hands for once. WHILE FOLLOWING THE COFFIN? Good thing there was no open grave because I would have felt the urgent need to push them in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mumotons said:


> TW being bold as brass at the funeral reminded me of Scarlett O’Hara in Gone with the Wind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5614131
> View attachment 5614130


Notice Kate’s eyes in the top photo.  _Something_ unpleasant happened.  Did they find the recording device?


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they for real. I was happy when someone said they didn't hold hands for once. WHILE FOLLOWING THE COFFIN? Good thing there was no open grave because I would have felt the urgent need to push them in.


That picture looks like it was taken on entering Westminster Abbey.

ETA, I tell a lie, its as they were leaving.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they for real. I was happy when someone said they didn't hold hands for once. WHILE FOLLOWING THE COFFIN? Good thing there was no open grave because I would have felt the urgent need to push them in.


See the dark shadow ? Is she wearing the device around her waist?


----------



## KEG66

Mumotons said:


> TW being bold as brass at the funeral reminded me of Scarlett O’Hara in Gone with the Wind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5614131
> View attachment 5614130


Honestly how does that woman always find the camera ? Thank goodness for that candle in the cathedral !!


----------



## lilly2002

i dont know if they have their own thread but whyyyyy did Beatrice and Eugenie leave westminister before the coffin?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

KEG66 said:


> Honestly how does that woman always find the camera ? Thank goodness for that candle in the cathedral !!


My guess is she has someone telling her where to look.  Same as on Ellen when she wore the earpiece.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> What's Camilla being criticized for??


being ugly, not being Diana....


----------



## xincinsin

Mumotons said:


> TW being bold as brass at the funeral reminded me of Scarlett O’Hara in Gone with the Wind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5614131
> View attachment 5614130


Vivien Leigh was miles out of TW's bottom feeder league.
I love it that they were held at arm's length. They really cannot be trusted.


----------



## KEG66

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is she has someone telling her where to look.  Same as on Ellen when she wore the earpiece.


That would make sense and also explain how there was such a clear photograph of her single tear.


----------



## xincinsin

justwatchin said:


> Well, if this is true and being the cynic I am, I am assuming she figured this was the best time to strike when KC is emotionally vulnerable. I think it’s less likely now that he is King and surrounded by family and advisors that she’ll get any private meeting.


What in the world is she going to say?

Your Majesty... Oh, that sounds so cold and distant! May I call you "Papa"? 
_(Raises hand to cover mouth in mock shock at her own impertinence, flutters lashes)_
I'm sorry for being forward, but the word "Daddy" just triggers me because of my father...
_(Dips her head in mock sorrow, pokes eye to produce tears, lets low-cut neckline fall open, then pretends to bravely stand tall)_
I know you are disappointed in us, but this is all the fault of Oprah Winfrey and Ken Sunshine! They misled us... (and so on, and so forth)


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> What in the world is she going to say?
> 
> Your Majesty... Oh, that sounds so cold and distant! May I call you "Papa"?
> _(Raises hand to cover mouth in mock shock at her own impertinence, flutters lashes)_
> I'm sorry for being forward, but the word "Daddy" just triggers me because of my father...
> _(Dips her head in mock sorrow, pokes eye to produce tears, lets low-cut neckline fall open, then pretends to bravely stand tall)_
> I know you are disappointed in us, but this is all the fault of Oprah Winfrey and Ken Sunshine! They misled us... (and so on, and so forth)



I thought I was reading one of her yacht escapades for a moment


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> What's Camilla being criticized for??











						The Queen's death has ignited a fresh wave of online abuse targeting Meghan Markle and Camilla Parker Bowles
					

In 2020, Markle described the online abuse she faced as "almost unsurvivable"




					www.insider.com


----------



## andrashik




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She should have been a bit more tightlipped to the press instead of being proud of her left eye producing a single tear by command.


----------



## Laila619

I really want to know who is watching those poor InvisiKids? They are still so young. I probably care more about their kids than these two clowns do, at this point. Go home and see them!


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She should have been a bit more tightlipped to the press instead of being proud of her left eye producing a single tear by command.



She really is a muppet. Everything she says comes back to bite her on the arse at some point. She’s shameless.


----------



## sdkitty

Laila619 said:


> I really want to know who is watching those poor InvisiKids? They are still so young. I probably care more about their kids than these two clowns do, at this point. Go home and see them!


supposedly Doria...but they have nannies


----------



## elvisfan4life

Let me know when the plane has taken off


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She should have been a bit more tightlipped to the press instead of being proud of her left eye producing a single tear by command.


I think the family must be really disgusted right? It was painful to see all of the RF controlling their emotions… like you could see how truly sad they are. And then there is this orange clown making a show of one single tear. I know I would be so furious if it’s someone I love - like you can’t even let the dead Rest In Peace right? You just have to make use of the situation somehow? Super duper disrespectful and distasteful. Ugh.


----------



## pixiejenna

I can’t decide what MM shed a tear for. Is she bored out of her mind pretending to care about the royal family? Is it because her meal ticket is gone? Did they find out JCMH isn’t included in the queens will?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

pixiejenna said:


> I can’t decide what MM shed a tear for. Is she bored out of her mind pretending to care about the royal family? Is it because her meal ticket is gone? Did they find out JCMH isn’t included in the queens will?


Kate outshined her by miles?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Laila619 said:


> I really want to know who is watching those poor InvisiKids? They are still so young. I probably care more about their kids than these two clowns do, at this point. Go home and see them!



I do wonder how these kids are doing...those two don't make for the healthiest parental unit at all.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> Kate outshined her by miles?


Charlotte outshines her by miles, as did Emma the pony and the corgis.


----------



## BlueCherry

Sharont2305 said:


> Charlotte outshines her by miles, as did Emma the pony and the corgis.


And the candle


----------



## andrashik

This one is so good. From reddit!


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> TW being bold as brass at the funeral reminded me of Scarlett O’Hara in Gone with the Wind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5614131
> View attachment 5614130




But Scarlet has an about face. MegZ  is just two-faced


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> KC is on his way to Scotland to grieve.
> 
> I guess Meghan didn’t get that pre-flight home meeting after all.



I mean seriously, does she really think that the King has time for her? NOW? And after everything? 

And then the conversation to be used?

OMG, the woman is clueless


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I mean seriously, does she really think that the King has time for her? NOW? And after everything?
> 
> And then the conversation to be used?
> 
> OMG, the woman is clueless


there is so much speculation and made-up stuff about these two.  I'm pretty sure even with her ego, she would expect any meeting she would ever have with the king would include "H"

Unless, of course, she is "bonkers"


----------



## Sophisticatted

Post Megxit, Charles has always seemed to leave the country when Harry is there.  This time seems to be no different.  LOL!


----------



## Jayne1

elvisfan4life said:


> Harry closed his eyes and dropped his head at those words as if he had been stung


He might actually think he does serve.  He might believe in his charitable work from CA.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> See the dark shadow ? Is she wearing the device around her waist?


It would be a lot easier to hide something under a dress like that than the more fitted styles worn by most of the other women.


----------



## bananaramma

I agree


----------



## TimeToShop

The details that keep coming. I know things were all planned but still. The scarf on the saddle, this, it’s really a testament to how much she was loved that people have put so much thought into small things.


----------



## Sharont2305

BlueCherry said:


> And the candle


Not forgetting THE candle, lol


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> He might actually think he does serve.  He might believe in his charitable work from CA.


giving out sandwiches?  making speeches?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Laila619 said:


> I really want to know who is watching those poor InvisiKids? They are still so young. I probably care more about their kids than these two clowns do, at this point. Go home and see them!


It seems like forever since their faux royal tour started, and then the Queen passed. It must be three weeks that they've been gone. I couldn't imagine being away that long when my kids were that young.



Jayne1 said:


> He might actually think he does serve.  He might believe in his charitable work from CA.


As if an occasional polo match counts as charitable work.


----------



## TimeToShop

It does look like there’s something there. You’d think you’d want as smooth a silhouette as you could have. Especially if you’re going to be photographed near Kate.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> The details that keep coming. I know things were all planned but still. The scarf on the saddle, this, it’s really a testament to how much she was loved that people have put so much thought into small things.




Not sure I want to laugh or cry a few more tears. That's precious.


----------



## lulu212121

I thought her waist area looked very fumpy. Always wrinkly. I was not a fan of her outfit. That makeup on the glove from her faux tear was gross. It looked like someone who didn't use toilet paper.


----------



## TimeToShop

I did post this on the The Queen’s thread. Harry’s in it so I guess it can count here too. It made me bawl. So maybe don’t watch if you don’t want some tears. I thought it lovely and has a wee Outlander nod, appropriate with her love of Scotland.


----------



## BlueCherry

sdkitty said:


> there is so much speculation and made-up stuff about these two.  I'm pretty sure even with her ego, she would expect any meeting she would ever have with the king would include "H"
> 
> Unless, of course, she is "bonkers"



But I bet he won’t be allowed to speak


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> I mean seriously, does she really think that the King has time for her? NOW? And after everything?
> 
> And then the conversation to be used?
> 
> OMG, the woman is clueless


She thinks everyone must bow to her and that she is entitled to  everything.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> I did post this on the The Queen’s thread. Harry’s in it so I guess it can count here too. It made me bawl. So maybe don’t watch if you don’t want some tears. I thought it lovely and has a wee Outlander nod, appropriate with her love of Scotland.




Thank you for the warning. Of course I watched anyway and now I need to go wash my face.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From DM:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who is the guy next to Charles?


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is the guy next to Charles?


Edward I think.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is the guy next to Charles?



Edward


----------



## elvisfan4life

pixiejenna said:


> I can’t decide what MM shed a tear for. Is she bored out of her mind pretending to care about the royal family? Is it because her meal ticket is gone? Did they find out JCMH isn’t included in the queens will?


To get attention from 
Idiots and idiot publications and tv channels


----------



## rose60610

I have difficulty believing Claw requested an appointment with Charles. Or even THOUGHT she could get on his calendar. Not that I don't put anything past her, but talk about emasculating your husband, like, "Sit here, H, and I'll go talk to Daddy. He owes us. I'm going to use the meal tickets our children as leverage. If he won't give us millions and millions then I'm going to tell Oprah that your family is racist."  As though she hadn't already played that card. What could she say after flaming The Firm?

Oops--I just got a notice banner from Page Six about her request "to clear the air". (Not that I think Page Six is even 50% reputable.) Clear the air? About what? That she really didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings?

How many racist families would give you a 50 million dollar wedding, pay for millions of dollars of clothes, give you private jet travel, provide you with a multi million dollar house, give you titles, servants, etc?

If she DOES meet with KC III, then I'd hope the meeting is recorded with sight and sound. Otherwise, who knows what she'd accuse Charles of saying or doing?


----------



## duna

Can someone explain what MYT1 stands for? I don't get it....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sgj99

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is the guy next to Charles?


That’s Edward, Earl of Wessex, the Queen’s youngest son.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Um, yes, now we see why MM ‘requested’ a meeting.  Pointing his finger at the King?  That takes stupid to another level.


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> Can someone explain what MYT1 stands for? I don't get it....


Mighty 1


----------



## CarryOn2020

CarryOn2020 said:


> From DM:
> 
> View attachment 5614238


The young man in the bottom left does not look like family.  The rest are family members.  Sheesh.


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Mighty 1


Ah, thanks, of course!


----------



## 1LV

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She should have been a bit more tightlipped to the press instead of being proud of her left eye producing a single tear by command.


Motor Mouth Meg?  Tight lipped?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sgj99 said:


> That’s Edward, Earl of Wessex, the Queen’s youngest son.



I completely didn't recognize him, in this photo he looked really young somehow.


----------



## 1LV

sdkitty said:


> there is so much speculation and made-up stuff about these two.  I'm pretty sure even with her ego, she would expect any meeting she would ever have with the king would include "H"
> 
> Unless, of course, she is "bonkers"


If I were Camilla it sure as hell would include me.


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Not forgetting THE candle, lol



Give that candle an OBE.

MegZ gets awards and she has done far less for the good of humanity


----------



## CarryOn2020

I cannot believe Hazz is caught pointing his finger at his father.   How stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Give that candle an OBE.
> 
> MegZ gets awards and she has done far less for the good of humanity



I said yesterday that that candle deserves a knighthood. Maybe we can petition for it.


----------



## bag-mania

BlueCherry said:


> And the candle


The candle is a hero.


----------



## TimeToShop

CarryOn2020 said:


> I cannot believe Hazz is caught pointing his finger at his father.   How stupid.



The King does not look amused. H looks a fool.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I cannot believe Hazz is caught pointing his finger at his father.   How stupid.



It looks like he's pointing at something a little further away, showing whatever it is to William?


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely didn't recognize him, in this photo he looked really young somehow.


They all look better with hats on


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It looks like he's pointing at something a little further away, showing whatever it is to William?


I need to see the entire photo reel to know for certain.  Imo it looks like hostile energy which would explain why Hazz was ignored/shunned when he was leaving.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> there is so much speculation and made-up stuff about these two.  I'm pretty sure even with her ego, she would expect any meeting she would ever have with the king would include "H"
> 
> Unless, of course, she is "bonkers"


The last two times that Hazard was sent for family negotiations (Sandringham and pre-Netherlands), he didn't bring home the bacon (allegedly of course). If this request to meet with the King is true, she is going to do the job herself and do it right. "Watch how Mummy does it, Hawwy."


----------



## TimeToShop

Yes! Plus I learned a new word today.
calumny​ noun

cal·um·ny |  \ ˈka-ləm-nē   also ˈkal-yəm-  \
plural calumnies
Definition of calumny​1: a misrepresentation intended to harm another's reputation
      //denounced his opponent for his defamatory insinuations and calumny
2: the act of uttering false charges or misrepresentations maliciously calculated to harm another's reputation
     //He was the target of calumny for his unpopular beliefs.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> giving out sandwiches?  making speeches?


Yes.  He might think that's all it takes... that and lip service.

Anyway, my point being, he may not have taken the archbishop's comments personally. He might actually think he's doing a great job.


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


>



To her credit, she mastered the left eye. It's not her fault that her father didn't pay the lessons for the right one.


----------



## Jayne1

TimeToShop said:


> It does look like there’s something there. You’d think you’d want as smooth a silhouette as you could have. Especially if you’re going to be photographed near Kate.



Meg must know about the implications she is wired. So why actually do it and have it air on Netfl*x and prove the BRF and social media right?  If she did wear a wire, they will never let her in the palace again.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely didn't recognize him, in this photo he looked really young somehow.



Hat (looks as if he had hair)


----------



## Cinderlala

Sharont2305 said:


> Good shot of Harry now, with a huuuge candle blocking M.
> A Cape dress, she's a super hero now, is she?





bag-mania said:


> The candle is a hero.



The candle deserves the cape.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Meg must know about the implications she is wired. So why actually do it and have it air on Netfl*x and prove the BRF and social media right?  If she did wear a wire, they will never let her in the palace again.


She would say to protect herself from false statements, create a historical record for the invisikids, blah blah. 

Looks like he is saying, “who me? What did I do?”  YMMV


----------



## TimeToShop

Maybe? Or she has terribly fitting underwear?


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Um, yes, now we see why MM ‘requested’ a meeting.  Pointing his finger at the King?  That takes stupid to another level.


I think he is pointing at something else, farther away.  

I don't think he's rude and he's not that stupid. Stupid, but you know, not that stupid.


----------



## Cinderlala

I thought it was refreshing for TW to stop cosplaying others and dress like herself. Extra witchy with a side of smug.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Yes.  He might think that's all it takes... that and lip service.
> 
> Anyway, my point being, he may not have taken the archbishop's comments personally. He might actually think he's doing a great job.



He would be the _only_ one that didn't think the comment was pointed at him (and her). 

My office was buzzing with ref to_ that _comment to day and_ everyone _thought it was about the gruesome twosome


----------



## SouthTampa

I do not think I would want to be on Ann’s bad side!


----------



## SouthTampa

Sorry, Anne’s


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This refers to a CNN person that participated on the meeting that brought TW to the UK this time. It in spoiler and I think it is relatively interesting. 




Spoiler: Unexpected


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> She would say to protect herself from false statements, create a historical record for the invisikids, blah blah.
> 
> Looks like he is saying, “who me? What did I do?”  YMMV
> View attachment 5614284



Is he complaining to Anne?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This refers to a CNN person that participated on the meeting that brought TW to the UK this time. It in spoiler and I think it is relatively interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Unexpected




Is this the right link? It's a video discussing slavery and reparations? I see Harry's Grey Suit posted it but I don't fully get the connection.


----------



## lanasyogamama

They knew that TRF is too polite to confront them, they didn’t count on being frozen out.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> To her credit, she mastered the left eye. It's not her fault that her father didn't pay the lessons for the right one.


You are seeing a tear she’s wiping I see FU gesture to Harry’s family.


----------



## Lounorada

catlover46 said:


> *Meghan’s hat is too informal for a funeral.*





csshopper said:


> *My problem with the hat was not color or style but the material being too thin. In several photos light passes through it. Makes it appear cheap, like something from an end-of-season Summer Sale at a Clearance Center.*
> 
> I know that sounds picky, but respect for the Queen who valued hats and the historical enormity of this funeral merited the best. Remember one of her first outings with the Queen when she had been told protocol called for a hat and did not wear one? This, to me, felt similar. “I’ll wear one for the world wide cameras, but I don’t want to spend much on it, especially since that nasty man cut off my allowance.”


Exactly! Casual looking and the material was too flimsy and cheap. Nice hat for a holiday near the Mediterranean Sea, not for a formal state funeral.
The material of the dress looked cheap to me too and the exposed zip up around the neckline was amateurish.






lanasyogamama said:


> How long before TW announces a lawsuit against this candle?










TimeToShop said:


> This is sad. The way she scooches over to her mother when H tries to engage her. He could have been the fun uncle, now he’s the creepy one.



So awkward.


Just goes to show that JCMH is a stranger to those kids now. That's really sad.




BlueCherry said:


> One or both of Andrews girls left early. They were sitting together in the earlier service. Then Jack clearly and blatantly ignores Harry. Is there a possibility that Harry kicked up a fuss and took the girls seats? Or it could be because he was whining about Andrew being allowed the cypher and not him and this upset Andrews girls.





Toby93 said:


> Seems an odd thing to do in the middle of a state funeral.  They made a bit of a fuss and even the Archbishop looked back at them.


I spotted that too and thought it was very odd that they got up and appeared to leave in a hurry before the Queens coffin had left Westminster Abbey. Something must have happened to cause that reaction by both sisters...






TimeToShop said:


> The family is not playing with those two




Did Jack 'scarf' JCMH, but with his glasses? 





charlottawill said:


> Caught wearing a wire? A hidden camera in one of his medals?


I think it's as simple as them causing constant drama / throwing around demands / tantrums about wearing uniforms / having to be told how to behave when they should know damn well etc.
For the family having to tiptoe around them during a time when everyone is heartbroken, shocked and grieving it must have been so difficult to then have to be around two attention seeking, untrustworthy idiots who have already caused to much tension within a family and attacked the family as a whole while both grandparents were in ill-health for the last couple years of their lives. I'd say everyone in the RF is _sick _of them and this toxic, tiring, disgusting behaviour and it's starting to show, even though at the same time they are all relatively good at hiding their annoyance with Meg & Mog 




momtok said:


> Re: the last couple pages of CNN talk, and specifically it's coverage of QEII.
> 
> As of a few weeks ago, I intended to wait it out to see how these new changes continued to play out.  It's all *very* recent, and still very much in play.  The demotion on Lemon happened only within a few days before the Queen died, if that.  Might actually have been after she died -- this past week has been a blur.  But then everything switched to QEII, and someone I used to genuinely like -- *Amanpour -- just crossed a line for me.  And that genuinely saddened me when it happened.  Wrong place, really, *really* wrong time.  QEII had just died.  No.  Just absolutely no.  Now I'm hearing about these bizarre contortions for these two idiots?  Deep sigh.*


What did Amanpour say/do?




CarryOn2020 said:


> The speculation is she has been proven to be the leaker.  The BRF, especially William, know how to test loyalties.  This photo, mercy.



To be honest, JCMH body language looks like he's the one who's distancing himself from engaging with everyone else. Not that they are all ignoring him. He's the eternal victim so heaven forbid that he'd make an effort to be poilte, there are cameras watching e-v-e-r-y-w-h-e-r-e...
JCMH:


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is he complaining to Anne?


Maybe he is explaining how the BRF is “trapped” and he will lead them out of this horrible trap?


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> He would be the _only_ one that didn't think the comment was pointed at him (and her).
> 
> My office was buzzing with ref to_ that _comment to day and_ everyone _thought it was about the gruesome twosome


Yes, but look at his actions.  He threw away everything, and not just threw away, burned it to the ground.

You think he realizes what a fool he is or is he still so angry and petulant because he's not getting his way? I agree, he'd be the only one not realizing the comment was pointed at him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lounorada said:


> To be honest, JCMH body language looks like he's the one who's distancing himself from engaging with everyone else. Not that they are all ignoring him. He's the eternal victim so heaven forbid that he'd make an effort to be poilte, there are cameras watching e-v-e-r-y-w-h-e-r-e...
> JCMH:
> View attachment 5614307



This photo is before everyone leaves the Committal and Jack “glasses” him


----------



## sdkitty

nothing new here....Meghan supposedly requested a one-on-one meeting with the king.....uugh

in the picture here, she looks her age, in spite of all the tweaks she's probably done to her face









						King Charles Just Received an Unusual Formal Request from Meghan Markle, "Allegedly," Sources Claim
					

When Prince Harry first started dating Meghan Markle, it seemed that her relationship with her boyfriend's father was perfectly normal. Then, when Meghan's father backed out of coming to the huge wedding, King Charles stepped in and walked his future daughter-in-law down the aisle. Many assumed...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Oh, to be a fly on the wall for that conversation...
> 
> I'm sure if he says No, she will leak the convo to prove how un-okay she is.


I think this is part of their usual PR strategy. Stating that they have done something or asked for something that could never happen. She places herself in the victim position when she is refused. She claims she tried and he wouldn’t t give her the time of day. Is she going to claim racism on that as well.


----------



## BlueCherry

TimeToShop said:


> I did post this on the The Queen’s thread. Harry’s in it so I guess it can count here too. It made me bawl. So maybe don’t watch if you don’t want some tears. I thought it lovely and has a wee Outlander nod, appropriate with her love of Scotland.




So beautiful


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The candle seems to be here to stay in TW's path.



Protocol. He should have gone into the car before her.


----------



## BlueCherry

TimeToShop said:


> Yes! Plus I learned a new word today.
> calumny​noun
> 
> cal·um·ny |  \ ˈka-ləm-nē   also ˈkal-yəm-  \
> plural calumnies
> Definition of calumny​1: a misrepresentation intended to harm another's reputation
> //denounced his opponent for his defamatory insinuations and calumny
> 2: the act of uttering false charges or misrepresentations maliciously calculated to harm another's reputation
> //He was the target of calumny for his unpopular beliefs.




Maybe only the Brits will get this but I learned that word recently from Roy Cropper (Corrie)


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> KC has cleverly gone to Scotland, he will let things percolate forget a while


He did the same after PP ‘s funeral. Or was it Wales? Either way he and Camilla need a rest


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

BlueCherry said:


> Maybe only the Brits will get this but I learned that word recently from Roy Cropper (Corrie)


That’s a great word and old fashioned. I think it is right up there with my other favor, sedition.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> See the dark shadow ? Is she wearing the device around her waist?


Nothing would surprise me. Maybe it was up her bat sleeve.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice Kate’s eyes in the top photo.  _Something_ unpleasant happened.  Did they find the recording device?


Meghan is playing the optics game here. She stage managed this for later use  _They don’t like me!  They hate me!_  You get the idea.


----------



## TimeToShop

Whoa! Supposedly Doria and Thomas were invited to the funeral?


----------



## Jayne1

NM


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> She would say to protect herself from false statements, create a historical record for the invisikids, blah blah.
> 
> Looks like he is saying, “who me? What did I do?”
> View attachment 5614284


JCMH is telling them:”Look guys, you could be forking THIS much selling your dignity…ahem brand with My Wife! Meg has it all figured out


----------



## Jayne1

BlueCherry said:


> Maybe only the Brits will get this but I learned that word recently from Roy Cropper (Corrie)


I've learned a few things from Roy, except bats, not interested in bats.  (Corrie is very popular in Canada too.)


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> This photo is before everyone leaves the Committal and Jack “glasses” him



It was just brilliant. The Glassing Geek!


----------



## TimeToShop

BlueCherry said:


> Maybe only the Brits will get this but I learned that word recently from Roy Cropper (Corrie)



Well make that 2 things I’ve learned so far today. I had to look him up and learned about Coronation Street.


----------



## CobaltBlu

About crying.  When you are actually sad and crying, other things happen to your face and your nose gets a little red and it’s not just a tear dripping down your otherwise normal face.  Everyone’s cry face is different but hers is just her face but with a wet spot. I call shenanigans. 

About what she has on the RF. Either she doesn’t have anything, or they have worse on her. I don’t think she is free to drop anything without consequences.


----------



## rose60610

Have they left for the U.S. yet? Or is Claw going to stalk KC until she gets to speak with him (even if that means shrieking through an iron gate) or gets hauled off by security?


----------



## BlueCherry

Jayne1 said:


> I've learned a few things from Roy, except bats, not interested in bats.  (Corrie is very popular in Canada too.)



And trains lol. He has a genius vocabulary, second to Stephen Fry. Glad you’re enjoying Corrie over there


----------



## BlueCherry

gracekelly said:


> That’s a great word and old fashioned. I think it is right up there with my other favor, sedition.



That’s great too. Another old fashioned word I love is behove


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Meghan is playing the optics game here. She stage managed this for later use  _They don’t like me!  They hate me!_  You get the idea.


I've said this before - if someone is just looking at the photos, it looks like Meg is being ostracized. No one will talk to her.  And she's behaving so politely, not calling attention to herself or anything. She actually looks lonely.  (But sad, because we all saw the tear from her left eye.)

She can use this later.  The racist BRF refusing to let the only WOC in their inner circle.


BlueCherry said:


> And trains lol. He has a genius vocabulary, second to Stephen Fry. Glad you’re enjoying Corrie over there


True, but he hasn't talked about trains for a while, or even gone to the Cabin for his magazines.  lol


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> She would say to protect herself from false statements, create a historical record for the invisikids, blah blah.
> 
> Looks like he is saying, “who me? What did I do?”  YMMV
> View attachment 5614284



No word of a lie, my wife’s nose is THIS big


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

Jayne1 said:


> True, but he hasn't talked about trains for a while, or even gone to the Cabin for his magazines.  lol




That’s because Brian nicked his girlfriend


----------



## CarryOn2020

BlueCherry said:


> And trains lol. He has a genius vocabulary, second to Stephen Fry. Glad you’re enjoying Corrie over there


I’ll have to look for it. Always appreciate a good recommendation. Thank you.


----------



## gracekelly

BlueCherry said:


> That’s great too. Another old fashioned word I love is behove
> 
> View attachment 5614330


I thought I was having a dumb moment because I always thought it was spelled behoove. Turns out it both are correct!  Whew!  I feel so much better.  Now we can deal with spelled vs spelt. Lolololol!  Where you live is a spelling challenge like potato and “pahtato” for how it is spoken.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> The candle seems to be here to stay in TW's path.



Nervous valet- “I’m very sorry madam but I’m not sure it would stay lit if you did that…besides you might get wax on the duke’s only suit trousers”


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Nervous valet- “I’m very sorry madam but I’m not sure it would stay lit if you did that…besides you might get wax on the duke’s only suit trousers”


Speaking of trousers. I have to give points to Andrew for military bearing throughout even without a uniform. His suit was well fitted and immaculate. He stood next to Harry who was wearing his cheap renta-suit and after all that sitting, Andrew’s trousers were uncreased and Harry
looked like an unmade bed. Andrew always looked truly gutted and Harry was just mad and annoyed. _Darn it granny, you spoiled my fake royal tout!_


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> I think this is part of their usual PR strategy. Stating that they have done something or asked for something that could never happen. She places herself in the victim position when she is refused. She claims she tried and he wouldn’t t give her the time of day. Is she going to claim racism on that as well.


Yes.  IMO, this leaked 'story' is entirely fantasy.  I won't believe she asked to meet with anyone unless that person says it's true.


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> Yes.  IMO, this leaked 'story' is entirely fantasy.  I won't believe she asked to meet with anyone unless that person says it's true.


That’s the beauty  of these stunts for them. The family never responds and the tabloids eat stuff like this up and push it.


----------



## Sharont2305

TimeToShop said:


> Whoa! Supposedly Doria and Thomas were invited to the funeral?



I don't believe this for one second.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't believe this for one second.


Show me the guest list. I wasn’t  even sure that Earl Spencer would be there and he is their uncle. He was there with the whole family.


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> That’s the beauty  of these stunts for them. The family never responds and the tabloids eat stuff like this up and push it.


It's endless.  And endlessly annoying.


----------



## andrashik

rose60610 said:


> Have they left for the U.S. yet? Or is Claw going to stalk KC until she gets to speak with him (even if that means shrieking through an iron gate) or gets hauled off by security?


----------



## TimeToShop

gracekelly said:


> That’s a great word and old fashioned. I think it is right up there with my other favor, sedition.



Sedition. A word often heard these days in the US.


----------



## zinacef

Chanbal said:


> This refers to a CNN person that participated on the meeting that brought TW to the UK this time. It in spoiler and I think it is relatively interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Unexpected



.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

LemonDrop said:


> Harry fought in Afghanistan. Why does he not “deserve the honor of wearing a uniform”. In the US we honor our veterans. So that’s a bit confusing to me.


I do agree. Lots of ex servicemen wear uniforms and as a previous serving officer he should be allowed to wear it.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I do agree. Lots of ex servicemen wear uniforms and as a previous serving officer he should be allowed to wear it.


The law is different in the UK. Medals yes. Uniform no.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## momtok

Lounorada said:


> What did Amanpour say/do?



It was only one or two days after the official announcement of the Queen's death ... the coffin was still in Scotland at the time.  Amanpour became very animated and wanted to know *When!* Charles was going to work on reparations for the "colonies."

Alright, well first off, it wasn't the time.  And what I mean by that goes a lot deeper than some people presume.  I'm not merely talking about good manners.  When a reporter asks a question, they're supposed to be asking it because they expect a timely answer.  She knew darn well there was no way Charles had time to address *anything* other than the Queen's death for at least a week.  So why is a journalist making any demands -- about **any** topic -- *now*?  Is she actually expecting to receive an answer, or spur an action *now*?
Answer:  Because it wasn't news.  She just wanted to hear herself airing an opinion.  And she wanted her audience, to hear her airing an opinion.  To me, that's acting, not reporting the actual news.

Secondly, I thought this woman was educated.  Amanpour should know the difference between Parliamentary powers and monarchical powers.  Surely she knows who actually holds the purse strings?  So why is she demanding an answer from Charles about reparations, when she should be addressing Parliament?  I'm an American and even I know the difference.  Answer:  Again, it wasn't the news.  She was dramatically airing a grievance, and she hoped that the audience would just sit there and nod with her.  After all, the co-anchor sitting next to her was just sitting there nodding, so surely the audience would be too, right?  ..... Huh? .... What is this, sitting around chatting and nodding, or is it the news?  And as a sidenote, it particularly ticks me off that they just assume I'm going to sit there and blithely nod with them.  How about you people give me the news, and I'll form my *OWN* opinions, thank you very much.

Tired sigh.  If I turn to the news, then I want to know what's going on.  I want to know what has already happened, what's scheduled to come next, what *might* come next, and who has the legitimate ability to effect these events.  Her little fit was none of those things, and it wasn't even logical unless it was addressed to Parliament.  So yeah, my disappointment was magnified that it came from *her*.  I'd always thought her a well-educated, serious, even brave (considering where she sometimes traveled to) news reporter.  I don't need her giving me her *opinions* in the hopes that I'll just sit there and nod.

It was just the last straw for me.  I gave up and found my way to Sky News instead.  I'm still watching it now, and I'm actually NOT receiving soliloquies about what the anchor's personal feelings are.  It's news.  You hear interviews with average people affected by the stories, you hear interviews with people in office ... but those things actually are "the news."  I have yet to have someone perform a personal soliloquy for me from behind the anchor desk.  It feels not just more intelligent, but calmer as well.  I like it.


----------



## TimeToShop

The scarf. I have no knowledge of Hermes scarves so hopefully this is correct.


----------



## TimeToShop

Good thing he’s wearing a coat. Looks like he was frozen out. I know these could be cherry picked but they do look like they’re ignoring him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

momtok said:


> It was only one or two days after the official announcement of the Queen's death ... the coffin was still in Scotland at the time.  Amanpour became very animated and wanted to know *When!* Charles was going to work on reparations for the "colonies."
> 
> Alright, well first off, it wasn't the time.  And what I mean by that goes a lot deeper than some people presume.  I'm not merely talking about good manners.  When a reporter asks a question, they're supposed to be asking it because they expect a timely answer.  She knew darn well there was no way Charles had time to address *anything* other than the Queen's death for at least a week.  So why is a journalist making any demands -- about **any** topic -- *now*?  Is she actually expecting to receive an answer, or spur an action *now*?
> Answer:  Because it wasn't news.  She just wanted to hear herself airing an opinion.  And she wanted her audience, to hear her airing an opinion.  To me, that's acting, not reporting the actual news.
> 
> Secondly, I thought this woman was educated.  Amanpour should know the difference between Parliamentary powers and monarchical powers.  Surely she knows who actually holds the purse strings?  So why is she demanding an answer from Charles about reparations, when she should be addressing Parliament?  I'm an American and even I know the difference.  Answer:  Again, it wasn't the news.  She was dramatically airing a grievance, and she hoped that the audience would just sit there and nod with her.  The reporter who she was talking to was just sitting there nodding, so surely the audience would be too.  ..... Huh? .... What is this, sitting around chatting and nodding, or is it the news?  And as a sidenote, it particularly ticks me off that they just assume I'm going to sit there and blithely nod with them.  How about you people give me the news, and I'll form my *OWN* opinions, thank you very much.
> 
> Tired sigh.  If I turn to the news, then I want to know what's going on.  I want to know what has already happened, what's scheduled to come next, what *might* come next, and who has the legitimate ability to effect these events.  Her little fit was none of those things, and it wasn't even logical unless it was addressed to Parliament.  So yeah, my disappointment was magnified that it came from *her*.  I'd always thought her a well-educated, serious, even brave (considering where she sometimes traveled to) news reporter.  I don't need her giving me her *opinions* in the hopes that I'll just sit there and nod.
> 
> It was just the last straw for me.  I gave up and found my way to Sky News instead.  I'm still watching it now, and I'm actually NOT receiving soliloquies about what the anchor's personal feelings are.  It's news.  You hear interviews with average people affected by the stories, you hear interviews with people in office ... but those things actually are "the news."  I have yet to have someone perform a personal soliloquy for me from behind the anchor desk.  It feels not just more intelligent, but calmer as well.  I like it.


There.  You have explained quite eloquently why I do not watch the US stations - they are promoting their agenda and not reporting news.  I know we all have opinions, still please just give me news.  For this once in a lifetime event, I watched Sky news and BBC.  Bliss.


----------



## TimeToShop

CarryOn2020 said:


> There.  You have explained quite eloquently why I do not watch the US stations - they are promoting their agenda and not reporting news.  I know we all have opinions, still please just give me news.  For this once in a lifetime event, I watched Sky news and BBC.  Bliss.



I totally agree. I watched the BBC for coverage from the moment I saw the announcement about her declining health through yesterday’s services. I thought they did a wonderful job. There was no way I could listen to US channels and their “experts”.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> This photo is before everyone leaves the Committal and Jack “glasses” him


No one acknowledged their departure, although I’d bet the family members  were aware of it and at least internally sighing in relief at the toxic two’s exit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

TimeToShop said:


> Good thing he’s wearing a coat. Looks like he was frozen out. I know these could be cherry picked but they do look like they’re ignoring him.



It is difficult getting a story from the photos. The DM only printed a few of them. I found more by going to Getty Images, searching for Quadrangle Windsor Castle,  choose Newest for the Filter, and these popped up - not sure if the link works. Imo it looks like Hazz spotted a drone and that may have triggered him. Ya kno, he has had a problem with drones in Cali, allegedly. 





__





						Quadrangle Windsor  Castle Pictures and Photos - Getty Images
					

View and license Quadrangle Windsor  Castle pictures & news photos from Getty Images.



					www.gettyimages.com


----------



## WingNut

momtok said:


> It was only one or two days after the official announcement of the Queen's death ... the coffin was still in Scotland at the time.  Amanpour became very animated and wanted to know *When!* Charles was going to work on reparations for the "colonies."
> 
> Alright, well first off, it wasn't the time.  And what I mean by that goes a lot deeper than some people presume.  I'm not merely talking about good manners.  When a reporter asks a question, they're supposed to be asking it because they expect a timely answer.  She knew darn well there was no way Charles had time to address *anything* other than the Queen's death for at least a week.  So why is a journalist making any demands -- about **any** topic -- *now*?  Is she actually expecting to receive an answer, or spur an action *now*?
> Answer:  Because it wasn't news.  She just wanted to hear herself airing an opinion.  And she wanted her audience, to hear her airing an opinion.  To me, that's acting, not reporting the actual news.
> 
> Secondly, I thought this woman was educated.  Amanpour should know the difference between Parliamentary powers and monarchical powers.  Surely she knows who actually holds the purse strings?  So why is she demanding an answer from Charles about reparations, when she should be addressing Parliament?  I'm an American and even I know the difference.  Answer:  Again, it wasn't the news.  She was dramatically airing a grievance, and she hoped that the audience would just sit there and nod with her.  After all, the co-anchor sitting next to her was just sitting there nodding, so surely the audience would be too, right?  ..... Huh? .... What is this, sitting around chatting and nodding, or is it the news?  And as a sidenote, it particularly ticks me off that they just assume I'm going to sit there and blithely nod with them.  How about you people give me the news, and I'll form my *OWN* opinions, thank you very much.
> 
> Tired sigh.  If I turn to the news, then I want to know what's going on.  I want to know what has already happened, what's scheduled to come next, what *might* come next, and who has the legitimate ability to effect these events.  Her little fit was none of those things, and it wasn't even logical unless it was addressed to Parliament.  So yeah, my disappointment was magnified that it came from *her*.  I'd always thought her a well-educated, serious, even brave (considering where she sometimes traveled to) news reporter.  I don't need her giving me her *opinions* in the hopes that I'll just sit there and nod.
> 
> It was just the last straw for me.  I gave up and found my way to Sky News instead.  I'm still watching it now, and I'm actually NOT receiving soliloquies about what the anchor's personal feelings are.  It's news.  You hear interviews with average people affected by the stories, you hear interviews with people in office ... but those things actually are "the news."  I have yet to have someone perform a personal soliloquy for me from behind the anchor desk.  It feels not just more intelligent, but calmer as well.  I like it.


Amen. Times 100. I'm so sick of "opinion" being presented as news. It isn't. It's OPINION and a respected newscaster would keep it to him/her self.


----------



## TimeToShop

A picture really is worth 1,000 words. I hope they all get some time to truly grieve. Although I’m sure TW is grieving there will most likely not be a big payday.


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> The scarf. I have no knowledge of Hermes scarves so hopefully this is correct.











						Hermes Silk Scarf The Royal Mews - Buckingham Palace RARE
					

Carre de Paris - SOLD - Read about the Inspiration for this carre on my Hermes Scarf Blog. Visit this page for other HERMES Scarves, vintage, pre owned, rare and unworn.




					carredeparis.com


----------



## Vintage Leather

Lounorada said:


> Exactly! Casual looking and the material was too flimsy and cheap. Nice hat for a holiday near the Mediterranean Sea, not for a formal state funeral.
> The material of the dress looked cheap to me too and the exposed zip up around the neckline was amateurish.
> View attachment 5614308


On the Royalty Fashion thread, they found a report on the dress and hat. The dress is Stella McCartney, and the hat is Stephen Jones for Dior

She’s on-brand - cheap but expensive.

The sad part is, a good stylist would have directed her away from that disaster of a hat. It’s not the time and place and it looks awful in the close-up photographs.

 The Knight saw the pictures over my shoulders and asked if Catherine and Meghan was a “what I ordered, what I got” meme…


----------



## gracekelly

TimeToShop said:


> A picture really is worth 1,000 words. I hope they all get some time to truly grieve. Although I’m sure TW is grieving there will most likely not be a big payday.



Her face is hidden for the most part in this picture.  Shame?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Hermes Silk Scarf The Royal Mews - Buckingham Palace RARE
> 
> 
> Carre de Paris - SOLD - Read about the Inspiration for this carre on my Hermes Scarf Blog. Visit this page for other HERMES Scarves, vintage, pre owned, rare and unworn.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> carredeparis.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5614372


Maybe Hermes can reissue this one.  Worldwide, please, please let them reissue worldwide.  While they are at it, make one for King Charles, too.  Again, *worldwide. *


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> I don't believe this for one second.


Me either. Thomas and family would have had this all over the Internet and Lady C would have been offering lodging.


----------



## TimeToShop

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is difficult getting a story from the photos. The DM only printed a few of them. I found more by going to Getty Images, searching for Quadrangle Windsor Castle,  choose Newest for the Filter, and these popped up - not sure if the link works. Imo it looks like Hazz spotted a drone and that may have triggered him. Ya kno, he has had a problem with drones in Cali, allegedly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quadrangle Windsor  Castle Pictures and Photos - Getty Images
> 
> 
> View and license Quadrangle Windsor  Castle pictures & news photos from Getty Images.
> 
> 
> 
> www.gettyimages.com



It did work, thank you. Not totally frozen out but not a cozy dynamic either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

BlueCherry said:


> And the candle


Literally as well as figuratively.


----------



## Lounorada

momtok said:


> It was only one or two days after the official announcement of the Queen's death ... the coffin was still in Scotland at the time.  Amanpour became very animated and wanted to know *When!* Charles was going to work on reparations for the "colonies."
> 
> Alright, well first off, it wasn't the time.  And what I mean by that goes a lot deeper than some people presume.  I'm not merely talking about good manners.  When a reporter asks a question, they're supposed to be asking it because they expect a timely answer.  She knew darn well there was no way Charles had time to address *anything* other than the Queen's death for at least a week.  So why is a journalist making any demands -- about **any** topic -- *now*?  Is she actually expecting to receive an answer, or spur an action *now*?
> Answer:  Because it wasn't news.  She just wanted to hear herself airing an opinion.  And she wanted her audience, to hear her airing an opinion.  To me, that's acting, not reporting the actual news.
> 
> Secondly, I thought this woman was educated.  Amanpour should know the difference between Parliamentary powers and monarchical powers.  Surely she knows who actually holds the purse strings?  So why is she demanding an answer from Charles about reparations, when she should be addressing Parliament?  I'm an American and even I know the difference.  Answer:  Again, it wasn't the news.  She was dramatically airing a grievance, and she hoped that the audience would just sit there and nod with her.  After all, the co-anchor sitting next to her was just sitting there nodding, so surely the audience would be too, right?  ..... Huh? .... What is this, sitting around chatting and nodding, or is it the news?  And as a sidenote, it particularly ticks me off that they just assume I'm going to sit there and blithely nod with them.  How about you people give me the news, and I'll form my *OWN* opinions, thank you very much.
> 
> Tired sigh.  If I turn to the news, then I want to know what's going on.  I want to know what has already happened, what's scheduled to come next, what *might* come next, and who has the legitimate ability to effect these events.  Her little fit was none of those things, and it wasn't even logical unless it was addressed to Parliament.  So yeah, my disappointment was magnified that it came from *her*.  I'd always thought her a well-educated, serious, even brave (considering where she sometimes traveled to) news reporter.  I don't need her giving me her *opinions* in the hopes that I'll just sit there and nod.
> 
> It was just the last straw for me.  I gave up and found my way to Sky News instead.  I'm still watching it now, and I'm actually NOT receiving soliloquies about what the anchor's personal feelings are.  It's news.  You hear interviews with average people affected by the stories, you hear interviews with people in office ... but those things actually are "the news."  I have yet to have someone perform a personal soliloquy for me from behind the anchor desk.  It feels not just more intelligent, but calmer as well.  I like it.


Thanks for sharing this fantastically explained reply! 

After reading your post I have to agree with you completely and it's why I stopped watching CNN a while ago. Sky News is the only news channel I would watch now for 24/7 international news and it's all I watched for the past 10+ days for Royal coverage.
One night I switched over to CNN out of curiosity to see how they were reporting about the Royal Family after QEII died and I heard Erin Burnett call Catherine _'Kate [Middleton]'_, no titles, no full name- just 'Kate' and this was _after _KC had given her and William the Prince/Princess of Wales titles. The second I heard 'Kate' coming out of her mouth I switched off and didn't turn on the channel again. So unprofessional and so rude of her.

It's very disappointing to hear what C. Amanpour had to say just after the Queen had died. Wrong time, wrong place. I have seen/heard similar things brought up in other media outlets/social media since the Queen passed away and it's in really bad taste. Do people not know how to let the dust settle first before jumping into all that and if this was all so urgent to discuss, then why didn't they bring it up sooner, while she was alive? Like you said, people should be targeting Parliament if they have issues/concerns, not KC seeing as he is the monarch not the prime minister. Big big difference between the two that a lot of people don't seem to understand!


----------



## TimeToShop

csshopper said:


> Me either. Thomas and family would have had this all over the Internet and Lady C would have been offering lodging.



Not saying it’s true but perhaps the offer was made to Meghan and she said no to inviting her father. Doria tends to be quiet, so? That would have been something if the palace had invited Thomas behind her back and he showed up. Maybe a “Oops, we forgot to tell you. Our bad, here’s your dad!”


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> From DM:
> 
> View attachment 5614238


Edward and Andrew has his back to us.  Who's the guy next to Haz and William?


----------



## jennlt

gracekelly said:


> Her face is hidden for the most part in this picture.  Shame?


Somebody dropped a penny and she was thinking about picking it up. She's on a tight budget now.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Edward and Andrew has his back to us.  Who's the guy next to Haz and William?


Duke of Gloucester


----------



## charlottawill

Re the request for a private meeting, here's a thought -  what if she wants to make Charles a deal? As in, give me $20 million, I'll go away for good and surrender full custody of the kids to Harry. Her prince has turned into a frog, she's ready to move on but is looking for a safety net.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Edward and Andrew has his back to us.  Who's the guy next to Haz and William?


There is an unknown naval offficer far left front , white hat
Behind H are the Duke of Gloucester- blue hat and uniform, and Snowden - balding gray pate


----------



## TimeToShop

charlottawill said:


> Re the request for a private meeting, here's a thought -  what if she wants to make Charles a deal? As in, give me $20 million, I'll go away for good and surrender full custody of the kids to Harry. Her prince has turned into a frog, she's ready to move on but is looking for a safety net.



I think she’d want more money. She saw how much William has control of.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Eh,  think they’d rather play dirty using her past and the media.  I think they’d provide Harry (and the kids) with the best legal help money and connections can provide.  She has no real bargaining power here.


----------



## marietouchet

TimeToShop said:


> The scarf. I have no knowledge of Hermes scarves so hopefully this is correct.



Yes this is it


----------



## csshopper

TimeToShop said:


> It did work, thank you. Not totally frozen out but not a cozy dynamic either.


So he joined the group when he spied the drone?


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> Eh,  think they’d rather play dirty using her past and the media.  I think they’d provide Harry (and the kids) with the best legal help money and connections can provide.  She has no real bargaining power here.


But all their dirt will always be drowned out by her supporters' cries of racism. Sooner or later it's going to take a big check to get rid of her.


----------



## Lounorada

Vintage Leather said:


> On the Royalty Fashion thread, they found a report on the dress and hat. The dress is Stella McCartney, and the hat is Stephen Jones for Dior
> 
> She’s on-brand - cheap but expensive.
> 
> The sad part is, a good stylist would have directed her away from that disaster of a hat. It’s not the time and place and it looks awful in the close-up photographs.
> 
> * The Knight saw the pictures over my shoulders and asked if Catherine and Meghan was a “what I ordered, what I got” meme…*





Agreed! The hat was terrible in close-up pictures. If it was more structured and made with black velvet, it would have been a nice contrast with the dress and would have looked more luxurious. 
The hat was just as ugly when she wore it in white a few months ago, it reminded me of a really cheap easter bonnet-like hat I had as a kid in my dress-up box, only mine cost less than $5 and hers was 'Stephen Jones for Dior' and probably cost as much as a 1st class flight from London to Los Angeles  The fool hasn't a clue!
She'd be a stylist's nightmare; I'd be shocked if she even has one. She's tOo GrEaT to be told what to wear... as long as it costs lots of money- it's perfect!


----------



## TC1

Last time I checked..U.S.A is not part of the Monarchy, so perhaps reporters can keep their opinions to themselves about what KC should or shouldn't do


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

momtok said:


> It was only one or two days after the official announcement of the Queen's death ... the coffin was still in Scotland at the time.  Amanpour became very animated and wanted to know *When!* Charles was going to work on reparations for the "colonies."
> 
> Alright, well first off, it wasn't the time.  And what I mean by that goes a lot deeper than some people presume.  I'm not merely talking about good manners.  When a reporter asks a question, they're supposed to be asking it because they expect a timely answer.  She knew darn well there was no way Charles had time to address *anything* other than the Queen's death for at least a week.  So why is a journalist making any demands -- about **any** topic -- *now*?  Is she actually expecting to receive an answer, or spur an action *now*?
> Answer:  Because it wasn't news.  She just wanted to hear herself airing an opinion.  And she wanted her audience, to hear her airing an opinion.  To me, that's acting, not reporting the actual news.
> 
> Secondly, I thought this woman was educated.  Amanpour should know the difference between Parliamentary powers and monarchical powers.  Surely she knows who actually holds the purse strings?  So why is she demanding an answer from Charles about reparations, when she should be addressing Parliament?  I'm an American and even I know the difference.  Answer:  Again, it wasn't the news.  She was dramatically airing a grievance, and she hoped that the audience would just sit there and nod with her.  After all, the co-anchor sitting next to her was just sitting there nodding, so surely the audience would be too, right?  ..... Huh? .... What is this, sitting around chatting and nodding, or is it the news?  And as a sidenote, it particularly ticks me off that they just assume I'm going to sit there and blithely nod with them.  How about you people give me the news, and I'll form my *OWN* opinions, thank you very much.
> 
> Tired sigh.  If I turn to the news, then I want to know what's going on.  I want to know what has already happened, what's scheduled to come next, what *might* come next, and who has the legitimate ability to effect these events.  Her little fit was none of those things, and it wasn't even logical unless it was addressed to Parliament.  So yeah, my disappointment was magnified that it came from *her*.  I'd always thought her a well-educated, serious, even brave (considering where she sometimes traveled to) news reporter.  I don't need her giving me her *opinions* in the hopes that I'll just sit there and nod.
> 
> It was just the last straw for me.  I gave up and found my way to Sky News instead.  I'm still watching it now, and I'm actually NOT receiving soliloquies about what the anchor's personal feelings are.  It's news.  You hear interviews with average people affected by the stories, you hear interviews with people in office ... but those things actually are "the news."  I have yet to have someone perform a personal soliloquy for me from behind the anchor desk.  It feels not just more intelligent, but calmer as well.  I like it.


I'm not going to get into what I think about reparations....for one thing, it's complicated and for another, it's probably political.  But I will say I believe PBS radio is an excellent source of news and they interviewed a woman a few days ago on this subject.  I'm actually surprised it hasn't come up on this forum before.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CobaltBlu said:


> The law is different in the UK. Medals yes. Uniform no.


I think all men should wear uniforms


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> "Brave" now joins "sweet nod" and "special bond" as a determining characteristic of her? What a hoot!
> 
> It's a letter - to tug at heartstrings?
> 
> ETA The Daily Mail article says one always requests an audience with the monarch using a letter. So maybe not the heartstrings this time.


Did she write in her special calligraphy ?


----------



## Cinderlala

Toby93 said:


> Did she write in her special calligraphy ?


Yes, her imaginary calligraphy.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> There is an unknown naval offficer far left front , white hat
> Behind H are the Duke of Gloucester- blue hat and uniform, and Snowden - balding gray pate


It's Snowdon.


----------



## Sharont2305

Ali-bagpuss said:


> I think all men should wear uniforms


Like @CobaltBlu said, the law is different here in the UK.


----------



## BlueCherry

purseinsanity said:


> Edward and Andrew has his back to us.  Who's the guy next to Haz and William?



He looks like Lieutenant Commander Rob Dixon, who’s been Prince William's equerry since 2020. He’s touted as the new Major Jonny Thompson **


----------



## elvisfan4life

Vintage Leather said:


> On the Royalty Fashion thread, they found a report on the dress and hat. The dress is Stella McCartney, and the hat is Stephen Jones for Dior
> 
> She’s on-brand - cheap but expensive.
> 
> The sad part is, a good stylist would have directed her away from that disaster of a hat. It’s not the time and place and it looks awful in the close-up photographs.
> 
> The Knight saw the pictures over my shoulders and asked if Catherine and Meghan was a “what I ordered, what I got” meme…


Must be how Harry feels so jealous of William in every way


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> It's Snowdon.


The Earl has not been seen wearing a uniform during these events.  As far as I can read, he was never in the military and has no appointments/patronages.


----------



## Toby93

KEG66 said:


> That would make sense and also explain how there was such a clear photograph of her single tear.


Everyone else cried during the actual funeral service, which is normal.  TW waited until she stepped out of the church where she knew the world's cameras would all be directed at them, and let that one tear fall.  In case anyone missed it, she wiped it away with her odd black opera gloves.  Who cries out of one eye?


----------



## Mendocino

gracekelly said:


> Show me the guest list. I wasn’t  even sure that Earl Spencer would be there and he is their uncle. He was there with the whole family.


The Queen was his godmother.


----------



## TimeToShop

Sharont2305 said:


> Like @CobaltBlu said, the law is different here in the UK.



I read this as all men should wear uniforms - because they look good in them, not as what is the law/rule. Need a facepalm emoji.


----------



## Toby93

TimeToShop said:


> It does look like there’s something there. You’d think you’d want as smooth a silhouette as you could have. Especially if you’re going to be photographed near Kate.



I wonder why they think that a recording of conversations would be of use to anyone?  At the walkabout, there would have been so much background noise so could you really hear anything?  I thought it was illegal to record someone without their permission anyway?


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

Sharont2305 said:


> Like @CobaltBlu said, the law is different here in the UK.


Yeah I know, I meant I like a man in uniform lol


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> The Earl has not been seen wearing a uniform during these events.  As far as I can read, he was never in the military and has no appointments/patronages.


You're right, as far as I know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Someone please are tell me they have gone


----------



## Sharont2305

elvisfan4life said:


> Someone please are tell me they have gone


I hope so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> The scarf. I have no knowledge of Hermes scarves so hopefully this is correct.




I love Emma so much, especially after I learned she's a senior as well.



WingNut said:


> Amen. Times 100. I'm so sick of "opinion" being presented as news. It isn't. It's OPINION and a respected newscaster would keep it to him/her self.



I had a whole class in university called "Information and Opinion". It was enlightening. Obviously when someone just rants to the camera it's easier to spot.



TimeToShop said:


> I think she’d want more money. She saw how much William has control of.



Sure, but William doesn't have one billion in cash. Most of it is tied up in property.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but William doesn't have one billion in cash. Most of it is tied up in property.


it probably galls the spare and the WIFE though


----------



## kipp

In case everyone missed it---seen first on IG Marklenews1: 








						Inside Meghan Markle’s royal flop
					

For all their striving, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just don’t have it. Britain has realized this — and Hollywood is starting to realize




					spectatorworld.com
				



Worth a read!


----------



## scarlet555

kipp said:


> In case everyone missed it---seen first on IG Marklenews1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s royal flop
> 
> 
> For all their striving, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just don’t have it. Britain has realized this — and Hollywood is starting to realize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectatorworld.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worth a read!


Cannot access, but would appreciate snippets.   Yes, wake up hollywood!


----------



## DL Harper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice Kate’s eyes in the top photo.  _Something_ unpleasant happened.  Did they find the recording device?


Unpleasant - Absolutely! Charlotte & George told mom and grandmother they just saw a witch standing near them, giving them an eerie smile.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Re the request for a private meeting, here's a thought -  what if she wants to make Charles a deal? As in, give me $20 million, I'll go away for good and surrender full custody of the kids to Harry. Her prince has turned into a frog, she's ready to move on but is looking for a safety net.


I think it’s too late. Would Charles want him back after what was said in the Oprah interview? Not enough to pay a cent. Harry should be begging forgiveness, not being sold back to his father.


----------



## miss_chiff

scarlet555 said:


> Cannot access, but would appreciate snippets.   Yes, wake up hollywood!


----------



## needlv

scarlet555 said:


> Cannot access, but would appreciate snippets.   Yes, wake up hollywood!



Try clicking here: https://archive.ph/sD5ZB

it doesn’t have the paywall.


----------



## CobaltBlu

scarlet555 said:


> Cannot access, but would appreciate snippets.   Yes, wake up hollywood!





> Harry and Meghan’s attempts to manufacture friendship have continued. Last year Prince Harry, seemingly desperate to let the world know that he was in with the Montecito crowd, told Dax Shepard on his _Armchair Expert_ podcast that the pair had struck up a friendship with neighbors Orlando Bloom and his partner Katy Perry. Harry said, “just two days ago Orlando Bloom sent me a message because he’s down the road,” adding that the pair “keep in touch.” But an LA source claimed that “despite what they want you to think, Orlando Bloom and Harry are nowhere near being close friends.”
> 
> Unsurprisingly, the wedge between the pair is down to Meghan, who, a source reports, “is still angry about Katy Perry’s interview,” where the singer said that Meghan would have been well-served by another wedding-dress fitting. The source added that “the men are trying to stay out of it and although they are being cordial and kind to one another, they are certainly not going to the local bar together for a pint.” *It can’t help that Perry added in the interview that “Kate won” the wedding dress sweepstakes*.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I think it’s too late. Would Charles want him back after what was said in the Oprah interview? Not enough to pay a cent. Harry should be begging forgiveness, not being sold back to his father.


I agree, but you never know. Parents can be very forgiving. Charles is probably at a vulnerable point right now after losing both his parents in little over a year's time. He may be feeling sentimental and might like the idea of Harry and the kids settling in at Frogmore and growing up with their cousins. Maybe Harry even finding a nice but not too bright British girl to marry and live a quieter life. But I guess that's what Camilla and William are there for, to talk sense into him when necessary.


----------



## Jayne1

Vintage Leather said:


> On the Royalty Fashion thread, they found a report on the dress and hat. The dress is Stella McCartney


Isn't that the same dress she wore in white a while back? Stella McCartney gets a lot more favourable press than I ever thought she deserved.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Isn't that the same dress she wore in white a while back? Stella McCartney gets a lot more favourable press than I ever thought she deserved.


Another one who got a career boost because of her name.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I agree, but you never know. Parents can be very forgiving. Charles is probably at a vulnerable point right now after losing both his parents in little over a year's time. He may be feeling sentimental and might like the idea of Harry and the kids settling in at Frogmore and growing up with their cousins. Maybe Harry even finding a nice but not too bright British girl to marry and live a quieter life. But I guess that's what Camilla and William are there for, to talk sense into him when necessary.


Hmmm yeah $20m is in the ballpark of what MM will want

But put that in context, the Sovereign Grant is like £85M/yr and pays for all the building renovation costs - BIG ticket item - and the staffs - it is not a bucket of money that goes unspent

Yes, there is some unknown amount of personal wealth somewhere in cash, but the bulk of the billions comes from real estate that cannot be sold. Supposedly QEII paid £3M for Andrew’s lawsuit , a lot less than $20M 

IMHO KC a would be hard pressed to pay $20M, even on the installment plan 



			https://www.royal.uk/financial-reports-2021-22


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> Another one who got a career boost because of her name.


They’re now known as Nepo Babies!


----------



## miss_chiff

needlv said:


> Try clicking here: https://archive.ph/sD5ZB
> 
> it doesn’t have the paywall.


Really is a good article, thx for full article link!


----------



## youngster

From that Spectator Article.  Thanks for posting the link @kipp!
_Gossip extraordinaire Perez Hilton told me that he never believed the Sussexes stepped aside because they wanted more privacy: “It was more of a desire to call their own shots.” But no one seems to have told them that what they wanted — to be the Clooneys or the Obamas — was not something that could merely be bought._

And this:
_The Sussexes’ flop can’t be traced back to a single event; it’s the sum of a series of mistakes fueled by a failure to understand royalty and celebrity. When the actress moved to a palace, she brought with her a showbiz appetite for drama. Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace briefly hosted something akin to a Real Housewives spin-off: the starlet and her team dreamed up personality clashes and confected plotlines and fed them to the London newspapers. But the day-to-day job of a modern royal is gloriously glamour-free. It’s about opening schools and chatting to nurses. There is a relentless focus on celebrating, and spending time with, the little people. It takes a certain type of person — willing to smile, wave and do little else — to marry into the Firm. As the very high royal divorce rate of the last thirty years will tell you, not many are cut out for it.  Now the Sussexes are discovering that the reverse is true, too: you cannot simply take a prince to Hollywood and expect him to become a star. Their fame stems from both royalty and celebrity, but they’re not the same thing._

And this:
_Perez Hilton summed up the feeling in Hollywood : “They are not our royals. We don’t have any allegiance to them. We don’t have any reverence for them. We will not curtsy in front of them. To us, they are just celebrities.” That’s the problem with mixing monarchy with celebrity: the two worlds overlap — but they are not the same. Meghan and Harry claim to have one foot in both. Increasingly, they aren’t welcome in either._


----------



## Hyacinth

kipp said:


> In case everyone missed it---seen first on IG Marklenews1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s royal flop
> 
> 
> For all their striving, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just don’t have it. Britain has realized this — and Hollywood is starting to realize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectatorworld.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worth a read!



_"... Every streaming-service deal has invited quiet sniggers, every ill-judged interview and profile-raising event now brings with it a mixture of pity and irritation. These corporations are learning that they are getting little bang for their buck. Over the last few months there have been whispers of Spotify growing more frustrated with Duchess Dolittle after the $25 million deal that went public in December 2020 only yielded one thirty-three-minute Christmas episode..._

_It seems like a stern word may have worked, as we recently saw the much-awaited launch of Meghan’s new podcast Archetypes. Meghan calls the podcast a place “where we investigate, dissect and subvert the labels that try to hold women back”; her first special guest was the notably downtrodden Serena Williams. Listeners were offered little more than the Meghan show, with the Duchess managing to talk for eleven minutes straight before her guest got a word in edgeways."_

"Duchess Dolittle". I LOVE IT! 

Great article and Highly Recommended.


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> In case everyone missed it---seen first on IG Marklenews1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s royal flop
> 
> 
> For all their striving, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just don’t have it. Britain has realized this — and Hollywood is starting to realize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectatorworld.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worth a read!


Excellent article, this sums up her increasingly desperate situation:

"There is no doubt that if he returned, Harry would be welcomed by his family — and the British people — with open arms. But for Meghan, the game could well and truly be up." 

I can't wait to see KC's next move.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> IMHO KC a would be hard pressed to pay $20M, even on the installment plan



I'm sure British financial institutions would happily lend KC the money at a very favorable rate to rid the country of her.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I agree, but you never know. Parents can be very forgiving. Charles is probably at a vulnerable point right now after losing both his parents in little over a year's time. He may be feeling sentimental and might like the idea of Harry and the kids settling in at Frogmore and growing up with their cousins. Maybe Harry even finding a nice but not too bright British girl to marry and live a quieter life. But I guess that's what Camilla and William are there for, to talk sense into him when necessary.


True but Harry isn’t asking for help. As far as we know he and Meghan are still in lockstep. A vulnerable Charles might be furious at anyone who tried to make any part of the Queen’s funeral about himself by, say, fussing until he was allowed to wear a uniform for example.


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means…







						Today's Blind Items - The Document
					

Before the events of earlier this month, all the claims to the throne by this particular family, could be treated like background noise. No ...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means…
> View attachment 5614501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Document
> 
> 
> Before the events of earlier this month, all the claims to the throne by this particular family, could be treated like background noise. No ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Huh?


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means…
> View attachment 5614501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Document
> 
> 
> Before the events of earlier this month, all the claims to the throne by this particular family, could be treated like background noise. No ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Read the comments on this blind item.  Super fun!  There are some people who really know their UK history.  Nobody seems to know what "document" this blind item is referring to, other than perhaps a document that "proves" the illegitimacy of Edward IV about 600 years ago, which would have completely changed history and who inherited the throne and when.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means…
> View attachment 5614501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Document
> 
> 
> Before the events of earlier this month, all the claims to the throne by this particular family, could be treated like background noise. No ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Sounds like someone's imagination has gone into overdrive.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Read the comments on this blind item.  Super fun!  There are some people who really know their UK history.  Nobody seems to know what "document" this blind item is referring to, other than perhaps a document that "proves" the illegitimacy of Edward IV about 600 years ago, which would have completely changed history and who inherited the throne and when.


"***** has it at Mar-a-Lago, but it's ok, he declassified it, honest."


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 1LV

Toby93 said:


> Everyone else cried during the actual funeral service, which is normal.  TW waited until she stepped out of the church where she knew the world's cameras would all be directed at them, and let that one tear fall.  In case anyone missed it, she wiped it away with her odd black opera gloves.  *Who cries out of one eye?*


Lisa Rinna!  Bunny Gate. Real Housewives of Beverly Hills.  She’s why I stopped watching.


----------



## Straight-Laced

Who cries out of one eye?  

In her own words :
'I can do that so well. It's crazy -  "Meghan, one tear, left eye. Go!"  Gimme three seconds.'

Has this been posted since the funeral ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF. She also got to keep her apartment in Kensington Palace and a yearly sum to maintain her office. She was married to the Heir to the Throne in addition to being the mother of a future king. Fergie got a much smaller divorce settlement from Andrew in 1996. Something in the neighborhood of 2 million pounds. So TW being married to the spare and not the heir may not get $20 million or more. Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property. So if they acquired substantial assets after their marriage, TW should do well in a divorce. However, if the rumors are true and they really are in financial difficulty, there might not be much property/ assets to split up. Child support would be another source of contention. Any attorneys on this thread please feel free to correct if I got anything wrong.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sophisticatted

The Queen gave Charles money for Diana’s divorce settlement.  He didn’t have it then.  Who knows who has what and how much now.


----------



## momtok

youngster said:


> Read the comments on this blind item.  Super fun!  There are some people who really know their UK history.  Nobody seems to know what "document" this blind item is referring to, other than perhaps a document that "proves" the illegitimacy of Edward IV about 600 years ago, which would have completely changed history and who inherited the throne and when.



Personally, I think the whole matter is irrelevant in this day and age, and I would see no actual danger to the status quo in *practicality*,

 .... BUT ....

OMG, did anyone else catch this line in the comment section? 

From someone named "Occasional Badger" ...
"So Meghan Markle may not be "really royal". Is the world ready for this bombshell? No wonder they 'lost' the incriminating document."

BAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## WingNut

Straight-Laced said:


> Who cries out of one eye?
> 
> In her own words :
> 'I can do that so well. It's crazy -  "Meghan, one tear, left eye. Go!"  Gimme three seconds.'
> 
> Has this been posted since the funeral ?



I couldn’t watch the whole thing. My God she’s insufferable…


----------



## Toby93

Duplicate


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF. She also got to keep her apartment in Kensington Palace and a yearly sum to maintain her office. She was married to the Heir to the Throne in addition to being the mother of a future king. Fergie got a much smaller divorce settlement from Andrew in 1996. Something in the neighborhood of 2 million pounds. So TW being married to the spare and not the heir may not get $20 million or more. Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property. So if they acquired substantial assets after their marriage, TW should do well in a divorce. However, if the rumors are true and they really are in financial difficulty, there might not be much property/ assets to split up. Child support would be another source of contention. Any attorneys on this thread please feel free to correct if I got anything wrong.


I had read in several books and articles that Diana got £17 million and was allowed to *reside* in KP. She lost her HRH and even though it was in the divorce agreement, she was denied the royal jet for a lot of her trips. She ended up borrowing a private plane from her many rich acquaintances who were happy to lend.

As you have said, the only reason she got as much as she got was because she was the mother of the future king.  TW should pick up a book once in a while.  She told a friend that she had "gone deeply into Harrys life" before she met him, but she should have studied up on what was involved in becoming a member of the BRF.  She should look to Fergie as a cautionary tale.  She was married to the spare, but came out of it with next to nothing.


----------



## Jayne1

Sophisticatted said:


> The Queen gave Charles money for Diana’s divorce settlement.  He didn’t have it then.  Who knows who has what and how much now.


Almost full circle.  The Queen gave Charles his divorce money to give to Diana who in turn gave it to Harry.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> I had read in several books and articles that Diana got £17 million and was allowed to *reside* in KP. She lost her HRH and even though it was in the divorce agreement, she was denied the royal jet for a lot of her trips. She ended up borrowing from her many rich acquaintances who were happy to lend.


Why borrow from rich friends when you have £17 million and what kind of friends happily give to a woman with £17 million in the bank with no added housing/rental costs.


----------



## Straight-Laced

WingNut said:


> I couldn’t watch the whole thing. My God she’s insufferable…


It’s hard to watch. The smugness is overwhelming.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Read the comments on this blind item.  Super fun!  There are some people who really know their UK history.  Nobody seems to know what "document" this blind item is referring to, other than perhaps a document that "proves" the illegitimacy of Edward IV about 600 years ago, which would have completely changed history and who inherited the throne and when.


I laughed my head off over this.  I especially like the suggestion that the document might be at a certain home in Palm Beach.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



I don't know who Janina Gavankar is but she strikes me as an MM clone. Birds of a feather I guess.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Why borrow from rich friends when you have £17 million and what kind of friends happily give to a woman with £17 million in the bank with no added housing/rental costs.


Richer friends who looked at her and thought, "Poor thing really got scr*wed in the divorce, how will she get by on that amount?".


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF. She also got to keep her apartment in Kensington Palace and a yearly sum to maintain her office. She was married to the Heir to the Throne in addition to being the mother of a future king. Fergie got a much smaller divorce settlement from Andrew in 1996. Something in the neighborhood of 2 million pounds. So TW being married to the spare and not the heir may not get $20 million or more. Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property. So if they acquired substantial assets after their marriage, TW should do well in a divorce. However, if the rumors are true and they really are in financial difficulty, there might not be much property/ assets to split up. Child support would be another source of contention. Any attorneys on this thread please feel free to correct if I got anything wrong.


Good analysis - agree probably not a lot of post wedding community property to divide
I think the issue would be alimony , child support and/or settlement for giving up rights to the children

Ps another might be the book , Netflix and Spotify contracts - they might be liabilities given how little was produced and the purported down payments for product


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> "gone deeply into Harrys life"


Translation: A lot of late night Googling in bed while eating Oreos.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## tiktok

Jayne1 said:


> Why borrow from rich friends when you have £17 million and what kind of friends happily give to a woman with £17 million in the bank with no added housing/rental costs.


People who want to stay close to the glamour / prestige. She was an icon after all. MM not so much…


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Translation: A lot of late night Googling in bed while eating Oreos.


And drinking Tignanello. Oh, I’m sorry I meant The Tig!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## StylishMD

Chanbal said:


> This refers to a CNN person that participated on the meeting that brought TW to the UK this time. It in spoiler and I think it is relatively interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Unexpected



What is your point here? Why is a discussion of slavery relevant to this thread?


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't know the history behind the bracelet


----------



## Katel

Cinderlala said:


> I thought it was refreshing for TW to stop cosplaying others and dress like herself. Extra witchy with a side of smug.



This is a copy of a blue one she wore that is a copy of Ivanka T (there’s a montage of all these cosplay inspirations, I’m not sure where I saw it).


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> And drinking Tignanello. Oh, I’m sorry I meant The Tig!


Sigh. I used to love Tignanello. I even visited the Antinori winery in Tuscany several years ago. I wasn’t even aware TW had a blog until I read about it on this thread including why she named her blog The Tig. I haven’t been able to being myself to drink any of the bottles I have in storage since then


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know the history behind the bracelet



I don't understand why she is so attached to a bracelet from her first husband. If she were considerate of her current husband's feelings, haha, she'd retire it. She could donate it to a charity auction and get some positive press.


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> Why borrow from rich friends when you have £17 million and what kind of friends happily give to a woman with £17 million in the bank with no added housing/rental costs.


I meant to say she borrowed a *private jet *from rich acquaintances.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I don't understand why she is so attached to a bracelet from her first husband. If she were considerate of her current husband's feelings, haha, she'd retire it. She could donate it to a charity auction and get some positive press.


Hazz may not know that the bracelet was a gift from an ex-husband. I recall to have read that several copies of the Tom Bower's book were delivered to Frogmore, but I'm not sure if the bracelet story was there.


----------



## charlottawill

Me neither....


----------



## Hyacinth

WingNut said:


> I couldn’t watch the whole thing. My God she’s insufferable…



I lasted 35 seconds.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Read the comments on this blind item.  Super fun!  There are some people who really know their UK history.  Nobody seems to know what "document" this blind item is referring to, other than perhaps a document that "proves" the illegitimacy of Edward IV about 600 years ago, which would have completely changed history and who inherited the throne and when.





gracekelly said:


> I laughed my head off over this.  I especially like the suggestion that the document might be at a certain home in Palm Beach.


Today is the day of crazy stories. A very crazy one is in Spoiler. I wonder if it's one of the 'truth bombs' for Hazz's book. 



Spoiler: One more






			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/kings-alleged-love-child-simon-dorantedays-next-move/news-story/fed3efe1502436667e7a20513155391f


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means…
> View attachment 5614501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Document
> 
> 
> Before the events of earlier this month, all the claims to the throne by this particular family, could be treated like background noise. No ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


I'm sorry to be Haz level stupid, but WTF are they talking about?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Well, at my FIL's funeral last year, I wore a smokey (the smokier the better) cat eye and a bright red lip so I could garner as much attention from grieving MIL as I could.


Not.



charlottawill said:


> Translation: A lot of late night Googling in bed while eating Oreos.


Don't forget the Tignanello wine 



bag-mania said:


> And drinking Tignanello. Oh, I’m sorry I meant The Tig!


Damn you beat me to it!!  



charlottawill said:


> I don't understand why she is so attached to a bracelet from her first husband. If she were considerate of her current husband's feelings, haha, she'd retire it. She could donate it to a charity auction and get some positive press.


It's probably used as a means of manipulation.


----------



## momtok

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sorry to be Haz level stupid, but WTF are they talking about?


Oh I've seen stories of that guy before.  He claims he's Charles' and Camilla's love child from when the current King/Queen were children.  let me type another post in just a second.

OOOPS ... that should have been from when Charles/Camilla were TEENAGERS


----------



## momtok

Chanbal said:


> Today is the day of crazy stories. A very crazy one is in Spoiler. I wonder if it's one of the 'truth bombs' for Hazz's book.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: One more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/kings-alleged-love-child-simon-dorantedays-next-move/news-story/fed3efe1502436667e7a20513155391f


Yeah, I've heard of that guy before.  I actually feel sorry for him, because I think he's a little "touched in the head."
Camilla and Charles both have blue eyes.  This guy has brown eyes, yet he claims he's their long lost love child.
Blue eyes means two recessive blue genes.  Which means any biological kids Camilla and Charles would produce would only receive recessive blue genes, and thus would have to be blue themselves.
Or to look at it a different way, brown is dominant.  If you you have one brown gene and one blue gene, your eyes will be brown.  For him to be brown, he has to have at least one dominant brown gene, that dominant brown gene had to have come from a parent --- who would then have had to have been brown eyed as well.

When confronted with this biological issue, he claimed that they forced him into a mysterious surgery, in the early 1970s mind you, to change his eye color to brown.
Um .... yeah.  In the seventies. 
Sigh.

Like I said, I kind of feel sorry for him, because I think there's something deeply off in his head.


----------



## momtok

I should also add that when people said they could find no proof of such surgery, or even a surgery at the time that could do something like that, his insistence was that "well it must have happened because one of my lenses is differently shaped than the other.  What else could have done that but some sort of surgery on my eyes?"  (Paraphrasing from memory of having read that a year or two ago.  I do recall it was lenses being either different shape or different size.)  (In other words, he's saying that an asymmetry as a result of a natural error in growth, could not possibly have caused different size, shape.  It must have been a surgery!  Which means it must have been the surgery that changed him from blue to brown! ... Again, in the early 1970s.)

... .... Yeah.     :-/
See what I mean?


----------



## purseinsanity

momtok said:


> Yeah, I've heard of that guy before.  I actually feel sorry for him, because I think he's a little "touched in the head."
> Camilla and Charles both have blue eyes.  This guy has brown eyes, yet he claims he's their long lost love child.
> Blue eyes means two recessive blue genes.  Which means any biological kids Camilla and Charles would produce would only receive recessive blue genes, and thus would have to be blue themselves.
> Or to look at it a different way, brown is dominant.  If you you have one brown gene and one blue gene, your eyes will be brown.  For him to be brown, he has to have at least one dominant brown gene, that dominant brown gene had to have come from a parent --- who would then have had to have been brown eyed as well.
> 
> When confronted with this biological issue, he claimed that they forced him into a mysterious surgery, in the early 1970s mind you, to change his eye color to brown.
> Um .... yeah.  In the seventies.
> Sigh.
> 
> Like I said, I kind of feel sorry for him, because I think there's something deeply off in his head.


He's probably a quack, but eye color is not so easy.
My DH has very blue eyes.  My eyes are browner than a cow's.  Both of my children have green, cat like eyes.  I have distant relatives with green and blue eyes, but my immediate family all have brown.  My brother also married a Caucasian and she actually also has brown eyes like my brother (her father has blue and her mother has brown).  Their three children have hazel, brown, and piercingly blue eyes.  The one with blue eyes looks like a Viking, and besides my brother being almost 6' tall, he has nothing Scandinavian about him.  You just never know!


----------



## momtok

purseinsanity said:


> He's probably a quack, but eye color is not so easy.
> My DH has very blue eyes.  My eyes are browner than a cow's.  Both of my children have green, cat like eyes.  I have distant relatives with green and blue eyes, but my immediate family all have brown.  My brother also married a Caucasian and she actually also has brown eyes like my brother (her father has blue and her mother has brown).  Their three children have hazel, brown, and piercingly blue eyes.  The one with blue eyes looks like a Viking, and besides my brother being almost 6' tall, he has nothing Scandinavian about him.  You just never know!


"My DH has very blue eyes.  My eyes are browner than a cow's.  Both of my children have green, cat like eyes."
Green and blue do have different ways of mixing, if a child gets one recessive green from one parent and one recessive blue from a different parent.  But all that means is that you must have one dominant brown gene (B), which is why you display brown, and either one recessive green (g) or one recessive blue (b) floating around in your genes.  So you're either Bg or Bb, but since brown is dominant, you display brown.

(In genetics, you capitalize dominant genes, and lower case recessive.)

"she actually also has brown eyes like my brother (her father has blue and her mother has brown)."
Again, the child in question has brown eyes, one parent is blue, the other is brown.  That means she inherited a dominant brown B gene from her brown-eyed mother.  If you inherit a dominant B gene, you will display brown.  You really can't get around it.  And for her to display brown, she must have inherited that brown B from her mother.

"Their three children have hazel, brown, and piercingly blue eyes."
Which means that there are recessive green (g), recessive blue (b), and dominant brown (B) genes being inherited by the children.  If you inherit Bb or Bg, you will display brown because brown B dominates.  If you in inherit bb you'll display blue, gg you'll display green, gb you may go green or blue or hazel, or "bluish-green" or "greenish-blue", or some sort of combination of them.  Green and blue are both recessive, so when there's no *brown* around to dominate them, then they're free to mix together depending on other more detailed genes that might also have influence.  I mean, there are other genes that can influence that little battle between a green gene and a blue gene.  But that's only because there's no brown around to *force* brown.

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to belabor the point (honestly, I promise, and I'm not trying to be difficult), but your examples still fit the genetic rules of dominant and recessive.  Any child that has brown eyes, has at least *one* dominant brown gene.  They may be BB, they may be Bg, they may be Bb.  But as long as that one dominant brown B is in there, the child will display brown.  And if the child does *not* display brown, then they do *not* contain a brown gene.  If they *did* have a brown gene, it would completely take over and force the brown color.

This man who claims he's the King's child, has brown eyes.  Which means there are two choices:

Either:
1) One of his parents gave him a brown B gene (no matter what color he inherited from the other parent).
2) Some crazy surgery in a decade I highly doubt.

That Camilla is not brown, means that she has no brown B gene to pass on.  If she *did* have one to pass on, it would have made her display brown as well.
That Charles is not brown, means that he has no brown B gene to pass on either.  If he *did* have one to pass on, it would have made him display brown as well.

It's genetically impossible.  (Or "surgery".)


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> He's probably a quack, but eye color is not so easy.
> My DH has very blue eyes.  My eyes are browner than a cow's.  Both of my children have green, cat like eyes.  I have distant relatives with green and blue eyes, but my immediate family all have brown.  My brother also married a Caucasian and she actually also has brown eyes like my brother (her father has blue and her mother has brown).  Their three children have hazel, brown, and piercingly blue eyes.  The one with blue eyes looks like a Viking, and besides my brother being almost 6' tall, he has nothing Scandinavian about him.  You just never know!


We may be hearing of more people who think/believe they have a right to the throne.  It’s always about power.  That is why the Palace let the world know immediately that Charles is *The King*.  There was _no lapse in power_.  Rumors swirl in a power vacuum and can be a real threat to peace and unity.  Imo it is significant that KCIII has so much security with him.  I’m sure QE had it, usually they remained unseen.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> I don't understand why she is so attached to a bracelet from her first husband. If she were considerate of her current husband's feelings, haha, she'd retire it. She could donate it to a charity auction and get some positive press.



Wait a minute. You marry into the TRF and consistently wear a bracelet from an ex husband? And got angry when TQ didn't allow you to wear the tiara you wanted? And then changed up your engagement ring that your new prince husband gave to you? And happily wore blood diamond earrings from a Saudi prince?  Claw loves control. Claw loves to cause controversy. Claw is garbage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute. You marry into the TRF and consistently wear a bracelet from an ex husband? And got angry when TQ didn't allow you to wear the tiara you wanted? And then changed up your engagement ring that your new prince husband gave to you? And happily wore blood diamond earrings from a Saudi prince?  Claw loves control. Claw loves to cause controversy. Claw is garbage.


Sounds like _drama_ to me.


----------



## momtok

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute. You marry into the TRF and consistently wear a bracelet from an ex husband? And got angry when TQ didn't allow you to wear the tiara you wanted? And then changed up your engagement ring that your new prince husband gave to you? And happily wore blood diamond earrings from a Saudi prince?  Claw loves control. Claw loves to cause controversy. Claw is garbage.


Yeah, she lost me wayyyyy back there at "wearing a bracelet from a former husband."  That would absolutely crush my own husband.  I mean, just crush him.


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know the history behind the bracelet



Very interesting.
But I always wondered if the Cartier bracelet is a gift from Trevor? How do we know? Did she say something?


----------



## Helventara

Straight-Laced said:


> Who cries out of one eye?
> 
> In her own words :
> 'I can do that so well. It's crazy -  "Meghan, one tear, left eye. Go!"  Gimme three seconds.'
> 
> Has this been posted since the funeral ?



Yes,yes, I will be sick later  but I kinda like her here. She was beautiful, modern, fun, like any other young women on TV/IG but that’s the full extent of her potential: she just cannot comprehend anything beyond and therefore cannot grow beyond this type of persona. Plus, BRF is just waaay out of her league.



Chanbal said:


>



I think she was aiming for 'iconic' shot ala Princess of Wales behind her mask otw to Prince Phillip's funeral.


----------



## Sol Ryan

Helventara said:


> Yes,yes, I will be sick later  but I kinda like her here. She was beautiful, modern, fun, like any other young women on TV/IG but that’s the full extent of her potential: she just cannot comprehend anything beyond and therefore cannot grow beyond this type of persona. Plus, BRF is just waaay out of her league.
> 
> 
> I think she was aiming for 'iconic' shot ala Princess of Wales behind her mask otw to Prince Phillip's funeral.



With the hat and cape, I thought she was trying to channel Darkwing Duck…. Doesn’t she know No Capes!


----------



## andrashik

Chanbal said:


> Today is the day of crazy stories. A very crazy one is in Spoiler. I wonder if it's one of the 'truth bombs' for Hazz's book.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: One more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/kings-alleged-love-child-simon-dorantedays-next-move/news-story/fed3efe1502436667e7a20513155391f


I have one too! 


			https://newsbeezer.com/romaniaeng/a-romanian-the-son-of-prince-charles-appeal-to-buckingham-palace-i-have-dna-evidence-dad-help/
		


 I think he is being sarcastic


----------



## Sharont2305

Damn, I wish I posted yesterday. Remember her saying that after she did an engagement with The Queen (in Chester) they got into the car, M first obviously, The Queen put a blanket over Ms knees as it was chilly. I saw a reel yesterday of that. She didn’t.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Damn, I wish I posted yesterday. Remember her saying that after she did an engagement with The Queen (in Chester) they got into the car, M first obviously, The Queen put a blanket over Ms knees as it was chilly. I saw a reel yesterday of that. She didn’t.


I think the story of that trip was that TQ offered to share the blanket on the train. 
Did the reel have any footage of the train journey?
I hope it happened, because if it didn't happen, then what can we trust about her?


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> I think the story of that trip was that TQ offered to share the blanket on the train.
> Did the reel have any footage of the train journey?
> I hope it happened, because if it didn't happen, then what can we trust about her?


No, no footage of train journey, just the car. I've always assumed she meant the car.


----------



## xincinsin

Adding on to the vocabulary list we are building. This word reminds me of those anonymous friends who always come to Zedzee's defence, especially regarding the recent "uninvite".


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> No, no footage of train journey, just the car. I've always assumed she meant the car.


You are right. I stand corrected. It was the car.








						Queen shares blanket with Meghan Markle after their engagement
					

In a moment caught on camera, The Queen, 94, and Meghan Markle can be seen departing Cheshire together in June 2018, with the monarch sharing a blanket with the Duchess.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I didn't notice at first, but so true.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> You are right. I stand corrected. It was the car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen shares blanket with Meghan Markle after their engagement
> 
> 
> In a moment caught on camera, The Queen, 94, and Meghan Markle can be seen departing Cheshire together in June 2018, with the monarch sharing a blanket with the Duchess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yes, that's the video, as we can see there was no blanket sharing.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't notice at first, but so true.



And this is why she needs a £/$20M settlement as she can't cope?


----------



## jelliedfeels

StylishMD said:


> What is your point here? Why is a discussion of slavery relevant to this thread?


So to be fair Don Lemon is discussing the royal family/funeral at the beginning in the context of their excessive spending and the possibility of reparations so it does fit.

I do think it’s pretty bad that ridiculously over-simplified and wrong opinions like that woman’s are being put on tv news like some kind of gotcha moment when they aren’t helpful in the discussion at all.

I’m of the inclination that most institutions asked for reparations can easily afford to give them but that they tend to try and shift it to be a national guilt rather than an organisation-based one. As to national guilt I think the British public continues to invest enough in international aid and development and medical research to absolve whatever guilt the *sometimes* descendants of a load of disenfranchised peasants can have in the trade of international exploitation conducted by the elite classes. I do think the royal family have not done enough and their continued involvement in the arms trade and ‘apolitical’ entertaining of tyrants are testament to their continued involvement in oppression. 



BlueCherry said:


> He looks like Lieutenant Commander Rob Dixon, who’s been Prince William's equerry since 2020. He’s touted as the new Major Jonny Thompson **
> 
> View attachment 5614448


On a lighter note he looks a bit like Harry to me 


marietouchet said:


> Hmmm yeah $20m is in the ballpark of what MM will want
> 
> But put that in context, the Sovereign Grant is like £85M/yr and pays for all the building renovation costs - BIG ticket item - and the staffs - it is not a bucket of money that goes unspent
> 
> Yes, there is some unknown amount of personal wealth somewhere in cash, but the bulk of the billions comes from real estate that cannot be sold. Supposedly QEII paid £3M for Andrew’s lawsuit , a lot less than $20M
> 
> IMHO KC a would be hard pressed to pay $20M, even on the installment plan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.royal.uk


The sovereign grant is only a very small part of their earnings. When H&M made a big stink about giving up the grant they made it clear they would keep the duchy of Sussex- this wasn’t just cos they like their titles. Proceeds from the duchies are in the tens of millions annually and that’s just income from farming and rent. They also control properties and private estates in the billions nationally and internationally. Then they also own objects of great value such as jewels and works of art and cars, aircraft etc. 

So I don’t see them needing a loan anytime soon and For what it’s worth there’s no way M would go away for a lump sum- she is clearly motivated by power and attention and therefore her obscurity cannot be bought just enforced. 


DoggieBags said:


> Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF. She also got to keep her apartment in Kensington Palace and a yearly sum to maintain her office. She was married to the Heir to the Throne in addition to being the mother of a future king. Fergie got a much smaller divorce settlement from Andrew in 1996. Something in the neighborhood of 2 million pounds. So TW being married to the spare and not the heir may not get $20 million or more. Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property. So if they acquired substantial assets after their marriage, TW should do well in a divorce. However, if the rumors are true and they really are in financial difficulty, there might not be much property/ assets to split up. Child support would be another source of contention. Any attorneys on this thread please feel free to correct if I got anything wrong.


I think Fergie got a lot more than she lets on including possible hush money and she accesses the ski properties and lives in a royal home. It’s a useful myth for the royals that she was put out penniless and she doesn’t mind playing the poor relation also it stops her getting dragged too close to Andrew’s quagmire (after all she’s much more expendable as a scapegoat than him) so it’s mutually beneficial. 

As I said I don’t see M giving any of this up- she’s narcissistic and she loves the attention - and tbh I think the royals love all the press they get from the black sheep of the family making them look good by comparison.


----------



## Pessie

jelliedfeels said:


> So to be fair Don Lemon is discussing the royal family/funeral at the beginning in the context of their excessive spending and the possibility of reparations so it does fit.
> 
> I do think it’s pretty bad that ridiculously over-simplified and wrong opinions like that woman’s are being put on tv news like some kind of gotcha moment when they aren’t helpful in the discussion at all.
> 
> I’m of the inclination that most institutions asked for reparations can easily afford to give them but that they tend to try and shift it to be a national guilt rather than an organisation-based one. As to national guilt I think the British public continues to invest enough in international aid and development and medical research to absolve whatever guilt the *sometimes* descendants of a load of disenfranchised peasants can have in the trade of international exploitation conducted by the elite classes. I do think the royal family have not done enough and their continued involvement in the arms trade and ‘apolitical’ entertaining of tyrants are testament to their continued involvement in oppression.
> 
> 
> On a lighter note he looks a bit like Harry to me
> 
> The sovereign grant is only a very small part of their earnings. When H&M made a big stink about giving up the grant they made it clear they would keep the duchy of Sussex- this wasn’t just cos they like their titles. Proceeds from the duchies are in the tens of millions annually and that’s just income from farming and rent. They also control properties and private estates in the billions nationally and internationally. Then they also own objects of great value such as jewels and works of art and cars, aircraft etc.
> 
> So I don’t see them needing a loan anytime soon and For what it’s worth there’s no way M would go away for a lump sum- she is clearly motivated by power and attention and therefore her obscurity cannot be bought just enforced.
> 
> I think Fergie got a lot more than she lets on including possible hush money and she accesses the ski properties and lives in a royal home. It’s a useful myth for the royals that she was put out penniless and she doesn’t mind playing the poor relation also it stops her getting dragged too close to Andrew’s quagmire (after all she’s much more expendable as a scapegoat than him) so it’s mutually beneficial.
> 
> As I said I don’t see M giving any of this up- she’s narcissistic and she loves the attention - and tbh I think the royals love all the press they get from the black sheep of the family making them look good by comparison.


There’s no land and income associated with the Duchy of Sussex.  It’s just a title.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means…
> View attachment 5614501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's Blind Items - The Document
> 
> 
> Before the events of earlier this month, all the claims to the throne by this particular family, could be treated like background noise. No ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



Oh please. Not you, the conspiration theorists.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Yes, that's the video, as we can see there was no blanket sharing.


The video stops after TQ places the blanket over her knees but the car moves off anyway, so we can't see if she offered to share it. The article references the OW interview where Zedzee says they shared the blanket. It also notes that in that interview, Zedzee says she received a necklace which matches the pearl earrings. Wonder why the necklace didn't make an appearance.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> And this is why she needs a £/$20M settlement as she can't cope?


If they ever give her a settlement, it will open a bottomless pit. Narcs are insatiable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF.



Why would anyone's net worth but Charles's count though. In fact wasn't it said Charles didn't have that kind of money, so The Queen stepped in and paid the settlement from her personal money?



DoggieBags said:


> Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property.



Harry's alleged status (some sort of diplomatic) makes it so that they can only get divorced in the UK.


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> There’s no land and income associated with the Duchy of Sussex.  It’s just a title.


I was going to say exactly the same.
In this context, it's only the Duchy of Cornwall that has those ties.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> I was going to say exactly the same.
> In this context, it's only the Duchy of Cornwall that has those ties.


And Duchy of Lancaster, for the Monarch.  Profits treated as Crown not personal property.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

Helventara said:


> Yes,yes, I will be sick later  but I kinda like her here. She was beautiful, modern, fun, like any other young women on TV/IG but that’s the full extent of her potential: she just cannot comprehend anything beyond and therefore cannot grow beyond this type of persona. Plus, BRF is just waaay out of her league.
> 
> 
> I think she was aiming for 'iconic' shot ala Princess of Wales behind her mask otw to Prince Phillip's funeral.



Of course she was but she failed. Every photo of her is the same, an artificially bloated face with a simpering faux look of sadness. 

Why does she keep on trying to compete with Catherine


----------



## Sharont2305

Pessie said:


> And Duchy of Lancaster, for the Monarch.  Profits treated as Crown not personal property.


Ah, yes, of course,  I'd forgotten that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> He's probably a quack, but eye color is not so easy.
> My DH has very blue eyes.  My eyes are browner than a cow's.  Both of my children have green, cat like eyes.



I was going to say. My father had brown eyes, mine are green. He also had black hair and I don't.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> The sovereign grant is only a very small part of their earnings. When H&M made a big stink about giving up the grant they made it clear they would keep the duchy of Sussex- this wasn’t just cos they like their titles. Proceeds from the duchies are in the tens of millions annually and that’s just income from farming and rent. They also control properties and private estates in the billions nationally and internationally. Then they also own objects of great value such as jewels and works of art and cars, aircraft etc.



The Duchy of Sussex didn't come with any property though, just the title. What they counted on keeping was the income from Charles's Duchy of Cornwall, which at the time was 95% of their income and in the millions, while generously giving up their 5% of Sovereign Grant money.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Pessie said:


> There’s no land and income associated with the Duchy of Sussex.  It’s just a title





Sharont2305 said:


> I was going to say exactly the same.
> In this context, it's only the Duchy of Cornwall that has those ties.


I’m inclined to think this is a massive tax/income fudge. You read that these titles don’t come with an income but I think that’s in the same sense that Asswell makes less than 50k a year aka it’s a lie. 

Charles paid his sons an income…and members of the House of Lords receive an income…. And these duchys have valuable properties that turn a profit inside them…. Duchys for tax reasons are not people but institutions until they suddenly are people for other tax reasons. So to me it makes sense that you can truthfully claim that the duchy doesn’t receive money but the duke does. 

I’m very firmly of the belief that the royal family is still paying H&M’s way and the idea that their titles are a legal reason why they get that money makes sense to me. I grant you I don’t have a lot of evidence for this but I think it seems more likely than netflix paid them all the money upfront despite years of experience and basic business sense telling them that’s a bad idea.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Charles paid his sons an income…and members of the House of Lords receive an income…. And these duchys have valuable properties that turn a profit inside them…. Duchys for tax reasons are not people but institutions until they suddenly are people for other tax reasons. So to me it makes sense that you can truthfully claim that the duchy doesn’t receive money but the duke does.



Right, but that income from Charles is generated by the Duchy of Cornwall, not the Duchy of Sussex. In fact, there is no Duchy of Sussex and hence no valuable properties, just the dukedom.


----------



## Pessie

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m inclined to think this is a massive tax/income fudge. You read that these titles don’t come with an income but I think that’s in the same sense that Asswell makes less than 50k a year aka it’s a lie.
> 
> Charles paid his sons an income…and members of the House of Lords receive an income…. And these duchys have valuable properties that turn a profit inside them…. Duchys for tax reasons are not people but institutions until they suddenly are people for other tax reasons. So to me it makes sense that you can truthfully claim that the duchy doesn’t receive money but the duke does.
> 
> I’m very firmly of the belief that the royal family is still paying H&M’s way and the idea that their titles are a legal reason why they get that money makes sense to me. I grant you I don’t have a lot of evidence for this but I think it seems more likely than netflix paid them all the money upfront despite years of experience and basic business sense telling them that’s a bad idea.


Charles paid Harry from his Duchy of Cornwall income.  William has now inherited the Duchy of Cornwall.  That’s fact.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder if William would be expected to fund Harry? Because that's what we always assumed but also I never heard Charles was funding his siblings.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would anyone's net worth but Charles's count though. In fact wasn't it said Charles didn't have that kind of money, so The Queen stepped in and paid the settlement from her personal money?
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's alleged status (some sort of diplomatic) makes it so that they can only get divorced in the UK.


since The Queen had shown on several occasions that she was willing to backstop her children financially when necessary, anyone looking for money from any of her children would eye the BRF net worth and not just the net worth of the offspring in question. So if Charles didn’t have enough money, to avoid the scandal and having their private finances discussed by the press, etc. The Queen did, as you just said, step in to pay at least part of his divorce settlement for him with her personal money. The last thing the BRF wants is to have any of their members deposed under oath in a legal proceeding. They let it play out until Andrew lost a serious of motions in his recent court case  and it looked like he would have to give a deposition and then The Queen stepped in and used her personal money to pay part of Andrew’s $12 million settlement to one of the alleged victims of Epstein. As to the issue of diplomatic immunity affecting where one can file divorce proceedings, I’m not a lawyer, but I do know of one case of an American who married a diplomat from another country. They resided for many years in the US before she filed for divorce in the US state they were living in at the time of their divorce. The proceedings were handled by a US divorce court even though the husband had diplomatic immunity. She got a share of the assets they had accumulated in the US during the years they were married.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if William would be expected to fund Harry? Because that's what we always assumed but also I never heard Charles was funding his siblings.


Many of the minor royals were being supported by the Queen from the sovereign grant, it percolating down from them to their sons and daughters etc.  I’m sure there’ll be some interesting negotiations ahead.  If I were William I’d not be too keen to fund Harry and Meghan.  And Harry and Meghan have already received what most people would think more than sufficient to start an independent life of their own.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> _The sovereign grant is only a very small part of their earnings. When H&M made a big stink about giving up the grant they made it clear they would keep the duchy of Sussex- this wasn’t just cos they like their titles. Proceeds from the duchies are in the tens of millions annually and that’s just income from farming and rent. They also control properties and private estates in the billions nationally and internationally. Then they also own objects of great value such as jewels and works of art and cars, aircraft etc.
> 
> So I don’t see them needing a loan anytime soon and For what it’s worth there’s no way M would go away for a lump sum- she is clearly motivated by power and attention and therefore her obscurity cannot be bought just enforced._


Whoaaa.  This sounded like breaking news to me. So, I looked it up.  No, this is not true. There is no Duchy of Sussex. Whew.
If you have links that could verify the DoS income, please do share. 

_Currently, there are *two* *duchies in England*; *the royal Duchy of Lancaster and the royal Duchy of Cornwall.* Unlike historic duchies in England, these are no longer coextensive with a distinct geographic area, though they originated in the counties palatine of Lancaster and Cornwall. Rather, they are "Crown bodies", regulated by Acts of Parliament, that have some of the powers of a corporation or trust. The administration of the duchies is regulated by the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall (Accounts) Act 1838.  The duchies invest primarily in land, and their income is payable either to the monarch or the monarch's eldest heir.





						Duchies in England - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if William would be expected to fund Harry? Because that's what we always assumed but also I never heard Charles was funding his siblings.


I think Charles, when he was Prince of Wales, was expected to use the income from the Duchy of Cornwall to fund his expenses, his children, and his grandchildren. Charles’s siblings were funded by The Queen. So now that William has inherited the Duchy of Cornwall, Harry, if he were still a working member of the BRF, would be funded by King Charles. William would be responsible for his 3 children and their children as long as he remains the Duke of Cornwall.


----------



## Sunshine247365

andrashik said:


> Very interesting.
> But I always wondered if the Cartier bracelet is a gift from Trevor? How do we know? Did she say something?


If it is from her ex-husband I honestly don't believe it's got any sentimental value to her, she just cares that it's expensive, gold and Cartier and makes her look like she has valuable jewellery. I mean she basically redesigned the engagement ring her current husband gave her, so clearly she has no emotional attachment to anything. Or anyone. Or actual emotions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> since The Queen had shown on several occasions that she was willing to backstop her children financially when necessary, anyone looking for money from any of her children would eye the BRF net worth and not just the net worth of the offspring in question. So if Charles didn’t have enough money, to avoid the scandal and having their private finances discussed by the press, etc. The Queen did, as you just said, step in to pay at least part of his divorce settlement for him with her personal money. The last thing the BRF wants is to have any of their members deposed under oath in a legal proceeding.



All I was trying to say is that the parents' - or any other relative's - fortune doesn't matter for divorce proceedings. She cannot expect a settlement that's based on the billions that whole family owns.

In addition to this, I am quite positive should Harry ever make the decision the BRF's lawyers would have a nice quiet chat with Raptor which might or might not result in her suddenly becoming quite modest. Of course she can always count on her pawns, sorry, children to maybe give her an advantage.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> I think Charles, when he was Prince of Wales, was expected to use the income from the Duchy of Cornwall to fund his expenses, his children, and his grandchildren. Charles’s siblings were funded by The Queen. So now that William has inherited the Duchy of Cornwall, Harry, if he were still a working member of the BRF, would be funded by King Charles. William would be responsible for his 3 children and their children as long as he remains the Duke of Cornwall.



That does make a whole lot of sense, but it just now dawned on me because we have discussed many times how William would control the pursestrings which was obviously not correct.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> All I was trying to say is that the parents' - or any other relative's - fortune doesn't matter for divorce proceedings. She cannot expect a settlement that's based on the billions that whole family owns.
> 
> In addition to this, I am quite positive should Harry ever make the decision the BRF's lawyers would have a nice quiet chat with Raptor which might or might not result in her suddenly becoming quite modest. Of course she can always count on her pawns, sorry, children to maybe give her an advantage.


Imo they should stay together and reap all the rewards, hassles, struggles, etc. of raising 2 kids who are only 2 years apart.  Since they are older parents, they most definitely will enjoy interacting with the younger parents.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure British financial institutions would happily lend KC the money at a very favorable rate to rid the country of her.



But as someone said before blackmailers never just 'go away', they come back again and again


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Read the comments on this blind item.  Super fun!  There are some people who really know their UK history.  Nobody seems to know what "document" this blind item is referring to, other than perhaps a document that "proves" the illegitimacy of Edward IV about 600 years ago, which would have completely changed history and who inherited the throne and when.



There's also an 'illegitimacy' of Henry VII - but seriously, royalty has been 'imported' and usurped many times.

If they think that the people of the United Kingdom would prefer 'Mildred' a receptionist from Shrewsbury or 'Dave' a retired butcher from Hastings be sat on a red velvet chair, given a football and a chopstick to hold, be sworn in and ascend to represent the Crown and Head of the Church of England, I think that Anon is somewhat mistaken.


----------



## xincinsin

Sunshine247365 said:


> If it is from her ex-husband I honestly don't believe it's got any sentimental value to her, she just cares that it's expensive, gold and Cartier and makes her look like she has valuable jewellery. I mean *she basically redesigned the engagement ring her current husband gave her,* so clearly she has no emotional attachment to anything. Or anyone. Or actual emotions.


Plastic Pal claims that it was Hazard who redesigned it. I think I stopped looking at that ring after the alleged second change.


----------



## papertiger

Straight-Laced said:


> Who cries out of one eye?
> 
> In her own words :
> 'I can do that so well. It's crazy -  "Meghan, one tear, left eye. Go!"  Gimme three seconds.'
> 
> Has this been posted since the funeral ?




O.M.G that woman is so annoying. How can anyone stand her 24/7?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Plastic Pal claims that it was Hazard who redesigned it. I think I stopped looking at that ring after the alleged second change.



I mean, everything's possible, but why didn't he design it in the redesign to begin with then?


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> All I was trying to say is that the parents' - or any other relative's - fortune doesn't matter for divorce proceedings. She cannot expect a settlement that's based on the billions that whole family owns.
> 
> In addition to this, I am quite positive should Harry ever make the decision the BRF's lawyers would have a nice quiet chat with Raptor which might or might not result in her suddenly becoming quite modest. Of course she can always count on her pawns, sorry, children to maybe give her an advantage.


Hard to say hypothetically how a divorce would play out in this instance. Diana and Fergie were both British citizens who grew up and lived in the UK their entire lives and wished to continue to live in the UK after their divorces. They also had young children who were brought up in the UK and, in Diana’s case, could not be taken to live in a different country after the divorce. If they didn‘t play ball, the BRF had the clout to close ranks in their social circles and make life very difficult for them. Both women clearly understood that they had a vested interest in not damaging the image of the BRF and in playing ball. At the end of the day it was mutually beneficial for both sides to settle without airing all their dirty laundry in public. In Meghan’s case, she’s made it quite clear she couldn’t give two hoots about living in the UK. She wants to remain in California. She also has clearly demonstrated she doesn’t give a toss about the image of the BRF or the BRF as an institution. She’d burn it all to the ground if it would be to her advantage. She won’t shut up and could do a lot more damage. She’s already demonstrated her willingness to take endless pot shots at the BRF and has never let minor details like truth and reality stand in the way of the narrative she wishes to put out there. She also has the 2 very young children residing with her in the US. So the BRF has a lot less leverage over her than they had over Diana and Fergie. Having said that, the BRF has the resources and the clout to tie her up in court for years. Yes in the legal sense she can only go after Harry’s assets in court and not the entire BRF’s assets. But It really doesn’t matter what Harry’s net worth is because at the end of the day, Meghan, has shown her willingness and ability to do anything and say anything to get what she wants in the court of public opinion. The BRF is going to have to decide how much they are going to be willing to pay to get her to agree to hush up and give them reasonable access to the children. Can you see Harry, the dim, testifying in a divorce court? If you think Andrew’s interview was disastrous, imagine Harry being grilled under oath by a top notch divorce lawyer. You know her lawyers will try to pry open the BRF finances with a can opener to see if Harry gets any income from the BRF Trusts, etc. How far they’ll get I haven’t got a clue but you know they’ll definitely try.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Whoaaa.  This sounded like breaking news to me. So, I looked it up.  No, this is not true. There is no Duchy of Sussex. Whew.
> If you have links that could verify the DoS income, please do share.
> 
> _Currently, there are *two* *duchies in England*; *the royal Duchy of Lancaster and the royal Duchy of Cornwall.* Unlike historic duchies in England, these are no longer coextensive with a distinct geographic area, though they originated in the counties palatine of Lancaster and Cornwall. Rather, they are "Crown bodies", regulated by Acts of Parliament, that have some of the powers of a corporation or trust. The administration of the duchies is regulated by the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall (Accounts) Act 1838.  The duchies invest primarily in land, and their income is payable either to the monarch or the monarch's eldest heir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchies in England - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I’ve seen this stuff online too and perhaps I’m not expressing myself very clearly or getting the technicalities exactly right but I don’t think that I need to have access to confidential information I couldn’t possibly have for this to be an unreasonable speculation. Of course I don’t know what H’s income and I would love to know. It just strikes me as odd that a H&M seem to have so much money to burn - more than you would imagine netflix or Spotify would give in advance and b) it just strikes me as extremely strange there’s dukes but no duchies and there’s a duchy of Lancaster but no duke of Lancaster and there’s a duke of Sussex but apparently no earnings and no duchy from a wealthy place like Sussex and really the more you go into it the more confusing it gets and it just smells like obfuscation c) why does Harry still have that frog more lease- what’s going on there? We don’t know and d) we already know the royals avoid tax- they’ve made no secret of the fact Charles won’t pay inheritance tax.

Tbh I feel this is getting OT my overall point was it wouldn’t be difficult for royals to raise a lump sum of 20m, M wouldn’t take it on those conditions and tbh I think they are still getting millions in handouts from their family anyway and I do think it’s tied into this wrangling about Sussex somehow.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF. She also got to keep her apartment in Kensington Palace and a yearly sum to maintain her office. She was married to the Heir to the Throne in addition to being the mother of a future king. Fergie got a much smaller divorce settlement from Andrew in 1996. Something in the neighborhood of 2 million pounds. So TW being married to the spare and not the heir may not get $20 million or more. Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property. So if they acquired substantial assets after their marriage, TW should do well in a divorce. However, if the rumors are true and they really are in financial difficulty, there might not be much property/ assets to split up. Child support would be another source of contention. Any attorneys on this thread please feel free to correct if I got anything wrong.



I'm behind so...

If Harry has Diplomatic status (which we suspect) any divorce would be in England. Otherwise it's like filing a divorce in a place you happen to be on holiday. 

Can you imagine the circus wherever anyway? 

I don't think she would fare much better in Cali though. As you say, she couldn't get her hands on money his mother left him, so it would be 0.5 of the Housing Unit/Toilet Block and whatever money Spotify/Netflix deals _already_ paid and clear. 

If they signed the Spotify and/or Netflix together (as a power couple) they will default if they break-up and can't fulfil obligations. They will either still have to work together after break-up or default to whatever the clause says about unfulfilled delivery and obligations or both be sued themselves. 

They have/are probably using her US legal team to put things together. If the sh*t hit the fan, HC would fund Harry's lawyers personally no problem, but then KC would be left in-charge. Although,  diplomatically, KC III may think it better to let Harry fry in Cali and not raise a finger, then, and only then, pick-up the pieces of H later.


----------



## jelliedfeels

DoggieBags said:


> Hard to say hypothetically how a divorce would play out in this instance. Diana and Fergie were both British citizens who grew up and lived in the UK their entire lives and wished to continue to live in the UK after their divorces. They also had young children who were brought up in the UK and, in Diana’s case, could not be taken to live in a different country after the divorce. If they didn‘t play ball, the BRF had the clout to close ranks in their social circles and make life very difficult for them. Both women clearly understood that they had a vested interest in not damaging the image of the BRF and in playing ball. At the end of the day it was mutually beneficial for both sides to settle without airing all their dirty laundry in public. In Meghan’s case, she’s made it quite clear she couldn’t give two hoots about living in the UK. She wants to remain in California. She also has clearly demonstrated she doesn’t give a toss about the image of the BRF or the BRF as an institution. She’d burn it all to the ground if it would be to her advantage. She won’t shut up and could do a lot more damage. She’s already demonstrated her willingness to take endless pot shots at the BRF and has never let minor details like truth and reality stand in the way of the narrative she wishes to put out there. She also has the 2 very young children residing with her in the US. So the BRF has a lot less leverage over her than they had over Diana and Fergie. Having said that, the BRF has the resources and the clout to tie her up in court for years. Yes in the legal sense she can only go after Harry’s assets in court and not the entire BRF’s assets. But It really doesn’t matter what Harry’s net worth is because at the end of the day, Meghan, has shown her willingness and ability to do anything and say anything to get what she wants in the court of public opinion. The BRF is going to have to decide how much they are going to be willing to pay to get her to agree to hush up and give them reasonable access to the children. Can you see Harry, the dim, testifying in a divorce court? If you think Andrew’s interview was disastrous, imagine Harry being grilled under oath by a top notch divorce lawyer. You know her lawyers will try to pry open the BRF finances with a can opener to see if Harry gets any income from the BRF Trusts, etc. How far they’ll get I haven’t got a clue but you know they’ll definitely try.


Ok can’t lie- you had me at Harry gets grilled   

I know it won’t happen but it’d make the depp trial look like child’s play. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> All I was trying to say is that the parents' - or any other relative's - fortune doesn't matter for divorce proceedings. She cannot expect a settlement that's based on the billions that whole family owns.
> 
> In addition to this, I am quite positive should Harry ever make the decision the BRF's lawyers would have a nice quiet chat with Raptor which might or might not result in her suddenly becoming quite modest. Of course she can always count on her pawns, sorry, children to maybe give her an advantage.


Can puppets testify?

She’d need them to be in one of those awful Disney remakes so she could claim they are ‘live action’


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I had read in several books and articles that Diana got £17 million and was allowed to *reside* in KP. She lost her HRH and even though it was in the divorce agreement, she was denied the royal jet for a lot of her trips. She ended up borrowing a private plane from her many rich acquaintances who were happy to lend.
> 
> As you have said, the only reason she got as much as she got was because she was the mother of the future king.  TW should pick up a book once in a while.  She told a friend that she had "gone deeply into Harrys life" before she met him, but she should have studied up on what was involved in becoming a member of the BRF.  She should look to Fergie as a cautionary tale.  She was married to the spare, but came out of it with next to nothing.



The irony is, she could have had it all. 

Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered. 

She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose eyes are bigger than her stomach (my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> All I was trying to say is that the parents' - or any other relative's - fortune doesn't matter for divorce proceedings. She cannot expect a settlement that's based on the billions that whole family owns.
> 
> In addition to this, I am quite positive should Harry ever make the decision the BRF's lawyers would have a nice quiet chat with Raptor which might or might not result in her suddenly becoming quite modest. Of course she can always count on her pawns, sorry, children to maybe give her an advantage.



Especially since it is easily enough proven that under British law, his brother William will receive everything, then _his_ first born.

There can be no assumption that Harry would ever inherit anything at all.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> The irony is, she could have had it all.
> 
> Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered.
> 
> She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose eyes are bigger than her stomach (my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


This.  Can’t “like” it enough.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> The irony is, she could have had it all.
> 
> Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered.
> 
> She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose eyes are bigger than her stomach (my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


So true!


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’ve seen this stuff online too and perhaps I’m not expressing myself very clearly or getting the technicalities exactly right but I don’t think that I need to have access to confidential information I couldn’t possibly have for this to be an unreasonable speculation. Of course I don’t know what H’s income and I would love to know. It just strikes me as odd that a H&M seem to have so much money to burn - more than you would imagine netflix or Spotify would give in advance and b) it just strikes me as extremely strange there’s dukes but no duchies and there’s a duchy of Lancaster but no duke of Lancaster and there’s a duke of Sussex but apparently no earnings and no duchy from a wealthy place like Sussex and really the more you go into it the more confusing it gets and it just smells like obfuscation c) why does Harry still have that frog more lease- what’s going on there? We don’t know and d) we already know the royals avoid tax- they’ve made no secret of the fact Charles won’t pay inheritance tax.
> 
> Tbh I feel this is getting OT my overall point was it wouldn’t be difficult for royals to raise a lump sum of 20m, M wouldn’t take it on those conditions and tbh I think they are still getting millions in handouts from their family anyway and I do think it’s tied into this wrangling about Sussex somehow.


Ok, apologies, I misunderstood. I thought there was new info.  You are right, it is odd.  We do not know where their funds are coming from [Opr?]. They do not seem to be hurting for perks - private jet rides, first class cabins, polo ponies, expensive clothes,  etc. Perhaps someone with far more knowledge than Wikipedia and I have will post the info.

ETA:  this article lists the dukes.  I am guessing we will see these men at the coronation. Perhaps others?  Idk.





						List of dukes in the peerages of Britain and Ireland - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ok, apologies, I misunderstood. I thought there was new info.  You are right, it is odd.  We do not know where their funds are coming from [Opr?]. They do not seem to be hurting for perks - private jet rides, first class cabins, polo ponies, expensive clothes,  etc. Perhaps someone with far more knowledge than Wikipedia and I have will post the info.


It’s history not conspiracy imo.  Eg Cromwell took titles and land and gave them out to his mates like sweets, and he appropriated houses and land from the church which was divvied up too.  He in turn lost all his titles when he fell from power and was executed.  The King rewarded his supporters and punished others.  Theres centuries of death, marriage and struggle for power and property.
The Duke of Westminster’s current fortune (Mayfair etc) was originally a worthless piece of barren country outside London brought into the family on marriage by a fairly ordinary woman called Mary I think.  But that’s not a Royal Dukedom.
ETA just remembered.  The Duke of Norfolk owns Arundel Castle - which is in Sussex!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> It’s history not conspiracy imo.  Eg Cromwell took titles and land and gave them out to his mates like sweets, and he appropriated houses and land from the church which was divvied up too.  He in turn lost all his titles when he fell from power and was executed.  The returning King rewarded his supporters and punished others.  *There’s centuries of death, marriage and struggle for power and property.*
> The Duke of Westminster’s current fortune (Mayfair etc) was originally a worthless piece of barren country outside London brought into the family on marriage by a fairly ordinary woman called Mary I think.  But that’s not a Royal Dukedom.


This is exactly the history I need to learn   So much to know, so little time.  Thank you 

ETA:  _*power and property *_What else is there?


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> The irony is, she could have had it all.
> 
> Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered.
> 
> She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose *eyes are bigger than her stomach *(my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


I love that description!
My mum used to say "eyes bigger than a cartwheel", but your turn of phrase is much funnier.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is exactly the history I need to learn   So much to know, so little time.  Thank you
> 
> ETA:  _*power and property *_What else is there?


Peace of mind


----------



## papertiger

PDina, love her


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't notice at first, but so true.



It's sad if she is really undermining her own husband like this. 
Also, if it is so obvious, how is she going to hook her next big fish?


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> PDina, love her



Someone should make _this _woman a Duchess!


----------



## CarryOn2020

_HELLO! understands the couple flew out of London Heathrow on Tuesday. As previously reported, the pair arrived on British soil on the morning of Saturday, 3 September for what was due to be a short trip to visit several charities. After 17 days away from home, Harry and Meghan will have been very eager to get back to their two children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet.1.









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry return home to reunite with children following the Queen's funeral
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left the UK to reunite with their children following the funeral of the Queen




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




  _


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> _HELLO! understands the couple flew out of London Heathrow on Tuesday. As previously reported, the pair arrived on British soil on the morning of Saturday, 3 September for what was due to be a short trip to visit several charities. After 17 days away from home, Harry and Meghan will have been very eager to get back to their two children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet.1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry return home to reunite with children following the Queen's funeral
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left the UK to reunite with their children following the funeral of the Queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I wonder if Oprah went with them?  It doesn’t say whether it was a private plane?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> b) it just strikes me as extremely strange there’s dukes but no duchies and* there’s a duchy of Lancaster but no duke of Lancaster*



There is! Charles is the current Duke of Lancaster. Before him it was The Queen (that's right, she was the *Duke* of Lancaster, not the Duchess).


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> PDina, love her




This was great!

One woman, with a known agenda, calls the Royals Racist. 

Well excuse me, I saw thousands of people of every race attend the Queens funeral that clearly do not agree with this statement.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> since The Queen had shown on several occasions that she was willing to backstop her children financially when necessary, anyone looking for money from any of her children would eye the BRF net worth and not just the net worth of the offspring in question. So if Charles didn’t have enough money, to avoid the scandal and having their private finances discussed by the press, etc. The Queen did, as you just said, step in to pay at least part of his divorce settlement for him with her personal money. The last thing the BRF wants is to have any of their members deposed under oath in a legal proceeding. They let it play out until Andrew lost a serious of motions in his recent court case  and it looked like he would have to give a deposition and then The Queen stepped in and used her personal money to pay part of Andrew’s $12 million settlement to one of the alleged victims of Epstein. As to the issue of diplomatic immunity affecting where one can file divorce proceedings, I’m not a lawyer, but I do know of one case of an American who married a diplomat from another country. They resided for many years in the US before she filed for divorce in the US state they were living in at the time of their divorce. The proceedings were handled by a US divorce court even though the husband had diplomatic immunity. She got a share of the assets they had accumulated in the US during the years they were married.



You may find that if they happened, Harry would be somehow be 'stuck' in the UK at that time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> The Duke of Norfolk owns Arundel Castle - which is in Sussex!



Wasn't Arundel the peer (not sure about his title) beheaded by Elizabeth I?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There is, though. Charles is the current Duke of Lancaster. Before him it was The Queen (that's right, she was the *Duke* of Lancaster, not the Duchess).


According to Wikipedia, it seems that the Duke of Lancaster “merged into the Crown” - more in spoiler.




Spoiler



A title held by someone who becomes monarch is said to merge in the Crown and therefore ceases to exist, because the sovereign cannot hold a dignity from himself.

The Dukedoms of Cornwall and of Rothesay, and the Earldom of Carrick, are special cases, which when not in use are said to lapse to the Crown: they are construed as existing, but held by no-one, during such periods. These peerages are also special in that they are never directly inherited. The Dukedom of Cornwall was held formerly by the eldest son of the King of England, and the Dukedom of Rothesay, the Earldom of Carrick, and certain non-peerage titles (Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland) by the eldest son of the King of Scotland. Since those titles have been united, the dukedoms and associated subsidiary titles are held by the eldest son of the monarch. In Scotland, the title Duke of Rothesay is used for life. In England and Northern Ireland, the title Duke of Cornwall is used until the heir apparent is created Prince of Wales; at the same time as the principality is created, the duke is also created Earl of Chester. The earldom is a special case, because it is not hereditary, instead revesting or merging in the Crown if the prince succeeds to the Crown or predeceases the monarch: thus George III (then the grandson of the reigning monarch) was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester a month after the death of his father Frederick, Prince of Wales.

The Dukedom of Cornwall is associated with the Duchy of Cornwall; the former is a peerage dignity, while the latter is an estate held by the Duke of Cornwall. Income from the Duchy goes to the Duke of Cornwall, or, when there is no duke, to the sovereign (but the money is then paid to the heir to the throne under the Sovereign Grant Act 2011). 

The only other duchy in the United Kingdom is the Duchy of Lancaster, which is also an estate rather than a peerage dignity. The Dukedom of Lancaster merged in the Crown when Henry of Monmouth, Duke of Lancaster became King Henry V. Nonetheless, the Duchyof Lancaster continues to exist, theoretically run by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (which is normally a sinecure position with no actual duties related to the duchy and is used to appoint a minister without portfolio). The Duchy of Lancaster is the inherited property that belongs personally to the monarch, rather than to the Crown. Thus, while income from the Crown Estate is turned over to the Exchequer in return for a Sovereign grant payment, the income from the duchy forms a part of the Privy Purse, the personal funds of the Sovereign.

​


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Especially since it is easily enough proven that under British law, his brother William will receive everything, then _his_ first born.
> 
> There can be no assumption that Harry would ever inherit anything at all.



Actually, I should say, as per British tradition. 

Under British law, you can leave your property/estate/money to whoever you please if it's in a will (unlike French law for example, - which is one of the reasons why my mother sold her French property)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to Wikipedia, it seems that the Duke of Lancaster “merged into the Crown” - more in spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> A title held by someone who becomes monarch is said to merge in the Crown and therefore ceases to exist, because the sovereign cannot hold a dignity from himself.
> 
> The Dukedoms of Cornwall and of Rothesay, and the Earldom of Carrick, are special cases, which when not in use are said to lapse to the Crown: they are construed as existing, but held by no-one, during such periods. These peerages are also special in that they are never directly inherited. The Dukedom of Cornwall was held formerly by the eldest son of the King of England, and the Dukedom of Rothesay, the Earldom of Carrick, and certain non-peerage titles (Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland) by the eldest son of the King of Scotland. Since those titles have been united, the dukedoms and associated subsidiary titles are held by the eldest son of the monarch. In Scotland, the title Duke of Rothesay is used for life. In England and Northern Ireland, the title Duke of Cornwall is used until the heir apparent is created Prince of Wales; at the same time as the principality is created, the duke is also created Earl of Chester. The earldom is a special case, because it is not hereditary, instead revesting or merging in the Crown if the prince succeeds to the Crown or predeceases the monarch: thus George III (then the grandson of the reigning monarch) was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester a month after the death of his father Frederick, Prince of Wales.
> 
> The Dukedom of Cornwall is associated with the Duchy of Cornwall; the former is a peerage dignity, while the latter is an estate held by the Duke of Cornwall. Income from the Duchy goes to the Duke of Cornwall, or, when there is no duke, to the sovereign (but the money is then paid to the heir to the throne under the Sovereign Grant Act 2011).
> 
> The only other duchy in the United Kingdom is the Duchy of Lancaster, which is also an estate rather than a peerage dignity. The Dukedom of Lancaster merged in the Crown when Henry of Monmouth, Duke of Lancaster became King Henry V. Nonetheless, the Duchyof Lancaster continues to exist, theoretically run by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (which is normally a sinecure position with no actual duties related to the duchy and is used to appoint a minister without portfolio). The Duchy of Lancaster is the inherited property that belongs personally to the monarch, rather than to the Crown. Thus, while income from the Crown Estate is turned over to the Exchequer in return for a Sovereign grant payment, the income from the duchy forms a part of the Privy Purse, the personal funds of the Sovereign.
> 
> ​



_All_ UK property, estate and titles can merge into the Crown if there is no direct named person in a will or direct heir.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't Arundel the peer (not sure about his title) beheaded by Elizabeth I?



Quickly googled, it's the Earl of Arundel, and the headless one - Philip Howard - happened to be the eldest son of the Duke of Norfolk which explains why they have the castle. His father was executed as well, not a very loyal family apparently.

ETA: he became the Earl of Arundel because his mother Mary was her father's (12th EoA) heiress.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Actually, I should say, as per British tradition.
> 
> Under British law, you can leave your property/estate/money to whoever you please if it's in a will (unlike French law for example, - which is one of the reasons why my mother sold her French property)



In Germany spouses and children are entitled to a minimum unless they did something horrible (e.g., trying to kill you).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to Wikipedia, it seems that the Duke of Lancaster “merged into the Crown” - more in spoiler.



From the website of the Duchy of Lancaster, obviously not updated yet:

"The Duke of Lancaster
*Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II* is the current Duke of Lancaster. During a reign which has lasted 70 years, Her Majesty has taken a keen interest in the estate, paying regular visits to the Surveys. The title Duke of Lancaster continues to be used, even for a female monarch."


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> He's probably a quack, but eye color is not so easy.
> My DH has very blue eyes.  My eyes are browner than a cow's.  Both of my children have green, cat like eyes.  I have distant relatives with green and blue eyes, but my immediate family all have brown.  My brother also married a Caucasian and she actually also has brown eyes like my brother (her father has blue and her mother has brown).  Their three children have hazel, brown, and piercingly blue eyes.  The one with blue eyes looks like a Viking, and besides my brother being almost 6' tall, he has nothing Scandinavian about him.  You just never know!


My DH and I both have green eyes.  Our son has green but my daughter has blue


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, everything's possible, but why didn't he design it in the redesign to begin with then?


If he designed it in the first place, then he was obviously very happy with it....until it was pointed out to him that it could be bigger, more expensive, ornate, etc.  There is only one person who would want to do that, but subtly so he thinks it's his idea


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Plastic Pal claims that it was Hazard who redesigned it. I think I stopped looking at that ring after the alleged second change.


Harry wouldn’t have known it had to be redesigned if someone hadn’t looked sad and wheedled him to do it.

Here’s another old word:
wheedle​verb​whee·dle ˈ(h)wē-dᵊl 
: to influence or entice by soft words or flattery


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> The irony is, she could have had it all.
> 
> Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered.
> 
> She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose eyes are bigger than her stomach (my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


Everyone here sees how short sighted she was, but honestly, does someone born and raised raised in LA actually think that in terms of status, Hollywood is ranked higher than the BRF?  

I am biased, being from the UK and respecting the royals and being raised in a home who loved the RF.  I just cannot wrap my head around someone who was handed it all on a silver platter, and thinking that celebrity in LA was more desirable than royalty?  

I truly do believe that from day one, her intention was to return to LA with her tiara, and go straight to the top of the Hollywood stratosphere.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Harry wouldn’t have known it had to be redesigned if someone hadn’t looked sad and wheedled him to do it.
> 
> Here’s another old word:
> wheedle​verb​whee·dle ˈ(h)wē-dᵊl
> : to influence or entice by soft words or flattery


Reminds me of those old fairy tales which have wicked women wheedling besotted men, like what happens in Beauty and the Beast.

*besotted*
/bɪˈsɒtɪd/
1. adjective
strongly infatuated.
"he became *besotted with* a local barmaid"
2. ARCHAIC
intoxicated; drunk.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Everyone here sees how short sighted she was, but honestly, does someone born and raised raised in LA actually think that in terms of status, Hollywood is ranked higher than the BRF?
> 
> I am biased, being from the UK and respecting the royals and being raised in a home who loved the RF.  I just cannot wrap my head around someone who was handed it all on a silver platter, and thinking that celebrity in LA was more desirable than royalty?
> 
> I truly do believe that from day one, her intention was to return to LA with her tiara, and go straight to the top of the Hollywood stratosphere.



It's true that US celebs are almost automatically international celebs, but she was never going to be the next Zendaya or anything like. 

_If_ she was clever, 'settling' for a Duchess of some little 'backwater' country was so _more_ than she could ever hoped on the Global stage.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Everyone here sees how short sighted she was, but honestly, does someone born and raised raised in LA actually think that in terms of status, Hollywood is ranked higher than the BRF?
> 
> I am biased, being from the UK and respecting the royals and being raised in a home who loved the RF.  I just cannot wrap my head around someone who was handed it all on a silver platter, and thinking that celebrity in LA was more desirable than royalty?
> 
> I truly do believe that from day one, her intention was to return to LA with her tiara, and go straight to the top of the Hollywood stratosphere.


She wanted money, lots of money, and a life of ease and sleaze. Cannot fathom how anyone could equate joining the Firm as non-stop partying. Maybe her in-depth research into Handbag only touched on his party and drugs lifestyle choices.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't notice at first, but so true.




A lot of women do this. They are able to bring a man to the point of walking and within minutes have them wrapped round their little finger again. I have a SIL that’s been doing it for 25+ years. None of us get it. 

Regarding divorce, she might be able to successfully portray victimhood using her one trick pony acting face to her online supporters but not to a court. 

There is enough out there to show that whilst Harry complied, albeit reluctantly in the Oprah interview, she is the instigator of all the allegations. The only time I saw genuine annoyance was the withdrawal of money and we all know how tight Harry is so that bears truth.


----------



## Toby93

I just saw this on twitter


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of those old fairy tales which have wicked women wheedling besotted men, like what happens in Beauty and the Beast.
> 
> *besotted*
> /bɪˈsɒtɪd/
> 1. adjective
> strongly infatuated.
> "he became *besotted with* a local barmaid"
> 2. ARCHAIC
> intoxicated; drunk.



Besotted with a flibbertigibbet


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## calicocat

xincinsin said:


> She wanted money, lots of money, and a life of ease and sleaze. Cannot fathom how anyone could equate joining the Firm as non-stop partying. Maybe her in-depth research into Handbag only touched on his party and drugs lifestyle choices.


Note to self - no late-night research Google-ing with Tignanello/Oreos. Maybe with morning coffees and post breakfast. (Disclaimer: results may vary)


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Housing Unit/Toilet Block


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT but I fell down the Wikipedia rabbit hole of dukedoms and heirs...UK's most eligible bachelor is getting old (over 30!).


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _HELLO! understands the couple flew out of London Heathrow on Tuesday. As previously reported, the pair arrived on British soil on the morning of Saturday, 3 September for what was due to be a short trip to visit several charities. After 17 days away from home, Harry and Meghan will have been very eager to get back to their two children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet.1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry return home to reunite with children following the Queen's funeral
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left the UK to reunite with their children following the funeral of the Queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Fasten your seat belts, the next few weeks could be a bumpy ride.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I truly do believe that from day one, her intention was to return to LA with her tiara, and go straight to the top of the Hollywood stratosphere.


We are on the same page.


----------



## marietouchet

Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part


----------



## CarryOn2020

Peace deal?  Does CBS realize H&M were there for a funeral, not a negotiation?  What is wrong with GK?
Time and place, Gayle, time and place.  Ick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
> I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part



Oh really. And there I thought they were jetting home to see their small children. How naive of me.


----------



## Mumotons

Hmmm let’s see, will they wait until next Tuesday to sell their next ‘poor poor us, did you see how the evil RF ignored us ?’
I mean their timing is always ****, covid, the death of Her Majesty and now Russia is stirring the pot, why are the planets not aligned for Megsy, why is everyone against her


----------



## rose60610

So they flew to California already? No meeting with the King? Awww. Bbbbbbut I thought Claw was soooooo important! Let's see how long it'll take before she blubbers on about how terribly they were treated at the funeral and behind the scenes. You KNOW that's coming. After all, why can't the RF be nice to them after Claw and Haz accused them of being racist, rotten, driving her to suicide, etc? That's no excuse (sarcasm in case there's any confusion).


----------



## CarryOn2020

My guess — Friday, they’ll release something.  
They’ve been in the spotlight for almost 25 days now.  They won’t give it up. Maybe more Spotify?  polo?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

CarryOn2020 said:


> Peace deal?  Does CBS realize H&M were there for a funeral, not a negotiation?  What is wrong with GK?
> Time and place, Gayle, time and place.  Ick.


So they still haven't learned their lesson. Leaking info to the US press while the royals are still in mourning. Despicable


----------



## papertiger

hollieplus2 said:


> So they still haven't learned their lesson. Leaking info to the US press while the royals are still in mourning. Despicable



So much for her (single) tear!


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> Everyone here sees how short sighted she was, but honestly, does someone born and raised raised in LA actually think that in terms of status, Hollywood is ranked higher than the BRF?
> 
> I am biased, being from the UK and respecting the royals and being raised in a home who loved the RF.  I just cannot wrap my head around someone who was handed it all on a silver platter, and thinking that celebrity in LA was more desirable than royalty?
> 
> I truly do believe that from day one, her intention was to return to LA with her tiara, and go straight to the top of the Hollywood stratosphere.


I think of Hollywood fame as being a transient thing - especially for women - because youth and looks are such a feature of it.  The royals remain royal despite age, so if I were looking for a comfy old age (or middle age for that matter) I wouldn’t set aim for Hollywood.  There are a few exceptions, like Judi Dench, Jane Fonda, and Helen Mirren, but they’re few.
You’d think Meghan would know about the fate of actresses past 40 more than most?


marietouchet said:


> Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
> I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part


Well that didn’t take long.


----------



## BlueCherry

marietouchet said:


> Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
> I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part



Seriously? Where did she get this info from I wonder. Some leopards just don’t change their spots.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

_"It’s a big mistake to think about yourself. No one is interested in you in the long run. Don’t court popularity, it doesn’t last. Remember attention comes because of the position you are privileged to hold, not because of who you are. If you think it’s all about you, you’ll never be happy"_
Prince Philip


----------



## BlueCherry

Pessie said:


> I think of Hollywood fame as being a transient thing - especially for women - because youth and looks are such a feature of it.  The royals remain royal despite age, so if I were looking for a comfy old age (or middle age for that matter) I wouldn’t set aim for Hollywood.  There are a few exceptions, like Judi Dench, Jane Fonda, and Helen Mirren, but they’re few.
> You’d think Meghan would know about the fate of actresses past 40 more than most?
> 
> Well that didn’t take long.



I can imagine in todays world staying popular and relevant takes a great deal of hard work. But we all know hard work is anathema to the Duchess.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> _"It’s a big mistake to think about yourself. No one is interested in you in the long run. Don’t court popularity, it doesn’t last. Remember attention comes because of the position you are privileged to hold, not because of who you are. If you think it’s all about you, you’ll never be happy"_
> Prince Philip



He was an astute and wise buffoon. God love him


----------



## DoggieBags

Gayle King has a functioning brain So I don’t understand why she continues to check her brain at the door and suspend all her capacity for critical thinking when dealing with the Harkles. She does herself no favors by consistently mouthing the Harkle party line regardless of how patently absurd some of their pronouncements are.


----------



## Pessie

BlueCherry said:


> I can imagine in todays world staying popular and relevant takes a great deal of hard work. But we all know hard work is anathema to the Duchess.


I dunno, Meghan seems to be scrabbling like a mad thing to keep herself in the headlines


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
> I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part


I imagine the only offer from the unSussexfuls is "Give us money and we'll stop the truth bombs. Give us more money and we'll let you see the kids."


----------



## lanasyogamama

Gayle’s comment is so stupid! They’re a couple of whiners, not a country for KC to have peace talks with.  Is this really the hill she wants to die on?


----------



## Jayne1

Helventara said:


> Yes,yes, I will be sick later  but I kinda like her here. She was beautiful, modern, fun, like any other young women on TV/IG but that’s the full extent of her potential: she just cannot comprehend anything beyond and therefore cannot grow beyond this type of persona. Plus, BRF is just waaay out of her league.


I liked her before. Very effervescent. Not subdued royal though.

I only watched the video to see her favourite spots in Toronto... but they only showed her clothes, so Meg saying she was showing us her favourite spots was a trick to get me to watch the whole thing.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> _HELLO! understands the couple flew out of London Heathrow on Tuesday. As previously reported, the pair arrived on British soil on the morning of Saturday, 3 September for what was due to be a short trip to visit several charities. After 17 days away from home, Harry and Meghan will have been very eager to get back to their two children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet.1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry return home to reunite with children following the Queen's funeral
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left the UK to reunite with their children following the funeral of the Queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


If I hadn’t just been for my covid booster I’d be doing cartwheels bye bye don’t come back


----------



## BlueCherry

DoggieBags said:


> Gayle King has a functioning brain So I don’t understand why she continues to check her brain at the door and suspend all her capacity for critical thinking when dealing with the Harkles. She does herself no favors by consistently mouthing the Harkle party line regardless of how patently absurd some of their pronouncements are.



Her brain is keeping Harry’s balls company


----------



## elvisfan4life

Toby93 said:


> Everyone here sees how short sighted she was, but honestly, does someone born and raised raised in LA actually think that in terms of status, Hollywood is ranked higher than the BRF?
> 
> I am biased, being from the UK and respecting the royals and being raised in a home who loved the RF.  I just cannot wrap my head around someone who was handed it all on a silver platter, and thinking that celebrity in LA was more desirable than royalty?
> 
> I truly do believe that from day one, her intention was to return to LA with her tiara, and go straight to the top of the Hollywood stratosphere.


Well her talent certainly wasn’t going to get her there


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> It's true that US celebs are almost automatically international celebs, but she was never going to be the next Zendaya or anything like.
> 
> _If_ she was clever, 'settling' for a Duchess of some little 'backwater' country was so _more_ than she could ever hoped on the Global stage.


Who is Zendaya????


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Peace deal?  Does CBS realize H&M were there for a funeral, not a negotiation?  What is wrong with GK?
> Time and place, Gayle, time and place.  Ick.


Whaaaaat! Gayle scooped Scoobie?


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> Fasten your seat belts, the next few weeks could be a bumpy ride.


Or just ignore them and it won’t -deprive them of any recognition at all and they will wither away I can’t see a divorce they are as bad as each other and no one else would want either of them


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _HELLO! understands the couple flew out of London Heathrow on Tuesday. As previously reported, the pair arrived on British soil on the morning of Saturday, 3 September for what was due to be a short trip to visit several charities. After 17 days away from home, Harry and Meghan will have been very eager to get back to their two children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet.1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry return home to reunite with children following the Queen's funeral
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left the UK to reunite with their children following the funeral of the Queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


...as a collective sigh of relief of the BRF echoed throughout the kingdom.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

elvisfan4life said:


> Who is Zendaya????


She’s a young actress, very talented and beautiful.


----------



## duna

Pessie said:


> *There’s no land and income associated with the Duchy of Sussex*.  It’s just a title.


Thank God for that! Having grown up between London and Sussex, where I still have a house, I would be overjoyed to sign a petition to strip them of the Sussex title.


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> Who is Zendaya????


Everything MM is not. A young, talented, award-winning American actress who also has very lucrative cosmetic and jewelry contracts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Seems the Brits are on to us


----------



## TimeToShop

charlottawill said:


> ...as a collective sigh of relief of the BRF echoed throughout the kingdom.



As their plane descended a feeling of dispair spread across the land (US).


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> ...as a collective sigh of relief of the BRF echoed throughout the kingdom.


Loud cheering clapping and whooping  and that’s just my house


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s a young actress, very talented and beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5614797


Never heard of her


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Never heard of her



Wish we could say the same of the MeAgain


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
> I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part


After reflection... I think GK's words are incredibly telling ... 
no peace deal ... 
1. It is as if there had been an armed conflict
2. I dont remember the press ever saying the family relations were THAT BAD - there were hints, implied language but this is an OVERT declaration that there have been HOSTILITIES 
3. OK, a deal has not been struck YET, as if this family issue were the biggest thing on the mind of KC, to be dealt with IMMEDIATELY - come on, it has been going on for 4 years, another month or two.... 
Gloves are off now


----------



## DoggieBags

TimeToShop said:


> As their plane descended a feeling of dispair spread across the land (US).


You give them way too much credit. They’re really not that important. We have way crazier, more destructive personalities in this country.  They’re mere ripples in the vast ocean of crazies the US has spawned over the centuries


----------



## WingNut

Pessie said:


> I dunno, Meghan seems to be scrabbling like a mad thing to keep herself in the headlines


Sorry I read this as "scratching like a mad thing...".

Mange?

It suits her....


----------



## bellecate

In looking at the photos where H and TW stand somewhat distanced from the rest of the family, I wondered if that was intentional on the Harkles part. To use to further their ‘woe is to us’ victimhood, we were ostracized.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> In looking at the photos where H and TW stand somewhat distanced from the rest of the family, I wondered if that was intentional on the Harkles part. To use to further their ‘woe is to us’ victimhood, we were ostracized.


All done for Nflix.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Serious question for all... Since Sxnshine Sxchs allegedly dropped them because again, allegedly for not paying their bills, do we now see much less planted or leaked stories and information? Seems like the main parties who are dropping bombs or making new comments or allegations via the mass media, on behalf of them, are Scoobie Doo and G^yle King.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I imagine the only offer from the unSussexfuls is "Give us money and we'll stop the truth bombs. Give us more money and we'll let you see the kids."


What the Sussexes (she) want(s) - that they might not get
1. Titles for the children but I see no reason to grant these now and for the BRF to give up the leverage of not having granted them 
2. Assurance that the ducal title will not be removed
3. Tacit approval of book publication - see item 4
4. Money is always nice including eg buy H&M out of the book/Spotify deals 
5. Guaranteed International Protected Person status - I dont think the BRF can grant this ?

What the BRF wants
1. Signed non disclosure agreement from both H and M, otherwise there is a constant threat of more truth bombs forever. No autobiography for MM.
2. Signed agreement of no more lawsuits ?

The remaining 3 Spotify episodes are a done deal - delivered to Spotify - heck what does Spotify gain if they let MM edit out any juicy bits - nothing - so there will be at least 3 more truth bomb filled episodes, the only question is how many more will be produced


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s a young actress, very talented and beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5614797


yes, only 26....M will never catch up with her


----------



## Icyjade

marietouchet said:


> What the Sussexes (she) want(s) - that they might not get
> 1. Titles for the children but I see no reason to grant these now and for the BRF to give up the leverage of not having granted them
> 2. Assurance that the ducal title will not be removed
> 3. Tacit approval of book publication - see item 4
> 4. Money is always nice including eg buy H&M out of the book/Spotify deals
> 5. Guaranteed International Protected Person status - I dont think the BRF can grant this ?
> 
> What the BRF wants
> 1. Signed non disclosure agreement from both H and M, otherwise there is a constant threat of more truth bombs forever. No autobiography for MM.
> 2. Signed agreement of no more lawsuits ?
> 
> The remaining 3 Spotify episodes are a done deal - delivered to Spotify - heck what does Spotify gain if they let MM edit out any juicy bits - nothing - so there will be at least 3 more truth bomb filled episodes, the only question is how many more will be produced


But she can’t be trusted to keep to the NDA, so why bother. I think just destroy her credibility. So if they have dirt on MM, then unleash it...


----------



## Icyjade

lanasyogamama said:


> She’s a young actress, very talented and beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5614797



And so very stylish. She always looks fabulous on the red carpet. Everything fits perfectly. Make-up on point, etc.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> We should ship them a box though that could be quite dangerous because she might burn down the house to claim insurance since they are so under the water and need money now


The fire will start in the nursery to keep with the repetitive themes of her life, but the guttering candle will be put out by her loyal aide Omid. Archie was not in the room because he was outside introducing his sister to their parental trees.


marietouchet said:


> After reflection... I think GK's words are incredibly telling ...
> no peace deal ...
> 1. It is as if there had been an armed conflict
> 2. I dont remember the press ever saying the family relations were THAT BAD - there were hints, implied language but this is an OVERT declaration that there have been HOSTILITIES
> 3. OK, a deal has not been struck YET, as if this family issue were the biggest thing on the mind of KC, to be dealt with IMMEDIATELY - come on, it has been going on for 4 years, another month or two....
> Gloves are off now


Maybe this was GK helping Zedzee to declare war.


----------



## Debbini

marietouchet said:


> Oh dearrrrr Gayle has reported no peace deal has been struck despite efforts on both sides, so they jet home
> I guess writing a letter to KC counts as an effort on her part


On Twitter or Instagram?


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> What the Sussexes (she) want(s) - that they might not get
> 1. Titles for the children but I see no reason to grant these now and for the BRF to give up the leverage of not having granted them
> 2. Assurance that the ducal title will not be removed
> 3. Tacit approval of book publication - see item 4
> 4. Money is always nice including eg buy H&M out of the book/Spotify deals
> 5. Guaranteed International Protected Person status - I dont think the BRF can grant this ?
> 
> What the BRF wants
> 1. Signed non disclosure agreement from both H and M, otherwise there is a constant threat of more truth bombs forever. No autobiography for MM.
> 2. Signed agreement of no more lawsuits ?
> 
> The remaining 3 Spotify episodes are a done deal - delivered to Spotify - heck what does Spotify gain if they let MM edit out any juicy bits - nothing - so there will be at least 3 more truth bomb filled episodes, the only question is how many more will be produced



An agreement can only be signed about retrospective action/words if the declaration was positive, therefore:

Not

I will not mention anything that hasn't already been mentioned (silenced)

But rather

There is nothing that I haven't mentioned already (declaration)


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The fire will start in the nursery to keep with the repetitive themes of her life, but the guttering candle will be put out by her loyal aide Omid. Archie was not in the room because he was outside introducing his sister to their parental trees.
> 
> Maybe this was GK helping Zedzee to declare war.


GK, Opr et al. trying so desperately to be relevant at any cost. Willing to begin a battle of words, as needed.  Shame on them all.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> The fire will start in the nursery to keep with the repetitive themes of her life, but the guttering candle will be put out by her loyal aide Omid. Archie was not in the room because he was outside introducing his sister to their parental trees.
> 
> Maybe this was GK helping Zedzee to declare war.


Was just listening to a podcast on the causes of WWI
It was not just about the death of the archduke, WWI had been brewing for years - the 1912 Balkans war, the colonial expansions of the French/Germans/UK/US (Cuba), the expansion of the German military since the Franco Prussian war of 1870, silly royals (Wilhelm and Nicholas II)
Somehow I was struck by the metaphor of WWI and the upcoming Harkle wars, which have been brewing for 4 years


----------



## DL Harper

DoggieBags said:


> Gayle King has a functioning brain So I don’t understand why she continues to check her brain at the door and suspend all her capacity for critical thinking when dealing with the Harkles. She does herself no favors by consistently mouthing the Harkle party line regardless of how patently absurd some of their pronouncements are.


Because she's a puppet to OW????  OR maybe even Tyler P???


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> The remaining 3 Spotify episodes are a done deal - delivered to Spotify - heck what does Spotify gain if they let MM edit out any juicy bits - nothing - so there will be at least 3 more truth bomb filled episodes, the only question is how many more will be produced



I think there are 9 more episodes (?)   I read there were 12 total and 3 have been released. Probably the original plan was for the episodes to run through the fall and then Harry's book to come out right after.  Now that timing is in disarray.   If I'm KCIII, I'm waiting to see what's in the book and what swipes MM takes at the family in the remaining podcasts before making any decisions about anything.    At a certain point, they'll run out of material.  Other than this funeral, it's literally been 3 years since they were last in the UK for any length of time.  Recall how they started a long vacation/break in the fall of 2019 then they  hightailed it to Canada where they spent Thanksgiving and Christmas, then Megexit in early 2020.  All this stuff they are whining about is 3, 4, 5 years old and I doubt KCIII has much patience for them at this point.


----------



## Mrs.Z

CarryOn2020 said:


> Peace deal?  Does CBS realize H&M were there for a funeral, not a negotiation?  What is wrong with GK?
> Time and place, Gayle, time and place.  Ick.


Seriously Gayle King is embarrassing and needs to get a life and Markle needs to stop using these people as her mouthpiece.  It’s all very pathetic.


----------



## EverSoElusive

DL Harper said:


> Because she's a puppet to OW????  OR maybe even Tyler P???


She's OW's bff so I'm assuming if anything, she's influenced by OW, not TP though TP is friends with OW herself.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> An agreement can only be signed about retrospective action/words if the declaration was positive, therefore:
> 
> Not
> 
> I will not mention anything that hasn't already been mentioned (silenced)
> 
> But rather
> 
> There is nothing that I haven't mentioned already (declaration)


Good point, was thinking about D's divorce settlement, she allegedly signed her rights to do a tell all, but got a lot
Fergie supposedly did not , did not get much and wrote a book


----------



## ccbaggirl89

charlottawill said:


> Everything MM is not. A young, talented, award-winning American actress who also has very lucrative cosmetic and jewelry contracts.


And she happens to be dating British actor Tom Holland for several years now and visits London with him often to see his family. She is just so awesome. Totally love Zendaya so much and the energy she puts out there is super positive.


----------



## marietouchet

ccbaggirl89 said:


> And she happens to be dating British actor Tom Holland for several years now and visits London with him often to see his family. She is just so awesome. Totally love Zendaya so much and the energy she puts out there is super positive.


Agree Zendaya is a super star and has learned to balance fame, privacy etc
She is Chani in the new DUNE movies, the hero's love interest


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> After reflection... I think GK's words are incredibly telling ...
> no peace deal ...
> 1. It is as if there had been an armed conflict
> 2. I dont remember the press ever saying the family relations were THAT BAD - there were hints, implied language but this is an OVERT declaration that there have been HOSTILITIES
> 3. OK, a deal has not been struck YET, as if this family issue were the biggest thing on the mind of KC, to be dealt with IMMEDIATELY - come on, it has been going on for 4 years, another month or two....
> Gloves are off now


Why should there be a peace deal?  That infers that they are important, and they are not. They are fruit flies buzzing around the top banana. I think BP will continue to ignore them and whatever so called truth bombs they put out. The UK has moved into a new era with a new King and Prince of Wales.  The heirs were front and center at the funeral. In general people loved  seeing George and Charlotte. They even loved seeing little Louis acting up and won’t forget the images of him at the Jubilee actively engaging in conversation with his loving  great grandmother and sitting on his grandfather’s lap. There is a feeling of calm and security seeing the continuity. Disrupters are not welcome.

The behavior of two young children during a very long and trying day was not unnoticed and their parents were given the credit for it that they deserved. It said a lot about them all as future leaders. Spend time with your children Harry and Meghan and let the world see them. It can’t be that difficult if you stop obsessing about yourselves for 5 minutes.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Seriously Gayle King is embarrassing and needs to get a life and Markle needs to stop using these people as her mouthpiece.  It’s all very pathetic.


She’s just another entertainment reporter and should stay in her lane. Some of these people need to stop attempting to have deep thoughts.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> She would say to protect herself from false statements, create a historical record for the invisikids, blah blah.
> 
> Looks like he is saying, “who me? What did I do?”  YMMV
> View attachment 5614284


Overly dramatic and quite combative hand gestures there by the man-child.
Anne wouldn't be taking any sh*t from JCMH, that's for sure.
I would love to have heard that exchange...







Cinderlala said:


> I thought it was refreshing for TW to stop cosplaying others and dress like herself. Extra witchy with a side of smug.


Maybe she's trying to modernize witchcraft?







Straight-Laced said:


> Who cries out of one eye?
> 
> In her own words :
> 'I can do that so well. It's crazy -  "Meghan, one tear, left eye. Go!"  Gimme three seconds.'
> 
> Has this been posted since the funeral ?





She was so full of herself, even back then when she was a 'nobody' 
Also, wtf was that outfit with the stripe skirt and red sweater and all the vomit-inducing posing...






Chanbal said:


>



Stop it! The end of that video took me out...


Hilarious!  




momtok said:


> OMG, did anyone else catch this line in the comment section?
> From someone named "Occasional Badger" ...
> *"So Meghan Markle may not be "really royal". Is the world ready for this bombshell? No wonder they 'lost' the incriminating document."*
> BAHAHAHA!!!


MM seeing this for the first time:







papertiger said:


> The irony is, she could have had it all.
> 
> Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered.
> 
> She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose eyes are bigger than her stomach (my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


Exactly. She's an idiot and greedy to the core.


I imagine this is what she says to herself in the mirror every morning:






CarryOn2020 said:


> _HELLO! understands the couple flew out of London Heathrow on Tuesday. As previously reported, the pair arrived on British soil on the morning of Saturday, 3 September for what was due to be a short trip to visit several charities. After 17 days away from home, Harry and Meghan will have been very eager to get back to their two children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet.1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry return home to reunite with children following the Queen's funeral
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have left the UK to reunite with their children following the funeral of the Queen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _










CarryOn2020 said:


> Peace deal?  Does CBS realize H&M were there for a funeral, not a negotiation?  What is wrong with GK?
> Time and place, Gayle, time and place.  Ick.


Gayle King is an absolute PITA. I _can't_ stand her, never could. I hope she understands the only reason she is in the privileged position she is, is because she is OW bEsT fRiEnD- using that connection to further herself and worshipping her a$$ for years.





BlueCherry said:


> Her brain is keeping Harry’s balls company


Girl...






bellecate said:


> In looking at the photos where H and TW stand somewhat distanced from the rest of the family, I wondered if that was intentional on the Harkles part. To use to further their ‘woe is to us’ victimhood, we were ostracized.


Well, when you put it like that...


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> I don't understand why she is so attached to a bracelet from her first husband. If she were considerate of her current husband's feelings, haha, she'd retire it. She could donate it to a charity auction and get some positive press.


I agree--I can't see H being happy seeing his wife wearing it. Funny how she sent back the rings but not the bracelet--what a goldd!gger. 

Also, I remember as a teen going to the local library monthly and grabbing all the fashion mags and reading away the afternoon. I remember when that bracelet was adverted as the "slave" bracelet, I thought it weird with the screws and screwdriver and definitely thinking the "slave" name was not cool. And I still feel that way about that bracelet but very clever for Cartier renaming it and burying the original name--it has worked.


----------



## kang504

ccbaggirl89 said:


> And she happens to be dating British actor Tom Holland for several years now and visits London with him often to see his family. She is just so awesome. Totally love Zendaya so much and the energy she puts out there is super positive.


Why discussion of Zendaya on Megan and Harry thread? Because Zendaya is an acceptable black woman?


----------



## Lodpah

I’m confused. TE said she was silenced but she did not sign an NDA? HM was smart.


----------



## gracekelly

Thank you for *saying this about the bracelet *@Lounorada.  I always found the entire concept of it distasteful. I think she keeps wearing it as a dig at Harry that she can get any man she wants. He sees her flirting so he gets the message.  However you view it, it’s in poor taste to continue wearing it.


----------



## charlottawill

WingNut said:


> Sorry I read this as "scratching like a mad thing...".
> 
> Mange?
> 
> It suits her....


I just noticed this:

_-if it has testicles or tires, it's going to give you trouble_-


----------



## Cavalier Girl

^ I believe it was used as a comparison of talent.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for *saying this about the bracelet *@Lounorada.  I always found the entire concept of it distasteful. I think she keeps wearing it as a dig at Harry that she can get any man she wants. He sees her flirting so he gets the message.  However you view it, it’s in poor taste to continue wearing it.



It's a very strange concept, as is the bondage design, but one that came along in the 1970s when historically there was huge debate on why women had to wear wedding rings (many men of the period did not even if their wife did). There was also a whole thing about why get married at all.

I suspect it was as simple as wedding rings were not selling like they once were so Cartier brought out a kind of 'wedding' ring for cool, rich people who were committed but not legally married.

Edited to say it was created 1969 (and at first designed to be sold in his/her pairs)


----------



## gracekelly

Ben Goldsmith claims Meghan Markle is disliked in Britain NOT because of racism but 'because she is a manipulative bully who got found out'​
*Ben Goldsmith, who held a governmental role and whose brother Zac is a current Government minister, made the allegations online in a series of extraordinary Tweets this morning*
*Mr Goldsmith claimed Meghan was 'a manipulative bully who got found out', although other Tweets were deleted*
*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have consistently denied bullying allegations, which were dismissed as calculated smears and falsehoods*
By DAN SALES FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 07:34 EDT, 21 September 2022 | UPDATED: 09:14 EDT, 21 September 2022


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## Jayne1

kemilia said:


> I agree--I can't see H being happy seeing his wife wearing it. Funny how she sent back the rings but not the bracelet--what a goldd!gger.
> 
> Also, I remember as a teen going to the local library monthly and grabbing all the fashion mags and reading away the afternoon. I remember when that bracelet was adverted as the "slave" bracelet, I thought it weird with the screws and screwdriver and definitely thinking the "slave" name was not cool. And I still feel that way about that bracelet but very clever for Cartier renaming it and burying the original name--it has worked.


Completely forgot about the Slave bracelet name!

I also remember the Cartier designer (Aldo Cipullo) partnered with Charles Revson (from Revlon Cosmetics) to design an almost exact copy that wasn't gold, just gold plated.


----------



## csshopper

TimeToShop said:


> As their plane descended a feeling of dispair spread across the land (US).





charlottawill said:


> ...as a collective sigh of relief of the BRF echoed throughout the kingdom.


And on the other side of the Pond, gloom descends. Google map says they are, door to door, 323 miles south from me. Not far enough.

They arrive home announced by second tier mouthpiece Gayle King, (Oprah being busy covering her butt) demonstrating they have learned nothing about the value of keeping family business in the family. STFU.

In the interim the world has seen how magnificently the Royal Family functions without them and in spite of them. We observed one disgraced Duke who carried himself with dignity, and one who pouted and whined and was disgustingly petty. He and his one tear Wife bring even more baggage home than they left with weeks ago. The messy life they’ve made for themselves continues:

In 2 weeks Tom Bower’s book is released in the US. How considerate of the Harkles to potentially boost sales for a whole new audience to learn the real truth, not Raptor’s.

If recent articles are accurate, they have serious cash flow problems and need an influx. I have NO sympathy for them. Data, from public records, on one US real estate site, states the estimated remaining mortgage is $11,293,644. having purchased it in June 2020 for $14,650,000. The site says estimated Monthly payment is $82,274. In the past two years in CA real estate home values soared, theirs included. If they sold now and, horrors, downsized they could use potential profit for the next place. Will they be smart enough, or will they continue to think their Victimhood business will keep them afloat?

Boggles the mind a company like Butter Up would charge clients for services from a man clearly in need of treatment for his own mental health issues that appear to exceed their level of expertise. If his compensation is tied to performance after maybe an original signing bonus, he’s in trouble.

They could cut costs by abandoning the security law suit. It’s a belly laugh at this point. The King and heir engage with thousands of strangers, but Haz thinks he and TW are targets.

He embarrassed the military with his shoulder insignia snit. The real soldiers would know since he no longer served in the role they signified, he could not wear them. Had nothing to do with a family issue. How long will Invictus be meaningful if he stays in charge? Especially since he seems to have ceded so much to TW whose only connection to the military is the weak man in her claw.

On and on it goes. Spotify. Netflix. 

An observation: Emma and her groom Teddy Pendry and the Corgis, Muick and Sandy were more meaningful in paying their respects to the Queen than Haz and Raptor. I had to go back for another look to see it, tears having gotten in the way the first time, but Teddy Pendry said Emma had a sixth sense and as the hearse passed raised her right front leg. That clutched my heart, one tear was an insult.


----------



## TimeToShop

The comment


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Ben Goldsmith claims Meghan Markle is disliked in Britain NOT because of racism but 'because she is a manipulative bully who got found out'​
> *Ben Goldsmith, who held a governmental role and whose brother Zac is a current Government minister, made the allegations online in a series of extraordinary Tweets this morning*
> *Mr Goldsmith claimed Meghan was 'a manipulative bully who got found out', although other Tweets were deleted*
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have consistently denied bullying allegations, which were dismissed as calculated smears and falsehoods*
> By DAN SALES FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 07:34 EDT, 21 September 2022 | UPDATED: 09:14 EDT, 21 September 2022



One of the commenters said, Goldsmith represents an important family and friends, so for him to say this out loud, in public - it lets everyone know King Charles has their full support.  Hazz&Tw can enjoy life overseas


----------



## Toby93

BlueCherry said:


> Seriously? Where did she get this info from I wonder. Some leopards just don’t change their spots.


She no longer has SS to do her dirty work, so she is having to leak things directly to Gayle King


----------



## charlottawill

I look forward to the Harkle rants and rages over their mistreatment just for the entertainment value. They might get some air in the US, but imo the Brits are ready to move on. They've seen her for who she really is and I believe they will rally in support of the BRF. 

Breaking news: "Massive Montecito Meltdown"


----------



## scarlet555

gracekelly said:


> Ben Goldsmith claims Meghan Markle is disliked in Britain NOT because of racism but 'because she is a manipulative bully who got found out'​
> *Ben Goldsmith, who held a governmental role and whose brother Zac is a current Government minister, made the allegations online in a series of extraordinary Tweets this morning*
> *Mr Goldsmith claimed Meghan was 'a manipulative bully who got found out', although other Tweets were deleted*
> *The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have consistently denied bullying allegations, which were dismissed as calculated smears and falsehoods*
> By DAN SALES FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 07:34 EDT, 21 September 2022 | UPDATED: 09:14 EDT, 21 September 2022


That's old news here...


----------



## BlueCherry

kang504 said:


> Why discussion of Zendaya on Megan and Harry thread? Because Zendaya is an acceptable black woman?



I too wondered who she is and now I know I think she’s is awesome. So beautiful and classy. My new girl crush   
Everything that Meghan isn’t …


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Whaaaaat! Gayle scooped Scoobie?


I guess she is going to have to find more people to leak info to.  With no PR company, they are going to have to step up their game


----------



## BlueCherry

charlottawill said:


> I just noticed this:
> 
> _-if it has testicles or tires, it's going to give you trouble_-


No fear of Harry having the mange then


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> Never heard of her


Me either


----------



## BlueCherry

gracekelly said:


> She’s just another entertainment reporter and should stay in her lane. Some of these people need to stop attempting to have deep thoughts.


“stay in her lane” 

I like that!


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> After reflection... I think GK's words are incredibly telling ...
> no peace deal ...
> 1. It is as if there had been an armed conflict
> 2. I dont remember the press ever saying the family relations were THAT BAD - there were hints, implied language but this is an OVERT declaration that there have been HOSTILITIES
> 3. OK, a deal has not been struck YET, as if this family issue were the biggest thing on the mind of KC, to be dealt with IMMEDIATELY - come on, it has been going on for 4 years, another month or two....
> Gloves are off now


I'm still trying to understand WHY there would need to be a *peace* deal in the first place?  What GK should have said, was that the Harkles did not fall to their knees, apologise and beg forgiveness.  They are the ones 100% in the wrong, so why the h*ll would the RF have to do anything to accommodate them?


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't notice at first, but so true.



This was my thought the whole time.  Who is manipulative enough to leak this info?  Who gains?  Who loses?  Notice nothing was leaked about any unhappiness of TW --- do we really think she just kept her head down and carried on quietly because she's such a trouper?  We know she's not.  We know she wants to control the narrative, always.  We know she had LOTS of time on her hands.  We know she was managed to limit her time in public.  We know she would have been furious about those things.  She damaged what she could.

Just my opinion based on previous behavior of H's current wife. (And knowledge of NPD.)


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> And on the other side of the Pond, gloom descends. Google map says they are, door to door, 323 miles south from me. Not far enough.
> 
> They arrive home announced by second tier mouthpiece Gayle King, (Oprah being busy covering her butt) demonstrating they have learned nothing about the value of keeping family business in the family. STFU.
> 
> In the interim the world has seen how magnificently the Royal Family functions without them and in spite of them. We observed one disgraced Duke who carried himself with dignity, and one who pouted and whined and was disgustingly petty. He and his one tear Wife bring even more baggage home than they left with weeks ago. The messy life they’ve made for themselves continues:
> 
> In 2 weeks Tom Bower’s book is released in the US. How considerate of the Harkles to potentially boost sales for a whole new audience to learn the real truth, not Raptor’s.
> 
> If recent articles are accurate, they have serious cash flow problems and need an influx. I have NO sympathy for them. Data, from public records, on one US real estate site, states the estimated remaining mortgage is $11,293,644. having purchased it in June 2020 for $14,650,000. The site says estimated Monthly payment is $82,274. In the past two years in CA real estate home values soared, theirs included. If they sold now and, horrors, downsized they could use potential profit for the next place. Will they be smart enough, or will they continue to think their Victimhood business will keep them afloat?
> 
> Boggles the mind a company like Butter Up would charge clients for services from a man clearly in need of treatment for his own mental health issues that appear to exceed their level of expertise. If his compensation is tied to performance after maybe an original signing bonus, he’s in trouble.
> 
> They could cut costs by abandoning the security law suit. It’s a belly laugh at this point. The King and heir engage with thousands of strangers, but Haz thinks he and TW are targets.
> 
> He embarrassed the military with his shoulder insignia snit. The real soldiers would know since he no longer served in the role they signified, he could not wear them. Had nothing to do with a family issue. How long will Invictus be meaningful if he stays in charge? Especially since he seems to have ceded so much to TW whose only connection to the military is the weak man in her claw.
> 
> On and on it goes. Spotify. Netflix.
> 
> An observation: Emma and her groom Teddy Pendry and the Corgis, Muick and Sandy were more meaningful in paying their respects to the Queen than Haz and Raptor. I had to go back for another look to see it, tears having gotten in the way the first time, but Teddy Pendry said Emma had a sixth sense and as the hearse passed raised her right front leg. That clutched my heart, one tear was an insult.


Love love love your post!  

It only hit me yesterday that the were all sitting, or a more accurately slow marching, ducks following Her Majesty all around and to and fro.  Not to mention going out and KC speaking with the people, shaking hands and one woman even hugged him and gave him a kiss on the cheek!  Talk about approachable.  Hazz and TW were out there briefly as well and lord help them, with  no Teflon tent around them and they survived. Even the protesters who were holding signs that had absolutely nothing to do with the funeral behaved themselves nicely.   

Time to put the whinging about security to rest. Drop the suit and save your money Harry, because the Bank of Dad closed


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> This was my thought the whole time.  Who is manipulative enough to leak this info?  Who gains?  Who loses?  Notice nothing was leaked about any unhappiness of TW --- do we really think she just kept her head down and carried on quietly because she's such a trouper?  We know she's not.  We know she wants to control the narrative, always.  We know she had LOTS of time on her hands.  We know she was managed to limit her time in public.  We know she would have been furious about those things.  She damaged what she could.
> 
> Just my opinion based on previous behavior of H's current wife. (And knowledge of NPD.)


I think she kept her head down because of the bullying complaints. More whining from her would stir that up. As we see today, a totally different person brought up her bullying, so it’s not forgotten and didn’t go away.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Only $10


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

The King’s response:


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the commenters said, Goldsmith represents an important family and friends, so for him to say this out loud, in public - it lets everyone know King Charles has their full support.  Hazz&Tw can enjoy life overseas



Bens father, Sir James was a very controversial and combative character who hated the press. It was Private Eye that started it. His family lost all their money and he made it all back and more. If Ben is like his father he will hopefully fight back. PS. I have a little crush on his brother Zak.


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> I think she kept her head down because of the bullying complaints. More whining from her would stir that up. As we see today, a totally different person brought up her bullying, so it’s not forgotten and didn’t go away.


Do you think so?  I don't think she has that kind of restraint.  I think she was very skillfully handled by the grey suits to keep her under control and out of sight as much as possible.


----------



## LittleStar88

The inkwells can be a metaphor for H&M


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Almost 60 pages to catch up. I couldn't cancel a Monday appointment so I spent Monday evening and Tuesday watching videos of the funeral and of HM and Prince Philip's lives on BritBox and anywhere else I could find them. 
I'm convinced that the Despicable Pair are responsible for hastening Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth's demise the same as if they had aimed and shot arrows through their hearts and still the conniving b!tches had the gall to attend the funeral expecting a warm welcome.


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> You may find that if they happened, Harry would be somehow be 'stuck' in the UK at that time.


The renewed lease at Frogmore Cottage gives him official domicile in the UK, despite/in addition to his status in the US.  I wonder if the lease is under his name only...


----------



## lulu212121

CarryOn2020 said:


> The King’s response:
> View attachment 5614987



Thank you!!! You and @Lounorada have given me quite the abdominal workout today.


----------



## calicocat

csshopper said:


> An observation: Emma and her groom Teddy Pendry and the Corgis, Muick and Sandy were more meaningful in paying their respects to the Queen than Haz and Raptor. I had to go back for another look to see it, tears having gotten in the way the first time, but *Teddy Pendry said Emma had a sixth sense and as the hearse passed raised her right front leg**.* That clutched my heart, one tear was an insult.


Emma video


----------



## Sharont2305

BlueCherry said:


> Bens father, Sir James was a very controversial and combative character who hated the press. It was Private Eye that started it. His family lost all their money and he made it all back and more. If Ben is like his father he will hopefully fight back. PS. I have a little crush on his brother Zak.


Also, its rumoured Sir James and Diana's mother had a fling and the result was Diana. Who knows what to believe?


----------



## TimeToShop

calicocat said:


> Emma video



Emma curtsied!


----------



## jelliedfeels

Pessie said:


> It’s history not conspiracy imo.  Eg Cromwell took titles and land and gave them out to his mates like sweets, and he appropriated houses and land from the church which was divvied up too.  He in turn lost all his titles when he fell from power and was executed.  The King rewarded his supporters and punished others.  Theres centuries of death, marriage and struggle for power and property.
> The Duke of Westminster’s current fortune (Mayfair etc) was originally a worthless piece of barren country outside London brought into the family on marriage by a fairly ordinary woman called Mary I think.  But that’s not a Royal Dukedom.
> ETA just remembered.  The Duke of Norfolk owns Arundel Castle - which is in Sussex!


Interesting info but that’s kind of misrepresenting Cromwell a little. His system of governance survived him and certain parties desecrated his remains to prove a point rather than he was usurped and executed while living.


papertiger said:


> _All_ UK property, estate and titles can merge into the Crown if there is no direct named person in a will or direct heir.


Which is a little odd when you think about it. I know I keep harping on about my pet subjects but that does happen in Golden age mysteries a lot too 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but I fell down the Wikipedia rabbit hole of dukedoms and heirs...UK's most eligible bachelor is getting old (over 30!).


That’s good getting old enough to settle down


CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess — Friday, they’ll release something.
> They’ve been in the spotlight for almost 25 days now.  They won’t give it up. Maybe more Spotify?  polo?


I’m hoping for first single-  I mean who is to say they won’t be the next Sunny and Cher…. Or axel f and crazy frog?


lanasyogamama said:


> Gayle’s comment is so stupid! They’re a couple of whiners, not a country for KC to have peace talks with.  Is this really the hill she wants to die on?


The poor woman would have to decompose next to Scobie’s unchanging plastic carcass - what an ignominious fate! 


Jayne1 said:


> I liked her before. Very effervescent. Not subdued royal though.
> 
> I only watched the video to see her favourite spots in Toronto... but they only showed her clothes, so Meg saying she was showing us her favourite spots was a trick to get me to watch the whole thing.


Spill the tea- where should we be hitting in Toronto to enjoy the best spots and avoid the Megs? 


gracekelly said:


> She’s just another entertainment reporter and should stay in her lane. Some of these people need to stop attempting to have deep thoughts.


The shade is phenomenal 


kemilia said:


> I agree--I can't see H being happy seeing his wife wearing it. Funny how she sent back the rings but not the bracelet--what a goldd!gger.
> 
> Also, I remember as a teen going to the local library monthly and grabbing all the fashion mags and reading away the afternoon. I remember when that bracelet was adverted as the "slave" bracelet, I thought it weird with the screws and screwdriver and definitely thinking the "slave" name was not cool. And I still feel that way about that bracelet but very clever for Cartier renaming it and burying the original name--it has worked.


I remember hearing it was called a slave bangle. In fact slave used to be a generic term for solid bangles luckily that’s gone out of fashion now


papertiger said:


> It's a very strange concept, as is the bondage design, but one that came along in the 1970s when historically there was huge debate on why women had to wear wedding rings (many men of the period did not even if their wife did). There was also a whole thing about why get married at all.
> 
> I suspect it was as simple as wedding rings were not selling like they once were so Cartier brought out a kind of 'wedding' ring for cool, rich people who were committed but not legally married.


Agreed it’s essentially a commitment token like an engagement ring or a love spoon. 
I’m struck how many cult jewellery items have kinky elements when you think about it- the JUC being pointy, those tight Tiffany change n collars, the CDC obviously. 
I wonder if it helps the lover to hand over the credit card.   


Jayne1 said:


> Completely forgot about the Slave bracelet name!
> 
> I also remember the Cartier designer (Aldo Cipullo) partnered with Charles Revson (from Revlon Cosmetics) to design an almost exact copy that wasn't gold, just gold plated.


Sssh Cartier would like us to all forget about their slump period 


CobaltBlu said:


> The renewed lease at Frogmore Cottage gives him official domicile in the UK, despite/in addition to his status in the US.  I wonder if the lease is under his name only...


That is a very interesting question..


----------



## noreen_uk

not sure if this has been shared but it's an interesting to read 

https://www.eonline.com/news/134723...-prince-harrys-relationship-with-royal-family


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


>



One of the comments.... ..


----------



## TimeToShop

Watching this again, a few times. In the beginning it looks like TWs face falls when she looks at his scowl. It looks like a genuine about to cry face. They smile to the person helping them into the car. Once in her face and neck look so tense and he puffs out his cheeks. She appears to scooch over, away from him. Maybe they’ve had it out.

Perhaps he’s had a moment of clarity and realizes what he threw away for her. I still think he’s terrible for the way he’s treated his family, but do wonder if he would have stayed if it wasn’t for the kids.


----------



## Lounorada

gracekelly said:


> Thank you for *saying this about the bracelet *@Lounorada.  I always found the entire concept of it distasteful. I think she keeps wearing it as a dig at Harry that she can get any man she wants. He sees her flirting so he gets the message.  However you view it, it’s in poor taste to continue wearing it.


@gracekelly I agree with you completely, but I don't think that was me who said something about the bracelet! Unless I did and can't remember but I don't think it was me...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Those legs


----------



## Pessie

jelliedfeels said:


> Interesting info but that’s kind of misrepresenting Cromwell a little. His system of governance survived him and certain parties desecrated his remains to prove a point rather than he was usurped and executed while living.
> 
> Which is a little odd when you think about it. I know I keep harping on about my pet subjects but that does happen in Golden age mysteries a lot too
> 
> That’s good getting old enough to settle down
> 
> I’m hoping for first single-  I mean who is to say they won’t be the next Sunny and Cher…. Or axel f and crazy frog?
> 
> The poor woman would have to decompose next to Scobie’s unchanging plastic carcass - what an ignominious fate!
> 
> Spill the tea- where should we be hitting in Toronto to enjoy the best spots and avoid the Megs?
> 
> The shade is phenomenal
> 
> I remember hearing it was called a slave bangle. In fact slave used to be a generic term for solid bangles luckily that’s gone out of fashion now
> 
> Agreed it’s essentially a commitment token like an engagement ring or a love spoon.
> I’m struck how many cult jewellery items have kinky elements when you think about it- the JUC being pointy, those tight Tiffany change n collars, the CDC obviously.
> I wonder if it helps the lover to hand over the credit card.
> 
> Sssh Cartier would like us to all forget about their slump period
> 
> That is a very interesting question..


That was the other Cromwell (Charles II), not the Cromwell who worked for Henry VIII.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I guess she is going to have to find more people to leak info to.  With no PR company, they are going to have to step up their game


She'll take a page out of T****'s playbook and call up media outlets under an assumed name. A lot cheaper than paying a PR firm.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Those legs



How many noses ago was that?


----------



## Diamondbirdie

papertiger said:


> The irony is, she could have had it all.
> 
> Money in the bank, rank, status, respect and all her living expenses covered.
> 
> She's not clever, she's an idiot, whose eyes are bigger than her stomach (my father's favourite saying watching others attack a party buffet)


Exactly this. I hope her experience of the funeral, in the company of many heads of state and European monarchs shows her how she passed up the biggest opportunity she ever had. It’s all such a waste. She could have done an IMMENSE amount of good with charities and had a very comfortable life.


----------



## bag-mania

Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.   









						Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
					

Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## lallybelle

She's giving me a bit of Kim K there, lol.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



I’m wondering how much he was paid to say this.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I get it a bit…
GK had her big announcement on one channel in the US , not UK
Tyler was on another channel … in the US , not UK 
And TMZ reports on Tyler, TMZ is a very US type source
TMZ is less of a serious news shop than Vanity Fair or People


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Good grief  is Tyler being paid to say this?  I can’t think of any other reason why a grown man would spontaneously come out with such nonsense.
That picture of Chateau Montecito and the pool makes me wonder two things 1. Has either of them ever dipped a toe in it? and 2. How do they keep the kids safe?  (People with goldfish ponds fill them in when they have kids where I live)


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m wondering how much he was paid to say this.


He mentioned that Oprah is his son's godmother, and Oprah is BFFs with Gayle, and Gayle is now the Harkles mouthpiece.....connect the dots and follow the $$$$.   Someone mentioned a few hundred pages back, how incestuous these connections really are


----------



## charlottawill

lallybelle said:


> She's giving me a bit of Kim K there, lol.


She wishes.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m wondering how much he was paid to say this.


He's not going back now.  He invested in them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


amazing?  how much time did he spend with them?  what did he see that was so telling?   I'm sure there are lots of couples who are happy and in love (or appear to be), then they're not.
 why is he talking about them at all?  disappointing


----------



## Cinderlala

Pessie said:


> Good grief  is Tyler being paid to say this?  I can’t think of any other reason why a grown man would spontaneously come out with such nonsense.


 It is a bizarre tactic.  I guess it's good for them to still have 2 paid shills supporters.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

noreen_uk said:


> not sure if this has been shared but it's an interesting to read
> 
> https://www.eonline.com/news/134723...-prince-harrys-relationship-with-royal-family


Just another US media outlet trying to put lipstick on a pig.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> Good grief  is Tyler being paid to say this?  I can’t think of any other reason why a grown man would spontaneously come out with such nonsense.
> That picture of Chateau Montecito and the pool makes me wonder two things 1. Has either of them ever dipped a toe in it? and 2. How do they keep the kids safe?  (People with goldfish ponds fill them in when they have kids where I live)


he has Lots of money....that can't be the motivation...he gifted O and Gayle Bentleys (I think that's what the car was, or Rolls Royce) years ago....he's even richer now
So - favor for a friend?


----------



## charlottawill

Harry 2016:



Harry 2022:



They're just so in love. Hope she's been worth it.


----------



## Lounorada

csshopper said:


> And on the other side of the Pond, gloom descends. Google map says they are, door to door, 323 miles south from me. Not far enough.
> 
> They arrive home announced by second tier mouthpiece Gayle King, (Oprah being busy covering her butt) demonstrating they have learned nothing about the value of keeping family business in the family. STFU.
> 
> In the interim the world has seen how magnificently the Royal Family functions without them and in spite of them. We observed one disgraced Duke who carried himself with dignity, and one who pouted and whined and was disgustingly petty. He and his one tear Wife bring even more baggage home than they left with weeks ago. The messy life they’ve made for themselves continues:
> 
> In 2 weeks Tom Bower’s book is released in the US. How considerate of the Harkles to potentially boost sales for a whole new audience to learn the real truth, not Raptor’s.
> 
> If recent articles are accurate, they have serious cash flow problems and need an influx. I have NO sympathy for them. Data, from public records, on one US real estate site, states the estimated remaining mortgage is $11,293,644. having purchased it in June 2020 for $14,650,000. The site says estimated Monthly payment is $82,274. In the past two years in CA real estate home values soared, theirs included. If they sold now and, horrors, downsized they could use potential profit for the next place. Will they be smart enough, or will they continue to think their Victimhood business will keep them afloat?
> 
> Boggles the mind a company like Butter Up would charge clients for services from a man clearly in need of treatment for his own mental health issues that appear to exceed their level of expertise. If his compensation is tied to performance after maybe an original signing bonus, he’s in trouble.
> 
> They could cut costs by abandoning the security law suit. It’s a belly laugh at this point. The King and heir engage with thousands of strangers, but Haz thinks he and TW are targets.
> 
> He embarrassed the military with his shoulder insignia snit. The real soldiers would know since he no longer served in the role they signified, he could not wear them. Had nothing to do with a family issue. How long will Invictus be meaningful if he stays in charge? Especially since he seems to have ceded so much to TW whose only connection to the military is the weak man in her claw.
> 
> On and on it goes. Spotify. Netflix.
> 
> An observation: Emma and her groom Teddy Pendry and the Corgis, Muick and Sandy were more meaningful in paying their respects to the Queen than Haz and Raptor. I had to go back for another look to see it, tears having gotten in the way the first time, but Teddy Pendry said Emma had a sixth sense and as the hearse passed raised her right front leg. That clutched my heart, one tear was an insult.


This entire post @csshopper






bag-mania said:


> Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com





He's delusional AF! Like attracts like, after all. What an idiot.




lallybelle said:


> She's giving me a bit of Kim K there, lol.


Yeah! The Kim K era when she used to be trying to flog toilet paper! 




charlottawill said:


> Harry 2016:
> View attachment 5615034
> 
> 
> Harry 2022:
> View attachment 5615035
> 
> 
> They're just so in love. Hope she's been worth it.





What a difference 6 years makes 




TimeToShop said:


> Watching this again, a few times. In the beginning it looks like TWs face falls when she looks at his scowl. It looks like a genuine about to cry face. They smile to the person helping them into the car. Once in her face and neck look so tense and he puffs out his cheeks. She appears to scooch over, away from him. Maybe they’ve had it out.
> 
> Perhaps he’s had a moment of clarity and realizes what he threw away for her. I still think he’s terrible for the way he’s treated his family, but do wonder if he would have stayed if it wasn’t for the kids.



Yes, I kept meaning to bring this up!
I could see the tension between them from when they met in Westminster Abbey, through that ceremony until the end of the day when they left the chapel in Windsor. The atmosphere between the two of them was ice cold, like they hated each other. Very unusual for them. He looked like he was fuming for most of the day.
Even my mom noticed this, she mentioned it to me when we were talking on the phone that evening after all the events had finished. She was surprised how frosty JCMH & TW were with each other- the tension was so obvious!

Then, during the Westminster Abbey ceremony I spotted JCMH a couple of times looking off to his right where the alter was, away from TW, like he was avoiding interacting with her. Normally they'd be looking at each other/whispering.
I also spotted him a couple of times glancing over while deep in thought (what looked to be) in William's (C & kids) direction.
I'm sure if they were on great terms and nothing bad had happened before, that H would have been sitting alongside W&C instead of the second row way over the far side.
Anyway, I hope he was realizing what he has lost.


----------



## Toby93

Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  Who is their PR now?


----------



## CobaltBlu

Toby93 said:


> Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  Who is their PR now?



hahahahah!  sure they are.  Who rights this stuff?  Are they 12?


----------



## kipp

This is a few days old (and what the author says is exactly what we here have been saying) but it's refreshing that there are more people who are on to Megain's MO. 








						Meghan Markle's $25 Million Podcast is Finally Out. So Is the Verdict
					

The duchess investigates stereotypes and deconstructs the b-word—Prince Harry even makes a cameo—but, really, "Archetypes" is all about her.




					airmail.news
				



In fact the heading on my email from AirMail said "Meghan Markle and the art of self-sabotage"


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  Who is their PR now?


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## skyqueen

This sums it up quite nicely!


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> She no longer has SS to do her dirty work, so she is having to leak things directly to Gayle King


Something tells me that the story about her contacting a US news outlet about TQ"s death may be her contacting Gayle King.  Her superiors contacted the BBC who told them to hold it.


----------



## Toby93

kipp said:


> This is a few days old (and what the author says is exactly what we here have been saying) but it's refreshing that there are more people who are on to Megain's MO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's $25 Million Podcast is Finally Out. So Is the Verdict
> 
> 
> The duchess investigates stereotypes and deconstructs the b-word—Prince Harry even makes a cameo—but, really, "Archetypes" is all about her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> airmail.news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact the heading on my email from AirMail said "Meghan Markle and the art of self-sabotage"


When Meghan claims that “the diva thing is not something I connect to”, a laughing Carey rebukes her: “You give us diva moments sometimes, Meghan.”
This sends Meghan into a touchy tailspin. After the interview, she returns with an addendum analysis. “What nonsense must she have clicked on to make her say that?” She then decides Carey was just being complimentary about the “chic, aspirational” way Meghan dresses. Hmmm. But wasn’t reclaiming the term “diva” in a positive light part of the point of this episode? *The target audience seems American, which is a relief.*

I'm not sure who Patricia Nicol is, nor am I American, but this seems like an insulting sentence  **


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill




----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> @gracekelly I agree with you completely, but I don't think that was me who said something about the bracelet! Unless I did and can't remember but I don't think it was me...
> View attachment 5615010


You're right!  It was Kimilia who wrote it.  Thank you Kimilia!



kemilia said:


> I agree--I can't see H being happy seeing his wife wearing it. Funny how she sent back the rings but not the bracelet--what a goldd!gger.
> Also, I remember as a teen going to the local library monthly and grabbing all the fashion mags and reading away the afternoon. *I remember when that bracelet was adverted as the "slave" bracelet, I thought it weird with the screws and screwdriver and definitely thinking the "slave" name was not cool. *And I still feel that way about that bracelet but very clever for Cartier renaming it and burying the original name--it has worked.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Diamondbirdie

skyqueen said:


> This sums it up quite nicely!



That’s a brilliant article! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## TimeToShop

Lounorada said:


> This entire post @csshopper
> View attachment 5615022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5615028
> 
> He's delusional AF! Like attracts like, after all. What an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah! The Kim K era when she used to be trying to flog toilet paper!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5615043
> 
> What a difference 6 years makes
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I kept meaning to bring this up!
> I could see the tension between them from when they met in Westminster Abbey, through that ceremony until the end of the day when they left the chapel in Windsor. The atmosphere between the two of them was ice cold, like they hated each other. Very unusual for them. He looked like he was fuming for most of the day.
> Even my mom noticed this, she mentioned it to me when we were talking on the phone that evening after all the events had finished. She was surprised how frosty JCMH & TW were with each other- the tension was so obvious!
> 
> Then, during the Westminster Abbey ceremony I spotted JCMH a couple of times looking off to his right where the alter was, away from TW, like he was avoiding interacting with her. Normally they'd be looking at each other/whispering.
> I also spotted him a couple of times glancing over while deep in thought (what looked to be) in William's (C & kids) direction.
> I'm sure if they were on great terms and nothing bad had happened before, that H would have been sitting alongside W&C instead of the second row way over the far side.
> Anyway, I hope he was realizing what he has lost.



One more then I’ll, maybe, move on from this picture. This is not a happy couple.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


>



His expression is one of relief that it is over.  Round three was in the evening and after he had a few drinks to soften the blow.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> he has Lots of money....that can't be the motivation...he gifted O and Gayle Bentleys (I think that's what the car was, or Rolls Royce) years ago....he's even richer now
> So - favor for a friend?


But notice that with all the movies he makes, he has not given the gifted actress a job.


----------



## TimeToShop

Toby93 said:


> Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  Who is their PR now?




Then she can merch all the details from their playdate! As if they’re really going to hang out together.


----------



## Lounorada

TimeToShop said:


> One more then I’ll, maybe, move on from this picture. *This is not a happy couple.*



Not happy at all. 
While they were waiting outside the chapel in Windsor Castle for their car to arrive, they both looked like they'd rather be anywhere else, separately.
In the car was probably the first time all day that they had been together alone, in a small space, not surrounded by other people.


----------



## sdkitty

TimeToShop said:


> One more then I’ll, maybe, move on from this picture. This is not a happy couple.



neither of them looks happy....she must not have known the camera was there


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kang504 said:


> Why discussion of Zendaya on Megan and Harry thread? Because Zendaya is an acceptable black woman?



Yes, that will be it. Not.

But also, unless you are a mod we prefer not to be told what we can talk about. Thanks for understanding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> An observation: Emma and her groom Teddy Pendry and the Corgis, Muick and Sandy were more meaningful in paying their respects to the Queen than Haz and Raptor. I had to go back for another look to see it, tears having gotten in the way the first time, but Teddy Pendry said Emma had a sixth sense and as the hearse passed raised her right front leg. That clutched my heart, one tear was an insult.





Animals tug at my hearstrings more than anything, and I've been a bit sensitive those past 12 days anyway. Little Emma knew OMG.


----------



## EverSoElusive

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m wondering *how much he was paid to say this.*





Pessie said:


> Good grief * is Tyler being paid to say this? * I can’t think of any other reason why a grown man would spontaneously come out with such nonsense.
> That picture of Chateau Montecito and the pool makes me wonder two things 1. Has either of them ever dipped a toe in it? and 2. How do they keep the kids safe?  (People with goldfish ponds fill them in when they have kids where I live)


If they allegedly cannot afford Sxnshine S^chs, how can they afford TP (makes me think of toilet paper for arsewipes) as their new unofficial mouthpiece?  But I guess it pays to be connected to OW to get this kind of useless and nonsensical clout.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m hoping for first single- I mean who is to say they won’t be the next Sunny and Cher…



In that case, they should try Cher's "If I Could Turn Back Time."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> This was my thought the whole time.  Who is manipulative enough to leak this info?  Who gains?  Who loses?  Notice nothing was leaked about any unhappiness of TW --- do we really think she just kept her head down and carried on quietly because she's such a trouper?  We know she's not.  We know she wants to control the narrative, always.  We know she had LOTS of time on her hands.  We know she was managed to limit her time in public.  We know she would have been furious about those things.  She damaged what she could.
> 
> Just my opinion based on previous behavior of H's current wife. (And knowledge of NPD.)



I know we're not fond of Harry anymore, but it does hurt me that his own wife treats him like this. I was ultra sensitive to the pushing and shoving and touching to make him sit, stand, move when we saw plenty of it (when they still had stuff to attend...) and it's just rotten.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know we're not fond of Harry anymore, but it does hurt me that his own wife treats him like this. I was ultra sensitive to the pushing and shoving and touching to make him sit, stand, move when we saw plenty of it (when they still had stuff to attend...) and it's just rotten.


that may be the worst part of her for me....the pushing, pulling putting herself in front of him when he tries to talk to people


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  *Who is their PR now? *



Whoever it is isn’t limiting themselves in their creativity in any way. I wonder if anyone has told Jen that she is excited at the prospect of being friends with Meghan yet.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Also, its rumoured Sir James and Diana's mother had a fling and the result was Diana. Who knows what to believe?



I didn't hear that one before. But also, I personally hate these paternity speculations because I find it so hurtful to the children.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She'll take a page out of T****'s playbook and call up media outlets under an assumed name. A lot cheaper than paying a PR firm.



I mean, she made up a PR person when she couldn't afford one and people tracked the email back to her, so...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Has anyone posted this? I am sad because it is obvious Tyler Perry doesn’t understand what love is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Harry and Meghan Are the Example of True Love
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry isn't holding anything back in sharing just how impressive the love between Prince Harry and Meghan Markle truly is ... saying they're the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



It's a prime example of Stockholm syndrome.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Saw this gem on FB. Kind of fitting to describe Z-list & Co. - died by their own hands. They dug their own graves and buried themselves. Like we kept saying, they could have had a comfortable life but of course they love mud slinging more  William is left with all the riches of the Duchy of Cornwall. What does Harry have? A wife who should have just been a ONS at most.


----------



## TimeToShop

Pessie said:


> That was the other Cromwell (Charles II), not the Cromwell who worked for Henry VIII.



I’m an American who was taught little of British history in school. I have a hard time keeping all the Henry’s, Edward’s, Richard’s, etc straight - which roman numeral goes to whom. Also when it’s the (n)th Lord of Wherever. Not to mention all the Jane’s, Catherine’s, Anne’s, etc. And then the rankings - Earls, Lords, and all. 

Major kudos to those of you who come from countries where you had to learn thousands of years of history.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> neither of them looks happy....she must not have known the camera was there


And you know how she always finds it. She's slipping.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> A wife who should have just been a ONS at most.


Harsh but true.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Queen Consort Camilla 'spluttered over her tea' when Harry suggested bringing in a mediator to resolve the rift within the family, royal book claims​
*A new royal book claims King Charles and the Queen Consort were shocked at Harry wanting to use mediator*
*The Sussexes' relationship with the rest of the family has been strained the couple moved to the US in 2020*









						Prince Harry suggested a 'mediator' to help resolve rift with family
					

A royal book written by Vanity Fair's royal journalist and author Katie Nicholl claims the Queen Consort told Harry they would resolve their differences within the family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo it is not just her. He is responsible for 90% of this mess.
 Maybe she is now thoroughly embarrassed, maybe he is, too.  Have they landed?


----------



## Pessie

TimeToShop said:


> I’m an American who was taught little of British history in school. I have a hard time keeping all the Henry’s, Edward’s, Richard’s, etc straight - which roman numeral goes to whom. Also when it’s the (n)th Lord of Wherever. Not to mention all the Jane’s, Catherine’s, Anne’s, etc. And then the rankings - Earls, Lords, and all.
> 
> Major kudos to those of you who come from countries where you had to learn thousands of years of history.


Oh my knowledge is really patchy - I ditched history as soon as poss at school, but got more interested as I got older.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> And you know how she always finds it. She's slipping.


even if she didn't smile due to the situation, she would usually look at the camera I think


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Queen Consort Camilla 'spluttered over her tea' when Harry suggested bringing in a mediator to resolve the rift within the family, royal book claims​
> *A new royal book claims King Charles and the Queen Consort were shocked at Harry wanting to use mediator*
> *The Sussexes' relationship with the rest of the family has been strained the couple moved to the US in 2020*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry suggested a 'mediator' to help resolve rift with family
> 
> 
> A royal book written by Vanity Fair's royal journalist and author Katie Nicholl claims the Queen Consort told Harry they would resolve their differences within the family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They don’t need a mediator - they need to say sorry and stop making up stories about the family.


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> even if she didn't smile due to the situation, *she would usually look at the camera *I think


This is accurate from all the photos.  
This woman could be green, the hate would be the same with that attitude.


----------



## BlueCherry

What’s wrong with these people. Have they forgotten how the Queen must have been feeling while Philip was in hospital and they were on TV making ludicrous allegations? The Queen may have been stoic and strong in public but she could feel hurt too. She never hurt Harry.


----------



## momtok

EverSoElusive said:


> Saw this gem on FB. Kind of fitting to describe Z-list & Co. - died by their own hands. They dug their own graves and buried themselves. Like we kept saying, they could have had a comfortable life but of course they love mud slinging more  William is left with all the riches of the Duchy of Cornwall. What does Harry have? A wife who should have just been a ONS at most.
> 
> View attachment 5615080



Actually, now you're talking my language, though I never heard that before ... about the suicides.  (It wasn't in the front of the thermo text I was given, but this would certainly have lightened the mood at the start of the year.)

There's another topic in thermo called Brownian Motion or "random walk" ... basically a small particle having a randomness to its specific path, even if its overall progression is in one overall direction.  Like a molecule in a gas.  Or a microscopic droplet of liquid descending to the ground.  It's due to other particles around it, usually interacting with it only briefly then bouncing it off in a different direction.  (Retain that thought for what I'm about to say.)  It's a confused-looking walk, as if the particle has no idea where it belongs or where it should go.  That actually makes me flash to all the pics of the Harkles standing alone at the funeral ... like they weren't sure where they were supposed to go.  ... Harry on that lawn with the other men, or M outside the church with Camilla/Kate/Sophie. ... Thinking. ... It actually does remind me of that.


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> What’s wrong with these people. Have they forgotten how the Queen must have been feeling while Philip was in hospital and they were on TV making ludicrous allegations? The Queen may have been stoic and strong in public but she could feel hurt too. She never hurt Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5615090



It's just for clicks. 

Editors give them orders at a meeting. One day they just say that the last H story wasn't bringing in clicks (what they use to entice ad revenue) and she is instructed to up the controversy. 

Stupid thing to do because it makes her look stupid. On the other hand she still has her job.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## ladyglen

Hyacinth said:


> _"... Every streaming-service deal has invited quiet sniggers, every ill-judged interview and profile-raising event now brings with it a mixture of pity and irritation. These corporations are learning that they are getting little bang for their buck. Over the last few months there have been whispers of Spotify growing more frustrated with Duchess Dolittle after the $25 million deal that went public in December 2020 only yielded one thirty-three-minute Christmas episode..._
> 
> _It seems like a stern word may have worked, as we recently saw the much-awaited launch of Meghan’s new podcast Archetypes. Meghan calls the podcast a place “where we investigate, dissect and subvert the labels that try to hold women back”; *her first special guest was the notably downtrodden Serena Williams. L*isteners were offered little more than the Meghan show, with the Duchess managing to talk for eleven minutes straight before her guest got a word in edgeways."_
> 
> "Duchess Dolittle". I LOVE IT!
> 
> Great article and Highly Recommended.


very snarky


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> neither of them looks happy....she must not have known the camera was there


She always knows where the camera is.

They were coming from the funeral in the photo weren’t they? It would’ve been really disrespectful if they had looked happy.


----------



## scarlet555

Pessie said:


> They don’t need a mediator - they need to say sorry and stop making up stories about the family.


they want a mediator who would side with them against the royal family, and so the mediator could be a source for their TV shows/they NEED to milk this.  
They are probably not poor like the average human, but want security, best of everything, want to be treated like royals though don't want the duty and pretend they don't want the title (they do want the title)...  and constantly contradict what they preach (carbon footprint/jet set life)...  and talk out of turn (nobody asked you!)  
Nutmeg would be irrelevant without Harry.  Harry would be nothing, NOTHING without his birthright/title.  
Now both are fools together, and since they are both spoiled brats, they don't know anything about dignity and class.


----------



## scarlet555

BlueCherry said:


> What’s wrong with these people. Have they forgotten how the Queen must have been feeling while Philip was in hospital and they were on TV making ludicrous allegations? The Queen may have been stoic and strong in public but she could feel hurt too. She never hurt Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5615090


who is paying this clown?


----------



## momtok

EverSoElusive said:


> Saw this gem on FB. Kind of fitting to describe Z-list & Co. - died by their own hands. They dug their own graves and buried themselves. Like we kept saying, they could have had a comfortable life but of course they love mud slinging more  William is left with all the riches of the Duchy of Cornwall. What does Harry have? A wife who should have just been a ONS at most.
> 
> View attachment 5615080


(P.S.  I'm saving that pic.  Just read it to hubby (we're both physicists; I went into computer work for the time that I worked, but hubby actually did spend some years as a professor; I think he taught the thermo course too).  He'd never heard of the suicides either.  Interesting.  The curse seems to have lifted though, as my dissertation was in the "statistical mechanics" of polymers.  Fortunately, I still live.   )


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> It's just for clicks.
> 
> Editors give them orders at a meeting. One day they just say that the last H story wasn't bringing in clicks (what they use to entice ad revenue) and she is instructed to up the controversy.
> 
> Stupid thing to do because it makes her look stupid. On the other hand she still has her job.



Makes you wonder, does anyone have any integrity any more


----------



## scarlet555

Prince harry OW destroying his Grandma, the Queen and OW encouraging him to talk sh!t about the Queen.
Unbelievable.
I didn't watch the whole interview, just stuff coming onto my feed.
The family betrayal is UNREAL!


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> Makes you wonder, does anyone have any integrity any more



I had a friend who was a journalist (actually worked under Piers) she was lovely, bright and down to earth. You wouldn't believe the stuff that goes on.


----------



## Hermes Zen

charlottawill said:


> I guess this means he'll be applying for US citizenship when he gets "home" to CA? Or should I be more charitable and assume he was fighting back emotion?



Looking at KC's face, you would think he could or COULD NOT hear H singing behind him.  I HOPE KC realized H wasn't and ram it to him soon!  Also, M wasn't singing IMHO.  You don't see her cheek moving so don't think she sang either.  I bet Queen Consort Camilla AND Princess Anne noticed it too!!    Sorry if this has already been posted.  I have 50+ pages to go.


----------



## momtok

BlueCherry said:


> What’s wrong with these people. Have they forgotten how the Queen must have been feeling while Philip was in hospital and they were on TV making ludicrous allegations? The Queen may have been stoic and strong in public but she could feel hurt too. She never hurt Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5615090


You know, if those two pictures were within a short time of each other, then H's chin actually jutted out further while the salute was going on.  And I'm sorry, I *know* I should be nice, and I *know* I should try to feel sorry for another person being in such a position, but honestly, my instinctual reaction to that chin-jutting is to laugh.


----------



## Pessie

scarlet555 said:


> Prince harry OW destroying his Grandma, the Queen and OW encouraging him to talk sh!t about the Queen.
> Unbelievable.
> I didn't watch the whole interview, just stuff coming onto my feed.
> The family betrayal is UNREAL!



Now everyone’s too busy to see him.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's a prime example of Stockholm syndrome.


Maybe Tyler Perry is a secret fan of Haz’s polo playing cheerleader, Nacho and they’ve agreed to be his rah-rah team . Both demean themselves with their gushing drivel.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Maybe Tyler Perry is a secret fan of Haz’s polo playing cheerleader, Nacho and they’ve agreed to be his rah-rah team . Both demean themselves with their gushing drivel.




It's all very bizarre. 

I don't even think of my friends in that way. I see them as complex human beings, 2 separate individuals first, with a unique relationship/partnership, certainly not as romantic movie cliches. 

How can one measure a couple's love for each other from the outside anyway?


----------



## a_b_c

There’s plenty of sycophantic drivel written about will and Kate’s love story, so I don’t see anything out of the ordinary with someone else doing the same for Harry & Meghan. It’s just par for the course.


----------



## charlottawill

a_b_c said:


> There’s plenty of sycophantic drivel written about will and Kate’s love story, so I don’t see anything out of the ordinary with someone else doing the same for Harry & Meghan. It’s just par for the course.


But I think it's a safe bet that the P&PoW will still be together in ten years. I doubt the Sussexes will be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> She always knows where the camera is.
> 
> *They were coming from the funeral in the photo weren’t they? It would’ve been really disrespectful if they had looked happy.*


I dunno... that's true, yes, but they didn't have to look 'happy', just comfortable together, at least.
Being at the procession of QEII coffin to Westminster Hall a week ago didn't stop her looking smug AF.
Something happened between then and the funeral for her to be looking way off-form at the funeral. She looked pissed off, uncomfortable and far from smug- the complete opposite to her usual narc self.


----------



## BlueCherry

a_b_c said:


> There’s plenty of sycophantic drivel written about will and Kate’s love story, so I don’t see anything out of the ordinary with someone else doing the same for Harry & Meghan. It’s just par for the course.



At least we don’t have to witness said drivel being acted out when it comes to William and Catherine


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> It's all very bizarre.
> 
> I don't even think of my friends in that way. I see them as complex human beings, 2 separate individuals first, with a unique relationship/partnership, certainly not as romantic movie cliches.
> 
> How can one measure a couple's love for each other from the outside anyway?



I don’t even know if I love my own man never mind how much other couples love each other


----------



## BlueCherry

Lounorada said:


> I dunno... that's true, yes, but they didn't have to look 'happy', just comfortable together, at least.
> Being at the procession of QEII coffin to Westminster Hall a week ago didn't stop her looking smug AF.
> Something happened between then and the funeral for her to be looking way off-form at the funeral. She looked pissed off, uncomfortable and far from smug- the complete opposite to her usual narc self.



I was wondering this too. All those media references to her being kept under control when we all know she practically threatened the RF in The Cut. Why would she suddenly toe the line if she had so many destructive truth bombs not yet detonated.


----------



## charlottawill

BlueCherry said:


> I was wondering this too. All those media references to her being kept under control when we all know she practically threatened the RF in The Cut. Why would she suddenly toe the line if she had so many destructive truth bombs not yet detonated.


Maybe the threat of losing the titles and any financial support. They've been backed into a corner.


----------



## BlueCherry

charlottawill said:


> Maybe the threat of losing the titles and any financial support. They've been backed into a corner.



Hmmm but couldn’t that threat have been used way back when they first started this nonsense to nip it in the bud. Unless it really was the Queen that prevented Charles from doing anything. But even that doesn’t make sense because she would have put the Monarchy first and he was damaging it somewhat


----------



## bag-mania

Lounorada said:


> Something happened between then and the funeral for her to be looking way off-form at the funeral. *She looked pissed off, uncomfortable *and far from smug- the complete opposite to her usual narc self.


Maybe Harry told her “no” and it completely caught her off guard.   

No matter, she will have him whipped back in shape soon enough once they’re home.


----------



## youngster

BlueCherry said:


> Hmmm but couldn’t that threat have been used way back when they first started this nonsense to nip it in the bud. Unless it really was the Queen that prevented Charles from doing anything. But even that doesn’t make sense because she would have put the Monarchy first and he was damaging it somewhat



I'd say it's because way back when, Meghan and Harry brushed off the potential loss of titles and financial support as a bluff by Charles and the Queen. It would take time to rescind the titles and Harry could draw on his inheritance from Diana and the upfront payments from Spotify and Netflix if they needed immediate money.  They likely thought they had time to force the Queen and Charles to apologize and give them the half-in/half-out deal they wanted.  They also likely believed their own hype that they were a billion dollar brand, all on their own.  

Instead, years have passed, no apology came because they made so many inaccurate statements and "recollections vary".  They got no half-in/half-out deal. They have not been paid big dollars to hit the speaking circuit.  Meghan's children's literature career consisted of one poorly received book. They also have had to deal with many PR screw ups (the cemetery pap walk, Ellen appearance, Uvalde appearance, skipping Prince Philip's memorial service, skipping visiting the Queen this summer, etc.) and the public perception, certainly in the UK and in other countries, that they made Prince Philip and the Queen's final years unhappy. So, they are in a weaker position now, especially with both Spotify and Netflix expecting a concrete return on their investments in the next few months and that billion dollars not magically materializing.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Maybe the threat of losing the titles and any financial support. They've been backed into a corner.


HandM were on a short leash , definitely, allowed few events, she went with Sophie, he with William
the walkabout … there were stories that W agreed to that only to curtail HandM going it alone
the press was not allowed within an inch of her, and her position at events was chosen to minimize camera exposure thanks to the candle
They must have been told NOT to talk to the press with the threat of beheading, and reporters were told HANDS OFF in the UK
yet, they managed a few puff pieces via People about the walkabout


----------



## bag-mania

Opinion piece from _Vogue_ calling criticism of Meghan from the funeral racist. The author doesn’t address the validity of any of the complaints, she’s decided she knows the source of them.









						Let’s Call the Endless Meghan Markle Scrutiny What It Is
					

Meghan participated in funereal procedures pitch-perfectly, objectively fulfilling the ambient obligations of any attendee. Yet somehow the duchess is once again being slated for acting inappropriately.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I'd say it's because way back when, Meghan and Harry brushed off the potential loss of titles and financial support as a bluff by Charles and the Queen. It would take time to rescind the titles and Harry could draw on his inheritance from Diana and the upfront payments from Spotify and Netflix if they needed immediate money.  They likely thought they had time to force the Queen and Charles to apologize and give them the half-in/half-out deal they wanted.  They also likely believed their own hype that they were a billion dollar brand, all on their own.
> 
> Instead, years have passed, no apology came because they made so many inaccurate statements and "recollections vary".  They got no half-in/half-out deal. They have not been paid big dollars to hit the speaking circuit.  Meghan's children's literature career consisted of one poorly received book. They also have had to deal with many PR screw ups (the cemetery pap walk, Ellen appearance, Uvalde appearance, skipping Prince Philip's memorial service, skipping visiting the Queen this summer, etc.) and the public perception, certainly in the UK and in other countries, that they made Prince Philip and the Queen's final years unhappy. So, they are in a weaker position now, especially with both Spotify and Netflix expecting a concrete return on their investments in the next few months and that billion dollars not magically materializing.


He had no idea of the COST of their lifestyle relative to the size of his money
And they counted on paid security which means limos and planes


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Opinion piece from _Vogue_ calling criticism of Meghan from the funeral racist. The author doesn’t address the validity of any of the complaints, she’s decided she knows the source of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s Call the Endless Meghan Markle Scrutiny What It Is
> 
> 
> Meghan participated in funereal procedures pitch-perfectly, objectively fulfilling the ambient obligations of any attendee. Yet somehow the duchess is once again being slated for acting inappropriately.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


Ok, must laugh -  the writer does not not vocabulary
used “funereal” not “funeral”
and pitch-perfectly is a cringe-worthy concocted adverb

nor has the writer done much due diligence , it is as if the only research was on this thread , and this is a GOSSIP thread, we love ourselves a good chuckle


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Ok, must laugh -  the writer does not not vocabulary
> used “funereal” not “funeral”


Not only that, she misspells Meghan’s name once in the article. You would think if she was setting herself up as being Meghan’s defender she would at least do a search to make sure she spelled her name consistently.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I'd say it's because way back when, Meghan and Harry brushed off the potential loss of titles and financial support as a bluff by Charles and the Queen. It would take time to rescind the titles and Harry could draw on his inheritance from Diana and the upfront payments from Spotify and Netflix if they needed immediate money.  They likely thought they had time to force the Queen and Charles to apologize and give them the half-in/half-out deal they wanted.  They also likely believed their own hype that they were a billion dollar brand, all on their own.
> 
> Instead, years have passed, no apology came because they made so many inaccurate statements and "recollections vary".  They got no half-in/half-out deal. They have not been paid big dollars to hit the speaking circuit.  Meghan's children's literature career consisted of one poorly received book. They also have had to deal with many PR screw ups (the cemetery pap walk, Ellen appearance, Uvalde appearance, skipping Prince Philip's memorial service, skipping visiting the Queen this summer, etc.) and the public perception, certainly in the UK and in other countries, that they made Prince Philip and the Queen's final years unhappy. So, they are in a weaker position now, especially with both Spotify and Netflix expecting a concrete return on their investments in the next few months and that billion dollars not magically materializing.


Plus they saw how they were treated as a result of their antics.  It's all karma really with the added bonus of having nothing work out the way they thought it would. This really could be a study in how to fail at every turn.  Such irony.


----------



## DL Harper

marietouchet said:


> Ok, must laugh -  the writer does not not vocabulary
> used “funereal” not “funeral”
> and pitch-perfectly is a cringe-worthy concocted adverb
> 
> nor has the writer done much due diligence , it is as if the only research was on this thread , and this is a GOSSIP thread, we love ourselves a good chuckle


What's the statement about Sophie holding hands with her husband in Westminster?  Was a photo published?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> HandM were on a short leash , definitely, allowed few events, she went with Sophie, he with William
> the walkabout … there were stories that W agreed to that only to curtail HandM going it alone
> the press was not allowed within an inch of her, and her position at events was chosen to minimize camera exposure thanks to the candle
> They must have been told NOT a to talk to the press with the threat of beheading, and reporters were told HANDS OFF in the UK
> yet, they managed a few puff pieces via People about the walkabout


They have more than a few puff pieces in People and some of them are total fiction.  Someone is trying to create a relationship between the Wales children and these two and it couldn't be further than the truth.  Those kids were watched like hawks by Kate and Sophie.  Fierce mommies X 2.  Even a seven year old can sense danger and Charlotte had her spidey senses working.  George, I don't think is as acute with that yet,, but he watched his sister and took cues from her. They were fully instructed by their parents and these are kids who actually listened.


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> He had no idea of the COST of their lifestyle relative to the size of his money
> And they counted on paid security which means limos and planes


Not defending him, but I wonder whether he had any experience at all in understanding income versus expenses, mortgages, maintenance costs, etc. I can just picture H buying that house without one thought of what the monthly upkeep cost would be. Most of us start small in our early 20s with a small apartment or a small house and then build from there, whereas this may be his first time ever seeing a bill for anything.


----------



## lanasyogamama

DL Harper said:


> What's the statement about Sophie holding hands with her husband in Westminster?  Was a photo published?


Sophie and her husband held hands after the procession, not during it like the other two.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Has anyone else started getting People in the magazine in the mail without subscribing to it? I gave it up a few years ago when it just got too annoying, but all of a sudden they are sending it every week again.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Not defending him, but I wonder whether he had any experience at all in understanding income versus expenses, mortgages, maintenance costs, etc. I can just picture H buying that house without one thought of what the monthly upkeep cost would be. Most of us start small in our early 20s with a small apartment or a small house and then build from there, whereas this may be his first time ever seeing a bill for anything.


I’d be surprised if Harry thought about any of that. I wouldn’t be surprised if Meghan handled the bulk of the home purchase and he just signed papers where she told him.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> neither of them looks happy....she must not have known the camera was there


I am old enough to remember when another couple couldn't stand the sight of each other.....


----------



## marietouchet

BlueCherry said:


> I was wondering this too. All those media references to her being kept under control when we all know she practically threatened the RF in The Cut. Why would she suddenly toe the line if she had so many destructive truth bombs not yet detonated.


Why toe the line in the UK ?
Because the UK press is hostile to her, and would her give her enough rope to hang herself, and causing a stink during the funeral … NO ONE would have forgiven her
Just like at a wedding, don’t do anything that will be held against you in 20 years
Her sugars are all in the US


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> Not defending him, but I wonder whether he had any experience at all in understanding income versus expenses, mortgages, maintenance costs, etc. I can just picture H buying that house without one thought of what the monthly upkeep cost would be. Most of us start small in our early 20s with a small apartment or a small house and then build from there, whereas this may be his first time ever seeing a bill for anything.


He never held a paid job before Megxit


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I am old enough to remember when another couple couldn't stand the sight of each other.....
> 
> View attachment 5615213


Those two never did much handholding even when they did get along.


----------



## marietouchet

DL Harper said:


> What's the statement about Sophie holding hands with her husband in Westminster?  Was a photo published?


Zara and Mike held hands, Sophie and Edward too, but ONLY after the procession had disbanded
HandM held hands walking during the procession in 
the US press failed to draw the distinction about being IN/OUT of procession, and the US press thought HandM were being picked on, they were not treated differently 

There has been a lot of fake news in the US about the funeral, eg FOX NEWS - serious news channel - had the bit about epaulettegate , but H and W had diff epaulettes at H’s wedding, although we don’t know why, H was not treated differently at the funeral, he was given the same privilege as Andrew- wearing a uniform


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> I am old enough to remember when another couple couldn't stand the sight of each other.....
> 
> View attachment 5615213


That was mostly Diana communicating to the world how unhappy she was.  Philip did not approve.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Has anyone else started getting People in the magazine in the mail without subscribing to it? I gave it up a few years ago when it just got too annoying, but all of a sudden they are sending it every week again.


You should contact them. You may have somehow gotten subscribed with auto billing and could be surprised to see a charge on a CC statement down the road.


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

BlueCherry said:


> What’s wrong with these people. Have they forgotten how the Queen must have been feeling while Philip was in hospital and they were on TV making ludicrous allegations? The Queen may have been stoic and strong in public but she could feel hurt too. She never hurt Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5615090


I don’t understand this. I don’t think he was humiliated but he came back to the UK where they stated the media was mean to his wife, which I don’t deny there were nasty articles about her but they went on national tv and called the royal family racist and made all sorts of statements and then they expect to come back to this family and be welcomed with open arms like nothing happened? I don’t blame them giving Harry and a Meghan the cold shoulder. They keep coming back to the UK, the very place that was so cruel to them…Why? She keeps making speeches and that’s it. maybe in the US instead of just saying things she should do things. Volunteer at some organizations or volunteer for Habitat for Humanity and help build some houses or volunteer at some animal rescues where help is needed. I don’t know what they expected when they came back to the UK???


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I’d be surprised if Harry thought about any of that. I wouldn’t be surprised if Meghan handled the bulk of the home purchase and he just signed papers where she told him.


I wonder what else she may have gotten him to sign?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Those two never did much handholding even when they did get along.



Protocol was even stricter back then, no PDAs, you'd never see them hand holding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Not defending him, but I wonder whether he had any experience at all in understanding income versus expenses, mortgages, maintenance costs, etc. I can just picture H buying that house without one thought of what the monthly upkeep cost would be. Most of us start small in our early 20s with a small apartment or a small house and then build from there, whereas this may be his first time ever seeing a bill for anything.


I doubt they teach personal finance at Eton.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Opinion piece from _Vogue_ calling criticism of Meghan from the funeral racist. The author doesn’t address the validity of any of the complaints, she’s decided she knows the source of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s Call the Endless Meghan Markle Scrutiny What It Is
> 
> 
> Meghan participated in funereal procedures pitch-perfectly, objectively fulfilling the ambient obligations of any attendee. Yet somehow the duchess is once again being slated for acting inappropriately.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


I googled the author of the article, and she is black.  It's interesting that the author of The Cut is also black, but_ did her research_ and was able to write an article that showed us who Meghan really is (sadly it appears she lost her job over it)

The Vogue author is going by what she saw, like the rest of us on TV and in articles and is showing her obvious bias and interpreting her own experiences as a WOC.  

She must have missed the numerous observations that show Meghan identified as a caucasian  before she married Harry and then it became convenient for her to use racism as the excuse to return to California.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Harry is a d!ck and I believe he hates his father.


I think Oedipus Dufus has always unconsciously hated his father because he was married to his mother.


----------



## Katel

papertiger said:


> PDina, love her




“This is the moment of truth - how will Harry and Meghan go forward? Now that they have been shown that ‘you still ain’t learned nothing yet!’ ”

She’s right - all eyes will be on them to watch their next move in this slow-motion bloody train-wreck.


----------



## csshopper

Pure speculation:

There were 2 incidents during the week orchestrated by Haz and Raptor. (1)The staged big hug from a sugar scene at the Windsor walk about and her audacity of thanking the planted sugar on behalf of the family certainly must have grated on the RF. (2)Then when the hearse was arriving at BP, the picture of them on the stairs behind the King, which got turned into at least one headline stating they were the ones on hand to greet it’s arrival. Both made it clear Raptor wasn’t sitting at Frogmore reading fashion magazines, but plotting.

These preceded the very very important ceremonial days ahead leading to the burial. Read the first draft of Operation London Bridge was first developed 17 years ago. History was at stake without the Suckesses giving a damn.

Realizing her determination to write her own script, seeing clearly how emasculated Hazbeen is, I bet there was a very secret high level meeting and information from pre wedding vetting investigations was reviewed. Using a few selected examples of the data that she probably had no idea was known, (not all, the RF will play it close to the vest) she and Haz were possibly told toe the line or this goes public. In addition to feeling the family freeze, realizing even Eugenie and Jack turned out to be on the home team now (bet that was a shock to them), being hit in the face with evidence of overwhelming support of thousands and thousands for the Monarchy from diverse groups in mourning, having no one protecting them, at least a little fear might have started they could be on thin ice. Enough to keep them in line.

I think if she was actually trying to meet with Charles it was to attempt to broker a deal for Haz to dump the book in exchange for a like amount pay off from the RF to cover the loss.

edited to add: Tuned into one of Neil Sean’s broadcasts from today and he discusses speculation about payoffs to the publisher.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> *And the giant highlighter stripe down the front of her nose.*
> 
> She sure was ready for the camera today!


That could be her Pinocchio Nose in full retraction indicating she hadn't yet lied on that day.


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Realizing her determination to write her own script, seeing clearly how emasculated Hazbeen is, I bet there was a very secret high level meeting and information from pre wedding vetting investigations was reviewed. Using a few selected examples of the data that she probably had no idea was known, (not all, the RF will play it close to the vest) she and Haz were possibly told toe the line or this goes public. In addition to feeling the family freeze, realizing even *Eugenie and Jack turned out to be on the home team now *(bet that was a shock to them), being hit in the face with evidence of overwhelming support of thousands and thousands for the Monarchy from diverse groups in mourning, having no one protecting them, at least a little fear might have started they could be on thin ice. Enough to keep them in line.


I was wondering if Eugenie thinks that now her uncle is King, maybe she will be allowed to play a bigger role?  When push came to shove, she has chosen to side with the BRF and not the Harkles?


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> I was wondering if Eugenie thinks that now her uncle is King, maybe she will be allowed to play a bigger role?  When push came to shove, she has chosen to side with the BRF and not the Harkles?


Yup - interesting.  Friends until it wasn't convenient.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I think I have found Z-list's match in spray tanning


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> Hard to say hypothetically how a divorce would play out in this instance. Diana and Fergie were both British citizens who grew up and lived in the UK their entire lives and wished to continue to live in the UK after their divorces. They also had young children who were brought up in the UK and, in Diana’s case, could not be taken to live in a different country after the divorce. If they didn‘t play ball, the BRF had the clout to close ranks in their social circles and make life very difficult for them. Both women clearly understood that they had a vested interest in not damaging the image of the BRF and in playing ball. At the end of the day it was mutually beneficial for both sides to settle without airing all their dirty laundry in public. In Meghan’s case, she’s made it quite clear she couldn’t give two hoots about living in the UK. She wants to remain in California. She also has clearly demonstrated she doesn’t give a toss about the image of the BRF or the BRF as an institution. She’d burn it all to the ground if it would be to her advantage. She won’t shut up and could do a lot more damage. She’s already demonstrated her willingness to take endless pot shots at the BRF and has never let minor details like truth and reality stand in the way of the narrative she wishes to put out there. She also has the 2 very young children residing with her in the US. So the BRF has a lot less leverage over her than they had over Diana and Fergie. Having said that, the BRF has the resources and the clout to tie her up in court for years. Yes in the legal sense she can only go after Harry’s assets in court and not the entire BRF’s assets. But It really doesn’t matter what Harry’s net worth is because at the end of the day, Meghan, has shown her willingness and ability to do anything and say anything to get what she wants in the court of public opinion. The BRF is going to have to decide how much they are going to be willing to pay to get her to agree to hush up and give them reasonable access to the children. Can you see Harry, the dim, testifying in a divorce court? If you think Andrew’s interview was disastrous, imagine Harry being grilled under oath by a top notch divorce lawyer. You know her lawyers will try to pry open the BRF finances with a can opener to see if Harry gets any income from the BRF Trusts, etc. How far they’ll get I haven’t got a clue but you know they’ll definitely try.


I think sometimes, you just cut your losses and move on.  At this point, I wouldn't care about "reasonable access to the children" if I was any of them, except maybe Charles.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is exactly the history I need to learn   So much to know, so little time.  Thank you
> 
> ETA:  _*power and property *_What else is there?


Sex.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Pure speculation:
> 
> There were 2 incidents during the week orchestrated by Haz and Raptor. (1)The staged big hug from a sugar scene at the Windsor walk about and her audacity of thanking the planted sugar on behalf of the family certainly must have grated on the RF. (2)Then when the hearse was arriving at BP, the picture of them on the stairs behind the King, which got turned into at least one headline stating they were the ones on hand to greet it’s arrival. Both made it clear Raptor wasn’t sitting at Frogmore reading fashion magazines, but plotting.
> 
> These preceded the very very important ceremonial days ahead leading to the burial. Read the first draft of Operation London Bridge was first developed 17 years ago. History was at stake without the Suckesses giving a damn.
> 
> Realizing her determination to write her own script, seeing clearly how emasculated Hazbeen is, I bet there was a very secret high level meeting and information from pre wedding vetting investigations was reviewed. Using a few selected examples of the data that she probably had no idea was known, (not all, the RF will play it close to the vest) she and Haz were possibly told toe the line or this goes public. In addition to feeling the family freeze, realizing even Eugenie and Jack turned out to be on the home team now (bet that was a shock to them), being hit in the face with evidence of overwhelming support of thousands and thousands for the Monarchy from diverse groups in mourning, having no one protecting them, at least a little fear might have started they could be on thin ice. Enough to keep them in line.
> 
> I think if she was actually trying to meet with Charles it was to attempt to broker a deal for Haz to dump the book in exchange for a like amount pay off from the RF to cover the loss.


I agree that she wanted to make a deal. I can’t decide if she/they were threatened that there would be disclosures. I would prefer to think that they were very strongly  intimidated by an explanation of what was expected of them and that under no circumstances were they to do more than what was on the program. I think that Harry understood this, but it didn’t stop him from having a self entitled hissy fit over the uniform.  I don’t believe that they were invited to the reception and put out that they were just to be disruptive or to cage an invitation. Meg maintained her own agenda of playing the victim by standing apart and giving long soulful lonely looks whenever possible.  This was aided by the fact that no one really wanted anything to do with either of them. On the whole they looked like two unhappy people trapped in a play.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Reminds me of those old fairy tales which have wicked women wheedling besotted men, like what happens in Beauty and the Beast.
> 
> *besotted*
> /bɪˈsɒtɪd/
> 1. adjective
> strongly infatuated.
> "he became *besotted with* a local barmaid"
> 2. ARCHAIC
> intoxicated; drunk.


Y'all are making me feel smart because I actually know all these vocal words you're posting.  Don't I sound intelligent saying y'all?


----------



## purseinsanity

TimeToShop said:


> As their plane descended a feeling of dispair spread across the land (US).


That explains the sudden feeling of doom I felt yesterday!


----------



## purseinsanity

kemilia said:


> I agree--I can't see H being happy seeing his wife wearing it. Funny how she sent back the rings but not the bracelet--what a goldd!gger.
> 
> Also, I remember as a teen going to the local library monthly and grabbing all the fashion mags and reading away the afternoon. I remember when* that bracelet was adverted as the "slave" bracelet*, I thought it weird with the screws and screwdriver and definitely thinking the "slave" name was not cool. And I still feel that way about that bracelet but very clever for Cartier renaming it and burying the original name--it has worked.


That's seriously what it was first called??  I feel icky just reading that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  Who is their PR now?



"OMG!  Let's braid each other's hair!"


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> "OMG!  Let's braid each other's hair!"


Maybe make friendship bracelets too


----------



## Frivole88




----------



## CobaltBlu




----------



## momtok

Lounorada said:


> I dunno... that's true, yes, but they didn't have to look 'happy', just comfortable together, at least.
> Being at the procession of QEII coffin to Westminster Hall a week ago didn't stop her looking smug AF.
> Something happened between then and the funeral for her to be looking way off-form at the funeral. She looked pissed off, uncomfortable and far from smug- the complete opposite to her usual narc self.


I agree with this and commented as much to hubby a few times.  There were moments where she looked almost sheepish.  My instinctive guess at the time, just from gut feeling, was an argument with H.  I neither had nor have any concrete reason, just a feeling I had a few times.  Shrug.  ... Yes, I agree with this above.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Ok...every other posting on Twitter is something to do with these two??  What is going on?  Who is their PR now?



Has TW hired Aniston's PR company?


----------



## csshopper

momtok said:


> I agree with this and commented as much to hubby a few times.  There were moments where she looked almost sheepish.  My instinctive guess at the time, just from gut feeling, was an argument with H.  I neither had nor have any concrete reason, just a feeling I had a few times.  Shrug.  ... Yes, I agree with this above.


Maybe she heard a foreign phrase, “NO; you will not …” and didn’t have any experience in handling it.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Harry 2016:
> View attachment 5615034
> 
> 
> Harry 2022:
> View attachment 5615035
> 
> 
> They're just so in love. Hope she's been worth it.


If they are truly still so in love, good for them. But why does the rest of the world need to know and (presumably) rejoice in their love? If South Africa had not sat up and yelled (figuratively), we would have heard about the celebration in the streets for years, just like the P&G story.

I keep thinking this is a branding exercise and sooner or later we will get a tome entitled The Sussex Way to Staying In Love, subtitled Royal Ways in the Bedroom.


----------



## xincinsin

scarlet555 said:


> Prince harry OW destroying his Grandma, the Queen and OW encouraging him to talk sh!t about the Queen.
> Unbelievable.
> I didn't watch the whole interview, just stuff coming onto my feed.
> The family betrayal is UNREAL!



This is the guy who also claims that he was keeping an eye on her and making sure she had the right people around her?

Okay, I'm now leaning towards Harry being a narc as well because my office narcs made contradictory statements and got really upset if anyone pointed it out. We were NOT supposed to remember that they said something different earlier. Many times, they even denied that they made the earlier statements. Once, the entire office (10 pax) said, "we all heard it" and he got humiliated and screamed, "I don't remember it, so it doesn't count!"


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Opinion piece from _Vogue_ calling criticism of Meghan from the funeral racist. The author doesn’t address the validity of any of the complaints, she’s decided she knows the source of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s Call the Endless Meghan Markle Scrutiny What It Is
> 
> 
> Meghan participated in funereal procedures pitch-perfectly, objectively fulfilling the ambient obligations of any attendee. Yet somehow the duchess is once again being slated for acting inappropriately.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


Sorry for giggling, but this sentence is so nonsensical: "after vocal concern about the coloring of her kids, she bore two light-skinned offspring". It's not like that story about Archie's skin colour is proven fact. And this sentence makes them sound like they were mail-order babies and she purposely had light-skinned kids to prove her detractors wrong.

But anyway, I looked through the rest of Raven Smith's writings for Vogue. I think he thrives on controversy. His subject matter is never the same and he says he writes on whatever topic strikes his fancy that week. Maybe he likes to play the devil's advocate with his opinion pieces to up the clicks.








						Who is Raven Smith? Vogue article compares Amber Heard trial to 'modern day witch trial', leaves the internet divided
					

British Vogue columnist Raven Smith recently left the internet divided after writing about the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard defamation trial.




					www.sportskeeda.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lounorada said:


> @gracekelly I agree with you completely, but I don't think that was me who said something about the bracelet! Unless I did and can't remember but I don't think it was me...
> View attachment 5615010


Just picking up the bangle thing - it is interesting she lets it be put out it’s her ex’s gift but I doubt it is.  She probably sold the original on eBay but it’s not like it’d be hard to get a replacement with her clothing allowance and it pays for itself in emotional blackmail points.


bag-mania said:


> Opinion piece from _Vogue_ calling criticism of Meghan from the funeral racist. The author doesn’t address the validity of any of the complaints, she’s decided she knows the source of them.
> 
> https://www.vogue.com/article/meghan-markle-queen-elizabeth-ii-funeral-scrutiny-racism/amp[/URL



Courting all this easy controversy gets clicks and saves having to research anything or find a new story. It’s just the  opinions market.

I do blame fox news for this the highly editorial/speech heavy news style was such a big seller everyone wants a piece.

Frustrating in many ways especially for those of us who prefer our H&M content to be the pure undiluted cringe of their actions.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Sorry for giggling, but this sentence is so nonsensical: "after vocal concern about the coloring of her kids, she bore two light-skinned offspring". It's not like that story about Archie's skin colour is proven fact. And this sentence makes them sound like they were mail-order babies and she purposely had light-skinned kids to prove her detractors wrong.
> 
> But anyway, I looked through the rest of Raven Smith's writings for Vogue. I think he thrives on controversy. His subject matter is never the same and he says he writes on whatever topic strikes his fancy that week. Maybe he likes to play the devil's advocate with his opinion pieces to up the clicks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Raven Smith? Vogue article compares Amber Heard trial to 'modern day witch trial', leaves the internet divided
> 
> 
> British Vogue columnist Raven Smith recently left the internet divided after writing about the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard defamation trial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sportskeeda.com


I’m not going to bother giving it the click he wants I agree that sentence is actually kind of undermining his point because it sounds like a struggle with happy resolution and that happy end is ‘light-skin’ kids - makes me wonder if we’re meant to conclude it’d be a less happy ending if they weren’t and what that says about the author really thinks.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Sorry for giggling, but this sentence is so nonsensical: "after vocal concern about the coloring of her kids, she bore two light-skinned offspring". It's not like that story about Archie's skin colour is proven fact. And this sentence makes them sound like they were mail-order babies and she purposely had light-skinned kids to prove her detractors wrong.
> 
> But anyway, I looked through the rest of Raven Smith's writings for Vogue. I think he thrives on controversy. His subject matter is never the same and he says he writes on whatever topic strikes his fancy that week. Maybe he likes to play the devil's advocate with his opinion pieces to up the clicks.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is Raven Smith? Vogue article compares Amber Heard trial to 'modern day witch trial', leaves the internet divided
> 
> 
> British Vogue columnist Raven Smith recently left the internet divided after writing about the Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard defamation trial.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sportskeeda.com


I really need to step away from the computer when I'm tired     I clicked on a few pages of Raven Smith Vogue and saw pictures of women beside his name,  but I guess I should have kept clicking


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Sophie and her husband held hands after the procession, not during it like the other two.


I thought that was Zara and Mike. Sophie and Edward didn't.


----------



## elvisfan4life

TimeToShop said:


> I’m an American who was taught little of British history in school. I have a hard time keeping all the Henry’s, Edward’s, Richard’s, etc straight - which roman numeral goes to whom. Also when it’s the (n)th Lord of Wherever. Not to mention all the Jane’s, Catherine’s, Anne’s, etc. And then the rankings - Earls, Lords, and all.
> 
> Major kudos to those of you who come from countries where you had to learn thousands of years of history.


I have a history degree and find it  fascinating but then I also have book after book on your presidents and American history too from ever trip over the pond


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

DoggieBags said:


> Gayle King has a functioning brain So I don’t understand why she continues to check her brain at the door and suspend all her capacity for critical thinking when dealing with the Harkles. She does herself no favors by consistently mouthing the Harkle party line regardless of how patently absurd some of their pronouncements are.


I never thought much of Gayle's brain power.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DL Harper said:


> What's the statement about Sophie holding hands with her husband in Westminster?  Was a photo published?



Wasn't that Zara and Mike? But also, they held hands leaving, not while still in procession formation. Plus, they don't forcefully hold hands at the most inappropriate of times so people aren't as annoyed already.


----------



## papertiger

scarlet555 said:


> who is paying this clown?



Never mind Netflix' _The Crown_, more like the Crown and the Clown


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Frivole88 said:


> View attachment 5615261



Did he? Omid I mean. I tend to believe if Omid released it that it came from the Harkles.

I also shouldn't be surprised, but can't help but feel disappointed in Harry.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I'd say it's because way back when, Meghan and Harry brushed off the potential loss of titles and financial support as a bluff by Charles and the Queen. It would take time to rescind the titles and Harry could draw on his inheritance from Diana and the upfront payments from Spotify and Netflix if they needed immediate money.  They likely thought they had time to force the Queen and Charles to apologize and give them the half-in/half-out deal they wanted.  They also likely believed their own hype that they were a billion dollar brand, all on their own.
> 
> Instead, years have passed, no apology came because they made so many inaccurate statements and "recollections vary".  They got no half-in/half-out deal. They have not been paid big dollars to hit the speaking circuit.  Meghan's children's literature career consisted of one poorly received book. They also have had to deal with many PR screw ups (the cemetery pap walk, Ellen appearance, Uvalde appearance, skipping Prince Philip's memorial service, skipping visiting the Queen this summer, etc.) and the public perception, certainly in the UK and in other countries, that they made Prince Philip and the Queen's final years unhappy. So, they are in a weaker position now, especially with both Spotify and Netflix expecting a concrete return on their investments in the next few months and that billion dollars not magically materializing.



Their brand power is definitely waning not waxing.

They are like a band that once had a hit but can't write another. That's why we see them write the same words over and over, they rely on covers of the same old (sad) song. 

Unfortunately, 4 years is a long time in media. They'll soon be obsessed about a new couple soon and the twosome will get all the privacy they want.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

DP


----------



## VickyB

kemilia said:


> I agree--I can't see H being happy seeing his wife wearing it. Funny how she sent back the rings but not the bracelet--what a goldd!gger.
> 
> Also, I remember as a teen going to the local library monthly and grabbing all the fashion mags and reading away the afternoon. I remember when that bracelet was adverted as the "slave" bracelet, I thought it weird with the screws and screwdriver and definitely thinking the "slave" name was not cool. And I still feel that way about that bracelet but very clever for Cartier renaming it and burying the original name--it has worked.


Hold the phone! You mean that's not a gift from H but from her 1st hubby??? I only noticed her wearing it once they exited!!!

Side note, I was under the impression that it was originally named the "Love " bracelet" and slang was  "slave". I have no idea.  My grandparents gave me mine in 1979. Still have it on. It's marked Aldo. It's that old.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I'd say it's because way back when, Meghan and Harry brushed off the potential loss of titles and financial support as a bluff by Charles and the Queen. It would take time to rescind the titles and Harry could draw on his inheritance from Diana and the upfront payments from Spotify and Netflix if they needed immediate money.  They likely thought they had time to force the Queen and Charles to apologize and give them the half-in/half-out deal they wanted.  They also likely believed their own hype that they were a billion dollar brand, all on their own.
> 
> Instead, years have passed, no apology came because they made so many inaccurate statements and "recollections vary".  They got no half-in/half-out deal. They have not been paid big dollars to hit the speaking circuit.  Meghan's children's literature career consisted of one poorly received book. They also have had to deal with many PR screw ups (the cemetery pap walk, Ellen appearance, Uvalde appearance, skipping Prince Philip's memorial service, skipping visiting the Queen this summer, etc.) and the public perception, certainly in the UK and in other countries, that they made Prince Philip and the Queen's final years unhappy. So, they are in a weaker position now, especially with both Spotify and Netflix expecting a concrete return on their investments in the next few months and that billion dollars not magically materializing.



I also don't think HaZZer knew the cost of living. He is used to having that money in the bank and drawing out mere pocket money whilst we pay for the rest. 

Can you imagine the shock? 

Even my DH doesn't know the price of things. He's complaining about this or that when we go to stores and I'm telling him, that was 20 years ago, _this_ is the normal price of a coat _now_.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

jenayb said:


> The way she is showcasing her wedding ring is so telling.  Fingers sprawled et al.


She even uses the claw on herself


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Not defending him, but I wonder whether he had any experience at all in understanding income versus expenses, mortgages, maintenance costs, etc. I can just picture H buying that house without one thought of what the monthly upkeep cost would be. Most of us start small in our early 20s with a small apartment or a small house and then build from there, whereas this may be his first time ever seeing a bill for anything.



Exactly


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I doubt they teach personal finance at Eton.



Only how to spend others money, Princes and Hedge Fund managers


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> I also don't think HaZZer knew the cost of living. He is used to having that money in the bank and drawing out mere pocket money whilst we pay for the rest.
> 
> Can you imagine the shock?
> 
> Even my DH doesn't know the price of things. He's complaining about this or that when we go to stores and I'm telling him, that was 20 years ago, _this_ is the normal price of a coat _now_.



That’s funny when it happens isn’t it. A couple of years ago my ex hubby wanted to get my Mum a little gift and as she loves her lipsticks I brought him to the Dior concession. I chose one and he reached into his wallet and withdrew a £5 note. I smirked to myself and noted the salespersons smile too then she said that will be £34 please sir. He said “how much” and “for a lipstick” and kept looking at me incredulous. 

Another time she admired an ornamental sheep in the gardening centre and I whispered at him “just put in the trolley, it will be a nice surprise”. When we got to the checkout he was calling me quietly but insistently and whispered “that sheep is £70” and I hissed back “shut up and pay”. Then I heard him asking if they had a recovery room. 

Men


----------



## BlueCherry

I keep seeing everywhere that KC extended an olive branch to H&M by referencing his love for them. We all know you can love the sinner but not the sin.

But this first speech was a very important one and if it was an olive branch why then reference his new life overseas. You would just omit that part of it if it was an olive branch.

I’ve returned to my original opinion that he does not want those two back and for the public to acknowledge that anything that happens during the funeral period is protocol but temporary and to bear with him.


----------



## White Orchid

BlueCherry said:


> That’s funny when it happens isn’t it. A couple of years ago my ex hubby wanted to get my Mum a little gift and as she loves her lipsticks I brought him to the Dior concession. I chose one and he reached into his wallet and withdrew a £5 note. I smirked to myself and noted the salespersons smile too then she said that will be £34 please sir. He said “how much” and “for a lipstick” and kept looking at me incredulous.
> 
> Another time she admired an ornamental sheep in the gardening centre and I whispered at him “just put in the trolley, it will be a nice surprise”. When we got to the checkout he was calling me quietly but insistently and whispered “that sheep is £70” and I hissed back “shut up and pay”. Then I heard him asking if they had a recovery room.
> 
> Men


Oh Lord, I am your husband!!!  I see chips and get incredulous and think no way I’m paying $7.00 for a bloody bucket of chips, but you’ve made me realise I’m living in the midset of 30 years ago lol.  We are as pathetic as each other


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> I keep seeing everywhere that KC extended an olive branch to H&M by referencing his love for them. We all know you can love the sinner but not the sin.
> 
> But this first speech was a very important one and if it was an olive branch why then reference his new life overseas. You would just omit that part of it if it was an olive branch.
> 
> I’ve returned to my original opinion that he does not want those two back and for the public to acknowledge that anything that happens during the funeral period is protocol but temporary and to bear with him.



Charles will always be Harry's father, however, in all respects that speech was to reassure us he was the King first and foremost, and until the dies (and the Head of the Church of England). He wanted to put to bed a lot of speculative nonsense that had been written about him.

He wrote that speech a while ago, but I think the   to H & M was a line drawn under. It really was a "I wish you the best, maybe we'll do lunch sometime, see ya"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Charles will always be Harry's father, however, in all respects that speech was to reassure us he was the King first and foremost, and until the dies (and the Head of the Church of England). He wanted to put to bed a lot of speculative nonsense that had been written about him.
> 
> He wrote that speech a while ago, but I think the   to H & M was a line drawn under. It really was a "I wish you the best, maybe we'll do lunch sometime, see ya"


Hope so.  I think if Meg (allegedly) wrote Charles a letter, and requested a face to face meeting, and didn’t get either, it’s a pretty clear message.


----------



## BlueCherry

White Orchid said:


> Oh Lord, I am your husband!!!  I see chips and get incredulous and think no way I’m paying $7.00 for a bloody bucket of chips, but you’ve made me realise I’m living in the midset of 30 years ago lol.  We are as pathetic as each other



Lolololol he did the same with a crepe, squealed “£5.50 for a bit of flour and an egg, sure I’ll go home and make one”.


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> Charles will always be Harry's father, however, in all respects that speech was to reassure us he was the King first and foremost, and until the dies (and the Head of the Church of England). He wanted to put to bed a lot of speculative nonsense that had been written about him.
> 
> He wrote that speech a while ago, but I think the   to H & M was a line drawn under. It really was a "I wish you the best, maybe we'll do lunch sometime, see ya"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

White Orchid said:


> Oh Lord, I am your husband!!!  I see chips and get incredulous and think no way I’m paying $7.00 for a bloody bucket of chips, but you’ve made me realise I’m living in the midset of 30 years ago lol.  We are as pathetic as each other



I was a child when we got the Euro and I still convert to D-Mark and get mad how expensive stuff is


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> Lolololol he did the same with a crepe, squealed “£5.50 for a bit of flour and an egg, sure I’ll go home and make one”.



Haha, that's how I feel...why pay big bucks for something mediocre I can cook better and cheaper at home. Has spoiled going out a bit for me to be honest.


----------



## KEG66

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haha, that's how I feel...why pay big bucks for something mediocre I can cook better and cheaper at home. Has spoiled going out a bit for me to be honest.


I think Covid had a lot to do with that, in my case anyway !


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

KEG66 said:


> I think Covid had a lot to do with that, in my case anyway !



True, I don't trust people to be responsible and if the choice is going out or spending time with my grandmother without being a risk I choose the latter.


----------



## xincinsin

Someone described Handbag as "Trapped in California". Now I have earworm.
_you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave_


----------



## Helventara

papertiger said:


> however, in all respects that speech was to reassure us he was the King first and foremost, and until the dies (and the Head of the Church of England). He wanted to put to bed a lot of speculative nonsense that had been written about him.


So true. If he (and PW) wants the monarchy as an institution to continue, he needs to make this distinction: like a privately, family-owned company that goes public. Not everything is truly yours anymore.

However, this point is what the sugars (and MM and H)  don’t understand and therefore they keep on harping on baseless things such as racism, etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He sure does look like he already checked out but never left.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I am old enough to remember when another couple couldn't stand the sight of each other.....
> 
> View attachment 5615213


Is Diana wearing a wig here?


----------



## xincinsin

I learnt a new word today.
Love how educational this thread is


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Could be a day of “breaking news” from the overseas people and other _unreliable_ sources:


----------



## White Orchid

BlueCherry said:


> Lolololol he did the same with a crepe, squealed “£5.50 for a bit of flour and an egg, sure I’ll go home and make one”.


I’m like that with tiny slices of cakes at my local cafes lol.  In Aussie vernacular, we are commonly known as “tight a$$es”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## White Orchid

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is Diana wearing a wig here?


Nope.  Am old enough to remember, and used to buy all the weekly mags with her on the cover.  She went through a bad hair stage like many of us.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought that was Zara and Mike. Sophie and Edward didn't.


My mistake


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be a day of “breaking news” from the overseas people and other _unreliable_ sources:




Aren't the nobodies generous, offering THE KING a truce if he does as they want


----------



## KEG66

White Orchid said:


> Nope.  Am old enough to remember, and used to buy all the weekly mags with her on the cover.  She went through a bad hair stage like many of us.


Yep big hair was definitely a thing then and to be honest not sure I’ve moved on lol


----------



## EverSoElusive

IF they really asked KC to undo what's decided at the Sandringham Summit then that should be one of the most concrete evidences for allegations of money problems. They spend faster than they ever put in any work to make more. 

IF they got paid in advance by Netflix and Spotify, then that's probably how they managed to sustain their spending. With other companies seeing how they barely held up their end of the bargain with Netflix and Spotify, that certainly doesn't give other companies any confidence to want to work with them, let alone paying them in advance and waiting 2-3 years before they put out anything. 

IF no one is willing to pay them in advance again and they are not the working type, then they might have to sell their forever home and move into another TP's property seeing how TP is now seemingly chummy with his comments about them. TP can probably raise the Invisikids too or OW can make them her grandbabies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW today I feel especially for the BRF (sorry a bit lenghty, you can skip to the last paragraph).

Ten days ago I received a text message late at night which was a bit mysterious but later turned out to be a professional contact I used to have while newly at university, like 20 years ago. That person has quite few Sussex traits: a user who always used to make sure he got more out of a deal than he put in, a master in asking favours but not returning, an ego as big as a small planet, played an extremely unfunny prank on me without ever acknowledging or let alone apologizing, entitled (HE wants to talk to me NOW, so he's trying to force it).

I've been ignoring because grown up me simply has no room in my life for people like this, and so far he's

a) texted me shortly before midnight without introducting himself and I don't know which of the two I find more rude - that was the initial contact.

b) sent an email which completely confirmed he's still the same user who stumbled upon some of my work and thought I could do something for him

c) sent me a WhatApp message informing me he sent the email

d) sent another email letting me know some apparently important person visited him (I had to google who that is)

e) called me this morning before 8 a.m. which again I feel is so rude and I'm an early bird

f) "accidentally" sent me another WhatsApp message after the call wasn't answered that very obviously wasn't meant for me and I strongly suspect was to tickle an answer along the lines of "Uh, wrong person" or "?" out of me

I could just email back and say to leave me alone but I refuse to be forced into any form of interaction. It's been not even two weeks, it is obviously super tame compared to the sh*t the Sussexes put the BRF through and I have no emotional involvement whatsoever, but at this point I'm slightly annoyed and also slightly confused because I personally would have gotten the message a few unanswered messages ago. We've said often enough they need to be harsher on them, but I now understand the feeling of. Just. Not. Wanting. To. Deal. With the nutjobs.


----------



## marietouchet

Today’s yummy DM story …
When they saw KC in the spring, 15 min short visit because they were late , they suggested a mediator
Camilla spit out her tea 

I sense a pattern, MM may not be a punctual person


----------



## Mumotons

I found a video on YouTube entitled Queen Elizabeth II reflects on her life , rare footage
MM and JH have NO idea what service is, MM especially had a Hollywood idea of Royalty. The mundane every day things are the complete opposite to the greedy shallow MM


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Today’s yummy DM story …
> When they saw KC in the spring, 15 min short visit because they were late , they suggested a mediator
> Camilla spit out her tea
> 
> I sense a pattern, MM may not be a punctual person



Does Better Up have mediators? Maybe Harry gets a good deal.


----------



## charlottawill

BlueCherry said:


> Men


Don't get me started....


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be a day of “breaking news” from the overseas people and other _unreliable_ sources:



More like a pound of salt


----------



## Frivole88




----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I googled the author of the article, and she is black.  It's interesting that the author of The Cut is also black, but_ did her research_ and was able to write an article that showed us who Meghan really is (sadly it appears she lost her job over it)
> 
> The Vogue author is going by what she saw, like the rest of us on TV and in articles and is showing her obvious bias and interpreting her own experiences as a WOC.
> 
> She must have missed the numerous observations that show Meghan identified as a caucasian  before she married Harry and then it became convenient for her to use racism as the excuse to return to California.


You’re right, the author of _The Cut _article has actually met, spent time with, and interviewed Meghan. The _Vogue_ author has never spoken with her but he_ just knows _that criticism of Meghan is based on her skin color and not her behavior. That’s why the _Vogue_ article had to be marked as an Opinion piece so readers will know it is purely about the author’s feelings. Unfortunately, not all readers notice that distinction.


----------



## sdkitty

not sure if this has been talked about here:
Camilla Spluttered Into Her Tea When Harry Asked for Mediation With Royals​STIFF UPPER LIP
Matt Young​
Night Editor
Published Sep. 22, 2022 12:05AM ET 





Chris Jackson/Getty​Camilla Parker-Bowles spluttered into her tea when Prince Harry suggested bringing in a mediator to help solve the royal family’s rift, a new book reveals. According to _Vanity Fair_, the book, _The New Royals_, written by journalist Katie Nicholl, quotes an unnamed family friend who alleges Harry visited his father, then called Prince Charles, in the spring, with hopes of healing the growing rift between the family. “Harry went in with hugs and the best of intentions and said he wanted to clear the air,” the source said. “He actually suggested that they use a mediator to try and sort things out, which had Charles somewhat bemused and Camilla spluttering into her tea. She told Harry it was ridiculous and that they were a family and would sort it out between themselves.” The source claimed the meeting with Charles “was more awkward” than Harry’s tea with the queen. “The Sussexes were late, and Charles had just 15 minutes with his son and daughter-in-law,” Nicholl writes. Any chance of reconciliation was sidelined after he appeared on NBC’s _Today_ show, reportedly “raising eyebrows” at Buckingham Palace as he discussed his relationship with the queen. “It seemed Harry’s drive to win back some of the trust that had been shattered post-Oprah was dashed,” Nicholl writes.
Read it at Vanity Fair

ADVERTISEMENT


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be a day of “breaking news” from the overseas people and other _unreliable_ sources:



The gall.  A TRUCE in exchange for "reinstatement" of titles"...that's blackmail. WTF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does Better Up have mediators? Maybe Harry gets a good deal.


Probably why he suggested it.  B-up trying to grift off the royals.
Yep, I am with Cam.


----------



## sdkitty

IDK the source of this but it's ridiculous....they are so intent on having their kids be a prince and princess?  then they should have stayed in great britain and done their duty.
And he was so supportive of his delicate flower during the funeral.  








						Prince Harry Ensured Meghan Markle Felt “Comfortable” During Queen Elizabeth’s Funeral With a Sweet Gesture
					

The Monarch's state funeral took place on Monday at Westminster Abbey.




					www.instyle.com


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> Someone described Handbag as "Trapped in California". Now I have earworm.
> _you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave_



Thanks for sharing the earworm, I’m sure my DH will appreciate it as well as I share it with him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Frivole88 said:


> View attachment 5615410



I am prepared.  Bring.it.on.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

White Orchid said:


> I’m like that with tiny slices of cakes at my local cafes lol.  In Aussie vernacular, we are commonly known as “tight a$$es”


We have those here in the States too. I prefer to think we are the ones with functioning brains.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Frivole88 said:


> View attachment 5615410



I do believe they are Harry's children. That little girl looks exactly like him (and I always find it so unfortunate when little girls look EXACTLY like their father...luckily most grow out of it at some point). 

But also, what was the original question? Because I wouldn't jump from "Dealing with Sussexes...shocking news" to "The children are adopted".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am prepared.  Bring.it.on.



I'm divided. At this point I'd be happy to never hear of them again (really! We just need to find another space to hang out at then), and I'd tremendously enjoy if Raptor finally reaped what she sowed and lost what she never deserved, but there are two small children who have it bad enough as is with that set of parents. I won't enjoy learning something deeply troubling or embarrassing about them.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> IDK the source of this but it's ridiculous....they are so intent on having their kids be a prince and princess?  then they should have stayed in great britain and done their duty.
> And he was so supportive of his delicate flower during the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Ensured Meghan Markle Felt “Comfortable” During Queen Elizabeth’s Funeral With a Sweet Gesture
> 
> 
> The Monarch's state funeral took place on Monday at Westminster Abbey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.instyle.com


Uhm, does the funeral guest who provided the inside scoop not know any other words besides "comfortable"? It sounds rather inappropriate at the moment and in this context since it was used a number of times to describe the late Queen's status just before she passed away.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do believe they are Harry's children. That little girl looks exactly like him (and I always find it so unfortunate when little girls look EXACTLY like their father...luckily most grow out of it at some point).
> 
> But also, what was the original question? Because I wouldn't jump from "Dealing with Sussexes...shocking news" to "The children are adopted".


Mercy, praises for how you handled the narc.  Weird, entitled people everywhere. 

See, I do not trust the Harkle photo. Way too easy to photoshop it.  And no, the BRF does not need to renegotiate the half in-half out summit.  QE is barely buried and they start this sh!!t.  Noooo, just no.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> You’re right, the author of _The Cut _article has actually met, spent time with, and interviewed Meghan. The _Vogue_ author has never spoken with her but _she just knows _that criticism of Meghan is based on her skin color and not her behavior. That’s why the _Vogue_ article had to be marked as an Opinion piece so readers will know *it is purely about the author’s feelings*. *Unfortunately, not all readers notice that distinction.*


It is pure fiction, but unfortunately, most readers don't follow TPF and aren't updated on the falsehoods emitted by TW of Montecito and her always non-delightful hubby.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm divided. At this point I'd be happy to never hear of them again (really! We just need to find another space to hang out at then), and I'd tremendously enjoy if Raptor finally reaped what she sowed and lost what she never deserved, but there are two small children who have it bad enough as is with that set of parents. I won't enjoy learning something deeply troubling or embarrassing about them.


The media will not let this story rest.  Same as with Diana - it’s way too lucrative for them. Hazz can be very proud following in D’s footsteps.


----------



## xincinsin

WingNut said:


> The gall. " A TRUCE in exchange for "reinstatement" of titles"...that's blackmail. WTF.


This!
Unfortunately it does ring true after Zedzee openly threatened the BRF in The Cut interview.
And giving in to blackmail is never a good idea. There is no war requiring a truce. There are two ill-mannered delinquents lobbing Molotov cocktails at their families.


----------



## CarryOn2020

All of this war terminology is odd -  ‘broker a peace deal’, a ‘truce’.  
H&M must really feel small to need all of this big talk.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I do understand families fight, but I absolutely do not understand this pathological need to air dirty laundry. I wouldn't even understand it if they were actual grievances and not mostly made up.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> All of this war terminology is odd -  ‘broker a peace deal’, a ‘truce’.
> H&M must really feel small to need all of this big talk.


on the one hand, the RF isn't a "regular" family - so there is that.  On the other hand, it's kind of ironic that Harry, who has always been the temperamental one, is supposedly suggesting this.  doesn't fit.  The Brits are lucky he wasn't born first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles and their Romeo and Juliet 'love' story left the UK… 



and life continues as usual… Kate and Will's faces are so much lighter now that they are gone.


----------



## bag-mania

Just realized that Raven Smith is a guy. That is what happens when you make assumptions. I had to go back and edit my post to change the pronouns.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do understand families fight, but  do*I absolutely not understand this pathological need to air dirty laundry.* I wouldn't even understand it if they were actual grievances and not mostly made up.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do understand families fight, but I absolutely do not understand this pathological need to air dirty laundry. I wouldn't even understand it if they were actual grievances and not mostly made up.


Presumably, the only leverage the gruesome twosome has to force the BRF to the bargaining table is to take their case to the court of public opinion. If they air enough dirty laundry in public (whether real or made up) they hope it will cause enough embarrassment to the Royal Family that they will eventually feel it necessary to offer H&M a deal to shut them up. This is very much out of the Diana playbook in how she handled her relationship with Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

AL is not wrong. H&M behaved badly on the world stage.  Maybe now they won’t show their faces until next year


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Presumably, the only leverage the gruesome twosome has to force the BRF to the bargaining table is to take their case to the court of public opinion. If they air enough dirty laundry in public (whether real or made up) they hope it will cause enough embarrassment to the Royal Family that they will eventually feel it necessary to offer H&M a deal to shut them up. *This is very much out of the Diana playbook in how she handled her relationship with Charles.*


Wonder if they are behind the Andrew leak.  How awful for Bea and Eug.  Maybe that’s why B&E blanked them 

ETA: Remove them from their connection to the RF and this stuff will stop.  It did with Diana.


----------



## WingNut

sdkitty said:


> IDK the source of this but it's ridiculous....they are so intent on having their kids be a prince and princess?  then they should have stayed in great britain and done their duty.
> And he was so supportive of his delicate flower during the funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Ensured Meghan Markle Felt “Comfortable” During Queen Elizabeth’s Funeral With a Sweet Gesture
> 
> 
> The Monarch's state funeral took place on Monday at Westminster Abbey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.instyle.com


Ok....Whyyyyyyy is this news that he "comforted her with sweet comforting gestures"?? Why?? Someone actually had to write words to this effect. Are people so desperate for the most minute details that someone feels it's necessary to pay someone else to write this crap?


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


>




I saw this when it happened, that she was seated, when everyone else stood.  Does anybody recall what happened next?  Harry was looking down at her and then?  Did she stand up?


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if they are behind the Andrew leak.  How awful for Bea and Eug.  Maybe that’s why B&E blanked them
> 
> ETA: Remove them from their connection to the RF and this stuff will stop.  It did with Diana.


Andrew leak?


----------



## sdkitty

WingNut said:


> Ok....Whyyyyyyy is this news that he "comforted her with sweet comforting gestures"?? Why?? Someone actually had to write words to this effect. Are people so desperate for the most minute details that someone feels it's necessary to pay someone else to write this crap?


well, come on now - didn't you see what Tyler Perry said?  they are Such a loving couple


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> Andrew leak?


_Prince Andrew secretly plotted with Princess Diana and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson to try to prevent Charles becoming King and allow Prince William to take the throne with the Duke of York as Regent, an explosive new biography claimed today.  

Andrew is also alleged to have 'lobbied' the Queen and campaigned against the marriage between Charles and Camilla, now King and Queen Consort, telling his mother that she was not trustworthy.









						Prince Andrew 'lobbied' Queen to stop Charles being King, book claims
					

The Duke of York 'plotted' with Diana to 'push Prince Charles aside', with the aim of Prince Andrew becoming 'Regent to Prince William', Angela Levin writes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> That Andrew wanted Charles removed from LoS and he wanted to be regent to William .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew 'lobbied' Queen to stop Charles being King, book claims
> 
> 
> The Duke of York 'plotted' with Diana to 'push Prince Charles aside', with the aim of Prince Andrew becoming 'Regent to Prince William', Angela Levin writes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





CarryOn2020 said:


> I missed that. Thanks.


----------



## Chanbal

_*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave Britain for a new life in America dominated royal reporting during the final years of Elizabeth's life.*

The upcoming biography The New Royals, by Vanity Fair royal correspondent Katie Nicholl…

"And according to a friend, privately the queen confided that she was exhausted by the turmoil of their decision.

"'*She was very hurt* and told me, 'I don't know, I don't care, and I don't want to think about it anymore,' says that person," the excerpt continued…

The book also described how *King Charles III and Prince William had also felt hurt*, with William struggling to forgive Harry.

"*He always expected Harry would be his wingman; there was a long-term plan in place for the brothers to work together and support one another*," Nicholl wrote. "After Harry announced their departure, William summoned aides to address the future, in what has been referred to by some in William's circle as the 'Anmer Summit.'

"But William and Kate also felt a sense of relief, that 'the drama was gone' when Harry and Meghan left, as a source told me. To this day, William still cannot forgive his brother.








						Queen Was 'Very Hurt' by Harry, Meghan Exit: 'Don't Want to Think About It'
					

The queen also found it "a source of sadness" that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle did not bring Archie and Lilibet to join her summer holiday, a new book says.




					www.newsweek.com
				



_


----------



## elvisfan4life

Frivole88 said:


> View attachment 5615410


I fear Charles will have them back he always wanted them if he does it’s the end of the monarchy as we knew it very disappointed in him


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm divided. At this point I'd be happy to never hear of them again (really! We just need to find another space to hang out at then), and I'd tremendously enjoy if Raptor finally reaped what she sowed and lost what she never deserved, but *there are two small children who have it bad enough as is with that set of parents. *I won't enjoy learning something deeply troubling or embarrassing about them.


With those parents it will be a miracle if the kids turn out well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CL1955 if you are a member here, thank you for your comment!


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do believe they are Harry's children. That little girl looks exactly like him (and I always find it so unfortunate when little girls look EXACTLY like their father...luckily most grow out of it at some point).
> 
> But also, what was the original question? Because I wouldn't jump from "Dealing with Sussexes...shocking news" to "The children are adopted".


I took the posting to mean that the children are not "of the body", meaning they were carried by a surrogate.  Still Harry's child, but not carried to term by TW.  

In days gone by, the home secretary had to be present to make sure the child was actually theirs and not switched at birth.  

There was so much secrecy surrounding the births of those 2 children that it is no wonder that these rumours persist.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Just realized that Raven Smith is a guy. That is what happens when you make assumptions. I had to go back and edit my post to change the pronouns.


Same here, but it was too late for me to change mine   But come one, doesn't "Raven" just sound like a girls name ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I took the posting to mean that the children are not "of the body", meaning they were carried by a surrogate.  Still Harry's child, but not carried to term by TW.
> 
> In days gone by, the home secretary had to be present to make sure the child was actually theirs and not switched at birth.
> 
> There was so much secrecy surrounding the births of those 2 children that it is no wonder that these rumours persist.


Plus, they lie. 
17 confirmed lies in just the Opr interview .  Sheesh.


----------



## KEG66

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do understand families fight, but I absolutely do not understand this pathological need to air dirty laundry. I wouldn't even understand it if they were actual grievances and not mostly made up.


Totally agree that is what I find so despicable. All families have problems, and I know they had ulterior motives, but to be so public especially when Prince Philip was ill. Unforgivable imo.


----------



## jennlt

Is Netflix the reason TP is pushing the H&MM agenda? Cross-selling while he promotes his "romantic" movie?








						Tyler Perry flexes dramatic muscles in Netflix period romance ‘A Jazzman’s Blues’
					

Tyler Perry is flexing his dramatic muscles in a new Netflix love story. It’s about a couple torn apart by family in 1940s Georgia, but...




					wsvn.com


----------



## charlottawill

Frivole88 said:


> View attachment 5615410


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Plus, they lie.
> 17 confirmed lies in just the Opr interview .  Sheesh.


I had read that Tom Bower danced around the birth of Archie, and knows more than he put into print.  He talks about how Harry told the palace that TW was in labour, when in fact, the baby was already born and the palace had to change the announcement 20 minutes later.  This pair is exhausting with all their lies and coverups.


----------



## Toby93

This!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> on the one hand, the RF isn't a "regular" family - so there is that.  On the other hand, it's kind of ironic that Harry, who has always been the temperamental one, is supposedly suggesting this.  doesn't fit.  The Brits are lucky he wasn't born first.


I came across an article yesterday from one of the British tabs that someone posted on Twitter, claiming that Harry was quiet and shy as a young child and William was the trouble maker. Staffers supposedly called him "The Basher". Do with that what you will.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Presumably, the only leverage the gruesome twosome has to force the BRF to the bargaining table is to take their case to the court of public opinion. If they air enough dirty laundry in public (whether real or made up) they hope it will cause enough embarrassment to the Royal Family that they will eventually feel it necessary to offer H&M a deal to shut them up. This is very much out of the Diana playbook in how she handled her relationship with Charles.


Brits will have greater respect for him if he acts swiftly and firmly with their ridiculous demands. It will not go well for him if he goes back on his mother's decisions, and he shouldn't give a rat's *ss what Americans think about him and how he deals with the problem couple. As has been said here, you don't negotiate with blackmailers and terrorists.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I came across an article yesterday from one of the British tabs that someone posted on Twitter, claiming that Harry was quiet and shy as a young child and William was the trouble maker. Staffers supposedly called him "The Basher". Do with that what you will.


sounds like BS to me


----------



## charlottawill

WingNut said:


> Ok....Whyyyyyyy is this news that he "comforted her with sweet comforting gestures"?? Why?? Someone actually had to write words to this effect. Are people so desperate for the most minute details that someone feels it's necessary to pay someone else to write this crap?


It seems all of these ridiculous articles are coming from fluff publications like InStyle, Vogue, Marie Claire and the like. Not exactly hard-hitting journalism. I imagine some recent grad like Anne Hathaway in "The Devil Wears Prada" being tasked with silly assignments like these.


----------



## sdkitty

WillstarveforLV said:


> Pretty sure its been stated what her father and siblings think of their daughter and sister....


and how she treats them


----------



## Sharont2305

charlottawill said:


> I came across an article yesterday from one of the British tabs that someone posted on Twitter, claiming that Harry was quiet and shy as a young child and William was the trouble maker. Staffers supposedly called him "The Basher". Do with that what you will.


I actually remember this, it is true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I came across an article yesterday from one of the British tabs that someone posted on Twitter, claiming that Harry was quiet and shy as a young child and William was the trouble maker. Staffers supposedly called him "The Basher". Do with that what you will.


Could be true. I've known little kids who were terrors at home but shy in front of outsiders, and vice versa. Or who were angels when little, and dreadful when grown, and vice versa.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do understand families fight, but I absolutely do not understand this pathological need to air dirty laundry. I wouldn't even understand it if they were actual grievances and not mostly made up.


The 'sharing' feels very American rather than British. 

I'm not suggesting this behavior is an American trait but I am suggesting the public airing of these complaints originates from the American.


----------



## BlueCherry

If KC decides to allow those two back into the RF they may please a member or two of their family but in the process they piss off more than half the British public. Not a wise decision at all. And I promise to attend every event she does and to protest!


----------



## Sharont2305

BlueCherry said:


> If KC decides to allow those two back into the RF they may please a member or two of their family but in the process they piss off more than half the British public. Not a wise decision at all. And I promise to attend every event she does and to protest!


I will tag along, if I may?


----------



## BlueCherry

Sharont2305 said:


> I actually remember this, it is true.



I remember that too but couldn’t quite the source. It was said when William was naughty that Harry got the blame because he wasn’t going to be King. Whoever made that decision was spot on


----------



## BlueCherry

Sharont2305 said:


> I will tag along, if I may?



Yes please. We can add TPF to our protest placards


----------



## Cinderlala

BlueCherry said:


> I remember that too but couldn’t quite the source. It was said when William was naughty that Harry got the blame because he wasn’t going to be King. Whoever made that decision was spot on


Something similar was in Bower's book.


----------



## BlueCherry

Cinderlala said:


> Something similar was in Bower's book.



I’m one of 11 kids and one of us would always take a spanking for something a sibling had done. Our code was never grass. It hasn’t turned any of us into vitriolic, money grabbing, victimised liars. And we didn’t hate our parents.


----------



## sdkitty

BlueCherry said:


> I’m one of 11 kids and one of us would always take a spanking for something a sibling had done. Our code was never grass. It hasn’t turned any of us into vitriolic, money grabbing, victimised liars. And we didn’t hate our parents.


11 kids!  are you one of younger ones?


----------



## BlueCherry

sdkitty said:


> 11 kids!  are you one of younger ones?



I’m the youngest and the most traumatised


----------



## Cinderlala

Oh my goodness, I can't imagine!  I'm sorry you were the most traumatized.

Edited to add: My laughing emoji is for the penguin, not your trauma.


----------



## miss_chiff

^One word was changed. ‘Equality’ in place of ‘peace’. A lot of good sleuths out there. And a lot of content waiting to be found out? 
Thx to original poster and poster that confirmed when it was said. 
[UN woman's advocacy conference in 2015.]


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I actually remember this, it is true.





xincinsin said:


> Could be true. I've known little kids who were terrors at home but shy in front of outsiders, and vice versa. Or who were angels when little, and dreadful when grown, and vice versa.


According to palace sources, both boys seldom received corrections when they misbehaved.  The claim is Diana spoiled them, almost rewarded the bad behavior. Plenty of stories of Hazz ramming his tricycle into the staff’s shins, causing security scares when he ran off, being a terrible student, etc.  William had his troubles, too, but he grew out of it [probably with QE’s assistance and guidance].


----------



## sdkitty

BlueCherry said:


> I’m the youngest and the most traumatised


OMG.....your older siblings had had a big hand in raising you I bet


----------



## sdkitty

miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615480
> 
> ^One word was changed. ‘Equality’ in place of ‘peace’. A lot of good sleuths out there. And a lot of content waiting to be found out?
> Thx to original poster and poster that confirmed when it was said.
> [UN woman's advocacy conference in 2015.]


the nerve!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to palace sources, both boys seldom received corrections when they misbehaved.  The claim is Diana spoiled them, almost rewarded the bad behavior. Plenty of stories of Hazz ramming his tricycle into the staff’s shins, causing security scares when he ran off, being a terrible student, etc.  William had his troubles, too, but he grew out of it [probably with QE’s assistance and guidance].


Thankfully.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Thankfully.


this brings me to another tangent.  supposedly Haz was so so close to grandma.  well grandma, while a wonderful queen, was pretty well known to be a pretty cold mother to Charles. (too busy being queen)

 so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?  Or I guess it's possible this huge relationship took place after Harry was grown (not that he seems very adult IMO)


----------



## BlueCherry

Cinderlala said:


> Oh my goodness, I can't imagine!  I'm sorry you were the most traumatized.
> 
> Edited to add: My laughing emoji is for the penguin, not your trauma.



The trauma was thoroughly enlightening and light hearted. I love my siblings and the years of brilliant fun growing up. The best bit was when TV remote controls were invented and I could finally sit down for more than 5 minutes   

The penguin cracked me up too. It reminded me of my brothers pushing me down a water slide when I was 6 and couldn’t swim. They hauled me out and I was yelling “Dad they tried to drown me and kill me” and everyone was laughing. Tough love it was called. Pity Meghan wasn’t brought up with some.


----------



## BlueCherry

sdkitty said:


> the nerve!



Wouldn’t you just love it if someone just stood up and announced she’s a plagiarist in front of everyone. Every time I read something like this I’m cringing so bad and I’m on my own


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> this brings me to another tangent.  supposedly Haz was so so close to grandma.  well grandma, while a wonderful queen, was pretty well known to be a pretty cold mother to Charles. (too busy being queen)
> 
> so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?  Or I guess it's possible this huge relationship took place after Harry was grown (not that he seems very adult IMO)


Parents are typically far more lenient when they become grandparents.  I barely recognize my parents in their roles as grandparents---they definitely have very different standards for the grandchildren.   But, it's because they are not in charge of raising the grandchildren.  They just love them, spoil them, and give them back.  

Plus, it's likely that TQ was simply a product of her generation & environment---it's unlikely that any previous monarch had a highly hands-on role in parenting.  I'd imagine being mostly raised by the nanny was just what was done in her circle.


----------



## BlueCherry

sdkitty said:


> this brings me to another tangent.  supposedly Haz was so so close to grandma.  well grandma, while a wonderful queen, was pretty well known to be a pretty cold mother to Charles. (too busy being queen)
> 
> so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?  Or I guess it's possible this huge relationship took place after Harry was grown (not that he seems very adult IMO)



It was a completely different generation. My parents from that similar era believed that children should be brought up the hard way. This meant you generally ended up with a good work ethic, a thick skin and independence. No harm in that. But they do soften as they age and become more aware of todays touchy feely generation.


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> This!



Just look at that picture.  They’re in a solemn procession where everyone is showing respect for the dead and mourning, and they’re holding hands like silly teenagers.  Who makes it all about their “love story” in the middle of a funeral?  It’s disgustingly self absorbed. 


miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615480
> 
> ^One word was changed. ‘Equality’ in place of ‘peace’. A lot of good sleuths out there. And a lot of content waiting to be found out?
> Thx to original poster and poster that confirmed when it was said.
> [UN woman's advocacy conference in 2015.]


She said it herself - she’s a fake.  She can’t think of anything herself she has to steal ideas.


----------



## BlueCherry

@elvisfan4life you asked have they left yet?    

Here is a pic of W&C on public duty today. The looks on their faces would suggest a resounding yes they’re gone


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> this brings me to another tangent.  supposedly Haz was so so close to grandma.  well grandma, while a wonderful queen, was pretty well known to be a pretty cold mother to Charles. (too busy being queen)
> 
> so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?  Or I guess it's possible this huge relationship took place after Harry was grown (not that he seems very adult IMO)



As a former teacher I have seen this play out multiple time IRL.  The grandparents didn’t do such a great job raising their own kids, then have to raise the grandchildren and really actively try to do a much better and more involved job.


----------



## bag-mania

BlueCherry said:


> I’m the youngest and the most traumatised


I’m the youngest too. It’s amazing I survived to adulthood!


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Could be true. I've known little kids who were terrors at home but shy in front of outsiders, and vice versa. Or who were angels when little, and dreadful when grown, and vice versa.


I have read that in several book and articles that this is true.  It apparently had a lot to do with the style of parenting that Diana wanted.  Not the strict, royal upbringing, but lots of hugging, and never saying no.  She wanted to show that she was doing things differently, but it backfired and William became a little horror 
She had to backpedal a bit and enforce more rules.  Harry was supposedly a cuddler and a much softer child.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do understand families fight, but I absolutely do not understand this pathological need to air dirty laundry. I wouldn't even understand it if they were actual grievances and not mostly made up.


In this case I believe they have an intense desire/need to be seen as being sympathetic victims, deserving of the public’s support. The success of their brand and foundation depends on strangers forking over their hard-earned money to two people who don’t really do much. 

In other words, they want to WIN against the BRF.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> I fear Charles will have them back he always wanted them if he does it’s the end of the monarchy as we knew it very disappointed in him


Please tell me why you believe Charles will have them back. I don’t see any sign of it and I’m afraid I missed something important.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Please tell me why you believe Charles will have them back. I don’t see any sign of it and I’m afraid I missed something important.


Charles (according to the book I'm reading) was absolutely crushed by Diana's death.....full of guilt.  So he probably still feels some of that for H.  But I doubt he cares much for the WIFE at this point.


----------



## BlueCherry

bag-mania said:


> I’m the youngest too. It’s amazing I survived to adulthood!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Please tell me why you believe Charles will have them back. I don’t see any sign of it and I’m afraid I missed something important.


Hypothetically, KC might want them back to atone for his issues (mistreatment) with Diana
ok that is a stretch, and that was done and dusted over 25 years ago … or at least many adults would see it that way, not that HandM act like …


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> *Charles (according to the book I'm reading) was absolutely crushed by Diana's death.....full of guilt. * So he probably still feels some of that for H.  But I doubt he cares much for the WIFE at this point.


Who said that he was full of guilt in the book?


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I have read that in several book and articles that this is true.  It apparently had a lot to do with the style of parenting that Diana wanted.  Not the strict, royal upbringing, but lots of hugging, and never saying no.  She wanted to show that she was doing things differently, but it backfired and William became a little horror
> She had to backpedal a bit and enforce more rules.  Harry was supposedly a cuddler and a much softer child.


And Diana was a very young mother … and her mother left her father - when D was six, I think - so D lacked a good role model for the job of mother


----------



## zinacef

miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615480
> 
> ^One word was changed. ‘Equality’ in place of ‘peace’. A lot of good sleuths out there. And a lot of content waiting to be found out?
> Thx to original poster and poster that confirmed when it was said.
> [UN woman's advocacy conference in 2015.]


when you have time in the world —- essentially no jobs but still getting money somewhere, you got time to look up  speech, change a few words, voila! For all we know, she got a book of speech premade like her Diana and Ivanka cosplay album.


----------



## elvisfan4life

BlueCherry said:


> @elvisfan4life you asked have they left yet?
> 
> Here is a pic of W&C on public duty today. The looks on their faces would suggest a resounding yes they’re gone
> 
> View attachment 5615486


Now we need to make sure they don’t get back in lol


----------



## papertiger

Cinderlala said:


> The 'sharing' feels very American rather than British.
> 
> I'm not suggesting this behavior is an American trait but I am suggesting the public airing of these complaints originates from the American.



They both definitely over-share. I'm embarrassed on their behalf.

Although, maybe it's because they can't talk about anything else but themselves.


----------



## jelliedfeels

BlueCherry said:


> It was a completely different generation. My parents from that similar era believed that children should be brought up the hard way. This meant you generally ended up with a good work ethic, a thick skin and independence. No harm in that. But they do soften as they age and become more aware of todays touchy feely generation.


This  analogy doesn’t really work even if we focus exclusively on the royal family though- everything we know about them would suggest that  Andrew, Charles and even Edward are far more touchy and temperamental than William, Zara or In the younger bracket, Lady Louise.

Oh yes and I wouldn’t commend Andy and Ed’s  work ethic either 




Toby93 said:


> I have read that in several book and articles that this is true.  It apparently had a lot to do with the style of parenting that Diana wanted.  Not the strict, royal upbringing, but lots of hugging, and never saying no.  She wanted to show that she was doing things differently, but it backfired and William became a little horror
> She had to backpedal a bit and enforce more rules.  Harry was supposedly a cuddler and a much softer child.


I don’t get this Diana was such a bad mum thing - weren’t they raised by nannies and sent to boarding school very young so it wasn’t massively different from Charles’ upbringing- well apart from the whole issue of the parents divorcing and then their mum dying suddenly. I mean maybe she wasn’t super maternal  but she definitely didn’t have near sole responsibility the way most parents do.

Also I do find it a bit difficult to believe the BRF would be so hands off about the techniques of raising the heir after all.


----------



## BlueCherry

jelliedfeels said:


> This  analogy doesn’t really work even if we focus exclusively on the royal family though- everything we know about them would suggest that  Andrew, Charles and even Edward are far more touchy and temperamental than William, Zara or In the younger bracket, Lady Louise.
> 
> Oh yes and I wouldn’t commend Andy and Ed’s  work ethic either




There’s one more possibility and that’s that Harry is a bare faced liar a bit like he was with the allegation he never rode a bike with his Dad


----------



## jelliedfeels

BlueCherry said:


> There’s one more possibility and that’s that Harry is a bare faced liar a bit like he was with the allegation he never rode a bike with his Dad


For sure he’s a liar    That’s one of the most frequent leitmotifs of this thread.

I’m just saying the idea of degeneration doesn’t even work if you compare Charles to William or  Andrew to 99% of humanity


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> This  analogy doesn’t really work even if we focus exclusively on the royal family though- everything we know about them would suggest that  Andrew, Charles and even Edward are far more touchy and temperamental than William, Zara or In the younger bracket, Lady Louise.
> 
> Oh yes and I wouldn’t commend Andy and Ed’s  work ethic either
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t get this Diana was such a bad mum thing - weren’t they raised by nannies and sent to boarding school very young so it wasn’t massively different from Charles’ upbringing- well apart from the whole issue of the parents divorcing and then their mum dying suddenly. I mean maybe she wasn’t super maternal  but she definitely didn’t have near sole responsibility the way most parents do.
> 
> Also I do find it a bit difficult to believe the BRF would be so hands off about the techniques of raising the heir after all.


I'm not saying that Diana was a bad mom at all.  She was a very young mother, and definitely a modern mom, and wanted to raise her children as normally as possible.  She had a nanny, but even the nanny was left feeling a bit redundant sometimes as Diana wanted to be hands on.

The POWs private secretary was quoted as saying that he was sure the PoW had more important things to do than bath the baby    Diana tried to get Charles as involved as possible - in the beginning.....


----------



## jennlt

If you have 12 minutes and like a dry sense of humor, this is for you. If not, he summarizes, " The more Meghan talks, the better the Royal Family looks".


----------



## CobaltBlu

Whatever is going on here, this is not a good look....


----------



## CobaltBlu

Uh OH.  June 2020. 
hahahah



			https://www.newidea.com.au/jennifer-aniston-meghan-markle-brad-pitt-claim


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Who said that he was full of guilt in the book?


written by tina brown....I don't recall if she said the source of that part....but she said he was very upset - talking to camilla and other friends


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> If you have 12 minutes and like a dry sense of humor, this is for you. If not, he summarizes, " The more Meghan talks, the better the Royal Family looks".



I think he’s my favorite now, more than BLG.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Prince Andrew secretly plotted with Princess Diana and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson to try to prevent Charles becoming King and allow Prince William to take the throne with the Duke of York as Regent, an explosive new biography claimed today.
> 
> Andrew is also alleged to have 'lobbied' the Queen and campaigned against the marriage between Charles and Camilla, now King and Queen Consort, telling his mother that she was not trustworthy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew 'lobbied' Queen to stop Charles being King, book claims
> 
> 
> The Duke of York 'plotted' with Diana to 'push Prince Charles aside', with the aim of Prince Andrew becoming 'Regent to Prince William', Angela Levin writes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



I don't like Andrew any more than anyone else, but I call nonsense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to leave Britain for a new life in America dominated royal reporting during the final years of Elizabeth's life.*
> 
> The upcoming biography The New Royals, by Vanity Fair royal correspondent Katie Nicholl…
> 
> "And according to a friend, privately the queen confided that she was exhausted by the turmoil of their decision.
> 
> "'*She was very hurt* and told me, 'I don't know, I don't care, and I don't want to think about it anymore,' says that person," the excerpt continued…
> 
> The book also described how *King Charles III and Prince William had also felt hurt*, with William struggling to forgive Harry.
> 
> "*He always expected Harry would be his wingman; there was a long-term plan in place for the brothers to work together and support one another*," Nicholl wrote. "After Harry announced their departure, William summoned aides to address the future, in what has been referred to by some in William's circle as the 'Anmer Summit.'
> 
> "But William and Kate also felt a sense of relief, that 'the drama was gone' when Harry and Meghan left, as a source told me. To this day, William still cannot forgive his brother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Was 'Very Hurt' by Harry, Meghan Exit: 'Don't Want to Think About It'
> 
> 
> The queen also found it "a source of sadness" that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle did not bring Archie and Lilibet to join her summer holiday, a new book says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



This is so sad all around. What the hell was he thinking.


----------



## gelbergirl

Did they leave England yet?


----------



## charlottawill

miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615480
> 
> ^One word was changed. ‘Equality’ in place of ‘peace’. A lot of good sleuths out there. And a lot of content waiting to be found out?
> Thx to original poster and poster that confirmed when it was said.
> [UN woman's advocacy conference in 2015.]



Makes me wonder how many papers the Northwestern honors grad plagiarized.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?


It actually does happen. Sometimes uninvolved parents do become doting grandparents.


----------



## charlottawill

gelbergirl said:


> Did they leave England yet?


Yes, they're back in Montecito, licking their wounds and plotting their next moves no doubt.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I had read that Tom Bower danced around the birth of Archie, and knows more than he put into print.  He talks about how Harry told the palace that TW was in labour, when in fact, the baby was already born and the palace had to change the announcement 20 minutes later.  This pair is exhausting with all their lies and coverups.



I don't even understand it unless maybe you are paranoid to the point you need professional help. Either say nothing or tell your team "Baby arrived, please don't announce until x amount of time later". Why would you lie to your own press secretary saying your wife was in labour hours after the fact?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so sad all around. What the hell was he thinking.


I'm not really convinced that the queen, who has many grandchildren and great grandchildren, was worried about whether Harry brought his kids to see her
I could be wrong (after all, he was her most trusted advisor. she talked to him about stuff she couldn't talk to anyone else about)  but that's my opinion


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> This!




And at this point, that's totally fine.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did he? Omid I mean. I tend to believe if Omid released it that it came from the Harkles.
> 
> I also shouldn't be surprised, but *can't help but feel disappointed in Harry*.


I know you have a much softer spot for Haz than I.  I told my kids growing up that, "I'm not mad, just disappointed."  Well, with these two, I'm not disappointed, I'm mad.  It's par for course for his behavior as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And at this point, that's totally fine.


if she wants to look like a decent person, she needs to make up with her father


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Please tell me why you believe Charles will have them back. I don’t see any sign of it and I’m afraid I missed something important.


Some people get ornery with age, some mellow and get sentimental. He may want the Invisikids to grow up at Frogmore with their cousins and other relatives. But I'm sure the thought of it makes the P&PoW's blood run cold.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Charles will always be Harry's father, however, in all respects that speech was to reassure us he was the King first and foremost, and until the dies (and the Head of the Church of England). He wanted to put to bed a lot of speculative nonsense that had been written about him.
> 
> He wrote that speech a while ago, but I think the   to H & M was a line drawn under. It really was a "I wish you the best, *maybe we'll do lunch sometime, see ya"*


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could be a day of “breaking news” from the overseas people and other _unreliable_ sources:



"They wanted Charles to undo what the Queen did"? JFC these two have zero sense of accountability, don't they?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> this brings me to another tangent.  supposedly Haz was so so close to grandma.  well grandma, while a wonderful queen, was pretty well known to be a pretty cold mother to Charles. (too busy being queen)
> 
> so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?  Or I guess it's possible this huge relationship took place after Harry was grown (not that he seems very adult IMO)



Rumour has it my grandmother was busy at work while her own mother raised her kids, but she has been a stellar grandmother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## miss_chiff

Going to add this here. Hope original poster doesn’t  mind. Interesting considering duo’s ‘claim’.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> "They wanted Charles to undo what the Queen did"


----------



## TC1

^^ M&H weren't in LA. This post seems odd


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615609
> 
> Going to add this here. Hope they don’t mind. Interesting.



OMFG. Just when I thought I couldn't be more disgusted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> ^^ M&H weren't in LA. This post seems odd



It also doesn't say Raptor whispered into someone's ear in person. They probably didn't strip her of her phone.

Rumours that she tried to sell the story were there from the minute The Queen's death was announced. This just takes it a little further and somewhat confirms it IMO.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't even understand it unless maybe you are paranoid to the point you need professional help. Either say nothing or tell your team "Baby arrived, please don't announce until x amount of time later". Why would you lie to your own press secretary saying your wife was in labour hours after the fact?


It's all about control with her.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Rumour has it my grandmother was busy at work while her own mother raised her kids, but she has been a stellar grandmother.


Harry's grandmother was busy with work until the end of her life....but I suppose she could have found time for her grandsons after their mother died


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It's all about control with her.



But it was Harry briefing his team and going along with the nonsense and unnecessary lie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> *Harry's grandmother was busy with work until the end of her life.*...but I suppose she could have found time for her grandsons after their mother died



That's true of course.


----------



## gelbergirl

charlottawill said:


> Yes, they're back in Montecito, licking their wounds and plotting their next moves no doubt.



I wasn’t sure.
I understood the Royal family still had a seven-day grief protocol.
Wasn’t sure if these two would participate.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Saw this on FB. Credit NOT to me.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this brings me to another tangent.  supposedly Haz was so so close to grandma.  well grandma, while a wonderful queen, was pretty well known to be a pretty cold mother to Charles. (too busy being queen)
> 
> so I guess we are supposed to believe she changed dramatically when it came to her granchildren?  Or I guess it's possible this huge relationship took place after Harry was grown (not that he seems very adult IMO)


I often hear that people have much more fun with their grandchildren than their children, and try to make up for their failings as parents through their grandchildren.  
My parents were horribly strict with me growing up.  I didn't have just a tiger mom, I had a tiger dad too.  They relaxed a bit with my younger sister, and more so with our younger brother.  I come from a culture that sounds like it's shouting even when having a normal conversation.  When my kids were younger, they'd tell me all the time to "Stop yelling at Grandpa!" (I wasn't actually!), because, "He's old and so sweet".  I felt like telling them that "sweet old man" was anything but if I misbehaved when I was younger!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But it was Harry briefing his team and going along with the nonsense and unnecessary lie.


She sold him on the idea that they were going to release the news on their own terms, not on BP's. When they were first engaged she told the palace ladies who were supposed to teach her royal protocol "No thanks, I'll do things my way", and this was just more of that attitude.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm one of those who doesn't get the joke, please let me in!

ETA: that was in response to @EverSoElusive


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I often hear that people have much more fun with their grandchildren than their children, and try to make up for their failings as parents through their grandchildren.
> My parents were horribly strict with me growing up.  I didn't have just a tiger mom, I had a tiger dad too.  They relaxed a bit with my younger sister, and more so with our younger brother.  I come from a culture that sounds like it's shouting even when having a normal conversation.  When my kids were younger, they'd tell me all the time to "Stop yelling at Grandpa!" (I wasn't actually!), because, "He's old and so sweet".  I felt like telling them that "sweet old man" was anything but if I misbehaved when I was younger!


that is so funny
sounds like you're shouting all the time 
may I ask what culture?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She sold him on the idea that they were going to release the news on their own terms, not on BP's. When they were first engaged she told the palace ladies who were supposed to teach her royal protocol "No thanks, I'll do things my way", and this was just more of that attitude.



I get what you are saying, but my simple brain still doesn't compute why they wouldn't just say nothing instead of actively lying. Like, just do not make that phonecall until you're ready, problem solved.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm one of those who doesn't get the joke, please let me in!
> 
> ETA: that was in response to @EverSoElusive


I'm not sure cause I was going to ask the same. I suppose they are joking that the BRF won't see Z-list again anytime soon now that HMTQ has passed and HMTK will not grant her an audience (allegedly)  

Anyone else have a different interpretation?


----------



## lulu212121

miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615609
> 
> Going to add this here. Hope original poster doesn’t  mind. Interesting considering duo’s ‘claim’.


Lady C said the same on her video the day Queen Elizabeth died. I should say "alluded" to that being a cause of death.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm not sure cause I was going to ask the same. I suppose they are joking that the BRF won't see Z-list again anytime soon now that HMTQ has passed and HMTK will not grant her an audience (allegedly)
> 
> Anyone else have a different interpretation?


I wouldn't want to see her if I were them


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But it was Harry briefing his team and going along with the nonsense and unnecessary lie.


Not to mention that TW had already been in contact with the US media and promised them exclusive first pics of the baby.  I'm sure she didn't do it out of the goodness of her heart - must have been money involved.


----------



## sdkitty

gelbergirl said:


> I wasn’t sure.
> I understood the Royal family still had a seven-day grief protocol.
> Wasn’t sure if these two would participate.


Ha
protocol?  in CA?  I doubt it
then again they could easily take time off from "work"


----------



## Toby93

I had forgotten about reading how Jennifer had found it funny to receive an invite to a wedding of people she had never met     Too bad more people were not as transparent.  (Yes, I'm talking about you, Clooney & Oprah)


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


>



I was thinking more along the lines of this - especially the line "But you, you're not allowed. You're uninvited."


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I had forgotten about reading how Jennifer had found it funny to receive an invite to a wedding of people she had never met     Too bad more people were not as transparent.  (Yes, I'm talking about you, Clooney & Oprah)



Jennifer Aniston and her best friend Courtney Cox have a 20+ year history of buying houses. doing some reno and flipping them.  She was doing it well before Ellen D.  She will take the property in Montecito and do the same there i.e. fix and flip.  Someone will buy Casa Monstercito and throw it down and completely rebuild.  It's not worth doing a reno,
The Harkles could see a profit unless the RE market totally tanks with the stock market.  Then they can move to what they can really afford, a nice mobile home in Needles.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> written by tina brown....I don't recall if she said the source of that part....but she said he was very upset - talking to camilla and other friends


It’s frustrating when these tell-all books don’t cite their sources. How do we know the source doesn’t have an ax to grind? Or whether there was a source at all? Charles may very well have felt guilty but it bugs me that we have to take the author’s word for it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’s frustrating when these tell-all books don’t cite their sources. How do we know the source doesn’t have an ax to grind? Or whether there was a source at all? Charles may very well have been upset but it bugs me that we have to take the author’s word for it.


I looked again and don't see sources name but I think she's considered credible


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I was thinking more along the lines of this - especially the line "But you, you're not allowed. You're uninvited."


----------



## jennlt

EverSoElusive said:


> Saw this on FB. Credit NOT to me.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5615621





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm one of those who doesn't get the joke, please let me in!
> 
> ETA: that was in response to @EverSoElusive


The bottom picture is from a long-running TV show called _Supernatural _and this character is Crowley AKA the Devil. He made your dreams come true for ten years when you signed over your soul to him. He collected your soul after 10 years and sent you straight to Hell.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I know there is no proof but that all rings true.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

jennlt said:


> The bottom picture is from a long-running TV show called _Supernatural _and this character is Crowley AKA the Devil. He made your dreams come true for ten years when you signed over your soul to him. He collected your soul after 10 years and sent you straight to Hell.


DH loves Supernatural. I should have asked him  However, need probably roll his eyes if I mention Z-list & Co.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jennlt said:


> The bottom picture is from a long-running TV show called _Supernatural _and this character is Crowley AKA the Devil. He made your dreams come true for ten years when you signed over your soul to him. He collected your soul after 10 years and sent you straight to Hell.


Sounds like another Faustian bargain - hmmm.

Old news?  Why publish it now?  Is he firing warning shots or does he really have more? 

Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​








						Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
					

It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I looked again and don't see sources name but I think she's considered credible


I hope so. There’s great temptation to make these kinds of books juicy so they’ll sell better.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like another Faustian bargain - hmmm.
> 
> Old news?  Why publish it now?  Is he firing warning shots or does he really have more?
> 
> Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
> 
> 
> It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ugh, if even half of that is true I can’t stand Harry. Stupid little man-child unable to do anything without Meghan literally holding his hand. Yes, by all means bring the person who has disrupted his family for years now so she can feel included at the time when everyone else is absorbing what has just happened.


----------



## BlueCherry

lulu212121 said:


> Lady C said the same on her video the day Queen Elizabeth died. I should say "alluded" to that being a cause of death.



The only place I heard this was from Lady C. I’m not sure the Queen had bone cancer, it’s really hard to know how it feels to be 96 until you experience it. But doing something one day at that age can leave you exhausted for up to 3/4 days afterwards. She worked so hard, her husband died and she was undoubtedly stressed at the M&H shenanigans along with Andrew. I’ve lost a few members of family to cancer and none was fine one day and gone the next. There was always a deterioration that involved a lack of lucidity but the Queen was a sharp as a tack with Liz Truss the day before she died. Some will dispute this but I believe that those with an incredibly strong faith don’t fear death and often feel ready to go.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> The bottom picture is from a long-running TV show called _Supernatural _and this character is Crowley AKA the Devil. He made your dreams come true for ten years when you signed over your soul to him. He collected your soul after 10 years and sent you straight to Hell.



Half time then, hu?

Thank you!


----------



## Redbirdhermes

BlueCherry said:


> The only place I heard this was from Lady C. I’m not sure the Queen had bone cancer, it’s really hard to know how it feels to be 96 until you experience it. But doing something one day at that age can leave you exhausted for up to 3/4 days afterwards. She worked so hard, her husband died and she was undoubtedly stressed at the M&H shenanigans along with Andrew. I’ve lost a few members of family to cancer and none was fine one day and gone the next. There was always a deterioration that involved a lack of lucidity but the Queen was a sharp as a tack with Liz Truss the day before she died. Some will dispute this but I believe that those with an incredibly strong faith don’t fear death and often feel ready to go.


I haven't read any speculation about what the effects of having COVID at age 96 would be.  I did read that she had COVID in February, and told someone in April that she was easily fatigued.  I can't help but wonder if the effects of this disease helped to shorten her life, by hastening her decline over the summer.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like another Faustian bargain - hmmm.
> 
> Old news?  Why publish it now?  Is he firing warning shots or does he really have more?
> 
> Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
> 
> 
> It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Like the BRF cares  Keep leaking. They are just hanging themselves. They are on very thin ice with William.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like another Faustian bargain - hmmm.
> 
> Old news?  Why publish it now?  Is he firing warning shots or does he really have more?
> 
> Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
> 
> 
> It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I still can’t believe this shameless tramp wanted to go to the Queens bedside along with her closest family, those who dearly loved her. It’s outrageously unbelievable! I think this would have been her most unpalatable act to date. 

I’m sure Charles and William were devastated that Harry was having a strop. Not.


----------



## RueMonge

sdkitty said:


> I looked again and don't see sources name but I think she's considered credible


I have read Tina Brown’s other books, but not this one yet. She is certainly credible as a journalist and an editor, but she might not be unbiased. She covered Diana extensively back in the day. Like most of her work, I would expect there to be plenty of facts, and personal reminiscence, and rumors to make it juicy and readable.


----------



## BlueCherry

Redbirdhermes said:


> I haven't read any speculation about what the effects of having COVID at age 96 would be.  I did read that she had COVID in February, and told someone in April that she was easily fatigued.  I can't help but wonder if the effects of this disease helped to shorten her life, by hastening her decline over the summer.



I had forgotten about the Covid, of course that too could have assisted the slow decline. She was definitely suffering extreme fatigue but what a trooper, working the day before she died at age 96. I admire the older generation so much.


----------



## charlottawill

"Britain's new King phoned his youngest son and told him it was 'not appropriate' for the former Suits actress to be there, according to reports."

Don't underestimate KC. There may be a lot of pain ahead for the Harkles. They deserve every bit of it.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I get what you are saying, but my simple brain still doesn't compute why they wouldn't just say nothing instead of actively lying. Like, just do not make that phonecall until you're ready, problem solved.


I wouldn't attempt to figure out their thought processes, it would be a fool's errand.


----------



## BlueCherry

BlueCherry said:


> I still can’t believe this shameless tramp wanted to go to the Queens bedside along with her closest family, those who dearly loved her. It’s outrageously unbelievable! I think this would have been her most unpalatable act to date.
> 
> I’m sure Charles and William were devastated that Harry was having a strop. Not.



Now I’m even more outraged, I need to take an extra BP tablet. I’ve just read the story in the paper and if it’s true then H&M are truly revolting. 

Charles has just lost his Mother and Harry is on the phone arguing with him about his wife being refused. Who on earth would berate a man suffering such a loss for a long enough time to miss a flight


----------



## WingNut

jennlt said:


> If you have 12 minutes and like a dry sense of humor, this is for you. If not, he summarizes, " The more Meghan talks, the better the Royal Family looks".




This whole thing was hilarious, particularly amusing : “based on her first podcast, people in SA were too preoccupied putting out out heater fires to have thought of this” (figuring out how to marry somebody)

Said in the driest tone I’ve ever heard


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
> 
> 
> It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hazz


----------



## miss_chiff

Another tidbit to share from the same author as in my previous post.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Hazz



This is the same of flip of the story that the Sussex PR uses all the time.  Harry most likely had dinner with Anne, Edward and Sophie.  Charles and William had different things to discuss re the funeral and matters of state that had nothing to do with Harry.  He knew this and still they are putting out this kind of PR.  This angry man schtick is really old.  He wanted to leave the UK and he did, so why whinge about being left out of UK matters?  Dragging his wife into the story is all her idea.  If she couldn't understand that she didn't belong at Balmoral, they tough tooties.  And if he fought with his father about this, he is even more despicable.

Memo to King Charles, please do yourself a favor and keep your younger son out of your life.   He is nothing, but aggravation.


----------



## piperdog

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like another Faustian bargain - hmmm.
> 
> Old news?  Why publish it now?  Is he firing warning shots or does he really have more?
> 
> Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
> 
> 
> It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This makes me think they must be doing their own PR. Who else would think this is a good idea?


----------



## Icyjade

KC and PW will have to decide what is best for “the Firm” if the Harkles did ask to undo the deal. They are family but I’m sure the senior royals will consider how best to keep the Firm as a going concern. Given how badly the British think of them, hopefully the answer is “no” to them going back. Whatever the Americans may think, it is the British Royal Family and not the American Royal Family. And frankly speaking I think give the Harkles another 3 years and the duo will self-implode. The RF play the long game after all, see how Camilla’s image was rehabilitated.


----------



## Chanbal

miss_chiff said:


> View attachment 5615679
> 
> Another tidbit to share from the same author as in my previous post.


I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?


----------



## miss_chiff

Succubus and her lackey regarding ‘that day’….
(Don’t think I’ve seen this article posted here)
 edit: sorry, just saw it had been posted here. 
*Credit to the thread I got it from in another forum.






__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## miss_chiff

Chanbal said:


> I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?


Lol good question!!
Possible new spin suggested by M?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?


He has an Nflix movie to promote. Remember, it is Hwood where every.single.thing is transactional.


----------



## WingNut

EverSoElusive said:


> Saw this on FB. Credit NOT to me.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5615621




Hahaha sold their souls to Crowley. Love it!!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?


Maybe he is going to make a movie out of it lololol


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


> I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?





miss_chiff said:


> Lol good question!!
> Possible new spin suggested by M? Allegedly.



I posted this article earlier today. Tyler Perry has a new "romantic" Netflix drama that premieres soon and I think Netflix has asked him to cross promote the Harkles because it's mutually advantageous for all of them. Apparently, all of Hollywood will do anything to make a buck even if it's means sacrificing integrity. Or maybe I'm just too cynical  









						Tyler Perry flexes dramatic muscles in Netflix period romance ‘A Jazzman’s Blues’
					

Tyler Perry is flexing his dramatic muscles in a new Netflix love story. It’s about a couple torn apart by family in 1940s Georgia, but...




					wsvn.com


----------



## miss_chiff

jennlt said:


> I posted this article earlier today. Tyler Perry has a new "romantic" Netflix film that premieres soon and I think Netflix has asked him to cross promote the Harkles because it's mutually advantageous for all of them. Apparently, all of Hollywood will do anything to make a buck even if it's means sacrificing integrity. Or maybe I'm just too cynical
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry flexes dramatic muscles in Netflix period romance ‘A Jazzman’s Blues’
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry is flexing his dramatic muscles in a new Netflix love story. It’s about a couple torn apart by family in 1940s Georgia, but...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wsvn.com


I missed this. Thx for reposting!
 Gees.  Ulterior motives.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?


That particular rumor doesn’t pass the smell test. Why would Tyler Perry be going out of his way to talk about them and give them good press if he thought she was mean to his staff when he let them stay in one of his properties.

The only reason would be if he had an interest in their success. Can’t imagine what that might be.


----------



## bag-mania

jennlt said:


> I posted this article earlier today. Tyler Perry has a new "romantic" Netflix drama that premieres soon and I think *Netflix has asked him to cross promote the Harkles because it's mutually advantageous for all of them. *Apparently, all of Hollywood will do anything to make a buck even if it's means sacrificing integrity. Or maybe I'm just too cynical
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry flexes dramatic muscles in Netflix period romance ‘A Jazzman’s Blues’
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry is flexing his dramatic muscles in a new Netflix love story. It’s about a couple torn apart by family in 1940s Georgia, but...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wsvn.com


I would think talking about Meghan and Harry (who don’t have anything ready for Netflix yet) would only distract attention from Perry’s own movie which he will be promoting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like another Faustian bargain - hmmm.
> 
> Old news?  Why publish it now?  Is he firing warning shots or does he really have more?
> 
> Furious Prince Harry 'SNUBBED dinner with King Charles and William at Balmoral after bust-up when monarch banned Meghan from joining grieving royal family at Scottish estate the day The Queen died - causing the duke to miss his flight'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'snubbed Charles and William after Meghan BANNED from joining'
> 
> 
> It's alleged that Charles phoned his youngest son to say it was 'not appropriate' for Meghan to be there and in the ensuing row Prince Harry missed his flight to Scotland.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



He always behaves like a petulant 4 yo (apologies to 4 yo)
He could have say goodbye to his grandmother of whom he claim to be her “protector” and be very close to but instead he blew it
This two have the reverse Midas’ touch, nothing they touch turns into gold but turns into s#%^ instead


----------



## jennlt

miss_chiff said:


> I missed this. Thx for reposting!
> Gees.  Ulterior motives.


It reeks of desperation for the Harkles and Netflix but I can't figure out how TP will profit from this association. He must owe someone a _really_ big favor


----------



## miss_chiff

Queen Consort Camilla tried to advise Meghan, book claims
					

An explosive new biography of Queen Consort Camilla by Angela Levin has described how the then-Duchess of Cornwall 'warmly' welcomed Meghan and was 'fond' of her.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

miss_chiff said:


> Queen Consort Camilla tried to advise Meghan, book claims
> 
> 
> An explosive new biography of Queen Consort Camilla by Angela Levin has described how the then-Duchess of Cornwall 'warmly' welcomed Meghan and was 'fond' of her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Not that MM every listened to anyone, but she was predisposed to dislike Camilla from the start because Harry had told her how miserable she made his mother's life. Yet she could have learned from Camilla how quiet diligence goes a long way in earning the respect of the public.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I'm bit lost here. Why is Tyler Perry talking about the Harkles' love story?


Damned if I know.


----------



## lulu212121

BlueCherry said:


> The only place I heard this was from Lady C. I’m not sure the Queen had bone cancer, it’s really hard to know how it feels to be 96 until you experience it. But doing something one day at that age can leave you exhausted for up to 3/4 days afterwards. She worked so hard, her husband died and she was undoubtedly stressed at the M&H shenanigans along with Andrew. I’ve lost a few members of family to cancer and none was fine one day and gone the next. There was always a deterioration that involved a lack of lucidity but the Queen was a sharp as a tack with Liz Truss the day before she died. Some will dispute this but I believe that those with an incredibly strong faith don’t fear death and often feel ready to go.


Agreed! I was only pointing out this had come from Lady C days before whoever it is that posted it came from LA.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> Diana supposedly got a $22.5 million divorce settlement in one lump sum in 1996. In today’s $$, that would be about $42 million which is not that impressive when compared to the theoretical net worth of the BRF. She also got to keep her apartment in Kensington Palace and a yearly sum to maintain her office. She was married to the Heir to the Throne in addition to being the mother of a future king. *Fergie got a much smaller divorce settlement from Andrew in 1996. Something in the neighborhood of 2 million pounds. So TW being married to the spare and not the heir may not get $20 million or more.* Of course Diana and Fergie both got divorced in England whereas TW presumably would file for divorce in California which is a community property state. In very simplistic terms anything H had before he married TW would not be community property but anything acquired or earned after they got married would be considered community property. So if they acquired substantial assets after their marriage, TW should do well in a divorce. However, if the rumors are true and they really are in financial difficulty, there might not be much property/ assets to split up. Child support would be another source of contention. Any attorneys on this thread please feel free to correct if I got anything wrong.


Sarah received a smaller settlement maybe because Andrew was no longer the spare and had become redundant at #3 since Charles already had two children #1W and #2H.  Now, Dufus is in a worse situation because William has three children #1G, #2C and #3L which makes him utterly redundant and probably not worth much more than Andrew. What would ZedZed be worth considering that Sarah's received only 2 million pounds in 1996? In 2021 that figure converted to approx. 3,955,032,704 BPS (inflation etc.) Sorry couldn't find any results for 2022 and trust me I didn't do the calculations. So lets throw in a few more pounds for ZedZed who is no more important than Sarah was in 1996, but unlike Sarah, she abominably disparaged Queen Elizabeth II and therefore should be satisfied with last years' figures. Child support would of course be separate but I would never trust her to manage that account fearing she might use for her own desires.

ETA I'm not an attorney, but just having fun!


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Not that MM every listened to anyone, but she was predisposed to dislike Camilla from the start because Harry had told her how miserable she made his mother's life. Yet she could have learned from Camilla how quiet diligence goes a long way in earning the respect of the public.


It really sounds like a misery-loves-company dating relationship.

H: I lost my mum.
M: I never really had a family.
H: I'm not sure what to do with my life.
M: Me too.
H: At least I have Invictus and Sentebale.
M: I devote my time to charities.
H: You understand me so well.
M: I do, don't I?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


>



Missed out a few words: She's known to be passionate about making the world a better place *for herself*.


----------



## youngster

Looking back, we could all see the decline in the Queen's health since Prince Philip's death. (Whether she suffered from bone cancer as the rumors say, I've got no idea of course.) The bout of covid she suffered last winter and likely the stress from the past 4 or so years probably added to her decline though.  Harry, Meghan and Andrew contributed to that stress and all 3 of them should be ashamed. Andrew, for as much as I dislike him and I dislike him a whole lot, at least had the grace to basically disappear, not complain, and not leak stories to the press.

Harry and Meghan? Every single day it's a new complaint, a new trivial _something_ about how they have been wronged. Neither of them can understand that the Queen had no wish to have Meghan at her bedside in her final hours?  That Charles and his siblings only wanted those closest to the Queen and to themselves to be present at such a sad time? That Kate likely stepped back and didn't go to mollify Meghan?

It just boggles the mind, these two little toddlers masquerading as adults, addicted to manufacturing drama. Apparently, Harry can't spend 18 hours apart from Meghan. So, we have him throwing a tantrum that he couldn't bring Meghan when the Queen was dying, when he is the one who declined the Queen's invitation to go to Balmoral this summer with Meghan and the children when the Queen was actually _still alive_ and would have been happy to see him.


----------



## bag-mania

I think _Vanity Fair _made this part up about Doria taking care of the kids all this time. No one else has reported that, have they?

While on this extended trip, Harry and Meghan left their two children, 3-year-old *Archie* and 1-year-old *Lilibet*, back home in Montecito with the Duchess's mother, *Doria Ragland*. The pair have been living in the ritzy California neighborhood popular with celebrities since 2020 when they officially stepped down from their positions as senior royals.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Return to California After Queen Elizabeth's Funeral
					

The royal couple was originally in Europe to support a number of charities they work with when the monarch died.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## Karenska

Redbirdhermes said:


> I haven't read any speculation about what the effects of having COVID at age 96 would be.  I did read that she had COVID in February, and told someone in April that she was easily fatigued.  I can't help but wonder if the effects of this disease helped to shorten her life, by hastening her decline over the summer.


I haven’t read anything on this possibility, either, RBH, but it was the first thing I thought when Queen Elizabeth’s death was announced. Seeing how thin she was at the jubilee and how frail she was in the photos with Liz Truss, I couldn’t help thinking, did covid contribute?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Not that MM every listened to anyone, but she was predisposed to dislike Camilla from the start because Harry had told her how miserable she made his mother's life. Yet she could have learned from Camilla how quiet diligence goes a long way in earning the respect of the public.


From what I read about TW, I would think that her predisposition to dislike Camilla has more to do with Camilla not facilitating her financial/power desires than whatever Harry feels about Camilla.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> Sorry for giggling, but this sentence is so nonsensical: "after vocal concern about the coloring of her kids, she bore two light-skinned offspring". It's not like that story about Archie's skin colour is proven fact. And this sentence makes them sound like they were mail-order babies and she purposely had light-skinned kids to prove her detractors wrong.


I thought she did?

ETA - definitely Harry's though.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Looking back, we could all see the decline in the Queen's health since Prince Philip's death. (Whether she suffered from bone cancer as the rumors say, I've got no idea of course.) The bout of covid she suffered last winter and likely the stress from the past 4 or so years probably added to her decline though.  Harry, Meghan and Andrew contributed to that stress and all 3 of them should be ashamed. Andrew, for as much as I dislike him and I dislike him a whole lot, at least had the grace to basically disappear, not complain, and not leak stories to the press.
> 
> Harry and Meghan? Every single day it's a new complaint, a new trivial _something_ about how they have been wronged. Neither of them can understand that the Queen had no wish to have Meghan at her bedside in her final hours?  That Charles and his siblings only wanted those closest to the Queen and to themselves to be present at such a sad time? That Kate likely stepped back and didn't go to mollify Meghan?
> 
> It just boggles the mind, these two little toddlers masquerading as adults, addicted to manufacturing drama. Apparently, Harry can't spend 18 hours apart from Meghan. So, we have him throwing a tantrum that he couldn't bring Meghan when the Queen was dying, when he is the one who declined the Queen's invitation to go to Balmoral this summer with Meghan and the children when the Queen was actually _still alive_ and would have been happy to see him.


Excellent summation, and it does boggle the mind. How do they think?  They certainly are not normal and the farthest thing from being humanitarians.


----------



## charlottawill

What a dolt he is...


----------



## Chanbal

It will be interesting to read the extra chapters.


----------



## Katel

sdkitty said:


> not sure if this has been talked about here:
> Camilla Spluttered Into Her Tea When Harry Asked for Mediation With Royals​STIFF UPPER LIP
> Matt Young​Night Editor
> Published Sep. 22, 2022 12:05AM ET
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris Jackson/Getty​Camilla Parker-Bowles spluttered into her tea when Prince Harry suggested bringing in a mediator to help solve the royal family’s rift, a new book reveals. According to _Vanity Fair_, the book, _The New Royals_, written by journalist Katie Nicholl, quotes an unnamed family friend who alleges Harry visited his father, then called Prince Charles, in the spring, with hopes of healing the growing rift between the family. “Harry went in with hugs and the best of intentions and said he wanted to clear the air,” the source said. “He actually suggested that they use a mediator to try and sort things out, which had Charles somewhat bemused and Camilla spluttering into her tea. She told Harry it was ridiculous and that they were a family and would sort it out between themselves.” The source claimed the meeting with Charles “was more awkward” than Harry’s tea with the queen. “The Sussexes were late, and Charles had just 15 minutes with his son and daughter-in-law,” Nicholl writes. Any chance of reconciliation was sidelined after he appeared on NBC’s _Today_ show, reportedly “raising eyebrows” at Buckingham Palace as he discussed his relationship with the queen. “It seemed Harry’s drive to win back some of the trust that had been shattered post-Oprah was dashed,” Nicholl writes.
> Read it at Vanity Fair
> 
> ADVERTISEMENT


----------



## xincinsin

Katel said:


> View attachment 5615811


I read wrong because my screen view was cut off: I saw "Camillla Spluttered Into Her Tea When Harry Asked for Medication"
I spluttered into my turmeric latte


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> y





Chanbal said:


>



Well of course. Just supports their typical MO. Say you were invited or complain that you weren’t invited. Either way these  are falsehoods. Very predictable behavior with them for quite a while.


----------



## Chanbal

This video is about one person in the long list of used & markled…


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> This video is about one person in the long list of used & markled…



The same patterns of behaviour again and again.  I don’t understand how anyone can advocate for this woman.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> The same patterns of behaviour again and again.  I don’t understand how anyone can advocate for this woman.


Disclaimer: I'm not saying this applies in general. This is only my own experience.
I had a bad time with the 3 office narcs because they directly impacted my work. Colleagues who were not impacted found them to be perfectly pleasant. Colleagues who were love-bombed thought they were lovely people. And some colleagues objectively knew they were liars, unreliable and losers, but still liked them because subjectively they appeared to be nice or they just kept giving the narcs the benefit of the doubt. 

IMO, most people don't want to think the worst of anyone. They find the levels to which narcs descend to be unbelievable. So, unless you get personally backstabbed, you prefer to think that there may be a plausible reason for what they are doing, whether it be foolishness or idiocy. It's only when you become their victim that you look into self-preservation or, as Piers seems to be doing, counter-attack.


----------



## Pessie

I suppose I could hire a small crowd to wait at the end of my drive to make a fuss and take my picture when I got home, but how would it really feel knowing they wouldn’t be there if I hadn’t paid them to be?  It wouldn’t make me feel good inside and I doubt the neighbours would impressed.  I don’t get the celeb PR culture at all.
The Royals don’t need to try and people are interested anyway.  Meghan could’ve saved herself a boatload of money and work.  She’s a fool.


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


> What a dolt he is...



Scobie is a toad and a not very well educated one at that.


----------



## elvisfan4life

BlueCherry said:


> The only place I heard this was from Lady C. I’m not sure the Queen had bone cancer, it’s really hard to know how it feels to be 96 until you experience it. But doing something one day at that age can leave you exhausted for up to 3/4 days afterwards. She worked so hard, her husband died and she was undoubtedly stressed at the M&H shenanigans along with Andrew. I’ve lost a few members of family to cancer and none was fine one day and gone the next. There was always a deterioration that involved a lack of lucidity but the Queen was a sharp as a tack with Liz Truss the day before she died. Some will dispute this but I believe that those with an incredibly strong faith don’t fear death and often feel ready to go.


Personally I think getting covid in Feb finished her off by causing circulation problems as evidenced by her black hands and the bad days outweighing the good -makes me think how amazing she really was to be able to carry off the few appearances we saw - in June at the jubilee and the final act of welcoming her last prime minister 2 days before her death - sheer grit and determination to do her duty when most of us would be lying in bed with pain relief


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

Redbirdhermes said:


> I haven't read any speculation about what the effects of having COVID at age 96 would be.  I did read that she had COVID in February, and told someone in April that she was easily fatigued.  I can't help but wonder if the effects of this disease helped to shorten her life, by hastening her decline over the summer.


Totally agree I fear she didn’t fully recover and was getting progressively weaker but refused to be bed bound


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> Disclaimer: I'm not saying this applies in general. This is only my own experience.
> I had a bad time with the 3 office narcs because they directly impacted my work. Colleagues who were not impacted found them to be perfectly pleasant. Colleagues who were love-bombed thought they were lovely people. And some colleagues objectively knew they were liars, unreliable and losers, but still liked them because subjectively they appeared to be nice or they just kept giving the narcs the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> IMO, most people don't want to think the worst of anyone. They find the levels to which narcs descend to be unbelievable. So, unless you get personally backstabbed, you prefer to think that there may be a plausible reason for what they are doing, whether it be foolishness or idiocy. It's only when you become their victim that you look into self-preservation or, as Piers seems to be doing, counter-attack.



I see this a lot, unless someone is directly impacted by someone’s behaviour they tend to overlook it somewhat.


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> "Britain's new King phoned his youngest son and told him it was 'not appropriate' for the former Suits actress to be there, according to reports."
> 
> Don't underestimate KC. There may be a lot of pain ahead for the Harkles. They deserve every bit of it.


Yet Harry and Meghan have an open invitation to dine with Charles whenever they are in the UK allegedly and Charles loves them both he told us in his first speech he will let them back in at his peril it could kill off the monarchy completely


----------



## BlueCherry

elvisfan4life said:


> Yet Harry and Meghan have an open invitation to dine with Charles whenever they are in the UK allegedly and Charles loves them both he told us in his first speech he will let them back in at his peril it could kill off the monarchy completely



That open invite should be as a family member and kept private. But he had to say he loves them or he would have been criticised so who knows whether he really does. They got one line, a cursory mention of love but also wishing them well overseas. We mustn’t forget that. 

I cannot imagine William allowing them back into the public royal family. The trouble and hurt is two fold. If Charles has to choose between the future of the Monarchy (and William) versus H&M I think he will choose wisely.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My opinion is King Charles and Queen Camilla are a formidable duo. They have advisors with access to info that H&M could only dream about. Plus, they are older & wiser. So, let H&M try to usurp their authority.  It will backfire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

elvisfan4life said:


> Personally I think getting covid in Feb finished her off by causing *circulation problems as evidenced by her black hands* and the bad days outweighing the good -makes me think how amazing she really was to be able to carry off the few appearances we saw - in June at the jubilee and the final act of welcoming her last prime minister 2 days before her death - sheer grit and determination to do her duty when most of us would be lying in bed with pain relief



That was a massive bruise, not a dead hand though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Another day, another pointless message from my personal nuisance. At this point I can see how the Troublesome Two just wear away at their opponents.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was a massive bruise, not a dead hand though.


The bruising could have been caused by being on medication including blood thinners. My Mum only has to slightly knock her hand, arm or leg against something and the bruising is terrible. Really black/purple and takes up to 3 weeks to go away. By which time she’s got another on top or beside it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is so weird. But also, I didn't even know Kate could have such a stern look. I guess from Raptor's behaviour she underestimated her too.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I hope so. There’s great temptation to make these kinds of books juicy so they’ll sell better.



The authors of these books are more than strongly encouraged to maximise juice. It kills a lot of friendships and family relationships. 

I predict, that since H doesn't need to credit most sources if direct reporting he will do a good deal of rough embroidering - and subsequently have to do a lot of unpicking of stitches for many years to come.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The authors of these books are more than strongly encouraged to maximise juice. It kills a lot of friendships and family relationships.
> 
> I predict, that since H doesn't need to credit most sources if direct reporting he will do a good deal of rough embroidering - and subsequently have to do a lot of unpicking of stitches for many years to come.



One can only hope he picks on the wrong person - a non-BRF member who has no qualms to take him to court and/or strike back.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, if even half of that is true I can’t stand Harry. Stupid little man-child unable to do anything without Meghan literally holding his hand. Yes, by all means bring the person who has disrupted his family for years now so she can feel included at the time when everyone else is absorbing what has just happened.



I mean seriously. 

They both poured pure acid-bile over their respective families, British people and the entire United Kingdom - and they are still acting the injured party. 

They are the definition of narcs and will never be forgiven. 

If "London is a trigger" for Hazard, stay away forever. As for MegZ' walkabout, hypocritical b*tch to even try and shake peoples' hands, let alone hug them and coo over babies. She is a bad penny. 

They only have secrets and lies to tell and sell, they have both sold their souls to the devil as far as I'm concerned. All they think of is money because it's all the measure of their respective self-worth(s) they have.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so weird. But also, I didn't even know Kate could have such a stern look. I guess from Raptor's behaviour she underestimated her too.




Anyone would look aghast at someone who was acting as though they'd been kidnapped and forced to participate in something against their religion. MegZ is doing her 'vulnerable person' act here. 

This is the only the beginning of this story. We'll hear every detail of the BRF's evil ways later. Kate can see she's setting the family up.


----------



## papertiger

Something to listen to whilst doing the washing-up 

Lady C also noticed MegZ hat was too thin for her costume / H is in danger (from himself) if MegZ endZ the 'relationship'.  Lady C gets a bit carried away at times but when she stays focused she's quite insightful.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Anyone would look aghast at someone who was acting as though they'd been kidnapped and forced to participate in something against their religion. MegZ is doing her 'vulnerable person' act here.
> 
> This is the only the beginning of this story. We'll hear every detail of the BRF's evil ways later. Kate can see she's setting the family up.


Yes, this’ll be used for another *Kate made me cry* segment with Oprah.  I think Meg is overacting with a purpose


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> I posted this article earlier today. Tyler Perry has a new "romantic" Netflix drama that premieres soon and I think Netflix has asked him to cross promote the Harkles because it's mutually advantageous for all of them. Apparently, all of Hollywood will do anything to make a buck even if it's means sacrificing integrity. Or maybe I'm just too cynical
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry flexes dramatic muscles in Netflix period romance ‘A Jazzman’s Blues’
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry is flexing his dramatic muscles in a new Netflix love story. It’s about a couple torn apart by family in 1940s Georgia, but...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wsvn.com



Yup, anything involving their names promotes thousands of clicks, even if most of them come from rubbernecking passers-by


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This video is about one person in the long list of used & markled…




TRG is a super-sleuth and she has great insight


----------



## BlueCherry

I don’t know, it seems they’ve gone home with their tail between their legs. Kept it all quiet which is not M’s usual style. Maybe they realise they took on the wrong people when they saw the outpouring of love for the Queen and even Charles. And she’s a reactive type that wouldn’t have the intelligence to think about her actions when firing off pithy statements. Maybe they finally get it - no one is interested in their obnoxious brand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Anyone would look aghast at someone who was acting as though they'd been kidnapped and forced to participate in something against their religion. MegZ is doing her 'vulnerable person' act here.
> 
> This is the only the beginning of this story. We'll hear every detail of the BRF's evil ways later. Kate can see she's setting the family up.


We know QE used hand signals to let her staff know she needed to leave, etc.
Is Kate [and maybe Hazz] using signals? She and William often have the same hand positions.  Holding both hands, holding just the forefinger, maybe hair signals too?  Wonder what it all means?

ETA: Hazz does this one finger out of the jacket thing.


----------



## papertiger

Another from TRG (haven't seen it yet, but will catch-up after work)


----------



## EverSoElusive

All the whinging about not being invited or invited then uninvited, is absolutely childish and petty, and a weak planted story. Clearly Z-list who is allegedly doing their own PR now, is awful at it, like she is with everything else, other than playing a victim.

This is the BRF that we're talking about here, Harry's dad is the king and his brother is first in line to be the next monarch. While anyone of us, including Z-list & Co., may think or assume that's just a family dinner, more than likely there are state matters that are being discussed unofficially. Even unofficially, clearly untrustworthy and/or non-working royals, people such as Z-list & Co., shouldn't be at the table. Why? Because they are leakers and may just end up committing treason, jeopardizing the BRF and/or national security. If Z-list & Co. have done a lot of the same but||sh|t in North Korea, Russia or China, they would have probably been arrested and thrown in jail by now.

If Z-list & Co. are so eager to attend family anything or see family members, then how come all the alleged olive branches that were allegedly offered by HMTQ got thrown back into her face, with the last one being HMTQ's invitation for them to see her at Balmoral?

Nothing is ever good for them. The greed that they have is unrivaled. Imagine in an alternate universe where KC is not king and W is not the heir, instead Harry and Z-list are the king and queen, you know they are still going to complain that the palace is not big enough, they don't have enough money from the taxpayers to spend, they are not allowed to live overseas and run the country remotely purely via Zoom, etc.



ETA: I should say it's not only dinner. Other events too.


----------



## duna

BlueCherry said:


> Bens father, Sir James was a very controversial and combative character who hated the press. It was Private Eye that started it. His family lost all their money and he made it all back and more. If Ben is like his father he will hopefully fight back. PS. I have a little crush on his brother Zak.


Yes Zac is good looking. Their sister is Jemima Goldsmith who married Imran Kahn ( he was very handsom when he was young) He was prime minister of Pakistan until Spring 2022. Also he was a famous cricketer in his young days. Jemima was a good friend of Diana.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> All the whinging about not being invited or invited then uninvited, is absolutely childish and petty, and a weak planted story. Clearly Z-list who is allegedly doing their own PR now, is awful at it, like she is with everything else, other than playing a victim.
> 
> This is the BRF that we're talking about here, Harry's dad is the king and his brother is first in line to be the next monarch. While anyone of us, including Z-list & Co., may think or assume that's just a family dinner, more than likely there are state matters that are being discussed unofficially. Even unofficially, clearly untrustworthy and/or non-working royals, people such as Z-list & Co., shouldn't be at the table. Why? Because they are leakers and may just end up committing treason, jeopardizing the BRF and/or national security. If Z-list & Co. have done a lot of the same but||sh|t in North Korea, Russia or China, they would have probably been arrested and thrown in jail by now.
> 
> If Z-list & Co. are so eager to attend family anything or see family members, then how come all the alleged olive branches that were allegedly offered by HMTQ got thrown back into her face, with the last one being HMTQ's invitation for them to see her at Balmoral?
> 
> Nothing is ever good for them. The greed that they have is unrivaled. Imagine in an alternate universe where KC is not king and W is not the heir, instead Harry and Z-list are the king and queen, you know they are still going to complain that the palace is not big enough, they don't have enough money from the taxpayers to spend, they are not allowed to live overseas and run the country remotely purely via Zoom, etc.



They've already committed treason. They just haven't paid for it IMO


----------



## Pessie

BlueCherry said:


> I don’t know, it seems they’ve gone home with their tail between their legs. Kept it all quiet which is not M’s usual style. Maybe they realise they took on the wrong people when they saw the outpouring of love for the Queen and even Charles. And she’s a reactive type that wouldn’t have the intelligence to think about her actions when firing off pithy statements. Maybe they finally get it - no one is interested in their obnoxious brand.


Somehow I think Meg will be in touch to “clear the air”.  Because it’s not her it’s us.  I‘d put money on there being another big interview in the US.


----------



## Mumotons

Something is going down; Chris Bouzy of Bot Sentinel is being sued for defamation by Nate the Lawyer . Will the **** hit the fan ?


----------



## lallybelle

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was a massive bruise, not a dead hand though.


I was thinking about this - could it have been from an IV?


papertiger said:


> Something to listen to whilst doing the washing-up
> 
> Lady C also noticed MegZ hat was too thin for her costume / H is in danger (from himself) if MegZ endZ the 'relationship'.  Lady C gets a bit carried away at times but when she stays focused she's quite insightful.



I saw some of this yesterday when it popped up in my feed. Lady C was going OFF. I'll watch some more of it later.


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> They've already committed treason. They just haven't paid for it IMO









Although I’m a reasonable person, tongues would suffice


----------



## KEG66

Mumotons said:


> Something is going down; Chris Bouzy of Bot Sentinel is being sued for defamation by Nate the Lawyer . Will the **** hit the fan ?


Hi could you please explain, I don’t know who these people are. Probably being dim like Hazza !


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> Although I’m a reasonable person, tongues would suffice



That gif looks more like MeAgain


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> That gif looks more like MeAgain



Lololol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One can only hope he picks on the wrong person - a non-BRF member who has no qualms to take him to court and/or strike back.


I’m guessing some of the delay in releasing the book is tied up in having lawyers make sure the publisher can’t be sued because of its content.


----------



## Mumotons

Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Another from TRG (haven't seen it yet, but will catch-up after work)




OK lunchtime.

TRG is very clever, she shows MegZ very likely wearing a transmitter at the actually funeral with some very credible pics/comparisons. She is very careful not to utter a word because like anti-plagiarism YT caption software monitors speech and language, it maybe an alleged theory too far. However that kind of software cannot reason images (yet anyway). 

TRG is trying to help Americans know what's been going on, and non-Americans understand how MegZ has manipulated the US media. She thinks justice will come out in the wash, maybe we have reached a tipping-point, I hope so.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I’m guessing some the delay in releasing the book is tied up in having lawyers make sure the publisher can’t be sued because of its content.



The BRF doesn't sue, nor does anyone working for them whilst under their patronage.

Probably looking to see who else could though. Those checks are usually done well in advance so I don't think it's delay is for that reason. I think they're waiting for the TB book to come out (eminently) and will try piggy-back (piggybank) it.

Sadly, H has a new chapter to write too.


----------



## lallybelle

He is also an Amber Heard supporter. Amber & her twitter supporters have been trying to take down #lawtube (aka all of the lawyers on Youtube that covered the Depp case) Most if not all of them were are Depps side as they streamed and watched every moment of the trial. Many have been critical of "mainstream" media's coverage of the case because instead of reporting what actually happened, they insist on following their set "Amber is a victim" narrative. (Sound familiar?) Well looks like after Bouzey was saying horrible lies and disinformation on Nate, he struck back. Seems Bouzey forgot these are real lawyers not just random commenters and know their ****. He ****ed around and now he's about to find out.


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube



Thank you,

A whole new shady layer to plunder, but even more interesting


----------



## BlueCherry

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube



I hotfooted it off to Google and whilst trying to listen was distracted by Nate’s gorgeous teeth and smile. I heard he supports Meghan so Nate go let him have it 

Edit: I mean Bouzey supports


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> The BRF doesn't sue, nor does anyone working for them whilst under their patronage.
> 
> Probably looking to see who else could though. Those checks are usually done well in advance so I don't think it's delay is for that reason. I think they're waiting for the TB book to come out (eminently) and will try piggy-back (piggybank) it.
> 
> Sadly, H has a new chapter to write too.



If it’s the next chapter of his exiled life it won’t take long


----------



## KEG66

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube


Thanks for explaining, much appreciated. Watch this space then !


----------



## Mumotons

I


KEG66 said:


> Thanks for explaining, much appreciated. Watch this space then !


You’re welcome , I should also point out that he hates the RF (that’s ok , that’s his right), but has called Catherine a hag and other names . So he’s only claiming that people who hate Meghan should be banned from social media . Not a nice person by all accounts


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> OK lunchtime.
> 
> TRG is very clever, she shows MegZ very likely wearing a transmitter at the actually funeral with some very credible pics/comparisons. She is very careful not to utter a word because like anti-plagiarism YT caption software monitors speech and language, it maybe an alleged theory too far. However that kind of software cannot reason images (yet anyway).
> 
> TRG is trying to help Americans know what's been going on, and non-Americans understand how MegZ has manipulated the US media. She thinks justice will come out in the wash, maybe we have reached a tipping-point, I hope so.



Much as I would love to agree that she’s wired, it’s difficult with those pictures as the device is so obvious. Would she really not know that any smooth fabric in a plain colour would show this up. 

On the other hand I could imagine her waiting for a direct accusation and then putting out there that it’s a medical device because she’s terminally ill and we all caused it


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I read wrong because my screen view was cut off: I saw "Camillla Spluttered Into Her Tea When Harry Asked for Medication"
> I spluttered into my turmeric latte


Would it be rude to be concerned about the color of your turmeric latte ? My chai , what Americans call Indian tea with spices, is dark brown

Chai is Russia is just any ole tea FYI, spice not required … a geeky detail … all chais are not made equal


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The BRF doesn't sue, nor does anyone working for them whilst under their patronage.
> 
> Probably looking to see who else could though. Those checks are usually done well in advance so I don't think it's delay is for that reason. I think they're waiting for the TB book to come out (eminently) and will try piggy-back (piggybank) it.
> 
> Sadly, H has a new chapter to write too.


Agree they don’t sue but … 
this week has been a barrage of pro MM puff pieces eg Tyler, and hugging fan at walkabout, OS pushing KC to act fast 
And in the last two days, I noticed a bit of a response … eg DM has piece on Camilla tried to help MM ….  Arguments caused H to miss flight to Balmoral with all the other royals 
So the BRF is lobbing the ball back over the net , good for them


----------



## Mumotons

The first extract from Valentine Lows book will be in The Times on Saturday. I have a subscription so if anyone needs I can copy it here


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Would it be rude to be concerned about the color of your turmeric latte ? My chai , what Americans call Indian tea with spices, is dark brown
> 
> Chai is Russia is just any ole tea FYI, spice not required … a geeky detail … all chais are not made equal



It's the word for tea in Turkish, Persian and Kurdish as well. As in, it just means plain black tea, even the addition of sugar requires an add-on to the name, let alone spices (though none of these cultures does the elaborate Indian chai with a whole spice universe and milk, at most it's a bit of ginger or cinnamon).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I am annoyed this morning, because an Instagram woman I follow, Liz Moody, did an ask me anything, and when someone asked what her favorite podcast was she named archetypes! she mentioned a good conversation with Mindy, Kay leg, and I am a Mindy fan, but I hate thinking that she sending any traffic over that way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> I am annoyed this morning, because an Instagram woman I follow, Liz Moody, did an ask me anything, and when someone asked what her favorite podcast was she named archetypes! she mentioned a good conversation with Mindy, Kay leg, and I am a Mindy fan, but I hate thinking that she sending any traffic over that way.



Yeah, that would annoy me too.


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> The first extract from Valentine Lows book will be in The Times on Saturday. I have a subscription so if anyone needs I can copy it here


Here is the info on how to purchase VL's book directly from the source…

I plan to buy the American version of TB's book (a few for gifts), and I'll also add VL's book to my list of purchases. Unfortunately, I'm about to join a 'cost containment program,' and I'll not be able to buy Hazz's upcoming masterpiece.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Totally random, but this is totally a "I was today years old" moment. I just learned that non-profit just means that the organization doesn't give money to shareholders. It does not mean they don't pay their executives as much money as they want. I never gave it detailed thought, but I feel somewhat stupid now.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Totally random, but this is totally a "I was today years old" moment. I just learned that non-profit just means that the organization doesn't give money to shareholders. It does not mean they don't pay their executives as much money as they want. I never gave it detailed thought, but I feel somewhat stupid now.


I didn’t know that either


----------



## Mumotons

Chanbal said:


> Here is the info on how to purchase VL's book directly from the source…
> 
> I plan to buy the American version of TB's book (a few for gifts), and I'll also add VL's book to my list of purchases. Unfortunately, I'm about to join a 'cost containment program,' and I'll not be able to buy Hazz's upcoming masterpiece.



I’ve ordered it too


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I am annoyed this morning, because an Instagram woman I follow, Liz Moody, did an ask me anything, and *when someone asked what her favorite podcast was she named archetypes! *she mentioned a good conversation with Mindy, Kay leg, and I am a Mindy fan, but I hate thinking that she sending any traffic over that way.


That is how to instantly lose respect for someone you liked.


----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so weird. But also, I didn't even know Kate could have such a stern look. I guess from Raptor's behaviour she underestimated her too.



This is such an interesting clip! Kate s expression says” I’m not putting up with your childish behavior and untruths” . TW s expression when she turns away from Kate is that of discombobulation and fear.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This video is about one person in the long list of used & markled…



yeah, Meghan was an unabashed social climber and user....and this woman who made the video is being a parasite on Meghan


----------



## pukasonqo

Pessie said:


> I didn’t know that either



Me neither and always wondered how people working for a “not for profit” organisation made a living


----------



## Pessie

Mumotons said:


> Something is going down; Chris Bouzy of Bot Sentinel is being sued for defamation by Nate the Lawyer . Will the **** hit the fan ?


I didn’t understand what this meant when I first read it, I get it now - thanks for posting.


----------



## marietouchet

Marklenews1 on IG
Way too many posts to copy here , fast moving posts ..
Kc to banish H …
H did not snub KC dinner invite at Balmoral - H got there too late and KC was gone … this story makes no sense .. not from professional PR people


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I didn’t understand what this meant when I first read it, I get it now - thanks for posting.



One of my best and oldest friends worked for a UK charity until quite recently. He put me to rights on a lot of things I never realised, I was


----------



## marietouchet

MissThing said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed before but I alwasy thought the paternity runopoirs around prince harry and Diana's other lovers were just crazy rumours.  Now I'm not so sure.


Musings on H’s hair
I always thought that was mussed up due to lack of comb
But, if you look in recent photos, he might have curly/wiry hair
Photo above was just after puberty and you can start to see the wiry hair 
Now - where did come from ? Well, Anne has unruly hair but she hides it in a French twist and probably has it straightened


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> One for my best and oldest friends worked for a UK charity until quite recently. He put me to rights on a lot of things I never realised, I was


I was a trustee for a small charity in the UK for many years.  I did it for free, we all did.  (Staff were paid a salary of course)   I assumed when I read non-profit it meant something similar?  Silly me lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

pukasonqo said:


> Me neither and always wondered how people working for a “not for profit” organisation made a living


Expenses - traVel - are paid by foundation
Office spaces in house - are reimbursed by foundation - part of mortgage is paid
Clothes are paid or reimbursed …
Child care expenses - you can ask to have them paid in Toto while you (supposedly) work all day long
Security, and physical trainers - exercise stuff , well aren’t they reimbursable too ?
Some people push the limits on this stuff , or go outside the limits - I can’t work without a Starbucks …
That is how it works in the us ..,


----------



## djfmn

lanasyogamama said:


> I am annoyed this morning, because an Instagram woman I follow, Liz Moody, did an ask me anything, and when someone asked what her favorite podcast was she named archetypes! she mentioned a good conversation with Mindy, Kay leg, and I am a Mindy fan, but I hate thinking that she sending any traffic over that way.


Remember you always need to follow the money. She has a podcast and you do not know if she is being encouraged or paid to make recommendations. I know that SS had their clients make recommendations etc. It is all about business and money. At least that is my opinion.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Expenses - traVel - are paid by foundation
> Office spaces in house - are reimbursed by foundation - part of mortgage is paid
> Clothes are paid or reimbursed …
> Child care expenses - you can ask to have them paid in Toto while you (supposedly) work all day long
> Security, and physical trainers - exercise stuff , well aren’t they reimbursable too ?
> Some people push the limits on this stuff , or go outside the limits - I can’t work without a Starbucks …
> That is how it works in the us ..,


but as far as we know, their foundation is self-funded (or funded by daddy) - doesn't do any fund raising - nor does it give away any significant money


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Would it be rude to be concerned about the color of your turmeric latte ? My chai , what Americans call Indian tea with spices, is dark brown
> 
> Chai is Russia is just any ole tea FYI, spice not required … a geeky detail … all chais are not made equal


Depends on where I buy it, but it is usually a shade of golden brown. The flavour varies a lot - amount and type of spices used. I have turmeric growing in my garden. The leaves are finely shredded for some local herbal salads.


----------



## lanasyogamama

djfmn said:


> Remember you always need to follow the money. She has a podcast and you do not know if she is being encouraged or paid to make recommendations. I know that SS had their clients make recommendations etc. It is all about business and money. At least that is my opinion.


Great point


----------



## marietouchet

hellooholly said:


> don't forget how good-looking PC was in some of his early day photos!
> 
> the trick when looking at a man's looks is to look at the men in his family and how they've aged..
> 
> some good-looking people age soo terribly...
> (looks-wise anyway. not debating their less tangible more valuable properties of course.)


And KC still has a lot of wave in his hair


sdkitty said:


> but as far as we know, their foundation is self-funded (or funded by daddy) - doesn't do any fund raising - nor does it give away any significant money


yes their foundation is likely in the red 
If your business is not making money , the hypothetical ability for reimbursement evaporates 
But they thought their foundation would be swimming in cash , when they bought house and hired all the superfluous security


----------



## CarryOn2020

VickyB said:


> This is such an interesting clip! Kate s expression says” I’m not putting up with your childish behavior and untruths” . TW s expression when she turns away from Kate is that of discombobulation and fear.


I watched this whole scene as it happened. Imo someone in the crowd said or did something MM did not like - racist, idk. She became agitated enough to tell W&K. She may have demanded they do something n.o.w.  They look at her as if she is an alien. Hazz does his perma-frown face.  William must have said something like we will look into it. Kate smiles, then MM demands Hazz opens her door, etc.

RE: non-profit vs. not-for-profit vs. for-profit









						Nonprofit, Not-for Profit & For-Profit Organizations Explained
					

These terms have different implications for your taxes, corporate governance and business activities.




					www.uschamber.com


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> Somehow I think Meg will be in touch to “clear the air”.  Because it’s not her it’s us.  I‘d put money on there being another big interview in the US.


The obvious answer is with GK on CBS Mornings.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The obvious answer is with GK on CBS Mornings.


I guess M's fifteen minutes isn't up yet....but I'm waiting


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mumotons said:


> I’ve ordered it too


Yes, my bank refuses to process any charges for H&MM stuff - books, videos, podcasts, clothes, etc.  I’ll wait for the DM to post the so-called trash-bombs. 

RE: Sarah Rafferty - she and Jessica Pearson were the best female characters on that Suits show imo.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Totally random, but this is totally a "I was today years old" moment. I just learned that non-profit just means that the organization doesn't give money to shareholders. It does not mean they don't pay their executives as much money as they want. I never gave it detailed thought, but I feel somewhat stupid now.


I understood that payments to executives and other related perks (e.g. travel expenses on behalf of the non-profit) can be up to 95 percent of the value of the non-profit endowment. I'm not an accountant, so please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, my bank refuses to process any charges for H&MM stuff - books, videos, podcasts, clothes, etc.  I’ll wait for the DM to post the so-called trash-bombs.
> 
> RE: Sarah Rafferty - she and Jessica Pearson were the best female characters on that Suits show imo.


but I wouldn't call sarah rafferty a household name.  she may have neen more successful than Meghan but not like she was one of the stars of Grey's Anatomy....(I didn't watch Suits)


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Musings on H’s hair
> I always thought that was mussed up due to lack of comb
> But, if you look in recent photos, he might have curly/wiry hair
> Photo above was just after puberty and you can start to see the wiry hair
> Now - where did come from ? Well, Anne has unruly hair but she hides it in a French twist and probably has it straightened


In that photo it almost looks like he is wearing a toupee.  Maybe it’s the light.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> but I wouldn't call sarah rafferty a household name.  she may have neen more successful than Meghan but not like she was one of the stars of Grey's Anatomy....(I didn't watch Suits)


Greys Anatomy - no idea she was on that. I stopped watching it years ago.









						Sarah Rafferty - IMDb
					

Sarah Rafferty. Actress: Suits. Sarah Rafferty's character Donna on USA network's hit show "Suits" is one of the most formidable minds at their law firm, Pearson Hardman. With her razor sharp wit and knowledge of all the firm's happenings, Donna is admired and feared by everyone there, and she's...




					www.imdb.com


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> yeah, Meghan was an unabashed social climber and user....and this woman who made the video is being a parasite on Meghan


I don't know who the author of the video is, but I believe that they are people genuinely invested in denouncing phonies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I don't know who the author of the video is, but I believe that they are people genuinely invested in denouncing phonies.


IDK....she is saying what we're saying here but we don't get any money out of it


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, Andi&Sarah, once again trying to ruin King Charles’s moment.  These people are *really* jealous.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Greys Anatomy - no idea she was on that. I stopped watching it years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Rafferty - IMDb
> 
> 
> Sarah Rafferty. Actress: Suits. Sarah Rafferty's character Donna on USA network's hit show "Suits" is one of the most formidable minds at their law firm, Pearson Hardman. With her razor sharp wit and knowledge of all the firm's happenings, Donna is admired and feared by everyone there, and she's...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


I don't watch Grey's anymore either but it's still on and I assume still has good ratings


----------



## Chanbal

I read somewhere that no princely titles from Charles until Hazz publishes his masterpiece, and TW is done with her Nefl*x/Spot*fy events. I hope it's true.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> What the Sussexes (she) want(s) - that they might not get
> 1. Titles for the children but I see no reason to grant these now and for the BRF to give up the leverage of not having granted them
> 2. Assurance that the ducal title will not be removed
> 3. Tacit approval of book publication - see item 4
> 4. Money is always nice including eg buy H&M out of the book/Spotify deals
> 5. Guaranteed International Protected Person status - I dont think the BRF can grant this ?
> 
> What the BRF wants
> *1. Signed non disclosure agreement from both H and M,* otherwise there is a constant threat of more truth bombs forever. No autobiography for MM.
> 2. Signed agreement of no more lawsuits ?
> 
> The remaining 3 Spotify episodes are a done deal - delivered to Spotify - heck what does Spotify gain if they let MM edit out any juicy bits - nothing - so there will be at least 3 more truth bomb filled episodes, the only question is how many more will be produced


Nope! Even if the Despicable duo signed a NDA, they could never be trusted to keep their word as they would find a way to tell some lie to GK or OW that would become "breaking news from a palace source."


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't watch Grey's anymore either but it's still on and I assume still has good ratings


Speaking of:




			https://preview.redd.it/adding-another-plagiarized-quote-to-the-rapidly-growing-v0-q0oc164dylp91.jpg?width=851&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=daf24f0d978e0cae061dfe30c12185009cbca9b8


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking of:
> View attachment 5616148
> 
> 
> 
> https://preview.redd.it/adding-another-plagiarized-quote-to-the-rapidly-growing-v0-q0oc164dylp91.jpg?width=851&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=daf24f0d978e0cae061dfe30c12185009cbca9b8


One more:


----------



## Chanbal

Does anyone know the date of this summit? Should we all start packing?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking of:
> View attachment 5616148
> 
> 
> 
> https://preview.redd.it/adding-another-plagiarized-quote-to-the-rapidly-growing-v0-q0oc164dylp91.jpg?width=851&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=daf24f0d978e0cae061dfe30c12185009cbca9b8


does she take notes on what people say to be used when convenient?
she must be terrified now....unless her narcissism is fooling her.  she has failed to make it as a TV or movie star.  all she really has is her connection to the RF, which she has trashed.  so how long does she think she can continue to hold onto fame by accusing everyone of racism?  Maybe she's holding back on exposing the kids for the time when she really needs them.  or maybe H isn't letting them be exposed.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Karenska

Karenska said:


> I haven’t read anything on this possibility, either, RBH, but it was the first thing I thought when Queen Elizabeth’s death was announced. Seeing how thin she was at the jubilee and how frail she was in the photos with Liz Truss, I couldn’t help thinking, did covid contribute?


We’ll never know, but I also lamented to myself that if covid hastened the end of Queen Elizabeth’s otherwise healthy life, and had she not contracted covid, she might have lived a few years more, well, that’s so sad and heart-breaking, in my opinion.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Expenses - traVel - are paid by foundation
> Office spaces in house - are reimbursed by foundation - part of mortgage is paid
> Clothes are paid or reimbursed …
> Child care expenses - you can ask to have them paid in Toto while you (supposedly) work all day long
> Security, and physical trainers - exercise stuff , well aren’t they reimbursable too ?
> Some people push the limits on this stuff , or go outside the limits - I can’t work without a Starbucks …
> That is how it works in the us ..,



Teeth, cosmetic surgery, MUA, stylists etc are all explainable as expenses. 

Same as for actors and models. Very normal for people who make appearance part f their work. Why do you think she goes to these events? Fronting is a tax write-off.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> The obvious answer is with GK on CBS Mornings.


Nah GK is not prime time …
OW lol


----------



## bubablu

Chanbal said:


> One more:



That fake face delivering the speech, it's embarrassing to see. Do she really was an actress? We had better ones, including myself, on my high school shows.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> I am old enough to remember when another couple couldn't stand the sight of each other.....
> 
> View attachment 5615213


Yep, Diana was a much better actress than ZedZed will ever be!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> That fake face delivering the speech, it's embarrassing to see. Do she really was an actress? We had better ones, including myself, on my high school shows.


does she believe uncredited plagarism is OK?


----------



## TC1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Greys Anatomy - no idea she was on that. I stopped watching it years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah Rafferty - IMDb
> 
> 
> Sarah Rafferty. Actress: Suits. Sarah Rafferty's character Donna on USA network's hit show "Suits" is one of the most formidable minds at their law firm, Pearson Hardman. With her razor sharp wit and knowledge of all the firm's happenings, Donna is admired and feared by everyone there, and she's...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


She's been on Chicago Med on NBC for the last 2 seasons (at least)


----------



## CarryOn2020

bubablu said:


> That fake face delivering the speech, it's embarrassing to see. Do she really was an actress? We had better ones, including myself, on my high school shows.


The splotches on her neck and chest — is this why she uses the dark spray tan ?


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> She's been on Chicago Med on NBC for the last 2 seasons (at least)


I used to watch that but lost interest....I think watching HBO series spoiled a lot of the network shows for me


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The splotches on her neck and chest — is this why she uses the dark spray tan ?


kinda looks like vitiligo - the disease michael jackson had


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Does anyone know the date of this summit? Should we all start packing?



Well Scobie knows something about misinformation.  He’s finally on a subject he’s qualified to talk about.


----------



## TC1

sdkitty said:


> I used to watch that but lost interest....I think watching HBO series spoiled a lot of the network shows for me


Well, as we mentioned in another thread, I still have cable and my DVR just picks them up   I'll put them on when there's nothing else on. Chicago Fire, Chicago PD and Med.


----------



## bubablu

sdkitty said:


> does she believe uncredited plagarism is OK?


Sure not, she has a moral: that was a script, she was just audioning for a princes role. Obviously no one in his right mind would have hired heOH MAN.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Andi&Sarah, once again trying to ruin King Charles’s moment.  These people are *really* jealous.



But the recent (this week) planting of story of A&F lobbying to depose the worthless C   (Back in the 80s) did not necessarily come from A&F
Planted this week by MM to make KC look bad ?

the real anecdote dates to the time of the F and A marriage - late 80s? when both wives of Windsor - D and F - made common cause whining about each other’s husbands


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Well, as we mentioned in another thread, I still have cable and my DVR just picks them up   I'll put them on when there's nothing else on. Chicago Fire, Chicago PD and Med.


same here....last night I watched the first episode of new season of Chicago PD....disappointing - continuing the storyline about the death of Ana....I think they've wrapped it up now....between PD, Fire and Med, I've liked PD best....I used to like fire but since they married off the hot guy - Kelly Severide - meh....it's kinda played out for me


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The splotches on her neck and chest — is this why she uses the dark spray tan ?


Had not noticed the splotches before… 

Weren‘t we talking last week - that her face did not match her neck ?

And her spray tan was uneven in the famous red formal in NY

But why wear such a low cut red formal with uneven skin? Everyone was looking at the décolleté … but then she is not great at picking clothes to emphasize her good points rather than the bad ones

PS hate how iPad magically inserts/deletes capital letters, and does not offer a correction since the machine’s choice is obviously the correct one …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Taking a short break from peeling, slicing and gently frying 7 pounds of onions for tomorrow's onion cake (which is a direct translation but always sounds wrong) to give you this.

An American Facebook friend of mine just posted it, wondering why Germans have THE BEST words (I will say I personally was very fond of those oldfashioned British ones people posted a few days ago). I thought it kind of applied here, too.

P.S. a Backpfeife is a slap to the face with a flat hand, so maybe not quite as brutal.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Pessie said:


> I suppose I could hire a small crowd to wait at the end of my drive to make a fuss and take my picture when I got home, but how would it really feel knowing they wouldn’t be there if I hadn’t paid them to be?  It wouldn’t make me feel good inside and I doubt the neighbours would impressed.  I don’t get the celeb PR culture at all.
> The Royals don’t need to try and people are interested anyway.  Meghan could’ve saved herself a boatload of money and work.  She’s a fool.


Is it just me or does this really seem like a hilarious idea if you wanted to troll your HOA?


----------



## bubablu

marietouchet said:


> PS hate how iPad magically inserts/deletes capital letters, and does not offer a correction since the machine’s choice is obviously the correct one …


This! (But I cannot live without it ❤️)


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> does she believe uncredited plagarism is OK?



I thought all plagiarism is uncredited, otherwise it would be referenced


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I thought all plagiarism is uncredited, otherwise it would be referenced


yes, oxymoron my part I guess


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Had not noticed the splotches before…
> 
> Weren‘t we talking last week - that her face did not match her neck ?
> 
> And her spray tan was uneven in the famous red formal in NY
> 
> But why wear such a low cut red formal with uneven skin? Everyone was looking at the décolleté … but then she is not great at picking clothes to emphasize her good points rather than the bad ones
> 
> PS hate how iPad magically inserts/deletes capital letters, and does not offer a correction since the machine’s choice is obviously the correct one …


Someone did a series of progressive photos of this event. The longer Zedzee talked, the more red splotches there were. I think the linkwas dozens of pages back in this thread. If I ever find it, I'll post it.


----------



## Toby93

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube


The things you learn on this forum   So is this the same Bouzey who just posted this?  And why is showing upon my feed?


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Had not noticed the splotches before…
> 
> Weren‘t we talking last week - that her face did not match her neck ?
> 
> And her spray tan was uneven in the famous red formal in NY
> 
> But why wear such a low cut red formal with uneven skin? Everyone was looking at the décolleté … but then she is not great at picking clothes to emphasize her good points rather than the bad ones
> 
> PS hate how iPad magically inserts/deletes capital letters, and does not offer a correction since the machine’s choice is obviously the correct one …



She makes the mistake of wearing things she likes/are expensive/lent or given for free rather than the things that might actually look good or work for her body type. I feel it’s a mistake people make when they’re still young and figuring out wardrobe for body type. Or she just really thinks so highly of herself that she believes she looks great and no one to tell her the truth about how she looks (which is probably the case)

On the iPad comment, I thought it was just mine! I legitimately bought a new iPad because I thought my older one had an issue. Nope! They all do it!


----------



## lallybelle

Toby93 said:


> The things you learn on this forum   So is this the same Bouzey who just posted this?  And why is showing upon my feed?



That's him.

Maybe one of your followers retweeted him?


----------



## uhpharm01

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube


what is the Susses squad.


----------



## uhpharm01

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube


I heard that he is always involved in some drama on twitter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, Andi&Sarah, once again trying to ruin King Charles’s moment.  These people are *really* jealous.




I'm sorry, I refuse to believe that. Fergie is problematic, but other than Raptor she does not strike me as a person evil and psychopathic enough to be excited about someone's death.


----------



## A1aGypsy

papertiger said:


> The BRF doesn't sue, nor does anyone working for them whilst under their patronage.
> 
> Probably looking to see who else could though. Those checks are usually done well in advance so I don't think it's delay is for that reason. I think they're waiting for the TB book to come out (eminently) and will try piggy-back (piggybank) it.
> 
> Sadly, H has a new chapter to write too.


Didn’t they sue Tattler?


----------



## BlueCherry

sdkitty said:


> same here....last night I watched the first episode of new season of Chicago PD....disappointing - continuing the storyline about the death of Ana....I think they've wrapped it up now....between PD, Fire and Med, I've liked PD best....I used to like fire but since they married off the hot guy - Kelly Severide - meh....it's kinda played out for me



I came across that one day and bought the series on YT up to 7 I think and binge watched it. I liked the girl and Hank. So much so that I can’t remember her name


----------



## BittyMonkey

I'm in the nonprofit sphere in the US so I want to clarify a couple of things for how it works here at least.

It is super not cool to overspend on administration vs mission and you will get fired by the Board of Directors and potentially sued for financial hijinks by using donated funds for personal things. You can't fly first class without disclosing it on your IRS  990, which are public if you are a 501c3 (unless it is a religious organization).

If you want to review the spending of your favorite charity, go here: https://www.guidestar.org/
If you are a spectacular idiot, you do things like this.

There are best practice guidelines for CEO compensation. If a donor has an intent for funds ("restricted") it must be spent on that, or the nonprofit can be sued for return of the funds.


----------



## BlueCherry

marietouchet said:


> Had not noticed the splotches before…
> 
> Weren‘t we talking last week - that her face did not match her neck ?
> 
> And her spray tan was uneven in the famous red formal in NY
> 
> But why wear such a low cut red formal with uneven skin? Everyone was looking at the décolleté … but then she is not great at picking clothes to emphasize her good points rather than the bad ones
> 
> PS hate how iPad magically inserts/deletes capital letters, and does not offer a correction since the machine’s choice is obviously the correct one …



I hate how Apple keyboard changes everything I type and the speech recognition doesn’t understand me even though I speak clearer English than Siri. 

And I hate that I get like, unlike, insightful, uninsightful, copy and paste before I finally get the laughing emoji that I wanted in the first place.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bubablu said:


> That fake face delivering the speech, it's embarrassing to see. Do she really was an actress? We had better ones, including myself, on my high school shows.



As an innocent victim wanting to watch an episode of The Nanny I once stumbled upon one of her early movies on Disney Channel. She really is that bad of an actress, her range is what we see now - the overacting "cute" and "sexy" (but not really) supporting role. Actually after those 10 mins of my life I'm never going to get back I wonder how she ever nailed that Suits gig.


----------



## LittleStar88

I still hold the belief that they are running everything through as “business expenses”. The house, cars, bicycles, trips… everything. And receiving as a benefit and not paying taxes on those benefits.

I had a boss that does this. Works for a company that is not publicly traded but is privately funded. The company pays for the house, cars, groceries, everything… Receives a small paycheck and I guarantee not paying any tax on the benefits received from the company. I am thinking this is what H&M do. I hope the IRS can staff up and look into their situation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The splotches on her neck and chest — is this why she uses the dark spray tan ?



I have never gotten one, but would spray tan on splotchy skin not just make it worse?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

BlueCherry said:


> I hate how Apple keyboard changes everything I type and the speech recognition doesn’t understand me even though I speak clearer English than Siri.
> 
> And I hate that I get like, unlike, insightful, uninsightful, copy and paste before I finally get the laughing emoji that I wanted in the first place.



I once replied to a text from my boss using the speech function (while I was driving). I hit send without reviewing the message assuming it would be ok. It wasn’t, and the nonsense it sent was hilarious   

I no longer use that unless I can view before sending.


----------



## BlueCherry

LittleStar88 said:


> I still hold the belief that they are running everything through as “business expenses”. The house, cars, bicycles, trips… everything. And receiving as a benefit and not paying taxes on those benefits.
> 
> I had a boss that does this. Works for a company that is not publicly traded but is privately funded. The company pays for the house, cars, groceries, everything… Receives a small paycheck and I guarantee not paying any tax on the benefits received from the company. I am thinking this is what H&M do. I hope the IRS can staff up and look into their situation.



I know ***** was a nightmare but he would have hammered TW on Twitter and definitely instigated a tax inquiry


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> The things you learn on this forum   So is this the same Bouzey who just posted this?  And why is showing upon my feed?




Oh, if only she married the man she loved. Or if only she loved the man she married.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have never gotten one, but would spray tan on splotchy skin not just make it worse?



I’m fair skinned and my sister is olive skinned. She put fake tan on me after calling me insipid. It made my freckles go darker. Well, I call them all freckles but I suspect a few might be liver spots


----------



## BlueCherry

LittleStar88 said:


> I once replied to a text from my boss using the speech function (while I was driving). I hit send without reviewing the message assuming it would be ok. It wasn’t, and the nonsense it sent was hilarious
> 
> I no longer use that unless I can view before sending.


----------



## LittleStar88

BlueCherry said:


> I know ***** was a nightmare but he would have hammered TW on Twitter and definitely instigated a tax inquiry



Ha! Yeah, Trumpet would have sunk his teeth into them and would not have let go.it was personal for him!


----------



## BittyMonkey

LittleStar88 said:


> I still hold the belief that they are running everything through as “business expenses”. The house, cars, bicycles, trips… everything. And receiving as a benefit and not paying taxes on those benefits.
> 
> I had a boss that does this. Works for a company that is not publicly traded but is privately funded. The company pays for the house, cars, groceries, everything… Receives a small paycheck and I guarantee not paying any tax on the benefits received from the company. I am thinking this is what H&M do. I hope the IRS can staff up and look into their situation.


Well, let's just say that whatever I said has fark all to do with Archwell.


----------



## BlueCherry

LittleStar88 said:


> Ha! Yeah, Trumpet would have sunk his teeth into them and would not have let go.it was personal for him!



You’re smart 

You knew how to get his name in the post but I’m a div


----------



## 880

kipp said:


> In case everyone missed it---seen first on IG Marklenews1:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Meghan Markle’s royal flop
> 
> 
> For all their striving, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle just don’t have it. Britain has realized this — and Hollywood is starting to realize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectatorworld.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worth a read!


I’m very behind on this thread, but thank you @kipp ! Love the article


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> Well Scobie knows something about misinformation.  He’s finally on a subject he’s qualified to talk about.


You are right, but I see a potential problem here. He will likely apply his knowledge on the subject and spread misinformation during the summit.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Maybe he is going to make a movie out of it lololol


*Medea meets MeGain*?


----------



## Chanbal

BittyMonkey said:


> I'm in the nonprofit sphere in the US so I want to clarify a couple of things for how it works here at least.
> 
> It is super not cool to overspend on administration vs mission and you will get fired by the Board of Directors and potentially sued for financial hijinks by using donated funds for personal things. You can't fly first class without disclosing it on your IRS  990, which are public if you are a 501c3 (unless it is a religious organization).
> 
> If you want to review the spending of your favorite charity, go here: https://www.guidestar.org/
> If you are a spectacular idiot, you do things like this.
> 
> There are best practice guidelines for CEO compensation. If a donor has an intent for funds ("restricted") it must be spent on that, or the nonprofit can be sued for return of the funds.


I did it, and got this:


----------



## LittleStar88

BlueCherry said:


> You’re smart
> 
> You knew how to get his name in the post but I’m a div



I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky  


Here’s a good Friday read…









						Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
					

After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….  
	

			archive.ph


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph



You must have a subscription. It's not available to non-subs.


----------



## charlottawill

Re her splotchy skin, women often have a problem with this when they get hot or nervous, especially in perimenopause. Someone here said it got worse as her speech progressed, so I'm guessing that was the cause. It's not vitiligo. But you'd think she'd avoid a low cut neckline like that if she knows she is prone to this happening, unless it had never happened before.

ETA: In my limited experience, spray tans will only make skin imperfections more noticeable, not cover them up. Age spots and scars get darker, they don't disappear.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> You must have a subscription. It's not available to non-subs.


Click on the archive link at the bottom - worked for me


----------



## Pessie

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Oh my


----------



## miss_chiff

archive.ph
		

Synopsis of the beginning.
Edit to add as I was in a hurry: article about early days and behind the scenes behavior with KP staff and such. Much of it we’ve heard before, maybe some we haven’t.
Editing again! Sorry, I missed it as this article has already been posted. Lol y’all are so fast!


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Click on the archive link at the bottom - worked for me



Maybe it's because I'm in the 
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
UK


----------



## papertiger

miss_chiff said:


> archive.ph
> 
> 
> Synopsis of the beginning.



Thanks, that link works


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is disgusting. 

But also, too bad Harry didn't take his only chance.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting perspective!


----------



## DoggieBags

Toby93 said:


> The things you learn on this forum   So is this the same Bouzey who just posted this?  And why is showing upon my feed?



I guess we’re supposed to ignore that TW was cheating with H while she was still living with someone else in Toronto?


----------



## bellecate

A1aGypsy said:


> Didn’t they sue Tattler?


IIRC they sued and won damages over the topless photo’s they took of Catherine in 2017.


----------



## LittleStar88

papertiger said:


> You must have a subscription. It's not available to non-subs.



The archive link might work better: https://archive.ph/DyX3B


----------



## Toby93

Someone just said that all the PR thats flooding social media is to deflect from the new book by Low


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Well I for one can't wait for the book to come out


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Great article .. my fav bit …
CA before Megxit, H directly calls W asks to meet, to clear thae air, I guess W says sure but I need to inform my secretary of my plans. H gets mad, he wanted PRIVATE meeting and if you tell one of the dreadful suits …
Result - mtg never happened


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I thought William successfully sued a French newspaper for publishing topless pics of Catherine?


Well, pix were never published


----------



## miss_chiff

marietouchet said:


> Well, pix were never published


There are pictures that you can still see online, unfortunately.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Well, pix were never published


----------



## miss_chiff

miss_chiff said:


> There are pictures that you can still see online, unfortunately.


After thought…How is it all of she devil’s junk was scrubbed from the internet, yet there are still lingering topless pics of PoW?


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> I think _Vanity Fair _made this part up about Doria taking care of the kids all this time. No one else has reported that, have they?
> 
> While on this extended trip, Harry and Meghan left their two children, 3-year-old *Archie* and 1-year-old *Lilibet*, back home in Montecito with the Duchess's mother, *Doria Ragland*. The pair have been living in the ritzy California neighborhood popular with celebrities since 2020 when they officially stepped down from their positions as senior royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Return to California After Queen Elizabeth's Funeral
> 
> 
> The royal couple was originally in Europe to support a number of charities they work with when the monarch died.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Yeah it’s weird this fixating on Doria- how do they know that? Why doesn’t she get privacy if the Propaganda wing are so concerned about intrusive tabloids.


CarryOn2020 said:


> The splotches on her neck and chest — is this why she uses the dark spray tan ?





sdkitty said:


> kinda looks like vitiligo - the disease michael jackson had


I don’t think it’s vitiligo as we would definitely have been informed by now if she had it.

Oh I was going to say fake tan goes blotchy- very blotchy on dry skin patches. Elbows and knees are often much darker than arms and legs if you aren’t careful. Also sweat does rub it off and she might be a bit sweaty  in that suit cover bag she decided to wear as a dress.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, if only she married the man she loved. Or if only she loved the man she married.


It would be sweet that he actually believes this is a true love story if he wasn’t so obviously spoiling for a fight.


purseinsanity said:


> *Medea meets MeGain*?


She’s too wooden an actress for TP and that is saying something.


LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph


When I see things like this I do feel a drop in sympathy for the royals though - she didn’t try and hide that she was a liability and a bully even before the ring was on the finger and they knew that this was going on and still pushed ahead with the big romantic wedding and trying to make the ‘fab 4’ really they dug their own hole here. Should offered him the Wallis ultimatum.


charlottawill said:


> Re her splotchy skin, women often have a problem with this when they get hot or nervous, especially in perimenopause. Someone here said it got worse as her speech progressed, so I'm guessing that was the cause. It's not vitiligo. But you'd think she'd avoid a low cut neckline like that if she knows she is prone to this happening, unless it had never happened before.
> 
> ETA: In my limited experience, spray tans will only make skin imperfections more noticeable, not cover them up. Age spots and scars get darker, they don't disappear.


Oh god I dread to think what my skin looks like giving a speech if hers is like that and she clearly believes she’s killing it and the audience loves her  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is disgusting.
> 
> But also, too bad Harry didn't take his only chance.



I know talk about threatening someone with a good time. He should’ve run to the hills.


----------



## Helventara

LittleStar88 said:


> The archive link might work better: https://archive.ph/DyX3B


I hate, HATE bullying. I ABHOR people in power who use their power and position to bully their staffs to the point that the only way out is to resign. HOW CAN sugars buy her act and blame the hate she receives on racism, etc?!! Or find excuses for her behaviour?! Or pretend not to understand why we have issues with her?!!

Honestly!  Just so angry reading about her treatment of the staffs! (Half a bottle of Burgundy didn’t help. Pardon the numerous exclamation marks. )


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That was a massive bruise, not a dead hand though.


Agree --  minor blood vessel damage or elderly hands prone to bruising.


----------



## papertiger

Helventara said:


> I hate, HATE bullying. I ABHOR people in power who use their power and position to bully their staffs to the point that the only way out is to resign. HOW CAN sugars buy her act and blame the hate she receives on racism, etc?!! Or find excuses for her behaviour?! Or pretend not to understand why we have issues with her?!!
> 
> Honestly!  Just so angry reading about her treatment of the staffs! (Half a bottle of Burgundy didn’t help…. )



This hit home particularly hard, and Harry sounds as hideous as TW

'As one source said: “There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.” One member of staff, they said, was “completely destroyed”. Another staffer who had been having a rough time told a colleague they were considering resigning and that the couple were “outrageous bullies”, adding, “I will never trust or like them again, but have made peace with that.” The colleague replied: “That’s so dreadful. And they are bullies.'


----------



## Helventara

papertiger said:


> This hit home particularly hard, and Harry sounds as hideous as TW
> 
> 'As one source said: “There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.” One member of staff, they said, was “completely destroyed”. Another staffer who had been having a rough time told a colleague they were considering resigning and that the couple were “outrageous bullies”, adding, “I will never trust or like them again, but have made peace with that.” The colleague replied: “That’s so dreadful. And they are bullies.'


YES!  I should have directed the anger to *Their* Royal Horriblenesses!  Not just *Her* Royal Horribleness.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> TRG is a super-sleuth and she has great insight


How Meg deals with Harry and the BRF is enough digging for me.  Looking at how she dealt with a fellow actress many years ago is really a waste of her super-sleuth abilities, I think.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> OK lunchtime.
> 
> TRG is very clever, she shows MegZ very likely wearing a transmitter at the actually funeral with some very credible pics/comparisons. She is very careful not to utter a word because like anti-plagiarism YT caption software monitors speech and language, it maybe an alleged theory too far. However that kind of software cannot reason images (yet anyway).
> 
> TRG is trying to help Americans know what's been going on, and non-Americans understand how MegZ has manipulated the US media. She thinks justice will come out in the wash, maybe we have reached a tipping-point, I hope so.


I was halfway through the video and she was still reading out loud the Kennedy article which I already read.

Are we that desperate for content? I guess there's nothing new to say.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> How Meg deals with Harry and the BRF is enough digging for me.  Looking at how she dealt with a fellow actress many years ago is really a waste of her super-sleuth abilities, I think.



I don't think so. She was trying to show us that not only M plagiarises, but how she operates including almost blatantly copying someone's life. 

I am beginning to think I had a (unhinged) older friend like M once. I knew her from 14-18, she wanted everything I had, including my friends, groups and hobbies, and then she wanted to freeze me out. Happily, none of those people were good for me and I went to university. It's only recently, when I see the manipulations and wired competition (where there is none) that I see the patterns. 

Kate is M's new 'competition', she's fixated. Obviously it's a 'thing' with some people.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I was halfway through the video and she was still reading out loud the Kennedy article which I already read.
> 
> Are we that desperate for content? I guess there's nothing new to say.



That's because we are on this thread. 

If you saw the 'forgive and forget' comments on DM recently with pics of 'the fab 4' after the Queen's passing, and the media crap about 'brothers making peace' etc, then you'd know most people do _not_ know what's been going on.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I know we're not fond of Harry anymore, but it does hurt me that his own wife treats him like this. I was ultra sensitive to the pushing and shoving and touching to make him sit, stand, move when we saw plenty of it (when they still had stuff to attend...) and it's just rotten.


Yes, I see that, but he is an adult and puts up with that
We tell 6 years old kids that they should call out bullying and say it is not ok

He is probably too scared to say no, since he has essentially driven away all of his friends and family in the UK, he has no one to turn to except MM, GK and OW


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> That's because we are on this thread.
> 
> If you saw the 'forgive and forget' comments on DM recently with pics of 'the fab 4' after the Queen's passing, and the media crap about 'brothers making peace' etc, then you'd know most people do _not_ know what's been going on.


I was about to settle in and listen while doing some work on the computer and she didn't say anything new or investigative.

I guess I prefer BLG type videos because he demonstrates things I am missing and what to look out for... but this you-tuber (who I generally like) seems to need some content so she's posting whatever she can think of.

I appreciate you linking the videos though.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


>



I'm starting to think she's hired Kris Jenner.  She's the only one that works harder than the devil.


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Taking a short break from peeling, slicing and gently frying 7 pounds of onions for tomorrow's onion cake (which is a direct translation but always sounds wrong) to give you this.
> 
> An American Facebook friend of mine just posted it, wondering why Germans have THE BEST words (I will say I personally was very fond of those oldfashioned British ones people posted a few days ago). I thought it kind of applied here, too.
> 
> P.S. a Backpfeife is a slap to the face with a flat hand, so maybe not quite as brutal.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616195


HA! Love it. Will use it endlessly going forward. (FYI although I live in the US, I was born in Berlin, and most of my family is still there, so you are right up my alley!!!). This one I'm going to send to my mom. Best part is that I can use it at work and no one will know what I mean. My mom and I used to always speak German here when we didn't want people to understand our snarkiness (so rude I know  )


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I'm starting to think she's hired Kris Jenner.  She's the only one that works harder than the devil.



But I have trust that Kris would make them happen.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But I have trust that Kris would make them happen.



They'd actually have to pay Kris.  

Upfront.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I don't think so. She was trying to show us that not only M plagiarises, but how she operates including almost blatantly copying someone's life.
> 
> I am beginning to think I had a (unhinged) older friend like M once. I knew her from 14-18, she wanted everything I had, including my friends, groups and hobbies, and then she wanted to freeze me out. Happily, none of those people were good for me and I went to university. It's only recently, when I see the manipulations and wired competition (where there is none) that I see the patterns.
> 
> Kate is M's new 'competition', she's fixated. Obviously it's a 'thing' with some people.


Haha no, her new target is Charlotte, someone her own size ...
We can all hope that C will tell MM "no you're not allowed"


----------



## Chanbal

miss_chiff said:


> archive.ph
> 
> 
> Synopsis of the beginning.
> Edit to add as I was in a hurry: article about early days and behind the scenes behavior with KP staff and such. Much of it we’ve heard before, maybe some we haven’t.
> Editing again! Sorry, I missed it as this article has already been posted. Lol y’all are so fast!


Thanks for posting this. Wow, the Harkles fit the description of bullies in this article.

I have read TW's infamous words “_*It’s not my job to coddle people*_” before, but it's nice to see them in the right context.

Very revealing was also what she told to one of Harry’s advisers prior to the wedding, “_*I think we both know I’m going to be one of your bosses soon.*_"

Her personality was also evidenced by her comments after a royal tour, “_*I can’t believe I’m not getting paid for this*._”

Interesting that Will hoped that one of TW's victims was OK, and TW's statement that not many people have asked if she was OK. How could Will ask a mere assistant if she is OK and not HRH TW!!!

_"*Later, Prince William, who had heard of some of the treatment that she had been subjected to, came to find the woman. “I hope you’re OK,” he told her. “You’re doing a really good job.” She promptly burst into tears.*"_

Valentine Low's book is worth to buy!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is impossible. How did she manage to make not one poor idiot, but two marry her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"I know how the palace works"...after mere months of dating  I wonder if she needs physio therapy for that neck that must be strained from the weight of that ego.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Very revealing was also what she told to one of Harry’s advisers prior to the wedding, “_*I think we both know I’m going to be one of your bosses soon.*_"



More than six months before the engagement even happened! WTFFFFF.


----------



## DoggieBags

I always thought Harry was dim but in the book excerpt he comes across as dumber than a box of rocks.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this. Wow, the Harkles fit the description of bullies in this article.
> 
> I have read TW's infamous words “_*It’s not my job to coddle people*_” before, but it's nice to see them in the right context.
> 
> Very revealing was also what she told to one of Harry’s advisers prior to the wedding, “_*I think we both know I’m going to be one of your bosses soon.*_"
> 
> Her personality was also evidenced by her comments after a royal tour, “_*I can’t believe I’m not getting paid for this*._”
> 
> Interesting that Will hoped that one of TW's victims was OK, and TW's statement that not many people have asked if she was OK. How could Will ask a mere assistant if she is OK and not HRH TW!!!
> 
> _"*Later, Prince William, who had heard of some of the treatment that she had been subjected to, came to find the woman. “I hope you’re OK,” he told her. “You’re doing a really good job.” She promptly burst into tears.*"_
> 
> Valentine Low's book is worth to buy!


Awesome book report, you pulled out all the best bits from the article


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Taking a short break from peeling, slicing and gently frying 7 pounds of onions for tomorrow's onion cake (which is a direct translation but always sounds wrong) to give you this.
> 
> An American Facebook friend of mine just posted it, wondering why Germans have THE BEST words (I will say I personally was very fond of those oldfashioned British ones people posted a few days ago). I thought it kind of applied here, too.
> 
> P.S. a Backpfeife is a slap to the face with a flat hand, so maybe not quite as brutal.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616195


Begging with a wistful expression. 
i am dying for a pic of your onion cake

More on topic, yes. These two need a fist


----------



## elvisfan4life

I doubt Meghan's tears were real. Why cry over the boss of a firm you hate?
					

LET’S cast our minds back to the funeral of Princess Diana.  We’d never seen anything so enormous or so unexpected or so moving.  There were so many crushingly sad moments that I sat ther…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




Jeremy Clarkson I salute you


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is impossible. *How did she manage to make not one poor idiot, but two marry her.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"On another occasion, when Meghan felt she had been let down over an issue that was worrying her, she rang repeatedly when the staffer was out for dinner on a Friday night. “Every ten minutes, I had to go outside to be screamed at by her and Harry. It was, ‘I can’t believe you’ve done this. You’ve let me down. What were you thinking?’ It went on for a couple of hours.” The calls started again the next morning and continued “for days”, the staffer said. “You could not escape them. There were no lines or boundaries – it was last thing at night, first thing in the morning.”"

I have never worked for royalty, but I like to think I'd have turned off my phone - in my free time no less - after the first less than polite call. WTF is wrong with these people (and again, her behaviour stuns me more as the newcomer and nobody, not that I'd condone this behaviour even coming from The Queen herself).


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> I always thought Harry was dim but in the book excerpt he comes across as dumber than a box of rocks.


He comes across as a dumb and vain little man imo!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry, I refuse to believe that. Fergie is problematic, but other than Raptor she does not strike me as a person evil and psychopathic enough to be excited about someone's death.


That’s why I think many of these tell-all books are bullsh!t. They count on the fact that most celebrities will not sue them, if only for the fact that they don’t want the salacious rumors spread in the mainstream press if it goes to court.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> That's because we are on this thread.
> 
> If you saw the 'forgive and forget' comments on DM recently with pics of 'the fab 4' after the Queen's passing, and the media crap about 'brothers making peace' etc, then you'd know most people do _not_ know what's been going on.


You are correct about most people not knowing what's been going on (or care )  I was out for lunch this week with an old friend and out of the blue, she mentions how horrible the royal family was for taking the epaulettes from Harry's uniform.  I had to bite my tongue and smile, but it showed me how much people just read headlines.


----------



## uhpharm01

Mumotons said:


> Chris Bouzey is the CEO of Bot sentinel and judge and jury on what you can and can’t say on social media , especially twitter and YouTube. He has already gone for Murky Meg and Yankee Wally. He is a Meghan fan and has a lot to do with the Sussex squad. But has tried to take the wrong person down this time and has his sights a Nate the Lawyer, one of a number of lawyers on lawtube



here's an update.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I always thought Harry was dim but in the book excerpt he comes across as *dumber than a box of rocks.*



I thought that the saying was a 'madder than a box of frogs', but in Harry's case you are quite right


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "On another occasion, when Meghan felt she had been let down over an issue that was worrying her, she rang repeatedly when the staffer was out for dinner on a Friday night. “Every ten minutes, I had to go outside to be screamed at by her and Harry. It was, ‘I can’t believe you’ve done this. You’ve let me down. What were you thinking?’ It went on for a couple of hours.” The calls started again the next morning and continued “for days”, the staffer said. “You could not escape them. There were no lines or boundaries – it was last thing at night, first thing in the morning.”"
> 
> I have never worked for royalty, but I like to think I'd have turned off my phone - in my free time no less - after the first less than polite call. WTF is wrong with these people (and again, her behaviour stuns me more as the newcomer and nobody, not that I'd condone this behaviour even coming from The Queen herself).



Surely that behaviour counts as torture, abuse totally beyond acceptable


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "On another occasion, when Meghan felt she had been let down over an issue that was worrying her, she rang repeatedly when the staffer was out for dinner on a Friday night. “Every ten minutes, I had to go outside to be screamed at by her and Harry. It was, ‘I can’t believe you’ve done this. You’ve let me down. What were you thinking?’ It went on for a couple of hours.” The calls started again the next morning and continued “for days”, the staffer said. “You could not escape them. There were no lines or boundaries – it was last thing at night, first thing in the morning.”"
> 
> I have never worked for royalty, but I like to think I'd have turned off my phone - in my free time no less - after the first less than polite call. WTF is wrong with these people (and again, her behaviour stuns me more as the newcomer and nobody, not that I'd condone this behaviour even coming from The Queen herself).


This is reminding me of The Devil Wears Prada with Miranda contently interrupting Andi.  That scene where Andi is having dinner with her father, in particular.  Driving Andi  crazy to get her back to NYC during a hurricane and then Miranda managing to do it on her own anyway.

I have asked myself many times what demands  did Meghan make on her staff that drove them to distraction and tears. How was she bullying them? The one bit about the freebees may have a lot to do with it.  She asked for things she should not have and was given things she should not keep.  If an assistant was playing by the rules, there was a huge problem, but there had to be more than that.  What was Meghan asking them to do that was so impossible.  Anyone here want to venture guesses?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> This is reminding me of The Devil Wears Prada with Miranda contently interrupting Andi.  That scene where Andi is having dinner with her father, in particular.  Driving Andi  crazy to get her back to NYC during a hurricane and then Miranda managing to do it on her own anyway.
> 
> I have asked myself many times what demands  did Meghan make on her staff that drove them to distraction and tears. How was she bullying them? The one bit about the freebees may have a lot to do with it.  She asked for things she should not have and was given things an should not keep.  If an assistant was playing by the rules, there was a huge problem, but there had to be more than that.  What was Meghan asking them to do that was so impossible.  Anyone here want to venture guesses?



Sounds like H&M were probably coked out their tiny minds TBH!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry, I refuse to believe that. Fergie is problematic, but other than Raptor she does not strike me as a person evil and psychopathic enough to be excited about someone's death.


As i recall, Diana and Fergie were as thick as thieves at one point and then something happened.  Anyone know what it was?  Did Diana ghost her the same way that Meghan ghosts her friends?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"In fact, when Meghan learnt that Pickerill had handed in her notice, she was so angry that she refused to let Pickerill travel with her in the car to an official engagement in London that morning."

That woman is so vengeful it's scary.


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> I doubt Meghan's tears were real. Why cry over the boss of a firm you hate?
> 
> 
> LET’S cast our minds back to the funeral of Princess Diana.  We’d never seen anything so enormous or so unexpected or so moving.  There were so many crushingly sad moments that I sat ther…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson I salute you


Jeremy Clarkson is my new favourite author    My DH is a huge Top Gear fan.

 "I do not wish Meghan any harm. I hope that after she has been photographed sitting by herself on the back of a playboy’s superyacht and outside the Taj Mahal, she goes on to lead a long and happy life.

But she should know this.

 When she dies, hopefully many years from now, she will not be carried in front of millions by stoic men with good hearts and strong arms.

 If it’s a slow news day, the best she’ll get is a small obituary in The Times on Page 27.


Because her whole being is based on nothing at all, and we prefer people with a bit more stuff going on.
 That’s why we liked the Queen and it’s why we like Charles and it’s why, many years from now, after he’s been through a blizzard of roses, we will like William too and then, way on down the road, George.

So, Meghan, my dear, to use the sort of language you Americans understand: “*You’re gonna lose this war with our Royal Family. And you’re gonna lose it big”.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I have asked myself many times what demands  did Meghan make on her staff that drove them to distraction and tears. How was she bullying them? The one bit about the freebees may have a lot to do with it.  She asked for things she should not have and was given things an should not keep.  If an assistant was playing by the rules, there was a huge problem, but there had to be more than that.  What was Meghan asking them to do that was so impossible.  Anyone here want to venture guesses?



To be honest, I never got the impression she asked for impossible to do things. Those people did their job, they did it well, and the crazy nutjob yelled at them anyway for no particular reason simply because she wanted to and because she knew better than them.


----------



## Mumotons

uhpharm01 said:


> what is the Susses squad.


There are urban dictionary definitions, but I would just say mega fans with no other purpose than elevate their idols while bullying or canceling anyone who doesn’t agree with them


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> As i recall, Diana and Fergie were as thick as thieves at one point and then something happened.  Anyone know what it was?  Did Diana ghost her the same way that Meghan ghosts her friends?


As I recall I think Diana didn’t like something Fergie said about her in her book. They weren’t speaking when Diana died but I suspect if she had lived they would have reconciled, at least somewhat. Time has a way of healing little grudges.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be honest, I never got the impression she asked for impossible to do things. Those people did their job, they did it well, and the crazy nutjob yelled at them anyway for no particular reason simply because she wanted to and because she knew better than them.



Because she wanted to yes, but not because she knew better than them, but because she could, because she was allowed to, and carry on to the next poor person.

That's why the Palace should open the full report. The Palace are to blame too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Not because she knew better than them, but because she could, because she was allowed to, and carry on to the next poor person.
> 
> That's why the Palace should open the full report.



*thought she knew better than them

But yes, I am shocked whoever was in charge let it escalate like this without putting a stop to it. What needed to happen, her literally ripping out someone's throat with her teeth and drinking their blood?


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph


For a woman who has an endless thirst for publicity, why was she so afraid of the press at the beginning of their relationship and what was this need for so much protection?  The only thing that comes to mind is that she was scared that the press would delve very deeply into her life and come up with unsavory things.  She didn't want any of them coming close enough to her to ask her questions where she would lose control of the narrative. Tom Bower certainly did the work, but that was much later.  No one in the press at the time was willing to expend that kind of energy, or there was a silent agreement not to write about it as they were more invested in the "great love story" aspect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *thought she knew better than them
> 
> But yes, I am shocked whoever was in charge let it escalate like this without putting a stop to it. What needed to happen, her literally ripping out someone's throat with her teeth and drinking their blood?



I think the Palace owe the public an explanation of how and why this woman was allowed to abuse these staff members for no reason other than she's a complete bully.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> I think the Palace owe the public an explanation of how and why this woman was allowed to abuse these staff members for no reason other than she's a complete bully.



Correction, bullies, Harry sounds just as bad.


----------



## sdkitty

BittyMonkey said:


> I'm in the nonprofit sphere in the US so I want to clarify a couple of things for how it works here at least.
> 
> It is super not cool to overspend on administration vs mission and you will get fired by the Board of Directors and potentially sued for financial hijinks by using donated funds for personal things. You can't fly first class without disclosing it on your IRS  990, which are public if you are a 501c3 (unless it is a religious organization).
> 
> If you want to review the spending of your favorite charity, go here: https://www.guidestar.org/
> If you are a spectacular idiot, you do things like this.
> 
> There are best practice guidelines for CEO compensation. If a donor has an intent for funds ("restricted") it must be spent on that, or the nonprofit can be sued for return of the funds.


I'm no expert on this but there are charitable foundation and there are non-profits....I worked for a medical group which was non-profit but the doctors got paid plenty and they didn't give significant amounts to charity
Over-simplified but that's my two cents

found this online:
A nonprofit is an organization that uses its income and profits for the organization’s main goal that supports the mission. On the other hand, a charity is a type of nonprofit that engages in activities aimed at improving lives in the communities.

Read more: Difference Between Nonprofit and Charity | Difference Between http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-nonprofit-and-charity/#ixzz7fkccPMJT


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan strikes me as a person who is always changing her mind.  She might have told an assistant that she wanted something done one way, and by the time the task was completed, she had changed her mind and wanted it done another way.  People like this can and do drive a person crazy even without the yelling.  Of course there are some people who do all of the above on purpose just to make you miserable.  It is all  a control trip.  I always thought that was a sign of a person with low self image and that it took bullying and criticizing another person to make them feel good.

I do wonder about the level of paranoia, especially with Harry.  If in the army, an officer who is cautious is one thing, paranoid is another.  Usage of certain drugs can bring on this behavior.  Paranoia can certainly be used as a tool to keep another person in line and under control, and apparently, when they were dating, Harry's staff observed that he acted that way about losing her.  Too bad.  It would have been better if he had.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> As i recall, Diana and Fergie were as thick as thieves at one point and then something happened.  Anyone know what it was?  Did Diana ghost her the same way that Meghan ghosts her friends?


Yes, something like that.  Apparently Diana would turn on and off with her friends.

I remember she was fighting with Elton John and then decided he was sad when she saw him at Gianni Versace's funeral, so said they could be friends again.


----------



## Chanbal

It's indeed from CNN, and about Will & Kate (and not the Harkles). Don Lem*n was so receptive of TW's claims about "_the color of son Arch*e's skin_" (OW's interview) that I would like to have his opinion on the CNN comments about George. 
















						What -- and who -- will the royal baby look like? | CNN
					

Bets are already being placed on the appearance of the royal baby -- the future king or queen of England.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> As i recall, Diana and Fergie were as thick as thieves at one point and then something happened.  Anyone know what it was?  Did Diana ghost her the same way that Meghan ghosts her friends?



At first, I think they became good friends as they were both about the same age and came into the family as outsiders.  Diana though became jealous of Fergie's popularity and that she was very much liked within the family, especially by the Queen and Prince Philip and even Charles who thought Fergie was fun.  Later, it was said that it might have been Diana who tipped off the press that Fergie was vacationing with her financial advisor which led to the infamous toe-sucking photos. Their relationship went through ups and downs through the years and they bonded again over their mutual divorces. But, Fergie wrote in her tell all book that Diana loaned her shoes all the time and she got plantar warts from them.  Diana was really upset about that, stopped speaking to her, and had not forgiven Fergie at the time of her death.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think at this point it's abundantly clear that Harry had all kinds of mental problems before ever crossing ways with the nutjob. BUT I'll stand by my words saying she escalated him quickly by pushing all his buttons and feeding into his paranoia. She wasn't adding fuel to the fire, she showed up with her personal supply of napalm...sticky, highly flammable, extremely aggressive and nearly impossible to put out. I've since abandoned the mission wanting to understand why, but I wholeheartedly wish the BRF party that voted for a) not giving royal permission to the marriage and b) releasing the dirt they had on her could have won the argument.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> At first, I think they became good friends as they were both about the same age and came into the family as outsiders.



Weren't they friends before Fergie even married into the BRF, having somewhat grown up together? I seem to remember Diana invited her to the party where she met Andrew.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> For a woman who has an endless thirst for publicity, why was she so afraid of the press at the beginning of their relationship and what was this need for so much protection?  The only thing that comes to mind is that she was scared that the press would delve very deeply into her life and come up with unsavory things.  She didn't want any of them coming close enough to her to ask her questions where she would lose control of the narrative. Tom Bower certainly did the work, but that was much later.  No one in the press at the time was willing to expend that kind of energy, or there was a silent agreement not to write about it as they were more invested in the "great love story" aspect.


Your hypothesis is very good - she did not want digging before the wedding
Nd she had really pushed the relationship - by doing VF article, and the blackmail bit - I will leave you if the press is not under control , H might have put 2 and 2 together
But the press equated to paparazzi and need for security for H - he needed limos to the front door so he could stumble out later, and bodyguards to brush away how polloi taking selfies


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> H gets mad, he wanted PRIVATE meeting and if you tell one of the dreadful suits …


Just add paranoia to his long list of problems. The bottom line is she is a nobody who snagged a somebody and she owes everything she has to the BRF. I eagerly await her well-deserved downfall. Don't disappoint me KC.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is disgusting.
> 
> But also, too bad Harry didn't take his only chance.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I was halfway through the video and she was still reading out loud the Kennedy article which I already read.
> 
> Are we that desperate for content? I guess there's nothing new to say.


Give it a week or two. I think gloves are going to come off after the mourning period ends.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> At first, I think they became good friends as they were both about the same age and came into the family as outsiders.  Diana though became jealous of Fergie's popularity and that she was very much liked within the family, especially by the Queen and Prince Philip and even Charles who thought Fergie was fun.  Later, it was said that it might have been Diana who tipped off the press that Fergie was vacationing with her financial advisor which led to the infamous toe-sucking photos. Their relationship went through ups and downs through the years and they bonded again over their mutual divorces. But, Fergie wrote in her tell all book that Diana loaned her shoes all the time and she got plantar warts from them.  Diana was really upset about that, stopped speaking to her, and had not forgiven Fergie at the time of her death.


Neither woman was that far off from the Windsors.  Major Ronald Ferguson was the polo manager for Prince Philip and Diana's sister had dated Charles.  Fergie was probably better known early on than Diana.  That Fergie would say and do inappropriate things was a given.  That was foolish of her to say that about the shoes though funny!


----------



## LittleStar88

"On another occasion, when Meghan felt she had been let down over an issue that was worrying her, she rang repeatedly when the staffer was out for dinner on a Friday night. “Every ten minutes, I had to go outside to be screamed at by her and Harry. It was, ‘I can’t believe you’ve done this. You’ve let me down. What were you thinking?’ It went on for a couple of hours.” The calls started again the next morning and continued “for days”, the staffer said. “You could not escape them. There were no lines or boundaries – it was last thing at night, first thing in the morning.”"


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have never worked for royalty, but I like to think I'd have turned off my phone - in my free time no less - after the first less than polite call. WTF is wrong with these people (and again, her behaviour stuns me more as the newcomer and nobody, not that I'd condone this behaviour even coming from The Queen herself).



I actually had a boss like this. Not the screaming but the lack of boundaries. Unfortunately turning off the phone wasn’t an option. I think this kind of “always on” mentality is an American thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Meghan strikes me as a person who is always changing her mind.  She might have told an assistant that she wanted something done one way, and by the time the task was completed, she had changed her mind and wanted it done another way.  People like this can and do drive a person crazy even without the yelling.  Of course there are some people who do all of the above on purpose just to make you miserable.  It is all  a control trip.  I always thought that was a sign of a person with low self image and that it took bullying and criticizing another person to make them feel good.
> 
> I do wonder about the level of paranoia, especially with Harry.  If in the army, an officer who is cautious is one thing, paranoid is another.  Usage of certain drugs can bring on this behavior.  Paranoia can certainly be used as a tool to keep another person in line and under control, and apparently, when they were dating, Harry's staff observed that he acted that way about losing her.  Too bad.  It would have been better if he had.


Hmmm
Drugs in theatres of war, reading fascinating bestseller BLITZED  by Norman Ohler about WWII, who knew ??? Eye opening but controversial book


----------



## Mumotons

Meghan will be lucky to get a Christmas card from King Charles - let alone a private audience
					

The hide on Meghan Markle is remarkable.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> As i recall, Diana and Fergie were as thick as thieves at one point and then something happened.  Anyone know what it was?  Did Diana ghost her the same way that Meghan ghosts her friends?


No. As I recall Diana felt Fergie betrayed her confidences, the specifics of which I do not recall. Maybe selling info to the tabs?


----------



## csshopper

Helventara said:


> YES!  I should have directed the anger to *Their* Royal Horriblenesses!  Not just *Her* Royal Horribleness.


I like the sound of “Fascist Feminist”  for MM, in other words do it my way or I will destroy you and enjoy the power of doing it.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I think the Palace owe the public an explanation of how and why this woman was allowed to abuse these staff members for no reason other than she's a complete bully.


It all comes down to their fear of being called racist, which she did anyway.


LittleStar88 said:


> "On another occasion, when Meghan felt she had been let down over an issue that was worrying her, she rang repeatedly when the staffer was out for dinner on a Friday night. “Every ten minutes, I had to go outside to be screamed at by her and Harry. It was, ‘I can’t believe you’ve done this. You’ve let me down. What were you thinking?’ It went on for a couple of hours.” The calls started again the next morning and continued “for days”, the staffer said. “You could not escape them. There were no lines or boundaries – it was last thing at night, first thing in the morning.”"
> 
> 
> I actually had a boss like this. Not the screaming but the lack of boundaries. Unfortunately turning off the phone wasn’t an option. I think this kind of “always on” mentality is an American thing.


One of my children lives like this. It has taken a toll on her mental health and it upsets me, but she is an adult and I really can't do anything.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is impossible. How did she manage to make not one poor idiot, but two marry her.


Some men don’t think with the head on their shoulders.


----------



## youngster

I read the Times excerpt of the new book by Valentine Low. Wow.  The two of them are awful.  Harry is not a good guy and he wasn't one before he met Meghan, that's become pretty obvious.  

From the Times excerpt:
_. . .After Meghan had pulled to shreds a plan she had drawn up, the woman told Meghan how hard it would be to implement a new one. “*Don’t worry,” Meghan told her. “If there was literally anyone else I could ask to do this, I would be asking them instead of you.”*

The harsh treatment was not confined to junior staff. One source said that Samantha Cohen had been bullied. Another said: “They treated her terribly. Nothing was ever good enough. It was, ‘She doesn’t understand. She’s failing.’ ” In fact, the source said, Cohen was “a saint” and the best organiser of royal tours they had known.

A source once said: “Sam (Cohen) always made clear that it was like working for a couple of teenagers. They were impossible and pushed her to the limit. She was miserable.”_

Also:
_. . .the clashes between Meghan and Touabti centred on the free gifts that some companies would send to Meghan. Deliveries were constantly arriving at Kensington Palace. “Clothes, jewellery, candles… It was absolutely nonstop,” said a source. Touabti was apparently punctilious in following the household rule that members of the royal family cannot accept freebies from commercial organisations. Her approach did not go down well with Meghan._


----------



## Cinderlala

The "always on" mentality is definitely a thing in America.  Not everywhere, obviously, but it is certainly something TW would do to make herself feel powerful.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *thought she knew better than them
> 
> But yes, I am shocked whoever was in charge let it escalate like this without putting a stop to it. What needed to happen, her literally ripping out someone's throat with her teeth and drinking their blood?


As mentioned in the article, I believe a lot of the trouble was rooted in the difference between the UK and US ways of doing things. She thought everyone should bow and scrape to her just because she was H's fiancee/wife, and people were afraid to stand up to her out of royal deference.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> At first, I think they became good friends as they were both about the same age and came into the family as outsiders.  Diana though became jealous of Fergie's popularity and that she was very much liked within the family, especially by the Queen and Prince Philip and even Charles who thought Fergie was fun.  Later, it was said that it might have been Diana who tipped off the press that Fergie was vacationing with her financial advisor which led to the infamous toe-sucking photos. Their relationship went through ups and downs through the years and they bonded again over their mutual divorces. But, Fergie wrote in her tell all book that Diana loaned her shoes all the time and she got plantar warts from them.  Diana was really upset about that, stopped speaking to her, and had not forgiven Fergie at the time of her death.


Ahh, thank you! I had forgotten all about the plantar wart story.


----------



## Cinderlala

@uhpharm01  The term Sussex Squad is used to describe hardcore stans of MM.  Fans who become outraged about any negative publicity pertaining to MM.  

I don't think the definition in the Urban Dictionary is particularly accurate with regard to actual usage.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Just add paranoia to his long list of problems. *The bottom line is she is a nobody who snagged a somebody* and she owes everything she has to the BRF. I eagerly await her well-deserved downfall. Don't disappoint me KC.



And that would be totally fine with me had she treated Harry the way he deserves - because I strongly believe everyone deserves a spouse who loves, respects and supports them until they do something to said spouse to not deserve preferential treatment anymore -, and gotten on with the job with dignity.


----------



## charlottawill

What a load of BS


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I actually had a boss like this. Not the screaming but the lack of boundaries. Unfortunately turning off the phone wasn’t an option. I think this kind of “always on” mentality is an American thing.



I think I'm super spoiled because I've started freelancing pretty early on in my career, and my clients pay me for specific results that don't invite micromanaging as much as say, a press secretary or personal assistant. The most I had to do was change my WhatsApp settings so it wasn't identifiable when I was last online or if I had read the messages because none of them would have gone so far to complain when I didn't get back to them ASAP as they are not paying me for my time. 

Obviously, if there's an emergency I am available, I just don't want to be bothered Saturday night at 11 p.m. because that's when they thought of something.


----------



## BlueCherry

Harry knew he was getting on and couldn’t seem to find a wife. She snagged him at a time he was probably desperate so when she made the threat to leave he would have done anything to stop her. She played on that and she was definitely on a power trip with regards to the bullying. She’s just a nasty piece of work and I’m glad random people are now calling her out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## miss_chiff

Deleted…someone already posted link!


----------



## AbbytheBT

QueenofWrapDress said:


> "On another occasion, when Meghan felt she had been let down over an issue that was worrying her, she rang repeatedly when the staffer was out for dinner on a Friday night. “Every ten minutes, I had to go outside to be screamed at by her and Harry. It was, ‘I can’t believe you’ve done this. You’ve let me down. What were you thinking?’ It went on for a couple of hours.” The calls started again the next morning and continued “for days”, the staffer said. “You could not escape them. There were no lines or boundaries – it was last thing at night, first thing in the morning.”"
> 
> I have never worked for royalty, but I like to think I'd have turned off my phone - in my free time no less - after the first less than polite call. WTF is wrong with these people (and again, her behaviour stuns me more as the newcomer and nobody, not that I'd condone this behaviour even coming from The Queen herself).


I have only worked for people who thought they were royalty - lol
And it is truly terrifying to work for someone like TW. They are often quite charming in public, complete with love bombs,  and you have no idea what they are capable of until it happens. And at first you think maybe just a bad day, etc. etc.  And then the subtle cuts ( and not so subtle) cuts come in public about your abilities to manage complicated logistics, relations, and then self doubt creeps in …. so you try harder …..

Fortunately for my mental health, my boss was fired - long story - but it was related to his inability to recognize the staff wasn’t available 24/7 to satisfy his whims. 

Only with the subsequent replacement with a few truly considerate and supportive bosses did I realize I really was quite good in my job, and the former boss was a bully. And this happened in the last part of a 35 year career with a Gov‘t agency.  I can totally relate to Sam Cohen’s situation, plus can understand how TW can charm with the best!


----------



## needlv

BlueCherry said:


> Harry knew he was getting on and couldn’t seem to find a wife. She snagged him at a time he was probably desperate so when she made the threat to leave he would have done anything to stop her. She played on that and she was definitely on a power trip with regards to the bullying. She’s just a nasty piece of work and I’m glad random people are now calling her out.


Harry is also nasty and extremely entitled.

No aristos wanted him, a notorious tight @ss, mean, entitled, with a temper and penchant for drugs alcohol and mental health issues.  In addition his future  is predicted to go down - he becomes less important as George, Charlotte and Louis hit their teens.

every woman with common sense went “no thanks” to that entitled @SS.  Who wants to manage a huge man baby who is lazy and doesn’t want to work, yet seethes with jealousy over his brother.

He married MM, a gold digger who is continuing to do what she always does - hustle and grift for $/ perceived status.  They are stuck with each other.  Let them fall into obscurity.  I am enjoying the downfall - and I am not a pro- monarchy person  at all…


----------



## miss_chiff

elvisfan4life said:


> I doubt Meghan's tears were real. Why cry over the boss of a firm you hate?
> 
> 
> LET’S cast our minds back to the funeral of Princess Diana.  We’d never seen anything so enormous or so unexpected or so moving.  There were so many crushingly sad moments that I sat ther…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson I salute you


That was great. I just posted and deleted same story (saw you posted).

Quote:
“…That could be because he has giant balls.
 But it’s more likely that Meghan’s got them attached to a bomb in a chest of drawers in their hideous house in California.

 Maybe that’s what all those suspicious bulges were under her tight-fitting dress. The detonator.”


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> It all comes down to their fear of being called racist, which she did anyway.
> 
> One of my children lives like this. It has taken a toll on her mental health and it upsets me, but she is an adult and I really can't do anything.



I transferred to a different team after a month. The last straw was when I was literally afraid to leave the house on a Saturday because I would get a ping/text/call that would summon me home immediately, then worked all day the following Sunday on things that could have waited but caused me to disrupt other people’s weekend to get what was needed.

Several times I had to abandon my shopping cart in the grocery store to immediately go home for some dumb thing… It was ridiculous. That boss eventually left the company but full of others just like them!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, something like that.  Apparently Diana would turn on and off with her friends.
> 
> I remember she was fighting with Elton John and then decided he was sad when she saw him at Gianni Versace's funeral, so said they could be friends again.


i just realized something!!!  The sad pose of Meghan's that is all over the papers/internet is a copy of the sad face that Diana pulled at the Versace funeral.


----------



## youngster

I think Diana was truly sad about the death of Versace though.  I don't think Meghan cared at all about the Queen.  She probably met the Queen all of a dozen times in her short time as a royal.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the Wales are lobbying that the California kids do not get the titles for one reason. Calling them Prince and Princess will put them on equal footing to the three Wales children. The CA kids will never be raised as a true Englishman/woman. They will never have the same cultural sensibilities or sense of responsibility or understanding of the monarchy that the Wales children are raised with. Certainly George and Charlotte already have an understanding having attended the funeral. They saw how people treated their late great grandmother, their grandfather and their parents with love and respect. The ceremonial aspects of the past week made a huge impression on a 9 and 7 year old.  I don't believe that you can fully be a Princess/Princess of the UK with split loyalties and they will have them growing up in the US.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I think Diana was truly sad about the death of Versace though.  I don't think Meghan cared at all about the Queen.  She probably met the Queen all of a dozen times in her short time as a royal.


True, but she was a drama queen as well.  Not one to miss an opportunity lol!


----------



## BittyMonkey

sdkitty said:


> I'm no expert on this but there are charitable foundation and there are non-profits....I worked for a medical group which was non-profit but the doctors got paid plenty and they didn't give significant amounts to charity
> Over-simplified but that's my two cents
> 
> found this online:
> A nonprofit is an organization that uses its income and profits for the organization’s main goal that supports the mission. On the other hand, a charity is a type of nonprofit that engages in activities aimed at improving lives in the communities.
> 
> Read more: Difference Between Nonprofit and Charity | Difference Between http://www.differencebetween.net/business/difference-between-nonprofit-and-charity/#ixzz7fkccPMJT


Basically this just means some nonprofits provide direct services to people (like a food bank) and others enable achievement of the mission through research (Michael J Fox Foundation), advocacy (ACLU), etc. It just depends on what you choose to support.

A healthcare nonprofit can provide medical services regardless of the inability to pay (safety net providers) or they can be plastic surgeons in Beverly Hills (for profit) or fix cleft palates for children in Tibet (nonprofit).

Re: Archewell having zeros in Guidestar, participation is voluntary so this just means they have no intention of sharing their assets and liabilities with us all.


----------



## Mumotons




----------



## Mumotons

Prince Harry 'feared he would become a has-been once nephew turned 18'
					

It alleges Harry, before he met Meghan, had a 'long-held' fear' that he would be an 'also-ran'. Extracts of Courtiers: the Hidden Power Behind the Crown by Valentine Low were published by The Times.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Has the DM stolen one of Harry’s nicknames


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> As mentioned in the article, *I believe a lot of the trouble was rooted in the difference between the UK and US ways of doing things*. She thought everyone should bow and scrape to her just because she was H's fiancee/wife, and people were afraid to stand up to her out of royal deference.



I don't buy that. Not only were there Americans on her team who found her behaviour troublesome, I personally have worked in places far removed from my own culture like the Middle East, I did not have a professional team to aid my transition, and I absolutely did not provoke all but a diplomatic incident, bullied staff to tears or had any noteworthy difficulties to fit in. She's just a self-important a*shole, a nobody who finally drank a drop of power and couldn't stomach it.


----------



## Chloe302225

I didn't think anything could be more damaging than Tom Bower's book but Valentine Low's account was searing. I don't know how the two of them will come up with a reason for why they don't sue or even offer an official response to what is being said.


----------



## miss_chiff

Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent post on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does ‘correct’  the earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> View attachment 5616394
> View attachment 5616394


Now I want someone to write an article stating that Meg is really really a nice person and she was misunderstood.  If this happens, I am contacting that person immediately because I want to sell them the Brooklyn Bridge and I might even throw in the Throgs Neck and the Kościuszko Bridge as well.


----------



## BittyMonkey

miss_chiff said:


> Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent follow up on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does retract and earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.
> View attachment 5616395
> View attachment 5616396
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616397


Good grief. These people are so exhausting.


----------



## Mumotons

Sorry already posted


----------



## youngster

*I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this.*

This is one of the most damming things she could have said from my POV.  First, Charles handsomely supported them with millions per year so that they could represent the Queen and do events and tours as senior working royals. So, they _were_ effectively being paid. On top of that, they had a beautiful home on the grounds of Windsor remodeled to the tune of millions. Charles also spent God knows how much money on her extravagant wardrobe as well. But, to her, being on royal tour, meeting people and attending events, was a huge, uncomfortable, hard chore that she did only reluctantly.  You'd think she'd feel honored that people wanted to meet her and that she was carrying out her duties representing the Queen. Nope.  Everything is about money and is transactional.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> As mentioned in the article, I believe a lot of the trouble was rooted in the difference between the UK and US ways of doing things. She thought everyone should bow and scrape to her just because she was H's fiancee/wife, and people were afraid to stand up to her out of royal deference.


i read Bower but do not remember …
MM, during Suits period of 6 years - as B list actress, was a social climber, used people but was she then known as a bully ? Or just as self serving ?
she certainly seems to have bullied/manipulated H from day 1
Did I just gloss over bullying while in Suits time frame ?

PS a with H she was suddenly in a position where she had lots of people to do her bidding, if not reporting to her and with an oversight department ie HR


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think the Palace owe the public an explanation of how and why this woman was allowed to abuse these staff members for no reason other than she's a complete bully.


It may come, someone may yet release the report


----------



## gracekelly

miss_chiff said:


> Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent post up on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does ‘correct’  the earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.
> View attachment 5616395
> View attachment 5616396
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616397


She was a colossal trouble maker.  Figuring the angles from the second Harry was told TQ had passed.  The flower incident with the aide makes perfect sense.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I thought all plagiarism is uncredited, otherwise it would be referenced


Hmmm there was a time in the early internet days, when no one credited their sources, that has changed but there are older sites still around, sans credits, it is still plagiarism but then it was accepted as OK


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Did I just gloss over bullying while in Suits ?



The crew of Suits used to call her "princess" behind her back on the set after the show became successful.  She was difficult then as well.  There is a story in the Bowers book about her behavior during the filming of the ads she did for Reitmans Department store where she behaved so badly and was so demanding that her agent was called, told about it, and she was told to apologize.  My guess is that she's really nice and sweet and kind to people who can help her and a complete bully to those she sees as beneath her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

miss_chiff said:


> Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent post up on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does ‘correct’  the earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.
> View attachment 5616395
> View attachment 5616396
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616397



I've literally sat here for a minute after reading this staring at my screen, and I still don't have eloquent words. This is so, so ugly.


----------



## Katel

BlueCherry said:


> I’m one of 11 kids and one of us would always take a spanking for something a sibling had done. *Our code was never grass.* It hasn’t turned any of us into vitriolic, money grabbing, victimised liars. And we didn’t hate our parents.



Congrats on your sunny disposition and grit! Does “grass” here mean “squeal” or “rat out” your sibling?



purseinsanity said:


> I often hear that people have much more fun with their grandchildren than their children, and try to make up for their failings as parents through their grandchildren.
> My parents were horribly strict with me growing up.  I didn't have just a tiger mom, I had a tiger dad too.  They relaxed a bit with my younger sister, and more so with our younger brother. * I come from a culture that sounds like it's shouting even when having a normal conversation.*  When my kids were younger, they'd tell me all the time to "Stop yelling at Grandpa!" (I wasn't actually!), because, "He's old and so sweet".  I felt like telling them that "sweet old man" was anything but if I misbehaved when I was younger!



Hahaha - you sound like the Italians I know …but my Iranian friends can get down too. 



BlueCherry said:


> That open invite should be as a family member and kept private. But he had to say he loves them or he would have been criticised so who knows whether he really does. *They got one line, a cursory mention of love but also wishing them well overseas. *We mustn’t forget that.
> 
> I cannot imagine William allowing them back into the public royal family. The trouble and hurt is two fold. If Charles has to choose between the future of the Monarchy (and William) versus H&M I think he will choose wisely.



And KC3 used Hazzie’s favorite “just call me Harry.” 




gracekelly said:


> i just realized something!!!  The sad pose of Meghan's that is all over the papers/internet is a copy of the sad face that Diana pulled at the Versace funeral.
> 
> View attachment 5616391
> View attachment 5616391
> 
> View attachment 5616392
> View attachment 5616392
> 
> View attachment 5616393
> View attachment 5616393


Is that Sting, Anna W and Karl L? What a pic!



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't buy that. Not only were there Americans on her team who found her behaviour troublesome, I personally have worked in places far removed from my own culture like the Middle East, I did not have a professional team to aid my transition, and I absolutely did not provoke all but a diplomatic incident, bullied staff to tears or had any noteworthy difficulties to fit in. She's just a self-important a*shole, a nobody who finally drank a drop of power and couldn't stomach it.


YES! Courtesy, good manners, honor and respect are not defined or determined by one’s country -  they’re universal - and you either have them or you don’t. She don’t.


----------



## miss_chiff

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've literally sat here for a minute after reading this staring at my screen, and I still don't have eloquent words. This is so, so ugly.


I’m completely dumbfounded by it all. What took the cake for me is that she just didn’t give it a break when The Queen died. Completely despicable. Time to take that trash out, it smells.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sorry, I refuse to believe that. Fergie is problematic, but other than Raptor she does not strike me as a person evil and psychopathic enough to be excited about someone's death.


My take on Sarah is that she is a bit dim and does not think through her actions or words. More importantly, she would love to have been queen, not realizing the full ramifications of that wish. If questioned about being excited about Charles’s death, my guess is she would deny that, say she was didn’t mean _that, _etc.  

MM, on the other hand, is far more devious and cunning.  Congrats to William if he has proven her to be the leaker.  Interesting how most of Hazzie’s fears are coming true. 


LittleStar88 said:


> I’m always trying to be one step ahead. Sometimes I get lucky
> 
> 
> Here’s a good Friday read…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan and the palace insiders who saw what really happened
> 
> 
> After the death of the Queen, is there a way back for the Sussexes? Valentine Low speaks to members of the royal household about how the relationship between the court and the couple unravelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: Here’s the link that’s not behind a paywall….
> 
> 
> archive.ph


_In the spring of 2017, more than six months before the couple were engaged, she told one of Harry’s advisers: 
*“I think we both know I’m going to be one of your bosses soon.”*_


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *"I know how the palace works"*...after mere months of dating  I wonder if she needs physio therapy for that neck that must be strained from the weight of that ego.


The irony. First she claimed she didn't know about the BRF. Then she said no one guided/taught her royal etiquettes and protocols. Yet somehow, she knows how the palace works. She must have early onset Alzheimer's


----------



## Chanbal

miss_chiff said:


> Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent post on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does ‘correct’  the earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.
> View attachment 5616395
> View attachment 5616396
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616397


This matches Lady C's explanation as to why she decided to go ahead with the announcement about QE.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> i just realized something!!!  The sad pose of Meghan's that is all over the papers/internet is a copy of the sad face that Diana pulled at the Versace funeral.
> 
> View attachment 5616391
> View attachment 5616391
> 
> View attachment 5616392
> View attachment 5616392
> 
> View attachment 5616393
> View attachment 5616393


Now I know there are several people here who really dislike Diana, but those photos are not her pulling a face. Her expressions look the same as the people around her. I don’t think Meghan looks bad in that shot either. I mean that is what their faces look like. They can’t change that.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Now I want someone to write an article stating that Meg is really really a nice person and she was misunderstood.  If this happens, I am contacting that person immediately because I want to sell them the Brooklyn Bridge and I might even throw in the Throgs Neck and the Kościuszko Bridge as well.


This ^^^ is so good…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mumotons said:


> View attachment 5616394
> View attachment 5616394


After reading those headlines, I’m shaking with fear, too.  They are a scary couple.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Now I know there are several people here who really dislike Diana, but those photos are not her pulling a face. Her expressions look the same as the people around her. I don’t think Meghan looks bad in that shot either. I mean that is what their faces look like. They can’t change that.



Notice MM’s _tear_.


----------



## bag-mania

I looked on Amazon for the Valentine Low book and it isn’t being released in the US until June 2023. 

Why do we have to wait nine months for the dirt?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice MM’s _tear_.


I prefer to think it was a bead of sweat. It was warm that day.


----------



## Mumotons

bag-mania said:


> I looked on Amazon for the Valentine Low book and it isn’t being released in the US until June 2023.
> 
> Why do we have to wait nine months for the dirt?


I could copy and paste a page a day if it helps


----------



## Kevinaxx

EverSoElusive said:


> The irony. First she claimed she didn't know about the BRF. Then she said no one guided/taught her royal etiquettes and protocols. Yet somehow, she knows how the palace works. She must have early onset Alzheimer's


She spins so many lies I’m not at all surprised she’s unhappy and stressed which leads to BS like 


miss_chiff said:


> Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent post on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does ‘correct’  the earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.
> View attachment 5616395
> View attachment 5616396
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616397


^whats shared here. It’s absolutely INSANE to me that harry, despite him also not being the best person, can still be hung up on her. Really, what does she have? Some magical V?



youngster said:


> *I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this.*
> 
> This is one of the most damming things she could have said from my POV.  First, Charles handsomely supported them with millions per year so that they could represent the Queen and do events and tours as senior working royals. So, they _were_ effectively being paid. On top of that, they had a beautiful home on the grounds of Windsor remodeled to the tune of millions. Charles also spent God knows how much money on her extravagant wardrobe as well. But, to her, being on royal tour, meeting people and attending events, was a huge, uncomfortable, hard chore that she did only reluctantly.  You'd think she'd feel honored that people wanted to meet her and that she was carrying out her duties representing the Queen. Nope.  Everything is about money and is transactional.


100%.

The issue with twisted, entitled, psychopaths like her is if they’re given an inch they’ll want the whole damn mile. Never satisfied and if she was just a wrecking ball to herself, not on such a public platform, I would actually feel sorry for her and how sad her life is.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like Hazz has been the recipient of several 'truth bombs' …



_ “He was always messaging, making phone calls. It was nonstop. There were constant battles with the media and expecting the team to be on your side.… *He was always on Twitter*." (_Source: VL's article_)_


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

Mumotons said:


> I could copy and paste a page a day if it helps


We could have our own book club and have daily discussions.


----------



## lulu212121

gracekelly said:


> Now I want someone to write an article stating that Meg is really really a nice person and she was misunderstood.  If this happens, I am contacting that person immediately because I want to sell them the Brooklyn Bridge and I might even throw in the Throgs Neck and the Kościuszko Bridge as well.


Or release a family photo.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow


----------



## Chanbal

Has the Harkles' jet already landed in Montecito? The UK must be the last place they want to be today.


----------



## Mumotons

bag-mania said:


> We could have our own book club and have daily discussions.


Absolutely!!! That’s a fab idea


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

gracekelly said:


> I think the Wales are lobbying that the California kids do not get the titles for one reason. Calling them Prince and Princess will put them on equal footing to the three Wales children. The CA kids will never be raised as a true Englishman/woman. They will never have the same cultural sensibilities or sense of responsibility or understanding of the monarchy that the Wales children are raised with. Certainly George and Charlotte already have an understanding having attended the funeral. They saw how people treated their late great grandmother, their grandfather and their parents with love and respect. The ceremonial aspects of the past week made a huge impression on a 9 and 7 year old.  I don't believe that you can fully be a Princess/Princess of the UK with split loyalties and they will have them growing up in the US.


I think they should not be Prince and Princess too, for the same reasons re not being in UK and because Princess Anne and Prince Edward’s kids are not titled. So we have ample precedence that royals who will never be working royals are untitled. 



Chloe302225 said:


> I didn't think anything could be more damaging than Tom Bower's book but Valentine Low's account was searing. I don't know how the two of them will come up with a reason for why they don't sue or even offer an official response to what is being said.


If they don’t sue we know it’s true right? I would love for them to sue and for more information to be released


----------



## Icyjade

Chanbal said:


> Wow



This is great. Can they be stripped of their dukedom please?


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the UK members may have a reason to celebrate, but we in the US… Are we getting them permanently here?


----------



## bag-mania

Spotify’s rating system must be rigged. They currently have Archetypes as being the #3 podcast despite it being paused and not having had a new episode in over two weeks. How is it that it is beating new offerings from established, popular shows?


----------



## plumed

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Totally random, but this is totally a "I was today years old" moment. I just learned that non-profit just means that the organization doesn't give money to shareholders. It does not mean they don't pay their executives as much money as they want. I never gave it detailed thought, but I feel somewhat stupid now.


Not having shareholders is part of being a nonprofit corporation, but not the only factor. "Charities" such as those working in the environment, arts, literacy, food-distribution are governed by a complex set of federal and state regulations. The have to prove to the IRS and their state officials that they are fulfilling their charitable purpose, receive support from the general public, how much they've spent on their programs v. administration, disclose their donors, etc. And no, they don't "pay their executives as much money as they want." They pay what the work and the marketplace require, and have to justify that pay to the IRS and the state officials responsible for oversight of nonprofits (such as the state Attorney General via annual filings). Are there some abuses? Of course, but in general nonprofit CEOs are paid quite a bit less than their counterpart in a for-profit business of similar size that may be less complex. Example: an art museum is a professional organization with curators, restorers, etc. plus an attraction plus an educational institution plus the operator of a restaurant and a shop. What skills do you think it takes to run all of that in a single organization?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> We could have our own book club and have daily discussions.



It's already a Best Seller!


----------



## CarryOn2020

They say QE had a very good sense of humor.  They say she planned the seating and the camera positions.  No wonder William insisted H&M ago first.  He knew where the camera was, too.  Brilliant.


----------



## EverSoElusive

The next time someone say we are mean to Z-list, we'll tell them we are...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *They say QE had a very good sense of humor.*  They say she planned the seating and the camera positions.  No wonder William insisted H&M ago first.  He knew where the camera was, too.  Brilliant.


And the candle?


----------



## miss_chiff




----------



## EverSoElusive

Is this the book that you guys have been mentioning in the last few pages?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's already a Best Seller!
> 
> View attachment 5616482


SunnySaks knew what was in this book.  They bailed.  Looking forward to those Spotify pods.   Guessing H&Mm are furiously ‘revising’ Hazz’s book


----------



## plumed

Chanbal said:


> I understood that payments to executives and other related perks (e.g. travel expenses on behalf of the non-profit) can be up to 95 percent of the value of the non-profit endowment. I'm not an accountant, so please correct me if I'm wrong.


Totally wrong. There is no formula based on size of endowment. And there is a difference between foundations and other nonprofit "charities," such as environmental and arts organizations. In the US, foundations must give away for their mission a defined minimum percentage of their assets every year. "Charities" have other rules, but spending is tied to revenue (donations, earned income through admission tickets, etc.) as in any other business. Where size of endowment comes into play is in the amount of money the organization can take from the endowment appreciation (the investment earnings, not the principal) each year to support operations. That is generally a max of 5% of the average value of the endowment over 13 quarters.


----------



## WingNut

elvisfan4life said:


> I doubt Meghan's tears were real. Why cry over the boss of a firm you hate?
> 
> 
> LET’S cast our minds back to the funeral of Princess Diana.  We’d never seen anything so enormous or so unexpected or so moving.  There were so many crushingly sad moments that I sat ther…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson I salute you



HUGE Jeremy Clarkson fan here: “ I was gasted with flabber”…
Most importantly, he does not hold back in skewering her.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I looked on Amazon for the Valentine Low book and it isn’t being released in the US until June 2023.
> 
> Why do we have to wait nine months for the dirt?


I just saw a post from someone in the UK saying that they had preordered it on Kindle


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> And the candle?
> View attachment 5616486


QE planned it all - the seating behind the coffin, the candle, Hazz in the 2nd row.  
The large black hat that MM chose worked against her for this occasion.  Or did it?  






Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, _Princess Charlotte of Wales, Catherine, Princess of Wales, Prince George of Wales and Prince William, Prince of Wales _— Photo: VICTORIA JONES/POOL/AFP via Getty Images


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm there was a time in the early internet days, when no one credited their sources, that has changed but there are older sites still around, sans credits, it is still plagiarism but then it was accepted as OK


I do not agree, respectfully.  Plagiarism is like pregnancy.  It is an absolute. Or not.  On any domain.    As long as there have been library resources, regardless of era or culture, credit to a previously written or printed statement or research always has been attributed to the source.  She could have used Eleanor Roosevelt as her inspiration and stated she was replacing one word.   The concept would have been as strong and valid and she would have credibility.


----------



## Chanbal

plumed said:


> Totally wrong. There is no formula based on size of endowment. And there is a difference between foundations and other nonprofit "charities," such as environmental and arts organizations. In the US, foundations must give away for their mission a defined minimum percentage of their assets every year. "Charities" have other rules, but spending is tied to revenue (donations, earned income through admission tickets, etc.) as in any other business. Where size of endowment comes into play is in the amount of money the organization can take from the endowment appreciation (the investment earnings, not the principal) each year to support operations. That is generally a max of 5% of the average value of the endowment over 13 quarters.


I appreciate the clarification. If a foundation must distribute 5% of the value of their assets every year, what can happen to the remaining 95%? Assuming the foundation distributes only the required minimum of 5%.












						What is the 5% payout rule?
					

This familiar, if complex, rule is getting additional attention from family foundations looking at the fourth quarter of the year amid an economic downturn. What do the rules require?




					ncfp.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

As we go through this long goodbye, it may be worth remembering that MM was the best Hazz could do. 
No one else in the realm would have him, even knowing his dad would be King.


----------



## charlottawill

miss_chiff said:


> Since I had posted this posters post on The Queens death previously, thought I’d follow up with this recent post on it. Take what you will with it. Poster does ‘correct’  the earlier suggestion of the bone cancer to their credit. Some of it we’ve heard before.
> View attachment 5616395
> View attachment 5616396
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616397



So she was going to pull a Uvalde to upstage the P&PoW? If true I'm glad they were able to thwart her disgusting plan. 

Does KC have the power to permanently banish them from the UK? They sure as hell deserve it. And strip those titles while he's at it. I can't wait to hear her scream about how her children were robbed of their birthright.


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> Courtesy, good manners, honor and respect are not defined or determined by one’s country


Generally true, but all of those qualities seem to be in short supply in the US these days.


----------



## xincinsin

The toilet obsession started early 
From her current publication of choice.


			https://www.thecut.com/2018/04/royal-wedding-toilets-meghan-markle-prince-harry.html


----------



## plumed

Chanbal said:


> I appreciate the clarification. If a foundation must distribute 5% of the value of their assets every year, what can happen to the remaining 95%? Assuming the foundation distributes only the required minimum of 5%.
> 
> View attachment 5616492
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is the 5% payout rule?
> 
> 
> This familiar, if complex, rule is getting additional attention from family foundations looking at the fourth quarter of the year amid an economic downturn. What do the rules require?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ncfp.org


Foundations may spend more if they chose; 5% is the minimum for non-operating foundations (those that make grants, as opposed to operating foundations, which deliver their own programs). The rest of their funds remains in investments, to generate the revenue to make the grants and pay staff, "in perpetuity" if the funds are an official endowment. Most foundations keep expenses fairly low, so that investments grow over time.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> QE planned it all - the seating behind the coffin, the candle, Hazz in the 2nd row.
> The large black hat that MM chose worked against her for this occasion.  Or did it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, _Princess Charlotte of Wales, Catherine, Princess of Wales, Prince George of Wales and Prince William, Prince of Wales _— Photo: VICTORIA JONES/POOL/AFP via Getty Images


I guess the coffin will be called mean and racist too   Should be knighted along with the candle.


----------



## Chanbal

The new Charlie's Angels


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> Generally true, but all of those qualities seem to be in short supply in the US these days.


Respectfully, it depends where in America you look - it’s true there is a small minority of a rabid, vile and disgustingly rude people in America - but that is definitely not the majority of the Nation, IMO.


----------



## Katel




----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> I just saw a post from someone in the UK saying that they had preordered it on Kindle


The same thing happened with Tom Bowers book.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Toby93 said:


> Jeremy Clarkson is my new favourite author    My DH is a huge Top Gear fan.
> 
> "I do not wish Meghan any harm. I hope that after she has been photographed sitting by herself on the back of a playboy’s superyacht and outside the Taj Mahal, she goes on to lead a long and happy life.
> 
> But she should know this.
> 
> When she dies, hopefully many years from now, she will not be carried in front of millions by stoic men with good hearts and strong arms.
> 
> If it’s a slow news day, the best she’ll get is a small obituary in The Times on Page 27.
> 
> 
> Because her whole being is based on nothing at all, and we prefer people with a bit more stuff going on.
> That’s why we liked the Queen and it’s why we like Charles and it’s why, many years from now, after he’s been through a blizzard of roses, we will like William too and then, way on down the road, George.
> 
> So, Meghan, my dear, to use the sort of language you Americans understand: “*You’re gonna lose this war with our Royal Family. And you’re gonna lose it big”.*


His whole article is spot on


----------



## bubablu

needlv said:


> I am enjoying the downfall - and I am not a pro- monarchy person  at all…


I actually think monarchy is a nonsense, but this series is on Breaking bad level now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bubablu said:


> I actually think monarchy is a nonsense, but this series is on Breaking bad level now.


Breaking bad was a prestige series though- this is more like a CW teen drama series or desperate housewives 


gracekelly said:


> This is reminding me of The Devil Wears Prada with Miranda contently interrupting Andi.  That scene where Andi is having dinner with her father, in particular.  Driving Andi  crazy to get her back to NYC during a hurricane and then Miranda managing to do it on her own anyway.
> 
> I have asked myself many times what demands  did Meghan make on her staff that drove them to distraction and tears. How was she bullying them? The one bit about the freebees may have a lot to do with it.  She asked for things she should not have and was given things she should not keep.  If an assistant was playing by the rules, there was a huge problem, but there had to be more than that.  What was Meghan asking them to do that was so impossible.  Anyone here want to venture guesses?


Impossible requests:-
1 - sell me as charismatic and likeable 
2 - I want to be a star - a real A lister - you know the thing I couldn’t do in Hollywood 
3- find me a flattering Emilia wickstead dress 

I get a devil where’s Praia vibe too- that film definitely glorified Miranda priestly and her controlling behaviour so I can see why M would fancy herself in that role. 


gracekelly said:


> As i recall, Diana and Fergie were as thick as thieves at one point and then something happened.  Anyone know what it was?  Did Diana ghost her the same way that Meghan ghosts her friends?


Not talking to you specifically I am amazed the amount of passes Fergie gets on this thread for being dumb and gullible whereas we tend to scrutinise the apparently dumb and gullible too Diana’s behaviour. 

To me, when you look at Ferguson’s life- marries A, tries to sell contact and royal connections, divorces A over adultery fallout, tries to launch solo career, career fails, tries to suck up to royal family now new enemy Megs is in town,  gets back into A’s life and enjoys his resources and connections despite revelations of his  dark secrets…. Well I see a woman with very dubious morals - easily the equal of TW.




papertiger said:


> Because she wanted to yes, but not because she knew better than them, but because she could, because she was allowed to, and carry on to the next poor person.
> 
> That's why the Palace should open the full report. The Palace are to blame too.


100% palace is to blame too. They sell these courtiers jobs as not well paid but you can have a special relationship with royalty - be a backstairs billy or Angela Kelly. Also these people tend to be very well qualified but their opinions and well-being aren’t valued as highly as some woman with no industry experience who H just happens to be sleeping with? To see that they just threw their ‘valued’ help in the thresher like this just to try and get some ‘modern’ PR is very bad for them. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> *thought she knew better than them
> 
> But yes, I am shocked whoever was in charge let it escalate like this without putting a stop to it. What needed to happen, her literally ripping out someone's throat with her teeth and drinking their blood?





Chanbal said:


> It's indeed from CNN, and about Will & Kate (and not the Harkles). Don Lem*n was so receptive of TW's claims about "_the color of son Arch*e's skin_" (OW's interview) that I would like to have his opinion on the CNN comments about George.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616369
> 
> 
> View attachment 5616367
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What -- and who -- will the royal baby look like? | CNN
> 
> 
> Bets are already being placed on the appearance of the royal baby -- the future king or queen of England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com



This is a great smoking gun but it would have had a lot more weight several years ago during the interview heyday. People have made up their minds or lost interest now.


charlottawill said:


> It all comes down to their fear of being called racist, which she did anyway.
> 
> One of my children lives like this. It has taken a toll on her mental health and it upsets me, but she is an adult and I really can't do anything.


It’s awful and it’s just lack of job security- the boss tells her someone else will take the night calls. Is she able to join a union?

I mean this is why the racism thing doesn’t seem a suitable thing on its own. As a short term ex girlfriend she would be far less newsworthy than as an ex or current wife and they really tried to sell her at the beginning. I do wonder if they thought she’d work as well as a villain as a hero.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> At first, I think they became good friends as they were both about the same age and came into the family as outsiders.  Diana though became jealous of Fergie's popularity and that she was very much liked within the family, especially by the Queen and Prince Philip and even Charles who thought Fergie was fun.  Later, it was said that it might have been Diana who tipped off the press that Fergie was vacationing with her financial advisor which led to the infamous toe-sucking photos. Their relationship went through ups and downs through the years and they bonded again over their mutual divorces. But, Fergie wrote in her tell all book that Diana loaned her shoes all the time and she got plantar warts from them.  Diana was really upset about that, stopped speaking to her, and had not forgiven Fergie at the time of her death.


Apologies if already posted. 

It was when Sarah told the world that she got plantar warts after trying on Diana’s shoes.  Fergie and Andi have always been a low level type of royal, almost exactly like H&M.  

The article is a really good summary of the Diana-Fergie relationship:

_In 1996, the Yorks officially divorced, leaving Fergie with mounting debts and life as a single mother. She penned her autobiography My Story the same year, a move Diana gave her approval for. The only thing — she didn't want the Duchess to mention her.

While the two, now both former members of the royal family, had had a tumultuous friendship, one simple line in Fergie's bestseller put the final nail in the coffin of her relationship with Diana. She wrote: "*Diana helped me by giving me all her shoes (and less happily, her plantar warts)."*
No matter that it was only a brief mention of a very common, minor ailment, the Princess was infuriated.









						The tragic reason Princess Diana ditched Fergie - NZ Herald
					

They were the Meghan and Kate of their day, until a bitter falling out.




					www.nzherald.co.nz
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Now I want someone to write an article stating that Meg is really really a nice person and she was misunderstood.  If this happens, I am contacting that person immediately because I want to sell them the Brooklyn Bridge and I might even throw in the Throgs Neck and the Kościuszko Bridge as well.


Will this do? I read that the fan who recorded the Zedzee hugging incident at the Windsor Walk posted on SM that based on her few seconds of interaction, she can tell that Zedzee is beautiful inside and out. And the hugger told CNN that she wants Zedzee to know that the Brits still love her


----------



## andrashik

papertiger said:


> This hit home particularly hard, and Harry sounds as hideous as TW
> 
> 'As one source said: “There were a lot of broken people. Young women were broken by their behaviour.” One member of staff, they said, was “completely destroyed”. Another staffer who had been having a rough time told a colleague they were considering resigning and that the couple were “outrageous bullies”, adding, “I will never trust or like them again, but have made peace with that.” The colleague replied: “That’s so dreadful. And they are bullies.'


The thing that really pissed me was this


The entitlement...
And this:


----------



## Pessie

I can’t get my head around what they threw away, and just how badly they‘ve stuffed up.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm there was a time in the early internet days, when no one credited their sources, that has changed but there are older sites still around, sans credits, it is still plagiarism but then it was accepted as OK



But not public speeches or comment. MegZ makes public speeches and written work for publication that she passes off as her own (words) - that is the definition of plagiarism. She blatantly and *deliberately* steals peoples ideas and expressions so she sounds good, and pretends _she_ comes up with them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just quickly on my phone: so that nasty rumour of Raptor's behaviour trying to sell The Queen's dead body and staging another Uvalde moment?

I read a little on Insta before getting up todsy and wouldn't you know Bookworm something the Youtuber was in the comments complaining the other person took that info from a video they made yesterday, but her (is it a her? Never watched them) source was someone who was in town with a European royal.

I'm inclined to believe the person who posted about The Queen's death hours before the announcement really does have their LA sources, and the Bookworm person spoke to someone in London who told basically the same story, and Markle is a disgusting ghoul who feeds off dead people.

Did I say I am so disappointed in Harry?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> But not public speeches or comment. MegZ makes public speeches and written work for publication that she passes off as her own (words) - that is the definition of plagiarism. She blatantly and *deliberately* steals peoples ideas and expressions so she sounds good, and pretends _she_ comes up with them.


Steals their looks, too.  Here are her Diana steals.  Then, we have her Kate steals, then we have the Ivanka steals, AngieJolie steals, ad nauseam.


----------



## BlueCherry

Pessie said:


> I can’t get my head around what they threw away, and just how badly they‘ve stuffed up.



In retrospect it’s good that they threw it all away. Imagine they had stayed and caused all this angst from a few miles down the road. 

People like this who are simply rotten to the core don’t rehabilitate and are best off as far away from decent folk as possible.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Steals their looks, too.  Here are her Diana steals.  Then, we have her Kate steals, then we have the Ivanka steals, AngieJolie steals, ad nauseam.
> 
> View attachment 5616597



She is such a twat. You could easily find two people dressed similarly but hers are blatant copies and happen way too often and always of the same people.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Will this do? I read that the fan who recorded the Zedzee hugging incident at the Windsor Walk posted on SM that based on her few seconds of interaction, she can tell that Zedzee is beautiful inside and out. And the hugger told CNN that she wants Zedzee to know that the Brits still love her



Happily the 'hugger' (outside BP not Windsor) is only 14 and has 4 whole years till she's eligible to vote. 

14 y o and a calculated master of PR though, 'the hugger' will be forever the 'angelic face of forgiveness', MegZ could learn a thing from her about instinctive but calculated savvy both in timing and opportunity.


----------



## Pessie

BlueCherry said:


> In retrospect it’s good that they threw it all away. Imagine they had stayed and caused all this angst from a few miles down the road.
> 
> People like this who are simply rotten to the core don’t rehabilitate and are best off as far away from decent folk as possible.


I meant it in the sense that Meghan lacked the imagination to comprehend the scale of what she’d been gifted on marrying Harry.  As in Royalty comes with the kind of fame, access and privileges that money cannot buy.  She could’ve travelled anywhere, trained as anything she wanted with the best in the world, had researchers at her fingertips…..had the very best of everything for her kids….  Not to mention the clothes and jewels - because they’d undoubtedly have been key members of Charles slimline monarchy.
She can’t think outside the grifter mindset, she has no ideas of her own, and her narcissism has her sc*ewed.  I think I’m having a *should‘ve been me moment* (not that I envy her Harry, but ykwim).


----------



## BlueCherry

Here we go 

Prince Harry 'paid £30,000 for private jet to Balmoral day Queen died'


https://mol.im/a/11245467


----------



## Sophisticatted

Speaking of “overseas exile”, I believe that Eugenie is in a form of exile, too.  It’s just more quiet.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I meant it in the sense that Meghan lacked the imagination to comprehend the scale of what she’d been gifted on marrying Harry.  As in Royalty comes with the kind of fame, access and privileges that money cannot buy.  She could’ve travelled anywhere, trained as anything she wanted with the best in the world, had researchers at her fingertips…..had the very best of everything for her kids….  Not to mention the clothes and jewels - because they’d undoubtedly have been key members of Charles slimline monarchy.
> She can’t think outside the grifter mindset, she has no ideas of her own, and her narcissism has her sc*ewed.  I think I’m having a *should‘ve been me moment* (not that I envy her Harry, but ykwim).



 . MegZ f****d-up herself big time.

Everyone is a stepping-stone for her, she'll be forever on her 'journey', she cannot recognise when she's hit the jack pot and when she's arrived.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

Someone is insisting on pursuing Harry’s narrative that he was not told of the Queens death and found out from his phone online. 

If he was able to access the internet, surely he could have received a call. Whether that be a regular call or a data call. 

If he hadn’t spent so much time arguing with his Dad and M about her going to Balmoral it wouldn’t have happened. If it did happen. But in his inimitable style it’s someone else’s fault. 

Regardless, after everything he put the Queen through did he really expect Charles to wait for him before making the announcement public.


----------



## Pessie

BlueCherry said:


> Here we go
> 
> Prince Harry 'paid £30,000 for private jet to Balmoral day Queen died'
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/11245467


Are the gloves off?  Seems to be lots of expose H&M news today.


----------



## BlueCherry

Pessie said:


> Are the gloves off?  Seems to be lots of expose H&M news today.



It usually starts with a little dig doesn’t it then escalates. He didn’t even allow the family their private 7 day mourning period


----------



## Pessie

BlueCherry said:


> It usually starts with a little dig doesn’t it then escalates. He didn’t even allow the family their private 7 day mourning period


True, but I think the RF have let the hounds loose.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Can you imagine Z-list trying to do this???  Even someone as graceful as CP Mary was having a little bit of trouble, I wonder how much worse it would be if it was Z-list. Imagine her courtiers trying to teach her and she tells them that she knows how to dance AND picks a gown with a train along with the highest possible stilettos that she could find, preferably a pair of Aquazurra that was swiped from somewhere. Oh the trainwreck!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> True, but I think the RF have let the hounds loose.


A quiet word has spread throughout the realm


----------



## papertiger

Leaks and Soobie Doo Doo in trouble - he's as bad as they are


----------



## CarryOn2020

And just like that - with a stroke of a [working] pen, things change:

_The latest name marks its *fifth* in 12 years. 

The foundation started life as the Prince William & Prince Harry. In 2012 it became the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. From 2018-2019, it was known as the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.









						Prince and Princess of Wales update the name of their Royal Foundation
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton have updated the name of their Royal Foundation to reflect their new titles. It is now known as The Royal Foundation of the Prince and Princess of Wales.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## BittyMonkey

plumed said:


> Totally wrong. There is no formula based on size of endowment. And there is a difference between foundations and other nonprofit "charities," such as environmental and arts organizations. In the US, foundations must give away for their mission a defined minimum percentage of their assets every year. "Charities" have other rules, but spending is tied to revenue (donations, earned income through admission tickets, etc.) as in any other business. Where size of endowment comes into play is in the amount of money the organization can take from the endowment appreciation (the investment earnings, not the principal) each year to support operations. That is generally a max of 5% of the average value of the endowment over 13 quarters.


Yes. Thanks for helping clear up those generalizations on social media about nonprofits for folks. That’s aggravating when I see it. The IRS (and in healthcare, the government) has tons of rules and if you are senior leadership you better know what you are doing. Especially in California.


----------



## Chanbal

plumed said:


> Foundations may spend more if they chose; 5% is the minimum for non-operating foundations (those that make grants, as opposed to operating foundations, which deliver their own programs). The rest of their funds remains in investments, to generate the revenue to make the grants and pay staff, "in perpetuity" if the funds are an official endowment. Most foundations keep expenses fairly low, so that investments grow over time.



Thank you once again for sharing your knowledge with us, it's a very interesting subject. Absolutely, a foundation can spend more than the required minimum of 5%, and have the remaining funds in investments to generate additional revenue.

However, let's hypothetically consider a foundation that has $2M in incoming unrestricted cash donations/year (not endowment funds), from which it distributes only $100K (5%). What prevents that particular foundation from spending the remaining $1.9M in salaries, rent, travel and other related expenses?


----------



## BittyMonkey

I just had a thought. I think it’s brilliant that the released articles focus on Harry’s pre-existing flaws and discuss how MM is just basically gasoline. What this does is remove the tendency for people to dig in and defend MM. You can see it in the SM responses that people are shocked H was so protected. The RF know they are kicking H out the door with this and that they are admitting the Hero Harry gambit, but they also know it’s the only way. Like your child is a heroin addict and has failed rehab repeatedly, and so you need to be done. It is hard, and sad, but you are done. 

Live by social media, die by social media.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> Thank you once again for sharing your knowledge with us, it's a very interesting subject. Absolutely, a foundation can spend more than the required minimum of 5%, and have the remaining funds in investments to generate additional revenue.
> 
> However, let's hypothetically consider a foundation that has $2M in incoming cash donations/year (not endowment funds), from which it distributes only $100K (5%). What prevents that particular foundation from spending the remaining $1.9M in salaries, rent, travel and other related expenses?


Your donors, and public opinion, keeping the lights on, and organizations like Guidestar. Family foundations don’t like to pay non-family exorbitant salaries. If they are family and do get ridiculous salaries, that comes out and your organizational integrity is impugned. Your reputation means a lot.


----------



## Chanbal

BittyMonkey said:


> Your donors, and public opinion, keeping the lights on, and organizations like Guidestar. Family foundations don’t like to pay non-family exorbitant salaries. If they are family and do get ridiculous salaries, that comes out and your organizational integrity is impugned. Your reputation means a lot.


Let me clarify, I'm not an accountant and I don't have a for- or non-profit foundation. If I would have a foundation, I can assure you that my salary would be 0 dollars from it. 

However, I'm curious about this subject. Apart from the reputation, which can perhaps be managed by an efficient PR agency, it seems that there little to prevent a foundation from covering exorbitant expenses…


----------



## carmen56

bag-mania said:


> As I recall I think Diana didn’t like something Fergie said about her in her book. They weren’t speaking when Diana died but I suspect if she had lived they would have reconciled, at least somewhat. Time has a way of healing little grudges.


Didn’t Fergie complain she got a verruca from wearing a pair of Diana’s shoes?


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> This is a great smoking gun but it would have had a lot more weight several years ago during the interview heyday. People have made up their minds or lost interest now.


I think the first paragraph of the CNN article about the normal curiosity is timeless. What I found interesting is the apparent double standard.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> Let me clarify, I'm not an accountant and I don't have a for- or non-profit foundation. If I would have a foundation, I can assure you that my salary would be 0 dollars from it.
> 
> However, I'm curious about this subject. Apart from the reputation, which can perhaps be managed by an efficient PR agency, it seems that there little to prevent a foundation from covering exorbitant expenses…


Some of them try it, but they don't exist very long without blowback.

And no one expects people to work for free. In fact, this is an area of nonprofits that isn't talked about - exploitation of staff and the failure to pay a living wage. Staff are often pressured to not ask for raises etc because "you must not love the children." Ridiculous and bad management.

CEO salaries should not be exorbitant, and nonprofits are not infrequently called out for this. For instance, Komen. I was recently cornered by one of our donors who wanted my help deciding how to complain about the CEO's salary at a very large nonprofit.


----------



## Chanbal

BittyMonkey said:


> *Some of them try it, but they don't exist very long without blowback.
> 
> And no one expects people to work for free. *In fact, this is an area of nonprofits that isn't talked about - exploitation of staff and the failure to pay a living wage. Staff are often pressured to not ask for raises etc because "you must not love the children." Ridiculous and bad management.
> 
> *CEO salaries should not be exorbitant, and nonprofits are not infrequently called out for this.* For instance, Komen. I was recently cornered by one of our donors who wanted my help deciding how to complain about the CEO's salary at a very large nonprofit.


Fortunately, that foundations with impaired ethics may not last long. I'm also all in favor that CEO salaries shouldn't be exorbitant and that staff must be adequately paid and not exploited. If I would decide to establish a foundation as a post-career (aka retirement ) activity, I wouldn't want any salary from it (my choice obviously).


----------



## CarryOn2020

BittyMonkey said:


> Some of them try it, but they don't exist very long without blowback.
> 
> And no one expects people to work for free. In fact, this is an area of nonprofits that isn't talked about - exploitation of staff and the failure to pay a living wage. Staff are often pressured to not ask for raises etc because "you must not love the children." Ridiculous and bad management.
> 
> CEO salaries should not be exorbitant, and nonprofits are not infrequently called out for this. For instance, Komen. I was recently cornered by one of our donors who wanted my help deciding how to complain about the CEO's salary at a very large nonprofit.


Plus the volunteers.  The not-for-profit one where I volunteered, the staff really did not like the volunteers doing jobs the stars had been assigned to.  The place was flooded with volunteers of all skill levels. Also, the staff was unionized which took things to another level.  Very informative experience.



Chanbal said:


> I think the first paragraph of the CNN article about the normal curiosity is timeless. What I found interesting is the apparent double standard.



For me, it is the part that CNN [and others] knew exactly what was going on and misled the public.  Certainly has generated lots of $$$$$ for lots of people - think of all the articles, photos, websites, IGs, blogs, etc.  So many clicks, so much $$$$.  Wonder if the BRF gets a kickback?  Perma-frown Hazz probably laughs all the way to the bank.


----------



## Chanbal

This is an interesting post related to V. Low's book, I believe.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> This is an interesting post related to V. Low's book, I believe.



Eh. I tend to think that the RF and the Royal reporters have a symbiotic relationship, so they mutually agreed to both hold back and let loose on the same schedule. They're just executing their part of the deal now.

This is so fascinating, and gross. Looks like you Brits aren't so different from how it works over here in Hollywood.  No one's going out for a beer with that dude and he won't be able to get his agent/father on the phone because they'll be "on another call" for eternity.


----------



## Chanbal

Humor from Twitter


----------



## Chanbal

One more…


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> Humor from Twitter


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> Not talking to you specifically I am amazed the amount of passes Fergie gets on this thread for being dumb and gullible whereas we tend to scrutinise the apparently dumb and gullible too Diana’s behaviour.
> 
> To me, when you look at Ferguson’s life- marries A, tries to sell contact and royal connections, divorces A over adultery fallout, tries to launch solo career, career fails, tries to suck up to royal family now new enemy Megs is in town,  gets back into A’s life and enjoys his resources and connections despite revelations of his  dark secrets…. Well I see a woman with very dubious morals - *easily the equal of TW*.


I think the big difference between Fergie and TW is that Fergie didn't go on national TV and trash the BRF.  For all her other ridiculous stunts, she did not start out with an agenda, and I think that TW only had one thought in her head - hook herself a prince and get back to Hollywood to flaunt him, since the acting thing obviously wasn't making her famous.

Fergie went on Oprah, but I don't recall any huge backlash or media frenzy because it was pretty tame.  Oprah actually had the gall to ask her to wear a tiara since she is not above making a fool of people as long as it makes her money.  Sarah had enough sense to say no to that.


I believe that their marriage failed because Andrew was so involved in his naval career and he was not around.  It has been stated in many articles that at one point, he was home only 40 something days out of the year.  I do think they do truly get along well and that is why she is back with him after so many years.


----------



## Toby93

I laughed at this one


----------



## Chanbal

I'm always amazed by the things people are able to find…


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I think the big difference between Fergie and TW is that Fergie didn't go on national TV and trash the BRF.  For all her other ridiculous stunts, she did not start out with an agenda, and I think that TW only had one thought in her head - hook herself a prince and get back to Hollywood to flaunt him, since the acting thing obviously wasn't making her famous.
> 
> Fergie went on Oprah, but I don't recall any huge backlash or media frenzy because it was pretty tame.  Oprah actually had the gall to ask her to wear a tiara since she is not above making a fool of people as long as it makes her money.  Sarah had enough sense to say no to that.
> 
> 
> I believe that their marriage failed because Andrew was so involved in his naval career and he was not around.  It has been stated in many articles that at one point, he was home only 40 something days out of the year.  I do think they do truly get along well and that is why she is back with him after so many years.


Fergie did do an interview with Oprah where she complained about THE SUITS ie courtiers


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the courtiers from Valentine Low's book will also be added to this panel.


----------



## marietouchet

VL a book will be a must read, the bit about OW interview negotiated 6 mos before trip to Canada - cringe worthy 

Insiders claim Meghan moaned she wasn't getting PAID for royal tours











						Insiders claim Meghan moaned she wasn't getting PAID for royal tours
					

The explosive extracts of the forthcoming book, Courtiers: the Hidden Power Behind the Crown by Valentine Low, were published by The Times today.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

And KC is a doting grandpa but NOT a giving away the milk, he needs TRUST , YES !
Charles 'willing to give Sussex children prince and princess titles'









						Charles 'willing to give Sussex children prince and princess titles'
					

King Charles is willing to give Archie and Lilibet  the prince and princess titles they are owed but must trust the Sussex family, royal expert Katie Nicholl said on the latest episode of The Royal Beat.




					mol.im


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Fergie did do an interview with Oprah where she complained about THE SUITS ie courtiers


Iirc she was the one who called the palace people “The Grey Men”. 

Article from 1997 - good background info:
_She marries a system, not a man. She speaks of the man in question, Prince Andrew, with unfailing admiration, but he's part of the system that's killing her. This is a story about a woman essentially alone, at the mercy of her own questionable behavior, haunted by the troupe of what she calls "grey men," those courtiers, and taunted incessantly by the malicious, sanctimonious press about her gaffes, her wardrobe, the size of her behind. Of course, there are other sides to this story. But why didn't somebody stand up for her? She never asks the question, but why didn't that prince of hers stand up for her?



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1997/02/28/fergies-royal-pain/7ca77b91-6f2c-4bef-9d9b-c56ac066e551/
		

_


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> And KC is a doting grandpa but NOT a giving away the milk, he needs TRUST , YES !
> Charles 'willing to give Sussex children prince and princess titles'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles 'willing to give Sussex children prince and princess titles'
> 
> 
> King Charles is willing to give Archie and Lilibet  the prince and princess titles they are owed but must trust the Sussex family, royal expert Katie Nicholl said on the latest episode of The Royal Beat.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im



I think Grandpapa KC needs to _change_ the protocol and not make it automatic that grandchildren get Prince/Princess titles. 

It's not likely the titles will actually do them any good in the States, probably the reverse. 

Those children will never be Working Royals, they will grow up knowing more about baseball than Trooping the Colour.  

Do those kids a favour and cut them loose to make their own way.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc she was the one who called the palace people “The Grey Men”.
> 
> Article from 1997 - good background info:
> _She marries a system, not a man. She speaks of the man in question, Prince Andrew, with unfailing admiration, but he's part of the system that's killing her. This is a story about a woman essentially alone, at the mercy of her own questionable behavior, haunted by the troupe of what she calls "grey men," those courtiers, and taunted incessantly by the malicious, sanctimonious press about her gaffes, her wardrobe, the size of her behind. Of course, there are other sides to this story. But why didn't somebody stand up for her? She never asks the question, but why didn't that prince of hers stand up for her?
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1997/02/28/fergies-royal-pain/7ca77b91-6f2c-4bef-9d9b-c56ac066e551/
> 
> 
> _



This is a woman that had debts paid off by Epstein (Telegraph 2011). I'm not sure why we're talking about her on this thread, she seems like a waste of space.

*Like TW, she has had no other life, talent or claim to fame other that she married the spare and spent money like water.* Her only saving grace was she was scapegoated for a divorce with her illicit affair, when obviously her ex, PA, was not fussy who he was sleeping with. At least she had an affair with someone she actually knew.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think Grandpapa KC needs to _change_ the protocol and not make it automatic that grandchildren get Prince/Princess titles.
> 
> It's not likely the titles will actually do them any good in the States, probably the reverse.
> 
> Those children will never be Working Royals, they will grow up knowing more about baseball than Trooping the Colour.
> 
> Do those kids a favour and cut them loose to make their own way.


Yes, after all, half of QEII's grandchildren are not HRHs/dont use the style
And there is a diff between being an HRH and Prince - two diff styles


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> This is a woman that had debts paid off by Epstein (Telegraph 2011). I'm not sure why we're talking about her on this thread, she seems like a waste of space.
> 
> *Like TW, she has had no other life, talent or claim to fame other that she married the spare and spent money like water.* Her only saving grace was she was scapegoated for a divorce with her illicit affair, when obviously her ex, PA, was not fussy who he was sleeping with. At least she had an affair with someone she actually knew.


Apologies, If these should be in the Andrew thread, let me know.  I will try to copy/paste.

Imo Fergie is very similar to Tw just as Andi is to perma-frown Hazz.  Many people may not be aware of what some of us endured in the 80s and 90s with these people. It was shocking then, now not so much.  Looking at the bigger picture, maybe the BRF does this every so often in an effort to build up the heir.  wallis&ed, andi&fergie, now H&Mm.

ETA:  the Andi thread is such a sleazy place due to the Epstein stuff. It always sickens me to see any of it.


----------



## bagshopr

I don't understand why there is even a question of Harry's kids getting Prince and Princess titles. 
Harry and Meghan resigned from the working royal family, snatched up their belongings, and bolted across the ocean.  They trash their former employer, the BRF, at every opportunity. The children aren't going to do anything with those titles, just as H & M don't do anything as Duke and Duchess. Take the royal trappings away from this diseased branch of the family.


----------



## jennlt

Part B


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Fergie did do an interview with Oprah where she complained about THE SUITS ie courtiers


Yes, the dreaded courtiers, the men in grey suits.  Both Diana and Fergie had complained about them, and how they ran things.  I don't think complaining about staff is even close to finger pointing at your family and making unsubstantiated claims about racism, and about feeling pushed to point of suicide.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Yes, after all, half of QEII's grandchildren are not HRHs/dont use the style
> And there is a diff between being an HRH and Prince - two diff styles



It is doubtful that in in the US people will understand the difference between HRH or plain ol' Prince. Charles should give them both a (clean) break, encourage the family's obsession for privacy and self-reliance.  After all, this is why HaZ-bin and never-waZ left the   BRF and their "mindset" (Harry 2016)   "...his distaste for the media’s interest in his private life" (Ruddick, Guardian Nov''17).

Let them all find or found a (mind)set of their own.


----------



## Toby93

bagshopr said:


> I don't understand why there is even a question of Harry's kids getting Prince and Princess titles.
> Harry and Meghan resigned from the working royal family, snatched up their belongings, and bolted across the ocean.  They trash their former employer, the BRF, at every opportunity. The children aren't going to do anything with those titles, just as H & M don't do anything as Duke and Duchess. Take the royal trappings away from this diseased branch of the family.


Totally agree!  The kids have no use for titles since they now live in the US.  The very place that made a point of breaking ties with the UK and becoming a republic.  Why on earth would they need or want a title to go about your life in America?  Unless, of course, their parents (parent?) have plans of merching those titles for big money?  Princess Lilibet Diana clothing line for kids, Prince Archie toys, shoes candy....etc.  Can you imagine? It would be the BRF's worst nightmare


----------



## plumed

Chanbal said:


> Thank you once again for sharing your knowledge with us, it's a very interesting subject. Absolutely, a foundation can spend more than the required minimum of 5%, and have the remaining funds in investments to generate additional revenue.
> 
> However, let's hypothetically consider a foundation that has $2M in incoming unrestricted cash donations/year (not endowment funds), from which it distributes only $100K (5%). What prevents that particular foundation from spending the remaining $1.9M in salaries, rent, travel and other related expenses?


The foundation has to spend 5% of its total assets, not 5% of what comes in during a single year. In your example, yes, the foundation can spend 100% of the annual unrestricted funds on operations, but if it's not replenishing the investments, it will eventually run out of money. In any case, it still has to prove to the IRS and the state officials that the expenses legitimately served the foundation's charitable purpose. And the "watchdogs" like Guidestar and Charity Navigator will "out" bad actors too, as they scrutinize expenses for operations v. grantmaking (or, with operating foundations, expenses v. program services). Can bad actors get away with spending on the personal expenses of their executives? Sure, for a while. But eventually they get caught.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Do they have class action suits in the UK ?JCMH should pay for one to go after The Times haha


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> *They say QE had a very good sense of humor. * They say she planned the seating and the camera positions. No wonder William insisted H&M ago first. He knew where the camera was, too. Brilliant.





Chanbal said:


> *And the candle? *
> View attachment 5616486


Kudos to the late HMQEII, who was a master planner and chess player and who even after death could throw the best shade.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> My take on Sarah is that she is a bit dim and does not think through her actions or words. More importantly, she would love to have been queen, not realizing the full ramifications of that wish. If questioned about being excited about Charles’s death, my guess is she would deny that, say she was didn’t mean _that, _etc.
> 
> MM, on the other hand, is far more devious and cunning.  Congrats to William if he has proven her to be the leaker.  Interesting how most of Hazzie’s fears are coming true.
> 
> _In the spring of 2017, more than six months before the couple were engaged, she told one of Harry’s advisers:
> *“I think we both know I’m going to be one of your bosses soon.”*_


wow!  this is from a credible newspaper, not a tabloid, right?  you'd think this could be damaging to the "princess"....talk about arrogant! (and before she was even engaged)....this should even anger Harry


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

This should be printed, framed and shipped to Z-list & Co. A concept they cannot quite grasp though they were given a lot before they lost some and then more


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> wow!  this is from a credible newspaper, not a tabloid, right?  you'd think this could be damaging to the "princess"....talk about arrogant! (and before she was even engaged)....this should even anger Harry


The Times is real journalism, if I remember, Valentine Low reports the BRF for the Times, both are credible


----------



## Molly0

Not a regular poster on this thread & most of what is said goes right over my head.  Not a supporter, nor a hater of Megan/Harry but it keeps occurring to me, over and over “What is up with Oprah?”  Decades ago, I remember on her talk show she was focused in on seeking “dirt” on the Royal Family from Sarah Ferguson when she was going through her “stuff”. (Everyone has their turn, at some point in life, at going through “stuff”.).  It seems she has been on the lookout for decades for any loose cannon existing in the royal’s inner circle that she can pounce on. 
It’s baffling. …& certainly not very “enlightened” ! ( …as she professes to be.)


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> At first, I think they became good friends as they were both about the same age and came into the family as outsiders.  Diana though became jealous of Fergie's popularity and that she was very much liked within the family, especially by the Queen and Prince Philip and even Charles who thought Fergie was fun.  Later, it was said that it might have been Diana who tipped off the press that Fergie was vacationing with her financial advisor which led to the infamous toe-sucking photos. Their relationship went through ups and downs through the years and they bonded again over their mutual divorces. But, Fergie wrote in her tell all book that Diana loaned her shoes all the time and she got plantar warts from them.  Diana was really upset about that, stopped speaking to her, and had not forgiven Fergie at the time of her death.


When Fergie joined the RF, she had a negative influence on Diana.

Remember when they were caught poking someone's butt with their umbrellas at the Royal Ascot? That was Fergie influencing Diana.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Totally agree!  The kids have no use for titles since they now live in the US.  The very place that made a point of breaking ties with the UK and becoming a republic.  Why on earth would they need or want a title to go about your life in America?  Unless, of course, their parents (parent?) have plans of merching those titles for big money?  Princess Lilibet Diana clothing line for kids, Prince Archie toys, shoes candy....etc.  Can you imagine? It would be the BRF's worst nightmare



Diane von Furstenberg is an example of a European royal (by marriage) in the US.  Of course her husband was from a less prominent RF than the Brits but anyway.  She probably got some advantage using the association but made her own career in fashion and business.  I don't really see much advantage for Harry's kids being called prince or princess here.  In fact, according to tina brown's book, King Charles was bullied mercilessly in boarding school - and he was the heir to the throne.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> This should be printed, framed and shipped to Z-list & Co. A concept they cannot quite grasp though they were given a lot before they lost some and then more
> 
> View attachment 5616781


I used to think Diana should appreciate all that was bestowed upon her and stop complaining so much.

Interesting, that whining (or whinging in the UK ) made women of the same age range relate to her becuase they thought she was just like them. As if that were true.


----------



## Stansy

WingNut said:


> HA! Love it. Will use it endlessly going forward. (FYI although I live in the US, I was born in Berlin, and most of my family is still there, so you are right up my alley!!!). This one I'm going to send to my mom. Best part is that I can use it at work and no one will know what I mean. My mom and I used to always speak German here when we didn't want people to understand our snarkiness (so rude I know  )


Haha - this can backfire though 
my fave teacher at school „worked“ as bus driver in his wife‘s tourist company during school holidays and used to drive people around in Italy/Spain/France - he was fluent in all these roman languages and would also pass as a local.
so one day strolling around Rome he would comment to his wife on the not-so-appealing overall impression of a lady in the widest accent from Wetterau region, and the lady would turn around and give him an earful, as she actually came from this region


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I used to think Diana should appreciate all that was bestowed upon her and stop complaining so much.
> 
> Interesting, that whining (or whinging in the UK ) made women of the same age range relate to her becuase they thought she was just like them. As if that was true.


for me, diana is so different from the WIFE.  She came from bloodlines that were more British and arguably more noble than the RF.  She married very young and produced the heir and the spare.  Yes, she whined and embarassed them but she didn't tear her husband away from the family.  And I think she did some very sincere humanitarian work.
Her form of revenge might not have been the most admirable but she was pretty much duped into a loveless marriage.  At her tender age I think it's fair to think she was pretty naive.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies if already posted.
> 
> It was when Sarah told the world that she got plantar warts after trying on Diana’s shoes.  Fergie and Andi have always been a low level type of royal, almost exactly like H&M.
> 
> The article is a really good summary of the Diana-Fergie relationship:
> 
> _In 1996, the Yorks officially divorced, leaving Fergie with mounting debts and life as a single mother. She penned her autobiography My Story the same year, a move Diana gave her approval for. The only thing — she didn't want the Duchess to mention her.
> 
> While the two, now both former members of the royal family, had had a tumultuous friendship, one simple line in Fergie's bestseller put the final nail in the coffin of her relationship with Diana. She wrote: "*Diana helped me by giving me all her shoes (and less happily, her plantar warts)."*
> No matter that it was only a brief mention of a very common, minor ailment, the Princess was infuriated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tragic reason Princess Diana ditched Fergie - NZ Herald
> 
> 
> They were the Meghan and Kate of their day, until a bitter falling out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nzherald.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Diana loved public adulation and she became jealous of Sarah's rising popularity. She gave a speech on motherhood about the same time Sarah visited Andrew who was on deployment leaving her young daughter in the care of the nannies and that info was leaked to the press. Sarah was severely criticized for abandoning her young daughter. It was later learned that Diana was the source of the leak.


----------



## Kevinaxx

bagshopr said:


> The children aren't going to do anything with those titles, just as H & M don't do anything as Duke and Duchess.



It’s appalling. (Expectation of children entitled to titles (pun intended) and the fact that they have no shame exploiting the Sussex one).

They still have this site: https://sussexroyal.com/

Just wants to pick and choose only what suits them.

I wish harry would take a page from Mako:








						Mako of Japan: the fallen princess exiled in New York has found her very first job - World Today News
					

Japan’s former princess has landed her first job in New York, according to this April 12, 2022 Royal Histories article. Japan’s Mako is collaborating with a New York museum. Mako du Japan no longer holds the title of princess since she got married au roturier Kei Komuro. Their marriage is among...



					www.world-today-news.com
				












						Princess Mako’s new life in NYC, from an unpaid internship to one-bedroom flat
					

We find out what the former princess Mako has been up to with her husband in New York, months after she left the Japanese royal family in October 2021




					www.scmp.com


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> Are the gloves off?  Seems to be lots of expose H&M news today.


Not in the US press, most are still supporting them. As far as I know _Variety_ still plans to give Meghan a cover.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Not in the US press, most are still supporting them. As far as I know _Variety_ still plans to give Meghan a cover.


maybe SS arranged that before the separation


----------



## bag-mania

carmen56 said:


> Didn’t Fergie complain she got a verruca from wearing a pair of Diana’s shoes?


Apparently so. Fergie put it in her book. I can’t imagine it added much to her story and it came off as a passive aggressive dig at Diana.


----------



## Cinderlala

marietouchet said:


> i read Bower but do not remember …
> MM, during Suits period of 6 years - as B list actress, was a social climber, used people but was she then known as a bully ? Or just as self serving ?
> she certainly seems to have bullied/manipulated H from day 1
> Did I just gloss over bullying while in Suits time frame ?
> 
> PS a with H she was suddenly in a position where she had lots of people to do her bidding, if not reporting to her and with an oversight department ie HR


IIRC she was described as respected by the Suits directors(?) until she started seeing H.  Then her attitude changed.  I think there were reports of poor treatment from the crew.  She was eventually written out of the last season(?) entirely.  She was awful to the people at the Reitmans(?) commercial shoot pre-H to the point where her agent forced her to return and apologize.  So, the bullying started earlier than H.

And remember she was not a B list actress----it's ZZZZ list.   

In all honesty, she truly was not even a C-list actress.  And she was never a Hollywood actress---her only success was as a third-tier character on a cable show filmed in Toronto.  The distance from LA alone would make further acting success more difficult not to mention her age and lack of talent.  She hasn't even managed to parlay her post-H fame into getting a single role in Hollywood as an actress---that speaks volumes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Developments


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Apparently so. Fergie put it in her book. I can’t imagine it added much to her story and it came off as a passive aggressive dig at Diana.


and diana towered over fergie....same shoe size?  I think Jackie Kennedy wore a size 11 or something...isn't fergie average height?


----------



## Kevinaxx

bag-mania said:


> Not in the US press, most are still supporting them. As far as I know _Variety_ still plans to give Meghan a cover.


Sadly I’ve learned my lesson in speaking publicly here about my feelings when H&M are brought up.

(So very glad there’s folks here that feel same).

And the fact that they’re defending her simply because she’s black and an American, never mind her personality or character, just shows how wonky our country is.

Not getting into politics or anything because that’s the rules (respecting), but you get the drift.


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> and diana towered over fergie....same shoe size?  I think Jackie Kennedy wore a size 11 or something...isn't fergie average height?


According to the interwebs, Fergie is 5'8" and Diana was 5'10"


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> According to the interwebs, Fergie is 5'8" and Diana was 5'10"


oh, not that different I guess


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> I think the Palace owe the public an explanation of how and why this woman was allowed to abuse these staff members for no reason other than she's a complete bully.


Now I am thinking it is because Harry was abusive as well and that would have come out. It's like Meghan unleashed the worst in him.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> When Fergie joined the RF, she had a negative influence on Diana.
> 
> Remember when they were caught poking someone's butt with their umbrellas at the Royal Ascot? That was Fergie influencing Diana.


And didn't they once go to a nightclub in disguises? It reminded me of something my roommates and I did in college.


----------



## bag-mania

Kevinaxx said:


> Sadly I’ve learned my lesson in speaking publicly here about my feelings when H&M are brought up.
> 
> (So very glad there’s folks here that feel same).
> 
> And the fact that they’re defending her simply because she’s black and an American, never mind her personality or character, just shows how wonky our country is.
> 
> Not getting into politics or anything because that’s the rules (respecting), but you get the drift.


I feel most here have no idea what H&M are doing. All they know are the PR puff pieces and of course the notorious Oprah interview which they believed because they trust Oprah and CBS. If people knew she brought her own photographer to Uvalde to take pictures of her laying flowers down at the courthouse for publicity they might feel differently. Or not, celebrities have never needed to be good people to be popular.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cinderlala said:


> IIRC she was described as respected by the Suits directors(?) until she started seeing H.  Then her attitude changed.  I think there were reports of poor treatment from the crew.  She was eventually written out of the last season(?) entirely.  She was awful to the people at the Reitmans(?) commercial shoot pre-H to the point where her agent forced her to return and apologize.  So, the bullying started earlier than H.
> 
> And remember she was not a B list actress----it's ZZZZ list.
> 
> In all honesty, she truly was not even a C-list actress.  And she was never a Hollywood actress---her only success was as a third-tier character on a cable show filmed in Toronto.  The distance from LA alone would make further acting success more difficult not to mention her age and lack of talent.  She hasn't even managed to parlay her post-H fame into getting a single role in Hollywood as an actress---that speaks volumes.


Remember the video of the friend’s 10-11? yr old birthday - she put on a crown and made everyone call her queen. 
That should count as bullying imo.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Now I am thinking it is because Harry was abusive as well and that would have come out. It's like Meghan unleashed the worst in him.


You may be right. Meghan becomes whatever she needs to be to achieve her goals. Particularly early on, if she thought Harry would disapprove of her treating the employees poorly, she wouldn’t have done it. Clearly by that time she was secure in the knowledge that Harry would side with her, no matter what.


----------



## csshopper

Molly0 said:


> Not a regular poster on this thread & most of what is said goes right over my head.  Not a supporter, nor a hater of Megan/Harry but it keeps occurring to me, over and over “What is up with Oprah?”  Decades ago, I remember on her talk show she was focused in on seeking “dirt” on the Royal Family from Sarah Ferguson when she was going through her “stuff”. (Everyone has their turn, at some point in life, at going through “stuff”.).  It seems she has been on the lookout for decades for any loose cannon existing in the royal’s inner circle that she can pounce on.
> It’s baffling. …& certainly not very “enlightened” ! ( …as she professes to be.)


How *Oprah* Winfrey tried (and *failed) to get interviews with* ...​https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...rince-harry-meghan-markle-diana-b1813407.html - 461k - Cached - Similar pages 
Mar 6, 2021 *...* Harry and Meghan on *Oprah*: How TV personality tried (and *failed) to get* an *interview with Princess Diana* · Winfrey's *interview* with Harry and ...

This helps explain it, Oprah holds a grudge. I also remember reading Fergie was her second choice, but she took the opportunity to get any RF member on camera she could.


----------



## Molly0

csshopper said:


> How *Oprah* Winfrey tried (and *failed) to get interviews with* ...​https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...rince-harry-meghan-markle-diana-b1813407.html - 461k - Cached - Similar pages
> Mar 6, 2021 *...* Harry and Meghan on *Oprah*: How TV personality tried (and *failed) to get* an *interview with Princess Diana* · Winfrey's *interview* with Harry and ...
> 
> This helps explain it, Oprah holds a grudge. I also remember reading Fergie was her second choice, but she took the opportunity to get any RF member on camera she could.


It’s so ugly that’s she seems hell bent on “poking” the Royals decade after decade.


----------



## Molly0

Molly0 said:


> It’s so ugly that’s she seems hell bent on “poking” the Royals decade after decade.


Perhaps she should stick to interviewing Dr Oz?  

Or hauling around those little red wagons?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> This is great. Can they be stripped of their dukedom please?



Sorry to be nitpicky, but...HIS dukedom. Raptor is just a tag-along.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lake Effect

Molly0 said:


> Perhaps she should stick to interviewing Dr Oz?
> 
> Or hauling around those little red wagons?
> 
> View attachment 5616924


OMG I remember those Oprah years ...


----------



## gracekelly

Molly0 said:


> Perhaps she should stick to interviewing Dr Oz?
> 
> Or hauling around those little red wagons?
> 
> View attachment 5616924


I remember this very well.  Right after she announced she was opening a restaurant in Chicago and her favorite dish of mashed potatoes was on the menu.  At that exact moment, I knew she would gain it all back and that was the end of her 125lb figure.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I remember this very well.  Right after she announced she was opening a restaurant in Chicago and her favorite dish of mashed potatoes was on the menu.  At that exact moment, I knew she would gain it all back and that was the end of her 125lb figure.


it's not easy losing weight and keeping it off....when I see someone do it (marie osmond, dolly parton) I'm always a bit surprised.
as far as O, I don't agree with what she did with H&M but that woman had a ton of charisma.  when she did her favorite things show, you believed she actually used those products.  now when you see her minion doing it on the view, it just looks like they're selling stuff


----------



## charlottawill

Molly0 said:


> It’s so ugly that’s she seems hell bent on “poking” the Royals decade after decade.


I think her ego tells her she is American royalty due to her fame and success in spite of humble beginnings. America worships the "self made", although most really aren't. She doesn't understand and probably resents actual royalty, hence her kinship with MM.


----------



## Molly0

sdkitty said:


> it's not easy losing weight and keeping it off....when I see someone do it (marie osmond, dolly parton) I'm always a bit surprised.
> as far as O, I don't agree with what she did with H&M but that woman had a ton of charisma.  when she did her favorite things show, you believed she actually used those products.  now when you see her minion doing it on the view, it just looks like they're selling stuff


It was indeed a clever celebrity marketing/merch ploy.


----------



## Molly0

charlottawill said:


> I think her ego tells her she is American royalty due to her fame and success in spite of humble beginnings. America worships the "self made", although most really aren't. She doesn't understand and probably resents actual royalty, hence her kinship with MM.


Could be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yes, after all, half of QEII's grandchildren are not HRHs/dont use the style
> And there is a diff between being an HRH and Prince - two diff styles



HRH is a style, Prince is a title.


----------



## charlottawill

Molly0 said:


> Perhaps she should stick to interviewing Dr Oz?
> 
> Or hauling around those little red wagons?
> 
> View attachment 5616924



I can never forgive her for foisting those two charlatans on the world (Oz and McGraw).


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I can never forgive her for foisting those two charlatans on the world (Oz and McGraw).


I'm sure she has big regrets on that


----------



## marietouchet

Th


CobaltBlu said:


> Now I am thinking it is because Harry was abusive as well and that would have come out. It's like Meghan unleashed the worst in him.


There was a time when H could do no wrong and no one would have listened to complaints about him


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't know about you, but my daily affirmations are a bit more positive.


----------



## miss_chiff

Did Meghan carefully plot her own exile from the Royal Family?
					

It alleges that her aides - who named themselves the 'Sussex Survivors' Club' after Meghan and Harry quit their roles - called the Duchess a 'narcissistic sociopath'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> How *Oprah* Winfrey tried (and *failed) to get interviews with* ...​https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...rince-harry-meghan-markle-diana-b1813407.html - 461k - Cached - Similar pages
> Mar 6, 2021 *...* Harry and Meghan on *Oprah*: How TV personality tried (and *failed) to get* an *interview with Princess Diana* · Winfrey's *interview* with Harry and ...
> 
> This helps explain it, Oprah holds a grudge. I also remember reading Fergie was her second choice, but she took the opportunity to get any RF member on camera she could.


I have mentioned this before. OW had lined up a tell-all interview with Diana, but the BRF managed to convince her to forget the interview. OW never forgave the BRF's interference and from then on she seemed hell-bent on getting even. This is probably the reason she never thoroughly questioned Dufus and ZedZed about any of their 17 lies during their charade of an interview.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Th
> 
> There was a time when H could do no wrong and no one would have listened to complaints about him


Everything about him from 2018 on should carry the notation, “PM” for “Post Meghan.”

If he does publish his book about “the man he has become” it will be a delusional train wreck. Maybe Valentine Low’s book will help debunk Hazbeen/Raptor’s “truths.” Probably a rehash of things we already know since she’s incapable of an original thought, and her dimwit handbag even less so.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> I have mentioned this before. OW had lined up a tell-all interview with Diana, but the BRF managed to convince her to forget the interview. OW never forgave the BRF's interference and from then on she seemed hell-bent on getting even. This is probably the reason she never thoroughly questioned Dufus and ZedZed about any of their 17 lies during their charade of an interview.


that could be so but I think a lot of it had to do with just the opportunity for a sensational interview and the whole WOC thing....which is ironic considering the privileged life the WIFE grew up with....Very different from O's experience


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

miss_chiff said:


> Did Meghan carefully plot her own exile from the Royal Family?
> 
> 
> It alleges that her aides - who named themselves the 'Sussex Survivors' Club' after Meghan and Harry quit their roles - called the Duchess a 'narcissistic sociopath'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



"New book claims that Meghan Markle's aides, the 'Sussex Survivors' Club', called her a 'narcissistic sociopath'"


----------



## Mumotons

Queen 'surprised' Meghan wanted to wear white at wedding book claims
					

KATIE NICHOLL's new book claims the late Queen was surprised by Meghan's wedding dress choice, that she had to step in and that royal brother's rift remains damaged.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



Well, weren’t we all ?


----------



## Molly0

Maggie Muggins said:


> I have mentioned this before. OW had lined up a tell-all interview with Diana, but the BRF managed to convince her to forget the interview. OW never forgave the BRF's interference and from then on she seemed hell-bent on getting even. This is probably the reason she never thoroughly questioned Dufus and ZedZed about any of their 17 lies during their charade of an interview.


Ah I see.  Kind of sad really for someone in her position.  Always on the lookout for a loose cannon that she can use.  
   …and after all that “enlightenment” too.


----------



## miss_chiff

charlottawill said:


> "New book claims that Meghan Markle's aides, the 'Sussex Survivors' Club', called her a 'narcissistic sociopath'"


LOVE KRAMER!!! He’s a human Beaker lol


----------



## Cinderlala

This book from Valentine Low looks sensational!  I can't wait to read it.  It sounds like we've been right since the very beginning.    (Well, from as soon as I knew who she was since I'd never heard of her until H.)  

Something tells me there will be some unpleasant weeks ahead for Ginge & Unhinged.


----------



## needlv

Mumotons said:


> Queen 'surprised' Meghan wanted to wear white at wedding book claims
> 
> 
> KATIE NICHOLL's new book claims the late Queen was surprised by Meghan's wedding dress choice, that she had to step in and that royal brother's rift remains damaged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, weren’t we all ?


What was worse was that MM’s veil was longer than the Queen’s.  So the next royal bride must go longer to knock off MM’s statement…


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> that could be so but I think a lot of it had to do with just the opportunity for a sensational interview and the whole WOC thing....which is ironic considering the privileged life the WIFE grew up with....Very different from O's experience


By not following up on MM and H ‘s answers, OW did not interrupt the flow of their drivel, and make them more cautious in their replies 
in retrospect, what she did was to give them enough rope to hang themselves, 
That interview is one of the strongest bits in the case against HandM, and we have OW to thank


----------



## marietouchet

Cinderlala said:


> This book from Valentine Low looks sensational!  I can't wait to read it.  It sounds like we've been right since the very beginning.    (Well, from as soon as I knew who she was since I'd never heard of her until H.)
> 
> Something tells me there will be some unpleasant weeks ahead for Ginge & Unhinged.


And the Low excerpts are different from the Bower book which focused exclusively on HER, the gloves are off now, VL has lots things to say about H too
cant wait for the revised Bower book too , yummy


----------



## charlottawill

Mumotons said:


> Queen 'surprised' Meghan wanted to wear white at wedding book claims
> 
> 
> KATIE NICHOLL's new book claims the late Queen was surprised by Meghan's wedding dress choice, that she had to step in and that royal brother's rift remains damaged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, weren’t we all ?



'Meghan was at the castle to taste some of the dishes, and told one of the caterers she could taste egg,' said the source. 'She got quite upset, saying that the dish was meant to be vegan and macrobiotic, when *suddenly the Queen walked in and said. 'Meghan, in this family we don't speak to people like that.' '*


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> I'm always amazed by the things people are able to find…




To even the weird double jointed thumb


----------



## Toby93

This article says Harry got a £17 million advance for his book and £35 million in total.


----------



## Suncatcher

Such an odious couple.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry’s book had already been delayed until next year before the Queen died. If there was any chance of it coming out this year it would already be up for pre-order and it isn’t.

The publisher is more than happy to wait in hopes that anything added will make it a better book.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> This article says Harry got a £17 million advance for his book and £35 million in total.



Is he desperate to get it "refined" because:
a) he wants to remove truth bombs attacking Charles/Camille
b) he wants to add truth bombs orginally slated for after TQ's death
c) he wants to add in latest news updates aka the funeral
d) all of the above?


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Is he desperate to get it "refined" because:
> a) he wants to remove truth bombs attacking Charles/Camille
> b) he wants to add truth bombs orginally slated for after TQ's death
> c) he wants to add in latest news updates aka the funeral
> d) all of the above?


B & C


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

miss_chiff said:


> Did Meghan carefully plot her own exile from the Royal Family?
> 
> 
> It alleges that her aides - who named themselves the 'Sussex Survivors' Club' after Meghan and Harry quit their roles - called the Duchess a 'narcissistic sociopath'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


_A former staff member told Low: ‘*Everyone knew that the institution would be judged by her happiness. The mistake they made was thinking that she wanted to be happy*_.’


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Is he desperate to get it "refined" because:
> a) he wants to remove truth bombs falsehoods attacking Charles/Camille because he wants the titles for his kids.
> b) he wants to add truth bombs orginally slated for after TQ's death
> c) he wants to add in latest news updates aka the funeral
> d) all of the above?


d


----------



## Awillow

Molly0 said:


> Perhaps she should stick to interviewing Dr Oz?
> 
> Or hauling around those little red wagons?
> 
> View attachment 5616924


----------



## LittleStar88

Fingers crossed!


----------



## rose60610

I think Meghan would have been a perfect wife for....Caligula. They're both as disgusting as each other, felt like they were rulers of the world, and demand respect and loyalty of everyone regardless.  They're both deranged.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Wow



This might be the only reason to listen to her crappy podcasts...the venom she spewed about the BRF not knowing the Queen was about to pass!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> The next time someone say we are mean to Z-list, we'll tell them we are...
> 
> View attachment 5616483


I love your signature BTW!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> and diana towered over fergie....same shoe size?  I think Jackie Kennedy wore a size 11 or something...isn't fergie average height?


Sadly, can happen.  I'm 5'4", SIL is 5'9".  We both wear a 39 
Neither of us have plantar warts.


----------



## scarlet555

LittleStar88 said:


> Fingers crossed!



Hoping we can see the receipts soon, we knew it all along here.


----------



## miss_chiff

Sorry if it’s already been posted.
Part 1


----------



## miss_chiff

Part 2


----------



## Mumotons

I still don’t get mememe’s brain - did she really believe in the day and age of social media that you can’t hide things, not forever. 
She and JH deserve each other, it really didn’t take that long to see the truth of them both, welcome to the Hotel California Mm and JH


----------



## CarryOn2020

More from VLow - worth a read  

_After the duchess wore the earrings for a second time, an aide decided to take it up with Harry. He is said to have looked “shocked” that people knew where the earrings came from, although the Sussexes’ lawyers deny he was ever questioned about their provenance._


----------



## andrashik

Of course


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure I believe the BRF had the headspace to even notice she was holding her shoes into a camera. Seeing which other stunts she pulled that's really a minor sin in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

LittleStar88 said:


> Fingers crossed!



Sadly huge sections of the British media and public support her it’s unbelievable and depressing how thick people are here - the same people cheering an awful budget that has shocked the markets so stocks and sterling has plummeted - maybe when they buy things like fuel and realise the price has gone up because the pound is so weak it will sink in but I doubt it - these people will buy the stupid book - hope it comes with free crayons for them


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5617152
> 
> Of course


Could that be why she claimed her shoes were missing? So that the next time she was in public, people would check out her new shoes.


----------



## Mumotons

elvisfan4life said:


> Sadly huge sections of the British media and public support her it’s unbelievable and depressing how thick people are here - the same people cheering an awful budget that has shocked the markets so stocks and sterling has plummeted - maybe when they buy things like fuel and realise the price has gone up because the pound is so weak it will sink in but I doubt it - these people will buy the stupid book - hope it comes with free crayons for them


I think the Guardian always will, even at the expense of looking stupid when the facts are in their faces, likewise there will always be fans who won’t hear the truth, but I think I huge swathe of people in the UK can’t stand her either. The next few months will be telling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One little detail, but so telling. Pre-Raptor Harry is described as shouldering a good part of the burden resting on William's shoulders, being a honest sounding board and most important to me as unwaveringly loyal. Not jealous, not unhappy with his lower rank, not of the opinion he deserves the same as William.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> This article says Harry got a £17 million advance for his book and £35 million in total.




That still means £17M (if it's true) 

The rest will depend on sales.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I think Meghan would have been a perfect wife for....Caligula. They're both as disgusting as each other, felt like they were rulers of the world, and demand respect and loyalty of everyone regardless.  They're both deranged.



FYI: Caligula's history has been revised lately by Classical scholars 

I wouldn't wish her on anyone TBH but Harry seems pretty deserving.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> FYI: Caligula's history has been revised lately by Classical scholars
> 
> I wouldn't wish her on anyone TBH but Harry seems pretty deserving.



You know how I feel about that, but even if we take Harry out of the equation - the real drama is how that thing is making a whole extended family completely miserable. She should be banned into a magic lamp or something. Maybe some long forgotten dungeon would do as well.


----------



## Diamondbirdie

The gloves are off in the British press today, wow, all these book extracts coming at the same time. I think this is the start of H and M being entirely cut adrift. Charles and William know that the monarchy really doesn’t need the distraction of Harry constantly sniping in the background. They will thoroughly discredit him, then there will be no way back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Diamondbirdie said:


> The gloves are off in the British press today, wow, all these book extracts coming at the same time. I think this is the start of H and M being entirely cut adrift. Charles and William know that the monarchy really doesn’t need the distraction of Harry constantly sniping in the background. They will thoroughly discredit him, then there will be no way back.



As Raptor said, though I'm using it not quite with the same meaning (she was blaming the evil BRF, I'm blaming her, her, her and Harry): "It didn't have to be this way. It's quite sad, really."


----------



## Suncatcher

Were these book extracts were scheduled for release now and it is a coincidence that the Queen has passed? Or were they timed for release after her passing?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Suncatcher said:


> Were these book extracts were scheduled for release now and it is a coincidence that the Queen has passed? Or were they timed for release after her passing?


I do not believe in coincidences, so my guess is they were timed this way.  Hazzie’s book, too, is being rewritten.  Seems to be a mad scramble to revise ‘recollections’.  Cannot help but wonder if the King has sent word about the titles — H&Mm’s, not the kids.


----------



## papertiger

Suncatcher said:


> Were these book extracts were scheduled for release now and it is a coincidence that the Queen has passed? Or were they timed for release after her passing?



They will have been planned a while ago (there's a timeline to any book's release). This is usually in time for the Thanksgiving/Christmas (holidays) market. PR, sending for and media reviews, ads, sponsorship etc all take time to set-up. 

However, publishers could have also brought forward the book's release by days or even a week or two to ride on the HUGE wave of interest (read focus) on the BRF right now with the mourning/funeral or conversely waited until the period of mourning was officially over.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do not believe in coincidences, so my guess is they were timed this way.  Hazzie’s book, too, is being rewritten.  Seems to be a mad scramble to revise ‘recollections’.  Cannot help but wonder if the King has sent word about the titles — H&Mm’s, not the kids.



_Courtiers: The Inside Story of the Palace Power Struggles_, was mentioned many times when the TB book came out. 

As in "if you think the TB paints M as hideous, just wait for the VL book".


----------



## 880

i think it suited BRF to cover for H’s character (thus his portrayal as a loyal wingman etc) before Meghan came along.

but, since he left, and now that the queen has passed away, they can cut him adrift simply by lack of opposition to the publication of his own words and deeds by others.

there is a reason why no one in the UK wanted to marry him


----------



## Suncatcher

Thank you @CarryOn2020 and @papertiger! And @880 too!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of books, I just bought "Our Rainbow Queen" to give as a Christmas gift to an 11yo Queen fan. I'll make sure to thumb through it as well.


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> i think it suited BRF to cover for H’s character (thus his portrayal as a loyal wingman etc) before Meghan came along.
> 
> but, since he left, and now that the queen has passed away, they can cut him adrift simply by lack of opposition to the publication of his own words and deeds by others.
> 
> there is a reason why no one in the UK wanted to marry him



He was actually fairly decent looking - until the wedding. 

Makes me wonder what he eats/does (or doesn't do anymore).


----------



## papertiger

'Truth bombs' explode worldwide -


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Bless the sugars, I'll have what they are smoking.


----------



## LittleStar88

DH calls MM “That Broad” and “Gold Digger” and has asked that I not bring her up anymore


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Sadly, can happen.  I'm 5'4", SIL is 5'9".  We both wear a 39
> Neither of us have plantar warts.


Ha
I'm like you - not tall but pretty large feet.....If Diana wore size 9 (which is what I just saw when googling) that's small for a tall woman


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *This might be the only reason to listen to her crappy podcasts..*.the venom she spewed about the BRF not knowing the Queen was about to pass!


Absolutely! Though, I'll wait for the clips from the DM, BLG, Twitter…


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Ha
> I'm like you - not tall but pretty large feet.....If Diana wore size 9 (which is what I just saw when googling) that's small for a tall woman



UK 9, so more like an 11 US

I'm a 5.5 UK (8-ish US)


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> UK 9, so more like an 11 US
> 
> I'm a 5.5 UK (8-ish US)


ok, thanks
then I still say Fergie had pretty big feet for her height.  but in any case that was nasty of her to take the shoes and then accuse diana of giving her plantar warts


----------



## Chanbal

miss_chiff said:


> Part 2



This is a very revealing chapter. The way TW treated the staff is shocking, "_They were run over by her, and then run over by Harry._"

 "_She wanted to make money…_" and she was "_laying a trail of evidence._" I believe these are TW's receipts that Gail K bragged about in one of her programs.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bless the sugars, I'll have what they are smoking.



I don't understand what this sugar is saying. Is she claiming that Zedzee is Diana's daughter?


----------



## CobaltBlu

These two nasty grifters really are made for each other.  
I doubt they will stick together though.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I don't understand what this sugar is saying. Is she claiming that Zedzee is Diana's daughter?



I wouldn't try to reason it, doesn't work on any level unless you're stoned, Elton John or away with the fairy elves.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> These two nasty grifters really are made for each other.
> I doubt they will stick together though.


IDK
He is weak and where is she gonna find another prince?  His royalty is the only reason she is rich and famous


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure I believe the BRF had the headspace to even notice she was holding her shoes into a camera. Seeing which other stunts she pulled that's really a minor sin in the grand scheme of things.


You are probably right. However, I think the BRF had staff members keeping an eye on every move of the Harkles. I would be 'shocked' if they didn't.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As Raptor said, though I'm using it not quite with the same meaning (she was blaming the evil BRF, I'm blaming her, her, her and Harry): "It didn't have to be this way. It's quite sad, really."


What she meant when she said it was, if only the BRF had given in to their demands and allowed them half in, half out with all the perks and none of the actual work, she wouldn't have had to vindictively lie and try to embarrass and humiliate them on national TV.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One little detail, but so telling. Pre-Raptor Harry is described as shouldering a good part of the burden resting on William's shoulders, being a honest sounding board and most important to me as unwaveringly loyal. Not jealous, not unhappy with his lower rank, not of the opinion he deserves the same as William.



seems to me that if she was having that huge wedding it wouldn't be a surprise that she was wearing white...I suppose TQ might have expected ivory?  the whole idea of that wedding seems so ridiculous on hindsight.  guess H wanted what his big brother had and Meghan wanted to be a Star.  and the RF couldn't say not or they would be racists


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> IDK
> He is weak and where is she gonna find another prince?  His royalty is the only reason she is rich and famous



Yup, if she had any sense, but her 'eyes are bigger than her stomach'. 

MegZ _always_ thinks she can do and deserves better.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> Ha
> I'm like you - not tall but pretty large feet.....If Diana wore size 9 (which is what I just saw when googling) that's small for a tall woman.


I had read years ago, when Diana had just married into the RF that she was self conscious of her foot size.  I am 5'10 and wear a 9.5 - 10 US depending on the brand.  She always had to wear low heels, otherwise she would tower over KC3, and low heels always look larger and longer 

As the years went on, she started to wear higher heels as she no longer cared if she was taller than him.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One little detail, but so telling. Pre-Raptor Harry is described as shouldering a good part of the burden resting on William's shoulders, being a honest sounding board and most important to me as unwaveringly loyal. Not jealous, not unhappy with his lower rank, not of the opinion he deserves the same as William.




Master manipulator that she is, she found a buried ember of resentment and jealousy and fanned it into a raging fire.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> seems to me that if she was having that huge wedding it wouldn't be a surprise that she was wearing white...I suppose TQ might have expected ivory? the whole idea of that wedding seems so ridiculous on hindsight. guess H wanted what his big brother had and Meghan wanted to be a Star. and the RF couldn't say not or they would be racists



What's crazy about this is that Meghan has actually complained about the wedding, that it was a "spectacle" for the world.  As if she and Harry didn't demand the spectacle in the first place, which they did.  She could have had a Beatrice-sized wedding with just the family but, of course, they needed the huge wedding for the spectacle of it, to invite all those people they didn't know but wanted to know.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> What she meant when she said it was, *if only the BRF had given in to their demands *and allowed them half in, half out with all the perks and none of the actual work,* she wouldn't have had to vindictively lie and try to embarrass and humiliate them on national TV*.You know what, I believe she would do it.



I believe she would still find an excuse to do it. For people like TW, nothing is never enough imo.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> This is a very revealing chapter. The way TW treated the staff is shocking, "_They were run over by her, and then run over by Harry._"
> 
> "_She wanted to make money…_" and she was "_laying a trail of evidence._" I believe these are TW's receipts that Gail K bragged about in one of her programs.


And yet here we are, 18 months later and most of her statements have been proven as lies, and still no "reciepts"?


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> What's crazy about this is that Meghan has actually complained about the wedding, that it was a "spectacle" for the world.  As if she and Harry didn't demand the spectacle in the first place, which they did.  She could have had a Beatrice-sized wedding with just the family but, of course, they needed the huge wedding for the spectacle of it, to invite all those people they didn't know but wanted to know.


exactly....I'm sorry if this is old fashioned but I don't think a twice divorced woman of almost 40 should be walking down the aisle with a veil over her face


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> exactly....I'm sorry if this is old fashioned but I don't think a twice divorced woman of almost 40 should be walking down the aisle with a veil over her face


I'm with you.  Maybe the younger crowd thought it was fine, but I thought it was laughable that she had the nerve to show up in white with the veil.  It *was* a spectacle, but not for the same reason that she thinks it was


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> He was actually fairly decent looking - until the wedding.
> 
> Makes me wonder what he eats/does (or doesn't do anymore).


The bitterness is eating away at him. Regret over his poor choices will now accelerate it.


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> He was actually fairly decent looking - until the wedding.
> 
> Makes me wonder what he eats/does (or doesn't do anymore).



I want to see what he looks like when he has to eat his words


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Yup, if she had any sense, but her 'eyes are bigger than her stomach'.
> 
> MegZ _always_ thinks she can do and deserves better.


I think that would be a big miscalculation....unless she can get one of her friends to introduce her to rupert murdoch


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> exactly....I'm sorry if this is old fashioned but I don't think a twice divorced woman of almost 40 should be walking down the aisle with a veil over her face


Twice? I thought that was unconfirmed. Still, I agree with you.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I'm with you.  Maybe the younger crowd thought it was fine, but I thought it was laughable that she had the nerve to show up in white with the veil.  It *was* a spectacle, but not for the same reason that she thinks it was


As in, "Stop making a spectacle of yourself MM".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> And yet here we are, 18 months later and most of her statements have been proven as lies, and still no "reciepts"?



Speaking to the head of human resources may be just a small part of a possibly created 'trail of evidence'. I wouldn't be surprised if TW has still a couple of more cards up her sleeve. However, I don't think she ever anticipated the public response to "her truth". It was likely a miscalculation on her part.


----------



## Chanbal

TW orchestrated every little detail, allegedly!


----------



## Stansy

sdkitty said:


> exactly....I'm sorry if this is old fashioned but I don't think a twice divorced woman of almost 40 should be walking down the aisle with a veil over her face


I was „only“ 28 at my first and only wedding and did not wear a veil…


----------



## purseinsanity

andrashik said:


> View attachment 5617152
> 
> Of course


Someone here already knew that days ago!


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I think that would be a big miscalculation....unless she can get one of her friends to introduce her to rupert murdoch


All I can say to that is ewwwwww


----------



## Chanbal

Oh gosh!


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## BlueCherry

Toby93 said:


> All I can say to that is ewwwwww



Although I reckon the conversation and the conjugals would be better than with Harry


----------



## Chanbal

Fingers crossed!


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> All I can say to that is ewwwwww


$$$


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I don't understand what this sugar is saying. Is she claiming that Zedzee is Diana's daughter?



In spirit.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


>




Hahahaha! This woman has lost her damn mind.


----------



## BlueCherry

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh!




They couldn’t even wait for the mourning period to end before whining about this. Disgusting!

Let’s assume he gives them in exchange for their silence. But what are the chances they’ll honour this.


----------



## BlueCherry

charlottawill said:


>




That’s testament to what they will do for fame and money, it’s not bravery, it’s greed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> IDK
> He is weak and where is she gonna find another prince?  His royalty is the only reason she is rich and famous



Yeah, I would have said it's in her nature to look for the next stepping stone, but where do you go after the son of the King of the UK?

Plus, she's effectively middle aged, has two small children, sun damage, publicly proven she is a complete nutjob and what little waist she had is gone forever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Lizzie's post below is interesting.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


>



Is she F’ing crazy?!  She’s comparing what women in Iran are going through to TW?  The delusions people have are unreal.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I think that would be a big miscalculation....unless she can get one of her friends to introduce her to rupert murdoch



But: 

A) he'd get her to sin a NDA and pre-nup 

B) she'd have to change her politics, not just her religion/denomination (again) 

C) RM is not quite the fool H is


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> TW orchestrated every little detail, allegedly!



We all knew she flew to NY at seven and a half months pregnant for her lavish baby shower, but it disgusted me how just after the Oprah interview, _she was too "heavily pregnant"_ to fly to the UK for Prince Philips funeral. She had spewed all those lies and then had no problem sending Harry back to the family they trashed.

She IS a coward.  We all saw it on the walkabout.  She is a "strong independant woman" as long as there is 5000 miles between her and the BRF.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I would have said it's in her nature to look for the next stepping stone, but where do you go after the son of the King of the UK?
> 
> Plus, she's effectively middle aged, has two small children, *sun damage*, publicly proven she is a complete nutjob and *what little waist she had is gone forever.*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Oh gosh!




May Charles surprise us all. Just in case the BRF keeps an eye on what's written online: we're all rooting for you Charles, and we'll celebrate if the Harkles see consequences.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


>



Poor Dolly, now she knows how Prince William feels with a idiot for a sibling


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Lizzie's post below is interesting.




I see the word "_female_ (descendants)" there though 

However, since M is a feminist (or 'feminist') she won't think it fair and refuse any titles even if offered for her (or 'her') children on the grounds of inequality.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




As someone who's following the situation in Iran very closely with a somewhat personal interest, that makes me extremely angry.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Speaking to the head of human resources may be just a small part of a possibly created 'trail of evidence'. I wouldn't be surprised if TW has still a couple of more cards up her sleeve. However, I don't think she ever anticipated the public response to "her truth". It was likely a miscalculation on her part.


IDK about the public but a lot of US media took their word for everything they said....the women on the View were basically quoting what they said in the O interview - that the British tabloids were stalking Meghan the same way they did Diana and H had to protect his wife....this one I think came from Sara Haines


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As someone who's following the situation in Iran very closely with a somewhat personal interest, that makes me extremely angry.


the nerve....a woman lost her life and they are comparing Meghan & H's struggle?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> May Charles surprise us all. Just in case the BRF keeps an eye on what's written online: we're all rooting for you Charles, and we'll celebrate if the Harkles see consequences.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Lizzie's post below is interesting.




Yeah, but we knew that they were not born with a princely title. The discussion is if Charles will grant it, and he seems in no particular rush.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I would have said it's in her nature to look for the next stepping stone, but where do you go after the son of the King of the UK?
> 
> Plus, she's effectively middle aged, has two small children, sun damage, publicly proven she is a complete nutjob and what little waist she had is gone forever.


she already achieved way more than she could have dreamed of when the captured him


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I see the word "_female_ (descendants)" there though
> 
> However, since M is a feminist (or 'feminist') she won't think it fair and refuse any titles even if offered for her (or 'her') children on the grounds of inequality.



Naw. We all know Ghoul's belief system is flexible.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As someone who's following the situation in Iran very closely with a somewhat personal interest, that *makes me extremely angry*.



Me too! I have family in and scattered over ME too (although not Iran) there are shockwaves all over.  Absolutely disgusting to equate/compare/layer the 2.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Me too! I have family in and scattered over ME too (although not Iran) there are shockwaves all over.  Absolutely disgusting to equate/compare/layer the 2.


Exactly, the disgusting duo need to renounce and enjoy their overseas life [just like W&E]. 
The world is teetering on WW3, which  is why the BRF titles, LoS, CoS, etc. should be the *least* of our problems and concerns.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but we knew that they were not born with a princely title. The discussion is if Charles will grant it, and he seems in no particular rush.



and let him pontificate - until after his coronation.

and _then_ - say NO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> the nerve....a woman lost her life and they are comparing Meghan & H's struggle?



It's not only Jina (Mahsa was just the name the regime forced on her. All my Iranian Kurdish friends not born in Europe have two names, one name their parents actually wanted to give them and one to go on their Iranian passport) at this point. It's hard to verify exactly but the count was above 50 killed civilians on Friday. The newest victim is a 20yo girl who went to one of the demonstrations who got shot in the face yesterday evening. Iran's MO is turning off the internet - I think Elon Musk sought an exception from embargoes to turn on Starlink, though? -, then sending in military to proceed most brutally against their own people. 

But sure, Raptor had it harder because the BRF didn't coddle her while mourning their matriarch. Give me a break.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she already achieved way more than she could have dreamed of when the captured him



And then she bulldozed it all because she couldn't see the jackpot she hit.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And then she bulldozed it all because she couldn't see the jackpot she hit.


a case of truth being stranger than fiction


----------



## csshopper

I wonder if things will get bad enough she will magnanimously visit Daddy, dragging Hazbeen behind her, kids toddling along in a massive effort to deflect all the truth being exposed. Think of the headlines and photo ops. Maybe in December when William and Kate are to be in Boston for the Earthshot Event?

Or, I know this sounds horrid, but I think she’s so cold, calculating, soulless and with her narcissistic mind to plot this, she’ll wait until he’s on his deathbed, try to steamroller over Thomas Jr and Samantha to stage a reconciliation where she’s the focus of making his last moments happy, but is spared by his death of actually having to have a relationship with him. I think she’s evil enough to do it. Her handbag will be clutched in her claw because he, at this point,  has been thoroughly conditioned to do as he’s told. The descriptions of him emerging from the newest books out him as a mean repugnant bully, who is actually her willing accomplice, not her victim.


----------



## DoggieBags

There’s been a lot of discussion about the cultural differences between TW, as an American, who was used to being much more direct vs the typical BRF approach to things. The BRF approach is wrapped in traditions developed over centuries and in some cases could probably use a change or an update. But that doesn’t explain her many alleged instances of bullying her staff in the UK. Being direct is not synonymous with bullying people. Again from the American point of view there is belief in advancement via merit and hard work as opposed to entitlement via an accident of birth. It’s a nice thought but nepotism is alive and well in the US also so it’s not a pure meritocracy. Where this argument as applied to TW fails, imo, is that H&M don’t appear want to work hard for anything. 2 years later and nothing for Netflix, 2 years later with help from a veritable army of producers, etc., and 12 astonishingly vacuous and pointless 45 minute podcasts are the only things she’s managed to come up with. As they continue to flail around, reeling from one newsworthy cause to another in a vain attempt to get their names associated with a cause that will catapult them into the front ranks of world-famous philanthropists, it’s become more and more apparent that they lack the talent, intelligence, charisma, work ethic, conviction, or network to achieve the fame and fortune they so desperately crave. It’s actually painful to watch how much positive press these 2 grifters still get in the US after over 2 years of nothing out of them but relentless self-promotion not backed by anything even remotely substantive.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> I wonder if things will get bad enough she will magnanimously visit Daddy, dragging Hazbeen behind her, kids toddling along in a massive effort to deflect all the truth being exposed. Think of the headlines and photo ops. Maybe in December when William and Kate are to be in Boston for the Earthshot Event?
> 
> Or, I know this sounds horrid, but I think she’s so cold, calculating, soulless and with her narcissistic mind to plot this, she’ll wait until he’s on his deathbed, try to steamroller over Thomas Jr and Samantha to stage a reconciliation where she’s the focus of making his last moments happy, but is spared by his death of actually having to have a relationship with him. I think she’s evil enough to do it. Her handbag will be clutched in her claw because he, at this point,  has been thoroughly conditioned to do as he’s told. The descriptions of him emerging from the newest books out him as a mean repugnant bully, who is actually her willing accomplice, not her victim.



I wouldn't put it past her but until now she has been freaked by the thought of Harry and Tom Snr. meeting. MegZ hates her 'worlds' colliding where she can't control them (or remember what she's said and to whom)


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, but we knew that they were not born with a princely title. The discussion is if Charles will grant it, and he seems in no particular rush.



I can't see any titles being granted until after Harry's book is out, Meghan's remaining 9 podcast episodes have aired, and also how they generally behave over the next year. Meghan had a huge PR campaign planned with appearances on late night shows and some Variety magazine cover which were cancelled due to the Queen's death.  That'll likely all be rescheduled that so there is plenty of opportunity for her to level some new charge at the family.  Something from Netflix is also likely to air in the next few months, even if it is just the Invictus documentary, or maybe even their reality show.  It's a wise approach by Charles and a bargaining chip for him.

I also again wonder why they, who walked away from the family and have trashed them at every opportunity, are so eager to have the children claim their titles?  The titles do them no good in the U.S.  Nobody is going to curtsy to them here lol.  The only answer is because they plan to exploit and monetize the titles in some way down the road.

ETA:  Also, if I were Charles, I'd tell them that the children have to live and go to school in the UK for 5 - 7 years before the age of 18 if they expect to be granted a title from the BRF.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> There’s been a lot of discussion about the cultural differences between TW, as an American, who was used to being much more direct vs the typical BRF approach to things. The BRF approach is wrapped in traditions developed over centuries and in some cases could probably use a change or an update. But that doesn’t explain her many alleged instances of bullying her staff in the UK. Being direct is not synonymous with bullying people. Again from the American point of view there is belief in advancement via merit and hard work as opposed to entitlement via an accident of birth. It’s a nice thought but nepotism is alive and well in the US also so it’s not a pure meritocracy. Where this argument as applied to TW fails, imo, is that H&M don’t appear want to work hard for anything. 2 years later and nothing for Netflix, 2 years later with help from a veritable army of producers, etc., and 12 astonishingly vacuous and pointless 45 minute podcasts are the only things she’s managed to come up with. As they continue to flail around, reeling from one newsworthy cause to another in a vain attempt to get their names associated with a cause that will catapult them into the front ranks of world-famous philanthropists, it’s become more and more apparent that they lack the talent, intelligence, charisma, work ethic, conviction, or network to achieve the fame and fortune they so desperately crave. It’s actually painful to watch how much positive press these 2 grifters still get in the US after over 2 years of nothing out of them but relentless self-promotion not backed by anything even remotely substantive.



But the positive press is 90% generated by them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> There’s been a lot of discussion about the cultural differences between TW, as an American, who was used to being much more direct vs the typical BRF approach to things. The BRF approach is wrapped in traditions developed over centuries and in some cases could probably use a change or an update. But that doesn’t explain her many alleged instances of bullying her staff in the UK. Being direct is not synonymous with bullying people.



I absolutely don't understand how so many people seem to accept this explanation. Jason Knauff himself is American, wouldn't you think he'd understood her if it was just being American? Yet he didn't excuse her, went to his boss with his concerns and at one point thought it likely he'd be next on the list.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Words of wisdom from T.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Chanbal said:


> TW orchestrated every little detail, allegedly!



A group of friends set on financially exploiting Meghan’s status?  A lot of those ”friends” seemed to be more famous than Meghan and the entire spectacle seemed to mostly benefit her/generate publicity for her.  I recall that Shower being a media circus.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Words of wisdom from T.



I know that TW made a huge deal about the titles on the Oprah interview, deliberately misleading the American audience by saying it was "against protocol" to deny Archie the title of Prince.  She said she herself couldn't care less about titles, but it was his birthright.  

If she was so concerned about hereditary titles and where they actually matter, she should not have dragged Hazz and the kid(s) to sunny California.  The only place that titles would apply is in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait, wasn't it "They said they'd bend the rules for us and then didn't because he's black!" I vividly remember the bending rules part, which implies they knew very well he wasn't eligible.


----------



## Debbini

BlueCherry said:


> They couldn’t even wait for the mourning period to end before whining about this. Disgusting!
> 
> Let’s assume he gives them in exchange for their silence. But what are the chances they’ll honour this.


None!


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Twice? I thought that was unconfirmed. Still, I agree with you.


once divorced and maybe once annulled?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I absolutely don't understand how so many people seem to accept this explanation. Jason Knauff himself is American, wouldn't you think he'd understood her if it was just being American? Yet he didn't excuse her, went to his boss with his concerns and at one point thought it likely he'd be next on the list.


Imo it is too easy to say the issues are mostly cultural. There is so much more to it than that.  It all centers on the age-old greed.  Same for W&Ed, Andi&Sarah.  Hazz is a greedy, power-hungry jerk. Tw is greedy, old grifter. 

Charlie’s Angels


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Sadly huge sections of the British media and public support her it’s unbelievable and depressing how thick people are here - the same people cheering an awful budget that has shocked the markets so stocks and sterling has plummeted - maybe when they buy things like fuel and realise *the price has gone up because the pound is so weak *it will sink in but I doubt it - these people will buy the stupid book - hope it comes with free crayons for them


I didn’t realize until recently how much the value of the pound had fallen. Currently 1 pound = 1.09 dollar.


----------



## Debbini

There are different ways and approaches to talk to different people. I'm American and I usually prefer to be direct, but that never means rude, condescending, or impolite. Bullying is entirely a whole other beast and is Never acceptable. There are times, especially when I'm exasperated I may tend to be a little sarcastic, or spicy....lol.. never hurtful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t realize until recently how much the value of the pound had fallen. Currently 1 pound = 1.09 dollar.



Oh wow. I'm just getting used to the dollar being slightly better than the Euro once again after what, a decade, but I can't remember the British pound ever being in the same ballpark.


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> Were these book extracts were scheduled for release now and it is a coincidence that the Queen has passed? Or were they timed for release after her passing?


I’m hoping every tell-all writer jumps on the writing about H&M bandwagon. There’s bound to still be plenty left to discover.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, wasn't it "*They said they'd bend the rules for us and then didn't because he's black*!" I vividly remember the bending rules part, which implies they knew very well he wasn't eligible.


----------



## CobaltBlu

This is bizarre, really.  I mean there is so much other stuff but this was all super weird, the announcements are so different.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Excellent point, Baroness.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Those children are deprived by something so grand (and not to forget, close family bonds with anyone) only because their mother is an insufferable nutjob and their father has no backbone. It is sad really.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> This is bizarre, really.  I mean there is so much other stuff but this was all super weird, the announcements are so different.




Not so weird. It's the only thing that keeps monarchy as a monarchy (otherwise you'd all be free to vote for me  )

It just means that the BRF were _informed_ of Archie's birth date/time/place/circumstances _after_ the birth/fact/M&H truth, and hence presumed legitimacy, but there's no proof/evidence/verification and gave a notice to say as much. Lili's birth seems even more murky. If not provable, they are not entitled to titles nor #6 & #7 LOS. Harry and Meghan make a mockery of everything.

The others are evidence of that those royal children in line to the throne were born legitimate and were at least provably born of the mother's body and are entitled to be entitled.

You obviously can't officially (ap)prove what you can't prove and the BRF have to be careful.

If H&M can't prove these are Harry AND Meghan's children AND born of her body, they should leave out the  and the  and the demands and just love those children as _children_.

Personally, I absolutely don't care if the children were born of a surrogate or adopted or whatever, so long as they are loved, cared for, not used as pawns and are not made Prince/Princess (which is not only _not_ their right, but IMO much _better_ for the children).


----------



## Chanbal

Excellent point!


----------



## Chanbal

I think this can be posted here as it alludes to 'Pump Pump'


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> DH calls MM “That Broad” and “Gold Digger” and has asked that I not bring her up anymore


My Hubby told me at the beginning that he wasn't interested in any ZedZed or Dufus gossip, but then after the funeral when all their shenanigans were getting exposed online, he started casually mentioning them to me.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> and let him pontificate - until after his coronation.
> 
> and _then_ - say NO



And it is the only thing he needs to say to them. No explanations, justifications, apologies. It's good to be the King.


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> Not so weird. It's the only thing that keeps monarchy as a monarchy (otherwise you'd all be free to vote for me  )
> 
> It just means that the BRF were _informed_ of Archie's birth date/time/place/circumstances _after_ the birth/fact/M&H truth, and hence presumed legitimacy, but there's no proof/evidence/verification and gave a notice to say as much. Lili's birth seems even more murky. If not provable, they are not entitled to titles nor #6 & #7 LOS. Harry and Meghan make a mockery of everything.
> 
> The others are evidence of that those royal children in line to the throne were born legitimate and were at least provably born of the mother's body and are entitled to be entitled.
> 
> You obviously can't officially (ap)prove what you can't prove and the BRF have to be careful.
> 
> If H&M can't prove these are Harry AND Meghan's children AND born of her body, they should leave out the  and the  and the demands and just love those children as _children_.
> 
> Personally, I absolutely don't care if the children were born of a surrogate or adopted or whatever, so long as they are loved, cared for, not used as pawns and are not made Prince/Princess (which is not only _not_ their right, but IMO much _better_ for the children




It feels more and more like they are pawns.  I hope I am wrong.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> And it is the only thing he needs to say to them. No explanations, justifications, apologies. It's good to be the King.


Let Major Johnny deliver the news.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> What she meant when she said it was, if only the BRF had given in to their demands and allowed them half in, half out with all the perks and none of the actual work, she wouldn't have had to vindictively lie and try to embarrass and humiliate them on national TV.


Seeing how they have operated these last two or so years, even if the BRF had caved to all of their demands they still wouldn’t have been satisfied. I guarantee they would’ve kept pushing the envelope


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Those children are deprived by something so grand (and not to forget, close family bonds with anyone) only because their mother is an insufferable nutjob and their father has no backbone. It is sad really.


If we thought they were being brought up in a "normal" loving household, I would say that's OK.  But I don't think she's capable of giving much love to anyone except herself.  I coulde be wrong


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


>



Apparently Dolly not only has all of the talent in her family but the good sense as well. Her little sis is a couple bricks short of a load.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Re her splotchy skin, women often have a problem with this when they get hot or nervous, especially in perimenopause. Someone here said it got worse as her speech progressed, so I'm guessing that was the cause. It's not vitiligo. But you'd think she'd avoid a low cut neckline like that if she knows she is prone to this happening, unless it had never happened before.
> 
> ETA: In my limited experience, spray tans will only make skin imperfections more noticeable, not cover them up. Age spots and scars get darker, they don't disappear.


Good to know--never have I gotten a spray tan but maybe someday.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Dolly not only has all of the talent in her family but the good sense as well. Her little sis is a couple bricks short of a load.


Or as one of the Twitter commenters said, a few fries short of a Happy Meal


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> Good to know--never have I gotten a spray tan but maybe someday.


Did it once, never again.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Or as one of the Twitter commenters said, a few fries short of a Happy Meal


This is someone who believes the H&M publicity machine without question. Unfortunately, I suspect there are millions of them out there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



In case Nflix is interested, no one in my house, absolutely no one, wants to watch any shows that include H&M.
  Nope, not going to happen.


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> My Hubby told me at the beginning that he wasn't interested in any ZedZed or Dufus gossip, but then after the funeral when all their shenanigans were getting exposed online, he started casually mentioning them to me.


OMG my DH too!  Couldn't have cared less, then last night tells me he spent some time reading about MM and said she sounds like an absolutely awful woman.  Asked me why, if she demanded Haz declare she's his GF or she'd break up with him, he didn't say "ok see ya later!"


----------



## Toby93

Interesting that a lot of twitter users are saying this is TWs own account   Myra, as in My Real Account


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> If we thought they were being brought up in a "normal" loving household, I would say that's OK.  But I don't think she's capable of giving much love to anyone except herself.  I coulde be wrong


Honestly, at this point, I really don't give a rat's a$$ about their two pawns and whether or not they're missing out on being members of the BRF.  They're living in a mansion in Montecito, probably being raised by nannies more than their nut case parents.  I feel much sorrier for children around the world that are starving, raped, abused, and living generally crappy lives.


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


>



I hope it’s true that H has not agreed to a Netflix documentary on his kids. If H caves and agrees to a Netflix documentary on his kids, he will be exposed as one of the biggest hypocrites in recent memory. Whatever happened to leaving the BRF and the UK to ensure privacy for his kids? TW put out the false narrative that they couldn‘t send their kids to school in the UK without 40 plus paparazzi chasing after them snapping pictures. I mean W&C have managed to take their kids to and from school every day for years without hordes of paparazzi chasing them every day but clearly TW knows better! But somehow a Netflix documentary on the kids that will splash their pics all over social media is better and more private?


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that a lot of twitter users are saying this is TWs own account   Myra, as in My Real Account



Do you think Myra would like to share this video?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case Nflix is interested, no one in my house, absolutely no one, wants to watch any shows that include H&M.
> Nope, not going to happen.
> 
> View attachment 5617499


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> I hope it’s true that H has not agreed to a Netflix documentary on his kids. If H caves and agrees to a Netflix documentary on his kids, he will be exposed as one of the biggest hypocrites in recent memory. Whatever happened to leaving the BRF and the UK to ensure privacy for his kids? TW put out the false narrative that they couldn‘t send their kids to school in the UK without 40 plus paparazzi chasing after them snapping pictures. I mean W&C have managed to take their kids to and from school every day for years without hordes of paparazzi chasing them every day but clearly TW knows better! But somehow a Netflix documentary on the kids that will splash their pics all over social media is better and more private?


I agree with what you're saying, but they've already been exposed as two of the biggest hypocrites in history.  "Rules for thee, not for me" is their MO.


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


>



I can hear TW going off at JCMH: Give the kids to NETFLIX, you are worthless sonofaking! Or go get the MONEY!!


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


>



If Netflix isn’t interested in the duo’s love story then it makes Tyler Perry’s excessively saccharine tweet about H&M’s love story even more incomprehensible. Wasn’t one of the theories advanced that he did it to somehow drive interest both in the duo’s rumored documentary about their love story and in the thing he’s producing for Netflix?


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> This might be the only reason to listen to her crappy podcasts...the venom she spewed about the BRF not knowing the Queen was about to pass!


I don't understand that.  She knew it was to happen eventually.  One year, three years, but it was going to happen soon enough so surely she could have thought ahead...


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that a lot of twitter users are saying this is TWs own account   Myra, as in My Real Account



So now she's going to post daily Twitter tirades like "you know who" used to before he got banned? The similarities between the two are uncanny at times.


----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> So now she's going to post daily Twitter tirades like "you know who" used to before he got banned? The similarities between the two are uncanny at times.


Good lord. If that's really her own account and writing, she has the emotional maturity of a teenager.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> 'Meghan was at the castle to taste some of the dishes, and told one of the caterers she could taste egg,' said the source. 'She got quite upset, saying that the dish was meant to be vegan and macrobiotic, when *suddenly the Queen walked in and said. 'Meghan, in this family we don't speak to people like that.' '*


Hmmm this anecdote got me thinking ... 
Where did this happen ? In the *kitchen*, I presume ???
What was the Queen doing in the kitchen ? She was not one to scrounge around for ice cream like Diana did ...

One wonders if the Queen had been alerted to a kerfuffle ...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



This photo is not aging well.  Hmmm.
At some point, they must realize that the world does not respect their entitled complaints.  And, yes, the world has moved on from the Opr interview. Opr who?  Just as Diana and Sarah miscalculated their importance, so have these 2.  King Charles rules.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bless the sugars, I'll have what they are smoking.



That's very imaginative!


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> So now she's going to post daily Twitter tirades like "you know who" used to before he got banned? The similarities between the two are uncanny at times.


1. Titles are complicated so many exceptions , see reference below, I got tired reading of all the special cases
2. George V letters patent were written 105 years ago , hmmm kinda obsolete??? They were written before the fall of the German and Austrian empires
PS It was different then due to the number of Queen Victoria's children, G5's kids were related to half of European royalty, styling them better/at least as well as their cousins was a must
3. Half of QEII's grandchildren dont have/use HRHs, she extemporized in titling the 8 of them
PS It was said that Anne turned down title for Mark Philips, otherwise we would have Lady Zara. That seems to have worked just fine
4. Any monarch can issue new letters patent to negate the old ones ...  KC is still thinking... he is extemporizing
5. Why the heck did H&M turn down Dumbarton ? They should have taken when offered ... OK we all know the story she hates the name









						What was George V thinking?
					






					royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com


----------



## youngster

OK, really good stuff in Valentine Low's 3rd excerpt published in the Times:


			archive.ph
		


About the Sandringham meeting to discuss Megexit:
_The people sitting around the table went through five different scenarios, which ranged from Harry and Meghan spending most of their time being working members of the royal family, but having a month a year to do their own thing, to them spending most of their time privately, but doing a select number of royal activities. There was, according to more than one source, a positive atmosphere in the room: they wanted to find a solution. At one stage, Alderton made the point that if they could get this right, they would be solving a problem for future generations of the royal family who were not in the direct line of succession.

By the end of the week, the five scenarios had been worked through. The view from the palace establishment was that, however much time Harry and Meghan spent away from royal duties, anything they did would reflect on the institution. That meant that the normal rules about royal behaviour would apply. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends.

*But the Sussexes wanted their freedom: freedom to make money, freedom to dip their toes into American politics*. There was no way for the two sides to reach an agreement on that point. *Crucially, it was the Queen who took the view that unless the couple were prepared to abide by the restrictions that applied to working members of the royal family, they could not be allowed to carry out official duties*. One source said: “There was a very clear view: you can’t be in and out. And if you’ve got such clarity of view, it’s very difficult to say, ‘Why don’t we go 10 per cent this way instead of 20 per cent?’ ” _*Compromise was off the table, removed by the Queen.*


----------



## Diamondbirdie

marietouchet said:


> 1. Titles are complicated so many exceptions , see reference below, I got tired reading of all the special cases
> 2. George V letters patent were written 105 years ago , hmmm kinda obsolete???
> 3. Half of QEII's grandchildren dont have/use HRHs, she extemporized in titling the 8 of them
> 4. Any monarch can issue new letters patent to negate the old ones ...  KC is still thinking... he is extemporizing
> 5. Why the heck did H&M turn down Dumbarton ? They should have taken when offered ... OK we all know the story she hates the name
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What was George V thinking?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalmusingsblogspotcom.blogspot.com


5. I thought that was one of H’s titles anyway? For use in Scotland?


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> This might be the only reason to listen to her crappy podcasts...the venom she spewed about the BRF not knowing the Queen was about to pass!


The podcasts were small potatoes, she did not know for sure !!!! LOL

The nonsense that was going around behind the scenes during the 10 days before the funeral ... UNFORGIVABLE ... THE LEAKS
Refusing/missing dinner/flight with the king due to argument


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> OK, really good stuff in Valentine Low's 3rd excerpt published in the Times:
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> About the Sandringham meeting to discuss Megexit:
> _The people sitting around the table went through five different scenarios, which ranged from Harry and Meghan spending most of their time being working members of the royal family, but having a month a year to do their own thing, to them spending most of their time privately, but doing a select number of royal activities. There was, according to more than one source, a positive atmosphere in the room: they wanted to find a solution. At one stage, Alderton made the point that if they could get this right, they would be solving a problem for future generations of the royal family who were not in the direct line of succession.
> 
> By the end of the week, the five scenarios had been worked through. The view from the palace establishment was that, however much time Harry and Meghan spent away from royal duties, anything they did would reflect on the institution. That meant that the normal rules about royal behaviour would apply. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends.
> 
> *But the Sussexes wanted their freedom: freedom to make money, freedom to dip their toes into American politics*. There was no way for the two sides to reach an agreement on that point. *Crucially, it was the Queen who took the view that unless the couple were prepared to abide by the restrictions that applied to working members of the royal family, they could not be allowed to carry out official duties*. One source said: “There was a very clear view: you can’t be in and out. And if you’ve got such clarity of view, it’s very difficult to say, ‘Why don’t we go 10 per cent this way instead of 20 per cent?’ ” _*Compromise was off the table, removed by the Queen.*


Was re-reading (Wiki?) of Edward and Sophie. QEII had issues with their money making efforts, and stopped that 
They had businesses that proved problematic eg she did PR and was seen to be peddling influence, Edward did documentaries and caught William on camera at uni - a total NO NO
Edward was the producer of the famous silly TV game show - with Anne, Andrew, Fergie etc in medieval dress, made a lot of money for charity, but fools of the BRF


----------



## marietouchet

Diamondbirdie said:


> 5. I thought that was one of H’s titles anyway? For use in Scotland?


Yes, you are correct, I wondered that too - for exclusive use in Scotland ?
But, Philip was Duke of Edinburgh everywhere (outside of Scotland)


----------



## youngster

So, this is how the 3rd excerpt from Valentine Low's book concludes:
_There is one final thought on this, and it comes from a surprising source, someone who knows Harry well but remains upset about what Harry and Meghan did. Their view is that perhaps the Sussexes’ departure was not the untrammelled disaster that so many think it was. “There is a part of me that thinks Meghan did Harry the greatest kindness anyone could do to him, which was to take him out of the royal family, because he was just desperately unhappy in the last couple of years in his working life. We knew he was unhappy, but we didn’t really know what the solution would be. She came along and found the solution.”_

The above is a really interesting POV.  But, the real question is whether he is actually happy that he's cut ties to his family, his country, his friends, his entire old life.   I think it likely seemed the answer to all his problems and unhappiness at the time.  Run away to another country, to another continent, trade on his connections and title to build a billion dollar media empire in the U.S. So much easier said than done.  Right now, Harry seems more polo-playing house husband than anything else and the constant sniping and nastiness towards the family indictates that he's not happy at all.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> So, this is how the 3rd excerpt from Valentine Low's book concludes:
> _There is one final thought on this, and it comes from a surprising source, someone who knows Harry well but remains upset about what Harry and Meghan did. Their view is that perhaps the Sussexes’ departure was not the untrammelled disaster that so many think it was. “There is a part of me that thinks Meghan did Harry the greatest kindness anyone could do to him, which was to take him out of the royal family, because he was just desperately unhappy in the last couple of years in his working life. We knew he was unhappy, but we didn’t really know what the solution would be. She came along and found the solution.”_
> 
> The above is a really interesting POV.  But, the real question is whether he is actually happy that he's cut ties to his family, his country, his friends, his entire old life.   I think it likely seemed the answer to all his problems and unhappiness at the time.  Run away to another country, to another continent, trade on his connections and title to build a billion dollar media empire in the U.S. So much easier said than done.  Right now, Harry seems more polo-playing house husband than anything else and the constant sniping and nastiness towards the family indictates that he's not happy at all.


amazing the difference between the two brothers only a few years apart in age....one has his act together with a happy family - the other floundering and seems psychologically unhealthy.  William took his time finding a wife, preparing her for what life would be like.  The other one just impulsively decided to marry the Z-list actress and give up everything he had known.


----------



## Vintage Leather

xincinsin said:


> I don't understand what this sugar is saying. Is she claiming that Zedzee is Diana's daughter?


Maybe that the spirit of Diana is reaching through the veil to protect Z-list from the awful cameras?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




At least one of them stands somewhat up for the kids. I am still convinced she doesn't show them a) out of spite because she really thinks it annoys the world, as if anybody really cares that much, and b) because nobody was willing to pay big bucks.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that a lot of twitter users are saying this is TWs own account   Myra, as in My Real Account




If that's Ghoul there's nothing to be proud of. That Myra woman doesn't sound very smart if we have to explain simple things to her, e.g. what changed is that one of his sons WALKED AWAY.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that a lot of twitter users are saying this is TWs own account   Myra, as in My Real Account




People have said the same before. Stranger things have happened


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> People have said the same before. Stranger things have happened


could she sink  that low?


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> So, this is how the 3rd excerpt from Valentine Low's book concludes:
> _There is one final thought on this, and it comes from a surprising source, someone who knows Harry well but remains upset about what Harry and Meghan did. Their view is that perhaps the Sussexes’ departure was not the untrammelled disaster that so many think it was. “There is a part of me that thinks Meghan did Harry the greatest kindness anyone could do to him, which was to take him out of the royal family, because he was just desperately unhappy in the last couple of years in his working life. We knew he was unhappy, but we didn’t really know what the solution would be. She came along and found the solution.”_
> 
> The above is a really interesting POV.  But, the real question is whether he is actually happy that he's cut ties to his family, his country, his friends, his entire old life.   I think it likely seemed the answer to all his problems and unhappiness at the time.  Run away to another country, to another continent, trade on his connections and title to build a billion dollar media empire in the U.S. So much easier said than done.  Right now, Harry seems more polo-playing house husband than anything else and the constant sniping and nastiness towards the family indictates that he's not happy at all.


I would state the issue as - is he HAPPIER now ? or did the unhappiness follow him ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> 5. Why the heck did H&M turn down Dumbarton ? They should have taken when offered ... OK we all know the story she hates the name



The minute I heard it I said she was salty Archie wasn't Prince Archie while they stuck to their "We want him to be a private citizen" shtick, only to confirm on Oprah I was right all along. She is so immature, vengeful and embarrassingly petulant she could be on one of these TV shows where a professional nanny comes in to deal with unruly kids.


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> This photo is not aging well.  Hmmm.
> At some point, they must realize that the world does not respect their entitled complaints.  And, yes, the world has moved on from the Opr interview. Opr who?  Just as Diana and Sarah miscalculated their importance, so have these 2.  King Charles rules.
> 
> View attachment 5617508
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google Image Result for https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5f/14/c5/5f14c5cc77e12a35c02be1b2ff95dff1.gif


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> I don't understand that.  She knew it was to happen eventually.  One year, three years, but it was going to happen soon enough so surely she could have thought ahead...


Based on her actions so far, I don't think she looks at the big picture at all.  It's basically, "GIMME GIMME GIMME NOWWWWW!"


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> could she sink  that low?


Nothing she does would surprise me at this point, but I don't believe that's really her. Just a rabid supporter.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> could she sink  that low?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Yes, you are correct, I wondered that too - for exclusive use in Scotland ?
> But, Philip was Duke of Edinburgh everywhere (outside of Scotland)



Because that was a royal dukedom, as such it is a British title and not exclusively in the Scottish peerage.


----------



## jenayb

It is so wildly depressing to me that Her Majesty was forced to spend her final years with this..... thing.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Compromise was off the table, removed by the Queen.


I hope KC doesn't back down on that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> So, this is how the 3rd excerpt from Valentine Low's book concludes:
> _There is one final thought on this, and it comes from a surprising source, someone who knows Harry well but remains upset about what Harry and Meghan did. Their view is that perhaps the Sussexes’ departure was not the untrammelled disaster that so many think it was. “There is a part of me that thinks Meghan did Harry the greatest kindness anyone could do to him, which was to take him out of the royal family, because he was just desperately unhappy in the last couple of years in his working life. We knew he was unhappy, but we didn’t really know what the solution would be. She came along and found the solution.”_
> 
> The above is a really interesting POV.  But, the real question is whether he is actually happy that he's cut ties to his family, his country, his friends, his entire old life.   I think it likely seemed the answer to all his problems and unhappiness at the time.  Run away to another country, to another continent, trade on his connections and title to build a billion dollar media empire in the U.S. So much easier said than done.  Right now, Harry seems more polo-playing house husband than anything else and the constant sniping and nastiness towards the family indictates that he's not happy at all.



It could have been a great kindness if she was actually capable of seeing anything else but her own needs and wants. He doesn't look particularly happy to me now that he doesn't have and friends and family left (of course we can't forget Nacho, the most loyal of bros) and has no real purpose in life.

ETA: also, you could have taken him out of the BRF without destroying any human to connection he ever had and without trying to destroy his family.


----------



## charlottawill

jenayb said:


> It is so wildly depressing to me that Her Majesty was forced to spend her final years with this..... thing.


I could not agree with you more.


----------



## sdkitty

jenayb said:


> It is so wildly depressing to me that Her Majesty was forced to spend her final years with this..... thing.


I wonder if she really let it bother her much....I know they were so so close but....not sure I believe it.  She seemed to be primarily concerned with doing her duty


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

HL's comment is good!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think I'll change my favourite...style from Raptor to Ghoul, with emphasis on "feasting on corpses". Until she learns a new trick that requires a new name.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> could she sink  that low?



Let's look at some facts:
1.Tells blatant proven lies on Global media 
2. Ditto to court
3. Passes other words off as her own
4. Makes her husband lie 
5. Makes unsustainable slurs against an entire multicultural nation (which is a racist act in itself) 
6. Plays with the UK legal system 
7. Purposely flouts protocols 
8. Bullies her staff
9. Makes out all women are natural victims 
10. Accepts awards for doing nothing 

Need I go on?

Never mind low. MegZZ is a bottomless pit with the lengths she'll go to


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she really let it bother her much....I know they were so so close but....not sure I believe it.  She seemed to be primarily concerned with doing her duty


I think she had accepted the situation and focused on the happier relationships in her life. She looked happy at the PJ and in what we now realize were her last days. She knew the monarchy would be in good hands with PC and PW. Harry is the one who cannot undo what he has done and has to live with it.


----------



## rhyvin

purseinsanity said:


> Based on her actions so far, I don't think she looks at the big picture at all.  It's basically, "GIMME GIMME GIMME NOWWWWW!"


----------



## Mumotons

sdkitty said:


> could she sink  that low?


Yes


----------



## Diamondbirdie

marietouchet said:


> Yes, you are correct, I wondered that too - for exclusive use in Scotland ?
> But, Philip was Duke of Edinburgh everywhere (outside of Scotland)


Maybe it’s because it’s a minor title, an earldom rather than a dukedom? Anyway, I’m sure the residents of Dumbarton (an actual town, not very exciting, but still real, outside Glasgow) were not impressed to hear that Meghan thought they were “dumb”!


----------



## Chanbal

Just like his grandma?










						Meghan Markle's worst nightmare isn't King Charles, it's the Prince of Wales: royal expert
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reunited with the royal family for Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral. But royal expert Neil Sean says the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's future with the royal family remains uncertain.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## kemilia

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've literally sat here for a minute after reading this staring at my screen, and I still don't have eloquent words. This is so, so ugly.


I'm a couple days late and many pages behind but I just read this and am shocked and really saddened for the RF. 

She is hideous beyond belief and Karma will befall her some day. And someone get those ivisikids away from both of those whack jobs please. 

She makes Wallis look like she was a wonderful gal! (and based on what's been written she was not all into marrying Edward--she just wanted some fun)


----------



## papertiger

Diamondbirdie said:


> Maybe it’s because it’s a minor title, an earldom rather than a dukedom? Anyway, I’m sure the residents of Dumbarton (an actual town, not very exciting, but still real, outside Glasgow) were not impressed to hear that Meghan thought they were “dumb”!



When they visit Scotland, they are supposed to use their Scottish titles


----------



## charlottawill

Apologies if this has been posted already - "the Overseas In Law"      Let's hope she stays there permanently. And what the hell is "Babe Statistics"? Her Global Rank was 28564 and falling


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she really let it bother her much....I know they were so so close but....not sure I believe it.  She seemed to be primarily concerned with doing her duty



Never forget....


----------



## KEG66

youngster said:


> So, this is how the 3rd excerpt from Valentine Low's book concludes:
> _There is one final thought on this, and it comes from a surprising source, someone who knows Harry well but remains upset about what Harry and Meghan did. Their view is that perhaps the Sussexes’ departure was not the untrammelled disaster that so many think it was. “There is a part of me that thinks Meghan did Harry the greatest kindness anyone could do to him, which was to take him out of the royal family, because he was just desperately unhappy in the last couple of years in his working life. We knew he was unhappy, but we didn’t really know what the solution would be. She came along and found the solution.”_
> 
> The above is a really interesting POV.  But, the real question is whether he is actually happy that he's cut ties to his family, his country, his friends, his entire old life.   I think it likely seemed the answer to all his problems and unhappiness at the time.  Run away to another country, to another continent, trade on his connections and title to build a billion dollar media empire in the U.S. So much easier said than done.  Right now, Harry seems more polo-playing house husband than anything else and the constant sniping and nastiness towards the family indictates that he's not happy at all.


Unfortunately the grass isn’t always greener on the other side and be careful what you wish for !!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm this anecdote got me thinking ...
> Where did this happen ? In the *kitchen*, I presume ???
> What was the Queen doing in the kitchen ? She was not one to scrounge around for ice cream like Diana did ...
> 
> One wonders if the Queen had been alerted to a kerfuffle ...


HM probably wanted a snack and instead of bothering anyone, she went to the kitchen to grab a cup of tea and a marmalade sandwich to tide her over until mealtime, but lost her appetite when she overheard ZedZed making an ass of herself as usual.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> I would state the issue as - is he HAPPIER now ? or did the unhappiness follow him ?



Yes, exactly.  Running away doesn't solve your problems, you just take them with you.  If Harry had mental health issues that he thought would be magically fixed once he was living in California, he's likely found out how wrong he was.  Now, on top of that, he has financial issues and career issues that he's never had to deal with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> 'Meghan was at the castle to taste some of the dishes, and told one of the caterers she could taste egg,' said the source. 'She got quite upset, saying that the dish was meant to be vegan and macrobiotic, when *suddenly the Queen walked in and said. 'Meghan, in this family we don't speak to people like that.' '*


IDK if this story is true but I'd love to believe the queen put her in her place


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Yes, exactly.  Running away doesn't solve your problems, you just take them with you.  If Harry had mental health issues that he thought would be magically fixed once he was living in California, he's likely found out how wrong he was.  Now, on top of that, he has financial issues and career issues that he's never had to deal with.



And the worst issue of all, the person he married.


----------



## kemilia

C


bag-mania said:


> Spotify’s rating system must be rigged. They currently have Archetypes as being the #3 podcast despite it being paused and not having had a new episode in over two weeks. How is it that it is beating new offerings from established, popular shows?


'Cause they're making it up (the ratings). 

They want to keep anyone that's interested in the Markles think this is the greatest thing (podcast) ever.


----------



## Toby93

Diamondbirdie said:


> Maybe it’s because it’s a minor title, an earldom rather than a dukedom? Anyway, I’m sure the residents of Dumbarton (an actual town, not very exciting, but still real, outside Glasgow) were not impressed to hear that Meghan thought they were “dumb”!


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At least one of them stands somewhat up for the kids. I am still convinced she doesn't show them a) out of spite because she really thinks it annoys the world, as if anybody really cares that much, and b) because nobody was willing to pay big bucks.


C) she doesn’t want competition for attention from her own offspring. It is inevitable that one day her children will grow up and be of great interest to the press. It will kill her ego when the media starts talking about Lilibet and her generation and ignoring her mom. As it is Meghan is pushing it being 40+ years old striving for popularity with young people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan Markle 'thought she would be the Beyoncé of the UK'
					

Meghan Markle thought that she would be the Beyoncé of the UK when she married Prince Harry, a bombshell new book has claimed, suggesting the Sussexes felt 'cornered'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> C) she doesn’t want competition for attention from her own offspring. It is inevitable that one day her children will grow up and be of great interest to the press. It will kill her ego when the media starts talking about Lilibet and her generation and ignoring her mom. As it is Meghan is pushing it being 40+ years old striving for popularity with young people.


Good point … if the kids were Prince A and Princess L, mommy would not be happy since she will never be Princess M


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan Markle 'thought she would be the Beyoncé of the UK'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle thought that she would be the Beyoncé of the UK when she married Prince Harry, a bombshell new book has claimed, suggesting the Sussexes felt 'cornered'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

This picture keeps popping up in recent articles. Previously I hadn’t paid much attention to her hair. Yuck, her misadventures with tack ons (not good enough quality to be “extensions”) has been going on for longer than I realized.

Of course if she had worn a hat as requested, the mess would have been undercover. Looks like the Queen had her eyes scrunched up to shield the view


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> This picture keeps popping up in recent articles. Previously I hadn’t paid much attention to her hair. Yuck, her misadventures with tack ons (not good enough quality to be “extensions”) has been going on for longer than I realized.
> 
> Of course if she had worn a hat as requested, the mess would have been undercover. Looks like the Queen had her eyes scrunched up to shield the view
> View attachment 5617588


I noticed that too - what a hot mess she is.


----------



## Hyacinth

purseinsanity said:


> OMG my DH too!  Couldn't have cared less, then last night tells me he spent some time reading about MM and said she sounds like an absolutely awful woman.  Asked me why, if she demanded Haz declare she's his GF or she'd break up with him, he didn't say "ok see ya later!"



Or as we say in the States "Don't let the door hit ya in the a$$ on your way out".


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> This picture keeps popping up in recent articles. Previously I hadn’t paid much attention to her hair. Yuck, her misadventures with tack ons (not good enough quality to be “extensions”) has been going on for longer than I realized.
> 
> Of course if she had worn a hat as requested, the mess would have been undercover. Looks like the Queen had her eyes scrunched up to shield the view
> View attachment 5617588


The Queen was not happy about this union but knew she had to keep silent. Imagine being in this position with your child or grandchild, and how much worse it must be for high profile people. No one in the Palace was celebrating this relationship, just putting on happy faces for the media.


----------



## jenayb

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she really let it bother her much....I know they were so so close but....not sure I believe it.  She seemed to be primarily concerned with doing her duty



She and the Queen? No, I don't believe they were close at all. I feel awful because of what happened to her family as a result of this woman - the idiotic problems that she caused.


----------



## sdkitty

jenayb said:


> She and the Queen? No, I don't believe they were close at all. I feel awful because of what happened to her family as a result of this woman - the idiotic problems that she caused.


no, I meant Harry - says he was so close to his grandmother - they could talk about things she didn't talk to other people about, etc.


----------



## CobaltBlu

marietouchet said:


> Good point … if the kids were Prince A and Princess L, mommy would not be happy since she will never be Princess M


And her kids will outrank her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is all so bizarre. Does anyone know if TW's obstetrician has reopened her practice? I hope she is OK. She is married to a top infertility specialist who provides a long list of treatment options. I'm reading too many twitter posts, I need a break…   



Spoiler: the husband 












						Daniel F. Rychlik MD, FACOG | Health Services |  | California |Santa Barbara| The Global Directory of WHO'S WHO Honoring Executives & Professionals
					

Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility; Fertility treatment for couples seeking to create their families.



					globalwwonline.com
				








						Santa Barbara, California Fertility Clinic & Surrogacy Center
					

Oma Fertility is one of the best fertility clinics in Santa Barbara, California that also provides surrogacy options to help grow your family with options that work for you.




					omafertility.com
				











						Meghan Markle daughter Lilibet's doctor shuts her practice
					

Lilibet celebrated her first birthday on June 4, 2022




					www.geo.tv


----------



## Hermes Zen

Sharing interesting Fox News article … snippet of what’s in it but there’s more that’s insightful. 

"Imagine 15, 20 years time, and you’ve got Princess (Lilibet) and Prince Archie charging around L.A., having never really participated in any meaningful way in royal life, and yet because they’re prince and princess: What they do, what they get up to, who they hang around with, will have an impact on the reputation on the wider family," says Larcombe.

"They’re cute cuddly kids now, but goodness knows what might happen. I’m not saying Archie and Lilibet are going to be scandalous. I’m simply saying that there is a risk of having a high-profile called prince and princess because they’re royals when they’re not actually part of that in any way, or shape, or form, other than they just happen to be related to the British royal family."


King Charles first 'major test': Punish or protect Harry by snubbing his and Meghan Markle's kids, expert says
King Charles III has a decision to make regarding the children of his son Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. No definitive statement has been given regarding their use of prince and princess.

Read in Fox News: https://apple.news/Aa7ABthuvRUmji0wfCYxu3w


Shared from Apple News


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Sharing interesting Fox News article … snippet of what’s in it but there’s more that’s insightful.
> 
> "Imagine 15, 20 years time, and you’ve got Princess (Lilibet) and Prince Archie charging around L.A., having never really participated in any meaningful way in royal life, and yet because they’re prince and princess: What they do, what they get up to, who they hang around with, will have an impact on the reputation on the wider family," says Larcombe.
> 
> "They’re cute cuddly kids now, but goodness knows what might happen. I’m not saying Archie and Lilibet are going to be scandalous. I’m simply saying that there is a risk of having a high-profile called prince and princess because they’re royals when they’re not actually part of that in any way, or shape, or form, other than they just happen to be related to the British royal family."
> 
> 
> King Charles first 'major test': Punish or protect Harry by snubbing his and Meghan Markle's kids, expert says
> King Charles III has a decision to make regarding the children of his son Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. No definitive statement has been given regarding their use of prince and princess.
> 
> Read in Fox News: https://apple.news/Aa7ABthuvRUmji0wfCYxu3w
> 
> 
> Shared from Apple News


This is why waiting until these kids are older makes sense, especially with these parents.


----------



## youngster

And the conclusion of that opinion piece on the titles of the children that @Hermes Zen linked:

_And while Larcombe says the King will "almost certainly … never tell publicly" the reason for whatever he decides, "He has to do something." 
"Is King Charles trying to punish his son? Possibly," says Larcombe. "I would argue that what King Charles is trying to do is purely *to protect the monarchy that he has just become the head of. It is about protecting the monarchy from being used by people who do not work or do not commit their life to the duty of being a royal but do make lots and lots of lots of money — fortunes — out of trading in the royal brand.* So is it punishment, or is it protection? Probably both."_


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is why waiting until these kids are older makes sense, especially with these parents.


Yep. I thought it was enlightening when I read that. Let’s hope KC does the right thing! NO Prince and Princess titles.


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> no, I meant Harry - says he was so close to his grandmother - they could talk about things she didn't talk to other people about, etc.


I don’t believe this. I’m sure his grandmother was fond of and indulged him. But at the end of the day, he was one of her grandchildren, not her son or daughter. That fondness would grow thin if she felt that his actions damaged the monarchy that he left behind.


----------



## Chanbal

Why?








						Prince Harry was ‘morbidly obsessed’ with keeping Archie’s birth private: book
					

By the time the Palace announced Meghan Markle had gone into labor, she was already safely at home with baby Archie.




					pagesix.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was ‘morbidly obsessed’ with keeping Archie’s birth private: book
> 
> 
> By the time the Palace announced Meghan Markle had gone into labor, she was already safely at home with baby Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



I really don't think it was him, and unless someone explains why it would be him instead of just stating as a fact my mind won't be changed.

I think it was her playing power games with the UK press. 

I could see him being worried in his paranoia, but I'd still blame her for planting the thought in his head and being in his ear about their security.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was ‘morbidly obsessed’ with keeping Archie’s birth private: book
> 
> 
> By the time the Palace announced Meghan Markle had gone into labor, she was already safely at home with baby Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jenayb said:


> She and the Queen? No, I don't believe they were close at all. I feel awful because of what happened to her family as a result of this woman - the idiotic problems that she caused.





sdkitty said:


> no, I meant Harry - says he was so close to his grandmother - they could talk about things she didn't talk to other people about, etc.


Initially Dufus was like the class clown, an amusing distraction while the rest of the BRF tried to shield HM from his nastier behaviours, tantrums and high jinks. However, after the OW interview, I think he was granted only limited access to her and I'm sure he added a few nails to her coffin with all his lies and innuendos.


----------



## jenayb

sdkitty said:


> no, I meant Harry - says he was so close to his grandmother - they could talk about things she didn't talk to other people about, etc.


Oh! Sorry. That makes more sense. 

But yeah, I agree; I don’t know how much I believe that either…


----------



## papertiger




----------



## Toby93

Very interesting article, if you can skip over the "positives" for TW.  The author thinks it was a huge miscalculation on her part to leave the monarchy.

"During the same conversation, when the topic of ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment came up, Meghan said "this is a moment that I am absolutely going to show up for" and "Well, Gloria, maybe it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon."* She has yet to comment or engage on this issue again or to set foot in Washington.*

Beyond that, her push for paid parental leave has seen her cold-call nonplussed conservative Senators, talk about the issue at New York Times' DealBook Summit and donate a *US$25 ($43.50) Starbucks gift card to the employees of PL+US, a non-profit working on the cause. (No, there are not one or two zeros missing *from that amount.
So, why haven't we seen her on the front steps of the Supreme Court, loudhailer in hand, rallying women to fight against the Roe decision? *Why haven't we seen her put her cheque book where her mouth is*?

Therein lies quite the irony because right as Meghan's feminism-lite (diet feminism?) is being found oh-so-wanting, the women of the royal family have been quietly staging something of a feminist takeover.
Here's where I think Meghan made such a whopping whoopsie: She left the royal family right as this shift was taking place and right now, instead of joining her stepmother-in-law, sister-in-law and aunt-in-law in remaking the royal family's pale, male and stale image, *she is off in Hollywood recording a cringe-worthy podcast and buying cheap Starbucks gift cards.*

There is also the fact that the royal family gave Meghan a platform and opened doors that* she can never, no matter how hard she works, try and match now.*

That was something that *Diana understood keenly,* according to her biographer Tina Brown, who said during an interview with The Daily Beast last month: "*She kept Kensington Palace as her base. Unlike Harry and Meghan she understood having the power base of monarchy was enormously important."*


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Why?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry was ‘morbidly obsessed’ with keeping Archie’s birth private: book
> 
> 
> By the time the Palace announced Meghan Markle had gone into labor, she was already safely at home with baby Archie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Remember the speculation back then about her wearing a fake maternity belly to various events? She made a big show of cradling her 4-6 weeks pregnant stomach at his cousin’s wedding to announce “I’m pregnant” without having to say it. 

Then it was nothing but secrecy about the actual births of both babies. I suspect one of them has fertility problems and Archie and Lilibet were conceived with help.


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> Remember the speculation back then about her wearing a fake maternity belly to various events? She made a big show of cradling her 4-6 weeks pregnant stomach at his cousin’s wedding to announce “I’m pregnant” without having to say it.
> 
> Then it was nothing but secrecy about the actual births of both babies. I suspect one of them has fertility problems and Archie and Lilibet were conceived with help.


Even if they used IVF or something else, why the secrecy about the births? That's where the surrogacy rumors come in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



I thought that silly movie was historical enough. They want to do a docu that is even more fictional?


purseinsanity said:


> OMG my DH too!  Couldn't have cared less, then last night tells me he spent some time reading about MM and said she sounds like an absolutely awful woman.  Asked me why, if she demanded Haz declare she's his GF or she'd break up with him, he didn't say "ok see ya later!"


It's sounding like those car lots which try to upsell you and then get desperate when you walk away.


DoggieBags said:


> I hope it’s true that H has not agreed to a Netflix documentary on his kids. If H caves and agrees to a Netflix documentary on his kids, he will be exposed as one of the biggest hypocrites in recent memory. Whatever happened to leaving the BRF and the UK to ensure privacy for his kids? TW put out the false narrative that they couldn‘t send their kids to school in the UK without 40 plus paparazzi chasing after them snapping pictures. I mean W&C have managed to take their kids to and from school every day for years without hordes of paparazzi chasing them every day but clearly TW knows better! But somehow a Netflix documentary on the kids that will splash their pics all over social media is better and more private?


Wouldn't it be hilarious if they did a docu on the kids and only showed them back view, sideview, behind the infamous twin trees, photoshopped to indecipherability, mosaic-applied for privacy. Or she might play the victim again and claim that she had no choice, she had to prove their existence (sob sob).


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I thought that silly movie was historical enough. They want to do a docu that is even more fictional?
> 
> It's sounding like those car lots which try to upsell you and then get desperate when you walk away.
> 
> *Wouldn't it be hilarious if they did a docu on the kids and only showed them back view, sideview, behind the infamous twin trees, photoshopped to indecipherability, mosaic-applied for privacy. Or she might play the victim again and claim that she had no choice, she had to prove their existence (sob sob).*


They could blur out the faces and disguise their voices for further secrecy.


----------



## Chanbal

On Valentine Low's book!


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> But, the real question is whether he is actually happy that he's cut ties to his family, his country, his friends, his entire old life.   I think it likely seemed the answer to all his problems and unhappiness at the time.  Run away to another country, to another continent, trade on his connections and title to build a billion dollar media empire in the U.S. So much easier said than done.  Right now, Harry seems more polo-playing house husband than anything else and the constant sniping and nastiness towards the family indictates that he's not happy at all.


A narc is never happy with his or her lot in life. So whether or not Handbag is a narc, he would be getting the full force of Zedzee's "It's unfair .. We deserve... Why can't we... They should give us..."


sdkitty said:


> could she sink  that low?


Now I know why "The World's Largest Sinkhole" (from BBC no less) appeared in my feed.


marietouchet said:


> I would state the issue as - is he HAPPIER now ? or did the unhappiness follow him ?


He must be suffering flashbacks because his new life is a dollar store version of his old life.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> Even if they used IVF or something else, why the secrecy about the births? That's where the surrogacy rumors come in.


Then there was the editorial she wrote for the _New York Times_ about her miscarriage. It came out at Thanksgiving and Invisibet was born the first week of June, meaning she was pregnant when she wrote it.

(Should I say allegedly for both the pregnancy and the miscarriage?)


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if she really let it bother her much....I know they were so so close but....not sure I believe it.  She seemed to be primarily concerned with doing her duty


Agree. Also, the Queen had a large family with lots of dedicated supporters close by.  Harry, although she apparently really cared for him, was one of many in her family.


----------



## bag-mania

Has this been posted yet?

Things got so bad between Prince Harry, Meghan Markle and their royal staff that they called her a “narcissistic sociopath.” They also reportedly said on repeated occasions: “We were played.”









						Meghan Markle Was ‘Narcissistic Sociopath’ Who Wanted to Be Rejected by Royals, Former Aides Say
					

Plus, Harry is reportedly looking to make urgent edits to his memoir in the wake of the queen’s death, and Harry and Meghan still don’t know if Archie and Lilibet will become HRH.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Agree. Also, the Queen had a large family with lots of dedicated supporters close by.  Harry, although she apparently really cared for him, was one of many in her family.


yes, I doubt he was as significant to her as he makes himself out to be


----------



## tiktok

Hermes Zen said:


> Sharing interesting Fox News article … snippet of what’s in it but there’s more that’s insightful.
> 
> *"Imagine 15, 20 years time, and you’ve got Princess (Lilibet) and Prince Archie charging around L.A., having never really participated in any meaningful way in royal life, and yet because they’re prince and princess: What they do, what they get up to, who they hang around with, will have an impact on the reputation on the wider family," says Larcombe.*
> 
> "They’re cute cuddly kids now, but goodness knows what might happen. I’m not saying Archie and Lilibet are going to be scandalous. I’m simply saying that there is a risk of having a high-profile called prince and princess because they’re royals when they’re not actually part of that in any way, or shape, or form, other than they just happen to be related to the British royal family."
> 
> 
> King Charles first 'major test': Punish or protect Harry by snubbing his and Meghan Markle's kids, expert says
> King Charles III has a decision to make regarding the children of his son Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. No definitive statement has been given regarding their use of prince and princess.
> 
> Read in Fox News: https://apple.news/Aa7ABthuvRUmji0wfCYxu3w
> 
> 
> Shared from Apple News


Hmm, that’s a somewhat idiotic rationale given that one prince who grew up under the queen’s thumb turned out to be a pedophile (allegedly) and another turned out to be an entitled petulant child with zero judgment when it comes to making life choices, so I’m not sure how much worse Harry’s kids could be.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> yes, I doubt he was as significant to her as he makes himself out to be


"But Grannie always said I was her favorite!"


----------



## rose60610

Ellen got Claw to do humiliating acts: squirrel impressions, crazy person impressions (came naturally to Claw), duck impressions.  So this is the person who wants her kids to inherit titles? If Ellen could get Claw to do these things, just think what she'd do for her kids to get titles. The Ellen gags were nothing. Claw would do a full court yacht girl press for those titles. I'd like to watch her squirm when KC III says "enjoy your lives overseas in the privacy you so crave" then mike drop.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Remember the speculation back then about her wearing a fake maternity belly to various events? She made a big show of cradling her 4-6 weeks pregnant stomach at his cousin’s wedding to announce “I’m pregnant” without having to say it.
> 
> Then it was nothing but secrecy about the actual births of both babies. I suspect one of them has fertility problems and Archie and Lilibet were conceived with help.


You might be right on the potential fertility problems. It's an interesting coincidence that the husband of TW's obstetrician seems to be an expert in infertility and surrogacy.

If that's the case, they lost an opportunity to advocate for infertility awareness. For example, they could have fought for children born through surrogacy to have the same rights as those who are not.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




I knew it, I knew it, I knew it.  I _told _you Me-again wanted to live in Windsor Castle.

I mean seriously, what's the point of marrying into royalty - having to live in some cold, _hideous_ country, and putting up with _stupid_ Hot-rock-head,  if you can't even live in a darn castle?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

$11million? That’s how much her integrity is worth


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> You might be right on the potential fertility problems. It's an interesting coincidence that the husband of TW's obstetrician seems to be an expert in infertility and surrogacy.
> 
> *If that's the case, they lost an opportunity to advocate for infertility awareness. For example, they could have fought for children born through surrogacy to have the same rights as those who are not.*


This! ^^^
But in her "I'm the best" eyes, it would be inconceivable to let anyone know that they had to have help. It doesn't even have to do with narcissism. It may be just plain old pride. One of my friends married a lovely guy who was dying to have a family, preferably a large family. When it was crickets for 3 years, they went to see a doctor. He was okay with the wife getting tested (normal), but he refused to get tested himself. That was fine with the wife because she had some health issues which meant that if she got pregnant, she might be high-risk. Imagine if either Handbag or Zedzee had to let the world know that they couldn't conceive because XYZ. Don't think their pride could take the hit.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Based on her actions so far, I don't think she looks at the big picture at all.  It's basically, "GIMME GIMME GIMME NOWWWWW!"



ITA

Otherwise why does she (and he) keep digging and digging when they get into holes


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This! ^^^
> But in her "I'm the best" eyes, it would be inconceivable to let anyone know that they had to have help. It doesn't even have to do with narcissism. It may be just plain old pride. One of my friends married a lovely guy who was dying to have a family, preferably a large family. When it was crickets for 3 years, they went to see a doctor. He was okay with the wife getting tested (normal), but he refused to get tested himself. That was fine with the wife because she had some health issues which meant that if she got pregnant, she might be high-risk. Imagine if either Handbag or Zedzee had to let the world know that they couldn't conceive because XYZ. Don't think their pride could take the hit.



You forget, MegZ didn't have 3 years. Nothing was secure until after a baby.  Harry was also obsessed by having a perfect family to rival Will's. They needed a baby NOW


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> You forget, MegZ didn't have 3 years. Nothing was secure until after a baby.  Harry was also obsessed by having a perfect family to rival Will's. They needed a baby NOW



And honestly, it's a private matter. It's just if she didn't birth those children they cannot expect them to be in the LoS when royal law (in lack of a better word) says otherwise.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And honestly, it's a private matter. It's just if she didn't birth those children they cannot expect them to be in the LoS when royal law (in lack of a better word) says otherwise.



Exactly. It's a private matter for _every_ single other family (or mother and child if alone) in the entire world.

Not for royalty. If you marry royalty that's part of what you sign-up for.

I have no wish to see or hear about their private lives or children, but why shouldn't the British public want clarity and accountability, done by the book. I don't want them (or their children) lording it over me if they are not into the rules. If those two can't be asked to even follow the most basic of rule, storm the Bastille, Vive la République.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just saw out of the corner of my eye that apparently the Troublesome Two have major media deals lined up and "we'll see a lot more of them". I couldn't stomach the thought so I quickly scrolled past.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Exactly. It's a private matter for _every_ single other family (or mother and child if alone) in the entire world.
> 
> Not for royalty. If you marry royalty that's part of what you sign-up for.
> 
> I have no wish to see or hear about their private lives or children, but why shouldn't the British public want clarity and accountability, done by the book. I don't want them (or their children) lording it over me if they are not into the rules. If those two can't be asked to even follow the most basic of rule, storm the Bastille, Vive la République.



Yes, but I still don't think they need to disclose they used IVF as long as they meet the conditions for those children to be legitimate (e.g. used their own genetic material and she carried them).

Honestly, the BRF should have put their foot down...no witnesses to the birth (that said, there must have been medical staff present? They could have released them from confidentiality), no place in the LoS and we'll communicate it to the public exactly like this, your choice.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just saw out of the corner of my eye that apparently the Troublesome Two have major media deals lined up and "we'll see a lot more of them". I couldn't stomach the thought so I quickly scrolled past.



Shame I'd love to know:

Contestant(s) in RP's Drag Race?
Cameos in KUWT*Ks*?
Desperate Housewives replacement
Desperate Husband's of (spinoff series)?
Project Polo-way?
New contract, Deal or No Deal?
How to Marry a Harry?
How to Live with a Narcissist Sociopath?
Remake of The Waltons?
Remake of Dynasty?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> How to Marry a Harry?



You're killing me


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, but I still don't think they need to disclose they used IVF as long as they meet the conditions for those children to be legitimate (e.g. used their own genetic material and she carried them).
> 
> Honestly, the BRF should have put their foot down...no witnesses to the birth (that said, there must have been medical staff present? They could have released them from confidentiality), no place in the LoS and we'll communicate it to the public exactly like this, your choice.



ITA!!! 

No reason why not (if that was the case)


----------



## papertiger

So, US peeps, is this true? 

Section 9 of the Constitution reads: “*No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States*…” Section 10 reads: “No State shall…grant any Title of Nobility.” Thus, both federal and state governments are prevented from conferring a Title of Nobility upon any of its citizens.

From https://wunschlaw.com/2016/03/28/on-the-constitutional-prohibition-against-titles-of-nobility/


----------



## duna

Toby93 said:


> I know that TW made a huge deal about the titles on the Oprah interview, deliberately misleading the American audience by saying it was "against protocol" to deny Archie the title of Prince.  She said she herself couldn't care less about titles, but it was his birthright.
> 
> *If she was so concerned about hereditary titles and where they actually matter, she should not have dragged Hazz and the kid(s) to sunny California.  The only place that titles would apply is in the UK.*


This. I don't understand what all the fuss is about: the Harkles freely decided to leave the UK and give up being Senior Royals, so why do their kids need titles??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> This. I don't understand what all the fuss is about: the Harkles freely decided to leave the UK and give up being Senior Royals, so why do their kids need titles??



Because it's their bIrtHriGht. Or because their mother is nuts.


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> This. I don't understand what all the fuss is about: the Harkles freely decided to leave the UK and give up being Senior Royals, so why do their kids need titles??


They should just include it in the kids' names if it was so important.
First name: Prince; middle name: Archie
First name: Princess; middle name Lilibet

The saddest comment on their names was when someone wrote that the girl baby would grow up to know that her name was weaponized, chosen specifically to hurt her great-grandma.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Very interesting article, if you can skip over the "positives" for TW.  The author thinks it was a huge miscalculation on her part to leave the monarchy.
> 
> "During the same conversation, when the topic of ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment came up, Meghan said "this is a moment that I am absolutely going to show up for" and "Well, Gloria, maybe it seems as though you and I will be taking a trip to DC together soon."* She has yet to comment or engage on this issue again or to set foot in Washington.*
> 
> Beyond that, her push for paid parental leave has seen her cold-call nonplussed conservative Senators, talk about the issue at New York Times' DealBook Summit and donate a *US$25 ($43.50) Starbucks gift card to the employees of PL+US, a non-profit working on the cause. (No, there are not one or two zeros missing *from that amount.
> So, why haven't we seen her on the front steps of the Supreme Court, loudhailer in hand, rallying women to fight against the Roe decision? *Why haven't we seen her put her cheque book where her mouth is*?
> 
> Therein lies quite the irony because right as Meghan's feminism-lite (diet feminism?) is being found oh-so-wanting, the women of the royal family have been quietly staging something of a feminist takeover.
> Here's where I think Meghan made such a whopping whoopsie: She left the royal family right as this shift was taking place and right now, instead of joining her stepmother-in-law, sister-in-law and aunt-in-law in remaking the royal family's pale, male and stale image, *she is off in Hollywood recording a cringe-worthy podcast and buying cheap Starbucks gift cards.*
> 
> There is also the fact that the royal family gave Meghan a platform and opened doors that* she can never, no matter how hard she works, try and match now.*
> 
> That was something that *Diana understood keenly,* according to her biographer Tina Brown, who said during an interview with The Daily Beast last month: "*She kept Kensington Palace as her base. Unlike Harry and Meghan she understood having the power base of monarchy was enormously important."*



I, for one, am glad that Zedzee "miscalculated" and went off to conquer Hollywood. Just imagine if she had the fortitude to lie low and wait till TQ passed away, then showed her true colours as a trusted senior royal turned traitor. I don't think KC needs new problems on his plate. Zedzee is now a known problem, a recognized gaping maw of greed.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because it's their bIrtHriGht. Or because their mother is nuts.


The second option for sure!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because it's their bIrtHriGht. Or because their mother is nuts.





duna said:


> The second option for sure!



Or both, and _both_ their parents are


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> They should just include it in the kids' names if it was so important.
> First name: Prince; middle name: Archie
> First name: Princess; middle name Lilibet
> 
> The saddest comment on their names was when someone wrote that the girl baby would grow up to know that her name was weaponized, chosen specifically to hurt her great-grandma.



Sorry, but they'll only ever be one US Prince


----------



## Redbirdhermes

papertiger said:


> So, US peeps, is this true?
> 
> Section 9 of the Constitution reads: “*No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States*…” Section 10 reads: “No State shall…grant any Title of Nobility.” Thus, both federal and state governments are prevented from conferring a Title of Nobility upon any of its citizens.
> 
> From https://wunschlaw.com/2016/03/28/on-the-constitutional-prohibition-against-titles-of-nobility/


Our Declaration of Independence also states that all men (interpreted as meaning all persons) are created equal.  We have an elected President, not a King.  At the time, some wanted to make George Washington to be King.  That idea was specifically rejected in our constitution.  So, he became our first President instead.  There are no noble titles to be passed on as a birthright in our country.  No one bows or curtsies to anyone else.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> So, US peeps, is this true?
> 
> Section 9 of the Constitution reads: “*No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States*…” Section 10 reads: “No State shall…grant any Title of Nobility.” Thus, both federal and state governments are prevented from conferring a Title of Nobility upon any of its citizens.
> 
> From https://wunschlaw.com/2016/03/28/on-the-constitutional-prohibition-against-titles-of-nobility/


I’m not a lawyer so maybe one of the legal minds on this thread can weigh in on this subject. But my understanding of the issue of American citizens with foreign titles is the answer differs for private citizens vs government officials. Private citizens can accept foreign titles but government officials while in office cannot also hold foreign titles without prior approval by Congress. So TW can cling to her Duchess of Sussex title even while living in the US provided she does not then accept any form of public office in the US. Ditto for her 2 children. So all these trial balloons of TW running for President are so much bs unless she actually plans to give up her title. The US and the UK do allow dual citizenship so H could become a US citizen without losing his UK citizenship. I do wonder though if people holding foreign citizenship can still be part of the BRF LoS? This question would apply to H’s 2 children who presumably hold US passports already. Even if they hold dual citizenship, how can they still be in the LoS?
edit: the foreign titles have no power in the US so are essentially useless in the US except as a vanity thing in certain social circles.


----------



## xincinsin

Redbirdhermes said:


> Our Declaration of Independence also states that all men (interpreted as meaning all persons) are created equal.  We have an elected President, not a King.  At the time, some wanted to make George Washington to be King.  That idea was specifically rejected in our constitution.  So, he became our first President instead.  There are no noble titles to be passed on as a birthright in our country.  No one bows or curtsies to anyone else.


When the kids have kids, and they are all 100% American born & bred, AND this cadet line generation would be even further from the throne, Handbag's grandchildren would not be prince and princess, or even have any inherited title, right?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> When the kids have kids, and they are all 100% American born & bred, AND this cadet line generation would be even further from the throne, Handbag's grandchildren would not be prince and princess, or even have any inherited title, right?



Yup,_ only_ while Charles is King. 

Once William is King, George's (or C's or L's) children would be Prince/Princess. 

Harry and his children will move further and further away from the Crown as the Crown moves along first-borns.


----------



## 880

One of the links posted above quotes a friend of rhe BRF, who is not happy with the behavior of either M or H, saying nevertheless, H was miserable as a working Royal BRF member pre M, so it was for the best that they left. And, since there are many statements re H‘s concern that he would be irrelevant when George turns18, I think it’s clear his issue is his position in the family. So it’s not just M. H was like this beforehand.

ETA:
@jblended, I think we’re thinking along the same lines   We just arrive at different points
i remember reading somewhere on this thread someone posted that H had a lot of issues re W getting the best charities and patronages, and that H’s were set up to detract from his misbehavior. I have no doubt that Sentebale etc made him happy, but it was never enough.

i think it’s also very possible that BRF would rather push all the blame on M and try to salvage what they can re H in the event that they divorce and H returns. But, I can just as easily see H digging his heels in, and the BRF deciding to exile them as was done with Wallis/Edward
JMO though ! Hugs


----------



## gelbergirl

Remember when they left the UK, they had very long negotiation meetings??
Wasn't this covered? Along with support payments and all that?
What were they all talking about.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

xincinsin said:


> When the kids have kids, and they are all 100% American born & bred, AND this cadet line generation would be even further from the throne, Handbag's grandchildren would not be prince and princess, or even have any inherited title, right?


No title can be granted by the United States government.  Titles can still be granted by other nations or governments, but they do not confer additional rights that are recognized by the United States.


----------



## jblended

880 said:


> I think it’s clear his issue is his position in the family. So it’s not just M. H was like this beforehand.


It has never been just M. Harry has been battling his demons for as long as I can remember. The thing is, when he worked on Sentebale, and then later with the Invictus Games and Heads Together, he had laid those demons to rest. He was happy- radiating joy when he was with those Sentebale kids. That light in him switched off with M. She brought back the bitterness he'd long since let go of.
Some people bring out the worst in you, others the best. She's in the former category and undid a lot of the progress he had made towards accepting his place and healing from his grief.
Just IMO, of course. I remember both his rowdy youth and drug habit, as well as him beaming with those kids. He's a shell of a man today. They both don't want to be happy anymore, they just want to win at any cost.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Can’t find it now, someone tweeted screenshots of domain names/websites she or her team have created - MeghanMarkle2020 all the way to 2040.  These were done in 4yr cycles to match presidential elections.  ???wth???  Someone is overthinking her influence. Last year T&C posted this:








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Secretly Purchased Domain Names for Lilibet Before Birth
					

The Duke and Duchess registered both LilbetDiana.com and LiliDiana.com.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## papertiger

More readings of excerpts from the Low book


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> One of the links posted above quotes a friend of rhe BRF, who is not happy with the behavior of either M or H, saying nevertheless, H was miserable as a working Royal BRF member pre M, so it was for the best that they left. And, since there are many statements re H‘s concern that he would be irrelevant when George turns18, I think it’s clear his issue is his position in the family. So it’s not just M. H was like this beforehand.
> 
> @jblended, I think we’re thinking along the same lines   We just arrive at different points
> i remember reading somewhere on this thread someone posted that H had a lot of issues re W getting the best charities and patronages, and that H’s were set up to detract from his misbehavior. I have no doubt that Sentebale etc made him happy, but it was never enough. JMO though ! Hugs



To be so jealous and wary of your little nephew (George) is awful. 

Likewise, M with young Charlotte.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Diamondbirdie

DoggieBags said:


> I’m not a lawyer so maybe one of the legal minds on this thread can weigh in on this subject. But my understanding of the issue of American citizens with foreign titles is the answer differs for private citizens vs government officials. Private citizens can accept foreign titles but government officials while in office cannot also hold foreign titles without prior approval by Congress. So TW can cling to her Duchess of Sussex title even while living in the US provided she does not then accept any form of public office in the US. Ditto for her 2 children. So all these trial balloons of TW running for President are so much bs unless she actually plans to give up her title. The US and the UK do allow dual citizenship so H could become a US citizen without losing his UK citizenship. I do wonder though if people holding foreign citizenship can still be part of the BRF LoS? This question would apply to H’s 2 children who presumably hold US passports already. Even if they hold dual citizenship, how can they still be in the LoS?
> edit: the foreign titles have no power in the US so are essentially useless in the US except as a vanity thing in certain social circles.


I don’t think we’d want them in the line of succession anyway! Part of that is surely at least being present in the U.K., no one would want a King foisted on them who was living in another country. That might have been ok in the 1600 and 1700’s where the monarch’s role was more central, but now? It would be the end of the monarchy. Luckily with W and K having 3 kids it’s unlikely to be an issue. I’m all for KC removing all their titles.


----------



## jblended

880 said:


> @jblended, I think we’re thinking along the same lines  We just arrive at different points
> i remember reading somewhere on this thread someone posted that H had a lot of issues re W getting the best charities and patronages, and that H’s were set up to detract from his misbehavior. I have no doubt that Sentebale etc made him happy, but it was never enough.
> 
> i think it’s also very possible that BRF would rather push all the blame on M and try to salvage what they can re H in the event that they divorce and H returns. But, I can just as easily see H digging his heels in, and the BRF deciding to exile them as was done with Wallis
> JMO though ! Hugs


You always manage to make me look beyond the surface and I'm very grateful for that. 

I think both conclusions are equally probable. He may well have been deeply dissatisfied all along and we're just finding out the true extent of it now. Maybe none of it was ever enough, as you say. 

Re your second point, I don't think we'll ever know for sure if M is partially a convenient scapegoat for the BRF but, I would say her own actions are helping cement her as part of the problem, regardless of any outside influences trying to paint her in a negative light. The stuff she's saying on her podcast is her choice and it's making her seem very problematic in her own right.

The pair of them would do well to just go live a private life of privilege. Unfortunately their entire lives revolve around attention (H from his family, M from her chosen career) and they're a bit addicted to being in the news cycle. As I said earlier, I think their focus is solely on winning this PR war at any cost, which is a shame because they could just focus on living on their own terms now.
To my mind, the cost of this ongoing fued is their reputation and integrity, thus they cannot truly win.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> If that's the case, they lost an opportunity to advocate for infertility awareness. For example, *they could have fought for children born through surrogacy to have the same rights as those who are not.*


It would be a bruise to their pride if they had to do something that would expose their infertility issues especially Z-list because she likes people to think that she's perfect! That aside, it's been proven to us that these two do not want to do any kind of hard work. They want things to be handed to them in a diamond crusted platter (silver won't be good enough). 




Chanbal said:


>



Having read TB's book, I know she's capable of being evil. However, I'm still mortified that Harry would allow this to happen in his presence. He was taught better and should know better.


----------



## xincinsin

gelbergirl said:


> Remember when they left the UK, they had very long negotiation meetings??
> Wasn't this covered? Along with support payments and all that?
> What were they all talking about.


Handbag was fronting the Sussex negotiation. If...
a)  we are right about him not being aware of RL and the cost of living 
b)  he thought he was still entitled to get a million-pound "allowance" from the Bank of Dad
c)  he assumed Hollywood was going to be throwing money at him and Zedzee
then he probably didn't think longterm or thought the BRF would let things slide if he didn't exactly adhere to the t&c. "But I thought you wouldn't mind if we ... "

Is there any report on who was advising Handbag apart from his comms with the Handbag owner? If  Sucks or that entertainment lawyer who set up Zedzee's network of companies was involved, he would have struck a shrewder deal.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Handbag was fronting the Sussex negotiation. If...
> a)  we are right about him not being aware of RL and the cost of living
> b)  he thought he was still entitled to get a million-pound "allowance" from the Bank of Dad
> c)  he assumed Hollywood was going to be throwing money at him and Zedzee
> then he probably didn't think longterm or thought the BRF would let things slide if he didn't exactly adhere to the t&c. "But I thought you wouldn't mind if we ... "
> 
> Is there any report on who was advising Handbag apart from his comms with the Handbag owner? If  Sucks or that entertainment lawyer who set up Zedzee's network of companies was involved, he would have struck a shrewder deal.


Alas, they overestimated their presumption that Harry is QEII's favorite grandchild


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> Handbag was fronting the Sussex negotiation. If...
> a)  we are right about him not being aware of RL and the cost of living
> b)  he thought he was still entitled to get a million-pound "allowance" from the Bank of Dad
> c)  he assumed Hollywood was going to be throwing money at him and Zedzee
> then he probably didn't think longterm or thought the BRF would let things slide if he didn't exactly adhere to the t&c. "But I thought you wouldn't mind if we ... "
> 
> Is there any report on who was advising Handbag apart from his comms with the Handbag owner? If  Sucks or that entertainment lawyer who set up Zedzee's network of companies was involved, he would have struck a shrewder deal.


Not sure how much leverage H actually had in his negotiations with the BRF. At the end of the day, the BRF had the money, the properties, control over who had and could use titles, control over who got full time security, and all the other perks H&M wanted to hang on to. The allowance came from Charles who could stop it at any time. There is nothing that says any parent has to keep supporting his adult children when they choose not to work to support themselves. Which family members are allowed to live in crown properties was decided by the Queen and now the King. The Queen let them lease Frogmore  Cottage while they were still working royals and allowed them to renovate it with funds that they had to pay back after Megxit. They allegedly asked for a suite of rooms in Windsor Castle and the Queen said no. That again was the Queen’s right to decide and nothing that H&M had the power to change. She let them keep the lease but did not allow them to keep the freebie renovation. The Queen set the rule of security only for working royals so Harry can sue His Majesty’s government until the cows come home, he doesn’t appear to have a viable case and I sincerely hope that when he loses both his legal suits he is forced to pay the court costs. Again, titles and honors are granted by the Queen, now the King, so the grifters have no right to use HRH titles granted to them by the Queen if she told them not use them. I wish KC would ask parliaments to strip them of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles as well. And I hope KC does not give their children the Prince and Princess titles for many reasons already discussed in this thread. So the despicable duo has no legal remedy to compel the BRF to accede to any of their demands. Their only leverage is to threaten to release information that could harm the BRF image and reputation. They’ve repeatedly played the race card and leaked “damaging” misinformation via their sycophants. I’ve yet to see what good that strategy has done them. They’re playing a very weak hand but just don’t know when to fold.


----------



## jblended

Slightly ridiculous question because it's doesn't matter, but can someone tell me if the BBC footage of the funeral included the infamous candle or their cameras were set up in different positions? I am seeing tons of memes of the candle  and wondered if all major broadcasters had access to only one stream or if people just preferred Sky News on the day (as I did, since they seemed not to cut back to the studio as often). TIA


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Or both, and _both_ their parents are



At this point even I can't argue that anymore. Something is very wrong with Harry.


----------



## DoggieBags

jblended said:


> Slightly ridiculous question because it's doesn't matter, but can someone tell me if the BBC footage of the funeral included the infamous candle or their cameras were set up in different positions? I am seeing tons of memes of the candle  and wondered if all major broadcasters had access to only one stream or if people just preferred Sky News on the day (as I did, since they seemed not to cut back to the studio as often). TIA


I watched the BBC broadcast and it had the candle angle too. I assume all networks were using the same feed


----------



## jblended

DoggieBags said:


> I assume all networks were using the same feed


That would make the most sense, given the enormity of the occasion. Thank you!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> I do wonder though if people holding foreign citizenship can still be part of the BRF LoS?



They can. We have this very embarrassing nobleman (married to Caroline of Monaco) who I know for a fact is in the LoS. Somewhere in the 400s or something, but that's due to others being closer to the throne, not him being German. I'm pretty sure there are more seeing how all of Europe's royal families are basically related one way or another.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> When the kids have kids, and they are all 100% American born & bred, AND this cadet line generation would be even further from the throne, Handbag's grandchildren would not be prince and princess, or even have any inherited title, right?



If Archie has a son he'll inherit the dukedom. If Archie doesn't get the HRH it will cease to be a royal dukedom as soon as Harry dies, though.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

As I understand it, Parliament would have to strip the royal titles.  My guess is that the King doesn’t want to go there, because questions could be asked.  What is the criteria for stripping titles?  These two haven’t committed any crimes, they are just unpopular and don’t want to work.  If anyone in the line of succession is unpopular, then they get their titles stripped?  Why stop with Harry and Meghan?  Why not strip everyone’s titles and get rid of the whole monarchy?  Charles is not nearly so popular that he wants to risk going to Parliament.  In my opinion he will let it ride.


----------



## xincinsin

jblended said:


> Slightly ridiculous question because it's doesn't matter, but can someone tell me if the BBC footage of the funeral included the infamous candle or their cameras were set up in different positions? I am seeing tons of memes of the candle  and wondered if all major broadcasters had access to only one stream or if people just preferred Sky News on the day (as I did, since they seemed not to cut back to the studio as often). TIA


I was watching BBC and it had the candle. I  also had another media feed on my laptop. Shots outside the abbey were different but I think shots inside were similar.

According to an article I read, BBC, ITV and Sky News collaborated on the coverage.


----------



## Mumotons

Redbirdhermes said:


> As I understand it, Parliament would have to strip the royal titles.  My guess is that the King doesn’t want to go there, because questions could be asked.  What is the criteria for stripping titles?  These two haven’t committed any crimes, they are just unpopular and don’t want to work.  If anyone in the line of succession is unpopular, then they get their titles stripped?  Why stop with Harry and Meghan?  Why not strip everyone’s titles and get rid of the whole monarchy?  Charles is not nearly so popular that he wants to risk going to Parliament.  In my opinion he will let it ride.


But it will be interesting to see how this pans out ;


			https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> If that's the case, they lost an opportunity to advocate for infertility awareness. For example, they could have fought for children born through surrogacy to have the same rights as those who are not.


That would require them to care more about the issue of infertility than they did about their own importance as producers of heirs #6 and #7 in the line of succession. So you can see why it would be a nonstarter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They can. We have this very embarrassing nobleman (married to Caroline of Monaco) who I know for a fact is in the LoS. Somewhere in the 400s or something, but that's due to others being closer to the throne, not him being German. I'm pretty sure there are more seeing how all of Europe's royal families are basically related one way or another.



I googled. So any offspring of Sophie of Hannover is in the LoS because at one point in the 18th century she was the heir presumptive. 

Other non-Brits currently in the LoS include King Harald of Norway, King Carl Gustav of Sweden and Queen Marghrete of Denmark (plus their children and grandchildren). There's more German nobility as well from families I've never heard of. Currently the LoS has like 5000 people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> Slightly ridiculous question because it's doesn't matter, but can someone tell me if the BBC footage of the funeral included the infamous candle or their cameras were set up in different positions? I am seeing tons of memes of the candle  and wondered if all major broadcasters had access to only one stream or if people just preferred Sky News on the day (as I did, since they seemed not to cut back to the studio as often). TIA


BBC had the candle-block angle as well as the coffin angle. Seems these angles were requested by QE.


----------



## Pivoine66

Redbirdhermes said:


> As I understand it, Parliament would have to strip the royal titles.  My guess is that the King doesn’t want to go there, because questions could be asked.  What is the criteria for stripping titles?  These two haven’t committed any crimes, they are just unpopular and don’t want to work.  If anyone in the line of succession is unpopular, then they get their titles stripped?  Why stop with Harry and Meghan?  Why not strip everyone’s titles and get rid of the whole monarchy?  Charles is not nearly so popular that he wants to risk going to Parliament.  In my opinion he will let it ride.


Hm. Don't know in US. Though her actions IMO might/could  be subject in some countries to an investigation whether a criminal act has been committed. (sorry not a native speaker) - such as maybe the "slipping memory" in court, the allegedly proven lies in the Oprah interview, which could be insinuating that the British People and the Royal Family are racists, the "no NDA" so she could ... in the last interview ...?


----------



## Sophisticatted

It wouldn’t surprise me if the church had cameras permanently attached and then news stations have use of video from them during important occasions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry I'm easily obsessed. Fun fact: Prince Sverre Magnus, #3 in the Norwegian LoS is in front of his sister Ingrid Alexandra the future queen in the UK LoS. Just as poor Carl Philip wasn't dethroned by Victoria over there.


----------



## Diamondbirdie

Redbirdhermes said:


> As I understand it, Parliament would have to strip the royal titles.  My guess is that the King doesn’t want to go there, because questions could be asked.  What is the criteria for stripping titles?  These two haven’t committed any crimes, they are just unpopular and don’t want to work.  If anyone in the line of succession is unpopular, then they get their titles stripped?  Why stop with Harry and Meghan?  Why not strip everyone’s titles and get rid of the whole monarchy?  Charles is not nearly so popular that he wants to risk going to Parliament.  In my opinion he will let it ride.


Hopefully they will learn by their mistakes and stop handing out dukedoms to all the kids. If they had left him as Prince Harry only, Meghan and the kids would have remained untitled, like Princess Anne’s family. Prince Edward too- he is supposed to be getting the Duke of Edinburgh title but there’s been absolutely no mention of that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Queen’s funeral feeds were limited to BBC and Sky.  Other channels had to pay licensing fees to those channels. There was an article posted on this thread [maybe the QE funeral thread?] about the feeds and the ‘approved’ videos.


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> As I understand it, Parliament would have to strip the royal titles.  My guess is that the King doesn’t want to go there, because questions could be asked.  What is the criteria for stripping titles?  These two haven’t committed any crimes, they are just unpopular and don’t want to work.  If anyone in the line of succession is unpopular, then they get their titles stripped?  Why stop with Harry and Meghan?  Why not strip everyone’s titles and get rid of the whole monarchy?  Charles is not nearly so popular that he wants to risk going to Parliament.  In my opinion he will let it ride.



Couldn't strip titles already given (although there _are _a few precedents of British Royal Princes having their titles stripped) but he could choose not grant titles. He decides. KC could also delay decisions indefinitely.


----------



## Diamondbirdie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I googled. So any offspring of Sophie of Hannover is in the LoS because at one point in the 18th century she was the heir presumptive.
> 
> Other non-Brits currently in the LoS include King Harald of Norway, King Carl Gustav of Sweden and Queen Marghrete of Denmark (plus their children and grandchildren). There's more German nobility as well from families I've never heard of. Currently the LoS has like 5000 people.


It’s quite bizarre, isn’t it? Why bother with going that far down??


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Because it's their bIrtHriGht. Or because their mother is nuts.


And because there is likely a way to monetize it in the future.


----------



## papertiger

Diamondbirdie said:


> Hopefully they will learn by their mistakes and stop handing out dukedoms to all the kids. If they had left him as Prince Harry only, Meghan and the kids would have remained untitled, like Princess Anne’s family. Prince Edward too- he is supposed to be getting the Duke of Edinburgh title but there’s been absolutely no mention of that.



Well, exactly. Why do you think H&M waited until they had titles before leaving?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> And because there is likely a way to monetize it in the future.



That's the circle squared.

King Charles has to decide if he can trust H&M.

He obviously can't.

They need to be stopped, stopped from cheapening (selling) and talking down the monarchy and Crown.

Strong, firm (non)action is required.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry I'm easily obsessed. Fun fact: Prince Sverre Magnus, #3 in the Norwegian LoS is in front of his sister Ingrid Alexandra the future queen in the UK LoS. Just as poor Carl Philip wasn't dethroned by Victoria over there.



Last posting, I promise. Last time the full LoS was updated (around 2011) Prince Philip was #679.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> It wouldn’t surprise me if the church had cameras permanently attached and then news stations have use of video from them during important occasions.


Maybe the cabling for broadcast quality video is laid in advance, because that is time-consuming. The Palace would have certain broadcasters involved and sworn to secrecy for Operation London Bridge. Once the event happens, fibre optics would have been activated and the cabling gone "live" for transmission. Wireless transmitters might have been used if they had a priority feed not shared with the public. Whether or not the cameras were pre-installed would likely depend on how often the abbey was used for national events (regularly required usage would justify the cost of purchase/maintenance/upgrades) or if the broadcasters were alerted that they best get the cameras up. Basing this on my own experience with coverage of state events in my locality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Diamondbirdie said:


> Hopefully they will learn by their mistakes and stop handing out dukedoms to all the kids. If they had left him as Prince Harry only, Meghan and the kids would have remained untitled, like Princess Anne’s family. Prince Edward too- he is supposed to be getting the Duke of Edinburgh title but there’s been absolutely no mention of that.



I don't think that's entirely correct. She would be Princess Henry, and the children would have some minor courtesy title like they have now, maybe The Honorable or something?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Diamondbirdie said:


> It’s quite bizarre, isn’t it? Why bother with going that far down??



I don't think the BRF does, they stop with Zara and her children on their official websites. But someone absolutely compiles that list regularly.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Last posting, I promise. Last time the full LoS was updated (around 2011) Prince Philip was #679.



What's my #???? Where's my tiara?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think that's entirely correct. She would be Princess Henry, and the children would have some minor courtesy title like they have now, maybe The Honorable or something?



The Hon or Something of Nowhere in Particular sounds good to me   

Go for it!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Can’t find it now, someone tweeted screenshots of domain names/websites she or her team have created - MeghanMarkle2020 all the way to 2040.*  These were done in 4yr cycles to match presidential elections.  ???wth???  Someone is overthinking her influence. Last year T&C posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Secretly Purchased Domain Names for Lilibet Before Birth
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess registered both LilbetDiana.com and LiliDiana.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


I believe this is the post you were looking for (see MabelSyrup below).


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Handbag was fronting the Sussex negotiation. If...
> a)  we are right about him not being aware of RL and the cost of living
> b)  he thought he was still entitled to get a million-pound "allowance" from the Bank of Dad
> c)  he assumed Hollywood was going to be throwing money at him and Zedzee
> then he probably didn't think longterm or thought the BRF would let things slide if he didn't exactly adhere to the t&c. "But I thought you wouldn't mind if we ... "
> 
> Is there any *report on who was advising Handbag apart from his comms with the Handbag owner?* If  Sucks or that entertainment lawyer who set up Zedzee's network of companies was involved, he would have struck a shrewder deal.



Exactly!

Never mind "He". He knows/knew nothing, she's obviously been drip-feeding him demands and telling him what it's like in the "light, bright, big BIG World" from the beginning.

pic Pinterest


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Not sure how much leverage H actually had in his negotiations with the BRF. At the end of the day, the BRF had the money, the properties, control over who had and could use titles, control over who got full time security, and all the other perks H&M wanted to hang on to. The allowance came from Charles who could stop it at any time. There is nothing that says any parent has to keep supporting his adult children when they choose not to work to support themselves. Which family members are allowed to live in crown properties was decided by the Queen and now the King. The Queen let them lease Frogmore  Cottage while they were still working royals and allowed them to renovate it with funds that they had to pay back after Megxit. They allegedly asked for a suite of rooms in Windsor Castle and the Queen said no. That again was the Queen’s right to decide and nothing that H&M had the power to change. She let them keep the lease but did not allow them to keep the freebie renovation. The Queen set the rule of security only for working royals so Harry can sue His Majesty’s government until the cows come home, he doesn’t appear to have a viable case and I sincerely hope that when he loses both his legal suits he is forced to pay the court costs. Again, titles and honors are granted by the Queen, now the King, so the grifters have no right to use HRH titles granted to them by the Queen if she told them not use them. I wish KC would ask parliaments to strip them of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles as well. And I hope KC does not give their children the Prince and Princess titles for many reasons already discussed in this thread. So the despicable duo has no legal remedy to compel the BRF to accede to any of their demands. Their only leverage is to threaten to release information that could harm the BRF image and reputation. They’ve repeatedly played the race card and leaked “damaging” misinformation via their sycophants. I’ve yet to see what good that strategy has done them. They’re playing a very weak hand but just don’t know when to fold.



Basically, H&M over-valued their brand. 

There is an art to selling hot-air and snake oil, and these two grifters don't have it.


----------



## bag-mania

Anybody can buy a domain name in hopes of selling it at a profit later. I would assume it wasn’t Meghan who registered those.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> And because there is likely a way to monetize it in the future.


Sky News seems to have a comparable opinion… "_to propel her own fame_"


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Monday!


----------



## Chanbal

I hope it's Ok to share this beautiful quote I found while reading the last news on the Harkles.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> You forget, MegZ didn't have 3 years. Nothing was secure until after a baby.  Harry was also obsessed by having a perfect family to rival Will's. They needed a baby NOW


True. If the rumour is true that she had eggs in storage in Canada, then money can get her quickie fertilisation and implantation. Expedience does not translate well into PR terms.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Exactly. It's a private matter for _every_ single other family (or mother and child if alone) in the entire world.
> 
> Not for royalty. *If you marry royalty that's part of what you sign-up for.*
> 
> I have no wish to see or hear about their private lives or children, but why shouldn't the British public want clarity and accountability, done by the book. I don't want them (or their children) lording it over me if they are not into the rules. If those two can't be asked to even follow the most basic of rule, storm the Bastille, Vive la République.


Exactly!  Look at what they put Diana through.  She had to go to their doctors to make sure she could *have* children.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Exactly!  Look at what they put Diana through.  She had to go to their doctors to make sure she could _have_ children.


OT about Diana. The sugars are claiming that Diana's sepulchral voice can be heard on the ITV coverage of the funeral.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Exactly!  Look at what they put Diana through.  She had to go to their doctors to make sure she could _have_ children.



You have to ask yourself why she and Trevor never had children (I_ am_ presuming he could, but there are sperm donors if I presume too much) if she was so keen.

She certainly seemed 'keen' with Has-been (this line should be in a song).


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> OT about Diana. The sugars are claiming that Diana's sepulchral voice can be heard on the ITV coverage of the funeral.



Sugars gotta give-up on Harry was an only-child  

Maybe she speaking to her son William and his wife Catherine.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Maybe she should have trained in singing, dancing, songwriting, acting and owning her inner-diva then


----------



## xincinsin

She's getting a GQ Men of the Year award  
For charity work  
GQ postponed the whole event just so the Harkles could attend  
Not sure if I can swallow this.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> She's getting a GQ Men of the Year award
> For charity work
> GQ postponed the whole event just so the Harkles could attend
> Not sure if I can swallow this.




I was mega-nice to myself all year too, where's my award?   


Don't forget guys, these awards are bought, bought, BOUGHT


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> She's getting a GQ Men of the Year award
> For charity work
> GQ postponed the whole event just so the Harkles could attend
> Not sure if I can swallow this.



People on Twitter are questioning this, they think it's comparable to their perpetual invitation to the Oscars.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are questioning this, they think it's comparable to their perpetual invitation to the Oscars.



GQ are gonna look like fools if it's true


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting sentences on QE's gift of the Frogmore Cottage: 

_'"The cottage was a big deal," she said. "*The Queen's entrance into the gardens is right next to their cottage. *
'*It is essentially her back yard, her solitude, and her privacy*. She was giving that up in gifting Harry and Meghan Frogmore Cottage. We all thought it was very big of her. She said, "*I hope they'll respect it.*"'_









						Harry and Meghan wanted Windsor Castle but were given Frogmore
					

Harry and Meghan had their hearts set on a home in the heart of the Queen's Berkshire bolthole but were left disappointed, according to claims published in Katie Nicholl's book, The New Royals.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

I'm not sure about "pride" being the issue if M&H had fertility issues. I mean, Claw is the person who said the BRF drove her to suicidal thoughts and that they're "racist". Harry said the RF is "trapped". Why shut their mouths about having difficulty cranking out kids like a puppy mill? Or is it the timeline? They needed a baby puppy child NOW, then when they realized that TQ wasn't handing over the keys to all the palaces and castles and putting Claw next in line to inherit the throne that the BRF suddenly became "racist and drove Hapless Meghan to suicidal thoughts".


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> She's getting a GQ Men of the Year award
> For charity work
> GQ postponed the whole event just so the Harkles could attend
> Not sure if I can swallow this.




GQ boys are _baaad_. They will probably boo her 

RE: Trevor’s prenup - Article from 2018:








						Meghan Markle Allegedly Made Her Ex-Husband Sign A Pregnancy Contract
					

According to a "close friend," the Duchess of Sussex allegedly had some requests and made her ex-husband literally sign on a dotted line.




					www.refinery29.com
				




_According to a "close friend" of Markle's who spoke to Daily Mail TV, the Duchess of Sussex allegedly made her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson, sign a pregnancy contract that stated that he would pay for a personal trainer and nutritionist if and when she got pregnant. In addition to those health and fitness conditions, there was also allegedly mention of how they'd handle childcare and nannies, the source said.

According to Daily Mail TV's source, Markle also allegedly made Engelson literally sign a physical contract. "Maybe just a handwritten letter that she could hang over his head," the source said. While this so-called close friend of Markle's clearly had some personal beef to air about Markle's lifestyle choices, a pre-baby contract isn't that weird.

In fact, some might say a pregnancy contract is a practical measure that allows you to explicitly communicate your needs and expectations of your partner before you add a kid to the mix. Many couples fight when they have a kid because they each have a vision or perception of what their partner will be like, Esther Boykin, LMFT, a relationship therapist told Refinery29. So a contract could help prevent those arguments before they happen.


Some people refer to this as a pregnancy "prenup," or "prepup," and say it's great. A pregnancy contract might explain how chores are delineated, and ensure that emotional labor doesn't end up one-sided. What you decide to put in a pregnancy contract is personal, and who are we to judge Markle for wanting to prioritize her health and fitness during pregnancy?


Since this contract was allegedly signed, Markle's attitude and preferences may have changed. "It came up at a time when they were considering having a family, at some point in the near future," the friend told Daily Mail TV. Who knows why this friend felt the need to bring this out of the woodwork. Maybe it's because Markle just gave a great speech about feminism. Or maybe it's just the Halloween spirit that inspired her to drag her one-time friend's skeletons out for all to see and judge.



_


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> True. If the rumour is true that she had *eggs in storage* in Canada, then money can get her quickie fertilisation and implantation. Expedience does not translate well into PR terms.





papertiger said:


> You have to ask yourself why she and Trevor never had children (I_ am_ presuming he could, but there are sperm donors if I presume too much) if she was so keen.
> 
> She certainly seemed 'keen' with Has-been (this line should be in a song).


I believe the storage of the eggs was confirmed by her father. I don't recall in which video, but it should be available online.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> You have to ask yourself why she and Trevor never had children (I_ am_ presuming he could, but there are sperm donors if I presume too much) if she was so keen.
> 
> She certainly seemed 'keen' with Has-been (this line should be in a song).


If she is the narcissist we believe her to be, she wouldn’t want her figure changed because it would be damaging to _HER ACTING CAREER_. In reality, I think she had zero interest in children until Harry and only then because kids could be used as a means of holding on to him and controlling him. It worked beautifully. 

Trevor has had at least one child with his new wife so he wasn’t against having them.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> She's getting a GQ Men of the Year award
> For charity work
> GQ postponed the whole event just so the Harkles could attend
> Not sure if I can swallow this.



Interesting, she is honored but not him, so far they have been inseparable - except for podcast, did they only pay for one award ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ceremony is in London, in November. Isn’t Hazzie’s book coming out then?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Can’t find it now, someone tweeted screenshots of domain names/websites she or her team have created - MeghanMarkle2020 all the way to 2040.  These were done in 4yr cycles to match presidential elections.  ???wth???  Someone is overthinking her influence. Last year T&C posted this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Secretly Purchased Domain Names for Lilibet Before Birth
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess registered both LilbetDiana.com and LiliDiana.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


the most fascinating bit about domain names …
She registered Archewell like the day the pregnancy was announced, she knew it was a boy to be called Archie, she did n9 ask TQ for permission for that name either …

And it was Bower, I think, who said Archie and Veronica was her fav comic strip, I guess that is where she got the name


----------



## CarryOn2020

Truth!  She wanted to be kicked out.  So did Hazz.  Jerks


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> $11million? That’s how much her integrity is worth



Gayle did get a boost after the R Kelly interview....this is the first time I've heard she benefited from her association with Meghan


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> You forget, MegZ didn't have 3 years. Nothing was secure until after a baby.  Harry was also obsessed by having a perfect family to rival Will's. They needed a baby NOW


we don't know how cute his kids are in comparison to Will's but Will and Kate have set a high bar


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ceremony is in London, in November. Isn’t Hazzie’s book coming out then?



Nope, there isn’t a publication date for Harry’s book.

I see it is UK GQ giving her an award. The people who write for American GQ shouldn’t give a sh!t about her.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Maybe she should have trained in singing, dancing, songwriting, acting and owning her inner-diva then
> 
> View attachment 5617989


TW opted for a more practical approach, skipped all those parts, and went straight to the lessons on fame, money, and power. She achieved an A+ in fame so far, she is known everywhere in the world. Though, she might be failing on money and power.


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> One of the links posted above quotes a friend of rhe BRF, who is not happy with the behavior of either M or H, saying nevertheless, H was miserable as a working Royal BRF member pre M, so it was for the best that they left. And, since there are many statements re H‘s concern that he would be irrelevant when George turns18, I think it’s clear his issue is his position in the family. So it’s not just M. H was like this beforehand.
> 
> ETA:
> @jblended, I think we’re thinking along the same lines   We just arrive at different points
> i remember reading somewhere on this thread someone posted that H had a lot of issues re W getting the best charities and patronages, and that H’s were set up to detract from his misbehavior. I have no doubt that Sentebale etc made him happy, but it was never enough.
> 
> i think it’s also very possible that BRF would rather push all the blame on M and try to salvage what they can re H in the event that they divorce and H returns. But, I can just as easily see H digging his heels in, and the BRF deciding to exile them as was done with Wallis/Edward
> JMO though ! Hugs


the longer he waits (assuming he is going back), probably the less popular he would be with the British public....he's getting less attractive with age


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> True. If the rumour is true that she had eggs in storage in Canada, then money can get her quickie fertilisation and implantation. Expedience does not translate well into PR terms.


I was surprised how quickly she became pregnant after they married given her age. My daughter is early 30's and some of her friends are freezing eggs for when "Mr. Right" comes along. Others who are in relationships and want to have children are dealing with infertility. I think MM had eggs on hold ready and waiting for "Mr. Right". All part of her grand scheme.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Interesting, she is honored but not him, so far they have been inseparable - except for podcast, did they only pay for one award ?


One funny comment asked if they would be getting Handbag a Cosmopolitan Women of the Year award. So gutteral...


----------



## charlottawill

And what in the world is going on here?  The last picture where she's bursting at the seams of her dress.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I was surprised how quickly she became pregnant after they married given her age. My daughter is early 30's and some of her friends are freezing eggs for when "Mr. Right" comes along. Others who are in relationships and want to have children are dealing with infertility. I think MM had eggs on hold ready and waiting for "Mr. Right". All part of her grand scheme.


who knows?
could have been donor eggs....not saying they were but it's possible

Interesting thought - if Charles asked for a DNA test (which he wouldn't IMO) and it was a donor egg but Harry's sperm, then it would be OK?  since H is the royal, not M.  since H is likely to have viable sperm and since the kids (I think) have sorta red hair, he is likely the bio dad


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> Slightly ridiculous question because it's doesn't matter, but can someone tell me if the BBC footage of the funeral included the infamous candle or their cameras were set up in different positions? I am seeing tons of memes of the candle  and wondered if all major broadcasters had access to only one stream or if people just preferred Sky News on the day (as I did, since they seemed not to cut back to the studio as often). TIA


----------



## 880

The person I’m happy for is M’s ex husband Trevor. I hope he and his wife and child are very happy


----------



## sdkitty

behind a paywall from daily beast
Meghan Saved ‘Desperately Unhappy’ Harry From Royal Family​PALACE PRISONER

Tom Sykes


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> And what in the world is going on here?  The last picture where she's bursting at the seams of her dress.



Thank you! I knew I'd seen the crone posture somewhere, but I couldn't recall at which event.
Same posture as in the striped shirt photo below.


kipp said:


> If you think the red or beige outfits/fake tan were bad, look at today's mess!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ceremony is in London, in November. Isn’t Hazzie’s book coming out then?



My first thought was, “GQ, male oriented magazine. Did all her former yacht club clients contribute?”


----------



## kemilia

papertiger said:


> I knew it, I knew it, I knew it.  I _told _you Me-again wanted to live in Windsor Castle.
> 
> I mean seriously, what's the point of marrying into royalty - having to live in some cold, _hideous_ country, and putting up with _stupid_ Hot-rock-head, if you can't even live in a darn castle?


I kinda agree.  And wear crowns and tiaras all day long!


----------



## Chanbal

Great question!


----------



## xincinsin

kemilia said:


> I kinda agree.  And wear crowns and tiaras all day long!


And get tons of freebies. Mustn't forget the all-important freebies!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> behind a paywall from daily beast
> Meghan Saved ‘Desperately Unhappy’ Harry From Royal Family​PALACE PRISONER
> 
> Tom Sykes


I think the title is based on this part of the article:


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I think the title is based on this part of the article:
> View attachment 5618027


"desperately" unhappy....uugh
so hard to live the life of a prince
Now he has a "life of service" but what service?  making speeches and giving out cookies and sandwiches?  and playing polo.  What a couple of ingrates


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> And get tons of freebies. Mustn't forget the all-important freebies!



I don't know what you mean!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> "desperately" unhappy....uugh
> so hard to live the life of a prince
> Now he has a "life of service" but what service?  making speeches and giving out cookies and sandwiches?  and playing polo.  What a couple of ingrates



Bananas

Don't forget the bananas 

If she hadn't shown him the way with bananas he may well have been stuck with just plain ol' sandwiches forever


----------



## papertiger

This is so sad:


----------



## Chanbal

This is a great article. And by the way Charles, we here at TPF are ready to give you the advice you need on the Harkles.   








			archive.ph


----------



## bubablu

Redbirdhermes said:


> As I understand it, Parliament would have to strip the royal titles.  My guess is that the King doesn’t want to go there, because questions could be asked.  What is the criteria for stripping titles?  These two haven’t committed any crimes, they are just unpopular and don’t want to work.  If anyone in the line of succession is unpopular, then they get their titles stripped?  Why stop with Harry and Meghan?  Why not strip everyone’s titles and get rid of the whole monarchy?  Charles is not nearly so popular that he wants to risk going to Parliament.  In my opinion he will let it ride.


This.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ceremony is in London, in November. Isn’t Hazzie’s book coming out then?



So they will be flying back to London in a few weeks.  Anyone think they will be visiting KC3?


----------



## Aimee3

marietouchet said:


> the most fascinating bit about domain names …
> She registered Archewell like the day the pregnancy was announced, she knew it was a boy to be called Archie, she did n9 ask TQ for permission for that name either …
> 
> And it was Bower, I think, who said Archie and Veronica was her fav comic strip, I guess that is where she got the name


Does anyone remember the date she announced the pregnancy?  I’m attempting to figure out if they did IVF since you could know the sex of the baby before it’s even transferred into the woman.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss

CobaltBlu said:


>



OMG why do they write headlines like this - they were seated in the second row because the Queen’s children and partners were in the front row (quite rightly) and William etc as he’s Heir to the throne!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> And what in the world is going on here?  The last picture where she's bursting at the seams of her dress.




Ugh, that stupid tortoise head again. Also, besides the dress being 3 sizes too small...it was winter and she chose a flowery, shortsleeved summer dress.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> who knows?
> could have been donor eggs....not saying they were but it's possible
> 
> Interesting thought - if Charles asked for a DNA test (which he wouldn't IMO) and it was a donor egg but Harry's sperm, then it would be OK?  since H is the royal, not M.  since H is likely to have viable sperm and since the kids (I think) have sorta red hair, he is likely the bio dad



No. The children have to be the legal wife's.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Does anyone remember the date she announced the pregnancy?  I’m attempting to figure out if they did IVF since you could know the sex of the baby before it’s even transferred into the woman.



Eugenie's wedding was October 12th 2018.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Eugenie's wedding was October 12th 2018.


Wasn't it actually announced when they were almost touching down in Australia two or three days later?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Wasn't it actually announced when they were almost touching down in Australia two or three days later?



Yeah, they only stole the bride's thunder privately, but I couldn't remember if they announced officially a day later or a few days. I thought the rough estimate was good enough


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, they only stole the bride's thunder privately, but I couldn't remember if they announced officially a day later or a few days. I thought the rough estimate was good enough


And they supposedly like Eugenie and Meghan still couldn’t keep herself from posing with her hand cradling the nonexistent baby bump. Imagine how bad it would’ve been at the wedding of someone she didn’t like!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I would love to know what happened between the Harkles and the Brooksbanks. Eugenie was all over them even after the wedding stunt and suddenly she didn't even want to make smalltalk.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I think the title is based on this part of the article:
> View attachment 5618027


Sorry, I read this article with a heavy dose of salt. The rules / protocol exit to ensure that everyone know what's expected of them, but this egotistical megalomaniac thought she could waltz in and change everything to her liking and when she realized that she couldn't be top dog, she created a stink. I admit that there could've been changes made, but it would've been wasted on the Despicable Pair because we already know that she never intended to remain in the UK and that she married Dufus so she could merch the titles.

PS: Re the bolded section below, I can hear ZedZed answering, "I want to be the Queen and I want it now. Nothing else will appease me!!!"

Article continued here:
Low, who is the respected royal correspondent for _The Times_, has previously alleged in the book that Meghan’s treatment of staff left them, on occasion, “shaking” with fear.
However he also says in the book that Meghan and Harry felt “cornered” by the “ridiculous rules” over what they could and couldn’t do and the Palace’s “inflexibility.”
*Another source criticized the Palace’s handling of the crisis as “incompetent beyond belief,” adding, “It just required the decision-makers to sit around a table and say, ‘OK, what are we going to do about this? What do you need to feel better? And what can we give?’”*
Low quotes a source who told him: “In Meghan and the household, you had two worlds that had no experience of each other, had no way to relate to each other, had no way to comprehend each other. And Meghan was never going to fit in that model and that model was never going to tolerate the Meghan who Meghan wanted to be.”
Low also adds, however, that in the early days of the exit negotiations, a serious effort was made to find a solution with five different scenarios being wargamed, “which ranged from Harry and Meghan spending most of their time being working members of the royal family, but having a month a year to do their own thing, to them spending most of their time privately, but doing a select number of royal activities.”
Low says that at one point then-Prince Charles’s private secretary Clive Alderton “made the point that if they could get this right, they would be solving a problem for future generations of the royal family who were not in the direct line of succession.”
Ultimately, however, it was Queen Elizabeth who declared that royal rules around individuals earning money and being apolitical had to be sacrosanct, and that if Harry and Meghan wanted to “make money” or “dip their toes into American politics” they “could not be allowed to carry out official duties.”
The notion of “compromise,” Low says, was ultimately “removed by the queen.”


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I was surprised how quickly she became pregnant after they married given her age. My daughter is early 30's and some of her friends are freezing eggs for when "Mr. Right" comes along. Others who are in relationships and want to have children are dealing with infertility. I think MM had eggs on hold ready and waiting for "Mr. Right". All part of her grand scheme.


That's what I have said.

Not only did she immediately become pregnant with her geriatric eggs, she had to make sure she wasn't pregnant before the wedding and have a bump walking down the aisle.  So... perfect timing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, I have friends who got pregnant rather quickly without intervention in their mid-40s, but yeah, it was very well timed.


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> Does anyone remember the date she announced the pregnancy?  I’m attempting to figure out if they did IVF since you could know the sex of the baby before it’s even transferred into the woman.


I thought that years ago, especially when they custom chose the redheaded little girl.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would love to know what happened between the Harkles and the Brooksbanks. Eugenie was all over them even after the wedding stunt and suddenly she didn't even want to make smalltalk.


Eugenie was still close to them as recently as February of this year. That’s when Harry had Super Bowl tickets and took Eugenie while Meghan stayed home or went elsewhere. 

Since we’re speculating, I have two guesses: 1) They pumped Eugenie for information on that trip and then used it in some way. Now Eugenie feels betrayed and is the last one in the family to stop trusting them. OR 2) The reason Eugenie & family moved out of Frogmore so abruptly is H&M kicked them out or raised the rent to some ridiculous amount. 

Other ideas are welcome.


----------



## Toby93

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, I read this article with a heavy dose of salt. The rules / protocol exit to ensure that everyone know what's expected of them, but this egotistical megalomaniac thought she could waltz in and change everything to her liking and when she realized that she couldn't be top dog, she created a stink. I admit that *there could've been changes made,* but it would've been wasted on the Despicable Pair because we already know that she never intended to remain in the UK and that she married Dufus so she could merch the titles.
> 
> PS: Re the bolded section below, I can hear ZedZed answering, "I want to be the Queen and I want it now. Nothing else will appease me!!!"
> 
> Article continued here:
> Low, who is the respected royal correspondent for _The Times_, has previously alleged in the book that Meghan’s treatment of staff left them, on occasion, “shaking” with fear.
> However he also says in the book that Meghan and Harry felt “cornered” by the “ridiculous rules” over what they could and couldn’t do and the Palace’s “inflexibility.”
> *Another source criticized the Palace’s handling of the crisis as “incompetent beyond belief,” adding, “It just required the decision-makers to sit around a table and say, ‘OK, what are we going to do about this? What do you need to feel better? And what can we give?’”*
> Low quotes a source who told him: “In Meghan and the household, you had two worlds that had no experience of each other, had no way to relate to each other, had no way to comprehend each other. And Meghan was never going to fit in that model and that model was never going to tolerate the Meghan who Meghan wanted to be.”
> Low also adds, however, that in the early days of the exit negotiations, a serious effort was made to find a solution with five different scenarios being wargamed, “which ranged from Harry and Meghan spending most of their time being working members of the royal family, but having a month a year to do their own thing, to them spending most of their time privately, but doing a select number of royal activities.”
> Low says that at one point then-Prince Charles’s private secretary Clive Alderton “made the point that if they could get this right, they would be solving a problem for future generations of the royal family who were not in the direct line of succession.”
> Ultimately, however, it was Queen Elizabeth who declared that royal rules around individuals earning money and being apolitical had to be sacrosanct, and that if Harry and Meghan wanted to “make money” or “dip their toes into American politics” they “could not be allowed to carry out official duties.”
> The notion of “compromise,” Low says, was ultimately “removed by the queen.”


Yes, changes _could_ be made, but why?  I don't recall Catherine demanding changes and she is married to the heir?  Harry is and always will be the spare.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Eugenie was still close to them as recently as February of this year. That’s when Harry had Super Bowl tickets and took Eugenie while Meghan stayed home or went elsewhere.
> 
> Since we’re speculating, I have two guesses: 1) They pumped Eugenie for information on that trip and then used it in some way. Now Eugenie feels betrayed and is the last one in the family to stop trusting them. OR 2) The reason Eugenie & family moved out of Frogmore so abruptly is H&M kicked them out or raised the rent to some ridiculous amount.
> 
> Other ideas are welcome.


Or they were Markled once they were no longer of use to them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Eugenie was still close to them as recently as February of this year. That’s when Harry had Super Bowl tickets and took Eugenie while Meghan stayed home or went elsewhere.
> 
> Since we’re speculating, I have two guesses: 1) They pumped Eugenie for information on that trip and then used it in some way. Now Eugenie feels betrayed and is the last one in the family to stop trusting them. OR 2) The reason Eugenie & family moved out of Frogmore so abruptly is H&M kicked them out or raised the rent to some ridiculous amount.
> 
> Other ideas are welcome.



3) All the rumours re: The Queen's death are true and that's where Eugenie drew the line. That whole family was crushed and truly grieving.


----------



## Aimee3

So I did the math and M announces she’s pregnant at Eugenies wedding (by opening her coat and cradling her stomach).  She would have only been 8 weeks pregnant then at most and ultrasound wouldn’t show baby’s sex then.  It’s usually 14-18 weeks to see it on ultrasound.  To me this would mean IVF where they implant an embryo and the sex of the baby would already be known.  I’m still not sure M was the woman actually pregnant, what with all the bump mishaps, but regardless of who was pregnant with Archie, they would have known the baby would be a boy, thus she would have registered the domain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> The person I’m happy for is M’s ex husband Trevor. I hope he and his wife and child are very happy



Yer, lucky escape for him!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No. The children have to be the legal wife's.



and born of her body


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> So they will be flying back to London in a few weeks.  Anyone think they will be visiting KC3?


Will KC3 see them?


----------



## youngster

Hermes Zen said:


> Yep. I thought it was enlightening when I read that. Let’s hope KC does the right thing! NO Prince and Princess titles.



I think Charles should tell them that the titles are under consideration and keep saying that for a long, long time, as well as reminding everyone that the British people have a reasonable expectation that if you are a prince/princess of their country, you should be raised there and go to school there and live several years there at minimum and be, you know, actually British. That then leaves Harry and MM in the position of having to justify _why_ they want these titles immediately when they supposedly both don't care about titles or rank and are living in America where we wouldn't pay any attention to the titles anyway.  (It would be a stupid PR move on their part to keep insisting on the titles, from my American POV, but they've made lots of stupid PR moves.)

Of course, Charles could also say he's going to follow the path of Prince Edward and Sophie and leave it up to the children to decide if they want the title at age 18. No titles before then.  So, take it out of the hands of Harry and MM and give the decision to the children, just like Prince Edward and Sophie did.  Of course, in 15 or so years when the first of the children turn 18, it's somewhat likely that William will be king and both Harry and MM are apparently afraid of William.


----------



## marietouchet

We are at DEFCON 1, I saw the word alledgedly and knew our boy Neil Sean wrote the piece 

Meghan Markle set to go nuclear, but who's to blame? Royal expert explains









						Meghan Markle set to go nuclear, but who's to blame? Royal expert explains
					

Meghan Markle was labeled the "difficult" duchess by former staffers. Royal expert Neil Sean explains what's next for Markle and Prince Harry after the bombshell claims were made.




					www.foxnews.com
				




Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at http://www.foxnews.com/apps-products/index.html.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I'm not sure about "pride" being the issue if M&H had fertility issues. I mean, Claw is the person who said the BRF drove her to suicidal thoughts and that they're "racist". Harry said the RF is "trapped". Why shut their mouths about having difficulty cranking out kids like a puppy mill? Or is it the timeline? They needed a baby puppy child NOW, then when they realized that TQ wasn't handing over the keys to all the palaces and castles and putting Claw next in line to inherit the throne that the BRF suddenly became "racist and drove Hapless Meghan to suicidal thoughts".


She registered ARCHEWELL domain name when pregnancy was announced
she had been married for like 5 mos, with plans for her own FOUNDATION already ?
Low and Bower posit that HandM had discussions if not plans for Megxit long before it happened , the reg date proves this


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> So they will be flying back to London in a few weeks.  Anyone think they will be visiting KC3?


No. Frankly, I'm skeptical about the award. Why would GQ magazine chose to honor Meghan at their "Men of the Year Awards" while completely ignoring Harry who is, you know, A MAN? Until I see the PR-purchased puff piece from a US entertainment site about it, I'm not believing it.


----------



## Mrs.Z

marietouchet said:


> We are at DEFCON 1, I saw the word alledgedly and knew our boy Neil Sean wrote the piece
> 
> Meghan Markle set to go nuclear, but who's to blame? Royal expert explains
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle set to go nuclear, but who's to blame? Royal expert explains
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was labeled the "difficult" duchess by former staffers. Royal expert Neil Sean explains what's next for Markle and Prince Harry after the bombshell claims were made.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at http://www.foxnews.com/apps-products/index.html.


I read this earlier, The Markles must be fuming angry and plotting their revenge!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Mrs.Z said:


> I read this earlier, The Markles must be fuming angry and plotting their revenge!


They can plot but the BRF is better at the game than these troublemakers


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Eugenie was still close to them as recently as February of this year. That’s when Harry had Super Bowl tickets and took Eugenie while Meghan stayed home or went elsewhere.
> 
> Since we’re speculating, I have two guesses: 1) They pumped Eugenie for information on that trip and then used it in some way. Now Eugenie feels betrayed and is the last one in the family to stop trusting them. OR 2) The reason Eugenie & family moved out of Frogmore so abruptly is H&M kicked them out or raised the rent to some ridiculous amount.
> 
> Other ideas are welcome.


Or... maybe the BRF made them an offer they couldn't refuse. Stay in the family circle and ice out M&H or go your own way, friendship wise, but without royal perks in the future.

Margaret supposedly gave up the man she loved to keep her royal perks, this is a lesser version of it.


----------



## jennlt

youngster said:


> I think Charles should tell them that the titles are under consideration and keep saying that for a long, long time, as well as reminding everyone that the British people have a reasonable expectation that if you are a prince/princess of their country, you should be raised there and go to school there and live several years there at minimum and be, you know, actually British. That then leaves Harry and MM in the position of having to justify _why_ they want these titles immediately when they supposedly both don't care about titles or rank and are living in America where we wouldn't pay any attention to the titles anyway.  (It would be a stupid PR move on their part to keep insisting on the titles, from my American POV, but they've made lots of stupid PR moves.)
> 
> Of course, Charles could also say he's going to follow the path of Prince Edward and Sophie and leave it up to the children to decide if they want the title at age 18. No titles before then.  So, take it out of the hands of Harry and MM and give the decision to the children, just like Prince Edward and Sophie did.  Of course, in 15 or so years when the first of the children turn 18, it's somewhat likely that William will be king and both Harry and MM are apparently afraid of William.


I also think it would be appropriate for _both_ parents to have British citizenship before the children get titles. I'm surprised M's title wasn't delayed until after she had British citizenship because I think that is a fair requirement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> No. Frankly, I'm skeptical about the award. Why would GQ magazine chose to honor Meghan at their "Men of the Year Awards" while completely ignoring Harry who is, you know, A MAN? Until I see the PR-purchased puff piece from a US entertainment site about it, I'm not believing it.


GQ London must be throwing some shade at MM.  They know an ‘award’ will lure her back, then they will *boo* her - loudly. 
 It’s a trap. Bet she doesn’t go.


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> I think Charles should tell them that the titles are under consideration and keep saying that for a long, long time, as well as reminding everyone that the British people have a reasonable expectation that if you are a prince/princess of their country, you should be raised there and go to school there and live several years there at minimum and be, you know, actually British. That then leaves Harry and MM in the position of having to justify _why_ they want these titles immediately when they supposedly both don't care about titles or rank and are living in America where we wouldn't pay any attention to the titles anyway.  (It would be a stupid PR move on their part to keep insisting on the titles, from my American POV, but they've made lots of stupid PR moves.)
> 
> Of course, Charles could also say he's going to follow the path of Prince Edward and Sophie and leave it up to the children to decide if they want the title at age 18. No titles before then.  So, take it out of the hands of Harry and MM and give the decision to the children, just like Prince Edward and Sophie did.  Of course, in 15 or so years when the first of the children turn 18, it's somewhat likely that William will be king and both Harry and MM are apparently afraid of William.


Every time someone mentions about them wanting or trying to demand for titles, all I can think about is how do these people live and function day-to-day. Are they that dumb and delusional? I cannot imagine someone going to a former employer and and say "Hey, I would like my Branch Manager title back along with the work benefits BUT I am not going to work for your company and I will continue to trash you in the media. You'll just need to give it to me."

Seriously now


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> Or... maybe the BRF made them an offer they couldn't refuse. Stay in the family circle and ice out M&H or go your own way, friendship wise, but without royal perks in the future.
> 
> Margaret supposedly gave up the man she loved to keep her royal perks, this is a lesser version of it.



This is what Harry is so angry about.  He wants all the perks. He wants the titles for the children even if it makes him (Just Call Me Harry) a hypocrite.  He wants continued significant financial support and security paid for by UK taxpayers.  He just doesn't want to do the work and accept that he is lower in the pecking order.  He wanted the institution to change to accommodate what he and Meghan wanted, to bail on all the boring duties, to be half-in/half-out and just do the fun stuff and make money off their titles and connections. He can't seem to get through that dim brain of his that the monarch is head of state and the senior royals just can't do that.   

Imagine if the Queen had given in to them for that half-in/half-out arrangement?  Harry and MM would be thrilled but there would be huge public outcry and likely lots of bad press, and that doesn't even take into consideration the legal ramifications.  So, the Queen and Charles were facing a problem no matter which choice they made.  Cutting Harry and MM out of the family and dropping them as working royals was the most straightforward option, though the two of them can't see beyond their own selfishness and self-interest.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, that stupid tortoise head again. Also, besides the dress being 3 sizes too small...it was winter and she chose a flowery, shortsleeved summer dress.


She's trying to look like the Hollywood celebs that look like they've been poured into sausage casings to advertise their pregnancies.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Antonia

Aimee3 said:


> So I did the math and M announces she’s pregnant at Eugenies wedding (by opening her coat and cradling her stomach).  She would have only been 8 weeks pregnant then at most and ultrasound wouldn’t show baby’s sex then.  It’s usually 14-18 weeks to see it on ultrasound.  To me this would mean IVF where they implant an embryo and the sex of the baby would already be known.  *I’m still not sure M was the woman actually pregnant, what with all the bump mishaps*, but regardless of who was pregnant with Archie, they would have known the baby would be a boy, thus she would have registered the domain.


I have to chime in because she definitely was pregnant at least with Archie because she appeared quite bloated in the face and her stomach was still bloated after birth-she looks like any other woman who just gave birth-how can she fake that?  See photos from USA today and Daily Express:


----------



## Sophisticatted

Trouble with the Brooksbank:  (my TOTAL speculation).  They were caught being untrustworthy in some way (ex. Leaking info) and William said he wouldn’t want to live near (on the same estate) untrustworthy people and then somehow they were sent to live in Portugal for Jack’s job (which is with the same people but is actually a very different job than the one he was originally doing).  I think Euge is on thin ice with William.  The BLG could probably analyze.  So now she is markleing the Harkles as a form of self-preservation.  Again, TOTAL speculation.


----------



## charlottawill

Antonia said:


> I have to chime in because she definitely was pregnant at least with Archie because she appeared quite bloated in the face and her stomach was still bloated after birth-she looks like any other woman who just gave birth-how can she fake that?  See photos from USA today and Daily Express:
> View attachment 5618196
> 
> View attachment 5618197


I agree, but Lilibet's origin is murkier.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> "markleing the Harkles"


What goes around comes around


----------



## papertiger

I think we had this but just wanted to spotlight a couple from these blind items analysis through the years, all in one place. 10 Nov '18 obviously has come home to roost in Low's new book. 29 July '18 was a bit of a  .


----------



## Toby93

Antonia said:


> I have to chime in because she definitely was pregnant at least with Archie because she appeared quite bloated in the face and her stomach was still bloated after birth-she looks like any other woman who just gave birth-how can she fake that?  See photos from USA today and Daily Express:
> View attachment 5618196
> 
> View attachment 5618197


Um, on any given month I can look like that.  If she bulked up on her eating, knowing the due date then that's an easy one to pull off. 
Edit: a few people on twitter have said she used the wrong size moonbump, post pregnancy.  It does seem a bit high but her bustline doesn't seem to match. Sorry, but after reading all the nonsense that these two have pulled off, I just can't give her any benefit of the doubt.  Seriously, a hat on a newborn when the whole world had been waiting to see that baby?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Maggie Muggins said:


> She's trying to look like the Hollywood celebs that look like they've been poured into sausage casings to advertise their pregnancies.


She was definitely channelling Kim K like when she's pregnant with North and encased herself in that god awful Mrs. Doubtfire inspired outfit


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Sorry, I read this article with a heavy dose of salt. The rules / protocol exit to ensure that everyone know what's expected of them, but this egotistical megalomaniac thought she could waltz in and change everything to her liking and when she realized that she couldn't be top dog, she created a stink. I admit that there could've been changes made, but it would've been wasted on the Despicable Pair because we already know that she never intended to remain in the UK and that she married Dufus so she could merch the titles.
> 
> PS: Re the bolded section below, I can hear ZedZed answering, "I want to be the Queen and I want it now. Nothing else will appease me!!!"
> 
> Article continued here:
> Low, who is the respected royal correspondent for _The Times_, has previously alleged in the book that Meghan’s treatment of staff left them, on occasion, “shaking” with fear.
> However he also says in the book that Meghan and Harry felt “cornered” by the “ridiculous rules” over what they could and couldn’t do and the Palace’s “inflexibility.”
> *Another source criticized the Palace’s handling of the crisis as “incompetent beyond belief,” adding, “It just required the decision-makers to sit around a table and say, ‘OK, what are we going to do about this? What do you need to feel better? And what can we give?’”*
> Low quotes a source who told him: “In Meghan and the household, you had two worlds that had no experience of each other, had no way to relate to each other, had no way to comprehend each other. And Meghan was never going to fit in that model and that model was never going to tolerate the Meghan who Meghan wanted to be.”
> Low also adds, however, that in the early days of the exit negotiations, a serious effort was made to find a solution with five different scenarios being wargamed, “which ranged from Harry and Meghan spending most of their time being working members of the royal family, but having a month a year to do their own thing, to them spending most of their time privately, but doing a select number of royal activities.”
> Low says that at one point then-Prince Charles’s private secretary Clive Alderton “made the point that if they could get this right, they would be solving a problem for future generations of the royal family who were not in the direct line of succession.”
> Ultimately, however, it was Queen Elizabeth who declared that royal rules around individuals earning money and being apolitical had to be sacrosanct, and that if Harry and Meghan wanted to “make money” or “dip their toes into American politics” they “could not be allowed to carry out official duties.”
> The notion of “compromise,” Low says, was ultimately “removed by the queen.”


@Maggie Muggins thanks for posting the second part of the article, but i'll need to increase my prescription to be able to read it.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> When the kids have kids, and they are all 100% American born & bred, AND this cadet line generation would be even further from the throne, Handbag's grandchildren would not be prince and princess, or even have any inherited title, right?


Well, unless William does some Targaryen type $hit and marries George to Invisibet, Haz's grandchildren won't be grandchildren of the Monarch and so, no way Jose.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> @Maggie Muggins thanks for posting the second part of the article, *but i'll need to increase my prescription to be able to read it. *



Just copy and paste the text somewhere and enlarge the font size to read


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Um, on any given month I can look like that.  If she bulked up on her eating, knowing the due date then that's an easy one to pull off.
> Edit: a few people on twitter have said she used the wrong size moonbump, post pregnancy.  It does seem a bit high but her bustline doesn't seem to match.
> 
> View attachment 5618211



I agree. I have been around the same for most of my adult life and I love my body just the way it is, but if wanted I could fluff-up and puff-up in a month _no_ problem.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I agree. I have been around the same for most of my adult life and I love my body just the way it is, but if wanted I could fluff-up and puff-up in a month _no_ problem.


you'd have to give up your vanity though....for someone like M who seems to struggle a bit with weight, it would be a sacrafice to put on pounds....but maybe worth it if the prize is big enough


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I think we had this but just wanted to spotlight a couple from these blind items analysis through the years, all in one place. 10 Nov '18 obviously has come home to roost in Low's new book. 29 July '18 was a bit of a  . Some blind it's say she was 'pay to play'
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618203
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618204




All speculation - Rumor is Mm used Jessica Mulroney to buy the clothes, then return the clothes. They supposedly spit the money.  Some say this is why the clothes did not fit Mm - Jess had them sized to fit herself or bought the sample sizes.  Whatever the actual facts of this grift, the bottom line is she was ripping King Charles off. Once he realized the grift, he ceased the tours, so no new clothes were needed.  It all fits with the “how am I supposed to make money” attitude. It also explains why we never see those clothes worn again. One and done.  This chica knew from from the get-go how to make a buck.  My guess is the King and Queen knew what she was doing, too.

ETA: Freebies are one thing, *but* returns - new ballgame entirely.  Doubt anyone in the BRF ever did that.  Question is what did Hazz know and when did he know it.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Um, on any given month I can look like that.  If she bulked up on her eating, knowing the due date then that's an easy one to pull off.
> Edit: a few people on twitter have said she used the wrong size moonbump, post pregnancy.  It does seem a bit high but her bustline doesn't seem to match. Sorry, but after reading all the nonsense that these two have pulled off, I just can't give her any benefit of the doubt.  Seriously, a hat on a newborn when the whole world had been waiting to see that baby?
> 
> View attachment 5618211


I read a comment on Twitter saying that MM's uterine fundus (the top) was too high up under her bust for someone who had just given birth. It was a good observation. Every woman's pregnancy and delivery is different, but there some things that are universal. 

I gave Kate credit for letting the world see her real two or three day postpartum belly, instead of wearing the voluminous kind of dresses that Diana wore for the presentation of her newborns.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Antonia said:


> I have to chime in because she definitely was pregnant at least with Archie because she appeared quite bloated in the face and her stomach was still bloated after birth-she looks like any other woman who just gave birth-how can she fake that?  See photos from USA today and Daily Express:
> View attachment 5618196
> 
> View attachment 5618197


I'm not saying she was or wasn't pregnant, but since she exaggerates and lies about anything and everything, I have many doubts about her pregnancy. First, this appears to be ZedZed's normal stance of tilting her pelvis forward. Second, she could have gained weight just from being idle. Third, while staying out of sight before Archie's birth, she may have had PS to her face causing similar swelling.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

jblended said:


> It has never been just M. Harry has been battling his demons for as long as I can remember. The thing is, when he worked on Sentebale, and then later with the Invictus Games and Heads Together, he had laid those demons to rest. He was happy- radiating joy when he was with those Sentebale kids. That light in him switched off with M. She brought back the bitterness he'd long since let go of.
> Some people bring out the worst in you, others the best. She's in the former category and undid a lot of the progress he had made towards accepting his place and healing from his grief.
> Just IMO, of course. I remember both his rowdy youth and drug habit, as well as him beaming with those kids. He's a shell of a man today. *They both don't want to be happy anymore, they just want to win at any cost.*


You hit the nail on the head.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Just copy and paste the text somewhere and enlarge the font size to read


Thanks, I have access to the article.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> No. Frankly, I'm skeptical about the award. Why would GQ magazine chose to honor Meghan at their "Men of the Year Awards" while completely ignoring Harry who is, you know, A MAN? Until I see the PR-purchased puff piece from a US entertainment site about it, I'm not believing it.


Well, maybe her man of the year award is part of her nuclear strategy, either that or she needs new pronouns


----------



## Chanbal

Dan provides a great overview … 'Sussex Survivor Squad' 










						DAN WOOTTON: Sussex Survivor Squad finally having their 'truth' heard
					

DAN WOOTTON: The Sussex Survivor Squad, as they now refer to themselves, are the band of once loyal staff members who made a herculean bid to keep Meghan Markle happy




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lounorada

Toby93 said:


> This article says Harry got a £17 million advance for his book and £35 million in total.





The worst thing is that he's still going ahead with releasing this shameful book. There are not enough words to describe how F'd up this is.




LittleStar88 said:


> Fingers crossed!










QueenofWrapDress said:


> Bless the sugars, I'll have what they are smoking.



OMG!







youngster said:


> What's crazy about this is that Meghan has actually complained about the wedding, that it was a "spectacle" for the world.  As if she and Harry didn't demand the spectacle in the first place, which they did.  She could have had a Beatrice-sized wedding with just the family but, of course, they needed the huge wedding for the spectacle of it, to invite all those people they didn't know but wanted to know.


This!






charlottawill said:


>





People like this make me weep for humanity. She needs to shut up and take several seats for herself.
That is the most ridiculous. disgraceful and careless comparison I have seen for a while.





Toby93 said:


> Interesting that a lot of twitter users are saying this is TWs own account   Myra, as in My Real Account





Wouldn't be surprised.
I would actually guess she has multiple accounts she posts from.





Chanbal said:


> Just like his grandma?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's worst nightmare isn't King Charles, it's the Prince of Wales: royal expert
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reunited with the royal family for Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral. But royal expert Neil Sean says the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's future with the royal family remains uncertain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com



Yes William! Lets keep it that way.







csshopper said:


> This picture keeps popping up in recent articles. Previously I hadn’t paid much attention to her hair. Yuck, her misadventures with tack ons (not good enough quality to be “extensions”) has been going on for longer than I realized.
> 
> Of course if she had worn a hat as requested, the mess would have been undercover. Looks like the Queen had her eyes scrunched up to shield the view
> View attachment 5617588


Pictures from this event always make me cringe. She looked a sloppy mess that day, despite wearing a very expensive outfit.
The woman behind MM in the white outfit- her face looks just like she's thinking out loud:_ 'Oh meggy you silly bish, you should have worn that hat you were told to wear and wore your hair tied back.... would have saved you from looking like you got caught in a ceiling fan on full speed'_


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> You hit the nail on the head.


Could it be the special effects makeup that Hwood uses?


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> I agree. I have been around the same for most of my adult life and I love my body just the way it is, *but if wanted *I could fluff-up and puff-up in a month _no_ problem.


Sometimes it happens even when I _don't_ want it to


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I hope it's Ok to share this beautiful quote I found while reading the last news on the Harkles.



That's lovely, and so accurate!  Wonder how long until MeGain claims _*Mandela*_ stole her quote?


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> Um, on any given month I can look like that.  If she bulked up on her eating, knowing the due date then that's an easy one to pull off.
> Edit: a few people on twitter have said she used the wrong size moonbump, post pregnancy.  It does seem a bit high but her bustline doesn't seem to match. Sorry, but after reading all the nonsense that these two have pulled off, I just can't give her any benefit of the doubt.  Seriously, a hat on a newborn when the whole world had been waiting to see that baby?
> 
> View attachment 5618211



One bean burrito is all it takes for me! 

I think because she has no waist, then add bloat, then add an Ill-fitting, unflattering trench dress … I would have cried and then burned that dress if those photos were of me.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> She's getting a GQ Men of the Year award
> For charity work
> GQ postponed the whole event just so the Harkles could attend
> Not sure if I can swallow this.



Another out of touch, useless rag giving out useless, meaningless, bought awards.

Truth be told, she does have bigger balls than Haz.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 3) All the rumours re: The Queen's death are true and that's where Eugenie drew the line. That whole family was crushed and truly grieving.


and another factor in Eugenie's thinking, perhaps ... 
She has more than 3 decades of experience with the family and how they handle crises ie SLOWLY. She was there for her father's problems, and for her mother's problems. She may have a good read on her uncle KC and how he will SLOWLY handle things in the future. 
E may just be biding her time


----------



## kang504

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, that will be it. Not.
> 
> But also, unless you are a mod we prefer not to be told what we can talk about. Thanks for understanding.


I didn't say you couldn't talk. Just called you out on what you are talking about.  Discussion. As in discussion forum.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

I checked the RF site (https://www.royal.uk/royal-family), and here is how it presently looks: 

At the top, the King and Kate! Charles seems to really appreciate his daughter in law.   



At the very bottom- TW and Randy A (waiting for Will )


----------



## marietouchet

Deleted


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> TW opted for a more practical approach, skipped all those parts, and went straight to the lessons on fame, money, and power. She achieved an *A+ in fame so far*, she is known everywhere in the world. Though, she might be failing on money and power.


More like in notoriety!


----------



## Lodpah

I


Antonia said:


> I have to chime in because she definitely was pregnant at least with Archie because she appeared quite bloated in the face and her stomach was still bloated after birth-she looks like any other woman who just gave birth-how can she fake that?  See photos from USA today and Daily Express:
> View attachment 5618196
> 
> View attachment 5618197


Pseudocyesis? She probably willed herself to mimic pregnancy as she was so desperate to be famous? I don’t know.


----------



## EverSoElusive

kang504 said:


> I didn't say you couldn't talk. Just called you out on what you are talking about.  Discussion. As in discussion forum.


Respectfully, this forum is called The Purse Forum with many different sub-forums. This thread is under Celebrity News, Gossip, and Style. Hence all the gossips you're reading, which you complained about in your first post within this thread.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> I read a comment on Twitter saying that MM's uterine fundus (the top) was too high up under her bust for someone who had just given birth. It was a good observation. Every woman's pregnancy and delivery is different, but there some things that are universal.
> 
> I gave Kate credit for letting the world see her real two or three day postpartum belly, instead of wearing the voluminous kind of dresses that Diana wore for the presentation of her newborns.


Yep, everything about this woman is a stunt.  This is my favourite pic of her 2nd fake pregnancy.  Anyone who has actually *been* pregnant would know that you just don't/can't carry a 2 year old on your stomach?

 If you were going to carry a toddler while supposedly this pregnant, it could only be much further down on your hip.  Archies leg is on top of the "bump".  Notice the skinny wrists and fingers  No way could I wear my wedding rings after the 6 or 7th month.

Edit:  It helps if I attach the pic I'm referring to


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Flickers of hope. _Ooooh the shade


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> So they will be flying back to London in a few weeks.  Anyone think they will be visiting KC3?


For a place that is _*sooooo*_ triggering, they seem to be going back quite often!


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> I read a comment on Twitter saying that MM's uterine fundus (the top) was too high up under her bust for someone who had just given birth. It was a good observation. Every woman's pregnancy and delivery is different, but there some things that are universal.
> 
> I gave Kate credit for letting the world see her real two or three day postpartum belly, instead of wearing the voluminous kind of dresses that Diana wore for the presentation of her newborns.


I can remember my first doctors visit 5 days after giving birth.  My stomach wasn't too bad actually, but when I tried to wear a loose fitting dress with buttons down the front, I couldn't get the buttons done up top


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Dan provides a great overview … 'Sussex Survivor Squad'
> View attachment 5618237
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: Sussex Survivor Squad finally having their 'truth' heard
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: The Sussex Survivor Squad, as they now refer to themselves, are the band of once loyal staff members who made a herculean bid to keep Meghan Markle happy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


What is really great about the Low book and all of these stories is that the bullying stories are out there and the Royals didn't have to lift a finger or release the report.  The Harkles can't point their fingers at the family when all these other people are releasing information.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Another out of touch, useless rag giving out useless, meaningless, bought awards.
> 
> Truth be told, she does have bigger balls than Haz.


Magazines in general are failing.  In this case the magazine is piggybacking on her notoriety.  The joke is on Meghan.


----------



## Toby93

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5618176
> 
> The worst thing is that he's still going ahead with releasing this shameful book. There are not enough words to describe how F'd up this is.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618178
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG!
> View attachment 5618183
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This!
> View attachment 5618187
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618199
> 
> People like this make me weep for humanity. She needs to shut up and take several seats for herself.
> That is the most ridiculous. disgraceful and careless comparison I have seen for a while.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618235
> 
> Wouldn't be surprised.
> I would actually guess she has multiple accounts she posts from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes William! Lets keep it that way.
> View attachment 5618214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pictures from this event always make me cringe. She looked a sloppy mess that day, despite wearing a very expensive outfit.
> The woman behind MM in the white outfit- her face looks just like she's thinking out loud:_ 'Oh meggy you silly bish, you should have worn that hat you were told to wear and wore your hair tied back.... would have saved you from looking like you got caught in a ceiling fan on full speed'_


The woman behind her is Samatha Cohen, the one who has 17 years experience and yet was bullied almost to tears.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I read a comment on Twitter saying that MM's uterine fundus (the top) was too high up under her bust for someone who had just given birth. It was a good observation. Every woman's pregnancy and delivery is different, but there some things that are universal.
> 
> I gave Kate credit for letting the world see her real two or three day postpartum belly, instead of wearing the voluminous kind of dresses that Diana wore for the presentation of her newborns.


but times changed....there was a time when women always wore loose maternity tops...now everyone shows off their bump


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> What is really great about the Low book and all of these stories is that the bullying stories are out there and the Royals didn't have to lift a finger or release the report.  The Harkles can't point their fingers at the family when all these other people are releasing information.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> you'd have to give up your vanity though....for someone like M who seems to struggle a bit with weight, it would be a sacrafice to put on pounds....but maybe worth it if the prize is big enough



Her vanity is all about status


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will KC3 see them?



I think he will be washing his hair or decorating Buckingham Palace.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> and another factor in Eugenie's thinking, perhaps ...
> She has more than 3 decades of experience with the family and how they handle crises ie SLOWLY. She was there for her father's problems, and for her mother's problems. She may have a good read on her uncle KC and how he will SLOWLY handle things in the future.
> E may just be biding her time


PS MM is different - definitely an immediate gratification type of person


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I agree. I have been around the same for most of my adult life and I love my body just the way it is, but *if wanted I could fluff-up and puff-up in a month no problem.*


Sadly, same here.  Puffing up, no problem.  Depuffing?  Different story.


----------



## Chanbal

Another interesting title…


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Her vanity is all about status


well, maybe today but look at all the pics of her back in the day trying her hardest to look sexy....do you think she's totally over that?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I read a comment on Twitter saying that MM's uterine fundus (the top) was too high up under her bust for someone who had just given birth. It was a good observation. Every woman's pregnancy and delivery is different, but there some things that are universal.
> 
> I gave Kate credit for letting the world see her real two or three day postpartum belly, instead of wearing the voluminous kind of dresses that Diana wore for the presentation of her newborns.


Good point.  It should be around the belly button immediately after delivery and shrink below that until back to normal size 6 weeks or so later.  If not, there would've been some serious issues and TW's puffy face wouldn't have been smiling.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*Flickers of hope.* _Ooooh the shade
> View attachment 5618253



Someone replied…


----------



## gelbergirl

Body Language Guy going LIVE with his analysis and interpreting major articles on Harkels.
LOL
He’s on fire


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Someone replied…



Flickers of hope that perma-frown Hazz will be overseas asap.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> I can remember my first doctors visit 5 days after giving birth.  My stomach wasn't too bad actually, but when I tried to wear a loose fitting dress with buttons down the front, I couldn't get the buttons done up top


My first day post op after my C section, during my first walk, I made a bee line to the scale in the hallway (don't ask WTF they had one in the hallway!) excited to think I've just lost 15 lbs!  (I was really skinny before having children and probably had some body dysmorphia.)  I got on the scale and because of all the fluid they'd pumped into me for my surgery, I weighed 10 lbs *MORE *than I had the morning of my C section.  I almost had a nervous breakdown!  I'd brought my skinny jeans which I couldn't even pull up my calves.  My sister had to run home to get me my sweat pants so I could leave the next day.  Even so, the top of my uterus did not meet my boobs.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think he will be washing his hair or decorating Buckingham Palace.


Quick to the Outer Hebrides to thank the folks for their support.


----------



## Lounorada

Toby93 said:


> The woman behind her is Samatha Cohen, the one who has 17 years experience and yet was bullied almost to tears.


Thanks for reminding me of her name! I knew she was one of the long serving royal employees, but I could not think of her name, the only name that kept popping into my head was Sara Latham  
I think her opinion of MM is written all over her face in that picture


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> That's lovely, and so accurate!  Wonder how long until MeGain claims _*Mandela*_ stole her quote?



Well, MegZ and HaZ seem to be an expert on Mandela's life and times. 

They invoke his wise and authentically powerful name anytime it's convenient and advantageous to enhance their reputation(s) 

It's H&M's truth that counts, no? Why would you let facts, sense or propriety get in the way of biggin' yourself up?

I think both Harry and Meghan should have _already_ apologised to the Mandela family for the many times they have tarnished their family name and great patriarch's reputation.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Another interesting title…
> 
> View attachment 5618261



I think he was always a nasty piece of work.  After he saw her doing it, he felt it was OK for him to do it as well.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> well, maybe today but look at all the pics of her back in the day trying her hardest to look sexy....do you think she's totally over that?



I think she thinks she's HOT whatever, whenever. That's a great confidence to have actually. 

Yes, I think she is trying very hard to distance herself from her sexy Deal or no Deal persona


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s have the Queen’s Cocktail - it could be a _long_ night
_As noted in Food & Wine magazine, Queen Elizabeth II's preferred mixed drink was a gin & Dubonnet cocktail (it was the favorite of the Queen Mother's as well).

It's a simple recipe with three ingredients: Dubonnet (a French aperitif), gin (the Queen, rather patriotically, prefers Gordon's London dry gin), and a lemon slice._


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> My first day post op after my C section, during my first walk, I made a bee line to the scale in the hallway (don't ask WTF they had one in the hallway!) excited to think I've just lost 15 lbs!  (I was really skinny before having children and probably had some body dysmorphia.)  I got on the scale and because of all the fluid they'd pumped into me for my surgery, I weighed 10 lbs *MORE *than I had the morning of my C section.  I almost had a nervous breakdown!  I'd brought my skinny jeans which I couldn't even pull up my calves.  My sister had to run home to get me my sweat pants so I could leave the next day.  Even so, the top of my uterus did not meet my boobs.



I'm so sorry, that sounds really difficult


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Did I read here that she is getting an award from GQ? For what exactly?


----------



## CarryOn2020

LVlvoe_bug said:


> Did I read here that she is getting an award from GQ? For what exactly?


Service  
[Gosh, that sounds so dirty.]


----------



## Chanbal

LVlvoe_bug said:


> Did I read here that she is getting an award from GQ? For what exactly?


Good question!   Does it matter?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Flickers of hope. _Ooooh the shade
> View attachment 5618253




He probably sensed a tremendous flicker of hope that Harry will agree to the divorce at some point.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Service
> [Gosh, that sounds so dirty.]


I just saw HarrysGreySuit twitter post on the TW's service… very informative.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> but times changed....there was a time when women always wore loose maternity tops...now everyone shows off their bump



My best friend was visibly pregnant when she defended her PhD thesis, wearing a pant suit. Her mother said she was very pregnant while doing her exams back in the day and was so embarrassed because in the late 70s, early 80s it was still considered somewhat awkward.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I'm so sorry, that sounds really difficult


Awww, thank you!  
My son will be 21 in March of next year, but apparently, I still haven't gotten over the shock!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My best friend was visibly pregnant when she defended her PhD thesis, wearing a pant suit. Her mother said she was very pregnant while doing her exams back in the day and was so embarrassed because in the late 70s, early 80s it was still considered somewhat awkward.


Were they *heavily* pregnant?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Sadly, same here.  Puffing up, no problem.  Depuffing?  Different story.



OMG yes. I have not been pregnant but I can tell you I'd be a whale by the 2nd trimester.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG yes. I have not been pregnant but I can tell you I'd be a whale by the 2nd trimester.



Me neither, but I can tell you now, I would be cradling my bump after a week


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think he will be washing his hair or decorating Buckingham Palace.


I do not remember if it was this thread or KCIII's but someone mentioned about Diana wanted Charles to be more involved in taking care of the kids but Charles' private secretary (or someone else) said he's too busy to have time to change diapers. This was when he was just PoW. Now that he IS King, he definitely doesn't have time for his man child especially all Harry wants to do is whine and demand, and not contributing to the BRF and country in a positive way


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Chanbal said:


> Good question!   Does it matter?


I guess it matters to me when she is getting an award for her charity work when I’m trying to figure out what she does. Any person can make speech after speech but she not really doing anything. There are more deserving people for this recognition than her. And she is getting the award in place that says is so mean to her ..I don’t get it…


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Me neither, but I can tell you now, I would be cradling my bump after a week


So in that regard, you'd act a little like TW!


----------



## Chanbal

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I guess it matters to me when she is getting an award for her charity work when I’m trying to figure out what she does. Any person can make speech after speech but she not really doing anything. There are more deserving people for this recognition than her. And she is getting the award in place that says is so mean to her ..I don’t get it…


" Does it matter?' was meant as a joke, because it's very possible this is a 'PR-sponsored' award.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I guess it matters to me when she is getting an award for her charity work when I’m trying to figure out what she does. Any person can make speech after speech but she not really doing anything. There are more deserving people for this recognition than her. And she is getting the award in place that says is so mean to her ..I don’t get it…


Yes, as @Chanbal said, it is most likely this ‘award’ is a joke.  Come on, a mens magazine giving a service award to Tw. Nooooo, they are not serious. She shows up, she will be boo’ed and oogled by these _men_.  No, they are not serious.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



One of the commenters:

_They are all owned by Conde Nast: Vogue, GQ, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker & The Cut who‘ve been attavking Charles within a week of his Mother dying. ALL have been promoting her non stop for a couple of months now so it’s easy to see how this award was “acquired” rather than earnt._


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the commenters:
> 
> _They are all owned by Conde Nast: Vogue, GQ, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker & The Cut who‘ve been attavking Charles within a week of his Mother dying. ALL have been promoting her non stop for a couple of months now so it’s easy to see how this award was “acquired” rather than earnt._


Why though?  What is their end game?  How can they actually promote this grifter??


----------



## Lodpah

Toby93 said:


> Yep, everything about this woman is a stunt.  This is my favourite pic of her 2nd fake pregnancy.  Anyone who has actually *been* pregnant would know that you just don't/can't carry a 2 year old on your stomach?
> 
> If you were going to carry a toddler while supposedly this pregnant, it could only be much further down on your hip.  Archies leg is on top of the "bump".  Notice the skinny wrists and fingers  No way could I wear my wedding rings after the 6 or 7th month.
> 
> Edit:  It helps if I attach the pic I'm referring to
> 
> View attachment 5618283


Yep. You carry on your hips.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Why though?  *What is their end game? * How can they actually promote this grifter??


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

Chanbal said:


> " Does it matter?' was meant as a joke, because it's very possible this is a 'PR-sponsored' award.


No, I know I’m just baffled why she keeps getting recognized for doing nothing but complaining…and she keeps going back to the UK. Can she not find anything in the US to volunteer for?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


> I hope it's Ok to share this beautiful quote I found while reading the last news on the Harkles.






purseinsanity said:


> That's lovely, and so accurate!  Wonder how long until MeGain claims _*Mandela*_ stole her quote?





papertiger said:


> Well, MegZ and HaZ seem to be an expert on Mandela's life and times.
> 
> They invoke his wise and authentically powerful name anytime it's convenient and advantageous to enhance their reputation(s)
> 
> It's H&M's truth that counts, no? Why would you let facts, sense or propriety get in the way of biggin' yourself up?
> 
> I think both Harry and Meghan should have _already_ apologised to the Mandela family for the many times they have tarnished their family name and great patriarch's reputation.


Just fyi the quote is misattributed to Mandela, it appears to be from Mohamad Safa.

In his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, Mandela wrote this which is similar and maybe where the confusion started...

"No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love. For love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite."


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just fyi the quote is misattributed to Mandela, it appears to be from Mohamad Safa.
> 
> In his autobiography, Long Walk to Freedom, Mandela wrote this which is similar and maybe where the confusion started...
> 
> "No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin or his background or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love. For love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite."


Yes, Safa has claimed those words. It's a beautiful quote. 









						Fact check: Quote on a divided world misattributed to Nelson Mandela
					

Social media users have been sharing a quote about divisions in the world and misattributing it to former South African President Nelson Mandela.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## csshopper

Lounorada said:


> View attachment 5618176
> 
> The worst thing is that he's still going ahead with releasing this shameful book. There are not enough words to describe how F'd up this is.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618178
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMG!
> View attachment 5618183
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This!
> View attachment 5618187
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618199
> 
> People like this make me weep for humanity. She needs to shut up and take several seats for herself.
> That is the most ridiculous. disgraceful and careless comparison I have seen for a while.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618235
> 
> Wouldn't be surprised.
> I would actually guess she has multiple accounts she posts from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes William! Lets keep it that way.
> View attachment 5618214
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pictures from this event always make me cringe. She looked a sloppy mess that day, despite wearing a very expensive outfit.
> The woman behind MM in the white outfit- her face looks just like she's thinking out loud:_ 'Oh meggy you silly bish, you should have worn that hat you were told to wear and wore your hair tied back.... would have saved you from looking like you got caught in a ceiling fan on full speed'_


Lounorada,

Great interpretation of body language because I think that woman is Sam Cohen, one of the staff who’s quoted in the current articles about being a Sussex Survivor. If so, she’s the one who was on the Queen’s staff, was going to retire, but stayed on at the Queen’s personal request to work for Meghan to help her adjust to Royal life.  The older lady is one of the Queen’s long time Ladies in Waiting


----------



## EverSoElusive

I bet Z-list thinks she looks like this because she's a "supermodel"   This veil is certainly more appropriate for her once allegedly annulled and once divorced self.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Etymology​Verb​*sliving*

present participle of slive
Etymology 2​Created by celebrity Paris Hilton from blend of slaying +‎ living (your best life).[1]
Verb​*sliving*

A person is sliving when they are glamorously successful, self-empowered, and fulfilled—they are "killing it" all on their own, loving every minute of it, and lookin' good while doing it.
​
_Blend slaying and living your best life together and, if you’re Paris Hilton, you get sliving. The idea, then, of sliving is living your life in a successful and fulfilling way. (Note that sliving rhymes with living.) Hilton is credited with inventing word sliving on social media on November 7–8, 2019.








						What Is Sliving And What Does Paris Hilton Have To Do With It?
					

Created by celebrity Paris Hilton, sliving is a blend the slang slaying and living (your best life).




					www.dictionary.com
				




That same day, she explained her coinage in an interview with E!News: “My new word is ‘sliving.’ It’s slaying mixed with living my best life. I am sliving, sliving it, sliving my best life, sliving single … I googled it because I was like, has anyone thought of this word yet? And it’s not a word yet.” (Well, it’s our slang dictionary now, Paris.)

In that interview, Hilton also mentioned sliving single, which adds an important layer to her word: sliving is apparently about “killing it” all on one’s own, not in need of a romantic partner for their happiness or empowerment.

Hilton continue sliving into late 2019 and early 2020. On Entertainment Tonight in December 2019, she said she trademarked sliving (no official record yet of this) and referred to her house as Slivington Manor. *She also played with forms of the word: “We are slivers who slive around the world sliving it.”*

One her YouTube cooking show in January 2020, Hilton taught over million of viewers how to make Sliving Lasagna. That month, Hilton also introduced a sliving filter on Instagram: the filter digitally places pink, heart-shaped glasses topped with the word sliving on a persons’ face._


----------



## Chanbal

LVlvoe_bug said:


> No, I know I’m just baffled why she keeps getting recognized for doing nothing but complaining…and she keeps going back to the UK. Can she not find anything in the US to volunteer for?


As long as she has money and is able to show a sound association with the BRF family (e.g. titles for her kids), she will keep on getting (buying?) awards and other recognitions. It's all about greed, hypocrisy… a sad and sick world imo. Though, as Tom Bower said, "_it's a fascinating story…", _one that keeps so many of us coming back to this thread.


----------



## CarryOn2020

King Charles is sliving.  H&M, not so much.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> Um, on any given month I can look like that.  If she bulked up on her eating, knowing the due date then that's an easy one to pull off.
> Edit: a few people on twitter have said she used the wrong size moonbump, post pregnancy.  It does seem a bit high but her bustline doesn't seem to match. Sorry, but after reading all the nonsense that these two have pulled off, I just can't give her any benefit of the doubt.  Seriously, a hat on a newborn when the whole world had been waiting to see that baby?
> 
> View attachment 5618211


That's what it was.  Her bump (not Kate's obviously) went right under her bust considering she was post delivery. She was still carrying high after giving birth.  Good point!

ETA - just read charlottawill said that too!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Etymology​Verb​*sliving*
> 
> present participle of slive
> Etymology 2​Created by celebrity Paris Hilton from blend of slaying +‎ living (your best life).[1]
> Verb​*sliving*
> 
> A person is sliving when they are glamorously successful, self-empowered, and fulfilled—they are "killing it" all on their own, loving every minute of it, and lookin' good while doing it.
> ​
> _Blend slaying and living your best life together and, if you’re Paris Hilton, you get sliving. The idea, then, of sliving is living your life in a successful and fulfilling way. (Note that sliving rhymes with living.) Hilton is credited with inventing word sliving on social media on November 7–8, 2019.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Is Sliving And What Does Paris Hilton Have To Do With It?
> 
> 
> Created by celebrity Paris Hilton, sliving is a blend the slang slaying and living (your best life).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dictionary.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That same day, she explained her coinage in an interview with E!News: “My new word is ‘sliving.’ It’s slaying mixed with living my best life. I am sliving, sliving it, sliving my best life, sliving single … I googled it because I was like, has anyone thought of this word yet? And it’s not a word yet.” (Well, it’s our slang dictionary now, Paris.)
> 
> In that interview, Hilton also mentioned sliving single, which adds an important layer to her word: sliving is apparently about “killing it” all on one’s own, not in need of a romantic partner for their happiness or empowerment.
> 
> Hilton continue sliving into late 2019 and early 2020. On Entertainment Tonight in December 2019, she said she trademarked sliving (no official record yet of this) and referred to her house as Slivington Manor. *She also played with forms of the word: “We are slivers who slive around the world sliving it.”*
> 
> One her YouTube cooking show in January 2020, Hilton taught over million of viewers how to make Sliving Lasagna. That month, Hilton also introduced a sliving filter on Instagram: the filter digitally places pink, heart-shaped glasses topped with the word sliving on a persons’ face._



I am old


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I am old


Time to slive - let’s get on our rainbows and slive   
Can’t wait to see H&M sliving


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I am old


Who's old?


----------



## EverSoElusive

It's that time of the year where I need to re-do my company's global compliance training. I just finished the harassment and bullying module. Oh yeah, this is 100% Z-list


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the commenters:
> 
> _They are all owned by Conde Nast: Vogue, GQ, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker & The Cut who‘ve been attavking Charles within a week of his Mother dying. ALL have been promoting her non stop for a couple of months now so it’s easy to see how this award was “acquired” rather than earnt._


I must have been pretty naive before I came to this forum   I just assumed that when you see or hear a celebrity talking about something, they couldn't possibly be getting _paid_ for it, or some kind of kickback. I now question everything that I see and read, and consider the source.

When I see Tyler Perry talking about wonderful the Harkles are, I realize that he is also represented by SS  Doesn't seem like anyone has any real ethics or morals or principles when it comes to Hollywood and the almighty dollar.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> *i must have pretty naive before I came to this forum *  I just assumed that when you see or hear a celebrity talking about something, they couldn't possibly be getting _paid_ for it, or some kind of kickback. I now question everything that I see and read, and consider the source.
> 
> When I see Tyler Perry talking about wonderful the Harkles are, I realize that he is also represented by SS  Doesn't seem like anyone has any real ethics or morals or principles when it comes to Hollywood and the almighty dollar.
> 
> View attachment 5618308


We follow here the school of philosophical skepticism.


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Why though?  What is their end game?  How can they actually promote this grifter??


Those magazines need people - good, bad but not boring - who sell issues, HandM get a lot of press


----------



## sdkitty

LVlvoe_bug said:


> I guess it matters to me when she is getting an award for her charity work when I’m trying to figure out what she does. Any person can make speech after speech but she not really doing anything. There are more deserving people for this recognition than her. And she is getting the award in place that says is so mean to her ..I don’t get it…


right....that's what I keep saying....they haven't given any significant donations to any cause that I know of with their foundation....just posing


----------



## sdkitty

LVlvoe_bug said:


> No, I know I’m just baffled why she keeps getting recognized for doing nothing but complaining…and she keeps going back to the UK. Can she not find anything in the US to volunteer for?


she's going there to get someting, not to give or provide "service"


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> What's crazy about this is that Meghan has actually complained about the wedding, that it was a "spectacle" for the world.  As if she and Harry didn't demand the spectacle in the first place, which they did.  She could have had a Beatrice-sized wedding with just the family but, of course, they needed the huge wedding for the spectacle of it, to invite all those people they didn't know but wanted to know.


If she had just waited, she would have met all those A-listers she invited in the natural progression of royal life. Well, except for Winfrey who would have jumped the queue, dying for first bite.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, that stupid tortoise head again. Also, besides the dress being 3 sizes too small...it was winter and she chose a flowery, shortsleeved summer dress.


To balance her winter wardrobe worn in summer.


Antonia said:


> I have to chime in because she definitely was pregnant at least with Archie because she appeared quite bloated in the face and her stomach was still bloated after birth-she looks like any other woman who just gave birth-how can she fake that?  See photos from USA today and Daily Express:
> View attachment 5618196
> 
> 
> View attachment 5618197


I still believe she was using tight clothes + a moonbump to enhance her own bump, hence the mobile mutating bump mishaps. I'd imagine her thinking "What's the point of being pregnant if I don't look *heavily* pregnant for at least 6 months?" In some of these post-partum photos, her belly appears to have shifted to the side. Might be the camera angle or she is standing tilted to one side, but I have never seen any new mum's belly move to the side. And IMO she looks more pregnant post-partum than she did before she gave birth.


CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: Freebies are one thing, *but* returns - new ballgame entirely.  Doubt anyone in the BRF ever did that.  Question is what did Hazz know and when did he know it.


Does it matter? If he believed she was practically an orphan, he would have swallowed any story she spun about anything she did.


purseinsanity said:


> That's lovely, and so accurate!  Wonder how long until MeGain claims _*Mandela*_ stole her quote?


Or for the sugars to claim she is his daughter in spirit.


----------



## Chanbal

Not your typical yahoo's story about TW. 















						Meghan Markle set to go nuclear, but who's to blame? Royal expert explains
					

Meghan Markle was labeled the "difficult" duchess by former staffers. Royal expert Neil Sean explains what's next for Markle and Prince Harry after the bombshell claims were made.




					news.yahoo.com


----------



## ccbaggirl89

If someone can help me, please. I want to buy my mom the Valentine Low book but it says it has a US release date of June 2023. Every news outlet is talking about it as though it'll be out soon. Is it going to release in the UK first??


----------



## carmen56

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If someone can help me, please. I want to buy my mom the Valentine Low book but it says it has a US release date of June 2023. Every news outlet is talking about it as though it'll be out soon. Is it going to release in the UK first??


Comes out here (UK) on October 6th.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Why though?  What is their end game?  How can they actually promote this grifter??


Are they anti-royalist and will support anyone and anything that makes the BRF look bad?


----------



## Toby93

carmen56 said:


> Comes out here (UK) on October 6th.


It's not available in North America on Amazon or Kindle yet.  The Tom Bower book was available on Kindle in the US and Canada at the same time as the UK, but has still not been released in hardcover here yet.  Hopefully the Valentine Low book will be available on Kindle soon.


----------



## bag-mania

ccbaggirl89 said:


> If someone can help me, please. I want to buy my mom the Valentine Low book but it says it has a US release date of June 2023. Every news outlet is talking about it as though it'll be out soon. Is it going to release in the UK first??


You can buy his book through Book Depository in the UK and have it shipped for free to the US. It may take two or three weeks to get to you but it will still be a lot quicker than next June.

Here is the link for the paperback, there is also a hardcover version available for about $5 more.






						Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
					

Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.




					www.bookdepository.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

It just occurred to me that her Sunshine Sachs bill was so high (described by someone as 10 times higher than normal PR bills) because SS likely had to make hefty donations/contributions in her name to buy her all those awards *as well as *charge her a massive premium for using their own clout and connections to get her the awards. Even genuine charity heroes don't get showered with awards like this.

 I'm slow on the uptake...


----------



## zen1965

NM


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> You can buy his book through Book Depository in the UK and have it shipped for free to the US. It may take two or three weeks to get to you but it will still be a lot quicker than next June.
> 
> Here is the link for the paperback, there is also a hardcover version available for about $5 more.
> 
> https://www.bookdepository.com/Courtiers-Valentine-Low/9781472290915?ref=Jpd_detail_2_sims_cat_bs_1


Thanks for this!


----------



## purseinsanity

Taking a break from regular programming to say _*we are on page 7500!!!!
*_


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> Taking a break from regular programming to say _*we are on page 7500!!!!
> *_



Only a wretched, vile and repulsive human being could provide the fodder for 7500 pages. We all gave her a chance, then benefit of the doubt early on, but at every turn our Tig swilling whiner has shown over and over that she is incapable of decency as well as wearing anything that fits.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> You can buy his book through Book Depository in the UK and have it shipped for free to the US. It may take two or three weeks to get to you but it will still be a lot quicker than next June.
> 
> Here is the link for the paperback, there is also a hardcover version available for about $5 more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com


Great info from @bag-mania. I suggest getting the hardcover as the paperback version is usually released significantly later despite showing the same date.


----------



## LittleStar88

Well, I guess William doesn’t have to “test” Harry to see if he’s leaking info…


----------



## Rouge H

Grow up you two…two children to raise….why do narcissistic people have children?


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I guess William doesn’t have to “test” Harry to see if he’s leaking info…
> 
> View attachment 5618431


Extortion? This is so low. I believe Charles and William will have to let him talk until he gets tired…


----------



## KikiStLoy

csshopper said:


> Thanks for this!


You can also buy directly from Waterstones bookshop UK and they will ship to the US


----------



## gracekelly

So Harry leaks family info until King Charles gives the Prince/Princess titles to the kids?  Is he kidding?


----------



## Chanbal

_But Low claims that the aides decided "not to confront" Meghan and Harry on the issue and the potential upset it could cause "*out of fear for what their reaction would be*".

However, a few weeks later, Meghan donned the earrings once more as she headed to the 70th birthday party of the then-Prince Charles.

Low's book alleges that following this second occasion, an aide decided to discuss the provenance of the earrings with the Duke of Sussex and *Prince Harry*_* was "said to have looked 'shocked' that people knew where the earrings came from".*


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> So Harry leaks family info until King Charles gives the Prince/Princess titles to the kids?  Is he kidding?


Princely titles? 








						Bizarre Nostradamus prediction claims Harry 'will become king after Charles'
					

MEDIEVAL mystic Nostradamus predicted that Prince Harry will become king after Charles is forced into a shock abdication, according to a book. The bizarre claims were made using a loose interpretat…




					www.the-sun.com


----------



## Straight-Laced

Rouge H said:


> Grow up you two…two children to raise….why do narcissistic people have children?


So they can use them. Sadly


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I guess William doesn’t have to “test” Harry to see if he’s leaking info…
> 
> View attachment 5618431



_This _is the behavior of a mature man who wants our trust [and $$$$]????  He is the bully.   Let him talk.  Undoubtedly whatever he says will be discredited or reversed.  Only the sleezy people will do business with him.  There’s a reason he is at the bottom of the BRF website.

More on the GQ award - Mini tour???  Grandiose delusions.
_Initially set to take place on September 7, the bash was postponed, with the source telling the Sun that Meghan would not have been able to attend as she was undertaking a *mini tour* of Europe with Prince Harry at the time.








						Charles 'saw
					

Hopes of a thaw in the 'cold war' between The Firm and the Sussexes have emerged after aides said the King saw 'flickers of hope' when speaking to Harry and Meghan at the Queen's funeral.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Scoobie has confirmed to the world Hazbeen has no ethics, no scruples, no moral compass or conscience. Do these two dimwits not realize by announcing this to the universe they likely have destroyed the possibility of any future business deals with companies or agencies who are honest and forthright? Why would someone risk financial data,  for example,  with these two lowlifes?

Will Butter Up wake up and can him. Blackmail and extortion are not synonymous with what they are trying to preach about mental health.

Someday when  Archie turns on him I hope he remembers where Archie learned  disrespect and dishonor behavior.

edit: I think his picture on the Royal Family website should be on the same line with Uncle Andrew.


----------



## jblended

csshopper said:


> Do these two dimwits not realize by announcing this to the universe they likely have destroyed the possibility of any future business deals with companies or agencies who are honest and forthright? Why would someone risk financial data, for example, with these two lowlifes?


Not only will companies with good values surely be backing away now, but likely personal relationships with the elite are also being severed.
The thing about the level they're aspiring to mingle with (that H had always mingled with as a working royal) is that implicit trust and discretion are key. Who will socialize with them now that there is a risk of a sensationalist interview that may reveal private conversations with dignitaries, politicians, or even A-list celebs? Nobody would be stupid enough to risk it with a couple who constantly leaks private info for clout, drama and attention.
It is insane that H grew up with these rules drummed into him- you are respectful, you are discreet, you're a ROYAL- and yet he's choosing to act like some fame-hungry youtuber trying to maximize his follower count with click-bait.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I guess William doesn’t have to “test” Harry to see if he’s leaking info…
> 
> View attachment 5618431


Notice that Handbag is committing social suicide on his own. Zedzee is letting him do it and announcing it via her mouthpiece. Plausible deniability?


----------



## duna

I have pre-ordered the Valentine Low book, it should arrive in the first half of October.


----------



## White Orchid

ayla said:


> Have you guys also now noticed Will getting.. ugh, uglier ?
> 
> Harry is definitely the prince to marry at this point !!


Erm….


----------



## xincinsin

White Orchid said:


> Erm….


I think it's a post from the start of this 7501 page thread.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of the commenters:
> 
> _They are all owned by Conde Nast: Vogue, GQ, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker & The Cut who‘ve been attavking Charles within a week of his Mother dying. ALL have been promoting her non stop for a couple of months now so it’s easy to see how this award was “acquired” rather than earnt._



It's an American owned company (HQ NY) so I'm just guessing it's not very knowledgeable about British Royalty. However, they promote LUXURY, and that is something I (and you all) know about. Luxury is about detail in the back-room, but the fantasy up-front.  The mags mostly cater to the affordable end of luxury, those interested in fashion but end-up buying the fashion fragrances and spa treatments. The mags are not about the ins and outs and small print, it's about the lifestyle headlines and the glossy pics, basically they are all celeb/fashion mags for the coffee table and then dumped at the dentist as charity.

H&M promote themselves along progressive lines. Conde Nast had strategy meetings around the time the two were married. For me, this is not a coincidence. Conde Nast were possibly the last wave of trad mags to go 'progressive'. They held-out longer than anyone, worried about offending their older demographic.  They were equally conscious of looking conservative, fuddy-duddy and matronly, so they had a radical overhaul (face-lift) 4-ish years go.

Cone Nast have 2 sets of people to please:
1. Advertisers (mostly big-brand/multi-brands known for fashion/leather goods. Fashion always want to look young (even though it doesn't sell to them directly)
2. Buyers of print mags (tend(ed) to be over 40) Also don't want their choices to make them look 'past it'.

My guess it H&M represent the progressive side (agenda) within a conventional setting (BRF) globally recognisable and not totally ugly in pics. It actually helps CN they are slightly older because most their readership are 40+. Saying to a 60+ yo woman "the young Royals" with a pic, seeing a non-typical royal family dressed smart-casual with no shoes on, and with babies instead of a grown family cuts 10 years of H&M's optics (which is why she captions are life with 'young mothers' and the rest of the BS).

SPIN SPIN SPIN SPIN, a little money to grease the wheels, and that's all there is to it. One commercial one-hand-washing-the-other and BS all round.

As WE know, H&M are about as loving, inclusive, and woke as Edward and Wallis were, but for the conventional, commercial press they scream "look how young/woke we are" so do Conde Nast. Mutually fit each other's agendas/PR.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Although it's proven that no one removed the cipher on this occasion. Harry is a liar.

Furthermore, behind the scenes, privately KC gave special permission for Harry to wear uniform that he was NOT entitled to. That was even after Harry declared (EXCLAIMED from the rooftops) he would NOT be wearing it. Can you imagine the comms on that one? Hence Harry is a liar and a nagger and KC caved.


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> You can buy his book through Book Depository in the UK and have it shipped for free to the US. It may take two or three weeks to get to you but it will still be a lot quicker than next June.
> 
> Here is the link for the paperback, there is also a hardcover version available for about $5 more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com


Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me

ETA: came to my senses almost immediately after I wrote this and ordered one for me and one for a friend 
from Waterstones bc i couldn’t figure out how to get hardcover from book depository


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Although it's proven that no one removed the cipher on this occasion. Harry is a liar.
> 
> Furthermore, behind the scenes, privately KC gave special permission for Harry to wear uniform that he was NOT entitled to. That was even after Harry declared (EXCLAIMED from the rooftops) he would NOT be wearing it. Can you imagine the coms on that one? Hence Harry is a liar and a nagger and KC caved.


King Charles III will protect the monarchy always because that is what is at issue here.  Imo.


----------



## EverSoElusive

880 said:


> Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me


Not that TB's book wasn't good but the subject matter is exhausting and sickening. I feel drained after reading each time. Good thing there's e-books these days, which are cheaper so I won't be paying for a hardcopy.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> King Charles III will protect the monarchy always because that is what is at issue here. . Imo.




For sure, BLG and Baroness Buck said so too (one of BLG's latest web streams) 

For sure he is using anti-narc tactics against the narcs. King nice publicly and King resolute behind the scenes. 

However, I really hope he doesn't cave to the Prince/Princess titles. That could go either way. Once the adults have got the children fancy titles there'll be no holding these two form selling the Monarchy once deal at a time. Every Disney premiere will have 'a real live princess' to merch the franchise - NO.


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> King Charles III will protect the monarchy always because that is what is at issue here. . Imo.


I really hope he is as steadfast as QEII, like when she said "h3ll to the no, no, no" without any doubt to the Troublesome Duo when they wanted to halfsie, despite Harry being the favorite grandchild, allegedly


----------



## CarryOn2020

I have great confidence Queen Camilla, the Prince of Wales and many others  will guide KCIII in the proper direction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## elvisfan4life

EverSoElusive said:


> I really hope he is as steadfast as QEII, like when she said "h3ll to the no, no, no" without any doubt to the Troublesome Duo when they wanted to halfsie, despite Harry being the favorite grandchild, allegedly


No one will be as good a monarch as our beloved Queen I pray Charles is better than I fear


----------



## EverSoElusive

elvisfan4life said:


> No one will be as good a monarch as our beloved Queen I pray Charles is better than I fear


I agree. Her Majesty was an extraordinary lady  She set the bar really high and some big shoes to fill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hope this is not too political:


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me
> 
> ETA: came to my senses almost immediately after I wrote this and ordered one for me and one for a friend lol
> from Waterstones bc i couldn’t figure out how to get hardcover from book depository



For sure it's more dry-wit reference book than a sensationalist 'truth bomber' (the latter, I'm expecting from HaZbin's book). 

For TB's, I think that at least someone would have to have seen and be interested in the Oprah interview pre-reading. TB is dense (necessary because he needs to present evidence like at court) but it's not hard if you have followed the story even a little bit. 

It's only depressing because of the subject(s) IMO. I look at H&M and I feel depressed about the World


----------



## carmen56

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I guess William doesn’t have to “test” Harry to see if he’s leaking info…
> 
> View attachment 5618431


Never give in to blackmailers, they will still keep coming back for more.  How can Harry stoop so low?


----------



## skyqueen

#markeled was trending on Twitter, yesterday...I almost wet my pants! A lot of tweets concerning Oprah and how she was "markeled" by MM's BS


----------



## CarryOn2020

skyqueen said:


> #markeled was trending on Twitter, yesterday...I almost wet my pants! A lot of tweets concerning Oprah and how she was "markeled" by MM's BS



To The Cut:


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I think it's a post from the start of this 7501 page thread.


Yes, and it shows how well thought of Harry was here… in *2006*. What a difference!


----------



## Hyacinth

880 said:


> Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me
> 
> ETA: came to my senses almost immediately after I wrote this and ordered one for me and one for a friend
> from Waterstones bc i couldn’t figure out how to get hardcover from book depository



Just scroll down the page in that BookDepository.com link and a link to the hardcover version comes up. It's $20.16 US with free shipping. Cancelled my pre-order from Amazon UK, $20.16 beats $35.60 any day and Amazon UK's shipping to the US is almost $15.00.






						Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
					

Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.




					www.bookdepository.com


----------



## papertiger

Lady C making it clear this (Low's) book would not have gone out without Palace cooperation, but don't worry, it's NOT a Lady C channel length story, just a_ quick_ GBNews item:


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5618453
> 
> _But Low claims that the aides decided "not to confront" Meghan and Harry on the issue and the potential upset it could cause "*out of fear for what their reaction would be*".
> 
> However, a few weeks later, Meghan donned the earrings once more as she headed to the 70th birthday party of the then-Prince Charles.
> 
> Low's book alleges that following this second occasion, an aide decided to discuss the provenance of the earrings with the Duke of Sussex and *Prince Harry*_* was "said to have looked 'shocked' that people knew where the earrings came from".*



They look terrible. So does she.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I think it's a post from the start of this 7501 page thread.


My how times have changed.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> They look terrible. So does she.



I'm more interested how terrible they look thinking and saying the things they do. 

They 'ruled' their staff with fear, got staff to lie for them (even when it made the Palace look bad) and were happy to accept/wear blood diamonds.


----------



## CarryOn2020

for H&M and all their supporters,  this is what real service looks like.  You cannot fake genuine joy


----------



## White Orchid

xincinsin said:


> I think it's a post from the start of this 7501 page thread.


Yeah I got bored so went to page 1 lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> for H&M and all their supporters,  this is what real service looks like.  You cannot fake genuine joy
> 
> View attachment 5618540


See, even PoW knows how to give way to Kate and stand back so that she can have her moment but without Kate clawing his back.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Those magazines need people - good, bad but not boring - who sell issues, HandM get a lot of press


Was thinking of MM turning up in the UK in November , I bet KC would heave a sigh of relief if she just came and went quietly
Think of the other grandchildren of QEII, Zara, Peter, Louise, they are good examples of how to be quiet 
But, November hmmm when does the new season of the Crown start and end … that will stir the muck … does (Actor) make cameo for H ?  Is quiet possible without MM’s PR folks going bananas as usual ?

Having written that… I think of MM’s banana messages and am pleased with my pun … lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> Who will socialize with them now that there is a risk of a sensationalist interview that may reveal private conversations with dignitaries, politicians, or even A-list celebs? Nobody would be stupid enough to risk it with a couple who constantly leaks private info for clout, drama and attention.
> It is insane that H grew up with these rules drummed into him- you are respectful, you are discreet, you're a ROYAL- and yet he's choosing to act like some fame-hungry youtuber trying to maximize his follower count with click-bait.



Right? And nobody wants the blueprint of their homes leaked either.


----------



## jennlt

Have the chickens come home to roost for H & MM?


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Are they anti-royalist and will support anyone and anything that makes the BRF look bad?


I will take a whack at answering this one …

People, VF etc would die to get an interview with the BRF, they would love it, but the BRF does not do interviews of that type. The BRF controls the press with the rota - they limit press access (and annoyance from the hacks)
Similarly, OW tried to score and interview with D and failed, and allegedly OW was unhappy

I don’t think those publications and people are anti monarchy, just annoyed they can’t get direct interviews, they get it usually  second hand and nasty sells


----------



## marietouchet

skyqueen said:


> #markeled was trending on Twitter, yesterday...I almost wet my pants! A lot of tweets concerning Oprah and how she was "markeled" by MM's BS



Those blurbs from the CUT … wow nasty stuff in the HEADLINE , not subtly implied deep down in the text
THE CUT a is a tabloid, yes, there are tabloids in the US


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me
> 
> ETA: came to my senses almost immediately after I wrote this and ordered one for me and one for a friend
> from Waterstones bc i couldn’t figure out how to get hardcover from book depository



I didn't order it for the longest time although I wanted to read it. The other one left my house the day I finished it, it weighted so heavy on me. I just went ahead, it will be out on Thursday but not arrive until October 10th with amazon...probably is shipped directly from the UK, though that usually doesn't take two weeks.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have great confidence Queen Camilla, the Prince of Wales and many others  will guide KCIII in the proper direction.


Charles has been taking direction from others for 73 years. Now he is in the top position and we don’t know how he will handle it. His temperament is very different from his mother’s.


----------



## oldbag

I have a certain mindset when it comes to "awards". In my other life, so to speak, I have won some small writing awards and a few recognitions from my old job. Everything I earned or won was done above board. I never lobbied, I never pressured, whatever came my way was something I was proud of. My smile was genuine. Never could I ever accept any recognition I did not earn. I don't understand fake awards. They are dross. Even burning them would pollute the air. I hope those " awards" are enjoyed before they eventually get tossed in the garbage where they belong.


----------



## WingNut

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, I guess William doesn’t have to “test” Harry to see if he’s leaking info…
> 
> View attachment 5618431


I'm sorry I'm so late to reply to this BS, but, What an A$$hole!


----------



## WingNut

Rouge H said:


> Grow up you two…two children to raise….why do narcissistic people have children?


They have them for self-validation. And for small people to control and ruin.


----------



## LittleStar88

oldbag said:


> I have a certain mindset when it comes to "awards". In my other life, so to speak, I have won some small writing awards and a few recognitions from my old job. Everything I earned or won was done above board. I never lobbied, I never pressured, whatever came my way was something I was proud of. My smile was genuine. Never could I ever accept any recognition I did not earn. I don't understand fake awards. They are dross. Even burning them would pollute the air. I hope those " awards" are enjoyed before they eventually get tossed in the garbage where they belong.



100%!

Until learning that H&M “buy” these awards and magazine covers, I naively had no idea that such a thing was possible. It’s so embarrassing and gross. Especially since it seems the majority of people in these social circles probably know this already - half of me thinks how embarrassing it is to have everyone else know you purchased your kudos, the other half cringes at those showing up to these awards ceremonies applauding these “winners”. Mortifying.

How any of them sleep at night is beyond me.


----------



## xincinsin

880 said:


> Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me
> 
> ETA: came to my senses almost immediately after I wrote this and ordered one for me and one for a friend
> from Waterstones bc i couldn’t figure out how to get hardcover from book depository


We often describe them as a slow-mo train wreck, and, much as we mock them, we are conscious of the end result of a train wreck. It's depressing to see them dig their hole ever deeper. But I'm going to carry on rubber-necking the implosion anyway.


papertiger said:


> For sure, BLG and Baroness Buck said so too (one of BLG's latest web streams)
> 
> For sure he is using anti-narc tactics against the narcs. King nice publicly and King resolute behind the scenes.
> 
> However, I really hope he doesn't cave to the Prince/Princess titles. That could go either way. Once the adults have got the children fancy titles there'll be no holding these two form selling the Monarchy once deal at a time. Every Disney premiere will have 'a real live princess' to merch the franchise - NO.


With the royal warrants lapsed and the merchants having to re-apply, I'm surprised that the faux royal court of Monteshitshow isn't taking advantage of the situation to hand out their own warrants in exchange for $$$$$


CarryOn2020 said:


> I have great confidence Queen Camilla, the Prince of Wales and many others  will guide KCIII in the proper direction.


I hope they remind him about how, very soon after the wedding spectacle, she turned up at his garden party, wanted to leave after 15 mins because she was bored, allegedly accepted gifts meant for him, and wiggled her butt as she was escorted out. *Not* royal material.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


> for H&M and all their supporters,  this is what real service looks like.  You cannot fake genuine joy
> 
> View attachment 5618540


Look how happy and proud William is for his beautiful wife to be centre stage - unlike Charles who grimaced and sulked when crowds clamoured for Diana on their joint engagements - he doesn’t really treat Camilla much better no wonder she keeps her retreat to have time out


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _This _is the behavior of a mature man who wants our trust [and $$$$]????  He is the bully.   Let him talk.  Undoubtedly whatever he says will be discredited or reversed.  Only the sleezy people will do business with him.  There’s a reason he is at the bottom of the BRF website.
> 
> More on the GQ award - Mini tour???  Grandiose delusions.
> _Initially set to take place on September 7, the bash was postponed, with the source telling the Sun that Meghan would not have been able to attend as she was undertaking a *mini tour* of Europe with Prince Harry at the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles 'saw
> 
> 
> Hopes of a thaw in the 'cold war' between The Firm and the Sussexes have emerged after aides said the King saw 'flickers of hope' when speaking to Harry and Meghan at the Queen's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I believe Charles cares about Hazz and whether he and his family have plenty of funds to live well; however, Charles is not willing to sponsor a royal court for the Harkles in the US.

The many millions Hazz brought with him and the ones he made because of his royal association are not enough to sustain the lifestyle of aspiring billionaires. He is showing all signs of being despaired.

I feel sorry for Charles and Will, they should have taken the letter from TW's brother more seriously.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5618453
> 
> _But Low claims that the aides decided "not to confront" Meghan and Harry on the issue and the potential upset it could cause "*out of fear for what their reaction would be*".
> 
> However, a few weeks later, Meghan donned the earrings once more as she headed to the 70th birthday party of the then-Prince Charles.
> 
> Low's book alleges that following this second occasion, an aide decided to discuss the provenance of the earrings with the Duke of Sussex and *Prince Harry*_* was "said to have looked 'shocked' that people knew where the earrings came from".*





DAMN, those are some *tacky* earrings!


----------



## charlottawill

Hyacinth said:


> DAMN, those are some *tacky* earrings!



Tacky earrings for a tacky woman with no taste.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> Tacky earrings for a tacky woman with no taste.



Forever TW’s theme song…


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have great confidence Queen Camilla, the Prince of Wales and many others  will guide KCIII in the proper direction.


I may be wrong, but I believe Charles has the potential to be a great king. He has a soft heart, a good mind, and a strong personality. He supported important issues when they were not fashionable (not bandwagons), he listens to people, his staff members seem to like working with him… He means well and loves his country. All these are great signs imo.


----------



## Hyacinth

jennlt said:


> Have the chickens come home to roost for H & MM?





I hope she gave Paddington Bear a copy too! He can read it while he's relaxing with a nice cuppa and a marmalade sandwich.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Until learning that H&M “buy” these awards and magazine covers, I naively had no idea that such a thing was possible. It’s so embarrassing and gross. Especially since it seems the majority of people in these social circles probably know this already - half of me thinks how embarrassing it is to have everyone else know you purchased your kudos, the other half cringes at those showing up to these awards ceremonies applauding these “winners”. Mortifying.
> 
> How any of them sleep at night is beyond me.


This is one of the many things I am grateful for about this thread. It has opened my eyes about how much phoniness is involved in celebrity promotion.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Lady C making it clear this (Low's) book would not have gone out without Palace cooperation, but don't worry, it's NOT a Lady C channel length story, just a_ quick_ GBNews item:



Great video, thanks for posting it. On TW's complaints about not being paid for the royal tours despite living in a palace and having the biggest spending budget:

"_She wanted divorce money_…" Lady C!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Great video, thanks for posting it. On TW's complaints about not being paid for the royal tours despite living in a palace and having the biggest spending budget:
> 
> "_She wanted divorce money_…" Lady C!




Absolutely, she wants to stash some cash and not have Hazzer along for the ride.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I may be wrong, but I believe Charles has the potential to be a great king. He has a soft heart, a good mind, and a strong personality. He supported important issues when they were not fashionable (not bandwagons), he listens to people, his staff members seem to like working with him… He means well and loves his country. All these are great signs imo.


Charles may be nicer than he used to be but there are real concerns. I never saw him as having a strong personality. For the past year and a half Charles’ presence has been mostly nonexistent as far as dealing with his errant son and his wife. Now perhaps there isn’t anything he could have done to change things but there is no indication he tried.

Charles has always been a weak man who leans towards conflict avoidance whenever possible. I wish it was otherwise.


----------



## sdkitty

so in addition to what the spoiled brat got from his mom, he got more than his brother from his great grandma....but still an amount he and his WIFE can burn through with their grand lifestyle


			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/queen-mother-left-prince-harry-more-money-than-william-in-her-25-million-will-to-protect-him/news-story/1f9c560e81a7737b8d4d39470975767d


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I believe Charles cares about Hazz and whether he and his family have plenty of funds to live well; however, Charles is not willing to sponsor a royal court for the Harkles in the US.
> 
> The many millions Hazz brought with him and the ones he made because of his royal association are not enough to sustain the lifestyle of aspiring billionaires. He is showing all signs of being despaired.
> 
> I feel sorry for Charles and Will, they should have taken the letter from TW's brother more seriously.




The money that HaZ has in the bank (trust) should surely be enough. How many men have that much money at 30-something? 

That they call themselves a charity is shocking. The whole 'charity' sector needs revising (IMHO). 

MegZ could go back to WORK   Like actual - work. Get a job! 

They don't need that huge team of staff. According to Low, before they left Working Royals line-up, _as well as_ all the Palace staff - M kept her own team (US lawyers, PR, PAs etc etc). Ridiculous. And according to the VL book, H&M had Palace staff that should have just been concentrating on official stuff doing personal errands and what not.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The money that HaZ has in the bank (trust) should surely be enough. How many men have that much money at 30-something?
> 
> That they call themselves a charity is shocking. The whole 'charity' sector needs revising (IMHO).
> 
> MegZ could go back to WORK   Like actual - work. Get a job!
> 
> They don't need that huge team of staff. According to Low, before they left Working Royals line-up, _as well as_ all the Palace staff - M kept her own team (US lawyers, PR, PAs etc etc). Ridiculous. And according to the VL book, H&M had Palace staff that should have just been concentrating on official stuff doing personal errands and what not.


when you live in a huge mansion, you need staff....who needs to live in a home that size?  as I've said before, I'd love nothing better than to see them go live in a "regular" house similar to the one the WIFE grew up in


----------



## rose60610

I had to laugh at the statement "We're not getting paid" in relation to doing royal tours. So...what was CLAW paying for rent, wardrobe, private travel and trips, servants, getting every whim catered to, etc?  Oh that's right, NOTHING! How much did SHE shell out for the 50 million dollar wedding? NOTHING! And she had the gall to beeyatch at "not getting paid" for royal tours? 

How many of their celebrity wedding guests so much as gave them the time of day after the wedding? They all disappeared and haven't been seen since except Oprah and Serena who hang around only because there's a buck to be made. 

The only good press H&M get is the press they pay for. Any sugars they have are either clueless or use Claw for an agenda. I think Palace intel were onto Claw, but Harry was too naive to be swayed. He's sticking with Claw the way women who fall in love with prison death row inmates do. Everyone knows they're nuts (zero self esteem) but it's like they "must prove to the world that love conquers all".  Archie and Lilibet are bargaining chips, not kids. Those poor things will require a good therapist. Haz and Claw are imploding, and it isn't pretty.


----------



## rose60610

sdkitty said:


> when you live in a huge mansion, you need staff....who needs to live in a home that size?  as I've said before, I'd love nothing better than to see them go live in a "regular" house similar to the one the WIFE grew up in



And let them eat at Sizzler's. Oh, the horror!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Charles may be nicer than he used to be but there are real concerns. I never saw him as having a strong personality. For the past year and a half Charles’ presence has been mostly nonexistent as far as dealing with his errant son and his wife. Now perhaps there isn’t anything he could have done to change things but there is no indication he tried.
> 
> Charles has always been a weak man who leans towards conflict avoidance whenever possible. I wish it was otherwise.


I respectfully disagree, Charles might be soft but not weak. Weak people are usually cowards and have a need to hide their own mistakes and show how good and important they are. Charles doesn't sound prepotent like his brother, Randy A. He seems to be a person aware of his mistakes and that tries to be fair. He likely knew about TW's questionable background, but he wanted to believe that she could improve. I'm convinced that he wants his son happy, and that he gave the Harkles a real chance to succeed in the UK. He was a gentleman with TW and her mother. He is now the king, he will put his country ahead of everything like his mother did. Just my 2 cents!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> I had to laugh at the statement "We're not getting paid" in relation to doing royal tours. So...what was CLAW paying for rent, wardrobe, private travel and trips, servants, getting every whim catered to, etc?  Oh that's right, NOTHING! How much did SHE shell out for the 50 million dollar wedding? NOTHING! And she had the gall to beeyatch at "not getting paid" for royal tours?
> 
> How many of their celebrity wedding guests so much as gave them the time of day after the wedding? They all disappeared and haven't been seen since except Oprah and Serena who hang around only because there's a buck to be made.
> 
> The only good press H&M get is the press they pay for. Any sugars they have are either clueless or use Claw for an agenda. I think Palace intel were onto Claw, but Harry was too naive to be swayed. He's sticking with Claw the way women who fall in love with prison death row inmates do. Everyone knows they're nuts (zero self esteem) but it's like they "must prove to the world that love conquers all".  Archie and Lilibet are bargaining chips, not kids. Those poor things will require a good therapist. Haz and Claw are imploding, and it isn't pretty.



If you think about both Harry and Meghan. Although in different leagues, they have both had daddies to pay for them their _entire _lives.

Just having everything the best of and for free isn't enough for M, and H never even thought of money (literally a foreign concept). Her jokey "I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this!" gives absolute insight into where her mind is at all the time.

They both think the world not only owes them a living for being born so special but should bow/curtsey to them too.

Both of them are not just grifters but anti-grafters.

Neither daddy did them any favours.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> I respectfully disagree, Charles might be soft but not weak. Weak people are usually cowards and have a need to hide their own mistakes and show how good and important they are. Charles doesn't sound prepotent like his brother, Randy A. He seems to be a person aware of his mistakes and that tries to be fair. He likely knew about TW's questionable background, but he wanted to believe that she could improve. I'm convinced that he wants his son happy, and that he gave the Harkles a real chance to succeed in the UK. He was a gentleman with TW and her mother. He is now the king, he will put his country ahead of everything like his mother did. Just my 2 cents!


Only time will tell wish we could fast forward a few years


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



I won't click on anything from this source


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> If you think about both Harry and Meghan. Although in different leagues, they have both had daddies to pay for them their _entire _life.
> 
> Just having everything the best of and for free isn't enough for M, and H never even thought of money (literally a foreign concept). Her jokey "I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this!" gives absolute insight into where her mind is at all the time.
> 
> They both think the world not only owes them a living for being born so special but should bow/curtsey to them too.
> 
> Both of them are not just grifters but anti-grafters.
> 
> Neither daddy did them any favours.


Tw had daddy, Trev, Corey, Hazzie, her mother?,  possibly  others to fund her delusions.  She learned by watching her father’s  soap opera as well as from her private schools and sorority. *Everything* was transactional and aspirational - clothes, jewelry, makeup, etc.  I doubt she ever paid for much out of her own pocket.   The idea of giving without expecting or getting anything in return is unknown to her. Sadly, there many women just like her. 

RE: The King - imo he will succeed. He knows how to win, too.  So does The Queen.


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't see this article posted here yet.



sdkitty said:


> I won't click on anything from this source


Is there a problem with Josh Rom? I don't know anything about him. His words in the video clip about the Harkles sounded ok.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I didn't see this article posted here yet.
> 
> 
> Is there a problem with Josh Rom? I don't know anything about him. His words in the video clip about the Harkles sounded ok.



I was referring to newsmax...


----------



## rose60610

papertiger said:


> If you think about both Harry and Meghan. Although in different leagues, they have both had daddies to pay for them their _entire _life.





papertiger said:


> Both of them are not just grifters but anti-grafters.
> 
> Neither daddy did them any favours.



Mainly agreed. Will turned out OK, Haz could always afford to be a dope, and he was/is. He didn't have to be. Haz had all the abilities to do something positive, but like a lot of spoiled brats he resorted to living life as a glorified Peter Pan. Granted, Will was groomed to be King one day, but it isn't to say that Harry didn't have a chance to become something other than the Claw-oppressed-idiot that he is. William appears to be authentic in taking his duties seriously and doesn't act entitled.  He'll be King regardless if he's serious or like his idiot brother. And they had the same daddy. Which is to say, the same nannies  .


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tw had daddy, Trev, Corey, Hazzie, her mother?,  possibly  others to fund her delusions.  She learned by watching her father’s  soap opera as well as from her private schools and sorority. *Everything* was transactional and aspirational - clothes, jewelry, makeup, etc.  I doubt she ever paid for much out of her own pocket.   The idea of giving without expecting or getting anything in return is unknown to her. Sadly, there many women just like her.
> 
> RE: The King - imo he will succeed. He knows how to win, too.  So does The Queen.



I think H&M both overestimated their popularity - away from the Monarchy, and also _under_estimated the love for the institution.

They are mixing-up personality (celebs/themselves) with institutions, ideals and standards (the Monarchy/Crown). This is the reason why KC et al should stick to his guns (no military puns intended) and cut them adrift.

They need him/the Crown. He/UK (We and we) doesn't/don't need _them_.

We wish them well overseas.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Mainly agreed. Will turned out OK, Haz could always afford to be a dope, and he was/is. He didn't have to be. Haz had all the abilities to do something positive, but like a lot of spoiled brats he resorted to living life as a glorified Peter Pan. Granted, Will was groomed to be King one day, but it isn't to say that Harry didn't have a chance to become something other than the Claw-oppressed-idiot that he is. William appears to be authentic in taking his duties seriously and doesn't act entitled.  He'll be King regardless if he's serious or like his idiot brother. And they had the same daddy. Which is to say, the same nannies  .



If Low's book is correct, the rot seemed to set in when Will created his own family and suddenly it wasn't about the brothers anymore.. He was alarmed he'd be cut adrift from the spotlight before proving himself, and started to to resent George growing up. 

Makes me think that H will always think of himself as a young man in the way M thinks she's a young mother. They are stuck in their minds, delusional, what is that age-dysmorphia? 

IMO Harry didn't have to do anything besides be a day by day working royal, he went for charming and personable to resentful and morose. _Then_ he met Meghan who encouraged such negative traits and he projected all his hate/fear/insecurity onto others.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> If Low's book is correct, the rot seemed to set in when Will created his own family and suddenly it wasn't about the brothers anymore.. He was alarmed he'd be cut adrift from the spotlight before proving himself, and started to to resent George growing up.
> 
> Makes me think that H will always think of himself as a young man in the way M thinks she's a young mother. They are stuck in their minds, delusional, what is that age-dysmorphia?
> 
> IMO Harry didn't have to do anything besides be a day by day working royal, he went for charming and personable to resentful and morose. _Then_ he met Meghan who encouraged such negative traits and he projected all his hate/fear/insecurity onto others.


I think he's a case of arrested development...I think if his great-grandma was around to see his horrible disloyalty she would change her will


----------



## Chanbal

@papertiger Here is a long one for you.   I didn't watch it yet, but…


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> @papertiger Here is a long one for you.   I didn't watch it yet, but…




Thank you. I'm gonna go for a walk now, then listen to it later (when I do some clearing up). I know she's not everyone's cup of tea but I do think she has occasional great insight (when she doesn't get _too_ excited  )


----------



## kang504

EverSoElusive said:


> Respectfully, this forum is called The Purse Forum with many different sub-forums. This thread is under Celebrity News, Gossip, and Style. Hence all the gossips you're reading, which you complained about in your first post within this thread.


You are right. I didn't realize this kind of nastiness went on purseforum. My mistake. Will stop following.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

Chanbal said:


> I may be wrong, but I believe Charles has the potential to be a great king. He has a soft heart, a good mind, and a strong personality. He supported important issues when they were not fashionable (not bandwagons), he listens to people, his staff members seem to like working with him… He means well and loves his country. All these are great signs imo.


I agree with you, he thinks things through, puts plans in motion.


bag-mania said:


> Charles may be nicer than he used to be but there are real concerns. I never saw him as having a strong personality. For the past year and a half Charles’ presence has been mostly nonexistent as far as dealing with his errant son and his wife. Now perhaps there isn’t anything he could have done to change things but there is no indication he tried.
> 
> Charles has always been a weak man who leans towards conflict avoidance whenever possible. I wish it was otherwise.


 What do you think he should have done?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I respectfully disagree, Charles might be soft but not weak. Weak people are usually cowards and have a need to hide their own mistakes and show how good and important they are. Charles doesn't sound prepotent like his brother, Randy A. He seems to be a person aware of his mistakes and that tries to be fair. He likely knew about TW's questionable background, but he wanted to believe that she could improve. I'm convinced that he wants his son happy, and that he gave the Harkles a real chance to succeed in the UK. He was a gentleman with TW and her mother. He is now the king, he will put his country ahead of everything like his mother did. Just my 2 cents!


Another possibility - C was silent per his mother’s wishes

And the Bower and Low books were going to be published … 
I bet the BRF got advance copies of each and knew the authors were going to do a number on MM /JCMH anyway

The books helped the BRF in a time when the Queen was not well after COVID - spring of this year


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Another possibility - C was silent per his mother’s wishes
> 
> And the Bower and Low books were going to be published …
> I bet the BRF got advance copies of each and knew the authors were going to do a number on MM /JCMH anyway
> 
> The books helped the BRF in a time when the Queen was not well after COVID - spring of this year



Sources say (Lady C included) no way ether book would gone out without absolute approval by the Palace. 

That would have included the late Queen (re.timeline)


----------



## K.D.

Just leaving this here...


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I respectfully disagree, Charles might be soft but not weak. Weak people are usually cowards and have a need to hide their own mistakes and show how good and important they are. Charles doesn't sound prepotent like his brother, Randy A. He seems to be a person aware of his mistakes and that tries to be fair. He likely knew about TW's questionable background, but he wanted to believe that she could improve. I'm convinced that he wants his son happy, and that he gave the Harkles a real chance to succeed in the UK. He was a gentleman with TW and her mother. He is now the king, he will put his country ahead of everything like his mother did. Just my 2 cents!


That’s fine, like everyone else in the celebrity forum, Charles inspires differing opinions. 

I’m hoping for the best. Knowing Charles accepted suitcases and bags stuffed with €3 million cash from Qatar only three months ago, I question his judgement and common sense. That isn’t something that improves. You are either sensible or you are not.


----------



## bag-mania

mikimoto007 said:


> What do you think he should have done?


Not closed off the line of communication for one. I get that Charles is angry, anyone would be under the circumstances. But doing nothing doesn’t solve the problem, it just prolongs it.

Charles could have taken the opportunity when Harry came back without Meghan last year to meet with his son face-to-face. Instead Charles left town and made himself unavailable. Now would Harry talking it out directly with Charles (without any middle men) have made any difference? Who knows. The point is we’ll never know because he DIDN’T TRY.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> I didn't see this article posted here yet.
> 
> 
> Is there a problem with Josh Rom? I don't know anything about him. His words in the video clip about the Harkles sounded ok.




@Chanbal, this was a great link, The Times bottom line opinion on Harry and Meghan, published 9/26/22. Short and to the point and quite damming and from The Times, not the Daily Mail or another tabloid. 

_. . . The monarchy operates by the power of example. It is not an easy life but the late Queen, like her father and grandfather before her, exemplified the principle that those born to privilege have an obligation to public service.

As the book recounts with impeccable sourcing, the conduct of the Sussexes has more than occasionally fallen short of this ideal. *Rudeness to staff is inexcusable in any working relationship, yet it happened, and was replicated in other forums. “Thanks for coming,” said the duke to journalists covering the couple’s South Pacific tour in 2018, “even though you weren’t invited.” They had been, and were insulted for their pains.

It is to be hoped that the Sussexes will enjoy private life. It will be to their own benefit, and enhance the dignity that King Charles has already demonstrated in his reign, if it is indeed private.*_


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> If Low's book is correct, the rot seemed to set in when Will created his own family and suddenly it wasn't about the brothers anymore.. He was alarmed he'd be cut adrift from the spotlight before proving himself, and started to to resent George growing up.
> 
> Makes me think that H will always think of himself as a young man in the way M thinks she's a young mother. They are stuck in their minds, delusional, what is that age-dysmorphia?
> 
> IMO Harry didn't have to do anything besides be a day by day working royal, he went for charming and personable to resentful and morose. _Then_ he met Meghan who encouraged such negative traits and he projected all his hate/fear/insecurity onto others.


I read somewhere that Queen Elizabeth had William over for tea once a week while he was at Eton so they could discuss the future of the Monarchy and basically she would give him one on one coaching to prepare him to be the future King. maybe I missed seeing it, but I don’t recall seeing anything about the Queen having weekly meetings with Harry.


----------



## mikimoto007

bag-mania said:


> Not closed off the line of communication for one. I get that Charles is angry, anyone would be under the circumstances. But doing nothing doesn’t solve the problem, it just prolongs it.
> 
> Charles could have taken the opportunity when Harry came back without Meghan last year to meet with his son face-to-face. Instead Charles left town and made himself unavailable. Now would Harry talking it out directly with Charles (without any middle men) have made any difference? Who knows. The point is we’ll never know because he DIDN’T TRY.


Ah, see I think Charles did the right thing. Freeze them out. Give them nothing to sell to Oprah. Show them how irrelevant they are to the Royal Family. It’s all too far gone for a reconciliation. I don’t think the problem can be solved. Harry and Meghan want to be superstars and the royal family want them to shut up.


----------



## carmen56

bag-mania said:


> That’s fine, like everyone else in the celebrity forum, Charles inspires differing opinions.
> 
> I’m hoping for the best. Knowing Charles accepted suitcases and bags stuffed with €3 million cash from Qatar only three months ago, I question his judgement and common sense. That isn’t something that improves. You are either sensible or you are not.



I don’t have any time for Charles and Parker Bowles.  I’m hoping his reign is short and we can move on to William and Catherine.  I just want to live long enough to see them accede the throne.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Not closed off the line of communication for one. I get that Charles is angry, anyone would be under the circumstances. But doing nothing doesn’t solve the problem, it just prolongs it.
> 
> Charles could have taken the opportunity when Harry came back without Meghan last year to meet with his son face-to-face. Instead Charles left town and made himself unavailable. Now would Harry talking it out directly with Charles (without any middle men) have made any difference? Who knows. The point is we’ll never know because he DIDN’T TRY.


Nobody can trust either H or M not to leak conversations to their pet mouthpieces. Any conversation Charles had with H would inevitably end up leaked to the press and slanted as unfavorably towards Charles as possible. Whereas if you never have a supposedly private conversation with either H or M, anything they leak can easily be disproved because you never had a private conversation with them in the first place.


----------



## Chanbal

K.D. said:


> Just leaving this here...



Is it true that they lost 6 nannies within Archie's 1st year?   

With so many rumors being confirmed by respected authors like Tom Bower and Valentine Low, I'm starting to believe that whatever is written on their parenting rules is a sad possibility.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> @Chanbal, this was a great link, The Times bottom line opinion on Harry and Meghan, published 9/26/22. Short and to the point and quite damming and from The Times, not the Daily Mail or another tabloid.
> 
> _. . . The monarchy operates by the power of example. It is not an easy life but the late Queen, like her father and grandfather before her, exemplified the principle that those born to privilege have an obligation to public service.
> 
> As the book recounts with impeccable sourcing, the conduct of the Sussexes has more than occasionally fallen short of this ideal. *Rudeness to staff is inexcusable in any working relationship, yet it happened, and was replicated in other forums. “Thanks for coming,” said the duke to journalists covering the couple’s South Pacific tour in 2018, “even though you weren’t invited.” They had been, and were insulted for their pains.
> 
> It is to be hoped that the Sussexes will enjoy private life. It will be to their own benefit, and enhance the dignity that King Charles has already demonstrated in his reign, if it is indeed private.*_


Hazz was also rude - cursing at AngelaK, ramming the shins of palace staff with his trike, running off, etc.  The one who would know the truth is TiggyLeggBourke.  We need to hear her assessment. Imo The King knows the full range of Hazz’s learning difficulties and personality/addiction issues, so he is probably getting professional advice on how to handle the situation. His approach seems solid so far. Now, though, is the time to make adjustments - LoS, CoS, titles, etc.  Just do it and move on. The world has seen the real H&M and the world is not pleased. Screaming, entitled jerks are so last century.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> That’s fine, like everyone else in the celebrity forum, Charles inspires differing opinions.
> 
> I’m hoping for the best. Knowing Charles accepted suitcases and bags stuffed with €3 million cash from Qatar only three months ago, I question his judgement and common sense. That isn’t something that improves. You are either sensible or you are not.


C takes donations - is a chrck better than cash ? To me , it is about the donor …
For ex - BRF has always had relations with Saudi royals , Spanish royals - hmm about Juan Carlos


----------



## andrashik

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think he will be washing his hair or decorating Buckingham Palace.


For Christmas


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

mikimoto007 said:


> Ah, see I think Charles did the right thing. Freeze them out. Give them nothing to sell to Oprah. Show them how irrelevant they are to the Royal Family. It’s all too far gone for a reconciliation. I don’t think the problem can be solved. Harry and Meghan want to be superstars and the royal family want them to shut up.





DoggieBags said:


> Nobody can trust either H or M not to leak conversations to their pet mouthpieces. Any conversation Charles had with H would inevitably end up leaked to the press and slanted as unfavorably towards Charles as possible. Whereas if you never have a supposedly private conversation with either H or M, anything they leak can easily be disproved because you never had a private conversation with them in the first place.


I see your point, don’t give them any ammunition. On the other hand, doing nothing emboldened them. They knew they could lie and nobody would do anything and nothing would happen to them. Harry has little, if any, respect left for his family. If it was anyone else, shutting them out might have worked, but these two attention hogs are going to make a lot of noise regardless.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Not closed off the line of communication for one. I get that Charles is angry, anyone would be under the circumstances. But doing nothing doesn’t solve the problem, it just prolongs it.
> 
> *Charles could have taken the opportunity when Harry came back without Meghan last year to meet with his son face-to-face.* Instead Charles left town and made himself unavailable. Now would Harry talking it out directly with Charles (without any middle men) have made any difference? Who knows. The point is we’ll never know because he DIDN’T TRY.


I think Charles tried to reason with Hazz many times, but Hazz might be a brainwashed person that only listens to what he wants. Isn't Hazz threatening to disclose private conversations with his father and brother? Charles has plenty of reasons to believe that the Harkles will attempt to commercialize any little drop of information, so he has to keep a distance from them. This must be very painful for any parent that loves his/her child. I'm also thinking about TM.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I see your point, don’t give them any ammunition. On the other hand, doing nothing emboldened them. They knew they could lie and nobody would do anything and nothing would happen to them. Harry has little, if any, respect left for his family. If it was anyone else, shutting them out might have worked, but these two attention hogs are going to make a lot of noise regardless.
> 
> View attachment 5618783


Without ammunition and money to buy more they eventually will become powerless. We are talking about a couple that will not be satisfied with anything one gives them, they want more and more. Allegedly!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _This _is the behavior of a mature man who wants our trust [and $$$$]????  He is the bully.   Let him talk.  Undoubtedly whatever he says will be discredited or reversed.  Only the sleezy people will do business with him.  There’s a reason he is at the bottom of the BRF website.
> 
> More on the GQ award - Mini tour???  Grandiose delusions.
> _Initially set to take place on September 7, the bash was postponed, with the source telling the Sun that Meghan would not have been able to attend as she was undertaking a *mini tour* of Europe with Prince Harry at the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Charles 'saw
> 
> 
> Hopes of a thaw in the 'cold war' between The Firm and the Sussexes have emerged after aides said the King saw 'flickers of hope' when speaking to Harry and Meghan at the Queen's funeral.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


The more he keeps shooting himself in the foot the more likely that he will only need to resole one shoe.


----------



## gracekelly

jennlt said:


> Have the chickens come home to roost for H & MM?



I know this is a joke photoshop for the book, but someone photoshopped her hands in the original.


----------



## gracekelly

kang504 said:


> You are right. I didn't realize this kind of nastiness went on purseforum. My mistake. Will stop following.


The Purse Forum is probably one of the,  if not the most civilized forums  on the web. The parameters were set out by the owners on day one. There are several other sites that are meaner, use more off color language and allow you to say pretty much anything as long as you stick to the thread topic and don’t insult fellow posters.  We just state our opinions on the thread topic of Harry and Meghan. All are welcome. The opinions may not be palatable to some.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I think Charles tried to reason with Hazz many times, but Hazz might be a brainwashed person that only listens to what he wants. Isn't Hazz threatening to disclose private conversations with his father and brother? Charles has plenty of reasons to believe that the Harkles will attempt to commercialize any little drop of information, so he has to keep a distance from them. This must be very painful for any parent that loves his/her child. I'm also thinking about TM.


I think Harry hates his father. As to why, maybe it goes back to Diana, maybe it’s because of Meghan. More than likely it wasn’t any one thing but has developed and been quietly festering over the years.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I think Charles tried to reason with Hazz many times, but Hazz might be a brainwashed person that only listens to what he wants. Isn't Hazz threatening to disclose private conversations with his father and brother? Charles has plenty of reasons to believe that the Harkles will attempt to commercialize any little drop of information, so he has to keep a distance from them. This must be very painful for any parent that loves his/her child. I'm also thinking about TM.


Pigheaded, muleheaded, call it whatever you like. You can’t reason with a person who doesn’t want to be reasoned with. It is doubtful that there is anything damaging to KC in those conversations. More likely that Harry threatening or begging for money would be more damaging to himself. If they told him he was being insulting and disrespectful to grandparents etc., it would not be something Harry would want known.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I think Harry hates his father. As to why, maybe it goes back to Diana, maybe it’s because of Meghan. More than likely it wasn’t any one thing but has developed and been quietly festering over the years.


And you know who encouraged this line of thinking


----------



## mikimoto007

bag-mania said:


> I see your point, don’t give them any ammunition. On the other hand, doing nothing emboldened them. They knew they could lie and nobody would do anything and nothing would happen to them. Harry has little, if any, respect left for his family. If it was anyone else, shutting them out might have worked, but these two attention hogs are going to make a lot of noise regardless.
> 
> View attachment 5618783


I don't think anything would would have stopped them. Their royal connections are what sets them apart and they need to crow about that to maintain their standard of living. If you issue a denial about soemthing they've said, you're just forcing the story to run another day - and you can find yourself in a tricky spot when you don't issue denials - if you've denied before, and don't deny a story now, is it true?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *I think Harry hates his father.* As to why, maybe it goes back to Diana, maybe it’s because of Meghan. More than likely it wasn’t any one thing but has developed and been quietly festering over the years.


You are likely right. I think Hazz is a very weak person, and TW brings the worst out of him.  
It's possible that Diana is being exploited by TW to trigger anger against Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I think Harry hates his father. As to why, maybe it goes back to Diana, maybe it’s because of Meghan. More than likely it wasn’t any one thing but has developed and been quietly festering over the years.



IMO he would have this same angst against both parents if Diana had lived. Immature people blame their parents for almost all of their issues.  He will attack anyone who tells him “no”.  At some point, he would have criticized Diana for remarrying, having more children, working, etc.  Remember he chose to talk to her for only a few minutes when she last spoke to him.  He had a video game to play. Perhaps he was angry with her for dating Dodi. Who knows. He is riddled with the guilt of it now.

ETA: that is my uncertified, casual observer analysis.


----------



## bellecate

Hyacinth said:


> Just scroll down the page in that BookDepository.com link and a link to the hardcover version comes up. It's $20.16 US with free shipping. Cancelled my pre-order from Amazon UK, $20.16 beats $35.60 any day and Amazon UK's shipping to the US is almost $15.00.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free delivery worldwide on all books from Book Depository
> 
> 
> Book Depository is the world's most international online bookstore offering over 20 million books with free delivery worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bookdepository.com


Just ordered my Hardcover copy from them. In Canada the total only comes to $30.92. Looking forward to getting it.


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> We often describe them as a slow-mo train wreck, and, much as we mock them, we are conscious of the end result of a train wreck. It's depressing to see them dig their hole ever deeper. But I'm going to carry on rubber-necking the implosion anyway.
> 
> With the royal warrants lapsed and the merchants having to re-apply, I'm surprised that the faux royal court of Monteshitshow isn't taking advantage of the situation to hand out their own warrants in exchange for $$$$$
> 
> I hope they remind him about how, very soon after the wedding spectacle, she turned up at his garden party, wanted to leave after 15 mins because she was bored, allegedly accepted gifts meant for him, and wiggled her butt as she was escorted out. *Not* royal material.





> "With the royal warrants lapsed and the merchants having to re-apply, I'm surprised that the faux royal court of Monteshitshow isn't taking advantage of the situation to hand out their own warrants in exchange for $$$$$"


Hope you haven't given TW any ideas when she reads this.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazz was also rude - cursing at AngelaK, ramming the shins of palace staff with his trike, running off, etc.  The one who would know the truth is TiggyLeggBourke.  We need to hear her assessment. Imo The King knows the full range of Hazz’s learning difficulties and personality/addiction issues, so he is probably getting professional advice on how to handle the situation. His approach seems solid so far. Now, though, is the time to make adjustments - LoS, CoS, titles, etc.  Just do it and move on. The world has seen the real H&M and the world is not pleased. Screaming, entitled jerks are so last century.



Just like to point out that learning difficulties (learning differences) are not a factor in "screaming entitled jerk"'s bad manners. It's a choice Harry's made. 

My worry is because Charles is so concerned with public perception of being the 'nice king' outwardly, he'll let the gruesome twosome have titles for 'equal ops' sake (coz you know the monarchy is all about equality  ) for their children, and it will then turn out to be a HUGE  ongoing problem not only for him, but later for Will and then George, who'll have inherited these embarrassing relatives (and also the kids) and have to deal on day to day basis.

One blow, one NO, once _now_ will save Charles (and Will/George) so much embarrassment later on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> And you know who encouraged this line of thinking


As I said previously, she found an ember of resentment and jealousy and fanned it into a raging fire. It was apparent on his face during the funeral.


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Hope you haven't given TW any ideas when she reads this.



Happily, only the King (perhaps the Queen Consort) and the PoWs count for Royal Warrants. It also takes years of continuous supplying of the above before an application can even be looked at. 

Although, no doubt M&H can cobble some influencer scheme together for the highest bidder.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Lady C making it clear this (Low's) book would not have gone out without Palace cooperation, but don't worry, it's NOT a Lady C channel length story, just a_ quick_ GBNews item:



Thanks for the link!

That was a good one, straight to the point! Also, I learned Valentine Low is a male.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Just ordered my Hardcover copy from them. In Canada the total only comes to $30.92. Looking forward to getting it.


I also ordered the hardcover from www.bookdepository.com, it's only $20.16 (tax and shipping included). There is no point in waiting until June 2023 to buy the book in the US.


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Not closed off the line of communication for one. I get that Charles is angry, anyone would be under the circumstances. But doing nothing doesn’t solve the problem, it just prolongs it.
> 
> Charles could have taken the opportunity when Harry came back without Meghan last year to meet with his son face-to-face. Instead Charles left town and made himself unavailable. Now would Harry talking it out directly with Charles (without any middle men) have made any difference? Who knows. The point is we’ll never know because he DIDN’T TRY.


Sometimes a parent tries until they realize that you can talk til you're blue in the face but the only resolution your child will accept is %100 their way. You reach a point when you need to close the bank/concessions and walk away and stand your ground. I totally understand KC's dilemma.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> Have the chickens come home to roost for H & MM?



I'm curious how these Tweeters would know that?    I mean, I hope it's true, but I can't tweet all my hopes and dreams as facts.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> And you know who encouraged this line of thinking


It could also be Harry's therapist, if he's currently seeing one, who is encouraging this line of thinking.  It's so very convenient to blame parents for everything.  (Obviously, there are plenty of terrible parents out there that are responsible for many of the issues their children have.)  Charles' poor behavior involved Diana, not his boys though, my understanding is that he loved both his sons very much and did his best considering the massive job and travel schedule he had as PoW and that he effectively served as their only parent after Diana died.  He and Harry had a good, close relationship from what I understand for many years.  So, for sure, Meghan encouraged this line of thinking plus likely some idiot therapist out there in Santa Barbara.


----------



## purseinsanity

elvisfan4life said:


> Look how happy and proud William is for his beautiful wife to be centre stage - unlike Charles who grimaced and sulked when crowds clamoured for Diana on their joint engagements - he doesn’t really treat Camilla much better no wonder she keeps her retreat to have time out


I think Diana also enjoyed the attention.  I don't think Camilla cares for it, and Kate has learned to deal with it.


----------



## K.D.

papertiger said:


> Happily, only the King (perhaps the Queen Consort) and the PoWs count for Royal Warrants. It also takes years of continuous supplying of the above before an application can even be looked at.
> 
> Although, no doubt M&H can cobble some influencer scheme together for the highest bidder.


Can't remember the poster who gave the recipe for the Queen's favourite drink, but it made me look up Dubonnet and it actually received its royal warrant from the Queen in November 2021!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> @papertiger Here is a long one for you.   I didn't watch it yet, but…




Just watched it 

Lady C says she knows for a fact that there is so much "frustration" in the Harkle household. She also called M a "two-bit hustler" 

I have found a great trick. I have to watch the city fashion shows for work. Catching up with Paris atm. I listened to Lady C whilst watching Saint Laurent SS23 with the sound off (maxi/sheer/HUGE shoulders on outerwear/barely-there sandals for every outfit).

Voila! 2 birds and one stone.

Edited to say Lady C also says she knows stuff about M that make everything so far look tame. She says what she knows about MegZ "makes Rosemary's Baby look like John the Baptist"


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> She also called M a "two-bit hustler"


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Sometimes a parent tries until they realize that you can talk til you're blue in the face but the only resolution your child will accept is %100 their way. You reach a point when you need to close the bank/concessions and walk away and stand your ground. I totally understand KC's dilemma.


It’s hard to compare them to other people because their family dynamic and way of raising children is so different. The kids are sent off to boarding school at age 8. That’s young to have that kind of separation IMO but that’s the way they do it. Maybe it comes with a cost later.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Just watched it
> 
> Lady C says she knows for a fact that there is so much "frustration" in the Harkle household. She also called M a "two-bit hustler"
> 
> I have found a great trick. I have to watch the city fashion shows for work. Catching up with Paris atm. I listened to Lady C whilst watching Saint Laurent SS23 with the sound off (maxi/sheer/HUGE shoulders on outerwear/barely-there sandals for every outfit).
> 
> Voila! 2 birds and one stone.
> 
> Edited to say Lady C also says she knows stuff about M that make everything so far look tame. She says what she knows about MegZ "makes Rosemary's Baby look like John the Baptist"


well, I agree she's a hustler but she's a very successful one....


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> well, I agree she's a hustler but she's a very successful one....



By our standards, but MegZ thinks she deserves so much more. 

More revelations to come...aparently


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> Not that TB's book wasn't good but the subject matter is exhausting and sickening. I feel drained after reading each time. Good thing there's e-books these days, which are cheaper so I won't be paying for a hardcopy.


We can't even get the e-book on the Kindle site


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> Thank you! does anyone else hesitate bc the TB book was so horribly accurate and detailed that it became a depressingly slow slog? Maybe that’s just me


Agreed. I think TB's writing style is reflective of the fact that he is a lawyer. From what I've seen of VL's excerpts so far, his book seems like it will be much more readable.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Tacky earrings for a tacky woman with no taste.


Much like the designer clothing she wears.  She doesn't care how she looks, as long as it's expensive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

K.D. said:


> Just leaving this here...




What did it say?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

elvisfan4life said:


> No one will be as good a monarch as our beloved Queen I pray Charles is better than I fear


I can imagine how hard it would have been, but Her Majesty should have cut them out herself after the 1 year review. Now, Charles and William will be plagued by these 2 monsters for years to come.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> We can't even get the e-book on the Kindle site


Try Kindle unlimited


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> so in addition to what the spoiled brat got from his mom, he got more than his brother from his great grandma....but still an amount he and his WIFE can burn through with their grand lifestyle
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/queen-mother-left-prince-harry-more-money-than-william-in-her-25-million-will-to-protect-him/news-story/1f9c560e81a7737b8d4d39470975767d


Does anyone believe these stories?  The Queen mother had lots of great grandchildren, so I doubt she left the "bulk" of her estate to just one.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Does anyone believe these stories?  The Queen mother had lots of great grandchildren, so I doubt she left the "bulk" of her estate to just one.


according to what I read, she did leave him more than William because she knew William would be getting a lot more later in life.  don't know what percentage but more...


----------



## Cavalier Girl

Toby93 said:


> We can't even get the e-book on the Kindle site



I can't get it on iBooks, either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> As I said previously, she found an ember of resentment and jealousy and fanned it into a raging fire. It was apparent on his face during the funeral.



Who does that. I completely agree, but...who does that!


----------



## papertiger

Cavalier Girl said:


> I can imagine how hard it would have been, but Her Majesty should have cut them out herself after the 1 year review. Now, Charles and William will be plagued by these 2 monsters for years to come.



Good point.

The (now late) Queen could have done it a that point and no one would have tuned a hair.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> according to what I read, she did leave him more than William because she knew William would be getting a lot more later in life.  don't know what percentage but more...


I also read about this before. It's very possible that in the past Hazz got more inheritance funds than Will… 

I remember Lady C mentioning that he had access to >$40M dollars or pounds, I can't remember which one. This is plenty of money to live very well and establish a great business if they were interested in working. Though, it's not enough to establish a monarchy in the US.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Edited to say Lady C also says she knows stuff about M that make everything so far look tame. She says what she knows about MegZ "makes Rosemary's Baby look like John the Baptist"



Don't leave us hanging Lady C. Spill those beans!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> We can't even get the e-book on the Kindle site


I managed to but this is probably the same situation as the TB book. I remember sharing the tips on how to but others weren't successful   I am in the US and do not use any VPN so my IP is definitely US based.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But funny she uses Rosemary's Baby as a comparison (I never watched it, or The Exorcist or any of the classics because I would literally never sleep again). As I've said before I'd only be half surprised if it was revealed she is not fully human.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But funny she uses Rosemary's Baby as a comparison (I never watched it, or The Exorcist or any of the classics because I would literally never sleep again). As I've said before I'd only be half surprised if it was revealed she is not fully human.


I don't know who came up with this, but…


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Much like the designer clothing she wears.  She doesn't care how she looks, as long as it's expensive.


No innate taste and that is why she copies so much, but she still gets it wrong 99% of the time.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> according to what I read, she did leave him more than William because she knew William would be getting a lot more later in life.  don't know what percentage but more...



The Queen Mother also had quite a few great-grandchildren and, while she may not have left William much because she knew he would get the Duchy of Cornwall one day, she also knew that Harry, as the son of the future KCIII and future PoW, would also likely be taken care of.  She would not have imagined the falling out they'd all have back when she drew up her will 20+ years ago. So, she may have left the majority of her funds to her other great-grandchildren like Zara, Peter, Lady Lousie, Viscount James, Bea, Eugenie, Lady Sarah Chatto's children, etc.  That is if she even had much in the way of actual money to leave anyone.  There were lots of rumors that she spent quite lavishly and the Queen settled all the debts when her mother passed.  So, there may have been jewelry and art and personal property perhaps but maybe not a lot of actual money left to anyone.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't leave us hanging Lady C. Spill those beans!


Lady C is uber careful. She won't spill unless she can fully back it up.  She has been down the road of lawsuits, which she won,  so she knows how it all works.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> The Queen Mother also had quite a few great-grandchildren and, while she may not have left William much because she knew he would get the Duchy of Cornwall one day, she also knew that Harry, as the son of the future KCIII and future PoW, would also likely be taken care of.  She would not have imagined the falling out they'd all have back when she drew up her will 20+ years ago. So, she may have left the majority of her funds to her other great-grandchildren like Zara, Peter, Lady Lousie, Viscount James, Bea, Eugenie, Lady Sarah Chatto's children, etc.  That is if she even had much in the way of actual money to leave anyone.  There were lots of rumors that she spent quite lavishly and the Queen settled all the debts when her mother passed.  So, there may have been jewelry and art and personal property perhaps but maybe not a lot of actual money left to anyone.


I never thought she left anything to anyone unless it was in a trust and safe from creditors, of whom she had many. The woman lived longer than even she expected and I think that is why she was so in debt at the end,  I am under the impression that they keep their money in a straight line down to the next and don't vary because then it would get watered down.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sure the BLG or DM will share the info.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Lady C is uber careful. She won't spill unless she can fully back it up.  She has been down the road of lawsuits, which she won,  so she knows how it all works.



Which is why I tend to believe it when she makes a more outrageous claim like "We're only one plane crash away from the throne."


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> The Queen Mother also had quite a few great-grandchildren and, while she may not have left William much because she knew he would get the Duchy of Cornwall one day, she also knew that Harry, as the son of the future KCIII and future PoW, would also likely be taken care of.  She would not have imagined the falling out they'd all have back when she drew up her will 20+ years ago. So, she may have left the majority of her funds to her other great-grandchildren like Zara, Peter, Lady Lousie, Viscount James, Bea, Eugenie, Lady Sarah Chatto's children, etc.  That is if she even had much in the way of actual money to leave anyone.  There were lots of rumors that she spent quite lavishly and the Queen settled all the debts when her mother passed.  So, there may have been jewelry and art and personal property perhaps but maybe not a lot of actual money left to anyone.


I think most if not all the Queen Mother’s jewelry and art collections went to Queen Elizabeth who then placed much of the art collection she inherited in the Royal Collection. And if you believe the cbs news article, the Queen Mother’s entire estate went to Queen Elizabeth thereby avoiding the 40% inheritance tax.





						The Queen Mother is revealed to be a top collector
					

Clarence House is full of treasures




					www.theartnewspaper.com
				











						Queen Elizabeth Gets It All
					

Inherits Her Mother's Estate: Works Of Art, Horses, Jewelry




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> The Queen Mother also had quite a few great-grandchildren and, while she may not have left William much because she knew he would get the Duchy of Cornwall one day, she also knew that Harry, as the son of the future KCIII and future PoW, would also likely be taken care of.  She would not have imagined the falling out they'd all have back when she drew up her will 20+ years ago. So, she may have left the majority of her funds to her other great-grandchildren like Zara, Peter, Lady Lousie, Viscount James, Bea, Eugenie, Lady Sarah Chatto's children, etc.  That is if she even had much in the way of actual money to leave anyone.  There were lots of rumors that she spent quite lavishly and the Queen settled all the debts when her mother passed.  So, there may have been jewelry and art and personal property perhaps but maybe not a lot of actual money left to anyone.



True. 

How did this woman who owed the banks £4M at one point have any money to leave her GGchildren? 

Once when the (then) Queen had to bailout the QM yet again over more debt, QE2 snapped "Oh Mummy grow-up!" Source


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I also ordered the hardcover from www.bookdepository.com, it's only $20.16 (tax and shipping included). There is no point in waiting until June 2023 to buy the book in the US.


I wonder why the publisher has a date into next year for the US release?  It makes no sense.  Who is going to want to read a book that's almost a year old and everything has been posted all over the internet about it's contents?  The TB book was the same, just not as long a gap.  The Palace Papers by Tina Brown was released simultaneously in the UK and the US.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I'm sure the BLG or DM will share the info.




Shame, that's the day/night I'll be washing my hair


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Try Kindle unlimited


I didn't know there was such a thing


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Shame, that's the day/night I'll be washing my hair



You just told us you're an excellent multi-tasker, though!


----------



## Vintage Leather

Toby93 said:


> I didn't know there was such a thing


It’s basically a subscription service. For $10 a month, you can read as many KU books as you like. The authors get paid by the page.

Most of the authors who are part of the program find it lucrative, but it does tend to get more indie and small press titles than Big 5 titles.

Tom Bower’s book was listed on there, and they offered a month free, so that’s how a lot of readers got it before it hit the US publishing market.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> according to what I read, she did leave him more than William because she knew William would be getting a lot more later in life.  don't know what percentage but more...


That part makes sense, but if her estate was broken into 6 parts for her great grandchildren, and she left a bit more out of that for Harry, still not the bulk.  Would she not have left some to her grandchildren and children as well?  Very misleading article.  To divide £14 million between 6+ is not an astronomical amount (although I would be _more_ than happy with that!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Looks like the gloves are off and people are speaking up


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You just told us you're an excellent multi-tasker, though!



Thank you, normally I would say I wasn't, but perhaps I know what to listen for concerning those hateful rogues and what the CD is trying to convey during a show.

Lady C also drops lots of little hints M's births were not natural at all. In fact, I would say Lady C is getting braver now all these books are coming out. M&H can't sue everybody


----------



## Chanbal

This is funny…


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I'm curious how these Tweeters would know that?    I mean, I hope it's true, but I can't tweet all my hopes and dreams as facts.



I didn't mean to ruin our 7,500 page, facts-only gossip thread with actual gossip lol Now I feel like the person who gets hurt at work and they have to take down the "7,500 days since last accident" sign  I guess we'll have to start over at zero




Btw, she said she had a source when she replied to someone in the comments. I posted it because I thought it would be fun for us to discuss but I guess we'll all have to meet back here on this date in 100 years when the will is released to find out if she's right


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Thank you, normally I would say I wasn't, but perhaps I know what to listen for concerning those hateful rogues and what the CD is trying to convey during a show.
> 
> Lady C also drops lots of little hints M's births were not natural at all. In fact, I would say Lady C is getting braver now all these books are coming out. M&H can't sue everybody


I thought the same thing.  She read a question last week that someone asked her if she thought the kids were by surrogates.  She danced around it, saying she didn't want to get sued, but didn't say no


----------



## Chanbal

jennlt said:


> Btw, she said she had a source when she replied to someone in the comments. I posted it because I thought it would be fun for us to discuss but* I guess we'll all have to meet back here on this date in 100 years when the will is released to find out if she's right*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I thought the same thing.  She read a question last week that someone asked her if she thought the kids were by surrogates.  She danced around it, saying she didn't want to get sued, but didn't say no



I do think she had Archie, her face was so bloated, her nose swollen and she gained a lot of weight. BUT I cannot explain the folding, creasing, shapeshifting belly and I'm entirely not crazy enough to even marginally understand why someone would enhance their natural belly with a moonbump for added drama. Maybe it was easy for her as she also doesn't think twice about fake hair, fake teeth, fake boobs and a fake nose?


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I thought the same thing.  She read a question last week that someone asked her if she thought the kids were by surrogates.  She danced around it, saying she didn't want to get sued, but didn't say no



and this week she said M ordered red headed children from a catalogue (or something _very_ similar - don't want to get sued by Lady C now  )


----------



## Toby93

Apparently we are not the only ones who thinks this is a fake award


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But funny she uses Rosemary's Baby as a comparison (I never watched it, or The Exorcist or any of the classics because I would literally never sleep again).* As I've said before I'd only be half surprised if it was revealed she is not fully human.*


I wouldn't be surprised at all. Especially after seeing that pic of her that was shared a few times on here in the last few days of her looking deranged with messed up hair and eye-makeup smeared all over her face (not sure where the pic was from). 
She looked creepy AF...


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think she had Archie, her face was so bloated, her nose swollen and she gained a lot of weight. BUT I cannot explain the folding, creasing, shapeshifting belly and I'm entirely not crazy enough to even marginally understand why someone would enhance their natural belly with a moonbump for added drama. Maybe it was easy for her as she also doesn't think twice about fake hair, fake teeth, fake boobs and a fake nose?



I think she just ate too many cakes 

Sue me


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Apparently we are not the only ones who thinks this is a fake award




It'll make GQ look like idiots. 

Guess that's up to them.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> and this week she said M ordered red headed children from a catalogue (or something _very_ seminar - don't want to get sued by Lady C now  )


Ha, I have always thought that!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think she just ate too many cakes
> 
> Sue me



What gave me a little pause was when people on here brought up the after-delivery belly sat way too high. Not speaking from personal experience, but don't they push on your belly post delivery to determine it's going down the way it's supposed to be (and that's definitely not up into your boobs)? The belly won't fully go away immediately but the uterus is supposed to shrink massively to avoid hemorraghing.


----------



## jenayb

Toby93 said:


> Apparently we are not the only ones who thinks this is a fake award




Harry's nutsack dipped in gold.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> True.
> 
> How did this woman who owed the banks £4M at one point have any money to leave her GGchildren?
> 
> Once when the (then) Queen had to bailout the QM yet again over more debt, QE2 snapped "Oh Mummy grow-up!" Source


 She put a huge portion of her wealth into trust funds for her great grandchildren. I think it was almost 20 million. As the money was in trust, she couldn’t touch it to clear her own debts.

I understand it’s a common way to avoid inheritance tax, by divesting of assets more than 7 years before death.


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What gave me a little pause was when people on here brought up the after-delivery belly sat way too high. Not speaking from personal experience, but don't they push on your belly post delivery to determine it's going down the way it's supposed to be (and that's definitely not up into your boobs)? The belly won't fully go away immediately but the uterus is supposed to shrink massively to avoid hemorraghing.


I can confirm they do NOT "push on your belly" to determine if it's "going down" post delivery.


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> She put a huge portion of her wealth into trust funds for her great grandchildren. I think it was almost 20 million. As the money was in trust, she couldn’t touch it to clear her own debts.
> 
> I understand it’s a common way to avoid inheritance tax, by divesting of assets more than 7 years before death.



When you think about it, if it were anyone else (if she didn't have the Queen to pay-off the debts or have them waived) she would be in big trouble. Most of the debt was from gambling (as well as keeping horses).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TC1 said:


> I can confirm they do NOT "push on your belly" to determine if it's "going down" post delivery.



Well, apparently they do in Germany, but also why the snark?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> When you think about it, it it were anyone else (if she didn't have the Queen to pay-off the debts or have them wained) she would be in big trouble. Most of the debt was from gambling (as well as keeping horses).



I guess it pays to have your children have good careers


----------



## TC1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, apparently they do in Germany, but also why the snark?


No snark intended. I have given birth and cannot imagine someone coming in to push on my belly post delivery. That sounds horrible to me. So...I guess just a reaction on my part.


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> When you think about it, it it were anyone else (if she didn't have the Queen to pay-off the debts or have them wained) she would be in big trouble. Most of the debt was from gambling (as well as keeping horses).



She had assets to sell though, which weren’t in the trust. I think a Monet? Tonnes of jewellery.
I think she had a sense of entitlement that she deserved to be kept in that style.


----------



## Chanbal

Nana's comments are spot on as usual…


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who does that. I completely agree, but...who does that!


A narcissistic sociopath? Sociopathic narcissist? This describes her to a tee


----------



## BlueCherry

Been MIA a few days but I’ve been reading a bit and saw some comments on the podcasts. Allegedly M wanted to amend them and Spotify said no and also that if she does then it must be at her own expense. 

Is there any chance that Spotify are getting revenge and/or cutting their losses by letting them play out as they are. If everyone is waiting for M to be spiteful Spotify at least get a return on their investment with more listeners.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I also read about this before. It's very possible that in the past Hazz got more inheritance funds than Will…
> 
> I remember Lady C mentioning that he had access to >$40M dollars or pounds, I can't remember which one. This is plenty of money to live very well and establish a great business if they were interested in working. Though, it's not enough to establish a monarchy in the US.


That is certainly a lot of money, but not enough to support her in the manner to which she thinks she is entitled.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What gave me a little pause was when people on here brought up the after-delivery belly sat way too high. Not speaking from personal experience, but don't they push on your belly post delivery to determine it's going down the way it's supposed to be (and that's definitely not up into your boobs)? The belly won't fully go away immediately but the uterus is supposed to shrink massively to avoid hemorraghing.



You're talking to the wrong person. 

I would think it would be different hospital to hospital, C-section v natural etc. I would ask my SIL she is the head honcho midwife but she's also in Germany (I think NRW). I don't think a Dr. midwife or nurse would push someone's belly in the UK unless a Dr. would fear something's already wrong.


----------



## BlueCherry

Also if M is hell bent on destroying the Monarchy how on earth could she get money from it if it were abolished 

I think KC should let her mouth off all she wants. Most people don’t believe her and the rest find it simply boring. She will eventually exhaust her threats and burn out.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What did it say?


I think it was this post. I took a screenshot so it won't disappear.


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> Been MIA a few days but I’ve been reading a bit and saw some comments on the podcasts. Allegedly M wanted to amend them and Spotify said no and also that if she does then it must be at her own expense.
> 
> Is there any chance that Spotify are getting revenge and/or cutting their losses by letting them play out as they are. If everyone is waiting for M to be spiteful Spotify at least get a return on their investment with more listeners.



M has obviously already handed them over to Spotify (before the sad passing of the late Queen).

Takes as long as an interview to record. It takes a lot longer to edit. They've been edited already and passed through a legal team. 

Technically, IMO, the only way to edit any major embarrassing clangers out, is to caption it (voice recognition) and then try to re-edit. Only problem is then making whatever's around it make sense and natural, so a lot more would be cut than just offending words. Then they won't be to time. Technically a fall-short in time will leave M open to non-delivery of content. 

M is not going to be able to it herself, she also won't recollect every word. She 'corrected' her diva moment with Mariah with an extra later. That means Spotify are in charge NOT her (oh dear ) My guess is the podcasts will go out as they were first recorded but she'll record extra to try an worm herself out of trouble (but as before digging herself in deeper.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RueMonge

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What gave me a little pause was when people on here brought up the after-delivery belly sat way too high. Not speaking from personal experience, but don't they push on your belly post delivery to determine it's going down the way it's supposed to be (and that's definitely not up into your boobs)? The belly won't fully go away immediately but the uterus is supposed to shrink massively to avoid hemorraghing.


I recall once or twice a doc or midwife pressing into my belly to make sure the uterus was returning to normal. This would have been in California in the 1990’s.


----------



## charlottawill

mikimoto007 said:


> She had assets to sell though, which weren’t in the trust. I think a Monet? Tonnes of jewellery.
> I think she had a sense of entitlement that she deserved to be kept in that style.


So Harry married someone like his Great Gran?   The QM probably would have seen right through her.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> I think she just ate too many cakes
> 
> Sue me


Or maybe her new anti-psychotic meds made her more bacon-y than her supermodel self 



RE: GQ award... Bought or not, the award is meaningless coming from a men's fashion and style magazine. This will be forgotten in a few months. If I was Z-list, I wouldn't have cared to leak this. Now if it was a Nobel Prize or Pulitzer Prize, then maybe I'll pay more attention


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> M has obviously already handed them over to Spotify (before the sad passing of the late Queen).
> 
> Takes as long as an interview to record. It takes a lot longer to edit. They've been edited already and passed through a legal team.
> 
> Technically, IMO, the only way to edit any major embarrassing clangers out, is to caption it (voice recognition) and then try to re-edit. Only problem is then making whatever's around it make sense and natural, so a lot more would be cut than just offending words. Then they won't be to time. Technically a fall-short in time will leave M open to non-delivery of content.
> 
> M is not going to be able to it herself, she also won't recollect every word. She 'corrected' her diva moment with Mariah with an extra later. That means Spotify are in charge NOT her (oh dear ) My guess is the podcasts will go out as they were first recorded but she'll record extra to try an worm herself out of trouble (but as before digging herself in deeper.



I look forward to hearing about them in that case. It’s a shame I retired construction, I could have loaned her that shovel she will be needing


----------



## airkay

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why the publisher has a date into next year for the US release?  It makes no sense.  Who is going to want to read a book that's almost a year old and everything has been posted all over the internet about it's contents?  The TB book was the same, just not as long a gap.  The Palace Papers by Tina Brown was released simultaneously in the UK and the US.


Not an expert but friends and family in publishing say it's really hard to produce books now because of supply chain problems starting with a shortage of paper.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What gave me a little pause was when people on here brought up the after-delivery belly sat way too high. Not speaking from personal experience, but don't they push on your belly post delivery to determine it's going down the way it's supposed to be (and that's definitely not up into your boobs)? The belly won't fully go away immediately but the uterus is supposed to shrink massively to avoid hemorraghing.


Yes, in US hospitals they keep you in recovery for a few hours to make sure your uterus is shrinking normally and you're not hemorrhaging before sending you to a room. Then nurses continue to check periodically until you are discharged. It takes awhile, a few weeks for most I believe, to return to normal size. Breastfeeding speeds it up.

"The fundus is assessed for: *By approximately one hour post delivery, the fundus is firm and at the level of the umbilicus*. The fundus continues to descend into the pelvis at the rate of approximately 1 cm or finger-breadth per day and should be nonpalpable by 14 days postpartum."

ETA: The dress she wore for Archie's presentation would make a non-postpartum belly look big.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> Yes, in US hospitals they keep you in recovery for a few hours to make sure your uterus is shrinking normally and you're not hemorrhaging before sending you to a room. Then nurses continue to check periodically until you are discharged. It takes awhile, a few weeks for most I believe, to return to normal size. Breastfeeding speeds it up.


Childbirth sounds scary   Respect to all you ladies who have experienced it


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> I didn't mean to ruin our 7,500 page, facts-only gossip thread with actual gossip lol Now I feel like the person who gets hurt at work and they have to take down the "7,500 days since last accident" sign  I guess we'll have to start over at zero
> 
> View attachment 5619034
> 
> 
> Btw, she said she had a source when she replied to someone in the comments. I posted it because I thought it would be fun for us to discuss but I guess we'll all have to meet back here on this date in 100 years when the will is released to find out if she's right


I'm sorry if you misunderstood, but I was questioning the original tweet, not your post.  A lot of these tweets say things that unless there are other moles in the BRF, not sure how random Tweeters (or whatever they're called) would know.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why the publisher has a date into next year for the US release?  It makes no sense.  Who is going to want to read a book that's almost a year old and everything has been posted all over the internet about it's contents?  The TB book was the same, just not as long a gap.  The Palace Papers by Tina Brown was released simultaneously in the UK and the US.


Most books are published like that -- first in one country and then usually 6 months to 1 year+ later in another country. They will generally revise it before the republication in another country, include a new cover, new pictures, new foreword/epilogue, etc. it's very very common, with both fiction and nonfiction and also for translated books (which can take 2-3 years to get to another country). I often read Jill Mansell (British author) and it can take up to 1 year+ for her books to get published in the US, so if you really really want a book buy it from the country initially published (or places like ebay), but if you do wait it'll generally be revised/updated. The US title for the Valentine Low book will apparently have a different title.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What gave me a little pause was when people on here brought up the after-delivery belly sat way too high. Not speaking from personal experience, but don't they push on your belly post delivery to determine it's going down the way it's supposed to be (and that's definitely not up into your boobs)? The belly won't fully go away immediately but the uterus is supposed to shrink massively to avoid hemorraghing.


They do fundal massage, at least here in the US.  You are right, a boggy uterus can hemorrhage and especially after delivery and the first few days postpartum, nurses will massage regularly to minimize bleeding.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Or maybe her new anti-psychotic meds made her more bacon-y than her supermodel self
> 
> 
> 
> RE: GQ award... Bought or not, the award is meaningless coming from a men's fashion and style magazine. This will be forgotten in a few months. If I was Z-list, I wouldn't have cared to leak this. Now if it was a Nobel Prize or Pulitzer Prize, then maybe I'll pay more attention



Well, other blind items have more than once, twice, thrice pointed to her other party habits. MegZ probably stopped doing a lot of things that kept her more svelte. Getting married, no job, and not running around so much may have also impacted her figure. She could have also tried fertility drugs in IVF which can cause weight gain. Whether or not the treatment is successful the side-effects can be the same.

You're correct, it's a nothin award given for nothing. It just annoys me she's coming back to the UK.


----------



## papertiger

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Most books are published like that -- first in one country and then usually 6 months to 1 year+ later in another country. They will generally revise it before the republication in another country, include a new cover, new pictures, new foreword/epilogue, etc. it's very very common, with both fiction and nonfiction and also for translated books (which can take 2-3 years to get to another country). I often read Jill Mansell (British author) and it can take up to 1 year+ for her books to get published in the US, so if you really really want a book buy it from the country initially published (or places like ebay), but if you do wait it'll generally be revised/updated. The US title for the Valentine Low book will apparently have a different title.



True. They renegotiate contracts as the same piece of work goes around the globe. Different style contracts, legal docs and regs for different countries. Sometimes with a different cover and title too (and of course translations for some countries).


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Or maybe her new anti-psychotic meds made her more bacon-y than her supermodel self
> 
> 
> 
> RE: GQ award... Bought or not, the award is meaningless coming from a men's fashion and style magazine. This will be forgotten in a few months. If I was Z-list, I wouldn't have cared to leak this. Now if it was a Nobel Prize or Pulitzer Prize, then maybe I'll pay more attention


If she wins the Pulitzer after all of her plagiarism, I'm done.  The world is hopeless.


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sorry if there was any misunderstanding, but I was questioning the original tweet, not your post!  A lot of these tweets say things that unless there are other moles in the BRF, not sure how random Tweeters (or whatever they're called) would know.


I was just having a bit of fun and there's absolutely no apology necessary  I love the camaraderie of Team Candle but I'm also here for the gossip because even if some of it is as fake as NutMeg's "we got married 3 days early" story, it's still entertaining


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Well, other blind items have more than once, twice, thrice pointed to her other party habits. MegZ probably stopped doing a lot of things that kept her more svelte. Getting married, no job, and not running around so much may have also impacted her figure. She could have also tried fertility drugs in IVF which can cause weight gain. Whether or not the treatment is successful the side-effects can be the same.
> 
> You're correct, it's a nothin award given for nothing. It just annoys me she's coming back to the UK.


The 'anti-psychotic meds' comment was pure sarcasm because I do think she's a little crazy in the head  

Like you guys mentioned a few pages back, they sure go back to London a lot despite claiming it to be triggering. Right about now, probably most countries don't even want them around, not just the UK. Maybe Russia will welcome them  Z-list might try to sell her soul to Putin and claim that she'd make a great spy for him because she knows all the BRF and government secrets


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, apparently they do in Germany, but also why the snark?


I'm not sure about every delivery, but they absolutely DID push on my stomach immediately after I had my son and I can tell you it was one of the most painful things I have ever experienced (keep in mind I had just given birth  ).  It was something to do with the placenta and I ended up having to have surgery immediately.


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> If she wins the Pulitzer after all of her plagiarism, I'm done.  The world is hopeless.


It's unlikely that she would win one anyways because she has a talent of none and zero credibility for a prestigious award that actually means something.

The world is not hopeless. The world has amazing people such as William and Kate!


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> You're talking to the wrong person.
> 
> I would think it would be different hospital to hospital, C-section v natural etc. I would ask my SIL she is the head honcho midwife but she's also in Germany (I think NRW). I don't think a Dr. midwife or nurse would push someone's belly in the UK unless a Dr. would fear something's already wrong.



@QueenofWrapDress hope I didn't come across as rude. I just meant I know nothing about giving birth -  only from films and from what friends (now mothers) have told me. 

Honestly, when my SIL talks about her job and the huge miracle of life that birth is I can feel my eyes glazing over (she's very keen on babies and tries to be very 'encouraging'). 

I know in the UK treatment is very different depending geographically and depending on a woman's treatment plan. 

Thanks for all mothers/women who've given birth for the info. Any UK mothers confirm whether a Dr. would have (dared) lay hands on Megatron's stomach had she indeed given birth?


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I'm not sure about every delivery, but they absolutely DID push on my stomach immediately after I had my son and I can tell you it was one of the most painful things I have ever experienced (keep in mind I had just given birth  ).  It was something to do with the placenta and I ended up having to have surgery immediately.



OMG, so sorry!


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> You're talking to the wrong person.
> 
> I would think it would be different hospital to hospital, C-section v natural etc. I would ask my SIL she is the head honcho midwife but she's also in Germany (I think NRW). I don't think a Dr. midwife or nurse would push someone's belly in the UK unless a Dr. would fear something's already wrong.


Talking 40 years ago but in all 3 C-Sections I had they pressed down on my belly. Two different hospitals but both were the same province in Canada.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




Peace prize?
Giving to charity (not just saying)?
Acting?

I need to find more out about these GQ awards.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> OMG, so sorry!


Lol, it was a long time ago and I've _almost_ forgotten about it


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5618453
> 
> _But Low claims that the aides decided "not to confront" Meghan and Harry on the issue and the potential upset it could cause "*out of fear for what their reaction would be*".
> 
> However, a few weeks later, Meghan donned the earrings once more as she headed to the 70th birthday party of the then-Prince Charles.
> 
> Low's book alleges that following this second occasion, an aide decided to discuss the provenance of the earrings with the Duke of Sussex and *Prince Harry*_* was "said to have looked 'shocked' that people knew where the earrings came from".*



I don't even like these earrings.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Lol, it was a long time ago and I've _almost_ forgotten about it



Sounds horrendous. I hate just going to the dentist.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


>



Well, at least they're consistent!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I don't even like these earrings.



She din't have those reset straight away either (I'm talking to Harry here  )


----------



## sdkitty

mikimoto007 said:


> She put a huge portion of her wealth into trust funds for her great grandchildren. I think it was almost 20 million. As the money was in trust, she couldn’t touch it to clear her own debts.
> 
> I understand it’s a common way to avoid inheritance tax, by divesting of assets more than 7 years before death.


according to tina brown, she had real estate which she left to charles....and in 1994 she put aside two thirds of her fortune in a trust for her great grandchildren, of which princes william and harry share 14 million (larger portion for harry)


----------



## bellecate

Yes please.


----------



## charlottawill

I don't think this was taken to send to Doria with a "Wish you were here". In her defense though,  I think it was $30,000, not $30


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5619201
> 
> Yes please.
> View attachment 5619204


don't know if I believe this one


----------



## miss_chiff

If true, I have no words. I’m sure y’all can help me out with that lol


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5619201
> 
> Yes please.
> View attachment 5619204


I really hope this is true!


----------



## purseinsanity

miss_chiff said:


> If true, I have no words. I’m sure y’all can help me out with that lol



Uh huh. 
Haz: Sure, pops, we'll cancel it.
KC: Prince and Princess
Haz: oh, it's back on!


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


>



If that's the case, her vajayjay must really be something.  He's probably used to virgins.  I don't think TW would qualify for that since many a moon.


----------



## LittleStar88

Her vijayjay must be something magical


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think she had Archie, her face was so bloated, her nose swollen and she gained a lot of weight. BUT I cannot explain the folding, creasing, shapeshifting belly and I'm entirely not crazy enough to even marginally understand why someone would enhance their natural belly with a moonbump for added drama. Maybe it was easy for her as she also doesn't think twice about fake hair, fake teeth, fake boobs and a fake nose?


My feeling is both babies are from surrogates. Archie was conceived within 4 months of the marriage. They weren’t messing around about getting a baby fast. The details of both births were incredibly secret, even after the fact when it wouldn’t matter anymore. 

Didn’t she get some work done around that time? That would explain a puffy face.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> I read somewhere that Queen Elizabeth had William over for tea once a week while he was at Eton so they could discuss the future of the Monarchy and basically she would give him one on one coaching to prepare him to be the future King. maybe I missed seeing it, *but I don’t recall seeing anything about the Queen having weekly meetings with Harry.*


I don't believe this happened, but then who would want to waste their time trying to teach a little brat and goofball how to be royal / regal when he would never accede to the throne. Besides, Dufus lacked the drive to profit from HM's lessons same as with his school lessons.


----------



## lulu212121

Charles need to deal with Has-been and this stupid book. "If" this so called book is really written, then it's done. Other people have already seen it and know what's in it. Whatever is in it will never go away. This means after Charles dies, then William, then George, and on and on will have to deal with this. This is getting ridiculous using this pathetic book to get something. 

I had really hoped the Charles would have dealt with Has been before the Queen died. If the Queen did not want that, Charles should and could have reminded her that he is his son to deal with. Has been and Megain were such a distraction during the Queen's 10 days of mourning.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> My feeling is both babies are from surrogates. Archie was conceived within 4 months of the marriage. They weren’t messing around about getting a baby fast. The details of both births were incredibly secret, even after the fact when it wouldn’t matter anymore.
> 
> Didn’t she get some work done around that time? That would explain a puffy face.


it's not usually that easy for an almost-40-year-old woman to get pregnant.  but she's very special


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Well, other blind items have more than once, twice, thrice pointed to her other party habits. MegZ probably stopped doing a lot of things that kept her more svelte. Getting married, no job, and not running around so much may have also impacted her figure. She could have also tried fertility drugs in IVF which can cause weight gain. Whether or not the treatment is successful the side-effects can be the same.
> 
> You're correct, it's a nothin award given for nothing. It just annoys me she's coming back to the UK.


Weight gain can be linked to so many causes, including lactation hormone therapy.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Weight gain can be linked to so many causes, including lactation hormone therapy.


I cannot imagine Z-list being a willing breastfeeder. She doesn't even know how to spend time with her children (re: the nanny gossip)


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> I don't even like these earrings.


I don't like their provenience. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind keeping them.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> it's not usually that easy for an almost-40-year-old woman to get pregnant.  but she's very special


Another reason why I think Meghan has never given birth, if she had _we would have heard all about it! _

Narcissists exaggerate and elevate everything they do. If she’d had a baby she would have told the story to the world as if she was the only woman who had ever had a baby. The drama! The pain! 

Did she do that after Archie? I don’t think so but perhaps I’ve deliberately forgotten it if she did.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> I cannot imagine Z-list being a willing breastfeeder. She doesn't even know how to spend time with her children (re: the nanny gossip)


Yeah, it's hard to imagine her willing to go over all that work. However, if someone would want to hide a birth via surrogacy, lactation hormones would be highly recommended in addition to fake bumps imo.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Yeah, it's hard to imagine her willing to go over all that work. However, if someone would want to hide a birth via surrogacy, lactation hormones would be highly recommended in addition to fake bumps imo.


I agree!! That would definitely make a self-carry pregnancy lie more plausible with the progressive weight gain


----------



## lulu212121

bag-mania said:


> Another reason why I think Meghan has never given birth, if she had _we would have heard all about it! _
> 
> Narcissists exaggerate and elevate everything they do. If she’d had a baby she would have told the story to the world as if she was the only woman who had ever had a baby. The drama! The pain!
> 
> Did she do that after Archie? I don’t think so but perhaps I’ve deliberately forgotten it if she did.


Exactly!!! Mariah Carey let us all know how traumatizing the whole experience was for her.  TW hasn't mentioned either of her pregnancies. Nothing.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Another reason why I think Meghan has never given birth, if she had _we would have heard all about it! _
> 
> Narcissists exaggerate and elevate everything they do. If she’d had a baby she would have told the story to the world as if she was the only woman who had ever had a baby. The drama! The pain!
> 
> Did she do that after Archie? I don’t think so but perhaps I’ve deliberately forgotten it if she did.





lulu212121 said:


> Exactly!!! Mariah Carey let us all know how traumatizing the whole experience was for her.  TW hasn't mentioned either of her pregnancies. Nothing.


She did go into nauseating detail about her alleged miscarriage.  *"I knew, as I clutched my firstborn child, that I was losing my second," *which, if IIRC, was also more plagiarism.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> If that's the case, her vajayjay must really be something.  He's probably used to virgins.  I don't think TW would qualify for that since many a moon.



I have to laugh, as I recall the first person I ever heard use the term "vajayjay" was Oprah many years ago.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> My feeling is both babies are from surrogates. Archie was conceived within 4 months of the marriage. They weren’t messing around about getting a baby fast. The details of both births were incredibly secret, even after the fact when it wouldn’t matter anymore.
> 
> Didn’t she get some work done around that time? That would explain a puffy face.


If she used a surrogate for Archie, then she definitely has balls pulling a fast one so soon after the wedding. It also reflects quite badly on Handbag if he was party to a hoax of this magnitude.
Post-Archie and mid-Lil seem to be about the same size.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> If she used a surrogate for Archie, then she definitely has balls pulling a fast one so soon after the wedding. It also reflects quite badly on Handbag if he was party to a hoax of this magnitude.
> Post-Archie and mid-Lil seem to be about the same size.
> View attachment 5619257


Probably used the same bump.  Maybe the others weren't unpacked yet or misplaced into one of the 16 bathrooms.  Archie almost looks like he's been drugged and has passed out.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Probably used the same bump.  Maybe the others weren't unpacked yet or misplaced into one of the 16 bathrooms.  Archie almost looks like he's been drugged and has passed out.


You can't trust anything that is put out by these 2.  Even the other "pregnancy" pic with Hazz with the giant tree in the background was photoshopped!  There was no tree in the original, it was added later


----------



## Chanbal

Podcast: How Meghan Markle lost Hollywood
					

Incoming staff writer Kara Kennedy discusses her October magazine piece about Meghan Markle’s failure to take Hollywood by storm with Kinsey Schofield, a royal commentator and host of the To Di For Daily podcast.




					spectatorworld.com


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t think, imho, she gave birth to these two children. Per the nanny gossip, she does not seem attached to them “emotionally.” Those two are so manipulative that nothing surprises me anymore as to what they do. Most parents, especially if they had the means, and gone a long time like they did, would have brought the babies to them. They are probably just props to them as much I hate to say that. M15 knows the true story but as stupid as they are, they seem are hell bent on destroying themselves. Something nefarious is going on. Probably being paid by some shady people to wreak havoc upon the BRF. Ok to take my time foil hat off.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Hyacinth

miss_chiff said:


> If true, I have no words. I’m sure y’all can help me out with that lol




So what's to prevent them from saying "OK, we've cancelled the book", wait until after their sperm weasels get their titles, wait a few months more and then release the book anyway? Or tell KCIII "Ha ha Pops, guess what we want you to give us next?" while waving a copy of the manuscript in front of his face.

Meanwhile how many other people such as publishing company employees, editors, company execs and their secretaries or PAs or spouses or partners have already seen it? What happens if one of them decides to make a little extra spending money by copying the manuscript or just the juiciest bits to be sold later to unscrupulous bidders, or even to post them anonymously on Twitter just for the helluvit? Would anyone with any common sense actually trust those two to destroy what might be their strongest bargaining chip? They've proved over and over again that they can't be trusted, especially since Charles could revoke almost any concession they squeeze from him with just a few strokes of his leaky fountain pen.

I don't think books are published in a vacuum. If anyone reading this is or has been in the publishing business, can they give us some idea how many pairs of eyes probably would have  already seen that manuscript before it goes to the printer?


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> I don’t think, imho, she gave birth to these two children. Per the nanny gossip, she does not seem attached to them “emotionally.” Those two are so manipulative that nothing surprises me anymore as to what they do. Most parents, especially if they had the means, and gone a long time like they did, would have brought the babies to them. They are probably just props to them as much I hate to say that. M15 knows the true story but as stupid as they are, they seem are hell bent on destroying themselves. Something nefarious is going on. Probably being paid by some shady people to wreak havoc upon the BRF. Ok to take my time foil hat off.


I’m flashing back to the stories about the tight ring of security around them at the hospital when Lili was born. Then their Dr. suddenly shuts down her practice with short notice, leaving patients mid pregnancy scrambling to find a new doctor according to articles published at the time. Her reason is “to spend more time with her family.” Not a reason that would seem to need  a sudden departure. Because the Suckesses are involved it seems suspicious.

Maybe Lili was  a surrogate birth? There is specific legal paperwork in CA covering surrogate births, but maybe the Dr. initially signed off on a Birth Certificate that did not accurately state the conditions of the birth?. Maybe someone on staff with morals and ethics reported it? Maybe Dr. Drake was quietly given the option to resign and close down her practice or face possible prosecution?  Maybe the arguments about Titles will turn out to be a moot point?  Maybe an innocent child will suffer because of her repugnant parents?
.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I’m flashing back to the stories about the tight ring of security around them at the hospital when Lili was born. Then their Dr. suddenly shuts down her practice with short notice, leaving patients mid pregnancy scrambling to find a new doctor according to articles published at the time. Her reason is “to spend more time with her family.” Not a reason that would seem to need  a sudden departure. Because the Suckesses are involved it seems suspicious.
> 
> Maybe Lili was  a surrogate birth? There is specific legal paperwork in CA covering surrogate births, but maybe the Dr. initially signed off on a Birth Certificate that did not accurately state the conditions of the birth?. Maybe someone on staff with morals and ethics reported it? Maybe Dr. Drake was quietly given the option to resign and close down her practice or face possible prosecution?  Maybe the arguments about Titles will turn out to be a moot point?  Maybe an innocent child will suffer because of her repugnant parents?
> .


It could be they like the ‘mystery’ surrounding these births. Knowing Hazz sneers at media, the mystery keeps their names in the news with lots of clickbait.  At some point, we may be surprised to find that they are like the Wizard of Oz - all bluster and nothing there. Imo the interest is waning on these two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> *Maybe Lili was  a surrogate birth?* There is specific legal paperwork in CA covering surrogate births, but maybe the Dr. initially signed off on a Birth Certificate that did not accurately state the conditions of the birth?. Maybe someone on staff with morals and ethics reported it? Maybe Dr. Drake was quietly given the option to resign and close down her practice or face possible prosecution?  Maybe the arguments about Titles will turn out to be a moot point?  *Maybe an innocent child will suffer because of her repugnant parents?*
> .


There is no shame in surrogacy, unless of course you had your beady eye on the throne and was praying for plane crashes. But the weird secrecy surrounding the whole second pregnancy was strange and seemingly unnecessary. I don't believe that paps were surrounding Montecito in a ring of flashbulbs waiting for her to stick her toe out the front gate. They are able to lead a fairly normal celebrity style life. They just want to up the mystery factor to max out public thirst for info about them.

The suffering of the innocent child? That would be a ship that has already sailed. I can't imagine how she is going to feel when she is old enough to google about her family and how she was named.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Cavalier Girl said:


> I can imagine how hard it would have been, but Her Majesty should have cut them out herself after the 1 year review. Now, Charles and William will be plagued by these 2 monsters for years to come.


I disagree Charles had all the power in the world to sort them out if he were man enough


----------



## elvisfan4life

youngster said:


> The Queen Mother also had quite a few great-grandchildren and, while she may not have left William much because she knew he would get the Duchy of Cornwall one day, she also knew that Harry, as the son of the future KCIII and future PoW, would also likely be taken care of.  She would not have imagined the falling out they'd all have back when she drew up her will 20+ years ago. So, she may have left the majority of her funds to her other great-grandchildren like Zara, Peter, Lady Lousie, Viscount James, Bea, Eugenie, Lady Sarah Chatto's children, etc.  That is if she even had much in the way of actual money to leave anyone.  There were lots of rumors that she spent quite lavishly and the Queen settled all the debts when her mother passed.  So, there may have been jewelry and art and personal property perhaps but maybe not a lot of actual money left to anyone.


Louise and James hadn’t even been born !!!


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> When you think about it, if it were anyone else (if she didn't have the Queen to pay-off the debts or have them waived) she would be in big trouble. Most of the debt was from gambling (as well as keeping horses).


And her booze bill


----------



## jblended

Not quite in step with the current discussion but, still on topic as we were discussing earlier whether H has always had this jealous bitterness to the same degree as he currently does. I think he really has gotten worse after marrying. His demeanor before was totally different.
I don't think that joy is all put on for the cameras. He was actually thriving in his position, alongside his brother and SIL. He had purpose and he had goodwill. Where has this guy gone? He's unrecognizable now!



Edit to add: I was never a fan of his, btw. HMQ is my one and only, in all honesty. However, even with merely a passing interest, I am totally flabbergasted by the change in him. It's clear as day.


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> Well, other blind items have more than once, twice, thrice pointed to her other party habits. MegZ probably stopped doing a lot of things that kept her more svelte. Getting married, no job, and not running around so much may have also impacted her figure. She could have also tried fertility drugs in IVF which can cause weight gain. Whether or not the treatment is successful the side-effects can be the same.
> 
> You're correct, it's a nothin award given for nothing. It just annoys me she's coming back to the UK.


Could be the menopause if she is older than she claims


----------



## elvisfan4life

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5619201
> 
> Yes please.
> View attachment 5619204


This is want to read!!!! Meghan the word is the “Truth”


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I don't even like these earrings.



They look very heavy, and all the broadness and big stone is around the jaw line.  Very odd.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




That was good and strong, I won't need a coffee this morning


----------



## xincinsin

elvisfan4life said:


> Could be the menopause if she is older than she claims


I've always wondered if her age was iffy, although I understand that her father confirmed her age.
HRHfacts is not known to monkey around with photos, so when she posted this pic of Zedzee in her wedding finery, I thought it was an unfortunate snap that made Zedzee look older than her true age.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


> I think it was this post. I took a screenshot so it won't disappear.
> 
> View attachment 5619070



Thank you.

But also, that's so sad. I'm not surprised she is a bad mother, but I really thought Harry - who badly wanted kids and did nice things for the Wales crew - would enjoy spending time with them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

airkay said:


> Not an expert but friends and family in publishing say it's really hard to produce books now because of supply chain problems starting with a shortage of paper.



I am expecting a book in November that was supposed to come out LAST November for these exact reasons. Also, as funny as it sounds, another one didn't arrive because a ship lost a huge container at sea (wasn't secured the way it should and slid off when there were some waves or something) that basically held all the supply for the US market. What world are we living in


----------



## andrashik

I know we discussed it here but I don't think we discussed how she got refused by the community when she tried to take photos and videos of the children


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> @QueenofWrapDress hope I didn't come across as rude. I just meant I know nothing about giving birth -  only from films and from what friends (now mothers) have told me.



I read it as such and I'm basically in the same boat...I just randomly remember stuff friends told me. E.g. my best friend's verdict was "Don't let anyone tell you that bullsh*t about how the angels sing when they hand you the baby...the amazing thing is when suddenly the freaking pain goes away!!!"  

But it was just a random note that came to my mind when people said belly was sitting a bit high...basically what I didn't word well at all was they'd probably not have let her leave if the recovery wasn't progressing as it should.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She din't have those reset straight away either (I'm talking to Harry here  )



My little gossipy theory: she doesn't have a problem with the design itself (the stupid new diamond band really doesn't make it, does it), she is secretly p*ssed he didn't buy her a rock along the lines of Kim Kardashian or JLo, so she passive-aggressively keeps changing it up. Maybe he can buy an upgrade for the vow renewal. 

The ugly blood diamonds are in typical Saudi over-the-top style (judging from the other presents the BRF has received over the years...I'm not a fan of most of the pieces), so no need to disimprove them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> View attachment 5619201
> 
> Yes please.
> View attachment 5619204



I wonder why, though. He's kept quiet all these years (and to be honest, while it will be entertaining and I absolutely will read it, I'm not sure how I feel about it).


----------



## Aminamina

purseinsanity said:


> I really hope this is true!







__





						Google Image Result for https://www.concentus.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/JackNicholson.jpg
					





					images.app.goo.gl


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My little gossipy theory: she doesn't have a problem with the design itself (the stupid new diamond band really doesn't make it, does it), she is secretly p*ssed he didn't buy her a rock along the lines of Kim Kardashian or JLo, so she passive-aggressively keeps changing it up. Maybe he can buy an upgrade for the vow renewal.
> 
> The ugly blood diamonds are in typical Saudi over-the-top style (judging from the other presents the BRF has received over the years...I'm not a fan of most of the pieces), so no need to disimprove them.



I think you're correct. Bet M was thinking "how they gonna see that from 200 yards on cell phone pics?"

The UK doesn't have the tradition of out-blinging each other's E-rings. It's all about showing (apparent restraint (good sense - middle class) or inherited pieces (upper class)) Hence, Princess Margaret exclamation at the American actress Elizabeth Taylor's Krupp diamond ring "It's so large! How very vulgar!”.  After Margret tried it and admired it on her finger, ET said "Not so vulgar now is it?" 

It used to be more a thing in my mother's generation, but in GB's working class communities. That was only because it would probably be the only fancy piece of jewellery a woman be getting for the rest of her life. Then, size mattered more than any other 'C' factor, and the married women would all be blinging them out at each other's weddings, christenings and parties.


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.concentus.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/JackNicholson.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> images.app.goo.gl



 

Can't see.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I read it as such and I'm basically in the same boat...I just randomly remember stuff friends told me. E.g. my best friend's verdict was "Don't let anyone tell you that bullsh*t about how the angels sing when they hand you the baby...the amazing thing is when suddenly the freaking pain goes away!!!"
> 
> But it was just a random note that came to my mind when people said belly was sitting a bit high...basically what I didn't word well at all was *they'd probably not have let her leave if the recovery wasn't progressing as it should.*



That's what I would have thought. 

I know in the UK, women are heavily encouraged to go in to hospital for their first baby, but kicked out quick. M would not have been in the same boat. She would have doctor after doctor fawning over her making sure she was perfectly fine at every minute of the day.


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> Can't see.


I can’t seem to master the gif inserting art in the new layout, sorry
Here’s the image link https://images.app.goo.gl/i8wby7eqsNjeboJi6
Hope it works)


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> I know we discussed it here but I don't think we discussed how she got refused by the community when she tried to take photos and videos of the children




Wow upon wow. Lower than low. 

I am literally feeling shivers going up and down my spine  MegZZZ is absolutely ruthless and shameless.


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> I can’t seem to master the gif inserting art in the new layout, sorry
> Here’s the image link https://images.app.goo.gl/i8wby7eqsNjeboJi6
> Hope it works)



No. Sadly still not.

But someone who can see is bound to post.

Thank you for trying


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> No. Sadly still not.
> 
> But someone who can see is bound to post.
> 
> Thank you for trying





That was my link. Lost its luster now)))xx


----------



## bisousx

.


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> Not quite in step with the current discussion but, still on topic as we were discussing earlier whether H has always had this jealous bitterness to the same degree as he currently does. I think he really has gotten worse after marrying. His demeanor before was totally different.
> I don't think that joy is all put on for the cameras. He was actually thriving in his position, alongside his brother and SIL. He had purpose and he had goodwill. Where has this guy gone? He's unrecognizable now!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit to add: I was never a fan of his, btw. HMQ is my one and only, in all honesty. However, even with merely a passing interest, I am totally flabbergasted by the change in him. It's clear as day.




That man needs to be made to watch himself then/now.

We know he can't act to save his life, so the only change is a claw came into it.


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> View attachment 5619321
> 
> That was my link. Lost its luster now)))xx



No, no, no lustre lost, I'm laughing!!!


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I think you're correct. Bet M was thinking "how they gonna see that from 200 yards on cell phone pics?"
> 
> The UK doesn't have the tradition of out-blinging each other's E-rings. It's all about showing (apparent restraint (good sense - middle class) or inherited pieces (upper class)) Hence, Princess Margaret exclamation at the American actress Elizabeth Taylor's Krupp diamond ring "It's so large! How very vulgar!”.  After Margret tried it and admired it on her finger, ET said "Not so vulgar now is it?"
> 
> It used to be more a thing in my mother's generation, but in GB's working class communities. That was only because it would probably be the only fancy piece of jewellery a woman be getting for the rest of her life. Then, size mattered more than any other 'C' factor, and the married women would all be blinging them out at each other's weddings, christenings and parties.



This reminded me of my mother's colleagues. She was a teacher and once a year, there would be a dinner to celebrate the founding of the school in 1887, held at a swanky hotel ballroom. Several of her colleagues were married to wealthy businessmen and this was the one and only time in the school calendar that they could bring out the heavy artillery. Mum's accounts of the dinner always included which teacher won the Diamond Contest, out-blinging the seething competition.

Back to Zedzee, she should just have those three rocks reset into something ostentatious.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This reminded me of my mother's colleagues. She was a teacher and once a year, there would be a dinner to celebrate the founding of the school in 1887, held at a swanky hotel ballroom. Several of her colleagues were married to wealthy businessmen and this was the one and only time in the school calendar that they could bring out the heavy artillery. Mum's accounts of the dinner always included which teacher won the Diamond Contest, out-blinging the seething competition.
> 
> Back to Zedzee, she should just have those three rocks reset into something ostentatious.



Back to Zedzee, she should have just got engaged to someone else LOL


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Back to Zedzee, she should have just got engaged to someone else LOL


I agree. She could have achieved social status by snaring some heir of billionaire family. Expectations would have been less. Divorce money would have been bountiful. And if she did a few rounds of it, she could have amassed a fortune. But she wanted the brass ring, thinking that it was pure gold.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mumotons

Bodyguard pictured with Meghan and Harry was convicted of choking wife
					

EXCLUSIVE: Pere Daobry, 51, was pictured driving the Duke and Duchess of Sussex in a Range Rover as they left Frogmore cottage last week on their way to London's Euston station.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The UK doesn't have the tradition of out-blinging each other's E-rings.



Until very recently Germany didn't do engagement rings. In my grandmother's generation, the engagement ring was the wedding band worn on the left hand, then at the wedding it changed to the right hand. 

Then for some years traditional engagements fell out of favour and deemed oldfashioned (a little weird as legally an engagement is the agreement to marry, so you can't get married without former engagement, but whatever). 

It's just in recent years American/British style engagement rings are on the rise, but German men would never consider dropping that kind of money so it's either tiny or fake stones. Which I personally find insulting  Like no, I don't do cubic circonia and I'm also not wearing out a 25 pointer/1/4 carat of solitaire, sorry not sorry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Wow upon wow. Lower than low.
> 
> I am literally feeling shivers going up and down my spine  MegZZZ is absolutely ruthless and shameless.



Same. I have spent weeks and months closely following war crimes, yet her ruthlessness and complete lack of conscience give me physical reactions.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Same. I have spent weeks and months closely following war crimes, yet her ruthlessness and complete lack of conscience give me physical reactions.


It was a calculated move IMO. Uvalde would have been in shock after the tragedy. She probably thought she could waltz right in and get her "compassionate" footage with everyone too numb to resist. Same way that unscrupulous funeral home vultures used to badger the bereaved families to sign up for elaborate packages.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Same. I have spent weeks and months closely following war crimes, yet her ruthlessness and complete lack of conscience give me physical reactions.



There is defiantly something 'wrong', I mean, there just _is  _


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Until very recently Germany didn't do engagement rings. In my grandmother's generation, the engagement ring was the wedding band worn on the left hand, then at the wedding it changed to the right hand.
> 
> Then for some years traditional engagements fell out of favour and deemed oldfashioned (a little weird as legally an engagement is the agreement to marry, so you can't get married without former engagement, but whatever).
> 
> It's just in recent years American/British style engagement rings are on the rise, but German men would never consider dropping that kind of money so it's either tiny or fake stones. Which I personally find insulting  Like no, I don't do cubic circonia and I'm also not wearing out a 25 pointer/1/4 carat of solitaire, sorry not sorry.



As someone married to a German, that explains a lot


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I agree. She could have achieved social status by snaring some heir of billionaire family. Expectations would have been less. Divorce money would have been bountiful. And if she did a few rounds of it, she could have amassed a fortune. But she wanted the brass ring, thinking that it was pure gold.



Apparently she liked Englishmen hence the treasure hunt in the UK. 

I can only think she didn't know many (Englishmen) before her quest (and that's all I'm saying about that!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> There is defiantly something 'wrong', I mean, there just _is _


What did the BRF, the Palace, know and when did they know it?   Someone had to know something.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Until very recently Germany didn't do engagement rings. In my grandmother's generation, the engagement ring was the wedding band worn on the left hand, then at the wedding it changed to the right hand.
> 
> Then for some years traditional engagements fell out of favour and deemed oldfashioned (a little weird as legally an engagement is the agreement to marry, so you can't get married without former engagement, but whatever).
> 
> It's just in recent years American/British style engagement rings are on the rise, but German men would never consider dropping that kind of money so it's either tiny or fake stones. Which I personally find insulting  Like no, I don't do cubic circonia and I'm also not wearing out a 25 pointer/1/4 carat of solitaire, sorry not sorry.



I picked an engagement ring from Argos. Hubby was in hysterics but didn't mind


----------



## CarryOn2020

A comment:
_Tactless Inquisitor 

Don't forget the gunning for IPP status too_


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did the BRF, the Palace, know and when did they know it?   Someone had to know something.



I think that would be between MegZ and her therapist


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> It was a calculated move IMO. Uvalde would have been in shock after the tragedy. She probably thought she could waltz right in and get her "compassionate" footage with everyone too numb to resist. Same way that unscrupulous funeral home vultures used to badger the bereaved families to sign up for elaborate packages.



I picked Ghoul specifically for its corpse eating habits because I felt vulture was unfair to the bird which has a very important task in the eco system.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Apparently she liked Englishmen hence the treasure hunt in the UK.
> 
> I can only think she didn't know many (Englishmen) before her quest (and that's all I'm saying about that!)



I still don't get it. I mean, I have a type too, but this always seemed so random.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I think that would be between MegZ and her therapist


She has one???


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Probably used the same bump.  Maybe the others weren't unpacked yet or misplaced into one of the 16 bathrooms.  Archie almost looks like he's been drugged and has passed out.


Or maybe Archie used them to build pillow fort in his room


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has one???


She's her own therapist  If she had a therapist, she would be telling the therapist that he/she is wrong and he/she should have given her (Z-list) a different advice or suggestion. Then of course, Z-list would blame the therapist for anything that goes wrong after she (Z-list) started seeing him/her. Oh what a nightmare to deal with that crazy woman


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has one???



Unfortunately, I think that's the biggest problem - she doesn't seem to.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't get it. I mean, I have a type too, but this always seemed so random.



I think 'got her number' on this before

It was a power-couple strategy thing for upselling her MM brand (a la Madonna and Gwyneth). There seems to be a certain 'thing' that US women seem to have/find attractive for/in British guys (accents?). You would have ask an American woman as to what the fated attraction is.

Years ago, well before even M's time, at least one could say a British husband would only be seen at Sunday lunch (otherwise at his (Private Members) Club, country club or 'down the boozer'. Nowadays I have no idea, all the UK pubs (and libraries) seem to be shutting, or turning into stitch 'n' b*tch/quiz night venues.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> What did the BRF, the Palace, know and when did they know it?   Someone had to know something.



I don’t get this either. There is no way there’s no real dirt on her yet everyone is quiet. So far.

Why unleash a war with the RF that she can’t possibly win unless she is seriously wired wrong.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Hyacinth said:


> If anyone reading this is or has been in the publishing business, can they give us some idea how many pairs of eyes probably would have  already seen that manuscript before it goes to the printer?


A LOT, like in the hundreds. Rough drafts (advance reader copies) go out to other channels all the time (like bookstores and libraries and schools etc -- publishers get their presale numbers that way) months before the public gets to purchase. Lots of people could easily sell a rough draft or pass off some leaks to the media. NDAs are not common in publishing, it's just assumed you'll keep quiet and not share drafts, but people do all the time, and sell them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I think 'got her number' on this before
> 
> It was a power-couple strategy thing for upselling her MM brand (a la Madonna and Gwyneth). There seems to be a certain 'thing' that US women seem to have/find attractive for/in British guys (accents?). You would have ask an American woman as to what the fated attraction is.
> 
> Years ago, well before even M's time, at least one could say a British husband would only be seen at Sunday lunch (otherwise at his (Private Members) Club, country club or 'down the boozer'. Nowadays I have no idea, all the UK pubs (and libraries) seem to be shutting, or turning into stitch 'n' b*tch/quiz night venues.


Speaking as an American, [ahem], it seems to be the refinement, the style, the intelligence, wit, etc.  That said, Trev did not seem to be an oaf, but who knows.  Hazzie did not seem as angry as he is now.

Here is some ‘real’ research:








						Why American Women Keep Falling for British Dudes
					

Blame Hugh Grant... or Mr. Darcy.




					www.elle.com


----------



## BlueCherry

EverSoElusive said:


> She's her own therapist  If she had a therapist, she would be telling the therapist that he/she is wrong and he/she should have given her (Z-list) a different advice or suggestion. Then of course, Z-list would blame the therapist for anything that goes wrong after she (Z-list) started seeing him/her. Oh what a nightmare to deal with that crazy woman



I had a friend who detested her husband but had counselling. She would message me constantly to say the therapist was wrong and always taking his side. I realise now, having read this post, she was a narcissist. I ended the friendship when she said she wished he would die in action (he’s Army) so she could have his home, money and free healthcare. Some people are just vile.


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking as an American, [ahem], it seems to be the refinement, the style, the intelligence, wit, etc.  That said, Trev did not seem to be an oaf, but who knows.  Hazzie did not seem as angry as he is now.
> 
> Here some ‘real’ research:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why American Women Keep Falling for British Dudes
> 
> 
> Blame Hugh Grant... or Mr. Darcy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com



In the old days perhaps. Most of the fit and well dressed men are gay. I’m 51 and well maintained, ahem, but many British men my age have completely gone to pot, have flabby bellies, no arse and bigger boobs than me. I haven’t enjoyed my trips to the supermarket for ages


----------



## EverSoElusive

BlueCherry said:


> I had a friend who detested her husband but had counselling. She would message me constantly to say the therapist was wrong and always taking his side. I realise now, having read this post, she was a narcissist. I ended the friendship when *she said she wished he would die in action (he’s Army) so she could have his home, money and free healthcare. *Some people are just vile.


Sorry to hear about your friend and the friendship. You're better off without such a toxic person in your life  

Bolded part... That's almost like what Z-list is secretly hoping for


----------



## BlueCherry

EverSoElusive said:


> Sorry to hear about your friend and the friendship. You're better off without such a toxic person in your life
> 
> Bolded part... That's almost like what Z-list is secretly hoping for



Thanks   

Bolded part, yes it wouldn’t surprise me if she didn’t care at all if anything happened to H so long as she gets sympathy and money


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> I don’t get this either. There is no way there’s no real dirt on her yet everyone is quiet. So far.
> 
> Why unleash a war with the RF that she can’t possibly win *unless she is seriously wired wrong.*



The explanation is right there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> In the old days perhaps. Most of the fit and well dressed men are gay. I’m 51 and well maintained, ahem, but many British men my age have completely gone to pot, have flabby bellies, no arse and bigger boobs than me. I haven’t enjoyed my trips to the supermarket for ages



Random because I was looking at pictures of the wider BRF yesterday. James Ogilvy (son of Princess Alexanda, The Queen's cousin) was handsome when young and has aged really nicely. Interestingly, his son looks quite a bit like young Philip (who was a first cousin to Princess Marina, Princess Alexandra's mother).


----------



## CarryOn2020

BlueCherry said:


> In the old days perhaps. Most of the fit and well dressed men are gay. I’m 51 and well maintained, ahem, but many British men my age have completely gone to pot, have flabby bellies, no arse and bigger boobs than me. I haven’t enjoyed my trips to the supermarket for ages


Are they kind?   That’s all MM gals want to know


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Random because I was looking at pictures of the wider BRF yesterday. James Ogilvy (son of Princess Alexanda, The Queen's cousin) was handsome when young and has aged really nicely. Interestingly, his son looks quite a bit like young Philip (who was a first cousin to Princess Marina, Princess Alexandra's mother).


Is this the one?


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> I don’t get this either. There is no way there’s no real dirt on her yet everyone is quiet. So far.
> 
> Why unleash a war with the RF that she can’t possibly win unless she is seriously wired wrong.



Blind items have indicated on more than once occasion she paid and got people to sign NDAs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

With his mom and lovely wife:








						Princess Alexandra (L), her son James (R) and daughter in law Julia Ogilvy (C) Royal Wedding - pre-wedding dinner held at the Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park - Arrivals. London, England - 28.04.11 Stock Photo - Alamy
					

Download this stock image: Princess Alexandra (L), her son James (R) and daughter in law Julia Ogilvy (C) Royal Wedding - pre-wedding dinner held at the Mandarin Oriental Hyde Park - Arrivals. London, England - 28.04.11 - DB5CJ0 from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos...




					www.alamy.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this the one?
> 
> View attachment 5619380



I think! I've only looked at very young and recent pics.

ETA: I was speaking about James, not Alexander.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies, that was the father.  This is the son.  Very attractive imo.









						Flora Ogilvy, granddaughter of Princess Alexandra, arrives with her brother Alexander Ogilvy, for her wedding to Timothy Vesterberg, at St James's Church in Piccadilly, central London. Picture date: Friday September 10, 2021 Stock Photo - Alamy
					

Download this stock image: Flora Ogilvy, granddaughter of Princess Alexandra, arrives with her brother Alexander Ogilvy, for her wedding to Timothy Vesterberg, at St James's Church in Piccadilly, central London. Picture date: Friday September 10, 2021. - 2GJJ9NA from Alamy's library of millions...




					www.alamy.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW I'm having a super productive day...I am cleaning out the freezer and started by eating icecream so I could throw out the package.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think! I've only looked at very young and recent pics.
> 
> ETA: I was speaking about James, not Alexander.


He could be the one Nostradamus mentioned.   









						Meet the hottest British royal you've never heard of
					

Could he be your prince charming?




					au.lifestyle.yahoo.com


----------



## JulesB68

papertiger said:


> Just watched it
> 
> Lady C says she knows for a fact that there is so much "frustration" in the Harkle household. She also called M a "two-bit hustler"
> 
> I have found a great trick. I have to watch the city fashion shows for work. Catching up with Paris atm. I listened to Lady C whilst watching Saint Laurent SS23 with the sound off (maxi/sheer/HUGE shoulders on outerwear/barely-there sandals for every outfit).
> 
> Voila! 2 birds and one stone.
> 
> Edited to say Lady C also says she knows stuff about M that make everything so far look tame. She says what she knows about MegZ "makes Rosemary's Baby look like John the Baptist"


Can I also suggest that Lady C's videos are what double-speed playback was invented for!


----------



## CarryOn2020

From September 20:












						Queen's 25-year-old distant cousin at her funeral who fans say is a heartthrob
					

Royal fans said they 'couldn't help but look' when Alexander Charles Ogilvy arrived at Westminster Abbey




					www.mylondon.news


----------



## papertiger

JulesB68 said:


> Can I also suggest that Lady C's videos are what double-speed playback was invented for!



_Esp._ Lady C's! (no offence of any kind dear Lady C - just take your time in your timely fashion  )


----------



## charlottawill

jblended said:


> Not quite in step with the current discussion but, still on topic as we were discussing earlier whether H has always had this jealous bitterness to the same degree as he currently does. I think he really has gotten worse after marrying. His demeanor before was totally different.
> I don't think that joy is all put on for the cameras. He was actually thriving in his position, alongside his brother and SIL. He had purpose and he had goodwill. Where has this guy gone? He's unrecognizable now!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit to add: I was never a fan of his, btw. HMQ is my one and only, in all honesty. However, even with merely a passing interest, I am totally flabbergasted by the change in him. It's clear as day.



Hmmm, that video definitely gave me a "what he ordered vs. what he got" vibe.


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> From September 20:
> 
> View attachment 5619382
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's 25-year-old distant cousin at her funeral who fans say is a heartthrob
> 
> 
> Royal fans said they 'couldn't help but look' when Alexander Charles Ogilvy arrived at Westminster Abbey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mylondon.news


Hmmm. He may need his own thread


----------



## BittyMonkey

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies, that was the father.  This is the son.  Very attractive imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Flora Ogilvy, granddaughter of Princess Alexandra, arrives with her brother Alexander Ogilvy, for her wedding to Timothy Vesterberg, at St James's Church in Piccadilly, central London. Picture date: Friday September 10, 2021 Stock Photo - Alamy
> 
> 
> Download this stock image: Flora Ogilvy, granddaughter of Princess Alexandra, arrives with her brother Alexander Ogilvy, for her wedding to Timothy Vesterberg, at St James's Church in Piccadilly, central London. Picture date: Friday September 10, 2021. - 2GJJ9NA from Alamy's library of millions...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.alamy.com


I'm sorry, but that kid looks like James Spader in his 80s villain glory.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Hmmm. He may need his own thread


Ya kno, seems there are plenty of non-working royals who could do the top job.  Hazzie does not have it locked down [if Nostradamus is correct].


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Apparently she liked Englishmen hence the treasure hunt in the UK.
> 
> I can only think she didn't know many (Englishmen) before her quest (and that's all I'm saying about that!)


According to TB in Revenge, she made it clear to everyone she met that she was looking for a rich Englishman. She just happened to cross paths with someone who knew Harry and agreed to arrange a blind date. And here we are.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I still don't get it. I mean, I have a type too, but this always seemed so random.


She claimed that they were more gentlemanly. Money and titles were just an added bonus.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> @Chanbal, this was a great link, The Times bottom line opinion on Harry and Meghan, published 9/26/22. Short and to the point and quite damming and from The Times, not the Daily Mail or another tabloid.
> 
> _. . . The monarchy operates by the power of example. It is not an easy life but the late Queen, like her father and grandfather before her, exemplified the principle that those born to privilege have an obligation to public service.
> 
> As the book recounts with impeccable sourcing, the conduct of the Sussexes has more than occasionally fallen short of this ideal. *Rudeness to staff is inexcusable in any working relationship, yet it happened, and was replicated in other forums. “Thanks for coming,” said the duke to journalists covering the couple’s South Pacific tour in 2018, “even though you weren’t invited.” They had been, and were insulted for their pains.
> 
> It is to be hoped that the Sussexes will enjoy private life. It will be to their own benefit, and enhance the dignity that King Charles has already demonstrated in his reign, if it is indeed private.*_


Compare and contrast
Zara did an interview with 60 Minutes Australia - YouTube - who knew ?
it was after her olympics win, and all she talked about was horses, interviewer tried to get her started on QEII’s love of horses, but Z did not take the bait, she said something  along the lines of “yes QEII likes horses”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I'm having a super productive day...I am cleaning out the freezer and started by eating icecream so I could throw out the package.



Now that's what I call multitasking!!!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Is it true that they lost 6 nannies within Archie's 1st year?
> 
> With so many rumors being confirmed by respected authors like Tom Bower and Valentine Low, I'm starting to believe that whatever is written on their parenting rules is a sad possibility.


Dunno but I did put 2 and 2 together
they had a nanny named Lauren that they took to Africa, she was the one snacking in the kitchen while nursery burned
They left for Vancouver - 2 mos later ? - HandM told no one where they were going [for how long … ) until the plane was in the air, that is how Lauren found out she was going to live in Canada
Discuss - what is the legal definition of kidnapping ?


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Hmmm. He may need his own thread



Maybe I should set up a transatlantic dating service between US ladies and British 'gentlemen', seems like a huge gap in the market. We have plenty of Hoorays and Geezers looking for a good home (and a Green Card). 

I'm on the lookout for the equivalent of a French mistress but male (master - no, that doesn't sound right). Please be on the look out, 16th arrondissemen a Paris , Haute Côte d'Azur, Monaco, only "kind" Frenchman si vous plait, coz that's top of my list when looking in those specific areas.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> According to TB in Revenge, she made it clear to everyone she met that she was looking for a rich Englishman. She just happened to cross paths with someone who knew Harry and agreed to arrange a blind date. And here we are.


Heard that before and putting 2 and 2 together …
1. she was ok with living in Toronto for Suits, while rest of cast moaned at leaving LA
2. she lived in Canada for 4-5 years, LEARNED about US/Canada cultural diffs
3. she moved her focus to the UK - speaking engagements etc
4. Why want a UK man From yet another diff culture?

The desire for a UK husband is not only a desire to MOVE UP, but also indicates that she Markled (ghosted, gave up on ) US and Canadian men, and discounted cultural diff issues (the foreigners would adapt to her, not the other way round)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut ooooh - beware Hazz. It is happening.

_European Queen strips second son's title of prince in ruthless cull to streamline monarchy_​_A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves"._​








						European Queen strips second grandson title of prince in ruthless cull
					

A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, this is refreshing:

_A new tell-all book looking inside the life of courtiers for the Royal Family has revealed Prince Harry was totally unfazed when an aide did not address him in a formal manner. Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown, by Valentine Low, divulged the error made by Prince Harry's press secretary when he was still a working royal. The book reads: "Ed Perkins, who also had a spell as press secretary for the two princes, once accidentally sent a text to Harry saying, 'Hello mate'. He recalled: 'I texted back saying, ‘So sorry, just called you mate. I didn’t mean to.’ [Harry] wrote back saying, ‘Please don’t worry.’" The book has made a series of bombshell claims about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, with several courtiers detailing their difficult relationship with the couple to Mr Low.
_








						Prince Harry's surprising three-word reply when aide called him 'mate'
					

A new book has revealed the an aide to the Duke of Sussex accidentally forgot to address him properly.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut ooooh - beware Hazz. It is happening.
> 
> _European Queen strips second son's title of prince in ruthless cull to streamline monarchy_​_A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves"._​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> European Queen strips second grandson title of prince in ruthless cull
> 
> 
> A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



That's...harsh.

BTW said second son's wife is said to be Denmark's Markle...a troublemaker extremely jealous of Princess Mary.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's...harsh.
> 
> BTW said second son's wife is said to be Denmark's Markle...a troublemaker extremely jealous of Princess Mary.


Imo this paves the way for King Charles.  If he does it today, it will look so much better than waiting. 
Wonder what Opr thinks of this - yeah, it can and did happen.  Deal with it.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo this paves the way for King Charles.  If he does it today, it will look so much better than waiting.
> Wonder what Opr thinks of this - yeah, it can and did happen.  Deal with it.



and the headline can read "King Charles Modernising the Monarchy" 

Go Charlie, go!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Such mature attitudes [unlike those Cali royals]:

_The Danish palace also noted that "the Queen's decision is in line with similar adjustments that other royal houses have made in various ways in recent years." Similarly, Sweden's King Carl XVI Gustaf announced in October 2019 that the children of Princess Madeleine and Chris O'Neill as well as Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia would no longer official members of the royal house. They retained their titles of prince or princess, but the titles became personal and any future spouses or children will not have a right to them.


Princess Madeleine responded to the news on Instagram, writing: "Earlier today, the court announced that Leonore, Nicolas and Adrienne will no longer belong to the royal house. This change has been planned for a long time. Chris and I think it's good that our children are now getting a greater opportunity to shape their own lives as private individuals in the future."


Prince Carl Philip also shared his thoughts on Instagram, writing: "Today, the King announced the decision that our children no longer hold the Royal Highness position. We see this as positive as Alexander and Gabriel will have freer choices in life." (Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia later welcomed a third son, Prince Julian.)









						Queen Margrethe of Denmark Strips Four Grandchildren of Royal Titles
					

The children of Prince Joachim, Queen Margrethe's second son, will now be counts and countess instead of princes and princess




					people.com
				





_


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> Maybe I should set up a transatlantic dating service between US ladies and British 'gentlemen', seems like a huge gap in the market. We have plenty of Hoorays and Geezers looking for a good home (and a Green Card).
> 
> I'm on the lookout for the equivalent of a French mistress but male (master - no, that doesn't sound right). Please be on the look out, 16th arrondissemen a Paris , Haute Côte d'Azur, Monaco, only "kind" Frenchman si vous plait, coz that's top of my list when looking in those specific areas.


Been done before think Downton abbey


----------



## Aimee3

Going back a few pages where we were discussing H&M being rather silent about the births of the kids, I totally agree.  H when he always manages to insert “my wife” into every speech would likely add something nauseating like “my wife, who suffered near death bringing our son into this world, and bravely did it again to bring our daughter into this world” etc.  M for her part would’ve milked every child birth horror into her own narrative.  So yes, further proof to me that there were surrogate(s).


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut ooooh - beware Hazz. It is happening.
> 
> _European Queen strips second son's title of prince in ruthless cull to streamline monarchy_​_A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves"._​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> European Queen strips second grandson title of prince in ruthless cull
> 
> 
> A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Charles shouldn't miss this boat! The ones from Montecito have already no duties related to the UK monarchy, so…  

_The statement from the palace detailed: "With her decision, Her Majesty The Queen wishes to create the framework for the four grandchildren to be able to shape their own lives to a much greater extent without being limited by the* special considerations and duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves*."_


----------



## Kevinaxx

papertiger said:


> To be so jealous and wary of your little nephew (George) is awful.
> 
> Likewise, M with young Charlotte.


For all their wants/desire to have titles for their kids (and possibly for themselves)…

Do they not realize the actual work behind said titles? They got all the $$ thanks to Charles (because M has to be dressed with millions nevermind she doesn’t look like a million bucks)

But they scuffed at the work, turned their backs and decided to go the Hollywood route (how’s that working for them?).

They’re fighting really hard for something I don’t think they even have the ability to comprehend it’s not all rainbows and sunshine just because you have a staff to help (help, not terrorize into doing everything the way you want it without you lifting a pinky or burning a brain cell).


----------



## carmen56

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut ooooh - beware Hazz. It is happening.
> 
> _European Queen strips second son's title of prince in ruthless cull to streamline monarchy_​_A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves"._​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> European Queen strips second grandson title of prince in ruthless cull
> 
> 
> A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Are you paying attention, KC?  This is the way to go.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kevinaxx said:


> For all their wants/desire to have titles for their kids (and possibly for themselves)…
> 
> Do they not realize the actual work behind said titles? They got all the $$ thanks to Charles (because M has to be dressed with millions nevermind she doesn’t look like a million bucks)
> 
> But they scuffed at the work, turned their backs and decided to go the Hollywood route (how’s that working for them?).
> 
> They’re fighting really hard for something I don’t think they even have the ability to comprehend it’s not all rainbows and sunshine just because you have a staff to help (help, not terrorize into doing everything the way you want it without you lifting a pinky or burning a brain cell).


Notice how no one in the other royal families is screaming about _birthright.  _Imo it shows how ignorant some Americans are about royalty.  Where’s GK now?  Spotify?  Let’s hear that slander.  H&M look  more and more ridiculous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One side???  Out.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*Princess Madeleine responded to the news on Instagram, writing: "Earlier today, the court announced that Leonore, Nicolas and Adrienne will no longer belong to the royal house. This change has been planned for a long time. Chris and I think it's good that our children are now getting a greater opportunity to shape their own lives as private individuals in the future."*
> 
> 
> Prince Carl Philip also shared his thoughts on Instagram, writing: "Today, the King announced the decision that our children no longer hold the Royal Highness position. We see this as positive as Alexander and Gabriel will have freer choices in life." (Prince Carl Philip and Princess Sofia later welcomed a third son, Prince Julian.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe of Denmark Strips Four Grandchildren of Royal Titles
> 
> 
> The children of Prince Joachim, Queen Margrethe's second son, will now be counts and countess instead of princes and princess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Perfect timing! I wonder if the other Royal Houses are trying to help a fellow King at his new job…


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they kind?   That’s all MM gals want to know



With a little persuasion yes   



papertiger said:


> Blind items have indicated on more than once occasion she paid and got people to sign NDAs.



Sneaky bish. There is nothing that money could persuade me to do that I didn’t want to…

Unless Colin Firth asked 









QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I'm having a super productive day...I am cleaning out the freezer and started by eating icecream so I could throw out the package.



Ooh that’s an idea. Except I don’t fancy eating 46 dog eared chipolatas



BittyMonkey said:


> I'm sorry, but that kid looks like James Spader in his 80s villain glory.
> View attachment 5619389



Looooooooool



charlottawill said:


> She claimed that they were more gentlemanly. Money and titles were just an added bonus.



Gentlemanly would be wasted on a bullish oaf like her. 

I find Irish men quite gentlemanly.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> One side???  Out.




To one side, downstairs and behind the door - OUTside


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Perfect timing! I wonder if the other Royal Houses are trying to help a fellow King at his new job…


Feels like this was the plan all along.  It may have been QE’s idea.  We are certainly watching some historic moments!


----------



## Chanbal

He deserves a Happy Birthday from TPF imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> To one side, downstairs and behind the door - OUTside



If that doesn't work, we can always do inside. For example the Tower of London.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> One side???  Out.



Swipe left KC


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Simpering, self-congratulatory speeches  Tell it how it is, Aussies!


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If that doesn't work, we can always do inside. For example the Tower of London.


Close to the crown jewels?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Close to the crown jewels?




The Ravens and the Beefeaters will keep her in check


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The Ravens and the Beefeaters will keep her in check



And the ghosts. Apparently they've attacked tourists before.


----------



## DebbieAnn

*I have a question or questions.  I come on this forum every two weeks or so & just skim a lot of it.

What does TW mean?  I have a suspicion on that one.  Zeedee, Hazmat or others like this.

They are rather funny.

Thank you!*


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Compare and contrast
> Zara did an interview with 60 Minutes Australia - YouTube - who knew ?
> it was after her olympics win, and all she talked about was horses, interviewer tried to get her started on QEII’s love of horses, but Z did not take the bait, she said something  along the lines of “yes QEII likes horses”


Princess Anne and her kids do not suffer fools. They are smart and if only there were higher up in rank 




papertiger said:


> and the headline can read "King Charles Modernising the Monarchy"
> 
> Go Charlie, go!


Do you mean go, *Chuck*, go since Z-list is American? 




DebbieAnn said:


> *I have a question or questions.  I come on this forum every two weeks or so & just skim a lot of it.
> 
> What does TW mean?  I have a suspicion on that one.  Zeedee, Hazmat or others like this.
> 
> They are rather funny.
> 
> Thank you!*


TW = The Wife or you can go for The Witch too. Most of the times it is The Witch in my head when I read TW


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are they kind?   That’s all MM gals want to know



"Are they really rich and stupid, naive and able to be manipulated? Fall for yacht girl charms, sashaying hips and girly giggles?   I mean, "Are they kind?" So I can get my claws on them, work fast, and get them to the altar before their advisors knock some sense into them?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> The Ravens and the Beefeaters will keep her in check





QueenofWrapDress said:


> And the ghosts. Apparently they've attacked tourists before.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_King Charles III
To Do list:

1. Keeping in line with other European monarchies, only direct heirs will be granted styles, titles, IPP, and funds. This will save our beloved taxpayers billions.

2. Duke of Wessex will now be Duke of Edinburgh, Sophie will be Duchess of Edinburgh. 

3.  The CoS are: Camilla, Willam, Edward, and Princess Anne.  Lady Louise will serve as alternate [do they have one?]

4. Andrew, Sarah, Harry and Meghan have all renounced their titles, styles and funding.  We wish them well. 

5. Change the website and the locks._


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Close to the crown jewels?



Close but never in reach.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> _King Charles III
> To Do list:
> 
> 1. Keeping in line with other European monarchies, only direct heirs will be granted styles, titles, IPP, and funds. This will save our beloved taxpayers billions.
> 
> 2. Duke of Wessex will now be Duke of Edinburgh, Sophie will be Duchess of Edinburgh.
> 
> 3.  The CoS are: Camilla, Willam, Edward, and Princess Anne.  Lady Louise will serve as alternate [do they have one?]
> 
> 4. Andrew, Sarah, Harry and Meghan have all renounced their titles, styles and funding.  We wish them well.
> 
> 5. Change the website and the locks._


Need clarification on 2 
1 Philip was Duke of Edinburgh, title used in England too
2 is DoE a Scottish title, rather than English ???
3. Isn’t Scotland having a referendum soon on exiting the Uk ?
4. Is DoE a politically correct (for someone who lives in England ) and long term viable title ?
5 ok the Waleses don’t live in Wales …. 
But the heir has been been PoW since the Middle Ages whereas DoE has been created 3 times
Since about 1720s - less long term history
6 yes Edward has been posited as next DoE for donkeys years


----------



## Debbini

BlueCherry said:


> With a little persuasion yes
> 
> 
> 
> Sneaky bish. There is nothing that money could persuade me to do that I didn’t want to…
> 
> Unless Colin Firth asked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ooh that’s an idea. Except I don’t fancy eating 46 dog eared chipolatas
> 
> 
> 
> Looooooooool
> 
> 
> 
> Gentlemanly would be wasted on a bullish oaf like her.
> 
> I find Irish men quite gentlemanly.


I'm with you on the Colin Firth part!


----------



## LittleStar88

EverSoElusive said:


> TW = The Wife or you can go for The Witch too. Most of the times it is The Witch in my head when I read TW



I always read TW as _That Woman(!)   _


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> _King Charles III
> To Do list:
> 
> 1. Keeping in line with other European monarchies, only direct heirs will be granted styles, titles, IPP, and funds. This will save our beloved taxpayers billions.
> 
> 2. Duke of Wessex will now be Duke of Edinburgh, Sophie will be Duchess of Edinburgh.
> 
> 3.  The CoS are: Camilla, Willam, Edward, and Princess Anne.  Lady Louise will serve as alternate [do they have one?]
> 
> 4. Andrew, Sarah, Harry and Meghan have all renounced their titles, styles and funding.  We wish them well.
> 
> 5. Change the website and the locks._


Yes to all, lol


----------



## marietouchet

Nothing we don’t know - interesting article nonetheless
1 focus is on H not M , the gloves are off - he is also a target now
2 fox is a real news channel , I actually get disappointed when they cover the royals , I like to have some feeds be serious news only
—-

Prince Harry 'has a penchant for wanting his cake and eating it too,' royal expert claims









						Prince Harry 'has a penchant for wanting his cake and eating it too,' royal expert claims
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have engaged in "hypocritical habits" since stepping down from their royal roles in 2020, royal experts tell Fox News Digital.




					www.foxnews.com
				




Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at http://www.foxnews.com/apps-products/index.html.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> I always read TW as _That Woman(!)  _


TW is a powerful acronym - covers a lot of territory


----------



## EverSoElusive

LittleStar88 said:


> I always read TW as _That Woman(!)  _


You are certainly much nicer than me  _That Woman_ is too tame for such an evil person.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Podcast: How Meghan Markle lost Hollywood
> 
> 
> Incoming staff writer Kara Kennedy discusses her October magazine piece about Meghan Markle’s failure to take Hollywood by storm with Kinsey Schofield, a royal commentator and host of the To Di For Daily podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spectatorworld.com


interesting point she makes that US media won't criticize them because the want access....so what we need is for the public to lose interest in them....
I look forward to that day
Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen is a guilty pleasure for me.  Andy brings them up fairly often.  Last episode I watched he had his guests weigh in on various pictures and whether they cared or not.  He held up a picture of M at TQs funeral.  guests were mildly interested.


----------



## duna

EverSoElusive said:


> Childbirth sounds scary   Respect to all you ladies who have experienced it


LOL! This makes me think of my doctor who delivered my 4 kids: he said that women have a very bad memory that's why most of them have more than one child. The other thing he said , which is pretty obvious IMO, was that if men were to give birth the human race would have become extinct ages ago.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Need clarification on 2
> 1 Philip was Duke of Edinburgh, title used in England too
> 2 is DoE a Scottish title, rather than English ???
> 3. Isn’t Scotland having a referendum soon on exiting the Uk ?
> 4. Is DoE a politically correct (for someone who lives in England ) and long term viable title ?
> 5 ok the Waleses don’t live in Wales ….
> But the heir has been been PoW since the Middle Ages whereas DoE has been created 3 times
> Since about 1720s - less long term history
> 6 yes Edward has been posited as next DoE for donkeys years


I have no idea about the DoE. I strongly believe Edward&Sophie deserve this title.


----------



## zen1965

sdkitty said:


> it's not usually that easy for an almost-40-year-old woman to get pregnant.  but she's very special


No, but there are exceptions. E.g. I got pregnant at 42 within two months.


----------



## rose60610

A woman I knew a while back told of her upcoming wedding plans "Get married in June and be pregnant by December". She was over 40 and pregnant with twins within a few months.


----------



## EverSoElusive

duna said:


> LOL! This makes me think of my doctor who delivered my 4 kids: he said that women have a very bad memory that's why most of them have more than one child. The other thing he said , which is pretty obvious IMO, was that if men were to give birth the human race would have become extinct ages ago.


Your doctor is pretty smart


----------



## lulu212121

zen1965 said:


> No, but there are exceptions. E.g. I got pregnant at 42 within two months.


I can believe it as I have seen 2 of my aunts pregnant after 40, but before 45. One of them had 2 babies, in her early 20's and then 2 more in her 40's 2 years apart. 17 years after her 1st. My other aunt was 43 when she had her daughter. All full term, natural deliveries with no difficulties. 

I only side eye TW because of her literally carrying her pregnancy.


----------



## scarlet555

marietouchet said:


> Nothing we don’t know - interesting article nonetheless
> 1 focus is on H not M , the gloves are off - he is also a target now
> 2 fox is a real news channel , I actually get disappointed when they cover the royals , I like to have some feeds be serious news only
> —-
> 
> Prince Harry 'has a penchant for wanting his cake and eating it too,' royal expert claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'has a penchant for wanting his cake and eating it too,' royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have engaged in "hypocritical habits" since stepping down from their royal roles in 2020, royal experts tell Fox News Digital.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at http://www.foxnews.com/apps-products/index.html.


Fox news-yes, everyone, please wake up... those two are horrible hypocrites, hope they get found out by more people.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> One side???  Out.



Sloppy journalism, he’s King Charles *III.*


----------



## Cinderlala

marietouchet said:


> Heard that before and putting 2 and 2 together …
> 1. she was ok with living in Toronto for Suits, while rest of cast moaned at leaving LA
> 2. she lived in Canada for 4-5 years, LEARNED about US/Canada cultural diffs
> 3. she moved her focus to the UK - speaking engagements etc
> 4. Why want a UK man From yet another diff culture?
> 
> The desire for a UK husband is not only a desire to MOVE UP, but also indicates that she Markled (ghosted, gave up on ) US and Canadian men, and discounted cultural diff issues (the foreigners would adapt to her, not the other way round)


She also wanted to move to the UK because she could not get work in Hollywood.  I believe it was mentioned somewhere that she thought British men responded well to compliments---seems like she meant "easy to manipulate" now that we know her character.

Edited to add:  I don't know what UK men are like but I wouldn't assume they are easy to manipulate.  However, I am obviously not TW.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> If that's the case, her vajayjay must really be something.  He's probably used to virgins.  I don't think TW would qualify for that since many a moon.





LittleStar88 said:


> Her vijayjay must be something magical


Then, is the story from a few years ago about women going to Japan to have their hymen surgically replaced really true?  Oh my virgin ears and eyes!


----------



## Cinderlala

I think the amazing at 'yachting' might be something TW would like others to think.  I'd say the key to yachting is primarily availability.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Your doctor is pretty smart


My doctor had 2 great lines, one per child:

”There’s a reason it’s called Labor.” Worth it but our son took a long time making his debut.

Hoping for a sister for him, when the doctor announced the head was coming and I excitedly asked ”is it a girl or a boy?” Without missing a beat he replied, “We haven’t gotten to the parts that answer your question yet.”


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> interesting point she makes that US media won't criticize them because the want access....so what we need is for the public to lose interest in them....
> I look forward to that day
> Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen is a guilty pleasure for me.  Andy brings them up fairly often.  Last episode I watched he had his guests weigh in on various pictures and whether they cared or not.  He held up a picture of M at TQs funeral.  guests were mildly interested.


I'm listening to it now, it's a good one. I put the link below for the ones that missed it. 



			https://the-district.simplecast.com/episodes/how-meghan-markle-lost-hollywood-8CPaJk_M


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> A woman I knew a while back told of her upcoming wedding plans "Get married in June and be pregnant by December". She was over 40 and pregnant with twins within a few months.


no fertility drugs?
anything is possible but if a woman is near 40 and has been on the pill for years, I think it's generally harder to get pregnant fast


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if these posts are in preparation for Trevi Trev's upcoming book…


----------



## Chanbal

Siblings not cousins: a ‘royal styles and titles’ solution | The rules regarding who gets to use "HRH Prince/ss" style and titles in the British royal family aren't clear. A "siblings not cousins" rule may be the answer
					

The rules regarding who gets to use "HRH Prince/ss" style and titles in the British royal family aren't clear. King Charles III will eventually have to decide.




					writeroyalty.com


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> The suffering of the innocent child? That would be a ship that has already sailed. *I can't imagine how she is going to feel when she is old enough to google about her family and how she was named.*


Those poor kids don't have a chance.  Imagine being given a beloved _private_ nickname of your great grandmother for spite.  There is no other reason they did this.


----------



## Frivole88

so Harry is the 3rd husband


----------



## charlottawill

duna said:


> he said that women have a very bad memory that's why most of them have more than one child.


It's not that women have a very bad memory, and leave it to a male doctor to say that. Humans are designed to remember that something was painful, but not the actual feeling of the pain itself. I remember saying to my doctor the day after my first child was born that I could not go through it again. She just smiled knowingly.

And I will put my memory up against my husband's any day of the week


----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> It's not that women have a very bad memory, and leave it to a male doctor to say that. Humans are designed to remember that something was painful, but not the actual feeling of the pain itself. I remember saying to my doctor the day after my first child was born that I could not go through it again. She just smiled knowingly.
> 
> And I will put my memory up against my husband's any day of the week


This! The body "erases" the feeling of pain. It's not that "women have bad memories" geesh.


----------



## LittleStar88

EverSoElusive said:


> You are certainly much nicer than me  _That Woman_ is too tame for such an evil person.



For some reason I read it as an expletive in Prince William’s voice


----------



## Chanbal

Still on the titles of the Montecitos…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone kindly put it all together.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have no idea about the DoE. I strongly believe Edward&Sophie deserve this title.


I agree BUT in some popularity polls, and yes, THE FIRM pays attention to these ... I saw one where Edward is just barely above MM and it depends on whether Sophie is lumped in with him or not , she is more popular than he is

So, will they get the duchy? Stay tuned ... Will Charles give out inheritable titles to those NOT in the direct line ? Hand out honors that are not inheritable (think Princess Royal)? KC might get creative, esp due to creativity required for handling H, A & L, and Andrew

There are millions of polls, they disagree...
Camilla and Edward are WAY down on this one https://www.statista.com/chart/19988/the-most-unpopular-royals-yougov/
Edward is pretty low here https://www.theweek.co.uk/104474/the-most-popular-british-royals
But higher here https://yougov.co.uk/ratings/politics/popularity/royalty/all


----------



## Toby93

BlueCherry said:


> I picked an engagement ring from Argos. Hubby was in hysterics but didn't mind


I always stop to browse the diamonds in Costco.  They have some nice ones there


----------



## Chanbal

On TW's awards


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## redney

Re: Sussex children's titles (and possibly Hazz and TW's own titles), I'm betting Charles is being advised to tread lightly for now as he and the rest of the Commonwealth and the world adjust to his ascent to King, and possibly with quiet signaling for his vision of the monarchy and BRF.

His immediate action to make Will and Kate PoW & PoW was expected, uncontroversial, and sends a message they are important members of the monarchy and BRF going forward. We thought the same of making Edward and Sophie Duke & Duchess of Edinburgh yet he hasn't done it. Perhaps that's a way to send a signal of a more slimmed down monarchy (?) as we know he has addressed in the past. If so, it's unfortunate as it seemed to be his parents' wishes before they died. We must wait and see.

As for not acting immediately regarding the Suckess family's titles (grant to the kids! remove from the parents!), it would seem to me he could be sending a message that they are not that important to the monarchy and BRF (anymore). If he had acted on the kids' titles (or moved to remove Hazz's and TW's) in the first days/weeks/months of his reign, it could send a message they are important enough for the monarchy and BRF now and in the future to merit his immediate attention. By playing the long game, he could be sending a message their whines and demands are not important business, and he may get to them in time (or in due course as they like to say).


----------



## DebbieAnn

EverSoElusive said:


> Princess Anne and her kids do not suffer fools. They are smart and if only there were higher up in rank
> 
> 
> 
> Do you mean go, *Chuck*, go since Z-list is American?
> 
> 
> 
> TW = The Wife or you can go for The Witch too. Most of the times it is The Witch in my head when I read TW


I was thinking The Witch!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DebbieAnn said:


> I was thinking The Witch!



Only two letters and so many possibilities.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only two letters and so many possibilities.


There is also the very risqué version if I may be so bold…the whxre !


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> interesting point she makes that US media won't criticize them because the want access....so what we need is for the public to lose interest in them....
> I look forward to that day
> Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen is a guilty pleasure for me.  Andy brings them up fairly often.  Last episode I watched he had his guests weigh in on various pictures and whether they cared or not.  He held up a picture of M at TQs funeral.  guests were mildly interested.


I was disappointed in her, I think, misleading statement that Tom Bower’s book hadn’t made much of an impact in the US. It will not be released here until next week and I think that will make a difference as it’s available to a wider audience.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> There is also the very risqué version if I may be so bold…the whxre !


I've refrained from that obvious one because as much as I dislike her I don't like to hear any woman called that. Camilla referred to her publicly as an "adventuress" and a "minx", but I'll bet in private she uses more colorful terms.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if these posts are in preparation for Trevi Trev's upcoming book…



Chanbal,  you always find the most entertaining bits. Thanks continue!


----------



## charlottawill

They look like a perfectly lovely family. Why on earth would she be ashamed of them? They should be ashamed of her. She was stupid not to realize that by inviting them to the wedding she likely would have appealed to a larger part of the British population than the part that she ditched them for.


----------



## Cinderlala

When I refer to her as TW I do so thinking "The Wife" because she's such a powerful 'feminist' who never wanted to be defined by her husband.  Plus, it's the only reason she's even known.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone kindly put it all together.



The devil is always in the details Megsy.


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> Re: Sussex children's titles (and possibly Hazz and TW's own titles), I'm betting Charles is being advised to tread lightly for now as he and the rest of the Commonwealth and the world adjust to his ascent to King, and possibly with quiet signaling for his vision of the monarchy and BRF.
> 
> His immediate action to make Will and Kate PoW & PoW was expected, uncontroversial, and sends a message they are important members of the monarchy and BRF going forward. We thought the same of making Edward and Sophie Duke & Duchess of Edinburgh yet he hasn't done it. Perhaps that's a way to send a signal of a more slimmed down monarchy (?) as we know he has addressed in the past. If so, it's unfortunate as it seemed to be his parents' wishes before they died. We must wait and see.
> 
> As for not acting immediately regarding the Suckess family's titles (grant to the kids! remove from the parents!), it would seem to me he could be sending a message that they are not that important to the monarchy and BRF (anymore). If he had acted on the kids' titles (or moved to remove Hazz's and TW's) in the first days/weeks/months of his reign, it could send a message they are important enough for the monarchy and BRF now and in the future to merit his immediate attention. By playing the long game, he could be sending a message their whines and demands are not important business, and he may get to them in time (or in due course as they like to say).


I believe Charles will eventually pass the Edinburgh title to his brother and sister in law. I bet he (and his counselors) will first prioritize an approach to neutralize the Montecitos. I can't see him giving the Montecitos the titles they want, particularly after what's going on in other European Royal Houses, UK's (and the rest of the world) tough economy, …He is likely waiting for the outcome of the Harkles' books, podcasts, ongoing lawsuits… before he finalizes his plans. 

If I were Charles, instead of titles, I would set up a very good thrust fund to pay for the education of the Montecito kids, one that couldn't be accessed by their parents. I would make sure the kids would have the best education possible and help to establish themselves in whatever career they choose.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> I was disappointed in her, I think, misleading statement that Tom Bower’s book hadn’t made much of an impact in the US. It will not be released here until next week and I think that will make a difference as it’s available to a wider audience.


I don't think that many Americans care about them one way or the other.  She has her core base of stans who got so excited about an American WOC marrying a prince.  And there are a few like us here who don't like them.  But I think most don't care.  My DH thinks they're like the Kardashians (or want to be).  I think he's probably an example of an average American on this subject.
We'll see how long the media believes they're worth talking about.
Their "life of service" is nothing so far......pure BS


----------



## charlottawill

I don't doubt this at all. He had a reputation for putting his royal foot in his mouth, but Prince Philip was often right on target:


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


>



Wow. Had never read the Daily Mail article or seen most of the pictures. Maybe Tom Bower has this story in his new chapters? Better yet, if Trevor pens his own. I had read, I think via her father, she wanted all wedding pictures destroyed. Looks like a few at least survived.

edited to add: She is such a user of people, more proof she will never change.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Wow. Had never read the Daily Mail article or seen most of the pictures. Maybe Tom Bower has this story in his new chapters? Better yet, if Trevor pens his own. I had read, I think via her father, she wanted all wedding pictures destroyed. Looks like a few at least survived.


TB covered it in Revenge. She told her father to destroy the wedding video right after the wedding. Who does that?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Nothing we don’t know - interesting article nonetheless
> 1 focus is on H not M , the gloves are off - he is also a target now
> 2 fox is a real news channel , I actually get disappointed when they cover the royals , I like to have some feeds be serious news only
> —-
> 
> Prince Harry 'has a penchant for wanting his cake and eating it too,' royal expert claims
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry 'has a penchant for wanting his cake and eating it too,' royal expert claims
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have engaged in "hypocritical habits" since stepping down from their royal roles in 2020, royal experts tell Fox News Digital.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Explore the Fox News apps that are right for you at http://www.foxnews.com/apps-products/index.html.


I found this quote hilarious.  I don't believe she was ever pregnant, but apparently she wanted to have a home birth 

"It was not just Harry that was obsessed with keeping the details a secret," royal expert Kinsey Schofield exclusively told Fox News Digital. "Meghan thought the entire ordeal was barbaric and did not want to participate. Meghan originally didn't even want to have the baby in a hospital." 

"The Duchess wanted to do *everything in secret at home* but was told there could be too many complications *since it was a geriatric pregnancy*"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> You are certainly much nicer than me  _That Woman_ is too tame for such an evil person.


I am nastier than all of you, because when I see or type "TW", in my mind, it stands for something much worse


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I found this quote hilarious.  I don't believe she was ever pregnant, but apparently she wanted to have a home birth
> 
> "It was not just Harry that was obsessed with keeping the details a secret," royal expert Kinsey Schofield exclusively told Fox News Digital. "Meghan thought the entire ordeal was barbaric and did not want to participate. Meghan originally didn't even want to have the baby in a hospital."
> 
> "The Duchess wanted to do *everything in secret at home* but was told there could be too many complications *since it was a geriatric pregnancy*"


I'm sure she loved being called geriatric     . Seriously though, it's an outdated usage and should be retired, along with its partner "elderly primagravida". Both are used to describe women 35 and up having a baby, which is increasingly common.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I am nastier than all of you, because when I see or type "TW", in my mind, it stands for something much worse


As I often tell my husband, just because you think it doesn't mean you should say it.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> The devil is always in the details Megsy.


Princess Beatrice and Eugenie are both HRH, but rarely have police protection unless they are performing royal duties.  The HRH never guaranteed security, but the TW knew that when she went on Oprah. Were her lies directed at the BRF or designed to get the US audience on her side?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I don't doubt this at all. He had a reputation for putting his royal foot in his mouth, but Prince Philip was often right on target:




The nerve and the ego. If it wasn't so disgusting I'd be impressed.

But also: that stupid cow really, really miscalculated how sheer respect for The Queen served as her security blanket. It seems a lot of people have sat on a lot of dirt for four years, and they might consider cleaning out their basements now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> TB covered it in Revenge. She told her father to destroy the wedding video right after the wedding. Who does that?



Honestly, she does a lot of things that make me ask this exact question.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I found this quote hilarious.  I don't believe she was ever pregnant, but apparently she wanted to have a home birth
> 
> "It was not just Harry that was obsessed with keeping the details a secret," royal expert Kinsey Schofield exclusively told Fox News Digital. "Meghan thought the entire ordeal was barbaric and did not want to participate. Meghan originally didn't even want to have the baby in a hospital."
> 
> "The Duchess wanted to do *everything in secret at home* but was told there could be too many complications *since it was a geriatric pregnancy*"



Poor thing, supposed to pose for a few pictures on the doorsteps of a hospital instead of at Windsor Castle. Really, really barbaric.

And I truly felt for Kate each time, but I just can't see the stark difference changing up the location. Of course, Kate had to wave to the unwashed masses while Ghoul had her handpicked US media people there.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only two letters and so many possibilities.





Aimee3 said:


> There is also the very risqué version if I may be so bold…the whxre !





Toby93 said:


> I am nastier than all of you, because when I see or type "TW", in my mind, it stands for something much worse



Sometimes my head goes with the following instead of The Witch, and they are awful:

The W3nch
Tw@+

 myself for being impolite


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> I’m flashing back to the stories about the tight ring of security around them at the hospital when Lili was born. Then their Dr. suddenly shuts down her practice with short notice, leaving patients mid pregnancy scrambling to find a new doctor according to articles published at the time. Her reason is “to spend more time with her family.” Not a reason that would seem to need  a sudden departure. Because the Suckesses are involved it seems suspicious.
> 
> Maybe Lili was  a surrogate birth? There is specific legal paperwork in CA covering surrogate births, but maybe the Dr. initially signed off on a Birth Certificate that did not accurately state the conditions of the birth?. Maybe someone on staff with morals and ethics reported it? Maybe Dr. Drake was quietly given the option to resign and close down her practice or face possible prosecution?  Maybe the arguments about Titles will turn out to be a moot point?  Maybe an innocent child will suffer because of her repugnant parents?
> .


Even if they used a surrogate, the doctor is bound by HIPAA, and cannot disclose anything.  Using a surrogate is not illegal in California; in fact, surrogacy laws are much more lenient in CA, which is why people come from all over the world to CA to have babies via surrogacy here, so I don't understand why her Obstetrician would be required to report anything.  The delivering doctor does not have to sign any legal surrogacy paperwork; that's between a surrogate, the potential parents and their lawyers.  The birth certificates are not individually filled out by Obstetricians; that's done by the hospital.  Honestly, I do not see any plausible reason why she'd be resigning because these two did or did not use a surrogate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The nerve and the ego. If it wasn't so disgusting I'd be impressed.
> 
> But also: that stupid cow really, really miscalculated how sheer respect for The Queen served as her security blanket. It seems a lot of people have sat on a lot of dirt for four years, and they might consider cleaning out their basements now.


I like Prince Phillip’s response:

_MM: "Oh, I'm getting in trouble for making this family
look good."
Prince Philip was heard saying:
"This American is worse than the other one"_


Toby93 said:


> Princess Beatrice and Eugenie are both HRH, but rarely have police protection unless they are performing royal duties.  The HRH never guaranteed security, but the TW knew that when she went on Oprah. Were her lies directed at the BRF or designed to get the US audience on her side?


Didn’t Hazz know the rules?  Why doesn’t he set her straight?  [rhetorical question]


----------



## youngster

As was posted earlier today, Queen Margreth of Denmark seems to have done KCIII a big favor. Like KCIII, Queen Margreth has 2 sons: Crown Prince Frederick and Prince Joachim. Today, the Queen stripped the prince and princess titles from all four of Prince Joachim's children.  Two of these children were born with Prince Joachim's first wife, Alexandra, and two with his second wife, Princess Marie.  

Apparently, the prince's first wife, Alexandra, is not at all happy about this.  She said she was shocked, she was not told, says the children feel ostracized from the family, their identify has been taken from them, etc. Alexandra is of mixed Asian-European ancestry (English/Chinese/Indian/Iranian) and was born in Hong Kong. I've always read that she had a good relationship with Queen Margrethe and an amicable divorce from Joachim.  The Danish Royal Palace responded by saying that Joachim has known about this since May and was involved in the process.  He appears to have neglected to tell his first wife.  (No wonder these two got divorced.)  









						Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix's Mom Shocked by Decision to Strip Them of Titles
					

Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, has reacted to Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision to strip four grandchildren of their prince and princess titles




					people.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> As was posted earlier today, Queen Margreth of Denmark seems to have done KCIII a big favor. Like KCIII, Queen Margreth has 2 sons: Crown Prince Frederick and Prince Joachim. Today, the Queen stripped the prince and princess titles from all four of Prince Joachim's children.  Two of these children were born with Prince Joachim's first wife, Alexandra, and two with his second wife, Princess Marie.
> 
> Apparently, the prince's first wife, Alexandra, is not at all happy about this.  She said she was shocked, she was not told, says the children feel ostracized from the family, their identify has been taken from them, etc. Alexandra is of mixed Asian-European ancestry (English/Chinese/Indian/Iranian) and was born in Hong Kong. I've always read that she had a good relationship with Queen Margrethe and an amicable divorce from Joachim.  The Danish Royal Palace responded by saying that Joachim has known about this since May and was involved in the process.  He appears to have neglected to tell his first wife.  (No wonder these two got divorced.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix's Mom Shocked by Decision to Strip Them of Titles
> 
> 
> Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, has reacted to Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision to strip four grandchildren of their prince and princess titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Yes, Queen Margreth was questioned about it as she was walking into her jubilee event tonight.  She handled it like a Queen - _It was done to help the grandkids. _ Just the idea that wife #1 expresses her disapproval publicly should tell us why it needs to be done. Taxpayers will not support these royals who are not direct heirs.  These non-working royal kids/teens need to be told to move along.  Bea and Eug look really silly by keeping theirs.  Sarah is even sillier to continue using hers.  Titles are last century.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I found this quote hilarious.  I don't believe she was ever pregnant, but apparently she wanted to have a home birth
> 
> "It was not just Harry that was obsessed with keeping the details a secret," royal expert Kinsey Schofield exclusively told Fox News Digital. "Meghan thought the entire ordeal was barbaric and did not want to participate. Meghan originally didn't even want to have the baby in a hospital."
> 
> "The Duchess wanted to do *everything in secret at home* but was told there could be too many complications *since it was a geriatric pregnancy*"


Gosh, why is it that no one understands that Meg was not only going to have a virgin birth, this was another baby Jesus.  SMH.......

Actually, the really true thing that Schofield said was that "Meghan did not want to participate."  Not participating can also mean not really wanting to have  a baby.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> As was posted earlier today, Queen Margreth of Denmark seems to have done KCIII a big favor. Like KCIII, Queen Margreth has 2 sons: Crown Prince Frederick and Prince Joachim. Today, the Queen stripped the prince and princess titles from all four of Prince Joachim's children.  Two of these children were born with Prince Joachim's first wife, Alexandra, and two with his second wife, Princess Marie.
> 
> Apparently, the prince's first wife, Alexandra, is not at all happy about this.  She said she was shocked, she was not told, says the children feel ostracized from the family, their identify has been taken from them, etc. Alexandra is of mixed Asian-European ancestry (English/Chinese/Indian/Iranian) and was born in Hong Kong. I've always read that she had a good relationship with Queen Margrethe and an amicable divorce from Joachim.  The Danish Royal Palace responded by saying that Joachim has known about this since May and was involved in the process.  He appears to have neglected to tell his first wife.  (No wonder these two got divorced.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix's Mom Shocked by Decision to Strip Them of Titles
> 
> 
> Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, has reacted to Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision to strip four grandchildren of their prince and princess titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


I understand what  the Queen is doing, but to "strip' them of titles they have had since birth is rather harsh.  I don't think it is a good look.  It would have been better just to say going forward, no more Prince/Princess except for direct heirs.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor thing, supposed to pose for a few pictures on the doorsteps of a hospital instead of at Windsor Castle. Really, really barbaric.
> 
> And I truly felt for Kate each time, but I just can't see the stark difference changing up the location. Of course, Kate had to wave to the unwashed masses while Ghoul had her handpicked US media people there.


Here are the Wales with Prince George.  How difficult was it to brush you hair and put on a little makeup?  When you know that you are going to do this, you have your team get you ready at the hospital.  The Duchess stated at the time that she felt that this was the right thing to do since people had been so supportive and excited.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I understand what  the Queen is doing, but to "strip' them of titles they have had since birth is rather harsh.  I don't think it is a good look.  It would have been better just to say going forward, no more Prince/Princess except for direct heirs.


The King of Sweden changed the succession rules when he made his adjustments. His son _who thought he would be king_ was indeed shocked.  Imo it is a powerful statement from the monarchs. They are saying “the money is running out and the taxpayers won’t support us, especially when they know we have oh-so much money, land, palaces, jewels, cars, etc.”   It does make sense to limit the support to the direct, working heirs.


----------



## pukasonqo

sdkitty said:


> I don't think that many Americans care about them one way or the other.  She has her core base of stans who got so excited about an American WOC marrying a prince.  And there are a few like us here who don't like them.  But I think most don't care.  My DH thinks they're like the Kardashians (or want to be).  I think he's probably an example of an average American on this subject.
> We'll see how long the media believes they're worth talking about.
> Their "life of service" is nothing so far......pure BS



Well…they didn’t specify service to whom and so far they seem very active in self service and promotion 
No other WOC has experienced racism as bad as  MM, no other orphan has had the awful experience that Hazza had…etc, etc


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The King of Sweden changed the succession rules when he made his adjustments. His son _who thought he would be king_ was indeed shocked.  Imo it is a powerful statement from the monarchs. They are saying “the money is running out and the taxpayers won’t support us, especially when they know we have oh-so much money, land, palaces, jewels, cars, etc.”   It does make sense to limit the support to the direct, working heirs.


Of course it is understood that the modern monarchy has to change and not everyone can be supported by the taxpayers.  No argument with that. The Wales fully expect Charlotte and Louis to have careers, whether it is with the family business or not.  I was just thinking that it is a harsh thing to do to these young men, who already understood that they needed to work.  Prince Nickolai already has a modeling career in addition to going to university.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Of course it is understood that the modern monarchy has to change and not everyone can be supported by the taxpayers.  No argument with that. The Wales fully expect Charlotte and Louis to have careers, whether it is with the family business or not.  I was just thinking that it is a harsh thing to do to these young men, who already understood that they needed to work.  Prince Nickolai already has a modeling career in addition to going to university.


Agree, it does seem QueenM was a bit clumsy in handling this matter.  Perhaps since her son, Fred, the heir, is kinda flakey, this was a major factor in  announcing now.  Doubt he would change when he becomes king. Also, I’m guessing she and QE had several conversations about this.

The worst though, imo, is Sweden.  They backdated the rules so Victoria could be queen. Sheesh.

_In 1979, the __Riksdag__ introduced absolute primogeniture, meaning that the eldest child of the monarch, regardless of gender, is first in the line of succession. The change entered into force on 1 January 1980, making Sweden the first country to adopt _*absolute primogenitur*_. The Swedish crown had previously (since 1810) descended according to agnatic primogeniture, meaning that only males could inherit it._ *Though the change took effect in 1980, its application was backdated *_so that Crown Princess Victoria, who was born in 1977, became the first in line of succession, replacing her brother, Prince Carl Philip, who was born in 1979.








						Succession to the Swedish throne - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Princess Beatrice and Eugenie are both HRH, but rarely have police protection unless they are performing royal duties.  The HRH never guaranteed security, but the TW knew that when she went on Oprah. Were her lies directed at the BRF or designed to get the US audience on her side?


The average American  is clueless about royalty, nobility, titles, the whole nine yards except for Disney Princesses 
For ex, I am geeky enough to know there is a difference between being an average Prince eg Andrew and Edward and being a Prince of Wales. It is a subject not discussed in polite US conversation no matter how many times you try to correct people by opening Wikipedia when everyone else is on the Disney site


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, it does seem QueenM was a bit clumsy in handling this matter.  Perhaps since her son, Fred, the heir, is kinda flakey, this was a major factor in  announcing now.  Doubt he would change when he becomes king. Also, I’m guessing she and QE had several conversations about this.
> 
> The worst though, imo, is Sweden.  They backdated the rules so Victoria could be queen. Sheesh.
> 
> _In 1979, the __Riksdag__ introduced absolute primogeniture, meaning that the eldest child of the monarch, regardless of gender, is first in the line of succession. The change entered into force on 1 January 1980, making Sweden the first country to adopt _*absolute primogenitur*_. The Swedish crown had previously (since 1810) descended according to agnatic primogeniture, meaning that only males could inherit it._ *Though the change took effect in 1980, its application was backdated *_so that Crown Princess Victoria, who was born in 1977, became the first in line of succession, replacing her brother, Prince Carl Philip, who was born in 1979.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Succession to the Swedish throne - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I'm happy that Victoria is the future queen. Men and women should have the same rights for royal titles imo. All 3 Carl Gustaf's kids seem fine. No Harrys in Sweden.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Of course it is understood that the modern monarchy has to change and not everyone can be supported by the taxpayers.  No argument with that. The Wales fully expect Charlotte and Louis to have careers, whether it is with the family business or not.  I was just thinking that it is a harsh thing to do to these young men, who already understood that they needed to work.  Prince Nickolai already has a modeling career in addition to going to university.


Was thinking George V and QEII handed out buckets of duchies to their children, there are none of the good ones left anymore, supply does meet the demand in the UK 
Interestingly, in Sweden, the grandkids of the current monarchs are all Duke or duchess of this that or the other, none of the ducal titles are inheritable, so supply will not get exhausted in the long run


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth… I believe most of it has been previously posted here. I moved the info to Spoiler because I don't think is has been confirmed yet. Let's see if it will appear on Valentine Low's book. It's all allegedly at this point.   



Spoiler: Oz Tour


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> As was posted earlier today, Queen Margreth of Denmark seems to have done KCIII a big favor. Like KCIII, Queen Margreth has 2 sons: Crown Prince Frederick and Prince Joachim. Today, the Queen stripped the prince and princess titles from all four of Prince Joachim's children.  Two of these children were born with Prince Joachim's first wife, Alexandra, and two with his second wife, Princess Marie.
> 
> Apparently, the prince's first wife, Alexandra, is not at all happy about this.  She said she was shocked, she was not told, says the children feel ostracized from the family, their identify has been taken from them, etc. Alexandra is of mixed Asian-European ancestry (English/Chinese/Indian/Iranian) and was born in Hong Kong. I've always read that she had a good relationship with Queen Margrethe and an amicable divorce from Joachim.  The Danish Royal Palace responded by saying that Joachim has known about this since May and was involved in the process.  He appears to have neglected to tell his first wife.  (No wonder these two got divorced.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix's Mom Shocked by Decision to Strip Them of Titles
> 
> 
> Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, has reacted to Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision to strip four grandchildren of their prince and princess titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I'm not fond of stripping existing people of anything (like, why don't you think about stuff as soon as you have children, or as soon as they get married?), but I still find it funny how it's the non-blood royals who are miffed while everone else seems to be either completely fine or at least pretend publicly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Here are the Wales with Prince George.  How difficult was it to brush you hair and put on a little makeup?  When you know that you are going to do this, you have your team get you ready at the hospital.  The Duchess stated at the time that she felt that this was the right thing to do since people had been so supportive and excited.
> 
> View attachment 5619716



I don't know, but I am pretty sure I'd find anything but crashing into bed in my pyjamas after 12 hours of excruciating pain and physical strain difficult. Which is why I was very sympathetic to Kate. I'd be sympathetic to Ghoul as well but as usual, she wasn't bringing on real change (e.g. "I'm not getting up for a week after giving birth") but was just being difficult and defiant because.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Of course it is understood that the modern monarchy has to change and not everyone can be supported by the taxpayers.  No argument with that. The Wales fully expect Charlotte and Louis to have careers, whether it is with the family business or not.  I was just thinking that it is a harsh thing to do to these young men, who already understood that they needed to work.  Prince Nickolai already has a modeling career in addition to going to university.


I don't think any of them are in any danger of starvation or homelessness.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The King of Sweden changed the succession rules when he made his adjustments. His son _who thought he would be king_ was indeed shocked.  Imo it is a powerful statement from the monarchs. They are saying “the money is running out and the taxpayers won’t support us, especially when they know we have oh-so much money, land, palaces, jewels, cars, etc.”   It does make sense to limit the support to the direct, working heirs.



Oh, it wasn't Carl Gustav. It was parliament and he wouldn't shut up for years how he'd have preferred Carl Philip over Victoria.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, but I am pretty sure I'd find anything but crashing into bed in my pyjamas after 12 hours of excruciating pain and physical strain difficult. Which is why I was very sympathetic to Kate. I'd be sympathetic to Ghoul as well but as usual, she wasn't bringing on real change (e.g. "I'm not getting up for a week after giving birth") but was just being difficult and defiant.


Speaking only for myself, even after a long labor and delivery you're on an endorphin high for the first few days. The crash comes a week or so later when you're up during the night every two hours with a newborn. However, I would not expect Kate or anyone else to do the presentation of the newborn shortly after a C section. That's a different story, although my daughter did say they wanted her up and walking ASAP to lower the risk of a blood clot. MM, no surprise, was being a bit dramatic when she called it barbaric.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, it wasn't Carl Gustav. It was parliament and he wouldn't shut up for years how he'd have preferred Carl Philip over Victoria.


Oh, I thought the King did it, thank you for letting me know.  So, Parliament can make the change without the King’s approval?  Wow.  
Absolutely, women should rule. The backdating was a surprise to me - in 2022 eyes, it seems wrong.  QE, though, was signaling H&M and everyone when she called them _non-working royals_. She did not state precisely what that meant but I understand now.  Really quite an elegant solution.  Does King Charles really need to issue a statement?


----------



## Chanbal

JEM's response is interesting…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> Speaking only for myself, even after a long labor and delivery you're on an endorphin high for the first few days. The crash comes a week or so later when you're up during the night every two hours with a newborn. However, I would not expect Kate or anyone else to do the presentation of the newborn shortly after a C section. That's a different story, although my daughter did say they wanted her up and walking ASAP to lower the risk of a blood clot. MM, no surprise, was being a bit dramatic when she called it barbaric.



For some reason I am reminded of a stupid comment made by Elle McPherson about wanting to labour like a Peruvian woman who gives birth, straps the baby to her back and continues working…I think she was referring to Inca women but unfortunately there is no proof that was the case
My experience has been that unless there are serious concerns the policy is to have you walking and moving around ASAP
My SIL just had a little girl back home (Peru) and was discharged within 3 days


----------



## jennlt

She's still angling for that meeting with KCIII


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Those poor kids don't have a chance.  Imagine being given a beloved _private_ nickname of your great grandmother for spite.  There is no other reason they did this.


I hope it isn't true that the one and only time she allegedly met the Queen, her parents planned it to attempt to get the money shot.


----------



## Chanbal

_Better Up - a mental fitness start-up, presided over by  Prince Harry, has been dubbed ‘*Toxic Boys Club*’ by the ex-employees_.









						Prince Harry’s Better Up dubbed ‘Toxic Boys Club’ by ex-employee
					

Better Up - a mental fitness start-up, presided over by  Prince Harry, has been dubbed ‘Toxic Boys Club’ by the ex-employees.The Duke of Sussex joined the company as a Chief Impact...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## xincinsin

Kevinaxx said:


> For all their wants/desire to have titles for their kids (and possibly for themselves)…
> 
> Do they not realize the actual work behind said titles? They got all the $$ thanks to Charles (because M has to be dressed with millions nevermind she doesn’t look like a million bucks)
> 
> But *they scuffed at the work, turned their backs and decided to go the Hollywood route* (how’s that working for them?).
> 
> They’re fighting really hard for something I don’t think they even have the ability to comprehend it’s not all rainbows and sunshine just because you have a staff to help (help, not terrorize into doing everything the way you want it without you lifting a pinky or burning a brain cell).


Do you get the feeling that when Zedzee sold her Hollywood snake oil, she gave Handbag the impression that it was easy peasey money, no work required? Heck, for all we know, she may have assumed her royal title would help her avoid the actual work and talent required.


papertiger said:


> To one side, downstairs and *behind the door* - OUTside


That would be the backdoor, or the outhouse door...


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> _Better Up - a mental fitness start-up, presided over by  Prince Harry, has been dubbed ‘*Toxic Boys Club*’ by the ex-employees_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s Better Up dubbed ‘Toxic Boys Club’ by ex-employee
> 
> 
> Better Up - a mental fitness start-up, presided over by  Prince Harry, has been dubbed ‘Toxic Boys Club’ by the ex-employees.The Duke of Sussex joined the company as a Chief Impact...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk


I think "presided over" is a bit of a stretch. He gets a check in exchange for them using his name to attract more unsuspecting people seeking what they believe is easy access to affordable mental health care and those looking to make easy money providing it. I do believe it is a house of cards that will collapse.


----------



## melissatrv

Queen of Denmark strips family members of "prince" and "Princess" titles.  Swedish family did the the same not so long ago.  The Queen should have followed suit at the time and it would be less controversial (I think, who knows).  Anyway, I think Charles needs to take a page out of this book:

https://www.hola.com/us/royals/20220928337509/queen-margrethe-prince-joachim-children-prince-princess-titles-discontinued/

The Danish Royal House has announced changes in titles for the children of Queen Margrethe II’s youngest son Prince Joachim. The monarch’s grandchildren Prince Nikolai, 23, Prince Felix, 20, Prince Henrik, 13, and ten-year-old Princess Athena’s titles of Prince and Princess will be “discontinued” starting next year.

“In April 2008, Her Majesty The Queen bestowed upon her sons, their spouses and their descendants the titles of count and countess of Monpezat. In May 2016, it was also announced that His Royal Highness Prince Christian, as the only one of The Queen’s grandchildren, is expected to receive an annuity from the state as an adult,” the Royal House said in a statement on Sept. 28.

“As a natural extension of this, Her Majesty has decided that, as of 1 January 2023, His Royal Highness Prince Joachim’s descendants can only use their titles as counts and countess of Monpezat, as the titles of prince and princess that they have held up until now will be discontinued. Prince Joachim’s descendants will thus have to be addressed as excellencies in the future. The Queen’s decision is in line with similar adjustments that other royal houses have made in various ways in recent years,” the statement continued.

The Royal House noted that with the decision, the Danish Queen “wishes to create the framework for the four grandchildren to be able to shape their own lives to a much greater extent without being limited by the special considerations and duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves.” Although Nikolai, Felix, Henrik, and Athena’s titles of Prince and Princess are being removed, they will maintain their places in the order of succession.

Prince Joachim shares his eldest sons Nikolai and Felix with his first wife, Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, and Henrik and Athena with Princess Marie, whom he married in 2008.

As the Danish Royal House pointed out, other royal houses have made “similar adjustments” in recent years. Back in 2019, King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden removed his son Prince Carl Philip and daughter Princess Madeleine’s respective children from the Royal House. It was also announced at the time that Prince Carl Philip and Princess Madeleine’s kids would “no longer enjoy the style of Royal Highness.”


----------



## melissatrv

Chanbal said:


> JEM's response is interesting…



To be fair, MM though the HR dept at Buckingham Palace would help her so why ask her doctor?


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> I hope it isn't true that the one and only time she allegedly met the Queen, her parents planned it to attempt to get the money shot.


Well the Queen told that they couldn't bring their photographer with them, so I have no doubt this is exactly what their plan was.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Even if they used a surrogate, the doctor is bound by HIPAA, and cannot disclose anything.  Using a surrogate is not illegal in California; in fact, surrogacy laws are much more lenient in CA, which is why people come from all over the world to CA to have babies via surrogacy here, so I don't understand why her Obstetrician would be required to report anything.  The delivering doctor does not have to sign any legal surrogacy paperwork; that's between a surrogate, the potential parents and their lawyers.  The birth certificates are not individually filled out by Obstetricians; that's done by the hospital.  Honestly, I do not see any plausible reason why she'd be resigning because these two did or did not use a surrogate.


Maybe I’m confused, wouldn’t be the first time at my age.  The issue for succession, I thought, is the child being born of the Mother’s body (Raptor). If they used a surrogate, but a Birth Certificate was presented as if Raptor had been the one giving birth, it would be fraudulent. They are so unscrupulous, even the most ordinary situations are clouded because of the secrecy and games they play.

The hospital has a solid reputation for quality of care and is noted for their willingness to work with surrogate births, there’s an advocacy organization (can’t remember the name) that  helps potential parents identify hospitals that are supporters of surrogacy.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I think "presided over" is a bit of a stretch. He gets a check in exchange for them using his name to attract more unsuspecting people seeking what they believe is easy access to affordable mental health care and those looking to make easy money providing it. I do believe it is a house of cards that will collapse.


From the Theranos comparison to the employees being afraid… It's disturbing.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> TW is a powerful acronym - covers a lot of territory


In my mind, H and M are becoming The Wimp and The Wench. They are also merging into The Whiners.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I don't think any of them are in any danger of starvation or homelessness.


I told them to go to your house and you would give them a hot meal and put them up


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

To TPF members of this thread in Florida, we are rooting for you!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Well they were told that they couldn't bring their photographer with them, so I have no doubt this is exactly what their plan was.


Someday MM will fuel the Invisikids' hatred of the RF by saying the Queen wouldn't allow a photo because she thought they weren't equal to their cousins, never mind that it's not the truth. Always and forever the victim.


----------



## LittleStar88

melissatrv said:


> To be fair, MM though the HR dept at Buckingham Palace would help her so why ask her doctor?



This whole story makes her look like a complete moron. Every time I see it mentioned, my eyes roll so far into the back of my head…  By your late 30’s nowadays, unless you’ve been locked in a basement your whole life you know who to ask for help.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, it wasn't Carl Gustav. It was parliament and he wouldn't shut up for years how he'd have preferred Carl Philip over Victoria.


Thanks!  I learn something new everyday on tPF!  I had no idea that it wasn't his idea and at the same time I was puzzled because I knew that he wanted his son to be King over CP Victoria.  He did seem rather nasty about it.


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> LOL! This makes me think of my doctor who delivered my 4 kids: he said that women have a very bad memory that's why most of them have more than one child. The other thing he said , which is pretty obvious IMO, was that if men were to give birth the human race would have become extinct ages ago.


When I gave birth, it was starting to get trendy where I am for the hubbies  to request to be present for the birth. The first time my gynae agreed, the guy fainted. After that, she said No. If the couple insisted, they were made to understand that if the guy faints/pukes/whatever, no one was going to have time to assist him.


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> I think "presided over" is a bit of a stretch. He gets a check in exchange for them using his name to attract more unsuspecting people seeking what they believe is easy access to affordable mental health care and those looking to make easy money providing it. I do believe it is a house of cards that will collapse.



Reminds me of Pierre Cardin and Paco Rabanne whose signature was on everything with NIL regard to quality, etc
I remember umbrellas, tees and even cigarrettes!


----------



## Katel

Sophisticatted said:


> Trouble with the Brooksbank:  (my TOTAL speculation).  They were caught being untrustworthy in some way (ex. Leaking info) and William said he wouldn’t want to live near (on the same estate) untrustworthy people and then somehow they were sent to live in Portugal for Jack’s job (which is with the same people but is actually a very different job than the one he was originally doing).  I think Euge is on thin ice with William.  The BLG could probably analyze.  So now she is markleing the Harkles as a form of self-preservation.  Again, TOTAL speculation.



Agree completely, I think this is the scenario (also totally imo).



xincinsin said:


> Notice that Handbag is committing social suicide on his own. Zedzee is letting him do it and announcing it via her mouthpiece. Plausible deniability?



Haven’t we noticed MeePeeZee doing this earlier? Almost as if she’s cutting Hazbeen loose and hanging him out to dry?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut ooooh - beware Hazz. It is happening.
> 
> _European Queen strips second son's title of prince in ruthless cull to streamline monarchy_​_A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves"._​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> European Queen strips second grandson title of prince in ruthless cull
> 
> 
> A statement said Her Majesty the Queen of Denmark wants her four grandchildren "to be able to shape their own lives" without being restricted by "duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Maybe she's trying to set an example for Charles.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Gosh, why is it that no one understands that *Meg was not only going to have a virgin birth, this was another baby Jesus.  *SMH.......
> 
> Actually, the really true thing that Schofield said was that "Meghan did not want to participate."  Not participating can also mean not really wanting to have  a baby.


Don’t give her any ideas. Before we know it we could have a web site for the Church of Archewell, donations graciously accepted!  

Although I’d like to see Harry and Meghan as a modern day Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Perfect timing! I wonder if the other Royal Houses are trying to help a fellow King at his new job…


They are all family, after all!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's trying to set an example for Charles.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> I always read TW as _That Woman(!)  _


I gravitate towards "That Wench" or when I'm really annoyed, the other bad W word that we were previously scolded for using.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> My doctor had 2 great lines, one per child:
> 
> ”There’s a reason it’s called Labor.” Worth it but our son took a long time making his debut.
> 
> Hoping for a sister for him, when the doctor announced the head was coming and I excitedly asked ”is it a girl or a boy?” Without missing a beat he replied, “We haven’t gotten to the parts that answer your question yet.”


It should be called "Hard Labor and Delivery" TBH!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> no fertility drugs?
> *anything is possible but if a woman is near 40 and has been on the pill for years*, I think it's generally harder to get pregnant fast


Pills don't affect fertility.  That's why they have to be taken every day.  Every one you miss...oopsie daisy!


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I don't doubt this at all. He had a reputation for putting his royal foot in his mouth, but Prince Philip was often right on target:



This is the event where she came stumbling out of the darkness like some disoriented gameshow victim, hair in disarray, and almost banged noses with somebody who was trying to curtsey to her? Impressive


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Then, is the story from a few years ago about women going to Japan to have their hymen surgically replaced really true?  Oh my virgin ears and eyes!


Oh, I heard that too - reported as straight news, but I think it was Korea and Thailand too. This was because in some Asian cultures, it was traditional for families to check the sheets of the marital bed after the first night, to look for bloodstains which supposedly indicate the bride was a virgin and that was the first time she had sex and tore her hymen. The local newspaper report pointed out that with sports being heavily advocated for teenage girls, it was likely that their hymen was already torn. The image of young girls running the track during a hurdles race immediately came to mind then. (Some images just remain forever...) 


CarryOn2020 said:


> I like Prince Phillip’s response:
> 
> _MM: "Oh, I'm getting in trouble for making this family
> look good."
> Prince Philip was heard saying:
> "This American is worse than the other one"_
> 
> *Didn’t Hazz know the rules?  Why doesn’t he set her straight?*  [rhetorical question]


Rhetorically answering: narcs would never listen. 


gracekelly said:


> Here are the Wales with Prince George.  *How difficult was it to brush you hair and put on a little makeup?*  When you know that you are going to do this, you have your team get you ready at the hospital.  The Duchess stated at the time that she felt that this was the right thing to do since people had been so supportive and excited.
> 
> View attachment 5619716


If she didn't brush her hair for royal events, she certainly wasn't going to do it after (supposedly) giving birth.





charlottawill said:


> Speaking only for myself, even after a long labor and delivery you're on an endorphin high for the first few days. The crash comes a week or so later when you're up during the night every two hours with a newborn. However, I would not expect Kate or anyone else to do the presentation of the newborn shortly after a C section. That's a different story, although my daughter did say they wanted her up and walking ASAP to lower the risk of a blood clot. *MM, no surprise, was being a bit dramatic when she called it barbaric*.


So ironic when she shows a lack of civilized behaviour.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> As was posted earlier today, Queen Margreth of Denmark seems to have done KCIII a big favor. Like KCIII, Queen Margreth has 2 sons: Crown Prince Frederick and Prince Joachim. Today, the Queen stripped the prince and princess titles from all four of Prince Joachim's children.  Two of these children were born with Prince Joachim's first wife, Alexandra, and two with his second wife, Princess Marie.
> 
> Apparently, the prince's first wife, Alexandra, is not at all happy about this.  She said she was shocked, she was not told, says the children feel ostracized from the family, their identify has been taken from them, etc. Alexandra is of mixed Asian-European ancestry (English/Chinese/Indian/Iranian) and was born in Hong Kong. I've always read that she had a good relationship with Queen Margrethe and an amicable divorce from Joachim.  The Danish Royal Palace responded by saying that Joachim has known about this since May and was involved in the process.  He appears to have neglected to tell his first wife.  (No wonder these two got divorced.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Nikolai and Prince Felix's Mom Shocked by Decision to Strip Them of Titles
> 
> 
> Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, has reacted to Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision to strip four grandchildren of their prince and princess titles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


OT The first time I heard of Alexandra was in an article about a tiara that she kept after her divorce. Really nice tiara.








						Queen Alexandrine's Incredible Diamond Drop Tiara
					

April's birthstone is the glittering diamond, and where I live, it's also the month for spring rainstorms. What better way to combine the two than a shower of diamond drops? The royal tiara that exemplifies




					www.thecourtjeweller.com


----------



## Chanbal

Charles is still working on the titles… This potential choice makes sense to me.









						EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Will Princess Anne become Duchess of Edinburgh?
					

EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: A source whispers that Charles may be considering making Princess Anne Duchess of Edinburgh, a title last held by her mother.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Maybe I’m confused, wouldn’t be the first time at my age.  The issue for succession, I thought, is the child being born of the Mother’s body (Raptor). If they used a surrogate, but a Birth Certificate was presented as if Raptor had been the one giving birth, it would be fraudulent. They are so unscrupulous, even the most ordinary situations are clouded because of the secrecy and games they play.
> 
> The hospital has a solid reputation for quality of care and is noted for their willingness to work with surrogate births, there’s an advocacy organization (can’t remember the name) that  helps potential parents identify hospitals that are supporters of surrogacy.



and in the UK paid surrogacy is illegal, so if they used one for A they'd also be breaking the law.


----------



## RAINDANCE

Chanbal said:


> Charles is still working on the titles… This potential choice makes sense to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Will Princess Anne become Duchess of Edinburgh?
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: A source whispers that Charles may be considering making Princess Anne Duchess of Edinburgh, a title last held by her mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That makes no sense, she's Princess Royal which I reckon would outrank Edinburgh. Need to fact check that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> When I gave birth, it was starting to get trendy where I am for the hubbies  to request to be present for the birth. The first time my gynae agreed, the guy fainted. After that, she said No. If the couple insisted, they were made to understand that if the guy faints/pukes/whatever, no one was going to have time to assist him.



My grandfather went to the first or the first two births, can't remember (that was in the late 50s, early 60s). After that, it got forbidden because a Turkish father assaulted the doctor after the birth of a girl   

But he wasn't squeamish anyway, when my grandmother got mastitis from blocked milk ducts (or blocked milk ducts from mastitis?) the baby was too weak to clear he took a hearty sip to help her out


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> This is the event where she came stumbling out of the darkness like some disoriented gameshow victim, hair in disarray, and almost banged noses with somebody who was trying to curtsey to her? Impressive



No, that was the one where she cradled her bump like it was about to fall off. Hair was slicked back into a tight bun. Black one-shoulder dress. Objectively she looked good, if it weren't for the inner ugly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Charles is still working on the titles… This potential choice makes sense to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Will Princess Anne become Duchess of Edinburgh?
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: A source whispers that Charles may be considering making Princess Anne Duchess of Edinburgh, a title last held by her mother.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Her mother held the title only because she was married to the Duke of Edinburgh. He cannot make her Duchess of Edinburgh in her own right, that's not how this particular title is set up. There are peerages than can be inherited by daughters in their own right if there is no son  (though for all of them, if there's two or more daughters, it goes in abeyance instead of going to the eldest because they are still not equal), this is not one of them.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My grandfather went to the first or the first two births, can't remember (that was in the late 50s, early 60s). After that, it got forbidden because a Turkish father assaulted the doctor after the birth of a girl
> 
> But he wasn't squeamish anyway, when my grandmother got mastitis from blocked milk ducts (or blocked milk ducts from mastitis?) the baby was too weak to clear he took a hearty sip to help her out


My dearly departed MIL refused to breastfeed for fear that it would ruin her figure. I find it hard to believe Zedzee would breastfeed for the same reason. Didn't she attend some polo gathering with Archie and people commented that even though she was there a long time, the baby didn't need feeding or diaper changing?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> and in the UK paid surrogacy is illegal, so if they used one for A they'd also be breaking the law.



Would they? The Marchioness of Bath had her 2nd child via surrogacy in the US. Maybe there's a loophole? E.g. it's illegal in Germany as well, but not unheard of people rent e.g. an Ukrainian womb and that's not prosecuted.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

RAINDANCE said:


> That makes no sense, she's Princess Royal which I reckon would outrank Edinburgh. Need to fact check that.



I don't think so. The royal dukedoms outrank the princely titles the children and grandchildren of the monarch were born with. Princess Royal is not even a real title, more like a sign of appreciation.


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> It's not that women have a very bad memory, and leave it to a male doctor to say that. Humans are designed to remember that something was painful, but not the actual feeling of the pain itself. I remember saying to my doctor the day after my first child was born that I could not go through it again. She just smiled knowingly.
> 
> And I will put my memory up against my husband's any day of the week


He was joking of course!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Would they? The Marchioness of Bath had her 2nd child via surrogacy in the US. Maybe there's a loophole? E.g. it's illegal in Germany as well, but not unheard of people rent e.g. an Ukrainian womb and that's not prosecuted.



For sure, they could have used services abroad where its legal, but not in the UK (this only applies to professional arrangements). With NDAs I'm sure they will have paid and not used real names. All speculation of course


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think so. The royal dukedoms outrank the princely titles the children and grandchildren of the monarch were born with. Princess Royal is not even a real title, more like a sign of appreciation.


Although one could say all bestowed titles are signs of appreciation, especially these days.


----------



## BlueCherry

I’ve never given birth and I’m genuinely amazed at how much more there is to child birth than I imagined. I decided to ask my Mum who’s done it 11 times. From 1955 to 1970. She says she gave birth quietly, no screaming, no men in the room, went back to work within a day or two but she had no complications. Apparently that’s mostly how it happened back then but said she does find the TV depictions a bit OTT. When I asked about pushing the belly she looked at me like I was mad and said she can’t remember . The more I read here the more questions I ask her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

charlottawill said:


>




Absolutely love this!   

It does make you wonder if the announcement was timed to assist Charles, I really hope it was because it’s nice to actually see he has support in this situation.


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> The King of Sweden changed the succession rules when he made his adjustments. His son _who thought he would be king_ was indeed shocked.  Imo it is a powerful statement from the monarchs. They are saying “the money is running out and the taxpayers won’t support us, especially when they know we have oh-so much money, land, palaces, jewels, cars, etc.”   It does make sense to limit the support to the direct, working heirs.



The king did not change the succession rules, the government at the time did. It was widely known that he was actually very upset at the change and made it publicly known.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my, maybe it's not just Marie and Alexandra, but also Joachim. Apparently the first thing he did was give an interview complaining how his children were punished and that he only learned about it five days ago, not several months as the palace had said. What do they think will come out of publicly complaining?

The Danish Harkles!


----------



## Chloe302225

melissatrv said:


> Queen of Denmark strips family members of "prince" and "Princess" titles.  Swedish family did the the same not so long ago.  The Queen should have followed suit at the time and it would be less controversial (I think, who knows).  Anyway, I think Charles needs to take a page out of this book:
> 
> https://www.hola.com/us/royals/20220928337509/queen-margrethe-prince-joachim-children-prince-princess-titles-discontinued/
> 
> The Danish Royal House has announced changes in titles for the children of Queen Margrethe II’s youngest son Prince Joachim. The monarch’s grandchildren Prince Nikolai, 23, Prince Felix, 20, Prince Henrik, 13, and ten-year-old Princess Athena’s titles of Prince and Princess will be “discontinued” starting next year.
> 
> “In April 2008, Her Majesty The Queen bestowed upon her sons, their spouses and their descendants the titles of count and countess of Monpezat. In May 2016, it was also announced that His Royal Highness Prince Christian, as the only one of The Queen’s grandchildren, is expected to receive an annuity from the state as an adult,” the Royal House said in a statement on Sept. 28.
> 
> “As a natural extension of this, Her Majesty has decided that, as of 1 January 2023, His Royal Highness Prince Joachim’s descendants can only use their titles as counts and countess of Monpezat, as the titles of prince and princess that they have held up until now will be discontinued. Prince Joachim’s descendants will thus have to be addressed as excellencies in the future. The Queen’s decision is in line with similar adjustments that other royal houses have made in various ways in recent years,” the statement continued.
> 
> The Royal House noted that with the decision, the Danish Queen “wishes to create the framework for the four grandchildren to be able to shape their own lives to a much greater extent without being limited by the special considerations and duties that a formal affiliation with the Royal House of Denmark as an institution involves.” Although Nikolai, Felix, Henrik, and Athena’s titles of Prince and Princess are being removed, they will maintain their places in the order of succession.
> 
> Prince Joachim shares his eldest sons Nikolai and Felix with his first wife, Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg, and Henrik and Athena with Princess Marie, whom he married in 2008.
> 
> As the Danish Royal House pointed out, other royal houses have made “similar adjustments” in recent years. Back in 2019, King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden removed his son Prince Carl Philip and daughter Princess Madeleine’s respective children from the Royal House. It was also announced at the time that Prince Carl Philip and Princess Madeleine’s kids would “no longer enjoy the style of Royal Highness.”



The King of Sweden only removed the HRH but the Queen went a step further and also removed their princely titles which some see as a bit harsh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chloe302225 said:


> The King of Sweden only removed the HRH but the Queen went a step further and also removed their princely titles which some see as a bit harsh.


Thank you. @QueenofWrapDress corrected me yesterday, still always helpful to get the right info in as many places as possible. 
My question:  can the British Parliament make these same changes?   Seems like most [if not all] of the European monarchies have or are in the process of _slimming down_.  With economies as they are, it makes sense. Imo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is Joachim’s interview - I can see H&M doing many of these:
BLG has trained us well enough to realize Joachim is hurt and upset.









						Prins Joachim bliver spurgt om forholdet til sin mor. Derpå følger en 7 sekunders pause
					

Prins Joachims fire børn mister deres titler som prinsesse og prinser før tid.




					www.dr.dk
				












						Queen Margrethe of Denmark STRIPS four grandchildren of their titles
					

Prince Joachim has claimed he was only given five days to break the news to his children that they will be stripped of Prince and Princess titles, after Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






There must be a better way of handling these issues:


----------



## Chloe302225

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. @QueenofWrapDress corrected me yesterday, still always helpful to get the right info in as many places as possible.
> My question:  can the British Parliament make these same changes?   Seems like most [if not all] of the European monarchies have or are in the process of _slimming down_.  With economies as they are, it makes sense. Imo



Charles can ask that they not use the HRH and can even go a step further and ask parliament to remove the titles. But he would have to ask them to do it, it is not something they are going to do on their own.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you. @QueenofWrapDress corrected me yesterday, still always helpful to get the right info in as many places as possible.
> My question:  can the British Parliament make these same changes?   Seems like most [if not all] of the European monarchies have or are in the process of _slimming down_.  With economies as they are, it makes sense. Imo



There are 2 different things at play here IMO.

1. The NOT gifting titles to 2 very little children that may find their titles actually hinder their lives and emotional welfare given where they seem to be growing up.

This does not require Parliament's to pass any Act (Bill being processed or any another). 

2. The removal of Duke/Duchess/Prince/Princess titles from those that constantly seek to undermine the same monarchy which those titles represent. Every time the titles are used/uttered and written in reference to the vile hate poured on the Crown and its people (the United Kingdom) is another treasonable act IMO. It may be just about OK at home (UK) to play the petulant, rebel Prince, but on a World stage it's quite another story.

The King does not need Parliament to remove their Duke/Duchess titles
The King would only require Parliament to revise on removal of Royal Princes/Princess titles (bloodline heirs). But, KC could forbid the couple to use the Prince/Princess titles outside the UK or even within. He could also forbid the use of Princess in ref to M - but he won't want to single her out.

We (We and we UK) have no monarchal relationship to the US, not even a British Commonwealth one, MegZ and HaZ-bin should point-blank not be using titles that constantly represent us (even though unofficially) in the US.

My guess is he'll keep them guessing and not just till after H's book is out. Even whiners, moaners and wingers can only whine so long and so many times before people literally get tired of it.


----------



## skyqueen

#MARKLED


----------



## Chanbal

RAINDANCE said:


> That makes no sense, she's Princess Royal which I reckon would outrank Edinburgh. Need to fact check that.


It is my understand that QE was also Duchess of Edinburg.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Her mother held the title only because she was married to the Duke of Edinburgh. He cannot make her Duchess of Edinburgh in her own right, that's not how this particular title is set up. There are peerages than can be inherited by daughters in their own right if there is no son  (though for all of them, if there's two or more daughters, it goes in abeyance instead of going to the eldest because they are still not equal), this is not one of them.


You are probably right. However, it sounds rather unfair to me that daughters can inherit peerages only "if there is no son." I wonder if Charles as the king can update/modernize those laws/rules. My 2 cents, of course!


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's trying to set an example for Charles.


Another article … the 4 Danish kids and dad are bereft … ohhhh dearrrr

1. this has been in the works for a long time 5-10 years bc the Danish governemnt decided they were not going to finance the 8 grandkids of the Queen
2. The Queen’s late husband did a lot of complaining about just being consort not King in his own right , so grousing is a family occupation
3. Denmark does not have all the royal hoopla a la BRF , houses etc
4. The Queen’s two sisters all still on the Danish government payroll, don’t live in Denmark but come for parties, so, I am sure some Danes are not OK with that

PS Prince Joachim and his 4 children and Frenchborn wife live in France now , they inherited Dad’s French title


----------



## marietouchet

On all this title inheritance for boys vs girls hmmm in the light of the difficulty in defining the sexes (trans)
After all, a US Supreme Court justice was unable to define eh term WOMAN at her confirmation hearing …
For ex Lady Colin Campbell’s gendering issues, see Wiki
Subject is now very complicated


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> There are 2 different things at play here IMO.
> 
> 1. The NOT gifting titles to 2 very little children that may find their titles actually hinder their lives and emotional welfare given where they seem to be growing up.
> 
> This does not require Parliament's to pass any Act (Bill being processed or any another).
> 
> 2. The removal of Duke/Duchess/Prince/Princess titles from those that constantly seek to undermine the same monarchy which those titles represent. Every time the titles are used/uttered and written in reference to the vile hate poured on the Crown and its people (the United Kingdom) is another treasonable act IMO. It may be just about OK at home (UK) to play the petulant, rebel Prince, but on a World stage it's quite another story.
> 
> The King does not need Parliament to remove their Duke/Duchess titles
> The King would only require Parliament to revise on removal of Royal Princes/Princess titles (bloodline heirs). But, KC could forbid the couple to use the Prince/Princess titles outside the UK or even within. He could also forbid the use of Princess in ref to M - but he won't want to single her out.
> 
> We (We and we UK) have no monarchal relationship to the US, not even a British Commonwealth one, MegZ and HaZ-bin should point-blank not be using titles that constantly represent us (even though unofficially) in the US.
> 
> My guess is he'll keep them guessing and not just till after H's book is out. Even whiners, moaners and wingers can only whine so long and so many times before people literally get tired of it.


I am a practical person… they live in the US
1. There is no box on US forms for titles …. 
2. No one knows what their last name is … lots of computers hiccup at the use of hyphens 
3. No one would know what to do anyway … do I call him Your Grace or JCMH ? I personally like YOUR ROYALNESS 
A title is just a complication. 

US a people like it simple. I still use my Swiss maiden name , which I happen to like, but DS has his fathers last name, and I used that for simplicity when DS was at school. There was no box on the forms for. a different last name for the mother


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ouch


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Sabotaged by auto-correct 
A thread was discussing how TWx2 should make up with KC because he isn't young anymore. Someone commented: "_Charles is extremely fit. Non drinking smoking etc. *ears organic*_ ."  ...

Then I realized it was supposed to be "eats organic".


----------



## Toby93

This gave me a chuckle this morning


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Another reason why I think Meghan has never given birth, if she had _we would have heard all about it! _
> 
> Narcissists exaggerate and elevate everything they do. If she’d had a baby she would have told the story to the world as if she was the only woman who had ever had a baby. The drama! The pain!


Mariah! We know she actually birthed those kids because she never shut up about how hard it was and what a trooper she was! (Also she looked pregnant.)


----------



## Jayne1

elvisfan4life said:


> And her booze bill


Yeah, the stories about the Queen Mum... everyone loved her because she stayed behind (and very safe) during the Blitz.  That's what she did and that's all it took.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is Joachim’s interview - I can see H&M doing many of these:
> BLG has trained us well enough to realize Joachim is hurt and upset.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prins Joachim bliver spurgt om forholdet til sin mor. Derpå følger en 7 sekunders pause
> 
> 
> Prins Joachims fire børn mister deres titler som prinsesse og prinser før tid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dr.dk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe of Denmark STRIPS four grandchildren of their titles
> 
> 
> Prince Joachim has claimed he was only given five days to break the news to his children that they will be stripped of Prince and Princess titles, after Queen Margrethe of Denmark's decision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There must be a better way of handling these issues:
> View attachment 5619901


This was a rather harsh decision, but I think it will prove to be a good one in the long run. These kids have already access to so much privilege. The older ones are models, one could question wether they would have access to such careers without being a part of the royal family. Good for them, but I don't see a justification for public funds be spent on them (if that's the case). Why are people so attached to HRH designations if they are not full time royals? It's not something they achieved by their own merit or work. As usual, my humble opinion.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> This gave me a chuckle this morning



It might mean that they are sold out.


----------



## Chanbal

Are the Harkles going to take out information to be released post-princely titles? If I were the BRF, I would let them empty their bag of goodies. They already proved that can't be trusted imo. 



_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been working on a docuseries as part of their multimillion-dollar Netflix deal for more than a year. Netflix chiefs — who have not even officially announced the Sussex project yet — had hoped to air the docuseries in December after the fifth season of “The Crown” on Nov. 9. Now we’re told the couple want to make more edits to the hotly anticipated show, which would potentially push back its release until later in 2023.

Harry’s memoir, originally scheduled for release from Penguin Random House in November, has already been pushed back until sometime next year.

Many royal experts have said that Harry’s father, King Charles, will hold off giving the title of prince and princess to the Sussex children, Archie, 3, and Lilibet, 1, until the couple’s various media projects are out.

*While the Sussexes were part of the usual editing process on both the show and the book well before the monarch’s death, sources said the couple is keen to take out or downplay much of what they have said about King Charles, Queen Consort Camilla, Prince William and his wife, Kate, the new Princess of Wales.*

One Hollywood industry source told us: “A lot of conversations are happening. I hear that Harry and Meghan want the series to be held until next year, they want to stall.”

“I wonder if the show could even be dead in the water at this point, do Harry and Meghan just want to shelve this thing?_”


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



I hope no one (or not many) watch


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This was a rather harsh decision, but I think it will prove to be a good one in the long run. These kids have already access to so much privilege. The older ones are models, one could question wether they would have access to such careers without being a part of the royal family. Good for them, but I don't see a justification for public funds be spent on them (if that's the case). Why are people so attached to HRH designations if they are not full time royals? It's not something they achieved by their own merit or work. As usual, my humble opinion.


Harsh or not, the son _going public with his complaints _about his mother and his children’s entitled life seems unroyal, ungrateful and distasteful. Imo the world does not need this kind of behavior.  He has suffered other indignities [supposedly his father cut him out of his will], so he should not be surprised at this stuff. Of course, we have no way of knowing what transpired behind the scenes.  H&M should tread carefully.  Titles are so last century imho.


----------



## Cinderlala

purseinsanity said:


> It should be called "Hard Labor and Delivery" TBH!


TRUTH!  Haha, I might sound like Mariah Carey but it was harrowing for me.

Pregnancy, labor, and giving birth were all just dreadful. I felt I might die after giving birth.  But, much worse than that was that my child was in grave danger during labor/birth so I'm exceptionally grateful he was fine in the end. 

Unbeknownst to me (and apparently the doctor) it was a high-risk birth and should have been an emergency C-section.  The doctor was filling in for my actual ob/gyn and he was annoyed to be called in on his day off.  He did not take anything seriously until the situation was perilous. He sheepishly admitted his error to the NICU doctor who immediately whisked our son away with the dozen other medical professionals who had been summoned to the room.

To sort of get back to the topic, one of the nurses pushed so hard on my abdomen during labor that I would have harmed her if I had not been so distracted by everything else. She was using her full force to push on my abdomen---it was SO painful.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I hope no one (or not many) watch


----------



## papertiger

Cinderlala said:


> TRUTH!  Haha, I might sound like Mariah Carey but it was harrowing for me.
> 
> Pregnancy, labor, and giving birth were all just dreadful. I felt I might die after giving birth.  But, much worse than that was that my child was in grave danger during labor/birth so I'm exceptionally grateful he was fine in the end.
> 
> Unbeknownst to me (and apparently the doctor) it was a high-risk birth and should have been an emergency C-section.  The doctor was filling in for my actual ob/gyn and he was annoyed to be called in on his day off.  He did not take anything seriously until the situation was perilous. He sheepishly admitted his error to the NICU doctor who immediately whisked our son away with the dozen other medical professionals who had been summoned to the room.
> 
> To sort of get back to the topic, one of the nurses pushed so hard on my abdomen during labor that I would have harmed her if I had not been so distracted by everything else. She was using her full force to push on my abdomen---it was SO painful.



I'm so sorry, that makes me squirm and fell terrible for you


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> I hope no one (or not many) watch


I will definitely not watch.  Their deal with Netflix is part of the reason I ended my subscription in the first place.


----------



## papertiger

Just finished work and off for a walk, then I'll watch in full (actually listen whilst topping and tailing beans. I leave you with this. 

Lady C is looking lovely BTW


----------



## Cinderlala

papertiger said:


> I'm so sorry, that makes me squirm and fell terrible for you


 Thank you!  Not many people have asked me if I'm okay.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Mariah! We know she actually birthed those kids because she never shut up about how hard it was and what a trooper she was! (Also she looked pregnant.)


Of course! Meghan would have matched (if not exceeded) her fellow diva in the amazing birth story department if she thought she could get away with it. Even with her proven history of plagiarizing she knew she couldn't pull off a believable, epic delivery tale that she didn't experience.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Cinderlala said:


> Thank you!  *Not many people have asked me if I'm okay. *


So, my question for you is, are you OK?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harsh or not, the son _going public with his complaints _about his mother and his children’s entitled life seems unroyal, ungrateful and distasteful. Imo the world does not need this kind of behavior.  He has suffered other indignities [supposedly his father cut him out of his will], so he should not be surprised at this stuff. Of course, we have no way of knowing what transpired behind the scenes.  H&M should tread carefully.  Titles are so last century imho.


^^^ I couldn't agree more. "_Respect is earned, not given," _the same with titles, awards, etc


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I am a practical person… they live in the US
> 1. There is no box on US forms for titles ….
> 2. No one knows what their last name is … lots of computers hiccup at the use of hyphens
> 3. No one would know what to do anyway … do I call him Your Grace or JCMH ? I personally like YOUR ROYALNESS
> A title is just a complication.
> 
> US a people like it simple. I still use my Swiss maiden name , which I happen to like, but DS has his fathers last name, and I used that for simplicity when DS was at school. There was no box on the forms for. a different last name for the mother


The most important aspects of the titles are the following for me.

1. They will grow up as US citizens and think like US citizens.
2. They will have no understanding of what it is like to be British or the monarchy.
3. They will have the same titles as the direct heirs to the throne and that is unfair to the Wales children who will grow up with full understanding of being British and the monarchy. These five children are not equals in that sense.
4. If Prince Edward’s children, grandchildren of the monarch, do not have those titles, then the precedent has been set already for the Sussex children not to be called Prince and Princess. They are fully entitled to use Lord and Lady as children of a Duke and Archie already has a title he can use as Earl of Dumbarton.


QEll was well aware that the Sussex plan was to merchandise the Sussex title and did her best to stop it. King Charles has to know it as well. Prince William certainly understands this.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Harsh or not, the son _going public with his complaints _about his mother and his children’s entitled life seems unroyal, ungrateful and distasteful. Imo the world does not need this kind of behavior.  He has suffered other indignities [supposedly his father cut him out of his will], so he should not be surprised at this stuff. Of course, we have no way of knowing what transpired behind the scenes.  H&M should tread carefully.  Titles are so last century imho.


His father, the consort, did publicly complain that his wife, Queen of Denmark, did not make him king - not sure she could …
But he did public interviews on the topic
So, the son Joachim is following in dad’s footsteps, ohhh dearrr, maybe bad role model


----------



## EverSoElusive

Why oh why are the crazies comparing Charlotte to Invisibet? I've said this once here and I'll say it again, Invisibet is not a good looking baby. 

And nope, NO resemblance. Sorry, not sorry


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Hi father, the consort, did publicly complain that his wife did not make him king - not sure she could …
> But he did public interviews on the topic
> So, the son Joachim is following in dad’s footsteps, ohhh dearrr, maybe bad role model


 

While these royal families sit in their mega-mansions with gardens maintained by highly knowledgeable landscapers, dine on the finest china made in the land with the finest food with the finest private chefs,  look at rarely-seen paintings by the old masters, drive their ultra-luxury vehicles, play their elite sports, race their boats, travel to all parts of the world, utilize elite security  - at taxpayers’ expense,  a lot more gratitude and much less attitude would be greatly appreciated.  Especially from the _non-workers. _

Seriously, how did we get here?


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> Why oh why are the crazies comparing Charlotte to Invisibet? I've said this once here and I'll say it again, Invisibet is not a good looking baby.
> 
> And nope, NO resemblance. Sorry, not sorry



It’s called photoshop.  Who _are _these people? Meghan ? Hazzi?  Still looking for those handouts?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> It’s called photoshop.  Who _are _these people? Meghan ? Hazzi?  Still looking for those handouts?



That background and Lili don't seem to match at all


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Why oh why are the crazies comparing Charlotte to Invisibet? I've said this once here and I'll say it again, Invisibet is not a good looking baby.
> 
> And nope, NO resemblance. Sorry, not sorry



well, they're both babies...both have chubby cheeks 
I'm not taken with Lily either but we have only seen one picture?
Love Charlotte


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Of course! Meghan would have matched (if not exceeded) her fellow diva in the amazing birth story department if she thought she could get away with it. Even with her proven history of plagiarizing she knew she couldn't pull off a believable, epic delivery tale that she didn't experience.



Nobody outdivas Mariah


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> well, they're both babies...both have chubby cheeks
> I'm not taken with Lily either but *we have only seen one picture*?
> Love Charlotte


I'd like to see more of the Invisikids


----------



## jennlt

More about possible surrogacy...swipe to see the whole story


----------



## Cinderlala

EverSoElusive said:


> So, my question for you is, are you OK?


Hahahahahaha!  It's been almost 19 years so (*shallow breaths* *single tear out of left eye*) I'm healing...(and, scene!!)  Thank you, thank you for viewing this week's MM story hour -- next time we'll be reading The Bench.  





  You are all the best!


----------



## BlueCherry

Let’s assume KC is waiting to see if all of the vindictive attacks, books and podcasts are shelved before giving the titles to the kids. He is well aware that no drama means little income so that leaves merchandising said titles. 

The Queen is a very, very hard act to follow so he simply cannot risk doing anything that’s going to upset the British public that she had already publicly vetoed. 

When I speak of the British public I refer to normal people I know. Most of these people either liked or were ambivalent towards Meghan. Now these same people, many without too much interference from me, actively despise her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

BlueCherry said:


> Let’s assume KC is waiting to see if all of the vindictive attacks, books and podcasts are shelved before giving the titles to the kids. He is well aware that no drama means little income so that leaves merchandising said titles.
> 
> The Queen is a very, very hard act to follow so he simply cannot risk doing anything that’s going to upset the British public that she had already publicly vetoed.
> 
> When I speak of the British public I refer to normal people I know. *Most of these people either liked or were ambivalent towards Meghan. Now these same people, many without too much interference from me, actively despise her.*


That's interesting.  Do you know what caused their change in opinion?  She's certainly a destructive force.


----------



## csshopper

The Suckesses should be gone, to the extent possible, understanding birthright ensures he will always be a Prince.

There is nothing to be gained by pursuing rapprochement with William and Hazbeen as long as H is in a parasitic relationship with Raptor. Bower’s book provides, along with others speaking out, insights she will n e v e r change. What we see is what she has always been and always will be, only her location is now a world wide stage, not the LA neighborhood where she began.

That she cannot be a Royal is proven. Hazbeen has been whining for years, the difference now is it’s transparency without the protective cover of the RF. Neither of them are fit to be an asset to the Royal Family. Painful to the family, but frankly suck it up and move on. End the Frogmore lease and keep them out of Windsor housing. There are other options for the Sussexes, hotels being one.

Charles and even more so, William, as father of a future King have fully committed lives with their hands full. If one objective of gathering H and M back into the fold is more bodies to do the work in a slimmed down monarchy, pull in Beatrice, mentor Lady Louise. Use members committed to the Royal
Family. Hazbeen and Raptor will never be trusted. I don’t see a divorce, he has embraced victimhood aided and abetted by a sinister manipulator. She obviously has no love or need of family and she has sucked him in.

Odds of it happening are slim, but there is one way in which the Royal Family could emulate Raptor and Hazbeen: MARKLE THEM.

edited to add a daydream, An “exit” interview with H and M in which it is clearly spelled out:
                     “Meaghan we have observed and experienced your treatment of  family, you have modeled behaviors you view as appropriate towards people you believe have harmed you and no longer have value by ignoring them. Using your model, going forward we shall treat the Harry Windsor family as you treat the Markle and Ragland families, ignoring your existence. Don’t let the door hit you in the azz on your way out.”


----------



## Sina08

youngster said:


> *I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this.*
> 
> This is one of the most damming things she could have said from my POV.  First, Charles handsomely supported them with millions per year so that they could represent the Queen and do events and tours as senior working royals. So, they _were_ effectively being paid. On top of that, they had a beautiful home on the grounds of Windsor remodeled to the tune of millions. Charles also spent God knows how much money on her extravagant wardrobe as well. But, to her, being on royal tour, meeting people and attending events, was a huge, uncomfortable, hard chore that she did only reluctantly.  You'd think she'd feel honored that people wanted to meet her and that she was carrying out her duties representing the Queen. Nope.  Everything is about money and is transactional.


I’m far too many pages behind, so sorry if this is already old news.
MM’s depicted attitude is such an “influencer” reaction and totally consistent with her overall behavior so far. This whole paying/gifting influencers for not so hidden advertising has gotten so ridiculous they now feel entitled to anything and expect to be paid for lifting their finger. Looks like MM’s brain works exactly the same. A leftover from the Tig times? Being a z-list minor celebrity, hustling would have been her bread and butter so it’s only logical she expects payment. She really internalized that not giving away the milk for free thing and can’t leave the influencer mind behind. More proof that she was no Duchess material.


----------



## BlueCherry

Cinderlala said:


> That's interesting.  Do you know what caused their change in opinion?  She's certainly a destructive force.



I do tell my sister much of what I read and she passes me snippets from the newspapers. I haven’t the heart to keep saying “yeah I know” because I already heard it here   

I bent my ex husbands ear about her and he would say “I don’t want to know”. He’s a lovely man and wouldn’t know how to dislike someone so I assumed he was defending her. I persevered and he ended up spitting “I hate her, I don’t want to hear about her or see pictures of her”. I don’t know where he got this from but presume it was mostly the news which he is addicted to. 

I don’t know anyone who uses social media so I guess they’re too getting this dislike from normal news reports about her. 

I think everyone here knew of the Oprah interview and were disgusted as Philip was in hospital. 

I don’t have Twitter so thank you all for the Twitter posts and YT videos that I would never been able to find myself


----------



## kipp

jennlt said:


> More about possible surrogacy...swipe to see the whole story



I read this whole thing on IG earlier and someone commented there (and maybe someone here, too!)  that it was unusual that Tom Bower didn't address this issue in his book.  That the fact that he didn't "go there" meant that for sure there was an injunction...


----------



## CentralTimeZone

kipp said:


> I read this whole thing on IG earlier and someone commented there (and maybe someone here, too!)  that it was unusual that Tom Bower didn't address this issue in his book.  That the fact that he didn't "go there" meant that for sure there was an injunction...


Also read that in the book he referenced them as "Harry's kids" not Harry and Meghan's. Seems odd as the book was about them both.


----------



## marietouchet

Cinderlala said:


> That's interesting.  Do you know what caused their change in opinion?  She's certainly a destructive force.


Well, MM has two faces -  M1 can be charming when she wants to be, M2 is a vindictive bully behind the scenes
At first, everyone was distracted by M1, not noticing M2

Ca 4 years ago, M1 did a nice job on the walkabouts, friendly, not off putting, the palace did a lot of covering up and cleaning up after M2 - press kind of muzzled, people noticed only M1 in the news and videos
OS wrote silly book and covered only M1

Ca 2 years ago, M2 went after the BRF in the Oprah interview, the palace stopped doing clean up, press no longer muzzled and everybody started dissecting old videos and news, M2 had been there all along, if you looked hard enough

Ca now, Bower wrote an entire book about M2, gloves off


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> I will definitely not watch.  Their deal with Netflix is part of the reason I ended my subscription in the first place.


Yep, and Spotify.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> I read this whole thing on IG earlier and someone commented there (and maybe someone here, too!)  that it was unusual that Tom Bower didn't address this issue in his book.  That the fact that he didn't "go there" meant that for sure there was an injunction...


Tom Bower is a smart man. If he alluded to it the media would go absolutely bananas! The last thing we need is the mainstream press falling all over themselves to defend Meghan’s right to reproductive privacy. She doesn’t need another platform to exploit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is Joachim’s interview - I can see H&M doing many of these:
> BLG has trained us well enough to realize Joachim is hurt and upset.



I'm not a fan of Marghrete's course of action at all, but also: if he wants to whine about unfairness he might want to consider that some people find it unfair that these people have sat on power, money and property for centuries for no apparent reason than their bloodline. So cry me a river really. They are still members of an influential family, rich and with opportunities most people can only dream of.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> well, they're both babies...both have chubby cheeks
> I'm not taken with Lily either but we have only seen one picture?
> Love Charlotte


What bothers me is the amount of teeth this "one year old" has?  That's not normal.  Prince Louis on his first is right where he should be with his teeth on his first birthday pics.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> That background and Lili don't seem to match at all


That's because every pic that TW releases has been photoshopped and altered.


----------



## bag-mania

hollieplus2 said:


> Also read that in the book he referenced them as "Harry's kids" not Harry and Meghan's. Seems odd as the book was about them both.


Subtle. I like it!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Well, MM has two faces -  M1 can be charming when she wants to be, M2 is a vindictive bully behind the scenes
> At first, everyone was distracted by M1, not noticing M2
> 
> Ca 4 years ago, M1 did a nice job on the walkabouts, friendly, not off putting, the palace did a lot of covering up and cleaning up after M2 - press kind of muzzled, people noticed only M1 in the news and videos
> OS wrote silly book and covered only M1
> 
> Ca 2 years ago, M2 went after the BRF in the Oprah interview, the palace stopped doing clean up, press no longer muzzled and everybody started dissecting old videos and news, M2 had been there all along, if you looked hard enough
> 
> Ca now, Bower wrote and entire book about M2, gloves off


I bet that she has also a M3


----------



## CarryOn2020

One day all of the truth about these kids is going to be printed, reprinted and posted online for all the world to see. Imo if BRF royals have participated in any of these falsehoods or shenanigans, this will make the BRF look awful.  Once the trust is gone, it is game over.  My guess is the BRF knows this, so they must have a damage control plan in place.  Time will tell.  My 2 cents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _*While the Sussexes were part of the usual editing process on both the show and the book well before the monarch’s death, sources said the couple is keen to take out or downplay much of what they have said about King Charles, Queen Consort Camilla, Prince William and his wife, Kate, the new Princess of Wales.*_



Are they even more stupid than we thought? Was it some kind of mystery to them that The Queen would eventually die, Charles would be king and William and Kate would be promoted to Prince and Princess of Wales?


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they even more stupid than we thought? Was it some kind of mystery to them that The Queen would eventually die, Charles would be king and William and Kate would be promoted to Prince and Princess of Wales?


They knew intellectually that that would happen at some point. But their only way to make money is to throw dirt on the BRF so I think they gambled that they would have a few years between the time they released H’s book of fiction and TW’s podcrashes before The Queen passed away and by then memories of the bs they spouted may have faded.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> I'd like to see more of the Invisikids


You can, but you need to have Invisivision.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they even more stupid than we thought? Was it some kind of mystery to them that The Queen would eventually die, Charles would be king and William and Kate would be promoted to Prince and Princess of Wales?


The very fact that they feel that they need to do this speaks volumes about what they should not have said in the first place.  They totally outed themselves as being ungrateful brats.  Think three times (for these two) and speak half as much.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I read this whole thing on IG earlier and someone commented there (and maybe someone here, too!)  that it was unusual that Tom Bower didn't address this issue in his book.  That the fact that he didn't "go there" meant that for sure there was an injunction...


I wonder if it has to do with invading the privacy of the surrogate, if there indeed was one.  I don't see how he could have gotten access to hospital records showing the op report of the birth for whomever it was who actually gave birth.  The only time that report could come out is if there is a suit and the records are subpoenaed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please note the hashtag


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comments from the surrogate Insta.


----------



## Cinderlala

BlueCherry said:


> I do tell my sister much of what I read and she passes me snippets from the newspapers. I haven’t the heart to keep saying “yeah I know” because I already heard it here
> 
> I bent my ex husbands ear about her and he would say “I don’t want to know”. He’s a lovely man and wouldn’t know how to dislike someone so I assumed he was defending her. I persevered and he ended up spitting “I hate her, I don’t want to hear about her or see pictures of her”. I don’t know where he got this from but presume it was mostly the news which he is addicted to.
> 
> I don’t know anyone who uses social media so I guess they’re too getting this dislike from normal news reports about her.
> 
> I think everyone here knew of the Oprah interview and were disgusted as Philip was in hospital.
> 
> I don’t have Twitter so thank you all for the Twitter posts and YT videos that I would never been able to find myself


Interesting.  I've never been a fan of TW so it's interesting to me to see what causes the shift for others.  Too funny about your ex!


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> Why oh why are the crazies comparing Charlotte to Invisibet? I've said this once here and I'll say it again, Invisibet is not a good looking baby.
> 
> And nope, NO resemblance. Sorry, not sorry



I guess every child's mother thinks it's beautiful (if your mother thinks you're ugly, you're screwed!  ).  I made the mistake of telling my BFF years before that I literally cannot lie and say a baby is beautiful if I think it's ugly, so I try to come up with a different compliment like, "He/She has so much hair!".  Fast forward 10 years and BFF has the hairiest baby I've ever seen.  Chimp like.  I said my "Oh, she's got a full head of hair!"  My friend gave me a side eye and said, "You think my daughter is ugly don't you???  No worries, my mother's been trying ancient Aruyvedic remedies to scrub all the hair off her body."


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> What bothers me is the amount of teeth this "one year old" has?  That's not normal.  Prince Louis on his first is right where he should be with his teeth on his first birthday pics.
> 
> View attachment 5620230


Some kids have more earlier, I remember story that Athina Onassis was born with a tooth


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


>




This is so awful that I don't even want to contemplate that Harry could be capable of denigrating the memory of his grandmother in this manner. 

Hopefully, KCIII and POW are too astute to fall for this two-season scheme of Haz-Been's and the possibility of titles will be a dangling carrot to ensure years of good (or at least less horrible) behavior. Or, the BRF could rip off the Band-Aid and tell H the children will not receive titles and he is welcome to do his worst. This charade of victimhood has gone on long enough.


----------



## pukasonqo

The problem (for me) with the don’t give the milk away advice is:
-What if nobody wants it (free or not)
-Milk ages and goes sour
-There is always a new milkmaid in the block who can be younger, smarter, wittier, etc
-Sour milk does not have a great taste/smell


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Are they even more stupid than we thought?* Was it some kind of mystery to them that The Queen would eventually die, Charles would be king and William and Kate would be promoted to Prince and Princess of Wales?


If Charles gives them the princely titles, they may not be alone.
I like Charles and believe he can be a great king, but giving more titles to be commercialized by the Harkles doesn't sound right or smart to me. It's like giving them more ammunition to be used against the UK people, particularly Will, Kate, and their kids.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>




Someone please send this to BP.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Frivole88

Watch out Beyonce


----------



## gracekelly

pukasonqo said:


> The problem (for me) with the don’t give the milk away advice is:
> -What if nobody wants it (free or not)
> -Milk ages and goes sour
> -There is always a new milkmaid in the block who can be younger, smarter, wittier, etc
> -Sour milk does not have a great taste/smell


You just described young wannabe actresses in Hollywood. Especially the ones who get a break by being on a hit show and then their head swells and they ask for more money.  Then they get fired and no one will hire them because they are trouble.  Meghan never even go this far.


----------



## Sharont2305

This is funny, my favourite author has just done this today with one of her books. How apt. 

Ps, I highly recommend this book.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Aimee3

So seems like the kids are H’s sperm and red headed donor eggs!


----------



## Chanbal

Sharont2305 said:


> This is funny, my favourite author has just done this today with one of her books. How apt.
> 
> Ps, I highly recommend this book.
> 
> View attachment 5620264
> 
> 
> View attachment 5620272


Great idea! TW likes to copy…  This little library box may soon display "the commode" (or whatever the book is called).


----------



## Chanbal

I didn't know this. 











						Oprah lied about poverty, sex abuse, tell-all book claims
					

Oprah Winfrey embellished her poor upbringing and made up stories about sexual abuse to boost her ratings, her relatives say in Kitty Kelley’s new biography. Although Winfrey claims she never had a…




					nypost.com


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I didn't know this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah lied about poverty, sex abuse, tell-all book claims
> 
> 
> Oprah Winfrey embellished her poor upbringing and made up stories about sexual abuse to boost her ratings, her relatives say in Kitty Kelley’s new biography. Although Winfrey claims she never had a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Now we know where Meg got the growing up poor stuff.  Musso and Frank has never been a cheap restaurant (Thomas took her there for Sat. lunches) and it sounds much better to say you were eating the salad bar at The Sizzler.  Poor kids don't take trips to Europe or Hawaii.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Now we know where Meg got the growing up poor stuff.  Musso and Frank has never been a cheap restaurant (Thomas took her there for Sat. lunches) and it sounds much better to say you were eating the salad bar at The Sizzler.  Poor kids don't take trips to Europe or Hawaii.


I'm ! Plagiarism and copy are words often linked to TW, I'm not sure why one still gets shocked/surprised.


----------



## mia55

Frivole88 said:


> Watch out Beyonce
> View attachment 5620258



She was actually very pretty earlier. Looks like marriage aged both of them badly.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I'm ! Plagiarism and copy are words often linked to TW, I'm not sure why one still gets shocked/surprised.


i know, but she has this talent for topping herself all the time lol!


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> More about possible surrogacy...swipe to see the whole story



Why would the BRF go along with this, especially if succession is involved?  I don't understand the BRF's logic.


----------



## DoggieBags

mia55 said:


> She was actually very pretty earlier. Looks like marriage aged both of them badly.


I think she has had too many cosmetic procedures and doesn’t know when to stop. There reaches a point of diminishing returns and I’ve seen several friends of my mother who were drop dead gorgeous ruin their looks with too many procedures because they were never satisfied with how they looked.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Any word from do-gooders [not]?  Any volunteering photos?  Yeah, I thought not.









						World Central Kitchen
					






					wck.org


----------



## marietouchet

Self inflicted wound … LOL 
I try to look at both sides of things … so subscribed to SUSSEXONLY on IG
My feed was suddenly FULL of sugary three year old photos …
Unfollowed them toot suite


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Why would the BRF go along with this, especially if succession is involved?  I don't understand the BRF's logic.


I think because the family knew there was no acceptable way they could object to it. We know royal succession is about bloodline but that reason doesn’t play well in today’s politically correct world. Can you imagine the backlash they would receive if they did anything that indicated they considered Harry’s children to be “lesser” in any way?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I think because the family knew there was no acceptable way they could object to it. We know royal succession is about bloodline but that reason doesn’t play well in today’s politically correct world. Can you imagine the backlash they would receive if they did anything that indicated they considered Harry’s children to be “lesser” in any way?



Also, these people snuck public engagements past their own team. Maybe the BRF learned of it a little...late. I don't know. It is all very confusing.


----------



## charlottawill

Plates are breaking in Montecito...if they still have any.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> That background and Lili don't seem to match at all


Remember,  Missan Harriman, her photographer and Sussex Squad member, admitted the “Tree of Life”  pregnancy photo was shot remotely by him. He was not present.  Her picture is probably photoshopped. Seems like everything related to the Sussexes is contrived.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, these people snuck public engagements past their own team. Maybe the BRF learned of it a little...late. I don't know. It is all very confusing.


FACT the births were all hush hush - the palace did not know where / when


----------



## jennlt

purseinsanity said:


> Why would the BRF go along with this, especially if succession is involved?  I don't understand the BRF's logic.


Maybe the BRF thinks it is such a remote chance that H's children would ever get close to the throne that it isn't worth the controversy of denying them their place in the LoS? As George, Charlotte and Louis marry and become parents, Lili and Archie will move further and further down.

Maybe "of the body" is outdated terminology that wasn't addressed or amended earlier because it had never been an issue before?

Maybe the BRF is afraid of destabilizing either the monarchy or Haz by making surrogacy and LoS an issue?

Maybe the BRf has had so much sh!t hit the fan with Haz-Been and NutMeg's constant craziness that this is the least of their worries?


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s another reason why I think there was a surrogate. She was wearing high heels up almost until Archie’s birth. I believe in one photo she was caught running up the stairs. It was enough of a big deal where doctors were warning pregnant women not to wear high heels in this article about her. This was back in her _heavily pregnant_ days. 









						Meghan warned not to 'risk baby for sake of fashion' after wearing 4-inch heels
					

MEGHAN Markle stepped out in another pair of Aquazzura heels as she and Prince Harry visited Canada House. The Duchess, believed to be eight-months-pregnant, stepped out in a green Erden coat – and…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

I don't want to offend anyone with this pic, but it really shows how there was no way she was able to squat as many times as she did while "heavily pregnant"   


Spoiler


----------



## jennlt

bag-mania said:


> I think because the family knew there was no acceptable way they could object to it. We know royal succession is about bloodline but that reason doesn’t play well in today’s politically correct world. Can you imagine the backlash they would receive if they did anything that indicated they considered Harry’s children to be “lesser” in any way?


I didn't see your answer until I had already posted mine but you answered with the same thoughts I had only much more succinctly!


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> Maybe the BRF thinks it is such a remote chance that H's children would ever get close to the throne that it isn't worth the controversy of denying them their place in the LoS? As George, Charlotte and Louis marry and become parents, Lili and Archie will move further and further down.
> 
> Maybe "of the body" is outdated terminology that wasn't addressed or amended earlier because it had never been an issue before?
> 
> Maybe the BRF is afraid of destabilizing either the monarchy or Haz by making surrogacy and LoS an issue?
> 
> Maybe the BRf has had so much sh!t hit the fan with Haz-Been and NutMeg's constant craziness that this is the least of their worries?



I think it's mostly the first. They'll be #50 & #51 one day. 

I think it's more telling that all talk/writing of/on the pregnancies and births was fiercely met with shushes before the funeral, even lady C and Tom Bower's book met with 'we won't go there' or heavy silence. 

Since QE2's very sad passing, the continual bad behaviour, discovery of unscheduled walk-abouts and laying of flowers like a daytime soap, niggling over which row they sat in etc, and all in all, constantly making _sure_ that the solemn period of mourning was all about themselves and firing the feud, the Palace is fed-up. 

NOW we see Low's book on her bullying, on both their entitlement and carping, now it seems the Palace has taken off the breaks on lots of things coming out with no fight.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I think because the family knew there was no acceptable way they could object to it. We know royal succession is about bloodline but that reason doesn’t play well in today’s politically correct world. Can you imagine the backlash they would receive if they did anything that indicated they considered Harry’s children “lesser” in any way?


I think I understand what you’re saying but I am not certain.  Hazzi and his kids are not heirs to the throne, never will be.  The line does not go through him. Does that make him “lesser”?  It takes an understanding of how royalty has functioned for centuries.  No, it is not a system based on equality, never has been.   Royalty by definition has never been politically correct. It is a well-defined hierarchy, a pecking order.  H&M are near the bottom. Imo this is why it is so ridiculous that MM wanted to be part of this system, they still do apparently.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I think because the family knew there was no acceptable way they could object to it. We know royal succession is about bloodline but that reason doesn’t play well in today’s politically correct world. Can you imagine the backlash they would receive if they did anything that indicated they considered Harry’s children to be “lesser” in any way?



Then again, if the monarchy is not about bloodline, then what is it about?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I think I understand what you’re saying but I am not certain.  Hazzi and his kids are not heirs to the throne, never will be.  The line does not go through him. Does that make him “lesser”?  It takes an understanding of how royalty has functioned for centuries.  No, it is not a system based on equality, never has been.   Royalty by definition has never been politically correct. It is a well-defined hierarchy, a pecking order.  H&M are near the bottom. Imo this is why it is so ridiculous that MM wanted to be part of this system, still does apparently.



_His_ line doesn't matter, in a way that's what kills him and her and why they cling to their own titles and want titles for the kids.

Nothing but those titles separates him/her/them from the plebs that they lord it over and bully.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Of course! Meghan would have matched (if not exceeded) her fellow diva in the amazing birth story department if she thought she could get away with it. Even with her proven history of plagiarizing she knew she couldn't pull off a believable, epic delivery tale that she didn't experience.


Either that or her Archie delivery was so blah that if she dramatized it, it would sound fake and truth would be leaked. Some of my friends really had short labour and "baby slipped right out" births. 

3rd possibility is she couldn't find a suitably obscure but highly impressive birthing description to plagiarize: As I felt my cervix bloom open and my precious princeling gyrated his way down my birth canal, suddenly I had a vision of the entire cast of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat singing Grovel, Grovel in my honour!


----------



## Chanbal

Jan Moir   









						JAN MOIR: Who are the REAL victims in the Sussexes' royal soap opera?
					

JAN MOIR: You are either in or you are out, the Queen once said. She was famously referring to Megxit and the flight of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

purseinsanity said:


> Why would the BRF go along with this, especially if succession is involved?  I don't understand the BRF's logic.



Like many others have speculated, they probably did it and then shared the news. I think a lot of things will come out now that the Queen has passed. She deserved respect with a capital R. She earned the right to as peaceful an end to her reign as possible even though the two **** heads did their best to spoil it. 



charlottawill said:


> Plates are breaking in Montecito...if they still have any.




I’m no romantic, about 4 years is my maximum man limit, but something about seeing The Queen and Prince Philip like that in photos makes me melt every time


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> Either that or her Archie delivery was so blah that if she dramatized it, it would sound fake and truth would be leaked. Some of my friends really had short labour and "baby slipped right out" births.
> 
> 3rd possibility is she couldn't find a suitably obscure but highly impressive birthing description to plagiarize: As I felt my cervix bloom open and my precious princeling gyrated his way down my birth canal, suddenly I had a vision of the entire cast of Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat singing Grovel, Grovel in my honour!



You’ve confused that with her going to the toilet in the woods


----------



## BlueCherry

I don’t know if anyone mentioned this but it said on the news earlier that the Queens death certificate cited old age as her cause of death. That would explain why it was so sudden and unexpected


----------



## bisousx

I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.

Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.


----------



## BlueCherry

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.



Congratulations


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.


A new bundle of joy


----------



## Aimee3

Lots of love and joy to Bisousx , new baby and family!


----------



## BlueCherry

Maybe because the Markles would have sold the story before an announcement could be made. Maybe because people who actually cared about her wanted to stay with her as long as they could. Maybe because there were more important people in the family to tell first. Maybe because he’s a nasty, back stabbing little creep who didn’t deserve to be told as a priority. 

The Queen died at 3:10pm. So, why did it take so long to tell Harry? 


https://mol.im/a/11264553


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> _His_ line doesn't matter, in a way that's what kills him and her and why they cling to their own titles and want titles for the kids.
> 
> *Nothing but those titles separates him/her/them from the plebs that they lord it over and bully.*


Time to bring back memories of TW's deeply commitment to being a feminist and activist. It means everything to her on "every level"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.



Congratulations! I hope you're healing well


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Time to bring back memories of TW's deeply commitment to being a feminist and activist. It means everything to her on "every level"



Mm had no idea, none, what _linked, not ranked_ meant.  No, nothing, not even a flicker.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Charles would like to become a TPF member, he could get his news updates here. _Not Popular_ in LaLa Land, a _liability_ to the BRF, a _loose cannon_…











						Meghan Markle dubbed a 'loose cannon' for the Royal Family
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex departed frontline royal duties in acrimonious fashion in 2020




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## Cinderlala

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.


Congratulations!  I hope you are healing and recovering well.


----------



## pukasonqo

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.



Congratulations, enjoy your little one!


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry for double post  , shock at this article , and shared before reading last 10 pages
It is so hard to delete stuff on iPad, sorry
…..
This article is not nice to jcmh
What a difference three weeks makes …


JAN MOIR: Who are the REAL victims in the Sussexes' royal soap opera?











						JAN MOIR: Who are the REAL victims in the Sussexes' royal soap opera?
					

JAN MOIR: You are either in or you are out, the Queen once said. She was famously referring to Megxit and the flight of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					mol.im


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

BlueCherry said:


> Maybe because the Markles would have sold the story before an announcement could be made. Maybe because people who actually cared about her wanted to stay with her as long as they could. Maybe because there were more important people in the family to tell first. Maybe because he’s a nasty, back stabbing little creep who didn’t deserve to be told as a priority.
> 
> The Queen died at 3:10pm. So, why did it take so long to tell Harry?
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/11264553



Law book excerpts explain they had a deal with Oprah before Megxit 
Surely they had one with Gayle before the baby
None of which was shared with BRF


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> You can, but you need to have Invisivision.


Or I should just go to the casting agency that they typically hire from  




Aimee3 said:


> So seems like the kids are H’s sperm and red headed donor eggs!


If a donor was used, I'm not surprised that they would choose a red headed lady. They probably gambled and hoped that the kids would end up with red hair. That way no one can claim that the kids aren't Harry's because they have red hair, like he did when he was younger. Again, allegedly. 

TBH, they are already causing the BRF a lot of problems and shame so KCIII should just ask for paternity tests to be done on the Invisikids to prove that they are of Harry and his wife's genetic material


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> I guess every child's mother thinks it's beautiful (if your mother thinks you're ugly, you're screwed!  ).  I made the mistake of telling my BFF years before that I literally cannot lie and say a baby is beautiful if I think it's ugly, so I try to come up with a different compliment like, "He/She has so much hair!".  Fast forward 10 years and BFF has the hairiest baby I've ever seen.  Chimp like.  I said my "Oh, she's got a full head of hair!"  My friend gave me a side eye and said, "You think my daughter is ugly don't you???  No worries, my mother's been trying ancient Aruyvedic remedies to scrub all the hair off her body."


That's quite a funny story. I read that to my husband at the coffee shop and we both laughed so hard  

Anyways, if anyone thinks I'm only saying Invisibet is not good looking because she's allegedly the child of Z-list and Harry, I must say that you're wrong. I don't think George is good looking either though I like his parents. George looks too much like Charles Spencer. Charlotte and Louis are certainly blessed with better genes in the looks department


----------



## csshopper

For the sake of the children settle this now while they are too young to be hurt by it if rumors are true!

1. There is enough chatter it will not go away.
The fall out will be on H and M for their duplicity. But, it could become an opportunity to speak out, under their mental health umbrella, about infertility issues and surrogacy as an option. It’s legit. There shouldn’t be any shame attached to using a surrogate, although their actions imply there is.

2. Articles will be on the Internet forever. Speculatively speaking, Archie and Lili are likely to be children with “issues” being raised by Haz and especially Raptor. It will not help them to have to try to wrestle this as pre teens or teenagers with their parents if the subject of births is resurrected for some reason and they have been clueless. They could be bullied and teased at school.

3. Haz is nearing 40 and some people still question his parentage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> That's quite a funny story. I read that to my husband at the coffee shop and we both laughed so hard
> 
> Anyways, if anyone thinks I'm only saying Invisibet is not good looking because she's allegedly the child of Z-list and Harry, I must say that you're wrong. I don't think George is good looking either though I like his parents. George looks too much like Charles Spencer. Charlotte and Louis are certainly blessed with better genes in the looks department


Hmmm, I see so much Mike Middleton with George.  Let’s hope they all have Kate’s hair


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> For the sake of the children settle this now while they are too young to be hurt by it if rumors are true!
> 
> 1. There is enough chatter it will not go away.
> The fall out will be on H and M for their duplicity. But, it could become an opportunity to speak out, under their mental health umbrella, about infertility issues and surrogacy as an option. It’s legit. *There shouldn’t be any shame attached to using a surrogate, although their actions imply there is.*
> 
> 2. Articles will be on the Internet forever. Speculatively speaking, Archie and Lili are likely to be children with “issues” being raised by Haz and especially Raptor. It will not help them to have to try to wrestle this as pre teens or teenagers with their parents if the subject of births is resurrected for some reason and they have been clueless. They could be bullied and teased at school.
> 
> 3. Haz is nearing 40 and some people still question his parentage.



Especially for the non-workers, the non-heirs, the line that is not important.  DM has Denmark’s Joachim’s 23 yr old son gritching about losing his title.  Unreal how these people think only of their needs and wants.


----------



## bag-mania

The podcast break is over, Archetypes returns next week, Oct. 4. For reasons I cannot fathom, Spotify still has it ranked #6 despite there not being any new episodes in nearly a month. 

“At the close of the episode, the Duchess of Sussex revealed that the next guests would be Margaret Cho and Lisa Ling, where they'd break down the trope "Dragon Lady."









						Meghan Markle's Podcast Announces Return Date After Pausing New Releases in Wake of Queen's Death
					

Meghan Markle's podcast, Archetypes, will return with new episodes on October 4, after pausing new releases following the death of Queen Elizabeth




					people.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.


Congratulations and best wishes to you and baby bisousx!!!


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> I don’t know if anyone mentioned this but it said on the news earlier that the Queens death certificate cited old age as her cause of death. That would explain why it was so sudden and unexpected


Seriously, my MIL passed away earlier this year. There were like a dozen things breaking down in her body, but, when she suddenly stopped breathing, it was not due to one cause. The doctor who certified her death chose to put cancer, but it really was more like old age leading to her body just failing in many ways.


bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.


Congratulations, @bisousx!  

I think that close legged squat might be possible late into pregnancy if the baby was still riding high and had not yet done the somersault to go headfirst down. Once that happened for me, I couldn't wait to give birth! But squatting down is one thing, getting up (in towering heels) without problems is another kettle of fish. I can remember in my third trimester, I needed to press on a stable surface like the armrest of the chair to order to rise from a seated position. And I had a fairly small pregnancy belly.


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> Maybe because the Markles would have sold the story before an announcement could be made. Maybe because people who actually cared about her wanted to stay with her as long as they could. Maybe because there were more important people in the family to tell first. Maybe because he’s a nasty, back stabbing little creep who didn’t deserve to be told as a priority.
> 
> The Queen died at 3:10pm. *So, why did it take so long to tell Harry?*
> 
> 
> https://mol.im/a/11264553


Did he change phone numbers again? One of my narcs openly admitted that every time he changed jobs, he changed his phone number to ghost his ex-colleagues. (No, he wasn't very bright, but he had a good facade to con people into employing him.)


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Sorry for double post  , shock at this article , and shared before reading last 10 pages
> It is so hard to delete stuff on iPad, sorry
> …..
> This article is not nice to jcmh
> What a difference three weeks makes …
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Who are the REAL victims in the Sussexes' royal soap opera?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Who are the REAL victims in the Sussexes' royal soap opera?
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: You are either in or you are out, the Queen once said. She was famously referring to Megxit and the flight of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


No worries, Jan Moir deserves at least 2 posts for her article.  

I agree, she sounds very annoyed with Hazz. I like the way she describes his credentials and the potential titles for his book.

"_Harry's *got half an A-level in art and a master's degree in grievance and self-pity*…"

"First there will be the publication of the Duke of Sussex's autobiography. Publishing insiders reveal that potential *titles* include *My* *So-Called Life*, *The Twits*, *The Adventures Of Dennis The Menace & Minnie The Minx* and, of course, *The Secret Diary Of Prince Harry, Age 13 And ¾*."_

And of course she asks a very pertinent question: 
"*So why, almost three years later, is everything so very much worse instead of being so much better?*"


----------



## purseinsanity

bisousx said:


> I’m sorta ashamed to report back this info but lol I was able to do the MM closed legged squat at 8 months’ pregnant  and although I am no MM fan, I must say… “heavily pregnant” is most definitely a thing. Ask anyone who is 8-9 months’ pregnant during a heat wave  the only person who complained more about their pregnancy than Mariah was me.
> 
> Just gave birth to my beautiful baby boy last week via emergency c-section (I had pre eclampsia and postpartum pre eclampsia , lucky me). The nurses do press down on your belly daily to check on your uterus. Luckily I did not find that part too painful.


Many congratulations!  Wishing you a speedy recovery and hope you, baby and family are all getting some rest!


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> That's quite a funny story. I read that to my husband at the coffee shop and we both laughed so hard
> 
> Anyways, if anyone thinks I'm only saying Invisibet is not good looking because she's allegedly the child of Z-list and Harry, I must say that you're wrong. I don't think George is good looking either though I like his parents. *George looks too much like Charles Spencer. *Charlotte and Louis are certainly blessed with better genes in the looks department


Yes, I also noticed a striking resemblance between him and Charles Spencer. I think he is a cute kid, and I hope he is also a kind person.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Why oh why are the crazies comparing Charlotte to Invisibet? I've said this once here and I'll say it again, Invisibet is not a good looking baby.
> 
> And nope, NO resemblance. Sorry, not sorry



Because some people see two eyes, a small nose and a smile with a face turned on an angle... and they see a resemblance.

It's like when people compared Philip in a hat with a beard to Harry in a hat with a beard and said they looked alike. Yeah, because their faces were covered and they look alike...


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> For the sake of the children settle this now while they are too young to be hurt by it if rumors are true!
> 
> 1. There is enough chatter it will not go away.
> The fall out will be on H and M for their duplicity. But, it *could become an opportunity to speak out*, under their mental health umbrella, *about infertility issues and surrogacy as an option*. It’s legit. There shouldn’t be any shame attached to using a surrogate, although their actions imply there is.
> 
> 2. Articles will be on the Internet forever. Speculatively speaking, Archie and Lili are likely to be children with “issues” being raised by Haz and especially Raptor. It will not help them to have to try to wrestle this as pre teens or teenagers with their parents if the subject of births is resurrected for some reason and they have been clueless. They could be bullied and teased at school.
> 
> 3. Haz is nearing 40 and some people still question his parentage.


She was pregnant so fast after their wedding, that who knows if they actually have infertility or just wanted to SO a baby!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> For the sake of the children settle this now while they are too young to be hurt by it if rumors are true!
> 
> 1. There is enough chatter it will not go away.
> The fall out will be on H and M for their duplicity. But, it could become an opportunity to speak out, under their mental health umbrella, about infertility issues and surrogacy as an option. It’s legit. There shouldn’t be any shame attached to using a surrogate, although their actions imply there is.
> 
> 2. Articles will be on the Internet forever. Speculatively speaking, Archie and Lili are likely to be children with “issues” being raised by Haz and especially Raptor. It will not help them to have to try to wrestle this as pre teens or teenagers with their parents if the subject of births is resurrected for some reason and they have been clueless. They could be bullied and teased at school.
> 
> 3. Haz is nearing 40 and some people still question his parentage.


I agree with you. There is nothing wrong about having fertility issues and surrogacy, but the use of prosthetic pregnant bumps aka fake bumps is rather embarrassing imo. If that was the case. 

For the kids' sake, they should stop pretending to be the world saviors and live a private life. It may imply a more modest mansion, and less private jets, but they will likely be able to raise happier kids. My 2 cents!


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmm, I see so much Mike Middleton with George.  Let’s hope they all have Kate’s hair
> 
> View attachment 5620477





Chanbal said:


> Yes, I also noticed a striking resemblance between him and Charles Spencer. I think he is a cute kid, and I hope he is also a kind person.
> View attachment 5620532


Here's George and Charles Spencer 









Right now all the Wales kids have nice hair and I sure hope the boys don't start balding like William when they get older


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> She was pregnant so fast after their wedding, that who knows if they actually have infertility or just wanted to SO a baby!


Sorry to play the devil's advocate but these two were likely very sexually active during the early period of their relationship leading up to their wedding day. 

Perhaps she made sure that they went bareback every time (sorry to be gross ) to allow her enough time to allegedly get knocked up, didn't matter if it was before or after marriage. She needed the anchor baby. Her alleged pregnancy timeline is murky just like everything else concerning her so she was highly likely allegedly pregnant before her spectacle of a wedding.

As usual, just speculations. I would like to know the actual truth too but it is unlikely that we'd ever find out


----------



## bisousx

xincinsin said:


> Congratulations, @bisousx!
> 
> I think that close legged squat might be possible late into pregnancy if the baby was still riding high and had not yet done the somersault to go headfirst down. Once that happened for me, I couldn't wait to give birth! But squatting down is one thing, getting up (in towering heels) without problems is another kettle of fish. I can remember in my third trimester, I needed to press on a stable surface like the armrest of the chair to order to rise from a seated position. And I had a fairly small pregnancy belly.



Thank you I think you are right. My baby was breech. Now, why anyone would do a close legged squat - pregnant or not - is beyond me.


----------



## Chanbal

*Another source explained that ‘few people in the family’ were regularly in touch with Harry any more and that he could also be ‘incredibly hard to reach’.*


----------



## Chanbal

bisousx said:


> Thank you I think you are right. My* baby *was breech. Now, why anyone would do a close legged squat - pregnant or not - is beyond me.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Because some people see two eyes, a small nose and a smile with a face turned on an angle... and they see a resemblance.
> 
> It's like when people compared Philip in a hat with a beard to Harry in a hat with a beard and said they looked alike. Yeah, because their faces were covered and they look alike...


Science can explain it!








						Seeing 'Jesus in toast' phenomenon perfectly normal, professor says
					

Researchers have found that the phenomenon of “face pareidolia” -- where onlookers report seeing images of Jesus, Virgin Mary, or Elvis in objects such as toasts, shrouds, and clouds -- is normal and based on physical causes.



					www.sciencedaily.com


----------



## Chanbal

This is sad!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Time to bring back memories of TW's deeply commitment to being a feminist and activist. It means everything to her on "every level"




It's like all the boards and whatnot (Commission on Information Disorder included) both M and H sit on to curb misinformation    Source


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So apparently now the eldest Danish grandchild has spoken to the press and harshly criticized his grandmother. Honestly I'd be tempted to skip Christmas gifts this year.


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> Seriously, my MIL passed away earlier this year. There were like a dozen things breaking down in her body, but, when she suddenly stopped breathing, it was not due to one cause. The doctor who certified her death chose to put cancer, but it really was more like old age leading to her body just failing in many ways.



Sincere condolences on your loss  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





You’re right though, even with a litany of conditions they have to opt for one main cause to put on the certificate



xincinsin said:


> Did he change phone numbers again? One of my narcs openly admitted that every time he changed jobs, he changed his phone number to ghost his ex-colleagues. (No, he wasn't very bright, but he had a good facade to con people into employing him.)



On the whole only the most devious of people change their phone number lots of times. I’ve known people do it to avoid debt collectors, child support agency, mistresses …



Chanbal said:


> *Another source explained that ‘few people in the family’ were regularly in touch with Harry any more and that he could also be ‘incredibly hard to reach’.*




I read that KC had been in touch earlier. If H claims he wasn’t told about her death how can he not dispute he was advised to fly to Scotland by KC earlier in the day.

Makes me wonder if the petulant brat turned his phone off or blocked KC after being told Meghan was not allowed to join him and it backfired so decides to lie and say KC never told him.



Chanbal said:


> This is sad!




Let’s hope all of this is allowed to come out when she gets her chance in court.


----------



## BlueCherry

Chanbal said:


> This is sad!






QueenofWrapDress said:


> So apparently now the eldest Danish grandchild has spoken to the press and harshly criticized his grandmother. Honestly I'd be tempted to skip Christmas gifts this year.



Just goes to show she was right in her decision. This public behaviour is not commensurate with royal behaviour.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I guess every child's mother thinks it's beautiful (if your mother thinks you're ugly, you're screwed!  ).  I made the mistake of telling my BFF years before that I literally cannot lie and say a baby is beautiful if I think it's ugly, so I try to come up with a different compliment like, "He/She has so much hair!".  Fast forward 10 years and BFF has the hairiest baby I've ever seen.  Chimp like.  I said my "Oh, she's got a full head of hair!"  My friend gave me a side eye and said, "You think my daughter is ugly don't you???  No worries, my mother's been trying ancient Aruyvedic remedies to scrub all the hair off her body."



Hence the ol' (London) East-end expression "Only a mother could love that face"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My Valentine Low book was delayed indefinitely (as in, it was supposed to ship today or so and arrive October 10th, I just got an email they will email if they have a delivery date). 

BTW I spent the past few days making tomato sauce from the last tomatoes we had to take off the vine and ripen inside (enough for 3 quarts or so, and I still have a huge bag of frozen tomatoes as I threw everything that started to go soft into the freezer over the summer), drying porcini mushrooms my brother brought from his daily dog walks and baking bread. I kind of enjoy slow domestic life, why oh why didn't I put some effort into becoming a trophy wife when I was in my 20s  Obviously I don't like cleaning and laundry


----------



## xincinsin

I always felt something was wrong with this. 
I finally figured out what was bothering me. 
The tone is that of a playdate being arranged for two little girls. 
Whoever is doing Zedzee's PR now doesn't have much experience and has very little substance to work with.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So apparently now the eldest Danish grandchild has spoken to the press and harshly criticized his grandmother. Honestly I'd be tempted to skip Christmas gifts this year.



I'd be tempted to miss Christmas altogether, especially the all togethers.


----------



## Mumotons

Queen of Denmark hints decision was inspired by King Charles
					

Queen Margrethe, 82, has stripped four of her eight grandchildren of their princely titles, saying it is 'for their own good' - prompting an unseemly royal row redolent of Megxit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Former MP Norman Baker, a leading expert on royal finances, told MailOnline: 'Why is Harry still an HRH? Charles says he wants to slim down the monarchy, but this must be real, not just superficial. He must slim down the costs to the taxpayer. It just needs it be him, Camilla, William and Kate and their children. The rest of them should get their P45s and retire or go out an earn a living'.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My Valentine Low book was delayed indefinitely (as in, it was supposed to ship today or so and arrive October 10th, I just got an email they will email if they have a delivery date).
> 
> BTW I spent the past few days making tomato sauce from the last tomatoes we had to take off the vine and ripen inside (enough for 3 quarts or so, and I still have a huge bag of frozen tomatoes as I threw everything that started to go soft into the freezer over the summer), drying porcini mushrooms my brother brought from his daily dog walks and baking bread. I kind of enjoy slow domestic life, why oh why didn't I put some effort into becoming a trophy wife when I was in my 20s  Obviously I don't like cleaning and laundry



Oh the rich men I let get away, I could tell you all stories  

Apparently I like working for a living, independence and not being told what to wear, eat and think day in day out. Ridiculous, but there you go.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mumotons said:


> Queen of Denmark hints decision was inspired by King Charles
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe, 82, has stripped four of her eight grandchildren of their princely titles, saying it is 'for their own good' - prompting an unseemly royal row redolent of Megxit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former MP Norman Baker, a leading expert on royal finances, told MailOnline: 'Why is Harry still an HRH? Charles says he wants to slim down the monarchy, but this must be real, not just superficial. He must slim down the costs to the taxpayer. It just needs it be him, Camilla, William and Kate and their children. The rest of them should get their P45s and retire or go out an earn a living'.



What cost to the taxpayer, though. They basically maintain themselves through the Crown Estate AND give in the hundreds of millions of what said Crown Estate generates back to the government. What extra cost does the taxpayer take on, security?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So apparently now the eldest Danish grandchild has spoken to the press and harshly criticized his grandmother. Honestly I'd be tempted to skip Christmas gifts this year.


I agree it's rather harsh, but jeez, STFU already!  These privileged people sound like such brats.  They're making good cases as to why royal families should be abolished.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I agree it's rather harsh, but jeez, STFU already!  These privileged people sound like such brats.  They're making good cases as to why royal families should be abolished.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> What cost to the taxpayer, though. They basically maintain themselves through the Crown Estate AND give in the hundreds of millions of what said Crown Estate generates back to the government. What extra cost does the taxpayer take on, security?



Linking this to H&M but quoting from the DM today, the boys are "punished" and their "identity is removed" Source Makes me A) have less sympathy for either and B) Makes a really good case for slimming down the monarchy.


----------



## papertiger

Meanwhile... Mr and Mrs. Windsor Mountbatten are in LaLa Land...pretending they will be good 

More H&M Propoganda LOL

Notice how the Danish RF goes to mainstream news pages whilst the H&M pretenders to the throne get coughed-up on Femail (DM). Funny that   Sorry, H&M but women are not more sympathetic to your pathetic-ness.


----------



## jennlt

papertiger said:


> It's like all the boards and whatnot (Commission on Information Disorder included) both M and H sit on to curb misinformation    Source


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So apparently now the eldest Danish grandchild has spoken to the press and harshly criticized his grandmother. Honestly I'd be tempted to skip Christmas gifts this year.


Oh definitely - hard pass this year and beyond. Joachim, his unhappy wives, and the spoiled, ungrateful, overgrown kids [imo 23 is not a kid],  they need to find somewhere else to go.  Perhaps a McMansion in monteshito?  They can all moan&groan together.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> My Valentine Low book was delayed indefinitely (as in, it was supposed to ship today or so and arrive October 10th, I just got an email they will email if they have a delivery date).
> 
> BTW I spent the past few days making tomato sauce from the last tomatoes we had to take off the vine and ripen inside (enough for 3 quarts or so, and I still have a huge bag of frozen tomatoes as I threw everything that started to go soft into the freezer over the summer), drying porcini mushrooms my brother brought from his daily dog walks and baking bread. *I kind of enjoy slow domestic life, why oh why didn't I put some effort into becoming a trophy wife when I was in my 20s*  Obviously I don't like cleaning and laundry


This, 100% this. GloriaS and her crowd have lots to answer for.


----------



## marietouchet

I knew the Swedes had already stripped titles before the Danes did it
Did not know the Dutch have already done it too
Belgium is like UK - monarchs kids are not that old and kings brother is in the Dog house a la Andrew, they have effectively slimmed down already but maybe not stripped titles

The old UK paradigm - give titles to all the boys of the sovereign ala G5 and QEII , will be toast


Queen of Denmark hints decision was inspired by King Charles









						Queen of Denmark hints decision was inspired by King Charles
					

Queen Margrethe, 82, has stripped four of her eight grandchildren of their princely titles, saying it is 'for their own good' - prompting an unseemly royal row redolent of Megxit.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

THEY do not seem to have been invited.

Compare and contrast - Clooney Foundation for Justice and Archewell, GC handed out Albie awards, he and Amal were not getting them 

This article is more about the foundation than the clothes worn, there are other great articles about the fashions worn 








						All the Celebs at the Clooney Foundation for Justice's Albie Awards
					

Julia Roberts, Lori Harvey and Meryl Streep were among the attendees.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## purseproblm

I feel bad and don’t for the Danes. The older ones are adults and thought there was a life of nothingness and leisure headed for them. The younger ones have plenty of time to make a plan.
I don’t know why they didn’t think it could happen to them. The Swedes did it and everyone applauded including the parents. I think we’re seeing Mina cut for the 21st century and beyond.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Sorry to play the devil's advocate but these two were likely very sexually active during the early period of their relationship leading up to their wedding day.
> 
> Perhaps she made sure that they went bareback every time (sorry to be gross ) to allow her enough time to allegedly get knocked up, didn't matter if it was before or after marriage. She needed the anchor baby. Her alleged pregnancy timeline is murky just like everything else concerning her so she was highly likely allegedly pregnant before her spectacle of a wedding.
> 
> As usual, just speculations. I would like to know the actual truth too but it is unlikely that we'd ever find out


Hmmm interesting ideas 
I was thinking, on the other hand, that she would not have wanted to ruin her figure prior to wedding , but then maybe that is why there were so many dress fittings and changes 

Compare and contrast - Catherine’s dress was a state secret, not even Anna Wintour was in on it, yet we have all sorts of gossip about the MM dress evolution and Givenchy


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> THEY do not seem to have been invited.
> 
> Compare and contrast - Clooney Foundation for Justice and Archewell, GC handed out Albie awards, he and Amal were not getting them
> 
> This article is more about the foundation than the clothes worn, there are other great articles about the fashions worn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All the Celebs at the Clooney Foundation for Justice's Albie Awards
> 
> 
> Julia Roberts, Lori Harvey and Meryl Streep were among the attendees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Scanned the pics. Gayle King was there with Zedzee-style hair. And two guests wore something similar to Zedzee's funeral attire but looked much better than her. Was Zedzee's dress too big for her?


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm interesting ideas
> I was thinking, on the other hand, that she would not have wanted to ruin her figure prior to wedding , but then maybe that is why there were so many dress fittings and changes
> 
> Compare and contrast - Catherine’s dress was a state secret, not even Anna Wintour was in on it, yet we have all sorts of gossip about the MM dress evolution and Givenchy


There were rumours back then that she had allegedly claimed to be preggers to force a quick hitching. And rumours after the wedding of people allegedly overhearing Handbag question her if the Archie pregnancy was real unlike the previous one.

Everything they do has to be so OTT.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Reassessment time ?
We were hard on Charles, thinking he was too soft with regards to H
But, maybe it was really QEII, but C took the hits for her decisions ?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *My Valentine Low book* was delayed indefinitely (as in, it was supposed to ship today or so and arrive October 10th, I just got an email they will email if they have a delivery date).
> 
> BTW I spent the past few days making tomato sauce from the last tomatoes we had to take off the vine and ripen inside (enough for 3 quarts or so, and I still have a huge bag of frozen tomatoes as I threw everything that started to go soft into the freezer over the summer), drying porcini mushrooms my brother brought from his daily dog walks and baking bread. I kind of enjoy slow domestic life, why oh why didn't I put some effort into becoming a trophy wife when I was in my 20s  *Obviously I don't like cleaning and laundry*


Did you order the hardcover or paperback? I ordered the hardcover and has a release date of October 6. 

I hear you about cleaning & laundry! They aren't my thing either, but covid brought them into my life and I thank Lady C for her long videos.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Reassessment time ?
> We were hard on Charles, thinking he was too soft with regards to H
> But, maybe it was really QEII, but C took the hits for her decisions ?


Imo all these monarchies realize their future is bleak.  They want their message to be clear - we are cutting back. Sure, sure, we will still live in fabulous palaces, wear the fabulous clothes and jewels, drive those mega-luxe cars, sail in expensive boats, etc.  _but_ we are getting rid of the non-workers.  Spain, Belgium, Nederlands, now Denmark, maybe the BRF - they all have slimmed down, trimmed off the non-workers, so H&M’s resistance seems even more disproportionate  and ill-advised.

Yes, time to reassess. Imo QEII knew what needed to be done and told Charles to do it.  My guess, she, Charles, Anne, Felipe, Willem, Margrethe, etc. were either calling or texting about the cutbacks while enjoying a quiet laugh and smirk at the mouthy dimwits.
Those monarchs hang together.  They have seen plenty of monarchies come and go, ahem Greece.  They are planning the way forward. We plebeians should take good notes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Did you order the hardcover or paperback? I ordered the hardcover and has a release date of October 6.



The hardcover, which was listed with a release date of September 29th on amazon Germany. But now it says release date of October 6th for both with a delivery date of October 17th. I can't take 11 days to ship something from the UK to central Europe, can it?


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> Queen of Denmark hints decision was inspired by King Charles
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe, 82, has stripped four of her eight grandchildren of their princely titles, saying it is 'for their own good' - prompting an unseemly royal row redolent of Megxit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former MP Norman Baker, a leading expert on royal finances, told MailOnline: 'Why is Harry still an HRH? Charles says he wants to slim down the monarchy, but this must be real, not just superficial. He must slim down the costs to the taxpayer. It just needs it be him, Camilla, William and Kate and their children. The rest of them should get their P45s and retire or go out an earn a living'.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> What cost to the taxpayer, though. They basically maintain themselves through the Crown Estate AND give in the hundreds of millions of what said Crown Estate generates back to the government. What extra cost does the taxpayer take on, security?


It's really funny that her decision was inspired by Charles's words. Let's hope this is not the case of "_do as I say, not as I do_," for Charles. 

_"King Charles III is known to have spoken for decades about the need for the House of Windsor to be slimmed down."_


----------



## Chanbal

The news about the Harkles' divorce fromSachs is likely true. Well they may need to be hired back…

The articles on Yahoo went from diabetic sweet to a little acidic. The comments are more than a little acidic. Oops! Here is a quote from the article:












						Meghan Markle didn't know difference between celebrity and royal life, expert says: She's 'like a minefield'
					

Meghan Markle didn't understand the difference between being a royal and being a celebrity, royal expert Duncan Larcombe explained to Fox News Digital. Markle married Prince Harry in 2018.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Chanbal

This is good! It brings to mind some of TW's comments…


----------



## CarryOn2020

See how they merch.  Grandmother knew what she was doing.  See spoiler.

Hazzi and Andi, the entitled twerps.  Ugh.  Old but not forgotten article:








						Harry faces human rights row over Kazakh ski jaunt: Campaigners attack Prince for choosing country with repressive regime
					

The 29-year-old and his girlfriend, Cressida Bonas - accompanied by a team of taxpayer-funded Scotland Yard bodyguards - were flown to the billionaires' playground of Shymbulak.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






Spoiler


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is good! It brings to mind some of TW's comments…



Great minds think alike 

That ad reeks of spoiled brat.


----------



## Chanbal

An explanation on titles in the UK…


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> *Another source explained that ‘few people in the family’ were regularly in touch with Harry any more and that he could also be ‘incredibly hard to reach’.*



Maybe H didn't answer because the screaming, yelling, plate throwing etc was far louder (and maybe more important) than the ring of his phone???


----------



## DL Harper

xincinsin said:


> Scanned the pics. Gayle King was there with Zedzee-style hair. And two guests wore something similar to Zedzee's funeral attire but looked much better than her. Was Zedzee's dress too big for her?


Note GK's ankle wrap.  An injury caused by "how high and often should I jump, OW?"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> See how they merch.  Grandmother knew what she was doing.  See spoiler.



Yeah, I wasn't initially a fan of the whole thing, but I am amazed how these people don't see how their actions are not compatible with holding royal titles. Be a model, advertise luxury hotels, but do it in your own name then.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> That ad reeks of spoiled brat.



Seriously. Also, what's with making yourself HRH when your style has always been just HH? Geez.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo all these monarchies realize their future is bleak. They want their message to be clear - we are cutting back. Sure, sure, we will still live in fabulous palaces, wear the fabulous clothes and jewels, drive those mega-luxe cars, sail in expensive boats, etc. _but_ we are getting rid of the non-workers. Spain, Belgium, Nederlands, now Denmark, maybe the BRF - they all have slimmed down, trimmed off the non-workers,



I think Queen Margreth's decision was also possibly influenced by both Prince Joachim's sons quickly dropping out of their 2 year military programs and then both using their titles in their modeling careers. I can't imagine she was pleased by any of that.  Joachim and his family live in France now too. Supposedly Prince Joachim has not gotten on well with his older brother, CP Frederik, and supposedly their wives do not get along well, so it's got some interesting parallels to the Harry/MM situation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


>



He’s so quick to sue this newspaper over one ridiculous point about whether or not he offered to pay for government provided security but crickets from the despicable duo over the Bowers book. Which makes me think the stuff in the Bowers book is true otherwise they would have sued him by now.


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm interesting ideas
> *I was thinking, on the other hand, that she would not have wanted to ruin her figure prior to wedding* , but then maybe that is why there were so many dress fittings and changes
> 
> Compare and contrast - Catherine’s dress was a state secret, not even Anna Wintour was in on it, yet we have all sorts of gossip about the MM dress evolution and Givenchy


That's why there was a lot of 'allegedly' in my comment  It is not just about ruining her figure. There were plenty of photographic evidence out there that would support allegations of her wearing moon bumps so who can really tell if that was a self-carrying pregnancy.

As for many dress fittings and changes, we are talking about someone who is very indecisive and thinks she knows better than the pros. Also, she is very nitpicky therefore I am not surprised if she was constantly finding something wrong and demanded for things to be redone or fixed. Then once that's taken care of, she would repeat the cycle and waste everyone's time, which of course ended up costing KCIII even more money to pay for these man/woman hours.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Seriously, my MIL passed away earlier this year. There were like a dozen things breaking down in her body, but, when she suddenly stopped breathing, it was not due to one cause. The doctor who certified her death chose to put cancer, but it really was more like old age leading to her body just failing in many ways.
> 
> Congratulations, @bisousx!
> 
> I think that close legged squat might be possible late into pregnancy if the baby was still riding high and had not yet done the somersault to go headfirst down. Once that happened for me, I couldn't wait to give birth! But squatting down is one thing, getting up (in towering heels) without problems is another kettle of fish. I can remember in my third trimester, I needed to press on a stable surface like the armrest of the chair to order to rise from a seated position. And I had a fairly small pregnancy belly.


yes, eventually the human body wears out....there are a few exceptions but most people don't live longer - or even as long - as TQ.  and once her spouse passed I'm sure it was a big blow to her.  Lots of cases of people passing soon after their life partners.  RIP


----------



## Toby93

Hmmm...I wasn't sure if the Trevor book was a real thing, or just someone hoping he would write one...


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Hmmm...I wasn't sure if the Trevor book was a real thing, or just someone hoping he would write one...



this doesn't seem to warrant a whole book....more like an interview IMO


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great minds think alike
> 
> That ad reeks of spoiled brat.



If I was a royal, I would keep my mouth shut rather than open it and spoil the illusion. They obviously don't know when thy have it good great.

I just _know_ the Raffles' campaign shoot story-board

Tadzi in Visconti's _Death in Venice_ blah blah using real royalty blah blah, decadent, beautiful and entitled blah blah, family portrait, wet tee- Summer whites blah blah.

Made _him_ look like a prat LOL


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> this doesn't seem to warrant a whole book....more like an interview IMO



You never know what else may be in it


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> Hmmm...I wasn't sure if the Trevor book was a real thing, or just someone hoping he would write one...




That is a really nice picture of Meghan.  She looks pretty. 



sdkitty said:


> this doesn't seem to warrant a whole book....more like an interview IMO



She and Trevor were together for 10+ years apparently.  He's likely got a lot of information on her. What she was like. How much time they spent with her family.  What Doria was like. What Thomas was like. Her relationships with her half-siblings.  Her career.  Their romance and relationship and how they grew apart and how she ended it. Meghan and Harry's prospects as Hollywood producers from a guy who is a Hollywood producer.  I think there will be enough for a very juicy book.

Btw, when Harry and MM got engaged and then quickly married, I think it was discussed in this thread that it was likely Trevor would stay silent for awhile as he didn't want to be seen as a jealous ex when everyone was falling all over Harry/MM.  He wanted to be seen as a good, stand up guy among his Hollywood friends and co-workers and people who might have the power to greenlight his own projects.  There was also speculation that he might have been paid off by Meghan even.  But, a few of us speculated that he would wait a few years, see how things were going, see how the wind was blowing with popular opinion, and_ then_ write his book, which is what he appears to be doing.


----------



## marietouchet

I am on a roll this morning, another DEEP thought …

All of Margrethe’s BIRACIAL grandkids were among those “stripped“ of titles

i hope someone asks if I am OK with this


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Hmmm...I wasn't sure if the Trevor book was a real thing, or just someone hoping he would write one...



I've seen similar postings about a book by Trevor. They weren't together for that long. Does he really have sufficient material to write a whole book about the crazy? Not being rude or snarky to my fellow forum members, that's a serious I-want-to-know question 

ETA: NVM. @youngster just said they were together for 10+ years.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> That is a really nice picture of Meghan.  She looks pretty.
> 
> 
> 
> She and Trevor were together for 10+ years apparently.  He's likely got a lot of information on her. What she was like. How much time they spent with her family.  What Doria was like. What Thomas was like. Her relationships with her half-siblings.  Her career.  Their romance and relationship and how they grew apart and how she ended it. Meghan and Harry's prospects as Hollywood producers from a guy who is a Hollywood producer.  I think there will be enough for a very juicy book.
> 
> Btw, when Harry and MM got engaged and then quickly married, I think it was discussed in this thread that it was likely Trevor would stay silent for awhile as he didn't want to be seen as a jealous ex when everyone was falling all over Harry/MM.  He wanted to be seen as a good, stand up guy among his Hollywood friends and co-workers and people who might have the power to greenlight his own projects.  There was also speculation that he might have been paid off by Meghan even.  But, a few of us speculated that he would wait a few years, see how things were going, see how the wind was blowing with popular opinion, and_ then_ write his book, which is what he appears to be doing.


I wish him luck but I think that book would only appeal to a niche audience....I'll get the tidbits here 
and hope it damages her "brand"


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> Hence the ol' (London) East-end expression "Only a mother could love that face"


And a very Brooklyn, NY Italian as well)) The face, only mother could love.


----------



## sdkitty

Aminamina said:


> And a very Brooklyn, NY Italian as well)) The face, only mother could love.


I think it was Barbara Walters who said in the case of a baby that wasn't cute, she'd say "what a baby!" or something like that


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I am on a roll this morning, another DEEP thought …
> 
> All of Margrethe’s BIRACIAL grandkids were among those “stripped“ of titles
> 
> i hope someone asks if I am OK with this



The whole of Europe's Royalty can strip away, I don't mind at all.

The only reason all the grandkids were made Royal was for marrying prospects - to each other.

Now they're marrying whoever anyway there's simply no point in all these Prince and Princesses running around doing nothing or the odd photo shoot at all, far better they do their own thing and with whom they please.


----------



## Aminamina

EverSoElusive said:


> I've seen similar postings about a book by Trevor. They weren't together for that long. Does he really have sufficient material to write a whole book about the crazy? Not being rude or snarky to my fellow forum members, that's a serious I-want-to-know question
> 
> ETA: NVM. @youngster just said they were together for 10+ years.


As the discarded rocket booster Trevor should have a lot of material to share


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> That is a really nice picture of Meghan.  She looks pretty.
> 
> 
> 
> She and Trevor were together for 10+ years apparently.  He's likely got a lot of information on her. What she was like. How much time they spent with her family.  What Doria was like. What Thomas was like. Her relationships with her half-siblings.  Her career.  Their romance and relationship and how they grew apart and how she ended it. Meghan and Harry's prospects as Hollywood producers from a guy who is a Hollywood producer.  I think there will be enough for a very juicy book.
> 
> Btw, when Harry and MM got engaged and then quickly married,* I think it was discussed in this thread that it was likely Trevor would stay silent for awhile as he didn't want to be seen as a jealous ex when everyone was falling all over Harry/MM.  He wanted to be seen as a good, stand up guy among his Hollywood friends and co-workers* and people who might have the power to greenlight his own projects.  There was also speculation that he might have been paid off by Meghan even.  But, a few of us speculated that he would wait a few years, see how things were going, see how the wind was blowing with popular opinion, and_ then_ write his book, which is what he appears to be doing.


The bolded part... He looks classier, more mature and like the bigger person by staying quiet. He already remarried and had a baby not too long ago, why start now? What is he going to gain from wasting his time writing and releasing a book about the crazy ex-wife?  

Unless his current wife is a money and attention hungry person, she might not want bad spotlight on Trevor and to have crazy SSquad starting a smear campaign, where she and her baby will likely get dragged into the whole mess.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> If I was a royal, I would keep my mouth shut rather than open it and spoil the illusion. They obviously don't know when thy have it good great.
> 
> I just _know_ the Raffles' campaign shoot story-board
> 
> Tadzi in Visconti's _Death in Venice_ blah blah using real royalty blah blah, decadent, beautiful and entitled blah blah, family portrait, wet tee- Summer whites blah blah.
> 
> Made _him_ look like a prat LOL



Oooooh, shaking my head, this is a perfect example of why these snobs do not deserve titles. 
_Inherited poise and etiquette??? Naturally exude a charisma and panache?   _

Article from 2021  
_Jean-Guilhem Lamberti, Chief Creative Officer, Accor, tells me, “Accor has many brands with the most incredible DNAs. Raffles’ very first advertising referenced its link to royalty. For its renewed ambition and strong development plan, we immediately thought of Peter Greenaway to gather the most impressive cast. The strongest names, monarchs whose families have ruled for centuries, one crowned the unofficial Maharaja of Jaipur. A Danish prince of Chinese descent. A princess of French American origin proudly carrying the name of her beloved Greece on her passport. A mother and daughter from the only family ever carrying both royal and imperial titles, descending from Empress Elisabeth of Austria and Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France. A cousin of Lady Diana and descendant of Sir Winston Churchill. We presented the project to each member personally and were surprised to see how well they knew the brand, its iconic landmark in Singapore, and other Raffles properties around the world. *With instinctively inherited poise and etiquette, they naturally exuded a charisma and panache we immediately fell in love with.*”








						Raffles Hotel Launches Stunning New Campaign Featuring Actual Royalty
					

The campaign pays tribute to the brand’s storied history with a multi-generational cast of modern-day royals.




					www.forbes.com
				



_


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> I wish him luck but I think that book would only appeal to a niche audience....I'll get the tidbits here
> and hope it damages her "brand"



I think it will appeal to a niche audience for sure and, depending on what he reveals, it'll get huge headlines,  especially if he contradicts many things she's said about her family and background, and if he reveals her as someone who is loose with the truth and provides examples.


----------



## Aminamina

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, shaking my head, this is a perfect example of why these snobs do not deserve titles.
> _Inherited poise and etiquette??? Naturally exude a charisma and panache?   _
> 
> Article from 2021
> _Jean-Guilhem Lamberti, Chief Creative Officer, Accor, tells me, “Accor has many brands with the most incredible DNAs. Raffles’ very first advertising referenced its link to royalty. For its renewed ambition and strong development plan, we immediately thought of Peter Greenaway to gather the most impressive cast. The strongest names, monarchs whose families have ruled for centuries, one crowned the unofficial Maharaja of Jaipur. A Danish prince of Chinese descent. A princess of French American origin proudly carrying the name of her beloved Greece on her passport. A mother and daughter from the only family ever carrying both royal and imperial titles, descending from Empress Elisabeth of Austria and Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France. A cousin of Lady Diana and descendant of Sir Winston Churchill. We presented the project to each member personally and were surprised to see how well they knew the brand, its iconic landmark in Singapore, and other Raffles properties around the world. *With instinctively inherited poise and etiquette, they naturally exuded a charisma and panache we immediately fell in love with.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raffles Hotel Launches Stunning New Campaign Featuring Actual Royalty
> 
> 
> The campaign pays tribute to the brand’s storied history with a multi-generational cast of modern-day royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Talking about the “wedding general”, wow. Who writes such a low crap? My guess is they were targeting Nouveau riche clientele…like TW, lol


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think it will appeal to a niche audience for sure and, depending on what he reveals, it'll get huge headlines,  especially if he contradicts many things she's said about her family and background, and if he reveals her as someone who is loose with the truth and provides examples.


what will it get him?  if it doesn't sell a lot of copies, then not a lot of money, right?  publicity?  good or bad?


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> The bolded part... He looks classier, more mature and like the bigger person by staying quiet. He already remarried and had a baby not too long ago, why start now? What is he going to gain from wasting his time writing and releasing a book about the crazy ex-wife?
> 
> Unless his current wife is a money and attention hungry person, she might not want bad spotlight on Trevor and to have crazy SSquad starting a smear campaign, where she and her baby will likely get dragged into the whole mess.



I thought Trevor married an heiress 

Why do all these people's lives sound like they come out of a Aaron Spelling soap from the '70s/80s?


----------



## charlottawill

Aminamina said:


> "discarded rocket booster Trevor"


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I thought Trevor married and heiress
> 
> Why do all these people's lives sound like they come out of a Aaron Spelling soap from the '70s/80s?


The British royals are surpassing anything Spelling came up with on Dynasty.


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> Talking about the “wedding general”, wow. Who writes such a low crap? My guess is they were targeting Nouveau riche clientele…like TW, lol



You got it!

Engagement parties, weddings, honeymooning / renewal of vowel couples, once in a lifetime travellers, 'bespoke' luxe packages, nouveau, product launches etc


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> I thought Trevor married and heiress
> 
> Why do all these people's lives sound like they come out of a Aaron Spelling soap from the '70s/80s?


They all should just battle it out on Jerry Springer's show


----------



## youngster

EverSoElusive said:


> The bolded part... He looks classier, more mature and like the bigger person by staying quiet. He already remarried and had a baby not too long ago, why start now? What is he going to gain from wasting his time writing and releasing a book about the crazy ex-wife?



Could be his own career isn't going well and he could use the money? He has lots of first hand information, receipts to prove it, and someone willing to pay for it. Very similar to what Harry is doing right now with his book. If she weren't the target, Meghan would approve lol!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Trevor is a highly successful producer.  Look at his successes.

ETA - no way a spare royal compares









						Trevor Engelson - IMDb
					

Trevor Engelson was born on October 23, 1976 in Great Neck, Long Island, New York, USA. He is a producer and manager, known for Deep Blue Sea (1999), ...




					www.imdb.com


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The British royals are surpassing anything Spelling came up with on Dynasty.



Didn't Dynasty have a real Yugoslavian Princess playing a petulant daughter/DIL???? 

Sorry, I never watched but I do know she had battles with her own daughter and had to kidnap from a cult 

Actually, thinking about it my friend's mother would have been a Hungarian princess (explained a lot about my friend's behaviour too). Definitely some "genetic pain" running through that family. 

Makes me worry for H&M's kids


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Could be his own career isn't going well and he could use the money? He has lots of first hand information, receipts to prove it, and someone willing to pay for it. Very similar to what Harry is doing right now with his book. *If she weren't the target, Meghan would approve lol!!*



MegZ would want 50%


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> MegZ would want 50%


She's greedy. It would be 99%


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> She's greedy. It would be 99%



MegZ will definitely be looking for her NDA hush money back, that's for sure (was a #Blind Item a while ago)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ut oh, I see a conflict - he was producer on this documentary.  









						L.A. Burning: The Riots 25 Years Later (TV Movie 2017) - IMDb
					

L.A. Burning: The Riots 25 Years Later: Directed by One9, Erik Parker. With George Holliday, John Singleton, Michael Winters, Henry Keith Watson. L.A BURNING: The Riots 25 Years Later is a 2-hour documentary film exploring the lives of the people at the flashpoint of the LA riots, 25 years after...




					www.imdb.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> MegZ will definitely be looking for her NDA hush money back, that's for sure (was a #Blind Item a while ago)


Or she might try to sue Trevor and the attorney that drew up the NDA


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Or she might try to sue Trevor and the attorney that drew up the NDA



Great, then we'll know all about it


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> You got it!
> 
> Engagement parties, weddings, honeymooning / renewal of vowel couples, once in a lifetime travellers, 'bespoke' luxe packages, nouveau, product launches etc


It kind of fits the description of MM&JCMH “talents” for rent…coming soon next to ya! Dial-A-Duchess


----------



## papertiger

Aminamina said:


> It kind of fits the description of MM&JCMH “talents” for rent…coming soon next to ya! Dial-A-Duchess



Shame. 

She was supposed to marry him and become a Working Royal.   

Instead he married her and became a party low-rent


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Great, then we'll know all about it


The crazy is so desperate for attention and to be in the news cycle, she will leak it herself or have her unofficial mouthpieces drop breadcrumbs everywhere so that we know all about her dirty laundry  She has zero class and does not know when to stop.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Shame.
> 
> She was supposed to marry him and *become a Working Royal*.
> 
> Instead he married her and became a party low-rent


Weren't they trying to change the world? Didn't they say that their marriage would allow them to do some good and champion some causes? I mean, they lie so much that I can't really keep up with what's being said and when   I mean, I am old so please excuse my memory


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Weren't they trying to change the world? Didn't they say that their marriage would allow them to do some good and champion some causes? I mean, they lie so much they I can't really keep up with what's being said and when   I mean, I am old so please excuse my memory



That was (so) last year 

Gotta change with the times,

CoZ the timeZ, they are a cha-ching


----------



## Aminamina

EverSoElusive said:


> The crazy is so desperate for attention and to be in the news cycle, she will leak it herself or have her unofficial mouthpieces drop breadcrumbs everywhere so that we know all about her dirty laundry  She has zero class and does not know when to stop.


I seriously wonder if Kim Kardashian and Kris Jenner names are being pronounced in the Montesito as the aspiration or a way out…


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> I think it will appeal to a niche audience for sure and, depending on what he reveals, it'll get huge headlines,  especially if he contradicts many things she's said about her family and background, and if he reveals her as someone who is loose with the truth and provides examples.


You would think that even Hazz has to notice the amount of people coming out of the woodwork and accusing her of bullying and writing dam*ing books about her.  Any normal person would be questioning themselves and thinking "who did I just marry?"


----------



## csshopper

Aminamina said:


> As the discarded rocket booster Trevor should have a lot of material to share


I wonder if he saved the mailer envelope she used to return her wedding rings to him: Toronto to LA? It would make a great visual statement, cold hearted B**CH. Cheap too if the report is true she “mailed” them, not “shipped“ them.


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> *Didn't Dynasty have a real Yugoslavian Princess playing a petulant daughter/DIL????*
> 
> Sorry, I never watched but I do know she had battles with her own daughter and had to kidnap from a cult
> 
> Actually, thinking about it my friend's mother would have been a Hungarian princess (explained a lot about my friend's behaviour too). Definitely some "genetic pain" running through that family.
> 
> Makes me worry for H&M's kids



Dynasty did!  Catherine Oxenberg.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trevor is a highly successful producer.  Look at his successes.
> 
> ETA - no way a spare royal compares
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trevor Engelson - IMDb
> 
> 
> Trevor Engelson was born on October 23, 1976 in Great Neck, Long Island, New York, USA. He is a producer and manager, known for Deep Blue Sea (1999), ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


And, he is well groomed in contrast to her disheveled, smelly looking, sometimes stoned current husband who lives with a snarl on his face.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> That was (so) last year
> 
> Gotta change with the times,
> 
> CoZ the timeZ, they are a cha-ching
> 
> 
> View attachment 5620922
> View attachment 5620923


So I was not losing my mind. They definitely talked about working as a team to champion causes and serve the commonwealth. It's all in the engagement interview transcript, too long to copy so here's the link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnew...arkles-engagement-interview/story?id=51415779

Of course Harry was gushing how capable the crazy is


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> And, he is well groomed in contrast to her disheveled, smelly looking, sometimes stoned current husband who lives with a snarl on his face.


I find Trevor to be rather attractive


----------



## Chanbal

People may have forgotten that Hazz has a 4-book deal! Whatever he doesn't include in book 1, he has 3 additional books to fantasize…


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ut oh, I see a conflict - he was producer on this documentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> L.A. Burning: The Riots 25 Years Later (TV Movie 2017) - IMDb
> 
> 
> L.A. Burning: The Riots 25 Years Later: Directed by One9, Erik Parker. With George Holliday, John Singleton, Michael Winters, Henry Keith Watson. L.A BURNING: The Riots 25 Years Later is a 2-hour documentary film exploring the lives of the people at the flashpoint of the LA riots, 25 years after...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


Great catch, CarryOn2020.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Hmmm...I wasn't sure if the Trevor book was a real thing, or just someone hoping he would write one...



Is this going to be a Tom Bower's book with Trevor's collaboration? If yes, wow!!!!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> An explanation on titles in the UK…




Thank you, very well explained! 

No titles, because the titles are not 'automatic'. Had they been, they would have been up on the LoS page. 

KC is the fount of all honours

NO titles, and that better be the way it stays.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Trevor is a highly successful producer. Look at his successes.
> 
> ETA - no way a spare royal compares



I checked his IMDB resume and I've not heard of many of his projects. He has a TV series, where he is Executive Producer, that is still running. I checked and there are many Executive Producers listed.  So, who knows how profitable his projects have been.  Could be that an extra million dollars or so would come in handy!  

He may be happily married with a young child now himself but he could still be salty over how she treated him.  They had a really long relationship, though they were married a fairly short time.  When she was through with him, she treated him like dirt, mailed his rings back to him, maybe she cheated on him when she was in Toronto for Suits and he knows about it?  Would not surprise me.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Dynasty did!  Catherine Oxenberg.



Thank you, thank you, thank you


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> And, he is well groomed in contrast to her disheveled, smelly looking, sometimes stoned current husband who lives with a snarl on his face.


Trev grew up in a nice upper middle class family in Great Neck, NY. His parents never warmed up to her and the feeling was mutual. They were most likely relieved when the divorce happened and are thrilled now with current wife and grandchildren. Happy ending for all of them. I hope he doesn’t sully himself with writing a book


----------



## BlueCherry

charlottawill said:


> The British royals are surpassing anything Spelling came up with on Dynasty.



No way, I’d rather watch Alexis and Krstal wrestle than Catherine and Meghan


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> I checked his IMDB resume and I've not heard of many of his projects. He has a TV series, where he is Executive Producer, that is still running. I checked and there are many Executive Producers listed.  So, who knows how profitable his projects have been.  Could be that an extra million dollars or so would come in handy!
> 
> He may be happily married with a young child now himself but he could still be salty over how she treated him.  They had a really long relationship, though they were married a fairly short time.  When she was through with him, she treated him like dirt, mailed his rings back to him, maybe she cheated on him when she was in Toronto for Suits and he knows about it?  Would not surprise me.


Trevor is in the entertainment industry. I would be surprised if someone he knows somehow heard something through the grapevine or saw something, and not share it with him.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> So I was not losing my mind. They definitely talked about working as a team to champion causes and serve the commonwealth. It's all in the engagement interview transcript, too long to copy so here's the link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Entertainment/full-transcript-prince-harry-meghan-markles-engagement-interview/story?id=51415779
> 
> Of course Harry was gushing how capable the crazy is


The BLG did an analysis of the Interview. At Haz’s mention of their being a “team” and working with the family, her facial expression did a momentary mask slip and foretold the future, “No way in Hell, I’m a star and a solo act, F*** teamwork!”


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> People may have forgotten that Hazz has a 4-book deal! Whatever he doesn't include in book 1, he has 3 additional books to fantasize…



I don't think he's even read 4 books in his life.

So, it'll be _Harry's Memoirs Volumes I - IV _or maybe he'll only have enough material for 2 or 3 books on his family.  He could then write: _How To Maximize Your Family Connections and Title: A Handbook for the Lower Born Royal.  _


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> The BLG did an analysis of the Interview. At Haz’s mention of their being a “team” and working with the family, her facial expression did a momentary mask slip and foretold the future, “No way in Hell, I’m a star and a solo act, F*** teamwork!”


That's the least that we can expect from her being a narcissist. She definitely doesn't care about teamwork. Her mask slip is kind of scary sometimes. She has this crazy look in her eyes like she's about to murder someone


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, shaking my head, this is a perfect example of why these snobs do not deserve titles.
> _Inherited poise and etiquette??? Naturally exude a charisma and panache?  _
> 
> Article from 2021
> _Jean-Guilhem Lamberti, Chief Creative Officer, Accor, tells me, “Accor has many brands with the most incredible DNAs. Raffles’ very first advertising referenced its link to royalty. For its renewed ambition and strong development plan, we immediately thought of Peter Greenaway to gather the most impressive cast. The strongest names, monarchs whose families have ruled for centuries, one crowned the unofficial Maharaja of Jaipur. A Danish prince of Chinese descent. A princess of French American origin proudly carrying the name of her beloved Greece on her passport. A mother and daughter from the only family ever carrying both royal and imperial titles, descending from Empress Elisabeth of Austria and Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France. A cousin of Lady Diana and descendant of Sir Winston Churchill. We presented the project to each member personally and were surprised to see how well they knew the brand, its iconic landmark in Singapore, and other Raffles properties around the world. *With instinctively inherited poise and etiquette, they naturally exuded a charisma and panache we immediately fell in love with.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raffles Hotel Launches Stunning New Campaign Featuring Actual Royalty
> 
> 
> The campaign pays tribute to the brand’s storied history with a multi-generational cast of modern-day royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I'm with you on those snobs not deserving the titles. Though, the article brought memories of the amazing Raffles Hotel. I wish I could book a trip and fly to Singapore now.


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> I don't think he's even read 4 books in his life.
> 
> So, it'll be _Harry's Memoirs Volumes I - IV _or maybe he'll only have enough material for 2 or 3 books on his family.  He could then write: _How To Maximize Your Family Connections and Title: A Handbook for the Lower Born Royal.  _


If he's out of ideas, I'm sure the crazy will gladly provide him with plagiarized material   Maybe she would ask him to make her his ghost writer so she can get paid.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

EverSoElusive said:


> I find Trevor to be rather attractive



A little look of Matthew McConnaughey. Yum


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> *what will it get him?*  if it doesn't sell a lot of copies, then not a lot of money, right?  publicity?  good or bad?


----------



## Aimee3

I’m all for Trevor’s book.  He’s known M longer than H has.  I hope he makes a ton of money with it.  After all he was with her 10 crazy years!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I don't think he's even read 4 books in his life.
> 
> So, it'll be _Harry's Memoirs Volumes I - IV _or maybe he'll only have enough material for 2 or 3 books on his family.  He could then write: _How To Maximize Your Family Connections and Title: A Handbook for the Lower Born Royal.  _


The Cat in the Hat was on Harry’s advanced reading list and he didn’t get past the first few pages. Dick and Jane is still his favorite book.


----------



## papertiger

BlueCherry said:


> No way, I’d rather watch Alexis and Krstal wrestle than Catherine and Meghan



Me too! More teeth, fewer tears, more shoulder-pads, fewer tiaras

I prefer Collins ju-jitsu jibes over Markle's compulsive claw any day of the week


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> I’m all for Trevor’s book.  He’s known M longer than H has.  I hope he makes a ton of money with it.  After all he was with her 10 crazy years!


If he really knew her, he wouldn’t have been so blindsided by finding her wedding ring in his mailbox.


----------



## DL Harper

Aimee3 said:


> I’m all for Trevor’s book.  He’s known M longer than H has.  I hope he makes a ton of money with it.  After all he was with her 10 crazy years!


nm


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Apologies if already posted.
> 
> It was when Sarah told the world that she got plantar warts after trying on Diana’s shoes.  Fergie and Andi have always been a low level type of royal, almost exactly like H&M.
> 
> The article is a really good summary of the Diana-Fergie relationship:
> 
> _In 1996, the Yorks officially divorced, leaving Fergie with mounting debts and life as a single mother. She penned her autobiography My Story the same year, a move Diana gave her approval for. The only thing — she didn't want the Duchess to mention her.
> 
> While the two, now both former members of the royal family, had had a tumultuous friendship, one simple line in Fergie's bestseller put the final nail in the coffin of her relationship with Diana. She wrote: "*Diana helped me by giving me all her shoes (and less happily, her plantar warts)."*
> No matter that it was only a brief mention of a very common, minor ailment, the Princess was infuriated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The tragic reason Princess Diana ditched Fergie - NZ Herald
> 
> 
> They were the Meghan and Kate of their day, until a bitter falling out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nzherald.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Yeah I’d be fuming if someone wrote they caught something off me in a book- especially someone who does all the grubby things S did.


EverSoElusive said:


> Can you imagine Z-list trying to do this???  Even someone as graceful as CP Mary was having a little bit of trouble, I wonder how much worse it would be if it was Z-list. Imagine her courtiers trying to teach her and she tells them that she knows how to dance AND picks a gown with a train along with the highest possible stilettos that she could find, preferably a pair of Aquazurra that was swiped from somewhere. Oh the trainwreck!



This video makes me feel so nostalgic for a Viennese ball and I’ve never been   


Chanbal said:


> I think the first paragraph of the CNN article about the normal curiosity is timeless. What I found interesting is the apparent double standard.


I agree with you totally they should’ve pulled this out of the archives after the Oprah interview. 


Toby93 said:


> I think the big difference between Fergie and TW is that Fergie didn't go on national TV and trash the BRF.  For all her other ridiculous stunts, she did not start out with an agenda, and I think that TW only had one thought in her head - hook herself a prince and get back to Hollywood to flaunt him, since the acting thing obviously wasn't making her famous.
> 
> Fergie went on Oprah, but I don't recall any huge backlash or media frenzy because it was pretty tame.  Oprah actually had the gall to ask her to wear a tiara since she is not above making a fool of people as long as it makes her money.  Sarah had enough sense to say no to that.
> 
> 
> I believe that their marriage failed because Andrew was so involved in his naval career and he was not around.  It has been stated in many articles that at one point, he was home only 40 something days out of the year.  I do think they do truly get along well and that is why she is back with him after so many years.


Sorry I’ll move on from this but I think it was more differing opportunities rather than differing morals personally 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Until very recently Germany didn't do engagement rings. In my grandmother's generation, the engagement ring was the wedding band worn on the left hand, then at the wedding it changed to the right hand.
> 
> Then for some years traditional engagements fell out of favour and deemed oldfashioned (a little weird as legally an engagement is the agreement to marry, so you can't get married without former engagement, but whatever).
> 
> It's just in recent years American/British style engagement rings are on the rise, but German men would never consider dropping that kind of money so it's either tiny or fake stones. Which I personally find insulting  Like no, I don't do cubic circonia and I'm also not wearing out a 25 pointer/1/4 carat of solitaire, sorry not sorry.


I’m amazed to hear the German fellas have been getting away with CZ or nothing all these years. I feel routinely shamed for not having a 2 carat plus in platinum here on TPF 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> What cost to the taxpayer, though. They basically maintain themselves through the Crown Estate AND give in the hundreds of millions of what said Crown Estate generates back to the government. What extra cost does the taxpayer take on, security?


Not to get into it but the idea they make more than they cost is disputed and the crown estates and resources would I imagine become property of the British state if we didn’t have a monarchy same as in France etc. 


youngster said:


> I think Queen Margreth's decision was also possibly influenced by both Prince Joachim's sons quickly dropping out of their 2 year military programs and then both using their titles in their modeling careers. I can't imagine she was pleased by any of that.  Joachim and his family live in France now too. Supposedly Prince Joachim has not gotten on well with his older brother, CP Frederik, and supposedly their wives do not get along well, so it's got some interesting parallels to the Harry/MM situation.


Lol they should be happy their kids can still get modelling work - the small gene pool has worked in their favourz 


Toby93 said:


> Hmmm...I wasn't sure if the Trevor book was a real thing, or just someone hoping he would write one...



this weave works better on her than her usual. It’s giving me Rachel from friends a little bit but I think it’s mainly the finer texture being a better weight for her rather than the colour.

I don’t begrudge another chip in the facade so go for it t


----------



## bellecate

xincinsin said:


> There were rumours back then that she had allegedly claimed to be preggers to force a quick hitching. And rumours after the wedding of people allegedly overhearing Handbag question her if the Archie pregnancy was real unlike the previous one.
> 
> Everything they do has to be so OTT.


They just become bigger and bigger jokes as more comes out about them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> This is good! It brings to mind some of TW's comments…



I agree the false modesty is a bit grating 


Am I getting old or are all the pretty boys getting a bit too….boyish?
I feel like I should be reminding Timothy Chalomet to pack his PE kit.

It is so weird because for most of Hollywood history teens have been played by people clearly in their late 30s (cough John Travolta cough) 


Chanbal said:


> Is this going to be a Tom Bower's book with Trevor's collaboration? If yes, wow!!!!


That’d be interesting, it’d make sense why it’s coming out now if he only recently met TB and he convinced him to do it - maybe H isn’t the only one with a ghost writer


gracekelly said:


> Trev grew up in a nice upper middle class family in Great Neck, NY. His parents never warmed up to her and the feeling was mutual. They were most likely relieved when the divorce happened and are thrilled now with current wife and grandchildren. Happy ending for all of them. I hope he doesn’t sully himself with writing a book


Coincidentally Great Neck is what M credits for getting so far in life


----------



## youngster

So, I read the link about Trevor's upcoming book and it seems like it is not actually Trevor's book but Tom Bowers is including chapters on Trevor in his next book. It appears that Trevor may have talked with him.  Maybe I read the article wrong?  I just skimmed it quickly.


----------



## DL Harper

Anyone know the difference in these two books?  Both are by Valentine Low, but with different publishers, ISBN #s and number of pages.
To be released/available in June 2023 with the Wales' and Sussex' on the cover:
Courtiers: Intrigue, Ambition, and the Power Players Behind the House of Windsor​
Available in Oct 2022 with the crown on the cover:
Courtiers : The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations​(Even the "crown" cover shows a different ISBN and number of pages for the Oct 2022 & March 2023 paperback books.)

How am I to know which juicy book to order??


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I checked his IMDB resume and I've not heard of many of his projects. He has a TV series, where he is Executive Producer, that is still running. I checked and there are many Executive Producers listed.  So, who knows how profitable his projects have been.  Could be that an extra million dollars or so would come in handy!
> 
> He may be happily married with a young child now himself but he could still be salty over how she treated him.  They had a really long relationship, though they were married a fairly short time.  When she was through with him, she treated him like dirt, mailed his rings back to him, maybe she cheated on him when she was in Toronto for Suits and he knows about it?  Would not surprise me.


Santa Baby - you haven’t seen that one?  Yeah, me either. 
To my eye and I could be wrong, it looks like lots of low budget, low IQ type shows.  I don’t watch those.  My point was he appears to have plenty of jobs, unlike Hazz.  An extra million hurts no one imo. 

He did this one - I haven’t seen it either. 
Harry and Meghan: A Windsor Wedding​
2018
Not Rated
57m
IMDb RATING
2.8/10
104
YOUR RATING

Rate






https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8443794/mediaviewer/rm1700086272/?ref_=tt_ov_i
Documentary
Featuring the complete first ever public interview of the couple together on 27th November 2017, it also features testimonials and interviews from the people who know them the best. Join us as we celebrate the engagement of Harry and Meghan

Director
Jordan  Hill


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I thought Trevor married an heiress
> 
> Why do all these people's lives sound like they come out of a Aaron Spelling soap from the '70s/80s?


Reading Trev’s page at IMDB, his creative output stopped about the time marriage to MM fell apart
Did he lose his muse ??


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> Dynasty did!  Catherine Oxenberg.


Well, CO’s mom was a Princess, but CO had no title, she must have been stripped, poor baby, the daughter of a Princess is not a Princess


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

DL Harper said:


> Anyone know the difference in these two books?  Both are by Valentine Low, but with different publishers, ISBN #s and number of pages.
> To be released/available in June 2023 with the Wales' and Sussex' on the cover:
> Courtiers: Intrigue, Ambition, and the Power Players Behind the House of Windsor​
> Available in Oct 2022 with the crown on the cover:
> Courtiers : The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations​(Even the "crown" cover shows a different ISBN and number of pages for the Oct 2022 & March 2023 paperback books.)
> 
> How am I to know which juicy book to order??


My guess the 2023 will be about the same book, with additional newer chapters - funeral, title changes , podcasts etc - and a few edits


----------



## Chanbal

Hopefully this will not be used as an excuse to entertain the nice people of Montecito. Charles needs to put his country ahead of well mannered Hazz imo.










						Danish royal family is 'in the midst its own Megxit, expert says
					

Queen Margrethe, 82, has removed princely titles from four of her eight grandchildren - prompting a bitter royal row with her family redolent of when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex quit the UK.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> She and Trevor were together for 10+ years apparently.  He's likely got a lot of information on her. What she was like. How much time they spent with her family.  What Doria was like. What Thomas was like. Her relationships with her half-siblings.  Her career.  Their romance and relationship and how they grew apart and how she ended it. Meghan and Harry's prospects as Hollywood producers from a guy who is a Hollywood producer.  I think there will be enough for a very juicy book.
> 
> Btw, when Harry and MM got engaged and then quickly married, I think it was discussed in this thread that it was likely Trevor would stay silent for awhile as he didn't want to be seen as a jealous ex when everyone was falling all over Harry/MM.  He wanted to be seen as a good, stand up guy among his Hollywood friends and co-workers and people who might have the power to greenlight his own projects.  There was also speculation that he might have been paid off by Meghan even.  But, a few of us speculated that he would wait a few years, see how things were going, see how the wind was blowing with popular opinion, and_ then_ write his book, which is what he appears to be doing.


I read that at the wedding Trevor said he and his family would be the one she never had.

So, it could just be the same old story with Trevor too.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Well, CO’s mom was a Princess, but CO had no title, she must have been stripped, poor baby, the daughter of a Princess is not a Princess



From Wikki:

"Through her maternal grandmother, Catherine is a first cousin once removed of: Prince Edward, Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy and Prince Michael of Kent. Oxenberg is also a second cousin once removed of Queen Sofía of Spain and Charles III of the United Kingdom, making Catherine a third cousin of Felipe VI of Spain and Prince William, Prince of Wales."

*Which also makes her third cousin of HaZZer *(was she at the H&M wedding?) Probably washing hair hair that day.

She also played *Harry's mother *Diana Spencer in 1982 in the the Royal Romance of Charles and Diana (see, I'm keeping it on topic!)

Saw a pic, she is gorgeous!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hopefully this will not be used as an excuse to entertain the greedy people of Montecito. Charles needs to put his country ahead of spoiled Hazz imo.
> View attachment 5621010
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Danish royal family is 'in the midst its own Megxit, expert says
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe, 82, has removed princely titles from four of her eight grandchildren - prompting a bitter royal row with her family redolent of when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex quit the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Rubbish. 

KC hs already done all he's going to do and waved them farewell "overseas"


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> I read that at the wedding Trevor said he and his family would be the one she never had.
> 
> So, it could just be the same old story with Trevor too.



OK, now I'm really spooked. 

Someone send in the white coats and the


----------



## youngster

papertiger said:


> She also played *Harry's mother *Diana Spencer in 1982 in the the Royal Romance of Charles and Diana (see, I'm keeping it on topic!)
> 
> Saw a pic, she is gorgeous!



Catherine Oxenberg was really pretty and is still a very attractive woman. I watched Dynasty back in the day haha!

I just re-read her wikipedia bio and she went to Harvard.  She's had an interesting and colorful life.  She was married to big time producer Robert Evans for 9 days but it was annulled.  She married Casper Van Dien and has 2 daughters with him and a 3rd daughter with a convicted drug dealer who she rescued from a cult. (She rescued the daughter, not the drug dealer.)  In 2005, she and Van Dien appeared in their own reality series, _I Married A Princess_.   So, there is quite the precedent for Harry and MM's reality show lol.


----------



## Chanbal

One more book on the way?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DL Harper said:


> Anyone know the difference in these two books?  Both are by Valentine Low, but with different publishers, ISBN #s and number of pages.
> To be released/available in June 2023 with the Wales' and Sussex' on the cover:
> Courtiers: Intrigue, Ambition, and the Power Players Behind the House of Windsor​
> Available in Oct 2022 with the crown on the cover:
> Courtiers : The inside story of the Palace power struggles from the Royal correspondent who revealed the bullying allegations​(Even the "crown" cover shows a different ISBN and number of pages for the Oct 2022 & March 2023 paperback books.)
> 
> How am I to know which juicy book to order??



The 2022 one is the UK version, the 2023 one the US version. It's not unusual to change up the cover/title.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> One more book on the way?


----------



## BlueCherry

Chanbal said:


> Hopefully this will not be used as an excuse to entertain the greedy people of Montecito. Charles needs to put his country ahead of spoiled Hazz imo.
> View attachment 5621010
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Danish royal family is 'in the midst its own Megxit, expert says
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe, 82, has removed princely titles from four of her eight grandchildren - prompting a bitter royal row with her family redolent of when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex quit the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Charles doesn’t have to do anything in regards to the titles. Just sit quiet and watch those two have a melt down which will give him reason to hopefully strip them of theirs. Problem solved.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> One more book on the way?




Some of us called it. So wild. How could the BRF let this happen. What did they miscalculate.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The 2022 one is the UK version, the 2023 one the US version. It's not unusual to change up the cover/title.



I find that annoying. Sometimes my UK ebook has a different title to the title on the cover as it’s a US author


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> who did I just marry?"


But that's the thing, he didn't just marry her. He's lived with her for four years and has seen behind the mask. If he chooses to stay he's as bad as she is.


----------



## Chanbal

The divorce is official! I wonder if the rumors about the money shortage in Motecitoland are also real! 

_"I can disclose that the *couple have ditched Sunshine Sachs*, the New York-based public relations outfit that *has been advising Meghan Markle since her days as an actress on legal drama Suits*.

‘This is a really big deal for Meghan,’ a source tells me. ‘*She takes the view that she doesn’t need to pay an outside firm a lot of money to do PR for her and Harry anymore*.’

*Sunshine Sachs partner Keleigh Thomas Morgan played a key role in establishing the Sussexes in California, sharing her contacts and a powerful network of advisers and famous friends.*

A long-term friend of Meghan’s, *she also helped devise the strategy for the couple’s African tour in 2019* when they were still working members of the Royal Family_."



			archive.ph


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> But that's the thing, he didn't just marry her. He's lived with her for four years and has seen behind the mask. If he chooses to stay he's as bad as she is.



We (the world) has heard M threaten the BRF more than twice in no uncertain terms. What's the betting she more than enough on Harry to make him worry about stuff being leaked if he did not go along with whatever.


----------



## DL Harper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us called it. So wild. How could the BRF let this happen. What did they miscalculate.


Had the BRF tried to "stop" the H&M relationship & wedding, it would have created the same H&M sh*t show we have now.  BRF would have been in a no win situation.  Hell if you do, hell if you don't.  It became a risk BRF was willing to take if H followed through, giving BRF an opportunity to let MM expose herself for who she really was/is.  So perhaps not a "miscalculation" on the BRF part, but a calculation with the "dirt" they had on MM and keeping their cards close.    
PA was never going to tell that he had (potentially) met MM while "yachting". (What has Ghislaine got to lose at this point if she spills info??)  Maybe PA wasn't fully aware of what BRF and QEII already knew about MM and even his own partying.    
QEII may have been a somewhat absent mum in early motherhood - having nannies, Monarch responsibilities etc. - but she still seemed to be well aware of what the "kids" were up to - the good and the no good.  After all, she stripped PA & H of their military and working royal status.  The Monarchy wasn't likely be taken down by a measly little nobody who thought she had entered a beauty and popularity contestant to win Queen of the UK and most respected woman of the world.
Again, playing the long game and handing out rope.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> "The divorce is official!"


Don't tease me! I got excited for a second.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> People may have forgotten that Hazz has a 4-book deal! Whatever he doesn't include in book 1, he has 3 additional books to fantasize…




FOUR books? He hardly has material for one!
And certainly he is no Proust but let’s try:

-In search of my lost mum
-Meghans’s way (or the highway)
-The Prisoner
-The Fugitive

Apologies to Proust (there are seven books but I am still surprised he was given a contract for 4 with NIL drafts…or talent)


----------



## csshopper

BlueCherry said:


> I find that annoying. Sometimes my UK ebook has a different title to the title on the cover as it’s a US author


Also annoying,  the teaser that Bowers book coming out in the US next week has new chapters added, but no intel on what’s included.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pukasonqo said:


> FOUR books? He hardly has material for one!
> And certainly he is no Proust but let’s try:
> 
> -In search of my lost mum
> -Meghans’s way (or the highway)
> -The Prisoner
> -The Fugitive
> 
> Apologies to Proust


Perhaps he has 5 books - Polo, My Way


----------



## Chanbal

DL Harper said:


> *Had the BRF tried to "stop" the H&M relationship & wedding, it would have created the same H&M sh*t show we have now. * BRF would have been in a no win situation.  Hell if you do, hell if you don't.  It became a risk BRF was willing to take if H followed through, giving BRF an opportunity to let MM expose herself for who she really was/is.  So perhaps not a "miscalculation" on the BRF part, but a calculation with the "dirt" they had on MM and keeping their cards close.
> PA was never going to tell that he had (potentially) met MM while "yachting". (What has Ghislaine got to lose at this point if she spills info??)  Maybe PA wasn't fully aware of what BRF and QEII already knew about MM and even his own partying.
> QEII may have been a somewhat absent mum in early motherhood - having nannies, Monarch responsibilities etc. - but she still seemed to be well aware of what the "kids" were up to - the good and the no good.  After all, she stripped PA & H of their military and working royal status.  The Monarchy wasn't likely be taken down by a measly little nobody who thought she had entered a beauty and popularity contestant to win Queen of the UK and most respected woman of the world.
> Again, playing the long game and handing out rope.


Many posts ago there was some info about how Hazz made sure his family would accept his future-TW. It wasn't pretty. He was in his 30s, there wasn't much they could have done. However, Charles must pursue his plans of slimming down the monarchy. Will the Harkles be furious? Yes. Will the Harkles try to destroy their families? They seem to have been doing that for a long time. TM had several strokes. There is a video posted not long ago about the attacks SM has suffered from a certain squad. Prince Philip and QE seem to have had very tough last years since TW joined the family.
To me the only way to neutralize them is to cut all royal ties with them and let them talk until they get tired and stop. If they are smart, they will keep quiet and work on strengthening the family ties with all sides of the family, the Markles, Raglands, and Windsors. My 2 cents, of course!


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


>


Given all the books they’ve spawned they could probably badger some Publishers Association to grant them an Award for (unwittingly) Encouraging Literacy, minus The Bench of course.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Well, CO’s mom was a Princess, but CO had no title, she must have been stripped, poor baby, the daughter of a Princess is not a Princess


Her father was a commoner, Howard Oxenberg.  No titles there.


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> Many posts ago there was some info about how Hazz made sure his family would accept his future-TW. It wasn't pretty. He was in his 30s, there wasn't much they could have done. However, Charles must pursue his plans of slimming down the monarchy. Will the Harkles be furious? Yes. Will the Harkles try to destroy their families? They seem to have been doing that for a long time. TM has several strokes. There is a video posted not long ago about the attacks SM has suffered from a certain squad. Prince Philip and QE seem to have had very tough last years since TW joined the family.
> To me the only way to neutralize them is to cut all royal ties with them and let them talk until they get tired and stop. If they are smart, they will keep quiet and work on strengthening the family ties with all sides of the family, the Markles, Raglands, and Windsors.


So sad that one amateur ventriloquist and her dummy can create such a wide swath of destruction, particularly on the world stage. 
Every family - big, small, famous or not deserves to function in a peaceful manner despite differences.  The constant waiting for "the other shoe to drop" has to be nerve wracking, devastating and so very disappointing.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Given all the books they’ve spawned they could probably badger *some Publishers Association to grant them an Award for* (unwittingly) *Encouraging Literacy, minus The Bench of course*.


This is so good that brought (laughing) tears to my eyes.   A literary award for the Harkles. 

The Bench could be the exception that proves the rule.


----------



## pukasonqo

Meghan according to Hazza:

My lady of the Various Sorrows
Some begged, some borrowed, some stolen
Some kept safe for tomorrow
-Do you love me-Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds

I feel sorry for SM because she has MS and stress can lead to relapses so the last thing she needs is a bunch of derranged sugars attacking her 

Many losers and hardly any winners in this story


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Many posts ago there was some info about how Hazz made sure his family would accept his future-TW. It wasn't pretty. He was in his 30s, there wasn't much they could have done. However, Charles must pursue his plans of slimming down the monarchy. Will the Harkles be furious? Yes. Will the Harkles try to destroy their families? They seem to have been doing that for a long time. TM had several strokes. There is a video posted not long ago about the attacks SM has suffered from a certain squad. Prince Philip and QE seem to have had very tough last years since TW joined the family.
> To me the only way to neutralize them is to cut all royal ties with them and let them talk until they get tired and stop. If they are smart, they will keep quiet and work on strengthening the family ties with all sides of the family, the Markles, Raglands, and Windsors. My 2 cents, of course!


They could have said have a quiet wedding as she is a divorcee.  That would have at least spared us that sh*t show.  He would have had a hissy fit and she wouldn't have liked it.  Tough.   The real problem with Harry is that no one ever said no to him in his life.  I have seen kids like this and they all end up overentitled and when things go bad, they end up living with mom and dad again.  Just like Omid Scobie living in his parent's basement.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She must be a hammer - she sees nails everywhere.  Sheesh

By V Low  

_If Harry’s energy and enthusiasm were one side of the coin, his frustration with the system was the other.

‘He’d feel frustrated by the bureaucracy, being told “you cannot do that, you cannot visit them, you cannot announce this there, because there is something else happening with the palace”,’ said one source. ‘It rattled him . . . It made him think: “I’m being held back, I’m having my time wasted.”’

Harry’s biggest problem, one that no one could talk him out of, was that he believed his time was running out.

‘He had this thing, that he had a shelf life,’ says one insider. ‘He was fixated [on] this. He would compare himself with his uncle [Prince Andrew].

‘He would say: “I have this time to make this impact. Because I can.” Until [Prince] George turns 18, was the way he was thinking about it. “Then I will be the also-ran.”’

His staff tried to dissuade him, telling him: ‘You can still have an impact in your 40s, 50s, even longer. So long as you set the right foundations now. You’re not going to retire like a footballer at 35.’

But Harry never saw that. He just thought he had to have the biggest impact he could before people forgot about him.









						Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
					

With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> She must be a hammer - she sees nails everywhere. Sheesh



She does rage quite a lot. She must be exhausting to be around. Never happy, never satisfied.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us called it. So wild. How could the BRF let this happen. What did they miscalculate.





papertiger said:


> We (the world) has heard M threaten the BRF more than twice in no uncertain terms. What's the betting she more than enough on Harry to make him worry about stuff being leaked if he did not go along with whatever.


I’m not sure about this maxwell blackmail allegation. 
I get the logic of keeping your enemies close but surely marrying her in is what made her powerful? I’ve said this before but if he’d dumped her after 6 months and she tried to do a racism story or a big bad BRF story the press wouldn’t have touched her- she would have stank of loser to them- the marriage is her only source of media credibility  here and we all know this.

It also strikes me that if you had the powers of state on your hands it’d be much easier to have the secret services put a blackmailing nobody on a slow boat to LA?(or even in a body bag.)


I don’t think it need even come to that even as also we all know about Virginia Guiffre now and nothing has happened -she’s no threat to the royal status quo and they’ve made no bones about publicly paying her off and calling it a day. 
FOUR books? He hardly has material for one!


pukasonqo said:


> And certainly he is no Proust but let’s try:
> 
> -In search of my lost mum
> -Meghans’s way (or the highway)
> -The Prisoner
> -The Fugitive
> 
> Apologies to Proust (there are seven books but I am still surprised he was given a contract for 4 with NIL drafts…or talent)


Thank you! This is hilarious,
In search of lost mum is so dark and so funny I am cackling. 
May I suggest:- 
1. Meghan’s way (or the highway)
2. In the shadow of a (still) young girl called flower / 
3. the get monies way/ 
4. So dumb and Gomorrah or the cities of the plain wife /
5. The (willing) prisoner /
6. the tax fugitive /
7. Time (cover) rogaine-d

With apologies to anyone who read Proust -  I have only managed Swanns way. I feel this thread is coming to rival him for volume now


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Don't tease me! I got excited for a second.


I apologize for the mislead. There is a possibility that the SS divorce is another PR stunt. Several puff pieces about Romeo and Juliet are being released…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> If they are smart, they will keep quiet and work on strengthening the family ties with all sides of the family, the Markles, Raglands, and Windsors. My 2 cents, of course!


That is an interesting tactic in theory but I doubt it would work with the Markles and the Raglands. Someone (not saying who) would tip off tabloids about how the palace is working behind the scenes to undermine the Harkles, and it wouldn't be a good look for the RF.


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> They could have said have a quiet wedding as she is a divorcee.  That would have at least spared us that sh*t show.  He would have had a hissy fit and she wouldn't have liked it.  Tough.   The real problem with Harry is that no one ever said no to him in his life.  I have seen kids like this and they all end up overentitled and when things go bad, they end up living with mom and dad again.  Just like Omid Scobie living in his parent's basement.


Instead of 1/2 in, 1/2 out H&M wanted but didn't get, wonder why QEII didn't offer them an ALL the way out?? Same thing Wallis & KE got - EXILE!!!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I apologize for the mislead. There is a possibility that the SS divorce is another PR stunt. Several puff pieces about Romeo and Juliet are being released…



No apology necessary


----------



## gracekelly

DL Harper said:


> Instead of 1/2 in, 1/2 out H&M wanted but didn't get, wonder why QEII didn't offer them an ALL the way out?? Same thing Wallis & KE got - EXILE!!!


She did exile them in  a way because she took away his military patronages and really made Harry mad.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> I think she has had too many cosmetic procedures and doesn’t know when to stop. There reaches a point of *diminishing returns *and I’ve seen several friends of my mother who were drop dead gorgeous ruin their looks with too many procedures because they were never satisfied with how they looked.


I'm wondering if she will ever acknowledge that or she will forever be trying to improve her facade while Handbag goes bald.


DoggieBags said:


> He’s so quick to sue this newspaper over one ridiculous point about whether or not he offered to pay for government provided security but crickets from the despicable duo over the Bowers book. Which makes me think the stuff in the Bowers book is true otherwise they would have sued him by now.


I suspect they sue based on projected odds for winning. For Bowers book, even if any of the info was false, suing him might lead to other truths coming to light. Zedzee certainly didn't count on her perjury coming out in her earlier court case. 


youngster said:


> That is a really nice picture of Meghan.  She looks pretty.
> 
> 
> 
> She and Trevor were together for 10+ years apparently.  He's likely got a lot of information on her. What she was like. How much time they spent with her family.  What Doria was like. What Thomas was like. Her relationships with her half-siblings.  Her career.  Their romance and relationship and how they grew apart and how she ended it. Meghan and Harry's prospects as Hollywood producers from a guy who is a Hollywood producer.  I think there will be enough for a very juicy book.
> 
> Btw, when Harry and MM got engaged and then quickly married, I think it was discussed in this thread that it was likely Trevor would stay silent for awhile as he didn't want to be seen as a jealous ex when everyone was falling all over Harry/MM.  He wanted to be seen as a good, stand up guy among his Hollywood friends and co-workers and people who might have the power to greenlight his own projects.  There was also speculation that he might have been paid off by Meghan even.  But, a few of us speculated that he would wait a few years, see how things were going, see how the wind was blowing with popular opinion, and_ then_ write his book, which is what he appears to be doing.


I read that they dated for more than 7 years. He was like her test run, spouted the same drivel about the family she never had at their wedding.  

And yes, Zedzee did look pretty back then. But my mental image of her is now this, with her inner superciliousness showing through.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DL Harper said:


> Had the BRF tried to "stop" the H&M relationship & wedding, it would have created the same H&M sh*t show we have now.  BRF would have been in a no win situation.  Hell if you do, hell if you don't.  It became a risk BRF was willing to take if H followed through, giving BRF an opportunity to let MM expose herself for who she really was/is.  So perhaps not a "miscalculation" on the BRF part, but a calculation with the "dirt" they had on MM and keeping their cards close.



Forget the scandal, now that nutjob is legally tied to them, the mother of Harry's children and abuses a royal title she doesn't deserve. He might have gone through with the wedding anyway (ETA: but would she have gone through with it if Harry had been dethroned even before the wedding?), but at least than the BRF could have cut him loose and not sure if the children would have lost rights to titles, LoS etc.

But you're always smarter afterwards I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Don't tease me! I got excited for a second.



Same, I was like "I was only offline for a few hours!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Also annoying,  the teaser that Bowers book coming out in the US next week has new chapters added, but no intel on what’s included.



I am super annoyed I sat through a book that made me physically weak only to learn now I didn't get all of the tea.


----------



## papertiger

DL Harper said:


> Instead of 1/2 in, 1/2 out H&M wanted but didn't get, wonder why QEII didn't offer them an ALL the way out?? Same thing Wallis & KE got - EXILE!!!



QE gave them a year and they could have returned. 
They didn't return.
We're past that now, and we wish H&M well building their lives together - overseas  

No doubt, if H ever wanted to return he'd be able. He'd end up having to keep a low profile like his uncle Andrew for a few years, but they'd let him do his sports and family stuff. Eventually they'd work him in.

As a couple 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 They cannot stand her. It would have to be over between them.

I think Covid wasn't good for 'their brand' but it has probably been used as enough of an excuse for him to think things would pick-up. Little does he realise, Spotify, Netflix and Penguin deals are as good as it will ever get (whatever the real figures are). 

Once those two start turning on each other and screaming about money they'll implode. 

You all think M's crazy about money but she's an optimist and would (and could) sell her soul to the devil, whatever it takes. Harry doesn't know how to live without money, he's not an optimist and can't do nothing for/by himself. 

Once he feels really worried about money panic will really set in, which is kind of funny because he has plenty already (more than most people). There are no grace and favour homes in the US, there's no safety-nets, no net-works that are his alone, he's not a US citizen so would find it hard to get a job (so not sure how he'd be allowed to work anyway) he would always just be used as 'roll out a Prince', plus he has no skills beyond polo. If he thought he was unhappy before he was married, wait a few years.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if the Harkles have access to the Bloomberg news channel, they could have watched Will speak on behalf of Earthshot a few minutes ago. It's now Bill Gates's turn.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> QE gave them a year and they could have returned.
> They didn't return.
> We're past that now, and we wish H&M well building their lives together -* overseas*



Or in the soon-to-be founded Mars colonies. 



papertiger said:


> No doubt, if H ever wanted to return he'd be able. He'd end up having to keep a low profile like his uncle Andrew for a few years, but they'd let him do his sports and family stuff. Eventually they'd work him in.
> 
> As a couple
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They cannot stand her. It would have to be over between them.



That's my feeling as well. And to be honest, I'm not very mad. He's family, even if traitorous. She is not. Blood is thicker than water.



papertiger said:


> I think Covid wasn't good for 'their brand' but it has probably been used as enough of an excuse for him to think things would pick-up. Little does he realise, Spotify, Netflix and Penguin deals are as good as it will ever get (whatever the real figures are).
> 
> Once those two start turning on each other and screaming about money they'll implode.



I can't figure out if he really is still head over heels for her or prefers to pretend, but I have a nagging feeling she's been over him for a while. He is not important, he doesn't bring in big money, and he's clearly unwell. I bet in her quiet moments she thinks hard about how she can get rid of the dead weight most elegantly.



papertiger said:


> If he thought he was unhappy before he was married, wait a few years.



That's so sad. I'm not being ironic.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> The divorce is official! I wonder if the rumors about the money shortage in Motecitoland are also real!
> 
> _"I can disclose that the *couple have ditched Sunshine Sachs*, the New York-based public relations outfit that *has been advising Meghan Markle since her days as an actress on legal drama Suits*.
> 
> ‘This is a really big deal for Meghan,’ a source tells me. ‘*She takes the view that she doesn’t need to pay an outside firm a lot of money to do PR for her and Harry anymore*.’
> 
> *Sunshine Sachs partner Keleigh Thomas Morgan played a key role in establishing the Sussexes in California, sharing her contacts and a powerful network of advisers and famous friends.*
> 
> A long-term friend of Meghan’s, *she also helped devise the strategy for the couple’s African tour in 2019* when they were still working members of the Royal Family_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


I had read that Keleigh Thomas Morgan is Tyler Perry's agent.  They are all without principles or ethics as far as I'm concerned.  They all talk each other up in interviews whether or not it's true in exchange for $$$.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or in the soon-to-be founded Mars colonies.
> 
> 
> 
> That's my feeling as well. And to be honest, I'm not very mad. He's family, even if traitorous. She is not. Blood is thicker than water.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't figure out if he really is still head over heels for her or prefers to pretend, but I have a nagging feeling she's been over him for a while. He is not important, he doesn't bring in big money, and he's clearly unwell. I bet in her quiet moments she thinks hard about how she can get rid of the dead weight most elegantly.
> 
> 
> 
> That's so sad. I'm not being ironic.



I think they're both over each other but they're trapped. And after she persuaded him that being in the RF was trapped.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Also annoying,  the teaser that Bowers book coming out in the US next week has new chapters added, but no intel on what’s included.


More annoying that a lot of us bought the first book, and now there are extra chapters? 

Edit: Sorry, just saw QueenOfWrapDress said the same thing!


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I'm wondering if she will ever acknowledge that or she will forever be trying to improve her facade while Handbag goes bald.
> 
> I suspect they sue based on projected odds for winning. For Bowers book, even if any of the info was false, suing him might lead to other truths coming to light. Zedzee certainly didn't count on her perjury coming out in her earlier court case.
> 
> I read that they dated for more than 7 years. He was like her test run, spouted the same drivel about the family she never had at their wedding.
> 
> And yes, Zedzee did look pretty back then. But my mental image of her is now this, with her inner superciliousness showing through.
> View attachment 5621176


She looked like a volcano about to erupt there. Shrew is the word that comes to mind.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Flickers of hope. _Ooooh the shade
> View attachment 5618253



Someone give that candle an Oscar! Even better... it deserves an EGOT!







jblended said:


> Not only will companies with good values surely be backing away now, but likely personal relationships with the elite are also being severed.
> The thing about the level they're aspiring to mingle with (that H had always mingled with as a working royal) is that implicit trust and discretion are key. Who will socialize with them now that there is a risk of a sensationalist interview that may reveal private conversations with dignitaries, politicians, or even A-list celebs? Nobody would be stupid enough to risk it with a couple who constantly leaks private info for clout, drama and attention.
> It is insane that H grew up with these rules drummed into him- you are respectful, you are discreet, you're a ROYAL- and yet he's choosing to act like some fame-hungry youtuber trying to maximize his follower count with click-bait.


They haven't a clue how to maneuver their way through the elite Hollywood set and form genuine connections/relationships with powerful people. All JCMH & TW see is dollar signs and how many TW burns through on a daily basis and all the money they have got to make to replace it. That's why they are in a permanent state of desperation.







Toby93 said:


> You can't trust anything that is put out by these 2.  Even the other "pregnancy" pic with Hazz with the giant tree in the background was photoshopped!  There was no tree in the original, it was added later
> View attachment 5619258





I had forgotten how cringe and forced looking those B&W photos were.
They couldn't even pose in front of the real tree, they had to photoshop it in afterwards. Pathetic 
Also, put on some socks or shoes JCMH, I don't ever want to see your ugly feet again.
These two fools cry for 'privacy', yet release dumb intimate pictures like this to announce a pregnancy where they are lying down on some grass, barefoot while he cradles his wifes head in his crotch.
Oh yeah, so private...







jblended said:


> Not quite in step with the current discussion but, still on topic as we were discussing earlier whether H has always had this jealous bitterness to the same degree as he currently does. I think he really has gotten worse after marrying. His demeanor before was totally different.
> I don't think that joy is all put on for the cameras. He was actually thriving in his position, alongside his brother and SIL. He had purpose and he had goodwill. Where has this guy gone? He's unrecognizable now!
> 
> 
> 
> Edit to add: I was never a fan of his, btw. HMQ is my one and only, in all honesty. However, even with merely a passing interest, I am totally flabbergasted by the change in him. It's clear as day.



Wow... watching this video it's almost like JCMH had a huge crush on C (for years) and that could possibly be where his jealousy of W came from. W found a great woman who the family love, got married and started having kids, look happy together and are a great team. H found some of those things, I guess.
Or am I just reading waaayyyy too far into things after having a large glass of red wine? Who knows!






QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's...harsh.
> 
> BTW said second son's wife is said to be Denmark's Markle...a troublemaker extremely jealous of Princess Mary.


It's made weirder by the fact that the two women look so alike they could pass as sisters and that they bother have different versions of the same name 





Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth… I believe most of it has been previously posted here. I moved the info to Spoiler because I don't think is has been confirmed yet. Let's see if it will appear on Valentine Low's book. It's all allegedly at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Oz Tour





NOT!




Mumotons said:


> Queen of Denmark hints decision was inspired by King Charles
> 
> 
> Queen Margrethe, 82, has stripped four of her eight grandchildren of their princely titles, saying it is 'for their own good' - prompting an unseemly royal row redolent of Megxit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former MP Norman Baker, a leading expert on royal finances, told MailOnline: 'Why is Harry still an HRH? Charles says he wants to slim down the monarchy, but this must be real, not just superficial. He must slim down the costs to the taxpayer. It just needs it be him, Camilla, William and Kate and their children. The rest of them should get their P45s and retire or go out an earn a living'.










Chanbal said:


> One more book on the way?


----------



## gracekelly

Here is what gets me.  Why should King Charles give the P&P titles to kids belonging to parents who don't want to work for the monarchy?  The kids won't want to work either.  Harry left a huge hole went he left. He was expected to do the sorts of things that Princess Anne does.  Opening things and going to charities etc.  For a guy who trained for nothing in real life, and couldn't even follow through with his military career, this doesn't seem like such a bad gig.  He let his family down after they had supported him and covered for him, his entire life.  Why does he deserve anything more now?  He just want those titles for his kids to build up his own ego and show he is as important as William and she wants the titles so she can merch them.


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> *Someone give that candle an Oscar! Even better... it deserves an EGOT!*
> View attachment 5621182
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They haven't a clue how to maneuver their way through the elite Hollywood set and form genuine connections/relationships with powerful people. All JCMH & TW see is dollar signs and how many TW burns through on a daily basis and all the money they have got to make to replace it. That's why they are in a permanent state of desperation.
> View attachment 5621184
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621188
> 
> I had forgotten how cringe and forced looking those B&W photos were.
> They couldn't even pose in front of the real tree, they had to photoshop it in afterwards. Pathetic
> Also, put on some socks or shoes JCMH, I don't ever want to see your ugly feet again.
> These two fools cry for 'privacy', yet release dumb intimate pictures like this to announce a pregnancy where they are lying down on some grass, barefoot while he cradles his wifes head in his crotch.
> Oh yeah, so private...
> View attachment 5621222
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow... watching this video it's almost like JCMH had a huge crush on C (for years) and that could possibly be where his jealousy of W came from. W found a great woman who the family love, got married and started having kids, look happy together and are a great team. H found some of those things, I guess.
> Or am I just reading waaayyyy too far into things after having a large glass of red wine? Who knows!
> View attachment 5621208
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's made weirder by the fact that the two women look so alike they could pass as sisters and that they bother have different versions of the same name
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621210
> 
> NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621211
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621213


I read somewhere that 'The Order of the Candle' has already been formed, and it seems to be accepting new members.


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> She did exile them in  a way because she took away his military patronages and really made Harry mad.


But not enough to keep them out of the UK or US or anyplace else they can travel to for "charity" and speaking engagements.


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would love to know what happened between the Harkles and the Brooksbanks. Eugenie was all over them even after the wedding stunt and suddenly she didn't even want to make smalltalk.





bag-mania said:


> Eugenie was still close to them as recently as February of this year. That’s when Harry had Super Bowl tickets and took Eugenie while Meghan stayed home or went elsewhere.
> 
> Since we’re speculating, I have two guesses: 1) They pumped Eugenie for information on that trip and then used it in some way. Now Eugenie feels betrayed and is the last one in the family to stop trusting them. OR 2) The reason Eugenie & family moved out of Frogmore so abruptly is H&M kicked them out or raised the rent to some ridiculous amount.
> 
> Other ideas are welcome.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> 3) All the rumours re: The Queen's death are true and that's where Eugenie drew the line. That whole family was crushed and truly grieving.


My guess is that *if* the very believable rumour is _true _that the family (William, Edward, Sophie, Andrew & JCMH) were rushing to see the Queen before she passed away but were delayed for an hour waiting for JCMH to get on the plane because instead he was entertaining his idiotic wife's amateur dramatics and baseless demands therefore causing the rest of the family to leave without JCMH after a significant amount of time had passed and this possibly being the reason they didn't get to see the Queen alive one last time... then if that was something that happened in my family and I was Eugenie or Beatrice knowing my dad could have got to see his mother one last time but was delayed by the family clown and his narc wife, I'd be f**king fuming and I'd cut all ties there and then.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooooh, shaking my head, this is a perfect example of why these snobs do not deserve titles.
> _Inherited poise and etiquette??? Naturally exude a charisma and panache?  _
> 
> Article from 2021
> _Jean-Guilhem Lamberti, Chief Creative Officer, Accor, tells me, “Accor has many brands with the most incredible DNAs. Raffles’ very first advertising referenced its link to royalty. For its renewed ambition and strong development plan, we immediately thought of Peter Greenaway to gather the most impressive cast. The strongest names, monarchs whose families have ruled for centuries, one crowned the unofficial Maharaja of Jaipur. A Danish prince of Chinese descent. A princess of French American origin proudly carrying the name of her beloved Greece on her passport. A mother and daughter from the only family ever carrying both royal and imperial titles, descending from Empress Elisabeth of Austria and Marie-Antoinette, Queen of France. A cousin of Lady Diana and descendant of Sir Winston Churchill. We presented the project to each member personally and were surprised to see how well they knew the brand, its iconic landmark in Singapore, and other Raffles properties around the world. *With instinctively inherited poise and etiquette, they naturally exuded a charisma and panache we immediately fell in love with.*”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raffles Hotel Launches Stunning New Campaign Featuring Actual Royalty
> 
> 
> The campaign pays tribute to the brand’s storied history with a multi-generational cast of modern-day royals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


 All I say when people want to hold events at the Raffles is that their ballroom can only hold 18 tables. QE did stay there during at least one of her visits. It has olde worlde charm and a fascinating history.

These minor royals may know of the Raffles, but the locals here wouldn't know them. The ad campaign was definitely targeting nouveau riche.


sdkitty said:


> what will it get him?  if it doesn't sell a lot of copies, then not a lot of money, right?  publicity?  good or bad?


Has TW said anything particularly malicious about Trevor? He might be pissed enough to tell his truth, especially to a skilled writer like Bower who lets readers read between the lines.


Toby93 said:


> You would think that even Hazz has to notice the amount of people coming out of the woodwork and accusing her of bullying and writing dam*ing books about her.  Any normal person would be questioning themselves and thinking "who did I just marry?"


He probably gets a strictly curated list of reading material. Has read the annotated Funding Freebies 200 times.


EverSoElusive said:


> So I was not losing my mind. They definitely talked about working as a team to champion causes and *serve the commonwealth*. It's all in the engagement interview transcript, too long to copy so here's the link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Entertainment/full-transcript-prince-harry-meghan-markles-engagement-interview/story?id=51415779
> 
> Of course Harry was gushing how capable the crazy is


This is why I take their lies personally. My country is part of the Commonwealth. How dare they use and discard us, treat us as another rung on their ladder to riches!


Chanbal said:


> People may have forgotten that Hazz has a 4-book deal! Whatever he doesn't include in book 1, he has 3 additional books to fantasize…



I'm sure Handbag hopes that people have forgotten what was said about his 4-book deal, especially since Book 2 was implied to be about stuff that couldn't be revealed before QE's death.


DL Harper said:


> PA was never going to tell that he had (potentially) met MM while "yachting". (What has Ghislaine got to lose at this point if she spills info??)  Maybe PA wasn't fully aware of what BRF and QEII already knew about MM and even his own partying.


Even if PA had met Zedzee in her alleged yachting days, I'd think nothing of it. She would be just one of hundreds or thousands of nubile young girls doing the party circuit. Honestly, if she didn't claw her way into the BRF, would she be memorable at all?


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or in the soon-to-be founded Mars colonies.
> 
> I can't figure out if he really is still head over heels for her or prefers to pretend, but I have a nagging feeling she's been over him for a while.


Wasn't it Edgar Rice Burroughs who wrote about a Princess of Mars? Yep, she can go plagiarise that!

And I don't think Handbag will divorce her. It would mean admitting that he made a mistake in his choice. I think she will either initiate it with her victim persona or she will do something to force his hand.


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.



Spoiler: The therapist


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credential professional at Betterwhatever.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270



 
They have trotted out the "barely surviving" nonsense again.
Is this photo from her acting days?


----------



## Aimee3

Well if anyone needs a therapist, TW definitely does BUT she will probably lie to the therapist and also won’t listen to therapist’s advice so seems a waste of time and money!


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Didn't Dynasty have a real Yugoslavian Princess playing a petulant daughter/DIL????
> 
> Sorry, I never watched but I do know she had battles with her own daughter and had to kidnap from a cult
> 
> Actually, thinking about it my friend's mother would have been a Hungarian princess (explained a lot about my friend's behaviour too). Definitely some "genetic pain" running through that family.
> 
> Makes me worry for H&M's kids


Yep, Catherine Oxenberg.  She's a cousin of KCIII!

ETA: a bunch of you beat me to it!


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> You would think that even Hazz has to notice the amount of people coming out of the woodwork and accusing her of bullying and writing dam*ing books about her.  Any normal person would be questioning themselves and thinking "who did I just marry?"


Sounds like he was complicit in the bullying, so he's no rose either.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> People may have forgotten that Hazz has a 4-book deal! Whatever he doesn't include in book 1, he has 3 additional books to fantasize…



Yep.  Not only do you remove the cancerous tumor, but you take a generous margin of the surrounding tissue as well, just in case.

Kind of like getting rid of Haz AND the wife AND the kids.  They're being poisoned since birth, and they will continue to spew lies, I have no doubt about it.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> They have trotted out the "barely surviving" nonsense again.
> Is this photo from her acting days?





Aimee3 said:


> Well if anyone needs a therapist, TW definitely does BUT she will probably lie to the therapist and also won’t listen to therapist’s advice so seems a waste of time and money!


This may be one of the cards she likes to play together with informing Charles that OW is still around. So she can perhaps give interview #2. 

If she is affected by Charles's snub, why does she insist in being linked to the BRF? She could have used the excuse of the kids in LA and not stay for the funeral. Why does she keeps insisting on titles from such family?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I’d be fuming if someone wrote they caught something off me in a book- especially someone who does all the grubby things S did.
> 
> This video makes me feel so nostalgic for a Viennese ball and I’ve never been
> 
> I agree with you totally they should’ve pulled this out of the archives after the Oprah interview.
> 
> Sorry I’ll move on from this but I think it was more differing opportunities rather than differing morals personally
> 
> 
> I’m amazed to hear the German fellas have been getting away with CZ or nothing all these years. I feel routinely shamed for not having a 2 carat plus in platinum here on TPF
> 
> Not to get into it but the idea they make more than they cost is disputed and the crown estates and resources would I imagine become property of the British state if we didn’t have a monarchy same as in France etc.
> 
> Lol they should be happy their kids can still get modelling work - the small gene pool has worked in their favourz
> 
> this weave works better on her than her usual. It’s giving me Rachel from friends a little bit but I think it’s mainly the finer texture being a better weight for her rather than the colour.
> 
> I don’t begrudge another chip in the facade so go for it t


Sarah talking about her plantar warts courtesy of Diana puts her toe sucking into a whole new perspective.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> Well if anyone needs a therapist, TW definitely does BUT she will probably lie to the therapist and also won’t listen to therapist’s advice so seems a waste of time and money!


Imo there is no recovery from the funeral debacle as well as TBower and VLow.  It is game over.  Most will never believe the liars.
So, bye  

ETA:  guessing Opr is behind the negative PR for Queen Margreth.  Considering she is 80 yrs old, celebrating her jubilee year, that  would be tacky tacky tacky. Imo.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270








xincinsin said:


> They have trotted out the "barely surviving" nonsense again.
> Is this photo from her acting days?





Chanbal said:


> This may be one of the cards she likes to play together with informing Charles that OW is still around. So she can perhaps give interview #2.
> 
> If she is affected by Charles's snub, why does she insist in being linked to the BRF? She could have used the excuse of the kids in LA and not stay for the funeral. Why does she keeps insisting on titles from such family?



Not many people have asked if she’s OK …


----------



## DL Harper

xincinsin said:


> They have trotted out the "barely surviving" nonsense again.
> Is this photo from her acting days?


Which day?  Every day is an acting day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Blasted internet -


----------



## CarryOn2020

Diva? Didn’t she tell us being a diva is cool now?  I’m so confused/


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> View attachment 5621294
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not many people have asked if she’s OK …




I'm not familiar with iSource and how they get their news, but I wouldn't be surprised if the therapist info has been provided by TW herself or by someone working for ArcheW.


----------



## Kevinaxx

Exactly. It’s basically her just maneuvering yet again.  If she really seeking help, because she’s finally seen the light (ha), she would do so without drama or flair. Ain’t no one gonna ask where’s M if she steps away from the spotlight.

And that’s really her issue. She needs. the. attention.

Said this hundreds of pages ago but I really feel sorry for the kids. 


Chanbal said:


> This may be one of the cards she likes to play together with informing Charles that OW is still around. So she can perhaps give interview #2.
> 
> If she is affected by Charles's snub, why does she insist in being linked to the BRF? She could have used the excuse of the kids in LA and not stay for the funeral. Why does she keeps insisting on titles from such family?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270



Meg is at the same spa that she wanted to go to when she was having suicidal thoughts.  Hope she is OK *smirk*


----------



## gracekelly

Kevinaxx said:


> Exactly. It’s basically her just maneuvering yet again.  If she really seeking help, because she’s finally seen the light (ha), she would do so without drama or flair. Ain’t no one gonna ask where’s M if she steps away from the spotlight.
> 
> And that’s really her issue. She needs. the. attention.
> 
> Said this hundreds of pages ago but I really feel sorry for the kids.


Pleeez.  This is Meghan playing a victim again. She was so gutted by TQ's death and no one cared or noticed or asked if she was OK.  Wah wah wah.


----------



## Kevinaxx

gracekelly said:


> Pleeez.  This is Meghan playing a victim again. She was so gutted by TQ's death and no one cared or noticed or asked if she was OK.  Wah wah wah.


You say victim I say maneuvering (or scheming if we’re being blunt).


----------



## ccbaggirl89

I watched a Hallmark-ish type movie yesterday (Finding love in big sky) and I discovered actress Hedy Nasser. I was struck by how very similar she looked to MM so I kept watching (it was an awful film); she could easily play MM, they even have a very similar speaking voice. Pics via Google images.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Sarah talking about her plantar warts courtesy of Diana puts her toe sucking into a whole new perspective.


Now to be fair to Sarah, apparently her lover was kissing her toes not sucking them. Does that make it any better? I don’t know. It was the press that called it sucking for sensationalism purposes.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> They have trotted out the "barely surviving" nonsense again.
> Is this photo from her acting days?


The crazy barely knew and barely have a relationship with QEII. She doesn't have love, respect and compassion for QEII. If the crazy did, she wouldn't have done all the vile things that greatly affected QEII given her age as well as the rest of the BRF.

So really, how can the crazy be "barely surviving"? 

As for KCIII's snub, that's their own doing so she only has herself and Harry to blame for "barely surviving".


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Now to be fair to Sarah, apparently her lover was kissing her toes not sucking them. Is that make it any better? I don’t know. It was the press that called it sucking for sensationalism purposes.


Ummmmm, no, not really.    
Feet gross me out, LOLOL.  No way in hell could I be a Podiatrist or do pedicures.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am super annoyed I sat through a book that made me physically weak only to learn now I didn't get all of the tea.


I’m not sure I can handle much more.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> The crazy barely knew and barely have a relationship with QEII. She doesn't have love, respect and compassion for QEII. If the crazy did, she wouldn't have done all the vile things that greatly affected QEII given her age as well as the rest of the BRF.
> 
> So really, how can the crazy be "barely surviving"?
> 
> As for KCIII's snub, that's their own doing so she only has herself and Harry to blame for "barely surviving".


She's "barely surviving" that others are catching on to her BS!


----------



## EverSoElusive

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I watched a Hallmark-ish type movie yesterday (Finding love in big sky) and I discovered actress Hedy Nasser. I was struck by how very similar she looked to MM so I kept watching (it was an awful film); she could easily play MM, they even have a very similar speaking voice. Pics via Google images.
> 
> View attachment 5621358
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621355


The other actress is way better looking and doesn't have crazy eyes


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270



Oprah probably hooked her up with a therapist who was just what a Hollywood narcissist would want, someone who listens to their every petty complaint and then agrees that they have been wronged.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

EverSoElusive said:


> The other actress is way better looking and doesn't have crazy eyes


She has youth on her side, I believe she's 25 or so.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure I can handle much more.


Yassssssss. I felt like my head was going to explode after reading a few chapters each day   I'm not sure if I will survive reading VL's book.


----------



## xincinsin

Katel said:


> View attachment 5621294
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not many people have asked if she’s OK …



Aren't we lucky that she didn't ask HR for help this time?

But seriously, even if true, it's an Oprah-selected therapist who was waiting in the wings. If this doesn't sound like a premeditated play for pity  to you, I have some beach side property in the Kalahari to sell you 


gracekelly said:


> Meg is at the same spa that she wanted to go to when she was having suicidal thoughts.  Hope she is OK *smirk*


The same spa that was paying her in kind to merch them! The courtiers put a stop to that. If she used her ingenuity to do good rather than indulge in conniving backroom deals, everything would be different.


----------



## EverSoElusive

ccbaggirl89 said:


> She has youth on her side, I believe she's 25 or so.


Sure but she's not a professional victim player


----------



## gracekelly

Kevinaxx said:


> You say victim I say maneuvering (or scheming if we’re being blunt).


Please be as blunt as you like   Hang around here long enough and you will realize that maneuvering and scheming is axiomatic with everything she does.  We often use the term "playing the victim card" on this thread and that is what is meant by it.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> She's "barely surviving" that others are catching on to her BS!


That is why she taking the tactic of making it look like she is trying to change her ways and seeking therapy to do it.  I have a bridge for sale if you believe that one.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> That is why *she taking the tactic of making it look like she is trying to change her ways *and seeking therapy to do it.  I have a bridge for sale if you believe that one.


Oh, I doubt that. She would never portray herself as being someone who needs to change, even pretending. In her mind, she’s perfect. 

No, the therapy (which I am skeptical is real) would be to show how her sweet, sensitive soul has been damaged by all those meanies writing books and making videos saying things she doesn’t like. 

Nearly everything she does is a play for sympathy, isn’t it?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270




Where's the vomit emoji?


----------



## Kevinaxx

bag-mania said:


> Oh, I doubt that. She would never portray herself as being someone who needs to change, even pretending. In her mind, she’s perfect.
> 
> No, the therapy (which I am skeptical is real) would be to show how her sweet, sensitive soul has been damaged by all those meanies writing books and making videos saying things she doesn’t like.
> 
> *Nearly everything she does is a play for sympathy, isn’t it?*


That’s what’s giving me whiplash.


----------



## charlottawill

This is interesting....


----------



## 1LV

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blasted internet -



She. Is. Nuts.

ETA  Or as Harry would say, “bonkers!”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

DP


----------



## Chanbal

PLATELL'S PEOPLE: What are Sussexes worth if not hateful to royals?
					

PLATELL'S PEOPLE: What a rotten few weeks it's been for Prince Harry. First, there was his desperate attempt to be at his grandmother's bedside before she died.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting....
> 
> 
> 
> @Arsewelll
> Follow
> FYI @LadyColinCampb was contacted by royal officials & asked to release news of HMTQ's death early b/c word got out that the wife of H was going to release to social media, website, etc. LadyC is not media & not under embargo & agreed to stop #MeghanMarkleisToxic from profiting
> 6:29 AM · Sep 30, 2022
> https://twitter.com/intent/like?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1575840298931994625|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=&tweet_id=1575840298931994625



Because she’s so familiar with lawsuits/legalities and is very careful and cautious with her words/phrasing, I was surprised when Lady C “blurted” out the news of HMQ’s passing …

But she very subtly implied there was a reason for it on her next video.

I’m glad to read that tweet, @charlottawill - I hope that’s the case - I didn’t want to think she was just going for the “news scoop.”

And if true - just when you thought MeeeePeeZee could not become any more revolting - she does. Ugh.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure I can handle much more.


No worries


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Oprah probably hooked her up with a therapist who was just what a Hollywood narcissist would want, someone who listens to their every petty complaint and then agrees that they have been wronged.


I wonder if Oprah got TW a participation on Dr. Phil's talk show.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270



The real Royals are carrying on, the Faux ones are acting out. 

I laughed out loud at this very predictable “news”. She needs to find a new script.


----------



## BlueCherry

purseinsanity said:


> Ummmmm, no, not really.
> Feet gross me out, LOLOL.  No way in hell could I be a Podiatrist or do pedicures.



My brother is a podiatrist and when I questioned him about unpalatable feet he said he sprays all feet with liberal amounts of disinfectant   



Katel said:


> Because she’s so familiar with lawsuits/legalities and is very careful and cautious with her words/phrasing, I was surprised when Lady C “blurted” out the news of HMQ’s passing …
> 
> But she very subtly implied there was a reason for it on her next video.
> 
> I’m glad to read that tweet, @charlottawill - I hope that’s the case - I didn’t want to think she was just going for the “news scoop.”
> 
> And if true - just when you thought MeeeePeeZee could not become any more revolting - she does. Ugh.



Imagine that, they took away her one chance of saying something that was actually true 



csshopper said:


> The real Royals are carrying on, the Faux ones are acting out.
> 
> I laughed out loud at this very predictable “news”. She needs to find a new script.



Instead of sympathy most will be of the opinion she should have just gone home. But why waste a golden opportunity


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> Imagine that, they took away her one chance of saying something that was actually true


  
Is there no justice in this world?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly TW is seeing a therapist recommended by Oprah to help her deal with the last events related to QE's funeral, see Spoiler for sources/screenshots. I wonder why she didn't consult Hazz or any other highly credentialed professional at Betterwhatever. If those therapists are good for BetterW's patients (including Serena W), they should be good for her.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The therapist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621268
> 
> View attachment 5621269
> 
> View attachment 5621270




Poor thing. I'm sure a bruised ego is super painful.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Blasted internet -




 Did she google that? No way in hell did she just randomly know about a blackfaced song in a 1930s movie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Yassssssss. I felt like my head was going to explode after reading a few chapters each day   I'm not sure if I will survive reading VL's book.



I'm an avid reader who has read through a whole Harry Potter in one sitting before. I found it SO hard. I literally had to do a few pages at a time because while there was very little new information for us having it all put together like this was oh so draining.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Pleeez.  This is Meghan playing a victim again. She was so gutted by TQ's death and no one cared or noticed or asked if she was OK.  Wah wah wah.



Well, it's good if she is truly going, coz she clearly isn't well.

Unfortunately, she will seek help for coping with 'the world against her', when actually therapy is all about changing oneself - if it's any good.

Who lets the world know they're seeking help unless they manipulating - again? That's the first question I would be asking if I was her therapist.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking about unsurvivable (and BTW Ghoul is like weed, she'll always find a way to grow in the most unlikely places sadly) - today I got up really early to try to make bakery style breakfast rolls after I got my hands on a professional recipe. I was in the kitchen mixing up my dough when I heard a loud bang followed by clinking. Turns out the storm managed to burst open a window in the living room because someone didn't lock the fixed element correctly and all flowers and  candleholders that were on the sill were pushed off. So I finished my dough, cleaned up the shards and happily waited for my results only to learn that apparently that newly opened package of yeast was dead. Too bad I also made pizza dough with it yesterday for tomorrow. So I threw on a coat over my pyjamas and drove out to buy both yeast and breakfast rolls and remade the pizza dough 

I do think I *may* survive after all, but I am NOT attempting to do anything today that needs to work out 100%


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm an avid reader who has read through a whole Harry Potter in one sitting before. I found it SO hard. I literally had to do a few pages at a time because while there was very little new information for us having it all put together like this was oh so draining.


The whole is greater than the sum of the parts


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Well, it's good if she is truly going, coz she clearly isn't well



Oh, she isn't going because something is wrong with her. She's going to have someone agree with her everyone else was being unfair and horrible.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, she isn't going because something is wrong with her. She's going to have someone agree with her everyone else was being unfair and horrible.


It's distressing how textbook narc she is.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> If she is affected by Charles's snub, why does she insist in being linked to the BRF? She could have used the excuse of the kids in LA and not stay for the funeral. Why does she keeps insisting on titles from such family?


As our esteemed sisters here keep reminding us, it's all $$$$$$$$$$


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> This is interesting....




Lady C said she put out her video after reading about it from 2 other news sources (who later retracted their content), That's all there was to it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Lady C said she put out her video after reading about it from 2 other news sources (who later retracted their content), That's all there was to it.



Yeah, I have a hard time believing the BRF reached out to her when they could just have moved up their announcement if they didn't want to go through traditional media.


----------



## periogirl28

Chanbal said:


> I'm with you on those snobs not deserving the titles. Though, the article brought memories of the amazing Raffles Hotel. I wish I could book a trip and fly to Singapore now.


Frankly do not need royals to sell Raffles. Just do a good job by delivering the service, food and comfort. 
Dear Chanbal wait for F1 to be over. Singapore is overrun at the moment.


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The hardcover, which was listed with a release date of September 29th on amazon Germany. But now it says release date of October 6th for both with a delivery date of October 17th. I can't take 11 days to ship something from the UK to central Europe, can it?


I pre-ordered the paperback on amazon Italy which was released Sept.29th, delivery should be Oct.11th, I haven't heard of any delays....yet!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I pre-ordered the paperback on amazon Italy which was released Sept.29th, delivery should be Oct.11th, I haven't heard of any delays....yet!



My shipping estimate says now October 4th with the publication date still October 6th


----------



## Poppins_Purse

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I have said.
> 
> Not only did she immediately become pregnant with her geriatric eggs, she had to make sure she wasn't pregnant before the wedding and have a bump walking down the aisle.  So... perfect timing.


----------



## JulesB68

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I watched a Hallmark-ish type movie yesterday (Finding love in big sky) and I discovered actress Hedy Nasser. I was struck by how very similar she looked to MM so I kept watching (it was an awful film); she could easily play MM, they even have a very similar speaking voice. Pics via Google images.
> 
> View attachment 5621358
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621355


I have always found the stark white contrast of TW's scalp against her hair very strange. These pictures just go to show just how much fake tan she must be using on her face!


----------



## Stansy

EverSoElusive said:


> Why oh why are the crazies comparing Charlotte to Invisibet? I've said this once here and I'll say it again, Invisibet is not a good looking baby.
> 
> And nope, NO resemblance. Sorry, not sorry



What? Do you not see the similarities??
both have hair, two eyes and ears, a mouth and even teeth! Come on - they look more like each other than two eggs


----------



## Mumotons




----------



## marietouchet

ccbaggirl89 said:


> I watched a Hallmark-ish type movie yesterday (Finding love in big sky) and I discovered actress Hedy Nasser. I was struck by how very similar she looked to MM so I kept watching (it was an awful film); she could easily play MM, they even have a very similar speaking voice. Pics via Google images.
> 
> View attachment 5621358
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621355


Separated at birth , same mole !


----------



## xincinsin

I stumbled across a sugar IG where Zedzee is praised for her "light" which cannot be dimmed. They were astounded by her uber generous offer to pay for all the funerals after the Uvalde tragedy. Sugar fiction? Or were they giving her someone else's credit? Didn't someone else pay for the funerals?


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> The real Royals are carrying on, the Faux ones are acting out.
> 
> I laughed out loud at this very predictable “news”. She needs to find a new script.


The real BRF is doing their thing
The Faux BRF a is scheming and plotting
dying to see reaction to Tuesday’s podcast, there hasn’t really been time enough to edit even if she could snip out nasty bits


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo there is no recovery from the funeral debacle as well as TBower and VLow.  It is game over.  Most will never believe the liars.
> So, bye
> 
> ETA:  guessing Opr is behind the negative PR for Queen Margreth.  Considering she is 80 yrs old, celebrating her jubilee year, that  would be tacky tacky tacky. Imo.


Disagree … OW does not care about the Danes , she did not report on the stripping at the Swedish or Dutch courts
IMHO, The Danish thing got covered bc Joachim and Marie are whiners, and even his first wife spoke to the press, they did a mini Megxit of their own and live in France 
There is an active royal press POINT DE VUE  in the French Language
The French press features all the minor Royals esp not from the UK, or from extinct monarchies eg all the German and French nobles


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Hmmm wasn’t this thread that was started in 2006 originally called “I’m just wild about Harry”?  Seriously, TW isn’t happy unless she can find something to complain about!  If the magazine was going to interview somebody from the Suits cast, TW would’ve been the last person on the list.  Her character didn’t have much screen time and what little there was, was bland and forgettable.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> This may be one of the cards she likes to play together with informing Charles that OW is still around. So she can perhaps give interview #2.
> 
> If she is affected by Charles's snub, why does she insist in being linked to the BRF? She could have used the excuse of the kids in LA and not stay for the funeral. Why does she keeps insisting on titles from such family?


She could not leave esp bc she was already in the UK , leaving is much worse than using an excuse not to come

1. H would have timidly told her that she needs to stay ,  he would not have done it without her, they need each other to prop themselves up
2. I don’t doubt the palace told H it was QEII’s wish for him to be there, see item 1.  He HAD to be there
3. NOT being there would have burned the rickety bridge to the BRF FOREVER, say bye bye to titles , a watershed event given that she was 8n the UK


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I stumbled across a sugar IG where Zedzee is praised for her "light" which cannot be dimmed. They were astounded by her uber generous offer to pay for all the funerals after the Uvalde tragedy. Sugar fiction? Or were they giving her credit? *Didn't someone else pay for the funerals*?


According to several news outlets, Bo Jackson, a former NFL and MLB star, paid for the funerals. TW's alleged participation on this tragic event has been depicted by a nurse , see Spoiler.



Spoiler: The nurse, allegedly


----------



## jennlt

xincinsin said:


> I stumbled across a sugar IG where Zedzee is praised for her "light" which cannot be dimmed. They were astounded by her uber generous offer to pay for all the funerals after the Uvalde tragedy. Sugar fiction? Or were they giving her someone else's credit? Didn't someone else pay for the funerals?


As usual, the sugars are wrong.


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/07/22/bo-jackson-uvalde-victims-funerals/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> IMHO, The Danish thing got covered bc Joachim and Marie are whiners, and even his first wife spoke to the press, they did a mini Megxit of their own and live in France.



I don't follow the Danish RF closely, but if I remember correctly that wasn't quite by choice. They were all but sent to Paris where Joachim now holds a diplomatic position because the both of them have difficulties knowing their place and gave their brother respectively SIL a hard time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> She could not leave esp bc she was already in the UK , leaving is much worse than using an excuse not to come



Absolutely, but then again they conveniently have a toddler and a baby who could have been used as an excuse.

My bff has a farm hand who makes it a habit to basically turn any day off in at least a day longer by being "sick". He usually goes visit his mother and just doesn't return on time. Today he took the cake by apparently leaving during the night or very early in the morning and they only found out when he didn't show up for stable duty and was nowhere to be found (he lives on the farm). I've probably said three times by now how it's one thing to not return when you are supposed to, but another one to actively leave without letting anyone know. We know he hasn't quit because most of his stuff is still there. I mean, for all we know he could have fallen into the slurry pit.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> 3. NOT being there would have burned the rickety bridge to the BRF FOREVER, say bye bye to titles , a watershed event given that she was 8n the UK


Wouldn't you want to 'burn' a bridge to people that discriminated against you? Why do you insist in having a bridge to people that hurt you so deeply, particularly after 'finding freedom'? She doesn't seem to want to have a bridge to her father. A man that she praised so much until becoming engaged to Hazz.
I bet the BRF would have been very receptive if she had excused herself from attending QE's funeral events. They would have understood the need of a mother to be reunited with her young children.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely, but then again they conveniently have a toddler and a baby who could have been used as an excuse.
> 
> My bff has a farm hand who makes it a habit to basically turn any day off in at least a day longer by being "sick". He usually goes visit his mother and just doesn't return on time. Today he took the cake by apparently leaving during the night or very early in the morning and they only found out when he didn't show up for stable duty and was nowhere to be found (he lives on the farm). I've probably said three times by now how it's one thing to not return when you are supposed to, but another one to actively leave without letting anyone know. We know he hasn't quit because most of his stuff is still there. I mean, for all we know he could have fallen into the slurry pit.


How does this person get to keep his job for pulling the same stunt over and over again? Doesn't sound like a very reliable employee.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Wouldn't you want to 'burn' a bridge to people that discriminated against you? Why do you insist in having a bridge to people that hurt you so deeply, particularly after 'finding freedom'? She doesn't seem to want to have a bridge to her father. A man that she praised so much until becoming engaged to Hazz.
> I bet the BRF would have been very receptive if she had excused herself from attending QE's funeral events. They would have understood the need of a mother to reunited with her young children.


Why NOT a burn bridge ? Because SHE cant let go of the palaces, titles

the BRF would have been relieved if she had gone home, but the UK a public would never forgive and H probably wanted her there 

And of course, it was her chance to sneak up on KC on the staircase and ask about titles for the kids


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> How does this person get to keep his job for pulling the same stunt over and over again? Doesn't sound like a very reliable employee.



He is absolutely not reliable and also rude and entitled. But also, bff has been in cancer treatment for the past six months and stuck in hospital for the last two. She runs the farm with her sister although both of them have fulltime jobs because it's been in the family for 8 generations. She absolutely wants to get rid of him but feels at this point what little work he does contribute is better than nothing. He only started to escalate like this once she fell sick which really says a lot about his character.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking about unsurvivable (and BTW Ghoul is like weed, she'll always find a way to grow in the most unlikely places sadly) - today I got up really early to try to make bakery style breakfast rolls after I got my hands on a professional recipe. I was in the kitchen mixing up my dough when I heard a loud bang followed by clinking. Turns out the storm managed to burst open a window in the living room because someone didn't lock the fixed element correctly and all flowers and  candleholders that were on the sill were pushed off. So I finished my dough, cleaned up the shards and happily waited for my results only to learn that apparently that newly opened package of yeast was dead. Too bad I also made pizza dough with it yesterday for tomorrow. So I threw on a coat over my pyjamas and drove out to buy both yeast and breakfast rolls and remade the pizza dough
> 
> I do think I *may* survive after all, but I am NOT attempting to do anything today that needs to work out 100%


But are you *ok*?


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Why NOT a burn bridge ? Because SHE cant let go of the palaces, titles
> 
> the BRF would have been relieved if she had gone home, but the UK a public would never forgive and H probably wanted her there
> 
> And of course, it was her chance to sneak up on KC on the staircase and ask about titles for the kids


I agree with you that TW seems to be very attached to palaces and titles. I was only using her claims from the OW's interview about the pain and suffering she endured in the UK. I sincerely feel sorry for Charles, Will, and the other members of the BRF that have to deal with someone like TW. I feel sorry for the victims depicted in Valentine Low's book, particularly the ones that lost their jobs. I feel sorry for TW's father and sister that were forced into the spotlight without the support and resources needed to deal with it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He is absolutely not realiable and also rude and entitled. But also, bff has been in cancer treatment for the past six months and stuck in hospital for the last two. She runs the farm with her sister although both of them have fulltime jobs because it's been in the family for 8 generations. She absolutely wants to get rid of him but feels at this point what little work he does contribute is better than nothing. He only started to escalate like this once she fell sick which really says a lot about his character.


Reminds me of my staff who finally got fired. 

His main problem was being tardy everyday and every ETA given was always inaccurate. He would tell me that he's arriving say 10 AM because of (insert reason - reason given was always plausible but with him, I've caught him lying to me almost every time) but he would show up a few hours later, past the ETA he had given. Then he would have the nerve to ask me when he could go to lunch, when he could have eaten before he came into work. 

Get this, this is the same guy who's always in the restroom for at least 30 minutes each time. We work 7.5 hours each day and with him being late the first few hours of the day, coupled with at least four 30-minute restroom visits each day, he was only at his desk for 2 hours or 3 hours top. 

While at the office, he would sit with his head all up in the clouds thinking about his non-existent acting career instead of focusing on doing his full-time job. Everything he did, I would always had to clean up and redo the work. Whenever I pulled him aside and highlighted that something was not done right or he had been acting against our company's HR policies, he would always get defensive and like his poor job performance and misconducts were news to him


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> But are you *ok*?



Thanks for asking, not many have!


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I stumbled across a sugar IG where Zedzee is praised for her "light" which cannot be dimmed. They were astounded by her uber generous offer to pay for all the funerals after the Uvalde tragedy. Sugar fiction? Or were they giving her someone else's credit? Didn't someone else pay for the funerals?


Yes, and someone else paid for all the coffins.  Several stories have been written about those who stepped up.  *Please let us make sure the truth gets out there.   Shut these awful people down!*
How tacky can they be.  Shame on them. Shame.

The funerals  
Bo Jackson and a friend :

_Three days later, Jackson and a close friend flew to Uvalde, briefly met with Gov. Greg Abbott and presented a check for $170,000 with an offer to pay for all funeral expenses.

Abbott announced it as an anonymous donation during a May 27 news conference about aid the state was giving to victims._

*"We didn't want media," Jackson said. "No one knew we were there."*

_And though Jackson suggested he hasn't kept it a secret, he hadn't spoken publicly about what moved him to make the trip to Uvalde and the donation until this week.

"Uvalde is a town that sticks in your mind. Just the name," Jackson said. "I don't know a soul there. It just touched me."_

*Jackson declined to name the friend who went with him and also contributed to the donation.








						Bo Jackson helps pay for Uvalde victims' funerals
					

Bo Jackson helped pay for the funerals of the 19 children and two teachers killed in the Uvalde school massacre in May.




					www.espn.com
				



*
The Coffins 








						Trey Ganem's Edna shop donates custom caskets to Uvalde shooting victims
					

SoulShine Industries worked to put together and donate 19 custom caskets for the victims of the Uvalde mass shooting.




					www.victoriaadvocate.com
				




_Since caskets for children are not something generally kept in large stock locally, Ganem bought 19 caskets from Cherokee Casket Co. in Griffin, Georgia, about $3,400-3,800 apiece for 18 children and one adult, he said._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Are they for real?  The person who designs the stupid pinky rings she merches was in the audience?  The photographer is Misan Harriman?  They had to bring their own photographer?


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you that TW seems to be very attached to palaces and titles. I was only using her claims from the OW's interview about the pain and suffering she endured in the UK. I sincerely feel sorry for Charles, Will, and the other members of the BRF that have to deal with someone like TW. I feel sorry for the victims depicted in Valentine Low's book, particularly the ones that lost their jobs. I feel sorry for TW's father and sister that were forced into the spotlight without the support and resources needed to deal with it.


I read on Twitter that she is desperate to be invited to the coronation and wear the tiara and the robes


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My shipping estimate says now October 4th with the publication date still October 6th


I just checked and apparently the paperback will be released next March. So maybe I ordered the hardback, I dunno! Anyway it's the number one most sold. Now even the hardback isn't available anymore. Only the Kindle version but, I have no idea how it works, you read it online correct? Sorry but I'm old and technology isn't my thing


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thanks for asking, not many have!


Please send me your address so that I can ship you some lemon olive oil cake, banana with a handwritten message, some peonies and Lays chips that I received for free. I hope that's enough for your 'are you OK' situation


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Reminds me of my staff who finally got fired.
> 
> His main problem was being tardy everyday and every ETA given was always inaccurate. He would tell me that he's arriving say 10 AM because of (insert reason - reason given was always plausible but with him, I've caught him lying to me almost every time) but he would show up a few hours later, past the ETA he had given. Then he would have the nerve to ask me when he could go to lunch, when he could have eaten before he came into work.
> 
> Get this, this is the same guy who's always in the restroom for at least 30 minutes each time. We work 7.5 hours each day and with him being late the first few hours of the day, coupled with at least four 30-minute restroom visits each day, he was only at his desk for 2 hours or 3 hours top.
> 
> While at the office, he would sit with his head all up in the clouds thinking about his non-existent acting career instead of focusing on doing his full-time job. Everything he did, I would always had to clean up and redo the work. Whenever I pulled him aside and highlighted that something was not done right or he had been acting against our company's HR policies, he would always get defensive and like his poor job performance and misconducts were news to him


  
I had his twin in my office - when I was pregnant and trying to train Mr MIA to cover my duties while I was on maternity leave. S.T.R.E.S.S!!!


----------



## Chanbal

The continued use of a title from an institution that they criticized so much…


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking about unsurvivable (and BTW Ghoul is like weed, she'll always find a way to grow in the most unlikely places sadly) - today I got up really early to try to make bakery style breakfast rolls after I got my hands on a professional recipe. I was in the kitchen mixing up my dough when I heard a loud bang followed by clinking. Turns out the storm managed to burst open a window in the living room because someone didn't lock the fixed element correctly and all flowers and  candleholders that were on the sill were pushed off. So I finished my dough, cleaned up the shards and happily waited for my results only to learn that apparently that newly opened package of yeast was dead. Too bad I also made pizza dough with it yesterday for tomorrow. So I threw on a coat over my pyjamas and drove out to buy both yeast and breakfast rolls and remade the pizza dough
> 
> I do think I *may* survive after all, but I am NOT attempting to do anything today that needs to work out 100%


Sending the Harkles NFlix crew over asap.  They are kinda busy at the moment covering the cameras installed in the neighborhood, but they will be there. 









						Security to ramp up in Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's neighborhood
					

License plate scanning cameras will be installed across Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's celebrity studded neighborhood, as their California hometown sees an uptick in crime.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Are they for real?  The person who designs the stupid pinky rings she merches was in the audience?  The photographer is Misan Harriman?  They had to bring their own photographer?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621740



  she certainly behaves like Harry's mother!
Can't get over the fake tan


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I had his twin in my office - when I was pregnant and trying to train Mr MIA to cover my duties while I was on maternity leave. S.T.R.E.S.S!!!


Wow I cannot imagine dealing with such stress while being pregnant! Sorry that it happened to you   

My guy didn't just stressed me out. He wasted a lot of my precious work time when I had to redo his work. 7.5 hours are never enough to cover all that I need to do at work so imagine the extra hours that I'd have to somehow find to do my job and meet my deadlines


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, and someone else paid for all the coffins.  Several stories have been written about those who stepped up.  *Please let us make sure the truth gets out there.   Shut these awful people down!*
> How tacky can they be.  Shame on them. Shame.




From Wikipedia: "A *ghoul* (Arabic: غول, _ghūl_) is a demon-like being or monstrous humanoid. The concept originated in pre-Islamic Arabian religion, [1] associated with graveyards and the consumption of human flesh. Modern fiction often uses the term to label a certain kind of undead monster."


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Wow I cannot imagine dealing with such stress while being pregnant! Sorry that it happened to you
> 
> My guy didn't just stressed me out. He wasted a lot of my precious work time when I had to redo his work. 7.5 hours are never enough to cover all that I need to do at work so imagine the extra hours that I'd have to somehow find to do my job and meet my deadlines


HR couldn't believe us when we told them this guy was totally not suitable.
His average day: dashed in at 9am (half an hour late), sat there dripping with perspiration for 20 minutes, then wanders off for his morning coffee, works for a couple of hours, goes for lunch, works another hour, needs afternoon tea break, requests to leave an hour early because he has "night classes". In the end, HR took him on as an admin assistant, assigned someone to time him, and discreetly gave him the boot. He wasn't a narc, just stuck in some 1970s time loop when life in the company really was very laid-back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I read on Twitter that she is desperate to be invited to the coronation and wear the tiara and the robes



Oh no, not Ghoul. She doesn't care for status symbols. Which is why she wanted to take a tiara to her first royal mini tour and Charles had to inform her that wasn't flying.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The continued use of a title from an institution that they criticized so much…




Honestly I can't even be mad it's so ridiculous. Don't these people realize that at this point this gushing nonsense reads like 1st class trolling?


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> HR couldn't believe us when we told them this guy was totally not suitable.
> His average day: dashed in at 9am (half an hour late), sat there dripping with perspiration for 20 minutes, then wanders off for his morning coffee, works for a couple of hours, goes for lunch, works another hour, needs afternoon tea break, requests to leave an hour early because he has "night classes". In the end, HR took him on as an admin assistant, assigned someone to time him, and discreetly gave him the boot. He wasn't a narc, just stuck in some 1970s time loop when life in the company really was very laid-back.


Such behavior really bothers me and the level of entitlement exhibited is way off the charts. Oh well glad he and my guy were booted


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> she certainly behaves like Harry's mother!
> Can't get over the fake tan



I wonder if she changes his diapers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Sounds about right


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if she changes his diapers.


That's beneath her. It's the nanny's job. Wondering if they change nannies as frequently for Harry like they do with the Invisikids


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sending the Harkles NFlix crew over asap.  They are kinda busy at the moment covering the cameras installed in the neighborhood, but they will be there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Security to ramp up in Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's neighborhood
> 
> 
> License plate scanning cameras will be installed across Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's celebrity studded neighborhood, as their California hometown sees an uptick in crime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The support of OW, GK, TP and others to TW is making me . TW has been leaving a trail of victims behind her, and they still promote her as a 'saint' . So much hypocrisy and greed imo.

The Harkles' work, charity, activism seem to be all produced by costly PR. What a contribution to the world these people give!


----------



## xincinsin

I came across these in my drawer: six £1 coins from my last visit to the UK 20 years ago. It will feel strange the next time I am there to see the new currency (DH is keen to travel now that he is semi-retired).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> *The support of OW, GK, TP and others to TW is making me . *TW has been leaving a trail of victims behind her, and they still promote her as a 'saint' . So much hypocrisy and greed imo.
> 
> The Harkles' work, charity, activism seem to be all produced by costly PR. What a contribution to the world these people give!


*
Me too.  *So sick, disgusted, and irritated with the *lies* from H&M and their mouthpieces.  Nothing they say will change the facts.  The good thing is now we know *who* is willing to lie and who is not.  Once the trust in these people goes, so does their $$$$.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Me too.  *So sick, disgusted, and irritated with the *lies* from H&M and their mouthpieces.  Nothing they say will change the facts.  The good thing is now we know *who* is willing to lie and who is not.  Once the trust in these people goes, so does their $$$$.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yay, Cressie, a _real mom_ look:













						Pregnant Cressida Bonas wears a green coat over her growing baby bump
					

Cressida Bonas looked cosy as she donned a chic green coat over her growing baby bump while walking her dachshund Budgie Bear in London this week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another shuffling of the chairs and One more name to add to the _bs_ list:









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry turn to top Silicon Valley PR
					

The Duke and Duchess's ventures will now be handled 'in-house' at their charitable foundation Archewell, with Christine Weil Schirmer, 42, from Long Island, at the helm




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EmilyM11

xincinsin said:


> HR couldn't believe us when we told them this guy was totally not suitable.
> His average day: dashed in at 9am (half an hour late), sat there dripping with perspiration for 20 minutes, then wanders off for his morning coffee, works for a couple of hours, goes for lunch, works another hour, needs afternoon tea break, requests to leave an hour early because he has "night classes". In the end, HR took him on as an admin assistant, assigned someone to time him, and discreetly gave him the boot. He wasn't a narc, just stuck in some 1970s time loop when life in the company really was very laid-back.


I had graduate analyst like that. He was a son of a millionaire so obviously didn't give a f***. Despite him graduating from Oxford's Mathematics I couldn't get him to calculate ROI on advertising spend (honestly he couldn't get it)  I asked my boss to start the procedure leading to fire him but my boss really didn't want to be bothered (boss was super nice and sweet guy) so we ended up with our analyst keep sitting in the cafeteria (with various ETAs) running his cafe in another country remotely Eventually he just left on his own, without being pushed.
Sorry for off topic.


----------



## Ali-bagpuss




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, why can't I ever get lucky with my bosses. I can sit on my behind drinking tea all day long while being paid for doing nothing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, why can't I ever get lucky with my bosses. I can sit on my behind drinking tea all day long while being paid for doing nothing.


I can do all of that very quietly and will never complain or explain.


----------



## xincinsin

EmilyM111 said:


> I had graduate analyst like that. He was a son of a millionaire so obviously didn't give a f***. Despite him graduating from Oxford's Mathematics I couldn't get him to calculate ROI on advertising spend (honestly he couldn't get it)  I asked my boss to start the procedure leading to fire him but my boss really didn't want to be bothered (boss was super nice and sweet guy) so we ended up with our analyst keep sitting in the cafeteria (with various ETAs) running his cafe in another country remotely Eventually he just left on his own, without being pushed.
> Sorry for off topic.


To keep it on topic, I can imagine Handbag being a version of our nightmare staff. He failed his academics, didn't grow up in the hard knocks school of life, and his guide into the world of Hollywood success is Zedzee. I'm sure he is being given Cliff's Notes and Dummies Guides so that he can pretend to function as an inspiring CHIMPO and faux humanitarian, but neither of them have any lasting commitment to hard work.

I'm really hoping that Handbag bucks up and makes an honest living to provide for his family, and not hope to rely on hand-outs from his estranged family. Gah, if they do Round 2 with Godmother Oprah, he might spout another tale about how his darling wife was so hurt that she cried in bed etc etc. I hope for the best but expect the worst.


----------



## Chanbal

TL has been accurate so far!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> TL has been accurate so far!



Imo they should not be invited.  They will merch all of it, make a scene, being their Nflix crew.  Camilla, please say *no*.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Ali-bagpuss said:


> View attachment 5621777


They do love those titles… 

Opinions about the Harkles ditching SS may vary, including the possibility that they are still working together. 

They seem to have agreements in place for years to come.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I would very much enjoy Kate decked out in big, bold and new to her jewelry while Ghoul can wear her tacky bracelet-bangle-watch stack. 

Also, just in case they make a poor intern read here: Bentley&Skinner and Hancocks London rent out tiaras. Just sayin'.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> They do love those titles…
> 
> Opinions about the Harkles ditching SS may vary, including the possibility that they are still working together.
> 
> They seem to have agreements in place for years to come.



I have read the FrogCott lease is up in Nov, 2023.  Looks like this could be the _good-bye/good riddance_ year


----------



## marietouchet

Today’s bon mot from Oprah, someone is a sugar … note medals


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors…









						Harry and Meghan 'are hunting for new estate in Hope Ranch California'
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are rumored to be looking for a new mansion in Hope Ranch, California because their current $14million home 'does not properly accommodate them.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jennlt

Get the candle ready just in case...


----------



## purseinsanity

BlueCherry said:


> My brother is a podiatrist and when I questioned him about unpalatable feet he said he sprays all feet with liberal amounts of disinfectant


No offense intended...it's a very noble profession!  Certain body parts just gross me out   
When my mother kept telling me to become a physician, I said but they all have some gross area they have to touch!!!  
One of my good friends is an orthodontist.  That too...the mouth...blech!!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> My shipping estimate says now October 4th with the publication date still October 6th


Now that is service!


----------



## scarlet555

jennlt said:


> Get the candle ready just in case...



Yes
We don’t understand why they need to be there
1)They walked off royal duty
2)They don’t like the BRF and 
3)they said BRF don’t like them so why would you go?

Let me guess Nutty Needs pictures to have any worth at all…


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Are they for real?  The person who designs the stupid pinky rings she merches was in the audience?  The photographer is Misan Harriman?  They had to bring their own photographer?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621740



Oh look, she spray tanned her arms to actually match her face this time.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> I read on Twitter that she is desperate to be invited to the coronation and wear the tiara and the robes


Does she want to hold the Orb and Septer too?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if she changes his diapers.


Gosh no!  They have nannies for that!


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Today’s bon mot from Oprah, someone is a sugar … note medals
> 
> View attachment 5621828


It's pretty much the same wording in every release.  I guess they are trying to convince the unwashed masses that they are good people   Apparently it's all Hearst magazines, which is affiliated with Oprah, who makes money promoting the Harkles who make money from merching.......it's actually quite pathetic and desperate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rest up, everyone. Tuesday is Slander Day - the new podcast drops, right?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> It's pretty much the same wording in every release.  I guess they are trying to convince the unwashed masses that they are good people   Apparently it's all Hearst magazines, which is affiliated with Oprah, who makes money promoting the Harkles who make money from merching.......it's actually quite pathetic and desperate.
> 
> View attachment 5621853



Now, there is another easy job - copy/paste, repeat 30 times.  Sheesh.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Today’s bon mot from Oprah, someone is a sugar … note medals
> 
> View attachment 5621828


Anyone recognize when was this pic taken? She's wearing a hat? Amazing!


----------



## DL Harper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'are hunting for new estate in Hope Ranch California'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are rumored to be looking for a new mansion in Hope Ranch, California because their current $14million home 'does not properly accommodate them.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sure they are ready to move.  The new security cameras being installed in the area could mean H&M's can no longer (falsely?) claim invasions and security breeches that SOOOO badly threatened their lives!  Move out before caught on camera?????


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, why can't I ever get lucky with my bosses. I can sit on my behind drinking tea all day long while being paid for doing nothing.


Funny how some people get away with so much stuff. Meanwhile, my management still thinks I'm not doing enough though I work off the clock to make sure things are taken care of, pay for things out of my own pocket because certain things aren't on the company's approved purchase list despite the need for them to run the office, go above and beyond to serve not only the clients attached to my branch but also other branches, have over 150 hours of unused paid time off because we've been having staffing issue so no one would be able to cover me if I want to take some time off, getting called names for trying to complete a task. It's total insanity. 

Anyhow, Z-list & Co. is definitely like many entitled and lazy employees out there. They want to get paid or rewarded for doing nothing. If you try to ask them to do their job, they would be offended and act like you're being mean to them  




purseinsanity said:


> Oh look, she spray tanned her arms to actually match her face this time.


I'm more shocked that she wore that top. That does not look like something that's expensive or high class enough for her snooty ass  Honestly, it's ugly, expensive or not.


----------



## Aimee3

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'are hunting for new estate in Hope Ranch California'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are rumored to be looking for a new mansion in Hope Ranch, California because their current $14million home 'does not properly accommodate them.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Have they clogged up all the toilets already?


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Anyone recognize when was this pic taken? She's wearing a hat? Amazing!


Imo it looks photoshopped. She looks way too much  like Kate.  I looked at Opr’s  twitter - the photo has been changed.
ETA: comments are mostly negative.
ETA2: oh, apologies, it is a video. The cream dress and hat appear near the end.  Will search for it.


----------



## Toby93

Moving closer and closer to LA


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



I thought their current home is their forever home and how they could feel peace when they are on the property   They are a family of four. I don't think they have a huge team living on their property with them so how is it not accommodating them properly? If they are expecting as many rooms found in Buckingham, Kensington and Windsor, then that's just another proof that they are out of their minds at the point of no return


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo it looks photoshopped. She looks way too much  like Kate.  I looked at Opr’s  twitter - the photo has been changed.
> ETA: comments are mostly negative.
> ETA2: oh, apologies, it is a video. The cream dress and hat appear near the end.  Will search for it.



I am not sure about the background of the image but she actually did wear that outfit during one of her very few royal engagements after marrying Harry. That was not photoshopped though it pains me to say it. Which royal engagement? That I cannot tell you because I don't remember


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I am not sure about the background of the image but she actually did wear that outfit during one of her very few royal engagements after marrying Harry. That was not photoshopped though it pains me to say it. Which royal engagement? That I cannot tell you because I don't remember


Yes, you are correct.  




_All eyes were on Meghan, who recently confirmed her pregnancy, and who wore a dress by Australian label Zimmerman, a Stephen Jones hat, earrings which were a gift from the Queen and a bracelet which was a gift from the Prince of Wales.

She and Harry were met at Suva's Nausori Airport by Fiji’s High Commissioner Melanie Hopkins and chief of protocol, Jonetani Tagivetaua._
_








						Meghan Markle giggles as Harry drinks aphrodisiac in Fiji
					

MEGHAN Markle and Prince Harry were given a warm welcome in Fiji when they arrived for a three-day visit as part of the royal tour - with the Duke of Sussex gamely downing an aphrodisiac drink during a traditional ceremony held in the Royal couple's honour.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_​


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



It's really not. Closer to the beach, between downtown Santa Barbara and the campus of UCSB. Maybe Harry wants to get a degree. Nice campus but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get in. Just the ticket for him. 

From the DM comments - "As long as the new neighbourhood is not on British soil then I really don't care."   

I wonder if the move has anything to do with them not being "embraced" by the Montecito crowd?


----------



## CarryOn2020

@bizarrolady
Replying to @BaronessBruck
I feel a downsize coming on


----------



## Stansy

EverSoElusive said:


> I thought their current home is their forever home and how they could feel peace when they are on the property   They are a family of four. I don't think they have a huge team living on their property with them so how is it not accommodating them properly? If they are expecting as many rooms found in Buckingham, Kensington and Windsor, then that's just another proof that they are out of their minds at the point of no return


Maybe they feel that their Montecito place is just too big for them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I had completely missed the "altruist" in that drivel. Are. These. People. For. Real? I don't think Ghoul has ever in her life done something selfless.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Funny how some people get away with so much stuff. Meanwhile, my management still thinks I'm not doing enough though I work off the clock to make sure things are taken care of, pay for things out of my own pocket because certain things aren't on the company's approved purchase list despite the need for them to run the office, go above and beyond to serve not only the clients attached to my branch but also other branches, have over 150 hours of unused paid time off because we've been having staffing issue so no one would be able to cover me if I want to take some time off, getting called names for trying to complete a task. It's total insanity.



Oh wow. Your company doesn't deserve you.


----------



## AbbytheBT

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



Actually - the DM has it wrong on the map- Hope Ranch is located off Hwy 101 north of SB. It would be logical move if they wanted to keep horses, but doing errands around there is all suburban lowlands -lol - no bike riding to the local market.
I was a student at UCSB many years ago  It seems a more reclusive than their MO - IMO


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> It's really not. Closer to the beach, between downtown Santa Barbara and the campus of UCSB. Maybe Harry wants to get a degree. Nice campus but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get in. Just the ticket for him.
> 
> From the DM comments - "As long as the new neighbourhood is not on British soil then I really don't care."
> 
> I wonder if the move has anything to do with them not being "embraced" by the Montecito crowd?


I am not from California, so I just went from the map provided by the newspaper article    On our last trip before covid hit, we visited Palm Springs and travelled to LA and saw the Hollywood sign.  I would love to go back, but I'm not flying anytime soon


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I stumbled across a sugar IG where Zedzee is praised for her "light" which cannot be dimmed. They were astounded by her uber generous offer to pay for all the funerals after the Uvalde tragedy. Sugar fiction? Or were they giving her someone else's credit? Didn't someone else pay for the funerals?



That's not even funny


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't follow the Danish RF closely, but if I remember correctly that wasn't quite by choice. They were all but sent to Paris where Joachim now holds a diplomatic position because the both of them have difficulties knowing their place and gave their brother respectively SIL a hard time.



Edward and Mrs. Simpson, now Joachim and sons? 

Is this a thing with loyalty, banish you spoilt brats and difficult-to-handles to Paris.

I wish someone would exile me to Paris on full pay! 

Not sure I would complain about a toilet block/housing unit in Montecito, or even Monte Carlo, but the weather is even better. 

What happened to Bird Island, Alcatraz or Elba for the wayward Royals?


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Oh look, she spray tanned her arms to actually match her face this time.



That woman has far too much time on her hands (as well as fake tan)


----------



## LVlvoe_bug

xincinsin said:


> I stumbled across a sugar IG where Zedzee is praised for her "light" which cannot be dimmed. They were astounded by her uber generous offer to pay for all the funerals after the Uvalde tragedy. Sugar fiction? Or were they giving her someone else's credit? Didn't someone else pay for the funerals?


I did a search and they said it was former baseball and football player Bo Jackson .. she better not be stealing his credit!


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> It's pretty much the same wording in every release.  I guess they are trying to convince the unwashed masses that they are good people   Apparently it's all Hearst magazines, which is affiliated with Oprah, who makes money promoting the Harkles who make money from merching.......it's actually quite pathetic and desperate.
> 
> View attachment 5621853



The only causes close to the Duchess of Sussex' heart are Rachel Markle, Meghan Markle and the Duchess of Sussex.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, there is another easy job - copy/paste, repeat 30 times.  Sheesh.



Must have something for the dozen unpaid interns to do, can't all be on bot-generating duty


----------



## DL Harper

papertiger said:


> Edward and Mrs. Simpson, now Joachim and sons?
> 
> Is this a thing with loyalty, banish you spoilt brats and difficult-to-handles to Paris.
> 
> I wish someone would exile me to Paris on full pay!
> 
> Not sure I would complain about a toilet block/housing unit in Montecito, or even Monte Carlo, but the weather is even better.
> 
> What happened to Bird Island, Alcatraz or Elba for the wayward Royals?


Bird Island/Alcatraz is now a museum, but Riker's Island is still accepting "reservations" for a few more years.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> @bizarrolady
> Replying to @BaronessBruck
> I feel a downsize coming on



That's pretty much where I live


----------



## papertiger

DL Harper said:


> Bird Island/Alcatraz is now a museum, but Riker's Island is still accepting "reservations" for a few more years.



Great, let's book them a full suite until all 3 of Will's kids have 3-4 kids each of their own.

P.S sorry, you are correct, should have been '/' not ',' .


----------



## DL Harper

papertiger said:


> Great, let's book them a full suite until all 3 of Will's kids have 3-4 kids each of their own.
> 
> P.S sorry, you are correct, should have been '/' not ',' .


Rikers Island has had some well known residents - Harvey W & Bill C to name a couple.  So why not unruly Royals???


----------



## luckylove

Toby93 said:


> Are they for real?  The person who designs the stupid pinky rings she merches was in the audience?  The photographer is Misan Harriman?  They had to bring their own photographer?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5621740




And again with the strange spray tan.....


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz holding a pen! I'm sharing the photo here because it must be a rare one. 


Charles camp fears Harry book ‘truth bombs’​
KATE MANSEY Assistant Editor
OCTOBER 1, 2022

_Buckingham Palace advisers have embarked on a 100-day blitz to set the tone for the reign of King Charles III – *but increasingly fear that Prince Harry’s memoirs could scupper the strategy…*

The Mail on Sunday last week revealed that *Harry was attempting to make changes to the manuscript* after spending a fortnight in Britain after the death of the Queen.

*It is thought that he is attempting to tone down the final draft for fear of misjudging the public mood *after the huge outpouring of grief and love for the Monarchy during the Queen’s State Funeral…

Palace sources have confirmed that *the Royal Family is not expecting Harry’s publishers to extend them the courtesy of showing them any passages in advance*.

But the Family’s lawyers at the firm Harbottle & Lewis will be on standby to read the book when it is released.

In truth, those in the palace realise that *there is perhaps little they can do to stop Harry’s memoirs being published. 

It is unlikely that King Charles would bring in lawyers to launch an injunction against his ‘much-loved’ younger son and Harry’s lucrative $40million multi-book deal* with Penguin Randomhouse may mean that even he is powerless to stop it at this late stage… _



			archive.ph


----------



## Mrs.Z

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



What an absolutely obnoxious headline, it doesn’t properly accommodate them?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Mrs.Z said:


> What an absolutely obnoxious headline, it doesn’t properly accommodate them?


Translation: they can't afford the massive cost of upkeep for it. Hazy thought things like palace grounds just magically get taken care of.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hazz holding a pen! I'm sharing the photo here because it must be a rare one.
> View attachment 5621967
> 
> Charles camp fears Harry book ‘truth bombs’​
> KATE MANSEY Assistant Editor
> OCTOBER 1, 2022
> 
> _Buckingham Palace advisers have embarked on a 100-day blitz to set the tone for the reign of King Charles III – *but increasingly fear that Prince Harry’s memoirs could scupper the strategy…*
> 
> The Mail on Sunday last week revealed that *Harry was attempting to make changes to the manuscript* after spending a fortnight in Britain after the death of the Queen.
> 
> *It is thought that he is attempting to tone down the final draft for fear of misjudging the public mood *after the huge outpouring of grief and love for the Monarchy during the Queen’s State Funeral…
> 
> Palace sources have confirmed that *the Royal Family is not expecting Harry’s publishers to extend them the courtesy of showing them any passages in advance*.
> 
> But the Family’s lawyers at the firm Harbottle & Lewis will be on standby to read the book when it is released.
> 
> In truth, those in the palace realise that *there is perhaps little they can do to stop Harry’s memoirs being published.
> 
> It is unlikely that King Charles would bring in lawyers to launch an injunction against his ‘much-loved’ younger son and Harry’s lucrative $40million multi-book deal* with Penguin Randomhouse may mean that even he is powerless to stop it at this late stage… _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph




Does he know that's not actually how it's used? 

Do you want to tell him or shall I?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> What an absolutely obnoxious headline, it doesn’t properly accommodate them?


They need more bathrooms


----------



## Mrs.Z

charlottawill said:


> Translation: they can't afford the massive cost of upkeep for it. Hazy thought things like palace grounds just magically get taken care of.


actually good point!!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I am not from California, so I just went from the map provided by the newspaper article    On our last trip before covid hit, we visited Palm Springs and travelled to LA and saw the Hollywood sign.  I would love to go back, but I'm not flying anytime soon



Same. I'm so itching to travel but I'm not flying or letting strangers breathe on me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Edward and Mrs. Simpson, now Joachim and sons?
> 
> Is this a thing with loyalty, banish you spoilt brats and difficult-to-handles to Paris.



I think France was the logical option as Marie is French and Joachim holds a French title via his father. 



papertiger said:


> I wish someone would exile me to Paris on full pay!



Yes! Sign me up. I'll be fine with London or Rome too. Or maybe not, I'm a country girl through and through. I enjoy city trips as long as they are short


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The only causes close to the Duchess of Sussex' heart are Rachel Markle, Meghan Markle and the Duchess of Sussex.



This. I don't even think her husband or children are very high up her priority list.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hazz holding a pen! I'm sharing the photo here because it must be a rare one.
> View attachment 5621967
> 
> Charles camp fears Harry book ‘truth bombs’​



Can the media please get that right. They don't fear any truth bombs, just more outrageous inventions and lies from Camp Sussex.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> What an absolutely obnoxious headline, it doesn’t properly accommodate them?



It sounds better than "They can no longer afford it".

ETA: @charlottawill beat me to it!


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> Edward and Mrs. Simpson, now Joachim and sons?
> 
> Is this a thing with loyalty, banish you spoilt brats and difficult-to-handles to Paris.
> 
> I wish someone would exile me to Paris on full pay!
> 
> Not sure I would complain about a toilet block/housing unit in Montecito, or even Monte Carlo, but the weather is even better.
> 
> What happened to Bird Island, Alcatraz or Elba for the wayward Royals?



Or Chunga Changa.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



It means they are tired of a fixer upper where everything is breaking down. Or the oligarch isn't an oligarch anymore and he wants his house back so he can sell it.  Someone will buy the pile for the land.


----------



## sdkitty

O is doing a docuseries about black women and their hair....wonder if the WIFE will participate - I don't think so








						Oprah and Tracee Ellis Ross’s Docuseries About Black Hair Is Finally Here
					

Out on October 22, 2022, Ross says “The Hair Tales” is a “love letter to Black women.”




					www.oprahdaily.com


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> It's really not. Closer to the beach, between downtown Santa Barbara and the campus of UCSB. Maybe Harry wants to get a degree. Nice campus but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get in. Just the ticket for him.
> 
> From the DM comments - "As long as the new neighbourhood is not on British soil then I really don't care."
> 
> I wonder if the move has anything to do with them not being "embraced" by the Montecito crowd?


Perhaps they want to move where there are children so the invisibles can have playmates.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> O is doing a docuseries about black women and their hair....wonder if the WIFE will participate - I don't think so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah and Tracee Ellis Ross’s Docuseries About Black Hair Is Finally Here
> 
> 
> Out on October 22, 2022, Ross says “The Hair Tales” is a “love letter to Black women.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com


She's a day late and a dollar short.  Chris Rock did a fantastic doc about this years ago.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> She's a day late and a dollar short.  Chris Rock did a fantastic doc about this years ago.


that's good and I like Chris Rock but this is from a woman's POV so I think they could bring something new.....I know people here don't care for O but I do think she has talent and smarts (except when it comes to H&M)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> O is doing a docuseries about black women and their hair....wonder if the WIFE will participate - I don't think so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah and Tracee Ellis Ross’s Docuseries About Black Hair Is Finally Here
> 
> 
> Out on October 22, 2022, Ross says “The Hair Tales” is a “love letter to Black women.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com


Not very original Oprah. Chris Rock already did it in 2009, to critical acclaim. Here it is if anyone is interested:



>


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> She's a day late and a dollar short.  Chris Rock did a fantastic doc about this years ago.


Thanks, I just posted the YT link, didn't see your post


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Perhaps they want to move where there are children so the invisibles can have playmates.


I don't think there are many young families in Hope Ranch. Could be perfect though - invisible playmates for the invisible children. You know she's going to want the best schools for them in the SB area, and that is usually where young children make a lot of their friends, as do their moms. Unless she plans to home school them. Assuming they exist, what are the chances that these children will turn out as well-adjusted adults?


----------



## jennlt

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA






Mrs.Z said:


> What an absolutely obnoxious headline, it doesn’t properly accommodate them?



Twitter comment: It's not big enough for their egos


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'are hunting for new estate in Hope Ranch California'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are rumored to be looking for a new mansion in Hope Ranch, California because their current $14million home 'does not properly accommodate them.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





This is what they have ”outgrown”. Must be their egos have ruptured the walls. Mentioned on another page of the listing, it sits on 7.38 acres.

Maybe it’s my giddiness in relief that my BFF from Kindergarten in 1949 and family survived Hurricane Ian in Ft Myers Fl where it made land fall and are relatively unscathed, but reading this recent crap from the new PR person about Raptor’s tears/therapy and now needing bigger digs is making me laugh with the absurdity.They are warts on the real world and can’t take them seriously 

Maybe they are tenuously near foreclosure, the CA real estate market is sinking, and need to get out while they can make a few million? 

Hope Ranch, as in hope we can hang on to royalty, seems from a quick scan of info about the community, to have an Uber wealthy demographic, but maybe not so heavily weighted to A listers. Moving to Hope Ranch might disguise not having been welcomed by that group. Oprah being the exception.

They will never acknowledge they carry their baggage with them: London - Canada -Los Angeles - Montecito - next stop Hope Ranch? Change of address will not buy them Class.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> View attachment 5621998
> 
> This is what they have ”outgrown”. Must be their egos have ruptured the walls. Mentioned on another page of the listing, it sits on 7.38 acres.
> 
> Maybe it’s my giddiness in relief that my BFF from Kindergarten in 1949 and family survived Hurricane Ian in Ft Myers Fl where it made land fall and are relatively unscathed, but reading this recent crap from the new PR person about Raptor’s tears/therapy and now needing bigger digs is making me laugh with the absurdity.They are warts on the real world and can’t take them seriously
> 
> Maybe they are tenuously near foreclosure, the CA real estate market is sinking, and need to get out while they can make a few million?
> 
> Hope Ranch, as in hope we can hang on to royalty, seems from a quick scan of info about the community, to have an Uber wealthy demographic, but maybe not so heavily weighted to A listers. Moving to Hope Ranch might disguise not having been welcomed by that group. Oprah being the exception.
> 
> They will never acknowledge they carry their baggage with them: London - Canada -Los Angeles - Montecito - next stop Hope Ranch? Change of address will not buy them Class.


Glad to hear your friend is OK. The news coverage is heartbreaking to watch. I have friends who winter in the area and are afraid to see what awaits when they go down.

CA real estate is crazy. We don't know if they got a bargain because it has issues (the smell in the area), or it's really worth the Zestimate. I suspect they're looking to cash out at the Zestimate or higher because they think their name makes it more valuable.


----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.









						Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
					

With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mrs.Z

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
> And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
> 
> 
> With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


She reminds me of my brother, unhappy with everyone and everything….you know what that means….the problem is YOU! Also, since we’re all feminists here, who wants the cover of Vanity Fair solely bc of the guy you’re dating….ew.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> She reminds me of my brother, unhappy with everyone and everything….you know what that means….the problem is YOU! Also, since we’re all feminists here, who wants the cover of Vanity Fair solely bc of the guy you’re dating….ew.


too bad H didn't have better self esteem when they were dating....that demand the he announce she was his girlfriend should have been a red flag


----------



## Suncatcher

Breaking dishes at the sight of the new royal photo!


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
> And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
> 
> 
> With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I thought I read somewhere that the song was from the first Broadway musical with an all black cast in the 1930’s.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
> And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
> 
> 
> With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So, is The Sun racist?  Can’t find anything to indicate the BRF or Palace complained. Seems like they would have if it bothered them, but I could be wrong.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The New Fab Four -
  Take that, H&M


Relaxed with his hand in his pocket and his arm around Camilla, the new portrait of the King that puts William and Kate at the heart of his monarchy: Palace release official shot taken on eve of Queen's funeral to mark the start of Charles III's reign​
*Buckingham Palace releases a portrait to mark the start of the King's reign, taken day before Queen's funeral*
*The new monarch looks relaxed with his arm around Camilla, the Queen Consort, joined by Kate and William *
*The new Prince and Princess of Wales stand smiling together' with Kate's arm behind her husband*
*The newly released photograph was described by an insider as a combination of ‘formal and informal’ *









						New 'Fab Four': Portrait marking start of King Charles' reign released
					

Buckingham Palace released a new portrait of the King to mark the start of his reign, after the Royal Family's period of mourning for the Queen ended. He is pictured with Queen Consort, Camilla.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Same. I'm so itching to travel but I'm not flying or letting strangers breathe on me


I was scared to resume my travels, but I'm glad I did. Vaccine, boosters, and masks, and I'm ready for another trip.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> that's good and I like Chris Rock but this is from a woman's POV so I think they could bring something new.....I know people here don't care for O but I do think she has talent and smarts (except when it comes to H&M)


Chris Rock interviewed women who told him everything.  He went into salons too. They talked about their hair in relation to their lifestyles.   What more can Opie do?









						Good Hair - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




The wiki about this is very informative.

Rock delves into the $9 billion Black hair industry, and visits such places as beauty salons, barbershops, and hairstyling conventions to explore popular approaches to styling. He visits scientific laboratories to learn the science behind chemical relaxers that straighten hair.[3][4]

Rock intended to explore the topic seriously, but with humor.[4] The movie features interviews from hair care industry businesspeople, stylists (Derek J, Jason Griggers and others) and their customers, and celebrities such as Ice-T, Nia Long, Paul Mooney, T-Pain, Raven-Symoné, Maya Angelou, KRS-One, Salt-n-Pepa, Kerry Washington, Eve, Reverend Al Sharpton, Andre Harrell, Tracie Thoms, Lauren London, and Meagan Good.[3] These public figures discuss their experiences with their own hair, and the issue of how different types and characteristics of Black hair are perceived in the Black community.


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> Chris Rock interviewed women who told him everything.  He went into salons too. They talked about their hair in relation to their lifestyles.   What more can Opie do?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good Hair - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wiki about this is very informative.
> 
> Rock delves into the $9 billion Black hair industry, and visits such places as beauty salons, barbershops, and hairstyling conventions to explore popular approaches to styling. He visits scientific laboratories to learn the science behind chemical relaxers that straighten hair.[3][4]
> 
> Rock intended to explore the topic seriously, but with humor.[4] The movie features interviews from hair care industry businesspeople, stylists (Derek J, Jason Griggers and others) and their customers, and celebrities such as Ice-T, Nia Long, Paul Mooney, T-Pain, Raven-Symoné, Maya Angelou, KRS-One, Salt-n-Pepa, Kerry Washington, Eve, Reverend Al Sharpton, Andre Harrell, Tracie Thoms, Lauren London, and Meagan Good.[3] These public figures discuss their experiences with their own hair, and the issue of how different types and characteristics of Black hair are perceived in the Black community.


So is OW taking a page from MM's playbook?  Use someone else's words and research, then claim it to be your own???


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can the media please get that right. They don't fear any truth bombs, just more outrageous inventions and lies from Camp Sussex.


The Harkles have their own 'your truth' and dictionary. 
'truth bombs' = falsehoods


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Not very original Oprah. Chris Rock already did it in 2009, to critical acclaim. Here it is if anyone is interested:


We - our team here , Merci to all - is rockin 
We know to suspect merch deal between A and B when we see A post about BFF B 
Go team !


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It means they are tired of a fixer upper where everything is breaking down. Or the oligarch isn't an oligarch anymore and he wants his house back so he can sell it.  Someone will buy the pile for the land.


The purchase of a new house could be just PR to neutralize rumors that they are broke.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Translation: they can't afford the massive cost of upkeep for it. Hazy thought things like palace grounds just magically get taken care of.


Hmmm finances are the reason …. Nah 
I saw a map - and the new place is a gated community half the distance to LA , where  all the action is
Montecito is a long ways from LA in traffic … and MM did some of her podcast in la not in her home studio in Montecito


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
> And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
> 
> 
> With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## BlueCherry

Chanbal said:


> Wouldn't you want to 'burn' a bridge to people that discriminated against you? Why do you insist in having a bridge to people that hurt you so deeply, particularly after 'finding freedom'? She doesn't seem to want to have a bridge to her father. A man that she praised so much until becoming engaged to Hazz.
> I bet the BRF would have been very receptive if she had excused herself from attending QE's funeral events. They would have understood the need of a mother to be reunited with her young children.



I would have been receptive. Her smug mug has totally ruined my QEII memorial magazine. I have some poo emoji stickers I shall put on her face.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'are hunting for new estate in Hope Ranch California'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are rumored to be looking for a new mansion in Hope Ranch, California because their current $14million home 'does not properly accommodate them.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





CarryOn2020 said:


> @bizarrolady
> Replying to @BaronessBruck
> I feel a downsize coming on





Stansy said:


> Maybe they feel that their Montecito place is just too big for them



Daddy finally pulled the plug?



sdkitty said:


> O is doing a docuseries about black women and their hair....wonder if the WIFE will participate - I don't think so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah and Tracee Ellis Ross’s Docuseries About Black Hair Is Finally Here
> 
> 
> Out on October 22, 2022, Ross says “The Hair Tales” is a “love letter to Black women.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com



Oh Opie.

As has been mentioned, Chris Rock already did this in 2009, and for his daughters no less.

Stealing someone’s idea is always easier. They’re thieving vultures, birds of a feather, she and MeePeeZee stick together, leeches made for each other.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm more shocked that she wore that top. That does not look like something that's expensive or high class enough for her snooty ass  Honestly, it's ugly, expensive or not.


I agree.  I'm not a huge fan of polo shirts on women.  Private school PTSD.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



Their current house "does not properly accommodate them".

Accommodate ----> Commode.  As in they need many more.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It's really not. Closer to the beach, between downtown Santa Barbara and the campus of UCSB. Maybe Harry wants to get a degree. Nice campus but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get in. Just the ticket for him.
> 
> From the DM comments - "As long as the new neighbourhood is not on British soil then I really don't care."
> 
> I wonder if the move has anything to do with them not being "embraced" by the Montecito crowd?


It's #32 overall in the US and #7 in rankings for public schools, so not that easy any more.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I was scared to resume my travels, but I'm glad I did. Vaccine, boosters, and masks, and I'm ready for another trip.


My brother and his wife just got back a from cruise.  They are vaccinated and boosted and always wear masks, but just came down with covid a few days after getting home.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> My brother and his wife just got back a from cruise.  They are vaccinated and boosted and always wear masks, but just came down with covid a few days after getting home.


I'm very sorry for your brother and sister in law. I hope they get well soon. Fortunately, many of the vaccinated and boosted people are having relatively mild symptoms.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
> And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
> 
> 
> With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It was a popular song and was performed/recorded by many different people over many years. The fact that the song was originally from 1921 and the Judy Garland performance she objects to was in a movie 18 years later shows she didn’t really do her homework. The line “I’m Just Wild About Harry” has been used for famous “Harrys” since it was written, even when people don’t know the source of it.









						I'm Just Wild About Harry - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One more article…



_When Harry & Meghan: An African Journey aired a couple of weeks later, the similarities between Diana, Princess of Wales and her daughter-in-law Meghan’s experiences were undeniable. Two women who had married two princes, only for them to suffer so much.

And then, in January 2020 when Meghan and husband Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex peremptorily bailed on life as frontline members of the royal family, a blow delivered by Instagram no less, there seemed to be a certain sort of symmetry, of Diana’s son treading a path she first set out.

*But what if we have gotten it all wrong? What if Meghan is not in fact Diana 2.0, a woman trammelled by the monarchy?*

That’s the question we are left with after new bombshell claims that have come via the Times’ longtime royal reporter Valentine Low’s forthcoming Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown, with one of his most devastating revelations going to the very heart of the Meghan narrative: *What if the university-educated, self-made professional never really intended to stay in the royal family at all?*_



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/meghan-markle-wanted-to-be-rejected-by-the-royal-family-book-claims/news-story/3c1ea8ec49489daf4f2f2ae9f4cfa4be


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I'm very sorry for your brother and sister in law. I hope they get well soon. Fortunately, many of the vaccinated and boosted people are having relatively mild symptoms.


Thank you.  My brother doesn't seem too bad, but my SIL is not doing as well.  Hope it improves quickly


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> Thank you.  My brother doesn't seem too bad, but my SIL is not doing as well.  Hope it improves quickly


Sending good thoughts your brother and SIL's way


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

More humor from Twitter…


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> O is doing a docuseries about black women and their hair....wonder if the WIFE will participate - I don't think so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah and Tracee Ellis Ross’s Docuseries About Black Hair Is Finally Here
> 
> 
> Out on October 22, 2022, Ross says “The Hair Tales” is a “love letter to Black women.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com


Doesn't Tracee Ellis Ross have a hair care line at Sephora and other places?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



How sad for Zedzee (not).
Some of the comments point out that the guy is a mysogynist, but agree that his view of Zedzee is absolutely right.
She is indeed a unifying force  

That snark about how no one gave classes on how to be a royal reminded me of a manager who just transferred out of my team last month. She made a US20k error (cumulative over 2 years) and told my boss that it was my fault that she got it wrong. According to her, I didn't sit her down and draw pictures to explain the task to her. Yes, she wanted literal pictures drawn because my boss had to do it to get her to understand where she went wrong. My boss and I were happy for her that another team wanted her for a different set of skills, because none of us have time to do kindergarten arithmetic with her.


----------



## charlottawill

Happens too often to be coincidence...


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> This may be one of the cards she likes to play together with informing Charles that OW is still around. So she can perhaps give interview #2.
> 
> If she is affected by Charles's snub, why does she insist in being linked to the BRF? She could have used the excuse of the kids in LA and not stay for the funeral. Why does she keeps insisting on titles from such family?


She’s barely surviving and needs a therapist because of KC’s snub but has callously done the ultimate snub to her father and family without a single qualm.


----------



## csshopper

9


Toby93 said:


> My brother and his wife just got back a from cruise.  They are vaccinated and boosted and always wear masks, but just came down with covid a few days after getting home.


When people who have done all the right things become sick with it, it’s scary! Hoping their symptoms are mild and with no lingering effects,   .


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Happens too often to be coincidence...



She is really really sick, imagine how much time she must put into researching photos and then sourcing the outfits, never recognizing she makes a fool of herself.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> Moving closer and closer to LA



So bets on why they are moving

Do we think the toilets are clogged, the place is haunted by the ghosts of dead producers who keep laughing at M’s acting or the kids need to be moved before they get tall enough to open the curtains? 


sdkitty said:


> O is doing a docuseries about black women and their hair....wonder if the WIFE will participate - I don't think so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oprah and Tracee Ellis Ross’s Docuseries About Black Hair Is Finally Here
> 
> 
> Out on October 22, 2022, Ross says “The Hair Tales” is a “love letter to Black women.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com


I hope she does- whoever does that bad a job deserves to be named and shamed though to be fair  probably M insists she naturally has long thick black waves 


sdkitty said:


> apologize if this has already been posted.....I usually take stuff about them with a grain of salt but when it comes to the way Meghan treated people while she was a "royal" I think there's too much smoke to not have fire
> And as far as the song, I wasn't aware it was done it blackface but maybe others were.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle raged at 'RACIST' Vanity Fair cover, new book claims
> 
> 
> With Morgan on board, Meghan agreed to do an interview with Vanity Fair for their October 2017 issue. The interview was, in effect, Meghan's big launch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I mean if you are talking about pre WW2 American showbiz it’s not difficult to find a reference  a blackface performance of any song surely but I have a hard time believing that or any historical reference came into the great echoing vaults of M’s mind when she saw the cover. 

This is just a whiplash denial from TB’s book saying she was ecstatic the cover forced the palace to acknowledge their relationship. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> The New Fab Four -
> Take that, H&M
> 
> 
> Relaxed with his hand in his pocket and his arm around Camilla, the new portrait of the King that puts William and Kate at the heart of his monarchy: Palace release official shot taken on eve of Queen's funeral to mark the start of Charles III's reign​
> *Buckingham Palace releases a portrait to mark the start of the King's reign, taken day before Queen's funeral*
> *The new monarch looks relaxed with his arm around Camilla, the Queen Consort, joined by Kate and William *
> *The new Prince and Princess of Wales stand smiling together' with Kate's arm behind her husband*
> *The newly released photograph was described by an insider as a combination of ‘formal and informal’ *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New 'Fab Four': Portrait marking start of King Charles' reign released
> 
> 
> Buckingham Palace released a new portrait of the King to mark the start of his reign, after the Royal Family's period of mourning for the Queen ended. He is pictured with Queen Consort, Camilla.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622054


Talking about stealing names I wish they’d give this fab 4 gimmick a rest it is an insult to the Beatles. 


gracekelly said:


> Chris Rock interviewed women who told him everything.  He went into salons too. They talked about their hair in relation to their lifestyles.   What more can Opie do?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good Hair - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wiki about this is very informative.
> 
> Rock delves into the $9 billion Black hair industry, and visits such places as beauty salons, barbershops, and hairstyling conventions to explore popular approaches to styling. He visits scientific laboratories to learn the science behind chemical relaxers that straighten hair.[3][4]
> 
> Rock intended to explore the topic seriously, but with humor.[4] The movie features interviews from hair care industry businesspeople, stylists (Derek J, Jason Griggers and others) and their customers, and celebrities such as Ice-T, Nia Long, Paul Mooney, T-Pain, Raven-Symoné, Maya Angelou, KRS-One, Salt-n-Pepa, Kerry Washington, Eve, Reverend Al Sharpton, Andre Harrell, Tracie Thoms, Lauren London, and Meagan Good.[3] These public figures discuss their experiences with their own hair, and the issue of how different types and characteristics of Black hair are perceived in the Black community.


If the documentary is going to be popular and make money it’s going to get remade especially by the moneybags community lol 

Just think this time round Oprah can interview the other professional victim/trophy(?) wife/talent vacuum jaida plinkett smith about the evil Chris Rock and her traction alopecia, sorry, tragic alopecia


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> She is really really sick, imagine how much time she must put into researching photos and then sourcing the outfits, never recognizing she makes a fool of herself.


I don’t think it’s a conscious choice I just think if you are trashy trying to look classy you have similar aesthetics/references - well either that or her stylist is a history buff who hates her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> So bets on why they are moving
> 
> Do we think the toilets are clogged, the place is haunted by the ghosts of dead producers who keep laughing at M’s acting or the kids need to be moved before they get tall enough to open the curtains?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I read on Twitter that she is desperate to be invited to the coronation and wear the tiara and the robes



And which tiara would that be?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if she changes his diapers.



PleaZZZe, she doesn't even change the baby's diapers


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I came across these in my drawer: six £1 coins from my last visit to the UK 20 years ago. It will feel strange the next time I am there to see the new currency (DH is keen to travel now that he is semi-retired).
> View attachment 5621767



I would cash them in considering thestate of the pound.

Good point for Harry, he better check which denomination(s) his inheritance is in, squirrelled away in the Caymans


----------



## papertiger

Another long one.

Trigger warning on content for those newly bereaved or otherwise sensitive around the subject



P.S I love Lady C's adorable dogs


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> And which tiara would that be?
> 
> View attachment 5622303



I'd make sure they're all in the workshop for maintenance. Every single one of them besides the ones everyone else is wearing.

That said, IF they once again gave in I would think it would probably be her wedding tiara instead of giving her access to one more. Just in case I tried to be helpful and posted which London jewelers rent out tiaras.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren 




_Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.



The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.


The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
​
_

__Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_

_See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.








						A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
					

Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...




					orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
				



_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She has a few questionable tiaras.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren
> 
> View attachment 5622387
> 
> 
> _Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.
> 
> 
> The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
> ​
> _
> 
> __Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_
> 
> _See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
> 
> 
> Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Another tiara the Danes should loam to the Princess of Darkness

This one would have gone well with her funeral attire









						The Midnight Tiara
					

Crown Princess Mary wears the Midnight Tiara at the Swedish royal wedding, June 2013 (Photo: Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images) While the Danish royal jewel collection includes a number of antique heirloom tiaras, the women of the




					www.thecourtjeweller.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren
> 
> View attachment 5622387
> 
> 
> _Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.
> 
> 
> The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
> ​
> _
> 
> __Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_
> 
> _See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
> 
> 
> Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Somehow this reminds me of Coach's tea flower motive that they have used for some fob designs  If I inherited this, I'd more than likely have the whole thing melted and remake into something else along with the pearls and itty bitty diamonds.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Glad to hear your friend is OK. The news coverage is heartbreaking to watch. I have friends who winter in the area and are afraid to see what awaits when they go down.
> 
> CA real estate is crazy. We don't know if they got a bargain because it has issues (the smell in the area), or it's really worth the Zestimate. I suspect they're looking to cash out at the Zestimate or higher because they think their name makes it more valuable.


I am still thinking a move is to be closer to LA … since they both now seem to be working on stuff and M has gone to LA to do her podcast

Remember how H said it was hard to work from home due to kids (boo  hoo )so maybe the original home studio at Montecito (thus making the mortgage a business expense) proved to be an unworkable idea


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> Somehow this reminds me of Coach's tea flower motive that they have used for some fob designs  If I inherited this, I'd more than likely have the whole thing melted and remake into something else along with the pearls and itty bitty diamonds.


It was a gift from a Danish artisan so impolitic to melt down 

Queen Mary melted down all sorts of her tiaras ca 1930s and has been roundly criticized for destroying historical artifacts


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> Another tiara the Danes should loam to the Princess of Darkness
> 
> This one would have gone well with her funeral attire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Midnight Tiara
> 
> 
> Crown Princess Mary wears the Midnight Tiara at the Swedish royal wedding, June 2013 (Photo: Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images) While the Danish royal jewel collection includes a number of antique heirloom tiaras, the women of the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecourtjeweller.com


The Midnight Tiara doesn't look so bad. It's modest and designed with Mary's Australian heritage in mind. 

If this belonged to QEII and she offered it to the crazy for her wedding, you know the crazy would have had a fit because it's not fully encrusted in lots of diamonds and/or the upper end colored gems.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Remember how H said it was hard to work from home due to kids (boo boo), so maybe the original home studio at Montecito (thus making the mortgage a business expense) proved to be an unworkable idea



I don't know, working from a 19-bathroom-home staffed with nannies doesn't sound that horrible.

Try working from home in a 2-bedroom with a toddler and no nanny and report back, whiner.


----------



## Chanbal

One has to admire Sam M for going against people with so much money, resources, and who apparently align with "_The truth is boring_." Good luck SM! 

"_Oprah__, 68, is among the witnesses Meghan’s sister Samantha Markle wants to call as she sues for £60,000 damages.

Samantha, 57, says her reputation was damaged by comments Meghan, 41, made during the 2021 interview with Oprah.

She even wants Harry to undergo a deposition but that appears far less likely, say legal sources.

Samantha also says she was defamed in the book Finding Freedom.

*Meghan’s lawyer Michael Kump said Samantha’s legal team had ‘identified a whopping 19 non-party witnesses, including Prince Harry, Meghan’s mother, Oprah Winfrey’ and others that she wants to depose including the authors of Finding Freedom."*_









						Oprah Winfrey may be quizzed by lawyers over interview with Harry & Meghan
					

OPRAH Winfrey could be questioned by lawyers over her bombshell TV interview with Prince Harry and wife Meghan. She may be ordered to submit to a deposition in the US — sparking the potential for f…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd make sure they're all in the workshop for maintenance. Every single one of them besides the ones everyone else is wearing.
> 
> That said, IF they once again gave in I would think it would probably be her wedding tiara instead of giving her access to one more. Just in case I tried to be helpful and posted which London jewelers rent out tiaras.


Did she actually hang around long enough to attend any royal function that required a tiara, besides the wedding?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> It was a gift from a Danish artisan so impolitic to melt down
> 
> Queen Mary melted down all sorts of her tiaras ca 1930s and has been roundly criticized for destroying historical artifacts


The article said it was commissioned by Queen Margrethe. Didn't know it was a gift   If it was a gift, then I'd tend to agree that it's impolite to melt it down.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I am still thinking a move is to be closer to LA … since they both now seem to be working on stuff and M has gone to LA to do her podcast
> 
> Remember how H said it was hard to work from home due to kids (boo  hoo )so maybe the original home studio at Montecito (thus making the mortgage a business expense) proved to be an unworkable idea


Is it closer to Nacho’s polo fields?  IIRC he is building a huge polo facility somewhere in/near LA


----------



## Chanbal

This seems to refer to titles, not tiaras…


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren
> 
> View attachment 5622387
> 
> 
> _Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.
> 
> 
> The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
> ​
> _
> 
> __Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_
> 
> _See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
> 
> 
> Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _





QueenofWrapDress said:


> She has a few questionable tiaras.





EverSoElusive said:


> Somehow this reminds me of Coach's tea flower motive that they have used for some fob designs  If I inherited this, I'd more than likely have the whole thing melted and remake into something else along with the pearls and itty bitty diamonds.



Oh no I love the Golden Poppies

I'm not sure that is strictly what I would call a tiara, more like hair ornaments, but it's very beautiful, especially since she has long hair to style.

I didn't like Harry's mother in tiaras, in pantomime speak, she looked like a principle-boy borrowing from the dame.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Oh no I love the Golden Poppies
> 
> I'm not sure that is strictly what I would call a tiara, more like hair ornaments, but it's very beautiful, especially since she has long hair to style.
> 
> I didn't like Harry's mother in tiaras, in pantomime speak, she looked like a principle-boy borrowing from the dame.
> 
> View attachment 5622403
> View attachment 5622404


It is definitely more of a hair ornament to me. When I saw it, the first image that flashed through my head was young girls with their hair down and wearing such ornamental pieces as their hair accessories during the Tudor period


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Doesn't Tracee Ellis Ross have a hair care line at Sephora and other places?


yes


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd make sure they're all in the workshop for maintenance. Every single one of them besides the ones everyone else is wearing.
> 
> That said, IF they once again gave in I would think it would probably be her wedding tiara instead of giving her access to one more. Just in case I tried to be helpful and posted which London jewelers rent out tiaras.


Thank you for the name of those jewelers.  Most of their tiaras have already been sold (hmmm in anticipation of the coronation?) but it was still such fun to see them.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't think TW will get an invite, but this info might be useful to some…


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Another long one.
> 
> Trigger warning on content for those newly bereaved or otherwise sensitive around the subject
> 
> 
> 
> P.S I love Lady C's adorable dogs



dogs are adorable...sorry, this is too long for me


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd make sure they're all in the workshop for maintenance. Every single one of them besides the ones everyone else is wearing.
> 
> That said, IF they once again gave in I would think it would probably be her wedding tiara instead of giving her access to one more. Just in case I tried to be helpful and posted which London jewelers rent out tiaras.


Didn't someone mention earlier that all the tiaras had replicas? Zedzee should be loaned a replica in case she decides to leave the coronation early and "forgets" to return the tiara because it got entangled in her windswept weave.

But seriously, her Stans led by Plastic Pal should buy her a tiara since she is such a "guiding light" for them. She herself uses "light" strangely too, as in her weird description of the mysterious SA actor who allegedly spoke to her about her wedding. Some stan will spin it as an angel, a being of light who descended from the heavens to praise Saint Me-again at a Lion King premiere.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren
> 
> View attachment 5622387
> 
> 
> _Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.
> 
> 
> The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
> ​
> _
> 
> __Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_
> 
> _See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
> 
> 
> Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I like Golden Poppies! Reminds me of the ornate hair ornaments of the Chinese Imperial court.

Sweden has a nocturnal creatures tiara that is gorgeous. Much too exquisite for the likes of Zedzee.








						The Nocturnal Creatures Tiara
					

Elisabeth Toll, The Royal Court of Sweden Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden treated us to a festival of heirloom jewels in her recent tenth anniversary portraits -- and the debut of a very modern bejeweled




					www.thecourtjeweller.com
				





Toby93 said:


> Did she actually hang around long enough to attend any royal function that required a tiara, besides the wedding?


She was a working royal for around 70 days. I don't recall her attending any State dinners. She may have missed her chance at filching a tiara when she refused to meet the previous Prez of the US.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren
> 
> View attachment 5622387
> 
> 
> _Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.
> 
> 
> The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
> ​
> _
> 
> __Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_
> 
> _See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
> 
> 
> Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


OK you keep the tiara, and I get the 'Toi et Moi' ring…


----------



## Chanbal

On the Danish Markles…


----------



## youngster

I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all. 
2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog. 

In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This seems to refer to titles, not tiaras…



Can't think of anything else QE gave them that would need taking back. 

If she filched anything belonging to Diana, the Spencer ladies would follow up on it. I doubt there was anything to steal from Frogmore. 

She did steal a lot of £££ from KC if the alleged switcheroo clothing deals is fact, but that would be harder to prove if she had alleged accomplices like J Mulroney funnelling the cash and clothes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


wouldn't she have remodeled the kitchen right away?
acording to the santa barbara news, they are shopping for a new "estate"
Of course, a home isn't worthy of their magnificence - has to be an "estate"


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


Now Frogmore Cottage doesn't seem so bad anymore, does it, Z-list? Not like they really had to pay anything had they stuck around and stayed as working royals.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> OK you keep the tiara, and I get the 'Toi et Moi' ring…



 
Absolutely, Denmark has an outstanding and beautiful jewelry closet always under the watchful eye of Margrethe and her 2 sisters. Benedik is nothing to be trifled with. Formidable and powerful women, they get the jewels. The young ones have no idea how strong these ladies are.  The poppy tiara, tho, seems a misstep imo.  On the hand, it is indeed fun to play around with the jewels. So, why not?



youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


Over on Reddit, there are some _intriguing_ theories on H&M’s connection to the Russian owner of the Monteshito house.  I would be surprised if any are true, so I won’t repeat them here.   Surely the BRF would not let Hazz become involved with that kind of  shady stuff. Still, one does wonder why Hazz showed up at the FW rodeo in a cowboy hat.  Was he really attending a tween party as repayment for loans?  Oh my


----------



## Chanbal

Why is Oprah so invested in the BRF?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't she have remodeled the kitchen right away?
> acording to the santa barbara news, they are shopping for a new "estate"
> Of course, a home isn't worthy of their magnificence - has to be an "estate"


What was wrong with this ‘estate’? :swoon:









						Meghan and Harry’s secret £2.5m farmhouse hidden in the Cotswolds revealed
					

The pair have been living at the residence since May, having turned down the chance to live next door to William and Kate amid rumours of a rift




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> wouldn't she have remodeled the kitchen right away?
> acording to the santa barbara news, they are shopping for a new "estate"
> Of course, a home isn't worthy of their magnificence - has to be an "estate"


Can they afford an estate though?  They don't have the money and they have squandered off most of what Harry brought to the table.

At this point, they should just get a modest house with a pool and a small guesthouse in a regular residential neighborhood and call it a day. 

KCIII might still give Harry some money but it's unlikely that it would be enough for monthly maintenance of an expensive estate in addition to the crazy's heiress style spending.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was wrong with this ‘estate’? :swoon:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s secret £2.5m farmhouse hidden in the Cotswolds revealed
> 
> 
> The pair have been living at the residence since May, having turned down the chance to live next door to William and Kate amid rumours of a rift
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Probably too old and musty for her highness


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


They may have found the right one…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Why is Oprah so invested in the BRF?



Dementia - it’s the only thing I can think of.  She knows she is misrepresenting the truth. Perhaps this is same delusional bs she pumped the dim MM with. This idea of manifesting one’s wishes and desires can be dangerous imo .  I’m all for dream big, let’s be honest - she has yet to explain convincingly her connection to HarvW and GK’s defence of CRose was absurd imo.


----------



## EverSoElusive

How about these tiny houses from Home Depot??  


*Option 1: Rose Cottage a sweet nod to Frogmore* *Cottage






Option 2: The California a sweet nod to the state of California where they are living now*



*
*


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I read on Twitter that she is desperate to be invited to the coronation and wear the tiara and the robes



I was wondering if they would or would not be invited to the coronation. After all the obvious tension they created at the funeral I hope they can be excluded. Tiara and robes? Really?  When will it sink into their delusional heads that when they chose to step away from royal life and the work that it entails, they also gave up the privileges of being a royal.  It can never be said enough, but....


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

EverSoElusive said:


> Can they afford an estate though?  They don't have the money and they have squandered off most of what Harry brought to the table.



We don't know if they have squandered the money Harry had.  It could be locked up in trust and the income doled out to him annually so the principle is still intact, or perhaps the trust purchased the house for him out of its assets. They also got advances perhaps from Spotify and Netflix and Harry's publisher and Meghan makes money merching her shoes and jewelry and such. So, they are still likely quite wealthy.  The cash flow projections through next year and the next though might not look so good, what with their huge staff, PR bills, lawyer bills, security, nannies, and everything else. 

Could be too, as some have mentioned, that they never bought the house but leased it from the Russian? Maybe with an option to buy?  That would have been smart. But, property records show ownership was transferred and they stated publicly that they bought it.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> How about these tiny houses from Home Depot??
> 
> 
> *Option 1: Rose Cottage a sweet nod to Frogmore* *Cottage
> 
> View attachment 5622487
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Option 2: The California a sweet nod to the state of California where they are living now*
> 
> View attachment 5622488


The first one is actually kind of cute. I've been telling my husband for our retirement we should buy a lot and get two of those. We can visit each other when we want, and when he's getting on my nerves I can kick him out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Good enough for Elon…








						Elon Musk is reportedly living in a prefab tiny house worth only $50K on SpaceX site
					

Elon Musk may be one of the world’s richest people, but he’s not living large.




					nypost.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Why is Oprah so invested in the BRF?



Oprah is really pushing for these titles   Someone posted the link on Twitter to report her for misleading and false statements.


----------



## Molly0

CarryOn2020 said:


> Absolutely, Denmark has an outstanding and beautiful jewelry closet always under the watchful eye of Margrethe and her 2 sisters. Benedik is nothing to be trifled with. Formidable and powerful women, they get the jewels. The young ones have no idea how strong these ladies are.  The poppy tiara, tho, seems a misstep imo.  On the hand, it is indeed fun to play around with the jewels. So, why not?
> 
> 
> Over on Reddit, there are some _intriguing_ theories on H&M’s connection to the Russian owner of the Monteshito house. I would be surprised if any are true, so I won’t repeat them here. Surely the BRF would not let Hazz become involved with that kind of shady stuff. Still, one does wonder why Hazz showed up at the FW rodeo in a cowboy hat. Was he really attending a tween party as repayment for loans? Oh my


But then there is this ?  





			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-island-mansion-harry-meghan-yuri-milner-pandora-1.6419328


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> Could be too, as some have mentioned, that they never bought the house but leased it from the Russian? Maybe with an option to buy?  That would have been smart. But, property records show ownership was transferred and they stated publicly that they bought it.


I read that it was bought in the name of one of Zedzee's spiderweb of companies.


----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> We don't know if they have squandered the money Harry had.  It could be locked up in trust and the income doled out to him annually so the principle is still intact, or perhaps the trust purchased the house for him out of its assets. They also got advances perhaps from Spotify and Netflix and Harry's publisher and Meghan makes money merching her shoes and jewelry and such. So, they are still likely quite wealthy.  The cash flow projections through next year and the next though might not look so good, what with their huge staff, PR bills, lawyer bills, security, nannies, and everything else.
> 
> Could be too, as some have mentioned, that they never bought the house but leased it from the Russian? Maybe with an option to buy?  That would have been smart. But, property records show ownership was transferred and they stated publicly that they bought it.


You are right maybe Harry's money is still there in a trust, which would make it hard for Harry to get the money out. IF and only if that's the case, I'm not saying that I know for sure, then again, that still means that they don't have sufficient cash flow or anything liquid to spend as recklessly as the crazy has been doing.

Yes, they got advance payments from Netflix and Spotify. However, this is not a neverending source of income or flow of cash. These payments were large sums but since they don't seem to know how to manage these fat checks/cheques or invest them, the money is probably long gone by now due to their long list of expenses.

As for the crazy's marching, just how much can she really make to amount to a large sum of wealth? 

IF the house wasn't purchased with their own money, then they had $14 millions in their pockets. But back to the point where they have high expenses, this amount of money is probably long gone too.

With allegations of being dropped by SSachs due to non-payment, if that's true, then that's one proof that they're not liquid or even as wealthy as they want people to believe. 

Harry and the crazy strike me as the 'fake it till you make it' type.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Oprah is really pushing for these titles   Someone posted the link on Twitter to report her for misleading and false statements.
> 
> View attachment 5622494
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622495


There are two possibilities.

1.  She is stupid and ignorant of how this all works with The King making the decision. 

2.  She knows the Royals have Markled her for supporting Migraine so she is tweaking them by posting this.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> The first one is actually kind of cute. I've been telling my husband for our retirement we should buy a lot and get two of those. We can visit each other when we want, and when he's getting on my nerves I can kick him out.


That's actually a nice idea. When you've been married a number of years, after awhile, one may just want a little more private time and space  Whatever floats one's boat. I wouldn't judge. In fact, I'd like to do that too if that something that my husband is interested in  

Tiny houses would force me to downsize and get rid of "clutters" and less home maintenance. That sounds kinda relaxing!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The first one is actually kind of cute. I've been telling my husband for our retirement we should buy a lot and get two of those. We can visit each other when we want, and when he's getting on my nerves I can kick him out.


I told the DH that we need three. One to live in. One for my clothes/handbags/shoes and one more for all his newspapers and other reading material  It’s doable, don’t you think?


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Why is Oprah so invested in the BRF?



Hopefully Madamanous Oprah, a Queen in her own mind,  is prophetic and indeed “Change is in store for this Royal Family tree”. 

However, not as she views it, instead,  the rotted by avariciousness limbs will be removed, left to molder into the ground “overseas.”


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Oprah is really pushing for these titles   Someone posted the link on Twitter to report her for misleading and false statements.
> 
> View attachment 5622494
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622495


She is a T.W.A.T.  She’s mad that she and her puppet Gayle were shut down from squealing the early news of TQ’s death.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> I told the DH that we need three. One to live in. One for my clothes/handbags/shoes and one more for all his newspapers and other reading material  It’s doable, don’t you think?


I need one for my handbags, jewelries and nail dip powders


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Oprah is really pushing for these titles   Someone posted the link on Twitter to report her for misleading and false statements.
> 
> View attachment 5622494
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622495


I don't understand why Oprah would post this as if if were fact?  Is that actually Oprah's account?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand why Oprah would post this as if if were fact?  Is that actually Oprah's account?


Oprah thinks she is omnipotent. The alpha and the omega. If she says it then it must come to pass She needs a really big wake up call.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was wrong with this ‘estate’? :swoon:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s secret £2.5m farmhouse hidden in the Cotswolds revealed
> 
> 
> The pair have been living at the residence since May, having turned down the chance to live next door to William and Kate amid rumours of a rift
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mirror.co.uk


Isn't that the place where the tabloids published drone pictures of the interior taken through the kitchen window and Meghan refused to go back?  They don't like drones, and I can't blame them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Did she actually hang around long enough to attend any royal function that required a tiara, besides the wedding?



Nope. Not even Harry went to that many.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Oprah thinks she is omnipotent. The alpha and the omega. If she says it then it must come to pass She needs a really big wake up call.


Oprah allegedly loved The Secret. She's probably one of those 'speak it into existence' people


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> But seriously, her Stans led by Plastic Pal should buy her a tiara since she is such a "guiding light" for them.



Right, why are they so cheap? One of The Queen's faves was given to Queen Mary as a wedding present by a women's group who collected the funds.

But also, let's not give them ideas, shall we


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd make sure they're all in the workshop for maintenance. Every single one of them besides the ones everyone else is wearing.
> 
> That said, IF they once again gave in I would think it would probably be her wedding tiara instead of giving her access to one more. Just in case I tried to be helpful and posted which London jewelers rent out tiaras.


would this actually be an occasion where she could wear a tiara?  a non-working royal?  or non-royal?  or is this a someone's humor?
and how hypocritical would she look?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> On the Danish Markles…




I was not initially fond of Marghrete's decision, but I think that's changed rapidly. Now Charles, she's been at this job a bit longer, maybe take note how to deal with unroyal a*sholes. I especially enjoy her laying down the law when the rude ones had "terms"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> would this actually be an occasion where she could wear a tiara?  a non-working royal?  or non-royal?  or is this a someone's humor?
> and how hypocritical would she look?



I don't think you need to be a working royal. All the peers' wives will dust theirs off for the coronation.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I read that it was bought in the name of one of Zedzee's spiderweb of companies.


Really? 

I thought they put down 20% and had a mortgage 



Toby93 said:


> Oprah is really pushing for these titles   Someone posted the link on Twitter to report her for misleading and false statements.
> 
> View attachment 5622494
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622495



WHAT the hell?? 



Molly0 said:


> But then there is this ?
> 
> View attachment 5622496
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbc.ca



WHAT?

Which universe did I wake up in today???


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I told the DH that we need three. One to live in. One for my clothes/handbags/shoes and one more for all his newspapers and other reading material  It’s doable, don’t you think?


Agreed, and with weather enclosed connecting corridors, like a giant hamster habitat


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I would need a fourth just to have a spacious kitchen


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> That's actually a nice idea. When you've been married a number of years, after awhile, one may just want a little more private time and space  Whatever floats one's boat. I wouldn't judge. In fact, I'd like to do that too if that something that my husband is interested in
> 
> Tiny houses would force me to downsize and get rid of "clutters" and less home maintenance. That sounds kinda relaxing!



But where do you keep your bags - and tiaras?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think you need to be a working royal. All the peers' wives will dust theirs off for the coronation.


oh, didn't know that....still the WIFE should decide whether she is an American feminist or a princess


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> But where do you keep your bags - and tiaras?


In my subsequent comment, agreeing with @gracekelly I need one solely for my handbags, jewelries and nail dip powders  

For the crazy, she can dream all she wants but she got not tiaras to fill in a second tiny house


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> oh, didn't know that....still the WIFE should decide whether she is an American feminist or a princess



I find it so funny that she has been loudly proclaiming to not care for titles, status, jewels from day 1, but has given us plenty of proof that's actually ALL she cares about. At least embrace it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gotta love Reddit:
_
ryansschultz •3 hr. ago

/me opens web browser, checks https://www.royal.uk/succession, nods, closes browser 
Oprah is *wrong*; Archie and Lilibet do *not* have prince and princess titles. Once again, Meghan is “manifesting” via press release/media leak._


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it so funny that she has been loudly proclaiming to not care for titles, status, jewels from day 1, but has given us plenty of proof that's actually ALL she cares about. At least embrace it.


Yes!!! The funniest of it all is that they claimed they didn't want titles for their kids and then now it's all about their kids not given princely titles


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> In my subsequent comment, agreeing with @gracekelly I need one solely for my handbags, jewelries and nail dip powders
> 
> For the crazy, she can dream all she wants but she got not tiaras to fill in a second tiny house



Nail dip powdees? I have to go and look them up.

I have no idea why these 2 are moving but it could be they are both restless and they think a move will fix it. Adds to D. I. V. O R. C. E rumours IMO


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it so funny that she has been loudly proclaiming to not care for titles, status, jewels from day 1, but has given us plenty of proof that's actually ALL she cares about. At least embrace it.



I think it's even funnier, they claim to hate misinformation.

In fact OW is litte Miss Information Incorporated


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think you need to be a working royal. All the peers' wives will dust theirs off for the coronation.


I don't know much about it since it's been 70 years since the last one.  It's interesting to me that when QE was coronated, Charles and Anne did not wear anything but white, and yet when QE's father was coronated, Elizabeth and Margaret both wore the robes and tiaras.  

It will remain to be seen whether the gruesome twosome who stepped down from ALL royal duties to make money in California are included in the ceremony.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> Nail dip powdees? I have to go and look them up.
> 
> I have no idea why these 2 are moving but it could be they are both restless and they think a move will fix it. Adds to D. I. V. O R. C. E rumours IMO


Nail dipping is an alternative method of doing manicure. I think the first well known nail dipping system is SNS. Now we can buy all sorts of dipping powders and glitters from independent brands. That's my current addiction and I have way too many of them and I can't use them fast enough. My upcoming manicure is going to consist of 10 different dip powders as a challenge 

The crazy can continue to stay in swanky hotels if she wants. I cannot wait until the day that their imminent divorce is announced. I want to see how the crazy is going to extort the BRF for more than what they are willing to throw at her and she'd be forced to shut up and accept what's offered.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was not initially fond of Marghrete's decision, but I think that's changed rapidly. Now Charles, she's been at this job a bit longer, maybe take note how to deal with unroyal a*sholes. I especially enjoy her laying down the law when the rude ones had "terms"


Absolutely, and I hope KC3 is paying attention.  Someone posted earlier that they are really rattled by the Danish decision, hence the propaganda put out by Oprah.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Absolutely, and I hope KC3 is paying attention.  Someone posted earlier that they are really rattled by the Danish decision, hence the propaganda put out by Oprah.



Opr’s propaganda will not work. It makes all of them look more and more ignorant of the facts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> PleaZZZe, she doesn't even change the baby's diapers
> 
> View attachment 5622304


Where are you getting all these creepy kids pageant gifs? I feel so badly  for those little girls.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps QueenMargrethe would loan this one - yes, she is the Queen who strips titles from her beloved grandchildren
> 
> View attachment 5622387
> 
> 
> _Popularly named the _*Golden Poppies,*_ this is an example of modern design and experimentation with materials that features excellent craftsmanship and yet results in a dubious final execution. Queen Margrethe commissioned this from Danish artist Arje Griegst in 1976, and with her creative streak I think there can be no doubt she had a hand in the appearance.
> 
> 
> 
> The flowers themselves are made from thinly hammered plates of 21 carat gold. Each flower has baroque pearls inside and 4 diamond-tipped stamens. The design is a very literal translation of a garden flower, including moonstones and aquamarines on the leaves to represent dewdrops and insects depicted in pearls, crystals, opals, moonstones, and diamonds crawling about. It is often said that there are also tiny lights involved, to illuminate the flowers. Oh, yeah, and it’s a parure to boot: earrings and necklace included, because you can never get enough garishly bright gold.
> 
> 
> The thing is, the flowers themselves aren’t so bad. (Except for the insects. You lost me with the insects. Ew.) They can be detached from their headdress and worn on their own, just a few at a time. It’s when they all get together that things get creepy._
> ​
> _
> 
> __Margrethe in the full flowered headdress_
> 
> _See now, they no longer look like flowers to me. I see a cluster of dish television receptors, a set of toy teacups, crawling insects (hey, the designer started it), or *some sort of knowledge-sucking device straight from the alien warlords*. Creepy, I tell you. Maybe this would have been a better fit for an April Fools’ Day celebration, since ol’ Daisy obviously has a sense of humor. And this little practical jewelry joke is her personal property, by the way, so she can leave it to whomever she pleases. What do you think, kids: Mary in the poppies someday? Oh, giggles.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Very Special Tiara Friday: The Golden Poppies
> 
> 
> Halloween is upon us, lovelies. Do you celebrate in your nook of the world? (You should, you know. Socially acceptable occasions to wear tia...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> orderofsplendor.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So I think the flowers are beautifully crafted and it’s a good idea but this to me is a rare example of a tiara that looks worse as you get older. The coachella/hippy vibes on a mature lady just looks silly - this should be the tiara the ingenue wears to her first ball.


marietouchet said:


> Another tiara the Danes should loam to the Princess of Darkness
> 
> This one would have gone well with her funeral attire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Midnight Tiara
> 
> 
> Crown Princess Mary wears the Midnight Tiara at the Swedish royal wedding, June 2013 (Photo: Pascal Le Segretain/Getty Images) While the Danish royal jewel collection includes a number of antique heirloom tiaras, the women of the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecourtjeweller.com


This should be the tiara the queen wears to the tax office or a funeral or a visit to the cement factory. It’s sort of Claire’s accessories.  How do you take a theme like night and those lovely materials  and come up with something so…blah?


Chanbal said:


> This seems to refer to titles, not tiaras…



I don’t get what’s going on here at all


papertiger said:


> Oh no I love the Golden Poppies
> 
> I'm not sure that is strictly what I would call a tiara, more like hair ornaments, but it's very beautiful, especially since she has long hair to style.
> 
> I didn't like Harry's mother in tiaras, in pantomime speak, she looked like a principle-boy borrowing from the dame.
> 
> View attachment 5622403
> View attachment 5622404


The shade!
To be fair the Spencer tiara is hideous- there I said it  
Apparently I have a lot of opinions on tiaras


xincinsin said:


> Didn't someone mention earlier that all the tiaras had replicas? Zedzee should be loaned a replica in case she decides to leave the coronation early and "forgets" to return the tiara because it got entangled in her windswept weave.
> 
> But seriously, her Stans led by Plastic Pal should buy her a tiara since she is such a "guiding light" for them. She herself uses "light" strangely too, as in her weird description of the mysterious SA actor who allegedly spoke to her about her wedding. Some stan will spin it as an angel, a being of light who descended from the heavens to praise Saint Me-again at a Lion King premiere.
> 
> I like Golden Poppies! Reminds me of the ornate hair ornaments of the Chinese Imperial court.
> 
> Sweden has a nocturnal creatures tiara that is gorgeous. Much too exquisite for the likes of Zedzee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Nocturnal Creatures Tiara
> 
> 
> Elisabeth Toll, The Royal Court of Sweden Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden treated us to a festival of heirloom jewels in her recent tenth anniversary portraits -- and the debut of a very modern bejeweled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecourtjeweller.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She was a working royal for around 70 days. I don't recall her attending any State dinners. She may have missed her chance at filching a tiara when she refused to meet the previous Prez of the US.


She’d have worn the emeralds to the food bank and the pearls to the job office if she had the chance after all the peasants live to see her happy.


youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


I think this is a very good analysis of their problems as you say they wanted to buy their way into the montecito moneybags set but the writing was on the wall when Ellen snubbed them- they find they don’t fit in at all and the lawns need a lot of watering.

Thinking about their ugly mansion maybe they should do a Kris Jenner and start filming infomercials in it? She could have a lemon cake mix prepared in her very own tacky kitchen or


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think it's even funnier, they claim to hate misinformation.
> 
> In fact OW is litte Miss Information Incorporated



Naw, we just misunderstand Ghoul's definition of misinformation because it doesn't match ours. To her, fiction isn't misinformation as long as it fits her narrative, and true facts become misinformation if she doesn't like them.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> I don't know much about it since it's been 70 years since the last one.  It's interesting to me that when QE was coronated, Charles and Anne did not wear anything but white, and yet when QE's father was coronated, Elizabeth and Margaret both wore the robes and tiaras.
> 
> It will remain to be seen whether the gruesome twosome who stepped down from ALL royal duties to make money in California are included in the ceremony.
> 
> View attachment 5622538
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622539


If KCIII is trying to maintain peace yet again (like he did during QEII's vigil and funeral period), more than likely he will include them in the ceremony. If he doesn't, the crazy will use her unofficial mouthpiece to create a ruckus, forcing KCIII to give in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> So I think the flowers are beautifully crafted and it’s a good idea but this to me is a rare example of a tiara that looks worse as you get older. The coachella/hippy vibes on a mature lady just looks silly - this should be the tiara the ingenue wears to her first ball.



Plus, it is so...yellow, and I really like high carat, bold gold jewelry. She has another one from the same bold gold in a bit more tame design that just looks too Queen Midas to me as well.



jelliedfeels said:


> She’d have worn the emeralds to the food bank and the pearls to the job office if she had the chance after all the peasants live to see her happy.



OMG yes. Just as she would have her private citizen kids' titles embroidered on all their clothes should Charles grant them.


----------



## Sunshine247365

Chanbal said:


> This seems to refer to titles, not tiaras…



Or maybe Frogmore House? Someone mentioned earlier the lease runs out November 2023 and the tweet mentions "Late 2023". And whilst not technically theirs it was given to them for use by the queen...just a theory.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sunshine247365 said:


> Or maybe Frogmore House? Someone mentioned earlier the lease runs out November 2023 and the tweet mentions "Late 2023". And whilst not technically theirs it was given to them for use by the queen...just a theory.


Frogmore Cottage, not House


----------



## papertiger

Sunshine247365 said:


> Or maybe Frogmore House? Someone mentioned earlier the lease runs out November 2023 and the tweet mentions "Late 2023". And whilst not technically theirs it was given to them for use by the queen...just a theory.



Cottage not House.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Frogmore Cottage, not House



You got there before me!

Or are you me? That was scary


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Absolutely, and I hope KC3 is paying attention.  Someone posted earlier that they are really rattled by the Danish decision, hence the propaganda put out by Oprah.



Danes are giving Norway RF ideas too.

Lady C was very clued up on the Danish RF situation. I'm more familiar Norway's RF because I used to live there.

KING Charles needs to hold firm


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> My brother and his wife just got back a from cruise.  They are vaccinated and boosted and always wear masks, but just came down with covid a few days after getting home.


Same.  DH, DD and I went on a cruise this April.  We've all had the vaccines and boosters.  DH and DD both tested positive right after the cruise.  I somehow tested negative multiple times, much to DH's shock.  I have asthma so he's always been terrified I'd get it.  Nope.  I then went to Paris with a girlfriend in July, landed back at home in August and BOOM.  The very next day, I've never seen a test turn positive so fast in my life!


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> You got there before me!
> 
> Or are you me? That was scary


Great minds simply think alike


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Great minds simply think alike



I bet Meghan and Harry thought they were getting the House, which makes the distinction even more important


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was not initially fond of Marghrete's decision, but I think that's changed rapidly. Now Charles, she's been at this job a bit longer, maybe take note how to deal with unroyal a*sholes. I especially enjoy her laying down the law when the rude ones had "terms"


I wasn't either, but the more I learn about the grandchildren, the more I see that they were merching the titles.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would need a fourth just to have a spacious kitchen


Agreed!  At this rate, it will look like two people living in a commune.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Where are you getting all these creepy kids pageant gifs? I feel so badly  for those little girls.
> 
> So I think the flowers are beautifully crafted and it’s a good idea but this to me is a rare example of a tiara that looks worse as you get older. The coachella/hippy vibes on a mature lady just looks silly - this should be the tiara the ingenue wears to her first ball.
> 
> This should be the tiara the queen wears to the tax office or a funeral or a visit to the cement factory. It’s sort of Claire’s accessories.  How do you take a theme like night and those lovely materials  and come up with something so…blah?
> 
> I don’t get what’s going on here at all
> 
> The shade!
> To be fair the Spencer tiara is hideous- there I said it
> Apparently I have a lot of opinions on tiaras
> 
> She’d have worn the emeralds to the food bank and the pearls to the job office if she had the chance after all the peasants live to see her happy.
> 
> I think this is a very good analysis of their problems as you say they wanted to buy their way into the montecito moneybags set but the writing was on the wall when Ellen snubbed them- they find they don’t fit in at all and the lawns need a lot of watering.
> 
> Thinking about their ugly mansion maybe they should do a Kris Jenner and start filming infomercials in it? She could have a lemon cake mix prepared in her very own tacky kitchen or



The Internet is full of Pageant Princesses. 

Megz reminds me of them so much when she does her fake smiles and all - for-the-camera act for the public. Tantrums behind the scenes too


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Nail dip powdees? I have to go and look them up.
> 
> I have no idea why these 2 are moving but it could be they are both restless and they think a move will fix it. Adds to D. I. V. O R. C. E rumours IMO


It does add to the rumors.  Sell the house and he goes back to UK and she gets a condo in Century City.


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Same.  DH, DD and I went on a cruise this April.  We've all had the vaccines and boosters.  DH and DD both tested positive right after the cruise.  I somehow tested negative multiple times, much to DH's shock.  I have asthma so he's always been terrified I'd get it.  Nope.  I then went to Paris with a girlfriend in July, landed back at home in August and BOOM.  The very next day, I've never seen a test turn positive so fast in my life!


Thats awful  Hope there are no lingering symptoms!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


Normally I would agree about the time it might take to sell, but at this point, no one is buying it for the house.  They will want the land and who knows, they might be able to put up more than one on that property if they can get the zoning commission to agree.  Jennifer Aniston just paid 15 mill for a house that she is going to redo and flip.  If a buyer comes along and it's a break even deal for them, they will sell it, just to get rid of it.  There is so much money floating around with tech people, I could see one of them buying it to rebuild.  They do that in San Francisco all the time.


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> The Internet is full of Pageant Princesses.
> 
> Megz reminds me of them so much when she does her fake smiles and all - for-the-camera act for the public. Tantrums behind the scenes too


TP should branch out and start doing reality tv shows. He can start the adult version of Toddlers and Tiaras. The crazy should be in the inaugural season


----------



## Toby93

jelliedfeels said:


> To be fair the Spencer tiara is hideous- there I said it
> Apparently I have a lot of opinions on tiaras


I don't have strong opinions on tiaras, but I absolutely love the Cambridge Lovers Knot.  It's my favourite and I love it when the PoW wears it


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> There are two possibilities.
> 
> 1.  She is stupid and ignorant of how this all works with The King making the decision.
> 
> 2.  She knows the Royals have Markled her for supporting Migraine so she is tweaking them by posting this.


I vote for 2. And I will raise you one: there will be a new interview with OW 

My logic 
OW interview 1 was done shortly after losing all the patronages, the motivation for JVMH and MM was revenge 
OW 2 will be done as revenge for treatment during funeral. WE KNOW MM leaked during funeral to GK - no peace accord reached …


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it so funny that she has been loudly proclaiming to not care for titles, status, jewels from day 1, but has given us plenty of proof that's actually ALL she cares about. At least embrace it.


Just more hypocrisy.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I bet Meghan and Harry thought they were getting the House, which makes the distinction even more important


It was a hard time for them - favorite grandson asked for the palace, thought he was getting the House and got the unrenovated Cottage


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I vote for 2. And I will raise you one: there will be a new interview with OW
> 
> My logic
> OW interview 1 was done shortly after losing all the patronages, the motivation for JVMH and MM was revenge
> OW 2 will be done as revenge for treatment during funeral. WE KNOW MM leaked during funeral to GK - no peace accord reached …


I think you could be right about another interview.  If they pretty well know that there will be no titles for the kids, it is going to happen. It will be a B.I.T.C.H.F.E.S.T. and why they think this would be helpful is amazing.  Opie, Gaylepuppet and Migraine.  A group of women scorned.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> It was a hard time for them - favorite grandson asked for the palace, thought he was getting the House and got the unrenovated Cottage


In retrospect, giving him Frog Cot, the former servants quarters, was TQ sending Harry a message.  You are a servant of the monarchy the same way that I am, and  you will take what I choose to give you the same as the tiara.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it so funny that she has been loudly proclaiming to not care for titles, status, jewels from day 1, but has given us plenty of proof that's actually ALL she cares about. At least embrace it.


They doth protest too much.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

I will take a whack at it - tiaras for coronation ?

Yes, they were plentiful for wives of peers 70 years ago at coronation.
BUT lots of those have been sold for death duties. And there are not enough tiaras for Garrards to loan out.
A few wives of peers still wear them to the House of Lords, Jamie Curtis borrowed one
AND Camilla will think twice about wearing the consort crown with the infamous KOH I NOOR [stolen ? From India/ Pakistan, 4 countries claim it) Just a tiara ? Vladimir !
And what will George/Charlotte/Louis wear ? Coronets will NOT be made made for them and Elizabeth and Margaret’s tiny coronets will neither fit nor are there enough to go around.
and the Prince of Wales crown used by Charles 40 years is too hideous for words, will it fit William ??? 

My prediction - tiaras only for SENIOR WORKING ROYALS. Bag the coronets.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I don't know much about it since it's been 70 years since the last one.  It's interesting to me that when QE was coronated, Charles and Anne did not wear anything but white, and yet when QE's father was coronated, Elizabeth and Margaret both wore the robes and tiaras.
> 
> It will remain to be seen whether the gruesome twosome who stepped down from ALL royal duties to make money in California are included in the ceremony.
> 
> View attachment 5622538
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622539


That was a full on bling event.  I don't know how a scaled down coronation fits in with what is being depicted here.  I don't see KC3 doing this in a business suit or morning coat, but you never know.  I think it would be a shame though and just look like a presidential inauguration.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I don't have strong opinions on tiaras, but I absolutely love the Cambridge Lovers Knot.  It's my favourite and I love it when the PoW wears it
> 
> View attachment 5622569



I'm not a huge pearl lover and I like diamonds as much as the next person, but I think this particular tiara would look better without the upper row of diamonds.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not a huge pearl lover and I like diamonds as much as the next person, but I think this particular tiara would look better without the upper row of diamonds.



LOL I would wear it no problem


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> LOL I would wear it no problem



Team Lotus Flower   

But also, I am INSANELY particular with jewelry. Sometimes I love a design but hate a minor detail like the clasp to an extent it would make me not wear it


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Team Lotus Flower
> 
> But also, I am INSANELY particular with jewelry. Sometimes I love a design but hate a minor detail like the clasp to an extent it would make me not wear it



If I'm buying yes, if the Queen's loaning, I'll take what I'm given.

I wish I'd bought the little minimalist diamond and wg tiara for myself from Theo Fennell, I know I would have worn it a lot. I wouldn't even wait for an occasion


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> If I'm buying yes, if the Queen's loaning, I'll take what I'm given.



True that.



papertiger said:


> I wish I'd bought the little minimalist diamond and wg tiara for myself from Theo Fennell, I know I would have worn it a lot. I wouldn't even wait for an occasion



Pics?


----------



## LittleStar88

Some insight on the cost of keeping a California mansion cool during a heat wave. I’m sure it costs less to keep H & M’s Olive Garden cool, but willing to bet it’s still a painful bill.









						A $50,000 electric bill? The cost of cooling L.A.’s biggest houses in a heat wave
					

As heat waves hit, electric bills for  mansions are becoming pricier than many mortgages.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## DL Harper

Toby93 said:


> I don't have strong opinions on tiaras, but I absolutely love the Cambridge Lovers Knot.  It's my favourite and I love it when the PoW wears it
> 
> View attachment 5622569


You can have your very own - and not even have to put it under lock and key!








						Cambridge Lover's Knot Princess Diana Wedding Tiara Pearl - Etsy
					

This Tiaras item by SugarRoseGardens has 2158 favorites from Etsy shoppers. Ships from Brooklyn, NY. Listed on Nov 2, 2022




					www.etsy.com


----------



## EverSoElusive

marietouchet said:


> I will take a whack at it - tiaras for coronation ?
> 
> Yes, they were plentiful for wives of peers 70 years ago at coronation.
> BUT lots of those have been sold for death duties. And there are not enough tiaras for Garrards to loan out.
> A few wives of peers still wear them to the House of Lords, Jamie Curtis borrowed one
> AND Camilla will think twice about wearing the consort crown with the infamous KOH I NOOR [stolen ? From India/ Pakistan, 4 countries claim it) Just a tiara ? Vladimir !
> And what will George/Charlotte/Louis wear ? Coronets will NOT be made made for them and Elizabeth and Margaret’s tiny coronets will neither fit nor are there enough to go around.
> and the Prince of Wales crown used by Charles 40 years is too hideous for words, will it fit William ???
> 
> My prediction - tiaras only for SENIOR WORKING ROYALS. Bag the coronets.


If there's no rule saying that Camilla must wear the Consort Crown, I think the Greville Tiara would be a wonderful choice. Camilla has worn it multiple times and it works with her hairstyle and she looks regal


----------



## EverSoElusive

DL Harper said:


> You can have your very own - and not even have to put it under lock and key!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cambridge Lover's Knot Princess Diana Wedding Tiara Pearl - Etsy
> 
> 
> This Tiaras item by SugarRoseGardens has 2158 favorites from Etsy shoppers. Ships from Brooklyn, NY. Listed on Nov 2, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com


Now I'll need a third tiny house just to store tiara replicas from Etsy


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> True that.
> 
> 
> 
> Pics?



Only a stock one (picture credit Theo Fennell) 

You can style it so many ways (well, I could have)


----------



## DL Harper

EverSoElusive said:


> Now I'll need a third tiny house just to store tiara replicas from Etsy


Exactly because it looks as though there are lots of "inspired by" tiaras listed.

Idea....should we take up a collection, in the name of charity of course, to buy MM her very own Cambridge tiara???  Naturally it would give MM the opportunity to copy Diana and Catherine, her idols


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DL Harper said:


> Idea....should we take up a collection, in the name of charity of course, to buy MM her very own Cambridge tiara???  Naturally it would give MM the opportunity to copy Diana and Catherine, her idols



So very kind of you.


----------



## Aimee3

Ooh we can ALL wear tiaras soon. Halloween is coming and I think I will go as a princess!!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it so funny that she has been loudly proclaiming to not care for titles, status, jewels from day 1, but has given us plenty of proof that's actually ALL she cares about. At least embrace it.


she didn't want to do the job so how can she embrace it?  she's an entitled, arrogant, nasty woman


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

I've found MegZ a suitable tiara, and one  even Haz can afford if if they do get invited to the Coronation


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I've found MegZ a suitable tiara, and one  even Haz can afford if if they do get invited to the Coronation
> 
> View attachment 5622639


as the son of the king, he will be invited, right?  the question may be where they seat the two grifters


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> as the son of the king, he will be invited, right?  the question may be where they seat the two grifters



Maybe they'll be late and miss the main event because they can't stop fighting before the plane takes off.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> as the son of the king, he will be invited, right?  the question may be where they seat the two grifters



So long as they stick MegZ head behind a candle and his behind a pillar, I don't mind


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> So long as they stick MegZ head behind a candle and his behind a pillar, I don't mind


if she had any integrity, she would stay home....but I doubt she'll give up a photo op


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> So long as they stick MegZ head behind a candle and his behind a pillar, I don't mind


I hope the candle is fatter this time


----------



## DL Harper

papertiger said:


> I've found MegZ a suitable tiara, and one  even Haz can afford if if they do get invited to the Coronation
> 
> View attachment 5622639


Looks like they might even have a "Pay in 30 days" option if they can't swing the cost now


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I've thought about what that Danish Midnight Tiara reminded me off ever since someone posted a picture. Does someone remember how a former FLOTUS decorated the White House for Christmas and it was a nightmare in white, grey and dead souls? That.

Not that the one where the trees looked like dripping with blood was better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> I hope the candle is fatter this time



Also someone should prepare the candle to ward off evil spirits.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> if she had any integrity, she would stay home....but I doubt she'll give up a photo op



Every time they go to the UK, get gussied-up, take part in a ceremony, it's going to get harder and harder for them to whine when they're there or back in the States .

And let's face their only selling point is whining


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I think they are looking for a new house for two reasons:
> 1. It's much too expensive an estate for them to maintain.  The property taxes, insurance, maintenance, utilities, repairs, plus the staff to clean and maintain it, would be enormous. Decorating would cost a fortune and it's likely that the bathrooms and kitchen need updating from that early 2000's faux-Tuscan style.  Can't see that being to Meghan's taste at all.
> 2. It's a soulless heap of interconnected rooms and a ridiculous number of bathrooms that feels more like an upscale resort hotel and not a home.  Harry probably wanders the halls, wondering when they're going to check out. He's used to living in castles and estates that are centuries old, have been impeccably maintained (by other people), and decorated with priceless art and furniture and rugs.  Their house looks like it could serve as the backdrop for a Pottery Barn catalog.
> 
> In the $15 million+ price range though, it could still take years to sell for the same reasons it languished on the market before Harry bought it. That, plus the decline in the stock market and especially in the tech sector and the rise in interest rates, is going to shrink the potential buyer pool. There aren't that many Russian oligarchs running freely around, spending wildly either.  It's true that they could get a quick sale, because "Prince Harry lived there for 2 years", maybe some murky deal with some Saudi prince?  More likely the two of them will get a lesson in real estate and the markets that they will not likely forget.


I'm petty. I hope they can't sell it and it is foreclosed.


----------



## DL Harper

charlottawill said:


> I'm petty. I hope they can't sell it and it is foreclosed.


Then TP or OW can step in to help them


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she didn't want to do the job so how can she embrace it?  she's an entitled, arrogant, nasty woman


Or as Lady C said, she's a two bit hustler.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

Maybe the sugars can start a go fund me and buy MM her own tiara, I am sure you witty ladies can come w a suitable name for it!
Then she can either merch it or complain that it wasn’t as big as the crown she knows she deserves because she exists
MM is the result of giving participation prizes to every kid in a game/competition she always wants one (prize) just because she is special (Doria and Thomas told her so) regardless and if she doesn’t get one is not because she is not deserving one but because the world is RACIST and scared of acknowledging her talents


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Forget the tiara, let's all ship out some plates to Montecito. Yes, we've seen the picture before, but it's Vogue!


----------



## csshopper

If rumors are true, an overview of the future neighborhood: perkinsgroupre.com/neighborhoods/hope-ranch

Hope Ranch real estate listings currently online: Total of 8 homes plus
                                                                      3 offerings of acreage for sale. ($3.5-$5 million range)

Most expensive is listed at $22,000,000.  6 bedrooms, 5.5 bathrooms on 5.5  acres
                                       $21,000,000.  6 bedrooms, 7.5 bathrooms on 1.54 acres
                                       $20,000,000.  8 bedrooms, 9.5 bathrooms on 3.67 acres  (Tuscan architecture)

The remainder demonstrate the diversity in the area:
                                       $14,950,000.  3 bedrooms, 3.0 bathrooms, on 2.42 acres
                                         $8,900,000.  4 bedrooms, 4.5 bathrooms, on 1.2 acres
                                         $8,995,000.  5 bedrooms, 4.5 bathrooms, on 1.5 acres
                                         $7,250,000.  4 bedrooms, 4.5 bathrooms, on 3.5 acres
                                         $4,450,000.  4 bedrooms, 3.5 bathrooms, on 1.5 acres

Maybe Mr. Nacho Bromance and his P Wife will offer to help their "poor" besties, whom they adore,
with financing and set Haz up in the Polo Pony business or something related?

Meanwhile, if they make the vote to be admitted, Haz and Raptor, could join the local, members-only Country Club so they'd have a group of people to claim as "friends." 
Edited to add: Tiara's are optional.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I bet Meghan and Harry thought they were getting the House, which makes the distinction even more important


I seem to recall reading that somewhere, that she thought she was getting the House, and when she saw the Cottage she threw a fit. I've read so much gossip about them over the past year I've forgotten who said what, when and where.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Forget the tiara, let's all ship out some plates to Montecito. Yes, we've seen the picture before, but it's Vogue!



Isn't it amazing that even though this was taken the night before the funeral, they look relaxed. I'm guessing the Harkles were not present.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I seem to recall reading that somewhere, that she thought she was getting the House, and when she saw the Cottage she threw a fit. I've read so much gossip about them over the past year I've forgotten who said what, when and where.



At first she thought Harry and her were getting a suite in Windsor Castle  and that my dears is on record


----------



## sdkitty

I don't really know anything about the Guardian but this seems like a fairly balanced article about the grifters








						Cool reception to Meghan media blitz suggests US not yet sold on former royals
					

Response to podcast series and magazine profile met with barb that duke and duchess are ‘taking a hardship and turning it into content’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> That was a full on bling event.  I don't know how a scaled down coronation fits in with what is being depicted here.  I don't see KC3 doing this in a business suit or morning coat, but you never know.  I think it would be a shame though and just look like a presidential inauguration.


I don't think it will look like an inauguration, but I do think it will be scaled back considerably from his mother's for many reasons, not the least of which is out of consideration for the economic situation of many Brits.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I don't think it will look like an inauguration, but I do think it will be scaled back considerably from his mother's for many reasons, not the least of which is out of consideration for the economic situation of many Brits.


In my humble opinion Charles should probably be mindful of the difficult economy and of his reputation for being luxurious and keep the event a bit more simple


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> "if she had any integrity"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> At first she thought Harry and her were getting a suite in Windsor Castle  and that my dears is on record



Isn't it on record as well they downright ASKED for Frogmore House after Windsor Castle was swiftly shut down, claiming they needed the space for establishing their own court? Too bad The Queen didn't find either idea agreeable.


----------



## Toby93

DL Harper said:


> You can have your very own - and not even have to put it under lock and key!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cambridge Lover's Knot Princess Diana Wedding Tiara Pearl - Etsy
> 
> 
> This Tiaras item by SugarRoseGardens has 2158 favorites from Etsy shoppers. Ships from Brooklyn, NY. Listed on Nov 2, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com


Oh my goodness, I would just wear this around the house, and wash the dishes in it


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it on record as well they downright ASKED for Frogmore House, claiming they needed they space for establishing their own court? Too bad The Queen didn't find either idea agreeable.



They were lucky they got the Cottage, I'd have given them the garden shed


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> In my humble opinion Charles should probably be mindful of the difficult economy and of his reputation for being luxurious and keep the event a bit more simple


Even if he has to throw in some of his own money (or William’s),  he will make this a very special, distinguished, elegant, meaningful, one-of-a-kind event  ceremony. I feel confident it will *_not_* look like a US presidential inauguration. Are any non-royal people are invited? I cannot find my invitation.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


>



Since this girl is the one who wanted a photo, a commenter thinks the girl was marked.  This happened after the photo.  Clearly they know each other.  All staged, all lies.


----------



## Chanbal

pukasonqo said:


> Maybe the sugars *can start a go fund me and buy MM her own tiara*, I am sure you witty ladies can come w a suitable name for it!
> Then she can either merch it or complain that it wasn’t as big as the crown she knows she deserves because she exists
> MM is the result of giving participation prizes to every kid in a game/competition she always wants one (prize) just because she is special (Doria and Thomas told her so) regardless and if she doesn’t get one is not because she is not deserving one but because the world is RACIST and scared of acknowledging her talents


No need for a GoFundMe fund, I'll donate the tiara and the candle (all from Bezos's store).


----------



## Toby93

This article makes a good point . they care about one thing and one thing only and that is Brand Sussex 



And this is just plain funny  



And has Scooby Doo realized they are going down, so like all rats on a sinking ship.....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> This article makes a good point . they care about one thing and one thing only and that is Brand Sussex



Or is he making this book more offensive, now that QE has passed?  He needs to sell millions of copies, so he may have decided to be mouthier and meaner than ever.


----------



## Chanbal

This grants an interview with OW or GK.  










						The women behind the reign of King Charles III
					

Charles is now King but he has the support of four women of Windsor who are ready to fill the void left by Queen Elizabeth.




					pagesix.com


----------



## djfmn

Interesting from the latest Harry Markle Blog saying there are claims that TW has not returned some jewelry that was loaned to her from the Royal Family collection. It goes on to say that it is embarrassing to have to ask for it to be returned and that most people who are honest and have some integrity would just do it automatically and unless there is a divorce it would be difficult for the RF to take any action to get the jewelry back.
This is the first time I have read about jewelry that was on loan and not returned.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since this girl is the one who wanted a photo, a commenter thinks the girl was marked.  This happened after the photo.  Clearly they know each other.  All staged, all lies.



What for, though. For Lucifer to come get her? This is seriously creepy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> And has Scooby Doo realized they are going down, so like all rats on a sinking ship.....




Hu? I didn't know he was able to tweet something no nonsense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

djfmn said:


> Interesting from the latest Harry Markle Blog saying there are claims that TW has not returned some jewelry that was loaned to her from the Royal Family collection. It goes on to say that it is embarrassing to have to ask for it to be returned and that most people who are honest and have some integrity would just do it automatically and unless there is a divorce it would be difficult for the RF to take any action to get the jewelry back.
> This is the first time I have read about jewelry that was on loan and not returned.



I vaguely remember reading right after Megxit that pieces might have gone missing. But also, what pieces could she possibly have? It was rumoured early on The Queen had restricted her access due to her behaviour and Harry's opinion she should be treated like Kate. It's most certainly not one of the big guns.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


>


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Why is Oprah so invested in the BRF?



Someone’s been taking porky pie lessons from TW AKA Ghoul.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Someone’s been taking porky pie lessons from TW AKA Ghoul.


seems to me O is damaging her own credibility by stating something as fact which everyone knows isn't fact....for what?  she still thinks these two are that relevant?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What for, though. For Lucifer to come get her? This is seriously creepy.


So the NFlix interviewer knew which “lucky” girl to interview.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So the NFlix interviewer knew which “lucky” girl to interview.



So I wasn't completely off


----------



## Aimee3

djfmn said:


> Interesting from the latest Harry Markle Blog saying there are claims that TW has not returned some jewelry that was loaned to her from the Royal Family collection. It goes on to say that it is embarrassing to have to ask for it to be returned and that most people who are honest and have some integrity would just do it automatically and unless there is a divorce it would be difficult for the RF to take any action to get the jewelry back.
> This is the first time I have read about jewelry that was on loan and not returned.


Well she’s had sticky fingers in the past so I wouldn’t be surprised if she took the jewelry.  Were the Saudi earrings gifted to her or to the crown?
Edited for typos


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> Someone’s been taking porky pie lessons from TW AKA Ghoul.





sdkitty said:


> seems to me O is damaging her own credibility by stating something as fact which everyone knows isn't fact....for what?  she still thinks these two are that relevant?











						Oprah lied about poverty, sex abuse, tell-all book claims
					

Oprah Winfrey embellished her poor upbringing and made up stories about sexual abuse to boost her ratings, her relatives say in Kitty Kelley’s new biography. Although Winfrey claims she never had a…




					nypost.com
				











						Swiss Saleswoman Is Now Calling Oprah Winfrey a Liar
					

After Oprah Winfrey claimed that she was denied service at a trendy Swiss boutique and told that she couldn't afford a $38,000 handbag, and Switzerland's tourism office and the boutique where she was shopping issued their apologies, the saleswoman at the center of this maelstrom is now saying...




					www.theatlantic.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Well she’s had sticky fingers in the past so I wouldn’t be surprised if she took the jewelry.  Were the Saudi earrings gifted to her or to the crown?
> Edited for typos



Iirc they were a wedding present from an official, so crown property.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Iirc they were a wedding present from an official, so crown property.


True, crown property should have been returned.  Did she return them when they came back from their tour?
Every single thing with them is covered in stench. Ew.

ETA:
She wore these earring on the tour and again for KCIII’s 70th birthday.








						Meghan Markle wore earrings from Mohammed bin Salman 3 weeks after Saudi agents murdered Jamal Khashoggi, report says
					

Markle was unaware of the rumors that the Saudi crown prince could be connected to the killing when she wore the earrings, a source told Insider.




					www.businessinsider.com
				












						Mystery behind Meghan's earrings from Saudi prince revealed by book
					

During a royal tour of Fiji, Meghan wore an eye-catching pair of diamond earrings. It was later revealed they were a gift from Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> seems to me O is damaging her own credibility by stating something as fact which everyone knows isn't fact....for what?  she still thinks these two are that relevant?



Miss Information may use 'journalist' somewhere on her linked-in page but she doesn't seem to know fact from fiction.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Iirc they were a wedding present from an official, so crown property.



I thought she just told her staff to say they were Crown property so she wouldn't look so bad accepting/wearing blood diamonds


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I think you could be right about another interview.  If they pretty well know that there will be no titles for the kids, it is going to happen. It will be a B.I.T.C.H.F.E.S.T. and why they think this would be helpful is amazing.  Opie, Gaylepuppet and Migraine.  A group of women scorned.


I am stunned about OW - she did an Oprah’s daily post about MM -  Ok, lots of ways to explain that

But the second post about titles ??? that was beyond some vague business commitMent to MM via SS

why do GK and OW need to stir up the hornet’s nest ? They have achieved a LOT, this is not about climbing to the top in a man’s world, this is freaking personal

As a card carrying feminist, minority, glass ceiling buster I am offended by what I see coming , pls tell me, I AM way off

PS just saw the post about fake OW posts, pls let this be true …


----------



## CarryOn2020

A bit dramatic for me, this could be a sign of the times — looking forward to Slander Tuesday, podcast day:

_The picture that tells Harry and Meghan there's no way back: The first official portrait of King Charles with Queen Consort Camilla - alongside William and Kate - carries an air of finality, writes RICHARD KAY_​_








						RICHARD KAY: Picture that tells Harry and Meghan there's no way back
					

RICHARD KAY: All over the world yesterday, the first official portrait of King Charles with Queen Consort Camilla was being studied with affection and fascination.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Iirc they were a wedding present from an official, so crown property.


I think the rule is 
1. if the recipient pays taxes then the recipient can own them 
2. taxes unpaid, they might go tot the crown tax free OR ????


----------



## marietouchet

djfmn said:


> Interesting from the latest Harry Markle Blog saying there are claims that TW has not returned some jewelry that was loaned to her from the Royal Family collection. It goes on to say that it is embarrassing to have to ask for it to be returned and that most people who are honest and have some integrity would just do it automatically and unless there is a divorce it would be difficult for the RF to take any action to get the jewelry back.
> This is the first time I have read about jewelry that was on loan and not returned.


I remember QEII talking about crown jewelry worn/loaned to the Queen Mum and QEII saying something along the lines of - I trust her,  she will return them ..


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I am stunned about OW - she did an Oprah’s daily post about MM -  Ok, lots of ways to explain that
> 
> But the second post about titles ??? that was beyond some vague business commitMent to MM via SS
> 
> why do GK and OW need to stir up the hornet’s nest ? They have achieved a LOT, this is not about climbing to the top in a man’s world, this is freaking personal
> 
> As a card carrying feminist, minority, glass ceiling buster I am offended by what I see coming , pls tell me, I AM way off
> 
> PS just saw the post about fake OW posts, pls let this be true …


Nope, you see it how it is — some kind of weird personal attack.   OW/GK and lots of the SunnySacks folks are helping out.  Guessing the upcoming elections are part of this effort to stir up emotions?  

The post comes from Opr’s twitter - doesn’t matter if she made the video or not. She or her minions posted it, has left it up all day and not apologized for it.  The comments are almost all negative.

ETA:  Opr, GK, H&M, etc. are all seasoned tweeters, not little kids or tweens. So, the “I didn’t know” excuse will not work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I thought she just told her staff to say they were Crown property so she wouldn't look so bad accepting/wearing blood diamonds



Alledegdly she told her staff to make it be known she had nO iDeA these were blood diamonds, even after being told and rewearing them. Or in fact it might have been Harry, because said staff was so afraid of her they spoke to him first and he was visibly uncomfortable to be found out.

I do think when the missing jewelry came up it was speculated these were amongst the missing pieces. If so, I'll bet money they've since been dismantled because after the public outcry she can't ever be seen in them again.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> I think you could be right about another interview.  If they pretty well know that there will be no titles for the kids, it is going to happen. It will be a B.I.T.C.H.F.E.S.T. and why they think this would be helpful is amazing.  Opie, Gaylepuppet and Migraine.  A group of women scorned.


I’m thinking Ghoul and JCMh will get money from OW for this interview.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I think the rule is
> 1. if the recipient pays taxes then the recipient can own them
> 2. taxes unpaid, they might go tot the crown tax free OR ????



You might be thinking about inheritance. Members of the BRF cannot accept costly gifts including wedding gifts from government officials (not sure when that changed, The Queen was able to keep hers I think?). E.g. Camilla has been gifted demi-parures (necklace, bracelet, ring, earrings) dripping with diamonds and sapphires from Arab royals before while touring their countries. They are not her personal property, but she can use them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of crowns avaialable for the consort  at coronation 

1 That worn by the Queen Mum has the non correct KOH i NOOR stone in it hmmm, something else available ?? See humongous diamond on crown 









						Garrard & Co  - Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mothers Crown
					

The crown has a platinum frame set with 2,800 diamonds, mainly cushion-shaped but with some rose-cut and some brilliant-cut. The band, comprising alternating clusters formed as crosses and rectangles, is bordered with single rows of brilliant-cut diamonds and set at the front with a large...




					www.rct.uk
				




2. King George V had another Crown made, bc he was supposed to haul off the good ones to India but KC will have all the good ones available so  that one is not needed 

3. What did Queen Mary wear in India  ? the delhi durbar tiara , which has been redone, removing the giant pear diamonds and pear shaped emeralds, and is currently worn by  Camilla , I vote that Camilla will trot that one out for the coronation, maybe some the removed emeralds or 









						Tiara of the Month: The fascinating origins of the Delhi Durbar tiara
					

The royal headpiece inherited by the Queen but only worn in recent years by her daughter-in-law, the Duchess of Cornwall




					www.tatler.com
				




4. We can hope MM will have a nail appointment and won’t come, no tiara for her


----------



## Toby93




----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hu? I didn't know he was able to tweet something no nonsense.


Maybe all the Botox he gets froze the nerves that usually kill his common sense.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Someone’s been taking porky pie lessons from TW AKA Ghoul.


LOL the comments are majority anti Oprah.


----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Well she’s had sticky fingers in the past so I wouldn’t be surprised if she took the jewelry.  Were the Saudi earrings gifted to her or to the crown?
> Edited for typos


Was she gifted, or was it she that grifted?


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I told the DH that we need three. One to live in. One for my clothes/handbags/shoes and one more for all his newspapers and other reading material  It’s doable, don’t you think?


Love the idea but I would need covered walkways linking them in my locale's inclement weather.


gracekelly said:


> She is a T.W.A.T.  She’s mad that she and her puppet Gayle were shut down from squealing the early news of TQ’s death.


The way she was behaving in the interview, I think we can stop the sentence at "She's mad." She is an entertainer with delusions of being a kingmaker.


Redbirdhermes said:


> Isn't that the place where the tabloids published drone pictures of the interior taken through the kitchen window and Meghan refused to go back?  They don't like drones, and I can't blame them.


Didn't that also happen at their McMansion? And they told their Frogmore neighbours to avert their eyes. It's the Streisand effect, and possibly deliberate to generate headlines. The more you pretend to hide, the more people think you have something to hide.


----------



## Hyacinth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can the media please get that right. They don't fear any truth bombs, just more outrageous inventions and lies from Camp Sussex.



Exactly! The Spare is the one biting his nails down to the knuckles, not Bonnie King Charlie. Prince No-Longer-Charming is realising that he badly mis-read the room and that throwing shade at the new King and Queen Consort is a massively STUPID move. Daddy is now calling the shots and can do more than send him to bed without his supper.

Watching the Gruesome Twosome try to do damage control should be interesting, especially if Hairless's bio publishers insist on publishing his tell-all tome as written because they have figured out that a book throwing dirt on the now-highest members of the BRF will sell 2 or 3 times as many copies as Harry's cleaned-up version would.

Popcorn, anyone?


----------



## Hyacinth

sdkitty said:


> that's good and I like Chris Rock but this is from a woman's POV so I think they could bring something new.....I know people here don't care for O but I do think she has talent and smarts (except when it comes to H&M)



And maybe a certain "doctor" loudly and publicly spewing misinformation about Covid and eyeing a career change? And a few others as well.

Seriously, WTH is wrong with that woman? Gullibility, greed, or a combination of both? Where does she find these parasites?


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> A bit dramatic for me, this could be a sign of the times — looking forward to Slander Tuesday, podcast day:
> 
> _The picture that tells Harry and Meghan there's no way back: The first official portrait of King Charles with Queen Consort Camilla - alongside William and Kate - carries an air of finality, writes RICHARD KAY_​
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Picture that tells Harry and Meghan there's no way back
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: All over the world yesterday, the first official portrait of King Charles with Queen Consort Camilla was being studied with affection and fascination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


  My husband just told me about this article!  (I've done a good job infiltrating his feed.) 



Toby93 said:


>



In the world of yachting you serve the clients but you don't choose the clients.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


>



Quite frankly, she looks pretty in this picture. If only she would stop with all the current spray tans and unnecessary additional facial tweaks. Perhaps stop being a vile two bit hustler too


----------



## rose60610

So why would Claw have wanted Windsor Castle if the BRF was racist and drove her to suicidal thoughts?  Is being denied Windsor Castle a racist action? If they DID get to move into WC (fat hilarious chance), would she have thought about supposed suicide? See, NOTHING on their timeline makes any sense.  I hope they get stripped of titles. One wonders if the new Montecito house hunt is a sign that their finances aren't secure.


----------



## charlottawill

djfmn said:


> Interesting from the latest Harry Markle Blog saying there are claims that TW has not returned some jewelry that was loaned to her from the Royal Family collection. It goes on to say that it is embarrassing to have to ask for it to be returned and that most people who are honest and have some integrity would just do it automatically and unless there is a divorce it would be difficult for the RF to take any action to get the jewelry back.
> This is the first time I have read about jewelry that was on loan and not returned.


So now she's copying Sharon Stone's tactic with Harry Winston re the Oscars bling? "But I thought it was a gift!"


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


>






xincinsin said:


> How sad for Zedzee (not).
> Some of the comments point out that the guy is a mysogynist, but agree that his view of Zedzee is absolutely right.
> She is indeed a unifying force
> 
> That snark about how no one gave classes on how to be a royal reminded me of a manager who just transferred out of my team last month. She made a US20k error (cumulative over 2 years) and told my boss that it was my fault that she got it wrong. According to her, I didn't sit her down and draw pictures to explain the task to her. Yes, she wanted literal pictures drawn because my boss had to do it to get her to understand where she went wrong. My boss and I were happy for her that another team wanted her for a different set of skills, because none of us have time to do kindergarten arithmetic with her.


This guy Andrew Tate is loud and opinionated and appears obnoxious at times  …  he has been banned from social media before apparently but was recently banned from everything, and this recent banning seems different, on a much larger level, including closed transaction and banking accounts.

Funny, it came right on the heels of his criticism vids of MeePeeZee.

Reminiscent of the Piers Morgan and Sharon Osbourne talk show / contract cancellations.

Surely it can’t be just because lil ‘ol MeAgain’s complaining? I know we have asked this before - and it does sound very Tinfoil Hatty but - does she have some woke global mega-entity fronting her? 

How is “she” managing to shut these people down so thoroughly?


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> This guy Andrew Tate is loud and opinionated and appears obnoxious at times  …  he has been banned from social media before apparently but was recently banned from everything, and this recent banning seems different, on a much larger level, including closed transaction and banking accounts.
> 
> Funny, it came right on the heels of his criticism vids of MeePeeZee.
> 
> Reminiscent of the Piers Morgan and Sharon Osbourne talk show / contract cancellations.
> 
> Surely it can’t be just because lil ‘ol MeAgain’s complaining? I know we have asked this before - and it does sound very Tinfoil Hatty but - does she have some woke global mega-entity fronting her?
> 
> How is “she” managing to shut these people down so thoroughly?


Thanks for the info. I have never heard of this person before. I saw his video clip on a Twitter post and thought the criticism was good.


----------



## Chanbal

_The day after the documentary aired, *William WhatsApped his brother to ask if he could come and see him*. This put Harry and Meghan into a spin. What should they do?

Initially, Harry was in favour. Then he spoke to his brother again, and asked him whom he would tell.

William explained that he'd have to clear his schedule, which would mean telling his private secretary. At that point, *Harry told him: Don't come*._


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> Same.  DH, DD and I went on a cruise this April.  We've all had the vaccines and boosters.  DH and DD both tested positive right after the cruise.  I somehow tested negative multiple times, much to DH's shock.  I have asthma so he's always been terrified I'd get it.  Nope.  I then went to Paris with a girlfriend in July, landed back at home in August and BOOM.  The very next day, I've never seen a test turn positive so fast in my life!


So many new variants evading the vaccines and immunity from previous infection now


----------



## Stansy

sdkitty said:


> if she had any integrity, she would stay home....but I doubt she'll give up a photo op


A coworker of mine usually says in situations like this: I like your humor.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I don't understand why Oprah would post this as if if were fact?  Is that actually Oprah's account?


Pulling a fast one on her fans? I mean, if she could put out a full-length interview with 17 lies or allegations, this little vid is nothing.


papertiger said:


> Really?
> 
> I thought they put down 20% and had a mortgage


Supposedly, there was a $10mil mortgage. The cash was tendered and the purchase was done in the name of one of Zedzee's companies. Was the mortgage under the company too? If the cash was from Handbag, that would be commingling of funds. He's going to the cleaners in the event of a parting of ways.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I would need a fourth just to have a spacious kitchen


All that flour ....


papertiger said:


> But where do you keep your bags - and tiaras?


  (If they sell tiny houses, they probably sell tiny bunkers...)


gracekelly said:


> In retrospect, giving him Frog Cot, the former servants quarters, was TQ sending Harry a message.  You are a servant of the monarchy the same way that I am, and  you will take what I choose to give you the same as the tiara.


TQ, bless her soul, would have known Fave Grandson would be too dim to get the message. Hence the repeated messages - like banging her head on a brick wall  


gracekelly said:


> That was a full on bling event.  I don't know how a scaled down coronation fits in with what is being depicted here.  I don't see KC3 doing this in a business suit or morning coat, but you never know.  I think it would be a shame though and just look like a presidential inauguration.


I think QE's father need the bling for his coronation, to assure the kingdom that it was in good hands after their previous king scarpered off with THAT WOMAN.


Aimee3 said:


> Ooh we can ALL wear tiaras soon. Halloween is coming and I think I will go as a princess!!!!


Sweet nod, naturally 


CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5622635


From my local $2 store: just the right size for Zedzee to store her replica tiara.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also someone should prepare the candle to ward off evil spirits.


Sage - because you know how the delicate flower cannot abide those musty historical buildings. They give her conniptions.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Since this girl is the one who wanted a photo, a commenter thinks the girl was marked.  This happened after the photo.  Clearly they know each other.  All staged, all lies.


Really weird gesture.
Their behaviour on the entire walk was strange, which gives credence to the rumour that the Sussexcubi had people planted to shower her with "sinpathy" and tell her that she is beautiful (who goes to a memorial to tell the family of the deceased that they are beautiful? Equally creepy!)


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Alledegdly she told her staff to make it be known she had nO iDeA these were blood diamonds, even after being told and rewearing them. Or in fact it might have been Harry, because said staff was so afraid of her they spoke to him first and he was visibly uncomfortable to be found out.
> 
> I do think when the missing jewelry came up it was speculated these were amongst the missing pieces. If so, I'll bet money they've since been dismantled because after the public outcry she can't ever be seen in them again.



I think she wanted to reuse the diamonds all along. 

If there's a divorce, it's something they can use against her.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> LOL the comments are majority anti Oprah.



Oprah has turned into the National Enquirer


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Unfortunately Amazon sells lots of these 'almost' the real thing books. Buyer beware!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Unfortunately Amazon sells lots of these 'almost' the real thing books. Buyer beware!



They do this even with cookbooks. So weird. I've wanted to buy one just to see what they are up to, but then I thought I have better ways to waste money.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just found this while closing up browser windows. That person puts together exactly what I've been saying for a while. Harry could have absolutely been someone in both Charles's and William's monarchy. I don't get it either.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I think the rule is
> 1. if the recipient pays taxes then the recipient can own them
> 2. taxes unpaid, they might go tot the crown tax free OR ????



All members of the BRF pay tax except the King and money from Duchy(its) (PoW). However, the Queen and Charles (when he was PoW) paid some tax voluntarily.

The Sovereign Grant is distributed through the Monarch and they are expenses only including staff wages etc (which is why H&M didn't pay for anything when they were Working Royals). Harry hasn't had to pay for anything out his own pocket his entire life even though he was/is eligible to pay tax.

When Head of States/dignitaries give wedding presents they are Crown property because they would not have been given save for the couple are Royal.

When, say Doria bestowed a toaster on the couple, they could keep that because DR is not a head of state or official dignitary, she's gifting for personal reasons.

This is where it gets complicated (murky):
If a Saudi Prince sends MegZ blood diamond earrings (just a random example  ) and that receiver is too 'stupid' to learn the rules (because apparently_ they_ don't have "classes" on how to be royal)  she may i'nterpret' (reasonable to assume) the said diamond earrings were a personal gift to _her_ and not the couple/wedding gift (since Harry doesn't wear earrings - that we know of) hence the keeping/wearing of them. MegZ would also plead ignorance of the origin of diamonds and history of giver because that's what she does. Feminist or not, when it comes to court or criticism she plays the 'dumb broad' card.

However, here's the rub, once 'her people' have put out the earrings were Crown property (i.e. she was loaned them) to evade criticism from social justice advocates and blame the Crown for accepting blood diamonds, she can't say she didn't know they were/should be Crown property. She still kept them. 

If  a HoS/dignitary bought M gifts at anytime, wedding or not, personal or not, they are Crown property. She (and Harry) are using/playing 'dumb' to suit them whenever it suits them.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just found this while closing up browser windows. That person puts together exactly what I've been saying for a while. Harry could have absolutely been someone in both Charles's and William's monarchy. I don't get it either.




What Harry thought (in his paranoia) is he only had until George was 18 and then he'd be 'put out to grass'. That's only 9 years away. He feared a life like Andrew. That's another reason H was in such a hurry to have a family (one way or another) of his own and quickly - and explains the alternative court he wanted. 

There is a very unbecoming trail of malice of the Sussex's towards their own nephews/niece. IMO the S. Squad will try to stir-up lots of hate towards those children the older they get.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They do this even with cookbooks. So weird. I've wanted to buy one just to see what they are up to, but then I thought I have better ways to waste money.



That's why I use Waterstones.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> All members of the BRF pay tax except the King and money from Duchy(its) (PoW). However, the Queen and Charles (when he was PoW) paid some tax voluntarily.
> 
> The Sovereign Grant is distributed through the Monarch and they are expenses only including staff wages etc (which is why H&M didn't pay for anything when they were Working Royals). Harry hasn't had to pay for anything out his own pocket his entire life even though he was/is eligible to pay tax.
> 
> When Head of States/dignitaries give wedding presents they are Crown property because they would not have been given save for the couple are Royal.
> 
> When, say Doria bestowed a toaster on the couple, they could keep that because DR is not a head of state or official dignitary, she's gifting for personal reasons.
> 
> This is where it gets complicated (murky):
> If a Saudi Prince sends MegZ blood diamond earrings (just a random example  ) and that receiver is too 'stupid' to learn the rules (because apparently_ they_ don't have "classes" on how to be royal)  she may i'nterpret' (reasonable to assume) the said diamond earrings were a personal gift to _her_ and not the couple/wedding gift (since Harry doesn't wear earrings - that we know of) hence the keeping/wearing of them. MegZ would also plead ignorance of the origin of diamonds and history of giver because that's what she does. Feminist or not, when it comes to court or criticism she plays the 'dumb broad' card.
> 
> However, here's the rub, once 'her people' have put out the earrings were Crown property (i.e. she was loaned them) to evade criticism from social justice advocates and blame the Crown for accepting blood diamonds, she can't say she didn't know they were/should be Crown property. She still kept them.
> 
> If  a HoS/dignitary bought M gifts at anytime, wedding or not, personal or not, they are Crown property. She (and Harry) are using/playing 'dumb' to suit them whenever it suits them.


Since TW kept the earrings from the Saudi Prince, could the British tax authorities go after her for unpaid taxes on the ”gift” she received?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> Since TW kept the earrings from the Saudi Prince, could the British tax authorities go after her for unpaid taxes on the ”gift” she received?



Sady not. 

The Crown would be reprimanded for letting her accept/steal, not her. The act is one of treason, you'd have to look up the recourse and penalties of that. 

I doubt they are/were insured/insurable either. The only record of them is presumably through the photos of her wearing them. As @QueenofWrapDress said she could easily have them re-set, even re-cut and someone would have a very hard time proving which diamonds were which. 

It's not like a daughter stealing jewels from her mother and the mother deciding on whether to prosecute her daughter stealing. It's not like a daughter 'running off' off with jewels from her mother because they were coming to her one day anyway. It's not like a family thing. On the other hand, Parliament/Tax Office would not know how to value jewellery that is more than monetary. She's a jewel thief, pure and simple and I'm so glad they didn't give her a real tiara to wear for the ridiculous wedding she had (to have). 

When nobility and related families sold of their jewels fleeing from revolution, what they sold was not actually theirs to sell. Royals and nobility were/are supposed to be guardians of their inherited wealth, included symbols of it. That's why they are called representatives and that's why there is an Hermitage Museum. Even a hundred years ago, people understood those treasures belonged to the people and not individuals. That's why Charles (Earl) Spencer (Harry's uncle) was so upset that his step-mother sold-off family paintings and other Spencer treasures (even though it stopped Althorp being sold off).


----------



## skyqueen

CarryOn2020 said:


> A bit dramatic for me, this could be a sign of the times — looking forward to Slander Tuesday, podcast day:
> 
> _The picture that tells Harry and Meghan there's no way back: The first official portrait of King Charles with Queen Consort Camilla - alongside William and Kate - carries an air of finality, writes RICHARD KAY_​
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: Picture that tells Harry and Meghan there's no way back
> 
> 
> RICHARD KAY: All over the world yesterday, the first official portrait of King Charles with Queen Consort Camilla was being studied with affection and fascination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Some of the US press is now calling them the NEW Fab Four!


----------



## xincinsin

skyqueen said:


> Some of the US press is now calling them the NEW Fab Four!


Will Oprah and Tyler push the narrative that the Unsussexfuls and their invisikids are the US-based Fantastic 4? They already have a hotheaded ginger for the Human Torch and an invisible girl.


----------



## marietouchet

PR idea for H …
Major Johnny has been the breakout star of 2022
H needs to get himself a Dumbarton tartan kilt and go to the Highlands

I have not seen a photo of W or H in a kilt since before their mother died … I hope the tradition does not die with KC

ps I know Dumbarton is rather south ( in Scotland), but a nice isolated Scottish northern archipelago but be just the spot - Shetlands ?


----------



## marietouchet

HOW ODD

Last night Scooby posted this from palace , including the embargo notice, he did so 1 hr after embargo was lifted, no bad there, and tweet is on innocuous topic

BUT NO ONE tweets the Palace communique , it is as if he is trying to prove to us that he is still on the palace email list

Tweeted: King Charles will host the first state visit of his reign next month. President @CyrilRamaphosa and First Lady Tshepo Motsepe of South Africa, a member of the Commonwealth, will visit the UK from Nov 22–24. Engagements will be announced in due course. 

PS Per Times, visit was scheduled before the Queen’s death ? But South African leader is very controversial, has his own problems at home, so maybe OS is hinting (muckraking) at something ??? 

AND Santa could give me something this year …. I am a miserable typist and dream of an INFINITE time window for correcting my typos, I do check them , battle the spelling checker and strive but I have special needs  LOL No one has asked how I cope with this issue LOL


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> PR idea for H …
> Major Johnny has been the breakout star of 2022
> H needs to get himself a Dumbarton tartan kilt and go to the Highlands
> 
> I have not seen a photo of W or H in a kilt since before their mother died … I hope the tradition does not die with KC
> 
> ps I know Dumbarton is rather south ( in Scotland), but a nice isolated Scottish northern archipelago but be just the spot - Shetlands ?


Lol, don't even think of Shetland (there is no s on the end) I have close ties to there and have been many times. Don't spoil such a magical place.


----------



## carmen56

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, don't even think of Shetland (there is no s on the end) I have close ties to there and have been many times. Don't spoil such a magical place.


Isn’t there an uninhabited rock somewhere they could land on and make their realm?  What about down near Antarctica?  Then again, I wouldn’t want to upset the penguins!


----------



## skyqueen

xincinsin said:


> Will Oprah and Tyler push the narrative that the Unsussexfuls and their invisikids are the US-based Fantastic 4? They already have a hotheaded ginger for the Human Torch and an invisible girl.


Oprah has lost her luster, IMHO. She has a first class PR system working for her but what to believe? I love Tyler Perry and am very disappointed. He has more money than God but he's used a a lot of it for philanthropic causes. He owns several homes that he has lent out to other celebrities. He's been #markeled!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> HOW ODD
> 
> Last night Scooby posted this from palace , including the embargo notice, he did so 1 hr after embargo was lifted, no bad there, and tweet is on innocuous topic
> 
> BUT NO ONE tweets the Palace communique , it is as if he is trying to prove to us that he is still on the palace email list
> 
> Tweeted: King Charles will host the first state visit of his reign next month. President @CyrilRamaphosa and First Lady Tshepo Motsepe of South Africa, a member of the Commonwealth, will visit the UK from Nov 22–24. Engagements will be announced in due course.
> 
> PS Per Times, visit was scheduled before the Queen’s death ? But South African leader is very controversial, has his own problems at home, so maybe OS is hinting (muckraking) at something ???
> 
> AND Santa could give me something this year …. I am a miserable typist and dream of an INFINITE time window for correcting my typos, I do check them , battle the spelling checker and strive but I have special needs  LOL No one has asked how I cope with this issue LOL



Are you okay?  

Horrid is busy reinforcing public perception that he is a bona fide royal reporter. Fancies himself the mole in the palace who will help his goddess regain her throne/diamonds/tiara/huge merching deals/unlimited freebies.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Are you okay?
> 
> Horrid is busy reinforcing public perception that he is a bona fide royal reporter. Fancies himself the mole in the palace who will help his goddess regain her throne/diamonds/tiara/huge merching deals/unlimited freebies.


Thank you for asking , and back at you - are you OK ?

Why does OS still have press credentials? DISCUSS …


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, don't even think of Shetland (there is no s on the end) I have close ties to there and have been many times. Don't spoil such a magical place.


Your request shall be respected, I just can’t think of another island as close to the ARTIC …

IT CAME TO ME !!!!
Joachim and H should collaborate on a whine fest ! GREENLAND is beckoning and owned by Denmark, they would be SO welcome …
And think of MM in one of those outfits, which I actually think are wonderfulartisanal creations, the outfit rocks





__





						Google Image Result for https://c8.alamy.com/comp/R3WNP8/greenland-paamiut-sermersooq-indigenous-traditional-clothing-on-display-at-the-paamiut-museum-R3WNP8.jpg
					





					images.app.goo.gl


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, don't even think of Shetland (there is no s on the end) I have close ties to there and have been many times. Don't spoil such a magical place.


My Scottish grammar … ughhh 
I added an S because there is more than one chilly island to pick from, a cornucopia of opportunities for H


----------



## sdkitty

Hyacinth said:


> And maybe a certain "doctor" loudly and publicly spewing misinformation about Covid and eyeing a career change? And a few others as well.
> 
> Seriously, WTH is wrong with that woman? Gullibility, greed, or a combination of both? Where does she find these parasites?


I'm sure Oprah is embarassed about at least a couple of people who she turned into stars.  but it took years for them to morph into what they are today


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Pulling a fast one on her fans? I mean, if she could put out a full-length interview with 17 lies or allegations, this little vid is nothing.
> 
> Supposedly, there was a $10mil mortgage. The cash was tendered and the purchase was done in the name of one of Zedzee's companies. Was the mortgage under the company too? If the cash was from Handbag, that would be commingling of funds. He's going to the cleaners in the event of a parting of ways.
> 
> All that flour ....
> 
> (If they sell tiny houses, they probably sell tiny bunkers...)
> 
> TQ, bless her soul, would have known Fave Grandson would be too dim to get the message. Hence the repeated messages - like banging her head on a brick wall
> 
> I think QE's father need the bling for his coronation, to assure the kingdom that it was in good hands after their previous king scarpered off with THAT WOMAN.
> 
> Sweet nod, naturally
> 
> From my local $2 store: just the right size for Zedzee to store her replica tiara.
> View attachment 5622845
> 
> 
> Sage - because you know how the delicate flower cannot abide those musty historical buildings. They give her conniptions.
> View attachment 5622945


re Oprah - I think it's different to give a friendly interview and allow someone to spew their "truth" than to tell a lie yourself on that person's behalf

re the Montecito house.  CA is a community property state so no matter what vehicle they used to buy that house, I'm sure it's at least half hers

After all, lest you forget - she is his WIFE


----------



## Stansy

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure Oprah is embarassed about at least a couple of people who she turned into stars.  but it took years for them to morph into what they are today


I have serious doubts that she feels embarrassed at anything…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Same.  DH, DD and I went on a cruise this April.  We've all had the vaccines and boosters.  DH and DD both tested positive right after the cruise.  I somehow tested negative multiple times, much to DH's shock.  I have asthma so he's always been terrified I'd get it.  Nope.  I then went to Paris with a girlfriend in July, landed back at home in August and BOOM.  The very next day, I've never seen a test turn positive so fast in my life!


I'm sorry to hear that you all got sick. Vaccines and boosters have helped to minimize the symptoms for so many people. I hope it was your and your family's case.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Goodfrtune

elvisfan4life said:


> So many new variants evading the vaccines and immunity from previous infection now


There are and I think Covid in one form or another will be with us for a long, long time. I cannot let it control my life any more. It all seems so random as to who will get it and who won’t as well as who will get truly ill and who won’t. My mother’s last two years of life were spent locked up in her house. For the first four months we didn’t even take her to a doctor’s appointment for fear of her being exposed. Might I add that my mother was gravely ill with many issues among them leukemia (in remission at the time), COPD, heart failure, dementia, Parkinson’s and a month and a half before she passed she was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer as well. The first time I took her to the doctor for blood work it came back with her testing positive for the antibodies. My mother, who was battling all of these illnesses somehow managed to contract Covid and fight it off. Her doctors were baffled. My husband and I tested negative for the antibodies and her caregivers never showed any signs of Covid either. Next blood test, still positive for the antibodies. All the time that we spent caring for her, wearing masks but not kissing or hugging her for fear of infecting her didn’t mean a thing. Fast forward to April of last year. I got her double vaccinated and was hoping to finally let her live a little. She passed on April 5 of 2021. Her cleaning person who was 57 with no underlying health conditions passed suddenly due to Covid that Friday. Go figure. Have been out of the country and on planes numerous times since then. Our cruise to Antarctica had one member of our party test positive the day we were to disembark and two others were positive when they got home. Went on a cruise to the Greek Islands and nothing. Went to Anguila, St. Barths, Maui, Florida, South Carolina etc. and nothing. In addition DH has also had numerous work trips domestically and internationally and nothing. We went out to dinner with my best friend and her family. She and I both come down with it. I will continue to get boosted and follow protocol but I have to live my life. I don’t write this to change anyone’s mind or say that what someone is doing is right or wrong but just to tell my story and give my rationale. Now, back on topic…TW is a horrible, disgusting snake and I would like to see nothing more than her and her useless handbag stripped of their titles and slink off into oblivion.


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


>



Sure - like they also decided to not go to the Oscars. Sounds better than admitting that they have not been invited…


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth! The reminders are probably Bower and Low's books, and if Hazz is still wondering "if he's made a big mistake"… 
Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'​_ "He's beginning to realise he's backed himself into a corner, and *all these reminders about some of Meghan's behaviour are making him uncomfortable.*"

Harry is said to have put the fact Meghan pushed him to go public with their romance out of his mind, however in hindsight insiders reveal *he now feels he should have bet on her not walking away and asserted his true feelings about the situation*.

"Sadly, *it was to be the first of many times that she would threaten him into compliance*. Never forget, *this is a woman who has fallen out with her entire family* and has been instrumental in why Harry is alienated from his own," says the source, noting the couple's recent demotion on the official royal family website last week is a telling sign of their place in the new-look Firm.
"*He's seriously wondering if he's made a big mistake but he feels trapped in a mess that's his own making… their honeymoon phase is well and truly over*."_









						Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'
					

He "is starting to see the big ugly picture".




					www.nowtolove.com.au


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> PR idea for H …
> Major Johnny has been the breakout star of 2022
> H needs to get himself a Dumbarton tartan kilt and go to the Highlands
> 
> I have not seen a photo of W or H in a kilt since before their mother died … I hope the tradition does not die with KC
> 
> ps I know Dumbarton is rather south ( in Scotland), but a nice isolated Scottish northern archipelago but be just the spot - Shetlands ?



The Black Watch _are_ the old 'police' that roamed Scotland wide, including the Highlands. 

BTW, there is no Dumbarton tartan, most tartans are clan based, not geographical.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! The reminders are probably Bower and Low's books, and if Hazz is still wondering "if he's made a big mistake"…
> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'​_ "He's beginning to realise he's backed himself into a corner, and *all these reminders about some of Meghan's behaviour are making him uncomfortable.*"
> 
> Harry is said to have put the fact Meghan pushed him to go public with their romance out of his mind, however in hindsight insiders reveal *he now feels he should have bet on her not walking away and asserted his true feelings about the situation*.
> 
> "Sadly, *it was to be the first of many times that she would threaten him into compliance*. Never forget, *this is a woman who has fallen out with her entire family* and has been instrumental in why Harry is alienated from his own," says the source, noting the couple's recent demotion on the official royal family website last week is a telling sign of their place in the new-look Firm.
> "*He's seriously wondering if he's made a big mistake but he feels trapped in a mess that's his own making… their honeymoon phase is well and truly over*."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'
> 
> 
> He "is starting to see the big ugly picture".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nowtolove.com.au



You don't say


----------



## Chanbal

Stansy said:


> Sure - like they also decided to not go to the Oscars. Sounds better than admitting that they have not been invited…


In other words, one more indication that Charles is not in a rush to give the princely titles.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! The reminders are probably Bower and Low's books, and if Hazz is still wondering "if he's made a big mistake"…
> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'​_ "He's beginning to realise he's backed himself into a corner, and *all these reminders about some of Meghan's behaviour are making him uncomfortable.*"
> 
> Harry is said to have put the fact Meghan pushed him to go public with their romance out of his mind, however in hindsight insiders reveal *he now feels he should have bet on her not walking away and asserted his true feelings about the situation*.
> 
> "Sadly, *it was to be the first of many times that she would threaten him into compliance*. Never forget, *this is a woman who has fallen out with her entire family* and has been instrumental in why Harry is alienated from his own," says the source, noting the couple's recent demotion on the official royal family website last week is a telling sign of their place in the new-look Firm.
> "*He's seriously wondering if he's made a big mistake but he feels trapped in a mess that's his own making… their honeymoon phase is well and truly over*."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'
> 
> 
> He "is starting to see the big ugly picture".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nowtolove.com.au


I doubt he's that smart


----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> Isn’t there an uninhabited rock somewhere they could land on and make their realm?  What about down near Antarctica?  Then again, I wouldn’t want to upset the penguins!



They could invade the Principality of Sealand. They'd have privacy and their own helicopter pad


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Lol, don't even think of Shetland (there is no s on the end) I have close ties to there and have been many times. Don't spoil such a magical place.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I doubt he's that smart


If he only wonders after so much evidence, it certainly doesn't support a high IQ.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Sure, Harry, we believe you. Your dad said "Whatever you want, whenever you want." Of course he did


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! The reminders are probably Bower and Low's books, and if Hazz is still wondering "if he's made a big mistake"…
> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'​_ "He's beginning to realise he's backed himself into a corner, and *all these reminders about some of Meghan's behaviour are making him uncomfortable.*"
> 
> Harry is said to have put the fact Meghan pushed him to go public with their romance out of his mind, however in hindsight insiders reveal *he now feels he should have bet on her not walking away and asserted his true feelings about the situation*.
> 
> "Sadly, *it was to be the first of many times that she would threaten him into compliance*. Never forget, *this is a woman who has fallen out with her entire family* and has been instrumental in why Harry is alienated from his own," says the source, noting the couple's recent demotion on the official royal family website last week is a telling sign of their place in the new-look Firm.
> "*He's seriously wondering if he's made a big mistake but he feels trapped in a mess that's his own making… their honeymoon phase is well and truly over*."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'
> 
> 
> He "is starting to see the big ugly picture".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nowtolove.com.au


Does that mean the vow renewal event has been called off???


----------



## DL Harper

papertiger said:


> They could invade the Principality of Sealand. They'd have privacy and their own helicopter pad
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5623170



Privacy - why start now??  Helicopter pad - it won't support someone else's private jet.   Bathrooms???  The place doesn't appear to be able to accommodate as many as they need. Maybe not even space for one bathroom!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Goodfrtune said:


> There are and I think Covid in one form or another will be with us for a long, long time. I cannot let it control my life any more. It all seems so random as to who will get it and who won’t as well as who will get truly ill and who won’t. My mother’s last two years of life were spent locked up in her house. For the first four months we didn’t even take her to a doctor’s appointment for fear of her being exposed. Might I add that my mother was gravely ill with many issues among them leukemia (in remission at the time), COPD, heart failure, dementia, Parkinson’s and a month and a half before she passed she was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer as well. The first time I took her to the doctor for blood work it came back with her testing positive for the antibodies. My mother, who was battling all of these illnesses somehow managed to contract Covid and fight it off. Her doctors were baffled. My husband and I tested negative for the antibodies and her caregivers never showed any signs of Covid either. Next blood test, still positive for the antibodies. All the time that we spent caring for her, wearing masks but not kissing or hugging her for fear of infecting her didn’t mean a thing. Fast forward to April of last year. I got her double vaccinated and was hoping to finally let her live a little. She passed on April 5 of 2021. Her cleaning person who was 57 with no underlying health conditions passed suddenly due to Covid that Friday. Go figure. Have been out of the country and on planes numerous times since then. Our cruise to Antarctica had one member of our party test positive the day we were to disembark and two others were positive when they got home. Went on a cruise to the Greek Islands and nothing. Went to Anguila, St. Barths, Maui, Florida, South Carolina etc. and nothing. In addition DH has also had numerous work trips domestically and internationally and nothing. We went out to dinner with my best friend and her family. She and I both come down with it. I will continue to get boosted and follow protocol but I have to live my life. I don’t write this to change anyone’s mind or say that what someone is doing is right or wrong but just to tell my story and give my rationale. Now, back on topic…TW is a horrible, disgusting snake and I would like to see nothing more than her and her useless handbag stripped of their titles and slink off into oblivion.


Thanks for sharing this with us. I'm terribly sorry for your mother and for so many cancer patients that missed on treatments and suffered so much more because of this cruel virus. I agree with you, we have to live our lives… Stay well!

I also agree with you on TW's topic.


----------



## rose60610

"Harry is reported to have halted any decision-making on the new titles of his children following the Queen’s death so “they can choose” themselves in the future"

Hmmm.  As though Harry has any say in this, but whatever. It isn't his call. Just like when he said he "wanted to make sure that his grandmother had the right people around her"  . Isn't the whole crux of wanting titles for the kids is that then they'd get security paid for by the RF? And does anybody think that Claw would let anybody decide anything for themselves if it meant a freebie for her? 
If KC III says the kids won't get titles, Haz and Claw will just construe it as either "Thank goodness, we didn't want them anyway", or "OMG, it's horrible and racist! We're under attack and Daddy doesn't care!".  Drama always rules their day.


----------



## Chanbal

DL Harper said:


> *Does that mean the vow renewal event has been called off?*??


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The Black Watch _are_ the old 'police' that roamed Scotland wide, including the Highlands.
> 
> BTW, there is no Dumbarton tartan, most tartans are clan based, not geographical.


Shucks on Dumbarton tartan, MM can invent one with a green cape
And of course, BW is the best tartan ever

PS it came to me !!! I was thinking of the Balmoral tartan worn by KC , a location tartan designed by the foreign-born Prince Albert,  rather than the Stuart tartan which is clan based another BRF tartan …

So, foreign born MM can design a Montecito tartan ! with green cape , of course, maybe made of sustainable recycled plastic bags .
Color suggestions anyone ? The flaming orange - of the California state poppy flower - would be a great start ….


----------



## DL Harper

marietouchet said:


> Shucks on personal tartan, MM can invent one with a green cape
> 
> BW is the best tartan ever


And use the "bin bag" funeral dress for accent!


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> The Black Watch _are_ the old 'police' that roamed Scotland wide, including the Highlands.
> 
> BTW, there is no Dumbarton tartan, most tartans are clan based, not geographical.


WAIT A SECOND !!!!! How come KC has the Balmoral and Stuart tartans you pick from ??? And he is wearing another (third one I don’t recognize) today In Scotland. And there is none for Dumbarton ???

That is discrimination … think of what you wrote … all that silly nonsense about clan vs location , does that not derive from ancient colonial times … Tartans for all, plaid lives matter LOL


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Shucks on Dumbarton tartan, MM can invent one with a green cape
> And of course, BW is the best tartan ever
> 
> PS it came to me !!! I was thinking of the Balmoral tartan worn by KC , a location tartan designed by the foreign-born Prince Albert,  rather than the Stuart tartan which is clan based another BRF tartan …
> 
> So, foreign born MM can design a Montecito tartan ! with green cape , of course, maybe made of sustainable recycled plastic bags .
> Color suggestions anyone ? The flaming orange - of the California state poppy flower - would be a great start ….



There may actually be a Markle tartan (?) I'm just too lazy to look it up


----------



## duna

Toby93 said:


> I don't have strong opinions on tiaras, but I absolutely love the Cambridge Lovers Knot.  It's my favourite and I love it when the PoW wears it
> 
> View attachment 5622569


I LOVE the Lovers Knot tiara aswell, and the Vladimir tiara, I also like the Spencer tiara.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Shucks on Dumbarton tartan, MM can invent one with a green cape
> And of course, BW is the best tartan ever
> 
> PS it came to me !!! I was thinking of the Balmoral tartan worn by KC , a location tartan designed by the foreign-born Prince Albert,  rather than the Stuart tartan which is clan based another BRF tartan …
> 
> So, foreign born MM can design a Montecito tartan ! with green cape , of course, maybe made of sustainable recycled plastic bags .
> Color suggestions anyone ? The flaming orange - of the California state poppy flower - would be a great start ….



This screams H&M imo



	

		
			
		

		
	
Thank you, everyone, for your generous contribution, H&M R


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> WAIT A SECOND !!!!! How come KC has the Balmoral and Stuart tartans you pick from ??? And there is none for Dumbarton ???
> 
> That is discrimination … think of what you wrote … all that silly nonsense about clan vs location , does that not derive from ancient colonial times … Tartans for all, plaid lives matter LOL



The Clans were colonised, hence the banning of tartans. 

Stuart, Black Watch, Balmoral, Campbell and some of the border tartans are often given the side eye (in same places) in Scotland. I think any Markle tartan would join the list.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> There may actually be a Markle tartan (?) I'm just too lazy to look it up


There apparently is a tartan for the Dumbarton Football Club.


----------



## papertiger

DL Harper said:


> Privacy - why start now??  Helicopter pad - it won't support someone else's private jet.   Bathrooms???  The place doesn't appear to be able to accommodate as many as they need. Maybe not even space for one bathroom!



It's bigger than it looks in pics and 8 toilets


----------



## marietouchet

carmen56 said:


> Isn’t there an uninhabited rock somewhere they could land on and make their realm?  What about down near Antarctica?  Then again, I wouldn’t want to upset the penguins!


Thank you for asking about the penguins !


papertiger said:


> There may actually be a Markle tartan (?) I'm just too lazy to look it up


some of us take the time for the key research … my tartan book is upsfairs but I googled MARKLE TARTAN without moving and found pix of MM in a Black Watch tartan coat probably by Prada /Dior/Givenchy 
Plagiarizing the Black Watch tartan in her long string of plagiarisms …


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> There apparently is a tartan for the Dumbarton Football Club.
> 
> View attachment 5623203



They can't use that because I quite like it


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Thank you for asking about the penguins !
> 
> some of us take the time for the key research … my tartan book is upsfairs but I googled MARKLE TARTAN without moving and found pix of MM in a Black Watch tartan coat probably by Prada /Dior/Givenchy
> Plagiarizing the Black Watch tartan in her long string of plagiarisms …



I think it's derived from Meikles that can from the N.E of the country (nice weather actually) 






						Meikle Name Meaning, Family History, Family Crest & Coats of Arms
					

View the Meikle surname, family crest and coat of arms. Discover the Meikle family history for the Scottish Origin. What is the origin of the name Meikle?




					www.houseofnames.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> It's bigger than it looks in pics and 8 toilets


When Sisyphus finishes his task [haaaa], H&M can have the grey rock [pun intended].


----------



## papertiger

There you go, MegZ family tartan 



	

		
			
		

		
	
Meghan's family tartan


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> I will take a whack at it - tiaras for coronation ?
> 
> Yes, they were plentiful for wives of peers 70 years ago at coronation.
> BUT lots of those have been sold for death duties. And there are not enough tiaras for Garrards to loan out.
> A few wives of peers still wear them to the House of Lords, Jamie Curtis borrowed one
> AND* Camilla will think twice about wearing the consort crown with the infamous KOH I NOOR [stolen ? From India/ Pakistan, 4 countries claim it) Just a tiara ? Vladimir !*
> And what will George/Charlotte/Louis wear ? Coronets will NOT be made made for them and Elizabeth and Margaret’s tiny coronets will neither fit nor are there enough to go around.
> and the Prince of Wales crown used by Charles 40 years is too hideous for words, will it fit William ???
> 
> My prediction - tiaras only for SENIOR WORKING ROYALS. Bag the coronets.


I read a very interesting book on the KOH-I-NOOR written by William Dalrymple. The Koh-i-Noor has had so many different owners it's crazy. If I were Camilla I would wear the Queen Mum's crown!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

For anyone wondering about Andrew Tate his issues far surpass MM…









						Why Social Media Sites Are Removing Andrew Tate’s Accounts
					

TikTok, YouTube and Facebook have taken down accounts belonging to Mr. Tate, a 35-year-old British American.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## sdkitty

it may be true that TQ had a soft spot for Harry as a child.  Seems from Tina Brown's book that everyone - Charles, Diana, TQ - was senstitive to his status a the "spare"
No one seemed concerned about this in the case of Princess Margaret.  Because she was a girl?  Because she had her own sparkling personality?
She and TQ were close just as Harry and William were.
Also allegedly William - only two years older than H - loved his mother but could see her faults.  Harry was more blind in that regard.  Diana was protective of him.  William as a very young child, was aware of his status as future king and could be a bit of a bully but he outgrew it.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> "Harry is reported to have halted any decision-making on the new titles of his children following the Queen’s death so “they can choose” themselves in the future"
> 
> Hmmm.  As though Harry has any say in this, but whatever. It isn't his call. Just like when he said he "wanted to make sure that his grandmother had the right people around her"  . Isn't the whole crux of wanting titles for the kids is that then they'd get security paid for by the RF? And does anybody think that Claw would let anybody decide anything for themselves if it meant a freebie for her?
> If KC III says the kids won't get titles, Haz and Claw will just construe it as either "Thank goodness, we didn't want them anyway", or "OMG, it's horrible and racist! We're under attack and Daddy doesn't care!".  Drama always rules their day.



Soo there you have it, confirmation

HaZZ-Bin saving face in the face of a big FAT* NO* from Daddy


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> For anyone wondering about Andrew Tate his issues far surpass MM…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Social Media Sites Are Removing Andrew Tate’s Accounts
> 
> 
> TikTok, YouTube and Facebook have taken down accounts belonging to Mr. Tate, a 35-year-old British American.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Can't read, behind paywall


----------



## melissatrv

Chloe302225 said:


> The King of Sweden only removed the HRH but the Queen went a step further and also removed their princely titles which some see as a bit harsh.


I think it is a bit harsh as well. From what I understand the Joaquim's family was rather blindsided by this. And boom at the stroke of midnight they are no longer princes and princess...yikes!

 I think Harry and MM should just be stripped of the HRH (which they still have but cannot use) and Duke and Duchess. He is essentially a US citizen and a non-working royal.   I am conflicted about the Prince part for Harry.  But Charles could always use this is what is happening with other European monarchies to jump on the bandwagon. I know this requires parliament's approval, but I really don't think they would dispute it if it is what Charles wants.


----------



## Aimee3

Not only is H a non-working royal, he’s a non-working person as well!  What is his job???


----------



## melissatrv

Chanbal said:


> You are probably right. However, it sounds rather unfair to me that daughters can inherit peerages only "if there is no son." I wonder if Charles as the king can update/modernize those laws/rules. My 2 cents, of course!


I also think that husbands married to a Queen Regent should be King Consorts.  Another outdated rule.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Soo there you have it, confirmation
> 
> HaZZ-Bin saving face in the face of a big FAT* NO* from Daddy


is it a no or is charles thinking about it while waiting to see what's in H's book?


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> The Black Watch _are_ the old 'police' that roamed Scotland wide, including the Highlands.
> 
> BTW, there is no Dumbarton tartan, most tartans are clan based, not geographical.


Sadly, I have many ties to Dumbarton, and I say that it is an entirely fitting place for them  The family that I have that are still in the area say it's not a place they would go for a walk alone after dark.


----------



## papertiger

melissatrv said:


> I think it is a bit harsh as well. From what I understand the Joaquim's family was rather blindsided by this. And boom at the stroke of midnight they are no longer princes and princess...yikes!
> 
> I think Harry and MM should just be stripped of the HRH (which they still have but cannot use) and Duke and Duchess. He is essentially a US citizen and a non-working royal.   I am conflicted about the Prince part for Harry.  But Charles could always use this is what is happening with other European monarchies to jump on the bandwagon. I know this requires parliament's approval, but I really don't think they would dispute it if it is what Charles wants.



Harry is not a US citizen (unless you know something new). Harry can't even officially work in the US.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> is it a no or is charles thinking about it while waiting to see what's in H's book?



There was vid that explained. Not automatic and actually KC would have to change precedent. They are as named on the LoS list. 

Doesn't take 18 years to write a book

Unless I'm writing it of course.


----------



## lulu212121

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> For anyone wondering about Andrew Tate his issues far surpass MM…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Social Media Sites Are Removing Andrew Tate’s Accounts
> 
> 
> TikTok, YouTube and Facebook have taken down accounts belonging to Mr. Tate, a 35-year-old British American.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Who? I can't read this. I did a search and came across a CNET article. Looks like this is maybe similar to the NYT article. I don't understand why this is posted here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## RAINDANCE

melissatrv said:


> I think it is a bit harsh as well. From what I understand the Joaquim's family was rather blindsided by this.* And boom at the stroke of midnight they are no longer princes and princess...yikes!*
> 
> I think Harry and MM should just be stripped of the HRH (which they still have but cannot use) and Duke and Duchess. He is essentially a US citizen and a non-working royal.   I am conflicted about the Prince part for Harry.  But Charles could always use this is what is happening with other European monarchies to jump on the bandwagon. I know this requires parliament's approval, but I really don't think they would dispute it if it is what Charles wants.


It is effective from 1st January 2023 so not overnight ! Also it is the children who are stripped of the princely titles, not Joaquim and Marie. The changes elsewhere in Europe (Sweden, Norway) also related to the children of the siblings of the heir to the throne. Creates a very clear precedent for Harry's kids but not H&M IMO.


----------



## youngster

melissatrv said:


> I think Harry and MM should just be stripped of the HRH (which they still have but cannot use) and Duke and Duchess. *He is essentially a US citizen* and a non-working royal.



Oh no, please, no, he's really not essentially a U.S. citizen.  To become a citizen, he'd have to renounce that title and pass a Civics test, among a list of things.  He's never going to voluntarily give up his title or pass a Civics test for that matter lol.  He may have filed to become a permanent resident with a green card which allows him to work here though I doubt he's done even that much.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Harry is not a US citizen (unless you know something new). Harry can't even officially work in the US.


he could get a work visa.....don't know his legal status


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> it may be true that TQ had a soft spot for Harry as a child.  Seems from Tina Brown's book that everyone - Charles, Diana, TQ - was senstitive to his status a the "spare"
> No one seemed concerned about this in the case of Princess Margaret.  Because she was a girl?  Because she had her own sparkling personality?
> She and TQ were close just as Harry and William were.
> Also allegedly William - only two years older than H - loved his mother but could see her faults.  Harry was more blind in that regard.  Diana was protective of him.  William as a very young child, was aware of his status as future king and could be a bit of a bully but he outgrew it.


Yes, I do agree that William loved Diana, but could also see a lot of her faults.  Apparently he wouldn't take her calls at school after the famous "there were three of us in this marriage " interview was aired


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> he could get a work visa.....don't know his legal status


H could also do an investor visa


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Harry is not a US citizen (unless you know something new). Harry can't even officially work in the US.


Which makes his job with ButterUp all the more baffling


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Harry is not a US citizen (unless you know something new). Harry can't even officially work in the US.


no one seems to know for sure but here's some speculation




__





						Loading…
					





					www.news.com.au


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> no one seems to know for sure but here's some speculation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.news.com.au



More likely he has a sort of diplomat visa


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> More likely he has a sort of diplomat visa


I guess it's possible but from this I'd say he doesn't qualify
Visas for Diplomats and Foreign Government Oﬃcials​
*If you are a diplomat or government official who is physically present in the United States on assignment:
Requesting to renew (reapply for) your visa or that of an immediate family member,* select Renewing an A-1 or A-2 Visa in the United States to learn more. A-3 visa holders must reapply for their visas outside the United States.
*Requesting to change status into or out of A status,* select Change of Status to/from A,G, NATO to learn more.


Diplomats and other foreign government officials traveling to the United States to engage solely in official duties or activities on behalf of their national government must obtain A-1 or A-2 visas prior to entering the United States. They cannot travel using visitor visas or under the Visa Waiver Program. With the exception of a Head of State or Government -- who qualifies for an A visa regardless of the purpose of travel -- your position within your country’s government and your purpose of travel determine whether you need an A-1 or A-2 visa. Immediate family members of diplomats and government officials receive A-1 or A-2 visas, with few exceptions. Personal employees, attendants, or domestic workers for diplomats and government officials (holding a valid A-1 or A-2 visa) may be issued A-3 visas.
To qualify for an A-1 or A-2 visa, you must be traveling to the United States on behalf of your national government to engage solely in official activities for that government. The specific duties or services that will be performed must be governmental in character or nature, as determined by the U.S. Department of State, in accordance with U.S. immigration laws. Government officials traveling to the United States to perform non-governmental functions of a commercial nature, or traveling as tourists, require the appropriate visas and do not qualif


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> Oh no, please, no, he's really not essentially a U.S. citizen.  To become a citizen, he'd have to renounce that title and pass a Civics test, among a list of things.  He's never going to voluntarily give up his title or pass a Civics test for that matter lol.  He may have filed to become a permanent resident with a green card which allows him to work here though I doubt he's done even that much.


Are all the contracts, BetterUp, Netflix, Spotify,  and book deals in her name?


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Which makes his job with ButterUp all the more baffling



ButterUp is inline with Archewell's bunch of blah objectives so expect he go payment to be given as a donation - that way MegZ can share every penny Harry makes as expenses, no questions asked (although there should be).


----------



## CarryOn2020

No way the BRF wants the IRS looking into Hazz’s finances.


----------



## Cinderlala

papertiger said:


> Oprah has turned into the National Enquirer


Without the accuracy.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> Are all the contracts, BetterUp, Netflix, Spotify,  and book deals in her name?



I think it's likely that he has some kind of diplomat visa as @papertiger stated that allows him to stay in the U.S.  Those companies can sign contracts with him directly, no matter his citizenship status.  It's up to Harry and his lawyers and accountants (of which he likely has a legion) to make sure he's filing the proper paperwork and tax returns in the U.S.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I guess it's possible but from this I'd say he doesn't qualify
> Visas for Diplomats and Foreign Government Oﬃcials​
> *If you are a diplomat or government official who is physically present in the United States on assignment:
> Requesting to renew (reapply for) your visa or that of an immediate family member,* select Renewing an A-1 or A-2 Visa in the United States to learn more. A-3 visa holders must reapply for their visas outside the United States.
> *Requesting to change status into or out of A status,* select Change of Status to/from A,G, NATO to learn more.
> 
> 
> Diplomats and other foreign government officials traveling to the United States to engage solely in official duties or activities on behalf of their national government must obtain A-1 or A-2 visas prior to entering the United States. They cannot travel using visitor visas or under the Visa Waiver Program. With the exception of a Head of State or Government -- who qualifies for an A visa regardless of the purpose of travel -- your position within your country’s government and your purpose of travel determine whether you need an A-1 or A-2 visa. Immediate family members of diplomats and government officials receive A-1 or A-2 visas, with few exceptions. Personal employees, attendants, or domestic workers for diplomats and government officials (holding a valid A-1 or A-2 visa) may be issued A-3 visas.
> To qualify for an A-1 or A-2 visa, you must be traveling to the United States on behalf of your national government to engage solely in official activities for that government. The specific duties or services that will be performed must be governmental in character or nature, as determined by the U.S. Department of State, in accordance with U.S. immigration laws. Government officials traveling to the United States to perform non-governmental functions of a commercial nature, or traveling as tourists, require the appropriate visas and do not qualif



We went through all this before. 

Bottom line is, it's easier to believe Harry had a few strings pulled both sides of the Atlantic to give him diplomatic status rather than convincing anyone he has 'extraordinary ability'  other than to be Prince Harry, or be an 'expert' on anything other than \my life as Prince Harry'.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Molly0

papertiger said:


> Harry is not a US citizen (unless you know something new). Harry can't even officially work in the US.


Haha.  This is what Google says:
Can a foreigner get a green card by marrying a U.S. citizen?

Marrying Abroad

*Get married outside the U.S. and then apply for a green card via consular processing*. You will need to file Form I-130 and then Form DS-160 (“Online Nonimmigrant Visa Application”), and also attend a medical exam and an interview at a U.S. Embassy or consulate.

haha maybe he went through all of this these last few years just to get that US Green card?


----------



## papertiger

Molly0 said:


> Haha.  This is what Google says:
> Can a foreigner get a green card by marrying a U.S. citizen?
> 
> Marrying Abroad
> 
> *Get married outside the U.S. and then apply for a green card via consular processing*. You will need to file Form I-130 and then Form DS-160 (“Online Nonimmigrant Visa Application”), and also attend a medical exam *and an interview at a U.S. Embassy or consulate.*



Then he would have had to have done that before leaving the UK for Canada or in Canada. A spouse cannot do it whilst already living in the US(?)


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> We went through all this before.
> 
> Bottom line is, it's easier to believe Harry had a few strings pulled both sides of the Atlantic to give him diplomatic status rather than convincing anyone he has 'extraordinary ability'  other than to be Prince Harry, or be an 'expert' on anything other than \my life as Prince Harry'.


either way, it would take some string pulling I think


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> No way the BRF wants the IRS looking into Hazz’s finances.
> 
> View attachment 5623314



They would only looking at his finances acquired during time in the US. The BRF wouldn't care


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> either way,* it would take some string pulling I think*



I totally agree




Credit Bimbo


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I read a very interesting book on the KOH-I-NOOR written by William Dalrymple. The Koh-i-Noor has had so many different owners it's crazy. If I were Camilla I would wear the Queen Mum's crown!


All of Dalrymple’s books , thumb way up


----------



## DL Harper

youngster said:


> I think it's likely that he has some kind of diplomat visa as @papertiger stated that allows him to stay in the U.S.  Those companies can sign contracts with him directly, no matter his citizenship status.  It's up to Harry and his lawyers and accountants (of which he likely has a legion) to make sure he's filing the proper paperwork and tax returns in the U.S.


H&M pay US taxes??  How discriminating!!


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> There apparently is a tartan for the Dumbarton Football Club.
> 
> View attachment 5623203


This looks like a more subdued version of the yellow plaid of dior from 2021.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> They would only looking at his finances acquired during time in the US. The BRF wouldn't care


If he’s still receiving income from family trusts domiciled in the UK or elsewhere, he will have to include that income in his US tax returns regardless of whether or not he owes any US taxes on said income. If he was still receiving an allowance from Charles, he would have to include that in his US tax returns. Any gifts he receives from related or non-related parties also need to be declared (jewelry bequeathed to him in QEII’s will as an example of the former, and blood diamonds from a Saudi Prince as an example of the latter). He may not owe any taxes on items gifted to him by non-US citizens but he is still required to declare the gifts on his US tax returns along with documentation stating who the gifts were from.


----------



## Stansy

melissatrv said:


> I think it is a bit harsh as well. From what I understand the Joaquim's family was rather blindsided by this. And boom at the stroke of midnight they are no longer princes and princess...yikes!
> 
> I think Harry and MM should just be stripped of the HRH (which they still have but cannot use) and Duke and Duchess. He is essentially a US citizen and a non-working royal.   I am conflicted about the Prince part for Harry.  But Charles could always use this is what is happening with other European monarchies to jump on the bandwagon. I know this requires parliament's approval, but I really don't think they would dispute it if it is what Charles wants.


To be honest I am more inclined to believe the palace that this has been in the works and discussed for months than pity-party-Joachim and his family who are well known for their entitlement (pun intended) and whining…


----------



## Stansy

Toby93 said:


> Which makes his job with ButterUp all the more baffling


It‘s probably more of a title than actual work performed. Sound familiar?


----------



## Molly0

DL Harper said:


> H&M pay US taxes??  How discriminating!!


Now I see why they didn’t want to stay in Canada for long.  Here in Canada we are known for being the worst when it comes to taxes.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



They reek of desperation so badly, I can smell the stench through my screen!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> If he’s still receiving income from family trusts domiciled in the UK or elsewhere, he will have to include that income in his US tax returns regardless of whether or not he owes any US taxes on said income. If he was still receiving an allowance from Charles, he would have to include that in his US tax returns. Any gifts he receives from related or non-related parties also need to be declared (jewelry bequeathed to him in QEII’s will as an example of the former, and blood diamonds from a Saudi Prince as an example of the latter). He may not owe any taxes on items gifted to him by non-US citizens but he is still required to declare the gifts on his US tax returns along with documentation stating who the gifts were from.



Excellent! That's them got some explaining to do.

However, I don't think it'll upset the BRF. After all, it was H that said Daddy cut him off (I'm still laughing at that one) if his recollection is 'tested' on that - so much the better.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



Oh it’s the we stand together look and don’t believe those reports   that we are separating. Stay tuned for that.

That pic of the four royals must be burning Harry to a crisp.


----------



## skyqueen

The jig may be up. #OprahisaLiar/#MeghanMarkleisaGrifter is trending on Twitter!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



If Misan can insert entire trees into the background, why couldn't he colour correct Handbag's sleeve? Makes him look like he had a prosthetic arm attached.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> If Misan can insert entire trees into the background, why couldn't he colour correct Handbag's sleeve? Makes him look like he had a prosthetic arm attached.


Milan is so  clever, maybe he can make the Sussex kid dolls look life like.


----------



## Chanbal

Stansy said:


> To be honest I am more inclined to believe the palace that this has been in the works and discussed for months than *pity-party-Joachim and his family *who are well known for their entitlement (pun intended) and whining…


The queen is addressing their entitlement…


----------



## lulu212121

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



Creepy! That's not a good photo of either of them. They look like they are posing for different photos.


----------



## calicocat

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



Her stance and extending arm/hand - clearly states she is in FRONT, ahead of him and in charge


----------



## xincinsin

lulu212121 said:


> Creepy! That's not a good photo of either of them. They look like they are posing for different photos.


Maybe Misan spliced two photos together? Thus accounting for the strange colour change sleeve? It would fit Zedzee's MO to have heavily and badly photoshopped portraits.

ETA: she looks like she had beauty filter and he had a touch more hair added.


----------



## sdkitty

calicocat said:


> Her stance and extending arm/hand - clearly states she is in FRONT, ahead of him and in charge


of course


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> There may actually be a Markle tartan (?) I'm just too lazy to look it up


If there is, it would have been Marked because the crazy will probably find it unattractive, much like the Dumbarton title.




Aimee3 said:


> Not only is H a non-working royal, he’s a non-working person as well!  What is his job???


Z-list's full-time puppet  




sdkitty said:


> he could get a work visa.....don't know his legal status


His lazy ass would complain if he had to get a work visa. He's not the working type  




papertiger said:


> Then he would have had to have done that before leaving the UK for Canada or in Canada. A spouse cannot do it whilst already living in the US(?)


Spousal visa petition requires the foreign spouse to be in a foreign country. 

If a foreign spouse is already in the US, he/she is supposed to file for adjustment of status from their existing visa to get a green card. 

I know this because I have personally experienced the American immigration process. 

I've mentioned numerous times that if Harry had a regular visa, it's probably an O visa. Otherwise, it's probably something more along the line of what a diplomat would receive.




DoggieBags said:


> If he’s still receiving income from family trusts domiciled in the UK or elsewhere, he will have to include that income in his US tax returns regardless of whether or not he owes any US taxes on said income. If he was still receiving an allowance from Charles, he would have to include that in his US tax returns. Any gifts he receives from related or non-related parties also need to be declared (jewelry bequeathed to him in QEII’s will as an example of the former, and blood diamonds from a Saudi Prince as an example of the latter). He may not owe any taxes on items gifted to him by non-US citizens but he is still required to declare the gifts on his US tax returns along with documentation stating who the gifts were from.


You are correct. Harry would have had to declare his foreign earned income. I no longer remember the calculation formula but you would have had to be outside of the US for a certain number of days in order for your foreign income to be excluded when paying your taxes. Still, the amount must be declared and the IRS literally has a form for it. 

Much like the visa situation, maybe there's special stipulations for royalties or diplomats?


----------



## RAINDANCE

IMO existing rules are being bent ( contorted even) for Harry especially regarding his work / income / visa status in the USA and his tax affairs. Complex multinational personal taxation is not my area of expertise but the basic rule is that in order be resident for UK tax purposes you need to be in the UK for a specific number of days in any tax year even if you largely work overseas.  EXCEPT if you are a crown employee eg a diplomat who is required by the very nature of their job to work overseas. 
I think Harry probably has a special dispensation which qualifies him as if he were a diplomat and is still therefore a UK taxpayer and UK government employee. 
 Correct me if I am wrong but diplomats do not need a visa as they are effectively in their own country in their embassy.

( We were in Geneva in the summer and our tour guide pointed out the Russian embassy compound which is fully self-sufficient, schools shops etc as noone can leave and go into the city as that is Switzerland)

Above is just IMO, but this is another thing that really angers me about this pair ; their arrogant abuse of the systems and laws - for their own personal advantage -  that govern all ordinary citizens lives.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> Oh it’s the we stand together look and don’t believe those reports   that we are separating. Stay tuned for that.
> 
> That pic of the four royals must be burning Harry to a crisp.


Especially when you factor in the context of the 2 pics. KC, Queen Consort, and the Prince and Princess of Wales are photographed with a historic backdrop in Buckingham Palace just before the largest reception for visiting royalty, heads of state and other dignitaries in the past century on the eve of the funeral of the longest reigning British Monarch. The other 2 are photographed with a dimly lit, nondescript background at some meaningless event. They could never even come remotely close to duplicating the historic nature of that picture of the King, his heir, and their Consorts. They couldn‘t even substitute the background with their usual lousy photoshopping because everyone knows they don’t have access to any of the Royal Palaces without the express invitation of the King and they wouldn’t be allowed in with their own photographers.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> They could invade the Principality of Sealand. They'd have privacy and their own helicopter pad
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5623170



Not to offend any of you from Sealand, but that looks like a dump.  Perfect for winge and cringe!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



Hazbeen and Raptor: Rulers of a chicken coop.
                                       vs
King Charles III, The Queen Consort Camilla, The Prince and Princess of Wales: Ruler and his heir of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Realms.*

The chasm in between is beyond measure. The Faux’s attempt to be relevant is pathetic.

Frankly they look like mock ups for updated dummies in Madame Tussaud’s, Wax Museum.

* if I did not state this correctly, please correct me?


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Not only is H a non-working royal, he’s a non-working person as well!  What is his job???


Hey someone's gotta feed the chickens and clean out the coop, and you know it's not her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Which makes his job with ButterUp all the more baffling


He is likely a contractor not an employee and I believe the rules for that are different.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Milan is so  clever, maybe he can make the Sussex kid dolls look life like.


re comic book look … googled for Veronica and Archie - MM’s childhood fav comic per Bower,  look what I found !!!! this is internet karma ! The freckles … gobsmacked …. Veronica has the black hair …

And it gets better … MM inspirations include Eleanor Roosevelt and Veronica !

“In my marriage with Chad... I felt like I was muted. Like I was fading. And it happened so slowly I didn't even notice it at first. And the thing is, I'm starting to feel that way again here. Like I'm not myself. Like I'm losing myself. [...] Archie, I think... I think... we should take a beat... until we figure out what we're doing. We shouldn't rush this.”
Veronica to Archie , cf infra








						Archie and Veronica
					

The relationship between Archie Andrews and Veronica Lodge, commonly referred to as "Varchie" among fans, began as a friendship, and though they were attracted to each other, they ignored their feelings for one another until they kissed during Jughead's 16th birthday party and officially started...




					riverdale.fandom.com


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



And having seen her in that outfit, on stage and sitting on the side, we can clearly see that Harriman is very good at photoshopping.  Sorry, but she is almost PoW thin in that pic, and we ALL saw her in her black dress a few days later.  Not even close.  She is not fat by any means, so why make her thinner in the pic?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> If Misan can insert entire trees into the background, why couldn't he colour correct Handbag's sleeve? Makes him look like he had a prosthetic arm attached.


It's her arm I have a problem with. It looks abnormally long. His is just sunlit with the shadow of a window on it.

And once again she seems incapable of standing with her feet together. Their photos always seem awkward.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> If Misan can insert entire trees into the background, why couldn't he colour correct Handbag's sleeve? Makes him look like he had a prosthetic arm attached.



MegZ on the other hand has had 2 sizes shaved off her silhouette through a dark halo around her outline

I wish I could do this in real life


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> It's her arm I have a problem with. It looks abnormally long. His is just sunlit with the shadow of a window on it.
> 
> And once again she seems incapable of standing with her feet together. Their photos always seem awkward.



The wide stance pose is supposed to make her convey Wonder Woman. And I'm not kidding, it's a thing


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> MegZ on the other hand has had 2 sizes shaved off her silhouette through a dark halo around her outline
> 
> I wish I could do this in real life


100%   Everything about her is fake. If she is such a feminist, why does she manipulate every pic that she puts out of herself?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> 100%   Everything about her is fake. If she is such a feminist, why does she manipulate every pic that she puts out of herself?
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5623473


_How this faux tour ended:_


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> 100%   Everything about her is fake. If she is such a feminist, why does she manipulate every pic that she puts out of herself?
> 
> View attachment 5623473



10lbs lighter
10 years younger

Remind me to some proper darn editing before posting mod shots on tPF


----------



## pukasonqo

Toby93 said:


> 100%   Everything about her is fake. If she is such a feminist, why does she manipulate every pic that she puts out of herself?
> 
> View attachment 5623473


What happened to her arms? Almost like the stretching character from the Fantastic Four
Hazza looks like a creep


----------



## bellecate

Aimee3 said:


> Not only is H a non-working royal, he’s a non-working person as well!  What is his job???


Handbag holder?


----------



## bubablu

bellecate said:


> Handbag holder?


Or to be the handbag?


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> More likely he has a sort of diplomat visa


Harry’s extraordinary ability is whinging.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> 100%   Everything about her is fake. If she is such a feminist, why does she manipulate every pic that she puts out of herself?
> 
> View attachment 5623473


Maybe a deliberate quick (but sloppy) photoshop by MH to emulate today's pic of KC, Camilla, W and Catherine


----------



## Chanbal

More people seem impressed with the photographer's skills


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

TW recruited a fact checker, but she might be paying only minimum wage…


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> It's her arm I have a problem with. It looks abnormally long. His is just sunlit with the shadow of a window on it.
> 
> And once again she seems incapable of standing with her feet together. Their photos always seem awkward.


Lol, now I can't unsee this arm   What is going on with it?  Both arms have been lengthened, but the one reaching for Hazz is freakishly long!
It reminds me of the Kristin Wiig SNL skit with the long arms and tiny hands


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> More people seem impressed with the photographer's skills



Harriman is obviously on the Harkle payroll.  Everything he puts out has been altered, so he not a credible photographer.  He is a minion doing her bidding.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> If Misan can insert entire trees into the background, why couldn't he colour correct Handbag's sleeve? Makes him look like he had a prosthetic arm attached.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles swimwear might be more appropriate for an appreciation thread, but just in case…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Shock claims Prince Harry regrets his marriage to Meghan Markle after he was 'backed into a corner'​_ "He's beginning to realise he's backed himself into a corner, and *all these reminders about some of Meghan's behaviour are making him uncomfortable.*"_



_Oh wow. Years after everyone else who doesn't live with her. Harry really is a slow learner. _



Chanbal said:


> _Harry is said to have put the fact Meghan pushed him to go public with their romance out of his mind, however in hindsight insiders reveal *he now feels he should have bet on her not walking away and asserted his true feelings about the situation*.
> 
> "Sadly, *it was to be the first of many times that she would threaten him into compliance*. Never forget, *this is a woman who has fallen out with her entire family* and has been instrumental in why Harry is alienated from his own," says the source, noting the couple's recent demotion on the official royal family website last week is a telling sign of their place in the new-look Firm._



That sounds exactly like her, though. All that sh*t she put him through with the highlight being her fake suicide threats.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> There apparently is a tartan for the Dumbarton Football Club.
> 
> View attachment 5623203



That's pretty. I'd wear it. I have a thing for mustard yellow


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> All of Dalrymple’s books , thumb way up



I have City of Jinns on my reading list.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382




If she didn't make my skin crawl like she does I'd find the picture, uh, esthetically pleasing...had I not seen her original appearance where she is like two sizes bigger. But what's with her always spread legs (maybe SHE wears diapers)?

But yes, the timing is awsome  They really think they can outdo THE KING?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The queen is addressing their entitlement…




Look to Denmark, Charles. Marghrete has finetuned my mantra of "Your opinion of me is no concern of mine" and is not shy to speak words when needed.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> The wide stance pose is supposed to make her convey Wonder Woman. And I'm not kidding, it's a thing


Yes, I've read recommendations that women in business settings should do it to convey their authority.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If she didn't make my skin crawl like she does I'd find the picture, uh, esthetically pleasing...had I not seen her original appearance where she is like two sizes bigger. But what's with her always spread legs (maybe SHE wears diapers)?
> 
> But yes, the timing is awsome  They really think they can outdo THE KING?



We all know she’s the one with the balls …

Seriously why even try to compete. So pathetic


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Yes, I've read recommendations that women in business settings should do it to convey their authority.



Maybe if done subtly, but subtle is not a talent of Ghoul. Overacting all the way.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Look to Denmark, Charles. Marghrete has finetuned my mantra of "Your opinion of me is no concern of mine" and is not shy to speak words when needed.


I think the Queen really paved the way for KC3  She is not falling for the whinging of the demoted family members.


----------



## momtok

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382




That picture (posted by @Chanbal) ... with Harry standing to the right.

I immediately saw Father Dougal.  (From the Irish-made TV show, "Father Ted", from some years ago, aired on BBC I think.  Father Dougal is an absolute, and absolutely hilarious, dimwit.)
Anyone else see the resemblance?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## momtok

momtok said:


> That picture (posted by @Chanbal) ... with Harry standing to the right.
> 
> I immediately saw Father Dougal.  (From the Irish-made TV show, "Father Ted", from some years ago, aired on BBC I think.  Father Dougal is an absolute, and absolutely hilarious, dimwit.)
> Anyone else see the resemblance?
> 
> View attachment 5623559



adding another.  This is where I see it even more ... Father Dougal ...


----------



## needlv

Harry looks like he is photobombing the photo of Meghan.

once again she Has the dominant position in the photo and he is the afterthought.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does this go here ?


----------



## momtok

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does this go here ?




I must admit, it does look like "triggered" is the right word.  LOL

eta:  And I love that bottom left pic of the line of succession.


----------



## Chanbal

This must be costly, I wonder if it's being paid by any non-profit foundation…


----------



## Chanbal

momtok said:


> I must admit, it does look like "*triggered" is the right word*.  LOL
> 
> eta:  And I love that bottom left pic of the line of succession.


People on Twitter have been "triggered"


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have City of Jinns on my reading list.


Keep me posted please, just bought the book about the Koh-i-noor


----------



## bellecate

lulu212121 said:


> Creepy! That's not a good photo of either of them. They look like they are posing for different photos.


There’s something very off about H. Those eyes to me don’t look very sane and that smile/grimace. Very disturbing overall.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I didn't even unmute this and her stupid mimic, gestures, fake laugh makes me want to poke out my eyes with a spoon.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382



UGH……SMUG!!!  (And why are her legs spread?)


----------



## pukasonqo

Mrs.Z said:


> UGH……SMUG!!!  (And why are her legs spread?)


Power stance like a sumo wrestler’s


----------



## CarryOn2020

bellecate said:


> There’s something very off about H. Those eyes to me don’t look very sane and that smile/grimace. Very disturbing overall.


Photoshop fail.  Perhaps MM requests Hazz looks awful in these photos.  Doubt he cares too much about it.


----------



## momtok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even unmute this and her stupid mimic, gestures, fake laugh makes me want to poke out my eyes with a spoon.




I can honestly say I have never heard her voice.  No lie.  Never heard any of the Kardashians speak either.

(Of course, I've never seen the movie E.T. either, but I am most pleased about the first two.     )

(And nor am I going to watch that video, even muted, though I politely thank you for taking that hit for the rest of us.     )


----------



## sgj99

RAINDANCE said:


> It is effective from 1st January 2023 so not overnight ! Also it is the children who are stripped of the princely titles, not Joaquim and Marie. The changes elsewhere in Europe (Sweden, Norway) also related to the children of the siblings of the heir to the throne. Creates a very clear precedent for Harry's kids but not H&M IMO.


I think Joachim and Marie complaining to the press is classless.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

momtok said:


> That picture (posted by @Chanbal) ... with Harry standing to the right.
> 
> I immediately saw Father Dougal.  (From the Irish-made TV show, "Father Ted", from some years ago, aired on BBC I think.  Father Dougal is an absolute, and absolutely hilarious, dimwit.)
> Anyone else see the resemblance?
> 
> View attachment 5623559


At the rate Hazy's aged since they got married I expect him to look like the guy on the far right by the time he's 45.


----------



## purseinsanity

calicocat said:


> Her stance and extending arm/hand - clearly states she is in FRONT, ahead of him and in charge


He's half in the shadows.  He's like Dracula, lurking in the dark.  Except his wife is the real blood sucker, and he's just her childe and she's the sire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sgj99 said:


> I think Joachim and Marie complaining to the press is classless.



Not a fan of Marie, but I think this time the ex-wife takes the cake. She's not even part of that family anymore. But yes, Joachim - the one who grew up at that court - is the worst.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even unmute this and her stupid mimic, gestures, fake laugh makes me want to poke out my eyes with a spoon.



I've wondered if she was actually a nice person would I react to her differently when I hear/see her. She's a Cali girl through and through. I'm sure Hazy found that quite enticing. She was never going to fit into the RF, but it seems more and more likely that she never intended to.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She's a Cali girl through and through.



I just watched an episode of the new Kardashian thing on Disney while doing a tedious chore, and even they are not as fake as this one.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> She is really really sick, imagine how much time she must put into researching photos and then sourcing the outfits, never recognizing she makes a fool of herself.


Oscar Wilde: "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness".


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> He is likely a contractor not an employee and I believe the rules for that are different.


Rules are different, but you still need to have a visa to work in the US.


----------



## BlueCherry

momtok said:


> That picture (posted by @Chanbal) ... with Harry standing to the right.
> 
> I immediately saw Father Dougal.  (From the Irish-made TV show, "Father Ted", from some years ago, aired on BBC I think.  Father Dougal is an absolute, and absolutely hilarious, dimwit.)
> Anyone else see the resemblance?
> 
> View attachment 5623559



On behalf of my fellow countrymen I take offence at that. Dougal is far, far more intelligent than Harry   

An amazing show and such a shame Fr Ted died so young


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles swimwear might be more appropriate for an appreciation thread, but just in case…



Oh look!  Their mouths are perfectly situated for all the $hit they spew!


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> At the rate Hazy's aged since they got married I expect him to look like the guy on the far right by the time he's 45.


Imo most of the Spencer family does not age too well. They look healthy, vibrant, full of life when young, but not so much as they get older.  Life does take its toll. My own observation, ymmv.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo most of the Spencer family does not age too well. They look healthy, vibrant, full of life when young, but not so much as they get older.  Life does take its toll. My own observation, ymmv.


I don't know, Charles Spencer looks OK for his age and I believe he was quite the party boy in his youth, plus three marriages and several divorces. I don't agree with the headline though.



> https://nypost.com/2022/06/06/princ...ge-of-princess-dianas-brother-royal-watchers/


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> He is likely a contractor not an employee and I believe the rules for that are different.





purseinsanity said:


> Rules are different, but you still need to have a visa to work in the US.



Yeap, the US government is very strict. You either need to be an American citizen, a foreigner with the right visa OR an immigrant with an employment authorization or green card to allow you to work or conduct business. This is not just a matter of immigration status, it is also to ensure that no one is evading taxation. 

How about that for chasing the American Dream?


----------



## Katel

papertiger said:


> If I'm buying yes, if the Queen's loaning, I'll take what I'm given.
> 
> I wish I'd bought the little minimalist diamond and wg tiara for myself from Theo Fennell, I know I would have worn it a lot. I wouldn't even wait for an occasion



If it’s no longer available, I’m sure something beautiful is waiting for you - go on, treat yourself! If not now, when? It would be beautiful on you and we could all practice our curtsies. 



Chanbal said:


> Thanks for the info. I have never heard of this person before. I saw his video clip on a Twitter post and thought the criticism was good.



I had never heard of him either, but I wanted to hear what else he had to say about MeePeeZee, because the clip you posted was so accurate lol! 

I could not find any of the other clips, except one and then I listened to some of Tucker Carlson‘s interview with him where he explained that he had been “vanished” completely.

The hivemind is too active for me rn … just because I don’t agree with this guy’s views, it doesn’t mean I can shut him up and dictate what he thinks and says and how he lives. 

That sort of oppression has never completely succeeded and it’s not going to now. 



carmen56 said:


> Isn’t there an uninhabited rock somewhere they could land on and make their realm?  What about down near Antarctica?  Then again, I wouldn’t want to upset the penguins!



Chunga Changa?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I don't know, Charles Spencer looks OK for his age and I believe he was quite the party boy in his youth, plus three marriages and several divorces. I don't agree with the headline though.


Yes, just ok, not dashing as his ancestors [of course, they died young-ish].  Spencer’s  Twitter feed is filled with fascinating historical tidbits and stories.  Guessing he would make an excellent dinner guest. Intelligence over looks?  That said, I am not surprised Hazz looks a bit ragged.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Yes, I've read recommendations that women in business settings should do it to convey their authority.



Yes, it's very good (Amy Cuddy _Presence_/TED) and I do believe in changing one's body language to change one's mind/emotional state. 

But you're not actually told to do a Wonder Woman pose to camera, just behind the scenes before you go on stage or to a job interview. 

I know MegZ has had a ton of empowerment/public speaking coaching because I know the signs and postures. Unfortunately, she over-emphasises everything, the ham that she is. That's why I get out the pageant gifs and drag queens, she's _all_ front and no inner-life. 

Front, front, teeth and smiles...except when she feels jealously and envy, she can barely contain herself around Kate.  You all noticed it waaaay before me. I thought H&M were their own worst enemies, I didn't realise their hate for W&K was even a thing, but wow, I really saw the mean girl at _the_ funeral.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even unmute this and her stupid mimic, gestures, fake laugh makes me want to poke out my eyes with a spoon.




I'll just take your word for it. I always regret seeing/hearing her


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yet again, misleading headline.  The photos were taken on Sept. 5.  This photographer, DM, H&M have a strong disregard for the facts. 









						Harry and Meghan release photos after Royal Family's new portrait
					

Just days after the publication of an official picture of the Royal Family they left behind in Britain, Harry and Meghan released new photos of themselves.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				










						One Young World Prince Harry Pictures and Photos - Getty Images
					

View and license One Young World Prince Harry pictures & news photos from Getty Images.



					www.gettyimages.com


----------



## papertiger

Katel said:


> If it’s no longer available, I’m sure something beautiful is waiting for you - go on, treat yourself! If not now, when? It would be beautiful on you and we could all practice our curtsies.
> 
> 
> 
> I had never heard of him either, but I wanted to hear what else he had to say about MeePeeZee, because the clip you posted was so accurate lol!
> 
> I could not find any of the other clips, except one and then I listened to some of Tucker Carlson‘s interview with him where he explained that he had been “vanished” completely.
> 
> The hivemind is too active for me rn … just because I don’t agree with this guy’s views, it doesn’t mean I can shut him up and dictate what he thinks and says and how he lives.
> 
> That sort of oppression has never completely succeeded and it’s not going to now.
> 
> 
> 
> Chunga Changa?


----------



## EverSoElusive

EverSoElusive said:


> Spousal visa petition requires the foreign spouse to be in a foreign country.
> 
> If a foreign spouse is already in the US, he/she is supposed to file for adjustment of status from their existing visa to get a green card.


Just wanted to point out something that I left out when I wrote the original comment.

A visa is a 'permission' to allow a foreign national into another country. 

Therefore, if the foreign spouse is already in the US, that is why they do not need a spousal visa but to simply file for adjustment of status from whatever existing visa that they hold.

A petition for a spousal visa is only needed when the foreign spouse is in a foreign country. Due to that, a lot of married couples who are going through the spousal visa journey are apart during the processing period and they visit each other short term.

Comparing the spousal visa to the fiance(e) visa, the spousal visa is better in the sense that as soon as the foreign spouse set foot on the US soil with their spousal visa, they will be issued a green card a few weeks upon arrival. 

On the other hand, fiance(e) visa requires the couple to get married 90 days within the foreign fiance(e)'s arrival in the US and after marriage, the now foreign spouse will have to file for adjustment of status, employment authorization and advance parole. Until the adjustment of status process is adjudicated and approved for green card issuance, the foreign fiance(e) turned spouse will use an employment authorization for employment or to conduct business. All these can take more than 12 months depending on USCIS case load and staffing capacity.


----------



## Toby93

Gender equality


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yet again, misleading headline.  The photos were taken on Sept. 5.  This photographer, DM, H&M have a strong disregard for the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan release photos after Royal Family's new portrait
> 
> 
> Just days after the publication of an official picture of the Royal Family they left behind in Britain, Harry and Meghan released new photos of themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One Young World Prince Harry Pictures and Photos - Getty Images
> 
> 
> View and license One Young World Prince Harry pictures & news photos from Getty Images.
> 
> 
> 
> www.gettyimages.com


From what I understood, while the photos were taken on Sept 5, the retouched versions were recently officially released by TW's photographer friend. Can you imagine if he had released the one below instead?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> From what I understood, while the photos were taken on Sept 5, the retouched versions were recently officially released by TW's photographer friend. Can you imagine if he had released the one below instead?
> View attachment 5623610



He can say whatever he wants. The timing is suspect imo.  Then, I am suspicious of all H&M ‘press’.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Gender equality



I'm assuming these are the kind of photos that Harry saw after Violet von Westerholz asked if he was interested in meeting MM and he replied in the affirmative in rather colorful language, per TB.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


>




Read: Daddy said “no” so we’re moving into “CYA” mode.  



Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382




What a terrible picture - of both of them - neither looks well in the head. They look miserable. And her arm - it’s waaay too long?!?



Toby93 said:


> Lol, now I can't unsee this arm   What is going on with it?  Both arms have been lengthened, but the one reaching for Hazz is freakishly long!
> It reminds me of the Kristin Wiig SNL skit with the long arms and tiny hands
> 
> View attachment 5623541





Hahahaha thank you! 



bellecate said:


> There’s something very off about H. Those eyes to me don’t look very sane and that smile/grimace. Very disturbing overall.



yes, “disturbing” is a good description.


----------



## jennlt

pukasonqo said:


> What happened to her arms? Almost like the stretching character from the Fantastic Four
> *Hazza looks like a creep*





Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382





He does! He reminds me of Jack Nicholson in _The Shining _- totally unhinged.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sgj99 said:


> I think Joachim and Marie complaining to the press is classless.


Joachim has been an ass for a long time, jealous of CP Frederik, hating being the spare and wanting the same attention and perks as his brother. Does that sound familiar?!


----------



## youngster

Maggie Muggins said:


> Joachim has been an ass for a long time, jealous of CP Frederik, hating being the spare and wanting the same attention and perks as his brother. Does that sound familiar?!



Joachim and Harry should get together and do a podcast.  _Two #2's: The Trials and Tribulations of Being The Spare._ Hear them complain endlessly about how hard their lives have been. You commoners just don't understand!


----------



## Cinderlala

Honestly, it would be more newsworthy to _*not*_ release photos of yourself for one day, Skeeter.

What is the deal with her face????  It looks like someone found a sticker of her (much younger) face and pasted it inside the hair. (On top of the much slimmer body.)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Joachim and Harry should get together and do a podcast.  _Two #2's: The Trials and Tribulations of Being The Spare._ Hear them complain endlessly about how hard their lives have been. You commoners just don't understand!


Hold up.  
Andrew wants to be a part of this, too.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

Dp


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Look to Denmark, Charles. Marghrete has finetuned my mantra of "Your opinion of me is no concern of mine" and is not shy to speak words when needed.





gracekelly said:


> I think the Queen really paved the way for KC3  She is not falling for the whinging of the demoted family members.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> The wide stance pose is supposed to make her convey Wonder Woman. And I'm not kidding, it's a thing


It conveys "I really wonder at That Woman". 
The Amazons would sneer at her. Diana Prince worked at the Louvre, an expert in ancient history. The closest Zedzee comes to that is she retcons history.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Gender equality



the pic with the rubber gloves and the garter belt!  what is that supposed to mean?


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> the pic with the rubber gloves and the garter belt!  what is that supposed to mean?


I’m looking for a boyfriend who would love to have me both clean the toilet and serve… in other ways, just like any other feminist warrior out there.


----------



## DL Harper

sdkitty said:


> the pic with the rubber gloves and the garter belt!  what is that supposed to mean?


Well....the rubber gloves might indicate she's had that 2-pair package for quite a while.  The black pair came in handy for the funeral.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> I’m looking for a boyfriend who would love to have me both clean the toilet and serve… in other ways, just like any other feminist warrior out there.


that's bordering on porn....I'm sure she wishes she could erase it from the Internet


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not a fan of Marie, but I think this time the *ex-wife* takes the cake. She's not even part of that family anymore. But yes, Joachim - the one who grew up at that court - is the worst.


Alexandra Manley married Joachim in 1995 and divorced in 2005. From the time she wed Joachim until Frederik married in 2004, she was the belle of the ball wearing outlandish gowns with very long trains, escorted by the two brothers during public family engagements.  J & A became embattled around the time of Frederik and Mary's courtship, engagement and wedding when all kinds of rumours were leaked regarding the state of their marriage and supposed affairs until Queen Margrethe gave a cease and desist order. Makes one wonder if the same could happen to Dufus and ZedZed if or when they divorce.


----------



## Toby93

Wow - how much is TW paying for the PR put out by these magazines?  Is this her new representation after SS?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Are we supposed to feel sorry for him?  

Prince Harry is looking as miserable as Edward VIII and 'radiates same sadness' as King who also quit royal duties for American divorcee, biographer claims​
Prince Harry has looked 'thoroughly miserable' since Megxit, Hugo Vicker says
He claims the Duke of Sussex has a similar sadness to ex-King Edward VIII 
Both men left royal duties in pursuit of happiness with American divorcees
Mr Vickers claims 'in the end it's duty that makes you happy'









						Prince Harry looks as miserable as Edward VIII, biographer claims
					

Royal biographer Hugo Vickers claims Prince Harry has looked as miserable as Edward VIII after stepping down from royal duties alongside his wife, Meghan Markle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

If true, the news will not be welcome in Montecito.  

_King Charles III has reportedly enlisted his sister Princess Anne to help sort out squabbles and deal with Prince Andrew, Prince Harry and  Meghan Markle. 

The idea was mentioned by a Palace Confidential viewer, with host Jo Elvin commenting: "On the question of who can handle family matters on behalf of Charles, one viewer told us Anne would be a 'viable replacement' for Philip."_









						Princess Anne assigned crucial duty by King Charles
					

King Charles III has reportedly enlisted his sister Princess Anne to help sort out squabbles and deal with Prince Andrew, Prince Harry and  Meghan Markle. The idea was mentioned by a...




					www.thenews.com.pk
				











						Anne 'enlisted' to put Harry and Andrew 'in their places'
					

The Princess Royal, who lives at Gatcombe Park, may be asked to solve family disputes by her elder brother following his accession to the throne last month




					www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

xincinsin said:


> How sad for Zedzee (not).
> Some of the comments point out that the guy is a mysogynist, but agree that his view of Zedzee is absolutely right.
> She is indeed a unifying force
> 
> That snark about how no one gave classes on how to be a royal reminded me of a manager who just transferred out of my team last month. She made a US20k error (cumulative over 2 years) and told my boss that it was my fault that she got it wrong. According to her, I didn't sit her down and draw pictures to explain the task to her. Yes, she wanted literal pictures drawn because my boss had to do it to get her to understand where she went wrong. My boss and I were happy for her that another team wanted her for a different set of skills, because none of us have time to do kindergarten arithmetic with her.





Katel said:


> This guy Andrew Tate is loud and opinionated and appears obnoxious at times  …  he has been banned from social media before apparently but was recently banned from everything, and this recent banning seems different, on a much larger level, including closed transaction and banking accounts.
> 
> Funny, it came right on the heels of his criticism vids of MeePeeZee.
> 
> Reminiscent of the Piers Morgan and Sharon Osbourne talk show / contract cancellations.
> 
> Surely it can’t be just because lil ‘ol MeAgain’s complaining? I know we have asked this before - and it does sound very Tinfoil Hatty but - does she have some woke global mega-entity fronting her?
> 
> How is “she” managing to shut these people down so thoroughly?





Chanbal said:


> Thanks for the info. I have never heard of this person before. I saw his video clip on a Twitter post and thought the criticism was good.





lulu212121 said:


> Who? I can't read this. I did a search and came across a CNET article. Looks like this is maybe similar to the NYT article. I don't understand why this is posted here.



The link was in response to the posts above.

It seems to be behind a paywall so the article is below...

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/24/technology/andrew-tate-banned-tiktok-instagram.html 

Andrew Tate, a former professional kickboxer who frequently made misogynistic comments about women online, has been barred in the last week from Facebook, YouTube and TikTok after concerns about his influence on his millions of followers escalated.

Mr. Tate, 35, first gained mainstream media attention after appearing on the reality television show “Big Brother” in 2016. He has since carved out a space online where he claims to know the secrets to wealth and makes hateful comments.

Among Mr. Tate’s comments, he has said women who are raped are partially responsible for the attacks, described in detail how he might attack women and criticized people who seek mental health treatment.

In a YouTube video posted on Tuesday, Mr. Tate addressed the social media bans and said clips of his comments had been taken out of context.

Here’s what to know about him.

How did he become popular?​Mr. Tate, who is British and American, has competed internationally as a professional kickboxer. But it was his appearance on the British version of “Big Brother” six years ago that gave him a platform — and provided fodder for the British media.

He was removed from “Big Brother” after The Sun, a British tabloid, showed producers a video of him hitting a woman with a belt.

Mr. Tate said at the time and in the video on Tuesday that it had been a consensual act.

He has since built a following online by posting YouTube videos and appearing on podcasts, including “The Alex Jones Show.” The far-right figure Mike Cernovich, known for, among other things, promoting the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, appeared on Mr. Tate’s podcast this year.

In one video Mr. Tate recorded while sitting in a bed, he described keeping a machete by his bed and what he would do if a woman accused him of cheating: “It’s bang out the machete, boom in her face and grip her up by the neck.”

During a July interview with the Barstool Sports podcast “BFFs,” Mr. Tate smoked a cigar and was asked about his previous statements suggesting women are men’s property. “I’m not saying they’re property,” he said. “I am saying they are given to the man and belong to the man.”

In 2017, he said depression “isn’t real.” In his video on Tuesday, he credited himself with curing people’s depression using “mind hacks.”

What is his online reach?​Before Mr. Tate’s accounts were deleted, he had about 4.6 million followers on Instagram and more than 740,000 followers on YouTube, and his videos on TikTok had millions of views, Rolling Stone reported.

Mr. Tate also offered a subscription for $49.99 per month to a program called Hustler’s University, which he said would provide “high-income skill development.” The program had 127,000 subscribers earlier this month but has since shut down, The Observer reported.

Interest in Mr. Tate has soared over the summer, according to Google Trends, which tracks inquiries on the search engine. And with that new attention, Mr. Tate has found new critics. In recent weeks, teachers have raised concerns about his influence on students, and one group of educators on Instagram even put together a guide for what it described as Mr. Tate’s “incredibly problematic and violent views.”

Last week, Hope not Hate, an antiracism advocacy group in Britain, called on social media companies to bar Mr. Tate. “It is not an exaggeration to say that many young students returning to school at the end of the summer holidays will have seen something produced by Andrew Tate,” the group said.

Mr. Tate did not directly address these allegations in Tuesday’s video, which is just over an hour long. In it, he complained that people were posting clips of his lengthy videos for their benefit, not his own. “I was massively a victim of my own success,” he said.

What does he say?​On Tuesday night, the porousness of those bans was evident when Mr. Tate posted a video on YouTube called the “Final Message” on a nonofficial account called “The Tate Bible.” It was promoted by popular accounts on Twitter and had more than 700,000 views by Wednesday afternoon.

In the video, Mr. Tate repeatedly described himself as the most famous person in the world and claimed that shortened clips of his videos that had circulated recently lacked context. He said that the videos were made five or six years ago when he was less popular, but that he was still responsible for how the messages were received.

To address this, he said he would stop doing podcast interviews for an indefinite amount of time.

Here’s what’s going on with his accounts.​In recent weeks, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok have taken down his official accounts, all citing violations of their policies.

Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, removed his official accounts on Friday and said they were in violation of its policies.

YouTube took down several channels affiliated with Mr. Tate “for multiple violations of our Community Guidelines and Terms of Service, including our hate speech policy,” said Ivy Choi, a spokeswoman for the company.

A Twitter spokesperson said the official Andrew Tate account was permanently banned from the website for violating its rules, but did not specify when.

TikTok has also barred Mr. Tate.

“Misogyny is a hateful ideology that is not tolerated on TikTok,” a spokesperson said in a statement. “Our investigation into this content is ongoing, as we continue to remove violative accounts and videos and pursue measures to strengthen our enforcement, including our detection models, against this type of content.”

On Twitch, the popular livestreaming service, Mr. Tate’s channel is listed as “closed by the user.” The company did not respond to a request for comment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> If true, the news will not be welcome in Montecito.
> 
> _King Charles III has reportedly enlisted his sister Princess Anne to help sort out squabbles and deal with Prince Andrew, Prince Harry and  Meghan Markle.
> 
> The idea was mentioned by a Palace Confidential viewer, with host Jo Elvin commenting: "On the question of who can handle family matters on behalf of Charles, one viewer told us Anne would be a 'viable replacement' for Philip."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Anne assigned crucial duty by King Charles
> 
> 
> King Charles III has reportedly enlisted his sister Princess Anne to help sort out squabbles and deal with Prince Andrew, Prince Harry and  Meghan Markle. The idea was mentioned by a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anne 'enlisted' to put Harry and Andrew 'in their places'
> 
> 
> The Princess Royal, who lives at Gatcombe Park, may be asked to solve family disputes by her elder brother following his accession to the throne last month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk


don't know if this is true but I love the idea


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Do Mm’s fingers look extra long?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> don't know if this is true but I love the idea


She could be the only somewhat impartial member of the family. If I were Meghan, I would be afraid of her


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Wow - how much is TW paying for the PR put out by these magazines?  Is this her new representation after SS?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Do Mm’s fingers look extra long?


They do, but I think it's an illusion: they are squished together so she bent her wrist at an extreme angle.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> The link was in response to the posts above.
> 
> It seems to be behind a paywall so the article is below...
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/24/technology/andrew-tate-banned-tiktok-instagram.html
> 
> Andrew Tate, a former professional kickboxer who frequently made misogynistic comments about women online, has been barred in the last week from Facebook, YouTube and TikTok after concerns about his influence on his millions of followers escalated.
> 
> Mr. Tate, 35, first gained mainstream media attention after appearing on the reality television show “Big Brother” in 2016. He has since carved out a space online where he claims to know the secrets to wealth and makes hateful comments.
> 
> Among Mr. Tate’s comments, he has said women who are raped are partially responsible for the attacks, described in detail how he might attack women and criticized people who seek mental health treatment.
> 
> In a YouTube video posted on Tuesday, Mr. Tate addressed the social media bans and said clips of his comments had been taken out of context.
> 
> Here’s what to know about him.
> 
> How did he become popular?​Mr. Tate, who is British and American, has competed internationally as a professional kickboxer. But it was his appearance on the British version of “Big Brother” six years ago that gave him a platform — and provided fodder for the British media.
> 
> He was removed from “Big Brother” after The Sun, a British tabloid, showed producers a video of him hitting a woman with a belt.
> 
> Mr. Tate said at the time and in the video on Tuesday that it had been a consensual act.
> 
> He has since built a following online by posting YouTube videos and appearing on podcasts, including “The Alex Jones Show.” The far-right figure Mike Cernovich, known for, among other things, promoting the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, appeared on Mr. Tate’s podcast this year.
> 
> In one video Mr. Tate recorded while sitting in a bed, he described keeping a machete by his bed and what he would do if a woman accused him of cheating: “It’s bang out the machete, boom in her face and grip her up by the neck.”
> 
> During a July interview with the Barstool Sports podcast “BFFs,” Mr. Tate smoked a cigar and was asked about his previous statements suggesting women are men’s property. “I’m not saying they’re property,” he said. “I am saying they are given to the man and belong to the man.”
> 
> In 2017, he said depression “isn’t real.” In his video on Tuesday, he credited himself with curing people’s depression using “mind hacks.”
> 
> What is his online reach?​Before Mr. Tate’s accounts were deleted, he had about 4.6 million followers on Instagram and more than 740,000 followers on YouTube, and his videos on TikTok had millions of views, Rolling Stone reported.
> 
> Mr. Tate also offered a subscription for $49.99 per month to a program called Hustler’s University, which he said would provide “high-income skill development.” The program had 127,000 subscribers earlier this month but has since shut down, The Observer reported.
> 
> Interest in Mr. Tate has soared over the summer, according to Google Trends, which tracks inquiries on the search engine. And with that new attention, Mr. Tate has found new critics. In recent weeks, teachers have raised concerns about his influence on students, and one group of educators on Instagram even put together a guide for what it described as Mr. Tate’s “incredibly problematic and violent views.”
> 
> Last week, Hope not Hate, an antiracism advocacy group in Britain, called on social media companies to bar Mr. Tate. “It is not an exaggeration to say that many young students returning to school at the end of the summer holidays will have seen something produced by Andrew Tate,” the group said.
> 
> Mr. Tate did not directly address these allegations in Tuesday’s video, which is just over an hour long. In it, he complained that people were posting clips of his lengthy videos for their benefit, not his own. “I was massively a victim of my own success,” he said.
> 
> What does he say?​On Tuesday night, the porousness of those bans was evident when Mr. Tate posted a video on YouTube called the “Final Message” on a nonofficial account called “The Tate Bible.” It was promoted by popular accounts on Twitter and had more than 700,000 views by Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> In the video, Mr. Tate repeatedly described himself as the most famous person in the world and claimed that shortened clips of his videos that had circulated recently lacked context. He said that the videos were made five or six years ago when he was less popular, but that he was still responsible for how the messages were received.
> 
> To address this, he said he would stop doing podcast interviews for an indefinite amount of time.
> 
> Here’s what’s going on with his accounts.​In recent weeks, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok have taken down his official accounts, all citing violations of their policies.
> 
> Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, removed his official accounts on Friday and said they were in violation of its policies.
> 
> YouTube took down several channels affiliated with Mr. Tate “for multiple violations of our Community Guidelines and Terms of Service, including our hate speech policy,” said Ivy Choi, a spokeswoman for the company.
> 
> A Twitter spokesperson said the official Andrew Tate account was permanently banned from the website for violating its rules, but did not specify when.
> 
> TikTok has also barred Mr. Tate.
> 
> “Misogyny is a hateful ideology that is not tolerated on TikTok,” a spokesperson said in a statement. “Our investigation into this content is ongoing, as we continue to remove violative accounts and videos and pursue measures to strengthen our enforcement, including our detection models, against this type of content.”
> 
> On Twitch, the popular livestreaming service, Mr. Tate’s channel is listed as “closed by the user.” The company did not respond to a request for comment.


He sounds like a horrible man, which makes it extra sad that he's got Zedzee's number so right.


----------



## Katel

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> The link was in response to the posts above.
> 
> It seems to be behind a paywall so the article is below...
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/24/technology/andrew-tate-banned-tiktok-instagram.html
> 
> Andrew Tate, a former professional kickboxer who frequently made misogynistic comments about women online, has been barred in the last week from Facebook, YouTube and TikTok after concerns about his influence on his millions of followers escalated.
> 
> Mr. Tate, 35, first gained mainstream media attention after appearing on the reality television show “Big Brother” in 2016. He has since carved out a space online where he claims to know the secrets to wealth and makes hateful comments.
> 
> Among Mr. Tate’s comments, he has said women who are raped are partially responsible for the attacks, described in detail how he might attack women and criticized people who seek mental health treatment.
> 
> In a YouTube video posted on Tuesday, Mr. Tate addressed the social media bans and said clips of his comments had been taken out of context.
> 
> Here’s what to know about him.
> 
> How did he become popular?​Mr. Tate, who is British and American, has competed internationally as a professional kickboxer. But it was his appearance on the British version of “Big Brother” six years ago that gave him a platform — and provided fodder for the British media.
> 
> He was removed from “Big Brother” after The Sun, a British tabloid, showed producers a video of him hitting a woman with a belt.
> 
> Mr. Tate said at the time and in the video on Tuesday that it had been a consensual act.
> 
> He has since built a following online by posting YouTube videos and appearing on podcasts, including “The Alex Jones Show.” The far-right figure Mike Cernovich, known for, among other things, promoting the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, appeared on Mr. Tate’s podcast this year.
> 
> In one video Mr. Tate recorded while sitting in a bed, he described keeping a machete by his bed and what he would do if a woman accused him of cheating: “It’s bang out the machete, boom in her face and grip her up by the neck.”
> 
> During a July interview with the Barstool Sports podcast “BFFs,” Mr. Tate smoked a cigar and was asked about his previous statements suggesting women are men’s property. “I’m not saying they’re property,” he said. “I am saying they are given to the man and belong to the man.”
> 
> In 2017, he said depression “isn’t real.” In his video on Tuesday, he credited himself with curing people’s depression using “mind hacks.”
> 
> What is his online reach?​Before Mr. Tate’s accounts were deleted, he had about 4.6 million followers on Instagram and more than 740,000 followers on YouTube, and his videos on TikTok had millions of views, Rolling Stone reported.
> 
> Mr. Tate also offered a subscription for $49.99 per month to a program called Hustler’s University, which he said would provide “high-income skill development.” The program had 127,000 subscribers earlier this month but has since shut down, The Observer reported.
> 
> Interest in Mr. Tate has soared over the summer, according to Google Trends, which tracks inquiries on the search engine. And with that new attention, Mr. Tate has found new critics. In recent weeks, teachers have raised concerns about his influence on students, and one group of educators on Instagram even put together a guide for what it described as Mr. Tate’s “incredibly problematic and violent views.”
> 
> Last week, Hope not Hate, an antiracism advocacy group in Britain, called on social media companies to bar Mr. Tate. “It is not an exaggeration to say that many young students returning to school at the end of the summer holidays will have seen something produced by Andrew Tate,” the group said.
> 
> Mr. Tate did not directly address these allegations in Tuesday’s video, which is just over an hour long. In it, he complained that people were posting clips of his lengthy videos for their benefit, not his own. “I was massively a victim of my own success,” he said.
> 
> What does he say?​On Tuesday night, the porousness of those bans was evident when Mr. Tate posted a video on YouTube called the “Final Message” on a nonofficial account called “The Tate Bible.” It was promoted by popular accounts on Twitter and had more than 700,000 views by Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> In the video, Mr. Tate repeatedly described himself as the most famous person in the world and claimed that shortened clips of his videos that had circulated recently lacked context. He said that the videos were made five or six years ago when he was less popular, but that he was still responsible for how the messages were received.
> 
> To address this, he said he would stop doing podcast interviews for an indefinite amount of time.
> 
> Here’s what’s going on with his accounts.​In recent weeks, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok have taken down his official accounts, all citing violations of their policies.
> 
> Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, removed his official accounts on Friday and said they were in violation of its policies.
> 
> YouTube took down several channels affiliated with Mr. Tate “for multiple violations of our Community Guidelines and Terms of Service, including our hate speech policy,” said Ivy Choi, a spokeswoman for the company.
> 
> A Twitter spokesperson said the official Andrew Tate account was permanently banned from the website for violating its rules, but did not specify when.
> 
> TikTok has also barred Mr. Tate.
> 
> “Misogyny is a hateful ideology that is not tolerated on TikTok,” a spokesperson said in a statement. “Our investigation into this content is ongoing, as we continue to remove violative accounts and videos and pursue measures to strengthen our enforcement, including our detection models, against this type of content.”
> 
> On Twitch, the popular livestreaming service, Mr. Tate’s channel is listed as “closed by the user.” The company did not respond to a request for comment.





xincinsin said:


> He sounds like a horrible man, which makes it extra sad that he's got Zedzee's number so right.


Right? What I find most interesting is he’s the same persona he’s always been, he’s been apparently banned several times, but not 100% scrubbed GONE like now … and the big scrub happened after his very public MeAgain rant …


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz with his uncle, and Major, did we miss this?


----------



## Chanbal

Are the Harkles expecting visits?


----------



## Chanbal

In the headlines…








						Meghan Markle was ‘obsessed’ with palace denying Kate Middleton feud: new book
					

Meghan Markle fought hard to make amends with Kate Middleton — in the headlines.




					nypost.com


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> They do, but I think it's an illusion: they are squished together so she bent her wrist at an extreme angle.


Photo on the right - something is wrong with it, on bottom center of image - there is a line, like photo was spread across two pages of a magazine ???, the line is absent on the top half of image
Nonetheless , she has unusual (super long and slender, double jointed ??) fingers as an observation of her in general


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> In the headlines…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was ‘obsessed’ with palace denying Kate Middleton feud: new book
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle fought hard to make amends with Kate Middleton — in the headlines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


The comments are not kind or nice about Zedzee.


----------



## pukasonqo

Toby93 said:


> Wow - how much is TW paying for the PR put out by these magazines?  Is this her new representation after SS?



Apart from the weird arms and Hazza looking like the creep one avoids at a pub/party she looks pretty in that pic


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> The link was in response to the posts above.
> 
> It seems to be behind a paywall so the article is below...
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/24/technology/andrew-tate-banned-tiktok-instagram.html
> 
> Andrew Tate, a former professional kickboxer who frequently made misogynistic comments about women online, has been barred in the last week from Facebook, YouTube and TikTok after concerns about his influence on his millions of followers escalated.
> 
> Mr. Tate, 35, first gained mainstream media attention after appearing on the reality television show “Big Brother” in 2016. He has since carved out a space online where he claims to know the secrets to wealth and makes hateful comments.
> 
> Among Mr. Tate’s comments, he has said women who are raped are partially responsible for the attacks, described in detail how he might attack women and criticized people who seek mental health treatment.
> 
> In a YouTube video posted on Tuesday, Mr. Tate addressed the social media bans and said clips of his comments had been taken out of context.
> 
> Here’s what to know about him.
> 
> How did he become popular?​Mr. Tate, who is British and American, has competed internationally as a professional kickboxer. But it was his appearance on the British version of “Big Brother” six years ago that gave him a platform — and provided fodder for the British media.
> 
> He was removed from “Big Brother” after The Sun, a British tabloid, showed producers a video of him hitting a woman with a belt.
> 
> Mr. Tate said at the time and in the video on Tuesday that it had been a consensual act.
> 
> He has since built a following online by posting YouTube videos and appearing on podcasts, including “The Alex Jones Show.” The far-right figure Mike Cernovich, known for, among other things, promoting the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, appeared on Mr. Tate’s podcast this year.
> 
> In one video Mr. Tate recorded while sitting in a bed, he described keeping a machete by his bed and what he would do if a woman accused him of cheating: “It’s bang out the machete, boom in her face and grip her up by the neck.”
> 
> During a July interview with the Barstool Sports podcast “BFFs,” Mr. Tate smoked a cigar and was asked about his previous statements suggesting women are men’s property. “I’m not saying they’re property,” he said. “I am saying they are given to the man and belong to the man.”
> 
> In 2017, he said depression “isn’t real.” In his video on Tuesday, he credited himself with curing people’s depression using “mind hacks.”
> 
> What is his online reach?​Before Mr. Tate’s accounts were deleted, he had about 4.6 million followers on Instagram and more than 740,000 followers on YouTube, and his videos on TikTok had millions of views, Rolling Stone reported.
> 
> Mr. Tate also offered a subscription for $49.99 per month to a program called Hustler’s University, which he said would provide “high-income skill development.” The program had 127,000 subscribers earlier this month but has since shut down, The Observer reported.
> 
> Interest in Mr. Tate has soared over the summer, according to Google Trends, which tracks inquiries on the search engine. And with that new attention, Mr. Tate has found new critics. In recent weeks, teachers have raised concerns about his influence on students, and one group of educators on Instagram even put together a guide for what it described as Mr. Tate’s “incredibly problematic and violent views.”
> 
> Last week, Hope not Hate, an antiracism advocacy group in Britain, called on social media companies to bar Mr. Tate. “It is not an exaggeration to say that many young students returning to school at the end of the summer holidays will have seen something produced by Andrew Tate,” the group said.
> 
> Mr. Tate did not directly address these allegations in Tuesday’s video, which is just over an hour long. In it, he complained that people were posting clips of his lengthy videos for their benefit, not his own. “I was massively a victim of my own success,” he said.
> 
> What does he say?​On Tuesday night, the porousness of those bans was evident when Mr. Tate posted a video on YouTube called the “Final Message” on a nonofficial account called “The Tate Bible.” It was promoted by popular accounts on Twitter and had more than 700,000 views by Wednesday afternoon.
> 
> In the video, Mr. Tate repeatedly described himself as the most famous person in the world and claimed that shortened clips of his videos that had circulated recently lacked context. He said that the videos were made five or six years ago when he was less popular, but that he was still responsible for how the messages were received.
> 
> To address this, he said he would stop doing podcast interviews for an indefinite amount of time.
> 
> Here’s what’s going on with his accounts.​In recent weeks, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok have taken down his official accounts, all citing violations of their policies.
> 
> Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, removed his official accounts on Friday and said they were in violation of its policies.
> 
> YouTube took down several channels affiliated with Mr. Tate “for multiple violations of our Community Guidelines and Terms of Service, including our hate speech policy,” said Ivy Choi, a spokeswoman for the company.
> 
> A Twitter spokesperson said the official Andrew Tate account was permanently banned from the website for violating its rules, but did not specify when.
> 
> TikTok has also barred Mr. Tate.
> 
> “Misogyny is a hateful ideology that is not tolerated on TikTok,” a spokesperson said in a statement. “Our investigation into this content is ongoing, as we continue to remove violative accounts and videos and pursue measures to strengthen our enforcement, including our detection models, against this type of content.”
> 
> On Twitch, the popular livestreaming service, Mr. Tate’s channel is listed as “closed by the user.” The company did not respond to a request for comment.


 What a vile and repulsive guy


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Photo on the right - something is wrong with it, on bottom center of image - there is a line, like photo was spread across two pages of a magazine ???, the line is absent on the top half of image
> Nonetheless , she has unusual (super long and slender, double jointed ??) fingers as an observation of her in general


It looks very much like a magazine fold, but if you enlarge the image, it does appear natural: the thumb folded in so the edge of the index finger appears extra long. She has long hands, and the photo manip frequently makes them look preternaturally long.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> It looks very much like a magazine fold, but if you enlarge the image, it does appear natural: the thumb folded in so the edge of the index finger appears extra long. She has long hands, and the photo manip frequently makes them look preternaturally long.
> View attachment 5623717


Finally photos of how her fingers are unusually jointed - the tips go "up" (rather being pointed towards the palm of the hand) even when the hand is somewhat clenched closed









						What Meghan Markle's Hamsa Hand ring means
					

The Duchess of Sussex is often seen sporting the Middle Eastern symbol




					www.thenationalnews.com
				



https://www.elle.com/culture/celebr...arry-meghan-markle-eternity-ring-anniversary/








						The touching detail on Meghan Markle's eternity ring
					

Meghan Markle's stunning eternity ring has a touching hidden detail on it.  Meghan Markle stepped out last month sporting a new pave engagement ring band alongside a glistening eternity ring, packed full of stunning diamonds.  The eternity ring was gifted to the Duchess of Sussex from her...




					au.lifestyle.yahoo.com


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are we supposed to feel sorry for him?
> 
> Prince Harry is looking as miserable as Edward VIII and 'radiates same sadness' as King who also quit royal duties for American divorcee, biographer claims​
> Prince Harry has looked 'thoroughly miserable' since Megxit, Hugo Vicker says
> He claims the Duke of Sussex has a similar sadness to ex-King Edward VIII
> Both men left royal duties in pursuit of happiness with American divorcees
> *Mr Vickers claims 'in the end it's duty that makes you happy'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry looks as miserable as Edward VIII, biographer claims
> 
> 
> Royal biographer Hugo Vickers claims Prince Harry has looked as miserable as Edward VIII after stepping down from royal duties alongside his wife, Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I do agree that having a sense of purpose in life contributes greatly to happiness.  The Dysfunctional Duo keep trying to claim they have a purpose, but in reality, they flit and float from one thing to another.  No wonder they’re such miserable sops.


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> It looks very much like a magazine fold, but if you enlarge the image, it does appear natural: the thumb folded in so the edge of the index finger appears extra long. She has long hands, and the photo manip frequently makes them look preternaturally long.
> View attachment 5623717


Is this yet another photoshopped picture?  It looks like her face has been pasted in.  Honestly, these two lead such silly, shallow lives   They’re just pointless.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even unmute this and her stupid mimic, gestures, fake laugh makes me want to poke out my eyes with a spoon.



This was on the Africa tour. She's saying the schedule is being timed between Archies feeds and it was very kind of them. I'm assuming she means the courtiers who organised it. Yet we have her now saying she was forced into doing an engagement after the 'fire' in the nursery. 
I'm interested to know when in the time line this was filmed. We know Harry had just come back from his solo part of the tour but was the fire before or after this?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> that's bordering on porn....I'm sure she wishes she could erase it from the Internet



She's tried, believe me she's tried


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It looks very much like a magazine fold, but if you enlarge the image, it does appear natural: the thumb folded in so the edge of the index finger appears extra long. She has long hands, and the photo manip frequently makes them look preternaturally long.
> View attachment 5623717



What's this? 

Advert for high-street jewellers? 

Buy E. ring, get bands for free?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




Those caricatures look more like them IRL than the PS portraits they officially put out


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It looks very much like a magazine fold, but if you enlarge the image, it does appear natural: the thumb folded in so the edge of the index finger appears extra long. She has long hands, and the photo manip frequently makes them look preternaturally long.
> View attachment 5623717



If I cut the width of my hand in half my fingers looker long too. 

It's all for the ring - how cheap can you get?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So my delivery estimate for Courtiers is back to October 17th.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> If I cut the width of my hand in half my fingers looker long too.
> 
> It's all for the ring - how cheap can you get?


You could bling it up with indecent haste.  As a sweet nod to your dear husband’s personal design of course


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> This was on the Africa tour. She's saying the schedule is being timed between Archies feeds and it was very kind of them. I'm assuming she means the courtiers who organised it. Yet we have her now saying she was forced into doing an engagement after the 'fire' in the nursery.
> I'm interested to know when in the time line this was filmed. We know Harry had just come back from his solo part of the tour but was the fire before or after this?


Good point.  I don’t think Meghan had any more to do with feeding that kid than I did, but I’d love to know the timeline re the housing unit “fire” 
There will come a point when the invisikids can no longer be kept hidden away and eventually they’ll be able to give their own version of their childhood experiences.  Can’t wait for that.


----------



## Mumotons

Meghan Markle releases delayed fourth episode of Archetypes podcast
					

Meghan, in her latest episode released today, explores the 'Dragon Lady' stereotype with journalist Lisa Ling and comedian Margaret Cho.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle releases delayed fourth episode of Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan, in her latest episode released today, explores the 'Dragon Lady' stereotype with journalist Lisa Ling and comedian Margaret Cho.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



We don't even have 'Dragon Lady' stereotypes (not an archetype)  in the UK, and I doubt if this translates globally. 

We have 'stage mothers/fathers' and their precocious, attention seeking-selves marching their kids  

credit Gifer


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> Good point.  I don’t think Meghan had any more to do with feeding that kid than I did, but I’d love to know the timeline re the housing unit “fire”
> There will come a point when the invisikids can no longer be kept hidden away and eventually they’ll be able to give their own version of their childhood experiences.  Can’t wait for that.


The _fire_ happened on Day 1 of the tour. 
Here is the schedule:








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's South Africa tour itinerary has been announced
					

They're going to be super busy




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I need to stop posting from my phone in the middle of the night...got the wrong thread again.

So we've seen some of these tweets but not all of them. Interesting.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Reddit is on fire with comments about the latest podcrash.
Upshot:  she offends Asian communities.

ETA: She says she understands _the Asian experience because she went to a Korean spa and ate noodles after. _
Yeah, I know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She's impossible.

Then again, she's alienating more and more people just by being her impossible self.


----------



## sgj99

I think she’ll eventually dump Harry when what she perceives as a “better deal” comes along.  People and relationships are disposable to her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sgj99 said:


> I think she’ll eventually dump Harry when what she perceives as a “better deal” comes along.  People and relationships are disposable to her.



I don't doubt it, I just wonder who else would touch the certified crazy with a 10-foot-pole. She's shown too much of her real self to the world.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's impossible.
> 
> Then again, she's alienating more and more people just by being her impossible self.



Even her attempts to be inclusive make her look ignorant (of all others' experiences)


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> the pic with the rubber gloves and the garter belt!  what is that supposed to mean?


I think it was from a TV movie: The Boys and Girls Guide to Getting Down. The plot is summarized as "Partygoers in Los Angeles indulge in alcohol, drugs, clubs and one-night stands". Our highly-sought-after actress had a bit part in it. After she dated Handbag, Harpers Bazaar promptly described her as the star of the movie.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit is on fire with comments about the latest podcrash.
> Upshot:  she offends Asian communities.
> 
> ETA: She says she understands _the Asian experience because she went to a Korean spa and ate noodles after. _
> Yeah, I know.



I can’t believe she said this. Well, I can… But who says these kinds of things?!?  

ETA: If I walked into my office and told my Asian colleagues that I understand because I went to a spa and ate noodles afterwards I’m sure I would get strange looks and someone would probably go to HR to complain about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I can’t believe she said this. Well, I can… But who says these kinds of things?!?


Entitled, privileged, arrogant people who live in McMansions with 19 bathrooms.  

ETA: people who think _archetypes_ means _stereotypes. _


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> We don't even have 'Dragon Lady' stereotypes (not an archetype)  in the UK, and I doubt if this translates globally.
> 
> We have 'stage mothers/fathers' and their precocious, attention seeking-selves marching their kids
> 
> credit Gifer
> 
> View attachment 5623806


Dragon Ladies is not a concept that translates in my part of Chinese Culture. It does remind me of Pearl S Buck's novels about China, Bruce Lee movies and anime/video game kung fu lady warriors.
(I'm totally mesmerized by that kid's amazing moves  )


CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit is on fire with comments about the latest podcrash.
> Upshot:  she offends Asian communities.
> 
> ETA: She says she understands _the Asian experience because she went to a Korean spa and ate noodles after. _
> Yeah, I know.


Can't stop guffawing.
May I return the favour? I always wanted to try soul food and learn how to cornrow hair.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> Dragon Ladies is not a concept that translates in my part of Chinese Culture. It does remind me of Pearl S Buck's novels about China, Bruce Lee movies and anime/video game kung fu lady warriors.
> (I'm totally mesmerized by that kid's amazing moves  )
> 
> Can't stop guffawing.
> May I return the favour? I always wanted to try soul food and learn how to cornrow hair.


Yup. I never heard of anyone being called a Dragon Lady in Asia. I think it’s a term that actually originated in Western culture.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Dragon Ladies is not a concept that translates in my part of Chinese Culture. It does remind me of Pearl S Buck's novels about China, Bruce Lee movies and anime/video game kung fu lady warriors.
> (I'm totally mesmerized by that kid's amazing moves  )
> 
> Can't stop guffawing.
> May I return the favour? I always wanted to try soul food and learn how to cornrow hair.


I have not listened to nor read a full transcript of this drivel, but the commenters say she uses Austin Powers’ movie and Kill Bill as her examples of stereotypes.  Ya kno, this level of stupid is not what I need today.


----------



## xincinsin

I want to know: how did the podcrash's guests interact with Zedzed? Are they her BFFs now? Did they fawn on each other?


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> I want to know: how did the podcrash's guests interact with Zedzed? Are they her BFFs now? Did they fawn on each other?



I’m guessing their interest in her is limited to either the amount they were paid or the stipulations of their contractual obligations dictated by their agent/agency.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing their interest in her is limited to either the amount they were paid or the stipulations of their contractual obligations dictated by their agent/agency.


Her guests so far are all very accomplished self-made women. I don’t see any advantage to them lending their names to these ill-conceived, poorly researched podcrashes. I’m still scratching my head as to why any of them agreed to be guests on her podcrashes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nimby - they really are Wallis&Ed2.0 [nobody wanted their circus either]

*Residents in Ranch Hope are allegedly fretting over Meghan and Harry's alleged move because of the 'baggage' they'll bring, according to reports








						Hope Ranch locals 'fear Harry and Meghan will bring
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly outgrown their idyllic Montecito mansion - and are looking to relocate about 10 miles away to Hope Ranch, Santa Barbara.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Her guests so far are all very accomplished self-made women. I don’t see any advantage to them lending their names to these ill-conceived, poorly researched podcrashes. I’m still scratching my head as to why any of them agreed to be guests on her podcrashes.


SunnySacks told them to. The modern quid pro quo - do the show, we’ll give you mega PR.
Only my guess, I have no knowledge of or connection to any of these people. Whew.


----------



## xincinsin

Ok, two googled definitions of Dragon Lady. Both mention sexual attraction. Maybe Zedzee sees herself as a dragon lady 

_“Dragon Lady” was a term created in the 1930's by the West to describe *Asian women who were strong, sexual, deceitful, and domineering*._ (Intiman Theatre, USA)

_Dragon Lady is usually a stereotype of certain East Asian and occasionally South Asian and/or Southeast Asian women as *strong, deceitful, domineering, mysterious, and often sexually alluring*._
(Wikipedia)

Eta: I have loads of dragon-themed clothes! I can cosplay a dragon lady!


----------



## marietouchet

I got it wrong … thought Hope Ranch is closer to LA than Montecito 
It is slightly further away from LA than Montecito 
so, my theory about wanting to move closer to LA is nonsense , sorry


----------



## marietouchet

Todays chuckle … DM article … MM has just hired a fact checker for Archetypes
I conclude that there was none for the first 6 episodes
Have popcorn out for today’s Margaret Cho episode


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I got it wrong … thought Hope Ranch is closer to LA than Montecito
> It is slightly further away from LA than Montecito
> so, my theory about wanting to move closer to LA is nonsense , sorry


Is there anyone at Hope Ranch that they want to (figuratively) get in bed with?


----------



## LittleStar88

I have not heard the term Dragon Lady since sometime in the 80’s as a reference to an old movie. I’m in the US (California).

It’s like she’s dusting off dead and buried terms and resurrecting them for her own personal advantage.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Ok, two googled definitions of Dragon Lady. Both mention sexual attraction. Maybe Zedzee sees herself as a dragon lady
> 
> _“Dragon Lady” was a term created in the 1930's by the West to describe *Asian women who were strong, sexual, deceitful, and domineering*._ (Intiman Theatre, USA)
> 
> _Dragon Lady is usually a stereotype of certain East Asian and occasionally South Asian and/or Southeast Asian women as *strong, deceitful, domineering, mysterious, and often sexually alluring*._
> (Wikipedia)
> 
> Eta: I have loads of dragon-themed clothes! I can cosplay a dragon lady!


There was a whole series of 1930s - 1950s  spooky movies with not so friendly Asian characters

PS
Ex my dogs will be dressed in Tang suits as the spooky dastardly Dr Fu Manchu for Halloween 
They are French bulldogs, zaftig, the only costumes that I could get that almost fit, and I will tailor them on the fly , ie cut the armholes larger to get them on 
Don’t believe all the stuff from advertising , frenchies are the models for ALL dog stuff, none of which actually fits them, it is wondrous what a stylist can do on the side not seen in photo


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> I think she’ll eventually dump Harry when what she perceives as a “better deal” comes along.  People and relationships are disposable to her.


I don’t think she’ll get a better deal. She’s a north of 40 ex-actress who comes with enough emotional and psychological baggage to fill a cruise ship. She could find someone who might want her but status wise there’s nowhere to go but down.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> Her guests so far are all very accomplished self-made women. I don’t see any advantage to them lending their names to these ill-conceived, poorly researched podcrashes. I’m still scratching my head as to why any of them agreed to be guests on her podcrashes.


It’s because they don’t know. Everyone who helps them believes the nonsense from the Oprah interview about why they left.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Entitled, privileged, arrogant people who live in McMansions with 19 bathrooms.
> 
> ETA: people who think _archetypes_ means _stereotypes. _


You are not alone!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Todays chuckle … DM article … MM has just hired a fact checker for Archetypes
> I conclude that there was none for the first 6 episodes
> Have popcorn out for today Margaret Cho episode


That fact checker Nicole? Nicola? has been in the credit list since podcrash #1. I checked her out then and she seems to have a credible background. I guess she has an easy job because it's a fact if it came out of Zedzee's mouth. No checking required. I'm guessing that Zedzee has final editorial control, so no factchecker is going to stop her from bending the truth to suit her script.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> There was a whole series of 1930s - 1950s  spooky movies with not so friendly Asian characters


Charlie Chan and Fu Manchu?


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Charlie Chan and Fu Manchu?


Charlie Chan the detective was cool , unassuming and the smartest in the room, loved the movies
Dr Fu Manchu was evil , he was trying to take over the world , the books - total pulp fiction - were so louche to me as a teenager, a forbidden sin of opium, silks


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> Charlie Chan and Fu Manchu?


throw in Ming the Merciless in the old Flash Gordon comics?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Hazz with his uncle, and Major, did we miss this?



I don't know about you but I'm too busy admiring the pretty man behind those losers.


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Her guests so far are all very accomplished self-made women. I don’t see any advantage to them lending their names to these ill-conceived, poorly researched podcrashes. I’m still scratching my head as to why any of them agreed to be guests on her podcrashes.





bag-mania said:


> It’s because they don’t know. Everyone who helps them believes the nonsense from the Oprah interview about why they left.


From what I've been reading, the guests/agreements were established by Sachs. Poor Karl!


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Is there anyone at Hope Ranch that they want to (figuratively) get in bed with?


I had never heard of HR before … though I knew EVERYONE lives in Montecito Eg David foster, Ellen and Portia, Katy perry


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> She's saying the schedule is being timed between Archies feeds and *it was very kind of them.* I'm assuming she means the courtiers who organised it. Yet we have *her now saying she was forced into doing an engagement after the 'fire' in the nursery.*


Thank you!


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I don't know about you but I'm too busy admiring the pretty man behind those losers.


The Major had his eye on Harry. I was so pleased when I spotted them just one row apart, and grinned because the guy in between was short. Hope Handbag could feel those eyes on him all the way.


----------



## calicocat

WTH! (from Hello!)  

_Adding that she had a "real love" of getting to know other cultures, she spoke of going to a Korean spa with her mother as a teenager and her* "adolescent embarrassment" of having to strip down in front of other women*, as per the custom in Korean spas.

"It's a very humbling experience for a girl going through puberty because you enter a room with women from ages nine to maybe 90, all walking around naked and waiting to get a body scrub on one of these tables that are all lined up in a row. *All I wanted was a bathing suit." *

"Once I was over that adolescent embarrassment, my mom and I, we would go upstairs we would sit in a room and we would have a steaming bowl of the most delicious noodles," she said._


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> From what I've been reading, the guests/agreements were established by Sachs. Poor Karl!



As to being set for life … they are paid more if podcasts and books sell
they may be counting their chickens before they are hatched , are you going to watch Invictus ???
I have not subscribed to Spotify but watch all the snippets of Archetypes on YouTube, I am not the desired audience, MM needs subscribers


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Is there anyone at Hope Ranch that they want to (figuratively) get in bed with?


Snoop Dogg had a house there at one point, but I believe he moved on to a less dull neighborhood


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> Good point.  I don’t think Meghan had any more to do with feeding that kid than I did, but I’d love to know the timeline re the housing unit “fire”
> There will come a point when the invisikids can no longer be kept hidden away and eventually they’ll be able to give their own version of their childhood experiences.  *Can’t wait for that*.


I can!


----------



## marietouchet

calicocat said:


> WTH! (from Hello!)
> 
> _Adding that she had a "real love" of getting to know other cultures, she spoke of going to a Korean spa with her mother as a teenager and her* "adolescent embarrassment" of having to strip down in front of other women*, as per the custom in Korean spas.
> 
> "It's a very humbling experience for a girl going through puberty because you enter a room with women from ages nine to maybe 90, all walking around naked and waiting to get a body scrub on one of these tables that are all lined up in a row. *All I wanted was a bathing suit." *
> 
> "Once I was over that adolescent embarrassment, my mom and I, we would go upstairs we would sit in a room and we would have a steaming bowl of the most delicious noodles," she said._


Oh my gosh … I thought those were quotes from Margaret, those are from MM … cringe worthy


----------



## jelliedfeels

DoggieBags said:


> There apparently is a tartan for the Dumbarton Football Club.
> 
> View attachment 5623203


I really like that - don’t think it’ll look great with an orange tan and red hair though.


sdkitty said:


> he could get a work visa.....don't know his legal status


He’s a trophy husband obviously lol 


Sharont2305 said:


> This was on the Africa tour. She's saying the schedule is being timed between Archies feeds and it was very kind of them. I'm assuming she means the courtiers who organised it. Yet we have her now saying she was forced into doing an engagement after the 'fire' in the nursery.
> I'm interested to know when in the time line this was filmed. We know Harry had just come back from his solo part of the tour but was the fire before or after this?


Several years after when M remembered it.


papertiger said:


> We don't even have 'Dragon Lady' stereotypes (not an archetype)  in the UK, and I doubt if this translates globally.
> 
> We have 'stage mothers/fathers' and their precocious, attention seeking-selves marching their kids
> 
> credit Gifer
> 
> View attachment 5623806


Id only heard the term dragon lady referring to both the 20s film star Anna May Wong:-









						Don't Call Her the Dragon Lady: Hollywood's First Chinese American Star
					

Wong Liu Tsong was born on Los Angeles’ Flower Street in 1905 – a rather befitting location for a gal whose Cantonese name meant “frosted yellow willow.” Most U.S. moviegoers, however, would get to know her under a more American moniker: Anna May Wong, the “Dragon Lady” of Hollywood. Wong was...




					www.messynessychic.com
				



And as a term for the stereotype of an Asian femme fatale - I’ve never heard it used to describe a mum.

I have heard of the book ‘Battle Hymn of the  Tiger Mother’ which was about the author Chua’s parenting and the wider culture of demanding ‘tiger’ parents - so I can’t  help wondering if it would be called that but the phrase is copyrighted so she just pulled an asian stereotype out of her ass- also why not just demanding mother? 

That strikes me as more of a psychological type than something a bit racist. This is her producer’s weird obsession with using outdated terms who are we going to have on next? ‘Dynamite broad’, ‘no-good vamp,’ ‘modern flapper’ or ‘spunky dame’?


----------



## DoggieBags

calicocat said:


> WTH! (from Hello!)
> 
> _Adding that she had a "real love" of getting to know other cultures, she spoke of going to a Korean spa with her mother as a teenager and her* "adolescent embarrassment" of having to strip down in front of other women*, as per the custom in Korean spas.
> 
> "It's a very humbling experience for a girl going through puberty because you enter a room with women from ages nine to maybe 90, all walking around naked and waiting to get a body scrub on one of these tables that are all lined up in a row. *All I wanted was a bathing suit." *
> 
> "Once I was over that adolescent embarrassment, my mom and I, we would go upstairs we would sit in a room and we would have a steaming bowl of the most delicious noodles," she said._


This is like saying you’ve gone to Disney World Show Case at Epcot and now know all about those 11 countries you “visited” at Epcot.


----------



## sdkitty

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle releases delayed fourth episode of Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan, in her latest episode released today, explores the 'Dragon Lady' stereotype with journalist Lisa Ling and comedian Margaret Cho.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm disappointed she got Lisa Ling, a credible journalist


----------



## marietouchet

Anna  Way Wong was THE Dragon Lady of 1930s Hollywood, the first Chinese American actress









						Anna May Wong - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

the scoop from DM 








						Meghan Markle releases delayed fourth episode of Archetypes podcast
					

Meghan, in her latest episode released today, explores the 'Dragon Lady' stereotype with journalist Lisa Ling and comedian Margaret Cho.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

calicocat said:


> WTH! (from Hello!)
> 
> _Adding that she had a "real love" of getting to know other cultures, she spoke of going to a Korean spa with her mother as a teenager and her* "adolescent embarrassment" of having to strip down in front of other women*, as per the custom in Korean spas.
> 
> "It's a very humbling experience for a girl going through puberty because you enter a room with women from ages nine to maybe 90, all walking around naked and waiting to get a body scrub on one of these tables that are all lined up in a row. *All I wanted was a bathing suit." *
> 
> "Once I was over that adolescent embarrassment, my mom and I, we would go upstairs we would sit in a room and we would have a steaming bowl of the most delicious noodles," she said._


Just wait for the Twitter replies to this. The one in Spoiler is likely mild.




Spoiler: Supermodel


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit is on fire with comments about the latest podcrash.
> Upshot:  she offends Asian communities.
> 
> ETA: She says she understands _the Asian experience because she went to a Korean spa and ate noodles after. _
> Yeah, I know.


yes, part of her oh so unprivileged youth


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nimby - they really are Wallis&Ed2.0 [nobody wanted their circus either]
> 
> *Residents in Ranch Hope are allegedly fretting over Meghan and Harry's alleged move because of the 'baggage' they'll bring, according to reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope Ranch locals 'fear Harry and Meghan will bring
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly outgrown their idyllic Montecito mansion - and are looking to relocate about 10 miles away to Hope Ranch, Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


They didn't get the memo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Opr, GK, Tyler, etc. are ok with this?  Wow.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> This was on the Africa tour. She's saying the schedule is being timed between Archies feeds and it was very kind of them. I'm assuming she means the courtiers who organised it. Yet we have her now saying she was forced into doing an engagement after the 'fire' in the nursery.
> I'm interested to know when in the time line this was filmed. We know Harry had just come back from his solo part of the tour but was the fire before or after this?


Is she implying she's breast feeding Archie?  how old is he?  three?


----------



## Kaka_bobo

Hahaha at this point you have to just laugh....what drugs is she on??? 

Yea, I'm of Chinese descent that speaks both Cantonese and Mandarin fluently and have never ever heard of the term "Dragon Lady"......


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nimby - they really are Wallis&Ed2.0 [nobody wanted their circus either]
> 
> *Residents in Ranch Hope are allegedly fretting over Meghan and Harry's alleged move because of the 'baggage' they'll bring, according to reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope Ranch locals 'fear Harry and Meghan will bring
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly outgrown their idyllic Montecito mansion - and are looking to relocate about 10 miles away to Hope Ranch, Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Well it's true, their insurance will def go up with Zed Zed and HaZ HaZ setting of alarms inside and outside, flying drones, calling police to report shadows and paranoid fantasies


----------



## Toby93

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle releases delayed fourth episode of Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan, in her latest episode released today, explores the 'Dragon Lady' stereotype with journalist Lisa Ling and comedian Margaret Cho.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hypocrite 

*"Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.'*

Just be yourself, while I will do my best to be as thin and as popular as the PoW


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> The _fire_ happened on Day 1 of the tour.
> Here is the schedule:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's South Africa tour itinerary has been announced
> 
> 
> They're going to be super busy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com


Yes, she did mention that they got off the plane and went directly to an event.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> As to being set for life … they are paid more if podcasts and books sell
> they may be counting their chickens before they are hatched , are you going to watch Invictus ???
> I have not subscribed to Spotify but watch all the snippets of Archetypes on YouTube, I am not the desired audience, MM needs subscribers



If they weren't for their cringe-worthy hilarity they'd be even more what they truly are, the world's most boring couple


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit is on fire with comments about the latest podcrash.
> Upshot:  she offends Asian communities.
> 
> ETA: She says she understands _the Asian experience because she went to a Korean spa and ate noodles after. _
> Yeah, I know.


At this point I’m thinking, seriously, you couldn’t make this stuff up  But I think she is.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I really like that - don’t think it’ll look great with an orange tan and red hair though.
> 
> He’s a trophy husband obviously lol
> 
> Several years after when M remembered it.
> 
> Id only heard the term dragon lady referring to both the 20s film star Anna May Wong:-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't Call Her the Dragon Lady: Hollywood's First Chinese American Star
> 
> 
> Wong Liu Tsong was born on Los Angeles’ Flower Street in 1905 – a rather befitting location for a gal whose Cantonese name meant “frosted yellow willow.” Most U.S. moviegoers, however, would get to know her under a more American moniker: Anna May Wong, the “Dragon Lady” of Hollywood. Wong was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.messynessychic.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And as a term for the stereotype of an Asian femme fatale - I’ve never heard it used to describe a mum.
> 
> I have heard of the book ‘Battle Hymn of the  Tiger Mother’ which was about the author Chua’s parenting and the wider culture of demanding ‘tiger’ parents - so I can’t  help wondering if it would be called that but the phrase is copyrighted so she just pulled an asian stereotype out of her ass- also why not just demanding mother?
> 
> That strikes me as more of a psychological type than something a bit racist. This is her producer’s weird obsession with using outdated terms who are we going to have on next? ‘Dynamite broad’, ‘no-good vamp,’ ‘modern flapper’ or ‘spunky dame’?



You forgot two-bit hustler


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> We don't even have 'Dragon Lady' stereotypes (not an archetype)  in the UK, and I doubt if this translates globally.
> 
> We have 'stage mothers/fathers' and their precocious, attention seeking-selves marching their kids
> 
> credit Gifer
> 
> View attachment 5623806


Wasn't Margaret Thatcher referred to as the dragon lady?  She wasn't asian.  I have never heard of that term related to race, just as a ruthless stereotype of woman


----------



## DL Harper

LittleStar88 said:


> I can’t believe she said this. Well, I can… But who says these kinds of things?!?
> 
> ETA: If I walked into my office and told my Asian colleagues that I understand because I went to a spa and ate noodles afterwards I’m sure I would get strange looks and someone would probably go to HR to complain about it.


Kinda like studying Black History month in US schools and thinking you have a grasp on the entire dynamic.  Really now?!?!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Anna  Way Wong was THE Dragon Lady of 1930s Hollywood, the first Chinese American actress
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anna May Wong - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org



But is anyone even alive that remembers the term?

What's next:

Flagrant hussy?
Loose woman?
Jezebel?
Siren?
Yé-yé chanteuse?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> I got it wrong … thought Hope Ranch is closer to LA than Montecito
> It is slightly further away from LA than Montecito
> so, my theory about wanting to move closer to LA is nonsense , sorry


I looked at the map the DM printed and thought it was closer as well


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Wasn't Margaret Thatcher referred to as the dragon lady?  She wasn't asian.  I have never heard of that term related to race, just as a ruthless stereotype of woman


I thought she was the Iron Lady? I'll take bronze - good metal of antiquity.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Wasn't Margaret Thatcher referred to as the dragon lady?  She wasn't asian.  I have never heard of that term related to race, just as a ruthless stereotype of woman



Iron Lady 

and many Russians LOVE her!


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> Her guests so far are all very accomplished self-made women. I don’t see any advantage to them lending their names to these ill-conceived, poorly researched podcrashes. I’m still scratching my head as to why any of them agreed to be guests on her podcrashes.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Iron Lady
> 
> and many Russians LOVE her!


Lol, that's right, I knew it was something like that   IMO, they both have the same connotations, and there is nothing sexualized about the names.


----------



## Sharont2305

xincinsin said:


> Ok, two googled definitions of Dragon Lady. Both mention sexual attraction. Maybe Zedzee sees herself as a dragon lady
> 
> _“Dragon Lady” was a term created in the 1930's by the West to describe *Asian women who were strong, sexual, deceitful, and domineering*._ (Intiman Theatre, USA)
> 
> _Dragon Lady is usually a stereotype of certain East Asian and occasionally South Asian and/or Southeast Asian women as *strong, deceitful, domineering, mysterious, and often sexually alluring*._
> (Wikipedia)
> 
> Eta: I have loads of dragon-themed clothes! I can cosplay a dragon lady!


Well, I'm going to be offended on every Welsh persons behalf, we have a Dragon on our flag.


----------



## Pessie

Is there a nation or culture Markle hasn’t yet offended?  What was her degree? International Relations (and how to c*ck things up)?


----------



## Aimee3

I was curious and looked up houses for sale in Hope Ranch. Nothing was as big as the montecito place. I think the largest house for sale which was around 22 million had 5 bedrooms.  There were also homes for much less than that.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Hypocrite
> 
> *"Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.'*
> 
> Just be yourself, while I will do my best to be as thin and as popular as the PoW
> 
> View attachment 5623892


Interesting opinions on TW's archetypes…


----------



## DL Harper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nimby - they really are Wallis&Ed2.0 [nobody wanted their circus either]
> 
> *Residents in Ranch Hope are allegedly fretting over Meghan and Harry's alleged move because of the 'baggage' they'll bring, according to reports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope Ranch locals 'fear Harry and Meghan will bring
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have reportedly outgrown their idyllic Montecito mansion - and are looking to relocate about 10 miles away to Hope Ranch, Santa Barbara.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Can the HOA vote to "accept" them into the neighborhood??


----------



## DL Harper

DL Harper said:


> Can the HOA vote to accept or deny them into the neighborhood??


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Just wait for the Twitter replies to this. The one in Spoiler is likely mild.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Supermodel



OMG LOL is that photo real? Can you imagine the look on QEII’s face when they showed her this photo of her future daughter-in-law?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> There was a whole series of 1930s - 1950s  spooky movies with not so friendly Asian characters
> 
> PS
> Ex my dogs will be dressed in Tang suits as the spooky dastardly Dr Fu Manchu for Halloween
> They are French bulldogs, zaftig, the only costumes that I could get that almost fit, and I will tailor them on the fly , ie cut the armholes larger to get them on
> Don’t believe all the stuff from advertising , frenchies are the models for ALL dog stuff, none of which actually fits them, it is wondrous what a stylist can do on the side not seen in photo


I am not understanding the Austin Powers references, and the Japanese twins.  When my daughter was young, she was obsessed with Sailor Moon, which I always thought to be a oversexed teen.  That specific cartoon/doll was put out in Japan and fed to the US market.  I believe that is where the stereotype originated, so what is the point of this podcast?


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Well, I'm going to be offended on every Welsh persons behalf, we have a Dragon on our flag.



and I was born the year of a Dragon and LOVE Wales (and dragons)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

DL Harper said:


> Can the HOA vote to "accept" them into the neighborhood??



Probably not, but they can try LOL

Harry riding around on his bike or polo pony, drive me nuts


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG LOL is that photo real? Can you imagine the look on QEII’s face when they showed her this photo of her future daughter-in-law?


I have no way of knowing if the photo is real or not. When I saw it, I thought that it was. 

Though, having in consideration the photos that are still circulating online, I wouldn't be surprised if QE saw a lot worse photos of TW.


----------



## sdkitty

DL Harper said:


> Can the HOA vote to "accept" them into the neighborhood??


HOAs aren't like co-op apartments in NY....you can't discriminate


----------



## Chanbal

DL Harper said:


> Can the HOA vote to "accept" them into the neighborhood??


Probably not…


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> I am not understanding the Austin Powers references, and the Japanese twins.  When my daughter was young, she was obsessed with Sailor Moon, which I always thought to be a oversexed teen, and that specific cartoon/doll was put out in Japan And fed to the US market.  I believe that is where the stereotype originated, so what is the point of this podcast?


Me neither, she mangles everything to fit a solution she’s already decided upon to a problem she’s invented.
It’s a Markle vehicle for grandiose self promotion - that’s the only point to it.  Unintentionally hilarious too, which is it’s only saving grace.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## essiedub

Intentional or not, in America, it is offensive to refer to a woman of Asian descent as “dragon lady.”


----------



## 1LV

Cinderlala said:


> Honestly, it would be more newsworthy to _*not*_ release photos of yourself for one day, Skeeter.
> 
> What is the deal with her face????  It looks like someone found a sticker of her (much younger) face and pasted it inside the hair. (On top of the much slimmer body.)


There it is again… Skeeter.  Never fails to make me laugh so thanks.


----------



## Chanbal

A contender for the Twitter of the day!


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle takes legal steps to stop Prince Harry from being deposed
					

Meghan Markle is attempting to block her half-sister from deposing husband Prince Harry and father Thomas Markle is her defamation lawsuit. Samantha Markle is suing Meghan over her now-infamous interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021, as well as the material published in the Finding Freedom...




					okdaily.net


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> yes, part of her oh so unprivileged youth


I was thinking the same thing     I had never had as much as a manicure until I was married and in my 30's.  My parents were struggling to pay their mortgage, not taking me to spas.  She "out's" herself everytime she opens her mouth.


----------



## pukasonqo

Pessie said:


> Is there a nation or culture Markle hasn’t yet offended?  What was her degree? International Relations (and how to c*ck things up)?


So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I was thinking the same thing     I had never had as much as a manicure until I was married and in my 30's.  My parents were struggling to pay their mortgage, not taking me to spas.  She "out's" herself everytime she opens her mouth.


same here
the only place I was taken to as a child was to the salon for a haircut....and my mom would tell them what to do....could be traumatic
This also shows (for better or worse) someting about Doria - taking a kid to a place full of nude women.


----------



## Toby93

Pessie said:


> At this point I’m thinking, seriously, you couldn’t make this stuff up  But I think she is.


I was thinking the same thing.  She has to be making these stories up, researching other peoples experiences and passing them off as her own?


----------



## sdkitty

pukasonqo said:


> So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…


deleted


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

pukasonqo said:


> So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…



I’m guessing she’ll be coming for you soon enough.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> same here
> the only place I was taken to as a child was to the salon for a haircut....and my mom would tell them what to do....could be traumatic
> This also shows (for better or worse) someting about Doria - taking a kid to a place full of nude women.


According to the TB book Doria was a pot smoking hippie, so this actually makes sense


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Me neither, she mangles everything to fit a solution she’s already decided upon to a problem she’s invented.
> It’s a Markle vehicle for grandiose self promotion - that’s the only point to it.  Unintentionally hilarious too, which is it’s only saving grace.



For business strategy they call that 'creating a crisis' s you can re-structure. 

Let's face it she makes everything up as she goes along.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> Is she implying she's breast feeding Archie?  how old is he?  three?


No the feeding refers to the African tour , she may have mixed up dates
i remember she and A stayed behind - Cape Town ? - while H went to his mother’s mine field 
I remember thinking the tour agenda was designed around a breast feeding schedule, no one said that, but it was my guess at the time


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> But is anyone even alive that remembers the term?
> 
> What's next:
> 
> Flagrant hussy?
> Loose woman?
> Jezebel?
> Siren?
> Yé-yé chanteuse?


No yé - yé girl is mine … I wont let her have it and compare herself to Françoise Hardy , Sheila or Sylvia Vartan , my idols


----------



## Toby93

What the heck....why is THIS showing up in my FB feed


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing she’ll be coming for you soon enough.



She's equal ops on insulting everyone. 



pukasonqo said:


> So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…




It's a kind of racism too.  Same as the amazing Latin contribution to popular music, no one credits inspiration(s) or influence(s).


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> No yé - yé girl is mine … I wont let her have it and compare herself to Françoise Hardy , Sheila or Sylvia Vartan , my idols



OK, I'll take 'siren' and OWN it


----------



## Toby93




----------



## carmen56

How can two adults and two (alleged) children outgrow a 16 bath house???


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623911
> View attachment 5623910
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle takes legal steps to stop Prince Harry from being deposed
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is attempting to block her half-sister from deposing husband Prince Harry and father Thomas Markle is her defamation lawsuit. Samantha Markle is suing Meghan over her now-infamous interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021, as well as the material published in the Finding Freedom...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okdaily.net


Ah yes, there’s only one “truth” and one voice allowed and thats Meghan’s.  She’s just great at telling everyone else to shut up and suffer her assault isn’t she?
I can just about tolerate her deceit and her sheer deviousness inspires a certain grudging admiration.  But her hypocrisy (towards other women especially) really finishes me off.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## LittleStar88

carmen56 said:


> How can two adults and two (alleged) children outgrow a 16 bath house???



H & M are so full of crap that 16 toilets are not enough to contain it.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## papertiger

carmen56 said:


> How can two adults and two (alleged) children outgrow a 16 bath house???



Not enough showers?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit is on fire with comments about the latest podcrash.
> Upshot:  she offends Asian communities.
> 
> ETA: She says she understands _the Asian experience because she went to a Korean spa and ate noodles after. _
> Yeah, I know.


Had to reply to this (yeah I know I'm way late since I can only catch up occasionally and this thread moves faaast). Nearly snorted my lunch all over my monitor in laughter. Since it was TJ's Chicken Tikka Masala, does that make me more educated about the Indian culture?

ETA: Lucy Liu, who might actually have the background to speak of the Asian experience, criticizes the criticisms that Kill Bill depicted a stereotypical "Dragon Lady".

Just how can Nutbag come up with this crap????


----------



## Pessie

carmen56 said:


> How can two adults and two (alleged) children outgrow a 16 bath house???


Too much dirty laundry?


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Probably not…



Conquering America one neighbourhood at a time?


pukasonqo said:


> So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…


She may be sparing you for now, because she already had a go at competing against Latina actresses for the same roles.


Toby93 said:


> What the heck....why is THIS showing up in my FB feed
> 
> View attachment 5623944


Merch, merch, merch...


Toby93 said:


>



She already Markled the Priddys, and the BFF she never had.


----------



## Chanbal

Father, Grandfather, but no brother…


----------



## marietouchet

Kaka_bobo said:


> Hahaha at this point you have to just laugh....what drugs is she on???
> 
> Yea, I'm of Chinese descent that speaks both Cantonese and Mandarin fluently and have never ever heard of the term "Dragon Lady"......


Quentin Tarantino was inspired by 1930-1950s pulp fiction  steven Spielberg too - raiders of the lost ark 
My personal fav is the Thin Man series of books and movies where the Caucasian detective had a drink in his hand in every shot , during prohibition 
Pulp fiction was equal opportunity - making fun of lots of segments of society 
It is a lost art


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> How can two adults and two (alleged) children outgrow a 16 bath house???


In the House of Harkle, one must take 5 baths a day and each loo can only be used once a day. The kids are getting too old to be showered together, so they are short of 4 bathrooms.


Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



ITA. The comedies I enjoy most are those which make fun of stereotypes, with larger than life characters: all the way from Golden Girls to Buffy to Zaphod Beeblebrox. Mind Your Language can be seen as terribly racist now, but my parents loved it way back when.


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> Just wait for the Twitter replies to this. The one in Spoiler is likely mild.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Supermodel



The best comment: "I truly believe this is photoshop… _she’s shaped Like SpongeBob_… this body can never be hers."


----------



## Chanbal

Tea on finances from California…


----------



## bellecate

DoggieBags said:


> Yup. I never heard of anyone being called a Dragon Lady in Asia. I think it’s a term that actually originated in Western culture.


I looked up Dragon Lady, while reading the results one Ghoul came to mind.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> This was on the Africa tour. She's saying the schedule is being timed between Archies feeds and it was very kind of them. I'm assuming she means the courtiers who organised it. Yet we have her now saying she was forced into doing an engagement after the 'fire' in the nursery.
> I'm interested to know when in the time line this was filmed. We know Harry had just come back from his solo part of the tour but was the fire before or after this?


I just imagine her rolling her eyes once she turns her back.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## purseinsanity

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle releases delayed fourth episode of Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan, in her latest episode released today, explores the 'Dragon Lady' stereotype with journalist Lisa Ling and comedian Margaret Cho.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"Dragon Lady"?  Didn't someone call Thatcher that?  Otherwise, I have never heard that sterotype in my life.  Someone says "Dragon Lady", I'm thinking Daenerys and Dracarys!


----------



## Molly0

Funny coincidence.  Growing up I heard Wallis Simpson referred to as a Dragon Lady.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I am not understanding the Austin Powers references, and the Japanese twins.  When my daughter was young, she was obsessed with Sailor Moon, which I always thought to be a oversexed teen.  That specific cartoon/doll was put out in Japan and fed to the US market.  I believe that is where the stereotype originated, so what is the point of this podcast?


Almost all Japanese anime has sexualized young teen girls. 13 and 14-year-old characters drawn like they were 26. Sailor Moon is extremely tame compared to some of them.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't doubt it, I just wonder who else would touch the certified crazy with a 10-foot-pole. She's shown too much of her real self to the world.


Well, some rich men love crazy.  Amber Heard comes to mind.


----------



## bag-mania

Isn't Austin Powers a bad example? It was a spoof of James Bond movies, complete with the characters having ridiculous double entendre names. Why didn't she bring up Felicity Shagwell and Ivana Humpalot? Oh, it's because those characters were white women and therefore didn't fit her podcast's narrow niche.


----------



## scarlet555

Pessie said:


> At this point I’m thinking, seriously, you couldn’t make this stuff up  But I think she is.


this is the I'm not racist, I have an Asian friend.... lol
She should have given her platform for someone to speak, and shut her trap altogether, but no...


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> I thought she was the Iron Lady? I'll take bronze - good metal of antiquity.


You're probably right, but to me, the Iron Lady will always be the Eiffel Tower!


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> But is anyone even alive that remembers the term?
> 
> What's next:
> 
> Flagrant hussy?
> Loose woman?
> Jezebel?
> Siren?
> Yé-yé chanteuse?


Her podcast is decades out of date. I'm still blown away she did an episode about the "stigma" of women being single with Mindy Kaling. 30 years ago maybe, but today? I can't remember the last time I saw an unmarried woman being shamed or mocked in a movie or TV show but it's been awhile.


----------



## EverSoElusive

So we get called racist for commenting about Z-list. Yet, none of her sugars and stans are calling her a racist for her trashy podcrash that's stereotyping Asian women. How ironic!


----------



## purseinsanity

pukasonqo said:


> So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…


She's just biding her time.  She's on an equal-opportunity-offend-all tour.


----------



## charlottawill

calicocat said:


> WTH! (from Hello!)
> 
> _Adding that she had a "real love" of getting to know other cultures, she spoke of going to a Korean spa with her mother as a teenager and her* "adolescent embarrassment" of having to strip down in front of other women*, as per the custom in Korean spas.
> 
> "It's a very humbling experience for a girl going through puberty because you enter a room with women from ages nine to maybe 90, all walking around naked and waiting to get a body scrub on one of these tables that are all lined up in a row. *All I wanted was a bathing suit." *
> 
> "Once I was over that adolescent embarrassment, my mom and I, we would go upstairs we would sit in a room and we would have a steaming bowl of the most delicious noodles," she said._



Oh the shame of it! The poor thing could only afford a spa in Koreatown, not one in Santa Monica. The struggle was real


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Her podcast is decades out of date. I'm still blown away she did an episode about the "stigma" of women being single with Mindy Kaling. 30 years ago maybe, but today? I can't remember the last time I saw an unmarried woman being shamed or mocked in a movie or TV show but it's been awhile.


Mm is addressing two twenty year old movies - you are spot on in your analysis of the out of date subject matter


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> this is the I'm not racist, I have an Asian friend.... lol
> She should have given her platform for someone to speak, and shut her trap altogether, but no...


You'd think if it was about Asian stereotypes, she'd let her ASIAN guests talk about the stereotypes they've been subjected to.  Or does TW claim to have 1/8 Asian blood somehow?  She tried to claim she was from Malta.  Is she from the "Far East" now too?  Stupid cow.


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> At this point I’m thinking, seriously, you couldn’t make this stuff up  But I think she is.


She probably looked at other successful talk radio hosts (which is essentially the same as doing a podcast) and thought if they can make millions spewing garbage why can't I?


----------



## charlottawill

DL Harper said:


> Can the HOA vote to "accept" them into the neighborhood??


I wouldn't be surprised if they get turned down, as other celebrities have by NY coop boards. If you move to a place for the quiet and privacy why would you want these two ruining it?


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



what does Margaret Cho say?  I don't care for her as a comedian at all...  I thought you can make fun of your own people?


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> According to the TB book Doria was a pot smoking hippie, so this actually makes sense


First she worked on a pot farm in the years before pot was legalized, so she was a _criminal _pot smoking hippie. 
Don't know the sequence of TW's life with her sometimes missing mother, but wonder if this was a "guilt trip" after the years Doria had disappeared from her life. Thomas probably paid for it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Stansy

pukasonqo said:


> So far we Latinos have managed to mark us as safe from her good intentions…


She also would not want to come here due to the language. And esp. in the eastern part people are quite fond of nakedness, there are beaches dedicated to bathing full naked


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


>



Charles seems to be a very generous man with his kids. He was certainly very generous with the demands of Hazz and TW while they were in the UK. It wouldn't be a big surprise if he gives Frongmore House to Will & Kate imo. Also, I would think that Frogmore Cottage, because of its location so close to Will and his family, it's not suitable for the Harkles.
Can you imagine all the riches he would give to the Harkles if they had stayed in the UK? I wonder if TW realizes the…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




That's kind of brilliant. Though I thought it would be Windsor Castle for them.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Dragon lady is a term I heard all the time when I was in JH and HS. It's incredibly racist in categorizing Asian females that way. Lucy Liu was one of the prime examples of what used to represent "Dragon Ladies" in more current films while growing up. I just don't know how TW would have any clue what AAPI communities go through, because she's been hanging around white crowds for basically all her life! In the part of LA she did grow up in during that time, there weren't a lot of AAPI populations, either.

What really irks me is that while going to Korean spas may be cheaper than those fancy BH spas, it is by no means something you do if you're POOR and DESTITUTE, or LOWER MIDDLE CLASS like she claimed she was. Same thing with eating at a Sizzler.

I grew up NOT going to spas of any kind, not traveling of any kind (except on road trips where we slept in motels on our way to national parks), eating at Sizzler for special occasions, wearing clothes from Sears outlet and shoes from Payless. I considered myself middle class in those days. I grew up in California and went to public school, because my parents could not afford private. My parents did not have money to put me in any extra curricular activities. This girl is either clueless, a perpetual liar - or both. I'm so sick of her "rags to riches" story.

If she considered herself poor, I consider my childhood growing up destitute. Then, I guess me making 6 figures before the age of 40, working a "regular" corporate job is a rags to riches story, too. Shall I share to everyone in the world how I made it? Like I'm the only one? Can someone say NARCISSIST???


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> You're probably right, but to me, *the Iron Lady *will always be the Eiffel Tower!


To me, it is Margaret Thatcher! I admired her and loved the designation.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

Yeah, no point in stopping it.







						Blind Item #5
					

The publication of the ginger one's book can be stopped in Commonwealth countries, but there would be no point because the publication can't...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> First she worked on a pot farm in the years before pot was legalized, so she was a _criminal _pot smoking hippie.
> Don't know the sequence of TW's life with her sometimes missing mother, but wonder if this was a "guilt trip" after the years Doria had disappeared from her life. Thomas probably paid for it.


The TB book doesn't address Doria spending time in jail, but a lot of posts on twitter and FB say she actually did and that's why she was gone so much.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


>



Great article, thanks for sharing it. Piers has a way with words…

_"He knows how damaging it is to the royal brand to have these two running an unofficial rival royal household that performs no duties but milks the titles for huge personal commercial gain while constantly attacking the family and institution."_


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Great article, thanks for sharing it. Piers has a way with words…
> 
> _"He knows how damaging it is to the royal brand to have these two running an unofficial rival royal household that performs no duties but milks the titles for huge personal commercial gain while constantly attacking the family and institution."_


Hazz is still a CoS, right?  LoS should not guarantee a CoS position imo.  Hope the King fixes this asap.

_According to the royal family's website, Counsellors of State include the spouse of the sovereign, and the next four people in the line of successionwho are over the age of 21. This means the current Counsellors of State are Prince William, Prince Harry, Prince Andrew, and Andrew's eldest daughter, Princess Beatrice.

Per the royal family, "Counsellors of State are authorised to carry out most of the official duties of the Sovereign, for example, *attending Privy Council meetings, signing routine documents and receiving the credentials of new ambassadors to the United Kingdom."*
_





						Princess Beatrice Is Now a Counsellor of State
					

Princess Beatrice can now represent King Charles on official duties.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I clicked on the T&C article and spotted an interesting detail. Apparently the Mapelli-Mozzis were not too busy to go to Balmoral this summer, and they brought not only their baby daughter but also Edo's son. So that child spent more time with The Queen than Harry's kids. I would have so many regrets if I was him.


----------



## Toby93

"The multitude of Asian cultures was a huge part of that for me. My weekends were spent in Little Tokyo, or having iced teas in Thai Town, or sitting with my friend Christina Wong and her parents at a local Chinese restaurant. I remember this so vividly and them teaching me why chow fun with dry noodles was so much better than chow fun with wet noodles. Now obviously I had a real fixation with food (not much has changed there),* but more than that, I had a real love of getting to know other cultures*."

Just not British culture apparently  How can she say all of this with a straight face?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Gal4Dior

Toby93 said:


> "The multitude of Asian cultures was a huge part of that for me. My weekends were spent in Little Tokyo, or having iced teas in Thai Town, or sitting with my friend Christina Wong and her parents at a local Chinese restaurant. I remember this so vividly and them teaching me why chow fun with dry noodles was so much better than chow fun with wet noodles. Now obviously I had a real fixation with food (not much has changed there),* but more than that, I had a real love of getting to know other cultures*."
> 
> Just not British culture apparently  How can she say all of this with a straight face?


Probably her ONE Asian friend, Christina Wong. Nutmeg needs to stop advocating for stuff she knows absolutely nothing about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


>





anybody else have this association?


----------



## Chanbal

Never been to a Korean spa, so I've no idea about the noodles. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if her story was fabricated.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> "The multitude of Asian cultures was a huge part of that for me. My weekends were spent in Little Tokyo, or having iced teas in Thai Town, or sitting with my friend Christina Wong and her parents at a local Chinese restaurant. I remember this so vividly and them teaching me why chow fun with dry noodles was so much better than chow fun with wet noodles. Now obviously I had a real fixation with food (not much has changed there),* but more than that, I had a real love of getting to know other cultures*."
> 
> Just not British culture apparently  How can she say all of this with a straight face?



This is all so cringey! I’d never try to use these anecdotal food items and excursions to “relate” to the entire Asian community. I imagine saying this to someone I don’t know well and, really…


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


>




She is missing the boat big time (as usual), with all that is happening in Iran she could have a podcast w activists and discuss how women had had their freedoms curtailed by the religious zealots
But then she would have to return her blood diamonds to the Saudis as there is no more dangerous place to be a woman (or a dissident) than one were dissent is punished by death


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Oh the shame of it! The poor thing could only afford a spa in Koreatown, not one in Santa Monica. The struggle was real


wonder if they went to Sizzler after the spa


----------



## Toby93

She must be spending an absolute fortune on this PR nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

pukasonqo said:


> She is missing the boat big time (as usual), with all that is happening in Iran she could have a podcast w activists and discuss how women had had their freedoms curtailed by the religious zealots
> But then she would have to return her blood diamonds to the Saudis as there is no more dangerous place to be a woman (or a dissident) than one were dissent is punished by death


Her podcast is meant to be safe and purely entertainment. That’s why she can fluff herself up in mock outrage as she discusses outdated issues while pretending they are still relevant to today’s women.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Who does that. This was not someone picked up on Craigslist, this was a highly qualified individual already vetted by senior staff. She is so f*cking rude.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Stansy said:


> View attachment 5624178
> 
> anybody else have this association?



At least Miranda was good at her job.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Her podcast is meant to be safe and purely entertainment. That’s why she can fluff herself up in mock outrage as *she discusses outdated issues *while pretending they are still relevant to today’s women.


and she is paid several millions for it… What a royal stamp does for you! TW went from $50K/Suits episode to >$1M/Spotify lousy podcast.


----------



## Chanbal

@QueenofWrapDress I'm unable to quote your post.

Ruthless & disgusting! People are to be treated with respect.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> She must be spending an absolute fortune on this PR nonsense.
> 
> View attachment 5624185


Is it my eyes, or is she trying to make herself look more Asian in that picture???  That's not her normal face.


----------



## csshopper

Hmmm, following TW’s plan for acquiring world knowledge, if she got a Swedish massage and later sipped Akvavit, she would then be qualified to speak about Scandinavian culture. In her low functioning brain that could morph into a podcast about “frigid women.”


----------



## marietouchet

I get the message, be yourself …. But this message completely discounts 
the listener eg if you are loud when weird, and your audience hates loud, your listener may not like YOU. Not everyone will like YOU
Trivial example but you get the idea … 

—— 
'Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.' Quote from DM article on podcast 4


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Charles, Drew… Who is the other lady with Charles on the photo? Is she Lisa Ling? I apologize for my ignorance, I was very busy in my other life and I'm still relatively new to the gossip/celebrity world.


----------



## V0N1B2

I must have grown up in a bubble, because the only time I’ve heard the words ‘dragon lady’ spoken was hearing (white) men describe their (white) mother-in-laws.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Charles, Drew… Who is the other lady with Charles on the photo? Is she Lisa Ling? I apologize for my ignorance, I was very busy in my other life and I'm still relatively new to the gossip/celebrity world.



actresses Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu , a premiere of the Charlie’s Angels movies they both starred in ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> 'Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.' Quote from DM article on podcast 4



That's somewhat funny coming from someone who doesn't possess even a spark of personality but copies and pastes from more interesting women.


----------



## gracekelly

Just more fabrications and lies in that podtrash.  I don't believe for a second that Meg and her mother went to a spa together, much less a Korean spa.  She obviously picked the brain of and/or had an Asian advisor for this this one.  Not fooling us.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> actresses Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu , a premiere of the Charlie’s Angels movies they both starred in ?


Thanks. Wow, Lucy Liu has a huge resemblance to Lisa Ling imo.

Yes, Charlie's Angels. I had forgotten about that.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> I get the message, be yourself …. But this message completely discounts
> the listener eg if you are loud when weird, and your audience hates loud, your listener may not like YOU. Not everyone will like YOU
> Trivial example but you get the idea …



PS this mantra reminds me of H’s advice to quit job if it impacts your mental health … collateral damage ??


marietouchet said:


> ——
> 'Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.' Quote from DM article on podcast 4


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Thanks. Wow, Lucy Liu has a huge resemblance to Lisa Ling imo.
> 
> Yes, Charlie's Angels. I had forgotten about that.


I got the names all backwards typing and am so proud I got Lucy Liu past the spelling checker that was fixated on Lisa Ling


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's somewhat funny coming from someone who doesn't possess even a spark of personality but copies and pastes from more interesting women.


And who has had a zillion plastic surgeries...  "be yourself"---LOL


----------



## charlottawill

Stansy said:


> View attachment 5624178
> 
> anybody else have this association?


Beat me to it


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sounds like trouble 

Harry and Meghan 'at odds' with Netflix: 'Panicked' Duke and Duchess 'requested significant edits' after 'having second thoughts' about 'tone' of docuseries - but the filmmakers want to keep the content, sources claim​
*Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want to edit their docuseries with Netflix, insiders have claimed *
Sources told Page Six Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'having second thoughts' and 'panicked' about series
Insiders said royal couple had requested 'such extensive edits' to the show, it could be 'shelved indefinitely'
However source at Netflix claimed the streaming service have pushed back and 'the project is going forward'
It was previously expected the production would be aired in December, following The Crown in November

_And now insiders have told the publication that the couple are 'having second thoughts' on the project, with one Netflix source saying: 'Harry and Meghan are panicked about trying to tone down even the most basic language. *But it’s their story, from their own mouths.'  *

Another said: 'They’ve made significant requests to walk back content they themselves have provided — to the extent that some Netflix staff believe, if granted, it will effectively shelve the project indefinitely.'

However the source added that the streaming platform was 'standing by the filmmakers' who want to keep the content in the project, and that it will still be 'going forward.'








						The end of Prince Harry and Meghan's Netflix series?
					

Sources told Page Six that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were 'trying to tone down even the most basic language' in the upcoming Netflix docuseries.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  _this *must* be wrong - 5 years???  5 years!!!!

_Last month, Meghan hinted that the documentary she and Prince Harry are currently filming for Netflix could focus on their 'love story'.

Speaking in an interview with The Cut, *the Duchess said her five-year-long romance with Prince Harry is one of the 'pieces of her life' that she has not yet been able to share with the public.*_


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like trouble
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'at odds' with Netflix: 'Panicked' Duke and Duchess 'requested significant edits' after 'having second thoughts' about 'tone' of docuseries - but the filmmakers want to keep the content, sources claim​
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want to edit their docuseries with Netflix, insiders have claimed *
> Sources told Page Six Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'having second thoughts' and 'panicked' about series
> Insiders said royal couple had requested 'such extensive edits' to the show, it could be 'shelved indefinitely'
> However source at Netflix claimed the streaming service have pushed back and 'the project is going forward'
> It was previously expected the production would be aired in December, following The Crown in November
> 
> _And now insiders have told the publication that the couple are 'having second thoughts' on the project, with one Netflix source saying: 'Harry and Meghan are panicked about trying to tone down even the most basic language. *But it’s their story, from their own mouths.'  *
> 
> Another said: 'They’ve made significant requests to walk back content they themselves have provided — to the extent that some Netflix staff believe, if granted, it will effectively shelve the project indefinitely.'
> 
> However the source added that the streaming platform was 'standing by the filmmakers' who want to keep the content in the project, and that it will still be 'going forward.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The end of Prince Harry and Meghan's Netflix series?
> 
> 
> Sources told Page Six that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were 'trying to tone down even the most basic language' in the upcoming Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So… they were counting on a 96 year old woman living forever, while doing everything they could to cause her as much pain and mental anguish as possible? Brilliant strategy.


----------



## Lounorada

jelliedfeels said:


> So bets on why they are moving
> 
> *Do we think the toilets are clogged, the place is haunted by the ghosts of dead producers who keep laughing at M’s acting or the kids need to be moved before they get tall enough to open the curtains?*










Toby93 said:


> Oprah is really pushing for these titles   Someone posted the link on Twitter to report her for misleading and false statements.
> 
> View attachment 5622494
> 
> 
> View attachment 5622495









charlottawill said:


>










Chanbal said:


>










Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5623382





What in the Kardashian-level photoshop mess is going on here?!
First of all, they don't even look like they were in the same room when this photo was taken. JCMH looks like he was copied and pasted into the picture. His head doesn't match the body... it's so odd.
Secondly, could they not have photoshopped out that odd looking crease in the fabric of her pants in the crotch area? She's looking like a well-endowed man who's letting it all hang loose underneath  I can't unsee that shape 
Thirdly, were they photographed in front of a green screen and had the background added in afterwards? It reminds me of those fake backgrounds people can add in behind them on zoom calls.
This picture is a mess. They are so pathetic.

Also, JCMH is looking like:


----------



## charlottawill

tiktok said:


> So… they were counting on a 96 year old woman living forever, *while doing everything they could to cause her as much pain and mental anguish as possible? *Brilliant strategy.


I shouldn't be so invested in these two, but I cannot wait for TW and her dolt of a husband to get their comeuppance for that reason alone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I shouldn't be so invested in these two, but I cannot wait for TW and her dolt of a husband to get their comeuppance for that reason alone.



I can't believe he refused to go see her at Balmoral. He could have left the witch at home. Hell, if she was making a fuss about the children being on British soil he could have gone on his own for a weekend. Now she's gone and he'll never spend another holiday with her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hyacinth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't doubt it, I just wonder who else would touch the certified crazy with a 10-foot-pole. She's shown too much of her real self to the world.




She's probably in the middle of an in-depth analysis of Elon Musk's pre- and post-Twitter's net worth even as we speak.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Speaking in an interview with The Cut, *the Duchess said her five-year-long romance with Prince Harry is one of the 'pieces of her life' that she has not yet been able to share with the public.*_


I believe she is referring to the five years between the time they met and now. That would make sense.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> I get the message, be yourself …. But this message completely discounts
> the listener eg if you are loud when weird, and your audience hates loud, your listener may not like YOU. Not everyone will like YOU
> Trivial example but you get the idea …
> 
> ——
> 'Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.' Quote from DM article on podcast 4


marietouchet, 
You are so right.
She has ZERO self knowledge because when someone is a raging hypocritical narcissistic bullying *****, the concept of “just be you” is destructive.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I believe she is referring to the five years between the time they met and now. That would make sense.


Ooooh, ok, you are correct.  I was thinking the _romance_ ended at the wedding.   The photos seem to confirm that imo.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooh, ok, you are correct.  I was thinking the _romance_ ended at the wedding.  The photos seem to confirm that imo.


In her mind the honeymoon continues. Not sure he'd agree   

"Marry in haste, repent at leisure". And he's got plenty of that


----------



## charlottawill

She is the gift that keeps on giving...but you'd really prefer to return  



"She forgot to slap sunglasses on H"


----------



## charlottawill

"Family numb nut"


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## EverSoElusive

I think some of you might end up cancelling Hulu


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't believe he refused to go see her at Balmoral. He could have left the witch at home. Hell, if she was making a fuss about the children being on British soil he could have gone on his own for a weekend. Now she's gone and he'll never spend another holiday with her.


I would have told them to stay away from the funeral. It this was a private family, I bet that would have happened.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like trouble
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'at odds' with Netflix: 'Panicked' Duke and Duchess 'requested significant edits' after 'having second thoughts' about 'tone' of docuseries - but the filmmakers want to keep the content, sources claim​
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want to edit their docuseries with Netflix, insiders have claimed *
> Sources told Page Six Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'having second thoughts' and 'panicked' about series
> Insiders said royal couple had requested 'such extensive edits' to the show, it could be 'shelved indefinitely'
> However source at Netflix claimed the streaming service have pushed back and 'the project is going forward'
> It was previously expected the production would be aired in December, following The Crown in November
> 
> _And now insiders have told the publication that the couple are 'having second thoughts' on the project, with one Netflix source saying: 'Harry and Meghan are panicked about trying to tone down even the most basic language. *But it’s their story, from their own mouths.'  *
> 
> Another said: 'They’ve made significant requests to walk back content they themselves have provided — to the extent that some Netflix staff believe, if granted, it will effectively shelve the project indefinitely.'
> 
> However the source added that the streaming platform was 'standing by the filmmakers' who want to keep the content in the project, and that it will still be 'going forward.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The end of Prince Harry and Meghan's Netflix series?
> 
> 
> Sources told Page Six that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were 'trying to tone down even the most basic language' in the upcoming Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  _this *must* be wrong - 5 years???  5 years!!!!
> 
> _Last month, Meghan hinted that the documentary she and Prince Harry are currently filming for Netflix could focus on their 'love story'.
> 
> Speaking in an interview with The Cut, *the Duchess said her five-year-long romance with Prince Harry is one of the 'pieces of her life' that she has not yet been able to share with the public.*_


2022-2016 =6 years, they met in 2016


----------



## marietouchet

Compare and contrast - note the words joke, comedy, comedian

Will smith hits comedian Chris rock for making a joke about his wife 
Mm takes aim at Asian stereotypes in 20 year old comedy movie - Austin powers


----------



## charlottawill

It seems like only yesterday that he was mocking his brother's hair loss....


----------



## Kevinaxx

EverSoElusive said:


> I think some of you might end up cancelling Hulu
> 
> 
> View attachment 5624324


Escaping the palace? More like the palace  (almost) escaping from their terror.

What would they be without Harry being born into the royal family? Would Megan even be with him? If nothing else you have to admire her tenacity and evil/successful scheme to land a prince.

Even if she’s not smart enough to realize she can’t have absolute control of the narrative.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Kevinaxx said:


> Escaping the palace? More like the palace  (almost) escaping from their terror.
> 
> What would they be without Harry being born into the royal family? Would Megan even be with him? If nothing else you have to admire her tenacity and evil/successful scheme to land a prince.
> 
> Even if she’s not smart enough to realize she can’t have absolute control of the narrative.


I'm watching the movie now because I'm curious though I know it's a Z-rate movie. Movie Nutmeg was trying to take on the Palace and Movie Kate told her that the Palace always wins but of course she didn't listen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> "Family numb nut"



Is this an old photo? She seems to have a bump here.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> "The multitude of Asian cultures was a huge part of that for me. My weekends were spent in Little Tokyo, or having iced teas in Thai Town, or sitting with my friend Christina Wong and her parents at a local Chinese restaurant. I remember this so vividly and them teaching me why chow fun with dry noodles was so much better than chow fun with wet noodles. Now obviously I had a real fixation with food (not much has changed there),* but more than that, I had a real love of getting to know other cultures*."
> 
> Just not British culture apparently  How can she say all of this with a straight face?


Does this friend Christina Wong exist?
Also, how can she spew this with a straight face? I believe Botox helps immobilise facial muscles...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Is this an old photo? She seems to have a bump here.


Yes, old photo from tour of Morocco









						Meghan Markle Wraps Up Royal Tour of Morocco in Regal Blue Maxi Dress
					

The Duchess of Sussex is glowing!




					www.etonline.com


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Is this an old photo? She seems to have a bump here.


Not sure, but it could be an illusion from the pattern. Then again, I think they're laying low in CA, so it probably is from the past.

Sorry @CarryOn2020, should read before posting.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, old photo from tour of Morocco
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wraps Up Royal Tour of Morocco in Regal Blue Maxi Dress
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is glowing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com



It doesn't look bad in those photos, and as a maternity dress. But a bit too long imo.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> I'm watching the movie now because I'm curious though I know it's a Z-rate movie. Movie Nutmeg was trying to take on the Palace and Movie Kate told her that the Palace always wins but of course she didn't listen


If you are watching the movie, you may also appreciate the excerpt below from her book Finding F. that someone kindly posted on Reddit.


----------



## bag-mania

For anyone keeping track, Archetypes is now ranked #13. This is after ranking #6 last week when there was no podcast.


----------



## Abba13

EverSoElusive said:


> @prettyprincess
> 
> If you've spent time enough time on this thread or even from the beginning where it was just Harry's thread to the present where The Wife was included, you would have understood the progression of opinion change towards the couple as a whole.
> 
> Myself and many others started out as supporters when they first started dating. Generally speaking, we saw that as progress involving the BRF because The Wife wasn't another white gal with blonde hair and blue eyes AND she's was a divorcee. Their relationship mirrors many modern day interracial relationships (mine included) something that quite a few of us can relate to. It was also quite endearing when Harry first came to The Wife's defence by issuing a public statement concerning harassment by the press.
> 
> The Wife got to move in with Harry and live on royal estate and be part of the BRF's pre-Christmas luncheon with The Queen though she was not a spouse yet (Kate never had this opportunity pre-marriage).
> 
> Subsequent to the whirlwind romance, The Wife was given a princely wedding despite only marrying the spare, traditions were broken allowing her to wear white and a veil though (again) she's a divorcee, American Bishop Michael Curry was allowed to give the sermon though he's not part of the Church of England.
> 
> Once married, things changed fairly quickly. The Wife started to break protocol everywhere she went. She loved going first as evident by her first solo engagement with The Queen!!! When she's on engagements with Harry, she made sure that Harry let her go first and she would interrupt Harry to get her introduction in before Harry could finish.
> 
> Harry and The Wife served together as senior working royals but not for long. They blindsided The Queen with their statement about stepping down, wanting to be half in, half out to move to North America so that they can pursue what matters to them and to be financially independent. Or so they say.
> 
> Upon leaving the UK, they did the infamous bombshell interview with OW. During this interview, they trash talked Harry's family, the BRF. In so many words, The Wife called her in-laws racist. From then on, every other thing that came out of her mouth was turned into race related. She also started to look (fake) tanner and tanner, which was not how she used to present herself from teen till when she just begun dating Harry. She used to pass herself as white. Period.
> 
> After not being allowed to be half in, half out and the BRF did not give in to her every whim by way of Harry, The Wife chose to play the victim all day everyday. Through her unofficial mouthpiece Anglo-Iranian Scoobie Doo and Sunshine Sachs, misinformation is planted and mostly, race is used as the key weapon to attack the BRF i.e. The Wife is treated differently than Kate because she's black and poor her no one is asking if she's OK.
> 
> The Wife grew desperate, did everything malicious that she could think of to change the narrative and to damage the BRF's image. She made sure to continue to play the race card solely to garner sympathy and/or support from the non-white general public, especially the black population. She had to make herself look darker in skin tone with awful spray tans because she wants them to see her as black (not biracial or half white) and one of them, in order for them to better empathize with her.
> 
> The regular posters here are not being racist. We formed our opinions after watching and reading about this couple multiple years and based on their many despicable actions up to the present day. You may not want to accept what we pointed out about the purpose of her spray tans but you can always look up her old photos (especially when she was on Suits) and current photos to make your own conclusion.
> 
> I'll be honest with you, I haven't met any white passing (black-white) biracial people who choose to get fake tans other than The Wife. They generally leave their skin tone as is and don't scream racism every opportunity.
> 
> I'm sure we can agree to disagree
> 
> FYI, I'm a POC and WOC. I'm originally from a very multiracial and multicultural South East Asian country. I now live in America and my husband is white. I have personally experienced racism in my life. However, just know that I was raised to treat people without looking at race.
> 
> It's 2.13 AM here and it took me forever to type this on my phone so I'm headed to bed.


You wrote the above on your phone?!  You must be very young with beautiful fingers.  Impressed.

I too was a huge fan.  Woke up early the day they married.  I didn't want to miss a moment.  So disappointed when her change took place.  One of the things that stood out was when she complained the palace wasn't concerned with her eating disorder.  Wasn't the love of her life, Harry, the one to lean on?  Huh?  Nitpicking told me a lot about her character.  Poor Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

Abba13 said:


> One of the things that stood out was when she complained the palace wasn't concerned with her eating disorder.


Wait, what? She claimed she had an eating disorder? Like Diana?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Wait, what? She claimed she had an eating disorder? Like Diana?


Maybe the poster meant when Meghan claimed to have suicidal thoughts while pregnant.


----------



## charlottawill

I am reminded of the movie Life Size with Tyra Banks.


----------



## Abba13

bag-mania said:


> Maybe the poster meant when Meghan claimed to have suicidal thoughts while pregnant.


Ahhhh....I misspoke.  Still remains that she should have leaned on Harry and Harry should have sought help.


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> I am reminded of the movie Life Size with Tyra Banks.



Reminds of Ali G asking Posh: does he talk? and she answering: well, Brooklyn is starting to say…to which Ali G interrupted and said he was talking about David not Brooklyn (who was a baby then)
BTW the above is my recollection so it might be not as funny
Found it:





						Posh floored as Ali G tackles Becks | Media | The Guardian
					

<p>For David and Victoria Beckham, ridicule is an occupational hazard. But rarely can Britain's first couple have been subjected to as uncomfortable a 40 minutes as that spent being grilled by Ali G for Comic Relief. </p>




					amp.theguardian.com


----------



## bag-mania

Abba13 said:


> Ahhhh....I misspoke.  Still remains that she should have leaned on Harry and Harry should have sought help.


Particularly since Harry was part of the Heads Together campaign with his brother. He had access to eight different mental health charities yet we are supposed to believe he didn’t know how to find a therapist for his depressed wife. They are such liars.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Charles, Drew… Who is the other lady with Charles on the photo? Is she Lisa Ling? I apologize for my ignorance, I was very busy in my other life and I'm still relatively new to the gossip/celebrity world.



I think that's lucy lui...she was in charlies angels with drew barrymore


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> For anyone keeping track, Archetypes is now ranked #13. This is after ranking #6 last week when there was no podcast.
> 
> View attachment 5624387


How can that lousy podcast still be #13?


----------



## Chanbal

Charles should include Tom Bower as an advisor, he understands TW.




_Biographer Tom Bower — who wrote “Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors” — told Page Six in an exclusive interview that he “absolutely” *believes the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released their most recent portraits to humiliate the royal family*.

“*It was all about, we’re back now on course to build Brand Meghan and the book, the Netflix series, the podcast,” he told us. “Everything is money. And to their advantage, they were in the public eye for seven days during the funeral or more, every day they were filmed*.”

Bower further compared it to their appearances months earlier during the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations where the couple was barely seen.

“They were shuffled off to a window upstairs and hardly seen,” he said contrasting it to Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral, where “they were center stage.”

“Y*ou know, she has really got one interest*,” Bower added, “*and that’s Meghan and the casualties are the royal family *and as far as she’s concerned, that’s terrific.”_









						New Meghan, Harry photo is a f–k you to the royal family: expert
					

“It was all about, we’re back now on course to build Brand Meghan and the book, the Netflix series, the podcast,” says a royal expert.




					pagesix.com


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> If Bea had her own thread, I would put this there.   She looks poised and elegant
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice attended her first event since the Queen's funeral
> 
> 
> Princess Beatrice, 34, attended her first event today since the Queen's funeral last week. The eldest daughter of Prince Andrew attended the Lady Garden Foundation Ladies Lunch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> coat has been worn multiple times -
> Worn by Princess Beatrice on:​
> 28 November 2012 - Valentino: Master Of Couture: VIP View
> 25 November 2015
> 15 May 2017 - Oscar’s Book Prize 2017
> 17 May 2017 - China Exchange UK event
> 18 December 2017
> 8 October 2020
> 29 September 2022
> https://ufonomore.com/recently-added/red-valentino-bow-and-ruffle-front-coat-in-black


She does: https://forum.purseblog.com/threads/princess-beatrice.1017932/


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *I would have told them to stay away from the funeral. *It this was a private family, I bet that would have happened.


You and Tom Bower. Those several days in the public eye during the funeral will likely be monetized and used against the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93




----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> She is the gift that keeps on giving...but you'd really prefer to return


She’s a gift so awful I’d never even consider regifting it.


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


>



She is such a terrible actress.  I’m cringing with second hand embarrassment watching this  


Chanbal said:


> If you are watching the movie, you may also appreciate the excerpt below from her book Finding F. that someone kindly posted on Reddit.
> View attachment 5624385



Must be a pain to live with someone who needs this much fluffing up all.the.time.


Chanbal said:


> Charles should include Tom Bower as an advisor, he understands TW.
> 
> View attachment 5624467
> 
> 
> _Biographer Tom Bower — who wrote “Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors” — told Page Six in an exclusive interview that he “absolutely” *believes the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released their most recent portraits to humiliate the royal family*.
> 
> “*It was all about, we’re back now on course to build Brand Meghan and the book, the Netflix series, the podcast,” he told us. “Everything is money. And to their advantage, they were in the public eye for seven days during the funeral or more, every day they were filmed*.”
> 
> Bower further compared it to their appearances months earlier during the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations where the couple was barely seen.
> 
> “They were shuffled off to a window upstairs and hardly seen,” he said contrasting it to Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral, where “they were center stage.”
> 
> “Y*ou know, she has really got one interest*,” Bower added, “*and that’s Meghan and the casualties are the royal family *and as far as she’s concerned, that’s terrific.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Meghan, Harry photo is a f–k you to the royal family: expert
> 
> 
> “It was all about, we’re back now on course to build Brand Meghan and the book, the Netflix series, the podcast,” says a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Everyones moving on already, on both sides of the Atlantic - and there’s no role in either the US or UK for these two.  All that’s left to play out is the divorce, which will be rubberneck type viewing.  Because I’m sure Meg’ll squeeze the pips out of it for drama (and £).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




Ah, sometimes I love how the internet never forgets.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Exciting news: Courtiers shipped and is said to arrive tomorrow! I have a DHL tracking number so I'm inclined to believe it.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> If you are watching the movie, you may also appreciate the excerpt below from her book Finding F. that someone kindly posted on Reddit.
> View attachment 5624385



So much for the "blind" date. He checked her out on IG and online, and she discussed him with her publicist/agent/whatever. 
I'm afraid the people who were truly blind were the rest of the world who actually wished them well until the garbage sack started splitting at the seams. 


Chanbal said:


> Charles should include Tom Bower as an advisor, he understands TW.
> 
> View attachment 5624467
> 
> 
> _Biographer Tom Bower — who wrote “Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors” — told Page Six in an exclusive interview that he “absolutely” *believes the Duke and Duchess of Sussex released their most recent portraits to humiliate the royal family*.
> 
> “*It was all about, we’re back now on course to build Brand Meghan and the book, the Netflix series, the podcast,” he told us. “Everything is money. And to their advantage, they were in the public eye for seven days during the funeral or more, every day they were filmed*.”
> 
> Bower further compared it to their appearances months earlier during the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee celebrations where the couple was barely seen.
> 
> “They were shuffled off to a window upstairs and hardly seen,” he said contrasting it to Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral, where “they were center stage.”
> 
> “Y*ou know, she has really got one interest*,” Bower added, “*and that’s Meghan and the casualties are the royal family *and as far as she’s concerned, that’s terrific.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New Meghan, Harry photo is a f–k you to the royal family: expert
> 
> 
> “It was all about, we’re back now on course to build Brand Meghan and the book, the Netflix series, the podcast,” says a royal expert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I don't mean this to sound racist in any way, but in the red pantsuit photos, she really looks like she is cosplaying ethnic Indians.


----------



## xincinsin

This Reddit post says Zedzee threw  Sucks under the bus. Was there any acrimony apart from the expected jibes from the Sussex Camp that it was SS's fault that Megxit happened?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I find it funny that his type was so very obviously blondes, but she is the most beautiful woman he's ever seen? Sure.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it funny that his type was so very obviously blondes, but she is the most beautiful woman he's ever seen? Sure.


The perfume clogged his vision.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, old photo from tour of Morocco
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Wraps Up Royal Tour of Morocco in Regal Blue Maxi Dress
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex is glowing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Nothing like a tent dress to emphasize that she is Heavily Pregnant. 
Her maxim seems to be: If it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing.


----------



## Pessie

Just been on H.com looking at the jewellery.  The Ever Herakles wedding band I read as Ever Harkles   and had to look again.


----------



## xincinsin

My sweet nod today. Dragon dress!


To stay current to the events


----------



## JulesB68

bag-mania said:


> Her podcast is meant to be safe and purely entertainment. That’s why she can fluff herself up in mock outrage as she discusses outdated issues while pretending they are still relevant to today’s women.


Wonder where she got that idea from?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> I am reminded of the movie Life Size with Tyra Banks.




The responses to this tweet


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh look, back when she was three sizes smaller and five shades lighter.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I get the message, be yourself …. But this message completely discounts
> the listener eg if you are loud when weird, and your audience hates loud, your listener may not like YOU. Not everyone will like YOU
> Trivial example but you get the idea …
> 
> ——
> 'Just be yourself no matter what any societal framework or archetype or loud voice coming from a small place tells you that you should be. Be yourself. your full complete whole layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome, but always best and true self. Just be you. You're so much greater than any archetype.' Quote from DM article on podcast 4



But to my mind that's her whole problem; she doesn't know who or what she is, let alone what she actually does. There is no authenticity there, all her aims, objectives, prefs and thoughts are only concerned with outside affirmations (that she's the very best, most important, truly significant etc). A round of applause should not be for the person, or even what they stand for, but what they've done.


----------



## sgj99

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't doubt it, I just wonder who else would touch the certified crazy with a 10-foot-pole. She's shown too much of her real self to the world.


Just like some women like “bad boys” (thinking they can nurture them) some men like “crazy women” (thinking they’ll be crazy in bed).  She’ll find some attention-seeking hound.
While she can easily manipulate Harry I think she’ll get bored with him.  She’ll have the time of her life playing the victim, how the BRF set out to ruin her marriage because of their racism.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Sounds like trouble
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'at odds' with Netflix: 'Panicked' Duke and Duchess 'requested significant edits' after 'having second thoughts' about 'tone' of docuseries - but the filmmakers want to keep the content, sources claim​
> *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want to edit their docuseries with Netflix, insiders have claimed *
> Sources told Page Six Duke and Duchess of Sussex are 'having second thoughts' and 'panicked' about series
> Insiders said royal couple had requested 'such extensive edits' to the show, it could be 'shelved indefinitely'
> However source at Netflix claimed the streaming service have pushed back and 'the project is going forward'
> It was previously expected the production would be aired in December, following The Crown in November
> 
> _And now insiders have told the publication that the couple are 'having second thoughts' on the project, with one Netflix source saying: 'Harry and Meghan are panicked about trying to tone down even the most basic language. *But it’s their story, from their own mouths.'  *
> 
> Another said: 'They’ve made significant requests to walk back content they themselves have provided — to the extent that some Netflix staff believe, if granted, it will effectively shelve the project indefinitely.'
> 
> However the source added that the streaming platform was 'standing by the filmmakers' who want to keep the content in the project, and that it will still be 'going forward.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The end of Prince Harry and Meghan's Netflix series?
> 
> 
> Sources told Page Six that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were 'trying to tone down even the most basic language' in the upcoming Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  _this *must* be wrong - 5 years???  5 years!!!!
> 
> _Last month, Meghan hinted that the documentary she and Prince Harry are currently filming for Netflix could focus on their 'love story'.
> 
> Speaking in an interview with The Cut, *the Duchess said her five-year-long romance with Prince Harry is one of the 'pieces of her life' that she has not yet been able to share with the public.*_



Sorry I am having problems with "basic language". Was that a push back or moving forward, standing by or shelving indefinitely, going forward or walk back, hate BRF or love story????????    

Do you know what? I don't care. I hope they both spontaneously combust considering what they put Harry's grandmother (and grandfather) through - never mind the British and N. Irish people. 

They are dust in the wind


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> My sweet nod today. Dragon dress!
> View attachment 5624540
> 
> To stay current to the events


Cool idea .… we should all have HTMMOTD, Hommage to MM Outfits of the Day 
Rummaging through my closet for a red pantsuit , green cape 
What we AS A TEAM can accomplish on Halloween !


----------



## papertiger

sgj99 said:


> Just like some women like “bad boys” (thinking they can nurture them) some men like “crazy women” (thinking they’ll be crazy in bed).  She’ll find some attention-seeking hound.
> While she can easily manipulate Harry I think she’ll get bored with him.  She’ll have the time of her life playing the victim, how the BRF set out to ruin her marriage because of their racism.



Speaking absolutely flat, technically, and non-salaciously.

Unlike most here, I doubt she's proficient in the 'private area'.

To be good in bed, one has to (at least occasionally) _want_ to give the other person pleasure, occasionally able to relinquish control and be attentive/intuitive. Since she's all about herself 24/7, a control freak and has zero empathy I think it's a couple of porn poses in Victoria Secret outlet co-ords, and tissues/dust buster at the ready  .

And that is the first and last time I will approach that subject with that subject.

Harry obviously has her down as the 'Mommy'/Madonna, and NOT the whore in his Madonna/whore complex. It's clear from his obsession about nonsensical protection and hyper-masculine, banal rants on her behalf that he thinks she's a cross between a saint and an all-powerful maternal figure https://www.34st.com/article/2021/0...complex-black-women-trans-women-sex-sexuality. We had proof in the TB where his friends and family could not see the 'Diana' in her at all. Even his version of Diana is more media construct rather than the complex woman she was. MagZ is perfect as figure for his projection, MegZ has very little inner life beyond adolescent fantasies and ambitions (of her own) and very little character.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Cool idea .… we should all have HTMMOTD, Hommage to MM Outfits of the Day
> Rummaging through my closet for a red pantsuit , green cape
> What we AS A TEAM can accomplish on Halloween !



You're on your own. Not even for Halloween  

Every time I find an item that remind me of MegZ's disasters, I donate (we have collections every Thurs morning). 

P.S. The red pantsuit was even worse, an evening jumpsuit.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> She is the gift that keeps on giving...but you'd really prefer to return
> 
> 
> 
> "She forgot to slap sunglasses on H"




O.M.G. they are both truly hideous - as a fashionista once said "the designer must have taken the day off"


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So my delivery estimate for Courtiers is back to October 17th.


Mine says next Tuesday....Go figure!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> I think some of you might end up cancelling Hulu
> 
> 
> View attachment 5624324



Escaping the Palace - fine. 

Why do they keep breaking back in??????


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> For anyone keeping track, Archetypes is now ranked #13. This is after ranking #6 last week when there was no podcast.
> 
> View attachment 5624387




IMO, Spotify have to be careful. If they make M's pod-crashes #1/#high too much, she'll demand another series based on their own ratings. 

I am serious


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> *Everyones moving on already, on both sides of the Atlantic - and there’s no role in either the US or UK for these two.*  All that’s left to play out is the divorce, which will be rubberneck type viewing.  Because I’m sure Meg’ll squeeze the pips out of it for drama (and £).


----------



## elvisfan4life

Goodfrtune said:


> There are and I think Covid in one form or another will be with us for a long, long time. I cannot let it control my life any more. It all seems so random as to who will get it and who won’t as well as who will get truly ill and who won’t. My mother’s last two years of life were spent locked up in her house. For the first four months we didn’t even take her to a doctor’s appointment for fear of her being exposed. Might I add that my mother was gravely ill with many issues among them leukemia (in remission at the time), COPD, heart failure, dementia, Parkinson’s and a month and a half before she passed she was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer as well. The first time I took her to the doctor for blood work it came back with her testing positive for the antibodies. My mother, who was battling all of these illnesses somehow managed to contract Covid and fight it off. Her doctors were baffled. My husband and I tested negative for the antibodies and her caregivers never showed any signs of Covid either. Next blood test, still positive for the antibodies. All the time that we spent caring for her, wearing masks but not kissing or hugging her for fear of infecting her didn’t mean a thing. Fast forward to April of last year. I got her double vaccinated and was hoping to finally let her live a little. She passed on April 5 of 2021. Her cleaning person who was 57 with no underlying health conditions passed suddenly due to Covid that Friday. Go figure. Have been out of the country and on planes numerous times since then. Our cruise to Antarctica had one member of our party test positive the day we were to disembark and two others were positive when they got home. Went on a cruise to the Greek Islands and nothing. Went to Anguila, St. Barths, Maui, Florida, South Carolina etc. and nothing. In addition DH has also had numerous work trips domestically and internationally and nothing. We went out to dinner with my best friend and her family. She and I both come down with it. I will continue to get boosted and follow protocol but I have to live my life. I don’t write this to change anyone’s mind or say that what someone is doing is right or wrong but just to tell my story and give my rationale. Now, back on topic…TW is a horrible, disgusting snake and I would like to see nothing more than her and her useless handbag stripped of their titles and slink off into oblivion.


My uncle caught covid in hospital 6 weeks ago peak of summer low cases so they said he was recovered from the reason for being in hospital and about to come home - but covid killed him in 4 days - enjoy your holidays and travel but please dont tell me it’s not a serious threat any longer or that those of us who will keep inside not travel or meet people and wear a mask forever are somehow being stupid


----------



## elvisfan4life

Toby93 said:


> Sadly, I have many ties to Dumbarton, and I say that it is an entirely fitting place for them  The family that I have that are still in the area say it's not a place they would go for a walk alone after dark.


My granny was Dumbarton born and bred she would have sorted this American hussy if she had still been around


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Cool idea .… we should all have HTMMOTD, Hommage to MM Outfits of the Day
> Rummaging through my closet for a red pantsuit , green cape
> What we AS A TEAM can accomplish on Halloween !


How fun would it be if we could all get together wearing one of her ensembles? I'd volunteer for the blue number she wore for the NAACP awards. I've got the perfect shower curtain.


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> My granny was Dumbarton born and bred


So was my grandma.  I have relatives who still live there.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it funny that his type was so very obviously blondes, but she is the most beautiful woman he's ever seen? Sure.





xincinsin said:


> The perfume clogged his vision.





CarryOn2020 said:


>



"…_their rotten strategy, the incredible love_…"

Their incredible love, her incredible beauty … , they all sound forced and rotten strategies!
I don't think they are able to love, and she looks plain despite all the plastic surgeries, makeup, and beauty advisors.


----------



## Chanbal

Cheers to the Aussies!


----------



## Chanbal

Breaking News!


----------



## LittleStar88

elvisfan4life said:


> My uncle caught covid in hospital 6 weeks ago peak of summer low cases so they said he was recovered from the reason for being in hospital and about to come home - but covid killed him in 4 days - enjoy your holidays and travel but please dont tell me it’s not a serious threat any longer or that those of us who will keep inside not travel or meet people and wear a mask forever are somehow being stupid



Agree. I'm a cancer patient, today is my 26th round of Chemo with no end date for these treatments as the cancer can only be managed and not cured or put into remission. I am forever immunocompromised.

While I am extremely envious of those who throw caution to the wind and go about their lives as though it is not a threat, I continue to live the mask life and take an abundance of precaution. The *one* time I got careless and mindlessly walked into a shop maskless this summer, I caught covid and had to go to ER for a 105 degree fever. I recovered but it was awful and delayed my chemo schedule. 

Some people seem unaffected by covid while some are still dying. No rhyme or reason and sometimes I see maskless folks with obvious health issues going unmasked and it really surprises me sometimes. It's now a gamble for everyone and not a gamble I am willing to take.


----------



## youngster

So much good stuff from Valentine Low.  This is another excerpt from his new book:

_As one source put it: 'The way I see it, *their view of not getting institutional support was that they were not getting permission to blow up the [royal] institution's relationships with the media.'*  Others suspected that, in the end, Meghan wanted to make money for herself. And the only way she could do that was by leaving behind her royal life in the UK and returning to America. Too cynical? Perhaps. But the sad truth is that the relationships between Meghan and her advisers were in such a sorry state that this is what they genuinely believed. Some argue that she never really wanted to be accepted by the Royal Family. That may be true._

On her mental health:
_In the Oprah interview, Meghan also made the startling claim that she went to one of the 'most senior people,' saying she needed to go somewhere to get help — only to be told it wouldn't be 'good for the institution'.  It is a strange thought: would anyone really say that to a pregnant woman?  Until one hears from the other person in the room, it's difficult to know what to make of this. However, the truth remains that Meghan appears to have been in a bad place. And Harry knew she was suffering.  Yet when Oprah asked why he didn't go to his own family to say his wife needed help, he said: 'I guess I was ashamed of admitting it to them.' We can all understand such feelings of shame: mental health can be hard to talk about.

*However, there is also something not quite right here.

Since 2016, Harry had devoted much of his energy to Heads Together, a campaign he had launched with William and Kate to try to persuade people to overcome the stigma surrounding mental health.  Years before, he'd decided to seek help himself after suffering his own mental crisis. Could he not have helped his wife do likewise? And if he couldn't, he must have met scores of people through Heads Together who could have offered help and support. As one well-informed source said: 'He would have known exactly where to turn, who to call, what to do.'*  Elsewhere in the Oprah interview, Meghan talked warmly of Julia Samuel, the psychotherapist who had been a friend of Princess Diana and remained close to Harry. She had, Meghan said, 'continued to be a friend and confidante'. Julia Samuel would also, presumably, have been an ideal person for the couple to go to for help._


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that like me didn't listen to the podcast, here is a good analysis of it. The entire article is provided in the link below.




_"Yesterday, a more high-profile return arrived in the form of the fourth instalment of the Duchess’s ‘Archetypes’ podcast, after a hiatus occasioned by the necessity of mourning the Queen. Once again, it has demonstrated Meghan’s genius for backing into the spotlight, *with her usual innate ability to make herself the centre of attention, regardless of the subject.*

It won't be surprising to any listeners that her guests are barely allowed to make any impression, so dominant is the host
This week, Meghan and her guests, the journalist Lisa Ling and the actress and comedian Margaret Cho, have explored Asian stereotyping, in particular the so-called ‘Dragon Lady’ archetype beloved by lazy screenwriters and directors alike. *Yet there’s no doubt that it is the Duchess’s life and experiences that are the ones of most interest to the executive producer, or Meghan herself. *From the folksy introduction (‘my weekends were spent in Little Tokyo or having iced teas…my mom and I would often go to the Korean spa together’) to a stern denunciation of the ‘evil exotic force’ that the Dragon Lady represents, it is clear that Meghan’s intention in this episode is to denounce the evils of racism and lazy xenophobia.

Which is commendable. *Unfortunately it will not come as a surprise to anyone listening to the podcast that her guests are barely allowed to make any impression, so dominant is the host*.

*Cho makes an interesting point about Anna May Wong, the first Chinese-American star who found herself trapped in roles that catered to the Dragon Lady archetype. Meghan, however, is unwilling – or unable – to discuss her further, and so the idea is not pursued*.

There is criticism of Tarantino’s Kill Bill films and – in a more obscure fashion – Mike Myers’s Austin Powers movies for promoting ‘caricatures of women of Asian descent as oversexualised or aggressive’. One could argue that the former presents American women as coolly homicidal and the latter shows British men to be sex pests with bad teeth, but there we go.

*Ling discusses racism in the broadcast media, but before long, Meghan has turned the conversation round to her own experiences growing up with Korean-American culture.* At the end, there is a cutesy bit with Ling’s nine-year old daughter Lisa. The sentimentality sits uneasily with the earlier citation of Full Metal Jacket’s famous line, as delivered by a Vietnamese sex worker, that ‘Me so horny…me love you long time.’ And at the end, there is an off-the-peg sermon, in which the Duchess exhorts her listeners to define themselves as they see fit, with *‘your full, complete, whole-layered, sometimes weird, sometimes awesome but always best and true self…you’re so much greater than any archetype.’ Podcast ends, job done*.

It is easy to sneer at Meghan’s Archetypes podcast series, but that does not mean that we should refrain from doing so. Tonally, its mixture of sentiment, anger and condescension is strange – but perhaps it reflects its presenter in that curious combination. No doubt we can expect many other headline-grabbing shows over the coming weeks, but *an unanticipated detail is a credit for a fact checker. If one was to be used in all of the Duchess’s public statements, let alone future podcasts,it could well be a full-time job, with the necessity of overtime."*_









						Meghan makes it all about herself, again
					

Since the Queen’s death last month, the Duchess of Sussex has found it hard to maintain her usual vice-like grip on the world media’s attention. Rumours have swirled that relations between her and Prince Harry and the now-Prince and Princess of Wales are yet to improve — despite the surface show...




					www.spectator.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Royal staff 'felt sick' before meetings with Sussexes, author claims
					

Staff were apparently wracked by nerves and some even left 'shaking' ahead of meetings with Meghan Markle, according to royal author and Times journalist Valentine Low.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 DM is following some posts here…   









						Newly released image shows Meghan and Wallis Simpson similarities
					

The Duchess of Sussex, it seems, is making a statement of firm resolution. The image struck some observers as being uncannily like the outfit of another Duchess, Wallis Simpson.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Agree. I'm a cancer patient, today is my 26th round of Chemo with no end date for these treatments as the cancer can only be managed and not cured or put into remission. I am forever immunocompromised.
> 
> While I am extremely envious of those who throw caution to the wind and go about their lives as though it is not a threat, I continue to live the mask life and take an abundance of precaution. The *one* time I got careless and mindlessly walked into a shop maskless this summer, I caught covid and had to go to ER for a 105 degree fever. I recovered but it was awful and delayed my chemo schedule.
> 
> Some people seem unaffected by covid while some are still dying. No rhyme or reason and sometimes I see maskless folks with obvious health issues going unmasked and it really surprises me sometimes. It's now a gamble for everyone and not a gamble I am willing to take.


I am so sorry to hear that. I hope this is a fun distraction for you at times.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> I am so sorry to hear that. I hope this is a fun distraction for you at times.



Thank you 

This space has been an endlessly entertaining distraction on a level I could never have expected. And I so appreciate everyone’s smart insight and clever comments. so thankful for this forum and for all of you!


----------



## Chanbal

Wow, plenty of interesting articles on the podcast, photo…today


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> Escaping the Palace - fine.
> 
> Why do they keep breaking back in??????


In all honesty Hazza without the royal family and the title is nothing
He is not intelligent, smart, nice or handsome
Has no visible interests or career…except whinging 
The interviews, job offers, etc come because of his BRF pedigree and hopes this will attract suckers
I wouldn’t put it past them to
and when the war in Ukraine is over to claim this was due to Hazza’s secret role securing a peace deal, they can then demand he is given the Nobel 
peace prize
They have been oddly silent regarding Ukraine (wasn’t he going to visit?) and the current situation in Iran, makes one wonder why


----------



## pukasonqo

LittleStar88 said:


> Agree. I'm a cancer patient, today is my 26th round of Chemo with no end date for these treatments as the cancer can only be managed and not cured or put into remission. I am forever immunocompromised.
> 
> While I am extremely envious of those who throw caution to the wind and go about their lives as though it is not a threat, I continue to live the mask life and take an abundance of precaution. The *one* time I got careless and mindlessly walked into a shop maskless this summer, I caught covid and had to go to ER for a 105 degree fever. I recovered but it was awful and delayed my chemo schedule.
> 
> Some people seem unaffected by covid while some are still dying. No rhyme or reason and sometimes I see maskless folks with obvious health issues go,,ing unmasked and it really surprises me sometimes. It's now a gamble for everyone and not a gamble I am willing to take.


Wishing you all the best
people have short memories and everyone behaves like COVID never happened


----------



## charlottawill

pukasonqo said:


> They have been oddly silent regarding Ukraine (wasn’t he going to visit?) and the current situation in Iran, makes one wonder why


Maybe someone told them the world isn't interested in their useless platitudes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
*Another* friendly reminder to stick to topic please


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> IMO, Spotify have to be careful. If they make M's pod-crashes #1/#high too much, she'll demand another series based on their own ratings.
> 
> I am serious


It’s #7 today. I still think half of the listeners are members of the press.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Wow, plenty of interesting articles on the podcast, photo…today



Plenty of articles on how she has plagiarized- again.  One article from Teen Vogue!  Eeeek.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Agree. I'm a cancer patient, today is my 26th round of Chemo with no end date for these treatments as the cancer can only be managed and not cured or put into remission. I am forever immunocompromised.
> 
> While I am extremely envious of those who throw caution to the wind and go about their lives as though it is not a threat, I continue to live the mask life and take an abundance of precaution. The *one* time I got careless and mindlessly walked into a shop maskless this summer, I caught covid and had to go to ER for a 105 degree fever. I recovered but it was awful and delayed my chemo schedule.
> 
> Some people seem unaffected by covid while some are still dying. No rhyme or reason and sometimes I see maskless folks with obvious health issues going unmasked and it really surprises me sometimes. It's now a gamble for everyone and not a gamble I am willing to take.


@LittleStar88 Thank you for sharing this with us and for keeping a positive attitude. You have my huge admiration and best wishes for the best possible response to Chemo. We are here with our comments on the Harkles to keep you distracted and help to go over the most difficult days.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Cool idea .… we should all have HTMMOTD, Hommage to MM Outfits of the Day
> Rummaging through my closet for a red pantsuit , green cape
> What we AS A TEAM can accomplish on Halloween !


Agree with @papertiger   No way I am putting on the maid costume 

ETA: I will consider the bikini, though


----------



## CarryOn2020

Archetypes are not stereotypes.  The plagiarist ought to know better, ought to do better imo.   
So, some are saying LA did not have those types of Korean spas back then - the ones with spa + noodles.  Guessing we will hear more about this.

RE:  divorce calendar is filling up quickly, so H&M better hurry or they will be lost in the shuffle - again. We’ve got TBrady, BPitt, and many others.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It’s #7 today. I still think half of the listeners are members of the press.


Tourre is showing #16. @bag-mania please keep checking. In the meantime, I prefer to go with T on this one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love Tourre:


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Tourre is showing #16. @bag-mania please keep checking. In the meantime, I prefer to go with T on this one.



It’s still showing #7, hard as that is to believe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

pukasonqo said:


> Wishing you all the best
> people have short memories and everyone behaves like COVID never happened


Thank you! Honestly, if I were very young and otherwise great health I would probably throw caution to the wind. Sometimes I feel like a masked weirdo in a store with no one masked 

We don't know the effects of covid long-term. I have enough to manage and not interested in adding to my plate  



Chanbal said:


> @LittleStar88 Thank you for sharing this with us and for keeping a positive attitude. You have my huge admiration and best wishes for the best possible response to Chemo. We are here with our comments on the Harkles to keep you distracted and help to go over the most difficult days.




Thank you! I'm so grateful for the kind words 

*On topic now* so as not to be deleted...

The more I read about this latest podcast, the more I am dumbfounded by the choice of movies referenced. For someone who was trying to live the hollywood life and wanting to act and do movies, how could she not understand movies and film context, and the art of cinematography in general? It really just makes he sound clueless. No wonder she couldn't get a big breakthrough. Well, aside from her acting being mediocre...

Wondering if this will land on Quentin Tarantino's radar and if he will even address it. Of all of his movies for her to pick on, she chooses the one that is generally least offensive of all of his films. Kill Bill series is IMHO one of his best works - true masterpiece - and all of the women depicted are strong and bad-a$$.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> If you are watching the movie, you may also appreciate the excerpt below from her book Finding F. that someone kindly posted on Reddit.
> View attachment 5624385



I started reading and then gagged after reading, "He knew she was beautiful."    A beautiful person doesn't denigrate her in-laws while accepting huge sums of money for clothing and living expenses.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It’s still showing #7, hard as that is to believe.
> 
> View attachment 5624758


@bag-mania Shocking, isn't it? How could such lousy piece of whatever could be rated #7? I'm not even listening to any clips via journalists.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Toby93 said:


> So was my grandma.  I have relatives who still live there.


Me too


----------



## marietouchet

Prediction - everyone will be watching Kill Bill and Austin Powers this weekend , they will shoot to the top of the charts above all the podcasts


----------



## Sharont2305

I'm replying to what @CarryOn2020 posted on the King Charles thread about the Coronation possibly being on the 3rd June. 
Going by recent photos there's a possibly someone might be heavily pregnant or a new mum of three so can't go.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm replying to what @CarryOn2020 posted on the King Charles thread about the Coronation possibly being on the 3rd June.
> Going by recent photos there's a possibly someone might be heavily pregnant or a new mum of three so can't go.


Haaa, indeed.  Perhaps Hazz will be recovering from having his perma-frown removed or jet off to play polo.
 Surely, they will _not_ go.  If so,  palace staff must get bigger candles and seat them in the way back row.  Maybe the coronets and crowns will block H&M.
Horror thought - Hazz is permitted to wear a coronet. 
​


Spoiler



Not sure if this is accurate?
_Crowns and coronets_​_Peers only wear coronets at coronations. The coronet is a silver-gilt circlet, with a crimson silk Genoa velvet lining, a gold tassel and a band of ermine around the base. The rank of peer is indicated by the form of the coronet he or she wears at a coronation.

A duke’s coronet is a circlet of silver-gilt (originally gold), and has eight strawberry leaves.



A marquesses’s coronet is a circlet of silver-gilt with four strawberry leaves alternating with four silver balls that are slightly raised on points from the rim of the coronet.

An Earl’s coronet is a silver-gilt circlet with eight strawberry leaves alternating with eight silver balls that are slightly raised on points or spikes from the rim of the coronet.

A viscount’s coronet has sixteen silver balls on the rim of the coronet.

A baron’s coronet, as befits the lowest rank, is the plainest design, with just six silver balls.

Aside from kings and queens, the only individuals authorised to wear crowns (as opposed to coronets) are the Kings of Arms, the United Kingdom’s senior heraldic officials._








						Coronation Dress
					

Monarch’s robes The monarch or sovereign wears a variety of different robes and other garments during the course of the ceremony: Crimson surcoat – the regular dress during most of the ceremony, worn under all other robes. This was replaced by the Coronation Dress for Her Majesty Queen...



					kingscoronation.com


----------



## piperdog

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaa, indeed.  Perhaps Hazz will be recovering from having his perma-frown removed or jet off to play polo.
> Surely, they will _not_ go.  If so,  palace staff must get bigger candles and seat them in the way back row.  Maybe the coronets and crowns will block H&M.


My guess is that the coronation may be one of their last chances to appear with the 'real' royals, so there is no force on this earth that would keep them from being there. The only way I can see that they'd voluntarily stay away is if HMTK has already yanked the titles, LoS, CoS, Froggie lease, etc. by then. But even if Nflix and Spify contracts are gone, they'll still go to generate content to sell to the highest bidder. 

I hope you're right, but I haven't seen anything to give me hope they'll have developed a conscience or any sense of decency by then.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> "…_their rotten strategy, the incredible love_…"
> 
> Their incredible love, her incredible beauty … , they all sound forced and rotten strategies!
> I don't think they are able to love, and she looks plain despite all the plastic surgeries, makeup, and beauty advisors.



It's her inner ugly that trips her.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It's her inner ugly that trips her.


And vacuousness.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

She's wearing the same shirt as the intro which was months ago, so when was this recorded?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm replying to what @CarryOn2020 posted on the King Charles thread about the Coronation possibly being on the 3rd June.
> Going by recent photos there's a possibly someone might be heavily pregnant or a new mum of three so can't go.



Aren't two guinea pigs enough


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> She's wearing the same shirt as the intro which was months ago, so when was this recorded?



Same shirt for the intro + same linen pants worn at FrogCott for Lilib photo [maybe] .  Whaaaa?

When was it recorded?  Imo based on the belt, probably 1985ish.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


>



To quote Lucy and Charlie Brown, “good grief.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> To quote Lucy and Charlie Brown, “good grief.”


She also used this article, so they say:

_Madame Butterfly epitomizes the Lotus Blossom (sometimes called the China Doll) trope — feminine, shy, fragile, subservient, and sexually submissive. We see the Lotus Blossom trope in Miss Saigon (1989) and Memoirs of a Geisha (2005). Another popular trope is the Dragon Lady who is cunning and deceitful. She uses her sexuality as a powerful tool of manipulation, but often is emotionally and sexually cold and threatens masculinity. A contemporary example of the Dragon Lady is with the Japanese Yakuza leader O-Ren Ishii (played by Lucy Liu) in Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)."_








						Hollywood Played a Role in Hypersexualizing Asian Women
					

“We become exotic objects of white male sexual desire."




					www.teenvogue.com


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> She also used this article, so they say:
> 
> _Madame Butterfly epitomizes the Lotus Blossom (sometimes called the China Doll) trope — feminine, shy, fragile, subservient, and sexually submissive. We see the Lotus Blossom trope in Miss Saigon (1989) and Memoirs of a Geisha (2005). Another popular trope is the Dragon Lady who is cunning and deceitful. She uses her sexuality as a powerful tool of manipulation, but often is emotionally and sexually cold and threatens masculinity. A contemporary example of the Dragon Lady is with the Japanese Yakuza leader O-Ren Ishii (played by Lucy Liu) in Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood Played a Role in Hypersexualizing Asian Women
> 
> 
> “We become exotic objects of white male sexual desire."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.teenvogue.com


You are the best — well read and a master at research and investigation.  Take a bow.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> You are the best — well read and a master at research and investigation.  Take a bow.


Awww, that is very kind   The credit, though, *must* go to the folks at Reddit. I am in awe of their skills. They had this TeenV connection shortly after the podcrash was posted on day 1.  Maybe they have the elite search engines 

Also, I spend way too much time reading about this stuff, just not on TeenV.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


>



That poor girl’s whole existence is the minority report for M. 
I think Priddy is Indian descent so alas no cute stories about being taken for pho, papaya salad and satay at the authentic Chinese BBQ restaurant while learning to use chopsticks and swigging soju to be mined from her.   



Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



I agree, I do get that the someone within the community can tell jokes that are both true and coming from love for the culture whereas the intentions of others outside can be harder to discern. 
But on the other hand if you are selling your material to a culturally mixed audience and your material is still full of stereotype based humour then you may not have much of a leg to stand on telling people what jokes aren’t appropriate. 

I mean maybe Cho is trying to pivot out of comedy? I imagine it’s not been a great five years to be in stand -up and I think edgy/offensive comedy has taken some of the biggest bumps. 

She must be spending an absolute fortune on this PR nonsense. 


Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5624185
> 
> 
> View attachment 5624186
> 
> 
> View attachment 5624187


I think someone needs to tell the production team that orientalism is considered to include positive stereotypes, patronising and divisive language and treating people as though they are defined by cultural objects and norms therefore a narrative about - _buying your way into an area, feeling different and embarrassed by the strange to you customs before apparently becoming one with the culture by being served and eating something_ would be a pretty prime example of an orientalist narrative. I mean it is a meaningful souvenir away from being the gap year cliche. 

I think it’s a bit rich as well to be waving your finger at stereotyping when it seems like the only reason she invited the journalist on is she went ‘she’s Taiwanese/Chinese descent?- she will want to do the episode about Asian stereotypes but I best put her in  the same one as the Korean-background comedian as she’s probably not interesting or well-known enough on her own. They are both Asians so they are bound to have the same experience/mindset too.’


----------



## kipp

Chanbal said:


>



Of course she still owns them!


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> She's wearing the same shirt as the intro which was months ago, so when was this recorded?



Rock stars wear the same outfits for all shows of a two moth tour, so, they can piece together videos from different nights, they buy three identical copies of the same outfit 

Her arm looks funny here too - I cant unsee the goofy photo of her red arm in front of Harry
Who picks these awful shots for distribution?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aren't two guinea pigs enough


And H said it is irresponsible to have more than 2 - due to climate change issues that endanger the planet


----------



## scarlet555

marietouchet said:


> Rock stars wear the same outfits for all shows of a two moth tour, so, they can piece together videos from different nights, they buy three identical copies of the same outfit
> 
> Her arm looks funny here too - I cant unsee the goofy photo of her red arm in front of Harry
> Who picks these awful shots for distribution?


LisaLing low key shading Nutmeg just like Mariah's Diva comment, Lisa calls Nutmeg a 'compelling conversationalist'....  hmmmm  that's a pretty intellectual blow, don't know if either idiots will get it  lol.  If someone calls me compelling, I am bit put off... that's not a compliment, it's a polite diss, now to call someone a compelling conversationalist - is not even saying _*you talk a lot*_, it's saying, _*you talk too much*_!  LOL!


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> I'm replying to what @CarryOn2020 posted on the King Charles thread about the Coronation possibly being on the 3rd June.


It’s too close to Invisibet’s birthday! How inconsiderate of Charles to not organize his life so as to not compete with his grandchild.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> And H said it is irresponsible to have more than 2 - due to climate change issues that endanger the planet


That’s for commoners not for royalty! Just like flying in private jets is perfectly fine if your status is high enough.


----------



## BlueCherry

Palace deny speculation King Charles III will be coronated on June 3 


https://mol.im/a/11284535

Someone putting out porkies again


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Swipe for 2nd slide. Netflix might be lawyering up.


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


>



Of course she did. 
Thank you for this. I laughed so hard at the sheer audacity and ridiculousness of her tears ran down my face.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> She also used this article, so they say:
> 
> _Madame Butterfly epitomizes the Lotus Blossom (sometimes called the China Doll) trope — feminine, shy, fragile, subservient, and sexually submissive. We see the Lotus Blossom trope in Miss Saigon (1989) and Memoirs of a Geisha (2005). Another popular trope is the Dragon Lady who is cunning and deceitful. She uses her sexuality as a powerful tool of manipulation, but often is emotionally and sexually cold and threatens masculinity. A contemporary example of the Dragon Lady is with the Japanese Yakuza leader O-Ren Ishii (played by Lucy Liu) in Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood Played a Role in Hypersexualizing Asian Women
> 
> 
> “We become exotic objects of white male sexual desire."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.teenvogue.com


Oh yeah it looks like it’s time for some secondhand half-baked film criticism everyone  

I’m already p*ssed off by the misrepresenting of Madame Butterfly which even though it was written over a 100 years ago is about our main character Butterfly is a classic tragic opera heroine who finds herself ostracised but doesn’t bend to convention & ultimately chooses to die over living through her humiliating betrayal. She’s pretty much the opposite of a passive character in a dark and dramatic story.  Now her husband Pinkerton on the other hand….

Also this O-ren slander is ridiculous-  i  kill bill has loads of different antagonists but it would be erasure if none of them were Asian given the clear Asian influences and setting.
The character being a villain and a Chinese actress doesn’t make her a dragon lady in of itself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> She's wearing the same shirt as the intro which was months ago, so when was this recorded?



I’m really beginning to believe that not only does she not own a full length mirror but she must never ever look in one to check her outfits.


----------



## Chanbal

According to Twitter, OW will be a moderator for MO tour. Is it now that TW will get an invite to an A-list event?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> It’s too close to Invisibet’s birthday! How inconsiderate of Charles to not organize his life so as to not compete with his grandchild.



Not close enough. 

How inconsiderate not to do the coronation _on_ her birthday!  Do the stuffy, ol, formal thang first, get it out the way, and_ then_ pop round for Invisibet's B-day party still wearing full regalia, join the _incredibly_ sweet toddler's party complete with elderflower, chive and lemongrass cake and the opportunity to have his picture with the real  Princess angel on her _very_ special day.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Oops!


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Not close enough.
> 
> How inconsiderate not to do the coronation _on_ her birthday!  Do the stuffy, ol, formal thang first, get it out the way, and_ then_ pop round for Invisibet's B-day party still wearing full regalia, join the _incredibly_ sweet toddler's party complete with elderflower, chive and lemongrass cake and the opportunity to have his picture with the real  Princess angel on her _very_ special day.


We can do better.

How about moving the entire coronation ceremony to Los Angeles? That way after all the pomp and fuss is over Charles can bask in the glory of his incredible granddaughter while not disrupting her schedule in any way.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


>



Did they think that Nflix was just handing out free money to them?


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Did they think that Nflix was just handing out free money to them?


Why not? Serving TW must be a privilege. 

I like the last sentence of the article:

"_Charles should realise, even if they tone down or push back this trashy Netflix reality show, that the damage is done by formally cutting ties with the Sussexes, who the public have long figured out are no longer an asset to the Royal Family._"


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> Why not? Serving TW must be a privilege.
> 
> I like the last sentence of the article:
> 
> "_Charles should realise, even if they tone down or push back this trashy Netflix reality show, that the damage is done by formally cutting ties with the Sussexes, who the public have long figured out are no longer an asset to the Royal Family._"


The crazy sure thinks the world revolves around her and that she's above everyone   I wonder when KCIII will feed her some humble pie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> We can do better.
> 
> How about *moving the entire coronation ceremony to Los Angeles*? That way after all the pomp and fuss is over Charles can bask in the glory of his incredible granddaughter while not disrupting her schedule in any way.



Oh my goodness, *that* is hilarious. Thank you for a good laugh - drinks on me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> Did they think that Nflix was just handing out free money to them?



Why not. They are sPeciAl after all.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh my goodness, *that* is hilarious. Thank you for a good laugh - drinks on me


If it got Major Jonny to come over here I would be buying a plane ticket.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> A contemporary example of the Dragon Lady is with the Japanese Yakuza leader O-Ren Ishii (played by Lucy Liu) in Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)."





jelliedfeels said:


> Also this O-ren slander is ridiculous- i kill bill has loads of different antagonists but it would be erasure if none of them were Asian given the clear Asian influences and setting.
> The character being a villain and a Chinese actress doesn’t make her a dragon lady in of itself.



Why bring up movies that are literally 20 years old?  Oh wait, maybe she mixed up her guest, Lisa Ling, with the actress from Kill Bill, who was Lucy Liu?  LOL


----------



## youngster

EverSoElusive said:


> Did they think that Nflix was just handing out free money to them?



Yes. Yes, they did.


----------



## jennlt

There is at least one doctoral candidate (of media manipulation, no less) who uses many of the same words we do to describe the duplicitous duo


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

jennlt said:


> There is at least one doctoral candidate (of media manipulation, no less) who uses many of the same words we do to describe the duplicitous duo




Love love the word cloud. Maybe in some small way we all contributed to it.  So, yay us!  Truth wins


----------



## bellecate

Something we here already knew. I still don’t understand how they get away with this stuff, why no MSM ever calls them on it.


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


>



Is there anyone the duo are not at odds with?  Oh, maybe Nacho, but that’s all I can come up with.


----------



## BlueCherry

bellecate said:


> Something we here already knew. I still don’t understand how they get away with this stuff, why no MSM ever calls them on it.
> View attachment 5625160
> View attachment 5625161
> View attachment 5625162



If this really is true that she would would leak information at such a time and it was a sting then well done to the RF. 

It would also indicate that they will never let either of them have access to information again.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Speaking absolutely flat, technically, and non-salaciously.
> 
> Unlike most here, I doubt she's proficient in the 'private area'.
> 
> To be good in bed, one has to (at least occasionally) _want_ to give the other person pleasure, occasionally able to relinquish control and be attentive/intuitive. Since she's all about herself 24/7, a control freak and has zero empathy I think it's a couple of porn poses in Victoria Secret outlet co-ords, and tissues/dust buster at the ready  .
> 
> And that is the first and last time I will approach that subject with that subject.
> 
> Harry obviously has her down as the 'Mommy'/Madonna, and NOT the whore in his Madonna/whore complex. It's clear from his obsession about nonsensical protection and hyper-masculine, banal rants on her behalf that he thinks she's a cross between a saint and an all-powerful maternal figure https://www.34st.com/article/2021/0...complex-black-women-trans-women-sex-sexuality. We had proof in the TB where his friends and family could not see the 'Diana' in her at all. Even his version of Diana is more media construct rather than the complex woman she was. MagZ is perfect as figure for his projection, MegZ has very little inner life beyond adolescent fantasies and ambitions (of her own) and very little character.


Wonder if Zedzee wails about it...
Z: (croc tears) The reporters keep saying I'm copying your mother! I love your mother! But they can't accept that I am my original authentic self! (Huge sob!)
H: (righteous fury) And Mummy would have adored you! I'll sue them for hurting your feelings! You are wonderful! You remind me so much of her... Your looks, your poses... (pregnant pause) I mean, great minds think alike... (sweat drop) I think I hear Archie calling me... (escapes from frigid glare)



Chanbal said:


> Cheers to the Aussies!



This comparison makes her hand look octopussy.


----------



## BlueCherry

Aimee3 said:


> Is there anyone the duo are not at odds with?  Oh, maybe Nacho, but that’s all I can come up with.



They seem to be leaving an utter trail of destruction wherever they go but still no one really in the know speaks out. 

I’m happy to wait though


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> Speaking absolutely flat, technically, and non-salaciously.
> 
> Unlike most here, I doubt she's proficient in the 'private area'.
> 
> To be good in bed, one has to (at least occasionally) _want_ to give the other person pleasure, occasionally able to relinquish control and be attentive/intuitive. Since she's all about herself 24/7, a control freak and has zero empathy I think it's a couple of porn poses in Victoria Secret outlet co-ords, and tissues/dust buster at the ready  .
> 
> And that is the first and last time I will approach that subject with that subject.
> 
> Harry obviously has her down as the 'Mommy'/Madonna, and NOT the whore in his Madonna/whore complex. It's clear from his obsession about nonsensical protection and hyper-masculine, banal rants on her behalf that he thinks she's a cross between a saint and an all-powerful maternal figure https://www.34st.com/article/2021/0...complex-black-women-trans-women-sex-sexuality. We had proof in the TB where his friends and family could not see the 'Diana' in her at all. Even his version of Diana is more media construct rather than the complex woman she was. MagZ is perfect as figure for his projection, MegZ has very little inner life beyond adolescent fantasies and ambitions (of her own) and very little character.



This talk of her proficiency in the private area in conjunction with her acting/looking like his Mother grosses me out somewhat 

What kind of freak relationship is this


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



Was this before or after the “Fact Checker” was hired?


----------



## BlueCherry




----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Love love the word cloud. Maybe in some small way we all contributed to it.  So, yay us!  Truth wins


Unless my tired eyes missed it, two key words are missing, “hypocrisy “ and “plagiarism“.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



Quote: "now the streaming giant is demanding its *pound of flesh*."

From Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice: Shylock the money lender demands a pound of flesh from Antonio, as part of the terms of their contract when he cannot repay a loan. Shylock is outwitted by clever Portia, who disguised as a man argues that he may have his pound of flesh but must not spill a single drop of blood thereby saving Antonio. 
Hopefully ZedZed, who isn't as clever as Portia, won't be able to outwit Netflix and the BRF can finally kick her to the curb if her documentary contains more lies and innuendos about them.


----------



## scarlet555

scarlet555 said:


> LisaLing low key shading Nutmeg just like Mariah's Diva comment, Lisa calls Nutmeg a 'compelling conversationalist'....  hmmmm  that's a pretty intellectual blow, don't know if either idiots will get it  lol.  If someone calls me compelling, I am bit put off... that's not a compliment, it's a polite diss, now to call someone a compelling conversationalist - is not even saying _*you talk a lot*_, it's saying, _*you talk too much*_!  LOL!


Also “compelling conversationalist” synonymous with “professional liar”


----------



## EverSoElusive

BlueCherry said:


> This talk of her proficiency in the private area in conjunction with her acting/looking like his Mother grosses me out somewhat
> 
> What kind of freak relationship is this


The 'pee in the woods' and 'roast chicken' type, of course


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> The more I read about this latest podcast, the more I am dumbfounded by the choice of movies referenced. For someone who was trying to live the hollywood life and wanting to act and do movies, how could she not understand movies and film context, and the art of cinematography in general? It really just makes he sound clueless. No wonder she couldn't get a big breakthrough. Well, aside from her acting being mediocre...
> 
> Wondering if this will land on Quentin Tarantino's radar and if he will even address it. Of all of his movies for her to pick on, she chooses the one that is generally least offensive of all of his films. Kill Bill series is IMHO one of his best works - true masterpiece - and all of the women depicted are strong and bad-a$$.


Reminds me that I need to re-watch Kill Bill.


piperdog said:


> My guess is that the coronation may be one of their last chances to appear with the 'real' royals, so there is no force on this earth that would keep them from being there. The only way I can see that they'd voluntarily stay away is if HMTK has already yanked the titles, LoS, CoS, Froggie lease, etc. by then. But even if Nflix and Spify contracts are gone, they'll still go to generate content to sell to the highest bidder.
> 
> I hope you're right, but I haven't seen anything to give me hope they'll have developed *a conscience or any sense of decency *by then.


Maybe next lifetime.


CarryOn2020 said:


> She also used this article, so they say:
> 
> _Madame Butterfly epitomizes the Lotus Blossom (sometimes called the China Doll) trope — feminine, shy, fragile, subservient, and sexually submissive. We see the Lotus Blossom trope in Miss Saigon (1989) and Memoirs of a Geisha (2005). Another popular trope is the Dragon Lady who is cunning and deceitful. She uses her sexuality as a powerful tool of manipulation, but often is emotionally and sexually cold and threatens masculinity. A contemporary example of the Dragon Lady is with the Japanese Yakuza leader O-Ren Ishii (played by Lucy Liu) in Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood Played a Role in Hypersexualizing Asian Women
> 
> 
> “We become exotic objects of white male sexual desire."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.teenvogue.com


I'm surprised she didn't use The World of Susie Wong.
Also, tropes are everywhere in fiction, movies, TV and art. Doesn't mean they are bad. They are artistic shorthand and can be used sensitively or heavy-handedly or racistly. 



bellecate said:


> Something we here already knew. I still don’t understand how they get away with this stuff, why no MSM ever calls them on it.
> View attachment 5625160
> View attachment 5625161
> View attachment 5625162


Omid sent out a press release? That's funny. Press releases are sent out on behalf of a VIP or organisation. Who was he fronting? The Royal Court of Monteshitshow?


----------



## BlueCherry

EverSoElusive said:


> The 'pee in the woods' and 'roast chicken' type, of course



You have generated a visual image I could really do without


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

BlueCherry said:


> You have generated a visual image I could really do without


I'm glad I could be of service to you


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> Oops!
> 
> View attachment 5625053


Ellen?  Michelle O is not reading the room and I am judging her. Badly.  Might as well give Meg a shot too.


----------



## Chanbal

Great comment from Andy N. Unfortunately there was no push back from Lisa Ling on TW's word salad.


----------



## Chanbal

One more article from NYP


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



This anecdote got me thinking. Many (hundreds of) pages ago on this thread, we noted that many of the women which ArcheSell hires look similar to Zedzee. Maybe that was the first criteria for Her Heinous - she is her own type.
ETA: I just realised that this is classic narcissism - to be in love with your own image


----------



## Chanbal

It's believable


----------



## charro

papertiger said:


> Speaking absolutely flat, technically, and non-salaciously.
> 
> Unlike most here, I doubt she's proficient in the 'private area'.
> 
> To be good in bed, one has to (at least occasionally) _want_ to give the other person pleasure, occasionally able to relinquish control and be attentive/intuitive. Since she's all about herself 24/7, a control freak and has zero empathy I think it's a couple of porn poses in Victoria Secret outlet co-ords, and tissues/dust buster at the ready  .
> 
> And that is the first and last time I will approach that subject with that subject.
> 
> Harry obviously has her down as the 'Mommy'/Madonna, and NOT the whore in his Madonna/whore complex. It's clear from his obsession about nonsensical protection and hyper-masculine, banal rants on her behalf that he thinks she's a cross between a saint and an all-powerful maternal figure https://www.34st.com/article/2021/0...complex-black-women-trans-women-sex-sexuality. We had proof in the TB where his friends and family could not see the 'Diana' in her at all. Even his version of Diana is more media construct rather than the complex woman she was. MagZ is perfect as figure for his projection, MegZ has very little inner life beyond adolescent fantasies and ambitions (of her own) and very little character.


Dust buster!


----------



## LittleStar88

> It comes after US talk show host Oprah Winfrey famously used the phrase in her interview with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex last year when she asked Meghan if she was speaking “your truth.”











						Cate Blanchett admits she doesn't understand those who boast of speaking 'my truth'
					

>




					nybreaking.com


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Chanbal

The noise around the Nefl*x's deal is increasing…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The noise around the Nefl*x's deal is increasing…






Chanbal said:


>



Definitely means that the Tiresome Two put in a lot of lies/innuendoes that will raise the RF's hackles to the point that they will never give the Harkles anything more henceforth. Maybe not even that all-important invite to the coronation. And it also means that the idiots were banking on HMTQ being there to calm the waters no matter what they did. So that story of her propping the door open is very likely true, and now the door is swinging shut and on the verge of auto-locking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Something we here already knew. I still don’t understand how they get away with this stuff, why no MSM ever calls them on it.
> View attachment 5625160
> View attachment 5625161
> View attachment 5625162



This is so sad (not the Scobie part, I don't care if he has to start scrubbing toilets for a living). Can you imagine having to explain to your son and brother why you lied to him in case he didn't leak it? So uncomfortable. Also I wonder if he told Ghoul because he wanted it to leak or because he's still a major idiot who actually trusts her, and if the latter, if this was a wake-up call.

Then again, maybe Charles and William didn't say anything and Scobie made it all up, he also had difficulties understanding Scotland is part of the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It's believable




She sure does love letters. I wonder if she recycled "Use me as you like"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


>




Gosh, she is such a scary psycho.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so sad (not the Scobie part, I don't care if he has to start scrubbing toilets for a living). Can you imagine having to explain to your son and brother why you lied to him in case he didn't leak it? So uncomfortable. Also I wonder if he told Ghoul because he wanted it to leak or because he's still a major idiot who actually trusts her, and if the latter, if this was a wake-up call.
> 
> Then again, maybe Charles and William didn't say anything and Scobie made it all up, he also had difficulties understanding Scotland is part of the UK.


It wouldn’t surprise me if it’s true.  William apparently did similar to find out which of his friends he could really trust when he was younger.


----------



## Pessie

I don’t know how Harry and Meg sleep at night.  They seem beset by massive problems in every aspect of their lives.  Perhaps their thinking now is if they get in an even deeper mess the RF will have no choice but to bail them out.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> I don’t know how Harry and Meg sleep at night.  They seem beset by massive problems in every aspect of their lives.  Perhaps their thinking now is if they get in an even deeper mess the RF will have no choice but to *bail them out.*



How?  Imo there is no way back and no way to recover.  They have gone one headline too far with no end in sight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> How?  Imo there is no way back and no way to recover.  They have gone one headline too far with no end in sight.



I tend to agree. There is certainly no way back for Ghoul, but I'm starting to massively see Harry's hopes being swept away as well even if he gets a grip and divorces the lunatic.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The noise around the Nefl*x's deal is increasing…




If this is true, the media jungle is actually a very small world.
Everything is based on commercial reward, but also being pain free process and reliability.
No one will want to work with these losers.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I tend to agree. There is certainly no way back for Ghoul, but I'm starting to massively see Harry's hopes being swept away as well even if he gets a grip and divorces the lunatic.



I can see the BRF taking Harry back, parking him in a country estate, putting him in rehab and telling him to keep quiet, no publicity etc only if he divorces her.  Years later they may use him for something small, but otherwise keep him out of the public.

 I don’t see the BRF taking them back as a coupLe.

however Harry has not had to face consequences of his choices before.  If he messed up, the BRF PR covers it with the “cheeky chappie” persona, a written apology and then he gets to keep going with his poor behaviours and have the BRF clean up after him.  Numerous photos of his drinking, falling out of  bars drunk, awful behaviours/ temper etc.

 I really hope that if the Duke and Duchess of Overseas file for bankruptcy that the BRF does not pay them out and let’s them face the consequences.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> I can see the BRF taking Harry back, parking him in a country estate, putting him in rehab and telling him to keep quiet, no publicity etc only if he divorces her.  Years later they may use him for something small, but otherwise keep him out of the public.
> 
> I don’t see the BRF taking them back as a coupLe.
> 
> however Harry has not had to face consequences of his choices before.  If he messed up, the BRF PR covers it with the “cheeky chappie” persona, a written apology and then he gets to keep going with his poor behaviours and have the BRF clean up after him.  Numerous photos of his drinking, falling out of bats drunk, awful behaviours/ temper etc.
> 
> I really hope that if the Duke and Duchess of Overseas file for bankruptcy that the BRF does not pay them out and let’s them face the consequences.



Finale of US faux #7 'hit' series:
Sh*t _really_ hits the fan. They are locked into a toilet on the Monteshitshow set. There's no money, no rep and way out. The tiresome 'Bonny and Clyde' have run out of money. There's no ammunition to launch at either family, all staff have departed crying and/or screaming. The two will eventually turn on each other, every word she screams is exactly what Hooray wants to say to her. She's blamed him for everything and threatened him with divorce unless she goes through with her plan to stage a kidnap on the children and extort money from his family... he'll start proceedings in the UK...

4 years later:
Cut to a small lodge in Cornwall on Will's Duchy estate, Harry sitting by the fire eating (organic) rabbit stew and putting away his stamp collection for the night.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so sad (not the Scobie part, I don't care if he has to start scrubbing toilets for a living). *Can you imagine having to explain to your son and brother why you lied to him in case he didn't leak it? *So uncomfortable. Also I wonder if he told Ghoul because he wanted it to leak or because he's still a major idiot who actually trusts her, and if the latter, if this was a wake-up call.
> 
> Then again, maybe Charles and William didn't say anything and Scobie made it all up, he also had difficulties understanding Scotland is part of the UK.


I think this is the part which hoi polloi like us may find difficult to understand. When a family is also a family business, there is a lot riding on whom you can trust.

I wouldn't trust one of my SILs as far as I could throw her. She has a history of twisting my words and then broadcasting the new story, which will then travel back to DH from some cousin twice removed. And her "innovation" can be hurtful. She once asked me how MIL was doing (her own mother). I told her the doctor said MIL was in decline. When the story travelled back to us, we learnt that she had told the extended clan that MIL would be dead in 6 months  I will admit feeding her tall tales sometimes just to see what she does with them (usually regarding unimportant things like what I will be cooking for the next family get together).

In this case, if H ever accosted his father and brother about why the train was not used, they can easily explain it as a change in plans. Security issues, you know. If H protests, then he obviously has no inkling what security issues are (jab jab).


papertiger said:


> 4 years later:
> Cut to a small lodge in Cornwall on Will's Duchy estate, Harry sitting by the fire eating (organic) rabbit stew and putting away his stamp collection for the night.


Umm, are you sure he is smart enough to have a stamp collection? Much of what I know about philately came from the Royal Mail.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> How?  Imo there is no way back and no way to recover.  They have gone one headline too far with no end in sight.


It would likely involve conditions unacceptable to M, such as keeping a very low profile with no public duties / media presence.  I can’t see either of them carrying out any official duty for the RF in future, and the RF now knows it can happily do just fine without them.  Things have changed a lot since March 2020.  And the economic climate being what is no one wants to hear wealthy people feeling sorry for the financial difficulties they’ve engineered for themselves.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> It would likely involve conditions unacceptable to M, such as keeping a very low profile with no public duties / media presence.  I can’t see either of them carrying out any official duty for the RF in future, and the RF now knows it can happily do just fine without them.  Things have changed a lot since March 2020.  And the economic climate being what is no one wants to hear wealthy people feeling sorry for the financial difficulties they’ve engineered for themselves.


KC now actually and actively wants them (as a couple) overseas. They don't want her anywhere near the family.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Finale of US faux #7 'hit' series:
> Sh*t _really_ hits the fan. They are locked into a toilet on the Monteshitshow set. There's no money, no rep and way out. The tiresome 'Bonny and Clyde' have run out of money. There's no ammunition to launch at either family, all staff have departed crying and/or screaming. The two will eventually turn on each other, every word she screams is exactly what Hooray wants to say to her. She's blamed him for everything and threatened him with divorce unless she goes through with her plan to stage a kidnap on the children and extort money from his family... he'll start proceedings in the UK...
> 
> 4 years later:
> Cut to a small lodge in Cornwall on Will's Duchy estate, Harry sitting by the fire eating (organic) rabbit stew and putting away his stamp collection for the night.


The day Harry sees Williams head on a stamp………


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nah, he is no stamp collector or 1,000 piece puzzle lover.  Sitting quietly is simply not who he is.  He _craves_ the noise, the spotlight, the adoring crowd, hide-n-seek from the paps, the snark and sarcasm, making fun of others.  Based on what I have read, even with a hard fall, guys like this rarely change.  The BRF probably did the smartest thing by sending him overseas, far away from the star players.  My opinion.

She can always return to this


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> KC now actually and actively wants them (as a couple) overseas. They don't want her anywhere near the family.


I think so too.  The difficulty is the invisikids, who are innocent in all this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

My copy of Courtiers arrived...I quickly thumbed through, it's quite a hefty volume and like TB it has a huge appendix...2 pages of bibliography and about 30 pages of sources bringing the book up to 370+ pages.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nah, he is no stamp collector or 1,000 piece puzzle lover.  Sitting quietly is simply not who he is.  He _craves_ the noise, the spotlight, the adoring crowd, hide-n-seek from the paps, the snark and sarcasm, making fun of others.  Based on what I have read, even with a hard fall, guys like this rarely change.  The BRF probably did the smartest thing by sending him overseas, far away from the star players.  My opinion.
> 
> She can always return to this



Hth did she get the Suits part?  Her voice is nails on a chalkboard to me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I think this is the part which hoi polloi like us may find difficult to understand. When a family is also a family business, there is a lot riding on whom you can trust.



I'm not blaming Charles or William at all. I find it extremely sad Harry made it so they are basically forced to try these techniques on him. That is ALL on him. He could have been one of their biggest confidants and now he's being fed false information because his behaviour has shown over and over again that he can't be trusted at all.



xincinsin said:


> I wouldn't trust one of my SILs as far as I could throw her. She has a history of twisting my words and then broadcasting the new story, which will then travel back to DH from some cousin twice removed. And her "innovation" can be hurtful. She once asked me how MIL was doing (her own mother). I told her the doctor said MIL was in decline. When the story travelled back to us, we learnt that she had told the extended clan that MIL would be dead in 6 months  I will admit feeding her tall tales sometimes just to see what she does with them (usually regarding unimportant things like what I will be cooking for the next family get together).



OMG. There is so much wrong with this, the first thing being her having to ask you how her mother is doing.



xincinsin said:


> In this case, if H ever accosted his father and brother about why the train was not used, they can easily explain it as a change in plans. Security issues, you know.



I mean, the second it was leaked that was his sign to keep his stupid mouth shut instead of complaining he was lied to. I feel even if he complained about it on Oprah the general public would be like "WTF dude" at this point. Then again, Oprah wouldn't follow up with "But wasn't it leaked?"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> I think so too.  The difficulty is the invisikids, who are innocent in all this.



That's why I still think it would be best if Harry returned with them. Get them stable nannies and embrace them in the fold with a whole bunch of cousins the same age, and they might turn out alright.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. There is so much wrong with this, the first thing being her having to ask you how her mother is doing.


There were a few reasons why she asked. It was at the height of the pandemic, so she had not visited her mother for some time. I live with my parents-in-law. Also, MIL had been in and out of the hospital and she was restricted to only 5 visitors per hospital stay. I was one of them. This SIL was not.  

Handbag would never dare accost his family. I think it may be ingrained in British consciousness that Loose Lips Sink Ships, so I hope he is heartily ashamed of himself. I don't care if he thinks Zedzee is his soulmate. If she is Miss Loose Lips, he should know better than to blab to her (unless they were planning to board the train and she leaks a single tear at every stop).


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, the second it was leaked that was his sign to keep his stupid mouth shut instead of complaining he was lied to. I feel even if he complained about it on Oprah the general public would be like "WTF dude" at this point. Then again, Oprah wouldn't follow up with "But wasn't it leaked?"


Oprah would go, "No way! Did you feel you were silenced?"


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> It's believable



Love it - "fully booked till HIS funeral"!  Hope that's not a typo.


----------



## DL Harper

Pessie said:


> I don’t know how Harry and Meg sleep at night.  They seem beset by massive problems in every aspect of their lives.  Perhaps their thinking now is if they get in an even deeper mess the RF will have no choice but to bail them out.


If she's not sleeping at night, it's because she's checking mags, photos, etc to see which fashion to duplicate.  If he's not sleeping...would you if in the same room with TW?!?!?  I'd be afraid to turn my back on her, even in daylight!


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Oprah would go, "No way! Did you feel you were silenced?"


OW may no longer be fully on team JCMH ? Did you notice the cast  for the Michelle O 2022 tour ? OW, Ellen, Tyler Perry, Gayle … and of course no MM
The whole lot is going over  to team MO, not to team MM, this is HUUUUGE
These are the type of guests MM needs for podcasts
Yes, OW and TP did insignificant posts recently that were pro MM, probably a strategic preventative strike, so that they don’t draw major fire from MM after the MO tour announcement … they can always say - but we did those nice posts for you …


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> It would likely involve conditions unacceptable to M, such as keeping a very low profile with no public duties / media presence.  I can’t see either of them carrying out any official duty for the RF in future, and the RF now knows it can happily do just fine without them.  Things have changed a lot since March 2020.  And the economic climate being what is no one wants to hear wealthy people feeling sorry for the financial difficulties they’ve engineered for themselves.


My 2 cents:

Charles and Will are probably too generous not to help Hazz and kids. However, they need to let the Harkles bankrupt themselves first before sending the rescue boat.

The BRF shouldn't take both back. TW will never be quiet. She will behave for the minimal amount of time possible, and then will resume her favorite activities. There is always someone ready to pay for gossip, jewels, used outfits… The more available cash, the more damage one can do. 

The BRF can take care of Hazz, pay his bills and help him to partially rehabilitate his image. However, the Harkles seem to have 2 kids, so TW will be always a constant presence in the BRF. Fergie is always around…  

 In short, the BRF needs to assemble a stellar team of professionals (advisors, lawyers…) to work on a 'contract' that helps the Harkles, but at the same time protects the BRF from their vicious attacks. 
They seem to like to bite the hand that feeds them. All allegedly, of course.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> KC now actually and actively wants them (as a couple) overseas. *They don't want her anywhere near the family.*


That's the brightest thing they can do.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


>



Haha really?  The booing in June wasn’t enough of a clue?  And let’s not pretend they don’t haunt every social media platform for refs to themselves


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> It's believable



If one keeps reading, the author of the quote, The Narcissist of Sussex, later admits that s/he made it up as a joke and IMO a good one too! 

Et remove link.


----------



## Chanbal

Start your Thursday with this one…


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> KC now actually and actively wants them (as a couple) overseas. They *don't want her anywhere near the family.*


I don’t think Charles wants Harry either. The family couldn’t have expected loyalty from Meghan but they did expect it from Harry. Then he stabs his family in the back the first chance he gets. That makes him worse than Meghan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The BRF can take care of Hazz, pay his bills and help him to partially rehabilitate his image. However, the Harkles seem to have 2 kids, so *TW will be always a constant presence in the BRF. Fergie is always around… *


Fergie is certainly an interesting comparison, imo MM uses the Angelina Jolie playbook with extra pages added from Gisele’s book.  In reality, it probably is similar to a Disney movie, Cruella seems appropriate.  My opinion only.












						Emma Stone's Cruella Look That Pays Homage To Glenn Close's 101 Dalmatians Character
					

Cruella de Vil's extensive fashion legacy lives on in Cruella.




					www.cinemablend.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Pessie said:


> Hth did she get the Suits part?  Her voice is nails on a chalkboard to me.


Maybe she had few speaking parts, but lots of heavy breathing and many many exclamations like oohs and aahs.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Received my Kindle e-book!!


----------



## piperdog

marietouchet said:


> OW may no longer be fully on team JCMH ? Did you notice the cast  for the Michelle O 2022 tour ? OW, Ellen, Tyler Perry, Gayle … and of course no MM
> The whole lot is going over  to team MO, not to team MM, this is HUUUUGE
> These are the type of guests MM needs for podcasts
> Yes, OW and TP did insignificant posts recently that were pro MM, probably a strategic preventative strike, so that they don’t draw major fire from MM after the MO tour announcement … they can always say - but we did those nice posts for you …


I wouldn't be surprised if MM shows up as a special surprise guest somewhere on the tour. The one thing H&M have been successful at shining a light on is the completely transactional/PR nature of these "relationships". We'd all like to think that MO is above these sorts of things, but this particular cast of characters for the tour makes me think otherwise. There just isn't any benefit to including MM right now. If Charles had given in to them and things had gone differently for the Jubilee and the funeral, I think Duchess/Princess/Empress Meghan would have been proudly and prominently featured as a good friend and fellow humanitarian. Honestly, I'm a little disappointed that OW/GK/EDG/TP are even involved, and it cheapens the whole endeavor IMO. I feel like MO could have gotten just about anyone she wanted, so why this particular group?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Charles wants Harry either. The family couldn’t have expected loyalty from Meghan but they did expect it from Harry. Then he stabs his family in the back the first chance he gets. That makes him worse than Meghan.



He'll never be trusted again, that's for sure


----------



## papertiger

piperdog said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if MM shows up as a special surprise guest somewhere on the tour. The one thing H&M have been successful at shining a light on is the completely transactional/PR nature of these "relationships". We'd all like to think that MO is above these sorts of things, but this particular cast of characters for the tour makes me think otherwise. There just isn't any benefit to including MM right now. If Charles had given in to them and things had gone differently for the Jubilee and the funeral, I think Duchess/Princess/Empress Meghan would have been proudly and prominently featured as a good friend and fellow humanitarian. Honestly, I'm a little disappointed that OW/GK/EDG/TP are even involved, and it cheapens the whole endeavor IMO. I feel like MO could have gotten just about anyone she wanted, so why this particular group?



The plans were obviously done some time ago, some of these people have only shown their true stupidity recently and they have lots of followers.

IMO, M won't be a guest. The 'O's have already shown which part of the family they're loyal too. 

It went wrong waaaaay before the Jubilee


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice how dear Catherine knows how to tie a bow - no slouchy, sloppy look for her 



ETA:   Humble apologies, this should be in the William and Catherine thread.  So sorry. It really was a blunder, not at all intentional. Really.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Notice how dear Catherine knows how to tie a bow - no slouchy, sloppy look for her
> View attachment 5625665



Catherine always looks so polished and on point. Never messy, lumpy, wrinkled… 

I cannot believe the MM podcast photo with the wrinkled pants. I personally would have been mortified if my pants looked like that for what was probably an important photo for her. Just being in public with pants that wrinkled would have me very embarrassed.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Ellen?  Michelle O is not reading the room and I am judging her. Badly.  Might as well give Meg a shot too.


I won't judge Michelle but have to admit, I've become convinced Ellen isn't a nice person


----------



## piperdog

papertiger said:


> The plans were obviously done some time ago, some of these people have only shown their true stupidity recently and they have lots of followers.
> 
> IMO, M won't be a guest. The 'O's have already shown which part of the family they're loyal too.
> 
> It went wrong waaaaay before the Jubilee


You're right that this has been in the works for a very long time, and maybe the planning team wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to some of those included on the program about whom there were longstanding rumors of unpleasantness (even pre-dating H&M).

Still, now that I look at the lineup, it's an odd mix. I love the 90's as much as any other Gen Xer in her 50's, but why so many talkshow hosts who are no longer as active in their chosen careers?

Speaking of which part of the family the O's chose, wouldn't it be a riot if W&K showed up at one of the events?

And to keep on topic, H&M manage to ruin just about anything they touch, so all involved should keep them far away from this tour.


----------



## sdkitty

so the wilting flower who cried in her husbands arms and said she was thinking about suicide was perceived by her FIL as "tungsten".....doesn't sound delicate at all








						King Charles III's nickname for Meghan Markle has been revealed. Details here
					

King Charles III's nickname for his daughter-in-law Meghan Markle demonstrates how much he previously admired her.




					economictimes.indiatimes.com


----------



## papertiger

piperdog said:


> You're right that this has been in the works for a very long time, and maybe the planning team wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to some of those included on the program about whom there were longstanding rumors of unpleasantness (even pre-dating H&M).
> 
> Still, now that I look at the lineup, it's an odd mix. I love the 90's as much as any other Gen Xer in her 50's, but why so many talkshow hosts who are, ummm, past their prime?
> 
> Speaking of which part of the family the O's chose, wouldn't it be a riot if W&K showed up at one of the events?
> 
> And to keep on topic, H&M manage to ruin just about anything they touch, so all involved should keep them far away from this tour.



I don't think people are ever past anything. 

Food, fashion, slang, but people should not be judged by the 'sell-by'/'store/by'/'common usage'.

Funnily enough it is the 'young' H&M that have proved themselves to be out of touch, as have many of the woke crowd who thought their 'truth'  was going to rewrite history


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Please swipe to slide 3 for the really interesting gossip.


----------



## piperdog

papertiger said:


> I don't think people are ever past anything.
> 
> Food, fashion, slang, but people should not be judged by the 'sell-by'/'store/by'/'common usage'.
> 
> Funnily enough it is the 'young' H&M that have proved themselves to be out of touch, as have many of the woke crowd who thought their 'truth'  was going to rewrite history


You're absolutely right and I edited my post accordingly. The point I meant to make is that many (OW, DL, CO, ED) were more active in their careers in the 90s and earlier in the 2000's. Thank you for pointing that out so thoughtfully.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please swipe to slide 3 for the really interesting gossip.



interesting but who is the source?


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> so the wilting flower who cried in her husbands arms and said she was thinking about suicide was perceived by her FIL as "tungsten".....doesn't sound delicate at all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles III's nickname for Meghan Markle has been revealed. Details here
> 
> 
> King Charles III's nickname for his daughter-in-law Meghan Markle demonstrates how much he previously admired her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> economictimes.indiatimes.com


My mum was fond of describing hypocrites as 见人讲人话，见鬼讲鬼话 _Speaking like a human to humans, speaking like a demon to demons_. Zedzee was playing roles, thinking that by being whatever she thought each (male) member of the RF wanted, she would gain the favour of all of them. So the sex kitten eyes towards William, and the pseudo-mummy/martyr for Handbag. For Charles, she was the independent tungsten who showed such interest in his hobbies. Philip probably thought she was a mere hussy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

piperdog said:


> You're right that this has been in the works for a very long time, and maybe the planning team wanted to give the benefit of the doubt to some of those included on the program about whom there were longstanding rumors of unpleasantness (even pre-dating H&M).
> 
> Still, now that I look at the lineup, it's an odd mix. I love the 90's as much as any other Gen Xer in her 50's, but *why so many talkshow hosts who are no longer as active in their chosen careers?*
> 
> Speaking of which part of the family the O's chose, wouldn't it be a riot if W&K showed up at one of the events?
> 
> And to keep on topic, H&M manage to ruin just about anything they touch, so all involved should keep them far away from this tour.


Who is MO's target audience？Maybe the people who grew up and grew old watching these talkshow hosts.


----------



## sgj99

papertiger said:


> He'll never be trusted again, that's for sure


And he shouldn’t be trusted again.  He’s proven that he is easily manipulated.


----------



## Annawakes

CarryOn2020 said:


> She can always return to this




No, she can’t.  Lol.  That was terrible terrible acting.  I’m baffled how she ever got a part in anything.  It couldn’t have been her acting skills.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> No, she can’t.  Lol.  That was terrible terrible acting.  I’m baffled how she ever got a part in anything.  It couldn’t have been her acting skills.


what is this anyway?  she's so annoying


----------



## Chanbal

It's hard to keep up with the Harkles! Here is one more video from Lady C that I didn't have a chance to watch yet.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please swipe to slide 3 for the really interesting gossip.



A new 'guy' to marry TW would likely be a blessing for the BRF.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> *so the wilting flower who cried in her husbands arms *and said she was thinking about suicide was perceived by her FIL as "*tungsten*".....doesn't sound delicate at all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles III's nickname for Meghan Markle has been revealed. Details here
> 
> 
> King Charles III's nickname for his daughter-in-law Meghan Markle demonstrates how much he previously admired her.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> economictimes.indiatimes.com


For starters, the crying jags were probably fabrications similar to most of ZedZed's stories that have already been debunked like the 17 lies from the OW interview.  IMO, Charles had her pegged right from the start. ZedZed was and is the equivalent of tungsten i.e. hard as nails, always thinking of herself first and markling anyone who crossed her or who she no longer needed like her father, but able to shed a left-eye tear on command.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> For starters, the crying jags were probably fabrications similar to most of ZedZed's stories that have already been debunked like the 17 lies from the OW interview.  IMO, Charles had her pegged right from the start. ZedZed was and is the equivalent of tungsten i.e. hard as nails, always thinking of herself first and markling anyone who crossed her or who she no longer needed like her father, but able to shed a left-eye tear on command.


I don't buy her crying and threatening suicide.....that was no doubt a way to manipulate harry.  I actually think the tungsten thing was intended as a compliment.  charles may have regretted later that the tungsten woman used her toughness against him and his family.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> A new 'guy' to marry TW would likely be a blessing for the BRF.



He’d have to have been living on Mars or something.  I can’t imagine who or why.


----------



## bag-mania

Make of this what you will. TMZ is comparing Meghan’s dress to Wallis’. It is a favorable comparison but it makes me wonder who gave them this story if Sunshine Sachs is out of the picture?









						Meghan Markle Dresses Identical to Divorced Wife of King Edward VIII Who Left Royals Like Harry
					

Meghan Markle not only mirrors a woman in the royal family with MANY similarities ... she even dresses like her!




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Goodfrtune

elvisfan4life said:


> My uncle caught covid in hospital 6 weeks ago peak of summer low cases so they said he was recovered from the reason for being in hospital and about to come home - but covid killed him in 4 days - enjoy your holidays and travel but please dont tell me it’s not a serious threat any longer or that those of us who will keep inside not travel or meet people and wear a mask forever are somehow being stupid


Umm, never said it wasn’t a serious threat, never said you have to travel, never said take your masks off and I certainly never said anyone was being stupid. Please don’t project those things on me. I gave my experience with my family. And thank you for your condolences on the loss of my mother. As I stated before I will continue to get boosted and follow protocol. Oh and by the way I do wear a mask when I am out in crowds and have yet to go to a theater or a few other places I do not feel comfortable going to. My point was that Covid seems to be indiscriminate and a wild card and that we all have to do what we feel is best. I never passed judgement on you or anyone else but thank you for passing judgement on me and not seeing the pain at the loss of my mother as my catalyst for trying to move forward.  I am sorry about your uncle just as I am sorry about my mother’s cleaning person who left behind a teenage daughter. Wishing you all health and happiness.


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> And he shouldn’t be trusted again.  He’s proven that he is easily manipulated.


Was it all manipulation? I’m thinking we are seeing Harry as he truly is, without the family and staff covering for him. Maybe in Meghan he found himself an accomplice to do the dirty work he wanted to do before, but was too afraid.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I don't buy her crying and threatening suicide.....that was no doubt a way to manipulate harry.  I actually think the tungsten thing was intended as a compliment.  charles may have regretted later that the tungsten woman used her toughness against him and his family.


I believe you're right about Dufus. The fact that Charles tried his very best to get ZedZed to reconcile with her father before the wedding but to no avail and all her machinations to appear like the virginal bride leaves me me to believe that Charles knew her better than we think.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Make of this what you will. TMZ is comparing Meghan’s dress to Wallis’. It is a favorable comparison but it makes me wonder who gave them this story if Sunshine Sachs is out of the picture?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Dresses Identical to Divorced Wife of King Edward VIII Who Left Royals Like Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle not only mirrors a woman in the royal family with MANY similarities ... she even dresses like her!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


If H&M were intelligent [ahem], they would strongly dislike this comparison.  Never have Wallis&Ed been pitched as anything but selfish, awkward, bejeweled, vapid, work-shy  ex-royals.  Add in Nazi lovers and this is most definitely *not* who 21st century celebs want to hang out with.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Make of this what you will. TMZ is comparing Meghan’s dress to Wallis’. It is a favorable comparison but it makes me wonder who gave them this story if Sunshine Sachs is out of the picture?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Dresses Identical to Divorced Wife of King Edward VIII Who Left Royals Like Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle not only mirrors a woman in the royal family with MANY similarities ... she even dresses like her!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


wow, this one seems hard to deny
maybe she is just an empty shell trying to fill herself with the ideas of others

from Psych central:
Narcissists lack a positive, emotional connection to themselves, making it difficult for them to emotionally connect with others. Their undeveloped self and deficient inner resources require them to be dependent on others for validation. Rather than confidence, they actually fear that they’re undesirable. They can only admire themselves as reflected in the eyes of others. Hence, despite their boasting and self-flattery, they crave attention and constant admiration. Because their sense of self is determined by what others think of them, they try to control what others think to feel better about themselves. They use relationships for self-enhancement and for their “narcissistic supply.” However, due to their inner emptiness, they’re never satisfied. Whatever you do for them is never enough to fill their emptiness. Like vampires who are dead inside, narcissists exploit and drain those around them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> If H&M were intelligent [ahem], they would strongly dislike this comparison.  Never have Wallis&Ed been pitched as anything but selfish, awkward, bejeweled, vapid, work-shy  ex-royals.  Add in Nazi lovers and this is most definitely *not* who 21st century celebs want to hang out with.


but wallis did have great style


----------



## CarryOn2020

While Mm may love those Cartier jewels, nobody wears it like Wallis.





Queen of Cartier?


Spoiler









						Subscribe to read | Financial Times
					

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication




					www.ft.com
				



The other crown jewels: the Wallis Simpson collection​The Duchess of Windsor’s jewellery, like her life, defied conventional tastes​June 22 2020






© Bettmann Archive
What is it that continually fascinates about the famously infamous Duchess of Windsor, the woman who 84 years ago seduced Edward VIII away from the British throne? She wasn’t the first to seduce a king, nor to use that influence to shift culture, maybe sway politics, definitely change history. Yet something about the former Mrs Simpson remains compelling. It’s not just the nostalgia and fascination with the royals, pressure-cooked up by _The Crown_ — Madonna directed a box office bomb about her (the execrable _W.E._ of 2011), Karl Lagerfeld shot fashion editorials in homage to her, the designers Erdem Moralioglu and Dries Van Noten own her portraits, copies of her pug pillows sell on Etsy, and books about her are regularly published, telling and retelling her tale.

Maybe it is all because, although Wallis Windsor had a seemingly storybook romance — she got her prince and her jewels, in a paparazzi-documented love affair that even inspired Walt Disney’s animated _Snow White_ of 1937, the year she was married in a castle — there was something a bit skew-whiff about her fairytale. There’s the sense of happiness never quite fulfilled, that Wallis and David — as Edward was known by his intimates — never got quite what either of them bargained for, nor really wanted. Which was, for Wallis to become queen. She was denied that, and denied the style Her Royal Highness, which rankled both until they died.

That is why, perhaps, the Duke of Windsor made up for it with a bounty of jewelled gifts so rich they became known as “the alternative Crown Jewels”. As tangible, glittering souvenirs of one of history’s great love affairs — or at least one of history’s most famous — these works of the jeweller’s art still tantalise today.

It was on April 2 1987, in a gargantuan red-and-white tent pitched outside the Beau-Rivage hotel on the banks of Lake Geneva, that pieces from Wallis’s extraordinary collection of jewellery were first sold, auctioned by Sotheby’s in a frenzied bidding war that ultimately brought in £30m — six times the expected figure.

Less than a year after the duchess’s death (by French law, the sale had to be held within 12 months), 1,500 people crammed into the venue for two sweaty days of bidding. “It was, to an auctioneer, a god’s gift,” says David Bennett, Sotheby’s worldwide jewellery chairman, who helped oversee that Geneva sale in 1987. “It had everything. It had astonishingly beautiful jewellery, some of the most important pieces made in the 20th century. And it had this wonderful love story: the man who gave up his throne for the love of a woman.”










Ruby and sapphire brooch given to Wallis Simpson by the Prince of Wales, later to become Edward VIII, sold on December 7 2006 at Bonhams, London
The pieces had previously been displayed in New York to entice interest — but not in England, where the duchess was still a contentious figure. They would only appear there in 2010, when a cache of 20 items originally sold in 1987 were auctioned again by Sotheby’s. “I have to say, I was quite nervous — in 1987, the prices paid for some of the important pieces were by far record prices,” says Bennett. These included the highest price for a pearl necklace, for a ruby necklace, for a yellow diamond and for a single-owner jewellery sale, and were only surpassed when Elizabeth Taylor’s gems were sold in 2011. Incidentally, the first important piece of jewellery Taylor ever bought for herself was from the 1987 Windsor sale: a diamond brooch in the form of the Prince of Wales’s feathers.

“Putting them up for sale again [in 2010] at close to the original price paid was a bit scary,” continues Bennett. “What was extraordinary was, from the moment we launched the sale, it took on its own momentum. It caught the imagination again.” The items, which made double their estimate, included two spectacular Cartier masterpieces: the 1952 panther bracelet, entirely articulated in pavé diamonds and onyx, which at £4.5m became the most expensive bracelet ever bought at auction (the buyer was rumoured to be Madonna); and a flamingo with plumage of calibre-cut emeralds, rubies and sapphires, which sold for £1.7m.

The latter exemplifies the Windsors’ taste for modernity, composed as it was of old pieces broken apart — a necklace and four bracelets supplied 42 each of rubies, sapphires and emeralds and 102 diamonds. Much of Wallis’s jewellery was reputed to contain gemstones with regal provenance. Her engagement ring, another emerald, weighing in at 19.77ct, was cut from a stone once worn by a Mughal emperor, purchased from Cartier in 1936 for £10,000 (which equates to some £700,000 today).

Jewellery is the glittering, material legacy of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. It took the place, perhaps, of art — their taste in that wasn’t sophisticated. The pictures in their house in the Bois de Boulogne in Paris consisted mainly of stylised, idealised portraits of the duchess, which the duke called his “Wallis Collection”. There were a few minor works of portraiture, by Sir Gerald Brockhurst, Cecil Beaton and the fashion illustrator Drian, but most were heavily retouched photographs, cluttering every surface.

The Paris house encapsulated not just the Windsors’ aesthetic, but their entire approach to life: decorated by Stéphane Boudin, who later masterminded Jackie Kennedy’s budget-blowing rework of the White House interiors, it was more theatrical mise-en-scène than home: all faux marble and silver gilt, Louis Quinze-ish furniture and trompe l’oeil — literal and metaphorical. The appearance of a palace, for a has-been king and Wallis, his would-be-queen in her other crown jewels.

“Her entire life was dedicated to trying to make the duke feel that he was still a royal figure,” says Suzy Menkes, editor for Vogue International and author of the books _The Royal Jewels_ and _The Windsor Style_. She visited the house in the mid-1980s, when the Duchess of Windsor was alive but bedridden. “The house, on the edge of the Bois de Boulogne, was so filled with objects and trinkets on every surface that I can still feel the tense panic of trying to find somewhere to put down a cup of tea.”

However, although the house was filled with trompe l’oeil and the photos were retouched, the jewels were — are — resolutely real. They became Wallis Windsor’s signature while she was still Mrs Simpson: Edward began to shower her with priceless gifts even while she remained wed to her second husband, effectively blowing the lid on their clandestine romance. The diarist Chips Channon used words such as “smothered” or “dripping” to describe the way she wore her pieces in the 1930s; one observer commented on how the severity of her outfits was ruined by her taste for flashy costume jewellery, prompting peals of laughter when it was relayed that the gems were, in fact, real. A king’s ransom, indeed.

They were also highly personal — a 1936 ruby-and-diamond bombé-link bracelet by Van Cleef & Arpels (along with Cartier, the Windsors’ most frequent go-to for custom items) is inscribed on the clasp with the phrase “Hold Tight”, executed in a facsimile of Edward’s handwriting. It is dated March of that year — Wallis would divorce in October, and Edward abdicate in December, making this bracelet not only an exceptional piece of jewellery but a unique historical document.






The Duke and Duchess Windsor at their home, the Château de la Croë in Cap d’Antibes, Cannes, January 1939 © Getty
Fifty years later, over the Christmas of 1986, Sotheby’s Bennett was in the Banque de France, cataloguing the Duchess of Windsor’s pieces. “The first of these huge red Morocco leather boxes came out, with the duchess’s monogram on,” he recalls, remembering that the first piece to emerge was the ruby bracelet. “Up until that point, nobody knew — apart from the men who engraved them — that the jewels had been inscribed with this very personal language between the duke and duchess,” says Bennett. “This was March 1936, Edward was still king. This would have been a bombshell, had it been known by the British public back then.” And almost every single piece bears some kind of literal message, a love note, pet name or phrase in a childish language with meaning then known only to them, now deciphered for the history books.

The Windsors engaged the best jewel houses across the globe, among them Cartier, New York’s Harry Winston and Cartier’s Place Vendôme neighbours Van Cleef & Arpels. “Jacques Arpels was still alive when I was writing the catalogue, and I was able to spend some time with him in Paris,” recalls Bennett. “He could remember the duke and the duchess coming in and designing, picking the stones, arriving with jewels. He mentioned that the duke was extremely involved, loved gemstones, loved jewellery. You do get the idea that it was a collaboration between the two of them.” And those two in turn worked with leading designers such as Jeanne Toussaint, who inspired Cartier’s now signature panthers, and Suzanne Belperron, an avant-garde French designer championed by Elsa Schiaparelli, the couturière who created Wallis Windsor’s trousseau. “Her Belperron jewels were perhaps the first to turn up at public auction, and really cast a light on this designer who, until 1987, hardly anyone knew about,” says Daniela Mascetti, European chairman of the jewellery department of Sotheby’s. “She was setting a trend — everything she started wearing, be it clothes or jewels, immediately became fashionable.”

There are those, of course, who aren’t so enamoured. Christian Lacroix, the French couturier, called the jewels “horrible” in the 1980s, just after their world-famous auction. Menkes, who literally wrote the book, comments that “Wallis seemed conventional about jewellery, but loved it bold to get people’s attention”. The Windsor jewels are certainly bold, and not everyone would want to wear a flamingo, even one that costs a cool million and is a masterpiece of engineering.

The Cartier Flamingo and Panther are, Bennett believes, exceptional irrespective of Wallis’s ownership, but he says that, with the added provenance, it’s dynamite. “I’m reminded of the famous pearl we sold a couple of years ago in Geneva, which belonged to Marie Antoinette,” he says. “Estimated £1-2m, it made £36m. That provenance, we were jokingly saying, “Is there a more grand provenance than Marie Antoinette? What about Cleopatra?” But the Duchess of Windsor, and the whole package, is up there with Marie Antoinette, in a weird way.”

Maybe Wallis did become some kind of a queen, after all.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> If H&M were intelligent [ahem], they would strongly dislike this comparison.  Never have Wallis&Ed been pitched as anything but selfish, awkward, bejeweled, vapid, work-shy  ex-royals.  Add in Nazi lovers and this is most definitely *not* who 21st century celebs want to hang out with.


You may be younger than me but I absolutely remember Edward and Wallis being presented as a wonderful love story in the 70s and 80s, at least in the US. The romantic illusion of a king giving up his throne for love was pushed out there. Of course Harry was _never_ going to be king but there were comparisons.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> You may be younger than me but I absolutely remember Edward and Wallis being presented as a wonderful love story in the 70s and 80s, at least in the US. The *romantic illusion *of a king giving up his throne for love was pushed out there. Of course Harry was _never_ going to be king but there were comparisons.


Yes, yes, that is all it was - a romantic illusion.  Same for H&M. 
Don’t want to go too far astray, so my memories are here 



Spoiler



I remember hearing my mother’s gossipy friends chatting about it.  They were certain it would all in sadness [which it did]. They were especially put off by the ‘too thin’ comment. They had read all the romance novels warning of being around men who are ‘too rich’.  They thought some of jewelry was a bit ‘gaudy’.  Silly times, back then.  My sisters and I thought they were just jealous. Still, now that we know more about _that_ story, how unwelcomed W&E were, their purposeless life, etc. H&M should have known better imo.  Hazz certainly should have.


----------



## jennlt

We're not the only ones giving side eye to Oprah proclaiming Archie and Lili prince and princess. You get a title and you get a title and you get a title!


----------



## Aminamina

csshopper said:


> Was this before or after the “Fact Checker” was hired?


I would say the fact checker here serves as the storyline writer/researcher with TW in charge of plagiarism.


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> I don’t think Charles wants Harry either. The family couldn’t have expected loyalty from Meghan but they did expect it from Harry. Then he stabs his family in the back the first chance he gets. That makes him worse than Meghan.


agree 100%

ETA: wonder if the series the Crown could incorporate some of the MH drama (perhaps after they get divorced)


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> The noise around the Nefl*x's deal is increasing…



Oh, I can‘t wait to see a Hollywood blockbuster about this $h!t


----------



## Aminamina

papertiger said:


> Finale of US faux #7 'hit' series:
> Sh*t _really_ hits the fan. They are locked into a toilet on the Monteshitshow set. There's no money, no rep and way out. The tiresome 'Bonny and Clyde' have run out of money. There's no ammunition to launch at either family, all staff have departed crying and/or screaming. The two will eventually turn on each other, every word she screams is exactly what Hooray wants to say to her. She's blamed him for everything and threatened him with divorce unless she goes through with her plan to stage a kidnap on the children and extort money from his family... he'll start proceedings in the UK...
> 
> 4 years later:
> Cut to a small lodge in Cornwall on Will's Duchy estate, Harry sitting by the fire eating (organic) rabbit stew and putting away his stamp collection for the night.


*played by the young Timothy Dalton*  But look, their whole mess is like the Charlotte Brontë’s, novel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aminamina said:


> Oh, I can‘t wait to see a Hollywood blockbuster about this $h!t


Hey Nflix, Spotify, anyone else in Harkle world -  we did warn ya!  7,600+ pages of warnings. You are welcome.  



_Friends all tried to warn me
But i held my head up high
All the time they warned me
But i only passed them by
They all tried to tell me
But i guess i didn't care
I turned my back and
Left them standing there_


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please swipe to slide 3 for the really interesting gossip.




These two are so delusional + over-inflated egos. 

I’d thought that they would assume their names would increase the value of their house. For one, they’re not that interesting. But like everything else, their timing is awful with the economy, inflation, interest rates, real estate leveling out, and most everyone seeing investment losses. 

Sounds like they’ll be lucky to make a few million (taxable if profit), then find something with an overall less expensive footprint while still looking important and wealthy.


----------



## bag-mania

880 said:


> agree 100%
> 
> ETA: wonder if the series the Crown could incorporate some of the MH drama (perhaps after they get divorced)


Not a chance. If anything The Crown would likely spin it in their favor. Netflix is too deeply entrenched with them to allow another of their shows to criticize.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Make of this what you will. TMZ is comparing Meghan’s dress to Wallis’. It is a favorable comparison but it makes me wonder who gave them this story if Sunshine Sachs is out of the picture?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Dresses Identical to Divorced Wife of King Edward VIII Who Left Royals Like Harry
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle not only mirrors a woman in the royal family with MANY similarities ... she even dresses like her!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



Think she is breaking plates to be compared to Wallis and not Diana?


----------



## DL Harper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hey Nflix, Spotify, anyone else in Harkle world -  we did warn ya!  7,600+ pages of warnings. You are welcome.
> 
> 
> 
> _Friends all tried to warn me
> But i held my head up high
> All the time they warned me
> But i only passed them by
> They all tried to tell me
> But i guess i didn't care
> I turned my back and
> Left them standing there_



This could be Harry's upcoming theme song - or the cry in his beer anthem.  Hope he's not expecting a pity party when the time comes for a D I V O R C E (that's assuming there will be a split of the Markles).


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Think she is breaking plates to be compared to Wallis and not Diana?


I don’t know. It might not be her preference but at least she’s being talked about.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know. It might not be her preference but at least she’s being talked about.



Haha true! If she weren’t completely unhinged she might realize not being talked about is better than a lot of what’s coming out now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure where Crazy Tarot Lady got that from...do we think this really is a microphone and it was during funeral proceedings? Oh Harry.


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nah, he is no stamp collector or 1,000 piece puzzle lover.  Sitting quietly is simply not who he is.  He _craves_ the noise, the spotlight, the adoring crowd, hide-n-seek from the paps, the snark and sarcasm, making fun of others.  Based on what I have read, even with a hard fall, guys like this rarely change.  The BRF probably did the smartest thing by sending him overseas, far away from the star players.  My opinion.
> 
> She can always return to this



  "You're not paid to think."  The writers definitely had her number.  


xincinsin said:


> My mum was fond of describing hypocrites as 见人讲人话，见鬼讲鬼话 _Speaking like a human to humans, speaking like a demon to demons_. Zedzee was playing roles, thinking that by being whatever she thought each (male) member of the RF wanted, she would gain the favour of all of them. So the sex kitten eyes towards William, and the pseudo-mummy/martyr for Handbag. For Charles, she was the independent tungsten who showed such interest in his hobbies. *Philip probably thought she was a mere hussy.*


 I'd say his opinion was apt.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure where Crazy Tarot Lady got that from...do we think this really is a microphone and it was during funeral proceedings? Oh Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5625857


Possible but inconclusive. That could be anything. Regardless, I don’t think anyone talked to Harry at the funeral so no harm done.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nah, he is no stamp collector or 1,000 piece puzzle lover.  Sitting quietly is simply not who he is.  He _craves_ the noise, the spotlight, the adoring crowd, hide-n-seek from the paps, the snark and sarcasm, making fun of others.  Based on what I have read, even with a hard fall, guys like this rarely change.  The BRF probably did the smartest thing by sending him overseas, far away from the star players.  My opinion.
> 
> She can always return to this



That is some really bad acting !  I have seen school plays with better acting than that


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't buy her crying and threatening suicide.....that was no doubt a way to manipulate harry.



This.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This.


and it worked very well!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Not a chance. If anything The Crown would likely spin it in their favor. Netflix is too deeply entrenched with them to allow another of their shows to criticize.


They'll be plenty of other TV movies horror shows


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I won't judge Michelle but have to admit, I've become convinced Ellen isn't a nice person


I don't think Oprah is either.  You don't get as far as she has by being nice, but last month's denial by her and her bff Gayle, that they don't get involved in *other peoples families* to try and backpedal after HMTQs death was disgusting.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This.


interesting that Harry so loudly proclaimed his hatred of the British tabloids on behalf of his mother and the WIFE.  He never complained (after the marriage anyway) about what they did to him.  according to tina brown's book he lost chelsey due to the way they harassed her.  and they made his life miserable.  once diana died they went after her sons.  but will was "boring" so harry became the prime target - they told stories (not necessarily true) about him using drugs, blackmailed the RF, etc.

guess he was being protective/noble by pointing mainly to the harassment of the WIFE


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It's hard to keep up with the Harkles! Here is one more video from Lady C that I didn't have a chance to watch yet.




The accusations against Samantha and MegZ father 

Was that a coke-mime   impersonating MagZ from Lady C. Maybe, maybe not, I was watching double speed

She called Harry an "oily merchant"


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> The accusations against Samantha and MegZ father
> 
> Was that a coke-mime   impersonating MagZ from Lady C. Maybe, maybe not, I was watching double speed
> 
> She called Harry an "oily merchant"


I can't seem to watch her anymore....guess people her feel she is credible?


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I don't think Oprah is either.  You don't get as far as she has by being nice, but last month's denial by her and her bff Gayle, that they don't get involved in *other peoples families* to try and backpedal after HMTQs death was disgusting.


I've heard some things about Oprah that don't sound great but not as much as Ellen.  And you're right - I'm sure she had to be tough to get where she did.
This may sound silly but the tipping point for me re Ellen was Rosie O'Donnell.  She was on Watch What Happens Live.  Now I'm not saying I'm a huge fan of rosie but she came off a being truthful/candid to me.  She said Ellen denied knowing her (which was not true).  there's more to it than that but anyway,  the video is on youtube.


----------



## needlv




----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I don't think Oprah is either.  You don't get as far as she has by being nice, but last month's denial by her and her bff Gayle, that they don't get involved in *other peoples families* to try and backpedal after HMTQs death was disgusting.



I'm not surprised by Oprah, but I am disappointed


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of HandM report card for the funeral. What would the BRF like to have seen to help build TRUST?

COMPLETE RADIO SILENCE for 2 wks … they were busy rewriting their Wiki pages … they don’t have Twitter, IG accounts and lack of output may be due to rupture with SS, rather than intent to be quiet … I give them a C-
NO LEAKS … hmmm no … leak to OS about train, leak to GK about lack of peace accord … those could not have come from anyone else … I give them an F
DONT GO OFF SCRIPT not sure if they were plotting their own walkabout … we don’t know for certain … I give them a pass
NO WHINING … hmmm no … uniformgate/epaulettegate … that would have come ONLY from H. The story about getting to Balmoral late due to argument - I don’t give them the benefit of the doubt. I give them an F on this one too.

I think they failed the test


----------



## Traminer

> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan and 'hooked by a political activist:' royal expert​











						Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
					

A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"




					knewz.com
				




Is there some truth in it?


----------



## gracekelly

Royal round up: 6th October
					

Well hello everyone and welcome to a new royal round up! I hope you’re all well and having a good week so far! Well feeling suitably relaxed from my break in Greece (until I returned to the o…




					thecrownsofbritain.com
				




This is really hilarious!


----------



## gracekelly

Traminer said:


> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
> 
> 
> A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> knewz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there some truth in it?


Why do they persist in continuing this fiction that she is a political activist?  She is neither political nor an activist.  She is purely out for herself.  And while I am pontificating, she isn't a humanitarian either.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Why do they persist in continuing this fiction that she is a political activist?  She is neither political nor an activist.  She is purely out for herself.  And while I am pontificating, she isn't a humanitarian either.


Because she likes to tell politicians what to do ?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I can't seem to watch her anymore....guess people her feel she is credible?



She gets carried away but she knows a lot about European and minor royals, who's who and what's what.


----------



## papertiger

Traminer said:


> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan and 'hooked by a political activist:' royal expert​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
> 
> 
> A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> knewz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Is there some truth in it?*



What, that she's a political activist? 

None at all

That he's unhappy? 

He's always unhappy


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Because she likes to tell politicians what to do ?



She likes to tell _everyone_ what to do


----------



## bag-mania

Her podcast is up to #4. Unbelievable (seriously, I don’t believe it.)


----------



## Toby93

Another lawsuit?..

And an interesting observation....


----------



## Cinderlala

Is litigation his full-time occupation, now?  I don't think the laid-back vibes of California living are working for him.


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe he thinks getting a big settlement is the best way to get lots of money.


----------



## DL Harper

Toby93 said:


> Another lawsuit?..
> 
> And an interesting observation....



Because H&M have never been wired????


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Next reading Dec. 9 - maybe this is why the disaster duo wanted to sue ?


Removal of Titles Bill​Private Members' Bill (Presentation Bill)​Originated in the House of Commons, Session 2022-23
Last updated: 24 June 2022 at 13:13

Long title
A Bill to give the Monarch powers to remove titles; to provide that such removals can be done by the Monarch on their own initiative or following a recommendation of a joint committee of Parliament; and for connected purposes.



			https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Another lawsuit?..
> 
> And an interesting observation....



MM is not involved … discuss ..  Only UK citizens are in this one …

Sadie Frost …. No one remembers her … OK she was a wild one 25 years ago when she made 1 movie - Dracula , where I think she was nude , dancing. Don’t remember a DM article recently where she is anything but the mother of the actor/model highlghted in the article , ho hum yawnnnn

Elizabeth Hurley … the DM is full of posed shots of her in bikinis or showing off her very handsome son , no Selfies or pap shots… I always assumed the DM paid her for the shots so that she can finance her extensive swimwear wardrobe. The story of her son’s inheritance battle for estate of American father was public domain in the US, based on court filings but maybe you in the UK aware not supposed to know …

PS Sir Elton is not paying H’s legal bill, they have different lawyers


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> MM is not involved … discuss ..  Only UK citizens are in this one …
> 
> Sadie Frost …. No one remembers her … OK she was a wild one 25 years ago when she made 1 movie - Dracula , where I think she was nude , dancing. Don’t remember a DM article recently where she is anything but the mother of the actor/model highlghted in the article , ho hum yawnnnn
> 
> Elizabeth Hurley … the DM is full of posed shots of her in bikinis or showing off her very handsome son , no Selfies or pap shots… I always assumed the DM paid her for the shots so that she can finance her extensive swimwear wardrobe. The story of her son’s inheritance battle for estate of American father was public domain in the US, based on court filings but maybe you in the UK aware not supposed to know …
> 
> PS Sir Elton is not paying H’s legal bill, they have different lawyers


I remember Sadie Frost and the Jude Law saga too!


----------



## DL Harper

marietouchet said:


> MM is not involved … discuss ..  Only UK citizens are in this one …
> 
> Sadie Frost …. No one remembers her … OK she was a wild one 25 years ago when she made 1 movie - Dracula , where I think she was nude , dancing. Don’t remember a DM article recently where she is anything but the mother of the actor/model highlghted in the article , ho hum yawnnnn
> 
> Elizabeth Hurley … the DM is full of posed shots of her in bikinis or showing off her very handsome son , no Selfies or pap shots… I always assumed the DM paid her for the shots so that she can finance her extensive swimwear wardrobe. The story of her son’s inheritance battle for estate of American father was public domain in the US, based on court filings but maybe you in the UK aware not supposed to know …
> 
> PS Sir Elton is not paying H’s legal bill, they have different lawyers


MM might be involved since she controls so much of ALL of what H says and thinks.  

Elton isn't paying H's legal bill....yet.  After all, no job, no money - how else will H&M pay for H's lawyers???


----------



## bellecate

marietouchet said:


> Because she likes to tell politicians what to do ?


She likes to tell everybody what to do.


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> She likes to tell _everyone_ what to do


Hadn’t read this before I replied the same thing. Great minds……


----------



## CarryOn2020

This cannot be a coincidence - 15 so far.
 How dim are H&M?


----------



## Hyacinth

Aminamina said:


> Oh, I can‘t wait to see a Hollywood blockbuster about this $h!t



Something tells me I'd better buy more popcorn.


----------



## sgj99

bag-mania said:


> Was it all manipulation? I’m thinking we are seeing Harry as he truly is, without the family and staff covering for him. Maybe in Meghan he found himself an accomplice to do the dirty work he wanted to do before, but was too afraid.


I do think he was manipulated because he is too simple-minded to have an original idea.  I’m not excusing him. No matter how stupid you are your family is still your family.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> Royal round up: 6th October
> 
> 
> Well hello everyone and welcome to a new royal round up! I hope you’re all well and having a good week so far! Well feeling suitably relaxed from my break in Greece (until I returned to the o…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is really hilarious!


That was brilliant, thank you for sharing.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> You may be younger than me but I absolutely remember Edward and Wallis being presented as a wonderful love story in the 70s and 80s, at least in the US. The romantic illusion of a king giving up his throne for love was pushed out there. Of course Harry was _never_ going to be king but there were comparisons.


If they want to be the modern-day equiv of Edward & Mrs Simpson, then Handbag should at least give up his ducal title  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure where Crazy Tarot Lady got that from...do we think this really is a microphone and it was during funeral proceedings? Oh Harry.
> 
> View attachment 5625857


Looks like a photo in one of the glossy memorial magazines. It might be the corner of his pocket square.


Traminer said:


> Harry 'desperately unhappy' in marriage to Meghan, royal biographer claims
> 
> 
> A royal biographer has come forward with sensational claims about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage, saying the Duke is "deeply unhappy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> knewz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there some truth in it?


Really old article, and Hazard is always looking pouty anyway. If he is "desperately unhappy", it would be because nothing seems to be going his way.


----------



## needlv

Another one bites the dust…


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Another one bites the dust…



  Whut?
Just yesterday we were reading that Christine Schirmer was horrified that Omid was caught in the coffin-by-rail sting. Now she herself is gone?


----------



## papertiger

More milage from H's mother fixation 









						Diana would NOT have admired Meghan, royal photographer claims
					

Royal Photographer John Swannell claims Princess Diana would not have been a fan of Meghan Markle. He predicts Diana would think that Meghan has 'stolen' Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah, at this point I cannot see a single member of that family feeling admiration or even neutral feelings about that woman.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Start your Thursday with this one…



funny thing is she’s not even happy


CarryOn2020 said:


> While Mm may love those Cartier jewels, nobody wears it like Wallis.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5625819
> 
> 
> Queen of Cartier?
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Subscribe to read | Financial Times
> 
> 
> News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The other crown jewels: the Wallis Simpson collection​The Duchess of Windsor’s jewellery, like her life, defied conventional tastes​June 22 2020
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> © Bettmann Archive
> What is it that continually fascinates about the famously infamous Duchess of Windsor, the woman who 84 years ago seduced Edward VIII away from the British throne? She wasn’t the first to seduce a king, nor to use that influence to shift culture, maybe sway politics, definitely change history. Yet something about the former Mrs Simpson remains compelling. It’s not just the nostalgia and fascination with the royals, pressure-cooked up by _The Crown_ — Madonna directed a box office bomb about her (the execrable _W.E._ of 2011), Karl Lagerfeld shot fashion editorials in homage to her, the designers Erdem Moralioglu and Dries Van Noten own her portraits, copies of her pug pillows sell on Etsy, and books about her are regularly published, telling and retelling her tale.
> 
> Maybe it is all because, although Wallis Windsor had a seemingly storybook romance — she got her prince and her jewels, in a paparazzi-documented love affair that even inspired Walt Disney’s animated _Snow White_ of 1937, the year she was married in a castle — there was something a bit skew-whiff about her fairytale. There’s the sense of happiness never quite fulfilled, that Wallis and David — as Edward was known by his intimates — never got quite what either of them bargained for, nor really wanted. Which was, for Wallis to become queen. She was denied that, and denied the style Her Royal Highness, which rankled both until they died.
> 
> That is why, perhaps, the Duke of Windsor made up for it with a bounty of jewelled gifts so rich they became known as “the alternative Crown Jewels”. As tangible, glittering souvenirs of one of history’s great love affairs — or at least one of history’s most famous — these works of the jeweller’s art still tantalise today.
> 
> It was on April 2 1987, in a gargantuan red-and-white tent pitched outside the Beau-Rivage hotel on the banks of Lake Geneva, that pieces from Wallis’s extraordinary collection of jewellery were first sold, auctioned by Sotheby’s in a frenzied bidding war that ultimately brought in £30m — six times the expected figure.
> 
> Less than a year after the duchess’s death (by French law, the sale had to be held within 12 months), 1,500 people crammed into the venue for two sweaty days of bidding. “It was, to an auctioneer, a god’s gift,” says David Bennett, Sotheby’s worldwide jewellery chairman, who helped oversee that Geneva sale in 1987. “It had everything. It had astonishingly beautiful jewellery, some of the most important pieces made in the 20th century. And it had this wonderful love story: the man who gave up his throne for the love of a woman.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ruby and sapphire brooch given to Wallis Simpson by the Prince of Wales, later to become Edward VIII, sold on December 7 2006 at Bonhams, London
> The pieces had previously been displayed in New York to entice interest — but not in England, where the duchess was still a contentious figure. They would only appear there in 2010, when a cache of 20 items originally sold in 1987 were auctioned again by Sotheby’s. “I have to say, I was quite nervous — in 1987, the prices paid for some of the important pieces were by far record prices,” says Bennett. These included the highest price for a pearl necklace, for a ruby necklace, for a yellow diamond and for a single-owner jewellery sale, and were only surpassed when Elizabeth Taylor’s gems were sold in 2011. Incidentally, the first important piece of jewellery Taylor ever bought for herself was from the 1987 Windsor sale: a diamond brooch in the form of the Prince of Wales’s feathers.
> 
> “Putting them up for sale again [in 2010] at close to the original price paid was a bit scary,” continues Bennett. “What was extraordinary was, from the moment we launched the sale, it took on its own momentum. It caught the imagination again.” The items, which made double their estimate, included two spectacular Cartier masterpieces: the 1952 panther bracelet, entirely articulated in pavé diamonds and onyx, which at £4.5m became the most expensive bracelet ever bought at auction (the buyer was rumoured to be Madonna); and a flamingo with plumage of calibre-cut emeralds, rubies and sapphires, which sold for £1.7m.
> 
> The latter exemplifies the Windsors’ taste for modernity, composed as it was of old pieces broken apart — a necklace and four bracelets supplied 42 each of rubies, sapphires and emeralds and 102 diamonds. Much of Wallis’s jewellery was reputed to contain gemstones with regal provenance. Her engagement ring, another emerald, weighing in at 19.77ct, was cut from a stone once worn by a Mughal emperor, purchased from Cartier in 1936 for £10,000 (which equates to some £700,000 today).
> 
> Jewellery is the glittering, material legacy of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor. It took the place, perhaps, of art — their taste in that wasn’t sophisticated. The pictures in their house in the Bois de Boulogne in Paris consisted mainly of stylised, idealised portraits of the duchess, which the duke called his “Wallis Collection”. There were a few minor works of portraiture, by Sir Gerald Brockhurst, Cecil Beaton and the fashion illustrator Drian, but most were heavily retouched photographs, cluttering every surface.
> 
> The Paris house encapsulated not just the Windsors’ aesthetic, but their entire approach to life: decorated by Stéphane Boudin, who later masterminded Jackie Kennedy’s budget-blowing rework of the White House interiors, it was more theatrical mise-en-scène than home: all faux marble and silver gilt, Louis Quinze-ish furniture and trompe l’oeil — literal and metaphorical. The appearance of a palace, for a has-been king and Wallis, his would-be-queen in her other crown jewels.
> 
> “Her entire life was dedicated to trying to make the duke feel that he was still a royal figure,” says Suzy Menkes, editor for Vogue International and author of the books _The Royal Jewels_ and _The Windsor Style_. She visited the house in the mid-1980s, when the Duchess of Windsor was alive but bedridden. “The house, on the edge of the Bois de Boulogne, was so filled with objects and trinkets on every surface that I can still feel the tense panic of trying to find somewhere to put down a cup of tea.”
> 
> However, although the house was filled with trompe l’oeil and the photos were retouched, the jewels were — are — resolutely real. They became Wallis Windsor’s signature while she was still Mrs Simpson: Edward began to shower her with priceless gifts even while she remained wed to her second husband, effectively blowing the lid on their clandestine romance. The diarist Chips Channon used words such as “smothered” or “dripping” to describe the way she wore her pieces in the 1930s; one observer commented on how the severity of her outfits was ruined by her taste for flashy costume jewellery, prompting peals of laughter when it was relayed that the gems were, in fact, real. A king’s ransom, indeed.
> 
> They were also highly personal — a 1936 ruby-and-diamond bombé-link bracelet by Van Cleef & Arpels (along with Cartier, the Windsors’ most frequent go-to for custom items) is inscribed on the clasp with the phrase “Hold Tight”, executed in a facsimile of Edward’s handwriting. It is dated March of that year — Wallis would divorce in October, and Edward abdicate in December, making this bracelet not only an exceptional piece of jewellery but a unique historical document.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess Windsor at their home, the Château de la Croë in Cap d’Antibes, Cannes, January 1939 © Getty
> Fifty years later, over the Christmas of 1986, Sotheby’s Bennett was in the Banque de France, cataloguing the Duchess of Windsor’s pieces. “The first of these huge red Morocco leather boxes came out, with the duchess’s monogram on,” he recalls, remembering that the first piece to emerge was the ruby bracelet. “Up until that point, nobody knew — apart from the men who engraved them — that the jewels had been inscribed with this very personal language between the duke and duchess,” says Bennett. “This was March 1936, Edward was still king. This would have been a bombshell, had it been known by the British public back then.” And almost every single piece bears some kind of literal message, a love note, pet name or phrase in a childish language with meaning then known only to them, now deciphered for the history books.
> 
> The Windsors engaged the best jewel houses across the globe, among them Cartier, New York’s Harry Winston and Cartier’s Place Vendôme neighbours Van Cleef & Arpels. “Jacques Arpels was still alive when I was writing the catalogue, and I was able to spend some time with him in Paris,” recalls Bennett. “He could remember the duke and the duchess coming in and designing, picking the stones, arriving with jewels. He mentioned that the duke was extremely involved, loved gemstones, loved jewellery. You do get the idea that it was a collaboration between the two of them.” And those two in turn worked with leading designers such as Jeanne Toussaint, who inspired Cartier’s now signature panthers, and Suzanne Belperron, an avant-garde French designer championed by Elsa Schiaparelli, the couturière who created Wallis Windsor’s trousseau. “Her Belperron jewels were perhaps the first to turn up at public auction, and really cast a light on this designer who, until 1987, hardly anyone knew about,” says Daniela Mascetti, European chairman of the jewellery department of Sotheby’s. “She was setting a trend — everything she started wearing, be it clothes or jewels, immediately became fashionable.”
> 
> There are those, of course, who aren’t so enamoured. Christian Lacroix, the French couturier, called the jewels “horrible” in the 1980s, just after their world-famous auction. Menkes, who literally wrote the book, comments that “Wallis seemed conventional about jewellery, but loved it bold to get people’s attention”. The Windsor jewels are certainly bold, and not everyone would want to wear a flamingo, even one that costs a cool million and is a masterpiece of engineering.
> 
> The Cartier Flamingo and Panther are, Bennett believes, exceptional irrespective of Wallis’s ownership, but he says that, with the added provenance, it’s dynamite. “I’m reminded of the famous pearl we sold a couple of years ago in Geneva, which belonged to Marie Antoinette,” he says. “Estimated £1-2m, it made £36m. That provenance, we were jokingly saying, “Is there a more grand provenance than Marie Antoinette? What about Cleopatra?” But the Duchess of Windsor, and the whole package, is up there with Marie Antoinette, in a weird way.”
> 
> Maybe Wallis did become some kind of a queen, after all.


She was a decent make up job away from being a bad drag queen especially in the Dracula wig era. 



Aminamina said:


> *played by the young Timothy Dalton*  But look, their whole mess is like the Charlotte Brontë’s, novel.


Young Timothy dalton in a Cornish lodge….
Please don’t make me start fancying Haz  



marietouchet said:


> MM is not involved … discuss ..  Only UK citizens are in this one …
> 
> Sadie Frost …. No one remembers her … OK she was a wild one 25 years ago when she made 1 movie - Dracula , where I think she was nude , dancing. Don’t remember a DM article recently where she is anything but the mother of the actor/model highlghted in the article , ho hum yawnnnn
> 
> Elizabeth Hurley … the DM is full of posed shots of her in bikinis or showing off her very handsome son , no Selfies or pap shots… I always assumed the DM paid her for the shots so that she can finance her extensive swimwear wardrobe. The story of her son’s inheritance battle for estate of American father was public domain in the US, based on court filings but maybe you in the UK aware not supposed to know …
> 
> PS Sir Elton is not paying H’s legal bill, they have different lawyers


They may not share lawyers but they are sharing hair plugs  


The intro to this tv show is a good summary of Sadie Frost’s career and tbh if you can find it the star stories show is hilarious.


Toby93 said:


> That is some really bad acting !  I have seen school plays with better acting than that


:
I was about to say her revulsion seemed earnest then I remembered she basically said  ‘no black men’ to that  matchmaker Lisa something so she probably wasn’t acting.


----------



## Saffron Skye

So my post was deleted - what a surprise.  Feel free to delete this as well, but that doesn't take away from the very obvious typical behaviour that was going on.  The abhorrent behaviours isn't allowed to be challenged - go on call the manager now.  Amazing what's deemed as off topic and subject to deletion.  But hey let's allow us to target a bully someone in peace....knock yourself out


----------



## EverSoElusive

Saffron Skye said:


> So my post was deleted - what a surprise.  Feel free to delete this as well, but that doesn't take away from the very obvious typical behaviour that was going on.  The abhorrent behaviours isn't allowed to be challenged - go on call the manager now.  Amazing what's deemed as off topic and subject to deletion.  But hey let's allow us to target a bully someone in peace....knock yourself out


Not sure what's in your deleted post but I post here regularly and even my posts have been moderated and deleted before, so have many others. The mods just want us to stay on topic and be respectful


----------



## EverSoElusive

See the kid all the way to the far right. Did they finally cast a new older child to play one of the Invisikids?


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Another one bites the dust…



There is an 'intriguing' reply to this.


----------



## marietouchet

The lawsuit, I do not get it, normally you need SPECIFIC grounds, a particular incident for litigation eg MM letter to dad publication 
This is different - a sort of celebrity class action suit - are the 6 of them going to trot out their own SPECIFIC incidents for the court, no, that would be too confusing for the court to keep straight 
This is going to be a non specific whinefest

Note the coverage of the topic by People , I failed to find anything in my hard news sources 
We are going to have the gripe of the week club in People


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like there is activity related to the video below, see Spoiler.   




Spoiler: About rights


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Toby93

EverSoElusive said:


> See the kid all the way to the far right. Did they finally cast a new older child to play one of the Invisikids?
> 
> View attachment 5626353


This looks to have been taken at the concert they just attended.  No mention of the invisikids being with them, and not to be insensitive, but that child looks not to be the paler than pale white, as we all know TWs kids to be


----------



## lallybelle

The lady anchor seemed pro- MM. Every point brought up, she jumped in to say "couldn't it be just that....".

LOL @ The Harkles monitoring Good Morning Britain.


----------



## jennlt

Toby93 said:


>



According to TMZ, they arrived separately and an hour apart


----------



## Pessie

jennlt said:


> According to TMZ, they arrived separately and an hour apart


Harry was doing his hair


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

jennlt said:


> According to TMZ, they arrived separately and an hour apart



Well, he sort of tags along like the family dog - everything is always about her and he's just her sidekick/court jester/handbag to be trotted out as it suits her needs.


----------



## LittleStar88

Pessie said:


> Harry was doing his hair


----------



## V0N1B2

EverSoElusive said:


> See the kid all the way to the far right. Did they finally cast a new older child to play one of the Invisikids?
> 
> View attachment 5626353


Is this supposed to be Archie? I can’t imagine any reason why a mother wouldn’t be holding her own child.


----------



## LittleStar88

V0N1B2 said:


> Is this supposed to be Archie? I can’t imagine any reason why a mother wouldn’t be holding her own child.



We've all seen how awkwardly MM holds a baby - definitely something best left for someone else.


----------



## Pessie

V0N1B2 said:


> Is this supposed to be Archie? I can’t imagine any reason why a mother wouldn’t be holding her own child.


Looks like a girl to me, so can’t be Archie and I think it’s too big for $$ibet.


----------



## Chanbal

Tourre sounds particularly annoyed today, and I can't blame him!


----------



## Chanbal

Didn't run away to Canada… Is this a hint?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Tourre sounds particularly annoyed today, and I can't blame him!



Note the ages cited by Tourre, these celebs are not 20-somethings, they are nearing their 60s, their issues with press were really 20 years ago (eg Diana death, Sir Elton and substance abuse, Sadie partying a lot)
Kind of like the movies critiqued by podcast, 20 year old movies

I think this is important , the world/the press was different 20ish years ago - no smartphone, no internet , no selfies, no social media
They are tilting at windmills that no longer exist, the world has changed


----------



## jennlt




----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> She gets carried away but she knows a lot about European and minor royals, who's who and what's what.


my attention span seems to be getting shorter.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> More milage from H's mother fixation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana would NOT have admired Meghan, royal photographer claims
> 
> 
> Royal Photographer John Swannell claims Princess Diana would not have been a fan of Meghan Markle. He predicts Diana would think that Meghan has 'stolen' Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Meghan is now older than Diana was when she died....actually she was probably older when he met her.  Is her expiration coming up?  could this be part of the reason she's copying Wallis now?  No, she probably doesn't recognize that she's middle aged


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> We've all seen how awkwardly MM holds a baby - definitely something best left for someone else.


I assumed it was someone else’s child. It doesn’t make sense for both parents to be posing for the camera and having… do we know who is holding the kid? Security guard? Bystander? Event attendee?


----------



## K.D.

EverSoElusive said:


> See the kid all the way to the far right. Did they finally cast a new older child to play one of the Invisikids?
> 
> View attachment 5626353


She was probably late because she spent all day looking for a blue outfit instead of whatever she had in order to have the primary monochromatic 'showdown' of the day with her SIL


----------



## bag-mania

I almost fell off my chair when I read that Archewell was giving away $1 million. Then I opened  the story and found that they are actually “teaming” with the group that is giving away the million. Never believe the headlines, folks!  









						Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation Teams Up to Give $1M to Women In Need
					

“Two things that bring me great joy are supporting women, and the spirit of giving," Meghan said.




					www.today.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I almost fell off my chair when I read that Archewell was giving away $1 million. Then I opened  the story and found that they are actually “teaming” with the group that is giving away the million. Never believe the headlines, folks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation Teams Up to Give $1M to Women In Need
> 
> 
> “Two things that bring me great joy are supporting women, and the spirit of giving," Meghan said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


so they get the million dollar headline but what did they give?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Stansy

sdkitty said:


> so they get the million dollar headline but what did they give?


Others give to charity, they give to PR…


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so they get the million dollar headline but what did they give?


I fail to see how that question is relevant.     

(They gave some sandwiches, well wishes, and important words.)


----------



## Chanbal

Valentine on Piers


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


>



A vomit emoji is sorely required.  Prince rewrite and Duchess full of it amend their “truth” to their own advantage.  Gross.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Hazz needs to deliver his bombs. The book deal is possibly bigger than what we thought. Allegedly, he received a $35M advance for the book…


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> This looks to have been taken at the concert they just attended.  No mention of the invisikids being with them, and not to be insensitive, but that child looks not to be the paler than pale white, as we all know TWs kids to be


I agree. However, the kid does look a bit like Archie though girlie 




V0N1B2 said:


> Is this supposed to be Archie? I can’t imagine any reason why a mother wouldn’t be holding her own child.


Looks like Archie but also girlie so probably not  Didn't someone posted recently that the nannies are usually required to stay in the room if the kids were brought to them? Z-list doesn't strike me as a hands-on mom.




Pessie said:


> Looks like a girl to me, so can’t be Archie and I think it’s too big for $$ibet.


Good point and I definitely agree  




bag-mania said:


> I assumed it was someone else’s child. It doesn’t make sense for both parents to be posing for the camera and having… do we know who is holding the kid? Security guard? Bystander? Event attendee?


Hopefully it's someone else's child. They usually require their nannies to be in the same room as someone posted recently.




Pessie said:


> A vomit emoji is sorely required.  Prince rewrite and Duchess full of it amend their “truth” to their own advantage.  Gross.


Here


----------



## CarryOn2020

EverSoElusive said:


> I agree. However, the kid does look a bit like Archie though girlie
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like Archie but also girlie so probably not  Didn't someone posted recently that the nannies are usually required to stay in the room if the kids were brought to them? Z-list doesn't strike me as a hands-on mom.
> 
> 
> 
> Good point and I definitely agree
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully it's someone else's child. They usually require their nannies to be in the same room as someone posted recently.
> 
> 
> 
> Here



Imo we should never never believe what the disaster duo post. 
_H&M want their names in the news. _Surest way to do that is pose with a kid, then everyone plays ‘is it’?   

RE: the lawsuit - these old people look desperate now.  They clearly need more $$$ to live in the 1% world, so their idea of suing for things that happened years ago smacks of dementia/delusions.  Yachts, private jets, designer clothes, surgeries, and the teens are very expensive to maintain. EJ really has become a sad caricature of his former self. Hurley, no words except cover up. Sadie Frost, who?  H&M, sad and tired non-working overseas people.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I almost fell off my chair when I read that Archewell was giving away $1 million. Then I opened  the story and found that they are actually “teaming” with the group that is giving away the million. Never believe the headlines, folks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation Teams Up to Give $1M to Women In Need
> 
> 
> “Two things that bring me great joy are supporting women, and the spirit of giving," Meghan said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


Giving it away one $1000 dribble at a time ? Over what time frame ? I don’t recognize name of their collaborator - is the latter , doing most of the donating ???


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



This image reminds me of the traitor Judas Iscariot's kiss.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


>



Wow even their taste in music is incredibly cringe!

They really are the human equivalent of a dulcolax advert.


lallybelle said:


> The lady anchor seemed pro- MM. Every point brought up, she jumped in to say "couldn't it be just that....".
> 
> LOL @ The Harkles monitoring Good Morning Britain.


For some reason British morning tv’s female hosts seem to be afraid of saying boo to geese in general - they are extremely made up wet blankets whereas most of the men are baity as anything.


V0N1B2 said:


> Is this supposed to be Archie? I can’t imagine any reason why a mother wouldn’t be holding her own child.


Only a commoner carries their child (especially during  the pregnancy)  and because Lauren(?) has one last chance to prove herself before she is forced to self-immolate with a storage heater (or hand in her notice)


Chanbal said:


> Didn't run away to Canada… Is this a hint?



I haven’t heard from him in a while. He needs to seize the opportunity and knock out Austin powers 4


sdkitty said:


> my attention span seems to be getting shorter.


Lady C’s videos are definitely dropping in quality though I don’t mind long rambling diversions on history or her own life but I’m not going to sit thrilled by her doing fart jokes in a very slow cadence.


CarryOn2020 said:


>



Not to offend any Christians on the thread but this pic immediately made me think of this painting…


So uncomfortable on so many levels.

@Maggie Muggins great minds!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hear! Hear!


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo we should never never believe what the disaster duo post.
> _H&M want their names in the news. _Surest way to do that is pose with a kid, then everyone plays ‘is it’?
> 
> RE: the lawsuit - these old people look desperate now.  They clearly need more $$$ to live in the 1% world, so their idea of suing for things that happened years ago smacks of dementia/delusions.  Yachts, private jets, designer clothes, surgeries, and the teens are very expensive to maintain. EJ really has become a sad caricature of his former self. Hurley, no words except cover up. Sadie Frost, who?  H&M, sad and tired non-working overseas people.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5626701


They’re just throwing up a load of flack to divert attention from who they AREN’T suing


----------



## jelliedfeels

Pessie said:


> Looks like a girl to me, so can’t be Archie and I think it’s too big for $$ibet.


I seriously doubt M is going to sit calmly and let Angelina Jolie hoover up all that good ‘I let my son wear dresses’ press - you can bet at least one of those cute little extras best turn up in a tutu and lellikellies


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hazz needs to deliver his bombs. The book deal is possibly bigger than what we thought. Allegedly, he received a $35M advance for the book…




I thought reportedly $17 and more promised

Plus there are options for more books (which doesn't mean anything except they have him locked into a multi-book option deal for his money and could drop him anytime).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Wow even their taste in music is incredibly cringe!
> 
> They really are the human equivalent of a dulcolax advert.
> 
> For some reason British morning tv’s female hosts seem to be afraid of saying boo to geese in general - they are extremely made up wet blankets whereas most of the men are baity as anything.
> 
> Only a commoner carries their child (especially during  the pregnancy)  and because Lauren(?) has one last chance to prove herself before she is forced to self-immolate with a storage heater (or hand in her notice)
> 
> I haven’t heard from him in a while. He needs to seize the opportunity and knock out Austin powers 4
> 
> Lady C’s videos are definitely dropping in quality though I don’t mind long rambling diversions on history or her own life but I’m not going to sit thrilled by her doing fart jokes in a very slow cadence.
> 
> Not to offend any Christians on the thread but this pic immediately made me think of this painting…
> View attachment 5626709
> 
> So uncomfortable on so many levels.
> 
> @Maggie Muggins great minds!



The women journalists are trying to provide balance. It's very hard with these two I know, they are as balanced as an elephant on one side of a see-saw.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Spoiler: About rights




She is freaking insane.


----------



## bellecate

I’m running out of words for how much of a laughing stock these two have become.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


>




Interesting. So the Baths have one heir to the title and one child that isn't even eligible for a courtesy title. Not sure I'd have created that divide.


----------



## kemilia

Annawakes said:


> No, she can’t.  Lol.  That was terrible terrible acting.  I’m baffled *how she ever got a part in anything*.  It couldn’t have been her acting skills.


Peanut butter?


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I thought reportedly $17 and more promised
> 
> Plus there are options for more books (which doesn't mean anything except they have him locked into a multi-book option deal for his money and could drop him anytime).


I thought so too, but the $35M info is from the video. It's possible that illiterates are in high demand theses days.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Valentine on Piers




I watched this, thanks for posting @Chanbal.  Valentine Low says that Harry will not return to the UK for one reason: the children.  Meghan will never allow them to leave the U.S. to live elsewhere so Harry will stick around for the children no matter what.  I think Low is probably right, at least for the next few years, while the children are very young.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is freaking insane.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> I’m running out of words for how much of a laughing stock these two have become.
> 
> View attachment 5626738


Is this true? So daddy Elton is not paying for his lawyers… Poor lawyer, I hope the publicity he/she will get compensates for the pain and suffering. I wonder if the lawyer read the Courtiers. He may need the services of BetterWhatever after the encounters with TW. All allegedly, of course.


----------



## Chanbal

Let's see if I understood this. EL donates the $1M and TW gets the credit for it. Why?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I thought reportedly $17 and more promised
> 
> Plus there are options for more books (which doesn't mean anything except they have him locked into a multi-book option deal for his money and could drop him anytime).


Like everything else they do there’s a lot of promises and very little follow through. The book deal was signed 15 months ago and there still isn’t a firm release date. Whether it’s $17 million or $35 million, that’s too much cash to have tied up for such a long time without getting anything back for it. Think of all the dozens of talented new writers who could have had their work published if that money had been available.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Like everything else they do there’s a lot of promises and very little follow through. The book deal was signed 15 months ago and there still isn’t a firm release date. Whether it’s $17 million or $35 million, that’s too much cash to have tied up for such a long time without getting anything back for it. *Think of all the dozens of talented new writers who could have had their work published if that money had been available.*


This is why I feel so disgusted.


----------



## Cinderlala

LittleStar88 said:


> Well, he sort of tags along like the family dog - everything is always about her and he's just her sidekick/court jester/handbag to be trotted out as it suits her needs.


Allegedly, she was not even meant to be there, only Prince Harry was expected.   


sdkitty said:


> Meghan is now older than Diana was when she died....actually she was probably older when he met her.  Is her expiration coming up?  could this be part of the reason she's copying Wallis now?  No, *she probably doesn't recognize that she's middle aged*


What?!  Don't you know she's a _YOUNG MOTHER_?!???


----------



## Chanbal

More from Tom Bower… the adjectives


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> Like everything else they do there’s a lot of promises and very little follow through. The book deal was signed 15 months ago and there still isn’t a firm release date. Whether it’s $17 million or $35 million, that’s too much cash to have tied up for such a long time without getting anything back for it. Think of all the dozens of talented new writers who could have had their work published if that money had been available.


Early on Meg trotted out guff about how she would be hitting the ground running as if pre-Meg no one in the RF had ever done anything.  Sussexes repeatedly announced they were about to launch this, that, and the other groundbreaking global wotnot….and it was all so much hot air.  After years of nothing it’s impossible to hide the sheer nothingness achieved.  H&M have a small army on the payroll but still don’t even know where to start or what they want to achieve.  But they are everywhere - like sh*t on a shoe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> More from Tom Bower… the adjectives



No kidding.  

_Complicated, depressed, unintelligent man, seeking a role._  Per Mr. Bowers.


----------



## Cinderlala

I love her latest quote, blah blah blah "supporting women and the spirit of giving."  Note: "spirit" of giving she loves, not actually giving.  

And let's make a list of the women she likes to support:

Friends
Fawning fans
Family
Employees
Icons/former icons  (non-royals only)
Non-famous, non-fans
Amazing women in BRF
Transactional acquaintances willing to pose as friends for mutually beneficial gain
Poor women (fawning fans OK)
Word salad women (greatest support of all!!) (oops, spoke too soon)
*Herself*


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> Early on Meg trotted out guff about how she would be hitting the ground running as if pre-Meg no one in the RF had ever done anything.  Sussexes repeatedly announced they were about to launch this, that, and the other groundbreaking global wotnot….and it was all so much hot air.  After years of nothing it’s impossible to hide the sheer nothingness achieved.  H&M have a small army on the payroll but still don’t even know where to start or what they want to achieve.  But they are everywhere - like sh*t on a shoe.


That first year she was signing contracts like there was no tomorrow. Eventually she was expected to deliver on what she promised. She thought she could hire people to do the work but even under those circumstances the employees needed some direction about what she wanted and I don’t think she knew.


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> That first year she was signing contracts like there was no tomorrow. Eventually she was expected to deliver on what she promised. She thought she could hire people to do the work but even under those circumstances the employees needed some direction about what she wanted and I don’t think she knew.


But, but...she can do _*anything*_!!!!    


Except take advice or listen to anyone.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> That first year she was signing contracts like there was no tomorrow. Eventually she was expected to deliver on what she promised. She thought she could hire people to do the work but even under those circumstances the employees needed some direction about what she wanted and I don’t think she knew.


Not a clue.  If Meg Inc. has a mission statement (ageing myself there) it’s “make me look wonderful” and that’s as profound as it gets.


----------



## youngster

youngster said:


> _Complicated, depressed, unintelligent man, seeking a role._ Per Mr. Bowers.



Quoting myself here lol.  

This description of Harry by Mr. Bowers begs the question, what kind of woman would find a _"complicated, depressed, unintelligent man"_ attractive in the least?  An intelligent woman would run in the opposite direction.


----------



## Aimee3

youngster said:


> Quoting myself here lol.
> 
> This description of Harry by Mr. Bowers begs the question, what kind of woman would find a _"complicated, depressed, unintelligent man"_ attractive in the least?  An intelligent woman would run in the opposite direction.


A woman who wants a prince and that’s all she sees.


----------



## kipp

Aimee3 said:


> A woman who wants a prince and that’s all she sees.


She saw $$$$ and thought this Prince would be the meal ticket to that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Quoting myself here lol.
> 
> This description of Harry by Mr. Bowers begs the question, what kind of woman would find a _"complicated, depressed, unintelligent man"_ attractive in the least?  An intelligent woman would run in the opposite direction.


She sees $$$$$$$, cars, fashion, glittering paps and more $$$$$$$$, just like Disney promised. So magical.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Too bad it will soon be midnight and all the glitter and gold converts back to pumpkins and mice.


----------



## WingNut

Cinderlala said:


> I love her latest quote, blah blah blah "supporting women and the spirit of giving."  Note: "spirit" of giving she loves, not actually giving.
> 
> And let's make a list of the women she likes to support:
> 
> Friends
> Fawning fans
> Family
> Employees
> Icons/former icons  (non-royals only)
> Non-famous, non-fans
> Amazing women in BRF
> Transactional acquaintances willing to pose as friends for mutually beneficial gain
> Poor women (fawning fans OK)
> Word salad women (greatest support of all!!) (oops, spoke too soon)
> *Herself*


Ahhhh hahaha excellent summary!


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> No kidding.
> 
> _Complicated, depressed, unintelligent man, seeking a role._  Per Mr. Bowers.


I believe the video below is the full version of Tom Bower's interview, I'm still watching it (too many interruptions today). TB provides a concise overview of the Harkle's saga, which might be interesting to some.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I almost fell off my chair when I read that Archewell was giving away $1 million. Then I opened  the story and found that they are actually “teaming” with the group that is giving away the million. Never believe the headlines, folks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Archewell Foundation Teams Up to Give $1M to Women In Need
> 
> 
> “Two things that bring me great joy are supporting women, and the spirit of giving," Meghan said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com


"Meghan Markle's Archewell"?
Is Handbag being sidelined from the foundation too?
Have to admit we benefit from Zedzee's largesse. She dispenses unintended merriment in spectacular doses, and uncalled-for misery in similar proportion.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG on the concert - another long live show. Still, excellent observations and comments.


----------



## Chanbal

2023, the year of reconciliation. According to the Sun, the Harkles planned for 'kiss and make up' after releasing all their masterpieces.The book is expected to be released in December.

*PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal.*
_Sources told The Sun Harry and Meghan saw the book and docuseries as a way of attacking the royals one final time before trying to build bridges again._









						Harry & Meg bid to make amends with royals by toning down book & Netflix show
					

PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal. The cou…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

OMG.
The delusionals have abandoned their Disney Princesses scenarios  and we now have them headed to the Land of Oz. They’re giving themselves a year for Hazbeen to be like the Scarecrow and find a brain and Raptor to mimic the Tinman (she wears the pants in the family and has Haz’s balls in her possession) to find a heart.

All kind of clichés come to mind starting with, “a leopard never changes its spots.”


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> 2023, the year of reconciliation. According to the Sun, the Harkles planned for 'kiss and make up' after releasing all their masterpieces.The book is expected to be released in December.
> 
> *PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal.*
> _Sources told The Sun Harry and Meghan saw the book and docuseries as a way of attacking the royals one final time before trying to build bridges again._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg bid to make amends with royals by toning down book & Netflix show
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal. The cou…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



This is incredibly bizarre. And it reeks of Omid Scobie and his fondness of making the Harkles a legend (in their own mind). Remember how he claimed that after all that paternity/maternity leave, the Harkles were embarking on their "thrive chapter"? And how for the sake of their mental health, they needed to keep an ocean away from the RF? 

So, after the thrive chapter which started in Aug 2021 and fizzled in 2022, now they are planning a few months of backstabbing glory, then grandiosely and idiotically expect a year of reconciliation. Needless to say, as they see themselves as the victims, they will be waiting for the RF, Markles, Raglands and assorted media to be prostrating themselves in abject agony, seeking forgiveness.


----------



## needlv




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Let's see if I understood this. EL donates the $1M and TW gets the credit for it. Why?



The tweet picked up a connection between Ving and Archewell: Ving has partnered with Aspen before, and Aspen has a case of Handbag misinformation hypocrisy.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> 2023, the year of reconciliation. According to the Sun, the Harkles planned for 'kiss and make up' after releasing all their masterpieces.The book is expected to be released in December.
> 
> *PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal.*
> _Sources told The Sun Harry and Meghan saw the book and docuseries as a way of attacking the royals one final time before trying to build bridges again._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg bid to make amends with royals by toning down book & Netflix show
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal. The cou…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Narcissists may think that’s a sound plan - but it takes both parties to truly reconcile.  Charles already said publicly he loves them and wishes them well.  I think he’d be happy to be on friendlier terms and see the kids, but that doesn’t mean bringing them back into the Royal fold or trusting them.  
William will be King for the majority of Harrys remaining life and old age.  Sucking up to Charles whilst slagging off William and Kate for money would be to repeat the mistakes they just made.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> 2023, the year of reconciliation. According to the Sun, the Harkles planned for 'kiss and make up' after releasing all their masterpieces.The book is expected to be released in December.
> 
> *PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal.*
> _Sources told The Sun Harry and Meghan saw the book and docuseries as a way of attacking the royals one final time before trying to build bridges again._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg bid to make amends with royals by toning down book & Netflix show
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal. The cou…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk




Good luck with that. Gosh, they can't be THAT idiotic, can they?


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> This is incredibly bizarre. And it reeks of Omid Scobie and his fondness of making the Harkles a legend (in their own mind). Remember how he claimed that after all that paternity/maternity leave, the Harkles were embarking on their "thrive chapter"? And how for the sake of their mental health, they needed to keep an ocean away from the RF?
> 
> So, after the thrive chapter which started in Aug 2021 and fizzled in 2022, now they are planning a few months of backstabbing glory, then grandiosely and idiotically expect a year of reconciliation. Needless to say, as they see themselves as the victims, they will be waiting for the RF, Markles, Raglands and assorted media to be prostrating themselves in abject agony, seeking forgiveness.


I think it’s a case of they need more content and the only way they can get that is to get back in contact with the BRF so they can secretly gather more dirt. After all H has 3 more books to write as part of his supposed 4 book deal. It doesn’t matter if they manage to get any real new dirt or not. As long as they are seen to be in the same room as any of the senior royals they can make up the content of their “conversations“ later. They’ll be able to lie with impunity as usual because they know the Royals won’t respond.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> I think it’s a case of they need more content and the only way they can get that is to get back in contact with the BRF so they can secretly gather more dirt. After all H has 3 more books to write as part of his supposed 4 book deal. It doesn’t matter if they manage to get any real new dirt or not. As long as they are seen to be in the same room as any of the senior royals they can make up the content of their “conversations“ later. They’ll be able to lie with impunity as usual because they know the Royals won’t respond.


They might save themselves the cost of the private jet and just make up the lies in the comfort of their toilets. After all, Zedzee boasted that she could phone TQ at any time and they claimed that they videocall the RF frequently. I'm sure they will say the same about Charles, and the Wales children will continue to send presents to their favourite uncle and aunt overseas.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> They might save themselves the cost of the private jet and just make up the lies in the comfort of their toilets. After all, Zedzee boasted that she could phone TQ at any time and they claimed that they videocall the RF frequently. I'm sure they will say the same about Charles, and the Wales children will continue to send presents to their favourite uncle and aunt overseas.


If they are shown to have achieved some sort of rapprochement with the BRF, that would allow the grifters to continue to really milk the BRF connection. At this point no one other than their sugars would believe that they had any special insight or a direct pipeline into the innermost circle of the BRF. Any “insights” or information they could provide would be seen as stale news or highly suspect fabrications. They probably want to try to insinuate themselves into more prominent roles in KC’s coronation as opposed to the bit parts they clearly were relegated at QE’s funeral. At the very least TW is going to want access to the Royal tiaras for the social events leading up to and imcluding the Coronation.


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good luck with that. Gosh, they can't be THAT idiotic, can they?


Well, actually yes.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> This is incredibly bizarre. And it reeks of Omid Scobie and his fondness of making the Harkles a legend (in their own mind). Remember how he claimed that after all that paternity/maternity leave, the Harkles were embarking on their "thrive chapter"? And how for the sake of their mental health, they needed to keep an ocean away from the RF?
> 
> So, after the thrive chapter which started in Aug 2021 and fizzled in 2022, now they are planning a few months of backstabbing glory, then grandiosely and idiotically expect a year of reconciliation. Needless to say, as they see themselves as the victims, they will be waiting for the RF, Markles, Raglands and assorted media to be prostrating themselves in abject agony, seeking forgiveness.





Pessie said:


> Narcissists may think that’s a sound plan - but it takes both parties to truly reconcile.  Charles already said publicly he loves them and wishes them well.  I think he’d be happy to be on friendlier terms and see the kids, but that doesn’t mean bringing them back into the Royal fold or trusting them.
> William will be King for the majority of Harrys remaining life and old age.  Sucking up to Charles whilst slagging off William and Kate for money would be to repeat the mistakes they just made.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good luck with that. Gosh, they can't be THAT idiotic, can they?


The year of "Kiss and Meg Up?"


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


>



Nice try for the Sussex Survival Club, but who is the inspirational woman in the Harkles world?


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> They probably want to try to insinuate themselves into more prominent roles in KC’s coronation as opposed to the bit parts they clearly were relegated at QE’s funeral. At the very least *TW is going to want access to the Royal tiaras for the social events* leading up to and imcluding the Coronation.


No, no, no...
They wouldn't loan a tiara to Light-fingered LiliMum!


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> The tweet picked up a connection between Ving and Archewell: Ving has partnered with Aspen before, and Aspen has a case of Handbag misinformation hypocrisy.


SS may have facilitated enough agreements to carry them until the Year of "Kiss and Meg Up", and this last meritorious PR is likely one of them.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> The year of "Kiss and Meg Up?"



Reconciliations may vary.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Overpaid and overseas


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> 2023, the year of reconciliation. According to the Sun, the Harkles planned for 'kiss and make up' after releasing all their masterpieces.The book is expected to be released in December.
> 
> *PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal.*
> _Sources told The Sun Harry and Meghan saw the book and docuseries as a way of attacking the royals one final time before trying to build bridges again._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meg bid to make amends with royals by toning down book & Netflix show
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry and Meghan have secretly planned a year of reconciliation with the Royal Family but only after their controversial memoir and Netflix series have come out, The Sun can reveal. The cou…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



So one more year of trashing his family to accumulate $$$$, and then they will try and weasel their way back in to the fold?  Does this make sense to anyone?  If they were serious, they would be begging forgiveness NOW and dropping the book, nflix, etc.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe this explains the _2023 year of reconciliation_ plan


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


> It seems like only yesterday that he was mocking his brother's hair loss....



Awkward. 
Princess Hairy should have learned ages ago to keep his mouth shut, but he didn't and look at him now... a rapidly balding outcast.







Chanbal said:


> If you are watching the movie, you may also appreciate the excerpt below from her book Finding F. that someone kindly posted on Reddit.
> View attachment 5624385





OK JCMH, whatever you say... at least try and make your lies sound believable.





charlottawill said:


> I am reminded of the movie Life Size with Tyra Banks.



WTF!?


She looks like she takes better care of her chucky doll than she does of her real life chucky husband.





EverSoElusive said:


> Did they think that Nflix was just handing out free money to them?












Toby93 said:


> Another lawsuit?..
> 
> And an interesting observation....



Another lawsuit? Is he for real?!


Hey JCMH- Suing everyone and anyone is NOT a valid career. GET A REAL JOB FFS!




jennlt said:


> According to TMZ, they arrived separately and an hour apart


She was probably at home practicing in the mirror how to act at a concert.
Yet she managed to fail because she looks awkward AF. Also, why is she dressed like she has an important business meeting in 5 mins? She probably thinks this is how rIcH & iMpOrTaNt people dress to go to a concert.







bellecate said:


> I’m running out of words for how much of a laughing stock these two have become.
> 
> View attachment 5626738


----------



## CarryOn2020

While Princess Anne is away, the lil twerps will try anything. Year of reconciliation?  Dream on.
Note the jewels  











						HRH The Princess BAMF
					

Fanblog for the Princess Royal, who hasn’t given a single **** since 1950




					princessanneftw.tumblr.com


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> 2023, the year of reconciliation. According to the Sun, the Harkles planned for 'kiss and make up' after releasing all their masterpieces.The book is expected to be released in December.



So, The Sun says that they planned to launch their charm offensive on _the Queen_ but she, _so very inconveniently for them_, died.  From their perspective, this plan probably made sense. They make their tens of millions from Netflix and Harry's book, are careful to not criticize the Queen directly and just express admiration for her and leave the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate, the named or nameless BP staff and suits.  They then work on charming and manipulating the Queen who still loves Harry and just wants peace in her remaining years.  With Charles now King though, everything has changed.  An attack on Charles is an attack on the institution and heaven help them if they attack Camilla or Kate. No wonder they are desperately trying to edit the book and reality show.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> So, The Sun says that they planned to launch their charm offensive on _the Queen_ but she, _so very inconveniently for them_, died.  From their perspective, this plan probably made sense. They make their tens of millions from Netflix and Harry's book, are careful to not criticize the Queen directly and just express admiration for her and leave the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate, the named or nameless BP staff and suits.  They then work on charming and manipulating the Queen who still loves Harry and just wants peace in her remaining years.  With Charles now King though, everything has changed.  An attack on Charles is an attack on the institution and heaven help them if they attack Camilla or Kate. No wonder they are desperately trying to edit the book and reality show.


That just sounds sick.


----------



## KEG66

xincinsin said:


> That just sounds sick.


That’s because it is and they are !


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> That just sounds sick.



It really does.  Trying to manipulate a 96 year old lady in frail health still mourning the death of her husband? Who does that? I don't think it would have worked in any case though.  QEII, as frail as she was, was likely still clear headed about Harry and his demands and certainly Charles and William are.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> It really does.  Trying to manipulate a 96 year old lady in frail health still mourning the death of her husband? Who does that? I don't think it would have worked in any case though.  QEII, as frail as she was, was likely still clear headed about Harry and his demands and certainly Charles and William are.


Makes you wonder how they will portray their last few meetings with her when they "popped by" on their way to Invictus and when they nipped in for the jubilee. The meeting from which Zedzee was allegedly excluded and which Handbag definitely lied about to Hoda, the alleged attempt to get the two Lillibet pic. Will Handbag pull a fast one, claiming that he still has an important/powerful role in the RF because that was what Gan Gan promised him, believing that no one would dare defy her wishes? Will Zedzee claim that she made up with TQ (and was promised a palace, more titles, and tiaras galore)? Will Misan splice a pic of QE with a pic of the babe?


----------



## marietouchet

Musings on latest litigation
1. Read somewhere that MM was awarded £1 for her big MOS/DM win, a total Pyrrhic victory. Well that went so well that …
2. Liz Hurley in lawsuit … hmm her biggest movie was Austin Powers, recently praised by Archewell podcast for its positive archetypes , what the heck ???
3. The last litigant , Baroness Lawrence … no pundit understands her participation in suit - complicated story - her son died - 25 years ago, DM helped bring case to Justice. I DO NOT claim to know her story, but she is not an everyday entertainment celebrity like Liz, Sadie, Elton
4. Another story says no court filings to date, but effort has been launched, with People magazine and Marie Claire as forums, I think


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Musings on latest litigation
> 1. Read somewhere that MM was awarded £1 for her big MOS/DM win, a total Pyrrhic victory. Well that went so well that …
> 2. Liz Hurley in lawsuit … hmm her biggest movie was Austin Powers, recently praised by Archewell podcast for its positive archetypes , what the heck ???
> 3. The last litigant , Baroness Lawrence … no pundit understands her participation in suit - complicated story - her son died - 25 years ago, DM helped bring case to Justice. I DO NOT claim to know her story, but she is not an everyday entertainment celebrity like Liz, Sadie, Elton
> 4. Another story says no court filings to date, but effort has been launched, with People magazine and Marie Claire as forums, I think



_In an extraordinary statement released late on Thursday night Associated Newspapers singled out Lady Lawrence for criticism, *suggesting she had only started the legal proceedings after being maliciously led astray by others.*

A spokesperson for the company said: “It is deeply saddening that whoever is cynically and unscrupulously orchestrating these claims appears to have persuaded Baroness Lawrence – for whom the Mail has the greatest respect and admiration – to endorse the word of someone who is such a manifestly discredited and untrustworthy liar.”

Although the detail of Lawrence’s legal claim is unclear, the company said she may be relying on the evidence of Jonathan Rees. He is a south London private investigator who undertook widespread work for newspaper groups and was tried in relation to the murder of his former colleague Daniel Morgan, although the case later collapsed.

Whether Associated Newspapers is able to deal financially with the prospect of lengthy litigation is less clear. Although the Daily Mail remains the biggest-selling print newspaper in the country, it faces the same long-term sales decline affecting the entire industry and has recently been taken private by an offshore trust controlled by the chair, Lord Rothermere. Newspaper costs are rising substantially, while the Mail recently announced plans to merge parts of its newspaper business with its sister website MailOnline to save on costs.

The bigger worry for the Mail is that, if any of the claims are successful, it could open the door for other cases against the newspaper that could leave it in legal limbo for years. Lawyers for the group of six claimants suggest their cases “represent the tip of the iceberg” and that “many other innocent people remain unknowing victims of similar terrible and reprehensible covert acts”. News UK has already paid hundreds of millions of pounds in costs and damages relating to claims of phone hacking at the News of the World and the Sun, with cases heading into a third decade.

Even though some of the allegations against the Mail relate to articles published in the early 1990s, many current leading newspaper executives – such as its editor, Ted Verity, and the Times editor, Tony Gallagher – were at the newspaper during the time.

Given the slow progress of the court system, it is unlikely any trial would take place before 2024. By that point Dacre may be already in the House of Lords – but this would not stop him giving evidence.








						Legal action by Doreen Lawrence and Prince Harry could mire Daily Mail for years
					

Six people have brought claims, but it is those from Stephen Lawrence’s mother that have really hurt newspaper




					www.theguardian.com
				



_


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> _In an extraordinary statement released late on Thursday night Associated Newspapers singled out Lady Lawrence for criticism, *suggesting she had only started the legal proceedings after being maliciously led astray by others.*
> 
> A spokesperson for the company said: “It is deeply saddening that whoever is cynically and unscrupulously orchestrating these claims appears to have persuaded Baroness Lawrence – for whom the Mail has the greatest respect and admiration – to endorse the word of someone who is such a manifestly discredited and untrustworthy liar.”
> 
> Although the detail of Lawrence’s legal claim is unclear, the company said she may be relying on the evidence of Jonathan Rees. He is a south London private investigator who undertook widespread work for newspaper groups and was tried in relation to the murder of his former colleague Daniel Morgan, although the case later collapsed.
> 
> Whether Associated Newspapers is able to deal financially with the prospect of lengthy litigation is less clear. Although the Daily Mail remains the biggest-selling print newspaper in the country, it faces the same long-term sales decline affecting the entire industry and has recently been taken private by an offshore trust controlled by the chair, Lord Rothermere. Newspaper costs are rising substantially, while the Mail recently announced plans to merge parts of its newspaper business with its sister website MailOnline to save on costs.
> 
> The bigger worry for the Mail is that, if any of the claims are successful, it could open the door for other cases against the newspaper that could leave it in legal limbo for years. Lawyers for the group of six claimants suggest their cases “represent the tip of the iceberg” and that “many other innocent people remain unknowing victims of similar terrible and reprehensible covert acts”. News UK has already paid hundreds of millions of pounds in costs and damages relating to claims of phone hacking at the News of the World and the Sun, with cases heading into a third decade.
> 
> Even though some of the allegations against the Mail relate to articles published in the early 1990s, many current leading newspaper executives – such as its editor, Ted Verity, and the Times editor, Tony Gallagher – were at the newspaper during the time.
> 
> Given the slow progress of the court system, it is unlikely any trial would take place before 2024. By that point Dacre may be already in the House of Lords – but this would not stop him giving evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Legal action by Doreen Lawrence and Prince Harry could mire Daily Mail for years
> 
> 
> Six people have brought claims, but it is those from Stephen Lawrence’s mother that have really hurt newspaper
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


No statute of limitations?
I must be dense (cannot multiquote) but how is Austin Powers a positive “archetype”? 

I don’t find Mike Myers particularly entertaining or funny and now I wonder if Megsy is aiming for a role in case the Austin Powers franchise is defrosted


----------



## Katel

jennlt said:


> Overpaid and overseas






Is this a real picture of their staff? 
Isn't a picture worth a thousand  words …


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe this explains the _2023 year of reconciliation_ plan



It's not that obvious. The reconciliation is allegedly scheduled for after the release of the bombshells, so any attempt before that might be considered premature.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> So, The Sun says that they planned to launch their charm offensive on _the Queen_ but she, _so very inconveniently for them_, died.  From their perspective, this plan probably made sense. They make their tens of millions from Netflix and Harry's book, are careful to not criticize the Queen directly and just express admiration for her and leave the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate, the named or nameless BP staff and suits.  They then work on charming and manipulating the Queen who still loves Harry and just wants peace in her remaining years.  With Charles now King though, everything has changed.  An attack on Charles is an attack on the institution and heaven help them if they attack Camilla or Kate. No wonder they are desperately trying to edit the book and reality show.


You summarized it very well. Here is just a complementing quote from the Sun's article:
"_Royal author Robert Jobson said: “*It shows they are a very calculating couple and yet again their timing has completely misfired.*_"


----------



## Sophisticatted

So, I guess this somewhat explains her “I’m ready to forgive” quote in The Cut article as well as Gayle’s weirdo “no peace agreement has been reached, sadly” quote (when it wasn’t a peace summit to begin with, it was a funeral that they happened to coincidentally be in town for…)

I keep seeing the date March 2023 as some big thing to look towards.  Any idea what’s so special about that month and year?


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Given the slow progress of the court system, it is unlikely any trial would take place before 2024. By that point Dacre may be already in the House of Lords – but this would not stop him giving evidence.



I wonder if it's just a nuisance lawsuit to tie up the DM for years and make them spend tons of money on defending themselves during a time when print media is in severe decline? Still, it's not like the DM and their other affiliates don't have online sites so it wouldn't put them out of business.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, The Sun says that they planned to launch their charm offensive on _the Queen_ but she, _so very inconveniently for them_, died.  From their perspective, this plan probably made sense. They make their tens of millions from Netflix and Harry's book, are careful to not criticize the Queen directly and just express admiration for her and leave the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate, the named or nameless BP staff and suits.  They then work on charming and manipulating the Queen who still loves Harry and just wants peace in her remaining years.  With Charles now King though, everything has changed.  An attack on Charles is an attack on the institution and heaven help them if they attack Camilla or Kate. No wonder they are desperately trying to edit the book and reality show.


If they did as you describe, and criticized everyone, but TQ, she still would not have been thrilled by that. I don't think that this plan would have worked even if she had lived.  Frankly, I would love to know what their idea of "charm" happens to be.  Harry telling the world that he wants to make sure that his granny has good people around her? He is going to protect her?  That would be a good trick since he refused to go and see her when she was alive.  Such hypocrisy!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I wonder if it's just a nuisance lawsuit to tie up the DM for years and make them spend tons of money on defending themselves during a time when print media is in severe decline? Still, it's not like the DM and their other affiliates don't have online sites so it wouldn't put them out of business.


If they actually believed that, they are are as dumb as a pile of rocks.  ANL makes money from ANY conflict because it sells papers and/or advertising in paper and the web.  I have no doubt that ANL has in-house attorneys on salary.  It doesn't cost them extra.


----------



## bellecate

They are almost going from a ridiculous duo to a sad pair. Almost…….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sophisticatted said:


> So, I guess this somewhat explains her “I’m ready to forgive” quote in The Cut article as well as Gayle’s weirdo “no peace agreement has been reached, sadly” quote (when it wasn’t a peace summit to begin with, it was a funeral that they happened to coincidentally be in town for…)
> 
> I keep seeing the date March 2023 as some big thing to look towards.  Any idea what’s so special about that month and year?


Iirc March, 2020 is when they left the UK for Canada and began the lease of FrogCott.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Makes you wonder how they will portray their last few meetings with her when they "popped by" on their way to Invictus and when they nipped in for the jubilee. The meeting from which Zedzee was allegedly excluded and which Handbag definitely lied about to Hoda, the alleged attempt to get the two Lillibet pic. Will Handbag pull a fast one, claiming that *he still has an important/powerful role in the RF because that was what Gan Gan promised him*, believing that no one would dare defy her wishes? Will Zedzee claim that she made up with TQ (and was promised a palace, more titles, and tiaras galore)? Will Misan splice a pic of QE with a pic of the babe?



I don't know whether to laugh or cry.  This is such an outright lie.  He has such an important role that his father in his VERY FIRST SPEECH AS KING said he wished them well OVERSEAS!  If that isn't the big kiss off, then I don't know what is.  Harry, that means out of sight and out of mind and go away.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> They are almost going from a ridiculous duo to a sad pair. Almost…….
> View attachment 5627552


Photoshopping wrinkles!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Sophisticatted said:


> So, I guess this somewhat explains her “I’m ready to forgive” quote in The Cut article as well as Gayle’s weirdo “no peace agreement has been reached, sadly” quote (when it wasn’t a peace summit to begin with, it was a funeral that they happened to coincidentally be in town for…)
> 
> I keep seeing the date March 2023 as some big thing to look towards.  Any idea what’s so special about that month and year?


Birth of new Invisikids?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Thank you for the link. Have not had a chance to listen, but skimmed some of the comments. 
EJ, Hurley, H&M all depend on the public buying their products. This should be everyone’s plan:

_Freedom of economic wealth. Don't buy their stuff._

Imo EJ has lost his senses. Hurley has some wretched publicity concerning her kid’s father. No surprise their sales would be affected.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> Birth of new Invisikids?


I thought the factory was having supply chain issues.  The  models of an older boy and girl are still on back order.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I thought the factory was having supply chain issues.  The  models of an older boy and girl are still on back order.



They are waiting until the electronic versions are available


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> I thought the factory was having supply chain issues.  The  models of an older boy and girl are still on back order.





papertiger said:


> They are waiting until the electronic versions are available



You guys are killing me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

@youngster This answers my question about how the information got out.  I thought it was a disgruntled employee.  Disgruntled and underpaid.  I don't know if I agree with the spying part, but someone definitely leaked.

CDAN
Blind Item #4​

The ginger haired one will soon learn it is actually people he hired and pays that were spying on him. They simply sold the information to the highest bidder.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> @youngster This answers my question about how the information got out.  I thought it was a disgruntled employee.  Disgruntled and underpaid.  I don't know if I agree with the spying part, but someone definitely leaked.
> 
> CDAN
> Blind Item #4​
> 
> The ginger haired one will soon learn it is actually people he hired and pays that were spying on him. They simply sold the information to the highest bidder.



What's the issue with the face of the ginger haired one?


----------



## gracekelly

I have never understood all the arm pulling. This is such juvenile and undignified behavior.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have never understood all the arm pulling. This is such juvenile and undignified behavior.


domination I think


----------



## Sharont2305

Katel said:


> View attachment 5627514
> 
> 
> Is this a real picture of their staff?
> Isn't a picture worth a thousand  words …


And this was when they landed for their tour in Australia. Their pregnancy announcement with Archie was made when they were mid air.


----------



## marietouchet

pukasonqo said:


> No statute of limitations?
> I must be dense (cannot multiquote) but how is Austin Powers a positive “archetype”?
> 
> I don’t find Mike Myers particularly entertaining or funny and now I wonder if Megsy is aiming for a role in case the Austin Powers franchise is defrosted


MM podcast was criticising the AP movie for not promoting positive Asian characters. Liz HRiley played a James Bond-style babe but heck the movie is a comedy. 

Curious that MM would choose to go after THAT movie NOW when LH is announced as co litigant with JCMH.  The podcast reminded me that LH is known for being a babe


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> So, The Sun says that they planned to launch their charm offensive on _the Queen_ but she, _so very inconveniently for them_, died.  From their perspective, this plan probably made sense. They make their tens of millions from Netflix and Harry's book, are careful to not criticize the Queen directly and just express admiration for her and leave the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate, the named or nameless BP staff and suits.  They then work on charming and manipulating the Queen who still loves Harry and just wants peace in her remaining years.  With Charles now King though, everything has changed.  An attack on Charles is an attack on the institution and heaven help them if they attack Camilla or Kate. No wonder they are desperately trying to edit the book and reality show.


BUT BUT BUT they had no plans to see QEII on that trip, charm offensive impossible, story makes no sense


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> So, I guess this somewhat explains her “I’m ready to forgive” quote in The Cut article as well as Gayle’s weirdo “no peace agreement has been reached, sadly” quote (when it wasn’t a peace summit to begin with, it was a funeral that they happened to coincidentally be in town for…)
> 
> I keep seeing the date March 2023 as some big thing to look towards.  Any idea what’s so special about that month and year?


date is arbitrary, announcement is timed to be prophylactic to dull the pain of movie and book ?

look at order of our info
1. first we learn they can’t tone down movie or book, oops 
2. Now they are trying to make nice to dull the uproar ?


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> You guys are killing me



and there is a chip shortage for the digital versions , which will of course be greener
Elon showed his new robot Optimus Prime this week 
They already have ordered two Minimus Prime models


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> What's the issue with the face of the ginger haired one?



Not an isolated incident.

Remember this one?  The BLG commented on this it being part of the Getty Image portfolio of pics for sale.


----------



## Lounorada

bellecate said:


> They are almost going from a ridiculous duo to a sad pair. Almost…….
> View attachment 5627552





gracekelly said:


> Photoshopping wrinkles!





and failed. Bless them!




csshopper said:


> Not an isolated incident.
> 
> Remember this one?  The BLG commented on this it being part of the Getty Image portfolio of pics for sale.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5627606


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> BUT BUT BUT they had no plans to see QEII on that trip, charm offensive impossible, story makes no sense



The Sun was saying that their charm offensive was to launch in 2023, after the Netflix series came out and after Harry's book was published, but QEII passed away upsetting their plans and causing them to try to revise the book and reality show.


----------



## pukasonqo

csshopper said:


> Not an isolated incident.
> 
> Remember this one?  The BLG commented on this it being part of the Getty Image portfolio of pics for sale.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5627606


Makes Mr Bean look intelligent and handsome by comparison (yes, I know he got caught unawares and yes, I have some awful pics taken of me but are we back to medieval times when royalty could not be mocked? All of this in case I get put on place for making fun of Hazza)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What's the issue with the face of the ginger haired one?



Imo he looks drunk, stoned, drugged, unhinged, or whatever, so she is guiding him, holding him up, who knows? She looks like she is giddy, too. 



23 March 2007: Prince Harry, looking worse for wear, leaves Boujis nightclub in London. After a scuffle with the paparazzi outside the club, he fell while trying to get into his car.Picture: Steve Allen / Rex Features CREDIT: Steve Allen / Rex Features


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> @youngster This answers my question about how the information got out.  I thought it was a disgruntled employee.  Disgruntled and underpaid.  I don't know if I agree with the spying part, but someone definitely leaked.
> 
> CDAN
> Blind Item #4​
> 
> The ginger haired one will soon learn it is actually people he hired and pays that were spying on him. They simply sold the information to the highest bidder.



What was leaked, though? It's probably somewhere in here, but I have a raging headache for the 3rd night and somehow missed it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> The Sun was saying that their charm offensive was to launch in 2023, after the Netflix series came out and after Harry's book was published, but QEII passed away upsetting their plans and causing them to try to revise the book and reality show.


I’m having a hard time believing that they actually had a strategy that was based on a 96 year old woman who had been looking increasingly frail to the point where she had severely cut back on her public appearances. Their supposed strategy had zero contingency planning in the event that QE passed away before they managed to launch their Netflix fantasy series and H’s book of fiction. I know many say that H is dim but even Bower points out that both H and M are quite clever about marketing. I think all the recent stories about their desperately trying to revise the Netflix stuff and the book are just fake news planted to drum up interest in the Netflix stuff and the book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is from the prologue of Low's book, the flight from Tonga back to Sydney where Harry was exceptionally rude to the press. I had to go back to it later to figure out what bothered me the first time around.

So Ghoul "stood a couple of feet behind him, smiling benignly but not saying much"? Does that sound even the least bit like her, the woman who grabbed him two days after the wedding so she could enter Charles's party first? The woman that ellbowed him in the stomach to step in front of him?

Purely speculating here, but I'll bet money she had been in his ear for all of that flight or maybe all of that trip, riling him up and then standing back quietly only to enjoy the fruits of her labour.


----------



## Mrs.Z

This is funny, ”she looks like a sociopath and he looks neutered.”


----------



## needlv




----------



## Katel

Sophisticatted said:


> So, I guess this somewhat explains her “I’m ready to forgive” quote in The Cut article as well as Gayle’s weirdo “no peace agreement has been reached, sadly” quote (when it wasn’t a peace summit to begin with, it was a funeral that they happened to coincidentally be in town for…)
> 
> I keep seeing the date March 2023 as some big thing to look towards.  Any idea what’s so special about that month and year?


Yes … I recall a Twitter influencer (like Harry’s grey suit?) saying something like  “Mark my words, watch for next October 2023” - they had heard a palace scoop - and it was someone credible (but I can’t find it now darn).  

But at this rate, it’s not going to take much longer for the combustion and flame out.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc March, 2020 is when they left the UK for Canada and began the lease of FrogCott.


They left the UK for Canada mid-November 2019.  IIRC, they were told to lay low after the South Africa documentary when Meghan shed her “tear, left eye” after telling the world not many people had asked her if she was ok. There was speculation at the time (since they hadn’t been seen publicly since October) that they were heading to America to spend Thanksgiving with her mother. I believe this was after Meghan and her husband declined the Queen’s invitation to Balmoral for Christmas.  Her sugars defended her saying that Kate Middleton spent Christmas with her family a few times since being married to William.  Lo and behold, we found out over a month later that they were in Canada.  Amazing they could keep quiet for so long - and out of sight!  Meghan staged those pap photos with her holding the doll, and visited that women’s centre on the mainland (when she took the heli during a crazy snowstorm), while she left Harry to fend for himself with his father and grandmother.  She came back by herself, didn’t she? I just remember them visiting Canada House - remember that epic photo of her with her pit-stained brown turtleneck? A classic. Luckily, they escaped that commie country under the cover of night in a private jet with just the shirts on their backs and made it safely to Tyler Perry’s house just before the covid went sh!tballs crazy.


----------



## lallybelle

Yes, they came back over to England without Archie, leaving him in Canada and Meghan peaced out only a couple of days later saying she had to get back to Archie and left Haz to deal with the summit on the "Megxit" negogiations. Harry then went back as well and then their great escape to Montashitshow began....


----------



## CobaltBlu

ah... memories....


----------



## V0N1B2

Speaking of memories, I went back and had a look at my first post in this thread (March2018) and then checked around the time of the Royal Wedding. There was a lot of speculation by members in this thread on what colour hair and skin their child would have.  Hmmm. I wonder if Hazza was confused. Did his auntie say this or was he secretly reading the purse forum?


----------



## Toby93

"One story illustrates the example clearly. Ahead of her marriage to Harry the spare, Meghan Markle made Catherine, Princess of Wales, cry. This she did by insisting that Catherine’s daughter Charlotte, a flower girl, could not wear stockings to the wedding. To have bare legs at a formal event is against royal protocol, and the dresses Markle had picked for the little girls were insufficiently modest. Having twenty years of experience under this particular limelight, Catherine worried about her young daughter stumbling and revealing too much during the second-most photographed social event of the decade. 

Nevertheless, Meghan persisted. She summoned the flying monkeys (her socialite friends) to bully the Waleses into submission. Kate cried. After this story was reported to the press, and after the royal family did not dispute it, Meghan secured an interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which she explicitly stated that the precise opposite happened, citing as proof of her innocence the fact that Kate gave her flowers, insinuating that Princess Catherine’s ex post facto signal of good will was an admission of guilt rather than a palliative gesture of charity ahead of the wedding. 

That wedding was entirely funded by the British taxpayer, whom she also trashed in the Oprah interview, and in several others since, as deeply racist. 

*Little indications of the truth will occasionally peek through the facade. British people in general don’t use plantation slurs to refer to black people. That unspeakable word is entirely an Americanism*. So when Markle complained in her most recent interview to _The Cut _that the royal policy of inviting the paparazzi to photograph royal children’s first day of school was her personal Afghanistan, because it forced her to share images of her son with “people who called him ‘the n-word’,” *she ever-so-slightly showed her hand.* This almost certainly never happened. But alas, the American media is permanently hungry for a _Django, Unchained _story to confirm the inherent evil of whites, and a particular kind of insecure American enjoys the psychodrama of self-flagellation. Or at least some vocal minority do."


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> So, The Sun says that they planned to launch their charm offensive on _the Queen_ but she, _so very inconveniently for them_, died.  From their perspective, this plan probably made sense. They make their tens of millions from Netflix and Harry's book, are careful to not criticize the Queen directly and just express admiration for her and leave the vitriol for Charles, Camilla, Will, Kate, the named or nameless BP staff and suits.  They then work on charming and manipulating the Queen who still loves Harry and just wants peace in her remaining years.  With Charles now King though, everything has changed.  An attack on Charles is an attack on the institution and heaven help them if they attack Camilla or Kate. No wonder they are desperately trying to edit the book and reality show.


Such idiots though.  How long did they think the Queen would live for their moronic plan to work??


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Such idiots though.  How long did they think the Queen would live for their moronic plan to work??


Their plans always seem to be in the moment and they are usually poorly thought out. They aren’t thinking ahead years or even months.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Their plans always seem to be in the moment and they are usually poorly thought out. They aren’t thinking ahead years or even months.


They can't see the forest for the trees


----------



## bag-mania

There is still no projected release date for Harry’s memoir. At this point I don’t see it coming out before next spring.


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> There is still no projected release date for Harry’s memoir. At this point I don’t see it coming out before next spring.


Who's gonna take one for the team and read to comment?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

They think and act like a couple of teens who ate too many pot brownies and think they have the perfect plan to rule the world   They have no one who is afraid to say no to their harebrained ideas. The turnover may reflect this. The hires see how ridiculous their plans are and want no part of them. At this point having them on a CV is not a good idea


----------



## DoggieBags

EverSoElusive said:


> Who's gonna take one for the team and read to comment?


I’m sure there will be multiple excerpts quoted in various press releases, articles, etc. Plus all the usual suspects will review the book immediately upon release. No need to give H any money by buying even a single copy of his book.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> BUT BUT BUT they had no plans to see QEII on that trip, charm offensive impossible, story makes no sense


If the story is true, they couldn't risk meeting QE prior to the release of their 'bombs.' QE could have asked them to reconsider their decision, and that would not be helpful to their plans. 

Having in consideration that QE's mother was >100yo when she died, they were probably counting with a couple more years to maneuver.


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Who's gonna take one for the team and read to comment?


All the hot stuff will be available online without the need to purchase the book. The more clicks or dollars we give them, the more we support their greed and hypocrisy.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> So, I guess this somewhat explains her “I’m ready to forgive” quote in The Cut article as well as Gayle’s weirdo “no peace agreement has been reached, sadly” quote (when it wasn’t a peace summit to begin with, it was a funeral that they happened to coincidentally be in town for…)
> 
> I keep seeing the date March 2023 as some big thing to look towards.  Any idea what’s so special about that month and year?


Apart from getting another purchased award or recognition of some sort at TIME's centenary?

Is their Frogmore lease expiring then? Their grace and favour rental should be reviewed then under the new monarch. If the Harkles and Eugenie aren't staying there, does that mean the Crown has to maintain and upkeep the interior of the house for them?


----------



## Chanbal

Markled?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> All the hot stuff will be available online without the need to purchase the book. The more clicks or dollars we give them, the more we support their greed and hypocrisy.


Perhaps Harry can take a page from the crazy's book i.e. use the unsold books to prop his laptop up


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> Perhaps Harry can take a page from the crazy's book i.e. use the unsold books to prop his laptop up


Don’t forget donating hundreds of them to libraries and counting them as sales!


----------



## EverSoElusive

bag-mania said:


> Don’t forget donating hundreds of them to libraries and counting them as sales!


I'm sure I'll see them marked down at Walmart


----------



## CarryOn2020

Looks like the world is catching up to H&M’s lies 

From Scotland:

_However, the critique has been blasted by Glasgow comedian Leo Kearsewho said the duchess was an "insufferably woke, race-baiting, self-obsessed grifter."
The anti-woke comic and GB News commentator told the Scottish Daily Express: "*Perma moaning race grifter Meghan Markle criticises the stereotype of Asian women portrayed in films such as Kill Bill and Austin Powers. 

"I was glad that she pointed out that these films contain stereotypes because I thought that they were documentaries. *Nobody thinks the portrayals of Asians in these films have any bearing on real life. Is she aware that Kill Bill is a homage to 70s sensationalised martial arts films? And Austin Powers is a satire of the fantasy world of James Bond?











						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> "One story illustrates the example clearly. Ahead of her marriage to Harry the spare, Meghan Markle made Catherine, Princess of Wales, cry. This she did by insisting that Catherine’s daughter Charlotte, a flower girl, could not wear stockings to the wedding. To have bare legs at a formal event is against royal protocol, and the dresses Markle had picked for the little girls were insufficiently modest. Having twenty years of experience under this particular limelight, Catherine worried about her young daughter stumbling and revealing too much during the second-most photographed social event of the decade.
> 
> Nevertheless, Meghan persisted. She summoned the flying monkeys (her socialite friends) to bully the Waleses into submission. Kate cried. After this story was reported to the press, and after the royal family did not dispute it, Meghan secured an interview with Oprah Winfrey, in which she explicitly stated that the precise opposite happened, citing as proof of her innocence the fact that Kate gave her flowers, insinuating that Princess Catherine’s ex post facto signal of good will was an admission of guilt rather than a palliative gesture of charity ahead of the wedding.
> 
> That wedding was entirely funded by the British taxpayer, whom she also trashed in the Oprah interview, and in several others since, as deeply racist.
> 
> *Little indications of the truth will occasionally peek through the facade. British people in general don’t use plantation slurs to refer to black people. That unspeakable word is entirely an Americanism*. So when Markle complained in her most recent interview to _The Cut _that the royal policy of inviting the paparazzi to photograph royal children’s first day of school was her personal Afghanistan, because it forced her to share images of her son with “people who called him ‘the n-word’,” *she ever-so-slightly showed her hand.* This almost certainly never happened. But alas, the American media is permanently hungry for a _Django, Unchained _story to confirm the inherent evil of whites, and a particular kind of insecure American enjoys the psychodrama of self-flagellation. Or at least some vocal minority do."



Wow! That was a very incisive gaze into the abyss of the Markle psyche.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Their plans always seem to be in the moment and they are usually poorly thought out. They aren’t thinking ahead years or even months.


They plan ahead in a grandiose me-centric manner, and are greatly put out when the rest of the world does not cooperate in promoting their self-interest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Eugenie is back to work at her London job. She can't possibly live in Portugal while physically going into the London office?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Eugenie is back to work at her London job. She can't possibly live in Portugal while physically going into the London office?



It’s doable if she only has to go in once a month, by private plane most likely, to shake a few hands and that’s probably all she does. When they say working royals they don’t mean having a job like peasants do.

Also this outfit is giving me pirates of Penzance


And yes I do feel like I’m doing Angela a disservice


Chanbal said:


> Markled?



Oh Lordy play stupid games win stupid prizes - they could’ve cooked the books for decades but they just had to get a bit more controversy….

If anyone is looking for an actually decent children’s charity I met this family the other day and I found their story so sad and touching 








						TBCD - A Life For Leo Research
					

Raising awareness and support for families affected with a TBCD related genetic disorder.




					www.alifeforleo.com


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> Wow! That was a very incisive gaze into the abyss of the Markle psyche.


She can’t conduct herself like a normal person.  In stills she can look ok, but as soon as she’s moving everything looks unnatural and weird.  It’s all hair tossing, grabbing for position and thrashing about.  There could be a guy with a megaphone following her about yelling  “it’s not about you Meghan”.  But I still don’t think she’d get the message.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> What's the issue with the face of the ginger haired one?



He’s gurning up a storm- I think he might be in a K-hole with an A-hole.


V0N1B2 said:


> Speaking of memories, I went back and had a look at my first post in this thread (March2018) and then checked around the time of the Royal Wedding. There was a lot of speculation by members in this thread on what colour hair and skin their child would have.  Hmmm. I wonder if Hazza was confused. Did his auntie say this or was he secretly reading the purse forum?


I don’t think he’s got the concentration level or would understand any references at all. This guy is so bland and thick  he makes stale bread look like a taste sensation.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Eugenie is back to work at her London job. She can't possibly live in Portugal while physically going into the London office?



I like the outfit.  Too many bags though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s doable if she only has to go in once a month, by private plane most likely, to shake a few hands and that’s probably all she does. When they say working royals they don’t mean having a job like peasants do.



Yeah, a working royal is someone working for the BRF. Eugenie works for an art dealer and wouldn't be referred to as working royal.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That just said from Reddit, but it sounds like it could be in Low's book


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So far I like the Low book. He starts out with Alan Lascelles who served George V, Edward VIII, George VI and The Queen. 

In fact, he worked for Edward when he was just Prince of Wales and thought it would be best for the country if he broke his neck before ascending to the throne, so bad were his partying and womanizing ways.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So far I like the Low book. He starts out with Alan Lascelles who served George V, Edward VIII, George VI and The Queen.
> 
> In fact, he worked for Edward when he was just Prince of Wales and thought it would be best for the country if he broke his neck before ascending to the throne, so bad were his partying and womanizing ways.


I have Lascelles autobiography (Kings Counsellor).  He writes very well - as well as the court, it’s a great insight to the war and how gutsy people were in those dark times when the Battle of Britain was on a knife edge.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of Low's book...you know who was treated horribly by both courtiers and peers, with the parents of the bride said to have been "unimpressed" at first?

Philip.

But of course Ghoul who was spoiled rotten by this family had it worst.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s doable if she only has to go in once a month, by private plane most likely, to shake a few hands and that’s probably all she does. When they say working royals they don’t mean having a job like peasants do.
> 
> Also this outfit is giving me pirates of Penzance
> View attachment 5627884
> 
> And yes I do feel like I’m doing Angela a disservice
> 
> Oh Lordy play stupid games win stupid prizes - they could’ve cooked the books for decades but they just had to get a bit more controversy….
> 
> If anyone is looking for an actually decent children’s charity I met this family the other day and I found their story so sad and touching
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TBCD - A Life For Leo Research
> 
> 
> Raising awareness and support for families affected with a TBCD related genetic disorder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.alifeforleo.com



She's not a working royal. Both sisters are not working royals.

B works in finance (though still is still said to receive pay through PA).

Eu is a director of a London art gallery Hauser & Wirth. Galleries are prestigious, and are magnets for 'well-bred' girls, it's like it was owning a boutique in the 1960s. H&W seem to know what they're doing with/wo her, have a publishing arm etc. My guess is she's a good fit and paid to use her title and meet-greet VIP clients, collabs & global B2B partnerships.

I am reading between the lines and being a bit of non-believer, but although both are educated and they have jobs, both CVs maybe be face/name/ lain-value only. They do what most of their ilk do, marry rich, 'work' in finance, fashion or the arts, all whist doing 'good' and 'charitable' works (including social engagements).

A director of an art gallery or finance consultant doesn't have to commute on a daily, even weekly basis, esp these days of Zoom etc. She could be in town for many reasons including personal or shopping. As a consultant, B stays as long as she needs and clears off.

Had MegZ been a normal person and have married Harry for Harry, once they opted out of being working royals, she too could have had a fabulous, low-key life in the UK or elsewhere doing whatever she darn well pleased, covered by general CV terms "works as X at Z Inc", "patron for Y, J, & V charities". But no MegZ knows best and threw it all away for wanting to be Queen of Neverland and patron of 'Nothing-in-particular'.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Markled?




Good! 

All these fake charities should be investigated.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I like the outfit.  Too many bags though.



LOL, this is how I look. 

Water bottle (not going to put a water bottle in my nice bag)
Handbag
Workbag 
Popped-out for a sandwich bag. 

I have total respect for this look. 

A) cares about her LV 
B) Carries water and doesn't buy plastic bottles if thirsty 
C) Carries her own stuff 
D) Buys her own food and doesn't get an intern to do it


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of Low's book...you know who was treated horribly by both courtiers and peers, with the parents of the bride said to have been "unimpressed" at first?
> 
> Philip.
> 
> But of course Ghoul who was spoiled rotten by this family had it worst.


Of course. She could probably read about Henry VIII and conclude that she had it worse than all his wives. I'm waiting for Horrid to redo her "unofficial" biography and retcon her as the longlost Princess of Russia, descended through Anastasia who fled to Malta and married Thomas's ancestor


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> But no MegZ knows best and threw it all away for wanting to be* Queen of Neverland* and patron of 'Nothing-in-particular'.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: the breaking his neck comment which seems to shock many of you (I too found it kind of, uh, harsh), if it softens the blow somewhat he said it specifically while speaking about Edward riding his horses in a somewhat risky manner. I'm not into wishing death on anyone, though.

That said, maybe we all owe Wallis because she is the reason the world saw an outstanding queen for 70+ years instead of a party boy who had a soft spot for Nazis.


----------



## DL Harper

EverSoElusive said:


> Perhaps Harry can take a page from the crazy's book i.e. use the unsold books to prop his laptop up


Don't they need toilet tissue for their current 16 bathrooms??


----------



## marietouchet

Katel said:


> Yes … I recall a Twitter influencer (like Harry’s grey suit?) saying something like  “Mark my words, watch for next October 2023” - they had heard a palace scoop - and it was someone credible (but I can’t find it now darn).
> 
> But at this rate, it’s not going to take much longer for the combustion and flame out.


note KC a called them just Meghan and Harry in his address , I think he meant it 
Upcoming events
1. book, Netflix and mandatory book tour ! the DIG HOLE DEEPER tour
H will be on every puff TV show With Gayle, Whoopi , what can go wrong ?
2. Act before Parliament to let the king remove titles, ok, that will take a while til mid 2023 ??
3. 03 Jun 2023 coronation, not before then?  Anne will be in charge of seating 
4. Yup Oct 2023 sounds good to me …


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> There is still no projected release date for Harry’s memoir. At this point I don’t see it coming out before next spring.


We have such a VERY LONG book list for the book club

Scoobie  revision 
Some have not been able to get Bower yet, hmmm, chapter on funeral for US edition Please
V Low
Autobiography 

We will be busy for ages …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm on my couch with a blanket, a cup of tea, a plate of gingerbread and fully planning on making a dent into Courtiers. It is much easier to read than Bower's book, but also, the Terrible Two haven't made an appearance yet aside from the prologue.


----------



## marietouchet

Compare  and contrast. I enjoyed this video on the abdication - sort of a documentary.
It lays a lot of the blame on the archbishop of Canterbury. He did not like Edward’s loose ways.  He drummed up support in government to see that Edward VIII abdicated of his own accord. The AC was thick with the Yorks - parents of QEII.
A family precedent for pushing out inconvenient members of the BRF  eg JCMH
As we note how much MM has studied the Duchess of Windsor ….

PS a compromise had been proposed -  Wallis could be the Duchess of Cornwall, but not Queen. W did not agree. So it all fell apart. 
Yet Camilla later would take on the lesser ducal title to get her man , different ladies


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I have never understood all the arm pulling. This is such juvenile and undignified behavior.


wouldn't it be great if some day he just yanked his hand or arm away from her?  doubt it will happen as  he's seemingly pretty much under her control but he has been known to have a temper


----------



## jennlt

Idris Elba calling it as he sees it


----------



## jennlt

Privacy is a must for their kids but not for anyone else's


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Eugenie is back to work at her London job. She can't possibly live in Portugal while physically going into the London office?



I saw this on DM last night, and became interested on the bottle bag. Does anyone know if it can be purchased in the US? I'm looking for a comparable nice bag to carry my water bottle. 

Returning to our topic, I don't think she is back @Frogmore, the Harkles digs. DM would report on that.


----------



## jennlt

The Hollywood  Reporter isn't buying the Spotify rankings, either


----------



## EverSoElusive

DL Harper said:


> Don't they need toilet tissue for their current 16 bathrooms??


Why, that's certainly a much better use of Harry's books but I suspect the pages would clog the toilets. I mean, might as well since these two are total shltheads  




sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be great if some day he just yanked his hand or arm away from her?  doubt it will happen as  he's seemingly pretty much under her control but he has been known to have a temper


Harry tried at UN but she quickly grabbed his hand back (sounds almost like she grabbed her handbag)


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I saw this on DM last night, and became interested on the bottle bag. Does anyone know if it can be purchased in the US? I'm looking for a comparable nice bag to carry my water bottle.
> 
> Returning to our topic, I don't think she is back @Frogmore, the Harkles digs. DM would report on that.


I don’t know what brand that one is, but Calpak has a super cute one. 









						Water Bottle Holder
					

When hydration is the goal, this water bottle sling bag makes it a priority. This water bottle holder bag is perfect for walking, hiking, and running.




					www.calpaktravel.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Back and forth


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Markled?



Zedzee will just feign ignorance or even do the victim act: No, no, I had no clue. My part in One Young World is 100% aboveboard. Such a scandal! Absolutely no idea that they were siphoning off huge amounts as their salary. (But it's a great idea!)


CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like the world is catching up to H&M’s lies
> 
> From Scotland:
> 
> _However, the critique has been blasted by Glasgow comedian Leo Kearsewho said the duchess was an "insufferably woke, race-baiting, self-obsessed grifter."
> The anti-woke comic and GB News commentator told the Scottish Daily Express: "*Perma moaning race grifter Meghan Markle criticises the stereotype of Asian women portrayed in films such as Kill Bill and Austin Powers.
> 
> "I was glad that she pointed out that these films contain stereotypes because I thought that they were documentaries. *Nobody thinks the portrayals of Asians in these films have any bearing on real life. Is she aware that Kill Bill is a homage to 70s sensationalised martial arts films? And Austin Powers is a satire of the fantasy world of James Bond?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


The sarcasm is thrilling!
Zedzee really has little clue about movie history despite her background. Her idea of being an actress may be as shallow as her idea of being a princess.


Pessie said:


> She can’t conduct herself like a normal person.  In stills she can look ok, but as soon as she’s moving everything looks unnatural and weird.  It’s all hair tossing, grabbing for position and thrashing about.  There could be a guy with a megaphone following her about yelling  “it’s not about you Meghan”.  But I still don’t think she’d get the message.


Those excessive arm movements - I am amazed she hasn't hit anyone so far.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Re: the breaking his neck comment which seems to shock many of you (I too found it kind of, uh, harsh), if it softens the blow somewhat he said it specifically while speaking about Edward riding his horses in a somewhat risky manner. I'm not into wishing death on anyone, though.
> 
> That said, maybe we all owe Wallis because she is the reason the world saw an outstanding queen for 70+ years instead of a party boy who had a soft spot for Nazis.


ITA. I appreciate Wallis for her jewelry. I am grateful to her for unknowingly and unintentionally changing the course of history for the better. Edward missed his calling as a jewelry designer.


sdkitty said:


> wouldn't it be great if some day he just yanked his hand or arm away from her?  doubt it will happen as  he's seemingly pretty much under her control but he has been known to have a temper


As we saw at the UN, she just reaches over and does the Double Claw to bring him to heel. If he ever truly resists her in public, it will be quite a show. They allegedly fight behind closed doors. I think they are conscious that their lovey dovey behaviour is a hallmark of their brand.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The sarcasm is thrilling!
> Zedzee really has little clue about movie history despite her background. Her idea of being an actress may be as shallow as her idea of being a princess.


Love love Perma-moaning  Matches perfectly Perma-Frown Hazzi  
The Perma-disasters!


----------



## Chanbal

On the "Sussexes’s truth," and a controlled narrative. Cancel culture?



_For the couple, it is their chance *to fully control the narrative *– the dream Prince Harry has held since he was an Eton schoolboy plotting to set up his own newspaper full of his own royal facts.

Now, on camera and in print, he is finally in the driving seat for what he hopes will be the final, definitive, canonical version of his own life.
“It’s interesting,” said the Duchess of Sussex recently, in what was for some a mild observation and for others a nuclear-level threat. “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking.”
*The world is about to find out just what the Sussexes want to say.*_


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Compare  and contrast. I enjoyed this video on the abdication - sort of a documentary.
> It lays a lot of the blame on the archbishop of Canterbury. He did not like Edward’s loose ways.  He drummed up support in government to see that Edward VIII abdicated of his own accord. The AC was thick with the Yorks - parents of QEII.
> A family precedent for pushing out inconvenient members of the BRF  eg JCMH
> As we note how much MM has studied the Duchess of Windsor ….
> 
> PS a compromise had been proposed -  Wallis could be the Duchess of Cornwall, but not Queen. W did not agree. So it all fell apart.
> Yet Camilla later would take on the lesser ducal title to get her man , different ladies




Unavailable to my country. No idea why. Probably still a sensitive subject(?)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Harry tried at UN but she quickly grabbed his hand back (sounds almost like she grabbed her handbag)



She's a grabber, that's for sure


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just more evidence that Charles was a father who cared greatly about his sons.  Imagine the horror.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> On the "Sussexes’s truth," and a controlled narrative. Cancel culture?
> 
> 
> 
> _For the couple, it is their chance *to fully control the narrative *– the dream Prince Harry has held since he was an Eton schoolboy plotting to set up his own newspaper full of his own royal facts.
> 
> Now, on camera and in print, he is finally in the driving seat for what he hopes will be *the final, definitive, canonical version of his own life.*
> “It’s interesting,” said the Duchess of Sussex recently, in what was for some a mild observation and for others a nuclear-level threat. “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking.”
> *The world is about to find out just what the Sussexes want to say.*_



That's a sad choice of words because it makes it sound like his life is over and he is now just going to coast along till the day he dies. Also, for them to do tell-alls now, do they really think this level of delusional indiscretion will endear them to the A-listers?  I'd think that if I ever had to do a project and had no choice but to include Looselips Markle, I'd draw up an NDA so ironclad and punitive that it would impoverish her. Only right to protect myself since she has been shown to blab and lie indiscriminately for self-enrichment.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> note KC a called them just Meghan and Harry in his address , I think he meant it
> Upcoming events
> 1. book, Netflix and mandatory book tour ! the DIG HOLE DEEPER tour
> H will be on every puff TV show With Gayle, Whoopi , what can go wrong ?
> 2. Act before Parliament to let the king remove titles, ok, that will take a while til mid 2023 ??
> 3. 03 Jun 2023 coronation, not before then?  Anne will be in charge of seating
> 4. Yup Oct 2023 sounds good to me …


 

3 June off the table. No way, not happening and never would be:

Derby Day so the toffs would be PO

FA Cup Final so the hoi polloi will be glued to the TV, but NOT the Coronation


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> That's a sad choice of words because it makes it sound like his life is over and he is now just going to coast along till the day he dies. Also, for them to do tell-alls now, do they really think this level of delusional indiscretion will endear them to the A-listers?  I'd think that if I ever had to do a project and had no choice but to include Looselips Markle, I'd draw up an NDA so ironclad and punitive that it would impoverish her. Only right to protect myself since she has been shown to blab and lie indiscriminately for self-enrichment.



Harry reminds me of an ex.

Sometimes he said some very odd things. They not only didn't sound like him, but were kind of fait accompli.

Years later, I worked out that they were just things he said that he thought made him look/sound good. Things, that when someone _else_ said, made him think 'oh yer, that sounds convincing' that person must have everything sussed.

MegZ and H both don't have an original thought in their head. I suppose that's why they live permanently in the land of Woke where everyone either agrees or falls off a cliff/sky-scraper. They can just re-tweet and puff-out sound-bites that they think will earn them Brownie points and earn them a badge.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting article on the duchess of decline…

Edit: Moved the article to Spoiler, since its source might be controversial.




Spoiler: The Duchess of Decline 












						The Duchess of Decline
					

Meghan Markle obsesses us because she is a symbol of our willful degeneration.




					americanmind.org


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Harry reminds me of an ex.
> 
> Sometimes he said some very odd things. They not only didn't sound like him, but were kind of fait accompli.
> 
> Years later, I worked out that they were just things he said that thought they made him look/sound good. Things, that when someone _else_ said, made him think 'oh yer, that sounds convincing' that person must have everything sussed.
> 
> MegZ and H both don't have an original thought in their head. I suppose that's why they live permanently in the land of Woke where everyone either agrees or falls off a cliff/sky-scraper. They can just re-tweet and puff-out sound-bites that they think will earn them Brownie points and earn them a badge.


IMO she is just pure amibition and has a history of knowing how to charm people.  She wants the rewards/high profile that A-list stars like Kate Blanchett and Angelina Jolie have.  But she doesn't have their talent.  She is just a mediocre actress.  So she tries to get everything just by pushing.  And - sorry for repeating myself - she succeed brilliantly when she landed the prince.  Too bad she didn't appreciate what she got.
Harry IMO was a broken, angry man and it was pretty easy for her to take advantage of that.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> That's a sad choice of words because it makes it sound like his life is over and he is now just going to coast along till the day he dies. Also, for them to do tell-alls now, do they really think this level of delusional indiscretion will endear them to the A-listers?  I'd think that if I ever had to do a project and had no choice but to include Looselips Markle, I'd draw up an NDA so ironclad and punitive that it would impoverish her. Only right to protect myself since she has been shown to blab and lie indiscriminately for self-enrichment.


This is what I understood, he divides his life in before and after TW. So he is now 'selling' his stories or memories (or TW's stories?) before his 'rebirth,' which occurred after meeting his savior (aka TW). He may also share info on his path to freedom. Though, I thought he had already shared that on Finding Freebies, but their love story is the just the beginning… In other words, they intend to be on the news for many years to come.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article on the duchess of decline…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Decline
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle obsesses us because she is a symbol of our willful degeneration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> americanmind.org


that source.  wow.  I won't click on anything from them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I just learned on Margaret's example that The Queen is only to grant permission for a marriage until the 25th birthday of the individual, and that in Margaret's case it wasn't The Queen insisting she step down and give up her place in the LoS und her Sovereign Grant, but *the government* threatening to block the marriage (and Churchill's wife threatening to leave him should he keep his benevolent stance towards Margaret and Townsend).

I'm still not nowhere near Harry's engagement, but what was the fuss about threatening his grandmother to agree to the marriage then? Very obviously he was over 25. But also, UK government, you failed all of us.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> that source.  wow.  I won't click on anything from them


I feel embarrassed because I've no idea who the source is.   I saw the link in one post, and thought the article was ok. Hope the source of the one below is OK.









						Meet the author of Courtiers - the royal book everyone is talking about | ITV News
					

The Times' Valentine Low sheds some light on the royal family's shadowy set of special advisers. | ITV National News




					www.itv.com


----------



## xincinsin

If the current spin is that the dimwit woke need to have the final say in their netflix "docu" and his masterpiece of a ghostwritten biography, then after the venting of their "truth", what is their future? Their friendly sources claim that after one last tantrum, the Harkles can move forward and show the world that they are a happy successful family. But when their measure of happiness is based on living like a king/queen, what do they have to offer to keep the money tree growing?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“It’s interesting,” said the Duchess of Sussex recently, in what was for some a mild observation and for others a nuclear-level threat. “I’ve never had to sign anything that restricts me from talking.”
> *The world is about to find out just what the Sussexes want to say.*_



We know she overestimates herself all the time, but even she couldn't have missed the numerous hints the BRF has given her ever since The Queen passed away.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm on my couch with a blanket, a cup of tea, a plate of gingerbread and fully planning on making a dent into Courtiers. It is much easier to read than Bower's book, but also, the Terrible Two haven't made an appearance yet aside from the prologue.


Sounds like a great way to spend a Sunday   Did you order from Book Depository?  This is the second time I have ordered from there and it still says "awaiting publication".  I ended up cancelling the TB book from there as it took so long.
Thank goodness for this forum and generous members who share!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We know she overestimates herself all the time, but even she couldn't have missed the numerous hints the BRF has given her ever since The Queen passed away.


Oh, that's just them being racist doncha know


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Sounds like a great way your spend a Sunday



My Sundays are sacred to me, I do as little as possible besides cooking opulent meals  I even get slightly annoyed when people invite me for something and I have to leave the house.



Toby93 said:


> Did you order from Book Depository?  This is the second time I have ordered from there and it still says "awaiting publication".  I ended up cancelling the TB book from there as it took so long.
> Thank goodness for this forum and generous members who share!



I got it on amazon Germany. Maybe amazon UK is an option? But they don't do free shipping.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> IMO she is just pure amibition and has a history of knowing how to charm people.  She wants the rewards/high profile that A-list stars like Kate Blanchett and Angelina Jolie have.  But she doesn't have their talent.  She is just a mediocre actress.  So she tries to get everything just by pushing.  And - sorry for repeating myself - she succeed brilliantly when she landed the prince.  Too bad she didn't appreciate what she got.
> *Harry IMO was a broken, angry man and it was pretty easy for her to take advantage of that.*


Imo he himself was *no* catch and the BRF knew it.  So, why was she willing to join up with someone who had numerous mental health issues?  She is very comfortable with the dysfunction [based on her family’s background]. An intelligent woman who respects herself would run from a guy like that.  Plus, the $$$$ was _guaranteed_, expectations much lower than Hwood.  Life is so much easier now because essentially she works for no one.  They can easily live separate lives which make the public appearances so much easier.  Some would consider it a sweet deal. Others would never accept it.  Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Eugenie is back to work at her London job. She can't possibly live in Portugal while physically going into the London office?



Didn't the couple say before the move that they would be splitting their time between Portugal and England?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Compare  and contrast. I enjoyed this video on the abdication - sort of a documentary.
> It lays a lot of the blame on the archbishop of Canterbury. He did not like Edward’s loose ways.  He drummed up support in government to see that Edward VIII abdicated of his own accord. The AC was thick with the Yorks - parents of QEII.
> A family precedent for pushing out inconvenient members of the BRF  eg JCMH
> As we note how much MM has studied the Duchess of Windsor ….
> 
> PS a compromise had been proposed -  Wallis could be the Duchess of Cornwall, but not Queen. W did not agree. So it all fell apart.
> Yet Camilla later would take on the lesser ducal title to get her man , different ladies



I have read at least 5 biographies on Wallis and Edward and they all have a slightly different take on it.  He was a weak man and it worked out for the best that he stepped down, but how he arrived at that decision is still not 100% confirmed.  

It really goes to show how times have changed.  Over 85 years later, the palace was willing to accept another American divorcee into the family.  In hindsight, they should have given Hazz the same ultimatum.  They did it to poor Princess Margaret, marry Townsend and no longer be on the civil list.  

She has really shown herself to be the D-I-L from hell.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo he himself was *no* catch and the BRF knew it.  So, why was she willing to join up with someone who had numerous mental health issues?  She is very comfortable with the dysfunction [based on her family’s background]. An intelligent woman who respects herself would run from a guy like that.  Plus, the $$$$ was _guaranteed_, expectations much lower than Hwood.  Life is so much easier now because essentially she works for no one.  They can easily live separate lives which makes the public appearances so much easier.  Some would consider it a sweet deal. Others would never accept it.  Just my 2 cents.


I disagree....his royalty brought her fame beyond anything she could have dreamed of.  and wealth.  did she live in a mansion with 16 baths when she was number six on the Suits call list?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Didn't the couple say before the move that they would be splitting their time between Portugal and England?



Yes, but I didn't think that would involve her working in the position she has. I was somehow thinking her job required being physically there, but others have said that's not really the case.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I disagree....his royalty brought her fame beyond anything she could have dreamed of.  and wealth.  did she live in a mansion with 16 baths when she was number six on the Suits call list?



Right. He was no catch for someone in his peer group who could just snag another rich, noble bachelor and who had family ties to bring them far in life anyway. For Ghoul, he was the jackpot of jackpots.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> It really goes to show how times have changed.  Over 85 years later, the palace was willing to accept another American divorcee into the family.  In hindsight, they should have given Hazz the same ultimatum.  They did it to poor Princess Margaret, marry Townsend and no longer be on the civil list.



It wasn't the palace it was the UK government. And I really think they should have done us all a favour and intervene here too.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Interesting article on the duchess of decline…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Decline
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle obsesses us because she is a symbol of our willful degeneration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> americanmind.org




MegZ has managed to buy or ingratiate herself into everywhere, including awards, titles and babies. It's something that worked for her steadily for her whole life. 

*1. MegZ doesn't understand that not everything/everyone is for sale or can be bought. *

MegZ has evidently LIED her whole life, whatever got her where she needed to go. Her father obviously encouraged it (Procter and Gamble). 

In Troy's evaluation of MegZ, she's a timely symbol of global malaise "She wears the monarchy as a profitable skinsuit while hollowing out its dignity". 

*2. MegZ charm and values have always been epidermis-level skin deep! MegZ doesn't understand how anyone cannot find her charming.*

MegZ doesn't understand that a lot of people _don't_ find her/it charming that she bullies working people, or carelessly abuses genuinely despicable acts of ignorances like racism or misogyny for her own ends and steals others' work/words.

*3. MegZ steals others stories of real misery and makes them her own  (and other acts of plaguerism)  *

What's more, she cannot understand that _the _truth is not individual but nor global. What works in LA doesn't translate into the UK. Meghan Merkel is the best example of a colonialist there is. 

*4. MegZ cannot tell the truth to save her own life.*

For Troy, MegZ maybe a cable/Z-list actress that has got everyone worked up, but to the people of the United Kingdom and particularly Sussex, Meghan is a Duchess, one goes around the World slagging off Britain, our heritage, customs, insulting _our_ BRF and all protocol whilst using us. That's not _just_ the monarchy's "dignity", that's an entire nation of people. 

I don't care why other people in the world like/dislike M. Personally, I dislike Harry _more_ because he should know better. He's the one who married her, schemed with her, lied with her, betrayed his own family and country.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It wasn't the palace it was the UK government. And I really think they should have done us all a favour and intervene here too.



I disagree:
Harry's own family saw this coming. they should have just said "marry anyone you like but have a quiet wedding and we're slimming down the monarchy so get a job".

The wedding built up expectations of H&M and the public (re. service). They knew the disconnect of those expectations and that it could never work for the couple and public.

Edward _was_ king. Totally different kettle of (Nazi) fish.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I don't care why other people in the world like/dislike M. Personally, I dislike Harry _more_ because he should know better. He's the one who married her, schemed with her, lied with her, betrayed his own family and country.



I'm still torn because I think she manipulated a vulnerable man and treats him poorly, BUT I wholeheartedly agree his treason - and the treatment of both of HIS grandparents. OMG! - is worse and must hurt the family so much more. 

When my grandfather was sick leading up to his death I was at his bedside several times a week. Someone was there every single day and we fought over who could go (no pandemic back then, but limited visitors due to being an ICU). With my grandmother, I visit often and try to do little events for fun at my house (a firm favourite is lady's lunch with her cousin and whoever is available that day). Screw my soft spot for Harry, I will NEVER forgive what he did to Philip and The Queen, and I don't care if Ghoul was holding a gun to his head.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I disagree:
> Harry's own family saw this coming. they should have just said "marry anyone you like but have a quiet wedding and we're slimming down the monarchy so get a job".
> 
> The wedding built up expectations of H&M and the public (re. service). They knew the disconnect of those expectations and that it could never work for the couple and public.
> 
> Edward _was_ king. Totally different kettle of (Nazi) fish.



Fair enough! 

We were talking about Margaret and Townsend though, not Edward and Wallis.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I disagree....his royalty brought her fame beyond anything she could have dreamed of.  and wealth.  did she live in a mansion with 16 baths when she was number six on the Suits call list?


Exactly, apologies for not being clearer.  Even with his royal name, his personality is such that he does not appear to be a fun guy in private.  Imo, that is not a catch. Money does not make him a catch either imo. His looks faded quickly too. Her choice was fame with an awkward, dimwit. _Fame always comes at a huge cost._  With the privileges comes enormous scrutiny and responsibility. Imo she was not ready for the intensity of the scrutiny [mainly because she was never really _famous_] , so she needed a way out of the BRF. She needed a way out  with $$$$ and privileges. Through him, she arranged an _exit_  that let her set her own parameters. It’s the Faustian bargain right before our eyes.  Fascinating stuff, really.  Again, just my opinion.

_Faustian bargain, a pact whereby a person trades something of supreme moral or spiritual importance, such as personal values or the soul, for some worldly or material benefit, such as knowledge, power, or riches.








						Faustian Bargain | Story, Meaning, & Facts
					

Faustian bargain,  a pact whereby a person trades something of supreme moral or spiritual importance, such as personal values or the soul, for some worldly or material benefit, such as knowledge, power, or riches. The term refers to the legend of Faust (or Faustus, or Doctor Faustus), a...



					www.britannica.com
				



_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't think she had any morals and values she could trade for fame and riches, though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't think she had any morals and values she could trade for fame and riches, though.


She did have a soul, imo that is leaving her, which is why we hear about all the bullying and mean comments.  She really ought to read some Shakespeare or Dickens.  Giving up the fame will be extremely challenging for her and, even, him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It wasn't the palace it was the UK government. And I really think they should have done us all a favour and intervene here too.


In Harry's case, he was not the heir, but neither was Margaret, and they could have/should have said NO to the big fiasco of a wedding instead of bending over backwards trying to show they were accepting of a WoC marrying into the family. 

Look how spectacularly it has backfired.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> She did have a soul, imo that is leaving her, which is why we hear about all the bullying and mean comments.  She really ought to read some Shakespeare or Dickens.  Giving up the fame will be extremely challenging for her and, even, him.



She used and bullied people way before she met Harry if we want to believe Tom Bower, though.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Useless knowledge of today: Ernst August of Hanover (husband of Caroline of Monaco), a German with no British citizenship nor titles (though he could claim a formerly royal dukedom) but a spot in the LoS was bound by the Marriage Act as well. 

But now it gets confusing, Low says after 25 you don't need to seek permission, but Ernst August sought - and got - permission to marry Catholic Caroline. But also, apparently the Royal Marriages Act was repealed in 2013 which took effect in 2015 together with the Succession to the Crown Act (Ernst August was married in 1999). So is there a rule we don't know of that made it so Harry had so seek permission anyway, or was it a fake courtesy request?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




WTF WTF WTF. 

So she not only did not inform her own team she would present the award, she did not even bother to inform the people organizing the f*cking event? But she did get all dressed up in designer gear with expensive jewelry and professionally done m/u? Then was overheard saying when The Queen wanted to confront her she was getting in trouble for "making this family look good"? The freaking nutjob is even crazier than I thought.


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


>



Reminds me of the Wimbledon incident


----------



## CarryOn2020

Finger pointing continues - 

_Talk TV host Cristo explained the dispute, saying: "Netflix are furious. They are still wondering how on earth they are going to present this documentary series.

"Netflix has been following them around for god knows how long and wanting a juicy documentary out of it.

"But since the death of the Queen, Harry and Meghan are saying we should re-edit the documentary

"So what on earth is the point of Netflix spending all this money if it will just be a *beige documentary*?"








						Harry and Meghan's own team back Netflix in battle against Sussexes
					

Harry and Meghan's own Archewell production team is understood to have taken the side of Netflix against the couple after the Sussexes discussed cuts to their documentary series on the streaming platform.




					www.express.co.uk
				



_


----------



## AB Negative

The Claremont Institute is a highly regarded conservative think tank dedicated to the founding principles of the United States and is the publisher of The American Mind, the source of the article SDKitty complained about.  No need to feel embarrassed.


Chanbal said:


> I feel embarrassed because I've no idea who the source is.   I saw the link in one post, and thought the article was ok. Hope the source of the one below is OK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the author of Courtiers - the royal book everyone is talking about | ITV News
> 
> 
> The Times' Valentine Low sheds some light on the royal family's shadowy set of special advisers. | ITV National News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.itv.com


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

AB Negative said:


> The Claremont Institute is a highly regarded conservative think tank dedicated to the founding principles if the United States and is the publisher of The American Mind the source of this article.



I had never heard of them and quickly googled which gave me a rough idea which circles they would be "highly regarded" in. I'll pass.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Was this before or after he neglected Harry and gave him genetic pain? It was most certainly before Ghoul told him he had a bad relationship with his father.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was this before or after he neglected Harry and gave him genetic pain? It was most certainly before Ghoul told him he had a bad relationship with his father.


It is certainly pre-wedding, I am not sure where, when the genetic pain began.  Was it just the King’s family that had the genetic pain, not Hazz’s mother’s side?  Seems unfair to pin it on one side, but what do I know.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Charles seems to be a decent man, and he was likely a good father to Hazz. The more I read, the more I believe the Harkles are/were planing a reconciliation year after 'selling' their information to the highest bidder. They realized that Hollywood doesn't care about them, and the Palaces & Status in the UK are a lot better than what they can afford in the US.


----------



## AB Negative

Pro-American Intellectual Circles.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had never heard of them and quickly googled which gave me a rough idea which circles they would be "highly regarded" in. I'll pass.


----------



## Sharont2305

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is certainly pre-wedding, I am not sure where, when the genetic pain began.  Was it just the King’s family that had the genetic pain, not Hazz’s mother’s side?  Seems unfair to pin it on one side, but what do I know.


Here it is, from 2016. Celebrating 40 years of the Princes Trust. Its very enjoyable.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I had never heard of them and quickly googled which gave me a rough idea which circles they would be "highly regarded" in. I'll pass.



For me, I judged by the title which was enough for me to know that truth is getting published - at least, it is not a glorification article. I have _not_ read the article.  Imo it is a very good thing that more articles and books are being _published _about how awful these perma-awfuls really are.  We’ve had several seasons of Opr, GKing, TylerP, Nacho, certain politicians, etc. *telling* us how great H&M are, even when the lawsuits, photos and videos suggested otherwise.  Now, it seems we are getting closer to the truth. Maybe.
 The key is balance.
All my opinion, ymmv.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Interesting that he could identify issues that he had no knowledge of, and should not get involved in.  After the TW got involved, there was no subject that he was not an expert on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> For me, I judged by the title which was enough for me to know that truth is getting published - at least, it is not a glorification article. I have _not_ read the article.  Imo it is a very good thing that more articles and books are being _published _about how awful these perma-awfuls really are.  We’ve had several seasons of Opr, GKing, TylerP, Nacho, certain politicians, etc. *telling* us how great H&M are, even when the lawsuits, photos and videos suggested otherwise.  Now, it seems we are getting closer to the truth. Maybe.
> The key is balance.
> All my opinion, ymmv.
> 
> View attachment 5628244



That article might be a great one for all we know, that organization is just not the company I want to keep. But I don't blame you at all, I rarely do a background check before I share stuff on here, I'm usually too excited to learn y'all's opinion


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that he could identify issues that he had no knowledge of, and should not get involved in.  After the TW got involved, there was no subject that he was not an expert on.



Before he knew her he also had basic manners and could mostly get along with his own staff. Oh, and he had friends and wasn't a pariah in his own family.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So Eugenie is back to work at her London job. She can't possibly live in Portugal while physically going into the London office?



Looks like she is merching big time.  Needs the moola.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Good!
> 
> All these fake charities should be investigated.


I think Meghan sniffed out that they were crooked and got them to pay her.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Compare  and contrast. I enjoyed this video on the abdication - sort of a documentary.
> It lays a lot of the blame on the archbishop of Canterbury. He did not like Edward’s loose ways.  He drummed up support in government to see that Edward VIII abdicated of his own accord. The AC was thick with the Yorks - parents of QEII.
> A family precedent for pushing out inconvenient members of the BRF  eg JCMH
> As we note how much MM has studied the Duchess of Windsor ….
> 
> PS a compromise had been proposed -  Wallis could be the Duchess of Cornwall, but not Queen. W did not agree. So it all fell apart.
> Yet Camilla later would take on the lesser ducal title to get her man , different ladies



In the Low book, there were several people who thought Edward should not be King and they thought that before he started seeing Wallis.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



I am gobsmacked that she did this to an actress like RP who made many very successful movies and a very good actress.  She also has a successful miniseries on Amazon.  I think Meghan delighted in embarrassing a woman who a bigger career  than she ever could in Hollywood and EU.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Useless knowledge of today: Ernst August of Hanover (husband of Caroline of Monaco), a German with no British citizenship nor titles (though he could claim a formerly royal dukedom) but a spot in the LoS was bound by the Marriage Act as well.
> 
> But now it gets confusing, Low says after 25 you don't need to seek permission, but Ernst August sought - and got - permission to marry Catholic Caroline. But also, apparently the Royal Marriages Act was repealed in 2013 which took effect in 2015 together with the Succession to the Crown Act (Ernst August was married in 1999). So is there a rule we don't know of that made it so Harry had so seek permission anyway, or was it a fake courtesy request?


He would never have gotten his "circus" of a wedding from granny if he had not asked for permission to marry her.  It would have been the registry office or a little church in the shires and we know that Meghan would have said no to both.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I am gobsmacked that she did this to an actress like RP who made many very successful movies and a very good actress.  She also has a successful miniseries on Amazon.  I think Meghan delighted in embarrassing a woman who a bigger career  than she ever could in Hollywood and EU.



I am fascinated that people just stepped aside and let her do her narc thing (not RP, the organizers). I wonder if The Queen summoned them because it was brought to her attention how that whole thing came to be (and not just "Why did you not keep your team in the loop").


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> In Harry's case, he was not the heir, but neither was Margaret, and they could have/should have said NO to the big fiasco of a wedding instead of bending over backwards trying to show they were accepting of a WoC marrying into the family.
> 
> Look how spectacularly it has backfired.


Margaret was upset, and rightly so that she wasted two years waiting to turn 25 and then was told that if she married him, she would be dropped from the civil list and the succession.  At this point Charles and Anne were children so Margaret was third in line.  Between 23-25 she could have dated other people seriously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> He would never have gotten his "circus" of a wedding from granny if he had not asked for permission to marry her.  It would have been the registry office or a little church in the shires and we know that Meghan would have said no to both.



Absolutely. But negotiating who pays for the outrageous bash is not the same as legally having to search permission. But maybe I'm too obsessed with details.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am fascinated that people just stepped aside and let her do her narc thing (not RP, the organizers). I wonder if The Queen summoned them because it was brought to her attention how that came to be (and not just "Why did you not keep your team in the loop").


It was her title and position.  This could not have happened anywhere, but in the UK.   It is like the army, where you salute the rank and not the person. They did want to be perceived as insulting a royal.   I ask myself if she knew/realized that she could do this just because of her married in rank or she was just plain pushy.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Absolutely. But negotiating who pays for the outrageous bash is not the same as legally having to search permission. But maybe I'm too obsessed with details.


He wasn't going to pay for it in any event. I don't think it is a negotiation.   It was yes you can have a big royal wedding or no you can't.  The only negotiation would be the church and size of it.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> I am gobsmacked that she did this to an actress like RP who made many very successful movies and a very good actress.  She also has a successful miniseries on Amazon.  I think Meghan delighted in embarrassing a woman who a bigger career  than she ever could in Hollywood and EU.


Knowing what we now know about the circumstances surrounding this event, she has b@lls of steel to push her way onto the stage and pretend to be humble.  Time magazine at the time had this to say....

BY RAISA BRUNER 
DECEMBER 11, 2018 10:19 AM EST
Only invite a Duchess to an event if you’re prepared for her to steal the show.
That’s the way of the world — especially Meghan Markle‘s world. The Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance at the British Fashion Awards on Monday night, popping up at the Royal Albert Hall in London to present an award to her wedding dress designer, Clare Waight Keller. Waight Keller, who is the artistic director of fashion house Givenchy, was bestowed with the British Womenswear Designer of the Year award, given to her by both Markle and _Gone Girl_ actress Rosamund Pike.

But naturally, most eyes were on the royal in the midst of the fashionable spectacle, who was decked out in a black one-shoulder dress by Waight Keller. “I recently read that the culture of fashion has changed from where it was once ‘cool to be cruel’ to now where it is ‘cool to be kind,'” Markle said in her address to Waight Keller. “I feel especially proud to announce tonight’s winner, who is a British designer leading on the global stage with vision and creativity, but also with incredible kindness.”

Since marrying Prince Harry in May, Markle has proceeded to remain a public figure, participating in royal events, publishing a charity cookbook, taking an official tour of Australia and New Zealand with her husband and announcing her pregnancy this fall. (She’s due in the spring.) Markle and Harry also recently announced they will soon be moving to the town of Windsor just outside London, where they will be making their home at Frogmore Cottage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Unavailable to my country. No idea why. Probably still a sensitive subject(?)


Shame that ... good documentary , actually researched by a  COE cleric (who has nothing to gain by bad mouthing the COE)


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm still torn because I think she manipulated a vulnerable man and treats him poorly, BUT I wholeheartedly agree his treason - and the treatment of both of HIS grandparents. OMG! - is worse and must hurt the family so much more.
> 
> When my grandfather was sick leading up to his death I was at his bedside several times a week. Someone was there every single day and we fought over who could go (no pandemic back then, but limited visitors due to being an ICU). With my grandmother, I visit often and try to do little events for fun at my house (a firm favourite is lady's lunch with her cousin and whoever is available that day). Screw my soft spot for Harry, I will NEVER forgive what he did to Philip and The Queen, and I don't care if Ghoul was holding a gun to his head.



So pleased you were there for the end for both your grandparents.

When it is the end of someone's life. When they've accomplished so much, how can you let them worry about that you're going to destroy it all? Harry will never be able to make it up.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I think Meghan sniffed out that they were crooked and got them to pay her.



Or the other way around


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Shame that ... good documentary , actually researched by a  COE cleric (who has nothing to gain by bad mouthing the COE)



I know, such a shame!


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Or the other way around


True.  They could have taken the chance and asked and at worst she could have said no. However,  like found like.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




She's mot just a mean girl, she's the meanest


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> BY RAISA BRUNER
> DECEMBER 11, 2018 10:19 AM EST
> Only invite a Duchess to an event if you’re prepared for her to steal the show.
> That’s the way of the world — especially Meghan Markle‘s world. *The Duchess of Sussex made a surprise appearance at the British Fashion Awards on Monday night*, popping up at the Royal Albert Hall in London to present an award to her wedding dress designer, Clare Waight Keller.



And what a surprise it was!


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> So pleased you were there for the end for both your grandparents.
> 
> When it is the end of someone's life. When they've accomplished so much, how can you let them worry about that you're going to destroy it all? Harry will never be able to make it up.


I like to think that TQ only had to look at the picture of the heirs and feel comforted.  She knew Harry was a problem, but there were two men to handle him and one in training.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I like to think that TQ only had to look at the picture of the heirs and feel comforted.  She knew Harry was a problem, but there were two men to handle him and one in training.


Plus a sassy young spare called Charlotte, lol.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Useless knowledge of today: Ernst August of Hanover (husband of Caroline of Monaco), a German with no British citizenship nor titles (though he could claim a formerly royal dukedom) but a spot in the LoS was bound by the Marriage Act as well.
> 
> But now it gets confusing, Low says after 25 you don't need to seek permission, but Ernst August sought - and got - permission to marry Catholic Caroline. But also, apparently the Royal Marriages Act was repealed in 2013 which took effect in 2015 together with the Succession to the Crown Act (Ernst August was married in 1999). So is there a rule we don't know of that made it so Harry had so seek permission anyway, or was it a fake courtesy request?



He would have had to ask permission, but MegZ probably gave him that ultimatum before (I'm guessing, I'm too lazy to look at the timeline). 

Anyway why is here: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...sion-marry-meghan-markle-princess-eugenie-evg


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, apologies for not being clearer.  Even with his royal name, his personality is such that he does not appear to be a fun guy in private.  Imo, that is not a catch. Money does not make him a catch either imo. His looks faded quickly too. Her choice was fame with an awkward, dimwit. _Fame always comes at a huge cost._  With the privileges comes enormous scrutiny and responsibility. Imo she was not ready for the intensity of the scrutiny [mainly because she was never really _famous_] , so she needed a way out of the BRF. She needed a way out  with $$$$ and privileges. Through him, she arranged an _exit_  that let her set her own parameters. It’s the Faustian bargain right before our eyes.  Fascinating stuff, really.  Again, just my opinion.
> 
> _Faustian bargain, a pact whereby a person trades something of supreme moral or spiritual importance, such as personal values or the soul, for some worldly or material benefit, such as knowledge, power, or riches.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faustian Bargain | Story, Meaning, & Facts
> 
> 
> Faustian bargain,  a pact whereby a person trades something of supreme moral or spiritual importance, such as personal values or the soul, for some worldly or material benefit, such as knowledge, power, or riches. The term refers to the legend of Faust (or Faustus, or Doctor Faustus), a...
> 
> 
> 
> www.britannica.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I think her desire for fame and wealth was much more important than having any kind of authentic relationship.  she got what she wanted.  is she happy?  IDK.  Is she even capable of having a relationship with anyone?  she uses and discards people from what I understand.  IDK if narcissists can be born rather than created.  Her mom was supposedly a hippy-type and her dad a nice hard-working guy.  ironically IMO the best thing she could do for her reputation would be to forgive her dad but she apparently isn't capable of that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> So pleased you were there for the end for both your grandparents.



Luckily, grandma is still going strong! I'll admit I slightly panicked though when The Queen - only a year older and as we all thought immortal - passed.



papertiger said:


> When it is the end of someone's life. When they've accomplished so much, how can you let them worry about that you're going to destroy it all? Harry will never be able to make it up.



Yes! I don't understand. I can't even make sense of not going to see them when they are actively dying or ask you to come for the summer holidays, but sitting on Oprah badmouthing their lives' work or standing by while your spouse gives slandering interviews is something else.

And I completely cannot get behind their thought pattern of apparently slandering Charles, Camilla and the Waleses in their upcoming projects and now panicking because did they think The Queen being alive would make the others forget what they had said and done? Maybe whoever said it's a marketing strategy is right.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I know, such a shame!



Try searching for it by another "provider". I doubt it's blocked because of the contents, but if it's uploaded by a foreign media network it might be blocked in certain countries.


----------



## Chanbal

Being royal is a pretty good gig…


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And what a surprise it was!



Diana planned a really stupid stunt with Wayne Sleep and the Royal Ballet at one point. Equally entitled and pointless except she wanted to live the fantasy of being a ballet dancer. At least you can excuse she was in her 20s.


Meghan wanted to hob-nob with the fashionistas, and I guess if you can't win a fashion award, second best to give it. CWK went from Pringle to Chloe to Givenchy. Shame MegZ cursed Claire wainwright Keller's career completely, CWK's last Wiki entry is she left Givenchy 10.04.20, a few months after MegZXit. Bang, nothing more.

MegZ is like the opposite of King Midas

King Midas in reverse (starts 1.26)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> It was her title and position.  This could not have happened anywhere, but in the UK.   It is like the army, where you salute the rank and not the person. They did want to be perceived as insulting a royal.   I ask myself if she knew/realized that she could do this just because of her married in rank or she was just plain pushy.


It’s still very British not to want to make a “scene” - no such qualms from Meg.


----------



## pukasonqo

MM reminds me of an ex friend, daughter of a diplomat with a huge ego and NIL personal taste

unfortunately my ex friend took a toll on a good friendship but luckily is out of my life

Funnily enough my friends always refer to her as “That Woman”, TW


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I think her desire for fame and wealth was much more important than having any kind of authentic relationship.  she got what she wanted.  is she happy?  IDK.  Is she even capable of having a relationship with anyone?  she uses and discards people from what I understand.  IDK if narcissists can be born rather than created.  Her mom was supposedly a hippy-type and her dad a nice hard-working guy.  ironically IMO the best thing she could do for her reputation would be to forgive her dad but she apparently isn't capable of that.


_her dad a nice hard-working guy_
Idk, he gave her the P&G lie which she has used her entire life.  Agree, forgiving her dad would help her reputation.


----------



## Toby93

I had never seen this before, but it made me laugh


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> I had never seen this before, but it made me laugh



Oh for a longer clip


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> Oh for a longer clip




Or


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> He would have had to ask permission, but MegZ probably gave him that ultimatum before (I'm guessing, I'm too lazy to look at the timeline).
> 
> Anyway why is here: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...sion-marry-meghan-markle-princess-eugenie-evg


Permission required varies with level , I think ? H was pretty high up before Louis was born … but i could be wrong

I read that HRH Alexandra, daughter of Ernst August, gave her up position in the LOS auto convert to Catholicism when she turned 18. She was Protestant.

I don’t know if any of the is correct, was correct at the time , what the rules are today, what they were back then

But these rules are a moving target, and I suspect modern reporters don’t  do due diligence past Wikipedia


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _her dad a nice hard-working guy_
> Idk, he gave her the P&G lie which she has used her entire life.  Agree, forgiving her dad would help her reputation.


well, that is true but according to tina brown's book, people who worked with him liked him - had positive things to say about him.  I guess maybe his weakness was his little princess


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I had never seen this before, but it made me laugh




Oh, she made more than up for it by pushing in front of Harry to greet was it the King or Crown Prince?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> I read that HRH Alexandra, daughter of Ernst August, gave her up position in the LOS auto convert to Catholicism when she turned 18. She was Protestant.



This is so weird to me (also in case of the Kents - the Duchess and one son I believe?). We have Catholics and Protestants in my family, I've been to church services of both denominations, and I really don't see enough differences wanting to convert officially, especially not when it costs you. And if so, I'd maybe consider converting to Protestantism as they seem to have a more liberal stance re: women in church positions and priests having families. 

But maybe I'm the problem here, I also kept rolling my eyes at Ghoul's stunt to convert because she suddenly found her spiritual home. Not.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Permission required varies with level , I think ? H was pretty high up before Louis was born … but i could be wrong



Margaret aged 25 was #3. Harry before Louis's birth was #5.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Margaret aged 25 was #3. Harry before Louis's birth was #5.


now harry is number 6, same as the WIFE's number on the Suits call list


----------



## youngster

Sharont2305 said:


> Plus a sassy young spare called Charlotte, lol.



And let's not forget Aunt Anne who is not afraid of anyone!


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> I had never seen this before, but it made me laugh




OMG LOL in her mind this must have been so humiliating


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I've read through several chapters featuring Charles. He is described as both having a temper and being a demanding boss, yet I have somehow never heard he was accused of bullying simply because working for him is not a 9 to 5.

So far I really enjoy the book, it's a fun read and I don't feel like taking long showers all the time


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> now harry is number 6, same as the WIFE's number on the Suits call list


 
He's #5 again because Charles got promoted.


----------



## Chanbal

Do they have enough cash to move? 


_The villagers are hoping that by airing their grievances, their case will be strong enough to deter the Duke and Duchess from settling in to this otherwise peaceful community._


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I am gobsmacked that she did this to an actress like RP who made many very successful movies and a very good actress.  She also has a successful miniseries on Amazon.  I think Meghan delighted in embarrassing a woman who a bigger career  than she ever could in Hollywood and EU.


I think she would have done it to any actress. Of course if it were an acclaimed actor, she would have gone into invade-body-privacy mode.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am fascinated that people just stepped aside and let her do her narc thing (not RP, the organizers). I wonder if The Queen summoned them because it was brought to her attention how that whole thing came to be (and not just "Why did you not keep your team in the loop").


ITA


Pessie said:


> It’s still very British not to want to make a “scene” - no such qualms from Meg.


When the Harkles wanted to modernize the RF, no doubt in Zedzee's mind, it meant changing the RF into a Hollywood celebrity family with her given top billing because of her background and experience as a Highly-Sought-After actress.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Kevinaxx

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or



I wonder if it’s things like this that made her ultimately decide to get Harry to break away from royal/duties. I can’t imagine her being happy about having to walk behind, off of red carpet, etc.


----------



## Toby93

Kevinaxx said:


> I wonder if it’s things like this that made her ultimately decide to get Harry to break away from royal/duties. I can’t imagine her being happy about having to walk behind, off of red carpet, etc.


Philip did it for 70 years and he did it out of respect.  It just goes to show how little she knew about the BRF and how she thought she could translate it to celebrity.  

I wonder if Hazz misses the attention he just took as his due and thinks about how he has now switched places with a c-list cable actress?


----------



## 880

Toby93 said:


> Philip did it for 70 years and he did it out of respect.  It just goes to show how little she knew about the BRF and how she thought she could translate it to celebrity.
> 
> I wonder if Hazz misses the attention he just took as his due and thinks about how he has now switched places with a c-list cable actress?


Agree ^ 

re the article calling Harry a lost soul. No. IMO he’s spoiled, self indulgent, and not too bright. But, not a lost soul.
Im not fond of either of them, but I think H should have known better and should shoulder his share of the blame for their collective idiocy.


----------



## Toby93

Interesting post, since we all know she will be making a statement soon


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Interesting post, since we all know she will be making a statement soon




Oh, yes, indeed, _“the cultural context”   _Do tell us more, perma-moaner.


----------



## Chanbal

Kevinaxx said:


> I wonder if it’s things like this that made her ultimately decide to get Harry to break away from royal/duties. I can’t imagine her being happy about having to walk behind, off of red carpet, etc.


I would understand that, but I don't think that was the reason. The way she treated the people that worked with her says a lot about her character. "_I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this,_" supports a sense of duty to her pocket imo.


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting discussion about the book deal


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Interesting post, since we all know she will be making a statement soon



Forgive me if I seem out of my mind, but she is well spoken there and coherent , like a different person , different lifestyle - cough cough hint hint


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so weird to me (also in case of the Kents - the Duchess and one son I believe?). We have Catholics and Protestants in my family, I've been to church services of both denominations, and I really don't see enough differences wanting to convert officially, especially not when it costs you. And if so, I'd maybe consider converting to Protestantism as they seem to have a more liberal stance re: women in church positions and priests having families.
> 
> But maybe I'm the problem here, I also kept rolling my eyes at Ghoul's stunt to convert because she suddenly found her spiritual home. Not.


On  working royal thing I used it to just mean a royal with a job and forgot the proper use of term. I know is she basically a spokesperson for some antiques and art dealer or something and I do think it’s true she probably goes in once a month to get publicity for the firm and that’s about it.

Yes I wasn’t really following the royals at the time but I remember her conversion to CofE being pretty hilariously fake seeming even at the time of the wedding. It always felt a valley girl yoga instructor or possibly Michael Bay  would be a more spiritually fitting official than the Episcopalian ministers.

  It’s also important to remember that Catholic services would have until pretty recently been very different because they were in Latin rather than the country’s spoken language and they have both toned down the politics a lot in my lifetime but the Catholics still have some stronger stances on some issues.


Interesting post, since we all know she will be making a statement soon  


Toby93 said:


>



The absolute irony of making a ‘culture is king’ statement then proceeding to claim you found the _British_ incomprehensible and hostile as an _American_. She’s fine with girls being repressed for the gender from childhood but god help she live in a country which speaks the same language in a slightly drier more sarcastic way and has a couple of extra letters in our spellings 

(yes I’m understating how cool being British or American  is here but one gets my point)


marietouchet said:


> Forgive me if I seem out of my mind, but she is well spoken there and coherent , like a different person , different lifestyle - cough cough hint hint


I can see the fury in her eyes that the guy not moving  her cue cards at the right pace so I don’t think it’s straight from the dome


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Forgive me if I seem out of my mind, but she is well spoken there and coherent , like a different person , different lifestyle - cough cough hint hint



Yeah, I didn't find her quite as disgusting as usually there. No stupid tortoise neck, no eyebrows in her hairline, no hands in other peoples' faces, normal tone of voice. I still can sense the impatience and surpressed rage that somehow the talk isn't quite going as she wants to.


----------



## Sharont2305

youngster said:


> And let's not forget Aunt Anne who is not afraid of anyone!


Plus Zara and Mike Tindall. Mike, a true commoner who, even though Zara doesn't have a title is behaving more Royal than a man who was born 3rd in line.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s also important to remember that Catholic services would have until pretty recently been very different because they were in Latin rather than the country’s spoken language and they have both toned down the politics a lot in my lifetime but the Catholics still have some stronger stances on some issues.



I mean, 1970 is not that recently, that's many years before I was even born  

The fundus next door still hold Latin mass. They also don't let girls wear pants, deny their cult members to listen to satanic music (the...radio) and find nothing weird with people having 17 kids, though. Oh, and their message is often so hateful I've said on several occasions I hope they are being monitored by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> He would have had to ask permission, but MegZ probably gave him that ultimatum before (I'm guessing, I'm too lazy to look at the timeline).
> 
> Anyway why is here: https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...sion-marry-meghan-markle-princess-eugenie-evg


Yeah I imagine the queen had to sign off on a big flash wedding to settle H and M’s egos and she did like … well I don’t want to say idiot but I will say in a way you would think a woman with her years of experience would shy away from. All she had to do was wait out the car crash relationship or tell Harry he can only have a cheapie wedding and wait for M to lose her rag at H.

*After all M was the only one who benefitted from their rush marriage*.

No one in U.K. was begging to see Harry take her up the aisle.

@queenofthewrapdress Yeah, I didn't find her quite as disgusting as usually there. No stupid tortoise neck, no eyebrows in her hairline, no hands in other peoples' faces, normal tone of voice. I still can sense the impatience and surpressed rage that somehow the talk isn't quite going as she wants to.
The prince kissed a starlet and she turned into a toad.  A big slimy toad that positively swells with smugness. Also I imagine the grating LA twang she uses now is for Harry’s benefit to convince him she’s Hollywood.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Permission required varies with level , I think ? H was pretty high up before Louis was born … but i could be wrong
> 
> I read that HRH Alexandra, daughter of Ernst August, gave her up position in the LOS auto convert to Catholicism when she turned 18. She was Protestant.
> 
> I don’t know if any of the is correct, was correct at the time , what the rules are today, what they were back then
> 
> But these rules are a moving target, and I suspect modern reporters don’t  do due diligence past Wikipedia



H's position in the LoS required him to ask permission, but Harry wasn't going to take NO for an answer anyway. 

I stand by what I said, the family _had_ misgivings. From the beginning, they should have not let the public pay for a huge wedding and 'retired' Harry from being a Working Royal right there and then. 

I think Harry (as the spare) had had too much of the spotlight anyway. Diana and Charles did him no service by not getting him used to thinking about supporting himself as he was growing-up. 

Obviously, the head of the CoE couldn't be Catholic or any another religion.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I imagine the queen had to sign off on a big flash wedding to settle H and M’s egos and she did like … well I don’t want to say idiot but I will say in a way you would think a woman with her years of experience would shy away from. All she had to do was wait out the car crash relationship or tell Harry he can only have a cheapie wedding and wait for M to lose her rag at H.
> 
> *After all M was the only one who benefitted from their rush marriage*.
> 
> No one in U.K. was begging to see Harry take her up the aisle.
> 
> @queenofthewrapdress Yeah, I didn't find her quite as disgusting as usually there. No stupid tortoise neck, no eyebrows in her hairline, no hands in other peoples' faces, normal tone of voice. I still can sense the impatience and surpressed rage that somehow the talk isn't quite going as she wants to.
> The prince kissed a starlet and she turned into a toad.  A big slimy toad that positively swells with smugness. Also I imagine the grating LA twang she uses now is for Harry’s benefit to convince him she’s Hollywood.



Yes, she must have convinced him she was a Hollywood. 

Strnge she had good timing until she met him. Her scheming and grafting landed her the top prize - and not a moment to soon. After the marriage she was proved an idiot too, her timing, her moves, her MO. 

That's what you get by reading Wiki instead of a book. M is still clueless on monarchy and the UK and he seems too arrogant and stupid to teach her. 

We all know now she never intended to stick around (as a WR) for longer than a few photo ops, him neither. He should have been made to leave the spotlight before the wedding.


----------



## pukasonqo

Toby93 said:


> Interesting post, since we all know she will be making a statement soon



She can then compare her ordeal w the royal family when she was merely existing w the death of Mahsa Amini and the struggle of women in Iran
Again a bit hypocritical as she still has the blood diamonds from the Saudis


----------



## JulesB68

CarryOn2020 said:


> Or



I think she was just pissed off that being made to walk on the tarmac instead of the carpet, meant the soles of the shoes would get ruined & she couldn’t return them!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

To be fair, I'd have been pissed too. Cultural context whatever, it is kind of rude. Also, I've travelled in several MENA countries and they usually make concessions to the foreigner even if that's not necessarily the done thing for natives.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, I'd have been pissed too. Cultural context whatever, it is kind of rude. Also, I've travelled in several MENA countries and they usually make concessions to the foreigner even if that's not necessarily the done thing for natives.


Perhaps like in many other events she attended, she wasn't the one invited, and not even the plus one, but more like the groupie hanger-on.


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Yes, she must have convinced him she was a Hollywood.
> 
> Strnge she had good timing until she met him. Her scheming and grafting landed her the top prize - and not a moment to soon. After the marriage she was proved an idiot too, her timing, her moves, her MO.
> 
> That's what you get by reading Wiki instead of a book. M is still clueless on monarchy and the UK and he seems too arrogant and stupid to teach her.
> 
> We all know now she never intended to stick around (as a WR) for longer than a few photo ops, him neither. He should have been made to leave the spotlight before the wedding.


Her good timing might be due to her sucking up to the right people to pull the correct strings for her climb upwards. Now that she thinks she is Monarch of the Mountain, she likely expects the right people to suck up to her and it's not happening. If she and SS have parted ways, will she have to depend on old soulmates like Markus Andersen again for her PR? After all, in The Cut, she is still using Soho House candles so there is a surviving link there.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, I'd have been pissed too. Cultural context whatever, it is kind of rude. Also, I've travelled in several MENA countries and they usually make concessions to the foreigner even if that's not necessarily the done thing for natives.


I wouldn’t.  When in Rome etc., you don’t offend your hosts - especially as she was there as a representative of The Queen.  If she’d been gracious and smiley it would’ve been no big deal, but she had to let her anger show and walk as close to it as she could.  In fact I’m sure she caught a few fibres there.  
Noticeable how the woman directing her watched her like a hawk


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth…


----------



## Chanbal

Prince Harry's book 'won't see light of day' over backlash fears
					

Prince Harry announced he was writing an "intimate" memoir in the summer of 2021.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

The drama continues…










						Harry and Meghan's own team back Netflix in battle against Sussexes
					

Harry and Meghan's own Archewell production team is understood to have taken the side of Netflix against the couple after the Sussexes discussed cuts to their documentary series on the streaming platform.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth…



I thought SS ditched the Sussexes?


Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry's book 'won't see light of day' over backlash fears
> 
> 
> Prince Harry announced he was writing an "intimate" memoir in the summer of 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Publish it you coward!


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry's book 'won't see light of day' over backlash fears
> 
> 
> Prince Harry announced he was writing an "intimate" memoir in the summer of 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I don’t think H has control over whether or not his book gets published at this point. It sounds like he already submitted a manuscript that was accepted by the publisher so I don’t see how he can stop the publication unless he’s prepared to repay his book advance plus penalties, if any are specified in his book contract. Perhaps he thinks he can get the funds from the Bank of Daddy the King but any funds from that Bank will probably come with so many strings attached that neither he nor TW will be able to breathe another word about the BRF without Daddy’s consent. And I doubt TW would accept that kind of a deal after famously bragging that she was never asked to sign an NDA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps like in many other events she attended, she wasn't the one invited, and not even the plus one, but more like the groupie hanger-on.


 I was going to say "unlikely because royal tour" but then I remembered whispers about a military occasion where she indeed wasn't expected. If that was the case my sympathy just vanished.


----------



## BlueCherry

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth…




It seems that telling Meghan no to travelling to Balmoral was the first time she’s been truly told no. Then the state of her at the walkabout suggested it was a hastily put together event. 

The split with SS, if it was their decision, is nothing more than the realisation that they are fully out. Wouldn’t surprise me if they’re just pretending so that they get the titles for the children.


----------



## BlueCherry

Pessie said:


> I wouldn’t.  When in Rome etc., you don’t offend your hosts - especially as she was there as a representative of The Queen.  If she’d been gracious and smiley it would’ve been no big deal, but she had to let her anger show and walk as close to it as she could.  In fact I’m *sure she caught a few fibres there. *
> Noticeable how the woman directing her watched her like a hawk


----------



## BlueCherry

Pessie said:


> I wouldn’t.  When in Rome etc., you don’t offend your hosts - especially as she was there as a representative of The Queen.  If she’d been gracious and smiley it would’ve been no big deal, but she had to let her anger show and walk as close to it as she could.  In fact I’m sure she caught a few fibres there.
> Noticeable how the woman directing her watched her like a hawk



I did some work for a Muslim guy for 4 years or so. He was lovely and had embraced British culture in his working life. He even told me he liked having a white girl working with him as it was good for his business with the British and Chinese customers. I took no offence and wouldn’t have minded if he had walked in front of me at meetings but he never did. 

Another time two of my Albanian employees/friends invited me to the their weddings (in very rural areas) but said I would have to sit only with the women, no alcohol and reverse out of the room after serving their food. I said **** that I’ll send a gift


----------



## EverSoElusive

Toby93 said:


> I had never seen this before, but it made me laugh



This must had been quite the eye opening and humbling experience for the crazy. I'm just shocked that she didn't announce on the OW interview that the BRF forced her into such sexist royal engagement where she was not allowed to walk on the red carpet with Harry or that the Moroccan government is sexist and racist towards her. 

It's actually quite refreshing to see someone putting her in her place successfully because she typically bulldozes her way through. 

I would like to believe that the crazy wasn't supposed to be there but insisted on going. Otherwise, the Moroccans probably wouldn't have had a problem with her walking behind Harry with the female escort. Morocco despite being a Muslim country and this being a royal engagement, I highly doubt that they would commit such faux pas intentionally and indirectly offend the late Queen. In other words, there must be a reason for the crazy to be shown the tarmac.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> This must had been quite the eye opening and humbling experience for the crazy. I'm just shocked that she didn't announce on the OW interview that the BRF forced her into such sexist royal engagement where she was not allowed to walk on the red carpet with Harry or that the Moroccan government is sexist and racist towards her.
> 
> It's actually quite refreshing to see someone putting her in her place successfully because she typically bulldozes her way through.
> 
> I would like to believe that the crazy wasn't supposed to be there but insisted on going. Otherwise, the Moroccans probably wouldn't have had a problem with her walking behind Harry with the female escort. Morocco despite being a Muslim country and this being a royal engagement, I highly doubt that they would commit such faux pas intentionally and indirectly offend the late Queen. In other words, there must be a reason for the crazy to be shown the tarmac.


Was the Morocco tour one of those which the Harkles bragged was a big success? All I recall about it are her underwear showing and the obscenely expensive ugly gown.


----------



## Suncatcher

Is the reason why she could not walk on the red carpet because she was not born royal? Or did this occur before she got married? Frankly I’m surprised we didn’t hear all about the pain and suffering she endured because of this.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> Was the Morocco tour one of those which the Harkles bragged was a big success? All I recall about it are her underwear showing and the obscenely expensive ugly gown.


Frankly, I've no idea if they ever bragged that it was a big success but I certainly remember the poor undergarment choices and the sad looking Dior kaftan


----------



## EverSoElusive

Suncatcher said:


> Is the reason why she could not walk on the red carpet because she was not born royal? Or did this occur before she got married? Frankly I’m surprised we didn’t hear all about the pain and suffering she endured because of this.


This was after they got married while she was pregnant with Archie. Not sure if it has anything to do with her not born royal. Kinda doubt it.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The drama continues…
> View attachment 5628595
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's own team back Netflix in battle against Sussexes
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's own Archewell production team is understood to have taken the side of Netflix against the couple after the Sussexes discussed cuts to their documentary series on the streaming platform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Makes sense .. these people want to have a best selling Netflix show on their CV so they can quit, they want it aired


----------



## lanasyogamama

It is so crazy to me that he can’t see that he needs to choose either to publish this book or have a relationship with his family.  He still thinks he can have both.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, I'd have been pissed too. Cultural context whatever, it is kind of rude. Also, I've travelled in several MENA countries and they usually make concessions to the foreigner even if that's not necessarily the done thing for natives.


Why was Hazz meeting troops?  As a prince, he is/was not the head of state or even the spare.  He was way down the line.  Agree with all those who say Hazz the Pretender was treated far too well.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why was Hazz meeting troops?  As a prince, he is/was not the head of state or even the spare.  He was way down the line.  Agree with all those who say Hazz the Pretender was treated far too well.


Representing Head of State though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> Representing Head of State though.


So, QE sent him?  Wow, that is some massive propping up imo.  No wonder he acts like a jerk - way too many privileges with no responsibilities   

an aside:  those photos of MM at Invictus do her no favors. She looks some kind of awful in each one.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, QE sent him?  Wow, that is some massive propping up imo.  No wonder he acts like a jerk - way too many privileges with no responsibilities
> 
> an aside:  those photos of MM at Invictus do her no favors. She looks some kind of awful in each one.


That’s what they’re all doing on official foreign tours, whether it’s Sophie, Anne, William or whoever - they are representing the UK and the Head of State.  It is an honour AND a responsibility.  That’s why  Harry and Meghan’s behaviour in S Africa (poor me nobody asked if I’m ok ) upset so many British people, me included.  (As she grew older the Queen was no longer able to travel herself)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

BlueCherry said:


> It seems that telling Meghan no to travelling to Balmoral was the first time she’s been truly told no. Then the state of her at the walkabout suggested it was a hastily put together event.
> 
> The split with SS, if it was their decision, is nothing more than the realisation that they are fully out. Wouldn’t surprise me if they’re just pretending so that they get the titles for the children.


Oh dearrr H made video/zoom to OYW .. the organization that was in the news yesterday for $2M by org leaders


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> It is so crazy to me that he can’t see that he needs to choose either to publish this book or have a relationship with his family.  He still thinks he can have both.


Not sure I agree … he might not want the book now, but the financial  hole he has dug for himself is too deep to get out of without it
Follow the money


----------



## youngster

lanasyogamama said:


> It is so crazy to me that he can’t see that he needs to choose either to publish this book or have a relationship with his family.  He still thinks he can have both.



Yes, agreed, I don't understand how he thinks he can trash the family with "his truth", no matter whether what he says is actually true or not, and still have a relationship with Charles and William and be welcomed on the balcony and all that. He's never going to browbeat them into giving him the half-in/half-out deal he desperately wants. That ship has sailed.  I think too, what he is complaining about is all ancient history and family business and, if he still has grievances, they should be handled in private. I can only imagine how tiresome he must be to Charles and William who have probably already heard about how everyone (themselves, other family, BP staff, his staff) has failed him. He has to be exhausting to be around.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> That’s what they’re all doing on official foreign tours, whether it’s Sophie, Anne, William or whoever - they are representing the UK and the Head of State.  It is an honour AND a responsibility.  That’s why  Harry and Meghan’s behaviour in S Africa (poor me nobody asked if I’m ok ) upset so many British people, me included.  (As she grew older the Queen was no longer able to travel herself)


Thank you, that does make sense.  I did some google-ing. Seems many were _surprised _by the very short visit.  The visit happens in Feb., 2019. In March, 2019, tensions begin with BP, H&M set up their own household. May, 2019, Archie born. Oct., 2019, Australia/NZ tour.  Jan., 2020 - Megxit begins.

The warnings were there - article from 2019:
_The odd feel of this quick trip hasn’t gone unnoticed.* “It is just so askew, off kilter, weird,” one veteran royal watcher messaged, “like there’s something we don’t know.” *Another echoed that sentiment: “It is so weird; *seems like there must be another agenda*—why send seven-month-pregnant Meghan here for this? I don’t get it.”








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'askew, off kilter, weird' trip to Morocco - Macleans.ca
					

Royal watchers are puzzled by the trip, but at least it's not the disaster that was Elizabeth's 1980 visit




					www.macleans.ca
				



_








						Timeline: Prince Harry and Meghan - and 'Megxit'
					

Prince Harry, grandson of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, and his American wife Meghan give a highly-anticipated interview with U.S. chat shot host Oprah Winfrey which airs on Sunday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## marietouchet

Polo video in all its cringe worthiness


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> Frankly, I've no idea if they ever bragged that it was a big success but I certainly remember the poor undergarment choices and the sad looking Dior kaftan


There was a rumour then that H&M were sent off to Morocco because she was planning a sneak trip to the Oscars. I wonder if this was after the Ros Pike incident and they didn't want her gate-crashing another awards ceremony. Some articles commented that she was overdressed in the Dior kaftan and speculated that she had had it made for another event.


----------



## V0N1B2

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, that does make sense.  I did some google-ing. Seems many were _surprised _by the very short visit.  The visit happens in Feb., 2019. In March, 2019, tensions begin with BP, H&M set up their own household. May, 2019, Archie born. Oct., 2019, Australia/NZ tour.  Jan., 2020 - Megxit begins.
> 
> The warnings were there - article from 2019:
> _The odd feel of this quick trip hasn’t gone unnoticed.* “It is just so askew, off kilter, weird,” one veteran royal watcher messaged, “like there’s something we don’t know.” *Another echoed that sentiment: “It is so weird; *seems like there must be another agenda*—why send seven-month-pregnant Meghan here for this? I don’t get it.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'askew, off kilter, weird' trip to Morocco - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> Royal watchers are puzzled by the trip, but at least it's not the disaster that was Elizabeth's 1980 visit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timeline: Prince Harry and Meghan - and 'Megxit'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, grandson of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, and his American wife Meghan give a highly-anticipated interview with U.S. chat shot host Oprah Winfrey which airs on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


I thought the last minute trip to Morocco was because Meghan was planning to go to the Oscars. Hence the $$$$ Dior Caftan? BP got wind of that and said, oh you’re expected in Morocco tomorrow 

Edit; I see @xincinsin and I got there at the same time.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's #5 again because Charles got promoted.


eww...they had better do something about that


----------



## Toby93

I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.



And I don't know what to say about this, except it's from the "Myra" account.  I don't know what race has to do with someone pretending to be pregnant


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.



well, at least he's smiling for once


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> There was a rumour then that H&M were sent off to Morocco because she was planning a sneak trip to the Oscars. I wonder if this was after the Ros Pike incident and they didn't want her gate-crashing another awards ceremony. Some articles commented that she was overdressed in the Dior kaftan and speculated that she had had it made for another event.


That would explain the sulking


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.



It looks like that in addition to acting lessons TW has trained him well on surprise appearances. 
I wonder what teaching methods she uses, she seems more successful with him than his teachers from his previous schools.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> There was a rumour then that H&M were sent off to Morocco because she was planning a sneak trip to the Oscars. I wonder if this was after the Ros Pike incident and they didn't want her gate-crashing another awards ceremony. Some articles commented that she was overdressed in the Dior kaftan and speculated that she had had it made for another event.


RPike was in December, 2018.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.
> 
> 
> 
> And I don't know what to say about this, except it's from the "Myra" account.  I don't know what race has to do with someone pretending to be pregnant



So Idris is racist?  I’m so confused.


----------



## Chanbal

What it looks like to be a very good advice for the BRF from one of TW's wedding guests.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Launch this new scheme… a must watch imo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.
> 
> 
> 
> And I don't know what to say about this, except it's from the "Myra" account.  I don't know what race has to do with someone pretending to be pregnant




Interesting he looks away and pauses when discussing his kids.  _Archie is uhhhhh.  Lily is uhhhhh._
Stalling for the answer.


----------



## Toby93

Ok, I found where that clip was from


----------



## jennlt

And they're morally bankrupt to the rest of us


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like the Harkles' bosses are not very generous with QE and PP.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, I'd have been pissed too. Cultural context whatever, it is kind of rude. Also, I've travelled in several MENA countries and they usually make concessions to the foreigner even if that's not necessarily the done thing for natives.


On the other hand, when one visits certain places such as mosques, churches, temples and synagogues, it is a sign of the visiting guests respect to honor that institution and its practices. I have never felt demeaned or disrespected in doing so.  Concessions for foreign visitors is a courtesy.  So is a guest’s adherence to protocols.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.
> 
> 
> 
> And I don't know what to say about this, except it's from the "Myra" account.  I don't know what race has to do with someone pretending to be pregnant



Sorry, not sorry: I don't intend to be mean, but has Handbag been coached in the art of exaggerated mien by Zedzee? His expressions are very OTT and often appear insincere.

I don't get the "racist" accusation either. But a recent accidental detour into sugar territory made me wonder about how they keep rehashing the same strident defences of racism and sexism. There are none so blind as those who will not see.


CarryOn2020 said:


> RPike was in December, 2018.



I think I need to timeline Zedzee's brief existence as a working royal. I'm too old to keep remembering which booboo preceded which snafu.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> It looks like that in addition to acting lessons TW has trained him well on surprise appearances.
> I wonder what teaching methods she uses, she seems more successful with him than his teachers from his previous schools.


Strange body language @34 seconds, stops looking directly at camera, completely disengages with it as he begins answer,  “ahhh Archie is very busy and Lily is learning to use her voice which is great.”

edit: just read CarryOn2022 caught this first.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Sorry, not sorry: I don't intend to be mean, but has Handbag been coached in the art of exaggerated mien by Zedzee? His expressions are very OTT and often appear insincere.
> 
> I don't get the "racist" accusation either. But a recent accidental detour into sugar territory made me wonder about how they keep rehashing the same strident defences of racism and sexism. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
> 
> I think I need to timeline Zedzee's brief existence as a working royal. I'm too old to keep remembering which booboo preceded which snafu.



Info from this Reuters article is in spoiler - it has most of their nonsense. My additions are italicized. 
Hope it helps.








						Timeline: Prince Harry and Meghan - and 'Megxit'
					

Prince Harry, grandson of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, and his American wife Meghan give a highly-anticipated interview with U.S. chat shot host Oprah Winfrey which airs on Sunday.




					www.reuters.com
				





Spoiler



July 2016: Harry, who is now sixth-in-line to the British throne and Meghan, a divorced actress from Los Angeles best known for her role in TV legal drama “Suits”, go on a blind date after being introduced by a friend.

A few weeks later, the British prince takes her on a romantic holiday to Botswana.

Oct. 2016: British tabloids begin to write stories saying Harry is secretly dating Meghan, whose father is white and mother African-American.

Nov. 2016: Harry formally reveals the couple’s relationship, issuing a statement through his official office to hit out at the media for intruding into his girlfriend’s private life, accusing some papers of abuse and harassment, some of which he described as racist.

Sept. 2017: Meghan gives an interview to Vanity Fair magazine in which she says the couple are in love and happy together.

Sept. 2017: The couple make their first public appearance together at the Invictus Games in Toronto, pictured together holding hands as they watched an event.

Nov. 2017: Harry’s father, heir-to-the-throne Prince Charles, issues a statement to say Harry and Meghan are engaged.

Dec. 2017: The couple draw cheering crowds as they carry out their first official engagement together in Nottingham, central England.

May 2018: Days before the wedding, Meghan’s father Thomas Markle reveals he will not attend after it is reported he staged paparazzi photographs. He announces he requires a heart procedure.

The couple tie the knot in the medieval chapel of the queen’s Windsor Castle, with Meghan accompanied down the aisle by Prince Charles in her father’s stead. They are bestowed with the titles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

Oct. 2018: Harry and Meghan announce she is expecting their first child while in Australia on their first overseas tour.

_Dec. 2018:  MM crashes Fashion Awards, interrupts RPike._

March 2019: In the first indication of tensions behind the scenes, Buckingham Palace announces Harry and Meghan will set up their own household, breaking from the joint operation they had with Harry’s elder brother Prince William and his wife Kate. There are media reports of rifts between the two couples.

May 2019: Meghan gives birth to a baby boy named Archie. The couple invite a small group of media to Windsor Castle for a photocall, prompting grumbling among some parts of the press that had been increasingly critical of the couple.

Oct. 2019: _Eug’s wedding & Australia/NZ tour_
Meghan announces she is suing the Mail on Sunday newspaper for printing parts of a letter she wrote to her estranged father months after the wedding. Days later, Harry announces he is suing other papers over allegations of phone-hacking.

In a TV documentary, Harry discloses a rift with his brother William. He accuses the media of bullying, comparing it to their treatment of his mother, the late Princess Diana, before her death in a Paris car crash in 1997.

Meghan says life had been hard as a new mother dealing with intense scrutiny, saying friends had warned her not to marry Harry because of the conduct of the British tabloid press.

Jan. 2020: The couple stun Queen Elizabeth and the royal family by announcing their intent to step back from senior roles, become financially independent and spend more time in North America.

After 10 days of talks between senior family members, it is agreed the couple will no longer be working royals and will give up their “Royal Highness” titles.

March 2020: Harry and Meghan carry out their last official engagement at the annual Commonwealth Day service in London. They move to California in what papers dub “Megxit”.

Sept. 2020: Streaming service Netflix, which made the hit TV drama “The Crown” based on the life of Queen Elizabeth and her family, announces the couple have signed a multi-year deal to produce films and series ranging from children’s shows to scripted content.

Feb. 2021: Harry, who served in the armed forces for a decade, wins an apology and damages from the Mail on Sunday over an article claiming he had turned his back on the military.

A London High Court judge rules the same paper breached Meghan’s privacy by publishing extracts of her letter to her father, with the Duchess saying it had been held to account for its “dehumanizing practices”.

Days later, the couple announce they are expecting their second child. The following day, it is announced that they will give an in-depth interview to U.S. chat show host Oprah Winfrey.

Four days after that announcement, Buckingham Palace announces the couple’s split as working members of the monarchy is permanent and they will lose their royal patronages.

Feb. 2021: Harry tells James Corden, British host of the U.S. TV programme “The Late Late Show”, that he stepped away from royal duties because the “toxic” British press was destroying his mental health and he wanted to protect his family.

March 2021: Buckingham Palace says it is “very concerned” about a report in the Times newspaper detailing allegations of bullying made by former staff of Harry and Meghan and will launch an investigation.

March 7, 2021: “Oprah with Meghan and Harry: a CBS primetime special” due to be broadcast.
/


----------



## sdkitty

interesting theory...not sure if this has been posted....tina brown thinks charles will pay back the advance and harry's book will be cancelled








						Prince Harry's Memoir "Won't See the Light of Day," Tina Brown Claims
					

"If the book continues, I don’t think there is any way for Harry to return."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Pessie said:


> Oh for a longer clip





CarryOn2020 said:


> Or



Again I am NOT a Meghan fan but it's tweets like these that make me think for some she will just never get it right. From the clip I see she's clearly looking toward the aide for guidance, following directions and smiling...no anger or steam at all


----------



## EmilyM11

CarryOn2020 said:


> RPike was in December, 2018.



Is it just me or is it so crazy disappointing that we are still living in the world where somebody without a talent and accomplishments but connected through marriage to somebody kind of important can push aside an accomplished woman?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> I wouldn’t.  When in Rome etc., you don’t offend your hosts - especially as she was there as a representative of The Queen.  If she’d been gracious and smiley it would’ve been no big deal, but she had to let her anger show and walk as close to it as she could.  In fact I’m sure she caught a few fibres there.
> Noticeable how the woman directing her watched her like a hawk



Oh, I absolutely wouldn't have shown my anger - and yes, I was thinking WTF she was walking like a hair next to that carpet -, but I'd still have found it rude. I happily indulge other cultures, but also I'm the kind of person who does everything to make my guests comfortable. And walking next to the carpet like an idiot wouldn't make me comfortable at all.

On the other hand, her pushing in front of Harry to greet the King was just unbelievably rude in not one, but two cultures.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Again I am NOT a Meghan fan but it's tweets like these that make me think for some she will just never get it right. From the clip I see she's clearly looking toward the aide for guidance, following directions and smiling...no anger or steam at all


walking behind H would be alien to her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth…




They really think we're all idiots, don't they.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They really think we're all idiots, don't they.


bottom line - they are getting less and less interesting IMO


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BlueCherry said:


> I did some work for a Muslim guy for 4 years or so. He was lovely and had embraced British culture in his working life. He even told me he liked having a white girl working with him as it was good for his business with the British and Chinese customers. I took no offence and wouldn’t have minded if he had walked in front of me at meetings but he never did.
> 
> Another time two of my Albanian employees/friends invited me to the their weddings (in very rural areas) but said I would have to sit only with the women, no alcohol and reverse out of the room after serving their food. I said **** that I’ll send a gift



Haha, we all have our own limits it seems. I've been to separated events (segregated? What's the correct word?)...it's fine if you're single anyway but not how I want to spend my spare time when coupled up to be honest. 

But that reminds me during my university days I was invited for dinner with my then-bf. After dinner, the men retreated to the living room to wait for tea and I as a female guest was expected to help clean the kitchen. I did not make a scene but that pissed me off to no end. I would do it if that was how things are done in my in-laws' home, no questions asked. I would probably have offered just to be nice anyway. But that's absolutely not how I treat my GUESTS and not how I want to be treated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Suncatcher said:


> Is the reason why she could not walk on the red carpet because she was not born royal? Or did this occur before she got married? Frankly I’m surprised we didn’t hear all about the pain and suffering she endured because of this.



She was pregnant with Archie at the time.


----------



## sgj99

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting he looks away and pauses when discussing his kids.  _Archie is uhhhhh.  Lily is uhhhhh._
> Stalling for the answer.


It’s because he doesn’t know what he supposed to say.  Without her pulling his strings he is lost.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lilliesdaughter said:


> On the other hand, when one visits certain places such as mosques, churches, temples and synagogues, it is a sign of the visiting guests respect to honor that institution and its practices. I have never felt demeaned or disrespected in doing so.  Concessions for foreign visitors is a courtesy.  So is a guest’s adherence to protocols.



I completely agree and have voiced my displeasure with her sloppy, naked arms appearance at that mosque in can't remember where.

I just don't fully get how that relates to the Moroccans making her walk next to that stupid carpet. I'm pretty sure it had no religious significance as Harry was seen walking all over it in his shoes.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Again I am NOT a Meghan fan but it's tweets like these that make me think for some she will just never get it right. From the clip I see she's clearly looking toward the aide for guidance, following directions and smiling...no anger or steam at all


I agree, she does not seem to be upset. I also think she was walking extremely close to the red carpet and maybe was testing how far she could push it. 

IMHO she courted controversy from the start as a means of attracting attention to herself and to show the BRF that she couldn't care two hoots about their stuffy traditions. And so, like the advertising agencies commented, she became a polarizing figure who provokes extreme responses. She has built herself a legacy of deceit and duplicity, so it is difficult to not look for ulterior motives in all she does.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely agree and have voiced my displeasure with her sloppy, naked arms appearance at that mosque in can't remember where.
> 
> I just don't fully get how that relates to the Moroccans making her walk next to that stupid carpet. I'm pretty sure it had no religious significance as Harry was seen walking all over it in his shoes.


I read that since she is *not* the monarch or an heir, she was not part of inspecting the troops. That was Hazz’s job.  Notice that William, Ed, even QE all do it alone.  It is a military thing, not a women’s issue.


----------



## xincinsin

sgj99 said:


> It’s because he doesn’t know what he supposed to say.  Without her pulling his strings he is lost.


 This reminds me of the stan who gushed over how Handbag spoke eloquently at some event WITHOUT once referring to his notes. She and the thousand stans who liked her tweet thought he was speaking off the cuff. Someone less impressed commented dryly that Handbag was reading off a teleprompter.


----------



## Chanbal

EmilyM111 said:


> Is it just me or is it so crazy disappointing that we are still living in the world where somebody without a talent and accomplishments but connected through marriage to somebody kind of important* can push aside an accomplished woman?*


What a nice way to support women! 

I believe this is part of the frustration we have with the Harkles and their questionable deals.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Prince Harry's book 'won't see light of day' over backlash fears
> 
> 
> Prince Harry announced he was writing an "intimate" memoir in the summer of 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



I don’t agree with Brown. if this book has been printed, it is definitely going to be shipped. If someone returns the entire amount spent on the production of it, including future profits, why else would the publisher trash it?  Does Harry have a clause in his contract that he can stop it going out?  With this amount of publicity, the publisher can only make money on it so why hold it?  With the Bower and Low books out there, there will be more of an interest in what Harry has to say.


----------



## gracekelly

EmilyM111 said:


> Is it just me or is it so crazy disappointing that we are still living in the world where somebody without a talent and accomplishments but connected through marriage to somebody kind of important can push aside an accomplished woman?


Yes it is disappointing, but that’s the way it is. Look how the Kardashians built an empire over just being famous. They took being famous for doing nothing, but being famous and built businesses with it. At least they built something. So far, the Harkles have built nothing.  At the moment their brand is nothing more than being ungrateful deceitful people.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haha, we all have our own limits it seems. I've been to separated events (segregated? What's the correct word?)...it's fine if you're single anyway but not how I want to spend my spare time when coupled up to be honest.
> 
> But that reminds me during my university days I was invited for dinner with my then-bf. After dinner, the men retreated to the living room to wait for tea and I as a female guest was expected to help clean the kitchen. I did not make a scene but that pissed me off to no end. I would do it if that was how things are done in my in-laws' home, no questions asked. I would probably have offered just to be nice anyway. But that's absolutely not how I treat my GUESTS and not how I want to be treated.


I was invited to a dinner where the hostess told the female guests that since she had made the dinner, we should do the cleaning up. She sat in her living room and the rest of us were in the kitchen. It’s one thing to volunteer to help and another to be told.


----------



## Chanbal

From NS's video, it looks like Hazz rejected an invitation to a one-on-one dinner with his father when in the UK. It appears that Hazz wanted the presence of someone else…


----------



## EmilyM11

gracekelly said:


> Yes it is disappointing, but that’s the way it is. Look how the Kardashians built an empire over just being famous. They took being famous for doing nothing, but being famous and built businesses with it. At least they built something. So far, the Harkles have built nothing.  At the moment their brand is nothing more than being ungrateful deceitful people.


Maybe it's controversial, but I feel like Kardashian show was entertaining enough (don't judge ) to keep it going for years, therefore I treat them a bit more than just famous by dad. That makes the Harkles even more embarassing when pushing ppl around.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW Sophie is visiting Congo and renowned surgeon and Nobel Peace Prize winner Dr. Mukwege.

I won't go into detail about what kind of medicine he practices as to not trigger someone, but google him if you like. 

Such important work and I was honestly surprised the BRF picked it up and sent Sophie to Congo as the first family member ever...while others whine about not enough cash flow, not being invited to events, Kate being more important and whatever petty grievance is the flavour of today.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EmilyM111 said:


> Maybe it's controversial, but I feel like Kardashian show was entertaining enough (don't judge ) to keep it going for years, therefore I treat them a bit more than just famous by dad. That makes the Harkles even more embarassing when pushing ppl around.



I liked them and would occasionally watch the show. I watched one episode on Disney though and was done. They seem a little out of touch at this point and Kourtney all but consummating her marriage on screen is too much for me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> From NS's video, it looks like Hazz rejected an invitation to a one-on-one dinner with his father when in the UK. It appears that Hazz wanted the presence of someone else…




WTF. If my parents want to see me for dinner one-on-one, I go. It's not like the extended family was there and Ghoul expected to stay home (and even if, could you blame them!).


----------



## EmilyM11

delete pls


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I read that since she is *not* the monarch or an heir, she was not part of inspecting the troops. That was Hazz’s job.  Notice that William, Ed, even QE all do it alone.  It is a military thing, not a women’s issue.



Yeah, if she once again weaseled her way into an occasion she absolutely brought it on herself.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Yes it is disappointing, but that’s the way it is. Look how the Kardashians built an empire over just being famous. They took being famous for doing nothing, but being famous and built businesses with it. At least they built something. So far, the Harkles have built nothing.  *At the moment their brand is nothing more than being ungrateful deceitful people.*


Yes ^^^^
From one of the video clips posted today, it appears that Kim K's podcast is rated ahead of ArcheT.


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I liked them and would occasionally watch the show. I watched one episode on Disney though and was done. They seem a little out of touch at this point and Kourtney all but consummating her marriage on screen is too much for me


I've lost it around the period Caitlyn went through the transition (not because of that of course but previously she was making the show more, not sure how to say that - entertaining?) but first few seasons were ok for occasional watching. The point is that they somehow made themselves relevant post sex video tape and on screen seem to be quite nice people (at least a few of them haha) whilst Harkles are SO BORING AND PREDICTABLE that only wit and humour of this thread keeps them interesting.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yes it is disappointing, but that’s the way it is. Look how the Kardashians built an empire over just being famous. They took being famous for doing nothing, but being famous and built businesses with it. At least they built something. So far, the Harkles have built nothing.  At the moment their brand is nothing more than being ungrateful deceitful people.


I think they are rapidly losing relevance.  how much mileage can you get out of trashing your family?  the american people like to see news of philanthropy but it's a one-day story.  and they haven't given any substantial money to any cause that I know of.  just posing.  maybe some people will listen to her podcast but not me.  they could have been much more relevant as part of the RF.  but H was angry that his brother was always first in line for everything.  so he found this POS woman and the rest is history.  they fueled each other's anger.  I can't wait to see them go broke.  sorry if this seems nasty but they are nasty.  the way they have treated her father - not to mention trashing his family, impling they are racist - is despicable


----------



## CarryOn2020

EmilyM111 said:


> Maybe it's controversial, but I feel like Kardashian show was entertaining enough (don't judge ) to keep it going for years, therefore I treat them a bit more than just famous by dad. That makes the Harkles even more embarassing when pushing ppl around



For years, I thought the Kardashians were the biggest joke ever.  Then, during the pandemic, I fell down the rabbit hole. It was not _that_ bad. You’re right. They _are_ doing something. Kudos for that.

Now, this explains Hazz’s post - 








						Prince and Princess of Wales take over Radio 1 Newsbeat
					

The Prince and Princess of Wales take over Radio 1's Live Lounge to host a mental health special.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> From NS's video, it looks like Hazz rejected an invitation to a one-on-one dinner with his father when in the UK. It appears that Hazz wanted the presence of someone else…



The someone else being his firm crew which was not allowed or his wife with her phone recording the conversation.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> For years, I thought the Kardashians were the biggest joke ever.  Then, during the pandemic, I fell down the rabbit hole. It was not _that_ bad. You’re right. They _are_ doing something. Kudos for that.
> 
> Now, this explains Hazz’s post -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince and Princess of Wales take over Radio 1 Newsbeat
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales take over Radio 1's Live Lounge to host a mental health special.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


When you see how they have influenced American culture, see how much money they have made from selling themselves and their businesses, you can see that they left being a joke behind them a while ago. H&M are still in the joke stage and likely to stay there.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It looks like that in addition to acting lessons TW has trained him well on surprise appearances.
> I wonder what teaching methods she uses, she seems more successful with him than his teachers from his previous schools.


He obviously responds to dog treats


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> When you see how they have influenced American culture, see how much money they have made from selling themselves and their businesses, you can see that they left being a joke behind them a while ago. H&M are still in the joke stage and likely to stay there.


maybe her final step will be to go the route of Kourtney and starting doing sexy poses as she did pre-Harry


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> interesting theory...not sure if this has been posted....tina brown thinks charles will pay back the advance and harry's book will be cancelled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's Memoir "Won't See the Light of Day," Tina Brown Claims
> 
> 
> "If the book continues, I don’t think there is any way for Harry to return."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com



In that way they can and will blackmail KC forever


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> walking behind H would be alien to her


Walking behind anyone would be alien to MegZ


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haha, we all have our own limits it seems. I've been to separated events (segregated? What's the correct word?)...it's fine if you're single anyway but not how I want to spend my spare time when coupled up to be honest.
> 
> But that reminds me during my university days I was invited for dinner with my then-bf. After dinner, the men retreated to the living room to wait for tea and I as a female guest was expected to help clean the kitchen. I did not make a scene but that pissed me off to no end. I would do it if that was how things are done in my in-laws' home, no questions asked. I would probably have offered just to be nice anyway. But that's absolutely not how I treat my GUESTS and not how I want to be treated.


I would have let the men wait - forever


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I don’t agree with Brown. if this book has been printed, it is definitely going to be shipped. If someone returns the entire amount spent on the production of it, including future profits, why else would the publisher trash it?  Does Harry have a clause in his contract that he can stop it going out?  With this amount of publicity, the publisher can only make money on it so why hold it?  With the Bower and Low books out there, there will be more of an interest in what Harry has to say.



Just returning the advance wouldn't do it anyway, H signed a contract there could be far bigger penalties


----------



## duna

marietouchet said:


> Shame that ... good documentary , actually researched by a  COE cleric (who has nothing to gain by bad mouthing the COE)


Very interesting documentary, thanks for posting it!


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, QE sent him?  Wow, that is some massive propping up imo.  No wonder he acts like a jerk - way too many privileges with no responsibilities
> 
> an aside:  those photos of MM at Invictus do her no favors. She looks some kind of awful in each one.



I take comfort in the idea that the Queen sent her knowing she wouldn’t be allowed to walk on the red carpet   



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haha, we all have our own limits it seems. I've been to separated events (segregated? What's the correct word?)...it's fine if you're single anyway but not how I want to spend my spare time when coupled up to be honest.
> 
> But that reminds me during my university days I was invited for dinner with my then-bf. After dinner, the men retreated to the living room to wait for tea and I as a female guest was expected to help clean the kitchen. I did not make a scene but that pissed me off to no end. I would do it if that was how things are done in my in-laws' home, no questions asked. I would probably have offered just to be nice anyway. But that's absolutely not how I treat my GUESTS and not how I want to be treated.



I would make the scene, I won’t allow anyone to take my voice and silence me. I am an empowered woman 



sdkitty said:


> I think they are rapidly losing relevance.  how much mileage can you get out of trashing your family?  the american people like to see news of philanthropy but it's a one-day story.  and they haven't given any substantial money to any cause that I know of.  just posing.  maybe some people will listen to her podcast but not me.  they could have been much more relevant as part of the RF.  but H was angry that his brother was always first in line for everything.  so he found this POS woman and the rest is history.  they fueled each other's anger.  I can't wait to see them go broke.  sorry if this seems nasty but they are nasty.  the way they have treated her father - not to mention trashing his family, impling they are racist - is despicable



They are a nasty pair. They’re double nasty for the way they treated a 95 year old lady who just happened to be his grandmother. And they’re triple nasty for doing it while her husband was evidently terminally ill.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just...why.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> It looks like the Harkles' bosses are not very generous with QE and PP.




I'm just appalled that Netflix would go there with allegations about Prince Philip and Penny Knatchbull, who is still very much alive.  She's only around 70 and is married herself. Will she sue them, do you think? Release a statement stating how much pain this has caused her?   How does Harry live with himself, signing a contract with Netflix of all companies, that causes his own family so much pain.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I don’t agree with Brown. if this book has been printed, it is definitely going to be shipped. If someone returns the entire amount spent on the production of it, including future profits, why else would the publisher trash it?  Does Harry have a clause in his contract that he can stop it going out?  With this amount of publicity, the publisher can only make money on it so why hold it?  With the Bower and Low books out there, there will be more of an interest in what Harry has to say.


If anything was delivered , it was in electronic format , and someone will be paid to leak bits , if it does not come out formally


----------



## Pessie

youngster said:


> I'm just appalled that Netflix would go there with allegations about Prince Philip and Penny Knatchbull, who is still very much alive.  She's only around 70 and is married herself. Will she sue them, do you think? Release a statement stating how much pain this has caused her?   How does Harry live with himself, signing a contract with Netflix of all companies, that causes his own family so much pain.


Worst is people treat it like fact, as if it’s a documentary.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I'm just appalled that Netflix would go there with allegations about Prince Philip and Penny Knatchbull, who is still very much alive.  She's only around 70 and is married herself. Will she sue them, do you think? Release a statement stating how much pain this has caused her?   How does Harry live with himself, signing a contract with Netflix of all companies, that causes his own family so much pain.


Sad that Philip / Penny relationship will be discussed / sullied - he was something like her uncle by marriage - both are Mountbattens. Anyway - they were close family and she had several family tragedies / problems (see wiki for details ) but soldiered on.
They shared carriage driving as a passion - is that so bad ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I'm just appalled that Netflix would go there with allegations about Prince Philip and Penny Knatchbull, who is still very much alive.  She's only around 70 and is married herself. Will she sue them, do you think? Release a statement stating how much pain this has caused her?   How does Harry live with himself, signing a contract with Netflix of all companies, that causes his own family so much pain.



Right? Someone needs to f*cking sue them to the ground, and I'm not very confrontational. But if everyone is too polite or too posh to react they'll just continue their ways.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why.




BTW I remember that memorial service for Harry's friend and how utterly odd I found it that SHE - the person who had never met the guy - took center stage and read a stupid poem. Ghoul seems really, really fitting.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> If anything was delivered , it was in electronic format , and someone will be paid to leak bits , if it does not come out formally



Right. The days of typewriters are long gone.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Sad that Philip / Penny relationship will be discussed / sullied - he was something like her uncle by marriage - both are Mountbattens. Anyway - they were close family and she had several family tragedies / problems (see wiki for details ) but soldiered on.
> *They shared carriage driving as a passion - is that so bad ?*



Exactly.  Netlfix piles on and adds to the (very wrong) convention that a man and a woman can't _ever_ be just friends and have a shared interest.


----------



## Chanbal

Wise words from Andrew Sullivan.


----------



## Jayne1

Pessie said:


> Worst is people treat it like fact, as if it’s a documentary.


It was a well known rumour though. Just as there are well known rumours there are little Philips running around.

I remember all the good and the bad we read about Philip over the years, but since he passed, people only want to talk about the good.  Fair enough.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Wise words from Andrew Sullivan.



I listened/watched twice! Thanks for the link.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

I have followed the Countess of Mountbatten’s story through the years.  She has had some very difficult times. So why is an American company with an obvious royal fixation slandering her?  Perhaps it is simple jealousy.  H&M surely must realize how stupid they have been. 









						CAROLINE GRAHAM: Pain was etched on the face of Penny Knatchbull
					

CAROLINE GRAHAM: Ashen-faced, Prince Philip's close friend, Countess Mountbatten of Burma, looked 'heartbroken' as she arrived for the funeral yesterday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Broadlands Estates - Events, House Tours and Concerts in Romsey
					

Broadlands is a fine example of mid-Georgian English architecture, standing serenely in picturesque parkland by the River Test in Hampshire




					www.broadlandsestates.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have followed the Countess of Mountbatten’s story through the years.  She has had some very difficult times. So why is an American company with an obvious royal fixation slandering her?  Perhaps it is simple jealousy.  H&M surely must realize how stupid they have been.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CAROLINE GRAHAM: Pain was etched on the face of Penny Knatchbull
> 
> 
> CAROLINE GRAHAM: Ashen-faced, Prince Philip's close friend, Countess Mountbatten of Burma, looked 'heartbroken' as she arrived for the funeral yesterday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Broadlands Estates - Events, House Tours and Concerts in Romsey
> 
> 
> Broadlands is a fine example of mid-Georgian English architecture, standing serenely in picturesque parkland by the River Test in Hampshire
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.broadlandsestates.co.uk


Why can't a man and a woman just be friends?  PP did not suffer fools gladly and he was probably worse in old age.  If this lady gave him companionship, she must be really great.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

papertiger said:


> In that way they can and will blackmail KC forever


I agree.  It would be a terrible error in judgement and a dangerous precedent.  Though as another poster stated, it would be foolish of a publisher to place a finite amount on their profit potential.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Why can't a man and a woman just be friends?  PP did not suffer fools gladly and he was probably worse in old age.  If this lady gave him companionship, she must be really great.



She has overcome enormous adversity and still manages to exude grace and dignity, something H&M need to learn. Shame on H&M + Nflix for trying to cheapen people who add value to our world. 

BTW, is that an Hermes piano bag?


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> There was a rumour then that H&M were sent off to Morocco because she was planning a sneak trip to the Oscars. I wonder if this was after the Ros Pike incident and they didn't want her gate-crashing another awards ceremony. Some articles commented that she was overdressed in the Dior kaftan and speculated that she had had it made for another event.


Morocco trip - I doubt it was a list minute way to distract her from Oscars. Trip was a state visit it was planned ahead of time 
More likely planned along with visits to down under and Africa, to get her out of the UK but show her off at walkabouts where she had some popularity - admit it - she does work the camera
She and H had some sort of (forgot the name) big position in the Commonwealth organization at the time (not that Morocco is part of the CW) so foreign trips were posited as a way to use their popularity


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Morocco trip - I doubt it was a list minute way to distract her from Oscars. Trip was a state visit it was planned ahead of time
> More likely planned along with visits to down under and Africa, to get her out of the UK but show her off at walkabouts where she had some popularity - admit it - she does work the camera
> She and H had some sort of (forgot the name) big position in the Commonwealth organization at the time (not that Morocco is part of the CW) so foreign trips were posited as a way to use their popularity


Article said it was  planned only 2 weeks in advance. Royal reporters were _surprised_ by it.

_Not this trip. It was revealed only two weeks before its start. And aside from a two-sentence announcement on Feb. 8—“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Morocco from Saturday 23rd February to Monday 25th February 2019. The Duke and Duchess’s visit is at the request of Her Majesty’s Government”—no other information was released to the public until four days before the trip.








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'askew, off kilter, weird' trip to Morocco - Macleans.ca
					

Royal watchers are puzzled by the trip, but at least it's not the disaster that was Elizabeth's 1980 visit




					www.macleans.ca
				



_


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I wonder why this was released and when it will be picked up by the media.  They most certainly have a "likeability agenda" with this, and the announcement of their fake charity giveaway.
> 
> 
> 
> And I don't know what to say about this, except it's from the "Myra" account.  I don't know what race has to do with someone pretending to be pregnant



OK ladies, I’m not an expert like Body Language Guy but I want you all to watch this video again.

Throughout the video Harry is making direct eye contact with the child and parents he’s talking with. But right as he finally answers the question about Archie and Lilibet, he quickly breaks eye contact and looks off to the side as he mutters about Archie being busy and Lilibet finding her voice. Then he immediately returns his gaze to the people he’s talking with. Thoughts?


----------



## Handbag1234

Jayne1 said:


> It was a well known rumour though. Just as there are well known rumours there are little Philips running around.
> 
> I remember all the good and the bad we read about Philip over the years, but since he passed, people only want to talk about the good.  Fair enough.


So true. A friend of mine who is ex royal household told me about Phillip’s secret trips to various women in London over the years . It was a badly kept secret.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting he looks away and pauses when discussing his kids.  _Archie is uhhhhh.  Lily is uhhhhh._
> Stalling for the answer.


Lol, you caught it before I did! That’ll teach me to post before catching up on all the comments.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Dp


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> OK ladies, I’m not an expert like Body Language Guy but I want you all to watch this video again.
> 
> Throughout the video Harry is making direct eye contact with the child and parents he’s talking with. But right as he finally answers the question about Archie and Lilibet, he quickly breaks eye contact and looks off to the side as he mutters about Archie being busy and Lilibet finding her voice. Then he immediately returns his gaze to the people he’s talking with. Thoughts?


to me, it looked like he rolled his eyes up - thinking before he responded


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> OK ladies, I’m not an expert like Body Language Guy but I want you all to watch this video again.
> 
> Throughout the video Harry is making direct eye contact with the child and parents he’s talking with. But right as he finally answers the question about Archie and Lilibet, he quickly breaks eye contact and looks off to the side as he mutters about Archie being busy and Lilibet finding her voice. Then he immediately returns his gaze to the people he’s talking with. Thoughts?


Don't we look off when thinking?

 Up and to the right is thinking or deceitful?  To the left is remembering?  Something like that.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> Don't we look off when thinking?
> 
> Up and to the right is thinking or deceitful?  To the left is remembering?  Something like that.


I'm cutting him a break on this one


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I'm cutting him a break on this one


Me too.

When someone asks me my kids age, I have to pause and think. lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

I thought the question was how is Archie doing.  His answer was “uhhhhh he is very very busy”
2 very’s = always suspicious
ETA:  around the 34 mark, he looks at someone off camera imo. 

Old article, but still gets the point across:








						A Very Very Very Useful Word | Grammar Grater | Minnesota Public Radio News
					

Grammar Graterâ„¢ is a weekly podcast about English words, grammar and usage for the Information Age.




					minnesota.publicradio.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Don't we look off when thinking?
> 
> Up and to the right is thinking or deceitful?  To the left is remembering?  Something like that.


He answered quickly that they were doing great. Then he changed the subject to asking the child his age. Something is cut out of the video or the camera is turned off. When it comes back, Harry says “in answer to your question…” Would he really need to think about it to say Archie is busy? What does that mean when talking about a three-year-old?

I imagined what he was about to say before _thinking or lying_ was “last time I saw Archie he looked well.”


----------



## Genie27

From my old body-language reading - up and right is the ‘making up stories’ part of the brain, while left is looking back into memory banks.

And who says their one year old is ‘finding their voice’? Aren’t they just starting to say basic words like archipelago and duplicitous at that age?

And what is a 4-yo ‘very very busy’ with? Is that just to make it clear that A would not be visible on the call?

I found it quite invasive for H to ask the child on the call his birthday. So much for Pri-va-ceeee…..just for his kids, I guess.

Edit to add: if not telling porkies, he was reading off the cue cards off screen.


----------



## Toby93

The PR is in overdrive right now.  Is there nothing that the Harkles do, that is anonymous or under the radar? Does everything have to be leaked and announced?  They may as well just release this nonsense themselves instead of having Scooby doo *leak* it


----------



## V0N1B2

Genie27 said:


> From my old body-language reading - up and right is the ‘making up stories’ part of the brain, while left is looking back into memory banks.
> 
> And who says their one year old is ‘finding their voice’? Aren’t they just starting to say basic words like archipelago and duplicitous at that age?
> 
> And what is a 4-yo ‘very very busy’ with? Is that just to make it clear that A would not be visible on the call?
> 
> I found it quite invasive for H to ask the child on the call his birthday. So much for Pri-va-ceeee…..just for his kids, I guess.
> 
> Edit to add: if not telling porkies, he was reading off the cue cards off screen.


Right? “Finding her voice” was either part of the script written by Meghan, or it was typical British shade meaning “the kid screams a lot”.


----------



## sdkitty

I finally finished tina brown's book The Palace Papers.  Long (500 pages) but pretty interesting.  My takeaway, in her opinion both Harry and William found women they love.  Kate and William calm each other down.  H&M fuel eachother's anger.

My feelings haven't changed much except I like Philip better - mostly because the staff liked him best.  that says a lot to me.  and he was candid.
William & Kate are just about perfect.  
I hope Charles will be a good king.  I think Camilla is a good influence.  very down to earth and everyone wants to sit next to her at dinner because she's so amusing.

TQ of course was a wonderful monarch and when push came to shove with H&M she did her duty as a queen, not as a grandma.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Wishful thinking MM!


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Wishful thinking MM!



even if she could land him I think they'd be miles apart on lifestyle...and I don't think she could boss him around


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> even if she could land him I think they'd be miles apart on lifestyle...and I don't think she could boss him around


Elon has options. He has lots of beautiful ladies willing and eager to carry a child for him. 

We don’t know for sure if Meghan did that for her husband.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> even if she could land him I think they'd be miles apart on lifestyle...and I don't think she could boss him around


I would think Elon's interest in TW is zero. She is not that attractive, intelligent or interesting. Though, everybody makes stupid mistakes, but this would the biggest for Elon.


----------



## Chanbal

TW makes more $ at the expense of Hazz and his family???


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Elon has options. He has lots of beautiful ladies willing and eager to carry a child for him.
> 
> We don’t know for sure if Meghan did that for her husband.


other than the money, he's no prize either....going around spreading his sperm, couch surfing when he can afford to live literally anywhere he wants
Eccentric would be kind IMO


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right? Someone needs to f*cking sue them to the ground, and I'm not very confrontational. But if everyone is too polite or too posh to react they'll just continue their ways.


Looking at these sentences, I'd say they apply equally to Netflix and the Harkles. Match made in their version of heaven.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## CarryOn2020

The dogs need a rescue. 









						Prince Harry Jokes About Being a Dog Dad in a New Video with WellChild Award Winners
					

"I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said of the Sussex family dogs.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Again I am NOT a Meghan fan but it's tweets like these that make me think for some she will just never get it right. From the clip I see she's clearly looking toward the aide for guidance, following directions and smiling...no anger or steam at all


I obviously don't like her at all, and I understand it's the custom of the country they were visiting, but I did think it was a little insulting that the wife can't walk on the red carpet with her husband.  My DH was a Naval Officer, and when I was with him, I was to be saluted too (knowing full well it was my husband being saluted and not me), as an "extension" of him.  Probably one of the few times I have felt sorry for her.  Until she shoved her way in front of Haz, that is.  I don't think she can help it!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> TW makes more $ at the expense of Hazz and his family???



I’m more surprised to read they have friends than I am by her remark. Haz is only a spare Prince, she-who-must-be-obeyed is a goddess, in her own mind.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> The dogs need a rescue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Jokes About Being a Dog Dad in a New Video with WellChild Award Winners
> 
> 
> "I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said of the Sussex family dogs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com



Is it me or does Harry seem more relaxed and engaged when he’s talking about their dogs than he does when talking about their kids? None of this, uuummm, he’s keeping busy nonsense.   

Speaking with Isabelle Delaney, winner of the Inspirational Young Person aged 12 to 14 award, the topic turned to Isabelle's service dog, Hope. "I tell you what, we all need a dog that keeps us calm. I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said. He continued, "I've got a black Labrador called Pula, a rescue beagle called Guy. And we got another rescue beagle called Mia. And between the three of them, they charge around chasing squirrels and causing all sorts of problems to us every single day. But they are also emotional, emotional support dogs 100% when they're behaving."


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She has overcome enormous adversity and still manages to exude grace and dignity, something H&M need to learn. Shame on H&M + Nflix for trying to cheapen people who add value to our world.
> 
> *BTW, is that an Hermes piano bag?  *



Yes it’s a piano bag. Good spot!  Looks like she has had it forever or inherited it


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> I would think Elon's interest in TW is zero. She is not that attractive, intelligent or interesting. Though, everybody makes stupid mistakes, but this would the biggest for Elon.



Yes but Elon does like crazy narcs - Amber H for example.

Although Elon seems to prefer blondes who want to have babies so he can keep populating the world… lol


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Yes but Elon does like crazy narcs - Amber H for example.
> 
> *Although Elon seems to prefer blondes *who want to have babies so he can keep populating the world… lol


It shouldn't be a problem for TW.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She. Is. So. Gross.

Who ridicules their spouse in public like this? She only makes any money now because she's his wife. Ew.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



Nuggets of fool's gold.


purseinsanity said:


> I obviously don't like her at all, and I understand it's the custom of the country they were visiting, but I did think it was a little insulting that the wife can't walk on the red carpet with her husband.  My DH was a Naval Officer, and when I was with him, I was to be saluted too (knowing full well it was my husband being saluted and not me), as an "extension" of him.  Probably one of the few times I have felt sorry for her.  Until she shoved her way in front of Haz, that is.  I don't think she can help it!


Casting my mind back: when the government leaders from my country are performing a ceremonial inspection of the guard either in our own country or overseas, I seem to recall their spouse following a few steps behind and to the side. Perhaps the red carpet is actually a red herring. Maybe all Zedzee was required to do was to follow Handbag a few steps behind and to the side, and the edge of the red carpet was just a convenient demarcation line.


Chanbal said:


> It shouldn't be a problem for TW.



I was actually thinking about it the other day: how she doesn't seem to have changed hair colours and eye colours - as a fashion statement, I mean. Just some lightening of her hair colour in her Toronto days. Wondered if she has the same issues as I have: my hair and eyes are very dark black/brown, so it would be a hassle to bleach the hair and I would look unnatural with coloured contacts.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Yes, she must have convinced him she was a Hollywood.
> 
> Strnge she had good timing until she met him. Her scheming and grafting landed her the top prize - and not a moment to soon. After the marriage she was proved an idiot too, her timing, her moves, her MO.
> 
> That's what you get by reading Wiki instead of a book. M is still clueless on monarchy and the UK and he seems too arrogant and stupid to teach her.
> 
> We all know now she never intended to stick around (as a WR) for longer than a few photo ops, him neither. He should have been made to leave the spotlight before the wedding.


I think it was pure luck on her part and a simple matter of attrition. I feel like Markus and the like have been feeding Harry ‘high class escorts’ for years in the hopes of getting their foot in the door and it had to pay off sooner or later. I mean he’s hardly the first royal to be besotted with an _actress_.

This would also explain why she’s been cocking things up since she got the reins - she’s not the chessmaster- she is a pawn who has taken over the game and is trying to become a queen  


bag-mania said:


> OK ladies, I’m not an expert like Body Language Guy but I want you all to watch this video again.
> 
> Throughout the video Harry is making direct eye contact with the child and parents he’s talking with. But right as he finally answers the question about Archie and Lilibet, he quickly breaks eye contact and looks off to the side as he mutters about Archie being busy and Lilibet finding her voice. Then he immediately returns his gaze to the people he’s talking with. Thoughts?


I think he’s telling the truth…

The actor is busy filming an ad so ‘Archie’ can’t make the call and ‘Lilli’ was at singing lessons because her real mum wants her to be a triple threat.


Handbag1234 said:


> So true. A friend of mine who is ex royal household told me about Phillip’s secret trips to various women in London over the years . It was a badly kept secret.


I agree.

I think it’s likely because and I’m just going to say this… they were cousins and sexual attraction between cousins just isn’t natural. It is one thing for them to have kids for the bloodline but I can easily see them both seeking others once they’ve had the kids. In fact I think this is a big part of why adultery was/is so  common among aristos - they could marry a relative for the sake of the estate but even before genetics they felt uncomfortable with their spouses.


Toby93 said:


> The PR is in overdrive right now.  Is there nothing that the Harkles do, that is anonymous or under the radar? Does everything have to be leaked and announced?  They may as well just release this nonsense themselves instead of having Scooby doo *leak* it



Imagine an Asian taking mental health advice from someone who called her a dragon lady- it’d be like having Mickey Spillane for a therapist.

I wonder if they are audio files and she’s doing the stereotypical 30s voice 
‘What you gotta do see… is donate to Archewell and then you will feel like a real spunky dame!’




Chanbal said:


> Wishful thinking MM!



Absolutely not!

I have gone on record before that Elon Bust and Azaelia Banks are endgame!
Can you imagine the domestics over Twitter? Popcorn would become extinct!



sdkitty said:


> other than the money, he's no prize either....going around spreading his sperm, couch surfing when he can afford to live literally anywhere he wants
> Eccentric would be kind IMO


It’s actually a very old school aristocratic attitude in a way- they were always inviting themselves to stay on their friends’ estates and possibly knocking the maids up while there.


bag-mania said:


> Is it me or does Harry seem more relaxed and engaged when he’s talking about their dogs than he does when talking about their kids? None of this, uuummm, he’s keeping busy nonsense.
> 
> Speaking with Isabelle Delaney, winner of the Inspirational Young Person aged 12 to 14 award, the topic turned to Isabelle's service dog, Hope. "I tell you what, we all need a dog that keeps us calm. I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said. He continued, "I've got a black Labrador called Pula, a rescue beagle called Guy. And we got another rescue beagle called Mia. And between the three of them, they charge around chasing squirrels and causing all sorts of problems to us every single day. But they are also emotional, emotional support dogs 100% when they're behaving."


I have always thought that 1st dog’s name was stupid. Do you think it’s meant to be Paula but Harry wanted the American spelling?


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Morocco trip - I doubt it was a list minute way to distract her from Oscars. Trip was a state visit it was planned ahead of time


Sorry to be picky but this wasn't a state visit. Only a Monarch or Head of Government does State visits.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Morocco trip - I doubt it was a list minute way to distract her from Oscars. Trip was a state visit it was planned ahead of time
> More likely planned along with visits to down under and Africa, to get her out of the UK but show her off at walkabouts where she had some popularity - admit it - she does work the camera
> She and H had some sort of (forgot the name) big position in the Commonwealth organization at the time (not that Morocco is part of the CW) so foreign trips were posited as a way to use their popularity



Youth ambassadors!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> OK ladies, I’m not an expert like Body Language Guy but I want you all to watch this video again.
> 
> Throughout the video Harry is making direct eye contact with the child and parents he’s talking with. But right as he finally answers the question about Archie and Lilibet, he quickly breaks eye contact and looks off to the side as he mutters about Archie being busy and Lilibet finding her voice. Then he immediately returns his gaze to the people he’s talking with. Thoughts?



I thought it extremely weird how he worded that especially seeing his wokester wife. Lili finding her voice? I'm sure that child has been screaming from the day she was born, like infants and babies tend to do. If he wanted to say she's learning how to talk that is still a weird way wording it.

But yes, I saw it too, I just don't have a theory what his exact problem was.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Article said it was  planned only 2 weeks in advance. Royal reporters were _surprised_ by it.
> 
> _Not this trip. It was revealed only two weeks before its start. And aside from a two-sentence announcement on Feb. 8—“The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Morocco from Saturday 23rd February to Monday 25th February 2019. The Duke and Duchess’s visit is at the request of Her Majesty’s Government”—no other information was released to the public until four days before the trip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'askew, off kilter, weird' trip to Morocco - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> Royal watchers are puzzled by the trip, but at least it's not the disaster that was Elizabeth's 1980 visit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So to reiterate… they tried to do something bad and they got a holiday to Morocco? 

Talk about rewarding bad behaviour! (which would be a great alternative title for this thread btw)

If I were queen they’d be packed off for a five week tour of the oil rigs or perhaps a caravan holiday in Newport


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I think it’s likely because and I’m just going to say this… they were cousins and sexual attraction between cousins just isn’t natural. It is one thing for them to have kids for the bloodline but I can easily see them both seeking others once they’ve had the kids. In fact I think this is a big part of why adultery was/is so  common among aristos - they could marry a relative for the sake of the estate but even before genetics they felt uncomfortable with their spouses.



Seeing  how many cultures know cousin marriage it doesn't seem to be all that unnatural. Also, what makes you not sexually attracted to someone is being raised with them in a family unit. E.g. China knew a practice of taking in a small girl to raise alongside the household's children as a bride for a son. That created problems even though the children were not blood-related.

Last but not least, they were not first cousins. They shared a great-grandmother - Victoria - and were cousins several times removed. Not quite the same.

As for royals and nobility known for having affairs...I really don't think that's due to the fact they may or may not have been related. It's due to the fact they married for all kinds of reason that were not compability or something so silly as love. So they married for dynastic reasons or to keep property in the family, and then the sidepieces were there to meet emotional needs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

needlv said:


> Yes but Elon does like crazy narcs - Amber H for example.
> 
> Although Elon seems to prefer blondes who want to have babies so he can keep populating the world… lol


I also think a big part of Amber’s attraction was cuckolding former heartthrob Depp- at least it would be to ‘mad lad’ Elon. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing  how many cultures know cousin marriage it doesn't seem to be all that unnatural. Also, what makes you not sexually attracted to someone is being raised with them in a family unit. E.g. China knew a practice of taking in a small girl to raise alongside the household's children as a bride for a son. That created problems even though the children were not blood-related.
> 
> Last but not least, they were not first cousins. They shared a great-grandmother - Victoria - and were cousins several times removed. Not quite the same.


No I still think it is unnatural  it’s just sometimes more expedient usually for financial reasons. Human beings can rationalise lots of things that are unnatural and bad for us I mean just look at smoking. 



purseinsanity said:


> I obviously don't like her at all, and I understand it's the custom of the country they were visiting, but I did think it was a little insulting that the wife can't walk on the red carpet with her husband.  My DH was a Naval Officer, and when I was with him, I was to be saluted too (knowing full well it was my husband being saluted and not me), as an "extension" of him.  Probably one of the few times I have felt sorry for her.  Until she shoved her way in front of Haz, that is.  I don't think she can help it!


No I think it’s fair - that carpet is for important people only   



Chanbal said:


> It shouldn't be a problem for TW.



Oh lord I’d love to see it! I mean it can’t be worse than the spaniel ears she usually has.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Why can't a man and a woman just be friends?  PP did not suffer fools gladly and he was probably worse in old age.  If this lady gave him companionship, she must be really great.



Of course they can


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing  how many cultures know cousin marriage it doesn't seem to be all that unnatural. Also, what makes you not sexually attracted to someone is being raised with them in a family unit. E.g. China knew a practice of taking in a small girl to raise alongside the household's children as a bride for a son. That created problems even though the children were not blood-related.
> 
> Last but not least, they were not first cousins. They shared a great-grandmother - Victoria - and were cousins several times removed. Not quite the same.
> 
> As for royals and nobility known for having affairs...I really don't think that's due to the fact they may or may not have been related. It's due to the fact they married for all kinds of reason that were not compability or something so silly as love. So they married for dynastic reasons or to keep property in the family, and then the sidepieces were there to meet emotional


NVM


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Is it me or does Harry seem more relaxed and engaged when he’s talking about their dogs than he does when talking about their kids? None of this, uuummm, he’s keeping busy nonsense.
> 
> Speaking with Isabelle Delaney, winner of the Inspirational Young Person aged 12 to 14 award, the topic turned to Isabelle's service dog, Hope. "I tell you what, we all need a dog that keeps us calm. I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said. He continued, "I've got a black Labrador called Pula, a rescue beagle called Guy. And we got another rescue beagle called Mia. And between the three of them, they charge around chasing squirrels and causing all sorts of problems to us every single day. But they are also emotional, emotional support dogs 100% when they're behaving."




Not all people can afford to keep a dog, have time to care for one or live in a place where they are allowed pets. Again, world according to privileged Harry.

Actually, the more I hear H speak the more I really fear for his sanity. He has contradicted himself in what is just a few sentences. 1. Dogs keeps us calm. 2. Dogs cause us worry every single day 3. _When_ they're well behaved, they support us. 4. Children are like dogs/dogs are like children. Make up your mind. 

No Harry, you have 3 dogs and (possibly) 2 kids. Dogs do not cause trouble, only their owners. I've had German Shepards, Dobermans and Jack Russell Terriers, 2 from rescue and brought baggage due to fear, but all ended-up content and well behaved. Part of our family, _never_ did my parents get confused between child/dog. What a weird thing to say. I also didn't bring-up they were rescue dogs every time I was talking to strangers - talk about virtue signalling. 

I love, love, love dogs (and cats) more than most humans, but dogs are dogs, cats are cats and children and children. Why does Harry talk as though no one else could _possibly_ know what it's like to have pets, children or a family. He talks like he's an alien just fallen to Earth.


----------



## Jktgal

with "problems" he probably meant the dogs need their poop picked up and have food put into their bowl. he's a prince, he's used to the opposite - somebody wiping his ass and putting food in his bowl.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I obviously don't like her at all, and I understand it's the custom of the country they were visiting, but I did think it was a little insulting that the wife can't walk on the red carpet with her husband.  My DH was a Naval Officer, and when I was with him, I was to be saluted too (knowing full well it was my husband being saluted and not me), as an "extension" of him.  Probably one of the few times I have felt sorry for her.  Until she shoved her way in front of Haz, that is.  I don't think she can help it!



Still, funny how she obeyed orders in Morocco, 'powerfully active feminist' she is, but did not follow protocol in the UK that has nothing to do with men/women but hierarchy within a family that she not only married into, but also took the titles of so she could literally lord it over the hoi polloi. 

In the UK, she'd be entitled to walk the red carpet - just after the Duke. Apparently that makes us racist and sexist. However, in Morocco when she's not allowed to walk on the red carpet, never mind in front/beside/behind the Duke, but hey, whatever's the custom. 

The red carpet is so the elite don't sully their fabulous footwear in practice or set the noble feet on mere earth symbolically. The red carpet is laid out for those it's laid out for. Take it, or leave it all, she's all to suit herself so I'm glad someone put her in her place, for once she wasn't putting someone else in _their_ place.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought it extremely weird how he worded that especially seeing his wokester wife. Lili finding her voice? I'm sure that child has been screaming from the day she was born, like infants and babies tend to do. If he wanted to say she's learning how to talk that is still a weird way wording it.
> 
> But yes, I saw it too, I just don't have a theory what his exact problem was.



Maybe he's never met A&L Incorp?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> No Harry, you have 3 dogs and (possibly) 2 kids. *Dogs do not cause trouble, only their owners. *



Where's the frantically applauding smilie when you need it!



papertiger said:


> I love, love, love dogs (and cats) more than most humans, but dogs are dogs, cats are cats and children and children.



Right. Little irks me more than people talking at length about their "fur kids" (that person that made a TikTok expressing "He's my son, deal with it!" referring to her husky? WTFFFF) or buying themselves mother's day gifts because they have a dog. Get a grip. I was there when my cat was born, I took care of him from the moment we saw something was not right with him (like, 30 mins after birth) until the moment he took his last breath (and if I may say so, probably better than some people take care of their kids), 24/7 most of the time. I was literally devastated when he died to the point I didn't get out of bed for a week and still cry regularly two years later, and yet I roll my eyes at these people.



papertiger said:


> Why does Harry talk as though no one else could _possibly_ know what it's like to have pets, children or a family. He talks like he's an alien just fallen to Earth.



He's just so far removed from what normal people do and experience, to him it is probably really an alien occurence. I wonder why William could transition into being a for all we know great dad when he had the very same super privileged upbringing.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> So to reiterate… they tried to do something bad and they got a holiday to Morocco?
> 
> Talk about rewarding bad behaviour! (which would be a great alternative title for this thread btw)
> 
> If I were queen they’d be packed off for a five week tour of the oil rigs or perhaps a caravan holiday in Newport



Nothing wrong with Newport or caravans, could be fun. 3 weeks at Balmoral would be colder and tougher for the 2 of them. 

Anyway, what's wrong with good ol' fashioned Community Service?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo bottom line on the video - He is zooming with a group for children, about children.  When asked a simple question about his children’s well being, he noticeably looks away from the camera. Then, stumbles with the answer.  I call that _weird. _


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where's the frantically applauding smilie when you need it!
> 
> 
> 
> Right. Little irks me more than people talking at length about their "fur kids" (that person that made a TikTok expressing "He's my son, deal with it!" referring to her husky? WTFFFF) or buying themselves mother's day gifts because they have a dog. Get a grip. I was there when my cat was born, I took care of him from the moment we saw something was not right with him (like, 30 mins after birth) until the moment he took his last breath (and if I may say so, probably better than some people take care of their kids), 24/7 most of the time. I was literally devastated when he died to the point I didn't get out of bed for a week and still cry regularly two years later, and yet I roll my eyes at these people.
> 
> 
> 
> He's just so far removed from what normal people do and experience, to him it is probably really an alien occurence. I wonder why William could transition into being a for all we know great dad when he had the very same super privileged upbringing.



I think we're forgetting Harry has swallowed all the Hollywood clap-trap Megan feeds him along with the dog treats. 

I do believe in the good of emotional support pets. However, there is no LEGAL definition of an emotional support dog in the UK, only a guide dogs (for the blind) and assistance dogs for the disabled. They are working animals and usually trained and supported by charities. 

There is obviously a great deal of love on both sides of emotional supports pets. However, I really hate people getting any pet with th thought of what it can do for them and not the other way around. 

I'm so sorry about your little cat  I lost one of my 'fur-babies'   a year ago next Friday and I am still devastated (as is his real fur-brother who still goes to look for him).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo bottom line on the video - He is zooming with a group for children, about children.  When asked a simple question about his children’s well being, he noticeably looks away from the camera. Then, stumbles with the answer.  I call that _weird. _



It is a little. He always seemed a natural even with small children (I personally prefer them when they are a bit older and, you know, interesting), so what's so hard in saying a few lighthearted things about his? Even if it's made up if he still had that privacy thing going on.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Yes it’s a piano bag. Good spot!  Looks like she has had it forever or inherited it


Thanks so much   Old money whispers.  So sad that Hazz never learned that lesson.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is a little. He always seemed a natural even with small children (I personally prefer them when they are a bit older and, you know, interesting), so what's so hard in saying a few lighthearted things about his? Even if it's made up if he still had that privacy thing going on.



It's _totally_ peculiar. 

It just goes to show that no-one asks him how his kids are on a day to day basis either. As if people had done, he'd already have worked out what to say and not be thinking "Archie and Lili, er, um, who? Oh yer, now I remember, er um" etc 

As for children, I have no problem with them either, I just prefer them when they've reached 21.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think we're forgetting Harry has swallowed all the Hollywood clap-trap Megan feeds him along with the dog treats.



Oh, I never forget she's the root of all evil 



papertiger said:


> There is obviously a great deal of love on both sides of emotional supports pets. However, I really hate people getting any pet with the thought of what it can do for them and not the other way around.



Yes! Also, it can go horribly wrong when the pet senses something is off but feels there's nothing they can do to fulfill their natural instinct of protecting their owner.




papertiger said:


> I'm so sorry about your little cat  I lost one of my 'fur-babies'   a year ago next Friday and I am still devastated (as is his real fur-brother who still goes to look for him).



I'm so sorry *hugs* How something so small can leave such a big hole that just doesn't close. Interestingly, from all the other pets we have it was the dog who went looking for him for a long while after he was gone. The dog also gifted me her favourite toy after the loss.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LizzieBennett

Jktgal said:


> with "problems" he probably meant the dogs need their poop picked up and have food put into their bowl. he's a prince, he's used to the opposite - somebody wiping his ass and putting food in his bowl.


I’m an American and we say that our dogs cause “trouble” quite a lot.   It’s meant affectionately.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I thought it extremely weird how he worded that especially seeing his wokester wife. Lili finding her voice? I'm sure that child has been screaming from the day she was born, like infants and babies tend to do. If he wanted to say she's learning how to talk that is still a weird way wording it.
> 
> But yes, I saw it too, I just don't have a theory what his exact problem was.


It was very weirdly phrased. "She loves to talk" would be simple and the kids he was talking to would totally get the concept of a babbling baby. Finding her voice is on the level of speaking her truth.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you, that does make sense.  I did some google-ing. Seems many were _surprised _by the very short visit.  The visit happens in Feb., 2019. In March, 2019, tensions begin with BP, H&M set up their own household. May, 2019, Archie born. Oct., 2019, Australia/NZ tour.  Jan., 2020 - Megxit begins.
> 
> The warnings were there - article from 2019:
> _The odd feel of this quick trip hasn’t gone unnoticed.* “It is just so askew, off kilter, weird,” one veteran royal watcher messaged, “like there’s something we don’t know.” *Another echoed that sentiment: “It is so weird; *seems like there must be another agenda*—why send seven-month-pregnant Meghan here for this? I don’t get it.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's 'askew, off kilter, weird' trip to Morocco - Macleans.ca
> 
> 
> Royal watchers are puzzled by the trip, but at least it's not the disaster that was Elizabeth's 1980 visit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.macleans.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timeline: Prince Harry and Meghan - and 'Megxit'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, grandson of Britain's Queen Elizabeth, and his American wife Meghan give a highly-anticipated interview with U.S. chat shot host Oprah Winfrey which airs on Sunday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


Slightly OT but this statistic blew me away! “As Kensington Palace noted on Twitter, 70 per cent of females in the nation are illiterate and many can’t access secondary education, which is why such boarding houses are so vital.” That’s heartbreaking! I’m completely ignorant to Moroccan culture…are women still seen as second class and denied education?!


----------



## LittleStar88

And we start our day with this…

Meghan Markle Suggests She Has Been Labeled 'Crazy' in Spotify Podcast​


			archive.ph


----------



## Pessie

The woman is a narcissistic bore.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> And we start our day with this…
> 
> Meghan Markle Suggests She Has Been Labeled 'Crazy' in Spotify Podcast​
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Pro-Harkle source - Newsweek.
The funniest part is the photo at the end captioned MM wears a black hat to QE's funeral. So? Is this a random injection of  fashion commentary? What does it have to do with the article (which regurgitates what appears to be her opening remarks to the podcrash)?

Btw, those who listened to the podcrashes, is there an "expert" speaking for 15 minutes at the start of each podcrash? Someone pointed out that Zedzee promised experts and historians in her teaser for the series. A Stan claimed that every podcrash opened with an expert giving a definition of the topic.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> Pro-Harkle source - Newsweek.
> The funniest part is the photo at the end captioned MM wears a black hat to QE's funeral. So? Is this a random injection of  fashion commentary? What does it have to do with the article (which regurgitates what appears to be her opening remarks to the podcrash)?
> 
> Btw, those who listened to the podcrashes, is there an "expert" speaking for 15 minutes at the start of each podcrash? Someone pointed out that Zedzee promised experts and historians in her teaser for the series. A Stan claimed that every podcrash opened with an expert giving a definition of the topic.



She’s the opening expert   


> Today's 55-minute instalment, titled The Decoding of Crazy, begins by Meghan addressing listeners.
> 'Raise your hand if you've ever been called crazy or hysterical or what about nuts? Insane out of your mind, completely irrational, okay? You get the point.'





			archive.ph


----------



## LittleStar88

She got help then? I thought she told Oprah that she didn’t get help ??? Am I remembering it wrong?









						Meghan got "help" with mental health from woman Harry found—podcast
					

Meghan Markle discussed mental health on her latest "Archetypes" episode, having previously told Oprah Winfrey concerns over her mental well-being were ignored by royal aides.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## marietouchet

Yummy pass the popcorn please … today’s archetype is CRAZY women

when are they going to post the CLIFF NOTES aversion on YouTube , I refuse to pay for this … I have standards


----------



## marietouchet

sweetasc6h12o6 said:


> Slightly OT but this statistic blew me away! “As Kensington Palace noted on Twitter, 70 per cent of females in the nation are illiterate and many can’t access secondary education, which is why such boarding houses are so vital.” That’s heartbreaking! I’m completely ignorant to Moroccan culture…are women still seen as second class and denied education?!


A telling Moroccan anecdote … big trip there with tour guides - all of whom are telling the state approved story, OK
Anyway guide went on about the palaces and Moroccan Queen, nothing deep or salacious but she was covered in a lot of superficial detail , Laila Salma is gorgeous 
Well, 6 months go by, and reporters notice she has not been seen or heard from in 6 mos, her kids are still around, she has been MIA for like 4 years now
No official divorce, death, she just went poof ! 
Different things happen in foreign countries just as the US is “foreign” to the UK and vice versa and MM totally did not get that


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Is it me or does Harry seem more relaxed and engaged when he’s talking about their dogs than he does when talking about their kids? None of this, uuummm, he’s keeping busy nonsense.
> 
> Speaking with Isabelle Delaney, winner of the Inspirational Young Person aged 12 to 14 award, the topic turned to Isabelle's service dog, Hope. "I tell you what, we all need a dog that keeps us calm. I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said. He continued, "I've got a black Labrador called Pula, a rescue beagle called Guy. And we got another rescue beagle called Mia. And between the three of them, they charge around chasing squirrels and causing all sorts of problems to us every single day. But they are also emotional, emotional support dogs 100% when they're behaving."


In the video, it was obvious H froze for a bit when the topic got to the children 

I remember an anecdote from Bower, I think - before Megxit, he told one interviewer no shots of him and M together bc he already had deal with OW that she was to get the first Interview with both on camera at same time  

Maybe he has lucrative deal to show off the kids, and knows he is not to spill the beans before hand


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo bottom line on the video - He is zooming with a group for children, about children.  When asked a simple question about his children’s well being, he noticeably looks away from the camera. Then, stumbles with the answer.  I call that _weird. _


It is freakin’ weird!

In my experience it’s never difficult to get someone to talk about their child. Quite the opposite in fact, some parents find it hard to talk about anything else without an anecdote about their kids slipping into the conversation. 

Harry was a little uncomfortable answering a seemingly innocuous question. Why?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> It is freakin’ weird!
> 
> In my experience it’s never difficult to get someone to talk about their child. Quite the opposite in fact, some parents find it hard to talk about anything else without an anecdote about their kids slipping into the conversation.
> 
> Harry was a little uncomfortable answering a seemingly innocuous question. Why?



He probably wants to. I’m guessing it’s not allowed unless money is involved, and TW was probably hovering in the background ready to shut it down if he said too much.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> In the video, it was obvious H froze for a bit when the topic got to the children
> 
> I remember an anecdote from Bower, I think - before Megxit, he told one interviewer no shots of him and M together bc he already had deal with OW that she was to get the first Interview with both on camera at same time
> 
> Maybe he has lucrative deal to show off the kids, and knows he is not to spill the beans before hand


If they sell access to their kids after making their big statement about leaving the UK for reasons of safety and privacy, even their biggest stans won’t be able to deny the hypocrisy. (Oh, I know they’ll still try)


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> He probably wants to. I’m guessing it’s not allowed unless money is involved, and TW was probably hovering in the background ready to shut it down if he said too much.


He was talking to a child only slightly older than Archie. He could easily have said simple things like Archie likes to ride his tricycle or Lili loves the color yellow. Instead he drew a complete blank.  

At least with the dogs he knew they like to chase squirrels.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> I have always thought that 1st dog’s name was stupid. Do you think it’s meant to be Paula but Harry wanted the American spelling?


I thought I remembered there was some pretentious or “special” meaning for the dog’s name.

From _People_ last year:

And the dog's name has special meaning — Pula is the official currency of Botswana, the country in Africa where Harry took Meghan when they first started dating. Pula means "rain" in Setswana — and since rain is very scarce in Botswana, it's considered valuable and a blessing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> And we start our day with this…
> 
> Meghan Markle Suggests She Has Been Labeled 'Crazy' in Spotify Podcast​
> 
> 
> archive.ph



And why would that be? I can't think of a single thing that could warrant such harsh judgement.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Who could listen to these podcasts they are so negative, everything‘s racist, everything’s sexist.  She also cites movies and TV shows from 10-20 years ago, how the heck is that relevant at all!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> And the *dog's name has special meaning* — *Pula is the official currency of Botswana*, the country in Africa where Harry took Meghan when they first started dating. Pula means "rain" in Setswana — and since rain is very scarce in Botswana, it's considered valuable and a blessing.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> And we start our day with this…
> 
> Meghan Markle Suggests She Has Been Labeled 'Crazy' in Spotify Podcast​
> 
> 
> archive.ph


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> It is freakin’ weird!
> 
> In my experience it’s never difficult to get someone to talk about their child. Quite the opposite in fact, some parents find it hard to talk about anything else without an anecdote about their kids slipping into the conversation.
> 
> Harry was a little uncomfortable answering a seemingly innocuous question. Why?


Did he once behave rudely towards a child when that child asked about his child or children? During the NY trip, I think.


----------



## bag-mania

Was there another celebrity, even a minor one, in this week's podcast?

Or was it Meghan preaching to a bunch of hired extras who were contract-bound to agree with her statements and not offer any of their own opinions on the subject?


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bag-mania said:


> Is it me or does Harry seem more relaxed and engaged when he’s talking about their dogs than he does when talking about their kids? None of this, uuummm, he’s keeping busy nonsense.
> 
> Speaking with Isabelle Delaney, winner of the Inspirational Young Person aged 12 to 14 award, the topic turned to Isabelle's service dog, Hope. "I tell you what, we all need a dog that keeps us calm. I've got three in this house now. So, we basically have five children," Harry said. He continued, "I've got a black Labrador called Pula, a rescue beagle called Guy. And we got another rescue beagle called Mia. And between the three of them, they charge around chasing squirrels and causing all sorts of problems to us every single day. But they are also emotional, emotional support dogs 100% when they're behaving."


Not sure he fully understands what support dogs are and do. He makes it seem as if any living thing, fish or turtle for example, could be emotional support.  While true, the descriptive term applies to trained animals I believe. Wonder if TW will claim her blood diamonds are for emotional support. I know women who claim their Birkins are purchased for that reason. (If I could, I would too!)


----------



## Frivole88




----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Did he once behave rudely towards a child when that child asked about his child or children? During the NY trip, I think.


There was some footage where it looked like he may have brushed a child away as I recall. Maybe it looked worse than it was because that is something that even the supportive members of the press would hone in on if it was bad. The parent didn't complain.

Or are you thinking of a different incident?


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> There was some footage where it looked like he may have brushed a child away as I recall. Maybe it looked worse than it was because that is something that even the supportive members of the press would hone in on if it was bad. The parent didn't complain.
> 
> Or are you thinking of a different incident?


Think it may be a different incident. IIRC the child asked if he had a photo of Archie or the baby and he got annoyed.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She. Is. So. Gross.
> 
> Who ridicules their spouse in public like this? She only makes any money now because she's his wife. Ew.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Think it may be a different incident. IIRC the child asked if he had a photo of Archie or the baby and he got annoyed.


LOL, don't remember that one. Was it in the first several months after Lilibet's birth when they hadn't hired an infant for the role yet? Instead of being annoyed with the kid, he could have patiently explained that the casting process takes time.


----------



## marietouchet

Frivole88 said:


>



I have noticed that the Aussie press is downright hostile to MM and JCMH


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> If they sell access to their kids after making their big statement about leaving the UK for reasons of safety and privacy, even their biggest stans won’t be able to deny the hypocrisy. (Oh, I know they’ll still try)


Well, they could just be like Michael Jackson , he hid his kids when they were young , it was MJ’s thing


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Fi@bizarrolady makes a valid point, Spot*fy may need to renew TW's contract for a few more years.  










						Meghan Markle: I’ve been called ‘insane,’ ‘hysterical’ and ‘crazy’
					

“Calling someone ‘crazy’ or ‘hysterical’ completely dismisses their experience and minimizes what they’re feeling.”




					nypost.com


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Well, they could just be like Michael Jackson , he hid his kids when they were young , it was MJ’s thing


It was but he wouldn't hide them completely away. He improvised workarounds like having them wear Halloween masks and veils when he took them out. He didn't want the press seeing what their actual faces looked like. To me that's different (while still being weird) than releasing one or two photos a year which show the kids' faces but rarely being seen in public with their kids.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm at the 'Oh dear, oh dear' part…



EDIT: TW wrote a letter to Will telling him to come to CA when he will be in the US for Earthshot, so they can work things out between them (reliable source, allegedly). There is more, including Hazz's apparent preference for money instead of princely titles…


----------



## BittyMonkey

marietouchet said:


> I have noticed that the Aussie press is downright hostile to MM and JCMH


I missed the tea throwing. What was that about?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Fi@bizarrolady makes a valid point, Spot*fy may need to renew TW's contract for a few more years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I’ve been called ‘insane,’ ‘hysterical’ and ‘crazy’
> 
> 
> “Calling someone ‘crazy’ or ‘hysterical’ completely dismisses their experience and minimizes what they’re feeling.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



I've read that Zedzee said there were no tabloids in the US. If that's true, then her Cali paediatrician friend had to import tabloids to shred for her   No wonder she was so impressed by the gift packaging. Btw, do any of you call the shredded paper "mesh" and "bedding"? I call the stuff packaging filler. I thought bedding was the shredded stuff you use for hamster cages.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> She got help then? I thought she told Oprah that she didn’t get help ??? Am I remembering it wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan got "help" with mental health from woman Harry found—podcast
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle discussed mental health on her latest "Archetypes" episode, having previously told Oprah Winfrey concerns over her mental well-being were ignored by royal aides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I distinctly recall her saying she went to HR for help  Ridiculous to me as the RF which she was part of are not employees.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And why would that be? I can't think of a single thing that could warrant such harsh judgement.


does narcissism count as crazy?


----------



## bag-mania

From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.

During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."

"I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."

Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."










						Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
					

Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"




					people.com


----------



## Chanbal

BittyMonkey said:


> I missed the tea throwing. What was that about?











						Meghan Markle Allegedly 'Threw A Cup Of Tea Into The Air' During Royal Tour, New Book Divulges
					

Meghan Markle allegedly 'threw a cup of tea into the air' during royal tour, a new book claims.




					okmagazine.com


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.
> 
> During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."
> 
> "I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."
> 
> Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



I’m convinced this woman just lies for a living. The only throne she’ll ever sit on…


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.
> 
> During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."
> 
> "I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."
> 
> Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


This sounds crazy. I thought at her worst point, she was passive agressively gaslighting Handbag about how she didn't want to live any more and he was too embarrassed to tell his family? And they definitely told Oprah that they couldn't find help for her. So suddenly they are revising history again?


----------



## marietouchet

Medical gashlighting - term for when medical professionals ignore your claims
ok it exists, I get it …
BUT now MM is taking on the medical profession sighhhh
and who are you going to go to if it is not a medical professional ??? I am all in on crystals, cupping, incense
compare and contrast W and K were talking about knowing whats in your toolbox


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.
> 
> During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."
> 
> "I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "Shesh didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."
> 
> Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


she called the mental health specialist on the cell phone, just like she did with the US politicians...pushy - if it's even true


----------



## carmen56

bag-mania said:


> LOL, don't remember that one. Was it in the first several months after Lilibet's birth when they hadn't hired an infant for the role yet? Instead of being annoyed with the kid, he could have patiently explained that the casting process takes time.


Wasn’t it at the previous Well Child event?


----------



## marietouchet

Latest word salad from OS , great (ambiguous) wording ….
“people working in the field of modern slavery” , the slavers or the PHDs ?  Sloppy choice of words


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she called the mental health specialist on the cell phone, just like she did with the US politicians...pushy - if it's even true


Well, her sister calls her Princess Pushy. The expectation of immediate access to the therapist was the part that I found the most believable.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Well, her sister calls her Princess Pushy. The expectation of immediate access to the therapist was the part that I found the most believable.


and the woman could immediately tell how much distress M was in - even though she was busy at the checkout


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.
> 
> During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."
> 
> "I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."
> 
> Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Oh please, that’s not a referral.  A referral is when the therapist or health professional is prepared with your details, is therefore confident they have the skills to help and offers you an appointment.  What’s she’s describing is being bunged someone’s number and making an unscheduled call.  Meghan is so bl**dy ridiculous it’s unbelievable.


----------



## Pessie

Pessie said:


> The woman is a narcissistic bore.


Make that _crazy _narcissistic bore


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> Oh please, that’s not a referral.  A referral is when the therapist or health professional is prepared with your details, is therefore confident they have the skills to help and offers you an appointment.  What’s she’s describing is being bunged someone’s number and making an unscheduled call.  Meghan is so bl**dy ridiculous it’s unbelievable.


if Harry was her patient or if she was a friend of the family, he could have had her cell number....still, that's not how one would normally contact a healthcare provider.  but of course they are so special - why should they go through normal channels


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> This sounds crazy. I thought at her worst point, she was passive agressively gaslighting Handbag about how she didn't want to live any more and he was too embarrassed to tell his family? And they definitely told Oprah that they couldn't find help for her. So suddenly they are revising history again?


She doesn’t seem to factor in to her plans that people have memories and the internet.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> does narcissism count as crazy?



Yes it does if the symptoms make it chronic enough to be a Disorder. 

Narcissistic personality disorder leaves people with no friends and family, and IMH (non specialist) O, M is exhibits classic symptoms.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> This sounds crazy. I thought at her worst point, she was passive agressively gaslighting Handbag about how she didn't want to live any more and he was too embarrassed to tell his family? And they definitely told Oprah that they couldn't find help for her. So suddenly they are revising history again?



Revising history is their speciality 

QE2 put it far more politely but forcibly "recollections may vary". Biggest putdown on the planet.


----------



## marietouchet

BittyMonkey said:


> I missed the tea throwing. What was that about?


see YouTube - extensive snippets from Aussie TV , morning shows, I guess, not new tea, same ole tea, but handled in manner more hostile than that of the DM, and definitely nothing like the all-sugar stuff seen on US TV
What struck me is the tone is so much more hostile


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> She doesn’t seem to factor in to her plans that people have memories and the internet.



Or the Internet has a memory (bank)


----------



## marietouchet

This whole medical gaslighting leitmotif , straight out of Diana’s playbook

See Morton book … D stated the response to her issues (bulimia) was to say she was crazy … I am pretty sure that exact word was used 

so, in one fell swoop , MM is complaining of the treatment received by herself and by D, her MIL


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> see YouTube - extensive snippets from Aussie TV , morning shows, I guess, not new tea, same ole tea, but handled in manner more hostile than that of the DM, and definitely nothing like the all-sugar stuff seen on US TV
> What struck me is the tone is so much more hostile


PS i keep thinking why do the Aussies hate her so much ? her shenanigans on tour ?


----------



## marietouchet

Pessie said:


> Oh please, that’s not a referral.  A referral is when the therapist or health professional is prepared with your details, is therefore confident they have the skills to help and offers you an appointment.  What’s she’s describing is being bunged someone’s number and making an unscheduled call.  Meghan is so bl**dy ridiculous it’s unbelievable.


And the medical professional took the call at the grocery store …
I would not be thrilled to have my issues handled where anyone can hear them but more important, where the professional is distracted …
yet MM connected on this call, so, it was not just a let me ring back later …


----------



## Pessie

marietouchet said:


> And the medical professional took the call at the grocery store …
> I would not be thrilled to have my issues handled where anyone can hear them but more important, where the professional is distracted …
> yet MM connected on this call, so, it was not just a let me ring back later …


So she says…. I think the whole story is a fabrication


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and the woman could immediately tell how much distress M was in - even though she was busy at the checkout



I have never known a health-professional, especially one that deals with chronic mental health, allow themselves to be manipulated in that way. MegZ is clearly blurring both her and the health-professional's boundaries. If something happened later, and if MegZ or H sued her, no way could she justify her action. Her indemnity insurance wouldn't cover her either.

They would say "Ring my receptionist first thing in the morning for a face2face/Zoom appointment when and where we can talk properly". The first-time appointment (at mutual convenience) is always an assessment and setting boundaries one.

There is no way this happened or if it did, no way the woman was a real accredited health professional.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Oh please, that’s not a referral.  A referral is when the therapist or health professional is prepared with your details, is therefore confident they have the skills to help and offers you an appointment.  What’s she’s describing is being bunged someone’s number and making an unscheduled call.  Meghan is so bl**dy ridiculous it’s unbelievable.



Discussing personal info in a checkout queue, LOLOLOL

I think M is trying to create scenes that will play in her own drama-drama biopic TV movie of the life-in-a-lunchtime.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo bottom line on the video - He is zooming with a group for children, about children.  When asked a simple question about his children’s well being, he noticeably looks away from the camera. Then, stumbles with the answer.  I call that _weird. _


Maybe it's because, just like the Archie incident, where they couldn't show the baby since they had signed a deal with the devil in the US.  Could it be that Nflix *owns* the rights to the invisikids until their tacky reality show is aired?
Edit: I see that this point has already been made - I'm a few pages behind


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I'm at the 'Oh dear, oh dear' part…
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: TW wrote a letter to Will telling him to come to CA when he will be in the US for Earthshot, so they can work things out between them (reliable source, allegedly). There is more, including Hazz's apparent preference for money instead of princely titles…



That’s so goofy if it’s true.  UK to Boston is 3000 miles.  It’s another 3000 miles to California, not exactly “pop on by” distance.


----------



## K.D.

marietouchet said:


> see YouTube - extensive snippets from Aussie TV , morning shows, I guess, not new tea, same ole tea, but handled in manner more hostile than that of the DM, and definitely nothing like the all-sugar stuff seen on US TV
> What struck me is the tone is so much more hostile


I think it's about actual tea that was thrown? https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/world-news/meghan-markle-threw-tea-made-27516662 

When I typed 'tea throwing' in Google it autofilled with 'incident in australia' and 'meghan markle'


----------



## Sharont2305

I wonder what they'll be doing on 6th May next year? Archie's birthday and his grandfather's Coronation.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Latest word salad from OS , great (ambiguous) wording ….
> “people working in the field of modern slavery” , the slavers or the PHDs ?  Sloppy choice of words



I agree. Scooby Sh!t for Brains' blathering actually means that Eugenie's Anti-Slavery group will be supporting slavery.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Fi@bizarrolady makes a valid point, Spot*fy may need to renew TW's contract for a few more years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I’ve been called ‘insane,’ ‘hysterical’ and ‘crazy’
> 
> 
> “Calling someone ‘crazy’ or ‘hysterical’ completely dismisses their experience and minimizes what they’re feeling.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com




Why would anyone voluntarily listen to that idiot. 

Also, judging from this drivel she has no clue what medical gaslighting is. At all. But then again, what's new?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> EDIT: TW wrote a letter to Will telling him to come to CA when he will be in the US for Earthshot, so they can work things out between them (reliable source, allegedly). There is more, including Hazz's apparent preference for money instead of princely titles…



Aw. I do hope he answered telling her to go eff herself. My patience with her is definitely running low.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Discussing personal info in a checkout queue, LOLOLOL
> 
> I think M is trying to create scenes that will play in her own drama-drama biopic TV movie of the life-in-a-lunchtime.


Remember Meghan claims she thought about harming herself!

She had to create a story which shows the incredible urgency of the situation. Naturally it couldn't wait for regular business hours or to make an appointment to meet a therapist in a normal way. I assume the UK has a version of the Suicide Hotline, a number where anyone who is considering suicide can call and get help immediately? Apparently her situation wasn't _that_ dire, she was still in command of herself enough to arrange an appointment in the most intrusive and self-absorbed way she could.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I've read that Zedzee said there were no tabloids in the US. If that's true, then her Cali paediatrician friend had to import tabloids to shred for her   No wonder she was so impressed by the gift packaging. Btw, do any of you call the shredded paper "mesh" and "bedding"? I call the stuff packaging filler. I thought bedding was the shredded stuff you use for hamster cages.


Idk I call it trash.

RE:  names for Mm - we have a full list compiled by dear @Maggie Muggins.  Was crazy on there?  Insane?  Should we email the list to Spot-a-jerk, Spotify’s new name


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> This sounds crazy. I thought at her worst point, she was passive agressively gaslighting Handbag about how she didn't want to live any more and he was too embarrassed to tell his family? And they definitely told Oprah that they couldn't find help for her. So suddenly they are revising history again?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW one of our senior horses is sick with a mystery infection...he was fine or shall we say inconspicuous at noon, then barely made it from pasture to stable at 5 p.m. with a sudden very high fever. His buddy of 25 years all but completely lost it, threw the biggest tantrum and nearly stomped down the barrier while the vet was there because he wanted to be by his side.

And Harry can't go see either of his dying grandparents. He's such a low form of life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> And the medical professional took the call at the grocery store …
> I would not be thrilled to have my issues handled where anyone can hear them but more important, where the professional is distracted …
> yet MM connected on this call, so, it was not just a let me ring back later …


Surely she used her title to identify herself.  Another example of MM bullying an innocent person.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Latest word salad from OS , great (ambiguous) wording ….
> “people working in the field of modern slavery” , the slavers or the PHDs ?  Sloppy choice of words




For a journalist, Omid really doesn't have a way with words.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> PS i keep thinking why do the Aussies hate her so much ? her shenanigans on tour ?



Maybe their general population doesn't suffer fools gladly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> I wonder what they'll be doing on 6th May next year? Archie's birthday and his grandfather's Coronation.


 they stay home, otherwise the invisikids will be blasted all over tv


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


>



Gurrrl, that was *not* high school


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Remember Meghan claims she thought about harming herself!
> 
> She had to create a story which shows the incredible urgency of the situation. Naturally it couldn't wait for regular business hours or to make an appointment to meet a therapist in a normal way. I assume the UK has a version of the *Suicide Hotline*, a number where anyone who is considering suicide can call and get help immediately? Apparently her situation wasn't _that_ dire, she was still in command of herself enough to arrange an appointment in the most intrusive and self-absorbed way she could.



  we have The Samaritans

With her known history, a health professional would be even more careful to adhere to the rules. Never mind Meghan and her truth, there is a Code of Conduct and if medical practitioners do not follow it they can be struck off. 

Safeguarding: If someone says to a health professional or institution member (like a school, uni or large company) that he/she can't see themselves living 'till morning, you call the emergency services, an ambulance, whatever. 

So either it was an emergency, in which case it is an emergency and the person needs to be protected from themselves, or, it's not an emergency, and therefore, they can arrange an appointment first thing in the morning. First rule of psychiatrists, therapists and so on, no VIP treatment, because very often VIPs need to relearn what is NORMAL and what how to act NORMALLY

I do not believe this happened.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For a journalist, Omid really doesn't have a way with words.



'Journalist' has become a very loose term


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> 'Journalist' has become a very loose term



As someone with a degree in journalism it has always slightly irked me that anyone who can operate a computer keyboard now refers to themselves as journalists or reporters  But at least Omid has the reputable employers even if I don't fully understand how he got there.


----------



## Chloe302225

marietouchet said:


> A telling Moroccan anecdote … big trip there with tour guides - all of whom are telling the state approved story, OK
> Anyway guide went on about the palaces and Moroccan Queen, nothing deep or salacious but she was covered in a lot of superficial detail , Laila Salma is gorgeous
> Well, 6 months go by, and reporters notice she has not been seen or heard from in 6 mos, her kids are still around, she has been MIA for like 4 years now
> No official divorce, death, she just went poof !
> Different things happen in foreign countries just as the US is “foreign” to the UK and vice versa and MM totally did not get that


Laila Salma and the King got divorced. I read about it in a translated article from a French tabloid. She still lives in Morocco and was recently seen enjoying a day out with friends.


----------



## pukasonqo

marietouchet said:


> PS i keep thinking why do the Aussies hate her so much ? her shenanigans on tour


TBH I don’t follow, read or watch those papers or programs so probably not the most suitable to provide a reason

I don’t think is hate but irreverent Aussie humour

Funnily enough Princess May of Denmark can do no wrong and there was a time when they rreferred to Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise as “our” Nic and Tom…go figure

The press seems to either idolise or dislike public figures and,unfortunately for MM the Oz press has ticked box 2


----------



## marietouchet

Now … MM states that Serena’s medical concerns were dismissed after S gave birth. I remember S had a difficult birth, heck she has a one of a kind body - she is a world class athlete. Not to minimize S’s issues, but, hmmm, to what extent should MM be discussing S’s issues on a public podcast?
I went ballistic when friends and family were discussing my medical condition without me in the room
i just don’t think this is MM’s issue to discuss


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


>



I'm sure they'll spin it as a 'sweet nod' and proof that Archie is Grampa's favorite, just like Harry was Granny's. 

Related: I always found it odd and tacky that so many stories included references to specific children or grandchildren being favorites in that family. And of course, there was the episode of The Crown all about it. Even if it were true, why would 'news' writers publicly say something like that about any family when there were 3 other siblings and 7 other grandchildren involved?


----------



## Chanbal

The results of the $2M that TW allegedly paid to SS????


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just came back from rushing out because someone posted in a local group they saw an injured cat supposedly hit by a car that was still alive but they were too busy to stop and check on it at 10 p.m. I walked around for like 20 mins trying to find the poor critter on poorly lit country roads. Is is too f*cking hard to get the poor thing yourself OR wait until someone can come help you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The results of the $2M that TW allegedly paid to SS????




Are these people for real. I'm just so over everyone sucking up to them when there could be worthy people who actually did the work getting those awards. Their work on racial injustice my a*s.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gurrrl, that was *not* high school


LOL, that was just the other day before she left the palace after terrorizing the staff...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The results of the $2M that TW allegedly paid to SS????



Somebody wants invites to the coronation.  How sad and pathetic they are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I just came back from rushing out because someone posted in a local group they saw a cat hit by a car that was still alive but they were too busy to stop and check on it at 10 p.m. I walked around for like 20 mins trying to find the poor critter on poorly lit country roads. Is is too f*cking hard to get the poor thing yourself OR wait until someone can come help you.


Eeek, so sorry to hear this.  We need a better world. Take care.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Somebody wants invites to the coronation.  How sad and pathetic they are.



I was just thinking...maybe they'll decline because of course their children come first and it's Archie's birthday. Well played Charles


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking...maybe they'll decline because of course their children come first and it's Archie's birthday. Well played Charles


I was thinking the RFK people want the invites.   H&M will become everyone’s bestie.  Imo H&M and their supporters should not attend.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Now … MM states that Serena’s medical concerns were dismissed after S gave birth. I remember S had a difficult birth, heck she has a one of a kind body - she is a world class athlete. Not to minimize S’s issues, but, hmmm, to what extent should MM be discussing S’s issues on a public podcast?
> I went ballistic when friends and family were discussing my medical condition without me in the room
> i just don’t think this is MM’s issue to discuss


When I wrote that, I was thinking of the privacy kind of issues eg my body, mine to discuss
then I relooked at the story , I have soooo many questions about the anecdote not about personal issues but about medical procedure  issues … who did S ask for help, who turned her down, what was her mental condition (haziness due to medical drugs), well the anecdote does not hang together 
Similar to the questions about MM’s suicide account, why go to HR ?
This anecdote is sooo goopy, the AMA will be incandescent , I would Markle a friend that told MY story in manner as to inflame the entire medical profession, again not to make light of S’s condition but the story is full of holes


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aw. I do hope he answered telling her to go eff herself. My patience with her is definitely running low.


ignoring her is probably more like it and maybe more of an insult....you can't spin that or quote it


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> When I wrote that, I was thinking of the privacy kind of issues eg my body, mine to discuss
> then I relooked at the story , I have soooo many questions about the anecdote not about personal issues but about medical procedure  issues … who did S ask for help, who turned her down, what was her mental condition (haziness due to medical drugs), well the anecdote does not hang together
> Similar to the questions about MM’s suicide account, why go to HR ?
> This anecdote is sooo goopy, the AMA will be incandescent , I would Markle a friend that told MY story in manner as to inflame the entire medical profession, again not to make light of S’s condition but the story is full of holes


Agree, does not make sense. Serena was/is surrounded by an extremely supportive family and a very competent husband. She also has a team of elite coaches, etc.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> The results of the $2M that TW allegedly paid to SS????



Looks like they bought themselves another meaningless award


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> ignoring her is probably more like it and maybe more of an insult....you can't spin that or quote it



I mean, I love the subtle burns the BRF dishes out. "Recollections may vary", "Wishing Harry and Ghoul good luck overseas"  But you are right, "Postal services must have lost that letter" is probably the most sensible way to deal with it.


----------



## scarlet555

self delegates phony duo!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> When I wrote that, I was thinking of the privacy kind of issues eg my body, mine to discuss
> then I relooked at the story , I have soooo many questions about the anecdote not about personal issues but about medical procedure  issues … who did S ask for help, who turned her down, what was her mental condition (haziness due to medical drugs), well the anecdote does not hang together
> Similar to the questions about MM’s suicide account, why go to HR ?
> This anecdote is sooo goopy, the AMA will be incandescent , I would Markle a friend that told MY story in manner as to inflame the entire medical profession, again not to make light of S’s condition but the story is full of holes





CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, does not make sense. Serena was/is surrounded by an extremely supportive family and a very competent husband. She also has a team of elite coaches, etc.



I went and read up on the story and I am not necessarily suspicious. She had a pre-existing condition that made her high risk for blood clots, she had a c-section (which comes with its own risk for blood clots), she was off her medication, and as a result she suffered a blood clot.

Or do you think because she's Serena Williams her doctors wouldn't have been so dismissive? But that's basically what she says, "Had I not been Serena Williams but a random black mother I'd be dead."

ETA: I can see how it's hard to believe medical staff would be so careless with a known history. As someone who nearly died after an illtempered doctor dismissed my very clear symptoms and medical history and ended up in the ICU for 10 days I am not that surprised though.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gurrrl, that was *not* high school


I guess it was in junior high when she had the curly hair she was ashamed of


----------



## Toby93

I saw this on Twitter, and thought they are 100% correct.  She Is just going after everyone and everything that people said about HER and trying (unsuccesfully) to get even


----------



## Redbirdhermes

marietouchet said:


> Now … MM states that Serena’s medical concerns were dismissed after S gave birth. I remember S had a difficult birth, heck she has a one of a kind body - she is a world class athlete. Not to minimize S’s issues, but, hmmm, to what extent should MM be discussing S’s issues on a public podcast?
> I went ballistic when friends and family were discussing my medical condition without me in the room
> i just don’t think this is MM’s issue to discuss


Serena wrote about her complications after the birth of her daughter in Vogue magazine, so that information is in the public domain.  Here is a Good Morning America story about that as well as the Vogue story.











						Serena Williams on Motherhood, Marriage, and Making Her Comeback
					

Serena Williams, Vogue’s February 2018 cover star discusses her difficult delivery for the first time and when she hopes to make her triumphant return to tennis.




					www.vogue.com
				




The next day, while recovering in the hospital, Serena suddenly felt short of breath. Because of her history of blood clots, and because she was off her daily anticoagulant regimen due to the recent surgery, she immediately assumed she was having another pulmonary embolism. (Serena lives in fear of blood clots.) She walked out of the hospital room so her mother wouldn’t worry and told the nearest nurse, between gasps, that she needed a CT scan with contrast and IV heparin (a blood thinner) right away. The nurse thought her pain medicine might be making her confused. But Serena insisted, and soon enough a doctor was performing an ultrasound of her legs. “I was like, a Doppler? I told you, I need a CT scan and a heparin drip,” she remembers telling the team. The ultrasound revealed nothing, so they sent her for the CT, and sure enough, several small blood clots had settled in her lungs. Minutes later she was on the drip. “I was like, listen to Dr. Williams!”

But this was just the first chapter of a six-day drama. Her fresh C-section wound popped open from the intense coughing spells caused by the pulmonary embolism, and when she returned to surgery, they found that a large hematoma had flooded her abdomen, the result of a medical catch-22 in which the potentially lifesaving blood thinner caused hemorrhaging at the site of her C-section. She returned yet again to the OR to have a filter inserted into a major vein, in order to prevent more clots from dislodging and traveling into her lungs. Serena came home a week later only to find that the night nurse had fallen through, and she spent the first six weeks of motherhood unable to get out of bed. “I was happy to change diapers,” Alexis says, “but on top of everything she was going through, the feeling of not being able to help made it even harder. Consider for a moment that your body is one of the greatest things on this planet, and you’re trapped in it.”


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW one of our senior horses is sick with a mystery infection...he was fine or shall we say inconspicuous at noon, then barely made it from pasture to stable at 5 p.m. with a sudden very high fever. His buddy of 25 years all but completely lost it, threw the biggest tantrum and nearly stomped down the barrier while the vet was there because he wanted to be by his side.
> 
> And Harry can't go see either of his dying grandparents. He's such a low form of life.


Oh no… I hope your horse is ok!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> But this was just the first chapter of a six-day drama. Her fresh C-section wound popped open from the intense coughing spells caused by the pulmonary embolism, and when she returned to surgery, they found that a large hematoma had flooded her abdomen, the result of a medical catch-22 in which the potentially lifesaving blood thinner caused hemorrhaging at the site of her C-section. She returned yet again to the OR to have a filter inserted into a major vein, in order to prevent more clots from dislodging and traveling into her lungs. Serena came home a week later only to find that the night nurse had fallen through, and she spent the first six weeks of motherhood unable to get out of bed. “I was happy to change diapers,” Alexis says, “but on top of everything she was going through, the feeling of not being able to help made it even harder. Consider for a moment that your body is one of the greatest things on this planet, and you’re trapped in it.”



OMG. I somehow missed that part, that is gruesome.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are these people for real. I'm just so over everyone sucking up to them when there could be worthy people who actually did the work getting those awards. Their work on racial injustice my a*s.


And then there’s someone like this woman who uses Meghan is an example of women receiving social media hate while completely disregarding the reasons why she is so disliked by so many. 









						Meghan Markle's Treatment Is Evidence That Social Media Is "Safer for Abusers Than for Women," Says Digital Hate Expert
					

"Meghan Markle is another example of a high-profile woman targeted with racist abuse, misogynist attacks and conspiracy theories on social media platforms."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WingNut said:


> Oh no… I hope your horse is ok!!



Thank you. Waiting on lab results but he's on antibiotics already and I went over at 10 p.m. to change his blanket as he'd been sweating profusely earlier and he seemed ok. He's 30 with chronic heart problems so you never know.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Thank you. Waiting on lab results but he's on antibiotics already and I went over at 10 p.m. to change his blanket as he'd been sweating profusely earlier and he seemed ok. He's 30 with chronic heart problems so you never know.


Glad he is doing better.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> I was thinking the RFK people want the invites.   H&M will become everyone’s bestie.  Imo H&M and their supporters should not attend.


Speculation: Arsewell sought them out to get the award.

It’s a snark against William and the Earthshot relationship to President K and the visit from The Prince and Princess  of Wales to Boston in December…….

Hazbeen  and Raptor will be in NYC for this RFK award on December 6.


----------



## justwatchin

bag-mania said:


> From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.
> 
> During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."
> 
> "I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."
> 
> Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


She can’t keep her story straight. One point suicidal and the next Harry found her a therapist? She need not worry though…she might not keep track of her constantly changing stories/lies but the internet sure will.


----------



## justwatchin

marietouchet said:


> In the video, it was obvious H froze for a bit when the topic got to the children
> 
> I remember an anecdote from Bower, I think - before Megxit, he told one interviewer no shots of him and M together bc he already had deal with OW that she was to get the first Interview with both on camera at same time
> 
> Maybe he has lucrative deal to show off the kids, and knows he is not to spill the beans before hand


Or had to stop and think who Archie and Lilibet were…


----------



## Cinderlala

If nothing else, Ginge & Cringe are teaching us, one award at a time, which are merit-based as opposed to up for sale.  Add to that the exposure (via their use) of misinformation and they are walking PSAs! 

Disconcertingly, in reading Courtiers, I'm seeing unfortunate similarities between the duplicitous duo and Charles.  C harbored distrust for BP aides, he thought nothing of calling his employees at any time of the day or night, he was fooled by ambitious individuals with odd ideas, his head could be turned by someone telling him what he wanted to hear, he has/had an unpleasant temper.  He seems to be quite fond of shiny pennies, so to speak.  (By that, I mean new ideas/things/etc.)

I can see how C would have really liked TW.  It seems we're all very lucky TW managed to sabotage herself out the door.


----------



## Chanbal

On today's podcast


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, TW wants the Palace to condemn Tom Bower's and Valentine Low's books.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> Speculation: Arsewell sought them out to get the award.
> 
> It’s a snark against William and the Earthshot relationship to President K and the visit from The Prince and Princess of Wales to Boston in December…….
> 
> Hazbeen and Raptor will be in NYC for this RFK award on December 6.



Will and Kate will be in Boston on 12/2.  I assume they'll be arriving a day before and staying another day or two after perhaps?  Not sure how long this trip of to the U.S. will be but apparently one of Jack Kennedy's grandchildren will be on hand at the Earthshot event.  So, what a shocking coincidence it is that Harry/MM will be on the east coast on 12/5 or 12/6 to pick up an award from from the Bobby Kennedy foundation!  I wonder how much it cost them?

Really, I'm sure as soon as Will and Kate's trip was announced, Harry/MM went into overdrive to find something they could do around the same time on the east coast so as to ride on the wave of Will and Kate's trip and try to make it look like they're still royal too!  I'm also expecting lots of "leaks" around that time that the 2 brothers are "looking to get together while they are both on the east coast" and "trying to find some time to work things out", none of which will actually happen.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, TW wants the Palace to condemn Tom Bower's and Valentine Low's books



She wants a whole lot of things she's never going to get.  

Allegedly, one of the things she and Harry were most upset about during their hot 10 minutes as a working pair was that BP would not change how they dealt with the press and media to suit them.  BP was not going to clap back at every article, tweet, TV interview, or book published that wasn't flattering.  They recognize that it only inflames more interest in the topic (whatever it happened to be) and was generally gone within 24 hours anyway.


----------



## 880

@QueenofWrapDress , I hope your horse is okay. With everything you have going on, I also think it’s amazing that you went out to search for the cat. Hope you have an easier rest of the week!

+1 with @youngster above. I hope that KCIII also does not succumb to pressure from either H or M re titles, and that the BRF just ignore whatever allegations are published in HS book should it come out later this year.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Not all people can afford to keep a dog, have time to care for one or live in a place where they are allowed pets. Again, world according to privileged Harry.
> 
> Actually, the more I hear H speak the more I really fear for his sanity. He has contradicted himself in what is just a few sentences. 1. Dogs keeps us calm. 2. Dogs cause us worry every single day 3. _When_ they're well behaved, they support us. 4. Children are like dogs/dogs are like children. Make up your mind.
> 
> No Harry, you have 3 dogs and (possibly) 2 kids. Dogs do not cause trouble, only their owners. I've had German Shepards, Dobermans and Jack Russell Terriers, 2 from rescue and brought baggage due to fear, but all ended-up content and well behaved. Part of our family, _never_ did my parents get confused between child/dog. What a weird thing to say. I also didn't bring-up they were rescue dogs every time I was talking to strangers - talk about virtue signalling.
> 
> I love, love, love dogs (and cats) more than most humans, but dogs are dogs, cats are cats and children and children. Why does Harry talk as though no one else could _possibly_ know what it's like to have pets, children or a family. He talks like he's an alien just fallen to Earth.



Where's the frantically applauding smilie when you need it!


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. Little irks me more than people talking at length about their "fur kids" (that person that made a TikTok expressing "He's my son, deal with it!" referring to her husky? WTFFFF) or buying themselves mother's day gifts because they have a dog. Get a grip. I was there when my cat was born, I took care of him from the moment we saw something was not right with him (like, 30 mins after birth) until the moment he took his last breath (and if I may say so, probably better than some people take care of their kids), 24/7 most of the time. I was literally devastated when he died to the point I didn't get out of bed for a week and still cry regularly two years later, and yet I roll my eyes at these people.
> 
> 
> 
> He's just so far removed from what normal people do and experience, to him it is probably really an alien occurence. I wonder why William could transition into being a for all we know great dad when he had the very same super privileged upbringing.


I think I’m relatively dispassionate about animals on the scale of this thread so I’m gratified to hear that he really did sound insane with this comparison and it’s not just me.

Also I’ve deleted it by accident but Papertiger you were bang on with pointing out M wouldn’t dream of even referencing sexist practices she experienced in another society but will happily lie to  complain about her  equitable and in fact preferential treatment in Brit society.


papertiger said:


> Nothing wrong with Newport or caravans, could be fun. 3 weeks at Balmoral would be colder and tougher for the 2 of them.
> 
> Anyway, what's wrong with good ol' fashioned Community Service?


I agree with you on so many things but I’m afraid I must ‘live my truth’ like the esteemed couple claims to and assert, to me, there are many things very, very wrong with caravans 


LittleStar88 said:


> And we start our day with this…
> 
> Meghan Markle Suggests She Has Been Labeled 'Crazy' in Spotify Podcast​
> 
> 
> archive.ph


There’s an American expression I love ‘a hit dog will holler….’

The reality is you can’t spend years in the public eye clawing people, lying, posting bananas to prostitutes and old cake across the country  while wearing a pair of spaniel ears that would’ve looked bad on 00s reality tv and not expect the word to come up now and again 


bag-mania said:


> I thought I remembered there was some pretentious or “special” meaning for the dog’s name.
> 
> From _People_ last year:
> 
> And the dog's name has special meaning — Pula is the official currency of Botswana, the country in Africa where Harry took Meghan when they first started dating. Pula means "rain" in Setswana — and since rain is very scarce in Botswana, it's considered valuable and a blessing.


Thank you! So it is a pretentious bad name is what we’re saying  


xincinsin said:


> I've read that Zedzee said there were no tabloids in the US. If that's true, then her Cali paediatrician friend had to import tabloids to shred for her   No wonder she was so impressed by the gift packaging. Btw, do any of you call the shredded paper "mesh" and "bedding"? I call the stuff packaging filler. I thought bedding was the shredded stuff you use for hamster cages.


This is straight from R/that really happened. Bedding here means the newspapers H sleeps on until he’s considered fully broken in.


bag-mania said:


> From the podcast, does anyone know when this incident supposedly took place? It seems like major backpedaling from the Oprah interview where they hold the palace responsible for her mental health when she had a husband who was on the board for a mental health program. By the way, I can totally believe Meghan would finagle some poor therapist's cell number out of someone and then call her during nonwork hours when the woman was doing her shopping.
> 
> During her talk with Deepika, Meghan described how husband Prince Harry found her a referral to a mental health professional when she was at her "worst point."
> 
> "I mean, I think at my worst point, being finally connected to someone that, you know, my husband had found a referral for me to call. And I called this woman," Meghan, 41, said. "She didn't know I was even calling her. And she was checking out at the grocery store. I could hear the little beep, beep, and I was like, "Hi," and I'm introducing myself and that you can literally you're going, wait, sorry. I'm just. Who is this? Um, and saying I need help. And she could hear the dire state that I was in."
> 
> Meghan continued, "But I think it's for all of us to be really honest about what it is that you need and to not be afraid to make peace with that, to ask for it."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Discusses How Prince Harry Helped at Her 'Worst Point' in New Podcast Episode
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, released a new episode of her Spotify podcast, welcoming guests Constance Wu, Jenny Slate and Deepika Padukone to discuss "The Decoding of Crazy"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


R/that really happened.

So in the highly competitive world of professional therapy our alleged therapist a) gives out their personal number which could get them reprimanded or struck off and then b) having apparently given a VIP client (and by extension his family) this instant access proceeds to give them the dismissive brush-off when they actually do call even though this would surely be the dream gig?

I mean evidently  H does not make a truly world class example of their competence of his therapists but this really strains the bounds of credibility. 


piperdog said:


> I'm sure they'll spin it as a 'sweet nod' and proof that Archie is Grampa's favorite, just like Harry was Granny's.
> 
> Related: I always found it odd and tacky that so many stories included references to specific children or grandchildren being favorites in that family. And of course, there was the episode of The Crown all about it. Even if it were true, why would 'news' writers publicly say something like that about any family when there were 3 other siblings and 7 other grandchildren involved?


I agree - I guess it’s just easy content but I’ve always found the favourite child stories very strange.


Toby93 said:


>



A while back, poopsie said every day was festivus for M with the perpetual airing of grievances and boy was she prophetic!


marietouchet said:


> Medical gashlighting - term for when medical professionals ignore your claims
> ok it exists, I get it …
> BUT now MM is taking on the medical profession sighhhh
> and who are you going to go to if it is not a medical professional ??? I am all in on crystals, cupping, incense
> compare and contrast W and K were talking about knowing whats in your toolbox





Cinderlala said:


> If nothing else, Ginge & Cringe are teaching us, one award at a time, which are merit-based as opposed to up for sale.  Add to that the exposure (via their use) of misinformation and they are walking PSAs!
> 
> Disconcertingly, in reading Courtiers, I'm seeing unfortunate similarities between the duplicitous duo and Charles.  C harbored distrust for BP aides, he thought nothing of calling his employees at any time of the day or night, he was fooled by ambitious individuals with odd ideas, his head could be turned by someone telling him what he wanted to hear, he has/had an unpleasant temper.  He seems to be quite fond of shiny pennies, so to speak.  (By that, I mean new ideas/things/etc.)
> 
> I can see how C would have really liked TW.  It seems we're all very lucky TW managed to sabotage herself out the door.


I was about to say- it’s well known alternative medicine is one of C’s hobby horses to the extent he has lobbied the NHS to have homeopathy recognised and offered so there is a precedent for dabbling in all this stuff outside of the California cliche.

Of course if we believe HG Tudor then Charles is a narcissist too…now whether you believe that or not is up to you but I’m inclined to think any similarities C had with M would make him more prone to dislike rather than like her as it would feel like she was stepping on his turf.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> TW makes more $ at the expense of Hazz and his family???



She makes more money because she is taking from him more than he is earning.



Chanbal said:


> I'm at the 'Oh dear, oh dear' part…
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: TW wrote a letter to Will telling him to come to CA when he will be in the US for Earthshot, so they can work things out between them (reliable source, allegedly). There is more, including Hazz's apparent preference for money instead of princely titles…



This preference for letters - maybe it's the required mode for requesting a meeting with the King, but for anyone else, I'm suspicious that she will pull the same trickery that she did to her own father.


bag-mania said:


> She doesn’t seem to factor in to her plans that people have memories and the internet.


Typical narc behaviour. My previous office narc was always very upset when we disputed his version of the event. OMG just realized that he was trying to push "his truth"! My current office narc, who rejoined my department a couple of months ago, sits near me but I maintain a strict no-interaction policy with her. She too reversions history to benefit herself.


Maggie Muggins said:


> I agree. Scooby Sh!t for Brains' blathering actually means that Eugenie's Anti-Slavery group will be supporting slavery.


I got the impression that he was advocating for a platform where modern day slavers could network.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Traminer

As you probably know, King Charles - when he still was Prince of Wales - has given Meghan this nickname: Tungsten.
"Wolfram" in German. - Was it meant to be a compliment?

Here some info about Tungsten:



> The name "tungsten" (which means "heavy stone" in Swedish) is used in English, French, and many other languages as the name of the element, but not in the Nordic countries. "Tungsten" was the old Swedish name for the mineral scheelite. "Wolfram" (or "volfram") is used in most European (especially Germanic, Spanish and Slavic) languages and is derived from the mineral wolframite, which is the origin of the chemical symbol *W*.[17] The name "wolframite" is derived from German "_wolf rahm_" ("wolf soot" or "wolf cream"), the name given to tungsten by Johan Gottschalk Wallerius in 1747. This, in turn, derives from Latin "_lupi spuma_", the name Georg Agricola used for the element in 1546, which translates into English as "wolf's froth" and is a reference to the large amounts of tin consumed by the mineral during its extraction, as though the mineral devoured it like a wolf.[8] This naming follows a tradition of colorful names miners from the Ore Mountains would give various minerals, out of a superstition that certain ones that looked as if they contained then-known valuable metals but didn't were somehow "hexed". Cobalt (c.f. Kobold), pitchblende (c.f. German "blenden" for "to blind" or "to deceive") and nickel (c.f. "Old Nick") derive their names from the same miner's idiom.











						Tungsten - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## ccbaggirl89

The Valentine Low book, Courtiers, I ordered for my mom is out for delivery tomorrow with DHL. I used Amazon via Amazon UK and ordered it 2 weeks ago with regular delivery. Just fyi, in case anyone is wanting it faster than the US release. I'm hoping my mom reads fast so I can maybe read it, too.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Idk I call it trash.
> 
> RE:  names for Mm - we have a full list compiled by dear @Maggie Muggins.  Was crazy on there?  Insane?  Should we email the list to Spot-a-jerk, Spotify’s new name


We were definitely more inventive!


CarryOn2020 said:


> Surely she used her title to identify herself.  Another example of MM bullying an innocent person.


- Hi, I'm Meghan and I don't feel well.
- Hang on, my peas are falling out of the basket.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was just thinking...maybe they'll decline because of course their children come first and it's Archie's birthday. Well played Charles


Or they do the same as for the babe's birthday and throw an intimate party at Frogmore that everyone is too busy to attend, but which they leak was a success. And then Misan or other photog in their pocket contributes a Photoshopped portrait.


Redbirdhermes said:


> Serena wrote about her complications after the birth of her daughter in Vogue magazine, so that information is in the public domain.  Here is a Good Morning America story about that as well as the Vogue story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serena Williams on Motherhood, Marriage, and Making Her Comeback
> 
> 
> Serena Williams, Vogue’s February 2018 cover star discusses her difficult delivery for the first time and when she hopes to make her triumphant return to tennis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, while recovering in the hospital, Serena suddenly felt short of breath. Because of her history of blood clots, and because she was off her daily anticoagulant regimen due to the recent surgery, she immediately assumed she was having another pulmonary embolism. (Serena lives in fear of blood clots.) She walked out of the hospital room so her mother wouldn’t worry and told the nearest nurse, between gasps, that she needed a CT scan with contrast and IV heparin (a blood thinner) right away. The nurse thought her pain medicine might be making her confused. But Serena insisted, and soon enough a doctor was performing an ultrasound of her legs. “I was like, a Doppler? I told you, I need a CT scan and a heparin drip,” she remembers telling the team. The ultrasound revealed nothing, so they sent her for the CT, and sure enough, several small blood clots had settled in her lungs. Minutes later she was on the drip. “I was like, listen to Dr. Williams!”
> 
> But this was just the first chapter of a six-day drama. Her fresh C-section wound popped open from the intense coughing spells caused by the pulmonary embolism, and when she returned to surgery, they found that a large hematoma had flooded her abdomen, the result of a medical catch-22 in which the potentially lifesaving blood thinner caused hemorrhaging at the site of her C-section. She returned yet again to the OR to have a filter inserted into a major vein, in order to prevent more clots from dislodging and traveling into her lungs. Serena came home a week later only to find that the night nurse had fallen through, and she spent the first six weeks of motherhood unable to get out of bed. “I was happy to change diapers,” Alexis says, “but on top of everything she was going through, the feeling of not being able to help made it even harder. Consider for a moment that your body is one of the greatest things on this planet, and you’re trapped in it.”



That sounds real. Unlike a certain somebody's alleged miscarriage.


justwatchin said:


> Or had to stop and think who Archie and Lilibet were…


Or what he was permitted to say about them. Hmm, if the kids are contract-bound from birth to Netflix or some other media company, does that count as indenture?


youngster said:


> I'm also expecting lots of "leaks" around that time that the 2 brothers are "looking to get together while they are both on the east coast" and "trying to find some time to work things out", none of which will actually happen.


Newsweek will be full stooge mode then, hailing Zedzee's amazing accomplishments and we will be incredulous at the number of sweet nods flying about.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Will and Kate will be in Boston on 12/2.  I assume they'll be arriving a day before and staying another day or two after perhaps?  Not sure how long this trip of to the U.S. will be but apparently one of Jack Kennedy's grandchildren will be on hand at the Earthshot event.  So, what a shocking coincidence it is that Harry/MM will be on the east coast on 12/5 or 12/6 to pick up an award from from the Bobby Kennedy foundation! * I wonder how much it cost them?*
> 
> Really, I'm sure as soon as Will and Kate's trip was announced, Harry/MM went into overdrive to find something they could do around the same time on the east coast so as to ride on the wave of Will and Kate's trip and try to make it look like they're still royal too!  I'm also expecting lots of "leaks" around that time that the 2 brothers are "looking to get together while they are both on the east coast" and "trying to find some time to work things out", none of which will actually happen.



It was likely part of the Sunshine package…


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW I remember that memorial service for Harry's friend and how utterly odd I found it that SHE - the person who had never met the guy - took center stage and read a stupid poem. Ghoul seems really, really fitting.


I think (actually I know) I could never be friends or even be in the same vicinity as TW because she's so opposite me.  She will literally go to the opening of an envelope and act like she created the idea of envelopes.  Me, on the other hand?  I didn't even want a wedding ceremony, but would've preferred to elope and leave it at that!  The thought of attention on myself makes me extremely uncomfortable, almost ill.


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Me too.
> 
> When someone asks me my kids age, I have to pause and think. lol


LOL, I remember my kids ages.  It's their names I forget!  I've often called them my dogs' names and vice versa 
I have the C section scars to prove I definitely gave birth to both of them, not the dogs, but it still happens!


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I think (actually I know) I could never be friends or even be in the same vicinity as TW because she's so opposite me.  She will literally go to the opening of an envelope and act like she created the idea of envelopes.  Me, on the other hand?  I didn't even want a wedding ceremony, but would've preferred to elope and leave it at that!  The thought of attention on myself makes me extremely uncomfortable, almost ill.


TW uses highly paid podcasts as a platform to respond to her critics, weddings as networking events … I wonder if it is already time to recycle Hazz. All allegedly, of course!


----------



## purseinsanity

Genie27 said:


> From my old body-language reading - up and right is the ‘making up stories’ part of the brain, while left is looking back into memory banks.


I always wondered how accurate this is.  I have no idea where my eyes look when I'm thinking out loud.  I believe it's usually up or down, not to a side (does that mean I'm telling the truth if I look up towards heaven and I'm lying if I look down towards hell?  LOL).  Some of these body language things are such generalizations.  I found the one about how one sleeps with their partner to be interesting, specifically if you're spooning (like TW's bananas, to bring it back to topic) it means you're in conjunction with your spouse, where if you're not cuddling, you're disjointed from your SO.  
DH and I have been together for 26 years and if some BLG looked at us asleep in our bed, he'd claim it was the War of the Roses.  We each cling to our respective side, almost falling off, in a California King bed.  I love him more than ever, but with hot flashes, the last thing I need is his high metabolism body emanating heat anywhere near me!


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> So to reiterate… they tried to do something bad and they got a holiday to Morocco?
> 
> Talk about rewarding bad behaviour! (which would be a great alternative title for this thread btw)
> 
> If I were queen they’d be packed off for a five week tour of the oil rigs or perhaps a caravan holiday in Newport


Was Lili previously _*silent*_, or _was she silenced_??


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m convinced this woman just lies for a living. The only throne she’ll ever sit on…
> 
> View attachment 5629479


She has 16 other thrones in Montecito she can sit on as well!


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> PS i keep thinking why do the Aussies hate her so much ? her shenanigans on tour ?


They could see through her BS far longer than the rest of the world?


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Latest word salad from OS , great (ambiguous) wording ….
> “people working in the field of modern slavery” , the slavers or the PHDs ?  Sloppy choice of words



Downright stupid.  Does one major in college in "the field of modern slavery"??  WTH.  Botox has frozen his brain.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> if Harry was her patient or if she was a friend of the family, he could have had her cell number....still, that's not how one would normally contact a healthcare provider.  but of course they are so special - why should they go through normal channels


I know lots of Healthcare providers and they do NOT give out their personal cell phone numbers to patients.  Precisely because the crazies would do exactly what TW did.  Just call out of the blue.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I know lots of Healthcare providers and they do NOT give out their personal cell phone numbers to patients.  Precisely because the crazies would do exactly what TW did.  Just call out of the blue.


but Harry is a prince and supposedly this woman was a friend of his mother I think


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> but Harry is a prince and supposedly this woman was a friend of his mother I think


If I was any self respecting health care provider, I don't give a damn who he is.  All patients should be treated the same!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> If I was any self respecting health care provider, I don't give a damn who he is.  All patients should be treated the same!


should be but this is real life...royalty has privileges


----------



## Chanbal

justwatchin said:


> Or had to stop and think who Archie and Lilibet were…


You and..


----------



## pixiejenna

I can’t keep up with this thread because it goes so fast. But I was entertained to hear the KCIII’S coronation is scheduled on Archie‘s bday. I can’t wait to see what sort of stunt they try to pull to try to get attention back on them, while the whole world ignores them.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It was likely part of the Sunshine package…



Whatever I think of  Suck's immorality, I must say they gave their unpleasant client bang for her buck. I've never seen anyone get awarded so many honours for doing nothing. If they have truly parted ways, will the Harkles get any more awards after March 2023 when they get something from TIME?


sdkitty said:


> but Harry is a prince and supposedly this woman was a friend of his mother I think


That was one of the loopholes in their OW interview. This friend of Diana's was close to Harry but they didn't ask her for help for Miss Woeful Victim. I'm pretty sure the grocery-shopping therapist was someone else (fictional). 

Zedzee's mental health problems sound like a romcom. I know some of us do believe that she may have suffering from depression or other mental issues before Harry and/or during the brief stint in royalty. Perhaps. But based on my dealings with narcs, a lot of their unhappiness seems to stem from the fact that the world does not revolve around them, bend to their will or rearrange itself to benefit them


----------



## xincinsin

Interesting comment on the latest hrhfacts IG post:


----------



## K.D.




----------



## xincinsin

K.D. said:


>



Of course "Harry isn’t obligated to speak with his family if he doesn’t want to". And his family isn't obliged to invite them to events either. But it does seem like she wants his family to speak to them, preferably in subservient appeasing tones.

ETA I went to take a look and the comments are hilarious.
ETA2 Not just hilarious, many are also ruthless. I am enjoying myself. Thank you @K.D.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Disconcertingly, in reading Courtiers, I'm seeing unfortunate similarities between the duplicitous duo and Charles.  C harbored distrust for BP aides, he thought nothing of calling his employees at any time of the day or night, he was fooled by ambitious individuals with odd ideas, his head could be turned by someone telling him what he wanted to hear, he has/had an unpleasant temper.  He seems to be quite fond of shiny pennies, so to speak.  (By that, I mean new ideas/things/etc.)



The differences I saw was that a) Charles apologizes when he yelled at someone and b) he calls at all times (but apparently never before breakfast and never after 11 p.m.) because he works 24/7.

Also, who would have thought that Queen Mum's household was the most fun one to work for!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, TW wants the Palace to condemn Tom Bower's and Valentine Low's books.




I wouldn't be surprised if the Palace sent both of them a gift basked.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Typical narc behaviour. My previous office narc was always very upset when we disputed his version of the event. OMG just realized that he was trying to push "his truth"! My current office narc, who rejoined my department a couple of months ago, sits near me but I maintain a strict no-interaction policy with her. She too reversions history to benefit herself.



My business contact narc is back! This time, after not speaking to me for 20 years, they messaged "Am I worried about you? Yes!!!"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> PS i keep thinking why do the Aussies hate her so much ? her shenanigans on tour ?


Well… answering on behalf of my country -

1. we do not like fake people.  We see through her lack of authenticity.

2. we abhor those who look down on “us” and think they are better.  MM projects this all the time.  Using Duchess everywhere, looking down her nose at people in photos, smirking etc.

if you are in the “elite”/ celebs/politicians/ billionaires/ ex royalty etc  and you make derogatory comments about the public or your behaviour is that of thinking the rules/laws don’t apply to you, you can expect a media, social media and Twitter storm.  Eg, Amber Heard when visiting Australia snuck in her dogs, lied about it, got caught, claimed rules didn’t apply to her or Johnny Depp.  Animals from overseas countries go into quarantine for a while because they could have diseases etc that are not in Australia and have devastating effects on our wildlife and local pets!

3.  The Queen was greatly respected, and her Oprah interview whilst giving MM a few days of bombshell coverage - when the lies leaked out it was pretty obvious she was being spiteful.

4. it’s obvious to us - she is a gold digger, who is all about the money and fame.  We all see it and just want her to own it, but she continues on with fake publicity stunts (which we mock), fake humanitarian causes (which we mock), and clearly grasping for money by her sole talent - Selling family secrets.

5.  It came out later that Meghan hated the pointless Australian tour.  This did not go down well with our media or the public.  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-hated-second-touring-Australia.html

5.  She allegedly treated the Governor General, his wife and their staff appallingly, including a hot tea “flying in the air” at a staff member, ,along the staff repeatedly bake banana bread late at night Until it was up to her standards (then passed it off as her own creation in various PR releases).

I could continue but I’ll leave it there.


----------



## needlv




----------



## gelbergirl

needlv said:


> Well… answering on behalf of my country -
> 
> 1. we do not like fake people.  We see through her lack of authenticity.
> 
> 2. we abhor those who look down on “us” and think they are better.  MM projects this all the time.  Using Duchess everywhere, looking down her nose at people in photos, smirking etc.
> 
> if you are in the “elite”/ celebs/politicians/ billionaires/ ex royalty etc  and you make derogatory comments about the public or your behaviour is that of thinking the rules/laws don’t apply to you, you can expect a media, social media and Twitter storm.  Eg, Amber Heard when visiting Australia snuck in her dogs, lied about it, got caught, claimed rules didn’t apply to her or Johnny Depp.  Animals from overseas countries go into quarantine for a while because they could have diseases etc that are not in Australia and have devastating effects on our wildlife and local pets!
> 
> 3.  The Queen was greatly respected, and her Oprah interview whilst giving MM a few days of bombshell coverage - when the lies leaked out it was pretty obvious she was being spiteful.
> 
> 4. it’s obvious to us - she is a gold digger, who is all about the money and fame.  We all see it and just want her to own it, but she continues on with fake publicity stunts (which we mock), fake humanitarian causes (which we mock), and clearly grasping for money by her sole talent - Selling family secrets.
> 
> 5.  It came out later that Meghan hated the pointless Australian tour.  This did not go down well with our media or the public.  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-hated-second-touring-Australia.html
> 
> 5.  She allegedly treated the Governor General, his wife and their staff appallingly, including a hot tea “flying in the air” at a staff member, ,along the staff repeatedly bake banana bread late at night Until it was up to her standards (then passed it off as her own creation in various PR releases).
> 
> I could continue but I’ll leave it there.



Mods: please stickie this post to the top of the thread. Thank you.


----------



## needlv

Oooh … how much $$$$ do you think the Duke and Duchess of Overseas wanted?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Also I’ve deleted it by accident but Papertiger you were bang on with pointing out M wouldn’t dream of even referencing sexist practices she experienced in another society but will happily lie to  complain about her  equitable and in fact preferential treatment in Brit society.



Melanie Phillips would say it's because of her politics. You'd have to read about why MP left the Guardian many years ago when she pointed out to them their MO was biased and racist, they responded that some counties are third world (now termed developing world) and different culturally and therefore racism, sexism, homophobia, oppression, violence etc are to be tolerated at least not pointed out or condemned (because obviously they wouldn't know/understand right from wrong).

Some people are more comfortable playing the rebel at home (the West) rather than confronting atrocities abroad (all other places she can't understand the language). Both Harry's and M's attitude to African nations is incredibly selective, patronising and colonial. She knows who she is talking to (studio LA) she just doesn't grasp/understand that the whole world listens, and hence offending South Africans with her "housing units' nonsense etc. However, would she ever confront issues around cultures and countries that allow FGM? No way!



jelliedfeels said:


> "Of course if we believe HG Tudor then Charles is a narcissist too…now whether you believe that or not is up to you but I’m inclined to think any similarities C had with M would make him more prone to dislike rather than like her as it would feel like she was stepping on his turf."



I think M charmed C at first, I think everyone but the incredibly stupid have her number now. She's a one woman wrecking ball.

BTW
The only caravan I've stayed in was DH's friend's silver Airstream. Like something half-way stuck in the past and half-way to the futurist future. Even better he put it in our garden for the Summer so I just used it like an extra all amenities 'pod'. Looked pretty weird against a grouse moor.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Oooh … how much $$$$ do you think the Duke and Duchess of Overseas wanted?




I don't think that's how any of this works, but what do I know.


----------



## BlueCherry

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went and read up on the story and I am not necessarily suspicious. She had a pre-existing condition that made her high risk for blood clots, she had a c-section (which comes with its own risk for blood clots), she was off her medication, and as a result she suffered a blood clot.
> 
> Or do you think because she's Serena Williams her doctors wouldn't have been so dismissive? But that's basically what she says, "Had I not been Serena Williams but a random black mother I'd be dead."
> 
> ETA: I can see how it's hard to believe medical staff would be so careless with a known history. As someone who nearly died after an illtempered doctor dismissed my very clear symptoms and medical history and ended up in the ICU for 10 days I am not that surprised though.



I’m a random white woman and despite telling my GP repeatedly my BP was high they didn’t medicate me until I had a stroke. Ok now btw. 

Healthcare doesn’t give a hoot what colour you are, it’s all down to what doctor you get and if there are suitable resources and availability for further tests/care. 



youngster said:


> Will and Kate will be in Boston on 12/2.  I assume they'll be arriving a day before and staying another day or two after perhaps?  Not sure how long this trip of to the U.S. will be but apparently one of Jack Kennedy's grandchildren will be on hand at the Earthshot event.  So, what a shocking coincidence it is that Harry/MM will be on the east coast on 12/5 or 12/6 to pick up an award from from the Bobby Kennedy foundation!  I wonder how much it cost them?
> 
> Really, I'm sure as soon as Will and Kate's trip was announced, Harry/MM went into overdrive to find something they could do around the same time on the east coast so as to ride on the wave of Will and Kate's trip and try to make it look like they're still royal too!  I'm also expecting lots of "leaks" around that time that the 2 brothers are "looking to get together while they are both on the east coast" and "trying to find some time to work things out", none of which will actually happen.



If their pseudo royal trip doesn’t eclipse the real royal trip they can subsequently claim they were otherwise occupied when they declined W&C’s invitation to meet them to say sorry  



Chanbal said:


> It was likely part of the Sunshine package…




It’s times like this I love the internet 



pixiejenna said:


> I can’t keep up with this thread because it goes so fast. But I was entertained to hear the KCIII’S coronation is scheduled on Archie‘s bday. I can’t wait to see what sort of stunt they try to pull to try to get attention back on them, while the whole world ignores them.



I hope KC did this on purpose but it may backfire when they attend and brandish Archie and his birthday as means to usurp Charles’ big day. 

Hope the palace ban them entirely! They bring nothing to table but drama and angst and make the majority of the RF’s supporters sick. 



needlv said:


> Well… answering on behalf of my country -
> 
> 1. we do not like fake people.  We see through her lack of authenticity.
> 
> 2. we abhor those who look down on “us” and think they are better.  MM projects this all the time.  Using Duchess everywhere, looking down her nose at people in photos, smirking etc.
> 
> if you are in the “elite”/ celebs/politicians/ billionaires/ ex royalty etc  and you make derogatory comments about the public or your behaviour is that of thinking the rules/laws don’t apply to you, you can expect a media, social media and Twitter storm.  Eg, Amber Heard when visiting Australia snuck in her dogs, lied about it, got caught, claimed rules didn’t apply to her or Johnny Depp.  Animals from overseas countries go into quarantine for a while because they could have diseases etc that are not in Australia and have devastating effects on our wildlife and local pets!
> 
> 3.  The Queen was greatly respected, and her Oprah interview whilst giving MM a few days of bombshell coverage - when the lies leaked out it was pretty obvious she was being spiteful.
> 
> 4. it’s obvious to us - she is a gold digger, who is all about the money and fame.  We all see it and just want her to own it, but she continues on with fake publicity stunts (which we mock), fake humanitarian causes (which we mock), and clearly grasping for money by her sole talent - Selling family secrets.
> 
> 5.  It came out later that Meghan hated the pointless Australian tour.  This did not go down well with our media or the public.  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-hated-second-touring-Australia.html
> 
> 5.  She allegedly treated the Governor General, his wife and their staff appallingly, including a hot tea “flying in the air” at a staff member, ,along the staff repeatedly bake banana bread late at night Until it was up to her standards (then passed it off as her own creation in various PR releases).
> 
> I could continue but I’ll leave it there.



I asked my childhood Aussie friend and she said “she’s a clacker”


----------



## BlueCherry

papertiger said:


> I think M charmed C at first, I think everyone but the incredibly stupid have her number now. She's a one woman wrecking ball.



If he did succumb to her charm he will be even more on his guard now. Being hoodwinked and used makes you damn certain it won’t ever happen again.


----------



## needlv




----------



## kipp

Re: Archie's birthday and King Charles' coronation:  Whether or not they are invited or if young children are allowed, I wouldn't be surprised if the Harkles try to bring the children and to so to speak "kill two birds with one stone"----it seems like them to get photo-ops/film at the event and illustrate that Archie and Invisibet are related to the King, Archie's birthday notwithstanding.  Can't imagine that this almost once in a lifetime royal event won't supersede the kid's birthday...  as this connection is and always has been their meal ($$$$$) ticket.


----------



## Traminer

What about "Tungsten"?
Did you know that it is or was her nickname?
And does anybody know why?
Does it fit somehow?


----------



## xincinsin

Traminer said:


> What about "Tungsten"?
> Did you know that it is or was her nickname?
> And does anybody know why?
> Does it fit somehow?


The short story. I think that was when Zedzee was acting the part of ideal wife for dimwit.



.


----------



## Traminer

xincinsin said:


> The short story. I think that was when Zedzee was acting the part of ideal wife for dimwit.
> 
> View attachment 5630089
> 
> .


And what does "Zedzee" stand for?


----------



## xincinsin

Traminer said:


> And what does "Zedzee" stand for?


 Z-list actress. Some of us pronounce "Z" differently. I was brought up pronouncing it Zed.


----------



## DoggieBags

Per the royal society of chemistry web site - tungsten has the highest melting point of all the metals and is alloyed with other metals to strengthen them. Per this BBC article, it’s the perfect material for bullets and missiles.








						Tungsten: The perfect metal for bullets and missiles
					

If you fire it at someone else's armour, it will go right through it - that's one reason that tungsten is now so much in demand.



					www.bbc.com
				



So I assume KC meant it as a compliment as in she could handle the heat, she would be a strong support to H, and a valuable addition to the BRF. Well he got the someone who can handle the heat part right but I don’t think he ever imagined she’d be forged into a missile aimed at taking down the BRF. Tungsten is supposed to be a more eco friendly, less toxic alternative to depleted uranium for use in missiles but KC got that wrong too since TW has turned out to be incredibly toxic.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> The short story. I think that was when Zedzee was acting the part of ideal wife for dimwit.
> 
> View attachment 5630089
> 
> .


Perhaps KCIII and QC have a sense of humor, especially for irony?  Maybe it was “opposites day”?  Maybe KCIII was _manifesting_ that he wanted a DiL who had toughness and resilience - ya kno, he was following Opr’s strategies?


----------



## papertiger

kipp said:


> Re: Archie's birthday and King Charles' coronation:  Whether or not they are invited or if young children are allowed, I wouldn't be surprised if the Harkles try to bring the children and to so to speak "kill two birds with one stone"----it seems like them to get photo-ops/film at the event and illustrate that Archie and Invisibet are related to the King, Archie's birthday notwithstanding.  Can't imagine that this almost once in a lifetime royal event won't supersede the kid's birthday...  as this connection is and always has been their meal ($$$$$) ticket.



I have a feeling the date was absolutely chosen as a personal 'Cease and Desist' Notice


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> I have a feeling the date was absolutely chosen as a personal 'Cease and Desist' Notice


I know the Harkles like to twist everything so it’s always all about them but I have a hard time seeing how one child’s birthday, even though he is one of the King’s grandchildren, could be in any way shape or form a factor in deciding the date of something as momentous as the first coronation of a British Monarch to take place in 70 years.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I know the Harkles like to twist everything so it’s always all about them but I have a hard time seeing how one child’s birthday, even though he is one of the King’s grandchildren, could be in any way shape or form a factor in deciding the date of something as momentous as the first coronation of a British Monarch to take place in 70 years.



Are you telling me that no one on Household staff pointed out the coincidence? For the reason you stated it was laughed off, and that's what I meant. 

Archie's birthday, next year and forevermore will _always_ marked in the calendar as Coronation Day. That's how much the Harkle's and their family of dogs 'children' (or 5 dogs or 5 children or whatever) and pretend charities matter to the BRF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> I’m a random white woman and despite telling my GP repeatedly my BP was high they didn’t medicate me until I had a stroke. Ok now btw.
> 
> Healthcare doesn’t give a hoot what colour you are, it’s all down to what doctor you get and if there are suitable resources and availability for further tests/care.
> 
> I hope KC did this on purpose but it may backfire when they attend and brandish Archie and his birthday as means to usurp Charles’ big day.


I'm glad you recovered  

I doubt Archie's birthday was a deciding factor, but I'm sure a courtier somewhere is sniggering in glee. And the Stans will be photoshopping crowns onto Archie's head and hailing him again as King.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Another bites the dust


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Face-palming. Someone is upset that Zedzee is featured on HrhFacts because, this person asserts, Zedzee is not a HRH and does not deserve a HRH. He or she was kindly informed that the HRH was part of the name of this IG and responded angrily that it was misinformation. I might have to face-palm with both hands.


----------



## Chanbal

K.D. said:


>






xincinsin said:


> Of course "Harry isn’t obligated to speak with his family if he doesn’t want to". And his family isn't obliged to invite them to events either. But it does seem like she wants his family to speak to them, preferably in subservient appeasing tones.
> 
> ETA I went to take a look and the comments are hilarious.
> ETA2 Not just hilarious, many are also ruthless. I am enjoying myself. Thank you @K.D.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



The Return of the Myth of Being Silenced
She has been honking all this while.


----------



## Chanbal

Traminer said:


> And what does "Zedzee" stand for?





xincinsin said:


> Z-list actress. Some of us pronounce "Z" differently. I was brought up pronouncing it Zed.


It's also a sort of tribute to our dear member CeeJay who knew some of TW's acquaintances. She provided inside information about the TW's character that was much later confirmed by others like Tom Bower and Valentine Low. She used to call TW a Z-list actress.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

BlueCherry said:


> I’m a random white woman and despite telling my GP repeatedly my BP was high they didn’t medicate me until I had a stroke. Ok now btw.
> 
> Healthcare doesn’t give a hoot what colour you are, it’s all down to what doctor you get and if there are suitable resources and availability for further tests/care.


I’m so glad you are okay!!! 

Just FYI unfortunately healthcare outcomes are impacted by race, at least in the USA…

https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/racism-disparities/index.html 

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/...ted-states/racial-disparities-in-health-care/ 





__





						Working Together to Reduce Black Maternal Mortality  | Health Equity Features | CDC
					

The Office of Minority Health and Health Equity (OMHHE) Mission: Advance health equity and women’s health issues across the nation through CDC’s science and programs, and increase CDC’s capacity to leverage its diverse workforce and engage stakeholders toward this end.




					www.cdc.gov
				







CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?



Lol a celebrity forum crossover thread!!!


----------



## Cinderlala

That TW has "no interest in being silent" is the understatement of the century.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle criticises Jordan Peterson in latest Archetypes podcast - and discusses how the label 'crazy' is used to 'diminish women'
					

The episode is described as a 'vulnerable conversation' between the Duchess and two guests




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?



Is it April Fools Day already?   It would be laughable if it weren’t truly sad.


----------



## marietouchet

Redbirdhermes said:


> Serena wrote about her complications after the birth of her daughter in Vogue magazine, so that information is in the public domain.  Here is a Good Morning America story about that as well as the Vogue story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serena Williams on Motherhood, Marriage, and Making Her Comeback
> 
> 
> Serena Williams, Vogue’s February 2018 cover star discusses her difficult delivery for the first time and when she hopes to make her triumphant return to tennis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, while recovering in the hospital, Serena suddenly felt short of breath. Because of her history of blood clots, and because she was off her daily anticoagulant regimen due to the recent surgery, she immediately assumed she was having another pulmonary embolism. (Serena lives in fear of blood clots.) She walked out of the hospital room so her mother wouldn’t worry and told the nearest nurse, between gasps, that she needed a CT scan with contrast and IV heparin (a blood thinner) right away. The nurse thought her pain medicine might be making her confused. But Serena insisted, and soon enough a doctor was performing an ultrasound of her legs. “I was like, a Doppler? I told you, I need a CT scan and a heparin drip,” she remembers telling the team. The ultrasound revealed nothing, so they sent her for the CT, and sure enough, several small blood clots had settled in her lungs. Minutes later she was on the drip. “I was like, listen to Dr. Williams!”
> 
> But this was just the first chapter of a six-day drama. Her fresh C-section wound popped open from the intense coughing spells caused by the pulmonary embolism, and when she returned to surgery, they found that a large hematoma had flooded her abdomen, the result of a medical catch-22 in which the potentially lifesaving blood thinner caused hemorrhaging at the site of her C-section. She returned yet again to the OR to have a filter inserted into a major vein, in order to prevent more clots from dislodging and traveling into her lungs. Serena came home a week later only to find that the night nurse had fallen through, and she spent the first six weeks of motherhood unable to get out of bed. “I was happy to change diapers,” Alexis says, “but on top of everything she was going through, the feeling of not being able to help made it even harder. Consider for a moment that your body is one of the greatest things on this planet, and you’re trapped in it.”





Redbirdhermes said:


> Serena wrote about her complications after the birth of her daughter in Vogue magazine, so that information is in the public domain.  Here is a Good Morning America story about that as well as the Vogue story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serena Williams on Motherhood, Marriage, and Making Her Comeback
> 
> 
> Serena Williams, Vogue’s February 2018 cover star discusses her difficult delivery for the first time and when she hopes to make her triumphant return to tennis.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The next day, while recovering in the hospital, Serena suddenly felt short of breath. Because of her history of blood clots, and because she was off her daily anticoagulant regimen due to the recent surgery, she immediately assumed she was having another pulmonary embolism. (Serena lives in fear of blood clots.) She walked out of the hospital room so her mother wouldn’t worry and told the nearest nurse, between gasps, that she needed a CT scan with contrast and IV heparin (a blood thinner) right away. The nurse thought her pain medicine might be making her confused. But Serena insisted, and soon enough a doctor was performing an ultrasound of her legs. “I was like, a Doppler? I told you, I need a CT scan and a heparin drip,” she remembers telling the team. The ultrasound revealed nothing, so they sent her for the CT, and sure enough, several small blood clots had settled in her lungs. Minutes later she was on the drip. “I was like, listen to Dr. Williams!”
> 
> But this was just the first chapter of a six-day drama. Her fresh C-section wound popped open from the intense coughing spells caused by the pulmonary embolism, and when she returned to surgery, they found that a large hematoma had flooded her abdomen, the result of a medical catch-22 in which the potentially lifesaving blood thinner caused hemorrhaging at the site of her C-section. She returned yet again to the OR to have a filter inserted into a major vein, in order to prevent more clots from dislodging and traveling into her lungs. Serena came home a week later only to find that the night nurse had fallen through, and she spent the first six weeks of motherhood unable to get out of bed. “I was happy to change diapers,” Alexis says, “but on top of everything she was going through, the feeling of not being able to help made it even harder. Consider for a moment that your body is one of the greatest things on this planet, and you’re trapped in it.”



Read both accounts of S’s birth , by S and MM
Suffice to say, i had totally different reactions to the two accounts
S’s version spoke to me, not MM’s


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> Are you telling me that no one on Household staff pointed out the coincidence? For the reason you stated it was laughed off, and that's what I meant.
> 
> Archie's birthday, next year and forevermore will _always_ marked in the calendar as Coronation Day. That's how much the Harkle's and their family of dogs 'children' (or 5 dogs or 5 children or whatever) and pretend charities matter to the BRF.


I believe that the Harkles are such a non factor these days in the BRF event planning that no one noticed, or if anybody noticed, they didn‘t even bother mentioning it. They’re not even a source of humor, they’re just totally immaterial to the BRF event planners.


----------



## Annawakes

Are they for real giving themselves an award only a few days apart from W&K’s Earthshot award?????????

W&K must be annoyed to no end at these wannabes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?



Giving an award to these two parassites for having done f**k all makes me SOOO angry, when there are people who would REALLY deserve an award and most of the time never get one.....it makes my blood boil


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> LOL, I remember my kids ages.  It's their names I forget!  *I've often called them my dogs' names and vice versa*
> I have the C section scars to prove I definitely gave birth to both of them, not the dogs, but it still happens!


My two sons are now married and have their own family and yet when my dog misbehaves, I usually call her by one of their names. Honestly, it just automatically happens.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maggie Muggins said:


> My two sons are now married and have their own family and yet when my dog misbehaves, I usually call her by one of their names. Honestly, it just automatically happens.



Hahaha! My husband has done this!


----------



## BittyMonkey

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?



Oh, wow. I have to believe that someone on the inside is wanting to take this nonprofit down, because holy shi!take there are some bad decisions being made.


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?



Dios los cría y ellos se juntan or birds of a feather flock together 

MM and Hilaria can become besties and share pointers on cultural appropriation (although MM hasn’t got there yet), children and yoga


----------



## xincinsin

I happened to come across a few close-ups of Zedzee on her spectacle day and realized that whoever did her make-up did quite a poor job. From afar, she looked good, but up close, the wrinkles, freckles and blemishes were easily visible. She would have had access to all the experts plus a pretty much unlimited budget, yet she turned up in an ill-fitting gown, flyaway hair and bad make-up. Why? It makes no sense. Most brides want to look good.

Her hairdresser Serge Normant (of Tiaragate fame) seems to be excellent at his profession. He claims a messy hairdo was the most authentic style for Zedzee. Oh well, I agree that she has indeed made a thriving mess of things.


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m so glad you are okay!!!
> 
> Just FYI unfortunately healthcare outcomes are impacted by race, at least in the USA…
> 
> https://www.cdc.gov/minorityhealth/racism-disparities/index.html
> 
> https://www.americanbar.org/groups/...ted-states/racial-disparities-in-health-care/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Working Together to Reduce Black Maternal Mortality  | Health Equity Features | CDC
> 
> 
> The Office of Minority Health and Health Equity (OMHHE) Mission: Advance health equity and women’s health issues across the nation through CDC’s science and programs, and increase CDC’s capacity to leverage its diverse workforce and engage stakeholders toward this end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cdc.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lol a celebrity forum crossover thread!!!


On the host and the winners It’s like they are trying to troll us at this point. It also feels like that concert at the end of team America. 


On the issues raised - I am hesitant to conclude the issues raised are relevant to the likes of SW and M as they both have access to plutocratic resources, tons of free time, tons of information and a track record of casting themselves as martyrs.

It’s difficult to say how much crossover there would be between the U.K. and US systems but I would assume they are pretty different. 

I’ve read some of this research before and I have been turning it over in my head since. Personally while I am sure that evidence can and will be found of bias among some medical professionals I find that this line of argument seems to focus very heavily on the definite existence of this aspect as being the pervasive primary reason for the disparity while largely overlooking the expansive issue of how the peculiarities of race factor into medicine itself without any intention from the practitioner. 

 So for example, we know that being from a donor of the same race is a significant aspect of compatibility in bone marrow and other tissue transplants. In Britain, at least, POC are underrepresented in the donor pool. The NHS has in fact been campaigning for several years to specifically target potential black tissue and blood donors and of course them being a numerical minority means there are fewer donations to go around while a general increase in the age of our population means demand for treatment increases. Thus, a medical practitioner may have to map out a different course of treatment and prognosis without them having a bias.
These problems also work retrospectively- most treatments approved for use historically were tested on white people. Medicines may not work as well celiacs, lactose intolerant people, diabetics all of which have a genetic component.  Theres also the issue of scale- the Genetic pool of Europe is considerably smaller than the ge tic variation of Asia even China itself yet we continually categorise along these lines. Another issue of course is that many people are not of just one ancestry and that makes great genetic variation even greater. These are all just potential issues I pulled from general knowledge. I’m sure it goes much deeper. 

What I’m saying here is not that I don’t dismiss the accusation as untrue but that there seems to me there is a conjecture of widespread intent with relatively scant evidence for its existence given the number of other variables at play and it seems a bit of a  smear against people who ostensively seem amongst the most philanthropic in our world. 


I think we can definitely say we have done the research and can reasonably conjecture that The cringe couple are not amongst the most philanthropic in our world however.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I happened to come across a few close-ups of Zedzee on her spectacle day and realized that whoever did her make-up did quite a poor job. From afar, she looked good, but up close, the wrinkles, freckles and blemishes were easily visible. She would have had access to all the experts plus a pretty much unlimited budget, yet she turned up in an ill-fitting gown, flyaway hair and bad make-up. Why? It makes no sense. Most brides want to look good.
> 
> Her hairdresser Serge Normant (of Tiaragate fame) seems to be excellent at his profession. He claims a messy hairdo was the most authentic style for Zedzee. Oh well, I agree that she has indeed made a thriving mess of things.


People can get clothes and makeup wrong (ok she had a BIG budget and …) but the messy tendrils that was an awkward choice of HERS , a little hair spray please ?? Some things are trivial to notice and fix, the tendrils were a deliberate choice


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Meghan Markle criticises Jordan Peterson in latest Archetypes podcast - and discusses how the label 'crazy' is used to 'diminish women'
> 
> 
> The episode is described as a 'vulnerable conversation' between the Duchess and two guests
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gbnews.uk



Now that she’s thrown down the gauntlet I want to see a head to head ‘celebrity’ death match between those two of who can most torturously contort a metaphor and get single tear weepy  over historic minor transgressions against them. Loser has to commit seppuku using only their phone.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> People can get clothes and makeup wrong (ok she had a BIG budget and …) but the messy tendrils that was an awkward choice of HERS , a little hair spray please ?? Some things are trivial to notice and fix


her hairdresser may have advised or concurred on the tendrils


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> her hairdresser may have advised or concurred on the tendrils


It was likely not a hill that he wished to die on.


----------



## Chanbal

_*Julia Hartley-Brewer owns 'whinging' Meghan Markle*_ - Starts @ 4:20


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I believe that the Harkles are such a non factor these days in the BRF event planning that no one noticed, or if anybody noticed, they didn‘t even bother mentioning it. They’re not even a source of humor, they’re just totally immaterial to the BRF event planners.


I'd like to think so, but sadly I'm more of the opinion they're more like a thorn in everyone's side or stone in BRF and staff's shoe.


----------



## xincinsin

The Harkles should be pleased that their alleged kids' birthdays are associated with joyous events like the Platinum Jubilee and KC's coronation.

QE2 died on my birthday


----------



## Chanbal

The '_word soup_' is getting more and more difficult to follow…




_Imagine my shock when Meghan says sorrowfully that she, too, has been labelled some of those things. “No way!” I thought. “You felt wronged, Meg? You should have said.” Wu and Padukone speak bravely and honestly about their struggles with mental health. In turn,* Meghan shares a story about how, when she was at her lowest point — which I take to mean “living in England*” — her husband “finally” managed to find someone she could talk to. We learn that ignoring mental health issues can lead to “families being shattered”, which, to be fair, is something Meghan knows a lot about.
There are interesting discussions about the ways in which women can be stereotyped, but they’re lost somewhere in a *Meghan word soup*._









						Meghan tells us: ‘It’s OK. Just tune out.’ If only I could
					

Hilary Rose on Meghan Markle’s Archetypes podcast




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This guy is good imo.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The '_word soup_' is getting more and more difficult to follow…
> 
> View attachment 5630256
> 
> 
> _Imagine my shock when Meghan says sorrowfully that she, too, has been labelled some of those things. “No way!” I thought. “You felt wronged, Meg? You should have said.” Wu and Padukone speak bravely and honestly about their struggles with mental health. In turn,* Meghan shares a story about how, when she was at her lowest point — which I take to mean “living in England*” — her husband “finally” managed to find someone she could talk to. We learn that ignoring mental health issues can lead to “families being shattered”, which, to be fair, is something Meghan knows a lot about.
> There are interesting discussions about the ways in which women can be stereotyped, but they’re lost somewhere in a *Meghan word soup*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan tells us: ‘It’s OK. Just tune out.’ If only I could
> 
> 
> Hilary Rose on Meghan Markle’s Archetypes podcast
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk


Can I credit this "lowest point" incident as being the impetus and inspiration for Handbag going into the pseudo-counselling business? So that the next time his wife decides she is having a bad day and no one asked if she is okay ... ta da! Handbag to the rescue! (Who am I kidding?)

Time for us to start tracking Zedzee's lowest point stories. No doubt with half her podcrashes still to come, she will find more "lowest point" stories to one-up her guests.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>



Good tweet about ZedZed:


----------



## Mrs.Z

Love this IG

yes, this award is embarrassing


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> The Harkles should be pleased that their alleged kids' birthdays are associated with joyous events like the Platinum Jubilee and KC's coronation.
> 
> QE2 died on my birthday


She was buried on mine


----------



## BlueCherry

xincinsin said:


> I'm glad you recovered
> 
> I doubt Archie's birthday was a deciding factor, but I'm sure a courtier somewhere is sniggering in glee. And the Stans will be photoshopping crowns onto Archie's head and hailing him again as King.



Thank you and I imagine lots of courtiers lol



CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?




Sh1tsticks are as good as the company they keep



Chanbal said:


>




Her whining is the steady drone of white noise. Or is that racist


----------



## xincinsin

BlueCherry said:


> Her whining is the steady drone of white noise. Or is that racist


The things I learn from Prof Google and this thread 
_White noise, like the steady hum of a ceiling fan, blocks sudden noises from interrupting your sleep, while pink noise does the same, but in a much more soothing, calm manner. Brown noise, like the rumble of a storm, is a great way to achieve focus during the workday, and black noise is the absence of sound itself._
They don't have a noise that represents absence of meaning - which is her word salad essentially.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a minute and process this — who _are_ these people?




Yeah, I don't know. I don't like Baldwin at all (or his crazy wife for that matter), but I also don't think he is to blame for a cruel accident. 

Like, if my celebrity chef manages to poison his guests while on "my" TV show that will be either my fault (sh*tty recipe not handling problematic ingredients correctly) or the prop designer's fault who sets up the ingredients. Chef cooks and entertains and looks good on camera. 

Also, it gives me pause that the victim's husband apparently dropped his charges in exchange for becoming the executive producer of that very movie. But yes, I would have found it very appropriate if AB would lay low for a bit instead of emceeing anything.


----------



## K.D.

Chanbal said:


> _*Julia Hartley-Brewer owns 'whinging' Meghan Markle*_ - Starts @ 4:20



 
"Feel free to nip to the loo for the next 30 seconds, I'm very sorry!" 

The clip she played was eye opening, extremely rehearsed!


----------



## pixiejenna

BlueCherry said:


> I’m a random white woman and despite telling my GP repeatedly my BP was high they didn’t medicate me until I had a stroke. Ok now btw.
> 
> Healthcare doesn’t give a hoot what colour you are, it’s all down to what doctor you get and if there are suitable resources and availability for further tests/care.
> 
> 
> 
> If their pseudo royal trip doesn’t eclipse the real royal trip they can subsequently claim they were otherwise occupied when they declined W&C’s invitation to meet them to say sorry
> 
> 
> 
> It’s times like this I love the internet
> 
> 
> 
> I hope KC did this on purpose but it may backfire when they attend and brandish Archie and his birthday as means to usurp Charles’ big day.
> 
> Hope the palace ban them entirely! They bring nothing to table but drama and angst and make the majority of the RF’s supporters sick.
> 
> 
> 
> I asked my childhood Aussie friend and she said “she’s a clacker”



I absolutely believe that this date was chosen to send a message. When they plan their counter attack they’ll be annihilated to the extent that JCMH would never expect IMO. If they thought that the funeral was unfair they haven’t seen nothing yet lol.


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good tweet about ZedZed:



Wow! I would like to know who Michelle Johnson is. She wrote a great piece on TW's _faux sincerity_. Thanks @Maggie Muggins for sharing it.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Like, if my celebrity chef manages to poison his guests while on "my" TV show that will be either my fault (sh*tty recipe not handling problematic ingredients correctly) or the prop designer's fault who sets up the ingredients. Chef cooks and entertains and looks good on camera.
> 
> Also, it gives me pause that the victim's husband apparently dropped his charges in exchange for becoming the executive producer of that very movie. But yes, I would have found it very appropriate if AB would lay low for a bit instead of emceeing anything.


Baldwin wasn’t just the star, he was an executive producer and the western movie was his idea as I recall. It wouldn’t have existed without him.

I can see Baldwin and Meghan/Harry scrambling to be on the award show.  They all need good PR right now any way they can get it.


----------



## Chanbal

TW's mouthpiece informs:



_*I understand that the fifth-in-line to the throne is “very aware” of how long and arduous this process could be,* but is prepared to go the full distance – even if that may include taking to the stand and giving testimony.
“There is a risk that this, like previous cases, could see retaliative press attacks against him and his family… but he sees a bigger cause here, one he hopes can bring positive change to the media landscape,” a source tells me…

*Despite the risks, the Duke of Sussex clearly has no plans to slow down in his pursuit.* Harry has taken on a number of publications in the past three years, including voicemail hacking cases against The Sun and Mirror owners in 2019, and more recently, libel action against Associated Newspapers relating to a Mail on Sunday article on his security arrangements.

*And he’s not alone.* A group of eight led by actor Hugh Grant, and including David Beckham’s father and a 7/7 London bombings survivor, is currently seeing eight claims of phone hacking against The Sun making their way through the legal system. _



			archive.ph


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Wow! I would like to know who Michelle Johnson is. She wrote a great piece on TW's _faux sincerity_. Thanks @Maggie Muggins for sharing it.


Welcome. It made me wonder if it was one of our dear TPF members under a pseudonym.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Wow! I would like to know who Michelle Johnson is. She wrote a great piece on TW's _faux sincerity_. Thanks @Maggie Muggins for sharing it.



Do you have a link?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> TW's mouthpiece informs:
> View attachment 5630397
> 
> 
> _*I understand that the fifth-in-line to the throne is “very aware” of how long and arduous this process could be,* but is prepared to go the full distance – even if that may include taking to the stand and giving testimony.
> “There is a risk that this, like previous cases, could see retaliative press attacks against him and his family… but he sees a bigger cause here, one he hopes can bring positive change to the media landscape,” a source tells me…
> 
> *Despite the risks, the Duke of Sussex clearly has no plans to slow down in his pursuit.* Harry has taken on a number of publications in the past three years, including voicemail hacking cases against The Sun and Mirror owners in 2019, and more recently, libel action against Associated Newspapers relating to a Mail on Sunday article on his security arrangements.
> 
> *And he’s not alone.* A group of eight led by actor Hugh Grant, and including David Beckham’s father and a 7/7 London bombings survivor, is currently seeing eight claims of phone hacking against The Sun making their way through the legal system. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


This just tells me that Harry's mental illness is not getting better.  His paranoia is taking over his life.  If he doesn't want to be noticed, written about or a person of interest, then all he has to do is retire from public life.  Can't make money doing that the way he and she want to make money.  Meghan certainly doesn't want to hide under a rock.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Retaliative press attacks against his family...cry me a river.


----------



## BlueCherry

pixiejenna said:


> I absolutely believe that this date was chosen to send a message. When they plan their counter attack they’ll be annihilated to the extent that JCMH would never expect IMO. If they thought that the funeral was unfair they haven’t seen nothing yet lol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> This just tells me that Harry's mental illness is not getting better.  His paranoia is taking over his life.  If he doesn't want to be noticed, written about or a person of interest, then all he has to do is retire from public life.  Can't make money doing that the way he and she want to make money.  Meghan certainly doesn't want to hide under a rock.



It is really sad. A good wife would do anything in her power to be a calming influence, keep the person out of the spotlight and find help. Sadly he married Ghoul who fans the flames, sets him up and publicly jokes about him. Ew.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do you have a link?


Here is the tweet from dear @Maggie Muggins 

page-7672  post-35368779


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This just tells me that Harry's mental illness is not getting better.  His paranoia is taking over his life.  If he doesn't want to be noticed, written about or a person of interest, then all he has to do is retire from public life.  Can't make money doing that the way he and she want to make money.  Meghan certainly doesn't want to hide under a rock.


yes, no way the WIFE is retiring from public life - at least until she's fired from it for lack of interest, and that I can hardly wait for


----------



## needlv

Awards can be bought.


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> This just tells me that Harry's mental illness is not getting better.  His paranoia is taking over his life.  If he doesn't want to be noticed, written about or a person of interest, then all he has to do is retire from public life.  Can't make money doing that the way he and she want to make money.  Meghan certainly doesn't want to hide under a rock.


Nothing like a steady diet of coke & smoke to ratchet up paranoia.  


(Allegedly)


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is really sad. A good wife would do anything in her power to be a calming influence, keep the person out of the spotlight and find help. Sadly he married Ghoul who fans the flames, sets him up and publicly jokes about him. Ew.


guess maybe he's the one who made the Faustian bargain...he got the WIFE and now he has to walk on her leash


----------



## marietouchet

Cinderlala said:


> Nothing like a steady diet of coke & smoke to ratchet up paranoia.
> 
> 
> (Allegedly)


Dear mods
may we all please have an ALLEDGEDLY in our sign off for this thread, surely trivial to implement  just for us, because no one asked if we are ok without it
thank you (lol)


----------



## bag-mania

pixiejenna said:


> I absolutely believe that this date was chosen to send a message. When they plan their counter attack they’ll be annihilated to the extent that JCMH would never expect IMO. If they thought that the funeral was unfair they haven’t seen nothing yet lol.


Are you sure? Maybe it was a “sweet nod.” The US press will likely play it that way.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yes, no way the WIFE is retiring from public life - at least until she's fired from it for lack of interest, and that I can hardly wait for


Her sickness is that she lives for the spotlight.  She has been that way every since she was a little girl and will never change.  She will also do whatever it takes and if that includes throwing her husband under the bus, she will.  She has no qualms about throwing the British Royal Family, The Archbishop of Canterbury, the citizens of the UK, her own family, former friends and former husband, under that bus.  Boy that is a really big bus!!  That bus is so large, that the traffic accident is going to be epic when it crashes.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Her sickness is that she lives for the spotlight.  She has been that way every since she was a little girl and will never change.  She will also do whatever it takes and if that includes throwing her husband under the bus, she will.  She has no qualms about throwing the British Royal Family, The Archbishop of Canterbury, the citizens of the UK, her own family, former friends and former husband, under that bus.  Boy that is a really big bus!!  That bus is so large, that the traffic accident is going to be epic when it crashes.


but harry is her ticket to fame and all that stuff......she can't discard him unless she become relevant in her own right....and she is an empty shell of a Z-list actress


----------



## bag-mania

I wonder if that photo will be removed soon.









						King Charles Displays Photo from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Wedding at Palace Meeting
					

At King Charles' first weekly audience with Prime Minister Liz Truss, a portrait from Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 2018 wedding is seen on display at Buckingham Palace




					people.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I wonder if that photo will be removed soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles Displays Photo from Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Wedding at Palace Meeting
> 
> 
> At King Charles' first weekly audience with Prime Minister Liz Truss, a portrait from Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's 2018 wedding is seen on display at Buckingham Palace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


He needs to remind them of how much he has already paid for their folly.  Well played, sir.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

I think, hope, the Harkles have underestimated the King.


----------



## NYC Chicky

L


OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Again I am NOT a Meghan fan but it's tweets like these that make me think for some she will just never get it right. From the clip I see she's clearly looking toward the aide for guidance, following directions and smiling...no anger or steam at all


Look at 1:03 the aide clearly is pointing to walk further to the right but she instead went to the left closer to the red carpet.


----------



## marietouchet

worried that KC will HAVE to invite JCMH to coronation because he is a peer, then I perked up thinking here is a look for MM to copy









						Pin on JEWELS
					

Apr 1, 2022 - Kathleen Florence May Pelham-******* (née Candy), Duchess of Newcastle.    These aristocratic ladies, dressed for the coronation of Georg...




					pin.it


----------



## xincinsin

NYC Chicky said:


> L
> 
> Look at 1:03 the aide clearly is pointing to walk further to the right but she instead went to the left closer to the red carpet.


Topographical disorientation  
I'm sure Zedzee's paid trained compliant mental health specialist will assure her that such incidents plus her consistent use of the Claw on Handbag are due to a fundamental inability to know which way she is going. After all, they need enough physical and mental reasons to support her victim profile.


----------



## Chanbal

No more bots to cast fake votes!?


----------



## Chanbal

TW is the 'perfect' host


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> worried that KC will HAVE to invite JCMH to coronation because he is a peer, then I perked up thinking here is a look for MM to copy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin on JEWELS
> 
> 
> Apr 1, 2022 - Kathleen Florence May Pelham-******* (née Candy), Duchess of Newcastle.    These aristocratic ladies, dressed for the coronation of Georg...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pin.it


Proving that not everyone can pull off the tiara + jewels look


----------



## needlv




----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> TW's mouthpiece informs:
> View attachment 5630397
> 
> 
> _*I understand that the fifth-in-line to the throne is “very aware” of how long and arduous this process could be,* but is prepared to go the full distance – even if that may include taking to the stand and giving testimony.
> “There is a risk that this, like previous cases, could see retaliative press attacks against him and his family… but he sees a bigger cause here, one he hopes can bring positive change to the media landscape,” a source tells me…
> 
> *Despite the risks, the Duke of Sussex clearly has no plans to slow down in his pursuit.* Harry has taken on a number of publications in the past three years, including voicemail hacking cases against The Sun and Mirror owners in 2019, and more recently, libel action against Associated Newspapers relating to a Mail on Sunday article on his security arrangements.
> 
> *And he’s not alone.* A group of eight led by actor Hugh Grant, and including David Beckham’s father and a 7/7 London bombings survivor, is currently seeing eight claims of phone hacking against The Sun making their way through the legal system. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


This is how they’re going to explain all the negative press they’ve been receiving lately. It can all be attributed to some evil press cabal retaliating against our hero, JCMH, the renowned humanitarian (in his own mind) who’s fighting for “truth” on behalf of all mankind. How ironic since he, TW, and their various mouthpieces spew misinformation almost daily.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> This is how they’re going to explain all the negative press they’ve been receiving lately. It can all be attributed to some evil press cabal retaliating against our hero, JCMH, the renowned humanitarian (in his own mind) who’s fighting for “truth” on behalf of all mankind. How ironic since he, TW, and their various mouthpieces spew misinformation almost daily.


Snickering madly, crazily and insanely even!
Noted humanitarians? Noted by who?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> TW is the 'perfect' host



She has to put down her guests to prove to the world that she is better than them.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> TW is the 'perfect' host




That's another colonialist statement. M gives herself away.

Everyone all over the world would know a Hollywood actor, but what, only people in India would know a Bollywood actor?

 Bollywood and its stars and industry are trans-global, shows you how parochial princess Pinocchio is, her mind set is stuck in the LA suburbs, disturbing!

Edited: Interesting, autocorrect is also USA-biased and corrected 'Bollywood' to 'Hollywood'


----------



## duna

Maggie Muggins said:


> Good tweet about ZedZed:



Hats off to Michelle Johnson for a very good description of TW!


----------



## LibbyRuth

Chanbal said:


> TW is the 'perfect' host



I think this is one of those criticisms that is simply searching for anything to react to.  She's talking to a primarily American audience.  Most Americans don't know much about Bollywood beyond very popular movies they've never seen are made.  She's telling that audience that while they are not familiar the guest's star power is huge.  Rather normal way of introducing someone to an audience.


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> I think this is one of those criticisms that is simply searching for anything to react to.  She's talking to a primarily American audience.  Most Americans don't know much about Bollywood beyond very popular movies they've never seen are made.  She's telling that audience that while they are not familiar the guest's star power is huge.  Rather normal way of introducing someone to an audience.


I doubt Zedzee writes her own material so the fault may lie in the insensitivity of the writer. The intro would have worked just as well if it said: This is Deepika Padukone - actress, model and activist. She is one of the most famous actresses in Bollywood.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Troublesome Two should have hired Mark Bolland. He's Charles's former press secretary responsible for rehabilitating Camilla, and what a great job he did.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TW is the 'perfect' host




She is so effing rude. I will live for the moment one of her guests walks out on her with a few choice words.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> I doubt Zedzee writes her own material so the fault may lie in the insensitivity of the writer. The intro would have worked just as well if it said: This is Deepika Padukone - actress, model and activist. She is one of the most famous actresses in Bollywood.


The buck stops with TW. It’s her show. The writers may give her a script but she can choose to ask for changes to be made to the script. She’s been widely described as a micromanager so it’s difficult to blame anyone else but TW for the multiple glaring deficiencies including the racist overtones in some of her remarks about various Asian cultures in her podcrashes. As JCMH said, what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> The buck stops with TW. It’s her show. The writers may give her a script but she can choose to ask for changes to be made to the script. She’s been widely described as a micromanager so it’s difficult to blame anyone else but TW for the multiple glaring deficiencies including the racist overtones in some of her remarks about various Asian cultures in her podcrashes. As JCMH said, what Meghan wants, Meghan gets!


Agreed. The fault is the writer's but the buck stops with Zedzee. I don't consider her knowledgeable enough or culturally sensitive enough to vet anyone's writing. At the moment, if she even acknowledges how she is offending anyone, she is likely torn between two options. She, the eternal victim, blames the writer and exposes her own ignorance. Or she goes straight to the victim card and accuses the rest of the world of being oversensitive. It's never the narc's fault.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> *I think this is one of those criticisms that is simply searching for anything to react to.  She's talking to a primarily American audience. * Most Americans don't know much about Bollywood beyond very popular movies they've never seen are made.  She's telling that audience that while they are not familiar the guest's star power is huge.  Rather normal way of introducing someone to an audience.



I disagree. This is extremely US-centric and patronizing at best, with ugly colonial undertones at worst. Just as when Lee Jung-Jae, one of the leading actors of Squid Game, was asked on the red carpet how it felt to suddenly be famous and he was too polite to mention that he's been a huge star in Asia for decades.

Unless you want to claim US citizens are generally ignorant - which I also disagree with -  this is really not the path I want to follow. But also, even if I acknowledge most Americans don't know much about Bollywood I am positive there is a better way too word it than "She might not be a household name all over the world". Words matter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I doubt Zedzee writes her own material so the fault may lie in the insensitivity of the writer.



I would generally agree, but we're talking about the knightess in shiny armour jumping on every bandwagon, so it is kind of ironic she would let that slip. Or maybe not because that really is not the first time she's been incredibly rude to her guests. I'm still stunned how she handled Mariah.



xincinsin said:


> The intro would have worked just as well if it said: This is Deepika Padukone - actress, model and activist. She is one of the most famous actresses in Bollywood.



This!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Troublesome Two should have hired Mark Bolland. He's Charles's former press secretary responsible for rehabilitating Camilla, and what a great job he did.



He also managed to negotiate a fragile truce between both parties in the War of The Waleses, so they could really benefit


----------



## LibbyRuth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree. This is extremely US-centric and patronizing at best, with ugly colonial undertones at worst. Just as when Lee Jung-Jae, one of the leading actors of Squid Game, was asked on the red carpet how it felt to suddenly be famous and he was too polite to mention that he's been a huge star in Asia for decades.
> 
> Unless you want to claim US citizens are generally ignorant - which I also disagree with -  this is really not the path I want to follow. But also, even if I acknowledge most Americans don't know much about Bollywood I am positive there is a better way too word it than "She might not be a household name all over the world". Words matter.


When people go searching for something to be outraged over, they always find it.  Doesn't mean it's always right but it can always be found.


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree. This is extremely US-centric and patronizing at best, with ugly colonial undertones at worst. Just as when Lee Jung-Jae, one of the leading actors of Squid Game, was asked on the red carpet how it felt to suddenly be famous and he was too polite to mention that he's been a huge star in Asia for decades.
> 
> Unless you want to claim US citizens are generally ignorant - which I also disagree with -  this is really not the path I want to follow. But also, even if I acknowledge most Americans don't know much about Bollywood I am positive there is a better way too word it than "She might not be a household name all over the world". Words matter.


Thanks for saying this!


----------



## bisbee

LibbyRuth said:


> When people go searching for something to be outraged over, they always find it.  Doesn't mean it's always right but it can always be found.


I would venture to say that if all of our words were scrutinized as closely as some people scrutinize Meghan’s, we would all be found guilty of using inappropriate or ill-advised statements.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


Sending you best wishes for your horse's speedy recovery.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> When people go searching for something to be outraged over, they always find it.  Doesn't mean it's always right but it can always be found.



Or the matter of contention is valid.

I will happily admit we probably don't need to discuss e.g. her bodily flaws at length, but why would we give the Queen of Imagined Slights even the tiniest benefit of the doubt? She is only sensitive when is concerns herself.


----------



## Chanbal

LibbyRuth said:


> I think this is one of those criticisms that is simply searching for anything to react to.  She's talking to a primarily American audience.  Most Americans don't know much about Bollywood beyond very popular movies they've never seen are made.  She's telling that audience that while they are not familiar the guest's star power is huge.  Rather normal way of introducing someone to an audience.


It sounds rather rude imo. 'Although she may not be'… Instead, TW could have just said 'she is one of the most famous actresses in Bollywood and the face for LV…'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bisbee said:


> I would venture to say that if all of our words were scrutinized as closely as some people scrutinize Meghan’s, we would all be found guilty of using inappropriate or ill-advised statements.



And you know what? If all of us where saying these inappropritate statements on such a global stage someone *should* speak up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And you know what? If all of us where saying these inappropritate statements on such a global stage someone *should* speak up.


Hold all those thoughts til Tuesday, when we get an overall impression of the show


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And you know what? If all of us where saying these inappropritate statements on such a global stage someone *should* speak up.


I agree….which is why I've been disappointed at the (lack of) response when posters have spoken up about microagressions on this thread or the forum in general.


----------



## xincinsin

Are the Harkles or Mrs Harkle still describing themselves as philanthropists? I looked up the descriptions for philanthropists and humanitarians. While there is a huge overlap as both are concerned with the betterment of mankind (simplest meaning), I noted that the definition of philanthropist mentioned giving generous donations while the definition of humanitarian doesn't. Perhaps someone clued them in that being a humanitarian was cheaper.


----------



## Chanbal

Cunning teenagers, allegedly? 



*Samantha was a highly-regarded*_ in the royal household, having worked for the Queen before moving on to Harry's team.

Her working relationship with Prince Harry was of a cordial nature when she started, Low said.

'When she started, Harry knew her well, and liked her and she liked Harry. *Sam is an incredible problem solver,* she's a can-do personality and she just found it really difficult,' he said.

'*She was asked to do things that a private secretary wouldn't normally be asked to do and I think she was treated harshly*.

'*She was shouted at by Meghan*… she was said to have said that dealing with them was like dealing with a couple of teenagers,' he claimed…_

_But it alleges that *aides came to believe that Meghan's departure was premeditated and that 'one of [her] concerns was whether she was going to be able to make money for herself*'.

One ex staff member told the author: '*She wanted to be rejected, because she was obsessed with that narrative from day one*.'

And sources said that *her team reportedly said* of her on repeated occasions: '*We were played*.'

The book claims that staff became convinced *the Duchess wanted to show how the institution failed he*r – and even felt *there was a cynical motive behind her decision to complain to HR *bosses, who listened sympathetically but offered no help.

'This was inevitable: HR is there to deal with employee issues, not members of the Royal Family,' the book says. 'Meghan would presumably have known that, so what was she doing there? *Laying a trail of evidence, would be the cynical answer*.'_









						Royal author Valentine Low reveals shock Harry and Meghan claims
					

In the episode of Palace Confidential, Valentine Low claimed that courtier Samantha Cohen was treated 'harshly' by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I agree….which is why I've been disappointed at the (lack of) response when posters have spoken up about microagressions on this thread or the forum in general.



If someone adresses me personally in a civilized manner and shows me receipts of which statement they disliked I am inclined to talk it through, but I keep out of those big, general discussions where the alleged problem is "this thread" (thousands of pages and dozens of regular contributors).



Chanbal said:


> _One ex staff member told the author: '*She wanted to be rejected, because she was obsessed with that narrative from day one*.'
> 
> And sources said that *her team reportedly said* of her on repeated occasions: '*We were played*.'
> 
> The book claims that staff became convinced *the Duchess wanted to show how the institution failed he*r – and even felt *there was a cynical motive behind her decision to complain to HR *bosses, who listened sympathetically but offered no help.
> 
> 'This was inevitable: HR is there to deal with employee issues, not members of the Royal Family,' the book says. 'Meghan would presumably have known that, so what was she doing there? *Laying a trail of evidence, would be the cynical answer*.'_



This is pretty sick, and I still don't have a conclusive answer as to why.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is pretty sick, and I still don't have a conclusive answer as to why.


Just speculating. The claim of rejection, and the subsequent basking in the outpouring of sympathy can be like a drug. 

One of my office narcs once claimed to be sick but too broke to see a doctor. The entire office was horrified and overflowed with sympathy. A representative was sent to talk to me (I was #2 in the office hierarchy). She understood that I despised the narc but appealed to my humanity - surely there was something we or the company could do to alleviate his suffering! I pulled out the vacation calendar and showed her that Narc had booked 2 days off the next week to have an extended weekend holiday. She was stunned and actually went to confront him. Narc flippantly said he would rather spend his money on his vacation and was hoping they would stump up the cash for him to see a doctor. This was not the only time he deliberately courted sympathy by dramatizing his victimhood or arranging matters to ensure a lack of success.

I imagine when Zedzee was a not very successful actress, she got plenty of rejections at auditions. And each time the man of the moment in her life would coddle her and stroke her ego. Perhaps she became addicted to it and self-sabotages success. She needed people to "care" about her and cosset her, so she has to create situations when she will fail.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree. This is extremely US-centric and patronizing at best, with ugly colonial undertones at worst. Just as when Lee Jung-Jae, one of the leading actors of Squid Game, was asked on the red carpet how it felt to suddenly be famous and he was too polite to mention that he's been a huge star in Asia for decades.
> 
> Unless you want to claim US citizens are generally ignorant - which I also disagree with -  this is really not the path I want to follow. But also, even if I acknowledge most Americans don't know much about Bollywood I am positive there is a better way too word it than "She might not be a household name all over the world". Words matter.


I have to admit I'm not familiar with this actress.  I would say Meghan's words might have been fine in a private conversation but it's different when you're broadcasting.  You have to me more mindful of the effects of what you say.  And she - being so very smart - should know that.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


Poor guy. The IV should help. I hope they figure out what is wrong and he is feeling better soon.  
I'd love to see a photo of your old boy. You could put under it "Meghan rode a horse once when she was a teenager" to keep it marginally on topic.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Agreed. The fault is the writer's but the buck stops with Zedzee. I don't consider her knowledgeable enough or culturally sensitive enough to vet anyone's writing. At the moment, if she even acknowledges how she is offending anyone, she is likely torn between two options. She, the eternal victim, blames the writer and exposes her own ignorance. Or she goes straight to the victim card and accuses the rest of the world of being oversensitive. It's never the narc's fault.


It's funny how she's always a "victim of racism" when it's convenient for her, but she exposes her own prejudices and ignorance every time she opens her mouth.  The generalizations she makes are astounding, not in a good way.  One doesn't know Korean culture because they've been to a spa and eaten their noodles.  Although most Americans may not know Bollywood actors, Indian movies are popular in many other parts of the world, including the Middle East, Russia, even Europe.  One of my son's college roommates, who is German, often watched Hindi movies in their apartment.  Heck, she doesn't even truly know the Black experience in America!  She said it herself!  She didn't know what it was like to be black until she married Haz.


----------



## purseinsanity

bisbee said:


> I would venture to say that if all of our words were scrutinized as closely as some people scrutinize Meghan’s, we would all be found guilty of using inappropriate or ill-advised statements.


Very true.  In her case, no one would be constantly scrutinizing every single thing she said if she didn't try to make herself constantly front and center, shove herself into issues she's clearly ignorant about, and preach to the rest of us about every topic under the sun.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


hope he gets better...my sister's small dog got an infection from a tick and it cost a lot of heartache and about ten thousand dollars in vet bills....hopefully your horse doesn't have the same type of infection

oops - correction - I think the dog get infected by fly larvae...anyway best to you and your horse


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is pretty sick, and I still don't have a conclusive answer as to why.


Agree with you. See if this video sheds some light…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I have to admit I'm not familiar with this actress.  I would say Meghan's words might have been fine in a private conversation but it's different when you're broadcasting.  You have to me more mindful of the effects of what you say.  And she - being so very smart - should know that.



Neither am I, but to be honest I watch to little TV and I can't remember the last time I saw a cinema from the inside (probably 2019 or early 2020?), I'd probably have a hard time to name any of the shiny new Hollywood talent that's hot right now.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Neither am I, but to be honest I watch to little TV and I can't remember the last time I saw a cinema from the inside (probably 2019 or early 2020?), I'd probably have a hard time to name any of the shiny new Hollywood talent that's hot right now.


Last in theatre movie was Frozen II - about a Disney ice princess which somehow seems relevant to this thread


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> hope he gets better...my sister's small dog got an infection from a tick and it cost a lot of heartache and about ten thousand dollars in vet bills....hopefully your horse doesn't have the same type of infection
> 
> oops - correction - I think the dog get infected by fly larvae...anyway best to you and your horse



More tests just confirmed it's the tick disease. Now it's just waiting if treatment sticks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> More tests just confirmed it's the tick disease. Now it's just waiting if treatment sticks.


hope so


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Last in theatre movie was Frozen II - about a Disney ice princess



My mother was a huge Disney fan and collected the movies when we were kids. I still like to watch the new ones once in a while.



bag-mania said:


> Poor guy. The IV should help. I hope they figure out what is wrong and he is feeling better soon.
> I'd love to see a photo of your old boy. You could put under it "Meghan rode a horse once when she was a teenager" to keep it marginally on topic.



I'll PM you, I just took a pic to send to my mother who's out of town (out of tiny village?  ) today and worried sick.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Neither am I, but to be honest I watch to little TV and I can't remember the last time I saw a cinema from the inside (probably 2019 or early 2020?), I'd probably have a hard time to name any of the shiny new Hollywood talent that's hot right now.


Lol, I have a hard time identifying a lot of "celebrities" as well.  I check in on the Celebrities and their LV's thread, but I don't know about 90% of the people highlighted


----------



## Aminamina

Chanbal said:


> It sounds rather rude imo. 'Although she may not be'… Instead, TW could have just said 'she is one of the most famous actresses in Bollywood and the face for LV…'


Yes, she could if she cared about her subject. But these “interviews” are just her vanity mirror and all she really was implying was “Although she may not be the household name like moi Moi MOI!….


----------



## Toby93




----------



## EmilyM11

sdkitty said:


> I have to admit I'm not familiar with this actress.  I would say Meghan's words might have been fine in a private conversation but it's different when you're broadcasting.  You have to me more mindful of the effects of what you say.  And she - being so very smart - should know that.


This! I am unfortunately sometimes too direct and too fast with what i say but even I see that this line would make my guest uncomfortable (even if true- though I don't know, I'm not into movies). It's a matter of some intelligence.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bisbee said:


> I would venture to say that if all of our words were scrutinized as closely as some people scrutinize Meghan’s, we would all be found guilty of using inappropriate or ill-advised statements.


If I had to be in the public eye [ahem], I would take Kate and Jackie O’s approach.  Silence, minimum information  and good manners are the best answer.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Very true.  In her case, no one would be constantly scrutinizing every single thing she said if she didn't try to make herself constantly front and center, shove herself into issues she's clearly ignorant about, and preach to the rest of us about every topic under the sun.


It appears even her teachers did not closely examine her essays.  So, this scrutiny is all new to her.  That is why the BRF gave her their top advisors.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Neither am I, but to be honest I watch to little TV and I can't remember the last time I saw a cinema from the inside (probably 2019 or early 2020?), I'd probably have a hard time to name any of the shiny new Hollywood talent that's hot right now.


Same here!  My DD is making me watch Dancing with the Stars (actually kind of torture for me ) and I have no idea who 95% of the "stars" are dancing.  That's why really drives home the point I'm getting old: I don't know pop culture as well, the songs I listen to on the radio are considered "oldies" by my children, and every time I see an infant/child at the boarding gate, I say a silent prayer they're not sitting anywhere next to me.  Once upon a time, I used to sympathize with the parents, but now that my children are grown, I want nothing to do with them.  Kind of like Haz and TW.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




They still don't understand that the monarchy cares about exactly one person (the monarch), don't they?


----------



## jelliedfeels

I don’t know who a lot of the guests are really but my thought is it is the better thing to know that you are moderately famous in your chosen field than globally notorious for doing the nasty with a repulsive man.


----------



## Cinderlala

Aminamina said:


> Yes, she could if she cared about her subject. But these “interviews” are just her vanity mirror and all she really was implying was “Although she may not be the household name like moi Moi MOI!….


Exactly.  It really is not in TW's wheelhouse to happily recognize other women's fame/talent/beauty so she typically manages to insert a backhanded compliment somewhere in the show.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is pretty sick, and I still don't have a conclusive answer as to why.



Because it's deceit? Premeditated betrayal? Making people work under false pretences?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Because it's deceit? Premeditated betrayal? Making people work under false pretences?



Yes, but why would anyone do this. Most people would put their energy into building, not destroying from the get go.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


This is heartbreaking because the longer they live, the longer we've had to love them, and them us. The bond of horse and rider is very very special. First horse in our family was purchased 45 years ago, we've dealt with illness and loss multiple times through the years, never gets easier. I can imagine as you sit with him, memories are streaming. Thinking of you. 

How does this relate to Harry?  I'm sure there are others who post here, who also loathe his disregard for the welfare of his mount when he is abusive in Polo. There is no excuse for it, he is a bully and a cretin. This was years ago, but I still remember seeing the gash marks on one of his mounts. It made me angry because he seemed so cavalier about it.

Edited: Just read you have a diagnosis. Good news so the proper treatment can commence. Fingers crossed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Hope his hasn't been posted yet


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


Sending hugs


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OT but senior horse is still poorly, alternating between a scarily high fever and too low body temperature several times a day. Lab results are indecisive so far, one half pointing to a viral infection caused by ticks and the other half...not. Vet says the normal course of action would be vet clinic where he can be isolated and have an IV, but also agrees the stress of being separated from both his herd and human would probably kill a 30yo horse with a bunch of preexisting conditions including heart problems. The new plan is to put in the IV and pray he doesn't rip it out when nobody is watching and also that it's not something contagious that will spread to the others (he is separated but not completely no contact). I'm on babysitting duty for the next few hours.


----------



## pukasonqo

Cinderlala said:


> Exactly.  It really is not in TW's wheelhouse to happily recognize other women's fame/talent/beauty so she typically manages to insert a backhanded compliment somewhere in the show.


Deepika is successful as a actress, model and activist which is what MM aspires to be seen as 

I don’t follow Bollywood stars/films but taking into account the population in India is 1.38 billion is an educated guess that more people know who Deepika is that who is MM


----------



## Cinderlala

pukasonqo said:


> Deepika is successful as a actress, model and activist which is what MM aspires to be seen as
> 
> I don’t follow Bollywood stars/films but taking into account the population in India is 1.38 billion is an educated guess that more people know who Deepika is that who is MM


Yes, and this is why MM would be unable to acknowledge Deepika's talent/success/beauty.  It is exactly because it is what she most wants for herself but cannot obtain.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> Yes, and this is why MM would be unable to acknowledge Deepika's talent/success/beauty.  It is exactly because it is what she most wants for herself but cannot obtain.


as much as I dislike her, I can't imagine this was a conscious insult....how would she get guests if that's what she does.  maybe it was instinctive jealousy?


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> as much as I dislike her, I can't imagine this was a conscious insult....how would she get guests if that's what she does.  maybe it was instinctive jealousy?


It would definitely be instinctive jealousy.

But, I don't think she's had a guest that she hasn't shaded in some way, has she?


----------



## Chanbal

What a mess!   










						Harry & Meghan ‘contradict’ their own stories in his tell-all, Netflix docuseries
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s docu-series will debut on Netflix in early December, multiple sources told Page Six — but there are still lots of conflicts. Sources said Netflix and the…




					pagesix.com
				




_*Sources said Netflix and the series’ filmmakers were confused by some of the comments that Harry makes in his upcoming book being at odds with what he and his wife said on camera.*

“*A lot in the show contradicted what Harry has written*, so that was an issue,” one industry source revealed.

“Then Harry and Meghan made significant requests [to filmmakers] to walk back content they themselves have provided, for their own project,” the source added.

Now, multiple sources confirm that Netflix stuck to its guns and *the Sussex series — which was the couple’s idea — will debut in early December.*

The Sussexes — who have been filming for more than a year with Brooklyn director Liz Garbus — are believed to have talked a lot on camera about the royal family, including Prince William and Kate Middleton, as well as King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, and reportedly wanted to edit some of it out now.

They have to finish the project very soon as it takes weeks for Netflix to edit and translate for other languages. “Netflix needs a couple of months to do all of the formatting and dubbing, subtitling and audio — all of that stuff that enables it to launch on the platform,” a Netflix source told Page Six._


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> What a mess!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan ‘contradict’ their own stories in his tell-all, Netflix docuseries
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s docu-series will debut on Netflix in early December, multiple sources told Page Six — but there are still lots of conflicts. Sources said Netflix and the…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Sources said Netflix and the series’ filmmakers were confused by some of the comments that Harry makes in his upcoming book being at odds with what he and his wife said on camera.*
> 
> “*A lot in the show contradicted what Harry has written*, so that was an issue,” one industry source revealed.
> 
> “Then Harry and Meghan made significant requests [to filmmakers] to walk back content they themselves have provided, for their own project,” the source added.
> 
> Now, multiple sources confirm that Netflix stuck to its guns and *the Sussex series — which was the couple’s idea — will debut in early December.*
> 
> The Sussexes — who have been filming for more than a year with Brooklyn director Liz Garbus — are believed to have talked a lot on camera about the royal family, including Prince William and Kate Middleton, as well as King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, and reportedly wanted to edit some of it out now.
> 
> They have to finish the project very soon as it takes weeks for Netflix to edit and translate for other languages. “Netflix needs a couple of months to do all of the formatting and dubbing, subtitling and audio — all of that stuff that enables it to launch on the platform,” a Netflix source told Page Six._



what makes this a docuseries vs another Keeping up with the Kardashians?


----------



## bag-mania

How would Netflix know what was in the book? There’s no reason why they would be given an advance look at the manuscript. I’m calling BS.


----------



## Debbini

From Instagram


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I think ZedZed is too insert adjective to participate in similar events as I can imagine her elbowing her way to the front while dragging Dufus by the arm.



Below: The pic on the left that was apparently taken from a Netflix scene of 'The Crown' shows the actor wearing a replica of HMQEII's coronation gown and it looks comparable to HM's gown in pic on the right, however IMO the scene lacks the gravitas associated with HMTQ's coronation.


----------



## Chanbal

More humor from Twitter…


----------



## Chanbal

How can one sell family like this? 










						JAN MOIR: Will Prince Harry now call out Netflix for gross intrusion?
					

JAN MOIR: How are we going to amuse ourselves in the ceremonial void between the Queen's Funeral and the King's Coronation? Luckily, here comes Netflix to the rescue.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_
How are we going to amuse ourselves in the ceremonial void between the Queen’s Funeral and the King’s Coronation? Luckily, here comes Netflix to the rescue, with plans to plug that infotainment gap with a grisly ritual of its own making — *The Crown*.

The new series, which will be released next month, *focuses on the turbulent years between 1990 and 1997, and no one would argue that it was a low point for the Royal Family. Yet do the Windsors really deserve to be portrayed, as they have to date, as a parade of stuffed toff freaks with no redeeming features whatsoever?*

In series three, the Queen was even shown visiting Aberfan in 1966 — after the colliery spoil tip disaster that killed 116 children and 28 adults — and being so unmoved by the tragedy that she had to fake her tears before facing the bereaved public.

Art is one thing, duplicitous emotional embroidery for the sake of dramatic plot lines is another.

I thought it was shameful at the time, and still do now.

*This week we learn that the fifth series will continue in the same vein: the Queen is still a cold fish; Charles is an unfeeling brute; mad, marginalised Diana is a diamond-wearing schemer; and their children are collateral damage as the War of the Waleses plunges onwards, finally ending in divorce and separate quests for personal happiness*…

*Or is that another deafening silence I hear from Montecito?* *The silence of a prince who has his own lucrative Netflix deals to protect.* *Not to mention his plans to harvest recent royal history for his own gain.* God knows why I am so bothered about it all, if he is not. Yet I am. *For surely these events are too fresh to be historic, too raw to be served up as entertainment for the masses?*

The excavation and sexploitation of the recent past of a family who did not ask for this attention and who can do nothing about it seems very unfair.

Having a version of their most personal moments fictionalised, then lavishly distributed to an audience who have demonstrated in the past that they do not know the difference between make-believe and reality seems a very piercing, and very modern, form of cruelty.

*Would Netflix dare to do this to any other prominent family?* The Murdochs? The Beckhams? The Rainiers? The *****-Kushners? The House of Bourbon? I wonder.

*In the meantime, there is nothing much the senior royals can do, except sit with a trembling finger on the remote control while Prince Harry and Netflix do their worst*._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> How would Netflix know what was in the book? There’s no reason why they would be given an advance look at the manuscript. I’m calling BS.


You make a valid point. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if the Netfl*x's people that are working with the Harkles on their reality show have access to relevant chapters of the manuscript.


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, 1970 is not that recently, that's many years before I was even born
> 
> The fundus next door still hold Latin mass. They also don't let girls wear pants, deny their cult members to listen to satanic music (the...radio) and find nothing weird with people having 17 kids, though. Oh, and their message is often so hateful I've said on several occasions I hope they are being monitored by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution.


Late Q, but: What is a fundus? 

P.S. hope your horse feels better.  




needlv said:


> Well… answering on behalf of my country -
> 
> 1. we do not like fake people.  We see through her lack of authenticity.
> 
> 2. we abhor those who look down on “us” and think they are better.  MM projects this all the time.  Using Duchess everywhere, looking down her nose at people in photos, smirking etc.
> 
> if you are in the “elite”/ celebs/politicians/ billionaires/ ex royalty etc  and you make derogatory comments about the public or your behaviour is that of thinking the rules/laws don’t apply to you, you can expect a media, social media and Twitter storm.  Eg, Amber Heard when visiting Australia snuck in her dogs, lied about it, got caught, claimed rules didn’t apply to her or Johnny Depp.  Animals from overseas countries go into quarantine for a while because they could have diseases etc that are not in Australia and have devastating effects on our wildlife and local pets!
> 
> 3.  The Queen was greatly respected, and her Oprah interview whilst giving MM a few days of bombshell coverage - when the lies leaked out it was pretty obvious she was being spiteful.
> 
> 4. it’s obvious to us - she is a gold digger, who is all about the money and fame.  We all see it and just want her to own it, but she continues on with fake publicity stunts (which we mock), fake humanitarian causes (which we mock), and clearly grasping for money by her sole talent - Selling family secrets.
> 
> 5.  It came out later that Meghan hated the pointless Australian tour.  This did not go down well with our media or the public.  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...an-Markle-hated-second-touring-Australia.html
> 
> 5.  She allegedly treated the Governor General, his wife and their staff appallingly, including a hot tea “flying in the air” at a staff member, ,along the staff repeatedly bake banana bread late at night Until it was up to her standards (then passed it off as her own creation in various PR releases).
> 
> I could continue but I’ll leave it there.



BRILLIANT


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> You make a valid point. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if the Netfl*x's people that are working with the Harkles on their reality show have access to relevant chapters of the manuscript.


Penguin Random House wouldn’t like that. They aren’t forking over all those millions of dollars for Harry’s memoir so that he can give his story to Netflix first. H&M’s contract with Netflix was to produce programming, but not necessarily about themselves.


----------



## Katel

bisbee said:


> I would venture to say that if all of our words were scrutinized as closely as some people scrutinize Meghan’s, we would all be found guilty of using inappropriate or ill-advised statements.





purseinsanity said:


> Very true.  In her case, no one would be constantly scrutinizing every single thing she said if she didn't try to make herself constantly front and center, shove herself into issues she's clearly ignorant about, and preach to the rest of us about every topic under the sun.



Constantly and nonstop 24/7


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Penguin Random House wouldn’t like that. They aren’t forking over all those millions of dollars for Harry’s memoir so that he can give his story to Netflix first. H&M’s contract with Netflix was to produce programming, but not necessarily about themselves.


It's not unusual for authors to have their books or book chapters read by colleagues/co-workers prior to submission. I would think the Harkles have a group of people from Archewhatever & Netfl*x working closely with them on their reality show, so it's possible that he has shared selected materials with them. This would have nothing to do with the contract they have with Nefl*x.


----------



## Chanbal

Chloe302225 said:


>



Here is more info on the invitation to attend the Oscars. Oops, I meant on the Wales' trip to Boston.   


_"*Once Kate and William’s Boston plans are set in stone, she’s planning to extend an olive branch to Meghan in a bid to reunite the brothers and heal the rift*," a source claimed ahead of the Prince and Princess of Wales' visit to America in December.

Kate's efforts to squash the tension between her and Meghan can be credited to Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Diana, as the source said the mother-of-three believes it is what the late royals "would've wanted" for them.

"[*Prince] Harry and Meghan are knee deep with their hectic schedules, but Meghan is willing to put in the effort as long as dates don't clash,"* added the insider ahead of William and Kate's trip overseas_.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> It's not unusual for authors to have their books or book chapters read by colleges/co-workers prior to submission. I would think the Harkles have a group of people from Archewhatever & Netfl*x working closely with them on their reality show, so it's possible that he has shared selected materials with them. This would have nothing to do with the contract they have with Nefl*x.


JR Moehringer is the author so really it would have been sent to Harry to read prior to submission.  

I imagine a celebrity tell-all’s contract is written a little different than an average writer’s submission due to the large amount money involved and the necessity of avoiding leaks prior to release.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> JR Moehringer is the author so really it would have been sent to Harry to read prior to submission.
> 
> I imagine a celebrity tell-all’s contract is written a little different than an average writer’s submission due to the large amount money involved and the necessity of avoiding leaks prior to release.


Aren't Hazz & TW experts in leaking information? 

I've no idea how a celebrity tell-all's contract is written, and I'm also not familiar with $25M or $35M book advances.  

(By the way, I meant colleagues and not colleges, doing too many things at the same time ).


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> Here is more info on the invitation to attend the Oscars. Oops, I meant on the Wales' trip to Boston.


Their PR people are worth their weight in gold. They have the most imaginative brains in the industry, coming up with all these made-up baseless stories to glorify their masters day-in and day-out.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chloe302225 said:


>



OMG, she really takes self importance and delusion to a whole new level!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Here is more info on the invitation to attend the Oscars. Oops, I meant on the Wales' trip to Boston.
> View attachment 5631301
> 
> _"*Once Kate and William’s Boston plans are set in stone, she’s planning to extend an olive branch to Meghan in a bid to reunite the brothers and heal the rift*," a source claimed ahead of the Prince and Princess of Wales' visit to America in December.
> 
> Kate's efforts to squash the tension between her and Meghan can be credited to Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Diana, as the source said the mother-of-three believes it is what the late royals "would've wanted" for them.
> 
> "[*Prince] Harry and Meghan are knee deep with their hectic schedules, but Meghan is willing to put in the effort as long as dates don't clash,"* added the insider ahead of William and Kate's trip overseas_.


MmmmKay.  Kate could barely stomach looking at TW during the walk about and funeral.  The "olive branch" must be her version of "Talk Softly and Carry a Big Stick".


----------



## Katel

tiktok said:


> Their PR people are worth their weight in gold. They have the most imaginative brains in the industry, coming up with all these made-up baseless stories to glorify their masters day-in and day-out.



Isn’t MeePeeZee cranking it all out now? That would explain the sheer volume of nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> OMG, she really takes self importance and delusion to a whole new level!


TW is so accommodating. Despite her hectic schedule, she is willing to put in the effort…


----------



## Chanbal

_King Charles likely won’t invite Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to his coronation if Harry damagingly attacks wife Camilla, the Queen Consort, in his forthcoming book, *a friend of the new queen has told The Daily Beast…*

The palace declined to comment to The Daily Beast for this story. *Sources in the palace say simply that the question of the guest list is on the “tbc” pile, pointedly leaving the door open for Harry and Meghan to get the call up—or be excluded.*_









						Why Charles Is Ready to Ban Harry and Meghan From Coronation
					

If Harry and Meghan target Charles, other royals, and especially Camilla in Harry’s memoir and Netflix show, then the Sussexes can expect to have their coronation invite withdrawn.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> How would Netflix know what was in the book? There’s no reason why they would be given an advance look at the manuscript. I’m calling BS.



Agreed.It would be another breach of contract on confidentiality clause(s) if they did


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5631390
> 
> _King Charles likely won’t invite Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to his coronation if Harry damagingly attacks wife Camilla, the Queen Consort, in his forthcoming book, *a friend of the new queen has told The Daily Beast…*
> 
> The palace declined to comment to The Daily Beast for this story. *Sources in the palace say simply that the question of the guest list is on the “tbc” pile, pointedly leaving the door open for Harry and Meghan to get the call up—or be excluded.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Charles Is Ready to Ban Harry and Meghan From Coronation
> 
> 
> If Harry and Meghan target Charles, other royals, and especially Camilla in Harry’s memoir and Netflix show, then the Sussexes can expect to have their coronation invite withdrawn.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



They'd get invites, but the BRF may make the seating, logistical, and social plans excruciating for them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

First thing I read this morning and it's this. Nice try, Ghoul. Kate has all but forgotten you exist and is out of olive branches right now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Katel said:


> Late Q, but: What is a fundus?



It's plural of fundu which is one way to shorten fundamentalists.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Here is more info on the invitation to attend the Oscars. Oops, I meant on the Wales' trip to Boston.
> View attachment 5631301
> 
> _"*Once Kate and William’s Boston plans are set in stone, she’s planning to extend an olive branch to Meghan in a bid to reunite the brothers and heal the rift*," a source claimed ahead of the Prince and Princess of Wales' visit to America in December.
> 
> Kate's efforts to squash the tension between her and Meghan can be credited to Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Diana, as the source said the mother-of-three believes it is what the late royals "would've wanted" for them.
> 
> "[*Prince] Harry and Meghan are knee deep with their hectic schedules, but Meghan is willing to put in the effort as long as dates don't clash,"* added the insider ahead of William and Kate's trip overseas_.



Oh please. Their new PR person is not much better than SS, are they.

Also, at this point I think it's abundantly clear nobody is interested in healing anything with her...they might still think about how to handle Harry, the family member.


----------



## xincinsin

This olive branch story keeps getting repeated. Every few months, a story is planted/leaked about someone in the RF giving one to Zedzee. Maybe we will soon be introduced to a new business venture merching the kids.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> First thing I read this morning and it's this. Nice try, Ghoul. Kate has all but forgotten you exist and is out of olive branches right now.



The media writer Emily Tannenbaum writes pro-Harkle articles quoting royal experts who appear to be able to mindread QE2.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> This olive branch story keeps getting repeated. Every few months, a story is planted/leaked about someone in the RF giving one to Zedzee. Maybe we will soon be introduced to a new business venture merching the kids.
> 
> View attachment 5631435


Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> The media writer Emily Tannenbaum writes pro-Harkle articles quoting royal experts who appear to be able to mindread QE2.


They would have to hold a séance these days


----------



## bellecate

Chloe302225 said:


>



Ya right……. and pigs can fly.


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> They would have to hold a séance these days


No doubt they already have such professionals on speed dial, considering how often Handbag has been invoking his mum.


----------



## bellecate

The things coming out. Guess none of her podcasts will be about the word faithful.


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> The things coming out. Guess none of her podcasts will be about the word faithful.
> 
> View attachment 5631473
> View attachment 5631474


Crash course in Canadian ice hockey 
Never knew about Maple Leafs team before today


----------



## needlv




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Crash course in Canadian ice hockey
> Never knew about Maple Leafs team before today


I feel for our northern buddies/pals/guys this must be like seeing David Attenborough punch an elephant or indeed (for some) prince Harry shoot one.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

QueenofWrapDress said:


> First thing I read this morning and it's this. Nice try, Ghoul. Kate has all but forgotten you exist and is out of olive branches right now.



I see this as her way of begging for an invite to Earthshot. If they don't invite her then they'll say W&C ignored them and refused to try to heal the rift making it W&C fault. She's trying to put them in a no win situation. They bought that award to try and force them to interact with them on their turf.


----------



## pomeline

Just when you think you've got his intelligence level figured out... Yeah.

Prince Harry Has No Idea Why People Call Him Harry Instead Of His Real Name

Really? No idea whatsoever? Everyone and their dog knows his mother wanted to call him Harry. He probably also struggles to figure out why his wife calls him "H" and "Haz" (and probably several other names that are not Henry).


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## V0N1B2

xincinsin said:


> Crash course in Canadian ice hockey
> Never knew about Maple Leafs team before today


Strikes @xincinsin off Christmas card list


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Eeek,  beware the olive branch -


----------



## WillstarveforLV

xincinsin said:


> Crash course in Canadian ice hockey
> Never knew about Maple Leafs team before today


Its the NHL.


----------



## csshopper

hollieplus2 said:


> I see this as her way of begging for an invite to Earthshot. If they don't invite her then they'll say W&C ignored them and refused to try to heal the rift making it W&C fault. She's trying to put them in a no win situation. They bought that award to try and force them to interact with them on their turf.


I doubt there will be an invite to Earthshot. Caroline Kennedy, daughter of the President is a major organizer. 

The event in New York, the one where it appears Sunshine Sucks probably purchased the award for the Harkles last March while SS  were still schilling for the Harkles, is connected to Kerry Kennedy, one of Robert’s daughters, thus Caroline’s cousin.

Articles have alluded to bad blood between the cousins. Looking at the two events in terms of Caroline + the Prince and Princess of Wales vs Kerry + TW and her handbag, the Boston Earthshot event is THE coveted ticket. In the press release for Earthshot 2022, Ambassador Caroline Kennedy announced  the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation and Mayor Michelle Wu and the City of Boston as host partners. They don’t need the Harkles as any disruption.  And they, not William and Kate are the ones issuing invitations.

I suppose there is always the chance the Harkles might show up in Boston for Raptor to elbow her way in to try a gate crash, but given the panicked expression on her face when Kate briefly gave her the death stare during the walk about at Windsor prior to the Queen’s funeral, I don’t think she is that nervy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> I doubt there will be an invite to Earthshot. Caroline Kennedy, daughter of the President is a major organizer.
> 
> The event in New York, the one where it appears Sunshine Sucks probably purchased the award for the Harkles last March while SS  were still schilling for the Harkles, is connected to Kerry Kennedy, one of Robert’s daughters, thus Caroline’s cousin.
> 
> Articles have alluded to bad blood between the cousins. Looking at the two events in terms of Caroline + the Prince and Princess of Wales vs Kerry + TW and her handbag, the Boston Earthshot event is THE coveted ticket. In the press release for Earthshot 2022, Ambassador Caroline Kennedy announced  the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation and Mayor Michelle Wu and the City of Boston as host partners. They don’t need the Harkles as any disruption.  And they, not William and Kate are the ones issuing invitations.
> 
> I suppose there is always the chance the Harkles might show up in Boston for Raptor to elbow her way in to try a gate crash, but given the panicked expression on her face when Kate briefly gave her the death stare during the walk about at Windsor prior to the Queen’s funeral, I don’t think she is that nervy.


Imo royals should never mix their good deeds with politicians and their families.  Conflicting agendas will become a problem.


----------



## Chanbal

This makes perfect sense to me…  
:


----------



## Chanbal

@needlv Go Aussies!


----------



## TC1

xincinsin said:


> Crash course in Canadian ice hockey
> Never knew about Maple Leafs team before today


LOL at Canadian Ice Hockey. The Leafs are a team in the NHL (National Hockey League) although we can all agree the best hockey players are indeed Canadian


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> LOL at Canadian Ice Hockey. The Leafs are a team in the NHL (National Hockey League) although we can all agree the best hockey players are indeed Canadian


Yes, it’s the Outlier thing, right?








						Outliers: A Myth?
					

The latest news, analysis and stories from NHL.com, the official site of the National Hockey League




					www.nhl.com
				




Interesting that AngelaL is retweeting this - I do believe a corner has been turned [of course we posted it here eons ago]


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> @needlv Go Aussies!



I didn’t post at the time this was mentioned here, but I agree. I’m ambivalent towards Jordan Peterson, but Meghan is waaaay out of her league if she thinks she’s gonna pick a fight with him. He’ll rip her apart lash by lash, tendril by tendril. And I am here for it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Crash course in Canadian ice hockey
> *Never knew about Maple Leafs team before today*


Ahem, excuse me, I did!  DH and DS (even DD) and absolutely hockey fanatics.  If I didn't know who the Maple Leafs were, I'd be tarred and feathered.


----------



## purseinsanity

pomeline said:


> Just when you think you've got his intelligence level figured out... Yeah.
> 
> Prince Harry Has No Idea Why People Call Him Harry Instead Of His Real Name
> 
> Really? No idea whatsoever? Everyone and their dog knows his mother wanted to call him Harry. He probably also struggles to figure out why his wife calls him "H" and "Haz" (and probably several other names that are not Henry).


I have no idea why people keep calling him "Prince".  He should be "Doofus".


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> @needlv Go Aussies!



I learned a new Aussie word describing ZedZed.

*Bludger*
/ˈblʌdʒə/

noun

1.a scrounger:informal, derogatory Australian, New Zealand"just look at that *bludger*, can't get his thieving hands on the cash fast enough"
▪an idle or lazy person:informal, derogatory Australian, New Zealand"I suspect there are far more *bludgers* in jobs than on the dole"
Word Origin mid 19th century (originally British slang denoting a pimp, specifically one who robbed his prostitute's clients): abbreviation of bludgeoner, from bludgeon.


----------



## youngster

pomeline said:


> Just when you think you've got his intelligence level figured out... Yeah.
> 
> Prince Harry Has No Idea Why People Call Him Harry Instead Of His Real Name
> 
> Really? No idea whatsoever? Everyone and their dog knows his mother wanted to call him Harry.



He's thick as a plank.  Harry is a classic nickname for Henry.  A 5 year old would have asked his mum or dad why he's "Harry" instead of "Henry" and they would have explained and then he would have known. But, he never bothered asking.


----------



## DL Harper

youngster said:


> He's thick as a plank.  Harry is a classic nickname for Henry.  A 5 year old would have asked his mum or dad why he's "Harry" instead of "Henry" and they would have explained and then he would have known. But, he never bothered asking.


"Just call me Harry"  That was his chance to make the change to whatever name he wanted, regardless of being "Harry" since infancy.  Duh!!!  
That said, maybe MM calls him "H" because she intended to make his life just that - HELL!


----------



## MiniMabel

DoggieBags said:


> Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options


Priceless!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I suppose there is always the chance the Harkles might show up in Boston for Raptor to elbow her way in to try a gate crash, but given the panicked expression on her face when Kate briefly gave her the death stare during the walk about at Windsor prior to the Queen’s funeral, I don’t think she is that nervy.



Maybe she'll show up done up to the nines and inform them she's handing out the awards...I just have a nagging feeling these organizers might tell her to stick it where the light doesn't shine.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, it’s the Outlier thing, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Outliers: A Myth?
> 
> 
> The latest news, analysis and stories from NHL.com, the official site of the National Hockey League
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nhl.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that AngelaL is retweeting this - I do believe a corner has been turned [of course we posted it here eons ago]




Maybe that skirt is a little short to attempt to sit in it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options


Lawsuit Liver
[sorry, couldn’t resist]


----------



## andrashik

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I agree….which is why I've been disappointed at the (lack of) response when posters have spoken up about microagressions on this thread or the forum in general.


Hmm, what about our responses to one of your posts? From what I saw, you didn't even reply to those. The one regarding a former first lady and us liking her ? ( and other stuff)


----------



## Maggie Muggins

DoggieBags said:


> Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options


Split Pea-in-the-Woods Soup


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lawsuit Liver
> [sorry, couldn’t resist]



I'll be especially interested to see the whine menu.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, it’s the Outlier thing, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Outliers: A Myth?
> 
> 
> The latest news, analysis and stories from NHL.com, the official site of the National Hockey League
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nhl.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting that AngelaL is retweeting this - I do believe a corner has been turned [of course we posted it here eons ago]



ICK! Another example she’s always played this cutesie , wink , wink game with men. Too bad the desk was in the way of a cuddle or a boob rub on his arm.


----------



## CobaltBlu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be especially interested to see the whine menu.


i'm ded.


----------



## bag-mania

Has this been posted already? It confirms that the Netflix show about themselves was their idea and now they are backpedaling.

“Then Harry and Meghan made significant requests [to filmmakers] to walk back content they themselves have provided, for their own project,” the source added.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex wanted to hold the Netflix show until next year as they continue to edit, but, as Page Six previously revealed, Netflix chiefs insisted it stream after the fifth season of “The Crown,” which launches November 5.

Now, multiple sources confirm that *Netflix stuck to its guns and the Sussex series — which was the couple’s idea — will debut in early December.*

The Sussexes — who have been filming for more than a year with Brooklyn director Liz Garbus — are believed to have talked a lot on camera about the royal family, including Prince William and Kate Middleton, as well as King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla, and reportedly wanted to edit some of it out now.

They have to finish the project very soon as it takes weeks for Netflix to edit and translate for other languages.

“Netflix needs a couple of months to do all of the formatting and dubbing, subtitling and audio — all of that stuff that enables it to launch on the platform,” a Netflix source told Page Six.









						Harry & Meghan ‘contradict’ their own stories in his tell-all, Netflix docuseries
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s docu-series will debut on Netflix in early December, multiple sources told Page Six — but there are still lots of conflicts. Sources said Netflix and the…




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll be especially interested to see the whine menu.


Yes as long as it offers a free bottle of Sour Grape Whine.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

andrashik said:


> Hmm, what about our responses to one of your posts? From what I saw, you didn't even reply to those. The one regarding a former first lady and us liking her ? ( and other stuff)


Oh I'm so sorry I always try to respond but maybe I missed a post? 

I had just noticed a great deal of crossover between those two "celeb" threads but of course that doesn't apply to everyone. 

I did send a pm to QueenofWrapDress and we had what I thought was a lovely communication (I am just hoping she agrees)!


----------



## TimeToShop

The clean living had to be a deal breaker. She’s pretty. TW looks like a Dollar Store version.


----------



## bag-mania

TimeToShop said:


> The clean living had to be a deal breaker. She’s pretty. TW looks like a Dollar Store version.



Hmm, MARCA is a Spanish sports publication. Not sure how much credibility they have in the gossip department. It will be interesting to see if other websites jump on the bandwagon with the story.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

TimeToShop said:


> The clean living had to be a deal breaker. She’s pretty. TW looks like a Dollar Store version.




But when you read further than the clickbait headline it says he went on a few dates in the very early days of *knowing* Ghoul. I don't think that counts as cheating, and I come from a culture where you don't generally go on dates with several people at the same time until you have a talk about being exclusive.

I also found one of the comments re: him allegedly bombarding the model with text messages very interesting. She person said "So he basically stalked her, she wasn't impressed with his title, so he went back to [Ghoul] who stroked his ego."

Re: the clean living, didn't the crazy one even forbid him to drink coffee? Don't quote me, I only very clearly remember the alcohol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

andrashik said:


> Hmm, what about our responses to one of your posts? From what I saw, you didn't even reply to those. The one regarding a former first lady and us liking her ? ( and other stuff)



I basically live here and I've on occasion missed posts because this thread moves so fast and I gave up looking at the notifications a long time ago...I just refresh, read along and hope for the best.

From what I've seen @OriginalBalenciaga has her grievances with this thread/our approach sometimes, but is always happy to communicate.


----------



## TimeToShop

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But when you actually read further it says he went on a few dates in the very early days of *knowing* Ghoul. I don't think that counts as cheating, and I come from a culture where you don't generally go on dates with several people at the same time until you have a talk about being exclusive.
> 
> I also found one of the comments re: him allegedly bombarding the model with text messages very interesting. She person said "So he basically stalked her, she wasn't impressed with his title, so he went back to [Ghoul] who stroked his ego."


I don’t think TW would be so generous. I bet she thought he was hers after that first meeting and she wasn’t sharing. 

He probably had not heard “no” from a woman very often. I could see him bombarding her, trying to charm her. 

This is crude, but I doubt it was just his ego she was stroking.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

TimeToShop said:


> This is crude, but I doubt it was just his ego she was stroki



I do declare, I'm blushing!  (NOT)


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I basically live here and I've on occasion missed posts because this thread moves so fast and I gave up looking at the notifications a long time ago...I just refresh, read along and hope for the best.
> 
> From what I've seen @OriginalBalenciaga has her grievances with this thread/our approach sometimes, but is always happy to communicate.


Well, this saddens me. I realize this thread is not for everyone and respect their opinions, too. Imo most of us try to be diligent in forming our opinions. We usually include articles and sources.  What I enjoy about the thread is the diversity of opinions as well as the wealth of factual info we get - it’s almost like getting a degree in the BRF - almost.  Often, I interpret the article one way, but, after reading another viewpoint here, I change my mind or wait for more confirmation.  I never expected to come across royals who mislead, lie, deceive. Also, these fashion&gossip threads have increased my awareness of how I look to others, an eye-opening experience.  Upon occasion, I have been known to wear the linen pants [shudder]. 

My biggest gripes are the way H&M intrude into areas they know nothing about, lecture the world as if they have all the answers, try to upstage everyone else in the photo, sue over minor issues,  antagonize the BRF.   Humble apologies if this upsets anyone, that has never been my intention. Cheers and happy weekend to all.

Seems Nflix is unhappy, too:








						Harry and Meghan's statements in TV show were contradictory - source
					

Harry and Meghan 'confused' filmmakers on their docuseries with statements that they believed 'contradicted' what the Duke wrote in his book, a Netflix source told Page Six.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

andrashik said:


> Hmm, what about our responses to one of your posts? From what I saw, you didn't even reply to those. The one regarding a former first lady and us liking her ? ( and other stuff)


Speaking for my self, not the poster, I don’t need the last word , other points of view are fine, I don’t always reply either


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone just called her stage-5-clinging-climber barnacle and I can't stop laughing about the barnacle. I'm obviously easily amused.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The barnacle person also called her a black hole of extreme greed and said at this point it would need an act of God to make her go away.

Oh, and while several names got tossed around from the very slim pickings most seemed to think Katherine McPhee.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, this saddens me. I realize this thread is not for everyone and respect their opinions, too. Imo most of us try to be diligent in forming our opinions. We usually include articles and sources.  What I enjoy about the thread is the diversity of opinions as well as the wealth of factual info we get - it’s almost like getting a degree in the BRF - almost.  Often, I interpret the article one way, but, after reading another viewpoint here, I change my mind or wait for more confirmation.  I never expected to come across royals who mislead, lie, deceive. Also, these fashion&gossip threads have increased my awareness of how I look to others, an eye-opening experience.  Upon occasion, I have been known to wear the linen pants [shudder].
> 
> My biggest gripes are the way H&M intrude into areas they know nothing about, lecture the world as if they have all the answers, try to upstage everyone else in the photo, sue over minor issues,  antagonize the BRF.   Humble apologies if this upsets anyone, that has never been my intention. Cheers and happy weekend to all.
> 
> Seems Nflix is unhappy, too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's statements in TV show were contradictory - source
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'confused' filmmakers on their docuseries with statements that they believed 'contradicted' what the Duke wrote in his book, a Netflix source told Page Six.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sounds like they didn’t keep their stories straight.


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes as long as it offers a free bottle of Sour Grape Whine.


That would pair well with a Spill-the-Beans Burrito (in honor of their many tell-alls)


----------



## Toby93

Spoiler: Nudity


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93




----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Spoiler: Nudity



I remember that photo. The good looking young guy she’s rubbing up against in the top photo was a maître d’ at a bar. She probably just met him.

Her friend’s family used to take Meghan everywhere because she was their daughter’s best friend. That’s how Meghan first got to go to Europe.


----------



## bag-mania

This article is a gold mine! I thought I recognized the maître d’. It is full of dozens and dozens of photos of Meghan from childhood through her teens to early adulthood. It’s a long article but well worth the time, not only for the photos but also the insight into her personality from someone who knew her almost her whole life.









						Meghan Markle revelations by Ninaki - the friend who knew her best
					

Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Jktgal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I disagree. This is extremely US-centric and patronizing at best, with ugly colonial undertones at worst.


Even if US-centric, Deepika Padukone is arguably professionally more successful in the US than Meghan Markle had been or hope to be. 

The guests are probably too polite to push back, but future invites will take note. Soon she'll end up with Meghan Markle-type people as guests, if even that.



DoggieBags said:


> Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options



Fried Lies is all I got.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> I remember that photo. The good looking young guy she’s rubbing up against in the top photo was a maître d’ at a bar. She probably just met him.
> 
> Her friend’s family used to take Meghan everywhere because she was their daughter’s best friend. That’s how Meghan first got to go to Europe.


I don't know about you, but there are NO photos from my youth with my top completely undone with no bra underneath.  What the heck is she doing?  This is pretty sleazy


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> This article is a gold mine! I thought I recognized the maître d’. It is full of dozens and dozens of photos of Meghan from childhood through her teens to early adulthood. It’s a long article but well worth the time, not only for the photos but also the insight into her personality from someone who knew her almost her whole life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revelations by Ninaki - the friend who knew her best
> 
> 
> Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Very interesting article. 
‘It was such a shock when she told me they were getting divorced. After about three seasons of Suits, she called me and said she wanted me to know *because it was going to come out in the papers*"

I find this line especially hilarious. She really was full of herself, wasn't she? No one had ever heard of her, so it would not have been in any papers.


----------



## SBLady

DoggieBags said:


> Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options


Hot tea in a flying cup


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I find this line especially hilarious. She really was full of herself, wasn't she? No one had ever heard of her, so it would not have been in any papers.


In her mind she has always been a STAR. Plus, wasn’t she already paying Sunshine Sachs for their services, albeit on a much smaller scale. It still counts if you pay to make sure it is in the papers.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jennlt said:


> That would pair well with a Spill-the-Beans Burrito (in honor of their many tell-alls)


Your burritos would also taste very good with an Am-Busch-The-Royal-Family Beer.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Mike is right — Hazz is a _bellend. _


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


>



The alleged affair was never confirmed, was it? It was a rumor from  an unnamed source that died down quickly a few years back.

Hypothetically speaking, let’s say the rumor of Will cheating on Kate was true (not that I believe it was). That means Harry is going to devote a chapter of _his memoir_ to dishing about his brother’s love life. How lame is that? 

I know Harry’s life is rather dull but still…


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The alleged affair was never confirmed, was it? It was a rumor from  an unnamed source that died down quickly a few years back.
> 
> Hypothetically speaking, let’s say the rumor of Will cheating on Kate was true (not that I believe it was). That means Harry is going to devote a chapter of _his memoir_ to dishing about his brother’s love life. How lame is that?
> 
> I know Harry’s life is rather dull but still…


_*First of all, it is important to note that nothing here is confirmed or verified information*, but an explanation of the conversation which happened online. The Prince of Wales was dubbed the ‘Prince of Pegging’ after DeuxMoi ran an anonymous post about a royal affair. *Important to note that DeuxMoi’s disclaimer reads: “this account does not claim any information published is based in fact.”*

But anyway, there was a (rather scandalous) claim made about an unidentified royal, suspected to be Prince William, about an extramarital affair, and a love of pegging. “This is so salacious I’m almost too shook to share with you (but will anyway),” the post read. “This British royal’s extramarital affair is an open secret in London and amongst the English aristo set, and is the talk of every party and desk. At a recent media party, I was told the real reason for the affair was the royal’s love of pegging, which the wife is far too old-fashioned to engage in. The wife doesn’t mind her and in fact prefers her husband getting his sexual needs fulfilled elsewhere, as long as things don’t become emotional, which was the case with the last woman.”








						The Prince William & Rose Hanbury Rumours, Explained
					

The relationship status between the Prince of Wales and Rose Hanbury has long been speculated, and even inspired the trending term "Prince of Pegging."




					www.bustle.com
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> The alleged affair was never confirmed, was it? It was a rumor from  an unnamed source that died down quickly a few years back.
> 
> Hypothetically speaking, let’s say the rumor of Will cheating on Kate was true (not that I believe it was). That means Harry is going to devote a chapter of _his memoir_ to dishing about his brother’s love life. How lame is that?
> 
> I know Harry’s life is rather dull but still…


He probably needs to pad his memoir with lots of stories about other people because I cheated on my exams, skived in the army and got dumped by my girlfriends isn't riveting enough.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The differences I saw was that a) Charles apologizes when he yelled at someone and b) he calls at all times (but apparently never before breakfast and never after 11 p.m.) because he works 24/7.
> 
> Also, who would have thought that Queen Mum's household was the most fun one to work for!


I’m not surprised as when she was alive there was lots of talk about how nice she was. It’s only now she’s been dead a while the likes of lady C have been saying she was a schemer.

To be honest I think the whole royal popularity thing is largely cyclical - they all get their golden moments and they all take an L. I mean I remember when the press were calling Philip was a moronic bigot and then in his final years he enjoyed a volte face about what a masterful statesman and gent he is.

Of course the most telling example of this is Harry himself.

Is any of this true? Will we get the truth? Who knows.


xincinsin said:


> I happened to come across a few close-ups of Zedzee on her spectacle day and realized that whoever did her make-up did quite a poor job. From afar, she looked good, but up close, the wrinkles, freckles and blemishes were easily visible. She would have had access to all the experts plus a pretty much unlimited budget, yet she turned up in an ill-fitting gown, flyaway hair and bad make-up. Why? It makes no sense. Most brides want to look good.
> 
> Her hairdresser Serge Normant (of Tiaragate fame) seems to be excellent at his profession. He claims a messy hairdo was the most authentic style for Zedzee. Oh well, I agree that she has indeed made a thriving mess of things.


Ironically flying in a white man with little black hair experience  to do battle with that crusty weave when there are tons of able black hairstylists in London is a better inditement of the triumph of elite, white mediocrity over black expertise than anything Meg has ever said or spun for.


Chanbal said:


> _*Julia Hartley-Brewer owns 'whinging' Meghan Markle*_ - Starts @ 4:20



She’s a solid broadcaster that one.


marietouchet said:


> worried that KC will HAVE to invite JCMH to coronation because he is a peer, then I perked up thinking here is a look for MM to copy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin on JEWELS
> 
> 
> Apr 1, 2022 - Kathleen Florence May Pelham-******* (née Candy), Duchess of Newcastle.    These aristocratic ladies, dressed for the coronation of Georg...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pin.it


I love this photo this is exactly how I’d look if I had to endure in hours and hours of ‘the wonderful spectacle of British Pageantry’ just to rock my tiara without even the comfort of my phone (and this most dear thread.) 



Chanbal said:


> How can one sell family like this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Will Prince Harry now call out Netflix for gross intrusion?
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: How are we going to amuse ourselves in the ceremonial void between the Queen's Funeral and the King's Coronation? Luckily, here comes Netflix to the rescue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _How are we going to amuse ourselves in the ceremonial void between the Queen’s Funeral and the King’s Coronation? Luckily, here comes Netflix to the rescue, with plans to plug that infotainment gap with a grisly ritual of its own making — *The Crown*.
> 
> The new series, which will be released next month, *focuses on the turbulent years between 1990 and 1997, and no one would argue that it was a low point for the Royal Family. Yet do the Windsors really deserve to be portrayed, as they have to date, as a parade of stuffed toff freaks with no redeeming features whatsoever?*
> 
> In series three, the Queen was even shown visiting Aberfan in 1966 — after the colliery spoil tip disaster that killed 116 children and 28 adults — and being so unmoved by the tragedy that she had to fake her tears before facing the bereaved public.
> 
> Art is one thing, duplicitous emotional embroidery for the sake of dramatic plot lines is another.
> 
> I thought it was shameful at the time, and still do now.
> 
> *This week we learn that the fifth series will continue in the same vein: the Queen is still a cold fish; Charles is an unfeeling brute; mad, marginalised Diana is a diamond-wearing schemer; and their children are collateral damage as the War of the Waleses plunges onwards, finally ending in divorce and separate quests for personal happiness*…
> 
> *Or is that another deafening silence I hear from Montecito?* *The silence of a prince who has his own lucrative Netflix deals to protect.* *Not to mention his plans to harvest recent royal history for his own gain.* God knows why I am so bothered about it all, if he is not. Yet I am. *For surely these events are too fresh to be historic, too raw to be served up as entertainment for the masses?*
> 
> The excavation and sexploitation of the recent past of a family who did not ask for this attention and who can do nothing about it seems very unfair.
> 
> Having a version of their most personal moments fictionalised, then lavishly distributed to an audience who have demonstrated in the past that they do not know the difference between make-believe and reality seems a very piercing, and very modern, form of cruelty.
> 
> *Would Netflix dare to do this to any other prominent family?* The Murdochs? The Beckhams? The Rainiers? The *****-Kushners? The House of Bourbon? I wonder.
> 
> *In the meantime, there is nothing much the senior royals can do, except sit with a trembling finger on the remote control while Prince Harry and Netflix do their worst*._



The crown is just a very expensive soap opera and tbh I feel like the royals still benefit overall from the publicity


DoggieBags said:


> Perhaps H and M will start their own chain of restaurants, The Olive Branches, with an Invisa-kid friendly atmosphere and a menu featuring some of their world-renowned dishes such as Word Salad, Polo Nachos, Not-at-All Humble Pie, Lentil 16 Potty Pie, Misinformation Impossible Stew, The Ultimate Bully Beef Tongue, Burning Bridges Flaming Shish Kabobs,  Sussex Montecito Churdle, Korean 9 Year Old Spa Noodles, Lemon Olive Cake, M’s Aussie Banana Bread, Blood Diamond Bars, Markle Snow Ghost Cream Pie, Spotted-ify Dick Pudding, and Tiara Gate Cake. Expect some unique beverages such as Ask-Me-How-I-Am Bitter Melon Tea. I’m sure the many creative minds on this thread can come up with more menu options


I’d like the orange-glazed ham please with a side of farce meat stuffing and roasted carrot tops.
My friends will have the total coq au vin, the squat pigeon, the toasted and kippered spread, the smashed cottage pie, the mutton in lamb dressing and I was told there was a space for the children but I can’t see the kids (menu) anywhere?

Also the polo nachos…can I share with a friend? I hear that’s how it’s done in those circles   


V0N1B2 said:


> I didn’t post at the time this was mentioned here, but I agree. I’m ambivalent towards Jordan Peterson, but Meghan is waaaay out of her league if she thinks she’s gonna pick a fight with him. He’ll rip her apart lash by lash, tendril by tendril. And I am here for it.


She recently got outmanoeuvred by a candle so I don’t think it’d be a great achievement for the half-boiled lobster.


purseinsanity said:


> I have no idea why people keep calling him "Prince".  He should be "Doofus".





	

		
			
		

		
	
The one and only prince agrees


TimeToShop said:


> The clean living had to be a deal breaker. She’s pretty. TW looks like a Dollar Store version.



It’s weird how they both have the Kate Middleton hair/extensions it does feel like Harry was looking for a Clone wife…and it, um, didn’t work out.


CarryOn2020 said:


> _*First of all, it is important to note that nothing here is confirmed or verified information*, but an explanation of the conversation which happened online. The Prince of Wales was dubbed the ‘Prince of Pegging’ after DeuxMoi ran an anonymous post about a royal affair. *Important to note that DeuxMoi’s disclaimer reads: “this account does not claim any information published is based in fact.”*
> 
> But anyway, there was a (rather scandalous) claim made about an unidentified royal, suspected to be Prince William, about an extramarital affair, and a love of pegging. “This is so salacious I’m almost too shook to share with you (but will anyway),” the post read. “This British royal’s extramarital affair is an open secret in London and amongst the English aristo set, and is the talk of every party and desk. At a recent media party, I was told the real reason for the affair was the royal’s love of pegging, which the wife is far too old-fashioned to engage in. The wife doesn’t mind her and in fact prefers her husband getting his sexual needs fulfilled elsewhere, as long as things don’t become emotional, which was the case with the last woman.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince William & Rose Hanbury Rumours, Explained
> 
> 
> The relationship status between the Prince of Wales and Rose Hanbury has long been speculated, and even inspired the trending term "Prince of Pegging."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I know I shouldn’t but can you imagine if they put this drama in the crown? They couldn’t show it so they’d have to have the ‘tools of the trade’ fall out of her handbag into the blancmange at a state dinner - go full carry on farce.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*First of all, it is important to note that nothing here is confirmed or verified information*, but an explanation of the conversation which happened online. The Prince of Wales was dubbed the ‘Prince of Pegging’ after DeuxMoi ran an anonymous post about a royal affair. *Important to note that DeuxMoi’s disclaimer reads: “this account does not claim any information published is based in fact.”*
> 
> But anyway, there was a (rather scandalous) claim made about an unidentified royal, suspected to be Prince William, about an extramarital affair, and a love of pegging. “This is so salacious I’m almost too shook to share with you (but will anyway),” the post read. “This British royal’s extramarital affair is an open secret in London and amongst the English aristo set, and is the talk of every party and desk. At a recent media party, I was told the real reason for the affair was the royal’s love of pegging, which the wife is far too old-fashioned to engage in. The wife doesn’t mind her and in fact prefers her husband getting his sexual needs fulfilled elsewhere, as long as things don’t become emotional, which was the case with the last woman.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Prince William & Rose Hanbury Rumours, Explained
> 
> 
> The relationship status between the Prince of Wales and Rose Hanbury has long been speculated, and even inspired the trending term "Prince of Pegging."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bustle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



It’s always an unidentified source and an unidentified royal with H&M backed up with the usual disclaimer which most idiots (stans) won’t interpret.

Wish someone would peg those two as that’s the orifice they use the most to speak with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

As I'm of the opinion the affair never happened and there's plenty of breadcrumbs hinting to the rumours originating with Ghoul...the Harkles' marriage must really be in trouble if they bring it up again to deflect. But also, if Harry does that he will put the final nail in his BRF coffin, and rightfully so.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


>



I didn’t know who this was and clicked to check it wasn’t some celebrity but it seems it’s just someone on Twitter. Honestly I don’t think it’s fair to laugh at a normal person just because she has bad taste.  She should be able  to like who she likes and after all - her idol prince Harry has had far more horrific cosplay moments.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I'm of the opinion the affair never happened and there's plenty of breadcrumbs hinting to the rumours originating with Ghoul...the Harkles' marriage must really be in trouble if they bring it up again to deflect. But also, if Harry does that he will put the final nail in his BRF coffin, and rightfully so.



While she may be spreading them the rumours about infidelity do pre-exist M. Adultery rumours about Will do not sell well and they don’t want to sour the royal press team for low sales so they won’t run them is what I’ve heard from journalist I know.

I’m inclined to think the Will adultery rumours are true as aristocratic society just isn’t monogamous and he’s a man with enormous power. He seems a bit vanilla for steely Dan but you never know. I’m also inclined to think H and m both sleep around and he is being a first- rank hypocrite as per usual and that whole heart string pull about his mum is meant to appeal to us petty bourgeoisie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I didn’t know who this was and clicked to check it wasn’t some celebrity but it seems it’s just someone on Twitter. Honestly I don’t think it’s fair to laugh at a normal person just because she has bad taste.  She should be able  to like who she likes and after all - her idol prince Harry has had far more horrific cosplay moments.



I read it as "Do I need to say whom she's channelling", not dissing a random person. But if so I agree, let normal people be.


----------



## mikimoto007

jelliedfeels said:


> While she may be spreading them the rumours about infidelity do pre-exist M. Adultery rumours about Will do not sell well and they don’t want to sour the royal press team for low sales so they won’t run them is what I’ve heard from journalist I know.
> 
> I’m inclined to think the Will adultery rumours are true as aristocratic society just isn’t monogamous and he’s a man with enormous power. He seems a bit vanilla for steely Dan but you never know. I’m also inclined to think H and m both sleep around and he is being a first- rank hypocrite as per usual and that whole heart string pull about his mum is meant to appeal to us petty bourgeoisie.


I find it difficult to believe that the press wouldn’t publish if they  had concrete proof of infidelity. That is a dynamite story and would sell like crazy.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> I didn’t know who this was and clicked to check it wasn’t some celebrity but it seems it’s just someone on Twitter. Honestly I don’t think it’s fair to laugh at a normal person just because she has bad taste.  She should be able  to like who she likes and after all - her idol prince Harry has had far more horrific cosplay moments.


I read that she is a Stan who met Handbag at Invictus and took pics with him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

N


mikimoto007 said:


> I find it difficult to believe that the press wouldn’t publish if they  had concrete proof of infidelity. That is a dynamite story and would sell like crazy.



No its not worth the risk. Diana’s adultery story is the exception to the rule and it  made money because
 1. There was no internet. People can just look anything up for free now. 
2. Newspapers and paps had a long term storyline running on their troubled marriage 
3. Because of the storyline they could spin adultery speculation for months whereas now the news cycle is so much faster now it’d be dead in a month
4. The press kind of had the upper hand on the royals at this point as their main means of publicity. This is no longer true again thanks to the internet. 
5. The royals would be mega p****d if they did this to golden boy Will and now have more control over their image than they did in the 90s.
6. The current tabloid demographic *don’t want to know bad news about the royals *and non-readers aren’t going to buy *say* the daily mail to read the story if they can read it on the internet and they don’t want to give the DM their money.
7. Proof doesn’t necessarily engage people or sell papers. We have seen this with their hesitation about running with any of the extremely strong proof against Andrew and it’s subsequent gushing up and Andrew is nowhere near as important to the royal team as William is. 

I mean in general people want to believe  good things about those they like and don’t struggle to believe the worse about those they dislike. I mean I have no problem believing most anonymous tip offs about H&M because I already think them very capable of skullduggery.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I'm of the opinion the affair never happened and there's plenty of breadcrumbs hinting to the rumours originating with Ghoul...the Harkles' marriage must really be in trouble if they bring it up again to deflect. But also, if Harry does that he will put the final nail in his BRF coffin, and rightfully so.




Im going with … this rumour is false and cruel.  There are no pictures or video or eyewitness accounts where people go on record.

Giles Coren was the originator of the rumour (after a visit to Soho House in Amsterdam… and I believe H and M were there at the same time… so draw your own conclusion).  Giles drunkenly tweeted the rumour.  It caused a stir.  The British tabs and journalists started digging and found nothing.

Giles withdrew the claims when he was sober and apologised and said it “was a joke.”

yet the rumours persist.  Honestly it’s cruel, because kids (George, Charlotte and Louis) do have access to the internet and will get teased about this at school.  If true journalists can’t find anything - then this is MM using it to destroy P and POW, and deflect.  

Besides….MM taking back control of  her PR and then this gets leaked to spectator and circulates again!?  Too many coincidences for me to believe this.


----------



## needlv

One more thing - the rumour was posted in the USA version of the spectator.

…Another “coincidence”.


----------



## mikimoto007

jelliedfeels said:


> N
> 
> 
> No its not worth the risk. Diana’s adultery story is the exception to the rule and it  made money because
> 1. There was no internet. People can just look anything up for free now.
> 2. Newspapers and paps had a long term storyline running on their troubled marriage
> 3. Because of the storyline they could spin adultery speculation for months whereas now the news cycle is so much faster now it’d be dead in a month
> 4. The press kind of had the upper hand on the royals at this point as their main means of publicity. This is no longer true again thanks to the internet.
> 5. The royals would be mega p****d if they did this to golden boy Will and now have more control over their image than they did in the 90s.
> 6. The current tabloid demographic *don’t want to know bad news about the royals *and non-readers aren’t going to buy *say* the daily mail to read the story if they can read it on the internet and they don’t want to give the DM their money.
> 7. Proof doesn’t necessarily engage people or sell papers. We have seen this with their hesitation about running with any of the extremely strong proof against Andrew and it’s subsequent gushing up and Andrew is nowhere near as important to the royal team as William is.
> 
> I mean in general people want to believe  good things about those they like and don’t struggle to believe the worse about those they dislike. I mean I have no problem believing most anonymous tip offs about H&M because I already think them very capable of skullduggery.


Interesting, but I still don’t agree. If they could prove it free and clear, without fear of legal implications, there is no reason they wouldn’t print this story.

1. They can do that with any story. That’s a reason for them never to produce newspapers  again, not a reason why they wouldn’t do the scoop of the decade, if they could.
2. No reason why the press wouldn’t create this narrative for William and Kate if they felt it served their narrative.
3. They could spin this for months too, if they wanted.
4 and 5. I don’t think there’s an upper hand in this relationship. One badly needs the other at all times, and I think all parties are aware of that. Once one party think they have the upper hand, they’re in bother, as per Harry and Meghan.I’m sure if William had his way he would never work with the BBC again, but that’s just not going to happen.
6. Bad news always sells. It is unfortunate but the British press love to build up and rip down. For sure, people would want to read about an affair.
7. No, proof doesn’t. You can sell plenty of papers of the back of speculation and rumour. It would help you with the legal side though, if you were taken to court.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

needlv said:


> Im going with … this rumour is false and cruel.  There are no pictures or video or eyewitness accounts where people go on record.





needlv said:


> yet the rumours persist.  Honestly it’s cruel, because kids (George, Charlotte and Louis) do have access to the internet and will get teased about this at school.


I tend to agree with you…but also feel that way about the accusations that Archie and Lili don’t exist or questions about their birth stories etc…one day they too will have access to the internet and these unsubstantiated (as of now) claims will hurt them as well


----------



## BlueCherry

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I tend to agree with you…but also feel that way about the accusations that Archie and Lili don’t exist or questions about their birth stories etc…one day they too will have access to the internet and these unsubstantiated (as of now) claims will hurt them as well



I don’t believe the rumours about William, he has to much to lose if proven. Also you only have to see the way the POW looks at him sometimes, genuine love and admiration. 

I can’t comment on the alleged invisible kid/s but what I can say is that there were some odd photos taken which appeared to be manipulated. Why?

Also H&M claimed they wanted a quiet and private life to protect their children. What an absolute crock of sh1t that was. They’ve done anything and everything to stir drama and get their boring faces in the headlines every bloody day. That’s why people speculate about their kids - they bring it on themselves. 

Many superstars and uber wealthy people manage to keep their lives and family private. H&M don’t because they are greedy liars.


----------



## marietouchet

Brief intro to the Duchy of Cornwall, in a term it is BIG business, £1.2B is assets and income of £20M , hmmm , not a huge rate of return ??? Not my gosh, so much stuff to take care of … 


Prince William 'very much taking active role in' the Duchy of Cornwall








						Prince William 'very much taking active role in' the Duchy of Cornwall
					

A royal source told PEOPLE : '[William] is going to very much take an active role in it.' On Monday, William met with Alastair Martin, the Duchy of Cornwall secretary.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I tend to agree with you…but also feel that way about the accusations that Archie and Lili don’t exist or questions about their birth stories etc…one day they too will have access to the internet and these unsubstantiated (as of now) claims will hurt them as well


I lean to the side of KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS PERIOD then I roll my eyeballs up when there are more kid-related shenanigans  (that allegedly suspiciously look like they could only have come) from the parents


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I'm of the opinion the affair never happened and there's plenty of breadcrumbs hinting to the rumours originating with Ghoul...the Harkles' marriage must really be in trouble if they bring it up again to deflect. But also, if Harry does that he will put the final nail in his BRF coffin, and rightfully so.



I’m also of the opinion it didn’t happen, also even if there was a hint of truth, which I don’t believe, how scummy of JCMH to do this to his brother. What a sad amoral person he has become.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I’m also of the opinion it didn’t happen, also even if there was a hint of truth, which I don’t believe, how scummy of JCMH to do this to his brother. What a sad amoral person he has become.


agree ...and the fact that this was more salacious and not just alleging an affair is disgusting


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I lean to the side of KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS PERIOD then I roll my eyeballs up when there are more kid-related shenanigans  (that allegedly suspiciously look like they could only have come) from the parents


I agree with you, kids must be off limits. One more reason why parents shouldn't promote speculation about their kids by spreading misinformation and/or releasing manipulated photos for public consumption imo.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## RAINDANCE

bellecate said:


> I’m also of the opinion it didn’t happen, also even if there was a hint of truth, which I don’t believe, how scummy of JCMH to do this to his brother. What a sad amoral person he has become.


And equally offensive to the woman and her husband and family who, it seems to me, have been given zero consideration either by the original source of the made up rumour or M's stans who have promulgated this salacious gossip. So much for "compassion" as a brand. The alledged mistress that I have seen named also has young children.


----------



## sdkitty

RAINDANCE said:


> And equally offensive to the woman and her husband and family who, it seems to me, have been given zero consideration either by the original source of the made up rumour or M's stans who have promulgated this salacious gossip. So much for "compassion" as a brand. The alledged mistress that I have seen named also has young children.


for what it's worth Tina Brown's book just said that William was paying too much attention to this woman at a dinner party (allegedly)....nothing about an affair


----------



## jennlt

Chanbal said:


>



He's hard at work


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Im going with … this rumour is false and cruel.  There are no pictures or video or eyewitness accounts where people go on record.
> 
> Giles Coren was the originator of the rumour (after a visit to Soho House in Amsterdam… and I believe H and M were there at the same time… so draw your own conclusion).  Giles drunkenly tweeted the rumour.  It caused a stir.  The British tabs and journalists started digging and found nothing.
> 
> Giles withdrew the claims when he was sober and apologised and said it “was a joke.”
> 
> yet the rumours persist.  Honestly it’s cruel, because kids (George, Charlotte and Louis) do have access to the internet and will get teased about this at school.  If true journalists can’t find anything - then this is MM using it to destroy P and POW, and deflect.
> 
> Besides….MM taking back control of  her PR and then this gets leaked to spectator and circulates again!?  Too many coincidences for me to believe this.


I don’t believe this rumor at all. I see it coming from a woman who slept with countless men in her attempt to crawl up the greasy pole   She finally got lucky and found a schnook to marry her. She thinks that other people have her low morals  and has no problem creating mean and damaging lies.  Giles Coren was a fool for passing it on. It won’t be forgotten by Prince William. You can kiss any OBE goodbye, Giles.


----------



## KEG66

sdkitty said:


> for what it's worth Tina Brown's book just said that William was paying too much attention to this woman at a dinner party (allegedly)....nothing about an affair


Also Catherine’s sister, Pippa named her second daughter Rose. Can’t imagine she would do that if the rumours were true.


----------



## sdkitty

KEG66 said:


> Also Catherine’s sister, Pippa named her second daughter Rose. Can’t imagine she would do that if the rumours were true.


I can't believe harry would put this nasty rumouor in his book


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



If he doesn't hurl accusations and innuendoes at his family, and he deletes the unsavoury parts of his past, and he won't want to upset his sensitive wife by recounting his drunken escapades or his hunting expeditions, he is probably just going to write about Mummy.


----------



## lallybelle

Eh that new Deux Moi thing from a little while back was obviously Harkle stans. If I recall correctly it was around the time that they were  brushed pretty much off at the Jubilee. They tried to revive the Rose H rumors with a bit more salacious detail. Since anyone can write to that site, and they fully admit to not vetting or vouching for anything on it, pinch of salt and all that. Plus I mean they did this right after Pippa named her new daughter Rose. Even if you loved a name would you name your child after the women having an affair with your BIL and hurting your sister? I think not. 

This just sounds like an attempt to gain attention by claiming they are trying to stop them from including "juicy" details in the book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I can't believe harry would put this nasty rumouor in his book


For Hazz, the fact that so many believe he _could_ put this nasty rumor in his book - _that_ should be the worst part.  There was a time when few thought he would _gossip about his brother_, _much less put it in a book, _that _he himself claims is his own autobiography. _

1. gossip about his brother,  the next King
2. include the gossip in a book
3. claim this book is his autobiography

If this is not enough to remove H&M from CoS, LoS, and every future family function, what will it take?

ETA: Now, most people believe TW was the one who knowingly spread the false rumors and, indeed, most believe  Hazz _is_ _capable_ of including the rumor in his book.  Not sure he can recover from this sort of fall.


----------



## DL Harper

bellecate said:


> I’m also of the opinion it didn’t happen, also even if there was a hint of truth, which I don’t believe, how scummy of JCMH to do this to his brother. What a sad amoral person he has become.


Not just his brother, but didn't H (allegedly) mention how he didn't understand how a sibling "would treat their spouse like this"?  But then H is more than ready to print the alleged rumor for that same spouse to relive again??  Goes to show what H thinks of his SIL. H is a very angry and nasty person who will never be happy or satisfied with 1) any amount of money to shut up and go away, 2) come back and you can have the Kingdom because we know you're entitled to it all, nor 3) any title(s) for himself, MM or the (maybe) kids.  
Only one thing would ever remedy his nastiness and and hatred and that would be reversing Diana's death.  He is and always will be mad at the entire world - from the day of her death until his own.  Sadly, there doesn't seem to be anything to improve his disposition - not even a divorce and him returning to the fold.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> If he doesn't hurl accusations and innuendoes at his family, and he deletes the unsavoury parts of his past, and he won't want to upset his sensitive wife by recounting his drunken escapades or his hunting expeditions, he is probably just going to write about Mummy.


talking about mummy is big for him but not enough to fill a book


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I don’t believe this rumor at all. I see it coming from a woman who slept with countless men in her attempt to crawl up the greasy pole   She finally got lucky and found a schnook to marry her. She thinks that other people have her low morals  and has no problem creating mean and damaging lies.  Giles Coren was a fool for passing it on. It won’t be forgotten by Prince William. You can kiss any OBE goodbye, Giles.


actually this is the second or third schnook...but this was the jackpot


----------



## DL Harper

DL Harper said:


> Not just his brother, but didn't H (allegedly) mention how he didn't understand how a sibling "would treat their spouse like this"?  But then H is more than ready to print the alleged rumor for that same spouse to relive again??  Goes to show what H thinks of his SIL. H is a very angry and nasty person who will never be happy or satisfied with 1) any amount of money to shut up and go away, 2) come back and you can have the Kingdom because we know you're entitled to it all, nor 3) any title(s) for himself, MM or the (maybe) kids.
> Only one thing would ever remedy his nastiness and hatred and that would be reversing Diana's death.  He is and always will be mad at the entire world - from the day of her death until his own.  Sadly, there doesn't seem to be anything to improve his disposition - not even a divorce and him returning to the fold.


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


>



Color me confused.  H was more than ready, willing and happy ($$$$) to release the tell all book when QEII was alive, but now that the purse strings have changed hands, he's back pedaling???  
Isn't a memoir about ones own life, instead of suspicions, allegations, pretends, whispers and maybes about other people????


----------



## bag-mania

As I recall Kate and Rose used to be good friends and they had a falling out, but it was not about an affair. It seems they have resolved their differences to some degree because they are seen at the same events from time to time. Not sure if that would be the case if the rumor was true (unless Kate was thinking Rose was getting a little too friendly with Will and she nipped it in the bud before anything _could_ happen).

Here’s a three year old article about it.









						Kate Middleton has fall-out with friend and tells William to 'phase her out'
					

A FALLING out between Kate and one of her long-term best friends has stunned royal insiders. Last week it emerged that the Duchess of Cambridge views Rose Hanbury as a “rural rival” while at home i…




					web.archive.org


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> As I recall Kate and Rose used to be good friends and they had a falling out, but it was not about an affair. It seems they have resolved their differences to some degree because they are seen at the same events from time to time. Not sure if that would be the case if the rumor was true (unless Kate was thinking Rose was getting a little too friendly with Will and she nipped it in the bud before anything _could_ happen).
> 
> Here’s a three year old article about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton has fall-out with friend and tells William to 'phase her out'
> 
> 
> A FALLING out between Kate and one of her long-term best friends has stunned royal insiders. Last week it emerged that the Duchess of Cambridge views Rose Hanbury as a “rural rival” while at home i…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org


but this is a tabloid gossip?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> As I recall Kate and Rose used to be good friends and they had a falling out, but it was not about an affair. It seems they have resolved their differences to some degree because they are seen at the same events from time to time. Not sure if that would be the case if the rumor was true (unless Kate was thinking Rose was getting a little too friendly with Will and she nipped it in the bud before anything _could_ happen).
> 
> Here’s a three year old article about it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton has fall-out with friend and tells William to 'phase her out'
> 
> 
> A FALLING out between Kate and one of her long-term best friends has stunned royal insiders. Last week it emerged that the Duchess of Cambridge views Rose Hanbury as a “rural rival” while at home i…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> web.archive.org


Interesting.  Thanks for sharing.  I don't believe the rumor either, but the only one whose opinion matters is Kate's, and whether she believes the rumor or not.  
My take home point from this article was Rose's husband is 23 years old than she is.  My father was just shy of 24 years old when my parents had me.  So of course, my next thought was, Eeew, gross.  
Yes, I am immature in that way.  I know there are many successful couples with vast age differences, but I couldn't do it.  DH is 5.5 years older than I am, and even though we met when we were both in our 20s, I thought he was absolutely ancient for the longest time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I tend to agree with you…but also feel that way about the accusations that Archie and Lili don’t exist or questions about their birth stories etc…one day they too will have access to the internet and these unsubstantiated (as of now) claims will hurt them as well



You are right, but also it was their own parents starting it with their extremely weird behaviour - collapsing and sliding belly, unnecessary lies regarding the birth of Archie, no witness of birth even though technically that is the basic requirement for a place in the LoS to just name the main few. 

If they for once behaved like normal people I doubt anyone would even blink an eye about those kids. The heir to the throne is able to have a pretty unbothered childhood after all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> I’m also of the opinion it didn’t happen, also even if there was a hint of truth, which I don’t believe, how scummy of JCMH to do this to his brother. What a sad amoral person he has become.



Even under the disguise of caring oh so much for Kate (where was he when his own wife bullied her while very pregnant and post-partum, though?) it is awful. I have a feeling she would prefer him to not discuss her marriage in a book, on TV or whatever else he can come up with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I doubt we'll be the only ones cheering him on.


----------



## KEG66

lallybelle said:


> Eh that new Deux Moi thing from a little while back was obviously Harkle stans. If I recall correctly it was around the time that they were  brushed pretty much off at the Jubilee. They tried to revive the Rose H rumors with a bit more salacious detail. Since anyone can write to that site, and they fully admit to not vetting or vouching for anything on it, pinch of salt and all that. Plus I mean they did this right after Pippa named her new daughter Rose. Even if you loved a name would you name your child after the women having an affair with your BIL and hurting your sister? I think not.
> 
> This just sounds like an attempt to gain attention by claiming they are trying to stop them from including "juicy" details in the book.


Also what a horrible thing to do to the sister in law that you so obviously once loved and respected. Not to mention your nephews and niece. Despicable.


----------



## csshopper

At some point the despicable duo sat around discussing what would be the most damaging, hurtful, devastating thing they could do to William and Catherine, something to destroy them as a couple  (“Just think H we can score a twofer with one rumor!”) and their family. Children as collateral damage, even better, they’ll show those little Princes and Princess a thing or two.

Drop a word, with a knowing smirk, to some dumb ass at Soho House and the devil’s work is done.

What they did not foresee is that in the long game, it would fail to take hold with reasonable people.

     *William and Kate have a solid foundation under their marriage built on years of learning about each other. It’s enviable and I believe unusual. ”Waity Katy” took unwarranted abuse in the media, and at the end, when the wedding was celebrated, could have flipped them all her middle finger, but didn’t because she is too classy to do it. Instead, she and William have gone on to lead their best lives ever, together

      * Their body language, facial expressions, teasing comments, conversations reflect not only love, but liking (they are different but equally critical) and respect and appreciation And devotion. I think William fully realizes how fortunate he is to have Kate as his wife.

     * Likewise, intense parental love is demonstrated by both of them. William would not hurt his children nor be able to live with the shame of harming their mother.

       *Nor would he be able to face the Middletons, Carole, Mike, James, Pippa if he were an adulterer. It would be a slap at them as well for having completely embraced him. The damage of those relationships to him would be shattering.

     * Can’t see him having to face his Gran if he had cheated. Yes, absolutely, she had dealt with numerous situations in the family, but such is William’s conscience, I believe, that he would not have done something that would be so crushing.

      To me it doesn’t add up, and if it’s true Hawry the Horrible is still dragging it around, makes it even more suspicious.

      I vote it’s a mound of chicken poop.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but this is a tabloid gossip?


Yes, but I don’t automatically dismiss them in a case like this. It is a rumor and no other type of publication would address it.


----------



## andrashik

marietouchet said:


> Speaking for my self, not the poster, I don’t need the last word , other points of view are fine, I don’t always reply either


It is not about the last word. It is about us ladies explaining over and over again why we do not like her and I have seen some well done explanations, but sadly they were ignored. That is all.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Yes, but I don’t automatically dismiss them in a case like this. It is a rumor and no other type of publication would address it.


I take it with a grain of salt


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

The best outcome is that nobody buys the book.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> This article is a gold mine! I thought I recognized the maître d’. It is full of dozens and dozens of photos of Meghan from childhood through her teens to early adulthood. It’s a long article but well worth the time, not only for the photos but also the insight into her personality from someone who knew her almost her whole life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revelations by Ninaki - the friend who knew her best
> 
> 
> Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> b


one thing that struck me was the two teenagers shopping for diamonds....that takes big ones


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> This article is a gold mine! I thought I recognized the maître d’. It is full of dozens and dozens of photos of Meghan from childhood through her teens to early adulthood. It’s a long article but well worth the time, not only for the photos but also the insight into her personality from someone who knew her almost her whole life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle revelations by Ninaki - the friend who knew her best
> 
> 
> Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her ‘eternal love’ six years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


First sentence says it all:
_Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her *‘eternal love’ *six years ago._


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I don't believe a word either of them say, and considering how psychotic both of them are, I still wouldn't 100% believe them if they were hooked up to a lie detector.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> one thing that struck me was the two teenagers shopping for diamonds....that takes big ones


100%!!!!!!
My first thought was poor little destitute Sizzler eating MeGain shopping for diamonds with her friend.  Did she manage to sob story herself into manipulating her friend's parents too?  She started young!


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> First sentence says it all:
> _Ninaki Priddy is torn between joy and a deep bewilderment when she remembers the blissfully happy day that her best friend, Meghan Markle, married her *‘eternal love’ *six years ago._


For MeGain, 6 years *IS *an eternity.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> 100%!!!!!!
> My first thought was poor little destitute Sizzler eating MeGain shopping for diamonds with her friend.  Did she manage to sob story herself into manipulating her friend's parents too?  She started young!


I don't know if it was Meghan or if both of them were full of themselves but I wouldn't have had that nerve as a teen


----------



## csshopper

The pictures of fun times in high school belie, yet again, her pod cast statements about misery in high school that she was “an ugly duckling, no friends, no one to sit with.” She is insufferable.


----------



## bellecate




----------



## Chanbal

A couple of very interesting and rather serious posts…


----------



## Chanbal

By friends, do they mean Scoobie and GK? 









						RICHARD JOHNSON: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle complain about mistreatment at Queen Elizabeth’s funeral, say pals
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle both whined that the family wasn’t as welcoming as they should have been, say pals.




					www.nydailynews.com


----------



## Chanbal

They may only regret not to have asked for more $$$$…


----------



## CarryOn2020

The comments, once again, tell the story.


Chanbal said:


> A couple of very interesting and rather serious posts…



From the article, March, 2022 — stay focused on the real story, not their shiny objects  

_*Here's the exclusive we have: *

No, it isn't the Oprah interview that will be the total downfall of H&M. Truth is, they are playing with hot, bot fire in constantly using their misleading online infantry to fuel divisive, racist narratives online. This has gotten totally out of control and is being looked at.

There have been recent, new sit downs inside Palace walls about the implications of this social media set up. It is not going un-noticed by the Palace and they are completely aware of this situation. It has reached a fever pitch amid the recent Caribbean Royal Tour whereby, many accounts controlled by the same IP are rallying to create a hostile narrative toward the Royal Family. 

Finally, we have been contacted by real, verifiable people and organizations who are constantly being silenced or unjustifiably banned who are potentially seeking legal retribution against the pair's PR firm, using the technical data as proof that the overwhelming onslaught of pro-sussex material and harassment stems from a very small handful of pro-sussex IP addresses. It's looking like more legal drama in the near future and potential crisis intervention actions by the Palace in the days coming. 


As to *what will be DONE* about this remains to be seen... _


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> By friends, do they mean Scoobie and GK?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RICHARD JOHNSON: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle complain about mistreatment at Queen Elizabeth’s funeral, say pals
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle both whined that the family wasn’t as welcoming as they should have been, say pals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nydailynews.com




It takes a special kind of people to make a funeral all about themselves. Just get lost.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> A couple of very interesting and rather serious posts…



Because, after all, they are the "misinformation" caped crusaders!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




Who on earth would think that was an appropriate PR stragegy!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who on earth would think that was an appropriate PR stragegy!


A pair of foul miscreants.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who on earth would think that was an appropriate PR stragegy!


Doesn’t matter if the attention is positive or negative as long people are talking about H and M and their various projects such as her podcrash series or his book.  As long as articles mentioning them keep getting clicks, they’ll keep getting mentioned and they‘re hoping public interest will build in their projects. Maybe someone will listen to one of her podcrashes to see what all the fuss is about, like what they heard and tune into more of her series. Sort of like the shock jock strategy of creating controversy to drive viewership.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> The pictures of fun times in high school belie, yet again, her pod cast statements about misery in high school that she was “an ugly duckling, no friends, no one to sit with.” She is insufferable.


think that may have been junior high, when she was so ashamed of her natural hair....I notice by college graduation she had the long fake hair


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

andrashik said:


> It is not about the last word. It is about us ladies explaining over and over again why we do not like her and I have seen some well done explanations, but sadly they were ignored. That is all.


I'm sorry I don't mean to ignore anyone. I have tried to respond when I think my post would be appropriate and welcomed.


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> Because, after all, they are the "misinformation" caped crusaders!


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It takes a special kind of people loser to make a funeral all about themselves. Just get lost.


Fixed it for you


----------



## needlv

Well, well, well - this is an interesting read from the Telegraph…



			archive.ph
		


The *court* documents indicate that *only “in due course” *did they expect to be in a position to pay for their own security,* if necessary.

The Duke did not make his offer to pay personally for his protection directly to Ravec prior to launching legal action against the Home Office last September, he admitted.





*


----------



## Freak4Coach

Chanbal said:


> This makes perfect sense to me…
> :



My thought is the choice of the date was intentional. Hazzy and TW will never bring Archie and Lilibet (this name choice still chaps my a$$) to British soil and they won’t miss a birthday (or would they ). It’s a win-win. KC et al won’t have to deal with them and H & TW get another reason to whine. They did this to us on purpose boo hoo. Poor us


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who on earth would think that was an appropriate PR stragegy!


Asked 


bellecate said:


> A pair of foul miscreants.


Answered 

This is very sophomoric and the sign of a PR team  who doesn’t know appropriate from inappropriate


----------



## bag-mania

Freak4Coach said:


> My thought is the choice of the date was intentional.* Hazzy and TW will never bring Archie and Lilibet (this name choice still chaps my a$$) to British soil and they won’t miss a birthday* (or would they ). It’s a win-win. KC et al won’t have to deal with them and H & TW get another reason to whine. They did this to us on purpose boo hoo. Poor us


Sure they would. They already have.
They brought Lilibet on the jubilee trip this summer and then skipped all of the Saturday events in order to have a birthday party for a 1-year-old which nobody attended except for the photographer and his family.


----------



## lulilu

bag-mania said:


> Sure they would. They already have.
> They brought Lilibet on the jubilee trip this summer and then skipped all of the Saturday events in order to have a birthday party for a 1-year-old which nobody attended except for the photographer and his family.


I don't believe either child was with them on that trip.  No one saw a nanny.  No one saw a child.  There was a show of bringing high chair etc, which under any circumstance would have bee


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> think that may have been junior high, when she was so ashamed of her natural hair....I notice by college graduation she had the long fake hair


There’s a 1998 picture, labeled age 17, of her in the midst of a group of giggling high school friends, smiling high school prom pictures, attractively dressed, and  references throughout from Ninaki about them being inseparable from pre school on. The friendship only ended after M’s divorce from Trevy Trev Trev. She and Ninaki were ”like sisters”, she would never have had to eat lunch alone, unless she wanted to. M traveled with Ninaki’s family as their guest, including Europe.  None of this is reflected in her whining on Spotify.


----------



## bag-mania

lulilu said:


> I don't believe either child was with them on that trip.  No one saw a nanny.  No one saw a child.  There was a show of bringing high chair etc, which under any circumstance would have bee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5632164


I share your skepticism but at the moment I’m leaning towards that they brought Lilibet only. There was a big deal made that she met her great-grandmother, the Queen. Remember, they desperately wanted to get that money shot of the two of them together. No photos were allowed and supposedly the meeting was extremely brief. The family has no reason to back up their story of a meeting taking place if it didn’t happen. Their photographer is British and though the images from Lili’s birthday are Photoshopped I think they were from that trip.

Harry and Meghan can move about unseen when they want to, it’s just rare when the don’t want to be seen. The kids are kept under wraps for reasons unknown.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

will just leave this here, deep background material 
Where did this youtube channel get all this stuff ? Home videos, would love to know the dates of the material


----------



## xincinsin

Cavalier Girl said:


> I don't believe a word either of them say, and considering how psychotic both of them are, I still wouldn't 100% believe them if they were hooked up to a lie detector.


I think there were studies done which proved that if the liar really believed in his or her lies, the polygraph wouldbe inaccurate. I believe Zedzee believes in her lies to the point where the truth would cause her to freak out.


needlv said:


> Well, well, well - this is an interesting read from the Telegraph…
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> The *court* documents indicate that *only “in due course” *did they expect to be in a position to pay for their own security,* if necessary.
> 
> The Duke did not make his offer to pay personally for his protection directly to Ravec prior to launching legal action against the Home Office last September, he admitted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


You can't brag about making it big with multi-million dollar contracts signed and yet claim that you can't afford your own expenses.


bag-mania said:


> Sure they would. They already have.
> They brought Lilibet on the jubilee trip this summer and then skipped all of the Saturday events in order to have a birthday party for a 1-year-old which nobody attended except for the photographer and his family.


On the one hand, I believe they likely brought her because they really wanted the double Lil money shot. On the other hand, I find it quite unbelieveable that they could keep their kid(s) under wraps so securely that there was not a peep from anyone who glimpsed the babe. Was she transported in a box? Even if there were no pics, someone should have witnessed her in the country. I mean, someone apart from the photographer and his family who are paid puppets.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Sure they would. They already have.
> They brought Lilibet on the jubilee trip this summer and then skipped all of the Saturday events in order to have a birthday party for a 1-year-old which nobody attended except for the photographer and his family.


Allegedly, of course.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> will just leave this here, deep background material
> Where did this youtube channel get all this stuff ? Home videos, would love to know the dates of the material



Interesting videos.  I understand what the poster is saying, but not many parents would go up to their 10 year old and crush their dreams.  My DD always said she wanted to be an actress.  Now 17, as she is applying to colleges, I asked her what her dream job is.  She still says "Actress".  Age 10 is different from age 17.  I told my daughter she could do whatever she wanted to be happy, but seeing as how she still has never acted in a single school play, been in any theater class, done anything remotely theatrical, and has become horribly shy since COVID, I suggested she think of something else that is more realistic.


----------



## Chanbal

After Oprah's interview of her lifetime, and we have now Moehringer's book of his lifetime… 










						Ghost-writer J. R. Moehringer has just finished Prince Harry's memoir
					

The 57-year-old author is putting the finishing touches to what one acquaintance described as 'the book of his lifetime': Prince Harry's eagerly anticipated, tell-all memoir.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> After Oprah's interview of her lifetime, and we have now Moehringer's book of his lifetime…
> View attachment 5632759
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ghost-writer J. R. Moehringer has just finished Prince Harry's memoir
> 
> 
> The 57-year-old author is putting the finishing touches to what one acquaintance described as 'the book of his lifetime': Prince Harry's eagerly anticipated, tell-all memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sad that as a writer the book of a lifetime is a memoir (recollections might vary) of somebody who apart for being born into extreme privilege (with the advantages this brings) has actually achieved nothing of note


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> After Oprah's interview of her lifetime, and we have now Moehringer's book of his lifetime…
> View attachment 5632759
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ghost-writer J. R. Moehringer has just finished Prince Harry's memoir
> 
> 
> The 57-year-old author is putting the finishing touches to what one acquaintance described as 'the book of his lifetime': Prince Harry's eagerly anticipated, tell-all memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sad description: Handbag using his ghostwritten memoir to settle scores (and Zedzee using her podcrashes to settle scores), and yet they are allegedly upset that the BRF didn't dote on them at the funeral.


----------



## KEG66

pukasonqo said:


> Sad that as a writer the book of a lifetime is a memoir (recollections might vary) of somebody who apart for being born into extreme privilege (with the advantages this brings) has actually achieved nothing of note


How can Moehringer be ‘meticulous’ in his research if he only hears one side of the story ?


----------



## xincinsin

KEG66 said:


> How can Moehringer be ‘meticulous’ in his research if he only hears one side of the story ?


It sounds like he meticulously picks apart his subject on a psychological level rather than he does any investigative work. Of course he might be dealing with a man who has been indoctrinated by his wife who lives a fantasy life where they were cheated of the throne. All the lies about a flight to freedom in Canada with only the clothes on their back BS just makes me  but their stans lap it up as truth.


----------



## KEG66

xincinsin said:


> It sounds like he meticulously picks apart his subject on a psychological level rather than he does any investigative work. Of course he might be dealing with a man who has been indoctrinated by his wife who lives a fantasy life where they were cheated of the throne. All the lies about a flight to freedom in Canada with only the clothes on their back BS just makes me  but their stans lap it up as truth.


I think recollections may vary !


----------



## needlv




----------



## papertiger

Not sure if this has been posted yet?

Harry basically broke directives and procedure and went behind the Household's back 









						Prince Harry 'lobbied No10 adviser over security concerns'
					

The Duke of Sussex made an offer to fund his own security at the 'Sandringham Summit' in January 2020 but was under the impression his worries were 'not given proper consideration'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> will just leave this here, deep background material
> *Where did this youtube channel get all this stuff* ? Home videos, would love to know the dates of the material




TRG is an A1 researcher, and she really joins the dots too.

M is possibly the worst dancer ever, never mind he discomfort at being on the stage. Useless!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Random tidbit: the recipe developer and food stylist for the Spencer movie is a German chef and caterer. He shared the recipe for raspberry cake that apparently featured heavily in the movie. It's in German but you can run it through Deepl.

Spencer Raspberry Cake

He says he came up with it because apparently Diana loved raspberry anything. I'm really disappointed The Troublesome Two (or rather, one half of them) did such sloppy research, or else they would have known Lili shares Grandma's taste instead of ordering the poor thing elderflower&lemon. Such a wasted chance to milk the connection.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

purseinsanity said:


> Interesting videos.  I understand what the poster is saying, but not many parents would go up to their 10 year old and crush their dreams.  My DD always said she wanted to be an actress.  Now 17, as she is applying to colleges, I asked her what her dream job is.  She still says "Actress".  Age 10 is different from age 17.  I told my daughter she could do whatever she wanted to be happy, but seeing as how she still has never acted in a single school play, been in any theater class, done anything remotely theatrical, and has become horribly shy since COVID, I suggested she think of something else that is more realistic.


The YouTuber hints at an answer to your question … MM hung out on the set of Married with Children, at a young age, on a show for adults - adult topics, she was raised in that world … and the years when her mom was gone, we don’t know what happened with dad being a single father


----------



## marietouchet

Maybe Married with Children is a key to a lot??? The show was very popular and went on for a long time … 
I have a vague memory of characters Peg and Al Bundy.  Peg was a flashy/trashy babe who walked all over schlumpy Al. 
A paradigm for relationship between MM and dad?
Peg was a bullying narcissist ??


----------



## Chanbal

KEG66 said:


> How can Moehringer be ‘meticulous’ in his research if he only hears one side of the story ?


Is he being paid to be 'meticulous' about all sides of the story? Imo, he will deliver the most convincing, and difficult to refute, version possible of what TW and Hazz want him to write.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Is he being paid to be 'meticulous' about all sides of the story? Imo, he will deliver the most convincing, and difficult to refute, version possible of what TW and Hazz want him to write.


JM also wrote TENDER BAR - his own autobiography recently a Clooney/Affleck movie  
JM did the Andre Agassi memoir, in which AA owned up to troubles growing up, bad behavior, drug use on the court but AA has become a huge philanthropist - see Wiki, he does a lot of good


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Interesting videos.  I understand what the poster is saying, but not many parents would go up to their 10 year old and crush their dreams.  My DD always said she wanted to be an actress.  Now 17, as she is applying to colleges, I asked her what her dream job is.  She still says "Actress".  Age 10 is different from age 17.  I told my daughter she could do whatever she wanted to be happy, but seeing as how she still has never acted in a single school play, been in any theater class, done anything remotely theatrical, and has become horribly shy since COVID, I suggested she think of something else that is more realistic.


For "Go To Work With Parent Day", I took my kids to the studio at 4am to watch my colleagues prep for the 6am news bulletin. I also volunteered them to help as extras and gofers for projects. If they wanted to be actors or go into any media-related profession, they would be going into it with eyes open. I read that although Zedzee's father worked in lighting, what caught Zedzee's attention was how people jumped to serve the stars of the show, and that was what she wanted - not to be an actress but a star.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


>



They are the King and Queen of Double Standards.
That's a crown I'd smack onto their heads.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Is he being paid to be 'meticulous' about all sides of the story? Imo, he will deliver the most convincing, and difficult to refute, version possible of what TW and Hazz want him to write.


Exactly.  He's not doing an investigative book, he's a ghost writer to make Haz's thoughts and "recollections" sound coherent.  I think many of us here could be excellent ghost writers for Haz.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> Exactly.  He's not doing an investigative book, he's a ghost writer to make Haz's thoughts and "recollections" sound coherent. * I think many of us here could be excellent ghost writers for Haz*.


We could opt for a similar approach to the one used by Allison P. Davis in The Cut article.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Exactly.  He's not doing an investigative book, he's a ghost writer to make Haz's thoughts and "recollections" sound coherent.  I think many of us here could be excellent ghost writers for Haz.



Nobody understands him like we do.


----------



## gracekelly

Does this ghost writer select his subjects based on whether they had daddy issues as he did?  If so, then they are the perfect pair. This author may have studied Jung and Freud but that doesn’t make him a trained shrink. Nothing more dangerous than an armchair shrink. 

Bottom line is if all these warnings are true about a bombshell then  Harry will never pollute the shades of Windsor, BP or Kensington Palaces again. ( Thank you Jane Austen and Lady Catherine)

King Charles will still be King Charles.  after this comes out. People will shake their heads and say what a shame about all this family dysfunction, but Harry is going on 40 and time for him to give the past a rest or go into therapy. None of this information, however bad, is going to help him. Pity parties don’t last forever because people get bored easily.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> JM also wrote TENDER BAR - his own autobiography recently a Clooney/Affleck movie
> JM did the Andre Agassi memoir, in which AA owned up to troubles growing up, bad behavior, drug use on the court but AA has become a huge philanthropist - see Wiki, he does a lot of good


AA married and had a family with the right woman and he grew up. Harry is love sets on those points


----------



## 880

I thought that the ghostwriter quit or was fired and H &M tried to write it their way?


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> JM also wrote TENDER BAR - his own autobiography recently a Clooney/Affleck movie
> JM did the Andre Agassi memoir, in which AA owned up to troubles growing up, bad behavior, drug use on the court but AA has become a huge philanthropist - see Wiki, he does a lot of good


The DM said Moerhinger grew up in grinding poverty   I think that is a bit dramatic. What is true is that Manhasset is a very affluent community and his family didn’t have that kind of money. One of my girlhood friends from Manhasset considered herself poor when growing up there because her parents ran a stationery store. So her clothes weren’t Villager snd her father didn’t drive a Cadillac, but she didn’t whine about it. It’s all relative. I don’t think that JR went to  bed hungry. He and his mother later moved to Colorado where he went to HS. Life wasn’t bad for them there. The movie did not show any of that.


----------



## jennlt

880 said:


> I thought that the ghostwriter quit or was fired and H &M tried to write it their way?


Yes, there were rumors on social media a while ago that either he Markled the Harkles because they were so difficult to deal with or they Markled him for the same reason. Here's a Youtube claiming M fired the ghostwriter but there are others claiming he quit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The DM said Moerhinger grew up in grinding poverty   I think that is a bit dramatic. What is true is that Manhasset is a very affluent community and his family didn’t have that kind of money. One of my girlhood friends from Manhasset considered herself poor when growing up there because her parents ran a stationery store. So her clothes weren’t *Villager* and her father didn’t drive a Cadillac, but she didn’t whine about it. It’s all relative. I don’t think that JR went to  bed hungry. He and his mother later moved to Colorado where he went to HS. Life wasn’t bad for them there. The movie did not show any of that.


It had to be Villager for the label lovers.  Just as now, MM swathes herself in Dior, but never Hermes  



Spoiler



Oooooh la la, Villager.  Those were the days. 

_In the air was a sense of arrival, the triumphant serenity of a society whose values and canons, based on station wagons, arcadian green lawns, fathers with briefcases, and mothers in pearls, had become, by some divine dispensation, immortal. This mood of self-celebration appeared in the pastoral women’s fashions of the period: demure blouses, cunningly tucked shirtdresses, A-line skirts, blazers—and at the height of the craze, bras, underpants, sunhats and tote bags—all strewn with Liberty-print blossoms in the maidenly tints of Edwardian botanical drawings. *Up and down the East Coast, in that American provincial period before the invasion of international brands, before “Love Story” had graven the word “preppie” into the national consciousness, boarding-school girls and country-club wives swathed themselves in Ladybug and Villager.* Until, of course, the zeitgeist swept them off to become hippies. _
/



Spoiler












						Villager and Me
					

In the air was a sense of arrival, the triumphant serenity of a society whose values and canons, based on station wagons, arcadian green lawns, fathers …




					www.newyorker.com


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> King Charles will still be King Charles.  after this comes out. People will shake their heads and say what a shame about all this family dysfunction, but Harry is going on 40 and time for him to give the past a rest or go into therapy. None of this information, however bad, is going to help him. Pity parties don’t last forever because people get bored easily.


You have a good point -- pity parties on privileged older men are not very attractive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The DM said Moerhinger grew up in grinding poverty   I think that is a bit dramatic. What is true is that Manhasset is a very affluent community and his family didn’t have that kind of money. One of my girlhood friends from Manhasset considered herself poor when growing up there because her parents ran a stationery store. So her clothes weren’t Villager snd her father didn’t drive a Cadillac, but she didn’t whine about it. It’s all relative. I don’t think that JR went to  bed hungry. He and his mother later moved to Colorado where he went to HS. Life wasn’t bad for them there. The movie did not show any of that.



But did he have to eat at Sizzler?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Does this ghost writer select his subjects based on whether they had daddy issues as he did?  If so, then they are the perfect pair. This author may have studied Jung and Freud but that doesn’t make him a trained shrink.* Nothing more dangerous than an armchair shrink.*
> 
> Bottom line is if all these warnings are true about a bombshell then  Harry will never pollute the shades of Windsor, BP or Kensington Palaces again. ( Thank you Jane Austen and Lady Catherine)
> 
> King Charles will still be King Charles.  after this comes out. People will shake their heads and say what a shame about all this family dysfunction, but Harry is going on 40 and time for him to give the past a rest or go into therapy. None of this information, however bad, is going to help him. Pity parties don’t last forever because people get bored easily.


Maybe the author is a fellow "therapist" with Haz at ButterCup??


----------



## bag-mania

Writing Harry’s book has already hurt the author’s reputation and credibility and it isn’t out yet. I’m sure it seemed like a good idea when he accepted the offer but he probably should have passed on it.


----------



## csshopper

I was scrolling through articles on my Apple News feed and this startled me with a shiver at the intensely angry face of the world’s most entitled brat. 

Shockingly it was taken during the Queen’s funeral! 

This does not bode well for the book, so much bile seething in him, ready to erupt, and he probably did.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Does this ghost writer select his subjects based on whether they had daddy issues as he did?  If so, then they are the perfect pair. This author may have studied Jung and Freud but that doesn’t make him a trained shrink. Nothing more dangerous than an armchair shrink.


They are probably a good pair. Isn't Hazz an armchair mental health coach?   


gracekelly said:


> King Charles will still be King Charles.  after this comes out. People will shake their heads and say what a shame about all this family dysfunction, but Harry is going on 40 and time for him to give the past a rest or go into therapy. None of this information, however bad, is going to help him. Pity parties don’t last forever because people get bored easily.


Ventures like OW's interview and Moehringer's book are likely most helpful ($$$$) to Oprah and Moehringer…  I have no idea how Hazz will be able to have his pity party last for the three book deal.

EDIT: Further clarification…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## mikimoto007

Chanbal said:


> Is he being paid to be 'meticulous' about all sides of the story? Imo, he will deliver the most convincing, and difficult to refute, version possible of what TW and Hazz want him to write.



yeah…I wouldn’t necessarily expect  a memoir to be well researched, or give all perspectives. I’d only expect to hear one side of the story from a memoir.


----------



## lallybelle

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But did he have to eat at Sizzler?


LOL! There actually was one on Northern Blvd, very close to what would be Manhasset area.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It had to be Villager for the label lovers.  Just as now, *MM swathes herself in Dior*, but never Hermes
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Oooooh la la, Villager.  Those were the days.
> 
> _In the air was a sense of arrival, the triumphant serenity of a society whose values and canons, based on station wagons, arcadian green lawns, fathers with briefcases, and mothers in pearls, had become, by some divine dispensation, immortal. This mood of self-celebration appeared in the pastoral women’s fashions of the period: demure blouses, cunningly tucked shirtdresses, A-line skirts, blazers—and at the height of the craze, bras, underpants, sunhats and tote bags—all strewn with Liberty-print blossoms in the maidenly tints of Edwardian botanical drawings. *Up and down the East Coast, in that American provincial period before the invasion of international brands, before “Love Story” had graven the word “preppie” into the national consciousness, boarding-school girls and country-club wives swathed themselves in Ladybug and Villager.* Until, of course, the zeitgeist swept them off to become hippies. _
> /
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Villager and Me
> 
> 
> In the air was a sense of arrival, the triumphant serenity of a society whose values and canons, based on station wagons, arcadian green lawns, fathers …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newyorker.com


Concerns are being raised…


----------



## gracekelly

lallybelle said:


> LOL! There actually was one on Northern Blvd, very close to what would be Manhasset area.


This must have shown up after I left the area. Don't recall one.  Was it near the old Bonwit Teller?  In any case, JRM would have thought that eating there was like going to Spago. lolol!  I bet he thought going to HoJo's on N. Blvd was heaven too, or The Lamp Post!


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> I was scrolling through articles on my Apple News feed and this startled me with a shiver at the intensely angry face of the world’s most entitled brat.
> 
> Shockingly it was taken during the Queen’s funeral!
> 
> This does not bode well for the book, so much bile seething in him, ready to erupt, and he probably did.
> View attachment 5633079


I called him meany mouth weeks ago.  Great picture illustrating it.


----------



## gracekelly

mikimoto007 said:


> yeah…I wouldn’t necessarily expect  a memoir to be well researched, or give all perspectives. I’d only expect to hear one side of the story from a memoir.


Your memories are one thing, but if he is going to accuse other people of particular actions, then there should be some real proof.  The ghost writer should try and verify the stories and fact check.  In this particular case, the entire world knows who the ghost writer is.  I think it would be rather foolish for him to include things that can't be proven or include something that he knows to be untrue.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> It had to be Villager for the label lovers.  Just as now, MM swathes herself in Dior, but never Hermes
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Oooooh la la, Villager.  Those were the days.
> 
> _In the air was a sense of arrival, the triumphant serenity of a society whose values and canons, based on station wagons, arcadian green lawns, fathers with briefcases, and mothers in pearls, had become, by some divine dispensation, immortal. This mood of self-celebration appeared in the pastoral women’s fashions of the period: demure blouses, cunningly tucked shirtdresses, A-line skirts, blazers—and at the height of the craze, bras, underpants, sunhats and tote bags—all strewn with Liberty-print blossoms in the maidenly tints of Edwardian botanical drawings. *Up and down the East Coast, in that American provincial period before the invasion of international brands, before “Love Story” had graven the word “preppie” into the national consciousness, boarding-school girls and country-club wives swathed themselves in Ladybug and Villager.* Until, of course, the zeitgeist swept them off to become hippies. _
> /
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Villager and Me
> 
> 
> In the air was a sense of arrival, the triumphant serenity of a society whose values and canons, based on station wagons, arcadian green lawns, fathers …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newyorker.com


I don't think that Hermes would give Meghan the freebees she craves and she doesn't seem inclined to pay their prices.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Concerns are being raised…



Ummm, I’m going to answer yes. Yes she is destroying Dior.


----------



## lallybelle

gracekelly said:


> This must have shown up after I left the area. Don't recall one.  Was it near the old Bonwit Teller?  In any case, JRM would have thought that eating there was like going to Spago. lolol!  I bet he thought going to HoJo's on N. Blvd was heaven too, or The Lamp Post!


I would say it was  down toward the Little Neck Great neck area before you hit Manhasset, if you were heading East. It's been gone a while now.


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> Ummm, I’m going to answer yes. Yes she is destroying Dior.


She had some great points, but boy does she ramble!  I thought I talked a lot.


----------



## tiktok

purseinsanity said:


> She had some great points, but boy does she ramble!  I thought I talked a lot.


Also, Meghan is indeed a sartorial disaster 90% of the time, but you don’t prove it by comparing her to a supermodel who would look good in a potato sack.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I don't think that Hermes would give Meghan the freebees she craves and she doesn't seem inclined to pay their prices.


And she doesn't have the clout to be gifted a Birkin by those who would seek her favour. Although I do recall that Avalon blanket...


tiktok said:


> Also, Meghan is indeed a sartorial disaster 90% of the time, but you don’t prove it by comparing her to a supermodel who would look good in a potato sack.


Still find it incredible that she listed supermodel on her CV.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Is he being paid to be 'meticulous' about all sides of the story? Imo, he will deliver the most convincing, and difficult to refute, version possible of what TW and Hazz want him to write.


 Goodness no! When it comes down to it, aren’t all memoirs just vanity pieces?


----------



## Toby93

Um..what?


----------



## Annawakes

^^What an incredibly stupid thing to say


----------



## pukasonqo

Annawakes said:


> ^^What an incredibly stupid thing to say


Well…is Hazza we are talking about and he certainly does not come across as the brighter crayon in the box


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Goodness no! When it comes down to it, aren’t all memoirs just vanity pieces?


I've read memoirs which I enjoyed. The subject didn't take himself/herself too seriously, had fun events to recount and you gained insight into the person's life and philosophy. The pompousness that was evident in Handbag's description of his memoir makes me think that he takes himself way too gravely and we are going to be getting a whine fest. He needs to make his pre-Zed life miserable in order to ram home the way he was SAVED in memoir Part 2 The Me Me Me Era.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I've read memoirs which I enjoyed. The subject didn't take himself/herself too seriously, had fun events to recount and you gained insight into the person's life and philosophy. The pompousness that was evident in Handbag's description of his memoir makes me think that he takes himself way too gravely and we are going to be getting a whine fest. He needs to make his pre-Zed life miserable in order to ram home the way he was SAVED in memoir Part 2 The Me Me Me Era.


I assume most of his life will be covered in the first few chapters and that 85% of his memoir will be about what’s happened to him in the last five years since he met Meghan.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I assume most of his life will be covered in the first few chapters and that 85% of his memoir will be about what’s happened to him in the last five years since he met Meghan.


It was supposed to be a 2-parter with Part 2 containing stuff that he wanted to reveal after his grandma passed away (the coward!). Someone posted earlier that Part 2 would be the Me-Lurve-Meghan years. I presume all that has been thrown out the window now that QE2 has passed away. And I really can't imagine the first tome/slim volume to have no mention of his palm tree mate.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> It was supposed to be a 2-parter with Part 2 containing stuff that he wanted to reveal after his grandma passed away (the coward!). Someone posted earlier that Part 2 would be the Me-Lurve-Meghan years. I presume all that has been thrown out the window now that QE2 has passed away. And I really can't imagine the first tome/slim volume to have no mention of his palm tree mate.


As I recall the contract was for four books. I didn’t realize the memoir isn’t a single book. I can’t imagine buying one much less two volumes about Harry!  That’s almost as hilarious as Meghan writing a book about wellness which is also part of the contract. What does she know about that?


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> As I recall the contract was for four books. I didn’t realize the memoir isn’t a single book. I can’t imagine buying one much less two volumes about Harry!  That’s almost as hilarious as Meghan writing a book about wellness which is also part of the contract. What does she know about that?


Did you notice that the recent description of the contract in the media now says it is for 3 books? Is Penguin Random House cutting losses? Or it was a typo?
The Prince I Was
The Loser I've Become
Whine Your Way to Wellness


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Did you notice that the recent description of the contract in the media now says it is for 3 books? Is Penguin Random House cutting losses? Or it was a typo?
> The Prince I Was
> The Loser I've Become
> Whine Your Way to Wellness


I read somewhere that 1 of the 4 books is to be authored by TW.












						Harry and Meghan's money-spinning Netflix deal 'could be killed at any time'
					

NETFLIX bosses have told The Duke And Duchess Of Sussex they will pull the plug on their multi-million-dollar deal at any point if they are unhappy with what they produce, according to an industry …



					www.the-sun.com


----------



## needlv

Crowns of Britain blogger is back!









						Royal round up: 16th October
					

Hello hello everyone! And welcome back to a new royal round up! Back from Stockholm and seeing how much **** has gone down in my absence, I am raring to go!  So without further ago, let’s g…




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here is the old article, saying 4 books:
From July 26, 2021
_According to Page Six, who first broke news of the royal couple’s foray into the publishing world, their $20 million paycheck is actually for *four future books, including one Harry and Meghan are working on together about “leadership and philanthropy.” *The Duchess of Sussex is also rumored to be working on a *memoir of her own, as well as a book on “wellness.”* And despite reports Harry’s memoir would be split in two with a second installment to be published after the death of his grandmother, *Queen Elizabeth*, a spokesperson for the couple confirmed to the outlet just one book is scheduled to be released in late 2022.








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Working on a Book About “Leadership and Philanthropy”
					

The royal couple’s $20 million book deal apparently includes more than just the Duke of Sussex’s memoir.




					www.vanityfair.com
				



_
Book 1 = Hazz’s memoir
Book 2 = H&M on leadership and philanthropy
Book 3 = MM on wellness
Book 4 = MM’s memoir

Perhaps they are misusing the word ‘book’. Perhaps they mean _pamphlet_.


----------



## pukasonqo

MM should have set her sights on Kanye or Ye or Yeezy (or whatever he is called now a 
la Puff Diddy), they could have set court in Kalifornia and call themselves King and Kween and reign supreme (TM)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just for the records.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cavalier Girl said:


> The best outcome is that nobody buys the book.





	

		
			
		

		
	
Seems a bit of an waste of resources printing it up tbh. Can’t they just put out a rant post and a few gifs? 


Freak4Coach said:


> My thought is the choice of the date was intentional. Hazzy and TW will never bring Archie and Lilibet (this name choice still chaps my a$$) to British soil and they won’t miss a birthday (or would they ). It’s a win-win. KC et al won’t have to deal with them and H & TW get another reason to whine. They did this to us on purpose boo hoo. Poor us



I agree if it really is the kid’s birthday (honestly couldn’t tell you when he was born or care tbh) then either the grandad himself or more likely one of his aides would realise this. I find it a bit passive-aggressive tbh I mean he’s not exactly so busy really - he couldn’t rearrange his holiday in wales or meeting with Lockheed Martin? 


lulilu said:


> I don't believe either child was with them on that trip.  No one saw a nanny.  No one saw a child.  There was a show of bringing high chair etc, which under any circumstance would have bee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5632164


Agree also how much is a high chair £50? Just buy one for the grandparents like everyone else does. They probably alteady have an Ruby studded ebony one from queen Victoria’s time  (and a few mothercare ones too) or whatever anyway. Also Surely it’s more environmentally wasteful flying one over? It seems an obvious prop to me. I don’t think they brought them because they think they use keeping the family apart is emotional blackmail. 


pukasonqo said:


> MM should have set her sights on Kanye or Ye or Yeezy (or whatever he is called now a
> la Puff Diddy), they could have set court in Kalifornia and call themselves King and Kween and reign supreme (TM)



Nah she wouldn’t have a chance lol- while she is definitely tacky Kim and Amber have an obvious glamour and sex appeal to them which M lacks. 

She’d also kill his momentum on marketing himself as a reactionary mad lad if he became her sloppy fourths celeb bootlick….sorry… I mean boyfriend   

Beside  if he wants an insane lying b*tch with crunchy fried hair in his corner he could always go public with Jeffy star.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh yeah I was listening to this and by the time the ‘fabric expert’ came on I was shaking my head vehemently.

Please for the love of god no! No polyester or poly synthetic blends near TW! We’ve seen she’s a sweaty one to begin with and one would imagine it would make for  a very pungent claw hug for the poor photo op.


----------



## JulesB68

TimeToShop said:


> The clean living had to be a deal breaker. She’s pretty. TW looks like a Dollar Store version.



I'm playing catch up here, but my take on this is that she's preparing to divorce him (because if she can't make money off of talking about the RF while she's married to Hazza then she has to leave him) and needs to make him look the bad guy, whilst she must've been a saint for putting up with the man-child. I'm sure there will be more stuff along these lines coming out. 
*Not claiming to be an expert; just witnessed my classic narcissist of an ex-SIL do the same routine!


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Did you notice that the recent description of the contract in the media now says it is for 3 books? Is Penguin Random House cutting losses? Or it was a typo?
> The Prince I Was
> The Loser I've Become
> Whine Your Way to Wellness


And he is using up the material for the sequels if he edits vol 1 to include the funeral


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the old article, saying 4 books:
> From July 26, 2021
> _According to Page Six, who first broke news of the royal couple’s foray into the publishing world, their $20 million paycheck is actually for *four future books, including one Harry and Meghan are working on together about “leadership and philanthropy.” *The Duchess of Sussex is also rumored to be working on a *memoir of her own, as well as a book on “wellness.”* And despite reports Harry’s memoir would be split in two with a second installment to be published after the death of his grandmother, *Queen Elizabeth*, a spokesperson for the couple confirmed to the outlet just one book is scheduled to be released in late 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Working on a Book About “Leadership and Philanthropy”
> 
> 
> The royal couple’s $20 million book deal apparently includes more than just the Duke of Sussex’s memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Book 1 = Hazz’s memoir
> Book 2 = H&M on leadership and philanthropy
> Book 3 = MM on wellness
> Book 4 = MM’s memoir
> 
> Perhaps they are misusing the word ‘book’. Perhaps they mean _pamphlet_.


Interesting, this article says the book deal is THEIR deal not HIS deal , I did not remember that and all the chatter anymore is of HIS book deal

Hmmm funny that MM wrote THE BENCH but  not for Penguin ? You would think Penguin spent enough to get the rights to ALL books
I don’t remember the exact chronology of OW interview, Penguin deal, THE BENCH publication
I mention the interview in conjunction with the books because it goes to the question of exclusivity and  right to FIRST break the story , that is a big deal

Ps just looked it up random house did the Bench - huge competitor of Penguin
Hard copy is now 50 percent off at Amazon , first author listed is the illustrator not Mm


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


>



Sticking to the same time line, I wonder how all this would've panned out if The Queen had died first?


----------



## Hyacinth

marietouchet said:


> Interesting, this article says the book deal is THEIR deal not HIS deal , I did not remember that and all the chatter anymore is of HIS book deal
> 
> Hmmm funny that MM wrote THE BENCH but  not for Penguin ? You would think Penguin spent enough to get the rights to ALL books
> I don’t remember the exact chronology of OW interview, Penguin deal, THE BENCH publication
> I mention the interview in conjunction with the books because it goes to the question of exclusivity and  right to FIRST break the story , that is a big deal
> 
> Ps just looked it up random house did the Bench - huge competitor of Penguin
> Hard copy is now 50 percent off at Amazon , first author listed is the illustrator not Mm



The Critical reviews are NOT kind.

From "Amazon Customer" - 
A book published because of the authors status instead of on merit
_"Given 1 star because you cannot give it 0. I wanted to like this book. The thought that someone had written something to bring awareness to a father's bond with his child was uplifting. However, after one reads the title and turns to the first page you can clearly see this was published as a PR piece for Meghan and nothing more. Her writing is horribly commissioned, her use of rhyme is laughable and the content is less a story to read to a child and more of 34 pages of quick soundbites that express her ideas of what a father should be. As someone who seeks compassionate communities and unity, I truly wanted to be inspired by this...and I am left wholly disappointed. It is just another attempt to gain recognition for the Sussexx brand and their US empire they are building whilst stating they are doing it all for the love of service. Disappointing is not strong enough of a word to use for this book."_

No idea what the the Positive ones say, I just finished breakfast and would like to keep it in place for a while.






						Amazon.com: Customer reviews: The Bench
					

Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for The Bench at Amazon.com.  Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.



					www.amazon.com


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Interesting, this article says the book deal is THEIR deal not HIS deal , I did not remember that and all the chatter anymore is of HIS book deal
> 
> Hmmm funny that MM wrote THE BENCH but  not for Penguin ? You would think Penguin spent enough to get the rights to ALL books
> I don’t remember the exact chronology of OW interview, Penguin deal, THE BENCH publication
> I mention the interview in conjunction with the books because it goes to the question of exclusivity and  right to FIRST break the story , that is a big deal
> 
> Ps just looked it up random house did the Bench - huge competitor of Penguin
> Hard copy is now 50 percent off at Amazon , first author listed is the illustrator not Mm


It’s all the same. Random House and Penguin Books merged in 2013 to become Penguin Random House. The Bench came out last year in June under the children’s books division of Random House. The book deal with Penguin Random House was not announced until July 2021. The bench was not part of the deal.


----------



## Chanbal

TW's last podcast and poor Haz …


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

From the Aussies, straight to the point as usual… 



_Harry and Meghan have set off 'time bombs' under the Royal Family: Douglas Murray_
​


----------



## rose60610

For somebody who claims the BRF drove her suicidal thoughts and slighted her, she sure was desperate to be seen as having had a "special" relationship with Philip and TQ. Then she whines at having been shunned at the funeral? But she will always wallow in any kind of attention. I think we're due for a return of humiliating antics a la Ellen DeGeneres since she loves media coverage. She's going to do something for Halloween, and it's going to be stupid. Then again, everything she does is stupid and reeks of desperation.


----------



## bag-mania

They went for the quick and easy money and never thought of the long term. How are they going to earn anything once they've finished dishing their lies?


----------



## WingNut

needlv said:


> Crowns of Britain blogger is back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round up: 16th October
> 
> 
> Hello hello everyone! And welcome back to a new royal round up! Back from Stockholm and seeing how much **** has gone down in my absence, I am raring to go!  So without further ago, let’s g…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com


That is bloody hilarious!


----------



## rose60610

They'll never stop dishing their lies. As long as there's payment coming from somewhere for their faux suffering, they'll whine. But one of these days, a new person or couple is going to become the new media darling/s and the Harkles will fade into the background. Of course, they'll scream "racism" when it happens, but we've seen that movie before.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> It’s all the same. Random House and Penguin Books merged in 2013 to become Penguin Random House. The Bench came out last year in June under the children’s books division of Random House. The book deal with Penguin Random House was not announced until July 2021. The bench was not part of the deal.


Thanks for noting the merger


----------



## youngster

needlv said:


> Crowns of Britain blogger is back!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royal round up: 16th October
> 
> 
> Hello hello everyone! And welcome back to a new royal round up! Back from Stockholm and seeing how much **** has gone down in my absence, I am raring to go!  So without further ago, let’s g…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thecrownsofbritain.com



This is just hilarious!  Thanks for posting the link @needlv!


----------



## Stansy

bag-mania said:


> They went for the quick and easy money and never thought of the long term. How are they going to earn anything once they've finished dishing their lies?


They will simply come up with new ones…


----------



## pukasonqo

rose60610 said:


> For somebody who claims the BRF drove her suicidal thoughts and slighted her, she sure was desperate to be seen as having had a "special" relationship with Philip and TQ. Then she whines at having been shunned at the funeral? But she will always wallow in any kind of attention. I think we're due for a return of humiliating antics a la Ellen DeGeneres since she loves media coverage. She's going to do something for Halloween, and it's going to be stupid. Then again, everything she does is stupid and reeks of desperation.


Well, as the BRF was so racist, misogynistic and toxic that MM and Hazza had to flee from it then why their insistence (especially MMs) in using the titles granted to them by that oppressive and insensitive institution 
Both know that without those titles they are nothing especially Hazza, MM at least was busy hustling and working the room to get where she got


----------



## LittleStar88

We will have to wait to hear about their Love Story!









						“Rattled” Netflix Delays Harry And Meghan Documentary Until 2023 Following Attacks Undermining ‘The Crown’
					

EXCLUSIVE: Rattled after attacks on Season 5 of The Crown, Netflix has decided to postpone its documentary series featuring Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, until next year. The do…



					deadline.com
				




ETA: This may be one step towards scrapping the whole thing altogether? I don't think Netflix is "rattled".


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> We will have to wait to hear about their Love Story!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Rattled” Netflix Delays Harry And Meghan Documentary Until 2023 Following Attacks Undermining ‘The Crown’
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Rattled after attacks on Season 5 of The Crown, Netflix has decided to postpone its documentary series featuring Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, until next year. The do…
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: This may be one step towards scrapping the whole thing altogether? I don't think Netflix is "rattled".


The show might get the “Pearl treatment.”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hyacinth said:


> The Critical reviews are NOT kind.
> 
> From "Amazon Customer" -
> A book published because of the authors status instead of on merit
> _"Given 1 star because you cannot give it 0. I wanted to like this book. The thought that someone had written something to bring awareness to a father's bond with his child was uplifting. However, after one reads the title and turns to the first page you can clearly see this was published as a PR piece for Meghan and nothing more. Her writing is horribly commissioned, her use of rhyme is laughable and the content is less a story to read to a child and more of 34 pages of quick soundbites that express her ideas of what a father should be. As someone who seeks compassionate communities and unity, I truly wanted to be inspired by this...and I am left wholly disappointed. It is just another attempt to gain recognition for the Sussexx brand and their US empire they are building whilst stating they are doing it all for the love of service. Disappointing is not strong enough of a word to use for this book."_
> 
> No idea what the the Positive ones say, I just finished breakfast and would like to keep it in place for a while.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazon.com: Customer reviews: The Bench
> 
> 
> Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for The Bench at Amazon.com.  Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com



I had to look twice - this reads like a review of Hazzie’s soon-to-be-but-maybe-never-published book  

_Given 1 star because you cannot give it 0. I wanted to like this book [because I really loved Diana]. The thought that someone had written something to bring awareness to a father's bond with his child was uplifting. However, after one reads the title and turns to the first page you can clearly see this was published as a PR piece for Meghan [whinefest for Hazz] and nothing more. Her His writing is horribly commissioned, her his use of rhyme is laughable and the content is less a story to read to a child and more of 34 pages of quick soundbites that express her his ideas of what a father should be. As someone who seeks compassionate communities and unity, I truly wanted to be inspired by this...and I am left wholly disappointed. It is just another attempt to gain recognition for the Sussexx brand and their US empire they are building whilst stating they are doing it all for the love of service [and $$$ and titles, of course]. Disappointing is not strong enough of a word to use for this book."
_


----------



## rose60610

pukasonqo said:


> Well, as the BRF was so racist, misogynistic and toxic that MM and Hazza had to flee from it then *why their insistence (especially MMs) in using the titles granted to them by that oppressive and insensitive institution*
> Both know that without those titles they are nothing especially Hazza, MM at least was busy hustling and working the room to get where she got



Why? Because they're spoiled and entitled whores who can't STFU. They get rewarded for complaining about their "suffering".  Claw clawed her way into the BRF, and once in (after the 50 million dollar wedding and the perks and trappings of royalty), all of a sudden the BRF were racist and mean. Now the BRF are more racist and mean when they didn't coddle little poopie Meghan and make the Queen's funeral all about HER. She thought the BRF were supposed to kiss her butt after she threw them under the bus. She's a crazy bish sociopath and Harry is just a royal idiot. Somebody needs to take away their kids or they'll be programmed to lie about everything as a way of life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The show might get the “Pearl treatment.”


    Pray, people, pray. It’s our only hope.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Their good buddy Corden just got banned from some high end NYC restaurants for being so awful to the staff.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Their good buddy Corden just got banned from some high end NYC restaurants for being so awful to the staff.



hate to hear that kind of crap


----------



## Sharont2305

lanasyogamama said:


> Their good buddy Corden just got banned from some high end NYC restaurants for being so awful to the staff.



There's another one you can keep on your side of the pond. We don't want him back either.


----------



## pukasonqo

Sharont2305 said:


> There's another one you can keep on your side of the pond. We don't want him back either.


Neither do we in the Antipodes


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> There's another one you can keep on your side of the pond. We don't want him back either.


Explains his friendship with H, “birds of a feather flock together.”


----------



## LittleStar88

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix deal 'could be killed at any time,' bosses warn
					

The couple were reported to have signed a $100m contract but are said to have been warned that there are 'no guarantees' about what they create will air




					www.gbnews.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> ETA: This may be one step towards scrapping the whole thing altogether? I don't think Netflix is "rattled".



That was my reaction as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> There's another one you can keep on your side of the pond. We don't want him back either.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the old article, saying 4 books:
> From July 26, 2021
> _According to Page Six, who first broke news of the royal couple’s foray into the publishing world, their $20 million paycheck is actually for *four future books, including one Harry and Meghan are working on together about “leadership and philanthropy.” *The Duchess of Sussex is also rumored to be working on a *memoir of her own, as well as a book on “wellness.”* And despite reports Harry’s memoir would be split in two with a second installment to be published after the death of his grandmother, *Queen Elizabeth*, a spokesperson for the couple confirmed to the outlet just one book is scheduled to be released in late 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Reportedly Working on a Book About “Leadership and Philanthropy”
> 
> 
> The royal couple’s $20 million book deal apparently includes more than just the Duke of Sussex’s memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> Book 1 = Hazz’s memoir
> Book 2 = H&M on leadership and philanthropy
> Book 3 = MM on wellness
> Book 4 = MM’s memoir
> 
> Perhaps they are misusing the word ‘book’. Perhaps they mean _pamphlet_.



Book 1 = Hazz’s memoir, otherwise known as case-study in false memory syndrome 
Book 2 = H&M on leadership and philanthropy - otherwise known as making all your staff and family cry
Book 3 = MM on wellness - otherwise known as a directory for cosmetic dentistry, plastic surgery, spa visits, nail bars and surrogates 
Book 4 = MM’s memoir otherwise known as fiction


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> There's another one you can keep on your side of the pond. We don't want him back either.


We have plenty of home-grown @ssholes, we don’t need any imported ones!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> We have plenty of home-grown @ssholes, we don’t need any imported ones!



No, but now he's there...he's yours. Gotta keep down the carbon emissions  .

I have no idea how Hazzer's mate became popular _either_ side of the pond.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This is so freaking sad. Yes, he made his bed, but...ugh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also...seems like Charles is way more Tungsten than that stupid cow ever was. He is cutting off someone he loves dearly, a feeling completely alien to her.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> No, but now he's there...he's yours. Gotta keep down the carbon emissions  .
> 
> I have no idea how Hazzer's mate became popular _either_ side of the pond.


Ah well, if we must. Can we at least send you a couple of ours? We can work out an international @sshole exchange program.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so freaking sad. Yes, he made his bed, but...ugh.



I don’t believe this one. Regardless of the state of their marriage, Harry was furious at his family for ignoring him at the funeral and not giving him more material for Netflix. He wants to go scorched earth on the family but he’s afraid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Ah well, if we must. Can we at least send you a couple of ours? We can work out an international @sshole exchange program.


There is actually quite a bit of politics at play with the Brits coming to the US.  BBC did a report this weekend.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

lanasyogamama said:


> Their good buddy Corden just got banned from some high end NYC restaurants for being so awful to the staff.



An egg yolk omelette? And was mad about the whites? That sounds like complete b. S.


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> hate to hear that kind of crap


While I don’t condone abusive behavior and totally get why the restaurant management would ban him, the issues with the food described in the 2 incidents doesn’t show Balthazar’s in a good light either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apparently, many others share the opinion that Corden is indeed a jerk, possibly worse. Definitely explains Hazz’s awkward bro-fest:

April, 2022 article:
_In 2015, a British man nobody really cared about in America became the host of The Late Late Show, taking over from Craig Ferguson, a Scottish man who was generally well-liked. The British man’s name is James Corden, and he announced yesterday that his reign of terror will come to an end in 2023.

When Corden crossed the pond to take over for Ferguson, the star had no hold on American media, almost making him an underdog (he was well-known to people like me for his role on Doctor Who). Slowly, it became apparent that, in order to prove himself, Corden would have to overcompensate by convincing celebrities to participate in all kinds of embarrassing behavior._
https://www.gawker.com/media/farewell-to-james-corden-late-nights-biggest-*******


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so freaking sad. Yes, he made his bed, but...ugh.



My days of feeling even a wee bit sad for him are long gone.  He's shown himself to be an a$$hole as well.  "He doesn't want to lose his family forever."  Ummm, really?  He sure has a funny way of showing it.  Why not BTW?  They're all racists who dared to question your future embryo's skin color, couldn't help your wife not kill herself, and won't bestow royal titles only your children.  Dare I say it's because you need $$$$$$$??


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But also...seems like Charles is way more Tungsten than that stupid cow ever was. *He is cutting off someone he loves dearly, a feeling completely alien to her.*


So true.  She's very familiar with cutting people off, but she literally doesn't know how to truly love someone, even her children.  Hopefully the kids have nannies that care somewhat for them.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> We will have to wait to hear about their Love Story!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Rattled” Netflix Delays Harry And Meghan Documentary Until 2023 Following Attacks Undermining ‘The Crown’
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Rattled after attacks on Season 5 of The Crown, Netflix has decided to postpone its documentary series featuring Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, until next year. The do…
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: This may be one step towards scrapping the whole thing altogether? I don't think Netflix is "rattled".


If the Harkles are able to postpone the release of book and reality show to 2023, does it mean they will get an invite to the coronation?

I feel sorry for Charles, Will, and the other family members that have to live more months under the threat of Hazz's 'truth bombs.'



QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so freaking sad. Yes, he made his bed, but...ugh.




This matches one of Lady's last videos. She revealed TW's letter to Will and Hazz's current money priority over titles. It's great if Charles told them to go ahead with their threats. TW will never be satisfied, she will demand more and more… It's better to ignore her and let her empty her bag of tricks.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> While I don’t condone abusive behavior and totally get why the restaurant management would ban him, the issues with the food described in the 2 incidents doesn’t show Balthazar’s in a good light either.


I find people who bully or abuse employees or service people the worst...for me Prince Andrew's bullying is as bad as his problem keeping his pants zipped - maybe worse


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so freaking sad. Yes, he made his bed, but...ugh.




He is weak-minded and has been manipulated. He’s maybe only now seeing the possible result(s) of buying into whatever BS she fed him.

It’s sad but this is what happens I guess when someone whose been coddled, sheltered, and carefully guided his whole life decides to run off with some trick who played him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> He is weak-minded and has been manipulated. He’s maybe only now seeing the possible result(s) of buying into whatever BS she fed him.
> 
> It’s sad but this is what happens I guess when someone whose been coddled, sheltered, and carefully guided his whole life decides to run off with some trick who played him.


It is his life so he may live it as he wishes.  What he cannot do is *demand* USA taxpayers pay for his security.  If the decision goes his way, MM will have IPP status for life [and the USA taxpayers will have to pay for her security] , _when they divorce._ Read that again and understand what it means for all of us. She knew what she was doing by getting Hazz to file this suit before the divorce.  

Brits need to be very careful about this decision. KCIII needs to clean up his house asap. The shine is wearing off.  We see you.


----------



## Jayne1

LittleStar88 said:


> We will have to wait to hear about their Love Story!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “Rattled” Netflix Delays Harry And Meghan Documentary Until 2023 Following Attacks Undermining ‘The Crown’
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Rattled after attacks on Season 5 of The Crown, Netflix has decided to postpone its documentary series featuring Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, until next year. The do…
> 
> 
> 
> deadline.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: This may be one step towards scrapping the whole thing altogether? I don't think Netflix is "rattled".


Isn't that what they want?  Does she always get what she wants?


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> Book 1 = Hazz’s memoir, otherwise known as case-study in false memory syndrome
> Book 2 = H&M on leadership and philanthropy - otherwise known as making all your staff and family cry
> Book 3 = MM on wellness - otherwise known as a directory for cosmetic dentistry, plastic surgery, spa visits, nail bars and surrogates
> Book 4 = MM’s memoir otherwise known as fiction


Darn, that's good!

What will Meg do with the hidden microphone recordings if Netfl*x cancels their Love Story?


----------



## 880

Jayne1 said:


> Isn't that what they want?  Does she always get what she wants?


Yes agree. I wish that they just get it over with now. I believe others have posted on this thread that
no matter what dirt they try to throw on KCIII, the reaction will be, so you are 40 and have a dysfunctional family. get over it. . . shrug


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> It is his life so he may live it as he wishes.  What he cannot do is *demand* USA taxpayers pay for his security.  If the decision goes his way, MM will have IPP status for life [and the USA taxpayers will have to pay for her security] , _when they divorce._ Read that again and understand what it means for all of us. She knew what she was doing by getting Hazz to file this suit before the divorce.
> 
> Brits need to be very careful about this decision. KCIII needs to clean up his house asap. The shine is wearing off.  We see you.



It would make my blood boil to have my tax dollars go to her security.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Darn, that's good!
> 
> What will Meg do with the hidden microphone recordings if Netfl*x cancels their Love Story?


Use it in the post-divorce show, similar to Diana claiming she never wanted the divorce, blah blah. 
Admittedly, I am not sympathetic to the nasty two.  Too much drama daily.


----------



## marietouchet

The convoluted relations between Harkles, Invictus and Netflix , a compelling review of Invictus Annual Report, like wow


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

If they do go scorched earth in his memoir then i think KCIII will be justified in not inviting them to the coronation.  Release a statement saying

 “they are still much loved family members, but in light of their (issues/concerns/ statements) we have decided to not cause any more burdens (aka further grievances to be aired on tv/print/ Netflix) and will not be inviting them to attend any future royal functions in the UK.    They are always welcome for private family visits…”

At the moment I think the duo IS on the list to be invited - it’s KCIII’s big day and he would want his son there.  They will have to sit them near the Yorks (hopefully behind a post or a candle) And carefully stage manage them.

  It will be interesting watching their body language and facial expressions as they swear allegiance to the new king….


----------



## 880

needlv said:


> They will have to sit them near the Yorks (hopefully behind a post or a candle) And carefully stage manage them.


I think this ^ is better than the drama of excluding them 

But if all they have to sell is a story of imaginary woe, any public interest will fade away quickly


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> *It will be interesting watching their body language and facial expressions as they swear allegiance to the new king….*


Haaaaaa. Now *that* would be totally worth it!


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haaaaaa. Now *that* would be totally worth it!
> View attachment 5633913


H couldn‘t even bring himself to sing God Save the King at QEII’s funeral when he was standing directly behind KC with cameras focused on Charles also having H in the frame. I don’t see him speaking the words swearing allegiance to the king.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Awww, heck.
ETA: still does not excuse Hazz’s behavior.
_The owner of one of New York City's most famous restaurants has dropped his ban on James Corden after he said the Late Late Show host called him to apologize for berating his staff over an omelet.

Corden, 44, ate at SoHo restaurant Balthazar on October 9 and complained so harshly about his order that Keith McNally earlier today banned him from ever returning.

In an Instagram post, the restaurateur also told how the actor turned TV host had verbally abused his staff earlier this summer.

But just hours later McNally updated the story, saying he had received a call from Corden apologizing for his behavior earlier in the month.

'James Corden just called me and apologized profusely,' McNally wrote. 'Having f***** up myself more than most people, I strongly believe in second chances.

'So if James Corden lets me host his Late Late Show for 9 months, I'll immediately rescind his ban from Balthazar. No, of course not.

'But....anyone magnanimous enough to apologize to a deadbeat layabout like me (and my staff) doesn't deserve to be banned from anywhere. Especially Balthazar. 

'So Come Back to the 5 & Dime, Jimmy Corden, Jimmy Corden. All is Forgiven. xx'









						Owner of NYC's top restaurant Balthazar DROPS ban on James Corden
					

James Corden on Monday night during his show ignored the story of his day: his ban from NYC eatery Balthazar, and then its dramatic reversal after his apology to owner Keith McNally.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> If they do go scorched earth in his memoir then i think KCIII will be justified in not inviting them to the coronation.  Release a statement saying
> 
> “they are still much loved family members, but in light of their (issues/concerns/ statements) we have decided to not cause any more burdens (aka further grievances to be aired on tv/print/ Netflix) and will not be inviting them to attend any future royal functions in the UK.    They are always welcome for private family visits…”
> 
> At the moment I think the duo IS on the list to be invited - it’s KCIII’s big day and he would want his son there.  They will have to sit them near the Yorks (hopefully behind a post or a candle) And carefully stage manage them.
> 
> It will be interesting watching their body language and facial expressions as they swear allegiance to the new king….


My 2 cents: they are delaying the release of their masterpieces to get as much as possible from Charles, including invitations to the coronation. I wouldn't be surprised if they negotiated with Netfl*x to include first hand information about the coronation on their reality show.


----------



## LittleStar88

Maybe? Maybe not?









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Netflix show will air in December despite reports
					

“As far as I am aware, the docu-series is still going ahead later this year,” a source close to production told Page Six exclusively after reports it was pushed back to next year.




					pagesix.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe? Maybe not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Netflix show will air in December despite reports
> 
> 
> “As far as I am aware, the docu-series is still going ahead later this year,” a source close to production told Page Six exclusively after reports it was pushed back to next year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Every. Single. Time. 
There is an issue with them.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe? Maybe not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Netflix show will air in December despite reports
> 
> 
> “As far as I am aware, the docu-series is still going ahead later this year,” a source close to production told Page Six exclusively after reports it was pushed back to next year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


The reality show airing in December?!   Oops, there goes the invitation to the coronation.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Every. Single. Time.
> There is an issue with them.
> 
> View attachment 5633954


----------



## rose60610

Regardless when the doc airs, they shouldn't be invited to the Coronation. You know it's going to have scathing stuff, and if it's withheld, you KNOW it's because it has scathing stuff. 

Unless they take a vacay somewhere, their a$$es are staying home during the Coronation. Don't let those whore bishes anywhere NEAR the UK for Charles III's biggest day of his life, they'll do anything they can to make the occasion about themselves. The only reason they didn't do that at the funeral was because the Coronation is going to be bigger than the funeral, and they wanted to be invited to THAT. 

Let Harry stew in his juices when he can't be or at least be front and center at the Coronation because he chose a sociopath bish for a wife who carries his balls in a Ziplock. See, Haz, when your bish wife throws your own family under the bus and you didn't expect to be given the cold shoulder at the funeral of the century as a result, you have some issues. When Daddy doesn't invite you to his Coronation, you can blame your ever-loving gold digging Maggot. Is she worth it NOW?


----------



## Chanbal

After what they did, they are still surprised by the reception in the UK. 

_On the Daily Mail's "Palace Confidential," Richard Eden, the outlet's diary editor, talked about Meghan and Harry's eyebrow-raising seating. "*There I was, watching the coverage on television and you couldn't see Meghan,"* Eden said. "*There was this really tall candle right in front of the view of the camera*. *By coincidence Harry and Meghan seemed to be seated behind the tallest member of the Royal Family *– Tim Laurence, Princess Anne's husband, now that could be coincidence, but as we know everything was planned meticulously.

In addition, the evening before the funeral, *the Sussexes were disinvited from a large state reception* for world leaders. According to The Telegraph, the invitation was a mistake as the event was intended only for working royals. "*They have done everything as best they could,*" a source told the outlet. "*They have turned up, they have smiled, shaken hands, whatever was asked.*" 

Writing in the New York Daily News, Richard Johnson cited reports from friends of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Duke and Duchess of Sussex that the couple is "complaining they were snubbed and mistreated at Queen Elizabeth's funeral." Johnson added, "*They both whined that the family wasn't as welcoming as they should have been."*

According to the Daily Mail, another author, Lord Jeffrey Archer, says *Harry will air his grievances by adding an extra chapter to his upcoming memoir.* "'I fear for the book," Archer said. "I know they're writing the chapter on the funeral, so I suppose that's what the book will end on."_









						Meghan And Harry Are Reportedly Making Complaints To Friends About The Queen's Funeral - The List
					

Meghan and Harry might not be too happy about their recent treatment among the royal family.




					www.thelist.com


----------



## Jayne1

Am I allowed to credit and link to someone and something from another site? I don't think I can. It's regarding her theory that the Queen and Philip were photoshopped into the only known photo of them meeting baby Archie.

I love a conspiracy theory and hers is surprisingly really good, for a change. She shows how the Queen and Philip were wearing the exact same outfits at a horse show and were actually looking at a foal.

Or has this been discussed already?  It's kinda older news.

It's apparently on the T site as well but that's not where I saw it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Am I allowed to credit and link to someone and something from another site? I don't think I can. It's regarding her theory that the Queen and Philip were photoshopped into the only known photo of them meeting baby Archie.
> 
> I love a conspiracy theory and hers is surprisingly really good, for a change. She shows how the Queen and Philip were wearing the exact same outfits at a horse show and were actually looking at a foal.
> 
> Or has this been discussed already?  It's kinda older news.


Yes, I have heard about this from another site [cannot remember which one now].  Imo what continues to be *weird* about H&M is that so very many people are trying to discern the truth.  No one is able to.  Other couples [W&K, Zara&Mike, everyone I know] do not have these constant questions:  did they or didn’t they? will they or won’t they? Etc.  It is just *weird*.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Of course they are whinging that they weren't welcomed.  Well, gee whiz, trashing your family has that effect and they knew it.  They just have to use it as part of their victim narrative.   What else would they talk about?  The fact that they openly insulted TQ who asked them to come and see her when she knew the end was coming?  Spread rumors about William and Rose Hanbury?    At what point will these two realize how stupid they look?


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Am I allowed to credit and link to someone and something from another site? I don't think I can. It's regarding her theory that the Queen and Philip were photoshopped into the only known photo of them meeting baby Archie.
> 
> I love a conspiracy theory and hers is surprisingly really good, for a change. She shows how the Queen and Philip were wearing the exact same outfits at a horse show and were actually looking at a foal.
> 
> Or has this been discussed already?  It's kinda older news.
> 
> It's apparently on the T site as well but that's not where I saw it.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I have heard about this from another site [cannot remember which one now].  Imo what continues to be *weird* about H&M is that so very many people are trying to discern the truth.  No one is able to.  Other couples [W&K, Zara&Mike, everyone I know] do not have these constant questions:  did they or didn’t they? will they or won’t they? Etc.  It is just *weird*.


Does anyone remember how Tom Bower described the photo of QE & PP meeting Archie? It was a very intriguing comment, like 'they were looking at a shawl'.


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe? Maybe not?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Netflix show will air in December despite reports
> 
> 
> “As far as I am aware, the docu-series is still going ahead later this year,” a source close to production told Page Six exclusively after reports it was pushed back to next year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???    It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH.  Anyone here plan on watching it??


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> _In addition, the evening before the funeral, *the Sussexes were disinvited from a large state reception* for world leaders. According to The Telegraph, the invitation was a mistake as the event was intended only for working royals. "*They have done everything as best they could,*" a source told the outlet. "*They have turned up, they have smiled, shaken hands, whatever was asked.*"_





Chanbal said:


> _"*They both whined that the family wasn't as welcoming as they should have been."*
> 
> 
> According to the Daily Mail, another author, Lord Jeffrey Archer, says *Harry will air his grievances by adding an extra chapter to his upcoming memoir.* "'I fear for the book," Archer said. "I know they're writing the chapter on the funeral, so I suppose that's what the book will end on."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan And Harry Are Reportedly Making Complaints To Friends About The Queen's Funeral - The List
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry might not be too happy about their recent treatment among the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com


Again, to be "disinvited" or uninvited, one must first actually be invited.  Like, for real, not in the figment of your imagination.  
Also, are these two for real?  They trashed the "family" as often and at every opportunity they could, then expected to be welcomed back with open arms??  They need some serious mental help, and help as to how healthy relationships actually work.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



"Cruel"????  I feel like they exist in a parallel universe.  In most jobs and careers I know of, if you don't perform, heck if you DON'T WORK, you have a tendency to get fired!  Plus, you usually don't get paid before actually producing any work!  Not at that level anyway.  Why is NF telling them to actually produce a goddammmm thing "cruel"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why can't two extremely privileged people not stop whining for a single minute and appreciate all they have. I'm rapidly losing patience with their attitude.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I find people who bully or abuse employees or service people the worst...for me *Prince Andrew's bullying is as bad as his problem keeping his pants zipped *- maybe worse



IME, these things are never mutually exclusive.

Looks like Sarah F has taken on some of the worrying duos MO, she hired PR and posts through 'news outlets'. Who the hell cares what this woman does? No way do I want her rep rehabilitated. Is this is a strategy to endear Andrew through his ex.I guess if it works for the woke acid-twins, she thinks it'll work for her.


DoggieBags said:


> H couldn‘t even bring himself to sing God Save the King at QEII’s funeral when he was standing directly behind KC with cameras focused on Charles also having H in the frame. I don’t see him speaking the words swearing allegiance to the king.



I was going to say the same thing. Couldn't even bring himself to sing (in her case learn) the National Anthem.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> Am I allowed to credit and link to someone and something from another site? I don't think I can. It's regarding her theory that the Queen and Philip were photoshopped into the only known photo of them meeting baby Archie.
> 
> I love a conspiracy theory and hers is surprisingly really good, for a change. She shows how the Queen and Philip were wearing the exact same outfits at a horse show and were actually looking at a foal.
> 
> Or has this been discussed already?  It's kinda older news.
> 
> It's apparently on the T site as well but that's not where I saw it.



The foal pic looks PS to me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Looks like Sarah F has taken on some of the worrying duos MO, she hired PR and posts through 'news outlets'. Who the hell cares what this woman does? No way do I want her rep rehabilitated. Is this is a strategy to endear Andrew through his ex.I guess if it works for the woke acid-twins, she thinks it'll work for her.



I don't feel special hostility towards her - mainly because I'm just not that interested -, but I tend to agree. She's the not so new ex-wife of a senior but now through his scandal minor royal, she can lay low without feeding sh*t to the media.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OT but just because we just transitioned to the gloomy and rainy part of fall which just screams for soup and warm bread: we love Kenji Lopez-Alts "Low Knead Bread" for the NYT. Little work, a bit of pre-planning as it's started the night before and needs to be taken out of the fridge hours before baking, pretty foolproof.


----------



## LibbyRuth

The cynic in me thinks that if I were in charge of PR or marketing at Netflix and was hearing from producers that the Harry and Meghan series didn't have much content at all, I'd take the opportunity of Charles becoming King to float rumors that Harry and Meghan were fighting with Netflix to kill their show.  Then, come December, I'd promote it saying "Watch the show Harry and Meghan didn't want you to see" hoping to buy a few weeks of views until word spreads that the show sucks and there's nothing for H&M to be upset about when viewers can move on to other shows I'd been promoting around their reality show.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Who knows. I increasingly feel about the world how I felt after watching the first season of "The Watcher" on Netflix: everyone's crazy, nobody is telling the truth.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Does anyone remember how Tom Bower described the photo of QE & PP meeting Archie? It was a very intriguing comment, like 'they were looking at a shawl'.



It probably was. H&M probably made some excuse for him and they did the photo op without him. At this point he could have been looking too old for the dates given or whatever, who knows? Harder to tell with toddlers because they grow at different rates, but newborns look a certain way.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who knows. I increasingly feel about the world how I felt after watching the first season of "The Watcher" on Netflix: everyone's crazy, nobody is telling the truth.



Welcome to the real world.

The 'my truth' world 

Meghan got one thing right in her life, very few get anywhere by talent or hard work


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It probably was. H&M probably made some excuse for him and they did the photo op without him. At this point he could have been looking too old for the dates given or whatever, who knows? Harder to tell with toddlers because they grow at different rates, but newborns look a certain way.



But didn't they give a live interview before walking into The Queen's office? Unless they took one of this realistic dolls or tampered with the footage there was a baby.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???    It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH.  Anyone here plan on watching it??



Yeh, I couldn't. I can't afford to be sick, too much to do.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But didn't they give a live interview before walking into The Queen's office? Unless they took one of this realistic dolls or tampered with the footage there was a baby.



Pic could have been taken at any time I'm guessing. 

I do recall a baby with H&M, but no baby can be seen in the ensemble pic.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't feel special hostility towards her - mainly because I'm just not that interested -, but I tend to agree. She's the not so new ex-wife of a senior but now through his scandal minor royal, she can lay low without feeding sh*t to the media.



I'm just asking myself, "why now"? 

Either the Princesses are worried about their future with 2 ne'er-do-well as parents so trying to rehabilitate the less well known (these days) or SF sees her chance after the success of 'rebranding' Camilla. 

Certainly, all the interest (good and bad) about the HaZZer and MegZZ and the BRF (even monarchy in general) has given all these hangers-on more space on (Global) media platforms.


----------



## Mumotons

Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
					

The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



More victim-hood.

We've all seen her 'trying' dance and act *cough* *O* *M* *G* Obviously glamour-window-dressing for cheap TV _was_ her only option.

Although, excuse me, she could have got a job that didn't involve the exploitation of her body and sell her soul. She _chose_ to perpetuate stereotypes and smile while she did it. It wasn't the the '60s!

Give me a ****ing break!

Future prediction: Can't wait 'till she 'opens-up' about the time when she was _forced_ to marry PH and coerced into becoming a Duchess.... 

I will be returning to the post in a couple of years (see spoiler above)


----------



## csshopper

Continuing her rewriting of history, I laughed out loud about her statement of riding in a motorcade while working at the Argentinian Embassy, implying of course that as a low level Intern who got the job because of her Uncle, she was one of the dignitaries. She gives this job as evidence of “her brain” even though it’s been reported she failed the exam for entry into the Diplomatic Corps and needed Daddy’s help to pressure his brother to help Megsie score an Internship.


----------



## Debbini

purseinsanity said:


> WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???    It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH.  Anyone here plan on watching it??


Absolutely not!


----------



## Mrs.Z

purseinsanity said:


> WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???    It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH.  Anyone here plan on watching it??


I will definitely be watching it, I’m currently importing cases of Champagne to help me through it.  I‘m not sure how far I’ll make it as I have a huge aversion to “poor me victim” storylines but it’s bound to be a hot hot mess!


----------



## LibbyRuth

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Rewriting history is the perfect way to describe this.  Chrissy Teigen has done a much better job of talking about her Deal or No Deal days, making fun of herself for not concentrating, etc.  Meghan got a good job when she was trying to make it that celebrated that she was attractive. She's a fool to run away from that and pretend it was less than it was.


----------



## Aimee3

Judge Judy’s proclamation seems so perfect for H&M:  “beauty fades, dumb is forever!”


----------



## CobaltBlu

csshopper said:


> Continuing her rewriting of history, I laughed out loud about her statement of riding in a motorcade while working at the Argentinian Embassy, implying of course that as a low level Intern who got the job because of her Uncle, she was one of the dignitaries. She gives this job as evidence of “her brain” even though it’s been reported she failed the exam for entry into the Diplomatic Corps and needed Daddy’s help to pressure his brother to help Megsie score an Internship.


So here’s a funny story. While the mister and I were housebound a few weeks ago after his knee procedure, I, CB, took the sample Foreign Service Exam for free for kicks.  I am way past the age to be accepted, which is a pity, as you will soon see…

Because I, CB, received a rather stellar score despite being years out of higher learning, not living in the US for many years, and not exactly a news junkie. 

The test is three parts.  One part is legal/constitutional, one English comprehension with reading samples to dissect etc., and one is situational decision making in the workplace, where you choose the best outcome in a number of scenarios and situations in workplaces, general and foreign-service-y.  My total prep time was 0:00

The score is simply a % likelihood of passing the real exam.
You will be delighted to know that I, CB, received a 91% likelihood of passing the FSE, even at my advanced age. +99% score on the last two parts. *hair toss, buffs nails

I am relatively sure MM would have bombed the last bit.

If you find yourself snowed in and want to feel smart, here’s the link


			https://careers.state.gov/fsopracticetest/


----------



## marietouchet

It dropped …
1. Note photos where she is braless and has implants but talks of getting bust enhancers put in bra
2 all Paris Hilton said was - I never met her before the interview
ps see second DM article below about more from Paris , this article barely mentions what she said 

Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal








						Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
					

The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.




					mol.im


----------



## CobaltBlu

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I what did Paris Hilton have to say about all of this, I wonder?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> I what did Paris Hilton have to say about all of this, I wonder?


Paris Hilton dissects her 'bimbo' reputation with Meghan Markle








						Paris Hilton dissects her 'bimbo' reputation with Meghan Markle
					

Paris Hilton has explained how the 'lines got blurred' after she developed her ditzy blonde persona.




					mol.im


----------



## JulesB68

Still playing catch up!


Toby93 said:


> Spoiler: Nudity



Did anyone else spot this image some way down this twitter page? Just wondering if people think it's real/really who we think it is? Apologies for such a large pic of Andrew in all his er, glory!  Apologies also if this has already been discussed!


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Paris Hilton dissects her 'bimbo' reputation with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paris Hilton dissects her 'bimbo' reputation with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Paris Hilton has explained how the 'lines got blurred' after she developed her ditzy blonde persona.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


If it wasn't for Hazz (and probably S), Paris wouldn't give TW the time of day imo.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> I what did Paris Hilton have to say about all of this, I wonder?



Do you mean, did M let her get a word in?


----------



## Chanbal

Did she say this?


----------



## bag-mania

What was in it for Paris? Can’t imagine any woman wanting to be featured on the episode about the word Bimbo. She’s the same age as Meghan, maybe she understands her.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Silly story! If you work in media, it goes without saying that you are striving to produce hits. Only idiots like Handbag and the Wench would try to skive and consider Netflix's expectations "cruel".


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???   It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH. *Anyone here plan on watching it??*


Many posts ago, I recall to have read a comment (I believe) from @QueenofWrapDress about not being able to tolerate TW's voice, I reached that phase. So my answer is:


----------



## piperdog

Disclaimer: I haven't heard a second of any of the podcasts, and don't intend to. If there's brilliance to be mined from any of them, I'll take the risk of missing out. 

But from what I've read of today's whingefest, I think I made the right call. Let me get this straight. Two young women who had myriad resources and other options for career paths open to them, CHOSE to take these roles (briefcase girl and um, Paris Hilton) on these shows. They likely had full understanding of what was expected of them with regard to their appearance, their costumes, their behavior on-camera, and did it anyway, yet NOW they complain that these roles were demeaning? 

Meghan had a degree from Northwestern and a supportive dad, Paris had probably just about anything she wanted. Neither was forced into these jobs. They weren't trafficked or in the situations where this was their best option or only way out (e.g., like some of Epstein's victims). Either of them could have said "No Deal" and walked away and looked for a job in a field where intellect or other skill or training mattered. But they didn't. Both of them (assumedly) sought out these jobs where their known role going in was rich-blonde-bimbo or hot-chick-falling-out-of-her-dress. Both did those jobs that sustained or built upon the bimbo stereotype/archetype, and now they complain about it. Nope. I didn't watch Deal or No Deal. I didn't watch Simple Life. I'm not going to tune in for this mess, either.


----------



## bag-mania

TMZ is calling her out.   

MEGHAN MARKLE​I FELT LIKE A BIMBO ON 'DEAL OR NO DEAL' It Was All About Looks ... Duh​*Meghan Markle* says she was reduced to "bimbo" status after her stint on "Deal or No Deal" ... the question -- what on earth was she expecting from the show?

The Duchess of Sussex expressed her grievances on the new episode of her "Archetypes" podcast. She said the job was all about looks, and not smarts, complaining many of her briefcase-toting cohorts were super smart, but producers didn't care.

Gotta ask ... what did she think she signed up for ... wearing sexy dresses and striking poses as she cracked a big smile and opened the case. That was the job.

What's more  ... there were no surprises here. Meghan joined the show in season 2, so it was apparent to anyone who watched ... the briefcase models were not there to show off their intellect.

She admits she was grateful to land the job, especially getting something that was secure and paid the bills ... but she couldn't help but think back to her past work as an intern at the U.S. Embassy.

Meghan eventually became a series regular on USA Network's "Suits" in 2011 ... staying until 2018 -- when she married *Prince Harry*.

*Howie Mandel*, who hosted "Deal or No Deal" during Meghan's time on the show, said on *Piers Morgan*'s podcast back in May he had "absolutely no memory of her."









						Meghan Markle Quit 'Deal or No Deal' Because She Felt Like A 'Bimbo'
					

Meghan Markle says she left "Deal or No Deal" because she felt reduced to a "bimbo," adding it was all about looks and nothing to do with brains.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## KEG66

piperdog said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't heard a second of any of the podcasts, and don't intend to. If there's brilliance to be mined from any of them, I'll take the risk of missing out.
> 
> But from what I've read of today's whingefest, I think I made the right call. Let me get this straight. Two young women who had myriad resources and other options for career paths open to them, CHOSE to take these roles (briefcase girl and um, Paris Hilton) on these shows. They likely had full understanding of what was expected of them with regard to their appearance, their costumes, their behavior on-camera, and did it anyway, yet NOW they complain that these roles were demeaning?
> 
> Meghan had a degree from Northwestern and a supportive dad, Paris had probably just about anything she wanted. Neither was forced into these jobs. They weren't trafficked or in the situations where this was their best option or only way out (e.g., like some of Epstein's victims). Either of them could have said "No Deal" and walked away and looked for a job in a field where intellect or other skill or training mattered. But they didn't. Both of them (assumedly) sought out these jobs where their known role going in was rich-blonde-bimbo or hot-chick-falling-out-of-her-dress. Both did those jobs that sustained or built upon the bimbo stereotype/archetype, and now they complain about it. Nope. I didn't watch Deal or No Deal. I didn't watch Simple Life. I'm not going to tune in for this mess, either.


I couldn’t agree with you more, every word!


----------



## Chanbal

LibbyRuth said:


> Rewriting history is the perfect way to describe this.  Chrissy Teigen has done a much better job of talking about her Deal or No Deal days, making fun of herself for not concentrating, etc.  Meghan got a good job when she was trying to make it that celebrated that she was attractive. She's a fool to run away from that and pretend it was less than it was.


From twitter (spoiler), it appears TW got a more intellectually stimulating (no Bimbo @bag-mania) career after quitting Dear or No Deal. 



Spoiler: Next career step and values


----------



## JulesB68

Chanbal said:


> Did she say this?



Just showed this to DH who said it was no wonder the RF were speculating on what colour any future issue might be! 

Also think @soyoprincess won the internet for the day with their reply to who is responsible for TW's spray tans:


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *TMZ is calling her out.*
> 
> MEGHAN MARKLE​I FELT LIKE A BIMBO ON 'DEAL OR NO DEAL' It Was All About Looks ... Duh​*Meghan Markle* says she was reduced to "bimbo" status after her stint on "Deal or No Deal" ... the question -- what on earth was she expecting from the show?
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex expressed her grievances on the new episode of her "Archetypes" podcast. She said the job was all about looks, and not smarts, complaining many of her briefcase-toting cohorts were super smart, but producers didn't care.
> 
> Gotta ask ... what did she think she signed up for ... wearing sexy dresses and striking poses as she cracked a big smile and opened the case. That was the job.
> 
> What's more  ... there were no surprises here. Meghan joined the show in season 2, so it was apparent to anyone who watched ... the briefcase models were not there to show off their intellect.
> 
> She admits she was grateful to land the job, especially getting something that was secure and paid the bills ... but she couldn't help but think back to her past work as an intern at the U.S. Embassy.
> 
> Meghan eventually became a series regular on USA Network's "Suits" in 2011 ... staying until 2018 -- when she married *Prince Harry*.
> 
> *Howie Mandel*, who hosted "Deal or No Deal" during Meghan's time on the show, said on *Piers Morgan*'s podcast back in May he had "absolutely no memory of her."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Quit 'Deal or No Deal' Because She Felt Like A 'Bimbo'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle says she left "Deal or No Deal" because she felt reduced to a "bimbo," adding it was all about looks and nothing to do with brains.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


----------



## Debbini

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5634100


If the shoe fits.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lanasyogamama

Why is everyone being so unsympathetic when she obviously was forced against her will to try out and accept these jobs as a suitcase, girl, and a hot girl at the law office, as well as the mandatory spray tans that have continued to this day!?


----------



## Laila619

Her podcasts are such absolute garbage, ugh.


----------



## sdkitty

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


wow, she had to wear hair extensions and have spray tan....she would never do that today LOL


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Why is everyone being so unsympathetic when she obviously was forced against her will to try out and accept these jobs as a suitcase, girl, and a hot girl at the law office, as well as the mandatory spray tans that have continued to this day!?


you took the words right out of my mouth


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> *Why is everyone being so unsympathetic when she obviously was forced against her will *to try out and accept these jobs as a suitcase, girl, and a hot girl at the law office, as well as the mandatory spray tans that have continued to this day!?





sdkitty said:


> you took the words right out of my mouth


I know…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Of all the things she's done Deal or No Deal made her feel not smart? Ignorance is a bliss.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Of all the things she's done Deal or No Deal made her feel not smart? Ignorance is a bliss.


I can see where she would say that job was shallow.  but to cite the example of having extensions in her hair is beyond ludicrious.  no one has seen her natural hair since junior high school


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hwood and Disney have _always_ been about brains and talent. Their purpose is to save lives, guide the world’s policies and promote diversity.  They have never been about sex, bimbos, money and drugs. Everyone knows this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Did she say this?




At this point she must either be trolling us big time or suffer from some form of early Alzheimer's.


----------



## Chanbal

_"Not being as exciting as originally hoped': Netflix delays Meghan and Harry's docuseries"_​


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What a surprise. Usually everything they touch turn into gold. Oh wait.


----------



## Chanbal

More from the Aussies…

*"People won't 'forgive or forget' Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's behaviour"*


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this point she must either be trolling us big time or suffer from some form of early Alzheimer's.


Neither. She is following the playbook of every no-talent, no-brains, desperate for $$$, failed actor/actress.  When staring into the pit of despair, release the _I’m not a bimbo _cry and the world will forgive everything.  They teach this class at Playboy Universtiy [misspelled on purpose].


----------



## Helventara

She was treated like a bimbo and wants Lilibet to aspire _higher than a bimbo?_  I wonder what’s the context of this statement. What kind of a mother set such weird (I actually wanted to say low) bar for her daughter?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Helventara said:


> She was treated like a bimbo and wants Lilibet to aspire _higher than a bimbo?_  I wonder what’s the context of this statement. What kind of a mother set such weird (I actually wanted to say low) bar for her daughter?


Yes, and the way to do that is to live in Hwood land rather than with the BRF.  Makes complete sense to us bimbos.
ETA: iirc Hallmark Channel has already made this movie.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

Y’all’s comments are on fire today!


----------



## rose60610

The "Suitcase Girl" gig paid the bills. What's so shameful about that? Oh wait, was Hollyweird racist because they didn't cast her as the lead in a huge block buster movie when she was 17? You mean, she took small parts to break into the biz like anybody else? Who forced her into the "bimbo" roles? SHE is the one who applied for those roles. Besides, she didn't have to stand in the Sizzler buffet line anymore with the great unwashed. So here she is over 20 years later, whining about getting a job? She would have climbed into bed with Hugh Hefner and the three blondes for a buck, STFU.


----------



## Nutashha

Yeah, I hear you guys. There IS ranting involved. But the girl has had some fair share of 'cold' encounters in the past! Like the time when she was ignored by the Brits. I think she deserved better.

Meghan Received Brutal Treatment by British People after Queen’s Death​


----------



## TC1

If it was such a job for a "bimbo" what did she audition for it in S2? surely she had seen what the job entailed.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> If it was such a job for a "bimbo" what did she audition for it in S2? surely she had seen what the job entailed.


she wanted to be a bimbo back then?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> she wanted to be a bimbo back then?


Didn’t Julia Roberts cover this issue in Pretty Woman?  The money is always green, so do morals matter?


----------



## Chanbal

People may want to think twice before inviting TW or accepting one of her invitations…

I always thought that Paris H was rather snobbish, but I wasn't aware of certain type of rumors   




Spoiler: allegedly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh wow, I never knew that.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Didn’t Julia Roberts cover this issue in Pretty Woman?  The money is always green, so do morals matter?


Someone at reddit found a link between TW's choice of the Bimbo stereotype and "Legally Blonde."
Podcast guests, wedding guests… The obvious link I see is money…


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> More victim-hood.
> 
> We've all seen her 'trying' dance and act *cough* *O* *M* *G* Obviously glamour-window-dressing for cheap TV _was_ her only option.
> 
> Although, excuse me, she could have got a job that didn't involve the exploitation of her body and sell her soul. She _chose_ to perpetuate stereotypes and smile while she did it. It wasn't the the '60s!
> 
> Give me a ****ing break!
> 
> Future prediction: Can't wait 'till she 'opens-up' about the time when she was _forced_ to marry PH and coerced into becoming a Duchess....
> 
> I will be returning to the post in a couple of years (see spoiler above)


Poor, poor MeggyWeggy.  Told to "suck it in".  How devastating that must've been!  Her and every other actress/model has been told the same.  What's next?  She's going to claim how she developed an eating disorder, and because she's black again, she wasn't offered the same medical treatment?


----------



## purseinsanity

Mrs.Z said:


> I will definitely be watching it, I’m currently importing cases of Champagne to help me through it.  I‘m not sure how far I’ll make it as I have a huge aversion to “poor me victim” storylines but it’s bound to be a hot hot mess!


You are amazing!  Thank you for taking one for the team!   As much as I love y'all, there are things I literally can't stomach doing.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???    It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH.  Anyone here plan on watching it??


Only if I buy Netflix lololol and even  then with closed captioning.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> I what did Paris Hilton have to say about all of this, I wonder?


Nothing.  MeMeMe wouldn't let her get a word in!


----------



## LittleStar88

This trick talking about feeling like a bimbo... She should be grateful to have been found attractive enough to have that job. I'm sure some of the other briefcase girls resent this and are bright and intelligent and never felt diminished for having had the role.

What about TW's time on 90210 as the BJ girl?


----------



## purseinsanity

Debbini said:


> If the shoe fits.....


Or the G string.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle reflects on being a 'briefcase girl' on Deal or No Deal
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex said she was grateful for the work as she tried to break through as an actress -  'but not how it made me feel, which was not smart'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Maybe it’s because Meghan never took real acting classes to learn her craft and/or participate in college plays. Acting in productions of Shakespeare was never in her skill set or future. Face it Meg, opening suitcases was your level of talent. Playing the victim has been your longest role in your sorry career


----------



## purseinsanity

Helventara said:


> She was treated like a bimbo and wants Lilibet to aspire _higher than a bimbo?_  I wonder what’s the context of this statement. What kind of a mother set such weird (I actually wanted to say low) bar for her daughter?


The kind who doesn't really have any care or concern for her daughter.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> This trick talking about feeling like a bimbo... She should be grateful to have been found attractive enough to have that job. I'm sure some of the other briefcase girls resent this and are bright and intelligent and never felt diminished for having had the role.
> 
> What about TW's time on 90210 as the BJ girl?


Exactly!  Please explain that one Meg!  Did you do it intelligently?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I never knew that.


I also didn't know, and I'm beyond shocked.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> So here’s a funny story. While the mister and I were housebound a few weeks ago after his knee procedure, I, CB, took the sample Foreign Service Exam for free for kicks.  I am way past the age to be accepted, which is a pity, as you will soon see…
> 
> Because I, CB, received a rather stellar score despite being years out of higher learning, not living in the US for many years, and not exactly a news junkie.
> 
> The test is three parts.  One part is legal/constitutional, one English comprehension with reading samples to dissect etc., and one is situational decision making in the workplace, where you choose the best outcome in a number of scenarios and situations in workplaces, general and foreign-service-y.  My total prep time was 0:00
> 
> The score is simply a % likelihood of passing the real exam.
> You will be delighted to know that I, CB, received a 91% likelihood of passing the FSE, even at my advanced age. +99% score on the last two parts. *hair toss, buffs nails
> 
> I am relatively sure MM would have bombed the last bit.
> 
> If you find yourself snowed in and want to feel smart, here’s the link
> 
> 
> https://careers.state.gov/fsopracticetest/


Clearly your diplomatic abilities have been put to good use on tPF.  Can you do something about Putin?


----------



## marietouchet

PH DJs and has numerous very lucrative perfume deals. Her Barbie look has not changed in 20 years 
PH reminds me of another star I super respect - Dolly Parton. DP has a distinctive look and she is laughing all the way to the bank - she famously said it takes a lot to work to look this trashy 
Both are very successful while CHOOSING to still have a trashy/bimbo look, it is their thing , like Margaret Cho’s tattoos
Whereas, MM is implicitly criticizing that kind of look, spray tans, extensions and bra padding. In some sense, MM is putting down PH for owning her look, and putting down Mariah for being a diva, or Lucy Liu for  playing a role


----------



## TC1

The Simple Life was FUNNY. Opening your mouth and a briefcase at the same time doesn't get you your own TV series.


----------



## bag-mania

TC1 said:


> If it was such a job for a "bimbo" what did she audition for it in S2? surely she had seen what the job entailed.


Because they paid her $800 per episode and they filmed up to seven episodes in a day. That’s a tidy amount for one day of work for most people.


----------



## Annawakes

Beneath all the fakery I always thought Paris was much smarter than she looked.  Too bad she decided to get mixed up with Zeezy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> PH DJs and has numerous very lucrative perfume deals. Her Barbie look has not changed in 20 years
> PH reminds me of another star I super respect - Dolly Parton. DP has a distinctive look and she is laughing all the way to the bank - she famously said it takes a lot to work to look this trashy
> Both are very successful while CHOOSING to still have a trashy/bimbo look, it is their thing , like Margaret Cho’s tattoos
> Whereas, MM is implicitly criticizing that kind of look, spray tans, extensions and bra padding. In some sense, MM is putting down PH for owning her look, and putting down Mariah for being a diva, or Lucy Liu for  playing a role



I adore Dolly Parton. She's a true philantropist who does all kinds of awsome things with her very own money (like, sending kids in her hometown to college). I also once saw an old interview of young Dolly where the interviewer was so rude and demeaning to her and her answers were super eloquent and polite.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Maybe it’s because Meghan never took real acting classes to learn her craft and/or participate in college plays. Acting in productions of Shakespeare was never in her skill set or future. Face it Meg, opening suitcases was your level of talent. Playing the victim has been your longest role in your sorry career



So harsh but so true.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> PH DJs and has numerous very lucrative perfume deals. Her Barbie look has not changed in 20 years
> PH reminds me of another star I super respect - Dolly Parton. DP has a distinctive look and she is laughing all the way to the bank - she famously said it takes a lot to work to look this trashy
> Both are very successful while CHOOSING to still have a trashy/bimbo look, it is their thing , like Margaret Cho’s tattoos
> Whereas, MM is implicitly criticizing that kind of look, spray tans, extensions and bra padding. In some sense, MM is putting down PH for owning her look, and putting down Mariah for being a diva, or Lucy Liu for  playing a role


So how does Meg explain her plastic surgery, Botox, fillers and previous breast implants when she really wants to be known for her massive smarts?


----------



## Gal4Dior

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.



So having the third baby to save the marriage??


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.



Bandage babies don’t help marriages. It won’t help a royal reconciliation either, especially when you don’t allow gramps to see the kids you do have.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Beneath all the fakery I always thought Paris was much smarter than she looked.  Too bad she decided to get mixed up with Zeezy.


All of these podcasts were done before The Queen passed away. Now the participants are kicking themselves, not that they shouldn’t have been kicking themselves before. All were given bad advice to participate


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I'm just asking myself, "why now"?
> 
> Either the Princesses are worried about their future with 2 ne'er-do-well as parents so trying to rehabilitate the less well known (these days) or SF sees her chance after the success of 'rebranding' Camilla.
> 
> Certainly, all the interest (good and bad) about the HaZZer and MegZZ and the BRF (even monarchy in general) has given all these hangers-on more space on (Global) media platforms.


Imo SF has messed up her eyes with all the surgery/ injections, so that will hold her back now. 

The thing about the MM’s deal or no deal, she was in the show for 1 year [2006-07].  She landed in Suits in 2011.  Can we say that DorND was a launchpad for her?  I think not. *She got the Suits gig because of Trevor.  *It’s all about her hook-ups that got her where she is. Simple facts. 








						Meghan, Duchess of Sussex - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> WTF knows at this point.  Honestly, WTF cares??  I don't plan on watching it.  The thought of hearing TW's voice for hour long episodes???    It would make me wish I was deaf, TBH.  Anyone here plan on watching it??


I don't have netflix and I wouldn't watch it on principle


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo SF has messed up her eyes with all the surgery/ injections, so that will hold her back now.
> 
> The thing about the MM’s deal or no deal, she was in the show for 1 year [2006-07].  She landed in Suits in 2011.  Can we say that DorND was a launchpad for her?  I think not. *She got the Suits gig because of Trevor.  *It’s all about her hook-ups that got her where she is. Simple facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


Great point. Of course she wasn’t about to give her ex credit for helping her.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.




Huh?









						Harry, Meghan named environmental ‘role models’ for only having two children
					

Population Matters, a UK-based charity, has said the couple has been chosen to receive an award for their "enlightened" decision




					indianexpress.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo SF has messed up her eyes with all the surgery/ injections, so that will hold her back now.
> 
> The thing about the MM’s deal or no deal, she was in the show for 1 year [2006-07].  She landed in Suits in 2011.  Can we say that DorND was a launchpad for her?  I think not. *She got the Suits gig because of Trevor.  *It’s all about her hook-ups that got her where she is. Simple facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org



And she thanked him generously...by mailing back his rings.


----------



## bellecate

Gal4Dior said:


> So having the third baby to save the marriage??


Upping her payday for after the divorce.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Upping her payday for after the divorce.


if they divorce and she gets custody I'm thinking (I don't know of course) those kids will be raised by nannies....she doesn't have time for them


----------



## CarryOn2020

I dare her to cut her hair, stop the hair dye, lose the fake lashes and excessive make-up, stop the spray-tans, regain that weight. 
Hazzi would *run* for those woods.  He wanted a kinda Kate look-alike. She changes her look, he’s a runner.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Upping her payday for after the divorce.


Exactly, more kids means more royal child support.


----------



## JulesB68

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.



So what happened to their dig at C & W, saying that having more than 2 children was bad for the planet. Or is it now the case that because they're including the 4-legged kids, they're over 2 anyway, so what difference would another make!


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I dare her to cut her hair, stop the hair dye, lose the fake lashes and excessive make-up, stop the spray-tans, regain that weight.
> Hazzi would *run* for those woods.  He wanted a kinda Kate look-alike. She changes her look, he’s a runner.


I don't think that's her real hair....mainly extensions.  would love to see her rock her natural hair.  why not?


----------



## LittleStar88

I thought the only PR hustler that works harder than Kris Jenner was the devil. Turns out it's actually TW, which may be the same thing as the devil if you prefer


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Exactly, more kids means more royal child support.


More security paid for by [possibly USA taxpayers].


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## JulesB68

LittleStar88 said:


> Huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan named environmental ‘role models’ for only having two children
> 
> 
> Population Matters, a UK-based charity, has said the couple has been chosen to receive an award for their "enlightened" decision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indianexpress.com


You beat me to it!


----------



## Chanbal

Loyalty, hardworking, thankful… so many foreigner words to cousin Hazz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

She was in the way back.  Who would have ever noticed her?


----------



## LittleStar88

JulesB68 said:


> You beat me to it!



If kiddo #3 turns out to be a truth, I hope they plan to give back that award!


----------



## rose60610

Another baby to "bring them closer"?  Claw has her claws on Haz 24/7, they hold hands all the time! What does she mean by "being closer"? I thought they were crazy in love! Haz's announcement after TQ's death spoke of his "amazing wife". Wait, wait! You mean, they aReN't crazy in love?


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I thought the only PR hustler that works harder than Kris Jenner was the devil. Turns out it's actually TW, which may be the same thing as the devil if you prefer


apparently she's not as good at as Kris....maybe she needs to consult with her


----------



## CarryOn2020

King Charles rules!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I dare her to cut her hair, stop the hair dye, lose the fake lashes and excessive make-up, stop the spray-tans, regain that weight.
> Hazzi would *run* for those woods.  He wanted a kinda Kate look-alike. She changes her look, he’s a runner.



And still she looks nothing like Kate...not as a dig, just matter-of-factly.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan named environmental ‘role models’ for only having two children
> 
> 
> Population Matters, a UK-based charity, has said the couple has been chosen to receive an award for their "enlightened" decision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indianexpress.com


Am I understanding this well?

They got an award because of having only two kids, but they are now allegedly in search of a third one. They are charity award recipients due to alleged photo-op sandwich donations.
They are now environmental role models on private jets and 16 bathrooms…


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I dare her to cut her hair, stop the hair dye, lose the fake lashes and excessive make-up, stop the spray-tans, regain that weight.
> Hazzi would *run* for those woods.  He wanted a kinda Kate look-alike. She changes her look, he’s a runner.


Most of Harry’s exes are blondes. I don’t think he has a definite type, apparently finding a woman who wants to be with him is hard enough without limiting his options.


----------



## jelliedfeels

This sort of thing is my pet peeve about models in general. They are fine with being judged on beauty if they get the gig over 5 or 6 ‘lesser beauties’ (and of course there millions who shouldn’t even consider modelling a possiblility)  but the moment something about _them _isn’t up to the casting director’s mark they suddenly realise how subjective and demeaning being judged by looks is.

Sorry crunchess but if this entire thing is constructed to try and convince us you are some great beauty (and when you think about it her physical appearance has been discussed ad nauseum each episode) then you aren’t fooling anyone.


She’s dropped the ball here too on admitting she’s been blackfishing for a while. Why would a proud melaninated woman need to fake tan like her pasty white co-stars?


Sharont2305 said:


> Sticking to the same time line, I wonder how all this would've panned out if The Queen had died first?


I think it would’ve been more scandalous as they definitely wanted to leech off the popularity of the queen while she was alive. I dunno if Charles would’ve acted any different probably not I mean we’re only talking about a couple of years in total.


bag-mania said:


> What was in it for Paris? Can’t imagine any woman wanting to be featured on the episode about the word Bimbo. She’s the same age as Meghan, maybe she understands her.


Also let’s not even touch on the irony of her complaining about focus of sale being on her body with someone who launched themself into the public eye with a sex tape. 


Chanbal said:


> From twitter (spoiler), it appears TW got a more intellectually stimulating (no Bimbo @bag-mania) career after quitting Dear or No Deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Next career step and values



This is brilliant

I dunno if this has been mentioned but the British version of the DOND game show didn’t even have the  girls (the briefcases were opened by other contestants if I recall) so taking this ‘objectifying role seems even more bizarre.

It’s a hit dog will holler to me again. She knows people are laughing at how stupid she sounds so she’s trying to claim she’s just too damn pretty for us to take her seriously and it’s our prejudiced minds boo hoo.

Also I thought LA was full of smoking hot wannabe starlets? M should be thanking her lucky stars she ever got anything because she is nothing special looks wise. 


Helventara said:


> She was treated like a bimbo and wants Lilibet to aspire _higher than a bimbo?_  I wonder what’s the context of this statement. What kind of a mother set such weird (I actually wanted to say low) bar for her daughter?


Someone who is horribly jealous at the mere thought of her daughter (or anyone) exceeding her (even though there  but who also wants to suck up any credit for any of L’s future endeavours?

Well either that or she’s just lowering our expectations for when 20 years down the line it becomes so hard to find ginger actresses of the right submissive temperament that she needs to start hiring fetish porn stars?


marietouchet said:


> PH DJs and has numerous very lucrative perfume deals. Her Barbie look has not changed in 20 years
> PH reminds me of another star I super respect - Dolly Parton. DP has a distinctive look and she is laughing all the way to the bank - she famously said it takes a lot to work to look this trashy
> Both are very successful while CHOOSING to still have a trashy/bimbo look, it is their thing , like Margaret Cho’s tattoos
> Whereas, MM is implicitly criticizing that kind of look, spray tans, extensions and bra padding. In some sense, MM is putting down PH for owning her look, and putting down Mariah for being a diva, or Lucy Liu for  playing a role


I think the comparison is underselling  Dolly but yes it’s true Paris has always marketed herself with that ‘blonde bimbo’ act that worked so well for Jayne Mansfield and Mamie van Doren and obviously Marilyn before her. I mean if this podcast was ever remotely not tripe they could perhaps touch on the history of these things?

I’m also struck by the fact We basically called this episode when we were joking about how all the episodes  seemed to be about 1930s slang- I know bimbo is still used a bit more commonly today than some of the others but it does seem like an expression well at home with the floozy, the chanteusey and the spunky dame with tons of moxie.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> apparently she's not as good at as Kris....maybe she needs to consult with her



She doesn't have enough money or interest to make it on Kris' radar


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> The foal pic looks PS to me


So you think perhaps the horse show pictures were PS and not the official photo? Backwards! Interesting!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this point she must either be trolling us big time or suffer from some form of early Alzheimer's.



The only thing she's suffering from is a bad case of cognitive dissonance.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> She would have climbed into bed with Hugh Hefner and the three blondes for a buck


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this point she must either be trolling us big time or suffer from some form of early Alzheimer's.


she doesn't think anyone notices her tanning or her fake hair


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.




Time to defrost an embryo and find another surrogate.


----------



## jelliedfeels

TC1 said:


> The Simple Life was FUNNY. Opening your mouth and a briefcase at the same time doesn't get you your own TV series.


Very good point. Paris could at least act out a funny script. M struggles with an earnest one.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo SF has messed up her eyes with all the surgery/ injections, so that will hold her back now.
> 
> The thing about the MM’s deal or no deal, she was in the show for 1 year [2006-07].  She landed in Suits in 2011.  Can we say that DorND was a launchpad for her?  I think not. *She got the Suits gig because of Trevor.  *It’s all about her hook-ups that got her where she is. Simple facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan, Duchess of Sussex - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


Well that’s exactly what she’s complaining about! She slept her way into showbiz and still could only get chickens*** gigs! If you open a high-flying fly like a briefcase it is only just you should at the very least get your own 3 movie trilogy or prime time talk show and I mean for what’s it’s worth, this same tactic worked when she got stuck in with Harry.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I dare her to cut her hair, stop the hair dye, lose the fake lashes and excessive make-up, stop the spray-tans, regain that weight.
> Hazzi would *run* for those woods.  He wanted a kinda Kate look-alike. She changes her look, he’s a runner.


Well she’s done one of those things…..
I do agree with you the hair is meant to mimic Kate, it’s the only reason I can think she’d wear a dated style that is so clearly not the right weight for her head.

I suppose she also thought the Diana would be too on the nose.

At some point you’ve got to remove a weave and fake tan washes off so he has probably seen her without it.


sdkitty said:


> I don't think that's her real hair....mainly extensions.  would love to see her rock her natural hair.  why not?


I would encourage it on principle but I think it must be pretty fried and probably not salvageable. Her hair looks quite fine and only slightly curly so maybe she doesn’t need too much straightening but IDK it doesn’t look like  a healthy head.


LittleStar88 said:


> I thought the only PR hustler that works harder than Kris Jenner was the devil. Turns out it's actually TW, which may be the same thing as the devil if you prefer


Tw works harder but Kris is actually successful so it cancels out


bag-mania said:


> Most of Harry’s exes are blondes. I don’t think he has a definite type, apparently finding a woman who wants to be with him is hard enough without limiting his options.


I’m of the opinion his type was famous. He got papped with lots of girl group girls and minor actresses. I think Marcus and his colleagues introduced him to many a starlet. A lot of them would still be British of course and therefore less ‘exotic’ to him.
The seductive appeal of LA was a big part of M’s draw I think. Hollywood on *his doorstep*

Those blonde girl school prefect type girlfriends he had like Cressida were who his family wanted him to date/marry because she would get him organised and keep him busy with useful aristocratic  hobbies like carriage driving and maintaining a serf class. So I think he probably didn’t fancy them at all and only went along with it for as long as he wasn’t expected to get serious. Once he got old enough to get married he suddenly was single again.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone have the foal photo handy? I want to do another comparison. Here’s the official Archie photo.


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #5
					

As I recall, the alliterate one used the reality show she quit, to get yachting gigs, which was why she was able to quit the reality show.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5634368
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #5
> 
> 
> As I recall, the alliterate one used the reality show she quit, to get yachting gigs, which was why she was able to quit the reality show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Wait, what reality show?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Wait, what reality show?


I think they're referring to Deal Or No Deal.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5634368
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #5
> 
> 
> As I recall, the alliterate one used the reality show she quit, to get yachting gigs, which was why she was able to quit the reality show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



"Meghan Unmarketable"


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone have the foal photo handy? I want to do another comparison. Here’s the official Archie photo.
> 
> View attachment 5634362


If the photo was photoshopped, I'm impressed. With the exception of forgetting to iron Hazz's pants (and an apparently less realistic area between PP's jacket and Hazz's elbow?), the work is good.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I think they're referring to Deal Or No Deal.


That was a game show. How can I take it seriously if the most basic statement is wrong? Do better, blind item writer! You only had one sentence to write today.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> This sort of thing is my pet peeve about models in general. They are fine with being judged on beauty if they get the gig over 5 or 6 ‘lesser beauties’ (and of course there millions who shouldn’t even consider modelling a possiblility)  but the moment something about _them _isn’t up to the casting director’s mark they suddenly realise how subjective and demeaning being judged by looks is.
> 
> Sorry crunchess but if this entire thing is constructed to try and convince us you are some great beauty (and when you think about it her physical appearance has been discussed ad nauseum each episode) then you aren’t fooling anyone.
> 
> 
> She’s dropped the ball here too on admitting she’s been blackfishing for a while. Why would a proud melaninated woman need to fake tan like her pasty white co-stars?
> 
> I think it would’ve been more scandalous as they definitely wanted to leech off the popularity of the queen while she was alive. I dunno if Charles would’ve acted any different probably not I mean we’re only talking about a couple of years in total.
> 
> Also let’s not even touch on the irony of her complaining about focus of sale being on her body with someone who launched themself into the public eye with a sex tape.
> 
> This is brilliant
> 
> I dunno if this has been mentioned but the British version of the DOND game show didn’t even have the  girls (the briefcases were opened by other contestants if I recall) so taking this ‘objectifying role seems even more bizarre.
> 
> It’s a hit dog will holler to me again. She knows people are laughing at how stupid she sounds so she’s trying to claim she’s just too damn pretty for us to take her seriously and it’s our prejudiced minds boo hoo.
> 
> Also I thought LA was full of smoking hot wannabe starlets? M should be thanking her lucky stars she ever got anything because she is nothing special looks wise.
> 
> Someone who is horribly jealous at the mere thought of her daughter (or anyone) exceeding her (even though there  but who also wants to suck up any credit for any of L’s future endeavours?
> 
> Well either that or she’s just lowering our expectations for when 20 years down the line it becomes so hard to find ginger actresses of the right submissive temperament that she needs to start hiring fetish porn stars?
> 
> I think the comparison is underselling  Dolly but yes it’s true Paris has always marketed herself with that ‘blonde bimbo’ act that worked so well for Jayne Mansfield and Mamie van Doren and obviously Marilyn before her. I mean if this podcast was ever remotely not tripe they could perhaps touch on the history of these things?
> 
> I’m also struck by the fact We basically called this episode when we were joking about how all the episodes  seemed to be about 1930s slang- I know bimbo is still used a bit more commonly today than some of the others but it does seem like an expression well at home with the floozy, the chanteusey and the spunky dame with tons of moxie.



I agree. 

The whole episode was just about telling us how beautiful she was/is. Not that many people globally know her from those day, so basically she's saying she was hired for her looks. She's trying to say, "you know me as clever and as an award-winning humanitarian, but there was a time I was only paid to look gorgeous". 

Unfortunately, not only is M as dull as ditch-water, as narcissists all tend to be, not that clever, and just fake hair, fake nails and filler type of a beauty. Of which money can buy you a dime a dozen, no jackpot needed. Deal or no deal, the woman is CHEAP.  

Paris still milks it when she needs to (Versace SS23)  Although I found her story (_This is Paris_) of being kidnapped and put in that 'place' when she was younger horrifying and genuinely moving. It was clear she was not over that episode of her life, I hope she finds peace.


----------



## EmilyM11

papertiger said:


> Unfortunately, not only is M as
> *dull as ditch-water, *as narcissists all tend to be, not that clever, and just fake hair, fake nails and filler type of a beauty. Of which money can buy you a dime a dozen, no jackpot needed. Deal or no deal, the woman is CHEAP.


This! The woman is so boring that only this thread makes her interesting. This podcast confirms that she’s just plain, dull, boring with uninteresting life preHazard. Even my mother, currently residing in some dump in Poland  has more to offer.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

JulesB68 said:


> Still playing catch up!
> 
> Did anyone else spot this image some way down this twitter page? Just wondering if people think it's real/really who we think it is? Apologies for such a large pic of Andrew in all his er, glory!  Apologies also if this has already been discussed!


Looks like the claw to me


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

piperdog said:


> Disclaimer: I haven't heard a second of any of the podcasts, and don't intend to. If there's brilliance to be mined from any of them, I'll take the risk of missing out.
> 
> But from what I've read of today's whingefest, I think I made the right call. Let me get this straight. Two young women who had myriad resources and other options for career paths open to them, CHOSE to take these roles (briefcase girl and um, Paris Hilton) on these shows. They likely had full understanding of what was expected of them with regard to their appearance, their costumes, their behavior on-camera, and did it anyway, yet NOW they complain that these roles were demeaning?
> 
> Meghan had a degree from Northwestern and a supportive dad, Paris had probably just about anything she wanted. Neither was forced into these jobs. They weren't trafficked or in the situations where this was their best option or only way out (e.g., like some of Epstein's victims). Either of them could have said "No Deal" and walked away and looked for a job in a field where intellect or other skill or training mattered. But they didn't. Both of them (assumedly) sought out these jobs where their known role going in was rich-blonde-bimbo or hot-chick-falling-out-of-her-dress. Both did those jobs that sustained or built upon the bimbo stereotype/archetype, and now they complain about it. Nope. I didn't watch Deal or No Deal. I didn't watch Simple Life. I'm not going to tune in for this mess, either.


I am still questioning the claim of a degree from Northwestern.  Would love to see a final transcript with the statement regarding the specifics of the degree awarded.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan named environmental ‘role models’ for only having two children
> 
> 
> Population Matters, a UK-based charity, has said the couple has been chosen to receive an award for their "enlightened" decision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indianexpress.com


How will they face Jane Goodall after telling her they would only have two?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

A few years ago when she was explaining why she left Deal or No Deal she said it was because she hated standing around all day in the painful high heels they made her wear. Now, it’s because she was empowering herself to not be seen as a bimbo.   

It will never happen but I’d laugh if someone from the show came forward and said that she didn’t quit at all but she was let go for not being sexy enough.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She was in the way back.  Who would have ever noticed her?



Maybe it was just that the producers recognized your true self, Meg.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't think anyone notices her tanning or her fake hair


You're kidding.  That isn't her real hair?


----------



## gracekelly

TC1 said:


> The Simple Life was FUNNY. Opening your mouth and a briefcase at the same time doesn't get you your own TV series.


TBH, I never watched it. I was always under the impression that Paris was another one of these women who knew how to play dumb and turn it into a moneymaker.  She has had longevity so she must not be all that stupid.  As far as I know, she is on excellent terms with her family and they all support one another, unlike one of the named people of this thread.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan named environmental ‘role models’ for only having two children
> 
> 
> Population Matters, a UK-based charity, has said the couple has been chosen to receive an award for their "enlightened" decision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indianexpress.com



I should be given the Environmentalist of the Decade Award then, I hove no kids.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Her ability to insert herself into everything is extraordinary!


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> A few years ago when she was explaining why she left Deal or No Deal she said it was because she hated standing around all day in the painful high heels they made her wear. Now, it’s because she was empowering herself to not be seen as a bimbo.
> 
> It will never happen but I’d laugh if someone from the show came forward and said that she didn’t quit at all but she was let go for not being sexy enough.



I've seen her in heels 90% of the time. Who's making her wear them now?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh yeah I was listening to this and by the time the ‘fabric expert’ came on I was shaking my head vehemently.
> 
> Please for the love of god no! No polyester or poly synthetic blends near TW! We’ve seen she’s a sweaty one to begin with and one would imagine it would make for  a very pungent claw hug for the poor photo op.



Yes, ZedZed, just say  to dirty sweaty polyester cuz it's full of bacteria.

It's an older article but still interesting.
*Stinky T-Shirt? Bacteria Love Polyester In A Special Way*








						Stinky T-Shirt? Bacteria Love Polyester In A Special Way
					

Why does that sleek polyester T-shirt reek after 10 minutes, while the old-school cotton stays relatively sweet? Polyester attracts very different microbes, which may account for that special stink.




					www.npr.org


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I should be given the Environmentalist of the Decade Award then, I hove no kids.


I hope you like sharing because I qualify as well as a few others here.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> I've seen her in heels 90% of the time. Who's making her wear them now?


I think that show was prior to her bunion surgery so it might have been pretty painful if not in shoes of her choosing.  (Tee Hee!)


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I hope you like sharing because I qualify as well as a few others here.



What? I paid for this dam* award! 

I'll share when H&M give some money away gratis from their 'charity'


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> I've seen her in heels 90% of the time. Who's making her wear them now?


Apparently it’s bad if you have to wear heels and bronzer for your $800/hr job but it is empowering when you choose to wear them for yourself.


----------



## 880

papertiger said:


> I should be given the Environmentalist of the Decade Award then, I hove no kids.


+1


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> What? I paid for this dam* award!
> 
> I'll share when H&M give some money away gratis from their 'charity'


Sorry they pulled a fast one on ya and you paid .  I got it for free.  Not to worry, I will share the AUTHENTIC award with you.  You know, you have to watch out for fakes!


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> I think that show was prior to her bunion surgery so it might have been pretty painful if not in shoes of her choosing.  (Tee Hee!)


Her taste in shoes is likely what gave her bunions or at least made them worse. Oh irony!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> Her ability to insert herself into everything is extraordinary!
> 
> View attachment 5634395



I want to make a joke how after all Ghoul speaks Persian (she doesn't...she learned one sentence to seduce a fellow school boy at the tender age of 16), but this pisses me off to no end. Disgusting, well, ghoul.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW her name was Jîna. Mahsa is just the name the oppressors made her take.


----------



## pukasonqo

Mrs.Z said:


> Her ability to insert herself into everything is extraordinary!
> 
> View attachment 5634395


A bit late to jump into the bandwagon, the girls in Iran can show MM a thing or two about real activism and facing danger for daring no challenge a ridiculous “law”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes, ZedZed, just say  to dirty sweaty polyester cuz it's full of bacteria.
> 
> It's an older article but still interesting.
> *Stinky T-Shirt? Bacteria Love Polyester In A Special Way*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stinky T-Shirt? Bacteria Love Polyester In A Special Way
> 
> 
> Why does that sleek polyester T-shirt reek after 10 minutes, while the old-school cotton stays relatively sweet? Polyester attracts very different microbes, which may account for that special stink.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org



Two words: acne treatments. Not only is tretinoin (Retin-A...the topical, not the pills) the gold standard for anti-aging, nothing beats body odor like a body wash with benzoyl peroxide.


----------



## TC1

gracekelly said:


> TBH, I never watched it. I was always under the impression that Paris was another one of these women who knew how to play dumb and turn it into a moneymaker.  She has had longevity so she must not be all that stupid.  As far as I know, she is on excellent terms with her family and they all support one another, unlike one of the named people of this thread.


Neither Paris or Nicole Richie are dumb. They knew the roles they were playing for that show. They have both turned into successful business women. Cannot say the same for MM


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I also didn't know, and I'm beyond shocked.


I am, but I'm not.  The current season of RHOBH had underlying accusations that Paris' mother Kathy called a DJ the F word as well as yelled the N word.  The Hiltons are powerful and seem to scrub any negativity away.  Kathy showed up with a legal team to the reunion, probably to bully anyone from saying anything more.  As someone said in another thread, 3/4 of her children have been to jail, but you hard hear about any of that.  The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.  I worry for HazMat's children.  They're going to be trained to be bitter, accusatory victims.


----------



## purseinsanity

Gal4Dior said:


> So having the third baby to save the marriage??


Great idea!  That always works.  
More child support when the divorce comes.


----------



## LittleStar88

pukasonqo said:


> A bit late to jump into the bandwagon, the girls in Iran can show MM a thing or two about real activism and facing danger for daring no challenge a ridiculous “law”



Iranian girls have some serious bravery going on right now. TW thinks putting on a tee shirt makes her an AcTiViSt. She’s just a bandwagoner. She likes the low-hanging fruit activism versus actually doing something (without making it all about her).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pukasonqo said:


> A bit late to jump into the bandwagon, the girls in Iran can show MM a thing or two about real activism and facing danger for daring no challenge a ridiculous “law”



I just saw a video with school girls - with that I mean elementary school or maybe a lower grade of middle school, they looked like 10 - protesting. Which makes me proud but also so anxious for them. 

Also, Elnaz Rekabi, a professional climber who competed without a hijab in South Korea, has gone missing. So far it is thought the regime took her cell phone, passport and forced her on a plane back to Iran, but she has yet to resurface.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Iranian girls have some serious bravery going on right now. TW thinks putting on a tee shirt makes her an AcTiViSt. She’s just a bandwagoner. She likes the low-hanging fruit activism versus actually doing something (without making it all about her).


So true and not a peep out of them on this.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan named environmental ‘role models’ for only having two children
> 
> 
> Population Matters, a UK-based charity, has said the couple has been chosen to receive an award for their "enlightened" decision
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indianexpress.com


Well, shoot.  Why aren't they giving people with NO children the biggest awards then???


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And she thanked him generously...by mailing back his rings.


I guess we need to pat her on the back for returning them.  The witch we know now would merch them, then sell them.


----------



## lulu212121

Chanbal said:


> If the photo was photoshopped, I'm impressed. With the exception of forgetting to iron Hazz's pants (and an apparently less realistic area between PP's jacket and Hazz's elbow?), the work is good.


OMG! I just looked at his pants! What terrible seams.  I never gave this photo a second thought, now I am not sure.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> You're kidding.  That isn't her real hair?


guess she forgot she herself described her shame about her curly hair in junior high.....that was why she sat alone at lunch, right?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Sorry they pulled a fast one on ya and you paid .  I got it for free.  Not to worry, I will share the AUTHENTIC award with you.  *You know, you have to watch out for fakes!*


I feel like if you cut the back of Haz and TW's necks, "Made in China" tags would fall out.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

I can totally believe this. Allegedly of course.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I agree.
> 
> The whole episode was just about telling us how beautiful she was/is. Not that many people globally know her from those day, so basically she's saying she was hired for her looks. She's trying to say, "you know me as clever and as an award-winning humanitarian, but there was a time I was only paid to look gorgeous".
> 
> Unfortunately, not only is M as dull as ditch-water, as narcissists all tend to be, not that clever, and just fake hair, fake nails and filler type of a beauty. Of which money can buy you a dime a dozen, no jackpot needed. Deal or no deal, the woman is CHEAP.
> 
> Paris still milks it when she needs to (Versace SS23)  Although I found her story (_This is Paris_) of being kidnapped and put in that 'place' when she was younger horrifying and genuinely moving. It was clear she was not over that episode of her life, I hope she finds peace.


RE: Paris, the Hiltons, the Kardashians, the Harkles, etc.  imo none of these people should be trusted. They say things to get the views, the clicks, the headlines, the $$$$$, etc. They themselves have said it isn’t real.  So. No. I do not believe them. Since Victimhood sells well in today’s world, all the more reason to doubt them.  Revisionist history gets a pass.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> TBH, I never watched it. I was always under the impression that Paris was another one of these women who knew how to play dumb and turn it into a moneymaker.  She has had longevity so she must not be all that stupid.  As far as I know, she is on excellent terms with her family and they all support one another, unlike one of the named people of this thread.


Yes, her whole family attended her wedding. What a concept! They all looked very happy from the pictures I saw.



> https://people.com/tv/paris-hilton-and-carter-reum-wedding-every-single-photo/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> I can totally believe this. Allegedly of course.
> 
> View attachment 5634415



If I had any doubt the "inappropriate with her husband" convinced me. Wouldn't be the first time, no?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> Her ability to insert herself into everything is extraordinary!
> 
> View attachment 5634395


Interchangeable women, as Jackie O said.


Note how MM stands in the photo - legs apart.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> guess she forgot she herself described her shame about her curly hair in junior high.....that was why she sat alone at lunch, right?



I'm gonna make a wild guess and say it was not her curly hair that caused her to sit alone at lunch, if that actually even happened. Maybe her classmates found her to be annoying as hell. I can imagine her going on about how her father was a big deal in Hollywood and she got to hang out with him on the set of Married With Children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I'm gonna make a wild guess and say it was not her curly hair that caused her to sit alone at lunch, if that actually even happened. Maybe her classmates found her to be annoying as hell. I can imagine her going on about how her father was a big deal in Hollywood and she got to hang out with him on the set of Married With Children.


Here is the video. As you watch, remember her father lied about her letter changing anything.  It was a lie that she continues to tell to this day. Maybe it was her first lie [doubt it], it certainly is not her last one.  My heart goes out to her classmates.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm gonna make a wild guess and say it was not her curly hair that caused her to sit alone at lunch, if that actually even happened. Maybe her classmates found her to be annoying as hell. I can imagine her going on about how her father was a big deal in Hollywood and she got to hang out with him on the set of Married With Children.


well, she said she sat alone at lunch but also said that to solve her problem she became president of everything at school - even though she was so shy


----------



## Mumotons

Archewell Foundation builds a playground in Uvalde after mass shooting
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable foundation, Archewell, helped fund a playground in Uvalde following the Robb School shooting in May 2022.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> Archewell Foundation builds a playground in Uvalde after mass shooting
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable foundation, Archewell, helped fund a playground in Uvalde following the Robb School shooting in May 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Operative words are *helped fund. * That means they contributed $50.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Gal4Dior said:


> So having the third baby to save the marriage??





gracekelly said:


> Bandage babies don’t help marriages. It won’t help a royal reconciliation either, especially when you don’t allow gramps to see the kids you do have.


See: Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck or Gwen Stefani and Gavin Rossdale! 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Two words: acne treatments. Not only is tretinoin (Retin-A...the topical, not the pills) the gold standard for anti-aging, nothing beats body odor like a body wash with benzoyl peroxide.


I swear you and I use all the same products!


----------



## sdkitty

Mumotons said:


> Archewell Foundation builds a playground in Uvalde after mass shooting
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable foundation, Archewell, helped fund a playground in Uvalde following the Robb School shooting in May 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


oh - she made a "quiet appearance" with her film crew in tow
Headline says they are building the playground and then story says they are partnering with other organizations....more self-promotion.  they're shameless


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> well, she said she sat alone at lunch but also said that to solve her problem she became president of everything at school - even though she was so shy


That is one of my favorites of her many nonsensical lies. Everyone knows shy, introverted kids just love to join lots of clubs in school and become the leaders of them!


----------



## Jayne1

Annawakes said:


> Beneath all the fakery I always thought Paris was much smarter than she looked.  Too bad she decided to get mixed up with Zeezy.


No, Paris is dumber than dumb. 

I remember she had to take the stand for something back in 2009  when it was claimed she reneged on a contract and you would think you were listening to a child.  She has very little knowledge of basic facts.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> That is one of my favorites of her many nonsensical lies. Everyone knows shy, introverted kids just love to join lots of clubs in school and become the leaders of them!


right
as a person who was Painfully shy as a kid, I resent that stupid claim


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> So true and not a peep out of them on this.


Same as Ukraine but at least they got an wrong sided drawing of their flag courtesy of MM


----------



## CarryOn2020

The City of Uvalde, Archewell Foundation, and KABOOM! Unveil a New Playground to Bring Hope and Healing for Kids and Families in Uvalde
					

/PRNewswire/ -- The City of Uvalde, Archewell Foundation, and KABOOM! recently partnered to support community unity and healing by creating a playspace for...




					www.prnewswire.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> After what they did, they are still surprised by the reception in the UK.
> 
> _On the Daily Mail's "Palace Confidential," Richard Eden, the outlet's diary editor, talked about Meghan and Harry's eyebrow-raising seating. "*There I was, watching the coverage on television and you couldn't see Meghan,"* Eden said. "*There was this really tall candle right in front of the view of the camera*. *By coincidence Harry and Meghan seemed to be seated behind the tallest member of the Royal Family *– Tim Laurence, Princess Anne's husband, now that could be coincidence, but as we know everything was planned meticulously.
> 
> In addition, the evening before the funeral, *the Sussexes were disinvited from a large state reception* for world leaders. According to The Telegraph, the invitation was a mistake as the event was intended only for working royals. "*They have done everything as best they could,*" a source told the outlet. "*They have turned up, they have smiled, shaken hands, whatever was asked.*"
> 
> Writing in the New York Daily News, Richard Johnson cited reports from friends of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Duke and Duchess of Sussex that the couple is "complaining they were snubbed and mistreated at Queen Elizabeth's funeral." Johnson added, "*They both whined that the family wasn't as welcoming as they should have been."*
> 
> According to the Daily Mail, another author, Lord Jeffrey Archer, says *Harry will air his grievances by adding an extra chapter to his upcoming memoir.* "'I fear for the book," Archer said. "I know they're writing the chapter on the funeral, so I suppose that's what the book will end on."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan And Harry Are Reportedly Making Complaints To Friends About The Queen's Funeral - The List
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry might not be too happy about their recent treatment among the royal family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thelist.com


_ "*They have done everything as best they could,*" a source told the outlet. "*They have turned up, they have smiled, shaken hands, whatever was asked.*" _
If this was the best they could do - be pleasant at an important occasion, then their bar is set insanely low. No wonder she gets awards for breathing and preening (like a bimbo).


----------



## bellecate

Mumotons said:


> Archewell Foundation builds a playground in Uvalde after mass shooting
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable foundation, Archewell, helped fund a playground in Uvalde following the Robb School shooting in May 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wonder who’s actually paying for the whole thing, certainly not the grifters. I imagine their monetary contribution could pay for one rung on a ladder.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It will never happen *but I’d laugh if someone from the show came forward and said that she didn’t quit at all but she was let go *for not being sexy enough.


Are you laughing now?


----------



## DL Harper

bellecate said:


> I wonder who’s actually paying for the whole thing, certainly not the grifters. I imagine their monetary contribution could pay for one rung on a ladder.


No H&M top billing in this article.  Note it never says Archewell gives money.  Sandwiches aren't mentioned.   
*"About Archewell Foundation*
Archewell Foundation is an impact-driven non-profit created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The foundation's core purpose is to uplift and unite communities — local and global, online and offline — one act of compassion at a time."









						The City of Uvalde, Archewell Foundation, and KABOOM! Unveil a New Playground to Bring Hope and Healing for Kids and Families in Uvalde
					

/PRNewswire/ -- The City of Uvalde, Archewell Foundation, and KABOOM! recently partnered to support community unity and healing by creating a playspace for...




					www.prnewswire.com


----------



## purseinsanity

bellecate said:


> I can totally believe this. Allegedly of course.
> 
> View attachment 5634415


Who's Terry?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interchangeable women, as Jackie O said.
> 
> 
> Note how MM stands in the photo - legs apart.



I'm starting to think she actually really has balls.


----------



## Mumotons

Chanbal said:


> Are you laughing now?












						Meghan Markle's Deal or No Deal costar fires back at her claims
					

Real Housewives of Atlanta star Claudia Jordan starred alongside Meghan, 41, on NBC game show Deal or No Deal 16 years ago.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I am, but I'm not.  The current season of RHOBH had underlying accusations that Paris' mother Kathy called a DJ the F word as well as yelled the N word.  The Hiltons are powerful and seem to scrub any negativity away.  Kathy showed up with a legal team to the reunion, probably to bully anyone from saying anything more.  As someone said in another thread, 3/4 of her children have been to jail, but you hard hear about any of that.  The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.  I worry for HazMat's children.  They're going to be trained to be bitter, accusatory victims.


I'm well aware of the Hilton kids being difficult in school, but nothing like big donations to get them out of trouble. Though, the video still got me by surprise, but it shouldn't have. 

You are right about worrying for HazMat's children. Lemon cakes and sandwiches will not do the trick in schools. `


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Who's Terry?


It’s Howie Mandel’s wife.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Because they paid her $800 per episode and they filmed up to seven episodes in a day. That’s a tidy amount for one day of work for most people.


Her attention span is 15 min, then she gets bored.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.



A third child will bring us closer... closer to the big money? Close enough that Handbag won't be able to escape? You don't need to get any closer to make the baby, especially if the zygote came from a Petri dish.

The Lilibet gamble didn't work. Maybe now they are going to steal a name from Charles or Camilla to stay in the game.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interchangeable women, as Jackie O said.
> 
> 
> Note how MM stands in the photo - legs apart.



Interesting MD is president of Archewell, yet her Twitter and Wiki bios make scant mention of the job, as if her current employment were being downplayed for this talented and accomplished person, there was more about her job with Rachel Zoe


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Bandage babies don’t help marriages.


"Bandage babies" - that's a good one. And you're right, they don't.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> It’s Howie Mandel’s wife.


Howie says he doesn’t remember her. Now that’s a wife who identifies and neutralizes a potential problem efficiently.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Are you laughing now?



Why yes, yes I am!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Maggie Muggins

Nutashha said:


> Yeah, I hear you guys. There IS ranting involved. But the girl has had some fair share of 'cold' encounters in the past! Like the time when she was ignored by the Brits. I think she deserved better.
> 
> Meghan Received Brutal Treatment by British People after Queen’s Death​
> View attachment 5634230


My heart really really bleads for her, not! When things don't turn out exactly like she wants, ZedZed can do the same as us. Suck it up, buckle down, change her nasty behaviours, stop mooching off Dufus' family, quit lying about the BRF, stop preaching to the world and find a worthwhile occupation using only her marketable skills/talents which doesn't include acting and preaching to the world.


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.




So they have a Lilibet. Are they going to name the 3rd Charles, a sweet nod to KCIII?  Asking for a friend.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Interesting MD is president of Archewell, yet her Twitter and Wiki bios make scant mention of the job, as if her current employment were being downplayed for this talented and accomplished person, there was more about her job with Rachel Zoe


She may well be talented and accomplished [I do not know much about her ], but she has joined herself to well-documented liars and has participated in much of the Harkle mess. My comment was about how much she looks like MM.


_While the 49-year-old wanted her followers to know that she was not 'attacking' Meghan, she said it was important for her to defend the show, and all of the people who worked so hard to make it a success. 

'Lord knows *I've been defending this woman in the media for years*,' she explained. 'And I still will, but I just didn't want any misunderstanding about the climate and environment on the Deal or no Deal set.

'And I'm especially protective of [host] Howie Mandel, who was nothing but kind and respectful to all 26 of us.'
_


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> So they have a Lilibet. Are they going to name the 3rd Charles, a sweet nod to KCIII?  Asking for a friend.


And Camilla if it is a girl?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> And Camilla if it is a girl?


Or Fred? Gladys?









						Yes, Prince Charles and Camilla Really Used the Secret Nicknames Fred and Gladys
					

The pet names even predate Charles's relationship with Princess Diana...




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## csshopper

Mumotons said:


> Archewell Foundation builds a playground in Uvalde after mass shooting
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's charitable foundation, Archewell, helped fund a playground in Uvalde following the Robb School shooting in May 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Kaboom built it, as they have been doing since 1996 when the Charity was founded to provide play spaces for children. Home Depot partners with them and other major companies and groups. Mackenzie Scott, Jeff Bezos’s ex, gifted 14 million dollars to Kaboom in January. Archewell may have contributed something, but as with most of their P R, the headline is duplicitous.


----------



## CarryOn2020

In his own words - “I did not know her”


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> And Camilla if it is a girl?


I don't think Camilla would be very pleased. She's probably going to splutter into her tea again


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some of us were calling it! Not an actual baby but the cry for attention via pregnancy rumours.



Yes, because as everyone knows, when your relationship is in trouble, a baby ALWAYS fixes it


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Time to defrost an embryo and find another surrogate.


If it was a surrogate, I doubt it was TWs embryo's.


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> Iranian girls have some serious bravery going on right now. TW thinks putting on a tee shirt makes her an AcTiViSt. She’s just a bandwagoner. She likes the low-hanging fruit activism versus actually doing something (without making it all about her).


Why doesn't she hop on a private jet with her Nflix crew to Iran, just like she did with Uvalde since she is so supportive?  She latches on to any cause for the PR, but goes on to do absolutely nothing.  Same thing with Gloria Steinem and Roe v Wade.  Gets her name and pic in the news and then jumps on the next thing


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> She was in the way back.  Who would have ever noticed her?



This is a really bad pic of her. Despite the "enhanced" boobs, she still looks rectangular. She was probably jealous of the other suitcase girls. And since she wasn't that hot, did her daddy pull any strings to get her this job?


Jayne1 said:


> So you think perhaps the horse show pictures were PS and not the official photo? Backwards! Interesting!


Both pics look off to me. What we need is corroborating pics which seem oddly thin on the ground. Surely there are other pics of the two events 


charlottawill said:


> The only thing she's suffering from is a bad case of cognitive dissonance.


Totally disengaged from reality.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> In his own words - “I did not know her”



Piers has been relatively quiet…


----------



## needlv

Interesting news about the potential baby #3.

I thought I had read somewhere that the letters patent about naming grandchildren of a monarch prince/princess was being interpreted as not retropective.

ie, Archie and Lili were not grandchildren of the monarch (QEII) at the time they were born, so titles not automatically granted - even when KCIII ascended.

if H and M have another baby, as KCIII is now monarch, I wonder if H and M think they “automatically” get a title for the third child?

 It could force KCIII to clarify the letters patent.


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Paris Hilton dissects her 'bimbo' reputation with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Paris Hilton dissects her 'bimbo' reputation with Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Paris Hilton has explained how the 'lines got blurred' after she developed her ditzy blonde persona.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


I am confused.  Why does TW talk about how being on TV in Hwood, which is all she ever aspired to do, made her feel like a bimbo.  She talks about the intern job and how it made her feel smart, but her one and only spectacularly singular goal in life was to be a star?  Does this make sense to anyone?

There are not too many Hwood movies, reality shows, comedies, and even dramas where men or women are hired because they are super smart.  They are hired almost 100% because of their looks (and hopefully their ability to act).  Ever since she spent her childhood on TV set's and saw how the *stars* were treated, it was what she wanted to do, so to turn around and say that she was only doing for the money just sounds ridiculous.  

If she wanted to pursue literally anything else with her college degree she could have.  As we all know on this forum, stardom and celebrity was her ultimate goal, and she saw a shortcut by stalking a dimwitted prince and marrying into the most famous family in the world.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> She may well be talented and accomplished [I do not know much about her ], but she has joined herself to well-documented liars and has participated in much of the Harkle mess. My comment was about how much she looks like MM.
> 
> 
> _While the 49-year-old wanted her followers to know that she was not 'attacking' Meghan, she said it was important for her to defend the show, and all of the people who worked so hard to make it a success.
> 
> 'Lord knows *I've been defending this woman in the media for years*,' she explained. 'And I still will, but I just didn't want any misunderstanding about the climate and environment on the Deal or no Deal set.
> 
> 'And I'm especially protective of [host] Howie Mandel, who was nothing but kind and respectful to all 26 of us.'
> _



ZedZed's knees look like housemaid's knees specially the left one and makes one wonder if as a Yacht girl, she spent her time on her knees swabbing the decks or was she otherwise occupied.


----------



## gracekelly

DL Harper said:


> No H&M top billing in this article.  Note it never says Archewell gives money.  Sandwiches aren't mentioned.
> *"About Archewell Foundation*
> Archewell Foundation is an impact-driven non-profit created by The Duke and Duchess of Sussex. The foundation's core purpose is to uplift and unite communities — local and global, online and offline — one act of compassion at a time."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The City of Uvalde, Archewell Foundation, and KABOOM! Unveil a New Playground to Bring Hope and Healing for Kids and Families in Uvalde
> 
> 
> /PRNewswire/ -- The City of Uvalde, Archewell Foundation, and KABOOM! recently partnered to support community unity and healing by creating a playspace for...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.prnewswire.com


What a load of grandiose bull kaka. Who have they uplifted and united lately?


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> What a load of grandiose bull kaka. Who have they uplifted and united lately?


Themselves


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Charles is ready.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> That is one of my favorites of her many nonsensical lies. Everyone knows shy, introverted kids just love to join lots of clubs in school and become the leaders of them!



I was that shy, introverted kid and I'd probably have considered moving before inserting myself into social activities like this. I once stepped on a new bf's foot in my early 20s because I had just met his parents, we had gone out for a bit and returned to a house full of every relative they had in the area, and the sight scared me so much I instinctively jumped back 

Funnily, she shyness has somewhat improved the older I get, but the introversion has only grown stronger.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> So they have a Lilibet. Are they going to name the 3rd Charles, a sweet nod to KCIII?  Asking for a friend.



Charles Philip William George maybe. Then again, that's just a too sensible of a name.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I am, but I'm not.  The current season of RHOBH had underlying accusations that Paris' mother Kathy called a DJ the F word as well as yelled the N word.  The Hiltons are powerful and seem to scrub any negativity away.  Kathy showed up with a legal team to the reunion, probably to bully anyone from saying anything more.  As someone said in another thread, 3/4 of her children have been to jail, but you hard hear about any of that.  The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.  *I worry for HazMat's children.  They're going to be trained to be bitter, accusatory victims.*


It would be ironic if they blame their parents for their issues: generational pain and all that.


lulu212121 said:


> OMG! I just looked at his pants! What terrible seams.  I never gave this photo a second thought, now I am not sure.


Those crooked bunched seams always bothered me. Zedzee swans round in expensive (albeit ugly) haute couture and her prince hubby gets badly tailored pants?  


purseinsanity said:


> I feel like if you cut the back of Haz and TW's necks, "Made in China" tags would fall out.


The kids here get their childhood vaccinations on their bum. So my kids could feel the scar but they couldn't see it. I used to tell them that it said "Made in Mummy".


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I'm starting to think she actually really has balls.


Based on her tatty bras, I'm wondering if she has too tight panties - due to her believing she is a size 0.
Also, this popped up on my online ads. Obviously I have viewed too many pics of Zedzee's funeral attire


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Charles Philip William George maybe. Then again, that's just a too sensible of a name.


Perhaps she will skip Charles and go for sucking up to William? 
If a girl, Wilhelmina aka H*ll or Meanie?
If a boy, Reggie Williamson - to bookend with Archie Harrison, and because I believe she (allegedly) had eyes on William and started the pegging tale, and probably plotted to "comfort" him if the worst happened.


----------



## Annawakes

Someone smarter than me already said this earlier in the thread…but I just realized the whole purpose of her “podcast” is to clap back at all the supposedly nasty things people have said about her.

What are the remaining topics?  Is “Liar” an archetype??? She can have Hilaria as the guest lol


----------



## cat1234

Variety article today.


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Someone smarter than me already said this earlier in the thread…but I just realized the whole purpose of her “podcast” is to clap back at all the supposedly nasty things people have said about her.
> 
> What are the remaining topics?  Is “Liar” an archetype??? She can have Hilaria as the guest lol


She is such a stereotypical narc. They all believe that they are hard-done-by and unjustly accused.

The Mindy Kaling ep is an odd one out. I don't recall anyone saying anything about her in a nasty way that she is unmarried or a single mom. <<gasp>> Was it a dig at Kate regarding the Waity Katey insult? Or to insult Sam Markle?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

cat1234 said:


> Variety article today.


She did the L'oreal You're Worth It twirl n swirl.
I shudder because it mentions that this is Archetypes FIRST season. Spotify, please confirm if the dirge is carrying on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> She did the L'oreal You're Worth It twirl n swirl.
> I shudder because it mentions that this is Archetypes FIRST season. Spotify, please confirm if the dirge is carrying on.



My hope is that Spotify has the real numbers (as in, they know they are lying when she's in the Top 10) and won't shell out more money for that nonsense.


----------



## Toby93

That picture


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> That picture




The complicated time THEY had? Also reading how Ghoul is "grieving Queen Elizabeth" (and with that I mean the Tweet, I'm not opening that mess of an article) makes me want to kick furniture. She is utterly shameless.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The complicated time THEY had? Also reading how Ghoul is "grieving Queen Elizabeth" makes me want to kick furniture. She is utterly shameless.


The article itself has so many laughable parts, but she really is shameless and desperate.  Also,what is with this pic?  I thought it had been taken from last years photoshopped artwork


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




Now that I have to look at that picture again...I've never seen her wear such pronounced waterline liner. Is she channelling her inner Persian to go with her shirt?


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> What a load of grandiose bull kaka. Who have they uplifted and united lately?


Everyone and everything with "one act of compassion at a time".  Scary, isn't it???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> The article itself has so many laughable parts, but she really is shameless and desperate.  Also,what is with this pic?  I thought it had been taken from last years photoshopped artwork
> 
> View attachment 5634702



So was the interview scheduled for a later date, or did they do an add-on? Also, where's her engagement ring...at the workshop again to redesign it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why this flurry of publicity now?  What is next? When will it stop?


----------



## CarryOn2020

I refuse to read the article. Other people’s comments are hilarious.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Really? 



ETA:  Zara, a real royal








						Zara Tindall stuns in £250 coat as she poses for £500k Musto campaign
					

The Queen's granddaughter, 41, took part in the Gloucestershire photoshoot as part of her latest campaign with outdoor brand Musto - who she was worked with for the past 10 years.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> That picture



Cliff notes version of Variety article on DM, salient points, I will save you the time of reading it
1. Yes they have been filming a reality show/documentary for Netflix. I did not remember any ROCK SOLID confirmation of this anywhere.
2. Interview was updated after the death of QEII. MM got along great with QEII. No mention of any other BRF members. H isever hopeful for reconciliation. MM is desperately trying to say nothing bad about BRF.
3. Me me me


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> The article itself has so many laughable parts, but she really is shameless and desperate.  Also,what is with this pic?  I thought it had been taken from last years photoshopped artwork
> 
> View attachment 5634702


Big nose and the top of her head is flat - major photofhop fail.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Icyjade

Ugh, the clip is super cringey


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  Zara, a real royal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zara Tindall stuns in £250 coat as she poses for £500k Musto campaign
> 
> 
> The Queen's granddaughter, 41, took part in the Gloucestershire photoshoot as part of her latest campaign with outdoor brand Musto - who she was worked with for the past 10 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




OMG I watched this video just now. WTF did I just watch?! It was like an old school Barbizon commercial. And she called herself a SuPeRmOdEl …


----------



## Mrs.Z

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why this flurry of publicity now?  What is next? When will it stop?


We cannot escape her and her headlines, they are EVERYWHERE!  

That video is embarrassing, it’s all so forced and contrived.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I all but threw up a little. She probably met The Queen a handful of times - after all she wasn't especially interested to fit into that family -, but she "got to spend time and got to know her"? And Harry said "She's reuinted with her husband now"...not his grandfather? These people make me sick.


----------



## Annawakes

xincinsin said:


> She is such a stereotypical narc. They all believe that they are hard-done-by and unjustly accused.
> 
> The Mindy Kaling ep is an odd one out. I don't recall anyone saying anything about her in a nasty way that she is unmarried or a single mom. <<gasp>> Was it a dig at Kate regarding the Waity Katey insult? Or to insult Sam Markle?


I thought a bit about this one too.  I think she was trying to say a few things with this topic:

1. Against all odds I overcame my shyness and have become the full fledged swan you see before you today.  All from my own personal strength you see.

2. I’ve never really had anyone to help me or lean on, my entire life.  I had to depend on my own personal strength you see.

3. No, I never had a lot of boyfriends or partners.  I’ve been single most of my life.  That’s what makes me a strong, independent woman.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  Zara, a real royal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zara Tindall stuns in £250 coat as she poses for £500k Musto campaign
> 
> 
> The Queen's granddaughter, 41, took part in the Gloucestershire photoshoot as part of her latest campaign with outdoor brand Musto - who she was worked with for the past 10 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I just slept for a few hours tonight, and I'm  by the amount of waste dumped in such a short period of time. TW keeps cluttering the news with her Me Me stories/propaganda, I'm not clicking on the V. article.


----------



## Chanbal

Bring the bucket…


----------



## bag-mania

Her sole purpose in life is to celebrate herself. Somehow she’s managed to persuade a large number of people to join her in that endeavor.


----------



## Chanbal

POLL: Should Meghan and Harry attend the King’s coronation?
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be invited to attend King Charles III's coronation, which will take place at Westminster Abbey on Saturday, May 6, 2023.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones with a strong stomach!



EDIT: For what it's worth, I read somewhere that this may have been a paid article. In contrast to DM that can't accept payments, certain websites can accept money for coverage.


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> That picture



What a cringey, vomit inducing load of crap.


----------



## calicocat

Chanbal said:


> POLL: Should Meghan and Harry attend the King’s coronation?
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be invited to attend King Charles III's coronation, which will take place at Westminster Abbey on Saturday, May 6, 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


F*** NO. Neither of these two needs (more) ammunition for their self-promotion propaganda


----------



## pukasonqo

Interesting, will MM sue Gucci for trademark infringement?


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> That picture



so she was the smart one as a kid...and H is ever the optimist.....ok, an angry optimist?


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> The article itself has so many laughable parts, but she really is shameless and desperate.  Also,what is with this pic?  I thought it had been taken from last years photoshopped artwork
> 
> View attachment 5634702


Picture on the right  is channeling Kim Kardashian, minus the curves.

Interesting that she is recently posing pale complexioned.

Of course their life is complicated, Haz may be an emotional mess since his Gran disrupted  their plans by daring to die, he may actually feel some regret at missed opportunities, they lost the one possible supporter in the family, the Tom Bower and Valentine Low books have exposed them, Netflix is teetering, the book could destroy them and money is tight.

Put in perspective, “Variety” is a weekly of the entertainment industry, founded in 1905 to report about vaudeville, a type of entertainment featuring burlesque comedy and song and dance. Nothing to be taken seriously so a perfect platform for MEMEMEME.

Also shows how far the industry has collapsed that a Z lister is headline news.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

It’s _Variety_. They used to be the main publication for people in the entertainment industry to get the latest news in their field. Don’t know what it represents these days. It should have focused on her Netflix and Spotify projects. If it was all about her personal feelings and what not, then it sounds like a puff piece bought for self-promotional purposes.


----------



## DL Harper

pukasonqo said:


> Interesting, will MM sue Gucci for trademark infringement?
> 
> View attachment 5634823


Interesting because she doesn't own the trademark to "Archetype". 
According to the USPTO trademark electronic search system, *there are currently many active trade marks that include the word 'Archetype'*.May 31, 2022

Next she'll want to trademark Webster's Dictionary and all Google searches.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The complicated time THEY had? Also reading how Ghoul is "grieving Queen Elizabeth" (and with that I mean the Tweet, I'm not opening that mess of an article) makes me want to kick furniture. She is utterly shameless.


Of course the two twits found it complicated. They had to restrategize their year of reconciliation aka pull the wool over HMTQ's eyes, and figure out how to backstab without losing $$$$.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Her sole purpose in life is to celebrate herself. Somehow she’s managed to persuade a large number of people to join her in that endeavor.



But she can't even claim that success for herself. Those very same people who now worship at her altar and willingly drink her Kool-Aid didn't give her the time of the day before she hooked up with Harry. She should thank him and in extension the family who made him who he is every. Single. Day.


----------



## DL Harper

nm


----------



## rose60610

Question: Who the hell reads Variety magazine?


----------



## gracekelly

Wearing a slave collar around her neck. Not a good or politically correct look.



How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and big head. Looks photoshopped.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Question: Who the hell reads Variety magazine?



Not me.


----------



## gracekelly

These two are tap dancing as fast as they can to to undo all their bad behavior. Who is stupid enough to believe any of it? Meghan rewriting past history again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and *big head*. Looks photoshopped.



At least they got that right. They should have photoshopped that outrageous sun damage though. Did she never use sunscreen at all?


----------



## Suncatcher

I wish she could leave us all alone. We don’t need all her media pollution. What did we all do to deserve this?!?


----------



## scarlet555

Has to make a big headline   to compensate for the 'deal or no deal' fiasco, and now made even a bigger fool out of herself for talking-remember our compelling conversationalist-professional and pathological liar- at this point she just can't help herself.  I wouldn't even care about her ridiculous claims if she wasn't such a big hypocrite and made it so obvious to spot.


----------



## Annawakes

rose60610 said:


> Question: Who the hell reads Variety magazine?


Lol.  I guess the same people who are stans.  Whoever they are!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Annawakes

^^Big purple blob to cover up pit stain


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


>



A following tweet: 
With bonus track ‘I never promised you an olive branch garden’


----------



## gracekelly

I have noticed that she has about 5 facial expressions that she can pull up  at will. I particularly like the one where she is trying to look sad/sympathetic. This is the same facial expression she used at the funeral.


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Question: Who the hell reads Variety magazine?


I used to read Time, NYT and Variety when they had legit reporting. Now I read NYT only for the recipes (food lust - the struggle is real ) Variety still sends me email to try to lure me back into their subscription base.

If she pollutes Rolling Stone and American Cinematographer, I shall


----------



## rose60610

One of the sugars on the pro-Claw thread posted the Vanity Fair article. When asked about the Oprah interview you can tell she took pains to avoid the topic. The rest of it is also garbage. She was in desperate clean up mode IMO. And talk about photoshopping. 

And how exactly does "regretting" her bimbo days as Suitcase Girl explain the role she played in Suits where she also bared a lot of skin and did risqué scenes? She says nothing regretful about that.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I have noticed that she has about 5 facial expressions that she can pull up  at will. I particularly like the one where she is trying to look sad/sympathetic. This is the same facial expression she used at the funeral.
> 
> View attachment 5634913
> 
> 
> View attachment 5634914


The funeral expression reads "the lights are on but nobody's home".


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I used to read Time, NYT and Variety when they had legit reporting. Now I read NYT only for the recipes (food lust - the struggle is real ) Variety still sends me email to try to lure me back into their subscription base.
> 
> If she pollutes Rolling Stone and American Cinematographer, I shall



I get NYT also for recipes. Sam Sifton is great. I also love the obit section, it's like getting mini-history lessons in many cases. There is a section where they talk about somebody's mystery illness and readers try to come up with a diagnosis. That's interesting. There's a lot of eye rolling when reading some other parts. They often jump the shark, any articles mentioning Claw are true garbage. They are painfully pro-Claw.


----------



## rose60610

Her funeral expression is "I have to work on looking sad, but I'm dying to know what's in the will for MEEEEEE!".


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and big head. Looks photoshopped.


Her shoulders are there. They blend into the background color. What you are seeing is her dark sleeveless top.

ETA: What does "The Meghan Moment" on the cover mean?


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Wearing a slave collar around her neck. Not a good or politically correct look.
> 
> View attachment 5634902
> 
> How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and big head. Looks photoshopped.



Sher needs that giant head to hold that giant ego.


----------



## sdkitty

will she return to the "big screen"?....she was Never on the big screen....and why does it look like her neck is stretched out in this pic?









						Meghan Markle Reveals If She'll Ever Make A Return To Acting
					

The Duchess of Sussex also shared what she would tell Archie and Lili if they wanted a career in entertainment.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> will she return to the "big screen"?....she was Never on the big screen....*and why does it look like her neck is stretched out in this pic?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reveals If She'll Ever Make A Return To Acting
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex also shared what she would tell Archie and Lili if they wanted a career in entertainment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Because she is part Galapagos tortoise. Don't tell anyone though. I understand it will be the topic of an episode of Archetypes, the stigma of being judged for your reptilian nature!


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Her shoulders are there. They blend into the background color. What you are seeing is her dark sleeveless top.
> 
> ETA: What does "*The Meghan Moment*" on the cover mean?


Hopefully it means everything about her is ephemeral, flash in the pan, New York minute.


----------



## Stansy

Mrs.Z said:


> I will definitely be watching it, I’m currently importing cases of Champagne to help me through it.  I‘m not sure how far I’ll make it as I have a huge aversion to “poor me victim” storylines but it’s bound to be a hot hot mess!


Let me PM you my number in case you need help with the Champagne cases


----------



## Chanbal

Blind Item #4
					

One of the people that quit so many years ago because they hated working for the alliterate one, does, in fact have a recording of the allit...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5634948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #4
> 
> 
> One of the people that quit so many years ago because they hated working for the alliterate one, does, in fact have a recording of the allit...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


it's a blind item so I don't necessarily believe it...but if true, I don't know how "H" could forgive her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> it's a blind item so I don't necessarily believe it...but if true, I don't know how "H" could forgive her


Yep, it's very difficult to believe this. I wonder what is the source of these stories. I think Tom Bower confirmed several of them, but I don't recall about this one.


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Question: Who the hell reads Variety magazine?


VARIETY used to be part of Apple News , pay one monthly fee and you get access to 200 magazines 
it is a trade publication , full of full-page PAID adverts along the lines “JOE CELEBRITY, for your consideration for the Emmy/Oscar/Grammy award“ type of thing 
Interesting magazine for some one now eschewing her acting career 
I don’t remember a trade mag for philanthropists


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Her shoulders are there. They blend into the background color. What you are seeing is her dark sleeveless top.
> 
> ETA: What does "The Meghan Moment" on the cover mean?


This:


----------



## DebbieAnn

EverSoElusive said:


> So they have a Lilibet. Are they going to name the 3rd Charles, a sweet nod to KCIII?  Asking for a friend.


Maybe Charles Philip?


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> These two are tap dancing as fast as they can to to undo all their bad behavior.


Agree -- nice way to phrase it.

They must be spending a fortune on good-will press so no wonder the rumours are they are cash strapped.


----------



## CobaltBlu

rose60610 said:


> I get NYT also for recipes. Sam Sifton is great. I also love the obit section, it's like getting mini-history lessons in many cases. There is *a section where they talk about somebody's mystery illness and readers try to come up with a diagnosis.* That's interesting. There's a lot of eye rolling when reading some other parts. They often jump the shark, any articles mentioning Claw are true garbage. They are painfully pro-Claw.


 
Count me in for the recipes, they are really consistently solid so far. 
What is this mystery illness section called @rose60610 ?  

On topic:  Those pictures, IMHO are mostly awful.  They look horribly photoshopped and the tone and blur factor makes me feel like I need a decongestant. 

On the other hand, despite being such a wench, MM is not an unattractive woman. I don't understand why she looks so bad so much of the time. The blue dress would look great on Kate.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> I used to read Time, NYT and Variety when they had legit reporting. Now I read NYT only for the recipes (food lust - the struggle is real ) Variety still sends me email to try to lure me back into their subscription base.
> 
> If she pollutes Rolling Stone and American Cinematographer, I shall





rose60610 said:


> I get NYT also for recipes. Sam Sifton is great. I also love the obit section, it's like getting mini-history lessons in many cases. There is a section where they talk about somebody's mystery illness and readers try to come up with a diagnosis. That's interesting. There's a lot of eye rolling when reading some other parts. They often jump the shark, any articles mentioning Claw are true garbage. They are painfully pro-Claw.


The only reason I keep my NYT subscription is for the recipe app.


----------



## bag-mania

That Netflix series must be such a clusterf*ck. Can't find reliable information on whether it is postponed until 2023 or if it will air in December as previously announced.


----------



## lallybelle

This was the fluff piece that was supposed to accompany her appearance for some fake honor from the magazine. They put if off when QE died. I guess they threw in some updated Q's before publishing lest be accused of them not asking how SHE was coping. *BARF*


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Question: Who the hell reads Variety magazine?


Back in the days before the internet, Variety was the resource where out-of-work actors could find out where and when auditions would be taking place. Nowadays, I don't know who uses it.


----------



## Toby93

This poster on Twitter got it exactly right


----------



## Mrs.Z

She’s already throwing the Netflix Documentary under the bus, which means it’s going to be an epic next level debacle! 









						Meghan says £88M Netflix series is 'NOT the way we would have told it'
					

Meghan Markle appeared to distance herself and Prince Harry from their upcoming and controversial Netflix documentary.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Anyone in the industry who sees this article will run from her.  She uses the oft used political quote about a rising tide.  Smart, she is not.  The clothes look cheap. The poses, the hair, the makeup,  dear Lord, make it stop please. She is not aging well at all.   Compare this shoot to Zara’s for Musto.  Zara is in much more affordable clothes and her poses look natural because they are. Plus, Zara has a much better speaking voice, easy on the ears and eyes = champion.








						A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats:  Has the Right Been Misusing JFK's Quote? |  History News         Network
					






					historynewsnetwork.org


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> She’s already throwing the Netflix Documentary under the bus, which means it’s going to be an epic next level debacle!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says £88M Netflix series is 'NOT the way we would have told it'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appeared to distance herself and Prince Harry from their upcoming and controversial Netflix documentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


This way Meghan can play it both ways. She can have someone else unload all her venom and she can pretend that's not what she said.


----------



## bag-mania

Charles shouldn't make any decisions about them or their offspring's status until after the series airs and the book has been released.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> She’s already throwing the Netflix Documentary under the bus, which means it’s going to be an epic next level debacle!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says £88M Netflix series is 'NOT the way we would have told it'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appeared to distance herself and Prince Harry from their upcoming and controversial Netflix documentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


We get it. 
They are victims.  More accurately, Hazz is a _bellend _and she is a psycho-narc.  
Now, Nflix should remove the arseholes from the line-up.


----------



## rose60610

CobaltBlu said:


> Count me in for the recipes, they are really consistently solid so far.
> What is this mystery illness section called @rose60610 ?
> 
> On topic:  Those pictures, IMHO are mostly awful.  They look horribly photoshopped and the tone and blur factor makes me feel like I need a decongestant.
> 
> On the other hand, despite being such a wench, MM is not an unattractive woman. I don't understand why she looks so bad so much of the time. The blue dress would look great on Kate.



The Sunday insert NYT Magazine has a column called "Diagnosis" where they discuss, for example, a patient who came to the hospital/doctor's office/etc complaining of XYZ, tests showed nothing, patient saw many different specialists, on and on. Occasionally a case gets "solved" by a new doctor who'd volunteered in some remote part of the world and recognizes a symptom that nobody else did. Some cases are very interesting, (and still unfortunate for the patients) but it's heartening when people do end up receiving beneficial treatments. 

I agree, MM isn't unattractive, but the more she tries to look chic the more desperate she appears. Everything is a miss.


----------



## Laila619

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone in the industry who sees this article will run from her.  She uses the oft used political quote about a rising tide.  Smart, she is not.  The clothes look cheap. The poses, the hair, the makeup,  dear Lord, make it stop please. She is not aging well at all.   Compare this shoot to Zara’s for Musto.  Zara is in much more affordable clothes and her poses look natural because they are. Plus, Zara has a much better speaking voice, easy on the ears and eyes = champion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats:  Has the Right Been Misusing JFK's Quote? |  History News         Network
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historynewsnetwork.org



Zara is so naturally gorgeous! Seems like a nice lady.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> And Camilla if it is a girl?



I wonder if Camilla has a childhood nick-name? 

As @CarryOn2020 said, Gladys


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> This way Meghan can play it both ways. She can have someone else unload all her venom and she can pretend that's not what she said.


Allegedly, the Harkles want titles, $$$$, invitation to the coronation …, so they really want to postpone the release of their reality show & book.
If it doesn't work, TW is already working on her reconciliation path, and she is not responsible for any damaging information, she is such an innocent victim… I bet she will run soon for a favorite daughter in law position.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Charles shouldn't make any decisions about them or their offspring's status until after the series airs and the book has been released.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I used to read Time, NYT and Variety when they had legit reporting. Now I read NYT only for the recipes (food lust - the struggle is real ) Variety still sends me email to try to lure me back into their subscription base.
> 
> If she pollutes Rolling Stone and American Cinematographer, I shall



I bought the NYT Cookbook when they revamped it. You could kill someone with that thing, it's like 5" thick.


----------



## rose60610

When Charles spoke at the funeral and referred to William as "Prince of Wales" then simply said "Harry and Meghan", I took that as writing on the wall that the dopey duo isn't being awarded anything extra, nor their kids. So if Claw cranks out another innocent child, she'll have three kids with no titles. We'll see, time will tell.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> She’s already throwing the Netflix Documentary under the bus, which means it’s going to be an epic next level debacle!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says £88M Netflix series is 'NOT the way we would have told it'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle appeared to distance herself and Prince Harry from their upcoming and controversial Netflix documentary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


At this point I don't think NF or Garbus care a bit about what the Harkles have to say about the documentary.  NF is loving all this PR and want to get it shown for ratings.  If the Harkles want to throw it under the bus, none of them cares.  This is almost like the gossip rags of old where they would print anything no matter how scandalous to make sales.  The Harkles made a deal with the devil.  What may be true is that they thought they were very clever with their deal, but it looks like they got outplayed.



rose60610 said:


> When Charles spoke at the funeral and referred to William as "Prince of Wales" then simply said "Harry and Meghan", I took that as writing on the wall that the dopey duo isn't being awarded anything extra, nor their kids. So if Claw cranks out another innocent child, she'll have three kids with no titles. We'll see, time will tell.


That was calculated distancing and then wishing they well overseas was the nail in the coffin.



Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, the Harkles want titles, $$$$, invitation to the coronation …, so they really want to postpone the release of their reality show & book.
> If it doesn't work, TW is already working on her reconciliation path, and she is not responsible for any damaging information, she is such an innocent victim… I bet she will run soon for a favorite daughter in law position.



All this current PR is about her.  This latest round is part of the PR campaign that began before the passing of TQ and was only put on hold because of it.  The campaign is now back in full swing.  Meghan is distancing herself from Harry and soon will be spinning that the problems with the royals are all due to him.  After all she and TQ were buddies, right?


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> Interesting, will MM sue Gucci for trademark infringement?
> 
> View attachment 5634823



OK, that's NOT FUNNY!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> it's a blind item so I don't necessarily believe it...but if true, I don't know how "H" could forgive her



I believed it when I first heard it mainly because Lady C lately tries to avoid being sued (the other reason being that it's totally something a sociopath would say  ).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5634948
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #4
> 
> 
> One of the people that quit so many years ago because they hated working for the alliterate one, does, in fact have a recording of the allit...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net



I hope they send a copy to Charles just so he can listen to it when he has a soft moment.


----------



## Chanbal

*Disingenuous is the Duchess’s middle name,*_ *but this one really takes the chocolate Hobnob.* Meghan Markle traded on her looks, once telling an agent she had legs a mile long. No one begrudges an ambitious young woman cashing in on her assets – why not? - but to turn around and piously denounce the job of “attractive showgirl” for demeaning her is crazy.

Uh-oh. We’re not allowed to say the Duchess is crazy. In the previous episode of the podcast, Meghan claimed that “crazy” and “hysterical” were labels used to silence women.
You know what I dislike about Archetypes? It discusses sexual discrimination, which, despite enormous social progress, can still be a serious problem for women. _*But the woman hosting it has exploited the very sex appeal she now claims to find so restricting. In fact, you could say, it helped land her the rather good job of Duchess.

*


			archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Yep, it's very difficult to believe this. I wonder what is the source of these stories. I think Tom Bower confirmed several of them, but I don't recall about this one.



When Lady C mentioned it (that's where I heard it first) she said she was told by someone who stood next to her at a social occasion when she said it.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I hope they send a copy to Charles just so he can listen to it when he has a soft moment.


I think it's also good to send a copy to Camilla, so she can play it for him as needed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone in the industry who sees this article will run from her.  She uses the oft used political quote about a rising tide.  Smart, she is not.  The clothes look cheap. The poses, the hair, the makeup,  dear Lord, make it stop please. She is not aging well at all.   Compare this shoot to Zara’s for Musto.  Zara is in much more affordable clothes and her poses look natural because they are. Plus, Zara has a much better speaking voice, easy on the ears and eyes = champion.



Plus, she doesn't sound like an idiot when she opens her mouth.


----------



## gracekelly

All the comments on the DM are negative.  Nobody believes anything she says.

I love that they did the photoshoot at the San Ysidro Ranch.  Their place must be a dump by now.  No money to take of the grounds properly and the inside of the house was never decorated.  If she says they don't want pictures there because of privacy issues, she is full of it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, the Harkles want titles, $$$$, invitation to the coronation …, so they really want to postpone the release of their reality show & book.
> If it doesn't work, TW is already working on her reconciliation path, and she is not responsible for any damaging information, she is such an innocent victim…* I bet she will run soon for a favorite daughter in law position.*



I feel that ship has sailed (and sunk) a long time ago. Unless she wants to try with a new husband.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> All this current PR is about her.  This latest round is part of the PR campaign that began before the passing of TQ and was only put on hold because of it.  The campaign is now back in full swing.  Meghan is distancing herself from Harry and soon will be spinning that the problems with the royals are all due to him.  After all she and TQ were buddies, right?



I wonder if he sees the writing on the wall.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think it's also good to send a copy to Camilla, so she can play it for him as needed.



If that recording exists I can't get over the irony that they've tried to pull that sh*t on other people and someone did it to her


----------



## scarlet555

This woman is a straight face bullsh!tter-or complete psycho... I mean it, she is a danger to the public for spewing her lies...  I hope the world is catching on...  Now she is acting like 'acting' is beneath her, lol.  She should learn how to answer questions with the least ammunition for the world to use against her.  I bet all the interviewers and publication who are forced to print her crap are rolling their eyes...


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> We get it.
> They are victims.  More accurately, Hazz is a _bellend _and she is a psycho-narc.
> Now, Nflix should remove the arseholes from the line-up.


Hmm I don’t think MM was that negative in VARIETY about reality show director, BUT MM did say something along the lines of - now, we have to trust someone else to tell OUR story. A huge thing for a micro manager to not have the last word.

The innuendo that I feel is that
1. MAYBE MM and H used to have creative control
2. They don’t have it NOW
3. Maybe they did not get to choose director, maybe Netflix picked for them


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> All this current PR is about her.  This latest round is part of the PR campaign that began before the passing of TQ and was only put on hold because of it.  The campaign is now back in full swing.  Meghan is distancing herself from Harry and soon will be spinning that the problems with the royals are all due to him.  After all she and TQ were buddies, right?


Absolutely! She had to anticipate her reconciliation plan due to the passing of QE imo. Charles is the next target for bff. The run has started!


----------



## saligator

gracekelly said:


> All this current PR is about her.  This latest round is part of the PR campaign that began before the passing of TQ and was only put on hold because of it.  The campaign is now back in full swing.  Meghan is distancing herself from Harry and soon will be spinning that the problems with the royals are all due to him.  After all she and TQ were buddies, right?


Narcissism is about "3's." 

It's either Her and Harry against the RF, or it is  Her and Harry against the Press, or it is Her and [insert other thing or person] against Harry.

She needs three. She needs to be the victim, and she needs an apath to support her and she needs a target to blame. 

Watch her press. It's always some triangular pattern of 3.


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. I feel it's safe to say those poor kids will never be part of that family and legacy because of their psycho mother.

Plus, cute how she tries to take credit for that family and legacy.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Thank you for your service unknown Twitter user.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth…




I can't read if this is sarcasm or not. Also I don't get this Twitter account. They claim to be a journalist, apparently they have broken some legit news before, but also, which credible person would chose such an unprofessional Twitter handle that has nothing to do with their main topic, European royals?


----------



## marietouchet

nm


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. I feel it's safe to say those poor kids will never be part of that family and legacy because of their psycho mother.
> 
> Plus, cute how she tries to take credit for that family and legacy.



(Unconscious ?) microaggression aimed at BRF - they're part of a legacy and a tradition and a family that will have other expectations

I knew she could not shut the heck up about the family .


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Wearing a slave collar around her neck. Not a good or politically correct look.
> 
> View attachment 5634902
> 
> How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and big head. Looks photoshopped.


I read somewhere that she is looking at the White House in this photo.   

Some interesting comments below.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can't read if this is sarcasm or not. Also I don't get this Twitter account. They claim to be a journalist, apparently they have broken some legit news before, but also, which credible person would chose such an unprofessional Twitter handle that has nothing to do with their main topic, European royals?


I think it's meant to be real info. They claim to have good sources.


----------



## bag-mania

“That’s who our kids are.”

Um, first off you won’t get to decide who your kids are, no matter how controlling you may be, Megsy. Saying you _know_ who a three-year-old and a one-year-old are is about the silliest thing I’ve ever heard.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone in the industry who sees this article will run from her.  She uses the oft used political quote about a rising tide.  Smart, she is not.  The clothes look cheap. The poses, the hair, the makeup,  dear Lord, make it stop please. She is not aging well at all.   Compare this shoot to Zara’s for Musto.  Zara is in much more affordable clothes and her poses look natural because they are. Plus, Zara has a much better speaking voice, easy on the ears and eyes = champion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats:  Has the Right Been Misusing JFK's Quote? |  History News         Network
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historynewsnetwork.org



I've alwasy found Zara incredibly attractive.

Hate that background soundtrack though. Stop trying to play with my emotions, Musto.


----------



## Suncatcher

One would be crazy to ever work with her. Each time she opens her mouth it is another nail in the coffin.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Because she is part Galapagos tortoise. Don't tell anyone though. I understand it will be the topic of an episode of Archetypes, the stigma of being judged for your reptilian nature!
> 
> View attachment 5634920


I think you are doing a disservice to Galapagos tortoises by saying she is part tortoise.  Aren’t all remaining 12 sub-species of the Galapagos tortoise in danger of extinction? The 13th went extinct when Lonesome George sadly passed away a few years ago. TW is plastered all over the media and is in no danger of going extinct. The Galapagos Conservancy is a real charity that is funding important work. I still can’t figure out what Archewell does.


----------



## youngster

So, Meghan says:  ". . . they're part of a legacy and a tradition and a family that will have other expectations".

Pretty safe to say that the BRF will have zero expectations of Archie and Lili.



bag-mania said:


> “That’s who our kids are.”
> 
> Um, first off you won’t get to decide who your kids are, no matter how controlling you may be, Megsy. Saying you _know_ who a three-year-old and a one-year-old are is about the silliest thing I’ve ever heard.



This.  As a parent, this is 100% correct.  You absolutely can not tell how a child will turn out, or what they will be like or who they are or will be, when they are ages 1 or 3.  It's tough to tell when they are even 10 or 11 or 12.  The teenage years can be amazing, or send a young person completely off course. Right now MM and Harry are in those early parenting years where they think they are geniuses and every other parent out there is an idiot.  It's so easy!  Your child yields to your authority, goes to bed when you say, gets up when you say, generally eats what you tell them to eat, forgets little boo-boos or little hurts from one hour to the next and, if there are any crying jags or temper tantrums, well, that's what a nanny is for after all.  Let's see how they like parenting the tween and teen years.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Suncatcher said:


> One would be crazy to ever work with her. Each time she opens her mouth it is another nail in the coffin.


How big _*is*_ this alleged coffin? Seems there have been numerous nails.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Fell down the Reddit hole - wonder if she’ll do a pod crash on comeuppance  

_
Positive_Syllabub263 •5 hr. ago

No, I’m pretty much only interested in KARMA for these two. It’s what I’m waiting on — the fantastic implosion of Meghan and Harry. That’s why I want the book and reality show to come out sooner rather than later. 
I’m really hoping that 1. Them negging on KCIII, QCC, and P/PoWs isn’t edited out 2. The inconsistencies between the aren’t smoothed out. I want the entire world to see the Harkles for what we see them for: hypocritical, opportunistic, lying grifters. 
I wanna see fireworks — no invite to the coronation. No titles for the kids. I want to see them sleep in the bed they made for themselves. 
Am I petty? Obviously. Do I have a horse in this race? No. Why do I care so much? I don’t know — maybe it’s something I should take up with my therapist. But that’s what I’m interested in: *comeuppance*_


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> This way Meghan can play it both ways. She can have someone else unload all her venom and she can pretend that's not what she said.


Damn, I read the article as "Meghan Markle appeared to distance herself *from *Prince Harry"


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> I read somewhere that she is looking at the White House in this photo.
> 
> Some interesting comments below.




One of the comments: "She should do porn--she moans enough".


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Anyone in the industry who sees this article will run from her.  She uses the oft used political quote about a rising tide.  Smart, she is not.  The clothes look cheap. The poses, the hair, the makeup,  dear Lord, make it stop please. She is not aging well at all.   Compare this shoot to Zara’s for Musto.  Zara is in much more affordable clothes and her poses look natural because they are. Plus, Zara has a much better speaking voice, easy on the ears and eyes = champion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats:  Has the Right Been Misusing JFK's Quote? |  History News         Network
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> historynewsnetwork.org



Now I want a Musto parka. Canada Goose is so 2017.  

She is really pretty, and seems like a nice person from all I've read.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is so freaking in love with herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Fell down the Reddit hole *- wonder if she’ll do a pod crash on comeuppance
> 
> 
> _Positive_Syllabub263 •5 hr. ago
> 
> No, I’m pretty much only interested in KARMA for these two. It’s what I’m waiting on — the fantastic implosion of Meghan and Harry. That’s why I want the book and reality show to come out sooner rather than later.
> I’m really hoping that 1. Them negging on KCIII, QCC, and P/PoWs isn’t edited out 2. The inconsistencies between the aren’t smoothed out. I want the entire world to see the Harkles for what we see them for: hypocritical, opportunistic, lying grifters.
> I wanna see fireworks — no invite to the coronation. No titles for the kids. I want to see them sleep in the bed they made for themselves.
> Am I petty? Obviously. Do I have a horse in this race? No. Why do I care so much? I don’t know — maybe it’s something I should take up with my therapist. But that’s what I’m interested in: *comeuppance*_



mainstream media made me do it... lol reading those articles being so biased towards her without journalist integrity-


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so freaking in love with herself.




Just when I thought she couldn't be any more annoying.


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> This.  As a parent, this is 100% correct.  You absolutely can not tell how a child will turn out, or what they will be like or who they are or will be, when they are ages 1 or 3.  It's tough to tell when they are even 10 or 11 or 12.  The teenage years can be amazing, or send a young person completely off course. *Right now MM and Harry are in those early parenting years where they think they are geniuses and every other parent out there is an idiot.  It's so easy!  *Your child yields to your authority, goes to bed when you say, gets up when you say, generally eats what you tell them to eat, forgets little boo-boos or little hurts from one hour to the next and, if there are any crying jags or temper tantrums, well, that's what a nanny is for after all.  Let's see how they like parenting the tween and teen years.


For them it is extremely easy. They have nannies doing all the hard work of raising their kids. Every day the kids are already bathed, dressed, and fed by the time their parents roll out of bed. If the kids act up a nanny can be summoned to settle them down. Not exactly challenging parenting.


----------



## Chanbal

I browsed the DM article below, and there is so much vanity and hypocrisy on TW's statements. Here are a few examples for your entertainment:

Intellectual curiosity… 
_Oh! She's a real person! *She laughs and asks questions and approaches things with curiosity*_.'



Love of family…   
_'*So much of how my husband and I see things is through our love story.* I think that's what people around the world connected to, especially with our wedding. People love love. I'm not excluded in that sentiment. *And our definition of love is really expansive: Partner love, self-love, the love of community and family.* _


In-N-Out, the new Sizzler…  
_*my husband's favorite is In-N-Out.* There's one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. *It's really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them*. *They know our order.*'_










						Meghan Markle recorded Variety interview before the Queen died
					

The Duchess of Sussex praised Her Majesty's 'warmth' and 'leadership' after she passed away on September 8 but did not speak about other members of the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not posting the next short clip (same source so you can look it up on Insta if you wish) because it's somewhat redundant but boy has she aged horribly. And with that I don't mean necessarily/only the extent but how quickly her face turned from pretty youthful to this. 

BTW remember my fortune teller friend? She claims aging prematurely/within a pretty short amount of time is part of dabbling in, uh, the dark arts  Not everyone who has bad genes has...weird hobbies, but everyone who does will not look so fresh soon enough.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> How big _*is*_ this alleged coffin? Seems there have been numerous nails.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here is the video. As you watch, remember her father lied about her letter changing anything.  It was a lie that she continues to tell to this day. Maybe it was her first lie [doubt it], it certainly is not her last one.  My heart goes out to her classmates.



Poor classmates is right! They 
look like the Harkles’ current employees - not too happy


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> *It's really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them*. *They know our order.*'



And I'll bet when they roll up in their chauffeured Escalade or similar the staff rolls their eyes. She is a legend in her own mind.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *Not posting the next short clip *(same source so you can look it up on Insta if you wish) because it's somewhat redundant but boy has she aged horribly. And with that I don't mean necessarily/only the extent but how quickly her face turned from pretty youthful to this.
> 
> BTW remember my fortune teller friend? She claims aging prematurely/within a pretty short amount of time is part of dabbling in, uh, the dark arts  Not everyone who has bad genes has...weird hobbies, but everyone who does will not look so fresh soon enough.


----------



## Chanbal

Love Judi D.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW remember my fortune teller friend? She claims aging prematurely/within a pretty short amount of time is part of dabbling in, uh, the dark arts  Not everyone who has bad genes has...weird hobbies, but everyone who does will not look so fresh soon enough.


We’ve joked in the past about how Meghan managed to get Harry to turn his back on everything he knew for her. That makes as much sense as any other theory.


----------



## Chanbal

A brilliant article by Maureen C   This article deserves many clicks… 



*We are never, ever going to escape Meghan Markle, are we?*
_
*Right on the heels of her disastrous profile in New York Magazine's The Cut — in which she compared herself, never forget, to Nelson Mandela* — Meghan's back with yet another cover story, this one for Variety.

And guess what? *We're in for a rebrand.

The Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance now wants to be known as FUN! And SILLY! But also very, very smart. Most assuredly not a bimbo* — not at all like her most recent podcast guest Paris Hilton, who Meghan said she had judged for being . . . a bimbo.

Hey, we're all just women trying to lift up other women here, am I right?

*Our Meghan is nothing if not a phoenix rising from the ashes* — *even if said ashes result from all those Molotov cocktails she keeps tossing.* The Queen's funeral, replete with the sidelining of Harry and Meghan, is firmly in the rearview. *And despite Meghan's actions to the contrary* — *you know, that Oprah interview in which she said a senior royal was racist and that the palace didn't care that she was suicidal and pregnant — Meghan really loved the Queen.*

'Certainly, in terms of female leadership, she is the most shining example of what that looks like,' Meghan told Variety. 'I feel deep gratitude to have been able to spend time with her and get to know her . . . And I continue to be proud to have had a nice warmth with the matriarch of the family.'

Hmmm. *You'd never know that Harry reportedly rebuffed two invitations from the Queen to visit shortly before her death,* or that his brother reportedly remains incensed with Harry and Meghan's repeated betrayals, or that King Charles is holding the titles of prince and princess for H & M's children in abeyance, possibly until the damage from Harry's forthcoming memoir and the couple's Netflix docuseries becomes clearer.

*Oh, and about that Netflix deal,* one this couple has been trying to defang since Her Majesty's funeral? Wouldn't you know, *Meghan Markle — avatar of kindness, authenticity, love, goodness and 'meaningful change' — is already backpedaling*.

*She and Harry really have no control over their own show, you see.* Actually, apart from starring in it, they have almost nothing to do with it.

'*It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story,*' Meghan says of Liz Garbus, the Oscar-nominated director of her docu-series, ' . . .* even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it. But that's not why we're telling it.'

It's not? Netflix gave Harry and Meghan a reported $100 million production deal*, yet these two have produced almost nothing since signing back in 2020. Their requisite pound of flesh is long overdue. Meghan's establishing plausible deniability here. She just thinks we're all too stupid to see it.

'*We're trusting our story to someone else,' she goes on, 'and that means it will go through their lens.*'

Yes, Meghan. That's how these things work.

*Today's Meghan Markle is all about joy and she wants you to understand that. It's all she spreads. Love and light, people, love and light.

She has notes for any actress who might play her in the future* — not that she's saying for 'The Crown,' but you know,* maybe 'The Crown*.'

'I hope that in preparing for the role, she finds the softness and the playfulness and the laughter. The silliness . . . I just hope she finds the dimensions.'

Seriously, who speaks of themselves this way?

*The problem with this rebrand is that, like everything Meghan Markle has to say, it's meaningless. We're still left with the same old Meghan and Harry – self-obsessed and completely and totally out-of-touch.*

Case in point: *While the days of comparing herself to Mandela are long gone, now we're keeping company with Gloria Steinem — whom Meghan cringingly calls 'Glo' — and reminding us that she quoted Eleanor Roosevelt in her high school yearbook.*

Meghan, you see, is intelligent. Mensa material. According to her self-report, she's good at 'Jeopardy!' She plays Wordle and Scrabble — with a timer. She was once fluent in French. She doesn't watch TV for mere entertainment, as the rest of us, the great unwashed, do; no, she's in search of 'watching great storytelling.'

*In short, Meghan's as insufferable as ever.* She speaks of her and Harry's packed workdays — doing exactly what, she cannot say —* Zooming and whatnot from their vulgar $14 million, 16-bathroom Montecito mansion while lecturing us on eco-warrior-hood*.

Here she is, *our bimbo emeritus,* frolicking in her garden, barefoot in designer dresses, flicking her Cartier-adorned wrist just so, posing with that typical Markle expression of beatitude, our own latter-day saint parting the clouds and descending to save us…

*Heads are surely rolling at Spotify, which paid these two a reported $25 million back in, yes, 2020. Two years on and they have four formless, content-free, dated, hectoring, joyless episodes to show for it…*_










						Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance rebrands: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
					

CALLAHAN: Meghan Markle is the epitome of failing upward. Her lack of self-awareness, after all this time, remains staggering. A true legend in her own mind.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> A brilliant article by Maureen C   This article deserves many clicks…
> View attachment 5635120
> 
> 
> *We are never, ever going to escape Meghan Markle, are we?*
> 
> _*Right on the heels of her disastrous profile in New York Magazine's The Cut — in which she compared herself, never forget, to Nelson Mandela* — Meghan's back with yet another cover story, this one for Variety.
> 
> And guess what? *We're in for a rebrand.
> 
> The Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance now wants to be known as FUN! And SILLY! But also very, very smart. Most assuredly not a bimbo* — not at all like her most recent podcast guest Paris Hilton, who Meghan said she had judged for being . . . a bimbo.
> 
> Hey, we're all just women trying to lift up other women here, am I right?
> 
> *Our Meghan is nothing if not a phoenix rising from the ashes* — *even if said ashes result from all those Molotov cocktails she keeps tossing.* The Queen's funeral, replete with the sidelining of Harry and Meghan, is firmly in the rearview. *And despite Meghan's actions to the contrary* — *you know, that Oprah interview in which she said a senior royal was racist and that the palace didn't care that she was suicidal and pregnant — Meghan really loved the Queen.*
> 
> 'Certainly, in terms of female leadership, she is the most shining example of what that looks like,' Meghan told Variety. 'I feel deep gratitude to have been able to spend time with her and get to know her . . . And I continue to be proud to have had a nice warmth with the matriarch of the family.'
> 
> Hmmm. *You'd never know that Harry reportedly rebuffed two invitations from the Queen to visit shortly before her death,* or that his brother reportedly remains incensed with Harry and Meghan's repeated betrayals, or that King Charles is holding the titles of prince and princess for H & M's children in abeyance, possibly until the damage from Harry's forthcoming memoir and the couple's Netflix docuseries becomes clearer.
> 
> *Oh, and about that Netflix deal,* one this couple has been trying to defang since Her Majesty's funeral? Wouldn't you know, *Meghan Markle — avatar of kindness, authenticity, love, goodness and 'meaningful change' — is already backpedaling*.
> 
> *She and Harry really have no control over their own show, you see.* Actually, apart from starring in it, they have almost nothing to do with it.
> 
> '*It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story,*' Meghan says of Liz Garbus, the Oscar-nominated director of her docu-series, ' . . .* even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it. But that's not why we're telling it.'
> 
> It's not? Netflix gave Harry and Meghan a reported $100 million production deal*, yet these two have produced almost nothing since signing back in 2020. Their requisite pound of flesh is long overdue. Meghan's establishing plausible deniability here. She just thinks we're all too stupid to see it.
> 
> '*We're trusting our story to someone else,' she goes on, 'and that means it will go through their lens.*'
> 
> Yes, Meghan. That's how these things work.
> 
> *Today's Meghan Markle is all about joy and she wants you to understand that. It's all she spreads. Love and light, people, love and light.
> 
> She has notes for any actress who might play her in the future* — not that she's saying for 'The Crown,' but you know,* maybe 'The Crown*.'
> 
> 'I hope that in preparing for the role, she finds the softness and the playfulness and the laughter. The silliness . . . I just hope she finds the dimensions.'
> 
> Seriously, who speaks of themselves this way?
> 
> *The problem with this rebrand is that, like everything Meghan Markle has to say, it's meaningless. We're still left with the same old Meghan and Harry – self-obsessed and completely and totally out-of-touch.*
> 
> Case in point: *While the days of comparing herself to Mandela are long gone, now we're keeping company with Gloria Steinem — whom Meghan cringingly calls 'Glo' — and reminding us that she quoted Eleanor Roosevelt in her high school yearbook.*
> 
> Meghan, you see, is intelligent. Mensa material. According to her self-report, she's good at 'Jeopardy!' She plays Wordle and Scrabble — with a timer. She was once fluent in French. She doesn't watch TV for mere entertainment, as the rest of us, the great unwashed, do; no, she's in search of 'watching great storytelling.'
> 
> *In short, Meghan's as insufferable as ever.* She speaks of her and Harry's packed workdays — doing exactly what, she cannot say —* Zooming and whatnot from their vulgar $14 million, 16-bathroom Montecito mansion while lecturing us on eco-warrior-hood*.
> 
> Here she is, *our bimbo emeritus,* frolicking in her garden, barefoot in designer dresses, flicking her Cartier-adorned wrist just so, posing with that typical Markle expression of beatitude, our own latter-day saint parting the clouds and descending to save us…
> 
> *Heads are surely rolling at Spotify, which paid these two a reported $25 million back in, yes, 2020. Two years on and they have four formless, content-free, dated, hectoring, joyless episodes to show for it…*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance rebrands: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: Meghan Markle is the epitome of failing upward. Her lack of self-awareness, after all this time, remains staggering. A true legend in her own mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



MM keeps throwing things at the wall and hoping that something sticks. Figuratively speaking in this case


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> MM keeps throwing things at the wall and hoping that something sticks. Figuratively speaking in this case


She deserves her new title "_*Bimbo Emeritus*_" (Courtesy of Maureen Callahan-DM)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> She deserves her new title "_*Bimbo Emeritus*_" (Courtesy of Maureen Callahan-DM)



Love love this article. Thanks so much for posting it  @Chanbal


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Apparently Whoopi Goldberg was telling it like it is on The View today.

Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on _Deal or No Deal_: 'That's TV, baby'​
"_What did you think you were going to do? You know that's what the show was," Goldberg said on The View._

Whoopi Goldberg is on the case of Meghan Markle, after the Duchess of Sussex revealed that she felt "objectified" during her time as a briefcase-opening assistant on season 2 of Howie Mandel's NBC game show _Deal or No Deal._

"On that show, you basically had a suitcase and they wanted to know: Is this the deal you want, or is this not the deal you want?" Goldberg said on Wednesday's episode of _The View_, following Markle's comments about quitting the competition series on her _Archetypes With Meghan _podcast. "I don't know that the people who are sitting there are thinking about you like that. They're thinking, _I want the money_," Goldberg argued. "[_Wheel of Fortune_hostess] Vanna White is always in something interesting and beautiful, and she's been doing this. The objectification might be coming from you and how you felt about how these women were being portrayed, and that's what you have to change, because we're performers."

The Oscar-winning actress stressed to Markle that, "When you're a performer, you take the gig," which sometimes involves a "Bozo suit" or a "big nose," because that's "just the way it is" in Hollywood.

"We're not journalists, we're actors," Goldberg continued. "You left, and that was your prerogative. I feel bad, because I don't think people were looking at these girls like this, I think they want the money."

When Goldberg's _View_ cohost Sunny Hostin suggested that Markle's words made her think about issues of fetishization of specific body types in the industry, Goldberg responded: "That's TV, baby. But, what did you think you were going to? You know that's what the show was."

Goldberg ended the segment by cautioning Markle about not making "the other women feel bad, because they're trying to make a living, too."

On _Archetypes With Meghan_, Markle — who took the_ Deal or No Deal _role as an early gig in Hollywood before joining the cast of the hit series _Suits_ in 2011 — said she regularly felt uneasy with her work on the program.
"I would end up leaving with this pit in my stomach knowing that I was so much more than what was being objectified on the stage," the 41-year-old said. "I didn't like feeling forced to be all looks and little substance. And that's how it felt for me at the time: Being reduced to this specific archetype."

Markle later married into the British royal family when she tied the knot with Prince Harry on May 19, 2018. The couple eventually stepped back from their royal duties in 2020. 









						Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on 'Deal or No Deal'
					

Whoopi Goldberg questioned Meghan Markle's comments about feeling 'objectified' as a briefcase-opening assistant on the 'Deal or No Deal' show: 'What did you think you were going to do?'




					ew.com


----------



## Chanbal

The list is also below.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Whoopi Goldberg was telling it like it is on The View today.
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on _Deal or No Deal_: 'That's TV, baby'​
> "_What did you think you were going to do? You know that's what the show was," Goldberg said on The View._
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg is on the case of Meghan Markle, after the Duchess of Sussex revealed that she felt "objectified" during her time as a briefcase-opening assistant on season 2 of Howie Mandel's NBC game show _Deal or No Deal._
> 
> "On that show, you basically had a suitcase and they wanted to know: Is this the deal you want, or is this not the deal you want?" Goldberg said on Wednesday's episode of _The View_, following Markle's comments about quitting the competition series on her _Archetypes With Meghan _podcast. "I don't know that the people who are sitting there are thinking about you like that. They're thinking, _I want the money_," Goldberg argued. "[_Wheel of Fortune_hostess] Vanna White is always in something interesting and beautiful, and she's been doing this. The objectification might be coming from you and how you felt about how these women were being portrayed, and that's what you have to change, because we're performers."
> 
> The Oscar-winning actress stressed to Markle that, "When you're a performer, you take the gig," which sometimes involves a "Bozo suit" or a "big nose," because that's "just the way it is" in Hollywood.
> 
> "We're not journalists, we're actors," Goldberg continued. "You left, and that was your prerogative. I feel bad, because I don't think people were looking at these girls like this, I think they want the money."
> 
> When Goldberg's _View_ cohost Sunny Hostin suggested that Markle's words made her think about issues of fetishization of specific body types in the industry, Goldberg responded: "That's TV, baby. But, what did you think you were going to? You know that's what the show was."
> 
> Goldberg ended the segment by cautioning Markle about not making "the other women feel bad, because they're trying to make a living, too."
> 
> On _Archetypes With Meghan_, Markle — who took the_ Deal or No Deal _role as an early gig in Hollywood before joining the cast of the hit series _Suits_ in 2011 — said she regularly felt uneasy with her work on the program.
> "I would end up leaving with this pit in my stomach knowing that I was so much more than what was being objectified on the stage," the 41-year-old said. "I didn't like feeling forced to be all looks and little substance. And that's how it felt for me at the time: Being reduced to this specific archetype."
> 
> Markle later married into the British royal family when she tied the knot with Prince Harry on May 19, 2018. The couple eventually stepped back from their royal duties in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on 'Deal or No Deal'
> 
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questioned Meghan Markle's comments about feeling 'objectified' as a briefcase-opening assistant on the 'Deal or No Deal' show: 'What did you think you were going to do?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com



It's also on Page Six. Whoopi used to be a supporter of TW, but it must be difficult to ignore so much hypocrisy…

_“*You take the gig. Sometimes, you’re in a Bozo suit, sometimes you got a big nose, and this is just the way it is*.”

Goldberg continued, “*We’re not journalists. We’re actors.* We’re trying to get to another place.”_









						Whoopi Goldberg criticizes Meghan Markle’s ‘Deal or No Deal’ comments
					

“You take the gig. Sometimes, you’re in a Bozo suit, sometimes you got a big nose, and this is just the way it is,” the talk show host argued on “The View.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> *She and Harry really have no control over their own show, you see.* *Actually, apart from starring in it, they have almost nothing to do with it.*



Thanks for posting @Chanbal  This was one of the best lines from that Maureen Callahan article in the DM.  LOL!


----------



## needlv

I can’t believe I am writing this… but I am going to give her props for the attempt at rebranding and *effort *it would have taken not to throw the BRF under the bus.  This is a major PR cleanup.

it was (mostly) positive, tried to clean up some of her past statements (the wedding was a spectacle, for example), and mostly did not use her interview for grievances/ I am such a victim statements.  She even distanced herself from The Cut interview which is very amusing.

The rebrand is all about MM.  H is nowhere to be seen and M is not wearing her engagement ring.

For those not paying attention to the H/MM drama, this rebranding effort _could_ work.  And could be used for her own launch of her own brand.  In the event of a split/divorce she will have something to use going forward. The “I am a rich celebrity mum”/ influencer/the Tig type brand which she will need to merch going forward.

For those who watched the Oprah interview or like us can’t believe the lies she spins - it won’t work.

My (few) gripes - she should not have compared herself to Diana, and she should have called the Queen by her title, not “matriarch of the family”

So props for the *effort*.

The photos are awful though.


----------



## youngster

needlv said:


> The rebrand is all about MM. H is nowhere to be seen and M is not wearing her engagement ring.



Someone mentioned that earlier, that she isn't wearing her ER.  Interesting, no?

I also think the photos are not very good.  She looks like a vague copy of Kim Kardashian in one of the pics. In the blue Carolina Herrera dress, it looks like she was swallowed whole by the dining room drapes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo if this is the rebrand, it is another H&M epic fail.  She is being criticized by more and more elites now.  There is no coming back from a bimbo-esque photo op in very expensive clothes that look ridiculous on her with very sloppy styling. Her eye makeup shows the eyelash glue [again] = ick.  Nflix, release the video. Penguin, release the book. Spotify, wth were you thinking?   Release their nonsense, suffer through the criticisms, take the financial loss before the new year.  We are sick of them.




ETA:  a word to W&K:  rethink that Earthshot visit.  Now is not the time, even BillG is saying it is not enough [more or less].


----------



## Suncatcher

Chanbal said:


> A brilliant article by Maureen C   This article deserves many clicks…
> View attachment 5635120
> 
> 
> *We are never, ever going to escape Meghan Markle, are we?*
> 
> _*Right on the heels of her disastrous profile in New York Magazine's The Cut — in which she compared herself, never forget, to Nelson Mandela* — Meghan's back with yet another cover story, this one for Variety.
> 
> And guess what? *We're in for a rebrand.
> 
> The Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance now wants to be known as FUN! And SILLY! But also very, very smart. Most assuredly not a bimbo* — not at all like her most recent podcast guest Paris Hilton, who Meghan said she had judged for being . . . a bimbo.
> 
> Hey, we're all just women trying to lift up other women here, am I right?
> 
> *Our Meghan is nothing if not a phoenix rising from the ashes* — *even if said ashes result from all those Molotov cocktails she keeps tossing.* The Queen's funeral, replete with the sidelining of Harry and Meghan, is firmly in the rearview. *And despite Meghan's actions to the contrary* — *you know, that Oprah interview in which she said a senior royal was racist and that the palace didn't care that she was suicidal and pregnant — Meghan really loved the Queen.*
> 
> 'Certainly, in terms of female leadership, she is the most shining example of what that looks like,' Meghan told Variety. 'I feel deep gratitude to have been able to spend time with her and get to know her . . . And I continue to be proud to have had a nice warmth with the matriarch of the family.'
> 
> Hmmm. *You'd never know that Harry reportedly rebuffed two invitations from the Queen to visit shortly before her death,* or that his brother reportedly remains incensed with Harry and Meghan's repeated betrayals, or that King Charles is holding the titles of prince and princess for H & M's children in abeyance, possibly until the damage from Harry's forthcoming memoir and the couple's Netflix docuseries becomes clearer.
> 
> *Oh, and about that Netflix deal,* one this couple has been trying to defang since Her Majesty's funeral? Wouldn't you know, *Meghan Markle — avatar of kindness, authenticity, love, goodness and 'meaningful change' — is already backpedaling*.
> 
> *She and Harry really have no control over their own show, you see.* Actually, apart from starring in it, they have almost nothing to do with it.
> 
> '*It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story,*' Meghan says of Liz Garbus, the Oscar-nominated director of her docu-series, ' . . .* even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it. But that's not why we're telling it.'
> 
> It's not? Netflix gave Harry and Meghan a reported $100 million production deal*, yet these two have produced almost nothing since signing back in 2020. Their requisite pound of flesh is long overdue. Meghan's establishing plausible deniability here. She just thinks we're all too stupid to see it.
> 
> '*We're trusting our story to someone else,' she goes on, 'and that means it will go through their lens.*'
> 
> Yes, Meghan. That's how these things work.
> 
> *Today's Meghan Markle is all about joy and she wants you to understand that. It's all she spreads. Love and light, people, love and light.
> 
> She has notes for any actress who might play her in the future* — not that she's saying for 'The Crown,' but you know,* maybe 'The Crown*.'
> 
> 'I hope that in preparing for the role, she finds the softness and the playfulness and the laughter. The silliness . . . I just hope she finds the dimensions.'
> 
> Seriously, who speaks of themselves this way?
> 
> *The problem with this rebrand is that, like everything Meghan Markle has to say, it's meaningless. We're still left with the same old Meghan and Harry – self-obsessed and completely and totally out-of-touch.*
> 
> Case in point: *While the days of comparing herself to Mandela are long gone, now we're keeping company with Gloria Steinem — whom Meghan cringingly calls 'Glo' — and reminding us that she quoted Eleanor Roosevelt in her high school yearbook.*
> 
> Meghan, you see, is intelligent. Mensa material. According to her self-report, she's good at 'Jeopardy!' She plays Wordle and Scrabble — with a timer. She was once fluent in French. She doesn't watch TV for mere entertainment, as the rest of us, the great unwashed, do; no, she's in search of 'watching great storytelling.'
> 
> *In short, Meghan's as insufferable as ever.* She speaks of her and Harry's packed workdays — doing exactly what, she cannot say —* Zooming and whatnot from their vulgar $14 million, 16-bathroom Montecito mansion while lecturing us on eco-warrior-hood*.
> 
> Here she is, *our bimbo emeritus,* frolicking in her garden, barefoot in designer dresses, flicking her Cartier-adorned wrist just so, posing with that typical Markle expression of beatitude, our own latter-day saint parting the clouds and descending to save us…
> 
> *Heads are surely rolling at Spotify, which paid these two a reported $25 million back in, yes, 2020. Two years on and they have four formless, content-free, dated, hectoring, joyless episodes to show for it…*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance rebrands: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: Meghan Markle is the epitome of failing upward. Her lack of self-awareness, after all this time, remains staggering. A true legend in her own mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Absolutely cutting and brilliant article. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> The rebrand is all about MM. H is nowhere to be seen and M is not wearing her engagement ring.


Hmmm...intriguing......


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> My (few) gripes - she should not have compared herself to Diana, and she should have called the Queen by her title, not “*matriarch of the family*”
> 
> So props for the *effort*.
> 
> The photos are awful though.


Great overview of TW's rebranding. She used "matriarch of the family" because she wanted to remind people about her "family," the BRF. TM and her siblings don't count, and Doria may join them soon.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Whoopi used to be a supporter of TW, but it must be difficult to ignore so much hypocrisy…


Not always a fan of Whoopi but she speaks the truth in this case. I'd love to see her take on MM in person. She'd rip MM a new a**h*le  if she tried the same tactics that she's used on her previous pod guests.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo if this is the rebrand, it is another H&M epic fail.  She is being criticized by more and more elites now.  There is no coming back from a bimbo-esque photo op in very expensive clothes that look ridiculous on her with very sloppy styling. Her eye makeup shows the eyelash glue [again] = ick.  Nflix, release the video. Penguin, release the book. Spotify, wth were you thinking?   Release their nonsense, suffer through the criticisms, take the financial loss before the new year.  We are sick of them.
> 
> View attachment 5635180
> 
> 
> ETA:  a word to W&K:  rethink that Earthshot visit.  Now is not the time, even BillG is saying it is not enough [more or less].


I really hope there is no coming back … Though, I'm afraid that Maureen C might be right, and "_*We are never, ever going to escape Meghan Markle,* are we?"_




charlottawill said:


> Not always a fan of Whoopi but she speaks the truth in this case. I'd love to see her take on MM in person. She'd rip MM a new a**h*le  if she tried the same tactics that she's used on her previous pod guests.


Whoopi used to go straight to the point, and I always liked that about her. So let's hope she fights against (not joins) hypocrisy.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> The photos are awful though.



Interesting that the PoW looks pretty much the same in all her photos, yet this one never looks the same twice. Earlier today someone here posted a comparison of the Variety photos to one taken in bright sun last month in Germany. Amazing what filters can do, isn't it?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Probably via the same 'phone' carrier they use to talk with Diana


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>




I hope this face haunts Harry's dreams.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> OMG I watched this video just now. WTF did I just watch?! It was like an old school Barbizon commercial. And she called herself a SuPeRmOdEl …
> 
> View attachment 5634730


She can't even fake laugh.  The comments are full of stans.  Pretty scary stuff.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I hope this face haunts Harry's dreams.


She looks unwell.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I browsed the DM article below, and there is so much vanity and hypocrisy on TW's statements. Here are a few examples for your entertainment:
> 
> Intellectual curiosity…
> _Oh! She's a real person! *She laughs and asks questions and approaches things with curiosity*_.'
> 
> 
> 
> Love of family…
> _'*So much of how my husband and I see things is through our love story.* I think that's what people around the world connected to, especially with our wedding. People love love. I'm not excluded in that sentiment. *And our definition of love is really expansive: Partner love, self-love, the love of community and family.* _
> 
> 
> In-N-Out, the new Sizzler…
> _*my husband's favorite is In-N-Out.* There's one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. *It's really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them*. *They know our order.*'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle recorded Variety interview before the Queen died
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex praised Her Majesty's 'warmth' and 'leadership' after she passed away on September 8 but did not speak about other members of the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



oh, they drive an hour to go to in-n-out?  really?  It's not that special.  this is just her trying to make harry seem like a "regular guy"


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> For the ones with a strong stomach!
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: For what it's worth, I read somewhere that this may have been a paid article. In contrast to DM that can't accept payments, certain websites can accept money for coverage.



Four and a half minutes of my life I'll never get back.  I was able to semi tolerate it since I'm plowed after 2 glasses of champagne, but not plowed enough to not suddenly feel bile coming up my throat as I listened to her endless bull$hit.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Wearing a slave collar around her neck. Not a good or politically correct look.
> 
> View attachment 5634902
> 
> How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and big head. Looks photoshopped.


She's trying to channel Morgan Freeman and play that she's God.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> oh, they drive an hour to go to in-n-out?  really?  It's not that special.  this is just her trying to make harry seem like a "regular guy"


These "regular guys" can afford the California gas prices to drive an hour for a stupid fast food burger?  Even the contrived stories are out of touch.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> These "regular guys" can afford the California gas prices to drive an hour for a stupid fast food burger?  Even the contrived stories are out of touch.


They are trying to be just folks, but this is really old news.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> These "regular guys" can afford the California gas prices to drive an hour for a stupid fast food burger?  Even the contrived stories are out of touch.


good point...that drive in their big car would probably cost $200 in gas (unless they're driving an electric vehicle)


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> good point...that drive in their big car would probably cost $200 in gas (unless they're driving an electric vehicle)


Not even the fancy Tesla would hold that new giant head and old giant ego of hers.


----------



## gracekelly

If Meghan was given a huge tiara to wear and loads of jewels, a pink tulle gown and a wand  she would habve no problem being objectified as a fairy Princess. From what I can see of the photo layout she is trying to rebrand herself as a socialite jetsetter circa 1990.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Stand in your truth?  Even if it's all $hit??


----------



## rose60610

What's this about In n Out? This is the same person who gave TQ's staff hell when she said "I can taste egg in that". I thought Claw was a vegan. Now she wants an In n Out? Or is she one of these seasonal vegans? Or opportunistic vegans? And doesn't she have a private chef to make whatever she wants? So why drive the gas guzzler to In n Out for fast food? How much stupidity are we supposed to buy? Her fake persona is beyond the pale.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> All this current PR is about her.  This latest round is part of the PR campaign that began before the passing of TQ and was only put on hold because of it.  The campaign is now back in full swing.  Meghan is distancing herself from Harry and soon will be spinning that the problems with the royals are all due to him.  After all she and TQ were buddies, right?


I find her steady take-over of his projects quite scary. This crazy nut is now the face of Invictus and he has been ousted from projects that were originally billed as joint. In their photos as a couple, she is posing as the leader of the pack. He has been relegated to side-show status. On the bright side, if she dumps him, she won't have a 24/7 patsy to blame for her failures. And I'm very sure she will fail. She reminds me of the bimbos that are boosted to fleeting stardom by their choice of bedmate. (Her podcrashes are giving me such a palette of words to describe her.)  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> When Lady C mentioned it (that's where I heard it first) she said she was told by someone who stood next to her at a social occasion when she said it.


I thought it was at Charles' garden party? Unless she repeated it at another setting, I doubt there is a recording of her gloating plane crash remark.


Chanbal said:


>



My dislike of her is not the reason I think she looks absolutely stupid in both pictures. FAKE just screams from both pics. The Cut is all about "Look at me! I'm a serious stylish humanitarian and you better believe it!". Variety says "Oh, I'm such a sweet angel gazing at the castles in the air!"


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Wearing a slave collar around her neck. Not a good or politically correct look.
> 
> View attachment 5634902


I hope this doesn't offend anyone, but I really think this is the look she was going for:


----------



## Genie27

purseinsanity said:


> These "regular guys" can afford the California gas prices to drive an hour for a stupid fast food burger?  Even the contrived stories are out of touch.


Don’t forget, how they love to ‘surprise’ the drive through staff. FFS - place your order, pay up and GTFOutta the lineup. Why/how would the staff even know/care who the F is in the car?
Does it go something like this?
Welcome to In-n-Out, May I take your order

Hi, it Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, and my Royal husband JCMH. I’d like our usual please. And can I add a side order of fresh trimmed vegan fries, dusted with gold flakes and beluga caviar? I got so accustomed to that while living in the palace you know - it’s what the Queen’s chef created especially for me, when I was over for Tea. It was a very special time.

*crackle, crackle, mute* Who? (Security! It’s that nutter again.) Please pull over ma’am while we assemble your order. Yes, I’m very sorry but we are all out of gold flakes and the beluga machine is broken. Sorry for the inconvenience.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Love Judi D.



I   Judi Dench.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>


 
Here it is @Chanbal I was honestly slightly shocked. What happened there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Here it is @Chanbal I was honestly slightly shocked. What happened there.




Thats a huge vain down her forehead and side of her face….  I’m not sure what causes that?


----------



## Mumotons

Jackie O calls out Meghan Markle's 'fake voice' in Variety interview
					

'It's hard [to like Meghan] because she always sounds so insincere,' Henderson said on The Kyle and Jackie O Show on Thursday




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> I find her steady take-over of his projects quite scary. This crazy nut is now the face of Invictus and he has been ousted from projects that were originally billed as joint. In their photos as a couple, she is posing as the leader of the pack. He has been relegated to side-show status. On the bright side, if she dumps him, she won't have a 24/7 patsy to blame for her failures. And I'm very sure she will fail. She reminds me of the bimbos that are boosted to fleeting stardom by their choice of bedmate. (Her podcrashes are giving me such a palette of words to describe her.)
> 
> I thought it was at Charles' garden party? Unless she repeated it at another setting, I doubt there is a recording of her gloating plane crash remark.
> 
> My dislike of her is not the reason I think she looks absolutely stupid in both pictures. FAKE just screams from both pics. The Cut is all about "Look at me! I'm a serious stylish humanitarian and you better believe it!". Variety says "Oh, I'm such a sweet angel gazing at the castles in the air!"


I just heard “Beam me up Scotty” when I saw the Variety pic


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> A brilliant article by Maureen C   This article deserves many clicks…
> View attachment 5635120
> 
> 
> *We are never, ever going to escape Meghan Markle, are we?*
> 
> _*Right on the heels of her disastrous profile in New York Magazine's The Cut — in which she compared herself, never forget, to Nelson Mandela* — Meghan's back with yet another cover story, this one for Variety.
> 
> And guess what? *We're in for a rebrand.
> 
> The Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance now wants to be known as FUN! And SILLY! But also very, very smart. Most assuredly not a bimbo* — not at all like her most recent podcast guest Paris Hilton, who Meghan said she had judged for being . . . a bimbo.
> 
> Hey, we're all just women trying to lift up other women here, am I right?
> 
> *Our Meghan is nothing if not a phoenix rising from the ashes* — *even if said ashes result from all those Molotov cocktails she keeps tossing.* The Queen's funeral, replete with the sidelining of Harry and Meghan, is firmly in the rearview. *And despite Meghan's actions to the contrary* — *you know, that Oprah interview in which she said a senior royal was racist and that the palace didn't care that she was suicidal and pregnant — Meghan really loved the Queen.*
> 
> 'Certainly, in terms of female leadership, she is the most shining example of what that looks like,' Meghan told Variety. 'I feel deep gratitude to have been able to spend time with her and get to know her . . . And I continue to be proud to have had a nice warmth with the matriarch of the family.'
> 
> Hmmm. *You'd never know that Harry reportedly rebuffed two invitations from the Queen to visit shortly before her death,* or that his brother reportedly remains incensed with Harry and Meghan's repeated betrayals, or that King Charles is holding the titles of prince and princess for H & M's children in abeyance, possibly until the damage from Harry's forthcoming memoir and the couple's Netflix docuseries becomes clearer.
> 
> *Oh, and about that Netflix deal,* one this couple has been trying to defang since Her Majesty's funeral? Wouldn't you know, *Meghan Markle — avatar of kindness, authenticity, love, goodness and 'meaningful change' — is already backpedaling*.
> 
> *She and Harry really have no control over their own show, you see.* Actually, apart from starring in it, they have almost nothing to do with it.
> 
> '*It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story,*' Meghan says of Liz Garbus, the Oscar-nominated director of her docu-series, ' . . .* even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it. But that's not why we're telling it.'
> 
> It's not? Netflix gave Harry and Meghan a reported $100 million production deal*, yet these two have produced almost nothing since signing back in 2020. Their requisite pound of flesh is long overdue. Meghan's establishing plausible deniability here. She just thinks we're all too stupid to see it.
> 
> '*We're trusting our story to someone else,' she goes on, 'and that means it will go through their lens.*'
> 
> Yes, Meghan. That's how these things work.
> 
> *Today's Meghan Markle is all about joy and she wants you to understand that. It's all she spreads. Love and light, people, love and light.
> 
> She has notes for any actress who might play her in the future* — not that she's saying for 'The Crown,' but you know,* maybe 'The Crown*.'
> 
> 'I hope that in preparing for the role, she finds the softness and the playfulness and the laughter. The silliness . . . I just hope she finds the dimensions.'
> 
> Seriously, who speaks of themselves this way?
> 
> *The problem with this rebrand is that, like everything Meghan Markle has to say, it's meaningless. We're still left with the same old Meghan and Harry – self-obsessed and completely and totally out-of-touch.*
> 
> Case in point: *While the days of comparing herself to Mandela are long gone, now we're keeping company with Gloria Steinem — whom Meghan cringingly calls 'Glo' — and reminding us that she quoted Eleanor Roosevelt in her high school yearbook.*
> 
> Meghan, you see, is intelligent. Mensa material. According to her self-report, she's good at 'Jeopardy!' She plays Wordle and Scrabble — with a timer. She was once fluent in French. She doesn't watch TV for mere entertainment, as the rest of us, the great unwashed, do; no, she's in search of 'watching great storytelling.'
> 
> *In short, Meghan's as insufferable as ever.* She speaks of her and Harry's packed workdays — doing exactly what, she cannot say —* Zooming and whatnot from their vulgar $14 million, 16-bathroom Montecito mansion while lecturing us on eco-warrior-hood*.
> 
> Here she is, *our bimbo emeritus,* frolicking in her garden, barefoot in designer dresses, flicking her Cartier-adorned wrist just so, posing with that typical Markle expression of beatitude, our own latter-day saint parting the clouds and descending to save us…
> 
> *Heads are surely rolling at Spotify, which paid these two a reported $25 million back in, yes, 2020. Two years on and they have four formless, content-free, dated, hectoring, joyless episodes to show for it…*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance rebrands: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: Meghan Markle is the epitome of failing upward. Her lack of self-awareness, after all this time, remains staggering. A true legend in her own mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Love this, thanks.

The only this I would take issue with is the work '*phoenix*'. 

Personally, I think Meghan is far more *pigeon*. And in many ways that's to do a disservice to pigeons.

What ever she does, wears or says, she just comes across as a very ordinary, try-hard bird, that's awkward, desperate for every scrap, slightly stupid but loud, and basically as common as muck.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> MM keeps throwing things at the wall and hoping that something sticks. Figuratively speaking in this case



Thank you, you said it better


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She's more of a pest like the Cornish Pixies Lockhart sets free during class in Harry Potter. They make screeching noises and destroy everything in sight just because they want to.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Great overview of TW's rebranding. She used "matriarch of the family" because she wanted to remind people about her "family," the BRF. TM and her siblings don't count, and Doria may join them soon.



She was the ****ing Queen! End of.

My great great, aunt was a "family matriarch". A Queen is a Queen.

When _The _Queen (or King) invites (summons) you for an audience, doesn't matter if you're Mr's Smith from Bognor Regis  or Harry Windsor-Wales you GO!.  Fake-face and Harry didn't go and see the Queen when they were in the UK and say goodbye to her, never mind "the family". Total and utter disrespect.

_Zhe_ married a man and got rid of the rest of the family. He married her, took the titles and then divorced his family. There was no 'family' after M.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I hope this face haunts Harry's dreams.



Dreams?

Harry's locked into a perpetual nightmare in a trunk and wearing a gimp-mask. And likes it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I hope this doesn't offend anyone, but I really think this is the look she was going for:



A-greed.

That's what she was aiming for.

Happily, she looks like a money-laundering cult leader though. Which is what she is.


----------



## kipp

Mumotons said:


> Jackie O calls out Meghan Markle's 'fake voice' in Variety interview
> 
> 
> 'It's hard [to like Meghan] because she always sounds so insincere,' Henderson said on The Kyle and Jackie O Show on Thursday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think this is what grates on me when hearing or seeing her (I try not to!)---the FAKE-ness.  EVERYTHING is exaggerated---facial expressions, hand gestures, statements, clothing, spray tan, et. al.    And most of all, her sense of self-importance.  It's disgusting!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This!


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Hmm I don’t think MM was that negative in VARIETY about reality show director, BUT MM did say something along the lines of - now, we have to trust someone else to tell OUR story. A huge thing for a micro manager to not have the last word.
> 
> The innuendo that I feel is that
> 1. MAYBE MM and H used to have creative control
> 2. They don’t have it NOW
> 3. Maybe they did not get to choose director, maybe Netflix picked for them


I got the impression: Liz is such a great director (gush gush) and of course we are so lucky that she is telling our love story, even though (sniffs disparagingly) she isn't telling it the way *I (emphasis on I)* would have told it.


Chanbal said:


> I think it's meant to be real info. They claim to have good sources.


IIRC BarkJack said they were attacked by the Sussex Squad and their original account was shutdown.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> Love this, thanks.
> 
> The only this I would take issue with is the work '*phoenix*'.
> 
> Personally, I think Meghan is far more *pigeon*. And in many ways that's to do a disservice to pigeons.
> 
> What ever she does, wears or says, she just comes across as a very ordinary, try-hard bird, that's awkward, desperate for every scrap, slightly stupid but loud, and basically as common as muck.


And like a pigeon, she constantly craps over everything and everyone around her.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not posting the next short clip (same source so you can look it up on Insta if you wish) because it's somewhat redundant but boy has she aged horribly. And with that I don't mean necessarily/only the extent but how quickly her face turned from pretty youthful to this.
> 
> BTW remember my fortune teller friend? She claims aging prematurely/within a pretty short amount of time is part of dabbling in, uh, the dark arts  Not everyone who has bad genes has...weird hobbies, but everyone who does will not look so fresh soon enough.


A Starving Succubus ...


Chanbal said:


> Love Judi D.



Love Judi Dench too!
And that pic of the Diana actress looking sad - OMG looks just like Zedzee's version of "grieving".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> And like a pigeon, she constantly craps over everything and everyone around her.



Not the pigeons' fault. If they weren't left to starve in the cities (they are basically abandoned pets) with nothing but completely unsuitable food (and not even enough of this) they wouldn't have this very thin and aggressive so-called starvation stool. As usual, it's humans' fault.

Ghoul however could choose to, uh, adjust her behaviour.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> I got the impression: *Liz is such a great director (gush gush) and of course we are so lucky that she is telling our love story, even though (sniffs disparagingly) she isn't telling it the way I (emphasis on I) would have told it.*
> 
> IIRC BarkJack said they were attacked by the Sussex Squad and their original account was shutdown.



In racing terms, t's called an 'each way' bet.

It means whatever the outcome, she can't lose - coz she told us a) It's their love story  if people like it, and b) they're not the one telling it, if people don't.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not the pigeons' fault. If they weren't left to starve in the cities (they are basically abandoned pets) with nothing but completely unsuitable food (and not even enough of this) they wouldn't have this very thin and aggressive so-called starvation stool. As usual, it's humans' fault.
> 
> Ghoul however could choose to, uh, adjust her behaviour.



as I said her likeness was disservice to pigeons the world over.

I was the one incensed when our Mayor (of London - not City of London) called pigeons "vermin"

but she's not a phoenix either. A phoenix represents a magical re-birth having been all but extinguished by suffering and sacrifice. Zed is certainly no phoenix.

There is nothing that you could liken her (or Harry) to in the animal, reptile or insect world that wouldn't suffer by comparison.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> as I said her likeness was disservice to pigeons the world over.
> 
> I was the one incensed when our Mayor (of London - not City of London)
> 
> but she's not a phoenix either. A phoenix represents a magical re-birth having been all but extinguished by suffering and sacrifice. Zed is certainly no phoenix.
> 
> There is nothing that you could liken her (or Harry) to in the animal, reptile or insect world that wouldn't suffer by comparison.



I mean, I chose Ghoul over Vulture because the bird has an important place in the eco system, so I wholeheartedly agree.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Whoopi Goldberg was telling it like it is on The View today.
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on _Deal or No Deal_: 'That's TV, baby'​
> "_What did you think you were going to do? You know that's what the show was," Goldberg said on The View._
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg is on the case of Meghan Markle, after the Duchess of Sussex revealed that she felt "objectified" during her time as a briefcase-opening assistant on season 2 of Howie Mandel's NBC game show _Deal or No Deal._
> 
> "On that show, you basically had a suitcase and they wanted to know: Is this the deal you want, or is this not the deal you want?" Goldberg said on Wednesday's episode of _The View_, following Markle's comments about quitting the competition series on her _Archetypes With Meghan _podcast. "I don't know that the people who are sitting there are thinking about you like that. They're thinking, _I want the money_," Goldberg argued. "[_Wheel of Fortune_hostess] Vanna White is always in something interesting and beautiful, and she's been doing this. The objectification might be coming from you and how you felt about how these women were being portrayed, and that's what you have to change, because we're performers."
> 
> The Oscar-winning actress stressed to Markle that, "When you're a performer, you take the gig," which sometimes involves a "Bozo suit" or a "big nose," because that's "just the way it is" in Hollywood.
> 
> "We're not journalists, we're actors," Goldberg continued. "You left, and that was your prerogative. I feel bad, because I don't think people were looking at these girls like this, I think they want the money."
> 
> When Goldberg's _View_ cohost Sunny Hostin suggested that Markle's words made her think about issues of fetishization of specific body types in the industry, Goldberg responded: "That's TV, baby. But, what did you think you were going to? You know that's what the show was."
> 
> Goldberg ended the segment by cautioning Markle about not making "the other women feel bad, because they're trying to make a living, too."
> 
> On _Archetypes With Meghan_, Markle — who took the_ Deal or No Deal _role as an early gig in Hollywood before joining the cast of the hit series _Suits_ in 2011 — said she regularly felt uneasy with her work on the program.
> "I would end up leaving with this pit in my stomach knowing that I was so much more than what was being objectified on the stage," the 41-year-old said. "I didn't like feeling forced to be all looks and little substance. And that's how it felt for me at the time: Being reduced to this specific archetype."
> 
> Markle later married into the British royal family when she tied the knot with Prince Harry on May 19, 2018. The couple eventually stepped back from their royal duties in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on 'Deal or No Deal'
> 
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questioned Meghan Markle's comments about feeling 'objectified' as a briefcase-opening assistant on the 'Deal or No Deal' show: 'What did you think you were going to do?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com


If I didn't dislike Zedzee for any other reason, I would dislike her for butchering the English language: *Being reduced to this specific archetype.* Just because she wants to shoehorn in her Arch prefix, she is mutilating the word "archetype" to force it to be a synonym for "stereotype". Is there a word that means language butcher? I think I will call her "bimbo butcher" from now on.


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Love this, thanks.
> 
> The only this I would take issue with is the work '*phoenix*'.
> 
> Personally, I think Meghan is far more *pigeon*. And in many ways that's to do a disservice to pigeons.
> 
> What ever she does, wears or says, she just comes across as a very ordinary, try-hard bird, that's awkward, desperate for every scrap, slightly stupid but loud, and basically as common as muck.



Oooh good one.  Pigeons also poop everywhere in public….


----------



## Prada Prince

xincinsin said:


> If I didn't dislike Zedzee for any other reason, I would dislike her for butchering the English language: *Being reduced to this specific archetype.* Just because she wants to shoehorn in her Arch prefix, she is mutilating the word "archetype" to force it to be a synonym for "stereotype". Is there a word that means language butcher? I think I will call her "bimbo butcher" from now on.


I hereby, under my own Letters Patent - do appoint give and grant unto MM the said name state degree style dignity title and honour of... 

Marquess of Malapropisms...


----------



## marietouchet

The juxtaposition of the bottom  two articles - brilliant tabloid editors


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Probably via the same 'phone' carrier they use to talk with Diana



Soft - in the Head
Playful is the excuse Karens use when their cr*tch goblins break the Ming vase
Laughter is that hyena braying she uses in inappropriate situations, like plane crash
Silliness - I do not think she knows what this means: _having or showing a lack of common sense or judgement_
Dimensions - sorry, she is likely from another dimension where the inhabitants are one-dimensional


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

More on WG , I can’t believe my eyes that MM offended WG, MM knocked it out of the park 

Whoopi Goldberg accuses Meghan Markle of making 'other women feel bad'











						Whoopi Goldberg accuses Meghan Markle of making 'other women feel bad'
					

Speaking on her talk show The View yesterday, Goldberg said the Duchess of Sussex's views could be insulting to women who were 'just trying to make a living' in the entertainment industry.




					mol.im


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> I hope this doesn't offend anyone, but I really think this is the look she was going for:


Or this by artist Sue Halstenberg: Goddess of Mercy


Scratch that. She stole the necklace from Nezha, Dragon Prince.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Prada Prince said:


> I hereby, under my own Letters Patent - do appoint give and grant unto MM the said name state degree style dignity title and honour of...
> 
> Marquess of Malapropisms...



I always wonder id she really is so stupid and/or poorly educated (what's with the private school and expensive university?) or just assumes her listeners are. I wouldn't put that arrogant take behind her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Soft - in the Head
> Playful is the excuse Karens use when their cr*tch goblins break the Ming vase
> Laughter is that hyena braying she uses in inappropriate situations, like plane crash
> *Silliness - I do not think she knows what this means: *_*having or showing a lack of common sense or judgement*_
> Dimensions - sorry, she is likely from another dimension where the inhabitants are one-dimensional



Maybe you are the problem. Everyone knows silly is right up there with oh so cuTe at 40+.


----------



## CarryOn2020

At this point, can we discount drug/alcohol use?  Maybe it’s the restrictive diet? 
The prominent facial veins, though, give off a very _Angelina_ look.

ETA: or are we seeing desperation from a woman who has realized she made the biggest mistake of her life by marrying an un-employable  nearly 40 year old man-child?  Now, she is stuck, really stuck, and furious.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


>



Thanks to Photoshop she’s had a toeectomy!


----------



## CobaltBlu

She needs to stop with this Love Story narrative.

I am 100% certain that their relationship is not the epic sweeping love story she wants to be the star of. Broken down, it’s pretty ordinary when you strip away the royal bit. Yawn.  Girl contrives to meet boy, boy falls for it, they move away, have kids, boy learns plumbing, they have kids and pretend to eat vegan in and out burgers 

WTH does this mean!? 



> So much of how my husband and I see things is through our love story.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nothing, just the usual word salad hoping nobody asks to clarify. Which is probably even true because to say it with my favourite medical comedian: "No one cares. Not a single person cares."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> At this point, can we discount drug/alcohol use?  Maybe it’s the restrictive diet?
> The prominent facial veins, though, give off a very _Angelina_ look.



For all we know she prefers organic golden latte with a side of human rights violations.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> These "regular guys" can afford the California gas prices to drive an hour for a stupid fast food burger?  Even the contrived stories are out of touch.


Another lie. There is one in Goleta, by UCSB and Hope Ranch, ten miles from Montecito. I knew there had to be one in the SB area.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Apparently Whoopi Goldberg was telling it like it is on The View today.
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on _Deal or No Deal_: 'That's TV, baby'​
> "_What did you think you were going to do? You know that's what the show was," Goldberg said on The View._
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg is on the case of Meghan Markle, after the Duchess of Sussex revealed that she felt "objectified" during her time as a briefcase-opening assistant on season 2 of Howie Mandel's NBC game show _Deal or No Deal._
> 
> "On that show, you basically had a suitcase and they wanted to know: Is this the deal you want, or is this not the deal you want?" Goldberg said on Wednesday's episode of _The View_, following Markle's comments about quitting the competition series on her _Archetypes With Meghan _podcast. "I don't know that the people who are sitting there are thinking about you like that. They're thinking, _I want the money_," Goldberg argued. "[_Wheel of Fortune_hostess] Vanna White is always in something interesting and beautiful, and she's been doing this. The objectification might be coming from you and how you felt about how these women were being portrayed, and that's what you have to change, because we're performers."
> 
> The Oscar-winning actress stressed to Markle that, "When you're a performer, you take the gig," which sometimes involves a "Bozo suit" or a "big nose," because that's "just the way it is" in Hollywood.
> 
> "We're not journalists, we're actors," Goldberg continued. "You left, and that was your prerogative. I feel bad, because I don't think people were looking at these girls like this, I think they want the money."
> 
> When Goldberg's _View_ cohost Sunny Hostin suggested that Markle's words made her think about issues of fetishization of specific body types in the industry, Goldberg responded: "That's TV, baby. But, what did you think you were going to? You know that's what the show was."
> 
> Goldberg ended the segment by cautioning Markle about not making "the other women feel bad, because they're trying to make a living, too."
> 
> On _Archetypes With Meghan_, Markle — who took the_ Deal or No Deal _role as an early gig in Hollywood before joining the cast of the hit series _Suits_ in 2011 — said she regularly felt uneasy with her work on the program.
> "I would end up leaving with this pit in my stomach knowing that I was so much more than what was being objectified on the stage," the 41-year-old said. "I didn't like feeling forced to be all looks and little substance. And that's how it felt for me at the time: Being reduced to this specific archetype."
> 
> Markle later married into the British royal family when she tied the knot with Prince Harry on May 19, 2018. The couple eventually stepped back from their royal duties in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questions Meghan Markle feeling 'objectified' on 'Deal or No Deal'
> 
> 
> Whoopi Goldberg questioned Meghan Markle's comments about feeling 'objectified' as a briefcase-opening assistant on the 'Deal or No Deal' show: 'What did you think you were going to do?'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ew.com


yay, Whoopi for having the nerve to speak something not positive about Meegain...of course Sunny would have something to say in support of Meghan


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> A brilliant article by Maureen C   This article deserves many clicks…
> View attachment 5635120
> 
> 
> *We are never, ever going to escape Meghan Markle, are we?*
> 
> _*Right on the heels of her disastrous profile in New York Magazine's The Cut — in which she compared herself, never forget, to Nelson Mandela* — Meghan's back with yet another cover story, this one for Variety.
> 
> And guess what? *We're in for a rebrand.
> 
> The Duchess of Despair and Endless Grievance now wants to be known as FUN! And SILLY! But also very, very smart. Most assuredly not a bimbo* — not at all like her most recent podcast guest Paris Hilton, who Meghan said she had judged for being . . . a bimbo.
> 
> Hey, we're all just women trying to lift up other women here, am I right?
> 
> *Our Meghan is nothing if not a phoenix rising from the ashes* — *even if said ashes result from all those Molotov cocktails she keeps tossing.* The Queen's funeral, replete with the sidelining of Harry and Meghan, is firmly in the rearview. *And despite Meghan's actions to the contrary* — *you know, that Oprah interview in which she said a senior royal was racist and that the palace didn't care that she was suicidal and pregnant — Meghan really loved the Queen.*
> 
> 'Certainly, in terms of female leadership, she is the most shining example of what that looks like,' Meghan told Variety. 'I feel deep gratitude to have been able to spend time with her and get to know her . . . And I continue to be proud to have had a nice warmth with the matriarch of the family.'
> 
> Hmmm. *You'd never know that Harry reportedly rebuffed two invitations from the Queen to visit shortly before her death,* or that his brother reportedly remains incensed with Harry and Meghan's repeated betrayals, or that King Charles is holding the titles of prince and princess for H & M's children in abeyance, possibly until the damage from Harry's forthcoming memoir and the couple's Netflix docuseries becomes clearer.
> 
> *Oh, and about that Netflix deal,* one this couple has been trying to defang since Her Majesty's funeral? Wouldn't you know, *Meghan Markle — avatar of kindness, authenticity, love, goodness and 'meaningful change' — is already backpedaling*.
> 
> *She and Harry really have no control over their own show, you see.* Actually, apart from starring in it, they have almost nothing to do with it.
> 
> '*It's nice to be able to trust someone with our story,*' Meghan says of Liz Garbus, the Oscar-nominated director of her docu-series, ' . . .* even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it. But that's not why we're telling it.'
> 
> It's not? Netflix gave Harry and Meghan a reported $100 million production deal*, yet these two have produced almost nothing since signing back in 2020. Their requisite pound of flesh is long overdue. Meghan's establishing plausible deniability here. She just thinks we're all too stupid to see it.
> 
> '*We're trusting our story to someone else,' she goes on, 'and that means it will go through their lens.*'
> 
> Yes, Meghan. That's how these things work.
> 
> *Today's Meghan Markle is all about joy and she wants you to understand that. It's all she spreads. Love and light, people, love and light.
> 
> She has notes for any actress who might play her in the future* — not that she's saying for 'The Crown,' but you know,* maybe 'The Crown*.'
> 
> 'I hope that in preparing for the role, she finds the softness and the playfulness and the laughter. The silliness . . . I just hope she finds the dimensions.'
> 
> Seriously, who speaks of themselves this way?
> 
> *The problem with this rebrand is that, like everything Meghan Markle has to say, it's meaningless. We're still left with the same old Meghan and Harry – self-obsessed and completely and totally out-of-touch.*
> 
> Case in point: *While the days of comparing herself to Mandela are long gone, now we're keeping company with Gloria Steinem — whom Meghan cringingly calls 'Glo' — and reminding us that she quoted Eleanor Roosevelt in her high school yearbook.*
> 
> Meghan, you see, is intelligent. Mensa material. According to her self-report, she's good at 'Jeopardy!' She plays Wordle and Scrabble — with a timer. She was once fluent in French. She doesn't watch TV for mere entertainment, as the rest of us, the great unwashed, do; no, she's in search of 'watching great storytelling.'
> 
> *In short, Meghan's as insufferable as ever.* She speaks of her and Harry's packed workdays — doing exactly what, she cannot say —* Zooming and whatnot from their vulgar $14 million, 16-bathroom Montecito mansion while lecturing us on eco-warrior-hood*.
> 
> Here she is, *our bimbo emeritus,* frolicking in her garden, barefoot in designer dresses, flicking her Cartier-adorned wrist just so, posing with that typical Markle expression of beatitude, our own latter-day saint parting the clouds and descending to save us…
> 
> *Heads are surely rolling at Spotify, which paid these two a reported $25 million back in, yes, 2020. Two years on and they have four formless, content-free, dated, hectoring, joyless episodes to show for it…*_
> 
> 
> i


insufferable is the perfect word for her


----------



## Chanbal

The Aussies, straight to the point as usual…


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yay, Whoopi for having the nerve to speak something not positive about Meegain...of course Sunny would have something to say in support of Meghan


Whoopi has been in show business for a long time. She knows all it’s flaws and she also knows thousands of people try desperately to make it in the industry every year. It is an insult to all of those people still trying when Meghan condescendingly reflects on the job she used as a stepping stone before she achieved her ultimate goal, being the wife to a famous person and becoming famous herself!


----------



## Chanbal

TW was the first one linked to the BRF to talk about the passing of QE… 

Karl Stefanovic apparently went full circle, the world would be boring without TW (do not remember the exact words).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!  










						Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
					

Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!
> View attachment 5635394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


For a starving succubus, a BJ is sustenance.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!
> View attachment 5635394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Maybe she’s saving that anecdote for the sl*t stereotype episode. They are still having that one aren’t they? Maybe Bimbo replaced it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is anyone still reading Courtiers? I've stopped for a week or so because I was busy but I'll have a quiet weekend and get back to it.


----------



## papertiger

CobaltBlu said:


> She needs to stop with this Love Story narrative.
> 
> I am 100% certain that their relationship is not the epic sweeping love story she wants to be the star of. Broken down, it’s pretty ordinary when you strip away the royal bit. Yawn.  Girl contrives to meet boy, boy falls for it, they move away, have kids, boy learns plumbing, they have kids and pretend to eat vegan in and out burgers
> 
> WTH does this mean!?



PR-speak: someone must have told her people remember stories not facts (and that is a thing) 






						Harnessing the Power of Stories | Women's Leadership
					

Discussion Guide Use the free discussion guide to reflect on key takeaways from what you've seen or to start the conversation after watching the video with friends or colleagues. Download the Guide Still curious? View additional resources about Harnessing the Power of Stories. About This Video...




					womensleadership.stanford.edu


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Maybe she’s saving that anecdote for the sl*t stereotype episode. They are still having that one aren’t they? Maybe Bimbo replaced it.


Wonder what gems she will unearth from her past. The broken-down car episode?  The crying jags on the Night of Pristine Make-up? The gloating performance with Oprah? The faux virgin bride? The spendthrift wife?

_Per the Cut:
The rest of the episodes, she’ll dig into labels like Old Maid, Dragon Lady, Bimbo, Crazy, Angry Black Woman, ***** (well, “B-word,” she clarifies and then squeals, “Oooooh! I don’t want to say that word. It makes me so uncomfortable!”), and Slut (Will Meghan say slut? “Oh my gosh. That makes me so uncomfortable.”)_


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Maybe she’s saving that anecdote for the sl*t stereotype episode. They are still having that one aren’t they? Maybe Bimbo replaced it.



Why is sl*t is now a job description? 

At least Sl*t is kinda '90s, 'bimbo' seems pre-historic 

Seems she likes to shame a lot of_ other_ people on these podcrashes.

No one, _no_ one, thinks a woman dressed-up, heels, with a bit of war-paint on thinks any the worst of her these days. 

The only thing that Meghan is, is old-fashioned. My great-grandfather's favourite actress was Bette Davis. You'd literally have to go pre-WW1 to get a neg response to a bit of glamour.


----------



## rose60610

They got married four years ago and in order to hog media attention they brag about their ongoing Love Story? It's more like four years of a pair of Claws around Harry's neck and a puppet hand up his arse forcing him to exclaim "Of CouRSe I'm CrAZy in LoVe anD My FaMiLy is RaCIsT anD aLMost DroVE mY HoNEy to SuiCide!"  Anything for a buck. And Claw disparages dressing sexy to open suitcases? But somehow slandering the BRF is honorable? Isn't there anybody who can make this bish STFU?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> For a starving succubus, a BJ is sustenance.


Well it is all protein with no calories.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is anyone still reading Courtiers? I've stopped for a week or so because I was busy but I'll have a quiet weekend and get back to it.


Finished it 2 weeks ago.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I think this is what grates on me when hearing or seeing her (I try not to!)---the FAKE-ness.  EVERYTHING is exaggerated---facial expressions, hand gestures, statements, clothing, spray tan, et. al.    And most of all, her sense of self-importance.  It's disgusting!!!


I saw a video of her when she was a kid, and she had the same facial expressions. Creepy.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!
> View attachment 5635394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ms. "Poor Me Forced to Play a Bimbo" then took a role giving a BJ in a car? That wasn't demeaning. It was on-the-job training to bag a world famous Prince. "Here, Harry, you play Dustin and I'll..."  No wonder they want so much security when they leave home. They're busy in the car.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!
> View attachment 5635394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Anyone else feeling it ?  it is now open season on her or rather she now lacks the press cover provided by the BRF 

Her rebranding is not to heal rifts but rather because she knows what is coming ?


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Anyone else feeling it ?  it is now open season on her or rather she now lacks the press cover provided by the BRF
> 
> Her rebranding is not to heal rifts but rather because she knows what is coming ?


I suspect she is going to plant a great many more puppets to gush about how beautiful she is, how bravely she is coping with her grief, how she is simply amazing (inside and out). Also predict her stans will make another push at the Princess Meghan monicker to cement her royal status.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!
> View attachment 5635394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Yeah... this makes me think she didn't leave Deal or no deal by choice  like she says, She probably got fired.... surprise, surprise... and with the royals, she didn't leave them either, she was probably fired too and had to make up a wonderful story of how she wanted her own stuff.... blablabla


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suncatcher

Chanbal said:


> The DM is always helping people with memory issues…   They provide pictures and video clips, how sweet!
> View attachment 5635394
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took raunchy 90210 cameo giving oral sex in a car
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle took on a tiny cameo on 90210 where her character gave oral sex just a year after quitting Deal or No Deal because it made her feel like a 'bimbo'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I have no words. SMH at all the lies.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Ms. "Poor Me Forced to Play a Bimbo" then took a role giving a BJ in a car? That wasn't demeaning. It was on-the-job training to bag a world famous Prince. "Here, Harry, you play Dustin and I'll..."  No wonder they want so much security when they leave home. They're busy in the car.



If you wanna be an actor, you're an actor. Does it matter if your role has a name or not?  Deal or No Deal, suitcase #24 or 'Barbara'. Everyone knows you're just playing a role.

Sometimes I feel quite sorry for actors, even in edgy, neo-realist dramas like _The Industry _(BBC). The level and repetition of nudism during each episode (men and women) was practically gratuitous. I think most actors are really brave and the opposite of vain. 

Megs is vain. That's why she can't play anything but herself. She's 'perfected' and honed this false persona to protect the inadequacy inside. She can't be real, but she can't let her fake persona go so she can act either.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.



To them it's just another day's work. 

M obviously has editorial control or last word.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.



Sounds like it's part of the contract. "No challenges!" "No questions for Markle!" "Everything Markle says must be agreed to!" "Markle is the star! Do not outshine her!" "Softball fluff only!" "Follow the damned script so it sounds spontaneous!"


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> I have no words. SMH at all the lies.


And the HYPOCRISY!!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.


Spotify is just grateful they got any work out of her two years after giving her the sign on cash. As it is I recall Spotify had to bring in a crew to help her write and produce the show. That’s why there are more than 20 people credited on a friggin’ podcast.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.


Somebody ran a search on the initial revealed guest list and discovered they all had links to  sucks. The person concluded that this was part of the SS policy for its clients: you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Somebody ran a search on the initial revealed guest list and discovered they all had links to  sucks. The person concluded that this was part of the SS policy for its clients: you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.



But when the other person is a leper maybe you should reconsider.


----------



## purseinsanity

kipp said:


> I think this is what grates on me when hearing or seeing her (I try not to!)---the FAKE-ness.  EVERYTHING is exaggerated---facial expressions, hand gestures, statements, clothing, spray tan, et. al.    And most of all, her sense of self-importance.  It's disgusting!!!


Jackie O says it's hard to listen to TW because she sounds insincere.

She sounds insincere BECAUSE SHE IS.  About every.single.thing.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Jackie O says it's hard to listen to TW because she sounds insincere.
> 
> She sounds insincere BECAUSE SHE IS.  About every.single.thing.


right - sorry to repeat myself but IMO she is an empty shell of a person - nothing there except ambition for fame and money.  of course I don't know her but this is how she seems to me
I wonder what it's like to wake up in the morning for her.  does she think about feeding her kids?  reach out for her husband?  think about what she can do today to make herself more famous?


----------



## Chanbal

Lady C is inspired today.   She makes some interesting points…


----------



## LittleStar88

Just resurfacing on the Variety interview... These thoughts are swirling in my head. Dumping them here.

The opening for some reason really gets me:

_That morning, the Duchess of Sussex, known more commonly by her maiden name, Meghan Markle, sped past a group of 60-something women who’d made the trek to Montecito to celebrate a milestone birthday_.

Why mention their age group? How is that important? She waves to them from the golf cart like some budget pageant contestant? She must get a boner from people fawning over her.




Why do most of the pictures obscure the beauty of the scenery behind her with cheap fabric? One is some kind of chiffon haphazardly tossed in the air, the other looks like a parachute. And why the photos with the phony laugh video/photo? Was her salad making jokes?





Why does she insist on wearing the Cartier Love bracelet that was given to her by some other dude? Isn't that weird for her? For Harry? For her ex? She seems to wear it all of the time in a very public and obvious way. So cringe!


She comes across as so fake, pretentious, vapid, phony, trite in this interview... Devoid of any personality. She tries so hard to convince the reader that she is this person she wants everyone to believe her to be, but she delivers it in such an unconvincing way. Every response, every word is carefully planned. And in several responses, she doesn't even answer the question, just babbles about something totally forgettable. And not once does anything she said make me believe she was or is grieving the Queen.





Ok, I feel better. I think I can move on with my day now


----------



## CobaltBlu

We feel ya @LittleStar88


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Just resurfacing on the Variety interview... These thoughts are swirling in my head. Dumping them here.
> 
> The opening for some reason really gets me:
> 
> _That morning, the Duchess of Sussex, known more commonly by her maiden name, Meghan Markle, sped past a group of 60-something women who’d made the trek to Montecito to celebrate a milestone birthday_.
> 
> Why mention their age group? How is that important? She waves to them from the golf cart like some budget pageant contestant? She must get a boner from people fawning over her.
> 
> View attachment 5635595
> 
> 
> Why do most of the pictures obscure the beauty of the scenery behind her with cheap fabric? One is some kind of chiffon haphazardly tossed in the air, the other looks like a parachute. And why the photos with the phony laugh video/photo? Was her salad making jokes?
> 
> View attachment 5635592
> 
> 
> 
> Why does she insist on wearing the Cartier Love bracelet that was given to her by some other dude? Isn't that weird for her? For Harry? For her ex? She seems to wear it all of the time in a very public and obvious way. So cringe!
> 
> 
> She comes across as so fake, pretentious, vapid, phony, trite in this interview... Devoid of any personality. She tries so hard to convince the reader that she is this person she wants everyone to believe her to be, but she delivers it in such an unconvincing way. Every response, every word is carefully planned. And in several responses, she doesn't even answer the question, just babbles about something totally forgettable. And not once does anything she said make me believe she was or is grieving the Queen.
> 
> View attachment 5635591
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I feel better. I think I can move on with my day now


what you said about the way she comes across in the interview is her all the time IMO....fake, pretentious, vapid.....that is what the prince chose


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.


Does Piers Morgan ring a bell? Allison P. Davis, Sharon Osbourne… It's probably a long list.
Not everyone has courage to risk his/her career and challenge hypocrisy. Cheers to the ones that do it!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Does Piers Morgan ring a bell? Allison P. Davis, Sharon Osbourne… It's probably a long list.
> Not everyone has courage to risk his/her career and challenge hypocrisy. Cheers to the ones that do it!


Is it Opr, GK, TP giving H&M this kind of power?  Whoever it is, it does not the change the fact that H&M are being and will continue to be mocked/criticized/ridiculed.  

ETA:  maybe these people are involved as well as the SoHo guy, Nick Jones


----------



## Chanbal

_*Why Our Culture is to Blame for Meghan Markle's Current Persona, with Mike Rowe*_


----------



## bag-mania

Here we go again. Getting paid for speaking engagements about mental health.   

Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco​
Prince Harry made a surprise appearance in San Francisco on Wednesday evening.

The Duke of Sussex, who has called the ritzy Santa Barbara enclave of Montecito home since 2020, spoke on stage at the Presidio Theatre at a tech conference hosted by the Masters of Scale podcast. 

The news was broken Wednesday on Twitter by Financial Times reporter Dave Lee, who revealed that Harry was there to speak about mental health, an issue he has advocated for since his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, inspired him to seek help.

The prince opened up about his personal experience of growing up without a therapist. He reportedly told the audience that during his time in the royal family (or as Harry referred to it, “my previous job”) he never heard the words “therapy” or “coaching,” reported People magazine.

“Then the blinkers came off and his life changed,” tweeted Doron Weber, vice president of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, who was at the conference. 

“I have a coach; I wish I had two,” Harry reportedly added. 

Little is yet known about where Harry may be staying in San Francisco, and it’s unclear if he is joined by Meghan. 

In a recent interview with Variety, Meghan revealed that the couple have adapted quickly to California life and even enjoy its iconic fast-food chain, In-N-Out. 

“There’s one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. It’s really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them. They know our order.”

The Masters of Scale Summit at the Presidio Theatre concludes Thursday evening. Other speakers include Tyra Banks and Bill Gates. 









						Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco
					

The Duke of Sussex was in the Presidio on Wednesday evening.




					www.sfgate.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Does Piers Morgan ring a bell? Allison P. Davis, Sharon Osbourne… It's probably a long list.
> Not everyone has courage to risk his/her career and challenge hypocrisy. Cheers to the ones that do it!


but has anyone challenged her to her face?  she doesn't do interviews with people who will ask hard questions or challenge "her truth"


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it Opr, GK, TP giving H&M this kind of power?  Whoever it is, it does not the change the fact that H&M are being and will continue to be mocked/criticized/ridiculed.
> 
> ETA:  maybe these people are involved as well as the SoHo guy, Nick Jones



I guess they have that kind of power, particularly when supported by media outlets like CNN. This is why I think it's important to support the ones that have courage to denounce them. There are people on Twitter and Reddit doing an excellent work imo.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. Getting paid for speaking engagements about mental health.
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco​
> Prince Harry made a surprise appearance in San Francisco on Wednesday evening.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who has called the ritzy Santa Barbara enclave of Montecito home since 2020, spoke on stage at the Presidio Theatre at a tech conference hosted by the Masters of Scale podcast.
> 
> The news was broken Wednesday on Twitter by Financial Times reporter Dave Lee, who revealed that Harry was there to speak about mental health, an issue he has advocated for since his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, inspired him to seek help.
> 
> The prince opened up about his personal experience of growing up without a therapist. He reportedly told the audience that during his time in the royal family (or as Harry referred to it, “my previous job”) he never heard the words “therapy” or “coaching,” reported People magazine.
> 
> “Then the blinkers came off and his life changed,” tweeted Doron Weber, vice president of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, who was at the conference.
> 
> “I have a coach; I wish I had two,” Harry reportedly added.
> 
> Little is yet known about where Harry may be staying in San Francisco, and it’s unclear if he is joined by Meghan.
> 
> In a recent interview with Variety, Meghan revealed that the couple have adapted quickly to California life and even enjoy its iconic fast-food chain, In-N-Out.
> 
> “There’s one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. It’s really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them. They know our order.”
> 
> The Masters of Scale Summit at the Presidio Theatre concludes Thursday evening. Other speakers include Tyra Banks and Bill Gates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was in the Presidio on Wednesday evening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sfgate.com


It is beyond ludicrious to say you drive hours to go to a fast food place


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The prince opened up about his personal experience of growing up without a therapist. He reportedly told the audience that during his time in the royal family (or as Harry referred to it, “my previous job”) he never heard the words “therapy” or “coaching,” reported People magazine.


What a load of nonsense.  More lies. With his mother?? His brother??  He will say _anything_ to get attention.


----------



## Hyacinth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not the pigeons' fault. If they weren't left to starve in the cities (they are basically abandoned pets) with nothing but completely unsuitable food (and not even enough of this) they wouldn't have this very thin and aggressive so-called starvation stool. As usual, it's humans' fault.
> 
> Ghoul however could choose to, uh, adjust her behaviour.


 
Many are the descendants of escaped dinners. My granny and my mom used to raise them for food during the Great Depression 90 years ago. The constant pooping is probably the pigeons' way of getting even.

The family couldn't afford steak, but they had squab at least once a week.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> It is beyond ludicrious to say you driver hours to go to a fast food place


Oh, look! There is an In-n-Out Burger less than 10 miles from their home. No more driving for hours to get a burger. 

And they're hiring! This is your lucky day, Harry!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> but has anyone challenged her to her face?  she doesn't do interviews with people who will ask hard questions or challenge "her truth"


I believe she gets all questions ahead of time. Spontaneity is not a word associated to TW. As far as I recall, Piers has offered to interview her…   
When people like Whoopi and Don Lemon, who have been TW's supporters, question her stories, it's a good sign imo.


----------



## Mumotons

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. Getting paid for speaking engagements about mental health.
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco​
> Prince Harry made a surprise appearance in San Francisco on Wednesday evening.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who has called the ritzy Santa Barbara enclave of Montecito home since 2020, spoke on stage at the Presidio Theatre at a tech conference hosted by the Masters of Scale podcast.
> 
> The news was broken Wednesday on Twitter by Financial Times reporter Dave Lee, who revealed that Harry was there to speak about mental health, an issue he has advocated for since his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, inspired him to seek help.
> 
> The prince opened up about his personal experience of growing up without a therapist. He reportedly told the audience that during his time in the royal family (or as Harry referred to it, “my previous job”) he never heard the words “therapy” or “coaching,” reported People magazine.
> 
> “Then the blinkers came off and his life changed,” tweeted Doron Weber, vice president of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, who was at the conference.
> 
> “I have a coach; I wish I had two,” Harry reportedly added.
> 
> Little is yet known about where Harry may be staying in San Francisco, and it’s unclear if he is joined by Meghan.
> 
> In a recent interview with Variety, Meghan revealed that the couple have adapted quickly to California life and even enjoy its iconic fast-food chain, In-N-Out.
> 
> “There’s one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. It’s really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them. They know our order.”
> 
> The Masters of Scale Summit at the Presidio Theatre concludes Thursday evening. Other speakers include Tyra Banks and Bill Gates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was in the Presidio on Wednesday evening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sfgate.com


Lies lies lies Harry , if you’re going to lie make sure you cover your tracks


----------



## Chanbal

A couple of more video from the Aussies to help with preserving sanity…


----------



## Hyacinth

papertiger said:


> as I said her likeness was disservice to pigeons the world over.
> 
> I was the one incensed when our Mayor (of London - not City of London) called pigeons "vermin"
> 
> but she's not a phoenix either. A phoenix represents a magical re-birth having been all but extinguished by suffering and sacrifice. Zed is certainly no phoenix.
> 
> There is nothing that you could liken her (or Harry) to in the animal, reptile or insect world that wouldn't suffer by comparison.



She reminds me of what author Robert Ruark wrote about another critter with at least one similar characteristic in his 1965 book "The Honey Badger":

_"There is a bloody brave little animal in Africa called the honey badger. It may be the meanest animal in the world. It kills for malice and for sport, and it does not go for the jugular—it goes straight for the groin. It has a lot in common with the modern American woman."_


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> When people like Whoopi and Don Lemon, who have been TW's supporters, question her stories, it's a good sign imo.


Whoopi and Don are older POC. They can call her out for her shenanigans without getting the backlash that other members of the media would receive if they criticized her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Lady C is inspired today.   She makes some interesting points…



Thanks Lady C and @Chanbal for this video. Someone suggested nicknames, Hank & Skank, for the despicable pair that IMO would also make a novel and interesting blog title.


----------



## mikimoto007

What on earth was that variety interview about? Seeing everything through a lens of love? What is that?

People in happy relationships, do you see everything through a lens of love?


----------



## rose60610

Harry wishes he "had two" therapists?  Well isn't THAT a nice kick in the face to his current therapist!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mikimoto007 said:


> What on earth was that variety interview about? Seeing everything through a lens of love? What is that?
> 
> People in happy relationships, do you see everything through a lens of love?



Doesn't everyone?

Not me.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Doesn't everyone?
> 
> Not me.



perhaps I’m a dried up shrivelled husk of a person….but no….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder through what lense they are looking when they bully staff or terrorize the BRF.


----------



## Suncatcher

Bad timing by markle once again. Bumped off the front page news by much much much bigger news from across the pond.


----------



## bag-mania

Suncatcher said:


> Bad timing by markle once again. Bumped off the front page news by much much much bigger news from across the pond.


She will find a way. Perhaps Meghan will favor us with her ideas on what Britain needs to do to improve its economy. 

When life hands her lemons, Meghan makes lemonade (with the lemons grown in her own garden)!


----------



## Chanbal

mikimoto007 said:


> What on earth was that variety interview about? Seeing everything through a lens of love? What is that?
> 
> People in happy relationships, do you see everything through a lens of love?


I'm trying hard to visualize what she means by seeing "_everything through a lens of love._" The way she treated her father, siblings, courtiers…  I'll get back to you with an answer asap.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *She will find a way. Perhaps Meghan will favor us with her ideas* on what Britain needs to do to improve its economy.
> 
> When life hands her lemons, Meghan makes lemonade (with the lemons grown in her own garden)!


Now that she told us she has a brain, I'm certain that the UK can count on her to solve all problems.


----------



## DL Harper

Suncatcher said:


> Bad timing by markle once again. Bumped off the front page news by much much much bigger news from across the pond.


Maybe this is MM's chance to get her dibs in for the PM position, thinking it will get her one step closer to being Queen of the UK World. After all, she is more qualified than any other breathing human.


----------



## CarryOn2020

DL Harper said:


> Maybe this is MM's chance to get her dibs in for the PM position, thinking it will get her one step closer to being Queen of the UK World. After all, she is more qualified than any other breathing human.


Ooooh, I like the way you think.  Anything to get the disasters outta here!
I have the *love eyes  *


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> To them it's just another day's work.
> 
> M obviously has editorial control or last word.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Why do none of these interviewees/guests challenge her?  Is Spotify letting her cut out the challenges?  If so, the guests should tell us that.  They look as bad as she does.


My DD loves Iliza Schlesinger (I had not heard of her), so she listened to the part of the Paris Hilton episode where she was talking.  She was very disappointed.  She said it was mostly Markle doing the talking, and Schlesinger wasn't her usual smart @ss self.  It was as if it was heavily edited to sound really "serious" when it could have been entertaining. 

How does she manage to make everything boring, even with funny guests with a lot to add to the podcast?  Is it because she is talentless with nothing evenly remotely remarkable or interesting to say?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

mikimoto007 said:


> What on earth was that variety interview about? Seeing everything through a lens of love? What is that?
> 
> People in happy relationships, do you see everything through a lens of love?


Nope! Since I live in the real world, I can interpret various events and situations without confusing the emotions I feel with love. Meanwhile ZedZed lives in Lalaland where the past can be seen through a different lens to be reinterpreted, enhanced or simply fabricated. She is badly in need of ButterCup coaches as much as Dufus and since we know he wants two coaches now, she'll be asking for three at the very least.


----------



## Chanbal

If true…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> My DD loves Iliza Schlesinger (I had not heard of her), so she listened to the part of the Paris Hilton episode where she was talking.  She was very disappointed.  She said it was mostly Markle doing the talking, and Schlesinger wasn't her usual smart @ss self.  It was as if it was heavily edited to sound really "serious" when it could have been entertaining.
> 
> *How does she manage to make everything boring*, even with funny guests with a lot to add to the podcast?  Is it because she is talentless with nothing evenly remotely remarkable or interesting to say?


Now, we know why no one of quality would hire her. Nflix looks really dumb right now.



Maggie Muggins said:


> Nope! Since I live in the real world, I can interpret various events and situations without confusing the emotions I feel with love. Meanwhile ZedZed lives in Lalaland where the past can be seen through a different lens to be reinterpreted, enhanced or simply fabricated. She is badly in need of ButterCup coaches as much as Dufus and since we know he wants two coaches now, she'll be asking for three at the very least.


She sees herself through Daddy’s special filters and magic lighting.  None of it is real, simply Hwood fakery.


----------



## Toby93

Apparently it took a village to take those ridiculous glamour shots


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> If true…



I can't find any news to support this but if it was true, you'd think it would backfire on M


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## tiktok

Toby93 said:


> How does she manage to make everything boring, even with funny guests with a lot to add to the podcast?  *Is it because she is talentless with nothing evenly remotely remarkable or interesting to say?*


Yes.


----------



## xincinsin

scarlet555 said:


> Yeah... this makes me think she didn't leave Deal or no deal by choice  like she says, She probably got fired.... surprise, surprise... and with the royals, she didn't leave them either, she was probably fired too and had to make up a wonderful story of how she wanted her own stuff.... blablabla


In a sense, they fired themselves. When the RF rejected their half-in/half-out scam and they chose all out, it counts as a resignation.


papertiger said:


> If you wanna be an actor, you're an actor. Does it matter if your role has a name or not?  Deal or No Deal, suitcase #24 or 'Barbara'. Everyone knows you're just playing a role.


She can't get the whole concept that in acting, the awards are given for being able to portray a character. She just wants to be a star, a celebrity, enjoy adulation for being herself. 


LittleStar88 said:


> Just resurfacing on the Variety interview... These thoughts are swirling in my head. Dumping them here.
> 
> The opening for some reason really gets me:
> 
> _That morning, the Duchess of Sussex, known more commonly by her maiden name, Meghan Markle, sped past a group of 60-something women who’d made the trek to Montecito to celebrate a milestone birthday_.
> 
> Why mention their age group? How is that important? She waves to them from the golf cart like some budget pageant contestant? She must get a boner from people fawning over her.
> 
> View attachment 5635595
> 
> 
> Why do most of the pictures obscure the beauty of the scenery behind her with cheap fabric?


Having never been to Montecito, I have to ask: Why do people go there for milestone birthdays? People zip around there on golf carts? How the heck would she know anything about those women if she sped past them?

The cheap fabric? I'd assume the shoot stylist figured out that with Bimbo's lack of star quality, if there was a fight for attention, the scenery would win. So they have to use fabric backdrops and soft focus to keep the attention on fake teeth, fake lashes and fake hair.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. Getting paid for speaking engagements about mental health.
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco​
> Prince Harry made a surprise appearance in San Francisco on Wednesday evening.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who has called the ritzy Santa Barbara enclave of Montecito home since 2020, spoke on stage at the Presidio Theatre at a tech conference hosted by the Masters of Scale podcast.
> 
> The news was broken Wednesday on Twitter by Financial Times reporter Dave Lee, who revealed that Harry was there to speak about mental health, an issue he has advocated for since his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, inspired him to seek help.
> 
> The prince opened up about his personal experience of growing up without a therapist. He reportedly told the audience that during his time in the royal family (or as Harry referred to it, “my previous job”) he never heard the words “therapy” or “coaching,” reported People magazine.
> 
> “Then the blinkers came off and his life changed,” tweeted Doron Weber, vice president of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, who was at the conference.
> 
> “I have a coach; I wish I had two,” Harry reportedly added.
> 
> Little is yet known about where Harry may be staying in San Francisco, and it’s unclear if he is joined by Meghan.
> 
> In a recent interview with Variety, Meghan revealed that the couple have adapted quickly to California life and even enjoy its iconic fast-food chain, In-N-Out.
> 
> “There’s one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. It’s really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them. They know our order.”
> 
> The Masters of Scale Summit at the Presidio Theatre concludes Thursday evening. Other speakers include Tyra Banks and Bill Gates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was in the Presidio on Wednesday evening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sfgate.com


Because everyone who is anyone has a therapist of course. Poor deprived puppet! He suffered mental abuse while his wench was deprived adequate nutrition.


----------



## CobaltBlu

If I paid for a thing and the Palm Tree Plumber Prince of Despair showed up unannounced and started blathering on I would not be happy. Oh no sir.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmm, BillG is there.  Go, MM, go.  Seize this day. True love


----------



## youngster

So, Harry never heard the words "therapy" or "coaching" when he was working his "previous job".

Has it not been well documented that he was very active in Will and Kate's mental health charity, Heads Together, for years?  Has it also not been documented that Harry did indeed go into therapy as a young man (and it was William who suggested it)?  What is going on with him?  Now he needs _two_ coaches?  One isn't enough?  He keeps the one coach so busy with his endless phone calls and whine sessions that he needs a second?  No wonder he hasn't produced anything for Spotify or for Netflix in 3 years.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> So, Harry never heard the words "therapy" or "coaching" when he was working his "previous job".
> 
> Has it not been well documented that he was very active in Will and Kate's mental health charity, Heads Together, for years?  Has it also not been documented that Harry did indeed go into therapy as a young man (and it was William who suggested it)?  What is going on with him?  Now he needs _two_ coaches?  One isn't enough?  He keeps the one coach so busy with his endless phone calls and whine sessions that he needs a second?  No wonder he hasn't produced anything for Spotify or for Netflix in 3 years.


Ohhhhh, I know! He will blame it on a culture difference if he is challenged! He will claim that across the pond, they don't use the words "therapy" and "coaching"! They use other words! It was his American wife that clued him in with her superior intellect!

I might try my hand at writing comedy about a dufus prince and his flipflop wife, but then I'd have to hire these dimwits because Zedzee pronounced that actual actors would be insulted to play a dumbo and his bimbo.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> Having never been to Montecito, I have to ask: Why do people go there for milestone birthdays? People zip around there on golf carts? How the heck would she know anything about those women if she sped past them?
> 
> The cheap fabric? I'd assume the shoot stylist figured out that with Bimbo's lack of star quality, if there was a fight for attention, the scenery would win. So they have to use fabric backdrops and soft focus to keep the attention on fake teeth, fake lashes and fake hair.



The resort is suuuuuuper nice. $3000 per night for the cheapest bungalow. You can go there just for dining, so maybe it’s a place where you go to “see and be seen”.


----------



## LittleStar88

And another has come to call her on her lies and insults…









						Another Deal or No Deal briefcase girl slams Meghan's 'bimbo' comments
					

Patricia Kara, 50, starred alongside Meghan, 41, as one of the Deal or No Deal briefcase girls in season two of the NBC game show, which the Duchess of Sussex featured in for 34 episodes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it Opr, GK, TP giving H&M this kind of power?  Whoever it is, it does not the change the fact that H&M are being and will continue to be mocked/criticized/ridiculed.
> 
> ETA:  maybe these people are involved as well as the SoHo guy, Nick Jones



I think these people are dangerous.  They are misleading people and diverting them away from trained professionals that could help them.  These little meetings are nothing more than back patting sessions for them.  The idea that Henry Mountbatten-Windsor could help another person achieve success or their life goals is more than laughable. It is tragic.  I don't think he can tie his shoe laces unless he gets help.  Apparently his wife think he needs to be lead around and pushed into position like a puppet.  Even Charlie McCarthy had more interesting things to say and more get up and go than the Henry puppet. And his clothes were a lot nicer.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> In a sense, they fired themselves. When the RF rejected their half-in/half-out scam and they chose all out, it counts as a resignation.
> 
> She can't get the whole concept that in acting, the awards are given for being able to portray a character. She just wants to be a star, a celebrity, enjoy adulation for being herself.
> 
> Having never been to Montecito, I have to ask: Why do people go there for milestone birthdays? People zip around there on golf carts? How the heck would she know anything about those women if she sped past them?
> 
> The cheap fabric? I'd assume the shoot stylist figured out that with Bimbo's lack of star quality, if there was a fight for attention, the scenery would win. So they have to use fabric backdrops and soft focus to keep the attention on fake teeth, fake lashes and fake hair.


The area is pretty and it is nice to drive there for a day or the weekend.  It's more dignified a celebration than going to Lost Wages.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Apparently it took a village to take those ridiculous glamour shots
> 
> 
> View attachment 5635777



She is trying to age down and come off as an ingenue.  She past that sell by date a while ago just like she did the with the term young mother.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> She is trying to age down and come off as an ingenue.  She past that sell by date a while ago just like she did the with the term young mother.


"young mother": another term which she is hijacking and mangling to fit her purposes. Some enterprising person will come out with the Markle Dictionary (or The World According to Markle).


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Another Deal or No Deal briefcase girl slams Meghan's 'bimbo' comments
					

Patricia Kara, 50, starred alongside Meghan, 41, as one of the Deal or No Deal briefcase girls in season two of the NBC game show, which the Duchess of Sussex featured in for 34 episodes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I can't find any news to support this but if it was true, you'd think it would backfire on M


It looks like TW is not happy with Allison P Davis … Though, the Cut article was brilliant.   










						Meghan Markle hits back at THAT controversial interview with The Cut
					

The 41-year-old opened up about controversy surrounding her August cover interview with New York Magazine's The Cut in a new chat with Variety magazine.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lodpah

The narcissists prayer: That didn't happen. And if it did, it wasn't that bad. And if it was, that's not a big deal. And if it is, that's not my fault. And if it was, I didn't mean it. And if I did, YOU DESERVED IT.

Unknown author.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> If true…




Oh most certainly the rumours are true. It wouldn't be her first phonecall to get someone fired, would it.


----------



## papertiger

DL Harper said:


> Maybe this is MM's chance to get her dibs in for the PM position, thinking it will get her one step closer to being Queen of the UK World. After all, she is more qualified than any other breathing human.



Are we sure she's human?


----------



## pukasonqo

LittleStar88 said:


> And another has come to call her on her lies and insults…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another Deal or No Deal briefcase girl slams Meghan's 'bimbo' comments
> 
> 
> Patricia Kara, 50, starred alongside Meghan, 41, as one of the Deal or No Deal briefcase girls in season two of the NBC game show, which the Duchess of Sussex featured in for 34 episodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


MM had a choice, if the show was so demeaning and she felt like an object then she could have said no
I am sure the producers would’ve been devastated to lose such a prize but principles are principles


----------



## xincinsin

pukasonqo said:


> MM had a choice, if the show was so demeaning and she felt like an object then she could have said no
> I am sure the producers would’ve been devastated to lose such a prize but principles are principles


Maybe if they had paid her more and stuffed her into a suitcase as the ultimate prize, she would have felt $$$valued.


----------



## EmilyM11

CarryOn2020 said:


> What a load of nonsense.  More lies. With his mother?? His brother??  He will say _anything_ to get attention.
> 
> View attachment 5635667





bag-mania said:


> Here we go again. Getting paid for speaking engagements about mental health.
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco​
> Prince Harry made a surprise appearance in San Francisco on Wednesday evening.
> 
> The Duke of Sussex, who has called the ritzy Santa Barbara enclave of Montecito home since 2020, spoke on stage at the Presidio Theatre at a tech conference hosted by the Masters of Scale podcast.
> 
> The news was broken Wednesday on Twitter by Financial Times reporter Dave Lee, who revealed that Harry was there to speak about mental health, an issue he has advocated for since his wife Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, inspired him to seek help.
> 
> The prince opened up about his personal experience of growing up without a therapist. He reportedly told the audience that during his time in the royal family (or as Harry referred to it, “my previous job”) he never heard the words “therapy” or “coaching,” reported People magazine.
> 
> “Then the blinkers came off and his life changed,” tweeted Doron Weber, vice president of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, who was at the conference.
> 
> “I have a coach; I wish I had two,” Harry reportedly added.
> 
> Little is yet known about where Harry may be staying in San Francisco, and it’s unclear if he is joined by Meghan.
> 
> In a recent interview with Variety, Meghan revealed that the couple have adapted quickly to California life and even enjoy its iconic fast-food chain, In-N-Out.
> 
> “There’s one at the halfway point between L.A. and our neck of the woods. It’s really fun to go through the drive-thru and surprise them. They know our order.”
> 
> The Masters of Scale Summit at the Presidio Theatre concludes Thursday evening. Other speakers include Tyra Banks and Bill Gates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry makes surprise appearance in San Francisco
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex was in the Presidio on Wednesday evening.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sfgate.com


I know I always moan here but it’s all about seeing a celebrity. They could bring him in a cage or something and everybody would be equally excited. You want to hear real mental health journey? Talk to people who came from hell to be somebody in life. People coming from other, non privileged backgrounds. They beat poverty, immature parents, addicted parents, abusive parents etc and make it in life to have a career, family and self worth. Not a man child and his opportunist wife. I get too stressed reading news like that.


----------



## DL Harper

papertiger said:


> Are we sure she's human?


Good point!  We all know about assumptions.  My error.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> She is trying to age down and come off as an ingenue.  She past that sell by date a while ago just like she did the with the term young mother.


As a comment on the modern plastic fantastic (term borrowed from Grace Slick) society, I count 12 people to take what is supposed to look like an effortless photo, no wonder people go into therapy worrying about their bodies
ps if you think of MM growing up thinking she was not pretty and doing all the surgeries


----------



## BittyMonkey

EmilyM111 said:


> I know I always moan here but it’s all about seeing a celebrity. They could bring him in a cage or something and everybody would be equally excited. You want to hear real mental health journey? Talk to people who came from hell to be somebody in life. People coming from other, non privileged backgrounds. They beat poverty, immature parents, addicted parents, abusive parents etc and make it in life to have a career, family and self worth. Not a man child and his opportunist wife. I get too stressed reading news like that.


I'm here. I didn't even know he was here. And if I did the only degree to which I would care is if any traffic on the freeway was impacted.


----------



## Toby93

Looks like Bouzy is still her biggest stan


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh most certainly the rumours are true. It wouldn't be her first phonecall to get someone fired, would it.


My 2 cents on the subject:
I believe there were very unhappy phone calls from the Palace of the 16 Toilets to The Cut, but I don't think Allison P Davis was fired. The Cut wouldn't probably go that far. I would bet on a 'mutual agreeable suspension/sabbatical' between the author and the magazine to calm down the nerves of TW. The post on twitter from the author informing about her absence from the magazine would be part of such agreement…


----------



## Stansy

youngster said:


> So, Harry never heard the words "therapy" or "coaching" when he was working his "previous job".
> 
> Has it not been well documented that he was very active in Will and Kate's mental health charity, Heads Together, for years?  Has it also not been documented that Harry did indeed go into therapy as a young man (and it was William who suggested it)?  What is going on with him?  Now he needs _two_ coaches?  One isn't enough?  He keeps the one coach so busy with his endless phone calls and whine sessions that he needs a second?  No wonder he hasn't produced anything for Spotify or for Netflix in 3 years.


Harry is probably the most prominent handbag in the world - so of course he needs more than one COACH!
sorry, I could not help myself, we are on the purseforum after all


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> Looks like Bouzy is still her biggest stan



He and NYP! This is apparently related to the Bimbo (podcast)…


	

		
			
		

		
	
(Source: Reddit)








						Meghan Markle did oral sex scene on ‘90210’ two years after leaving ‘Deal or No Deal’ ‘bimbo’ gig
					

The former Duchess of Sussex may have had an issue being a briefcase babe, but she didn’t seem to have any reservations about doing a raunchy scene on “90210.”




					nypost.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I found something that's nearly as annoying as The Troublesome Two: doing my taxes. I swear next year I'm paying an accountant instead of thinking I have better ways to waste money.


----------



## bag-mania

pukasonqo said:


> MM had a choice, if the show was so demeaning and she felt like an object then she could have said no
> I am sure the producers would’ve been devastated to lose such a prize but principles are principles


The truth is Meghan was frustrated with the job because she was just one of 26 pretty women, dressed identically, holding a suitcase. She didn’t stand out in any way from the others around her and she couldn’t bear it. It wasn’t an acting job, it was a modeling gig.

The absolute worst thing that can happen in Meghan’s world is she has to blend in with everyone else and make an effort not to be noticed.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Lets be honest - Meghan talking about Deal or no Deal has no purpose beyond reminding people that she was pretty enough to get a job that cast models like Claudia Jordan and Chrissy Tiegen.  What's the term for a humble brag that shows no humility?  Can I suggest "Archetypes host"?


----------



## Chanbal

An interesting view on TW's last ventures …   

_But I think the biggest takeaway from both the Variety and The Cut pieces is this: *Meghan really has nothing to say.* Take away her royal journey, take away her titled in-laws and those nasty British press who failed to be impressed by her scribbling on bananas and the miserable time she had for 20 months of Palace-dom, take away her rote lines about compassion and change and the Duchess is a meaning-free zone.
There is an unmistakeable irony to the fact that, if she had not married the Queen’s grandson, it is highly doubtful that anyone would be clamouring to hear her point of view.

Also – she’s just not very interesting. In this piece we learn that she likes wine and Wordle and Beyonce. Well, hold the front page! What the Variety and The Cut stories prove is that the Duchess of Sussex might be one of the most famous women in the world but she is also quite boring._



			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/bizarre-interview-where-meghan-refuses-to-call-harry-by-his-name/news-story/fec03cd996552154ec51f748b3d0ac1c


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> The truth is Meghan was frustrated with the job because she was just one of 26 pretty women, dressed identically, holding a suitcase. She didn’t stand out in any way from the others around her and she couldn’t bear it. It wasn’t an acting job, it was a modeling gig.
> 
> The absolute worst thing that can happen in Meghan’s world is she has to blend in with everyone else and make an effort not to be noticed.



I think you're spot on. That is EXACTLY what rubbed her the wrong way.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Looks like Bouzy is still her biggest stan



Another Carolina Herrera mistake - too voluminous for her, it takes Karlie Kloss to carry off all the fabric


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> An interesting view on TW's last ventures …
> 
> _But I think the biggest takeaway from both the Variety and The Cut pieces is this: *Meghan really has nothing to say.* Take away her royal journey, take away her titled in-laws and those nasty British press who failed to be impressed by her scribbling on bananas and the miserable time she had for 20 months of Palace-dom, take away her rote lines about compassion and change and the Duchess is a meaning-free zone.
> There is an unmistakeable irony to the fact that, if she had not married the Queen’s grandson, it is highly doubtful that anyone would be clamouring to hear her point of view.
> 
> Also – she’s just not very interesting. In this piece we learn that she likes wine and Wordle and Beyonce. Well, hold the front page! What the Variety and The Cut stories prove is that the Duchess of Sussex might be one of the most famous women in the world but she is also quite boring._
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/bizarre-interview-where-meghan-refuses-to-call-harry-by-his-name/news-story/fec03cd996552154ec51f748b3d0ac1c


Nothing to say ? or rather, she chooses to edit out/censor/downplay the non BRF part of her life


----------



## Chanbal

Cheers to Valentine Low


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Choose wisely, Harry. You can always buy the kids if the price is right.


----------



## Chanbal

I just added this one to my long list of videos to watch…


----------



## WillstarveforLV

bag-mania said:


> The truth is Meghan was frustrated with the job because she was just one of 26 pretty women, dressed identically, holding a suitcase. She didn’t stand out in any way from the others around her and she couldn’t bear it. It wasn’t an acting job, it was a modeling gig.
> 
> The absolute worst thing that can happen in Meghan’s world is she has to blend in with everyone else and *make an effort not to be noticed.*


I guess that is why she did that stint on Ellen....I mean the squatting , the sucking from the baby bottle, doing kitten motions, I mean if she thinks Deal or No Deal made her look like a bimbo....


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> Looks like Bouzy is still her biggest stan



Quote from a tweeter: 
For some reason this pose is reminding me to wipe from the front to the back. Idk?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

WillstarveforLV said:


> I guess that is why she did that stint on Ellen....I mean the squatting , the sucking from the baby bottle, doing kitten motions, I mean if she thinks Deal or No Deal made her look like a bimbo....


But she was the center of attention so it was worth it!


----------



## Chanbal

This is serious…


----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think you're spot on. That is EXACTLY what rubbed her the wrong way.


For sure. While she was growing up as daddy’s little princess, she was told she was one in a million.  When she got out in the big bad real world, she realized she was really just one of a million.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> This is serious…



... and ridiculous-I mean who listens to these people?


----------



## csshopper

October 4th it was announced that Mememe/Archewell Foundation had employed Nicole Pasulka as a “Fact Checker” for the Archetypes podcast series. Maybe Nicole hasn’t started yet? If she is on the job, she’s already a boob for missing the lie about the “padded bra station.” And on and on it goes.

News flashes bombarding the media about Raptor’s “re branding” herself. Could there be any more declarative statement about being for sale? Maybe someone at Handbag’s Buttercup Co could help her examine the implications? She put herself in the same commercialization context as products like “Aunt Jemima Syrup”. In 1889 the pancake syrup with that label was first sold. In 2021 the Pepsico Company rebranded the Syrup, changing the graphics, and it’s now marketed as “Pearl Milling Company.” The outside changed, inside it’s still the same “corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, water, cellulose gum, caramel color, salt, sodium benzoate, sorbic acid, sodium hexametaphosphate“ product it’s always been.

Raptor can change her hair, her make up, alter her skin tones, continue to have plastic surgeries, drape herself in multi fashion labels, photo shop herself ad nauseum, toss word salads until the piles of garbage are knee deep around her,  but none of it will change the rot inside. Only the outside will have altered in hopes of better marketing.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


>




Somehow, I'd rather be markled than candled.


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> ... and ridiculous-I mean who listens to these people?


They are apparently cashing in on coaching, so I would think plenty of people… unfortunately.


----------



## Chanbal

V0N1B2 said:


> For sure. While she was growing up as daddy’s little princess, she was told she was one in a million.  When she got out in the big bad real world, she realized she was really just one of a million.


Just one of eight billions, I'm afraid.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Cheers to Valentine Low




I celebrate everyone standing up to the bullies and doing exactly what they had planned before being threatened. But also...what where they so afraid of to come out? It is not even a book on the Sussexes.


----------



## Helventara

Ok a bit mean but I was looking at this poster and I thought the smile reminds me of someone


----------



## Aminamina

Helventara said:


> Ok a bit mean but I was looking at this poster and I thought the smile reminds me of someone
> 
> View attachment 5636356


This, after so much effort put into trying to imitate Andie McDowell’s charachter and facial expressions in particular from “4 weddings and a funeral”! Isn’t it ironic, don’t you think?


----------



## sgj99

If the book is even close to being as nasty as the OW interview I hope the King strips them of their titles.  I don’t think KC would actually do it but it would be so deserved by those ungrateful wretches.


----------



## charlottawill

Helventara said:


> Ok a bit mean but I was looking at this poster and I thought the smile reminds me of someone
> 
> View attachment 5636356


The resemblance is striking.


----------



## oldbag

Helventara said:


> Ok a bit mean but I was looking at this poster and I thought the smile reminds me of someone
> 
> View attachment 5636356


Well thanks a lot, now I can never unsee it. I also scared myself watching the trailer. Thank goodness I am not known for smiling. The resemblance is uncanny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sgj99 said:


> If the book is even close to being as nasty as the OW interview I hope the King strips them of their titles.*  I don’t think KC would actually do it but it would be so deserved by those ungrateful wretches.*


He might if their b!tching and moaning diminishes the monarchy. Charles didn’t wait 75 years to become king to have the title become meaningless because his whiny son and his wife destroyed the “brand.”


----------



## Aimee3

bag-mania said:


> The truth is Meghan was frustrated with the job because she was just one of 26 pretty women, dressed identically, holding a suitcase. She didn’t stand out in any way from the others around her and she couldn’t bear it. It wasn’t an acting job, it was a modeling gig.
> 
> The absolute worst thing that can happen in Meghan’s world is she has to blend in with everyone else and make an effort not to be noticed.


Not only that, but she wasn’t in the front row, but ALL THE WAY IN THE LAST ROW IN THE BACK!!!


----------



## Helventara

oldbag said:


> Well thanks a lot, now I can never unsee it. I also scared myself watching the trailer. Thank goodness I am not known for smiling. The resemblance is uncanny.


So sorry!  I scared myself with the trailer too and I keep on wishing ppl post so that we skip a page and I don’t have to see this poster anymore.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Not only that, but she wasn’t in the front row, but ALL THE WAY IN THE LAST ROW IN THE BACK!!!


Yeah, from what I can tell she always carried suitcase #24 out of 26. The contestants and viewers couldn’t appreciate how smart she was from all the way back there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> This is serious…



I just have to ask.  Do grown men really sit like that?  One foot on top of the other?  At a professional event?  Imo it does not look that comfortable.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just have to ask.  Do grown men really sit like that?  One foot on top of the other?  At a professional event?  Imo it does not look that comfortable.


Ha....does look odd and a bit child-like
When I see men in public - like on a talk show - I prefer they have either both feet on the floor or cross the foot across the knee - don't like them to cross legs at knee like a woman.  Not that it's any of my business


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just have to ask.  Do grown men really sit like that?  One foot on top of the other?  At a professional event?  Imo it does not look that comfortable.


I hadn't noticed that.   It certainly doesn't look professional.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just have to ask.  Do grown men really sit like that?  One foot on top of the other?  At a professional event?  Imo it does not look that comfortable.


Maybe he’s unconsciously trying to scrape chicken **** off his shoes? He’s such a doofus he might have forgotten to wipe his feet after TW sent him out to gather eggs for breakfast.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if she means TW wouldn't have met her bimbo soulmate…   (It's a long article, link below)


_In retrospect, such flaunting of her assets was clearly an offence to Meghan’s high-brow ambitions. After all, *she points out in her latest podcast, she was a woman who had studied international relations at Northwestern University on the outskirts of Chicago, adding: ‘There were times when I was on set at Deal Or No Deal and I was thinking back to my time as an intern at the U.S. Embassy in Argentina, in Buenos Aires, and being in the motorcade with the Secretary of the Treasury at the time and being valued specifically for my brain.* Here I was being valued for something quite the opposite.’
This account is technically correct but significantly over-eggs her actual role. *She owed her six-week foreign internship at the U.S. State Department to her uncle, Mick Markle, who did communications systems work for the US government.
At the embassy in Buenos Aires, however, far from hob-nobbing with the bigwigs, she toiled as a humble junior press officer, answering phones and filing. *According to biographer Andrew Morton, *she only got permission to join the motorcade to collect U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill from the airport because it was her 21st birthday and not necessarily ‘for [her] brain’.* *While out in Argentina, she sat the entrance exam to enter the U.S. diplomatic service, but failed.*
But her ambitions were evident to everyone on the set of Deal Or No Deal._









						Meghan’s co-star: If it wasn’t for ‘bimbo’ role she wouldn’t have met Prince Harry
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk
				





			archive.ph


----------



## oldbag

Helventara said:


> So sorry!  I scared myself with the trailer too and I keep on wishing ppl post so that we skip a page and I don’t have to see this poster anymore.


Don't worry about it. I live up to my Chines zodiac, the rabbit. I'm easily startled and movies like that scare me. My DH delights in referring to me as a rabbit.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder how much Nefl*x pays for the advertisement… And of course, milking the UK title.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just have to ask.  Do grown men really sit like that?  One foot on top of the other?  At a professional event?  Imo it does not look that comfortable.


That can be painful over time. Is he perhaps using it as a pressure point to reduce stress and anxiety?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I wonder how much Nefl*x pays for the advertisement… And of course, milking the UK title.



You know she was paid to say that it was one of Archie‘s favorite shows. She’s not giving away endorsements for free.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if she means TW wouldn't have met her bimbo soulmate…   (It's a long article, link below)
> View attachment 5636464
> 
> _In retrospect, such flaunting of her assets was clearly an offence to Meghan’s high-brow ambitions. After all, *she points out in her latest podcast, she was a woman who had studied international relations at Northwestern University on the outskirts of Chicago, adding: ‘There were times when I was on set at Deal Or No Deal and I was thinking back to my time as an intern at the U.S. Embassy in Argentina, in Buenos Aires, and being in the motorcade with the Secretary of the Treasury at the time and being valued specifically for my brain.* Here I was being valued for something quite the opposite.’
> This account is technically correct but significantly over-eggs her actual role. *She owed her six-week foreign internship at the U.S. State Department to her uncle, Mick Markle, who did communications systems work for the US government.
> At the embassy in Buenos Aires, however, far from hob-nobbing with the bigwigs, she toiled as a humble junior press officer, answering phones and filing. *According to biographer Andrew Morton, *she only got permission to join the motorcade to collect U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill from the airport because it was her 21st birthday and not necessarily ‘for [her] brain’.* *While out in Argentina, she sat the entrance exam to enter the U.S. diplomatic service, but failed.*
> But her ambitions were evident to everyone on the set of Deal Or No Deal._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan’s co-star: If it wasn’t for ‘bimbo’ role she wouldn’t have met Prince Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


I hope she didn’t think the cavalcade was done to celebrate her intelligence 
TBH being in a cavalcade is like being a prop in a school play: you are one of many
I give her props for her immense ability to turn everything into a celebration of herself


----------



## purseinsanity

mikimoto007 said:


> What on earth was that variety interview about? Seeing everything through a lens of love? What is that?
> 
> People in happy relationships, do you see everything through a lens of love?


I personally see everything through my contacts and reading glasses 

People in love don’t have to go around constantly telling everyone they’re in love


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

Maggie Muggins said:


> Somehow, I'd rather be markled than candled.


If they go back for the coronation, they can expect to be candled but not coddled


----------



## mikimoto007

purseinsanity said:


> I personally see everything through my contacts and reading glasses
> 
> People in love don’t have to go around constantly telling everyone they’re in love


 They don’t mention their love story? But how do other people connect with them? Have they peeled back the layers of their definition of love? Is it textured and meaningful and nuanced?

Has anyone seen the episode of Friends where Joey finds the thesaurus on the laptop? “I love you with my full sized cardiac pump.” I feel like she talks like that. She desperately needs an editor.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Apparently it took a village to take those ridiculous glamour shots
> 
> 
> View attachment 5635777



I mean...I think we all know TW is anything BUT a 40 year old virgin.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Looks like Bouzy is still her biggest stan



Lots of comments about her photoshopped feet!  Sure enough...


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> For sure. While she was growing up as daddy’s little princess, she was told she was one in a million.  When she got out in the big bad real world, she realized *she was really just one of a million.*


Or one of 8 billion, as of 2022.
You ain't nothin' special Megalomaniac.

I'm still amazed at her In N Out BS:  They surprise them by going through the drive though and they know their order?  What?  Are their headshots posted inside?  Such crap!  Her ego is really beyond.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Just one of eight billions, I'm afraid.


You beat me to it!


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I personally see everything through my contacts and reading glasses
> 
> People in love don’t have to go around constantly telling everyone they’re in love





One of the times the lens cracked?


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> Lots of comments about her photoshopped feet!  Sure enough...


So funny, I noticed lots of bare feet in the article and thought she was trying to disprove her earlier comments about her gnarly feet, which don't look gnarly at all in this spread. So photoshopped... lol


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> So funny, I noticed lots of bare feet in the article and thought she was trying to disprove her earlier comments about her gnarly feet, which don't look gnarly at all in this spread. So photoshopped... lol


I don’t get it … if I had ugly feet, I would wear pumps, crop the feet out of the shot, not demand my feet be airbrushed in sandals
She is forever barefoot in all photos  !!?!!! Why go there ??? 
Come on Louboutin, Manolo pumps work miracles for the few minutes of a fashion shoot


----------



## xincinsin

Charitable thought of the week: we know Zedzee has an extremely poor memory despite being "whip-smart" and "valued for her brain". She needs emails to remind her of important incidents in her life - like her contribution to Funding Freebies. It is likely a main factor in her failure as a Z-actress. Just think about it: why else would she deliberately commit perjury?  

But I digress  What I mean to say is: maybe the bra padding/eyelash thickening/hair extending stations were somewhere else and not at Deal or No Deal? The poor wench is misremembering! Could it have been before a courtesan gig on the high seas or at SoHo House?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I don’t get it … if I had ugly feet, I would wear pumps, crop the feet out of the shot, not demand my feet be airbrushed in sandals
> She is forever barefoot in all photos  !!?!!! Why go there ???
> Come on Louboutin, Manolo pumps work miracles for the few minutes of a fashion shoot


True, perhaps those companies do not want her to ‘steal’ their shoes.  Ya kno, some people think those props belong to them.

If I touch it, it is mine.
If I see it, it is mine.
If I wear, it is mine.
If you see it, it is mine.
If you touch it, it is mine.
If they give it to you, it is mine, mine, mine


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> People in love don’t have to go around constantly telling everyone they’re in love


This is so true! In fact it’s sometimes an indicator of the opposite. I’ve noticed that when you see a woman who is suddenly barraging Facebook with lots of lovey-dovey posts about her husband, there’s a good chance there’s trouble in paradise.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> You know she was paid to say that it was one of Archie‘s favorite shows. She’s not giving away endorsements for free.


Of course not. Don't we all remember the wise words of TW's mother.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> I don’t get it … if I had ugly feet, I would wear pumps, crop the feet out of the shot, not demand my feet be airbrushed in sandals
> She is forever barefoot in all photos  !!?!!! Why go there ???
> Come on Louboutin, Manolo pumps work miracles for the few minutes of a fashion shoot


ITA.  I do have ugly feet and I've found Hermes Orans actually work wonders to make my feet look smaller and actually hide most of my surgical scars and imperfections.  Thank God I live in CA, where I can wear them almost year round.  A nice shoe and pedicure goes a long way!


----------



## Hyacinth

mikimoto007 said:


> They don’t mention their love story? But how do other people connect with them? Have they peeled back the layers of their definition of love? Is it textured and meaningful and nuanced?
> 
> Has anyone seen the episode of Friends where Joey finds the thesaurus on the laptop? “I love you with my full sized cardiac pump.” I feel like she talks like that. She desperately needs an editor.



And if Hank and Skank are Soooooooo Much In Lurve, why, in all the candid unposed photos of them together, does Mister Grumpy McGrumpyPants always look like he's ready to yank someone's still-beating heart out and eat it? Is that what Love looks like? If so, I'll pass, thank you very much.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

TW is featured in a new book about restaurant customers …    



*Waiting on Meghan Markle and her handler turned out to be a royal pain for Michael Cecchi-Azzolina, maitre d’ at NYC’s Michelin-starred restaurant Le Coucou in 2017.*_ His head reservationist passed him a note about an “irate” woman who had dropped the “*I’m bringing in royalty*” card *and demanded a private table*, something the restaurant could not accommodate. 

“*She said, ‘It’s for someone who is dating a prince*,’ ” Cecchi-Azzolina recalled, telling The Post that the handler copped an attitude when told the restaurant could not keep adjacent tables open. “I said, ‘I still don’t have a private table for you.’ ” He suggested a corner table instead and the woman finally acquiesced. 

“They came in with an attitude,” Cecchi-Azzolina said, of the duo showing up 20 minutes before their reservation. After welcoming them to have a drink with the commoners at the

“*Are you aware my guest is dating Prince Harry and about to be a duchess?”* Cecchi-Azzolina writes in his forthcoming book, “Your Table Is Ready,” out December 6. “ ‘Don’t you have a private area for us to wait?’ My first impulse was to laugh. *I could give two s–ts about Prince Harry’s date, and by the attention the escort was drawing from the crowd at the bar, nor did anyone else.”* 

Cecchi-Azzolina recalled that *Markle, meanwhile, “didn’t say a word,” while her handler threw a fit that the table wasn’t ready before their reservation time, describing the actress-turned-royal as “aloof.*” A rep for Markle did not return a request for comment._









						These celebrities are a restaurantu2019s worst nightmare: u2018They think they own the worldu2019u00a0
					

Playing the “royal card,” calling the hostess “a hooker” and stiffing a $3,000 tab — it’s all in a night out for these bad boldfacers.




					nypost.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Of course not. Don't we all remember the wise words of TW's mother.



I don’t even mind that she’s plugging a kids’ show that her son has probably never seen. She’s allowed to make money. It’s her continual use of the duchess title to promote herself that ticks me off the most after all she’s put Harry’s family through.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Snickering. I read the Sussex Squad attacked Whoopi and said she wasn't beautiful, and that's why she couldn't understand Zedzee's anguish at being objectified for her exterior (fake) assets.

One of the clickbaits that pop up on my screen is from Zergnet and promises to show me what Zedzee looks like sans make-up. I have not given them the click.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Of course not. Don't we all remember the wise words of TW's mother.



The start of merching Archie? Haven’t they already accumulated domain names for the children, think I read that somewhere?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



Why this obsession with the sleeveless trench coat style dresses? 



Article from June, 2021:


			https://www.vogue.com.au/fashion/trends/is-the-trench-coat-meghan-markles-signature-onduty-item/image-gallery/045ac2b3c5c137ea8350765e18c5c01c


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> I don’t get it … if I had ugly feet, I would wear pumps, crop the feet out of the shot, not demand my feet be airbrushed in sandals
> She is forever barefoot in all photos  !!?!!! Why go there ???
> Come on Louboutin, Manolo pumps work miracles for the few minutes of a fashion shoot


There's ugly, and then there's Meggsy's gnarled appendages


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> TW is featured in a new book about restaurant customers …
> View attachment 5636574
> 
> 
> *Waiting on Meghan Markle and her handler turned out to be a royal pain for Michael Cecchi-Azzolina, maitre d’ at NYC’s Michelin-starred restaurant Le Coucou in 2017.*_ His head reservationist passed him a note about an “irate” woman who had dropped the “*I’m bringing in royalty*” card *and demanded a private table*, something the restaurant could not accommodate.
> 
> “*She said, ‘It’s for someone who is dating a prince*,’ ” Cecchi-Azzolina recalled, telling The Post that the handler copped an attitude when told the restaurant could not keep adjacent tables open. “I said, ‘I still don’t have a private table for you.’ ” He suggested a corner table instead and the woman finally acquiesced.
> 
> “They came in with an attitude,” Cecchi-Azzolina said, of the duo showing up 20 minutes before their reservation. After welcoming them to have a drink with the commoners at the
> 
> “*Are you aware my guest is dating Prince Harry and about to be a duchess?”* Cecchi-Azzolina writes in his forthcoming book, “Your Table Is Ready,” out December 6. “ ‘Don’t you have a private area for us to wait?’ My first impulse was to laugh. *I could give two s–ts about Prince Harry’s date, and by the attention the escort was drawing from the crowd at the bar, nor did anyone else.”*
> 
> Cecchi-Azzolina recalled that *Markle, meanwhile, “didn’t say a word,” while her handler threw a fit that the table wasn’t ready before their reservation time, describing the actress-turned-royal as “aloof.*” A rep for Markle did not return a request for comment._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These celebrities are a restaurantu2019s worst nightmare: u2018They think they own the worldu2019u00a0
> 
> 
> Playing the “royal card,” calling the hostess “a hooker” and stiffing a $3,000 tab — it’s all in a night out for these bad boldfacers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



_"Are you aware my guest is dating Prince Harry and about to be a duchess?"_

Quite a leap from "dating" to "about to be a duchess". Further proof that MM went in for the kill from day one.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> There's ugly, and then there's Meggsy's gnarled appendages
> 
> View attachment 5636588


And I thought my feet were unattractive  Those sure look like feet that have been crammed into pointy-toed shoes for years. So much for the torture she was forced to endure while on Deal or No Deal.


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


>




OMG, I can't stop laughing! Love the HRH tag on his collar!

The comments on Reddit are excellent. 


And the picture's full size is about 11 by 8.5 inches (28 x 21.5 cm), perfect for printing and framing.   


			https://i.redd.it/n0wi07n1dav91.jpg


----------



## xincinsin

Funny throwback shot from her IG. Think she has on a thong. Weird patterning on her bum.


----------



## Katel




----------



## KEG66

xincinsin said:


> Funny throwback shot from her IG. Think she has on a thong. Weird patterning on her bum.
> View attachment 5636620


Think it’s sand ! Showing off her talents do you think ?


----------



## mikimoto007

Hyacinth said:


> And if Hank and Skank are Soooooooo Much In Lurve, why, in all the candid unposed photos of them together, does Mister Grumpy McGrumpyPants always look like he's ready to yank someone's still-beating heart out and eat it? Is that what Love looks like? If so, I'll pass, thank you very much.



Maybe he needs a third therapist?


----------



## pukasonqo

mikimoto007 said:


> Maybe he needs a third therapist?


Or a kick in the #%^*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

Katel said:


>



Gosh I loathe Katie Hopkins.

I haven't listened to the bimbo episode yet but from the press coverage, I don't think she was surprised about the role, its pretty clear what it was, but its somewhat depressing that the role exists in the first place. It just feels like a sexualisation that isn't needed - we didn't have it in the UK version if the show. 


Honestly, I'm doubtful that men respect these women. They  certainly don't look upon them as equals.


----------



## mikimoto007

pukasonqo said:


> Or a kick in the #%^*




Now where's the lens of love for you to look through?


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Just resurfacing on the Variety interview... These thoughts are swirling in my head. Dumping them here.
> 
> The opening for some reason really gets me:
> 
> _That morning, the Duchess of Sussex, known more commonly by her maiden name, Meghan Markle, sped past a group of 60-something women who’d made the trek to Montecito to celebrate a milestone birthday_.
> 
> Why mention their age group? How is that important? She waves to them from the golf cart like some budget pageant contestant? She must get a boner from people fawning over her.
> 
> View attachment 5635595
> 
> 
> Why do most of the pictures obscure the beauty of the scenery behind her with cheap fabric? One is some kind of chiffon haphazardly tossed in the air, the other looks like a parachute. And why the photos with the phony laugh video/photo? Was her salad making jokes?
> 
> View attachment 5635592
> 
> 
> 
> Why does she insist on wearing the Cartier Love bracelet that was given to her by some other dude? Isn't that weird for her? For Harry? For her ex? She seems to wear it all of the time in a very public and obvious way. So cringe!
> 
> 
> She comes across as so fake, pretentious, vapid, phony, trite in this interview... Devoid of any personality. She tries so hard to convince the reader that she is this person she wants everyone to believe her to be, but she delivers it in such an unconvincing way. Every response, every word is carefully planned. And in several responses, she doesn't even answer the question, just babbles about something totally forgettable. And not once does anything she said make me believe she was or is grieving the Queen.
> 
> View attachment 5635591
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I feel better. I think I can move on with my day now



All of the above


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> Gosh I loathe Katie Hopkins.
> 
> I haven't listened to the bimbo episode yet but from the press coverage, I don't think she was surprised about the role, its pretty clear what it was, but its somewhat depressing that the role exists in the first place. It just feels like a sexualisation that isn't needed - we didn't have it in the UK version if the show.
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm doubtful that men respect these women. They  certainly don't look upon them as equals.



I don't like her either. She's as bad as M, whatever gives her more press coverage.

Fair point. We (uk) had women draping themselves over things in lots of other game shows though. I think we got rid of them a bit earlier (or perhaps I stopped watching game shows.).

I dug up some hilarious ones from Sale of Century 1972 and 1982 (screenshots below. I never watched this or many others, but basically I think the women are there because the prizes/sets look so bad, it's to take people's eyes away away from the rubbish on offer and the (poor) quality of the programmes. They are invariably cheap, time-filling TV, the equivalent of a pub quiz without alcohol.

I agree though, it is a very weird use of women as decorative objects. Although, even decades ago, other jobs for women existed and no one forced these women to apply.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The truth is Meghan was frustrated with the job because she was just one of 26 pretty women, dressed identically, holding a suitcase. She didn’t stand out in any way from the others around her and she couldn’t bear it. It wasn’t an acting job, it was a modeling gig.
> 
> The absolute worst thing that can happen in Meghan’s world is she has to blend in with everyone else and make an effort not to be noticed.



This, this, and...THIS!


----------



## papertiger

LibbyRuth said:


> Lets be honest - Meghan talking about Deal or no Deal has no purpose beyond reminding people that she was pretty enough to get a job that cast models like Claudia Jordan and Chrissy Tiegen.  What's the term for a humble brag that shows no humility?  Can I suggest "Archetypes host"?



This, this and THIS!

Oprah poured herself all-over Harpo's *Sidney Poitier* (KBE - which had he been British, would make him a Lord) doc. First, throughout and last, the narrative was Oprah, first, threaded through and last-word, and not the great man himself.

MegZZ has learned well from her mentors. It's all about lining your history up for your legacy.

They both started their media lives and got their big breaks on and from trash TV.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Another Carolina Herrera mistake - too voluminous for her, it takes Karlie Kloss to carry off all the fabric



I think it's OK-ish, as you say, she's just not tall enough to carry it.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is serious…




'Coaching' is what people pay for when they have no friends to talk to.


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> They don’t mention their love story? But how do other people connect with them? Have they peeled back the layers of their definition of love? Is it textured and meaningful and nuanced?
> 
> Has anyone seen the episode of Friends where Joey finds the thesaurus on the laptop? “I love you with my full sized cardiac pump.” I feel like she talks like that. She desperately needs an editor.



Perhaps Google Translate should offer 'word salad' as a language


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




The woman raises the most important and serious point. 

M trades on her looks. The photoshoot for Variety, Vanity Fair etc are neither M modelling clothes, reportage, nor film stills.  M trades on her looks all the time, always has done, still doing it. She _chooses _to trade on her looks. She may not be a bimbo, but she is a total hypocrite.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Of course not. Don't we all remember the wise words of TW's mother.




Yup, the milk it defiantly off


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why this obsession with the sleeveless trench coat style dresses?
> 
> View attachment 5636587
> 
> Article from June, 2021:
> 
> 
> https://www.vogue.com.au/fashion/trends/is-the-trench-coat-meghan-markles-signature-onduty-item/image-gallery/045ac2b3c5c137ea8350765e18c5c01c



I have a red Burberry one from 2002.

I'd like he world to know, *I bought it because I saw Jerry Hall and Marie Helvin in them*.

Photo Burberry ad 2001




Edited: It was SS01, not as previously published, I must have bought it in the sale '02


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Funny throwback shot from her IG. Think she has on a thong. Weird patterning on her bum.
> View attachment 5636620



There's nothing wrong with her body, but the shot has been Photoshopped


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _His head reservationist passed him a note about an “irate” woman who had dropped the “*I’m bringing in royalty*” card *and demanded a private table*, something the restaurant could not accommodate.
> 
> “*She said, ‘It’s for someone who is dating a prince*,’ ” Cecchi-Azzolina recalled, telling The Post that the handler copped an attitude when told the restaurant could not keep adjacent tables open. “I said, ‘I still don’t have a private table for you.’ ” He suggested a corner table instead and the woman finally acquiesced. _



OMFG. Dating a prince now equals royalty?


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> I don't like her either. She's as bad as M, whatever gives her more press coverage.
> 
> Fair point. We (uk) had women draping themselves over things in lots of other game shows though. I think we got rid of them a bit earlier (or perhaps I stopped watching game shows.).
> 
> I dug up some hilarious ones from Sale of Century 1972 and 1982 (screenshots below. I never watched this or many others, but basically I think the women are there because the prizes/sets look so bad, it's to take people's eyes away away from the rubbish on offer and the (poor) quality of the programmes. They are invariably cheap, time-filling TV, the equivalent of a pub quiz without alcohol.
> 
> I agree though, it is a very weird use of women as decorative objects. Although, even decades ago, other jobs for women existed and no one forced these women to apply.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5636686
> View attachment 5636687
> View attachment 5636688
> View attachment 5636689



We did! And I think we had them on the generation game also? That's a vague memory. I'm not sure if they still have the girls at F1.

Possibly those women had other options, but I'm not sure they saw it that way. I would expect for most of them the reality was they were trying to break into acting or modelling and they considered this a stepping stone.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## calicocat




----------



## xincinsin

mikimoto007 said:


> Possibly those women had other options, but I'm not sure they saw it that way. I would expect* for most of them the reality was they were trying to break into acting or modelling and they considered this a stepping stone.*


I would think Zedzee thought of it the same way but is too supercilious to admit it. A long time ago, at the start of this romance in the Lens Of Love (LOL), wasn't there a story that she never interacted with the other briefcase girls because she felt that they were beneath her?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. Dating a prince now equals royalty?


I want to know who this grating idiot of a handler is. Sounds like an a*skisser who totally fawned on and buttered up the Zed.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> True, perhaps those companies do not want her to ‘steal’ their shoes.  Ya kno, some people think those props belong to them.
> 
> If I touch it, it is mine.
> If I see it, it is mine.
> If I wear, it is mine.
> If you see it, it is mine.
> If you touch it, it is mine.
> If they give it to you, it is mine, mine, mine


You are right, photos are all about merching, and some brands don’t want her,


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> There's ugly, and then there's Meggsy's gnarled appendages
> 
> View attachment 5636588


Again, why wear sandals ? Espadrilles please


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I want to know who this grating idiot of a handler is. Sounds like an a*skisser who totally fawned on and buttered up the Zed.


Sounds like the agent she had - sorry, cannot remember name but it is in Bower book, the agent who set her up with H
Agent has of course since been Markled


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG. Dating a prince now equals royalty?


rememeber the narrative in Bower, she is the one who leaked that she was dating H via Vanity Fair Article, and this is just another tiny little way to leak the same info
PS she pushed him into marriage .. she was victim of press (they followed her due to leaks), she had no security, boo boo, just like Diana, he got to come to her rescue … she was creating a situation where he could show his importance/flex muscles


----------



## Aminamina

xincinsin said:


> I want to know who this grating idiot of a handler is. Sounds like an a*skisser who totally fawned on and buttered up the Zed.


 Scobie?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Tucker Carlson, Katie Hopkins...I think this thread may be jumping the shark


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Tucker Carlson, Katie Hopkins...I think this thread may be jumping the shark


No denying that she is uniting some really strange bedfellows. She still has many followers. That commercial she did for Netflix has some mothers gushing over how if the kid's cartoon is good enough for her and "Prince" Archie, then it's good enough for them.


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> We did! And I think we had them on the generation game also? That's a vague memory. I'm not sure if they still have the girls at F1.
> 
> Possibly those women had other options, but I'm not sure they saw it that way. I would expect for most of them the reality was they were trying to break into acting or modelling and they considered this a stepping stone.



I literally searched 'British game shows girls' and hundreds of these kinds of tableaux showed-up. I suppose it was in the tradition of having a pretty magician's assistant. 

It's camp and weird but I don't think it was degrading as being in automatic-modem sitting in a typing-pool all day being or even going down a dangerous coal mine 7am-7pm for virtually no money. 

This woman does not know how good she's had it. 



xincinsin said:


> I want to know who this grating idiot of a handler is. Sounds like an a*skisser who totally fawned on and buttered up the Zed.



It's called a job, and you do what you're told. No one takes it upon themselves, they are instructed before hand.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> I want to know who this grating idiot of a handler is. Sounds like an a*skisser who totally fawned on and buttered up the Zed.


The handler was likely being paid in dollars or promises to follow orders from the master/TW. His/her performance if not stellar was at least memorable.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> The woman raises the most important and serious point.
> 
> M trades on her looks. The photoshoot for Variety, Vanity Fair etc are neither M modelling clothes, reportage, nor film stills.  *M trades on her looks all the time*, always has done, still doing it. *She chooses to trade on her looks.* She may not be a bimbo, but *she is a total hypocrite*.


----------



## Chanbal

Beautiful testimony…


----------



## Chanbal

@ UK members… They may all want to return to the UK, are you ready to welcome them?  











						EXCLUSIVE: James Corden selling $9.7 million LA home to return to UK
					

DailyMail.com can exclusively confirm that James Corden is leaving the United States! On Friday, a star of Million Dollar Listing LA was seen exiting Corden's home with a real estate broker.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That would be good news of course, but her treatment of his family and her lies about them (that he willingly participated in) weren't enough to tip him off?


----------



## carmen56

Any guesses who the celebrity is?


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> I would think Zedzee thought of it the same way but is too supercilious to admit it. A long time ago, at the start of this romance in the Lens Of Love (LOL), wasn't there a story that she never interacted with the other briefcase girls because she felt *that they were beneath her?*



Seems many, many, many were beneath her in one way or another...yacht girl anyone?

Oh wait. She's a DUCHESS and therefore extra special, to the point where you are dictated to NOT TAKE HER PHOTO at a restaurant. She is so full of herself it's sickening.


----------



## mikimoto007

carmen56 said:


> Any guesses who the celebrity is?


 My immediate reaction was Beyoncé. When it started talking about a potential romantic interest then I thought *****.


----------



## pukasonqo

MM reminds me sometimes of Becky Sharp from Thackerays’s book Vanity Fair (it was written in 1847)


----------



## JulesB68

Chanbal said:


> TW is featured in a new book about restaurant customers …
> View attachment 5636574
> 
> 
> *Waiting on Meghan Markle and her handler turned out to be a royal pain for Michael Cecchi-Azzolina, maitre d’ at NYC’s Michelin-starred restaurant Le Coucou in 2017.*_ His head reservationist passed him a note about an “irate” woman who had dropped the “*I’m bringing in royalty*” card *and demanded a private table*, something the restaurant could not accommodate.
> 
> “*She said, ‘It’s for someone who is dating a prince*,’ ” Cecchi-Azzolina recalled, telling The Post that the handler copped an attitude when told the restaurant could not keep adjacent tables open. “I said, ‘I still don’t have a private table for you.’ ” He suggested a corner table instead and the woman finally acquiesced.
> 
> “They came in with an attitude,” Cecchi-Azzolina said, of the duo showing up 20 minutes before their reservation. After welcoming them to have a drink with the commoners at the
> 
> “*Are you aware my guest is dating Prince Harry and about to be a duchess?”* Cecchi-Azzolina writes in his forthcoming book, “Your Table Is Ready,” out December 6. “ ‘Don’t you have a private area for us to wait?’ My first impulse was to laugh. *I could give two s–ts about Prince Harry’s date, and by the attention the escort was drawing from the crowd at the bar, nor did anyone else.”*
> 
> Cecchi-Azzolina recalled that *Markle, meanwhile, “didn’t say a word,” while her handler threw a fit that the table wasn’t ready before their reservation time, describing the actress-turned-royal as “aloof.*” A rep for Markle did not return a request for comment._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These celebrities are a restaurantu2019s worst nightmare: u2018They think they own the worldu2019u00a0
> 
> 
> Playing the “royal card,” calling the hostess “a hooker” and stiffing a $3,000 tab — it’s all in a night out for these bad boldfacers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I don't usually like pulling people apart for what they are wearing because, well, not exactly going to blow anyone away with my sartorial style, but this image was in this article:





As I scrolled down and saw the bra on display, I thought hmm, but then got to the shorts. Wtf is going on there?
Also did she get a spray tan at the same place that Ross went to in Friends? Looks like she only got her legs done on one side!


----------



## Debbini

carmen56 said:


> Any guesses who the celebrity is?


Kanye. Ah hahahaha!! Wouldn't that be a hoot?!


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> There's nothing wrong with her body, but the shot has been Photoshopped


Are there any "posed" pics of this woman that are *not* photoshopped?


----------



## KEG66

JulesB68 said:


> I don't usually like pulling people apart for what they are wearing because, well, not exactly going to blow anyone away with my sartorial style, but this image was in this article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I scrolled down and saw the bra on display, I thought hmm, but then got to the shorts. Wtf is going on there?
> Also did she get a spray tan at the same place that Ross went to in Friends? Looks like she only got her legs done on one side!


I can’t believe I’m saying this but I actually think she looks really pretty here, from the waist up anyway. Maybe it’s because she’s not looking directly at the camera with that ‘cat that got the cream’ trademark 
smirk !


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> I want to know who this grating idiot of a handler is. Sounds like an a*skisser who totally fawned on and buttered up the Zed.


A Sunshine Suck-Up?


----------



## marietouchet

carmen56 said:


> Any guesses who the celebrity is?


Jennifer Aniston ... isnt she a SS client?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> @ UK members… They may all want to return to the UK, are you ready to welcome them?
> View attachment 5636980
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: James Corden selling $9.7 million LA home to return to UK
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com can exclusively confirm that James Corden is leaving the United States! On Friday, a star of Million Dollar Listing LA was seen exiting Corden's home with a real estate broker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Love how the Daily Mail ties an obviously preplanned move in with Corden being outed as an @sshole to restaurant staff. One thing has nothing to do with the other. Although Corden proved who he was when he backpedaled from his apology earlier in the week and said he had nothing to apologize for.


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That would be good news of course, but her treatment of his family and her lies about them (that he willingly participated in) weren't enough to tip him off?



We need Ari Gold


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Jennifer Aniston ... isnt she a SS client?


interesting guess
I'm reading the book about Harvey Weinstein.  I was impressed to learn that when Harvey told many A-list actresses to wear his wife Georgina Chapman's designs on the red carpet, they complied.  But Aniston said no, that wasn't her style.  she stuck to her guns and didn't back down and even though she was in one of his movies, there were no repercussions.  so she's apparently pretty strong and independent.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That would be good news of course, but her treatment of his family and her lies about them (that he willingly participated in) weren't enough to tip him off?



Netflix execs must be gleeful at the rumors. Train wreck bystanders will be curious to watch their Love Story show to see how it matches up.

Plus it could generate a sequel based on a messy divorce and “new lives” for the former Harkles.

If TW dumps him, it frees her to really go after the RF, no holds barred, remember her threat in The Cut article about never having signed a Non Disclose Agreement?

If he has any active brain cells, Hazbeen may finally be seeing the pattern and is getting a glimpse of the Hell that awaits him if/when TW as  an “ex” spreads “her truth.”

Yesterday The Body Language Guy had a teaser on Twitter  to possibly look forward to an emerging story the TW left him for 3 weeks, but had returned.

Edited to add: Hazbeen did appear more disheveled than usual during his appearance in San Francisco this week. A sign of his current life if rumors are true? Looks like TW’s re branding must be limited to her wardrobe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> rememeber the narrative in Bower, she is the one who leaked that she was dating H via Vanity Fair Article, and this is just another tiny little way to leak the same info
> PS she pushed him into marriage .. she was victim of press (they followed her due to leaks), she had no security, boo boo, just like Diana, he got to come to her rescue … she was creating a situation where he could show his importance/flex muscles



I just came back from a visit with my sick friend and we spent the afternoon gossiping about the people we graduated highschool with. One of my not so close friends pushed her then-bf into moving in together because she claimed the dorm she was living in had a stalker and she feared for her life (as in, informed him that's what they were going to do). Worked for her, married for 12 years with two kids


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aminamina said:


> Scobie?



Naw. I doubt she ever had dinner with him, she really doesn't like him all that much.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This Reddit conversation should be blasted everywhere.  It is not simply how she looks that causes the negative reaction. It *is* more the misuse of the language. 




kayarisme •17 hr. ago
Archetypes vs. stereotypes. Gutteral vs. visceral. A pit in my stomach vs. in the pit of my stomach. 

RoohsMama OBE - Order of Banana Empaths  •15 hr. ago
Don’t forget genetic vs generational pain (because I suspect H gets his speeches from M) 

Theresapython •3 hr. ago
“Authenticness” - Prince Hawwy


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Beautiful testimony…




She is really talented in stepping on toes, isn't she. Maybe her only talent besides being a master manipulator.


----------



## papertiger

KEG66 said:


> I can’t believe I’m saying this but I actually think she looks really pretty here, from the waist up anyway. Maybe it’s because she’s not looking directly at the camera with that ‘cat that got the cream’ trademark
> smirk !



I like her bag


----------



## Toby93




----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is really talented in stepping on toes, isn't she. Maybe her only talent besides being a master manipulator.



You're right, she seems to offend people literally every time she opens her mouth.


----------



## CarryOn2020

With so much _divorce _talk, remember Hwood PR people claim divorce is good for publicity.  So, we have TomBrady, Stallone, KimK, etc.  H&M and Nflix could see this as a way to keep their names in the news.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




Maybe he and TW should go to the doctor to deal with their collective/individual amnesia, it may be early onset dementia


----------



## DL Harper

sdkitty said:


> interesting guess
> I'm reading the book about Harvey Weinstein.  I was impressed to learn that when Harvey told many A-list actresses to wear his wife Georgina Chapman's designs on the red carpet, they complied.  But Aniston said no, that wasn't her style.  she stuck to her guns and didn't back down and even though she was in one of his movies, there were no repercussions.  so she's apparently pretty strong and independent.


Too bad Harvey W isn't available for MM.  A match made in heaven, those two.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> interesting guess
> I'm reading the book about Harvey Weinstein.  I was impressed to learn that when Harvey told many A-list actresses to wear his wife Georgina Chapman's designs on the red carpet, they complied.  But Aniston said no, that wasn't her style.  she stuck to her guns and didn't back down and even though she was in one of his movies, there were no repercussions.  so she's apparently pretty strong and independent.


Is that why The Zed has her eye on Aniston as new targetted BFF?


QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is really talented in stepping on toes, isn't she. Maybe her only talent besides being a master manipulator.


Experience? Isn't there an insane children's game where the kids try to step on each other's toes? Zed may have been the Kween of that game and it carried over into other aspects of her life


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Is that why The Zed has her eye on Aniston as new targetted BFF?
> 
> Experience? Isn't there an insane children's game where the kids try to step on each other's toes? Zed may have been the Kween of that game and it carried over into other aspects of her life


IDK whether the has her sights on Aniston but Jennifer has plenty of friends and no aspirations that I know of to be an activist or a feminist role model.  She seems to be just living her life and enjoying it as she pleases.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Beautiful testimony…



A Zed supporter commented: _Deal or no Deal should fire the said fashion expert cos the poor women still look cheap. Congrats to Meghan for ditching the show!_

ITA she doesn't need his help to look cheap or turn gold to straw.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> IDK whether the has her sights on Aniston but Jennifer has plenty of friends and no aspirations that I know of to be an activist or a feminist role model.  She seems to be just living her life and enjoying it as she pleases.


The Sussex camp was pushing this narrative after the funeral.


----------



## Annawakes

It would be super weird if she was going after J Aniston as a new BFF but also pursuing Brad as a romantic interest simultaneously.

I thought the “celebrity” she is obsessed with might be Brad Pitt.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> It would be super weird if she was going after J Aniston as a new BFF but also pursuing Brad as a romantic interest simultaneously.
> 
> I thought the “celebrity” she is obsessed with might be Brad Pitt.


no offense but this is all just speculation.....I doubt she's gonna ditch the golde goose who made her a duchess.  and I highly doubt brad would be interested in her


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> no offense but this is all just speculation.....I doubt she's gonna ditch the golde goose who made her a duchess.  and I highly doubt brad would be interested in her


Agree. Plus, she is not A list material, especially now with the 2 kids.


----------



## Annawakes

^^Totally agree.  But I don’t think she sees herself that way haha


----------



## RAINDANCE

sdkitty said:


> interesting guess
> I'm reading the book about Harvey Weinstein.  I was impressed to learn that when Harvey told many A-list actresses to wear his wife Georgina Chapman's designs on the red carpet, they complied.  But Aniston said no, that wasn't her style.  she stuck to her guns and didn't back down and even though she was in one of his movies, there were no repercussions.  so she's apparently pretty strong and independent.


Many years ago (2008 I think) Aniston was flown by a private pilot friend of my husbands' family and apparently she, Aniston, was delightful. Everyone at his business was really taken with how nice she was, and some weeks later a gift arrived of the very same wine that the friend had mentioned in casual conversation was his favourite.


----------



## Chanbal

'Oh dear, oh dear'…  The meaning of the 'much loved' (members of the family) has been explained. It's quite interesting. TW's claims about QE on her last interview are what many of us expected…


----------



## Debbini

papertiger said:


> I like her bag


I do too, do you know what it is?


----------



## papertiger

Debbini said:


> I do too, do you know what it is?



Sadly not. Shows, she does better when she doesn't try so hard


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw. I doubt she ever had dinner with him, she really doesn't like him all that much.


Oh, don’t start me on all that she had done that she didn’t like that much


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Sadly not. Shows, she does better when she doesn't try so hard











						Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
					

Shop the Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag as seen on Meghan Markle



					www.meghansfashion.com


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Love how the Daily Mail ties an obviously preplanned move in with Corden being outed as an @sshole to restaurant staff. One thing has nothing to do with the other. *Although Corden proved who he was when he backpedaled from his apology earlier in the week and said he had nothing to apologize for.*


I didn't know that. Impressive! He certainly deserves to be a friend of TW and her husband. 

DM loves an eye-catching title, but who can blame it?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
> 
> 
> Shop the Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com



Thank you!


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> ...TW left him for 3 weeks, but had returned.


If true, I suspect it is only because she realized she had no place better to go. She has always overestimated her value in the trophy wife market.


----------



## Aimee3

charlottawill said:


> If true, I suspect it is only because she realized she had no place better to go. She has always overestimated her value in the trophy wife market.


Wouldn't it have been funny if H had changed the locks!!!


----------



## Chanbal

Brilliant


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



Harry really is a moron.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That would be good news of course, but her treatment of his family and her lies about them (that he willingly participated in) weren't enough to tip him off?



He's just now possibly starting to understand that she does not care about his family or her family and maybe not enough him or their kids?

He really is an idiot.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Are there any "posed" pics of this woman that are *not* photoshopped?


She has her legs apart.  Again.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
> 
> 
> Shop the Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


Marc Jacobs has a lot in common with Meghan.  Neither of them has ever had an original idea in their lives and they copy everything from other people.  Jacobs is ripping off the Hermes Plume.


----------



## Chanbal

Cheers to Nana!  Love it!!!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Harry really is a moron.


Or as Prince Philip said, he is the village idiot of the RF.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Marc Jacobs has a lot in common with Meghan.  Neither of them has ever had an original idea in their lives and they copy everything from other people.  Jacobs is ripping off the Hermes Plume.
> View attachment 5637357


I think Marc Jacobs is too good for her.  

She's more of a Steve Madden.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I think Marc Jacobs is too good for her.
> 
> She's more of a Steve Madden.


Didn't Steve Madden go to jail for something?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Or as Prince Philip said, he is the village idiot of the RF.


It's really a shame that PP was too old and ill to really deal with her, or should I say with Harry.  If Lady CC is correct and Harry threatened them with the  race card, then if PP had been  in his prime, he would have trounced him.  Seriously though, so what if Harry did pull out the race card?  If the courtiers that Valentine Low tells us run the government and the royal family are that smart, then they should have been able to handle it.  Obviously they couldn't, and that is why I take Low's book with a grain of salt.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Marc Jacobs has a lot in common with Meghan.  Neither of them has ever had an original idea in their lives and they copy everything from other people.  Jacobs is ripping off the Hermes Plume.
> View attachment 5637357



No question it is very similar, but to be fair there is copying all around the fashion industry. A lot more people can afford MJ than Hermes. The contemporary handbag brands get a lot of "inspiration" from the high end brands. Tory Burch, Kate Spade and MK all have Birkin style bags. MK's brown monogram is clearly influenced by LV. I think it continues because the high end brands aren't worried about it eating into their sales.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I think Marc Jacobs is too good for her.
> 
> She's more of a Steve Madden.


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
> 
> 
> Shop the Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


Cool, thank you!!!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Didn't Steve Madden go to jail for something?


Tax evasion

ETA:

 "In 2002, Madden was convicted of stock manipulation, money laundering, and securities fraud. He was sentenced to 41 months in prison, and was made to resign as CEO from Steven Madden, Ltd. and from the board of directors.[10] Shortly after resigning as CEO, Madden set himself up as a creative consultant with Steven Madden, Ltd., a position for which he drew $700,000 even when he was in prison."

He did time in federal prison but is now back as the CEO, and the company is doing well. All's well that ends well I guess.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Tax evasion


they might get along....I'm sure the Archewell foundation serves two purposes - tax advantage and making them look like philanthropists


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> IDK whether the has her sights on Aniston but Jennifer has plenty of friends and no aspirations that I know of to be an activist or a feminist role model.  She seems to be just living her life and enjoying it as she pleases.


I was thinking of Angelina but no, A is far too accomplished, Oscar, humanitarian, recognized on merit by QEII.
But, A knows how to string out a divorce on account of the kids. And to maximize angst - selling winery to their party. And dredge up abuse six years after the fact. Wow, a real talent in the divorce/separation fireworks department


----------



## Chanbal

Finally able to join the Book Club…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I was thinking of Angelina but no, A is far too accomplished, Oscar, humanitarian, recognized on merit by QEII.
> But, A knows how to string out a divorce on account of the kids. And to maximize angst - selling winery to their party. And dredge up abuse six years after the fact. Wow, a real talent in the divorce/separation fireworks department


Guessing Gisele knows how to do this as well.  The First Wives Club comes to mind.




ETA: *A list* women do not come to play nicely.  True love, of course.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> It's really a shame that PP was too old and ill to really deal with her, or should I say with Harry.  If Lady CC is correct and Harry threatened them with the  race card, then if PP had been  in his prime, he would have trounced him.  Seriously though, so what if Harry did pull out the race card?  If the courtiers that Valentine Low tells us run the government and the royal family are that smart, then they should have been able to handle it.  Obviously they couldn't, and that is why I take Low's book with a grain of salt.


Hindsight is always 20/20, but I wonder if "The Firm" now regrets not confronting Harry with all of the dirt you know they dug up on her and saying "This is the person you want to marry, we will not support it", and letting the chips fall where they may. The whole sordid mess would probably be in the rear view mirror by now.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Guessing Gisele knows how to do this as well.  The First Wives Club comes to mind.
> 
> View attachment 5637410
> 
> 
> ETA: *A list* women do not come to play nicely.  True love, of course.


Gisele has plenty of her own money. Before she "retired" I was surprised to read something that said she made $25 million, more than TB made that same year.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Hindsight is always 20/20, but I wonder if "The Firm" now regrets not confronting Harry with all of the dirt you know they dug up on her and saying "This is the person you want to marry, we will not support it", and letting the chips fall where they may. The whole sordid mess would probably be in the rear view mirror by now.


Shoulda, woulda, could. Imo granting H&M those titles, the big wedding, the tours, etc.  All a mistake.  Had they worked it all out in the beginning with signed and notarized documents from all parties, we would not be here.  Since she popped off about not signing an NDA, I wonder if H&M even had a pre-nup.   Regardless, in the end, the Crown will win [just look at Sarah and Diana’s settlements].


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Gisele has plenty of her own money. Before she "retired" I was surprised to read something that said she made $25 million, more than TB made that same year.


Yes, supposedly she does have more $$$ than he does.  This divorce is not about the money imo. This is about TB not doing what she wanted him to do and the public now knows it.  Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.  Ewwww.

ETA:  MM will not get what she wants once Hazz has left.  Who would be foolish enough?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It's really a shame that PP was too old and ill to really deal with her, or should I say with Harry.  If Lady CC is correct and Harry threatened them with the  race card, then if PP had been  in his prime, he would have trounced him.  Seriously though, so what if Harry did pull out the race card?  If the courtiers that Valentine Low tells us run the government and the royal family are that smart, then they should have been able to handle it.  Obviously they couldn't, and that is why I take Low's book with a grain of salt.


On the famous race card, the baby color incident was pre engagement.

I listened to a replay of the Oprah interview bit about the color of the baby, I finally caught a key bit - H says this happened when there was the row about “no security for MM”, ie when she was just a girlfriend. So, the flap over baby color was PRIOR ago engagement, if H is to be believed… 
OK that is a stretch, I know


----------



## VickyB

xincinsin said:


> Funny throwback shot from her IG. Think she has on a thong. Weird patterning on her bum.
> View attachment 5636620


I don't believe that she's holding this pose while her head is on a rock.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Hindsight is always 20/20, but I wonder if "The Firm" now regrets not confronting Harry with all of the dirt you know they dug up on her and saying "This is the person you want to marry, we will not support it", and letting the chips fall where they may. The whole sordid mess would probably be in the rear view mirror by now.


I have said it before .. my guess …  they DID confront him but he did not listen because they were being racists / anti American - never got over Wallis/ anti actresses  … take your pick

There is NO WAY that the Met did not do a background check and if they found something, it went to Charles for action


----------



## CarryOn2020

VickyB said:


> I don't believe that she's holding this pose while her head is on a rock.


The legs and butt look oddly proportioned, too.  We know she has short legs, which is why she wears the high heels.










						Six-mile runs, yoga and hempseed stew – Meghan Markle’s fitness secrets revealed
					

Obviously Meghan Markle captured Prince Harry’s heart because she’s smart, talented and an inspiring humanitarian. But let’s face it – the Suits star also has a killer bod. Meghan is a big fan of s…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The legs and butt look oddly proportioned, too.  We know she has short legs, which is why she wears the high heels.
> View attachment 5637427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Six-mile runs, yoga and hempseed stew – Meghan Markle’s fitness secrets revealed
> 
> 
> Obviously Meghan Markle captured Prince Harry’s heart because she’s smart, talented and an inspiring humanitarian. But let’s face it – the Suits star also has a killer bod. Meghan is a big fan of s…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


wait, I thought she bragged about her long legs


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
> 
> 
> Shop the Marc Jacobs Burgundy Gotham Bauletto Bag as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com



TU! Resembles (in a kind of thick way) the elegant Hermes Plume.



Chanbal said:


> Brilliant
> View attachment 5637322





The escaping cash, the caption and “tiny violin”  

ETA - @gracekelly you beat me to it


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> wait, I thought she bragged about her long legs


She did.  She brags about lots of stuff that is not true. 
ETA:  Her legs may be longer than her torso but imo that does not mean she has long legs. Gisele has long legs, Diana had long legs, Hazz has long legs.  She is a short person which is why she is in the back on DorND.  Imo. 






			https://www.newidea.com.au/meghan-markle-workout-routine


----------



## Chanbal

Is TMZ going to compete with DM?


----------



## VickyB

Did ya'll see the pic of her today wearing a strapless olive green romper that is peddle pusher in length and ruched up the sides????? It's ghastly. I can't recall how to share a pic here


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear, oh dear.
Those clothes look like left-overs from the ‘shoot’.
Look at the toe


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> Is TMZ going to compete with DM?
> 
> View attachment 5637451



Thanks!!!! I couldn't figure out how to share the pic!


----------



## saligator

Ok this looks like brand endorsement to me. There are several of these "LOOK AT MY BAG" photos around today.


----------



## Chanbal

VickyB said:


> Thanks!!!! I couldn't figure out how to share the pic!


Here is the poll for the ones that want to vote (Spoiler)… 

Mods: if not appropriate, please delete.



Spoiler: Stars and Scars 












						Stars and Scars -- You Be the Judge
					

Kanye West is fully off the rails with anti-Semitism, 'White Lives Matter' shirts, etc ... and should daycare workers scaring little kids with horror masks have been charged with felonies? So we gotta ask ...




					www.tmz.com


----------



## sdkitty

saligator said:


> Ok this looks like brand endorsement to me. There are several of these "LOOK AT MY BAG" photos around today.
> 
> View attachment 5637474


out shopping like a regular person?  is she be trailed by security agents?  wouldn't want her to come to the fate of Diana due to the huge excitement of the paps


----------



## Chanbal

saligator said:


> Ok this looks like brand endorsement to me. There are several of these "LOOK AT MY BAG" photos around today.
> 
> View attachment 5637474


From the TMZ article: "
_*Meghan Markle might've thought her "Deal or No Deal" days were chock-full of misogyny *-- but she was pretty into the deals she found in Montecito Friday ... or a lack thereof, rather.

*The Duchess was shopping at a swanky luxury boutique i*n her backyard with a friend and security guard/driver in tow. She was looking pretty chic, *but apparently wanted some new threads from a place she was happy to advertise on the way out* ... *bag-flashing* for days."_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> If true, I suspect it is only because she realized she had no place better to go. *She has always overestimated her value* in the trophy wife market.



I feel this applies to every aspect of her life.


----------



## Sharont2305

saligator said:


> Ok this looks like brand endorsement to me. There are several of these "LOOK AT MY BAG" photos around today.
> 
> View attachment 5637474


And look at how white she looks!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shoulda, woulda, could. Imo granting H&M those titles, the big wedding, the tours, etc.  All a mistake.  Had they worked it all out in the beginning with signed and notarized documents from all parties, we would not be here.  Since she popped off about not signing an NDA, *I wonder if H&M even had a pre-nup. *  Regardless, in the end, the Crown will win [just look at Sarah and Diana’s settlements].



Pre-nups aren't legally binding in the UK, plus amongst the upper class there is a mutual understanding things will be taken care of (a little vague if you ask me), so I'll go with no.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> And look at how white she looks!


and feet look pretty...so is this photoshopped?


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> and feet look pretty...so is this photoshopped?


She looks as pale as me, and I'm the palest shade of pale!


----------



## Chanbal

More from Nana… 

_'Prince Harry's following Meghan's way and developing his own truth about things' | Angela Levin_​


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> and feet look pretty...so is this photoshopped?


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> and feet look pretty...so is this photoshopped?


Yes and no.  These are Backgrid photos, so she paid for these.  PhotoS, sure, just not perfectly done. She gets what she paid for.
ETA:  she is clearly thirsty, so who knows what the next poddie will unleash on the world.


----------



## csshopper

saligator said:


> Ok this looks like brand endorsement to me. There are several of these "LOOK AT MY BAG" photos around today.
> 
> View attachment 5637474


Notice the BackGrid tag, lower left corner. She called them. Paps don’t randomly roam Montecito. Real celebrities appreciate the opportunity to be able to shop, eat, have appointments without a camera on them. The Photo Ho must have had to concentrate really hard to not look into the lens.


----------



## Lodpah

papertiger said:


> I have a red Burberry one from 2002.
> 
> I'd like he world to know, *I bought it because I saw Jerry Hall and Marie Helvin in them*.
> 
> Photo Burberry ad 2001
> 
> View attachment 5636699
> 
> 
> Edited: It was SS01, not as previously published, I must have bought it in the sale '02


They’re beautiful women in person. I was standing next to them at a Journey concert a long time ago. Jerry Hall was so thin but not as imposing looking as in her pictures.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Notice the BackGrid tag, lower left corner. She called them. Paps don’t randomly roam Montecito. Real celebrities appreciate the opportunity to be able to shop, eat, have appointments without a camera on them. The Photo Ho must have had to concentrate really hard to not look into the lens.



I completely don't understand why you'd work with a pap agency so everyone with half a brain knows you called them while you pretend you are just so important


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely don't understand why you'd work with a pap agency so everyone with half a brain knows you called them while you pretend you are just so important


guess she doesn't think people will know...honestly I wasn't aware of the backgrid thing....but just knowing what I do about her, I assumed she invited the photogs (or paid them)


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> They’re beautiful women in person. I was standing next to them at a Journey concert a long time ago. Jerry Hall was so thin but not as imposing looking as in her pictures.



I've met both and Marie Helvin several times too, she's not tall but she is totally stunning and down to earth. 

M taints the look for me, but not enough to ever get rid of my dress.


----------



## Lodpah

carmen56 said:


> Any guesses who the celebrity is?


My money is on Angelina Jolie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really don't think it's a woman. I don't believe her "empower women" shtick one bit. She finds it way easier to seduce men than to not be catty with other women.


----------



## Toby93

Parachute pants    Honestly, how many people need to go along to protect her?


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> The legs and butt look oddly proportioned, too.  We know she has short legs, which is why she wears the high heels.
> View attachment 5637427
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Six-mile runs, yoga and hempseed stew – Meghan Markle’s fitness secrets revealed
> 
> 
> Obviously Meghan Markle captured Prince Harry’s heart because she’s smart, talented and an inspiring humanitarian. But let’s face it – the Suits star also has a killer bod. Meghan is a big fan of s…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


She has a stumpy torso, which is why now that she has gained weight, she no longer has a waist


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Is TMZ going to compete with DM?
> 
> View attachment 5637451



Please, enough with the sandals   Those feet should never see the light of day again.  And to top it off, she is wearing a toe ring.


----------



## pomeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, oh dear.
> Those clothes look like left-overs from the ‘shoot’.
> Look at the toe
> 
> View attachment 5637461



Never mind the bunions, what's up with her shins...?


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Please, enough with the sandals   Those feet should never see the light of day again.  And to top it off, she is wearing a toe ring.
> 
> View attachment 5637601


That jumpsuit is a crime against humanity - the hip pockets -uggghhh
Totally an unforced error - not even Karlie Kloss would look good in those pockets
And yes … her skinny shins
And she has no hat game … didn’t anyone in the UK tell her that ? Where is Treacy ?


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> Never mind the bunions, what's up with her shins...?


Those cannot be natural.


----------



## Genie27

She must be wearing her favourite strapless bra. 

And after however many years of motorcade and security experience she still has no clue where to stand so the driver/guard can open the door for her. So awkward


----------



## Genie27

After re-watching that clip - wouldn’t you enter the vehicle on the curb side and then have the driver load the trunk? So staged for paps….


----------



## Chanbal

I don't think this has been posted here, it's about TW's lawyers. They were very aggressive with Valentine Low before the publication of his book, but very quiet since the book was released.


----------



## calicocat

Did I see a nipple showing and tip-of-tongue biting on left pic?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One more article about the bimbo emeritus… 



_Why try to rewrite the narrative? Why knock something that she, and countless young women, have done since time immemorial? Why turn it into a drama? Why make yourself a victim, why be ashamed? Why not just own it, as the Americans say, and laugh it off as youthful opportunism.

No wonder her former colleagues on Deal Or No Deal are a little put out about her comments.

As one of them pointed out: 'If Meghan didn't want to feel objectified, she could have chosen not to do the audition… that would have given another girl a chance.'

Quite.

And as the actress Whoopi Goldberg added: 'That's TV, baby. When you're a performer, you take the gig.'

And this is my problem with so much of today's post-#MeToo world. Of course it's progress that women no longer have to fear men such as Harvey Weinstein, but not all of us are helpless victims of the casting couch. Many willingly play the game – and play it they do, much to their own advantage.

*It's the hypocrisy that gets me. Just as her podcast episode was released, the Duchess of Sussex appeared in an interview for Variety magazine, accompanied by a set of pictures very much intended to flaunt her not inconsiderable physical attributes.

No mention of 'objectification' there. Funny, that.*_









						SARAH VINE: Many of us willingly play the bimbo card, Meghan, own it
					

SARAH VINE: Most women, if they're honest, have played the bimbo card at one point or another in their lives. When I was in my early 20s, I, too, had my Meghan moment.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> One more article about the bimbo emeritus…
> View attachment 5637644
> 
> 
> _Why try to rewrite the narrative? Why knock something that she, and countless young women, have done since time immemorial? Why turn it into a drama? Why make yourself a victim, why be ashamed? Why not just own it, as the Americans say, and laugh it off as youthful opportunism.
> 
> No wonder her former colleagues on Deal Or No Deal are a little put out about her comments.
> 
> As one of them pointed out: 'If Meghan didn't want to feel objectified, she could have chosen not to do the audition… that would have given another girl a chance.'
> 
> Quite.
> 
> And as the actress Whoopi Goldberg added: 'That's TV, baby. When you're a performer, you take the gig.'
> 
> And this is my problem with so much of today's post-#MeToo world. Of course it's progress that women no longer have to fear men such as Harvey Weinstein, but not all of us are helpless victims of the casting couch. Many willingly play the game – and play it they do, much to their own advantage.
> 
> *It's the hypocrisy that gets me. Just as her podcast episode was released, the Duchess of Sussex appeared in an interview for Variety magazine, accompanied by a set of pictures very much intended to flaunt her not inconsiderable physical attributes.
> 
> No mention of 'objectification' there. Funny, that.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Many of us willingly play the bimbo card, Meghan, own it
> 
> 
> SARAH VINE: Most women, if they're honest, have played the bimbo card at one point or another in their lives. When I was in my early 20s, I, too, had my Meghan moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


If she had not brought it up, no one would have remembered the show.  Whatever happened to ‘accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative’? Maybe today’s _therapists_ and _coaches_ are focusing on the negatives.  

_You've got to accentuate the positive
Eliminate the negative
Latch on to the affirmative
Don't mess with Mister In Between
You've got to spread joy up to the maximum
Bring gloom down to the minimum
Have faith or pandemonium
Liable to walk upon the scene
_


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> My DD loves Iliza Schlesinger (I had not heard of her), so she listened to the part of the Paris Hilton episode where she was talking.  She was very disappointed.  She said it was mostly Markle doing the talking, and Schlesinger wasn't her usual smart @ss self.  It was as if *it was heavily edited to sound really "serious" when it could have been entertaining. *
> 
> How does she manage to make everything boring, even with funny guests with a lot to add to the podcast?  Is it because she is talentless with nothing evenly remotely remarkable or interesting to say?


Madame does not wish to be entertaining. She wishes to be taken seriously and everyone ought to acclaim her wisdom. That's why she buys only serious awards  


VickyB said:


> I don't believe that she's holding this pose while her head is on a rock.


Well, the weight of her big head probably helped anchor her ...  


sdkitty said:


> wait, I thought she bragged about her long legs


The long legs was a tall tale...  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely don't understand why you'd work with a pap agency so everyone with half a brain knows you called them while you pretend you are just so important


Narcs always assume no one notices their shenanigans. If anyone notices, they must be bullies/sexist/racist/etc.


----------



## needlv

Toby93 said:


> Please, enough with the sandals   Those feet should never see the light of day again.  And to top it off, she is wearing a toe ring.
> 
> View attachment 5637601



What is that outfit?  It’s hideous.  Who goes outside with the intention of looking like a pop up camping tent??


----------



## Chanbal

@sdkitty DM has a better pic imo.











						Meghan Markle spotted shopping with a pal
					

Meghan Markle was seen enjoying a shopping day on Friday afternoon in Montecito, California, as she faces mounting criticisms over her comments about her days on Deal or No Deal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DoggieBags

She has this massive ego Coupled with zero clothes sense. I know she thinks she’s a supermodel but how can she not see that even a supermodel would look like a walking mound of mulch in this outfit. She knew she was going to be photographed since she alerted the paps so she must think she looked fabulous in this baggy monstrosity. There’s enough material in her outfit to make a second garment. She couldn’t have picked a less flattering silhouette for her body type. She’s set the bar so low already in terms of unflattering outfits but with this one she‘s managed to drop the bar even lower.


----------



## pureplatinum

Toby93 said:


> Looks like Bouzy is still her biggest stan



I really really like Carolina Herrera’s style/aesthetics, but this series of posts with MM on their IG made me unfollow them


----------



## CarryOn2020

The CH clothes look gorgeous on the runway models.  Tragic that MM chooses looks that do not suit her.



ETA:  as others have asked, why is this staffer in a sweater and shoes while MM is strolling around in flip flops and a strapless jumpsuit?  True, she is carrying a sweater. That may be because the jumpsuit has an open-type  back.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## rose60610

That's one ugly jumpsuit. Seems something that shoplifters would love, though. Baggy deep pockets.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Hindsight is always 20/20, but I wonder if "The Firm" now regrets not confronting Harry with all of the dirt you know they dug up on her and saying "This is the person you want to marry, we will not support it", and letting the chips fall where they may. The whole sordid mess would probably be in the rear view mirror by now.


I don’t think it would’ve made a difference. Harry fell for Meghan hard and fast and he wasn’t going to listen to anyone. Remember “what Meghan wants Meghan gets” was already his mantra before the wedding. The marriage was going to happen whether his family supported it or not.


----------



## Freak4Coach

Chanbal said:


> @sdkitty DM has a better pic imo.
> 
> View attachment 5637667
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle spotted shopping with a pal
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle was seen enjoying a shopping day on Friday afternoon in Montecito, California, as she faces mounting criticisms over her comments about her days on Deal or No Deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Someone needs to tell Meeeegain to use her thumb to hitchhike. Not her toe.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely don't understand why you'd work with a pap agency so everyone with half a brain knows you called them while you pretend you are just so important


She is counting on the fact that most people won’t look to see who took the photos and few outside of the entertainment industry know of Backgrid.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> Please, enough with the sandals  Those feet should never see the light of day again. *And to top it off, she is wearing a toe ring.*
> 
> View attachment 5637601


I laughed so much at this for some reason. To be fair (and you know I hate to be fair to her) I don’t think it’s a toe ring, it’s part of the sandal. In one of the other photos in the article there’s a ring on the other foot just like it.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, oh dear.
> Those clothes look like left-overs from the ‘shoot’.
> Look at the toe
> 
> View attachment 5637461


She called Backgrid to take photos but she can’t do anything if they sell the photos without Photoshopping them first.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

So who did it better?  

Maybe young Meghan saw this picture of Diana and decided that she needed to get into yoga when she grows up in order for her to cosplay Diana effectively. Joking!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5637509


 I will never worry about how my 60+ feet look in sandals again.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I will never worry about how my 60+ feet look in sandals again.


LOL!  Me neither.  I get regular pedicures and make sure my heels are always filed and not cracked.  Other than that, there's no hope, but I still wear my sandals every chance I can!


----------



## Toby93

Their paid photographer friend has been ordered to release another shot to show how _silly and relatable _TW is.  Still photoshopped 2 sizes smaller


----------



## Toby93

And just like that, she's white again


----------



## needlv

Toby93 said:


> And just like that, she's white again
> 
> View attachment 5637717


Are her legs different shades or is that the lighting?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## csshopper

I know this sounds weird, but I wonder how she decides which color to be on any given day?


----------



## carmen56

saligator said:


> Ok this looks like brand endorsement to me. There are several of these "LOOK AT MY BAG" photos around today.
> 
> View attachment 5637474


Why would you only have one bunion corrected?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Honestly guys these stories are getting too repetitive. 

It feels like everything she does is a reaction to the backlash and then she does the same stupid thing again. 

She went to the funeral and made a fool of herself looking like a royal suck up then she gets called fake so then she tried to do the cut interview to prove she’s political and woke and independent then when she gets exposed as vacuous so now she’s trying to call herself an artistic actress and Hollywood insider when everyone rightly points out she only got cheesecake roles because she can barely act and never showed any hesitation about stripping off and pouting before. Soon she will be insisting she’s just a simple stay at home mommy before using her husband’s name to try and wield unearned political influence again. 
I am tired of it tbh and it definitely does more harm than good.


----------



## jelliedfeels

csshopper said:


> I know this sounds weird, but I wonder how she decides which color to be on any given day?



there is a general trend - she’s bright orange when she’s Hollywood, she’s white when she’s trying to be the glam trophy wife and she suddenly all about freckles and dark contour when she’s trying to be political.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. Just read on Insta "She has a friend and called Backgrid for proof."


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Billy Connolly’s incontinence trousers sketch was on TV last night…...and then these crop up


----------



## justwatchin

Toby93 said:


> Please, enough with the sandals   Those feet should never see the light of day again.  And to top it off, she is wearing a toe ring.
> 
> View attachment 5637601


Where is her security team? Isn’t Harry concerned about her safety in the US?


----------



## needlv

carmen56 said:


> Why would you only have one bunion corrected?


You can’t walk for a while.  I assume that’s why you do one at a time….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

They made the cover of Us Weekly. Here’s the whole article…


----------



## pomeline

LittleStar88 said:


> They made the cover of Us Weekly. Here’s the whole article…
> 
> View attachment 5637837
> View attachment 5637838
> View attachment 5637839
> View attachment 5637840
> View attachment 5637841
> View attachment 5637842


Look how she's looking at his bald patch through a lense of love on the cover shot...


----------



## LittleStar88

pomeline said:


> Look how she's looking at his bald patch through a lense of love on the cover shot...



Or mind control stare


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> They made the cover of Us Weekly. Here’s the whole article…
> 
> View attachment 5637837
> View attachment 5637838
> View attachment 5637839
> View attachment 5637840
> View attachment 5637841
> View attachment 5637842


_Drama_?  They love _drama_, low level _drama_ but still _drama_.


----------



## rose60610

How can one even think there's some kind of "middle ground" when the two issues are the Monarchy vs Z Lister Claw whose reputation is "whine, whine, poor me, one plane crash away, the BRF is racist after they gave me a 50 million dollar wedding and all the perks of royal life, we got married three days before the big production wedding, not many people have asked me if I'm OK" etc. 

Claw doesn't have a chicken leg to stand on. Harry is toast for choosing and supporting this fraud. "Middle" ground? Doesn't exist.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Meghan has a friend??


----------



## Hyacinth

carmen56 said:


> Why would you only have one bunion corrected?



How can anyone have her money and still walk around with such UGLY feet? Those things should be permanently hidden in hiking boots, not flaunted in public in sandals.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Their paid photographer friend has been ordered to release another shot to show how _silly and relatable _TW is. Still photoshopped 2 sizes smaller



Puppet photog released this a propos of nothing? Did anyone miss an anniversary? Perhaps it's the third anniversary of her bunion op and we are supposed to hail her exposed toes?


----------



## Hyacinth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. Just read on Insta "She has a friend and called Backgrid for proof."





justwatchin said:


> Where is her security team? Isn’t Harry concerned about her safety in the US?





CobaltBlu said:


> Meghan has a friend??



That's probably one of her security people. She needs someone who can go with her into the fitting room. Or the Ladies Room, to help her get back into that hideous pile of rags she was wearing. The poor woman probably has to hold it out of the way while Her Wanna-Be Majesty takes a Royal P1ss. The only thing I can visualise is that she has to kneel in front of The Duchess Of Puke Street to hold that rag off the floor. Having the peasants kneel before her must make MeGain's day.


----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> Meghan has a friend??


The friend walking behind her made a funny face. No one asked if she's okay.


----------



## Chanbal

I thought that youtube was not showing the dislikes, but it looks like I'm wrong.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> The friend walking behind her made a funny face. No one asked if she's okay.
> View attachment 5637866


The friend/assistant should never walk ahead of the TW (hierarchy ).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I thought that youtube was not showing the dislikes, but it looks like I'm wrong.




I took one for the team and seeked out that video. For me, it still doesn't show the number of dislikes even if I, well, dislike it.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I took one for the team and seeked out that video. For me, it still doesn't show the number of dislikes even if I, well, dislike it.


Did you login? I wonder if to see the dislikes one has to have a youtube account.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Did you login? I wonder if to see the dislikes one has to have a youtube account.



Yes!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

rose60610 said:


> How can one even think there's some kind of "middle ground" when the two issues are the Monarchy vs Z Lister Claw whose reputation is "whine, whine, poor me, one plane crash away, the BRF is racist after they gave me a 50 million dollar wedding and all the perks of royal life, we got married three days before the big production wedding, not many people have asked me if I'm OK" etc.
> 
> Claw doesn't have a chicken leg to stand on. Harry is toast for choosing and supporting this fraud. "Middle" ground? Doesn't exist.


I also have difficulty comprehending why one needs to criticize the “royal life” as untenable or archaic or whatever their issue is. That is not  necessary to add to what they presume are their legitimate complaints or hurts.  If they only spoke of their personal hurts or disappointment there might be some validity but the other issues are opinions only. Further those opinions are moot since they wanted out.  There is nothing to be gained by such statements other than blatant spite. It is chauvinism and arrogance at its worst.


----------



## calicocat

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I took one for the team and seeked out that video. For me, it still doesn't show the number of dislikes even if I, well, dislike it.


YouTube account holder (in this case Variety) can choose to hide any aspect of the info (i.e. comments, 'About', subscriber/likes/dislikes etc.) of their videos from viewers. It seems like when the dislikes # was publicized, they hid it.

I'd also caution everyone that even 'dislikes' count as engagement - so more YouTube $$$ for Variety (and for the star of the videos if their contract covers it)


----------



## jennlt




----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> They made the cover of Us Weekly. Here’s the whole article…
> 
> View attachment 5637837
> View attachment 5637838
> View attachment 5637839
> View attachment 5637840
> View attachment 5637841
> View attachment 5637842


The video below claims that US Weekly is a TW friendly magazine and sources are potentially from her camp.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> That jumpsuit is a crime against humanity - the hip pockets -uggghhh
> Totally an unforced error - not even Karlie Kloss would look good in those pockets
> And yes … her skinny shins
> And she has no hat game … didn’t anyone in the UK tell her that ? Where is Treacy ?


Oh my gosh the model name for the horrid jumpsuit is the MONTECITO
ps and the horrid color sweater does not go with the off brown hat … and this was a STAGED photo op, not me going to the grocery store incognito


----------



## lanasyogamama

calicocat said:


> Did I see a nipple showing and tip-of-tongue biting on left pic?


To answer the question, yes to both. 

I hate the tongue bite thing so much.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> To answer the question, yes to both.
> 
> I hate the tongue bite thing so much.


is that supposed to make her relatable (silly)?  the woman behind her is security?


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I took one for the team and seeked out that video. For me, it still doesn't show the number of dislikes even if I, well, dislike it.


Same here.


----------



## bag-mania

justwatchin said:


> Where is her security team? Isn’t Harry concerned about her safety in the US?


Security is instructed to walk nearby but out of the camera frame. The purpose of this shoot was to show everyday Meghan out shopping for the essentials! Remember it’s supposed to look like she was caught unaware by those pesky paparazzi.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> The friend walking behind her made a funny face. No one asked if she's okay.
> View attachment 5637866


The poor soul is reassessing her career path.


----------



## DL Harper

bag-mania said:


> Security is instructed to walk nearby but out of the camera frame. The purpose of this shoot was to show everyday Meghan out shopping for the essentials! Remember it’s supposed to look like she was caught unaware by those pesky paparazzi.


But wasn't the tongue biting supposed to signify to the paps "Catch this pose - I'm ready for the "candid" shot now." ??


----------



## 880

I’m fine with H and M going public with their truth. But, then take the lumps.

the problem with them is they still want all of the benefits without any of the responsibility.

Arguably Harry, like Andrew, simply feels it’s his birthright, and never mind everything else he has done

IMO, M is just doing what every third rate social climbing wanna be actress does.


----------



## bag-mania

DL Harper said:


> But wasn't the tongue biting supposed to signify to the paps "Catch this pose - I'm ready for the "candid" shot now." ??


I thought it was to signify “I’m having so much fun!” 

She is learning though. Notice how she wore big sunglasses so you couldn’t see how her eyes are locked on the camera. She knows she can’t help herself, she always stares right at the photographer.


----------



## lallybelle

Yes. They want the money and attention fro selling "their story", yet want none of the consequences of slamming his family. They want to return to England and act as if everything's fine when they want to be included in any events or fanfare. Then they put out multiple stories of how they were wronged. 

But why doesn't the media ever ask them why if the RF is so horrid, why do they keep trying to be "in" when they are supposedly so happy they left? 

They would find the answer to be that the RF is their key to the money and attention they seek.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DL Harper

bag-mania said:


> I thought it was to signify “I’m having so much fun!”
> 
> She is learning though. Notice how she wore big sunglasses so you couldn’t see how her eyes are locked on the camera. She knows she can’t help herself, she always stares right at the photographer.


Yes, but the paps can't see thru the sunglasses to know she's ready for their "candid" shot.  The smile & tongue biting had to be the signal.  Would have been funny if she had slipped up and waved at the same time the photo was snapped.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> Their paid photographer friend has been ordered to release another shot to show how _silly and relatable _TW is. Still photoshopped 2 sizes smaller



A "joyous moment".  She looks like she's overly faking a smile (again) and he's looking down at her like, "WTF are you grinning about?"


----------



## bag-mania

DL Harper said:


> Yes, but the paps can't see thru the sunglasses to know she's ready for their "candid" shot.  The smile & tongue biting had to be the signal.  Would have been funny if she had slipped up and waved at the same time the photo was snapped.


The pap took dozens of shots. The experienced ones are fast! These photos were the best of the lot. Let that settle in.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> I know this sounds weird, but I wonder how she decides which color to be on any given day?


Same.  I've never had a spray tan.  Don't those take awhile to fade?  Maybe she just has dark foundation caked on everywhere visible any time she needs to be "black"?


----------



## youngster

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I also have difficulty comprehending why one needs to criticize the “royal life” as untenable or archaic or whatever their issue is. That is not necessary to add to what they presume are their legitimate complaints or hurts. If they only spoke of their personal hurts or disappointment there might be some validity but the other issues are opinions only. Further those opinions are moot since they wanted out. There is nothing to be gained by such statements other than blatant spite. It is chauvinism and arrogance at its worst.



I also have difficulty comprehending the point of the elaborate fashion shoots with incredibly expensive clothes that accompanied both recent articles, the one in The Cut and the one in Variety.  I get that it was likely her teen fantasy to do these types of photo shoots and perhaps she was paid for it as well, though I'd bet she wasn't, and the clothes were loaned or given to her as payment.


----------



## DL Harper

bag-mania said:


> The pap took dozens of shots. The experienced ones are fast! These photos were the best of the lot. Let that settle in.


That's actually rather terrifying to think these are the best photos of 1) the tent/mulch/shoplifting outfit 2) the legs and shins and 3) the bunions and toes.  YIKES!!  So glad we escaped the horrors of the rejected photos.


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> Did you login? I wonder if to see the dislikes one has to have a youtube account.



Some time in the last 3hours, either YouTube or Variety removed the "DISLIKES" count. It must have been a doozy. (It was 2.3K Likes, 17K Dislikes)

(Sorry if someone else already posted this. I'm running behind)

Here's a large version of jerseydeane's screencap showing Likes vs. Dislikes:





CENSORSHIP? WHAT censorship?








						YouTube Just Removed Anti-Meghan Markle Channels from Search
					

YouTube Just Removed Anti-murky meg Channels just a week ago, searching "Meghan Markle" on YouTube would show videos specifically at Duchess



					londonheadline.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

sdkitty said:


> is that supposed to make her relatable (silly)?  the woman behind her is security?


The tongue bite was a “tip” going around that was supposed to give you a good smile in pics, but it just looks so juveniles and forced. To me.


----------



## bag-mania

_Vanity Fair_ is so addicted to the clicks they get from anything with Meghan’s name in it that they find ways to shoehorn her into unrelated stories.









						Sex, Lies, and Meghan Markle: All the Buzz at the ‘White Lotus’ Season 2 Premiere
					

Jennifer Coolidge, Mike White, and more stars hit the red carpet ahead of the HBO favorite’s sophomore season.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The video below claims that US Weekly is a TW friendly magazine and sources are potentially from her camp.



If that is true, could it be her way of setting up for a possible divorce? She could try to claim Harry didn’t put her and the kids first. I would think that strategy wouldn’t go over well for her. She’s always overreaching.


----------



## calicocat

Hyacinth said:


> CENSORSHIP? WHAT censorship?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YouTube Just Removed Anti-Meghan Markle Channels from Search
> 
> 
> YouTube Just Removed Anti-murky meg Channels just a week ago, searching "Meghan Markle" on YouTube would show videos specifically at Duchess
> 
> 
> 
> londonheadline.co.uk


So hypocritical.  If I were one of the channels being removed I'd gather all the other (removed) channels' owners to start a *'we are silenced'* campaign


----------



## DoggieBags

calicocat said:


> So hypocritical.  If I were one of the channels being removed I'd gather all the other (removed) channels' owners to start a *'we are silenced'* campaign


I wonder how much it’s costing her to have someone constantly running around getting negative stuff about her removed or erased, and accounts blocked or closed, etc. it’s got to be a full time job at this point since she is apparently incapable of keeping her mouth shut and manages to alienate people every time she opens her mouth, especially now since she’s gotten so good at alienating large swaths of people each time (most South Africans and Asians in many countries to name just two of her recent clangers). I guess practice makes perfect in her case


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> The CH clothes look gorgeous on the runway models.  Tragic that MM chooses looks that do not suit her.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  as others have asked, *why is this staffer in a sweater and shoes while MM is strolling around in flip flops and a strapless jumpsuit?*  True, she is carrying a sweater. That may be because the jumpsuit has an open-type  back.



She didn't want to overshadow ZedZed in her new outfit but still managed to look better than her?!


----------



## sgj99

She married Harry not for love but for the fame (I’ll never be convinced she wasn’t aware of the “rules” the BRF follow).  When it didn’t go as she planned she initiated the move to California thinking she could have a career as a leader for all kinds of global issues.  That hasn’t worked out for her either.  She’s bitter.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I will never worry about how my 60+ feet look in sandals again.





purseinsanity said:


> LOL!  Me neither.  I get regular pedicures and make sure my heels are always filed and not cracked.  Other than that, there's no hope, but I still wear my sandals every chance I can!


My right foot has a bunion since age 6/7 from wearing tight shoes and I was born with the second toe on both feet longer than the big toes and yet I've worn summer sandals since my teens. However, IMO, my feet aren't as ugly as ZedZed's feet.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> And just like that, she's white again
> 
> View attachment 5637717


She's so ridiculous


----------



## DoggieBags

sgj99 said:


> She married Harry not for love but for the fame (I’ll never be convinced she wasn’t aware of the “rules” the BRF follow).  When it didn’t go as she planned she initiated the move to California thinking she could have a career as a leader for all kinds of global issues.  That hasn’t worked out for her either.  She’s bitter.


Not just fame but also fortune. She wanted money and lots of it. I don’t think she understood how tightly controlled the money is in these types of families plus having to account to the government for the publicly funded portion of their lifestyle. And I’m not saying she was dumb. A lot of highly intelligent, sophisticated people don’t understand trusts and estates planning.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Side-by-Side comparisons from Twitter


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Remember it’s supposed to look like she was caught unaware by those pesky paparazzi.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

This is good.


----------



## charlottawill

You'd never know that these two feet belonged to the same person.


----------



## redney

The ankle area looks puffy or swollen in the Variety mag photo.


----------



## DoggieBags

I think they did photoshop in someone else’s foot for the Variety photos. Everything from the ankle on down is completely different.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I think they did photoshop in someone else’s foot for the Variety photos. Everything from the ankle on down is completely different.


Probably just complying with one of her many demands.


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> After re-watching that clip - wouldn’t you enter the vehicle on the curb side and then have the driver load the trunk? So staged for paps….



Even the fake burst mode noises  

The woman is a writer, producer, director and star of her own life-movie, the only thing she can't do herself is drive and open a door.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The CH clothes look gorgeous on the runway models.  Tragic that MM chooses looks that do not suit her.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  as others have asked, why is this staffer in a sweater and shoes while MM is strolling around in flip flops and a strapless jumpsuit?  True, she is carrying a sweater. That may be because the jumpsuit has an open-type  back.




Good to know the toe ring is part of the sandal. I tried on a toe ring, it was even more uncomfortable than a faceted bead ankle chain my friend gave me and have never worn.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> So who did it better?
> 
> Maybe young Meghan saw this picture of Diana and decided that she needed to get into yoga when she grows up in order for her to cosplay Diana effectively. Joking!
> 
> View attachment 5637707



Well they're both wrong 

M is _between_ a standing bow and dancer pose

Diana is holding on to something so is probably just warning up or showing off


----------



## charlottawill

Just wanted to add, the founder of the store MM did her pap run to was a highly regarded member of the community who passed away earlier this year. My husband and I have long been fans of his wines. The Lafond winery is a peaceful and lovely place off the beaten path and well worth a stop if you're in the area.  



> https://www.independent.com/2022/04/26/wine-legend-pierre-lafond-dies/





> https://www.lafondwinery.com/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> The CH clothes look gorgeous on the runway models.  Tragic that MM chooses looks that do not suit her.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  as others have asked, why is this staffer in a sweater and shoes while MM is strolling around in flip flops and a strapless jumpsuit?  True, she is carrying a sweater. That may be because the jumpsuit has an open-type  back.




Truly the most horrible and unflattering jumpsuit anyone has _tried_ to design 

They'd have to pay me enough to last a lifetime to even try it on let alone have my picture taken in it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Truly the most horrible and unflattering jumpsuit anyone has _tried_ to design
> 
> They'd have to pay me enough to last a lifetime to even try it on let alone have my picture taken in it.



Seriously. Even if the shape wasn't so ridiculous, who would entertain wearing a jumpsuit that ends at the knees? I don't understand that garment at all.


----------



## charlottawill

What a pretentious twat she is. The problem is, she really believes all the crap she spews.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. Even if the shape wasn't so ridiculous, who would entertain wearing a jumpsuit that ends at the knees? I don't understand that garment at all.


Her jumpsuit could be a metaphor for TW. Poorly thought out and executed, Ridiculous, incomprehensible, not some thing you want to be associated with.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Did you login? I wonder if to see the dislikes one has to have a youtube account.



Went to mine. 

I can see them on another channel so maybe your right 

Went to Variety MM and disliked it on your behalves. The channel can probably hide dislikes like on Insta you can hide your likes. I've never put a public vid out so don't know for YT. 

Variety prob hid the figures after they caught all the dislikes. She still only has 100 more likes likes 4 days later. Prob hit 1M dislikes by now


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> What a pretentious twat she is. The problem is, she really believes all the crap she spews.




Remind me, how many, and which films MM has been in?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Security is instructed to walk nearby but out of the camera frame. The purpose of this shoot was to show everyday Meghan out shopping for the essentials! Remember it’s supposed to look like she was caught unaware by those pesky paparazzi.


Such a contrived pap shot.  She walked around to the driver's side to get in instead of getting in the SUV from the curb side.  Driver's side gave the clear shot.


----------



## papertiger

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5637912



Even cartoonists make MM look better in caricatures than she does IRL.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I also have difficulty comprehending the point of the elaborate fashion shoots with incredibly expensive clothes that accompanied both recent articles, the one in The Cut and the one in Variety.  I get that it was likely her teen fantasy to do these types of photo shoots and perhaps she was paid for it as well, though I'd bet she wasn't, and the clothes were loaned or given to her as payment.


Cosplaying the rich and intelligent socialite royal so she could erase the bimbo look.  Did I leave out any adjectives?


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Truly the most horrible and unflattering jumpsuit anyone has _tried_ to design
> 
> They'd have to pay me enough to last a lifetime to even try it on let alone have my picture taken in it.


Who wants to wear any pant or jumpsuit that gives you thunder thighs?


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Even cartoonists make MM look better in caricatures than she does IRL.


That's because it is Sarah Jessica Parker's body.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> You'd never know that these two feet belonged to the same person.



she can't help it she has that one long toe but why not just live with it?  does she think she's perfect?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> she can't help it she has that one long toe but why not just live with it?  does she think she's perfect?


In a word, yes. 

I have very long second toes. Years ago someone told me it means you have royalty in your blood. But God forbid, don't tell her that.


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> Lawsuit Liver
> [sorry, couldn’t resist]


Litigation Linguini  (I know this is ancient in this thread but I also couldn't resist.)


papertiger said:


> as I said her likeness was disservice to pigeons the world over.
> 
> I was the one incensed when our Mayor (of London - not City of London) called pigeons "vermin"
> 
> but she's not a phoenix either. A phoenix represents a magical re-birth having been all but extinguished by suffering and sacrifice. Zed is certainly no phoenix.
> 
> *There is nothing that you could liken her (or Harry) to in the animal, reptile or insect world that wouldn't suffer by comparison.*


True.  Even skeeters are food for birds. (Maybe?)


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is anyone still reading Courtiers? I've stopped for a week or so because I was busy but I'll have a quiet weekend and get back to it.


I finished it and I really liked the book.  It was such an interesting insight into a perspective rarely seen.


papertiger said:


> I have a red Burberry one from 2002.
> 
> I'd like he world to know, *I bought it because I saw Jerry Hall and Marie Helvin in them*.
> 
> Photo Burberry ad 2001
> 
> View attachment 5636699
> 
> 
> Edited: It was SS01, not as previously published, I must have bought it in the sale '02


Holy smokes, that dress looks like it was literally made for Jerry Hall.  She looks fabulous in it!  (But, it's a good indicator of why it also does not work for TW.)  Obviously, @papertiger , you should definitely keep your version in red---I bet it's beautiful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

montecito jumpsuit - black crepe​
$ 595.00

*take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you will): packs up super small and rolls out of your suitcase ready to rock








						montecito jumpsuit
					

take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you...




					www.maliamills.com
				



*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Cosplaying the rich and intelligent socialite royal so she could erase the bimbo look.  Did I leave out any adjectives?



Duchess ffs


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> montecito jumpsuit - black crepe​
> $ 595.00
> 
> *take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you will): packs up super small and rolls out of your suitcase ready to rock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montecito jumpsuit
> 
> 
> take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.maliamills.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


I wouldn't pay $20 for that thing


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> *montecito jumpsuit - black crepe*​
> *$ 595.00*
> 
> take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you will): packs up super small and rolls out of your suitcase ready to rock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montecito jumpsuit
> 
> 
> take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.maliamills.com



*$ 595.00*

Is that what they pay for someone to wear it?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> montecito jumpsuit - black crepe​
> $ 595.00
> 
> *take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you will): packs up super small and rolls out of your suitcase ready to rock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> montecito jumpsuit
> 
> 
> take one part misaki short, one part resolution jumpsuit and what do you get? your new favorite jumpsuit! our montecito jumpsuit has attitude to spare and looks as rad tossed on for a quick coffee run or dressed up for a night out. the icing on the cake (or the salt on the margarita rim, if you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.maliamills.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


It's on sale, half off - hurry or you'll miss it!

Of course it looks better on the model. Without the jodhpur legs it would be fine for the beach but that's about it.

And who says "rad" anymore?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't pay $20 for that thing


I'm sure you can find something similar at Forever 21 for that price.


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> *$ 595.00*
> 
> Is that what they pay for someone to wear it?


you wouldn’t get enough takers at that price. You’d have to pay people way more than that to get anyone willing to be the butt of jokes all night at whatever event they wore that hot mess to.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure you can find something similar at Forever 21 for that price.


thanks but no thanks


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> In a word, yes.
> 
> I have very long second toes. Years ago someone told me it means you have royalty in your blood. But God forbid, don't tell her that.


My second toe is longer than my big toe and I never knew it was a 'bad' thing.  I'm not going to be ashamed of my feet now, though.  (Perhaps the rest of myself, but not my feet.  )  

She has really damaged her feet by wearing pointy, high, high heels for so long, though.  That must be unfortunate.  Oddly, it also looks like she has quite flat feet.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> you wouldn’t get enough takers at that price. You’d have to pay people way more than that to get anyone willing to be the butt of jokes all night at whatever event they wore that hot mess to.



I know

I just couldn't  

Not for any price 

Some things are just - 

I'd never recover 
I'd fear for my mental health - and I am_ not_ kidding!!!


----------



## Chanbal

No!  I checked, the site is real!  TW is apparently even merching her clothes from QE's funeral… I can't believe that after being on this thread for quite awhile,  I'm still surprised…


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> No!  I checked, the site is real!  TW is apparently even merching her clothes from QE's funeral… I can't believe that after being on this thread for quite awhile,  I'm still surprised…
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5638108



Well Halloween is coming up. Someone should tell her to add a broom to complete the ensemble


----------



## lulu212121

charlottawill said:


> I'm sure you can find something similar at Forever 21 for that price.


And same polyester material.


----------



## Mumotons

charlottawill said:


> In a word, yes.
> 
> I have very long second toes. Years ago someone told me it means you have royalty in your blood. But God forbid, don't tell her that.


I have the long second toe too


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> No!  I checked, the site is real!  TW is apparently even merching her clothes from QE's funeral… I can't believe that after being on this thread for quite awhile,  I'm still surprised…
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5638108



that's what I'd call shameless....crass, cheap....certainly not a duchess


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> that's what I'd call shameless....crass, cheap....certainly not a duchess


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

lulu212121 said:


> And same polyester material.


At a fraction of the cost, I was thinking one of  the huge green bags used by the gardeners to haul away lawn clippings and yard waste could easily, with a few snips of a pair of shears, be turned into a costume version of TW’s Montecito green jumper.


----------



## charlottawill

This would have looked better on her, and for a fraction of the price. But I guess she doesn't have a merching deal with Nordstrom. 



> https://www.nordstrom.com/s/becca-p...ge_type=product&recs_seed=6985369&color=BLACK


----------



## needlv




----------



## DoggieBags

needlv said:


>



this woman really has no self-awareness.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> Omg this woman really has no self-awareness.


pretty sure this is a joke


----------



## pukasonqo

charlottawill said:


> This would have looked better on her, and for a fraction of the price. But I guess she doesn't have a merching deal with Nordstrom.


Nordstrom?! That is for us, plebs!


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> pretty sure this is a joke


Thanks! I realized that after I posted. But now I’m caught up in thinking who could be her guests in this fantasy podcrash. I mean is there a bigger gold digger than TW at this point?


----------



## 880

DoggieBags said:


> Thanks! I realized that after I posted. But now I’m caught up in thinking who could be her guests in this fantasy podcrash. I mean is there a bigger gold digger than TW at this point?


im sure we could think up a dream roster


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> Thanks! I realized that after I posted. But now I’m caught up in thinking who could be her guests in this fantasy podcrash. I mean is there a bigger gold digger than TW at this point?


there aren't many as successful as she is.....at least if you factor in the fame she got along with the wealth


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> there aren't many as successful as she is.....at least if you factor in the fame she got along with the wealth


Jeff Bezos’s GF?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Jeff Bezos’s GF?


successful in terms of money I guess but we have no info that he was a gold digger do we?  and I don't think he was lusting to be a household name
they are divorcing now so IDK what that's about


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> there aren't many as successful as she is.....at least if you factor in the fame she got along with the wealth



She's having the wrong approach. Can you imagine the millions she could make giving classes for desperate women on how do snag a rich man even though you're just not that young, beautiful, talented and likeable?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She's having the wrong approach. Can you imagine the millions she could make giving classes for desperate women on how do snag a rich man even though you're just not that young, beautiful, talented and likeable?


well, we don't like her but apparently she knows how to work people to make them like her when she wants to


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> successful in terms of money I guess but we have no info that he was a gold digger do we?  and I don't think he was lusting to me a household name


Oh, I thought you were looking for women who have done something similar to MM - marry a much wealthier man than themselves.  Perhaps Jerry Hall marrying Murdoch counts, too - although she had money before marriage. I don’t think of her as a gold digger tho.
ETA:  fixed the husband’s name [apologies to MForbes]


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, I thought you were looking for women who have done something similar to MM - marry a much wealthier man than themselves.  Perhaps Jerry Hall marrying MForbes counts, too - although she had money before marriage. I don’t think of her as a gold digger tho.


I don't want to name call Jerry Hall but her husband was more wealthy than Meghan's I think....she's set for life now I imagine

But she was a high profile model and had another very famous husband before Murdoch....so she was more successful and well-known than Meegain


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't want to name call Jerry Hall but her husband was more wealthy than Meghan's I think....she's set for life now I imagine
> 
> But she was a high profile model and had another very famous husband before Murdoch....so she was more successful and well-known than Meegain


Maybe Prince Albert’s wife - she was an Olympic swimmer, but not as wealthy as she is now.
Princess Mary - an unknown from Australia married CP Frederick

Here’s a good list - it includes Princess Grace








						Meet the Stylish Women Who Married Into Royalty
					

We're charting the fashionable ladies who married into royal families, from Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Prince Albert’s wife - she was an Olympic swimmer, but not as wealthy as she is now.
> Princess Mary - an unknown from Australia married CP Frederick


but were they gold diggers?  I don't know anything about Princess Mary and it seems everyone thinks Albert's wife is very unhappy in her marriage/role

I guess I'd say I view Meghan as ambitious and predatory - a high bar


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> but were they gold diggers?  I don't know anything about Princess Mary and it seems everyone thinks Albert's wife is very unhappy in her marriage/role
> 
> I guess I'd say I view Meghan as ambitious and predatory - a high bar


Imo gold digger is subjective - probably depends on how you define it.  Who’s to say these women were not in love when they married [whatever ‘in love’ means ] Princess Mary was an unknown, met the CP in a bar, etc.  Princess Sofia did some porno films.  Sooo.


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> but were they gold diggers?  I don't know anything about Princess Mary and it seems everyone thinks Albert's wife is very unhappy in her marriage/role
> 
> I guess I'd say I view Meghan as ambitious and predatory - a high bar


Maybe Amber Heard?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Prince Albert’s wife - she was an Olympic swimmer, but not as wealthy as she is now.
> Princess Mary - an unknown from Australia married CP Frederick
> 
> Here’s a good list - it includes Princess Grace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Stylish Women Who Married Into Royalty
> 
> 
> We're charting the fashionable ladies who married into royal families, from Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com



Not sure simply marrying someone with more money counts as gold digging.


----------



## CarryOn2020

My unpopular opinion is that MM did marry Hazz for love [however she defines it], not sure about him.  Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy.  I’ll leave now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, random and slightly off topic, but over the weekend I fell down a rabbit hole and read up on all the royal weddings starting with Queen Victoria (don't ask!). I was slightly surprised to learn (but then not really as it does make sense) that Eugenie's husband while not a peer is somewhere very far down a LoS to a title from some great-great-grandfather he apparently shares with Eugenie, and his father or maybe grandfather was a member of the royal household for many years. So not quite the Cinderella we thought he was.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion is that MM did marry Hazz for love [however she defines it], not sure about him.  Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy.  I’ll leave now.



I see it exactly the opposite. I am certain he was head over heels for her while all she saw was dollar signs and rubbing shoulders with celebs. Has she ever had a meaningful relationship with someone who couldn't do something for her?


----------



## DL Harper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe Prince Albert’s wife - she was an Olympic swimmer, but not as wealthy as she is now.
> Princess Mary - an unknown from Australia married CP Frederick
> 
> Here’s a good list - it includes Princess Grace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meet the Stylish Women Who Married Into Royalty
> 
> 
> We're charting the fashionable ladies who married into royal families, from Grace Kelly to Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


They got it wrong.  "Fashionable" does NOT describe MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I see it exactly the opposite. I am certain he was head over heels for her while all she saw was dollar signs and rubbing shoulders with celebs. Has she ever had a meaningful relationship with someone who couldn't do something for her?


 The bird’s eye view is that her relationships have been more transactional than emotional. My guess is that attitude comes from her family background. Some American women learn early not to get swept away by their emotions, keep their eye on their goals, just like in the Hallmark movies and soap operas. Still, imo she did love him, especially she loved all the things she _thought_  he could for her.  That’s not my definition of love. I have known many women who think like that.  The Real Housewives series is full of them, too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Princess Grace was made to bring a dowry of 1 million dollars, so in her case I guess Prince Rainier was the gold digger


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Princess Grace was made to bring a dowry of 1 million dollars, so in her case I guess Prince Rainier was the gold digger


she was truly a Big Movie Star and gave up a huge career....not a z-list tv actress


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion is that MM did marry Hazz for love [however she defines it], not sure about him.  Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy.  I’ll leave now.


I don't know if she loved him but if she did, you can't say him being a prince was just a coincidence....she just fell in love with a guy who happened to be a prince - yeah, right


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> this woman really has no self-awareness.



Well she does, she basically thinks she is launching missiles at missiles. 

The only problem is, she's totally in denial about so many of her issues, faults and character, she makes herself look like an ass. Meghan is practically the definition of a scheming Gold Digger


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't know if she loved him but if she did, you can't say him being a prince was just a coincidence....she just fell in love with a guy who happened to be a prince - yeah, right


Agree, she needed a level up. Her show was ending, her marriage was over, she was aging quickly which Hwood does not support.  He came along, she went for it.  None of _her_ behavior surprises me. The surprise is that _he_ with all his worldly knowledge agreed to it.  What surprised me more was that the BRF supported it.  I thought, then, they knew he had issues and wanted to get rid of him [figuratively].


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion is that MM did marry Hazz for love [however she defines it], not sure about him.  Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy.  I’ll leave now.



Have you taken your meds today? Or did you take too many?


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, she needed a level up. Her show was ending, her marriage was over, she was aging quickly which Hwood does not support.  He came along, she went for it.  None of _her_ behavior surprises me. The surprise is that _he_ with all his worldly knowledge agreed to it.  What surprised me more was that the BRF supported it.  I thought, then, they knew he had issues and wanted to get rid of him.


I think these are two very dysfunctional individuals who unfortunately bring out the worst in each other.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I think these are two very dysfunctional individuals who unfortunately bring out the worst in each other.



But it ain't got nothing to do with love, they are both entirely co-dependant. 

Taking mental health advice from these two is like taking shopping addiction advice from Elton John.


----------



## CarryOn2020

That jumpsuit pushed me over the edge.   Help me, help me, o wise ones


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> But it ain't got nothing to do with love, they are both entirely co-dependant.
> 
> Taking mental health advice from these two is like taking shopping addiction advice from Elton John.


I think they each thought they could use the other. Has it turned out the way they envisioned? No way to know since neither one can be trusted to tell the truth and I don’t know if they are capable of admitting even to themselves if their grandiose plans haven’t succeeded on the level they had hoped for. Other than lots and lots of money and independence from the BRF, I’m not even sure how they would define success.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> I think they each thought they could use the other. Has it turned out the way they envisioned? No way to know since neither one can be trusted to tell the truth and I don’t know if they are capable of admitting even to themselves if their grandiose plans haven’t succeeded on the level they had hoped for. Other than lots and lots of money and independence from the BRF, I’m not even sure how they would define success.



Problem is they can't see straight for dreaming-up impossible fantasies and seeing an impossible number of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

He had no idea that in the real world he had to spend actual money. That's what a lifetime of being paid for whilst you keep your money in the bank does for you. The man is stupid beyond belief.

And she (with her 'superior' brain) should have looked-up the word 'primogeniture'


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> That jumpsuit pushed me over the edge.   Help me, help me, o wise ones
> 
> View attachment 5638225



You need rest and a reset


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


>




Is THAT how she's earning extra cash? Damn, I'd love to see her and Lucy go toe-to-toe in a grape-stomping contest! But I just lost my taste for California wines. 

Lucy had better legs too. And she knew how to dance! Eat your heart out, MEEEEEaGain, THIS is how it's done:








						Lucille Ball - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion is that *MM did marry Hazz for love* [however she defines it], not sure about him. Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy. I’ll leave now.


She loved that she was able to get him to marry her. She loved that that marriage made her instantly famous. She loved that her royal wedding meant the world’s eyes were focused on her the way she has always dreamed. 

If we go by the narcissistic definition of love, Meghan would qualify.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> He had no idea that in the real world he had to spend actual money. That's what a lifetime of being paid for whilst you keep your money in the bank does for you. The man is stupid beyond belief.
> 
> And she (with her 'superior' brain) should have looked-up the word 'primogeniture'


He honestly believed that they could be half-in and half-out and still retain everything as far as status and money. Meghan had probably made it sound like it would be easy to move abroad where they could pick and choose what they would do without being assigned by the family. It threw them both for a loop when they were told no, that wasn’t possible.


----------



## Debbini

papertiger said:


> Problem is they can't see straight for dreaming-up impossible fantasies and seeing an impossible number of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
> 
> He had no idea that in the real world he had to spend actual money. That's what a lifetime of being paid for whilst you keep your money in the bank does for you. The man is stupid beyond belief.
> 
> And she (with her 'superior' brain) should have looked-up the word 'primogeniture'


My inferior brain had to look it up!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I wouldn't pay $20 for that thing


I wouldn't wear it if someone paid me $20!


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Princess Grace was made to bring a dowry of 1 million dollars, so in her case I guess Prince Rainier was the gold digger


I believe it was $2 million and was used to help bring Monaco back to life!  Someone posted a video in the Princess Grace thread.  Kind of fascinating.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> Well they're both wrong
> 
> M is _between_ a standing bow and dancer pose
> 
> Diana is holding on to something so is probably just warning up or showing off


Diana wanted to be a ballerina but grew too tall.  She took lessons for years and was on pointe for a number of years, so quite good.  She was probably messing around with flexibility


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> They made the cover of Us Weekly. Here’s the whole article…
> 
> View attachment 5637837
> View attachment 5637838
> View attachment 5637839
> View attachment 5637840
> View attachment 5637841
> View attachment 5637842


Four sources: Omid, Gayle, Misan/Tyler/Bouzy, some Archewell stooge or Sussex Squat groupie. Of course we cannot omit the very likely possibility that the fraud masquerades as her own sources.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> The pap took dozens of shots. The experienced ones are fast! *These photos were the best of the lot*. Let that settle in.


_So, do we sell the one that shows one nipple or the one where her top slid down because of the deflated boobs? Would she sue us for exposing her wardrobe mishap? Let's go with one nipple for now._

Btw, in an earlier photo that showed a lot of her cleavage, there was a red line on the lower part of her boob. I wondered if that was a surgical scar from her boob jobs.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion is that MM did marry Hazz for love [however she defines it], not sure about him.  Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy.  I’ll leave now.


----------



## pomeline

charlottawill said:


> In a word, yes.
> 
> I have very long second toes. Years ago someone told me it means you have royalty in your blood. But God forbid, don't tell her that.


The long second toe is called Morton's toe. Just one of the foot shapes and doubt it has anything to do with whether your ancestors were royal or not (just about everyone's were if you go back far enough). Some people have pain because of the long toe, some don't.

What Exactly Is Morton’s Toe?


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> *Four sources*: Omid, Gayle, Misan/Tyler/Bouzy, some Archewell stooge or Sussex Squat groupie. Of course we cannot omit the very likely possibility that the fraud masquerades as her own sources.


TW1, TW2, TW3, and TW4


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Hyacinth said:


> Is THAT how she's earning extra cash? Damn, *I'd love to see her and Lucy go toe-to-toe in a grape-stomping contest!* But I just lost my taste for California wines.
> 
> Lucy had better legs too. And she knew how to dance! Eat your heart out, MEEEEEaGain, THIS is how it's done:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lucille Ball - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


I love this scene!   ZedZed would not survive the first dunk. Enjoy!


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I don't know if she loved him but if she did, you can't say him being a prince was just a coincidence....she just fell in love with a guy who happened to be a prince - yeah, right


It's not a coincidence.  She pestered her friend/acquaintance/agent (?) who knew Hazz, for a set up.  She admitted to another friend that she had researched his life and knew all about him.  To me, that's stalking and to use another word that you just used -predatory   She was already living with another man, but keeping her options open for her next target.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Go Charles!


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> She loved that she was able to get him to marry her. She loved that that marriage made her instantly famous. She loved that her royal wedding meant the world’s eyes were focused on her the way she has always dreamed.
> 
> If we go by the narcissistic definition of love, Meghan would qualify.


You definitely have a point.  She must have not believed her luck in being able to convince him that she was "the one", and it probably went to her head, with all the private secretaries, equerries, butlers and maids waiting on her hand and foot.  There was no way she letting that go, and would have been love bombing him right up until the point of getting that ring.

What I do wonder about is how Hazz could be so thick, and yet the rest of his family were clearly able to see right through her and warned him to slow down.  Even Diana's sisters didn't like her and could not be made to see that she was just like Diana.  

What was it about her that she couldn't hide from his family?  I am sure that had a lot to do with her fast exit to the US and isolating him from all of those people (including the staff)  who saw exactly who she was.


----------



## Chanbal

@CarryOn2020 Hope you are feeling better. This is for you!


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't know if she loved him but if she did, you can't say him being a prince was just a coincidence....she just fell in love with a guy who happened to be a prince - yeah, right



She would not have given him a second glance if he was working behind the bar at SoHo House instead of sitting across the table from her and picking up the tab.


----------



## Kevinaxx

That variety piece is a load of crap.

“nice warmth with the matriarch of the family.”??

Same family she claims prohibited her from mental help, of course, she needed mental help because she couldn’t cope with the racism etc etc while being at the palace and so she and harry fled.

And she must have paid them or dropped major hints to get this:

“For most of her public life as the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan has been described as many things: disingenuous, calculating, determined, relatable, even *Diana-like*.”

Or do you think all those years of studying Diana and making sure she mimics Diana’s looks/“persona” that she not only manage to snag the son (who clearly suffers from mommy issues) but also fool a good portion of the population?

After all, she is the “smart” one.


----------



## xincinsin

lallybelle said:


> But why doesn't the media ever ask them why if the RF is so horrid, why do they keep trying to be "in" when they are supposedly so happy they left?


Not for a mercenary reason, naturally. The Harkles are the victims and the saints, don't cha know? 

Do you recall how many times they have put out the story that the RF is sending them olive branches and how often the wench has proclaimed herself ready to forgive them? They are laying it on thick that it's not them wanting back in, it's the RF repeatedly luring them back in and treating them horribly each time. 

This latest pap shot incident? Me-again is using retail therapy to deal with her "grief", and that eyesore of a romper is her modern-day equivalent of sackcloth and ashes.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> You'd never know that these two feet belonged to the same person.



The skin tone!


----------



## rose60610

Come on! Claw had her hooks in the water for any big fish. When she snagged Harry for a first date she probably crapped her pants. And had to call off five other dates for that night. Let's give her credit, she put on a full court press that got her to the 50 million dollar wedding altar. Mothers around the world had to be face palming their heads, knowing they also had gorgeous daughters who could have landed such an idiot prince and would have been GRATEFUL for all the perks the BRF provided. Hindsight is 20/20. We now know that Harry was a sitting duck for a pretty face and a good bod. Claw probably brainwashed him into believing that BEING A PERSON OF COLOR was a huge asset to "modernizing" the BRF and that Hazza would go into the history books with higher esteem than by simply winning the ovarian lottery. Whatever she did was a great sales job and HazNoBalls must have buyer's remorse at this point. Is there any man of substantial wealth alive at this point who can't see Maggot for what she really is? Harry is the best she'll ever do. When the divorce comes, her net worth will be related to the child support. My guess RF lawyers have already been working on the terms for a while. With or without Haz's knowledge. 

IMO Claw is like one of those huge lottery winners who pisses away all the winnings in a year. She doesn't realize what she has thrown away, and that nothing lasts forever.


----------



## Chanbal

Kevinaxx said:


> “For most of her public life as the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan has been described as many things: disingenuous, calculating, determined, relatable, even *Diana-like*.”
> 
> *Or do you think all those years of studying Diana and making sure she mimics Diana’s looks*/“persona” that she not only manage to snag the son (who clearly suffers from mommy issues) but also fool a good portion of the population?
> 
> After all, she is the “smart” one.


A cheap version?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

Toby93 said:


> It's not a coincidence.  She pestered her friend/acquaintance/agent (?) who knew Hazz, for a set up.  She admitted to another friend that she had researched his life and knew all about him.  To me, that's stalking and to use another word that you just used -predatory   She was already living with another man, but keeping her options open for her next target.



She didn’t research enough.  I don’t think she knew that H “in his own right” was not worth billions and money was held in family trusts!  

Any good gold-digger would have done a lot more digging into actual $ values of H worth.

she saw fame and $ and love bombed her way in.

H was not a catch with his substance abuse, temper, mental health and seething (jealousy) issues.  They are both awful people and deserve each other….


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion is that MM did marry Hazz for love *[however she defines it]*, not sure about him. Sure, she knew she would increase her wealth and status, but I think she did love the guy. I’ll leave now.


Your disclaimer is 
Love according to Zedzee is quite different from what it means to us. Handbag was free milk and she grabbed it.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I see it exactly the opposite. I am certain he was head over heels for her while all she saw was dollar signs and rubbing shoulders with celebs. Has she ever had a meaningful relationship with someone who couldn't do something for her?


I wonder if he is still head over heels for her now?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, she needed a level up. Her show was ending, her marriage was over, *she was aging quickly which Hwood does not support*.  He came along, she went for it.  None of _her_ behavior surprises me. The surprise is that _he_ with all his worldly knowledge agreed to it.  What surprised me more was that the BRF supported it.  I thought, then, they knew he had issues and wanted to get rid of him [figuratively].


She wasn't even Hollywood.


DoggieBags said:


> I think they each thought they could use the other. Has it turned out the way they envisioned? No way to know since neither one can be trusted to tell the truth and I don’t know if they are capable of admitting even to themselves if their grandiose plans haven’t succeeded on the level they had hoped for. Other than lots and lots of money and independence from the BRF, I’m not even sure how they would define success.


In her eyes, I'm sure apart from money and independence from the BRF, getting her way all day every day is #1. What Wench wants, Wench gets.


papertiger said:


> *He had no idea that in the real world he had to spend actual money. *That's what a lifetime of being paid for whilst you keep your money in the bank does for you. The man is stupid beyond belief.
> 
> And she (with her 'superior' brain) should have looked-up the word 'primogeniture'


Nailed it!!!!


Chanbal said:


> TW1, TW2, TW3, and TW4


The flight codes for London-Canada, Canada-LA...


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Go Charles!



Untitled TV show? Don't you just love the many ways we are challenged on this thread? Okay, the menu options challenge in still open. Latest entry "Litigation Linguini" from @Cinderlala. New challenge: name the love story! The Gold digger and the Village idiot?


rose60610 said:


> Come on! Claw had her hooks in the water for any big fish. When she snagged Harry for a first date she probably crapped her pants. And had to call off five other dates for that night. Let's give her credit, she put on a full court press that got her to the 50 million dollar wedding altar. Mothers around the world had to be face palming their heads, knowing they also had gorgeous daughters who could have landed such an idiot prince and would have been GRATEFUL for all the perks the BRF provided. Hindsight is 20/20. We now know that Harry was a sitting duck for a pretty face and a good bod. Claw probably brainwashed him into believing that BEING A PERSON OF COLOR was a huge asset to "modernizing" the BRF and that Hazza would go into the history books with higher esteem than by simply winning the ovarian lottery. Whatever she did was a great sales job and HazNoBalls must have buyer's remorse at this point. Is there any man of substantial wealth alive at this point who can't see Maggot for what she really is? Harry is the best she'll ever do. When the divorce comes, her net worth will be related to the child support. My guess RF lawyers have already been working on the terms for a while. With or without Haz's knowledge.
> 
> IMO Claw is like one of those huge lottery winners who pisses away all the winnings in a year. She doesn't realize what she has thrown away, and that nothing lasts forever.


I'm of the opinion that she played on his Saviour mentality with a million sob stories of her impoverished upbringing and "no one acknowledges that I'm Oscar material"  The schmuck was reeled in hook, line and sinker.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz and his kids are missing on a lot of fun…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 Hope you are feeling better. This is for you!



Thank you   Yes, all is well. That jumpsuit unnerved me, sent me out to ChungaChanga.  Sometimes I feel like the penguin being pushed and other times like I’m the one doing the pushing.  Bizarre, dysfunctioning family with H&M.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thank you  Yes, all is well. *That jumpsuit unnerved me, sent me out to ChungaChanga.*  Sometimes I feel like the penguin being pushed and other times like I’m the one doing the pushing.  Bizarre, dysfunctioning family with H&M.
> 
> View attachment 5638325


Ok, let's see if this brings you back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> She didn’t research enough.  I don’t think she knew that H “in his own right” was not worth billions and money was held in family trusts!
> 
> Any good gold-digger would have done a lot more digging into actual $ values of H worth.
> 
> she saw fame and $ and love bombed her way in.
> 
> H was not a catch with his substance abuse, temper, mental health and seething (jealousy) issues.  They are both awful people and deserve each other….



That said, they were still not exactly living in the poorhouse. A basically for free home, a million pounds allowance from dad, the vast ressources from the BRF at their fingertips (I think until Princess Margaret everyone honeymooned at their various castles all over the UK because there were so many. Even William and Kate had their first honeymoon in the UK. Margaret went on a Caribbean cruise).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Hazz and his kids are missing on a lot of fun…




A grandpa who reads Harry Potter? I'm sold.


----------



## needlv

Well… I have to find that chrome extension which shows me this… but wow.  Rebranding didn’t work.  The Oprah interview sunk them… they should not have trashed their family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh what is wrong with her face. Mine doesn't do that. But of course I was always diligent with my sunscreen.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> Diana wanted to be a ballerina but grew too tall.  She took lessons for years and was on pointe for a number of years, so quite good.  She was probably messing around with flexibility



You mean her fantasy was that she could have been a professional dancer. She was a good dancer for 'civilian' but she wasn't a good dancer for a dancer.  

Diana even used the Royal Ballet and the Royal Opera House (both party funded) to stage one of her stunts. She and the character dancer Wayne Sleep did a tall/short 'pas de deux' to 'Up-town Girl'. She made out it was for Prince Charles birthday, but it was all for her. Totally entitled, self-indulgent stunt.  The Crown for one thing right, it made PC (now KC) squirm, not because he thought she made a fool of herself but the indulgence of it all, and all for herself to fulfil a childhood fantasy. he saw it for what it was. 

Actually, it makes me think M and D have some share characteristics, but as we have all seen, for all M's training she cannot dance. 









						Yes, Princess Diana's Surprise Performance to Billy Joel's "Uptown Girl" Really Happened
					

"I was shaking in the wings," Royal Ballet dancer Wayne Sleep revealed. "What if I dropped the future Queen of England?"




					www.oprahdaily.com
				




As you can see, even the article writes she performed en pointe when she is clearly in shoes in the pic.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh what is wrong with her face. Mine doesn't do that. But of course I was always diligent with my sunscreen.



There is a huge noticeable vein near her right (viewing our left) eye.  What is that?!  Yikes.  Is that a side effect of Botox or fillers???

Edit - just googled: stress, aging and genetics.  Nothing mentions demonic possession though….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh what is wrong with her face. Mine doesn't do that. But of course I was always diligent with my sunscreen.


That vein is creepy. Not the first time it has appeared in photos, but the previous time, it was only on her forehead. It's growing ...


----------



## jelliedfeels

M


papertiger said:


> You mean her fantasy was that she could have been a professional dancer. She was a good dancer for 'civilian' but she wasn't a good dancer for a dancer.
> 
> Diana even used the Royal Ballet and the Royal Opera House (both party funded) to stage one of her stunts. She and the character dancer Wayne Sleep did a tall/short 'pas de deux' to 'Up-town Girl'. She made out it was for Prince Charles birthday, but it was all for her. Totally entitled, self-indulgent stunt.  The Crown for one thing right, it made PC (now KC) squirm, not because he thought she made a fool of herself but the indulgence of it all, and all for herself to fulfil a childhood fantasy. he saw it for what it was.
> 
> Actually, it makes me think M and D have some share characteristics, but as we have all seen, for all M's training she cannot dance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Princess Diana's Surprise Performance to Billy Joel's "Uptown Girl" Really Happened
> 
> 
> "I was shaking in the wings," Royal Ballet dancer Wayne Sleep revealed. "What if I dropped the future Queen of England?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, even the article writes she performed en pointe when she is clearly in shoes in the pic.


meh, I’m going to give her a pass on this because all the men in the royal family get to live out their childhood fantasies of being polo champs and golf pros and  great hunters and marksmen and toy admirals at the public expense too. I find them prancing about on polo horses far more embarrassing at least people got to watch the ballet and it was entertaining- better than the country club and private estate BS.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> There is a huge noticeable vein near her right (viewing our left) eye.  What is that?!  Yikes.  Is that a side effect of Botox or fillers???
> 
> Edit - just googled: stress, aging and genetics.  Nothing mentions demonic possession though….



I think it's partly the Botox and filler, perhaps PS scars in the light. . My friend has just stopped Tox and filler because he was noticing similar after 10 years of treatment, most noticeable on him towards the sides of his eyes.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

needlv said:


> H was not a catch with his substance abuse, temper, mental health and seething (jealousy) issues. They are both awful people and deserve each other….





papertiger said:


> Actually, it makes me think M and D have some share characteristics, but as we have all seen, for all M's training she cannot dance.





papertiger said:


> I think it's partly the Botox and filler, perhaps PS scars in the light.


Agree with all of the above.


----------



## MiniMabel

charlottawill said:


> What a pretentious twat she is. The problem is, she really believes all the crap she spews.




I'm just catching up but, really, what a lot of old b*llocks! The woman next to her looks totally bewildered at the word salad emanating from MeAgain!


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> I'm just catching up but, really, what a lot of old b*llocks! The woman next to her looks totally bewildered at the word salad emanating from MeAgain!


Some day, some interviewer will repeat the question till it's obvious that she is avoiding it. Hopefully it will be live on air, and not the edited BS that Oprah and Spotify put out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Some day, some interviewer will repeat the question till it's obvious that she is avoiding it. Hopefully it will be live on air, and not the edited BS that Oprah and Spotify put out.



I live for the day someone challenges her live on air and confronts her with her bullsh*t. One can dream.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> That jumpsuit is a crime against humanity - the hip pockets -uggghhh
> Totally an unforced error - not even Karlie Kloss would look good in those pockets
> And yes … her skinny shins
> And she has no hat game … didn’t anyone in the UK tell her that ? Where is Treacy ?


Honestly, I was harsh on the outfit, I saw another picture - up close, better lighting ..
The jumpsuit is inky green, the sweater is a gray green, the brown hat worked better when I could see the greens, they had been blanded out to gray in previous photos
I forgive the outfit
BUT honestly it was a staged photo , pick something that works better for the camera , neutrals get blanded out , we all know that, don’t we ?


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Go Charles!



Well this should be about a 5 minute documentary since neither one actually “works” anymore!


----------



## marietouchet

Mandana et Al are keyboard warriors fighting against anti Semitism but hypocritically work for H
Please help my memory , yes there was that dreadful costume party party event with H dressed in a WWII uniform, not exactly an anti semitic statement just in massively bad taste, he should not have done it PERIOD
But that was years ago, when he had a drinking issue, that maybe he has solved with therapy … it is time to forgive him ? Should we forgive him a bit ???
Were there other similar discrimination events in H’s life ? ones I have forgotten … are we judging the OLD Harry ? Or have I forgotten more recent events of that nature ?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Go Charles!



one of Netflix's most eagerly awaited shows?  the current VF editor is a Meghanite.  I just made up a new word


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Mandana et Al are keyboard warriors for anti Semitism but hypocritically work for H
> Please help my memory , yes there was that dreadful costume party party event with H dressed in a WWII uniform, not exactly an anti semitic statement just in massively bad taste, he should not have done it PERIOD
> But that was years ago, when he had a drinking issue, that maybe he has solved with therapy … it is time to forgive him ? Should we forgive him a bit ???
> Were there other similar discrimination events in H’s life ? ones I have forgotten … are we judging the OLD Harry ? Or have I forgotten more recent events of that nature ?


Good questions. The way things are perceived is constantly changing over time. When I was a kid in the 70s, little boys would draw pictures of tanks, planes, and swastickas in their notebooks. (Can you imagine what would happen if a kid in school was doing that today?) Those boys didn’t draw pictures because they were Nazis. They did it because it was not so far removed in time from WWII and boys were fascinated by everything about it. By the time Harry wore that costume attitudes had changed. I _think_ he wore it in the same way anyone would wear a villain costume and he didn’t think any more about it. I don’t believe he had bad intentions.


----------



## Chanbal

Est-ce que vous parlez français?


----------



## Chanbal

We have a serious problem with recollections, allegedly…


----------



## 880

marietouchet said:


> Mandana et Al are keyboard warriors for anti Semitism but hypocritically work for H
> Please help my memory , yes there was that dreadful costume party party event with H dressed in a WWII uniform, not exactly an anti semitic statement just in massively bad taste, he should not have done it PERIOD
> But that was years ago, when he had a drinking issue, that maybe he has solved with therapy … it is time to forgive him ? Should we forgive him a bit ???
> Were there other similar discrimination events in H’s life ? ones I have forgotten … are we judging the OLD Harry ? Or have I forgotten more recent events of that nature ?


I don’t see much difference between the old and new Harry. Thoughtless, arrogant, not too bright, and coasting on charm and the entitlement of being a spare. 
JMO though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Mandana et Al are keyboard warriors for anti Semitism but hypocritically work for H
> Please help my memory , yes there was that dreadful costume party party event with H dressed in a WWII uniform, not exactly an anti semitic statement just in massively bad taste, he should not have done it PERIOD
> But that was years ago, when he had a drinking issue, that maybe he has solved with therapy … it is time to forgive him ? Should we forgive him a bit ???
> Were there other similar discrimination events in H’s life ? ones I have forgotten … are we judging the OLD Harry ? Or have I forgotten more recent events of that nature ?


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> I don’t see much difference between the old and new Harry. Thoughtless, arrogant, not too bright, and coasting on charm and the entitlement of being a spare.
> JMO though.


except people liked him when he was young - not so much now


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Mandana et Al are keyboard warriors for anti Semitism but hypocritically work for H
> Please help my memory , yes there was that dreadful costume party party event with H dressed in a WWII uniform, not exactly an anti semitic statement just in massively bad taste, he should not have done it PERIOD
> But that was years ago, when he had a drinking issue, that maybe he has solved with therapy … it is time to forgive him ? Should we forgive him a bit ???
> Were there other similar discrimination events in H’s life ? ones I have forgotten … are we judging the OLD Harry ? Or have I forgotten more recent events of that nature ?


IIRC he also used racial slurs to describe his army mate(s). IMHO Handbag is less racist and more stupid. He doesn't understand nuance or implications. Can't imagine how someone so dense can do coaching. This is why he advises people to quit their jobs without considering if the average Joe has millions in trust funds.


Chanbal said:


>



Handbag claimed he was never able to ride a bike with his father, yet there are photos of him riding a bike with Charles. This just adds fuel to the rumour that his father isn't Charles. Face-palm moment. No wonder veins are popping up on his wench's face.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Honestly, I was harsh on the outfit, I saw another picture - up close, better lighting ..
> The jumpsuit is inky green, the sweater is a gray green, the brown hat worked better when I could see the greens, they had been blanded out to gray in previous photos
> I forgive the outfit
> BUT honestly it was a staged photo , pick something that works better for the camera , neutrals get blanded out , we all know that, don’t we ?


If anyone asks Zedzee about it, she will say with a gutteral moan that neutrals are racist.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> except people liked him when he was young - not so much now


Imo his popularity was due to the palace micromanaging his media.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo his popularity was due to the palace micromanaging his media.


And he wasn't trying to be a faux intellectual or global crusader then. What was that saying ... Better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and prove it?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Honestly, I was harsh on the outfit, I saw another picture - up close, better lighting ..
> The jumpsuit is inky green, the sweater is a gray green, the brown hat worked better when I could see the greens, they had been blanded out to gray in previous photos
> I forgive the outfit
> BUT honestly it was a staged photo , pick something that works better for the camera , neutrals get blanded out , we all know that, don’t we ?


Nooo, your initial assessment was spot on. She was merching this outfit.  While the green color is fine on her, those pants and shoes do not flatter her.  The top seemed a bit tight and the weather a bit nippy. Yes, once again, the top reveals way too much.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Est-ce que vous parlez français?



Just rewatched the MM interview with Craig Ferguson on YouTube
A completely cringe worthy 8 min , grab the popcorn please …
A few highlights
1. Her OVER THE TOP body language -arm gestures, and yes the BLG has analysis - recommend his video
2. she was flirting with Ferguson, ca 2013, and she was married ?
3. Is this the real MM ?
4. The dress that just about shows her undies as she gets up at the end
For someone trying to get over the bimbo moment at DOND, she had not gotten very far in her quest to establish herself as serious actress, she was in Uber bimbo mode in the interview
It would be fascinating take the key points therein - from MM herself - and compare to her timeline, eg marriage dates, DOND dates, spreadsheet anyone ???


----------



## xincinsin

Anyone encountered this body language expert before?








						Meghan 'caught off guard' when asked about Harry in latest video
					

Meghan Markle released a new interview and a behavioural expert analysed the Duchess' non-verbal communication.




					www.express.co.uk
				




Darren Stanton is certain that Zedzee's happiness is authentic because we can see 3 crow's feet at the corner of her eyes. Ummm... Interesting viewpoint. 

He also obviously believes that Zedzee was a Hollywood star: _"As Meghan was previously an actress with many professional accolades under her belt..."_


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> And he wasn't trying to be a faux intellectual or global crusader then. What was that saying ... Better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and prove it?


Interesting the path taken by Charles, he has always been a green warrior
I don’t remember H ever supporting any of dad’s green initiatives


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Anyone encountered this body language expert before?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'caught off guard' when asked about Harry in latest video
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle released a new interview and a behavioural expert analysed the Duchess' non-verbal communication.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darren Stanton is certain that Zedzee's happiness is authentic because we can see 3 crow's feet at the corner of her eyes. Ummm... Interesting viewpoint.
> 
> He also obviously believes that Zedzee was a Hollywood star: _"As Meghan was previously an actress with many professional accolades under her belt..."_


she and elizabeth holmes should get together....maybe they could do playdates


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nooo, your initial assessment was spot on. She was merching this outfit.  While the green color is fine on her, those pants and shoes do not flatter her.  The top seemed a bit tight and the weather a bit nippy *nipply*. Yes, once again, the top reveals way too much.



*Fixed!* 

She needs to troll for freebies from a good undergarment company because her bra game has been truly awful for a very long time. Not sure if she is just not wearing one at all with this outfit, or wearing one that does nothing to keep the nipples under control. She is one tug away from revealing the royal nips.




I have a love/hate feeling towards this jumpsuit. I know the style is very polarizing. It looks awful on her so that makes me really dislike it. BUT... It would look amazing on the right person with the right shoes and without that hat. Gwen Stefani could rock the heck out of it and look totally amazing. If the top half was not completely strapless I would probably buy it (I can't do strapless without looking like a linebacker).

What really kills me is that bag. I know it's Chloe but it is very fug and does not go with this outfit. And with the sweater? And those sandals? Like someone gave her this hodgepodge of loot and she just decided to wear it all together rather tan piece it out and pair with the right things.

Hot mess.


----------



## pukasonqo

marietouchet said:


> Mandana et Al are keyboard warriors fighting against anti Semitism but hypocritically work for H
> Please help my memory , yes there was that dreadful costume party party event with H dressed in a WWII uniform, not exactly an anti semitic statement just in massively bad taste, he should not have done it PERIOD
> But that was years ago, when he had a drinking issue, that maybe he has solved with therapy … it is time to forgive him ? Should we forgive him a bit ???
> Were there other similar discrimination events in H’s life ? ones I have forgotten … are we judging the OLD Harry ? Or have I forgotten more recent events of that nature ?


From memory it wasn’t just a WWII uniform, he had a svastika arm band
on


----------



## A1aGypsy

Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform complete with a swastika arm band to a party two weeks before the sixtieth anniversary of Auschwitz. It was in more than bad taste.


----------



## LittleStar88

pukasonqo said:


> From memory it wasn’t just a WWII uniform, he had a svastika arm band
> on



I honestly don't know how he came back from this, and how it doesn't continue to haunt him. Young and dumb isn't an excuse.


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Good questions. The way things are perceived is constantly changing over time. When I was a kid in the 70s, little boys would draw pictures of tanks, planes, and swastickas in their notebooks. (Can you imagine what would happen if a kid in school was doing that today?) Those boys didn’t draw pictures because they were Nazis. They did it because it was not so far removed in time from WWII and boys were fascinated by everything about it. By the time Harry wore that costume attitudes had changed. I _think_ he wore it in the same way anyone would wear a villain costume and he didn’t think any more about it. I don’t believe he had bad intentions.


Stupidity is not an excuse
He could have worn a German uniform and be the bad guy but he didn’t need to top it up w the symbol of a regime responsible for genocide


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I honestly don't know how he came back from this, and how it doesn't continue to haunt him. Young and dumb isn't an excuse.
> 
> View attachment 5638591
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a


apparently all of his life everyone in his family felt oh so sorry for him because he was the spare.....and the public thought he was cute, the fun prince whereas Will was dull with his good behavior


----------



## BittyMonkey

I remember when Harry got papped wearing his Nazi outfit. It was not unlike some of the jerk kids I went to high school with that were trying to be edgy. At that time it was a fast track to negative attention if you were wearing swastikas or blabbing about Hitler, etc. Most of those stupid fellow students got in a lot of trouble. 

There was one kid, who I'll call A, who went all out on the neo-Nazi scene. That kid was genuine, and one day mysteriously vanished from the high school. I have no doubt his parents sent him off somewhere. H's idiocy with the armband feels more like the first category of being edgy and seeking negative attention. However, today I would be afraid they were more genuine and less attention-seeking given certain events.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> That vein is creepy. Not the first time it has appeared in photos, but the previous time, it was only on her forehead. It's growing ...
> View attachment 5638363


The lighting and hairstyle are doing her no favors. If my forehead vein was that prominent I would never wear my hair like that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I honestly don't know how he came back from this, and how it doesn't continue to haunt him. Young and dumb isn't an excuse.
> 
> View attachment 5638591


This + his Vegas behavior, his Afghanistan behavior [rumors, so far], his use of a racist term for his ‘friend’ from Pakistan, throwing stink bombs at other people’s wedding celebrations, yelling at Angela Kelly, etc.  Probably much more that we do not know about.


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> *Fixed!*
> 
> She needs to troll for freebies from a good undergarment company because her bra game has been truly awful for a very long time. Not sure if she is just not wearing one at all with this outfit, or wearing one that does nothing to keep the nipples under control. She is one tug away from revealing the royal nips.
> 
> View attachment 5638578
> 
> 
> I have a love/hate feeling towards this jumpsuit. I know the style is very polarizing. It looks awful on her so that makes me really dislike it. BUT... It would look amazing on the right person with the right shoes and without that hat. Gwen Stefani could rock the heck out of it and look totally amazing. If the top half was not completely strapless I would probably buy it (I can't do strapless without looking like a linebacker).
> 
> What really kills me is that bag. I know it's Chloe but it is very fug and does not go with this outfit. And with the sweater? And those sandals? Like someone gave her this hodgepodge of loot and she just decided to wear it all together rather tan piece it out and pair with the right things.
> 
> Hot mess.



And what's up with the big floppy hats in general? On her they look even more stupid, especially the one she wore to the funeral. She probably thinks a large hat makes her stand out even more and forces more attention on her. I'm beginning to think that she enjoys dressing in disastrous looks. She probably gets more clicks ($$) when people say "That hat/top/dress/etc looks so wrong/doesn't fit/is ugly/etc" so she purposely dresses in such a way to invite criticism. Then she can also say "I'm a victim" when people say her clothes are ugly or don't fit right. Her favorite hobby is whining about how mean people are to her. Like she doesn't do anything to provoke criticism on purpose. Right? Like slamming the BRF then wondering why they shun her. And how many of the A-lister wedding guests have anything to do with her (Serena and Oprah don't count since they get paid for the affiliation). The only reason anybody went to the wedding was because of Harry's connections, nobody would have attended if Claw married some CEO. Now that those guests see Harry as a wimpy idiot who supports his wife's lies against the BRF, Harry is persona non grata (except to media whores like Vanity Fair and Variety who need $ clicks). But they'd make a bee line to associate with Charles or William from now on. Harry who? Meghan who?


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> And what's up with the big floppy hats in general? On her they look even more stupid, especially the one she wore to the funeral. She probably thinks a large hat makes her stand out even more and forces more attention on her. I'm beginning to think that she enjoys dressing in disastrous looks. She probably gets more clicks ($$) when people say "That hat/top/dress/etc looks so wrong/doesn't fit/is ugly/etc" so she purposely dresses in such a way to invite criticism. Then she can also say "I'm a victim" when people say her clothes are ugly or don't fit right. Her favorite hobby is whining about how mean people are to her. Like she doesn't do anything to provoke criticism on purpose. Right? Like slamming the BRF then wondering why they shun her. And how many of the A-lister wedding guests have anything to do with her (Serena and Oprah don't count since they get paid for the affiliation). The only reason anybody went to the wedding was because of Harry's connections, nobody would have attended if Claw married some CEO. Now that those guests see Harry as a wimpy idiot who supports his wife's lies against the BRF, Harry is persona non grata (except to media whores like Vanity Fair and Variety who need $ clicks). But they'd make a bee line to associate with Charles or William from now on. Harry who? Meghan who?


sadly for Harry, he isn't that likable anymore.....I'm sure some people still like him but for me the angry persona, all the lawsuits and the trashing of his family have ruined him


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Good questions. The way things are perceived is constantly changing over time. When I was a kid in the 70s, little boys would draw pictures of tanks, planes, and swastickas in their notebooks. (Can you imagine what would happen if a kid in school was doing that today?) Those boys didn’t draw pictures because they were Nazis. They did it because it was not so far removed in time from WWII and boys were fascinated by everything about it. By the time Harry wore that costume attitudes had changed. I _think_ he wore it in the same way anyone would wear a villain costume and he didn’t think any more about it. I don’t believe he had bad intentions.



There's a whole world of villains to choose from that have nothing to do with racism and genocide. I remember kids who were into the whole nazi thing and they had things seriously wrong with them - hateful, violent, angry... That's not attention-seeing, that's a damaged human acting out in an inhuman way.



CarryOn2020 said:


> This + his Vegas behavior, his Afghanistan behavior [rumors, so far], his use of a racist term for his ‘friend’ from Pakistan, throwing stink bombs at other people’s wedding celebrations, yelling at Angela Kelly, etc.  Probably much more that we do not know about.
> View attachment 5638619



I recall the racist term he used for his friend from Pakistan. This falls in line with my theory - he has a vein of hate that runs through him. Nazi uniform, later racist term for someone from Pakistan. Then pile his anger on top of it... Not wanting to hand out trophys or shake hands with the unwashed masses...

Harry is damaged goods. He's learned how to manage it and keep it under wraps for the most part but we see the flashes of the angry little man he has become when he gets his grumpy mug captured in pictures.

This is someone who is being paid to promote mental health when it seems perhaps he has done nothing more to repair his own damage and simply covers it up with this fake image of someone who cares. I call bullsh!t.

Meghan seems to feed that anger and has used it to her advantage - redirected it towards his family.


----------



## Jayne1

papertiger said:


> You mean her fantasy was that she could have been a professional dancer. She was a good dancer for 'civilian' but she wasn't a good dancer for a dancer.
> 
> Diana even used the Royal Ballet and the Royal Opera House (both party funded) to stage one of her stunts. She and the character dancer Wayne Sleep did a tall/short 'pas de deux' to 'Up-town Girl'. She made out it was for Prince Charles birthday, but it was all for her. Totally entitled, self-indulgent stunt.  The Crown for one thing right, it made PC (now KC) squirm, not because he thought she made a fool of herself but the indulgence of it all, and all for herself to fulfil a childhood fantasy. he saw it for what it was.
> 
> Actually, it makes me think M and D have some share characteristics, but as we have all seen, for all M's training she cannot dance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Princess Diana's Surprise Performance to Billy Joel's "Uptown Girl" Really Happened
> 
> 
> "I was shaking in the wings," Royal Ballet dancer Wayne Sleep revealed. "What if I dropped the future Queen of England?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, even the article writes she performed en pointe when she is clearly in shoes in the pic.


Yeah, Diana, for all her love of dance and wanting to show off, was quite stiff and awkward, even on the ballroom floor dancing with Charles and John Travolta.

She, like Meg are/were so darn sure of themselves and loved the limelight.


----------



## Stansy

charlottawill said:


> It's on sale, half off - hurry or you'll miss it!
> 
> Of course it looks better on the model. Without the jodhpur legs it would be fine for the beach but that's about it.
> 
> And who says "rad" anymore?


Doesn‘t it accentuate your „pins“?


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Interesting the path taken by Charles, he has always been a green warrior
> I don’t remember H ever supporting any of dad’s green initiatives


The only green that Handbag is interested in is the greenback.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> You mean her fantasy was that she could have been a professional dancer. She was a good dancer for 'civilian' but she wasn't a good dancer for a dancer.
> 
> Diana even used the Royal Ballet and the Royal Opera House (both party funded) to stage one of her stunts. She and the character dancer Wayne Sleep did a tall/short 'pas de deux' to 'Up-town Girl'. She made out it was for Prince Charles birthday, but it was all for her. Totally entitled, self-indulgent stunt.  The Crown for one thing right, it made PC (now KC) squirm, not because he thought she made a fool of herself but the indulgence of it all, and all for herself to fulfil a childhood fantasy. he saw it for what it was.
> 
> Actually, it makes me think M and D have some share characteristics, but as we have all seen, for all M's training she cannot dance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Princess Diana's Surprise Performance to Billy Joel's "Uptown Girl" Really Happened
> 
> 
> "I was shaking in the wings," Royal Ballet dancer Wayne Sleep revealed. "What if I dropped the future Queen of England?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.oprahdaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see, even the article writes she performed en pointe when she is clearly in shoes in the pic.


I know she staged the dance with Wayne Sleep, but I meant long before she was married.  She was a huge ballet fan and kept up with her lessons.  

She also loved tap dancing and practiced constantly.  I am not saying that she didn't harbour a fantasy that she could have been a professional dancer, but she had a lifelong love of dance and the Royal Ballet was one of the patronages that she kept after the "time and space" speech.  

I was merely commenting on the pose in the pic, and that I thought it was more than likely attributed to dance rather than yoga.


----------



## xincinsin

Clickbait








						There’s Speculation That the Sussexes Could Move Into Windsor Castle if They Return to the UK
					

This would truly be a plot twist.




					www.cosmopolitan.com
				



The Sun speculated that if Windsor Castle is standing vacant, then it might offered to the Sucksexes. What? As a bribe to get Handbag to come home? Cosmopolitan, Yahoo etc picked up the story and spread it.


----------



## MiniMabel

LittleStar88 said:


> *Fixed!*
> 
> She needs to troll for freebies from a good undergarment company because her bra game has been truly awful for a very long time. Not sure if she is just not wearing one at all with this outfit, or wearing one that does nothing to keep the nipples under control. She is one tug away from revealing the royal nips.
> 
> View attachment 5638578
> 
> 
> I have a love/hate feeling towards this jumpsuit. I know the style is very polarizing. It looks awful on her so that makes me really dislike it. BUT... It would look amazing on the right person with the right shoes and without that hat. Gwen Stefani could rock the heck out of it and look totally amazing. If the top half was not completely strapless I would probably buy it (I can't do strapless without looking like a linebacker).
> 
> What really kills me is that bag. I know it's Chloe but it is very fug and does not go with this outfit. And with the sweater? And those sandals? Like someone gave her this hodgepodge of loot and she just decided to wear it all together rather tan piece it out and pair with the right things.
> 
> Hot mess.



The tan lines are very clear on the right-hand side photo......MeAgain is actually quite pale so it seems very clear that she darkens her skin quite considerably on certain occasions which is truly appalling. I just can't grasp why someone does that........we know that it's for effect, I understand that, but the mentality of it defies description. Modesty, dignity and self-respect have surely evaporated.


----------



## xincinsin

MiniMabel said:


> The tan lines are very clear on the right-hand side photo......MeAgain is actually quite pale so it seems very clear that she darkens her skin quite considerably on certain occasions which is truly appalling. I just can't grasp why someone does that........we know that it's for effect, I understand that, but the mentality of it defies description. Modesty, dignity and self-respect have surely evaporated.


If she were merely tanned, it wouldn't be so bad. But when she goes multiple shades darker so that she can pass as another race, that is deception. Does spray tan wash off? She certainly switches races at the drop of a floppy hat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yeah right.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Good questions. The way things are perceived is constantly changing over time. When I was a kid in the 70s, little boys would draw pictures of tanks, planes, and swastickas in their notebooks. (Can you imagine what would happen if a kid in school was doing that today?) Those boys didn’t draw pictures because they were Nazis. They did it because it was not so far removed in time from WWII and boys were fascinated by everything about it. By the time Harry wore that costume attitudes had changed. I _think_ he wore it in the same way anyone would wear a villain costume and he didn’t think any more about it. I don’t believe he had bad intentions.



Not when you great-aunt and great-uncle were famous Nazis ready to betray their own country the Germans at a time of war and known informers.

I can't believe so many are willing to give this over-privileged hHoray Henry the benefit of the doubt. Just any litte kid is not 3rd in line to the throne.

Wearing swastikas as a joke is just as bad as wearing maliciously. 

How about if he'd gone as a slave trader?  Nazis used millions as forced labour and and then murdered them. It's not something to say "oops" to and never address again.

How about a Netflix  documentary on Harry delving into his own misdemeanours and stop pretending it didn't happen or down playing it.

ZERO tolerance to racists of any kind.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I honestly don't know how he came back from this, and how it doesn't continue to haunt him. Young and dumb isn't an excuse.
> 
> View attachment 5638591


It's hard to believe no adult saw him leaving the palace or wherever wearing it and didn't stop him.


----------



## charlottawill

Stansy said:


> Doesn‘t it accentuate your „pins“?


You mean those skeletal appendages she stands on?


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Not when you great-aunt and great-uncle were famous Nazis ready to betray their own country the Germans at a time of war and known informers.
> 
> I can't believe so many are willing to give this over-privileged hHoray Henry the benefit of the doubt. Just any litte kid is not 3rd in line to the throne.
> 
> Wearing swastikas as a joke is just as bad as wearing maliciously.
> 
> How about if he'd gone as a slave trader?  Nazis used millions as forced labour and and then murdered them. It's not something to say "oops" to and never address again.
> 
> How about a Netflix  documentary on Harry delving into his own misdemeanours and stop pretending it didn't happen or down playing it.
> 
> ZERO tolerance to racists of any kind.


I’m not defending him wearing the uniform. I was responding to  marietouchet’s post about whether he should be forgiven for it now. I factor in that Harry was 20, rather stupid, very protected, and he was going to a private birthday party at a house, not a public event where he represented his family. He obviously knew dressing the way he did would get him attention but he was completely clueless as to the kind of attention. 

I believe in second chances and as much as I can’t stand Harry, I really don’t believe he had malicious intent. He just didn’t think, which has become the story of his life.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Est-ce que vous parlez français?



Recollections may vary.

Even with the same individual.

As seen when one is lying.  Constantly.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nooo, your initial assessment was spot on. She was merching this outfit.  While the green color is fine on her, those pants and shoes do not flatter her.  The top seemed a bit tight and the *weather a bit nippy*. Yes, once again, the top reveals way too much.


"Nippy" or "*Nipply*"?


----------



## Miss Liz

papertiger said:


> Not when you great-aunt and great-uncle were famous Nazis ready to betray their own country the Germans at a time of war and known informers.
> 
> I can't believe so many are willing to give this over-privileged hHoray Henry the benefit of the doubt. Just any litte kid is not 3rd in line to the throne.
> 
> Wearing swastikas as a joke is just as bad as wearing maliciously.
> 
> How about if he'd gone as a slave trader?  Nazis used millions as forced labour and and then murdered them. It's not something to say "oops" to and never address again.
> 
> How about a Netflix  documentary on Harry delving into his own misdemeanours and stop pretending it didn't happen or down playing it.
> 
> ZERO tolerance to racists of any kind.


Harry and TW are an incredibly destructive partnership forged from the opportunity to do good gone terribly, irredeemably, pathologically wrong due to their own decisions/actions. IMO of course.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Anyone encountered this body language expert before?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'caught off guard' when asked about Harry in latest video
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle released a new interview and a behavioural expert analysed the Duchess' non-verbal communication.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darren Stanton is certain that Zedzee's happiness is authentic because we can see 3 crow's feet at the corner of her eyes. Ummm... Interesting viewpoint.
> 
> He also obviously believes that Zedzee was a Hollywood star: _"As Meghan was previously an actress with many professional accolades under her belt..."_


So, he basically was hired by TW to counter BLG.  That's my take on it.


----------



## BittyMonkey

papertiger said:


> Not when you great-aunt and great-uncle were famous Nazis ready to betray their own country the Germans at a time of war and known informers.
> 
> I can't believe so many are willing to give this over-privileged hHoray Henry the benefit of the doubt. Just any litte kid is not 3rd in line to the throne.
> 
> Wearing swastikas as a joke is just as bad as wearing maliciously.
> 
> How about if he'd gone as a slave trader?  Nazis used millions as forced labour and and then murdered them. It's not something to say "oops" to and never address again.
> 
> How about a Netflix  documentary on Harry delving into his own misdemeanours and stop pretending it didn't happen or down playing it.
> 
> ZERO tolerance to racists of any kind.


I hope you don't think I'm defending him. Any teen or young adult that does this is a complete and utter sh!tshow and needs consequences. H didn't get any. He should have been forced to watch Auschwitz footage, the unfiltered kind. There's no excuse for him, even if he only did it for attention.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> You mean those skeletal appendages she stands on?


She had better legs in 2013 - see her interview with Craig Ferguson - Youtube, her upper arms also had some muscling


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’m not defending him wearing the uniform. I was responding to  marietouchet’s post about whether he should be forgiven for it now. I factor in that Harry was 20, rather stupid, very protected, and he was going to a private birthday party at a house, not a public event where he represented his family. He obviously knew dressing the way he did would get him attention but he was completely clueless as to the kind of attention.
> 
> I believe in second chances and as much as I can’t stand Harry, I really don’t believe he had malicious intent. He just didn’t think, which has become the story of his life.



I kind of agree with the non-malicious intent, but also I completely agree with @papertiger when she says tasteless jokes about a genocide are far beyond just a stupid boy being stupid. In what world does a 20yo not know what that means? Even a stupid one.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Anyone encountered this body language expert before?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan 'caught off guard' when asked about Harry in latest video
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle released a new interview and a behavioural expert analysed the Duchess' non-verbal communication.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darren Stanton is certain that Zedzee's happiness is authentic because we can see 3 crow's feet at the corner of her eyes. Ummm... Interesting viewpoint.
> 
> He also obviously believes that Zedzee was a Hollywood star: _"As Meghan was previously an actress with many professional accolades under her belt..."_


This was the most interesting part of his assessment:

However, the expert claimed Meghan was "caught off guard" after being asked about her life with her husband Prince Harry.

Darren said: “I noticed a sudden shift in emotion with Meghan’s body language when she’s asked about what she watches with Harry. She broke her pattern of looking left and right by staring up, which often means she is reflecting back on memories. The fact that she began to blink quite a lot means that the question caught her off guard.

“The previous questions were all based on something she could have prepared for, however this one caused her to change and display leakage signals with the eyes. It doesn’t mean she is lying about her answer, but she has clearly shifted the way in which she answered the question in relation to the emotion it’s evoked.”


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I kind of agree with the non-malicious intent, but also I completely agree with @papertiger when she says tasteless jokes about a genocide are far beyond just a stupid boy being stupid. In what world does a 20yo not know what that means? Even a stupid one.


No, I get it, it was asinine. But is it unforgivable forever?


----------



## BittyMonkey

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it, it was asinine. But is it unforgivable forever?


I think:

1) It depends on who is on the other end. If you're Jewish, Roma, gay, or other populations that the Nazis singled out or if you lost family at a camp, that would be up to that person as to whether they think it's unforgivable.
2) It also depends on whether the person learned any kind of lesson from being an idiot. In H's case I doubt it.

I'm Jewish, and I think he is a freaking attention seeking privileged dumb@ss. Stunts like his send a cold wind down the spine of people like me.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> This was the most interesting part of his assessment:
> 
> However, the expert claimed Meghan was "caught off guard" after being asked about her life with her husband Prince Harry.
> 
> Darren said: “I noticed a sudden shift in emotion with Meghan’s body language when she’s asked about what she watches with Harry. She broke her pattern of looking left and right by staring up, which often means she is reflecting back on memories. The fact that she began to blink quite a lot means that the question caught her off guard.
> 
> “The previous questions were all based on something she could have prepared for, however this one caused her to change and display leakage signals with the eyes. It doesn’t mean she is lying about her answer, but she has clearly shifted the way in which she answered the question in relation to the emotion it’s evoked.”


Just means she was promoting Me Me Me. The mentions of Archie were as her appendage to give her credibility as nerd mom. She was not expecting a question not focused on her her her and had to recall What'sHisName.

Didn't Handbag also react strangely in that zoom call when he was asked about his kids? They both behave oddly when asked about their family. I guess with such a huge mansion, they rarely see each other


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it, it was asinine. But is it unforgivable forever?



No, but it would have helped had he a) shown accountability and b) went on to become a great guy. With his current behaviour, people will be all too happy to dig up stuff from 20 years ago. I mean, people bring up regularly how he rode his tricycle into his security detail as a toddler which I don't think is proof of anything. My own nephew was a truly horrible child all through toddlerhood and early school years (and he had better/more involved parents than Harry). As a teenager, he's now considerably calmed down, is polite and likeable.


----------



## kipp

LittleStar88 said:


> *Fixed!*
> 
> She needs to troll for freebies from a good undergarment company because her bra game has been truly awful for a very long time. Not sure if she is just not wearing one at all with this outfit, or wearing one that does nothing to keep the nipples under control. She is one tug away from revealing the royal nips.
> 
> View attachment 5638578
> 
> 
> I have a love/hate feeling towards this jumpsuit. I know the style is very polarizing. It looks awful on her so that makes me really dislike it. BUT... It would look amazing on the right person with the right shoes and without that hat. Gwen Stefani could rock the heck out of it and look totally amazing. If the top half was not completely strapless I would probably buy it (I can't do strapless without looking like a linebacker).
> 
> What really kills me is that bag. I know it's Chloe but it is very fug and does not go with this outfit. And with the sweater? And those sandals? Like someone gave her this hodgepodge of loot and she just decided to wear it all together rather tan piece it out and pair with the right things.
> 
> Hot mess.


I think she wore a ton of stuff so she had more things to merch.  One outfit, one bag, and one pair of shoes just wasn't enough to make $$$$.


----------



## CobaltBlu

LOL at MM's PR teams stunt about Windsor Castle.  What a bunch of nuts.


----------



## CobaltBlu

OK, which one of you did this?


----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> LOL at MM's PR teams stunt about Windsor Castle.  What a bunch of nuts.


Maybe the next tall tale will be about how she zoom-called Chuck to give him advice on how to reno BP and be a better monarch. QE2 gave her tips on how to be the Kween, you know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

People need to just be more sympathetic to her struggles. It must be so hard to be oh so popular and oh so beautiful and oh so famous.

Not.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Just means she was promoting Me Me Me. The mentions of Archie were as her appendage to give her credibility as nerd mom. She was not expecting a question not focused on her her her and had to recall What'sHisName.
> 
> Didn't Handbag also react strangely in that zoom call when he was asked about his kids? They both behave oddly when asked about their family. I guess with such a huge mansion, they rarely see each other


It does make you wonder. Stumbling over a simple question about her husband looks odd.


----------



## bag-mania

BittyMonkey said:


> I think:
> 
> 1) It depends on who is on the other end. If you're Jewish, Roma, gay, or other populations that the Nazis singled out or if you lost family at a camp, that would be up to that person as to whether they think it's unforgivable.
> 2) *It also depends on whether the person learned any kind of lesson from being an idiot. *In H's case I doubt it.
> 
> I'm Jewish, and I think he is a freaking attention seeking privileged dumb@ss. Stunts like his send a cold wind down the spine of people like me.


You’re probably right. Thinking back his apology was issued through his father’s office and not directly from Harry. It was also the incident which reportedly caused Harry to blame Will because he knew about the costume and didn’t try to stop Harry from wearing it. At least that’s what was written in that book about the brothers.


----------



## mikimoto007

charlottawill said:


> It's hard to believe no adult saw him leaving the palace or wherever wearing it and didn't stop him.



I think the story was that William was at the party with him. People said he should have stepped in.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> "Nippy" or "*Nipply*"?


nippy in American English​(ˈnɪpi)
ADJECTIVE*Word forms: *-pier, -piest
1.
chilly or cool
morning air that feels a bit nippy


----------



## Toby93

So they were specifically warned NOT to use their titles for monetary reasons, so what is this??.
Also, someone just mentioned that it's not an arena, it's a Marriot hotel.  Delusions of grandeur


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, but it would have helped had he a) shown accountability and b) went on to become a great guy. With his current behaviour, people will be all too happy to dig up stuff from 20 years ago. I mean, people bring up regularly how he rode his tricycle into his security detail as a toddler which I don't think is proof of anything. My own nephew was a truly horrible child all through toddlerhood and early school years (and he had better/more involved parents than Harry). As a teenager, he's now considerably calmed down, is polite and likeable.


Has he spoken out against the latest round of hate speech?  Yes, he did ‘apologize’, but it was truly half-assed imo.  The “if” sounds pompous.  If we look at his behavior in recent years, we must wonder why he is still in LoS and CoS.  Again, a half-assed attempt to leave/not leave.   He behaves this way because he can. His sad group of ‘lads’ applaud him for it. 

_From 2005,
In the statement, he said: "I am very sorry *if* I caused any offence or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologise."_








						Apology for Harry's Nazi outfit falls on deaf ears
					

BRITAIN: An apology offered on behalf of Prince Harry (20), third in line to the British throne, failed yesterday to stop a …




					www.irishtimes.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Words matter. "I'm sorry if" shifts the blame to the offended ones.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> I honestly don't know how he came back from this, and how it doesn't continue to haunt him. Young and dumb isn't an excuse.
> 
> View attachment 5638591


Didn't Dufus try to blame William for this fiasco saying his brother didn't tell him what to wear to the party? As if! Nothing ever changes with Dufus as he remains immature and selfish.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> No, I get it, it was asinine. But is it unforgivable forever?


Right now, he has way too many privileges with almost zero responsibilities.  Once he renounces the LoS and CoS, then it will be over.  He does not deserve this IPP status either.  Yes, many others have been cancelled for less. Imo.


----------



## bag-mania

mikimoto007 said:


> I think the story was that William was at the party with him. People said he should have stepped in.


William was there and he apparently knew about the costume. If Harry was 20 then Will was about 22. I don’t see it as being a literal case of being his brother’s keeper where Will, as the elder brother, was responsible for seeing that Harry didn’t do anything stupid. 

The birthday party they went to had a colonial theme didn’t it? I think Will went as a lion which didn’t invite controversy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Clickbait
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There’s Speculation That the Sussexes Could Move Into Windsor Castle if They Return to the UK
> 
> 
> This would truly be a plot twist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sun speculated that if Windsor Castle is standing vacant, then it might offered to the Sucksexes. What? As a bribe to get Handbag to come home? Cosmopolitan, Yahoo etc picked up the story and spread it.


No doubt, this is speculation put out by their team so that the BRF feels obliged to offer them Windsor Castle and when the offer doesn't materialize, ZedZed and Dufus will simply say that they refused their generous offer, because they can't be bought.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> People need to just be more sympathetic to her struggles. It must be so hard to be oh so popular and oh so beautiful and oh so famous.
> 
> Not.



Yep, that's what my acquaintances in Santa Barbara were instructed, "Don't talk or look at her".


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> nippy in American English​(ˈnɪpi)
> ADJECTIVE*Word forms: *-pier, -piest
> 1.
> chilly or cool
> morning air that feels a bit nippy
> 
> View attachment 5638799


I know, but since TW likes to tease showing her nipples...


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Words matter. "I'm sorry if" shifts the blame to the offended ones.


Yep.  Basically same as, "I'm sorry that you were offended..."


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I know, but since TW likes to tease showing her nipples...


I know you know. No worries, it’s ok. I was having fun, too. 
Cue the penguins.  Some days, I’m the pushy penguin, other days not so much.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah right.



These are the stories that keep me laughing.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And we’re off — Bridezilla time


----------



## CarryOn2020

*This is the story to follow.


Lord Addington = hero

*


----------



## A1aGypsy

A1aGypsy said:


> Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform complete with a swastika arm band to a party two weeks before the sixtieth anniversary of Auschwitz. It was in more than bad taste.


Sorry, this should say “of the liberation of Auschwitz”. I’m not sure how I mucked that up!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> And we’re off — Bridezilla time




Is this really the theme? That freaking nutjob really works her way through everything she thinks she has been called wrongfully. WTF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *This is the story to follow.
> 
> 
> Lord Addington = hero
> View attachment 5638821
> *




And he was so polite about it, asking if they really wanted two CoS of whom one had "left public life" and one had left the country. Can't argue with this.


----------



## gracekelly

The only people who are going to move into Windsor are the Wales. The Sussex like to float these ridiculous statements and see what sticks to the wall. This has been their boring MO with absolutely everything.   Nothing is going to stick.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Indianapolis Marriot



Open your wallets?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Anyone know what the topic of tomorrow’s podcast is?

I’m hoping for the slut episode but maybe she’s saving that for last.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Anyone know what the topic of tomorrow’s podcast is?
> 
> I’m hoping for the slut episode but maybe she’s saving that for last.


Bridezilla.
Time to make a bingo card.


----------



## gracekelly

A1aGypsy said:


> Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform complete with a swastika arm band to a party two weeks before the sixtieth anniversary of Auschwitz. It was in more than bad taste.


He is stupid.  He didn't know. He didn't care.  You could have told him about the anniversary and he just would have shrugged his shoulders. It would not have changed a thing. Aside from the obvious, he was demeaning all the brave British and Commonwealth  soldiers who fought the Nazis and all those who died in combat or during the Blitz.  He should have been pilloried.


----------



## Suncatcher

QueenofWrapDress said:


> People need to just be more sympathetic to her struggles. It must be so hard to be oh so popular and oh so beautiful and oh so famous.
> 
> Not.





purseinsanity said:


> Yep, that's what my acquaintances in Santa Barbara were instructed, "Don't talk or look at her".


Everything leaked about her is that she is consistently a truly awful human being. Her soul and spirit are so ugly. No wonder she has no friends in her life. She must be a very lonely person. Deservedly so.


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Words matter. "I'm sorry if" shifts the blame to the offended ones.



Exactly. A pet peeve of mine. He’s a pr1ck. A pompous, idiotic, whiney one.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> So they were specifically warned NOT to use their titles for monetary reasons, so what is this??.
> Also, someone just mentioned that it's not an arena, it's a Marriot hotel.  Delusions of grandeur
> 
> View attachment 5638819




It reeks of desperation.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> This + his Vegas behavior, his Afghanistan behavior [rumors, so far], his use of a racist term for his ‘friend’ from Pakistan, throwing stink bombs at other people’s wedding celebrations, yelling at Angela Kelly, etc.  Probably much more that we do not know about.
> View attachment 5638619


When he was early in his relationship with Chelsy Davy, he was asked about her in reference to her Zimbabwean ancestry he replied, “She’s not black or anything, you know.”


----------



## kipp

Toby93 said:


> So they were specifically warned NOT to use their titles for monetary reasons, so what is this??.
> Also, someone just mentioned that it's not an arena, it's a Marriot hotel.  Delusions of grandeur
> 
> View attachment 5638819



I have a sneaking hunch that in Indianapolis the audience won't be as large or as receptive as Megain expects...  I say this as a born and bred Mid-westerner...


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, that's what my acquaintances in Santa Barbara were instructed, "Don't talk or look at her".


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> People need to just be more sympathetic to her struggles. It must be so hard to be oh so popular and oh so beautiful and oh so famous.
> 
> Not.



This is where she is unlike Diana. Diana loved the public's attention therefore she would speak with everyone. She was the people's princess. Z-list, not so much. She's a fxcking snob  




bag-mania said:


> It does make you wonder. Stumbling over a simple question about her husband looks odd.


This reminds me of when Harry was asked about his Invisikids recently and he gave a nonsensical response. Are were sure that he didn't get banished to one of the many bathrooms in the mansion?


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bridezilla.
> Time to make a bingo card.


But there’s only 3 words you need on it;
I, me, mine.


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> So they were specifically warned NOT to use their titles for monetary reasons, so what is this??.
> Also, someone just mentioned that it's not an arena, it's a Marriot hotel. Delusions of grandeur



So, I guess this is where the speaking circuit has taken them. The Marriott in Indianapolis.  It'll be interesting to see how many movers and shakers in Indianapolis want to shell out $500/person or $5,000/table to listen to MM.



purseinsanity said:


> Yep, that's what my acquaintances in Santa Barbara were instructed, "Don't talk or look at her".



Honestly, a large number of people won't have any difficulty with this as they wouldn't recognize her.  She is not as well known as she thinks.   Like the woman at the shelter who thought she was talking to Meghan Fox.


----------



## charlottawill

kipp said:


> I have a sneaking hunch that in Indianapolis the audience won't be as large or as receptive as Megain expects...  I say this as a born and bred Mid-westerner...


It says $5000 per table, but how many tables do you think a place like that can hold? It's sad.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I have a sneaking hunch that in Indianapolis the audience won't be as large or as receptive as Megain expects...  I say this as a born and bred Mid-westerner...


Granted I lived in Minnesota a very long time ago, but even then the folks would have said "I'm sure she is nice, but I have to milk the cows."


----------



## oldbag

Maggie Muggins said:


> Didn't Dufus try to blame William for this fiasco saying his brother didn't tell him what to wear to the party? As if! Nothing ever changes with Dufus as he remains immature and selfish.


Maybe William, knowing what his brother was like and was just fed up and decided to let the idiot fall on his face so others could see him in action. This to me is akin to an abuser who blames his victim,"damnit Earline, you made me hit you." It does not appear if things have changed eighteen years down the line.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> It says $5000 per table, but how many tables do you think a place like that can hold? It's sad.


Hotels have ballrooms.  Maybe 250 people? Or more.


----------



## Chanbal

Only a despicable person would sell his/her father imo. 



…
*According to the Beast’s impeccably-sourced royal correspondent Tom Sykes, the news on the book front is bad for Charles,*_ with one royal insider saying that *one chapter in particular “could spell big trouble” for the 72-year-old.* (Maybe Charles should think about having a go at reclaiming Normandy as a distraction?)

Is it any surprise then that, per Sykes, “anxiety over the content of Prince Harry’s memoir is growing in the royal family’s inner circle”?

What is particularly interesting is that, reportedly, it is not the new season of The Crown and it’s lavish recreation of Charles’ philandering, tampon-fancying ways that has Palace brows furrowed and fountain pens being bitten, nor Harry and wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’s mysterious Netflix documentary.
Oh no. Instead, Sykes reports that “courtiers are moderately sanguine” about these projects.

*The duchess, after all, has managed via two high-profile interviews in the last two months to make herself look both ridiculous and boring. Take away her marriage and her very famous in-laws and Meghan is just as interesting and insightful as you would expect a B-list actress from a middling cable dramedy to be.* Which is to say, she is pathologically unable to not talk about herself. Talk about being hoist on your own PR.

*Her husband though?* He’s another kettle of fish entirely and for royal aides, “*Harry’s book is seen as a different order of threat.*”

For 35 years the duke’s life, identity and for many years, his job, was defined by his royal status. Contrast that with his mother Diana, Princess of Wales who had only clocked up ten years as a Windsor wife, with all the attendant heartbreak and misery that seems to be part and parcel of that gig, when she decided to tell-all to Andrew Morton.

The duke, though, has a literal lifetime of revelations, dirt and secrets to draw on, not to mention the Viking-sized battle axe he has to grind with his family. That combination of extraordinary inside knowledge, including how Princess Anne fashions her iconic backcombed pouf, and decades of grievances?

This book could well end up being the equivalent of the Gunpowder Plot 2.0.

*Nor would the death of his grandmother appear to have tempered Harry’s approach, with the Beast reporting that “the prospect of a full-blooded assault on the monarchy by Harry” is triggering “alarm” among royal insiders.*

The Times’ royal editor *Valentine Low,* and author of the recent bombshell Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown, *told Sykes “that he had knowledge of a meeting between Harry and a private individual (not a Palace staffer) while Harry was in London. The person gently suggested to Harry he might go easy on his family in the book.*”

*How was the advice received? About as well as a vegan scotch egg at a shooting lunch it sounds like. “Harry was not very receptive to the idea,” Low has said.*

What will further set the Duke of Sussex’s book apart is that it is being ghostwritten by Pulitzer-winner J.R. Moehringer. Earlier this year, celebrated royal biographer Robert Lacey, told the Guardian that Harry sat for “intense interviews” with Moehringer when he was “at just about peak rage” and prior to the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.

*Meanwhile, a publishing source told Page Six in July that the book is “juicy” with another saying, “There is some content in there that should make his family nervous.*”

The real kicker here for Charles is the timing.

Only months into his reign, the king simply does not have the public capital to easily withstand a full-frontal offensive by his own son, if that is what the book ends up being.

The world has only just recently, sorta, kinda been willing to forget about how, for decades, Charles was the posterboy for bad husbands and lacklustre dads everywhere. (In 1991, he proved he would never be getting one of those “Best Father Eva” mugs when Prince William ended up in hospital and surgery for a skull fracture after being hit in the head with a golf club at school. Diana rushed to his bedside and stayed the night. And his dad? Why, Charles tootled off to host some government ministers at a performance of Tosca.)

If Harry’s book lobbs a fresh round of a stinging accusations, for example, of rotten parenting, general neglect or poor treatment by his father and/or the Palace machine, then it will be a serious body blow to the new Carolean age (as the reign of a monarch named Charles is technically known as).

Sure, His Majesty will weather the storm but again, the issue here is time.

While his mother had 70 long years to create a legacy, the king must know he is looking at around 20 years in the top job, a very finite period in which to leave his mark on the UK and to finally get a chance to rule.

What the 72-year-old can’t afford is to waste precious months or years trying to put out PR fires and having to figure out how to countermand another relative busily telling the world what a dismal human being he is…_




			https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/king-charles-should-be-very-very-worried-about-prince-harrys-new-book/news-story/d844c5b18e6597f899500f334f8a7c22


----------



## Chanbal

Who would pay for this?


----------



## Chanbal

Spoiler: Radom Encounters of a Z-list…


----------



## 880

Chanbal said:


> Only a despicable person would sell his/her father imo.
> 
> View attachment 5638853
> 
> …
> *According to the Beast’s impeccably-sourced royal correspondent Tom Sykes, the news on the book front is bad for Charles,*_ with one royal insider saying that *one chapter in particular “could spell big trouble” for the 72-year-old.* (Maybe Charles should think about having a go at reclaiming Normandy as a distraction?)
> 
> Is it any surprise then that, per Sykes, “anxiety over the content of Prince Harry’s memoir is growing in the royal family’s inner circle”?
> 
> What is particularly interesting is that, reportedly, it is not the new season of The Crown and it’s lavish recreation of Charles’ philandering, tampon-fancying ways that has Palace brows furrowed and fountain pens being bitten, nor Harry and wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’s mysterious Netflix documentary.
> Oh no. Instead, Sykes reports that “courtiers are moderately sanguine” about these projects.
> 
> *The duchess, after all, has managed via two high-profile interviews in the last two months to make herself look both ridiculous and boring. Take away her marriage and her very famous in-laws and Meghan is just as interesting and insightful as you would expect a B-list actress from a middling cable dramedy to be.* Which is to say, she is pathologically unable to not talk about herself. Talk about being hoist on your own PR.
> 
> *Her husband though?* He’s another kettle of fish entirely and for royal aides, “*Harry’s book is seen as a different order of threat.*”
> 
> For 35 years the duke’s life, identity and for many years, his job, was defined by his royal status. Contrast that with his mother Diana, Princess of Wales who had only clocked up ten years as a Windsor wife, with all the attendant heartbreak and misery that seems to be part and parcel of that gig, when she decided to tell-all to Andrew Morton.
> 
> The duke, though, has a literal lifetime of revelations, dirt and secrets to draw on, not to mention the Viking-sized battle axe he has to grind with his family. That combination of extraordinary inside knowledge, including how Princess Anne fashions her iconic backcombed pouf, and decades of grievances?
> 
> This book could well end up being the equivalent of the Gunpowder Plot 2.0.
> 
> *Nor would the death of his grandmother appear to have tempered Harry’s approach, with the Beast reporting that “the prospect of a full-blooded assault on the monarchy by Harry” is triggering “alarm” among royal insiders.*
> 
> The Times’ royal editor *Valentine Low,* and author of the recent bombshell Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown, *told Sykes “that he had knowledge of a meeting between Harry and a private individual (not a Palace staffer) while Harry was in London. The person gently suggested to Harry he might go easy on his family in the book.*”
> 
> *How was the advice received? About as well as a vegan scotch egg at a shooting lunch it sounds like. “Harry was not very receptive to the idea,” Low has said.*
> 
> What will further set the Duke of Sussex’s book apart is that it is being ghostwritten by Pulitzer-winner J.R. Moehringer. Earlier this year, celebrated royal biographer Robert Lacey, told the Guardian that Harry sat for “intense interviews” with Moehringer when he was “at just about peak rage” and prior to the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> *Meanwhile, a publishing source told Page Six in July that the book is “juicy” with another saying, “There is some content in there that should make his family nervous.*”
> 
> The real kicker here for Charles is the timing.
> 
> Only months into his reign, the king simply does not have the public capital to easily withstand a full-frontal offensive by his own son, if that is what the book ends up being.
> 
> The world has only just recently, sorta, kinda been willing to forget about how, for decades, Charles was the posterboy for bad husbands and lacklustre dads everywhere. (In 1991, he proved he would never be getting one of those “Best Father Eva” mugs when Prince William ended up in hospital and surgery for a skull fracture after being hit in the head with a golf club at school. Diana rushed to his bedside and stayed the night. And his dad? Why, Charles tootled off to host some government ministers at a performance of Tosca.)
> 
> If Harry’s book lobbs a fresh round of a stinging accusations, for example, of rotten parenting, general neglect or poor treatment by his father and/or the Palace machine, then it will be a serious body blow to the new Carolean age (as the reign of a monarch named Charles is technically known as).
> 
> Sure, His Majesty will weather the storm but again, the issue here is time.
> 
> While his mother had 70 long years to create a legacy, the king must know he is looking at around 20 years in the top job, a very finite period in which to leave his mark on the UK and to finally get a chance to rule.
> 
> What the 72-year-old can’t afford is to waste precious months or years trying to put out PR fires and having to figure out how to countermand another relative busily telling the world what a dismal human being he is…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/king-charles-should-be-very-very-worried-about-prince-harrys-new-book/news-story/d844c5b18e6597f899500f334f8a7c22


I don’t necessarily agree with the level of impact this will have. At the end of the day, a lot of this is old news. In addition, many of us grew up with dysfunctional families, and H is old enough to rise above it and make something of his life. JMO though


----------



## Mrs.Z

For someone like Harry who has certainly needed grace and forgiveness for the stupid and awful things he’s done it’s amazing that he cannot seem to offer any to his own family.  Let it go Harry!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Only a despicable person would sell his/her father imo.
> 
> View attachment 5638853
> 
> …
> *According to the Beast’s impeccably-sourced royal correspondent Tom Sykes, the news on the book front is bad for Charles,*_ with one royal insider saying that *one chapter in particular “could spell big trouble” for the 72-year-old.* (Maybe Charles should think about having a go at reclaiming Normandy as a distraction?)
> 
> Is it any surprise then that, per Sykes, “anxiety over the content of Prince Harry’s memoir is growing in the royal family’s inner circle”?
> 
> What is particularly interesting is that, reportedly, it is not the new season of The Crown and it’s lavish recreation of Charles’ philandering, tampon-fancying ways that has Palace brows furrowed and fountain pens being bitten, nor Harry and wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’s mysterious Netflix documentary.
> Oh no. Instead, Sykes reports that “courtiers are moderately sanguine” about these projects.
> 
> *The duchess, after all, has managed via two high-profile interviews in the last two months to make herself look both ridiculous and boring. Take away her marriage and her very famous in-laws and Meghan is just as interesting and insightful as you would expect a B-list actress from a middling cable dramedy to be.* Which is to say, she is pathologically unable to not talk about herself. Talk about being hoist on your own PR.
> 
> *Her husband though?* He’s another kettle of fish entirely and for royal aides, “*Harry’s book is seen as a different order of threat.*”
> 
> For 35 years the duke’s life, identity and for many years, his job, was defined by his royal status. Contrast that with his mother Diana, Princess of Wales who had only clocked up ten years as a Windsor wife, with all the attendant heartbreak and misery that seems to be part and parcel of that gig, when she decided to tell-all to Andrew Morton.
> 
> The duke, though, has a literal lifetime of revelations, dirt and secrets to draw on, not to mention the Viking-sized battle axe he has to grind with his family. That combination of extraordinary inside knowledge, including how Princess Anne fashions her iconic backcombed pouf, and decades of grievances?
> 
> This book could well end up being the equivalent of the Gunpowder Plot 2.0.
> 
> *Nor would the death of his grandmother appear to have tempered Harry’s approach, with the Beast reporting that “the prospect of a full-blooded assault on the monarchy by Harry” is triggering “alarm” among royal insiders.*
> 
> The Times’ royal editor *Valentine Low,* and author of the recent bombshell Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown, *told Sykes “that he had knowledge of a meeting between Harry and a private individual (not a Palace staffer) while Harry was in London. The person gently suggested to Harry he might go easy on his family in the book.*”
> 
> *How was the advice received? About as well as a vegan scotch egg at a shooting lunch it sounds like. “Harry was not very receptive to the idea,” Low has said.*
> 
> What will further set the Duke of Sussex’s book apart is that it is being ghostwritten by Pulitzer-winner J.R. Moehringer. Earlier this year, celebrated royal biographer Robert Lacey, told the Guardian that Harry sat for “intense interviews” with Moehringer when he was “at just about peak rage” and prior to the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> *Meanwhile, a publishing source told Page Six in July that the book is “juicy” with another saying, “There is some content in there that should make his family nervous.*”
> 
> The real kicker here for Charles is the timing.
> 
> Only months into his reign, the king simply does not have the public capital to easily withstand a full-frontal offensive by his own son, if that is what the book ends up being.
> 
> The world has only just recently, sorta, kinda been willing to forget about how, for decades, Charles was the posterboy for bad husbands and lacklustre dads everywhere. (In 1991, he proved he would never be getting one of those “Best Father Eva” mugs when Prince William ended up in hospital and surgery for a skull fracture after being hit in the head with a golf club at school. Diana rushed to his bedside and stayed the night. And his dad? Why, Charles tootled off to host some government ministers at a performance of Tosca.)
> 
> If Harry’s book lobbs a fresh round of a stinging accusations, for example, of rotten parenting, general neglect or poor treatment by his father and/or the Palace machine, then it will be a serious body blow to the new Carolean age (as the reign of a monarch named Charles is technically known as).
> 
> Sure, His Majesty will weather the storm but again, the issue here is time.
> 
> While his mother had 70 long years to create a legacy, the king must know he is looking at around 20 years in the top job, a very finite period in which to leave his mark on the UK and to finally get a chance to rule.
> 
> What the 72-year-old can’t afford is to waste precious months or years trying to put out PR fires and having to figure out how to countermand another relative busily telling the world what a dismal human being he is…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/king-charles-should-be-very-very-worried-about-prince-harrys-new-book/news-story/d844c5b18e6597f899500f334f8a7c22


I am going to state my opinion which may be in the minority and totally wrong, but...I don't believe that there will be anything in this book that will ruin Charles.  People may gasp a bit, but will shake their heads and move on and say it was a long time ago and what matters is what is happening now.  The history that Harry will be dredging up is decades old for the most part. Charles and Camilla have been married for 17 years, they are happy and people can see it and she has been rehabilitated quite well in public opinion. Diana, on the other hand has been slyly brought down a few pegs and isn't quite as sainted as she used to be.  Her followers are much older now as well and don't care as much.   For every bad thing that Harry can bring up, there will be an equally bad thing in his own personal history. The Daily Mail would just love to go tit for tat regarding this.  All this pearl clenching and hand wringing is just to get people to buy the book.    It is doubtful that there will be any real revelations in it.  The fact that the few pearls of his childhood that have been mentioned by him, i.e. no  bicycle riding with dad, the lack of therapy,(I guess Harry forgot about having it)  have all been shown to be untrue.  Unless this book was meticulously fact checked by the ghost writer, there may not be that much he can point the finger at that is true or new.  I think that Moerhinger is going to pull a fast one on Harry and show a damaged man full of rage.  That won't harm Charles at all because it will all be on Harry.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

oldbag said:


> Maybe William, knowing what his brother was like and was just fed up and decided to let the idiot fall on his face so others could see him in action. This to me is akin to an abuser who blames his victim,"damnit Earline, you made me hit you." It does not appear if things have changed eighteen years down the line.


IMO, Dufus lied to avoid being blamed for his own stupidity, knowing William would never retaliate. As we know, Dufus' minders usually cleaned up his messes, but none did on this occasion for whatever reason and so it was easier although kind of chicken sh!t to lie.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> IIRC he also used racial slurs to describe his army mate(s). IMHO Handbag is less racist and more stupid. He doesn't understand nuance or implications. Can't imagine how someone so dense can do coaching. This is why he advises people to quit their jobs without considering if the average Joe has millions in trust funds.
> 
> Handbag claimed he was never able to ride a bike with his father, yet there are photos of him riding a bike with Charles. This just adds fuel to the rumour that his father isn't Charles. Face-palm moment. No wonder veins are popping up on his wench's face.


Yes the slurs about army colleagues


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> I don’t necessarily agree with the level of impact this will have. At the end of the day, a lot of this is old news. In addition, many of us grew up with dysfunctional families, and H is old enough to rise above it and make something of his life. JMO though


You are probably right, but the idea that Hazz is selling his family for cash is deplorable.


----------



## rose60610

Anybody want to bet that Archewell Foundation will pay for a Rent-a-Crowd for the Indianapolis Marriott?   I have a difficult time seeing anybody paying $50 to see these losers let alone $500. The parking will probably be a minimum $30 at the hotel. Cocktails $20 a piece. Will anybody be allowed to take Claw's photo? Or will they all be scolded/warned that they'd better not dare? You know there will be tables of merch, "dress like Claw", including fake tiaras. Does the $500 include a copy of The Bench? Who would pay $5 to hear a bunch of word salad from a whiner demanding pity for herself?


----------



## marietouchet

yes Moehringer may paint a disturbing portrait but that is on H not his father
PS I lost the quote of gracekelly’s original post , I can’t edit , my bad


----------



## purseinsanity

Suncatcher said:


> Everything leaked about her is that she is consistently a truly awful human being. Her soul and spirit are so ugly. No wonder she has no friends in her life. She must be a very lonely person. Deservedly so.


She thinks very highly of herself, especially funny considering she has nothing of substance to offer.  Spreading your legs only works for so long.  I'm sure there's a fetish for everyone, but old, wrinkly bi!chy gold diggers are not a common craving.


----------



## Gal4Dior

CarryOn2020 said:


> Indianapolis Marriot
> View attachment 5638825
> 
> 
> Open your wallets?



Will she be staying in the Presidential Suite? Oh wait, no...TW if TOO good for the Marriot. First class flight or PJ for her - straight to the Conrad for her (yes I looked it up - no Four Seasons or Ritz here).


----------



## rose60610

gracekelly said:


> I am going to state my opinion which may be in the minority and totally wrong, but...I don't believe that there will be anything in this book that will ruin Charles.  People may gasp a bit, but will shake their heads and move on and say it was a long time ago and what matters is what is happening now.  The history that Harry will be dredging up is decades old for the most part. Charles and Camilla have been married for 17 years, they are happy and people can see it and she has been rehabilitated quite well in public opinion. Diana, on the other hand has been slyly brought down a few pegs and isn't quite as sainted as she used to be.  Her followers are much older now as well and don't care as much.   For every bad thing that Harry can bring up, there will be an equally bad thing in his own personal history. The Daily Mail would just love to go tit for tat regarding this.  All this pearl clenching and hand wringing is just to get people to buy the book.    It is doubtful that there will be any real revelations in it.  The fact that the few pearls of his childhood that have been mentioned by him, i.e. no  bicycle riding with dad, the lack of therapy,(I guess Harry forgot about having it)  have all been shown to be untrue.  Unless this book was meticulously fact checked by the ghost writer, there may not be that much he can point the finger at that is true or new.  I think that Moerhinger is going to pull a fast one on Harry and show a damaged man full of rage.  That won't harm Charles at all because it will all be on Harry.



Considering how fast and loose Haz and Claw are with "their truths", I've no doubt Haz made up some scandalous crap about his own father to fatten sales. Not to say that Charles was a 100% wonderful person through the years, but Haz' credibility is garbage. IMO considering what Harry and Maggot have already said about the BRF, it's in their best interest to be extreme flame throwers in the book or the publisher and the public will be disappointed. The publisher wants its money's worth. There will be scandal bombs, IMO, that Charles won't be able to prove or disprove. It's all about selling the book, Harry and ME-me-me are all about money, and they'll go to any lengths to sell as many copies as possible, no matter how packed full of lies it had to be.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Speaking at Indianapolis downtown Marriott, not at Convention Center, sure ain’t BP
somewhere in the event notice , sorry I lost the link , it says Meghan Duchess of Sussex formerly known as Meghan Markle, chuckle


----------



## marietouchet

kipp said:


> I have a sneaking hunch that in Indianapolis the audience won't be as large or as receptive as Megain expects...  I say this as a born and bred Mid-westerner...


Agree, I live in the Midwest, and there is no woke here, we fell asleep eons ago


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> Just means she was promoting Me Me Me. The mentions of Archie were as her appendage to give her credibility as nerd mom. She was not expecting a question not focused on her her her and had to recall What'sHisName.
> 
> Didn't Handbag also react strangely in that zoom call when he was asked about his kids? They both behave oddly when asked about their family. I guess with such a huge mansion, they rarely see each other



On another forum, they are actively discussing whether H and M have already separated…

It was pointed out that:
1. They arrived separately for a date recently (i think H arrived over an hour later to a concert?)
2.  MM recent publicity is all hers - The Cut, Variety and the podcasts don’t mention H and are all about her.
3.  Not wearing engagement rings in variety shoot and some photos show her without the wedding ring too.  Same for the Cut.
4 H hasn’t been seen except for a zoom call for Well child and betterup (again no mention of M)

Perhaps they are in the early stages of separation.

but I think MM wants all eyes on her at the Coronation… so she won’t want to miss that.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I don’t know if anyone remembers the picture of her next to one of the other girls from deal or no deal last week, but I meant to post about it because I follow the girl she was standing next to on Instagram and I’ve heard her mention her time on the show here, and there, always positively.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> yes *Moehringer may paint a disturbing portrait *but that is *on H *not his father


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> On another forum, they are actively discussing whether H and M have already separated…
> 
> It was pointed out that:
> 1. They arrived separately for a date recently (i think H arrived over an hour later to a concert?)
> 2.  MM recent publicity is all hers - The Cut, Variety and the podcasts don’t mention H and are all about her.
> 3.  Not wearing engagement rings in variety shoot and some photos show her without the wedding ring too.  Same for the Cut.
> 4 H hasn’t been seen except for a zoom call for Well child and betterup (again no mention of M)
> 
> Perhaps they are in the early stages of separation.
> 
> but I think MM wants all eyes on her at the Coronation… so she won’t want to miss that.


But, historically the BRF ices out separated spouses ASAP even Diana lost invites to Christmas at Sandringham
If there is a whiff of separation, someone will forget to send HER invite


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Considering how fast and loose Haz and Claw are with "their truths", I've no doubt Haz made up some scandalous crap about his own father to fatten sales. Not to say that Charles was a 100% wonderful person through the years, but Haz' credibility is garbage. IMO considering what Harry and Maggot have already said about the BRF, it's in their best interest to be extreme flame throwers in the book or the publisher and the public will be disappointed. The publisher wants its money's worth. There will be scandal bombs, IMO, that Charles won't be able to prove or disprove. It's all about selling the book, Harry and ME-me-me are all about money, and they'll go to any lengths to sell as many copies as possible, no matter how packed full of lies it had to be.


Unfortunately, people won't forget the lies and a certain number of them will think they are true.  This is something that the Sussex have done repeatedly.  They are past the point of caring if something is true or not as long as it makes money.  Surely they know that the consequences with Charles.  Do they think they can later say they are sorry and the publisher forced Harry into do it?  If this book comes out with a pack of lies or even truths that should not have been made public, they are toast.


----------



## marietouchet

Thought I lost links to 08 Aug 2013 Ferguson interview but they were in my watch history so I could find them  for you


----------



## needlv

marietouchet said:


> But, historically the BRF ices out separated spouses ASAP even Diana lost invites to Christmas at Sandringham
> If there is a whiff of separation, someone will forget to send HER invite



I do wonder if the Queen’s passing was a huge wake-up call for H?

I think M mentioned something about it being a “complicated time”.  Maybe H is blaming MM for not going to see the Queen earlier….


----------



## lanasyogamama

I know she was super duper fake in the Craig Ferguson interview, but she still was 100 times sexier and more charming than she ever has been since she met the handbag.


----------



## lanasyogamama

It had also crossed my mind that there was some trouble between them, I feel like they haven’t been seen together in quite a while


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Hotels have ballrooms.  Maybe 250 people? Or more.


That's my point. I don't think there will be a very big turnout. Lots of echoes in the ballroom. It will be a repeat of the UN debacle.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Never mind the fact that it’s seriously abnormal for children to never be seen in public, faces blocked or not


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry, wanted to continue my thoughts. It’s understandable to want to give children privacy, but you have to allow them to be part of the world as well.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> But, historically the BRF ices out separated spouses ASAP even Diana lost invites to Christmas at Sandringham
> If there is a whiff of separation, someone will forget to send HER invite


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> It had also crossed my mind that there was some trouble between them, I feel like they haven’t been seen together in quite a while



There was this a few weeks ago:



> https://www.tmz.com/2022/10/07/prince-harry-meghan-markle-jack-johnson-concert-santa-barbara/


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I know she was super duper fake in the Craig Ferguson interview, but she still was 100 times sexier and more charming than she ever has been since she met the handbag.


Playing a bimbo got her to where she is but now she wants to be taken seriously. A woman of substance


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> There was this a few weeks ago:



Yes this was the concert where they arrived separately.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Yes this was the concert where they arrived separately.


I didn't know that.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> Agree, I live in the Midwest, and there is no woke here, we fell asleep eons ago



I beg to differ. Here in Chicago and Chicagoland, and bigger Midwest university towns, the woke try desperately to out-woke each other. There are many people who pride themselves at being offended at everything and plenty of caucasians who claim that they know exactly what it's like to be a racial minority. They're good at pretending to care when in reality they just have an agenda to push.  The more "offended" they are the more sophisticated they believe they are. But not a single one of them is going to pay $500 to see a fraud from Montecito.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> And we’re off — Bridezilla time



She does love being the "Perfect Woman". Maybe that is one of the themes. She can interview herself.


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> I do wonder if the Queen’s passing was a huge wake-up call for H?
> 
> I think M mentioned something about it being a “complicated time”.  Maybe H is blaming MM for not going to see the Queen earlier….


Big wake up call ? It had to have been for “Harry and Meghan, overseas”
No way did the King just fail to insert their title, THOSE words were huuuuge


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> I beg to differ. Here in Chicago and Chicagoland, and bigger Midwest university towns, the woke try desperately to out-woke each other. There are many people who pride themselves at being offended at everything and plenty of caucasians who claim that they know exactly what it's like to be a racial minority. They're good at pretending to care when in reality they just have an agenda to push.  The more "offended" they are the more sophisticated they believe they are. But not a single one of them is going to pay $500 to see a fraud from Montecito.


You are correct, yes, Chicago is quite liberal, I stand corrected


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Bridezilla.
> Time to make a bingo card.



Hahahahaaaa! No way!   

She’s trolling us now. 

I can’t wait to read all about it tomorrow!


----------



## marietouchet

Debate in the House of Lords 

Interesting note about how the current parliament was opened only due to the Regencry Act, Charles was able to do it in lieu of the Queen


----------



## needlv

Ouch….


----------



## csshopper

Can’t remember the details, but Tom Bowers included the story in his book about her having a hissy fit and demanding a change in hotels because the one that came with the deal was not posh enough for her. It sounded like it was a demand for an upgrade from posh to poshest. 

Would not be surprised if she flew in on a private jet, preached her Meghan THE MAGNICENT speech and red eyed it home afterwards.


----------



## EverSoElusive

csshopper said:


> Can’t remember the details, but Tom Bowers included the story in his book about her having a hissy fit and demanding a change in hotels because the one that came with the deal was not posh enough for her. It sounded like it was a demand for an upgrade from posh to poshest.
> 
> Would not be surprised if she flew in on a private jet, preached her Meghan THE MAGNICENT speech and red eyed it home afterwards.


Are you referring to the caged bird hotel?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> *And we’re off — Bridezilla time*


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> It says $5000 per table, but how many tables do you think a place like that can hold? It's sad.


Is this type and size of event even profitable? Her event expenses are ridiculously high when you factor in her private plane, her needlessly large security team cavalcade to make herself look more important, her Uber expensive ill fitting designer outfits, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Playing a bimbo got her to where she is but now she wants to be taken seriously. A woman of substance


Paris is being portrayed as grateful…


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> He just didn’t think, which has become the story of his life.


Didn't think. Didn't think or care what his country went through. That's really not thinking...


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> He is stupid.  He didn't know. He didn't care.  You could have told him about the anniversary and he just would have shrugged his shoulders. It would not have changed a thing. Aside from the obvious, he was demeaning all the brave British and Commonwealth  soldiers who fought the Nazis and all those who died in combat or during the Blitz.  He should have been pilloried.
> 
> View attachment 5638840


I was leaning more towards tarred and feathered - since they have so many rescue chickens...


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> You are correct, yes, Chicago is quite liberal, I stand corrected


Also, Minneapolis


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> Nothing suspicious there.On another forum, they are actively discussing whether H and M have already separated…
> 
> It was pointed out that:
> 1. They arrived separately for a date recently (i think H arrived over an hour later to a concert?)
> 2.  MM recent publicity is all hers - The Cut, Variety and the podcasts don’t mention H and are all about her.
> 3.  Not wearing engagement rings in variety shoot and some photos show her without the wedding ring too.  Same for the Cut.
> 4 H hasn’t been seen except for a zoom call for Well child and betterup (again no mention of M)
> 
> Perhaps they are in the early stages of separation.
> 
> but I think MM wants all eyes on her at the Coronation… so she won’t want to miss that.


Well, let’s look at the recent interviews. Meghan stumbles over how to answer a question about what shows she watches when with Harry. For his part, Harry couldn’t even answer a child’s question about what Archie and Lilibet were doing without sounding awkward. Make of that what you will.

As for the rings, maybe Meghan’s fingers are puffy or she’s having them reset again. Nothing suspicious there.


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> Are you referring to the caged bird hotel?
> 
> View attachment 5638981
> 
> View attachment 5638982


It's been a while since I read Revenge, but I think there was another incident where she threw a fit because the hotel she was put in was not up to her standards. I'd love to know how this Indianapolis thing came about and what she's getting out of it. You know she is not doing it out of the goodness of her heart, but I also can't imagine this group can come up with the speaking fee she feels she commands. Just a random thought, blackmail by a former sorority sister?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Speaking at Indianapolis downtown Marriott, not at Convention Center, sure ain’t BP
> somewhere in the event notice , sorry I lost the link , it says Meghan Duchess of Sussex formerly known as Meghan Markle, chuckle
> 
> View attachment 5638860


Yep, from Buckingham Palace to the downtown Marriot


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Anybody want to bet that Archewell Foundation will pay for a Rent-a-Crowd for the Indianapolis Marriott?   I have a difficult time seeing anybody paying $50 to see these losers let alone $500. The parking will probably be a minimum $30 at the hotel. Cocktails $20 a piece. Will anybody be allowed to take Claw's photo? Or will they all be scolded/warned that they'd better not dare? You know there will be tables of merch, "dress like Claw", including fake tiaras. Does the $500 include a copy of The Bench? Who would pay $5 to hear a bunch of word salad from a whiner demanding pity for herself?


The Women's Fund of Central Indiana seem to be doing good. They certainly give more than sandwiches and bananas.
_Women’s Fund of Central Indiana is highly regarded as the most influential organization creating transformative and sustainable change for women and girls in central Indiana. Women’s Fund creates options and opportunities in central Indiana through transformative grants to effective nonprofit organizations and philanthropy education for donors._

Wonder who sold them this bill of goods? By the way, the event is closed doors. No photography or recording. Anyone going has to declare "Neither myself nor any of my guests are attending this event as members of the media."





rose60610 said:


> Considering how fast and loose Haz and Claw are with "their truths", I've no doubt Haz made up some scandalous crap about his own father to fatten sales. Not to say that Charles was a 100% wonderful person through the years, but Haz' credibility is garbage. IMO considering what Harry and Maggot have already said about the BRF, it's in their best interest to be extreme flame throwers in the book or the publisher and the public will be disappointed. The publisher wants its money's worth. There will be scandal bombs, IMO, that Charles won't be able to prove or disprove. It's all about selling the book, Harry and ME-me-me are all about money, and they'll go to any lengths to sell as many copies as possible, no matter how packed full of lies it had to be.


Nothing but innuendo and inferences to point fingers at everyone and no one.


needlv said:


> On another forum, they are actively discussing whether H and M have already separated…
> 
> It was pointed out that:
> 1. They arrived separately for a date recently (i think H arrived over an hour later to a concert?)
> 2.  MM recent publicity is all hers - The Cut, Variety and the podcasts don’t mention H and are all about her.
> 3.  Not wearing engagement rings in variety shoot and some photos show her without the wedding ring too.  Same for the Cut.
> 4 H hasn’t been seen except for a zoom call for Well child and betterup (again no mention of M)
> 
> Perhaps they are in the early stages of separation.
> 
> but I think *MM wants all eyes on her at the Coronation*… so she won’t want to miss that.


We need Sir Candle to come to the world's defence! She reminds me of those MILs on Reddit threads who try on their future DIL's bridal gown. I'm sure she will be panting for a tiara, preferably something that makes her look regal and kweenly.


lanasyogamama said:


> It had also crossed my mind that there was some trouble between them, I feel like they haven’t been seen together in quite a while


Could that be why Misan had to post a "joyous" photo?
Frankly, will she be less of a nuisance if they split? She will, for the rest of her life, be braying about her Duchess title unless it is taken from her, then she will be the ex-Duchess. She will try to be in the headlines. And as long as some people, like those clueless ladies in the Indiana hotel, think she is the bee's knees, she will eke out a living with her word salad.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> Is this type and size of event even profitable? Her event expenses are ridiculously high when you factor in her private plane, her needlessly large security team cavalcade to make herself look more important, her Uber expensive ill fitting designer outfits, etc.


Don’t charity events like this count on large corporations footing the bill by buying tables? I hope it’s a reputable charity but who knows.


----------



## bag-mania

Harry had his mental health speech at the tech conference last week in San Francisco and now Meghan has this Indianapolis women’s event.

Whatever their current living arrangements, they are clearly working separately and taking personal gigs.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I think I found the hotel incident that @csshopper was referring to


----------



## lanasyogamama

I hope this isn’t offensive, but that new picture looks like it’s of two blind people.


----------



## lanasyogamama

EverSoElusive said:


> I think I found the hotel incident that @csshopper was referring to
> 
> View attachment 5638997


Won’t be able to pull that in Indy!


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> I think I found the hotel incident that @csshopper was referring to
> 
> View attachment 5638997


That was the incident I was thinking of. Did you take notes while reading?


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> That was the incident I was thinking of. Did you take notes while reading?


Oh yeah  Highlighted a lot to screenshot and share here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> You are correct, yes, Chicago is quite liberal, I stand corrected



Liberal would be fine, but Chicago has become just effin' cuckoo. Regardless of that, those that have said anything about Claw, even around here, said she's basically a slimy idiot. I have doubts that Indianapolis would fare any better for her. However, the 14 million spent on a mansion in Montecito could get her even a bigger mansion in Indiana and a whole lotta farmland to boot. Is she shopping around? And I'll add, any outfit from Target or Goodwill would look a helluva lot better than her latest jumpsuit and stupid floppy hat. Not that I want to say anything. When she finds out that people won't line up to spend $500 a head to see Her Greatness, she'll all of a sudden have a "schedule conflict" or "emergency" and "regret she cannot attend". 

Even if the Women's Fund of Central Indiana is doing well, after they get the bill for Claw's expenses (if she shows up), they'll puke. Don't they know her SECURITY detail is extensive? Maybe one (or several) of the ladies in this organization has a private plane and extended it to bring Claw to Indianapolis. (Do NOT underestimate some of the wealth in the Midwest from "no name" people. A good number under the radar are doing just fine.) Maybe that's why tickets are $500. It's another event for this particular group to get together, spend their own dime, sweet talk their well healed neighbors to attend, and get the charity donation write off.

I think somebody from the Women's Fund of Central Indiana smelled blood in the water.

Claw is desperate. She'll do anything for a buck. Even if it means she'd go to, where? Indianapolis? (Google it!) Where she'd GET PAID to spew some word salad, remind them that she went to nearby Northwestern University and how she's (cue the left eye tear) SO HAPPY to be "back in the neighborhood" (not really, Claw, but they'll kindly golf clap).

Yep. From Buckingham Palace to Indianapolis. Frogmore Cottage wasn't so bad after all........


----------



## LittleStar88

Though I’m sure she runs everything through as a write-off/business expense, I’m sure it’s still expensive to be TW…









						It’s Really Expensive to Be a Star
					

After talent is done covering commissions, taxes and other requisite costs, those headline-making paydays aren't as lavish as they seem.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth! I'm not familiar with this site, but "_Be aware of the Harkles curse_"  
The video claims that clothes TW wears don't sell. Does anyone know if there is any truth in this? 



_Meg's Clothes On Fire! Carolina Herrera Faces Recorded Drop After TW's Variety Cover -All Deals Cut_​


----------



## Chanbal

This is short and funny…


----------



## needlv

bag-mania said:


> Harry had his mental health speech at the tech conference last week in San Francisco and now Meghan has this Indianapolis women’s event.
> 
> Whatever their current living arrangements, they are clearly working separately and taking personal gigs.



Yes and her PR is all about MM - so brand separation.  It’s not the “couple” but just her.  A smart move if she is looking to leave as she has already launched / started her own brand.

however if it’s H looking to leave and she isn’t ready to discard him and latch onto her next boyfriend (victim), I bet she goes scorched earth over divorce (Angelina Jolie / Brad Pitt?)

BUT Divorce could open way more opportunities for her.  Do all the morning shows about being a victim, feeling trapped etc.  Write a book about being the partner of someone who has substance/mental health issues and feeling alone/trapped.  THEN use those interviews to launch yet another brand helping victims of domestic violence get support etc.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Don’t charity events like this count on large corporations footing the bill by buying tables? I hope it’s a reputable charity but who knows.


The buying of the tables, in this case $5,000 per table, is only partly tax deductible for the donors. This particular event’s ad said only 50% of the price per table was tax deductible. From the charity’s point of view, the $5,000 per table is gross revenue from which they have to deduct the costs involved in staging the event such as rental of the ballroom and equipment, cost of catering, cost of any speakers, etc. I’m assuming TW is going to want a guest speaker fee plus her expenses covered and from we’ve seen she likes to travel via private plane with a large entourage that includes her personal security team, personal photographers, hair, makeup and wardrobe team, and of course she has to bring several badly fitting very expensive designer outfits. At the end of the day, even if their usual corporate donors buy some tables, will this charity manage to make any money after it pays all of it’s event expenses including TW?


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> I think I found the hotel incident that @csshopper was referring to
> 
> View attachment 5638997


You have to ask where the sense of self importance came from. She was a second string player on a not much viewed cable show.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> The buying of the tables, in this case $5,000 per table, is only partly tax deductible for the donors. This particular event’s ad said only 50% of the price per table was tax deductible. From the charity’s point of view, the $5,000 per table is gross revenue from which they have to deduct the costs involved in staging the event such as rental of the ballroom and equipment, cost of catering, cost of any speakers, etc. I’m assuming TW is going to want a guest speaker fee plus her expenses covered and from we’ve seen she likes to travel via private plane with a large entourage that includes her personal security team, personal photographers, hair, makeup and wardrobe team, and of course she has to bring several badly fitting very expensive designer outfits. At the end of the day, even if their usual corporate donors buy some tables, will this charity manage to make any money after it pays all of it’s event expenses including TW?


It is axiomatic that  when you invite Meghan you are going to be into deficit spending.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> I think I found the hotel incident that @csshopper was referring to
> 
> View attachment 5638997


Yes, thank you, this is it. She did an epic DIVA performance.


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> Good questions. The way things are perceived is constantly changing over time. When I was a kid in the 70s, little boys would draw pictures of tanks, planes, and swastickas in their notebooks. (Can you imagine what would happen if a kid in school was doing that today?) Those boys didn’t draw pictures because they were Nazis. They did it because it was not so far removed in time from WWII and boys were fascinated by everything about it. By the time Harry wore that costume attitudes had changed. I _think_ he wore it in the same way anyone would wear a villain costume and he didn’t think any more about it. I don’t believe he had bad intentions.


No I think he wanted to dress up as something evil because he knew it would cause a reaction and he’s extremely thick so the Nazis are probably the only evil genocidal state he’s heard of. If he knew who say, Charles Taylor was, he’d have blacked up because it would’ve got more heat. Well that said I think even his spineless advisers might have spoken against that idea.

I think the difference between the children drawing nazis and tanks and Harry is most kids hear about WW2 as this  heroic adventure which the good guys win so it’s not surprising it appeals to them - the nazis are just bad guys/ black hats to them. They are shielded from the more horrific massacres until they reach their teens. 

Harry in contrast is an adult, and even the most ignorant British adult will have been told about the concentration camps and the experiments and the rapes but he simply doesn’t care for the feelings of others. To me he is the definition of what a racist and he always has been. He considers himself to be superior to others by virtue of his blood and treats others as less human and complex than himself. He may have a biracial wife but I think he’s just learned to better hide his own cruelty and malice tbh.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Only a despicable person would sell his/her father imo.
> 
> View attachment 5638853
> 
> …
> *According to the Beast’s impeccably-sourced royal correspondent Tom Sykes, the news on the book front is bad for Charles,*_ with one royal insider saying that *one chapter in particular “could spell big trouble” for the 72-year-old.* (Maybe Charles should think about having a go at reclaiming Normandy as a distraction?)
> 
> Is it any surprise then that, per Sykes, “anxiety over the content of Prince Harry’s memoir is growing in the royal family’s inner circle”?
> 
> What is particularly interesting is that, reportedly, it is not the new season of The Crown and it’s lavish recreation of Charles’ philandering, tampon-fancying ways that has Palace brows furrowed and fountain pens being bitten, nor Harry and wife Meghan, Duchess of Sussex’s mysterious Netflix documentary.
> Oh no. Instead, Sykes reports that “courtiers are moderately sanguine” about these projects.
> 
> *The duchess, after all, has managed via two high-profile interviews in the last two months to make herself look both ridiculous and boring. Take away her marriage and her very famous in-laws and Meghan is just as interesting and insightful as you would expect a B-list actress from a middling cable dramedy to be.* Which is to say, she is pathologically unable to not talk about herself. Talk about being hoist on your own PR.
> 
> *Her husband though?* He’s another kettle of fish entirely and for royal aides, “*Harry’s book is seen as a different order of threat.*”
> 
> For 35 years the duke’s life, identity and for many years, his job, was defined by his royal status. Contrast that with his mother Diana, Princess of Wales who had only clocked up ten years as a Windsor wife, with all the attendant heartbreak and misery that seems to be part and parcel of that gig, when she decided to tell-all to Andrew Morton.
> 
> The duke, though, has a literal lifetime of revelations, dirt and secrets to draw on, not to mention the Viking-sized battle axe he has to grind with his family. That combination of extraordinary inside knowledge, including how Princess Anne fashions her iconic backcombed pouf, and decades of grievances?
> 
> This book could well end up being the equivalent of the Gunpowder Plot 2.0.
> 
> *Nor would the death of his grandmother appear to have tempered Harry’s approach, with the Beast reporting that “the prospect of a full-blooded assault on the monarchy by Harry” is triggering “alarm” among royal insiders.*
> 
> The Times’ royal editor *Valentine Low,* and author of the recent bombshell Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind The Crown, *told Sykes “that he had knowledge of a meeting between Harry and a private individual (not a Palace staffer) while Harry was in London. The person gently suggested to Harry he might go easy on his family in the book.*”
> 
> *How was the advice received? About as well as a vegan scotch egg at a shooting lunch it sounds like. “Harry was not very receptive to the idea,” Low has said.*
> 
> What will further set the Duke of Sussex’s book apart is that it is being ghostwritten by Pulitzer-winner J.R. Moehringer. Earlier this year, celebrated royal biographer Robert Lacey, told the Guardian that Harry sat for “intense interviews” with Moehringer when he was “at just about peak rage” and prior to the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> *Meanwhile, a publishing source told Page Six in July that the book is “juicy” with another saying, “There is some content in there that should make his family nervous.*”
> 
> The real kicker here for Charles is the timing.
> 
> Only months into his reign, the king simply does not have the public capital to easily withstand a full-frontal offensive by his own son, if that is what the book ends up being.
> 
> The world has only just recently, sorta, kinda been willing to forget about how, for decades, Charles was the posterboy for bad husbands and lacklustre dads everywhere. (In 1991, he proved he would never be getting one of those “Best Father Eva” mugs when Prince William ended up in hospital and surgery for a skull fracture after being hit in the head with a golf club at school. Diana rushed to his bedside and stayed the night. And his dad? Why, Charles tootled off to host some government ministers at a performance of Tosca.)
> 
> If Harry’s book lobbs a fresh round of a stinging accusations, for example, of rotten parenting, general neglect or poor treatment by his father and/or the Palace machine, then it will be a serious body blow to the new Carolean age (as the reign of a monarch named Charles is technically known as).
> 
> Sure, His Majesty will weather the storm but again, the issue here is time.
> 
> While his mother had 70 long years to create a legacy, the king must know he is looking at around 20 years in the top job, a very finite period in which to leave his mark on the UK and to finally get a chance to rule.
> 
> What the 72-year-old can’t afford is to waste precious months or years trying to put out PR fires and having to figure out how to countermand another relative busily telling the world what a dismal human being he is…_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/royals/king-charles-should-be-very-very-worried-about-prince-harrys-new-book/news-story/d844c5b18e6597f899500f334f8a7c22



It's not the book that matters so much but the media's reporting of what's in it. 

Honestly, unless he comes up with he was abused as a kid, or he has evidence Diana's death was ordered by the BRF, there is not much that's gonna shock. If he comes up with anything less than wholesome about the Queen people will shut him out for good. 

Everything else has probably been alluded to already, and is literally gonna look like just more pouts, groans and moans from the world's most boring, over-privileged and over-indulged spare. 

Not to mention, at this point no one believes a single word either of these two say.


----------



## jelliedfeels

BittyMonkey said:


> I remember when Harry got papped wearing his Nazi outfit. It was not unlike some of the jerk kids I went to high school with that were trying to be edgy. At that time it was a fast track to negative attention if you were wearing swastikas or blabbing about Hitler, etc. Most of those stupid fellow students got in a lot of trouble.
> 
> There was one kid, who I'll call A, who went all out on the neo-Nazi scene. That kid was genuine, and one day mysteriously vanished from the high school. I have no doubt his parents sent him off somewhere. H's idiocy with the armband feels more like the first category of being edgy and seeking negative attention. However, today I would be afraid they were more genuine and less attention-seeking given certain events.


Those parents certainly did more to help their kid than Charles apparently did. H needed a wake up call from an early age not a PR puff up. I’ve said this before but I don’t feel at all sorry for the royals as they dug their own grave here.


papertiger said:


> Not when you great-aunt and great-uncle were famous Nazis ready to betray their own country the Germans at a time of war and known informers.
> 
> I can't believe so many are willing to give this over-privileged hHoray Henry the benefit of the doubt. Just any litte kid is not 3rd in line to the throne.
> 
> Wearing swastikas as a joke is just as bad as wearing maliciously.
> 
> How about if he'd gone as a slave trader?  Nazis used millions as forced labour and and then murdered them. It's not something to say "oops" to and never address again.
> 
> How about a Netflix  documentary on Harry delving into his own misdemeanours and stop pretending it didn't happen or down playing it.
> 
> ZERO tolerance to racists of any kind.


well they’ve rewritten the history on that - pro-royalists now will tell you old Ed and Wallis weren’t political and he was a just bit stupid too…

Astounding how people can plead their incompetence as an excuse for evil while maintaining a belief in the innate competency of royal rule


----------



## JulesB68

https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/10/blind-items-revealed-4_24.html?m=1#comment-6021530423

Looks like TW’s planting stories again 
One of the comments hits the nail squarely on the head:





Always thought she was holding on to the bump for a reason (not just “look at me, I’m pregnant!”); someone else claims these photos show when it came loose and dropped!


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> Those parents certainly did more to help their kid than Charles apparently did. H needed a wake up call from an early age not a PR puff up. I’ve said this before but I don’t feel at all sorry for the royals as they dug their own grave here.
> 
> well they’ve rewritten the history on that - pro-royalists now will tell you old George and Wallis weren’t political and he was a just bit stupid too…
> 
> Astounding how people can plead their incompetence as an excuse for evil while maintaining a belief in the innate competency of royal rule



George? Edward? 

Have you read Andrew Lownie's book on The Traitor King? He starts after the abdication? 

Just one minute


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> No, but it would have helped had he a) shown accountability and b) went on to become a great guy. With his current behaviour, people will be all too happy to dig up stuff from 20 years ago. I mean, people bring up regularly how he rode his tricycle into his security detail as a toddler which I don't think is proof of anything. My own nephew was a truly horrible child all through toddlerhood and early school years (and he had better/more involved parents than Harry). As a teenager, he's now considerably calmed down, is polite and likeable.


Um I thought he never got to ride a bike till he met Meggy Poppins and moved to the pristine and deserted roads of California so this story must be fiction 


Toby93 said:


> So they were specifically warned NOT to use their titles for monetary reasons, so what is this??.
> Also, someone just mentioned that it's not an arena, it's a Marriot hotel.  Delusions of grandeur
> 
> View attachment 5638819



I agree this is clear profiteering but we probably shouldn’t hold our breaths on any royal reprisals. 

That said It being at a Marriott is pretty hilarious. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> Has he spoken out against the latest round of hate speech?  Yes, he did ‘apologize’, but it was truly half-assed imo.  The “if” sounds pompous.  If we look at his behavior in recent years, we must wonder why he is still in LoS and CoS.  Again, a half-assed attempt to leave/not leave.   He behaves this way because he can. His sad group of ‘lads’ applaud him for it.
> 
> _From 2005,
> In the statement, he said: "I am very sorry *if* I caused any offence or embarrassment to anyone. It was a poor choice of costume and I apologise."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apology for Harry's Nazi outfit falls on deaf ears
> 
> 
> BRITAIN: An apology offered on behalf of Prince Harry (20), third in line to the British throne, failed yesterday to stop a …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.irishtimes.com


I’m sorry IF you didn’t get my hilarious joke


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> George? Edward?
> 
> Have you read Andrew Lownie's book on The Traitor King? He starts after the abdication?
> 
> Just one minute



Sorry I meant David/Edward I got mixed up - I mean him having 2 names is complicated enough


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> The buying of the tables, in this case $5,000 per table, is only partly tax deductible for the donors. This particular event’s ad said only 50% of the price per table was tax deductible. From the charity’s point of view, the $5,000 per table is gross revenue from which they have to deduct the costs involved in staging the event such as rental of the ballroom and equipment, cost of catering, cost of any speakers, etc. I’m assuming TW is going to want a guest speaker fee plus her expenses covered and from we’ve seen she likes to travel via private plane with a large entourage that includes her personal security team, personal photographers, hair, makeup and wardrobe team, and of course she has to bring several badly fitting very expensive designer outfits. At the end of the day, even if their usual corporate donors buy some tables, will this charity manage to make any money after it pays all of it’s event expenses including TW?


Probably has a "no brown M&Ms" clause just to emphasize her self-importance...


----------



## JulesB68

papertiger said:


> George? Edward?
> 
> Have you read Andrew Lownie's book on The Traitor King? He starts after the abdication?
> 
> Just one minute



Thanks for posting this Paper, really interesting watch!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. Brace yourselves for the breaking news?


----------



## piperdog

rose60610 said:


> I beg to differ. Here in Chicago and Chicagoland, and bigger Midwest university towns, the woke try desperately to out-woke each other. There are many people who pride themselves at being offended at everything and plenty of caucasians who claim that they know exactly what it's like to be a racial minority. They're good at pretending to care when in reality they just have an agenda to push.  The more "offended" they are the more sophisticated they believe they are. But not a single one of them is going to pay $500 to see a fraud from Montecito.


Native Hoosier here, and I agree with all of this. Actually, it's not just limited to the Midwest; the same could be said of many places I've lived and visited on both coasts, too.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> You have to ask where the sense of self importance came from. She was a second string player on a not much viewed cable show.


It came right from her own overdeveloped sense of entitlement. She believes she deserves it and she demands it. Shame on those who cave in to her delusional self-importance.


----------



## marietouchet

New archetype - angry black women. OK, it is about her being labeled an (demanding divaesque) ABW, but then she talks of cowering in fear in a meeting - angry folks don’t cower

WE CAN WRITE THIS SHOW … just list 12 pejorative terms used to describe MM 

And she is hitting the talk circuit now as evidenced by Indianapolis , see at bottom of article 

Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes









						Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
					

The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.




					mol.im


----------



## marietouchet

JulesB68 said:


> https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/10/blind-items-revealed-4_24.html?m=1#comment-6021530423
> 
> Looks like TW’s planting stories again
> One of the comments hits the nail squarely on the head:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5639061
> 
> 
> Always thought she was holding on to the bump for a reason (not just “look at me, I’m pregnant!”); someone else claims these photos show when it came loose and dropped!
> View attachment 5639062


We need a bump timeline, what is EXACT date of this photo, did the BUMP CRADLE get more pronounced after this date ??


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> On another forum, they are actively discussing whether H and M have already separated…
> 
> It was pointed out that:
> 1. They arrived separately for a date recently (i think H arrived over an hour later to a concert?)
> 2.  MM recent publicity is all hers - The Cut, Variety and the podcasts don’t mention H and are all about her.
> 3.  Not wearing engagement rings in variety shoot and some photos show her without the wedding ring too.  Same for the Cut.
> 4 H hasn’t been seen except for a zoom call for Well child and betterup (again no mention of M)
> 
> Perhaps they are in the early stages of separation.
> 
> but I think MM wants all eyes on her at the Coronation… so she won’t want to miss that.


And remember there is the rumor of another house …


----------



## kipp

marietouchet said:


> New archetype - angry black women. OK, it is about her being labeled an (demanding divaesque) ABW, but then she talks of cowering in fear in a meeting - angry folks don’t cower
> 
> WE CAN WRITE THIS SHOW … just list 12 pejorative terms used to describe MM
> 
> And she is hitting the talk circuit now as evidenced by Indianapolis , see at bottom of article
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


Someone on IG aptly said that Megain isn't an angry black woman---she's just a bully.  BINGO!


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> Someone on IG aptly said that Megain isn't an angry black woman---she's just a bully.  BINGO!


I can’t wait to hear how she talks over her guests about her own experience being angry.


----------



## Chanbal

DM info on the podcast. Responding to Valentine Low?


----------



## marietouchet

kipp said:


> Someone on IG aptly said that Megain isn't an angry black woman---she's just a bully.  BINGO!


Yeah I am having issues with the archetype … the OLD stereotype - ca 1930s - is of a cowering woman/wallflower. The MODERN  stereotype is of a LOUD/ABRASIVE US political figure. Two different stereotypes.

I am influenced in my thinking by my local Midwest politician who gets a lot of coverage for her abrasive behavior, not a wallflower

I do think MM is referring only  to US stereotypes for Angry Black Women. 

Would love to know if our UK readers think there is a UK equivalent to the MM ABW


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I can’t wait to hear how she talks over her guests about her own experience being angry.


Here is a hint from DM:

_Earlier in the episode, Nigerian-American comedian Miss Fumudoh described how her 'brash and rude' onscreen persona was 'in direct opposition to what a woman should be publicly, according to sexism'. 

*In a monologue responding to her comments, Meghan* said she was 'so right' and that 'when looked at through the lens of black women' her point of view was 'pretty inspiring'._ 









						Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
					

The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> DM info on the podcast. Responding to Valentine Low?
> 
> View attachment 5639104
> 
> View attachment 5639109



I do feel like the entire purpose of the ME ME ME episode is to justify her own behavior ie of a DIFFICULT woman that people don’t like
MM can’t get over the fact that DIIFICULT people are often not beloved


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Telling people what you need can make you BOTH difficult and demanding depending on what you NEED! Can she be more entitled!?!


----------



## Chanbal

Another gem from Maureen C.   










						CALLAHAN: Netflix replays Diana's last hours, Harry can't say a word
					

CALLAHAN: Prince Harry is surely in a hell of his own making. As Netflix prepares to drop season five of 'The Crown' - which covers Princess Diana's untimely death - Harry can't say a thing.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## KEG66

marietouchet said:


> Yeah I am having issues with the archetype … the OLD stereotype - ca 1930s - is of a cowering woman/wallflower. The MODERN  stereotype is of a LOUD/ABRASIVE US political figure. Two different stereotypes.
> 
> I am influenced in my thinking by my local Midwest politician who gets a lot of coverage for her abrasive behavior, not a wallflower
> 
> I do think MM is referring only  to US stereotypes for Angry Black Women.
> 
> Would love to know if our UK readers think there is a UK equivalent to the MM ABW


Maybe I’ve been living under a rock but I’m from the UK and I’ve never heard of the description Angry Black Woman. As other posters have said Megain is just trying to deflect from her actions in these episodes by claiming these are other people’s perceptions of her. She’s really a saint, why can’t people see that !


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> New archetype - angry black women. OK, it is about her being labeled an (demanding divaesque) ABW, but then she talks of cowering in fear in a meeting - angry folks don’t cower
> 
> WE CAN WRITE THIS SHOW … just list 12 pejorative terms used to describe MM
> 
> And she is hitting the talk circuit now as evidenced by Indianapolis , see at bottom of article
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


Surprised she didn't showcase Shola and that Carnegie assistant professor.


----------



## BittyMonkey

xincinsin said:


> Probably has a "no brown M&Ms" clause just to emphasize her self-importance...


As an aside, someone in the industry explained to me that the reason these ridiculous asks are put in contracts is that it demonstrates that the signer _has actually read it_, which affects further business deals. If they do get the stupid thing they ask for it shows that the group carefully follows the agreement.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *I do feel like the entire purpose of the ME ME ME episode is to justify her own behavior* ie of a DIFFICULT woman that people don’t like
> MM can’t get over the fact that DIIFICULT people are often not beloved


To justify that and the alleged $25M from Spot*fy…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

So, a speech at the Marriott Hotel Indianapolis. I think I remember reading that she and Harry expected to be paid $500K - $1 million per speech when they first arrived in the U.S.  Harry apparently was paid a large amount (can't recall how much exactly) to give his one and only speech in Florida right at the beginning of the pandemic but that's been in it. From what we heard, the speech was not particularly interesting or well delivered.  The impact of the pandemic, inflation, and the recession likely has meant that few companies will consider paying them even six figures, let alone $1 million.  

Even if MM manages to fill the largest ballroom in Indianapolis with 2,000 - 2,500 people at $500/person, you're talking maybe $1 million - $1.25 million in gross revenue from the event and that's if they draw a crowd of 2,000 people, and every single person pays with no free tickets handed out. So, after the cost of the venue, the food, the drinks, the wait staff, the planner and organizer, the flowers and decor, the equipment and technical crew to set up the sound and lights and all that, and the expenses of flying MM in with her security, it'd be pretty safe to say she is not being paid anywhere close to a million in a speaking fee.  

This might also be a try out event for her by whoever is representing her. See how many people are willing to pay big dollars to hear her speak in person and how well she does and how well her speech is received.   It could be that she will draw a large crowd because this is an annual event for this group and, if you're a member, you generally attend and pay whether you like the speaker or not, just to be supportive of the group.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

What does Claw have to be angry about? She was spoiled growing up, sent to private schools, got cosmetic procedures, WILLINGLY took a role as suitcase girl which she now claims as having been forced to be a "bimbo", got a good paying gig on Suits, and married a world famous prince. Of course she's angry! That gosh darned Will and Kate couple didn't step aside and allow Harry and Claw to become the next King/Queen after Charles/Camilla. And dang it, Charles didn't step aside either and appoint Harry in his place. And the NERVE of QEII when SHE didn't step down and tell Meghan to take over!  No wonder the BRF is racist!  Well, now that Claw has that $500 a person speaking engagement in Indianapolis, I hope all that anger subsides.


----------



## rose60610

Oh wait--so when Claw appeared on Ellen to squat like a duck, eat chips like a squirrel, and imitate a crazed person--it was to dispel the notion of "angry black woman"?  You mean, she did it just for us? To teach us all a lesson? Of course! Maybe she's angry for being talked into doing stupid things. Because she isn't angry, she's stupid!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Whom of you is he referring to? Come forward.


----------



## papertiger

KEG66 said:


> Maybe I’ve been living under a rock but I’m from the UK and I’ve never heard of the description Angry Black Woman. As other posters have said Megain is just trying to deflect from her actions in these episodes by claiming these are other people’s perceptions of her. She’s really a saint, why can’t people see that !



Me niether. I have never heard it, never even occurred. Maybe she just makes things up. 

'Karen' is one MM could and should explore, because not only does she embody the type from the POV of feeling superior to all the mucky commoners and complaining outrageously about having to be immune from real-world anything, it's often applied in a racist and classist way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> DM info on the podcast. Responding to Valentine Low?
> 
> View attachment 5639104
> 
> View attachment 5639109



 So suddenly the white-passing, white-identifying Ghoul is a pro in Black experiences? Can't make that up.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Probably has a "no brown M&Ms" clause just to emphasize her self-importance...



No, that's a real industry insiders' thing, not a diva or being difficult thing. It's a business thing

managers of bands always put those kind of things in as a test. No certain colour M&Ms or Smarties always indicated whether the rest of the rider was paid attention to. Very important for the Tech Rider.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> No, that's a real industry insiders' thing, not a diva or being difficult thing. It's a business thing
> 
> managers of bands always put those kind of things in as a test. No certain colour M&Ms or Smarties always indicated whether the rest of the rider was paid attention to. Very important for the Tech Rider.


In case you did not know the provenance of the legend of NO BROWN M&Ms
In the earlier days of rock concerts, bands had issues with the venues not adhering to the contracts. This would cause safety issues for the crew and/or bad acoustics for the concert goers. For ex, venues did not provide electrical with appropriate breakers. Or, venues did not provide appropriate house PS systems. All of this was specified in the contract the venues did not comply with.
Contracts also specified snacks and beverages to be provided for the band and roadies.
Enter Van Halen. They were tired of this. And wanted to get the venues to comply. So, their contract specified - they were to be provided with M&Ms with the brown ones removed.
The snacks were a tell. The band could immediately recognize if the venue did not bother to read the contract.

This story was famously in a memoir of one of the VH band members (Sammy Hagar?) or roadies


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I can’t wait to hear how she talks over her guests about her own experience being angry.


and a WOC


----------



## csshopper

Almost spit my coffee when I read, as The Body Language Guy calls it, the “Arsewype“ podcast transcript where TW describes herself as “cowering and tip toeing into a room.”

Hope someone will collect the multiple examples of her barging in, elbowing her way into multiple groups, sometimes thrusting the Handbag out of her way as she tramples all, to get to the center of attention. Over and over again.

E V E R Y podcast underscores her delusional state of mind. Every podcast underscores there is not one iota of grace or charm or dignity about her, she is the antithesis of “Royal.” TW merits no inclusion in this Royal line up: Queen Camilla, the Princess of Wales, the Princess Royal, and the Countess of Wessex.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> and a WOC


Next time she has a tantrum in a hotel she can justify it by saying the staff was threatened by her inner strength and it wasn’t that she was being an entitled brat.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> In case you did not know the provenance of the legend of NO BROWN M&Ms
> In the earlier days of rock concerts, bands had issues with the venues not adhering to the contracts. This would cause safety issues for the crew and/or bad acoustics for the concert goers. For ex, venues did not provide electrical with appropriate breakers. Or, venues did not provide appropriate house PS systems. All of this was specified in the contract the venues did not comply with.
> Contracts also specified snacks and beverages to be provided for the band and roadies.
> Enter Van Halen. They were tired of this. And wanted to get the venues to comply. So, their contract specified - they were to be provided with M&Ms with the brown ones removed.
> The snacks were a tell. The band could immediately recognize if the venue did not bother to read the contract.
> 
> This story was famously in a memoir of one of the VH band members (Sammy Hagar?) or roadies



That's what I thought I said  

Most bands/music artists did/do it.


----------



## csshopper

xincinsin said:


> Surprised she didn't showcase Shola and that Carnegie assistant professor.


Shrieking Shola talks louder and faster and appears to be far more intelligent than TW.  Shola would probably dominate, which would be intolerable for the TW, after all, the show is allllll about Her, not the window dressing guests.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> Almost spit my coffee when I read, as The Body Language Guy calls it, the “Arsewype“ podcast transcript where TW describes herself as “cowering and tip toeing into a room.”
> 
> Hope someone will collect the multiple examples of her barging in, elbowing her way into multiple groups, sometimes thrusting the Handbag out of her way as she tramples all, to get to the center of attention. Over and over again.
> 
> E V E R Y podcast underscores her delusional state of mind. Every podcast underscores there is not one iota of grace or charm or dignity about her, she is the antithesis of “Royal.” TW merits no inclusion in this Royal line up: Queen Camilla, the Princess of Wales, the Princess Royal, and the Countess of Wessex.



'Tramples' perfect word. 

Her MO is to barging herself into rooms, places, convosation and trample on others - regardless. 

She's a hideous piece of work. I'd call her a Medusa, but at least the Gorgon sisters learned to share an eye, this creature couldn't share anything.


----------



## piperdog

DoggieBags said:


> The buying of the tables, in this case $5,000 per table, is only partly tax deductible for the donors. This particular event’s ad said only 50% of the price per table was tax deductible. From the charity’s point of view, the $5,000 per table is gross revenue from which they have to deduct the costs involved in staging the event such as rental of the ballroom and equipment, cost of catering, cost of any speakers, etc. I’m assuming TW is going to want a guest speaker fee plus her expenses covered and from we’ve seen she likes to travel via private plane with a large entourage that includes her personal security team, personal photographers, hair, makeup and wardrobe team, and of course she has to bring several badly fitting very expensive designer outfits. At the end of the day, even if their usual corporate donors buy some tables, will this charity manage to make any money after it pays all of it’s event expenses including TW?


IMO all this event does is cast suspicion onto the 'charity'. Is this a trial run for a broader speaking tour? Is there a sorority/NW connection to someone in the charity? Is the charity sketchy like the One Young World thing that only seems to exist to provide generous salaries to the founder and her daughter? My guess is that reality is closer to the later than the former. What does this group's financial look like? #FollowTheMoney. As Harry told fake-Greta, there's a lot of money to be made in philanthropy. (Though he probably didn't use the word philanthropy; he may not know what it means.)


----------



## Chanbal

piperdog said:


> IMO all this event does is cast suspicion onto the 'charity'. Is this a trial run for a broader speaking tour? Is there a sorority/NW connection to someone in the charity? Is the charity sketchy like the One Young World thing that only seems to exist to provide generous salaries to the founder and her daughter? My guess is that reality is closer to the later than the former. *What does this group's financial look like?* #FollowTheMoney. As Harry told fake-Greta, there's a lot of money to be made in philanthropy. (Though he probably didn't use the word philanthropy; he may not know what it means.)


For what it's worth! Someone @ Reddit seems to have access to some info, see below.


----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! Someone @ Reddit seems to have access to some info, see below.



OT: This convinced me that I may need a Reddit account, but then I'd NEVER get any real work done


----------



## bag-mania

piperdog said:


> OT: This convinced me that I may need a Reddit account, but then I'd NEVER get any real work done


I’ve thought the same thing. There are so many rabbit holes to go down there, so much appalling information. I’m afraid I wouldn’t have any personal beliefs left!


----------



## LittleStar88

piperdog said:


> OT: This convinced me that I may need a Reddit account, but then I'd NEVER get any real work done



I spend way too much time on Reddit. But it’s been worth it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Almost spit my coffee when I read, as The Body Language Guy calls it, the “Arsewype“ podcast transcript where TW describes herself as “cowering and tip toeing into a room.”
> 
> Hope someone will collect the multiple examples of her barging in, elbowing her way into multiple groups, sometimes thrusting the Handbag out of her way as she tramples all, to get to the center of attention. Over and over again.
> 
> E V E R Y podcast underscores her delusional state of mind. Every podcast underscores there is not one iota of grace or charm or dignity about her, she is the antithesis of “Royal.” TW merits no inclusion in this Royal line up: Queen Camilla, the Princess of Wales, the Princess Royal, and the Countess of Wessex.



All. Of. This.

When I read that my jaw literally fell. It took peeling and chopping a bunch of potatoes and other veggies for tomorrow's potato soup to collect myself.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Yep. From Buckingham Palace to Indianapolis. Frogmore Cottage wasn't so bad after all........


----------



## charlottawill

piperdog said:


> Is there a sorority/NW connection to someone in the charity?


That was my first thought.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

BittyMonkey said:


> As an aside, someone in the industry explained to me that the reason these ridiculous asks are put in contracts is that it demonstrates that the signer _has actually read it_, which affects further business deals. If they do get the stupid thing they ask for it shows that the group carefully follows the agreement.





papertiger said:


> No, that's a real industry insiders' thing, not a diva or being difficult thing. It's a business thing
> 
> managers of bands always put those kind of things in as a test. No certain colour M&Ms or Smarties always indicated whether the rest of the rider was paid attention to. Very important for the Tech Rider.


It's real and it works. The rock band who started the practice did so because their concert contract stated that the arena must be able to support the weight of their stage, equipment, etc. One venue didn't take note of the requirements and the flooring gave way. I meant it sarcastically because the Kween Meghan would add clauses like no parrots or Dior bathrobe just to boost her ego.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! Someone @ Reddit seems to have access to some info, see below.



35 M in expenses
29 M given away , including 20 M in contrib and grants 
——
64 M accounted for

They raked in 78 M, so I cannot account for 78-64  = 14 M ….


----------



## Chanbal

piperdog said:


> OT: This convinced me that I may need a Reddit account, but then I'd NEVER get any real work done


I know very well what you mean. Reddit and Twitter can provide a ton of entertaining info, it's amazing. 

The post bellow is from Twitter, and I suppose it attempts to illustrate the shared "_warmth_" with QE…


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> I am going to state my opinion which may be in the minority and totally wrong, but...I don't believe that there will be anything in this book that will ruin Charles.  People may gasp a bit, but will shake their heads and move on and say it was a long time ago and what matters is what is happening now.  The history that Harry will be dredging up is decades old for the most part. Charles and Camilla have been married for 17 years, they are happy and people can see it and she has been rehabilitated quite well in public opinion. Diana, on the other hand has been slyly brought down a few pegs and isn't quite as sainted as she used to be.  Her followers are much older now as well and don't care as much.   For every bad thing that Harry can bring up, there will be an equally bad thing in his own personal history. The Daily Mail would just love to go tit for tat regarding this.  All this pearl clenching and hand wringing is just to get people to buy the book.    It is doubtful that there will be any real revelations in it.  The fact that the few pearls of his childhood that have been mentioned by him, i.e. no  bicycle riding with dad, the lack of therapy,(I guess Harry forgot about having it)  have all been shown to be untrue.  Unless this book was meticulously fact checked by the ghost writer, there may not be that much he can point the finger at that is true or new.  I think that Moerhinger is going to pull a fast one on Harry and show a damaged man full of rage.  That won't harm Charles at all because it will all be on Harry.



I totally agree with this. And, if the book drops late this year, the Coronation will be a big PR bump for the BRF, and I doubt Harry the Plumber will be anywhere but behind a candle with the other Palm Tree.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> 35 M in expenses
> 29 M given away , including 20 M in contrib and grants
> ——
> 64 M accounted for
> 
> They raked in 78 M, so I cannot account for 78-64  = 14 M ….


They can potentially add the 14M to their savings account, it would make sense to me. I believe it is the 35M in expenses that is intriguing for some people. The clarification will likely be posted on Reddit or Twitter at some point.


----------



## Chanbal

(there are 4 video clips)


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if TW's photographer made a typo (43% Naja, latin meaning?)


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Twitter can provide a ton of entertaining info, it's amazing.


It can be very entertaining or utterly depressing.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

marietouchet said:


> 35 M in expenses
> 29 M given away , including 20 M in contrib and grants
> ——
> 64 M accounted for
> 
> They raked in 78 M, so I cannot account for 78-64  = 14 M ….


In looking at the 990 form in the link, the 35 M in expenses includes the 29M of grants.  So those figures should not be added together.  There are 3M in salaries, leaving just 3M in other expenses.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if TW's photographer made a typo (43% Naja, latin meaning?)


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Chanbal said:


> They can potentially add the 14M to their savings account, it would make sense to me. I believe it is the 35M in expenses that is intriguing for some people. The clarification will likely be posted on Reddit or Twitter at some point.


Again, the 35 M of expenses includes 29M of grants, 3M of salaries, leaving 3M of other expenses.  See the 990 form which has been linked above.




Adding the relevant portion of Form 990.  The bulk of their revenue is on investment income ($57M in current tax year), which I expect will be way down for 2022.  Even with a substantial drop in their assets for this year, I think these folks can afford a speaker like MM.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> (there are 4 video clips)



this is the thing I hate most about her


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> They can potentially add the 14M to their savings account, it would make sense to me. I believe it is the 35M in expenses that is intriguing for some people. The clarification will likely be posted on Reddit or Twitter at some point.


Yes, 35 M out of 78 M is about a 1/3 expense rate
so, for every dollar you give, only 66 cents goes to do good things
the other 33 cents pays for speaker fees etc


----------



## Redbirdhermes

marietouchet said:


> Yes, 35 M out of 78 M is about a 1/3 expense rate
> so, for every dollar you give, only 66 cents goes to do good things
> the other 33 cents pays for speaker fees etc


Once again, the $35M of expenses includes $29M of grants.  Contributions were $20M.  Grants were $29M.  The bulk of their income is on their investments of $434M, so their grants include money from asset income.   I’m sure investment income will drop for 2022.  See form 990 above.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I do feel like the entire purpose of the ME ME ME episode is to justify her own behavior ie of a DIFFICULT woman that people don’t like
> MM can’t get over the fact that DIIFICULT people are often not beloved


She is saying that if you think she is difficult, then you are racist as well.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, a speech at the Marriott Hotel Indianapolis. I think I remember reading that she and Harry expected to be paid $500K - $1 million per speech when they first arrived in the U.S.  Harry apparently was paid a large amount (can't recall how much exactly) to give his one and only speech in Florida right at the beginning of the pandemic but that's been in it. From what we heard, the speech was not particularly interesting or well delivered.  The impact of the pandemic, inflation, and the recession likely has meant that few companies will consider paying them even six figures, let alone $1 million.
> 
> Even if MM manages to fill the largest ballroom in Indianapolis with 2,000 - 2,500 people at $500/person, you're talking maybe $1 million - $1.25 million in gross revenue from the event and that's if they draw a crowd of 2,000 people, and every single person pays with no free tickets handed out. So, after the cost of the venue, the food, the drinks, the wait staff, the planner and organizer, the flowers and decor, the equipment and technical crew to set up the sound and lights and all that, and the expenses of flying MM in with her security, it'd be pretty safe to say she is not being paid anywhere close to a million in a speaking fee.
> 
> This might also be a try out event for her by whoever is representing her. See how many people are willing to pay big dollars to hear her speak in person and how well she does and how well her speech is received.   It could be that she will draw a large crowd because this is an annual event for this group and, if you're a member, you generally attend and pay whether you like the speaker or not, just to be supportive of the group.


Yes, just like Broadway shows used to be tried out OOT.  The writers, director etc would work out the kinks and add and subtract before the show hit Broadway.  Somehow, I don't see Meghan taking that kind of criticism well.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Here is a hint from DM:
> 
> _Earlier in the episode, Nigerian-American comedian Miss Fumudoh described how her 'brash and rude' onscreen persona was 'in direct opposition to what a woman should be publicly, according to sexism'.
> 
> *In a monologue responding to her comments, Meghan* said she was 'so right' and that 'when looked at through the lens of black women' her point of view was 'pretty inspiring'._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Once again, she doesn't understand the meanings of archetype and sterotype.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan has never been an angry Black woman in her entire life.  She has been a bullying Karen white woman her entire life.  She really needs to get things straight.

If she took that genetic heritage test, she must have been disappointed.  I'm sure she expected the result to be 99.9% Caucasian and .1% other.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> (there are 4 video clips)



I don't care who you are, or what your relationship is to the person speaking.  Barging in front of the speaker and taking over the conversation is beyond rude. Harry was brought up with better manners than this and he must know that this is wrong.


----------



## piperdog

Redbirdhermes said:


> Again, the 35 M of expenses includes 29M of grants, 3M of salaries, leaving 3M of other expenses.  See the 990 form which has been linked above.
> 
> View attachment 5639298
> 
> 
> Adding the relevant portion of Form 990.  The bulk of their revenue is on investment income ($57M in current tax year), which I expect will be way down for 2022.  Even with a substantial drop in their assets for this year, I think these folks can afford a speaker like MM.


Thanks for breaking this down. Non-profit tax returns aren't my specialty. I'm actually relieved that I'm overly cynical and maybe this charity is actually legit. H&M have shined a light on too many shady practices, so now I assume anything that touches them is somehow tarnished.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


>




I'm sure Nigerians will be rejoicing, dancing in the streets


----------



## jennlt

M's idea of tiptoeing into a room and cowering in a corner. She's her own one-man band.


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> Meghan has never been an angry Black woman in her entire life.  She has been a bullying Karen white woman her entire life.  She really needs to get things straight.
> 
> If she took that genetic heritage test, she must have been disappointed.  I'm sure she expected the result to be 99.9% Caucasian and .1% other.


Didnt she tell Mariah that she was never black until the Harry?  Only mixed?


----------



## gracekelly

piperdog said:


> Thanks for breaking this down. Non-profit tax returns aren't my specialty. I'm actually relieved that I'm overly cynical and maybe this charity is actually legit. H&M have shined a light on too many shady practices, so now I assume anything that touches them is somehow tarnished.


I share your off the top of your head skepticism regarding any group/charity that she has a relationship with.  If they haven't been Markled, they will be after she shows up.


----------



## gracekelly

Harry Markle 









						It’s Buy-An-Award Season For The Sussexes!
					

The Harkles are persistent, in that they keep trying to publicise themselves whatever the cost and that includes purchasing awards. Most of their PR gimmicks last for about 24 hours if it is a quie…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> *This is the story to follow.
> 
> 
> Lord Addington = hero
> View attachment 5638821
> *



Good for him- sort it out lads 


marietouchet said:


> New archetype - angry black women. OK, it is about her being labeled an (demanding divaesque) ABW, but then she talks of cowering in fear in a meeting - angry folks don’t cower
> 
> WE CAN WRITE THIS SHOW … just list 12 pejorative terms used to describe MM
> 
> And she is hitting the talk circuit now as evidenced by Indianapolis , see at bottom of article
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


We all knew this day would come. The excuse that all these reports of her bad behaviour are a result of the wider public’s racism is just too good for her to resist. 

I myself would say the angry black woman stereoptye isn’t common here but I’ve heard it online from the US. 


bag-mania said:


> I can’t wait to hear how she talks over her guests about her own experience being angry.


Im not sure who these ladies  but I bet if they weren’t angry before they may be a little ticked off by the time they leave 


Chanbal said:


> DM info on the podcast. Responding to Valentine Low?
> 
> View attachment 5639104
> 
> View attachment 5639109



This is clearly conformation bias in action. 

I mean think about it- of course she thinks all roles for black women are angry characters as she’s only going to get a casting call when they are specifically looking for a person with a face like a slapped arse and hair like a lifetime movie psycho,


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> (there are 4 video clips)



  Chanbal,
Thank you! You are such a strong resource for us with the items you find and post.

Best of all, this latest find is affirming what we have been hoping to see, her duplicity continues to be more widely recognized and she’s being called out on her lies.


----------



## bag-mania

43% Nigerian? She must be related to those email scammers who used to pretend to be princes.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> (there are 4 video clips)



Meghan Markle is complete hypocrite that has no problem barging in front of people and making herself seem important, if she could get away with it, she would have kicked her husband out of the picture-she short of did it...


----------



## Chanbal

Redbirdhermes said:


> Again, the 35 M of expenses includes 29M of grants, 3M of salaries, leaving 3M of other expenses.  See the 990 form which has been linked above.
> 
> View attachment 5639298
> 
> 
> Adding the relevant portion of Form 990.  The bulk of their revenue is on investment income ($57M in current tax year), which I expect will be way down for 2022.  Even with a substantial drop in their assets for this year, I think these folks can afford a speaker like MM.


It seems to be a very solid non-profit. Would you think TW's payment is under other expenses, a grant to ArcheW, or both? In any event, TW has nothing of value to add to such organization imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

The angry black woman became a thing again when the media carried water for a Michelle ***** after she said "For the first time in my life I'm proud of my country". If one criticized her for her views, you were still racist. Get it? You must agree with EVERYTHING A POC says or else you're racist. Unless the POC is not a media pet. Then the media are out to destroy them too. And then that's OK. And you still qualify to call yourself woke if you hate and slander the correct POC.

And Maggot didn't exactly cower when she tried barging in front of The Queen. But isn't rewriting history mandatory when you're desperate to improve your image?


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> It's been a while since I read Revenge, but I think there was another incident where she threw a fit because the hotel she was put in was not up to her standards. I'd love to know how this Indianapolis thing came about and what she's getting out of it. You know she is not doing it out of the goodness of her heart, but I also can't imagine this group can come up with the speaking fee she feels she commands. Just a random thought, blackmail by a former sorority sister?


I think it was in the shoot contract with Reitman’s, the Canadian fashion line. She was upset that the tempur-pedic robes weren’t dior. I think it would be embarrassing for a bona fide A list actress to make these demands.


----------



## rose60610

I also wondered if somebody in the Indianapolis org was Claw's sorority sister. But weren't they all Markled too?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> (there are 4 video clips)



No matter how many times I've seen these it still blows my mind. Where did she ever get the idea that it was OK to do that?


----------



## Chanbal

Go Piers!


----------



## Chanbal

@csshopper This gem is for you! 

A previous claim…


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> Me niether. I have never heard it, never even occurred. Maybe she just makes things up.
> 
> 'Karen' is one MM could and should explore, because not only does she embody the type from the POV of feeling superior to all the mucky commoners and complaining outrageously about having to be immune from real-world anything, it's often applied in a racist and classist way.



Same here.  we have “Karen” which could be applied in a racist and classist way.  But I have not heard of “angry black woman” as a thing.

Basically we see people as either @ss-holes or not.  Thats it.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I also wondered if somebody in the Indianapolis org was Claw's sorority sister. But weren't they all Markled too?


The few who have spoken publicly have presented a united front, saying she was "a lovely person", etc.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> The few who have spoken publicly have presented a united front, saying she was "a lovely person", etc.



M probably has something on them


----------



## needlv

papertiger said:


> M probably has something on them



Im sure she is very nice if you can help her advance in some manner (networking etc) or give her free stuff…


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Me niether. I have never heard it, never even occurred. Maybe she just makes things up.
> 
> 'Karen' is one MM could and should explore, because not only does she embody the type from the POV of feeling superior to all the mucky commoners and complaining outrageously about having to be immune from real-world anything, it's often applied in a racist and classist way.


Oh it's definitely a thing in the US. I first heard it in reference to Michelle O. So is MM again comparing herself to her?


----------



## needlv

JulesB68 said:


> https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/10/blind-items-revealed-4_24.html?m=1#comment-6021530423
> 
> Looks like TW’s planting stories again
> One of the comments hits the nail squarely on the head:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5639061
> 
> 
> Always thought she was holding on to the bump for a reason (not just “look at me, I’m pregnant!”); someone else claims these photos show when it came loose and dropped!
> View attachment 5639062



CDAN is saying it’s been solved as “Prince William”.  But Catherine’s births were witnessed, so that is a stupid gossip post.

Is It possible it was planted to distract from the other MM blind posts On the same site? (The one about the pap shot?)


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> M probably has something on them


More likely it's just the unspoken code of silence common to sororities and fraternities. Like "omertà" with the Mafia.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @csshopper This gem is for you!
> 
> A previous claim…
> 
> View attachment 5639490


----------



## Fimpagebag

Too too funny for words. The Game Show Network is referencing MM in promos for their Deal or No Deal reruns!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Didnt she tell Mariah that she was never black until the Harry?  Only mixed?


I don't really understand all these strong black women showing her such respect....


----------



## Redbirdhermes

Chanbal said:


> It seems to be a very solid non-profit. Would you think TW's payment is under other expenses, a grant to ArcheW, or both? In any event, TW has nothing of value to add to such organization imo.


In looking at Form 990, Other Expenses comes from Part IX, and Line 19 of Part IX is for conference, convention and meeting expenses.  So, yes, I think her payment would be part of their other expenses, but I don't have a copy of that Part filled out, so can't be sure.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> CDAN is saying it’s been solved as “Prince William”.  But Catherine’s births were witnessed, so that is a stupid gossip post.
> 
> Is It possible it was planted to distract from the other MM blind posts On the same site? (The one about the pap shot?)



Also, since when is William the spare? I'm confused.


----------



## sdkitty

rose60610 said:


> The angry black woman became a thing again when the media carried water for a Michelle ***** after she said "For the first time in my life I'm proud of my country". If one criticized her for her views, you were still racist. Get it? You must agree with EVERYTHING A POC says or else you're racist. Unless the POC is not a media pet. Then the media are out to destroy them too. And then that's OK. And you still qualify to call yourself woke if you hate and slander the correct POC.
> 
> And Maggot didn't exactly cower when she tried barging in front of The Queen. But isn't rewriting history mandatory when you're desperate to improve your image?


I can't really engage on this subject as I might be banned but I will say she should not be discussed  in the same paragraph with Michelle


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Enty thing comments section. I will never get over people being oh so confident lecturing others but are completely off. That is not what a heir presumptive is.



> William was the heir presumptive to Charles the heir apparent until HMTQ's death. William is now the heir apparent and George the heir presumptive. Harry was heir presumptive until George was born, then he was moved down the line of succession with the three Cambridge/ Wales children. Harry was the spare only until George was born. If Catherine used a surrogette, there has been the greatest duping of a nation in the history of the British Isles.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, since when is William the spare? I'm confused.


The post makes no sense.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


>



Oddly it doesn’t say what or how much they donated to the flood victims. Clearly it must be an oversight!

I hope the lemon & olive oil cake didn’t  spoil when it was held up in customs.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the Enty thing comments section. I will never get over people being oh so confident lecturing others but are completely off. That is not what a heir presumptive is.


And not that I believe that surrogate thing for one second, but Catherine was hospitalized for hyperemesis gravidarum early on in her first pregnancy. As if that was staged. The things people come up with


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>




"her tendency to shape reality"  Everyone sees you Meg, except you.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I don't really understand all these strong black women showing her such respect....


Wanting representation? Hoping to use her podcast as an opportunity to plug their own projects? I hope the guest got something out of it for making the statement below.   

This is from the Vanity Fair article:

Ziwe responded to Meghan’s heritage with enthusiasm. “This is huge for our community,” she said. “No, honestly, you do look like a Nigerian, you look like my Aunt Uzo. So this is great.” 









						Meghan Markle Unpacks the “Angry Black Woman” Stereotype with Issa Rae and Ziwe
					

The duchess praised the show Insecure for fighting against the trope and also mentioned the results of a DNA test.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## lallybelle

LOL the commenters are not having it on the blind thing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> "her tendency to shape reality"  Everyone sees you Meg, except you.




The first commenter is making kind of a stupid argument, though. Tuscany is a part of Italy the country. Nigeria is part of Africa the continent.


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> "her tendency to shape reality"  Everyone sees you Meg, except you.



I have a friend who had a white father and Ojibewa mother. She had a DNA test and the results said she is 38% Asian. She does not look Asian or Native. She even has light colored eyes. I guess DNA has a broad  spectrum of results not a specific one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bubablu

Ohoh, Daily mail's front page right now 









						The Palace plan to sideline Harry and Andrew, writes ROBERT HARDMAN
					

ROBERT HARDMAN: Under proposals expected to come before Parliament,  the King will be able to draw on a pool of substitutes for constitutional duties when he is out of the country.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Toby93 said:


> This is a worthwhile cause and convenient if one is hoping for a UN ambassador/spokesperson position.  Between her Nigerian and Maltese heritage, I guess there is nothing left for Floridians who lost everything  in a recent hurricane.


----------



## LittleStar88

The results aren’t terribly specific. Here’s what mine looks like…


----------



## Chanbal

An overview of Episode #7 - ANGRY


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ya kno, I’m particular, too.  Now, go away, H&M.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## jcnc

charlottawill said:


> In a word, yes.
> 
> I have very long second toes. Years ago someone told me it means you have royalty in your blood. But God forbid, don't tell her



Never heard that before but happy to discover i have royal blood  my second toe is really long and my thumb is so short  next time if someone says my feet look funny, I will tell them they look like royalty


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The first commenter is making kind of a stupid argument, though. Tuscany is a part of Italy the country. Nigeria is part of Africa the continent.


----------



## bag-mania

Here, I fixed it.

“I’m not difficult, I’m particular,” says the Duchess of Sussex James Corden.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ya kno, I’m particular, too.  Now, go away, H&M.



"_The Duchess__ also revealed she has recently begun drinking coffee again, having given up while living in the UK. When she was an actress on the set of Suits, she said, she drank “Nespresso all day, every day”.
“And then I didn't drink it really in the UK,” she added.
Asked why she had recently resumed, Meghan said: “*I guess because life started to come back?* And so people started to come… when guests come or [I have] meetings and they’re like ‘oh would you like coffee?’”_

Is she implying that she had no life in the UK? It sounds like she continues criticizing the BRF.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> "_The Duchess__ also revealed she has recently begun drinking coffee again, having given up while living in the UK. When she was an actress on the set of Suits, she said, she drank “Nespresso all day, every day”.
> “And then I didn't drink it really in the UK,” she added.
> Asked why she had recently resumed, Meghan said: “*I guess because life started to come back?* And so people started to come… when guests come or [I have] meetings and they’re like ‘oh would you like coffee?’”_
> 
> Is she implying that she had no life in the UK? It sounds like she continues criticizing the BRF.


well, from her POV I guess she would feel she's in charge of her life now and when she was part of the RF, she wasn't in charge....but who cares that she's drinking coffee?


----------



## purseinsanity

JulesB68 said:


> https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/10/blind-items-revealed-4_24.html?m=1#comment-6021530423
> 
> Looks like TW’s planting stories again
> One of the comments hits the nail squarely on the head:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5639061
> 
> 
> Always thought she was holding on to the bump for a reason (not just “look at me, I’m pregnant!”); someone else claims these photos show when it came loose and dropped!
> View attachment 5639062


That bump is below crotch level.  Not possible in a human pregnancy.  If your uterus is falling out during pregnancy, you're in some deep $hit.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> "_The Duchess__ also revealed she has recently begun drinking coffee again, having given up while living in the UK. When she was an actress on the set of Suits, she said, she drank “Nespresso all day, every day”.
> “And then I didn't drink it really in the UK,” she added.
> Asked why she had recently resumed, Meghan said: “*I guess because life started to come back?* And so people started to come… when guests come or [I have] meetings and they’re like ‘oh would you like coffee?’”_
> 
> Is she implying that she had no life in the UK? It sounds like she continues criticizing the BRF.


She said she started again recently. I think she means she started drinking coffee again after Harry moved out.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh. Brace yourselves for the breaking news?



Well, gee, that post is a whole lot of nothing.  The most vague thing I've ever read.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> New archetype - angry black women. OK, it is about her being labeled an (demanding divaesque) ABW, but then she talks of cowering in fear in a meeting - angry folks don’t cower
> 
> WE CAN WRITE THIS SHOW … just list 12 pejorative terms used to describe MM
> 
> And she is hitting the talk circuit now as evidenced by Indianapolis , see at bottom of article
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan says black women are labelled 'angry' in latest Archetypes
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex chats to actress Issa Rae and comedian Ziwe Fumudoh to explore the stereotypes around 'women of colour'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


Oh!  She's black again!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

bubablu said:


> Ohoh, Daily mail's front page right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palace plan to sideline Harry and Andrew, writes ROBERT HARDMAN
> 
> 
> ROBERT HARDMAN: Under proposals expected to come before Parliament,  the King will be able to draw on a pool of substitutes for constitutional duties when he is out of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



So, if I read this correctly, the move to sideline Andrew and Harry was begun months ago by the late Queen. KC3 will move ahead with the plan by adding Princess Anne and Prince Edward to the list of Counsellors of State. 

The article implies they'll be added, rather than specifically removing Andrew and Harry. I guess we'll have to wait and see what the actual proposal says, though clearly the intention is to make sure neither Andrew or Harry ever serves in that role.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I'm sure Nigerians will be rejoicing, dancing in the streets





oldbag said:


> I have a friend who had a white father and Ojibewa mother. She had a DNA test and the results said she is 38% Asian. She does not look Asian or Native. She even has light colored eyes. I guess DNA has a broad  spectrum of results not a specific one.


DH’s DNA results says he is descended from the Yammaya (sic) who lived like 5000 years ago , one of the peoples postulated to THE proto Europeans


----------



## marietouchet

MM donated to Nigeria, nice thing to do BUT isnt she spreading herself a bit thin ? A year ago, it was COVID shots for India, then  gun control [Uvalde), lack of focus


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> An overview of Episode #7 - ANGRY



"Flopcast"


----------



## xincinsin

The jump in subject from formidable grandmothers to the Wimp known as Prince is so awkward that I winced.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> well, from her POV I guess she would feel she's in charge of her life now and when she was part of the RF, she wasn't in charge....but who cares that she's drinking coffee?


People in the UK are not happy…


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> 43% Nigerian? She must be related to those email scammers who used to pretend to be princes.


She pretends to be a princess ...


----------



## charlottawill

bubablu said:


> Ohoh, Daily mail's front page right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Palace plan to sideline Harry and Andrew, writes ROBERT HARDMAN
> 
> 
> ROBERT HARDMAN: Under proposals expected to come before Parliament,  the King will be able to draw on a pool of substitutes for constitutional duties when he is out of the country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> It seems to be a very solid non-profit. Would you think TW's payment is under other expenses, a grant to ArcheW, or both? In any event, TW has nothing of value to add to such organization imo.


I am having cognitive dissonance.

If the non-profit/charity/whatever was shady, any association with the Harkles would invite a spotlight and investigation.

If the non-profit/charity/whatever was above-board, why in the world do they want to be associated with the Harkles?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well, from her POV I guess she would feel she's in charge of her life now and when she was part of the RF, she wasn't in charge....but who cares that she's drinking coffee?


I read it as she is free to drink coffee now, versus the tyranny she was under having to drink tea in the UK.  The horror


----------



## rose60610

JulesB68 said:


> https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2022/10/blind-items-revealed-4_24.html?m=1#comment-6021530423
> 
> Looks like TW’s planting stories again
> One of the comments hits the nail squarely on the head:
> 
> 
> View attachment 5639061
> 
> 
> Always thought she was holding on to the bump for a reason (not just “look at me, I’m pregnant!”); someone else claims these photos show when it came loose and dropped!
> View attachment 5639062
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> r



Wait, what? Rumors that Kate's kids were surrogates? So Harry is "heir apparent"? Wow, that 's a stretch. Let's pretend that's true for a split second. I thought the BRF is so racist that Haz and Claw don't like traveling there, (unless to get press for attending funerals) that they wouldn't want to go back. How could Claw even think such a thing now that she's got that HUGE gig in Indianapolis???

I'm tellin' ya, Claw's sugars must still believe in Santa Claus.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> She pretends to be a princess ...


If she thought she could get away with claiming to be descended from royalty I bet she would try it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Oh it's definitely a thing in the US. I first heard it in reference to Michelle O. So is MM again comparing herself to her?
> 
> x


Is it just me or do they both sound insincere to you?


----------



## bag-mania

*Love the headline on this article.*​You can have dinner with Meghan Markle — but it will cost you​






What would you pay to have dinner with the Duchess?

Meghan Markle will be heading to the Midwest next month for a very special charity event alongside her husband Prince Harry.

Markle slams her 'Duchess Difficult' label: I 'make a choice' to be 'grounded'​
Which stars are a restaurant’s worst nightmare? ‘Think they own the world’ ​
'Deal or No Deal' models hit back at Meghan Markle's 'bimbo' claims: 'You know what you’re signing up for'​
'Deal or No Deal' 'bimbo' gig didn't stop Meghan Markle from doing oral sex scene on '90210'​
The pair will appear at The Power of Women: An Evening With Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, sponsored by the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana on Nov. 29.

Guests can purchase tickets to the bash at the Indianapolis Marriott Downtown, but it will cost them quite a hefty sum.

Tables of 10 are available on WomensFund.orgstarting at $5,000.

Markle, 41, will be interviewed by Rabbi Sandy Sasso, who is the first woman rabbi ordained by the Reconstructionist Judaism movement. Sasso previously served as rabbi of Congregation Beth-El Zedeck in Indianapolis.

According to a press release, the event will run from 5 to 8:30 p.m. The mission of Women’s Fund of Central Indiana is “to create equitable and sustainable change for all women and girls no matter of their race, place or identity.”

Guests will need to provide proof of vaccination against COVID-19 or a negative PCR test taken within 48 hours of the bash.

On Tuesday’s episode of her podcast, “Archetypes,” the former “Suits” actress shut down the “Duchess Difficult” label that she has been associated with. The moniker was first minted by Daily Express in 2018 after rumors surfaced that Markle had “dictatorial” behaviors.

“You’re allowed to set a boundary, you’re allowed to be clear,” the Duchess of Sussex told her podcast guest Ziwe Fumudoh. “That does not make you demanding, it does not make you difficult — it makes you clear.”

Markle also noted that she “makes a choice” to be “grounded” because “things are going to be said” no matter what she does.

She then admitted that she finds herself “cowering and tiptoeing into a room” because she’s afraid of being seen in a bad light in workplace situations.

The mother of two explains that there will be moments when she will say a sentence where “the intonation goes up like a question.”

Markle added: “You’re like, ‘Oh my God, stop. Stop whispering and tiptoeing around it. Just say what it is you need. You’re allowed to set a boundary. You’re allowed to be clear. It does not make you demanding. It does not make you difficult. It makes you clear.’”









						You can have dinner with Meghan Markle — but it will cost you
					

What would you pay to have dinner with the Duchess?




					nypost.com


----------



## rose60610

Maggie Muggins said:


> Is it just me or do they both sound insincere to you?



When you've stepped in it and are under heat, you'll say anything when it's in your best interest to deflect. And it's very easy when the media are kissing your a** all the while.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Redbirdhermes

xincinsin said:


> I am having cognitive dissonance.
> 
> If the non-profit/charity/whatever was shady, any association with the Harkles would invite a spotlight and investigation.
> 
> If the non-profit/charity/whatever was above-board, why in the world do they want to be associated with the Harkles?


The vast majority of Americans pay no attention whatsoever to the BRF.  None.  It matters not at all to us.  I'd guess that most people couldn't tell you who the current Monarch is.  They certainly aren't following Harry and Meghan stories.   My bet is that someone in the organization figured that having royalty for dinner would be really cool.  Royalty doesn't often show up at a hotel in the Midwestern United States.


----------



## gracekelly

Redbirdhermes said:


> The vast majority of Americans pay no attention whatsoever to the BRF.  None.  It matters not at all to us.  I'd guess that most people couldn't tell you who the current Monarch is.  They certainly aren't following Harry and Meghan stories.   My bet is that someone in the organization figured that having royalty for dinner would be really cool.  Royalty doesn't often show up at a hotel in the Midwestern United States.


Wait til they see her and hear her and realize she isn’t true British royalty. Think they can get a refund?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Wait til they see her and hear her and realize she isn’t true British royalty. Think they can get a refund?


Is there a chance they will tar and feather her and run her out of town on a rail instead. It would be a sight to behold!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Redbirdhermes

gracekelly said:


> Wait til they see her and hear her and realize she isn’t true British royalty. Think they can get a refund?


Nope.  It's a fundraising event for a charity.   My guess is that those present will have ample opportunities to give more.  To the charity, that is.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting feedback on TW's 43% claim…


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

"Baby do you think you can pound yams with your wedding ring?"


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> *Love the headline on this article.*​You can have dinner with Meghan Markle — but it will cost you​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would you pay to have dinner with the Duchess?
> 
> Meghan Markle will be heading to the Midwest next month for a very special charity event alongside her husband Prince Harry.
> 
> Markle slams her 'Duchess Difficult' label: I 'make a choice' to be 'grounded'​
> Which stars are a restaurant’s worst nightmare? ‘Think they own the world’​
> 'Deal or No Deal' models hit back at Meghan Markle's 'bimbo' claims: 'You know what you’re signing up for'​
> 'Deal or No Deal' 'bimbo' gig didn't stop Meghan Markle from doing oral sex scene on '90210'​
> The pair will appear at The Power of Women: An Evening With Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, sponsored by the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana on Nov. 29.
> 
> Guests can purchase tickets to the bash at the Indianapolis Marriott Downtown, but it will cost them quite a hefty sum.
> 
> Tables of 10 are available on WomensFund.orgstarting at $5,000.
> 
> Markle, 41, will be interviewed by Rabbi Sandy Sasso, who is the first woman rabbi ordained by the Reconstructionist Judaism movement. Sasso previously served as rabbi of Congregation Beth-El Zedeck in Indianapolis.
> 
> According to a press release, the event will run from 5 to 8:30 p.m. The mission of Women’s Fund of Central Indiana is “to create equitable and sustainable change for all women and girls no matter of their race, place or identity.”
> 
> Guests will need to provide proof of vaccination against COVID-19 or a negative PCR test taken within 48 hours of the bash.
> 
> On Tuesday’s episode of her podcast, “Archetypes,” the former “Suits” actress shut down the “Duchess Difficult” label that she has been associated with. The moniker was first minted by Daily Express in 2018 after rumors surfaced that Markle had “dictatorial” behaviors.
> 
> “You’re allowed to set a boundary, you’re allowed to be clear,” the Duchess of Sussex told her podcast guest Ziwe Fumudoh. “That does not make you demanding, it does not make you difficult — it makes you clear.”
> 
> Markle also noted that she “makes a choice” to be “grounded” because “things are going to be said” no matter what she does.
> 
> She then admitted that she finds herself “cowering and tiptoeing into a room” because she’s afraid of being seen in a bad light in workplace situations.
> 
> The mother of two explains that there will be moments when she will say a sentence where “the intonation goes up like a question.”
> 
> Markle added: “You’re like, ‘Oh my God, stop. Stop whispering and tiptoeing around it. Just say what it is you need. You’re allowed to set a boundary. You’re allowed to be clear. It does not make you demanding. It does not make you difficult. It makes you clear.’”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can have dinner with Meghan Markle — but it will cost you
> 
> 
> What would you pay to have dinner with the Duchess?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


The problem she has is that when others set boundaries, she gets incensed. What she wants...


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Wait til they see her and hear her and realize she isn’t true British royalty. Think they can get a refund?


Maybe the ladies will go home and tell their hubbies that wonder of wonders, British Royalty are _*Just Like Us (tm)*_.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> And not that I believe that surrogate thing for one second, but Catherine was hospitalized for hyperemesis gravidarum early on in her first pregnancy. As if that was staged. The things people come up with


I think she suffered from HEG in all three of her pregnancies.  She's a far better actress than TW.  She's still in character!!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Wanting representation? Hoping to use her podcast as an opportunity to plug their own projects? I hope the guest got something out of it for making the statement below.
> 
> This is from the Vanity Fair article:
> 
> Ziwe responded to Meghan’s heritage with enthusiasm. “This is huge for our community,” she said. “No, honestly, you do look like a Nigerian, you look like my Aunt Uzo. So this is great.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Unpacks the “Angry Black Woman” Stereotype with Issa Rae and Ziwe
> 
> 
> The duchess praised the show Insecure for fighting against the trope and also mentioned the results of a DNA test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


God helped me, I clicked on it.

What I saw as I skimmed:

"Rae asked Meghan what made her go back to coffee. *“I guess because life started to come back and so people started to come,”* Meghan explained. “When guests come or meetings or when they're like, Oh, would you like coffee? And I was like, Maybe I should join them.”


Say what???  Is TW now claiming to be Field of Dreams??


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The first commenter is making kind of a stupid argument, though.* Tuscany is a part of Italy the country. Nigeria is part of Africa the continent.*


Tomato/Tomahtoe


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


>



Her legs are whiter than a Scottish man's.  According to Google, "Measurable rainfall occurs on over 250 days in the Highlands to *175 days per year in other parts*." and "Rainfall totals vary widely across Scotland— the western highlands of Scotland is one of the wettest places in Europe with annual rainfall up to 4,577 mm (180.2 in)."

So almost half the year, parts of Scotland have no sun, and SHE is claiming she's portrayed as a Angry Black Woman?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> The vast majority of Americans pay no attention whatsoever to the BRF.  None.  It matters not at all to us.  I'd guess that most people couldn't tell you who the current Monarch is.  They certainly aren't following Harry and Meghan stories.   My bet is that someone in the organization figured that having royalty for dinner would be really cool.  Royalty doesn't often show up at a hotel in the Midwestern United States.



Is that so. Hate or like the BRF, but isn't that somewhat general knowledge? The current monarch is the head of state after all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if TW's photographer made a typo (43% Naja, latin meaning?)



That’s hilarious and I learnt something. Edifying humour!
.


charlottawill said:


> "her tendency to shape reality"  Everyone sees you Meg, except you.



Not to be cynical but Nigerians are  the biggest African descent community in UK and probably the US so I can’t help feeling she’s saying this just to try and regain some ground by claiming a prominent identity.

Especially given she’s p****d off all of South Africa



bag-mania said:


> This is from the Vanity Fair article:
> 
> Ziwe responded to Meghan’s heritage with enthusiasm. “This is huge for our community,” she said. “No, honestly, you do look like a Nigerian, you look like my Aunt Uzo. So this is great.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Unpacks the “Angry Black Woman” Stereotype with Issa Rae and Ziwe
> 
> 
> The duchess praised the show Insecure for fighting against the trope and also mentioned the results of a DNA test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Is she trying to promote Aunt Uzo going on botched?
Uzo, I don’t normally advocate prosecuting your own family but some things are beyond the pale…



Chanbal said:


> "_The Duchess__ also revealed she has recently begun drinking coffee again, having given up while living in the UK. When she was an actress on the set of Suits, she said, she drank “Nespresso all day, every day”.
> “And then I didn't drink it really in the UK,” she added.
> Asked why she had recently resumed, Meghan said: “*I guess because life started to come back?* And so people started to come… when guests come or [I have] meetings and they’re like ‘oh would you like coffee?’”_
> 
> Is she implying that she had no life in the UK? It sounds like she continues criticizing the BRF.


I’m afraid we don’t have  anything as classy as nestle coffee machines in our backwards nightmare hellscape of a country. Thank god she’s back in the warm embrace of the US where she can drink all the single use plastic capsules from a truly ethical producer she wants 


Chanbal said:


> Interesting feedback on TW's 43% claim…




‘Meg, are you Yoruba or Igbo?’
‘Do your research! I’m a Gemini.’

Exactly, she can claim some imaginary dna test told her whatever but she’s a vacuous liar lacking any connection with any culture or indeed anything meaningful.


----------



## tiktok

If the BRF confiscates your American passport, does that mean you can’t get to one of the 150 or so Starbucks locations in London to get an American cup of coffee either? Asking for a friend.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> If the BRF confiscate your American passport, does that mean you can’t get to one of the 150 or so Starbucks locations in London to get an American cup of coffee either? Asking for a friend.



But she barely left the house, ever! Probably was chained to the basement.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> An overview of Episode #7 - ANGRY




She's_ great _at unpicking M's BS.

M gives lots of clues (as she aways does) how she operates as a narc. Always "OMG I'm like you".


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> The jump in subject from formidable grandmothers to the Wimp known as Prince is so awkward that I winced.
> View attachment 5639597



Should just say 'Royal, formally known as Prince'


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> The vast majority of Americans pay no attention whatsoever to the BRF.  None.  It matters not at all to us.  I'd guess that most people couldn't tell you who the current Monarch is.  They certainly aren't following Harry and Meghan stories.   My bet is that someone in the organization figured that having royalty for dinner would be really cool.  Royalty doesn't often show up at a hotel in the Midwestern United States.



What's the betting that if sat next to an extremely wealthy philanthropist, she's suddenly found out she is 43% Midwestern


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> "her tendency to shape reality"  Everyone sees you Meg, except you.




Let's not even go half way with M's 'tendency' to 'shape reality' 

When someone make things up, it's called a _LIE_ when someone just can't stop themselves lying time and time again, it's called *compulsive lying*


----------



## papertiger

oldbag said:


> I have a friend who had a white father and Ojibewa mother. She had a DNA test and the results said she is 38% Asian. She does not look Asian or Native. She even has light colored eyes. I guess DNA has a broad  spectrum of results not a specific one.



Sounds about as useful as Entrupty


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> The results aren’t terribly specific. Here’s what mine looks like…
> 
> View attachment 5639568



Basically peoples DNA results only go back about a couple of hundred years. The only way they can tell more is if ancestors didn't migrate. 

These DNA tests were developed by American companies so Americans could find out where they came from before America. Even companies that are not US, use the same American data for results. 

As you can see on the test above (yours?) the Ashkenazim are now aligned with the Pale of Settlement on this test feedback, whereas they know (through their entire culture and records) and were confined to the Pale of Settlement (because) they were outsiders not only religiously but came from somewhere else i.e. Middle East. This is one of the stupid reasons given why many are saying Jews come from Europe when actually they didn't/don't. 

I had a friend in the UK, no part of her family ever having lived in Eastern or Middle Europe but living in Isreal, having had family that had only ever lived in Morocco (exiled) Jordan (exiled) or Lebanon (exiled) and took a DNA test, which said she was 88% Ashkenazi, 10% Sephardi. None of her family had ever visited that part of the world, let alone lived there. 

Tests can only get that info if it doesn't don't go too far back and the original DNA testers gave/knew correct information.


----------



## papertiger

jcnc said:


> Never heard that before but happy to discover i have royal blood  my second toe is really long and my thumb is so short  next time if someone says my feet look funny, I will tell them they look like royalty



Me too, we must be related


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> "_The Duchess__ also revealed she has recently begun drinking coffee again, having given up while living in the UK. When she was an actress on the set of Suits, she said, she drank “Nespresso all day, every day”.
> “And then I didn't drink it really in the UK,” she added.
> Asked why she had recently resumed, Meghan said: “*I guess because life started to come back?* And so people started to come… when guests come or [I have] meetings and they’re like ‘oh would you like coffee?’”_
> 
> Is she implying that she had no life in the UK? It sounds like she continues criticizing the BRF.



Her hatred of and for the UK is off the scale, not quite as much as her vile butchery of the English language though


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

At this point I am completely at a loss. What is her freaking problem?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW the UK is so racist that they now have a Muslim mayor of London with Pakistani roots and a Hindu prime minister with Indian roots. Maybe the British people simply didn't like her because she's insufferable.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> God helped me, I clicked on it.
> 
> What I saw as I skimmed:
> 
> "Rae asked Meghan what made her go back to coffee. *“I guess because life started to come back and so people started to come,”* Meghan explained. “When guests come or meetings or when they're like, Oh, would you like coffee? And I was like, Maybe I should join them.”
> 
> 
> Say what???  Is TW now claiming to be Field of Dreams??


Huh???
_“When guests come or meetings or when they're like, Oh, would you like coffee? And I was like, Maybe I should join them.”_
This makes no sense. When guests come, the host offers them coffee. This reads as the guests are offering the host coffee. I'm glad the guests are more polite than Zedzee and they bring their own coffee.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really shouldn't give her nonsense too much thought, but is she suggesting she wasn't allowed to have guests while living in a palace, sorry, being incarcerated?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What I need from Ghoul is for her to shut up and go away. Maybe treat her husband respectfully but really, if that's his flavour, whatever.


----------



## Chanbal

Valid point!


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> Oddly it doesn’t say what or how much they donated to the flood victims. Clearly it must be an oversight!
> 
> I hope the lemon & olive oil cake didn’t  spoil when it was held up in customs.



I used to like lemon olive oil cake. Somehow LOOC reminded me, in the best way, of both Nigella Lawson cookbooks (the recipes never worked but I still loved them anyway) AND Bridget Jones. The squidgy quality of something non chocolate.

I do remember how excited I was in the beginning about H with an American whose mother was black. It was useful for the BRF to emphasize the black part. I don’t think I would even mind the half black part if she would stop trading on an imaginary victimhood and shut up. And realize, if she did the math, she’s mainly white.


----------



## Annawakes

She really needs to do an episode about Lying.  Really really.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Huh???
> _“When guests come or meetings or when they're like, Oh, would you like coffee? And I was like, Maybe I should join them.”_
> This makes no sense. When guests come, the host offers them coffee. This reads as the guests are offering the host coffee. I'm glad the guests are more polite than Zedzee and they bring their own coffee.



I don't eat cake or biscuits, I still buy some for guests. I don't feel obligated to partake because of what my guests to choose to do. M just needs an excuse which is a whole other thing. 

I remember my mother had packets of cigars, Gauloises, Menthol and coloured cocktail cigarettes in our sideboard - just for guests. My mother never smoked unless one of her guests did, she needed the excuse that it 'wouldn't look right', we all knew she was kidding herself. How many smokers don't carry their own LOL? 

These days (within most cultures) we don't _need_ to eat meet, smoke, drink or eat because another is. She obviously feels ridiculously guilty for having a cup of coffee. I love coffee - fully caffeinated, no guilt at all. Just costs me a bit more money at the dentist.


----------



## papertiger

Annawakes said:


> She really needs to do an episode about Lying.  Really really.



In a year she could just tell everyone she did one.


----------



## piperdog

Annawakes said:


> She really needs to do an episode about Lying.  Really really.


Funny thing is that they're ALL about lying. She just doesn't admit it. This whole mess is at best about stereotypes, not archetypes, but really, it's about Meghan complaining about every insult that's ever been hurled her way. S*ify should be embarrassed that all it has done is give a woman of already-immense privilege a platform for spreading lies, settling scores, and perpetuating damaging stereotypes about women.


----------



## Genie27

xincinsin said:


> Huh???
> _“When guests come or meetings or when they're like, Oh, would you like coffee? And I was like, Maybe I should join them.”_
> This makes no sense. When guests come, the host offers them coffee. This reads as the guests are offering the host coffee. I'm glad the guests are more polite than Zedzee and they bring their own coffee.


Maybe she means the servants offer the guests coffee.

Whatever the case, again with the ‘cold uncaring British RF’ forcing their weak tea down her parched throat, while she valiantly tried to cling to life. Couldn’t even send the staff out for some life-saving non-fat-half-caf-oat-milk-matcha-latte.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Her legs are whiter than a Scottish man's.  According to Google, "*Measurable rainfall occurs on over 250 days in the Highlands to 175 days per year in other parts." and "Rainfall totals vary widely across Scotland*— the western highlands of Scotland is one of the wettest places in Europe with annual rainfall up to 4,577 mm (180.2 in)."
> 
> So *almost half the year, parts of Scotland have no sun,* and SHE is claiming she's portrayed as a Angry Black Woman?



This seems particularly true where I live in Scotland.

But actually, although we have more rain all year round, we also have more sun in the Summer because latitudinally we are quite high.

We don't get angry, we just get waterproofs.


----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> If the BRF confiscates your American passport, does that mean you can’t get to one of the 150 or so Starbucks locations in London to get an *American cup of coffee *either? Asking for a friend.



They grow cocoa in the US?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I think there is a significant difference between doubting MMs experience and questioning whether the stereotype exists. If you are not aware of the "angry black woman" trope may I respectfully suggest you get to know and listen to more black women. 

There are many examples of criticism toward Michelle *****'s bare arms for example, mostly from people who somehow forgot to be scandalized by the same fashion choice eight years later. (I am just jealous of both of these women, I'm in my fifties and if I could find a bathing suit with sleeves I would wear it)!


----------



## CobaltBlu

So when she was in the UK she drank tea? tea = death. Coffee = life.
She is weaponizing hot beverages


----------



## CobaltBlu

papertiger said:


> They grow cocoa in the US?


A little.  In Hawaii.  
Lots of coffee grown there too.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

tiktok said:


> If the BRF confiscates your American passport, does that mean you can’t get to one of the 150 or so Starbucks locations in London to get an American cup of coffee either? Asking for a friend.



I don't think you realize that Starbucks doesn't have American coffee.  It is different than espresso.  It has to do with how its ground and brewed.  And, we do grow coffee in the US, although that isn't what is meant by American coffee.  Kona coffee is grown exclusively in Hawaii.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

papertiger said:


> They grow cocoa in the US?


Hawaii does grow some coffee.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that so. Hate or like the BRF, but isn't that somewhat general knowledge? The current monarch is the head of state after all.


It is general knowledge, the Queen’s death was covered extensively in the US. It’s more that most people don’t follow what Charles and his family are doing because they don’t matter to them.


----------



## Aimee3

CobaltBlu said:


> So when she was in the UK she drank tea? tea = death. Coffee = life.
> She is weaponizing hot beverages


Ah so THAT’s why she threw hot tea at someone in Australia?  She was annoyed it wasn’t the coffee she had demanded?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I think there is a significant difference between doubting MMs experience and questioning whether the stereotype exists. If you are not aware of the "angry black woman" trope may I respectfully suggest you get to know and listen to more black women.
> 
> There are many examples of criticism toward Michelle *****'s bare arms for example, mostly from people who somehow forgot to be scandalized by the same fashion choice eight years later. *(I am just jealous of both of these women, I'm in my fifties and if I could find a bathing suit with sleeves I would wear it)! *



I've had one on my wishlist all summer because I loathe the sun  They are more out there since people try to avoid UV rays.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Her hatred of and for the UK is off the scale, not quite as much as her vile butchery of the English language though
> 
> View attachment 5639750





Chanbal said:


> _Asked why she had recently resumed, Meghan said: “*I guess because life started to come back?* And so people started to come… when guests come or [I have] meetings and they’re like ‘oh would you like coffee?’”_
> 
> Is she implying that she had no life in the UK? It sounds like she continues criticizing the BRF.


I _think_ she meant life was starting to come back after Covid. She should’ve clarified her statement because it was left open to interpretation.


----------



## WingNut

charlottawill said:


>



Ok. I laugh. A lot. You guys are killing me with the comments about this egregiously smarmy pair of grifters. And I willingly pile on for most of it. I loathe them for what they stand for, and for what they have done. But, I have to take at least some exception to the criticism of MeMe's physical attributes. Waist, legs, boobs, I agree 100% that she doesn't dress well *for her body* type, (thus all criticisms of her _style_ are fair game, IMO) but those features are genetic things that she cannot help. My 1 molecule of sympathy comes from a place of having had very thin pins (thankfully, I've grown into them, but still, was endlessly picked on for it as a kid). I think, to an extent, we criticize her physically *because* she's such an un-likable being, and were she more likable (ok, less of an asshat), we wouldn't be going there (so much), am I wrong?  

I will now go back to agreeing with everyone about the absurdity of the pair's behavior and mental ineptitude....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> I don't think you realize that Starbucks doesn't have American coffee.  It is different than espresso.  It has to do with how its ground and brewed.  And, we do grow coffee in the US, although that isn't what is meant by American coffee.  Kona coffee is grown exclusively in Hawaii.



She was living in metropolitan London, a member of one of the richest and most privileged families of the country. I am sure if it had made her happy they'd have found her some coffee to her liking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I _think_ she meant life was starting to come back after Covid. She should’ve clarified her statement because it was left open to interpretation.



But they left the UK in early 2020, before the pandemic ever hit. After spending months of 2019 in Canada. But maybe Canadian coffee was spoiled by her royal experience as well.


----------



## WingNut

Annawakes said:


> She really needs to do an episode about Lying.  Really really.


This. I'd like to see her do one on the "Archetype" of Narcissist and see what she has to say for herself


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I've been chewing on that peculiar claim for a bit. I'm a peculiar person in lots of aspects, but I don't expect anyone to bend backwards to satisfy all my wants to a T. Who does she think she is?

I am also extremely meticulous professionally, so I have standards for people working for me, yet I somehow don't bully them and treat them respectfully.


----------



## tiktok

Redbirdhermes said:


> I don't think you realize that Starbucks doesn't have American coffee.  It is different than espresso.  It has to do with how its ground and brewed.  And, we do grow coffee in the US, although that isn't what is meant by American coffee.  Kona coffee is grown exclusively in Hawaii.


Oh I was just distinguishing American coffee from any other form of beverage sold in the UK, since apparently the Brits don’t drink coffee at all. There are definitely no other coffeeshops in London or anywhere else that I’ve ever seen, it’s not something all the hundreds of nationalities living there ever drink. Even royalty doesn’t normally have access. That’s why Meghan had to stop drinking it too.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was living in metropolitan London, a member of one of the richest and most privileged families of the country. I am sure if it had made her happy they'd have found her some coffee to her liking.





tiktok said:


> Oh I was just distinguishing American coffee from any other form of beverage sold in the UK, since apparently the Brits don’t drink coffee at all. There are definitely no other coffeeshops in London or anywhere else that I’ve ever seen, it’s not something all the hundreds of nationalities living there ever drink. Even royalty doesn’t normally have access. That’s why Meghan had to stop drinking it too.



I have no doubt that M is doing a lot of whining here.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But they left the UK in early 2020, before the pandemic ever hit. After spending months of 2019 in Canada. But maybe Canadian coffee was spoiled by her royal experience as well.


Reading between the lines, she said she started again after being offered coffee in meetings. I figured she slipped that in there to humble brag about her oh so important business meetings.


----------



## DL Harper

tiktok said:


> Oh I was just distinguishing American coffee from any other form of beverage sold in the UK, since apparently the Brits don’t drink coffee at all. There are definitely no other coffeeshops in London or anywhere else that I’ve ever seen, it’s not something all the hundreds of nationalities living there ever drink. Even royalty doesn’t normally have access. That’s why Meghan had to stop drinking it too.


Not exactly.  My daughter and SIL who live in London are huge coffee drinkers (good coffee, that is) - he's English (or should I say British??) and she's a transplant.  That said, they each love their tea as well.
It just means MM is full of it - good coffee can't be that difficult to get, especially if you're nice about it instead of demanding.


----------



## 880

tiktok said:


> Oh I was just distinguishing American coffee from any other form of beverage sold in the UK, since apparently the Brits don’t drink coffee at all. There are definitely no other coffeeshops in London or anywhere else that I’ve ever seen, it’s not something all the hundreds of nationalities living there ever drink. Even royalty doesn’t normally have access. That’s why Meghan had to stop drinking it too.


Since she has a fixation on toilets. And sometimes drinks coffee, she should have visited this adorable coffeeshop while she was in London. 








						Victorian Toilet in London Turned Coffee Bar
					

Once a Victorian men’s public toilet, the Attendant is now a fashionable café, serving gourmet sandwiches and barista-style coffee.




					travelaway.me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BittyMonkey

880 said:


> Since she has a fixation on toilets. And sometimes drinks coffee, she should have visited this adorable coffeeshop while she was in London.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victorian Toilet in London Turned Coffee Bar
> 
> 
> Once a Victorian men’s public toilet, the Attendant is now a fashionable café, serving gourmet sandwiches and barista-style coffee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> travelaway.me


I'm sorry, the urinal seating is


----------



## papertiger

880 said:


> Since she has a fixation on toilets. And sometimes drinks coffee, she should have visited this adorable coffeeshop while she was in London.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Victorian Toilet in London Turned Coffee Bar
> 
> 
> Once a Victorian men’s public toilet, the Attendant is now a fashionable café, serving gourmet sandwiches and barista-style coffee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> travelaway.me



So that's what they planning to do with all their toilets on Montishitshow, turn them into coffee bars. 

Actually, a serious point. This shows the sad 21st century demise of the public conveniences. Still at least they didn't get rid of them altogether. One was turned into a nightclub in Shoreditch Public Venue/Warmer Room.


----------



## DL Harper

BittyMonkey said:


> I'm sorry, the urinal seating is


A whole new meaning to recycle, reuse.


----------



## papertiger

BittyMonkey said:


> I'm sorry, the urinal seating is





DL Harper said:


> A whole new meaning to recycle, reuse.



I'm sure they've washed a million times  

I like it. Part of the charm, something REAL. Something these 2 grifters have none of beyond charm of the artificial and superficial variety.


----------



## xincinsin

WingNut said:


> Ok. I laugh. A lot. You guys are killing me with the comments about this egregiously smarmy pair of grifters. And I willingly pile on for most of it. I loathe them for what they stand for, and for what they have done. But, I have to take at least some exception to the criticism of MeMe's physical attributes. Waist, legs, boobs, I agree 100% that she doesn't dress well *for her body* type, (thus all criticisms of her _style_ are fair game, IMO) but those features are genetic things that she cannot help. My 1 molecule of sympathy comes from a place of having had very thin pins (thankfully, I've grown into them, but still, was endlessly picked on for it as a kid). I think, to an extent, we criticize her physically *because* she's such an un-likable being, and were she more likable (ok, less of an asshat), we wouldn't be going there (so much), am I wrong?
> 
> I will now go back to agreeing with everyone about the absurdity of the pair's behavior and mental ineptitude....


I think the latest round of mockery is because her shins and feet have been photoshopped. She seems obsessed with physical perfection to an unhealthy degree. 

Someone posted on SM a video montage of photos purportedly showing Lil Bit but, apart from the Misan pics, all the other pics were kids photoshopped into photos of the Harkles. It was bizarre. And then I discover that similar videos are easily found on Youtube. Comments are about evenly divided between those pointing out that there are several different children in the montages, and those who believe every photo is Lil Bit and so are gushing over how cute the Harkle daughter is.


----------



## carmen56

Annawakes said:


> She really needs to do an episode about Lying.  Really really.


I just don’t get why she keeps spouting her lies when they can so easily be debunked.  It must be ingrained in her, she’s been doing it for so long.


----------



## BittyMonkey

papertiger said:


> I'm sure they've washed a million times
> 
> I like it. Part of the charm, something REAL. Something these 2 grifters have none of beyond charm of the artificial and superficial variety.


I like it outside of the urinals. Generally a good idea and the above-ground iron is beautiful.


----------



## sdkitty

jcnc said:


> Never heard that before but happy to discover i have royal blood  my second toe is really long and my thumb is so short  next time if someone says my feet look funny, I will tell them they look like royalty


seriously though - if you have a long toe, so what?  if you hate it that much, don't wear sandals.  but to photoshop it seems ridiculous to me


----------



## papertiger

Hope we haven't this one. 

Lady C in fake CC? 

Recommended playback speed at least 1.5


----------



## Aimee3

Just throwing this out here.  I read that identical triplets each sent in their samples to get DNA test results and all 3 of them were vastly different from each other, as in continents apart.  After that I decided I wasn’t going to bother since the whole process seemed sketchy to me.


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> Just throwing this out here.  I read that identical triplets each sent in their samples to get DNA test results and all 3 of them were vastly different from each other, as in continents apart.  After that I decided I wasn’t going to bother since the whole process seemed sketchy to me.


It is like the Olsen twins, I can’t tell Ashley and Mary Kate apart , they look like identical twins but are actually fraternal rwins


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Just throwing this out here.  I read that identical triplets each sent in their samples to get DNA test results and all 3 of them were vastly different from each other, as in continents apart.  After that I decided I wasn’t going to bother since the whole process seemed sketchy to me.


that's clearly not right....I wonder if some of these companies are legit and not others?  also, I guess you can be totally sure of your family's origins but if they go back to the beginning of time they will find some other blood in you


----------



## DL Harper

sdkitty said:


> that's clearly not right....I wonder if some of these companies are legit and not others?  also, I guess you can be totally sure of your family's origins but if they go back to the beginning of time they will find some other blood in you


Could be MM needs Henry Gates Jr to explore her ancestry to debunk the Nigerian claim - in whole or in part.  Or CeCe Moore.


----------



## sdkitty

DL Harper said:


> Could be MM needs Henry Gates Jr to explore her ancestry to debunk the Nigerian claim - in whole or in part.  Or CeCe Moore.


I'm always impressed with what Henry Gates and his team does
Would love it if they did Meghan's background and then asked her why no one was at her wedding


----------



## DL Harper

sdkitty said:


> I'm always impressed with what Henry Gates and his team does
> Would love it if they did Meghan's background and then asked her why non one was at her wedding


Exactly!  But she would deny his findings.  
Would love to be a part of his team - ancestry sleuthing!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really shouldn't give her nonsense too much thought, but is she suggesting she wasn't allowed to have guests while living in a palace, sorry, being incarcerated?


I think she is going for the stereotype that the Brits only drink tea or, in the rare occasions were they actually know about coffee they make terrible, instant coffee
Nevermind that is a cliche from at least 50 yrs ago


----------



## lanasyogamama

CobaltBlu said:


> So when she was in the UK she drank tea? tea = death. Coffee = life.
> She is weaponizing hot beverages


Wasn’t she also hawking green tea for a minute there? Contract must be done. 


marietouchet said:


> It is like the Olsen twins, I can’t tell Ashley and Mary Kate apart , they look like identical twins but are actually fraternal rwins


They used to look more alike. I believe MK had eating issues which may have impacted her face.


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that so. Hate or like the BRF, but isn't that somewhat general knowledge? The current monarch is the head of state after all.


I think most Americans would be able to tell you Queen Elizabeth died and Charles is King....beyond that....the vast majority could care less about the monarchy.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really shouldn't give her nonsense too much thought, but is she suggesting she wasn't allowed to have guests while living in a palace, sorry, being incarcerated?


And it is nonsense.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> This seems particularly true where I live in Scotland.
> 
> But actually, although we have more rain all year round, we also have more sun in the Summer because latitudinally we are quite high.
> 
> We don't get angry, we just get waterproofs.


It has always looked beautiful to me. My husband has been there several times for golf and says "Oh you wouldn't like it, too rainy". But I know he's wrong. I will get there eventually.


----------



## charlottawill

WingNut said:


> I think, to an extent, we criticize her physically *because* she's such an un-likable being, and were she more likable (ok, less of an asshat), we wouldn't be going there (so much), am I wrong?


No, I completely agree.


----------



## charlottawill

carmen56 said:


> I just don’t get why she keeps spouting her lies when they can so easily be debunked.  It must be ingrained in her, she’s been doing it for so long.


This is only my armchair psychoanalyis, but she is a pathological liar, in keeping with her apparent NPD.  

From Medical News Today:

*Pathological lying is a possible symptom of certain personality disorders, including:*


borderline personality disorder (BPD)
narcissistic personality disorder (NPD)
antisocial personality disorder (APD)
BPD is a condition that makes it difficult for a person to regulate their emotions. People with BPD may experience severe mood swings, feel greater instability and insecurity, and not have a stable sense of self.

*The hallmarks of NPD are fantasies of immense importance and the need for admiration and special treatment.*

Researchers argue that while pathological lying may, in theory, occur in people with APD, those with this condition often lie for personal gain or pleasure.

*A person with BPD or NPD may lie to distort reality into something that fits with the emotions that they are feeling, rather than the facts.*

These personality disorders can lead to significant challenges with interpersonal relationships.


----------



## EmilyM11

CobaltBlu said:


> So when she was in the UK she drank tea? tea = death. Coffee = life.
> She is weaponizing hot beverages


We'll soon find out she copied the coffee drama from somebody else.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> *I'm sure they've washed a million times *
> 
> I like it. Part of the charm, something REAL. Something these 2 grifters have none of beyond charm of the artificial and superficial variety.


Not to mention completely refinished with several coats of glaze.


----------



## Aimee3

charlottawill said:


> This is only my armchair psychoanalyis, but she is a pathological liar, in keeping with her apparent NPD.
> 
> From Medical News Today:
> 
> *Pathological lying is a possible symptom of certain personality disorders, including:*
> 
> 
> borderline personality disorder (BPD)
> narcissistic personality disorder (NPD)
> antisocial personality disorder (APD)
> BPD is a condition that makes it difficult for a person to regulate their emotions. People with BPD may experience severe mood swings, feel greater instability and insecurity, and not have a stable sense of self.
> 
> *The hallmarks of NPD are fantasies of immense importance and the need for admiration and special treatment.*
> 
> Researchers argue that while pathological lying may, in theory, occur in people with APD, those with this condition often lie for personal gain or pleasure.
> 
> *A person with BPD or NPD may lie to distort reality into something that fits with the emotions that they are feeling, rather than the facts.*
> 
> These personality disorders can lead to significant challenges with interpersonal relationships.


Ugh, so now she’ll blame it all on her NPD and thus she can’t be held responsible?


----------



## bag-mania

I like how Meghan’s guest politely pointed out to her that her Angry Black Woman trope is 20 years out of date, just like all of her other episode stereotypes so far.   

Rae echoed Meghan’s experience, recalling how, in the early 2000s, reality television shows fanned the flames of the already deeply seeded stereotype. Together, the two looked back on shows like “The Apprentice” and “The Flavor of Love” and how they featured Black female personalities like Omarosa Manigault and Tiffany Pollard. At the time, the two women often served as foils to the white characters in their respective shows and were primarily only ever depicted as bringing chaos and fury to scenes.

“It was this ruthless Black woman or this uncouth Black woman,” Rae noted. “We were made to laugh at them as opposed to or to laugh with them in some ways. But it was just like these caricatures of Black women.”

Years later, as Rae recalled, the pendulum of the portrayal of Black women in television and films swung to the opposite extreme. Black female characters became only “fierce” and only “flawless.” According to Rae, this depiction inspired her to fight for the title of her first television series, “Insecure.”

“I want to be able to show that not all women are like this. I don’t feel fierce, flawless all the time,” Rae explained. “These characters aren’t that all the time, and that’s OK.”

She added: “It was like we overcorrected this other narrative, and now we couldn’t be human. We were superhuman.”









						Meghan Markle discusses the ‘angry Black woman’ stereotype with Issa Rae and Ziwe
					

The women unpacked the meaning and history of the stereotype while also relating how it has affected and shaped their careers and relationships.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Ugh, so now she’ll blame it all on her NPD and thus she can’t be held responsible?


No, because narcissists never acknowledge that they're the problem. When she and Harry split she'll blame it on him and the RF. She can do no wrong in her mind.


----------



## WingNut

charlottawill said:


> No, because narcissists never acknowledge that they're the problem. When she and Harry split she'll blame it on him and the RF. She can do no wrong in her mind.


Was just about to respond with the same. As a person with NPD, she's incapable of the self-reflection that would make her aware she's NPD.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Ugh, so now she’ll blame it all on her NPD and thus she can’t be held responsible?


She’ll never acknowledge her narcissism. That would be a flaw and Meghan is flawless, don’t you know.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> No, because narcissists never acknowledge that they're the problem. When she and Harry split she'll blame it on him and the RF. She can do no wrong in her mind.


Lol, I should have read everything before I posted the same thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Lol, I should have read everything before I posted the same thing.


I've done the same. Great minds...


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> They used to look more alike. I believe MK had eating issues which may have impacted her face.
> 
> View attachment 5639936
> View attachment 5639936


I used to think the Olsen twins were odd looking when they were little girls on Full House. Part of it was they were really young and couldn’t act at all so having them there was like having a pet they trained to say “you got it, dude!”


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I've done the same. Great minds...


Avoiding duplicate posts is SOOOO hard, I will find a link that I am dying to share here, I SHOULD look over the ;ast 10 pages I have missed first, BUT I am scared I will lose the link in the meantime


----------



## marietouchet

BittyMonkey said:


> I'm sorry, the urinal seating is


A few works of art came to mind 

https://www.guggenheim.org/blogs/checklist/maurizio-cattelans-golden-toilet-in-the-time-of-*****





						‘Fountain’, Marcel Duchamp, 1917, replica 1964 | Tate
					

Artwork page for ‘Fountain’, Marcel Duchamp, 1917, replica 1964 on display at Tate Modern. Fountain is Duchamp’s most famous work. It is an example of what he called a ‘ready-made’ sculpture. These were made from ordinary manufactured objects. He then presented them as artworks. This invites us...




					www.tate.org.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

At what point does this lying become delusions?  The way she embellishes her descriptions of certain events strikes me as someone who deludes herself into thinking she is smarter, more beautiful, etc. than she is.  I could be way off base, so please correct me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

EmilyM111 said:


> We'll soon find out she copied the coffee drama from somebody else.


Gwyneth?  Madonna?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Only rumours so far, but I'd like to see that meltdown.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only rumours so far, but I'd like to see that meltdown.



Oooooh la la.  
He isn’t toying with us, is he?  It would be a masterful move


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The truly sad thing IMO is that had the Troublesome Two done their job and stopped complaining and demanding things I'm sure Charles would have found meaningful spots for both of them during his reign.


----------



## Toby93

Aimee3 said:


> Just throwing this out here.  I read that identical triplets each sent in their samples to get DNA test results and all 3 of them were vastly different from each other, as in continents apart.  After that I decided I wasn’t going to bother since the whole process seemed sketchy to me.


I sent mine in a few years ago - my FIL bought us all kits for the holidays.  I live in Canada now, but am from the UK and it was actually pretty accurate.  The rest of the family was completely different from mine, and scattered all over the map.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




Where does that even come from...as nobody asked, I'm inclined to believe they did try to come back and were told politely to not bother, so they put out that statement in their usual reactive manner.


----------



## bag-mania

The _New York Times_ is claiming that Harry’s memoir is coming out in January now. No idea if it is true.









						Prince Harry’s Memoir Is Due in January. How Explosive Will It Be?
					

The memoir is expected to be a best seller but, after the queen’s death, some royal experts and industry executives say the project has become risky for Harry.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> The _New York Times_ is claiming that Harry’s memoir is coming out in January now. No idea if it is true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s Memoir Is Due in January. How Explosive Will It Be?
> 
> 
> The memoir is expected to be a best seller but, after the queen’s death, some royal experts and industry executives say the project has become risky for Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


I can't open it but NY Times is a reputable newspaper


----------



## Mrs.Z

Yikes! 









						Prince Harry's bombshell memoir will be released on January 10
					

Prince Harry's memoir will be released on January 10, it has been revealed, after he battled to water down its content following the Queen's death.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

Toby93 said:


> I sent mine in a few years ago - my FIL bought us all kits for the holidays.  I live in Canada now, but am from the UK and it was actually pretty accurate.  The rest of the family was completely different from mine, and scattered all over the map.
> 
> View attachment 5640111


My partner and I did ours, he came out as Latvian (father) and a mix of Scottish and English
Mine…it is a hodgepodge


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> The _New York Times_ is claiming that Harry’s memoir is coming out in January now. No idea if it is true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s Memoir Is Due in January. How Explosive Will It Be?
> 
> 
> The memoir is expected to be a best seller but, after the queen’s death, some royal experts and industry executives say the project has become risky for Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Interesting sales strategy - launch book *after* Christmas, Hanukkah, etc.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> The _New York Times_ is claiming that Harry’s memoir is coming out in January now. No idea if it is true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s Memoir Is Due in January. How Explosive Will It Be?
> 
> 
> The memoir is expected to be a best seller but, after the queen’s death, some royal experts and industry executives say the project has become risky for Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



For a second I read Harry's coming out. 

It had always been a rumour but, I jumped the gun


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting sales strategy - launch book *after* Christmas, Hanukkah, etc.



I'm a gonna launch a range of chocolate eggs in May, maybe there's a trend


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




I'm more stuck on 'Chic and Classic: Meghan Market Markle (Documentary)' 

Must be the Self-Delusion Channel


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> It has always looked beautiful to me. My husband has been there several times for golf and says "Oh you wouldn't like it, too rainy". But I know he's wrong. I will get there eventually.


Me too!  I'm dying to do a tour of Scotland and Ireland.  I've been to England several times, but none of the rest of the UK.


----------



## WingNut

Toby93 said:


>



What in the actual F. Is she THAT delusional?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Me too!  I'm dying to do a tour of Scotland and Ireland.  I've been to England several times, but none of the rest of the UK.



I've been to Ireland and Wales, but I want to go to Edinburgh and London badly.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I used to think the Olsen twins were odd looking when they were little girls on Full House. Part of it was they were really young and couldn’t act at all so having them there was *like having a pet they trained to say “you got it, dude!*”


  
I know they were babies/kids, but they were promoted so heavily with their movies, etc., that I almost feel it's okay to comment on their appearance.  I thought they were odd looking as well, and not cute at all.  I thought baby chimps were cuter than them and could've been trained to do much more than Michelle Tanner with the stupid one line.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I can't open it but NY Times is a reputable newspaper


Used to be.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've been to Ireland and Wales, but I want to go to Edinburgh and London badly.


Wouldn't it be fun to all do a "TPF Haz and TW Thread Members Tour of the UK"?  
See all the spots in London that triggered Haz, see all the castles the Markles will never live in, see all the Queen's horses and all the Queen's men (Major Johnny)...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> Wouldn't it be fun to all do a "TPF Haz and TW Thread Members Tour of the UK"?
> See all the spots in London that triggered Haz, see all the castles the Markles will never live in, see all the Queen's horses and all the Queen's men (Major Johnny)...



Sign me up. Also...I nearly spit out my tea re: all the castles they will never live in


----------



## bellecate

I am 54 pages behind here and will probably fall behind more as my book just came from the Book Depository. All the way to Canada and reading it has commenced.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting sales strategy - launch book *after* Christmas, Hanukkah, etc.


Kwanza is Dec. 26 to Jan 1, 2023.  Ya think he is going for that?

I think I figured it out.  They are counting on all the folks who rushed to the stores to return their holiday gifts and that they will then spend the money on Harry's book!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I think I figured it out.  They are counting on all the folks who rushed to the stores to return their holiday gifts and that they will then spend the money on Harry's book!



He better not count on me.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting sales strategy - launch book *after* Christmas, Hanukkah, etc.


If anyone gifted me that book I'd sever ties with them.


----------



## Mrs.Z

What is the title?  “Just Call Me Harry”…..OR……”Harry: How being the Spare made me feel superfluous“ ……OR …… “Harry: Diary of a lost Prince found through Meghan’s love” 

You guys are on your own, I can’t read this nonsense!


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> The _New York Times_ is claiming that Harry’s memoir is coming out in January now. No idea if it is true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s Memoir Is Due in January. How Explosive Will It Be?
> 
> 
> The memoir is expected to be a best seller but, after the queen’s death, some royal experts and industry executives say the project has become risky for Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



Sounds like the publisher has no confidence in this book selling well. Worst timing for a book, post-holiday spending fatigue and people usually cool their spending in January. Release the dud during a quiet time and let the book quietly shuffle its way to the clearance table.


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> If anyone gifted me that book I'd sever ties with them.


But, but, but I was going to start a secret santa and gift the book  What if I drew you?


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> I'm more stuck on 'Chic and Classic: Meghan Market Markle (Documentary)'
> 
> Must be the Self-Delusion Channel


I want to know why she has ANYTHING to do with a documentary about the Princess of Wales?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Couldn’t help but notice how many titles are planned for 2022, which is almost over.  So, should we expect a massive push between now and the end of the year?   Maybe she will just change the years?


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> The _New York Times_ is claiming that Harry’s memoir is coming out in January now. No idea if it is true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s Memoir Is Due in January. How Explosive Will It Be?
> 
> 
> The memoir is expected to be a best seller but, after the queen’s death, some royal experts and industry executives say the project has become risky for Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com



To quote the Duke of Wellington: _publish, and be damned_. Wellington was also being threatened and blackmailed over a tell all memoir written by an ex-mistress in the 1820's. Strange how some things never change.

Really, get it over with, rip the band aid off, let Harry skewer his father, Camilla, the Queen, Prince Philip, his brother, whoever.  Does anybody really care?  We know he doesn't like any of them and that he hated his life in the UK.  Will it get more than a couple of days of headlines here and in the UK? I think it could just as easily backfire on Harry, with people sympathizing with Charles and Camilla.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Couldn’t help but notice how many titles are planned for 2022, which is almost over.  So, should we expect a massive push between now and the end of the year?   Maybe she will just change the years?


They sound like home movie titles. But seriously, all the ones which are not headlining Zedzee are described as documentary shorts. I'm guessing that they are just going to buy footage and photos, then compile them into 5 or 10 minuters, with the Duchess of Horror doing the voiceover. Give Netflix some filler content to appease them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, yes, this is what everyone will want - after the holidays.  A watered-down book by a never-do-well spare.  Can’t make this up!









						Prince Harry's bombshell memoir will be released on January 10
					

Prince Harry's memoir will be released on January 10, it has been revealed, after he battled to water down its content following the Queen's death.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting sales strategy - launch book *after* Christmas, Hanukkah, etc.


Just before the Lunar New Year. Hmm, maybe they are banking on a lesser known Chinese custom. I've read that when a Hongkong movie tycoon was gravely ill, he was gifted a taboo item - a mini coffin. This was to counter and dispel his ill fortune. The Harkles have done a lot to be seen as symbols of bad luck for a family: money grubbers, disrespectful to elders, abandoning family responsibilities, etc. Sales strategy: market Handbag's memoir as a taboo item, buy it and put it outside your door to repel bad luck, free garlic cloves included.





__





						MINI COFFINS USED AS GOOD LUCK CHARMS
					

Some people would resort to all sorts of means to gain wealth. I read that there is a trend among Chinese businessmen to collect “mini coff...




					shuangxingfu.blogspot.com


----------



## Toby93




----------



## oldbag

Mrs.Z said:


> What is the title?  “Just Call Me Harry”…..OR……”Harry: How being the Spare made me feel superfluous“ ……OR …… “Harry: Diary of a lost Prince found through Meghan’s love”
> 
> You guys are on your own, I can’t read this nonsense!


Maybe something simple, "I'm Trapped In A Harry Situation."


----------



## oldbag

Mrs.Z said:


> What is the title?  “Just Call Me Harry”…..OR……”Harry: How being the Spare made me feel superfluous“ ……OR …… “Harry: Diary of a lost Prince found through Meghan’s love”
> 
> You guys are on your own, I can’t read this nonsense!


Maybe something simple, "I'm Trapped In A Harry Situation."


----------



## oldbag

oldbag said:


> Maybe something simple, "I'm Trapped In A Harry Situation."


I'm sorry for the double post.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Miss Liz

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, yes, this is what everyone will want - after the holidays.  A watered-down book by a never-do-well spare.  Can’t make this up!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's bombshell memoir will be released on January 10
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's memoir will be released on January 10, it has been revealed, after he battled to water down its content following the Queen's death.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Isn’t Kate’s birthday January 9? If the release date has anything to do with that (and they are trashing her in the book) they are despicable. But we already knew that.


----------



## gracekelly

Miss Liz said:


> Isn’t Kate’s birthday January 9? If the release date has anything to do with that (and they are trashing her in the book) they are despicable. But we already knew that.


Kate probably expects them to do something.  I like to think that she is past caring about what MM does.  KC has just announced that he plans on giving Kate important work to do. MM can go eat dust.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

pukasonqo said:


> I think she is going for the stereotype that the Brits only drink tea or, in the rare occasions were they actually know about coffee they make terrible, instant coffee
> Nevermind that is a cliche from at least 50 yrs ago


I watch a lot of Brit mysteries and I would hope they portray Brits fairly accurately when they have coffee and cakes in the drawing room and they do say, "Coffee and cakes await your presence in the drawing room" or something very similar.


----------



## 880

youngster said:


> Really, get it over with, rip the band aid off, let Harry skewer his father, Camilla, the Queen, Prince Philip, his brother, whoever. Does anybody really care? We know he doesn't like any of them and that he hated his life in the UK. Will it get more than a couple of days of headlines here and in the UK? I think it could just as easily backfire on Harry, with people sympathizing with Charles and Camilla.





gracekelly said:


> KC has just announced that he plans on giving Kate important work to do. MM can go eat dust.











						King steps in to save Princes Andrew and Harry from being sacked from major job
					

It was widely thought the King would strip his estranged son Harry and disgraced brother Andrew of the roles since they are no longer working members of the royal family




					www.mirror.co.uk
				




KC acting to ‘spare the blushes’ of H and Andrew (simply adding others eligible for COS and not ‘sacking’ H and A) is very well done.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> I sent mine in a few years ago - my FIL bought us all kits for the holidays.  I live in Canada now, but am from the UK and it was actually pretty accurate.  The rest of the family was completely different from mine, and scattered all over the map.
> 
> View attachment 5640111


Since you live in Canada now, did you happen to see the investigative show on the CBC where the reporter and her identical twin sister (who share the same DNA code) sent their samples to Ancestry and other genealogy sites and they were expecting their results to be the exact same and they weren't?

I never forgot that.


----------



## xincinsin

oldbag said:


> I'm sorry for the double post.


----------



## purseinsanity

Mrs.Z said:


> What is the title?  “Just Call Me Harry”…..OR……”Harry: How being the Spare made me feel superfluous“ ……OR …… “Harry: Diary of a lost Prince found through Meghan’s love”
> 
> You guys are on your own, I can’t read this nonsense!


How about *Harry, Diary of an Angry White Man*?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



Perfect!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



That Invictus Games look was horrible. Not body-shaming. Her fashion parade was tasteless as usual. But what really made my eyes widen was whatever procedures she did on her face which made it look like a bottom-heavy oval. For someone who keeps trumpeting her authenticity, she is as genuine as a three-dollar bill.


----------



## needlv

To overshadow Catherine.  Pathetic


----------



## Debbini

Great responses on Twitter


----------



## bag-mania

It’s nice to see the press finally getting comfortable with saying “Meghan Markle lies.” What took them so long?












						‘Deal or No Deal’ briefcase girls reveal show truths — and Meghan Markle lies
					

“If she didn’t want people looking at her, she should have chosen a different career,” said one former “Deal or No Deal” briefcase girl of co-star Meghan Markle’s comp…




					nypost.com


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It’s nice to see the press finally getting comfortable with saying “Meghan Markle lies.” What took them so long?
> 
> View attachment 5640426
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘Deal or No Deal’ briefcase girls reveal show truths — and Meghan Markle lies
> 
> 
> “If she didn’t want people looking at her, she should have chosen a different career,” said one former “Deal or No Deal” briefcase girl of co-star Meghan Markle’s comp…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



From a fellow briefcase girl: "But how she expressed herself had more to do with how she felt about herself [than what happened on the show]."

Sure enough, it fits the profile: "*A person with BPD or NPD may lie to distort reality into something that fits with the emotions that they are feeling, rather than the facts."*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> To overshadow Catherine.  Pathetic



I doubt she or anyone else in the RF will really care.


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She was living in metropolitan London, a member of one of the richest and most privileged families of the country. I am sure if it had made her happy they'd have found her some coffee to her liking.



Somehow the family that paid for her FIFTY MILLION DOLLAR WEDDING could have made it possible for her to find an effin' cup of coffee. Coffee is not difficult to find in London. But then we're dealing with "Duchess Difficult"...


----------



## csshopper

Posted on Twitter, sums it all up.


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> Just throwing this out here.  I read that identical triplets each sent in their samples to get DNA test results and all 3 of them were vastly different from each other, as in continents apart.  After that I decided I wasn’t going to bother since the whole process seemed sketchy to me.



I've always been leery of of those ancestry tests from the standpoint of what is done with the very personal data those companies now have on you? And who do they sell that data to, and for what purposes do THOSE companies then do with it? I think it becomes a big rabbit hole. 

Claw will say anything. I don't think math is her strong suit. She may claim to be 43% Nigerian, then 26% that, 39% that, 16% that, 45% that, 12% that, 78% that, 42% that, not realizing those figures far surpass 100. 

And don't those tests indicate geographic regions, not often actual countries? Countries' boundaries change drastically through the years. So her "42%" may not be all Nigerian, but more representative of roughly a land mass somewhat near there. Nigeria isn't tiny, but it isn't all that large, either. I have doubts her tests came back "Nigerian" instead of something like "northwest Africa" but Claw always has to be dramatic. If one looks at a map, there are many countries in that region. But Claw knows everyone has heard of "Nigeria", but not necessarily Cameroon, Benin, Niger, Chad, etc, so she gloms onto a country name people can relate to. You can't believe anything this fraud says.


----------



## Hermes Zen

charlottawill said:


> It says $5000 per table, but how many tables do you think a place like that can hold? It's sad.


Still haven't caught up on the thread but I looked on the hotel website and it says the most they can accommodate is in the grand ballroom up to 2500 people.  So 250 tables with 10 per table x $5000 per table (unless there's more expensive tables closer to stage) = $1,250,000 total.


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> Still haven't caught up on the thread but I looked on the hotel website and it says the most they can accommodate is in the grand ballroom up to 2500 people.  So 250 tables with 10 per table x $5000 per table (unless there's more expensive tables closer to stage) = $1,250,000 total.


Yes, and half that fee is the charity donation ($2500) and the other half pays for the meal etc.

I wonder if some of the charity fee is an Archewell fee or the women fund fee

 (I keep getting distracted and thinking this womens charity is the same as George Constanzas “Human Fund” that he invented because he didn’t want to give away Christmas presents to work colleagues - reference from Seinfeld)


----------



## csshopper

Neil Sean did a segment on this and speculated the dinner is closed to the media to prevent reporting the embarrassment if the room is not full. He also said he'd bet someone from the media will be in attendance in spite of it.

Visions of the empty UN hall and the lack of an audience for Hazbeen comes to mind. But I'll bet the Sussex camp will see to it the room is filled even if they have to tap friends like Oprah and Tyler Perry to underwrite tables.


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> Yes, and half that fee is the charity donation ($2500) and the other half pays for the meal etc.
> 
> I wonder if some of the charity fee is an Archewell fee or the women fund fee
> 
> (I keep getting distracted and thinking this womens charity is the same as George Constanzas “Human Fund” that he invented because he didn’t want to give away Christmas presents to work colleagues - reference from Seinfeld)


Yep. I'm surprised, well maybe not because it's M ... it's $5000 per table.  I've seen events with real VIP's  that tables go for way more and dinners for $5000 (or more) a plate.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> How about *Harry, Diary of an Angry White Man*?



I'm gonna check if Ladbrokes will accept bets on:

_Princes are People Too_ by Royal, Formally-Known-As
or
_My Truth_ by Hooray Henry
or
_I Did it all for Love_ by Just Call me 'H'


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Yes, and half that fee is the charity donation ($2500) and* the other half pays for the meal* etc.
> 
> I wonder if some of the charity fee is an Archewell fee or the women fund fee
> 
> (I keep getting distracted and thinking this womens charity is the same as George Constanzas “Human Fund” that he invented because he didn’t want to give away Christmas presents to work colleagues - reference from Seinfeld)



$2.5K?    

Who did a cost breakdown of the meal? Coz I could eat the taster menu at Maxim's de Paris for that. TWICE over.

The 7 course Epicurean Journey (a la Escoffier) at th Ritz London is only £175, + £255 from the prestige wine selection

Plus, I wouldn't have to suffer word-salad sprinkled with BS after every course.

What they gonna serve up at this meal? Sizzler sausages on sticks, vegan roast chicken and lemon and elderflower crumbs with  O.M.G coffee?

They must have left Archewell in charge of the budget.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> $2.5K?
> 
> Who did a cost breakdown of the meal? Coz I could eat the taster menu at Maxim's de Paris for that. TWICE over.
> 
> The 7 course Epicurean Journey (a la Escoffier) at th Ritz London is only £175, + £255 from the prestige wine selection
> 
> Plus, I wouldn't have to suffer word-salad sprinkled with BS after every course.
> 
> What they gonna serve up at this meal? Sizzler sausages on sticks, vegan roast chicken and lemon and elderflower crumbs with  O.M.G coffee?
> 
> They must have left Archewell in charge of the budget.



I think it's for a table of 10? Still, you'd have to pay me GOOD money to hear Ghoul speak.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think it's for a table of 10? Still, you'd have to pay me GOOD money to hear Ghoul speak.



and noise-cancelation headphones


----------



## papertiger

More smashing plates at Montishitshow?


----------



## Mumotons

It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana








						Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
					

A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> Somehow the family that paid for her FIFTY MILLION DOLLAR WEDDING could have made it possible for her to find an effin' cup of coffee. Coffee is not difficult to find in London. But then we're dealing with "Duchess Difficult"...


You would think the courtiers working for their household were more than obliged to at least procure some great coffee beans and have them grinded to make a cuppa for Duchess Difficult, had she asked nicely, even if she couldn't get something decent in London. It's asinine if she's trying to make people think that the BRF didn't allow her to have coffee (if that's her intention). Next we're gonna hear how she couldn't get vegan food


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


He’s going to regret this.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> He’s going to regret this.



It starts after Diana's death because he doesn't want to spill the beans on his mother's behaviour?

He is walking poor taste anyway, I'm glad I'm not a member of his family. He's the boy who literally sold his grandmother.


----------



## EverSoElusive

This could very well be Merching Meg  Click play, you'll not regret it.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t believe he chose such a whiny title. I mean I can, but wow. And the photo oozes bitterness.


----------



## Pessie

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t believe he chose such a whiny title. I mean I can, but wow. And the photo oozes bitterness.


He even cropped out his bald patch


----------



## pomeline

"Spare" indeed... This is the kind of spare he is.







Might as well have named his book "Dud". And a "memoir" indeed... he has the memory of a chicken and the honesty of a snake oil salesman.


----------



## jennlt

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh, Spare me.


----------



## xincinsin

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Very appropriate. To go spare means to get upset and/or angry, and that is indeed his primary emotion nowadays.

There is a Chinese translation. I volunteer to check Chinese websites to read the reviews.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did he do the cover shot together with Ghoul's recent photos? The golden light and blur looks familiar.


----------



## kipp

The book can be ordered now for half price from Waterstones!


----------



## DoggieBags

kipp said:


> The book can be ordered now for half price from Waterstones!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640619


This looks like a mugshot.


----------



## 880

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh, the woes of a second son. Really? Meghan reaps the most vitriol, but honestly this makes  H soundlike he was always a resentful whiny idiot


----------



## zinacef

one of us here has to do the ultimate sacrifice of buying (in discount) and reading the book —— it will probably be a waste of time you’ll never get back but pretty please be our hero!


----------



## 1LV

zinacef said:


> one of us here has to do the ultimate sacrifice of buying (in discount) and reading the book —— it will probably be a waste of time you’ll never get back but pretty please be our hero!


I’m out.


----------



## bag-mania

880 said:


> Oh, the woes of a second son. Really? Meghan reaps the most vitriol, but honestly this makes  H soundlike *he was always a resentful whiny idiot*


He was, but he mostly kept his bitterness to himself. Meghan unlocked his full potential to wallow in self-pity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

DEEP ANALYSIS … compare and contrast
H goes on about his mental health issues - he has had them, went into therapy, is now an imperfect person but an expert on mental health OK
MM hmmm only prob she ever had was being suicidal and not being able to get help, but that seems to be the ONLY issue that she has owned up to, she is nearly  perfect OK
PS She never said how she got over the issue without help, all by herself


----------



## lanasyogamama

It’s interesting, because he could have used the spare title to his advantage, and said “oh, when I was younger, it bothered me that I would never be the heir but now I realize that I have such an opportunity to have an impact and make a difference without the weight of the world on my shoulders” but instead, he chose bitterness.


----------



## marietouchet

Thinking of the stereotypes and how they apply to HER

AMBITIOUS (Serena) , yes MM would admit to being that
DIVA (Mariah) - MM does not admit to that except in the choice of clothes
ASIAN DRAGON LADY (Cho) , not applicable ?
SINGLE (Mindy) - hmm Mindy is a single mom, but this stereotype was hardly addressed in podcast - stereotype is N/A to MM ?
BIMBO (Paris) - MM was forced into servile bimbohood by Hollywood
ANGRY BLACK WOMAN , MM admits only to telling people her needs not being angry, but she is 41 percent black

I am missing a stereotype …


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s interesting, because he could have used the spare title to his advantage, and said “oh, when I was younger, it bothered me that I would never be the heir but now I realize that I have such an opportunity to have an impact and make a difference without the weight of the world on my shoulders” but instead, he chose bitterness.


This book is going to be angst ridden -  get out the tissues


----------



## CarryOn2020

Alternate titles:
Poor pitiful me
Jerk
Bellend
Manchild
Despair


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Thinking of the stereotypes and how they apply to HER
> 
> AMBITIOUS (Serena) , yes MM would admit to being that
> DIVA (Mariah) - MM does not admit to that except in the choice of clothes
> ASIAN DRAGON LADY (Cho) , not applicable ?
> SINGLE (Mindy) - hmm Mindy is a single mom, but this stereotype was hardly addressed in podcast - stereotype is N/A to MM ?
> BIMBO (Paris) - MM was forced into servile bimbohood by Hollywood
> ANGRY BLACK WOMAN , MM admits only to telling people her needs not being angry, but she is 41 percent black
> 
> I am missing a stereotype …


We’re only half way through. There are six more stereotypes to go.


----------



## jennlt

Let the gif games begin.


----------



## Annawakes

They both like those super close up full face photos eh?  As if they’re so vulnerable.  Rolling my eyes…..


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> Since you live in Canada now, did you happen to see the investigative show on the CBC where the reporter and her identical twin sister (who share the same DNA code) sent their samples to Ancestry and other genealogy sites and they were expecting their results to be the exact same and they weren't?
> 
> I never forgot that.


No, I didn't see that one.  I would never have bothered with it myself, since I know it's just for fun, but my FIL wanted to give the kits as Christmas gifts.  It appeared to me that it probably got mine pretty close, but I wouldn't put too much stock in it.  Seems to be a hit and miss


----------



## zinacef

And super photoshopped, too


Annawakes said:


> They both like those super close up full face photos eh?  As if they’re so vulnerable.  Rolling my eyes…..


----------



## Toby93




----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternate titles:
> Poor pitiful me
> Jerk
> Bellend
> Manchild
> Despair





I do have to say this is one of the first photos I've seen in ages where he resembles a reasonably groomed person.


----------



## CarryOn2020

WingNut said:


> I do have to say this is one of the first photos I've seen in ages where he resembles a reasonably groomed person.


It is, of course, heavily photoshopped.  No bump on forehead, beard well groomed, bluer eyes, etc.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jennlt said:


> View attachment 5640632
> View attachment 5640633
> View attachment 5640634


He really stepped right into all of these jokes with that title!!


----------



## csshopper

Whiny Hawry and St. Meg the Savior. Nothing could compel me to purchase it for even pennies on the dollar, let alone read this tripe. The cover is a huge turn off, I shuddered in distaste at first glance. It reminds me of “sour puss,” a phrase I remember from my childhood as an admonishment for pouting. The photo offers reams of opportunities for ridicule in cartoons and memes, and when the sarcasm and laughing begins, he and TW can feed on their cravings for victimhood. 

“Spare” as a title speaks volumes about his need for intense therapy to sort his inferiority complex. His birth rank could have been irrelevant if he had focused his Royally privileged life on service to others instead of his emotionally stunted thumb sucking self. We had a brief glimpse of what might have been when he, William and Kate were a trio. Then The Malignacy implanted herself and it all rotted.

A more honest title would have been “Turd.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I cannot believe it’s actually called Spare!  That is cringe!  Oh horrid birth order!


----------



## youngster

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Pessie said:


> He’s going to regret this.





lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t believe he chose such a whiny title. I mean I can, but wow. And the photo oozes bitterness.



There are around three-quarters of a billion people on this planet who don't have access to electricity or access to clean running water close to their home.  Yet, he whines about being "the spare" of the British royal family.  He deserves every bit of mockery that's coming his way.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Alternate titles:
> Poor pitiful me
> Jerk
> Bellend
> Manchild
> Despair



Loser


----------



## Suncatcher

The whiny tales of a man born to privilege, titles and a royal life?  SPARE me. Some stories are never meant to be shared and this is one of them.


----------



## sdkitty

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


do we believe this from DM?  If it's true, I would think someone talked him into that title....he didn't enjoy being called Spare


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> do we believe this from DM?  If it's true, I would think someone talked him into that title....he didn't enjoy being called Spare


Usually the publisher has say on the title and the cover. They know what sells and they are taking all the risk in case it is a flop.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


>



If this is truly the cover, shame on him.  I think his grandfather would have been furious.  And I think when he realizes what he's done, he will be ashamed.  That's just based on the cover.  Who knows what's inside.
Talk about selling your soul.


----------



## 880

kipp said:


> The book can be ordered now for half price from Waterstones!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640619


At least one of us (not me) will have to take a bullet and buy it if only to discuss here lol


----------



## bag-mania

Holy crap! The hardcover is $36 on Amazon and the Kindle is $17.99. And if you really want to throw your money away, you can listen to the audiobook for $50. Harry must read the damn thing himself!   






						Untitled 3806: Random House Group: 9780593593806: Amazon.com: Books
					

Untitled 3806 [Random House Group] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Untitled 3806



					www.amazon.com


----------



## pukasonqo

kipp said:


> The book can be ordered now for half price from Waterstones!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640619


The cover pic  has no appeal whatsoever maybe is done on purpose to match the content?
Is almost a mug shot


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> Loser


Wastrel


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> DEEP ANALYSIS … compare and contrast
> H goes on about his mental health issues - he has had them, went into therapy, is now an imperfect person but an expert on mental health OK
> MM hmmm only prob she ever had was being suicidal and not being able to get help, but that seems to be the ONLY issue that she has owned up to, she is nearly  perfect OK
> PS She never said how she got over the issue without help, all by herself



It miraculously vanished when the she was able to leave the racist UK and evil BRF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s interesting, because he could have used the spare title to his advantage, and said “oh, when I was younger, it bothered me that I would never be the heir but now I realize that I have such an opportunity to have an impact and make a difference without the weight of the world on my shoulders” but instead, he chose bitterness.



Right? That's my take on things. I'd LOVE to be the spare or the spare's wife (if I had to, that is) while the idea of having to be the Princess of Wales makes me want to curl up on the floor and cry.


----------



## sdkitty

880 said:


> At least one of us (not me) will have to take a bullet and buy it if only to discuss here lol


not me...I wouldn't even borrow it from the library


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I cannot believe it’s actually called Spare!  That is cringe!  Oh horrid birth order!



He would have hated to be one of the Cholmondeley twins. They picked the bigger one to be the heir as Rose has revealed in an interview (but also, not sure how that works, did they tell the doctor to cut out the bigger baby first? Because if one twin is born before the other he's still technically the oldest son?).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

_Spare_ is 416 pages and here is the Amazon description. Looks like it’s going to spend a lot of time focusing on his post-Diana‘s death aftermath.

Product Description​It was one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow—and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling—and how their lives would play out from that point on.

For Harry, this is that story at last.

With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> do we believe this from DM?  If it's true, I would think someone talked him into that title....he didn't enjoy being called Spare



It is, you can pre-order it from amazon.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> not me...I wouldn't even borrow it from the library


You and me both! Especially forget about the audiobook…no way am I sitting through listening to his voice and I’m sure there’s a “special guest” with TW featured.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is, you can pre-order it from amazon.


if it truly does go for half price initially, who will he blame?  the WIFE?  did she talk him into this or was it his idea?


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap! The hardcover is $36 on Amazon and the Kindle is $17.99. And if you really want to throw your money away, you can listen to the audiobook for $50. Harry must read the damn thing himself!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806: Random House Group: 9780593593806: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806 [Random House Group] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Untitled 3806
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


I read somewhere that he is recording the audible right now


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is, you can pre-order it from amazon.


I am waiting for Amazon to have it on UNLIMITED like the Bower book


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I am waiting for Amazon to have it on UNLIMITED like the Bower book


With the amount the publisher gave him I bet it won’t appear there for a long while.


----------



## rose60610

EverSoElusive said:


> You would think the courtiers working for their household were more than obliged to at least procure some great coffee beans and have them grinded to make a cuppa for Duchess Difficult, had she asked nicely, even if she couldn't get something decent in London. It's asinine if she's trying to make people think that the BRF didn't allow her to have coffee (if that's her intention). Next we're gonna hear how she couldn't get vegan food



Exactly! And isn't there such a thing as "Fed Ex" to have beans shipped from  anywhere in the world? Or did the BRF allow only Dior and other designers to ship goods to Claw?


----------



## Laila619

I thought that cover pic and title “Spare” were a JOKE at first. How embarrassing for him that it’s actually real!


----------



## rose60610

WingNut said:


> I do have to say this is one of the first photos I've seen in ages where he resembles a reasonably groomed person.



Maybe the photo is of another man entirely and photoshopped to look like Harry?


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> It was one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow—and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling—and how their lives would play out from that point on.
> 
> For Harry, this is that story at last.
> 
> With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and *hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.*



In other words, pimping his mother's memory for money. AGAIN. As for "hard won wisdom" I wonder if it's in reference to realizing that marrying Claw was a huge mistake.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The Daily Mail and many other media will supply us with many excerpts, so there is no need to buy it.

ETA:


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap! The hardcover is $36 on Amazon and the Kindle is $17.99. And if you really want to throw your money away, you can listen to the audiobook for $50. Harry must read the damn thing himself!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806: Random House Group: 9780593593806: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806 [Random House Group] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Untitled 3806
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


When I pulled it up on Amazon it said $25 for hardcover. Discounted already


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## TC1

Well, the title leads with "poor me" already. I was always a spare..until I met my wife who convinced me I was being abused by my genetic pain and helped me break out- Into a mansion in Cali with my Dad's money


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DL Harper

zinacef said:


> one of us here has to do the ultimate sacrifice of buying (in discount) and reading the book —— it will probably be a waste of time you’ll never get back but pretty please be our hero!


OR...we could each go to our local library and just sit there to read their copy of the book.  It likley won't take very long.  If we check it out for home reading, it will appear the book is a great success and that everyone wants to read it.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t believe he chose such a whiny title. I mean I can, but wow. And the photo oozes bitterness.


He looks a lot like Prince Philip, and older than 40. Bitterness will do that to you.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap! The hardcover is $36 on Amazon and the Kindle is $17.99. And if you really want to throw your money away, you can listen to the audiobook for $50. Harry must read the damn thing himself!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806: Random House Group: 9780593593806: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806 [Random House Group] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Untitled 3806
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


Wow, yes! Holy crap piled high!

The most comparable celebrity book, due out November 5, is MO’s “The Light We Carry.”  An upbeat title and picture of smiling MO with soft colors. Hardcover is $32.50, Kindle is $16.99 and audio with Michelle reading is $35.00.

They will likely appeal to different audiences, but is there  some ego stroking in pricing Whiner’s book higher, as in “I’m a Royal and more important than she is, so I get bragging rights“?  He and TW are petty enough to demand it. The O’s have not worshipped at the feet of the Montecitans as probably expected, which must really pizz H&M off.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> He looks a lot like Prince Philip, and older than 40. Bitterness will do that to you.


It is photoshopped. No bump on the forehead is the clue. Plus, his eyes are not that blue and his nose has been changed. 
Really, he looks like James Hewitt, page 1 of this thread


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## DL Harper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only rumours so far, but I'd like to see that meltdown.



Could Kate as Princess of Wales legally be added to KCIII's "Counsellors of State" list???


----------



## DL Harper

DL Harper said:


> n/m


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is *a landmark publication* full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.



Really?  A "landmark publication"?  LOL.  There are few books that stand the test of time as "landmark publications".  This will be rifled through for the most salacious parts, headlines printed for a few days, and then the bargain bins. 

I imagine his "insight" and "self-examination" will involve blaming others for his poor behavior and poor choices.  Everything will be someone else's fault: his father, his brother, the Queen, Prince Philip, the press.  Then, of course, Meghan to the rescue.  That'll be her favorite part.  She'll read those chapters over and over lol.


----------



## DL Harper

youngster said:


> Really?  A "landmark publication"?  LOL.  There are few books that stand the test of time as "landmark publications".  This will be rifled through for the most salacious parts, headlines printed for a few days, and then the bargain bins.
> 
> I imagine his "insight" and "self-examination" will involve blaming others for his poor behavior and poor choices.  Everything will be someone else's fault: his father, his brother, the Queen, Prince Philip, the press.  Then, of course, Meghan to the rescue.  That'll be her favorite part.  She'll read those chapters over and over lol.


At least if her copy hits the bargain bins, MM will have already highlighted the "important" parts.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I read somewhere that he is recording the audible right now


makes sense as the sugars can probably do better with that than reading a book


----------



## rose60610

Harry had all the perks of royal life with very few responsibilities, and the responsibilities he had were laid out by assistants, all he had to do was show up. And he was still part of all the ceremonies and audiences with those who sought to curry favor with the BRF. Oh, but he felt "trapped". Fine. So he left. Now he whines that he's shut out after his disaster of a wife threw the BRF under the bus? 

He is a lifelong self pity party. What an embarrassment!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Really?  A "landmark publication"?  LOL.  There are few books that stand the test of time as "landmark publications".  This will be rifled through for the most salacious parts, headlines printed for a few days, and then the bargain bins.
> 
> I imagine his "insight" and "self-examination" will involve blaming others for his poor behavior and poor choices.  Everything will be someone else's fault: his father, his brother, the Queen, Prince Philip, the press.  Then, of course, Meghan to the rescue.  That'll be her favorite part.  She'll read those chapters over and over lol.


and we can get the salicious parts online - don't need to read that crap in a book


----------



## Sol Ryan

Thought ya’ll would get a kick out of this….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> When I pulled it up on Amazon it said $25 for hardcover. Discounted already


That was fast. Amazon is still working on the page so check often. It may drop even more!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> At least one of us (not me) will have to take a bullet and buy it if only to discuss here lol


No need imo. DM will graciously share with us all the important info.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Piers is having a blast…


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Really?  A "landmark publication"?  LOL.  There are few books that stand the test of time as "landmark publications".  This will be rifled through for the most salacious parts, headlines printed for a few days, and then the bargain bins.
> 
> I imagine his "insight" and "self-examination" will involve blaming others for his poor behavior and poor choices.  Everything will be someone else's fault: his father, his brother, the Queen, Prince Philip, the press.  Then, of course, Meghan to the rescue.  That'll be her favorite part.  She'll read those chapters over and over lol.


Yep!  As for the insight and self examination, that is all the ghost writer Moerhinger. I fully expected this as the writer is known for being an armchair Freudian/Jungian analyst. Harry must have been a feast for his ears and JRM went to town with it. This will be a self pitying sob story from start to finish. Oh, and thank goodness Meghan came along to SAVE him. Don’t worry KC, you can weather this. So he will call you a mean father.  Not so mean that KC didn’t welcome his choice of wife or give him millions to spend. If Harry tried to take anything out of the book, it was probably references to Camilla. He knew that would really incur the wrath of The King. I don’t know what he will say about Granny. She let him off the hook more than once. Other than being petulant for not getting his in/out and complaining about her advisors, what is he going to say?  This book is only worth a case of popcorn for reading the reviews and scathing criticisms.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Piers is having a blast…



Both pix cut off the bald tops of their heads.


----------



## gracekelly

DL Harper said:


> OR...we could each go to our local library and just sit there to read their copy of the book.  It likley won't take very long.  If we check it out for home reading, it will appear the book is a great success and that everyone wants to read it.


Someone will post a link for a free read. I’ll go for that.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yep!  As for the insight and self examination, that is all the ghost writer Moerhinger. I fully expected this as the writer is known for being an armchair Freudian/Jungian analyst. Harry must have been a feast for his ears and JRM went to town with it. This will be a self pitying sob story from start to finish. Oh, and thank goodness Meghan came along to SAVE him. Don’t worry KC, you can weather this. So he will call you a mean father.  Not so mean that KC didn’t welcome his choice of wife or give him millions to spend. If Harry tried to take anything out of the book, it was probably references to Camilla. He knew that would really incur the wrath of The King. I don’t know what he will say about Granny. She let him off the hook more than once. Other than being petulant for not getting his in/out and complaining about her advisors, what is he going to say?  This book is only worth a case of popcorn for reading the reviews and scathing criticisms.


I think they know the queen was loved and respected and won't say anything negative about grannie.  I doubt many Brits will take his side against the king.  Hopefully anything he says will roll right off.  As far as Americans, we'll see.  Will the mainstream media continue to believe everything he says and support him?  Will it matter if the book doesn't sell?  If he really got $20 million, how far will that go with their lifestyle?


----------



## jennlt

The best use for H's new book


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> The best use for H's new book




TP is almost as expensive as buying the book now


----------



## V0N1B2

I don’t think anyone here will need to sacrifice themselves by buying this fictional tome. I’m pretty sure excerpts will be posted on this very forum. Not this particular thread, but somewhere on TPF, I’m sure.


----------



## Handbag1234

In the current financial crisis people are choosing food or heating. I read  today that some people are not going to work because they can’t afford shampoo and deodorant, this book is so tone deaf. The poor prince who didn’t get to be king. 

He did lose his mother in terrible circumstances with the world watching, but many others have suffered tragic loss without the money and the monarchy to support them. Money isn’t everything, but it helps! 

I will not be buying his book.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Exactly! And isn't there such a thing as "Fed Ex" to have beans shipped from  anywhere in the world? Or did the BRF allow only Dior and other designers to ship goods to Claw?



I don't drink coffee (does that mean life is absent from my life?), but I can confirm that I have ordered AND received vanilla beans from eight countries and several continents not Europe. It works, it really does.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't drink coffee (does that mean life is absent from my life?), but I canfirm that I have ordered AND received vanilla beans from eight countries and several continents not Europe. It works, it really does.


Ooh, which are your favorites?

To keep this on topic, I watched an Irish comedy where anyone remotely 'English' asked for coffee rather than tea.  Make of that what you will.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I read somewhere that he is recording the audible right now



Wow, Harry is _really_ having to work hard for his money these days


----------



## papertiger

From the Scotsman:









						The Duke of Sussex’s memoir to be published next year - release date and full details
					

The Duke of Sussex’s highly anticipated memoir, billed as a book of “raw, unflinching honesty”, has been billed by its publisher as “his story at last”.




					www.scotsman.com
				










“It was one of the most searing images of the 20th century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling – and how their lives would play out from that point on."




“With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.”





 “Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, is a husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental wellness advocate, and environmentalist. He resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs.”



Prince Harry to release ‘accurate and wholly truthful’ book about his life​


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Ooh, which are your favorites?
> 
> To keep this on topic, I watched an Irish comedy where anyone remotely 'English' asked for coffee rather than tea.  Make of that what you will.



I only have one extract ready so far (takes 12 to 18 months), but from the smell and the sugar I made, Mexican beans followed by Hawaiian. Then I have a batch of beans from Uganda brewing in dark rum I think will be the bomb in chocolate desserts. All three are V. planifolia, Mexican beans are Mexican cured (sundried) and the other two Bourbon cured (steamed).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> “With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about *the eternal power of love over grief.*”



Or as others would call it, Stockholm syndrom.


----------



## oldbag

papertiger said:


> From the Scotsman:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s memoir to be published next year - release date and full details
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s highly anticipated memoir, billed as a book of “raw, unflinching honesty”, has been billed by its publisher as “his story at last”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scotsman.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640788
> View attachment 5640789
> 
> 
> “It was one of the most searing images of the 20th century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling – and how their lives would play out from that point on."
> 
> View attachment 5640791
> 
> 
> “With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.”
> 
> View attachment 5640792
> 
> 
> 
> “Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, is a husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental wellness advocate, and environmentalist. He resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs.”
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to release ‘accurate and wholly truthful’ book about his life​
> View attachment 5640794


I am going to do a general paraphrase from Inigo Montoya from Princess Bride when he said" you keep using that word but I don't think it means what you think it means." Actually I am referring to two wods, humanitarian and envrionmentalist. Private planes and big cars, just to name two. OK, if you say so.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Shouldn’t the title of this thread be changed to “Spare and MM”?


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I only have one extract ready so far (takes 12 to 18 months), but from the smell and the sugar I made, Mexican beans followed by Hawaiian. Then I have a batch of beans from Uganda brewing in dark rum I think will be the bomb in chocolate desserts. All three are V. planifolia, Mexican beans are Mexican cured (sundried) and the other two Bourbon cured (steamed).


That is very interesting.  

To get back to topic, I'd read his book but only if it included an unvarnished account of life with the wife---her real behaviors, not her imaginary reality.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Poor privileged Harry


----------



## CarryOn2020

Well said, there is something quite sinister in those eyes and his smirk.  Almost a sneer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> To get back to topic, I'd read his book but only if it included an unvarnished account of life with the wife---her real behaviors, not her imaginary reality.



I'd read it (I feel after Bower I can survive anything), but I'm absolutely not spending a single cent on acquiring it.


----------



## bellecate

zinacef said:


> one of us here has to do the ultimate sacrifice of buying (in discount) and reading the book —— it will probably be a waste of time you’ll never get back but pretty please be our hero!


Ya ...... no.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## JulesB68

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap! The hardcover is $36 on Amazon and the Kindle is $17.99. And if you really want to throw your money away, you can listen to the audiobook for $50. *Harry must read the damn thing himself*!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806: Random House Group: 9780593593806: Amazon.com: Books
> 
> 
> Untitled 3806 [Random House Group] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Untitled 3806
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


Can he?


----------



## JulesB68

I think rather than Spare, the book should have been called Remainder, since that's what it will become!


----------



## Genie27

kipp said:


> The book can be ordered now for half price from Waterstones!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640619


Half Price Harry
Hahahahahahahahahaha!


----------



## gracekelly

Unflinching honestly?  Will we hear about his stellar academic performance?  Who gets the blame for that?  The entire book will be the blame game.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> From the Scotsman:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s memoir to be published next year - release date and full details
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s highly anticipated memoir, billed as a book of “raw, unflinching honesty”, has been billed by its publisher as “his story at last”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scotsman.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To that description, please add:  whiner, liar, ungrateful, and delusional
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640788
> View attachment 5640789
> 
> 
> “It was one of the most searing images of the 20th century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling – and how their lives would play out from that point on."
> 
> View attachment 5640791
> 
> 
> “With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.”
> 
> View attachment 5640792
> 
> 
> 
> “Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, is a husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental wellness advocate, and environmentalist. He resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs.”
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to release ‘accurate and wholly truthful’ book about his life​
> View attachment 5640794


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shouldn’t the title of this thread be changed to “Spare and MM”?



Or Spare and Snare?


----------



## pomeline

Since Meghan is so interested in genealogy and percentages, I wonder why she's not mentioning what percentage of her is German while she's at it? I kid you not, her dad's family tree is online. There's a whole bunch of Merkels and Mengeles she hasn't even mentioned yet (again, not kidding). Some claim to be nobility.


----------



## purseinsanity

V0N1B2 said:


> I don’t think anyone here will need to sacrifice themselves by buying this fictional tome. I’m pretty sure excerpts will be posted on this very forum. Not this particular thread, but somewhere on TPF, I’m sure.


I am that person who will spend thousands of dollars on bags and jewelry, but refuse to spend $1 for an app, choosing to sit through ads for the free version instead.
No way in hell-o I will waste any of my hard earned money on this drivel.


----------



## bellecate

gracekelly said:


> Unflinching honestly?  Will we hear about his stellar academic performance?  Who gets the blame for that?  The entire book will be the blame game.


Unflinching honesty, no it will be H's honesty as told to him by TW.


----------



## purseinsanity

jennlt said:


> The best use for H's new book



I wouldn't dare.  The pages are so caustic that it would probably cause a rash and severe burning.


----------



## purseinsanity

oldbag said:


> I am going to do a general paraphrase from Inigo Montoya from Princess Bride when he said" you keep using that word but I don't think it means what you think it means." Actually I am referring to two wods, humanitarian and envrionmentalist. Private planes and big cars, just to name two. OK, if you say so.


Don't forget Archetypes.  TW thinks it means stereotypes.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Ok pun times-
Soon the sugars will be chanting ‘I’m Sparetucus’ in solidarity
He needs to pull himself together most of us on the thread are spare ribs and look how much we’ve achieved! 
Alternate title- Spare me! My life story
Soon to be  released in Pidgin as ‘De Spare’


pukasonqo said:


> The cover pic  has no appeal whatsoever maybe is done on purpose to match the content?
> Is almost a mug shot


I agree , I know he’s ageing really badly but I didn’t think he looked  like a malicious turnip before now.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Shouldn’t the title of this thread be changed to “Spare and MM”?



How about, "Spare the Rod, Spoil the Man Child Forevermore"


----------



## papertiger

Genie27 said:


> Half Price Harry
> Hahahahahahahahahaha!



Halfpenny Harry


----------



## gelbergirl

OMG that book title


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I only have one extract ready so far (takes 12 to 18 months), but from the smell and the sugar I made, Mexican beans followed by Hawaiian. Then I have a batch of beans from Uganda brewing in dark rum I think will be the bomb in chocolate desserts. All three are V. planifolia, Mexican beans are Mexican cured (sundried) and the other two Bourbon cured (steamed).


I can almost smell them


----------



## charlottawill

oldbag said:


> I am going to do a general paraphrase from Inigo Montoya from Princess Bride when he said" you keep using that word but I don't think it means what you think it means." Actually I am referring to two wods, humanitarian and envrionmentalist. Private planes and big cars, just to name two. OK, if you say so.


One of my faves


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Yep!  As for the insight and self examination, that is all the ghost writer Moerhinger. I fully expected this as the writer is known for being an armchair Freudian/Jungian analyst. Harry must have been a feast for his ears and JRM went to town with it. This will be a self pitying sob story from start to finish. Oh, and thank goodness Meghan came along to SAVE him. Don’t worry KC, you can weather this. So he will call you a mean father.  Not so mean that KC didn’t welcome his choice of wife or give him millions to spend. If Harry tried to take anything out of the book, it was probably references to Camilla. He knew that would really incur the wrath of The King. I don’t know what he will say about Granny. She let him off the hook more than once. Other than being petulant for not getting his in/out and complaining about her advisors, what is he going to say?  This book is only worth a case of popcorn for reading the reviews and scathing criticisms.


Analyzing the claim that the book will start at Diana's death. My guess - the recent editing was to excise the earlier material.
This stratagem conveniently avoids

1. Talking of the messy separation and divorce
2. Talking of mom eg her (ill advised?) contribution to the Morton book and the Panorama interview. What did the kids think of that stuff. 
3. The Camilla/Charles/Diana triangle, Camilla will enter the story about 5 years after the funeral when she married Charles. It will be like Camilla never met Diana. It was in the tabloids what did the kids think?
4. Charles and Camilla's liaison during the marriage. How much did H and W know? When did they learn it ? 

I bet the editing had nothing to do with the Queen's death except that item 4 now pertains to the King and Queen, not to dad and the other woman.

I bet Moehringer was savvy enough to plan ahead for maybe having to hit the delete key on the early material, ie on H's thoughts on dad's dalliance while Diana was alive.


----------



## gelbergirl

I can't wait for the book promo tour.


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> _Spare_ is 416 pages and here is the Amazon description. Looks like it’s going to spend a lot of time focusing on his post-Diana‘s death aftermath.
> 
> Product Description​It was one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow—and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling—and how their lives would play out from that point on.
> 
> For Harry, this is that story at last.
> 
> With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.


Still with the Diana obsession.  Like a broken record.  What can he tell us that he hasn't already?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Still with the Diana obsession.  Like a broken record.  What can he tell us that he hasn't already?


----------



## pomeline

Jayne1 said:


> Still with the Diana obsession.  Like a broken record.  What can he tell us that he hasn't already?



I fear the longer he keeps on going about it, the more disturbing and outlandish it will get. Anything from Mummy's ghost accompanying him at all times to asking Meghan to dress like Mummy, with wig and all. Seriously, it's not even therapeutic for him to keep regurgitating this on innocent people.


----------



## bag-mania

Speaking of the Diana obsession, _The Crown_ was in Paris today filming the crash scene. 









						'The Crown' Filming Princess Diana Crash Scene Near Actual Paris Location
					

Netflix's "The Crown" is currently filming its latest season, and it looks like it'll feature Princess Diana's tragic car crash.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> I am that person who will spend thousands of dollars on bags and jewelry, but refuse to spend $1 for an app, choosing to sit through ads for the free version instead.
> No way in hell-o I will waste any of my hard earned money on this drivel.


Haha....I thought I was the only one who won't pay for apps


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> asking Meghan to dress like Mummy, with wig and all.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of the Diana obsession, _The Crown_ was in Paris today filming the crash scene.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'The Crown' Filming Princess Diana Crash Scene Near Actual Paris Location
> 
> 
> Netflix's "The Crown" is currently filming its latest season, and it looks like it'll feature Princess Diana's tragic car crash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I thought they just said they weren't going to show it??


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of the Diana obsession, _The Crown_ was in Paris today filming the crash scene.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'The Crown' Filming Princess Diana Crash Scene Near Actual Paris Location
> 
> 
> Netflix's "The Crown" is currently filming its latest season, and it looks like it'll feature Princess Diana's tragic car crash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


For all his perceived slights and outrages, and his willingness to sue at the drop of a hat......_crickets_ when it comes to The Crown and the recent depiction of Diana.  Even Dame Judi Dench has spoken out about it, but Hazz has his $100 million payoff to keep his mouth shut.  Netfl*x calls the shots and he obeys.  He is so tone deaf and hypocritical it's embarrassing.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I thought they just said they weren't going to show it??


Intentions may vary.


----------



## pomeline

charlottawill said:


>



Are we sure that's not what she wore the night they first met...?  I mean, it has been revealed she wore Diana's perfume on their first date.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> Since Meghan is so interested in genealogy and percentages, I wonder why she's not mentioning what percentage of her is German while she's at it? I kid you not, her dad's family tree is online. There's a whole bunch of Merkels and Mengeles she hasn't even mentioned yet (again, not kidding). Some claim to be nobility.



I don't blame her for not wanting to be affiliated with anyone named Mengele


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Ok pun times-
> Soon the sugars will be chanting ‘I’m Sparetucus’ in solidarity.



OMG


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I thought they just said they weren't going to show it??


Who said that? Because it sure wasn’t the production company.


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't blame her for not wanting to be affiliated with anyone named Mengele



Neither do I!  I must admit I did giggle a bit when I noticed the name in the tree. How awful of me I know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Speaking of the Diana obsession, _The Crown_ was in Paris today filming the crash scene.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'The Crown' Filming Princess Diana Crash Scene Near Actual Paris Location
> 
> 
> Netflix's "The Crown" is currently filming its latest season, and it looks like it'll feature Princess Diana's tragic car crash.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



Ugh. Sure, freedom of the arts and all...but do we really need to go there when her children have been VERY outspoken how much their mother's death affected them? It is kind of gross.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Haha....I thought I was the only one who won't pay for apps


 
Me 3rd.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> From the Scotsman:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s memoir to be published next year - release date and full details
> 
> 
> The Duke of Sussex’s highly anticipated memoir, billed as a book of “raw, unflinching honesty”, has been billed by its publisher as “his story at last”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scotsman.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640788
> View attachment 5640789
> 
> 
> “It was one of the most searing images of the 20th century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling – and how their lives would play out from that point on."
> 
> View attachment 5640791
> 
> 
> “With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.”
> 
> View attachment 5640792
> 
> 
> 
> “Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex, is a husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental wellness advocate, and environmentalist. He resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs.”
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry to release ‘accurate and wholly truthful’ book about his life​
> View attachment 5640794


Dang, they Markled the chickens, no mention of them, only the dogs.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Dang, they Markled the chickens, no mention of them, only the dogs.


thought the chickens were rentals


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> thought the chickens were rentals


They turned out to be the Spares and flew the coop.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Who said that? Because it sure wasn’t the production company.


I thought I heard yesterday on Entertainment Tonight or similar, in response to criticism of the new season that Netflix said they weren't going to show the crash scene. If they do it's ghoulish.


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd read it (I feel after Bower I can survive anything), but I'm absolutely not spending a single cent on acquiring it.


I think we all should do as in Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express - each member should chip in and buy this book


----------



## Redbirdhermes

I was recently watching the Major League Baseball playoffs and color commentator John Smoltz, himself a retired baseball pitcher who was an eight-time All Star, told a story about another pitcher he was once on a team with.  He saw that the guy had the words "throw in" written inside his baseball cap, and asked him what that meant?  He was thinking it was a reminder to throw the ball to someone at some time perhaps.  The other pitcher says bitterly, "no, I was a throw in on a trade."  In baseball trades you trade the stars (as John Smoltz would have been), then sometimes you throw in player who isn't expected to contribute much, if at all.  The next play there was a home run and the announcer joked, "and the throw in performs like a star."  At least in baseball, the throw in has an opportunity to rise above his label.

"Spare" is a brilliant title for the book.  I'm sure it was chosen by the publisher.  I know there is great cynicism, but to think of carrying a label your whole life, since birth, that you are an add on, a throw in, a person who isn't really needed, has to be a huge burden to rise above.  Success would depend on a person's other gifts, such things as great intelligence, industry or empathy.  "Spare", like the baseball player "throw in", is a label that implies the individual has no value.  The contrast with being a member of one of the richest families in the world is stark, as members point out here constantly.  I truly wish Harry all the best in his future, but as many have said, the life role he is currently living will probably need to change in order to bring about the satisfaction that he is looking for.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I thought I heard yesterday on Entertainment Tonight or similar, in response to criticism of the new season that Netflix said they weren't going to show the crash scene. If they do it's ghoulish.


TMZ just updated to say Netflix is saying it will not show the crash itself. That leaves open everything before and after the crash.


----------



## KEG66

gelbergirl said:


> OMG that book title


Maybe William could write a memoir titled “Heir” ?


----------



## luckylove

rose60610 said:


> Harry wishes he "had two" therapists?  Well isn't THAT a nice kick in the face to his current therapist!


Ha! So true!  I didn't hear his speech, but someone quoted him as saying he has "a coach," which typically isn't the same thing as a licensed psychologist. In the US, Anyone can call themselves a life coach with no real professional training or licensure. Perhaps just One really good licensed psychologist might help him more than just a "coach." I sure do hope he gets the help and support he needs.


----------



## sdkitty

some news/entertainment program this morning said proceeds from the book will go to charity
What percentage?  What charity?  the one that pays their mortgage?

oh, here is something:








						Prince Harry memoir to be called Spare, publishers reveal
					

Publishers announce January publication date and say the Duke of Sussex will reveal his "hard-won wisdom".



					www.bbc.com


----------



## WingNut

Toby93 said:


> Haha....I thought I was the only one who won't pay for apps



Count me in as well!!


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> some news/entertainment program this morning said proceeds from the book will go to charity
> What percentage?  What charity?  the one that pays their mortgage?
> 
> oh, here is something:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry memoir to be called Spare, publishers reveal
> 
> 
> Publishers announce January publication date and say the Duke of Sussex will reveal his "hard-won wisdom".
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


so he's getting a $20 mil advance and giving $2 million to charity?  that's the first substantial number we've seen from them and it's 10 percent of his earnings? (assuming his total earnings are $20 million)


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> I thought I heard yesterday on Entertainment Tonight or similar, in response to criticism of the new season that Netflix said they weren't going to show the crash scene. If they do it's ghoulish.


Why else would they be there?  They can film the inside of any hotel and call it the Ritz.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> some news/entertainment program this morning said proceeds from the book will go to charity
> What percentage?  What charity?  the one that pays their mortgage?
> 
> oh, here is something:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry memoir to be called Spare, publishers reveal
> 
> 
> Publishers announce January publication date and say the Duke of Sussex will reveal his "hard-won wisdom".
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com


I thought the same thing when I saw that.  The statement was very vague, it didn't mention how much would be donated to charity, or what charity.  If they donate 1%, they can still say money was donated to charity.  This book is not about charity, it is about making as much money as possible while trashing his family.  He has learned well from Meegain.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Redbirdhermes said:


> "Spare", like the baseball player "throw in", is a label that implies the individual has no value.



I wouldn't go so far as to say no value, perhaps less value. One of the of the definitions is "an item kept in case another item of the same type is lost, broken, or worn out." I believe some of the fault may lie in the way the family treated him. They should have shown some sensitivity to the feelings of a child in this position, but we don't know if they did or not. It will be his word against theirs.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I thought the same thing when I saw that.  The statement was very vague, it didn't mention how much would be donated to charity, or what charity.  If they donate 1%, they can still say money was donated to charity.  This book is not about charity, it is about making as much money as possible while trashing his family.  He has learned well from Meegain.


from the BBC story posted above:
Some of the proceeds from the book go to charity. The publisher confirmed this was in the form of two donations of $1.5m (£1.3m) and £300,000 respectively to the charities Sentebale and WellChild.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> View attachment 5640903


I know they probably sat around trying to think of a title that would be like the Lion King **BAM** moment, but "Spare" falls flat on its face.  Just like everything else they do.


----------



## zinacef

Somebody in The Sugar End placed her pre-order today in “Hardcover” , I did some innocent eavesdropping, nothing else.


----------



## purseinsanity

pomeline said:


> Are we sure that's not what she wore the night they first met...?  I mean, it has been revealed she wore Diana's perfume on their first date.


Would that really be a turn on to most people??  I would think it would have the opposite effect.  
If I smelled my Dad's cologne from child hood on someone, it would no doubt bring back lots of memories, but I wouldn't be thinking, "OMG!  Get in my pants now!"


----------



## purseinsanity

KEG66 said:


> Maybe William could write a memoir titled “Heir” ?


Haz's sequel could be "No Heir/Hair"


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> from the BBC story posted above:
> Some of the proceeds from the book go to charity. The publisher confirmed this was in the form of two donations of $1.5m (£1.3m) and £300,000 respectively to the charities Sentebale and WellChild.


Ok, better than nothing I guess.


----------



## Freak4Coach

KEG66 said:


> Maybe William could write a memoir titled “Heir” ?


I think waiting until he can title it “KING” would pack more punch. Then George can write “Heir”


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Ok, better than nothing I guess.


Not even 10% 

===
Just a reminder - *Hazz has not been the spare since 2013, when George was born. * He really needs to get in the right game.
The ‘spare’ comments most likely happened when he was kid with an older brother [or mother] who teased him.  Brutal, I think not.  Kids being kids is more like it.  I thought _Ginger_ was the taunt that really bothered him.  Perhaps Andrew and Edward will weigh in on how they felt being called spare.


----------



## CobaltBlu

purseinsanity said:


> Me too!  I'm dying to do a tour of Scotland and Ireland.  I've been to England several times, but none of the rest of the UK.


ROAD TRIP!!


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've been to Ireland and Wales, but I want to go to Edinburgh and London badly.


Seriously, ROAD TRIP.  I am looking at 2024.


bag-mania said:


> _Spare_ is 416 pages and here is the Amazon description. Looks like it’s going to spend a lot of time focusing on his post-Diana‘s death aftermath.
> 
> Product Description​It was *one of the most searing images of the twentieth century*: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow—and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling—and how their lives would play out from that point on.
> 
> For Harry, this is that story at last.
> 
> With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.


Um, not not really....


















__





						Loading…
					





					www.boredpanda.com
				





The* really searing* ones I cannot share here.

These two really need to join the Peace Corps or something.










marietouchet said:


> I am waiting for Amazon to have it on UNLIMITED like the Bower book


Please post when that glorious day dawns, amiga!



purseinsanity said:


> I am that person who will spend thousands of dollars on bags and jewelry, but refuse to spend $1 for an app, choosing to sit through ads for the free version instead.
> No way in hell-o I will waste any of my hard earned money on this drivel.


Wait....are you....me?????


----------



## CarryOn2020

Quel crétin  
a comment: C’est un clown.


----------



## Lounorada

Wow... 
I'm just after being away on vacation for a week in Spain for a friend's wedding (the first time flying anywhere since before the pandemic started) I spent little time on my phone so was out of loop to what you were all talking about on here and then getting home to find nearly 70 pages of catchup. After a week of catching up on posts, I am now up to date and I just have to say I'm absolutely exhausted  I need another vacation 

For two idiots that claim they left the RF to live pRiVaTe LiVeS and don't want media attention, they sure know how to cram an awful lot of international attention seeking into one whole week. It's _almost _like they have proven yet again to be untruthful about their reasons for quitting their RF duties and fleeing to Monteshitshow *insert high levels of sarcasm*... 


They are both utterly pathetic.


I must reply tomorrow to posts I have quoted, but for now- I need a glass of wine... byyyye!


----------



## Chanbal

Aminamina said:


> I think we all should do as in Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express - each member should chip in and buy this book


We can play Miss Marple and find a free copy to share here. I've no intentions of spending one cent on TW's fiction book.


----------



## CobaltBlu

This makes a good point. He was never actually "The Spare." 
He was really The Heir's spare.... 














						Harry De Spare
					

The Overseas Son was only ever the Heir's spare




					harrymarkle.substack.com
				




LOL @ "the brat".
(a quote within the article)



> _*Ooh, I'm so cross with the ginger brat and with his father. The brat is absolutely vile as is the title of his book. He may have worn many hats but the most prevalent one is pointy with a big D on it! The man he's become, a man who couldn't bear not being the first born (I can only say thank goodness for that). A man so consumed by envy for everything his brother has as in a beautiful and supportive wife and three grounded and happy children. *_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

csshopper said:


> They turned out to be the Spares and flew the coop.



Money is tight these days at Casa de Sussex and they're not vegan on weekends... just saying...


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles are releasing the book virtually on Kate's b-day (01/09)…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Analyzing the claim that the book will start at Diana's death. My guess - the recent editing was to excise the earlier material.
> This stratagem conveniently avoids
> 
> 1. Talking of the messy separation and divorce
> 2. Talking of mom eg her (ill advised?) contribution to the Morton book and the Panorama interview. What did the kids think of that stuff.
> 3. The Camilla/Charles/Diana triangle, Camilla will enter the story about 5 years after the funeral when she married Charles. It will be like Camilla never met Diana. It was in the tabloids what did the kids think?
> 4. Charles and Camilla's liaison during the marriage. How much did H and W know? When did they learn it ?
> 
> I bet the editing had nothing to do with the Queen's death except that item 4 now pertains to the King and Queen, not to dad and the other woman.
> 
> I bet Moehringer was savvy enough to plan ahead for maybe having to hit the delete key on the early material, ie on H's thoughts on dad's dalliance while Diana was alive.


So a watered-down carefully edited and truncated but still searingly honest truth  
He should just honestly admit that this is the version that went through a ghostwriter filter, padded with Zedzee's truth, and eyeballed by Penguin Random House editors & lawyers for maximum scandal/profit and minimum legal issues.


----------



## bag-mania

Whoa, I made the mistake of looking at a Yahoo article. Meghan’s 43% Nigerian announcement made a big impact on some Twitter users.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> so he's getting a $20 mil advance and giving $2 million to charity?  that's the first substantial number we've seen from them and it's 10 percent of his earnings? (assuming his total earnings are $20 million)


Don’t forget H has to pay the ghostwriter , $1M and up


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Still with the Diana obsession.  Like a broken record.  What can he tell us that he hasn't already?


He or she will make more sensational stories up.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't blame her for not wanting to be affiliated with anyone named Mengele


Can't help but think she is a true descendant of that particular Mengele.


CarryOn2020 said:


> thought the chickens were rentals


Roasted...


charlottawill said:


> I thought I heard yesterday on Entertainment Tonight or similar, in response to criticism of the new season that Netflix said they weren't going to show the crash scene. If they do it's ghoulish.


They can always film it, then check market sentiment before making a final decision.


Redbirdhermes said:


> I was recently watching the Major League Baseball playoffs and color commentator John Smoltz, himself a retired baseball pitcher who was an eight-time All Star, told a story about another pitcher he was once on a team with.  He saw that the guy had the words "throw in" written inside his baseball cap, and asked him what that meant?  He was thinking it was a reminder to throw the ball to someone at some time perhaps.  The other pitcher says bitterly, "no, I was a throw in on a trade."  In baseball trades you trade the stars (as John Smoltz would have been), then sometimes you throw in player who isn't expected to contribute much, if at all.  The next play there was a home run and the announcer joked, "and the throw in performs like a star."  At least in baseball, the throw in has an opportunity to rise above his label.
> 
> "Spare" is a brilliant title for the book.  I'm sure it was chosen by the publisher.  I know there is great cynicism, but to think of carrying a label your whole life, since birth, that you are an add on, a throw in, a person who isn't really needed, has to be a huge burden to rise above.  Success would depend on a person's other gifts, such things as great intelligence, industry or empathy.  "Spare", like the baseball player "throw in", is a label that implies the individual has no value.  The contrast with being a member of one of the richest families in the world is stark, as members point out here constantly.  I truly wish Harry all the best in his future, but as many have said, the life role he is currently living will probably need to change in order to bring about the satisfaction that he is looking for.


If Handbag was going to rise above the stigma of being a spare, he would have done so by now. No chance of it happening with Zedzee stoking the flames of resentment.


luckylove said:


> Ha! So true!  I didn't hear his speech, but someone quoted him as saying he has "a coach," which typically isn't the same thing as a licensed psychologist. In the US, Anyone can call themselves a life coach with no real professional training or licensure. Perhaps just One really good licensed psychologist might help him more than just a "coach." I sure do hope he gets the help and support he needs.


One of my office narcs was angling to migrate to Canada where he would set up business as a "consultant". I bit my tongue to avoid saying anything, but his friends in the office innocently asked in which field was he qualified to give consultancy services. He looked blankly at them and loftily informed them that in Canada, a consultant only needed a licence, expertise was not required. He can be a "coach"...


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> Haha....I thought I was the only one who won't pay for apps


My DH will pay for them for himself which , but me, no way will I spend a penny on them.


----------



## mikimoto007

I’m so excited for this book….I’ll take one for the team and read it !


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> I can't wait for the book promo tour.


OMG YES!  Does anyone think that she will let him go one on one with the chat show host or will she insert herself into that too?  I bet she does.  He isn't smart enough to be a good guest.  I would love to see him on Graham Norton lolololol!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I am that person who will spend thousands of dollars on bags and jewelry, but refuse to spend $1 for an app, choosing to sit through ads for the free version instead.
> No way in hell-o I will waste any of my hard earned money on this drivel.


We know where to spend the money wisely, do we not?  Your Hermes bags are forever and Harry's book will line the bird cage.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> For all his perceived slights and outrages, and his willingness to sue at the drop of a hat......_crickets_ when it comes to The Crown and the recent depiction of Diana.  Even Dame Judi Dench has spoken out about it, but Hazz has his $100 million payoff to keep his mouth shut.  Netfl*x calls the shots and he obeys.  He is so tone deaf and hypocritical it's embarrassing.


Several other very well known British actresses have joined her complaint. Harry doesn't care,  He sold his soul.


----------



## Miss Liz

CobaltBlu said:


> ROAD TRIP!!
> 
> Seriously, ROAD TRIP.  I am looking at 2024.
> 
> Um, not not really....
> 
> View attachment 5640965
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640967
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640978
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640981
> 
> View attachment 5640982
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.boredpanda.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The* really searing* ones I cannot share here.
> 
> These two really need to join the Peace Corps or something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please post when that glorious day dawns, amiga!
> 
> 
> Wait....are you....me?????


Yes! Also this one….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> OMG YES!  Does anyone think that she will let him go one on one with the chat show host or will she insert herself into that too?  I bet she does.  He isn't smart enough to be a good guest.  I would love to see him on Graham Norton lolololol!


Whether she accompanies him on the book tour or not should be a pretty good indicator of the state of the marriage.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DL Harper

charlottawill said:


> Whether she accompanies him on the book tour or not should be a pretty good indicator of the state of the marriage.


Only if they arrive separately.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Hyacinth

rose60610 said:


> Maybe the photo is of another man entirely and photoshopped to look like Harry?



It's the first time I've noticed what piggy little eyes he has.

Whoever tweaked the photo must not like him very much.


----------



## gracekelly

_The publisher Penguin Random House writes: 'Spare takes readers immediately back to one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother's coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror._

I recall the funeral quite well.  The hyperbole in this statement is a bit much for me.  It was not one of the most searing images of the 20th century.  It was just sad.  A searing image was seeing little John John Kennedy salute his father's coffin.  He and his sister were younger than Harry, and his Caroline was certainly old enough to remember her father's funeral well.  Did we ever hear endless whinging from either of them?   The world watched in sorrow and horror?  Sorrow yes, horror no.  He was old enough to do this and he had all the male members of his family around him for support.  I can see Harry placing the biggest blame on his grandfather Philip who told him that if he did not do it, he would regret it.  The problem was that Philip credited Harry with the maturity that he Philip had at the same age when he was being tossed about from relative to relative because his father took off and his mother was mentally unwell. 

This entire book is an example of arrested development.  I hope the trained  professionals critique it and not the people who think they are experts because they read Psychology Today.


----------



## Mumotons

gracekelly said:


> _The publisher Penguin Random House writes: 'Spare takes readers immediately back to one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother's coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror._
> 
> I recall the funeral quite well.  The hyperbole in this statement is a bit much for me.  It was not one of the most searing images of the 20th century.  It was just sad.  A searing image was seeing little John John Kennedy salute his father's coffin.  He and his sister were younger than Harry, and his Caroline was certainly old enough to remember her father's funeral well.  Did we ever hear endless whinging from either of them?   The world watched in sorrow and horror?  Sorrow yes, horror no.  He was old enough to do this and he had all the male members of his family around him for support.  I can see Harry placing the biggest blame on his grandfather Philip who told him that if he did not do it, he would regret it.  The problem was that Philip credited Harry with the maturity that he Philip had at the same age when he was being tossed about from relative to relative because his father took off and his mother was mentally unwell.
> 
> This entire book is an example of arrested development.  I hope the trained  professionals critique it and not the people who think they are experts because they read Psychology Today.


The 20th Century also included two world wars, the Spanish Flu , the sinking of the Titanic, famine in Africa….. I could go on but poor Hawwwy had the hardest time of anybody in the 20th Century


----------



## bag-mania

mikimoto007 said:


> I’m so excited for this book….I’ll take one for the team and read it !


You have a strong stomach to volunteer to take that on. Thank you!

Just don’t pay full price. It is already 30% off and it may come down more. No sense giving Harry more than necessary.


----------



## bag-mania

Barnes & Noble is matching Amazon‘s price. 









						Spare|Hardcover
					

It was one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother's coffin as the world watched in sorrow—and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and...




					www.barnesandnoble.com


----------



## gracekelly

Mumotons said:


> The 20th Century also included two world wars, the Spanish Flu , the sinking of the Titanic, famine in Africa….. I could go on but poor Hawwwy had the hardest time of anybody in the 20th Century


Nazi  concentration camps and the images of the starved and dead prisoners.  That to me was true sadness and horror.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> from the BBC story posted above:
> Some of the proceeds from the book go to charity. The publisher confirmed this was in the form of two donations of $1.5m (£1.3m) and £300,000 respectively to the charities Sentebale and WellChild.


Did they ever give the cheque to the restaurant they visited for dinner? I remember it was promised but I didn't see a follow-up story.

And I am glad Handbag made good on his charity promise, rather than those vague Archewell donations which are blared loudly but never specific.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Whoa, I made the mistake of looking at a Yahoo article. Meghan’s 43% Nigerian announcement made a big impact on some Twitter users.
> 
> View attachment 5641046
> 
> View attachment 5641048
> View attachment 5641050
> View attachment 5641049


One of the many responses out there:


----------



## Chanbal

Removing him from the line of succession will fix all his 'spare' problems imo.


----------



## charlottawill

It's like two different people....


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Whoa, I made the mistake of looking at a Yahoo article. Meghan’s 43% Nigerian announcement made a big impact on some Twitter users.
> 
> View attachment 5641046
> 
> View attachment 5641048
> View attachment 5641050
> View attachment 5641049


Just imagine if she had claimed to be 51% Nigerian ... some of these bozos would have really crowned her. I wonder what she will claim for the other percentages of her ancestry. Will have to do the maths in case she exceeds 100% and becomes ... errrr, more than human.

Is the senator credible? I looked Shehu Sani up but his wiki write-up is rather bland and I can't tell if he is an easily duped guy.

Maybe one of the faux Nigerian princes will start a claim that they were betrothed at birth but Doria reneged on the deal.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Whoa, I made the mistake of looking at a Yahoo article. Meghan’s 43% Nigerian announcement made a big impact on some Twitter users.
> 
> View attachment 5641046
> 
> View attachment 5641048
> View attachment 5641050
> View attachment 5641049


I have a Brooklyn Bridge to sell to these fools.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> _The publisher Penguin Random House writes: 'Spare takes readers immediately back to one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother's coffin as the world watched in sorrow – and horror._
> 
> I recall the funeral quite well.  The hyperbole in this statement is a bit much for me.  It was not one of the most searing images of the 20th century.  It was just sad. * A searing image was seeing little John John Kennedy salute his father's coffin.  *He and his sister were younger than Harry, and his Caroline was certainly old enough to remember her father's funeral well.  Did we ever hear endless whinging from either of them?   The world watched in sorrow and horror?  Sorrow yes, horror no.  He was old enough to do this and he had all the male members of his family around him for support.  I can see Harry placing the biggest blame on his grandfather Philip who told him that if he did not do it, he would regret it.  The problem was that Philip credited Harry with the maturity that he Philip had at the same age when he was being tossed about from relative to relative because his father took off and his mother was mentally unwell.
> 
> This entire book is an example of arrested development.  I hope the trained  professionals critique it and not the people who think they are experts because they read Psychology Today.


ITA.  The Space Shuttle Challenger blowing up was another one for me.  I remember what I was doing when I heard Diana died, and when JFK Jr died.  I don't think of Poor Wittle Warry walking behind a coffin as one of the most searing images.  
God, they really do think highly of themselves.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


>



His eyes are very close set and look even beadier in a picture thisclose to his face.  They can paint them as blue as they want, but they still look dead and soulless to me.  Shark like, even.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> One of the many responses out there:



It's funny how they believe she's part Nigerian because she said so, no proof required.

Ok then, I'm Cindy Crawford.  For real.  Now bow down to me, you knaves.


----------



## CobaltBlu

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  The Space Shuttle Challenger blowing up was another one for me.  I remember what I was doing when I heard Diana died, and when JFK Jr died.  I don't think of Poor Wittle Warry walking behind a coffin as one of the most searing images.
> God, they really do think highly of themselves.


Right… many, many of the images are too gruesome or too heartbreaking for PF but the upshot is, sad Harry was not one of the most searing images of the last century and he needs to get over himself


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> It's funny how they believe she's part Nigerian because she said so, no proof required.
> 
> Ok then, I'm Cindy Crawford.  For real.  Now bow down to me, you knaves.


I'm waiting for her to say that she is descended from Nigerian royalty, who migrated to Malta...


----------



## gracekelly

I will qualify this thought by saying I don't have children but....is his behavior the result of being told how wonderful and special he was all his life? Getting a pass even when he didn't deserve it?   I understand that a parent wants to instill confidence in a child so the child can meet the challenges of life, but what is going on with this man-child?  When does encouragement morph into overentitlement?


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I'm waiting for her to say that she is descended from Nigerian royalty, who migrated to Malta...


At this point, I would say she could be related to the Borgias.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> OMG YES!  Does anyone think that she will let him go one on one with the chat show host or will she insert herself into that too?  I bet she does.  He isn't smart enough to be a good guest.  I would love to see him on Graham Norton lolololol!


Oh she will be there, no doubt.  New face, new clothes, away from the kids, she will be there.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> At this point, I would say she could be related to the Borgias.


Considering how talented in many ways the Borgias were, she would not have lasted long.
She was a fool to "escape" the BRF. She could have hidden her lack of talent and industry behind a pleasant facade and enjoyed a life of luxury. I truly believe her greed and delusion overcame any piddling amount of common sense or shrewdness she possesses.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This will not stop until he gives up {renounces it all}.


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Me too!  I'm dying to do a tour of Scotland and Ireland.  I've been to England several times, but none of the rest of the UK.


Never been either but it’s on my bucket list!  Maybe we can do a H&M thread gathering in the future!!


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Wouldn't it be fun to all do a "TPF Haz and TW Thread Members Tour of the UK"?
> See all the spots in London that triggered Haz, see all the castles the Markles will never live in, see all the Queen's horses and all the Queen's men (Major Johnny)...



Hahahaha I see you have already suggested. I’m in! Thanks!!


----------



## Mumotons

Prince Harry's memoir 'is critical of everyone and everything'
					

Billed as a work of 'raw, unflinching honesty', the controversial book will be eye-catchingly called Spare - a 'loaded' reference to his position as the younger brother of the heir to the throne.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



I’m glad the palace lawyers are on standby


----------



## Hermes Zen

needlv said:


> To overshadow Catherine.  Pathetic



Well maybe KC will make his big announcement on the new important role for Princess of Wales, Catherine! That would blow H&M out of the water!!  So there! Take that!!


----------



## xincinsin

Mumotons said:


> Prince Harry's memoir 'is critical of everyone and everything'
> 
> 
> Billed as a work of 'raw, unflinching honesty', the controversial book will be eye-catchingly called Spare - a 'loaded' reference to his position as the younger brother of the heir to the throne.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m glad the palace lawyers are on standby


Does that include himself and his wife?


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> I was recently watching the Major League Baseball playoffs and color commentator John Smoltz, himself a retired baseball pitcher who was an eight-time All Star, told a story about another pitcher he was once on a team with.  He saw that the guy had the words "throw in" written inside his baseball cap, and asked him what that meant?  He was thinking it was a reminder to throw the ball to someone at some time perhaps.  The other pitcher says bitterly, "no, I was a throw in on a trade."  In baseball trades you trade the stars (as John Smoltz would have been), then sometimes you throw in player who isn't expected to contribute much, if at all.  The next play there was a home run and the announcer joked, "and the throw in performs like a star."  At least in baseball, the throw in has an opportunity to rise above his label.
> 
> "Spare" is a brilliant title for the book.  I'm sure it was chosen by the publisher.  I know there is great cynicism, but to think of carrying a label your whole life, since birth, that you are an add on, a throw in, a person who isn't really needed, has to be a huge burden to rise above.  Success would depend on a person's other gifts, such things as great intelligence, industry or empathy.  "Spare", like the baseball player "throw in", is a label that implies the individual has no value.  The contrast with being a member of one of the richest families in the world is stark, as members point out here constantly.  I truly wish Harry all the best in his future, but as many have said, the life role he is currently living will probably need to change in order to bring about the satisfaction that he is looking for.



He carried the title even before the birth. Diana knew she had to produce an 'heir and a spare', that's where the word comes from. That's the saying for all the toffs and the marriage (meat) market that was the 'coming out'. Never mind the spare, if an heir, you _had_ to marry from a limited pool of aristos or heiresses or run the risk of being socially outcast - never mind your title.

I know it was the publishers that came up with the title, and in his case it fits, but it's really sad and pathetic that it does. He really has _made_ himself the spare.

A spare can _easily_ not become a spare these days, opt out, get a job, opt in, help the heir. He could have stayed in the army, he could have run a polo stables. What makes him and everyone else think that he just missed out on the 'lottery win'? He could have been the lucky one and done whatever he wanted to do.

Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, supported/helped all his life, none of the duties (if he didn't want one).

Are we supposed to feel sorry he has to be jealous of his brother and nephew when he has never wanted for anything save a (real) job?

If he'd had 4 more siblings, he'd still be the one to carry the tag like Andrew and not Anne. We should feel more sorry for Anne since she was overlooked entirely like she didn't exist, wasn't even counted as a spare. That's royalty for you. Go with it or live in a republic.


Both he and MM have ever-expanding egos. Their disconnect with hierarchy/protocol and their own limited capabilities is off the scale. They both overestimate themselves, if not titled, they'd be on the factory floor, not even management material. Even their 'politics' is convenient and the only charity work they do is virtue signalling.

Can you imagine having so little to write on your resume you actually have to write 'humanitarian' otherwise people wouldn't know? Can you imagine having to announce on CV or intro you have dogs? He has done nothing. The only thing this book is, is a glimpse through a tiny window on the Palace, he is literally selling his family through his tiny, whiny 'my truth' window.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

luckylove said:


> I sure do hope he gets the help and support he needs.



The kind of "help and support" that Harry "needs" come in the form of a "team of very successful divorce lawyers".


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> The kind of "help and support" that Harry "needs" come in the form of a "team of very successful divorce lawyers".


That would be a battle to behold.

But he has an appetite for public whining now. I doubt he will return to Happy-go-lucky Harry even if the Harkles split. And who in the BRF would dare to trust him with anything? I say leave them to wallow together. They deserve each other.


----------



## rose60610

"The Spare" is the most degrading title. 

So from now on are all second borns of a two child family going to feel denigrated if the man who was born into the BRF with all the riches and perks considers himself as some kind of "loser" as if the only reason for being is to be filler in the unlikely event his older sibling dies? 

The only reason Harry is now considered a loser is the fact that he not only married a woman who took pleasure in destroying his family ties and storing his gonads in a vice, but that he willingly went along with it. 

Is describing himself as "The Spare" another way of making beaucoup bucks by sending second born kids to BetterUp's life coaches in an attempt to not feel so inadequate now that Harry is "proof" that second born kids should feel like they are "throw away" children? Golly, thanks, Claw and Haz. You're basically telling all second borns that they are inferior. 

Shouldn't Harry's book be considered as "Hate Speech"?


----------



## xincinsin

Is this true? Does Zedzee host her podcrash using a phone sex voice? Or is this a hater throwing dirt at her?
I've looked at transcripts of the podcrashes, but I have not heard any of them.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> The Daily Mail and many other media will supply us with many excerpts, so there is no need to buy it.
> 
> ETA:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640703






Looks like a Bonnie and Clyde mugshot


----------



## mikimoto007

bag-mania said:


> You have a strong stomach to volunteer to take that on. Thank you!
> 
> Just don’t pay full price. It is already 30% off and it may come down more. No sense giving Harry more than necessary.


Don't worry I pre-ordered for 50% off


----------



## duna

rose60610 said:


> Harry had all the perks of royal life with very few responsibilities, and the responsibilities he had were laid out by assistants, all he had to do was show up. And he was still part of all the ceremonies and audiences with those who sought to curry favor with the BRF. Oh, but he felt "trapped". Fine. So he left. Now he whines that he's shut out after his disaster of a wife threw the BRF under the bus?
> 
> He is a lifelong self pity party. What an embarrassment!


This. I would much rather be the spare than the heir!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> Seriously, ROAD TRIP.  I am looking at 2024.



Not sure I can do a whole tour, but maybe we can do a mini meet-up at one of your road strip stations. UK is so accessible from Germany a two-day trip is totally doable.


----------



## Pessie

duna said:


> This. I would much rather be the spare than the heir!


Me too.  Harry ditched a lifetime of unbelievable privilege and opportunity for a life grubbing in the gutter for money.  Trading in his mother’s death worse than any cheap hack.  He now has to suck up to strangers and the media in a way he never did as a Royal.  He’s utterly and irretrievably destroyed his reputation.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  The Space Shuttle Challenger blowing up was another one for me.  I remember what I was doing when I heard Diana died, and when JFK Jr died.  I don't think of Poor Wittle Warry walking behind a coffin as one of the most searing images.
> God, they really do think highly of themselves.



I remember where I was when Diana died and when the news of 9/11 broke. That's about it. I must since have deadened.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> At this point, I would say she could be related to the Borgias.



And I'm sure she's sad poisoning is rather frowned upon recently.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Considering how talented in many ways the Borgias were, she would not have lasted long.
> She was a fool to "escape" the BRF. She could have hidden her lack of talent and industry behind a pleasant facade and enjoyed a life of luxury. I truly believe her greed and delusion overcame any piddling amount of common sense or shrewdness she possesses.



This this this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

People are growing so impatient with them.


----------



## Logic

I wonder what uncle spencer thinks about the book, since he’s a writer himself


----------



## Chanbal

Hermes Zen said:


> Never been either but it’s on my bucket list!  Maybe we can do a H&M thread gathering in the future!!


Love Scotland, but never been to Ireland.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Mrs.Z

And so it begins….?









						Charles replaces Prince Harry as Captain General of the Royal Marines
					

King Charles III today appointed himself as the new Captain General of the Royal Marines - a role previously held by Prince Harry until Megxit.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

N/M
Previous post has the same info.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Stansy

Mumotons said:


> It’s called Spare and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Funny - in German „Spare“ is the imperative of the verb „save“


----------



## Stansy

pomeline said:


> Since Meghan is so interested in genealogy and percentages, I wonder why she's not mentioning what percentage of her is German while she's at it? I kid you not, her dad's family tree is online. There's a whole bunch of Merkels and Mengeles she hasn't even mentioned yet (again, not kidding). Some claim to be nobility.


Mengele?? Wow. I will not say anything more…


----------



## rose60610

So if "Spare" is all about Diana's death again, how much more can Haz and Claw milk this? Isn't a book about it at this point sort of final? Or will they go on the circuit, every talk show, every late show, every radio program, podcast, etc. OK, then what? Will they be like Cher in all the "Come Back" tours, reliving the death for cash over and over? It's all they have left. That and accusing everybody of racism. 

I'm waiting for Claw to glom onto Martha Stewart, another 80+ woman, to try to muscle into her crafts and cooking empire. Doesn't seem Gloria Steinem is handing over the feminism reins, Claw has to keep trolling for a takeover. She needs another cause du jour.


----------



## White Orchid

Chanbal said:


>



Is it just me, or is this guy like a hotter version of William?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Harsh but so true.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I will qualify this thought by saying I don't have children but....is his behavior the result of being told how wonderful and special he was all his life? Getting a pass even when he didn't deserve it?   I understand that a parent wants to instill confidence in a child so the child can meet the challenges of life, but what is going on with this man-child?  When does encouragement morph into overentitlement?


maybe that's what he and the Wife have in common....she was apparently very spoiled and treated as the special little princess


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> ITA.  The Space Shuttle Challenger blowing up was another one for me.  I remember what I was doing when I heard Diana died, and when JFK Jr died.  I don't think of Poor Wittle Warry walking behind a coffin as one of the most searing images.
> God, they really do think highly of themselves.


actually I have to admit I found the image of those two boys walking behind the casket very touching.  at the time I understood that Phillip said he would walk with them (to harry? or to both of them?).  
For what it's worth (and maybe they don't care) I think it probably endeared them to the public.


----------



## CobaltBlu

> Meanwhile, brand expert Nick Ede predicted Spare would open up new commercial opportunities for Harry and Meghan.
> 
> 'I think the next step for Harry will be the very lucrative public speaking circuit,' he told MailOnline. *'Harry will read extracts from his book at events around the world with a Q&A. *
> 
> 'I also think he will make a lot of money through an *exclusive sit-down interview with a journalist* to promote the book. These kinds of sit-downs can command in the six-to-seven figures and I'm sure they'll be a bidding war.
> 
> 'And with the book being so explosive *he could even look to sell the film rights to it. Again that would be highly lucrative.'  *



Its never going to end is it friends...?

"Journalist"  LOL.  It will be Oprah (who is not a journalist).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I almost feel bad for him.


----------



## KEG66

CobaltBlu said:


> Its never going to end is it friends...?
> 
> "Journalist"  LOL.  It will be Oprah (who is not a journalist).


H can do all these things but he will never be happy and if he thinks he and TW will be when he has his “revenge” he is even more stupid or crazy than I thought! The “Spare” has just made himself a laughing stock for the majority of people and imo he will never escape that. Meanwhile the working royals carry on regardless.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

CobaltBlu said:


> ROAD TRIP!!
> 
> Seriously, ROAD TRIP.  I am looking at 2024.
> 
> Um, not not really....
> 
> View attachment 5640965
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640967
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640978
> 
> 
> View attachment 5640981
> 
> View attachment 5640982
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.boredpanda.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The* really searing* ones I cannot share here.
> 
> These two really need to join the Peace Corps or something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please post when that glorious day dawns, amiga!
> 
> 
> Wait....are you....me?????


CB, is the photo of the children for sale from the Great Depression?  That's incredibly sad. 


gracekelly said:


> I will qualify this thought by saying I don't have children but....is his behavior the result of being told how wonderful and special he was all his life? Getting a pass even when he didn't deserve it?   I understand that a parent wants to instill confidence in a child so the child can meet the challenges of life, but what is going on with this man-child?  When does encouragement morph into overentitlement?


As a parent, I think it's pretty normal to tell your children they are wonderful, and perhaps special, but I highly doubt H or TW are the consequences of that environment.  (Especially since most kids end up becoming relatively normal adults.) 

I'd say this is the result of marrying a raging lunatic/malignant narcissist. (Allegedly.)  Is this where he would be if he had married anyone even remotely normal? 


rose60610 said:


> The kind of "help and support" that Harry "needs" come in the form of a "team of very successful divorce lawyers".


 Yes!  Add a team of well-trained mental health professionals. (Not a coach!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmm, the similarity is still there imo


----------



## rose60610

I think Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis are already stronger people than Harry is. I don't see them in the future making a living out of begging people to pity them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the WSJ article, nothing new except this is a major US publication - America media awakes?

_At first glance, Harry’s face in the book’s cover image shows the prince with the start of a half smile. Looking more closely, some see intensity in that expression, while others see sadness or a sense of peace. Others say he looks a little like a video-game avatar. Body-language expert Darren Stanton sees anger.

“It’s almost like a hostage picture,” he said. “The eyebrows come together, the eyes are sort of narrowed, this is quite a defiant expression, it’s saying, ‘This is my time to say what I think.’”

“It’s informal and feels quite celebrity,” said Victoria Howard, founder and editor of the royal-watching site the Crown Chronicles. “One of the first things I thought was that it looked like a footballer’s autobiography.”

Ramona Rosales, the photographer who shot a sun-drenched Duchess of Sussex for a recent Variety feature, also shot the “Spare” image. Photos of both royals are taken straight on in a washed-out light a la Britney Spears on the cover of her “Glory” album. 

“There’s this visual cohesion with everything we’ve seen about Meghan trying to get her story out, and now it seems like it’s Harry’s turn,” said Amanda Matta, 27, a royal commentator whose TikTok videos to her 1.1 million followers are raising younger ranks of palace watchers.
_


----------



## sdkitty

not sure if this has been posted....they aren't removing Harry and the dirty uncle from performing official duties?








						King to amend law that keeps the peace with Harry and Andrew
					

The King will extend the number of royals who can act as counsellors of state rather than replace the Duke of Sussex and the Duke of York, the Telegraph understands.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## rose60610

Hmm. If Claw finds herself on the market with Giselle, who has the better chance of landing a future billionaire husband? Claw would be begging Giselle to be her wing-woman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Elon certainly has his choices to make


----------



## Maggie Muggins

rose60610 said:


> The kind of "help and support" that Harry "needs" come in the form of a "team of very successful divorce lawyers".


And one very competent psychiatrist and deprogrammer as opposed to several incompetent Buttercup Coaches.


----------



## CarryOn2020

A comment from the WSJ article:
_
What was it in the old days:- the oldest son got all the land and money; second eldest went into the military, and the third eldest son into the church._


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh she will be there, no doubt.  New face, new clothes, away from the kids, she will be there.


I'd pay to see Graham Norton ask her to repeat her chicken imitation from Ellen.


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> Its never going to end is it friends...?
> 
> "Journalist"  LOL.  It will be Oprah (who is not a journalist).


I respectfully disagree with this "brand expert". There is such a thing as overexposure and market saturation, and it already appears much of the public has had their fill of the the Harkle sideshow.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmm, the similarity is still there imo



I honestly don't see it but perceptions may vary


----------



## Maggie Muggins

White Orchid said:


> Is it just me, or is this guy like a hotter version of William?


Major Thompson has his own personality and doesn't need to copy anyone.


----------



## Pessie

CobaltBlu said:


> Its never going to end is it friends...?
> 
> "Journalist"  LOL.  It will be Oprah (who is not a journalist).


I think he’ll milk Diana’s death as long as people will buy it.  No amount of money can restore his credibility though, a realisation which I think will penetrate his thick stupid skull at some point. 
Meanwhile, completely disregarding the rest of Diana’s family who also lost a mother, sister, aunt…etc., with all his drivel you’d be forgiven for thinking he was the only one following the bl**dy coffin that day.  Hey, perhaps the evil British forced him to dig the grave??  Its certain he couldn’t possibly dig a bigger hole than the one he’s in now.


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


> I'd pay to see Graham Norton ask her to repeat her chicken imitation from Ellen.


You are not alone


----------



## gracekelly

Very clever of KC to take the Capt General position for himself. He can hold onto it until he decides who deserves it. It would be a long wait for George or Louis or even Charlotte. In the meantime it doesn’t look like the invisible children are any closer to their titles.  

Wouldn’t it be fun that for every little leak about the book, BP goes tit for tat with something to annoy Harry?  The part of the news story about Harry’s sadness at having the Captaincy taken from him was pure clickbait. That news has been out there for two plus years. The journos love to rub salt into the wound.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

Logic said:


> I wonder what uncle spencer thinks about the book, since he’s a writer himself


For all the intense love and admiration that Harry and Z-list supposedly have for Diana, I personally wonder why they never formed a closer relationship with the Spencers seeing how the BRF is THE devil and racist


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> For all the intense love and admiration that Harry and Z-list supposedly have for Diana, I personally wonder why they never formed a closer relationship with the Spencers seeing how the BRF is THE devil and racist


That's a good point. 

Charles didn't live in the UK for a bit, but now he does and I wonder if the aunts weren't glamorous enough.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the WSJ article, nothing new except this is a major US publication - America media awakes?
> 
> _At first glance, Harry’s face in the book’s cover image shows the prince with the start of a half smile. Looking more closely, some see intensity in that expression, while others see sadness or a sense of peace. Others say he looks a little like a video-game avatar. Body-language expert Darren Stanton sees anger.
> 
> “It’s almost like a hostage picture,” he said. “The eyebrows come together, the eyes are sort of narrowed, this is quite a defiant expression, it’s saying, ‘This is my time to say what I think.’”
> 
> “It’s informal and feels quite celebrity,” said Victoria Howard, founder and editor of the royal-watching site the Crown Chronicles. “One of the first things I thought was that it looked like a footballer’s autobiography.”
> 
> Ramona Rosales, the photographer who shot a sun-drenched Duchess of Sussex for a recent Variety feature, also shot the “Spare” image. Photos of both royals are taken straight on in a washed-out light a la Britney Spears on the cover of her “Glory” album.
> 
> “There’s this visual cohesion with everything we’ve seen about Meghan trying to get her story out, and now it seems like it’s Harry’s turn,” said Amanda Matta, 27, a royal commentator whose TikTok videos to her 1.1 million followers are raising younger ranks of palace watchers.
> _



I think it's supposed to be a neutral face and how someone perceives it reflects on them more than H's cover.

It seems that everyone sees something different and I wonder if we can identify neutral accurately.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> actually I have to admit I found the image of those two boys walking behind the casket very touching.  at the time I understood that Phillip said he would walk with them (to harry? or to both of them?).
> For what it's worth (and maybe they don't care) I think it probably endeared them to the public.


Absolutely.  It was touching and very sad, but not searing to me.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> Love Scotland, but never been to Ireland.



Yay!!! It would be super fun!! First round of drinks on me!

Adding on:  coffee or tea anyone or something else?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Harsh but so true.



As time goes by: Spare.  Sparer.  Sparest.

By stage 3, he will be dealing with muckraking volumes of “truths” penned by his son and daughter, whose dysfunctional lives have left them addicted and furious about the lost opportunities to have lived Royal instead of lives as ridiculed minor celebrities suffering from being raised by narcissistic , hypocritical, spiteful grifters.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## JulesB68

Jayne1 said:


> I think it's supposed to be a neutral face and how someone perceives it reflects on them more than H's cover.
> 
> It seems that everyone sees something different and I wonder if we can identify neutral accurately.


I'm not sure how accurately anyone can interpret an image that has been photoshopped to within an inch of its life! Other than he's obviously a bit touchy about the thinning Barnet on top of his head


----------



## JulesB68

charlottawill said:


>



I should have refreshed this page before I posted!


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> For all the intense love and admiration that Harry and Z-list supposedly have for Diana, I personally wonder why they never formed a closer relationship with the Spencers seeing how the BRF is THE devil and racist


Earl Spencer is very smooth when you see and hear him. Just saw two documentarirs about Althorp on PBS  For some reason I have always had the feeling that underneath the patina,there lies a mean streak.Perhaps that is a Spencer trait and Harry inherited it and his uncle recognizes it and keeps his distance. Plus, we don’t know what dealings have gone on with the aunts and the Diana inheritance.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Cinderlala said:


> CB, is the photo of the children for sale from the Great Depression?  That's incredibly sad.


yes. https://nypost.com/2013/07/14/finding-peace-in-a-life-sold-for-2/


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Earl Spencer is very smooth when you see and hear him. Just saw two documentarirs about Althorp on PBS  For some reason I have always had the feeling that underneath the patina,there lies a mean streak.Perhaps that is a Spencer trait and Harry inherited it and his uncle recognizes it and keeps his distance. Plus, we don’t know what dealings have gone on with the aunts and the Diana inheritance.


Yes, I remember when he was a correspondent for one of the big 3 US networks. A talking head mostly. That stopped soon after Diana died.

He was married a few times, had his troubles and seems to have calmed down, in terms of his personal relationships, in his later years.


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> So if "Spare" is all about Diana's death again, how much more can Haz and Claw milk this? Isn't a book about it at this point sort of final? Or will they go on the circuit, every talk show, every late show, every radio program, podcast, etc. OK, then what? Will they be like Cher in all the "Come Back" tours, reliving the death for cash over and over? It's all they have left. That and accusing everybody of racism.
> 
> I'm waiting for Claw to glom onto Martha Stewart, another 80+ woman, to try to muscle into her crafts and cooking empire. Doesn't seem Gloria Steinem is handing over the feminism reins, Claw has to keep trolling for a takeover. She needs another cause du jour.



Wait for the sequels, Harry has a multi-book deal - unfortunately 

Hopefully they'll drop him before they take up the next option.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> actually I have to admit I found the image of those two boys walking behind the casket very touching.  at the time I understood that Phillip said he would walk with them (to harry? or to both of them?).
> For what it's worth (and maybe they don't care) I think it probably endeared them to the public.


Looked back at photo of the 5 of them behind casket, dark business suits, no uniforms - with sparkling adornments, no morning suits - just 5 in black , very eye catching

I think THAT moment was perfectly encapsulated by the photographer which is why we associate the walk with Diana’s funeral, though it has been part of the ceremony forever

I was thinking of other formal UK funerals - Churchill & George VI were all in black and white photos, Duke of Windsor and Queen Mum were more low key - I never saw those
QEII funeral was of course the cat’s meow, overwhelming in the number of people - there is no photo that speaks to me, other than those of the vigils - 4 or 8 princes . The stark vigil photos will endure


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


>



The devil made me do it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> I'd say this is the result of marrying a raging lunatic/malignant narcissist. (Allegedly.)  *Is this where he would be if he had married anyone even remotely normal?*



I really don't think so.


----------



## Hyacinth

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I almost feel bad for him.




_"The cover image of the Harry book looks like a scientific reconstruction of the face of a neolithic hunter found remarkably well preserved in a peat bog"_


Or a police artist's drawing of a suspected serial killer.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, I remember when he was a correspondent for one of the big 3 US networks. A talking head mostly. That stopped soon after Diana died.
> 
> He was married a few times, had his troubles and seems to have calmed down, in terms of his personal relationships, in his later years.


Like so many of his peers he was quite a partier in his youth, but I think the passing of his father and inheriting the title and responsibility of maintaining the family estate was a wake up call for him.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I'm waiting for Claw to glom onto Martha Stewart


Martha's way too smart for that.


----------



## kemilia

White Orchid said:


> Is it just me, or is this guy like a hotter version of William?


Yeah, you're kinda right! Even without hair I think William is hot (and he has MUSCLES too). 

Major Jonny is just so nice to look at ...


----------



## papertiger

Mumotons said:


> The 20th Century also included two world wars, the Spanish Flu , the sinking of the Titanic, famine in Africa….. I could go on but poor Hawwwy had the hardest time of anybody in the 20th Century



Never mind the Holocaust, WW1 trench warfare, people made homeless by the Blitz, Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Ethiopian famine, Cambodia under Pol Pot, Rwandan War, Vietnam War, the atrocities that happened at the time of the Indian partition, Lebanon's civil war, forced child soldiers of Sierra Leone.... 

@CobaltBlu had it right. 

Harry's mother died in a car accident - as do 1.35M people a year, the 8 largest killer in the world. I am so, so sorry, it is truly awful, but that's 1349999 other families that lost a loved one the same way that mourned and grieved.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> At this point, I would say she could be related to the Borgias.



He'd have to have a brain for that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF!!!


----------



## needlv

Maggie Muggins said:


> Major Thompson has his own personality and doesn't need to copy anyone.


Major Thompson has been promoted to Lt. Colonel









						King Charles' 'handsome' kilt-clad assistant with adoring fans gets promotion
					

Johnny has been at the constant side of Charles to assist him during the early days of his reign, and seems to have earned a promotion.




					www.dailyrecord.co.uk
				




On topic, I wonder if H will admit to all the bullying he did of other boys at Eton?  Or cheating To pass his exams?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Ramona Rosales, the photographer who shot a sun-drenched Duchess of Sussex for a recent Variety feature, also shot the “Spare” image. Photos of both royals are taken straight on in a washed-out light a la Britney Spears on the cover of her “Glory” album. _



Well I guess that photographer's style is very recognizable which is generally a good thing...but also a bit too predictable for my taste, like a one-trick pony.


----------



## needlv




----------



## V0N1B2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF!!!



Wait…. WHAT? 
He was just casually strolling the streets of LA with a bottle of Jack and a gun in his hand? Mmm Hmm. And it was just after he’d moved there? And he already bought a gun? After coming from a country where people don’t sleep with Glocks under their pillow?
I’s izz confuzzled.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> *Major Thompson has been promoted to Lt. Colonel*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles' 'handsome' kilt-clad assistant with adoring fans gets promotion
> 
> 
> Johnny has been at the constant side of Charles to assist him during the early days of his reign, and seems to have earned a promotion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailyrecord.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On topic, I wonder if H will admit to all the bullying he did of other boys at Eton?  Or cheating To pass his exams?


Thank you and yes, I know but old habits die hard.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Hmm. If Claw finds herself on the market with Giselle, who has the better chance of landing a future billionaire husband? Claw would be begging Giselle to be her wing-woman.


Giselle doesn't need a billionaire. I just heard that she and Tom are each worth about $300 million. MM can breathe a sigh of relief that she has one less competitor in the marketplace.


----------



## kipp

V0N1B2 said:


> Wait…. WHAT?
> He was just casually strolling the streets of LA with a bottle of Jack and a gun in his hand? Mmm Hmm. And it was just after he’d moved there? And he already bought a gun? After coming from a country where people don’t sleep with Glocks under their pillow?
> I’s izz confuzzled.


I think this post by Carlos Greaves is a joke/satire...  not true, as hilarious as it is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hermes Zen said:


> Yay!!! It would be super fun!! First round of drinks on me!
> 
> Adding on:  coffee or tea anyone or something else?


I call the 5th round


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF!!!




I don't get it either. Is this a joke?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'll take extra sugar with that tea.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> I don't get it either. Is this a joke?


Yes


----------



## V0N1B2

Okay I feel better. I had to do a fact check. Apparently the tweet was some kind of joke. Phew! I mean Harry, walking on his own on the streets of LA without his wife hanging off him? I knew it sounded improbable.


----------



## Pessie

rose60610 said:


> I don't get it either. Is this a joke?


Yes, and it’s just the start IMO, floodgates are set to open


----------



## gelbergirl

Chanbal said:


>



This image is heartbreaking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well I guess that photographer's style is very recognizable which is generally a good thing...but also a bit too predictable for my taste, like a one-trick pony.


Oprah is a fan, too.  


Spoiler


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> I don't get it either. Is this a joke?



I think so, but that is really not funny to me. I think Marklenews didn't get the sarcasm which is why they paired it with the article on Ghoul and bowling.


----------



## needlv




----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Elon certainly has his choices to make


Elon only likes ‘em still of breeding age. That leaves them both out.


----------



## bag-mania

EverSoElusive said:


> For all the intense love and admiration that Harry and Z-list supposedly have for Diana, I personally wonder why they never formed a closer relationship with the Spencers seeing how the BRF is THE devil and racist


Diana’s sister had no use for Harry at the statue unveiling last year. Didn’t she run interference for Will with him?


----------



## sdkitty

Howie Mandel having a bit of fun at Meghan's expense - then backing down








						Howie Mandel Mocks Meghan Markle's 'Bimbo' Regret On 'Deal Or No Deal'
					

The former game show host ribbed the Duchess of Sussex after she recalled being objectified as a "briefcase girl."




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Logic

gracekelly said:


> Earl Spencer is very smooth when you see and hear him. Just saw two documentarirs about Althorp on PBS  For some reason I have always had the feeling that underneath the patina,there lies a mean streak.Perhaps that is a Spencer trait and Harry inherited it and his uncle recognizes it and keeps his distance. Plus, we don’t know what dealings have gone on with the aunts and the Diana inheritance.


I’ve been watching documentaries on Althorp too. I’ve actually never seen photos of W&H at the estate.

Charles Spencer is very well spoken, saw him in some clips finishing off a few charity events within the few years after Diana’s death. He was handsome too. Being the only boy and heir to an aristocratic family he was definitely spoilt.

Agree about the mean trait, he’s very intelligent and good with words, he’s sued newspapers a few times and in one of his interviews about why he rejected the house Diana wanted he said she’s not use to anyone saying no, and he did! It caused a rift for a few months.

So the Spencer trait is like I need to get what I want…


----------



## CarryOn2020

from Bower’s book:
_The explosive biography claims that Prince Harry's hopes for Princess Diana's sisters, Jane and Sarah, and her brother, Charles, to see Meghan as similar to the late Princess of Wales *fell flat. *

"Harry had introduced Meghan to Diana’s two sisters, Jane and Sarah, and her best friend Julia Samuel. Harry assumed that Diana’s family and friends would see a similarity between Diana and his fiancée," Bower explained in the book.

"Both, he said, shared the same problems. He was disappointed. *No one agreed that his vulnerable mother had anything in common with his girlfriend. *More discomforting for him, they thought Meghan would not fit in with the Royal Family," he added.








						Princess Diana's brother's warning to Prince Harry before he married Meghan Markle
					

Princess Diana's brother's warning to Prince Harry about marrying Meghan has been detailed in a new royal biography




					www.womanandhome.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And how right they were.


----------



## csshopper

Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: (1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. (2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.

They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.


----------



## Lounorada

Debbini said:


> From Instagram
> 
> View attachment 5631113










Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5631301
> 
> _"*Once Kate and William’s Boston plans are set in stone, she’s planning to extend an olive branch to Meghan in a bid to reunite the brothers and heal the rift*," a source claimed ahead of the Prince and Princess of Wales' visit to America in December.
> 
> Kate's efforts to squash the tension between her and Meghan can be credited to Queen Elizabeth II and Princess Diana, as the source said the mother-of-three believes it is what the late royals "would've wanted" for them.
> 
> "[*Prince] Harry and Meghan are knee deep with their hectic schedules, but Meghan is willing to put in the effort as long as dates don't clash,"* added the insider ahead of William and Kate's trip overseas_.


Oh sure...







Chanbal said:


>



To JCMH:


His life is so dull, he has to make up stories about other people to fill up his little book. Disgusting.





xincinsin said:


> He probably needs to pad his memoir with lots of stories about other people because I cheated on my exams, skived in the army and got dumped by my girlfriends isn't riveting enough.


Exactly!






gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5634902
> 
> How weird is this picture?  Tiny shoulders and big head. Looks photoshopped.





That picture is terrifying. She looks like some creepy cult leader and this is her new advertising poster for trying to recruit new members.
Also, the caked-on, chalky looking makeup is sooo bad.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so freaking in love with herself.



Ugh. She is insufferable.







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah right.





Dream on losers!




CobaltBlu said:


> I totally agree with this. And, if the book drops late this year, the Coronation will be a big PR bump for the BRF, and I doubt *Harry the Plumber* will be anywhere but behind a candle with the other Palm Tree.


This name cracks me up every time






Mumotons said:


> *It’s called Spare* and will start from the death of Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir is called Spare, publisher confirms
> 
> 
> A press release said: 'For Harry, this is his story at last. With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight... [and] hard-won wisdom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk












youngster said:


> There are around three-quarters of a billion people on this planet who don't have access to electricity or access to clean running water close to their home.  *Yet, he whines about being "the spare" of the British royal family.  He deserves every bit of mockery that's coming his way.*










CarryOn2020 said:


> Well said, there is something quite sinister in those eyes and his smirk.  Almost a sneer.



Yeah his weird picture on the cover screams this:


Also, this is the most perfect gif to represent JCMH that I've ever found and I will be overusing it


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> Did they ever give the cheque to the restaurant they visited for dinner? I remember it was promised but I didn't see a follow-up story.
> 
> And I am glad Handbag made good on his charity promise, rather than those vague Archewell donations which are blared loudly but never





csshopper said:


> Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: (1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. (2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.
> 
> They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.





csshopper said:


> Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: (1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. (2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.
> 
> They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.


Eloquent and precise. _ A surgical strike.  Brava _


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> For all the intense love and admiration that Harry and Z-list supposedly have for Diana, I personally wonder why they never formed a closer relationship with the Spencers seeing how the BRF is THE devil and racist


When Harry tried to convince his aunts that MM was so much like Diana they quickly dismissed the idea.


----------



## Chanbal

A couple of interesting posts…


----------



## Chanbal

Harry and Netfl*x










						Is Prince Harry any better than Netflix, the way he milks the royals?
					

PLATELL'S PEOPLE: In the cold light of day, is there really much difference between Netflix's ruthless exploitation of Diana's death for profit and Prince Harry's?




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


>



It appears he is keeping the version before QE passing???


----------



## Chanbal

Mrs Spare's podcast
People's Magazine Award? 



This is likely the type of people that work at People…


----------



## EverSoElusive

Jayne1 said:


> That's a good point.
> 
> Charles didn't live in the UK for a bit, but now he does and I wonder if the aunts weren't glamorous enough.





gracekelly said:


> Earl Spencer is very smooth when you see and hear him. Just saw two documentarirs about Althorp on PBS  For some reason I have always had the feeling that underneath the patina,there lies a mean streak.Perhaps that is a Spencer trait and Harry inherited it and his uncle recognizes it and keeps his distance. Plus, we don’t know what dealings have gone on with the aunts and the Diana inheritance.



Probably because there's less glamour. Not to mention, much less money for them to attempt to extort. Clearly no titles to be had that's better than what the late QEII bestowed upon them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It appears he is keeping the version before QE passing???



Out of _respect_, he should renounce the titles, remove himself and his family from the LoS, and remove himself from CoS.
To simplify:
1. Renounce the damn titles
2. Remove himself from LoS - take his family with him
3. Remove himself from CoS.


----------



## Mrs.Z

This is next level petty! Even though we have not been invited we’re not coming! 









						Harry WON'T spend Christmas with family as relations at 'rock bottom'
					

Sources close to the couple have said relations between Harry and Meghan and the royals are 'near rock bottom' and they could decline an invite to spend the festive period with Harry's family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> This is next level petty! Even though we have not been invited we’re not coming!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry WON'T spend Christmas with family as relations at 'rock bottom'
> 
> 
> Sources close to the couple have said relations between Harry and Meghan and the royals are 'near rock bottom' and they could decline an invite to spend the festive period with Harry's family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> _Spare_ is 416 pages and here is the Amazon description. Looks like it’s going to spend a lot of time focusing on his post-Diana‘s death aftermath.
> 
> Product Description​It was one of the most searing images of the twentieth century: two young boys, two princes, walking behind their mother’s coffin as the world watched in sorrow—and horror. As Diana, Princess of Wales, was laid to rest, billions wondered what the princes must be thinking and feeling—and how their lives would play out from that point on.
> 
> For Harry, this is that story at last.
> 
> With its raw, unflinching honesty, Spare is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief.


Eternal power of love over grief? Well, their love can't be all that powerful if Handbag is still griping away after several years of mothering from Zedzee.


gracekelly said:


> Yep!  As for the insight and self examination, that is all the ghost writer Moerhinger. I fully expected this as the writer is known for being an armchair Freudian/Jungian analyst. Harry must have been a feast for his ears and JRM went to town with it. This will be a self pitying sob story from start to finish. Oh, and thank goodness Meghan came along to SAVE him. Don’t worry KC, you can weather this. So he will call you a mean father.  Not so mean that KC didn’t welcome his choice of wife or give him millions to spend. If Harry tried to take anything out of the book, it was probably references to Camilla. He knew that would really incur the wrath of The King. I don’t know what he will say about Granny. She let him off the hook more than once. Other than being petulant for not getting his in/out and complaining about her advisors, what is he going to say?  This book is only worth a case of popcorn for reading the reviews and scathing criticisms.


If the book doesn't do well, they will blame Mr Ghostwriter for not viewing Handbag's story through a lens of love.


rose60610 said:


> "The Spare" is the most degrading title.
> 
> So from now on are all second borns of a two child family going to feel denigrated if the man who was born into the BRF with all the riches and perks considers himself as some kind of "loser" as if the only reason for being is to be filler in the unlikely event his older sibling dies?
> 
> The only reason Harry is now considered a loser is the fact that he not only married a woman who took pleasure in destroying his family ties and storing his gonads in a vice, but that he willingly went along with it.
> 
> Is describing himself as "The Spare" another way of making beaucoup bucks by sending second born kids to BetterUp's life coaches in an attempt to not feel so inadequate now that Harry is "proof" that second born kids should feel like they are "throw away" children? Golly, thanks, Claw and Haz. You're basically telling all second borns that they are inferior.
> 
> Shouldn't Harry's book be considered as "Hate Speech"?


I keep thinking of the children who were conceived so that they can donate bone marrow to an older sibling who is critically ill. I've read interviews with some of them who say they felt like spare parts, and some who felt glad that they helped save a life. Handbag keeps thinking he is spare parts.


Chanbal said:


>



Does the NDA include a clause for keeping mum if they treat him like he doesn't exist? An extreme form of plagiarism and downgrading another human?


sdkitty said:


> actually I have to admit I found the image of those two boys walking behind the casket very touching.  at the time I understood that Phillip said he would walk with them (to harry? or to both of them?).
> For what it's worth (and maybe they don't care) I think it probably endeared them to the public.


I remember the white flowers on the coffin, and the card saying Mummy.


CobaltBlu said:


> Its never going to end is it friends...?
> 
> "Journalist"  LOL.  It will be Oprah (who is not a journalist).


Q&A? I don't think so. They might do a mock one taking one question from a Harkle-friendly reporter like Royston.
Reporter: Would you say your mother's tragic death has significantly impacted your life?
Handbag: Yes.
Handler: And that's all the time we have for questions. Thank you for coming to today's booksigning. You may collect your autographed copy on the way out by showing your receipt.


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> For all the intense love and admiration that Harry and Z-list supposedly have for Diana, I personally wonder why they never formed a closer relationship with the Spencers seeing how the BRF is THE devil and racist





Jayne1 said:


> That's a good point.
> 
> Charles didn't live in the UK for a bit, but now he does and I wonder if the aunts weren't glamorous enough.


Maybe Zedzee never fostered the connection since there appears to be no $$$ gratification. She wants cash and freebies!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Mrs Spare's podcast
> People's Magazine Award?
> 
> 
> 
> This is likely the type of people that work at People…



The sugars (or this sugar) think Suits was a law firm? OMG...


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> The sugars (or this sugar) think Suits was a law firm? OMG...


It was a documentary, I can’t believe people didn’t know that!


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Mrs Spare's podcast
> People's Magazine Award?
> 
> 
> 
> This is likely the type of people that work at People…



Fortunately, the People’s Choice Awards is unrelated to People magazine. Winners are chosen by public vote.

Should we choose one of the other podcasts and vote for that? We should all agree on who to vote for so we don’t spread our votes too thin. We can make a difference. Who shall it be? 

These are the choices:
*THE POP PODCAST OF 2022*
_Anything Goes with Emma Chamberlain
Archetypes
Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
Call Her Daddy
Conan O'Brien Needs A Friend
Not Skinny But Not Fat
SmartLess
Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer_

You can click on a link for each award category in this article to vote.





__





						2022 People's Choice Awards: Complete List of Nominees - E! Online
					






					www.eonline.com


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Fortunately, the People’s Choice Awards is unrelated to People magazine. Winners are chosen by public vote.
> 
> Should we choose one of the other podcasts and vote for that? We should all agree on who to vote for so we don’t spread our votes too thin. We can make a difference. Who shall it be?
> 
> These are the choices:
> *THE POP PODCAST OF 2022*
> _Anything Goes with Emma Chamberlain
> Archetypes
> Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
> Call Her Daddy
> Conan O'Brien Needs A Friend
> Not Skinny But Not Fat
> SmartLess
> Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer_
> 
> You can click on a link for each award category in this article to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2022 People's Choice Awards: Complete List of Nominees - E! Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


I'm in. Just let me know which to click and I'll even get my gang to click.


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> The sugars (or this sugar) think Suits was a law firm? OMG...


It’s funny, and it’s not funny iykwim.  This is where blurring the difference between reality and fantasy get you.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> It’s funny, and it’s not funny iykwim.  This is where blurring the difference between reality and fantasy get you.


If she thinks Suits is a RL law firm, it stands to reason that she also believes her Kween Pearl was doing the horizontal mambo in the Suits file room.


----------



## Mumotons

EXCLUSIVE: A quarter of Britons prefer Charles since he became King
					

EXCLUSIVE: Charles has become more popular with Brits since becoming King, with a quarter of the public having a more positive view of him. New polling also shows Meghan less popular than other royals.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Poor Me Me and Hawwwy only the sugars love them…. Oh and scobid


----------



## gelbergirl

Is he going to out King Charles for the skin tone question?
And if so, what impact will it have?


----------



## papertiger

gelbergirl said:


> Is he going to out King Charles for the skin tone question?
> And if so, what impact will it have?



I would not believe him if he did. 

The establishment fingered Charles as far too progressive and inclusive for their liking years ago. That's why he affirmed his commitment and duty to his role as the King of the Church of England when he ascended the throne. 

I think the time has gone way past when anyone would believe a word HaZZer (or MegZZ) say about anything without 26 independent witnesses, recordings from a locked safe from a sealed envelope examined by an independent forensic sound laboratory and jury's unanimous vote.


----------



## KEG66

csshopper said:


> Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: (1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. (2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.
> 
> They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.


Perfect ! If only King Charles was on this forum


----------



## carmen56

csshopper said:


> Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: (1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. (2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.
> 
> They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.



Please send this to Clarence House, for the attention of the King.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But they left the UK in early 2020, before the pandemic ever hit. After spending months of 2019 in Canada. But maybe Canadian coffee was spoiled by her royal experience as well.


Tim hortons is suing as we speak 


pukasonqo said:


> I think she is going for the stereotype that the Brits only drink tea or, in the rare occasions were they actually know about coffee they make terrible, instant coffee
> Nevermind that is a cliche from at least 50 yrs ago


As I’ve said before baroness basic apparently considers premium nestle to be the sine qua non of coffee so  that alone should render her opinion worthless and I’m not even a coffee snob


bag-mania said:


> I like how Meghan’s guest politely pointed out to her that her Angry Black Woman trope is 20 years out of date, just like all of her other episode stereotypes so far.
> 
> Rae echoed Meghan’s experience, recalling how, in the early 2000s, reality television shows fanned the flames of the already deeply seeded stereotype. Together, the two looked back on shows like “The Apprentice” and “The Flavor of Love” and how they featured Black female personalities like Omarosa Manigault and Tiffany Pollard. At the time, the two women often served as foils to the white characters in their respective shows and were primarily only ever depicted as bringing chaos and fury to scenes.
> 
> “It was this ruthless Black woman or this uncouth Black woman,” Rae noted. “We were made to laugh at them as opposed to or to laugh with them in some ways. But it was just like these caricatures of Black women.”
> 
> Years later, as Rae recalled, the pendulum of the portrayal of Black women in television and films swung to the opposite extreme. Black female characters became only “fierce” and only “flawless.” According to Rae, this depiction inspired her to fight for the title of her first television series, “Insecure.”
> 
> “I want to be able to show that not all women are like this. I don’t feel fierce, flawless all the time,” Rae explained. “These characters aren’t that all the time, and that’s OK.”
> 
> She added: “It was like we overcorrected this other narrative, and now we couldn’t be human. We were superhuman.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle discusses the ‘angry Black woman’ stereotype with Issa Rae and Ziwe
> 
> 
> The women unpacked the meaning and history of the stereotype while also relating how it has affected and shaped their careers and relationships.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com


I dunno what they are saying about Tiffany- she is the main character of flavor of love and it crashed and burned without her and she’s a fantastic first rate reality tv star. Omarosa seems a) boring and b) like a piece of work in real life tbh so grouping them together is both lazy and very unflattering to Tiffany.



gracekelly said:


> I will qualify this thought by saying I don't have children but....is his behavior the result of being told how wonderful and special he was all his life? Getting a pass even when he didn't deserve it?   I understand that a parent wants to instill confidence in a child so the child can meet the challenges of life, but what is going on with this man-child?  When does encouragement morph into overentitlement?


Well I mean theoretically all the royals would be a bit spoiled and incapable of life in real world as they all get brought up the same way….

I do think he’s a spoilt brat certainly.


Stansy said:


> Mengele?? Wow. I will not say anything more…


You’d think she’d have better work done.


CarryOn2020 said:


> from Bower’s book:
> _The explosive biography claims that Prince Harry's hopes for Princess Diana's sisters, Jane and Sarah, and her brother, Charles, to see Meghan as similar to the late Princess of Wales *fell flat. *
> 
> "Harry had introduced Meghan to Diana’s two sisters, Jane and Sarah, and her best friend Julia Samuel. Harry assumed that Diana’s family and friends would see a similarity between Diana and his fiancée," Bower explained in the book.
> 
> "Both, he said, shared the same problems. He was disappointed. *No one agreed that his vulnerable mother had anything in common with his girlfriend. *More discomforting for him, they thought Meghan would not fit in with the Royal Family," he added.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's brother's warning to Prince Harry before he married Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> Princess Diana's brother's warning to Prince Harry about marrying Meghan has been detailed in a new royal biography
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.womanandhome.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


This story never stops being funny. She truly is  living embodiment of the ‘what you ordered/what you got’ meme.


bag-mania said:


> Fortunately, the People’s Choice Awards is unrelated to People magazine. Winners are chosen by public vote.
> 
> Should we choose one of the other podcasts and vote for that? We should all agree on who to vote for so we don’t spread our votes too thin. We can make a difference. Who shall it be?
> 
> These are the choices:
> *THE POP PODCAST OF 2022*
> _Anything Goes with Emma Chamberlain
> Archetypes
> Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
> Call Her Daddy
> Conan O'Brien Needs A Friend
> Not Skinny But Not Fat
> SmartLess
> Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer_
> 
> You can click on a link for each award category in this article to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2022 People's Choice Awards: Complete List of Nominees - E! Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


_Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer - _this title alone gave me deep second hand cringe. The intro even says ‘she loves giving BJs.’ Feminists everywhere must be so inspired by this angry and desperate plea for male attention 

Honestly although it’s probably a hack job go for Conan as it might at least be funny… the rest of it looks completely humourless, painfully inane and narcissistic.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Fortunately, the People’s Choice Awards is unrelated to People magazine. Winners are chosen by public vote.
> 
> Should we choose one of the other podcasts and vote for that? We should all agree on who to vote for so we don’t spread our votes too thin. We can make a difference. Who shall it be?
> 
> These are the choices:
> *THE POP PODCAST OF 2022*
> _Anything Goes with Emma Chamberlain
> Archetypes
> Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
> Call Her Daddy
> Conan O'Brien Needs A Friend
> Not Skinny But Not Fat
> SmartLess
> Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer_
> 
> You can click on a link for each award category in this article to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2022 People's Choice Awards: Complete List of Nominees - E! Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


Pardon my ignorance, but with so many podcasts out there, why is ArcheW on the short list to be voted? 

I like the idea of selecting one podcast to vote. Do we have a chance against bot votes?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Who knew ? About soon to be published hardcover books … 

reading Wall Street journal, came upon review of new book about T S Eliot, will be published in Nov 2022
went to Amazon and the hardcover is at a discount of 13 percent 

I guess new books are just commodities - like barrels of oil - you let the market determine the price 

Get your spreadsheet out to plot the price of the SPARE between now and Jan 2023


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



Wonder who is in charge of The Salam Project's SM. It apppears that the project does good work. But their SM manager is dense.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but with so many podcasts out there, why is ArcheW on the short list to be voted?
> 
> I like the idea of selecting one podcast to vote. Do we have a chance against bot votes?


It only has six or seven episodes out but it has received good ratings from Spotify (of course they paid a bundle for it). In the pre-Internet days they used to do Gallup polls to determine winners but since it’s gone online they have a different method. 

From their Wikipedia page, this is how nominees have been chosen in recent years:

The winners of the 31st People's Choice Awards (on January 9, 2005) were decided by online voting rather than Gallup polls. The nominees submitted for Internet voting were selected using an unpublished process involving editors at Entertainment Weekly, the show's production team and a panel of pop culture fans.





						People's Choice Awards - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I'm in. Just let me know which to click and I'll even get my gang to click.


Unless someone here has listened to one of the other podcasts and can make a good case for it, I’ll probably go for Conan. As @jelliedfeels said, at least he’s funny.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Unless someone here has listened to one of the other podcasts and can make a good case for it, I’ll probably go for Conan. As @jelliedfeels said, at least he’s funny.


I haven't listened to Conan but he's smart and funny.  I listened to Dax Shephard once or twice and didn't like it. He seemed to have some female co-host that I didn't know and the tone just wasn't to my liking.
 I listen to Fresh Air regularly - very informative - not self aggrandizing celebs


----------



## purseinsanity

Mrs.Z said:


> This is next level petty! Even though we have not been invited we’re not coming!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry WON'T spend Christmas with family as relations at 'rock bottom'
> 
> 
> Sources close to the couple have said relations between Harry and Meghan and the royals are 'near rock bottom' and they could decline an invite to spend the festive period with Harry's family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh for Pete’s sake.  According to DM, the “Spanish language version is even more pointed, having been given the subtitle En La Sombra, or 'in the shadow'.”
@Vlad can we PRETTY PLEASE get eye roll, face plant, and barf emojis in the little easily accessible bar at the bottom?


----------



## lallybelle

Tiffany "New York" Pollard is a queen and reality tv gold. Omarosa was just a B on the apprentice, she got attention because that show wasn't really for drama, I mean the most dramatic thing was supposed to the former guys tag line.


----------



## sdkitty

lallybelle said:


> Tiffany "New York" Pollard is a queen and reality tv gold. Omarosa was just a B on the apprentice, she got attention because that show wasn't really for drama, I mean the most dramatic thing was supposed to the former guys tag line.


I'm proud to say I never watched that show


----------



## bag-mania

lallybelle said:


> Tiffany "New York" Pollard is a queen and reality tv gold. Omarosa was just a B on the apprentice, she got attention because that show wasn't really for drama, I mean the most dramatic thing was supposed to the former guys tag line.


Omarosa was abrasive on the show. It wasn’t the same thing as the stereotype Meghan was pushing but she was counting on listening letting it slide, which they did. Hey, they should get Omarosa’s comments on being mentioned on Meghan’s show with her personality being a trope!


----------



## youngster

_. . . but she’s learned a long time ago not to get too cut up or demotivated by those who wish to dwell in negativity . . ._

Maybe she should give Harry that advice. He's the one wallowing in negativity and his perception of events and interactions that happened years and years ago.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


>



Typical narcissist.  “Oh that thing I said?  I’d almost forgotten.  Whyever are you being so silly and making such a big deal of it?”


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Fortunately, the People’s Choice Awards is unrelated to People magazine. Winners are chosen by public vote.
> 
> Should we choose one of the other podcasts and vote for that? We should all agree on who to vote for so we don’t spread our votes too thin. We can make a difference. Who shall it be?
> 
> These are the choices:
> *THE POP PODCAST OF 2022*
> _Anything Goes with Emma Chamberlain
> Archetypes
> Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
> Call Her Daddy
> Conan O'Brien Needs A Friend
> Not Skinny But Not Fat
> SmartLess
> Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer_
> 
> You can click on a link for each award category in this article to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2022 People's Choice Awards: Complete List of Nominees - E! Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


People’s Choice is the group where their Oprah Interview was nominated for an award last year. They lost. Fingers crossed Arsewypes suffers the same outcome and their brand is 0 - 2.


----------



## Freak4Coach

Chanbal said:


>



If she didn’t want “negative” responses, maybe she should have kept her mouth shut about it. No one was talking about it until she brought it up.  Or how about just being honest? Telling “your truth” has consequences Meggy. She needs a strong smack out of MememeLand. And no, I don’t mean an actual smack. Sorry. Gotta clarify these days…


----------



## Hermes Zen

purseinsanity said:


> Oh for Pete’s sake.  According to DM, the “Spanish language version is even more pointed, having been given the subtitle En La Sombra, or 'in the shadow'.”
> @Vlad can we PRETTY PLEASE get eye roll, face plant, and barf emojis in the little easily accessible bar at the bottom?


Maybe for just our thread Vlad. Pretty pretty please!


----------



## rose60610

Freak4Coach said:


> If she didn’t want “negative” responses, maybe she should have kept her mouth shut about it. No one was talking about it until she brought it up.  Or how about just being honest? Telling “your truth” has consequences Meggy. She needs a strong smack out of MememeLand. And no, I don’t mean an actual smack. Sorry. Gotta clarify these days…



100%. Claw brought up a job she had 20 years ago, nobody else did. As for the "bimbo" part, she essentially slammed hundreds of thousands of women whose jobs/secondary jobs at least partially are due to their looks--cheerleaders, careers in fashion, actors, some sales, etc. You're telling me she didn't dress in some risqué stuff when she was in process of brainwashing and lovebombing  dating Harry?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

gracekelly said:


> OMG YES!  Does anyone think that she will let him go one on one with the chat show host or will she insert herself into that too?  I bet she does.  He isn't smart enough to be a good guest.  I would love to see him on Graham Norton lolololol!



Graham would be too nice. I want Emily Matis.


----------



## gracekelly

mikimoto007 said:


> Graham would be too nice. I want Emily Matis.


I had to look her up.  They keep moving the Norton show around time wise so I have trouble seeing it.  He is a great host and so funny.  I like the format and how the guests interact.  I really doubt that it would happen if Harry was on his show.  It would definitely be the two of them and just them and no one else.  Probably for 7-10 minutes and then other guests.  Considering how spontaneous GN is and that Meghan is the opposite, it will never happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Interestingly half of the comments section didn't get the joke.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did someone have the talk with him?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting? observations from Airmail, Graydon Carter’s magazine - it’s kinda long, focus on VLow’s book and The Crown.

_It is slightly berserk to think that the entire, sprawling royalty-entertainment industry failed to anticipate the death of a 96-year-old woman, but here we are. When Queen Elizabeth II passed away, nearly two months ago, all manner of projects were flung into unknowable turmoil.

You already know about *Prince Harry’s epic tour of vengeance*. The coming weeks were meant to mark his big return to the limelight, with both a book and a Netflix series set to air all his myriad grievances as uncompromisingly as possible. But the Queen’s death (not to mention the fact that Harry’s dad is now the King and, therefore, in charge of royal titles) has caused him to panic.

_


Spoiler



Behind the Palace Curtain​A new season of The Crown, a scathing nonfiction account, the tell-all memoir from Prince Harry himself—there is no shortage of ways to take in the royal family, but none are flattering​October 29, 2022

Reading Time: 6 minutes

It is slightly berserk to think that the entire, sprawling royalty-entertainment industry failed to anticipate the death of a 96-year-old woman, but here we are. When Queen Elizabeth II passed away, nearly two months ago, all manner of projects were flung into unknowable turmoil.

You already know about Prince Harry’s epic tour of vengeance. The coming weeks were meant to mark his big return to the limelight, with both a book and a Netflix series set to air all his myriad grievances as uncompromisingly as possible. But the Queen’s death (not to mention the fact that Harry’s dad is now the King and, therefore, in charge of royal titles) has caused him to panic.



Harry is said to be scrambling to make last-minute changes to his memoir, postponing publication so that he can delete anything too “insensitive” about his family. The Netflix docuseries, which has been in the works for a year now (and which pays the Sussexes’ mortgage and sundry bills), has run into similar problems, with an insider telling the _New York Post’_s Page Six, “They’ve made significant requests to walk back content they themselves have provided—to the extent that some Netflix staff believe, if granted, it will effectively shelve the project indefinitely.” To add to the worries, a senior Netflix source suggests that the projects don’t even line up particularly well. “A lot in the show contradicted what Harry has written, so that was an issue,” this person says.

After a fire engulfed St. Georges’s Hall at Windsor Castle in 1992, the Queen described the year as the “annus horribilis.”
Equally braced are the makers of _The Crown._ The upcoming season returns on November 9 and will cover the period when the monarchy went full telenovela. The Windsor Castle fire. The divorce of Prince Charles and Diana. The separation of Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson. The divorce of Princess Anne and Mark Phillips. Sarah Ferguson being photographed topless, having her toes sucked. Diana’s tell-all book. Diana’s tell-all interview, and the deceit that it revealed. Charles’s tell-all interview. Diana’s death. Given that almost nothing happened in the first four seasons of the show, this is one that viewers have long been waiting for.

But now things are teetering on the brink. One main thread of the season looks set to be “Prince Charles: what a git.” This was probably fine when he was a prince. But now that he is the King—and a new one at that, still mourning his mother—the stakes have been upped somewhat. Especially since the first episode shows him having a secret meeting with Prime Minister John Major to discuss a plot to oust the Queen. Major has gone public to announce that no such meeting ever happened, calling the scene “a barrel-load of nonsense.” Others have rushed to defend Major, with Jonathan Dimbleby (the architect of Charles’s tell-all interview) calling it “nonsense on stilts,” and Major’s former foreign secretary Malcolm Rifkind calling the episode “pathetic and absurd.”




> But even figures unlikely to appear in the new series have wedged their oar in. Dame Judi Dench, for example, wrote a letter to _The Times_ of London demanding that Netflix put a disclaimer at the start of every episode, lest anyone confuse it with a documentary, because to continue without would be ‘cruelly unjust to the individuals and damaging to the institution they represent.”



The Queen, Diana, and Charles watch the traditional Highland Games in Braemar, Scotland.
Which is sort of the point of _The Crown,_ isn’t it? The show has always made it clear that it’s a historical dramatization, with scenes and plot lines conjured out of thin air to fill holes in a very well-reported story. Again, this was fine at the beginning, when the series largely concerned itself with musty old stuffed shirts who have been dead for decades. But as it marches ever closer to the present, the bulk of its subjects are still alive and—as Major has proved—they are very happy to bad-mouth the show to anyone with a tape recorder. With post-funeral patriotism still palpable in the U.K., this backlash might be enough to knock _The Crown_ off-balance for a while.



One project that doesn’t have to worry about accusations of bad-faith dramatization is _Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown,_ the new book by _The Times _of London’s esteemed royal correspondent Valentine Low. The book is ostensibly the story of the advisers and secretaries employed to keep the royal family on track. These people are the power behind the throne. When Emmanuel Macron noted last month that Queen Elizabeth gave the British people a “sense of eternity,” he could just as easily have been talking about this backstage mycelium, charged with setting the boundaries by which the royal family must conduct themselves.

It’s a tough job. Courtiers have to strike a fine balance between tradition and reform, plotting for the future while honoring the past, and at the same time trying to rein in what can only be described as a bunch of petulant, diaper-pooping babies.

Very, very few members of the royal family come out of _Courtiers_ looking good. The Queen Mother, by dint of the fact that she was superfluous and drunk a lot of the time, sounds like a fun boss, and Low writes with hope that Prince William might one day be a well-loved King. But, for the most part, the royals come off like a sentient, multi-headed H.R. nightmare.

Sarah Ferguson, the self-described “most persecuted woman in the history of the royal family,” and Prince Andrew, who always greeted the Queen as “Mummy,” before “bowing from the neck, kissing her hand, and then kissing her on both cheeks.”
There is Prince Andrew, a barking seal cursed with equal parts arrogance and understandably low self-esteem. At one point he demands a newspaper interview to tell the world what an “ideas factory” he is, then fails to recall a single idea of his to the journalist. At another, he screams, “**** off out of my office and **** off out of my life!” at a staff member.

King Charles, meanwhile, is a man defined by his temper. He screams abuse at his staff in long, furniture-kicking tirades. He is depicted as equal parts dithering and stubborn, and burns through a steady succession of courtiers. “I was called names I hadn’t heard since my early days in the army,” one says of an incident when Charles realized that an order of his hadn’t been carried out immediately. Even Queen Elizabeth doesn’t come out of the book untouched, with her decades-long reluctance to pay income tax being a nerve that Low repeatedly pokes at with glee.





> One main thread of the season looks set to be “Prince Charles: what a git.”


But while _Courtiers_ throws the word “bully” around with abandon, its prime recipient is Meghan Markle. A number of Palace staff claim to have been bullied by Markle, with one describing her “emotional cruelty and manipulation.” Markle complains that she should be paid to do public appearances. She lies about receiving earrings from a Saudi prince who had just recently ordered the death of a _Washington Post_ journalist. She pummels her aides around the clock with furious calls and e-mails. When one senior aide discreetly mentions that it isn’t a particularly good look to compulsively reduce staff to tears, Markle is said to have replied, “It’s not my job to coddle people.”

Markle is far from the only royal to bristle against the constraints of the courtiers. In her book _My Story,_ Sarah Ferguson writes of the same staff: “Gradually, relentlessly, they had beaten me down. They were killing me by inches”—and it has to be said that the royal household has a history of treating outsiders with incredible disdain. Nevertheless, Markle and Prince Harry are depicted here as such a pair of full-tilt toddlers that Megxit, when it happens in the book, comes as something of a relief to everyone who had to deal with them.

But _Courtiers_ is just one side of history. For the rest of the picture, there is always Prince Harry’s memoir, reportedly coming out on January 10. It is called _Spare, _which his family members no doubt pray applies to them.

_To hear Stuart Heritage reveal more about his story, listen to him on _AIR MAIL’_s_Morning Meeting_ podcast_

Stuart Heritage is a Kent, U.K.–based Writer at Large for AIR MAIL and the author of Bedtime Stories for Worried Liberals

Illustration: Heritage Images/TopFoto. Photos: Jeremy Selwyn/Reuters/Alamy (left lens); Tim Graham Photo Library/Getty Images (right lens; Highland Games); David Cooper/Alamy (St. George’s Hall); Tom Stoddart/Getty Images (Ferguson, Prince Andrew)


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interestingly half of the comments section didn't get the joke.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: *(1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. *(2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.
> 
> They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.



He doesn't even have to do that. Just revoke the dukedom and her title which is just an extension of his is toast.

But also, the last sentence. The burn of all burns


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did someone have the talk with him?



How about that other rumor that she was fired because Mrs. Mandel thought she was coming on to Mr. Mandel.  It may not be at all true, but knowing how she operates, it sounds like her.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Thinking ahead post SPARE publication, King Charles issues a letter  “After reviewing my beloved son’s intransigent statements of deep seated unhappiness regarding his position in the Royal Family, which requires his being bound to the Monarchy, an institution he disdains, I am taking the following actions, to go into immediate effect in an attempt to ease his family’s lives as private citizens without obligations to the Crown: (1) The titles of  Duke and Duchess of Sussex are revoked. (2) Prince Harry is permanently removed from the list of Councilors of State. (3) The lease of Frogmore Cottage as a Sussex domicile is rescinded. No further Royal residences will be made available for occupation by the Windsor family as such close proximity to Working Royals and the business of the Monarchy is depicted as causing distress. (4) Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor will retain their birth names without Royal titles.
> 
> They will always be family and we wish them peace and happiness abroad.


Please forward a copy of this to BP and suggest that he use it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




How do these people function in real life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did someone have the talk with him?



_She was just talking about what was going on in her mind._
Howie Mandel


----------



## 1LV

Chanbal said:


>



Please and thank you.


----------



## sgj99

csshopper said:


> People’s Choice is the group where their Oprah Interview was nominated for an award last year. They lost. Fingers crossed Arsewypes suffers the same outcome and their brand is 0 - 2.


I can’t believe that podcast has listeners


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




She is such a freaking gaslighter.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting? observations from Airmail, Graydon Carter’s magazine - it’s kinda long, focus on VLow’s book and The Crown.
> 
> _It is slightly berserk to think that the entire, sprawling royalty-entertainment industry failed to anticipate the death of a 96-year-old woman, but here we are. When Queen Elizabeth II passed away, nearly two months ago, all manner of projects were flung into unknowable turmoil.
> 
> You already know about *Prince Harry’s epic tour of vengeance*. The coming weeks were meant to mark his big return to the limelight, with both a book and a Netflix series set to air all his myriad grievances as uncompromisingly as possible. But the Queen’s death (not to mention the fact that Harry’s dad is now the King and, therefore, in charge of royal titles) has caused him to panic.
> 
> _
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Behind the Palace Curtain​A new season of The Crown, a scathing nonfiction account, the tell-all memoir from Prince Harry himself—there is no shortage of ways to take in the royal family, but none are flattering​October 29, 2022
> 
> Reading Time: 6 minutes
> 
> It is slightly berserk to think that the entire, sprawling royalty-entertainment industry failed to anticipate the death of a 96-year-old woman, but here we are. When Queen Elizabeth II passed away, nearly two months ago, all manner of projects were flung into unknowable turmoil.
> 
> You already know about Prince Harry’s epic tour of vengeance. The coming weeks were meant to mark his big return to the limelight, with both a book and a Netflix series set to air all his myriad grievances as uncompromisingly as possible. But the Queen’s death (not to mention the fact that Harry’s dad is now the King and, therefore, in charge of royal titles) has caused him to panic.
> 
> 
> 
> Harry is said to be scrambling to make last-minute changes to his memoir, postponing publication so that he can delete anything too “insensitive” about his family. The Netflix docuseries, which has been in the works for a year now (and which pays the Sussexes’ mortgage and sundry bills), has run into similar problems, with an insider telling the _New York Post’_s Page Six, “They’ve made significant requests to walk back content they themselves have provided—to the extent that some Netflix staff believe, if granted, it will effectively shelve the project indefinitely.” To add to the worries, a senior Netflix source suggests that the projects don’t even line up particularly well. “A lot in the show contradicted what Harry has written, so that was an issue,” this person says.
> 
> After a fire engulfed St. Georges’s Hall at Windsor Castle in 1992, the Queen described the year as the “annus horribilis.”
> Equally braced are the makers of _The Crown._ The upcoming season returns on November 9 and will cover the period when the monarchy went full telenovela. The Windsor Castle fire. The divorce of Prince Charles and Diana. The separation of Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson. The divorce of Princess Anne and Mark Phillips. Sarah Ferguson being photographed topless, having her toes sucked. Diana’s tell-all book. Diana’s tell-all interview, and the deceit that it revealed. Charles’s tell-all interview. Diana’s death. Given that almost nothing happened in the first four seasons of the show, this is one that viewers have long been waiting for.
> 
> But now things are teetering on the brink. One main thread of the season looks set to be “Prince Charles: what a git.” This was probably fine when he was a prince. But now that he is the King—and a new one at that, still mourning his mother—the stakes have been upped somewhat. Especially since the first episode shows him having a secret meeting with Prime Minister John Major to discuss a plot to oust the Queen. Major has gone public to announce that no such meeting ever happened, calling the scene “a barrel-load of nonsense.” Others have rushed to defend Major, with Jonathan Dimbleby (the architect of Charles’s tell-all interview) calling it “nonsense on stilts,” and Major’s former foreign secretary Malcolm Rifkind calling the episode “pathetic and absurd.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Queen, Diana, and Charles watch the traditional Highland Games in Braemar, Scotland.
> Which is sort of the point of _The Crown,_ isn’t it? The show has always made it clear that it’s a historical dramatization, with scenes and plot lines conjured out of thin air to fill holes in a very well-reported story. Again, this was fine at the beginning, when the series largely concerned itself with musty old stuffed shirts who have been dead for decades. But as it marches ever closer to the present, the bulk of its subjects are still alive and—as Major has proved—they are very happy to bad-mouth the show to anyone with a tape recorder. With post-funeral patriotism still palpable in the U.K., this backlash might be enough to knock _The Crown_ off-balance for a while.
> 
> 
> 
> One project that doesn’t have to worry about accusations of bad-faith dramatization is _Courtiers: The Hidden Power Behind the Crown,_ the new book by _The Times _of London’s esteemed royal correspondent Valentine Low. The book is ostensibly the story of the advisers and secretaries employed to keep the royal family on track. These people are the power behind the throne. When Emmanuel Macron noted last month that Queen Elizabeth gave the British people a “sense of eternity,” he could just as easily have been talking about this backstage mycelium, charged with setting the boundaries by which the royal family must conduct themselves.
> 
> It’s a tough job. Courtiers have to strike a fine balance between tradition and reform, plotting for the future while honoring the past, and at the same time trying to rein in what can only be described as a bunch of petulant, diaper-pooping babies.
> 
> Very, very few members of the royal family come out of _Courtiers_ looking good. The Queen Mother, by dint of the fact that she was superfluous and drunk a lot of the time, sounds like a fun boss, and Low writes with hope that Prince William might one day be a well-loved King. But, for the most part, the royals come off like a sentient, multi-headed H.R. nightmare.
> 
> Sarah Ferguson, the self-described “most persecuted woman in the history of the royal family,” and Prince Andrew, who always greeted the Queen as “Mummy,” before “bowing from the neck, kissing her hand, and then kissing her on both cheeks.”
> There is Prince Andrew, a barking seal cursed with equal parts arrogance and understandably low self-esteem. At one point he demands a newspaper interview to tell the world what an “ideas factory” he is, then fails to recall a single idea of his to the journalist. At another, he screams, “**** off out of my office and **** off out of my life!” at a staff member.
> 
> King Charles, meanwhile, is a man defined by his temper. He screams abuse at his staff in long, furniture-kicking tirades. He is depicted as equal parts dithering and stubborn, and burns through a steady succession of courtiers. “I was called names I hadn’t heard since my early days in the army,” one says of an incident when Charles realized that an order of his hadn’t been carried out immediately. Even Queen Elizabeth doesn’t come out of the book untouched, with her decades-long reluctance to pay income tax being a nerve that Low repeatedly pokes at with glee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But while _Courtiers_ throws the word “bully” around with abandon, its prime recipient is Meghan Markle. A number of Palace staff claim to have been bullied by Markle, with one describing her “emotional cruelty and manipulation.” Markle complains that she should be paid to do public appearances. She lies about receiving earrings from a Saudi prince who had just recently ordered the death of a _Washington Post_ journalist. She pummels her aides around the clock with furious calls and e-mails. When one senior aide discreetly mentions that it isn’t a particularly good look to compulsively reduce staff to tears, Markle is said to have replied, “It’s not my job to coddle people.”
> 
> Markle is far from the only royal to bristle against the constraints of the courtiers. In her book _My Story,_ Sarah Ferguson writes of the same staff: “Gradually, relentlessly, they had beaten me down. They were killing me by inches”—and it has to be said that the royal household has a history of treating outsiders with incredible disdain. Nevertheless, Markle and Prince Harry are depicted here as such a pair of full-tilt toddlers that Megxit, when it happens in the book, comes as something of a relief to everyone who had to deal with them.
> 
> But _Courtiers_ is just one side of history. For the rest of the picture, there is always Prince Harry’s memoir, reportedly coming out on January 10. It is called _Spare, _which his family members no doubt pray applies to them.
> 
> _To hear Stuart Heritage reveal more about his story, listen to him on _AIR MAIL’_s_Morning Meeting_ podcast_
> 
> Stuart Heritage is a Kent, U.K.–based Writer at Large for AIR MAIL and the author of Bedtime Stories for Worried Liberals
> 
> Illustration: Heritage Images/TopFoto. Photos: Jeremy Selwyn/Reuters/Alamy (left lens); Tim Graham Photo Library/Getty Images (right lens; Highland Games); David Cooper/Alamy (St. George’s Hall); Tom Stoddart/Getty Images (Ferguson, Prince Andrew)


I miss Graydon Carters VF


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Fortunately, the People’s Choice Awards is unrelated to People magazine. Winners are chosen by public vote.
> 
> Should we choose one of the other podcasts and vote for that? We should all agree on who to vote for so we don’t spread our votes too thin. We can make a difference. Who shall it be?
> 
> These are the choices:
> *THE POP PODCAST OF 2022*
> _Anything Goes with Emma Chamberlain
> Archetypes
> Armchair Expert with Dax Shepard
> Call Her Daddy
> Conan O'Brien Needs A Friend
> Not Skinny But Not Fat
> SmartLess
> Why Won't You Date Me? With Nicole Byer_
> 
> You can click on a link for each award category in this article to vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2022 People's Choice Awards: Complete List of Nominees - E! Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


I voted for Conan. He's generally funny and not a repulsive human like MM.


----------



## sdkitty

Oh yay - Howard and Robin Quivers both giving Meghan a big side eye....an American WOC in the media saying this








						Howard Stern Thinks Meghan Markle Is In Desperate Need Of A New PR Team Following Her Deal Or No Deal Scandal
					

Meghan Markle caused a lot of controversy when she criticized her time on the hit game show, Deal Or No Deal.




					www.thethings.com


----------



## gelbergirl

Any chance this book they move up the release date of this Spare book?


----------



## Vlad

purseinsanity said:


> @Vlad can we PRETTY PLEASE get eye roll, face plant, and barf emojis in the little easily accessible bar at the bottom?



I'll see what I can do!


----------



## mikimoto007

gracekelly said:


> I had to look her up.  They keep moving the Norton show around time wise so I have trouble seeing it.  He is a great host and so funny.  I like the format and how the guests interact.  I really doubt that it would happen if Harry was on his show.  It would definitely be the two of them and just them and no one else.  Probably for 7-10 minutes and then other guests.  Considering how spontaneous GN is and that Meghan is the opposite, it will never happen.


Graham is marvellous, I couldn't agree more, but he wouldn't hold Harry to account, he wouldn't ask Harry the questions I want asked, it would all softballs. I agree with you, it will never happen!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

On BritBox tonight I found a 'movie' called A Photograph that I skipped through here and there because it was so boring. It's about of an author who writes 'archetype' stories that are as boring as ZedZed's podcrashes. Knowing you won't go down this rabbit hole, I must tell you that the poor guy bites the big one in a very unkind fashion. Makes one wonder if ZedZed should consider adding a warning with each episode she spews out or if perhaps the mere word 'archetype' is a portent in itself.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz's book was written by a ghost writer based on the memories of pals (TW)??? Moreover, it appears that he wrote the book for himself and was paid $25-$30M for it. 











						Prince Harry submitted book more than once before publishers accepted it
					

PRINCE Harry had to submit his new book more than once before publishers accepted it — sparking fears it has been “sexed up” with revelations that will rock the royals. And it emerged the Duke of S…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				








			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

He loves the environment at his mansion, private jets..


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interestingly half of the comments section didn't get the joke.


NM


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> People’s Choice is the group where their Oprah Interview was nominated for an award last year. They lost. Fingers crossed Arsewypes suffers the same outcome and their brand is 0 - 2.


Call me cynical but it sounds like for the nominee list at least, either cash or clout can get you nominated.
There was a scandal in a local talent show some years ago. The results at the finals were decided partly by the judges and partly by popular votes. It was discovered that the wealthy family of one contestant paid people to vote for their son/daughter.


----------



## octopus17

Chanbal said:


> He loves the environment at his mansion, private jets..



If he wasn't the Prince of Wales' (now KC3) son, she wouldn't have given him the time of day and her focus would have remained on footballers etc.
He can identify all he wants, but "there's none so blind as those that will not see"...


----------



## CarryOn2020

Vlad said:


> I'll see what I can do!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> 100%. Claw brought up a job she had 20 years ago, nobody else did. As for the "bimbo" part, she essentially slammed hundreds of thousands of women whose jobs/secondary jobs at least partially are due to their looks--cheerleaders, careers in fashion, actors, some sales, etc. *You're telling me she didn't dress in some risqué stuff when she was in process of brainwashing and lovebombing  dating Harry?*


Of course not. She was an innocent in the ways of the world  
For some reason, The Scarlet A popped into my mind, so I went to refresh my memory. Guess what? The child of Hester's illicit liaison is named Pearl!


QueenofWrapDress said:


> How do these people function in real life.


I had a team member once who could not make any decisions. We had to give her A-Z instructions for everything. If we missed a step, the whole process stalled. One day, I was so frustrated that I told my colleague: "Surely she has to decide on what to buy for her clothes!" There was a suspicious pause, then my colleague told me that the team member (who dressed quite smartly) always went shopping with her SIL. If she tried on a dress and her SIL approved, she bought it in every colour available. She never chose her own clothes.


mikimoto007 said:


> Graham is marvellous, I couldn't agree more, but he wouldn't hold Harry to account, he wouldn't ask Harry the questions I want asked, it would all softballs. I agree with you, it will never happen!


I don't think they will appear on any talkshow that won't just deliver softballs. And if Zedzee tags along, it will be all flailing arms and HER opinions. Maybe they can entice OW to do Part Deux since they now have so much more new material to gripe about.


----------



## xincinsin

Hear hear...


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

xincinsin said:


> View attachment 5642728
> 
> Hear hear...


Just to add: the comments are well-worth a read. Some very insightful thoughts about Handbag's emotional stunting.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


>











Chanbal said:


> Hazz's book was written by a ghost writer based on the memories of pals (TW)??? Moreover, it appears that he wrote the book for himself and was paid $25-$30M for it.
> 
> View attachment 5642628
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry submitted book more than once before publishers accepted it
> 
> 
> PRINCE Harry had to submit his new book more than once before publishers accepted it — sparking fears it has been “sexed up” with revelations that will rock the royals. And it emerged the Duke of S…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5642613
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph







I'd love to know how someone can 'sex up' a book that will be nothing but a whine-fest journal for a narcissistic eternal-victim?
It will be boring if anything because it will be the same old woe-is-me stories with a few new fictional stories thrown in.
You're not a damn rockstar with exciting stories to tell. JCMH, you're a petulant man-child prince who married an insufferable fame-hungry woman and then you both ran away from your responsibilities to ****eau Monteshitshow where you spew hate for your family and repeatedly monetize your deceased mother. Nothing can sex-up that whole situation or your drab personality.

Also... no one is asking or making JCMH to live his life to 'trying to make his family happy', that should be for himself. The least he _can do _(or should do) is show basic respect toward his family, for all the good they have done for him and the privileges they have given him throughout his life. He would not be where he is right now without his family, it's time he remembered that.
Oh, but of course, he's too immature and resentful to act like a decent human being.


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t know how he can sex up the book without talking about his prior girlfriends and they won’t be too happy about it. I trust the attorneys vetted those portions. Is he going to say they had relations on the throne?


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> He loves the environment at his mansion, private jets..




If Haz no longer sees himself as a son or brother, is he announcing that he's been cut off 100%, the titles are toast, and his kids won't get titles, either? Well, well, well. That's a big difference compared to when he tried begging a ride in Daddy's Bentley en route to the Jubilee mass. That's what you get when you marry a narcissist who made you cut ties with your world famous family who have a thousand year history, considered herself a victim in spite of your 50 million dollar wedding, Frogmore, jet travel to exotic locations, parties galore, connections to the world's most prominent people, servants galore, a designer wardrobe, etc, and thinks that olive oil lemon cakes are her ticket to worldwide recognition for philanthropic works. Is she worth it, Haz? I mean, Spare?


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I don’t know how he can sex up the book without talking about his prior girlfriends and they won’t be too happy about it. I trust the attorneys vetted those portions. Is he going to say they had relations on the throne?


I find it hard to believe that his pals and ex-GFs agreed to talk to Mr Ghostwriter. Didn't he alienate his pals? And he is bound to compare his ex-GFs unfavourably to his current mummy.


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> Just to add: the comments are well-worth a read. Some very insightful thoughts about Handbag's emotional stunting.


This one comment hit me the most and really makes me feel disgusted at Harry. 
Reading the comments, I also find it sad that we live in the world that buy the (repeated) sob story of a privileged and entitled man-child instead of using that resources to help people who do need help.


----------



## Pessie

It seemed like everyone stood still when the Queen died, except for Harry and Meghan who still managed to get their discontent aired.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Obviously trying to make a raging psycho with a determination to be dissatisfied happy is so much better (and more achievable...not).


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> It seemed like everyone stood still when the Queen died, except for Harry and Meghan who still managed to get their discontent aired.


She ruined their plans  They had the Year of Reconciliation all planned out for after the Year of Betrayal. And they had just broken off with  Sucks, otherwise they could have forced the PR firm to restrategize everything. This is their Winter of Discontent.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously trying to make a raging psycho with a determination to be dissatisfied happy is so much better (and more achievable...not).



If he wrote the book for himself, presumably as a form of catharsis, why does he expect the rest of the world to underwrite his therapy cost? I think I will adopt a new nickname for him, coined by witty Redditors: Sparry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> It seemed like everyone stood still when the Queen died, except for Harry and Meghan who still managed to get their discontent aired.



We have family over (I feel so old. My nephew is taller than I am, what happened during Covid when we didn't see them?) and talked about The Queen's passing at dinner. Weeks after the fact. So many people you never thought cared either way were in shock and genuinely sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If he wrote the book for himself, presumably as a form of catharsis, why does he expect the rest of the world to underwrite his therapy cost? I think I will adopt a new nickname for him, coined by witty Redditors: Sparry.



I wonder if this is his new business idea or if that's really all he feels he is. Which would be so sad somehow.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if this is his new business idea or if that's really all he feels he is. Which would be so sad somehow.



i couldn’t handle 400+ pages of whining and complaining he wasn’t treated the same as William.

their only brand is selling stories of his family.


----------



## Mumotons

Apparently they’re trying to recruit influencers to push the book


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oh my. Even as a not die hard royalist I wouldn't want to be involved in this very public mud fight.


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> She ruined their plans  They had the Year of Reconciliation all planned out for after the Year of Betrayal. And they had just broken off with  Sucks, otherwise they could have forced the PR firm to restrategize everything. This is their Winter of Discontent.
> 
> If he wrote the book for himself, presumably as a form of catharsis, why does he expect the rest of the world to underwrite his therapy cost? I think I will adopt a new nickname for him, coined by witty Redditors: Sparry.


“Not a takedown” eh?  Sounds like backtracking to me.  Sp’Arry is a wimp then as well as a monetising sneak.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> Apparently they’re trying to recruit influencers to push the book
> View attachment 5642920



The publisher's tactic of reducing the price to 50% is to have the book on Bestsellers lists asap. Apparently, people that attend TW's dinner in November will have a chance to acquire signed copies of the book. The Harkles need the book to be a success, and several types of promotions are in place. I would have preferred the alternative title of "_Gone with the whinge._" 

There is no need to buy the book and sponsor the Harkles. The BLG, Lady C, DM and so many other outlets will release plenty of details to satisfy everyone's curiosity.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> It seemed like everyone stood still when the Queen died, except for Harry and Meghan who still managed to get their discontent aired.



Agreed. They were abominable. 

And then M went on about on about "Harry's grandmother' in Variety. 

They both make me want to


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The publisher's tactic of reducing the price to 50% is to have the book on Bestsellers lists asap. Apparently, people that attend TW's dinner in November will have a chance to acquire signed copies of the book. The Harkles need the book to be a success, and several types of promotions are in place. I would have preferred the alternative title of "_Gone with the whinge._"
> 
> There is no need to buy the book and sponsor the Harkles. The BLG, Lady C, DM and so many other outlets will release plenty of details to satisfy everyone's curiosity.



Yes, exactly. 

No one should buy this book. Not even for a door-stop. 

Every word will be picked-over anyway.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 880

The BRF may simply ignore as per ‘never complain, never explain’.

The book’s old news from a poor little rich prince should die out due to lack of oxygen

in the view of the BRF, H is simply not important enough to create a tsunami of bad feeling.

in the view of the world, there are true unfortunates, like victims of war and poverty.

my in laws live in Santa barbara and commented that there was a stir at a store recently with Prince Harry’s wife. . . . you know the one everyone dislikes  I said oh, you mean, MM


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>




As someone else has previously said, he wasn't born the spare.

He was the Monarch's grandson, and so he's only been the 'spare' for one month.


----------



## Chanbal

I have Harry’s autobiography, _Spare_, on order, as part of the unofficial contract we journos have with *the intellectually challenged ginger creature formerly known as Prince*. This contract stipulates that we will buy all Meghan’n’Harry merch in the hope that it will provide us with further reasons to intensely dislike them.

We will then hone our recently acquired slab of animus into vituperative prose directed against the ghastly couple, thereby publicising whatever it is they are flogging this week, as well as encouraging them to produce more vacuous, self-serving tripe — which, again, we will write about and thus subject to the nitrous oxide of publicity.

Meghan knows this is the deal and it is possible that Harry is dimly aware of it too. I think they would both be a little disappointed if a hack reviewed one of the Netflix documentaries, or Harry’s book, and concluded: “What a compelling and insightful piece of work this is, entirely worthy of this supremely likeable twosome.”

Nobody ever actually says that over here (not least because neither of them is capable of real insight). We buy the stuff because we hope and expect that Harry and Meghan are going to say something simultaneously spiteful about the royal family and hilariously self-pitying about themselves. If they cease saying spiteful and self-pitying stuff nobody would be remotely interested and the books would pile up in the couple’s 16 bathrooms, providing an environmentally sound alternative to Kleenex.

I’ve read the blurb. I am told that “With its raw, unflinching honesty, _Spare_ is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief”. Yeet. I sincerely hope it isn’t, although I expect that the “self-examination” runs to several hundred interminable pages.

We are also informed that the ginge is a “husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental-wellness advocate and environmentalist” who “resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs”. Finally, Harry tells us that it is an interesting story because he has “worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively”, which made me worry briefly that this would be a book solely about Harry’s favourite hats, those he liked and those he felt were less attractive — which would in my view be an account which risks teetering into tedium, even if it keeps his dad happy.

The Sussex rumour mill, meanwhile, has suggested that, since the Queen’s funeral, Harry has been busy striking out of his text stuff like “Camilla — that horrid old racist ratbag who kept dobbing my dad while Mum wasn’t looking” and “Dad doesn’t just talk to plants, he takes detailed instructions from them,” and so forth. I hope this rumour is wide of the mark, otherwise it’s 13 quid down the swanee.

But as I say, Harry knows the contract — and even if he doesn’t his publishers do, much as do the executives at Netflix. There has to be the intimation of bile directed at his old family — however vapidly expressed — otherwise his new family will lose a lucrative source of income and sink into a kind of D-list sleb obscurity, which is roughly where Meghan Markle resided before he popped the question.

In a sense this is Harry’s only real tragedy, and one that he has created for himself. His continued existence in the public eye is exclusively predicated upon him being a sullen counterpoint to the rest of the royal family. Without that, what could he possibly have to tell us all? And yet by the same token, the more and more estranged he becomes from the Windsors, the less impact his whining revelations carry. So the temptation will be to up the condemnations of both the institution and the individual members of it, to compensate for that inevitably growing sense of distance. He seems destined to become a kind of mirror-image of Meghan’s father, seething with anger and ready for a damaging quote every time Oprah or CNN wander along desperate to portray our country as a nation of colonialist bigots.

Harry’s disaffection with the monarchy has a lot more purchase with the dim-witted liberals in the United States than it does over here, where the overwhelming majority of people are not in the least bit sympathetic to the formerly royal couple. He can survive on that for a while, although with ever-diminishing returns.

He called his book _Spare_ because of his subordinance to his brother in the royal rankings — but when used in my neck of the woods, in the north of England, it can also mean either angry or mentally deficient. I don’t suppose he knew that.





__





						archive.ph
					





					archive.ph


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> As someone else has previously said, he wasn't born the spare.
> 
> He was the Monarch's grandson, and so he's only been the 'spare' for one month.


He’s never been second in line has he?


----------



## Chanbal

The heir got the looks, brain, wife… while the poor spare got TW


----------



## Pessie

880 said:


> The BRF may simply ignore as per ‘never complain, never explain’.
> 
> The book’s old news from a poor little rich prince should die out due to lack of oxygen
> 
> in the view of the BRF, H is simply not important enough to create a tsunami of bad feeling.
> 
> in the view of the world, there are true unfortunates, like victims of war and poverty.
> 
> my in laws live in Santa barbara and commented that there was a stir at a store recently with Prince Harry’s wife. . . . you know the one everyone dislikes  I said oh, you mean, MM


This.  We’ve heard it all already.  Everyone bar Harkle cult members has moved on, and just wishes they’d stfu.  The law of diminishing returns applies to sensationalist bombshells, but their ability to irritate remains undimmed unfortunately.


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> He’s never been second in line has he?



No, he's never been #2

Edited to say, as you point out, and to correct myself, he actually has _never_, ever been the 'spare'.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5642963
> 
> I have Harry’s autobiography, _Spare_, on order, as part of the unofficial contract we journos have with *the intellectually challenged ginger creature formerly known as Prince*. This contract stipulates that we will buy all Meghan’n’Harry merch in the hope that it will provide us with further reasons to intensely dislike them.
> 
> We will then hone our recently acquired slab of animus into vituperative prose directed against the ghastly couple, thereby publicising whatever it is they are flogging this week, as well as encouraging them to produce more vacuous, self-serving tripe — which, again, we will write about and thus subject to the nitrous oxide of publicity.
> 
> Meghan knows this is the deal and it is possible that Harry is dimly aware of it too. I think they would both be a little disappointed if a hack reviewed one of the Netflix documentaries, or Harry’s book, and concluded: “What a compelling and insightful piece of work this is, entirely worthy of this supremely likeable twosome.”
> 
> Nobody ever actually says that over here (not least because neither of them is capable of real insight). We buy the stuff because we hope and expect that Harry and Meghan are going to say something simultaneously spiteful about the royal family and hilariously self-pitying about themselves. If they cease saying spiteful and self-pitying stuff nobody would be remotely interested and the books would pile up in the couple’s 16 bathrooms, providing an environmentally sound alternative to Kleenex.
> 
> I’ve read the blurb. I am told that “With its raw, unflinching honesty, _Spare_ is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief”. Yeet. I sincerely hope it isn’t, although I expect that the “self-examination” runs to several hundred interminable pages.
> 
> We are also informed that the ginge is a “husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental-wellness advocate and environmentalist” who “resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs”. Finally, Harry tells us that it is an interesting story because he has “worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively”, which made me worry briefly that this would be a book solely about Harry’s favourite hats, those he liked and those he felt were less attractive — which would in my view be an account which risks teetering into tedium, even if it keeps his dad happy.
> 
> The Sussex rumour mill, meanwhile, has suggested that, since the Queen’s funeral, Harry has been busy striking out of his text stuff like “Camilla — that horrid old racist ratbag who kept dobbing my dad while Mum wasn’t looking” and “Dad doesn’t just talk to plants, he takes detailed instructions from them,” and so forth. I hope this rumour is wide of the mark, otherwise it’s 13 quid down the swanee.
> 
> But as I say, Harry knows the contract — and even if he doesn’t his publishers do, much as do the executives at Netflix. There has to be the intimation of bile directed at his old family — however vapidly expressed — otherwise his new family will lose a lucrative source of income and sink into a kind of D-list sleb obscurity, which is roughly where Meghan Markle resided before he popped the question.
> 
> In a sense this is Harry’s only real tragedy, and one that he has created for himself. His continued existence in the public eye is exclusively predicated upon him being a sullen counterpoint to the rest of the royal family. Without that, what could he possibly have to tell us all? And yet by the same token, the more and more estranged he becomes from the Windsors, the less impact his whining revelations carry. So the temptation will be to up the condemnations of both the institution and the individual members of it, to compensate for that inevitably growing sense of distance. He seems destined to become a kind of mirror-image of Meghan’s father, seething with anger and ready for a damaging quote every time Oprah or CNN wander along desperate to portray our country as a nation of colonialist bigots.
> 
> Harry’s disaffection with the monarchy has a lot more purchase with the dim-witted liberals in the United States than it does over here, where the overwhelming majority of people are not in the least bit sympathetic to the formerly royal couple. He can survive on that for a while, although with ever-diminishing returns.
> 
> He called his book _Spare_ because of his subordinance to his brother in the royal rankings — but when used in my neck of the woods, in the north of England, it can also mean either angry or mentally deficient. I don’t suppose he knew that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Very interesting how they have him pegged as M's new father.

MegZZ obviously used to wrap her stage-daddy around her finger, now she has HaZZ-bin. Funny how she projects the feminist warrior when she just plays Daddy's/H's little princess


----------



## papertiger

Recommended: Speed up to 1.5



Noted: M changed her ascendants that supposedly came from Zimbabwe a few years ago, to now her forebears from Nigeria. On her Tig she actually WROTE she said she was 8% Nigerian from a DNA test. Ethnicity doesn't have anything to do with nationality.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Obviously trying to make a raging psycho with a determination to be dissatisfied happy is so much better (and more achievable...not).



“Relatable”???  You are anything but relatable, Hazbeen.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> As someone else has previously said, he wasn't born the spare.
> 
> *He was the Monarch's grandson, and so he's only been the 'spare' for one month.*


Not even!  George is the “Spare”, then Charlotte, then Louis.
The book should be called “Spare #5”!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> But as I say, Harry knows the contract — and even if he doesn’t his publishers do, much as do the executives at Netflix. There has to be the intimation of bile directed at his old family — however vapidly expressed — *otherwise his new family will lose a lucrative source of income and sink into a kind of D-list sleb obscurity, which is roughly where Meghan Markle resided before he popped the question.*



OMG  It wasn't even directed at me and I can feel the heat from that burn


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> No, he's never been #2
> 
> Edited to say, as you point out, and to correct myself, he actually has _never_, ever been the 'spare'.



That depends how you define the heir and the spare. William has always been Charles's heir with Harry being the spare to William until George was born.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> He’s never been second in line has he?



No. When he was born it was already William and now it's George.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That depends how you define the heir and the spare. William has always been Charles's heir with Harry being the spare to William until George was born.



That would make Charlotte the spare, and Louis her spare. 

The Heir and the spare is particular and not general. 

Harry has actually never been the spare. He has been treated as such, but he hasn't been. Andrew was the spare, and for a long time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The Heir and the spare is particular and not general.



Exactly. Why would Diana have been aware she had to produce the heir and a spare (to the heir) if she could have just waited for William to procreate? With this logic William would have been the spare to Charles.

The spare is there to opt in when something happens to the heir before he has issue.

ETA: there seem to be two definitions, one being the next monarch + sibling (which supports your point) and the one where the spare is the sibling to any heir even if one generation further down the line. I personally feel it's unnecessary nitpicky to insist Harry - unlike Andrew - was never the spare to the very next monarch. It was still understood he'd take on William's role should William break his neck playing polo as a teenager.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Exactly. Why would Diana have been aware she had to produce the heir and a spare (to the heir) if she could have just waited for William to procreate?



She probably thought she would be Queen any minute


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Exactly. Why would Diana have been aware she had to produce the heir and a spare (to the heir) if she could have just waited for William to procreate? With this logic William would have been the spare to Charles.
> 
> The spare is there to opt in when something happens to the heir before he has issue.


Maybe because in the past, so many heirs passed before their time and before they could procreate?  Henry VI was never supposed to be king, and look what an a$$ he was.  
Best to never name any second sons Henry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But also, HAD William broken his neck as a teenager you bet Ghoul wouldn't have been so keen on beelining it back to Hollywood.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I don’t know how he can sex up the book without talking about his prior girlfriends and they won’t be too happy about it. I trust the attorneys vetted those portions. Is he going to say they had relations on the throne?


I think maybe in this case "sex up" means finding juicy, salicious stuff that will get people talking - like the big f-ing deal they made out of someone speculating about Archie's complexion


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The publisher's tactic of reducing the price to 50% is to have the book on Bestsellers lists asap. Apparently, people that attend TW's dinner in November will have a chance to acquire signed copies of the book. The Harkles need the book to be a success, and several types of promotions are in place. I would have preferred the alternative title of "_Gone with the whinge._"
> 
> There is no need to buy the book and sponsor the Harkles. The BLG, Lady C, DM and so many other outlets will release plenty of details to satisfy everyone's curiosity.


I would not put a penny in their pockets buying his crap....as you said, we'll get plenty of the "juicy bits" without reading the whole thing....and I don't know what he would have to say that isn't known already


----------



## lallybelle

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG  It wasn't even directed at me and I can feel the heat from that burn


LOL right? Straight up fire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These two bottomfeeders.


----------



## DL Harper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> These two bottomfeeders.



_"HM appealed to Charles for money, or" _- it seems that VERY closely resembles blackmail.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe in this case "sex up" means finding juicy, salicious stuff that will get people talking - like the big f-ing deal they made out of someone speculating about Archie's complexion


Exactly. They want the reader to have a reaction. Maybe something like this.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Exactly. They want the reader to have a reaction. Maybe something like this.
> 
> View attachment 5643045



When in fact, it'll be more like


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> Recommended: Speed up to 1.5
> 
> 
> 
> Noted: M changed her ascendants that supposedly came from Zimbabwe a few years ago, to now her forebears from Nigeria. On her Tig she actually WROTE she said she was 8% Nigerian from a DNA test. Ethnicity doesn't have anything to do with nationality.



Somebody get her a memory pill.  Or a fact-checker maybe….


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> Somebody get her a memory pill.  Or a fact-checker maybe….



I think she should go digital


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> Recommended: Speed up to 1.5
> 
> 
> 
> Noted: M changed her ascendants that supposedly came from Zimbabwe a few years ago, to now her forebears from Nigeria. On her Tig she actually WROTE she said she was 8% Nigerian from a DNA test. Ethnicity doesn't have anything to do with nationality.



Was she trying to be like Chelsy Davy who actually was from Zimbabwe?!?


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> As someone else has previously said, he wasn't born the spare.
> 
> He was the Monarch's grandson, and so he's only been the 'spare' for one month.


To stand up for H , I KNOW, I KNOW …. He was known as the SPARE during his mother’s lifetime
W and H were known as the heir and the spare, in the sense that D had done her reproductive job for C
It was not a reference to where they stood in the LOS

Remember … D’s parents had a lot of children before they had a surviving son  - D and sisters could not inherit the earldom- D’s mom had not done her job to produce a son early on ( she produced 3 daughters and an earlier son , died young ??? )


----------



## lanasyogamama

He’s claiming he wrote the book for himself? Isn’t that called a diary?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## purseinsanity

Aimee3 said:


> Was she trying to be like Chelsy Davy who actually was from Zimbabwe?!?


That was my first thought as well!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


>



Free breakfast from a Marriott?  Lately, that's not much better than the free cheese Danishes wrapped in plastic you get as part of a free breakfast from a Day's Inn.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> He’s claiming he wrote the book for himself? Isn’t that called a diary?


By hiring a ghostwriter it is with the understanding that it is being written on behalf of the famous person who isn’t a writer. There are likely many memoirs over the years which weren’t actually written by the “author.”


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> It seemed like everyone stood still when the Queen died, except for Harry and Meghan who still managed to get their discontent aired.


And plan how her death could be worked to their advantage.  The two of them wanted to go to Balmoral.  They wanted to do a walkabout by themselves, but were thwarted. He whinged about wearing a uniform.  He didn't like where they were sitting at the funeral.  Me, Me. Me. Me.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Free breakfast from a Marriott?  Lately, that's not much better than the free cheese Danishes wrapped in plastic you get as part of a free breakfast from a Day's Inn.


Gosh, they better make it vegan and have oat milk lattes or she will complain bitterly.


----------



## gracekelly

The DH informed me of his new theory about Harry and his intelligence, or lack of it.  He said that perhaps Harry had a low Apgar score at birth.  Thinking that if this is true, and he managed to hobble through Eton and Sandhurst with a lot of help, his score  might have just been on the minus side of 7.  Of course it could have been a 6 and that would really explain his only passing grade was in art.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Gosh, they better make it vegan and have oat milk lattes or she will complain bitterly.



Was her roast chicken vegan too?


----------



## DL Harper

gracekelly said:


> And plan how her death could be worked to their advantage.  The two of them wanted to go to Balmoral.  They wanted to do a walkabout by themselves, but were thwarted. He whinged about wearing a uniform.  He didn't like where they were sitting at the funeral.  Me, Me. Me. Me.


But...but...but...MM was the ONLY person to get their very own candle!!  Wasn't that special enough???


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe in this case "sex up" means finding juicy, salicious stuff that will get people talking - like the big f-ing deal they made out of someone speculating about Archie's complexion


I will state once again for the record that IMO Meghan Markle is the biggest racist of this entire bunch.  I think she was scared sh*tless  at how her children would turn out.  If anyone questioned how they would look, it was MM.  Granted recessive genes can always pop up, but the reality is that her children would never be that dark complected, i.e. darker than she is.  It turns out from the very limited pictures that we are allowed to view, that the children appear quite pale. She couldn't pass up the opportunity to use this as a stone to throw at the Royal family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Was her roast chicken vegan too?


It wasn't?  *smirk*


----------



## gracekelly

DL Harper said:


> But...but...but...MM was the ONLY person to get their very own candle!!  Wasn't that special enough???


Gosh!  You're right!  I hope she merches the hell out of it! They need the money.


----------



## Stansy

papertiger said:


> Was her roast chicken vegan too?





in Germany it is a tradition to have goose for Christmas. Attached is a vegan version


----------



## papertiger

Stansy said:


> View attachment 5643167
> 
> in Germany it is a tradition to have goose for Christmas. Attached is a vegan version



I hate to break it to you, but that is a ba-na-na


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


>



Next it will be a complimentary copy of ”The Bench.”


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I hate to break it to you, but that is a ba-na-na


Where's the other one spooning it??


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Where's the other one spooning it??



Must have escaped to a Sizzler. 

Maybe this one had words written on it. Something like 'BE NICE TO YOURSELF'


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Gosh, they better make it vegan and have oat milk lattes or she will complain bitterly.



They can always serve her chicken when they're out of vegan options.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The DH informed me of his new theory about Harry and his intelligence, or lack of it.  He said that perhaps Harry had a low Apgar score at birth.  Thinking that if this is true, and he managed to hobble through Eton and Sandhurst with a lot of help, his score  might have just been on the minus side of 7.  Of course it could have been a 6 and that would really explain his only passing grade was in art.



But the Apgar score has nothing to do with intelligence?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone isn't very popular these days. And she even got the shirt!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Someone isn't very popular these days. And she even got the shirt!



interesting list....very high level.  Oprah (who I know most people on this thread don't like) made it.  Duchess left out 

she probably didn't even make the draft list

wonder if she will begin to see the light - marrying a prince was a great achievement.  but she doesn't get to walk away and take that status with her.  Ha


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But the Apgar score has nothing to do with intelligence?


Yes it does.  It is  factor in the cognitive development of a child.  Scores below 7 can be linked to lower intelligence and school performance.  There are numerous studies about this with follow up of the children.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What was he thinking?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yes it does.  It is  factor in the cognitive development of a child.  Scores below 7 can be linked to lower intelligence and school performance.  There are numerous studies about this with follow up of the children.



It kind of makes me sad you're already measured up and judged five minutes after birth.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

What Is the Apgar Score?
					

The Apgar score is the very first test given to a newborn, done right after birth in the delivery or birthing room.




					www.hopkinsallchildrens.org
				




What if My Baby Has a Low Score?

Many babies with low scores are perfectly healthy and do just fine after adjusting to life outside the womb.

If your doctor or midwife is concerned about your baby's score, he or she will let you know and will explain how your baby is doing, what might be causing problems (if any), and what care is being given.

What Else Do I Need to Know?

This test was not designed to predict a baby's long-term health, behavior, intelligence, personality, or outcome. It was designed to help health care providers tell a newborn's overall physical condition so that they could quickly decide whether the baby needed immediate medical care.

With time to adjust to the new environment and with any necessary medical care, most babies do very well. So rather than focusing on a number, just enjoy your new baby!









						What Is a Good Apgar Score?
					

The Apgar score is a test your baby is given directly after birth. It helps your baby’s healthcare providers decide if your baby needs immediate medical care.




					my.clevelandclinic.org
				




Your baby’s healthcare providers don’t use the Apgar score to predict your baby’s future development, intelligence or future health. The Apgar tests can’t be used to determine if your baby will have serious or long-term health issues. The Apgar score simply alerts your baby’s healthcare providers if your baby needs a little extra assistance immediately after birth


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> What was he thinking?




Oh wow, I didn't know that it's a role usually held by the monarch or their spouse. I guess they forgot for a moment Harry was just the unwanted, neglected, poorly treated spare when they offered him the honour of a lifetime. 

Unforgiveable really that he ditched them so his bursting out of her dress wife (not mocking her post baby body, she could have just bought that dress in her size) could rub shoulders with Beyoncé and have Pharrell fawn over her in a really embarrassing way.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It kind of makes me sad you're already measured up and judged five minutes after birth.



Luckily, no-one tested me or I probably would have been thrown away. 

My form teacher used to pat me on the head when I was 11 and 'apologised' to my mother by saying I leaned "artistic". What I think she meant was I asked too many questions. 

These tests are to make the tester look more important. 

That's why M asks the questions on her Ache-types podcrashes. The one asking the questions always seems more knowledgeable and in control. The fact that she answers them too makes her look _doubly_-stupid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Yes it does.  It is  factor in the cognitive development of a child.  Scores below 7 can be linked to lower intelligence and school performance.  There are numerous studies about this with follow up of the children.



Not the hill I want to die on and just a layperson, but all I found was that an Apgar score below 7 hints to an enhanced risk of a neurologic disability and that the very few studies suggesting Apgar results somehow correlate with school performance, intelligence and cognitive function have been full of contradictions which call for further research. In fact the newest paper I could find (a Danish cohort study published this year) states the association between Apgar score and later cognitive function is unclear. 

I know we talk sh*t about the Troublesome Two all day long and mostly deservedly so, but that's a step too far for me.


----------



## Suncatcher

There are some real tragedies in the world. The news out of South Korea is heartbreaking. Harry’s story is not one of them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Suncatcher said:


> There are some real tragedies in the world. The news out of South Korea is heartbreaking. Harry’s story is not one of them.


Well said, thank you.  
This is why my interest in Hazzi’s “tour of vengeance” has dropped to new lows. Their same ole, same ole is not interesting, heartbreaking or even surprising.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s one that Hazz is silent on:  Green colonialism  

From the article:
_The widely shared image of Harry with Kagame during his recent trip has also revived debate about what critics label “fortress conservation”, a model of “green colonialism” that has limited benefit to communities near national parks that were created by force by colonial rulers who were enthusiastic hunters themselves.

_


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Is the Apgar Score?
> 
> 
> The Apgar score is the very first test given to a newborn, done right after birth in the delivery or birthing room.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hopkinsallchildrens.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What if My Baby Has a Low Score?
> 
> Many babies with low scores are perfectly healthy and do just fine after adjusting to life outside the womb.
> 
> If your doctor or midwife is concerned about your baby's score, he or she will let you know and will explain how your baby is doing, what might be causing problems (if any), and what care is being given.
> 
> What Else Do I Need to Know?
> 
> This test was not designed to predict a baby's long-term health, behavior, intelligence, personality, or outcome. It was designed to help health care providers tell a newborn's overall physical condition so that they could quickly decide whether the baby needed immediate medical care.
> 
> With time to adjust to the new environment and with any necessary medical care, most babies do very well. So rather than focusing on a number, just enjoy your new baby!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What Is a Good Apgar Score?
> 
> 
> The Apgar score is a test your baby is given directly after birth. It helps your baby’s healthcare providers decide if your baby needs immediate medical care.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my.clevelandclinic.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your baby’s healthcare providers don’t use the Apgar score to predict your baby’s future development, intelligence or future health. The Apgar tests can’t be used to determine if your baby will have serious or long-term health issues. The Apgar score simply alerts your baby’s healthcare providers if your baby needs a little extra assistance immediately after birth


If your baby doesn't get enough oxygen, baby is going to need a lot of help later in life.  My DH told me he thought Harry fit into that category.


----------



## Chanbal

From the creative people @ Twitter


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> If your baby doesn't get enough oxygen, baby is going to need a lot of help later in life.  My DH told me he thought Harry fit into that category.


Is your DH an obstetrician or pediatrician?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5643231
> 
> 
> If your baby doesn't get enough oxygen, baby is going to need a lot of help later in life.  My DH told me he thought Harry fit into that category.


Many neonatologists take the 5 minute Apgar score into account more than the 1 minute.
Low oxygenation before or right after birth can cause a low cord gas pH, which _can_ indicate hypoxia brain injury or brain damage.  
Cord pH is much more significant than Apgar scores.  Apgar scores are somewhat subjective, as the score depends on the scorer.


----------



## Chanbal

This doesn't look good for Hazz





Spoiler: Photo


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5643231


MM has never looked lovelier.


----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> MM has never looked lovelier.


But Hazz has WAY too much hair


----------



## EverSoElusive

purseinsanity said:


> Not even!  George is the “Spare”, then Charlotte, then Louis.
> The book should be called “Spare #5”!


I just want to say, perhaps *Unneeded* is a more fitting book title at this point. 

It would make me really happy if William and Kate would have another cute baby or even a pair of twins (or triplets!!!) because then *Unneeded* would be kicked further down the line of succession along with his Invisikids, that are more American than British


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> This doesn't look good for Hazz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Photo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5643296



Was the theme of this party the most offensive costumes imaginable?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> This doesn't look good for Hazz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Photo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5643296



That’s a fake photo.  It was taken from a parody sketch.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> This doesn't look good for Hazz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Photo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5643296



What exactly was the theme of that party?  “Come as your favorite racist”????


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5642963
> 
> I have Harry’s autobiography, _Spare_, on order, as part of the unofficial contract we journos have with *the intellectually challenged ginger creature formerly known as Prince*. This contract stipulates that we will buy all Meghan’n’Harry merch in the hope that it will provide us with further reasons to intensely dislike them.
> 
> We will then hone our recently acquired slab of animus into vituperative prose directed against the ghastly couple, thereby publicising whatever it is they are flogging this week, as well as encouraging them to produce more vacuous, self-serving tripe — which, again, we will write about and thus subject to the nitrous oxide of publicity.
> 
> Meghan knows this is the deal and it is possible that Harry is dimly aware of it too. I think they would both be a little disappointed if a hack reviewed one of the Netflix documentaries, or Harry’s book, and concluded: “What a compelling and insightful piece of work this is, entirely worthy of this supremely likeable twosome.”
> 
> Nobody ever actually says that over here (not least because neither of them is capable of real insight). We buy the stuff because we hope and expect that Harry and Meghan are going to say something simultaneously spiteful about the royal family and hilariously self-pitying about themselves. If they cease saying spiteful and self-pitying stuff nobody would be remotely interested and the books would pile up in the couple’s 16 bathrooms, providing an environmentally sound alternative to Kleenex.
> 
> I’ve read the blurb. I am told that “With its raw, unflinching honesty, _Spare_ is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief”. Yeet. I sincerely hope it isn’t, although I expect that the “self-examination” runs to several hundred interminable pages.
> 
> We are also informed that the ginge is a “husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental-wellness advocate and environmentalist” who “resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs”. Finally, Harry tells us that it is an interesting story because he has “worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively”, which made me worry briefly that this would be a book solely about Harry’s favourite hats, those he liked and those he felt were less attractive — which would in my view be an account which risks teetering into tedium, even if it keeps his dad happy.
> 
> The Sussex rumour mill, meanwhile, has suggested that, since the Queen’s funeral, Harry has been busy striking out of his text stuff like “Camilla — that horrid old racist ratbag who kept dobbing my dad while Mum wasn’t looking” and “Dad doesn’t just talk to plants, he takes detailed instructions from them,” and so forth. I hope this rumour is wide of the mark, otherwise it’s 13 quid down the swanee.
> 
> But as I say, Harry knows the contract — and even if he doesn’t his publishers do, much as do the executives at Netflix. There has to be the intimation of bile directed at his old family — however vapidly expressed — otherwise his new family will lose a lucrative source of income and sink into a kind of D-list sleb obscurity, which is roughly where Meghan Markle resided before he popped the question.
> 
> In a sense this is Harry’s only real tragedy, and one that he has created for himself. His continued existence in the public eye is exclusively predicated upon him being a sullen counterpoint to the rest of the royal family. Without that, what could he possibly have to tell us all? And yet by the same token, the more and more estranged he becomes from the Windsors, the less impact his whining revelations carry. So the temptation will be to up the condemnations of both the institution and the individual members of it, to compensate for that inevitably growing sense of distance. He seems destined to become a kind of mirror-image of Meghan’s father, seething with anger and ready for a damaging quote every time Oprah or CNN wander along desperate to portray our country as a nation of colonialist bigots.
> 
> Harry’s disaffection with the monarchy has a lot more purchase with the dim-witted liberals in the United States than it does over here, where the overwhelming majority of people are not in the least bit sympathetic to the formerly royal couple. He can survive on that for a while, although with ever-diminishing returns.
> 
> He called his book _Spare_ because of his subordinance to his brother in the royal rankings — but when used in my neck of the woods, in the north of England, it can also mean either angry or mentally deficient. I don’t suppose he knew that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Bloody BRILLIANT!

(But just a quick correction directed to the otherwise on-target Mister Liddle - not all of us Yank liberals are dim-witted. Trust me on this.)


----------



## needlv

Haha - very funny and only 3 minutes long


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> View attachment 5643231
> 
> 
> If your baby doesn't get enough oxygen, baby is going to need a lot of help later in life.  My DH told me he thought Harry fit into that category.



Is this the Alternative Miss World?


----------



## needlv

Is anyone here in publishing?

As I understand it, he isn’t paid (the allegedly) $20m upfront but it has milestone payments,

would Harry receive more $$ upon the release of his book - or is it tied to sales?

Just curious.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> That was my first thought as well!


I thought that too. Why Zimbabwe? 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh wow, I didn't know that it's a role usually held by the monarch or their spouse. I guess they forgot for a moment Harry was just the unwanted, neglected, poorly treated spare when they offered him the honour of a lifetime.
> 
> Unforgiveable really that he ditched them so his bursting out of her dress wife (not mocking her post baby body, *she could have just bought that dress in her size*) could rub shoulders with Beyoncé and have Pharrell fawn over her in a really embarrassing way.


Why doesn't she ever buy her fancy dresses in her size? If she was just running a "buy it/charge Charles/return dress for refund" scam, she could have bought them in her size. She couldn't have tailored them if she wanted to return them, but why didn't she buy them in the right size or a larger size? Why almost always the stuffed sausage look? ("Almost always" because there were a couple of times when she was swallowed by the excess fabric).


----------



## Mumotons

Looks like someone has jumped ship , plates smashing somewhere? 








						Roland Mouret says he designs with the Princess of Wales in mind
					

The London-based French designer, 61, said Kate Middleton, 40, is a 'powerful' woman who has created a 'sense of equality' in hers and the Prince of Wales' relationship.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> I thought that too. Why Zimbabwe?
> 
> Why doesn't she ever buy her fancy dresses in her size? If she was just running a "buy it/charge Charles/return dress for refund" scam, she could have bought them in her size. She couldn't have tailored them if she wanted to return them, but why didn't she buy them in the right size or a larger size? Why almost always the stuffed sausage look? ("Almost always" because there were a couple of times when she was swallowed by the excess fabric).


She's trying to start and immortalize the trend of dressing like a sausage


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> interesting list....very high level.  Oprah (who I know most people on this thread don't like) made it.  Duchess left out
> 
> she probably didn't even make the draft list
> 
> wonder if she will begin to see the light - marrying a prince was a great achievement.  but she doesn't get to walk away and take that status with her.  Ha



I used to see Oprah as a good person. The sad excuse for THAT interview, her insane meddling with a foreign country's title system and her coopting the life story of Sidney Poitier to elevate her own history changed my mind.


----------



## WingNut

Mumotons said:


> Looks like someone has jumped ship , plates smashing somewhere?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Roland Mouret says he designs with the Princess of Wales in mind
> 
> 
> The London-based French designer, 61, said Kate Middleton, 40, is a 'powerful' woman who has created a 'sense of equality' in hers and the Prince of Wales' relationship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Awesome. I love his designs!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is interesting!


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



These snippets periodically pop up re several incidents involving TW, claiming said incidents are on tape and that said recordings supposedly directly contradict her version of events. If these recordings really exist, why have none of them been made public yet? At this point I doubt any recordings do exist and unless any recordings do surface, it continues to be a case of she said vs they said. She’ll continue to talk about “her truths” until others come up with real hard evidence to disprove any of her stories.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> These snippets periodically pop up re several incidents involving TW, claiming said incidents are on tape and that said recordings supposedly directly contradict her version of events. If these recordings really exist, why have none of them been made public yet? At this point I doubt any recordings do exist and unless any recordings do surface, it continues to be a case of she said vs they said. She’ll continue to talk about “her truths” until others come up with real hard evidence to disprove any of her stories.


I doubt it too. No one is going around recording what she says 24/7. And those d*mning remarks are usually hearsay. So, much as I believe the plane crash remark is true, my belief is based on her being greedy and stupid enough to make such a remark where others can hear her, and not because someone allegedly recorded her saying it. She already tells enough lies on record to make us believe she is a liar.

Hmm, that makes me wonder if the sugars send her wedding anniversary wishes on her 3-day-earlier date or her spectacle-for-the-masses date.


----------



## pomeline

Has anyone taken one for the team and listened to her podcast where she claims to be 43% Nigerian? Someone on Lady C's YT video said she actually said she was 20% African and 43% of those 20% came from Nigeria which means she's actually 8.6% "Nigerian" (they said the country has only existed for about 60 years and is not an ethnic group). Someone went as far as to say she's a Lie-gerian.


----------



## xincinsin

pomeline said:


> Has anyone taken one for the team and listened to her podcast where she claims to be 43% Nigerian? Someone on Lady C's YT video said she actually said she was 20% African and 43% of those 20% came from Nigeria which means she's actually 8.6% "Nigerian" (they said the country has only existed for about 60 years and is not an ethnic group). Someone went as far as to say she's a Lie-gerian.


There was a comment on one of the gossip threads (Reddit probably) that claimed Zedzee remarked in The Tig that she was less than 10% Nigerian. Maybe ethnicity is one of the bandwagons she likes to hop on. She's got 100% to play around with.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




The gloves are truly off, aren't they.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!




I'm inclined to believe it. Kudos to Maria and the security detail for thinking ahead if that recording actually exists.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> These snippets periodically pop up re several incidents involving TW, claiming said incidents are on tape and that said recordings supposedly directly contradict her version of events. *If these recordings really exist, why have none of them been made public yet?* At this point I doubt any recordings do exist and unless any recordings do surface, it continues to be a case of she said vs they said. She’ll continue to talk about “her truths” until others come up with real hard evidence to disprove any of her stories.



I am not convinced one way or another (some claims of recordings I believe, others seem extremly unlikely), but even if they exist: because that's not how the BRF operates. Ghouls knows hat and trusts it will stay that way. But seeing how many unflattering bits have popped up in the press ever since The Queen hasn't been there to protect Harry - and Ghoul by proxy - I wouldn't get too comfortable on my Throne of Smug.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> Has anyone taken one for the team and listened to her podcast where she claims to be 43% Nigerian? Someone on Lady C's YT video said she actually said she was 20% African and 43% of those 20% came from Nigeria which means she's actually 8.6% "Nigerian" (they said the country has only existed for about 60 years and is not an ethnic group). Someone went as far as to say she's a Lie-gerian.



That would make much more sense TBH.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm inclined to believe it. Kudos to Maria and the security detail for thinking ahead if that recording actually exists.


I wonder if by recordings, they mean that they recorded their recollections and observations after the incidents.


----------



## xincinsin

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I wonder if by recordings, they mean that they recorded their recollections and observations after the incidents.


Complained to HR? 
Not likely to be bodycam or CCTV since we have video and photo evidence of how fast Zed can detect cameras as well as video from the walkabout as to how fast she can change her game face.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Complained to HR?
> Not likely to be bodycam or CCTV since we have video and photo evidence of how fast Zed can detect cameras as well as video from the walkabout as to how fast she can change her game face.


Maybe a staff member was present for one of her rants one too many times and decided to surreptitiously record it on their phone.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> These snippets periodically pop up re several incidents involving TW, claiming said incidents are on tape and that said recordings supposedly directly contradict her version of events. If these recordings really exist, why have none of them been made public yet? At this point I doubt any recordings do exist and unless any recordings do surface, it continues to be a case of she said vs they said. She’ll continue to talk about “her truths” until others come up with real hard evidence to disprove any of her stories.


Recorded doesn't have to be audio. It could have been recorded as an incident.

In the pecking order not only does Charlotte come above Meghan by a long way, but also Harry,


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Haha - very funny and only 3 minutes long



The gold collar is a nice touch.


----------



## papertiger

pomeline said:


> Has anyone taken one for the team and listened to her podcast where she claims to be 43% Nigerian? Someone on Lady C's YT video said she actually said she was 20% African and 43% of those 20% came from Nigeria which means she's actually 8.6% "Nigerian" (they said the country has only existed for about 60 years and is not an ethnic group). Someone went as far as to say she's a Lie-gerian.



That was in The Tig. On the podcrash she said 43% Nigerian.

Both are lies. Ethnicity is not nationality


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> That was in The Tig. On the podcrash she said 43% Nigerian.
> 
> Both are lies. Ethnicity is not nationality


And yet nobody in the press questioned it. In fact, they obediently repeated it thereby giving it credibility.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> And yet nobody in the press questioned it. In fact, they obediently repeated it thereby giving it credibility.



If questioned, the media will just say they are just reporting what she said. 

Media writers are just not (investigative) journalists anymore, merely syndicated PR merchants and political sh*t stirrers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nothing we did not already know -  where are my gloves? 


_MEGHAN AND HARRY - $9,522,500/ *$40,000 MONTHLY*

After leaving the Royal Family in 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made the move across the pond and settled into a $14.65million Montecito mansion in June that year. 

As Meghan, 41, and Harry, 38, have been cut adrift from the royal purse, the pair have had to fend for themselves and took out a huge $9,522,500 mortgage with City National Bank, costing around $40,000 in monthly payments. 

Harry and Meghan's massive Montecito home was built in 2003. The estate has sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, tall Italian cypress trees, blooming lavender, century old olive trees, a tennis court, tea house, children's cottage and a pool

In August 2020, DailyMail.com obtained a copy of the deed showing the sale of the mansion. The document is dated June 18, but shows the trust the Sussexes set up to buy the sprawling nine-bedroom home was created a month earlier on May 15, 2020, showing their plans to purchase go back at least three months.

Meghan and Harry's home is known as 'The Chateau' and sits on 5.4 acres of land and immaculately clipped hedges border the estate's stone-pillared entry gates. It boasts nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms.

Property listings say the home took nearly five years to build and included a library, office, spa with a separate dry and wet sauna, a gym with a stripper pole, game room, arcade, theater, wine cellar and five-car garage.








						Beyonce and Jay-Z top list of most expensive celebrity mortgages
					

DailyMail.com can reveal the celebrities who need to keep raking in the cash in order to keep up with their hefty monthly payments - some of which are in the six-figure range - for their extravagant homes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## eon

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Meghan and Harry's home is known as 'The Chateau' _


Or rather "The Sh*t-eau"


----------



## TC1

Gym with a stripper pole...


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Media writers are just not (investigative) journalists anymore, merely syndicated PR merchants and political sh*t stirrers.


Let’s not forget agenda pushers!


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Enough, we all say enough *

_Unlike many secondborns, you never had to rely on hand-me-downs from your big brother. You were never deprived of a top-notch education because your parents couldn’t quite afford two sets of school fees. Instead, you made your own future within the strictures of royal life, discovered huge success with programmes such as the Invictus Games — and then ‘found freedom’ altogether, thousands of miles away in Montecito.

So, rather than dwelling on the negatives and continually recounting your grievances, consider how fortunate you have been. You might indeed have been the ‘spare’ (until Prince George came along), but *you were never spared all the privileges that came with being third-in-line to the throne.

You weren’t denied the education, the expensive skiing holidays, the African safaris, the polo on pedigree ponies, the best seats in the house at rugby and football matches or a financial stipend of which most people can only dream.*

So, for goodness sake, snap out of it — and spare us all the moaning about being a spare. 

If you’ll let me be frank, your book’s title is at best misguided and at worst downright insulting to all us ‘spares’ — who’ve found a curious comfort in coming second.












						Stop whingeing, Harry. It's great to be the spare, writes MARK PALMER
					

Like you, I have a brother, in my case born three years before me. His name is Adrian (left) and he was always the heir. He inherited the title, Lord Palmer, some 30 years ago.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Cinderlala

The stripper pole is apt.   

We know they have at least 2 books for their library---not quite enough to fill it.  (Unless they have to store all the remaindered Bench books!)  

Sounds like they have plenty of space for a designated crockery-smashing room.


----------



## Chanbal

What's going on with this thread? It's very slow… Are we all bored? 
Here to cheer you up!


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure about the wife situation in Nigeria, but love the cartoon…


----------



## Chanbal

Cinderlala said:


> The stripper pole is apt.
> 
> We know they have at least 2 books for their library---not quite enough to fill it.  (Unless they have to store all the remaindered Bench books!)
> 
> Sounds like they have plenty of space for a designated crockery-smashing room.


I think they use their books as computer stands.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nothing we did not already know -  where are my gloves?
> 
> 
> _MEGHAN AND HARRY - $9,522,500/ *$40,000 MONTHLY*
> 
> After leaving the Royal Family in 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made the move across the pond and settled into a $14.65million Montecito mansion in June that year.
> 
> As Meghan, 41, and Harry, 38, have been cut adrift from the royal purse, the pair have had to fend for themselves and took out a huge $9,522,500 mortgage with City National Bank, costing around $40,000 in monthly payments.
> 
> Harry and Meghan's massive Montecito home was built in 2003. The estate has sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, tall Italian cypress trees, blooming lavender, century old olive trees, a tennis court, tea house, children's cottage and a pool
> 
> In August 2020, DailyMail.com obtained a copy of the deed showing the sale of the mansion. The document is dated June 18, but shows the trust the Sussexes set up to buy the sprawling nine-bedroom home was created a month earlier on May 15, 2020, showing their plans to purchase go back at least three months.
> 
> Meghan and Harry's home is known as 'The Chateau' and sits on 5.4 acres of land and immaculately clipped hedges border the estate's stone-pillared entry gates. It boasts nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms.
> 
> Property listings say the home took nearly five years to build and included a library, office, spa with a separate dry and wet sauna, a gym with a stripper pole, game room, arcade, theater, wine cellar and five-car garage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beyonce and Jay-Z top list of most expensive celebrity mortgages
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com can reveal the celebrities who need to keep raking in the cash in order to keep up with their hefty monthly payments - some of which are in the six-figure range - for their extravagant homes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Do not forget to add the property tax at about 6-7K to the 40K/month. Gardner(s), utilities… Poor Hazz. I hope the house doesn't need a new roof.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Not sure about the wife situation in Nigeria, but love the cartoon…



Does that mean we'll now start receiving emails from him about excellent investment opportunities in Nigeria?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> What's going on with this thread? It's very slow… Are we all bored?
> Here to cheer you up!



I think we're reaching the point of exhaustion with them. Same old same old, day in day out.  Until the next shoe, er book, drops.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What's going on with this thread? It's very slow… Are we all bored?
> Here to cheer you up!




We have spent our day polishing our broomsticks, like the good witches we are  
We ride at dark!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I think we're reaching the point of exhaustion with them. Same old same old, day in day out.  Until the next shoe, er book, drops.


my wish that they become uninteresting may be coming true


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Does that mean we'll now start receiving emails from him about excellent investment opportunities in Nigeria?


Not to mention the need for the Nigerians to buy his mental health services.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> We have spent our day polishing our broomsticks, like the good witches we are
> We ride at dark!
> 
> View attachment 5643818


----------



## Aimee3

Are they letting the invisible kids trick or treat?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Are they letting the invisible kids trick or treat?



They can knock on all of the 16 bathroom doors and staff can hand out candy. No danger to expose them to the outside world.


----------



## LittleStar88

For those who are not on Reddit…


----------



## Hermes Zen

This thread has changed me. I have a new title!  My DH today said 'Yes Princess Markleness' and bowed.    I was being to demanding and bossy I guess!! 

Happy Halloween everyone!!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> What's going on with this thread? It's very slow… Are we all bored?
> Here to cheer you up!



IMHO
1. H did not write a line, he talked with ghostwriter [GW] who recorded everything in case H tosses him under bus.
2. GW put together a timeline from internet, H’s calendar, any receipts H. might have collected, a daily diary - if H ever kept one.
3. H‘s narrative will include his OWN feelings, and reports of meetings with others. 
H may have contradicted himself in material used by GW, esp if he orally told the same tale twice To GW. 
H may have contradicted info generally available on the internet.
H has no previous experience in keeping his story straight time after time.
GW will have suggested talking to friends and staff as way of resolving the issues.

The Agassi bio came out in 2009 -  A LONG TIME AGO. We all have databases of searchable info now, and every line of SPARE will be picked apart by pros.

I doubt SPARE will have extensive notes a la Bower. I expect ALL the info in SPARE to be with deliberately vague timeframes.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> my wish that they become uninteresting may be coming true


They are both very uninteresting people, but their absurds while shocking are entertaining.


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Are they letting the invisible kids trick or treat?


Allegedly


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly



Well, if the kids are ghosts, we will not be able to see them, will we?  Kinda like the ghost hug


----------



## Chanbal

Would they want a spare crown? 



Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation next year, and could return to the UK to attend it, as per a royal expert.

Talking to _Express UK_ recently, royal commentator Lee Cohen suggested that despite Prince Harry testing the royals with his upcoming bombshell memoir titled Spare, him and his wife Meghan could be waiting on an invite to the coronation.

As per Cohen, “*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could be in attendance as the couple are always happy to rise to the occasion for events that give them legitimacy*.”

He went on to state that the possibility of them attending Charles’ coronation will also rest on whether *the event will give them a ‘PR moment*’.

Cohen also added that both Prince Harry and Meghan “*would be happy to snap up the opportunity*” as they have “for other royal occasions, even after they stepped back.”

It is pertinent to mention that King Charles’ coronation date has been decided as May 6, 2023, which also happens to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s son Archie’s birthday.









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation next year




					www.geo.tv


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, if the kids are ghosts, we will not be able to see them, will we?  Kinda like the ghost hug
> 
> View attachment 5643896


----------



## Chanbal

Trick or Treat


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nothing we did not already know -  where are my gloves?
> 
> 
> _MEGHAN AND HARRY - $9,522,500/ *$40,000 MONTHLY*
> 
> After leaving the Royal Family in 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made the move across the pond and settled into a $14.65million Montecito mansion in June that year.
> 
> As Meghan, 41, and Harry, 38, have been cut adrift from the royal purse, the pair have had to fend for themselves and took out a huge $9,522,500 mortgage with City National Bank, costing around $40,000 in monthly payments.
> 
> Harry and Meghan's massive Montecito home was built in 2003. The estate has sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, tall Italian cypress trees, blooming lavender, century old olive trees, a tennis court, tea house, children's cottage and a pool
> 
> In August 2020, DailyMail.com obtained a copy of the deed showing the sale of the mansion. The document is dated June 18, but shows the trust the Sussexes set up to buy the sprawling nine-bedroom home was created a month earlier on May 15, 2020, showing their plans to purchase go back at least three months.
> 
> Meghan and Harry's home is known as 'The Chateau' and sits on 5.4 acres of land and immaculately clipped hedges border the estate's stone-pillared entry gates. It boasts nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms.
> 
> Property listings say the home took nearly five years to build and included a library, office, spa with a separate dry and wet sauna, a gym with a stripper pole, game room, arcade, theater, wine cellar and five-car garage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beyonce and Jay-Z top list of most expensive celebrity mortgages
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com can reveal the celebrities who need to keep raking in the cash in order to keep up with their hefty monthly payments - some of which are in the six-figure range - for their extravagant homes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Warning snark attack:Based on what appears to be her preferred open stance, I don’t think TW can close her legs tight enough to be able to grip the stripper pole.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> What's going on with this thread? It's very slow… Are we all bored?
> Here to cheer you up!


I think we’re just waiting for Tuesday when the new podcrash drops. They’re otherwise quite uninteresting. Same sh!t regurgitated over and over. 
What’s the stereotype this week?


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> Talking to _Express UK_ recently, royal commentator Lee Cohen *suggested* that despite Prince Harry testing the royals with his upcoming bombshell memoir titled Spare, him and his wife Meghan *could be* waiting on an invite to the coronation.



In other words, whoever this Lee Cohen is, she's making a buck by "suggesting" at what "could be".  Not exactly words to hang your hat on.


----------



## Suncatcher

V0N1B2 said:


> I think we’re just waiting for Tuesday when the new podcrash drops. They’re otherwise quite uninteresting. Same sh!t regurgitated over and over.
> What’s the stereotype this week?


I’m told it will be “demystifying why people think I’m boring and uninteresting”.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> “*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could be in attendance as the couple are always happy to rise to the occasion for events that give them legitimacy*.”



Oh please! They want legitimacy? They should have thought about that before they tried to force their half in, half out scheme on the RF. So sick of these grifting losers.


----------



## Katel

Mrs.Z said:


> I cannot believe it’s actually called Spare!  That is cringe!  Oh horrid birth order!





Laila619 said:


> I thought that cover pic and title “Spare” were a JOKE at first. How embarrassing for him that it’s actually real!



Yes, completely my reaction! OMG!   







purseinsanity said:


> Free breakfast from a Marriott?  Lately, that's not much better than the free cheese Danishes wrapped in plastic you get as part of a free breakfast from a Day's Inn.


The Courtyard Marriott


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> Recorded doesn't have to be audio. It could have been recorded as an incident.
> 
> In the pecking order not only does Charlotte come above Meghan by a long way, but also Harry,


Roast Chicken Kween ain't even in the pecking order.


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> What’s the stereotype this week?


We’ll know soon. I believe b!tch, crazy, and sl*t are still to come. Can’t wait to see what story Meghan has to tell about those.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> We’ll know soon. I believe b!tch, crazy, and sl*t are still to come. Can’t wait to see what story Meghan has to tell about those.


Has she done “Daddy’s little girl” yet?


----------



## bag-mania

V0N1B2 said:


> Has she done “Daddy’s little girl” yet?


Not yet. I assume she must be saving “gold digger” and “con artist” for last.


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> Oh please! They want legitimacy? They should have thought about that before they tried to force their half in, half out scheme on the RF. So sick of these grifting losers.



I keep wondering what their definition of "legitimacy" is. Legitimacy what? They wanted to be "independent" of the BRF, then they stated that the BRF was racist and drove Meghan to "suicidal thoughts".  So what do they think is "legitimacy" at being invited to the Coronation ????  If they REALLY wanted "legitimacy", then they should completely avoid and ignore Charles III coronation, in their own words, he represents all that is racist and suicide provoking. Or do they just R E A L L Y want photos of themselves at the Coronation that they can sell for big bucks?


----------



## charlottawill

Slightly off topic but adorable...


----------



## charlottawill

Meanwhile, over on Twitter the sugars are losing their sh*t over Tom Bower's appearance on GMB, saying he doesn't have a problem with Harry, it's Meghan "he's after". So they're calling for him to be investigated for making public threats against her. They are too stupid to realize he's speaking figuratively not literally.


----------



## charlottawill

Hmm...


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> I keep wondering what their definition of "legitimacy" is. Legitimacy what? They wanted to be "independent" of the BRF, then they stated that the BRF was racist and drove Meghan to "suicidal thoughts".  So what do they think is "legitimacy" at being invited to the Coronation ????  If they REALLY wanted "legitimacy", then they should completely avoid and ignore Charles III coronation, in their own words, he represents all that is racist and suicide provoking. Or do they just R E A L L Y want photos of themselves at the Coronation that they can sell for big bucks?


“Legitimacy” is Hwood speak for _*publicity *_*publicity *_*publicity *_[aka, f.a.m.e.]

*

*


----------



## needlv

Hermes Zen said:


> This thread has changed me. I have a new title!  My DH today said 'Yes Princess Markleness' and bowed.    I was being to demanding and bossy I guess!!
> 
> Happy Halloween everyone!!



No - you were being *particular!  *


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Found on Reddit 
Photo on left says 2014, but it was taken in 2008.


Comments are worth a look:


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> I keep wondering what their definition of "legitimacy" is. Legitimacy what? They wanted to be "independent" of the BRF, then they stated that the BRF was racist and drove Meghan to "suicidal thoughts".  So what do they think is "legitimacy" at being invited to the Coronation ????  If they REALLY wanted "legitimacy", then they should completely avoid and ignore Charles III coronation, in their own words, he represents all that is racist and suicide provoking. Or do they just R E A L L Y want photos of themselves at the Coronation that they can sell for big bucks?



They want half-in and half- out which they always planned but QEII said ”no, fully out“.  This is what they wanted - jubilee, coronation, balcony for the trooping  appearances etc.  so they can pick the “good” royal assignments and skip the “opening a retirement village in Slough”.

Then when in California, monetize their titles - merching their royal adjacency.

The ethics of this are just awful.  No wonder QEII said no.

But H and MM still try to make it look like this half-in/out is what they have to the USA audiences.  Royal adjacency so they can merchandise…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Such a sweet face:








						Prince Harry of Wales is photographed on May 21, 2008 in Windsor,...
					

Prince Harry of Wales is photographed on May 21, 2008 in Windsor, England.



					www.gettyimages.ae


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Found on Reddit
> Photo on left says 2014, but it was taken in 2008.
> 
> 
> Comments are worth a look:




I don’t know if it’s the Twitter algorithm but I only see supportive comments.

it’s clear the book cover has photoshopped his nose though!


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> I don’t know if it’s the Twitter algorithm but I only see supportive comments.
> 
> it’s clear the book cover has photoshopped his nose though!


The comments I saw focused on how much his nose has changed.  Did he have surgery?  He looks much different.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> I don’t know if it’s the Twitter algorithm but I only see supportive comments.
> 
> it’s clear the book cover has photoshopped his nose though!


Oh, I apologize. I was looking at the Reddit comments.  I have not looked at the Twitter ones.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh, I apologize. I was looking at the Reddit comments.  I have not looked at the Twitter ones.



Haha - of course reddit/saint meghan markle thread is hilarious (and sometimes brutal)


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> Would they want a spare crown?
> 
> View attachment 5643894
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation next year, and could return to the UK to attend it, as per a royal expert.
> 
> Talking to _Express UK_ recently, royal commentator Lee Cohen suggested that despite Prince Harry testing the royals with his upcoming bombshell memoir titled Spare, him and his wife Meghan could be waiting on an invite to the coronation.
> 
> As per Cohen, “*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could be in attendance as the couple are always happy to rise to the occasion for events that give them legitimacy*.”
> 
> He went on to state that the possibility of them attending Charles’ coronation will also rest on whether *the event will give them a ‘PR moment*’.
> 
> Cohen also added that both Prince Harry and Meghan “*would be happy to snap up the opportunity*” as they have “for other royal occasions, even after they stepped back.”
> 
> It is pertinent to mention that King Charles’ coronation date has been decided as May 6, 2023, which also happens to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s son Archie’s birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation next year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv



DAMN. The 45 million dollar tab for their wedding that Daddy and the British taxpayers got stuck with sounds legitimate enough to me!


----------



## papertiger

Katel said:


> Yes, completely my reaction! OMG!
> 
> View attachment 5643929
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Courtyard Marriott



I don't eat breakfast.
If I did, I'd skip it.
Even if I was starving, I'd be put off my cornbread by the faker with the fake voice.
Happily, I don't eat breakfast 

In a few years, this sign probably won't be fictional.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I don't eat breakfast.
> If I did, I'd skip it.
> Even if I was starving, I'd be put off my cornbread by the faker with the fake voice.
> Happily, I don't eat breakfast
> 
> In a few years, this sign probably won't be fictional.



And another thing we share  I never eat breakfast unless maybe some Sundays. I can't eat first thing in the morning. But also, listening to Ghoul would help me hit any diet goals so fast.


----------



## Chanbal

_Prince Harry has been consumed by the ‘green eyed monster’_​


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> I think we're reaching the point of exhaustion with them. Same old same old, day in day out.  Until the next shoe, er book, drops.


Yup. It’s like every day is Groundhog day with them. Eternal victimhood from two vapid, self-centered spoiled brats living in the lap of luxury….yawn. Fashion shoots with ill fitting clothes on an aging Z-lister…yawn. I’d rather look at current runway collections modeled by any of the current crop of super models. Poorly researched, ill-conceived Podcrashes based on outdated stereotypes (mislabeled as archetypes because the host doesn’t actually know the difference between archetypes and stereotypes) apparently culled from famous films made several decades ago (Kill Bill, etc.) ….yawn. Listening to my dog barking is a better use of my time since my dog’s barking actually serves a purpose like alerting me to someone at the door. A feeble attempt at writing a children’s book, The Stench (aka The Bench), supposedly an ode to their love story.…yawn. It was so bad, she couldn’t even give it away. Constant references to their love story as if endless repetition will somehow get their names on the list of famous lovers through the ages…yawn. Can you just see it a hundred years from now when schoolchildren open their history books and talk about Antony and Cleopatra and H and TW in the same sentence. Possibly in some alternate universe I suppose. Countless cosmetic surgeries on her nose….yawn. It was perfectly fine before she started tinkering with it and however many noses later, the only surprise would be if it finally dropped completely off her face in protest. Bought and paid for awards for nebulous achievements given at awards ceremonies where she shoe horns herself into another frightfully expensive gown meant for someone 6 inches taller and at least 2 sizes smaller than her and gives another pompous word salad speech…yawn. More announcements of charitable donations where one is left wondering what they are actually donating...yawn. If they actually gave a serious amount of their own money instead of glomming on and attaching their names to someone else’s donation, now that would be newsworthy. H’s autobiography set to launch in January 2023. The publisher launched the pre-selling period with the book already at half-price to artificially get it on the best seller lists.…yawn. Lots of “leaks” about what bombshells could be in this book, the BRF bracing for nasty revelations, their lawyers at the ready….anything to try to drum up interest in a half-price book of fiction by a dim-witted hazbeen who’s only famous due to an accident of birth. There’s nothing left in their bag of tricks. We’ve seen it all before. In this time of 24/7 news (both real and fake) and relentless social media, it’s hard for anyone to keep an audience, let alone grow an audience, without a constant stream of fresh content. These 2 don’t have the talent, creativity, or work ethic to stay relevant.


----------



## Mumotons

Meghan Markle chats to First Lady of Canada Sophie Trudeau
					

The friends (pictured together in 2016) spoke about the challenges of parenting and being a partner to two famous men in an episode called: 'Good Wife/Bad Wife, Good Mom/Bad Mom'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mumotons

Meghan Markle shares a glimpse of her Montecito morning routine
					

Speaking to her guest, American actress Pamela Adlon, the Duchess of Sussex , 41, revealed what mornings are like for her and Prince Harry in their Montecito home.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Why does she keep referring to the Pratt as My Husband? Has she already forgotten his name ?


----------



## pomeline

Did you know that Duchess Meghan, the woman who invented the sentences coming out of Eleanor Roosevelt's mouth, has also invented the secret handshakes? 



> The Duchess of Sussex said the spontaneous moment made her reflect on the way in which Doria, who lives close by in Los Angeles, has supported her throughout her life.
> 
> She also joked that they still do a handshake she came up with when she was eight, and said that being mother can be 'the most thankless unpaid labor there is.'










So these... you can thank Meghan for them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> Nothing we did not already know -  where are my gloves?
> 
> 
> _MEGHAN AND HARRY - $9,522,500/ *$40,000 MONTHLY*
> 
> After leaving the Royal Family in 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made the move across the pond and settled into a $14.65million Montecito mansion in June that year.
> 
> As Meghan, 41, and Harry, 38, have been cut adrift from the royal purse, the pair have had to fend for themselves and took out a huge $9,522,500 mortgage with City National Bank, costing around $40,000 in monthly payments.
> 
> Harry and Meghan's massive Montecito home was built in 2003. The estate has sweeping lawns, tiered rose gardens, tall Italian cypress trees, blooming lavender, century old olive trees, a tennis court, tea house, children's cottage and a pool
> 
> In August 2020, DailyMail.com obtained a copy of the deed showing the sale of the mansion. The document is dated June 18, but shows the trust the Sussexes set up to buy the sprawling nine-bedroom home was created a month earlier on May 15, 2020, showing their plans to purchase go back at least three months.
> 
> Meghan and Harry's home is known as 'The Chateau' and sits on 5.4 acres of land and immaculately clipped hedges border the estate's stone-pillared entry gates. It boasts nine bedrooms and 16 bathrooms.
> 
> Property listings say the home took nearly five years to build and included a library, office, spa with a separate dry and wet sauna, a gym with a stripper pole, game room, arcade, theater, wine cellar and five-car garage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beyonce and Jay-Z top list of most expensive celebrity mortgages
> 
> 
> DailyMail.com can reveal the celebrities who need to keep raking in the cash in order to keep up with their hefty monthly payments - some of which are in the six-figure range - for their extravagant homes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



OMG I'm dying here...   Gym with a stripper pole and the famous 16 bathrooms... That's what I'll call Harry from now on Duke Harry of 16 Crappers  - sounds reasonable knowing they are probably one of the largest producers of utter excrement in California! I am always reminded of the story that did the rounds a couple of years ago involving Harry's luggage... Not to go into details further but true or not, I could well believe it.


----------



## Pessie

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle shares a glimpse of her Montecito morning routine
> 
> 
> Speaking to her guest, American actress Pamela Adlon, the Duchess of Sussex , 41, revealed what mornings are like for her and Prince Harry in their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does she keep referring to the Pratt as My Husband? Has she already forgotten his name ?


I sometimes call new dog (17 mths old) by old dogs name, even old cats name comes out of my mouth on occasion.  So I bet this is a cunning ruse to avoid accidentally referring to Harry as Trevity Trev (or whatever husband #1’s name was).


----------



## LittleStar88

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle shares a glimpse of her Montecito morning routine
> 
> 
> Speaking to her guest, American actress Pamela Adlon, the Duchess of Sussex , 41, revealed what mornings are like for her and Prince Harry in their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does she keep referring to the Pratt as My Husband? Has she already forgotten his name ?



Sounds like, by not referring to him by name, she’s somewhat minimalizing him. If that makes sense (still early here, brain still booting up, coffee not kicked in yet). Of less importance in the conversation… something like that. 

Transcript of this yawn fest:





__





						Loading…
					





					storage.googleapis.com


----------



## rose60610

Hermes Zen said:


> This thread has changed me. I have a new title!  My DH today said 'Yes Princess Markleness' and bowed.    I was being to demanding and bossy I guess!!
> 
> Happy Halloween everyone!!



Did you claw his arm, cut in front of him, make a bee line to a world leader or celebrity then start blabbing about how hard your life is? Or are you making lemon olive oil cakes, donating $10 to various causes and making sure you're getting press coverage for your generosity?  Remember, "it's not your job to coddle anybody".


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> No - you were being *particular!  *


Nah she was just telling us her NEEDS, not being particular


----------



## marietouchet

I do think the new podcast has her trying to be better behaved , trying to rearchitect her brand , will this last ??? 
Yes, it is a snooze fest


----------



## marietouchet

Timeline thoughts
JAN 10 - SPARE
MAY 8 - coronation 
Assuming no inflammatory podcasts during that time, is 4 mos long enuf to get over the book and score an invite to coronation ?
I am betting that BP has an advance copy, planning a counter attack, but invite will depend on public reaction to book


----------



## marietouchet

Something I had forgotten … but absolutely CRUCIAL
Reading book on George V, his daddy Edward VII did not make prince of Wales immediately, G5 had to wait a few years , he was just Duke of Cornwall for 3-5 years
The title of PoW is NOT automatic for the heir
The fact that KC gave it out ASAP to W (with nothing for overseas H) says volumes


----------



## LittleStar88

She literally has a staff of many to manage the kids, manage the housekeeping, manage the cooking, shop for groceries and household necessities, manage the bills, and who knows what else. Which allows her to choose how she wishes to spend her time each day.

I cannot accept her as a voice of mother and wife since her mothering and wifing duties are nothing like 99% of the world. Who is she to discuss this topic?

She needs to sit down and stop with this nonsense.


----------



## WingNut

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle shares a glimpse of her Montecito morning routine
> 
> 
> Speaking to her guest, American actress Pamela Adlon, the Duchess of Sussex , 41, revealed what mornings are like for her and Prince Harry in their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does she keep referring to the Pratt as My Husband? Has she already forgotten his name ?


Wow. I'm flabbergasted (or, in the immortal words of , Jeremy Clarkson..."gasted with flabber"). She packs her kid's lunchbox and has to feed dogs in the morning. What a whirlwind of difficult challenges she must face. I don't know how she can possibly handle it all. Is this meant to show that her haughtiness is "just like us mere mortals?". I mean, I and others can only aspire to be able to manage so many difficult tasks....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle chats to First Lady of Canada Sophie Trudeau
> 
> 
> The friends (pictured together in 2016) spoke about the challenges of parenting and being a partner to two famous men in an episode called: 'Good Wife/Bad Wife, Good Mom/Bad Mom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Just...why? Even if she was my best friend in the world I wouldn't want to be associated with her drama and bad press.


----------



## Kevinaxx

*ME*ghan = *MEMEME *


LittleStar88 said:


> Sounds like, by not referring to him by name, she’s somewhat minimalizing him. If that makes sense (still early here, brain still booting up, coffee not kicked in yet). Of less importance in the conversation… something like that.
> 
> Transcript of this yawn fest:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storage.googleapis.com


I couldn’t get past that first paragraph.

Is that how she really talks irl?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments I saw focused on how much his nose has changed.  Did he have surgery?  He looks much different.


to me, it's that he is older and has a beard.....I guess the beard was supposed to make him kinda scruffy and un-royal?


----------



## WingNut

Kevinaxx said:


> *ME*ghan = *MEMEME *
> 
> I couldn’t get past that first paragraph.
> 
> Is that how she really talks irl?


After blathering about pizza shaped pool floaties (with and without pepperoni) she actually says:
*But all that aside, this wasn’t our day of being the wives and moms all perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles.*

Is that really her definition of wives and moms? Huh? In which century does her pea-brain take up residence?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WingNut said:


> After blathering about pizza shaped pool floaties (with and without pepperoni) she actually says:
> *But all that aside, this wasn’t our day of being the wives and moms all perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles.*
> 
> Is that really her definition of wives and moms? Huh? In which century does her pea-brain take up residence?



She says the most stupid sh*t thinking she sounds extra smart. Oh my.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why? Even if she was my best friend in the world I wouldn't want to be associated with her drama and bad press.


Sophie is now allegedly one of her best friends?  where was she at the time of the big baby shower?  
Canada is a commonwealth country?  is she being disloyal to the Brits?


----------



## Pessie

Meghan’s just a fantasist with a bad imagination.  The nanny’s taking care of all the everyday stuff with the kids - because if not whats the point employing one??  Honestly, the average Mills and Boon heroine bears more resemblance to a woman’s real life than anything Meghan Markle comes out with.

I’m sure the pool party was staged as described for the benefit of her “dear friend” Sophie and I’m equally sure Archie and Lili were baffled as to wtf was happening to their normal routine.
And Meghan is not “in the public eye” - she has no public role whatsoever, having turned her back on it after 72 days only.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Sophie is now allegedly one of her best friends?  where was she at the time of the big baby shower?
> Canada is a commonwealth country?  is she being disloyal to the Brits?


Perhaps these ‘friendships’ with Sophie and JessicaM are why MM thinks she should be in politics.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why? Even if she was my best friend in the world I wouldn't want to be associated with her drama and bad press.


The PM's wife is not someone who takes up a lot of time here in Canada.  Over the last few years, there have not been many pics in the paper, and hardly any of the PM and her together in the same pic.  When I saw the  pic of them together at QE11 funeral, I had to think back to the last time I had seen her in the press.  Even when the PM called the last election and was campaigning a year or so ago, he was by himself.  There are rumours that they are not together, but I really hadn't given her much thought....until now.  

Just ewwwww.   I am so disappointed that she would call herself a friend to that POS and actually be on her podcrash.  How embarrassing and just a bad judge of character to let herself be associated with THAT   I thought it was pretty clever of her to stay under the radar and not be in the press all the time, but I guess she's not that clever.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps these ‘friendships’ with Sophie and JessicaM are why MM thinks she should be in politics.


who knows what she thinks?  she just wants to be very famous and rich IMO....in whatever way she can.  poor dim H thought he had found a smart (and sexy) woman who could be a good partner for him but she just used him I think.  Now he's stuck in CA trying to show how relevant and what a "regular guy" he is.  what a mess


----------



## Jayne1

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle chats to First Lady of Canada Sophie Trudeau
> 
> 
> The friends (pictured together in 2016) spoke about the challenges of parenting and being a partner to two famous men in an episode called: 'Good Wife/Bad Wife, Good Mom/Bad Mom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


We have a First Lady? Since when?

Sophie is the PM's wife.  That's what she's called as we don't have a First Lady.


----------



## bag-mania

WingNut said:


> After blathering about pizza shaped pool floaties (with and without pepperoni) she actually says:
> *But all that aside, this wasn’t our day of being the wives and moms all perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles.*
> 
> Is that really her definition of wives and moms? Huh? In which century does her pea-brain take up residence?


Her own mother was a hippie who flitted in and out of her life. Why doesn’t she talk about that? It is what she actually knows. Instead her little brain thinks everyone else’s mother was Barbara Billingsley from _Leave it to Beaver.   _

She is counting on her listeners being just as judgmental and clueless as she is and she might be right.


----------



## bag-mania

When I first read who she had as her guest I thought it was Pamela Anderson, not Pamela Adlon. Now _that_ would have been an interesting interview.  

Pamela Adlon did the voice of Bobby Hill on _King of the Hill_. I’m sure she’s a nice woman but she’s not a celebrity, not even a third-tier one. This is the best Spotify could round up for her later episodes?


----------



## rose60610

Wait, she packs her kid's lunchbox and feeds the dogs? All in ONE MORNING? I'm exhausted just reading about it. And this is the person who fled to CA "for privacy" but now feels compelled to tell us about her daily routine which is really:

1. Wake up and start b*tching
2. Listen to Harry telling her she's beautiful (trained via shock collar)
3. Demand coffee with oat milk
4. Scream at servant to make kid's lunch and feed dogs
5. Wait for phone to ring from high ranking official begging her to become Ambassador to country of her choice
6. Make daily call to State Department begging to become Ambassador to country of her choice
7. Listen to Harry consoling her, soon she will become an Ambassador, he'll get his dad to call the White House
8. Fume that no one IMPORTANT is calling, only jerks asking for donations
9. Yell at servant to make olive oil cakes to shut up donation asking jerks
10. Buy more clothes that are three sizes too small


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> When I first read who she had as her guest I thought it was Pamela Anderson, not Pamela Adlon. Now _that_ would have been an interesting interview.
> 
> Pamela Adlon did the voice of Bobby Hill on _King of the Hill_. I’m sure she’s a nice woman but she’s not a celebrity, not even a third-tier one. This is the best Spotify could round up for her later episodes?


I'm gonna differ with you on Pamela....agree, she's not A-list but she had her own show, Better Things.  guess it depends on how you define celebrity but she is known.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm gonna differ with you on Pamela....agree, she's not A-list but she had her own show, Better Things.  guess it depends on how you define celebrity but she is known.


Glad you told me. Never saw that show but it must have given her the celeb cred needed for Meghan. 

ETA: I looked at her Wiki and she's been working since she was a kid and she's done several minor roles and lots of cartoon voices. Turns out she has a more extensive acting resume than Meghan.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Wait, she packs her kid's lunchbox and feeds the dogs? All in ONE MORNING? I'm exhausted just reading about it. And this is the person who fled to CA "for privacy" but now feels compelled to tell us about her daily routine which is really:
> 
> 1. Wake up and start b*tching
> 2. Listen to Harry telling her she's beautiful (trained via shock collar)
> 3. Demand coffee with oat milk
> 4. Scream at servant to make kid's lunch and feed dogs
> 5. Wait for phone to ring from high ranking official begging her to become Ambassador to country of her choice
> 6. Make daily call to State Department begging to become Ambassador to country of her choice
> 7. Listen to Harry consoling her, soon she will become an Ambassador, he'll get his dad to call the White House
> 8. Fume that no one IMPORTANT is calling, only jerks asking for donations
> 9. Yell at servant to make olive oil cakes to shut up donation asking jerks
> 10. Buy more clothes that are three sizes too small


This is brilliant.


----------



## charlottawill

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle chats to First Lady of Canada Sophie Trudeau
> 
> 
> The friends (pictured together in 2016) spoke about the challenges of parenting and being a partner to two famous men in an episode called: 'Good Wife/Bad Wife, Good Mom/Bad Mom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


That article was cringe but the comments  - "Words fail me",  "Enough, please" , "Oh god not this woman again"


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> She is counting on her listeners being just as judgmental and clueless as she is and she might be right.



Even the sugars can't be that clueless.  Did any of them have a mother (or even a grandmother) who sat around "perfectly coiffed" wearing pearls and fixing Dad his martini after a long day of polishing the furniture?  I'm older than she is and my mom worked full time. Everything she knows seems to come from 1950's and 1960's TV re-runs, which were endlessly shown in the late afternoons and weekends on local TV stations throughout the 70's and 80's.


----------



## Kevinaxx

WingNut said:


> After blathering about pizza shaped pool floaties (with and without pepperoni) she actually says:
> *But all that aside, this wasn’t our day of being the wives and moms all perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles.*
> 
> Is that really her definition of wives and moms? Huh? In which century does her pea-brain take up residence?


I found this old article: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-oprah-interview-the-little-mermaid/

Shows how deluded she is, more like:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Even the sugars can't be that clueless.  Did any of them have a mother (or even a grandmother) who sat around "perfectly coiffed" wearing pearls and fixing Dad his martini after a long day of polishing the furniture?  I'm older than she is and my mom worked full time. Everything she knows seems to come from 1950's and 1960's TV re-runs, which were endlessly shown in the late afternoons and weekends on local TV stations throughout the 70's and 80's.


Meghan is channeling Leave it to Beaver, where Mrs Cleaver vacuum cleaned wearing a shirtwaist dress,pearls and heels. Meghan’s mother was sitting on the front lawn smoking dope and upsetting the neighbors


----------



## gracekelly

How hilarious that she asked Harry for help whilst studying for the citizenship test. She was asking a man who didn’t know that his country fought and many died fighting the Nazis. How else could he have been so clueless to put on that uniform. His great grandfather probably rolled over in his grave over that.
I could easily imagine Johnny Carson and Ed McMahon doing “how dumb was Harry “ jokes on the Tonight Show.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan couldn’t distance herself more from her husband if she tried by telling the world HE IS STUPID.  Divorce lawyers are lining up   She has probably called everyone good so he can’t use them.


----------



## Hermes Zen

rose60610 said:


> Did you claw his arm, cut in front of him, make a bee line to a world leader or celebrity then start blabbing about how hard your life is? Or are you making lemon olive oil cakes, donating $10 to various causes and making sure you're getting press coverage for your generosity?  Remember, "it's not your job to coddle anybody".



Aaaaaaaaah … yes  … jk.  Whew I guess I am okay and not like her!


----------



## gracekelly

That was a a pretty good run down in the DM on Harry’s close friends. I’m  betting that none of them will be quoted in the book. They all moved on and have grown up


----------



## Chanbal

What's going one here?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> That was a a pretty good run down in the DM on Harry’s close friends. I’m  betting that none of them will be quoted in the book. They all moved on and have grown up


If he uses my name, I  expect monetary compensation $$$$$.


----------



## Chanbal

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle chats to First Lady of Canada Sophie Trudeau
> 
> 
> The friends (pictured together in 2016) spoke about the challenges of parenting and being a partner to two famous men in an episode called: 'Good Wife/Bad Wife, Good Mom/Bad Mom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 1LV

gracekelly said:


> Meghan is channeling Leave it to Beaver, where Mrs Cleaver vacuum cleaned wearing a shirtwaist dress,pearls and heels. Meghan’s mother was sitting on the front lawn smoking dope and upsetting the neighbors


When the laughing emoji isn’t enough.


----------



## piperdog

The new factchecker may want to remove this gig from her resume. From calling Mrs. Trudeau the "First Lady of Canada" to painting the delightful picture of moms getting sloshed while the toddlers are in the pool, to the bad 1950's stereotypes of wife/mother, having any professional association with this mess will not look good to potential future employers.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## bag-mania

Kevinaxx said:


> I found this old article: https://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-oprah-interview-the-little-mermaid/
> 
> Shows how deluded she is, more like:
> View attachment 5644207


Ursula definitely wore it better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She is insufferable. Maybe her and Harry are indeed a match made in heaven because they both seem to have stunted development. Swipe for drivel. But yes, this happened as much as she had lunch with Michelle.


----------



## bag-mania

The other topics of her podcasts were 20 to 30 years out of date. This one has to be stale by 60 years. She’s the champion of taking a stand about subjects that have long been safely mainstream. Meghan is as far from original and innovative as you can get.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Just ewwwww.   I am so disappointed that she would call herself a friend to that POS and actually be on her podcrash.  How embarrassing and just a bad judge of character to let herself be associated with THAT   I thought it was pretty clever of her to stay under the radar and not be in the press all the time, but I guess she's not that clever.



It is completely incompatible with her role IMO.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




I missed that one the first few times around. Did they have the nanny nearby to make sure nobody drowned while they were drinking and being giddy, or are they irresponsible jerks who were lucky?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I missed that one the first few times around. Did they have the nanny nearby to make sure nobody drowned while they were drinking and being giddy, or are they irresponsible jerks who were lucky?


The nanny was too busy making sure the space heater didn’t start smoking.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The rumours are getting louder.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> If he uses my name, I  expect monetary compensation $$$$$.


If he uses your name, then write a book about whatever it was that you two did and make MORE money!


----------



## DL Harper

Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle shares a glimpse of her Montecito morning routine
> 
> 
> Speaking to her guest, American actress Pamela Adlon, the Duchess of Sussex , 41, revealed what mornings are like for her and Prince Harry in their Montecito home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does she keep referring to the Pratt as My Husband? Has she already forgotten his name ?


Remember...she told the world she just calls him "H". So, yes, she's probably forgotten what "H" stands for.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> _Prince Harry has been consumed by the ‘green eyed monster’_​



Looks more like a brown eyed monster to me.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is insufferable. Maybe her and Harry are indeed a match made in heaven because they both seem to have stunted development. Swipe for drivel. But yes, this happened as much as she had lunch with Michelle.



Drinking wine with Aldi and Lidi in the pool was irresponsible.


----------



## bag-mania

Hey, Doria was given a role in this week’s episode! She had to “coincidentally” call during the taping just to say I love you. I hope she got paid to recite this cheesy script and play the doting mother.   

On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.

Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"

"Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.

"I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"

"I see," Doria said.
Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."

"I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."

"I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.









						Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
					

Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify




					people.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm sure that was genuine and not scripted, because the first thing you do when recording anything is absolutely NOT setting your phone to silent and putting it away.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Valentine Low on Jamie Lowther-Pinkterton, the brothers' former private secretary they shared. It is really quite sad.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> Hey, Doria was given a role in this week’s episode! She had to “coincidentally” call during the taping just to say I love you. I hope she got paid to recite this cheesy script and play the doting mother.
> 
> On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.
> 
> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> 
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> 
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"
> 
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> 
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> 
> "I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Eewww   She really thinks her audience is stupid


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure that was genuine and not scripted, because the first thing you do when recording anything is absolutely NOT setting your phone to silent and putting it away.


No no no! You have to leave the phone right where it can be picked up quickly in case Mommy is overcome with the intense need to call and say I love you!




Pessie said:


> Eewww   She really thinks her audience is stupid


Is she wrong?


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Mrs T has not been ‘with’ Mr T in a very looooong time. Perhaps the Ghoul was getting tips on the perks of staying married while not being ‘with’ H.


----------



## djfmn

I wrote an email to Mark Palmer the journalist who wrote the article "Stop Whingeing Harry it's great to be a spare" to thank him for a really well written open letter. I indicated that it resonated with me and I am sure a lot of other readers. I never expected to get a response but here is his reply. I am a US resident. 

*How kind of you to write….

Best wishes

Mark*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is insufferable. Maybe her and Harry are indeed a match made in heaven because they both seem to have stunted development. Swipe for drivel. But yes, this happened as much as she had lunch with Michelle.



All I can say is WHY would the PM's wife play along with this drivel and lies?  It just doesn't make sense?  Is Sophie trying to make her break from Trudeau and is trying to establish herself as an individual?  This is _not_ the person to attach oneself to. I was speechless when I read the transcript    She should take note of MO and stay far away.


----------



## lanasyogamama

If the split rumors are true, it will be interesting to see how she spins everything given that they’ve gone on and on and on about their epic love story.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why? Even if she was my best friend in the world I wouldn't want to be associated with her drama and bad press.


Birds of a feather……..


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Hey, Doria was given a role in this week’s episode! She had to “coincidentally” call during the taping just to say I love you. I hope she got paid to recite this cheesy script and play the doting mother.
> 
> On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.
> 
> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> 
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> 
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"
> 
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> 
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> 
> "I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


This could have been any woman - D has never been interviewed before.  _Oh sugar _usually means _Oh sh#t_


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

youngster said:


> Even the sugars can't be that clueless.  Did any of them have a mother (or even a grandmother) who sat around "perfectly coiffed" wearing pearls and fixing Dad his martini after a long day of polishing the furniture?  I'm older than she is and my mom worked full time. Everything she knows seems to come from 1950's and 1960's TV re-runs, which were endlessly shown in the late afternoons and weekends on local TV stations throughout the 70's and 80's.


Even the Princess Royal does not sit around in pearls.  She works.  Every day.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> This could have been any woman - D has never been interviewed before.  _Oh sugar _usually means _Oh sh#t_


Meghan didn’t want to be a potty mouth in front of the guests! The episode was all about what a good mom she is.   

Doria never reveals anything about herself and this time was no exception.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> That article was cringe but the comments  - "Words fail me",  "Enough, please" , "Oh god not this woman again"


The Trudeau kids and Meg's kids had so much fun playing together in the pool.  The Trudeau kids are 8, 13 and 15.

ETA - some above just said that! Sorry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> If the split rumors are true, it will be interesting to see how she spins everything given that they’ve gone on and on and on about their epic love story.



Romeo and Juliet...it's the evil family and she jumped ship before someone died or some similar drama.

Or - probably more likely - she'll always love Harry but living with an unstable addict is just not something she could do to her children.


----------



## KEG66

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Romeo and Juliet...it's the evil family and they jumped ship before someone died or some similar drama.
> 
> Or - probably more likely - she'll always love Harry but living with an unstable addict is just not something she could do to her children.


I think you’re absolutely right. For sure TW tried her hardest to save him from his evil family and himself but she just had to put her children first lol


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Or - probably more likely - she'll always love Harry but living with an unstable addict is just not something she could do to her children.


Bingo. However she can garner the most sympathy and attention to wallow in.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Romeo and Juliet...it's the evil family and she jumped ship before someone died or some similar drama.
> 
> Or - probably more likely - she'll always love Harry but living with an unstable addict is just not something she could do to her children.


One things for sure - it won’t be her fault.  And the next stage of output will be all about how our plucky heroine pulls through against the odds and the might of the evil RF


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> One things for sure - it won’t be her fault.  And the next stage of output will be all about how our plucky heroine pulls through against the odds and the might of the evil RF


But she was just gushing about their LOVE STORY TM

She should already be transitioning to the next narrative.


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> But she was just gushing about their LOVE STORY TM
> 
> She should already be transitioning to the next narrative.


Give her a minute…


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hey, Doria was given a role in this week’s episode! She had to “coincidentally” call during the taping just to say I love you. I hope she got paid to recite this cheesy script and play the doting mother.
> 
> On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.
> 
> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> 
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> 
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"
> 
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> 
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> 
> "I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


remember - they bought doria that senior living facility and made her CEO....she's beholding to them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> But she was just gushing about their LOVE STORY TM
> 
> She should already be transitioning to the next narrative.



She might want to thread carefully until the financial part is agreed on.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> remember - they bought doria that senior living facility and made her CEO....she's beholding to them


Did we get confirmation that they really did that? I remember the discussion at the time but it’s hard to imagine them buying something like that.


----------



## purseinsanity

WingNut said:


> Wow. I'm flabbergasted (or, in the immortal words of , Jeremy Clarkson..."gasted with flabber"). She packs her kid's lunchbox and has to feed dogs in the morning. What a whirlwind of difficult challenges she must face. I don't know how she can possibly handle it all. Is this meant to show that her haughtiness is "just like us mere mortals?". I mean, I and others can only aspire to be able to manage so many difficult tasks....


I click on these occasionally for the comments, which are pure gold.    
"Cornflakes, anyone?"
"Who feeds the hens?  Or have they eaten them?"  LOLOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

Kevinaxx said:


> *ME*ghan = *MEMEME *
> 
> I couldn’t get past that first paragraph.
> 
> Is that how she really talks irl?


"By the way, the inflatable pizza slice proved to be a big hit. Which I found online and I kid you not, the one without pepperoni was a few dollars less than the one with pepperoni. And yes, I’m still talking about the inflatable pizza float for the pool. We all got a good laugh out of that"

Seriously?  They got a good laugh out of a inflatable pizza float?  

They either have the humor of a 3 year old, or they're both lunatics, laughing at the most moronic things.  Can someone explain to me the humor of a pizza float WITHOUT THE PEPPERONI?????


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> The Trudeau kids and Meg's kids had so much fun playing together in the pool.  The Trudeau kids are 8, 13 and 15.
> 
> ETA - some above just said that! Sorry.


The 15 year old was old enough to babysit Aldi and Lidi whilst their mom drank wine.  lololol!


----------



## DoggieBags

Pessie said:


> Eewww   She really thinks her audience is stupid


Didn’t somebody post that TW’s podcrashes have generated at least 1.5 million views so far? They can’t all be journalists reviewing the podcrashes for their respective organizations. So she’s got at least some genuine viewers hard as that is for me to believe.


----------



## purseinsanity

rose60610 said:


> Wait, she packs her kid's lunchbox and feeds the dogs? All in ONE MORNING? I'm exhausted just reading about it. And this is the person who fled to CA "for privacy" but now feels compelled to tell us about her daily routine which is really:
> 
> 1. Wake up and start b*tching
> 2. Listen to Harry telling her she's beautiful (trained via shock collar)
> 3. Demand coffee with oat milk
> 4. Scream at servant to make kid's lunch and feed dogs
> 5. Wait for phone to ring from high ranking official begging her to become Ambassador to country of her choice
> 6. Make daily call to State Department begging to become Ambassador to country of her choice
> 7. Listen to Harry consoling her, soon she will become an Ambassador, he'll get his dad to call the White House
> 8. Fume that no one IMPORTANT is calling, only jerks asking for donations
> 9. Yell at servant to make olive oil cakes to shut up donation asking jerks
> 10. Buy more clothes that are three sizes too small


I think I love you!


----------



## lanasyogamama

I wonder if the word Sugar was a signal to her minions.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is insufferable. Maybe her and Harry are indeed a match made in heaven because they both seem to have stunted development. Swipe for drivel. But yes, this happened as much as she had lunch with Michelle.



I'm sure the 15 year old, especially, loved the "Big Cuddles with our Little Ones" session in the pool


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Hey, Doria was given a role in this week’s episode! She had to “coincidentally” call during the taping just to say I love you. I hope she got paid to recite this cheesy script and play the doting mother.
> 
> On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.
> 
> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> 
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> 
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"
> 
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> 
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> 
> "I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


@Vlad, how is the barf emoji for little side bar coming along?  You said you'd see what you could do!  Help us, please!!!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Trying again to promote the 'fun-loving" Meghan rather than The Witch she appeared to be (is) at the funeral.


----------



## Mumotons

youngster said:


> Even the sugars can't be that clueless.  Did any of them have a mother (or even a grandmother) who sat around "perfectly coiffed" wearing pearls and fixing Dad his martini after a long day of polishing the furniture?  I'm older than she is and my mom worked full time. Everything she knows seems to come from 1950's and 1960's TV re-runs, which were endlessly shown in the late afternoons and weekends on local TV stations throughout the 70's and 80's.


Unless it’s another dig at Catherine


----------



## WingNut

Mumotons said:


> Unless it’s another dig at Catherine


If so, the only "digs" she's achieving are those for the hole she's making for herself....


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I missed that one the first few times around. Did they have the nanny nearby to make sure nobody drowned while they were drinking and being giddy, or are they irresponsible jerks who were lucky?


I'm sure a nanny was in the pool with the kids. Assuming it even really happened...

Her desperation to appear fun and relevant is embarrassing. How much more of this nonsense does the world have to endure before Spotify pulls the plug?


----------



## Pessie

Mumotons said:


> Unless it’s another dig at Catherine


I thought that too


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> Mrs T has not been ‘with’ Mr T in a very looooong time. Perhaps the Ghoul was getting tips on the perks of staying married while not being ‘with’ H.


So their handholding at the funeral must have been just for show too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

DoggieBags said:


> Didn’t somebody post that TW’s podcrashes have generated at least 1.5 million views so far? They can’t all be journalists reviewing the podcrashes for their respective organizations. So she’s got at least some genuine viewers hard as that is for me to believe.


I was shocked last week when a girlfriend of 50+ years was over for a few days and asked what I thought of TW. Before responding I asked what she thought of her, she then went on to rave about what a wonderful couple they were. The best love story ever, so generous ad nauseum. I tried pointing out a few provable negatives to her and was told that she *chooses* not to see or hear anything negative about them. ￼ She is still a dear friend, but it sure opened my eyes as to why TW could have any supporters.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Mumotons said:


> Apparently they’re trying to recruit influencers to push the book
> View attachment 5642920


They need to pay us we basically both sarcastically wrote and will review the Damn thing in convenient sound bites


TC1 said:


> Gym with a stripper pole...


always good to have a plan B….

She can spit roast H on it if his book doesn’t sell.



CarryOn2020 said:


> The comments I saw focused on how much his nose has changed.  Did he have surgery?  He looks much different.


He must have had a meeting with the knife by now- doesn’t LAX had a light rhinoplasty as a standard add on for business class waiting lounges?

It’s a lot less flared at the nostrils in second photo and the amount of coke he does you’d think it’d be getting wider not smaller.


Mumotons said:


> Meghan Markle chats to First Lady of Canada Sophie Trudeau
> 
> 
> The friends (pictured together in 2016) spoke about the challenges of parenting and being a partner to two famous men in an episode called: 'Good Wife/Bad Wife, Good Mom/Bad Mom'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I mean I can’t help but wonder if M as such a vocal and politically aware defender of POCs everywhere will bring up a certain image of S’s esteemed husband. I’m going to guess it Is about as likely as a mention of her own husband’s foray into fancy dress.


LittleStar88 said:


> Sounds like, by not referring to him by name, she’s somewhat minimalizing him. If that makes sense (still early here, brain still booting up, coffee not kicked in yet). Of less importance in the conversation… something like that.
> 
> Transcript of this yawn fest:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> storage.googleapis.com


well goodness why on earth would these ladies of all people want to insist being labelled a wife and a bad wife is a harmful stereotype?



marietouchet said:


> Something I had forgotten … but absolutely CRUCIAL
> Reading book on George V, his daddy Edward VII did not make prince of Wales immediately, G5 had to wait a few years , he was just Duke of Cornwall for 3-5 years
> The title of PoW is NOT automatic for the heir
> The fact that KC gave it out ASAP to W (with nothing for overseas H) says volumes


It’d be absolute PR suicide not to bring Will to front. Everyone thinks Charles is a place holder king


WingNut said:


> Wow. I'm flabbergasted (or, in the immortal words of , Jeremy Clarkson..."gasted with flabber"). She packs her kid's lunchbox and has to feed dogs in the morning. What a whirlwind of difficult challenges she must face. I don't know how she can possibly handle it all. Is this meant to show that her haughtiness is "just like us mere mortals?". I mean, I and others can only aspire to be able to manage so many difficult tasks....


Given we think these kids and dogs don’t really exist  I don’t think we should even credit her with doing these tasks and of course the maid would do it anyway.




WingNut said:


> After blathering about pizza shaped pool floaties (with and without pepperoni) she actually says:
> *But all that aside, this wasn’t our day of being the wives and moms all perfectly coiffed with updos and pearls and demure smiles.*
> 
> Is that really her definition of wives and moms? Huh? In which century does her pea-brain take up residence?


This is yet further proof that this podcast is set in the 1930s and I can’t help wondering if it’s all an elaborate excuse to explain away M’s horrific Wallis Simpson weave.


Toby93 said:


> The PM's wife is not someone who takes up a lot of time here in Canada.  Over the last few years, there have not been many pics in the paper, and hardly any of the PM and her together in the same pic.  When I saw the  pic of them together at QE11 funeral, I had to think back to the last time I had seen her in the press.  Even when the PM called the last election and was campaigning a year or so ago, he was by himself.  There are rumours that they are not together, but I really hadn't given her much thought....until now.
> 
> Just ewwwww.   I am so disappointed that she would call herself a friend to that POS and actually be on her podcrash.  How embarrassing and just a bad judge of character to let herself be associated with THAT   I thought it was pretty clever of her to stay under the radar and not be in the press all the time, but I guess she's not that clever.


It is a weird flex to be like ‘lol probably divorcing my more famous man so I’m going for vacuously slurping wine and laughing inanely as my personality. It’ll be like Girls Trip though I don’t actually know any black women.’


CarryOn2020 said:


>



Yeah it’s a gross image of someone thinking they can be relatable by being an ******* 

But on a seasonal note usually a pair of bimbos getting drunk by open water is the prelude to a horror movie so perhaps Jason will give the world the severance Charles needs to. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> The rumours are getting louder.



I’m not entirely inclined to believe her but I’d love  to know the details.


gracekelly said:


> Drinking wine with Aldi and Lidi in the pool was irresponsible.


It is a terrible image and it’s embarrassing for them if they think it makes them sound likeable or fun.




bag-mania said:


> On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.
> 
> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> 
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> 
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"
> 
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> 
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> 
> "I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Riveting as always. They both sound absolutely fried…. Do we think seeing M with a smiley face is the inciting incident of the bad trip to end all bad trips?


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Valentine Low on Jamie Lowther-Pinkterton, the brothers' former private secretary they shared. It is really quite sad.
> 
> View attachment 5644309


This all sounds a bit weird tbh, are we meant to believe he Skypes Harry   these days? When is he hanging out with Will for that matter?


bag-mania said:


> Did we get confirmation that they really did that? I remember the discussion at the time but it’s hard to imagine them buying something like that.


It’d be a little goldmine though and it’d be somewhere to pasture Harry out to, she just needs to hide his Rogaine and remind him of something his brother did when he was 14 and she will easily convince the nurses he’s a lost inmate who has been rambling around muttering to himself for weeks.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> So their handholding at the funeral must have been just for show too.


For sure.


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> Eewww   She really thinks her audience is stupid


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Did we get confirmation that they really did that? I remember the discussion at the time but it’s hard to imagine them buying something like that.


see this...I think they did








						Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
					

The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Can someone explain to me the humor of a pizza float WITHOUT THE PEPPERONI?????


That's the vegan version silly!


----------



## csshopper

It’s almost more than my old mind can grapple with : The Emasculated Whining Man-Child, who obsesses over the idea that HE should be King, does not know basic facts necessary for passage of the citizenship exam required for people to gain citizenship so they could be ruled by him?

A fact TW finds funny, maybe even “giddy.”  This sheet show just gets deeper and deeper.


----------



## Jayne1

bellecate said:


> Mrs T has not been ‘with’ Mr T in a very looooong time. Perhaps the Ghoul was getting tips on the perks of staying married while not being ‘with’ H.


This is the first I've heard of it. They do public appearances together... 

Also Sophie is the opposite of Meg, she isn't a fame whore, she doesn't lust for her picture to be taken, so I thought she was just being her low key regular self?


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> I was shocked last week when a girlfriend of 50+ years was over for a few days and asked what I thought of TW. Before responding I asked what she thought of her, she then went on to rave about what a wonderful couple they were. The best love story ever, so generous ad nauseum. I tried pointing out a few provable negatives to her and was told that she *chooses* not to see or hear anything negative about them. ￼ She is still a dear friend, but it sure opened my eyes as to why TW could have any supporters.



I have found that even my woke-est of friends rolled eyes at the mention of her/him which was a surprise. Maybe your friend is one of those people that just watched the wedding and sees 'pretty' PS pictures everywhere, I think H&M impresses those people.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I have found that even my woke-est of friends rolled eyes at the mention of her/him which was a surprise. Maybe your friend is one of those people that just watched the wedding and sees 'pretty' PS pictures everywhere, I think H&M impresses those people.


maybe the same people (women) who were so "there for it" about JLo and Ben getting back together...


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> see this...I think they did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
> 
> 
> The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It is a management company but it isn't a nursing facility. They will arrange to send a helper to a facility or the patient's home to give "holistic treatment." Sounds like a shell corporation to be honest, but they have a web site so maybe there are a few employees, Doria among them. Their web site is even more barren than Archewell's.





__





						Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
					

The capacity to care is the thing which gives life it's deepest significance. - Pablo Casals About Us We Advocate and Coordinate Life Care Needs for Your Loved Ones. The elderly population is growing and will soon be the largest population in need of supportive services. With chronic illnes ...




					www.lovingkindnessseniorcare.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> "By the way, the inflatable pizza slice proved to be a big hit. Which I found online and I kid you not, the one without pepperoni was a few dollars less than the one with pepperoni. And yes, I’m still talking about the inflatable pizza float for the pool. We all got a good laugh out of that"
> 
> Seriously?  They got a good laugh out of a inflatable pizza float?
> 
> They either have the humor of a 3 year old, or they're both lunatics, laughing at the most moronic things.  Can someone explain to me the humor of a pizza float WITHOUT THE PEPPERONI?????


oooh sugar!  Come on, D was there. They were high, oh so high, plus tipsy on a hot sunny Cali day.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> It’s almost more than my old mind can grapple with : The Emasculated Whining Man-Child, who obsesses over the idea that HE should be King, does not know basic facts necessary for passage of the citizenship exam required for people to gain citizenship so they could be ruled by him?
> 
> A fact TW finds funny, maybe even “giddy.”  This sheet show just gets deeper and deeper.



So you think she got that far with wanting to be British, you think she sat still, got stuck into our citizenship test? 

You think that because this vignette would make a good scene in a rom com, it really happened? 

Have you not learned? MegZZ has a completely alternative life she's made-up in her head. 

No sworn affidavit witness statements, never happened


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is a management company but it isn't a nursing facility. They will arrange to send a helper to a facility or the patient's home to give "holistic treatment." Sounds like a shell corporation to be honest, but they have a web site so maybe there are a few employees, Doria among them. Their web site is even more barren than Archewell's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
> 
> 
> The capacity to care is the thing which gives life it's deepest significance. - Pablo Casals About Us We Advocate and Coordinate Life Care Needs for Your Loved Ones. The elderly population is growing and will soon be the largest population in need of supportive services. With chronic illnes ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lovingkindnessseniorcare.com


whatever....she is a former yoga instructor and now a CEO thanks to her daughter


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> This all sounds a bit weird tbh, are we meant to believe he Skypes Harry   these days? When is he hanging out with Will for that matter?



Where do you read that (skyping Harry)? It just says he's fond of him. I used to be fond of Harry and we never met  Re: William, I don't know but he is George's godfather.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## djfmn

I took a number of UK Citizenship tests to see how difficult they were. I did not study although I did grow up in a Commonwealth country.  I passed every single one and got a couple of answers wrong. So each time about 22 out of 24 I did not find the tests that difficult and I took 4 of them to get some different questions. For me a lot of it was common knowledge and history, geography and things I had read about the UK over the years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> maybe the same people (women) who were so "there for it" about JLo and Ben getting back together...



I mean, if it works for them, more power to them (though I have my thoughts about someone on their 5th marriage)...but I stand by my initial thought which was "That guy's a project".


----------



## CarryOn2020

djfmn said:


> I took a number of UK Citizenship tests to see how difficult they were. I did not study although I did grow up in a Commonwealth country.  I passed every single one and got a couple of answers wrong. So each time about 22 out of 24 I did not find the tests that difficult and I took 4 of them to get some different questions. For me a lot of it was common knowledge and history, geography and things I had read about the UK over the years.


Good job!

Article from 2018: 
_About two-thirds of Americans would not pass the test required to become a United States citizen, a new survey says. 
Just 39 percent of Americans can pass a multiple choice test with questions taken from the U.S. Citizenship Test, according to a report by The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. The test has a passing score of 60.


			https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2018-10-12/2-of-3-americans-wouldnt-pass-us-citizenship-test
		

_
Jay Leno routinely ‘tested’ average people.  She simply stole his idea.


----------



## bag-mania

Why does she need to make Archie a lunchbox? He’s only three and there’s no pretending he’s going to school.

 This is what she had to say about Harry when she came up for air after talking about herself. Lukewarm praise indeed.

"Oh my husband, oh he's great."


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> see this...I think they did
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother takes over as boss of care homes firm
> 
> 
> The 64-year-old, who is a former yoga instructor, is now the Chief Executive Officer for the company Loving Kindness, based in Beverly Hills. The firm says it is a 'senior care management company'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The DM article is two years old


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It is, but it wasn't sold as news but brought up as background info on the company they bought for Doria.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Why does she need to make Archie a lunchbox? He’s only three and there’s no pretending he’s going to school.



Didn't she balance him on her heavily pregnant belly on his way to pre-school, though? (I always get confused, in Germany Kindergarten is what you attend from age 3, then pre-school is still Kindergarten but the last year before elementary school. In the US pre-school seems to come before KG?).


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> I was shocked last week when a girlfriend of 50+ years was over for a few days and asked what I thought of TW. Before responding I asked what she thought of her, she then went on to rave about what a wonderful couple they were. The best love story ever, so generous ad nauseum. I tried pointing out a few provable negatives to her and was told that she *chooses* not to see or hear anything negative about them. ￼ She is still a dear friend, but it sure opened my eyes as to why TW could have any supporters.


Their fandom requires millions of people to make that deliberate choice and so far it’s working. 

It is more important to defend Meghan and Harry from the meanies who criticize them than to acknowledge the lies. Even if they finally realize what’s been going on, don’t expect them to admit it. Doesn’t everyone believe they are a great judge of character?


----------



## papertiger

Well hello?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, if it works for them, more power to them (though I have my thoughts about someone on their 5th marriage)...but I stand by my initial thought which was "That guy's a project".


he may be a "project" but she is too in her way - needs a lot of attention I think....she will probably marry a few more times.  at what age (if any) will she either just live with a guy or give up the big white weddings?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't she balance him on her heavily pregnant belly on his way to pre-school, though? (I always get confused, in Germany Kindergarten is what you attend from age 3, then pre-school is still Kindergarten but the last year before elementary school. In the US pre-school seems to come before KG?).


She would only have been “pregnant”with Lilibet when Archie was 18 months old. I could believe they would shuttle him off to some high end daycare during the day to keep him busy.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Well hello?



I'm watching this video now (almost at the end). I wouldn't trust the separation rumors at this point. A pretending separation could work to strengthen Hazz's connection with his family, particularly now that his book is being released. They know that Charles can cut them completely, and they can't afford that.


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> Even the sugars can't be that clueless.  Did any of them have a mother (or even a grandmother) who sat around "perfectly coiffed" wearing pearls and fixing Dad his martini after a long day of polishing the furniture?  I'm older than she is and my mom worked full time. Everything she knows seems to come from 1950's and 1960's TV re-runs, which were endlessly shown in the late afternoons and weekends on local TV stations throughout the 70's and 80's.


This is sounding very Stepford Wife-ish. what is it with her and old movie roles?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I'm watching this video now (almost at the end). I wouldn't trust the separation rumors at this point. A pretending separation could work to strengthen Hazz's connection with his family, particularly now that his book is being released. They know that Charles can cut them completely, and they can't afford that.



The good thing is, if they have separated (for real) KC has already cut them off financially so she'll only be able to nag for H's money.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't she balance him on her heavily pregnant belly on his way to pre-school, though? (I always get confused, in Germany Kindergarten is what you attend from age 3, then pre-school is still Kindergarten but the last year before elementary school. In the US pre-school seems to come before KG?).


At the age he was, it could only have been daycare.  There is 25 months between them so he would not have been 2 yet.  I don't know of any "school" that takes kids less than 2.  It must have been so exhausting having to look after him, that she as a no  working parent, needed him to go to daycare in the middle of a pandemic


----------



## marietouchet

On the accuracy of BRF autobiographies … author talks to the birth of Duke of Windsor/Edward VIII, son of Queen Mary/May and George V, author cites 2 sources

- the diary of George V, the father
- the autobiography of Windsor, who is the baby being born in the story

which account do you think is accurate?

PS the author hints that the Windsor account is couched to show the father as indifferent to the son, where have we heard that ???

 Motherdear is Alexandra, mother of George V, Victoria is the sister of G5

from George V byJane Ridley, see Amazon books


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> It is a management company but it isn't a nursing facility. They will arrange to send a helper to a facility or the patient's home to give "holistic treatment." Sounds like a shell corporation to be honest, but they have a web site so maybe there are a few employees, Doria among them. Their web site is even more barren than Archewell's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home | Loving Kindness Senior Care Management
> 
> 
> The capacity to care is the thing which gives life it's deepest significance. - Pablo Casals About Us We Advocate and Coordinate Life Care Needs for Your Loved Ones. The elderly population is growing and will soon be the largest population in need of supportive services. With chronic illnes ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lovingkindnessseniorcare.com


There are so many outfits like this springing up that often prey upon vulnerable people and their concerned family members. I hope it's not some Medicaid/Medicare scam.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> At the age he was, it could only have been daycare.  There is 25 months between them so he would not have been 2 yet.  I don't know of any "school" that takes kids less than 2.  It must have been so exhausting having to look after him, that she as a no  working parent, needed him to go to daycare in the middle of a pandemic


A lot of daycare facilities call themselves early childhood education centers and are used by parents who work from home and need a place to park them during the day to avoid distraction. Or parents who just need some personal time for errands. Or drinking by the pool with friends.


----------



## Chanbal

Go Tom!








						'Their titles should be stripped’: Royal expert slams Harry & Meghan
					

A royal biographer is calling for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to have their royal titles stripped ahead of the release of Prince Harry’s highly controversial memoir Spare.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> There are so many outfits like this springing up that often prey upon vulnerable people and their concerned family members. I hope it's not some Medicaid/Medicare scam.


Her holistic treatment could be Doria dispensing edibles to elderly pain patients.


----------



## Chanbal

People on Twitter don't seem to be buying the divorce rumors…


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry body language claims go viral on TikTok
					

Meghan Markle is accused of controlling Prince Harry in Tiktok videos—including in one that has been viewed more than 24.9 million times.



					www.newsweek.com


----------



## shiba

Toby93 said:


> The PM's wife is not someone who takes up a lot of time here in Canada.  Over the last few years, there have not been many pics in the paper, and hardly any of the PM and her together in the same pic.  When I saw the  pic of them together at QE11 funeral, I had to think back to the last time I had seen her in the press.  Even when the PM called the last election and was campaigning a year or so ago, he was by himself.  There are rumours that they are not together, but I really hadn't given her much thought....until now.


lol this. She has been pretty quiet since the WE scandal and then the rumours of how she caught covid.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> This is sounding very Stepford Wife-ish. what is it with her and old movie roles?


Yep, Meghan outright calls it that in her podcast. Of course she’s barely coherent.

 "This idea of what it means to be a good mom, or like a Stepford Wife – all of these different archetypes where you feel this pressure to have to be a more or a wife or a partner in a certain way… and then the mom shaming that comes with it, often times… and I think it's so interesting to hear your journey of that."


----------



## shiba

Meghan said: 'This wasn't our day of being the wives and moms, all perfectly quaffed with up-dos and pearls and demure smiles.

Hmm, kind of comes across that she is so important, having to show up done, dressed and acting proper.


----------



## marietouchet

I took the citizenship test on the first try and passed with 75 percent

yeah there are tough questions, one who about the aisle of Man - which I vaguely remember as one of those miscellaneous Islands like guernsey, Jersey that have unique political status … I guessed … but then one question was - what was the 1960s known for ? Answer - pop music - hey the Beatles were more popular than Jesus per John Lenno


----------



## CobaltBlu

Is there a time warping machine in the recording studio? That would explain a lot.


----------



## purseinsanity

shiba said:


> lol this. She has been pretty quiet since the WE scandal and then the rumours of how she caught covid.


What is the WE scandal and what's the rumor!?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

shiba said:


> Meghan said: 'This wasn't our day of being the wives and moms, all perfectly quaffed with up-dos and pearls and demure smiles.
> 
> Hmm, kind of comes across that she is so important, having to show up done, dressed and acting proper.


Did MeMe think her up dos were "perfectly coiffed"????


----------



## marietouchet

A snippet By Hilary Rose on the Sophie podcast - today’s Times

It never ends well when Meghan reads a book. I’ve listened to nine of these podcasts and not once has she given a shoutout to Jilly Cooper. This week’s book is called A Radical Awakening and she reads us a poem about a woman who discards her old ways and “shreds her list of shoulds and obligations”. She finds that “artifice and guile leave her nauseated” and the “parental tentacles of tradition no longer define her truth”, and if that doesn’t make you yearn for Rupert Campbell Black playing naked tennis with someone else’s wife, nothing will.
The rest of the podcast is the usual trot through everything that is wrong with everyone else. “Don’t destroy your essence for this illusion of perfectionism,” says one of the guests, I forget who, does it matter? “The best woman you can be is the authentic one who is deeply connected to her own knowing,” says another. We talk about pendulums, which Meghan rejects, and “the limiting version of the mould that society has carved out for us”, a mould so limiting it doesn’t even allow for a woman to be born in California, find fame as an actress, marry an English prince, hobnob with the late Queen then go on Oprah to speak her truth.

from today’s Times - did not copy the link that goes behind the paywall , my bad


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> What is the WE scandal and what's the rumor!?


The *WE Charity scandal* was a Canadian political scandal regarding the awarding of a federal contract to WE Charity to administer the $912 million Canada Student Summer Grant program (CSSG) in 2020. The controversy arose when it was revealed that the WE charity had previously paid close family of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to appear at its events,[1][2] despite making claims to the contrary.[3] In total, Craig Kielburger confirmed at a parliamentary committee, WE Charity paid approximately $425,000 to Trudeau's family including expenses.

Just days before Idris Elba and Sophie Grégoire Trudeau tested positive for coronavirus, Elba, 57, and the wife of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau posed for a photo together at a charity event in London.

The rumor is they were much more than friends.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> A snippet By Hilary Rose on the Sophie podcast - today’s Times
> 
> It never ends well when Meghan reads a book. I’ve listened to nine of these podcasts and not once has she given a shoutout to Jilly Cooper. This week’s book is called A Radical Awakening and she reads us a poem about a woman who discards her old ways and “shreds her list of shoulds and obligations”. She finds that “artifice and guile leave her nauseated” and the “parental tentacles of tradition no longer define her truth”, and if that doesn’t make you yearn for Rupert Campbell Black playing naked tennis with someone else’s wife, nothing will.
> The rest of the podcast is the usual trot through everything that is wrong with everyone else. “Don’t destroy your essence for this illusion of perfectionism,” says one of the guests, I forget who, does it matter? “The best woman you can be is the authentic one who is deeply connected to her own knowing,” says another. We talk about pendulums, which Meghan rejects, and “the limiting version of the mould that society has carved out for us”, a mould so limiting it doesn’t even allow for a woman to be born in California, find fame as an actress, marry an English prince, hobnob with the late Queen then go on Oprah to speak her truth.
> 
> from today’s Times - did not copy the link that goes behind the paywall , my bad


Still waiting on that barf emoji.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> The *WE Charity scandal* was a Canadian political scandal regarding the awarding of a federal contract to WE Charity to administer the $912 million Canada Student Summer Grant program (CSSG) in 2020. The controversy arose when it was revealed that the WE charity had previously paid close family of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to appear at its events,[1][2] despite making claims to the contrary.[3] In total, Craig Kielburger confirmed at a parliamentary committee, WE Charity paid approximately $425,000 to Trudeau's family including expenses.
> 
> Just days before Idris Elba and Sophie Grégoire Trudeau tested positive for coronavirus, Elba, 57, and the wife of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau posed for a photo together at a charity event in London.
> 
> The rumor is they were much more than friends.


Well I can't fault her taste in men.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Well I can't fault her taste in men.


I can!  Look at her last name!    

How to tie this in with TW??  Hmmm....Um....Uhhhh....Oh!  Didn't Idris DJ the reception for the terrible twosome?


----------



## Lodpah

shiba said:


> Meghan said: 'This wasn't our day of being the wives and moms, all perfectly quaffed with up-dos and pearls and demure smiles.
> 
> Hmm, kind of comes across that she is so important, having to show up done, dressed and acting proper.


WTFudge is she spouting about? The 50s left. She’s so utterly desperate to come across as witty and smart women need to revolt and tell her to shut the hell up.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I can!  Look at her last name!
> 
> How to tie this in with TW??  Hmmm....Um....Uhhhh....Oh!  Didn't Idris DJ the reception for the terrible twosome?


That’s right! Harry asked him and then later he talked about it on Meghan’s good friend Ellen’s show. Celebrities are weird with their little connections.









						Idris Elba Explains How He Got the D.J.-ing Gig for Harry and Meghan’s Wedding
					

“. . . I was like is this a joke?”




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## rose60610

purseinsanity said:


> I think I love you!



Whaddayasay we and our wonderful thread contributors compose a (certified) letter to King Charles III discussing our collective disgust at his grifter daughter-in-law and giving our sympathy, support, and ENCOURAGEMENT to lose the Coronation invite in the mail not invite them to the Coronation so they can't pimp HRH photos (with Claw standing in front of Queen Consort Camilla) to Vanity Fair, People, or any other publication. Plus, King Charles III has our full support to extend our admiration to only WORKING ROYALS to recognize and thank them for their community service.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> So you think she got that far with wanting to be British, you think she sat still, got stuck into our citizenship test?
> 
> You think that because this vignette would make a good scene in a rom com, it really happened?
> 
> Have you not learned? MegZZ has a completely alternative life she's made-up in her head.
> 
> No sworn affidavit witness statements, never happened



I think at most she riffed through the pages of any study material and made a few jokes with H. I don’t think she ever for one moment intended to become a citizen. What boggled my mind was her outing his ignorance and laughing about it. Feels like a snide  “ yes, he really is dense as a brick isn’t he? tee hee” moment.


----------



## Freak4Coach

Found it…


----------



## EmilyM11

a


djfmn said:


> I took a number of UK Citizenship tests to see how difficult they were. I did not study although I did grow up in a Commonwealth country.  I passed every single one and got a couple of answers wrong. So each time about 22 out of 24 I did not find the tests that difficult and I took 4 of them to get some different questions. For me a lot of it was common knowledge and history, geography and things I had read about the UK over the years.


The actual UK citizenship test was crazy easy, the questions were very basic (about holidays and Queen EII). The materials I studied from were so-so. I'm from a different (like completely different) part of the world where we think La Manche is the right name for the channel between UK and France .  I studied very casually for a few days, mostly doing online tests and it was no problem. The Harkles like to make everything difficult.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> On the accuracy of BRF autobiographies … author talks to the birth of Duke of Windsor/Edward VIII, son of Queen Mary/May and George V, author cites 2 sources
> 
> - the diary of George V, the father
> - the autobiography of Windsor, who is the baby being born in the story
> 
> which account do you think is accurate?
> 
> PS the author hints that the Windsor account is couched to show the father as indifferent to the son, where have we heard that ???
> 
> Motherdear is Alexandra, mother of George V, Victoria is the sister of G5
> 
> from George V byJane Ridley, see Amazon books
> 
> View attachment 5644488



I mean, I wouldn't say a 19th century father was being indifferent if he didn't attend a birth, that was the norm well into the 1950s. In fact that seems extremely progressive he was there. But also, I'd trust said father's diary over the infant's nonexistant memory or whatever it was he presented as fact.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

shiba said:


> Meghan said: 'This wasn't our day of being the wives and moms, all perfectly quaffed with up-dos and pearls and demure smiles.
> 
> Hmm, kind of comes across that she is so important, having to show up done, dressed and *acting proper.*



She wouldn't know how to do that to save her life.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I think at most she riffed through the pages of any study material and made a few jokes with H. I don’t think she ever for one moment intended to become a citizen. What boggled my mind was her outing his ignorance and laughing about it. Feels like a snide  “ yes, he really is dense as a brick isn’t he? tee hee” moment.



And it's not just one moment we could try to give her a pass for. She's publicly put him down over and over again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

sdkitty said:


> who knows what she thinks?  she just wants to be very famous and rich IMO....in whatever way she can.  poor dim H thought he had found a smart (and sexy) woman who could be a good partner for him but she just used him I think.  Now he's stuck in CA trying to show how relevant and what a "regular guy" he is.  what a mess


After being on this thread from it's beginning and even more so since TW appeared on the scene, I'm more and more convinced that they are both as stupid as each other. Who, with a shred of intelligence or even just common sense, would behave and say the things she says and does?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I haven't seen these, but if so we predicted her MO months ago. Just not sure what changed that she doesn't need him anymore though, does she feel she is successful?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This lady nailed it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Did she stay with Harry while TQ was alive thinking that it's easy to manipulate an old lady into giving them whatever they asked for because Harry was her alleged favorite grandchild? Now that Charles is TK and knowing that he cannot be easily swayed with Camilla, William and Kate by his side, Z-list is finally trying to Markle Harry slowly. I thought they had an epic Love Story © 

SAVAGE.

I bet she would still use DoS after the divorce.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Hey, Doria was given a role in this week’s episode! She had to “coincidentally” call during the taping just to say I love you. I hope she got paid to recite this cheesy script and play the doting mother.
> 
> On the latest episode of her _Archetypes_podcast, released Tuesday, the Duchess of Sussex spoke with Sophie Trudeau, Pamela Adlon and Sam Jay about being a "good" mother and wife. Ironically, Doria called Meghan while she was working on the episode.
> 
> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> 
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> 
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?"
> 
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> 
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> 
> "I love you, too. I'll see you on Saturday," Doria said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Mom Doria Ragland Makes Surprise Cameo on New Podcast Episode: 'Hey, Mommy!'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's mother Doria Ragland made a surprise cameo on an episode of the Duchess of Sussex's Archetypes podcast on Spotify
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


It only goes to show that she isn't serious about her podcrashes if she doesn't even put her phone on silent. Or, more likely, that it was scripted. Maybe Doria pre-recorded it.


lanasyogamama said:


> If the split rumors are true, it will be interesting to see how she spins everything given that they’ve gone on and on and on about their epic love story.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Romeo and Juliet...it's the evil family and she jumped ship before someone died or some similar drama.
> 
> Or - probably more likely - she'll always love Harry but living with an unstable addict is just not something she could do to her children.


Star-crossed lovers... But if they already found their freedom, what the heck do stars have to do with it? 
_The Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced a trial separation today. The Duchess, tears dripping from her left eye, announced at a media conference, that theirs was a star-crossed union. Unless she gets to be a Hollywood star, she will remain cross with him._


sdkitty said:


> remember - they bought doria that senior living facility and made her CEO....she's beholding to them





bag-mania said:


> Did we get confirmation that they really did that? I remember the discussion at the time but it’s hard to imagine them buying something like that.


IIRC the deal was handled by her entertainment lawyer who set up her spider web of companies. 


charlottawill said:


> Trying again to promote the 'fun-loving" Meghan rather than The Witch she appeared to be (is) at the funeral.


It's post-Halloween. Now she is aiming for the Christmas market. Expect more merching...


bag-mania said:


> *Why does she need to make Archie a lunchbox? *He’s only three and there’s no pretending he’s going to school.
> 
> This is what she had to say about Harry when she came up for air after talking about herself. Lukewarm praise indeed.
> 
> "Oh my husband, oh he's great."


Maybe she sends Archie to the "children's house" for playschool.




bag-mania said:


> Their fandom requires millions of people to make that deliberate choice and so far it’s working.
> 
> *It is more important to defend Meghan and Harry from the meanies who criticize them than to acknowledge the lies. *Even if they finally realize what’s been going on, don’t expect them to admit it. Doesn’t everyone believe they are a great judge of character?


Some people think that they are the underdogs in a battle with the BRF, so they MUST be defended. Are the Nigerians heeding the call or are they following the example of the South Africans?


----------



## Toby93

shiba said:


> lol this. She has been pretty quiet since the WE scandal and then the rumours of how she caught covid.


She was out on the campaign trail every day during the first election.  She met with William and Catharine when they visited Canada.  She had a lot of press in the beginning, but over that last few years there has been nothing.  As I mentioned before, when I saw her picture in England at the funeral in Sept, it had been years since I had seen or read anything about her.  Did she take this opportunity on the taxpayers money to meet with TW?

I have been thinking about her being there, and trying not to be cynical, but I was not aware until yesterday that she had a relationship with the toxic twins.  How hypocritical of her to show up at the Queens funeral, all the while supporting the pair who caused her such pain during her final years.  

I hope that the PM is not involved in this mess, as I took him at face value when he made his statement.  He was close to tears when he said that he had a special relationship with the Queen and had known her since he was a child because of his father being PM.  I am hoping that he was genuine  and that the "friendship" is all his wife's.  Either way, it is not a good look.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## piperdog

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I haven't seen these, but if so we predicted her MO months ago. Just not sure what changed that she doesn't need him anymore though, does she feel she is successful?



I'm not sure how much all of the separation chatter I believe, but IF KCIII has made it clear to them that they are out (e.g., no $$, no Royal event appearances, no titles for kids, etc.) then I can see Meghan cutting her losses and dumping him. Or, I should say I can see her preparing a careful narrative that casts her as the victim yet again. How badly Harry gets trashed in the process - were they star-crossed lovers kept apart by his cruel family, or did Harry turn on her and show his true face as a dim, damaged, angry, racist and she had to flee for her life - probably depends on how large the settlement offer is. 

Also, if it's true, I'm torn. While I would like her to be safely away from the BRF and any legitimacy that comes from association with them, I also think Meghan and Harry deserve each other and keeping them together is a fitting punishment for both. I don't want to see Harry go through Palace-driven reputation rehab yet again. He doesn't deserve it, and I hope the family is smart and strong enough to give him the Andrew treatment. I don't see how any of them could ever trust him again.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


>




“Childcare team”. Must be nice


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> I think at most she riffed through the pages of any study material and made a few jokes with H. I don’t think she ever for one moment intended to become a citizen. *What boggled my mind was her outing his ignorance and laughing about it.* Feels like a snide  “ yes, he really is dense as a brick isn’t he? tee hee” moment.


As a narcissist Meghan loves to feel superior. In that same way she can’t stop herself from interrupting her guests, she won’t let making Harry sound stupid keep her from telling a story which she thinks will make her look good/nice/funny.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m still mystified at how a 40 plus year old woman can be “whispering” and “giggling like schoolgirls”.  Just….why.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Did she stay with Harry while TQ was alive thinking that it's easy to manipulate an old lady into giving them whatever they asked for because Harry was her alleged favorite grandchild? Now that Charles is TK and knowing that he cannot be easily swayed with Camilla, William and Kate by his side, Z-list is finally trying to Markle Harry slowly. I thought they had an epic Love Story ©
> 
> SAVAGE.
> 
> I bet she would still use DoS after the divorce.



She could use Duchess of Sussex, just not _The_ Duchess of Sussex. Unless Charles strips her/him of it. 

I don't know if Prince Harry is still 'of Wales' though ???????? or just Prince Harry M-W, so I don't know if she'll still be Meghan, Princess of 'something' (Oompa Loompa Land comes to mind) .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




So she still steals? I wonder if she gave back the wedding tiara.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

piperdog said:


> Also, if it's true, I'm torn. While I would like her to be safely away from the BRF and any legitimacy that comes from association with them, I also think Meghan and Harry deserve each other and keeping them together is a fitting punishment for both. I don't want to see Harry go through Palace-driven reputation rehab yet again. He doesn't deserve it, and I hope the family is smart and strong enough to give him the Andrew treatment. I don't see how any of them could ever trust him again.



I wouldn't trust him either, but I still feel that nobody should be chained to an abusive psycho only because he is a jerk.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wouldn't trust him either, but I still feel that nobody should be chained to an abusive psycho only because he is a jerk.


If it makes you feel any better, remember that Harry chose to marry his psycho. He chose to throw his family under the bus. He chose to make his grandparents’ last years as difficult as he could. He chose to write a tell-all book. 

At this point I don’t cut Harry any slack. He is Meghan’s co-conspirator, nothing less.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> I’m still mystified at how a 40 plus year old woman can be “whispering” and “giggling like schoolgirls”.  Just….why.


She is a giggly "young" mother


----------



## rose60610

If they get divorced, does Claw keep Diana's watch and aquamarine ring? She'd fight to keep them, can you imagine what Christie's or Sotheby's would get at auction for those? You know it's about the money, nothing to do with "fond memories", there would be number of things hitting the auction block.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> If it makes you feel any better, remember that Harry chose to marry his psycho. He chose to throw his family under the bus. He chose to make his grandparents’ last years as difficult as he could. He chose to write a tell-all book.
> 
> At this point I don’t cut Harry any slack. He is Meghan’s co-conspirator, nothing less.



It really does not. I agree he made his bed, but I still feel sympathy besides all the grievances I have with his behaviour.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW now that Halloween is over...is it time for Christmas yet? I'm in the mood for something fun


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW now that Halloween is over...is it time for Christmas yet? I'm in the mood for something fun


Costco has been promoting Christmas for a couple of weeks already in the stores


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> If they get divorced, does Claw keep Diana's watch and aquamarine ring? She'd fight to keep them, can you imagine what Christie's or Sotheby's would get at auction for those? You know it's about the money, nothing to do with "fond memories", there would be number of things hitting the auction block.



It probably depends on if he downright gifted them or if they came with strings attached. But also, I don't see the BRF fighting nails and teeth over them. They have treasure vaults full of stuff both more valuable in the monetary sense and with much more important provenance. Harry with his fixation on his mother might lose it, though. Maybe he can negotiate that they'll be sent to a deposit box for the girl to have once she turns 18.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It probably depends on if he downright gifted them or if they came with strings attached. But also, I don't see the BRF fighting nails and teeth over them. They have treasure vaults full of stuff both more valuable in the monetary sense and with much more important provenance. Harry with his fixation on his mother might lose it, though. Maybe he can negotiate that they'll be sent to a deposit box for the girl to have once she turns 18.


the way he was in such a hurry to marry her and the way the supposedly said "what Meghan wants Meghan gets" - I doubt he attached any strings to anything


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW now that Halloween is over...is it time for Christmas yet? I'm in the mood for something fun





sdkitty said:


> Costco has been promoting Christmas for a couple of weeks already in the stores


Got in the car yesterday and my Sirius channel had automatically defaulted to Christmas music station. Not gonna lie, I listened to it for a bit


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Got in the car yesterday and my Sirius channel had automatically defaulted to Christmas music station. Not gonna lie, I listened to it for a bit



I've already been buying baking ingredients. Just a few.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> Got in the car yesterday and my Sirius channel had automatically defaulted to Christmas music station. Not gonna lie, I listened to it for a bit


I don't like listening to that until it's Very close to Christmas


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> She was out on the campaign trail every day during the first election.  She met with William and Catharine when they visited Canada.  She had a lot of press in the beginning, but over that last few years there has been nothing.  As I mentioned before, when I saw her picture in England at the funeral in Sept, it had been years since I had seen or read anything about her.  Did she take this opportunity on the taxpayers money to meet with TW?
> 
> I have been thinking about her being there, and trying not to be cynical, but I was not aware until yesterday that she had a relationship with the toxic twins.  How hypocritical of her to show up at the Queens funeral, all the while supporting the pair who caused her such pain during her final years.
> 
> I hope that the PM is not involved in this mess, as I took him at face value when he made his statement.  He was close to tears when he said that he had a special relationship with the Queen and had known her since he was a child because of his father being PM.  I am hoping that he was genuine  and that the "friendship" is all his wife's.  Either way, it is not a good look.


Like TW aka Ghoul there’s not an ounce of genuine in his body.


----------



## V0N1B2

bag-mania said:


> Meghan is heard talking as she noticed her mother calling her via Facetime: "All right. So the first one is you said — oh sugar, my mom's FaceTiming me. Hey, Mommy!"
> *Who says ‘oh sugar’? Right, never mind, she’s living in the ‘50s I forgot. Also: MOMMY? mkay *
> "Hey, how's my girl?" Doria is heard saying over the phone.
> "I'm okay. I'm hanging in there. It's okay," Meghan replied. "I'm recording right now. Do you want to see?" *I thought this was a nice (scripted) touch, because... Thank you for asking, no one has really asked me if I’m okay. Thankfully y’all, she’s okay - hanging in there. It’s okay.  OMG you guys, Meghan is like, so brave. *
> "I see," Doria said.
> Doria also tells her daughter, "You have on a smiley face."
> "I have on a smiley face," Meghan confirmed. "I love you."
> * *repeating the phrase, making sure it was heard by everyone.*


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> the way he was in such a hurry to marry her and the way the supposedly said "what Meghan wants Meghan gets" - I doubt he attached any strings to anything


I’m not buying into the separation heading towards divorce rumors. But if they do get divorced, she’s obviously going to go for alimony in an amount that will allow her to maintain the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed. I doubt Harry’s personal funds would be sufficient. Even if she managed to take every penny he’s got, it probably would not be enough and H has no access to the BRF funds. I wonder if she thinks she’ll be able to tap into the BRF for her alimony? The Queen paid part of Andrew’s recent settlement so she may be thinking Charles will pony up funds in exchange for the 2 kids and / or for her to sign an NDA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW now that Halloween is over...is it time for Christmas yet? I'm in the mood for something fun


Oh no, I don’t do anything for Christmas till mid December.  People here put up trees earlier and earlier every year, so they’re practically brown and crispy on Christmas Day, and then rip it all down first thing Boxing Day because they’re so sick of it.  I don’t get it  

Is there a rumour that the spare is coming to the UK on his own for Christmas?  I think I read it somewhere, but can’t remember where?


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wouldn't trust him either, but I still feel that nobody should be chained to an abusive psycho only because he is a jerk.


Unfortunately, he chained himself to her irrevocably when he chose to have children with her and now protecting the kids from their narcissistic mother has to be his first priority. Generational trauma (aka "genetic pain") is a specialty of narcissists and they cause lasting emotional and physiological damage to their victims. 

Harry made his choice to marry her but the kids didn't have a choice and are completely innocent. 

It's difficult for normal, loving moms (and people in general) to understand how cruel a narcissistic parent can be. Not only can they be cold, critical and neglectful but some of them are willing to let their children be abused by other people as well. It gives them some sort of sickening gratification to have other people hurt their children. I worry about all the staff surrounding H & M's kids and the opportunity for this type of abuse. 

I don't really like to speak about this because it's extraordinarily painful but at the same time I feel so passionate about it because I had one abused sibling who, after years of suffering from depression and poor overall health caused by the stress and trauma of childhood, died of a stroke at a young age and another sibling who is still in therapy two days a week because of our childhood trauma. It's such unnecessary suffering.

Any sympathy I initially felt for Harry has now transferred to those two helpless, vulnerable, isolated children.


----------



## V0N1B2

purseinsanity said:


> @Vlad, how is the barf emoji for little side bar coming along?  You said you'd see what you could do!  Help us, please!!!


If a barf emoticon is too unfriendly for the TOF masses, I would be really happy with a good old fashioned side-eye instead.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> I’m not buying into the separation heading towards divorce rumors. But if they do get divorced, she’s obviously going to go for alimony in an amount that will allow her to maintain the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed. I doubt Harry’s personal funds would be sufficient. Even if she managed to take every penny he’s got, it probably would not be enough and H has no access to the BRF funds. I wonder if she thinks she’ll be able to tap into the BRF for her alimony? The Queen paid part of Andrew’s recent settlement so she may be thinking Charles will pony up funds in exchange for the 2 kids and / or for her to sign an NDA.


who knows?  but yes, I'm sure she would want to continue the life worthy of her magnificence


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW now that Halloween is over...is it time for Christmas yet? I'm in the mood for something fun


I’m pulling out recipes for Christmas baking, none will be for lemon olive oil cake.


----------



## Pessie

jennlt said:


> Unfortunately, he chained himself to her irrevocably when he chose to have children with her and now protecting the kids from their narcissistic mother has to be his first priority. Generational trauma (aka "genetic pain") is a specialty of narcissists and they cause lasting emotional and physiological damage to their victims.
> 
> Harry made his choice to marry her but the kids didn't have a choice and are completely innocent.
> 
> It's difficult for normal, loving moms (and people in general) to understand how cruel a narcissistic parent can be. Not only can they be cold, critical and neglectful but some of them are willing to let their children be abused by other people as well. It gives them some sort of sickening gratification to have other people hurt their children. I worry about all the staff surrounding H & M's kids and the opportunity for this type of abuse.
> 
> I don't really like to speak about this because it's extraordinarily painful but at the same time I feel so passionate about it because I had one abused sibling who, after years of suffering from depression and poor overall health caused by the stress and trauma of childhood, died of a stroke at a young age and another sibling who is still in therapy two days a week because of our childhood trauma. It's such unnecessary suffering.
> 
> Any sympathy I initially felt for Harry has now transferred to those two helpless, vulnerable, isolated children.


Thats very sad, I’m sorry.  You’re right, normal mothers can’t understand.  I’ve given up trying to explain to my BF what it was like growing up with my narcissistic mother, because she can’t fathom it and it’s not her fault.


----------



## DL Harper

DoggieBags said:


> I’m not buying into the separation heading towards divorce rumors. But if they do get divorced, she’s obviously going to go for alimony in an amount that will allow her to maintain the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed. I doubt Harry’s personal funds would be sufficient. Even if she managed to take every penny he’s got, it probably would not be enough and H has no access to the BRF funds. I wonder if she thinks she’ll be able to tap into the BRF for her alimony? The Queen paid part of Andrew’s recent settlement so she may be thinking Charles will pony up funds in exchange for the 2 kids and / or for her to sign an NDA.


A NDA only applies to her needs, so the BRF requiring one could be a waste of time, money and the paper it's written on. Even a NDA would not keep her quite forever.  Then she'd fight in court (forever) about preceived loopholes and misunderstandings in the NDA she signed.  She thrives on babbling - the good (not many), bad, ugly and falsehoods (far too many). 
IF KCIII would make alimony/child support funds available to MM, KCIII and the Monarchy in general (and UK taxpayers!) should require iron clad, scientific DNA as proof the invinsaKids are not only real, but REALLY Harry's - natural or adopted.


----------



## sdkitty

jennlt said:


> Unfortunately, he chained himself to her irrevocably when he chose to have children with her and now protecting the kids from their narcissistic mother has to be his first priority. Generational trauma (aka "genetic pain") is a specialty of narcissists and they cause lasting emotional and physiological damage to their victims.
> 
> Harry made his choice to marry her but the kids didn't have a choice and are completely innocent.
> 
> It's difficult for normal, loving moms (and people in general) to understand how cruel a narcissistic parent can be. Not only can they be cold, critical and neglectful but some of them are willing to let their children be abused by other people as well. It gives them some sort of sickening gratification to have other people hurt their children. I worry about all the staff surrounding H & M's kids and the opportunity for this type of abuse.
> 
> I don't really like to speak about this because it's extraordinarily painful but at the same time I feel so passionate about it because I had one abused sibling who, after years of suffering from depression and poor overall health caused by the stress and trauma of childhood, died of a stroke at a young age and another sibling who is still in therapy two days a week because of our childhood trauma. It's such unnecessary suffering.
> 
> Any sympathy I initially felt for Harry has now transferred to those two helpless, vulnerable, isolated children.


so sorry about your family....of course we don't know for sure what goes on with Meghan's kids but I suspect the nannies are the main caretakers


----------



## DL Harper

jennlt said:


> Unfortunately, he chained himself to her irrevocably when he chose to have children with her and *now protecting the kids from their narcissistic mother has to be his first priority.* Generational trauma (aka "genetic pain") is a specialty of narcissists and they cause lasting emotional and physiological damage to their victims.
> 
> Harry made his choice to marry her but the kids didn't have a choice and are completely innocent.
> 
> It's difficult for normal, loving moms (and people in general) to understand how cruel a narcissistic parent can be. Not only can they be cold, critical and neglectful but some of them are willing to let their children be abused by other people as well. It gives them some sort of sickening gratification to have other people hurt their children. I worry about all the staff surrounding H & M's kids and the opportunity for this type of abuse.
> 
> I don't really like to speak about this because it's extraordinarily painful but at the same time I feel so passionate about it because I had one abused sibling who, after years of suffering from depression and poor overall health caused by the stress and trauma of childhood, died of a stroke at a young age and another sibling who is still in therapy two days a week because of our childhood trauma. It's such unnecessary suffering.
> 
> Any sympathy I initially felt for Harry has now transferred to those two helpless, vulnerable, isolated children.


But does H really have the capability, know how, and resources to do that?  Without Daddy's help???
Helping others has not been something H is/was capable of based on his behavior over the last decades.  He's had people take care of him all of his life, how's he going to take care of young children???  And keep the evil one at bay???


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> She could use Duchess of Sussex, just not _The_ Duchess of Sussex. Unless Charles strips her/him of it.
> 
> I don't know if Prince Harry is still 'of Wales' though ???????? or just Prince Harry M-W, so I don't know if she'll still be Meghan, Princess of 'something' (Oompa Loompa Land comes to mind) .


Just my opinion but I believe the divorce settlement will require that she has to give up all usage of the title. They will want a clean and final break with the nightmare.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So she still steals? I wonder if she gave back the wedding tiara.


I'm sure she was just borrowing them for the evening.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Just my opinion but I believe the divorce settlement will require that she has to give up all usage of the title. They will want a clean and final break with the nightmare.


the would have to pay for that


----------



## bag-mania

DL Harper said:


> A NDA only applies to her needs, so the BRF requiring one could be a waste of time, money and the paper it's written on. Even a NDA would not keep her quite forever.  Then she'd fight in court (forever) about preceived loopholes and misunderstandings in the NDA she signed.  She thrives on babbling - the good (not many), bad, ugly and falsehoods (far too many).
> IF KCIII would make alimony/child support funds available to MM, KCIII and the Monarchy in general (and UK taxpayers!) should require iron clad, scientific DNA as proof the invinsaKids are not only real, but REALLY Harry's - natural or adopted.


Meghan has too many “sources” working on her behalf to do her dirty work, making NDAs meaningless.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Costco has been promoting Christmas for a couple of weeks already in the stores


The stores where I live are in full Christmas mode.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> the would have to pay for that


Oh they will, for sure.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Oh they will, for sure.


like ransom
But I don't really buy the divorce rumours....we'll see


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've already been buying baking ingredients. Just a few.


I can understand stocking up on that stuff now, especially if you see good deals.


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> Oh no, I don’t do anything for Christmas till mid December.  People here put up trees earlier and earlier every year, so they’re practically brown and crispy on Christmas Day, and then rip it all down first thing Boxing Day because they’re so sick of it.  I don’t get it
> 
> Is there a rumour that the spare is coming to the UK on his own for Christmas?  I think I read it somewhere, but can’t remember where?


It has been floating around on Twitter and also Reddit I believe, but it is a rumor.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



Was it a shoot for a commercial? Strange dress that does not flatter her. This must be post post boob job after she had her Deal or No Deal implants removed. She looks androgynous.


DoggieBags said:


> I’m not buying into the separation heading towards divorce rumors. But if they do get divorced, she’s obviously going to go for alimony in an amount that will allow her to maintain the lifestyle to which she has become accustomed. I doubt Harry’s personal funds would be sufficient. Even if she managed to take every penny he’s got, it probably would not be enough and H has no access to the BRF funds. I wonder if she thinks she’ll be able to tap into the BRF for her alimony? The Queen paid part of Andrew’s recent settlement so she may be thinking Charles will pony up funds in exchange for the 2 kids and / or for her to sign an NDA.


I doubt she will ever give up her meal tickets unless she hooks a bigger fish who doesn't want children from a previous marriage to tag along. The invisikids are her link to royalty even if her title gets taken back. She will probably start leaking to tabloids that they should be addressed as Lord Merchie and Lady Invisibet.


----------



## Debbini




----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> Just my opinion but I believe the divorce settlement will require that she has to give up all usage of the title. They will want a clean and final break with the nightmare.


Fergie was allowed to keep her Duchess of York title but had to give up her HRH. Diana also had to give up HRH but kept the Princess of Wales title. I would assume TW would also be allowed to keep the Duchess of Sussex title. Her HRH was already taken away when they left the BRF. I know she’s merched the heck out of that title but Fergie has made money off her title too.


----------



## purseinsanity

EmilyM111 said:


> a
> 
> The actual UK citizenship test was crazy easy, the questions were very basic (about holidays and Queen EII). The materials I studied from were so-so. I'm from a different (like completely different) part of the world where we think La Manche is the right name for the channel between UK and France . I studied very casually for a few days, mostly doing online tests and it was no problem. *The Harkles like to make everything difficult.*


Maybe it's not their fault.  It is very likely they are both just plain stupid.


----------



## EmilyM11

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe it's not their fault.  It is very likely they are both just plain stupid.


----------



## DL Harper

Debbini said:


> View attachment 5644831


Does Gloria A take on divorce cases???  Or just feminist and discrimination cases??


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I don't like listening to that until it's Very close to Christmas



My car gave me no choice. Evidently he’s ready to get the party started!


----------



## DoggieBags

DL Harper said:


> Does Gloria A take on divorce cases???  Or just feminist and discrimination cases??


Nope. Per her firm’s web site, she does not handle divorces.


----------



## Debbini

I messed up and didn't post all three pages.


----------



## LittleStar88

Debbini said:


> I messed up and didn't post all three pages.
> 
> View attachment 5644854
> 
> 
> View attachment 5644855


I was just coming to post this! Lots of deliciously hot, steaming tea to start the day!

It’s from u/secondhandcoke on Reddit


----------



## Chanbal

Debbini said:


> View attachment 5644831


I'm still very suspicious of this alleged separation/divorce, it sounds too convenient. Until Hazz publicly acknowledges the damage he has done to his family and country, stops the ongoing security lawsuit, and talks about his ordeal in Montecito the way he did with OW, I have my reservations. 

Though, I believe  the concerns with Betterwhatever, and other similar companies that deal with people going through very vulnerable phases, are real.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> Costco has been promoting Christmas for a couple of weeks already in the stores


Yep, and they're already playing Christmas music on the radio!  I feel bad for Thanksgiving.  It's like the red headed stepchild.  WTF!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Debbini said:


> View attachment 5644831


A divorce would not surprise, she’s gotten international notoriety as TW* to carry forward solo as long as she can and may view H as baggage slowing her down. Even as a divorcée she will always have some level of media presence.

The timing seems off in relationship to his book publication and the Coronation, unless her raging narcissism is so rampant she sees these events as contributing to even more media exposure with a divorce coming concurrently if filed January to May. Her team would flood the media with a tsunami of updates to distract from activities related to both H and the King.

*From the very first time, thousands of posts ago, when I first read TW in relationship to her, my mind read it as TheWhore. Still does.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> I'm still very suspicious of this alleged separation/divorce, it sounds too convenient. Until Hazz publicly acknowledges the damage he has done to his family and country, stops the ongoing security lawsuit, and talks about his ordeal in Montecito the way he did with OW, I have my reservations.
> 
> Though, I believe  the concerns with Betterwhatever, and other similar companies that deal with people going through very vulnerable phases, are real.


I’m certain they’ll divorce eventually, but this could well be noise designed to keep them in the headlines till the book comes out, since it’s been delayed.
Harry looks genuinely miserable, and she’s pulling no punches when it comes to being critical of him.  Only a matter of time.


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> I’m certain they’ll divorce eventually, but this could well be noise designed to keep them in the headlines till the book comes out, since it’s been delayed.
> Harry looks genuinely miserable, and she’s pulling no punches when it comes to being critical of him.  Only a matter of time.


I agree, Hazz is likely very miserable and they will eventually divorce. However, the present potential separation could be only to keep their connection with the BRF after the release of book and reality show. If Hazz keeps his perks, TW also benefits. They can later reconcile because of the kids… If I were Charles and Will, I wouldn't trust Hazz.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, and they're already playing Christmas music on the radio!  I feel bad for Thanksgiving.  It's like the red headed stepchild.  WTF!


I used to love Christmas music but playing it so early in the season has ruined it for me.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

rose60610 said:


> If they get divorced, does Claw keep Diana's watch and aquamarine ring? She'd fight to keep them, can you imagine what Christie's or Sotheby's would get at auction for those? You know it's about the money, nothing to do with "fond memories", there would be number of things hitting the auction block.


If the watch and aqua ring belonged to Diana and they were inherited by William and Harry, then I don't think the BRF would have any say, wouldn't they? Didn't the brothers choose what pieces they want from the collection and Harry allegedly said William should be the one getting the sapphire engagement ring for his future bride?

Even if the BRF has a say and wants them back, Z-list is unlikely to return them voluntarily. Her greedy a$s would flee with them.

The drama is about to get better


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Has this been posted? Scrolling back and forth on my phone is a task.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The accompanying picture in slide 2 is comedy gold. Something is ery wrong with this chick.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Fergie was allowed to keep her Duchess of York title but had to give up her HRH. Diana also had to give up HRH but kept the Princess of Wales title. I would assume TW would also be allowed to keep the Duchess of Sussex title. Her HRH was already taken away when they left the BRF. I know she’s merched the heck out of that title but Fergie has made money off her title too.


She has, but I don't believe she ever harbored or acted with any animosity toward the Queen and RF. And wasn't she actually on good terms with the Queen in her later years? TW caused the Queen nothing but grief in her last years, and if I were KC I'd give her the ultimatum "no title or no money".


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> I’m certain they’ll divorce eventually, but *this could well be noise designed to keep them in the headlines till the book comes out*, since it’s been delayed.
> Harry looks genuinely miserable, and she’s pulling no punches when it comes to being critical of him.  Only a matter of time.


I agree. There is something off about marklenews1’s revelations. I don’t doubt that the bloom is off the rose but I don’t believe they are ready to pull the plug on the marriage. Not yet. They are much too invested and both of their futures depends on this fantasy they’ve woven. 

They can live apart, pursue their own interests, and still stay married for their mutual benefit.


----------



## Sophisticatted

It was reported that The Queen was willing to let Diana keep the HRH, but Charles is the one who demanded it be taken away.  Charles is not a gracious person when he feels he has been wronged.  TW doesn’t have a chance with Charles.  I’m sure she thinks she’s cleverer than the BRF machine, but we all know she’s not.


----------



## charlottawill

Sophisticatted said:


> It was reported that The Queen was willing to let Diana keep the HRH, but Charles is the one who demanded it be taken away.  Charles is not a gracious person when he feels he has been wronged.  TW doesn’t have a chance with Charles.  I’m sure she thinks she’s cleverer than the BRF machine, but we all know she’s not.


But remember, the narc thinks she charmed Charles from the start and will assume he still feels warmly toward her. Let's hope she gets a rude awakening.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I agree. There is something off about marklenews1’s revelations. I don’t doubt that the bloom is off the rose but I don’t believe they are ready to pull the plug on the marriage. Not yet. They are much too invested and both of their futures depends on this fantasy they’ve woven.
> 
> They can live apart, pursue their own interests, and still stay married for their mutual benefit.


Or KC may have unpleasant memories of the long drawn out split from Diana and urge Harry for a divorce done yesterday.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


>



That’s a really unflattering picture of her. The veins on her forehead are so prominent and I’m surprised that she hasn’t done anything about her crows feet . And is that grey hair I see peeking through in spots?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Or KC may have unpleasant memories of the long drawn out split from Diana and urge Harry for a divorce done yesterday.


I’m inclined to believe Charles will not be forgiving in regards to Harry. He expected loyalty from his son and he didn’t get it. Charles can be spiteful and I don’t think Harry will be welcomed back into the fold any time soon (or ever).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’m inclined to believe Charles will not be forgiving in regards to Harry. He expected loyalty from his son and he didn’t get it. Charles can be spiteful and I don’t think Harry will be welcomed back into the fold any time soon (or ever).



I don't blame him. You can only get kicked in the face so often before even the most benevolent person gets it.


----------



## rose60610

In addition, there's substantial tension between William and Harry. I think William was appalled at the accusations of racism and "being trapped". Since Harry and TW say that the BRF "is trapped" then how in the world can they attempt to be brought back into the fold? In a divorce, Claw can argue that even Harry said being part of the BRF is to be "trapped", so how can the kids go back to that? She needs the kids for pocketbook money and nannies. The more the kids are with nannies the more Claw can be on the prowl for a wealthy man. Who's a huge sucker.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't blame him. You can only get kicked in the face so often before even the most benevolent person gets it.


I can see Harry becoming the California party prince. He doesn’t have to go home in disgrace. He’ll be one of those people who gets invited to events and he’ll give speeches. How long that can sustain him financially is up in the air but he could easily cobble together a nice, easy living as long as he doesn’t keep going overboard with the ridiculous extravagance.


----------



## DL Harper

rose60610 said:


> In addition, there's substantial tension between William and Harry. I think William was appalled at the accusations of racism and "being trapped". Since Harry and TW say that the BRF "is trapped" then how in the world can they attempt to be brought back into the fold? In a divorce, Claw can argue that even Harry said being part of the BRF is to be "trapped", so how can the kids go back to that? She needs the kids for pocketbook money and nannies. The more the kids are with nannies the more Claw can be on the prowl for a wealthy man. Who's a huge sucker.


Add World's Biggest Con Artist to her MO.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry becoming the California party prince. He doesn’t have to go home in disgrace. He’ll be one of those people who gets invited to events and he’ll give speeches. How long that can sustain him financially is up in the air but he could easily cobble together a nice, easy living.


I’m not sure he’d get paid to go to many events to give speeches. The one speech I know he was paid for which was just before the Covid lock down in early 2020 was not well received. Without the BRF speech writers, he’s apparently not a good speaker. The babble he’s spouted since has been at the UN (unpaid, resume padding appearance) and various award events (where he’s paid the organizations to give him / TW an award). Nome of these events have been money making events for him. Maybe they were paid to attend that charity in England just before Queen Elizabeth passed away? But TW gave the speech at that event, not H. And the latest breakfast at the Marriott charity event at $10,000 per table had only TW as the featured guest speaker, not him. I assume he’s getting some sort of compensation for Butter Up but I’m not sure how many of those types of business opportunities will continue to fall in his lap if his titles are taken away by KC.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry becoming the California party prince. He doesn’t have to go home in disgrace. He’ll be one of those people who gets invited to events and he’ll give speeches. How long that can sustain him financially is up in the air but he could easily cobble together a nice, easy living as long as he doesn’t keep going overboard with the ridiculous extravagance.



This is straight out of Wallis&Ed’s playbook.  Initially, they were the talk of the town, invited to all the glittering parties, then people realized they had only one song to sing [poor me poor meee  ].  The invites dried up, they moved to France.  Rarely seen, rarely heard from but always a nuisance.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I agree. There is something off about marklenews1’s revelations. I don’t doubt that the bloom is off the rose but I don’t believe they are ready to pull the plug on the marriage. Not yet. They are much too invested and both of their futures depends on this fantasy they’ve woven.
> 
> They can live apart, pursue their own interests, and still stay married for their mutual benefit.


Plus the Netflix story supposedly about their great love story has not been aired. Although since TW has already made statements that it’s not how they would have told it, implying those meanies at Netflix are editing , maybe not so loving after all?


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I used to love Christmas music but playing it so early in the season has ruined it for me.


Our tradition was always to put up our tree the day after Thanksgiving and I loved it when they started playing Christmas music at midnight.  Before that?  Too soon, IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> I’m not sure he’d get paid to go to many events to give speeches. The one speech I know he was paid for which was just before the Covid lock down in early 2020 was not well received. Without the BRF speech writers, he’s apparently not a good speaker. The babble he’s spouted since has been at the UN (unpaid, resume padding appearance) and various award events (where he’s paid the organizations to give him / TW an award). Nome of these events have been money making events for him. Maybe they were paid to attend that charity in England just before Queen Elizabeth passed away? But TW gave the speech at that event, not H. And the latest breakfast at the Marriott charity event at $10,000 per table had only TW as the featured guest speaker, not him. I assume he’s getting some sort of compensation for Butter Up but I’m not sure how many of those types of business opportunities will continue to fall in his lap if his titles are taken away by KC.


Harry spoke at a tech conference in San Francisco two weeks ago and presumably he was paid. It was his usual mental health speech which seems to be his comfort zone these days.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry becoming the California party prince. He doesn’t have to go home in disgrace. He’ll be one of those people who gets invited to events and he’ll give speeches. How long that can sustain him financially is up in the air but he could easily cobble together a nice, easy living as long as he doesn’t keep going overboard with the ridiculous extravagance.


Maybe the bromance with Nacho Figueras will lead to something?  NF’s polo enterprises?


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I agree. There is something off about marklenews1’s revelations. I don’t doubt that the bloom is off the rose but I don’t believe they are ready to pull the plug on the marriage. Not yet. They are much too invested and both of their futures depends on this fantasy they’ve woven.
> *
> They can live apart, pursue their own interests, and still stay married for their mutual benefit.*


That and having side pieces.  Isn't that accepted in the British upper crust anyway?


----------



## purseinsanity

Sophisticatted said:


> It was reported that The Queen was willing to let Diana keep the HRH, but Charles is the one who demanded it be taken away.  *Charles is not a gracious person when he feels he has been wronged. * TW doesn’t have a chance with Charles.  I’m sure she thinks she’s cleverer than the BRF machine, but we all know she’s not.


Can't say I blame him.


----------



## DL Harper

DoggieBags said:


> I’m not sure he’d get paid to go to many events to give speeches. The one speech I know he was paid for which was just before the Covid lock down in early 2020 was not well received. Without the BRF speech writers, he’s apparently not a good speaker. The babble he’s spouted since has been at the UN (unpaid, resume padding appearance) and various award events (where he’s paid the organizations to give him / TW an award). Nome of these events have been money making events for him. Maybe they were paid to attend that charity in England just before Queen Elizabeth passed away? But TW gave the speech at that event, not H. And the latest breakfast at the Marriott charity event at $10,000 per table had only TW as the featured guest speaker, not him. I assume he’s getting some sort of compensation for Butter Up but I’m not sure how many of those types of business opportunities will continue to fall in his lap if his titles are taken away by KC.


Can he get paid to play Polo???


----------



## Aimee3

Even if they take away TW’s title she can still go as TW the former duchess of Sussex.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

DL Harper said:


> Can he get paid to play Polo???


I don’t think he’s good enough to play professionally.


----------



## LittleStar88

The Times gave a review of her most recent podcast


----------



## RueMonge

LittleStar88 said:


> The Times gave a review of her most recent podcast
> 
> View attachment 5644953


That’s pretty brutal.


----------



## WingNut

LittleStar88 said:


> The Times gave a review of her most recent podcast
> 
> View attachment 5644953


That is hilariously scathing. An eyeroll in writing.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Maybe the bromance with Nacho Figueras will lead to something?  NF’s polo enterprises?


Nacho seems to have good business sense. I still wonder at his Santa Barbara polo club stint earlier this year. It looked like he did it solely to cheer up Harry. I was happy when Nacho and his p-wife moved on though. The messiness of Harry and Meghan could be toxic to bystanders regardless of their good intentions.


----------



## Debbini

Instagram is rolling it out left and right...lol.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> That and having side pieces.  Isn't that accepted in the British upper crust anyway?


It’s not unusual among LA celebrities either.


----------



## DL Harper

Debbini said:


> Instagram is rolling it out left and right...lol.
> 
> View attachment 5644998


MM's truth vs. H's truth.  How is that a problem??


----------



## DoggieBags

DL Harper said:


> Can he get paid to play Polo???


Polo players are assigned a handicap number to rank their level of play. With -2 goal being the lowest and 10 goal being the highest rank. According to this article, Charles got as high as a 4 goal handicap before he retired. William and Harry are both ranked 1 goal but are thought to have the talent to be ranked higher if they played full time. Nacho, who does play full time, has a 6 goal handicap. There are currently less than 10 polo players in the world with a 10 goal handicap. Nacho supposedly has approximately 500 polo ponies at varying levels of training so I would guess he has enough to lend H if H continues to play on the charity polo circuit. I’m not sure H would be paid to play but he wouldn’t be footing the bill for his horses while Nacho is around.








						Prince Harry 'more fiery' polo player than William and Charles
					

PRINCE HARRY is the "more fiery" royal polo player when compared to his brother Prince Charles and father Prince William, a commentator said.




					www.express.co.uk
				



An article that talks about the economics of playing polo with the top players earning as much as $1.5 million per year.








						Is Playing Polo Expensive? a Breakdown of the Costs to Play.
					

From my experience, I know owning and caring for a horse is expensive, and during a polo match, players use multiple horses. While watching teams swap out their horses, I began to wonder, how expensive




					horseracingsense.com


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The accompanying picture in slide 2 is comedy gold. Something is ery wrong with this chick.



that call from doria was definitely scripted


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Our tradition was always to put up our tree the day after Thanksgiving and I loved it when they started playing Christmas music at midnight.  Before that?  Too soon, IMO.


Agreed, I don’t like when everything goes full-on Christmas right after Halloween. Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday and it shouldn’t get the short shrift.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> that call from doria was definitely scripted


She should have written a more natural believable script. Only a 30-second exchange and they wasted it with riveting dialogue like “You have your smiley face on.” WTH

I take satisfaction in how badly she is squandering her worldwide platform. She isn’t going to get any better offers in the future.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She should have written a more natural believable script. Only a 30-second exchange and they wasted it with riveting dialogue like “You have your smiley face on.” WTH
> 
> I take satisfaction in how badly she is squandering her worldwide platform. She isn’t going to get any better offers in the future.


what do you expect from any empty shell of a person?


----------



## purseinsanity

Debbini said:


> Instagram is rolling it out left and right...lol.
> 
> View attachment 5644998


I admit I was thinking Lil Lilli may be a lil developmentally delayed.  Wasn't she born in early June?  That would make her 17 months old.  My kids took their first steps (admittedly, a little too early for me!) around 10 months old.  I believe Haz on this one.  You'd think the liars would at least keep their lies lined up with each other's!


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> That’s a really unflattering picture of her.


But that's the real her, with no filters or photoshop, in bright and unforgiving sunlight. She should have worn her big black polo hat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> as he doesn’t keep going overboard with the ridiculous extravagance.


That's doubtful as long as he's with her.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> That's doubtful as long as he's with her.


the way he was raised I'm sure he doesn't have a clue about money.  but he could get advice from people who do know


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I admit I was thinking Lil Lilli may be a lil developmentally delayed.  Wasn't she born in early June?  That would make her 17 months old.  My kids took their first steps (admittedly, a little too early for me!) around 10 months old.  I believe Haz on this one.  You'd think the liars would at least keep their lies lined up with each other's!


I thought the same thing when I read that People blurb yesterday. Mine both walked at 13 mos., which I was told is perfectly average. 9-10 mos. is on the early end, but I know several people whose kids walked at that age. If Invisibet is just walking now it is on the late side, but doesn't necessarily mean a developmental delay. 



> https://www.parentscanada.com/toddler/how-to-tell-if-a-late-walker-is-a-cause-for-concern/


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> what do you expect from any empty shell of a person?


there was something in Tina Brown's book....I can't recall exactly how it went but basically some Hollywood business person (maybe agent or PR someting like that) said Meghan was just a fame hungry actress and there were many many more like her.

  but her problem is she believes she is much more special than that.  she should have been grateful for the huge opportunity she got when she entrapped the prince.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> the way he was raised I'm sure he doesn't have a clue about money.  but he could get advice from people who do know


I don't think he can make the kind of money to support their current lifestyle by giving speeches and doing appearances here and there. If they had shown any charisma, charm or anything of value to say I could have seen them getting a daytime TV gig in the US just because of the novelty of it, but not as things stand right now. He bombed at the UN and her pod crashes are bombing. People are tired of their whining. The entertainment world is watching and taking notes on Spotify's and Netflix's costly mistakes. Next stop, Real Housewives for her....maybe some hot IPO tips for him. She wanted Jeff Bezos level wealth and Harry will never provide that.


----------



## Hyacinth

charlottawill said:


> That article was cringe but the comments  - "Words fail me",  "Enough, please" , "Oh god not this woman again"



A bit behind on reading my favorite Snarking Spot, but...

I can sense hundreds of my brain cells committing suicide after just 3 minutes of reading that dreck. Had to bail out to save what little is left of my sanity.

Missed 2 questions in the Citizenship test, under 10 minutes and no cheating. Misread Question 1 and never even heard of Sir Frank Whittle. Sorry, Frank. How should I make out the check?  

(She actually had to STUDY for that test ??? You've got to be freakin' KIDDING me!)


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> An article that talks about the economics of playing polo with the top players earning as much as $1.5 million per year.


That would be a drop in the bucket as far as their lifestyle expenses go.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Nacho seems to have good business sense. I still wonder at his Santa Barbara polo club stint earlier this year. It looked like he did it solely to cheer up Harry. I was happy when Nacho and his p-wife moved on though. The messiness of Harry and Meghan could be toxic to bystanders regardless of their good intentions.


Weren’t they on the polo tour for one of the polo leagues?


sdkitty said:


> that call from doria was definitely scripted


Are we certain it *was* D?  How would we know?  She has never done an interview.  The deepfake technology is readily available, so it could be anyone imo.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Weren’t they on the polo tour for one of the polo leagues?
> 
> Are we certain it *was* D?  How would we know?  She has never done an interview.  The deepfake technology is readily available, so it could be anyone imo.


He created a team for Santa Barbara’s spring/summer season and had himself, Harry, and two teenage protégés as teammates. Nacho goes around the world promoting the sport of polo but he decides where he’s going to go. I don’t think it’s a coincidence he came to Santa Barbara when he did. 

It was Doria. If it was an actress it would’ve been a more believable exchange.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> the way he was raised I'm sure he doesn't have a clue about money.  but he could get advice from people who do know


Life in the BRF is scripted tightly, you live HERE not THERE etc so there were fewer degrees of freedom in his previous existence other than an occasional boondoggle in first class for a vacation in Bali
And the cost of the staff was already factored in, you did not need to hire more security, lawyers, accountants etc


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He created a team for Santa Barbara’s spring/summer season and had himself, Harry, and two teenage protégés as teammates. Nacho goes around the world promoting the sport of polo but he decides where he’s going to go. I don’t think it’s a coincidence he came to Santa Barbara when he did.
> 
> It was Doria. If it was an actress it would’ve been a more believable exchange.


He and his investors are  building a huge polo stadium near LA.  They need to build public interest, beyond the country club crowd.


----------



## justwatchin

Debbini said:


> Instagram is rolling it out left and right...lol.
> 
> View attachment 5644998


This just confirms for me that neither of them are familiar with these mysterious offspring.  They should end all conversations with “ recollections may vary”.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooooops -


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> He and his investors are  building a huge polo stadium near LA.  They need to build public interest, beyond the country club crowd.


He opened a polo club in Los Angeles several years ago. I hadn’t heard anything about a stadium. Most polo clubs have bleacher-style seating (I think).


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> This is straight out of Wallis&Ed’s playbook.  Initially, they were the talk of the town, invited to all the glittering parties, then people realized they had only one song to sing [poor me poor meee  ].  The invites dried up, they moved to France.  Rarely seen, rarely heard from but always a nuisance.


As far as I understood, Wallis & Edward could have had a sweet life in Paris. Their house was gorgeous, they liked to entertain, and their allowance was likely enough to live very well. I read somewhere that he was always whining and was rather boring. 

Talking about allowances, I didn't know that Dor*a had/has one…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> He opened a polo club in Los Angeles several years ago. I hadn’t heard anything about a stadium. Most polo clubs have bleacher-style seating (I think).


Apologies, I stand corrected.  Not a stadium, not LA - a Napa Valley equestrian club plus more. Perhaps Hazz could mange it?

Article from 2021:
_He actually began exploring options outside polo in 2013, when he launched the Figueras Design Group, a global design consultancy firm headquartered in Buenos Aires. Upcoming projects include *Guenoc Valley, a 20,000-acre development in Napa Valley with an equestrian club, polo fields, a polo club, clubhouse, pony camp, golf course and winery *(FDG will be largely in charge of designing the equestrian leg of the project, as well as the homes and clubhouse), and AMAALA, an ultra-luxury destination on Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea Coast, of which Figueras was named an ambassador and advisory board member last January.








						World Famous Polo Player Nacho Figueras Shares Future Plans
					

World famous polo player Nacho Figueras has no intention of slowing down any time soon. Discover his "high goals" for the future here.




					hauteliving.com
				



_


----------



## Lounorada

xincinsin said:


> View attachment 5642728
> 
> Hear hear...


'Well said' to this person







Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5642963
> 
> I have Harry’s autobiography, _Spare_, on order, as part of the unofficial contract we journos have with *the intellectually challenged ginger creature formerly known as Prince*. This contract stipulates that we will buy all Meghan’n’Harry merch in the hope that it will provide us with further reasons to intensely dislike them.
> 
> We will then hone our recently acquired slab of animus into vituperative prose directed against the ghastly couple, thereby publicising whatever it is they are flogging this week, as well as encouraging them to produce more vacuous, self-serving tripe — which, again, we will write about and thus subject to the nitrous oxide of publicity.
> 
> Meghan knows this is the deal and it is possible that Harry is dimly aware of it too. I think they would both be a little disappointed if a hack reviewed one of the Netflix documentaries, or Harry’s book, and concluded: “What a compelling and insightful piece of work this is, entirely worthy of this supremely likeable twosome.”
> 
> Nobody ever actually says that over here (not least because neither of them is capable of real insight). We buy the stuff because we hope and expect that Harry and Meghan are going to say something simultaneously spiteful about the royal family and hilariously self-pitying about themselves. If they cease saying spiteful and self-pitying stuff nobody would be remotely interested and the books would pile up in the couple’s 16 bathrooms, providing an environmentally sound alternative to Kleenex.
> 
> I’ve read the blurb. I am told that “With its raw, unflinching honesty, _Spare_ is a landmark publication full of insight, revelation, self-examination, and hard-won wisdom about the eternal power of love over grief”. Yeet. I sincerely hope it isn’t, although I expect that the “self-examination” runs to several hundred interminable pages.
> 
> We are also informed that the ginge is a “husband, father, humanitarian, military veteran, mental-wellness advocate and environmentalist” who “resides in Santa Barbara, California, with his family and three dogs”. Finally, Harry tells us that it is an interesting story because he has “worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively”, which made me worry briefly that this would be a book solely about Harry’s favourite hats, those he liked and those he felt were less attractive — which would in my view be an account which risks teetering into tedium, even if it keeps his dad happy.
> 
> The Sussex rumour mill, meanwhile, has suggested that, since the Queen’s funeral, Harry has been busy striking out of his text stuff like “Camilla — that horrid old racist ratbag who kept dobbing my dad while Mum wasn’t looking” and “Dad doesn’t just talk to plants, he takes detailed instructions from them,” and so forth. I hope this rumour is wide of the mark, otherwise it’s 13 quid down the swanee.
> 
> But as I say, Harry knows the contract — and even if he doesn’t his publishers do, much as do the executives at Netflix. There has to be the intimation of bile directed at his old family — however vapidly expressed — otherwise his new family will lose a lucrative source of income and sink into a kind of D-list sleb obscurity, which is roughly where Meghan Markle resided before he popped the question.
> 
> In a sense this is Harry’s only real tragedy, and one that he has created for himself. His continued existence in the public eye is exclusively predicated upon him being a sullen counterpoint to the rest of the royal family. Without that, what could he possibly have to tell us all? And yet by the same token, the more and more estranged he becomes from the Windsors, the less impact his whining revelations carry. So the temptation will be to up the condemnations of both the institution and the individual members of it, to compensate for that inevitably growing sense of distance. He seems destined to become a kind of mirror-image of Meghan’s father, seething with anger and ready for a damaging quote every time Oprah or CNN wander along desperate to portray our country as a nation of colonialist bigots.
> 
> Harry’s disaffection with the monarchy has a lot more purchase with the dim-witted liberals in the United States than it does over here, where the overwhelming majority of people are not in the least bit sympathetic to the formerly royal couple. He can survive on that for a while, although with ever-diminishing returns.
> 
> He called his book _Spare_ because of his subordinance to his brother in the royal rankings — but when used in my neck of the woods, in the north of England, it can also mean either angry or mentally deficient. I don’t suppose he knew that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


This article...


So damn funny! Full of burns... I hope JCMH has plenty of Aloe Vera.





Chanbal said:


> Would they want a spare crown?
> 
> View attachment 5643894
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation next year, and could return to the UK to attend it, as per a royal expert.
> 
> Talking to _Express UK_ recently, royal commentator Lee Cohen suggested that despite Prince Harry testing the royals with his upcoming bombshell memoir titled Spare, him and his wife Meghan could be waiting on an invite to the coronation.
> 
> As per Cohen, “*The Duke and Duchess of Sussex could be in attendance as the couple are always happy to rise to the occasion for events that give them legitimacy*.”
> 
> He went on to state that the possibility of them attending Charles’ coronation will also rest on whether *the event will give them a ‘PR moment*’.
> 
> Cohen also added that both Prince Harry and Meghan “*would be happy to snap up the opportunity*” as they have “for other royal occasions, even after they stepped back.”
> 
> It is pertinent to mention that King Charles’ coronation date has been decided as May 6, 2023, which also happens to be Prince Harry and Meghan’s son Archie’s birthday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reportedly want ‘legitimacy’ at King Charles III’s coronation next year
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.geo.tv









QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well.



Oh dear... is this where we are supposed to feel sorry for poor little JCMH?
Well, not me.







Debbini said:


> Instagram is rolling it out left and right...lol.
> 
> View attachment 5644998


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooops -



As my grandmother used to say, if looks could kill...


----------



## gracekelly

__





						Blind Item #9
					

Unless both of them are using lawyers outside of Southern California, the alliterate one and her husband are not splitting.




					www.crazydaysandnights.net
				




The comments are great!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #9
> 
> 
> Unless both of them are using lawyers outside of Southern California, the alliterate one and her husband are not splitting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The comments are great!


They love drama, they love attention, they love freebies, they love themselves, etc. 
Their names *must* stay in the news.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #9
> 
> 
> Unless both of them are using lawyers outside of Southern California, the alliterate one and her husband are not splitting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The comments are great!


"She'd hire an assassin before a divorce lawyer".  

I never considered that but it might be a valid point. Better watch your back Hazy


----------



## CarryOn2020

Speaking of Nacho:
[what does _Windsor_ smell like?]
Prince Harry's polo-playing pal Nacho Figueras offers lessons to fans as part of $295,000 luxury holiday package after 'cashing in' on friendship with the Duke with his 'Windsor' fragrance​








						Prince Harry's pal Nacho Figueras included in $295 holiday package
					

The Argentinian sportsman, who has been dubbed the 'David Beckham of Polo', has made an unexpected appearance in Neiman Marcus' 'Fantasy Gift' Christmas catalogue.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




ETA:  
_In 2019, Nacho launched a range of six different perfumes inspired by his travels around the world - including one called 'Windsor', which he said he hoped would 'bring feelings of every kind of paradise.'

The box for the 'Windsor' perfume also appears to hint at the significance of his relationship with Prince Harry, and bears the words: 'The brotherhood of kindred spirits.'

The fragrances saw a portion of the sales proceeds donated to Prince Harry's charity Sentebale._


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Speaking of Nacho:
> [what does _Windsor_ smell like?]
> Prince Harry's polo-playing pal Nacho Figueras offers lessons to fans as part of $295,000 luxury holiday package after 'cashing in' on friendship with the Duke with his 'Windsor' fragrance​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's pal Nacho Figueras included in $295 holiday package
> 
> 
> The Argentinian sportsman, who has been dubbed the 'David Beckham of Polo', has made an unexpected appearance in Neiman Marcus' 'Fantasy Gift' Christmas catalogue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:
> _In 2019, Nacho launched a range of six different perfumes inspired by his travels around the world - including one called 'Windsor', which he said he hoped would 'bring feelings of every kind of paradise.'
> 
> The box for the 'Windsor' perfume also appears to hint at the significance of his relationship with Prince Harry, and bears the words: 'The brotherhood of kindred spirits.'
> 
> The fragrances saw a portion of the sales proceeds donated to Prince Harry's charity Sentebale._


Daily Mail is reaching there. They seem to forget that pre-Meghan Nacho used to be friends with both Harry _and_ William. He’s also ambassador to the Sentebale children’s charity and has tournaments to earn money for it every year. That is Harry’s charity but I don’t remember ever reading about Harry donating any money to it.

He named his colognes after places where he’s played polo. Other colognes in the same line are called Aspen, Palm Beach, and Dubai. Not truly “cashing in” on knowing Harry as DM is trying to say. I found an old article where he references both princes but it doesn’t sound like he got anything financially out of knowing them.









						Polo player Nacho Figueras on Princes William and Harry: 'It's always fun to be around them'
					

Nacho Figueras dished to HELLO! about playing polo with the royals and whether he's ever given his pal Prince Harry dating advice.



					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Daily Mail is reaching there. They seem to forget that pre-Meghan Nacho used to be friends with both Harry _and_ William. He’s also ambassador to the Sentebale children’s charity and has tournaments to earn money for it every year. That is Harry’s charity but I don’t remember ever reading about Harry donating any money to it.
> 
> He named his colognes after places where he’s played polo. Other colognes in the same line are called Aspen, Palm Beach, and Dubai. Not truly “cashing in” on knowing Harry as DM is trying to say. I found an old article where he references both princes but it doesn’t sound like he got anything financially out of knowing them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polo player Nacho Figueras on Princes William and Harry: 'It's always fun to be around them'
> 
> 
> Nacho Figueras dished to HELLO! about playing polo with the royals and whether he's ever given his pal Prince Harry dating advice.
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Neimans, it is all for Neimans. Does Hazz get a kickback?  I’m sure some of the polo lovers will buy it.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I thought the same thing when I read that People blurb yesterday. Mine both walked at 13 mos., which I was told is perfectly average. 9-10 mos. is on the early end, but I know several people whose kids walked at that age. If Invisibet is just walking now it is on the late side, but *doesn't necessarily mean a developmental delay.*


No, but I was being snarky.  I figured her parents are emotionally delayed and immature, so that could translate to their spawn in one form or another.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Neimans, it is all for Neimans. Does Hazz get a kickback?  I’m sure some of the polo lovers will buy it.


And Bergdorf Goodman. That stuff isn’t cheap! If Harry had an entrepreneurial spirit he could try different business ventures, instead of sitting on his rump and expecting to be given money for being a prince.





__





						Ignacio Figueras at Bergdorf Goodman
					

Shop Ignacio Figueras at Bergdorf Goodman, where you will find free shipping on the latest in fashion from top designers.



					www.bergdorfgoodman.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> And Bergdorf Goodman. That stuff isn’t cheap! If Harry had an entrepreneurial spirit he could try different business ventures, instead of sitting on his rump and expecting to be given money for being a prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignacio Figueras at Bergdorf Goodman
> 
> 
> Shop Ignacio Figueras at Bergdorf Goodman, where you will find free shipping on the latest in fashion from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bergdorfgoodman.com


One and the same,

*Bergdorf Goodman is a subsidiary of Neiman Marcus*, which is owned by the private equity firm Ares Management.





__





						NMG | Our Brands
					






					www.neimanmarcusgroup.com


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> If the watch and aqua ring belonged to Diana and they were inherited by William and Harry, then I don't think the BRF would have any say, wouldn't they? Didn't the brothers choose what pieces they want from the collection and Harry allegedly said William should be the one getting the sapphire engagement ring for his future bride?
> 
> Even if the BRF has a say and wants them back, Z-list is unlikely to return them voluntarily. Her greedy a$s would flee with them.
> 
> The drama is about to get better


If Zed has the watch and aquamarine ring, they will join her Cartier Love bracelet as hunting trophies.


rose60610 said:


> In addition, there's substantial tension between William and Harry. I think William was appalled at the accusations of racism and "being trapped". *Since Harry and TW say that the BRF "is trapped" then how in the world can they attempt to be brought back into the fold?* In a divorce, Claw can argue that even Harry said being part of the BRF is to be "trapped", so how can the kids go back to that? She needs the kids for pocketbook money and nannies. The more the kids are with nannies the more Claw can be on the prowl for a wealthy man. Who's a huge sucker.


The saintly woman will claim that they wanted to rescue William.


purseinsanity said:


> That and having side pieces.  Isn't that accepted in the British upper crust anyway?


Maybe, but no way Zed counts as upper crust anything no matter how crusty her weave becomes.


RueMonge said:


> That’s pretty brutal.


Not brutal enough.


bag-mania said:


> She should have written a more natural believable script. Only a 30-second exchange and they wasted it with riveting dialogue like “You have your smiley face on.” WTH
> 
> *I take satisfaction in how badly she is squandering her worldwide platform.* She isn’t going to get any better offers in the future.


I will admit to schadenfreude 


bag-mania said:


> He created a team for Santa Barbara’s spring/summer season and had himself, Harry, and two teenage protégés as teammates. Nacho goes around the world promoting the sport of polo but he decides where he’s going to go. I don’t think it’s a coincidence he came to Santa Barbara when he did.
> 
> It was Doria. If it was an actress it would’ve been a more believable exchange.


Zed forgot to script in a fond "my dearest Flower, light of my life".


CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooops -



One of her worse looks. Duchess Frumpy.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> And Bergdorf Goodman. That stuff isn’t cheap! If Harry had an entrepreneurial spirit he could try different business ventures, instead of sitting on his rump and expecting to be given money for being a prince.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ignacio Figueras at Bergdorf Goodman
> 
> 
> Shop Ignacio Figueras at Bergdorf Goodman, where you will find free shipping on the latest in fashion from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> www.bergdorfgoodman.com





CarryOn2020 said:


> One and the same,
> 
> *Bergdorf Goodman is a subsidiary of Neiman Marcus*, which is owned by the private equity firm Ares Management.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NMG | Our Brands
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.neimanmarcusgroup.com


I hope they don't ruin Bergdorf Goodman for me, I  that store.


----------



## Chanbal

M Kelly has definitely joined Piers M…   










						Megyn Kelly slams Meghan Markle for referring to Harry as 'husband'
					

Megyn Kelly, 51, slammed Meghan Markle, 41, for constantly referring to Prince Harry as 'her husband,' claiming the Duchess is only doing it for attention.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I hope they don't ruin Bergdorf Goodman for me, I  that store.


NM has ‘owned’ BG for years.  NM has sent out a coveted Christmas Catalog for years, too.  Always fun to guess what the Dallas elite will buy their loved ones.  People do actually flank down the mega bucks for those gifts.  Is this why Hazz went to the FW rodeo?  Looking for MM’s gift?

_Neiman Marcus is famous for its outrageous annual Christmas Book catalog, where money is often no object, and the gifts offer the ultimate bragging rights. Every year, the luxury store offers up many ridiculously priced items and a few affordable luxury products we can all enjoy. 

Among the most original and exclusive things in this year's book are: a $333,333 private basketball-court session with one of the most famous players; a $65,000 Paris trip where you customize your fragrance with a renowned perfumer, and a _*$3.2 million rare diamond tiara.*








						Neiman Marcus Christmas Catalog: Extravagant Fantasy Gifts For 2022
					

What's in the 2022 Neiman Marcus Christmas book? A private basketball session with Scottie Pippen, a $330k Barbie Maserati, and much more.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "a $3.2 million rare diamond tiara."


Cartier, of course. Only in her dreams is Santa (aka an oligarch) bringing that.


----------



## Hyacinth

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooops -




Why does she have half a roll of toilet paper stuck to her head?

And how much would I have to pay a professional hair stylist to NOT look like that?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> They love drama, they love attention, they love freebies, they love themselves, etc.
> Their names *must* stay in the news.


It’s a sickness. They must wake up every morning and run to the internet to see what is written about them. They probably try to outdo each other with the number of mentions.


----------



## gracekelly

Hyacinth said:


> Why does she have half a roll of toilet paper stuck to her head?
> 
> And how much would I have to pay a professional hair stylist to NOT look like that?


This is one of my favorite pictures!  It is so obvios that she is under the influence of something. Nothing about her appearance or her facial expression is normal.


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


> As my grandmother used to say, if looks could kill...





Hyacinth said:


> Why does she have half a roll of toilet paper stuck to her head?
> 
> And how much would I have to pay a professional hair stylist to NOT look like that?


Meghan looks like an unmade bed in this outfit.  It’s one of my favourite pictures of her because it captures her in a rare moment of self awareness.  She looks terrible, she knows it, and she’s steaming about it   Hilarious.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Where do you read that (skyping Harry)? It just says he's fond of him. I used to be fond of Harry and we never met  Re: William, I don't know but he is George's godfather.


I just meant if you are claiming to be friends, to me, you’ve got to be in contact with someone and I dunno it doesn’t really track given Harry apparently abandoned all his old school friends over night for old crisp and dry. I might have misread it but it does sound like a bit of a canned answer.



Toby93 said:


>



This can’t be their ad though because the kids never travel with the parents anywhere


bag-mania said:


> If it makes you feel any better, remember that Harry chose to marry his psycho. He chose to throw his family under the bus. He chose to make his grandparents’ last years as difficult as he could. He chose to write a tell-all book.
> 
> At this point I don’t cut Harry any slack. He is Meghan’s co-conspirator, nothing less.


He would be much easier to re-market if he hadn’t suddenly become ugly as sin after previously being reasonably good looking but him and M have absolutely aged like bags  of salad these last few years.

It’s like they must have two increasingly attractive portraits in the attic.


bag-mania said:


> I agree. There is something off about marklenews1’s revelations. I don’t doubt that the bloom is off the rose but I don’t believe they are ready to pull the plug on the marriage. Not yet. They are much too invested and both of their futures depends on this fantasy they’ve woven.
> 
> They can live apart, pursue their own interests, and still stay married for their mutual benefit.


I agree, also business wise it makes sense to save the divorce scoop to have something to write about in his sequel memoir. I’m betting on ‘spurned’ or ‘Cuck’ for the title

All this talk of M upgrading has me thinking….

If she wants her next man to be royalty who is both richer and at least as stupid as Harry who also love ageing failed actresses then I think we can buckle up for 
_Spaniel Ears the Dubai Years _


bag-mania said:


> I can see Harry becoming the California party prince. He doesn’t have to go home in disgrace. He’ll be one of those people who gets invited to events and he’ll give speeches. How long that can sustain him financially is up in the air but he could easily cobble together a nice, easy living as long as he doesn’t keep going overboard with the ridiculous extravagance.


I agree they would stick him with nanny back in Britain now whereas he can probably have at least as dignified a career in Hollywood as Kim Zolciak now  

Perhaps he could be the  next bachelor?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Weren’t they on the polo tour for one of the polo leagues?
> 
> Are we certain it *was* D?  How would we know?  She has never done an interview.  The deepfake technology is readily available, so it could be anyone imo.


Tonight the part of DOria will be played by the hologram of Michael Jackson!

I can’t wait for the Snapchat filter.

I think it’s her mother anything for a buck right?



CarryOn2020 said:


> [what does _Windsor_ smell like?]
> Prince Harry's polo-playing pal Nacho Figueras offers lessons to fans as part of $295,000 luxury holiday package after 'cashing in' on friendship with the Duke with his 'Windsor' fragrance​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's pal Nacho Figueras included in $295 holiday package
> 
> 
> The Argentinian sportsman, who has been dubbed the 'David Beckham of Polo', has made an unexpected appearance in Neiman Marcus' 'Fantasy Gift' Christmas catalogue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:
> _In 2019, Nacho launched a range of six different perfumes inspired by his travels around the world - including one called 'Windsor', which he said he hoped would 'bring feelings of every kind of paradise.'
> 
> The box for the 'Windsor' perfume also appears to hint at the significance of his relationship with Prince Harry, and bears the words: 'The brotherhood of kindred spirits.'
> 
> The fragrances saw a portion of the sales proceeds donated to Prince Harry's charity Sentebale._


Having been to Windsor I wouldn’t say it smells like paradise at all….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I just meant if you are claiming to be friends, to me, you’ve got to be in contact with someone and I dunno it doesn’t really track given Harry apparently abandoned all his old school friends over night for old crisp and dry. I might have misread it but it does sound like a bit of a canned answer.



That particular excerpt said he is *William's* friend, though, and that his relationship with Harry changed massively after meeting Ghoul, which would tie in nicely with "Harry abandoned all his old friends". It was also not Lowther-Pinkerton who claimed a friendship, but another member of the household who knows them well. I don't find it that suspicious and outlandish to be honest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, Charles apparently tested the waters for slimming down the monarchy during the 2012 Diamond Jubilee by having only The Queen, himself, Camilla, William, Kate and Harry on the balcony (which wasn't popular with Andrew and Edward. Philip was sick but would have been included otherwise). So where does Harry's paranoia come from he would have been kicked out of the family anytime soon? In fact, the Wessexes and Anne are back on the balcony.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, Charles apparently tested the waters for slimming down the monarchy during the 2012 Diamond Jubilee by having only The Queen, himself, Camilla, William, Kate and Harry on the balcony (which wasn't popular with Andrew and Edward. Philip was sick but would have been included otherwise). So where does Harry's paranoia come from he would have been kicked out of the family anytime soon? In fact, the Wessexes and Anne are back on the balcony.


 The paranoia was about his popularity.  He said he only had a short time before the media started paying attention to George (and Charlotte).  And the attention/ label of “most popular” was like a high for him.

He did talk about (in the past) wanting to escape the scrutiny, but his idea was not to ever be fully excluded.  He wants half-in/half out.  Still be popular but rich by merch and the trappings of celebrity.

what an idiot - he doesn’t understand the ethics violation that this is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: them not splitting up because the blind item person knows they didn't get lawyers. How would they know? Aren't lawyers supposed to not blab about their clients? Besides the minute little detail the divorce has to happen in the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Comments section from Blind Item, this is basically how I feel:

"Harry may be a spoild brat, but Nutmeg is a bona fide narcissist sociopath - both have issues, but living with a narcissist is absolute hell. She will suck him dry emotionally, mentally, financially and then blame him for all her troubles before she kicks him to the curb. She isn't done with him just yet - she is still waiting on King Charles to make decisions on titles, etc .... nothing will happen until that is decided."


----------



## DoggieBags

I have zero sympathy for H. The Queen and Prince Philip were his grandparents, not hers. They had a hand in raising him particularly after Diana died. He knew better than to ignore the multiple olive branches extended by The Queen particularly as she and Prince Philip were growing increasingly and very visibly frail. That last summer with The Queen at Balmoral was a chance he totally ignored and he and his children will never have that opportunity again. And now he intends to make money off his recently deceased grandparents and his long deceased mother by releasing his work of fiction that he’s billing as his “autobiography“. How low can anyone go? He should have the decency to let them rest in peace. He has achieved little by himself.  So he has to market himself as the son of Diana, a style icon of the late 20th century, and the grandson of Queen Elizabeth, a trailblazer in so many ways and one of the most recognizable women in the last 2 centuries. He makes himself even smaller by comparison.


----------



## Hyacinth

Pessie said:


> Meghan looks like an unmade bed in this outfit.  It’s one of my favourite pictures of her because it captures her in a rare moment of self awareness.  She looks terrible, she knows it, and she’s steaming about it   Hilarious.



Crikey, she looks like she tried to do her own hair without putting her contacts in while being pummeled by the world's worst hangover.

Be careful, Megsie. Next stop: selling your own line of cheap cosmetics on QVC ("Duchess Of Puke Street Olive Oil And Lemon Conditioner And Wrinkle Remover" anyone?).

Or maybe juicers? Sarah probably has a warehouse full of them that she'll give you a great deal on.








						Fergie flogging £40 food blenders on QVC
					

Fergie flogging £40 food blenders on QVC




					www.thesun.ie
				




or maybe she'll take you on as a partner since you're already a Lifestyle Expert AND a Duchess (for a little while longer anyway)








						Sarah Ferguson To Launch Own Lifestyle Brand
					

Duchess Inc will include jewellery, homeware, fragrances and food among other lines say reports...




					www.giftsandhome.net


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It’s a sickness. They must wake up every morning and run to the internet to see what is written about them. They probably try to outdo each other with the number of mentions.


her for sure...him I'm not so sure....he's been followed/covered all his life without asking for it

correction - he may look for negative stuff to complain about or file lawsuits - more so than just wanting to be in the "news"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ooooops -



She does have a talent for something after all- a talent for constantly choosing the ugliest hats/headpieces for events.
This one looks like a failed attempt at a white napkin being made into the shape of an animal and then getting caught in some strong winds.
I mean you'd expect people to maybe get it wrong sometimes and choose an unattractive hat, but she gets it wrong _every _time.
The hats she has worn in the past are always the cheapest looking, tacky, flimsy, don't compliment the outfit and are just plain ugly, like something you'd get in a heavily discounted bargain bin in a dept store.
The dress she wore to this wedding was also ugly AF and several sizes too big.
There's no excuse...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I just learned Andrew got stripped of a role as early as 2011 due to his Epstein connection (he blamed The Queen's privat secretary when in fact it was the Prime Minister who put his foot down).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, some more insight why The Queen might have been so lenient with Harry and Ghoul's shenanigans. In 2017, Charles and Andrew formed an unlikely coalition to fire her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt, a man she cherished and who did his job very well. He was removed from his position in a very unkind way, so unkind indeed that William made appointments with his grandmother, father and the Lord Chamberlain (head of the royal household) to voice his displeasure.

Anyway, onlookers were confused, because usually The Queen would have told her sons to stop being silly, get over whatever grievance they had and remind them that he was HER private secretary. That she did agree was seen as a sign that at age 91, after already having had to scale back her workload (mainly foreign trips and public appearances) she just wanted a quiet life without too much hassle and unrest within the household.

Maybe it's really as simple as that. We all were surprised the woman was actually mortal and died on us, maybe she just didn't have the energy anymore to deal with the a*sholes and appeasing them somewhat (after all, she was very firm during the Sandringham summit with what they couldn't have) was just easier. I mean, dealing with their nonsense is basically a fulltime job.

All new background info coming from Courtiers.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, some more insight why The Queen might have been so lenient with Harry and Ghoul's shenanigans. In 2017, Charles and Andrew formed an unlikely coalition to fire her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt, a man she cherished and who did his job very well. He was removed from his position in a very unkind way, so unkind indeed that William made appointments with his grandmother, father and the Lord Chamberlain (head of the royal household) to voice his displeasure.
> 
> Anyway, onlookers were confused, because usually The Queen would have told her sons to stop being silly, get over whatever grievance they had and remind them that he was HER private secretary. That she did agree was seen as a sign that at age 91, after already having had to scale back her workload (mainly foreign trips and public appearances) she just wanted a quiet life without too much hassle and unrest within the household.
> 
> Maybe it's really as simple as that. We all were surprised the woman was actually mortal and died on us, maybe she just didn't have the energy anymore to deal with the a*sholes and appeasing them somewhat (after all, she was very firm during the Sandringham summit with what they couldn't have) was just easier. After all, dealing with their nonsense is basically a fulltime job.
> 
> All new background info coming from Courtiers.


wow, hard to believe that an employee so close to the queen could be gotten rid of like that


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> She does have a talent for something after all- a talent for constantly choosing the ugliest hats/headpieces for events.
> This one looks like a failed attempt at a white napkin being made into the shape of an animal and then getting caught in some strong winds.
> I mean you'd expect people to maybe get it wrong sometimes and choose an unattractive hat, but she gets it wrong _every _time.
> The hats she has worn in the past are always the cheapest looking, tacky, flimsy, don't compliment the outfit and are just plain ugly, like something you'd get in a heavily discounted bargain bin in a dept store.
> The dress she wore to this wedding was also ugly AF and several sizes too big.
> There's no excuse...
> View attachment 5645480


I really have to laugh at the Meryl Streep gif. This is the patented up and down look a hardened fashionista NYC woman gives you whilst assessing your outfit. It happens quickly, but can be a withering experience. I can just see this happening with that toilet paper hat and bedspread dress. Even Meghan would cower under such scrutiny.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, some more insight why The Queen might have been so lenient with Harry and Ghoul's shenanigans. In 2017, Charles and Andrew formed an unlikely coalition to fire her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt, a man she cherished and who did his job very well. He was removed from his position in a very unkind way, so unkind indeed that William made appointments with his grandmother, father and the Lord Chamberlain (head of the royal household) to voice his displeasure.
> 
> Anyway, onlookers were confused, because usually The Queen would have told her sons to stop being silly, get over whatever grievance they had and remind them that he was HER private secretary. That she did agree was seen as a sign that at age 91, after already having had to scale back her workload (mainly foreign trips and public appearances) she just wanted a quiet life without too much hassle and unrest within the household.
> 
> Maybe it's really as simple as that. We all were surprised the woman was actually mortal and died on us, maybe she just didn't have the energy anymore to deal with the a*sholes and appeasing them somewhat (after all, she was very firm during the Sandringham summit with what they couldn't have) was just easier. I mean, dealing with their nonsense is basically a fulltime job.
> 
> All new background info coming from Courtiers.


I agree that we saw her as immortal and able to handle everything. Judging by my own mother who was a total control freak, there does come a point where the individual realizes that they need some help and they don’t want to put up with the nonsense anymore. I was shocked when my mother asked me to take over her business affairs    The problem was that Charles  should have been handling Harry better, and didn’t and she couldn’t handle him either. The fact that she did what she did over Megxit must have been exhausting for her. The Oprah interview as well.  

We all must be tired of stating what a hypocrite Harry is. He tried to back pedal all of his hateful nonsense by flying up to Balmoral after she had already passed. He only did that to make himself look like he cared, and have ammo to use against his father‘s telling him of her passing so late in the day. The hypocrite could have seen her prior to setting off on his fake royaling tour, but you won’t hear him saying that.  He certainly did not deserve to have the ER on the uniform that he shouldn’t have been allowed to wear


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> wow, hard to believe that an employee so close to the queen could be gotten rid of like that


All the more shocking when you read Low’s description of how Geidt worked on Constitutional matters as well. The man did the job 24/7/365. I think it was the addition of Andrew that got him fired. As the favored son, the Queen listened to him more than Charles. The sad part for Harry, was that he might have had a better deal with Geidt handling it


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> All the more shocking when you read Low’s description of how Geidt worked on Constitutional matters as well. The man did the job 24/7/365. I think it was the addition of Andrew that got him fired. As the favored son, the Queen listened to him more than Charles. The sad part for Harry, was that he might have had a better deal with Geidt handling it


Loyalty repaid....very sad....I think the queen had her wits about her at that time.  so andy talked her into letting that happen?


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> Loyalty repaid....very sad....I think the queen had her wits about her at that time.  so andy talked her into letting that happen?


*Anyone* is disposable to preserve the royal line.  Don’t we remember when Fawcett got sacked for a letter and bribery Chuck absolutely masterminded himself?  Not to mention they did nothing to protect the staff from M.

I would call this a completely unethical and unfair move not a momentary lapse with a spoilt black sheep and an ageing boss/mother (who shouldn’t be in power if they aren’t compos mentis anyway)  but their standard policy in case of the embarrassingly immoral behaviour of a family member. 

And they wonder why they can’t persuade top talent to work for them anymore….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I would call this a completely unethical and unfair move not a momentary lapse with a spoilt black sheep and an ageing boss/mother (*who shouldn’t be in power if they aren’t compos mentis anyway*)  but their standard policy in case of the embarrassingly immoral behaviour of a family member.



I'm not disagreeing that this was a sh*tty move, but not having the energy to fight with family members or managing your annoying grandson is not quite the same as being certifiably insane or suffering from dementia.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm not disagreeing that this was a sh*tty move, but not having the energy to fight with family members or managing your annoying grandson is not quite the same as being certifiably insane or suffering from dementia.


That’s what im saying it’s the standard procedure it’s got nothing to do with the Queen’s age or health. Charles is obviously younger and he got his own  secretary to take the fall too 

Then my secondary  point was even if she was infirm it wouldn’t be a good reason to mistreat your staff - how is firing someone because you don’t want to deal with your bratty adult kid any better than M making people cry? They all seem like appalling employers tbh


----------



## Pessie

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s what im saying it’s the standard procedure it’s got nothing to do with the Queen’s age or health. Charles is obviously younger and he got his own  secretary to take the fall too
> 
> Then my secondary  point was even if she was infirm it wouldn’t be a good reason to mistreat your staff - how is firing someone because you don’t want to deal with your bratty adult kid any better than M making people cry? They all seem like appalling employers tbh


I think that’s too much.  The Queen was working to the end of her life - her physical frailty didn’t mean she was senile, incapable or giving up.


----------



## DoggieBags

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s what im saying it’s the standard procedure it’s got nothing to do with the Queen’s age or health. Charles is obviously younger and he got his own  secretary to take the fall too
> 
> Then my secondary  point was even if she was infirm it wouldn’t be a good reason to mistreat your staff - how is firing someone because you don’t want to deal with your bratty adult kid any better than M making people cry? They all seem like appalling employers tbh


Not trying to justify the firings or forced resignations of the private secretaries of The Queen and KC, but we have no idea if strings were pulled behind the scenes so that they ended up in very good jobs / situations afterwards. KC’s private secretary took the fall for the dodgy cash transactions and TQ’s private secretary was fired during a power struggle. I doubt these 2 private secretaries were simply fired and dumped. I would bet stuff happened behind the scenes that the public will never know about to reward both gentlemen for their loyalty to the BRF.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, and they're already playing Christmas music on the radio! I feel bad for Thanksgiving. It's like the red headed stepchild. WTF!



It's like it's some kind of _spare_ holiday, less important and _second_ to all the other holidays.


----------



## Cinderlala

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s what im saying it’s the standard procedure it’s got nothing to do with the Queen’s age or health. Charles is obviously younger and he got his own  secretary to take the fall too
> 
> Then my secondary  point was even if she was infirm it wouldn’t be a good reason to mistreat your staff - how is firing someone because you don’t want to deal with your bratty adult kid any better than M making people cry? *They all seem like appalling employers tbh*


Based on the info in the Valentine Low book the only truly appalling employers were H&M, after M was in the picture.  

There was more to the issue with Geidt than just two sons ganging up on him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, some more insight why The Queen might have been so lenient with Harry and Ghoul's shenanigans. In 2017, Charles and Andrew formed an unlikely coalition to fire her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt, a man she cherished and who did his job very well. He was removed from his position in a very unkind way, so unkind indeed that William made appointments with his grandmother, father and the Lord Chamberlain (head of the royal household) to voice his displeasure.
> 
> Anyway, onlookers were confused, because usually The Queen would have told her sons to stop being silly, get over whatever grievance they had and remind them that he was HER private secretary. That she did agree was seen as a sign that at age 91, after already having had to scale back her workload (mainly foreign trips and public appearances) she just wanted a quiet life without too much hassle and unrest within the household.
> 
> Maybe it's really as simple as that. We all were surprised the woman was actually mortal and died on us, maybe she just didn't have the energy anymore to deal with the a*sholes and appeasing them somewhat (after all, she was very firm during the Sandringham summit with what they couldn't have) was just easier. I mean, dealing with their nonsense is basically a fulltime job.
> 
> All new background info coming from Courtiers.


I'm not following. Why was Geidt dismissed if the Queen cherished him and he did his job well. What was Charles' and Andrew's issue with him?



Cinderlala said:


> There was more to the issue with Geidt than just two sons ganging up on him.


Can you elaborate?


----------



## charlottawill

Would have been more accurate to say "Meghan Markle Has Reportedly Put Out" and left it at that. 



> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...e-middleton-archetypes-podcast-meghan-markle/


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> I'm not following. Why was Geidt dismissed if the Queen cherished him and he did his job well. What was Charles' and Andrew's issue with him?
> 
> 
> *Can you elaborate?*


I don't have my book with me so I only have my recollections but I'll give it a go.  Geidt suggested & implemented a centralized communications plan/system based in BP.  This left the non-BP royals without immediate access to their PR staff.  

It was a bit of a mess because the communications departments from the other royal households/offices were moved into BP, which angered Charles & Andrew, and made the comms staffers feel removed from the royals.

That is the brief summary of what I can recall.  HTH.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> It's like it's some kind of _spare_ holiday, less important and _second_ to all the other holidays.



We don't have Thanksgiving, so I can indulge in my love for Christmas without feeling like picking a favourite child.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Based on the info in the Valentine Low book the only truly appalling employers were H&M, after M was in the picture.
> 
> There was more to the issue with Geidt than just two sons ganging up on him.



Maybe my faul for not giving the full info but I didn't think it mattered for the point I was trying to make re: The Queen and The Troublesome Two.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I'm not following. Why was Geidt dismissed if the Queen cherished him and he did his job well. What was Charles' and Andrew's issue with him?



Andrew had beef with him because a) he blamed him for having to give up a prestigious position he held due to his Epstein connection (it wasn't Geidt, it was "Number 10 Downing Street", so basically the prime minister) and b) Geidt was a firm supporter of Charles's slimmed down monarchy who believed Beatrice and Eugenie shouldn't be working royals. Charles's problem - after being a fan for the longest time - was Geidt being less than diplomatic when The Queen had to scale back engagements and Geidt summoned the teams of the respective palaces (Clarence House for Charles, Kensington Palace for William, Kate and Harry, BP for The Queen) to inform them they'd have to step up and relieve the pressure on her and PR/outings would have to be centralised. In the process he stepped on toes and several people felt he was trying to take away their independence.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe my faul for not giving the full info but I didn't think it mattered for the point I was trying to make re: The Queen and The Troublesome Two.


I'm sorry, I don't know what you are referring to but I'm sure you are right about the devious duo.


----------



## bellecate

What do you all think.  ???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: blind item, I have a feeling the Sussexes wouldn't make the shortlist to be informed right away.


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> We don't have Thanksgiving, so I can indulge in my love for Christmas without feeling like picking a favourite child.


I just learned yesterday about the German Christmas Pickle Tradition. Such a shame Ghoul's only tradition is talking about herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I had to google because I've never heard of a German Christmas Pickle, and Wiki says it was a marketing gag made up by Woolworth in the late 19th century to sell christmas ornaments


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> What do you all think.  ???
> 
> View attachment 5645679


I thought this today when seeing her in the camel outfit. I think her face looks fuller.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. For someone not wanting to be objectified she sure had a lot of, uh, steamy scenes.


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> What do you all think.  ???
> 
> View attachment 5645679



I'd be very surprised. She hasn't had an easy time with her pregnancies and she already has three beautiful children, same as her mother and sister. She is also at an age where there is a higher likelihood of complications for mother and baby. I just don't see it, but who knows?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

#Megain is trending. Oof, this is not flattering...


----------



## V0N1B2

charlottawill said:


> #Megain is trending. Oof, this is not flattering...



Listen, I’ve never held back my disdain for Meghan, but photoshopping images of her to make her look tragically unattractive is a touch much. JMO.


----------



## Laila619

As much as I wish it were not so, Catherine and William seem like they are done with 3.


----------



## KEG66

V0N1B2 said:


> Listen, I’ve never held back my disdain for Meghan, but photoshopping images of her to make her look tragically unattractive is a touch much. JMO.


I agree there is no way that she looks that bad in real life, imo too


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cinderlala said:


> Based on the info in the Valentine Low book the only truly appalling employers were H&M, after M was in the picture.
> 
> There was more to the issue with Geidt than just two sons ganging up on him.


Had to look up this story - seems both Chas and Andi were petty, especially since Anne and Ed disagreed with the decision.









						Queen was under pressure to force chief aide to resign - plot exposed
					

THE QUEEN'S two eldest sons, Prince Charles and Prince Andrew had a hand in ousting Her Majesty's chief adviser, a royal expert has claimed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Who believes that Kate supports TW's photo-op in Uvalde? This magazine is usually pro-TW, but this is a little too much.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

TW looks delighted here…


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


>



The more affluent audience is not interested in her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Who believes that Kate supports TW's photo-op in Uvalde? This magazine is usually pro-TW, but this is a little too much.



Perhaps Kate was/is not aware of Uvalde’s location or all the other details that made MM’s ‘photo-op’  one of* gross poor taste.  *

Undoubtedly Kate always looks for the diplomatic answer, still she should have declined from publicly announcing her thoughts imo.  The other thing that irks me about these stories is the idea that an American and a mom can understand what the families are going through.  All of us humans can understand it, can’t we?  The shooter was born and raised in the USA.  Sheesh.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'd be very surprised. She hasn't had an easy time with her pregnancies and she already has three beautiful children, same as her mother and sister. She is also at an age where there is a higher likelihood of complications for mother and baby. I just don't see it, but who knows?


I agree with you, even though I thought she looked like she could be.  I don't think it is realistic given their new roles as The Wales for this to happen, however if she was already pregnant back in September it was just bad timing.


----------



## gracekelly

KEG66 said:


> I agree there is no way that she looks that bad in real life, imo too


Or perhaps it is just that every other picture of her is photoshopped to death so she looks better.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> TW looks delighted here…



Charles Spencer has always picked super attractive  wives and all his children are really good looking.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Perhaps Kate was/is not aware of Uvalde’s location or all the other details that made MM’s ‘photo-op’  one of* gross poor taste.  *
> 
> Undoubtedly Kate always looks for the diplomatic answer, still she should have declined from publicly announcing her thoughts imo.  The other thing that irks me about these stories is the idea that an American and a mom can understand what the families are going through.  All of us humans can understand it, can’t we?  The shooter was born and raised in the USA.  Sheesh.


I wonder if TW is the magazine's source and Kate's friend is an imaginary one. I think Kate would avoid commenting on TW outside of the family.


----------



## LittleStar88

Not sure if this was posted yet…. Apologies if it was 









						Meghan Markle Has Reportedly “Put Out Request” for Kate Middleton to Be on Her Podcast
					

Wait....!!!!!!!!!




					www.cosmopolitan.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure if this was posted yet…. Apologies if it was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Reportedly “Put Out Request” for Kate Middleton to Be on Her Podcast
> 
> 
> Wait....!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5645807


No, just no.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure if this was posted yet…. Apologies if it was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Reportedly “Put Out Request” for Kate Middleton to Be on Her Podcast
> 
> 
> Wait....!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5645807


I wonder which horrible stereotype she wants to assign to Kate.


----------



## bag-mania

She’s running out of ideas. The Tig could be making a comeback.









						Meghan Markle's bid to trademark blog name is 'under examination'
					

Meghan Markle's lifestyle blog has taken a step nearer rebirth as the Duchess's bid to trademark name 'The Tig' goes under examination more than 12 months after application was first made.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I wonder which horrible stereotype she wants to assign to Kate.


TW is always talking about the Stepford Wives, I wonder if she is the author of the post below. It was submitted by an anonymous source in 2014. Wasn't this the year that she wrote about 'Princess Kate' on her blog? 






			https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/meghan-markle-talks-mom-guilt-stepford-wife-stereotype


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure if this was posted yet…. Apologies if it was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Reportedly “Put Out Request” for Kate Middleton to Be on Her Podcast
> 
> 
> Wait....!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5645807


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> She’s running out of ideas. The Tig could be making a comeback.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's bid to trademark blog name is 'under examination'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's lifestyle blog has taken a step nearer rebirth as the Duchess's bid to trademark name 'The Tig' goes under examination more than 12 months after application was first made.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I have no idea what she used to post on her original blog but if she gets a new version of The Tig up and running, what life style tips could she post? We’ve all seen what atrocious taste she has in clothes. Beauty tips and skin care? Her hair is a hot mess, she’s got major sun damage to her skin, she can’t decide what shape her nose should be, and she seems to favor a very unnatural looking  peculiar orange shade of spray tan. Decorating tips a La Martha Stewart? Her Montecito mansion is not even close to architectural digest worthy. More like crate and barrel meets pottery barn. Wellness and Healthy eating a La Gwyneth Paltrow’s The Goop? She’s going to have to do more than lemon olive oil cake and elderflower cake. Environmentally friendly Travel tips? Take a private plane everywhere so you can maximize your carbon footprint wherever you go. what could she possibly say that anyone other than her sugars would find helpful or insightful?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, some more insight why The Queen might have been so lenient with Harry and Ghoul's shenanigans. In 2017, Charles and Andrew formed an unlikely coalition to fire her private secretary Sir Christopher Geidt, a man she cherished and who did his job very well. He was removed from his position in a very unkind way, so unkind indeed that William made appointments with his grandmother, father and the Lord Chamberlain (head of the royal household) to voice his displeasure.
> 
> Anyway, onlookers were confused, because usually The Queen would have told her sons to stop being silly, get over whatever grievance they had and remind them that he was HER private secretary. That she did agree was seen as a sign that at age 91, after already having had to scale back her workload (mainly foreign trips and public appearances) she just wanted a quiet life without too much hassle and unrest within the household.
> 
> Maybe it's really as simple as that. We all were surprised the woman was actually mortal and died on us, maybe she just didn't have the energy anymore to deal with the a*sholes and appeasing them somewhat (after all, she was very firm during the Sandringham summit with what they couldn't have) was just easier. I mean, dealing with their nonsense is basically a fulltime job.
> 
> All new background info coming from Courtiers.


Sometimes you try to find a peaceful solution, assuage both parties, and you never expect people like Handbag and the Ghoul to go way over the line. I am always taken aback by bad behaviour. I have a new team member, not a narc, but a mature woman so set in her ways that she does not realize her facial expressions are showing that she is unwilling to learn new methods of doing things. I think QE2 was not expecting Ghoul to come into the BRF without any intention to adapt, despite her supposedly sending the BRF a letter asking them to "use" her. That really makes her sound like a sex worker  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Andrew had beef with him because a) he blamed him for having to give up a prestigious position he held due to his Epstein connection (it wasn't Geidt, it was "Number 10 Downing Street", so basically the prime minister) and b) Geidt was a firm supporter of Charles's slimmed down monarchy who believed Beatrice and Eugenie shouldn't be working royals. Charles's problem - after being a fan for the longest time - was Geidt being less than diplomatic when The Queen had to scale back engagements and Geidt summoned the teams of the respective palaces (Clarence House for Charles, Kensington Palace for William, Kate and Harry, BP for The Queen) to inform them *they'd have to step up and relieve the pressure on her and PR/outings would have to be centralised. In the process he stepped on toes and several people felt he was trying to take away their independence.*


Centralisation processes tend to have that effect. One of the departments in the company where I work forced through a centralisation, and now is trying to "surreptitiously" return work to the other departments because they cannot provide personalized service. 


V0N1B2 said:


> Listen, I’ve never held back my disdain for Meghan, but photoshopping images of her to make her look tragically unattractive is a touch much. JMO.


This is an old photo, but it sure lingers in the mind. I believe that her face does have a lot of blemishes and wrinkles, but she uses Botox, fillers and thick make-up to look good.


Chanbal said:


> Who believes that Kate supports TW's photo-op in Uvalde? This magazine is usually pro-TW, but this is a little too much.



The source is Newsweek which is highly and ridiculously pro-Wench. One of their royal reporters Royston is a strident stan.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> I have no idea what she used to post on her original blog but if she gets a new version of The Tig up and running, *what life style tips could she post? *We’ve all seen what atrocious taste she has in clothes. Beauty tips and skin care? Her hair is a hot mess, she’s got major sun damage to her skin, she can’t decide what shape her nose should be, and she seems to favor a very unnatural looking  peculiar orange shade of spray tan. Decorating tips a La Martha Stewart? Her Montecito mansion is not even close to architectural digest worthy. More like crate and barrel meets pottery barn. Wellness and Healthy eating a La Gwyneth Paltrow’s The Goop? She’s going to have to do more than lemon olive oil cake and elderflower cake. Environmentally friendly Travel tips? Take a private plane everywhere so you can maximize your carbon footprint wherever you go. what could she possibly say that anyone other than her sugars would find helpful or insightful?


She’ll plagiarize it from other, more relevant but less well-known blogs, of course. Why worry about coming up with content when you can just take it from someone else and your fans won’t know the difference?


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


>



Is this the funeral or memorial where she showed up late and inappropriately dressed with trademark bedhead?


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I have no idea what she used to post on her original blog but if she gets a new version of The Tig up and running, what life style tips could she post? We’ve all seen what atrocious taste she has in clothes. Beauty tips and skin care? Her hair is a hot mess, she’s got major sun damage to her skin, she can’t decide what shape her nose should be, and she seems to favor a very unnatural looking  peculiar orange shade of spray tan. Decorating tips a La Martha Stewart? Her Montecito mansion is not even close to architectural digest worthy. More like crate and barrel meets pottery barn. Wellness and Healthy eating a La Gwyneth Paltrow’s The Goop? She’s going to have to do more than lemon olive oil cake and elderflower cake. Environmentally friendly Travel tips? Take a private plane everywhere so you can maximize your carbon footprint wherever you go. what could she possibly say that anyone other than her sugars would find helpful or insightful?


It will be as successful as her pod crashes.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Is this the funeral or memorial where she showed up late and inappropriately dressed with trademark bedhead?


Daytime memorial service for a murder victim, they showed up late, she was disheveled, hungover looking, and wearing a cocktail dress. Stay classy Megs.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I have no idea what she used to post on her original blog but if she gets a new version of The Tig up and running, what life style tips could she post? We’ve all seen what atrocious taste she has in clothes. Beauty tips and skin care? Her hair is a hot mess, she’s got major sun damage to her skin, she can’t decide what shape her nose should be, and she seems to favor a very unnatural looking  peculiar orange shade of spray tan. Decorating tips a La Martha Stewart? Her Montecito mansion is not even close to architectural digest worthy. More like crate and barrel meets pottery barn. Wellness and Healthy eating a La Gwyneth Paltrow’s The Goop? She’s going to have to do more than lemon olive oil cake and elderflower cake. Environmentally friendly Travel tips? Take a private plane everywhere so you can maximize your carbon footprint wherever you go. what could she possibly say that anyone other than her sugars would find helpful or insightful?


In case you'd like to read some of her previous musings on life:



> https://thetigarchives.tumblr.com/tagged/the tig


----------



## xincinsin

Do you get the feeling that because she established herself from the start as having a signature "messy bun", she thought messy hair all the time would be excused? No hair spray... even at her wedding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure if this was posted yet…. Apologies if it was
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Has Reportedly “Put Out Request” for Kate Middleton to Be on Her Podcast
> 
> 
> Wait....!!!!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cosmopolitan.com



I know this is all a lie because zZ would never and I mean never, let *anyone* have a whole episode to themselves.  Let alone her arch nemesis.


----------



## Freak4Coach

xincinsin said:


> Do you get the feeling that because she established herself from the start as having a signature "messy bun", she thought messy hair all the time would be excused? No hair spray... even at her wedding.
> View attachment 5645889


----------



## CarryOn2020

Keep trying, Hazzi, keep trying.

_However, Team Sussex say that Spare will be all about what Meghan would call 'compassion in action'.

Columnist Elaine Lui, a Canadian TV personality who has worked with Meghan's friend Ben Mulroney and is also close to Meghan's bestie, the Soho House executive Markus Anderson, says we should look at how the word spare is used as a verb. *She said: 'It is actually a really kind verb. It involves effort. When you spare time or money or thought for someone, you're making an effort and more often than not it's a helpful effort.' *









						ALISON BOSHOFF: Prince Harry may spare royal feelings
					

ALISON BOSHOFF: Most people here believe that 'spare' is a reference to the phrase 'an heir and a spare'; and that Prince Harry  will pour out feelings of rejection and isolation.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Keep trying, Hazzi, keep trying.
> 
> _However, Team Sussex say that Spare will be all about what Meghan would call 'compassion in action'.
> 
> Columnist Elaine Lui, a Canadian TV personality who has worked with Meghan's friend Ben Mulroney and is also close to Meghan's bestie, the Soho House executive Markus Anderson, says we should look at how the word spare is used as a verb. *She said: 'It is actually a really kind verb. It involves effort. When you spare time or money or thought for someone, you're making an effort and more often than not it's a helpful effort.' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ALISON BOSHOFF: Prince Harry may spare royal feelings
> 
> 
> ALISON BOSHOFF: Most people here believe that 'spare' is a reference to the phrase 'an heir and a spare'; and that Prince Harry  will pour out feelings of rejection and isolation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Hilarious! Of course Handbag would entitle his tome with a Verb. Action man 

I won't be holding my breath to check if Spare is filled with recounts of how the troublesome twosome are engaging in acts of compassion. If Handbag's focus was that, would he need the armchair psychiatrist ghost writer and claim that it is about his life since his mother's death? If it was about compassion, either the book is much slimmer or they used a really large font.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Keep trying, Hazzi, keep trying.
> 
> _However, Team Sussex say that Spare will be all about what Meghan would call 'compassion in action'.
> 
> Columnist Elaine Lui, a Canadian TV personality who has worked with Meghan's friend Ben Mulroney and is also close to Meghan's bestie, the Soho House executive Markus Anderson, says we should look at how the word spare is used as a verb. *She said: 'It is actually a really kind verb. It involves effort. When you spare time or money or thought for someone, you're making an effort and more often than not it's a helpful effort.' *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ALISON BOSHOFF: Prince Harry may spare royal feelings
> 
> 
> ALISON BOSHOFF: Most people here believe that 'spare' is a reference to the phrase 'an heir and a spare'; and that Prince Harry  will pour out feelings of rejection and isolation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


There is a song - BUDDY CAN SPARE A DIME ?


----------



## xincinsin

Links to Beyonce! OMG 


Bad English. Ambiguous headline about who is appearing in the podcrash: school principal or Beyonce.


One of the comments:


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cinderlala said:


> I don't have my book with me so I only have my recollections but I'll give it a go.  Geidt suggested & implemented a centralized communications plan/system based in BP.  This left the non-BP royals without immediate access to their PR staff.
> 
> It was a bit of a mess because the communications departments from the other royal households/offices were moved into BP, which angered Charles & Andrew, and made the comms staffers feel removed from the royals.
> 
> That is the brief summary of what I can recall.  HTH.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Andrew had beef with him because a) he blamed him for having to give up a prestigious position he held due to his Epstein connection (it wasn't Geidt, it was "Number 10 Downing Street", so basically the prime minister) and b) Geidt was a firm supporter of Charles's slimmed down monarchy who believed Beatrice and Eugenie shouldn't be working royals. Charles's problem - after being a fan for the longest time - was Geidt being less than diplomatic when The Queen had to scale back engagements and Geidt summoned the teams of the respective palaces (Clarence House for Charles, Kensington Palace for William, Kate and Harry, BP for The Queen) to inform them they'd have to step up and relieve the pressure on her and PR/outings would have to be centralised. In the process he stepped on toes and several people felt he was trying to take away their independence.


So basically the book shows they didn’t really have any reasonable grounds for sacking him (other than he hurt a few feelings giving a speech the queen will have signed off on and/or he implemented an unsuccessful initiative) they just did it anyway? I’m sure he’s fine ‘on to the next one’ and so are his other sacked colleagues but the point still stands this is an organisation can’t be so shady and then expect great work and loyalty. 

I realise I’m in a bit of a losing battle lbut I do question the PR we are fed that the royal system is a bastion of unchanging morality when you hear about either clearly immoral acts being sanctioned like weapons dealing and hosting Ghislaine and Jeff or even just b*tchy corporate BS like this Geidt story. 

I also think if you had a mayor in your town and everyone told you he was the best mayor the town ever had but he kept inviting his dear son R Kelly to events and R Kelly lived in a public paid for mansion with him then we would start to give him the side eye but in our reality  you don’t get the choice not to re-elect this mayor and Andrew has never written any all time bangers. 

But then people come back to ‘the queen is dead now show respect’ or when she was alive ‘ she’s an old lady I’d like to see you do better at 90’ and now with Charles ‘he’s Been through it with his ungrateful son’ which is silly because I could be 150 and the most qualified public servant in the world but I’d never be in her or Chaz’s position and I think _actually_ I would do a better job. I think millions of people would because I don’t think this family have very high ethical standards_ at all _



Chanbal said:


>



He looks like he’s in _Good Time - _don’t spoil another movie for me Haz you loser. 


xincinsin said:


> Do you get the feeling that because she established herself from the start as having a signature "messy bun", she thought messy hair all the time would be excused? No hair spray... even at her wedding.
> View attachment 5645889


----------



## JulesB68

jelliedfeels said:


> So basically the book shows they didn’t really have any reasonable grounds for sacking him (other than he hurt a few feelings giving a speech the queen will have signed off on and/or he implemented an unsuccessful initiative) they just did it anyway? I’m sure he’s fine ‘on to the next one’ and so are his other sacked colleagues but the point still stands this is an organisation can’t be so shady and then expect great work and loyalty.
> 
> *I realise I’m in a bit of a losing battle lbut I do question the PR we are fed that the royal system is a bastion of unchanging morality when you hear about either clearly immoral acts being sanctioned like weapons dealing and hosting Ghislaine and Jeff or even just b*tchy corporate BS like this Geidt story.*
> 
> I also think if you had a mayor in your town and everyone told you he was the best mayor the town ever had but he kept inviting his dear son R Kelly to events and R Kelly lived in a public paid for mansion with him then we would start to give him the side eye but in our reality  you don’t get the choice not to re-elect this mayor and Andrew has never written any all time bangers.
> 
> But then people come back to ‘the queen is dead now show respect’ or when she was alive ‘ she’s an old lady I’d like to see you do better at 90’ and now with Charles ‘he’s Been through it with his ungrateful son’ which is silly because I could be 150 and the most qualified public servant in the world but I’d never be in her or Chaz’s position and I think _actually_ I would do a better job. I think millions of people would because I don’t think this family have very high ethical standards_ at all _
> 
> 
> He looks like he’s in _Good Time - _don’t spoil another movie for me Haz you loser.
> 
> View attachment 5645965


Have to agree with the bit I've bolded in your post. We happen to rent a couple of bits of land from one of the estates. We were told when we first rented that TQ never evicts a sitting tenant and so shouldn't be concerned about taking it on a rolling basis. That was fine until Charlie-boy started getting more involved and replaced staff. New staff missed our existing contract and rented out our bit of land to someone else & refused to back down.


----------



## Chanbal

Since when is TW an acquaintance of Angie?


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth!


----------



## Annawakes

Just seeing if anything sticks.  First J Aniston, now Beyoncé, now Angie.  Riiight.


----------



## bag-mania

Those iSource News posts all look to be BS. Except for the one about her not spending any of her own money. That I can totally believe.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Does this sound familiar to you? Maybe it's...genetic pain.


----------



## xincinsin

There was a rumour that iSource is a Zedzee account used to put out either fake news or conflicting ****-stirring stories to keep her in the headlines.


----------



## pukasonqo

Chanbal said:


> Who believes that Kate supports TW's photo-op in Uvalde? This magazine is usually pro-TW, but this is a little too much.



NVM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Undoubtedly Kate always looks for the diplomatic answer, still she should have declined from publicly announcing her thoughts imo.



She did not. Allegedly she told a friend (so private, not public), the Twitter user points out the writer has NO royal sources whatsoever, so this is just one more of the things that never happened.


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



I’d never seen them side by side before. Gosh mother and daughter really do look alike. Same eyes, chin, and smile.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Since when is TW an acquaintance of Angie?




Wait a moment. SHE is adopting an African baby after SHE made up her mind? Wasn't she married just a bit ago, so should her handbag, sorry husband not be involved in this decision/process?


----------



## LittleStar88

DoggieBags said:


> I’d never seen them side by side before. Gosh mother and daughter really do look alike. Same eyes, chin, and smile.



She's looking more and more like her mom as she ages/puts the fillers in her face/carry more weight. 
Not saying as a negative, per se. Her mom is very pretty. But also not TW's pre-Harry look.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She’ll plagiarize it from other, more relevant but less well-known blogs, of course. Why worry about coming up with content when you can just take it from someone else and your fans won’t know the difference?


I see GOOP being a big inspiration.
Overpriced nonsense from another woman who thinks she knows it all and has candles that smell like her vagina.  We know TW thinks hers is pure gold.


----------



## JulesB68

I know that someone has already mentioned that her IMDB listing has rather presumptuously stated that she will be at KCIII’s coronation, but did anyone scroll down further and she what else is listed? 




That’s right. Every time she’s mentioned on the news she has listed it on IMDB, even attending a remembrance service at the Cenotaph. But wait! It gets even better!
.
.
.
.
.
.


A spectator at Wimbledon, I kid you not!! I think Catherine needs to apply for an Equity card, and should be up for an Oscar for pretending to enjoy her company throughout this ordeal 

Ps. I realise that she probably hasn’t personally added all these, far too much hard work, but whoever did must be operating under her instruction.


----------



## DoggieBags

JulesB68 said:


> I know that someone has already mentioned that her IMDB listing has rather presumptuously stated that she will be at KCIII’s coronation, but did anyone scroll down further and she what else is listed?
> 
> View attachment 5646121
> 
> 
> That’s right. Every time she’s mentioned on the news she has listed it on IMDB, even attending a remembrance service at the Cenotaph. But wait! It gets even better!
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> View attachment 5646122
> 
> A spectator at Wimbledon, I kid you not!! I think Catherine needs to apply for an Equity card, and should be up for an Oscar for pretending to enjoy her company throughout this ordeal
> 
> Ps. I realise that she probably hasn’t personally added all these, far too much hard work, but whoever did must be operating under her instruction.


Just goes to show how unsuccessful she really was as an actress when she’s having to list being a spectator at Wimbledon as part of her public appearance credits to pad her resume. But since this is the same person who at one point listed one of her occupations as supermodel, being grounded in reality is not one of her strong points.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Links to Beyonce! OMG
> 
> 
> Bad English. Ambiguous headline about who is appearing in the podcrash: school principal or Beyonce.
> View attachment 5645963
> 
> One of the comments:
> View attachment 5645964



Glamorous? She looks like she’s going to flash people in a dark alleyway in that dusty mac and old man trousers.

I will say the Naomi Campbell weave probably looked great in the store and on paper it is better than those stupid spaniel ears but it’s far too low on her forehead and she can’t  pull off the sleek siren look anyway. 




Chanbal said:


> Since when is TW an acquaintance of Angie?



I would welcome this as she’d be forced to finally go to a hairdresser who knows what to do with black hair. It’ll be like extreme makeover


DoggieBags said:


> I’d never seen them side by side before. Gosh mother and daughter really do look alike. Same eyes, chin, and smile.


Different nose - thank you Dr Zissman 


purseinsanity said:


> I see GOOP being a big inspiration.
> Overpriced nonsense from another woman who thinks she knows it all and has candles that smell like her vagina.  We know TW thinks hers is pure gold.


I swear that candle is the only entertaining thing Gwyn ever did but she knocked it out the park - hilarious.


----------



## LittleStar88

JulesB68 said:


> I know that someone has already mentioned that her IMDB listing has rather presumptuously stated that she will be at KCIII’s coronation, but did anyone scroll down further and she what else is listed?
> 
> View attachment 5646121
> 
> 
> That’s right. Every time she’s mentioned on the news she has listed it on IMDB, even attending a remembrance service at the Cenotaph. But wait! It gets even better!
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> View attachment 5646122
> 
> A spectator at Wimbledon, I kid you not!! I think Catherine needs to apply for an Equity card, and should be up for an Oscar for pretending to enjoy her company throughout this ordeal
> 
> Ps. I realise that she probably hasn’t personally added all these, far too much hard work, but whoever did must be operating under her instruction.



Did she include the appearance where she plodded across the graves of veterans with her "sad face"?


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> Just goes to show how unsuccessful she really was as an actress when she’s having to list being a spectator at Wimbledon as part of her public appearance credits to pad her resume. But since this is the same person who at one point listed one of her occupations as supermodel, being grounded in reality is not one of her strong points.


Also, it goes to show how truly boring she is. 
:yawn:


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Who believes that Kate supports TW's photo-op in Uvalde? This magazine is usually pro-TW, but this is a little too much.



oh, harry has principles?
and I'm sure Kate supported Meghans photo op at Uvalde


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> No, just no.


wow, she could have the whole episode to herself....LOL


----------



## jelliedfeels

JulesB68 said:


> Have to agree with the bit I've bolded in your post. We happen to rent a couple of bits of land from one of the estates. We were told when we first rented that TQ never evicts a sitting tenant and so shouldn't be concerned about taking it on a rolling basis. That was fine until Charlie-boy started getting more involved and replaced staff. New staff missed our existing contract and rented out our bit of land to someone else & refused to back down.


That’s awful I’m sorry. I have heard some shady things about Charles specifically including introducing invasive varieties into oyster beds (not very green) and that his office messes around a lot of tenants in Cornwall and Scilly isles. 

For what it’s worth I’m of opinion H&M egregious are just particularly blatant examples of the wider degeneration into self-obsession, greed, hypocrisy and immorality amongst the whole royal household.


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I know this is all a lie because zZ would never and I mean never, let *anyone* have a whole episode to themselves.  Let alone her arch nemesis.


I'm pretty sure Kate and William and anyone close to them would view this as a potential ambush - and beneath her dignity


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait a moment. SHE is adopting an African baby after SHE made up her mind? Wasn't she married just a bit ago, so should her handbag, sorry husband not be involved in this decision/process?


what is I source news?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait a moment. SHE is adopting an African baby after SHE made up her mind? Wasn't she married just a bit ago, so should her handbag, sorry husband not be involved in this decision/process?


Another hint at a separation?


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Did she include the appearance where she plodded across the graves of veterans with her "sad face"?
> 
> View attachment 5646127


I have worked at a national cemetery placing flags on veterans' graves for Memorial Day. To do this you have to walk around the graves and near the markers. What did they do wrong? They appear to be walking respectfully between the rows. That's OK as far as I know.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I will say the Naomi Campbell weave probably looked great in the store and on paper it is better than those *stupid spaniel ears* but it’s far too low on her forehead and she can’t  pull off the sleek siren look anyway.



Do tell, what are these???



jelliedfeels said:


> I would welcome this as she’d be forced to finally go to a hairdresser who knows what to do with black hair. It’ll be like extreme makeover



Wasn't her LA based hairdresser (the holistic one) a black woman? Someone posted their Insta a while ago. And she didn't make her look stellar.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Good luck with that, Harry. I was under the strong impression Bower had legitimate sources willing to repeat what they told him if necessary.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



these two are getting so old...."My Husband", "My Wife"....let's bring a lawsuit....


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Good luck with that, Harry. I was under the strong impression Bower had legitimate sources willing to repeat what they told him if necessary.


Having H and TW being deposed under oath in any lawsuit H decides to pursue against Bower would be interesting since TW was already caught lying about cooperating with the Finding $$$ book in a prior lawsuit about the publishing of the letter TW wrote to her father. I would think the last thing either of them would want would be to have to give a deposition under oath while being questioned by a clever lawyer with access to all Bower’s research.


----------



## calicocat

DoggieBags said:


> Having H and TW being deposed under oath in any lawsuit H decides to pursue against Bower would be interesting since TW was already caught lying about cooperating with the Finding $$$ book in a prior lawsuit about the publishing of the letter TW wrote to her father. I would think the last thing either of them would want would be to have to give a deposition under oath while being questioned by a clever lawyer with access to all Bower’s research.


Especially when neither can get most of their lies statements straight/consistent (Invisikids' first steps' timeline??)


----------



## purseinsanity

jelliedfeels said:


> I swear that candle is the only entertaining thing Gwyn ever did but she knocked it out the park - hilarious.


My OBGYN put one in her office bathroom.  

Told me some real vaginas smelled better, because she thought the candle smelled like crap.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Links to Beyonce! OMG
> 
> 
> Bad English. Ambiguous headline about who is appearing in the podcrash: school principal or Beyonce.
> View attachment 5645963
> 
> One of the comments:
> View attachment 5645964



"Links to Beyonce"??  Good Lord.  I guess I'm linked to Tom Hanks then, because I delivered my baby at the same hospital as one of his son's girlfriends with the same Obstetrician.  JFC.  I just can't.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Does this sound familiar to you? Maybe it's...genetic pain.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5646065


Thank you for posting this.  I could not quite remember Andrew's behavior---I vaguely recalled he was bad but I could only remember his fiercely devoted employee Ms. Thirsk who really, really, really liked him.

Based on the totality of the book, though, it seemed that no royal was truly intolerable to work for until H&M existed.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I have worked at a national cemetery placing flags on veterans' graves for Memorial Day. To do this you have to walk around the graves and near the markers. What did they do wrong? They appear to be walking respectfully between the rows. That's OK as far as I know.


It was offensive because it was a photo op.  Nothing genuine about it.  They did it because the Queen didn't allow a wreath from him put down on Remembrance Day, IIRC.


----------



## csshopper

There is so much crap being tossed around from the Suckesses it reeks of desperation. Name dropping Jennifer Anniston seemed to start the ramp up a month or so ago, various hits and misses with podcrash guests, now Beyoncé in a very contrived way, followed by Angelina.

If there’s any truth to it, the last is most telling I think, a major life change with no reference to the husband. IMO she is so diabolical this could be a move to set up a family dynamic in any future divorce (which I don’t see happening now) where she wants sole custody of a Nigerian adoptee, and Haz can have Archie and Lili for a hefty price of course. The adoptee will send her Sugars into raptuous swoons of support for her coming to the aid of a child honoring her supposed ancestry. And following in Angelina’s footsteps she’ll aggressively pursue some UN related work.
Yet another newly minted Raptor brand, media enhanced, will be launched as the Goddess of Goodness, who will sprinkle her fairy dust on the world.

Meantime, while they’re inundating media with the usual narcissistic, hypocritical drivel, there’s a madman in Russia with a palsied finger hovering too close to the nuclear button, Ukrainians are fighting to survive, cataclysmic climate events are affecting the globe, inflation is starting to wreak havoc, a strain on natural resources like water and fuel sources is causing worldwide despair and on it goes with local issues as well.

How does this relate to our subjects? In comparison, they are nothing more than seeping boils oozing pus as they slink through life. Going to take some deep breaths and and try to keep that perspective.  Increasingly I find myself skimming over items when the headlines hint at the same old whining over the same old issues. Haz threatening to sue Bower being one. I hope the Dunderhead Duke does, it will be delicious fun to see Bower wipe the floor with him and we’ll get all the juicy new bits that had previously been left unsaid.


----------



## TC1

Beyonce hasn't given an interview in about a decade. I can't see her choosing a no-name podcast called Archetypes to break her silence


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M are from the school of ‘_let’s pick a famous rich person and make a false claim_’.  None of it is true, all of it backfires.
See Mathew Perry for his recent stunt that has backfired on him.  Drugged up or not, these people are a new level of sick and desperate.


----------



## JulesB68

The Bower book is the reason I ended up following this thread. He was being interviewed by Chris Evans on the radio over here and came across as someone with integrity and most definitely not someone who would make himself vulnerable to lawsuits. Decided that could be my trash read for my summer holiday.   
Whilst I had seen some similarities before, it made me realise just how like my ex SIL she really was (even looks scarily like her, but being the narcissist that she truly is, my ex SIL would see that as a compliment!). I think a lot of us on this thread probably have been exposed to someone like TW much closer to home, and that's why we can see her for what she really is. Part of me is always trying to understand my ex SIL so that we can try to anticipate what her next moves might be, in order to protect my DB and his kids. In particular my niece, whom she is doing a right number on, in order to punish my brother for getting away from her.  
Anyhoo, I would absolutely love to see them try to sue Mr Bower, as then she really would be exposed for the liar she is, in a court of law, rather than that feeble interview with OW, who was so dim she couldn't/didn't question any of the inconsistencies.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M are from the school of ‘_let’s pick a famous rich person and make a false claim_’.  None of it is true, all of it backfires.
> See Mathew Perry for his recent stunt that has backfired on him.  Drugged up or not, these people are a new level of sick and desperate.
> 
> View attachment 5646242


what has backfied on matthew perry?  he has a book and apparently it's selling well



charlottawill said:


> In case you'd like to read some of her previous musings on life:


I'll pass...thanks



Chanbal said:


>



interesting that she's being called out for referring to H as her husband rather than by his name.  One my my pet peeves about them was Harry spouting out about his WIFE at every opportunity - never her name - like (sorry for repeating myself here) having a WIFE made him a big grown-up man (or made him equal to his big brother)


----------



## oldbag

sdkitty said:


> what has backfied on matthew perry?  he has a book and apparently it's selling well


If I remember right he made a remark about Keanu Reeves and he had to apologize. But I am not completely sure and it could have been something else.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Since when is TW an acquaintance of Angie?



Not a good choice of adoption mentor maybe … Angie no longer gets the Mom of the Year award-  She loses points over vitriol with Brad over stuff that happened 6 years ago, not good for the kids to see that in the papers, they can all read
but I get it , the legal crap between the ex spouses about winery ethics will avoid final judgment on custody until after the 3 youngest are 18 , a stalling tactic for A, who obviously does not want B to win half custody
But I bet MM and the very litigious A have a lot in common, and can trade tips about lawyering  up and how to get the last word and stick it to your ex


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> what has backfied on matthew perry?  he has a book and apparently it's selling well











						Keanu Reeves taken aback by Matthew Perry’s insults in memoir: report
					

The “Friends” alum recently apologized for asking why the “Matrix” star “walks among us” in “Friends, Lovers and the Big Terrible Thing.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> "Links to Beyonce"??  Good Lord.  I guess I'm linked to Tom Hanks then, because I delivered my baby at the same hospital as one of his son's girlfriends with the same Obstetrician.  JFC.  I just can't.


Well you know just because she and Hazy briefly met Bey and Jay at the movie premiere three or four years ago she now thinks they're BFFs for life. That is how her mind apparently works.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> It was offensive because it was a photo op.  Nothing genuine about it.  They did it because the Queen didn't allow a wreath from him put down on Remembrance Day, IIRC.


Ahh, I did not know that. Thanks.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Keanu Reeves taken aback by Matthew Perry’s insults in memoir: report
> 
> 
> The “Friends” alum recently apologized for asking why the “Matrix” star “walks among us” in “Friends, Lovers and the Big Terrible Thing.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


That was a really sh*tty thing of Perry to do. He is the only person I know of to ever say anything negative about Keanu. By all accounts Keanu is a genuine, caring and lovely person. I guess all those drugs really damaged Perry's brain.


----------



## sdkitty

oldbag said:


> If I remember right he made a remark about Keanu Reeves and he had to apologize. But I am not completely sure and it could have been something else.


oh yes but he apologized and I don't think it hurt him that much


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Thank you for posting this.  I could not quite remember Andrew's behavior---I vaguely recalled he was bad but I could only remember his fiercely devoted employee Ms. Thirsk who really, really, really liked him.
> 
> Based on the totality of the book, though, it seemed that no royal was truly intolerable to work for until H&M existed.



In fact Low says while Andrew is rude, entitled, arrogant and self-absorbed he was actually a good teamleader and looked out for his direct staff.

He also yelled and swore at The Queen's press secretary James Roscoe who had politely asked a military person to find The Queen an umbrella when it started raining cats and dogs minutes before she was supposed to arrive, then went straight to said queen and complained Roscoe had had the guts to ask him, the Duke of York, to go fetch him an umbrella (probably after coming to the conclusion she wouldn't appreciate the actual story should it get back to her). When The Queen brought it up all Roscoe had so say was "What do you think, Ma'am? Do you think I asked the Duke of York to fetch an umbrella?"


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In fact Low says while Andrew is rude, entitled, arrogant and self-absorbed he was actually a good teamleader and looked out for his direct staff.
> 
> He also yelled and swore at The Queen's press secretary James Roscoe who had politely asked a military person to find The Queen an umbrella when it started raining cats and dogs minutes before she was supposed to arrive, then went straight to said queen and complained Roscoe had had the guts to ask him, the Duke of York, to go fetch him an umbrella (probably after coming to the conclusion she wouldn't appreciate the actual story should it get back to her). When The Queen brought it up all Roscoe had so say was "What do you think, Ma'am? Do you think I asked the Duke of York to fetch an umbrella?"


that surprises me....I thought he was an arrogant bully toward staff....and required his teddy bears be lined up perfectly


----------



## CarryOn2020

This was a DP answering the MPerry issue, so here is a new-ish wrinkle, from everyone’s fave journalist, Omid:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> that surprises me....I thought he was an arrogant bully toward staff....and required his teddy bears be lined up perfectly



I have no idea how he treated e.g. housekeepers as that's not what the book focusses on (my guess would be, with arrogance and entitlement). With direct staff Low means his office (private secretary, press secretary, office manager and everyone working under those).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Can someone explain the Matthew Perry insult to me? I have read it several times and I don't even understand what he was trying to say.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was a DP answering the MPerry issue, so here is a new-ish wrinkle, from everyone’s fave journalist, Omid:




I had almost forgotten he exists.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain the Matthew Perry insult to me? I have read it several times and I don't even understand what he was trying to say.


_I think _he is claiming Keanu used the same, if not more, drugs as River who died of an overdose.  So, MP doesn’t understand why Keanu is alive and River isn’t.  Very immature way of looking at a tragedy.  I watched Mperry’s interview with DSawyer.  Not impressed at all - imo his publishers should not have pushed him to do these interviews.  Clearly, he needs more recovery and time to grow up.

Hazz and MM have similar immature issues.  Maybe it is a sign of the times?

ETA - this is just tacky. 

* Perry, 53, caused a social media storm after he wrote in his memoir 'Why is it that the original thinkers like River Phoenix and Heath Ledger die, but Keanu Reeves still walks among us?' *


----------



## kipp

CarryOn2020 said:


> This was a DP answering the MPerry issue, so here is a new-ish wrinkle, from everyone’s fave journalist, Omid:



Gotta love it (not!): 
"falling in love with a person your family doesn’t accept "  *(??? 50 million pound wedding) *
"Harry’s quest to find purpose and why he chose to commit to a lifetime of service" _*of making $$$$$ *_(my editorial comment)...


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do tell, what are these???
> 
> 
> 
> Wasn't her LA based hairdresser (the holistic one) a black woman? Someone posted their Insta a while ago. And she didn't make her look stellar.


You are correct, I’m sure a POC stylist may have been brought into the presence of the dreadful Do at some point but they probably don’t have much influence over her staid choices.

And of course, in this mad fantasy of mine where M not only looks after someone in need but also takes them out in public it’s still unimaginable she’d countenance the possibility the kid might end up with better hair than her 


By spaniel ears I mean when she has the waves which form the Greasy tendrils which move as one like they are attached to an floppy ear (though tufts do occasionally stand on end- again like a dog’s ear)
EG.















Yes this is an enormous insult to the beautiful spaniels of the world but it’s my immediate association. 


TC1 said:


> Beyonce hasn't given an interview in about a decade. I can't see her choosing a no-name podcast called Archetypes to break her silence


Given Beyonce doesn’t talk a lot in interviews and M talks for herself and her guest (and empowered feminist drunk spunky dames everywhere) I feel like they could wheel B’s waxwork into M’s booth and get the same outcome.



Here’s the PR still ready. I’m sure you pop quizzers can give a few good reasons why this photo is impossibly


----------



## Stansy

TC1 said:


> Beyonce hasn't given an interview in about a decade. I can't see her choosing a no-name podcast called Archetypes to break her silence


Was she silent, or was she silenced??


----------



## gracekelly

The article about The Princess of Wales being on a podcast...same old same old.  Throw something out there to see what sticks and in this case make Meghan look like the soul of magnanimity.    The PoW would never do it for a variety of reasons.  Trust being one of them since this is an edited production.  You can make a person look very good or very bad.  More importantly, why should she?  She didn't even speak to MM at the funeral and kept her distance.

An invite like this rates right up there with "we're not going to Sandringham for Christmas."  Well of course you aren't because you weren't invited.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> That was a really sh*tty thing of Perry to do. He is the only person I know of to ever say anything negative about Keanu. By all accounts Keanu is a genuine, caring and lovely person. I guess all those drugs really damaged Perry's brain.


I really liked the whole Friends cast until I read that.  Perry sounds like a jerk.  Keanu does many charitable things that get known well after the fact (unlike our despicable duo) and is known to treat everyone, from stars to homeless people, very kindly.  You don't have to tear others down to build yourself up Matthew.  Don't be a Megain.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I really liked the whole Friends cast until I read that.  Perry sounds like a jerk.  Keanu does many charitable things that get known well after the fact (unlike our despicable duo) and is known to treat everyone, from stars to homeless people, very kindly.  You don't have to tear others down to build yourself up Matthew.  Don't be a Megain.


it seems maybe he has some leftover bad feeling for Keanau from younger days.  but I didn't think he came across like a jerk on the recent interviews.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _I think _he is claiming Keanu used the same, if not more, drugs as River who died of an overdose.  So, MP doesn’t understand why Keanu is alive and River isn’t.  Very immature way of looking at a tragedy.  I watched Mperry’s interview with DSawyer.  Not impressed at all - imo his publishers should not have pushed him to do these interviews.  Clearly, he needs more recovery and time to grow up.
> 
> Hazz and MM have similar immature issues.  Maybe it is a sign of the times?
> 
> ETA - this is just tacky.
> 
> * Perry, 53, caused a social media storm after he wrote in his memoir 'Why is it that the original thinkers like River Phoenix and Heath Ledger die, but Keanu Reeves still walks among us?' *


I read his backtracking comment where he was "just throwing out a name" and likes Keanu.  He "threw out" the same name two different times.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In fact Low says while Andrew is rude, entitled, arrogant and self-absorbed he was actually a good teamleader and looked out for his direct staff.
> 
> *He also yelled and swore at The Queen's press secretary James Roscoe who had politely asked a military person to find The Queen an umbrella when it started raining cats and dogs minutes before she was supposed to arrive, then went straight to said queen and complained Roscoe had had the guts to ask him, the Duke of York, to go fetch him an umbrella (probably after coming to the conclusion she wouldn't appreciate the actual story should it get back to her). When The Queen brought it up all Roscoe had so say was "What do you think, Ma'am? Do you think I asked the Duke of York to fetch an umbrella?" *


Ohmygoodness yes, I had totally forgotten this part!  Roscoe's response was brilliant and I would have never been able to think of it at that moment. Of course, it's likely that anyone who works so closely with the monarch would be diplomatically brilliant.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _I think _he is claiming Keanu used the same, if not more, drugs as River who died of an overdose.  So, MP doesn’t understand why Keanu is alive and River isn’t.  Very immature way of looking at a tragedy.  I watched Mperry’s interview with DSawyer.  Not impressed at all - imo his publishers should not have pushed him to do these interviews.  Clearly, he needs more recovery and time to grow up.
> 
> Hazz and MM have similar immature issues.  Maybe it is a sign of the times?
> 
> ETA - this is just tacky.
> 
> * Perry, 53, caused a social media storm after he wrote in his memoir 'Why is it that the original thinkers like River Phoenix and Heath Ledger die, but Keanu Reeves still walks among us?' *



WTF!


----------



## Cinderlala

jelliedfeels said:


> You are correct, I’m sure a POC stylist may have been brought into the presence of the dreadful Do at some point but they probably don’t have much influence over her staid choices.
> 
> And of course, in this mad fantasy of mine where M not only looks after someone in need but also takes them out in public it’s still unimaginable she’d countenance the possibility the kid might end up with better hair than her
> 
> 
> By spaniel ears I mean when she has the waves which form the Greasy tendrils which move as one like they are attached to an floppy ear (though tufts do occasionally stand on end- again like a dog’s ear)
> EG.
> View attachment 5646300
> 
> View attachment 5646302
> 
> View attachment 5646304
> 
> View attachment 5646309
> 
> View attachment 5646311
> 
> 
> View attachment 5646301
> 
> View attachment 5646312
> 
> Yes this is an enormous insult to the beautiful spaniels of the world but it’s my immediate association.
> 
> Given Beyonce doesn’t talk a lot in interviews and M talks for herself and her guest (and empowered feminist drunk spunky dames everywhere) I feel like they could wheel B’s waxwork into M’s booth and get the same outcome.
> 
> View attachment 5646315
> 
> Here’s the PR still ready. I’m sure you pop quizzers can give a few good reasons why this photo is impossibly


  I was just going to ask what those poor dogs had done to be compared to TW but I see you already addressed that injustice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> You are correct, I’m sure a POC stylist may have been brought into the presence of the dreadful Do at some point but they probably don’t have much influence over her staid choices.
> 
> And of course, in this mad fantasy of mine where M not only looks after someone in need but also takes them out in public it’s still unimaginable she’d countenance the possibility the kid might end up with better hair than her
> 
> 
> By spaniel ears I mean when she has the waves which form the Greasy tendrils which move as one like they are attached to an floppy ear (though tufts do occasionally stand on end- again like a dog’s ear)
> EG.
> View attachment 5646300
> 
> View attachment 5646302



OMG I'll never unsee it again


----------



## oldbag

purseinsanity said:


> QueenofWrapDress said:
> 
> 
> 
> WTF!
> 
> 
> 
> One could then say, this explains why M Perry is still among us. I used to like his character on Friends. I do not like him at all anymore. Oh boy just wait until Harry does his tour!
Click to expand...


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain the Matthew Perry insult to me? I have read it several times and I don't even understand what he was trying to say.


I took it that Matthew Perry was saying that the people he named who died were far more talented than someone like Keanu Reeves. Implying why them? Keanu is a nice guy, but for many years he was considered to be lacking in acting ability. He has become somewhat more respected in recent years.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> In fact Low says while Andrew is rude, entitled, arrogant and self-absorbed he was actually a good teamleader and looked out for his direct staff.
> 
> He also yelled and swore at The Queen's press secretary James Roscoe who had politely asked a military person to find The Queen an umbrella when it started raining cats and dogs minutes before she was supposed to arrive, then went straight to said queen and complained Roscoe had had the guts to ask him, the Duke of York, to go fetch him an umbrella (probably after coming to the conclusion she wouldn't appreciate the actual story should it get back to her). When The Queen brought it up all Roscoe had so say was "What do you think, Ma'am? Do you think I asked the Duke of York to fetch an umbrella?"



I found this bit of the book quite contradictory. Plenty of examples of bad behaviour and few good ones.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> it seems maybe he has some leftover bad feeling for Keanau from younger days.  but I didn't think he came across like a jerk on the recent interviews.


But he looks like hell   The stark difference between him and Aniston shows what clean living can do for you.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain the Matthew Perry insult to me? I have read it several times and I don't even understand what he was trying to say.


My take was that he was saying that River and Heath were artistic geniuses taken too soon, while mediocre Keanu is still with us. But I don't ever recall hearing that Keanu did a lot of drugs, other than maybe weed.


----------



## charlottawill

Another day, another fantasy


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I took it that Matthew Perry was saying that the people he named who died were far more talented than someone like Keanu Reeves. Implying why them? Keanu is a nice guy, but for many years he was considered to be lacking in acting ability. He has become somewhat more respected in recent years.


the flaw in MP’s ‘logic’ matches H&M’s flawed ‘logic’

This is why I support the BRF’s policy of ‘never complain, never explain’.  Too much information is a serious buzzkill. Mystery, there must be some mystery.   H&M already have crossed that line as have many others.


----------



## needlv

So interestingly in Omids new article, the information about the book is all about H.  Sounds like MM is distancing herself from the (inevitable) fallout.

This makes sense since all PR lately has been pushing MM out herself as a Brand.

oh and Omid rewriting history about how M wasn’t accepted….


----------



## oldbag

bag-mania said:


> I took it that Matthew Perry was saying that the people he named who died were far more talented than someone like Keanu Reeves. Implying why them? Keanu is a nice guy, but for many years he was considered to be lacking in acting ability. He has become somewhat more respected in recent years.


Keanu has never been lacking in being a genuine humanitarian. M Perry will never be anyone but Chandler Bing. Being a drug addict does not make you enlightened. He is just one of many who have the world at their feet but just have to 'eff it up. I am sorry for my angry rant but I lost my only sibling some years back and he did everything right. I am sure he would have been more than happy to trade places with the poor me ones who think drugs will give them a higher plane to live on.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> My take was that he was saying that River and Heath were artistic geniuses taken too soon, while mediocre Keanu is still with us. But I don't ever recall hearing that Keanu did a lot of drugs, other than maybe weed.


Naming anyone and wondering why they're still alive, regardless of how mediocre, is rude, IMO,  Many those "geniuses" shouldn't have done so many drugs.  As much as I can't stand TW, I still wouldn't wish she "was just a plane crash away".  I wish she'd disappear off web pages for sure, but not necessarily die to do it.  I don't hate anyone enough for that.  His statement implies hatred to me.  Just my opinion!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> But he looks like hell   The stark difference between him and Aniston shows what clean living can do for you.


She may have good genes (or good surgeons).  She smoked for years, which can age you tremendously.


----------



## purseinsanity

oldbag said:


> Keanu has never been lacking in being a genuine humanitarian. M Perry will never be anyone but Chandler Bing. Being a drug addict does not make you enlightened. *He is just one of many who have the world at their feet but just have to 'eff it up.* I am sorry for my angry rant but I lost my only sibling some years back and he did everything right. I am sure he would have been more than happy to trade places with the poor me ones who think drugs will give them a higher plane to live on.


As did TW.

I'm sorry about your sibling.


----------



## KEG66

charlottawill said:


> But he looks like hell   The stark difference between him and Aniston shows what clean living can do for you.


And a lot of plastic surgery lol


----------



## charlottawill

KEG66 said:


> And a lot of plastic surgery lol


You mean it wasn't just the Smart Water and Aveeno?


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> I took it that Matthew Perry was saying that the people he named who died were far more talented than someone like Keanu Reeves. Implying why them?


I'll answer it for you, Matthew Perry - because they were drug addicts, using the hard stuff.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> She may have good genes (or good surgeons).  She smoked for years, which can age you tremendously.


Excellent surgeons, doctors, derms... and 2 private chefs!


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Excellent surgeons, doctors, derms... and 2 private chefs!


Don't forget personal trainers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

TW will likely divorce and return Hazz to the UK, but not the title…


----------



## oldbag

purseinsanity said:


> As did TW.
> 
> I'm sorry about your sibling.


Thank you


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz, born to be a Spare. 

_Mr Sacerdoti believes the narrative surrounding the couple "is about to shift" to centre around Harry with the release of his book and series five of the Netflix hit series, The Crown.

He said: "*We have generally seen Meghan taking centre stage so the title spare could be turned around on him in relation to that.

"I think it's about to shift, he is about to be the centre of attention again when The Crown and his memoir come out*."_









						Harry's memoir 'Spare' could be about Meghan 'taking centre stage'
					

Prince Harry is due to release his highly-anticipated tell-all memoir on January 10, 2023 with publisher Penguin Random House - promising the book will be full of "raw, unflinching honesty".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> TW will likely divorce and return Hazz to the UK, but not the title…




Just the Duke and Duchess titles.  Leave them as Earl and Countess of Dumbarton.

Edit - of course KC won’t.  It sets a precedent to be used against other royals in the future.


----------



## oldbag

needlv said:


> Just the Duke and Duchess titles.  Leave them as Earl and Countess of Dumbarton.
> 
> Edit - of course KC won’t.  It sets a precedent to be used against other royals in the future.


It is a shame it is not like in the old days when professional mourners could be hired. He would be booked solid. Just rent out that face when you want to ruin the day for anyone around you.


----------



## rose60610

csshopper said:


> There is so much crap being tossed around from the Suckesses it reeks of desperation. Name dropping Jennifer Anniston seemed to start the ramp up a month or so ago, various hits and misses with podcrash guests, now Beyoncé in a very contrived way, followed by Angelina.
> 
> If there’s any truth to it, the last is most telling I think, a major life change with no reference to the husband. IMO she is so diabolical this could be a move to set up a family dynamic in any future divorce (which I don’t see happening now) where she wants sole custody of a Nigerian adoptee, and Haz can have Archie and Lili for a hefty price of course. The adoptee will send her Sugars into raptuous swoons of support for her coming to the aid of a child honoring her supposed ancestry. And following in Angelina’s footsteps she’ll aggressively pursue some UN related work.
> Yet another newly minted Raptor brand, media enhanced, will be launched as the Goddess of Goodness, who will sprinkle her fairy dust on the world.
> 
> Meantime, while they’re inundating media with the usual narcissistic, hypocritical drivel, there’s a madman in Russia with a palsied finger hovering too close to the nuclear button, Ukrainians are fighting to survive, cataclysmic climate events are affecting the globe, inflation is starting to wreak havoc, a strain on natural resources like water and fuel sources is causing worldwide despair and on it goes with local issues as well.
> 
> How does this relate to our subjects? In comparison, they are nothing more than seeping boils oozing pus as they slink through life. Going to take some deep breaths and and try to keep that perspective.  Increasingly I find myself skimming over items when the headlines hint at the same old whining over the same old issues. Haz threatening to sue Bower being one. I hope the Dunderhead Duke does, it will be delicious fun to see Bower wipe the floor with him and we’ll get all the juicy new bits that had previously been left unsaid.



Oooh, that's good!


----------



## jelliedfeels

oldbag said:


> Keanu has never been lacking in being a genuine humanitarian. M Perry will never be anyone but Chandler Bing. Being a drug addict does not make you enlightened. He is just one of many who have the world at their feet but just have to 'eff it up. I am sorry for my angry rant but I lost my only sibling some years back and he did everything right. I am sure he would have been more than happy to trade places with the poor me ones who think drugs will give them a higher plane to live on.


I’m sorry about your brother it is very painful.

I feel like if Perry was fishing for the name of a less talented actor to offer up to the grim reaper his own would have been the most tasteful choice but it’s still a creepy thing to say.

 I can’t stand him, personally, a mediocre talent gets a 1 in a million opportunity and riches and he just stuffs it up his nose? What an idiot.


----------



## Sharont2305

KEG66 said:


> And a lot of plastic surgery lol


Totally off topic but I think out of the three girls, Lisa Kudrow has aged the best, she looks beautiful compared to Jen and Courtney who look fake somehow. 
Anyhoo, back on topic...


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Hazz, born to be a Spare.
> 
> _Mr Sacerdoti believes the narrative surrounding the couple "is about to shift" to centre around Harry with the release of his book and series five of the Netflix hit series, The Crown.
> 
> He said: "*We have generally seen Meghan taking centre stage so the title spare could be turned around on him in relation to that.
> 
> "I think it's about to shift, he is about to be the centre of attention again when The Crown and his memoir come out*."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir 'Spare' could be about Meghan 'taking centre stage'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is due to release his highly-anticipated tell-all memoir on January 10, 2023 with publisher Penguin Random House - promising the book will be full of "raw, unflinching honesty".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Raw, unflinching honesty is not a characteristic associated with the liars. The most honest expression on their faces is anger and mean spiritness.


oldbag said:


> It is a shame it is not like in the old days when professional mourners could be hired. He would be booked solid. Just rent out that face when you want to ruin the day for anyone around you.


Well, he could rent himself out in Asia. We still have professional mourners although it's a dying trade.


jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sorry about your brother it is very painful.
> 
> *I feel like if Perry was fishing for the name of a less talented actor to offer up to the grim reaper his own would have been the most tasteful choice* but it’s still a creepy thing to say.
> 
> I can’t stand him, personally, a mediocre talent gets a 1 in a million opportunity and riches and he just stuffs it up his nose? What an idiot.


ITA


----------



## duna

charlottawill said:


> #Megain is trending. Oof, this is not flattering...



Downright scary....


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> TW will likely divorce and return Hazz to the UK, but not the title…




All of these media questions about H&M line Vine's are just wanting clicks and comments.

Of_ course_ KC should strip them, but one day. First, he needs to totally let them make more fools of themselves (they obviously don't need any help there).

At the moment, these two are bearing the fruit of their lucrative first deals. They are both one-time wonders. The more interesting thing to me is what they'll do when their respective and collective aces have been played.

If they stay together, I think that in the unfolding of time, H&M will be given the option of 'stepping-down' and 'resigning' their titles so as not to lose face. KC will 'bend' to the will of the Gov/people (UK) to save _his_ face so he won't be blamed.

They will most likely remain D&D of Sussex to their lackieys and other servile followers (and foreign press) but publicly no longer be able to trade under their titles.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Hazz, born to be a Spare.
> 
> _Mr Sacerdoti believes the narrative surrounding the couple "is about to shift" to centre around Harry with the release of his book and series five of the Netflix hit series, The Crown.
> 
> He said: "*We have generally seen Meghan taking centre stage so the title spare could be turned around on him in relation to that.
> 
> "I think it's about to shift, he is about to be the centre of attention again when The Crown and his memoir come out*."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry's memoir 'Spare' could be about Meghan 'taking centre stage'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is due to release his highly-anticipated tell-all memoir on January 10, 2023 with publisher Penguin Random House - promising the book will be full of "raw, unflinching honesty".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



Surely M always takes centre stage. Which still leaves him as the Spare.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I posted a similar rumour a few days ago where we all agreed it was a bit unspecific. This is still unspecific but it's Richard Eden posting on Twitter instead of some anonymous source being quoted. I almost don't want to know what it is because I'm just not that stressresistant anymore


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok, a little bit anticlimatic: Lord Lucan and the murder of their nanny...apparently the nanny's son found him in Australia. I thought it was something fresh and new and earthshattering (not that I don't think a murder victim doesn't deserve justice, but it happened in 1974).


----------



## Toby93

For all of us who need a laugh today.....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Totally off topic but I think out of the three girls, Lisa Kudrow has aged the best, she looks beautiful compared to Jen and Courtney who look fake somehow.
> Anyhoo, back on topic...


Lisa is also very smart and has been married to the same guy for a long time - 26 years I think


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> For all of us who need a laugh today.....
> 
> View attachment 5646702


putting markle in that headline is absurd.....unless they call her wedding day the height of her fame


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> For all of us who need a laugh today.....
> 
> View attachment 5646702



Did the other ones get married to the catch of their lives too?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ok, a little bit anticlimatic: Lord Lucan and the murder of their nanny...apparently the nanny's son found him in Australia. I thought it was something fresh and new and earthshattering (not that I don't think a murder victim doesn't deserve justice, but it happened in 1974).


The original Colonel Mustard found with a lead pipe in his car.  The nanny was found in the hall, I think.
A real life Clue game!









						Cluedo cards found in Lord Lucan's car eerily describe a murder
					

A little-known aristocrat called Richard John Bingham, the 7th of Earl of Lucan, would find himself at the centre of one of the world's most enduring murder mysteries during the 1970s.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> For all of us who need a laugh today.....
> 
> View attachment 5646702



I like the way Gwyneth Paltrow, Audrey Hepburn and Meg Ryan are reduced to a byline


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I like the way Gwyneth Paltrow, Audrey Hepburn and Meg Ryan are reduced to a byline


and this is from a "conservative" source?  does she pay for these stories?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> putting markle in that headline is absurd.....unless they call her wedding day the height of her fame



It's not about the truth - it's about the almighty word-search/name-search and Googles ratings. 

But at least we know now, she obviously pays Google to push her named searches


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and this is from a "conservative" source?  does she pay for these stories?



It's so ridiculous, the comparisons are so ridiculous, I'm thinking she probably wrote it


----------



## csshopper

My cynical reading of the headline was that being a Zee list actress was “the height of her fame” and she was included for click bait. No need for any casting directors to call her in the future, she’d already hit her professional ceiling as a Zee.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> My cynical reading of the headline was that being a Zee list actress was “the height of her fame” and she was included for click bait. No need for any casting directors to call her in the future, she’d already hit her professional ceiling as a Zee.


I actually read the article....she talked about how suits lasted seven years....of course that puts her on the level of the others mentioned in the headline.  No.  She is famous for nailing Harry.  Period.


----------



## WingNut

Toby93 said:


> For all of us who need a laugh today.....
> 
> View attachment 5646702


Lol a new low bar has been set for the fame height criterion!


----------



## sdkitty

WingNut said:


> Lol a new low bar has been set for the fame height criterion!


she is famous now - or infamous - but not for her acting


----------



## sdkitty

I wonder if she is trying to take her husband's identity away - calling him H instead of his name?  who does that?


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Totally off topic but I think out of the three girls, Lisa Kudrow has aged the best, she looks beautiful compared to Jen and Courtney who look fake somehow.
> Anyhoo, back on topic...


She has allowed herself to age naturally, but she still looks good. That has always been my goal.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> For all of us who need a laugh today.....
> 
> View attachment 5646702


They do pay for PR…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


>



That stare reminds of a quip from my younger days that went something like this, "A little bird told me all about you and that you should just flock off."


----------



## marietouchet

I have lost it … 
Was there a podcast this week ? Or was that the snooze fest with Sophie Trudeau ? Shows much impact that one had on me … 
Next week is the friend of Beyonce ? Or, is next Tuesday a day off, since the election results will take up all the oxygen, and no one will notice a podcast ??


----------



## MiniMabel

jelliedfeels said:


> That’s awful I’m sorry. I have heard some shady things about Charles specifically including introducing invasive varieties into oyster beds (not very green) and that his office messes around a lot of tenants in Cornwall and Scilly isles.
> 
> For what it’s worth I’m of opinion H&M egregious are just particularly blatant examples of the *wider degeneration into self-obsession, greed, hypocrisy and immorality amongst the whole royal household.*


This is too strong. It's easy to criticise people one doesn't know but I can't believe such a description of Anne, William and Catherine, for example. 

Certainly, it applies to the Malarkey Harkles, though, no doubt about that!


----------



## CarryOn2020

MiniMabel said:


> This is too strong. It's easy to criticise people one doesn't know but I can't believe such a description of Anne, William and Catherine, for example.
> 
> Certainly, it applies to the Malarkey Harkles, though, no doubt about that!


It is easy for me to believe that none of the Royals are paragons of virtue.  They are human, just like the rest of us.


----------



## kemilia

CarryOn2020 said:


> NM has ‘owned’ BG for years.  NM has sent out a coveted Christmas Catalog for years, too.  Always fun to guess what the Dallas elite will buy their loved ones.  People do actually flank down the mega bucks for those gifts.  Is this why Hazz went to the FW rodeo?  Looking for MM’s gift?
> 
> _Neiman Marcus is famous for its outrageous annual Christmas Book catalog, where money is often no object, and the gifts offer the ultimate bragging rights. Every year, the luxury store offers up many ridiculously priced items and a few affordable luxury products we can all enjoy.
> 
> Among the most original and exclusive things in this year's book are: a $333,333 private basketball-court session with one of the most famous players; a $65,000 Paris trip where you customize your fragrance with a renowned perfumer, and a _*$3.2 million rare diamond tiara.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neiman Marcus Christmas Catalog: Extravagant Fantasy Gifts For 2022
> 
> 
> What's in the 2022 Neiman Marcus Christmas book? A private basketball session with Scottie Pippen, a $330k Barbie Maserati, and much more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


My neighbor gets the NM catalog and when she's done she tosses it over to me. I do love looking at all the ridiculous gifts.   A great guilty pleasure to enjoy with a cup of hot cocoa.


----------



## CarryOn2020

kemilia said:


> My neighbor gets the NM catalog and when she's done she tosses it over to me. I do love looking at all the ridiculous gifts.   A great guilty pleasure to enjoy with a cup of hot cocoa.


Paired with Williams-Sonoma’s marshmallows, of course


----------



## jelliedfeels

MiniMabel said:


> This is too strong. It's easy to criticise people one doesn't know but I can't believe such a description of Anne, William and Catherine, for example.
> 
> Certainly, it applies to the Malarkey Harkles, though, no doubt about that!


None of us have met H&M either (to my knowledge) but I think we all believe we’ve got a pretty good read on them. 

I disagree that we don’t know the royals enough to criticise , I am basing my opinion on what’s been made public of their actions:- the arms dealing, the Epstein connection, even Will asking for _another_ royal residence when most of the world is in a financial crisis- I think those are all pretty solid testaments to the characters involved and to me they are not counterbalanced by charitable/figurehead/service  work because that’s their raison d’etre on paper. 

Anne we don’t hear that much about but then she doesn’t seem to have that much power compared to her brothers and I do believe the old saying about power corrupting is very relevant with this family.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Either you all have gotten slow on the draw, or I missed the very serious discussion of the virtues of the tiara MM could replace her loss with in this year’s Neimans Xmas catalog.


----------



## sdkitty

jelliedfeels said:


> None of us have met H&M either (to my knowledge) but I think we all believe we’ve got a pretty good read on them.
> 
> I disagree that we don’t know the royals enough to criticise , I am basing my opinion on what’s been made public of their actions:- the arms dealing, the Epstein connection, even Will asking for _another_ royal residence when most of the world is in a financial crisis- I think those are all pretty solid testaments to the characters involved and to me they are not counterbalanced by charitable/figurehead/service  work because that’s their raison d’etre on paper.
> 
> Anne we don’t hear that much about but then she doesn’t seem to have that much power compared to her brothers and I do believe the old saying about power corrupting is very relevant with this family.


no one is perfect but seems to me Kate comes close to it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

BittyMonkey said:


> Either you all have gotten slow on the draw, or I missed the very serious discussion of the virtues of the tiara MM could replace her loss with in this year’s Neimans Xmas catalog.
> View attachment 5647034


Are they channeling ZedZed in advertising such a beautiful tiara with an ugly hairdo?!


----------



## BittyMonkey

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are they channeling ZedZed in advertising such a beautiful tiara with an ugly hairdo?!


I know! It’s like they don’t know the difference between a chignon and bedhead.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I disagree that we don’t know the royals enough to criticise , I am basing my opinion on what’s been made public of their actions:- the arms dealing, the Epstein connection, *even Will asking for another royal residence when most of the world is in a financial crisis*- I think those are all pretty solid testaments to the characters involved and to me they are not counterbalanced by charitable/figurehead/service  work because that’s their raison d’etre on paper.



You are not wrong, but also, not a single struggling person would have relief if he didn't move. They own the house already, he's not getting any more money for his upkeep regardless (though I guess he just got a massive raise). I personally find it more offensive to have just the one McMansion but being unable to go out in any outfit below 10000 bucks (the ugly abomination of a playsuit being the exception to the rule).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BittyMonkey said:


> Either you all have gotten slow on the draw, or I missed the very serious discussion of the virtues of the tiara MM could replace her loss with in this year’s Neimans Xmas catalog.
> View attachment 5647034



Not a fan of those halo tiaras...the Duke of Westminster used to own (or maybe still owns?) an especially ugly example. But also, I've wanted to ask Hancocks London over on Instagram if they've already had tiara sales in the wake of the coronation


----------



## Maggie Muggins

BittyMonkey said:


> I know! It’s like they don’t know the difference between a chignon and bedhead.


Agree and neither does ZedZed who probably thinks she looks wonderful and avant-garde with her two ugly side tufts.


----------



## BittyMonkey

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not a fan of those halo tiaras...the Duke of Westminster used to own (or maybe still owns?) an especially ugly example. But also, I've wanted to ask Hancocks London over on Instagram if they've already had tiara sales in the wake of the coronation


I really like kokoshnik tiaras.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I do too as long as the height is sensible. The Russian originals are too over the top for me.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Agree and neither does ZedZed who probably thinks she looks wonderful and avant-garde with her two ugly side tufts.


In some circles [ahem], they are called _slut strands_.  Google tells me there is an SS society on the insta.  






						slut strand - Wiktionary
					






					en.m.wiktionary.org


----------



## BittyMonkey

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do too as long as the height is sensible. The Russian originals are too over the top for me.


Hm…trying to think of a time when I would look in the mirror and decide that my tiara is too over the top for this particular event…


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do too as long as the height is sensible. The Russian originals are too over the top for me.


This one, such a beauty 
Of course, the necklace, the earrings, the brooch, most likely several bracelets, the power, the majesty  











						The Romanovs’ Favorite Style of Tiara Is Back on Trend (Seriously)
					

Say it with us now: Kokoshnik.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## BittyMonkey

CarryOn2020 said:


> This one, such a beauty
> Of course, the necklace, the earrings, the brooch, most likely several bracelets, the power, the majesty
> View attachment 5647069
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Romanovs’ Favorite Style of Tiara Is Back on Trend (Seriously)
> 
> 
> Say it with us now: Kokoshnik.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Love that one. I prefer some color though. 

I chose my parents poorly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Of course, the Fife tiara may be more to my liking.



ETA:  _*Composed of nearly 200 carats of diamonds*, this majestic tiara was given to Queen Victoria's granddaughter Princess Louise as a wedding gift from her husband in 1889. It features hundreds of exquisite diamonds ranging from one to ten carats, including a set of beautiful pear-shaped diamonds set on tiny pivots which would have dazzled onlookers when worn. _


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> In some circles [ahem], they are called _*slut strands*_. Google tells me there is an *SS society* on the insta.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slut strand - Wiktionary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wiktionary.org


Should've averted my poor virgin eyes!   But then I wouldn't be so well informed. Also, are we to assume that ZedZed belongs to this sorority?


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> no one is perfect but seems to me Kate comes close to it


I hope that the public's expectation of perfection in everything she does does not take a toll on her over time. I hope she has nights when she watches trashy TV while wearing sweats, eating delicious snacks, and texting with her sister and Mom, like a normal woman her age.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Should've averted my poor virgin eyes!   But then I wouldn't be so well informed. Also, are we to assume that ZedZed belongs to this sorority?


The things I learn here


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, the Fife tiara may be more to my liking.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  _*Composed of nearly 200 carats of diamonds*, this majestic tiara was given to Queen Victoria's granddaughter Princess Louise as a wedding gift from her husband in 1889. It features hundreds of exquisite diamonds ranging from one to ten carats, including a set of beautiful pear-shaped diamonds set on tiny pivots which would have dazzled onlookers when worn. _



Wow! What's going on? Are we having a tiara party today? Is TW getting a tiara? Is she getting anything from QE? By the way, this tiara is stunning!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

kemilia said:


> My neighbor gets the NM catalog and when she's done she tosses it over to me. I do love looking at all the ridiculous gifts.   A great guilty pleasure to enjoy with a cup of hot cocoa.


The NM catalog used to make me feel good just by showing what I saved by not purchasing its items.

Who would buy a Dolce and Gabbana's Refrigerator?


----------



## Chanbal

BittyMonkey said:


> Either you all have gotten slow on the draw, or I missed the very serious discussion of the virtues of the tiara MM could replace her loss with in this year’s Neimans Xmas catalog.
> View attachment 5647034


If the tiara is too much for Hazz, he could give TW the car. She could drive the kids to school after preparing their breakfast or lunch boxes (or whatever she said she does on her podcast).


----------



## Sol Ryan

Chanbal said:


> The NM catalog used to make me feel good just by showing what I saved by not purchasing its items.
> 
> Who would buy a Dolce and Gabbana's Refrigerator?



I have bought the Dolce and Gabbana pasta so I could reuse the packaging… the long spaghetti came wrapped in this really pretty paper… It was at TJ Maxx or Homegoods lol. I figure I’ll use it to decorate my pantry if I can ever afford to redo the kitchen (and get a pantry…) 

I wish I could afford the appliances…. They‘re so soooo stupid expensive and not practical…


----------



## charlottawill

It's simple, she was his personal echo chamber. I'm sure her yachting skills didn't hurt either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> NM has ‘owned’ BG for years.  NM has sent out a coveted Christmas Catalog for years, too.  Always fun to guess what the Dallas elite will buy their loved ones.  People do actually flank down the mega bucks for those gifts.  Is this why Hazz went to the FW rodeo?  Looking for MM’s gift?
> 
> _Neiman Marcus is famous for its outrageous annual Christmas Book catalog, where money is often no object, and the gifts offer the ultimate bragging rights. Every year, the luxury store offers up many ridiculously priced items and a few affordable luxury products we can all enjoy.
> 
> Among the most original and exclusive things in this year's book are: a $333,333 private basketball-court session with one of the most famous players; a $65,000 Paris trip where you customize your fragrance with a renowned perfumer, and a _*$3.2 million rare diamond tiara.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neiman Marcus Christmas Catalog: Extravagant Fantasy Gifts For 2022
> 
> 
> What's in the 2022 Neiman Marcus Christmas book? A private basketball session with Scottie Pippen, a $330k Barbie Maserati, and much more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



But did you see this one? A personal polo experience with Nacho for $295K!!! I was just browsing this year's offerings. 



> https://www.neimanmarcus.com/editor...XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX_XXXXXXXX_Fantasy_Gifts_102522


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> But did you see this one? A personal polo experience with Nacho for $295K!!! I was just browsing this year's offerings.


I am starting up my GoFundMe as we speak and I respectfully ask everyone to pitch in a few bucks. Anyone who wishes to be one of my 11 guests for the experience, let me know.


----------



## xincinsin

Sad that Rolling Stone is also part of the Harkle publicity machine now  

I thought Spare was starting from Diana's death? Conflicting info: now this says it includes his childhood. And yes, they are really trying to push the narrative that Sparry is literate enough to write a book.
_While there are many unauthorized biographies online about Prince Harry and the Royal Family, Spare is the first official memoir from the Duke of Sussex. *Written by the Prince himself*, the book is expected to touch on everything from *his childhood *growing up as part of the Royal Family, to the death of his mother Princess Diana, to his new life in America with wife Meghan Markle and their two kids._

Hedging their bets over whether or not Sparry will do a book tour.
_Other than the cover and publisher’s notes, few other details have been released about Spare, *though the notoriously-guarded Harry may give a few interviews to promote the book.* He and Markle famously sat down with Oprah in a tell-all interview last year, though it’s not clear whether Harry will do the same again this time around for his book._


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I am starting up my GoFundMe as we speak and I respectfully ask everyone to pitch in a few bucks. Anyone who wishes to be one of my 11 guests for the experience, let me know.


Meeeee, meeeee, meeee, please pick meeeeee.


xincinsin said:


> Sad that Rolling Stone is also part of the Harkle publicity machine now
> 
> I thought Spare was starting from Diana's death? Conflicting info: now this says it includes his childhood. And yes, they are really trying to push the narrative that Sparry is literate enough to write a book.
> _While there are many unauthorized biographies online about Prince Harry and the Royal Family, Spare is the first official memoir from the Duke of Sussex. *Written by the Prince himself*, the book is expected to touch on everything from *his childhood *growing up as part of the Royal Family, to the death of his mother Princess Diana, to his new life in America with wife Meghan Markle and their two kids._
> 
> Hedging their bets over whether or not Sparry will do a book tour.
> _Other than the cover and publisher’s notes, few other details have been released about Spare, *though the notoriously-guarded Harry may give a few interviews to promote the book.* He and Markle famously sat down with Oprah in a tell-all interview last year, though it’s not clear whether Harry will do the same again this time around for his book._



We all know SparryHarry is not capable of writing his own book and he will most definitely not give interviews [unless it is for MM’s poddy].  The media needs a reality slap.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> We all know SparryHarry is not capable of writing his own book and he will most definitely not give interviews [unless it is for MM’s poddy].  The media needs a reality slap.


I can totally see him giving an interview.

Host: And now, let's welcome our special guests - the Duke and Duchess of Sussex!
_Cue applause_
Host: So, Harry, may I call you Harry? You just published your autobiography. A riveting read, I must say!
Sparry: Yes.
Zed: We are very pleased that we have found like such resonance with the world like one compassionate act at a time. I told H, that's what I call him, you know. Like I said, I told H....


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Sad that Rolling Stone is also part of the Harkle publicity machine now
> 
> I thought Spare was starting from Diana's death? Conflicting info: now this says it includes his childhood. And yes, they are really trying to push the narrative that Sparry is literate enough to write a book.
> _While there are many unauthorized biographies online about Prince Harry and the Royal Family, Spare is the first official memoir from the Duke of Sussex. *Written by the Prince himself*, the book is expected to touch on everything from *his childhood *growing up as part of the Royal Family, to the death of his mother Princess Diana, to his new life in America with wife Meghan Markle and their two kids._
> 
> Hedging their bets over whether or not Sparry will do a book tour.
> _Other than the cover and publisher’s notes, few other details have been released about Spare, *though the notoriously-guarded Harry may give a few interviews to promote the book.* He and Markle famously sat down with Oprah in a tell-all interview last year, though it’s not clear whether Harry will do the same again this time around for his book._


Who is their new agency? It may be someone with some sway at Rolling Stone.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hmmmm


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> I hope that the public's expectation of perfection in everything she does does not take a toll on her over time. I hope she has nights when she watches trashy TV while wearing sweats, eating delicious snacks, and texting with her sister and Mom, like a normal woman her age.



I think what Catherine has done very well is separate her job from her personal life.  At her engagements, she is dressed impeccably, polite, follows all the protocol etc.

But what do we really know about her life when she is home?  Not much.  We don’t know her favourite colour, candles she likes, or even clothes she lounges around her home in.

 And for that I am grateful.  She has some privacy for herself and the kids, leaves an air of “mystery” around royal life, and isn’t merching like a instagram influencer.

I think she and William have found a good balance…. they do their jobs but don’t really talk about their home life.  And if asked will answer generically/ or rephrase the question.

Meanwhile in California, we know WAY too much about them, the style of their home, the oat lattes, favourite candles etc.  It’s the oversaturation which people now just don’t care (aside from us - the avid watchers - waiting for karma to hit hard…)


----------



## Hermes Zen

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmmm



A user and a loser!!  Makes me mad.


----------



## Mendocino

sdkitty said:


> I actually read the article....she talked about how suits lasted seven years....of course that puts her on the level of the others mentioned in the headline.  No.  She is famous for nailing Harry.  Period.


A slight correction if I may: Suits lasted nine seasons. Katherine Heigl came on board after Patrick J. Adams left after season seven. I was and am a massive Suits fan.


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> But did you see this one? A personal polo experience with Nacho for $295K!!! I was just browsing this year's offerings.


This one baffles me- https://www.neimanmarcus.com/en-gb/...y-and-special-events/holiday-decorations-2022

The photos and videos of the decs  looks like garden centre quality but even if they were exquisite who is going to want to go learn how to decorate before Christmas as their present or go do it after Christmas when they’ve already done it for year? 

Im trying to work out if we have a British equivalent to this catalogue available to public- it is entertaining 


xincinsin said:


> Sad that Rolling Stone is also part of the Harkle publicity machine now
> 
> I thought Spare was starting from Diana's death? Conflicting info: now this says it includes his childhood. And yes, they are really trying to push the narrative that Sparry is literate enough to write a book.
> _While there are many unauthorized biographies online about Prince Harry and the Royal Family, Spare is the first official memoir from the Duke of Sussex. *Written by the Prince himself*, the book is expected to touch on everything from *his childhood *growing up as part of the Royal Family, to the death of his mother Princess Diana, to his new life in America with wife Meghan Markle and their two kids._
> 
> Hedging their bets over whether or not Sparry will do a book tour.
> _Other than the cover and publisher’s notes, few other details have been released about Spare, *though the notoriously-guarded Harry may give a few interviews to promote the book.* He and Markle famously sat down with Oprah in a tell-all interview last year, though it’s not clear whether Harry will do the same again this time around for his book._


I’m loving this Sparry nickname - very funny. 
Notoriously guarded makes it sound like he’s in with the mafia. I would love to see Paulie and Christopher as his bumbling bodyguards & the McMansion get tapped by FBI


----------



## jelliedfeels

T


needlv said:


> I think what Catherine has done very well is separate her job from her personal life.  At her engagements, she is dressed impeccably, polite, follows all the protocol etc.
> 
> But what do we really know about her life when she is home?  Not much.  We don’t know her favourite colour, candles she likes, or even clothes she lounges around her home in.
> 
> And for that I am grateful.  She has some privacy for herself and the kids, leaves an air of “mystery” around royal life, and isn’t merching like a instagram influencer.
> 
> I think she and William have found a good balance…. they do their jobs but don’t really talk about their home life.  And if asked will answer generically/ or rephrase the question.
> 
> Meanwhile in California, we know WAY too much about them, the style of their home, the oat lattes, favourite candles etc.  It’s the oversaturation which people now just don’t care (aside from us - the avid watchers - waiting for karma to hit hard…)


Catherine’s personal image is very well maintained and she  is one of the only ones who consistently does a good job at being a figurehead. I think Will should be thanking his lucky stars everyday he married someone with such poise rather than going down the same crunchy path as his brother. However, the idea that she is close to perfect seems a bit of an anathema to me as she doesn’t really do or stand for much IMO. She just supports popular causes, speaks  pleasantries and does photo ops like any other ‘philanthropist.’

I would argue that if you have a permanent source of public money and private wealth you don’t need to hawk candles on Insta and actually  in fact  that the royal family merchandises themselves all the time just in a different way-

There’s a royal souvenirs/merch website -





						Official Royal Gifts and Souvenirs - Royal Collection Shop
					

Royal shop for gifts, collections and commemorative souvenirs commissioned by Buckingham Palace.  Buy Online.  Delivered worldwide.




					www.royalcollectionshop.co.uk
				




There is Duchy Originals the food brand so you too can buy products endorsed by Charles. 

Then there is the whole system of royal warrants which is when a company prints the family crest on their product as an endorsement - so British shoppers and people buying British products internationally can be informed on what products the royals apparently use-  in fact they even have a favoured candle brand  


Then of course there is the fact both our money and our stamps carry images of the monarch and occasionally other royals. (Though I believe that’s set to change with stamps.)

Finally the images of royal family members is trademarked


			https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media/royal_arms_blue_booklet20152.pdf
		

so companies can’t produce any of this kind of merchandise without their sign off ….





In a way just printing their images on saleable products as cross promotion looks a lot like the blueprint for influencer merchandising to me.

Of course this is exactly what H&M try to do too though of course  they aren’t as successful as burying the lead as the BRF has been.


----------



## jelliedfeels

BittyMonkey said:


> Either you all have gotten slow on the draw, or I missed the very serious discussion of the virtues of the tiara MM could replace her loss with in this year’s Neimans Xmas catalog.
> View attachment 5647034


Yeah  the way her hair is standing on end reminds me of…


It is a bit of a spaniel ear as well. 

What’s really bugging me is those messy eyebrows-  nothing wrong with a prominent brow line, but those straggly hairs just look unkempt. A few nasty wisps does not  a Frida Kahlo make. It’s like when a guy swears he’s got a beard and he’s just got 5 awful stragglers hanging off his top lip.



BittyMonkey said:


> Hm…trying to think of a time when I would look in the mirror and decide that my tiara is too over the top for this particular event…


Well naturally you don’t want to overdo it - that’s why one needs a whole wardrobe of them. Imagine if you wore a Ruby tiara to the fire station and it clashed?! Quelle Horreur!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here. Fun to work with. Close-knit team. Little regard for personal comfort, budget airline instead of private jet. POSITIVE ATTITUDE.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Of course, the Fife tiara may be more to my liking.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  _*Composed of nearly 200 carats of diamonds*, this majestic tiara was given to Queen Victoria's granddaughter Princess Louise as a wedding gift from her husband in 1889. It features hundreds of exquisite diamonds ranging from one to ten carats, including a set of beautiful pear-shaped diamonds set on tiny pivots which would have dazzled onlookers when worn. _




This might just be my favourite tiara ever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> But did you see this one? A personal polo experience with Nacho for $295K!!! I was just browsing this year's offerings.



And I thought I was overdoing it when I bought myself a 100 bucks lesson with my old trainer after 10+ years of not riding and planned to get a set of 10 or so. Then I got the infected tooth/jaw and had to have surgery and kind of never went back and now they have a horse plague and are closed for the public until it's resolved.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> What’s really bugging me is those messy eyebrows-  nothing wrong with a prominent brow line, but those straggly hairs just look unkempt. A few nasty wisps does not  a Frida Kahlo make. It’s like when a guy swears he’s got a beard and he’s just got 5 awful stragglers hanging off his top lip.



OMG yes. I don't get bad eyebrows at all, they make or break the face. I learned to do my own after the one person I trusted moved her studio from one end of the city to the other, which made the drive 1 hour instead of 30 mins for me.

Yesterday, for the first time ever - using a new wax that came out very liquid and went everywhere - I managed to make not one, but two nicks into my right brow. And you know how it is, wax brows, get the first stray hairs three days after. Wax a hole into a brow and it will take months to grow out.


----------



## Chanbal

Sol Ryan said:


> I have bought the Dolce and Gabbana pasta so I could reuse the packaging… the long spaghetti came wrapped in this really pretty paper… It was at TJ Maxx or Homegoods lol. I figure I’ll use it to decorate my pantry if I can ever afford to redo the kitchen (and get a pantry…)
> 
> I wish I could afford the appliances…. They‘re so soooo stupid expensive and not practical…


I often get the NM Panettone, they usually come in pretty boxes. Last year they came in Vogue boxes, which are great to store hats. However, I can't see myself paying 50K for a single-door Dolce Gabbana refrigerator. The appliances are pretty, and probably will look good in the Montecito Mansion together with the Barbie car.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> But did you see this one? A personal polo experience with Nacho for $295K!!! I was just browsing this year's offerings.


Who would pay 300K for a polo experience with Nacho? Does it include a photo-op with Hazz and TW?

I wonder if he/she will be able to enjoy the 'gift' without being asked to make a donation to ArchW or to any other comparable foundation. Does Nacho also have a non-profit foundation? I'm probably becoming too suspicious of the Harkles' friends/acquaintances.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

A couple of interesting posts…


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmmm



Ok I have a wild imagination …. I think I have this one figured out … allowance for Doria Ragland
1. WHY? That is obvious - so she does not go to the press. Bet she has a tale to tell. DR has NEVER been interviewed …
2. WHEN? It started before wedding, so, that DR would not endanger the wedding. It continues because MM has something to hide - that could jeopardize her standing in business deals, divorce, custody issues
3. HOW? MM set up an LLC for DR - some sort of wellness gig, that has no obvious clients , services etc . Setting up an LLC takes time and money … it was done for a reason
Archewell pays the LLC for wellness services rendered eg babysitting, and gets to deduct the allowance as a business expense


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This might just be my favourite tiara ever.


The briolettes , tear drops, are hanging and shimmer when worn , stunning effect, dainty while the kokoshniks have a magnificent solid  wall of diamonds look

i don’t think it is in the queen’s personal collection, the Duchess of Fife was a Queen Victoria grandaughter, so the tiara has a royal history, it was sold by the Fife family and bought back by the nation rather than the Queen herself 

i bet this is one that was on Mm’s short list of must-wear tiaras


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Two (or three?) more tidbits via Low: 

1. Invictus was indeed Harry's idea after he saw something similar in the US. Obviously he had a team to work on it, but he came up with wanting to do this.

2. When on royal tour pre-Ghoul, each day was finished with a shared meal and drinks, and the more interesting part: Harry never drank alcohol while on royal tour. Nobody with a serious alcohol problem can just go off it for days and weeks at a time just because. So...why did the Ghoul feel the need to feed the press she made Harry stop drinking and the BRF was oh so grateful to her?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Sad that Rolling Stone is also part of the Harkle publicity machine now
> 
> I thought Spare was starting from Diana's death? Conflicting info: now this says it includes his childhood. And yes, they are really trying to push the narrative that Sparry is literate enough to write a book.
> _While there are many unauthorized biographies online about Prince Harry and the Royal Family, Spare is the first official memoir from the Duke of Sussex. *Written by the Prince himself*, the book is expected to touch on everything from *his childhood *growing up as part of the Royal Family, to the death of his mother Princess Diana, to his new life in America with wife Meghan Markle and their two kids._
> 
> Hedging their bets over whether or not Sparry will do a book tour.
> _Other than the cover and publisher’s notes, few other details have been released about Spare, *though the notoriously-guarded Harry may give a few interviews to promote the book.* He and Markle famously sat down with Oprah in a tell-all interview last year, though it’s not clear whether Harry will do the same again this time around for his book._



How the Stone has fallen (and full of moss)


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hmmmm




Harry was?

No we (UK public) was going to pay Harry and ZedZed, he was going to put her through expenses 

Expenses for a hanger-on, nepotism at it's most glaring. So this is what women's liberation fought for


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The briolettes , tear drops, are hanging and shimmer when worn , stunning effect, dainty while the kokoshniks have a magnificent solid  wall of diamonds look
> 
> i don’t think it is in the queen’s personal collection, the Duchess of Fife was a Queen Victoria grandaughter, so the tiara has a royal history, it was sold by the Fife family and bought back by the nation rather than the Queen herself
> 
> i bet this is one that was on Mm’s short list of must-wear tiaras



I think they didn't sell it per se but offered it to the UK for settling inheritance tax when the 3. Duke of Fife died in 2015.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Ok I have a wild imagination …. I think I have this one figured out … allowance for Doria Ragland
> 1. WHY? That is obvious - so she does not go to the press. Bet she has a tale to tell. DR has NEVER been interviewed …
> 2. WHEN? It started before wedding, so, that DR would not endanger the wedding. It continues because MM has something to hide - that could jeopardize her standing in business deals, divorce, custody issues
> 3. HOW? MM set up an LLC for DR - some sort of wellness gig, that has no obvious clients , services etc . Setting up an LLC takes time and money … it was done for a reason
> Archewell pays the LLC for wellness services rendered eg babysitting, and gets to deduct the allowance as a business expense


By paying her off, Zed also gets to trot her out now and then to reinforce WOC credentials. If Zed ever adopts a child from Africa, that child will also become part of her WOC arsenal. Call me cynical, but Doria isn't going to be around forever, so Zed needs a back-up POC to flash around. If she had really embraced her black identity, she wouldn't have Markled her Ragland relatives.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Annawakes

What does the CV actually say?


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Ahh, I did not know that. Thanks.


He even wore his medals while they traipsed around the cemetery. THAT really fried me, it was such an obvious photo-op that TW orchestrated.


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> The NM catalog used to make me feel good just by showing what I saved by not purchasing its items.
> 
> Who would buy a Dolce and Gabbana's Refrigerator?


Oooh--spoiler alert please!  I have not seen the catalog yet and maybe that fridge is just what my tiny little kitchen needs.

Or maybe not.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Who would pay 300K for a polo experience with Nacho? Does it include a photo-op with Hazz and TW?
> 
> I wonder if he/she will be able to enjoy the 'gift' without being asked to make a donation to ArchW or to any other comparable foundation. Does Nacho also have a non-profit foundation? I'm probably becoming too suspicious of the Harkles' friends/acquaintances.


I thought the same thing. It says in the description that NM will donate 10k to a charity, forget the name but it is not Archewell.


----------



## kemilia

Sol Ryan said:


> I have bought the Dolce and Gabbana pasta so I could reuse the packaging… the long spaghetti came wrapped in this really pretty paper… It was at TJ Maxx or Homegoods lol. I figure I’ll use it to decorate my pantry if I can ever afford to redo the kitchen (and get a pantry…)
> 
> I wish I could afford the appliances…. They‘re so soooo stupid expensive and not practical…


I have not seen D&G pasta at my Home Goods yet but I always make a a beeline to the sauce/pasta shelves and get very "how dare you-like" feeling when I see that others have discovered my "special" place (uh, those are all mine). 

Ok so this is really NOT off-topic--I saw some teas tins with the awful duo's wedding pic on them. Did not put those in my cart for sure. Kinda creepy seeing pics of those 2 out in boring suburbia.


----------



## redney

kemilia said:


> Oooh--spoiler alert please!  I have not seen the catalog yet and maybe that fridge is just what my tiny little kitchen needs.
> 
> Or maybe not.


Just $50,000 (and triple points!) Also - read the reviews. 








						Smeg Dolce Gabbana x SMEG Giuseppe Garibaldi: The Hero of Two Worlds Refrigerator
					

Get free shipping on Smeg Dolce Gabbana x SMEG Giuseppe Garibaldi: The Hero of Two Worlds Refrigerator at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.




					www.neimanmarcus.com


----------



## redney

And if you dislike the colorway on NM's site, there's this one at Williams Sonoma





						Smeg Jousting Paladins Dolce & Gabbana Refrigerator | Williams Sonoma
					






					www.williams-sonoma.com


----------



## Swanky

Swanky said:


> Hi!
> A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….



We’re getting complaints everyday of how off topic this thread is, I don’t have time to sift through the posts and delete one by one as I don’t read this thread. Please stay on topic, a little OT is normal but it’s a persistent complaint in this thread so please be more cognizant.


----------



## rose60610

Now that the holiday season is nearly here, it's time for Claw to brag about how generous she and Haz are. How many Starbucks cards, cakes and packets of junk food this time? It's 50-50 on Thanksgiving whether Claw lists all the things she's thankful for, or uses the day to spew how horrible this country is (the one where she signed a 150 million dollar contract with Netflix and a 30 million dollar with Spotify, and where they got tens of millions for memoir advances). Yup, despite all that she's still a victim and we should feel sorry for her in her 19 bathroom mansion while we can enjoy our Butterball turkeys with our friends and families without pouting.


----------



## bag-mania

I do not believe Doria knows any deep dark secrets and they are supporting her so she keeps quiet. It seems more like she is on the payroll. She provides backup when Meghan needs to show she is capable of having normal family interactions. Those two are cheap asses. Whatever they are paying her is probably more than she was used to but Doria certainly isn’t living the high life.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I do not believe Doria knows any deep dark secrets and they are supporting her so she keeps quiet. It seems more like she is on the payroll. She provides backup when Meghan needs to show she is capable of having normal family interactions. Those two are cheap asses. Whatever they are paying her is probably more than she was used to but Doria certainly isn’t living the high life.


IDK - depends on what you call the high life.  she was a yoga instructor (or former yoga instructor) and now she's a CEO.  Compared to her daughter, she probably lives modestly but compared to the average person, she probably lives pretty well.


----------



## Vintage Leather

BittyMonkey said:


> Either you all have gotten slow on the draw, or I missed the very serious discussion of the virtues of the tiara MM could replace her loss with in this year’s Neimans Xmas catalog.
> View attachment 5647034


Fun fact - if anyone is stupid enough to buy this indistinguished example of Cartier’s most prolific period of tiara manufacturing, it will become the second most expensive tiara in the world. 

The Cartier Halo, that Kate wore to her wedding is roughly appraised at 1.5 mil, and over half the value is from the royal associations and provinance. Cartier tiaras have reached roughly a half-mil at auction, and that’s the high value. 

But this tiara is appraised at more than the Elizabeth Taylor/Mike Todd tiara that Ms Taylor wore to the  Oscars (because she was his queen and needed a crown )

The only tiara more valuable will be the Chaumet created Henckel von Donnersmarck tiara, with its 500 carats of emeralds and it’s ownership by Empress Eugenie of France (the lady who lifted Cartier from obscurity (literally, they were making sterling silver trinkets for other jewelers to sell) as well as making Louis Vuitton a household name)

Really, it might be a fitting crown for Meagain, because the bulk of its worth is in the convenience.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And I thought I was overdoing it when I bought myself a 100 bucks lesson with my old trainer after 10+ years of not riding and planned to get a set of 10 or so. Then I got the infected tooth/jaw and had to have surgery and kind of never went back and now they have a horse plague and are closed for the public until it's resolved.


I hope you can go back when they reopen.

We currently have a lottery in the US that is approaching $2 billion. I haven’t been on the back of a horse in years, but if I win I’m going to dust off my old boots and treat myself to the Nacho experience.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> IDK - depends on what you call the high life.  she was a yoga instructor (or former yoga instructor) and now she's a CEO.  Compared to her daughter, she probably lives modestly but compared to the average person, she probably lives pretty well.


She’s the CEO of how many employees though? If it’s a shell corporation it could be just her. Or maybe her and one or two others. Doria is an enigma because the press isn’t interested in her (unless she’s with Meghan).


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I have worked at a national cemetery placing flags on veterans' graves for Memorial Day. To do this you have to walk around the graves and near the markers. What did they do wrong? They appear to be walking respectfully between the rows. That's OK as far as I know.





purseinsanity said:


> It was offensive because it was a photo op.  Nothing genuine about it.  They did it because the Queen didn't allow a wreath from him put down on Remembrance Day, IIRC.





kemilia said:


> He even wore his medals while they traipsed around the cemetery. THAT really fried me, it was such an obvious photo-op that TW orchestrated.


I read that the wreaths are placed by the BRF on behalf of the country and the armed forces, but Handbag wanted a wreath placed in his own name, so his request was turned down and the Harkles staged their own ceremony. I'm still figuring out the ins and outs of the poppy wreaths.








						Wreath presented by Prince Harry removed from Poppy Factory
					

A £1,000 Remembrance Day wreath once laid by Prince Harry has been removed from display from the Poppy Factory in Richmond, southwest London.




					www.google.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This might just be my favourite tiara ever.


I call dibs on this one because it matches my pear shaped engagement ring. I am willing to lend it out, however. Angela, Kate and Camilla are OK with it.


----------



## gracekelly

Magazines have been in trouble for a long time. They are trying desperately to hold on and are trying to increase their audience. One way to do that is to give out awards to people in popular culture. Obviously Meghan’s people have bought her awards and the desperate media has sold it self to her. None of these awards can be taken seriously. Real people who do good things are rarely acknowledged on a grand scale because that is not why they do it. They leave the glory to the undeserving glory seekers and prefer to be in the background.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She’s the CEO of how many employees though? If it’s a shell corporation it could be just her. Or maybe her and one or two others. Doria is an enigma because the press isn’t interested in her (unless she’s with Meghan).



I will say I do appreciate that Doria is quiet whatever her motives are. The Markles, even if they do have a point, are entirely too annoying.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Magazines have been in trouble for a long time. They are trying desperately to hold on and are trying to increase their audience. One way to do that is to give out awards to people in popular culture. Obviously Meghan’s people have bought her awards and the desperate media has sold it self to her. None of these awards can be taken seriously. Real people who do good things are rarely acknowledged on a grand scale because that is not why they do it. They leave the glory to the undeserving glory seekers and prefer to be in the background.


McKenzie Scott seems like a good person


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I will say I do appreciate that Doria is quiet whatever her motives are. The Markles, even if they do have a point, are entirely too annoying.


There are now TV ads about applying for stimulus money if you had 4 employees with w2’s between 2020 and 2021. Would it be an infuriating chuckle if the Sussex tried for that?  Given reports, they had more than 4.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> A couple of interesting posts…




I'm thinking the whole "Harry is going to eviscerate the entire BRF in his ghost-written memoir" is just a PR ploy to build up pre-release buzz and pre-sales. Maybe he doesn't throw his family under the bus entirely because he knows he would be cut off, his titles possibly stripped, no titles for the children, and so forth.  That would basically strip his money earning potential from him for basically the rest of his life.  There would be no going back.  He may not be that stupid.  

Of course, just the rumors about what's in the book are also incredibly damaging to his family relationships long term.  They don't know what he's written and have had to wait to see. So, even if he goes easy on people individually this time, none of them know what he might do or say next year or 5 years from now, so they would be right to carefully keep their distance from him in the future.  He's going to continue to be snubbed and frozen out to a great extent which, in turn, might cause him to lash out down the road.


----------



## Chanbal

redney said:


> Just $50,000 (and triple points!) Also - read the reviews.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Smeg Dolce Gabbana x SMEG Giuseppe Garibaldi: The Hero of Two Worlds Refrigerator
> 
> 
> Get free shipping on Smeg Dolce Gabbana x SMEG Giuseppe Garibaldi: The Hero of Two Worlds Refrigerator at Neiman Marcus. Shop the latest luxury fashions from top designers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.neimanmarcus.com


Yep. There is one in debt and can’t afford the food to put in it, but the one that transformed the refrigerator in a fish tank takes the cake imo.

Though, I think the refrigerator would look great in TW's room '_with a stripper pole_'…


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I'm thinking the whole "Harry is going to eviscerate the entire BRF in his ghost-written memoir" is just a PR ploy to build up pre-release buzz and pre-sales. Maybe he doesn't throw his family under the bus entirely because he knows he would be cut off, his titles possibly stripped, no titles for the children, and so forth.  That would basically strip his money earning potential from him for basically the rest of his life.  There would be no going back.  He may not be that stupid.
> 
> Of course, just the rumors about what's in the book are also incredibly damaging to his family relationships long term.  They don't know what he's written and have had to wait to see. So, even if he goes easy on people individually this time, none of them know what he might do or say next year or 5 years from now, so they would be right to carefully keep their distance from him in the future.  He's going to continue to be snubbed and frozen out to a great extent which, in turn, might cause him to lash out down the road.


Could be but the problem is that reviewers will state right away that he didn’t throw them under the bus and that it was all hype. People won’t buy the book then.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> McKenzie Scott seems like a good person


Yes. She is a very public person thanks to the ex. Don’t think she is actively seeking PR.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> There are now TV ads about applying for stimulus money if you had 4 employees with w2’s between 2020 and 2021. Would it be an infuriating chuckle if the Sussex tried for that?  Given reports, they had more than 4.


Oh, I'm sure they have, those 2 know how to grift.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Now that the holiday season is nearly here, it's time for Claw to brag about how generous she and Haz are. *How many Starbucks cards, cakes and packets of junk food this time?* It's 50-50 on Thanksgiving whether Claw lists all the things she's thankful for, or uses the day to spew how horrible this country is (the one where she signed a 150 million dollar contract with Netflix and a 30 million dollar with Spotify, and where they got tens of millions for memoir advances). Yup, despite all that she's still a victim and we should feel sorry for her in her 19 bathroom mansion while we can enjoy our Butterball turkeys with our friends and families without pouting.


Nope, this time she will offer computer stands as holiday gifts.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Could be but the problem is that reviewers will state right away that he didn’t throw them under the bus and that it was all hype. People won’t buy the book then.


If reviews like that come you will be able to hear the sound of hundreds of thousands of pre-orders being canceled.


----------



## EmilyM11

bag-mania said:


> She’s the CEO of how many employees though? If it’s a shell corporation it could be just her. Or maybe her and one or two others. Doria is an enigma because the press isn’t interested in her (unless she’s with Meghan).


Agree with you. Titles are overinflated, in marketing many people are eg. directors (to direct like 2-3 other ppl). My friend is CEO... of a small ecommerce, generating $60k turnaround monthly .
I also believe she doesn't know Meghan's secrets (why would she? She took off for many years so hard to imagine Megs sharing embarrassing secrets with her). Probably they a. didn't need another parent running to the press for a few bucks b. Doria supports the WOC narrative c. maybe she needed A parent by her side then and dad wasn't ...how to call it...presentable (not offending her dad here, just emulating her mindset).


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I hope you can go back when they reopen.
> 
> We currently have a lottery in the US that is approaching *$2 billion*. I haven’t been on the back of a horse in years, but if I win I’m going to dust off my old boots and treat myself to the Nacho experience.


In that case, I bet the Nacho experience will come with an invitation to a certain podcast.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

marietouchet said:


> Ok I have a wild imagination …. I think I have this one figured out … allowance for Doria Ragland
> 1. WHY? That is obvious - so she does not go to the press. Bet she has a tale to tell. DR has NEVER been interviewed …
> 2. WHEN? It started before wedding, so, that DR would not endanger the wedding. It continues because MM has something to hide - that could jeopardize her standing in business deals, divorce, custody issues
> 3. HOW? MM set up an LLC for DR - some sort of wellness gig, that has no obvious clients , services etc . *Setting up an LLC takes time and money *… it was done for a reason
> Archewell pays the LLC for wellness services rendered eg babysitting, and gets to deduct the allowance as a business expense


I set up an LLC for my small business.   It is quick, easy and not expensive.   I was the sole proprietor.   One reason to do it is so your business has its own tax ID and you aren't passing out your Social Security Number to everyone.   My daughter did the same for the art that she sells.  There is nothing nefarious about having an LLC in and of itself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Yep. There is one in debt and can’t afford the food to put in it, but the one that transformed the refrigerator in a fish tank takes the cake imo.
> 
> Though, I think the refrigerator would look great in TW's room '_with a stripper pole_'…



I love the vintage charm of the Smegs, but I'd need like three to accomodate my food storage needs. They are so small. Also, the D&G design causes me eye cancer.


----------



## csshopper

It’s interesting it’s never appeared any of the Ragland family have sought to capitalize on their Doria and MeMeMe connection . Doesn’t appear to be any attempt in either direction. Makes me wonder what some of the gaps in Doria’s history might include. The Raglands may be relieved.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yes. She is a very public person thanks to the ex. Don’t think she is actively seeking PR.


no, I don't think she is an attention seeker.  and she gives huge donations to worthy causes


----------



## needlv




----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


>



1. H&M are desperate.
2. Hazzie looks wimpy compared to say baseball players.  Those guys bring the _guns _and the _abs and the dance. _Need I say more?
_


_

3. Maybe the Brits like(d?) Hazzie’s look, but, here in the USA, we expect better - much better.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There was a time Harry respected his grandmother greatly. This is about the short Invictus clip that included the O's. Apparently when they heard what Harry was setting up they texted him that clip of themselves and he wanted to answer accordingly. The Queen had fun BTW.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> They do pay for PR…



They're so transparent, it's nauseating.


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Hedging their bets over whether or not Sparry will do a book tour.  _Other than the cover and publisher’s notes, few other details have been released about Spare, *though the notoriously-guarded Harry may give a few interviews to promote the book.* He and Markle famously sat down with Oprah in a tell-all interview last year, though it’s not clear whether Harry will do the same again this time around for his book._


"Notoriously guarded Harry"?!!?  He's had oral diarrhea for over two years now!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




Well, why is it? Maybe I don't have much fantasy, but I can't see a single reason how that would benefit them. Like, who cares.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> "Notoriously guarded Harry"?!!?  He's had oral diarrhea for over two years now!



Maybe with notoriously guarded they mean kept on a short leash by Ghoul.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


>



he is just not lustworthy


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, why is it? Maybe I don't have much fantasy, but I can't see a single reason how that would benefit them. Like, who cares.


Maybe because there might be less commercial interest in a sad sack, disheveled, seethingly angry, dense as a brick, blitheringly incoherent communicator,  completely emasculated by an overbearing manipulative beech who is always attached like a barnacle than in a smiling, well groomed and spoken man who can act independently because he still has his balls in tact?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> 1. H&M are desperate.
> 2. Hazzie looks wimpy compared to say baseball players.  Those guys bring the _guns _and the _abs and the dance. _Need I say more?
> _
> View attachment 5647621
> View attachment 5647622
> _
> 
> 3. Maybe the Brits like(d?) Hazzie’s look, but, here in the USA, we expect better - much better.


The BLG explains, it's all about TW!


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> he is just not lustworthy


He use to look better BTW (before TW).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if TW saw this one.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm finally finishing up Courtiers, and I'm just starting the last three chapters on the Troublesome Two. I am stunned that Low reveals that just days after the forced confirmation of the relationship - you know, where she threatened to break up with him if he didn't put out said statement, which BTW made Buckingham Palace and Clarence House very unhappy - she was already inserting herselfs into conversations and discussions with Kensington Palace. The exact words Low chose were "Those fraught conversations between Harry and Meghan and Kensington Palace staff took place *just days after the couple's relationship became public knowledge*. They weren't even engaged yet, let alone married. Things would later get a lot worse." 

WTF is wrong with her. And what was wrong with Harry to let her.


----------



## Chanbal

That can't be true, can it?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The BLG explains, it's all about TW!



"sad cauliflower"


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm finally finishing up Courtiers, and I'm just starting the last three chapters on the Troublesome Two. I am stunned that Low reveals that just days after the forced confirmation of the relationship - you know, where she threatened to break up with him if he didn't put out said statement, which BTW made Buckingham Palace and Clarence House very unhappy - she was already inserting herselfs into conversations and discussions with Kensington Palace. The exact words Low chose were "Those fraught conversations between Harry and Meghan and Kensington Palace staff took place *just days after the couple's relationship became public knowledge*. They weren't even engaged yet, let alone married. Things would later get a lot worse."
> 
> WTF is wrong with her. And what was wrong with Harry to let her.


Repeat after me, he was c*ntstruck. He is apparently a weak and easily manipulated person.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Let the madness begin 

That Vanity Fair piece where she spoke at length about her "great love story"? She hated it and threw epic tantrums because the story was about Harry and not about her. This chick is nuts.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> That can't be true, can it?




I don't know. I have a hard time believing they faked introducing Archie to The Queen and she went along with a huge deception of the public. There were pictures released after all.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Miguel Head, William's private secretary, spoke to Ghoul shortly before the wedding. He told her there was no need to approach her new role in a set way, and she wouldn't have to be straitjacketed.

If only he had known how wrong he was, a straitjacket is exactly what this nutjob needs. And a gag.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> "sad cauliflower"


This might explain the new PR tactic of Hazz being "lustworthy"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also it was exactly as we had assumed: nobody told her to keep working because there was not enough money to support her, ever. They offered her to keep working if she wanted to as a goody, mentioning William as an example of a senior royal who had held a paying job.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> He use to look better BTW (before TW).



As I look at these photoshopped photos, now I can see his snarky side -the anger, the irritation, the hostility, the arrogance - it is all there, in his eyes, always has been.  Imo it comes from being told from day 1 how special he is.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. I have a hard time believing they faked introducing Archie to The Queen and she went along with a huge deception of the public. There were pictures released after all.


The kids are listed on the line of succession, they must be real. However, it's believable that the parents (or their people) are spreading misinformation about them. I'm still intrigued by one of Tom Bower's observations about having QE looking at a shawl. What did he mean by that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She was spoken to BEFORE THE WEDDING about her treatment of Kensington Palace staff. BEFORE THE WEDDING. That's when she said "It's not my job to coddle people." She really thought she had her hens in the co-op, didn't she.


----------



## marietouchet

Redbirdhermes said:


> I set up an LLC for my small business.   It is quick, easy and not expensive.   I was the sole proprietor.   One reason to do it is so your business has its own tax ID and you aren't passing out your Social Security Number to everyone.   My daughter did the same for the art that she sells.  There is nothing nefarious about having an LLC in and of itself.


But MM did not set up the LLC herself, she had Beverly Hills priced lawyers do it for her
Agree, nothing wrong with having LLCs, it is just another entity for which one does a tax return, ex if DR has an LLC, then she/MM/paid accountant has to do the return for the LLC, then DR/accountant has to do a personal return citing income from LLC
My point being ... someone is likely paying (exorbitant?) fees for an accountant which goes to MM&H's burn rate for money


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There was a time Harry respected his grandmother greatly. This is about the short Invictus clip that included the O's. Apparently when they heard what Harry was setting up they texted him that clip of themselves and he wanted to answer accordingly. The Queen had fun BTW.
> 
> View attachment 5647632


And that's the Harry that everyone liked and thought was fun.  No one recognizes this scowling guy who has zero sense of humor.  The Courtiers book says that he was paranoid about the media before he met TW, but he was still able to have fun.  Even his staff gave the marriage 5 years. 

No sympathy for him though, the minute he lied on national TV.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Low dedicates several pages to the blood diamonds. So much lies and deception out of sheer greed. Ew.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Even his staff gave the marriage 5 years.


That has been my prediction all along. But their five year anniversary is two weeks after the coronation, which brings us back to the question, will they split before or after?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> That has been my prediction all along. But their five year anniversary is two weeks after the coronation, which brings us back to the question, will they split before or after?



Didn't you even say "Five years, two kids", or was that someone else?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> That has been my prediction all along. But their five year anniversary is two weeks after the coronation, which brings us back to the question, will they split before or after?


who knows? 
I don't think she's gonna let go of the golden goose


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The kids are listed on the line of succession, they must be real. However, it's believable that the parents (or their people) are spreading misinformation about them. I'm still intrigued by one of Tom Bower's observations about having QE looking at a shawl. What did he mean by that?


The famous photo of Doria, Queen , Philip looking at baby - who is held in MM's arms in a blanket (shawl), the child's face is away from the camera , a very odd angle as called out by Bower, as if they were trying to hide something








						7 surprising things we've learned from royal birth certificates
					

Royal birth certificates reveal facts you may not have known before about Prince Harry, Meghan Markle, Princess Charlotte and more.




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




A tiny bit of the baby face shows in these photos with parents only








						Royal baby Archie's birth certificate shows he was born in London hospital
					

The birth certificate for Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor says Duchess Meghan gave birth gave to Harry's son in an American-owned London hospital.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> who knows?
> I don't think she's gonna let go of the golden goose


She may not have a choice. The recent reports suggesting that they are leading separate lives seems credible, and the Queen's funeral may have been a wake up call for him. The next six months should be very interesting.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> She may not have a choice. The recent reports suggesting that they are leading separate lives seems credible, and the Queen's funeral may have been a wake up call for him. The next six months should be very interesting.


we'll see
so you think Harry has the strength to get out of the grip of her claw?


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm finally finishing up Courtiers, and I'm just starting the last three chapters on the Troublesome Two. I am stunned that Low reveals that just days after the forced confirmation of the relationship - you know, where she threatened to break up with him if he didn't put out said statement, which BTW made Buckingham Palace and Clarence House very unhappy - she was already inserting herselfs into conversations and discussions with Kensington Palace. The exact words Low chose were "Those fraught conversations between Harry and Meghan and Kensington Palace staff took place *just days after the couple's relationship became public knowledge*. They weren't even engaged yet, let alone married. Things would later get a lot worse."
> 
> WTF is wrong with her. And what was wrong with Harry to let her.


Getting BP involved in the relationship... hmm 
An analogy - for us mere mortals - would be to start pushing around your future MIL and FIL - forcing them into the relationship from the start, SERIOUSLY???


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> we'll see
> so you think Harry has the strength to get out of the grip of her claw?


Yes, with the backing of the RF. Unless he throws them under the bus in the book, but I believe it's going to be a whole lot of nothing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So Low's book is nothing like Bower's - pleasant to read even through the Sussex chapters. Yet it is harrowing in its own way when he suggests Ghoul laid a "trail of evidence" for months and maybe years before Megxit to proof the BRF and the palace failed her. He even carefully implies sh*t like going to HR about being "suicidal" was just part of the scheme, knowing da*m well they couldn't help her but twisting it to fit her narrative. What a complete psycho she is.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> who knows?
> I don't think she's gonna let go of the golden goose


But, is there a golden goose anymore ?? KC is not paying, H&M are not (today) viable as paid speakers/philanthropists etc - that could change after the book - for better or worse
In a divorce, MM cannot try to get at KC's income, she can only get at what H can bring in. And KC cannot seem to be ransoming his grandkids 
If she hangs in there, and IF she is invited, they will have to let her borrow  a tiara for an hour for the coronation - thankfully, it will only take 1 hr, then Major Johnny will guard it for the hour, then come to rescue and rip it off her head and send it off to the vaults.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Getting BP involved in the relationship... hmm
> An analogy - for us mere mortals - would be to start pushing around your future MIL and FIL - forcing them into the relationship from the start, SERIOUSLY???



Kensington Palace was Harry's shared office with William and Kate at that point. My only question is what random girlfriend of three days has the guts to insert herself like this and is even entertained by the palace.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> we'll see
> so you think Harry has the strength to get out of the grip of her claw?


Imo, no, she is in it until Mr. billionaire rolls up [which is highly unlikely]. Right now, she is in a dismal state - wimpy Hazz, 2 kids under 5, a podcast that has become a joke, a McMansion with issues, clothes that don’t fit, hair that looks awful, money issues, etc. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kensington Palace was Harry's shared office with William and Kate at that point. My only question is what random girlfriend of three days has the guts to insert herself like this and is even entertained by the palace.


That is why we have so many conspiracy theories.  None of this relationship made sense then, and it still does not make sense now.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo, no, she is in it until Mr. billionaire rolls up [which is highly unlikely]. Right now, she is in a dismal state - wimpy Hazz, 2 kids under 5, a podcast that has become a joke, a McMansion with issues, clothes that don’t fit, hair that looks awful, money issues, etc.
> 
> 
> That is why we have so many conspiracy theories.  None of this relationship made sense then, and it still does not make sense now.


but does she recognize these things? or is she so full of herself that she only sees her own magnficence?  the kids are probably 99 percent under the care of nannies.  the flaws with her hair and clothing are only in other people's eyes.  she is actually perfectly beautiful.  money issues?  that she may recognize

the whole mess of her nailing a member of the RF is a fluke, an unfortunate accident of fate caused by her super networking skills

too bad there are children involved


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> but does she recognize these things? or is she so full of herself that she only sees her own magnficence?  the kids are probably 99 percent under the care of nannies.  the flaws with her hair and clothing are only in other people's eyes.  she is actually perfectly beautiful.  money issues?  that she may recognize
> 
> the whole mess of her nailing a member of the RF is a fluke, an unfortunate accident of fate caused by her super networking skills
> 
> too bad there are children involved


She, Markus, and her girls club  laugh all the way to the bank.  She hit the easy button long ago. Imo she really doesn’t care if the marriage lasts or not. The money will always be there. With the kids, she will always be connected to the BRF, so what does it matter if they live under the same roof? Imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> She, Markus, and her girls club  laugh all the way to the bank.  She hit the easy button long ago. Imo she really doesn’t care if the marriage lasts or not. The money will always be there. With the kids, she will always be connected to the BRF, so what does it matter if they live under the same roof? Imo.


and I suppose her sugars, rather than thinking she is no longer a princess, will think she is some sort of heroine for claiming her "independence"


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> In that case, I bet the Nacho experience will come with an invitation to a certain podcast.


Nacho is Harry’s friend, not Meghan’s. I don’t see Neiman Marcus putting anything up for sale with Meghan, do you? Their fantasy gifts are supposed to be _exclusive_.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The BLG explains, it's all about TW!



lololol!  I read this too fast and thought they wanted him to look more _trustworthy.  _


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm finally finishing up Courtiers, and I'm just starting the last three chapters on the Troublesome Two. I am stunned that Low reveals that just days after the forced confirmation of the relationship - you know, where she threatened to break up with him if he didn't put out said statement, which BTW made Buckingham Palace and Clarence House very unhappy - she was already inserting herselfs into conversations and discussions with Kensington Palace. The exact words Low chose were "Those fraught conversations between Harry and Meghan and Kensington Palace staff took place *just days after the couple's relationship became public knowledge*. They weren't even engaged yet, let alone married. Things would later get a lot worse."
> 
> WTF is wrong with her. *And what was wrong with Harry to let her.*


Dufus turned a blind eye to ZedZed's wiles and guiles because he was afraid he would never find anyone else considering all his previous girlfriends had given up on him due to his inability and/or unwillingness to change his bad habits and tendencies.
ET correct typo


----------



## CarryOn2020

Most likely he bought into the myth that we commoners are here to serve the royals.  All of us should fall at their feet all the time. Reality is those days are long gone.  They will be heckled, criticized, etc.  Same is true for the people who think they are the world’s _elites_.  Even the Kardashians agree that the quiet way is the better way.  Fame always comes at a cost.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> That has been my prediction all along. But their five year anniversary is two weeks after the coronation, which brings us back to the question, will they split before or after?


My bet is on after, TW wouldn't want to miss such precious photo-op.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> She may not have a choice. The recent reports suggesting that they are leading separate lives seems credible, and *the Queen's funeral may have been a wake up call for him*. The next six months should be very interesting.


Poor Hazz, he is such a heavy sleeper.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Nacho is Harry’s friend, not Meghan’s. I don’t see Neiman Marcus putting anything up for sale with Meghan, do you? Their fantasy gifts are supposed to be _exclusive_.


Since when has that stopped TW?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Since when has that stopped TW?
> View attachment 5647765


   Classic!

One of her least shining moments. Bless that 17-year-old holding up the trophy with his arm in her face. That kid is going places.


----------



## Chanbal

This is interesting…


----------



## Chanbal

I have seen pictures of TW's wedding, but this one speaks volumes. Philip knew how much QE was displeased.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> My bet is on after, TW wouldn't want to miss such precious photo-op.


Get the candle ready....


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know. I have a hard time believing they faked introducing Archie to The Queen and she went along with a huge deception of the public. There were pictures released after all.


Wasn't there also a baptism? Somebody was baptised, but whether it was their baby, idk. All the Queen-meets-Archie pics are oddly framed to not show the baby. If this is Zed's plan to up the marketability of her kids, it's not much of a success. I do think she wanted top dollar for the baby pics and no one was biting.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> lololol!  I read this too fast and thought they wanted him to look more trustworthy_.  _


Trustworthy, lustworthy…


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> I'm thinking the whole "Harry is going to eviscerate the entire BRF in his ghost-written memoir" is just a PR ploy to build up pre-release buzz and pre-sales. Maybe he doesn't throw his family under the bus entirely because he knows he would be cut off, his titles possibly stripped, no titles for the children, and so forth.  That would basically strip his money earning potential from him for basically the rest of his life.  There would be no going back.  He may not be that stupid.
> 
> Of course, just the rumors about what's in the book are also incredibly damaging to his family relationships long term.  They don't know what he's written and have had to wait to see. So, even if he goes easy on people individually this time, none of them know what he might do or say next year or 5 years from now, so they would be right to carefully keep their distance from him in the future.  He's going to continue to be snubbed and frozen out to a great extent which, in turn, might cause him to lash out down the road.


Plus, this is only the first book of 4!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe with notoriously guarded they mean kept on a short leash by Ghoul.


With a muzzle.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> I'm thinking the whole "Harry is going to eviscerate the entire BRF in his ghost-written memoir" is just a PR ploy to build up pre-release buzz and pre-sales. *Maybe he doesn't throw his family under the bus entirely because he knows he would be cut off, his titles possibly stripped, no titles for the children, and so forth.*  That would basically strip his money earning potential from him for basically the rest of his life.  There would be no going back.  He may not be that stupid.
> 
> Of course, just the rumors about what's in the book are also incredibly damaging to his family relationships long term.  They don't know what he's written and have had to wait to see. So, even if he goes easy on people individually this time, none of them know what he might do or say next year or 5 years from now, so they would be right to carefully keep their distance from him in the future.  He's going to continue to be snubbed and frozen out to a great extent which, in turn, might cause him to lash out down the road.


ITA
Sorry, Harry, but throwing your family under the bus *gradually* is only going to make them freeze you out harder because who knows whom or what you'll be targeting next. And it's perfectly fair for them to hold you at arm's length after your despicable behaviour.



purseinsanity said:


> With a muzzle.


The way she talks over him and barges in front of him, it's a choke leash.



Redbirdhermes said:


> I set up an LLC for my small business.   It is quick, easy and not expensive.   I was the sole proprietor.   One reason to do it is so your business has its own tax ID and you aren't passing out your Social Security Number to everyone.   My daughter did the same for the art that she sells.  There is nothing nefarious about having an LLC in and of itself.


With the number of LLCs she has set up, it will be a quagmire if anyone tries to follow the money.


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> Plus, this is only the first book of 4!



I read that the other books Harry will have ghost written will be on subjects like "philanthropy" and "leadership".


----------



## charlottawill

They certainly have their work cut out....


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> They certainly have their work cut out....



Sigh! I thought Zed being highly sexually desirable was the reason for their need for 24/7 security. Won't making Sparry lustworthy just compound the problem?


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't there also a baptism? Somebody was baptised, but whether it was their baby, idk. All the Queen-meets-Archie pics are oddly framed to not show the baby. If this is Zed's plan to up the marketability of her kids, it's not much of a success. I do think she wanted top dollar for the baby pics and no one was biting.


Archie did get baptised.  The queen didn’t attend.

Also that photo of being introduced to Archie - Tom Bower said they were all looking at a shawl….  It wouldn’t surprise me if photoshop was involved.

They do mess with photoshop with the kids to (I think) hide their identities.  I am actually ok with hiding their identities but would prefer they then don’t share ANY photoshopped pics of their kids.  Just let them be kids and enjoy their lives.  Every time they share a pic - people pull the photo apart (like the Lily birthday party where MM looks 20 years younger!). And then rumours start about the kids which I don’t think is fair…. They are kids!


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Sigh!* I thought Zed being highly sexually desirable was the reason for their need for 24/7 security*. Won't making Sparry lustworthy just compound the problem?


OMG, I'd forgotten about that!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> This is interesting…




She called him and inserted herself as per usual.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Also that photo of being introduced to Archie - Tom Bower said they were all looking at a shawl….  It wouldn’t surprise me if photoshop was involved.



It would surprise me to see The Queen go along with such nonsense.


----------



## needlv

I can almost hear the screaming in Monteceto from the other side of the world….


----------



## needlv

Let’s hope don’t do another “laying their wreath whilst A professional photographer takes our photos” stunt as that was awful.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It would surprise me to see The Queen go along with such nonsense.


It surprised me that none of the media asked for a clearer look at the baby. I know Zed restricted access to the event, but were all the journalists she authorized so wimpy that they were content with the shawl view?

To be honest, I've always been too distracted by her slid-sideways post-partum bump to look at the baby.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

It really does look odd.


----------



## Chanbal

Beatrice and Eugenie are such a great influence on TW, get the titles dear! Interestingly, uncle Randy Andy is not a part of the Spare's recollections. It's such a sweet family. All allegedly, of course! 










						Meghan 'changed her mind over kids' titles after Beatrice & Eugenie chats'
					

MEGHAN Markle changed her mind over Archie and Lilibet’s royal titles after talking with Beatrice and Eugenie, according to an expert. Royal commentator Neil Sean claims Meghan had a “dramati…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

TW has allegedly been invited to return to the big screen by James C.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Never mind, I misread.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh, I don't like the second tweet. Harry is clearly unwell.


----------



## Toby93

needlv said:


> Archie did get baptised.  The queen didn’t attend.
> 
> Also that photo of being introduced to Archie - Tom Bower said they were all looking at a shawl….  It wouldn’t surprise me if photoshop was involved.
> 
> They do mess with photoshop with the kids to (I think) hide their identities.  I am actually ok with hiding their identities but would prefer they then don’t share ANY photoshopped pics of their kids.  Just let them be kids and enjoy their lives.  Every time they share a pic - people pull the photo apart (like the Lily birthday party where MM looks 20 years younger!). And then rumours start about the kids which I don’t think is fair…. They are kids!


I saw this a while ago on Twitter....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That's slightly crazy.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I saw this a while ago on Twitter....
> 
> View attachment 5648166


If true and if exposed, Zed will just claim that she didn't feel obliged to show the real baby to the media.


----------



## LittleStar88

Ok, this whole real baby/fake baby thing is just *weird*. 

Infants pretty much all look the same so why would they care? Why the big stunt with the fake baby? Seems like way more work than it needs to be or is even worth.

If they used a fake baby for the photo they are definitely way too far up in their heads with this privacy and other nonsense and out of touch with reality.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Ok, this whole real baby/fake baby thing is just *weird*.
> 
> Infants pretty much all look the same so why would they care? Why the big stunt with the fake baby? Seems like way more work than it needs to be or is even worth.
> 
> If they used a fake baby for the photo they are definitely way too far up in their heads with this privacy and other nonsense and out of touch with reality.



My guess is she would have seen the fake babies on the soap opera.  She probably knows more about props than the rest so us do. Royals probably have their own prop dept. Since high schoolers use these fake babies in their ‘family’ classes, none of this is really surprising. We already know H&M are dishonest.


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, that's what my acquaintances in Santa Barbara were instructed, "Don't talk or look at her".


She is delusional!  Even the Queen herself had no such “rule”.  Wonder if she yells “off with their head!” If people dare to violate her “rule”.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Ok, this whole real baby/fake baby thing is just *weird*.
> 
> Infants pretty much all look the same so why would they care? Why the big stunt with the fake baby? Seems like way more work than it needs to be or is even worth.
> 
> If they used a fake baby for the photo they are definitely way too far up in their heads with this privacy and other nonsense and out of touch with reality.


One of the Youtubers examined the pap shots of Zed in Canada walking her dogs and supposedly carrying Archie in a baby carrier. She concluded that it was a doll because the baby never moved, one baby hand was tied to Zed's chest and, based on how loose the shoulder straps were, the baby weighed very little for its size. In many of the pics, Zed was grinning into the camera and paid no attention to the dogs or baby. You can see a black cord at Zed's neck in this photo. The Youtuber blew up the pics and said in some pics, you could see that the cord was tied round the baby's wrist. Weird if true.


----------



## Luvbolide

CarryOn2020 said:


> And we’re off — Bridezilla time



“MEyonce” - bwahahahaha!!


----------



## csshopper

I cannot believe the Queen and  Prince Phillip would participate in a fake baby photo.

There is a live baby boy with them in later media, they have a son. Whether or not she gave birth to him is still debatable IMO.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> I cannot believe the Queen and  Prince Phillip would participate in a fake baby photo.
> 
> There is a live baby boy with them in later media, they have a son. Whether or not she gave birth to him is still debatable IMO.


I cannot believe anyone besides the alleged parents and Sparry's MIL would participate in fake baby photos. There is a child, brought out when required. But when it was more convenient to use a prop, I believe she would have no qualms doing so.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> One of the Youtubers examined the pap shots of Zed in Canada walking her dogs and supposedly carrying Archie in a baby carrier. She concluded that it was a doll because the baby never moved, one baby hand was tied to Zed's chest and, based on how loose the shoulder straps were, the baby weighed very little for its size. In many of the pics, Zed was grinning into the camera and paid no attention to the dogs or baby. You can see a black cord at Zed's neck in this photo. The Youtuber blew up the pics and said in some pics, you could see that the cord was tied round the baby's wrist. Weird if true.
> View attachment 5648205



Maybe I am just lazy, but all of this seems like too much effort.

I vote fake baby here. Her face and smile is far too relaxed to be walking two dogs (medium and large dogs) + baby strapped to the front of her. I always thought this photo shoot was strange. Like, _why_?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> I cannot believe the Queen and  Prince Phillip would participate in a fake baby photo.
> 
> There is a live baby boy with them in later media, they have a son. Whether or not she gave birth to him is still debatable IMO.



This.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Who takes and picks up the kids from school/preschool? When the divorce comes we'll see Claw bawling her head off for custody and showing the world how close she is to them, photos galore.


----------



## JulesB68

xincinsin said:


> One of the Youtubers examined the pap shots of Zed in Canada walking her dogs and supposedly carrying Archie in a baby carrier. She concluded that it was a doll because the baby never moved, one baby hand was tied to Zed's chest and, based on how loose the shoulder straps were, the baby weighed very little for its size. In many of the pics, Zed was grinning into the camera and paid no attention to the dogs or baby. You can see a black cord at Zed's neck in this photo. The Youtuber blew up the pics and said in some pics, you could see that the cord was tied round the baby's wrist. Weird if true.
> View attachment 5648205


First the loose baby bumps, now a loose baby carrier. She's not very good at tying straps, is she? Seems Handbag is the only one she's good at tying in knots!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Who takes and picks up the kids from school/preschool? When the divorce comes we'll see Claw bawling her head off for custody and showing the world how close she is to them, photos galore.


Maybe that's why she talks about Mummy time with them in her flopcast. Then there is the story of her working hard while Sparry deals with the kids and the other story of her bragging that she earns more than him. Maintaining her image of mother and provider.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Maybe that's why she talks about Mummy time with them in her flopcast. Then there is the story of her working hard while Sparry deals with the kids and the other story of her bragging that she earns more than him. Maintaining her image of mother and provider.


She’ll say whatever she thinks will make her look good in the moment. She doesn’t care if she contradicts herself or if she makes someone else looks bad.


----------



## Aimee3

Years ago I took a reborn baby to a class because someone there wanted to see one.   I had her wrapped up in a blanket and carried her as if she were real.  I can’t tell you how many people were shocked that it was a doll!  Even after they knew it was a doll,  a lot of people (including men!) wanted to hold her.
To make this comply with the thread subject, I wouldn’t put it past them to use props!


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Yep, that's what my acquaintances in Santa Barbara were instructed, "Don't talk or look at her".


There was a story of some overentitled git celeb who pulled this at a grocery store in the Hamptons.  Demanded not to be looked or spoken to at and scared a clerk to death.  So in walks Sir Paul McCartney and starts shopping and when he starts to converse with pleasantries with the the same clerk, the clerk ignores him.  Sir Paul says "what is the matter?  We talk all the time."  The clerk then tells him about the entitled celeb who threatened him with a loss of his job if he looked at him and/or spoke to him. Sir Paul stored that celeb info  away for future reference.   Bottom line is that nice and classy people are nice and classy people.  Meghan Markle must have been absent from the classes in good manners at her fancy HS.  No one would ever accuse her of being nice or classy and definitely not at the same time.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> She’ll say whatever she thinks will make her look good in the moment. She doesn’t care if she contradicts herself or if she makes someone else looks bad.


Meg's truth is whatever is coming out of her mouth during that moment.  She has no regrets or remorse over anything she says or does.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Meg's truth is whatever is coming out of her mouth during that moment.  She has no regrets or remorse over anything she says or does.


It doesn’t help that most of the media accepts every word she says without question.


----------



## charlottawill

Delicious.....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

All that cauliflower talk makes me hungry.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> All that cauliflower talk makes me hungry.



Not many people buy cauliflower, but more people would buy cauliflower than they would Harry's book!

Personally, I am a sucker for buffalo cauliflower bites (extra blue cheese on the side).


----------



## JulesB68

It's quite interesting to see H's fall from on high when you look back at the first page of this thread. There may be a few people who requested name changes!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Mumotons

Prince Harry wanted to bring up his son Archie, three, in Africa
					

Prince Harry's friend, the celebrated primatologist Dame Jane Goodall, has revealed that he wanted the couple to live in Africa, where he has spent some of the happiest times in his life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also Low mentioned in his book that the palace was exploring sending them to Africa for a year or so because that's what The Queen and the Waleses did, having some couple time away from the public eye.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Not many people buy cauliflower, but more people would buy cauliflower than they would Harry's book!
> 
> Personally, I am a sucker for buffalo cauliflower bites (extra blue cheese on the side).


People like to use riced cauliflower instead of potatoes. Also as a base for pizza, so around here, cauliflower would definite outsell Harry's book! lol!  In fact , the price has gone up because of demand, whereas Harry will sit on the bargain shelf.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Honestly, I think most of the household staff will be Latinx.  It's just the nature of the area.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Low mentioned in his book that the palace was exploring sending them to Africa for a year or so because that's what The Queen and the Waleses did, having some couple time away from the public eye.


And as we all know by now, there was no way TW was planning on spending any time out of the public eye


----------



## scarlet555

charlottawill said:


> Delicious.....



Will it still make NYT best seller list..???


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Cheese makes cauliflower 1000% more edible.


Am I the only person who likes it cooked in a hot water bath per Julia Child?  It's delish! Of course cheese and butter make everything taste better, except for the Sussex.  Nothing would make either of them taste better or be tasteful.  Bad looks, bad  clothing and even the house looks like Rooms to Go.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> And as we all know by now, there was no way TW was planning on spending any time out of the public eye


That was the biggest load of horse pucky that Meghan ever landed on Harry, i.e., that she loves Africa.  She strikes me as the sort of woman who couldn't wait to get out of there.  The humidity made her hair frizz.  The flies drove her crazy. It was hot and sticky and her deodorant never worked.  Forget about peeing on a bush. She brought along Depends and used them rather than squat on a bush.


----------



## gracekelly

gracekelly said:


> Yum! Oh I could do that!  I try to stick with what I mentioned only because of the calorie count, but I have no problems with dressing it up.  I think you should send the recipe to Archie, because if he is as precocious as his mother indicates, he is  probably the family chef by now.


----------



## gracekelly

scarlet555 said:


> Will it still make NYT best seller list..???


If they can buy their way on the list it will.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> when you mash it, its supposed to be faux mashed potatoes but it doesn't taste like potato to me....I'm always watching calories too (supposedly) but a bit of butter and olive oil isn't that fattening


I only did it once.  The DH was meh about it and prefers it in the virgin state lol!  But the riced stuff in the bag sells according to the vegetable at Ralphs.  I preferred to do it myself. I made a cauliflower crust pizza and it was OK, but not crazy about it.

Actually I am waiting for Meghan's chicken cookbook.  I'm sure she will have a chapter on slaughtering the chicken if only because she eventually manages to slaughter just about everything and everyone around her.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> That was the biggest load of horse pucky that Meghan ever landed on Harry, i.e., that she loves Africa.  She strikes me as the sort of woman who couldn't wait to get out of there.  The humidity made her hair frizz.  The flies drove her crazy. It was hot and sticky and her deodorant never worked.  Forget about peeing on a bush. She brought along Depends and used them rather than squat on a bush.


So true. She wanted fame and fortune, rubbing shoulders with the rich and famous in Hollywood. She couldn’t even hack living in the lap of luxury in London and had to flee back to California after less than 2 years. She wouldn‘t have lasted even 2 hot minutes in Africa. She hasn’t shown herself to be even remotely flexible or adaptable when out of her very narrow comfort zone. Which makes it even more laughable when she refers to her brief internship with the state department. I couldn‘t imagine anyone less suited to being posted abroad while working for the state department.


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> Am I the only person who likes it cooked in a hot water bath per Julia Child?  It's delish! Of course cheese and butter make everything taste better, except for the Sussex.  Nothing would make either of them taste better or be tasteful.  Bad looks, bad  clothing and even the house looks like Rooms to Go.


I love it roasted with just a tiny bit of olive oil.  I've never tried it the Julia Child way but I'll have to look it up. 

Lol at Rooms to Go re: the Montecito Olive Garden Grande!   Haz & Hazbeen are definitely distasteful. (Actually, Haz & NeverWas is more accurate.)


----------



## rose60610

"Spare" will likely make the bestseller list, but I predict the blowback will be fierce. Here's a guy born into basically a fairytale, yes, his mother was killed at a young age, but here he is feeling sorry for himself and complaining despite all the resources, perks and advantages he's had throughout his life. The he marries a wench who just can't STFU with her whining. I wonder how he writes about being seated with his cousins at the Jubilee and not being front and center with Dad and Will. And not being able to wear his military uniform more than 15 minutes at TQ's funeral. Boo hoo!


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> So true. She wanted fame and fortune, rubbing shoulders with the rich and famous in Hollywood. She couldn’t even hack living in the lap of luxury in London and had to flee back to California after less than 2 years. She wouldn‘t have lasted even 2 hot minutes in Africa. She hasn’t shown herself to be even remotely flexible or adaptable when out of her very narrow comfort zone. Which makes it even more laughable when she refers to her brief internship with the state department. I couldn‘t imagine anyone less suited to being posted abroad while working for the state department.


well, she got comfortable living the lifestyle of the rich and famous pretty fast.  I guess she lived pretty well on her Suits salary but no 16-bath mansion....So she is adaptable


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> "Spare" will likely make the bestseller list, but I predict the blowback will be fierce. Here's a guy born into basically a fairytale, yes, his mother was killed at a young age, but here he is feeling sorry for himself and complaining despite all the resources, perks and advantages he's had throughout his life. The he marries a wench who just can't STFU with her whining. I wonder how he writes about being seated with his cousins at the Jubilee and not being front and center with Dad and Will. And not being able to wear his military uniform more than 15 minutes at TQ's funeral. Boo hoo!


The book will be a 24 hour story, then disappear.  We have all heard the lies, the fussing , the fuming, the poor-me, crybaby stories.
We are officially *over* H&M.


----------



## Gal4Dior

CarryOn2020 said:


> The book will be a 24 hour story, then disappear.  We have all heard the lies, the fussing , the fuming, the poor-me, crybaby stories.
> We are officially *over* H&M.


I'm guessing the same. The general public is over Harry talking about being traumatized walking behind his mum's coffin as a child. I felt sorry for him the first 10 times he talked about it, and now it's just incessant and annoying whining.

So you've been dealt a horrible blow in your childhood. Work out your "woe is me" issues with your close friends and therapist, not the public, and certainly not for your own profit. It's really hard for me to feel sorry for a prince capitalizing on his life of whinging.

People in war torn countries have dealt with the death of their loved ones in the most unimaginable ways. Being poor, destitute, and orphaned is sad. Harry, with no real life skills, who has to sell his own family out for profit, is TRAGIC. I'm waiting for all of this to catastrophically blow up in his face.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> well, she got comfortable living the lifestyle of the rich and famous pretty fast.  I guess she lived pretty well on her Suits salary but no 16-bath mansion....So she is adaptable


she’s seems like the type of person who when traveling outside the US, wonders why no one speaks English, why she can’t get the milk latte exactly the way she normally has it at home, etc. She’s living in the exact same area she grew up in but with lots more money. She doesn’t seem willing to live anywhere else when given a choice. Sure she’s living in a 16 bathroom mansion instead of her former 1 bedroom apartment but the decor is similar crate and barrel / pottery barn. She can afford more expensive clothes but she’s sticking to designers that are well known and worn by lots of Hollywood types. She’s not going to be the trend setter finding talented young designers no one has yet heard of. She wouldn’t be the first to buy a Tesla but she‘d buy a Tesla after she saw several major Hollywood celebs buy Teslas. She’s going to stick to safe choices, following what wealthy Hollywood celebs do. Her whole life style is about what she perceives as status and how the rich people in her area lived when she was growing up. She doesn’t seem able to think outside that narrow box. The way the BRF lived was not what she saw or wanted growing up. Never mind that the Cathedral she got married in is world famous and steeped in centuries of history. All she could focus on was it smelled musty and why couldn’t she bring in air fresheners. It was as far from a celebrity style California wedding as you get and I bet she hated every minute of it. I suspect her ideal wedding would be at some famous celebrity’s mansion in CA with the tent in the back yard filled with the Hollywood elite. Just look at who she invited to her actual wedding in London even though it turned out she didn’t even know most of them. Talk about high status but not the version she knew or aspired to, she couldn‘t and wouldn’t adapt to the BRF lifestyle. So it isn’t just a question of having lots more money to spend. It matters just as much as to where and on what she can spend it on and who she will be socializing with. That’s why imo she’s not flexible or adaptable.


----------



## Mrs.Z

The man behind the hair


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> *I cannot believe the Queen and  Prince Phillip would participate in a fake baby photo.*
> 
> There is a live baby boy with them in later media, they have a son. Whether or not she gave birth to him is still debatable IMO.


This! Soon after a pic similar to the one below was posted, someone on the internet suggested that PP and the late QEII were photoshopped from another picture showing PP and the late Queen dressed in similar clothing while viewing a horse in a field. Also, HM doesn't appear to be focusing on the doll/baby, but towards the lower right corner.  In any case, this has been discussed at length before and possibly on this thread. Sorry, I cannot find the other pic anywhere now.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> The man behind the hair
> 
> View attachment 5648399


Shades of Jose Eber "shake your head darling!"  All Harry is missing is the Eber cowboy hat.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also Low mentioned in his book that the palace was exploring *sending them to Africa for a year* or so because that's what The Queen and the Waleses did, having some couple time *away from the public eye*.


No photo-ops for TW


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Shades of Jose Eber "shake your head darling!"  *All Harry is missing is the Eber cowboy hat*.
> 
> View attachment 5648433
> View attachment 5648435


Hazz has his own cowboy hat, he is ready…


	

		
			
		

		
	
 (source Mirror)


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> she’s seems like the type of person who when traveling outside the US, wonders why no one speaks English, why she can’t get the milk latte exactly the way she normally has it at home, etc. She’s living in the exact same area she grew up in but with lots more money. She doesn’t seem willing to live anywhere else when given a choice. Sure she’s living in a 16 bathroom mansion instead of her former 1 bedroom apartment but the decor is similar crate and barrel / pottery barn. She can afford more expensive clothes but she’s sticking to designers that are well known and worn by lots of Hollywood types. She’s not going to be the trend setter finding talented young designers no one has yet heard of. She wouldn’t be the first to buy a Tesla but she‘d buy a Tesla after she saw several major Hollywood celebs buy Teslas. She’s going to stick to safe choices, following what wealthy Hollywood celebs do. Her whole life style is about what she perceives as status and how the rich people in her area lived when she was growing up. She doesn’t seem able to think outside that narrow box. The way the BRF lived was not what she saw or wanted growing up. Never mind that the Cathedral she got married in is world famous and steeped in centuries of history. All she could focus on was it smelled musty and why couldn’t she bring in air fresheners. It was as far from a celebrity style California wedding as you get and I bet she hated every minute of it. I suspect her ideal wedding would be at some famous celebrity’s mansion in CA with the tent in the back yard filled with the Hollywood elite. Just look at who she invited to her actual wedding in London even though it turned out she didn’t even know most of them. Talk about high status but not the version she knew or aspired to, she couldn‘t and wouldn’t adapt to the BRF lifestyle. So it isn’t just a question of having lots more money to spend. It matters just as much as to where and on what she can spend it on and who she will be socializing with. That’s why imo she’s not flexible or adaptable.


Just wanted to add that she expects the world to adapt to her, her wishes and her demands. And that I do blame on her parents. They must have given in to their precious Corpse Flower in everything.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



AGAIN - what they are saying is fine but I don't need to hear it from them.  WhoTF do they think they are?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



It's a reminder service?


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> It's a reminder service?


and he's not even a US citizen so guess he won't be voting....just go away you two


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


>



The ideas of increasing voter participation and voting early are things we can all get behind but the cynic in me thinks this is just another way for them to get more data that they can use for their marketing or other commercial money making  purposes.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> The ideas of increasing voter participation and voting early are things we can all get behind but the cynic in me thinks this is just another way for them to get more data that they can use for their marketing or other commercial money making  purposes.


or to show what wonderful elevated people they are


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> AGAIN - what they are saying is fine but I don't need to hear it from them.  *WhoTF do they think they are?*





xincinsin said:


> *It's a reminder service?*


Great questions, but I wonder who can answer them. 

Hazz and TW seem to have a little issue with the UK citizenship test, Hazz has a unique view of the US constitution… It's puzzling!


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> The ideas of increasing voter participation and voting early are things we can all get behind but the cynic in me thinks this is just another way for them to get more data that they can use for their marketing or other commercial money making  purposes.


We all know that voting is a fundamental right and a civic duty that should be encouraged. 

What is shocking imo is the offer to text ArchW 'to make a plan to vote.' People are being bombarded with scam calls/messages… I would be cautious about such service.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Hazz is rethinking the Christmas invitation to Sandringham…


----------



## bag-mania

Let’s not get bogged down in the details of Election Day when we are on the precipice of the next episode of Archetypes being released. The stereotype! The guests who will be talked over! The *MEG*alomaniac!

Priorities please, ladies.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> The ideas of increasing voter participation and voting early are things we can all get behind but the cynic in me thinks this is just another way for them to get more data that they can use for their marketing or other commercial money making  purposes.


That is it exactly and the first thing I thought of!  They are nefarious, sneaky and untrustworthy. They would sell your house out from under you if they could.  Anything to make a buck.  The nerve of them!  People with titles telling me to vote!  F U Harry!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Hazz is rethinking the Christmas invitation to Sandringham…



Harry wants the series to be shown at the same time as the book so it will validate his trash talking his father in the book.  People are stupid enough to believe a television series.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if Hazz is rethinking the Christmas invitation to Sandringham…



Who said he was invited?


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> We all know that voting is a fundamental right and a civic duty that should be encouraged.
> 
> What is shocking imo is the offer to text ArchW 'to make a plan to vote.' People are being bombarded with scam calls/messages… I would be cautious about such service.


Let's think about it this way: anyone who signs up for voter services with ArghWell is likely to be a Zed fan. This way, the Harkles can gauge where their public support is and target this segment of the voters for both votes and campaign volunteers, if/when she decides that she should bless the US with her wisdom as President and Handbag can be the First Sparry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Let’s not get bogged down in the details of Election Day when we are on the precipice of the next episode of Archetypes being released. The stereotype! The guests who will be talked over! The *MEG*alomaniac!
> 
> Priorities please, ladies.


Who’s up tomorrow?


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Harry wants the series to be shown at the same time as the book so it will validate his trash talking his father in the book.  *People are stupid enough to believe a television series.*


The first time I realized it was when I read an interview with the host of a cooking programme. She had dropped an ingredient while demonstrating a recipe, and she joked on air that her self-cleaning kitchen would take care of the spillage. The TV station was inundated with letters from housewives asking where they could get self-cleaning kitchens. 

There seems to be a lot of people who are stupid enough to believe the litany of lies in the OW interview, likely because they believe Oprah-anything and because Americans have the commendable trait of helping the underdog - sad that the underdogs in this instance are scammers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> We all know that voting is a fundamental right and a civic duty that should be encouraged.
> 
> What is shocking imo is the offer to text ArchW 'to make a plan to vote.' People are being bombarded with scam calls/messages… I would be cautious about such service.


I already voted, first day of early voting, no crowds, poll workers polite and professional - no stress.  H&M seem so desperate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Harry wants the series to be shown at the same time as the book so it will validate his trash talking his father in the book.  People are stupid enough to believe a television series.


Don’t they realize people attend parties, dinners, plays, church, etc. during the run-up to the holidays?  Few will sit at home just to watch cry-baby Sparry complain, gritch, fuss, fume about his excessively privileged life or read cry-baby’s tale of privileged woe.  He needs to get a clue.  We Americans detest that bs.  Imagine Bill Gates fuming about his privileged life? Or worse, BG’s kids? Musk? Any other billionaire?  Paris Hilton’s sad story wasn’t really a big seller, iirc. Note to the world: it may be harsh, we expect rich elites to keep quiet. We really only admire people who rise above their wretched lives when they do it _*on their own merits, *_not when they marry one of the richest families in the world or are born into that family.  Priorities, H&M, priorities, the disaster duo does not meet anyone’s criteria for sympathy [we’ve all lost loved ones, Sparry. Learn to cope - quietly.].

ETA:  we Americans think anyone who is part of the BRF really is _bonkers, _so back at ya.


----------



## 1LV

It’s true.  Harry, we hardly knew you, and Meg, we wish we’d never met you.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who’s up tomorrow?


No clue. They haven’t announced them all. Could be there are one or two big names they have held back for the last few weeks. When she gets around to the b!tch episode I read that it will be comedian Robin Thede. I’m not familiar with that name but maybe others here know her.


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> This might explain the new PR tactic of Hazz being "lustworthy"



Thank you  Would you please consider posting these here too? 






						Lt. Colonel Johnny Thompson of the Scots Guards and Handsome Men In Kilts **Appreciation Thread
					

I wonder if the young man Jonny ushered into the car, could be his replacement as Equerry.  He was carrying the standard folder which Jonny usually has so could be "in training" for when Jonny leaves the service of the King.  Hi, I do  not think so, he is a kind of assisant (maybe working with...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> One of the Youtubers examined the pap shots of Zed in Canada walking her dogs and supposedly carrying Archie in a baby carrier. She concluded that it was a doll because the baby never moved, one baby hand was tied to Zed's chest and, based on how loose the shoulder straps were, the baby weighed very little for its size. In many of the pics, Zed was grinning into the camera and paid no attention to the dogs or baby. You can see a black cord at Zed's neck in this photo. The Youtuber blew up the pics and said in some pics, you could see that the cord was tied round the baby's wrist. Weird if true.
> View attachment 5648205


I'm still amazed that on a walk in the woods, she is honed in directly at the photographer, grinning like a just escaped patient from a local mental asylum.


----------



## purseinsanity

JulesB68 said:


> First *the loose baby bumps, now a loose baby carrier*. She's not very good at tying straps, is she? Seems Handbag is the only one she's good at tying in knots!


Don't forget the loose tendrils.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I'm still amazed that on a walk in the woods, she is honed in directly at the photographer, grinning like a just escaped patient from a local mental asylum.


It was so spontaneous. Not.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> There was a story of some overentitled git celeb who pulled this at a grocery store in the Hamptons.  Demanded not to be looked or spoken to at and scared a clerk to death.  So in walks Sir Paul McCartney and starts shopping and when he starts to converse with pleasantries with the the same clerk, the clerk ignores him.  Sir Paul says "what is the matter?  We talk all the time."  The clerk then tells him about the entitled celeb who threatened him with a loss of his job if he looked at him and/or spoke to him. Sir Paul stored that celeb info  away for future reference.   Bottom line is that nice and classy people are nice and classy people.  Meghan Markle must have been absent from the classes in good manners at her fancy HS.  No one would ever accuse her of being nice or classy and definitely not at the same time.


Sir Paul McCartney has had several brushes with my own family members and he's always been kind and a gentleman, unlike TW who thinks she's above us all.  He once blocked my sister from walking into traffic (she was staring at her cell phone) saying, "Be careful Luv!"    My sister didn't even realize it was him until she finally looked up and saw him briskly walking across the street.

He belongs to the same yacht club as my BIL in the Hamptons.  One day, BIL and his youngest son (about age 5 at the time) were fishing and McCartney comes up in his boat with his youngest Beatrice, who was about the same age as my nephew.  He asked my BIL if he could watch Beatrice for a minute while he ran into the club.  BIL said sure.  The two children then started chatting.  Beatrice said something like, "My dad is a great singer!".  Nephew says, "Oh yeah, well so is mine!"  (BIL is tone deaf LOL!).  Then she says, "My dad is a great guitar player!".  Nephew says, "Oh yeah, well so is mine!" just as McCartney was walking down back to the group.  He asked my BIL, "You play guitar!?"  BIL said he was mortified at being compared to McCartney of all people and sheepishly told him, not in the last 40 years!


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> Will it still make NYT best seller list..???


For the right amount of money, absolutely!


----------



## Freak4Coach

I don’t think they understand that the smell of desperation is not a scent to aspire to.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Hazz has his own cowboy hat, he is ready…
> View attachment 5648449
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (source Mirror)


He looks more like a Crocodile Dundee wannabe than a cowboy.


----------



## Freak4Coach

purseinsanity said:


> He looks more like a Crocodile Dundee wannabe than a cowboy.


Tad harsh on ol’ Mick don’t you think?


----------



## rose60610

So when Sparry goes on the talk circuit for "Spare", is Claw going to accompany him, elbow him in the gut and do all the talking? For the purpose of also merching "The Bench" and the ill fitting clothes she's wearing that day? And just what do they do with their kids when away for extended periods? Sure, they got help, but if it were legal to kennel the kids at a Pet Smart so Claw could keep more money to buy terrible clothes and tan spray, she'd do it. We haven't seen the rescue chickens lately. Were they bussed in for the Oprah interview to be a prop for the day?


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> This! Soon after a pic similar to the one below was posted, someone on the internet suggested that PP and the late QEII were photoshopped from another picture showing PP and the late Queen dressed in similar clothing while viewing a horse in a field. Also, HM doesn't appear to be focusing on the doll/baby, but towards the lower right corner.  In any case, this has been discussed at length before and possibly on this thread. Sorry, I cannot find the other pic anywhere now.
> View attachment 5648401


It would take people more technically sophisticated than I am to check for Photoshopping, but I have to say that the composition of this photo always gives me an uncomfortable feeling, like there's something off about it. I can't tell if it's because TQ's eyes don't seem exactly focused on the baby, or the strange nondescript location. Someone once commented that it looked like Zed and Sparry went wandering down the corridors with a photographer in tow, and chanced upon TQ and PP in a random hallway.


----------



## needlv

This…


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> It would take people more technically sophisticated than I am to check for Photoshopping, but I have to say that the composition of this photo always gives me an uncomfortable feeling, like there's something off about it. I can't tell if it's because TQ's eyes don't seem exactly focused on the baby, or the strange nondescript location. Someone once commented that it looked like Zed and Sparry went wandering down the corridors with a photographer in tow, and chanced upon TQ and PP in a random hallway.



Yes this one with the Queen and Prince Philip  AND the christening of Archie photo looks off and I don’t know why?  Maybe they put one photo on top of another?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> This…




What kind of PR is this though...because my mind goes immediately to "But Ghoul wouldn't let him."


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What kind of PR is this though...because my mind goes immediately to "But Ghoul wouldn't let him."



To make him look relatable/ loved despite leaving?   I just roll my eyes at these statements.  He loves fawning attention just as much as MM does.  He loved  being the most popular royal behind the Queen And it went to his head.

it was the one thing he had where he beat  William. (feeding his seething jealousy etc)

There is no way he ever seriously contemplated moving anywhere in Africa because he wouldn’t get the attention he craves, he can’t be richer / compete with his brother…

Whereas from the USA, he saw the ability to be popular and rich and compete with his brother - setting up a rival court - and he wanted to be richer, more popular and without all the BRF rules that William has to follow.  Thankfully all their plans have not come to fruition.

It shocks me that no one on H and M’s team that were giving them advice took a look at history (Margaret, Edward and his own production company, Wallis etc) - yet he still thought half in/ out would be fine and they could ask and make billions??  their only selling point was connection to the BRF!.

He clearly has zero sense of ethics or what the duty involves.


----------



## bellecate

I’ll just leave this here.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

How cute. Separation and divorce rumours left and right, so of course they need to be seen on an undercover, private, romantic date 

Did they arrive in the same car?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

New MM / Archetype podcast - to B or not to B - where B is code for B****
Snoozefest


----------



## shpahlc

On the topic of will they/won't the separate - who knows if that is PR fluff generated by them or something closer to the truth. My gut tells me, _if_ there is some truth to it all, TW is waiting to see if they get invite to the coronation to decide what to do & when. 

If they do get an invite, I see her waiting until after the coronation to announce, while using the coronation as a standard TW photo opp to flaunt everything that is great about being TW. 

If they _don't_ get an invite, I see her dropping the news right before/during the coronation to distract from HMTK's moment to focus on all things MEgain, how awful the royal family & H are, woe is me, etc. 

Regardless of what happens, I expect the next few months to be highly entertaining (Netflix, Spareme, etc.), and will have my popcorn ready.


----------



## xincinsin

I'm really not looking forward to seeing her at the coronation. Please don't invite her, Charles!  She will go around alternating between smirks and faux serious, and there will be an avalanche of pro-Zed pieces claiming she has a special bond to TQ and TK.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> It would take people more technically sophisticated than I am to check for Photoshopping, but I have to say that the composition of this photo always gives me an uncomfortable feeling, like there's something off about it. I can't tell if it's because TQ's eyes don't seem exactly focused on the baby, or the strange nondescript location. *Someone once commented that it looked like Zed and Sparry went wandering down the corridors with a photographer in tow, and chanced upon TQ and PP in a random hallway.*


If you recall, ZedZed has a photographer friend, who took Invisiblet's first pictures that appeared to be heavily photoshopped, so maybe it's the same one who took this pic. Later, there were also questions about a picture of Archie playing outside that looked really weird. I wouldn't be surprised to learn, that the photo manipulations we've seen, were done with the help of ZedZed's photoshopping-photographer friend.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What kind of PR is this though...because my mind goes immediately to "But Ghoul wouldn't let him."


They did it to pretend, if only for a moment, that their focus wasn’t 100% solely on making money. Remember they were saying they wanted to escape the dangers of the paparazzi so Meghan didn’t end up like Diana. What could be more of an escape than saying they might move to Africa? They got media credit for doing something for safety that they never intended to do.


----------



## bag-mania

Gag. So now we’re in denial that some women can be b!tches. We all get a free pass to be horrible! No matter what you say or do, you are really just misunderstood for being strong. The very word gives Meghan hives.  

From _People_:

In a voiceover, Meghan said that the implication of the "very charged word" is that such women are "difficult."

"Which is really just a euphemism, or is probably not even a euphemism. It's really a code word for the B-word," she said before Thede dug into the power of reclaiming the word. While Meghan later said that she had "zero interest" in doing the same and joked that she hates the term so much that the conversation was giving her "hives," she praised the notion, saying, "these women I respect, whose work I love, a lot of them are entirely comfortable with that. They want to do that, to take the power out of it."


----------



## KEG66

bag-mania said:


> Gag. So now we’re in denial that some women can be b!tches. We all get a free pass to be horrible! No matter what you say or do, you are really just misunderstood for being strong. The very word gives Meghan hives.
> 
> From _People_:
> 
> In a voiceover, Meghan said that the implication of the "very charged word" is that such women are "difficult."
> 
> "Which is really just a euphemism, or is probably not even a euphemism. It's really a code word for the B-word," she said before Thede dug into the power of reclaiming the word. While Meghan later said that she had "zero interest" in doing the same and joked that she hates the term so much that the conversation was giving her "hives," she praised the notion, saying, "these women I respect, whose work I love, a lot of them are entirely comfortable with that. They want to do that, to take the power out of it."


Ffs I’ve never heard such a lot of sh!t
in all my life. MM must be the most boring person on the planet !


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Gag. So now we’re in denial that some women can be b!tches. We all get a free pass to be horrible! No matter what you say or do, you are really just misunderstood for being strong. The very word gives Meghan hives.
> 
> From _People_:
> 
> In a voiceover, Meghan said that the implication of the "very charged word" is that such women are "difficult."
> 
> "Which is really just a euphemism, or is probably not even a euphemism. It's really a code word for the B-word," she said before Thede dug into the power of reclaiming the word. While Meghan later said that she had "zero interest" in doing the same and joked that she hates the term so much that the conversation was giving her "hives," she praised the notion, saying, "these women I respect, whose work I love, a lot of them are entirely comfortable with that. They want to do that, to take the power out of it."


there is nothing new about this conversation....been going on since Bette Davis


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> there is nothing new about this conversation....been going on since Bette Davis


Meghan doesn’t take any risks. Everything she says in her podcasts has to be nice and safe. It won’t be interesting but that’s fine, she gets paid.


----------



## LittleStar88

Wow, this podcast is so groundbreaking   

Rather than be a big old bowl of bland tapioca, how about try being BOLD like many women are these days and taking that word back?


----------



## youngster

KEG66 said:


> Ffs I’ve never heard such a lot of sh!t
> in all my life. MM must be the most boring person on the planet !



During her short time as a working royal, she was occasionally referred to as "Duchess Difficult" so here is an episode that discusses being considered "difficult" and how it is a code word for the b word, and off she goes with her defense of difficult people who are really just "strong".  The whole podcast is about her, every episode, and using it to clap back at her critics and the media. Maybe she thinks she is being subtle lol.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> During her short time as a working royal, she was occasionally referred to as "Duchess Difficult" so here is an episode that discusses being considered "difficult" and how it is a code word for the b word, and off she goes with her defense of difficult people who are really just "strong".  The whole podcast is about her, every episode, and using it to clap back at her critics and the media. Maybe she thinks she is being subtle lol.


I hate when the podcaster makes it about themselves instead of the person they're intervewing.  I used to listen to Marc Maron.  He had a lot of good guests but I didn't like that he inserted himself into every conversation.  I prefer to hear about the person being interviewed, their projects, their history.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> During her short time as a working royal, she was occasionally referred to as "Duchess Difficult" so here is an episode that discusses being considered "difficult" and how it is a code word for the b word, and off she goes with her defense of difficult people who are really just "strong".  The whole podcast is about her, every episode, and using it to clap back at her critics and the media. Maybe she thinks she is being subtle lol.


The only podcasts I listen to are Lex Fridman  and Joe Rogan , some politics, conspiracy theories, tech. So I have nothing  to compare MM to … 
What topics do other influencers cover ? 
What topics could she cover ?


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> The only podcasts I listen to are Lex Fridman  and Joe Rogan , some politics, conspiracy theories, tech. So I have nothing  to compare MM to …
> What topics do other influencers cover ?
> What topics could she cover ?


oh, she's an influencer? Ha...wants to be


----------



## KEG66

youngster said:


> During her short time as a working royal, she was occasionally referred to as "Duchess Difficult" so here is an episode that discusses being considered "difficult" and how it is a code word for the b word, and off she goes with her defense of difficult people who are really just "strong".  The whole podcast is about her, every episode, and using it to clap back at her critics and the media. Maybe she thinks she is being subtle lol.


Yeah about as subtle as a brick ! Which I wish she would put in her boring mouth and stfu !


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> During her short time as a working royal, she was occasionally referred to as "Duchess Difficult" so here is an episode that discusses being considered "difficult" and how it is a code word for the b word, and off she goes with her defense of difficult people who are really just "strong".  The whole podcast is about her, every episode, and using it to clap back at her critics and the media. Maybe she thinks she is being subtle lol.



I am seriously stunned. How can you be so self-absorbed and so resentful?


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> The only podcasts I listen to are Lex Fridman  and Joe Rogan , some politics, conspiracy theories, tech. So I have nothing  to compare MM to …
> What topics do other influencers cover ?
> What topics could she cover ?


She could definitely interview people without telling her own stories. Or outside of straight interviews, there are podcasts about books, restaurants, child rearing, science, makeup, health, tv shows, really anything!


----------



## CarryOn2020

To put it simply, she is a _bonkers b$tch_


----------



## LittleStar88

Loosely related... TW and Handbag may be getting some neighbors to commiserate with.









						Norway: Princess gives up royal duties amid fiancé questions
					

Princess Märtha Louise, the daughter of Norway’s King Harald, said Tuesday she no longer will officially represent the Norwegian royal house following “many questions relating to me and my fiancé's role.”  The 51-year-old princess, who is fourth in line to the Norwegian throne, got engaged in...




					news.yahoo.com
				




_Norwegian media have accused Märtha Louise and Verrett of allegedly using her royal title for commercial gain along with promoting alternative health care methods.

On Instagram, Märtha Louise said “I believe that alternative methods can be an important supplement to the established medicine."

Verrett, 47, will not have a title or represent Norway’s royal house when he and Märtha Louise marry, according to the statement. The pair, who have been together since May 2019, according to Norwegian media, will attend family-related occasions and traditional royal events.

Märtha Louise has three daughters from her first marriage, which ended in 2016. According to Norwegian media, she plans to relocate to California with them. The palace did not say whether the change for Märtha Louise would have any effect on her daughters.

Alongside her royal duties, the princess has written books in which she claimed to have contact with angels._


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> The only podcasts I listen to are Lex Fridman and Joe Rogan , some politics, conspiracy theories, tech. So I have nothing to compare MM to …
> What topics do other influencers cover ?
> What topics could she cover ?



I don't really think of her as an influencer, do you? I really don't know what she is qualified to discuss week after week.  I can't think of anything other than _How To Land A Prince_ but that would take maybe 1 episode!  (Do your research and homework on him and his mum, agree with everything he says, make yourself as pretty as possible, astonish him with your bedroom skills.)

The podcasts that DH and I listen to are on real estate, the global economy, technology, investing and money management, and DH listens to podcasts about his favorite sports teams.   All of these provide a whole host of new data and information constantly so they are always interesting and fresh. Listening to some celebrity go on about their life and hardships would not last 1 minute in our house.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> I don't really think of her as an influencer, do you? I really don't know what she is qualified to discuss week after week.  I can't think of anything other than _How To Land A Prince_ but that would take maybe 1 episode!  (Do your research and homework on him and his mum, agree with everything he says, make yourself as pretty as possible, astonish him with your bedroom skills.)
> 
> The podcasts that DH and I listen to are on real estate, the global economy, technology, investing and money management, and DH listens to podcasts about his favorite sports teams.   All of these provide a whole host of new data and information constantly so they are always interesting and fresh. *Listening to some celebrity go on about their life and hardships would not last 1 minute in our house.*



I don't feel like many people want to spend their time listening to someone in a position of privilege sit and complain about outdated stereotypes. People are looking to be enlightened or entertained. TW's podcast does neither.


----------



## piperdog

youngster said:


> I don't really think of her as an influencer, do you? I really don't know what she is qualified to discuss week after week.  I can't think of anything other than _How To Land A Prince_ but that would take maybe 1 episode!  (Do your research and homework on him and his mum, agree with everything he says, make yourself as pretty as possible, astonish him with your bedroom skills.)
> 
> The podcasts that DH and I listen to are on real estate, the global economy, technology, investing and money management, and DH listens to podcasts about his favorite sports teams.   All of these provide a whole host of new data and information constantly so they are always interesting and fresh. Listening to some celebrity go on about their life and hardships would not last 1 minute in our house.


_How to Land a Prince_ and _How to Alienate Entire Countries _because these are the only two things she seems to have some talent at. Honestly, all of their endeavors should just be called _Petty Revenge:_ Harry's book about the misfortune that he wasn't born first. Meghan's podcast series responding to every mean thing that's ever been said to or about her. I can't even imagine what a CF the Netflix "reality" show is going to be.


----------



## sdkitty

re Archewell and their "activism" - I was trying to think whether I was being fair and whether I was holding them to the same standards as other "celebrity activists"
I thought of Eva Longoria.  I think it's fair to say she is actually doing something....while the two grifters are just posing






						Home - Eva Longoria Foundation
					






					evalongoriafoundation.org


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> re Archewell and their "activism" - I was trying to think whether I was being fair and whether I was holding them to the same standards as other "celebrity activists"
> I thought of Eva Longoria.  I think it's fair to say she is actually doing something....while the two grifters are just posing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Home - Eva Longoria Foundation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> evalongoriafoundation.org


I think the bottom line is money. They don’t have enough to do what other well know celebs have done. Talk is cheap and plentiful.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?


----------



## Luvbolide

At the risk of sounding shallow or even a b**ch (have to check with TW on that), I really think that Harry is just not good looking enough to have the entire cover of his book be just his face.  There, I said it!

But I do think the entire situation can be saved if they switch the photo to Ginge and Cringe at the service at the Jubilee.  But first they will have to crop it and enlarge it so that the focus is entirely on … Lt. Colonel Jonny Thompson!!  They will probably be able to sell a lot more copies.  Although I wouldn’t be surprised if most people would take the cover and leave the book behind!


----------



## LittleStar88

Here's the transcript for today's borefest whinecast:



			https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Final-Archetypes-EP9-To-B-or-not-to-B_rev.pdf


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I hate when the podcaster makes it about themselves instead of the person they're intervewing.  I used to listen to Marc Maron.  He had a lot of good guests but I didn't like that he inserted himself into every conversation.  I prefer to hear about the person being interviewed, their projects, their history.


Oprah does that too.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I don't really think of her as an influencer, do you? I really don't know what she is qualified to discuss week after week.  I can't think of anything other than _How To Land A Prince_ but that would take maybe 1 episode!  (Do your research and homework on him and his mum, agree with everything he says, make yourself as pretty as possible, astonish him with your bedroom skills.)
> 
> The podcasts that DH and I listen to are on real estate, the global economy, technology, investing and money management, and DH listens to podcasts about his favorite sports teams.   All of these provide a whole host of new data and information constantly so they are always interesting and fresh. Listening to some celebrity go on about their life and hardships would not last 1 minute in our house.


You outed me ... LOL,  my word influencer was badly chosen .. MM influences nothing ... I was thinking of Michelle O but trying to stay out of politics - what would you call MO ? MM is not in the same class, but she strives to be MO?


----------



## CobaltBlu

LittleStar88 said:


> Here's the transcript for today's borefest whinecast:
> 
> 
> 
> https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Final-Archetypes-EP9-To-B-or-not-to-B_rev.pdf





> I was just chatting with my girlfriends recently and I was asking them, for the show, what are the sort of archetypes you think we should discuss? *And almost immediately, unequivocally – they all jumped to “difficult” – that’s the word! You have to talk about difficult!, they said.* It gets thrown around so casually now. And as a woman… my friend said to me… there’s a certain point when you come to terms with the fact that not everyone's going to like you. The goal can't be for everyone to like you, but the goal can be for them to respect you.



Is there no one who can explain to her and her ditsy friends what an archetype is?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

This really struck me in that vanity fair article.
I didnt share it at the time because meh, she bores me silly. But this thing she does, filling her empty shell of a self with other people, is so bizarre; she is pathological in her need to model after other people. 

It's come up on this thread a few times.  She is such a weirdo.



> *Going through the process you did with the monarchy and then becoming a private citizen again, are those institutions similar?*
> 
> Every business has a model. I worked for NBCUniversal and the USA Network, and that was all part of a very large organization. Bonnie Hammer was my mentor. Very early on in “Suits,” she took me under her wing, and that was invaluable to me. Talk about a woman who can balance being a mom, creating so much in the industry and having a very strong sense of self! *I would sit at breakfast with her, studying what she ordered, hanging on her every word.*


----------



## purseinsanity

Freak4Coach said:


> Tad harsh on ol’ Mick don’t you think?


That's why I said wannabe


----------



## Gal4Dior

CobaltBlu said:


> Is there no one who can explain to her and her ditsy friends what an archetype is?


Well, she didn't seem to understand that Tig wasn't short for Tignanello - being so "wordly" and "sophisticated" I'm "surprised" she didn't catch that.


----------



## Aimee3

lanasyogamama said:


> Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?



She probably voted for herself…you know, a write-in vote!


----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> Gag. So now we’re in denial that some women can be b!tches. We all get a free pass to be horrible! No matter what you say or do, you are really just misunderstood for being strong. The very word gives Meghan hives.
> 
> From _People_:
> 
> In a voiceover, Meghan said that the implication of the "very charged word" is that such women are "difficult."
> 
> "Which is really just a euphemism, or is probably not even a euphemism. It's really a code word for the B-word," she said before Thede dug into the power of reclaiming the word. While Meghan later said that she had "zero interest" in doing the same and joked that she hates the term so much that the conversation was giving her "hives," she praised the notion, saying, "these women I respect, whose work I love, a lot of them are entirely comfortable with that. They want to do that, to take the power out of it."


I guess she was Baroness B*tch in addition to Duchess Difficult.


Jayne1 said:


> Oprah does that too.


I've intentionally started referring to her as op-ra in honor of Tom Bower.


CobaltBlu said:


> Is there no one who can explain to *her and her ditsy friends* what an archetype is?


What friends?  I think she just refers to the various versions of herself as her friends.  No one refers to TW as their friend unless it's in a transactional setting.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> She could definitely interview people without telling her own stories. Or outside of straight interviews, there are podcasts about books, restaurants, child rearing, science, makeup, health, tv shows, really anything!


But then she would have to do actual work researching various topics. It's easier for her just to spout off about her life experiences because they're just so relatable and everyone wants to hear all about them, right?


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Is there no one who can explain to her and her ditsy friends what an archetype is?


What do you call it when a word is used improperly for so long that the wrong interpretation eventually becomes the accepted version?


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Oprah does that too.


Fun fact, the cover photo on the O magazine was always Oprah herself, with few exceptions. Every month. Over twenty years. That should tell you something about why she and MM gravitated toward each other. Birds of a feather.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> You outed me ... LOL, my word influencer was badly chosen .. She influences nothing ... I was thinking of Michelle O but trying to stay out of politics - what would you call MO ? MM is not in the same class, but she strives to be MO?



I'd describe Michelle O as a former First Lady so she is a legitimate public figure in the U.S. who has hit the campaign trail for years and given probably a thousand speeches in small, medium and big cities all across the country, whether you agree with her or like her, or not.  I don't think she is an influencer the way we usually think of influencers, as a person trying to convince others to buy _something,_ whether it is fashion, technology, food, travel, though, at their core, I guess all politicians are influencers per se, trying to influence you to vote their way.  I guess Michelle would also like you to buy her books and listen to her podcast if she is still doing one.  

I think Meghan dreams of having an influence on public life and debate in America but she doesn't have the experience or resume for it. She's a former actress and the wife of Prince Harry.  She'd last 5 minutes in a hard hitting interview or public town hall with real questions from real people. She sticks to the easy stuff: issuing statements and doing photo ops.  So, I'd describe her as a celebrity, someone famous for who she married, and that pretty much sums her up.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Fun fact, the cover photo on the O magazine was always Oprah herself, with few exceptions. Every month. Over twenty years. That should tell you something about why she and MM gravitated toward each other. Birds of a feather.



I always wondered about that. I'd see O magazine in the stores and think, why is she on the cover _again_?  How many covers are enough?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I'm really not looking forward to seeing her at the coronation. Please don't invite her, Charles!  She will go around alternating between smirks and faux serious, and there will be an avalanche of pro-Zed pieces claiming she has a special bond to TQ and TK.


If he has to invite them, which he probably can't avoid, I hope there will be a ban on wearing tiaras. They should be limited to just Camilla and Catherine. You know TW is counting on her tiara photo op. He has already stated that his coronation will be much different than his mother's, so let's hope he means it.


----------



## purseinsanity

CobaltBlu said:


> Is there no one who can explain to her and her ditsy friends what an archetype is?


She was "chatting with her girlfriends"?  Sophie Trudeau during wine fest and who else??


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> I'd describe Michelle O as a former First Lady so she is a legitimate public figure in the U.S. who has hit the campaign trail for years and given probably a thousand speeches in small, medium and big cities all across the country, whether you agree with her or like her, or not.  I don't think she is an influencer the way we usually think of influencers, as a person trying to convince others to buy _something,_ whether it is fashion, technology, food, travel, though, at their core, I guess all politicians are influencers per se, trying to influence you to vote their way.  I guess Michelle would also like you to buy her books and listen to her podcast if she is still doing one.
> 
> I think Meghan dreams of having an influence on public life and debate in America but she doesn't have the experience or resume for it. She's a former actress and the wife of Prince Harry.  She'd last 5 minutes in a hard hitting interview or public town hall with real questions from real people. She sticks to the easy stuff: issuing statements and doing photo ops.  So, I'd describe her as a celebrity, someone famous for who she married, and that pretty much sums her up.


But…but…she thinks she’s a famous actress and supermodel! In her own mind, maybe H is famous for having married her


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I'd describe Michelle O as a former First Lady so she is a legitimate public figure in the U.S. who has hit the campaign trail for years and given probably a thousand speeches in small, medium and big cities all across the country, whether you agree with her or like her, or not.  I don't think she is an influencer the way we usually think of influencers, as a person trying to convince others to buy _something,_ whether it is fashion, technology, food, travel, though, at their core, I guess all politicians are influencers per se, trying to influence you to vote their way.  I guess Michelle would also like you to buy her books and listen to her podcast if she is still doing one.
> 
> I think Meghan dreams of having an influence on public life and debate in America but she doesn't have the experience or resume for it. She's a former actress and the wife of Prince Harry.  She'd last 5 minutes in a hard hitting interview or public town hall with real questions from real people. She sticks to the easy stuff: issuing statements and doing photo ops.  So, I'd describe her as a celebrity, someone famous for who she married, and that pretty much sums her up.


She cannot think on her feet. That alone would make her a failure in politics. When something unexpected happens she is stumped. That is why she does everything she can to control her environment and stay on script.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> But…but…she thinks she’s a famous actress and supermodel! In her own mind, maybe H is famous for having married her



Don't give her ideas.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> I always wondered about that. I'd see O magazine in the stores and think, why is she on the cover _again_?  How many covers are enough?


Oprah shared the cover with Michelle O and Ellen on separate occasions, but the only non-Oprah subject ever was Breonna Taylor, the Kentucky woman killed by a cop in her home. I hadn't made the connection before between Oprah/Ellen/MM, but I'm going to assume O introduced MM to Ellen. And as we know, the rest is history....


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Is there no one who can explain to her and her ditsy friends what an archetype is?


Reading bit from Victoria Jackson interview - cosmetics giant ... producer cuts into the podcast to say the story may be disturbing for some

See para on page 15 "always feeling again ", chaotic family then 10 lines of a  quote from VJ is about an attack she survived.  
The story takes up 1/4 of a page in a 23 pg podcast. Blink and you will miss the story.  The story raises more questions than it answers. Why was it included ?? 

The producers edited the heck out of this ??? Further proof that MM is trying to avoid all controversy by blanding out the podcast ? 

If you google VJ you will find stuff on Victoria Jackson from SNL. The Wiki page fro the cosmetics entrepreneur is virtually empty - WEIRD





						Victoria Jackson (entrepreneur) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think the bottom line is money. They don’t have enough to do what other well know celebs have done. Talk is cheap and plentiful.


maybe if the didn't live in a 16-bath mansion, they'd have more to share


----------



## charlottawill

'The Sage of Santa Barbara" 



> https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/meghan-speaks-out-again/


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Loosely related... TW and Handbag may be getting some neighbors to commiserate with.


Or someone to attempt to unload their house on


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?



I think it's just a shadow/lighting, but mine are slightly uneven, it's not uncommon.


----------



## charlottawill

"Have a nice day Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor!". I'm sure that would drive her crazy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> If he has to invite them, which he probably can't avoid, I hope there will be a ban on wearing tiaras. They should be limited to just Camilla and Catherine. You know TW is counting on her tiara photo op. He has already stated that his coronation will be much different than his mother's, so let's hope he means it.


In all fairness, Princess Anne deserves to wear her tiara as much as the married-in ones. She has been a staunch supporter of both Charles and the late QEII carrying out her duties while taking a lot of verbal abuse for her appearance without ever complaining and as the daughter of a Queen, she is a true royal princess.


----------



## bubablu

lanasyogamama said:


> Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?



And still no eye roll (or barf) emoji in the bottom bar, even if @purseinsanity has made a formal request, I'm sad, lol.


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?



I guess she's setting a good example for her stans but no one else cares


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Gag. So now we’re in denial that some women can be b!tches. We all get a free pass to be horrible! No matter what you say or do, you are really just misunderstood for being strong. The very word gives Meghan hives.
> 
> From _People_:
> 
> In a voiceover, Meghan said that the implication of the "very charged word" is that such women are "difficult."
> 
> "Which is really just a euphemism, or is probably not even a euphemism. It's really a code word for the B-word," she said before Thede dug into the power of reclaiming the word. While Meghan later said that she had "zero interest" in doing the same and joked that she hates the term so much that the conversation was giving her "hives," she praised the notion, saying, "these women I respect, whose work I love, a lot of them are entirely comfortable with that. They want to do that, to take the power out of it."


She sure knows how to bring out the gag reflex in others when she speaks. Talented in something finally.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> She sure knows how to bring out the gag reflex in others when she speaks. Talented in something finally.


Well, I’m sure she overcame her own gag reflex years ago. I’ll see myself to the corner now.


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s another term she isn’t using correctly. It isn’t gaslighting when she is called difficult. 

Nobody is trying to deceive you, Megsy! If they say you are being difficult, it’s because they mean exactly that.

The Duchess of Sussex, 41, said the word “difficult” is used to “gaslight” strong women in the ninth and latest episode of her Archetypes podcast.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> She cannot think on her feet.* That alone would make her a failure in politics. *When something unexpected happens she is stumped. That is why she does everything she can to control her environment and stay on script.


She is a pathological liar though.  That would qualify her for a good politician.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all fairness, Princess Anne deserves to wear her tiara as much as the married-in ones. She has been a staunch supporter of both Charles and the late QEII carrying out her duties while taking a lot of verbal abuse for her appearance without ever complaining and as the daughter of a Queen, she is a true royal princess.


I hope there's a small one for Charlotte too, lol.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all fairness, Princess Anne deserves to wear her tiara as much as the married-in ones. She has been a staunch supporter of both Charles and the late QEII carrying out her duties while taking a lot of verbal abuse for her appearance without ever complaining and as the daughter of a Queen, she is a true royal princess.


Yes tiaras … so many families have sold theirs for death duties 
And Bea and Eugenie don’t own any 
MM may really get the dregs of the royal collection


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope there's a small one for Charlotte too, lol.


There were tiny coronets for the princesses when their dad King George Vi was crowned but surely Lilibet won’t get the extra one


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> She is a pathological liar though.  That would qualify her for a good politician.


The US press mostly props her up. That would also help her campaign.

Still, she’s too fragile to survive in politics. Nobody will cut her a break when she starts looking all sad and weepy. ETA: or b!tchy difficult


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> She cannot think on her feet. That alone would make her a failure in politics. When something unexpected happens she is stumped. That is why she does everything she can to control her environment and stay on script.


The group sponsoring her speech in Indianapolis has banned media and I think I read, cell phones.    C O N T R O L  F R E A K


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Yes tiaras … so many families have sold theirs for death duties
> And Bea and Eugenie don’t own any
> MM may really get the dregs of the royal collection


PS there was also the moment in the QEII and previous coronations where peers and peeresses put on the coronets showing their rank
The ladies in the days of QEII had a tiny coronet that fit inside the tiaras, and they wore both at the same time
I have no clue whether the coronets were of precious metal, they certainly were ermine timed.
MM would put up a hissy fit about the fur

Marina of Kent , duchess at front , wears tiara and tiny cornet, Alexandra has only a coronet








						Princess Marina wearing both festoon tiara and coronet, leaving Westminster Abeey after the Coronation | Coronation, Royal jewels, British royal families
					

Jan 26, 2016 - Princess Marina wearing both festoon tiara and coronet, leaving Westminster Abeey after the Coronation




					www.pinterest.dk
				




The peers in their coronets are further down on page








						Coronation Dress
					

Monarch’s robes The monarch or sovereign wears a variety of different robes and other garments during the course of the ceremony: Crimson surcoat – the regular dress during most of the ceremony, worn under all other robes. This was replaced by the Coronation Dress for Her Majesty Queen...



					kingscoronation.com


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Let's think about it this way: anyone who signs up for voter services with ArghWell is likely to be a Zed fan. This way, the Harkles can gauge where their public support is and target this segment of the voters for both votes and campaign volunteers, if/when she decides that she should bless the US with her wisdom as President and Handbag can be the First Sparry.



No it's just to harvest sell their data.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> If he has to invite them, which he probably can't avoid, I hope there will be a ban on wearing tiaras. They should be limited to just Camilla and Catherine. You know TW is counting on her tiara photo op. He has already stated that his coronation will be much different than his mother's, so let's hope he means it.


Do they have to lend her one?


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?




Of course it's PSd


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> The group sponsoring her speech in Indianapolis has banned media and I think I read, cell phones.    C O N T R O L  F R E A K


You can bet she will have her own photographer there.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> I'm really not looking forward to seeing her at the coronation. Please don't invite her, Charles!  She will go around alternating between smirks and faux serious, and there will be an avalanche of pro-Zed pieces claiming* she has a special bond to TQ and TK.*


Just the thought of anyone thinking this is true makes me want to


----------



## Toby93

_How did we not notice this  


_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> there is nothing new about this conversation....been going on since Bette Davis


Yes, but Bette Davis was an outstanding actress while ZedZed only pretends to be an actress with her most famous role being that of a yacht girl.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Is this photoshopped or are her eyes uneven?



Might be photoshopped. I think it's because on the left, the foliage is large and clearly seen. Then on the right, it's unfocused, small leaves and receding. Makes her image look unbalanced.


CobaltBlu said:


> Is there no one who can explain to her and her ditsy friends what an archetype is?


I'm still amazed that she has friends. Sophie, Janina and some starstruck stans? 


CobaltBlu said:


> This really struck me in that vanity fair article.
> I didnt share it at the time because meh, she bores me silly. But this thing she does, filling her empty shell of a self with other people, is so bizarre; she is pathological in her need to model after other people.
> 
> It's come up on this thread a few times.  She is such a weirdo.


Agree. When someone mentors you, the mentor is trying to share something other than and more significant than what she orders for breakfast. 


bag-mania said:


> What do you call it when a word is used improperly for so long that the wrong interpretation eventually becomes the accepted version?


Semantic change or shift. Check out the Urban Dictionary. Her stans are trying to change the meaning of Markle to a positive definition.


----------



## bag-mania

Does anyone remember how many episodes of the podcast she made? I want to say it was either 10 or 12. If it is 10 then next week’s show will be the last one.


----------



## Suncatcher

I hope next week is on the topic of being boring. Because that’s what she is.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> In all fairness, Princess Anne deserves to wear her tiara as much as the married-in ones. She has been a staunch supporter of both Charles and the late QEII carrying out her duties while taking a lot of verbal abuse for her appearance without ever complaining and as the daughter of a Queen, she is a true royal princess.


Just limit it to *working royals. *


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> I hope there's a small one for Charlotte too, lol.


Probably not: 

 "In an interview with Town and Country jewelry expert, Geoffrey Munn explained the tiara’s hidden meaning. He said: “Any woman may wear one, but ancient tradition has it that they must be a bride or already married. The tiara has its roots in classical antiquity and was seen as an emblem of the loss of innocence to the crowning of love."

But there's always her father's coronation.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Do they have to lend her one?


Maybe she can just gel her spaniel ears and straggly fringe into upright position, and buy a more golden shade of her favourite spray tan to colour them. Hmmm, wouldn't she be triggered by such symbols of colonialism, racism and imperialism like crowns and tiaras? And heaven forbid that she is offered a coronet - that would be sexist and demeaning!  (Just hand her that large crown ... what do you mean it's for the king?)


bag-mania said:


> Does anyone remember how many episodes of the podcast she made? I want to say it was either 10 or 12. If it is 10 then next week’s show will be the last one.


I went through a happy phase thinking there were only 8 


Suncatcher said:


> I hope next week is on the topic of being boring. Because that’s what she is.


She is so easily offended and so easy to offend, that I'm sure she has many more insults to address. Her main problem (or her massive team's main problem) would be to find enough victims to identify with her insults and appear on her flopcast.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> If he has to invite them, which he probably can't avoid, I hope there will be a ban on wearing tiaras. They should be limited to just Camilla and Catherine. You know TW is counting on her tiara photo op. He has already stated that his coronation will be much different than his mother's, so let's hope he means it.


If he invites them, they will have minders on them 24/7.  KC 3 will not trust them for a moment to do something to ruin it for him or take away all the attention from him.  That may seem petty to some, but the man waited his whole life for this moment and it belongs to him and he doesn't have to share it if he doesn't want to.  I really think that they have proven themselves loose cannons given prior events.  Making a fuss about the procession, arriving late at the Jubilee service so they could have all the attention on them walking down the aisle, and when reaching  the row, wanting Bea to move so they could be closer to William and Kate.  It would be harder to pull something like this now since William has formally been declared PoW, but I don't put it past them to try anyway.  Harry will whine that he is the son of the King and should be treated extra special.

Ultimately nothing will be decided until the book comes out.


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> During her short time as a working royal, she was occasionally referred to as "Duchess Difficult" so here is an episode that discusses being considered "difficult" and how it is a code word for the b word, and off she goes with her defense of difficult people who are really just "strong".  The whole podcast is about her, every episode, and using it to clap back at her critics and the media. Maybe she thinks she is being subtle lol.


I say someone is "difficult" when what I really want to say can't be said in public. The most "difficult" office narc I ever had was codenamed "Sotong". This is a Malay word for squid, which in my neck of woods is used for people who are clueless. Should I call Zed "Sotong"? But she resembles an octopus more with all those tentacles coiling around Sparry.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh yeah. 

_








						Meghan speaks out (again)
					

These days, the Duchess of Sussex’s ambitions are a little more grandiose than that of a mere English county. Now, the recalcitrant royal seems to have her heart set on being the voice of all women everywhere, unconfined by the constraints of mere geography or taste. For in the latest edition of...




					www.spectator.co.uk
				



These days, the Duchess of Sussex’s ambitions are a little more grandiose than that of a mere English county. Now, the recalcitrant royal seems to have her heart set on being the voice of all women everywhere, unconfined by the constraints of mere geography or taste. For in the latest edition of her egomaniacal Archetypes podcast, the performance artist formerly known as Meghan Markle opted to suggest that epithets like her ‘Difficult Duchess’ nickname stemmed, in part, from (shock, horror) gendered sexism rather than, er, claims of objectionable personal behaviour.

With remarkable understatement, the Duchess sighed to her listeners that ‘not everyone is going to like you’ but that they ‘should respect you’ regardless. In an episode titled ‘To “B” or not to “B”’ the former Suits star brought her experience to bear on the meaning of the word ‘*****.’ When the aforementioned expletive is used, according to the sage of Santa Barbara, ‘What these people are implying when they use that very charged word, is that this woman: “Oh, she’s difficult”. Which is really just a euphemism or is probably not even a euphemism. It’s really a codeword for the B-word’. 

She continued: ‘Of course, names hurt but what happens when we use that pain to fuel purpose, when the b word is shouted with one intent, but you’re able to let it go and to remind yourself of all the other words with a ‘B’ that better describe you. Beautiful, blessed, brilliant. beguiling, blissful, bedazzling. Take your pick’.

Boring? Bland? Banal? All spring to mind when reviewing this ‘difficult’ listen…_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just limit it to *working royals. *


Why? For example, when a player commits a severe foul and is ejected from a game, the referee doesn't eject the entire team. Similarly the BRF should eject or reject ZedZed, Dufus and Andrew for their foul behaviour and allow the others to enjoy and rejoice with Charles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> Why? For example, when a player commits a severe foul and is ejected from a game, the referee doesn't eject the entire team. Similarly the BRF should eject or reject ZedZed, Dufus and Andrew for their foul behaviour and allow the others to enjoy and rejoice with Charles.


You’re right. Maybe if they say something like members of the BRF who have lost their military medals cannot attend.  There, no one can call KCIII a racist if he uses that excuse.  Does he really need an excuse?


----------



## bag-mania

Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.   

"That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a visceral reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these stereotypes that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh yeah.
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan speaks out (again)
> 
> 
> These days, the Duchess of Sussex’s ambitions are a little more grandiose than that of a mere English county. Now, the recalcitrant royal seems to have her heart set on being the voice of all women everywhere, unconfined by the constraints of mere geography or taste. For in the latest edition of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These days, the Duchess of Sussex’s ambitions are a little more grandiose than that of a mere English county. Now, the recalcitrant royal seems to have her heart set on being the voice of all women everywhere, unconfined by the constraints of mere geography or taste. For in the latest edition of her egomaniacal Archetypes podcast, the performance artist formerly known as Meghan Markle opted to suggest that epithets like her ‘Difficult Duchess’ nickname stemmed, in part, from (shock, horror) gendered sexism rather than, er, claims of objectionable personal behaviour.
> 
> With remarkable understatement, the Duchess sighed to her listeners that ‘not everyone is going to like you’ but that they ‘should respect you’ regardless. In an episode titled ‘To “B” or not to “B”’ the former Suits star brought her experience to bear on the meaning of the word ‘*****.’ When the aforementioned expletive is used, according to the sage of Santa Barbara, ‘What these people are implying when they use that very charged word, is that this woman: “Oh, she’s difficult”. Which is really just a euphemism or is probably not even a euphemism. It’s really a codeword for the B-word’.
> 
> She continued: ‘Of course, names hurt but what happens when we use that pain to fuel purpose, when the b word is shouted with one intent, but you’re able to let it go and to remind yourself of all the other words with a ‘B’ that better describe you. Beautiful, blessed, brilliant. beguiling, blissful, bedazzling. Take your pick’.
> 
> Boring? Bland? Banal? All spring to mind when reviewing this ‘difficult’ listen…_


Bull$hit is usually the B word (besides beeyotch) I associate with her.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.
> 
> "That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a visceral reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these stereotypes that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."


I was quite an avid reader, and I have (I think) a very good vocabulary, but I must be getting ADHD as I age, because I can only get through the first couple sentences before my mind thinks "WTF is she talking about?" before wandering off.
Saying "visceral" must make her feel intelligent.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Because *it was implanted on a granular level *without any of us thinking about it at the time._

Who did the implanting? Aliens?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.
> 
> *"That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a visceral reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these stereotypes that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."*


I don't read any of ZedZed's gibberish anymore and we need to ask her...


----------



## needlv

So if you want to have a little laugh To yourself you can read the snark. Published by the Times about Mm’s podcast here:



			archive.ph
		



My favourite parts:

As for poor old Meghan — sorry, womankind in general, my bad — the “difficult” label is used to deflect attention from her “awesome qualities: persistence, strength, perseverance”, and I am confident that when a courtier wrote a memo accusing Meghan of “unacceptable” behaviour, the sort of behaviour that led some palace employees to call themselves the Sussex Survivors Club, what he actually meant was: “I want to salute her awesomeness, persistence and strength. She is bedazzling.”






and this gem:

“As a woman,” Meghan says in closing, “you come to terms with the fact that not everyone’s going to like you. The goal can’t be for everyone to like you. *But the goal can be for them to respect you.*” The Sussex Survivors Club were unavailable for comment.


….

Sorry Meghan.  Respect is earned and you have not done anything to earn my respect.  In fact, you lost respect the second you appeared in front of the cameras and cried about how “no one asked you if you were ok” (because being a duchess with people to meet your whims is super hard)…, in another country -  the day after visiting people who are so poor they don’t know where their next meal is, or the fact that women suffer from the most horrific violence.

Between that and airing family secrets and telling lies on Oprah, you lost all respect.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Luvbolide

purseinsanity said:


> She was "chatting with her girlfriends"?  Sophie Trudeau during wine fest and who else??


Omid Scabies?


----------



## Freak4Coach

purseinsanity said:


> That's why I said wannabe



Touché


----------



## pukasonqo

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.
> 
> "That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a visceral reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these stereotypes that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."


What does she mean by granular level?


----------



## Hyacinth

CarryOn2020 said:


> In some circles [ahem], they are called _slut strands_.  Google tells me there is an SS society on the insta.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slut strand - Wiktionary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wiktionary.org





xincinsin said:


> Maybe she can just gel her spaniel ears and straggly fringe into upright position, and buy a more golden shade of her favourite spray tan to colour them. Hmmm, wouldn't she be triggered by such symbols of colonialism, racism and imperialism like crowns and tiaras? And heaven forbid that she is offered a coronet - that would be sexist and demeaning!  (Just hand her that large crown ... what do you mean it's for the king?)
> 
> I went through a happy phase thinking there were only 8
> 
> She is so easily offended and so easy to offend, that I'm sure she has many more insults to address. Her main problem (or her massive team's main problem) would be to find enough victims to identify with her insults and appear on her flopcast.




I think the use of the term "slut strands" should definitely be encouraged, since it already has a confirmed history behind it, both here and on Wiktionary. 


			https://forum.purseblog.com/search/1821315/?q=slut+strands&t=post&c[thread]=679793&o=relevance
		


Maybe MeMeMeGain could make it the subject of one of her podcrashes?


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Because *it was implanted on a granular level *without any of us thinking about it at the time._
> 
> Who did the implanting? Aliens?


Aliens 
You know, it occurred to me today: her stans like to insult Catherine by calling her a Stepford wife; in which case, I think Zed is like a pod person, predatory, empty, mimicking others.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.
> 
> "That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a *visceral* reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these stereotypes that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."



So proud of her, she learned it's visceral instead of guttural!


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So proud of her, she learned it's visceral instead of guttural!


Now she has to figure out that "it was implanted on *a granular level* without any of us thinking about it at the time" probably only applies to her sugars.




And just for laughs, a description of Travelyst.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lady C's newest:


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> I was quite an avid reader, and I have (I think) a very good vocabulary, but I must be getting ADHD as I age, because I can only get through the first couple sentences before my mind thinks "WTF is she talking about?" before wandering off.
> Saying "visceral" must make her feel intelligent.


She has a _visceral_ reaction, as opposed to the _guttural_ one she usually writes about. Yawn

ETA:  Sorry, I was a few pages behind and see @QueenofWrapDress beat me to it!


----------



## Aimee3

Can TW put a sentence together that actually makes sense?  It’s a good thing she probably spends no time with the invisible kids because can you imagine how in the world these kids would be able to learn a language that people could understand?


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone remember how many episodes of the podcast she made? I want to say it was either 10 or 12. If it is 10 t*hen next week’s show will be the last one.*



We can only hope


----------



## lanasyogamama

Difficult is a euphemism for b*tch. Who cares? Some people are difficult, that’s life. 

I’ve been using “prickly” lately to describe men and women if I need to get that message across, seems to work.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Probably not:
> 
> "In an interview with Town and Country jewelry expert, Geoffrey Munn explained the tiara’s hidden meaning. He said: “Any woman may wear one, but ancient tradition has it that they must be a bride or already married. The tiara has its roots in classical antiquity and was seen as an emblem of the loss of innocence to the crowning of love."
> 
> But there's always her father's coronation.



I think it goes bag to hair-dos as well. Traditionally, unmarried adolescent, girls could wear their hair long and down, whereas married women styled it and wore it up. 

However, an unmarried woman (over 21) may also be styled as married rather than be styled as a girl.


----------



## papertiger

pukasonqo said:


> What does she mean by granular level?



Granular level, guttural intonations? 

More like gutter-level and granular utterances.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Now she has to figure out that "it was implanted on *a granular level* without any of us thinking about it at the time" probably only applies to her sugars.
> 
> View attachment 5649219
> 
> 
> And just for laughs, a description of Travelyst.
> View attachment 5649220


I did notice you chose a picture of brown sugar not white ….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> I did notice you chose a picture of brown sugar not white ….


Actually, it was raw sugar, in honour of Sparry's allegedly raw unflinching honesty


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of sugar, I was considering going cold turkey on Harry and Ghoul for a bit while I enjoy my Christmas baking and presents from the kitchen time, but I'd miss you all


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Saying "visceral" must make her feel intelligent.


It’s a dramatic word for a dramatic woman.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of sugar, I was considering going cold turkey on Harry and Ghoul for a bit while I enjoy my Christmas baking and presents from the kitchen time, but I'd miss you all


This thread moves too fast. It is hard for me to catch up when I take a break. Even on busy days I make sure to check in at least once so I don’t get behind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> This thread moves too fast. It is hard for me to catch up when I take a break. Even on busy days I make sure to check in at least once so I don’t get behind.


I just start at the end and go backwards.  It does move fast and the comments are gold, if I may say.

Now this is interesting - is she really pap-walking in her backyard?


----------



## jennlt

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just start at the end and go backwards.  It does move fast and the comments are gold, if I may say.
> 
> Now this is interesting - is she really pap-walking in her backyard?



My vote goes  to the cat.


----------



## Suncatcher

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.
> 
> "That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a visceral reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these stereotypes that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."


Until I read this I considered myself a pretty smart person. Now I’m not so sure as I don’t understand one bit of what she is trying to say.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Suncatcher said:


> Until I read this I considered myself a pretty smart person. Now I’m not so sure as I don’t understand one bit of what she is trying to say.



I'd worry more if we fully got her to be honest. Because that chick doesn't make sense most of the time.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of sugar, I was considering going cold turkey on Harry and Ghoul for a bit while I enjoy my Christmas baking and presents from the kitchen time, but I'd miss you all


Likewise


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd worry more if we fully got her to be honest. Because that chick doesn't make sense most of the time.


If I feel brave, maybe I'll look up what she was saying during her meagre days as a royal. I remember when she was a working royal, there was a lot of hand gestures and talking, but I can't recall anything she said. Was she talking gibberish back then?


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> The US press mostly props her up. That would also help her campaign.
> 
> Still, she’s too fragile to survive in politics. Nobody will cut her a break when she starts looking all sad and weepy. ETA: *or b!tchy difficult*


You had it right the first time.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was so occupied with her stupidity this didn't even occur to me.


----------



## rose60610

Wow. "Granular" and "visceral" are SUCH BIG WORDS! Latest ingredients to her word salads. I'm so impressed  . I suggest she add "toady", "sycophant", "charlatan" and "vilipend" to her dazzling repertoire. To describe herself.


----------



## bag-mania

Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?

_Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”

She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”









						Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
					

In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention with “bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


melody hobson was on her show?  uugh


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> melody hobson was on her show?  uugh


She has conned many people.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She has conned many people.


uugh....not comparable but anyway - last night I was watching Watch What Happens Live.  Laverne Cox was on.  Andy played a game where she was supposed to react to things - "care or don't care".  He showed a pic re king charles coronation.  she did a long pause and then said "Hi Meghan".  She said Meghan chose her for the cover of the Vogue issue she edited.  so she loves her of course.  transactional.
She also said Will *and Jada Smith *are icons.  So I'm not impressed with her judgment.

Hobson is a smart woman though.  and married to a very wealthy man.  I'm sure they give large donations to causes.  Maybe some of these guests of hers are doing the talk show circuit selling a book or something?


----------



## DL Harper

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to *absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”*
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Her intense focus and absorption failed her completely!!!  With all that info, wouldn't she have passed the British citizenship test with flying colors on the first take, no studying involved or help () from Haz????
The BS train continues to move along at an uncontrollable pace.


----------



## eon

bag-mania said:


> Here’s the big heaping helping of word salad that she laid on Victoria Jackson.
> 
> "That’s what I’m thinking about, maybe that’s why I have such a visceral reaction to this word," Meghan says. "Because it was implanted on a granular level without any of us thinking about it at the time. And so, these *stereotypes* that were lurking beneath the surface of these characterizations, they just became ingrained in us without any real understanding. Because these were complex women with a range of life experiences and nearly all of whom, wielded some kind of power and attempted in some ways to challenge the social order."


 
I'm still not over the fact she actually used the word stereotype


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I was quite an avid reader, and I have (I think) a very good vocabulary, but I must be getting ADHD as I age, because I can only get through the first couple sentences before my mind thinks "WTF is she talking about?" before wandering off.
> Saying "visceral" must make her feel intelligent.


People don’t speak like this naturally. I believe every word out of her mouth is scripted.


----------



## gracekelly

pukasonqo said:


> What does she mean by granular level?


She means cellular, but once again she is confusing words like with archetypes  and stereotypes


----------



## bubablu

jennlt said:


> My vote goes  to the cat.



Oh my god, love the cat and the sticker. BTW his eyes are crazy, but not as crazy as nutmeg.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> People don’t speak like this naturally. I believe every word out of her mouth is scripted.


There is a crew of 20+ working on the podcast to put lipstick on a pig. That’s a lot of people writing and editing. Not that I believe she always takes their recommendations.


----------



## bag-mania

eon said:


> I'm still not over the fact she actually used the word stereotype


Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


----------



## gracekelly

DL Harper said:


> Her intense focus and absorption failed her completely!!!  With all that info, wouldn't she have passed the British citizenship test with flying colors on the first take, no studying involved or help () from Haz????
> The BS train continues to move along at an uncontrollable pace.


Her intense focus and absorption should have made learning royal protocol a breeze. Meghan is really good at putting her foot in her mouth and that is about it


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> There is a crew of 20+ working on the podcast to put lipstick on a pig. That’s a lot of people writing and editing. Not that I believe she always takes their recommendations.


Yes, but these nonsensical phrases come from her   A trained writer would  not write these things. I think she takes what they write and embellishes it by throwing in the the wrong word in the wrong place. They dare not correct her and probably laugh at her behind her back.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Hobson is a smart woman though.  and married to a very wealthy man.  I'm sure they give large donations to causes.  Maybe some of these guests of hers are doing the talk show circuit selling a book or something?


Smart people can still be bamboozled. All it takes is not paying attention.


----------



## Hyacinth

Suncatcher said:


> Until I read this I considered myself a pretty smart person. Now I’m not so sure as I don’t understand one bit of what she is trying to say.



Join the "WTF? Club". My branch of the line to apply for membership starts near Chicago and extends all the way back to Terre Haute.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Alex Trebek passed away and Zed received texts of condolences?
She really does want to be the corpse at every funeral!


----------



## pukasonqo

xincinsin said:


> Alex Trebek passed away and Zed received texts of condolences?
> She really does want to be the corpse at every funeral!


Silly me, of course it has to be all about MEghan, she suffered a huge loss


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

Suncatcher said:


> Until I read this I considered myself a pretty smart person. Now I’m not so sure as I don’t understand one bit of what she is trying to say.


One of the side effects of exposure to TW is losing brain cells.  Fortunately, the damage can be undone by exposure to actual reality.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of sugar, I was considering going cold turkey on Harry and Ghoul for a bit while I enjoy my Christmas baking and presents from the kitchen time, but I'd miss you all


+ you would be missed!

But it is tempting, they are so toxic they make even the Grinch look merry and bright.


----------



## Genie27

Our granular gutteral Duchess is Mrs Malaprop - a character from a play by Richard Sheridan called, get this - _*The Rivals*_ !!! 





						Malapropism - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



From wiki:
The word "malapropism" (and its earlier variant "malaprop") comes from a character named "Mrs. Malaprop" in Richard Brinsley Sheridan's 1775 play _The Rivals_.[2] Mrs. Malaprop frequently misspeaks (to comic effect) by using words which do not have the meaning that she intends but which sound similar to words that do. Sheridan presumably chose her name in humorous reference to the word _malapropos,_ an adjective or adverb meaning "inappropriate" or "inappropriately", derived from the French phrase _mal à propos_ (literally "poorly placed"). According to the _Oxford English Dictionary_, the first recorded use of "malapropos" in English is from 1630,[3] and the first person known to have used the word "malaprop" in the sense of "a speech error" is Lord Byron in 1814.[4]


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Alex Trebek passed away and Zed received texts of condolences?
> She really does want to be the corpse at every funeral!


I must tell my GF who is friends with the late Alex and his wife.  She will roll her eyeballs.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Alex Trebek passed away and Zed received texts of condolences?


Princess Pinocchio must see her plastic surgeon once a year for a trim.


----------



## charlottawill

But this one ....you couldn't make this stuff up:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> There is a crew of 20+ working on the podcast to put lipstick on a pig. That’s a lot of people writing and editing. Not that I believe she always takes their recommendations.



If these words come from a professional team of writers and editors they should think about a career change. I think she just inserts that sh*t to sound distinguished.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> But it is tempting, they are so toxic they make even the Grinch look merry and bright.



Poor Grinch was actually bullied so maybe had a reason to be so grinchy. The Terrible Two are just spoiled.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Poor Grinch was actually bullied so maybe had a reason to be so grinchy. The Terrible Two are just spoiled.


That was the reimagined Grinch of the 2000 Jim Carrey movie. The REAL Grinch was a grumpy hermit who lived with his dog and was sick of noisy people bothering him with their nonsense. Somehow I feel a personal connection to that one. 

ETA: I dread what Meghan and Harry will do on Veterans Day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> That was the reimagined Grinch of the 2000 Jim Carrey movie. The REAL Grinch was a grumpy hermit who lived with his dog and was sick of noisy people bothering him with their nonsense. Somehow I feel a personal connection to that one.
> 
> View attachment 5649547



Yeah, I somehow cannot hate on the OG either. I am annoyed by my noisy neighbours daily


----------



## CobaltBlu

hahahaha!!!
Also...this is NOT calligraphy.

What a mess. She is a mess.

Seriously this just screams " I AM SO EXTRA"
And, Archwell cannot afford stationery?
Sad.







> aliyarrow​I’ve loved listening to #Archetypes with Meghan the Duchess of Sussex, however, I am partial to today’s ep “To ‘B’ or Not to ‘B’” (linked in my bio) because it does such important work dissecting and trying to understand the archetype of the “B.” She doesn’t use the word in the ep—a choice I didn’t expect (perhaps I should have?)—but one that I really appreciate, considering her incredible influence and reach. It’s a word that I work hard to avoid because of what I know about where it comes from and how it has been used systematically to derogate women. Thrilled to be part of this meaningful project; touched by this gorgeous thank you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I follow a psychologist on Twitter who has the most interesting threads on relationship patterns and childhood trauma. She just now posted something about love bombing and how to spot it (I personally would and have RUN, but apparently that's an unhealthy emotional reaction as well  )

Sooo. Signs of Love Bombing:

1. Relationship moves too quickly - e.g. pushing for commitment early (you mean, like inserting yourself into your bf's work by speaking to his office only weeks into dating?).

2. Love comes with conditions - unrealistic expectations how you should behave or act (like having your bf's press secretary put out a statement you are dating after mere months or else you will break up with them?).

3. They demand excessive attention - struggle with separation anxiety, allowing space, understanding the need for outside relationships (like people with no true friends and no family who decide you don't need yours anymore?), guilttrip partner anytime they are not the sole focus (like faking being suicidal?).

4. They are highly critical - shower their victim with praise but also criticism. This stems from people who lovebomb not being able to controll their emotions very well and lacking impulse control (would explain the extreme tantrums...I still don't feel bad for her, it's something we all need to learn and most of us do it before entering elementary school).

5. Don't understand or respect boundaries - own needs come before everyone else's needs. Interestingly the example here is "You tell them you need a quiet evening to catch up on work, they show up anyway". I remember some noise of someone showing up to a wedding after being uninvited.

Someone should catch her and study her in an controlled environment. 

Also, said psychologist calls love bombing not only a tool of manipulation but also a form of emotional abuse that often isn't recognized as such.


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> One of the side effects of exposure to TW is losing brain cells.  Fortunately, the damage can be undone by exposure to actual reality.


That has been my view about watching the real housewives shows.  I want to keep my IQ from going down.  I think Meghan instills a state of confusion where you begin to doubt your own mentation.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> hahahaha!!!
> Also...this is NOT calligraphy.
> 
> What a mess. She is a mess.
> 
> Seriously this just screams " I AM SO EXTRA"
> And, Archwell cannot afford stationery?
> Sad.
> 
> View attachment 5649551


Who is Allison Yarrow? From her comments she must be Head Sugar of Meghan's fan club.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> There is a crew of 20+ working on the podcast to put lipstick on a pig. That’s a lot of people writing and editing. Not that I believe she always takes their recommendations.


I counted 30 credited folks …not including the interviewees


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## MiniMabel

CobaltBlu said:


> hahahaha!!!
> Also...this is NOT calligraphy.
> 
> What a mess. She is a mess.
> 
> Seriously this just screams " I AM SO EXTRA"
> And, Archwell cannot afford stationery?
> Sad.
> 
> View attachment 5649551


I'm English, and seeing the M with the crown above it on the notepaper is like fingernails on a blackboard. 

And the writing, so pretentious and barely legible.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com



I'll take: "Bull Sh!t Stories That Never Happened" for $2000, Alex.

"Bated breath" and "intense focus" ?? Are you effing kidding me?  "Absorbing facts" is a skill that Claw obviously never the hang of.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I counted 30 credited folks …not including the interviewees


 Seriously? Think of all the poor podcasters out there who come up with their own content every week _for years_ and make almost no money. They have no help and they do it only for the love of their topic. Meghan needed a staff of 30, hired by Spotify, to help her fulfill an obligation she took on two years ago and did nothing. 

At least we can be fairly certain she won't be renewed. I don't think they could come up with another batch of stereotypes. They were scraping the bottom of the barrel for the ones they used.


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I somehow cannot hate on the OG either. I am annoyed by my noisy neighbours daily


Off topic, but I love this little things so much, I have to share: since I bought the Bose quitecomfort earbuds with noise cancelling, I don't want to kill everyone every time. Loud music/baby screaming/ lawn mower? I cannot hear you anymore, bye! And well, you can obviously use them to listen Zed's podcrash, but it's not recommended. But now someone has to help me: I always wanted to ask where the Zed name comes from? I probably been away for few days, saw 80 new pages, jumped all of them and missed the baptism. Thanks!


----------



## DL Harper

CobaltBlu said:


> hahahaha!!!
> Also...this is NOT calligraphy.
> 
> What a mess. She is a mess.
> 
> Seriously this just screams " I AM SO EXTRA"
> And, Archwell cannot afford stationery?
> Sad.
> 
> View attachment 5649551


This falls under the saying - "That's enough to gag a maggot."


----------



## bubablu

MiniMabel said:


> I'm English, and seeing the M with the crown above it on the notepaper is like fingernails on a blackboard.
> 
> And the writing, so pretentious and barely legible.


Barely legible +1


----------



## Chloe302225

charlottawill said:


> Probably not:
> 
> "In an interview with Town and Country jewelry expert, Geoffrey Munn explained the tiara’s hidden meaning. He said: “Any woman may wear one, but ancient tradition has it that they must be a bride or already married. The tiara has its roots in classical antiquity and was seen as an emblem of the loss of innocence to the crowning of love."
> 
> But there's always her father's coronation.



This tradition has passed for some time. Princess Anne wore tiaras long before she got married. When she came of age and became a working royal, she was allowed to wear tiaras to the appropriate events. Queen Elizabeth and Princess Margaret wore tiaras before they were married too.


----------



## bag-mania

bubablu said:


> I always wanted to ask where the Zed name comes from?


I believe it evolved from Meghan being called a Z-list celebrity, with zed being another way of saying Z. Can't remember who first coined that name.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> I believe it evolved from Meghan being called a Z-list celebrity, with zed being another way of saying Z. Can't remember who first coined that name.


dearly departed Ceejay started the Z-list thing


----------



## Maggie Muggins

bubablu said:


> Off topic, but I love this little things so much, I have to share: since I bought the Bose quitecomfort earbuds with noise cancelling, I don't want to kill everyone every time. Loud music/baby screaming/ lawn mower? I cannot hear you anymore, bye! And well, you can obviously use them to listen Zed's podcrash, but it's not recommended. But now someone has to help me: I* always wanted to ask where the Zed name comes from?* I probably been away for few days, saw 80 new pages, jumped all of them and missed the baptism. Thanks!


It's how the UK and Canada and possibly other Commonwealth Countries pronounce the letter Z.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh. I really, really hope this is just malicious gossip. Poor little guy.


----------



## Cinderlala

Because TW (Zed/ZeeZee) is often referred to as having been a B-list actress but she never reached anything close to B-list status as an actress, thus she was a Z-list actress.  

This thread does move SO quickly!


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I really, really hope this is just malicious gossip. Poor little guy.



To be fair, it would probably be best for both children if they were allowed to never bond with TW.  (Obviously, I do hope for the best for both of the little ones.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I really, really hope this is just malicious gossip. Poor little guy.



I doubt it is “_anxiety_”, if this is true.


----------



## csshopper

Terrifying to think of the effect on the children when the mask slips.

I have yet to see a picture of her looking natural and at ease with the children, granted we have very few examples, but the ones published make the point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aimee3

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's how the UK and Canada and possibly other Commonwealth Countries pronounce the letter Z.


I never knew the UK and Canada pronounce the letter Z as Zed.  Here I thought we were using the French pronunciation. The things I learn in this thread! 
Now if I could figure out how to find the emojis regularly, I’d be happy.  Sometimes I can and right now I can’t.
Edited to well apparently I did find it after all.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I doubt it is “_anxiety_”, if this is true.


Autism perhaps?


----------



## Genie27

MiniMabel said:


> I'm English, and seeing the M with the crown above it on the notepaper is like fingernails on a blackboard.
> 
> And the writing, so pretentious and barely legible.


Take away the randomly attached flourishes and oversized (ego) capitals, and you’re left with tight, cramped, ugly, uneven almost illegible scratches. Yeah, sounds about right for the Pretender.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Autism perhaps?


I have no idea, I have no expertise in matters such as this. Plus, I do not know the child 
We do know things are never what H&M say they are, so I doubt whatever they say.


----------



## DL Harper

charlottawill said:


> Autism perhaps?


Maybe fear??


----------



## Toby93




----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I have no idea, I have no expertise in matters such as this. Plus, I do not know the child


True. The part about difficulty with socializing made me think of autism.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>



That hair


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> That hair


Yep! Her weave is a mess.  She looks drunk in this picture though she probably isn't. She was on the train with TQ.  Maybe she freaked out at the thought of the engagement and took something to calm her nerves.  Yes, I'm being nice.


----------



## pomeline

Aimee3 said:


> I never knew the UK and Canada pronounce the letter Z as Zed.  Here I thought we were using the French pronunciation. The things I learn in this thread!
> Now if I could figure out how to find the emojis regularly, I’d be happy.  Sometimes I can and right now I can’t.
> Edited to well apparently I did find it after all.


How do people pronounce it in the US then? Zee? Like in ZZ Top? It's always been zed to me, except in some rare cases like the one mentioned.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> She looks drunk in this picture though she probably isn't.


I think it's just a bad shot. I have had countless photos with half closed eyes over the years. Digital photography has been a godsend. Retake, delete. But there is no excuse for that bird's nest hair when you are a guest of the Queen. So disrespectful.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> *She said the show helped her develop her love for words.* “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


I wonder if this is a narc trait. My Sotong narc had a habit which drove the boss crazy. The boss wrote the company media releases and drafted speeches for the CEO. She was an ex-journalist and had a way with words. Sotong was in charge of drafting the simpler media releases: the one-subject one-paragraph type like "We are proud to announce that our programme has won a prize at X movie festival" or "XX will be collaborating with (VIP/celebrity) on (project)".

One day, Boss groaned to me that every time she used an impressive word in her media releases, Sotong would try to impress her by using that same word in his emails, conversations, media releases. And he did it even if the word was not appropriate for the situation. The straw that broke the camel's back was when she used "groundbreaking" to describe an important event we were organizing. And Sotong subsequently described every minor occasion after that event as "groundbreaking". Zed does the same thing, injecting hot air into her life and bamboozling her fans with big words so that they feel awed by her "intelligence".


----------



## DL Harper

charlottawill said:


> I think it's just a bad shot. I have had countless photos with half closed eyes over the years. Digital photography has been a godsend. Retake, delete. But there is no excuse for that bird's nest hair when you are a guest of the Queen. So disrespectful.


"Guest of the Queen"??? MM was certain she was at least an equal if not better than QE.  Afterall, MM disregards protocol and is a shining example of respectfulness.  Just another "Girls Day out" with QE!!


----------



## charlottawill

I just can't with these people....


----------



## charlottawill

They see you Megs. Gotta keep your story straight:

"Meghan Markle omits dad from new origin story about mom ‘juggling’ to raise her​
In her new podcast episode, Meghan makes it sound like her mother was left alone to raise her, but it’s well known that her estranged father was an involved parent who had her ‘full-time’ as an adolescent"​


> https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/11...origin-story-about-mom-juggling-to-raise-her/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Seriously?  This "difficult B" is now making Trebek's death all about herself?  Unreal.  
"Bated breath", my a$$.  Those questions move pretty fast.  She'd have turned blue from lack of oxygen.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of sugar, I was considering going cold turkey on Harry and Ghoul for a bit while I enjoy my Christmas baking and presents from the kitchen time, but I'd miss you all


I must admit, there have been many times I try not to come here, because the dastardly duo is truly exhausting, but then I miss all of you, and suck it up!


----------



## xincinsin

Aimee3 said:


> I never knew the UK and Canada pronounce the letter Z as Zed.  Here I thought we were using the French pronunciation. The things I learn in this thread!
> Now if I could figure out how to find the emojis regularly, I’d be happy.  Sometimes I can and right now I can’t.
> Edited to well apparently I did find it after all.


Commonwealth person here. I grew up saying Zed. I remember being very puzzled when Sesame Street muppets sang the Alphabet Song and finished with Zee. 


charlottawill said:


> Autism perhaps?


I hope not. I do think they may be neglected and socially awkward. 


Toby93 said:


>



Her hair was in a mess this entire trip, and it was her first official outing with the Queen   The worst photos had strips of scalp showing. 


charlottawill said:


> That hair


You beat me to it. (Echo...) That hair!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> That was the reimagined Grinch of the 2000 Jim Carrey movie. The REAL Grinch was a grumpy hermit who lived with his dog and was sick of noisy people bothering him with their nonsense. Somehow I feel a personal connection to that one.
> 
> ETA: I dread what Meghan and Harry will do on Veterans Day.
> 
> View attachment 5649547


I older I get, the more I can relate to the Grinch!  Except I treat my dogs much better.


----------



## Freak4Coach

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Ummmm what?!?? As my lovely MIL used to say - too bad stupidity isn’t painful….


----------



## Luvbolide

CobaltBlu said:


> hahahaha!!!
> Also...this is NOT calligraphy.
> 
> What a mess. She is a mess.
> 
> Seriously this just screams " I AM SO EXTRA"
> And, Archwell cannot afford stationery?
> Sad.
> 
> View attachment 5649551


She is so affected!  That writing looks ridiculous.  Gag!!


----------



## Luvbolide

xincinsin said:


> Commonwealth person here. I grew up saying Zed. I remember being very puzzled when Sesame Street muppets sang the Alphabet Song and finished with Zee.
> 
> I hope not. I do think they may be neglected and socially awkward.
> 
> Her hair was in a mess this entire trip, and it was her first official outing with the Queen   The worst photos had strips of scalp showing.
> 
> You beat me to it. (Echo...) That hair!


Of course if she had worn a hat as she was told to do, that rat’s nest would not be nearly as visible. But nooooo…


----------



## lalame

needlv said:


> This…




I have nothing bad to say about their appearance or fame seeking (too normal around these parts) but it's this contrived do gooder image that kills me. So many things they say just don't stack up with their actions. If they wanted to raise their kids in Africa, they are one of few people in the world with the luxury to live and raise their kids comfortably anywhere.... so do it. "I wanted to raise my kids in Africa but had to settle for Montecito," said NO ONE!


----------



## xincinsin

Luvbolide said:


> Of course if she had worn a hat as she was told to do, that rat’s nest would not be nearly as visible. But nooooo…


Did she ever complain to anyone about how the BRF tried to force her to wear hats? It seems like the sort of tradition or dress code which she would stomp her bunions about. Perhaps we could point out that head gear is head gear, and if she didn't want to wear a hat then, she should not have wanted to wear a tiara either.

Scalp... dandruff?


----------



## Hyacinth

purseinsanity said:


> Seriously?  This "difficult B" is now making Trebek's death all about herself?  Unreal.
> "Bated breath", my a$$.  Those questions move pretty fast.  She'd have turned blue from lack of oxygen.




Just curious, and it's a bit off-topic - what time was Jeopardy broadcast on the West Coast 25 or 35 years ago? It was shown back then at 3:30 in Chicago. Still is, as a matter of fact. A bit early for dinnertime viewing here, I was watching it at work.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> They see you Megs. Gotta keep your story straight:
> 
> "Meghan Markle omits dad from new origin story about mom ‘juggling’ to raise her​
> In her new podcast episode, Meghan makes it sound like her mother was left alone to raise her, but it’s well known that her estranged father was an involved parent who had her ‘full-time’ as an adolescent"​


The only part of  being left alone that was correct was that her mother left her alone with her father. With books, magazine articles, and newspaper articles documenting her family history, it is pretty late in the day to attempt to rewrite history.


----------



## gracekelly

Hyacinth said:


> Just curious, and it's a bit off-topic - what time was Jeopardy broadcast on the West Coast 25 or 35 years ago? It was shown back then at 3:30 in Chicago. Still is, as a matter of fact. A bit early for dinnertime viewing here, I was watching it at work.


I think it was 7:30pm


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> What do you call it when a word is used improperly for so long that the wrong interpretation eventually becomes the accepted version?


Bastardization, how appropriate.


----------



## Katel

purseinsanity said:


> I was quite an avid reader, and I have (I think) a very good vocabulary, but I must be getting ADHD as I age, because I can only get through the first couple sentences before my mind thinks "WTF is she talking about?" before wandering off.
> Saying "visceral" must make her feel intelligent.


It’s not you, lov. You have a beautiful brain, and it’s horrified by MeePeeZee’s word salad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I just can't with these people....




It must really hurt them that one is the Princess of Wales and the other still a wannabe.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It must really hurt them that one is the Princess of Wales and the other still a wannabe.


They really believe all the lies which fall like frogs and toads from her lips. Gaslighted...


----------



## Hyacinth

gracekelly said:


> I think it was 7:30pm



Thanks! That at least fits better with her story about watching it during dinner. The only things I remember watching during dinner are Mickey Mouse Club (the original!) and American Bandstand.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I’m kind of surprised no one is familiar with the term granular level, I feel like it’s fairly common?









						granular
					

1. made of, or seeming like, granules:  2. including small details:  3. made…




					dictionary.cambridge.org


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m kind of surprised no one is familiar with the term granular level, I feel like it’s fairly common?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> granular
> 
> 
> 1. made of, or seeming like, granules:  2. including small details:  3. made…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org


We are familiar with it. We just think she didn't choose the best word for the context. Same as when she used "gutteral" when she likely meant "visceral". I believe someone mentioned that she is very prone to malapropism.


----------



## Hyacinth

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m kind of surprised no one is familiar with the term granular level, I feel like it’s fairly common?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> granular
> 
> 
> 1. made of, or seeming like, granules:  2. including small details:  3. made…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org



It seems to be a a buzz word adopted and repurposed by a few Kool Kids probably in the Tech industry to show how creative and edgy they are. MeMeMe or one of her minders probably found it on some Hot Word Of The Week page or popup and threw it into a few of her flights of fantasy to show how "Real" and "With It" she is.

Pathetic.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

xincinsin said:


> We are familiar with it. We just think she didn't choose the best word for the context. Same as when she used "gutteral" when she likely meant "visceral". I believe someone mentioned that she is very prone to malapropism.


Oh thanks that makes more sense! Someone suggested she meant cellular but I don’t think that works either


----------



## DoggieBags

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Oh thanks that makes more sense! Someone suggested she meant cellular but I don’t think that works either


Trying to pierce through TW’s latest of fog of words is pointless because there is no real meaning behind her utterances. It’s just a grouping of the most impressive sounding words with many, many syllables that she and her team have found and strung together to try to make her sound as erudite as possible. As with everything else she does, all show with no substance. After all why use 2 words when 50 words is soooo much better  especially if you love the sound of your own voice. She takes every opportunity to club us over the head with how smart she thinks she is. Her favorite fairytale when growing up could have been Snow White “Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest, smartest, most talented one of all….” Can you just see the mirror answering back “Katherine” and then talk about guttural howls echoing down the halls of Montecito


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Oh thanks that makes more sense! Someone suggested she meant cellular but I don’t think that works either


It's an unfortunate tendency to show-off and not limited to Zed. I once had a colleague who would try to use the most complicated words he could find, words with Latin roots rather than Anglo-Saxon. Someone asked me what I meant. I said, given the choice between "chew your food" and "masticate your victuals", he would use the latter.


----------



## 1LV

xincinsin said:


> Did she ever complain to anyone about how the BRF tried to force her to wear hats? It seems like the sort of tradition or dress code which she would stomp her bunions about. Perhaps we could point out that head gear is head gear, and if she didn't want to wear a hat then, she should not have wanted to wear a tiara either.
> 
> Scalp... dandruff?
> View attachment 5649831


Yikes. I wouldn’t have to be told twice to grab a hat.


----------



## Aimee3

pomeline said:


> How do people pronounce it in the US then? Zee? Like in ZZ Top? It's always been zed to me, except in some rare cases like the one mentioned.


Yes, in the USA it’s pronounced Z like in ZZ Top except only one sound of “z” and not two in ZZ Top.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> That hair


The top of her head/hair looks like an egg beater got caught in it. 

To her credit she uses much better ($$$$) extensions now (though on her they look like horse tails).


----------



## kemilia

pomeline said:


> How do people pronounce it in the US then? Zee? Like in ZZ Top? It's always been zed to me, except in some rare cases like the one mentioned.


Yes, like ZZ top. I also learn a lot on this thread! 

Another odd thing I've learned (not on this thread but on various TV shows) is that those in the UK pronounce "th" like an "f" sound. Drove me nuts until someone explained it to me.


----------



## Sharont2305

kemilia said:


> Another odd thing I've learned (not on this thread but on various TV shows) is that those in the UK pronounce "th" like an "f" sound. Drove me nuts until someone explained it to me.


Actually, not many people do.


----------



## kemilia

xincinsin said:


> I wonder if this is a narc trait. My Sotong narc had a habit which drove the boss crazy. The boss wrote the company media releases and drafted speeches for the CEO. She was an ex-journalist and had a way with words. Sotong was in charge of drafting the simpler media releases: the one-subject one-paragraph type like "We are proud to announce that our programme has won a prize at X movie festival" or "XX will be collaborating with (VIP/celebrity) on (project)".
> 
> One day, Boss groaned to me that every time she used an impressive word in her media releases, Sotong would try to impress her by using that same word in his emails, conversations, media releases. And he did it even if the word was not appropriate for the situation. The straw that broke the camel's back was when she used "groundbreaking" to describe an important event we were organizing. And Sotong subsequently described every minor occasion after that event as "groundbreaking". Zed does the same thing, injecting hot air into her life and bamboozling her fans with big words so that they feel awed by her "intelligence".


I used to work with someone (a very nice gentleman) that kept a thesaurus next to his keyboard. I sat across from him and would watch him type out an email and constantly refer to his thesaurus. He never used a 25 cent word if he could find a 10 dollar one instead. His emails could be real chores to read.


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> Such bullsh!t! She thinks this will make everyone think she’s intelligent. Clearly she wasn’t paying attention “with bated breath.” Who is naïve enough to believe this crap?
> 
> _Jeopardy_ was my favorite show growing up,” Meghan said, “and I would eat my dinner on a TV tray in front of the screen, watching each category and clue with bated breath and intense focus, trying to absorb whatever facts they were firing off in the form of a question.”
> 
> She said the show helped her develop her love for words. “My obsession with this show was so deep,” she said. “You guys, when Alex Trebek passed away, I started to receive texts of condolence. I didn't know him, but everyone who knew me knew how meaningful Jeopardy – and its host – were as a daily part of my life.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Is a Huge Fan of Jeopardy
> 
> 
> In a new episode of her podcast Archetypes, the duchess opens up about her love for TV—and her hatred of the word “*****.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Love of TV in any form is not usually equated with intelligence.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> Usually love of TV in any form is not equated with intelligence.



Maybe if you do it with intense focus.


----------



## marietouchet

Movie club - I suggest HOUSE OF GUCCI with lady Gaga 
The parallels to H&M are delicious


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> I don't know if this is still true, but since it is a syndicated show it can be on at different times in different cities. For years I watched it around 7PM on the East Coast, but now where I live it is on late afternoon. So she may not be lying about that.



Not trying to channel my inner Markle, but I’ve been watching Jeopardy for as long as I can remember… on the west coast it was always an evening broadcast (dinner time).


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Yep! Her weave is a mess.  She looks drunk in this picture though she probably isn't. She was on the train with TQ.  Maybe she freaked out at the thought of the engagement and took something to calm her nerves.  Yes, I'm being nice.


so forgive my ignorance - that hair is a weave?  I know it's not her natural hair.  I wonder how she gets the root part to stay straight (most of the time anyway).  we know what her natural hair looks like from her childhood pics.  too bad she hates it.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> so forgive my ignorance - that hair is a weave?  I know it's not her natural hair.  I wonder how she gets the root part to stay straight (most of the time anyway).  we know what her natural hair looks like from her childhood pics.  too bad she hates it.


Probably rebonding or a relaxer or Brazilian keratin treatment. It would be a pain to try blow dry or straighten daily.


----------



## bubablu

bag-mania said:


> I believe it evolved from Meghan being called a Z-list celebrity, with zed being another way of saying Z. Can't remember who first coined that name.


Oh, thanks!


----------



## Redbirdhermes

pomeline said:


> How do people pronounce it in the US then? Zee? Like in ZZ Top? It's always been zed to me, except in some rare cases like the one mentioned.


James Earl Jones gets it right as far as how we pronounce the alphabet in the U.S.  He made this video for Sesame Street over 53 years ago.


----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> so forgive my ignorance - that hair is a weave?  I know it's not her natural hair.  I wonder how she gets the root part to stay straight (most of the time anyway).  we know what her natural hair looks like from her childhood pics.  too bad she hates it.


You can’t see her natural hair. It’s underneath the weave. 

She probably has relaxed it in the past but there’s no way it’d still be that sort of length naturally after decades of damage nor have a variation between straight and wave hair. The other day she had Naomi Campbell long straight glossy hair which we all know is nothing like her natural frizzy light curl or the spaniel ears she habitually wears.


----------



## Cinderlala

jelliedfeels said:


> You can’t see her natural hair. It’s underneath the weave.


In the picture of her during the outing with the Queen, there are several scattered places/parts where it looks like we see her scalp.  What is showing if it's not her scalp?  I assumed she was just wearing extensions on this occasion & her own hair was weighed down by the extensions and by being greasy. (??? I have no idea at all, though.)

And, I'd bet the bits that look possibly like dandruff are just actually just strands of gray hair.  It happens to me often now--I'll catch a glimpse of something bright white in my dark hair & will be horrified until I find the culprit is a previously unseen strand of silver/white hair.  Then, I'm a bit sad that I'm getting more gray hair.  Aging is not for the fainthearted.


----------



## DL Harper

Cinderlala said:


> In the picture of her during the outing with the Queen, there are several scattered places/parts where it looks like we see her scalp.  What is showing if it's not her scalp?  I assumed she was just wearing extensions on this occasion & her own hair was weighed down by the extensions and by being greasy. (??? I have no idea at all, though.)
> 
> And, I'd bet the bits that look possibly like dandruff are just actually just strands of gray hair.  It happens to me often now--I'll catch a glimpse of something bright white in my dark hair & will be horrified until I find the culprit is a previously unseen *strand of silver/white hair*. Then, I'm a bit sad that I'm getting more gray hair. Aging is not for the fainthearted.


Please let me help you understand.  Those strands are "shades of blonde", not silver, white or even gray as you may have thought.


----------



## Cinderlala

DL Harper said:


> Please let me help you understand.  Those strands are "shades of blonde", not silver, white or even gray as you may have thought.


Hyperblonde, perhaps.  

Editing to add: Sometimes it looks like I literally have tinsel in my hair!  I'm a bit of a magpie so anything that seems sparkly really stands out.  

And, to stay on topic, I wonder how long TW has had gray hair---I'm sure that's not something she'd like to think about.  (See, she's just like us!)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cinderlala said:


> Hyperblonde, perhaps.
> 
> Editing to add: Sometimes it looks like I literally have tinsel in my hair!  I'm a bit of a magpie so anything that seems sparkly really stands out.
> 
> And, to stay on topic, I wonder how long TW has had gray hair---I'm sure that's not something she'd like to think about.  (See, she's just like us!)


Well, if anyone wants to watch the ‘male’ version of MM, take a look at _Magpie Murders.  _So much narcissism and egoism.

Imagine telling QE her Garter sash is too dressy!  Who _are _these know-it-all people.


I do not understand the flat, center part.  Shouldn’t there be some lift in hair?  Ya kno, the higher the hair, the closer to God


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Not trying to channel my inner Markle, but I’ve been watching Jeopardy for as long as I can remember… on the west coast it was always an evening broadcast (dinner time).


Same with me on the East Coast, but I've been in the midwest for almost twenty years and it's on here at 4:30. For a while it was also on at noon.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The polo outing was one of the many mysteries. Why would you bring a newborn (heavier than they look) without a sling, carrier, pram to a polo tournament and just walk around with him in your arms, without any possibility to put him down and without any possibility for you to sit comfortably unless you go back to your car? So weird.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

The newborn polo mystery has me thinking that the child she is holding doesn't look like a just newborn. This looks like a baby much bigger, like 2 months.  I thought that she went to the match when he was just a week or so old.    Can some of the mothers here make a comment about that?


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, if anyone wants to watch the ‘male’ version of MM, take a look at _Magpie Murders.  _So much narcissism and egoism.
> 
> Imagine telling QE her Garter sash is too dressy!  Who _are _these know-it-all people.
> 
> 
> I do not understand the flat, center part.  Shouldn’t there be some lift in hair?  Ya kno, the higher the hair, the closer to God



lol!  I am watching Magpie Murders and you're right.  Alan Conway is a real b**ch.  He pulled a Meghan with Susan's sister.  Love bombed her for the family history.  Meg's patented move is love bombing.  I think that Alan did it better hahahahaha!  

I am pretty sure Jeopardy has always been on at 7:30  here on the West Coast.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So my aunt's MIL just passed away and when I asked why (which obviously is kind of stupid, but the first thing my brain produced) my mother said "Because she was old". The woman was at least 5 years younger than my grandmother, so this is the 2nd time this year I am having major anxiety (bear with me mods, I'm getting to the point that makes it on topic). 

I have said it a dozen times at least, I cannot understand Harry not going to see his dying grandparents. AT ALL. And it wasn't even so sudden, both times he was warned well in advance and CHOSE not to go because he had better things to do like throwing mud at them on Oprah. I'm the kind of grandchild that literally runs (I never run) over to grandma's house when there's a power outage so she doesn't break a leg in the dark. I blame Ghoul for a lot, but in this case he was being trash all on his own because whatever tantrum she threw, who in their right mind would care?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The newborn polo mystery has me thinking that the child she is holding doesn't look like a just newborn. This looks like a baby much bigger, like 2 months.  I thought that she went to the match when he was just a week or so old.    Can some of the mothers here make a comment about that?



He was about two months old. He was born on May 6th 2019, and the polo outing was July 11th (no, I didn't know that on top of my head, I googled).


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I am pretty sure Jeopardy has always been on at 7:30 here on the West Coast.



I think you are right.  On the west coast, Jeopardy was always paired back-to-back with Wheel of Fortune after the evening news broadcasts but before 8:00 PM when network prime time programming would come on.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Andrew Morton is doing an appearance in my town.  Do you think I should go?


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The polo outing was one of the many mysteries. Why would you bring a newborn (heavier than they look) without a sling, carrier, pram to a polo tournament and just walk around with him in your arms, without any possibility to put him down and without any possibility for you to sit comfortably unless you go back to your car? So weird.


No, you would definitely want a place to put the baby---blanket, car seat, stroller, bouncy seat, sling, carrier, any (or all!) would be normal.


gracekelly said:


> The newborn polo mystery has me thinking that the child she is holding doesn't look like a just newborn. This looks like a baby much bigger, like 2 months.  I thought that she went to the match when he was just a week or so old.    Can some of the mothers here make a comment about that?


You are right.  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> He was about two months old. He was born on May 6th 2019, and the polo outing was July 11th (no, I didn't know that on top of my head, I googled).


Thanks for checking! 

People rarely hold a baby in such a strange way---she is very odd.  There are two photos of her in different places with the child in the exact same position.  And, in the Canada 'pap' shot, the baby's entire face would have been pressed against her body in that position.  I would have been concerned about my child's ability to breathe like that.     Both children are being held in fairly precarious ways.  Ordinarily, an infant would be cradled because it cannot yet safely hold up its head.  Infants also typically move around at least a little.

I will say her dress looks very comfortable which would work nicely for a new mom.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> lol!  I am watching Magpie Murders and you're right.  Alan Conway is a real b**ch.  He pulled a Meghan with Susan's sister.  Love bombed her for the family history.  Meg's patented move is love bombing.  I think that Alan did it better hahahahaha!
> 
> I am pretty sure Jeopardy has always been on at 7:30  here on the West Coast.


Plus, Leslie Manville is amazing.  Loved her in _Mrs. Harris goes to Paris_, too.

Over on Reddit, someone posted about MM’s coat of arms. They explained how all the clues were there from Day 1.  Imo it is much more significant that MM chose a squawking bird while Catherine chose a unicorn.  



	

		
			
		

		
	
    VS.  
	

		
			
		

		
	




Article from 2018:








						Decoding the Symbolism in Meghan Markle’s Coat of Arms
					

Now that Meghan Markle is officially the Duchess of Sussex, what does her coat of arms actually mean? Well, to start, there are lots of California references. According to a statement released by K…




					www.printmag.com
				




Reddit:


----------



## Cinderlala

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, if anyone wants to watch the ‘male’ version of MM, take a look at _Magpie Murders.  _So much narcissism and egoism.
> 
> Imagine telling QE her Garter sash is too dressy!  Who _are _these know-it-all people.
> 
> 
> I do not understand the flat, center part.  Shouldn’t there be some lift in hair?  Ya kno, the higher the hair, the closer to God



I've only watched the first episode of Magpie Murders but it looked like a fun show to watch.  

I would have never told the Queen she was too anything!  Wouldn't it be fun to wear something like that??!  (Or is that just me?) 

My hair is naturally flat & I always wanted big hair with lots of volume but I learned to stop fighting my hair's natural state years ago.  Just like fighting with my natural skin tone. Learned to stop fighting it and decided to just accept facts.  
(My hair is not flat-ironed to my scalp, though.)


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Andrew Morton is doing an appearance in my town.  Do you think I should go?


What new insight can he possibly have at this point? Someone said he's been dining out on Diana for decades.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> May 6th 2019


Give or take.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lanasyogamama said:


> Andrew Morton is doing an appearance in my town.  Do you think I should go?


Only if it is free and you can leave when you want.  
If one of these events where the audience must buy a book, nope, I’d stay home.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The polo outing was one of the many mysteries. Why would you bring a newborn (heavier than they look) without a sling, carrier, pram to a polo tournament and just walk around with him in your arms, without any possibility to put him down and without any possibility for you to sit comfortably unless you go back to your car? So weird.


With no hat or sunscreen, on a redheaded child?


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> No, you would definitely want a place to put the baby---blanket, car seat, stroller, bouncy seat, sling, carrier, any (or all!) would be normal.
> 
> You are right.
> 
> Thanks for checking!
> 
> People rarely hold a baby in such a strange way---she is very odd.  There are two photos of her in different places with the child in the exact same position.  And, in the Canada 'pap' shot, the baby's entire face would have been pressed against her body in that position.  I would have been concerned about my child's ability to breathe like that.     Both children are being held in fairly precarious ways.  Ordinarily, an infant would be cradled because it cannot yet safely hold up its head.  Infants also typically move around at least a little.
> 
> I will say her dress looks very comfortable which would work nicely for a new mom.


I had never seen this angle before.  With the weight of that child, over 6 months old, it is unlikely that the shoulder strap would slip off.  The weight of the baby would hold it place.  I truly believe this is a doll.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I had never seen this angle before.  With the weight of that child, over 6 months old, it is unlikely that the shoulder strap would slip off.  The weight of the baby would hold it place.  I truly believe this is a doll.
> 
> View attachment 5650337


I don't like her but I have a hard time believing the doll theories. I do believe she's a sh*tty mother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Yes


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Yes



Then, she can easily renounce those titles or she is lying - cannot be both.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Yes



When was she a princess?


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> When was she a princess?


My guess is when she lived with her dad.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> My guess is when she lived with her dad.


Has to be. Or maybe she hears it from her more delusional fans.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> When was she a princess?


Isn't she allowed to go by Princess Henry of Wales if she wants?


----------



## xincinsin

kemilia said:


> I used to work with someone (a very nice gentleman) that kept a thesaurus next to his keyboard. I sat across from him and would watch him type out an email and constantly refer to his thesaurus. He never used a 25 cent word if he could find a 10 dollar one instead. His emails could be real chores to read.


Guilty! I was the only person at 14 who brought a dictionary and a theasaurus to school. Scored high marks in essay writing, and it was probably a contributing factor in my going into a career that required writing skills. (Thank you, Roget!) Unfortunately I didn't have the benefit of watching Jeopardy in my formative years


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Isn't she allowed to go by Princess Henry of Wales if she wants?


I don’t know. Truly a tough situation for Meghan. On one hand, PRINCESS! But the catch is she’d have to go by her husband’s name only. That’s unthinkable for a narcissist.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> Isn't she allowed to go by Princess Henry of Wales if she wants?


Since Charles is now King, Dufus can no longer use the title, Prince Henry of Wales because the 'Prince of Wales' title has passed on to William. Supposedly he is now The Prince Henry or Henry Windsor or Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex.
And here is ZedZed's possible new title.  


			https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhJwWsfWQAAouWH?format=jpg&name=large


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Since Charles is now King, Dufus can no longer use the title, Prince Henry of Wales because the 'Prince of Wales' title has passed on to William. Supposedly he is now The Prince Henry or Henry Windsor or Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex.
> And here is ZedZed's possible new title.
> 
> 
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhJwWsfWQAAouWH?format=jpg&name=large


NOOOOOO.... That's an insult to muppets....


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I don’t know. Truly a tough situation for Meghan. On one hand, PRINCESS! But the catch is she’d have to go by her husband’s name only. That’s unthinkable for a narcissist.


I think her sugars will (completely spontaneously and without instigation) push hard for her to be "Princess MEEEEghan" and for her lustband to be "Princess MEEEEghan's husband".


----------



## Toby93

Is anyone surprised?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I don't like her but I have a hard time believing the doll theories. I do believe she's a sh*tty mother.


If that was a real child,he must have been in a coma  So limp!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> NOOOOOO.... That's an insult to muppets....


This is not in reference to the sweet little Muppets like Elmo, but with the following definition in mind.

Muppet
/ˈmʌpɪt/

noun

1. an incompetent or foolish person, informal, derogatory, British


----------



## 880

charlottawill said:


> I don't like her but I have a hard time believing the doll theories. I do believe she's a sh*tty mother.


agree. 
if only she just would stop talking, I might not have such an issue with her


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Not sure if this was posted already...


----------



## claritysunshine

gracekelly said:


> If that was a real child,he must have been in a coma  So limp!



Agree, as a mother I find it hard to believe she was carrying a real child on that staged walk. The limpness, the lack of weight for the size, the lack of any movement from the child, the unnatural, almost dangerous way she was handling the child…
I believe the children exist, but I think it was a doll she was carrying on that pap walk so she won’t be photographed flustered and struggling to settle a screaming baby and manage two dogs


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I don't like her but I have a hard time believing the doll theories. I do believe she's a sh*tty mother.


I would prefer not to believe the doll theories or the fake bump theories (because this is really bonkers territory), but it's not easy to deny the motionless child or swaying mutable bump videos. The Youtuber who did the vid which convinced me that Zed uses dolls - she was trying to debunk the rumour but ended up convincing herself that for the Canada pap walk at least, that was not a real child.


Toby93 said:


> Is anyone surprised?



I'm surprised that Zed could come up with any ideas of her own, and amazed that Sparry has not realized that he has been relegated to spare in her plans too.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> I would prefer not to believe the doll theories or the fake bump theories (because this is really bonkers territory), but it's not easy to deny the motionless child or swaying mutable bump videos. The Youtuber who did the vid which convinced me that Zed uses dolls - she was trying to debunk the rumour but ended up convincing herself that for the Canada pap walk at least, that was not a real child.
> 
> I'm surprised that Zed could come up with any ideas of her own, and amazed that Sparry has not realized that he has been relegated to spare in her plans too.


It is possible that every photo of their kids has either been photoshopped or manipulated so much by Meghan that it doesn’t look like them at all, for “safety”.  Whatever.  Just stop sharing pics of the kids at all and let them be kids.


----------



## Toby93

She certainly doesn't look anything like the WOC she says she is so proud to be


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> It is possible that every photo of their kids has either been photoshopped or manipulated so much by Meghan that it doesn’t look like them at all, for “safety”.  Whatever.  Just stop sharing pics of the kids at all and let them be kids.


The pix have been photographed or the images quite obscured. She has erased them so throughly that no one cares about them. It’s too late to improve the situation. She screwed it up from the moment they were born.  All she had to do was copy how the Cambridge/Wales handled it. Harry wanted privacy and she wanted control. They both got what they wanted so too late to complain.


----------



## xincinsin

claritysunshine said:


> Agree, as a mother I find it hard to believe she was carrying a real child on that staged walk. The limpness, the lack of weight for the size, the lack of any movement from the child, the unnatural, almost dangerous way she was handling the child…
> I believe the children exist, but I think it was a doll she was carrying on that pap walk *so she won’t be photographed flustered and struggling to settle a screaming baby and manage two dogs*


She would have done so much better if she had brought the real baby and focused on it. People would have lapped up the images of a loving mum. She overdoes it: dangling baby, 2 dogs, concentrate on smiling towards camera. The only thing I can say is that it conforms to the image she likes to project of being the successful multi-tasker.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> The pix have been photographed or the images quite obscured. She has erased them so throughly that no one cares about them. It’s too late to improve the situation. She screwed it up from the moment they were born.  All she had to do was copy how the Cambridge/Wales handled it. Harry wanted privacy and she wanted control. They both got what they wanted so too late to complain.


They both wanted $$$$$$.  Oddly, no one wanted to pay their price.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Cinderlala said:


> In the picture of her during the outing with the Queen, there are several scattered places/parts where it looks like we see her scalp.  What is showing if it's not her scalp?  I assumed she was just wearing extensions on this occasion & her own hair was weighed down by the extensions and by being greasy. (??? I have no idea at all, though.)
> 
> And, I'd bet the bits that look possibly like dandruff are just actually just strands of gray hair.  It happens to me often now--I'll catch a glimpse of something bright white in my dark hair & will be horrified until I find the culprit is a previously unseen strand of silver/white hair.  Then, I'm a bit sad that I'm getting more gray hair.  Aging is not for the fainthearted.


So you can see scalp with a weave. I think you are confusing weaves with old school hard front wigs which were more like a swimming cap with hair on them.

Weaves are long strips of hair that are attached like extensions. What makes a weave a weave rather than extensions is that weaves are sewn together with the braided natural hair so it anchors the hair track and obscures the real hair (and this doesn’t work with straight fine hair hence why white women don’t wear weaves)  whereas extensions are sewn or glued in underneath the natural hair to the scalp or start of hairline. 
This is done in sections so you can see the scalp line with a weave or extensions and you can move the fake hair around like natural hair. You can actually create a natural looking  part and bits of scalp with some modern wigs as well there’s a an art to it. Honestly it is amazing what they can do. 

Here’s some drag queens in wigs with natural looking partings for example:-





M’s hair has somewhat improved since that awful pic of her with the queen but I still think she is not sophisticated enough to pull off long siren hair and it looks a bit like she’s desperately trying to be 20 now she’s 40. I think the shoulder Bob would be best for  her - it did wonders for khloe k’s puffy face and lack of style.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> So you can see scalp with a weave. I think you are confusing weaves with old school hard front wigs which were more like a swimming cap with hair on them.
> 
> Weaves are long strips of hair that are attached like extensions. What makes a weave a weave rather than extensions is that weaves are sewn together with the braided natural hair so it anchors the hair track and obscures the real hair (and this doesn’t work with straight fine hair hence why white women don’t wear weaves)  whereas extensions are sewn or glued in underneath the natural hair to the scalp or start of hairline.
> This is done in sections so you can see the scalp line with a weave or extensions and you can move the fake hair around like natural hair. You can actually create a natural looking  part and bits of scalp with some modern wigs as well there’s a an art to it. Honestly it is amazing what they can do.
> 
> Here’s some drag queens in wigs with natural looking partings for example:-
> View attachment 5650547
> 
> View attachment 5650548
> 
> 
> M’s hair has somewhat improved since that awful pic of her with the queen but I still think she is not sophisticated enough to pull off long siren hair and it looks a bit like she’s desperately trying to be 20 now she’s 40. I think the shoulder Bob would be best for  her - it did wonders for khloe k’s puffy face and lack of style.


I think Zed would sniff disparagingly at our comments on her fake hair and do a flopcast about how we don't respect her inner beauty. (is there a stereotype for that? Green-eyed Monster?) That was the narrative being pushed by her stans before and during the funeral: those who allegedly met her wrote swooning paeans to how she was beautiful inside and out.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> If that was a real child,he must have been in a coma  So limp!





claritysunshine said:


> Agree, as a mother I find it hard to believe she was carrying a real child on that staged walk. The limpness, the lack of weight for the size, the lack of any movement from the child, the unnatural, almost dangerous way she was handling the child…
> I believe the children exist, but I think it was a doll she was carrying on that pap walk so she won’t be photographed flustered and struggling to settle a screaming baby and manage two dogs



One of my children would only sleep when he was held…so anytime I went on a walk I put him in the bjorn and he immediately conked out. I'm sure that’s exactly what he looked like.


----------



## Stansy

Mumotons said:


> Prince Harry wanted to bring up his son Archie, three, in Africa
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's friend, the celebrated primatologist Dame Jane Goodall, has revealed that he wanted the couple to live in Africa, where he has spent some of the happiest times in his life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I honestly believe that with the right partner Harry would have done good things in Africa.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Yes




And yet you are so pissed UK law wasn't bent or changed for your child and that Kate is the Princess of Wales and you are not.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> This is not in reference to the sweet little Muppets like Elmo, but with the following definition in mind.
> 
> Muppet
> /ˈmʌpɪt/
> 
> noun
> 
> 1. an incompetent or foolish person, informal, derogatory, British


Ohhh I did not know … I love Kermit and Miss Piggy … H looks like Kermit and Miss piggy was a b*****? diva ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Is anyone surprised?




Corpse eater.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> She would have done so much better if she had brought the real baby and focused on it. People would have lapped up the images of a loving mum. She overdoes it: dangling baby, 2 dogs, concentrate on smiling towards camera. The only thing I can say is that it conforms to the image she likes to project of being the successful multi-tasker.


The polo pic can be explained … Catherine’s was there that day with Louis … MM had to keep up with the Cambridges and snag all the photo ops


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Not sure if this was posted already...



Bored last night , I wondered what OS aid up to do on Twitter since there is not much to say on MM, OS has taken on Twitter and Elon … OKKKK like who cares about OS’ opinion on Twitter ?
PS he is also becoming interested in political/humanitarian causes eg recent events in Iran, I get it , he is of Iranian descent but somehow his remarks are not putting the causes in the best light


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I had never seen this angle before.  With the weight of that child, over 6 months old, it is unlikely that the shoulder strap would slip off.  The weight of the baby would hold it place.  I truly believe this is a doll.
> 
> View attachment 5650337


Well if that were a real child, I would be concerned for its safety


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have a nagging feeling it wasn't the BRF nor the Sussex Survivor Club who nominated them. Geez, I like money as much as the next person but maybe stay credible while selling spots on your nominee list.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> One of my children would only sleep when he was held…so anytime I went on a walk I put him in the bjorn and he immediately conked out. I'm sure that’s exactly what he looked like.


My kids fell asleep in the baby sling but I never had to tie their hands to my chest.

And if the sling was slipping, I would adjust it, not leave my kid dangling.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> She certainly doesn't look anything like the WOC she says she is so proud to be



Plenty of side by side comparisons on Twitter…


----------



## claritysunshine

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> One of my children would only sleep when he was held…so anytime I went on a walk I put him in the bjorn and he immediately conked out. I'm sure that’s exactly what he looked like.



There are different views on this and I will not attempt to convince you. For me, it was not just the limpness that led me to see something was off with the photos/videos of that walk, it was the lack of weight. My child has also slept in the carrier many times (coincidentally the same ergo baby omni carrier model Meghan was reported to have worn on that walk), the design is such that the weight of a 6-8 months baby would anchor the carrier such that the strap does not just slip off, even on my silky blouses. The child in those photos looked bigger than mine at a similar age, and there should be more tension, a sense of weight on the shoulder straps and the seat part of the carrier. If the lack of tension/weight is due to her holding the baby to her chest, well, then the baby is kind of being suspended by the back of his neck on her arm, which I’m not sure is more or less disturbing than the notion that she was carrying a doll.  Just my perspective.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Ohhh I did not know … I love Kermit and Miss Piggy … H looks like Kermit and Miss piggy was a b*****? diva ?


Behold Miss Piggy the Moi Diva. 
Reminds you of anyone?? Except Miss Piggy is funny and entertaining unlike ZedZed, who believes she truly is the It Factor.


----------



## bellecate

Miss a day……….


----------



## Chanbal

Humor from Twitter


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Humor from Twitter



I have no doubt that she has called him a dumbass, if not to his face for sure behind his back.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Kind of sad when you're not even good at being a jerk.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Kind of sad when you're not even good at being a jerk.



I listened for about 15 seconds - couldn't take any more
She sounds smug and preachy to me


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sounds familiar?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And yet you are so pissed UK law wasn't bent or changed for your child and that Kate is the Princess of Wales and you are not.


If that’s the case Meg, you should have no problem giving up the title. Oh, you WILL have to get new stationery. No crown on the M.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Stansy said:


> I honestly believe that with the right partner Harry would have done good things in Africa.


Very possible, but he still would have needed direction from BP. Low said that Harry was full of ideas, which is good, but only a few were workable  He didn’t create Invictus by himself and he did copy the concept.


----------



## Darcy Lee

Chanbal said:


> Plenty of side by side comparisons on Twitter…





Tan line..  shes a phony from beginning to end.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Very possible, but he still would have needed direction from BP. Low said that Harry was full of ideas, which is good, but only a few were workable  He didn’t create Invictus by himself and he did copy the concept.



That honestly doesn't faze me. Not everyone has to be an innovative genius, it's enough if he has a place in the  structure that suits him.  Even Elon Musk pays engineers to build his teslas.


----------



## Nutashha

Did you guys know about this? I didn't!

*Did You Know Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Almost Broke up before Going Public?*


----------



## Darcy Lee

WHERE are these CHILDREN ???????  
 NO one, NO ONE can hide children like this.  Do doctors come to the secret compound, play mates.??? Have they ever seen the sun????
NO long lens cameras of any paparazzi taken one pic??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I listened for about 15 seconds - couldn't take any more
> She sounds smug and preachy to me



I didn't even listen to it, I reacted solely to Marklenews saying what psychologist have said to her. I'm not strong enough for audio today


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nutashha said:


> Did you guys know about this? I didn't!
> 
> *Did You Know Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Almost Broke up before Going Public?*
> 
> View attachment 5650804



I did. We were so close to the world being a better place.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Darcy Lee said:


> WHERE are these CHILDREN ???????
> NO one, NO ONE can hide children like this.  Do doctors come to the secret compound, play mates.??? Have they ever seen the sun????
> NO long lens cameras of any paparazzi taken one pic??



Only when their mother makes an appointment with the paps. Because contrary to popular rumours planted by her nobody is all that interested in those children.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only when their mother makes an appointment with the paps. Because contrary to popular rumours planted by her nobody is all that interested in those children.


Kate takes such beautiful pics of her kids....the only reason I can think of for H&M not to try to do same is Harry's hatred of attention (which is opposite of his wife's)


----------



## Darcy Lee

sdkitty said:


> Kate takes such beautiful pics of her kids....the only reason I can think of for H&M not to try to do same is Harry's hatred of attention (which is opposite of his wife's)


REALLY??????    HARRY has HATRED of ATTENTION???????   You coulda' fooled me!


----------



## Stansy

gracekelly said:


> Very possible, but he still would have needed direction from BP. Low said that Harry was full of ideas, which is good, but only a few were workable  He didn’t create Invictus by himself and he did copy the concept.


Yes, and what he did in the past he was enthusiastic about. Look at him in Africa playing soccer with kids and just enjoying himself. I am fine with him being not the sharpest crayon in the box, I do not expect him to be a great inventor. But it would have been nice to see him do good deeds in Africa where he actually seemed to be thriving!


----------



## gracekelly

Nutashha said:


> Did you guys know about this? I didn't!
> 
> *Did You Know Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Almost Broke up before Going Public?*
> 
> View attachment 5650804


Her threats kept them together. What a way to start a long term relationship.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only when their mother makes an appointment with the paps. Because contrary to popular rumours planted by her nobody is all that interested in those children.


They can take the blame for that themselves.


----------



## kemilia

charlottawill said:


> Yes



She's bragged that she was never a waitress--hard to keep the lies straight.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Kate takes such beautiful pics of her kids....the only reason I can think of for H&M not to try to do same is Harry's hatred of attention (which is opposite of his wife's)


Harry SAYS he hates attention. His actions speak louder than his words. I haven’t seen him shying away from attention before or after Meghan.

He is in on the deal to cloister the children away from publicity. Whether that is to protect them or to keep them from siphoning away attention from himself and Meghan, we don’t know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

kemilia said:


> She's bragged that she was never a waitress--hard to keep the lies straight.


When she persistently lies over a period of decades, and always generates new ones to stay current, it boggles my mind there are people who continue to “appreciate“ her and defend her.


----------



## gracekelly

Darcy Lee said:


> WHERE are these CHILDREN ???????
> NO one, NO ONE can hide children like this.  Do doctors come to the secret compound, play mates.??? Have they ever seen the sun????
> NO long lens cameras of any paparazzi taken one pic??


It just proves the point that when you want privacy you can have it.  When she doesn't call the paps, there are no pictures.  It is really that simple.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Harry SAYS he hates attention. His actions speak louder than his words. I haven’t seen him shying away from attention before or after Meghan.
> 
> He is in on the deal to cloister the children away from publicity. Whether that is to protect them or to keep them from siphoning away attention from himself and Meghan, we don’t know.


He wants only attention *if and only if *he is being paid for his presence.  A speech costs more.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Harry SAYS he hates attention. His actions speak louder than his words. I haven’t seen him shying away from attention before or after Meghan.
> 
> He is in on the deal to cloister the children away from publicity. Whether that is to protect them or to keep them from siphoning away attention from himself and Meghan, we don’t know.


It he really hated the attention, he wouldn't be obsessed with his expiration  date.  He came out and stated the number of years he had to stay in the public eye.  He knows that once the Wales children are older, he will no longer be of interest.  I think he is as big a control freak as Meghan in general  and more so when it comes to the children.


----------



## sdkitty

Darcy Lee said:


> REALLY??????    HARRY has HATRED of ATTENTION???????   You coulda' fooled me!


I guess I'm thinking of the attention he got as a child and his mother's attention from the paps....that maybe he wants to protect his kids....but I'd be surprised if he prevailed on anything in that marriage


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Stansy said:


> I honestly believe that with the right partner Harry would have done good things in Africa.





gracekelly said:


> Very possible, but he still would have needed direction from BP. Low said that Harry was full of ideas, which is good, but only a few were workable  He didn’t create Invictus by himself and he did copy the concept.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That honestly doesn't faze me. Not everyone has to be an innovative genius, it's enough if he has a place in the  structure that suits him.  Even Elon Musk pays engineers to build his teslas.


Yes a 1000%! Dufus would probably listen to a sympathetic partner's suggestions to seek mental health care to help him resolve some of his anger issues while they were living peacefully somewhere they both loved.


----------



## needlv

Isn’t there laws in California about no taking photos of celeb children by paparazzi?  I thought Jennifer Garner had publicly pushed for legislation to be passed to protect kids?


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I didn't even listen to it, I reacted solely to Marklenews saying what psychologist have said to her. I'm not strong enough for audio today


I had listened to the whole Jordan Peterson interview where that clip of a comment he made , it was soooo out of context it had nothing to do with how she used it.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> I had listened to the whole Jordan Peterson interview where that clip of a comment he made , it was soooo out of context it had nothing to do with how she used it.











						Jordan Peterson hits back at ‘sanctimonious’ Meghan Markle on Piers Morgan show
					

Dr. Jordan Peterson has hit back at Meghan Markle after she took a swipe at him in her podcast.




					nypost.com
				




The comments are pretty good.


----------



## 880

gracekelly said:


> Jordan Peterson hits back at ‘sanctimonious’ Meghan Markle on Piers Morgan show
> 
> 
> Dr. Jordan Peterson has hit back at Meghan Markle after she took a swipe at him in her podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The comments are pretty good.


Peterson and Markle are both pretty much bottom of the barrel IMO

ETA: I’m also dubious about his belief that incels — young white men who believe that they are entitled to have sex — as a marginalized and disenfranchised class


----------



## gracekelly

880 said:


> Peterson and Markle are both pretty much bottom of the barrel IMO


He went to the right place to complain about her lol!


----------



## Toby93

Ok, who was betting on this happening today   The comments on the disrespectful way she is dressed are spot on.


----------



## bag-mania

Why must everything be sly and open to interpretation with them? Who takes their wedding photographer to the Veterans Day ceremony? Why is the photo black and white? I suspect the photo is from last year when they were in New Jersey. It isn’t anywhere near cold enough on the east coast to be wearing that long coat today. Although it doesn’t look like anybody else is bundled up like she was.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Almost didn’t see them


----------



## CobaltBlu

she looks like she threw a robe on over her PJs,  went out get the paper and stumbled into a memorial service.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> ETA: I’m also dubious about his belief that incels — young white men who believe that they are entitled to have sex — as a marginalized and disenfranchised class



Honestly, a lot of them could be helped if they took a shower, got a haircut and overhauled their hostile beliefs.


----------



## charlottawill

Darcy Lee said:


> WHERE are these CHILDREN ???????
> NO one, NO ONE can hide children like this.  Do doctors come to the secret compound, play mates.??? Have they ever seen the sun????
> NO long lens cameras of any paparazzi taken one pic??


Agree 100%  If they do exist but she is keeping them hidden away in the mansion, that is very concerning for their well-being.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Why must everything be sly and open to interpretation with them? Who takes their wedding photographer to the Veterans Day ceremony? Why is the photo black and white? I suspect the photo is from last year when they were in New Jersey. It isn’t anywhere near cold enough on the east coast to be wearing that long coat today. Although it doesn’t look like anybody else is bundled up like she was.
> 
> View attachment 5650899



I'll admit it, it was me. I had been wondering why they were so awfully quiet and I believe in doing so I summoned their stupid press release. I'm sorry.

But why can't she ever dress appropriately? This is way too casual for a somber occasion, plus why can't she get her pants hemmed to not step on them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Agree 100%  If they do exist but she is keeping them hidden away in the mansion, that is very concerning for their well-being.



A few days ago they took a 7yo girl from her home because the mother, in an attempt to not let the father see her, had faked moving to Italy when the child was a young toddler. She didn't let her leave the house, attend kindergarten or school. She was confined to the house and the company of her mother and grandparents 24/7 for all those years. Authorities took the child after someone had seen her and alerted them and mother and grandparents are not allowed to see her. How traumatic.

Now I don't think it's that bad with the Sussex children, but their upbringing is definitely not normal in a slightly unhealthy way.


----------



## charlottawill

kemilia said:


> She's bragged that she was never a waitress--hard to keep the lies straight.


I caught that too. I read Revenge but it's already hazy, no pun intended, and I don't recall any mention of that. Thanks to her father's hard work she was a relatively pampered young LA princess, but that's not her current narrative.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll admit it, it was me. I had been wondering why they were so awfully quiet and I believe in doing so I summoned their stupid press release. I'm sorry.


When you summon the dark forces you have to have a way to put them back.


----------



## needlv

“Veterans Day” photo is an old photo taken when they were at invictus games.









						U.S. Embassy Invictus Games welcome event
					

Retired Air Force Tech. Sgt. Joshua Smith, Team U.S. Co-Captain, makes remarks during the U.S. Embassy the Hague, Netherlands welcome event, April 15, 2022. The event brought together the Ukrainian and U.S. competitors in preparation for the Invictus Games The Hague 2020 which are composed of 20...




					www.dvidshub.net


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Why must everything be sly and open to interpretation with them? Who takes their wedding photographer to the Veterans Day ceremony? Why is the photo black and white? I suspect the photo is from last year when they were in New Jersey. It isn’t anywhere near cold enough on the east coast to be wearing that long coat today. Although it doesn’t look like anybody else is bundled up like she was.
> 
> View attachment 5650899



The picture is from last year.  It is raining in NYC area today.


----------



## bag-mania

needlv said:


> “Veterans Day” photo is an old photo taken when they were at invictus games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Embassy Invictus Games welcome event
> 
> 
> Retired Air Force Tech. Sgt. Joshua Smith, Team U.S. Co-Captain, makes remarks during the U.S. Embassy the Hague, Netherlands welcome event, April 15, 2022. The event brought together the Ukrainian and U.S. competitors in preparation for the Invictus Games The Hague 2020 which are composed of 20...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dvidshub.net


That explains why the color was taken out. They were hoping nobody would make the connection. When will they learn?


----------



## charlottawill

880 said:


> Peterson and Markle are both pretty much bottom of the barrel IMO
> 
> ETA: I’m also dubious about his belief that incels — young white men who believe that they are entitled to have sex — as a marginalized and disenfranchised class


That is utter BS about incels. They are underachieving and socially backward males who gather in echo chambers like reddit and worse to bemoan how their lives have been ruined by "uppity" women who need to be put in "their place", often by means of violence. I read a terrifying account recently about a man in TN who has been stalking a former co-worker and has posted videos about it online. It is a tragedy in the making but the police can't arrest him because he hasn't broken any laws. Yet. Sorry for OT, but this is a subject that really disturbs me as a woman, a mother of daughters and grandmother of a baby girl.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> she looks like she threw a robe on over her PJs,  went out get the paper and stumbled into a memorial service.


Her MO is always to look as if she tumbled out of bed after having marital relations. She thinks it makes her look young and desirable.  We already know that Harry is lustful.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Ok, who was betting on this happening today   The comments on the disrespectful way she is dressed are spot on.




"I see old Puddle Pants and Handbag are trying to compete with the Royals once again."  Dying


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Her MO is always to look as if she tumbled out of bed after having marital relations. She thinks it makes her look young and desirable.  We already know that Harry is lustful.


----------



## charlottawill

Thanks to all here, and your family members, who have served and sacrificed.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll admit it, it was me. I had been wondering why they were so awfully quiet and I believe in doing so I summoned their stupid press release. I'm sorry.
> 
> But why can't she ever dress appropriately? This is way too casual for a somber occasion, plus why can't she get her pants hemmed to not step on them?


Draggy pants have been on trend with many for the past few years, and you know she thinks she is so on trend. It is at best unsafe and downright gross in places like NY.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

jelliedfeels said:


> So you can see scalp with a weave. I think you are confusing weaves with old school hard front wigs which were more like a swimming cap with hair on them.
> 
> Weaves are long strips of hair that are attached like extensions. What makes a weave a weave rather than extensions is that weaves are sewn together with the braided natural hair so it anchors the hair track and obscures the real hair (and this doesn’t work with straight fine hair hence why white women don’t wear weaves)  whereas extensions are sewn or glued in underneath the natural hair to the scalp or start of hairline.
> This is done in sections so you can see the scalp line with a weave or extensions and you can move the fake hair around like natural hair. You can actually create a natural looking  part and bits of scalp with some modern wigs as well there’s a an art to it. Honestly it is amazing what they can do.
> 
> Here’s some drag queens in wigs with natural looking partings for example:-
> View attachment 5650547
> 
> View attachment 5650548
> 
> 
> M’s hair has somewhat improved since that awful pic of her with the queen but I still think she is not sophisticated enough to pull off long siren hair and it looks a bit like she’s desperately trying to be 20 now she’s 40. I think the shoulder Bob would be best for  her - it did wonders for khloe k’s puffy face and lack of style.


Thank you for the explanation.  I had forgotten that weaves could be done like extensions.  The world of hair is amazing!

I don't think TW will give up her long hair for a very long time---definitely not while Catherine still has long hair.  She's a YOUNG woman/mom/girl, remember!!    (It seems like she thinks short hair = old.)


----------



## marietouchet

This is over a year old, how did we miss the Boston Tea Party ?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Draggy pants have been on trend with many for the past few years, and you know she thinks she is so on trend. It is at best unsafe and downright gross in places like NY.



Also, as a shorter person: I never felt it made me taller, quite the opposite.


----------



## White Orchid

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A few days ago they took a 7yo girl from her home because the mother, in an attempt to not let the father see her, had faked moving to Italy when the child was a young toddler. She didn't let her leave the house, attend kindergarten or school. She was confined to the house and the company of her mother and grandparents 24/7 for all those years. Authorities took the child after someone had seen her and alerted them and mother and grandparents are not allowed to see her. How traumatic.
> 
> Now I don't think it's that bad with the Sussex children, but their upbringing is definitely not normal in a slightly unhealthy way.


Sorry, where was this?  Horrific


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

White Orchid said:


> Sorry, where was this?  Horrific



Oh sorry, in Germany.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Why must everything be sly and open to interpretation with them? Who takes their wedding photographer to the Veterans Day ceremony? Why is the photo black and white? I suspect the photo is from last year when they were in New Jersey. It isn’t anywhere near cold enough on the east coast to be wearing that long coat today. Although it doesn’t look like anybody else is bundled up like she was.
> 
> View attachment 5650899


Interesting
can’t see her right hand , NOT over  her heart like for everyone else ? They must be playing the National Anthem

Hmm he does not have his hand over heart … hmmm … 

I would have looked up things on Wiki, it does say ALL and that applies to both of them , come onnnnn , if you are going to show respect, then show respect

“Federal law states that during a rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, *ALL* present including those in uniform should stand at attention; non-military service individuals should face the flag with the right hand over the heart; members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present and not in ...”









						The Star-Spangled Banner - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Toby93

This really seems to cross the line.  People magazine released this today, saying that the Harkles shared this pic and info?  It was also posted to their Archw@ll site.  What is wrong with that woman?  Is she so desperate to stay relevant and compete with the actual royals?


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> This really seems to cross the line.  People magazine released this today, saying that the Harkles shared this pic and info?  It was also posted to their Archw@ll site.  What is wrong with that woman?  Is she so desperate to stay relevant and compete with the actual royals?
> 
> View attachment 5650935



Not surprised. People is one of their media friends.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> Not surprised. People is one of their media friends.


Does no one fact check anymore before rushing to post?


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Interesting
> can’t see her right hand , NOT over  her heart like for everyone else ? They must be playing the National Anthem
> 
> Hmm he does not have his hand over heart … hmmm …
> 
> I would have looked up things on Wiki, it does say ALL and that applies to both of them , come onnnnn , if you are going to show respect, then show respect
> 
> “Federal law states that during a rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, *ALL* present including those in uniform should stand at attention; non-military service individuals should face the flag with the right hand over the heart; members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present and not in ...”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Star-Spangled Banner - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org



It is not regulatory though, just a recommendation. You're not going to get arrested. And I don't think a non-citizen is expected to follow. There has been a lot of confusion about it over the years, even among US presidents:

"President Barack ***** famously neglected to put his hand over his heart during the 2008 election campaign. He explained his mistake by saying his grandfather taught him to do this only during the pledge, and to only sing during the anthem.

On the balcony of the White House, President ***** needed a prompt from his wife Melania when he forgot to put his hand on his chest" 



> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37208404


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> Does no one fact check anymore before rushing to post?


What is this "fact check" you speak of?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> It is not regulatory though, just a recommendation. You're not going to get arrested. And I don't think a non-citizen is expected to follow. There has been a lot of confusion about it over the years, even among US presidents:
> 
> "President Barack ***** famously neglected to put his hand over his heart during the 2008 election campaign. He explained his mistake by saying his grandfather taught him to do this only during the pledge, and to only sing during the anthem.
> 
> On the balcony of the White House, President ***** needed a prompt from his wife Melania when he forgot to put his hand on his chest"


He is a foreigner who has been living here for almost 3 years without learning customs…  OK. He did not sing his own national anthem … 
but she should know better … and their people are DIMWITS

EVERYONE puts their hand on their heart when the national anthem is played at a baseball game, didn’t he watch Lady Gaga sing it for the Super Bowl, NO, they should know better
AND at this is for a photo op, are their people so stupid as to not tell them how to do it ?
The ONLY purpose of this photo is for them to look good, so get it right
EVERYONE else is doing it and they stick out

BO and DT got it wrong at times, but that is no excuse, and the news reported their faux pas


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> EVERYONE puts their hand on their heart when the national anthem is played at a baseball game


I think it varies from place to place. The last couple of games I attended I noticed a lot of people didn't, and lots of young men don't know to remove their baseball caps. That drives my husband crazy. I guess I should be glad they at least stand up.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I caught that too. I read Revenge but it's already hazy, no pun intended, and I don't recall any mention of that. Thanks to her father's hard work she was a relatively pampered young LA princess, but that's not her current narrative.


Didn't ZedZed say that at age thirteen she worked at some soda fountain or ice cream parlor behind the counter to help her father make ends meet at home?  As if anyone would employ a thirteen-year-old nut job!


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It is at best unsafe and downright gross in places like NY.


As it turns out the photo was taken at The Hague, Netherlands this past spring for the Invictus Games. So it wasn’t for Veterans Day and it wasn’t current. From the link *needlv* posted.

Please note the handholding.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> As it turns out the photo was taken at The Hague, Netherlands this past spring for the Invictus Games. So it wasn’t for Veterans Day and it wasn’t current. From the link *needlv* posted.
> 
> View attachment 5650966


I guess that was the point I was trying to make.  What is wrong with that woman, lying about being at a veterans day ceremony  and actually posting about it along with an old pic?  She is a compulsive liar.  I would think that any normal person would be embarrassed by the ethics and morality of deception at such a sombre ceremony.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I guess that was the point I was trying to make.  What is wrong with that woman, lying about being at a veterans day ceremony  and actually posting about it along with an old pic?  She is a compulsive liar.  I would think that any normal person would be embarrassed by the ethics and morality of deception at such a sombre ceremony.


Taking a photo from an unrelated event and putting it in their Veterans Day message cheapens the message. It screams “let’s throw something together that won’t require any time, expense or effort.” They want credit for doing the bare minimum.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> I guess that was the point I was trying to make.  What is wrong with that woman, lying about being at a veterans day ceremony  and actually posting about it along with an old pic?  She is a compulsive liar.  I would think that any normal person would be embarrassed by the ethics and morality of deception at such a sombre ceremony.


Not to worry, she will blame one of their employees for this terrible, terrible, terrible mistake and state that appropriate action was taken.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Has this been posted before?

ZedZed has nominated the CEO of UK patronage Smart Works for an award.

Question: Is this the organization that is being investigated because of the CEO's and her daughter's exorbitant salaries?









						The Duchess of Sussex recognises Kate Stephens
					

Meghan Markle has shone a light on Kate Stephens, CEO of Smart Works, for HELLO!'s Kind List.




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Didn't ZedZed say that at age thirteen she worked at some soda fountain or ice cream parlor behind the counter to help her father make ends meet at home?  As if anyone would employ a thirteen-year-old nut job!


I did think of that and wondered if she considered that being a waitress.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Taking a photo from an unrelated event and putting it in their Veterans Day message cheapens the message. It screams “let’s throw something together that won’t require any time, expense or effort.” They want credit for doing the bare minimum.


It might have been OK had they stated the photo was taken at Invictus, doing a bit of publicity for the cause 
I wonder if HandM have the rights to the phot ? Does Invictus .


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> It might have been OK had they stated the photo was taken at Invictus, doing a bit of publicity for the cause
> I wonder if HandM have the rights to the phot ? Does Invictus .


If she is really doing her own PR (or overseeing some poor interns) they are probably clueless about such things.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> It might have been OK had they stated the photo was taken at Invictus, doing a bit of publicity for the cause
> I wonder if HandM have the rights to the phot ? Does Invictus .


The Invictus photos might be public domain. Of course if they brought their own photographer then they would own those.

I found another photo from the same day of Meghan posing with some of the athletes. Who knows where Harry was.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I did think of that and wondered if she considered that being a waitress.


I recall some article or video, where she said she worked as a waitress at a Soho House, but it wasn't busy or hard work serving the customers.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> I did think of that and wondered if she considered that being a waitress.


IF she did work at a soda fountain it was probably the result of reading about the famous actress of a bygone era, Lana Turner, being discovered while working in one. Never having any original thoughts, she grabbed on it.


----------



## Jayne1

jelliedfeels said:


> Here’s some drag queens in wigs with natural looking partings for example:-
> View attachment 5650547
> 
> View attachment 5650548


And yet Nicole Kidman continues to wear the worst wigs imaginable when natural looking wigs are available.  Sorry to go off topic, but it is such a pet peeve... lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> IF she did work at a soda fountain it was probably the result of reading about the famous actress of a bygone era, Lana Turner, being discovered while working in one. Never having any original thoughts, she grabbed on it.


She _may_ not have worked as a fountain girl, but she played one on TV 









						Miller Lite - Skinny Jeans (2010) :30 (USA)
					






					adland.tv
				




Another one of her commercials - note the hair and the voice [hint: they did not use her voice  








						Meghan Markle Starred in a Chip Commercial Back in 2009 -- Watch!
					

Before she landed a role on 'Suits' and later fell in love with a prince, the Los Angeles native was kicking off her acting career by starring in commercials.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I listened for about 15 seconds - couldn't take any more
> She sounds smug and preachy to me


She sounds like she's copying some of the more successful female podcasters, in terms of being so upbeat, the pauses, the tone... it's a well rehearsed imitation.


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Didn't ZedZed say that at age thirteen she worked at some soda fountain or ice cream parlor behind the counter to help her father make ends meet at home?  As if anyone would employ a thirteen-year-old nut job!


She said she sold yoghurt at Humphrey Yogurt.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Has this been posted before?
> 
> ZedZed has nominated the CEO of UK patronage Smart Works for an award.
> 
> Question: Is this the organization that is being investigated because of the CEO's and her daughter's exorbitant salaries?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex recognises Kate Stephens
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has shone a light on Kate Stephens, CEO of Smart Works, for HELLO!'s Kind List.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Nope. It's One Young World that's being investigated.


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> *She sounds like she's copying some of the more successful female podcasters*, in terms of being so upbeat, the pauses, the tone... it's a well rehearsed imitation.


Opinions may vary…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

These are not the puff articles TW seems to enjoy. I wouldn't be too surprised if the statement about the tiara is right.


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> Prince Harry wanted to bring up his son Archie, three, in Africa
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's friend, the celebrated primatologist Dame Jane Goodall, has revealed that he wanted the couple to live in Africa, where he has spent some of the happiest times in his life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I wish Goodall would go back to chimp bothering and leave us other primates alone. She’s like that person who volunteered once for 6 months and never shuts up about it. Oh wait that’s H&M isn’t it? Birds of a feather….


xincinsin said:


> Did she ever complain to anyone about how the BRF tried to force her to wear hats? It seems like the sort of tradition or dress code which she would stomp her bunions about. Perhaps we could point out that head gear is head gear, and if she didn't want to wear a hat then, she should not have wanted to wear a tiara either.
> 
> Scalp... dandruff?
> View attachment 5649831


It’s an insult to Milliners everywhere to try and get something on that though very much gilding a turd- which does explain that  poo hat 


Toby93 said:


> This really seems to cross the line.  People magazine released this today, saying that the Harkles shared this pic and info?  It was also posted to their Archw@ll site.  What is wrong with that woman?  Is she so desperate to stay relevant and compete with the actual royals?
> 
> View attachment 5650935





bag-mania said:


> As it turns out the photo was taken at The Hague, Netherlands this past spring for the Invictus Games. So it wasn’t for Veterans Day and it wasn’t current. From the link *needlv* posted.
> 
> Please note the handholding.
> 
> View attachment 5650966


I’m of the opinion veterans day and remembrance day shouldn’t be celebrated together as they are fundamentally different in meaning anyway but just posting any old crap vaguely military is a new nadir of laziness and frankly shows how real any of this connection with a supposed passion project really is. 


csshopper said:


> IF she did work at a soda fountain it was probably the result of reading about the famous actress of a bygone era, Lana Turner, being discovered while working in one. Never having any original thoughts, she grabbed on it.


I was just reading about Lana Turner and she sounds like a crazy narcissist so M is probably taking a lot of notes. 


Jayne1 said:


> And yet Nicole Kidman continues to wear the worst wigs imaginable when natural looking wigs are available.  Sorry to go off topic, but it is such a pet peeve... lol


I know what you mean. She’s gone from elfin to Dee Snider. 


Chanbal said:


> Opinions may vary…



 I wonder if that’s why you don’t see them these days… too many men asked for their money back….
‘I wanted to cheer up not throw up’
‘I had a more erotic chat with the tax man.’
‘Obviously I’m a sleazy guy given its 3 in the afternoon and I’m in the office broom cupboard but even I find this Pearl girl a bit too creepy’


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I recall some article or video, where she said she worked as a waitress at a Soho House, but it wasn't busy or hard work serving the customers.



That was because she was serving herself, no other customer could possibly be as nauseatingly difficult demanding exacting


----------



## Stansy

gracekelly said:


> Her MO is always to look as if she tumbled out of bed after having marital relations. She thinks it makes her look young and desirable.  We already know that Harry is lustful.


The mere thought makes me throw up a little in my mouth


----------



## zen1965

@jelliedfeels I appreciate your commentary on this thread much, however, I feel that your comments above on Jane Goodall are a tad unfair . Goodall, Fossey and Galdikas - all women, all working at a time when women in science were largely ignored or ridiculed - revolutionised the field of primatology. Jane Goodall lived in utmost basic conditions in a very remote part of Tanzania for years (absolutely no comparison to H and MM’s luxury safaris). IMHO her at the age of 88 being misguided on H can easily be overlooked in light of her lifetime achievements.


----------



## xincinsin

zen1965 said:


> @jelliedfeels I appreciate your commentary on this thread much, however, I feel that your comments above on Jane Goodall are a tad unfair . Goodall, Fossey and Galdikas - all women, all working at a time when women in science were largely ignored or ridiculed - revolutionised the field of primatology. Jane Goodall lived in utmost basic conditions in a very remote part of Tanzania for years (absolutely no comparison to H and MM’s luxury safaris). IMHO her at the age of 88 being misguided on H can easily be overlooked in light of her lifetime achievements.


Zed appears to prefer preying on successful women of a certain age. There was a comment that she was currying favour with "Glo" to appear as an anointed successor to her status.


----------



## gelbergirl

zen1965 said:


> @jelliedfeels I appreciate your commentary on this thread much, however, I feel that your comments above on Jane Goodall are a tad unfair . Goodall, Fossey and Galdikas - all women, all working at a time when women in science were largely ignored or ridiculed - revolutionised the field of primatology. Jane Goodall lived in utmost basic conditions in a very remote part of Tanzania for years (absolutely no comparison to H and MM’s luxury safaris). IMHO her at the age of 88 being misguided on H can easily be overlooked in light of her lifetime achievements.



Jane is OG!
Who knew she was 88.
She’s still working & contributing. Amazing.


----------



## K.D.

charlottawill said:


> It is not regulatory though, just a recommendation. You're not going to get arrested. And I don't think a non-citizen is expected to follow. There has been a lot of confusion about it over the years, even among US presidents:
> 
> "President Barack ***** famously neglected to put his hand over his heart during the 2008 election campaign. He explained his mistake by saying his grandfather taught him to do this only during the pledge, and to only sing during the anthem.
> 
> On the balcony of the White House, President ***** needed a prompt from his wife Melania when he forgot to put his hand on his chest"


To be fair, as a non-American it's a bit weird? I was at the NHL last week during my holidays and I didn't. 

Regarding the photo, I guess using one that old and unrelated to the actual event mostly shows their lack of any type of activity/engagement... There's plenty of WWII memorials in 3 km radius in that specific embassy's location, if they really liked their outfits and needed stock photos :-P


----------



## bag-mania

jelliedfeels said:


> *I’m of the opinion veterans day and remembrance day shouldn’t be celebrated together as they are fundamentally different in meaning* anyway but just posting any old crap vaguely military is a new nadir of laziness and frankly shows how real any of this connection with a supposed passion project really is.
> 
> I was just reading about Lana Turner and she sounds like a crazy narcissist so M is probably taking a lot of notes.
> 
> I know what you mean. She’s gone from elfin to Dee Snider.
> 
> I wonder if that’s why you don’t see them these days… too many men asked for their money back….
> ‘I wanted to cheer up not throw up’
> ‘I had a more erotic chat with the tax man.’
> ‘Obviously I’m a sleazy guy given its 3 in the afternoon and I’m in the office broom cupboard but even I find this Pearl girl a bit too creepy’


I think a lot of people confuse the two because they are on the same day. The US equivalent of Remembrance Day is Memorial Day and it is in late May. Before it was called Veterans Day, it was Armistice Day, until the 50s when it’s name and purpose was changed.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> She _may_ not have worked as a fountain girl, but she played one on TV
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Miller Lite - Skinny Jeans (2010) :30 (USA)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> adland.tv
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another one of her commercials - note the hair and the voice [hint: they did not use her voice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Starred in a Chip Commercial Back in 2009 -- Watch!
> 
> 
> Before she landed a role on 'Suits' and later fell in love with a prince, the Los Angeles native was kicking off her acting career by starring in commercials.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


I like how she's "Principal Talent" for the Miller one. Did she list it on IMDB?


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> These are not the puff articles TW seems to enjoy. I wouldn't be too surprised if the statement about the tiara is right.



I doubt she sets foot in a grocery or drug store with the hot polloi, but I wouldn't be surprised if she sends an underling on a tabloid run once a week.


----------



## sdkitty

zen1965 said:


> @jelliedfeels I appreciate your commentary on this thread much, however, I feel that your comments above on Jane Goodall are a tad unfair . Goodall, Fossey and Galdikas - all women, all working at a time when women in science were largely ignored or ridiculed - revolutionised the field of primatology. Jane Goodall lived in utmost basic conditions in a very remote part of Tanzania for years (absolutely no comparison to H and MM’s luxury safaris). IMHO her at the age of 88 being misguided on H can easily be overlooked in light of her lifetime achievements.


thank you
I agree....we can disagree with someone for liking Harry but that doesn't mean we need to cancel them or even dislike them


----------



## charlottawill

gelbergirl said:


> Jane is OG!
> Who knew she was 88.
> She’s still working & contributing. Amazing.


I remember reading her articles in National Geographic when I was a kid. She was very inspirational to me.


----------



## andrashik

Ladies!! I am wayy wayyy behind but I found something in a sock shop in Amsterdam and took a pic for all of you


----------



## papertiger

andrashik said:


> Ladies!! I am wayy wayyy behind but I found something in a sock shop in Amsterdam and took a pic for all of you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5651284



Er, well, yer, thanks but no thanks, my stockings are filled


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

xincinsin said:


> NOOOOOO.... *That's an insult to muppet*s....



Actually I think she's a lot like Miss Piggy, she certainly behaves like her......allegedly


----------



## Luv2Shop1

K.D. said:


> To be fair, as a non-American it's a bit weird? I was at the NHL last week during my holidays and I didn't.


If you are a foreginer you aren't expected to put your hand over your heart when the US National Anthem is played. Etiquette is to stand, remove hat, be quiet and respectful but no need to participate in the rest. Same would apply to US citizens when a foreign anthem is played at an event.


----------



## duna

Maggie Muggins said:


> Behold Miss Piggy the Moi Diva.
> Reminds you of anyone?? Except Miss Piggy is funny and entertaining unlike ZedZed, who believes she truly is the It Factor.
> 
> View attachment 5650713


LOL, I posted a similar comment before reading yours!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

andrashik said:


> Ladies!! I am wayy wayyy behind but I found something in a sock shop in Amsterdam and took a pic for all of you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5651284


They look so much better on a pair of socks than in real life. They should buy a few pairs each in xxxxx-large to cover their faces and extra big egos.


----------



## Hyacinth

needlv said:


> “Veterans Day” photo is an old photo taken when they were at invictus games.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> U.S. Embassy Invictus Games welcome event
> 
> 
> Retired Air Force Tech. Sgt. Joshua Smith, Team U.S. Co-Captain, makes remarks during the U.S. Embassy the Hague, Netherlands welcome event, April 15, 2022. The event brought together the Ukrainian and U.S. competitors in preparation for the Invictus Games The Hague 2020 which are composed of 20...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dvidshub.net



What a couple of con artists! They converted the photo to B&W so no one would wonder why the grass and trees were still fully green (and a very pale Spring green too, not the darker greens of summer and autumn) and flowers were blooming on the east coast in early November.

LIAR LIAR, DRAGGY PANTS ON FIRE!


ETA - And kudos to whoever was clever enough to find that photo!


----------



## bag-mania

Hyacinth said:


> What a couple of con artists! They converted the photo to B&W so no one would wonder why the grass and trees were still fully green and flowers were blooming on the east coast in early November.
> 
> SHEEEESH!


Keep reading. Turns out they weren’t in the US and it wasn’t for Veterans Day. They were recycling an old unrelated image.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.

Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.

Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.









						Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
					

Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Hyacinth

bag-mania said:


> Keep reading. Turns out they weren’t in the US and it wasn’t for Veterans Day. They were recycling an old unrelated image.



That's what I'm referring to, the photo the scam artists just released compared to the original set from this year's Invictus Games in April. Note my link back to the Invictus Games color photo, April 15, 2022.

*ETA *- The color was taken out as much to disguise the time of year it was taken as to disguise the event _where_ it was taken.

ETA- and to add to their lie, Prince Lying-Sack-O-POOP* ACTUALLY POSTED THE B&W INVICTUS GAMES ORIGINAL ON HIS FACEBOOK PAGE 20 HOURS AGO!








						Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex
					

Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. 257,608 likes · 30,198 talking about this. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, (Henry Charles Albert David) is a member of the British royal family. As the younger son of...




					www.facebook.com
				





*

LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR


(So did they actually commemorate Remembrance/Veterans Day at all???)


----------



## Chanbal

andrashik said:


> Ladies!! I am wayy wayyy behind but I found something in a sock shop in Amsterdam and took a pic for all of you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5651284


So cute! I'm sure it will grow on the UK members like @papertiger.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.*
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
> 
> Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
> 
> Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


----------



## tiktok

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
> 
> Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
> 
> Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Thanks to the fame wh*res we get to learn about so many bullsh*t awards, galas and prizes that for some strange reason 7 people on the planet care about. I’m so grateful for that piece of essential general knowledge.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
> 
> Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
> 
> Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Wow, Kerry Kennedy must really be on the outs with cousin Caroline Kennedy Schlosser. This is a full on frontal attack to coattail on the December 2 Earthshot  Prize Awards in Boston. 
Nastiness on a world stage. The sneer on TW’s face will be so broad it will run off her cheeks.

Edited to add: Are rumors of pending divorce exaggerated?


----------



## Aminamina

andrashik said:


> Ladies!! I am wayy wayyy behind but I found something in a sock shop in Amsterdam and took a pic for all of you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5651284


_*Beavis and Butt-Head 2.0*_


----------



## bag-mania

Hyacinth said:


> That's what I'm referring to, the photo the scam artists just released compared to the original set from this year's Invictus Games in April. Note my link back to the Invictus Games color photo, April 15, 2022.
> 
> *ETA *- The color was taken out as much to disguise the time of year it was taken as to disguise the event _where_ it was taken.
> 
> ETA- and to add to their lie, Prince Lying-Sack-O-POOP* ACTUALLY POSTED THE B&W INVICTUS GAMES ORIGINAL ON HIS FACEBOOK PAGE 20 HOURS AGO!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex. 257,608 likes · 30,198 talking about this. Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, (Henry Charles Albert David) is a member of the British royal family. As the younger son of...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.facebook.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5651346
> *
> 
> LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR LIAR


It is also posted on the Archewell web site. They are definitely making the most of it.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Wow, Kerry Kennedy must really be on the outs with cousin Caroline Kennedy Schlosser. This is a full on frontal attack to coattail on the December 2 Earthshot  Prize Awards in Boston.
> Nastiness on a world stage. The sneer on TW’s face will be so broad it will run off her cheeks.
> 
> Edited to add: Are rumors of pending divorce exaggerated?


But I like this part:

"Philanthropists across America are vying to attend both events.

One wealthy Los Angeles heiress told the MoS: 'We love the Royals. I'd love to try to get tickets for both.* You can buy a ticket to the Meghan event so that's no problem but the William and Kate event is strictly invitation only, which is making it much harder to get into.'*

That speaks volumes. New money vs. old money, poseurs vs. people who matter. 

I can't wait to see her latest fashion trainwrecks, you know she will parade as many outfits as she possibly can while she's there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hyacinth

bag-mania said:


> It is also posted on the Archewell web site. They are definitely making the most of it.



It's SO tempting to post the link to the Invictus site along with the date on Harry's FB page, but I don't need that kind of shyte-storm at my time of life! One of their minions would just remove the photo anyway.

But I firmly believe that Kharma's a Beetch and that their lies will catch up to them.

Someone please pass the popcorn...


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
> 
> Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
> 
> Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So many comments on that article either say "More money than sense" or "A fool and their money". It will be the event of the year for social climbers, but it would be interesting to compare the guest lists. I'd love to see the Clooneys at the Boston event.  And Alec Baldwin is emcee, so maybe TW and Hilarious will meet. That could be interesting.


----------



## Annawakes

I always thought Hilaria is the perfect guest for ZeeZy’s show.

I wonder what color she is deciding to be for the ceremony….?  Lol


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> I always thought Hilaria is the perfect guest for ZeeZy’s show.


Oh the possibilities. I might actually pay to hear that sh!t storm. Although it would be more entertaining to have Meghan and Alec on a show together. They could have a throw down over who is the biggest victim.


----------



## Annawakes

Also, given their constant concerns about security, it’s odd they would want to be in the same room as AB…..will our dear Zeezy show up in a bulletproof vest….?  Lol


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Also, given their constant concerns about security, it’s odd they would want to be in the same room as AB…..will our dear Zeezy show up in a bulletproof vest….?  Lol


But it wasn’t his fault!! He’s the true victim. Why doesn’t everyone understand that?!

Times like this I am convinced we are living in bizarro world.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Oh the possibilities. I might actually pay to hear that sh!t storm. Although it would be more entertaining to have Meghan and Alec on a show together. They could have a throw down over who is the biggest victim.


AB would win, no contest. She is a Cali-puff piece compared to his NY smarts  brass balls.
ETA:  no offense intended. Imo he is much tougher than she is.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> So many comments on that article either say "More money than sense" or "A fool and their money". It will be the event of the year for social climbers, but it would be interesting to compare the guest lists. I'd love to see the Clooneys at the Boston event.  And Alec Baldwin is emcee, so maybe TW and Hilarious will meet. That could be interesting.


This is what Harry has come to. People paying to see him use a fork and knife. They will be disappointed because his wife will be cutting his food for him, putting it on the fork and handing it to him so he thinks he is feeding himself. 

The really telling comment was from the woman who said the Wales’ event was more exclusive because it was invitation only. You can pay to see Harry at the circus freak show. Big difference.  

It should be called The Arriviste Dinner with the Sussex.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> AB would win, no contest. She is a Cali-puff piece compared to his NY smarts  brass balls.
> ETA:  no offense intended. Imo he is much tougher than she is.
> 
> View attachment 5651410


He’s a lot nuttier too. Maybe Meghan will catch up to him one day.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
> 
> Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
> 
> Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Gosh we NEED that puke smilie in the reactions.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> But I like this part:
> 
> "Philanthropists across America are vying to attend both events.
> 
> One wealthy Los Angeles heiress told the MoS: 'We love the Royals. I'd love to try to get tickets for both.* You can buy a ticket to the Meghan event so that's no problem but the William and Kate event is strictly invitation only, which is making it much harder to get into.'*
> 
> That speaks volumes. New money vs. old money, poseurs vs. people who matter.
> 
> I can't wait to see her latest fashion trainwrecks, you know she will parade as many outfits as she possibly can while she's there.



I go back and forth between being irritated and feeling sad for Harry. The Meghan event? Seriously? She is a nobody who just happened to marry the actual royal.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> AB would win, no contest. She is a Cali-puff piece compared to his NY smarts  brass balls.
> ETA:  no offense intended. Imo he is much tougher than she is.
> 
> View attachment 5651410


Meghan can converse with Hilarious in Spanish


----------



## Aimee3

I wonder where the venue is in NYC.  (Not that I’d pay to see either of them.)


----------



## Aimee3

I was googling to find out where this gala is but so far I didn’t see where.  However you can buy a ticket for a mere $2500, you need not spend $100,000.  I saw Michael Bolton will be a guest.  I had the misfortune to meet him years ago.  What a rude nasty person who thinks he’s G-d’s gift.


----------



## Aminamina

Aimee3 said:


> I was googling to find out where this gala is but so far I didn’t see where.  However you can buy a ticket for a mere $2500, you need not spend $100,000.  I saw Michael Bolton will be a guest.  I had the misfortune to meet him years ago.  What a rude nasty person who thinks he’s G-d’s gift.


Then MB and JCMH can give a masterclass on how to appear Hairy while Bolding


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Hermes Zen

*President Volodymyr Zelensky *will be presented with the 2022 Ripple of Hope Award in recognition of his courageous and inspirational leadership in the face of relentless aggression.

What a HUGE disappointment H&M will also receive this award with leaders like President Zelensky and others.  WTF!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## youngster

Hermes Zen said:


> *President Volodymyr Zelensky *will be presented with the 2022 Ripple of Hope Award in recognition of his courageous and inspirational leadership in the face of relentless aggression.
> 
> What a HUGE disappointment H&M will also receive this award with leaders like President Zelensky and others.  WTF!



I'd guess President Zelensky will not be in attendance, likely a pre-recorded thank you message will be shown.  The man is a bit busy at the moment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I'd guess President Zelensky will not be in attendance, likely a pre-recorded thank you message will be shown.  The man is a bit busy at the moment.



He might send his wife. She's been to a few glitzy occasions lately.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He might send his wife. She's been to a few glitzy occasions lately.


I hope they stay away from things like this.  They need to be taken very seriously and not like celebrities.


----------



## charlottawill

"Pretty Woman vs. Pretty Awful"


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I hope they stay away from things like this.  They need to be taken very seriously and not like celebrities.


They were in their previous life. He was a comedian and actor and she was a screenwriter. Their daughter has done some acting and was the winner of a big kids' talent contest. But they do have much bigger things to worry about today.


----------



## charlottawill

Harry and Meghan who?


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> I just can't with these people....




Where do I begin???  Zed threw her own father under the bus after he'd paid for her plastic surgery, private schools, Northwestern University (where she majored in Int'l Relations and still didn't realize there was such a thing as the British Commonwealth) etc, yet still wasn't good enough to be invited to the wedding.  The same father who Zed still can't be bothered to visit when he's in critical health. But hop on a private jet for a photo op in Uvalde? No problem!  And some Zed sugars have to dig up unflattering early photos of a woman who went through years of British tabloid hell with grace to prove, what? That Claw-Zed, umm, Clawzz (?) can't get along with anyone whereas Kate has been the toast of town for years with a lovely family since surviving tabloid hell?  Whereas Clawzz went from celebrated (99.9999% media and tabloid approval) to now persona non grata as a result of her own idiocy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Harry and Meghan who?


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> Isn’t there laws in California about no taking photos of celeb children by paparazzi?  I thought Jennifer Garner had publicly pushed for legislation to be passed to protect kids?



In general, if people (including kids) are out and about in public, photos are legally fair game. Newspapers and magazines are full of photos of people (including children and infants) at festivals, playgrounds, schools, parties, sports events, walking to school on the sidewalk, etc. So I don't understand "children are off limit" in photos when they're in a public situation. Not saying it's OK to exploit anybody's photo, it's just that whenever anybody is in public I'm not sure when it's actually illegal to take their photo or publish a photo in where any person or persons are in the background.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


>




They're not paying for the purpose of seeing Claw and Loser, they're getting the charitable giving tax deduction. If beaucoup payments didn't have a tax benefit there wouldn't be a single person showing up. That must be their new gig: "Pay to see us then get the write off!"


----------



## lanasyogamama

charlottawill said:


> I caught that too. I read Revenge but it's already hazy, no pun intended, and I don't recall any mention of that. Thanks to her father's hard work she was a relatively pampered young LA princess, but that's not her current narrative.


She was definitely a waitress. A podcaster/comic I like, Chris Franjola worked with her at a place called “Mirabelle” in LA.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Rich Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala.
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala in New York on December 6, which honours people for their humanitarian and philanthropic efforts.
> 
> Hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy, the gala has a top-tier 'Pioneer' package that costs a cool $1 million and will include four seats at the top table where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are expected to be seated.
> 
> Other packages cost from $500,000 and will include access to a VIP reception at which photographers are expected to snap the Duke and Duchess with the event's main benefactors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Where does all the money go? Is it a "pat ourselves on the back" event or does the money go to fund the RFK Human Rights Awards?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> She was definitely a waitress. A podcaster/comic I like, Chris Franjola worked with her at a place called “Mirabelle” in LA.


Didn't she once claim in an interview that being a skilled calligrapher saved her from being a waitress?


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Didn't she once claim in an interview that being a skilled calligrapher saved her from being a waitress?


Who can keep up with her stories?


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> They're not paying for the purpose of seeing Claw and Loser, they're getting the charitable giving tax deduction. If beaucoup payments didn't have a tax benefit there wouldn't be a single person showing up. That must be their new gig: *"Pay to see us then get the write off!*"


If they put together a little performance, they may raise enough funds to support their lifestyle. 
The Harkles in the Cage: Royal Odyssey  




			https://www.moma.org/magazine/articles/704


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> They were in their previous life. He was a comedian and actor and she was a screenwriter. Their daughter has done some acting and was the winner of a big kids' talent contest. But they do have much bigger things to worry about today.



I’m aware if his history and it makes it all the more important not to look like they are celebrity chasing . The war isn’t over


----------



## Chanbal

How corrupt is this world… 



_*The couple are set to receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala on December 6*_
_*Previous winners include US President Joe *****, Barack ***** and Bill ******* *_
_*'Pioneer' package for event selling at $1million includes four seats at top table*_
_*The event is hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy*_
_*The glitzy gala is run by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation*_









						Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
					

Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> How corrupt is this world…
> View attachment 5651664
> 
> 
> _*The couple are set to receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala on December 6*_
> _*Previous winners include US President Joe *****, Barack ***** and Bill ******* *_
> _*'Pioneer' package for event selling at $1million includes four seats at top table*_
> _*The event is hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy*_
> _*The glitzy gala is run by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



How corrupt is this world? 
When you can win an award for: 
1) Throwing your family (who gave you everything) under the bus, 
2) Whining incessantly how hard you have it when you were part of the BRF who gave you millions and millions and millions, 
3) Lying you head off, 
4) Never growing up
5) Hiring camera crews to photograph you at soldiers' graves and memorials for dead children in Uvalde
6) Etc

Then, YES!, this world is very corrupt and EFFED UP!


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> How corrupt is this world?
> When you can win an award for:
> 1) Throwing your family (who gave you everything) under the bus,
> 2) Whining incessantly how hard you have it when you were part of the BRF who gave you millions and millions and millions,
> 3) Lying you head off,
> 4) Never growing up
> 5) Hiring camera crews to photograph you at soldiers' graves and memorials for dead children in Uvalde
> 6) Etc
> 
> Then, YES!, this world is very corrupt and EFFED UP!


It's eye-opening how many awards can be bought. I'm waiting to see, between Ripple in December and Time next March, how many more false accolades this Judas couple will collect. Should we do a year-on-year comparison end-2024 to compare SS and post-SS impact?


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> How corrupt is this world?
> When you can win an award for:
> 1) Throwing your family (who gave you everything) under the bus,
> 2) Whining incessantly how hard you have it when you were part of the BRF who gave you millions and millions and millions,
> 3) Lying you head off,
> 4) Never growing up
> 5) Hiring camera crews to photograph you at soldiers' graves and memorials for dead children in Uvalde
> 6) Etc
> 
> Then, YES!, this world is very corrupt and EFFED UP!


They “bought” the award for PR.

I mean, Alec Baldwin is hosting the event.  “Nuff”  said


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tourré being mean, but I thought y'all would appreciate the picture.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Don't hold back, Tourré!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> She was definitely a waitress. A podcaster/comic I like, Chris Franjola worked with her at a place called “Mirabelle” in LA.



Wasn't that the place where she claimed to have been the hostess? Which in her twisted mind probably makes a huge difference.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't that the place where she claimed to have been the hostess? Which in her twisted mind probably makes a huge difference.


Ah, I can see that.  I mean, it’s baloney, but she might use that as a differentiator.


----------



## LittleStar88

Hmmmmm…. 



And the comments are also a good read.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Hmmmmm….
> 
> 
> 
> And the comments are also a good read.



I wouldn't care if she was dating 10 people at the same time. What I can't stand is what she seems to represent, a world of hypocrisy, greed, taking advantage of other people, corruption …  Tourree B said it best.


----------



## Chanbal

A letter to children from "Pr*nce H*rry, The D*ke of S***"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

People like Valentine Low must be thanked for their work…


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> A letter to children from "Pr*nce H*rry, The D*ke of S***"



Beat me to it


----------



## rose60610

needlv said:


> They “bought” the award for PR.
> 
> I mean, Alec Baldwin is hosting the event.  “Nuff”  said



Alec Baldwin is hosting the event? What? Who decided to hire Baldwin? Well, they all three deserve each other, and I think there's a lot of people who see them as a gaggle of losers. I'm sure Hilaria will be in the mix somewhere. Loserville. What an embarrassment. Who in their right mind would attend this?


----------



## youngster

rose60610 said:


> Alec Baldwin is hosting the event? What? Who decided to hire Baldwin? Well, they all three deserve each other, and I think there's a lot of people who see them as a gaggle of losers. I'm sure Hilaria will be in the mix somewhere. Loserville. What an embarrassment. Who in their right mind would attend this?



There are loads of people with more money than sense, that's for sure.  There are enough rich people out there who want their photo taken with someone famous (or infamous, as the case may be) so they can post it on their social media and get 3 seconds of attention.  I'm sure there are many long time supporters of the RFK Foundation too, who will go no matter who is there or who is hosting though, damn, I'd have words with the organizers over Alec Baldwin hosting if I were a long time contributor.


----------



## Annawakes

Maybe AB is the only one who was willing to participate in the sham of the awards.  Maybe they did try to replace him and everyone else said No.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Alec Baldwin is hosting the event? What? Who decided to hire Baldwin? Well, they all three deserve each other, and I think there's a lot of people who see them as a gaggle of losers. I'm sure Hilaria will be in the mix somewhere. Loserville. What an embarrassment. Who in their right mind would attend this?


Isn’t this awards for members of a particular political party? That’s why they like Alec, accidental killing or not.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Beat me to it



He cared so much about grieving families that he passed on the Deal Memorial Concert and went to The Lion King premiere to beg for job for his wife.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The constant use of titles is increasingly annoying to me. It seems to be more frequent since QE passed, imo.  KCIII needs to act as quickly as possible to stop this.


----------



## gracekelly

Annawakes said:


> Maybe AB is the only one who was willing to participate in the sham of the awards.  Maybe they did try to replace him and everyone else said No.


Baldwin will do anything to make money. He has all those kids to fund. He has a lot in common with the Sussex in that regard


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> The constant use of titles is increasingly annoying to me. It seems to be more frequent since QE passed, imo.  KCIII needs to act as quickly as possible to stop this.


How about the crown over the letter on the stationery?


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> There are loads of people with more money than sense, that's for sure.  There are enough rich people out there who want their photo taken with someone famous (or infamous, as the case may be) so they can post it on their social media and get 3 seconds of attention.  I'm sure there are many long time supporters of the RFK Foundation too, who will go no matter who is there or who is hosting though, damn, I'd have words with the organizers over Alec Baldwin hosting if I were a long time contributor.


Yes and I know a couple who pay to go to the dog and pony shows with well known people speaking. They get their picture  taken with them and show all their friends.


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Alec Baldwin is hosting the event? What? Who decided to hire Baldwin? Well, they all three deserve each other, and I think there's a lot of people who see them as a gaggle of losers. I'm sure Hilaria will be in the mix somewhere. Loserville. What an embarrassment. Who in their right mind would attend this?


Thirsty nouveau arriviste people


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> Beat me to it




Making it about himself as usual.


----------



## Chanbal

Major Johnny, the new hero (starts @1:43)!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> *I wouldn't care if she was dating 10 people at the same time*. What I can't stand is what she seems to represent, a world of hypocrisy, greed, taking advantage of other people, corruption …  Tourree B said it best.



Dating multiple people at the same time is not quite the same as cheating on your live-in boyfriend, though.


----------



## CarryOn2020

If Hwood is done, then KCIII should be, too.  He cut off Andi, why is not doing the same to Hazz?  It’s time.
_"Never re-friend a person that has tried to destroy your character, your money or your relationships. A snake only sheds its skin to become a bigger snake."_ - George Clooney


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, of course!
Charles is supplementing the salary of Palace employees from his own private funds. If those were the funds he was planning to allocate to the Harkles, he certainly found a better use for them imo.
Tom Cruise is likely back for the coronation.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Dating multiple people at the same time is not quite the same as cheating on your live-in boyfriend, though.


Absolutely, it shows her character, or lack of. However, if she was living a private life and not constantly attempting to interfere in politics with her many photo-ops and statements, I would sincerely not care about it. People like TW can cause damage to the world imo, and that's what bothers me.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Major Johnny, the new hero (starts @1:43)!



Hey Neil, he’s been promoted. I thought you were a royal reporter.


----------



## BittyMonkey

gracekelly said:


> Hey Neil, he’s been promoted. I thought you were a royal reporter.


Promoted to my boudoir! 

...

j/k.

(sort of)


----------



## Chanbal

We heard about lemon cakes, sandwiches, partnerships with others that donate… but not about real donations like the one below.

_A longtime activist and philanthropist, Parton donated $1 million to Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s vaccine research efforts during the coronavirus pandemic. Her contributions helped fund Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine._









						Dolly Parton gets $100M from Jeff Bezos to give to her favorite charities
					

Dolly Parton was awarded $100 million from Jeff Bezos to give to charities of her choice.




					nypost.com


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> We heard about lemon cakes, sandwiches, partnerships with others that donate… but not about real donations like the one below.
> 
> _A longtime activist and philanthropist, Parton donated $1 million to Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s vaccine research efforts during the coronavirus pandemic. Her contributions helped fund Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton gets $100M from Jeff Bezos to give to her favorite charities
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton was awarded $100 million from Jeff Bezos to give to charities of her choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


To quote Dolly “I try to put my money *where my heart is*." 

Seems to be the way the Harkles do charity work and give donations too.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> We heard about lemon cakes, sandwiches, partnerships with others that donate… but not about real donations like the one below.
> 
> _A longtime activist and philanthropist, Parton donated $1 million to Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s vaccine research efforts during the coronavirus pandemic. Her contributions helped fund Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton gets $100M from Jeff Bezos to give to her favorite charities
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton was awarded $100 million from Jeff Bezos to give to charities of her choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


They can't donate what they don't have  Dolly's generosity is well known in TN. She just doesn't blow her horn about it.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> If Hwood is done, then KCIII should be, too.  He cut off Andi, why is not doing the same to Hazz?  It’s time.
> _"Never re-friend a person that has tried to destroy your character, your money or your relationships. A snake only sheds its skin to become a bigger snake."_ - George Clooney



Looks like hard times for Hazbeen and Neverwas. I know it's not likely to happen, but it would be funny if Tom Cruise was invited to the coronation and they weren't.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> We heard about lemon cakes, sandwiches, partnerships with others that donate… but not about real donations like the one below.
> 
> _A longtime activist and philanthropist, Parton donated $1 million to Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s vaccine research efforts during the coronavirus pandemic. Her contributions helped fund Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton gets $100M from Jeff Bezos to give to her favorite charities
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton was awarded $100 million from Jeff Bezos to give to charities of her choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Perfect example of trust and knowing she will do the right thing.  The Harkles will have their hand in the till.  _One for you and two for me.  One for you and three for me._


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Looks like hard times for Hazbeen and Neverwas. I know it's not likely to happen, but it would be funny if Tom Cruise was invited to the coronation and they weren't.


Tom has filmed in the UK and is good for the economy.  He provides jobs etc.  All the gruesome twosome do is take.


----------



## csshopper

This is eye popping, reading it leads me to think she and TW may be friends based on the mutually atrocious behaviors .  This the woman who made the Harkles award happen this year.

'*Dictator*' *Kerry Kennedy* is ruining family legacy - New York Post​https://nypost.com/2016/07/31/kerry-kennedys-fury-sends-family-charity-spiraling-staff/ - 366k - Cached - Similar pages 
Jul 31, 2016 *...* She claims to be a great advocate for human rights — but former employees tell The Post that behind closed doors, *Kerry Kennedy* is a monster ...

"increasingly erratic" "unhinged" "behaves like the dictator of a banana republic" " "...belittling and embarrassing them in front of others" "In the past year at least 9 employees have quit"  "her priorities can change  on a whim and her mood" "it's the most dysfunctional and disheartening organization" "Employees could never figure out what the foundation's goal were" "she has a wicked temper and is quite entitled and belligerent" "she has become bitter, mean and angry" "spread vindictive lies about her sister-in-law who committed suicide" 

She was arrested while driving impaired, smashed into a tractor trailer truck and fled the scene of the accident. She was acquitted, but still went on the Today show to complain "It's a terrible policy...pursuing every case of driving under the influence."

" The organization most heavily benefits the family." 

I'll amend my original statement, there's reason for her to be the Handbag's friend also, a similar lack of ethics in common.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5652025



What ??? it has not been published, ok , a few review copies may be circulating but not to the public , is this fake news ?


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> "It's a terrible policy...pursuing every case of driving under the influence."


I'd like her to say that to the face of someone who lost a loved one to a drunk driver. What an entitled twat.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The constant use of titles is increasingly annoying to me. It seems to be more frequent since QE passed, imo.  KCIII needs to act as quickly as possible to stop this.


We have seen 2 letters on palace stationary in last month.
The coronet paper is for personal use, not business. I think these are business letters , don’t  they have Archewell stationary?
And somehow the letters are available to the public. AFTER the flap about publishing the MM letter to dad. 
They send a different message by using personal stationary. Obviously a PR stunt to humanize H and M.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> They can't donate what they don't have  Dolly's generosity is well known in TN. She just doesn't blow her horn about it.


They wouldn't donate it even if they have it. Zed and Sparry see themselves as born to lead, born to command, born to set trends. In Sparry's case, all the good efforts he did in the past were backed by the well-oiled palace machine and any funds donated didn't come out of his own pocket. Even now, do you actually see him working to raise funds for Sentebale and Invictus? Others are putting in the work while he "graces" the occasions. Zed thinks her face and voice are worth millions and that will be all she is really going to donate. She already inveigled her way in to be a leader of Invictus. I wouldn't be surprised if she was investing time in being a pwife in the hopes that she can become the face of Sentebale too (Maybe she can pose with her face next to a pony's rear.)


----------



## purseinsanity

O


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tourré being mean, but I thought y'all would appreciate the picture.



He's not being mean.  He's just stating the truth.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> A letter to children from "Pr*nce H*rry, The D*ke of S***"



STFU HazBeen.  You do NOT share a bond.  Their parents were killed while serving their country and they're still children.  His mother, while tragically killed in an accident, died serving herself.  You are a f'ing middle aged man whose entire identity seems to be about your dead mother.  Stop using every god#amn thing as an opportunity to inject yourself into it and make it constantly about Diana.  He's turned her into the new Marcia Brady.


----------



## purseinsanity

DL Harper said:


> To quote Dolly “I try to put my money *where my heart is*."
> 
> Seems to be the way the Harkles do charity work and give donations too.


Dolly also said "*It costs a lot of money to look this cheap!, *which totally applies to TW.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> This is eye popping, reading it leads me to think she and TW may be friends based on the mutually atrocious behaviors .  This the woman who made the Harkles award happen this year.
> 
> '*Dictator*' *Kerry Kennedy* is ruining family legacy - New York Post​https://nypost.com/2016/07/31/kerry-kennedys-fury-sends-family-charity-spiraling-staff/ - 366k - Cached - Similar pages
> Jul 31, 2016 *...* She claims to be a great advocate for human rights — but former employees tell The Post that behind closed doors, *Kerry Kennedy* is a monster ...
> *
> She was arrested while driving impaired, smashed into a tractor trailer truck and fled the scene of the accident. She was acquitted, but still went on the Today show to complain "It's a terrible policy...pursuing every case of driving under the influence."*


That's interesting.  If you flee the scene, it's a hit and run.  Amazing how she was acquitted.  "It's a terrible policy"????  They should've thrown the book at her.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> This is eye popping, reading it leads me to think she and TW may be friends based on the mutually atrocious behaviors .  This the woman who made the Harkles award happen this year.
> 
> '*Dictator*' *Kerry Kennedy* is ruining family legacy - New York Post​https://nypost.com/2016/07/31/kerry-kennedys-fury-sends-family-charity-spiraling-staff/ - 366k - Cached - Similar pages
> Jul 31, 2016 *...* She claims to be a great advocate for human rights — but former employees tell The Post that behind closed doors, *Kerry Kennedy* is a monster ...
> 
> "increasingly erratic" "unhinged" "behaves like the dictator of a banana republic" " "...belittling and embarrassing them in front of others" "In the past year at least 9 employees have quit"  "her priorities can change  on a whim and her mood" "it's the most dysfunctional and disheartening organization" "Employees could never figure out what the foundation's goal were" "she has a wicked temper and is quite entitled and belligerent" "she has become bitter, mean and angry" "spread vindictive lies about her sister-in-law who committed suicide"
> 
> She was arrested while driving impaired, smashed into a tractor trailer truck and fled the scene of the accident. She was acquitted, but still went on the Today show to complain "It's a terrible policy...pursuing every case of driving under the influence."
> 
> " The organization most heavily benefits the family."
> 
> I'll amend my original statement, there's reason for her to be the Handbag's friend also, a similar lack of ethics in common.


Great finding @csshopper. It's scary to see the amount of mediocre people pretending to be activists, philanthropists… or whatever they call themselves. 

"_Multiple sources — all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity — say Kennedy uses foundation funds to pay for lavish expenses and the foundation itself as an excuse to party with celebs around the globe. The foundation’s most recent tax filings show she paid herself $357,340 in 2014. That same year, she took out a $2.4 million line of credit for the center, which has offices in DC and on Manhattan’s Madison Avenue._"


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Perfect example of trust and knowing she will do the right thing.  The Harkles will have their hand in the till.  _*One for you and two for me.  One for you and three for me.*_


You are almost there. I think it's 'None for you and all for me.'


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> That's interesting.  If you flee the scene, it's a hit and run.  Amazing how she was acquitted.  "It's a terrible policy"????  They should've thrown the book at her.


Their last name has protected members of the family from being held accountable like everyone else over the past 60 years.


----------



## LittleStar88

Not sure if the ghoul was with him…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## LittleStar88

More photos…


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan missed out on a trip to Hawaii? Now I know they are living apart.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> More photos…



Why?  Why the F is he _there?  _Can’t he just go away #$%#$%?
ETA: apologies for the coarse language - _that_ is most definitely *not* who I am.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Their last name has protected members of the family from being held accountable like everyone else over the past 60 years.


Can you say Chappaquiddick?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Why?  Why the F is he _there?  _Can’t he just go away #$%#$%?


It looks like he left her home, so we can be thankful for that at least.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure if the ghoul was with him…



You know there would be pics if she was.


----------



## charlottawill

This commenter makes a good point. He could have gone to a VFW post within driving distance of Montecitio and met with veterans but instead chose to fly to Pearl Harbor?

ETA: I wonder if this was staged by Netflix and they're picking up the tab? Maybe told her to stay home?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Pearl Harbor, this Kindness bs  nonsense, all of it is simply a cheap trick by Nflix.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> This commenter makes a good point. He could have gone to a VFW post within driving distance of Montecitio and met with veterans but instead chose to fly to Pearl Harbor?
> 
> ETA: I wonder if this was staged by Netflix and they're picking up the tab? Maybe told her to stay home?



Maybe Harry doesn’t understand that Veterans Day is different from Remembrance Day either.

And let’s face it, American vets don’t care about Prince Harry. They just don’t. If he had gone to meet some they would have been polite but probably confused as to why he was there.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Harry doesn’t understand that Veterans Day is different from Remembrance Day either.
> 
> And let’s face it, American vets don’t care about Prince Harry. They just don’t. If he had gone to meet some *they would have been polite but probably confused as to why he was there.*


That would have been a better response than the way the other performers edged away from Zed when she did her USO tour.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take note, Nflix:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Take note, H&M [hint, if ya must use a title, ya simply don’t have _*it*_.]


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> Not sure if the ghoul was with him…



Interesting that they have not been pictured together for a while and the black and white pic of them was from April.  Maybe there is something to the rumors of them being separated?


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> How corrupt is this world…
> View attachment 5651664
> 
> 
> _*The couple are set to receive an award at the Ripple of Hope gala on December 6*_
> _*Previous winners include US President Joe *****, Barack ***** and Bill ******* *_
> _*'Pioneer' package for event selling at $1million includes four seats at top table*_
> _*The event is hosted by President John F. Kennedy's niece Kerry Kennedy*_
> _*The glitzy gala is run by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Americans pay $1m to see Harry and Meghan receive same award as Obama
> 
> 
> Wealthy Americans are spending up to $1 million to rub shoulders with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle at a glittering New York gala. They will receive an award at the Ripple of Hope event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


No one will spend $1 mill - it’s all lies.


----------



## gracekelly

I find his trip to the Arizona Memorial to be infuriating. Is he running for office?  

I visited the Arizona Memorial with my mother many years ago. It was an emotional experience and we both cried. My father was a Naval officer during the war and stationed in the Pacific. It brought back her memories of wondering if she and my older brother would ever see him again. For me, it was knowing that we were standing where so many died. The thought that Harry is using this place for a photo op is maddening. How dare he trivialize such a tragic event and the memory of Pearl Harbor.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I find his trip to the Arizona Memorial to be infuriating. Is he running for office?
> 
> I visited the Arizona Memorial with my mother many years ago. It was an emotional experience and we both cried. My father was a Naval officer during the war and stationed in the Pacific. It brought back her memories of wondering if she and my older brother would ever see him again. For me, it was knowing that we were standing where so many died. The thought that Harry is using this place for a photo op is maddening. How dare he trivialize such a tragic event and the memory of Pearl Harbor.


I’m so sorry to hear of this experience.    
This is exactly the problem with H&M - their thoughtless actions trigger so many painful emotions for so many of us. Can’t help but think he is ‘scouting’ for ideas that he can sell to the UK as his own, just like Invictus. Iirc, the park can arrange for a *private* visit, much as his mom would do on her shopping excursions. KC really should apologize to the US and get the guy out of here. We do not need nor want his negativity and constant photos. Imo. 






						USS Arizona Memorial Tour
					

The memorial honors the stories of the events of WWII and the War in the Pacific. Located in Honolulu, Hawaii.



					www.pearlharborhistoricsites.org


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I find his trip to the Arizona Memorial to be infuriating. Is he running for office?
> 
> I visited the Arizona Memorial with my mother many years ago. It was an emotional experience and we both cried. My father was a Naval officer during the war and stationed in the Pacific. It brought back her memories of wondering if she and my older brother would ever see him again. For me, it was knowing that we were standing where so many died. The thought that Harry is using this place for a photo op is maddening. How dare he trivialize such a tragic event and the memory of Pearl Harbor.


I could not agree more. I visited with my family when we were in Honolulu for spring break about twenty years ago. I was surprised by how emotional I got, and I did not have any family connection to it. The visitors around me, including a lot of young people, understood the significance of it and were appropriately reverant. You could hear a pin drop inside the memorial. It was pre iPhone though, maybe it would be different today. But I think many will find it offensive if it is just filler for their Netflix show.


----------



## gracekelly

Hold the presses!  I just found out that the Arizona Memorial has been closed since Oct 17th for repairs. When did this Sh*t head go?  How old are these pictures?  Heis wearing a suit  I bet this was from a long time ago. 

USS Arizona Memorial Update Oct. 17th 2022
10/17/2022 3:30 PM PARK OPERATIONS UPDATE: USS ARIZONA MEMORIAL VISITOR CENTER DOCK IS CLOSED FOR REPAIRS AND CHIEF RANGER AT THE MEMORIAL DID NOT PROVIDE AN ESTIMATION AS TO WHEN IT WILL RE-OPEN.










						USS Arizona Memorial Repair Information - Pearl Harbor Tours
					

Repairs Are Underway To Fix The Dock At The USS Arizona Memorial. We Hope That It Will Be Repaired Soon. Check Back With Us For Updates.




					www.pearlharbortours.com
				




YOUR GUIDE WILL DELIVER MULTIPLE OPPORTUNITIES TO SEE THE MEMORIAL AND ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL TIME AT OTHER GREAT LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT PEARL HARBOR AND HONOLULU DURING YOUR TOUR.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

I don’t care when the pictures were taken. It is still infuriating that they are being published now for Veteran’s Day.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles' nomination, using John F. Kennedy's words, "is _worse than absurd_. It is bankruptcy of moral responsibility" imo.  

_Kerry Kennedy, president of Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, said the pair and their "willingness to speak up and change the narrative on racial justice and mental health" across the world "embody the type of moral courage that my father once called the 'one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change'."

However, *Professor David Nasaw, author of Pulitzer Prize-nominated book The Patriarch about President Kennedy's father, described their nomination as "absurd"*.

He told the Mail on Sunday: "*I find it somewhere between sublimely ridiculous and blatantly ludicrous. It's absurd.*

"If you look at the people who have been awarded the Robert Kennedy prize in the past – Bill and Hillary *******, Nancy ******, Bishop Desmond Tutu – and then you have to ask what are Harry and Meghan doing here?

*"What in God's name have they done to merit this? What percentage of Harry and Meghan's wealth is going to worthy causes?*"

The professor added the *Kennedys' patriarch Joseph, an Irish Catholic, would be turning in his grave to see branches of his family "latching on to British Royalty*"._







						Meghan and Harry human rights honour labelled 'sublimely ridiculous' | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are among the recipients of this year's Ripple of Hope Award.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> That's interesting.  If you flee the scene, it's a hit and run.  Amazing how she was acquitted.  "It's a terrible policy"????  They should've thrown the book at her.


Interesting that her defence was basically "Gee, I made a mistake" so she feels very aggrieved that she was taken to court. I don't think she fled the scene. She claims she took the wrong pills by accident and lost consciousness while driving (they were sleeping pills). Luckily she crashed her car into a tractor-trailer. If she had killed someone, would she (and her lawyer) still have thrown a tantrum over this and blamed it on persecution of her as an individual due to her family name?
_“You’ve got to wonder why an ill-advised prosecution like this was brought,” the attorney said. “Is it because of who the defendant is? They concede that it was an accident and nevertheless they brought this case. I find this very depressing.”_

Yes, I think Kerry and Zed would get on like a house on fire.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Absolutely, it shows her character, or lack of. However, if she was living a private life and not constantly attempting to interfere in politics with her many photo-ops and statements, I would sincerely not care about it. People like TW can cause damage to the world imo, and that's what bothers me.



Got you. It's true, wrecking havoc to everyone you know is different from wrecking havoc on a global stage, to monarchies and countries.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that they have not been pictured together for a while and the black and white pic of them was from April.  Maybe there is something to the rumors of them being separated?



One can only hope.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the Reddit thread on Ghoul cheating on Cory a few pages back. Sounds familiar? Didn't someone come forward recently saying how she dragged Archie back and forth until finally someone took that picture? Also, they should have known there and then she was trouble.



> Meghan was spotted outside Kensington Palace on November 2016 during which Harry was on royal duty with Prince Philip during the Festival of Remembrance. She was told to stay “unseen” that day and decided to do her “pap walk” in front of the daily Mail offices (she walked past their office multiple times until a photographer came out and took her photo & put her out of her misery, they were watching her through the window and were laughing at her desperation ) and took the public entrance to the palace when she was told to use the private entrance.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The accompanying picture is the one where she has a "End poverty worldwide" bag in one hand and a bag of Waitrose, UK's most expensive supermarket, in the other. Can't make that sh*t up


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, I dug a bit through that thread and it was brought up (with receipts) that she apparently was engaged to Cory while hooking up with Harry   She is such a low human being.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Dolly also said "*It costs a lot of money to look this cheap!, *which totally applies to TW.


The difference is, Dolly does cheap in a classy way and we love her for it.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take note, H&M [hint, if ya must use a title, ya simply don’t have _*it*_.]



This post doesn’t need to roar.  It just is.  Great find.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take note, H&M [hint, if ya must use a title, ya simply don’t have _*it*_.]



Yes ducal titles are not there printed at top of page, locations are used instead but there is a title hidden below 

MY GUESS is the BRF choose to avoid paper with titles since titles change - they can still use Balmoral paper for eons, but paper saying Cambridge needs to put on the shelf 

The undated letter from Charles top left is signed Charles R, I think ? hard to read, recent notes from Camilla are signed Camilla R
R is for Rex/Regina , Latin for king/ queen , QEII used the signature Elizabeth R


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles' nomination, using John F. Kennedy's words, "is _worse than absurd_. It is bankruptcy of moral responsibility" imo.
> 
> _Kerry Kennedy, president of Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights, said the pair and their "willingness to speak up and change the narrative on racial justice and mental health" across the world "embody the type of moral courage that my father once called the 'one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change'."
> 
> However, *Professor David Nasaw, author of Pulitzer Prize-nominated book The Patriarch about President Kennedy's father, described their nomination as "absurd"*.
> 
> He told the Mail on Sunday: "*I find it somewhere between sublimely ridiculous and blatantly ludicrous. It's absurd.*
> 
> "If you look at the people who have been awarded the Robert Kennedy prize in the past – Bill and Hillary *******, Nancy ******, Bishop Desmond Tutu – and then you have to ask what are Harry and Meghan doing here?
> 
> *"What in God's name have they done to merit this? What percentage of Harry and Meghan's wealth is going to worthy causes?*"
> 
> The professor added the *Kennedys' patriarch Joseph, an Irish Catholic, would be turning in his grave to see branches of his family "latching on to British Royalty*"._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry human rights honour labelled 'sublimely ridiculous' | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are among the recipients of this year's Ripple of Hope Award.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Some article pointed out the previous president BO’s Nobel Peace prize for comparison 
OK he did not buy that but some questioned the basis for the award , it was early in his presidency before he had done anything


----------



## piperdog

Cinderlala said:


> Hyperblonde, perhaps.
> 
> Editing to add: Sometimes it looks like I literally have tinsel in my hair!  I'm a bit of a magpie so anything that seems sparkly really stands out.
> 
> And, to stay on topic, I wonder how long TW has had gray hair---I'm sure that's not something she'd like to think about.  (See, she's just like us!)
> 
> 
> DL Harper said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please let me help you understand.  Those strands are "shades of blonde", not silver, white or even gray as you may have thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I call mine my naturally-occurring platinum highlights!
Click to expand...


----------



## periogirl28

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The accompanying picture is the one where she has a "End poverty worldwide" bag in one hand and a bag of Waitrose, UK's most expensive supermarket, in the other. Can't make that sh*t up


And what about the High St Ken Whole Foods excursions? (My local)


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the Reddit thread on Ghoul cheating on Cory a few pages back. Sounds familiar? Didn't someone come forward recently saying how she dragged Archie back and forth until finally someone took that picture? Also, they should have known there and then she was trouble.


Wasn't that the photo where she was allegedly heavily pregnant and carrying Archie on the street on the way to or from school? And Sparry was upset that the paps intruded on a personal moment?  I think there were accounts that she hung around till the paps came. But these stories pop up at all her papped appearances so I don't know whether or not to believe them.

What I do believe is that it was a merching event because M's Mirror identified everything in the shot, even the maternity jeans which are nondescript IMO and pretty much hidden beneath her coat. Someone in the Sussex camp has to be feeding them info or Zed is collaborating with her mirror.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Some article pointed out the previous president BO’s Nobel Peace prize for comparison
> OK he did not buy that but some questioned the basis for the award , it was early in his presidency before he had done anything


I remember that, it took many people by surprise. However, even the slightest comparison to TW (or her husband) is shocking. We can't compare a very articulate person with an already brilliant career in the public arena to a greedy z-list actress who vomits word salads.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> They can't donate what they don't have  Dolly's generosity is well known in TN. She just doesn't blow her horn about it.


well, if they didn't live in a huge mansion, maybe they would have some money to donate


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> More photos…



who cares?


----------



## Chanbal

DM clarifies: Hazz made one his beloved surprise visits to Pearl Harbor wearing a poppy and had fans/photographers there ready to take the official photos. However, TW and his medals were absent from the event.  











						Harry in Hawaii! Duke of Sussex made a solo surprise appearance
					

Photos of Prince Harry's solo visit to the USS Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbor were shared online this weekend after he was spotted by surprised onlookers.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


>



A parody account - I think Elon is requiring that such accounts all have PARODY in the name...
But that is a hilarious post, thank you


----------



## Chanbal

I knew that something was familiar with D's outfit.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> _"The professor added the *Kennedys' patriarch Joseph, an Irish Catholic, would be turning in his grave to see branches of his family "latching on to British Royalty*"._


Old Joe was Catholic in name only. He was as shady as they come and bought his family's way into the upper reaches of society with money made from illicit activities, and then focused his ambition for power onto his sons. A lot of his apples did not fall far from the tree.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I knew that something was familiar with D's outfit.



"Cos play if Diana were alive Meghan and her mother would be gone faster than you can say Jimmy Cricket."


----------



## charlottawill

Andrew Morton on the Today show this morning. He believes a reconciliation is a long way off. 



> https://www.today.com/3rd-hour-today


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


> DM clarifies: Hazz made one his beloved surprise visits to Pearl Harbor wearing a poppy and had fans/photographers there ready to take the official photos. However, TW and his medals were absent from the event.
> 
> View attachment 5652549
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry in Hawaii! Duke of Sussex made a solo surprise appearance
> 
> 
> Photos of Prince Harry's solo visit to the USS Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbor were shared online this weekend after he was spotted by surprised onlookers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I sure hope he used sunscreen…


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



How to say you are no longer relevant without saying you are no longer relevant.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



I haven't figured out if I should laugh at this or just roll my eyes.  Lots of innuendo.  Does this involve the invisible children? Or just the titles?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> who cares?


I care.  He is using one of the darkest days in US history to hit back at KC3 and the UK honoring the fallen.  Why didn't he visit Dunkirk? That would have been more appropriate.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> We heard about lemon cakes, sandwiches, partnerships with others that donate… but not about real donations like the one below.
> 
> _A longtime activist and philanthropist, Parton donated $1 million to Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s vaccine research efforts during the coronavirus pandemic. Her contributions helped fund Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton gets $100M from Jeff Bezos to give to her favorite charities
> 
> 
> Dolly Parton was awarded $100 million from Jeff Bezos to give to charities of her choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com



Dolly is a 100% self made successful person. She came from absolute poverty. For a long time Dolly would have considered eating at Sizzler's as a super big treat, not used it as a "See, look how poor I was and am still whining about it".


----------



## kemilia

Aimee3 said:


> I wonder where the venue is in NYC.  (Not that I’d pay to see either of them.)


With all the chat about this fancy NYC event it seems we have lost sight of TW's upcoming Indianapolis gala--"An Evening With Meghan" on Nov 29.

I get giddy thinking about the 2 different occasions' wardrobes--and the spray tans (which color to load into the spray gun for which event?)! 
Which Diana will she cosplay for each? 
And will Sparry be with her?


----------



## Aimee3

Chanbal said:


> DM clarifies: Hazz made one his beloved surprise visits to Pearl Harbor wearing a poppy and had fans/photographers there ready to take the official photos. However, TW and his medals were absent from the event.
> 
> View attachment 5652549
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry in Hawaii! Duke of Sussex made a solo surprise appearance
> 
> 
> Photos of Prince Harry's solo visit to the USS Arizona Memorial at Pearl Harbor were shared online this weekend after he was spotted by surprised onlookers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I thought someone posted these are old photos and the access to the ship has been closed since mid October?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Old Joe was Catholic in name only. He was as shady as they come and bought his family's way into the upper reaches of society with money made from illicit activities, and then focused his ambition for power onto his sons. A lot of his apples did not fall far from the tree.


Considering that old Joe was the US Ambassador to the Court of St James, I don't think he would have a problem with it.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> I thought someone posted these are old photos and the access to the ship has been closed since mid October?


Apparently the Memorial was re-opened at the beginning of November.  So I guess the pictures are current and real. That doesn't change the fact that he was trying to undermine KC3 and his family with a US major tragedy.   

 I think it is an absolute given that whenever there is a UK event, these two will come up with something to drop on their heads.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I care.  He is using one of the darkest days in US history to hit back at KC3 and the UK honoring the fallen.  Why didn't he visit Dunkirk? That would have been more appropriate.


Agreed, and all the more reason to think Netflix was behind it. Netflix producers probably thought Harry at Pearl Harbor would appeal more to their viewers. It's a shame, it could have been an opportunity to teach an American audience about an important event in British history while showing Hazy in a positive light for a change.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Apparently the Memorial was re-opened at the beginning of November.  So I guess the pictures are current and real. That doesn't change the fact that he was trying to undermine KC3 and his family with a US major tragedy.
> 
> I think it is an absolute given that whenever there is a UK event, these two will come up with something to drop on their heads.


Sounds like KC finally dropped something on him today.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Sounds like KC finally dropped something on him today.


He deputized Princess Anne and the Earl of Wessex.  This pushes Andrew and Harry down the food chain, though it doesn't appear that they were removed.  It was a diplomatic solution.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Thanks to the Duchess of Divisiveness, everything he does seems like a stunt. 
I get that the lone Palm Tree Prince needs to wander the world looking for relevance and possibly plumbing projects, but stunting at Pearl Harbor and most especially the Arizona Memorial is beyond. That is hallowed ground.


----------



## gracekelly

DAN WOOTTON: After watching The Crown, Prince Harry must quit Netflix
					

DAN WOOTTON: After weeks of non-stop hype and worrying leaks about what to expect from its 'storylines', I knew The Crown was going to be bad. But I had no idea it would be this bad.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Oh boy!


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Thanks to the Duchess of Divisiveness, everything he does seems like a stunt.
> I get that the lone Palm Tree Prince needs to wander the world looking for relevance and possibly plumbing projects, but stunting at Pearl Harbor and most especially the Arizona Memorial is beyond. That is hallowed ground.


That is a perfect description.  Everything they do is_ *stunting!  *_


----------



## kipp

Meghan Markle Reportedly Has Had A ‘Dramatic Change Of Heart’ And Wants To Keep Her Royal Titles Now
					

Meghan Markle has had a “dramatic change of heart regarding titles,” a royal expert has claimed, which goes against what she said in her bombshell Oprah interview back in March 2021, whereby she said that titles weren’t important to her. ...




					www.yahoo.com
				





Quelle surprise!!!!


----------



## LittleStar88

rose60610 said:


> Dolly is a 100% self made successful person. She came from absolute poverty. For a long time Dolly would have considered eating at Sizzler's as a super big treat, not used it as a "See, look how poor I was and am still whining about it".



Dolly is an American Treasure. I feel that she would still enjoy and feel grateful to dine at Sizzler. 100% class act.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> He deputized Princess Anne and the Earl of Wessex.  This pushes Andrew and Harry down the food chain, though it doesn't appear that they were removed.  It was a diplomatic solution.


I read somewhere that removing Andrew & H as COS creates a legal issue. So, the compromise is keep em, dont use em, add the good ones. What was the legal issue ? Not said in article.  I think the problem is removing someone who remains in the LOS. 

And I have no clue how to remove someone from LOS. I know no recent historical precedents. In the past, bad heirs conveniently died before their time and never got the throne. Ex: depraved dimwitted Duke of Clarence died and the throne went to George V.

If you go back to the death of Protestant Charles II, the throne ignored Charles' Catholic brother James and went to James's Protestant daughter Mary. James was never removed from LOS.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> Dolly is an American Treasure. I feel that she would still enjoy and feel grateful to dine at Sizzler. 100% class act.


Tbh, I think us Brits have adopted her as an honorary national treasure, lol. 
To keep it on topic, that is something TW will never be.


----------



## marietouchet

On the visit to Pearl Harbor ... hmmm
The attack on PH resonates with Americans. while the battle of the Somme resonates with Europeans
H has not shown the least interest in the US and its traditions ... and he puts up hissy fits over wearing his UK uniforms - to which he is no longer entitled...
I still have not forgiven his not putting his hand on heart while facing the flag, *everyone else in the photo did it *! Except MM


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> I haven't figured out if I should laugh at this or just roll my eyes.  Lots of innuendo.  Does this involve the invisible children? Or just the titles?


Ewwww ... invisikids will be COS in another decade or so, they can do it without hardly stepping foot in the UK or ever singing the national anthem


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I read somewhere that removing Andrew & H as COS creates a legal issue. So, the compromise is keep em, dont use em, add the good ones. What was the legal issue ? Not said in article.  I think the problem is removing someone who remains in the LOS.
> 
> And I have no clue how to remove someone from LOS. I know no recent historical precedents. In the past, bad heirs conveniently died before their time and never got the throne. Ex: depraved dimwitted Duke of Clarence died and the throne went to George V.
> 
> If you go back to the death of Protestant Charles II, the throne ignored Charles' Catholic brother James and went to James's Protestant daughter Mary. James was never removed from LOS.


If I understand the rules correctly, the person with the title simply needs to *renounce* it.  Edward had to *abdicate* because he was king. _Abdicate_ is used for kings/queens and _renounce_ is used for the others.  Of course, the monarch could request Parliament to remove the title but that gets messy and very public.  So much easier for all if Hazz renounces.  So, why doesn’t he?  $$$$$$


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> On the visit to Pearl Harbor ... hmmm
> The attack on PH resonates with Americans. while the battle of the Somme resonates with Europeans
> H has not shown the least interest in the US and its traditions ... and he puts up hissy fits over wearing his UK uniforms - to which he is no longer entitled...
> I still have not forgiven his not putting his hand on heart while facing the flag, *everyone else in the photo did it *! Except MM


In this instence, as a Brit I wouldn't put my hand over my heart whilst facing the American flag. It's not my flag even if I lived over there. It's not something we do to ours. I'd stand up and observe of course, as I would if any National Anthem of the world were played but hand over heart isn't something we do.

ETA, if I became an American citizen then, yes, I would.


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> In this instence, as a Brit I wouldn't put my hand over my heart whilst facing the American flag. It's not my flag even if I lived over there. It's not something we do to ours. I'd stand up and observe of course, as I would if any National Anthem of the world were played but hand over heart isn't something we do.
> 
> ETA, if I became an American citizen then, yes, I would.


I do see your point ... he is a UK citizen ... but I still have not forgiven him and more to the point MM









						Putting Your Hand Over Your Heart Makes You Both Appear And Behave More Honestly
					

Our bodily actions have more influence over our behavior and perceptions than we might realize




					www.smithsonianmag.com


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> If I understand the rules correctly, the person with the title simply needs to *renounce* it.  Edward had to *abdicate* because he was king. _Abdicate_ is used for kings/queens and _renounce_ is used for the others.  Of course, the monarch could request Parliament to remove the title but that gets messy and very public.  So much easier for all if Hazz renounces.  So, why doesn’t he?  $$$$$$


But this is indeed complicated ... he can renounce the title (Sussex) but still be in LOS 

There are people who used to  be in the LOS but converted to Roman Catholicism so, are no longer in the LOS, they dont meet the requirements , but that is different from renouncing ... 
And on a different note, how can invisi Lili be in the LOS if not in the COE? Who knows ...


----------



## LittleStar88

For non-US citizens, it is respectful to stand (as any non-citizen of another country should) but not necessary to put the hand over the heart. I don't hold it against Harry.

TW didn't put her hand over her heart - shame on her. She should have, and should have known better.


----------



## Cinderlala

Aside from the shenanigan-isms of the visit to Pearl Harbor, it is refreshing to see PH walking around without the CLAW constantly attached to him dictating his direction/actions/motions/etc.


----------



## LittleStar88

Cinderlala said:


> Aside from the shenanigan-isms of the visit to Pearl Harbor, it is refreshing to see PH walking around without the CLAW constantly attached to him dictating his direction/actions/motions/etc.



It must have felt so free not to have her pushing, pulling, redirecting him, and shoving herself in front of him!


----------



## Lodpah

bag-mania said:


> Maybe Harry doesn’t understand that Veterans Day is different from Remembrance Day either.
> 
> And let’s face it, American vets don’t care about Prince Harry. They just don’t. If he had gone to meet some they would have been polite but probably confused as to why he was there.


As a vet he does not need to be there. We are busy barbecuing and meeting up with family. He’s not American and he needs to be honoring the veterans of his country. Also what a slap in the face to honor those two whose only claim to fame is that . . . oh I don’t know. 

In military jargon, Harry and Meghan are ate the fcuk up.


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> Dolly is a 100% self made successful person. She came from absolute poverty. For a long time Dolly would have considered eating at Sizzler's as a super big treat, not used it as a "See, look how poor I was and am still whining about it".


Dolly sounds like a genuine person who is thankful for her talent. TW sounds like an ungrateful person with questionable talent and authenticity.


----------



## bag-mania

The tourists around him are wondering what the hell is going on.

I guess it wasn’t in the budget to Photoshop his bald spot.


----------



## Lodpah

Veterans Day is to honor Veterans. Memorial Day is to honor the fallen. Get it right Doofus Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Go Charles! I hope he had a big slice of chocolate cake, too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> He deputized Princess Anne and the Earl of Wessex.  This pushes Andrew and Harry down the food chain, though it doesn't appear that they were removed.  *It was a diplomatic solution*.


Too diplomatic for my taste.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> DAN WOOTTON: After watching The Crown, Prince Harry must quit Netflix
> 
> 
> DAN WOOTTON: After weeks of non-stop hype and worrying leaks about what to expect from its 'storylines', I knew The Crown was going to be bad. But I had no idea it would be this bad.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy!



A whole lot of strangers - British citizens, media, us - are showing this family a lot more support and loyalty than the lost son. He should be so ashamed of himself.



kipp said:


> Meghan Markle Reportedly Has Had A ‘Dramatic Change Of Heart’ And Wants To Keep Her Royal Titles Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has had a “dramatic change of heart regarding titles,” a royal expert has claimed, which goes against what she said in her bombshell Oprah interview back in March 2021, whereby she said that titles weren’t important to her. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quelle surprise!!!!



Naw. She always wanted those titles, she would have hers, sorry HARRY's tattooed on her forehead of she could. She is just a petulant tantrum throwing toddler (as I learned from following that psychologist, emotional immaturity is a thing) who comes out swinging with "I didn't want it anyway" when not indulged.

Remember that press leak how she didn't care about tiaras at all after she asked for one to take on tour (instead of trusting that if she should have one it would be brought up with her) and Charles had to tell her no? (thinking about this knowing what we know now after two very enlightening books, I wonder if Charles was sent because everyone else was deadly afraid already?)


----------



## CarryOn2020

This family :shaking my head:

EXCLUSIVE: 'A bewildering choice!' RFK Jr. is 'baffled' by his family's decision to honor Prince Harry and Meghan with prestigious human rights award in NYC... as tickets for glitzy December gala go on sale for up to $1 MILLION​
*Harry and Meghan will be honored at the annual Ripple of Hope gala on Dec 6 *
*They are among 'laureates' of this year's award and share it with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky *
*Some say it's 'blatantly ludicrous' that they should be honored when their Archewell foundation is so new *
*The award is given by RFK Human Rights, set up in honor of Bobby Kennedy and run predominantly by his daughter, Kerry Kennedy *
*RFK Jr., Kerry's brother, tells DailyMail.com Harry and Meghan are a 'bewildering choice' *
*He however thinks it's an 'encouraging step up' from Anthony Fauci in 2020 *
*Tickets to the event are being sold from $2,500 to $1million*
*








						RFK Jr. 'baffled' by Harry and Meghan winning humanitarian award
					

Speaking to DailyMail.com exclusively on Monday, he said it was however 'still an encouraging step up' from Anthony Fauci, who won the award two years ago on behalf of his handling of COVID-19.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe all of them should be quiet -  do not see what good they are doing by grabbing headlines.  Imo.

ETA: this includes H&M


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw. She always wanted those titles, she would have hers, sorry HARRY's tattooed on her forehead of she could. She is just a petulant tantrum throwing toddler (as I learned from following that psychologist, emotional immaturity is a thing) who comes out swinging with "I didn't want it anyway" when not indulged.
> 
> Remember that press leak how she didn't care about tiaras at all after she asked for one to take on tour (instead of trusting that if she should have one it would be brought up with her) and Charles had to tell her no? (thinking about this knowing what we know now after two very enlightening books, I wonder if Charles was sent because everyone else was deadly afraid already?)


I think TQ and Angela didn't want a tiaragate all over again so they sent Charles.


----------



## gracekelly

Using spoiler tags for this very long post.  I don't know who the person is who wrote it.  I wonder how this is related to the Theresa Longo post about something big is in the works.



Spoiler: Someone isn't telling the truth.



Excellent post by Deanna Eppers on Quora:

I personally believe Archie exists, and the royal family has evidence of that of some sort. What I write is controversial, because it flies in the face of what Harry and Meghan push through the media, but it’s from good sources. Meghan reportedly did not carry Archie, meaning she was never pregnant with him. A surrogate was used, and I think Meghan only knew about the American law that whoever donates the egg or even takes possession of the baby is the mother.

That’s not the case in the UK, so an unfortunate issue arose. Meghan was not viewed as the mother. There was no picture with the Queen, Doria and Prince Philip looking at baby Archie. That is why Tom Bower wrote in his book that they were all looking at a shawl. No baby was present. No Archie was there that day, and we know Harry and Megs love to play with the truth and keep people guessing and hopefully, interested in them.

Archie should not be in the line of succession as it stands, but I think Queen Elizabeth did not want to reveal Meg’s lie, and the big deal is no one can talk about it due to a legal injunction put in place by either Harry/Meg or the Palace. So many reporters are waiting to write the truth, but their hands are tied. I don’t know who has tied them, but is it the Palace? Is it Megs? The Palace has more weight behind them, so I tend to believe they decided the children issue needed to be placed on hold.

Something is not okay with Archie, apparently. His parents are both narcissists unfortunately, and their child isn’t thriving according to reports. He is behind in his social development, and since he is tucked away and not brought out with either parent, Archie isn’t doing well. So there is most likely an Archie, who is the child of Harry, but he’s ignored and treated harshly at times. Narcissists do not love, so I feel sorry for the boy.

As for Lilibet, there is nothing to suggest the child exists. No surrogate, no pregnancy, no hospital records either. So why would Lilibet be in the line of succession? Again, I believe Queen Elizabeth was being trusting and kind, because wouldn’t the old Harry come out and tell the truth about his children? But he didn’t do that.

There’s a new king in town, and he’s not interested in placating Harry and that wife of his, but I believe he’s biding his time. Let Harry come out with that memoir; let Netflix air the Markle reality show that will be one big boring show about lies. After that happens the world will fall in on the couple. That is when King Charles is supposed to pull titles, and he’s reportedly going to pull their children out of the line of succession at that point.

Many people will wonder how fictitious children can be in the line of succession, but they are there due to the lies told by Harry to cover for Megs. If Archie does not exist or if he was born of a surrogate (the more likely scenario), he has to be removed. As for Lilibet? Someone has to tell the truth. It’s difficult for the Palace, because Queen Elizabeth wanted to believe Harry. He was special to her, and she couldn’t imagine lying about children, but Megs is willing to go where so few would ever dare to tread.
Archie and Lilibet will be out of the line of succession sooner than later. When that happens, Megs and Harry will have much to answer for. They lied; not the royal family, not the Palace. The Palace chose to believe Harry’s word, so this will ruin Harry and Megs. Why do you think the word is that Meghan, the woman who couldn’t pass a simple test about Great Britain to become a citizen, is saying she will homeschool Archie? Why would he not attend regular school next year?

Why did Harry go along with Meghan’s lies? Why did they tell the lies?

Soon all will be laid bare, and this falls solely on the two who lied to the world. Harry and that wife.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Using spoiler tags for this very long post.  I don't know who the person is who wrote it.  I wonder how this is related to the Theresa Longo post about something big is in the works.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Someone isn't telling the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent post by Deanna Eppers on Quora:
> 
> I personally believe Archie exists, and the royal family has evidence of that of some sort. What I write is controversial, because it flies in the face of what Harry and Meghan push through the media, but it’s from good sources. Meghan reportedly did not carry Archie, meaning she was never pregnant with him. A surrogate was used, and I think Meghan only knew about the American law that whoever donates the egg or even takes possession of the baby is the mother.
> 
> That’s not the case in the UK, so an unfortunate issue arose. Meghan was not viewed as the mother. There was no picture with the Queen, Doria and Prince Philip looking at baby Archie. That is why Tom Bower wrote in his book that they were all looking at a shawl. No baby was present. No Archie was there that day, and we know Harry and Megs love to play with the truth and keep people guessing and hopefully, interested in them.
> 
> Archie should not be in the line of succession as it stands, but I think Queen Elizabeth did not want to reveal Meg’s lie, and the big deal is no one can talk about it due to a legal injunction put in place by either Harry/Meg or the Palace. So many reporters are waiting to write the truth, but their hands are tied. I don’t know who has tied them, but is it the Palace? Is it Megs? The Palace has more weight behind them, so I tend to believe they decided the children issue needed to be placed on hold.
> 
> Something is not okay with Archie, apparently. His parents are both narcissists unfortunately, and their child isn’t thriving according to reports. He is behind in his social development, and since he is tucked away and not brought out with either parent, Archie isn’t doing well. So there is most likely an Archie, who is the child of Harry, but he’s ignored and treated harshly at times. Narcissists do not love, so I feel sorry for the boy.
> 
> As for Lilibet, there is nothing to suggest the child exists. No surrogate, no pregnancy, no hospital records either. So why would Lilibet be in the line of succession? Again, I believe Queen Elizabeth was being trusting and kind, because wouldn’t the old Harry come out and tell the truth about his children? But he didn’t do that.
> 
> There’s a new king in town, and he’s not interested in placating Harry and that wife of his, but I believe he’s biding his time. Let Harry come out with that memoir; let Netflix air the Markle reality show that will be one big boring show about lies. After that happens the world will fall in on the couple. That is when King Charles is supposed to pull titles, and he’s reportedly going to pull their children out of the line of succession at that point.
> 
> Many people will wonder how fictitious children can be in the line of succession, but they are there due to the lies told by Harry to cover for Megs. If Archie does not exist or if he was born of a surrogate (the more likely scenario), he has to be removed. As for Lilibet? Someone has to tell the truth. It’s difficult for the Palace, because Queen Elizabeth wanted to believe Harry. He was special to her, and she couldn’t imagine lying about children, but Megs is willing to go where so few would ever dare to tread.
> Archie and Lilibet will be out of the line of succession sooner than later. When that happens, Megs and Harry will have much to answer for. They lied; not the royal family, not the Palace. The Palace chose to believe Harry’s word, so this will ruin Harry and Megs. Why do you think the word is that Meghan, the woman who couldn’t pass a simple test about Great Britain to become a citizen, is saying she will homeschool Archie? Why would he not attend regular school next year?
> 
> Why did Harry go along with Meghan’s lies? Why did they tell the lies?
> 
> Soon all will be laid bare, and this falls solely on the two who lied to the world. Harry and that wife.



Wow. How can we unpack that? I don’t believe it all but there is something seriously suspicious about the children. I think a Lilibet exists at this time but I am not convinced she was born the day they said she was.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Wow. How can we unpack that? I don’t believe it all but there is something seriously suspicious about the children. I think a Lilibet exists at this time but I am not convinced she was born the day they said she was.


Maybe this is what Theresa Longo keeps teasing about in her Twitter posts. I am inclined to believe it involves the origins of the supposed children. IMO that would be the biggest bombshell.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Maybe this is what Theresa Longo keeps teasing about in her Twitter posts. I am inclined to believe it involves the origins of the supposed children. IMO that would be the biggest bombshell.


Given how much Meghan loves attention the fact that she doesn’t take Archie and Lilibet on outings makes me really suspicious. You would think she’d love to take their photographer out for some autumn pumpkin patch shots of her with the children.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Given how much Meghan loves attention the fact that she doesn’t take Archie and Lilibet on outings makes me really suspicious. You would think she’d love to take their photographer out for some autumn pumpkin patch shots of her with the children.


Can't wait to see the Harkle Christmas card Photoshop disaster this year.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Wow. How can we unpack that? I don’t believe it all but there is something seriously suspicious about the children. I think a Lilibet exists at this time but I am not convinced she was born the day they said she was.


It sounds much worse than any outsiders suspected.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Maybe this is what Theresa Longo keeps teasing about in her Twitter posts. I am inclined to believe it involves the origins of the supposed children. IMO that would be the biggest bombshell.


I take these stories with a grain of salt.  and if untrue, it's cruel.
However it does seem odd that the children aren't seen


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> It sounds much worse than any outsiders suspected.


I believe after the book and Netflix release KC is going to come down hard on them early in 2023 in order to allow the dust to settle before his coronation. He's waited too long for that moment to allow them to steal the spotlight from him. Harry may be there but I'm betting she won't be. Her house of cards is about to collapse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Using spoiler tags for this very long post.  I don't know who the person is who wrote it.  I wonder how this is related to the Theresa Longo post about something big is in the works.



I can believe a lot of this, even The Queen choosing to not poke the subject any further. What I absolutely do not believe is her and Philip going along with a fake picture sans baby being released.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I take these stories with a grain of salt.  and if untrue, it's cruel.
> However it does seem odd that the children aren't seen


I did too, but as the saying goes "Where there's smoke there's fire", and the smoke keeps getting thicker.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Given how much Meghan loves attention the fact that she doesn’t take Archie and Lilibet on outings makes me really suspicious. You would think she’d love to take their photographer out for some autumn pumpkin patch shots of her with the children.



Right? I gave up on my former theory that she is just waiting for some glitzy magazine offering big bucks for a spread of the children a while ago. At this point she has to know it's not going to happen. I can believe Harry puts his foot down, but we know how that's worked out for him in the past (e.g. giving her orders to stay in and she does a pap walk in the middle of London, pap walk with baby Archie in Canada while he was in the UK negotiating Megxit).


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Using spoiler tags for this very long post.  I don't know who the person is who wrote it.  I wonder how this is related to the Theresa Longo post about something big is in the works.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Someone isn't telling the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent post by Deanna Eppers on Quora:
> 
> I personally believe Archie exists, and the royal family has evidence of that of some sort. What I write is controversial, because it flies in the face of what Harry and Meghan push through the media, but it’s from good sources. Meghan reportedly did not carry Archie, meaning she was never pregnant with him. A surrogate was used, and I think Meghan only knew about the American law that whoever donates the egg or even takes possession of the baby is the mother.
> 
> That’s not the case in the UK, so an unfortunate issue arose. Meghan was not viewed as the mother. There was no picture with the Queen, Doria and Prince Philip looking at baby Archie. That is why Tom Bower wrote in his book that they were all looking at a shawl. No baby was present. No Archie was there that day, and we know Harry and Megs love to play with the truth and keep people guessing and hopefully, interested in them.
> 
> Archie should not be in the line of succession as it stands, but I think Queen Elizabeth did not want to reveal Meg’s lie, and the big deal is no one can talk about it due to a legal injunction put in place by either Harry/Meg or the Palace. So many reporters are waiting to write the truth, but their hands are tied. I don’t know who has tied them, but is it the Palace? Is it Megs? The Palace has more weight behind them, so I tend to believe they decided the children issue needed to be placed on hold.
> 
> Something is not okay with Archie, apparently. His parents are both narcissists unfortunately, and their child isn’t thriving according to reports. He is behind in his social development, and since he is tucked away and not brought out with either parent, Archie isn’t doing well. So there is most likely an Archie, who is the child of Harry, but he’s ignored and treated harshly at times. Narcissists do not love, so I feel sorry for the boy.
> 
> As for Lilibet, there is nothing to suggest the child exists. No surrogate, no pregnancy, no hospital records either. So why would Lilibet be in the line of succession? Again, I believe Queen Elizabeth was being trusting and kind, because wouldn’t the old Harry come out and tell the truth about his children? But he didn’t do that.
> 
> There’s a new king in town, and he’s not interested in placating Harry and that wife of his, but I believe he’s biding his time. Let Harry come out with that memoir; let Netflix air the Markle reality show that will be one big boring show about lies. After that happens the world will fall in on the couple. That is when King Charles is supposed to pull titles, and he’s reportedly going to pull their children out of the line of succession at that point.
> 
> Many people will wonder how fictitious children can be in the line of succession, but they are there due to the lies told by Harry to cover for Megs. If Archie does not exist or if he was born of a surrogate (the more likely scenario), he has to be removed. As for Lilibet? Someone has to tell the truth. It’s difficult for the Palace, because Queen Elizabeth wanted to believe Harry. He was special to her, and she couldn’t imagine lying about children, but Megs is willing to go where so few would ever dare to tread.
> Archie and Lilibet will be out of the line of succession sooner than later. When that happens, Megs and Harry will have much to answer for. They lied; not the royal family, not the Palace. The Palace chose to believe Harry’s word, so this will ruin Harry and Megs. Why do you think the word is that Meghan, the woman who couldn’t pass a simple test about Great Britain to become a citizen, is saying she will homeschool Archie? Why would he not attend regular school next year?
> 
> Why did Harry go along with Meghan’s lies? Why did they tell the lies?
> 
> Soon all will be laid bare, and this falls solely on the two who lied to the world. Harry and that wife.


My 2 cents:
If the suspicions about the surrogate(s) will be confirmed, Harry will be 'forced' out of the line of succession. In that case, his kid(s) will also be excluded without breaking child privacy rules.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents:
> If the suspicions about the surrogate(s) will be confirmed, Harry will be 'forced' out of the line of succession. In that case, his kid(s) will also be excluded without breaking child privacy rules.


That will be only part of it.  They will be shown as total liars.

There are parts of this that are believable, but it is a lot to swallow as a whole.  Not seeing these children is suspicious and it isn't an air of mystery that is being created.  It is all sorts of doubts about them.  Their existence, their health, and their parentage.  The longer it goes on, the less people care. I don't think that was the intention of the mother who wants us to clamor for them to be shown.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe a lot of this, even The Queen choosing to not poke the subject any further. What I absolutely do not believe is her and Philip going along with a fake picture sans baby being released.


If true, such manipulated photo would be released without QE's knowledge under the assumption '_never complain never explain_' imo.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> If true, such manipulated photo would be released without QE's knowledge under the assumption '_never complain never explain_' imo.


That is what I was wondering.  Who actually released that photo?  BP or the Sussex?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I believe after the book and Netflix release KC is going to come down hard on them early in 2023 in order to allow the dust to settle before his coronation. He's waited too long for that moment to allow them to steal the spotlight from him. Harry may be there but I'm betting she won't be. Her house of cards is about to collapse.


we can hope her house of cards is about to collapse
I'd love nothing better than to see her fade away and go live in a house in the suburbs like where she grew up.  but that won't happen


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I believe after the book and Netflix release KC is going to come down hard on them early in 2023 in order to allow the dust to settle before his coronation. He's waited too long for that moment to allow them to steal the spotlight from him. Harry may be there but I'm betting she won't be. Her house of cards is about to collapse.


That's an interesting thought that he might be there on his own.  There would be less drama if just him I would hope.  They would still park him in the back with Andrew.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, *they* released the photos on their IG acct 

_The racism leveled against Meghan and her son weighed heavily on her mind when it was time to share photos._​_Instead of taking part in what Meghan called the "exchange game," she decided to share the photos on her own terms, using an Instagram account that she and Harry created to post about their lives and the work they were doing together.





						Parenting, Baby Names, Celebrities, and Royal News | CafeMom.com
					






					cafemom.com
				



_


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Using spoiler tags for this very long post.  I don't know who the person is who wrote it.  I wonder how this is related to the Theresa Longo post about something big is in the works.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Someone isn't telling the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent post by Deanna Eppers on Quora:
> 
> I personally believe Archie exists, and the royal family has evidence of that of some sort. What I write is controversial, because it flies in the face of what Harry and Meghan push through the media, but it’s from good sources. Meghan reportedly did not carry Archie, meaning she was never pregnant with him. A surrogate was used, and I think Meghan only knew about the American law that whoever donates the egg or even takes possession of the baby is the mother.
> 
> That’s not the case in the UK, so an unfortunate issue arose. Meghan was not viewed as the mother. There was no picture with the Queen, Doria and Prince Philip looking at baby Archie. That is why Tom Bower wrote in his book that they were all looking at a shawl. No baby was present. No Archie was there that day, and we know Harry and Megs love to play with the truth and keep people guessing and hopefully, interested in them.
> 
> Archie should not be in the line of succession as it stands, but I think Queen Elizabeth did not want to reveal Meg’s lie, and the big deal is no one can talk about it due to a legal injunction put in place by either Harry/Meg or the Palace. So many reporters are waiting to write the truth, but their hands are tied. I don’t know who has tied them, but is it the Palace? Is it Megs? The Palace has more weight behind them, so I tend to believe they decided the children issue needed to be placed on hold.
> 
> Something is not okay with Archie, apparently. His parents are both narcissists unfortunately, and their child isn’t thriving according to reports. He is behind in his social development, and since he is tucked away and not brought out with either parent, Archie isn’t doing well. So there is most likely an Archie, who is the child of Harry, but he’s ignored and treated harshly at times. Narcissists do not love, so I feel sorry for the boy.
> 
> As for Lilibet, there is nothing to suggest the child exists. No surrogate, no pregnancy, no hospital records either. So why would Lilibet be in the line of succession? Again, I believe Queen Elizabeth was being trusting and kind, because wouldn’t the old Harry come out and tell the truth about his children? But he didn’t do that.
> 
> There’s a new king in town, and he’s not interested in placating Harry and that wife of his, but I believe he’s biding his time. Let Harry come out with that memoir; let Netflix air the Markle reality show that will be one big boring show about lies. After that happens the world will fall in on the couple. That is when King Charles is supposed to pull titles, and he’s reportedly going to pull their children out of the line of succession at that point.
> 
> Many people will wonder how fictitious children can be in the line of succession, but they are there due to the lies told by Harry to cover for Megs. If Archie does not exist or if he was born of a surrogate (the more likely scenario), he has to be removed. As for Lilibet? Someone has to tell the truth. It’s difficult for the Palace, because Queen Elizabeth wanted to believe Harry. He was special to her, and she couldn’t imagine lying about children, but Megs is willing to go where so few would ever dare to tread.
> Archie and Lilibet will be out of the line of succession sooner than later. When that happens, Megs and Harry will have much to answer for. They lied; not the royal family, not the Palace. The Palace chose to believe Harry’s word, so this will ruin Harry and Megs. Why do you think the word is that Meghan, the woman who couldn’t pass a simple test about Great Britain to become a citizen, is saying she will homeschool Archie? Why would he not attend regular school next year?
> 
> Why did Harry go along with Meghan’s lies? Why did they tell the lies?
> 
> Soon all will be laid bare, and this falls solely on the two who lied to the world. Harry and that wife.


Don’t know if this is related or not, but The UK is partway through a multi year process of revising its  law on surrogacy. In October 2019 the Law Commission of England and Wales and the Scottish Law Commission set out to study the whole broad issue of surrogacy. Tentative publication of findings, Spring 2023.  There’s pages of detail online: onlinelibrary.wiley.com

 Coincidence ? Maybe, maybe, the issue of Master Archie and Miss Lilibet are relevant and we might learn whether they will remain in the LOS or not. As we know, there are many items about this. One article claimed the Queen knew about the surrogacies but stayed quiet because of Harry. That seems doubtful, but like so much concerning the Harkles, who knows?

Could be the two parts mentioned in the teaser are (1) findings about bogus pregnancies have been verified and (2) the Harkles will be outed????


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> That will be only part of it.  They will be shown as total liars.


All hypothetically…  If a surrogate is confirmed, Hazz will be presented with 2 options: 

1) Renounce voluntarily to the succession line, keep his kid(s) privacy and avoid further public humiliation. 
2) Palace lawyers will officially remove the kid(s) from the line of succession, and such legal process would likely be available to the public. He would lose the little credibility he might still have. 

I think he would opt for #1, and the surrogate info would be kept secret.


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> Using spoiler tags for this very long post.  I don't know who the person is who wrote it.  I wonder how this is related to the Theresa Longo post about something big is in the works.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Someone isn't telling the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent post by Deanna Eppers on Quora:
> 
> I personally believe Archie exists, and the royal family has evidence of that of some sort. What I write is controversial, because it flies in the face of what Harry and Meghan push through the media, but it’s from good sources. Meghan reportedly did not carry Archie, meaning she was never pregnant with him. A surrogate was used, and I think Meghan only knew about the American law that whoever donates the egg or even takes possession of the baby is the mother.
> 
> That’s not the case in the UK, so an unfortunate issue arose. Meghan was not viewed as the mother. There was no picture with the Queen, Doria and Prince Philip looking at baby Archie. That is why Tom Bower wrote in his book that they were all looking at a shawl. No baby was present. No Archie was there that day, and we know Harry and Megs love to play with the truth and keep people guessing and hopefully, interested in them.
> 
> Archie should not be in the line of succession as it stands, but I think Queen Elizabeth did not want to reveal Meg’s lie, and the big deal is no one can talk about it due to a legal injunction put in place by either Harry/Meg or the Palace. So many reporters are waiting to write the truth, but their hands are tied. I don’t know who has tied them, but is it the Palace? Is it Megs? The Palace has more weight behind them, so I tend to believe they decided the children issue needed to be placed on hold.
> 
> Something is not okay with Archie, apparently. His parents are both narcissists unfortunately, and their child isn’t thriving according to reports. He is behind in his social development, and since he is tucked away and not brought out with either parent, Archie isn’t doing well. So there is most likely an Archie, who is the child of Harry, but he’s ignored and treated harshly at times. Narcissists do not love, so I feel sorry for the boy.
> 
> As for Lilibet, there is nothing to suggest the child exists. No surrogate, no pregnancy, no hospital records either. So why would Lilibet be in the line of succession? Again, I believe Queen Elizabeth was being trusting and kind, because wouldn’t the old Harry come out and tell the truth about his children? But he didn’t do that.
> 
> There’s a new king in town, and he’s not interested in placating Harry and that wife of his, but I believe he’s biding his time. Let Harry come out with that memoir; let Netflix air the Markle reality show that will be one big boring show about lies. After that happens the world will fall in on the couple. That is when King Charles is supposed to pull titles, and he’s reportedly going to pull their children out of the line of succession at that point.
> 
> Many people will wonder how fictitious children can be in the line of succession, but they are there due to the lies told by Harry to cover for Megs. If Archie does not exist or if he was born of a surrogate (the more likely scenario), he has to be removed. As for Lilibet? Someone has to tell the truth. It’s difficult for the Palace, because Queen Elizabeth wanted to believe Harry. He was special to her, and she couldn’t imagine lying about children, but Megs is willing to go where so few would ever dare to tread.
> Archie and Lilibet will be out of the line of succession sooner than later. When that happens, Megs and Harry will have much to answer for. They lied; not the royal family, not the Palace. The Palace chose to believe Harry’s word, so this will ruin Harry and Megs. Why do you think the word is that Meghan, the woman who couldn’t pass a simple test about Great Britain to become a citizen, is saying she will homeschool Archie? Why would he not attend regular school next year?
> 
> Why did Harry go along with Meghan’s lies? Why did they tell the lies?
> 
> Soon all will be laid bare, and this falls solely on the two who lied to the world. Harry and that wife.


I believe 100% of this.


----------



## Aimee3

Many of us here have been saying for years that they used a surrogate.  I believe they used a donor egg and H’s sperm. Her moon bump was constantly sliding around and there are videos where it actually fell to her knees.  In keeping with TW’s reputation, her undergarments never fit properly and neither did the fake bump.


----------



## xincinsin

kemilia said:


> With all the chat about this fancy NYC event it seems we have lost sight of TW's upcoming Indianapolis gala--"An Evening With Meghan" on Nov 29.
> 
> I get giddy thinking about the 2 different occasions' wardrobes--and the spray tans (*which color to load into the spray gun* for which event?)!
> Which Diana will she cosplay for each?
> And will Sparry be with her?


I always get visions of her being spray-painted. If the gala business booms, maybe she can convert one of her 16 toilets into an automated spray-paint booth. 
_Just step in and let our 100 nozzles do their tanning magic! 
Get finely coated and bronzed where the sun don't shine! 
Only takes 30 seconds!_


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe a lot of this, even The Queen choosing to not poke the subject any further. What I absolutely do not believe is her and Philip going along with a fake picture sans baby being released.


Agree, QEII and PP would not have done the photo op if the baby did not exist. The blow back if the baby did not exist would be HUUUGE. They would not risk that.
W&K had photos of them and baby outside hospital, QEII was not required
BUT
QEII is not in Archie’s christening photos, she did not attend - WHY ? She was at christening of George and Charlotte, but not at Louis’ service. She also did service for Lucas and Sienna. So, she seems to have been at almost all great grand kids services?


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Agree, QEII and PP would not have done the photo op if the baby did not exist. The blow back if the baby did not exist would be HUUUGE. They would not risk that.
> W&K had photos of them and baby outside hospital, QEII was not required
> BUT
> QEII is not in Archie’s christening photos, she did not attend - WHY ? She was at christening of George and Charlotte, but not at Louis’ service. She also did service for Lucas and Sienna. So, she seems to have been at almost all great grand kids services?


Thing is, imo, if the Archie photo was photoshopped and released, QE may have not had a choice.  Sure, she and PP would have been most irritated about it, but once the photo was released, what could she really do?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thing is, imo, if the Archie photo was photoshopped and released, QE may have not had a choice.  Sure, she and PP would have been most irritated about it, but once the photo was released, what could she really do?


GOOD CALL - Looking into your hypothesis , the photo was (first?)  issued by SussexRoyal, you could be right. Photog had permission of HM (goes without saying … ) but BRF did not put out this version.

This photo and it’s issuance by SR could be at the root of the brouhaha whereby Lili was not photographed with QEII.









						Queen Elizabeth meets great-grandson Archie, son of Meghan and Prince Harry
					

Queen Elizabeth II meets her great-grandson Archie, son of Meghan and Prince Harry.




					www.goodmorningamerica.com


----------



## Chanbal

Aimee3 said:


> Many of us here have been saying for years that they used a surrogate.  I believe they used a donor egg and H’s sperm. Her moon bump was constantly sliding around and there are videos where it actually fell to her knees.  In keeping with TW’s reputation, her undergarments never fit properly and neither did the fake bump.


Surrogate or not, there is something very fishy about the pregnancy story. I'm convinced Tom Bower knows about it, and I wish he would share what he knows.


----------



## xincinsin

kipp said:


> Meghan Markle Reportedly Has Had A ‘Dramatic Change Of Heart’ And Wants To Keep Her Royal Titles Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has had a “dramatic change of heart regarding titles,” a royal expert has claimed, which goes against what she said in her bombshell Oprah interview back in March 2021, whereby she said that titles weren’t important to her. ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quelle surprise!!!!


_she reportedly wants to do whatever it takes to hang on to her Duchess of Sussex title to ensure that her and Prince Harry’s children – three-year-old son Archie and one-year-old daughter Lilibet – are offered __titles of their own._
Do you notice the implications of the wording? The selfless mother doesn't care about her title. She is only clinging to it for the sake of her children. Sure ... whatever you say ...



marietouchet said:


> I do see your point ... he is a UK citizen ... but I still have not forgiven him and more to the point MM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Putting Your Hand Over Your Heart Makes You Both Appear And Behave More Honestly
> 
> 
> Our bodily actions have more influence over our behavior and perceptions than we might realize
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.smithsonianmag.com


Zed pays respect to only herself - unless she is merching the shoes at QE's funeral, or in the case of the US, I'm going to predict that she will hold her hand over her heart if she gets to merch some gloves/jewellery.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw. She always wanted those titles, she would have hers, sorry HARRY's tattooed on her forehead of she could. She is just a petulant tantrum throwing toddler (as I learned from following that psychologist, emotional immaturity is a thing) who comes out swinging with "I didn't want it anyway" when not indulged.
> 
> Remember that press leak how she didn't care about tiaras at all after she asked for one to take on tour (instead of trusting that if she should have one it would be brought up with her) and *Charles had to tell her no*? (thinking about this knowing what we know now after two very enlightening books, I wonder if Charles was sent because everyone else was deadly afraid already?)


Maybe poor Charles didn't have a choice. Zed strikes me as the kind who plays the "ask father, if he says No, ask mother" game. So she was likely greedily asking for a tiara for the tour, the courtiers probably said a tiara would not be part of her wardrobe, so she flounced over to Charles to complain about how she was being bullied by the palace staff who wouldn't give a tiara to a proud WOC who needed to flaunt some sparkle when going to meet her "sisters".


CarryOn2020 said:


> So, *they* released the photos on their IG acct
> 
> _The racism leveled against Meghan and her son weighed heavily on her mind when it was time to share photos._​_Instead of taking part in what Meghan called the "exchange game," she decided to share the photos on her own terms, using an Instagram account that she and Harry created to post about their lives and the work they were doing together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Parenting, Baby Names, Celebrities, and Royal News | CafeMom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cafemom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Instead of the "exchange game", she now plays the "buy an award" game. On her own terms, of course 


marietouchet said:


> Agree, QEII and PP would not have done the photo op if the baby did not exist. The blow back if the baby did not exist would be HUUUGE. They would not risk that.
> W&K had photos of them and baby outside hospital, QEII was not required
> BUT
> QEII is not in Archie’s christening photos, she did not attend - WHY ? She was at christening of George and Charlotte, but not at Louis’ service. She also did service for Lucas and Sienna. So, she seems to have been at almost all great grand kids services?


Wasn't there a reason given then: the Harkles set up the Christening date & time without checking if TQ was available?


CarryOn2020 said:


> Thing is, imo, if the Archie photo was photoshopped and released, QE may have not had a choice.  Sure, she and PP would have been most irritated about it, but once the photo was released, what could she really do?


It would have been most undignified for the BP to release a statement stating that the photos were fake.

Most normal people don't expect the extremes of narc behaviour. My ex-boss found it extremely difficult to control Sotong because he came up with the wildest excuses and the weirdest behaviour. It was exhausting having to manage him defensively because you never knew what he would do next. There was an event where I pre-emptively froze him out of guest relations. He had a bad habit of fawning on beautiful people male or female, and we had a good-looking French male VIP coming. I sent Sotong to do something else far away from the guests.

As it was, I think TQ pretty much got fed up when the Harkles started declaring that they had her blessing to name the girl Lilibet and that the baby was already introduced to her great-grandma via frequent video chats, because the palace took the unusual step to deny it IIRC.


----------



## rose60610

Pearl Harbor? Really, Harry? After getting flamed for exploiting soldiers' graves in the cemetery and then Claw at Uvalde, they probably thought a poignant national memorial gravesite was a "safer bet" for a photo op. My guess a photo op at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is coming up on Memorial Day. Aren't there enough European war sites to barge in on for photo ops? Maybe Harry is right in figuring he can get away with more crap here in America vs other countries that would refuse to put up with his faux compassion and lust for self promotion for a buck.

I'd like to ask Harry "How much money are you raking in by taking advantage of our service members who got blown up or drowned on the USS Arizona?"

Harry and Claw skipped a Royal Marines memorial to gush over Beyonce and Jay Z.

How touching that Harry found the time to visit the USS Arizona. On Veterans Day. Wearing a suit instead of a gray polo. With camera crew en tow. Of course. Of course!!!!!

Beyonce must not have been in town.

Claw must be proud and checking the account balances several times a day. Our sailors killed on December 7th, 1941 are still working today, helping to pad the accounts of fraudulent grifters who "fled" the BRF in search of privacy. Barf bag, anyone?


----------



## CarryOn2020

One of these places seems so much more appropriate for Hazzi:









						Ten Great Revolutionary War Battlefield Parks - The American Revolution Institute
					

Dozens of Revolutionary War battlefields are preserved, in whole or part, in national, state and local parks. These ten parks are among the most important preserved Revolutionary War battlefields. Each rewards visitors with the insights needed to understand an important battle of the...




					www.americanrevolutioninstitute.org


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Many of us here have been saying for years that they used a surrogate.  I believe they used a donor egg and H’s sperm. Her moon bump was constantly sliding around and there are videos where it actually fell to her knees.  In keeping with TW’s reputation, her undergarments never fit properly and neither did the fake bump.


Agreed. They were “pregnant” within five months of getting married. They weren’t taking a wait-and-see approach for a natural conception. They got right on it. 

That makes me think they knew before the wedding that one of them was infertile. We assumed it was Meghan but what if it was really Harry?  That would explain why he went along with the charade, moon bumps and all. Is it possible the kids are not genetically related to either of them? Keeping that information secret is a pact they would keep for their mutual benefit, even if they are not getting along.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> One of these places seems so much more appropriate for Hazzi:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ten Great Revolutionary War Battlefield Parks - The American Revolution Institute
> 
> 
> Dozens of Revolutionary War battlefields are preserved, in whole or part, in national, state and local parks. These ten parks are among the most important preserved Revolutionary War battlefields. Each rewards visitors with the insights needed to understand an important battle of the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.americanrevolutioninstitute.org



Just as Claw claimed she didn't know about the British Commonwealth (despite majoring in International Relations at a prestigious university), she would claim that she and Hazzi had no idea why our Revolutionary War was fought. And then if you criticized her for it, well, then, you would be called "Racist!".  That's how the game works and the whores and media who play the game work.


----------



## bag-mania

Someone was leaking to the gossip press in August 2018.









						Ready For Baby! Meghan & Harry Consulted Fertility Doctor In Months Before Wedding
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry saw fertility doctors before deciding to get married, a Radar source has revealed.




					radaronline.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, *they* released the photos on their IG acct
> 
> _The racism leveled against Meghan and her son weighed heavily on her mind when it was time to share photos._​_Instead of taking part in what Meghan called the "exchange game," she decided to share the photos on her own terms, using an Instagram account that she and Harry created to post about their lives and the work they were doing together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Parenting, Baby Names, Celebrities, and Royal News | CafeMom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cafemom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


LOL
racism against her very white looking son?


----------



## Kaka_bobo

I am in the camp of TW never being pregnant for either A or L.

For someone like TW that thinks she's the goddess of us plebs.....if she was truly pregnant....you would think she would have a maternity shoot with her bare pregnant belly full centered and the main focus of the shoots! 

I dunno if the kids are real or not, every single photo we've seen of them have been altered...so who knows whose kids they are.


----------



## kemilia

bag-mania said:


> The tourists around him are wondering what the hell is going on.
> 
> I guess it wasn’t in the budget to Photoshop his bald spot.
> 
> View attachment 5652685


While at the drugstore yesterday, I saw a copy of US Weekly with him on the front and they gave him a full head of hair! Ridiculous.


----------



## xincinsin

This is strangely worded if it is indeed what Sparry said: "He would help in a *solo* capacity". What does that mean?
Solo meaning no pwife tagging along?
Solo meaning he wants his own credit and glory for helping William?
And I hate the word "use" in the Harkle context. It reminds me of the OW interview where the aggrieved birdshit lady claimed: "I wrote letters to his family when I got there saying, 'I am dedicated to this, I'm here for you, _*use me as*_* you'd like*".


----------



## bag-mania

This month is flying by so quickly. It is already time for the next episode of Archetypes. I am really hoping for the sl*t episode.


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. They were “pregnant” within five months of getting married. They weren’t taking a wait-and-see approach for a natural conception. They got right on it.
> 
> That makes me think they knew before the wedding that one of them was infertile. We assumed it was Meghan but what if it was really Harry?  That would explain why he went along with the charade, moon bumps and all. Is it possible the kids are not genetically related to either of them? Keeping that information secret is a pact they would keep for their mutual benefit, even if they are not getting along.


They don’t behave like normal parents. 
It’s making my spidey sense tingle and I know I am not alone. 
Most people want to show off their kids, and even if their privacy issues are a legit concern, by now they can control the narrative and the photo shoots and whatever they want.

A friends daughter I know is very very VERY private and rarely ever on social media, yet even her wee few IG followers got to see her kid in a pumpkin patch and Christmas flannels a couple times.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> The difference is, Dolly does cheap in a classy way and we love her for it.


Dolly is a great talent and doesn't take herself too seriously.
TW has no talent and thinks she's of great importance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> They don’t behave like normal parents.
> It’s making my spidey sense tingle and I know I am not alone.
> Most people want to show off their kids, and even if their privacy issues are a legit concern, by now they can control the narrative and the photo shoots and whatever they want.
> 
> A friends daughter I know is very very VERY private and rarely ever on social media, yet even her wee few IG followers got to see her kid in a pumpkin patch and Christmas flannels a couple times.


Absolutely. Harry fumbling when asked about Archie in an interview was a big red flag. He couldn’t think of one thing his son was doing. The same disconnect was with Meghan when she said Lilibet was just starting to walk when she is supposed to be 17-months-old. She should have taken her first steps months ago if she was the age they claim (which I doubt).


----------



## CobaltBlu

If any of this is true about the kids then they are sociopaths


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Apparently the Memorial was re-opened at the beginning of November.  So I guess the pictures are current and real. That doesn't change the fact that he was trying to undermine KC3 and his family with a US major tragedy.
> 
> I think it is an absolute given that whenever there is a UK event, these two will come up with something to drop on their heads.


HazBeen and TW have no scruples.  None, zero, nada.  That's why when anyone states, "I feel badly for Haz", I don't.  He is an a$$hole through and through.


----------



## xincinsin

Oh the subject of surrogacy, I think this Reddit comment captures my feelings exactly.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> Oh the subject of surrogacy, I think this Reddit comment captures my feelings exactly.
> View attachment 5652981



Not just lied, but also blatant and intentional deceit.


----------



## rose60610

xincinsin said:


> This is strangely worded if it is indeed what Sparry said: "He would help in a *solo* capacity". What does that mean?
> Solo meaning no pwife tagging along?
> Solo meaning he wants his own credit and glory for helping William?
> And I hate the word "use" in the Harkle context. It reminds me of the OW interview where the aggrieved birdshit lady claimed: "I wrote letters to his family when I got there saying, 'I am dedicated to this, I'm here for you, _*use me as*_* you'd like*".
> 
> View attachment 5652968



If Harry really "reached out", then the accurate term would be more like "GROVELLED".  The only Americans Harry understands are those who agree that the First Amendment is "bonkers". I fear that Harry's "understanding" of the American people is what Claw wants him to "understand".  Not everybody gets a 50 million dollar wedding, enjoys all the perks of royalty, gets many millions upon millions of dollars, inherits many riches, then feels justified for throwing the family who gave you all that under the bus for an American buck.

So, yes, I think Harry is GROVELLING William for a chance to get back into the BRF fold.  William has NO difficulty when he visits any foreign country, let alone one where English is spoken.

"Solo"? I think we can interpret that as "Claw is ordered to keep her lying beeycht a$$ home." Not that she would. 

On the other hand, it sounds like Harry isn't invited to this event, and can only attend if William feels he "needs help understanding Americans".  

Considering the tens of thousands of people from around the world who stood in line for up to twelve hours to view their grandmother's coffin for mere seconds, I don't think the Prince of Wales needs any help from Hazbeen in "understanding" Americans.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Given how much Meghan loves attention the fact that she doesn’t take Archie and Lilibet on outings makes me really suspicious. You would think she’d love to take their photographer out for some autumn pumpkin patch shots of her with the children.


Someone else had written an article a few months ago about the fact that TW can't stop talking and giving interviews, but not a word has been spoken about the delivery of these children.  You would think that she would not be able to shut up about how she had the _easiest_, or _most difficult_ labour, and how she _did_ or _did_ _not_ suffer from post partum, etc. She had no problem writing a very detailed article and submit it to a newspaper on losing (allegedly) a child, but when it comes to giving birth, one of the most biggest and most exciting things a woman will ever do - nada


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> This month is flying by so quickly. It is already time for the next episode of Archetypes. I am really hoping for the sl*t episode.
> 
> View attachment 5652975


So....no guest needed then?


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> If Harry really "reached out", then the accurate term would be more like "GROVELLED".  The only Americans Harry understands are those who agree that the First Amendment is "bonkers". I fear that Harry's "understanding" of the American people is what Claw wants him to "understand".  Not everybody gets a 50 million dollar wedding, enjoys all the perks of royalty, gets many millions upon millions of dollars, inherits many riches, then feels justified for throwing the family who gave you all that under the bus for an American buck.
> 
> So, yes, I think Harry is GROVELLING William for a chance to get back into the BRF fold.  William has NO difficulty when he visits any foreign country, let alone one where English is spoken.
> 
> "Solo"? I think we can interpret that as "Claw is ordered to keep her lying beeycht a$$ home." Not that she would.
> 
> On the other hand, it sounds like Harry isn't invited to this event, and can only attend if William feels he "needs help understanding Americans".
> 
> Considering the tens of thousands of people from around the world who stood in line for up to twelve hours to view their grandmother's coffin for mere seconds, I don't think the Prince of Wales needs any help from Hazbeen in "understanding" Americans.


The part I really love is Harry understands the American people. Bonkers.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz looks to be in a permanent furious state, so we may not notice the difference. 











						Royal expert backs King Charles as he snubs Duke of Sussex
					

The Kings' (pictured) decision to allow Princess Anne and Prince Edward to deputise when he can't fulfil official duties is a snub to Prince Harry that will make him 'furious', a royal expert said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA:  just my opinion

I know this will be unpopular [ahem] and it is possible I do not fully understand his Earthshot program,  I have an issue with William, future King, coming to our land simply to _hand out awards_. Is that what passes for conservation these days? Fly to a foreign land and hand out awards? Stop traffic in one of our busier cities? Couldn’t he use the zoom program from the UK?   With Hazz&William, sometimes I get the feeling they do what they do just to hear the applause, to get the ego-rush,  similar to their mother.  Sure sure, I know I know, she really cared.  Are the smaller crowds in the UK not enough for them? They are not rock stars, they are not elite athletes, they are not intellectuals, they are men of the most extreme privilege with very little talent who often they look awkward on those stages. Sure, they have access to billions, so why can’t spend their own money on conservation, innovation, etc.?  Maybe if we saw them actually doing the work, not just posing for a photo or lecturing us, maybe then it would be easier to accept their ‘show’.

Does the BRF have its own original ideas or must they copy us?  Hazzi took our wounded warrior program as his own.
_The Prize takes inspiration from President John F. Kennedy’s ‘Moonshot,’ which united millions of people around an organising goal to put man on the moon and catalysed the development of new technology in the 1960s.








						Prince William unveils the Finalists for the second annual Earthshot Prize Awards - The Earthshot Prize
					

The 2022 Earthshot Prize Finalists are revealed - innovators spearheading fifteen groundbreaking solutions to the planet's biggest environmental challenges.




					earthshotprize.org
				



_


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Someone else had written an article a few months ago about the fact that TW can't stop talking and giving interviews, but not a word has been spoken about the delivery of these children.  You would think that she would not be able to shut up about how she had the _easiest_, or _most difficult_ labour, and how she _did_ or _did_ _not_ suffer from post partum, etc. She had no problem writing a very detailed article and submit it to a newspaper on losing (allegedly) a child, but when it comes to giving birth, one of the most biggest and most exciting things a woman will ever do - nada


When I was in my 20’s and 3o’s I had to sit politely and listen to women relating their giving birth experiences. Once one got started, they all joined in. I’m not criticizing this in any way, and had really forgotten about it until reading this post. I think you have really pointed out something rather interesting.  Given how the world revolves around her, how is it that we never have heard a minute by contraction description of the entire experience?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  just my opinion
> 
> I know this will be unpopular [ahem] and it is possible I do not fully understand his Earthshot program,  I have an issue with William, future King, coming to our land simply to _hand out awards_. Is that what passes for conservation these days? Fly to a foreign land and hand out awards? Stop traffic in one of our busier cities? Couldn’t he use the zoom program from the UK?   With Hazz&William, sometimes I get the feeling they do what they do just to hear the applause, to get the ego-rush,  similar to their mother.  Sure sure, I know I know, she really cared.  Are the smaller crowds in the UK not enough for them? They are not rock stars, they are not elite athletes, they are not intellectuals, they are men of the most extreme privilege with very little talent who often they look awkward on those stages. Sure, they have access to billions, so why can’t spend their own money on conservation, innovation, etc.?  Maybe if we saw them actually doing the work, not just posing for a photo or lecturing us, maybe then it would be easier to accept their ‘show’.
> 
> Does the BRF have its own original ideas or must they copy us?  Hazzi took our wounded warrior program as his own.
> _The Prize takes inspiration from President John F. Kennedy’s ‘Moonshot,’ which united millions of people around an organising goal to put man on the moon and catalysed the development of new technology in the 1960s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William unveils the Finalists for the second annual Earthshot Prize Awards - The Earthshot Prize
> 
> 
> The 2022 Earthshot Prize Finalists are revealed - innovators spearheading fifteen groundbreaking solutions to the planet's biggest environmental challenges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> earthshotprize.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


@CarryOn2020 Hazz understands American people and offered his help to Will, so there is nothing to worry about.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> When I was in my 20’s and 3o’s I had to sit politely and listen to women relating their giving birth experiences. Once one got started, they all joined in. I’m not criticizing this in any way, and had really forgotten about it until reading this post. I think you have really pointed out something rather interesting.  Given how the world revolves around her, how is it that we never have heard a minute by contraction description of the entire experience?


Touch wood. For all we know, she may have set her stooges to research the pregnancy and birthing shelves at the library to find stories to plagiarize. After all, she has a speech to write for Indianapolis and needs more poignant fodder.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 Hazz understands American people and offered his help to Will, so there is nothing to worry about.


Hilarious!  Of course Hazzi knows best.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Oh the subject of surrogacy, I think this Reddit comment captures my feelings exactly.
> View attachment 5652981


Yes ... her podcast is always going on about be yourself


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  just my opinion
> 
> I know this will be unpopular [ahem] and it is possible I do not fully understand his Earthshot program,  I have an issue with William, future King, coming to our land simply to _hand out awards_. Is that what passes for conservation these days? Fly to a foreign land and hand out awards? Stop traffic in one of our busier cities? Couldn’t he use the zoom program from the UK?   With Hazz&William, sometimes I get the feeling they do what they do just to hear the applause, to get the ego-rush,  similar to their mother.  Sure sure, I know I know, she really cared.  Are the smaller crowds in the UK not enough for them? They are not rock stars, they are not elite athletes, they are not intellectuals, they are men of the most extreme privilege with very little talent who often they look awkward on those stages. Sure, they have access to billions, so why can’t spend their own money on conservation, innovation, etc.?  Maybe if we saw them actually doing the work, not just posing for a photo or lecturing us, maybe then it would be easier to accept their ‘show’.
> 
> Does the BRF have its own original ideas or must they copy us?  Hazzi took our wounded warrior program as his own.
> _The Prize takes inspiration from President John F. Kennedy’s ‘Moonshot,’ which united millions of people around an organising goal to put man on the moon and catalysed the development of new technology in the 1960s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William unveils the Finalists for the second annual Earthshot Prize Awards - The Earthshot Prize
> 
> 
> The 2022 Earthshot Prize Finalists are revealed - innovators spearheading fifteen groundbreaking solutions to the planet's biggest environmental challenges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> earthshotprize.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



IDK, apart from Andrew visiting Epstein's island, members of the BRF seldom cross the Atlantic. I think I know what you're saying, handing out awards for "Earth" bla bla could be accomplished via Zoom. So could most things. As long as we have celebrity hypocrites who slam everyday people for water, electricity, or use of other resources who then jet in private planes to their multiple homes and vacations, I don't begrudge William from coming over here. Traffic has long been a nightmare in all our big cities. Claw came over for a baby shower in NYC. Numerous people have gone to Nepal to climb Mount Everest and left litter garbage all over the place just to say they climbed the world's tallest peak and had the bucks to do it (with the help of Nepali sherpas). People fly all over to follow their soccer, football, rock concert etc events. 

I kind of like the thought of William coming over. If only to get gushing media reviews without hiring a PR firm to get, unlike his sellout brother and money whore sister-in-law.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. They were “pregnant” within five months of getting married. They weren’t taking a wait-and-see approach for a natural conception. They got right on it.
> 
> That makes me think they knew before the wedding that *one of them was infertile. We assumed it was Meghan but what if it was really Harry?  That would explain why he went along with the charade, moon bumps and all. Is it possible the kids are not genetically related to either of them? Keeping that information secret is a pact they would keep for their mutual benefit, even if they are not getting along.*


That's a really disturbing theory. Like both of them are able to threaten each other with a live grenade and if either of them gets driven into a corner and decides there's nothing left to lose, KABOOM!

I'm more of the opinion that Zed planted a lot of poisonous seeds and nudged Sparry in the right directions, but it was his own character flaws that watered the soil and grew the crooked trees. Zed is in it for the fame and the money.


----------



## periogirl28

If that is true about Archie being slow in developing and not even cared for, let alone loved, my heart breaks. This is the ultimate worst thing to come out of the whole debacle.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> QEII is not in Archie’s christening photos, she did not attend - WHY ? She was at christening of George and Charlotte, but not at Louis’ service. She also did service for Lucas and Sienna. So, she seems to have been at almost all great grand kids services?



Might have been answered already as I tend to answer as I read along, but: she had another commitment that day that had been scheduled a long time in advance.


----------



## bag-mania

Today’s podcast title is the “Audacity of the Activist.” (Be careful that your eyes don’t roll all the way up into your head.)


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. They were “pregnant” within five months of getting married. They weren’t taking a wait-and-see approach for a natural conception. They got right on it.
> 
> That makes me think they knew before the wedding that one of them was infertile. We assumed it was Meghan but what if it was really Harry?  That would explain why he went along with the charade, moon bumps and all. Is it possible the kids are not genetically related to either of them? Keeping that information secret is a pact they would keep for their mutual benefit, even if they are not getting along.


Thank you for saying that … I failed to find good words like you did …
to me timing is KEY, why alledgedly use a surrogate so soon after marriage ?
PS she might have had her eggs frozen prior to meeting H, and known they were viable ? She was a geriatric mother as they say


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> IDK, apart from Andrew visiting Epstein's island, members of the BRF seldom cross the Atlantic. I think I know what you're saying, handing out awards for "Earth" bla bla could be accomplished via Zoom. So could most things. As long as we have celebrity hypocrites who slam everyday people for water, electricity, or use of other resources who then jet in private planes to their multiple homes and vacations, I don't begrudge William from coming over here. Traffic has long been a nightmare in all our big cities. Claw came over for a baby shower in NYC. Numerous people have gone to Nepal to climb Mount Everest and left litter garbage all over the place just to say they climbed the world's tallest peak and had the bucks to do it (with the help of Nepali sherpas). People fly all over to follow their soccer, football, rock concert etc events.
> 
> I kind of like the thought of William coming over. If only to get gushing media reviews without hiring a PR firm to get, unlike his sellout brother and money whore sister-in-law.


QEII a went to state dinners in Washington DC but she also  visited Ronald R at his California home, and famously went riding with him, using a Western saddle , the world cringed at those photos
She was personally close to Ron and Nancy R


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Might have been answered already as I tend to answer as I read along, but: she had another commitment that day that had been scheduled a long time in advance.


Actually I followed up on that, yo7 are all correct, more details 
QEII was with retired Philip (sick?) at Sandringham when Louis turn came up, and the BRF notice was that her absence was jointly OKd with the Cambridges 
Yes, rumors were that HandM picked a time when QEII was booked , remember the stealth godparents that were never named …


----------



## kemilia

I realize I am late in asking this but as for the moon bump (which I have no doubt was used)--why wasn't more, or pretty much ANYTHING, of a media fuss made about the "slipping down to her knees" incident? Are we sure that wasn't photoshopped? I mean, geez louise, that is MAJOR fakery. 

I also believe the surrogate stuff totally; for her not to talk about her pregnancy/delivery/postpartum experiences is so not her.


----------



## marietouchet

“to stand for something is to stand for something good “

in the immortal words associated with  Eastwood, there is the good, the bad and the ugly

PS JJ comes off as a Sugar according to the DM, she takes MM ‘s side and badmouths the rest, she is taking a definite hard line position 


Jameela Jamil gushes over Meghan Markle's bond with 'ally' Prince Harry on Archetypes  | Daily Mail Online










						Jameela Jamil gushes over Meghan's bond with  Harry on Archetypes
					

The presenter and Good Place actress appeared on the ninth episode of the Duchess of Sussexes' show which was titled 'The Audacity of the Activist'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Podcast transcript.



			https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Arcehtypes_Activist-Transcript-Ep.-10.pdf
		


I haven’t read it yet, too early to roll my eyes to the back of my head.


----------



## marietouchet

kemilia said:


> I realize I am late in asking this but as for the moon bump (which I have no doubt was used)--why wasn't more, or pretty much ANYTHING, of a media fuss made about the "slipping down to her knees" incident? Are we sure that wasn't photoshopped? I mean, geez louise, that is MAJOR fakery.
> 
> I also believe the surrogate stuff totally; for her not to talk about her pregnancy/delivery/postpartum experiences is so not her.


a lot of the bump comments came out later, it takes a keen eye and still photos not videos to notice things 
And people put together multiple bump incidents , the whole is greater than the sum of the parts 

And at the time, she was covered by the BRF rota, selected press, and had the palace to explain things, and if her knickers/parties showed, no one was going to point it out environment


----------



## bag-mania

kemilia said:


> I realize I am late in asking this but as for the moon bump (which I have no doubt was used)--*why wasn't more, or pretty much ANYTHING, of a media fuss made about the "slipping down to her knees" incident? *Are we sure that wasn't photoshopped? I mean, geez louise, that is MAJOR fakery.
> 
> I also believe the surrogate stuff totally; for her not to talk about her pregnancy/delivery/postpartum experiences is so not her.


30 years ago the press _might_ have addressed it, but these days…

No media outlet wants to take the inevitable heat for outing someone’s procreation choices. The moon bump deception isn’t worth the backlash for not respecting their privacy. H&M have sued for a lot less because of their hypersensitivity.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Today’s podcast title is the “*Audacity of the Activist*.” (Be careful that your eyes don’t roll all the way up into your head.)


I'm trying to decide between  or 

Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!



_Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
“And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
*The Duchess did not name the woman*._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kemilia

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to decide between  or
> 
> Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!
> 
> 
> 
> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._



Baloney, there was no such “very very …” woman. That statement is as bogus as calling TW an activist.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> _*The Duchess did not name the woman*._


It was herself.


----------



## DL Harper

bag-mania said:


> It was herself.
> 
> View attachment 5653221


Mirror, mirror on the wall. Who the fairest of them all? MEMEgain...


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> 30 years ago the press _might_ have addressed it, but these days…
> 
> No media outlet wants to take the inevitable heat for outing someone’s procreation choices. The moon bump deception isn’t worth the backlash for not respecting their privacy. H&M have sued for a lot less because of their *hypersensitivity*.


I like your delicacy in describing their paranoia and tissue-thin skin 

The press are not going to mock that birdshit lady over a moonbump. The Unsussexfuls aren't high enough in the order of things for exposing their fakery to be worth the trouble of a lawsuit. There is also the deterrent known as the Sussex Squats, some of whom are violent. Zed's thuggish stans have threatened publicly to burn down palaces in Her Heinous' name, and ganged up on Twitter accounts which are Zed-unfriendly.

If you want to expose someone, you need witness testimony and some hard evidence at least. I've seen Zed supporters claim that the bump-slip-to-knees photos are due to, no, not photoshopping, but the wind that blew between her legs. Must have been a cross-current wind that blew one way between her legs and the other way to flatten the dress at her belly


----------



## bag-mania

DL Harper said:


> Mirror, mirror on the wall....


It’s Meghan being a control freak again. She is telling the world exactly how they should see her. 

She can’t help herself. She is always putting herself on a pedestal. She could’ve used her podcast to introduce lesser known women who have made a difference. Instead, she corralled the most famous women who would agree to do it, so that they could collectively b!tch about how they’ve been misunderstood at various times in their lives. Ho hum.


----------



## Chanbal

They seem to share a common friend, Piers.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to decide between  or
> 
> Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!
> 
> 
> 
> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._



  
Of course she didn't name the woman. That woman comes from the same alternate universe as the close friend who introduced them but cannot be named, the BRF who commented on Archie's skintone but cannot be named, the South African actor who does not exist and the mysterious South Africans dancing in the streets. Unless a blue police box appears in California, you will never find that woman again.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> *It’s Meghan being a control freak again. She is telling the world exactly how they should see her.*
> 
> She can’t help herself. She is always putting herself on a pedestal. She could’ve used her podcast to introduce lesser known women who have made a difference. Instead, she corralled the most famous women who would agree to do it, so that they could collectively b!tch about how they’ve been misunderstood at various times in their lives. Ho hum.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._



Was it one of the several voices in her head? (that said, I have not forgotten smart, accomplished women like Hillary gushing over this...thing)

Also, which activism...going to Malta on a lifestyle magazine's dime or begging Boris Becker to ask his friends to let her speak in Dublin to advance herself?

I have literally never encountered anyone so much in love with themselves who completely lacks any feeling for appropriateness re: tooting your own horn in public when they have very little to be proud of.


----------



## piperdog

If, and that's a big IF, this conversation occurred, I can imagine one of their celeb wedding guests (Amal, Oprah, Serena) saying something like that to her to be nice. Or not really paying attention to Meg's blathering about her 'activism' and just chiming in noncommitially - "yeah, yeah, definitely continue the activism, so important. Hey, is Catherine around?" 

Recollections may vary, but in the lead-up to the wedding (before most of us started seeing red flags) they had a huge amount of global goodwill so I'll grudgingly say that this claim is somewhat plausible. 

I'm curious if the BIG name would still say the same thing now.

The funnier thing is that she imagined she was somehow known for her activism. As if she truly had a global profile before forcing herself into prominence as Harry's girlfriend. Though I'll hand it to her for consistency. The delusion that they're some sort of activist/humanitarian continues today as they rack up pay-for-play prizes. 

Standard disclaimer: I haven't listened to a second of the podcast and never have any intention to.


----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to decide between  or
> 
> Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!
> 
> 
> 
> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._



Well Eleanor Roosevelt is deceased so I' m stumped. Talk about a very, very influential woman and activist


----------



## xincinsin

_the collective voice of all of us telling each other_
Pity that she can't hear the collective voice of all of us telling her to stop lying.
Really, she could have done and could still do so much good if she wanted to, but no, she needs this self-aggrandization to prove that she is important to women and girls everywhere. Does she really live in an echo-chamber? Perhaps the stans who jeer at Catherine and call her a Stepford wife should look at how Zed likes to hire women who look like her.


----------



## xincinsin

oldbag said:


> Well Eleanor Roosevelt is deceased so I' m stumped. Talk about a very, very influential woman and activist


OMG I got it! Seance with the medium calling up her MIL's spirit! Remember how Sparry was telling his team that Diana's stardust was on Zed?


----------



## Chanbal

oldbag said:


> Well Eleanor Roosevelt is deceased so I' m stumped. Talk about a very, very influential woman and activist


Who knows! If Diana is in Montecito, what would prevent Eleanor R from attending the wedding in the UK?


----------



## Chanbal

piperdog said:


> *I'm curious if the BIG name would still say the same thing now.*
> 
> The funnier thing is that she imagined she was somehow known for her activism. As if she truly had a global profile before forcing herself into prominence as Harry's girlfriend. Though I'll hand it to her for consistency. The delusion that they're some sort of activist/humanitarian continues today as they rack up pay-for-play prizes.
> 
> Standard disclaimer: I haven't listened to a second of the podcast and never have any intention to.


There is only one BIG name in TW's universe, and the answer is in her own words:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Laughter is a great remedy. Hope this ameliorates the effects of the podcast:


----------



## charlottawill

I think her intent was for people to assume it was Michelle O. Another one of her fantasies.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I think her intent was for people to assume it was Michelle O. Another one of her fantasies.


She left the identity of the very famous woman ambiguous so that we could each imagine the most influential woman we know in the position of admiring Meghan for her “advocacy.”


----------



## rose60610

If anybody were gushing over Claw's "advocacy" they'd make themselves known. But that isn't the case, is it?


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> If anybody were gushing over Claw's "advocacy" they'd make themselves known. But that isn't the case, is it?


In Zed's universe, her supporters are shy and retiring but still very famous and influential, and they all want her to take centre stage because she is so magnificent (I managed to say that with a straight face ... )


----------



## Chanbal

Julia: _I pay a million dollars not to have to sit with them, I sit elsewhere, I sit in the kitchen_… The disingenuous PR opportunity starts @ ~3:14.


----------



## sdkitty

interesting - this woman claims to have been defending Meghan for against the media for years before she knew her.  so there was an issue with Meghan being picked on before Harry?  right








						Jameela Jamil Reveals Something Most 'People Don't Know' About Meghan Markle
					

"The Good Place" actor shared what the royal does privately for those in their "most lonely and desperate moments."




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## CobaltBlu

I lightly skimmed the transcript and it seems like she let other people talk, and quite a bit.  Thats as far as I got.


----------



## jelliedfeels

zen1965 said:


> @jelliedfeels I appreciate your commentary on this thread much, however, I feel that your comments above on Jane Goodall are a tad unfair . Goodall, Fossey and Galdikas - all women, all working at a time when women in science were largely ignored or ridiculed - revolutionised the field of primatology. Jane Goodall lived in utmost basic conditions in a very remote part of Tanzania for years (absolutely no comparison to H and MM’s luxury safaris). IMHO her at the age of 88 being misguided on H can easily be overlooked in light of her lifetime achievements.


I’m of the opinion there is nothing wrong with wearing learning lightly in the general public no matter how exceptional or erudite one is. I don’t really have any opinions on her primatology but I do think it’s a bit rich she’s operating from her position as a former baroness and elite lady who got into primatology through connections and has been able to travel and indulge her passion subsidised by institutions to lecture the average Joe on why we shouldn’t have more than 2 kids (ignoring the fact that even basic understanding would show that our declining birth rate almost worldwide is evidently not the reason that we are struggling with overpopulation/resource shortages) and we should admire these obvious grifters. 

I mean she’s even a hypocrite as an animal rights activist as where was her concern for the proud elephant when Harry was blasting _their_ heads off?


bag-mania said:


> I think a lot of people confuse the two because they are on the same day. The US equivalent of Remembrance Day is Memorial Day and it is in late May. Before it was called Veterans Day, it was Armistice Day, until the 50s when it’s name and purpose was changed.


Agreed and the distinction to me seems an important one & both are notedly different from what he’s actually meant to be commemorating too. 


andrashik said:


> Ladies!! I am wayy wayyy behind but I found something in a sock shop in Amsterdam and took a pic for all of you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5651284


I mean at least by the end of the day it’d be an accurate portrayal of their sweatiness.


rose60610 said:


> Where do I begin???  Zed threw her own father under the bus after he'd paid for her plastic surgery, private schools, Northwestern University (where she majored in Int'l Relations and still didn't realize there was such a thing as the British Commonwealth) etc, yet still wasn't good enough to be invited to the wedding.  The same father who Zed still can't be bothered to visit when he's in critical health. But hop on a private jet for a photo op in Uvalde? No problem!  And some Zed sugars have to dig up unflattering early photos of a woman who went through years of British tabloid hell with grace to prove, what? That Claw-Zed, umm, Clawzz (?) can't get along with anyone whereas Kate has been the toast of town for years with a lovely family since surviving tabloid hell?  Whereas Clawzz went from celebrated (99.9999% media and tabloid approval) to now persona non grata as a result of her own idiocy.


Nepotism recognises nepotism




CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  just my opinion
> 
> I know this will be unpopular [ahem] and it is possible I do not fully understand his Earthshot program,  I have an issue with William, future King, coming to our land simply to _hand out awards_. Is that what passes for conservation these days? Fly to a foreign land and hand out awards? Stop traffic in one of our busier cities? Couldn’t he use the zoom program from the UK?   With Hazz&William, sometimes I get the feeling they do what they do just to hear the applause, to get the ego-rush,  similar to their mother.  Sure sure, I know I know, she really cared.  Are the smaller crowds in the UK not enough for them? They are not rock stars, they are not elite athletes, they are not intellectuals, they are men of the most extreme privilege with very little talent who often they look awkward on those stages. Sure, they have access to billions, so why can’t spend their own money on conservation, innovation, etc.?  Maybe if we saw them actually doing the work, not just posing for a photo or lecturing us, maybe then it would be easier to accept their ‘show’.
> 
> Does the BRF have its own original ideas or must they copy us?  Hazzi took our wounded warrior program as his own.
> _The Prize takes inspiration from President John F. Kennedy’s ‘Moonshot,’ which united millions of people around an organising goal to put man on the moon and catalysed the development of new technology in the 1960s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William unveils the Finalists for the second annual Earthshot Prize Awards - The Earthshot Prize
> 
> 
> The 2022 Earthshot Prize Finalists are revealed - innovators spearheading fifteen groundbreaking solutions to the planet's biggest environmental challenges.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> earthshotprize.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I 100% agree it is showy self-promotion based activism at its best and flying all about the place completely undermines the supposed  message but then royal environmentalism is all about one rule for a peasant another rule for me and my helicopter.


rose60610 said:


> IDK, apart from Andrew visiting Epstein's island, members of the BRF seldom cross the Atlantic. I think I know what you're saying, handing out awards for "Earth" bla bla could be accomplished via Zoom. So could most things. As long as we have celebrity hypocrites who slam everyday people for water, electricity, or use of other resources who then jet in private planes to their multiple homes and vacations, I don't begrudge William from coming over here. Traffic has long been a nightmare in all our big cities. Claw came over for a baby shower in NYC. Numerous people have gone to Nepal to climb Mount Everest and left litter garbage all over the place just to say they climbed the world's tallest peak and had the bucks to do it (with the help of Nepali sherpas). People fly all over to follow their soccer, football, rock concert etc events.
> 
> I kind of like the thought of William coming over. If only to get gushing media reviews without hiring a PR firm to get, unlike his sellout brother and money whore sister-in-law.


W&C plus entourage did that Poorly received tour of the Caribbean about year ago which was meant to be a triumphant gesture of their deep connections. A far more significant number of resources will have gone into that than we might think.
And of course H was flying to and from Canada privately for some time prior and immediately post marriage.

Ultimately - I would say it’s a bit different than people trekking Everest or whatever because these little trips are publicly funded and it comes down to whether you consider in person visits to be an effective form of advocacy and whether you think they are actually advocating for anything other than spreading  their own influence.


periogirl28 said:


> If that is true about Archie being slow in developing and not even cared for, let alone loved, my heart breaks. This is the ultimate worst thing to come out of the whole debacle.


Personally I’m starting to wonder if this image of the parentally deprived A&L is just the latest grift.

Here me out… this is more extreme than the prior generations granted (but this couple aren’t known for their subtlety) but haven’t we seen both Charles and Harry complain in maturity about distant parents, no fun, no love…. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if they though it would help them get a deal.


marietouchet said:


> “to stand for something is to stand for something good “
> 
> in the immortal words associated with  Eastwood, there is the good, the bad and the ugly
> 
> PS JJ comes off as a Sugar according to the DM, she takes MM ‘s side and badmouths the rest, she is taking a definite hard line position
> 
> 
> Jameela Jamil gushes over Meghan Markle's bond with 'ally' Prince Harry on Archetypes  | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jameela Jamil gushes over Meghan's bond with  Harry on Archetypes
> 
> 
> The presenter and Good Place actress appeared on the ninth episode of the Duchess of Sussexes' show which was titled 'The Audacity of the Activist'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ah yes the famous activist… Jameela….
I’m sorry I can’t even finish it…


----------



## bag-mania

It is lunchtime here on the East Coast. Here is some word salad:

“Or the word ‘woke.’ I know I’m saying ‘woke.’ I fully realize I am spoon-feeding the clickbait, but here’s why,” Markle, 41, said. “Because ‘woke,’ by definition, means alert to injustice in society, especially racism.”

“Now, what’s loaded or wrong with that? And when you layer a woman into that seemingly anodyne definition, it becomes for many almost disgusting, ‘outrageous,’ they would say, but why?” she continued.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It is lunchtime here on the East Coast. Here is some word salad:
> 
> “Or the word ‘woke.’ I know I’m saying ‘woke.’ I fully realize I am spoon-feeding the clickbait, but here’s why,” Markle, 41, said. “Because ‘woke,’ by definition, means alert to injustice in society, especially racism.”
> 
> “Now, what’s loaded or wrong with that? And when you layer a woman into that seemingly anodyne definition, it becomes for many almost disgusting, ‘outrageous,’ they would say, but why?” she continued.


What do they smoke?


----------



## lallybelle

Jameela Jamil is one of the most annoying people on the planet. That's my hot take of the day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m of the opinion there is nothing wrong with wearing learning lightly in the general public no matter how exceptional or erudite one is. I don’t really have any opinions on her primatology but I do think it’s a bit rich she’s operating from her position as a former baroness and elite lady who got into primatology through connections and has been able to travel and indulge her passion subsidised by institutions to lecture the average Joe on why we shouldn’t have more than 2 kids (ignoring the fact that even basic understanding would show that our declining birth rate almost worldwide is evidently not the reason that we are struggling with overpopulation/resource shortages) and we should admire these obvious grifters.
> 
> I mean she’s even a hypocrite as an animal rights activist as where was her concern for the proud elephant when Harry was blasting _their_ heads off?
> 
> Agreed and the distinction to me seems an important one & both are notedly different from what he’s actually meant to be commemorating too.
> 
> I mean at least by the end of the day it’d be an accurate portrayal of their sweatiness.
> 
> Nepotism recognises nepotism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I 100% agree it is showy self-promotion based activism at its best and flying all about the place completely undermines the supposed  message but then r*oyal environmentalism is all about one rule for a peasant another rule for me and my helicopter*.
> 
> W&C plus entourage did that Poorly received tour of the Caribbean about year ago which was meant to be a triumphant gesture of their deep connections. A far more significant number of resources will have gone into that than we might think.
> And of course H was flying to and from Canada privately for some time prior and immediately post marriage.
> 
> Ultimately - I would say it’s a bit different than people trekking Everest or whatever because these little trips are publicly funded and it comes down to whether you consider in person visits to be an effective form of advocacy and whether you think they are actually advocating for anything other than spreading  their own influence.
> 
> Personally I’m starting to wonder if this image of the parentally deprived A&L is just the latest grift.
> 
> Here me out… this is more extreme than the prior generations granted (but this couple aren’t known for their subtlety) but haven’t we seen both Charles and Harry complain in maturity about distant parents, no fun, no love…. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if they though it would help them get a deal.
> 
> Ah yes the famous activist… Jameela….
> I’m sorry I can’t even finish it…


*royal environmentalism is all about one rule for a peasant another rule for me and my helicopter*
Perfect!  Royal environmentalism, indeed.  At least, Camilla, Kate, Anne and Edward understand the _quiet way_.  Diana’s boys need to learn.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lallybelle said:


> Jameela Jamil is one of the most annoying people on the planet. That's my hot take of the day.


----------



## CobaltBlu

> Harry visited the memorial in a personal capacity. The USS Arizona Memorial on *the island of Oahu is a short flight* from his home in Montecito, California, where he lives with his wife Meghan Markle and their two children, son Archie, 3, and daughter Lilibet, 1.



No, it's 5.5 hours minimum.  People magazine is ridiculous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It is lunchtime here on the East Coast. Here is some word salad:
> 
> “Or the word ‘woke.’ I know I’m saying ‘woke.’ I fully realize I am spoon-feeding the clickbait, but here’s why,” Markle, 41, said. “Because ‘woke,’ by definition, means alert to injustice in society, especially racism.”
> 
> “Now, what’s loaded or wrong with that? And when you layer a woman into that seemingly anodyne definition, it becomes for many almost disgusting, ‘outrageous,’ they would say, but why?” she continued.


I can't even watch videos like the ones from the BLG about TW's podcasts, I reached saturation levels.


----------



## CobaltBlu

> ..... It's like taking your prince or soldier Ken doll and parading him around in your Cali style doll house with the Hollywood starlet Barbie. Then putting them somewhere else totally inappropriate like galas, sporting events or whatever Mattel accessories your parents bought you for last Xmas and making them act out stilted and clumsy scenarios like a kid would.
> 
> The problem of MM is that she got a prince Ken doll and now she doesn't know what to do with it. He was a collectors' item and came with a palace included in the box as an original accessory but she ditched that because she wanted her own doll house instead. But she found out he isn't really a prince anymore without that original accessory and the doll is now basically worthless. She puts him here and puts him there but he doesn't quite fit anywhere. I feel she will abandon or trade him for another toy very soon.


From Reddit....


----------



## Chanbal

CobaltBlu said:


> No, it's 5.5 hours minimum.  People magazine is ridiculous.


By private jet?


----------



## gracekelly

Channel surfed into the Fox show Outnumbered. The folks there just trashed her. Harris Faulkner wants to understand exactly what they do in general and why receive the Ripple Award. Really dumped on them. The male guest mentioned the private planes etc.  Another woman trashed.  the podcast with the exact clip that @bag-mania used.  I enjoyed every minute of it lololol!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to decide between  or
> 
> Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!
> 
> 
> 
> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._


----------



## papertiger

lallybelle said:


> Jameela Jamil is one of the most annoying people on the planet. That's my hot take of the day.



Happily, I don't know who she is. 

Unhappily, I know who Meghan is, that's bad enough


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> By private jet?



Maybe he hitched a ride with Oprah if she was going to her home in Hawaii.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> By private jet?



As @jelliedfeels said, it is called *Royal Environmentalism*.  
They are not like us, never think they are.


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I lightly skimmed the transcript and it seems like she let other people talk, and quite a bit.  Thats as far as I got.


ha...let other people talk because they were talking about her?


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to decide between  or
> 
> Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!
> 
> 
> 
> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._



Hmmmm remember the lie/misrepresentation/faulty memory of getting married three days earlier ?
The cheerleading by THE POWERFUL WOMAN could be her warped memory from any conversation, even with QEII, recollections may vary

PS since when are the recommendations of a bigwig ALWAYS the right thing to do ? Does Elon or Michelle get it right all the time?


----------



## gracekelly

When they played the podcast clip on Fox I had to listen to her phony voice. Sickening and so false. Every inflection was practiced.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> ha...let other people talk because they were talking about her?


Of course!  If she isn’t talking about herself then the others have to talk about HER. She needs to keep it on topic. Lololol!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Of course!  If she isn’t talking about herself then the others have to talk about HER. She needs to keep it on topic. Lololol!



Maybe the unnamed members who keep reporting us for straying off topic are really her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> When they played the podcast clip on Fox I had to listen to her phony voice. Sickening and so false. Every inflection was practiced.



Did she sound like a phone sex operator again? (I refuse to listen but that was the verdict on Reddit)


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I'm trying to decide between  or
> 
> Is anyone of you the unnamed woman?  Please come forward!
> 
> 
> 
> _Describing the lead-up to her 2018 wedding to Prince Harry, the Duchess said: “*Just a few days before my wedding, a very, very influential and inspiring woman* - who for her own privacy I won't share who [it] was with you - but she *said to me, I know that your life is changing but please don't give up your activism. Don't give up because it means so much to women and girls*.
> “And I kept doing the work for women and girls because it matters, yes, but also because she encouraged me to do so and the collective voice of all of us telling each other.”
> *The Duchess did not name the woman*._



So, it's her imaginary friend Mary?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did she sound like a phone sex operator again? (I refuse to listen but that was the verdict on Reddit)


Not having personal experience with a phone sex operator, I can only imagine, but suspect the answer is HELL YES!


----------



## charlottawill

Un


sdkitty said:


> interesting - this woman claims to have been defending Meghan for against the media for years before she knew her.  so there was an issue with Meghan being picked on before Harry?  right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jameela Jamil Reveals Something Most 'People Don't Know' About Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> "The Good Place" actor shared what the royal does privately for those in their "most lonely and desperate moments."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Unless they watched Suits no one had ever heard of her before Harry. I guess only a true friend would support her BS narrative.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Not having personal experience with a phone sex operator, I can only imagine, but suspect the answer is HELL YES!


I'm sure she'd be a natural at it.


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> No, it's 5.5 hours minimum.  People magazine is ridiculous.


Unless someone at People is so bad at geography that they confused it with Catalina


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Unless someone at People is so bad at geography that they confused it with Catalina


Or they watch TV shows that take place in LA where you can get anywhere, in the greater city environs, in 20 minutes.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> "And when you layer a woman into that seemingly anodyne definition",


I'm not stupid but WTF is she talking about?


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I'm not stupid but WTF is she talking about?


She is showing off that she learned a new word from her word-of-the-day calendar.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I'm not stupid but WTF is she talking about?


It's impossible to know without the super powers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Asking for a friend - how do you “layer a woman” into anything?   
Maybe I should check Urban Dictionary


----------



## jelliedfeels

Layer a woman?
 ….maybe she better check that imaginary DNA test of hers for Transylvanian 

It’s amazing how she speaks English like it’s her 6th language but that can’t be the case as she clearly has no knowledge of any other culture either


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Asking for a friend - how do you “layer a woman” into anything?
> Maybe I should check Urban Dictionary


I’m convinced it doesn’t matter what she says, it’s that she says it with such absolute conviction. I can imagine her sugars all nodding in agreement and clapping like trained seals.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I’m convinced it doesn’t matter what she says, it’s that she says it with such absolute conviction. I can imagine her sugars all nodding in agreement and clapping like trained seals.



I just...are all the people she encounters just so polite? I am pretty good at  the poker face but I think I'd have a hard time keeping it up if I met her and had to listen to the nonsense she spouts.


----------



## Katel

This made me happy, don’t know if it’s been posted yet, but ginge is off the list when W&K’s kids turn 21.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> I'm not stupid but WTF is she talking about?


Layer a woman?  Huh?

Anodyne is her new word of the week.  Last week it was granular.


----------



## gracekelly

nope


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m convinced it doesn’t matter what she says, it’s that she says it with such absolute conviction. I can imagine her sugars all nodding in agreement and clapping like trained seals.


----------



## bag-mania

What was today’s stereotype? Was she so busy patting herself on the back that she forgot the show’s theme?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Layer a woman?  Huh?
> 
> Anodyne is her new word of the week.  Last week it was granular.


That reminds me of Noella's "Stack of vaginas" on RHOOC.  That's another delusional woman.


----------



## purseinsanity

Katel said:


> This made me happy, don’t know if it’s been posted yet, but ginge is off the list when W&K’s kids turn 21.
> 
> View attachment 5653401


Not to be rude, but Princess Anne is already 72.  I truly hope she and Edward have their parents and grandmother's longevity.


----------



## marietouchet

this is in Mark Zuckerberg’s lauded metaverse where they will be their own avatars , YOU DONT SAY !

PS MZ has been laying off this week

Meghan and Harry planning to go 'truly global' in new imaginary world in virtual universe









						Meghan and Harry plan to build own world in new imaginary universe
					

A source said the Sussexes see the move as the "next stage to take their brand truly global".




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> When I was in my 20’s and 3o’s I had to sit politely and listen to women relating their giving birth experiences. Once one got started, they all joined in. I’m not criticizing this in any way, and had really forgotten about it until reading this post. I think you have really pointed out something rather interesting. * Given how the world revolves around her, how is it that we never have heard a minute by contraction description of the entire experience?*


Exactly!!  Especially now that she's in mom mode---she would have the most amazing insights for all other women who might one day become mothers.  She would talk about it like she's the only woman who had ever given birth.  And, she would NEVER stop.

Plus, we would have heard ALL about her birth plan.  SO many opportunities to merch!!


bag-mania said:


> Today’s podcast title is the “Audacity of the Activist.” (Be careful that your eyes don’t roll all the way up into your head.)


Right?!  Because women have been held back for decades by being called activists???  The mental gymnastics required to force something to fit into "Archetype" would be exhausting but we know she just decides it is so, thus, it is so.


CarryOn2020 said:


> What do they smoke?


Now, now, this is a low blow to Cousin It---he deserves better than to be linked to H&M!   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe the unnamed members who keep reporting us for straying off topic are really her.


   It is odd, isn't it?  This thread is rarely off topic---it does not need to be since the crazy is seemingly endless!


bag-mania said:


> What was today’s stereotype? Was she so busy patting herself on the back that she forgot the show’s theme?


Activism    Definitely patting herself on the back for being a woke woman who was "begged" by a "very influential" woman not to quit her activism after she was married.


----------



## DoggieBags

gracekelly said:


> Layer a woman?  Huh?
> 
> Anodyne is her new word of the week.  Last week it was granular.


Next week maybe she’ll try putting both granular and anodyne together in one sentence. Extra points if she manages to also throw in her new word for next week in that same sentence.


----------



## Cinderlala

marietouchet said:


> this is in Mark Zuckerberg’s lauded metaverse where they will be their own avatars , YOU DONT SAY !
> 
> PS MZ has been laying off this week
> 
> *Meghan and Harry planning to go 'truly global' in new imaginary world in virtual universe
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry plan to build own world in new imaginary universe
> 
> 
> A source said the Sussexes see the move as the "next stage to take their brand truly global".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


   This is the only way it will happen!  Imaginary world, virtual universe!!  Like the inside of TW's head.


----------



## marietouchet

From Hillary Rose article at Times - paywall maybe ?

“I (Hillary)  am processing feelings that I think might be rage or depression, but definitely confusion,” I tell my editor. “Meghan has spoken for more than an hour, and it was in English, but I didn’t understand a word. Help.”

“Don’t worry,” she reassures me. “It’s your dimensionality. You haven’t got any.”

And then Meghan breaks my heart with three short words. “Until next week . . .”

There’s more. It isn’t over. They promised me this was the last. My editor shrugs. “Recollections may vary.”
——  
Meghan’s podcast breaks my heart with three words









						Meghan’s podcast breaks my heart with three words
					

Who is the mystery woman encouraging the Duchess of Sussex’s activism, asks Hilary Rose




					www.thetimes.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, entries for the new H&M Dictionary, we have:

_Guttural_ as in _When the Duke of Sussex heard about the Supreme Court judgment revoking the ruling in Roe vs Wade, ‘His reaction last week was guttural, like mine,’ said his wife Meghan Markle.








						Does Meghan Markle know what ‘guttural’ means?
					

Meghan Markle has said that her reaction to the Roe vs Wade abortion rule by the Supreme Court was ‘gutteral’. But is that the right word?




					www.spectator.co.uk
				




Granular [the MM podcrash]

anodyne [the MM podcrash]

dimensionality [ @marietouchet Hilary Rose addition]

Note: definitions may vary, depending on your need to sound kinda educated _


----------



## marietouchet

Critique of Archie’s christening photo, the photo and question

Knesix (@Jesús Enrique Rosas - The Body Language Guy) Tweeted: Please reply to this @TheWantonWench’s post. I’m curious what’s this about. 

An answer
Tamarindos9 (@tam, just Tam.) Tweeted: just a few...


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> What was today’s stereotype? Was she so busy patting herself on the back that she forgot the show’s theme?


Activist


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> Next week maybe she’ll try putting both granular and anodyne together in one sentence. Extra points if she manages to also throw in her new word for next week in that same sentence.


Don't forget visceral.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Not to be rude, but Princess Anne is already 72.  I truly hope she and Edward have their parents and grandmother's longevity.


I think Anne definitely will.  She is very fit and active.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget visceral.


And guttural.  

My grandmother used to say that her son, my Uncle Jack, wrote his own newspaper.  I think Meghan writes her own dictionery.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bubablu

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget visceral.


And my favorite one, the first, the one that gave her away to me: organic.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Critique of Archie’s christening photo, the photo and question
> 
> Knesix (@Jesús Enrique Rosas - The Body Language Guy) Tweeted: Please reply to this @TheWantonWench’s post. I’m curious what’s this about.
> 
> An answer
> Tamarindos9 (@tam, just Tam.) Tweeted: just a few...



This is very weird.  Camilla is wearing the same thing and looks exactly the same in both photographs as does KC3.  No chair legs in the back for Kate who appears to be sitting on a magic two legged chair.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> *Meghan and Harry planning to go 'truly global' in new imaginary world in virtual universe*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry plan to build own world in new imaginary universe
> 
> 
> A source said the Sussexes see the move as the "next stage to take their brand truly global".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Gosh there is no escape from them…


----------



## charlottawill

She's so effing pretentious. I know have a good vocabulary, but I confess I had to look up "anodyne". It is a synonym for the much more common "innocuous", which I would not have had to look up. It must make her feel superior to do that in her speaking or writing. But as Mark Twain said, "Don't use a five dollar word when a fifty cent one will do". She must have missed that class in freshman English at Northwestern. She really is not a credit to the school.


----------



## bubablu

Me reading SaintMM on Reddit today:


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Gosh there is no escape from them…



Maybe they are watching the new amazon show The Peripheral, though if I have trouble understanding it, I doubt that they can.  I think the Sussex live on the planet Confabulation in the universe called Delusion Prime.  They managed to get there without the help of Elon Musk.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She's so effing pretentious. I know have a good vocabulary, but I confess I had to look up "anodyne". It is a synonym for the much more common "innocuous", which I would not have had to look up. It must make her feel superior to do that in her speaking or writing. But as Mark Twain said, "Don't use a five dollar word when a fifty cent one will do". She must have missed that class in freshman English at Northwestern. She really is not a credit to the school.


She also missed the quote from Twain about messing with people who buy ink by the barrel.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> this is in Mark Zuckerberg’s lauded metaverse where they will be their own avatars , YOU DONT SAY !
> 
> PS MZ has been laying off this week
> 
> Meghan and Harry planning to go 'truly global' in new imaginary world in virtual universe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry plan to build own world in new imaginary universe
> 
> 
> A source said the Sussexes see the move as the "next stage to take their brand truly global".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


The key word there is imaginary, just like so much else in her inner world.


----------



## charlottawill

bubablu said:


> And my favorite one, the first, the one that gave her away to me: organic.


My dislike of MM is organic and visceral.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apparently the meta world is not very happy   








						Skepticism, Confusion, Frustration: Inside Mark Zuckerberg’s Metaverse Struggles
					

Meta’s push to develop virtual and augmented reality technology has had a bumpy year.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Stansy

gracekelly said:


> This is very weird.  Camilla is wearing the same thing and looks exactly the same in both photographs as does KC3.  No chair legs in the back for Kate who appears to be sitting on a magic two legged chair.


Harry‘s hair looked too full - even if the pic is -allegedly- already 3 years old.
sorry, I am terribly ignorant to spot PS, but your comments really made sense to me!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> This is very weird.  Camilla is wearing the same thing and looks exactly the same in both photographs as does KC3.  No chair legs in the back for Kate who appears to be sitting on a magic two legged chair.


I do not know if they have the ORIGINAL photo ... but Twitter is abuzz on the one shown
But, heck, Kim K's team is known for bad photoshops, maybe MM uses the same team


----------



## gracekelly

Wouldn't it be a hoot if the person who did the photoshop left off those chair legs so someone would spot it and question the entire picture?  When looking at the picture now, it looks like several of the faces are inserted.  You'd think that Diana's sister would have worn something other than a Panama hat to a royal christening.  I always thought it odd.  She knew better, unless it was a deliberate dump on them.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> This is very weird.  Camilla is wearing the same thing and looks exactly the same in both photographs as does KC3.  No chair legs in the back for Kate who appears to be sitting on a magic two legged chair.


If you go to Twitter and zoom the photos you will clearly see all the black photoshop lines around each person. They were pasted into the grouping


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> My dislike of MM is organic and visceral.


Today’s podcrash, the first 2 minutes:












						Free online word cloud generator and tag cloud creator
					

Wordclouds.com is a free online word cloud generator and tag cloud generator, similar to Wordle. Create your own word clouds and tag clouds. Paste text or upload documents and select shape, colors and font to create your own word cloud. Wordclouds.com can also generate clickable word clouds with...




					www.wordclouds.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> My dislike of MM is organic and visceral.


Mine is guttural and layered whilst being anodyne.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> Don't forget visceral.


Don't worry, she won't let us forget.


----------



## piperdog

charlottawill said:


> My dislike of MM is organic and visceral.


Mine is granular and anodyne!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> This is very weird.  Camilla is wearing the same thing and looks exactly the same in both photographs as does KC3.  No chair legs in the back for Kate who appears to be sitting on a magic two legged chair.


I read the BLG's analysis of the criticisms and he concludes that the photo is legit.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Thanks to Reddit Saint Meghan Markle, today’s transcript  
Audacious, Brave, Bold - Looks like she needs to turn the page to the C’s.

_Ilana: I was just thinking about this! I just bought these like puffs that have hidden vegetables and I don't like the idea of tricking our children. Everybody, you know, all these like parenting things of tricking our children. I remember one like lifestyle brand years ago, brownies with hidden spinach. But then you just said, thank God my kids love vegetables.
I'm just like, but they are good for you and they are delicious. And then once you finish them, you can have chocolate or whatever. But it’s like actually, don’t hide the vegetables!

Meghan: It's not a zero sum game! Why do you have to hide it!

Ilana: No, they’re delicious!

MEGHAN: At this point in her career, Ilana, admittedly, doesn’t hide the vegetables. Outside of her comedic work, Ilana helps run Generator Collective – which is a non-profit targeted toward Gen Z and Millennials, which seeks to humanize policy through personal storytelling, mostly on social media. This group was started in 2016. And through it, she helps galvanize her audience with calls to action, live shows, and resources...
For Ilana, it’s all about civic engagement, getting people to care – because that’s what she is passionate about. Down to her very core...

Ilana: I think I'm personally past the point of like messaging and making sure the message is right because I'm just like, I live it, you know what I mean? Like my politics, my body, my gender, my sexuality — I'm living it so I don't have to pointedly do it, you know, just being it is the message.

MEGHAN: To live the message. I’ve never actually heard it put in those terms. But when Ilana said it, it clicked for me — that, to me, is *audacious. Because in its truest definition, it’s about being bold. And it’s about being brave.* Just like my next guests._



			https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Arcehtypes_Activist-Transcript-Ep.-10.pdf


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> It is lunchtime here on the East Coast. Here is some word salad:
> 
> “Or the word ‘woke.’ I know I’m saying ‘woke.’ I fully realize I am spoon-feeding the clickbait, but here’s why,” Markle, 41, said. “Because ‘woke,’ by definition, means alert to injustice in society, especially racism.”
> 
> “Now, what’s loaded or wrong with that? And when you layer a woman into that seemingly anodyne definition, it becomes for many almost disgusting, ‘outrageous,’ they would say, but why?” she continued.


Thanks for sharing, lost my appetite reading the insane drivel and it cut my lunchtime calorie count by at least 2/3!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks to Reddit Saint Meghan Markle, today’s transcript
> Audacious, Brave, Bold - Looks like she needs to turn the page to the C’s.
> 
> _Ilana: I was just thinking about this! I just bought these like puffs that have hidden vegetables and I don't like the idea of tricking our children. Everybody, you know, all these like parenting things of tricking our children. I remember one like lifestyle brand years ago, brownies with hidden spinach. But then you just said, thank God my kids love vegetables.
> I'm just like, but they are good for you and they are delicious. And then once you finish them, you can have chocolate or whatever. But it’s like actually, don’t hide the vegetables!
> 
> Meghan: It's not a zero sum game! Why do you have to hide it!
> 
> Ilana: No, they’re delicious!
> 
> MEGHAN: At this point in her career, Ilana, admittedly, doesn’t hide the vegetables. Outside of her comedic work, Ilana helps run Generator Collective – which is a non-profit targeted toward Gen Z and Millennials, which seeks to humanize policy through personal storytelling, mostly on social media. This group was started in 2016. And through it, she helps galvanize her audience with calls to action, live shows, and resources...
> For Ilana, it’s all about civic engagement, getting people to care – because that’s what she is passionate about. Down to her very core...
> 
> Ilana: I think I'm personally past the point of like messaging and making sure the message is right because I'm just like, I live it, you know what I mean? Like my politics, my body, my gender, my sexuality — I'm living it so I don't have to pointedly do it, you know, just being it is the message.
> 
> MEGHAN: To live the message. I’ve never actually heard it put in those terms. But when Ilana said it, it clicked for me — that, to me, is *audacious. Because in its truest definition, it’s about being bold. And it’s about being brave.* Just like my next guests._
> 
> 
> 
> https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Arcehtypes_Activist-Transcript-Ep.-10.pdf



MM is not nearly as perspicacious as she likes to think she is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> MM is not nearly as perspicacious as she likes to think she is.


She loves using _zero sum game.  _It must be a signal to her meta world.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> She loves using _zero sum game.  _It must be a signal to her meta world.


Hush now, she is connecting with young people. They like to be called young people, right?


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Layer a woman?  Huh?
> 
> Anodyne is her new word of the week.  Last week it was granular.



Guttural granular, layer?

Maybe she's building a woman


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Hush now, she is connecting with young people. They like to be called young people, right?


Thought they call themselves “young _talent_”


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


>


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> I read the BLG's analysis of the criticisms and he concludes that the photo is legit.


I have no idea if the photo is legit or not but I don’t place much confidence in BLG’s analysis. After all he was the one who said that, based on his analysis, the woman in the photo in Wyoming was TW and that subsequently turned out to be incorrect.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I have no idea if the photo is legit or not but I don’t place much confidence in BLG’s analysis. After all he was the one who said that, based on his analysis, the woman in the photo in Wyoming was TW and that subsequently turned out to be incorrect.


It did??? I know it was discussed at length here but I had never heard confirmation that it wasn't her. Don't know how I missed that.

And your Birkin is a beautiful color


----------



## Cinderlala

bubablu said:


> And my favorite one, the first, the one that gave her away to me: organic.


Don't forget authentic, she is nothing if not authentic.   


charlottawill said:


> She's so effing pretentious. I know have a good vocabulary, but I confess I had to look up "anodyne". It is a synonym for the much more common "innocuous", which I would not have had to look up. It must make her feel superior to do that in her speaking or writing. But as Mark Twain said, "Don't use a five dollar word when a fifty cent one will do". She must have missed that class in freshman English at Northwestern. *She really is not a credit to the school.*


She is not a credit to anything.  Heck, I wish we, as women, could get her to shut tf up on behalf of women.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> this is in Mark Zuckerberg’s lauded metaverse where they will be their own avatars , YOU DONT SAY !
> 
> PS MZ has been laying off this week
> 
> Meghan and Harry planning to go 'truly global' in new imaginary world in virtual universe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry plan to build own world in new imaginary universe
> 
> 
> A source said the Sussexes see the move as the "next stage to take their brand truly global".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk



What?  They_ already_ live in a parallel universe, in an overactive, meta-metric, imagi-nation of sugars and chopped-gooey lemon-drizzle steeped in media-rum source and photo-filter-shopped garnish with a cherry award on top.

They should try living in a real world for 5 minutes.


----------



## Hyacinth

marietouchet said:


> Hmmmm remember the lie/misrepresentation/faulty memory of getting married three days earlier ?
> The cheerleading by THE POWERFUL WOMAN could be her warped memory from any conversation, even with QEII, recollections may vary
> 
> PS since when are the recommendations of a bigwig ALWAYS the right thing to do ? Does Elon or Michelle get it right all the time?



Michelle gets it right MOST of the time. 

If Elon's definition of "getting it right" is "destroying Twitter", I'd say he's doing a damned fine job of it so far.


----------



## papertiger

bubablu said:


> And my favorite one, the first, the one that gave her away to me: organic.



You know she's so, so sensitive, she can taste eggs in a vegan dish, must be a real princess


----------



## Hyacinth

gracekelly said:


> Or they watch TV shows that take place in LA where you can get anywhere, in the greater city environs, in 20 minutes.



...AND find a parking spot right in front of the main entrance.


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Today’s podcast title is the *“Audacity of the Activist.” *(Be careful that your eyes don’t roll all the way up into your head.)





She seems to have ever so slightly misnamed the title of this podcrash episode.
I'll help her re-name it: *"MM the Faux-Activist: The audacity of this fraudulent woman"*


----------



## charlottawill

The comments...so good, and the linked Slate article makes it abundantly clear why they are friends.


----------



## Hyacinth

marietouchet said:


> If you go to Twitter and zoom the photos you will clearly see all the black photoshop lines around each person. They were pasted into the grouping



That would explain why there is no reflection in the mirror at all of the three women standing in front of it.

(Maybe they're vampires?)


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> Layer a woman?  Huh?
> 
> Anodyne is her new word of the week.  Last week it was granular.



How does that word even fit into that weird sentence?! Maybe it's a challenge, someone is feeding these to her in a dare. My guess for next week's word is "adenoid". Let's see if she pulls that one, I'm assuming she's reading this forum.

Edit: Maybe something like "I was appalled to notice some masculine characters paying attention to the adenoid formations on the chesticular region of female bodies".


----------



## sdkitty

pomeline said:


> How does that word even fit into that weird sentence?! Maybe it's a challenge, someone is feeding these to her in a dare. My guess for next week's word is "adenoid". Let's see if she pulls that one, I'm assuming she's reading this forum.


she is just a pretentious full-of-herself woman


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> She's so effing pretentious. I know have a good vocabulary, but I confess I had to look up "anodyne". It is a synonym for the much more common "innocuous", which I would not have had to look up. It must make her feel superior to do that in her speaking or writing. But as Mark Twain said, "Don't use a five dollar word when a fifty cent one will do". She must have missed that class in freshman English at Northwestern. She really is not a credit to the school.



In Germany we have a pain killer Anodyne because one of it's meanings apparently is, well, pain-killing  How I wish there was a drug strong enough to kill the headache Ghoul has caused all of us for years.

But also, I'm sure it makes her feel superior, but I'm also sure she looks these up. There's no way this woman you'd never guess went to a very prestigious university thinks like this naturally.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they are watching the new amazon show The Peripheral, though if I have trouble understanding it, I doubt that they can.  I think the Sussex live on the planet Confabulation in the universe called Delusion Prime.  *They managed to get there without the help of Elon Musk.*


Who said that?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> My dislike of MM is organic and visceral.





gracekelly said:


> Mine is guttural and layered whilst being anodyne.





piperdog said:


> Mine is granular and anodyne!


----------



## CarryOn2020

I used the spoiler because this tweet needs a sensitive warning - it is the old, nude photo of Hazzi in Vegas. Gross, I know.
  For someone with such a sanctimonious wife, some may need a reminder not to feel sorry for the spare.  



Spoiler


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



Spotify has missed the boat completely.  If they want to attract new listeners, all they need to do is have a person read the posts on this thread.  I elect @papertiger because I bet she has a very posh English  accent and people love that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors -


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

pomeline said:


> How does that word even fit into that weird sentence?! Maybe it's a challenge, someone is feeding these to her in a dare. My guess for next week's word is "adenoid". Let's see if she pulls that one, I'm assuming she's reading this forum.
> 
> Edit: Maybe something like "I was appalled to notice some masculine characters paying attention to the adenoid formations on the chesticular region of female bodies".


You got me thinking.  we should come up with suggestions for the word of the week for Meghan.  We have adenoid from @pomeline 

I have a sneaky one for her that she is sure to get wrong.  The word is forte.  The sneaky part is that everyone mispronounces it and say_ fortay_ as if there is a French  accent aigu, as in année.  She can go through the entire  podtrash saying it wrong.  

Meghan:  My fortay (sic) is my wokeness on a granular level.  It is layered in an anodyne way so people can agree without having guttaral feeling.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors -
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5653577



I really have to take this with a really really huge grain of salt because Harry has had the thunder look in his eyes and meany mouth of great anger.  It certainly looked as if this was directed at his father, brother and family.  Could it be that it was really directed at his wife?  What kind of groveling would there have to be for him to find a place back in the bosom of his family?  I think it would have to be so low that a  slithering snake would look as if was do so hovering above the ground.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors -
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5653577




If that's true, he's holding up better than I'd have thought, and she's keeping quieter than I'd have thought too. I certainly thought she'd go ballistic kill mode and he'd suffer a nervous breakdown.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors -
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5653577



I think it’s a bunch of Quora BS. I can believe they are living apart but I don’t believe for a minute Charles is in negotiations to take Harry back. If someone stabbed you in the back, would you pull the knife out and hand it back to that person and then turn your back again? Charles isn’t _that_ stupid.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> I think it’s a bunch of Quora BS. I can believe they are living apart but I don’t believe for a minute Charles is in negotiations to take Harry back. If someone stabbed you in the back, would you pull the knife out and hand it back to that person and then turn your back again? Charles isn’t _that_ stupid.


I do not believe these rumors either.  I do find it interesting that the same rumor continues to live through the internet. 
Perhaps that is simply the world we live in. We know they _enjoy_ reading about themselves, so they may start this stuff themselves.  Anything for clicks.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors -
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5653577



Hazz's photo-op @ Pearl Harbor On Veterans Day is so in line with TW's PR approaches. Until he publicly denounces TW's shenanigans, I don't give much credit to this type of news. Even Lady C is suspicious of those rumors. I wonder if the tea about an ex being in town is also part of any machiavellian plan.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I do not believe these rumors either.  I do find it interesting that the same rumor continues to live through the internet.
> Perhaps that is simply the world we live in. We know they _enjoy_ reading about themselves, so they may start this stuff themselves.  Anything for clicks.


Harry and Meghan are gold for everyone who writes about them. They are incredibly polarizing and are always doing something to get noticed. That means $$$.

By now BLG has probably bought a boat with the money he’s made since shifting the focus of his videos to be almost solely on them.


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> You know she's so, so sensitive, she can taste eggs in a vegan dish, must be a real princess
> 
> View attachment 5653465


And if she’s such a vegan, how would she know what eggs taste like?!?
I can’t stand when people use the word organic for anything that’s not a vegetable or fruit.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Hazz's photo-op @ Pearl Harbor On Veterans Day is so in line with TW's PR approaches. Until he publicly denounces TW's shenanigans, I don't give much credit to this type of news. Even Lady C is suspicious of those rumors. I wonder if the tea about an ex being in town is also part of any machiavellian plan.



Nonsense. Both of Harry’s exes are recently married, one just this year. If one of them is in town it doesn’t have to have anything to do with Harry. LA is a huge place and people go there for reasons completely unrelated to him. We’ve had a number of implausible blind items recently, haven’t we?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chels married in May to hotelier Sam Cutmore-Scott and had a baby boy in January,   swoon.








						Prince Harry's ex Chelsy Davy marries hotelier Sam Cutmore-Scott
					

Ms Davy, 36, who split up with Harry after a seven-year relationship because she didn't want to be a royal bride, has wed Sam Cutmore-Scott, 37, who was in the year above the prince at Eton College.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Cres married in 2020.  No baby, yet.
_In July 2022 she confirmed her first pregnancy in The Spectator magazine.  From Wikipedia_








						Prince Harry’s ex Cressida Bonas shares baby photo with husband Harry Wentworth-Stanley
					

Cressida Bonas, Prince Harry's ex-girlfriend, delights fans as she shares new baby photo with husband Harry Wentworth-Stanley




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Chels married in May to hotelier Sam Cutmore-Scott and had a baby boy in January,   swoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's ex Chelsy Davy marries hotelier Sam Cutmore-Scott
> 
> 
> Ms Davy, 36, who split up with Harry after a seven-year relationship because she didn't want to be a royal bride, has wed Sam Cutmore-Scott, 37, who was in the year above the prince at Eton College.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cres married in 2020 and recently had a baby.


I bet both of them are thankful they broke up with Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I used the spoiler because this tweet needs a sensitive warning - it is the old, nude photo of Hazzi in Vegas. Gross, I know.
> For someone with such a sanctimonious wife, some may need a reminder not to feel sorry for the spare.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler



So lustworthy


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> And if she’s such a vegan, how would she know what eggs taste like?!?
> I can’t stand when people use the word organic for anything that’s not a vegetable or fruit.


she's a vegan and she did roast chicken for H?  handling raw chicken?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Chels married in May to hotelier Sam Cutmore-Scott and had a baby boy in January,   swoon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry's ex Chelsy Davy marries hotelier Sam Cutmore-Scott
> 
> 
> Ms Davy, 36, who split up with Harry after a seven-year relationship because she didn't want to be a royal bride, has wed Sam Cutmore-Scott, 37, who was in the year above the prince at Eton College.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cres married in 2020.  No baby, yet.
> _In July 2022 she confirmed her first pregnancy in The Spectator magazine.  From Wikipedia_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry’s ex Cressida Bonas shares baby photo with husband Harry Wentworth-Stanley
> 
> 
> Cressida Bonas, Prince Harry's ex-girlfriend, delights fans as she shares new baby photo with husband Harry Wentworth-Stanley
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Looks like they both made good choices. Too bad for Hazy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So much better than the spare.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Nonsense. Both of Harry’s exes are recently married, one just this year. If one of them is in town it doesn’t have to have anything to do with Harry. LA is a huge place and people go there for reasons completely unrelated to him. *We’ve had a number of implausible blind items recently, haven’t we?*


Yep! I believe many rumors (including some blind items) are being spread by TW and her team.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

The BLG tea on the christening photo, in depth analysis , recommend, he shows it is odd but not manipulated


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The BLG tea on the christening photo, in depth analysis , recommend, he shows it is odd but not manipulated



I like that he acknowledges that he was taken in earlier by the original speculation about the photo. Not everyone is willing to admit to making a mistake.

It would be interesting to find out why that particular royal photo is the only one that is a restricted asset.


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> Next week maybe she’ll try putting both granular and anodyne together in one sentence. Extra points if she manages to also throw in her new word for next week in that same sentence.


I don't mean to _stereotype_ her stans, but judging by the far fetched comments that they feel the need to make constantly, they are not the brightest bunch.  Is that who she is trying to impress with the big words in these podcrashes?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did MM ever say she was a vegan or do people just assume that?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Ugh I’m surprised she had Jameela on, she has such a a bad (deserved) reputation.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> Ugh I’m surprised she had Jameela on, *she has such a a bad (deserved) reputation*.
> 
> View attachment 5653640


I never heard of this Jameela. Are those falsehoods?


----------



## lanasyogamama

Chanbal said:


> I never heard of this Jameela. Are those falsehoods?



No! Go to Tracie’s first highlight labeled JJ, it’s wild. 



			https://instagram.com/traciemorrissey?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=


----------



## CarryOn2020

_By definition, Meghan considers herself a vegan. But it's a lot more complicated than that. Yes, she's a vegan, but only on weekdays. Over the weekend, she reverts to a standard carnivorous diet but prefers to steer clear of animal protein on other days. In this article, we'll go over Meghan Markle's intriguing diet in depth.
Article from 9/2022








						Meghan Markle follows a vegan diet but makes exceptions on weekends
					

Meghan Markle is no stranger to the limelight. The former Suits star and current Duchess of Sussex has been one of the most talked-about public figures for the past decade or so.




					www.sportskeeda.com
				



_


----------



## lanasyogamama

That reminds me of this.


----------



## Chanbal

lanasyogamama said:


> No! Go to Tracie’s first highlight labeled JJ, it’s wild.
> 
> 
> 
> https://instagram.com/traciemorrissey?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=


It looks like TW and JJ they are soulmates.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Not having personal experience with a phone sex operator, I can only imagine, but suspect the answer is HELL YES!


I want to disagree. If only because in my idealistic mind, if I'm going to call a phone sex line, I want to feel excited and turned on by the voice I'm hearing. Sorry, but I have listened to Zed and, even though she does do the giggles and breathiness, she is BORING. I'm feeling particularly turned off by her voice this week because just 6 days ago, Kevin Conroy passed away. He was the voice of Batman and, if I wanted a audio representation of sex on legs, I would choose his Bruce Wayne voice.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> If you go to Twitter and zoom the photos you will clearly see all the black photoshop lines around each person. They were pasted into the grouping


Weirder and weirder...


bag-mania said:


> I think it’s a bunch of Quora BS. I can believe they are living apart but I don’t believe for a minute Charles is in negotiations to take Harry back. If someone stabbed you in the back, would you pull the knife out and hand it back to that person and then turn your back again? Charles isn’t _that_ stupid.


Maybe they are doing up a nice apartment in the Tower of London to welcome him back.


Chanbal said:


>



His pant legs look awfully odd in this photo.


Aimee3 said:


> And if she’s such a vegan, how would she know what eggs taste like?!?
> I can’t stand when people use the word organic for anything that’s not a vegetable or fruit.





lanasyogamama said:


> Did MM ever say she was a vegan or do people just assume that?





CarryOn2020 said:


> _By definition, Meghan considers herself a vegan. But it's a lot more complicated than that. Yes, she's a vegan, but only on weekdays. Over the weekend, she reverts to a standard carnivorous diet but prefers to steer clear of animal protein on other days. In this article, we'll go over Meghan Markle's intriguing diet in depth.
> Article from 9/2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle follows a vegan diet but makes exceptions on weekends
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is no stranger to the limelight. The former Suits star and current Duchess of Sussex has been one of the most talked-about public figures for the past decade or so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sportskeeda.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I saw one interview with her that had her saying on weekdays, she prefers plant-based but on weekends, she is a "flexitarian". Reminds me of an old schoolmate who took the pescatarian option in our dorm because fish was reserved for them, but if the roast beef looked good, she became carnivorous.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

at least we have a new special for the world’s most unappealing restaurant

Mille-feuille de femme anodyne…..


----------



## jelliedfeels

DoggieBags said:


> Next week maybe she’ll try putting both granular and anodyne together in one sentence. Extra points if she manages to also throw in her new word for next week in that same sentence.





CarryOn2020 said:


> So, entries for the new H&M Dictionary, we have:
> 
> _Guttural_ as in _When the Duke of Sussex heard about the Supreme Court judgment revoking the ruling in Roe vs Wade, ‘His reaction last week was guttural, like mine,’ said his wife Meghan Markle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does Meghan Markle know what ‘guttural’ means?
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has said that her reaction to the Roe vs Wade abortion rule by the Supreme Court was ‘gutteral’. But is that the right word?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Granular [the MM podcrash]
> 
> anodyne [the MM podcrash]
> 
> dimensionality [ @marietouchet Hilary Rose addition]
> 
> Note: definitions may vary, depending on your need to sound kinda educated _


I accept your challenge ladies….


Normally, I organically drink only *today’s sponsors* coffee however when I was imprisoned in the palatial dimensionality where my adenoidal  employees would dread to obey even my simplest command due to their deep seated racism and the British obsession with the ranks of nubility. Nonetheless they would be dispatched with my trademark precisitude to *sponsor’s coffee chain* where these licksplits would purchase my toffee nut latte and while advocating that the anodyne syrup be added to the granular levels and the accompanying assiette of meringue contain no eggs.

Upon the commencement of their return, I will be emetically engaged with the probing and timely questions to invigorate and expurgate and lubricate them in empowering a woman of colour through making the right choices. I will not choose to coddle white mediocrity if I discover that an aspect of my ordinance has been preponderantly and peevishly negated in the interests of further neglecting, negating and nebulising the mental health incapacitations of the dilettante duchess. Then my entropic exclamation  would be guttural as I empowered and assayed and launched the vessel of imbibition and imbibing into the visage of the patriarchal oppressor.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> I used the spoiler because this tweet needs a sensitive warning - it is the old, nude photo of Hazzi in Vegas. Gross, I know.
> For someone with such a sanctimonious wife, some may need a reminder not to feel sorry for the spare.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler




Oh, why did I click on the spoiler?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I used the spoiler because this tweet needs a sensitive warning - it is the old, nude photo of Hazzi in Vegas. Gross, I know.
> For someone with such a sanctimonious wife, some may need a reminder not to feel sorry for the spare.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler



Ugh, my eyes!  My eyes!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Oh, why did I click on the spoiler?


You beat me to it!!!  LOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> _By definition, Meghan considers herself a vegan. But it's a lot more complicated than that. Yes, she's a vegan, but only on weekdays. Over the weekend, she reverts to a standard carnivorous diet but prefers to steer clear of animal protein on other days. In this article, we'll go over Meghan Markle's intriguing diet in depth.
> Article from 9/2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle follows a vegan diet but makes exceptions on weekends
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle is no stranger to the limelight. The former Suits star and current Duchess of Sussex has been one of the most talked-about public figures for the past decade or so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.sportskeeda.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


So, it's kind of like she wants to save herself for marriage, but it's girls gone wild on weekends?

WTAF.


----------



## periogirl28

jelliedfeels said:


> I accept your challenge ladies….
> 
> 
> Normally, I organically drink only *today’s sponsors* coffee however when I was imprisoned in the palatial dimensionality where my adenoidal  employees would dread to obey even my simplest command due to their deep seated racism and the British obsession with the ranks of nubility. Nonetheless they would be dispatched with my trademark precisitude to *sponsor’s coffee chain* where these licksplits would purchase my toffee nut latte and while advocating that the anodyne syrup be added to the granular levels and the accompanying assiette of meringue contain no eggs.
> 
> Upon the commencement of their return, I will be emetically engaged with the probing and timely questions to invigorate and expurgate and lubricate them in empowering a woman of colour through making the right choices. I will not choose to coddle white mediocrity if I discover that an aspect of my ordinance has been preponderantly and peevishly negated in the interests of further neglecting, negating and nebulising the mental health incapacitations of the dilettante duchess. Then my entropic exclamation  would be guttural as I empowered and assayed and launched the vessel of imbibition and imbibing into the visage of the patriarchal oppressor.


You actually make more sense to me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Oh please. Chelsey is newly married with a baby, and Cressida is married and due any day. Not only do I have a hard time believing they are hiding in a hotel to meet Harry, I find it extremely disrespectful to these two (not you, the Twitter person).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> she's a vegan and she did roast chicken for H?  handling raw chicken?



I mean, consistency isn't necessarily key for her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Did MM ever say she was a vegan or do people just assume that?



She has, but to be fair IIRC she never claimed to be anything but a lifestyle vegan during the week to maintain weight and to indulge on weekends...which would make her a flexitarian I guess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wasn't familiar with Real Reality Gossip, but apparently it's a black entertainment channel.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh. I'm on day 10 with a nasty flu-like infection my sister gave me by being completely inconsiderate. I had to go off my work-out schedule, ate too much junk to comfort myself, I'm in massive pain because it went to my joints, my face is peeling in several spots and I just now discovered a sizeable herpes blister on my lip that is not done growing yet. I have a funeral to go to on Saturday and I need to start Christmas baking and candy making on Monday.

It would really lift my mood if Charles could make another announcement what he's planning to take away from the terrorists or even better Harry revealing he's going back to the UK with the children. One can daydream.


----------



## jelliedfeels

periogirl28 said:


> You actually make more sense to me.


In retrospect, I think her *sponsor’s coffee shop* order would be at least a paragraph in its own right but I’m sure you’ve all got better things to do than read about triple pump gluten-free wheatgerm lattes.


----------



## 880

gracekelly said:


> Mine is guttural and layered whilst being anodyne.


This sounds like a mediocre threesome

i hope you feel better soon @QueenofWrapDress


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EverSoElusive

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I'm on day 10 with a nasty flu-like infection my sister gave me by being completely inconsiderate. I had to go off my work-out schedule, ate too much junk to comfort myself, I'm in massive pain because it went to my joints, my face is peeling in several spots and I just now discovered a sizeable herpes blister on my lip that is not done growing yet. I have a funeral to go to on Saturday and I need to start Christmas baking and candy making on Monday.
> 
> It would really lift my mood if Charles could make another announcement what he's planning to take away from the terrorists or even better Harry revealing he's going back to the UK with the children. One can daydream.


Feel better soon


----------



## EverSoElusive

We might as well change it to Harry's picture and replace the word girlfriend with wife


----------



## piperdog

But is there anyone who really wants him back, and is Harry even worth $1.50 and a bag of chips?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, consistency isn't necessarily key for her.


and "her truth" isn't necessarily true


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTFFF. If greed was like leprosy she only could leave the house with her face covered.


----------



## sdkitty

Andrew Morton: Princess Diana Would Feel ‘Conflicted’ Over Prince Harry
					

Princess Diana was the ultimate royal rebel. But Andrew Morton, as he publishes a new biography of Queen Elizabeth, says the late princess would be troubled by Harry’s behavior.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> Andrew Morton: Princess Diana Would Feel ‘Conflicted’ Over Prince Harry
> 
> 
> Princess Diana was the ultimate royal rebel. But Andrew Morton, as he publishes a new biography of Queen Elizabeth, says the late princess would be troubled by Harry’s behavior.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com



Yes, and I also have a nagging feeling she wouldn't adore Ghoul. Like, at all. But I still think she could have never sunk her claws into Harry had Diana lived.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, and I also have a nagging feeling she wouldn't adore Ghoul. Like, at all. But I still think she could have never sunk her claws into Harry had Diana lived.


Hard to say.  She might have been charmed by her initially.   We'll never know.  I do think she'd likely be disappointed in him now.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTFFF. If greed was like leprosy she only could leave the house with her face covered.



Story does not make entire sense, she did elephant video when part of BRF , there was no Archewell at the time, there was SussexRoyal 
And I don’t know UK tax law, but I doubt she was interested in SR claiming a tax credit 
She was probably paid in the US though via the staff she kept there while in the UK 
The details of the story are goofy, the main thrust of it may be true


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> I accept your challenge ladies….
> 
> 
> Normally, I organically drink only *today’s sponsors* coffee however when I was imprisoned in the palatial dimensionality where my adenoidal  employees would dread to obey even my simplest command due to their deep seated racism and the British obsession with the ranks of nubility. Nonetheless they would be dispatched with my trademark precisitude to *sponsor’s coffee chain* where these licksplits would purchase my toffee nut latte and while advocating that the anodyne syrup be added to the granular levels and the accompanying assiette of meringue contain no eggs.
> 
> Upon the commencement of their return, I will be emetically engaged with the probing and timely questions to invigorate and expurgate and lubricate them in empowering a woman of colour through making the right choices. I will not choose to coddle white mediocrity if I discover that an aspect of my ordinance has been preponderantly and peevishly negated in the interests of further neglecting, negating and nebulising the mental health incapacitations of the dilettante duchess. Then my entropic exclamation  would be guttural as I empowered and assayed and launched the vessel of imbibition and imbibing into the visage of the patriarchal oppressor.


Well done ! Did you like the coffee? Did you even fricking drink it ? Must not have been tailored to perfection? Do you drink your coffee black these days ? LOL


----------



## bag-mania

piperdog said:


> But is there anyone who really wants him back, and is Harry even worth $1.50 and a bag of chips?


Does anyone know who his close friends were when he met Meghan? Other than his cousin and Nacho, no one has come to see him that we know about.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Story does not make entire sense, she did elephant video when part of BRF , there was no Archewell at the time, there was SussexRoyal



Did she though. The documentary was available from late March, they left early January. I have never worked for Disney obviously, but I've worked on TV stuff and the voiceover is usually the finishing touch after the footage has been cut. Also, as a freelancer I'm not necessarily always paid the minute I deliver work....first I need to bill the client, then they need to pay me, and some projects aren't paid until they are made public. If she did the voiceover in late 2019 she would have already known they'd leave.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know who his close friends were when he met Meghan? Other than his cousin and Nacho, no one has come to see him that we know about.



They are mostly family friends with ties to Charles...the kids all grew up together. E.g. the van Cutsem brothers, the van Straubenzee brothers, Tom Inskip (didn't he visit in Montecito once...when they went on the bike ride?).


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did she though. The documentary was available from late March, they left early January. I have never worked for Disney obviously, but I've worked on TV stuff and the voiceover is usually the finishing touch after the footage has been cut. Also, as a freelancer I'm not necessarily always paid the minute I deliver work....first I need to bill the client, then they need to pay me, and some projects aren't paid until they are made public. If she did the voiceover in late 2019 she would have already known they'd leave.


I stand corrected … thank you

PS HandM were in the BRF when soliciting Disney work at Lion king Premiere, so, I was convinced the Disney gig was going to benefit a UK foundation - she saw that the money went to the US/self, very badly done


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, and I also have a nagging feeling she wouldn't adore Ghoul. Like, at all. But I still think she could have never sunk her claws into Harry had Diana lived.


Exactly my thoughts, there would be no Meghan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wasn't familiar with Real Reality Gossip, but apparently it's a black entertainment channel.



It's a very balanced view, thanks for posting this! 

Unless you are JJ or Kerry K who allegedly have a history of bullying and lying, I can't see any decent person support TW. I read somewhere that some sugars/stans receive payments. I would think they are the ones that instigate others to support this self-serving couple.




Spoiler: Kerry K












						Bitter Kerry Kennedy uses RFK charity to travel and party with celebs
					

RFK's daughter Kerry is acts like the dictator of a banana republic at her father's charity while she enriches herself off its coffers and has no real direction - according to several former employees.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

we all wondered why so many people are credited on Archetpes …

Is Meghan REALLY speaking with the guests on her podcast? Journalist thanked producer for interview | Daily Mail Online










						So is Meghan Markle REALLY speaking with the guests on her podcast?
					

In an Instagram post, Allison Yarrow, a guest on the Duchess of Sussexes' Archetypes podcast  thanked a producer from Gimlet Media for 'an excellent interview'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know who his close friends were when he met Meghan? Other than his cousin and Nacho, no one has come to see him that we know about.


One of them did last year, Tom von Straubenzee I believe. The paps caught them riding around Montecito on electric bikes. Sad that I know this


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They are mostly family friends with ties to Charles...the kids all grew up together. E.g. the van Cutsem brothers, the van Straubenzee brothers, Tom Inskip (didn't he visit in Montecito once...when they went on the bike ride?).


Oops I should have read further


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> Hard to say.  She might have been charmed by her initially.   We'll never know.  I do think she'd likely be disappointed in him now.


Yep, Diana also had questionable taste in friends, so who knows?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I'm on day 10 with a nasty flu-like infection my sister gave me by being completely inconsiderate. I had to go off my work-out schedule, ate too much junk to comfort myself, I'm in massive pain because it went to my joints, my face is peeling in several spots and I just now discovered a sizeable herpes blister on my lip that is not done growing yet. I have a funeral to go to on Saturday and I need to start Christmas baking and candy making on Monday.
> 
> It would really lift my mood if Charles could make another announcement what he's planning to take away from the terrorists or even better Harry revealing he's going back to the UK with the children. One can daydream.


Aww I hope you feel better soon. I had some non-COVID crud that I couldn't shake for over two weeks.


----------



## Toby93

Hmmm.....I was browsing the LV site, and saw that they have these on their holiday list.  Do you think the TW will be suing them for copyright infringement?


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if some journalists stopped watching the podcasts. I can't blame them, it must be torture.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Yep, Diana also had questionable taste in friends, so who knows?


we know that even though most of us her don't like her, she is very capable of making friends and charming people


----------



## Chanbal

Why is TP allegedly promoting moral bankruptcy?


----------



## Chanbal

Humor from Twitter!


----------



## CarryOn2020

The CoS should be resolved next week.  Apparently, it is easier, less messy, to _add_ people to the list rather than to _remove_ people.  Makes sense, maybe the non-working royals will renounce.  It certainly makes the three look power-hungry imo.










						'Counsellors of state' was 'high up on the King's To Do list'
					

Speaking to Vanity Fair, former Buckingham Palace spokesperson Dickie Arbiter told how the decision taken by the King was an 'important and significant one.'




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Yep, Diana also had questionable taste in friends, so who knows?



Sure, but she'd have quickly seen how her son changed for the worse. No mother likes that.


----------



## duna

lallybelle said:


> Jameela Jamil is one of the most annoying people on the planet. That's my hot take of the day.


One person less for me to be annoyed by: I have NO idea who this lady is


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> and "her truth" isn't necessarily true


It's her feelings that matter. Subjective truth, used to be called opinion  


bag-mania said:


> Does anyone know who his close friends were when he met Meghan? Other than his cousin and Nacho, no one has come to see him that we know about.


I thought they were all either scared off by her tantrum over the wrong shade of red, or her insulting crazy combative woke behaviour.

Frankly, I'm certain she would have been an utter failure as a diplomat since she lacks diplomacy. If she ended up in an embassy somewhere, it would have been because she showed promise as a honey trap. There was a story that she allegedly got booted out of her internship because she seduced someone.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did she though. The documentary was available from late March, they left early January. I have never worked for Disney obviously, but I've worked on TV stuff and the voiceover is usually the finishing touch after the footage has been cut. Also, as a freelancer I'm not necessarily always paid the minute I deliver work....first I need to bill the client, then they need to pay me, and some projects aren't paid until they are made public. If she did the voiceover in late 2019 she would have already known they'd leave.


DH did contractor work for Disney and I've worked in media. Payment terms are dependant on the contract, but in this case, since there was actually no payment due to her, it gets murky. I find the story of her so obviously pocketing the money rather dubious but can believe she would manipulate the situation to slyly siphon it off. The paper trail from Disney to her or Archewell should be clear. After that, it is likely that the money gets swallowed into her spider web of companies and funnelled till the trail is obfuscated.


Chanbal said:


> Why is TP allegedly promoting moral bankruptcy?



Does the timeline even make sense? I thought the baby formula shortage happened when they had already fled to Monteshitshow? Are they implying that during that lightning fast visit to TQ, she found time in her draggy pants and costly Nail to go to the shops to search for baby formula?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lallybelle

^^ LOL. She's an actress. I mostly know her from her running her mouth all the time.

About Diana, I think Harry & MeMe's cult have a warped sense of how Diana would love her and think it was so great that Harry "got out". NOPE. While Diana had her issues with the Palace and wanted her boys to grow up knowing some normalcy, she was extremely proud that the boys were a part of it. Especially that William would be King. Had she lived, I believe she would have continued as she planned, helping them learn their roles and trying to balance that with a loving environment. I also think she would have encouraged Harry to get any help he might need, and she'd be horrified at him slamming the family, especially his brother.


----------



## bag-mania

duna said:


> One person less for me to be annoyed by: I *have NO idea who this lady is*


Me neither. Fortunately nothing about her is interesting enough to retain any memory of her. I’ll file her away as another desperate self- promoter.


----------



## sgj99

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if some journalists stopped watching the podcasts. I can't blame them, it must be torture.



It would be very deserving if her podcast tanked.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> The CoS should be resolved next week.  Apparently, it is easier, less messy, to _add_ people to the list rather than _remove_ people.  Makes sense, maybe the non-working royals will renounce.  It certainly makes the three look power-hungry imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Counsellors of state' was 'high up on the King's To Do list'
> 
> 
> Speaking to Vanity Fair, former Buckingham Palace spokesperson Dickie Arbiter told how the decision taken by the King was an 'important and significant one.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Who's the third, Bea? Andrew and Harry shouldn't cling to anything, but I don't see how it makes her power-hungry to accept a position that comes with her position in the family. In fact, unless it comes out she's secretly a fan of Ghoul I have no beef with Bea. She doesn't seek out the spotlight.

Interesting tidbit, though (thanks to Valentine Low): apparently Bea came to the meeting before Andrew gave the awful interview re: Guiffre that was the last nail to his coffin, and was described by attendees as "the power in the room". Who would have thought.


----------



## rose60610

lallybelle said:


> ^^ LOL. She's an actress. I mostly know her from her running her mouth all the time.
> 
> About Diana, I think Harry & MeMe's cult have a warped sense of how Diana would love her and think it was so great that Harry "got out". NOPE. While Diana had her issues with the Palace and wanted her boys to grow up knowing some normalcy, she was extremely proud that the boys were a part of it. Especially that William would be King. Had she lived, I believe she would have continued as she planned, helping them learn their roles and trying to balance that with a loving environment. I also think she would have encouraged Harry to get any help he might need, and she'd be horrified at him slamming the family, especially his brother.



Agree. I also think that Diana could have seen Claw coming a mile away and knocked some sense into Haz, more so than Charles. At least I'd like to think so, in terms of recognizing a social climbing fraud. Even if the BRF tried to persuade Haz, I think Diana would have had a little more impact. Certainly Claw would have been gushing over her (while trying to replace her at the same time) and Diana would have recognized this. On the other hand, Haz is responsible for himself and has only himself to blame for his disastrous marital decision. Maybe a BetterUp coach can make some good divorce lawyer suggestions.


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> Agree. I also think that Diana could have seen Claw coming a mile away and knocked some sense into Haz, more so than Charles. At least I'd like to think so, in terms of recognizing a social climbing fraud. Even if the BRF tried to persuade Haz, I think Diana would have had a little more impact. Certainly Claw would have been gushing over her (while trying to replace her at the same time) and Diana would have recognized this. On the other hand, Haz is responsible for himself and has only himself to blame for his disastrous marital decision. Maybe a BetterUp coach can make some good divorce lawyer suggestions.


Diana would have kept tabs on what her sons were doing much more than Charles did. I can’t say that Harry wouldn’t still have had drug and alcohol issues in his teens but I bet it would have been addressed much sooner than it was had she been alive.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes, and I also have a nagging feeling she wouldn't adore Ghoul. Like, at all. But I still think she could have never sunk her claws into Harry had Diana lived.


Yeah I concur, While I obv can’t say what her influence would be had she lived think there would be less of this frenzied haste to marriage and thus M would have let the mask slip and been swiftly excised. 

My reasoning being:-
1. Diana rolled with a lot of influential celebs so I don’t think the ‘Megsy is a big star’ story would have sold to her or even the public if the future MIL was still chilling with Bowie, Elton and George Michael and knew all the LA gossip. Chaz by contrast probably prides himself in being oblivious., Obviously other royals have some links to celebs but Diana was the one with the real A star taste. I mean Will has Ellie Goulding and Haz James corden  by comparison  
2. Even if you don’t like her I think you’ve got to admit Diana was majorly influential in how the royals now handle their media presence and she is a big factor in their current interest in *ahem* ‘relatability and emotions’ over their previous preference for stagey stoicism and a certain aloofness. Anyway, what I’m coming to is were she alive I don’t think they’d have been quite so starved for pizazz as they were to consider a plain Z lister to be the lifeboat of star quality they we’re looking for.
3. I just don’t think the ‘I’m a WOC so if there’s ever a problem you are racists ’ thing would have worked so well. I mean obviously Diana was white but she didn’t seem to have the awkwardness about engaging in discussions of race that M has always banked on.
4. I mean what would H be like if he didn’t have his sad backstory? Maybe he would be less motivated by envy and sadism but we can certainly say the public would give his whining less sympathetic credence in that scenario anyway.




Chanbal said:


> Why is TP allegedly promoting moral bankruptcy?



I actually laughed at the comment that TP might have slept with M. I mean she’s pale and her clothes are bursting  off but she’s no chiselled lightskin chippendale.

Maybe she’s blackmailing him with an outing as I suppose his fear that his core audience of older ‘religious’ types are more homophobic than the general public might not be entirely unfounded but that still seems sad.

Also wouldn’t it be illegal to bring formula over from abroad and that’s why people didn’t do it in the first place?

 It’s a sh*^** situation caused by corporate greed and negligence either way.


----------



## gracekelly

i think she was Markled by Disney because she did a lousy job with something that had already be done by a name actress and she was difficult to work with. They were doing her a favor because Harry begged for her  and it flopped. They don’t need her or anyone of her family.


----------



## gracekelly

Two attention hungry women in the same room, Diana and Meghan, would not have worked. An explosion would have resulted.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> i think she was Markled by Disney because she did a lousy job with something that had already be done by a name actress and she was difficult to work with. They were doing her a favor because Harry begged for her  and it flopped. They don’t need her or anyone of her family.


Yep. It was a nature documentary and Disney threw her a bone because Harry outright asked Bob Iger for it at the premiere. Had Meghan been an exceptional narrator they may have used her for other projects but the quality wasn’t there.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Yep. It was a nature documentary and Disney threw her a bone because Harry outright asked Bob Iger for it at the premiere. Had Meghan been an exceptional narrator they may have used her for other projects but the quality wasn’t there.


Gosh, she was just trying to make elephants sound sexy with her narration. Is that no bueno?


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sure, but she'd have quickly seen how her son changed for the worse. No mother likes that.


My thought is that if Diana had not died, Hazz might have grown up without the massive chip on his shoulder and going through life pretending to be a victim?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who's the third, Bea? Andrew and Harry shouldn't cling to anything, but I don't see how it makes her power-hungry to accept a position that comes with her position in the family. In fact, unless it comes out she's secretly a fan of Ghoul I have no beef with Bea. She doesn't seek out the spotlight.
> 
> Interesting tidbit, though (thanks to Valentine Low): apparently Bea came to the meeting before Andrew gave the awful interview re: Guiffre that was the last nail to his coffin, and was described by attendees as "the power in the room". Who would have thought.


Yes, Bea is the third.  Imo, since the CoS steps in for the monarch, they should be people who are participating *actively* in the running of the monarchy.  If they are non-workers, then how can they _know_ what is going on?  Sure, they can read the papers, but there is more to ‘_knowing_’ than merely reading about it.  I can _know_ how to bake a pumpkin bread, but that is not the same as actually making it.  

As for Bea, why would she want the job?  She is not a working member, not actively involved in the daily tasks.  It takes time, effort, energy to brief outsiders on all the details. In an emergency, there is not always time.  Time spent briefing the uninformed non-workers takes precious time and energy away from the task at hand.  Other than power, why would the non-worker want the job?

The old saying may apply: _Tell me, I forget. Show me,  I remember.  Involve me, I understand._  Non-workers, by definition are uninvolved.  Why should they suddenly be at the helm?  Makes no sense to me. 
======
 wishes for a speedy recovery


----------



## Sharont2305

bag-mania said:


> Diana would have kept tabs on what her sons were doing much more than Charles did. I can’t say that Harry wouldn’t still have had drug and alcohol issues in his teens but I bet it would have been addressed much sooner than it was had she been alive.


^ This. 
If Diana were alive today, we would be seeing a very different Harry.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, Bea is the third.  Imo, since the CoS steps in for the monarch, they should be people who are participating *actively* in the running of the monarchy.  If they are non-workers, then how can they _know_ what is going on?  Sure, they can read the papers, but there is more to ‘_knowing_’ than merely reading about it.  I can _know_ how to bake a pumpkin bread, but that is not the same as actually making it.



You are absolutely not wrong, but that is not her fault, that's a faulty system.



CarryOn2020 said:


> As for Bea, why would she want the job?  She is not a working member, not actively involved in the daily tasks.  It takes time, effort, energy to brief outsiders on all the details. In an emergency, there is not always time.  Time spent briefing the uninformed non-workers takes precious time and energy away from the task at hand.  Other than power, why would the non-worker want the job?



A sense of duty maybe? I don't have children, I'm not the fun aunt who dies to spend time with them, and I have no clue how to not kill a baby besides basic common sense. But I'd take on my siblings'/cousins' child in a heartbeat, no questions asked, if there ever came up a situation where that was needed. Even a clueless Bea would have a bunch of advisors (the people who help run the show as their daily bread anyway) plus she's still pretty much down the pecking order.



CarryOn2020 said:


> wishes for a speedy recovery



Thank you


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



I know I'm old but I've never really seen much difference between talk radio and podcasts. It is very difficult to be a successful talk radio host day in and day out. Not that I was ever a fan of them, but I can understand why Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh were successful. You really have to have the "gift of gab", which MM does not possess. Her podcasts do not sound like they're insightful, thought provoking or humorous. They're just her self-aggrandizement showcase.


----------



## charlottawill

So here's my 2023 vision for the Harkles. After the divorce he gets the kids, moves to Africa with them and hires a nanny there, they fall in love and live happily ever after. Straight out of Lifetime movie, no?


----------



## charlottawill

sgj99 said:


> It would be very deserving if her podcast tanked.


I think it's a when not an if.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> A sense of duty maybe?


Possibly.  Imo [and I am not arguing with your insight, I’m really trying to understand the system], it seems a sense of duty would tell the non-worker to step aside for the experienced, working royal.  For me,  it is the fact that these 3 people are _non-working royals_.  Shouldn’t the working royals have more of a voice?  I can easily envision a scenario where Hazz tries to worm his way into the power role.



charlottawill said:


> I know I'm old but I've never really seen much difference between talk radio and podcasts. It is very difficult to be a successful talk radio host day in and day out. Not that I was ever a fan of them, but I can understand why Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh were successful. You really have to have the "gift of gab", which MM does not possess. Her podcasts do not sound like they're insightful, thought provoking or humorous. They're just her self-aggrandizement showcase.


Howard, Rush, and Don Imus all had a team they worked with.  They were the leaders but not the whole show. Imo a strong podcast or talk show needs more than a host and an interviewee.  Two people talking can become very dull very quickly.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Howard, Rush, and Don Imus all had a team they worked with.  They were the leaders but not the whole show. Imo a strong podcast or talk show needs more than a host and an interviewee.  Two people talking can become very dull very quickly.


I forgot all about Imus, and he was the OG of the shock jocks. He was on when I was in high school.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I forgot all about Imus, and he was the OG of the shock jocks. He was on when I was in high school.


 didn’t always agree with Imus, but thoroughly enjoyed his show - always learned something.  He left a huge gap 

He would most definitely have had a strong opinion on H&M


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can easily envision a scenario where Hazz tries to worm his way into the power role.


If the Harkles had stayed in the UK and toed the royal line he may have moved to the front of the line in the future. But he has proven to be untrustworthy so he's toast as a CoS.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I know I'm old but I've never really seen much difference between talk radio and podcasts. It is very difficult to be a successful talk radio host day in and day out. Not that I was ever a fan of them, but I can understand why Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh were successful. You really have to have the "gift of gab", which MM does not possess. Her podcasts do not sound like they're insightful, thought provoking or humorous. They're just her self-aggrandizement showcase.


The true test of a good talk show radio host is can he/she handle live callers. 

Nowadays they screen the callers to make sure they stay on topic and to weed out the nutcases, but years ago the hosts would have to deal with whoever dialed the phone. It took a quick mind and a good sense of humor.  Someone like Meghan, who needs everything scripted for her, couldn’t hack it on radio.


----------



## charlottawill

Here's a five dollar word for TW. Let's hope the RF doesn't experience any "recrudescence" for the coronation.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> ^ This.
> If Diana were alive today, we would be seeing a very different Harry.


I wonder about that.  She didn't trash the Royal Family, but she had a chip on her shoulder where Charles was concerned.  If she continued her socially downward spiral, Harry could have morphed into being Eurotrash.



charlottawill said:


> Here's a five dollar word for TW. Let's hope the RF doesn't experience any "recrudescence" for the coronation.



I wonder if that is the origin of the word "crud"


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh. I'm on day 10 with a nasty flu-like infection my sister gave me by being completely inconsiderate. I had to go off my work-out schedule, ate too much junk to comfort myself, I'm in massive pain because it went to my joints, my face is peeling in several spots and I just now discovered a sizeable herpes blister on my lip that is not done growing yet. I have a funeral to go to on Saturday and I need to start Christmas baking and candy making on Monday.
> 
> It would really lift my mood if Charles could make another announcement what he's planning to take away from the terrorists or even better Harry revealing he's going back to the UK with the children. One can daydream.


Feel better soon!


----------



## bag-mania

More of Tyler Perry's continual and baffling promotion of Meghan. The woman is never seen with her own children but she will drop everything and go searching for baby formula if Tyler asks. "Act of kindness" indeed, it must be more of her audacious advocacy (i.e. kissing up to Tyler) at work.  

I noticed it doesn't say Meghan was successful in finding the formula, but she must get all the credit as a humanitarian for going to a store to look for it.

Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage​The Duchess of Sussex personally searched for the essential while abroad earlier this year, the _Madea_ director said​Meghan Markle went out of her way for a family in need.

While speaking on stage at the Baby2Baby Gala in West Hollywood on Tuesday night, Tyler Perry revealed that the Duchess of Sussex, 41, personally searched stores for baby formula during the national shortage earlier this year.

According to _Vanity Fair_, the 53-year-old writer/director told the crowd of 800 that he was approached by an employee desperate to find formula for their child during the crisis. Perry's own hunt was unsuccessful, inspiring him to turn to friends across the pond: Meghan and Prince Harry. The California-based couple was in the U.K. at the time (likely for Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration in June), and Meghan went out looking for the formula herself, Perry said.

Meghan and the _Madea _director have a history of helping each other out. While Meghan and Harry, 38, transitioned out of their senior royals roles in 2020, they stayed at Perry's Los Angeles estate, living in the Beverly Hills mansion with their son Archie Harrison for a few months before buying a home in Montecito. They would welcome their daughter Lilibet Diana in June 2021.









						Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage
					

Meghan Markle personally searched for baby formula for a family in need earlier this year, Tyler Perry said at the Baby2Baby Gala




					people.com


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> More of Tyler Perry's continual and baffling promotion of Meghan. The woman is never seen with her own children but she will drop everything and go searching for baby formula if Tyler asks. "Act of kindness" indeed, it must be more of her audacious advocacy (i.e. kissing up to Tyler) at work.
> 
> I noticed it doesn't say Meghan was successful in finding the formula, but she must get all the credit as a humanitarian for going to a store to look for it.
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage​The Duchess of Sussex personally searched for the essential while abroad earlier this year, the _Madea_ director said​Meghan Markle went out of her way for a family in need.
> 
> While speaking on stage at the Baby2Baby Gala in West Hollywood on Tuesday night, Tyler Perry revealed that the Duchess of Sussex, 41, personally searched stores for baby formula during the national shortage earlier this year.
> 
> According to _Vanity Fair_, the 53-year-old writer/director told the crowd of 800 that he was approached by an employee desperate to find formula for their child during the crisis. Perry's own hunt was unsuccessful, inspiring him to turn to friends across the pond: Meghan and Prince Harry. The California-based couple was in the U.K. at the time (likely for Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration in June), and Meghan went out looking for the formula herself, Perry said.
> 
> Meghan and the _Madea _director have a history of helping each other out. While Meghan and Harry, 38, transitioned out of their senior royals roles in 2020, they stayed at Perry's Los Angeles estate, living in the Beverly Hills mansion with their son Archie Harrison for a few months before buying a home in Montecito. They would welcome their daughter Lilibet Diana in June 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle personally searched for baby formula for a family in need earlier this year, Tyler Perry said at the Baby2Baby Gala
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


The Baby2Baby gala that she and Harry were conspicuously absent from? Oh I know, previous commitments yada yada....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage​



What's his deal? 

The whole story is slightly weird. I don't think I'd ask my boss for help finding baby formula unless he ran a grocery store or pharmacy, but that's just me. Also, if that story even remotely happened she went so personally as she personally baked banana bread (by having her staff redo it until late so she could pass it off as her own the next day).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

@QueenofWrapDress   So sorry to hear that you are under the weather.  I hope we can keep you amused and H&M will do their best to give us material to do it!  Get well soon!


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The Baby2Baby gala that she and Harry were conspicuously absent from? Oh I know, previous commitments yada yada....


He baffles me.  Why is he so invested in them?  He must be a bleeding heart underneath it all.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> The Baby2Baby gala that she and Harry were conspicuously absent from? Oh I know, previous commitments yada yada....





QueenofWrapDress said:


> What's his deal?
> 
> The whole story is slightly weird. I don't think I'd ask my boss for help finding baby formula unless he ran a grocery store or pharmacy, but that's just me. Also, if that story even remotely happened she went so personally as she personally baked banana bread (by having her staff redo it until late so she could pass it off as her own the next day).


Kim Kardashian gave $1 million to that charity. Tyler gave half a million dollars. Other celebs donated. 

My guess is Harry and Meghan have never given a cent to Baby2Baby. No reason they would be invited to take up valuable space that more generous attendees could fill. 

_If _the story is true, Tyler knows their whereabouts and he feels comfortable calling her in England to ask a favor. That’s weird to be sure. Maybe he has been propping them up behind the scenes all along and it went beyond just lending them one of his mansions.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> He baffles me.  Why is he so invested in them?  He must be a bleeding heart underneath it all.


I thought that he was a decent person, but I'm questioning my opinion…


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I thought that he was a decent person, but I'm questioning my opinion…



I don't think we can decide that everyone who falls for her BS is a bad person


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I don't think we can decide that everyone who falls for her BS is a bad person


Absolutely. However, after learning about the bullying, the way she treated her family…,  it's very weird that he is still promoting her with what it looks like a lousy story about formula.

If the stories about TW bullying TP's staff are true, it's even worse.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> I don't think we can decide that everyone who falls for her BS is a bad person


True, we just do not need to be such enthusiastic supporters and defenders.  Best to have the complete story. With all the crypto news, it certainly seems that many [mostly young-ish ones] have been doing stuff far worse than E Holmes and BernieM did.  Maybe this is the culture that H&M wish to run with? Idk.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He baffles me.  Why is he so invested in them?  He must be a bleeding heart underneath it all.


from what I know of him, he is kind and generous


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Howard, Rush, and Don Imus all had a team they worked with.  They were the leaders but not the whole show. Imo a strong podcast or talk show needs more than a host and an interviewee.  Two people talking can become very dull very quickly.


Terry Gross is the best.  she does her homework and asks insightful questions.  never makes it about herself.  she can make just about any guest interesting.  I'm listening to her inverivew with Misty Copeland.  I wasn't excited about it but it's actually very engaging.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Howard, Rush, and Don Imus all had a team they worked with.  They were the leaders but not the whole show. Imo a strong podcast or talk show needs more than a host and an interviewee.  Two people talking can become very dull very quickly.


They might be ok if they have a really great personality, obv not the case here!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Metaverse - who wants to jump in to the latest thang with the DisasterDuo?



ETA:  this photo may apply to a game and not the real virtual meta world  
This may be what it will look like:










						Celebrities embracing the METAVERSE including Prince Harry and Meghan
					

According to reports, Harry and Megan will join Paris Hilton, Snoop Dogg and Justin Bieber by embracing the metaverse - a virtual space online with avatars of real people.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> Yeah I concur, While I obv can’t say what her influence would be had she lived think there would be less of this frenzied haste to marriage and thus M would have let the mask slip and been swiftly excised.
> 
> My reasoning being:-
> 1. Diana rolled with a lot of influential celebs so I don’t think the ‘Megsy is a big star’ story would have sold to her or even the public if the future MIL was still chilling with Bowie, Elton and George Michael and knew all the LA gossip. Chaz by contrast probably prides himself in being oblivious., Obviously other royals have some links to celebs but Diana was the one with the real A star taste. I mean Will has Ellie Goulding and Haz James corden  by comparison
> 2. Even if you don’t like her I think you’ve got to admit Diana was majorly influential in how the royals now handle their media presence and she is a big factor in their current interest in *ahem* ‘relatability and emotions’ over their previous preference for stagey stoicism and a certain aloofness. Anyway, what I’m coming to is were she alive I don’t think they’d have been quite so starved for pizazz as they were to consider a plain Z lister to be the lifeboat of star quality they we’re looking for.
> 3. I just don’t think the ‘I’m a WOC so if there’s ever a problem you are racists ’ thing would have worked so well. I mean obviously Diana was white but she didn’t seem to have the awkwardness about engaging in discussions of race that M has always banked on.
> 4. I mean what would H be like if he didn’t have his sad backstory? Maybe he would be less motivated by envy and sadism but we can certainly say the public would give his whining less sympathetic credence in that scenario anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually laughed at the comment that TP might have slept with M. I mean she’s pale and her clothes are bursting  off but she’s no chiselled lightskin chippendale.
> 
> Maybe she’s blackmailing him with an outing as I suppose his fear that his core audience of older ‘religious’ types are more homophobic than the general public might not be entirely unfounded but that still seems sad.
> 
> Also wouldn’t it be illegal to bring formula over from abroad and that’s why people didn’t do it in the first place?
> 
> It’s a sh*^** situation caused by corporate greed and negligence either way.


MM sent her PA to store to buy formula and got the credit …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Metaverse - who wants to jump in to the latest thang with the DisasterDuo?
> 
> View attachment 5654215
> 
> ETA:  this photo may apply to a game and not the real virtual meta world
> This may be what it will look like:
> View attachment 5654219
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Celebrities embracing the METAVERSE including Prince Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> According to reports, Harry and Megan will join Paris Hilton, Snoop Dogg and Justin Bieber by embracing the metaverse - a virtual space online with avatars of real people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Wouldn't it be splendid if this turned out to be some kind of modern Jumanji and swallowed them?


----------



## piperdog

bag-mania said:


> More of Tyler Perry's continual and baffling promotion of Meghan. The woman is never seen with her own children but she will drop everything and go searching for baby formula if Tyler asks. "Act of kindness" indeed, it must be more of her audacious advocacy (i.e. kissing up to Tyler) at work.
> 
> I noticed it doesn't say Meghan was successful in finding the formula, but she must get all the credit as a humanitarian for going to a store to look for it.
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage​The Duchess of Sussex personally searched for the essential while abroad earlier this year, the _Madea_ director said​Meghan Markle went out of her way for a family in need.
> 
> While speaking on stage at the Baby2Baby Gala in West Hollywood on Tuesday night, Tyler Perry revealed that the Duchess of Sussex, 41, personally searched stores for baby formula during the national shortage earlier this year.
> 
> According to _Vanity Fair_, the 53-year-old writer/director told the crowd of 800 that he was approached by an employee desperate to find formula for their child during the crisis. Perry's own hunt was unsuccessful, inspiring him to turn to friends across the pond: Meghan and Prince Harry. The California-based couple was in the U.K. at the time (likely for Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration in June), and Meghan went out looking for the formula herself, Perry said.
> 
> Meghan and the _Madea _director have a history of helping each other out. While Meghan and Harry, 38, transitioned out of their senior royals roles in 2020, they stayed at Perry's Los Angeles estate, living in the Beverly Hills mansion with their son Archie Harrison for a few months before buying a home in Montecito. They would welcome their daughter Lilibet Diana in June 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle personally searched for baby formula for a family in need earlier this year, Tyler Perry said at the Baby2Baby Gala
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Well, they did seem to have a lot of free time on their hands during the Jubilee while the rest of the family was off elsewhere celebrating Queen Elizabeth. More likely, if anything she added it to the list of things for staff to get. Or, she sent staff to scour stores to stockpile for her own kids and called it looking for others.


----------



## Chanbal

A couple of interesting posts on TW's podcasts for your entertainment… 

Rankings: >100 sounds about right, but I don't know how to confirm this. 


A kind translation of TW's podcasts


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

So many questions.....


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Metaverse - who wants to jump in to the latest thang with the DisasterDuo?
> 
> View attachment 5654215
> 
> ETA:  this photo may apply to a game and not the real virtual meta world
> This may be what it will look like:
> View attachment 5654219
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Celebrities embracing the METAVERSE including Prince Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> According to reports, Harry and Megan will join Paris Hilton, Snoop Dogg and Justin Bieber by embracing the metaverse - a virtual space online with avatars of real people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I can see how metaverse might work for shopping… However, I would hate to spend my beach vacations on a virtual world.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> So many questions.....



Wait, I think I know this. Weren’t they using old photos for their posts in the months right before Archie was born? She was avoiding having the press calling her “heavily pregnant.”  

ETA: oh this one was for Lilibet! Okay, I have no explanation for it.


----------



## Chanbal

piperdog said:


> Well, they did seem to have a lot of free time on their hands during the Jubilee while the rest of the family was off elsewhere celebrating Queen Elizabeth. More likely, if anything she added it to the list of things for staff to get. Or, she sent staff to scour stores to stockpile for her own kids and called it looking for others.


The purchase of the formula was just part of a PR stunt imo. How would TW know that a person working for TP wanted formula? Why was TP informed of the formula transaction?
TP is a smart man, this is why I'm puzzled about his participation in this. Do they think that their audience is stupid?


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Wait, I think I know this. Weren’t they using old photos for their posts in the months right before Archie was born? She was avoiding having the press calling her “heavily pregnant.”
> 
> ETA: oh this one was for Lilibet! *Okay, I have no explanation for it.*


For the effort:


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


> Here's a five dollar word for TW. Let's hope the RF doesn't experience any "recrudescence" for the coronation.



Well, she has to actually give us a period of relief worth noting because up until now it's been daily unpleasantness from her.


----------



## Annawakes

I think these baffling stories from TP about the formula etc are made up by ZeeZy’s minions.

I mean, he isn’t really going to issue a statement saying “No, I never asked her to find formula.”  

He may have did them some favors in the past (like lending them the house), but these stories propping up Zeezy are just so absurd and trivial.  They aren’t even worth refuting, from TP’s perspective.


----------



## Chanbal

I read that GS has damaged her own legacy in the last years. I wonder if her support to TW and AH is because she has become senile or in need of cash (or both).


----------



## Chanbal

Annawakes said:


> I think these baffling stories from TP about the formula etc are made up by ZeeZy’s minions.
> 
> I mean, he isn’t really going to issue a statement saying “No, I never asked her to find formula.”
> 
> He may have did them some favors in the past (like lending them the house), but these stories propping up Zeezy are just so absurd and trivial.  They aren’t even worth refuting, from TP’s perspective.


I would agree with you but apparently he told the story to about 800 people. Unless this is a fake story published by VF. 

_Speaking at the annual Baby2Baby Gala, which raises funds for children living in poverty, he recalled how he told his staff member that the Duchess of Sussex, who was in London at the time, 'was going to stores on their behalf', reported Vanity Fair. 

Mr Perry told the story to a group of 800 guests gathered together at Los Angeles’s Pacific Design Center on Saturday night. It's unclear when exactly the call to Meghan and Harry took place.








						Tyler Perry says Meghan Markle visited UK stores for infant formula
					

The American actor, 53, told his staff member that the Duchess of Sussex, who was in London at the time, last year, 'was going to stores on their behalf', reported Vanity Fair.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Annawakes

^^Ah.  I missed that detail!


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I don't think we can decide that everyone who falls for her BS is a bad person


Lots of people get deluded by charming con artists. He would not be the first.


sdkitty said:


> from what I know of him, he is kind and generous


Kind and generous people are targeted by narcs.

Let's say from Tyler's POV, the story is true. He did contact Zed during the Jubilee to ask her to look for baby formula. She assures him that she will personally look into it.

(After 3 hours of primping her extensions and haranguing the palace staff for allegedly serving her a less than 100% vegan meal plus lecturing them on the virtues of eggs from rescued chickens, she calls him back.)

Zed: Oh Tyler honey! (makes kissy noises). I tried, I really tried! I walked to ten shops and supermarkets but I really couldn't find baby formula. (shrieks softly) OMG does that mean there is a shortage here too? What am I going to do? My baby needs formula!

London was filled with the media covering the Jubilee. Not a single pap or non-journalist saw her searching for baby formula? But the paps managed to capture a long distance snap of her and her handbag shushing kids at a window? Colour me surprised.

I think she conned Tyler and deliberately reminded him of the incident, knowing that he might incorporate it into his speech and/or tell others about it at the event. Getting others to vouch for her compassion is more credible than if she bragged about it herself. I call BS and it never happened.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The purchase of the formula was just part of a PR stunt imo. *How would TW know that a person working for TP wanted formula? Why was TP informed of the formula transaction?*
> TP is a smart man, this is why I'm puzzled about his participation in this. Do they think that their audience is stupid?


That’s what I cannot get over. Tyler called her back in June to ask her to look for baby formula in England for one of his employees. She didn’t find any, but Tyler makes a point of taking time at the charity event in November to tell an audience that _she tried_. Why?

From VF:
Last year, in the midst of the global infant formula shortage that left shelves across the world empty and families scrambling to feed their young children, an employee who works for *Tyler Perry* came to their boss for help. Their kid needed formula, and, like millions of families at that moment, they couldn’t find it anywhere. Not in store after store, city after city, state after state. Perry began the hunt on their behalf and came up empty. He ended up calling *Prince Harry* and *Meghan Markle*, who, at the time, were in London, asking if stores across the pond were as hard up as those in the US. He told his employee that Markle was going to stores on their behalf. That’s how dire the crisis was.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Reddit has some comments about this TP story:



===
_It just doesn't make sense. He's incredibly rich and connected, he could easily have gotten formula for people flown in. He didn't need to call a member of the royal family to go prowl local stores . Do they think people are this dumb? 
===
He could fly the family anywhere in the world to get formula. He’s a billionaire. It’s so odd that he keeps mentioning this married woman.

ETA: a few more  

"Meghan Markle quietly..." Right, I can stop reading. 
===
She's always doing things quietly, but yet the world somehow finds out. 
===
where was she when i needed toilet paper? 
===
The power of that thing she calls "my voice." ^-^_


----------



## DL Harper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit has some comments about this TP story:
> 
> 
> 
> ===
> _It just doesn't make sense. He's incredibly rich and connected, he could easily have gotten formula for people flown in. He didn't need to call a member of the royal family to go prowl local stores . Do they think people are this dumb?
> ===
> He could fly the family anywhere in the world to get formula. He’s a billionaire. It’s so odd that he keeps mentioning this married woman.
> 
> ETA: a few more
> 
> "Meghan Markle quietly..." Right, I can stop reading.
> ===
> She's always doing things quietly, but yet the world somehow finds out.
> ===
> where was she when i needed toilet paper?
> ===
> The power of that thing she calls "my voice." ^-^_



TP wouldn't be foolish enough to be MM's next victim husband, would he???


----------



## sdkitty

DL Harper said:


> TP wouldn't be foolish enough to be MM's next victim husband, would he???


hope not
I used to think he was gay...then he supposedly had a girlfriend - then he married her?  then they split?  lots of contradictions doing a google search
Judging by the fortune he has amassed, he isn't stupid but I suppose business and personal are two different things


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania




----------



## DL Harper

sdkitty said:


> hope not
> I used to think he was gay...then he supposedly had a girlfriend - then he married her?  then they split?  lots of contradictions doing a google search
> Judging by the fortune he has amassed, he isn't stupid but I suppose *business and personal are two different things*


Exactly.  He does have a child from that relationship/marriage.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5654286


she isn't an interviewer....she's an attention seeker


----------



## rose60610

Her guest are excuses for her to blabber her stupid mouth off. About herself. Comments about her on other sites are NOT flattering.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> View attachment 5654286


And they chose a photo where she is applauding herself - so apt!


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> And they chose a photo where she is applauding herself - so apt!


The caption was not-so-subtle shade.


----------



## Katel

Annawakes said:


> I think these baffling stories from TP about the formula etc are made up by ZeeZy’s minions.
> 
> I mean, he isn’t really going to issue a statement saying “No, I never asked her to find formula.”
> 
> He may have did them some favors in the past (like lending them the house), but these stories propping up Zeezy are just so absurd and trivial.  They aren’t even worth refuting, from TP’s perspective.


Maybe MeeZee (or someone’s) paying him? There may be some other incentive/money involved somewhere?


----------



## Katel

(p.s. xincinsin beat me to it!  )


----------



## xincinsin

Katel said:


> Maybe MeeZee (or someone’s) paying him? There may be some other incentive/money involved somewhere?


Definitely "some other incentive". People like Oprah and Tyler have more than enough money and, even if they didn't, do you think Zed has enough money to pay them longterm? Not intending to offend anyone but, in the US context, would Tyler lend support to Zed purely because she played the race card? I know I once looked disbelievingly at a colleague who tried to convince me that I should support him purely because we were the same race. Did the "you-and-me-against-the-world" nonsense to try to persuade me to believe his lies. I feel ashamed that he obviously thought I was stupid


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Definitely "some other incentive". People like Oprah and Tyler have more than enough money and, even if they didn't, do you think Zed has enough money to pay them longterm? Not intending to offend anyone but, in the US context, would Tyler lend support to Zed purely because she played the race card? I know I once looked disbelievingly at a colleague who tried to convince me that I should support him purely because we were the same race. Did the "you-and-me-against-the-world" nonsense to try to persuade me to believe his lies. I feel ashamed that he obviously thought I was stupid


Key point is his nonsense did not get through your BS detector.  Excellent work!


----------



## Chanbal

DL Harper said:


> TP wouldn't be foolish enough to be MM's next victim husband, would he???


I think you are onto something.


----------



## Chanbal

Poor Hazz…


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Key point is his nonsense did not get through your BS detector.  Excellent work!


There were repercussions. He subsequently told people that I was against him because I hated men, and since I was management level and he was not, I hated men who were of lower status. Gee, he was likely a prototype incel  

But back to topic, maybe Tyler has a soft spot for the underdog, which is not a character flaw in itself. We all know how Zed is an expert is making herself out to be the victim. Her entire flopcast series is a longdrawn Woe is Me, How IIIIIIII have suffered.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Poor Hazz…



There goes his excuse for declaring the private jet retainer cost as a tax-deductible business expense: _I need to have a transAtlantic private jet on standby in case the monarch of the UK needs me to cover for him at short notice. _


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles are difficult…  


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle initially hired a different Oscar-nominated director for their Netflix docuseries before they had a falling out with her over the vision of the project, multiple sources tell Page Six…

Sources said both sides could not agree on the tone of the Sussexes’ series, with one industry insider saying: “Garrett wanted Harry and Meghan to film at home and they were not comfortable doing that.

“There were a few sticky moments between them, and Garrett left the project. Harry and Meghan’s own production company captured as much footage as they could before Liz Garbus was hired.”

*According to another source, this is why the Sussexes were spotted with two different film crews on two trips to NYC last year — on the second trip, they were seen with Garbus and her own crew.

But it was not all smooth sailing for Netflix bosses and Oscar-nominated Garbus who also clashed with Meghan and Harry over the content of the series, which the couple wanted to heavily edit, according to sources.* It’s also believed the Sussexes wanted the show pushed back until next year, but Netflix refused.

Despite reports to the contrary, _*the Sussexes’ show will stream early next month*…









						Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dropped original director for Netflix docuseries
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fell out with their first director over their Netflix series before hiring another Oscar-winning documentarian to helm it, sources told The Post.




					pagesix.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles are difficult…
> View attachment 5654378
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle initially hired a different Oscar-nominated director for their Netflix docuseries before they had a falling out with her over the vision of the project, multiple sources tell Page Six…
> 
> Sources said both sides could not agree on the tone of the Sussexes’ series, with one industry insider saying: “Garrett wanted Harry and Meghan to film at home and they were not comfortable doing that.
> 
> “There were a few sticky moments between them, and Garrett left the project. Harry and Meghan’s own production company captured as much footage as they could before Liz Garbus was hired.”
> 
> *According to another source, this is why the Sussexes were spotted with two different film crews on two trips to NYC last year — on the second trip, they were seen with Garbus and her own crew.
> 
> But it was not all smooth sailing for Netflix bosses and Oscar-nominated Garbus who also clashed with Meghan and Harry over the content of the series, which the couple wanted to heavily edit, according to sources.* It’s also believed the Sussexes wanted the show pushed back until next year, but Netflix refused.
> 
> Despite reports to the contrary, _*the Sussexes’ show will stream early next month*…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dropped original director for Netflix docuseries
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fell out with their first director over their Netflix series before hiring another Oscar-winning documentarian to helm it, sources told The Post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


----------



## Toby93

This post is making a connection between her "dear friend" Misan Harriman, and her introduction to Harry.  It goes back to 2014, so this is really creepy - it looks like she was stalking him for years before she reeled him in


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> hope not
> *I used to think he was gay.*..then he supposedly had a girlfriend - then he married her?  then they split?  lots of contradictions doing a google search
> Judging by the fortune he has amassed, he isn't stupid but I suppose business and personal are two different things


You might also be onto something. I read on reddit something about a potential link to Markus A. I believe OW mentioned that she wasn't the one that introduced TW to TP. If true, I wonder if it was MA.
Disclosure: Huge speculation


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Why is TP allegedly promoting moral bankruptcy?






Chanbal said:


> I would agree with you but apparently he told the story to about 800 people. Unless this is a fake story published by VF.
> 
> _Speaking at the annual Baby2Baby Gala, which raises funds for children living in poverty, he recalled how he told his staff member that the Duchess of Sussex, who was in London at the time, 'was going to stores on their behalf', reported Vanity Fair.
> 
> Mr Perry told the story to a group of 800 guests gathered together at Los Angeles’s Pacific Design Center on Saturday night. It's unclear when exactly the call to Meghan and Harry took place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry says Meghan Markle visited UK stores for infant formula
> 
> 
> The American actor, 53, told his staff member that the Duchess of Sussex, who was in London at the time, last year, 'was going to stores on their behalf', reported Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _





CarryOn2020 said:


> Reddit has some comments about this TP story:
> 
> 
> 
> ===
> _It just doesn't make sense. He's incredibly rich and connected, he could easily have gotten formula for people flown in. He didn't need to call a member of the royal family to go prowl local stores . Do they think people are this dumb?
> ===
> He could fly the family anywhere in the world to get formula. He’s a billionaire. It’s so odd that he keeps mentioning this married woman.
> 
> ETA: a few more
> 
> "Meghan Markle quietly..." Right, I can stop reading.
> ===
> She's always doing things quietly, but yet the world somehow finds out.
> ===
> where was she when i needed toilet paper?
> ===
> The power of that thing she calls "my voice." ^-^_



What is really humiliating for them is (even if it were true)  they think a story of an employee grovelling with gratitude that a supposed billionaire would spend about £30 on the food needed to _keep a baby alive _would convince the audience of the incredible selflessness and compassion of that billionaire and that this unbelievable  generosity should be repeatedly described. It’s like something from the Middle Ages.

Add on- then she didn’t even get it - that’s awful - worse and worse. Unless they were looking for something super obscure we have  all the same big brands & we’ve had no production issues so…. She probably didn’t bother looking. 

Edit - how do I do spoiler tags. Tbh I have some feelings about the formula shortage but I don’t want to get deleted for political posts.


sdkitty said:


> hope not
> I used to think he was gay...then he supposedly had a girlfriend - then he married her?  then they split?  lots of contradictions doing a google search
> Judging by the fortune he has amassed, he isn't stupid but I suppose business and personal are two different things


I mean even Elton John had a wife before he decided coming out wouldn’t harm his business and, if anything, raised his profile. There’s been plenty of stories about TP secretly hooking up with dudes (heck there’s even an episode of the boondocks about it.)

Whatever, it’s his life, though it would be sad if he thought he had to hide something natural and was getting blackmailed by scumbags for it.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Sounds like Tyler needs to take his own advice no?


Chanbal said:


> I think you are onto something.



At least they could share wigs.


Chanbal said:


> You might also be onto something. I read on reddit something about a potential link to Markus A. I believe OW mentioned that she wasn't the one that introduced TW to TP. If true, I wonder if it was MA.
> Disclosure: Huge speculation


. Does TP come to London a lot? Would he be interested in very white nouveau country clubs?

I can’t see MA’s influence being particularly useful for TP as his specialties seem to be coke and call girls and it’s not like there’s a shortage of those in the USA (& I don’t c think TP likes either of those either.)

realistically MA is essentially a servant to celebs, he’s a bar manager who goes the extra mile for his special clients but would anyone really listen if he started telling tales on his clients and then he’d have lost his position among the elite he clawed for.


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> Definitely "some other incentive". People like Oprah and Tyler have more than enough money and, even if they didn't, do you think Zed has enough money to pay them longterm? Not intending to offend anyone but, in the US context, would Tyler lend support to Zed purely because she played the race card? I know I once looked disbelievingly at a colleague who tried to convince me that I should support him purely because we were the same race. Did the "you-and-me-against-the-world" nonsense to try to persuade me to believe his lies. I feel ashamed that he obviously thought I was stupid



With “some other,” I mean someone’s agenda TP’s following (not MeeZee’s). Given their dual idiocy, Ginge and Cringe’s income and reach are hard to explain. Is KC3 funding them? They’ve gotten some odd gigs …. like both UN events. If they’re buying all the awards/pr placement, etc., where is the $$ coming from? Hazz is notoriously cheap with his $$. And they’re certainly not earning the gigs … what gives?


----------



## Katel

jelliedfeels said:


> …
> Whatever, it’s his life, though it would be sad if he thought he had to hide something natural and was getting *blackmailed by scumbags for it.*


Valid theory, could be  who’s behind it, if so?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Annawakes said:


> I think these baffling stories from TP about the formula etc are made up by ZeeZy’s minions.
> 
> I mean, he isn’t really going to issue a statement saying “No, I never asked her to find formula.”
> 
> He may have did them some favors in the past (like lending them the house), but these stories propping up Zeezy are just so absurd and trivial.  They aren’t even worth refuting, from TP’s perspective.



He was the one mentioning it while attending an event.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DL Harper said:


> TP wouldn't be foolish enough to be MM's next victim husband, would he???



He's not her type.


----------



## needlv

rose60610 said:


> Her guest are excuses for her to blabber her stupid mouth off. About herself. Comments about her on other sites are NOT flattering.


her guests are an excuse for Meghan to clap back about every thing she is accused of - diva, bully, bimbo, etc.

it’s all about HER getting “revenge”.

it’s so boring.  MM needs to learn to let go.  Not everyone will like you.

Especially the smart ones on this forum


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's not her type.





	

		
			
		

		
	
 (Google search, Forbes)


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Wait, I think I know this. Weren’t they using old photos for their posts in the months right before Archie was born? She was avoiding having the press calling her “heavily pregnant.”
> 
> ETA: oh this one was for Lilibet! Okay, I have no explanation for it.



We got there first, already exposed this 'deviation' of her timeline - looks like she forget to "layer a woman" - herself


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> I would agree with you but apparently he told the story to about 800 people. Unless this is a fake story published by VF.
> 
> _Speaking at the annual Baby2Baby Gala, which raises funds for children living in poverty, he recalled how he told his staff member that the Duchess of Sussex, who was in London at the time, 'was going to stores on their behalf', reported Vanity Fair.
> 
> Mr Perry told the story to a group of 800 guests gathered together at Los Angeles’s Pacific Design Center on Saturday night. It's unclear when exactly the call to Meghan and Harry took place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry says Meghan Markle visited UK stores for infant formula
> 
> 
> The American actor, 53, told his staff member that the Duchess of Sussex, who was in London at the time, last year, 'was going to stores on their behalf', reported Vanity Fair.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



How would he know? 

Was he he in London too, stalking her?


----------



## CentralTimeZone

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He's not her type.


He does get invited to hollywood parties though and she doesn't....


----------



## marietouchet

jelliedfeels said:


> Sounds like Tyler needs to take his own advice no?
> 
> At least they could share wigs.
> 
> . Does TP come to London a lot? Would he be interested in very white nouveau country clubs?
> 
> I can’t see MA’s influence being particularly useful for TP as his specialties seem to be coke and call girls and it’s not like there’s a shortage of those in the USA (& I don’t c think TP likes either of those either.)
> 
> realistically MA is essentially a servant to celebs, he’s a bar manager who goes the extra mile for his special clients but would anyone really listen if he started telling tales on his clients and then he’d have lost his position among the elite he clawed for.



MA reminds me of Ghislaine


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Garrett B's view was similar to the one described by Allison D (The Cut)


----------



## Chanbal

The release of the Harkles' reality show seems confirmed. It will be a feast for DM imo.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## xincinsin

Maybe we are overcomplicating it. Perhaps Tyler is one of Invisibet's godparents, so he feels obliged as "practically family" to help Zed. Maybe they told him that they owe their baby to him. He gave them a place to rest and recover from their terrible suffering as pampered royals. And well, you know what people do when they have R&R... and when they need to keep their dimmer half distracted before he can have any second thoughts.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Maybe we are overcomplicating it. Perhaps Tyler is one of Invisibet's godparents, so he feels obliged as "practically family" to help Zed. Maybe they told him that they owe their baby to him. He gave them a place to rest and recover from their terrible suffering as pampered royals. And well, you know what people do when they have R&R... and when they need to keep their dimmer half distracted before he can have any second thoughts.


Agree there is some sort of bond bet MM and TP. We don’t know what it is 
I think the bond is beyond having been introduced by Oprah


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


>



Mean words from KK about BRF , wow


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


>



My views on so many people have changed (for worse) thanks to the Harkles. Diana, the Kennedys, OW… the list keeps on going. 
Accusing the monarchy headed by QE, which is the same as accusing QE, of structural racism while they were allegedly bullying their own staff, spending money lavishly on themselves, stepping over others…merching the titles graciously given to them by QE is shocking to say the least imo.


----------



## bag-mania

I’m tired of hearing about these meaningless, fabricated awards that are passed around by rich elitists who like to pose as great humanitarians.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I’m tired of hearing about these meaningless, fabricated awards that are passed around by *self-serving* rich elitists who like to pose as great humanitarians.


Allow me to add one word to your statement.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



Of course the Harkles are heroes for outing the racist BRF. That's the reason why they wanted half-in/half-out and why they emphasize their titles so much. Kerry Kennedy joins the legion of idiots who have drunk the Harkle Kool Aid.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The release of the Harkles' reality show seems confirmed. It will be a feast for DM imo.




Well, it's probably in their contract they can't officially separate until the drivel about their loVesTorY is out.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Social media has exposed the vast majority of high profile people as boring idiots.


----------



## EmilyM11

marietouchet said:


> Agree there is some sort of bond bet MM and TP. We don’t know what it is
> I think the bond is beyond having been introduced by Oprah


Well, maybe she is likeable and nice in short intervals and for selected people. I have an acquaintance (well, former) who befriended me to - what I found later on- buy off me Hermes bags and goodies during my severe depression episode when I was selling out at below market prices. That  girl has many friends though, has a small but popular youtube channel and is deemed likeable (obviously I liked her until I realised she's always calling to ask whether I bought something new or whether I had something to sell). So maybe it's Meghan's case, she can contain herself with TP. Hence he has no reason to ditch her and believe what people say.


----------



## youngster

Per Kerry Kennedy: 
*They went to the oldest institution in the history of the United Kingdom and told them what they were doing wrong. *

_*They knew that if they did this, it would have consequences, that they would be condemned to ostracism, they would lose their family . . . *_

What an idiot Kerry Kennedy is and what a poorly written statement.  It pretty much tells you what you need to know about her.  Well, that and her extramarital affair and her DUI that she refused to take responsibility for.


----------



## youngster

Btw, Kerry Kennedy hasn't done MM and Harry any favors with this statement of hers.  She's desperately trying to justify giving them this award because of all the negative press surrounding it.  But, while doing so, foolish Kerry Kennedy said some pretty terrible things about the royal family and the institution in her statement and now Harry and MM are going to be photographed with her accepting their little statue or crystal vase or whatever.  It's not going to endear them more with KC3 or William, that is for sure.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## piperdog

youngster said:


> Per Kerry Kennedy:
> *They went to the oldest institution in the history of the United Kingdom and told them what they were doing wrong. *
> 
> _*They knew that if they did this, it would have consequences, that they would be condemned to ostracism, they would lose their family . . . *_
> 
> What an idiot Kerry Kennedy is and what a poorly written statement.  It pretty much tells you what you need to know about her.  Well, that and her extramarital affair and her DUI that she refused to take responsibility for.


Apparently Kerry is the Harry of this generation of the Kennedys. Though, TBH, almost all of them seem to be Harrys. Same privilege, same lecturing, same coasting on their ancestors' reputations, same covering up of scandals, same self-promotion, and same tone-deafness to how the rest of us perceive them.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> This post is making a connection between her "dear friend" Misan Harriman, and her introduction to Harry.  It goes back to 2014, so this is really creepy - it looks like she was stalking him for years before she reeled him in



The comments 

"Oh poor Meghan she falls over her own lies"

"Imagine, the level M went to just to marry into the BRF and all she ended up with was the petulant, dim-witted spare."

"If Misan is an expert professional photographer it stand to reason he’s also extremely skilled with photoshop, right? ( Think Christening and Birthday photos ). Things that make you say, hmm"


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Especially the smart ones on this forum


And there's plenty more than us on Twitter and IG.


----------



## charlottawill

Hey Kerry Kennedy....


----------



## bag-mania

piperdog said:


> Apparently Kerry is the Harry of this generation of the Kennedys. Though, TBH, *almost all of them seem to be Harrys. Same privilege, same lecturing, same coasting on their ancestors' reputations, same covering up of scandals, same self-promotion, and same tone-deafness* to how the rest of us perceive them.


The Kennedys are finally losing their luster as de facto leaders in the US. For decades almost any of them who ran for office would be automatically elected because of the name.

Thanks for pointing out the many similarities between Kerry and Harry!


----------



## youngster

piperdog said:


> Apparently Kerry is the Harry of this generation of the Kennedys. Though, TBH, almost all of them seem to be Harrys. Same privilege, same lecturing, same coasting on their ancestors' reputations, same covering up of scandals, same self-promotion, and same tone-deafness to how the rest of us perceive them.



I was thinking too, that this is such a calculated PR move by both the Harkes and Kerry Kennedy.  Bobby Kennedy died 55 years ago. Nobody under the age of 65 or so has any real life memory of him. All the people who knew him are mostly gone.  Many of the long time donors to the RFK Foundation are dying off.  Kerry Kennedy needs to keep the Foundation going and keep her cushy job that pays her hundreds of thousands per year and picks up her travel expenses and provides her with a PA.  She needs PR and she needs a connection to a younger demographic and potential younger donors.  Enter the Harkles.  

Any decent person would be embarrassed and would have turned down the award, when there is literally nothing they have done to justify it in any way, no matter what Kerry Kennedy said. But, nope, not Harry or Meghan.  Anything for the cameras and an extra minute of attention.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I was thinking too, that this is such a calculated PR move by both the Harkes and Kerry Kennedy.  Bobby Kennedy died 55 years ago. Nobody under the age of 65 or so has any real life memory of him. All the people who knew him are mostly gone.  Many of the long time donors to the RFK Foundation are dying off.  Kerry Kennedy needs to keep the Foundation going and keep her cushy job that pays her hundreds of thousands per year and picks up her travel expenses and provides her with a PA.  She needs PR and she needs a connection to a younger demographic and potential younger donors.  Enter the Harkles.
> 
> Any decent person would be embarrassed and would have turned down the award, when there is literally nothing they have done to justify it in any way, no matter what Kerry Kennedy said. But, nope, not Harry or Meghan.  Anything for the cameras and an extra minute of attention.


what's constitutes younger?  Meghan is 40.  guess you're saying she has young stans?


----------



## Chanbal

This is good…


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




Is Kerry unwell? Coz she's clearly delusional (IMHO)


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> This is good…



is she gonna be in trouble with TW?


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> what's constitutes younger?  Meghan is 40.  guess you're saying she has young stans?



41, but who's counting? I know she isn't *cough*


----------



## bag-mania

I thought it was already known that Meghan didn’t create her podcast. She had two years to create one and she didn’t do it. Spotify figured out if they wanted to get anything out of her they were going to have to do it. That’s why they announced in the spring they were stepping in. They brought a crew to her and they did everything.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> what's constitutes younger? Meghan is 40. guess you're saying she has young stans?



I think a lot of their stans are in their 20's, 30's and 40's, not that I think any of them would likely become big donors to the RFK Foundation.  But, it's PR for the RFK Foundation and gets their stans talking about it and newspapers writing stories for a day and maybe (in Kerry Kennedy's view) will help her woo younger donors.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> The comments
> 
> "Oh poor Meghan she falls over her own lies"
> 
> "Imagine, the level M went to just to marry into the BRF and all she ended up with was the petulant, dim-witted spare."
> 
> "If Misan is an expert professional photographer it stand to reason he’s also extremely skilled with photoshop, right? ( Think Christening and Birthday photos ). Things that make you say, hmm"


Misan isn’t that skilled. Bad photography and bad photoshop.


----------



## youngster

piperdog said:


> Apparently Kerry is the Harry of this generation of the Kennedys.



The Kennedys have a whole bunch of Harry's spread among the various generations.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> is she gonna be in trouble with TW?


Her heavy lifting needs work and she should hire a personal trainer to improve her strength.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Life can be so unfair.


----------



## CobaltBlu

This is good, and also give props to REAL women in activism. Its a really intelligent breakdown of the video, which Meghan should listen to, because its also very constructive. 

Another look at the Jameela character, whom I knew nothing about. Still don't care much about her but it's interesting how clearly even semi-shady Jameela is more authentic than Meghan...

The author also makes some excellent points about Shorheh's portion, and the idiotic comments Meghan makes throughout the podcast.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> her guests are an excuse for Meghan to clap back about every thing she is accused of - diva, bully, bimbo, etc.
> 
> it’s all about HER getting “revenge”.
> 
> it’s so boring.  MM needs to learn to let go.  Not everyone will like you.
> 
> Especially the smart ones on this forum


It appears that this was the reason there was no podcast before. She had nothing to talk about. The producer hit on the idea that she should use the podcast as a clap back


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> It appears that this was the reason there was no podcast before. She had nothing to talk about. The producer hit on the idea that she should use the podcast as a clap back


where is the vomit emoji


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> is she gonna be in trouble with TW?


The podcasts are so bad that TW might thank her for taking credit for them.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> This is good, and also give props to REAL women in activism. Its a really intelligent breakdown of the video, which Meghan should listen to, because its also very constructive.
> 
> Another look at the Jameela character, whom I knew nothing about. Still don't care much about her but it's interesting how clearly even semi-shady Jameela is more authentic than Meghan...
> 
> The author also makes some excellent points about Shorheh's portion, and the idiotic comments Meghan makes throughout the podcast.



Iranian actresses who have spoken out or just been in movies deemed to be inappropriate by the Iranian govt are threatened and can’t return to their country. Shorheh  is one of the most successful. Her voice is so distinctive. Hope she doesn’t get Markled


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> This is good…


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> where is the vomit emoji



This is the closest we have so I’ll use lots of them.


----------



## csshopper

Why would anyone want to take credit for these **** shows?
As the ratings continue to tank, I read this week’s was #55, she’s  handed MEMEME another victimhood to add to the list. MEMEME will blame it on the Producer.


----------



## DebbieAnn

youngster said:


> I was thinking too, that this is such a calculated PR move by both the Harkes and Kerry Kennedy.  Bobby Kennedy died 55 years ago. Nobody under the age of 65 or so has any real life memory of him. All the people who knew him are mostly gone.  Many of the long time donors to the RFK Foundation are dying off.  Kerry Kennedy needs to keep the Foundation going and keep her cushy job that pays her hundreds of thousands per year and picks up her travel expenses and provides her with a PA.  She needs PR and she needs a connection to a younger demographic and potential younger donors.  Enter the Harkles.
> 
> Any decent person would be embarrassed and would have turned down the award, when there is literally nothing they have done to justify it in any way, no matter what Kerry Kennedy said. But, nope, not Harry or Meghan.  Anything for the cameras and an extra minute of attention.


54 years actually (June 6, 1968)


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The podcasts are so bad that TW might thank her for taking credit for them.


I’m sure the Spotify crew had to take “Meghan’s vision” for the podcast and find a way to bring it to a format suitable for airing. There is too much of her incomprehensible dialogue to say the crew had full creative control. However, they were able to guide her carefully to get the episodes done. I don’t think they will get any more out of her once this batch is done.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> *The Harkles are difficult…*
> View attachment 5654378
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle initially hired a different Oscar-nominated director for their Netflix docuseries before they had a falling out with her over the vision of the project, multiple sources tell Page Six…
> 
> Sources said both sides could not agree on the tone of the Sussexes’ series, with one industry insider saying: “Garrett wanted Harry and Meghan to film at home and they were not comfortable doing that.
> 
> “There were a few sticky moments between them, and Garrett left the project. Harry and Meghan’s own production company captured as much footage as they could before Liz Garbus was hired.”
> 
> *According to another source, this is why the Sussexes were spotted with two different film crews on two trips to NYC last year — on the second trip, they were seen with Garbus and her own crew.
> 
> But it was not all smooth sailing for Netflix bosses and Oscar-nominated Garbus who also clashed with Meghan and Harry over the content of the series, which the couple wanted to heavily edit, according to sources.* It’s also believed the Sussexes wanted the show pushed back until next year, but Netflix refused.
> 
> Despite reports to the contrary, _*the Sussexes’ show will stream early next month*…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Prince Harry and Meghan Markle dropped original director for Netflix docuseries
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle fell out with their first director over their Netflix series before hiring another Oscar-winning documentarian to helm it, sources told The Post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Not difficult, particular. She spent a whole episode explaining that, remember?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure the Spotify crew had to take “Meghan’s vision” for the podcast and find a way to bring it to a format suitable for airing. There is too much of her incomprehensible dialogue to say the crew had full creative control. However, they were able to guide her carefully to get the episodes done. I don’t think they will get any more out of her once this batch is done.


They had to battle her the same way the first Netflix director did and she ended up quitting. The second director isn’t having luck either. Too much input  from the peanut gallery.


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> Why would anyone want to take credit for these **** shows?
> As the ratings continue to tank, I read this week’s was #55, she’s  handed MEMEME another victimhood to add to the list. MEMEME will blame it on the Producer.


It is #29 at the moment but I am skeptical about their ratings system. Spotify has millions of $$$ in incentive to try to pump up listener interest in her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I was thinking too, that this is such a calculated PR move by both the Harkes and Kerry Kennedy.  Bobby Kennedy died 55 years ago. Nobody under the age of 65 or so has any real life memory of him. All the people who knew him are mostly gone.  Many of the long time donors to the RFK Foundation are dying off.  Kerry Kennedy needs to keep the Foundation going and keep her cushy job that pays her hundreds of thousands per year and picks up her travel expenses and provides her with a PA.  She needs PR and she needs a connection to a younger demographic and potential younger donors.  Enter the Harkles.
> 
> Any decent person would be embarrassed and would have turned down the award, when there is literally nothing they have done to justify it in any way, no matter what Kerry Kennedy said. But, nope, not Harry or Meghan.  Anything for the cameras and an extra minute of attention.



But is it a smart PR move? Their star is sinking. They never took off in the US like they planned to. People are waking up to their shenanigans. Plus, even if they were rockstars, I still think BRF tops that any time.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Not difficult, particular. She spent a whole episode explaining that, remember?


Well face it, Meg is a perfectionist. I mean take her nose, face and hair for example. There is ongoing tweaking with all of it so she can achieve the unachievable.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I’m sure the Spotify crew had to take “Meghan’s vision” for the podcast and find a way to bring it to a format suitable for airing. There is too much of her incomprehensible dialogue to say the crew had full creative control. However, they were able to guide her carefully to get the episodes done. I don’t think they will get any more out of her once this batch is done.


I expect to hear early in 2023 from Spotify that they and the Harkles are "amicably" parting ways because the Harkles just have too many other things going on. Same for Netflix after the reality show airs.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I expect to hear early in 2023 from Spotify that they and the Harkles are "amicably" parting ways because the Harkles just have too many other things going on. Same for Netflix after the reality show airs.


Maybe. It was a three year contract so it will expire next summer anyway. All those millions for a dozen episodes. What a crappy deal for Spotify.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It is #29 at the moment but I am skeptical about their ratings system. Spotify has millions of $$$ in incentive to try to pump up listener interest in her.


They heard you, and took care of it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Spotify didn’t do themselves any favors with the pod crashes, but they didn’t do the Harkles any favors, either.  Sure, TW gets to speak her truths, but she is continuing to tank herself while doing so.  It’s rather karmic.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> More of Tyler Perry's continual and baffling promotion of Meghan. The woman is never seen with her own children but she will drop everything and go searching for baby formula if Tyler asks. "Act of kindness" indeed, it must be more of her audacious advocacy (i.e. kissing up to Tyler) at work.
> 
> I noticed it doesn't say Meghan was successful in finding the formula, but she must get all the credit as a humanitarian for going to a store to look for it.
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage​The Duchess of Sussex personally searched for the essential while abroad earlier this year, the _Madea_ director said​Meghan Markle went out of her way for a family in need.
> 
> While speaking on stage at the Baby2Baby Gala in West Hollywood on Tuesday night, Tyler Perry revealed that the Duchess of Sussex, 41, personally searched stores for baby formula during the national shortage earlier this year.
> 
> According to _Vanity Fair_, the 53-year-old writer/director told the crowd of 800 that he was approached by an employee desperate to find formula for their child during the crisis. Perry's own hunt was unsuccessful, inspiring him to turn to friends across the pond: Meghan and Prince Harry. The California-based couple was in the U.K. at the time (likely for Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee celebration in June), and Meghan went out looking for the formula herself, Perry said.
> 
> Meghan and the _Madea _director have a history of helping each other out. While Meghan and Harry, 38, transitioned out of their senior royals roles in 2020, they stayed at Perry's Los Angeles estate, living in the Beverly Hills mansion with their son Archie Harrison for a few months before buying a home in Montecito. They would welcome their daughter Lilibet Diana in June 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry Says Meghan Markle Quietly Shopped for Baby Formula for Family in Need During Shortage
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle personally searched for baby formula for a family in need earlier this year, Tyler Perry said at the Baby2Baby Gala
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


That right there is the lie.  "Meghan *quietly *shopped"??  Yeah, right.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> hope not
> I used to think he was gay...then he supposedly had a girlfriend - then he married her?  then they split?  lots of contradictions doing a google search
> Judging by the fortune he has amassed, he isn't stupid but I suppose business and personal are two different things


I thought he was gay as well.  Maybe she's hoping he'll become her gay best friend.


----------



## purseinsanity

lallybelle said:


> KK is an asswipe and the brother is a crazy Covid denier / anti vax idiot. *Only respectable Kennedy of that generation is Caroline.*
> 
> No fan of Cuomo, but they had 3 children and she had an affair when they were married. She can get off her soap box, especially acting as if anything she she said about the Harkles were facts.


Not sure about that either.  From what I read, her behavior towards SIL Carolyn's mother after Carolyn died in John's plane was atrocious.  That whole family can step to the side as far as I'm concerned.

Kerry seems to be willing to trash the BRF, but seems to love being part of "America's Royal Family".  How convenient.


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I thought he was gay as well.  Maybe she's hoping he'll become her gay best friend.


With him, it’s complicated  



Sophisticatted said:


> Spotify didn’t do themselves any favors with the pod crashes, but they didn’t do the Harkles any favors, either.  Sure, TW gets to speak her truths, but she is continuing to tank herself while doing so.  It’s rather karmic.


Certainly *not* a service I am willing to pay for.  Same for Nflix.


----------



## youngster

Sophisticatted said:


> Spotify didn’t do themselves any favors with the pod crashes, but they didn’t do the Harkles any favors, either. *Sure, TW gets to speak her truths, but she is continuing to tank herself while doing so. It’s rather karmic.*



The more she or Harry speak, the more they reveal.  Neither of them are very bright, neither of them are particularly quick or witty, and neither of them are well educated, no matter MM's degree from Northwestern (which is a fine institution).  I doubt she spent much time studying and probably spent most of her time partying and networking.  Notice that she didn't graduate with honors which should have been fairly easy given the Theater/Intl' Relations major.  It wasn't like she was pre-med or STEM with all of their math and statistics and physics classes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

He had *choices* -


----------



## sdkitty

not sure if this has been posted....their "highly anticipated" docuseries premieres in december








						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's Netflix Docuseries Set to Premiere in December
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's highly anticipated Netflix series will be released next month, PEOPLE has learned




					people.com


----------



## charlottawill

This might explain her absence at the GQ awards


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It appears that this was the reason there was no podcast before. She had nothing to talk about. The producer hit on the idea that she should use the podcast as a clap back


But given the recent tea on the podcasts, she had not yet hired a staff to do the podcast for her, it takes time to get slaves

PS Rebecca Sananes was not hired until Jun 2021, as head of Archewell audio(podcasts) and she managed to get out 12 episodes starting in Aug 2022


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I thought he was gay as well.  Maybe *she's hoping he'll become her gay best friend.*


Omid Scobie will be devastated.


----------



## Chanbal

I came across a very interesting NYP article on the family of the Harkles' award presenter, Kerry K. She should look into her very close family (Horror Hill, Spoiler ) before accusing others…









						Inside Ethel Kennedy’s cruel neglect of her troubled kids
					

Since Robert F. Kennedy’s assassination on June 6, 1968, his widow, Ethel, has been his torchbearer. Unlike her late sister-in-law, Jackie Kennedy Onassis, she never remarried, never sought a path …




					nypost.com
				





Spoiler: ‘Horror Hill’



(Maureen Callahan, NYP 2015)
_‘Horror Hill’   _​_In his 1994 biography of Ethel, “The Other Mrs. Kennedy,” Oppenheimer writes of her “uncontrolled rage” and the abuse that extended to her household staff. Her brother-in-law Peter Lawford was shocked when Ethel berated a new maid for going to throw out some old scraps of paper.

“You stupid n- - - -r,” Ethel yelled. “Don’t you know what you’re doing? You’re destroying history. Get out of my sight! You’re fired.”

One of Ethel’s secretaries, Noelle Fell, told Oppenheimer she was surprised by such outbursts.

“She would say things like, ‘Those black people are stupid,’ ” Fell recalled. “I really don’t think she liked blacks or Hispanics. She couldn’t stand it if they didn’t speak English.”

One such maid, who brought sanitary pads when Ethel asked for face cream, got a hard slap in the face. She quit on the spot.

Such high turnover contributed to the deplorable conditions at Hickory Hill, which staff dubbed “Horror Hill…” _


----------



## bag-mania

Regarding her receiving a GQ Award, this is perplexing. The Marie Claire article claims that the date of the GQ awards ceremony was moved back two months to make it more convenient for Harry and Meghan to attend. At first I thought that the Queen passing away might have been the reason for the change of date, but then I saw that she died on Sept. 8 and the awards had already been moved from its original date of the 7th before that happened. So what gives?

*The GQ Awards have been postponed from their original date of Sept. 7, reportedly so that Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan can come if they want to.*

"Due to their mini tour of Europe Meghanwouldn’t have been able to attend if awards went ahead on their original date in September," The Sun's source continued.

"Talks about the evening were already happening before The Queen’s passing so no doubt things will have to be reevaluated to make sure it’s as respectful as possible."









						Meghan Markle May Return to the U.K. in November to Receive an Award
					

"Meghan has been offered one of the top awards of the evening so it’s a massive coup for her."




					www.marieclaire.com


----------



## bag-mania

Exactly what does it mean when it says the award_ has been offered?_ Does it mean GQ offered to sell Meghan the award?


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Regarding her receiving a GQ Award, this is perplexing. The Marie Claire article claims that the date of the GQ awards ceremony was moved back two months to make it more convenient for Harry and Meghan to attend. At first I thought that the Queen passing away might have been the reason for the change of date, but then I saw that she died on Sept. 8 and the awards had already been moved from its original date of the 7th before that happened. So what gives?
> 
> *The GQ Awards have been postponed from their original date of Sept. 7, reportedly so that Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan can come if they want to.*
> 
> "Due to their mini tour of Europe Meghanwouldn’t have been able to attend if awards went ahead on their original date in September," The Sun's source continued.
> 
> "Talks about the evening were already happening before The Queen’s passing so no doubt things will have to be reevaluated to make sure it’s as respectful as possible."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle May Return to the U.K. in November to Receive an Award
> 
> 
> "Meghan has been offered one of the top awards of the evening so it’s a massive coup for her."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com


The article is from Sep 2021 and said MM might possibly win an award
I guess she did not ?
I am going for the easiest explanation 
The awards are given out in London, so any delay was surely due to the death of the Queen - allowing a mourning period, not for the convenience of MM


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Exactly what does it mean when it says the award_ has been offered?_ Does it mean GQ offered to sell Meghan the award?


This practice may be more common than we realize. You have to pay something like $60k for a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> This practice may be more common than we realize. You have to pay something like $60k for a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.


Now we know what a scam these awards have been. 

RE: if H&M had any sense [or worthwhile advisors], they would know to stay away from sh!tshows like this.  
 Do what William is doing - host your own award show.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The article is from Sep 2021 and said MM might possibly win an award
> I guess she did not ?
> I am going for the easiest explanation
> The awards are given out in London, so any delay was surely due to the death of the Queen - allowing a mourning period, not for the convenience of MM


The article was published on September 29, 2022. But the date of the awards had already been moved to November _before_ the Queen’s death and it said she _might be _honored for her charity work. It’s weird.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now we know what a scam these awards have been.
> 
> RE: if H&M had any sense [or worthwhile advisors], they would know to stay away from sh!tshows like this.
> Do what William is doing - host your own award show.


After reading the 2015 & 2016 NYP articles by Maureen Callahan, I finally understood why the Harkes are recipients of a *Human Rights* Award. It has all to do with the presenter's interpretation of what '*human rights*' are.

Kerry K calls herself a *human rights*_ activist_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerry_Kennedy
Ethel K calls herself a *human rights*_ advocate_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethel_Kennedy





Spoiler: NYP 2016












						‘Dictator’ Kerry Kennedy is ruining family legacy
					

She claims to be a great advocate for human rights — but former employees tell The Post that behind closed doors, Kerry Kennedy is a monster who’s driving her father’s legacy into the ground. “For …




					nypost.com


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> Not sure about that either.  From what I read, her behavior towards SIL Carolyn's mother after Carolyn died in John's plane was atrocious.  That whole family can step to the side as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> Kerry seems to be willing to trash the BRF, but seems to love being part of "America's Royal Family".  How convenient.


Oh I never forgot that.  Caroline was cold, cold, cold. And penny-pinching too. Every time I see her photo in the papers, I remember what a horrid person she really is.

She smartly dropped out of that Senate race when she discovered she'd never win and after saying "you know" almost 200 times in an interview... but she does like being an Ambassador, doesn't she.


----------



## charlottawill

OK which one of you posted this?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I came across a very interesting NYP article on the family of the Harkles' award presenter, Kerry K. She should look into her very close family (Horror Hill, Spoiler ) before accusing others…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Ethel Kennedy’s cruel neglect of her troubled kids
> 
> 
> Since Robert F. Kennedy’s assassination on June 6, 1968, his widow, Ethel, has been his torchbearer. Unlike her late sister-in-law, Jackie Kennedy Onassis, she never remarried, never sought a path …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: ‘Horror Hill’
> 
> 
> 
> (Maureen Callahan, NYP 2015)
> _‘Horror Hill’   _​_In his 1994 biography of Ethel, “The Other Mrs. Kennedy,” Oppenheimer writes of her “uncontrolled rage” and the abuse that extended to her household staff. Her brother-in-law Peter Lawford was shocked when Ethel berated a new maid for going to throw out some old scraps of paper.
> 
> “You stupid n- - - -r,” Ethel yelled. “Don’t you know what you’re doing? You’re destroying history. Get out of my sight! You’re fired.”
> 
> One of Ethel’s secretaries, Noelle Fell, told Oppenheimer she was surprised by such outbursts.
> 
> “She would say things like, ‘Those black people are stupid,’ ” Fell recalled. *“I really don’t think she liked blacks or Hispanics. She couldn’t stand it if they didn’t speak English.”*
> 
> One such maid, who brought sanitary pads when Ethel asked for face cream, got a hard slap in the face. She quit on the spot.
> 
> Such high turnover contributed to the deplorable conditions at Hickory Hill, which staff dubbed “Horror Hill…” _


So much for the "civil rights" the Kennedys were so famous for.  She wasn't even civil in her own home.
Never ceases to amaze me on how hypocritical many of these people are behind closed doors.  She sounds like TW's idol.


----------



## pukasonqo

NVM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> Oh I never forgot that.  Caroline was cold, cold, cold. And penny-pinching too. Every time I see her photo in the papers, I remember what a horrid person she really is.
> 
> She smartly dropped out of that Senate race when she discovered she'd never win and after saying "you know" almost 200 times in an interview... but she does like being an Ambassador, doesn't she.


I guess in a sense, it's not her fault.  Like someone said earlier, reading this thread has caused my view of many celebrities to rapidly deteriorate.  They are human after all, and unfortunately, many of them are more rotten than the average Joe.

Caroline Kennedy was propped up on a pedestal for what?  She was the young daughter of a president assassinated, yet she somehow became the princess of Camelot (thank you Jackie for such a great imagination).  At least she didn't make her parent's death the focal point of her life, as Haz has.

The media props these people up and presents them as "heroes" for really nothing done on their own volition.  They get into Harvard or Princeton or USC or wherever based on family name and not on pure merit.  JFK Jr got into Brown but couldn't pass the Bar exam until how many tries?  I'm sure some are very intelligent, but intelligence is not so much more profound in their families compared to the rest of ours.

These celebrities are propped up on such high pedestals that they only can fall down from a perch they never should've been on to begin with.  We are the fools that keep them there.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I came across a very interesting NYP article on the family of the Harkles' award presenter, Kerry K. She should look into her very close family (Horror Hill, Spoiler ) before accusing others…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Inside Ethel Kennedy’s cruel neglect of her troubled kids
> 
> 
> Since Robert F. Kennedy’s assassination on June 6, 1968, his widow, Ethel, has been his torchbearer. Unlike her late sister-in-law, Jackie Kennedy Onassis, she never remarried, never sought a path …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: ‘Horror Hill’
> 
> 
> 
> (Maureen Callahan, NYP 2015)
> _‘Horror Hill’   _​_In his 1994 biography of Ethel, “The Other Mrs. Kennedy,” Oppenheimer writes of her “uncontrolled rage” and the abuse that extended to her household staff. Her brother-in-law Peter Lawford was shocked when Ethel berated a new maid for going to throw out some old scraps of paper.
> 
> “You stupid n- - - -r,” Ethel yelled. “Don’t you know what you’re doing? You’re destroying history. Get out of my sight! You’re fired.”
> 
> One of Ethel’s secretaries, Noelle Fell, told Oppenheimer she was surprised by such outbursts.
> 
> “She would say things like, ‘Those black people are stupid,’ ” Fell recalled. “I really don’t think she liked blacks or Hispanics. She couldn’t stand it if they didn’t speak English.”
> 
> One such maid, who brought sanitary pads when Ethel asked for face cream, got a hard slap in the face. She quit on the spot.
> 
> Such high turnover contributed to the deplorable conditions at Hickory Hill, which staff dubbed “Horror Hill…” _


I'm not particularly a fan of Ethel (and def not of RFK Jr) but the NY Post is likely going to be biased against this family


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I'm not particularly a fan of Ethel (and def not of RFK Jr) but the NY Post is likely going to be biased against this family


It's very possible. However, I believe the 2015 article was written based on Ethel's biography, and the 2016 article includes testimonies from Kerry's former employees. In any event, the choice of the Harkles for a Human Rights award doesn't say much for Kerry K imo. These are people in positions of power accused of bullying their subordinates.


----------



## oldbag

sdkitty said:


> NM


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I guess in a sense, it's not her fault.  *Like someone said earlier, reading this thread has caused my view of many celebrities to rapidly deteriorate.*  They are human after all, and unfortunately, many of them are more rotten than the average Joe.
> 
> Caroline Kennedy was propped up on a pedestal for what?  She was the young daughter of a president assassinated, yet she somehow became the princess of Camelot (thank you Jackie for such a great imagination).  At least she didn't make her parent's death the focal point of her life, as Haz has.
> 
> The media props these people up and presents them as "heroes" for really nothing done on their own volition.  They get into Harvard or Princeton or USC or wherever based on family name and not on pure merit.  JFK Jr got into Brown but couldn't pass the Bar exam until how many tries?  I'm sure some are very intelligent, but intelligence is not so much more profound in their families compared to the rest of ours.
> 
> These celebrities are propped up on such high pedestals that they only can fall down from a perch they never should've been on to begin with.  We are the fools that keep them there.


My list keeps on increasing. So much greed and hypocrisy…


----------



## Luvbolide

Redbirdhermes said:


> James Earl Jones gets it right as far as how we pronounce the alphabet in the U.S.  He made this video for Sesame Street over 53 years ago.



My gosh, he looks so young!


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> I guess in a sense, it's not her fault.  Like someone said earlier, reading this thread has caused my view of many celebrities to rapidly deteriorate.  They are human after all, and unfortunately, many of them are more rotten than the average Joe.
> 
> Caroline Kennedy was propped up on a pedestal for what?  She was the young daughter of a president assassinated, yet she somehow became the princess of Camelot (thank you Jackie for such a great imagination).  At least she didn't make her parent's death the focal point of her life, as Haz has.
> 
> The media props these people up and presents them as "heroes" for really nothing done on their own volition.  They get into Harvard or Princeton or USC or wherever based on family name and not on pure merit.  JFK Jr got into Brown but couldn't pass the Bar exam until how many tries?  I'm sure some are very intelligent, but intelligence is not so much more profound in their families compared to the rest of ours.
> 
> These celebrities are propped up on such high pedestals that they only can fall down from a perch they never should've been on to begin with.  We are the fools that keep them there.


Agree 100%.  Google is our friend.  Although the truth about these people is tangled, it is out there.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I'm not particularly a fan of Ethel (and def not of RFK Jr) but the NY Post is likely going to be biased against this family


True, but since most of the press is biased to support the Kennedys it’s refreshing to see an article that isn’t reflexively kissing their @sses for a change.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> what's constitutes younger?  Meghan is 40.  guess you're saying she has young stans?


Maybe that's why Zed keeps emphasizing that she is a "young" mother and upgrades her face constantly. It's all about perception.


gracekelly said:


> It appears that this was the reason there was no podcast before. She had nothing to talk about. *The producer hit on the idea that she should use the podcast as a clap back*


Zed would have lurved that idea. Hits all her petty buttons.


bag-mania said:


> This is the closest we have so I’ll use lots of them.


There is also 
Just put the word "throwup" between two ":"


bag-mania said:


> I’m sure the Spotify crew had to take “Meghan’s vision” for the podcast and find a way to bring it to a format suitable for airing. There is too much of her incomprehensible dialogue to say the crew had full creative control. However, they were able to guide her carefully to get the episodes done. *I don’t think they will get any more out of her once this batch is done.*


I think there is plenty more that she feels insulted about but, as time goes by, will there be people wanting to appear on a tacky flopcast like hers? Will anyone want to listen to the constant whinefest? How much higher can the Zimbo build herself up?


youngster said:


> The more she or Harry speak, the more they reveal.  Neither of them are very bright, neither of them are particularly quick or witty, and neither of them are well educated, no matter MM's degree from Northwestern (which is a fine institution).  I doubt she spent much time studying and probably spent most of her time partying and networking.  Notice that she didn't graduate with honors which should have been fairly easy given *the Theater/Intl' Relations major*.  It wasn't like she was pre-med or STEM with all of their math and statistics and physics classes.


There was talk that the Theatre/Intl Relations major was also a lie and she was doing some other course.


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> This is good…




So she is advertising she did all the work?  This feels like an open job advert…. She’s looking for the next employer!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> I'm not particularly a fan of Ethel (and def not of RFK Jr) but the NY Post is likely going to be biased against this family


Well considering how impartial and fair media is nowadays (), why should the Kennedys be spared?


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> True, but since most of the press is biased to support the Kennedys it’s refreshing to see an article that isn’t reflexively kissing their @sses for a change.


A  friend attended the same  school as Ethel. She said Ethel personified “Money can’t buy you class” from an early age. Rude, crude, a “mean girl” who was an under age drinker and knew no boundaries.


----------



## DoggieBags

needlv said:


> So she is advertising she did all the work?  This feels like an open job advert…. She’s looking for the next employer!


Not sure claiming the credit for producing TW‘s puerile podcrashes is a thing you would want on your resume. It’s a series of Poorly constructed, poorly scripted, inane vanity pieces that demonstrate very clearly that the creative team has zero command of the English language. They named the series Archetypes but presented a series on stereotypes so they apparently don’t know the difference between the definitions of the two words. So the concept is deeply flawed and it has just gone downhill from there. If she’s so desperate to pad her resume that she’ll willingly claim credit for this ongoing train wreck, I wouldn’t hire her even if she offered to work for free.


----------



## sweetasc6h12o6

CarryOn2020 said:


> Thanks to Reddit Saint Meghan Markle, today’s transcript
> Audacious, Brave, Bold - Looks like she needs to turn the page to the C’s.
> 
> _Ilana: I was just thinking about this! I just bought these like puffs that have hidden vegetables and I don't like the idea of tricking our children. Everybody, you know, all these like parenting things of tricking our children. I remember one like lifestyle brand years ago, brownies with hidden spinach. But then you just said, thank God my kids love vegetables.
> I'm just like, but they are good for you and they are delicious. And then once you finish them, you can have chocolate or whatever. But it’s like actually, don’t hide the vegetables!
> 
> Meghan: It's not a zero sum game! Why do you have to hide it!
> 
> Ilana: No, they’re delicious!
> 
> MEGHAN: At this point in her career, Ilana, admittedly, doesn’t hide the vegetables. Outside of her comedic work, Ilana helps run Generator Collective – which is a non-profit targeted toward Gen Z and Millennials, which seeks to humanize policy through personal storytelling, mostly on social media. This group was started in 2016. And through it, she helps galvanize her audience with calls to action, live shows, and resources...
> For Ilana, it’s all about civic engagement, getting people to care – because that’s what she is passionate about. Down to her very core...
> 
> Ilana: I think I'm personally past the point of like messaging and making sure the message is right because I'm just like, I live it, you know what I mean? Like my politics, my body, my gender, my sexuality — I'm living it so I don't have to pointedly do it, you know, just being it is the message.
> 
> MEGHAN: To live the message. I’ve never actually heard it put in those terms. But when Ilana said it, it clicked for me — that, to me, is *audacious. Because in its truest definition, it’s about being bold. And it’s about being brave.* Just like my next guests._
> 
> 
> 
> https://storage.googleapis.com/pr-newsroom-wp/1/2022/03/Arcehtypes_Activist-Transcript-Ep.-10.pdf


Good Lord, how many times did that Ilana woman say “like”?!


----------



## needlv

Um… I can’t stop watching this.  Ignore the sound and concentrate on the edge of MM’s jacket where her bump is, and you see the bump pop outwards.  It’s not just the jacket moving angles.

Proof she padded herself to look more pregnant.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

youngster said:


> Per Kerry Kennedy:
> *They went to the oldest institution in the history of the United Kingdom and told them what they were doing wrong. *
> 
> _*They knew that if they did this, it would have consequences, that they would be condemned to ostracism, they would lose their family . . . *_
> 
> What an idiot Kerry Kennedy is and what a poorly written statement.  It pretty much tells you what you need to know about her.  Well, that and her extramarital affair and her DUI that she refused to take responsibility for.


I've no idea what this Kerry Kennedy does, except being the daughter of Robert Kennedy(?) but, I agree, she must be a total idiot! Oh well, I suppose birds of a feather......


----------



## youngster

duna said:


> I've no idea what this Kerry Kennedy does, except being the daughter of Robert Kennedy(?) but, I agree, she must be a total idiot! Oh well, I suppose birds of a feather....



She's in charge of the RFK Foundation and is paid a great deal of money to do . . . something . . . there.  Her tasks appear to involve getting people to donate money to the foundation so they can continue to pay her a great deal of money, writing lots of thank you notes, (allegedly) berating and belittling the staff, and hanging about with as many celebrities as possible so she can convince more people to donate money. She is also the ex-wife of former disgraced NY Governor Cuomo.  She's the one who decided to give the RFK award to Meg and Harry.


----------



## marietouchet

needlv said:


> Um… I can’t stop watching this.  Ignore the sound and concentrate on the edge of MM’s jacket where her bump is, and you see the bump pop outwards.  It’s not just the jacket moving angles.
> 
> Proof she padded herself to look more pregnant.



I don’t see a bump move, but rather see it as a moment where she was compensating because her skirt rode up
Her skirt is above her knees and would rise up A LOT when squatting
Awkward wardrobe moment ? She should wear longer hems and wider skirts for bending over and squatting, she pulled the coat into her lap - to hide her thighs, the the coat rippled out/floated down as she got up

ps had lots of fun watching video, thank you , keep ‘em coming


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> I've no idea what this Kerry Kennedy does, except being the daughter of Robert Kennedy(?) but, I agree, she must be a total idiot! Oh well, I suppose birds of a feather......





youngster said:


> She's in charge of the RFK Foundation and is paid a great deal of money to do . . . something . . . there.  Her tasks appear to involve getting people to donate money to the foundation so they can continue to pay her a great deal of money, writing lots of thank you notes, (allegedly) berating and belittling the staff, and hanging about with as many celebrities as possible so she can convince more people to donate money. She is also the ex-wife of former disgraced NY Governor Cuomo.  She's the one who decided to give the RFK award to Meg and Harry.


@duna I'm with you, I never paid much attention to Kerry K. She came on my radar with the Harkles' Human Rights Award. She is one of many siblings of Ethel Kennedy, a human rights advocate and/or activist. One more article in Spoiler about human rights for a certain type of Activists. As @CarryOn2020 would say, we can learn a lot thanks to Google.



Spoiler: Human Rights & Pretending Activists



 https://expressdigest.com/ethel-kennedy-treated-her-immigrant-servants-like-dogs-sources-say/



Thanks @youngster for the great summary.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Um… I can’t stop watching this.  Ignore the sound and concentrate on the edge of MM’s jacket where her bump is, and you see the bump pop outwards.  It’s not just the jacket moving angles.
> 
> Proof she padded herself to look more pregnant.



I had to watch it a few times but then I did see it. Very odd indeed. Even the movements of a third trimester fetus won't make your belly do that.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Um… I can’t stop watching this.  Ignore the sound and concentrate on the edge of MM’s jacket where her bump is, and you see the bump pop outwards.  It’s not just the jacket moving angles.
> 
> Proof she padded herself to look more pregnant.


----------



## Chanbal

Someone reposted this!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Exactly what does it mean when it says the award_ has been offered?_ Does it mean GQ offered to sell Meghan the award?


See if this answers your question. I'm starting to believe that anything is possible…


----------



## xincinsin

Reddit is snickering over a variation of what you ordered vs what you get. They figure Zed wanted to be the face of a designer brand but in reality, she is more likely to be a door-to-door cosmetics sales person. Word salad reimagined as a sales spiel:_ "It gives your face a multidimensional layered look that shows the world the fantastic woman you really are. Not as fantastic as me, Meghan, of course, but the best layered you you can be,"_


----------



## gracekelly

From the Daily Mail​​Harry and Meghan's original Netflix director quit 'over creative differences': Oscar-nominated film-maker walked out after couple were 'uncomfortable' filming at their home​
*Harry and Meghan have been working on the series as part of a rumoured $100 million (£88million) deal *
*Netflix was believed to have been set to push back release of show until 2023 amid backlash over The Crown *
But a 'senior source' has told Page Six it will be out in December despite the Sussexes' apparent reticence
Today it emerged they had artistic differences with first director Garrett Bradley
By MARTIN ROBINSON, CHIEF REPORTER FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 09:05 EST, 18 November 2022 | UPDATED: 10:25 EST, 18 November

Was it a question of keeping the invisible children invisible?  The lack of furniture? The lack of a real home? The chicken coop was being refurbished?  Isn’t it a given that if you want to document your life, you have to show where you live so it becomes more personal?  The only room we see looks like it could be a room at the Holiday Inn. It’s not personal and as cold as stone, and the Hermes blanket didn’t warm it up either.


Netflix is enjoying every second of the will  it or won’t it be shown in December. It is really hyping it up


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> From the Daily Mail​​Harry and Meghan's original Netflix director quit 'over creative differences': Oscar-nominated film-maker walked out after couple were 'uncomfortable' filming at their home​
> *Harry and Meghan have been working on the series as part of a rumoured $100 million (£88million) deal *
> *Netflix was believed to have been set to push back release of show until 2023 amid backlash over The Crown *
> But a 'senior source' has told Page Six it will be out in December despite the Sussexes' apparent reticence
> Today it emerged they had artistic differences with first director Garrett Bradley
> By MARTIN ROBINSON, CHIEF REPORTER FOR MAILONLINE
> 
> PUBLISHED: 09:05 EST, 18 November 2022 | UPDATED: 10:25 EST, 18 November
> 
> Was it a question of keeping the invisible children invisible?  The lack of furniture? The lack of a real home? The chicken coop was being refurbished?  Isn’t it a given that if you want to document your life, you have to show where you live so it becomes more personal?  The only room we see looks like it could be a room at the Holiday Inn. It’s not personal and as cold as stone, and the Hermes blanket didn’t warm it up either.
> 
> 
> Netflix is enjoying every second of the will  it or won’t it be shown in December. It is really hyping it up


Look for pigs flying in the sky, but I'm going to have to agree with them about not filming in their home, unless that was specifically agreed upon up front. That would be going full Kardashian, and I don't think that was a line they were ready to cross when they signed the contract. But check back with her this time next year. Notice I said her, not them.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> I never paid much attention to Kerry K. She came on my radar with the Harkles' Human Rights Award. *She is one of many siblings of Ethel Kennedy*



Kerry Kennedy is one of Ethel Kennedy's 11 children.  Two of the children are deceased (accident for one, drugs for another).  Her other children include RFK Jr. who is the anti-vaccine activist and married to his 3rd wife, actress Cheryl Hines.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Harry and Meghan's original Netflix director quit 'over creative differences': Oscar-nominated film-maker walked out after couple were 'uncomfortable' filming at their home​
> *Harry and Meghan have been working on the series as part of a rumoured $100 million (£88million) deal *
> *Netflix was believed to have been set to push back release of show until 2023 amid backlash over The Crown *
> But a 'senior source' has told Page Six it will be out in December despite the Sussexes' apparent reticence
> Today it emerged they had artistic differences with first director Garrett Bradley



Isn't it funny that Bradley could be Ghoul's younger and prettier sister? Maybe she didn't want to look into a mirror all day long, especially seeing Bradley is accomplished and she is not.


----------



## charlottawill

This should finally put to rest any questions about who his father is. It's sad that he didn't show more respect to his grandfather in his final days, the grandfather who was there for him when his mother died. He'll never be able to undo that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This should finally put to rest any questions about who his father is. It's sad that he didn't show more respect to his grandfather in his final days, the grandfather who was there for him when his mother died. He'll never be able to undo that.




I have not once, with all the pictures people brought up to prove it, seen Hewitt in his face, and more importantly, I can see a lot of family resemblance to several relatives, not least to Charles (is that grammatically correct? Sounds little butchered but I'm still a bit feverish  ).

Speaking of resemblance, my teenage nephew has turned into a clone of my brother (his uncle, not dad). He looks like him, he walks like him, he does the same stupid little quirks like cracking his back a certain way  And they live several hours away so it's not like he's imitating him or something. Genes are funny.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This should finally put to rest any questions about who his father is. I*t's sad that he didn't show more respect to his grandfather in his final days, the grandfather who was there for him when his mother died. He'll never be able to undo that.*



But also this so much.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It's sad that he didn't show more respect to his grandfather in his final days, the grandfather who was there for him when his mother died. He'll never be able to undo that.



Meghan has trained Harry well. 
Cut off all ties to your former life and those you loved, Harry.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanel Celebrated Emerging Women Filmmakers With a High Powered Luncheon at The Academy Museum
					

An unseasonably warm day provided the backdrop for the 2022 Academy Gold Fellowship for Women presentation in partnership with Chanel at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures on Wednesday.




					www.vogue.com
				




Oh look!  Meghan, a well known actress and political activist wasn’t invited. How did that happen?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I had to watch it a few times but then I did see it. Very odd indeed. Even the movements of a third trimester fetus won't make your belly do that.


I agree, the situation is very odd to say the least. Someone posted on Reddit today a very puzzling tale on TW's OBGYN (see Spoiler). Wow!



Spoiler: The curious case of the OBGYN


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> This should finally put to rest any questions about who his father is. It's sad that he didn't show more respect to his grandfather in his final days, the grandfather who was there for him when his mother died. He'll never be able to undo that.



I hope as he ages and the resemblance deepens H is savaged with remorse every single time he looks in the mirror or at a photo of the Duke.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I agree, the situation is very odd to say the least. Someone posted on Reddit today a very puzzling tale on TW's OBGYN (see Spoiler). Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The curious case of the OBGYN



It’s too soon for any punitive actions against her, if there are any, to show up on the Medical Board site. I’m sure she didn’t just close her door and leave patients in the cold. She may have stopped taking on new patients at a certain point and arranged medical coverage for those still waiting to deliver.  Either the patient could stick with the covering MD or find a different one.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> I hope as he ages and the resemblance deepens H is savaged with remorse every single time he looks in the mirror or at a photo of the Duke.


I think Harry exhibits more of the Spencer gene pool. He certainly has their coloring.


----------



## Toby93

duna said:


> I've no idea what this Kerry Kennedy does, except being the daughter of Robert Kennedy(?) but, I agree, she must be a total idiot! Oh well, I suppose birds of a feather......


I remember going to my doctor years ago post pregnancy and we were talking about me having another child.  He said that it was always a good idea to wait 2 years between children to let your body and the gene pool recover  That was 30 years ago before internet so I have no idea if it's true or not, but it always stuck with me.  Having 11 kids, one after the other every year seems like a watered down gene pool, and maybe it's not Kerry's fault she is missing a few marbles?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> It’s too soon for any punitive actions against her, if there are any, to show up on the Medical Board site. I’m sure she didn’t just close her door and leave patients in the cold. She may have stopped taking on new patients at a certain point and arranged medical coverage for those still waiting to deliver.  Either the patient could stick with the covering MD or find a different one.


I agree with you that she may have transferred her existing patients to a new physician, and just stopped taking on new patients. However, there are many intriguing aspects linked to her quitting her practice, including the husband's speciality and connections. I hope an investigative journalist becomes interested on the subject… Tom Bower? 

I also find it intriguing TW's alleged claim that "_Archie's doctor from the London, Dr. Gowri Motha, coached Meghan's medical team over zoom for Lilibet's birth_". Why would they need someone from the UK to coach a medical team in the US? There are plenty of very experienced OBGYNs in the US…


----------



## DL Harper

Chanbal said:


> I agree with you that she may have transferred her existing patients to a new physician, and just stopped taking on new patients. However, there are many intriguing aspects linked to her quitting her practice, including the husband's speciality and connections. I hope an investigative journalist becomes interested on the subject… Tom Bower?
> 
> I also find it intriguing TW's alleged claim that "_Archie's doctor from the London, Dr. Gowri Motha, coached Meghan's medical team over zoom for Lilibet's birth_". Why would they need someone from the UK to coach a medical team in the US? There are plenty of very experienced OBGYNs in the US…


Even though H&M were presumably in the US at the time of Lilibet's birth, maybe the medical team and the suspected/alleged/supposed surrogate/birth mother of Lilibet weren't located in the US??


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Um… I can’t stop watching this.  Ignore the sound and concentrate on the edge of MM’s jacket where her bump is, and you see the bump pop outwards.  It’s not just the jacket moving angles.
> 
> Proof she padded herself to look more pregnant.



It literally grew before our eyes.  Either it's fake or the video is doctored.


----------



## purseinsanity

duna said:


> I've no idea what this Kerry Kennedy does, except being the daughter of Robert Kennedy(?) but, I agree, she must be a total idiot! Oh well, I suppose birds of a feather......


I think she capitalizes on her last names.


----------



## Chanbal

One mystery seems to have been solved by Lady C (last video). It's Hillary C the influential woman who implored TW to not give up on activism. Michelle O asked TW the same. According to a source, the conversations happened around the time of Arch*e's birth and TW apparently confided to someone. There is only a minor problem, HC and MO may not be aware of such conversations with TW.  All allegedly, of course!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I remember going to my doctor years ago post pregnancy and we were talking about me having another child.  He said that it was always a good idea to wait 2 years between children to let your body and the gene pool recover  That was 30 years ago before internet so I have no idea if it's true or not, but it always stuck with me.  Having 11 kids, one after the other every year seems like a watered down gene pool, and maybe it's not Kerry's fault she is missing a few marbles?


I'm of the same reproductive era and I was told nine months to get there and nine months back, but women have been having annual pregnancies since forever. For some the weeklong stay in the hospital was like a vacation. Many women have uncomplicated pregnancies and healthy babies (see: Duggar) while others die in childbirth. I have a friend whose mother had six children by age 22, no multiples, then her doctor told her another would kill her. This was in the 50s, a good Italian Catholic woman. Ethel Kennedy was raised with that mindset, like her MIL Rose Kennedy before her. I think the issue with KK was more emotional neglect/abuse while growing up.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have not once, with all the pictures people brought up to prove it, seen Hewitt in his face, and more importantly, I can see a lot of family resemblance to several relatives, not least to Charles (is that grammatically correct? Sounds little butchered but I'm still a bit feverish  ).
> 
> Speaking of resemblance, my teenage nephew has turned into a clone of my brother (his uncle, not dad). He looks like him, he walks like him, he does the same stupid little quirks like cracking his back a certain way  And they live several hours away so it's not like he's imitating him or something. Genes are funny.


I knew a kid like that.  He looked exactly like his father's uncle - not like his father.  we used to joke that his mom must have had an affair with the uncle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Chanel Celebrated Emerging Women Filmmakers With a High Powered Luncheon at The Academy Museum
> 
> 
> An unseasonably warm day provided the backdrop for the 2022 Academy Gold Fellowship for Women presentation in partnership with Chanel at the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh look!  Meghan, a well known actress and political activist wasn’t invited. How did that happen?



It must enrage her when she reads of events like this. These are the types of things at which she expected to be front and center when they moved to CA. And have we ever seen her in Chanel? Probably not since they don't do merching deals.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I agree, the situation is very odd to say the least. Someone posted on Reddit today a very puzzling tale on TW's OBGYN (see Spoiler). Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The curious case of the OBGYN



I find this whole argument ridiculous for a couple reasons.  

First of all, an OBGYN ABSOLUTELY can quit practicing while having pregnant patients.  How many practicing OBs only have a couple patients?  There are multiple patients due at any given month, so this person is saying an OB is some machine that can't get old/retire/die WITHOUT transferring care?  Give me a break.  It is NOT a doctor's responsibility to find a new doctor for their patients.  They DO have to notify their patients in advance (I don't remember if it's a 30 or 60 day window) that they plan on moving/closing their practice, which she did do.  Obviously, doctors can die as well, at which no such notice can understandably be given.  My son's pediatrician died out of nowhere, and I wasn't exactly able to sue his estate because the poor guy dropped dead.

Second, how would BP have any right to demand Dr. Drake sign any da!n thing verifying the birth?  She is in the US, and last I checked, BP has zero authority in demanding any legalities in the US for something like that.

Third, what exactly do people think doctors lose their licenses for?  Malpractice?  Yes.  Drugs/incapacity to care properly for patients?  Absolutely.  Faking qualifications?  Sure.  Not notifying everyone that their patient used a surrogate?  He!l NO.  Doctors have a sacred relationship with their patient.  She would've ultimately been responsible to TW's wishes, not even Haz, not even if he's a "Prince of the UK", unless TW has given her permission in writing.  Doesn't mean a damn thing.  If she announced something publicly without permission from her patient, HIPAA would rear it's ugly head and THAT could make her lose her license.

I like a fun conspiracy theory myself, but these people are barking up the wrong angle.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I agree, the situation is very odd to say the least. Someone posted on Reddit today a very puzzling tale on TW's OBGYN (see Spoiler). Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The curious case of the OBGYN



That's certainly a lot to process. Dr. Rychik worked at the Shriver Institute, named for the mother of Maria Shriver, who is good friends with Oprah, who of course knows MM. Could O have referred MM to Maria, knowing her family connection to the institute, who then referred MM to the institute where she ultimately met Rychik? Or is it just another innocuous example of six degrees of separation?


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> I find this whole argument ridiculous for a couple reasons.
> 
> First of all, an OBGYN ABSOLUTELY can quit practicing while having pregnant patients.  How many practicing OBs only have a couple patients?  There are multiple patients due at any given month, so this person is saying an OB is some machine that can't get old/retire/die WITHOUT transferring care?  Give me a break.  It is NOT a doctor's responsibility to find a new doctor for their patients.  They DO have to notify their patients in advance (I don't remember if it's a 30 or 60 day window) that they plan on moving/closing their practice, which she did do.  Obviously, doctors can die as well, at which no such notice can understandably be given.  My son's pediatrician died out of nowhere, and I wasn't exactly able to sue his estate because the poor guy dropped dead.
> 
> Second, how would BP have any right to demand Dr. Drake sign any da!n thing verifying the birth?  She is in the US, and last I checked, BP has zero authority in demanding any legalities in the US for something like that.
> 
> Third, what exactly do people think doctors lose their licenses for?  Malpractice?  Yes.  Drugs/incapacity to care properly for patients?  Absolutely.  Faking qualifications?  Sure.  Not notifying everyone that their patient used a surrogate?  He!l NO.  Doctors have a sacred relationship with their patient.  She would've ultimately been responsible to TW's wishes, not even Haz, not even if he's a "Prince of the UK", unless TW has given her permission in writing.  Doesn't mean a damn thing.  If she announced something publicly without permission from her patient, HIPAA would rear it's ugly head and THAT could make her lose her license.
> 
> I like a fun conspiracy theory myself, but these people are barking up the wrong angle.


You must have read the all thing a lot more carefully than I did.   I don't think the point here is about the doctor losing her license, it's more about a few very intriguing 'coincidences'.
By the way, the obgyn opened her Santa Barbara practice in 2017, and looked too young to retire. Of course, it could be related to a major illness, which I hope it's not the case.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> You must have read the all think a lot more carefully than I did.   I don't think the point here is about the doctor losing her license, it's more about a few very intriguing 'coincidences'.
> By the way, the obgyn opened her Santa Barbara practice in 2017, and looked too young to retire. Of course, it could be related to a major illness, which I hope was not the cause.



I thought it was to spend more time with her own young children, unless I am imagining/misremembering.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It must enrage her when she reads of events like this. These are the types of things at which she expected to be front and center when they moved to CA. And have we ever seen her in Chanel? Probably not since they don't do merching deals.



Didn't she wear a Chanel jacket while in the Netherlands? With those baggy jeans? My memory is blurry though.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Didn't she wear a Chanel jacket while in the Netherlands? With those baggy jeans? My memory is blurry though.


You're right, I do recall that outfit. But was it Chanel or Chanel-style? There are a lot of lookalikes out there.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> My son's pediatrician died out of nowhere, and I wasn't exactly able to sue his estate because the poor guy dropped dead.



Random, but what are the chances? My friend's kid's pediatrician with his wife and tourguide died during a trip to Alaska because a piece of a glacier broke off and fell on their boat.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> You're right, I do recall that outfit. But was it Chanel or Chanel-style? There are a lot of lookalikes out there.



If someone makes lookalikes that are more expensive than the original she probably went for that one.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I thought it was to spend more time with her own young children, unless I am imagining/misremembering.


I think she kept the reason private. I've a couple of acquaintances that quitted medicine to do something totally different. It's very possible that her decision to close her practice has nothing to do with TW.

@QueenofWrapDress I don't think death was the cause here, I believe she was the one that issued the statement about closing the practice.


----------



## oldbag

charlottawill said:


> I'm of the same reproductive era and I was told nine months to get there and nine months back, but women have been having annual pregnancies since forever. For some the weeklong stay in the hospital was like a vacation. Many women have uncomplicated pregnancies and healthy babies (see: Duggar) while others die in childbirth. I have a friend whose mother had six children by age 22, no multiples, then her doctor told her another would kill her. This was in the 50s, a good Italian Catholic woman. Ethel Kennedy was raised with that mindset, like her MIL Rose Kennedy before her. I think the issue with KK was more emotional neglect/abuse while growing up.


My mother gave birth to my brother and me in the same year and this was more than 70 years ago. She was also in her mid 30's. I guess that was enough of that no more kids.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I think she kept the reason private. I've a couple of acquaintances that quitted medicine to do something totally different. *It's very possible that her decision to close her practice has nothing to do with TW.*
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress I don't think death was the cause here, I believe she was the one that issued the statement about closing the practice.


It almost certainly had nothing to do with her. The doctor announced she was leaving her practice in June of this year. But Lil’bit was born in June of 2021. An entire year is a long span of time to be making a connection to Meghan.

I enjoy reading overly thought-out theories like that though. Sometimes I worry that I am too fixated on the Harkles but when I read something like that I realize I could be a lot worse.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I enjoy reading overly thought-out theories like that though. Sometimes I worry that I am too fixated on the Harkles but when I read something like that I realize I could be a lot worse.


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> I hope as he ages and the resemblance deepens H is savaged with remorse every single time he looks in the mirror or at a photo of the Duke.


I'm not saying anything about whether there is or isn't a resemblance, but it has gotten to the point where I don't trust any pics posted to _not be_ photoshopped.  The picture of prince Philip looks to be manipulated to look more like Harry.  If it was a well known pic then maybe I would trust it, but there is something about this picture that looks off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

csshopper said:


> I hope as he ages and the resemblance deepens H is savaged with remorse every single time he looks in the mirror or at a photo of the Duke.





Toby93 said:


> I'm not saying anything about whether there is or isn't a resemblance, but it has gotten to the point where I don't trust any pics posted to _not be_ photoshopped.  The picture of prince Philip looks to be manipulated to look more like Harry.  If it was a well known pic then maybe I would trust it, but there is something about this picture that looks off.


Agree - Philip looks odd and photoshopped.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> I agree, the situation is very odd to say the least. Someone posted on Reddit today a very puzzling tale on TW's OBGYN (see Spoiler). Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The curious case of the OBGYN



Wow, that's a long post and filled with information... anyone want to condense it for me? I'm a bit busy but still love a good conspiracy theory.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>



But there's a glaring difference. Crazy and Hazy will never earn the kind of money that Gisele and Tom did from modeling, football, product endorsements and so on. It is certainly disingenuous of Gisele to claim to be some big time philanthropist if she really isn't, but they actually earned the money and they can do whatever they want with it. I can't see how the Harkles could ever generate that kind of income. We've watched them flop with Netflix and Spotify, who is going to fall for their next grift?


----------



## RJY

charlottawill said:


> But there's a glaring difference. Crazy and Hazy will never earn the kind of money that Gisele and Tom did from modeling, football, product endorsements and so on. It is certainly disingenuous of Gisele to claim to be some big time philanthropist if she really isn't, but they actually earned the money and they can do whatever they want with it. I can't see how the Harkles could ever generate that kind of income. We've watched them flop with Netflix and Spotify, who is going to fall for their next grift?


I have no problem with Gisele/Tom or anyone else amassing a fortune and doing what they want with it. The problem, as I see it, is that it's a tax exempt charitable fund that only donated less than 1% of it's worth. That sounds like they're hiding assets so as not to pay taxes. I could be wrong, but that's what I got out of the article. And if true, that's exactly what I see the Harkles doing with Archewell and all their myriad companies.


----------



## Toby93

"A convenient excuse to save face....."


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Wow, that's a long post and filled with information... anyone want to condense it for me? I'm a bit busy but still love a good conspiracy theory.


Ok, I'll try. It's about the obgyn that allegedly delivered TW's daughter. She is relatively young and closed her practice several months after the 'royal' delivery. Interestingly (conveniently?), she is married to a specialist in IVF and surrogacy. Her practice was established only in 2017 and it's closure took some people by surprise. There are many experienced obgyns and practices in California. However, TW has apparently claimed to have had a doctor from the UK assisting the delivery via zoom  telephone. Many questions and speculations have been raised since then.

EDIT 1: There is an interesting comment on the same Reddit post that shows a job advertisement by the obgyn prior to quitting her practice (see Spoiler). No mention of the baby's mother. The plot thickens. 
EDIT 2: Added a reference to Spoiler about the UK guru.



Spoiler: Job offer










__





						Obstetrics / Gynecology Job Located Job in Santa Barbara, CA at Melissa Drake MD OB / GYN | JobSearcher
					

Melissa Drake MD OB / GYN Easy 1-Click Apply. Obstetrics / Gynecology Job Located job in Santa Barbara, CA. View Job description, benefits and responsibilities. Find out if you meet the requirements!




					jobsearcher.com
				











						Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Guru Shares the Tips She Offered for the Birth of Baby Lili
					

Dr. Gowri Motha helped deliver both of Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's babies, Archie and Lilibet Diana




					people.com


----------



## charlottawill

rita2129 said:


> I have no problem with Gisele/Tom or anyone else amassing a fortune and doing what they want with it. The problem, as I see it, is that it's a tax exempt charitable fund that only donated less than 1% of it's worth. That sounds like they're hiding assets so as not to pay taxes. I could be wrong, but that's what I got out of the article. And if true, that's exactly what I see the Harkles doing with Archewell and all their myriad companies.


I did not read it that way, but you may be right.

The article states "that less than 0.09 percent of their wealth was directed towards the Luz Foundation."


----------



## charlottawill

I guess Megsy had a prior engagement



>


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> Ok, I'll try. It's about the obgyn that allegedly delivered TW's daughter. She is relatively young and closed her practice several months after the 'royal' delivery. Interestingly (conveniently?), she is married to a specialist in IVF and surrogacy. Her practice was established only in 2017 and it's closure took some people by surprise. There are many experienced obgyns and practices in California. However, TW has apparently claimed to have had a doctor from the UK assisting the delivery via zoom. Many questions and speculations have been raised since then.
> 
> EDIT: There is an interesting comment on the same Reddit post that shows a job advertisement by the obgyn prior to the practice closure (see Spoiler). No mention of the baby's mother. The plot thickens.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Job offer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5655794


This theory is too far fetched for me.

Doctors do suffer from burn out.  And in one of the comments someone posted a link saying the Doctor was being sued for losing a baby the week before she made her announcement to quit.


----------



## RJY

charlottawill said:


> I did not read it that way, but you may be right.
> 
> The article states "that less than 0.09 percent of their wealth was directed towards the Luz Foundation."


Thanks, I went back and reread it. You're right, they don't state what was sitting in the foundation, only that they gave away less than 1% of their net worth. Still, coming from someone who swore it was her duty, that's a tiny amount. 

At this point, I feel like Meghan saw all the shenanigans going on in Hollywood (one of my favorites is the fundraiser that costs the foundation more to setup and collects less than these celebs, etc. could just donate themselves) and thought Harry was her ticket on that train.


----------



## bag-mania

Spotted this on The Cut.

Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse​
Having already expanded their dominion into podcasts, streaming, and literature, there is only one final media frontier left for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to conquer, and I will give you three hints as to what it might be. One: It’s buzzy, mostly if you’re a celebrity inclined to drink tech Kool-Aid. Two: It sounds similar to a scheme Mark Zuckerberg has been trying, and failing, to make happen for ages. Three: It runs on cryptocurrency. If you are sighing, _Oh, God,_ _not the metaverse_, then I award you one non-fungible token: According to _The Mirror_, Meghan and Harry may be buying up acreage in a virtual reality and may even render themselves as avatars “in an effort to reach millions more fans.” Someone allegedly close to the couple explained their reasoning thus:


> Both Meghan and Harry believe they will have an even greater ability to spread their message if they have a presence in the virtual world as well as the physical world. They’ve spoken to a variety of experts and the view is this is the next stage to take their brand truly global.


In my opinion? Absolutely not. In the tabloid’s opinion, however, the couple are in talks to launch a VR platform “dubbed the ‘Meg-averse’” — whether by _The Mirror_ or the Sussexes, it’s not clear, though the latter would probably call it “Archeworld” or something — with a company called Pax.world, which sells “tiles” of buildable “land” to the “$PAXW”-holding public. “The new deal could take many forms,” the tabloid reports, “including gaming, online communities and business meetings,” presumably featuring Meghan and Harry as tiny digital versions of themselves. Keeping in mind the source of this rumor, I must urge caution and incredulity on everyone including myself, lest we get all worked up over nothing.

But for me, it’s not so much the thought of “Prince Harry as bitcoin bro” — that actually sits companionably alongside “chief impact officer at start-up” on his increasingly amorphous CV — that’s ominous, nor is it my ballooning suspicion that many of these celebrity-backed crypto-trends will wind up being scams. For me, it’s the mental image of little Zuckerberg-style Meghan and Harry cartoons hovering (legs are coming soon!) at the gates of their pixelated meta-Montecito community, beckoning me to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” Personally, I am hoping that, as has been the case with so many of their other giant deals, the Sussexes will take their sweet time getting this hypothetical unconfirmed project off the ground.








						Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse
					

A tabloid report claims the Sussexes are considering buying “land” in a virtual reality in order to “reach millions more fans.”




					www.thecut.com


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> This theory is too far fetched for me.
> 
> Doctors do suffer from burn out.  And in one of the comments someone posted a link saying the Doctor was being sued for losing a baby the week before she made her announcement to quit.


Absolutely, everyone can suffer from burnout. While not frequent for a young doctor to quit her/his practice, it's very possible.


----------



## Hyacinth

bag-mania said:


> Spotted this on The Cut.
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse​
> Having already expanded their dominion into podcasts, streaming, and literature, there is only one final media frontier left for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to conquer, and I will give you three hints as to what it might be. One: It’s buzzy, mostly if you’re a celebrity inclined to drink tech Kool-Aid. Two: It sounds similar to a scheme Mark Zuckerberg has been trying, and failing, to make happen for ages. Three: It runs on cryptocurrency. If you are sighing, _Oh, God,_ _not the metaverse_, then I award you one non-fungible token: According to _The Mirror_, Meghan and Harry may be buying up acreage in a virtual reality and may even render themselves as avatars “in an effort to reach millions more fans.” Someone allegedly close to the couple explained their reasoning thus:
> 
> In my opinion? Absolutely not. In the tabloid’s opinion, however, the couple are in talks to launch a VR platform “dubbed the ‘Meg-averse’” — whether by _The Mirror_ or the Sussexes, it’s not clear, though the latter would probably call it “Archeworld” or something — with a company called Pax.world, which sells “tiles” of buildable “land” to the “$PAXW”-holding public. “The new deal could take many forms,” the tabloid reports, “including gaming, online communities and business meetings,” presumably featuring Meghan and Harry as tiny digital versions of themselves. Keeping in mind the source of this rumor, I must urge caution and incredulity on everyone including myself, lest we get all worked up over nothing.
> 
> But for me, it’s not so much the thought of “Prince Harry as bitcoin bro” — that actually sits companionably alongside “chief impact officer at start-up” on his increasingly amorphous CV — that’s ominous, nor is it my ballooning suspicion that many of these celebrity-backed crypto-trends will wind up being scams. For me, it’s the mental image of little Zuckerberg-style Meghan and Harry cartoons hovering (legs are coming soon!) at the gates of their pixelated meta-Montecito community, beckoning me to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” Personally, I am hoping that, as has been the case with so many of their other giant deals, the Sussexes will take their sweet time getting this hypothetical unconfirmed project off the ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse
> 
> 
> A tabloid report claims the Sussexes are considering buying “land” in a virtual reality in order to “reach millions more fans.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com






Please please please, let them buy into that scam head-first and lose their arses, as well as their house, the Handbag's polo ponies, AND MeMeMeGain's blood diamond earrings.

Maybe THEN they'll finally go away.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Ok, I'll try. It's about the obgyn that allegedly delivered TW's daughter. She is relatively young and closed her practice several months after the 'royal' delivery. Interestingly (conveniently?), she is married to a specialist in IVF and surrogacy. Her practice was established only in 2017 and it's closure took some people by surprise. There are many experienced obgyns and practices in California. However, TW has apparently claimed to have had a doctor from the UK assisting the delivery via zoom  telephone. Many questions and speculations have been raised since then.
> 
> EDIT 1: There is an interesting comment on the same Reddit post that shows a job advertisement by the obgyn prior to quitting her practice (see Spoiler). No mention of the baby's mother. The plot thickens.
> EDIT 2: Added a reference to Spoiler about the UK guru.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Job offer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5655794
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obstetrics / Gynecology Job Located Job in Santa Barbara, CA at Melissa Drake MD OB / GYN | JobSearcher
> 
> 
> Melissa Drake MD OB / GYN Easy 1-Click Apply. Obstetrics / Gynecology Job Located job in Santa Barbara, CA. View Job description, benefits and responsibilities. Find out if you meet the requirements!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jobsearcher.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Pregnancy Guru Shares the Tips She Offered for the Birth of Baby Lili
> 
> 
> Dr. Gowri Motha helped deliver both of Prince Harry and Meghan's Markle's babies, Archie and Lilibet Diana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Thanks for the bullet points - but who cares that she quit her practice or am I missing something?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> This should finally put to rest any questions about who his father is. It's sad that he didn't show more respect to his grandfather in his final days, the grandfather who was there for him when his mother died. He'll never be able to undo that.



Yes, there are plenty of [doctored?] photos that show Hazz looks like Phillip.  Same number that shows he looks like Hewitt.  









						Prince Harry's uncanny resemblance to late grandfather Prince Philip in photos
					

Royal watchers have noticed how Prince Harry is the spitting image of his late paternal grandfather Prince Philip, the Queen's husband – see the photographic proof




					www.hellomagazine.com
				













						Is James Hewitt Prince Harry's Real Father? Paternity Theories Swirl About Princess Di's Lover After Elizabeth's Death
					

Theories are swirling yet again that James Hewitt is the biological father of Prince Harry after Queen Elizabeth's death, RadarOnline.com can confirm.




					radaronline.com


----------



## xincinsin

Chris Hemsworth just did a docu series (Disney!) on old age diseases and, in the process of filming, underwent tests which showed he had a genetic predisposition to develop Alzheimer's. What he said: _“My concern was I just didn’t want to manipulate it and overdramatize it and make it into some sort of hokey grab at empathy or whatever for entertainment.”_

And I compared that with Mr "My Mummy Died" and Madam "No One Asked If I'm Okay"...  And I wonder how talentless and empty Zed must be if her moaning is the only inspiration the ginormous production team could wring out of her for her flopcast. What other inspiration can Spotify excavate to justify their money going into Harkle coffers? Their triumphant activism and charity endeavours?


----------



## Katel

bag-mania said:


> Spotted this on The Cut.
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse​Having already expanded their dominion …
> In my opinion? Absolutely not. In the tabloid’s opinion, however, the couple are in talks to launch a VR platform “dubbed the ‘*Meg-averse*’” — whether by _The Mirror_ or the Sussexes, it’s not clear, though the latter would probably call it “Archeworld” or something — with a company called Pax.world, which sells “tiles” of buildable “land” to the “$PAXW”-holding public. “The new deal could take many forms,” the tabloid reports, “including gaming, online communities and business meetings,” presumably featuring Meghan and Harry as tiny digital versions of themselves. Keeping in mind the source of this rumor, I must urge caution and incredulity on everyone including myself, lest we get all worked up over nothing.
> 
> But for me, it’s not so much the thought of “Prince Harry as bitcoin bro” — that actually sits companionably alongside “chief impact officer at start-up” on his increasingly amorphous CV — that’s ominous, nor is it my ballooning suspicion that many of these celebrity-backed crypto-trends will wind up being scams. For me, it’s the mental image of little Zuckerberg-style Meghan and Harry cartoons hovering (legs are coming soon!) at the gates of their pixelated meta-Montecito community, beckoning me to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” Personally, I am hoping that, as has been the case with so many of their other giant deals, the Sussexes will take their sweet time getting this hypothetical unconfirmed project off the ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse
> 
> 
> A tabloid report claims the Sussexes are considering buying “land” in a virtual reality in order to “reach millions more fans.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com



“Meg-averse”  how accurate.
They like this idea because it’s fake like they are.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> You're right, I do recall that outfit. But was it Chanel or Chanel-style? There are a lot of lookalikes out there.


It was a Chanel style. As far as I know, the only Chanel that she has worn was  the ballet flat and not clothing


----------



## CarryOn2020

She wore Chanel in the The Cut interview:

_But it was Meghan's *Chanel* *dress*, in Chanel's iconic boucle-tweed, that caught our attention. With a ballerina bun, pared-back makeup and bare feet, the black and white bandeau dress, called the Chanel Fantasy Tweed Dress, is a lesson in understated chic._








						Meghan Markle's tweed dress is autumn fashion goals – here are 11 from the high street
					

Meghan Markle's recent interview with The Cut saw Prince Harry's wife showcasing her imitable style, wearing Lanvin, Tory Burch, and Bottega Veneta. But it's her Chanel dress in boucle we're calling autumn fashion goals – and we've found some of the best tweed dresses on the high street. Shop...




					www.hellomagazine.com
				




She also has a Gabrielle Hobo, allegedly









						Chanel Gabrielle Black Hobo Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
					

Shop the Chanel Gabrielle Black Hobo Bag as seen on Meghan Markle



					www.meghansfashion.com


----------



## xincinsin

hmmmmk said:


> Not as a reply, as a new post.. i dont see a button to create a new post


If you don't use the reply button in an existing post, and just write in the field at the bottom of the webpage, then it creates a fresh post that counts as a reply to the thread itself.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> She wore Chanel in the The Cut interview:
> 
> _But it was Meghan's *Chanel* *dress*, in Chanel's iconic boucle-tweed, that caught our attention. With a ballerina bun, pared-back makeup and bare feet, the black and white bandeau dress, called the Chanel Fantasy Tweed Dress, is a lesson in understated chic._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's tweed dress is autumn fashion goals – here are 11 from the high street
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's recent interview with The Cut saw Prince Harry's wife showcasing her imitable style, wearing Lanvin, Tory Burch, and Bottega Veneta. But it's her Chanel dress in boucle we're calling autumn fashion goals – and we've found some of the best tweed dresses on the high street. Shop...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She also has a Gabrielle Hobo, allegedly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chanel Gabrielle Black Hobo Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
> 
> 
> Shop the Chanel Gabrielle Black Hobo Bag as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


Oh right you are. She did. It was an aberration lol!  Someone must have given her the Gabrielle. Not a popular bag currently.


----------



## EmilyM11

Toby93 said:


> "A convenient excuse to save face....."
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5655785
> 
> 
> View attachment 5655786



The real fact here that Netflix paid (or would pay if...) them $100M in anticipation of great ratings and viewership makes me really wonder who runs the place there. The Crown (regardless whether it's real or made up) encompassing 50+ years of exciting lives of the almost WHOLE royal family didn't manage, so how 2 unaccomplished people with lives more boring than my own mother would do that? I work for one of those tech giants and we felt last week how it is to be run by somebody incompetent, but this is something else altogether.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> She wore Chanel in the The Cut interview:
> 
> _But it was Meghan's *Chanel* *dress*, in Chanel's iconic boucle-tweed, that caught our attention. With a ballerina bun, pared-back makeup and bare feet, the black and white bandeau dress, called the Chanel Fantasy Tweed Dress, is a lesson in understated chic._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's tweed dress is autumn fashion goals – here are 11 from the high street
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's recent interview with The Cut saw Prince Harry's wife showcasing her imitable style, wearing Lanvin, Tory Burch, and Bottega Veneta. But it's her Chanel dress in boucle we're calling autumn fashion goals – and we've found some of the best tweed dresses on the high street. Shop...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She also has a Gabrielle Hobo, allegedly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chanel Gabrielle Black Hobo Bag - Meghan Markle's Handbags
> 
> 
> Shop the Chanel Gabrielle Black Hobo Bag as seen on Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> 
> www.meghansfashion.com


Gabrielle is already one of my least used bags, and TW may have ruined it for me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Are these people for real.


----------



## lanasyogamama

bag-mania said:


> Spotted this on The Cut.
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse​
> Having already expanded their dominion into podcasts, streaming, and literature, there is only one final media frontier left for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to conquer, and I will give you three hints as to what it might be. One: It’s buzzy, mostly if you’re a celebrity inclined to drink tech Kool-Aid. Two: It sounds similar to a scheme Mark Zuckerberg has been trying, and failing, to make happen for ages. Three: It runs on cryptocurrency. If you are sighing, _Oh, God,_ _not the metaverse_, then I award you one non-fungible token: According to _The Mirror_, Meghan and Harry may be buying up acreage in a virtual reality and may even render themselves as avatars “in an effort to reach millions more fans.” Someone allegedly close to the couple explained their reasoning thus:
> 
> In my opinion? Absolutely not. In the tabloid’s opinion, however, the couple are in talks to launch a VR platform “dubbed the ‘Meg-averse’” — whether by _The Mirror_ or the Sussexes, it’s not clear, though the latter would probably call it “Archeworld” or something — with a company called Pax.world, which sells “tiles” of buildable “land” to the “$PAXW”-holding public. “The new deal could take many forms,” the tabloid reports, “including gaming, online communities and business meetings,” presumably featuring Meghan and Harry as tiny digital versions of themselves. Keeping in mind the source of this rumor, I must urge caution and incredulity on everyone including myself, lest we get all worked up over nothing.
> 
> But for me, it’s not so much the thought of “Prince Harry as bitcoin bro” — that actually sits companionably alongside “chief impact officer at start-up” on his increasingly amorphous CV — that’s ominous, nor is it my ballooning suspicion that many of these celebrity-backed crypto-trends will wind up being scams. For me, it’s the mental image of little Zuckerberg-style Meghan and Harry cartoons hovering (legs are coming soon!) at the gates of their pixelated meta-Montecito community, beckoning me to “unleash the power of compassion to drive systemic cultural change.” Personally, I am hoping that, as has been the case with so many of their other giant deals, the Sussexes will take their sweet time getting this hypothetical unconfirmed project off the ground.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry: Beware the Metaverse
> 
> 
> A tabloid report claims the Sussexes are considering buying “land” in a virtual reality in order to “reach millions more fans.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com


I love that The Cut is dragging them so hard after that interview! I might have to re follow them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

She’ll never get anywhere with merching. She doesn’t make clothes look good.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> She’ll never get anywhere with merching. She doesn’t make clothes look good.


She is never going to believe that. If she doesn't appear on covers or become the face of something, it won't be because of her own lack of glamour. She will blame it on everyone else's lack of appreciation of her sparkle.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> She is never going to believe that. If she doesn't appear on covers or become the face of something, it won't be because of her own lack of glamour. She will blame it on everyone else's lack of appreciation of her sparkle.


Or blame racism. Never mind the many many successful WOC in the space.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh. A new Prince of Bel Air?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I enjoy reading overly thought-out theories like that though. Sometimes *I worry that I am too fixated on the Harkles *but when I read something like that I realize I could be a lot worse.



…in the pursuit of an answer…


----------



## Miss Liz

I follow them out of morbid curiosity.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Gabrielle is already one of my least used bags, and TW may have ruined it for me.


Lol!  I had a really pretty tweed one and sold it because it weighed a ton. The resale on it wasn’t great because the style was already being ghosted. It doesn’t look like the kind of bag that Meghan favors.


----------



## charlottawill

charlottawill said:


> I guess Megsy had a prior engagement


I was trying to post a clip from CNN about a program airing on Monday featuring a panel discussion with Michelle O, Amal Clooney, Melinda Gates and several others. Don't know what happened. I'm sure MM will be seething with jealousy and FOMO. Hazy and staff
better take cover.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I was trying to post a clip from CNN about a program airing on Monday featuring a panel discussion with Michelle O, Amal Clooney, Melinda Gates and several others. Don't know what happened. I'm sure MM will be seething with jealousy and FOMO. Hazy and staff
> better take cover.


she may be jealous but she has no status to be in that group


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are these people for real.



But why?


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> She’ll never get anywhere with merching. She doesn’t make clothes look good.


Exactly. The reason Gisele Bundchen made the kind of money that she did is because she makes designer clothes look good and even though she is not conventionally pretty, as they say, the camera loves her.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Exactly. The reason Gisele Bundchen made the kind of money that she did is because she makes designer clothes look good and even though she is not conventionally pretty, as they say, the camera loves her.


yes, Gisele is probably about six feet tall and slender while Meegain is maybe 5'5" and boxy shaped
Sadly for her, Kate is much closer to the height and shape of a model than she will ever be


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> Or blame racism. Never mind the many many successful WOC in the space.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> yes, Gisele is probably about six feet tall and slender while Meegain is maybe 5'5" and boxy shaped
> Sadly for her, Kate is much closer to the height and shape of a model than she will ever be


And you know that is one of the things she hates Kate for. If Kate was so inclined in her youth she probably could have been a model. In several B&W funeral photos for the TQ and PP she reminded me of Estée Lauder models of the 80s and 90s.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> And you know that is one of the things she hates Kate for. If Kate was so inclined in her youth she probably could have been a model. In several B&W funeral photos for the TQ and PP she reminded me of Estée Lauder models of the 80s and 90s.


Kate is maybe a bit too healthy for a top model but not by much.  she looks great in clothes.  also has very nice (and real) hair


----------



## pukasonqo

Miss Liz said:


> I follow them out of morbid curiosity.


Same here, a bit like watching a slow car crash through the lattice of your fingers over your eyes
Is almost like a game of “how low can they go?”
The sad thing is that it didn’t have to go this way…


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> But why?


Because Elton is an attention hog too and they do get lots of attention.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> *You must have read the all thing a lot more carefully than I did.*   I don't think the point here is about the doctor losing her license, it's more about a few very intriguing 'coincidences'.
> By the way, the obgyn opened her Santa Barbara practice in 2017, and looked too young to retire. Of course, it could be related to a major illness, which I hope it's not the case.


Haha, yes.  Full disclosure, I know of the community of OBs in SB pretty well, and let's just say they aren't exactly welcoming to new, younger doctors.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> That's certainly a lot to process. Dr. Rychik worked at the Shriver Institute, named for the mother of Maria Shriver, who is good friends with Oprah, who of course knows MM. Could O have referred MM to Maria, knowing her family connection to the institute, who then referred MM to the institute where she ultimately met Rychik? Or is it just another innocuous example of six degrees of separation?


My SIL worked for Michael J Fox's Parkinson foundation when she lived in NY, but doesn't mean she knew him, KWIM?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> But why?


Why did Elton credit MM and H? 
Guess - I did see somewhere on Reddit - which has more unreliable info than say the Daily Mail - that MM has been accused of homophobia. Hunh??? This might be E's way of debunking that if untrue. 
MM was in business with E's husband. That was for the cartoon series PEARL, which was canceled. E & M seemed to be friends ???


----------



## Katel

hysterical!    

(he starts reading HR‘s article a little before the two minute mark.)


----------



## Hyacinth

charlottawill said:


> But why?



Something to do with this bogus lawsuit, I imagine:









						Prince Harry, Elton John, Elizabeth Hurley Sue Daily Mail Publisher Over Phone-Tapping Allegations
					

The celebrity lawsuit alleges "gross breaches of privacy" by Associated Newspapers.




					www.hollywoodreporter.com
				




and









						Why are Prince Harry and Sir Elton John suing Daily Mail publisher?
					

A group of high-profile people, including the mother of the murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, are suing Associated Newspapers over allegations of “gross breaches of privacy”.




					www.euronews.com
				




and this:









						Prince Harry, Elton John and others sue Daily Mail publisher
					

Several public figures are suing the UK paper group over alleged breaches of privacy, including phone-tapping.




					www.aljazeera.com
				





and there was a little ditty written about another woman that Elton tweaked to honor Harry's Mummy, remember "Candle In The Wind"? A little extra pre-trial publicity for that lawsuit couldn't hurt, could it?


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Why did Elton credit MM and H?
> Guess - I did see somewhere on Reddit - which has more unreliable info than say the Daily Mail - that MM has been accused of homophobia. Hunh??? This might be E's way of debunking that if untrue.
> MM was in business with E's husband. That was for the cartoon series PEARL, which was canceled. E & M seemed to be friends ???


Oh I know Elton and the Harkles are friends. Several years ago they got criticized for flying to France on Elton's private jet to visit him. He defended them by saying that because of his friendship with Diana he felt the need to ensure the safety of Harry and his family, so he offered his jet. I just wondered why they had to be included in whatever it was at his concert. Seems like a not so subtle way of showing his support for them.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> Oh I know Elton and the Harkles are friends. Several years ago they got criticized for flying to France on Elton's private jet to visit him. He defended them by saying that because of his friendship with Diana he felt the need to ensure the safety of Harry and his family, so he offered his jet. I just wondered why they had to be included in whatever it was at his concert. Seems like a not so subtle way of showing his support for them.


And he played at their wedding … and he and H are suing the DM about invasion of privacy
But I was not sure if that was old news and maybe they are no longer friends,  MM seems to be good at losing friends
All the evidence is that they are still good friends and the story I read about her homophobia is bogus/offensive.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> And he played at their wedding … and he and H are suing the DM about invasion of privacy
> But I was not sure if that was old news and maybe they are no longer friends,  MM seems to be good at losing friends
> All the evidence is that they are still good friends this the story I read about her homophobia is bogus/offensive.


she can keep friends if it benefits her


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


>



What happened to the rest of the money?  Hmmmm.  Honestly, most of these foundations are scams.  I either donate directly to places I know or donate my time.  I'd rather hand out money to homeless people myself than trust these slime balls and others like them to do the right thing.


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Why did Elton credit MM and H?
> Guess - I did see somewhere on Reddit - which has more unreliable info than say the Daily Mail - that MM has been accused of homophobia. Hunh??? This might be E's way of debunking that if untrue.
> MM was in business with E's husband. That was for the cartoon series PEARL, which was canceled. E & M seemed to be friends ???


He lent them his private jet which was one of the first hypocritical things they did, remember?  Haz had to then claim something stupid about security and Elton defended them.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Oh I know Elton and the Harkles are friends. Several years ago they got criticized for flying to France on Elton's private jet to visit him. He defended them by saying that because of his friendship with Diana he felt the need to ensure the safety of Harry and his family, so he offered his jet. I just wondered why they had to be included in whatever it was at his concert. Seems like a not so subtle way of showing his support for them.


Sorry you beat me to it!


----------



## Toby93

They are being given an award for lying?  This article is really sad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I was trying to post a clip from CNN about a program airing on Monday featuring a panel discussion with Michelle O, Amal Clooney, Melinda Gates and several others. Don't know what happened. I'm sure MM will be seething with jealousy and FOMO. Hazy and staff
> better take cover.


Well, don’t come at me, please, for my 2 unpopular opinions:  to be fair, these are women who did indeed ‘_marry well_’.  I kno I kno, they had their own careers, still they achieved ‘next level’ icon status based on marrying wealthy wealthy men. MM _thought _Hazzio was a wealthy man, but  cruel reality slapped her down. He is simply a man-child who begs his daddy for $$$$. She should be in the group of a woman scorned or disappointed with her lot in life.  A huge crowd, no?







RE: Elton - as much as I do respect his undeniable talent, is anyone else tired of his ‘protection’ for Hazzi and EJ’s Saint Diana nonsense?  Imo it seems excessive, misguided and irritating.


----------



## tiktok

Toby93 said:


> They are being given an award for lying?  This article is really sad.



I totally get it; I mean, there are so few heroes these days willing to escape from a palace to a 16 bathroom mansion their racist dad bought them via private jet… I can’t think of a more courageous, human-rights-affirming act than that.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, don’t come at me, please, for my 2 unpopular opinions:  to be fair, these are women who did indeed ‘_marry well_’.  I kno I kno, they had their own careers, still they achieved ‘next level’ icon status based on marrying wealthy wealthy men. MM _thought _Hazzio was a wealthy man, but  cruel reality slapped her down. He is simply a man-child who begs his daddy for $$$$. She should be in the group of a woman scorned or disappointed with her lot in life.  A huge crowd, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RE: Elton - as much as I do respect his undeniable talent, is anyone else tired of his ‘protection’ for Hazzi and EJ’s Saint Diana nonsense?  Imo it seems excessive, misguided and irritating.


Michelle O did not marry a wealthy man. She was Barack's supervisor when they met at the law firm he was interning at. She put a promising career on the back burner to support his political aspirations. George Clooney has joked that Amal married down and he married up. Melinda did marry the boss, but she was every bit his partner in building the Gates Foundation. MM will never be in the same league as any of them.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, don’t come at me, please, for my 2 unpopular opinions:  to be fair, these are women who did indeed ‘_marry well_’.  I kno I kno, they had their own careers, still they achieved ‘next level’ icon status based on marrying wealthy wealthy men. MM _thought _Hazzio was a wealthy man, but  cruel reality slapped her down. He is simply a man-child who begs his daddy for $$$$. She should be in the group of a woman scorned or disappointed with her lot in life.  A huge crowd, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RE: Elton - as much as I do respect his undeniable talent, is anyone else tired of his ‘protection’ for Hazzi and EJ’s Saint Diana nonsense?  Imo it seems excessive, misguided and irritating.


Agree, especially Amal Alamuddin because contrary to marketing, was never a human rights lawyer.  She represented corrupt third world leaders. So she fought for their human rights to get them out of prison - if she wants to spin it that way.

Anyway, she's a great example of marrying well, quickly changing her name and achieving next level status as you said.


----------



## Freak4Coach

Toby93 said:


> They are being given an award for lying?  This article is really sad.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, don’t come at me, please, for my 2 unpopular opinions:  to be fair, these are women who did indeed ‘_marry well_’.  I kno I kno, they had their own careers, still they achieved ‘next level’ icon status based on marrying wealthy wealthy men. MM _thought _Hazzio was a wealthy man, but  cruel reality slapped her down. He is simply a man-child who begs his daddy for $$$$. She should be in the group of a woman scorned or disappointed with her lot in life.  A huge crowd, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RE: Elton - as much as I do respect his undeniable talent, is anyone else tired of his ‘protection’ for Hazzi and EJ’s Saint Diana nonsense?  Imo it seems excessive, misguided and irritating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> senator.



Agreed.  Pres. O's grandmother was very wealthy, was on the board of Bank of Hawaii, Mr. O inherited millions in Bank of Hawaii stock, it's on his tax returns as capital gains when he sold shares throughout the years. Look it up. DH and I also spoke to bank employees on this issue when we were in Hawaii. Presumably grandma paid his way through schools. Mr. O was not poor by a long shot, even though the media love to make him out as a guy who worked for everything. Not saying he didn't work, but this BS of being poor and coming from nothing is effing garbage. Even when he himself says it. Mrs O was given a $300,000 a year job in Chicago for a no-show job with Rush Hospital when Mr. O became Illinois senator.  A long time ago.  Obviously they have nothing to worry about. They'll be billionaires before they die. No wonder Claw loves them. She desperately tries to tie herself onto their life story by being a POC. That's her only tie but she hawks it like they're buddies on the phone.


----------



## EmilyM11

CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, don’t come at me, please, for my 2 unpopular opinions:  to be fair, these are women who did indeed ‘_marry well_’.  I kno I kno, they had their own careers, still they achieved ‘next level’ icon status based on marrying wealthy wealthy men. MM _thought _Hazzio was a wealthy man, but  cruel reality slapped her down. He is simply a man-child who begs his daddy for $$$$. She should be in the group of a woman scorned or disappointed with her lot in life.  A huge crowd, no?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RE: Elton - as much as I do respect his undeniable talent, is anyone else tired of his ‘protection’ for Hazzi and EJ’s Saint Diana nonsense?  Imo it seems excessive, misguided and irritating.


Think the difference might not only sit in H’s wealth. These ladies are smart and hard working, so leveraged their position after marriage and their ultimate fame came from both hubby and their own presence. M could marry anyone rich, powerful and famous  and still blow it. She just doesn’t have intelligence and emotional maturity to navigate that world.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Well, don’t come at me, please, for my 2 unpopular opinions:  to be fair, these are women who did indeed ‘_marry well_’.  I kno I kno, they had their own careers, still they achieved ‘next level’ icon status based on marrying wealthy wealthy men.



Admittedly I know nothing about Ms. Gates (not even what her job is), and I agree that Amal's popularity was greatly helped by marrying a superstar (acting is just more glamorous than human rights), but I enjoy bringing up that Barack and Michelle met when he was her law firm intern.

ETA: @charlottawill beat me to it.



CarryOn2020 said:


> RE: Elton - as much as I do respect his undeniable talent, is anyone else tired of his ‘protection’ for Hazzi and EJ’s Saint Diana nonsense?  Imo it seems excessive, misguided and irritating.



Seriously. If I went to a concert wanting to enjoy music and forget the crazy world for a bit and was confronted with Harry and Ghoul I'd be so annoyed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Michelle O did not marry a wealthy man. She was Barack's supervisor when they met at the law firm he was interning at. *She put a promising career on the back burner to support his political aspirations.* George Clooney has joked that Amal married down and he married up. Melinda did marry the boss, but she was every bit his partner in building the Gates Foundation. MM will never be in the same league as any of them.



And she made personal sacrifices (as in their private life) as well. I adore Barack, but I remember thinking after reading Becoming that she had the patience of a saint with him. I know I would have lost it more than once at his quirks.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Agree, especially Amal Alamuddin because contrary to marketing, was never a human rights lawyer.  She represented corrupt third world leaders. So she fought for their human rights to get them out of prison - if she wants to spin it that way.
> 
> Anyway, she's a great example of marrying well, quickly changing her name and achieving next level status as you said.



Is that true, though? Because I have definitely seen her work with genocide victims.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Agreed.  Pres. O's grandmother was very wealthy, was on the board of Bank of Hawaii, Mr. O inherited millions in Bank of Hawaii stock, it's on his tax returns as capital gains when he sold shares throughout the years. Look it up. DH and I also spoke to bank employees on this issue when we were in Hawaii. Presumably grandma paid his way through schools. Mr. O was not poor by a long shot, even though the media love to make him out as a guy who worked for everything.



I have never once heard someone say Barack grew up poor. The inheritance is news to me, but I was always of the opinion he grew up comfortably middle class.



rose60610 said:


> Not saying he didn't work, but this BS of being poor and coming from nothing is effing garbage. Even when he himself says it. Mrs O was given a $300,000 a year job in Chicago for a no-show job with Rush Hospital when Mr. O became Illinois senator.  A long time ago.



It didn't sound like a no-show job when she spoke about it at length in her book.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Fact check...Madelyn Dunham started working in an entry level position at the Bank of Hawaii in 1961 and was promoted to vice president in 1970 which was especially impressive for a female in those days. Dunham left her grandson bank stock valued at almost $500,000. 

Also just fyi while her grandson received scholarships to attend the Punahou School he said of her sacrifices "She's the one who taught me about hard work. She's the one who put off buying a new car or a new dress for herself so that I could have a better life. She poured everything she had into me."

She sounds like an amazing woman and it breaks my heart that she died two days before the man she raised so well was elected as a trailblazer himself.


----------



## Jktgal

rose60610 said:


> Agreed.  Pres. O's grandmother was very wealthy, was on the board of Bank of Hawaii, Mr. O inherited millions in Bank of Hawaii stock, it's on his tax returns as capital gains when he sold shares throughout the years. Look it up. DH and I also spoke to bank employees on this issue when we were in Hawaii. Presumably grandma paid his way through schools. Mr. O was not poor by a long shot, even though the media love to make him out as a guy who worked for everything. Not saying he didn't work, but this BS of being poor and coming from nothing is effing garbage.


Unfortunate that there is no thread anymore for the Obamas. But I have to correct this.
Barack lived with his mother in Indonesia for several years before living in Hawaii with his grandparents and I know people who knew Ann Dunham (the circle who goes 'Ann Dunham's son is coming!' whenever he visits ). They were not 'very wealthy'. They were comfortable, upper middle class in a backward, dirt poor country that was very racist where black people were often thrown stones at (and in some places this still happens til now). A lifestyle that was probably closer to the standard of a poor household in America at the time, which was one reason his mother left him in Hawaii when she went back to Indonesia. I first went to USA in the 80s and Indonesian in comparison was very backward.
He has also said and attended schools on scholarships.
Was his grandmother wealthy, I have no idea. But I also lived in Hawaii. It's very prosperous now but as comparison, in 1970 California population was 20 million compared to Hawaii population of 700,000 (3.5%). So Bank of Hawaii was an equivalent of if currently there is a local bank in the infamous Orange Country serving a third of its population. That small. Moral of the story is: stock shares are long term investments.


----------



## Jktgal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> She sounds like an amazing woman and it breaks my heart that she died two days before the man she raised so well was elected as a trailblazer himself.


She was. 50 years later many people in Indonesia remember her fondly and with great respect. I've met Maya, her daughter (B's stepsister). The children are a credit to their mother. Edited to add: What Ann Dunham did was real activism, not the word salad salad and photo op activism preferred by Harry's wife.

B's father was probably the wealthiest person in his life, the person with the highest social standing (relatively speaking, of course). Imagine the social standing of a Harvard grad in USA in the 80s, and multiply that 10x for a Harvard grad in a developing country (I would say 100x but y'all probably won't believe me). Tragic how his life turned, though.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> What happened to the rest of the money?  Hmmmm.  Honestly, most of these foundations are scams.  I either donate directly to places I know or donate my time.  I'd rather hand out money to homeless people myself than trust these slime balls and others like them to do the right thing.


what you do is great but there are also plenty of upstanding charitable organizations for those of us who don't want to hand out money on the street or volunteer.  I use Charity Navigator and try to select ones who don't pay a high salary to the CEO, etc.
My sister told me recently she bought some food for a couple of homeless men.  I thought that was nice.


----------



## marietouchet

Compare and contrast
Amal, Michelle, MM, Melinda - all educated women
BO was the only spouse with a solid Education
The other 3 DHs were famous/successful without college educations
Harry is not alone in his lack of a college degree


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is that true, though? Because I have definitely seen her work with genocide victims.


yes, she has been a legit human rights attorney before the marriage.  of couse she became much more famous when she married george but that doesn't mean her work isn't legitimate and real


----------



## Swanky

Swanky said:


> Hi!
> A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….



This thread continues to be far off topic, please stick to Harry and Meghan in this thread


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I remember this from several years ago, and it broke my heart at the time. His mother, Ann Dunham was also a unique woman, and it's difficult to read about her life without tearing imo. BO must be very proud of his mother and grandmother, and it's so sad that they couldn't see what he has achieved.
> However, we are talking about real women who share virtually nothing with TW.


TW is only famous due to her excellent networking skills landing her a prince.  Instead of being happy or grateful, she has a huge ego and thinks she is a top tier star/humanitarian.  Harry just seems like a weakling who is willing to throw his family under the bus for no good reason.


----------



## Chanbal

N/M


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

The best Claw can do these days is sponge off of off-the-radar celebrities who in turn are "famous" only due to their family name. Looooong step down and miles apart from wallowing in the A-Lister crowd. Where are all these powerful producers and directors and actors ringing your doorbell, Claw? Oh wait, there aren't any! Because she's TOXIC!


----------



## charlottawill

Hmmm. The MM and TP rumor is rearing its head again.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Hmmm. The MM and TP rumor is rearing its head again.



I'd like to think that TP is smarter than to fall for her wiles, but it sure looks like he is being fooled by her. Zed might not be after marriage. She may see him as a back door to Hollywood. If I were her, I'd be looking for gigs that capitalize on her (in)famous face and name and her ability to schmooze. Maybe get TP to make her the Executive Producer of some production. "Meghan Markles Presents XXXX" and hope that leads to an Oscar invite.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I'd like to think that TP is smarter than to fall for her wiles, but it sure looks like he is being fooled by her. Zed might not be after marriage. She may see him as a back door to Hollywood. If I were her, I'd be looking for gigs that capitalize on her (in)famous face and name and her ability to schmooze. Maybe get TP to make her the Executive Producer of some production. "Meghan Markles Presents XXXX" and hope that leads to an Oscar invite.


Kris Jenner is probably her patron saint, but I don't believe MM possesses the same talent for turning garbage into gold.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Compare and contrast
> Amal, Michelle, MM, Melinda - all educated women
> BO was the only spouse with a solid Education
> The other 3 DHs were famous/successful without college educations
> Harry is not alone in his lack of a college degree



Call me a snob, but I kind of refuse to laud a bachelor's degree as oh so educated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Hmmm. The MM and TP rumor is rearing its head again.




Honestly, with all that's out there by now, if a man smart enough to make himself a billionaire falls for that sh*t so be it. Survival of the fittest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Kris Jenner is probably her patron saint, but I don't believe MM possesses the same talent for turning garbage into gold.



Nor would she proudly watch as her children become the celebrity she could never achieve.


----------



## csshopper

rose60610 said:


> The best Claw can do these days is sponge off of off-the-radar celebrities who in turn are "famous" only due to their family name. Looooong step down and miles apart from wallowing in the A-Lister crowd. Where are all these powerful producers and directors and actors ringing your doorbell, Claw? Oh wait, there aren't any! Because she's TOXIC!


Articles published in 2020 claimed the Claw was a “diva” who told her agents she would only accept offers involving award winning Directors like Ava DuVernay, anything less was not acceptable to her.

This probably explains why she is unemployed, Ava and others never called.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just FYI, a _gong_ is not a derogatory term in the UK:
_UK informal
an honour that is given to someone for the public service they have done, or to a performer for a particular acting or singing performance








						gong
					

1. a round piece of metal that is hung in a frame and hit with a stick to…




					dictionary.cambridge.org
				



_
This excellent video explains the inconsistencies in choosing H&M for this _award_. So many others have done do much more.


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> Articles published in 2020 claimed the Claw was a “diva” who told her agents she would only accept offers involving award winning Directors like Ava DuVernay, anything less was not acceptable to her.
> 
> This probably explains why she is unemployed, Ava and others never called.


I am waiting on my call, too


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am waiting on my call, too



I'm waiting for my Hogwarts letter.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just FYI, a _gong_ is not a derogatory term in the UK:
> _UK informal
> an honour that is given to someone for the public service they have done, or to a performer for a particular acting or singing performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gong
> 
> 
> 1. a round piece of metal that is hung in a frame and hit with a stick to…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> This excellent video explains the inconsistencies in choosing H&M for this _award_. So many others have done do much more.



Obviously H has made his choice.  Meghan is his family now and the family who raised him and made him wealthy doesn't count.  So Charles should repay him in-kind.  Take away any titles, money, anything royal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> Obviously H has made his choice.  Meghan is his family now and the family who raised him and made him wealthy doesn't count.  So Charles should repay him in-kind.  Take away any titles, money, anything royal.


So, why doesn’t Hazz renounce those titles, etc.?   
It is long past time for interviewers to ask him that question.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, why doesn’t Hazz renounce those titles, etc.?
> It is long past time for interviewers to ask him that question.


right
they like to use the titles while trying to destroy the family?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, why doesn’t Hazz renounce those titles, etc.?
> It is long past time for interviewers to ask him that question.


I suppose now they're going to talk about the jewels that should be returned to South Africa - but Meghan can keep her blood diamond earrings


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just FYI, a _gong_ is not a derogatory term in the UK:
> _UK informal
> an honour that is given to someone for the public service they have done, or to a performer for a particular acting or singing performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gong
> 
> 
> 1. a round piece of metal that is hung in a frame and hit with a stick to…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> This excellent video explains the inconsistencies in choosing H&M for this _award_. So many others have done do much more.



OK, HandM claim the BRF is/was racist, but their claim has never been verified … If all the hurts suffered by MM were true, ther is no proof that the mistreatment was due to race
The only issue raised by HandM was the story that someone asked about the baby’s skin color. Again that convo has never been verified, thee were holes in the story on Oprah ( who said EXCATLY what to whom ? Was MM in the room ?? etc ) and finally as we discussed here people do it all the time with no disrespect to race (will the child be swarthy like dad or blue eyed like mom )
I think KK and the Foundation are way out of a limb standing behind a claim (racism) of such dubious veracity if it is ever proved that HandM lied about this.


----------



## marietouchet

I thought things were dying down BRF v HandM

But, this award adds fuel to the fire


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> OK, HandM claim the BRF is/was racist, but their claim has never been verified … If all the hurts suffered by MM were true, ther is no proof that the mistreatment was due to race
> The only issue raised by HandM was the story that someone asked about the baby’s skin color. Again that convo has never been verified, thee were holes in the story on Oprah ( who said EXCATLY what to whom ? Was MM in the room ?? etc ) and finally as we discussed here people do it all the time with no disrespect to race (will the child be swarthy like dad or blue eyed like mom )
> I think KK and the Foundation are way out of a limb standing behind a claim (racism) of such dubious veracity if it is ever proved that HandM lied about this.


but there is this story too....would they go there?





						Should the Royal Family return their stolen jewels? – Triton Times
					






					tritontimes.com


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just FYI, a _gong_ is not a derogatory term in the UK:
> _UK informal
> an honour that is given to someone for the public service they have done, or to a performer for a particular acting or singing performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gong
> 
> 
> 1. a round piece of metal that is hung in a frame and hit with a stick to…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> This excellent video explains the inconsistencies in choosing H&M for this _award_. So many others have done do much more.




I think this award is a step too far for Harry.

 If they accept the award for fighting racism in the royal structure, then KC will need to respond.

And it does cause a diplomatic furore.  You get an award for claiming another country’s political structure is racist?  Did you forget about the Commonwealth?

Im surprised no one from the US state department is looking at it.


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> I think this award is a step too far for Harry.
> 
> If they accept the award for fighting racism in the royal structure, then KC will need to respond.


you'd think.....but if his WIFE is he boss, then he may do whatever she wants him to


----------



## needlv

sdkitty said:


> you'd think.....but if his WIFE is he boss, then he may do whatever she wants him to



Yes but they are accusing another country (and those in the commonwealth) for having a racist institution?  Too far


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> Yes but they are accusing another country (and those in the commonwealth) for having a racist institution?  Too far


agree it's too far.  time will tell what they will do and what reaction will be from the king


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I suppose now they're going to talk about the jewels that should be returned to South Africa - but Meghan can keep her blood diamond earrings


They'll have to pry those out of her cold dead hands.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


> They'll have to pry those out of her cold dead hands.


Does she still have them though?  Have we seen her wearing them since?


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm waiting for my Hogwarts letter.


I'll meet you on Platform 9 3/4 and we can take the Hogwarts Express together.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Does she still have them though?  Have we seen her wearing them since?


I'm not sure. I seem to recall reading that she had worn earrings to some event that appeared as though they may have come from the gifted earrings. We know she likes to "restyle" jewelry. But in looking for verification as to whether she does have them or not I found this gem of a comment:

"She accepted them and didn't care who they were from. This woman would unplug your life support to charge her mobile phone."


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> but there is this story too....would they go there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should the Royal Family return their stolen jewels? – Triton Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tritontimes.com


The Triton Times appears to be a high school newspaper ???

In any case, return of jewels is the tip of a much larger iceberg … Many countries that had colonial empires bought/took/appropriated colonial artifacts - heck the V&A, Louvre, Pergamon, Met Museum are full of those items , the diamonds are but one of many items … 
Heck, half the gems in the Crown Jewels are of dubious provenance, the pearls in one crown were stolen by QEI when she imprisoned Mary Queen of Scots, do these need to go back to Scotland ??


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, she is repulsive.


----------



## gracekelly

I think the response from BP will be no response.  The chill wind, cold enough to make ice cubes at 20 paces, will suffice as a response.  Totally ignoring the two of them is the best thing at this point.  They can moan all they like about invitations and titles for the kids, but none of it will happen.  Back channels can tell Harry that if he believes that his father is racist, then the best thing is to stay away and no invite to the coronation.  Of course Harry will try to finesse this award with his father.  Hopefully KC3 will not fall for it.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think the response from BP will be no response.  The chill wind, cold enough to make ice cubes at 20 paces, will suffice as a response.  Totally ignoring the two of them is the best thing at this point.  They can moan all they like about invitations and titles for the kids, but none of it will happen.  Back channels can tell Harry that if he believes that his father is racist, then the best thing is to stay away and no invite to the coronation.  Of course Harry will try to finesse this award with his father.  Hopefully KC3 will not fall for it.


They continue to dig themselves deeper and deeper into a hole that is going to collapse on them. Unwelcome in the UK, increasingly unwelcome here, where to next? Maybe Elon will give them a free ride on a flight to Mars.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

charlottawill said:


> They continue to dig themselves deeper and deeper into a hole that is going to collapse on them. Unwelcome in the UK, increasingly unwelcome here, where to next? *Maybe Elon will give them a free ride on a flight to Mars.*



And leave them there ? Claw is so irritating that space aliens would bring her back  . So Elon needs to add "Return Address Undeliverable" . Better yet--Return Address: Chunga Changa (and let the aliens figure it out ) .


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> Obviously H has made his choice.  Meghan is his family now and the family who raised him and made him wealthy doesn't count.  So Charles should repay him in-kind.  Take away any titles, money, anything royal.


Oh lord, the cries of victimhood - he was born to be a royal! You can't take away his titles! It will be an escalation of the whinefest over the loss of security.


sdkitty said:


> but there is this story too....would they go there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Should the Royal Family return their stolen jewels? – Triton Times
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tritontimes.com


This does bring to mind those rumours that Zed stole jewellery and scarpered off to Canada with the goods.


needlv said:


> Does she still have them though?  Have we seen her wearing them since?


I totally believe she had them re-set to deflect suspicion.


charlottawill said:


> I'm not sure. I seem to recall reading that she had worn earrings to some event that appeared as though they may have come from the gifted earrings. We know she likes to "restyle" jewelry. But in looking for verification as to whether she does have them or not I found this gem of a comment:
> 
> "She accepted them and didn't care who they were from. This woman would unplug your life support to charge her mobile phone."


Is it sad that I don't find this surprising?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> They continue to dig themselves deeper and deeper into a hole that is going to collapse on them. Unwelcome in the UK, increasingly unwelcome here, where to next? Maybe Elon will give them a free ride on a flight to Mars.


When I was a little girl we were told that if we dug a deep enough hole, we would dig our way to China. I think the Harkles are digging their hole down to the meta universe. That will be perfect and accurate for them because they are closer and closer to living in a world that is fabricated of imaginary accomplishments. Pure delusion that can only be seen by them when wearing their rose colored goggles.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> When I was a little girl we were told that if we dug a deep enough hole, we would dig our way to China. I think the Harkles are digging their hole down to the meta universe. That will be perfect and accurate for them because they are closer and closer to living in a world that is fabricated of imaginary accomplishments. Pure delusion that can only be seen by them when wearing their rose colored goggles.


They must be getting close by now, no?



xincinsin said:


> Oh lord, the cries of victimhood - he was born to be a royal! _You can't take away his titles!_ It will be an escalation of the whinefest over the loss of security.
> 
> This does bring to mind those rumours that Zed stole jewellery and scarpered off to Canada with the goods.
> 
> I totally believe she had them re-set to deflect suspicion.
> 
> Is it sad that I don't find this surprising?



You are correct.  We _cannot_ take away those titles.  The King can.  *Hazzi himself can renounce them *- it is a simple enough procedure.  One signature on the page.  So, why hasn’t he renounced? Especially since it is soooo awful being a member of the BRF.   Sure, we _think_ we know why.  He himself needs to answer the question out loud, for all the world to hear.  Sooner is better than later. Just one interviewer needs to ask him.  Just 1.  Every day that goes by with him still as a titled BRF, it makes him look weaker and weaker imo. 

Agree, those jewels have been reset.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The debate happens tomorrow.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> They must be getting close by now, no?
> 
> 
> 
> You are correct.  We _cannot_ take away those titles.  The King can.  *Hazzi himself can renounce them *- it is a simple enough procedure.  One signature on the page.  So, why hasn’t he renounced? Especially since it is soooo awful being a member of the BRF.   Sure, we _think_ we know why.  He himself needs to answer the question out loud, for all the world to hear.  Sooner is better than later. Just one interviewer needs to ask him.  Just 1.  Every day that goes by with him still as a titled BRF, it makes him look weaker and weaker imo.
> 
> Agree, those jewels have been reset.



only Uk parliament can take away these titles and remove H from line of succession.  KC can’t unless the bill being reviewed currently gives KC that power.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> only Uk parliament can take away these titles and remove H from line of succession.  KC can’t unless the bill being reviewed currently gives KC that power.


Hazzi can renounce, right?









						9 royals who rejected their titles, and the surprising reasons why
					

Japan's Princess Mako had to give up her royal title after marrying her "commoner" college boyfriend in October.




					www.insider.com


----------



## needlv

Hmm… on Quora, someone named Benjamin Smallbrook is saying that H has reached out to KC and asked if he comes back does he keep the Sussex title and get back Captain General of Marines.

Adding to “Divorce Watch” rumours.




CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi can renounce, right?


yes


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> He had *choices* -



Even if it were true and all the royals are racists…  then H&M  *haven’t actually* done anything to combat that - the institution is still running as normal, they  couldn’t keep their story straight in a single interview and never named names - hardly a bold expose. Which seems like they are trying to play both sides  given it’s not exactly hard to claim you heard someone dropping the n bomb and the accused can hardly disprove it.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Just FYI, a _gong_ is not a derogatory term in the UK:
> _UK informal
> an honour that is given to someone for the public service they have done, or to a performer for a particular acting or singing performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gong
> 
> 
> 1. a round piece of metal that is hung in a frame and hit with a stick to…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> This excellent video explains the inconsistencies in choosing H&M for this _award_. So many others have done do much more.








I believe it means ‘Stop! Stop Now!’ In the USA so in this case I prefer the American usage  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, she is repulsive.



I thought the eco warriors  flew private? I don’t believe you can sit next to le princess somehow anyway they’d probably buy up the whole cabin if they had to go commercial and get away with it because they are ‘diplomats’


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, those jewels have been reset.


There was also a quite credible story that someone gave Sparry a baggie of diamonds while they were still royals, and he gave them to Zed to do as she wished. Supposedly, the stone in the pinkie ring was from that stash. 


needlv said:


> Hmm… on Quora, someone named Benjamin Smallbrook is saying that H has reached out to KC and asked if he comes back does he keep the Sussex title and get back Captain General of Marines.
> 
> Adding to “Divorce Watch” rumours.


Don't take him back, Charles! He'll be bargaining for more once he thinks he has the upper hand.

_"So, if I were to come back, I'd still be the Duke of Sussex, and you'll return me my military honours, right?"
...
"And of course we'd get a larger house, right? I'm giving up a mansion to come back, you know?"
...
"You're not going to deprive the kids of titles, right? It would be cruel not to give them titles when their cousins have titles. And Meghan gets to keep her title too, of course..."_

Nope, let them succeed overseas.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> There was also a quite credible story that someone gave Sparry a baggie of diamonds while they were still royals, and he gave them to Zed to do as she wished. Supposedly, the stone in the pinkie ring was from that stash.
> 
> Don't take him back, Charles! He'll be bargaining for more once he thinks he has the upper hand.
> 
> _"So, if I were to come back, I'd still be the Duke of Sussex, and you'll return me my military honours, right?"
> ...
> "And of course we'd get a larger house, right? I'm giving up a mansion to come back, you know?"
> ...
> "You're not going to deprive the kids of titles, right? It would be cruel not to give them titles when their cousins have titles. And Meghan gets to keep her title too, of course..."_
> 
> Nope, let them succeed overseas.



I wonder if the context was Harry seeing if there was a return without MM.  if I were KC I would offer support during divorce proceedings and ability to come back home, but royal duty etc would not occur without strict conditions - eg a full public apology / repentance, clarifying statements in his book, Netflix and years of staying quiet and following the requirements.


----------



## jelliedfeels

To bring it back to M’s earrings specifically - they wouldn’t be an item considered for repatriation anyway because they aren’t an object of historical or national significance and they were a private gift freely given by the Saudi royals. If she is comfortable with accepting a gift from a murderer then she can keep them and wear them _and she is not the only Windsor to do so._

It does annoy me a little they get called blood diamonds but it is only means that it was in poor taste to wear them straight after Khashoggi was murdered and the critique ends there. The British Royal family deserve far more criticism than Meghan in this incident in fact because they:- 
1. exchange gifts and keep up close relations with this tyrannical regime who have executed far more of their own people than Khashoggi and they show no interest in severing ties after learning of Khashoggi’s dismemberment. 
2. the royals receive gifts like blood diamonds and they encourage and participate in selling weapons to the Saudi regime which are used in strikes on Yemeni civilians. 
3. The recognition of the Saudis legitimises their regime and is far in excess of an impartial or even scornful treatment other leaders have received. They make no secret who their favourites are and it is telling the company they keep…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She literally makes my skin crawl.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She literally makes my skin crawl.



Now that set of extensions is really bad, doesn't even look natural.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Just FYI, a _gong_ is not a derogatory term in the UK:
> _UK informal
> an honour that is given to someone for the public service they have done, or to a performer for a particular acting or singing performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gong
> 
> 
> 1. a round piece of metal that is hung in a frame and hit with a stick to…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> dictionary.cambridge.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> This excellent video explains the inconsistencies in choosing H&M for this _award_. So many others have done do much more.




A gong for lying, how appropriate for the Duke and Duchess of lies


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi can renounce, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9 royals who rejected their titles, and the surprising reasons why
> 
> 
> Japan's Princess Mako had to give up her royal title after marrying her "commoner" college boyfriend in October.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



 

But he won't. What else has he got. 

Those that think Diana did the right thing by bringing him up to think himself the equal of his brother were very much mistaken. It would have been kinder to let him grow and go away from the 'there spare role a long time ago. To be jealous of your own nephews and niece because they exist is quite awful. 

Never mind the truth, he needs to get a grip.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> This does bring to mind those rumours that Zed stole jewellery and scarpered off to Canada with the goods.



It really gives one pause how often she has been accused of stealing...expensive shoes, designer clothes, charity money, jewelry.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Face it, Ghoul. People don't like you because you're insufferable, not because your mother is a WOC.


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She literally makes my skin crawl.



Harry's exaggerated blinking in this clip looks like Morse code for "Help me".


----------



## Toby93

People are asking why Harrys eyes are brown now?


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> People are asking why Harrys eyes are brown now?




He’s so full of sh!te his eyes are brown now.


----------



## bag-mania

I can honestly say I’ve never given a moment’s thought to Harry’s eye color before. Are they blue? They aren’t the greenish-brown muddy color of a fetid swamp?


----------



## Redbirdhermes

papertiger said:


> *We have many minerals and gems from Scotland, but no pearls.* You'd have to ask where Mary, Queen of Scotts got them.
> 
> Also the King (Chales) is King of Scotland (among many other titles). Since Mary's, son James took over the throne of England  as well as Scotland (1567) the countries have been united (hence our Union Jack/Flag). Charles would have to give them back - to himself.


To the contrary,  there are natural Scottish river pearls that grow in a freshwater mussel in the river Tay.  The pearls were plentiful in the past, but like so much of the natural world today, the mussels, and therefore the pearls, are rare and endangered.   One source I found says that Roman historian Suetonius refers to Julius Ceasar's preference for British pearls as one of his main reasons for invading the country.  The pearl earrings that QE2 gifted MM back in 2018 are undoubtedly natural pearls, and likely Scottish in origin.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Redbirdhermes said:


> To the contrary,  there are natural Scottish river pearls that grow in a freshwater mussel in the river Tay.  The pearls were plentiful in the past, but like so much of the natural world today, the mussels, and therefore the pearls, are rare and endangered.   One source I found says that Roman historian Suetonius refers to Julius Ceasar's preference for British pearls as one of his main reasons for invading the country.  The pearl earrings that QE2 gifted MM back in 2018 are undoubtedly natural pearls, and likely Scottish in origin.



Aren't freshwater pearls more irregular? Those earrings looked like your generic South Sea pearls.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aren't freshwater pearls more irregular? Those earrings looked like your generic South Sea pearls.



Pearls vary in quality.   The Queen would have access to the best of the best.  Photo below is from karipearls.









						Scottish Pearls
					

Scottish Pearls...are they still being found, or are the pearl bearing mussels threatened with extinction?




					www.karipearls.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I love this place, I learn so much on here   (I still do hope they didn't waste precious British "ingredients" on her, it's already annoying she got one of the last pieces of Welsh gold)


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> People are asking why Harrys eyes are brown now?



The moaner looks like a stoner. Probably grows his own pot at Monteshitshow since it’s legal in California.


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> The moaner looks like a stoner. Probably grows his own pot at Monteshitshow since it’s legal in California.



It's a lot of effort and attention required to grow your own, and even then it may not turn out great. He comes off as too lazy. 

I'm sure he just sends SeCuRiTy to the dispensary to get it for him.


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


>



Wow was that bad- I never cease to be amazed by the British ability to ship our unfunniest comedians out to the US. 

Wouldn’t it make more sense if museums all over the world didn’t already have many European and American pieces in them (but they do)   
I get maybe I’m taking it a bit literally but acting like all museums are just full of stolen goods  and these artefacts would still be well-preserved in their context otherwise is just a lazy generalisation- most of it was bought and considerable amounts of money have been invested in their preservation since.

I will say I think we should return the Benin bronzes because:-
1. They were definitely obtained immorally. 
2. maybe if they were actually in their context of being mounted against the palace wall they would  look impressive. 
3. I wouldn’t have to suffer through any more experts barefacedly insisting lost wax and stick figures were advanced metalwork techniques by the 14th century when I go to the BM. 

Sorry to bring it back to the couple…. I can see them being in a cringe skit like this. They should have got H to hand out headsets.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> We have many minerals and gems from Scotland, but no pearls. You'd have to ask where Mary, Queen of Scotts got them.
> 
> Also the King (Chales) is King of Scotland (among many other titles). Since Mary's, son James took over the throne of England  as well as Scotland (1567) the countries have been united (hence our Union Jack/Flag). Charles would have to give them back - to himself.


The pearls were gifted to Mary when she was In France and married the dauphin. Her mother in law Catherine de Medici was the giftor. 
Now how did Catherine get them ? Don’t remember


----------



## papertiger

Redbirdhermes said:


> To the contrary,  there are natural Scottish river pearls that grow in a freshwater mussel in the river Tay.  The pearls were plentiful in the past, but like so much of the natural world today, the mussels, and therefore the pearls, are rare and endangered.   One source I found says that Roman historian Suetonius refers to Julius Ceasar's preference for British pearls as one of his main reasons for invading the country.  The pearl earrings that QE2 gifted MM back in 2018 are undoubtedly natural pearls, and likely Scottish in origin.



Good to know, most river pearls are rare, my mother had a long row of Mississppi pearls 

I used to have a pair of natural pearl drop earrings, they had diamonds set into the stones. They were too heavy for me to wear so I sold them. 

I doubt M knows the difference between natural and plastic except price.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> The pearls were gifted to Mary when she was In France and married the dauphin. Her mother in law Catherine de Medici was the giftor.
> Now how did Catherine get them ? Don’t remember



Thanks so much 

She also gave France the beginnings of ballet.


----------



## marietouchet

I chuckled at the wording about the pearls in the crown , Mary, Queen of Scots “ALLEDGEDLY” sold them to Elizabeth per Royal Collection Trust









						Garrard & Co  - The Imperial State Crown
					

The Imperial State Crown is formed from an openwork gold frame, mounted with three very large stones, and set with 2868 diamonds in silver mounts, largely table-, rose- and brilliant-cut, and coloured stones in gold mounts, including 17 sapphires, 11 emeralds and 269 pearls. At the front of the...




					www.rct.uk


----------



## CobaltBlu

We had a lot of interesting, yet off topic posts today, along with some political posts.
I am sure Meghan would be the first to say it….

Please keep this thread about Meghan and Harry.


----------



## charlottawill

jelliedfeels said:


> I thought the eco warriors flew private? I don’t believe you can sit next to le princess somehow anyway they’d probably buy up the whole cabin if they had to go commercial and get away with it because they are ‘diplomats’


Due to budget concerns they've probably been reduced to taking commercial flights, but I was skeptical of that post about a couple sitting next to them. Unless they booked at the last minute and they got the last two seats in first class that happened to be aisle. Maybe that's why she was pissed off, especially after the funeral week debacle. My husband prefers aisle, I prefer window, so we have on occasion had to book seats that are separated. This is the only scenario in which I could see them being seated with another couple. Hazy may have been relieved to have had the chance to converse with a normal woman.


----------



## Croisette7

Toby93 said:


> People are asking why Harrys eyes are brown now?



Contact lenses?


----------



## CobaltBlu

charlottawill said:


> Due to budget concerns they've probably been reduced to taking commercial flights, but I was skeptical of that post about a couple sitting next to them. Unless they booked at the last minute and they got the last two seats in first class that happened to be aisle. Maybe that's why she was pissed off, especially after the funeral week debacle. My husband prefers aisle, I prefer window, so we have on occasion had to book seats that are separated. This is the only scenario in which I could see them being seated with another couple. *Hazy may have been relieved to have had the chance to converse with a normal woman.*


----------



## Toby93

I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now


----------



## Cinderlala

xincinsin said:


> Now that set of extensions is really bad, doesn't even look natural.


That's how you know the money is really running out.


----------



## Cinderlala

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now



Open up about her recent endeavors?!  When has she ever shut up???


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now



This was the appearance that was postponed when the Queen died. It was meant to be used to promote her podcast. Now it will probably be to promote the Netflix show.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now



Which one is Fallon again? Is it a comedy thing cos that will be AWFUL.  I dunno if I prefer them besmirching the hand that feeds them to them attempting jokes. 


Cinderlala said:


> That's how you know the money is really running out.


True enough she’s back on the 00s Claire’s quality hair until H’s book is a smash hit


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> People are asking why Harrys eyes are brown now?



What we learn on this thread … 
I watched the BLG YouTube analysis of Meg talking about her wedding dress - she dropped her mask (unhappy) and blinked her eyes (get me out of here) ..
If you watch the Elton video by HandM, you will see she does both tells


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> This was the appearance that was postponed when the Queen died. It was meant to be used to promote her podcast. Now it will probably be to promote the Netflix show.


I clicked the link in the post and the cited article is now titled - M is NOT appearing despite confusion …


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> I clicked the link in the post and the cited article is now titled - M is NOT appearing despite confusion …


Lol....who put out the PR garbage?  Isn't that scooby-doos job?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> I clicked the link in the post and the cited article is now titled - M is NOT appearing despite confusion …


Weird. How could NBC have any “confusion?” She must have been scheduled at some point, they didn’t just pull that date out of their butt. Maybe someone told her she wouldn’t be paid to appear on The Tonight Show.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now



Dec 7th is Pearl Harbor Day.   That was a day of bombings, death and explosions.  Maybe Fallon can explode  her lies and throwing bombs on the royals and put her reputation in the grave yard.

ETA:  So now it isn't happening?


----------



## Lounorada

Toby93 said:


> Lol....who put out the PR garbage?  Isn't that scooby-doos job?





Is this another case of them announcing an upcoming attendance at an event or appearing on a tv show that they would never be invited to/be on, with the hopes of their announcement tricking event organizers/hosts/producers into inviting them? She's so transparent and pathetic.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Lol....who put out the PR garbage?  Isn't that scooby-doos job?



That's a shame because Fallon does stupid stunts like Ellen and would ask her to bark like a dog.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Dec 7th is Pearl Harbor Day.   That was a day of bombings, death and explosions.  Maybe Fallon can explode  her lies and throwing bombs on the royals and put her reputation in the grave yard.
> 
> ETA:  So now it isn't happening?


Harry visited Pearl Harbor two weeks ago. I think it was unrelated but who can tell anymore?


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> People are asking why Harrys eyes are brown now?



Maybe he's slowly going to claim he's a POC by association?  Brown eyes are way more common in POCs than other colors...


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> Harry visited Pearl Harbor two weeks ago. I think it was unrelated but who can tell anymore?



True.  Who knows what he was doing there.  It might have been for more film for Netflix and their reality show.  The visuals at Pearl Harbor and the USS Arizona Memorial are stunning.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Weird. How could NBC have any “confusion?” She must have been scheduled at some point, they didn’t just pull that date out of their butt. Maybe someone told her she wouldn’t be paid to appear on The Tonight Show.


I hope Fallon comments on her "absence".


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I hope Fallon comments on her "absence".


He’s too professional for that. If she changed her mind and canceled, she can kiss ever being invited again goodbye. The first time was understandable because of the Queen. If she canceled because there was something else she wanted to do instead that day, she can forget it. 

She isn’t a star, they aren’t going to wait around on her pleasure.


----------



## csshopper

Wonder if she will do the flirty femme fatale routine, claw his arm and boob thrust? I WILL NOT be watching.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now



It will only be a tell all if she makes it so. He is a lightweight as an interviewer and never asks hard questions. He is big on doing stunts with his guests. I hope he gets her to do egg roulette. I will stay up for it and report back.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> That's a shame because Fallon does stupid stunts like Ellen and would ask her to bark like a dog.


Egg Roulette!


----------



## rose60610

Does anyone watch late night talk shows anymore? Doing stupid and humiliating stunts are right up Claw's alley. Oh, I forgot! She's sooo elegant and royal   .


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> It will only be a tell all if she makes it so. He is a lightweight as an interviewer and never asks hard questions. He is big on doing stunts with his guests. I hope he gets her to do egg roulette. I will stay up for it and report back.



I found it more interesting to watch Jane attempt to breathe with her tightened face, Botox and tight dress. I think she will have to get her wig washed after the egg challenge.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> Does anyone watch late night talk shows anymore? Doing stupid and humiliating stunts are right up Claw's alley. Oh, I forgot! She's sooo elegant and royal   .


Never stay up and certainly not for Fallon.  It's just a nighttime Ellen show.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> Does anyone watch late night talk shows anymore? Doing stupid and humiliating stunts are right up Claw's alley. Oh, I forgot! She's sooo elegant and royal   .


Let's not forget Hazy's appearance on James Corden.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now



special guest?  OK.  so then the other guests aren't as special?



sdkitty said:


> special guest?  OK.  so then the other guests aren't as special?


wait.....tell-all? with Fallon? that doesn't fit


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> special guest?  OK.  so then the other guests aren't as special?


I think this means she will come out at the very beginning herself with no other guests and no stupid stunts.  Hang for 5-8 min and gone by the commercial.  If she had any brains that is what she would do after being made a fool of by Ellen.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think this means she will come out at the very beginning herself with no other guests and no stupid stunts.  Hang for 5-8 min and gone by the commercial.  If she had any brains that is what she would do after being made a fool of by Ellen.


I never watch a whole show if his but from the bits and pieces I've seen, he like to play games and joke around


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think this means she will come out at the very beginning herself with no other guests and no stupid stunts.  Hang for 5-8 min and gone by the commercial.  If she had any brains that is what she would do after being made a fool of by Ellen.


Yeah I don't see her hanging around to play celebrity charades with some C listers.


----------



## marietouchet

Big stuff for MM after Thanksgiving on Nov 23
Nov 29 - last podcast , I hope
Nov 29 - Indianapolis, can’t wait to hear more about Proctor and Gamble in her keynote 
Dec 6 - ripple of hope, a donation of only $20k will get anyone an invite to the gala (goofy website, I had to click on the donation link to find out  the date … but anyone can doNate,  even moi )
Fallon would be such icing on the cake


----------



## pomeline

sdkitty said:


> special guest?  OK.  so then the other guests aren't as special?
> 
> 
> wait.....tell-all? with Fallon? that doesn't fit



Uh... I guess she markled her appearance... 

Meghan Markle's 'not appearing on Jimmy Fallon' after confusion from NBC 'announcement'


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


>



So this was nothing more than a chewing gum maneuver?  She thought if she let them know she wanted to be on the show and threw the gum at the wall it would happen?  I guess they didn't bite.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Redbirdhermes said:


> To the contrary,  there are natural Scottish river pearls that grow in a freshwater mussel in the river Tay.  The pearls were plentiful in the past, but like so much of the natural world today, the mussels, and therefore the pearls, are rare and endangered.   One source I found says that Roman historian Suetonius refers to Julius Ceasar's preference for British pearls as one of his main reasons for invading the country.  The pearl earrings that QE2 gifted MM back in 2018 are undoubtedly natural pearls, and likely Scottish in origin.


Fascinating!  Thanks so much for posting this.  I had no idea about Caesar and these pearls.
More info here:








						Scottish Freshwater Pearls
					

Scottish river pearls have been coveted since the time of Julius Caesar with Royalty in particular known to have desired, cherished and collected this beautiful and natural gem. The Scottish Crown Jewels housed in Edinburgh castle is set with Scottish pearls. Since 1998 the mussel that produces...




					www.cairncrossofperth.co.uk
				




The more I learn about Scotland, the more I do _not_  understand H&M’s attitude towards it.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

marietouchet said:


> The pearls were gifted to Mary when she was In France and married the dauphin. Her mother in law Catherine de Medici was the giftor.
> Now how did Catherine get them ? Don’t remember


Fascinating question.  She got them from her uncle, Pope Clement VII as a wedding gift.  They have been handed down, and some are in the monarch’s crown to this day.






						How the Medici pearls of great price found themselves round the neck of an English Queen and into the Imperial Crown. | Beyond the Yalla Dog
					






					www.beyondtheyalladog.com
				




(To stay on topic, I doubt that any were gifted to Meagan.)


----------



## Hyacinth

Toby93 said:


> I have never watched Fallons show, so I won't be starting now




I don't know who the guy whose photo is about half-way thru the article is (sorry, too many pretty faces out there for me to keep track of all of them but he looks vaguely familiar. British?), but that's NOT Fallon.

And Fallon has been known to make poor decisions about guests before. Sometimes he even musses up their hair... I don't think Megsie Baby would like that.

ETA - Or maybe THIS was the problem?








						How much do guests get paid on The Late Show?
					

Answer (1 of 2): Whether it’s Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise or Tom Hanks… or whether it’s Joan Embry from the San Diego Zoo, or someone you have never even heard of, they all get paid the exact same for the appearances on chat shows. Union scale.  Union scale is the least an actor can be paid under th...




					www.quora.com
				




by John Knox
Former Interactive Producer, Tonight Show with Jay Leno & Late Night with Conan O'Brien(1997–2000)Author has 174 answers and 2.7M answer views2y
_Do guests on late shows get paid?_
_Whether it’s Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise or Tom Hanks… or whether it’s Joan Embry from the San Diego Zoo, or someone you have never even heard of, *they all get paid the exact same for the appearances on chat shows. Union scale.*
Union scale is the least an actor can be paid under the various union agreements, (SAG, AFTRA, Equity etc) … Currently, the average Screen Actors Guild (SAG) scale minimum for a television appearance is around $980–$1005. That covers up to 8 hours of work.
HOWEVER - from that amount must come agent’s 10 %, possibly a manager’s 10%, taxes, health care premiums and god knows what else.
Talk shows would pay zero if they could but to remain a union production and have union members make appearances, scale is the solution when the real reason they are there is promotion._

_Frequently actors will donate these appearance fees to organizations like the ACTOR’S FUND - a registered charity that helps those in the entertainment industry (in front and behind the camera etc)._


File that in the "I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this" file.


----------



## charlottawill

Hyacinth said:


> I don't know who the guy whose photo is about half-way thru the article is (sorry, too many pretty faces out there for me to keep track of all of them but he looks vaguely familiar. British?), but that's NOT Fallon.
> 
> And Fallon has been known to make poor decisions about guests before. Sometimes he even musses up their hair...


Zach Efron, an actor. Don't know why his picture is there. I've never heard of the Daily Star, but I'm guessing they're not know for award winning journalism.


----------



## Hyacinth

charlottawill said:


> Zach Efron, an actor. Don't know why his picture is there. I've never heard of the Daily Star, but I'm guessing they're not know for award winning journalism.



Thanks! I've heard the name but never seen any of his work. I've never heard of the Daily Star either, now I understand why.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> *Let's not forget *Hazy's appearance on James Corden.



You sure?  I'd rather forgotten about him and her forever!


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


>





gracekelly said:


> So this was nothing more than a chewing gum maneuver?  She thought if she let them know she wanted to be on the show and threw the gum at the wall it would happen?  I guess they didn't bite.


No, it was real. Her publicists don’t have any say over NBC’s website. NBC took it down but there are still traces of the original announcement remaining.

Not sure what they meant by “how to watch Meghan Markle.” Maybe they were going to advise their viewers to get drunk first so they could tolerate listening to her nonsense.


----------



## Toby93

__


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> That's a shame because Fallon does stupid stunts like Ellen and would ask her to bark like a dog.


I was hoping for something like this - she was oh so goood


----------



## CarryOn2020

So, which is worse for a Z lister wannabe?
 Say you’ll appear on the big name talk show, then cancel OR appear and be mocked [as with Craig Ferguson’s show, see above]?   

ETA:  does she need to be a member of the union to get paid? 
Most of us will recall she lied [then bragged about lying] about this before.


----------



## bag-mania

It’s that time of the week again. A new pretentious podcast is about to be released. 

Everyone get some rest. We’ll soon have much to discuss.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It’s that time of the week again. A new pretentious podcast is about to be released.
> 
> Everyone get some rest. We’ll soon have much to discuss.


are these things almost done?


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> are these things almost done?


Unless they made more than they originally said, I believe next week will be the last one.

Of course nothing is absolute and straightforward in Meghan world.


----------



## Annawakes

bag-mania said:


> This was the appearance that was postponed when the Queen died. It was meant to be used to promote her podcast. Now it will probably be to promote the Netflix show.


Or distance herself from the Netflix show.


----------



## bag-mania

Annawakes said:


> Or distance herself from the Netflix show.


That would be incredibly poor judgment, biting the hand that’s feeding her. What am I saying? That’s classic Meghan. 

Bob Iger has been brought back as CEO in an attempt to save Disney from ruin. Will she have Harry corner him again at a premiere to beg for work for her?


----------



## needlv

Toby93 said:


> __




If there docuseries is being released… then why no promotion from Netflix?  Are they planning on tiger-king/the Cut treatment? (Show their own words so they can be widely mocked?)


----------



## jelliedfeels

gracekelly said:


> That's a shame because Fallon does stupid stunts like Ellen and would ask her to bark like a dog.


Seems appropriate for old spaniel ears given she is always begging for tidbits and sniffing crotches.


charlottawill said:


> Let's not forget Hazy's appearance on James Corden.



I’m fairly sure it’s been largely forgotten apart from in Guantanamo


Toby93 said:


> __



We will see if it is as real as fallon. 


needlv said:


> If there docuseries is being released… then why no promotion from Netflix?  Are they planning on tiger-king/the Cut treatment? (Show their own words so they can be widely mocked?)


If I was an editor there I can see how it would be seriously tempting to give the footage the tiger king treatment - M already has the dead eyed and self righteous Carole baskin quality and now H has gone all Cali cowboy he could hang out with Joe exotic- maybe even marry him once Meg tries to feed him to the tigers (he’s step up even with a murder conviction)  - a happy ending for all!


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA:  does she need to be a member of the union to get paid?
> Most of us will recall she lied [then bragged about lying] about this before.




But then Thomas came forward and said of course she was in the union because he paid the fees.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> That would be incredibly poor judgment, biting the hand that’s feeding her. What am I saying? That’s classic Meghan.
> 
> Bob Iger has been brought back as CEO in an attempt to save Disney from ruin. Will she have Harry corner him again at a premiere to beg for work for her?


First H & M would have to be invited to another Disney premier in order for Ginge to have a chance to corner Iger again. Weren’t they still working members of the BRF and that was the reason they were invited to the premier where Ginge made his sales pitch for TW’s voice over? Have H & M attended any premiers since Megxit? I don’t think they’ve been invited to any. Meanwhile William and Kate in London attended the James Bond premier in 2021 and the Top Gun Maverick premier in 2022 and Kate looked spectacular at both events.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> are these things almost done?



We live with hope.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> No, it was real. Her publicists don’t have any say over NBC’s website. NBC took it down but there are still traces of the original announcement remaining.
> 
> Not sure what they meant by “how to watch Meghan Markle.” Maybe they were going to advise their viewers to get drunk first so they could tolerate listening to her nonsense.
> 
> View attachment 5657665


Maybe a stan infiltrated NBC and put it out so that Horrid Scabies could immediately blast it on SM and force it to come true


----------



## Sharont2305

Meanwhile, on this side of the pond, the racist RF are hosting a State Visit for the South African President (not that Harry would've been invited if he was still a working Royal)


----------



## marietouchet

The complete title of article is priceless , the company that MM is keeping - one accused of DUI, another is scandal ridden …









						CALLAHAN: Kennedy gets Baldwin to give Markle an award? Make it stop!
					

CALLAHAN: This is satire, right? An ultra-liberal host, one most rational people believe guilty of manslaughter, awarding two spoiled middle-aged beta royals a human rights award.




					mol.im


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Unless they made more than they originally said, I believe next week will be the last one.
> 
> Of course nothing is absolute and straightforward in Meghan world.


happy to say I haven't heard a word of it and won't watch the Netflix "docuseries" either


----------



## bag-mania

Oooo, another cutting edge podcast. Meghan discovered there exists a DOUBLE STANDARD and she wants to tell us about it. Yes, this is the sl*t episode we’ve all been expecting.









						Meghan Markle talks to Sex and the City author Candace Bushnell
					

Opening the podcast, Meghan says: 'There's a piece of art in my sitting room... it just says simply ''human kind'' - be both.'



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> First H & M would have to be invited to another Disney premier in order for Ginge to have a chance to corner Iger again. Weren’t they still working members of the BRF and that was the reason they were invited to the premier where Ginge made his sales pitch for TW’s voice over? Have H & M attended any premiers since Megxit? I don’t think they’ve been invited to any. Meanwhile William and Kate in London attended the James Bond premier in 2021 and the Top Gun Maverick premier in 2022 and Kate looked spectacular at both events.


The premiere attended by The Harkles, Iger, Elton , Beyoncé and Jay Z, they chose to go to that networking opportunity instead of going to the military (Marines ?) event on the same night


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> happy to say I haven't heard a word of it and won't watch the Netflix "docuseries" either


Her voice repels me like the screech of a banshee. Reading the reviews is all I need.


----------



## LittleStar88

Another Archetypes podcast. I stay positive. Then Meghan says this . . .
					

The Duchess of Sussex sits in her authenticity as she interviews Sex and the City author Candace Bushnell




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




Darn paywall. Archive link here: https://archive.ph/2022.11.22-14482...pes-podcast-review-candace-bushnell-83kdk0z82


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Another Archetypes podcast. I stay positive. Then Meghan says this . . .
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex sits in her authenticity as she interviews Sex and the City author Candace Bushnell
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Darn paywall. Archive link here: https://archive.ph/2022.11.22-14482...pes-podcast-review-candace-bushnell-83kdk0z82


Great article - thanks so much for posting.  I did read it while sitting in my authenticity.  Here’s a lil snippet:


_“I find it so inspiring to listen to women who are clear on who they are, unwavering, not waffling, confident in spite of whatever barriers they might have seen,” she says. She wishes she could “bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation, when you shed all your fears of judgment” and get on a private jet out of England, for example, and when — wait for it — “*you sit in your authenticity*”. Of course.
This was billed as the penultimate episode, but you know what worries me? Does Meghan know what penultimate means? See you next Tuesday. And the one after that._


----------



## WingNut

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article - thanks so much for posting.  I did read it while sitting in my authenticity.  Here’s a lil snippet:
> 
> 
> _“I find it so inspiring to listen to women who are clear on who they are, unwavering, not waffling, confident in spite of whatever barriers they might have seen,” she says. She wishes she could “bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation, when you shed all your fears of judgment” and get on a private jet out of England, for example, and when — wait for it — “*you sit in your authenticity*”. Of course.
> This was billed as the penultimate episode, but you know what worries me? Does Meghan know what penultimate means? See you next Tuesday. And the one after that._


"Sitting in her authenticity" makes me think of a baby sitting in its own pile of poop. Which is exactly what she's doing.....


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article - thanks so much for posting.  I did read it while sitting in my authenticity.  Here’s a lil snippet:
> 
> 
> _“I find it so inspiring to listen to women who are clear on who they are, unwavering, not waffling, confident in spite of whatever barriers they might have seen,” she says. She wishes she could “bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation, when you shed all your fears of judgment” and get on a private jet out of England, for example, and when — wait for it — “*you sit in your authenticity*”. Of course.
> This was billed as the penultimate episode, but you know what worries me? Does Meghan know what penultimate means? See you next Tuesday. And the one after that._


She's a joke. Can't help but think some of her stans may have dropped off by now. Anyone would be underwhelmed by these nonsensical, boring proclamations.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> She's a joke. Can't help but think some of her stans may have dropped off by now. Anyone would be underwhelmed by these nonsensical, boring proclamations.


Well, if they aren't paid, then maybe they belong to the subset of human being that is easily impressed by big words. 

One of my office narcs tried to impress us with big words and claims of being well-travelled. And my subordinates were duly impressed. One of them told me: "He can't be lying. He ... he has a university degree! He was a teacher! Teachers deserve respect!" I was waiting for her to claim that teachers don't lie, but my eyerolling tipped her off and she shut up


----------



## CarryOn2020

I need more time to sit in my authenticity before I can comment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> That would be incredibly poor judgment, biting the hand that’s feeding her. What am I saying? That’s classic Meghan.
> 
> Bob Iger has been brought back as CEO in an attempt to save Disney from ruin. Will she have Harry corner him again at a premiere to beg for work for her?


This will be his reaction if he encounters them at some Hwood event that they weasel an invite to.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> I need more time to sit in my authenticity before I can comment.



Me too.


----------



## K.D.

So can you wallow in your authenticity? Envelope yourself in it? Immerse yourself in your authenticity? The possibilities are endless!


----------



## sdkitty

K.D. said:


> So can you wallow in your authenticity? Envelope yourself in it? Immerse yourself in your authenticity? The possibilities are endless!


from what I can see, there's just about nothing authentic about her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Torture Us Tuesday


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Torture Us Tuesday



Returning once again to what she believes to be her glory years. At the rate she is going, those will be her glory years.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Torture Us Tuesday



Did she install a Commemorative plaque on her old locker so everyone passing by could pay homage?  Maybe leave the door open so a votive candle could be installed like an altar to worship her space?

The woman makes me gag.


----------



## marietouchet

Ok , I only read the excerpts of the podcast but this is the message I got from mm
1. Men can be badly behaved but woman are sl$ts
2. Be yourself 
3. If you wanna misbehave and be sl$tty - go for it


----------



## jennlt

csshopper said:


> *Did she install a Commemorative plaque on her old locker so everyone passing by could pay homage?  *Maybe leave the door open so a votive candle could be installed like an altar to worship her space?
> 
> The woman makes me gag.


No but somebody else installed a dartboard featuring Sparry and Scary.


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> Returning once again to what she believes to be her glory years. At the rate she is going, those will be her glory years.


Now I have Bruce Springsteen’s “Glory Days” in my head


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Torture Us Tuesday



Well the good news is I actually know who the celebrity guests are …. SATC obv famous, MJ is St Blanca  in pose (I like pose but boy was B too good to be true) and Gorman is the poet. 

She went to quite a famous, expensive school so I imagine there is already the American equivalent of a blue plaque dedicated to a girl who actually achieved something beyond sleeping with a more important man?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Torture Us Tuesday



I couldn’t tell you where my locker was if I went back to my high school. For one, it changed every year. For another, who the f*ck cares?


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> Well the good news is I actually know who the celebrity guests are …. SATC obv famous, MJ is St Blanca  in pose (I like pose but boy was B too good to be true) and Gorman is the poet.
> 
> She went to quite a famous, expensive school so I imagine there is already the American equivalent of a blue plaque dedicated to a girl who actually achieved something beyond sleeping with a more important man?


It's not that famous.  I never even heard of it until she became famous. There are much fancier and expensive private schools in LA.


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Did she install a Commemorative plaque on her old locker so everyone passing by could pay homage?  Maybe leave the door open so a votive candle could be installed like an altar to worship her space?
> 
> The woman makes me gag.


She she point out which toilet she used?  I would think so because it is apparent that bathrooms are very important to her.


----------



## CobaltBlu

gracekelly said:


> It's not that famous.  I never even heard of it until she became famous. There are much fancier and expensive private schools in LA.


Correct. It is absolutely NOT one of the fancy expensive private schools there. It is basic. The tuition is half the average of the very good ones. Marlborough, for example, now is almost 49K; Immaculate Heart is 17K. It was much less when she went. Definitely NOT famous, expensive (by comparison), or exclusive by any stretch of (Meghan's) imagination.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Torture Us Tuesday




You mean at the private school that her father paid for? The one where if she was lucky she got to eat at Sizzler's afterward? She must be so emotionally scarred from her underprivileged upbringing. Will she demand payment from the kid who's using her old locker now since she'll be making that locker "famous"   ?


----------



## bag-mania

Even _People_ has given up protecting her from herself. Check out how she was confronted with both her age and how dated her podcast is.    

Meghan said, "You've heard me talk about Immaculate Heart on the series before and the influence it's had on my life. And look I was there from ages, about 12 to 17 which are really formative years in your life – they certainly were for me. And let me just say, being back there, the energy, it was, it was palpable. I was happy to be back there, and it was also really fun — especially when I made a surprise visit and I popped into some of the young ladies in volleyball practice."

During her return to her former school, Meghan sat down with three recent graduates — Grace, Abigail and Diana — to learn about the labels put on women, including "b—" and "bossy."

Meghan was surprised to learn that the women had only heard the word "bimbo," which she previously discussed in an episode with Paris Hilton, on TikTok.

"I mean talk about aging myself," Meghan said. "But this idea of the 'bimbo,' the dumb blonde, this was something I grew up seeing all the time and here you go…they hadn't."









						Meghan Markle Visits Her High School in New Podcast Episode: 'My Locker Was Right Over Here'
					

Meghan Markle's latest episode of Archetypes, her podcast on Spotify, features a conversation with Candace Bushnell and Michaela Jaé Rodriquez — and a visit to her former school




					people.com


----------



## purseinsanity

marietouchet said:


> Ok , I only read the excerpts of the podcast but this is the message I got from mm
> 1. Men can be badly behaved but woman are sl$ts
> 2. Be yourself
> *3. If you wanna misbehave and be sl$tty - go for it*


She's justifying her yacht days.
That's what all these pod casts have been: justification for her general $hittiness and for being the most annoying human being on the planet.


----------



## needlv

I think I can hear some crockery being smashed in Monteceto.


----------



## Sharont2305

We've gone through plates and toilets, are windows being smashed right now? 
#statedinner


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> I think I can hear some crockery being smashed in Monteceto.



Wait until she see the picture of the cape gown and tiara. She will be taking a sledge hammer to the house.


Sharont2305 said:


> We've gone through plates and toilets, are windows being smashed right now?
> #statedinner


See above comment about sledge hammer lol!   This what Meghan imagined her life would be as a Princess.  It could have been.  She could have been at the dinner and wearing a tiara.  This is what happens when you think you are smarter than everyone else.  YOU BLEW IT BABE!


----------



## CarryOn2020

where is Hazzie? MM?


----------



## bag-mania

I love how she contradicts herself and thinks everyone is too stupid to notice. Why would recent graduates be available at the school for Meghan to interview if she hadn’t arranged for them to be there in advance? They were likely hand-selected by the school. But sure, let’s call it a _surprise visit_.

I was happy to be back there, and it was also really fun — especially when* I made a surprise visit and I popped into some of the young ladies in volleyball practice."*

During her return to her former school, *Meghan sat down with three recent graduates* — Grace, Abigail and Diana — to learn about the labels put on women, including "b—" and "bossy."


----------



## CarryOn2020

So Hazzi won’t be regent to Prince George, in case something happens to William.  Well. Well.
Seems like Parliament knows how to protect its _working_  royals.



ETA: before anyone claims this is off topic,  IMO this speech is spot on, on topic.  Hazzie left a huge gap in the management of the monarchy, among other things. It is exactly the topic that should be discussed in this thread.  Almost every job requires a seamless transition of power, responsibilities, knowledge.  Hazzi should have done better.  Again, history in the making - a royal being removed


----------



## papertiger

WingNut said:


> "Sitting in her authenticity" makes me think of a baby sitting in its own pile of poop. Which is exactly what she's doing.....



I think "_bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation" _is even worse


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> I love how she contradicts herself and thinks everyone is too stupid to notice. Why would recent graduates be available at the school for Meghan to interview if she hadn’t arranged for them to be there in advance? They were likely hand-selected by the school. But sure, let’s call it a _surprise visit_.
> During her return to her former school, *Meghan sat down with three recent graduates* — Grace, Abigail and Diana — *to learn about the labels put on women, including "b—" and "bossy."*



Well M should know, she's the bossiest b*tch on the planet 

I would have more respect for her if she would just own it and sashay, sashay, sashay


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article - thanks so much for posting.  I did read it while sitting in my authenticity.  Here’s a lil snippet:
> 
> 
> _“I find it so inspiring to listen to women who are clear on who they are, unwavering, not waffling, confident in spite of whatever barriers they might have seen,” she says. She wishes she could “bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation, when you shed all your fears of judgment” and get on a private jet out of England, for example, and when — wait for it — “*you sit in your authenticity*”. Of course.
> This was billed as the penultimate episode, but you know what worries me? Does Meghan know what penultimate means? See you next Tuesday. And the one after that._



Sorry to be unappetizing, butsomeone is sitting in their own sh*t.


----------



## marietouchet

Yippee , per Reddit, hard bound Review copies go out next week, for the Harkle memoir
Leaks please


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> We've gone through plates and toilets, are windows being smashed right now?
> #statedinner



At some point it will be Harry's face.


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Well M should know,* she's the bossiest b*tch on the planet *
> 
> I would have more respect for her if she would just own it and sashay, sashay, sashay


She's also the b*tchiest boss


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I think I can hear some crockery being smashed in Monteceto.




BTW it's not just a brooch. When it was given to Alexandra it was a whole set with a magnificent necklace, pendants to exchange and emerald drop earrings. Camilla has been seen wearing the brooch with the earrings.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I was sitting in my authenticity thinking....  isn't energy palpable by nature?  Isnt that what makes is....er....energy?  

Also...Kate.  OMG.  
I wouldn't want to be in Harry's shoes right now (or ever)


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Well M should know, she's the bossiest b*tch on the planet
> 
> I would have more respect for her if she would just own it and sashay, sashay, sashay


I disagree, kinda , sorta, she thinks she is owning it, heck she is sitting in a puddle of authenticity


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So Hazzi won’t be regent to Prince George, in case something happens to William.  Well. Well.
> Seems like Parliament knows how to protect its _working_  royals.
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: before anyone claims this is off topic,  IMO this speech is spot on, on topic.  Hazzie left a huge gap in the management of the monarchy, among other things. It is exactly the topic that should be discussed in this thread.  Almost every job requires a seamless transition of power, responsibilities, knowledge.  Hazzi should have done better.  Again, history in the making - a royal being removed




Can you imagine? She would probably run over someone in rage if Kate was made CoS. I'm here for it (not the manslaughter).


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> I was sitting in my authenticity thinking....  isn't energy palpable by nature?  Isnt that what makes is....er....energy?
> 
> Also...Kate.  OMG.
> I wouldn't want to be in Harry's shoes right now (or ever)


well whose fault is it they gave up the royal life?  granted, she would have been below kate in status but still could have had some great stuff


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Does anyone know who the lady is who walks in with William?


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> She's a joke. Can't help but think some of her stans may have dropped off by now. Anyone would be underwhelmed by these nonsensical, boring proclamations.


So is she saying she was fake in England and authentic once she got on that jet?


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> from what I can see, there's just about nothing authentic about her


Yep...not her hair, her nose, her teeth, her kids


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Yep...not her hair, her nose, her teeth, her kids


and especially not her personality and all the BS she spews trying to be relevant or a leader or whatever


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG  Swipe for a Best of Ghoul.


----------



## Aimee3

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At some point it will be Harry's face.


Well his blue eyes seem to have turned brown…so maybe she already did attack his face …allegedly.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> No but somebody else installed a dartboard featuring Sparry and Scary.
> View attachment 5658050


Where do I place my order?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> It's not that famous.  I never even heard of it until she became famous. There are much fancier and expensive private schools in LA.


Harvard Westlake is the one that always comes to my mind. Hers didn't even make this list:



> https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/l...e-la-private-schools-1029445/laurence-school/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> You mean at the private school that her father paid for? The one where if she was lucky she got to eat at Sizzler's afterward? She must be so emotionally scarred from her underprivileged upbringing. Will she demand payment from the kid who's using her old locker now since she'll be making that locker "famous"   ?


Royalties for the faux royal?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I think someone just posted Ghoul's favourite Christmas ornament on FB.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Suspicious belly aside,  I just can't with her leaving the house in a dress three sizes too small. Did she not own a mirror in Frogmore?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Imo once the CoS has added the necessary people, Hazzie’s reign of terror will be over.  If he had renounced [thereby saving the King and the Lords’ time  and effort] it is possible his reputation would have been salvageable.  Now, not at all.  Seriously, who is interested in the sound and fury ramblings from someone who has no power, no land, no wealth.  His line has fizzled.


----------



## jennlt

charlottawill said:


> Where do I place my order?



25% off for Black Friday! Get yours before her lawyers send a cease and desist order!









						Stunning! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Dart Board | Zazzle
					

FREE Design Tool on Zazzle! Shop Stunning! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Dart Board created by picturestation. Personalize it with photos & text or purchase as is!



					www.zazzle.com


----------



## marietouchet

Dec 8 for Harkle Netflix series, popcorn please



charlottawill said:


>



MM has an odd ability to flex her joints - here it is the neck but also her hands and torso



bag-mania said:


> Unless they made more than they originally said, I believe next week will be the last one.
> 
> Of course nothing is absolute and straightforward in Meghan world.


The next 6 weeks will tell all - Indianapolis , ripple of hope, Netflix and autobiography - we will be busy


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Suspicious belly aside,  I just can't with her leaving the house in a dress three sizes too small. Did she not own a mirror in Frogmore?


 
I know….it’s pulling every possible way.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG  Swipe for a Best of Ghoul.




Oh wow! Princess of Wales looks stunning, and with the tiara and earrings 

I would LOVE to have been a fly on the wall when H and M first saw the pics of the state dinner….

someone please leak (even audio…..)


----------



## Toby93

Nvm


----------



## Toby93




----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


>



I’m over the 50 mark. Sure, women talk, some are catty.  Never once have I heard another woman say _that_ about anyone, much less someone she knew in college.  This tells me MM knows some rough, very hard, women.  She may want to rethink her peer group.


----------



## oldbag

,


marietouchet said:


> Fallon





CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m over the 50 mark. Sure, women talk, some are catty.  Never once have I heard another woman say _that_ about anyone, much less someone she knew in college.  This tells me MM knows some rough, very hard, women.  She may want to rethink her peer group.


I worked in a factory for 25 years before I worked in a well known financial firm. So from blue collar to white collar and to the best of my memory I never heard a woman refer to another woman as a sl#t. The worst I ever heard was the B word and that was not thrown around lightly. Also I never heard a male co worker say that either. Maybe my fellow factory rats (the company owner liked to call us animals) were classier than some of the more educated ones we have now.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m over the 50 mark. Sure, women talk, some are catty.  Never once have I heard another woman say _that_ about anyone, much less someone she knew in college.  This tells me MM knows some rough, very hard, women.  She may want to rethink her peer group.


It really does say a lot about her and how she thinks of other women.


----------



## charlottawill

jennlt said:


> 25% off for Black Friday! Get yours before her lawyers send a cease and desist order!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stunning! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Dart Board | Zazzle
> 
> 
> FREE Design Tool on Zazzle! Shop Stunning! Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Dart Board created by picturestation. Personalize it with photos & text or purchase as is!
> 
> 
> 
> www.zazzle.com


Should we send a group gift to the P and P of Wales? 



marietouchet said:


> MM has an odd ability to flex her joints - here it is the neck but also her hands and torso


The Hunchback of Montecito.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Suspicious belly aside,  I just can't with her leaving the house in a dress three sizes too small. Did she not own a mirror in Frogmore?


Dolly said it best. I do remember my grandfather using the more vulgar version of the phrase many years ago.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

The contrast today is even more staggering than usual: MEMEME stuck at a high school level, disparaging women through her out dated stereotypical victimhood lens.

Meanwhile the dynamic working Royal women, The Princess of Wales in particular, are centered on the world stage, involved in the present and future relationship with a major Commonwealth country.

The King in his speech, openly acknowledging the issues of colonialism, weakens the Suckesses IMO. The King from a position of power will work to make a difference, the impotent Suckesse will point their limp fingers and continue to whine.


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The next 6 weeks will tell all - Indianapolis , ripple of hope, Netflix and autobiography - we will be busy


And here I’ll be traveling over the holidays. Well, I’ll just have to make the time to keep up with the thread while I’m away. I can’t come back and try to catch up on 150 pages of missed commentary.


----------



## charlottawill

Go Team USA!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> And here I’ll be traveling over the holidays. Well, I’ll just have to make the time to keep up with the thread while I’m away. I can’t come back and try to catch up on 150 pages of missed commentary.


Is there a way to get a daily digest emailed to us?  Still, these rumors have been out there from day 1.  Here we are 3/4 years later - H&M are still putting out photos, recording videos, etc.  Methinks [fears] they and their anti-rhetoric will be around for quite some time.


----------



## needlv

charlottawill said:


>



“Involuntary rehab”?    Is that even possible?  I’m putting this gossip as not likely.

Rehab maybe but not involuntary….

plus Charles won’t pay a cent towards any settlement.  Divorce is between Haz and M only, not the family finances.  Look at how much (or little) Sarah F got, because it was worked out on what Prince Andrew’s net worth was.

Charles may pay H’s legal fees though…if he wants to.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> “Involuntary rehab”?    Is that even possible?  I’m putting this gossip as not likely.
> 
> Rehab maybe but not involuntary….
> 
> plus Charles won’t pay a cent towards any settlement.  Divorce is between Haz and M only, not the family finances.  Look at how much (or little) Sarah F got, because it was worked out on what Prince Andrew’s net worth was.
> 
> Charles may pay H’s legal fees though…if he wants to.


I agree the word involuntary implies that there is a court order of some kind. I think this is rather an extreme thing for this person to write


----------



## Chanbal

DM is on the job! One more organization on its way to get markled?!  


_*I learn that the 'non-profit' organisation handed out just $300,000 [£250,000] in grants in the same year that it raked in a staggering $43 million [£36 million] in contributions and grants.*

That year — 2018, its 50th anniversary — its president, Kerry Kennedy, 63, was paid $555,000 [£467,000], almost twice what it handed out in grants. Kerry — the daughter of Robert F. Kennedy, assassinated in 1968, and niece of John F. Kennedy – had her vast salary topped up by a further $42,000 [£36,000] in 'other compensation from the organisation and other related organisations'…


In the years that followed, the amount of income to the charity fell, but Kennedy's wages remained consistent. 

In 2019, for example, there was a huge drop in income, from $43 million to $18 million [£15 million], but Kennedy received similar pay to the previous year._









						EDEN CONFIDENTIAL: Surprising finances of Prince Harry's prize charity
					

RICHARD EDEN: At a New York gala on December 6, the foundation is to give Prince Harry and Meghan the Ripple Of Hope award, previously awarded to Bill and Hillary *******.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				






charlottawill said:


> Go Team USA!



You must be from the UK  



Toby93 said:


>



She is so vulgar.

The Award is for Oprah's interview… and

*There were 'over 30 lies' in Harry and Meghan's Oprah interview*​


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

More on the Human Rights Award… people are rightfully outraged! 


_Harry and Meghan can be a ‘complete bastard’ to their own family and ‘still get a prize for heroism’_​


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m over the 50 mark. Sure, women talk, some are catty.  Never once have I heard another woman say _that_ about anyone, much less someone she knew in college. This tells me MM knows some rough, very hard, women. She may want to rethink her peer group.



She is also shaming women for speaking out, even among themselves, about possible bullying claims or bad behaviour (I wonder why  ?). What she's saying is once a woman is perceived successful she should above and beyond reproach?

Isn't that what happened to 'successful' men that bullied and abused their way to the top, people kept (too) quiet for fear of retribution or being thought jealous.

Why shouldn't people speak their mind? She (and Harry) is/are the one constantly silencing people, threatening with litigation and being cancelled.



Toby93 said:


> It really does say a lot about her and how she thinks of other women.



You got there first! 

We just know that she's talking about herself, on both counts. She's obviously b*tching about Kate and others non-stop. Everyone 'above' her is in her way.



oldbag said:


> ,
> 
> 
> 
> I worked in a factory for 25 years before I worked in a well known financial firm. So from blue collar to white collar and to the best of my memory I never heard a woman refer to another woman as a sl#t. The worst I ever heard was the B word and that was not thrown around lightly. Also I never heard a male co worker say that either. Maybe my fellow factory rats (the company owner liked to call us animals) were classier than some of the more educated ones we have now.



My mostly female colleagues are really great, I don't have a bad word to say bout them. I can't say the same for the dept I used to work in (once they visibly got rid of all the women that worked there). All the men were 'mates' or Machiavellian.

MegZZ gives no credit to women at all, other than to use them - and then Markle* them.

*Urban dictionary *a 'verb for ghosting or disposing of people once you have no use or benefit from them anymore, without regard to genuine human relationship*'.



charlottawill said:


>




Sorry, but no one's father pays anything in a divorce settlement


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great article - thanks so much for posting.  I did read it while sitting in my authenticity.  Here’s a lil snippet:
> 
> 
> _“I find it so inspiring to listen to women who are clear on who they are, unwavering, not waffling, confident in spite of whatever barriers they might have seen,” she says. She wishes she could “bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation, when you shed all your fears of judgment” and get on a private jet out of England, for example, and when — wait for it — “*you sit in your authenticity*”. Of course.
> This was billed as the penultimate episode, but you know what worries me? Does Meghan know what penultimate means? See you next Tuesday. And the one after that._


What relatable content lol. This is like a more waffling version of that Beyoncé house song - can she even put her own spin on spouting cliches?


Toby93 said:


>



Even in my 30s, I will say that the odd people you meet who are still obsessed with college/uni are the ones with the issues.
I mean it’s not news M has issues.

This is probably also an attempt to flex on H because he didn’t go: though to me that’s actually one of his few mature choices.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I’m over the 50 mark. Sure, women talk, some are catty.  Never once have I heard another woman say _that_ about anyone, much less someone she knew in college. This tells me MM knows some rough, very hard, women. She may want to rethink her peer group.


The call is coming from inside the house.

When M looks at all the successful, intelligent women she isn’t…. then what can she say to soothe her volcanic envy and avoid facing her own mediocrity?
All she’s got is ‘she’s older than me the 40 year old ingenue’ and ‘she must sleep around unlike me who is so *famously* married’.

I mean it goes without saying she’s only highlighting her own insecurities and needs a cup of self awareness.

I will admit for my own part I drag M so hard about the spaniel ears because I feel a deep revulsion at the memory of the plastic spider legs I wore in the 00s


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


>



I personally feel like this Twitter person seems to be mentally ill and I do worry getting involved in the continuing H&M maelstrom isn’t helping.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Even _People_ has given up protecting her from herself. Check out how she was confronted with both her age and how dated her podcast is.
> 
> Meghan said, "You've heard me talk about Immaculate Heart on the series before and the influence it's had on my life. And look I was there from ages, about 12 to 17 which are really formative years in your life – they certainly were for me. And let me just say, being back there, the energy, it was, it was palpable. I was happy to be back there, and it was also really fun — especially when I made a surprise visit and I popped into some of the young ladies in volleyball practice."
> 
> During her return to her former school, Meghan sat down with three recent graduates — Grace, Abigail and Diana — to learn about the labels put on women, including "b—" and "bossy."
> 
> Meghan was surprised to learn that the women had only heard the word "bimbo," which she previously discussed in an episode with Paris Hilton, on TikTok.
> 
> "I mean talk about aging myself," Meghan said. "But this idea of the 'bimbo,' the dumb blonde, this was something I grew up seeing all the time and here you go…they hadn't."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Visits Her High School in New Podcast Episode: 'My Locker Was Right Over Here'
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's latest episode of Archetypes, her podcast on Spotify, features a conversation with Candace Bushnell and Michaela Jaé Rodriquez — and a visit to her former school
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


Word of the week was "palpable"? 
I cannot stand "I popped into some of the young ladies..." You can pop into a store to pick up groceries, but can you actually pop into people? Sounds quite ... uhm, invasive.



bag-mania said:


> I couldn’t tell you where my locker was if I went back to my high school. For one, it changed every year. For another, who the f*ck cares?


Maybe she kept bimbo and sl*t supplies in that locker, so it was a very formative symbol of her childhood (ugh, the inauthenticity is choking me...)


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> I think "_bottle up that inspiring feeling of liberation" _is even worse


I'm getting perfume commercial vibes...


Chanbal said:


> More on the Human Rights Award… people are rightfully outraged!
> 
> 
> _Harry and Meghan can be a ‘complete bastard’ to their own family and ‘still get a prize for heroism’_​



Sigh, so these heroes stood up to the racist BRF heroically ... and then griped to OW that the BRF's current monarch refused to give them more money? My mind hurts when it tries to follow their complete lack of logic.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




Yeah, why would he do that (Charles). Harry has a dukedom already, he is not getting a second one. Charles has been very appreciative of Anne and Edward, maybe he's waiting for the right moment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> And here I’ll be traveling over the holidays. Well, I’ll just have to make the time to keep up with the thread while I’m away. I can’t come back and try to catch up on 150 pages of missed commentary.



I guess someone will have to get their priorities straight!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




Said no one ever. How does she even come up with this nonsense?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> My mostly female colleagues are really great, I don't have a bad word to say bout them. I can't say the same for the dept I used to work in (once they visibly got rid of all the women that worked there). All the men were 'mates' or Machiavellian.
> 
> MegZZ gives no credit to women at all, other than to use them - and then Markle* them.
> 
> *Urban dictionary *a 'verb for ghosting or disposing of people once you have no use or benefit from them anymore, without regard to genuine human relationship*'.



Same. Even the one that would feed anyone to the wolves when it would advance her position has helped me generously with professional advice others would have refused to give (what to charge, where to find x contact etc.). I have literally never worked with backstabbing witches, and I genuinely like spending time with other women.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I'm getting perfume commercial vibes...
> 
> Sigh, so these heroes stood up to the racist BRF heroically ... and then griped to OW that the BRF's current monarch refused to give them more money? My mind hurts when it tries to follow their complete lack of logic.



And more racist, classist, ranked titles for their offspring.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Sorry, but no one's father pays anything in a divorce settlement



The Queen reportedly paid Charles's! But I agree I don't think anyone can MAKE parents pay.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen reportedly paid Charles's! But I agree I don't think anyone can MAKE parents pay.


Starting to sound like those AITA threads on Reddit. _My son married a gold-digger who refuses to give him a divorce unless he forks over a huge sum of money. AITA for refusing to pay her off for him?_


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen reportedly paid Charles's! But I agree I don't think anyone can MAKE parents pay.


She loaned the money to Charles as he didn’t have readily available cash.


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Said no one ever. How does she even come up with this nonsense?


I think she wants to present women herself, as usual, as a victim. I used to have minor issues like that, liked to think things happening to me are major drama but my counsellor fixed that in a few sessions. Can share his number, he's affordable


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Queen reportedly paid Charles's! But I agree I don't think anyone can MAKE parents pay.


Maybe QEII paid/loaned the money for Diana’s hefty divorce settlement, but D was the mother of the future king 
Sarah Ferguson got no such hefty settlement as the ex wife of the SPARE


----------



## Chanbal

the creativity out there is mind-blowing  


	

		
			
		

		
	
(Heaven vs. Hell; Source Reddit)


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

Someone found a better pic.   I wonder if the reason the Harkles do videos outside of the house is because everything is already destroyed inside…


QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG  Swipe for a Best of Ghoul.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> She is also shaming women for speaking out, even among themselves, about possible bullying claims or bad behaviour (I wonder why  ?). What she's saying is once a woman is perceived successful she should above and beyond reproach?
> 
> Isn't that what happened to 'successful' men that bullied and abused their way to the top, people kept (too) quiet for fear of retribution or being thought jealous.
> 
> Why shouldn't people speak their mind? She (and Harry) is/are the one constantly silencing people, threatening with litigation and being cancelled.


She says whatever she believes will get her accolades. Her goal is positive attention which is why everything in her podcast is already mainstream (and stale) thinking.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Someone found a better pic.   I wonder if the reason the Harkles do videos outside of the house is because everything is already destroyed inside…



You know .. W and H never wear kilts, thankfully we have Lt Colonel Johnny, swoon


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

People, foundations, publishing companies… should start thinking twice before associating to the Harkles… 



Edit: Additional news on Hazz's masterpiece…


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> Sorry, but no one's father pays anything in a divorce settlement


maybe this would be like ransom


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She literally makes my skin crawl.



Sorry I'm a little late on this, but I found TW's words so condescending about being proud of Elton John (Spoiler 1). Without her association to the BRF, EJ wouldn't look at her twice…  



Spoiler: 1-So proud of Elton








Is EJ also on his way to be markled (Spoiler 2)?  



Spoiler: 2-Elton John and his questionable taste in art and literature


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Sorry I'm a little late on this, but I found TW's words so condescending about being proud of Elton John (Spoiler 1). Without her association to the BRF, EJ wouldn't look at her twice…
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 1-So proud of Elton
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is EJ also on his way to be markled (Spoiler 2)?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 2-Elton John and his questionable taste in art and literature
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> El



Elton sang at Diana's memorial so if they had a falling out, maybe it was mended.  Meghan saying she is proud of him?  Like a parent being proud of a child?  Isn't is just so sweet the way she puts her head of H's shoulder at the end?  So In Love


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> Elton sang at Diana's memorial so if they had a falling out, maybe it was mended.  Meghan saying she is proud of him?  Like a parent being proud of a child?  Isn't is just so sweet the way she puts her head of H's shoulder at the end?  So In Love


They had a falling out, but made up the month before Diana's death at the Johnny Versace funeral.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> They had a falling out, but made up the month before Diana's death at the Johnny Versace funeral.



We only have his word for it they made up (_Me, Elton John _2019).  The two were put next to each other at the Versace service, but that could have been seating arrangements. Unless you were H&M, no-one would choose to cause a fuss at a funeral.  

EJ certainly emotionally and commercially exploited her funeral (IMHO) and has been dining out on his 'Di & me' stories ever since.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Elton sang at Diana's memorial so if they had a falling out, maybe it was mended.  Meghan saying she is proud of him?  Like a parent being proud of a child?  Isn't is just so sweet the way she puts her head of H's shoulder at the end?  So In Love



I don't know what she's proud of. 

If she's not being hostile towards people, she's being patronising. It comes from her 'lady bountiful' routine. Who cares what she thinks of Elton?


----------



## Aimee3

papertiger said:


> I don't know what she's proud of.
> 
> If she's not being hostile towards people, she's being patronising. It comes from her 'lady bountiful' routine. Who cares what she thinks of Elton?


I don't now how to do the "I fixed it for you" but "who cares what she thinks, period."


----------



## Aminamina

My first impression was they had absolutely nothing to say off the head and acted as if the camera caught them on their way to taking their trash out.


----------



## Chanbal

Is this handsome gentleman trying to rescue his family legacy? I feel sorry for Robert F. Kennedy to have his name associated to the Harkles. In Piers Morgan's words, "_Bobby Kennedy will be turning in his grave at what his daughter’s done in his name_."



By TATE DELLOYE FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 10:34 EST, 23 November 2022 | UPDATED: 11:31 EST, 23 November 2022

_On one side is President John F. Kennedy's grandson, Jack Schlossberg, 29, who has teamed up with the Prince and Princess of Wales to honor his grandfather's legacy with five recipients of the 'Earthshot Prize' at the JFK Library Foundation in Boston on December 2. _









						Kennedys are SPLIT over the royal rift between Harry and William
					

The Kennedys are the latest to be sucked into the royal feud as separate branches of the political dynasty are hosting competing galas just days apart from each other in America next month




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				












						Harry and Meghan a pair of greedy grifters who ditched royal duty
					

Robert F. "Bobby" Kennedy was a brilliant man - ferociously intelligent, supremely eloquent, and passionately committed to protecting human rights.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


>



How terrible to give a revered title to an undeserving and disrespectful  ingrate.


----------



## Chanbal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> How terrible to give a revered title to an undeserving and disrespectful  ingrate.


I believe Charles would give Hazz the Edinburgh title as well as one of the palaces had he stayed in the UK, but not after what he has been doing in the US. Charles is likely waiting for the right time to pass it to his brother.


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments…


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> No further comments…



That asswipe is the perfect person to introduce Meghan and Harry.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


>




One is every bit a future Queen Consort. The other looks a hot mess.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


>



And the perfect tiara for it…


In the meantime, Montecito…


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

Hilarious


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I believe Charles would give Hazz the Edinburgh title as well as one of the palaces had he stayed in the UK, but not after what he has been doing in the US. Charles is likely waiting for the right time to pass it to his brother.


Nahhh KC3 can’t give away a palace but he can gift Highgrove

Years ago, it was suggested that H pursue agricultural studies so he knew more about managing organic farming, not that idea stuck . I think Louis will be penciled in to get that place 
but for the Harkles ? KC3 has a place in Romania


----------



## TC1

marietouchet said:


> Hilarious



Please FTLOG DO NOT advocate for them to come to Canada


----------



## Chanbal

When words fail Piers, it must be serious…   

*PIERS MORGAN:* _I think it's absolutely disgusting and shame on Kerry Kennedy, frankly, for besmirching the name and memory of her father in this way. The idea that these two little grifters, who quit royal duty, quit Britain… exploited and fleeced their royal titles for hundreds of millions of dollars straight in their back pocket…the idea that they're being lauded as some kind of heroes in America by your own sort of royal family, if you like, the Kennedys, it really sticks in my gullet. And I think they should rethink this, because I think it just to me, it epitomizes the malaise of modern celebrity when you have two people going out of their way to trash their families on national television. Harry has this book coming out, and he's going to do it all over again to his father who's now the king, who's still mourning, of course, the death of his mother. You've got Meghan Markle, who was a sort of two-bit mediocre actress who married into a family, took our favorite prince, took him to America, and is now spending her entire time __trying to attack the monarchy__. And I'm sorry, but as a monarchist and as somebody who loves this country, I think it's completely outrageous that they are now being given the cloak of honor and prestige and branded heroes by a Kennedy… *Honestly, words fail me.* _


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Nahhh KC3 can’t give away a palace but he can gift Highgrove
> 
> Years ago, it was suggested that H pursue agricultural studies so he knew more about managing organic farming, not that idea stuck . I think Louis will be penciled in to get that place
> but for the Harkles ? KC3 has a place in Romania


I agree, I don't think Charles has any perks for Hazz at this point. However, if he had stayed in the UK and behaved like a normal adult, I'm positive he would get a lot from his father.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I agree, I don't think Charles has any perks for Hazz at this point. However, if he had stayed in the UK and behaved like a normal adult, I'm positive he would get a lot from his father.



And to think that greedy thing he married ruined it all for him because she couldn't upstage Kate. I'd be very happy a few places down the pecking order, still rich, still very comfortable, but maybe I have simpler taste


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> When words fail Piers, it must be serious…
> 
> *PIERS MORGAN:* _I think it's absolutely disgusting and shame on Kerry Kennedy, frankly, for besmirching the name and memory of her father in this way. The idea that these two little grifters, who quit royal duty, quit Britain… exploited and fleeced their royal titles for hundreds of millions of dollars straight in their back pocket…the idea that they're being lauded as some kind of heroes in America by your own sort of royal family, if you like, the Kennedys, it really sticks in my gullet. And I think they should rethink this, because I think it just to me, it epitomizes the malaise of modern celebrity when you have two people going out of their way to trash their families on national television. Harry has this book coming out, and he's going to do it all over again to his father who's now the king, who's still mourning, of course, the death of his mother. You've got Meghan Markle, who was a sort of two-bit mediocre actress who married into a family, took our favorite prince, took him to America, and is now spending her entire time __trying to attack the monarchy__. And I'm sorry, but as a monarchist and as somebody who loves this country, I think it's completely outrageous that they are now being given the cloak of honor and prestige and branded heroes by a Kennedy… *Honestly, words fail me.* _




_*they are now being given the cloak of honor and prestige and branded heroes by a Kennedy*_

Yes, there was a time [long gone] where the Kennedy name meant something.  Not so much now.  So many issues, scandals and conflicts with these recent generations.   This particular award is well known for its shady activity, even more so now.  Being connected to this side of ‘the family’ will not enhance anyone’s reputation imo.  AlecB knows this.  H&M are about to find out.   

There is *no* _cloak of honor or prestige. _


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*they are now being given the cloak of honor and prestige and branded heroes by a Kennedy*_
> 
> Yes, there was a time [long gone] where the Kennedy name meant something.  Not so much now.  So many issues, scandals and conflicts with these recent generations.   This particular award is well known for its shady activity, even more so now.  Being connected to this side of ‘the family’ will not enhance anyone’s reputation imo.  AlecB knows this.  H&M are about to find out.
> 
> There is *no* _cloak of honor or prestige. _


I feel this way.  The day is long gone when trading on the Kennedy name is a good thing.  Caroline tried it in an aborted run for Senator from NY many years ago.  She didn't last very long.  She was smart to pull out and wait for an Ambassadorship, which she received X2.  When one of the clan runs for office, I roll my eyes.  

I think at this point, after all this negative publicity, even if the Sussex called up Kerry and said, don't give us the award, the damage has been done and The King can't ignore it.  If the Sussex were at the back of the room before, they have now been shunted to the far end of the porch with one arm holding on to the railing.  They can blame themselves.  Not that they will, of course.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I believe Charles would give Hazz the *Edinburgh title* as well as one of the palaces had he stayed in the UK, but not after what he has been doing in the US. Charles is likely waiting for the right time to pass it to his brother.


Reading lots of catch-up posts after taking a long break from the disastrous twosome starting at the end.
Since Prince Philip asked that the Duke of Edinburgh title be transferred to Prince Edward upon his death, I don't believe Dufus has a chance in hell of ever getting it. When PP died the title automatically reverted to then Prince Charles and I'm guessing that KCIII is waiting until the Coronation to award the title to Edward.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Reading lots of catch-up posts after taking a long break from the disastrous twosome starting at the end.
> Since Prince Philip asked that the Duke of Edinburgh title be transferred to Prince Edward upon his death, I don't believe Dufus has a chance in hell of ever getting it. When PP died the title automatically reverted to then Prince Charles and I'm guessing that KCIII is waiting until the Coronation to award the title to Edward.


After how Harry acted regarding  his military appt with the Royal Marines, I think PP would roll over in his tomb if Harry was given his title.


----------



## charlottawill

I watched video this morning of the state dinner and KC's speech. Had the Harkles stayed they'd have been included and she'd have gotten her tiara moments. But then I realized she'd never have been satisfied having to attend boring state dinners with random heads of state and visiting the young and old at hospitals and care centers. She craves the glitzy events - Vanity Fair Oscar parties, Met Gala invites, front row seats at Fashion Week, etc. I am convinced she had no intention all along of staying in England and used racism as her "get out of royal jail" card. But ever since TQ shot down their (her) half in, half out plan that would have let her have her cake and eat it too she has been on the warpath. Hell hath no greater fury than a woman scorned.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>



I just can't see how her gown was $265K. Was that one of her early scams? She paid Givenchy that amount and got a very large rebate?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I watched video this morning of the state dinner and KC's speech. Had the Harkles stayed they'd have been included and she'd have gotten her tiara moments. But then I realized she'd never have been satisfied having to attend boring state dinners with random heads of state and visiting the young and old at hospitals and care centers. She craves the glitzy events - Vanity Fair Oscar parties, Met Gala invites, front row seats at Fashion Week, etc. I am convinced she had no intention all along of staying in England and used racism as her "get out of royal jail" card. But ever since TQ shot down their (her) half in, half out plan that would have let her have her cake and eat it too she has been on the warpath. Hell hath no greater fury than a woman scorned.


but she hasn't really gotten the red carpet moments, met gala etc.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if TW was able to get one of those brooches. It's a sweet nod to QE.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if TW was able to get one of those brooches. It's a sweet nod to QE.



No she did not get the Order of Queen Elizabeth II.  Kate didn't get hers until she had been around for a while.



charlottawill said:


> I watched video this morning of the state dinner and KC's speech. Had the Harkles stayed they'd have been included and she'd have gotten her tiara moments. But then I realized she'd never have been satisfied having to attend boring state dinners with random heads of state and visiting the young and old at hospitals and care centers. She craves the glitzy events - Vanity Fair Oscar parties, Met Gala invites, front row seats at Fashion Week, etc. I am convinced she had no intention all along of staying in England and used racism as her "get out of royal jail" card. But ever since TQ shot down their (her) half in, half out plan that would have let her have her cake and eat it too she has been on the warpath. Hell hath no greater fury than a woman scorned.


All she wants is to walk the red carpet and have all eyes on her and then have pictures taken.  That is it.  No way she would have tolerated sitting at a State Dinner next to a person she didn't know.  

The one think I have noted about Kate is her ability to be completely still.  No fidgeting and complete placidity. She is always totally composed.   That is very difficult unless you are brain dead and she certainly is not.  I think that is one reason why you never see a bad picture of her. Meghan is sticking her tongue out, playing with her hair, grabbing on to Harry or someone and is just incapable of any stillness.  Lucky for us because it provides us with plenty of bad and inane pictures!



marietouchet said:


> Nahhh KC3 can’t give away a palace but he can gift Highgrove
> 
> Years ago, it was suggested that H pursue agricultural studies so he knew more about managing organic farming, not that idea stuck . I think Louis will be penciled in to get that place
> but for the Harkles ? KC3 has a place in Romania


Let's not forget about Chunga Changa.  I also have had an ice floe in the Arctic on reserve for him as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it the makeup? Fillers?  Weight?  A stand-in?


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I just can't see how her gown was $265K. Was that one of her early scams? She paid Givenchy that amount and got a very large rebate?


I wonder if the cost of the gown was lumped in with the cost of the cathedral length veil - too long for the Windsor Chapel. 
The veil was very expensive - 500 hours of skilled work. 
Just read that QEII had the flowers of the commonwealth on her coronation dress, another idea used by MM but she added a California poppy to the veil


----------



## csshopper

TC1 said:


> Please FTLOG DO NOT advocate for them to come to Canada


Lucky you, they moved on once. Wish we in California could be so fortunate. They tarnish “the Golden State”, (our official state nickname since 1968). Although to be candid, they aren’t the only ones.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it the makeup? Fillers?  Weight?  A stand-in?



Silly you , change of filters ? noooo … procedures


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> No she did not get the Order of Queen Elizabeth II.  Kate didn't get hers until she had been around for a while.


it is satisfying that the Orders have always been given out by QEII for service of the senior women in the BRF


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it the makeup? Fillers?  Weight?  A stand-in?



Pinocchio‘s nose has grown so much from all her lies, her face had to stretch to make it fit.

Stupid, cheap looking, no class photoshop.


----------



## marietouchet

Weasel wording … H wishes (future tense) to give  A LOT OF MONEY from his book proceeds (proceeds depends on sales … hmmm  ) …. H has donated (past tense)  A LOT OF MONEY , see page 2 of IG post


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> but she hasn't really gotten the red carpet moments, met gala etc.


Exactly, and that's made her crazy.


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> Is this handsome gentleman trying to rescue his family legacy? I feel sorry for Robert F. Kennedy to have his name associated to the Harkles. In Piers Morgan's words, "_Bobby Kennedy will be turning in his grave at what his daughter’s done in his name_."
> 
> View attachment 5658483
> 
> By TATE DELLOYE FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
> PUBLISHED: 10:34 EST, 23 November 2022 | UPDATED: 11:31 EST, 23 November 2022
> 
> _On one side is President John F. Kennedy's grandson, Jack Schlossberg, 29, who has teamed up with the Prince and Princess of Wales to honor his grandfather's legacy with five recipients of the 'Earthshot Prize' at the JFK Library Foundation in Boston on December 2. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kennedys are SPLIT over the royal rift between Harry and William
> 
> 
> The Kennedys are the latest to be sucked into the royal feud as separate branches of the political dynasty are hosting competing galas just days apart from each other in America next month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan a pair of greedy grifters who ditched royal duty
> 
> 
> Robert F. "Bobby" Kennedy was a brilliant man - ferociously intelligent, supremely eloquent, and passionately committed to protecting human rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au



I don't think I've ever agreed with Piers Morgan before, but he actually got it 100 percent correct on this one.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it the makeup? Fillers?  Weight?  A stand-in?



To use a line from an old game show, "Will the real MM please stand up?".


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> but she hasn't really gotten the red carpet moments, met gala etc.


No, and that’s hilarious. They are not in the industry nor are they respected. I figured they would be invited to one or two big events early on when they were a novelty. They weren’t invited and the novelty has long worn off.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> No, and that’s hilarious. They are not in the industry nor are they respected. I figured they would be invited to one or two big events early on when they were a novelty. They weren’t invited and the novelty has long worn off.


serves her right


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> No, and that’s hilarious. They are not in the industry nor are they respected. I figured they would be invited to one or two big events early on when they were a novelty. They weren’t invited and the novelty has long worn off.


Just like Wallis and what’s his name


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> No, and that’s hilarious. They are not in the industry nor are they respected. I figured they would be invited to one or two big events early on when they were a novelty. They weren’t invited and the novelty has long worn off.


Oh, but don't you remember she was a big TV star?


----------



## Chanbal

Hyacinth said:


> I don't think I've ever agreed with Piers Morgan before, but he actually got it 100 percent correct on this one.


Piers has been getting it ~100% on the Harkles imo.

By the way, I'm watching "Hetty Wainthropp Investigates."


----------



## sdkitty

Hyacinth said:


> I don't think I've ever agreed with Piers Morgan before, but he actually got it 100 percent correct on this one.


yes - I'm not a fan of his but I agree on this one


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Ewwww ... *invisikids will be COS in another decade or so*, they can do it without hardly stepping foot in the UK or ever singing the national anthem


IIRC, a COS must have a UK residence and spend time there as well and it isn't necessarily an automatically given/awarded position.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I take these stories with a grain of salt.  and if untrue, it's cruel.
> *However it does seem odd that the children aren't seen*


If the children do exist, ZedZed might view them as competitors who would take media attention away from herself. That could be an intolerable and insufferable consequence for narcissists who often love themselves more than their own children.


----------



## rose60610

marietouchet said:


> I wonder if the cost of the gown was lumped in with the cost of the cathedral length veil - too long for the Windsor Chapel.
> The veil was very expensive - 500 hours of skilled work.
> Just read that QEII had the flowers of the commonwealth on her coronation dress, another idea used by MM but she added a California poppy to the veil



Right! And remember when afterward Claw "didn't know about the Commonwealth"? She's such a piece of work.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> No, and that’s hilarious. They are not in the industry nor are they respected. I figured they would be invited to one or two big events early on when they were a novelty. They weren’t invited and the novelty has long worn off.


Down the road, I fully expect Zed to blame the pandemic for their rocket ship to fame puttering to a stop. And IMO she might have a point. If the world had not ground to a halt and major events cancelled, the Harkles could have ramped up their scam and kept it going to become famous for being famous (as opposed to their current infamy). 


LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5658677


I wonder which organisations were foolish enough to accept these two bozos as volunteers.


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> I wonder which organisations were foolish enough to accept these two bozos as volunteers.



I’m guessing Ghoul will arrange for a publicity blast showing her serving the poors, so whatever organization wants the free publicity and will piggyback on that.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing Ghoul will arrange for a publicity blast showing her serving the poors, so whatever organization wants the free publicity and will piggyback on that.


You know she's only doing it for the photo op. Serve a few meals, smile for the cameras, then go home. Gotta burnish those humanitarian credentials. Disgusting.


----------



## DoggieBags

LittleStar88 said:


> I’m guessing Ghoul will arrange for a publicity blast showing her serving the poors, so whatever organization wants the free publicity and will piggyback on that.


Except that free publicity might backfire on those organizations because I automatically view with suspicion any organization that deals with them these days. The Harkles reputation is that toxic. The light that has been shone on several of the organizations that have sold them awards, invited them as guest speakers, etc. has revealed that at least some of these organizations appear to exist primarily to enrich their founders and / or top executives. I wouldn‘t donate to any organization that has had any dealings with the Harkles. There may be some legitimate charities who for whatever reason have dealings with them but I just won’t donate to anything that might benefit them in any way. If organizations can point to a jump in donations after a publicized appearance by the 2 grifters, that might encourage other organizations to invite them to some of their events. Do the Harkles get paid for these appearances? Since they’ve been caught lying so many times in the past, I would be wary of any organizations they endorse and suspect they are somehow deriving some personal benefit from their association with said organizations.


----------



## needlv

TC1 said:


> Please FTLOG DO NOT advocate for them to come to Canada



On behalf of Australia (and heck I’ll throw in New Zealand too), we politely decline to participate in this competition… and will wait to see who wins the football match.

PS Australia sucks at soccer (football) anyway - so it’s not a fair competition for us to participate in…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seeing  Kate shine like this, I can't help but wonder. Ghoul waltzed in and seriously thought she could dethrone her. Just...how? You don't have to marry into the BRF to understand that this is not how things work. Besides the fact everyone who's met Kate sings her praises, there has never been as much as a whisper she treats staff sh*tty, she dresses to perfection and senior royals (e.g. The Queen, Charles) seem to adore her, so on top of her position she is generally well liked and popular.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing  Kate shine like this, I can't help but wonder. *Ghoul waltzed in and seriously thought she could dethrone her.* Just...how? You don't have to marry into the BRF to understand that this is not how things work. Besides the fact everyone who's met Kate sings her praises, there has never been as much as a whisper she treats staff sh*tty, she dresses to perfection and senior royals (e.g. The Queen, Charles) seem to adore her, so on top of her position she is generally well liked and popular.


IMO, ZedZed was after the top position and in her arrogance she thought the late QEII would let her manage and transform the TRF into a moneygrubbing (quoting her own words, "I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this!") theatrical farce, because she believed she was more popular, clever, knowledgeable, etc. while in fact she understood very little about the royal family, its hierarchy and sense of duty.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, ZedZed was after the top position and in her arrogance she thought the late QEII would let her manage and transform the TRF into a moneygrubbing (quoting her own words, "I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this!") theatrical farce, because she believed she was more popular, clever, knowledgeable, etc. while in fact she understood very little about the royal family, its hierarchy and sense of duty.



Maybe I'm looking at it from the wrong angle. Surely she thought she could achieve anything after bagging one of the world's most eligible bachelors, because really, what were the chances?

But then she found out the hard way that the BRF wasn't all that interested in letting her reign supreme.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it the makeup? Fillers? Weight? A stand-in?



She looks closer to 50 than 40.  That long, long hair, so flat around her head, is really not helping.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> yes - I'm not a fan of his but I agree on this one


Proof that Meghan really is an influencer like she dreamed. Disgust with her has brought people of all beliefs together.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> On behalf of Australia (and heck I’ll throw in New Zealand too), we politely decline to participate in this competition… and will wait to see who wins the football match.
> 
> PS Australia sucks at soccer (football) anyway - so it’s not a fair competition for us to participate in…


We could start a GoFundMe to sponsor the Harkles' trip to Qatar, so they can wait there for their asylum proceedings.  

They may even prefer to stay in Qatar instead of joining whoever loses the World Cup. According to Forbes, there is 1 billionaire in Qatar and I trust TW's skills to find him fast.


----------



## Chanbal

Fierce competition between TW and Randy A, but TW is not done yet.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is an article authored by Nelson Mandela's grandson, Ndileka Mandela. Kerry K might benefit from reading it. It certainly doesn't support the Harkles' merit for her award, but she may not care… 

*I know from personal recollection with my grandfather that he saw in the Queen a true friend.*_ Someone who understood him and how he understood the world. Someone who was, for Britain, exactly what Britain needed during times of change: compassionate conscience.

*The Queen refused to visit South Africa during apartheid,* with some even believing the tension between her and Margaret Thatcher was partly due to Thatcher’s blatant inaction. What the Queen did after apartheid underscored where she stood all along (and might explain why she and my grandfather were on a first-name basis, an uncommon status with a British monarch). *Her Majesty declared her support for South Africa’s first Black president quickly, making her one of the first world leaders to do so.* She also smoothed the way for South Africa to rejoin the Commonwealth, overturning yet another consequence of apartheid._









						What Charles can learn from the bond between the Queen and my grandfather | Ndileka Mandela
					

Nelson Mandela understood that ‘Elizabeth’, as he called her, provided exactly what Britain needed during times of change, says Ndileka Mandela




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Handbag1234

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seeing  Kate shine like this, I can't help but wonder. Ghoul waltzed in and seriously thought she could dethrone her. Just...how? You don't have to marry into the BRF to understand that this is not how things work. Besides the fact everyone who's met Kate sings her praises, there has never been as much as a whisper she treats staff sh*tty, she dresses to perfection and senior royals (e.g. The Queen, Charles) seem to adore her, so on top of her position she is generally well liked and popular.


There was room for both of them. Shame MM couldn’t see it. It was queen b or nothing for her.


----------



## Sharont2305

Now, this is selfless. Take note M. 
For those that don't know, his sister is the Princess of Wales.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Wonder how M & H are celebrating today?  Roasting chickens?  Happy Thanksgiving to those that celebrate the day!


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> She looks closer to 50 than 40.  That long, long hair, so flat around her head, is really not helping.


It looks like costume jewelry. This is a rather desperate and pathetic thing  to do and very obvious. I expect them to start calling themselves the P&P Harry of Wales.

The Duchess of Gloucester really tweaked her with her emerald tiara lol!


----------



## gracekelly

Hermes Zen said:


> Wonder how M & H are celebrating today?  Roasting chickens?  Happy Thanksgiving to those that celebrate the day!


Vegan turkey sandwiches catered by the meta verse. Yum.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> It looks like costume jewelry. This is a rather desperate and pathetic thing  to do and very obvious. I expect them to start calling themselves the P&P Harry of Wales.
> 
> The Duchess of Gloucester really tweaked her with her emerald tiara lol!


No, no, no, never mention Wales and that woman in the same breath!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Now, this is selfless. Take note M.
> For those that don't know, his sister is the Princess of Wales.




He also donated the pup!


----------



## bag-mania

Hermes Zen said:


> Wonder how M & H are celebrating today?  Roasting chickens?  Happy Thanksgiving to those that celebrate the day!


Well, she’s not doing the cooking herself. That’s for damn sure.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> No, no, no, never mention Wales and that woman in the same breath!


The problem is that she will continue to use their (W&K) status to big themselves up. Even if their were told not to use it who could stop them


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He also donated the pup!


He has a beautiful speaking voice.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Her nasolabial folds are hanging on for dear life, she is Markle-ing them within an inch of their lives.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>





I am thankful for all of our delightful posters. I cannot say it enough - you all make the difference    Thank you.
Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Be strong, dear ones.  Tourre is right.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



And to you as well!


----------



## Helventara

CarryOn2020 said:


> Be strong, dear ones.  Tourre is right.



I have to ask: how do people know this image is altered?  I did think he looked especially kind here when I saw the initial picture but would have never thought about photoshop.


----------



## DoggieBags

Helventara said:


> I have to ask: how do people know this image is altered?  I did think he looked especially kind here when I saw the initial picture but would have never thought about photoshop.


He has too much hair in this pic. The photoshopped pics always remove his balding spot on top.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Helventara said:


> I have to ask: how do people know this image is altered?  I did think he looked especially kind here when I saw the initial picture but would have never thought about photoshop.


The knot on his forehead is gone. Usually it is prominent.
His skin is too smooth with the sun damage erased.

Somehow, they got rid of the perma-scowl


----------



## lanasyogamama

Whenever she posts a picture with the straight flat Bert eyebrows, she’s trying to look “kind”


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I am thankful for all of our delightful posters. I cannot say it enough - you all make the difference    Thank you.
> Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## Kevinaxx

Since when has she been “Princess”?!











						Meghan Markle Reportedly More Determined Than Ever to Keep Her Duchess of Sussex Title After Conversations with Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie
					

She has had a “dramatic change of heart regarding titles” as of late, a royal commentator says.




					www.marieclaire.com
				




And why is wiki still showing her as a “duchess”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CobaltBlu

They whitened Harry’s teeth in the photo too. This one is not altered.


----------



## LittleStar88

About that Ripple of Nope award …


----------



## needlv

Kevinaxx said:


> Since when has she been “Princess”?!
> 
> View attachment 5659199
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly More Determined Than Ever to Keep Her Duchess of Sussex Title After Conversations with Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie
> 
> 
> She has had a “dramatic change of heart regarding titles” as of late, a royal commentator says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And why is wiki still showing her as a “duchess”.



Technically she is Princess Henry…. So if you stripped ALL titles she is “Princess Henry“

that is why I am in favour of removing duke and duchess titles but leaving them as ”The Earl and Countess of Dumbarton”

harder to merch


----------



## needlv

LittleStar88 said:


> About that Ripple of Nope award …
> 
> 
> View attachment 5659233



Benjamin Smallbrook of Quora said Haz got warned that if he did accept this, there is no coming back.  The warning allegedly came from someone close to the palace….

I believe Lady C had a similar message to on YouTube today.

so yes, this ties with Barkjacks statements.  Although they could clean it up with a tweet from KKennedy backtracking and saying the award is for charitable works and nothing else...

Then point to the gift cards, snacks, pledges (who knows if paid) and other partnerships.


----------



## Kevinaxx

needlv said:


> Technically she is Princess Henry…. So if you stripped ALL titles she is “Princess Henry“
> 
> that is why I am in favour of removing duke and duchess titles but leaving them as ”The Earl and Countess of Dumbarton”
> 
> harder to merch


Huh, I learned something new today.

Would have thought she’d be using that for all it’s worth and only giving it up if she got queen. Which was why I was surprised she’s holding onto the duchess over princess.


----------



## gracekelly

Kevinaxx said:


> Huh, I learned something new today.
> 
> Would have thought she’d be using that for all it’s worth and only giving it up if she got queen. Which was why I was surprised she’s holding onto the duchess over princess.


It is because she loses her first name if she does that.  She can be Princess Henry, but not Princess Meghan. The title is his and she is a piggyback on it.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> About that Ripple of Nope award …
> 
> 
> View attachment 5659233



Lady C mentioned that according to a source that likes Hazz, there is no way back with the BRF if he accepts the award in person. Hazz knows that. Also, it's possible that instead of declining the award, he will opt for a cowardly approach and have someone else accept it for him.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Benjamin Smallbrook of Quora said Haz got warned that if he did accept this, there is no coming back.  The warning allegedly came from someone close to the palace….
> 
> I believe Lady C had a similar message to on YouTube today.
> 
> so yes, this ties with Barkjacks statements.  Although they could clean it up with a tweet from KKennedy backtracking and saying the award is for charitable works and nothing else...
> 
> Then point to the gift cards, snacks, pledges (who knows if paid) and other partnerships.


I think it is too late for KK to walk back what she wrote.  She can add the bit about charitable good works, but she already spouted off about racism.  Even if they don't show up and/or have another person pick up the award, the damage has been done and it doesn't reflect well on them.  They have not uttered a word unequivocally stating that KK was wrong with what she wrote.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Lady C mentioned that according to a source that likes Hazz, there is no way back with the BRF if he accepts the award in person. Hazz knows that. Also, it's possible that instead of declining the award, he will opt for a cowardly approach and have someone else accept it for him.


A lot depends on if he wants to go back.  If he wants to lash out at his father and family.  If he wants this to be PR for whatever he is going to spout off on in his book.


----------



## Chanbal

Kevinaxx said:


> Since when has she been “Princess”?!
> 
> View attachment 5659199
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Reportedly More Determined Than Ever to Keep Her Duchess of Sussex Title After Conversations with Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie
> 
> 
> She has had a “dramatic change of heart regarding titles” as of late, a royal commentator says.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And why is wiki still showing her as a “duchess”.


It's one more of TW's falsehoods, she never disregarded the importance of the titles. She will play all her (victim, race…) cards for those titles.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It's one more of TW's falsehoods, she never disregarded the importance of the titles. She will play all her (victim, race…) cards for those titles.


She and the meshsugarnoids will claim they are preventing her from being the first black princess.  They will throw Lidi into the mix as well.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> *I think it is too late for KK to walk back what she wrote.*  She can add the bit about charitable good works, but she already spouted off about racism.  Even if they don't show up and/or have another person pick up the award, the damage has been done and it doesn't reflect well on them.  They have not uttered a word unequivocally stating that KK was wrong with what she wrote.


KK made the life a little difficult for the Harkles, but she didn't have much to justify the award.   


gracekelly said:


> A lot depends on if he wants to go back.  If he wants to lash out at his father and family.  If he wants this to be PR for whatever he is going to spout off on in his book.


He probably doesn't know what he wants, but he may know that he has little value without the family connection. After the publication of the book, without talent, what else does he have to offer?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you missed this - the Palace has spoken.  Hazzi, Andi and Bea are excluded = *out*.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

There's nothing I  would put past her at this point, but several books claim they got engaged months before the annoucement. So for me, those logistics don't add up.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> About that Ripple of Nope award …
> 
> 
> View attachment 5659233



Isn't it interesting that instead of awards making them look good, they end-up making all these award givers look bad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Kevinaxx said:


> Huh, I learned something new today.
> 
> Would have thought she’d be using that for all it’s worth and only giving it up if she got queen. Which was why I was surprised she’s holding onto the duchess over princess.



That's because the dukedom ranks higher than Harry's inherited title.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> It is because she loses her first name if she does that.  She can be Princess Henry, but not Princess Meghan. *The title is his and she is a piggyback on it.*



I particularly enjoy pointing out that this is the case with the dukedom as well. It's Harry's dukedom and her Duchess title is just a courtesy.


----------



## LittleStar88

needlv said:


> Technically she is Princess Henry…. So if you stripped ALL titles she is “Princess Henry“
> 
> that is why I am in favour of removing duke and duchess titles but leaving them as ”The Earl and Countess of Dumbarton”
> 
> harder to merch



Oh, but then she can’t carry that customized Dior handbag with DDOSS on it. It will have to sit on a shelf and mock her from across the room.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## marietouchet

Lady C said that accepting the award is like crossing the Rubicon, I love that expression. What could the book discuss that is worse than racism ?
KK was black and white in her wording, the award is for accusing  the BRF of racism in the OW interview
AND more importantly, the accusation on OW interview was 2 years ago, there has been no BP/BRF public statement addressing/debunking  the interview likely because they found it baseless. But the lack of rebuttal makes it look like BP\BRF has done nothing 
This award is a huge PROBLEM, I wanted to use a four letter word expression to indicate the gravity, but I demurred

Earthshot is 2 days before Ripple ? Wannna take bets on press release the day after Earthshot ?


----------



## Aimee3

gracekelly said:


> She and the meshsugarnoids will claim they are preventing her from being the first black princess.  They will throw Lidi into the mix as well.


Meshsugarnoids …priceless. Love it!


----------



## Hyacinth

Toby93 said:


>




Maybe the Gruesome Twosome should start eating Imperial Margarine instead of butter. That's the only way Spare-y Harry is ever going to get a crown of his own.


----------



## duna

I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, apparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Lady C said that accepting the award is like crossing the Rubicon, I love that expression. What could the book discuss that is worse than racism ?
> *KK was black and white in her wording, the award is for accusing  the BRF of racism *in the OW interview
> AND more importantly, the accusation on OW interview was 2 years ago, there has been no BP/BRF public statement addressing/debunking  the interview likely because they found it baseless. But the lack of rebuttal makes it look like BP\BRF has done nothing
> This award is a huge PROBLEM, I wanted to use a four letter word expression to indicate the gravity, but I demurred
> 
> Earthshot is 2 days before Ripple ? Wannna take bets on press release the day after Earthshot ?


My 2 cents (all allegedly, of course ):

It's obvious that KK was asked (by SS or someone else) to give the Harkles that award. The problem is that several news outlets started publishing the ridiculous contrast between the Harkles and the previous award recipients.

Like the Harkles, KK is also a member of the club of self-service. She was about to 'lose face', so had to come up with the best justification possible asap. How could KK justify the merit of an award on lemon cakes and sandwiches?

Though, KK's justification is a pain in the neck even for masters of hypocrisy like TW and her DH.



KK - Kerry Kennedy, TW-the wife, SS- Sachs, DH- dear husband.


----------



## charlottawill

duna said:


> I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, apparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....


I saw that somewhere too, probably a Twitter comment. I take these rumors with a grain of salt, but sometimes the tabloids do get it right.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's nothing I  would put past her at this point, but several books claim they got engaged months before the annoucement. So for me, those logistics don't add up.



Some great comments on that Tweet, such as: 

"He looked like he was headed to the gallows during the wedding while she looked like a hunter proud of its catch."


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I saw that somewhere too, probably a *Twitter comment*. I take these rumors with a grain of salt, but sometimes the tabloids do get it right.


It doesn't look good…


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents (all allegedly, of course ):
> 
> It's obvious that KK was asked (by SS or someone else) to give the Harkles that award. The problem is that several news outlets started publishing the ridiculous contrast between the Harkles and the previous award recipients.
> 
> Like the Harkles, KK is also a member of the club of self-service. She was about to 'lose face', so had to come up with the best justification possible asap. How could KK justify the merit of an award on lemon cakes and sandwiches?
> 
> Though, KK's justification is a pain in the neck even for masters of hypocrisy like TW and her DH.
> 
> 
> 
> KK - Kerry Kennedy, TW-the wife, SS- Sachs, DH- dear husband.



The KK accusation is HUUGE … her bridge with BRF/UK is BURNT permanently on humanitarian and political levels 
I read that Beatrice chided her dad saying “you have damaged this family” KK’s kids should read that to her


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The KK accusation is HUUGE … her bridge with BRF/UK is BURNT permanently on humanitarian and political levels
> I read that Beatrice chided her dad saying “you have damaged this family” KK’s kids should read that to her


I agree, KK's accusation is a very serious one. I wonder if she will suffer some sort of repercussion from it. Though, I don't think KK had many bridges with the BRF to burn to begin with, but she will certainly not be invited for dinner @Buckingham.   From what I read, she sounds like a selfish person, so she could be possibly more worried with herself than with her kids.

If Beatrice said that, I feel sorry for her. She could have had a more prominent role in the family.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The KK accusation is HUUGE … her bridge with BRF/UK is BURNT permanently on humanitarian and political levels
> I read that Beatrice chided her dad saying “you have damaged this family” KK’s kids should read that to her


I’m not sure KK had a bridge with the BRF to burn. She isn’t that significant, even among the Kennedys.

As far as Beatrice, I am skeptical that conversation took place. That would have been a private matter and she would not have said it in front of anybody where there was any chance of it being repeated.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I agree, KK's accusation is a very serious one. I wonder if she will suffer some sort of repercussion from it. Though, I don't think KK had many bridges with the BRF to burn to begin with, but she will certainly not be invited for dinner @Buckingham.   From what I read, she sounds like a selfish person, so she could be possibly more worried with herself than with her kids.
> 
> If Beatrice said that, I feel sorry for her. She could have had a more prominent role in the family.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's because the dukedom ranks higher than Harry's inherited title.


Not sure I agree.. it is all about who goes first/last (in processions) and seating order. 
IMHO that is done on a case by case matter eg the seating at the Jubilee. The Harkles seating was not as good as that of the Tindalls, arguably. But in the end the Harkles “rank” above the Tindalls, but we don’t like them as much.

I think the ducal title is just more convenient/less awkward. MM could be Princess Henry, but that is goofy sounding. Duchess of Sussex sounds better and does not rely on Harry’s name. 
She could also chose to be Mrs Mountbatten-Windsor (did I get the order wrong ??) but that is such a mouthful…


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure KK had a bridge with the BRF to burn. She isn’t that significant, even among the Kennedys.
> 
> As far as Beatrice, I am skeptical that conversation took place. That would have been a private matter and she would not have said it in front of anybody where there was any chance of it being repeated.


Agree we don’t really know what B said to A in private
i just thought it was a bon mot concerning cringe worthy behaviors of parents


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


>



Beautiful crowns/tiaras wasted on an effing mop and lousy side bailing wires or binding twine makes her look totally unroyal and unregal. There is nothing more beautiful than a coveted tiara perched atop a nice updo or well-combed short hair.  IMO, long Cinderella tresses with a tiara belong in fairytales or beauty pageants.


----------



## DoggieBags

Toby93 said:


>



Do their stans realize that if the monarchy is abolished then their idol’s titles will disappear too?


----------



## pukasonqo

DoggieBags said:


> Do their stans realize that if the monarchy is abolished then their idol’s titles will disappear too?


I don’t think so, they bleat about abolishing the monarchy under the tab of racism but MM happily enter into it even though she claimed not knowing anything about it
I have my own views about monarchies but the sugars are really pushing it


----------



## lallybelle

KK's statements were more a "clapback" at her own brother and others pointing out the absurdity of them receiving an award. This is as per usual some sort of quid pro quo to make them look good and get attention for the awards, not some real statement of anything "grand" they have done to earn it. As with most things they do, this will come a go with no one actually ever giving a **** about it.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> Do their stans realize that if the monarchy is abolished then their idol’s titles will disappear too?


You have already put more thought into the matter with that one sentence than their stans have in the last three years.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> She and the meshsugarnoids will claim t*hey are preventing her from being the first black princess.*  They will throw Lidi into the mix as well.


Too late, Princess Angela of Liechtenstein beat her to it when she married Prince Maximilian of Liechtenstein in 2000, among all the other Women of Colour who married into royalty long before her.


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Do their stans realize that if the monarchy is abolished then their idol’s titles will disappear too?


Nothing to worry about, TW will become the the Empress of Montecito in the stans' hearts.


----------



## Chanbal

Gosh, for a brief moment I thought this article was about Hazz's book. 
It must be an interesting book. 


_Written by author and broadcaster Gyles Brandreth, Elizabeth: An Intimate Portrait – which is serialised in Mail +  as well as tomorrow's Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday – is littered with fascinating vignettes about our longest-serving but still so enigmatic sovereign._









						New book reveals Queen's stoicism in her final months
					

Written by author and broadcaster Gyles Brandreth, Elizabeth: An Intimate Portrait is littered with fascinating vignettes about our longest-serving but still so enigmatic sovereign.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Maggie Muggins

duna said:


> I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, a*pparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard* ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....


Can this be fake news from her stans to portray ZedZed as the new Diana, who reportedly had her first affair with bodyguard, Barry Mannakee in 1985!?


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Can this be fake news from her stans to portray ZedZed as the new Diana, who reportedly had her first affair with bodyguard, Barry Mannakee in 1985!?


As entertaining as the gossip is, it is almost certainly fake news. I don't believe Meghan aspires to be like Diana in _every_ way. As of last month she was still publicly promoting the line that she and Harry have an amazing love story. Diana knew her husband didn't love her and she sought affection elsewhere. Do you think for one minute that Meghan ever would admit her husband didn't love her? That is not the narcissist's way. Besides, how would an Italian newspaper know anything? They are way off the path for American gossip.


----------



## marietouchet

Doing research on what KK thinks is bad behavior

How many times have we talked of the over use of spray tans by MM ? I guess we are all bad people.

Read tweets from top to bottom


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Doing research on what KK thinks is bad behavior
> 
> How many times have we talked of the over use of spray tans by MM ? I guess we are all bad people.
> 
> Read tweets from top to bottom



Scoobie is a dangerous minister of propaganda, he is taking Angela's words out of context imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Yep, the award is probably too small for the price they are paying.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Maggie Muggins said:


> Too late, Princess Angela of Liechtenstein beat her to it when she married Prince Maximilian of Liechtenstein in 2000, among all the other Women of Colour who married into royalty long before her.
> View attachment 5659370


It is amazing the extent to which M stole Angela’s look and she rarely gets brought up as an inspiration even by ‘royal fans’. 
I suppose in a way it’s flattering to Angela that people don’t clock the similarity because it would be like comparing her haute cuisine to a dog’s dinner. 


Maggie Muggins said:


> Beautiful crowns/tiaras wasted on an effing mop and lousy side bailing wires or binding twine makes her look totally unroyal and unregal. There is nothing more beautiful than a coveted tiara perched atop a nice updo or well-combed short hair.  IMO, long Cinderella tresses with a tiara belong in fairytales or beauty pageants.


Let’s not underestimate the pageant girls most of them put a lot more effort into looking poised and having  event-appropriate conversation than M has ever bothered to. Most of them are also proud of representing their background not changing like an unattended Rachel dolezal at the makeup samples.


----------



## Chanbal

_'Disgusting!': Royal expert slams Prince Harry and Meghan Markle award for Oprah interview claims_​


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie is a dangerous minister of propaganda, he is taking Angela's words out of context imo.


 What was the context?


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> What was the context?


Well I don’t think it’s so much it’s out of context as it’s a fair comment to make. When you’ve seen a couple of videos of her it is obvious she does wear completely different makeup and tan shades for different audiences. I mean what kind of example is that really? Madame authentic says be proud of who you are and then changes to suit her audience. 
We can safely bet on it she didn’t look like that photo when she was telling Ziwe  she was 60% (?) Nigerian.
 It is very toxic and fake.  
While I see why some people don’t think white people should comment on it I’m personally of the opinion everyone needs to address the elephant in the room.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga




----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Meghan Markle "racist" tweet lands Prince Harry author in hot water
					

Royal commentator Angela Levin has come under fire online after she tweeted, "look how white Meghan's skin colour looks."




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Chanbal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> What was the context?


You seem to follow this thread  quite closely, so I'm a little surprised by the question. I'm sure you saw several references to spray tans and to TW's different shades. While I think it was an unfortunate comment from AL, it was not a racist one imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, apparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....



Naw. Ghoul isn't interested in screwing the help.


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> What was the context?


119654 see that post in this thread, see photo of MM that AL commented on, then OS comments on AL comments


----------



## marietouchet

duna said:


> I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, apparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....


saw same article and read it in Italian, they named the bodyguard, so a very specific allegation  ! Archie got picked up late from schools bc MM and BG were distracted with each other, alledgedly


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Too late, Princess Angela of Liechtenstein beat her to it when she married Prince Maximilian of Liechtenstein in 2000, among all the other Women of Colour who married into royalty long before her.
> View attachment 5659370


True, but I was referring to the British Royal Family.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's nothing I  would put past her at this point, but several books claim they got engaged months before the annoucement. So for me, those logistics don't add up.



One of the comments was "how hard was it for the palace to verify a pregnancy?"  In retrospect, she would have made it hard.  Look at how she refused to use the OB/GYN that the royals used.  She didn't want to go to the same hospital at Kate.  There was deliberate misinformation as to when she went into labor. It isn't even certain that they were living at Frog Cot when she went into labor.   Looking at the whole of it, it would seem as if deception is the way MM works.  So the answer is, they would not have been able to verify it.


----------



## needlv

Fake news from Italy?   The affair story looks entirely made up


			https://news.italy24.press/lifestyle/213896.html


----------



## Helventara

.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Helventara

marietouchet said:


> Hilarious






TC1 said:


> Please FTLOG DO NOT advocate for them to come to Canada



CANADA!  ARE YOU READY?!! *drum roll*


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Naw. Ghoul isn't interested in screwing the help.


That was my first thought.


----------



## Chanbal

A different type of video from Lady C that might be interesting for some here.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Chanbal said:


> You seem to follow this thread  quite closely, so I'm a little surprised by the question. I'm sure you saw several references to spray tans and to TW's different shades. While I think it was an unfortunate comment from AL, it was not a racist one imo.


My question was in reference to this statement...

"Scoobie is a dangerous minister of propaganda, *he is taking Angela's words out of context* imo."


----------



## LittleStar88

I’m not buying the bodyguard affair. She aims higher and it’s probably not easy to find a replacement to fetch her lattes and what not.

TW would be going after someone with money and influence.

Isn’t the first time the Italian press came out with a wild story.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Scoobie is a dangerous minister of propaganda, he is taking Angela's words out of context imo.


Omid is one to talk....he has gone at least 3 shades lighter in the last 10 years, not to mention multiple plastic surgeries   He wasn't' bad looking before he destroyed himself.  He looks like a ken doll....


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Some great comments on that Tweet, such as:
> 
> "He looked like he was headed to the gallows during the wedding while she looked like a hunter proud of its catch."



I completely agree that she was standing proudly with one foot on her killed elephant, but I thought he looked genuinely happy at the wedding.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It doesn't look good…




What did it say?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Not sure I agree.. it is all about who goes first/last (in processions) and seating order.



But that's not a matter of agreeing or not, it's a fact the dukedom outranks the princely title. Procession and seating order are somewhat unrelated to that, they go by seniority/place in LoS here. Harry sat at the kid's table because he's bothersome.



marietouchet said:


> I think the ducal title is just more convenient/less awkward. MM could be Princess Henry, but that is goofy sounding. Duchess of Sussex sounds better and does not rely on Harry’s name.
> She could also chose to be Mrs Mountbatten-Windsor (did I get the order wrong ??) but that is such a mouthful…



You go by the highest title, though (the dukedom). The Queen herself was Duchess of Edinburgh at one point (she still outranked the Duke, her husband who made her a duchess, due to being the heir presumptive).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> One of the comments was "how hard was it for the palace to verify a pregnancy?"  In retrospect, she would have made it hard.  Look at how she refused to use the OB/GYN that the royals used.  She didn't want to go to the same hospital at Kate.  There was deliberate misinformation as to when she went into labor. It isn't even certain that they were living at Frog Cot when she went into labor.   Looking at the whole of it, it would seem as if deception is the way MM works.  So the answer is, they would not have been able to verify it.



Admittedly, I would not see a male OB/GYN if I could help it and especially not only because my in-laws utilize him. But I agree, with her it's this childish "You can't make me" and "Now more than ever" and the pathological need to be different.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely agree that she was standing proudly with one foot on her killed elephant, but I thought he looked genuinely happy at the wedding.


Recollections may vary  Seriously though, I agree with you.


----------



## Annawakes

1) He was happy because he finally got someone to marry him

2) Scooby do looking like a ken doll….you know he’s gonna take that as a compliment! @Toby93


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> True, but I was referring to the British Royal Family.


I'm truly sorry, but can I still add two Queens and one beautiful Viscountess who paved the way so that Princess Henry can live like a queen in Montesh!tshow while merching the title given to her by the same BRF she now accuses of being racists.









						Black British Royalty: The 3 women who paved the way for Meghan Markle
					

Here's a brief history of the three other rarely discussed women of color who are the pre-cursor to Meghan Markle's royal reign.




					thegrio.com


----------



## jelliedfeels

OriginalBalenciaga said:


>



It’s amazing to see people still buy Meghan as the bullied rather than the bully. 
Also  she’s not just anyone she’s someone who falsely claimed she and her child were given second class treatment for being ‘too dark’ so she is actually the one who set the terms of this conversation.

If she was just lying/exaggerating her background to seem cool then she wouldn’t be exactly uncommon in the media but she’s clearly and repeatedly weaponised this against others and it’s ongoing with them receiving an award for the laughable reason that their lies are meant to be a stand against racism.

Add on- for what it’s worth Angela Levin is a royal reporter so she is a parasite of a parasite and her opinions aren’t exactly golden Bon mots and she and Scobie both could do with a good drag. However, the idea that it is wrong to point out that M keeps dramatically changing skin tone after claiming it was such a barrier in her life seems a little strange.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What did it say?


Oh Gosh, I can't remember.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I completely agree that she was standing proudly with one foot on her killed elephant, but I thought he looked genuinely happy at the wedding.


TBF Harry looked very happy standing on a dead elephant too- let’s not forget who he really is.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> It is because she loses her first name if she does that.  She can be Princess Henry, but not Princess Meghan. The title is his and she is a piggyback on it.


Doesn't she have to be in the same room as Harry? Can she be a princess by herself shopping for groceries?


----------



## Jayne1

duna said:


> I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, apparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....


Doubt it.  Meg having an affair with someone who cannot advance her career and status?


----------



## Chloe302225

Jayne1 said:


> Doesn't she have to be in the same room as Harry? Can she be a princess by herself shopping for groceries?



I think you are thinking about the rules around curtseying. Meghan has her titles as long as she is married and can be referred to as Princess Henry with or without Harry being in the room.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Oops! Our members from Canada might not be happy.


----------



## Chanbal

The Caribbean Prince makes a very valid point imo.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> The Caribbean Prince makes a very valid point imo.



Interesting that they said they planned to balance their time between the UK and _North America_ and not specifically Canada, which is where they had said they would live.  She never intended to live anywhere but LA, with her prize catch in tow.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that they said they planned to balance their time between the UK and _North America_ and not specifically Canada, which is where they had said they would live.  She never intended to live anywhere but LA, with her prize catch in tow.


ZedZed's motto: Why bother with details when dissembling will suffice!


----------



## Chanbal

For what it's worth! It sounds pretty serious. 










						Prince Harry accused of committing 'treason' against King Charles III
					

Prince Harry has been accused of allegedly committing ‘treason’ against his father King Charles



					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! It sounds pretty serious.
> View attachment 5659601
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of committing 'treason' against King Charles III
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been accused of allegedly committing ‘treason’ against his father King Charles
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk


King Charles rules!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Interesting that they said they planned to balance their time between the UK and _North America_ and not specifically Canada, which is where they had said they would live.  She never intended to live anywhere but LA, with her prize catch in tow.


Imo the *lying* Hazz is no _prize catch_.  When the engagement was announced, several posters here said so.  He came with lots of baggage,  poor work ethic, living off his daddy.  Then, _*boom. *_

Surely, someone will ask the *liars* why they continue to use titles from a racist institution.  They even accept money from KCIII. 
Who wants to be led/influenced by two *liars*?

How delusional are people?


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> I have quite a few pages to catch up on so I don't know if this has already been posted..... I read yesterday on the front page of one of the main Italian newspapers that the Harkles' marriage is at it's end, apparently TW has or has had an affair with a bodyguard ( they wrote his name aswell but I can't remember it) Goodness knows if it's true.....





Maggie Muggins said:


> Can this be fake news from her stans to portray ZedZed as the new Diana, who reportedly had her first affair with bodyguard, Barry Mannakee in 1985!?


Is Hollywood planning a remake of the Houston-Costner movie?


bag-mania said:


> Do you think for one minute that Meghan ever would admit her husband didn't love her? That is not the narcissist's way.


Maybe her stans will consider it proof that ALL men love her and she is worthy of her own harem.


marietouchet said:


> Doing research on what KK thinks is bad behavior
> 
> How many times have we talked of the over use of spray tans by MM ? I guess we are all bad people.
> 
> Read tweets from top to bottom



Omid feels it personally because, if you look at old photos of him, he has obviously undergone some kind of skin bleaching.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Meghan Markle "racist" tweet lands Prince Harry author in hot water
> 
> 
> Royal commentator Angela Levin has come under fire online after she tweeted, "look how white Meghan's skin colour looks."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


To be honest, as a POC myself, my first thought when I saw that photo was that she was as white as her husband. My second thought was "Is she really biracial?" My 3rd thought considered my friends who are children of biracial marriages (Chinese-Indian mostly) and the conclusion was: yes, it's possible to be very fair or very dark, but none of them change skin colour on a daily basis.


----------



## Amandines

Oh my… I just accidentally started on page 1 of this thread.. When everyone seemed to think H was the one to marry.. How the tide turned!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> It’s amazing to see people still buy Meghan as the bullied rather than the bully.
> Also  she’s not just anyone she’s someone who falsely claimed she and her child were given second class treatment for being ‘too dark’ so she is actually the one who set the terms of this conversation.
> 
> If she was just lying/exaggerating her background to seem cool then she wouldn’t be exactly uncommon in the media but she’s clearly and repeatedly weaponised this against others and it’s ongoing with them receiving an award for the laughable reason that their lies are meant to be a stand against racism.
> 
> Add on- for what it’s worth Angela Levin is a royal reporter so she is a parasite of a parasite and her opinions aren’t exactly golden Bon mots and she and Scobie both could do with a good drag. However, the idea that it is wrong to point out that M keeps dramatically changing skin tone after claiming it was such a barrier in her life seems a little strange.



I agree 

M's name and her 'statements' (recollections my vary) about her passport and whatever being taken away were brought into an awareness course on forced marriage, honour abuse and killings. She was never forced to marry Harry, that's for sure, and she certainly didn't have her passport taken away as her trip to NYC proved. Her lies are repeated again and again by people as truth because they look no further than the headlines. 

I feel desperately sorry for real victims of honour abuse, having someone play-act a victim is so disgusting to me I can even go there. 1) knowing accusations would not be refuted 2) proclamations to the world as a first point of call 3) recanted hearsay and many more besides. Many victims of this kind of abuse don't even realise they are being subjugated. M's only talent is manipulation, which has much more in common with abusers, every trick in the book.  

Meghan and Harry are not just numbskulls but actually quite evil, they _know_ they are lying, all the HATE they've stirred-up can't be stilled. 

I don't care so much about the Monarchy, but they have besmirched the UK with their lies and false accusations. The only good thing to come out of all this is they can't come back. Even without MegZZ, I do not want Harry back in the UK.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> TBF Harry looked very happy standing on a dead elephant too- let’s not forget who he really is.



THIS ^


----------



## elvisfan4life

Personally I think they are well matched and deserve each other - when this thread started I disliked Meghan and was accused of being racist - I don’t care about her skin colour and unlike many others on here who criticise her looks I think she is a beautiful woman it’s her character or lack of that is the problem - I used to feel sorry for Harry and hoped he would find a partner and enjoy life - let’s face it even the spare will have a life of luxury and privilege - but no he shows his true colours instead of maturing into an adult he found a partner who is as vain selfish and self entitled as he is - they bring out the absolute worst in each other - and the media feed their insanity with 24/7 coverage I’d love them to be exiled to somewhere so we never see or hear of them again


----------



## Hyacinth

papertiger said:


> I agree
> 
> M's name and her 'statements' (recollections my vary) about her passport and whatever being taken away were brought into an awareness course on forced marriage, honour abuse and killings. She was never forced to marry Harry, that's for sure, and she certainly didn't have her passport taken away as her trip to NYC proved. Her lies are repeated again and again by people as truth because they look no further than the headlines.
> 
> I feel desperately sorry for real victims of honour abuse, having someone play-act a victim is so disgusting to me I can even go there. 1) knowing accusations would not be refuted 2) proclamations to the world as a first point of call 3) recanted hearsay and many more besides. Many victims of this kind of abuse don't even realise they are being subjugated. M's only talent is manipulation, which has much more in common with abusers, every trick in the book.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are not just numbskulls but actually quite evil, they _know_ they are lying, all the HATE they've stirred-up can't be stilled.
> 
> I don't care so much about the Monarchy, but they have besmirched the UK with their lies and false accusations. The only good thing to come out of all this is they can't come back. Even without MegZZ, I do not want Harry back in the UK.



The ONLY thing that should ever come back to the UK from that pair of lying, whining grifters is the 30 million-plus pounds that their travesty of a wedding cost the British taxpayers and the BRF. Add in the (IIRC) 2 million pounds a year that the UK threw down that black hole (NOT a reference to Megsie Baby's race, BTW!) for The Duchess Of Puke Street's clothing allowance.

Their greed, lies, arrogance, bullying and constant lust for publicity is bad enough, but the contempt they showed for Prince Philip and the Queen in their last few months when it was obvious that Harry's adoring grandparents were both dying and he just didn't GAF was abhorrent and bordering on vicious. Nothing in the world can *ever* excuse his behavior. That just by itself should have prompted Charles to cut him off from his titles and his income. The sooner he does so, the better.


----------



## xincinsin

elvisfan4life said:


> I think she is a beautiful woman it’s her character or lack of that is the problem


False facade, but then, the facial and dental improvements are common in Hollywood. Just don't do all those enhancements and then preach about authenticity! I do think it's karmic that the cracks are appearing and letting her true nature crawl out. Those micro-slips in her expression, creepy eyes and popping veins ...


----------



## KEG66

elvisfan4life said:


> Personally I think they are well matched and deserve each other - when this thread started I disliked Meghan and was accused of being racist - I don’t care about her skin colour and unlike many others on here who criticise her looks I think she is a beautiful woman it’s her character or lack of that is the problem - I used to feel sorry for Harry and hoped he would find a partner and enjoy life - let’s face it even the spare will have a life of luxury and privilege - but no he shows his true colours instead of maturing into an adult he found a partner who is as vain selfish and self entitled as he is - they bring out the absolute worst in each other - and the media feed their insanity with 24/7 coverage I’d love them to be exiled to somewhere so we never see or hear of them again


This every word! Even though I enjoy watching their car crash I just wish they’d disappear. Their attempts to stay relevant are both toxic and pathetic.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I can’t back this up with data, but I can feel public interest in these two waning, including my own interest. I predict they will find it harder and harder to get press coverage.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t back this up with data, but I can feel public interest in these two waning, including my own interest. I predict they will find it harder and harder to get press coverage.


Or they will devise ever more ludicrous stories to create headlines. Although after her flopcasts, his ghostwritten life story and their Netflix romance, will there be anything left to credibly spin?


----------



## Chanbal

Would this be possible?


----------



## Chanbal

It's a short video clip—-'once well respected'…


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> I can’t back this up with data, but I can feel public interest in these two waning, including my own interest. I predict they will find it harder and harder to get press coverage.


At this point I believe 99% of the interest in them is seeing what they will do next. Everyone is watching for scandal.


----------



## bag-mania

elvisfan4life said:


> Personally I think they are well matched and deserve each other - when this thread started I disliked Meghan and was accused of being racist - I don’t care about her skin colour and unlike many others on here who criticise her looks I think she is a beautiful woman it’s her character or lack of that is the problem - I used to feel sorry for Harry and hoped he would find a partner and enjoy life - let’s face it even the spare will have a life of luxury and privilege - but no he shows his true colours instead of maturing into an adult he found a partner who is as vain selfish and self entitled as he is - they bring out the absolute worst in each other - and the media feed their insanity with 24/7 coverage I’d love them to be exiled to somewhere so we never see or hear of them again


I’ve believed that for a long time. She couldn’t have convinced him to do all that he did unless he was fully on board. He is not particularly bright and he is also petty, spiteful, and easily persuaded.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> At this point I believe 99% of the interest in them is seeing what they will do next. Everyone is watching for scandal.


I don’t know if there is more than one Netflix episode … but the first will be a blockbuster


----------



## CarryOn2020

Surely people are tired of the “_poor, lil, rich me_” stuff.  


marietouchet said:


> I don’t know if there is more than one Netflix episode … but the first will be a blockbuster



Cry me a river


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! It sounds pretty serious.
> View attachment 5659601
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of committing 'treason' against King Charles III
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been accused of allegedly committing ‘treason’ against his father King Charles
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk


Is this a reliable news source? Please say yes.


----------



## xincinsin

Debbini said:


> Is this a reliable news source? Please say yes.


Nope


----------



## Helventara

Eh?  Spare is available for Free in Amazon?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...EE-Black-Friday-deal-months-hits-shelves.html


----------



## Chanbal

Debbini said:


> Is this a reliable news source? Please say yes.


Haha! I don't think so, but "_where there's smoke there's fire._"


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! It sounds pretty serious.
> View attachment 5659601
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of committing 'treason' against King Charles III
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been accused of allegedly committing ‘treason’ against his father King Charles
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk


Well.. just finished S5 of The Crown. It was a snoozefest and there was nothing that seemed to have "inside" info


----------



## kemilia

Helventara said:


> Eh?  Spare is available for Free in Amazon?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...EE-Black-Friday-deal-months-hits-shelves.html
> 
> View attachment 5659880


Every time I see her in that droopy boobie dress I laugh.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

elvisfan4life said:


> and the media feed their insanity with 24/7 coverage I’d love them to be exiled to somewhere so we never see or hear of them again





bag-mania said:


> At this point I believe 99% of the interest in them is seeing what they will do next. Everyone is watching for scandal.


It's so funny because other than this thread or an occasional tweet I NEVER read about them...where are they being covered so much other than tabloids?

Also I saw a very interesting segment about how hate or rage becomes almost addictive which is why social media and politicians can use it to their advantage. And why positive news receives so much less coverage or clicks.


----------



## Chanbal

TC1 said:


> Well.. just finished S5 of The Crown. It was a snoozefest and there was nothing that seemed to have "inside" info


I didn't watch S5, but heard that it's not as good as the previous series. It's hard for us to know what could be or not be inside info. Having Hazz as an employee of Netfl*x should give some sort of credibility to S5 imo, but I guess not…

Another snoozefest?


----------



## csshopper

Amandines said:


> Oh my… I just accidentally started on page 1 of this thread.. When everyone seemed to think H was the one to marry.. How the tide turned!


If Netflix wanted to produce an honest documentary, THIS is the ultimate source of material complete with all the Net links to supporting material.


----------



## Chanbal

_In today’s compelling extract, Mr Brandreth, a former Conservative MP reveals:_

_The Queen was ‘devoted’ to Harry and thought he was ‘huge fun’ but feared he was ‘perhaps a little too in-love’ with Meghan;_
_She liked Meghan and did ‘everything to make her feel welcome’;_
_The Queen told Meghan she could continue her career, saying: ‘You can carry on being an actress if you like – that’s your profession, after all’;_
_When Meghan said she would quit acting to dedicate herself to Royal service, the Queen was ‘delighted’ – but then became concerned when her offer to have Sophie Wessex ‘show her the ropes’ was rejected;_
_The Queen liked Meghan’s mother Doria, and was sorry the Markle family was ‘fractured’;_
_While other members of the Royal Family found the Sussexes’ decision to name their daughter Lilibet – the Queen’s childhood nickname – ‘bewildering’ and ‘rather presumptuous’, the Queen remarked it was ‘very pretty and seems just right’;_
_If Harry and Meghan are mentioned to other members of the Royal Family, the response is a brief smile and the curt platitude: ‘We wish them all the best’;_
_When Prince Andrew ‘harrumphed’ about Meghan and Harry’s tell-all interview with Ms Winfrey in 2020, the Queen gently reminded him of a similar interview his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson had given to the same talk-show host;_
_Prince Philip felt that the Sussexes’ interview was ‘madness’ but the Queen was relaxed, dismissing it – and a forthcoming Netflix documentary –  as ‘this television nonsense’;_
_The story that the Queen shed tears at the decommissioning of the Royal Yacht Britannia in 1997 is debunked as a myth, as Prince Philip told Mr Brandreth that it was simply down to a cold wind that day which made everyone’s eyes water;_
_When Zara Tindall told her grandmother she was calling her daughter Lena rather than Elena because she didn’t want her child’s initials to be ET, the Queen, not appreciating the reference to the 1982 film about an extra-terrestrial, replied. ‘You’ve lost me’._



			archive.ph


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> Every time I see her in that droopy boobie dress I laugh.



That dress is the gift that keeps on giving! And the press seems to be using it a lot lately


----------



## LittleStar88

TC1 said:


> Well.. just finished S5 of The Crown. It was a snoozefest and there was nothing that seemed to have "inside" info



I literally fell asleep during a couple of episodes. But there were a couple of really good ones. I enjoyed the introduction of the Fayed family. Sent me down a rabbit hole online to learn more. And the actress who played Diana was great. But overall not the best season.


----------



## bag-mania

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's so funny because other than this thread or an occasional tweet I NEVER read about them...where are they being covered so much other than tabloids?
> 
> Also I saw a very interesting segment about how hate or rage becomes almost addictive which is why social media and politicians can use it to their advantage. And why positive news receives so much less coverage or clicks.


It makes sense that they are mainly in the entertainment and gossip media. That is who their publicists work with and they don’t do anything that would get them attention from the news media (except when they complain about the royal family).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I might just order the book as a Christmas break read. Still up to my ellbows in Christmas baking so I haven't caught up today.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So. Much. Wrong with this.

But also, the same mother that was giving interviews praising Ghoul as basically a saint?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5659896
> 
> 
> _In today’s compelling extract, Mr Brandreth, a former Conservative MP reveals:_
> 
> _The Queen was ‘devoted’ to Harry and thought he was ‘huge fun’ but feared he was ‘perhaps a little too in-love’ with Meghan;_
> _She liked Meghan and did ‘everything to make her feel welcome’;_
> _The Queen told Meghan she could continue her career, saying: ‘You can carry on being an actress if you like – that’s your profession, after all’;_
> _When Meghan said she would quit acting to dedicate herself to Royal service, the Queen was ‘delighted’ – but then became concerned when her offer to have Sophie Wessex ‘show her the ropes’ was rejected;_
> _The Queen liked Meghan’s mother Doria, and was sorry the Markle family was ‘fractured’;_
> _While other members of the Royal Family found the Sussexes’ decision to name their daughter Lilibet – the Queen’s childhood nickname – ‘bewildering’ and ‘rather presumptuous’, the Queen remarked it was ‘very pretty and seems just right’;_
> _If Harry and Meghan are mentioned to other members of the Royal Family, the response is a brief smile and the curt platitude: ‘We wish them all the best’;_
> _When Prince Andrew ‘harrumphed’ about Meghan and Harry’s tell-all interview with Ms Winfrey in 2020, the Queen gently reminded him of a similar interview his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson had given to the same talk-show host;_
> _Prince Philip felt that the Sussexes’ interview was ‘madness’ but the Queen was relaxed, dismissing it – and a forthcoming Netflix documentary –  as ‘this television nonsense’;_
> _The story that the Queen shed tears at the decommissioning of the Royal Yacht Britannia in 1997 is debunked as a myth, as Prince Philip told Mr Brandreth that it was simply down to a cold wind that day which made everyone’s eyes water;_
> _When Zara Tindall told her grandmother she was calling her daughter Lena rather than Elena because she didn’t want her child’s initials to be ET, the Queen, not appreciating the reference to the 1982 film about an extra-terrestrial, replied. ‘You’ve lost me’._
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


To me this book is the most damning account regarding the despicable Hawry. His Grandmother gave he and his evil conniving wife nothing but unconditional love, even as she had to make difficult decisions to protect the Monarchy. I had not comprehended the apparent  degree of tolerance she showed them. Without any appreciation, they responded with disrespect and malicious behaviors. They deserve to be obliterated from all things Royal.


----------



## charlottawill

TC1 said:


> Well.. just finished S5 of The Crown. It was a snoozefest and there was nothing that seemed to have "inside" info


Not surprised. I have zero interest in this season. I was around for all the tabloid coverage of the real events and don't like the cast.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might just order the book as a Christmas break read. Still up to my ellbows in Christmas baking so I haven't caught up today.



I'm sure it will be a better read than Spare.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> To me this book is the most damning account regarding the despicable Hawry. His Grandmother gave he and his evil conniving wife nothing but unconditional love, even as she had to make difficult decisions to protect the Monarchy. I had not comprehended the apparent degree of tolerance she showed them. Without any appreciation, they responded with disrespect and malicious behaviors.



I read the excerpt in the DM too and it appears that everyone around the Queen knew she was ill, possibly battling some type of bone marrow cancer as the excerpt states.  The family and her closest staff knew her time was short and Harry/MM still did what they did over the past couple of years _and_ turned down the invitation to stay with her during her final summer at Balmoral.  The rest of the family spent time with her.   It would not have been hard for Harry and Meghan to do the same.  I don't expect Meghan has any regrets about that, she didn't know the Queen well and couldn't care less about her, but Harry certainly did.  So, I think that is particularly damning and speaks volumes about him.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So. Much. Wrong with this.
> 
> But also, *the same mother that was giving interviews praising Ghoul as basically a saint?*



Cory's mother sounds like a smart lady.  One needs to read between the lines, she may have meant to say 'please take her.'


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Not surprised. I have zero interest in this season. I was around for all the tabloid coverage of the real events and don't like the cast.


I think that's it.  I too was around for the media coverage and it just doesn't seem to work. 

I also think this new Diana doesn't have the same appeal. They also aren't doing her blue liner including on the lower lash line which makes this actress not very Diana like.


----------



## Stansy

so I was invited to a Christmas party yesterday, and we went to the circus.
I almost choked on my drink when the puppet master came up (he was really good!), the resemblance of the puppet was striking! The icing on the cake was its removable toupet, I kid you not!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

This thread moves so fast, much faster than the mall traffic 
Just sharing my thoughts:

RE: Cory’s mom: she said nice things to avoid the lawsuit.  Her praises did seem a bit too much [which to me was the big clue she didn’t really mean it]. 

RE:  Spare:  free?  Nope. Not going to fall for that tactic.  I really hope this book is an epic fail, like all their other half-a$$ nonsense. 

RE: QE’s treatment - imo he did not respect her when she was well, so he simply continued his $hitty behavior.  Think about his behavior through the years [nude in Vegas, nazi shirt, drug issues, stumbling out of bars, etc.].  None of that stuff is kind to his family, none of that is ‘royal’ behavior. He was and still is an embarrassment - no matter how much money they give him.  Andi, at least, has been quiet. 

RE: The Crown - agree with @Jayne1 - I gave up several seasons ago.  The historical seasons were informative, the modern day seasons twist the truth too much.  My interest fell off with the modern day seasons. 






Happy shopping


----------



## CarryOn2020

ETA: possible Fake News below ​​Princess Charlotte to be Duchess of Edinburgh: King Charles wants to keep the role for the third in line to throne in a 'fitting' tribute to The Queen - who also held the title - and to 'honour the line of succession'​
*Prince Edward was expected to become Duke of Edinburgh after father's death*
*Princess Charlotte is third in line to the throne after Prince William and George*
*Giving her the title would honour the late Queen and the line of succession *









						King Charles is saving the Edinburgh title for Princess Charlotte
					

The revelation comes after months of speculation as to why the King has withheld the title from Prince Edward, who had been expected to inherit the Dukedom after his father's death last year.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I read the excerpt in the DM too and it appears that everyone around the Queen knew she was ill, possibly battling some type of bone marrow cancer as the excerpt states.  The family and her closest staff knew her time was short and Harry/MM still did what they did over the past couple of years _and_ turned down the invitation to stay with her during her final summer at Balmoral.  The rest of the family spent time with her.   It would not have been hard for Harry and Meghan to do the same.  I don't expect Meghan has any regrets about that, she didn't know the Queen well and couldn't care less about her, but Harry certainly did.  So, I think that is particularly damning and speaks volumes about him.


He is selfish.  There is nothing good to say about him after acting like this and treating TQ and PP as he did.  It is not even worth talking about Meghan in this regard as she thinks of no one, but herself.   She has made that crystal clear.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Princess Charlotte to be Duchess of Edinburgh: King Charles wants to keep the role for the third in line to throne in a 'fitting' tribute to The Queen - who also held the title - and to 'honour the line of succession'​
> *Prince Edward was expected to become Duke of Edinburgh after father's death*
> *Princess Charlotte is third in line to the throne after Prince William and George*
> *Giving her the title would honour the late Queen and the line of succession *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King Charles is saving the Edinburgh title for Princess Charlotte
> 
> 
> The revelation comes after months of speculation as to why the King has withheld the title from Prince Edward, who had been expected to inherit the Dukedom after his father's death last year.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I read the article and understand KC's reasoning, but I still can't help but feel a bit sorry for Prince Edward. It seems like anyone else who is passed over for a promotion after they've kept their head down and worked hard. I hope his royal privilege makes it easier to swallow.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So. Much. Wrong with this.
> 
> But also, the same mother that was giving interviews praising Ghoul as basically a saint?



Lest anyone think we're a bunch of crazies here, there are plenty of IG and Twitter commenters who share our distaste for MM:

"I've followed the happenings in May 2016 for a little while and it is sure that while she was living with Cory, Markus was in the picture, she met Haz and there was Rory, Mister Ice-Bucket... busy gal that month our Meg!
I have also seen a story that *she "met" Haz in April 2015 at the opening of her legs and Soho House Istanbul.*"


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I read the article and understand KC's reasoning, but I still can't help but feel a bit sorry for Prince Edward. It seems like anyone else who is passed over for a promotion after they've kept their head down and worked hard. I hope his royal privilege makes it easier to swallow.


Some are saying this story is fake news. Stay tuned.

ETA:  this _working_ royal thing is really becoming a huge consideration.  Perhaps the glory days are over.  Many other monarchies have trimmed down, too.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kemilia said:


> Every time I see her in that droopy boobie dress I laugh.


One never knows, but some day ZedZed might surprise us and have it auctioned for her favourite charity: MEMEME. 
In my mind's eye, I can see the headlines now.

*       DROOPY BOOBIE DRESS TO BE AUCTIONED FOR CHARITY          


*


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> One never knows, but some day ZedZed might surprise us and have it auctioned for her favourite charity: MEMEME.
> In my mind's eye, I can see the headlines now.
> 
> *       DROOPY BOOBIE DRESS TO BE AUCTIONED FOR CHARITY
> 
> View attachment 5660037
> *


Who would want it? Certainly not to wear, maybe to burn.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's nothing I  would put past her at this point, but several books claim they got engaged months before the annoucement. So for me, those logistics don't add up.



I think if they didn't do a bhcg level if she was claiming to be pregnant, then the BRF are dumber than I've been giving them credit for.  Unless of course, Haz blocked it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The Caribbean Prince makes a very valid point imo.




Gosh, I had completely forgotten how pretentious and rude that statement was. Collaborate with The Queen and The Prince of Wales


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth! It sounds pretty serious.
> View attachment 5659601
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry accused of committing 'treason' against King Charles III
> 
> 
> Prince Harry has been accused of allegedly committing ‘treason’ against his father King Charles
> 
> 
> 
> www.thenews.com.pk



What kind of source is that who doesn't know there is no such thing as Princess Catherine?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What kind of source is that who doesn't know there is no such thing as Princess Catherine?


I don't know.   I skipped that part and focused on Hazz becoming obsolete…


----------



## Chanbal

Another creative article…


----------



## CarryOn2020

When H&M are fussing and fuming:


----------



## CarryOn2020

When other posters come in here and ask why we are so mean, dislike H&M, etc:


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> Personally I think they are well matched and deserve each other - when this thread started I disliked Meghan and was accused of being racist - I don’t care about her skin colour and unlike many others on here who criticise her looks I think she is a beautiful woman it’s her character or lack of that is the problem - I used to feel sorry for Harry and hoped he would find a partner and enjoy life - let’s face it even the spare will have a life of luxury and privilege - but no he shows his true colours instead of maturing into an adult he found a partner who is as vain selfish and self entitled as he is - they bring out the absolute worst in each other - and the media feed their insanity with 24/7 coverage I’d love them to be exiled to somewhere so we never see or hear of them again


I would like to see them do what they said they were going to do when they left the BRF, that they desperately needed to escape the media and live a private life.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


>



Imo he has always been a maligner who is jealous of William, so something nasty was going to happen.  For too long Hazzie got away with most _unroyal_ behavior.  He had no intentions of changing.  Imo.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's so funny because other than this thread or an occasional tweet I NEVER read about them...where are they being covered so much other than tabloids?
> 
> Also I saw a very interesting segment about how hate or rage becomes almost addictive which is why social media and politicians can use it to their advantage. And why positive news receives so much less coverage or clicks.


I'd say all obsessive behaviour is addictive. When I was in my teens, I was targeted by the classmate sitting in front of me who was trying to convert me to something I shall not identify. Like the stans with Zed, she could see no wrong with her chosen one and accused me of ill-will against her chosen if I pointed out that the person in question was no saint.

Also, sad that Vanity Fair, Vogue, Time and other previously credible publications are now tabloid-grade.


Chanbal said:


> While other members of the Royal Family found the Sussexes’ decision to name their daughter Lilibet – the Queen’s childhood nickname – ‘bewildering’ and ‘rather presumptuous’, the Queen remarked it was ‘very pretty and seems just right’;


This I don't believe. I think she didn't see it as something worth fighting about especially when Ginge and Cringe were obviously out to provoke her with their declarations of her approval and those claims of non-existent video calls. I particularly remember Zed's hilarious tale of how she could pick up the phone and call TQ, when Sparry had to book time to meet his grandma. Sure, Zed, you're special.


youngster said:


> I don't expect Meghan has any regrets about that, she didn't know the Queen well and couldn't care less about her


Zed only cares about Zed. Typical narc. My office narc used to wax lyrical about his imagined wonderful life after his planned migration to Canada. When we asked about his aged parents (in their 70s and 80s), he looked blankly at us because they did not factor into his plans.


purseinsanity said:


> I think if they didn't do a bhcg level if she was claiming to be pregnant, then the BRF are dumber than I've been giving them credit for.  Unless of course, Haz blocked it.


She might have screamed about her rights to not do any tests. When I had my baby, one of the pre-delivery procedures practiced here was to give the mum-to-be an enema to clear out waste products. The expat mums from the US frequently refused the enema, citing their "rights". According to my ob/gyn, the delivery was sometimes a literal sh*tshow. Not a complaint, she was just explaining to me the reason for the enema.


Toby93 said:


> I would like to see them do what they said they were going to do when they left the BRF, that they desperately needed to escape the media and live a private life.


Hear, hear! Unfortunately, their post-BRF plans never considered what they could do to make a living. I think they just planned to dine out on their celebrity status forever.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I would like to see them do what they said they were going to do when they left the BRF, that they desperately needed to escape the media and live a private life.


I believe he really did want that, but media attention is like oxygen to her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One more story of his past - true or attention-seeking?  
Part of the story in spoiler.



Spoiler



_Catherine lifted the lid after learning that Harry, 38, was writing about his ex-girlfriends in his new memoir.

She told The Sun on Sunday: “I doubt I will be in Harry’s book as a prince can’t run off with a 34-year-old mother-of-two, it’s just not the done thing.”

Catherine, who once starred in American reality TV show The Real Housewives of DC, was separated from ex-husband Stephen when she and Harry met at trendy Art Bar in London’s Chelsea in May 2006.

She is not sure if Harry was on a break from Chelsy.

She said: “We had some mutual friends in the property business and he introduced himself.

“Harry was wearing an Australian-style hat that made me laugh so I asked him, ‘What are you doing looking like a t*** in that?’

“I don’t think he was used to people taking the Mickey and once we started talking, it was like there was no one else was in the room.”

Harry was accompanied by three Royal Protection Officers who hovered constantly.

Speaking from Majorca, where she now lives, the interior designer continued: “He was only 21 so a relationship was the furthest thing from my mind. 

"But when everyone started leaving at around 11pm, Harry pointed to one of three Range Rovers parked outside and said, ‘Hop in with me,’ which I found very flattering.

“We were driven to Eclipse nightclub in South Kensington and whisked downstairs to the VIP area.

“A few moments later the manager came over and asked, ‘What is your favourite song?’ Harry said, ‘Gnarls Barkley, Crazy.’ 

"It came on a second later and I said, ‘You are so spoiled.’ Harry just laughed.

“I started chatting to somebody and Harry took the cloth out of the champagne bucket and put it over my head. I was a bit upset because it was freezing. I told him, ‘Stop being so needy, that is not the way to behave.’

“One of his security guards came over and told him off, saying, ‘Get a grip, you can’t behave like that.’

“I saw him get told off like that a few times.”“We went to another club but after half an hour I told Harry, ‘I’m starving, do you make a good bacon sandwich?’ 

"He said, ‘I make an excellent bacon sandwich’ and we went back to his friend’s place in Chelsea. 

"Harry and I shared a cigarette on the steps outside and he really opened-up to me.” 

Harry, now living in California with wife Meghan and their two children, told her about his grandmother the Queen and “how close they were”.

She added: “We went upstairs to the bathroom and started mucking about like teenagers, singing into toothbrushes like they were microphones. We got into the bath with our clothes on and one of our friends took a photo on my phone.

“Harry and I went to the kitchen and he made a great bacon sandwich. We sat in the kitchen chatting for ages and we both had the giggles. We started play fighting and I think we were wrestling on and off for about 15 minutes when I told him I needed to go home.

“It was then that he lifted me by my waist off the floor and held me against the wall. He gave me the most incredible, passionate kiss I have ever had in my life. I was absolutely speechless.”

Harry insisted on taking her back to the home she shared with daughters Ruby and Jade, then six and eight, in London’s Battersea.

She said: “We continued texting and I saw him again about a week later at a bar in Kensington.

“We had another kiss and Harry was very complimentary, telling me how beautiful I was. We met a few more times, always in private bars.”

The romance was dealt a blow when news of the relationship broke.

After two more dates, Harry changed his number and Catherine did not see him again until 2009, when they bumped into each other at a polo match in Barbados.

This was a year after she married her second husband, from whom she is now separated.

She said: “Harry pushed past his bodyguards to give me a kiss and a hug and we had a great conversation. In hindsight it’s a shame we couldn’t have remained friends.

“I had the time of my life when I was with Harry as we got each other’s sense of humour.

“Without being arrogant, I think we both quite fancied each other even though he was way too young for me. If he wasn’t a royal and was maybe ten years older, he would be my perfect man.

“If Harry walked through the door here now, he would probably give me a high five and I am sure we will meet again, because the world is a small place. 

"I hope he is happy and has found some freedom finally, because that is something he was desperately searching for back then. 

"I hope Meghan looks after him and I don’t wish him anything other than happiness and success because he is a very brave, charismatic, incredibly funny, intelligent and lovely human being.” _


_









						Harry was my toyboy aged 21, I was 34 & bet his book doesn’t mention that
					

A US reality TV star has spoken for the first time of her month-long fling with Prince Harry — when he was just 21 and she was a 34-year-old mother of two. Catherine Ommanney has spoken out because…




					www.the-sun.com
				



_


----------



## needlv

William and Kate’s US trip highlights how they’re not Harry and Meghan
					

By downplaying their celebrity on Boston visit, the Prince and Princess of Wales are poised to claim the crown of the royal family’s No. 1 couple.




					pagesix.com
				




I did laugh at the actual headline

William and Kate’s US trip highlights how they’re not Harry and Meghan​






not just the US trip… lol


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more story of his past - true or attention-seeking?
> Part of the story in spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> _Catherine lifted the lid after learning that Harry, 38, was writing about his ex-girlfriends in his new memoir.
> 
> She told The Sun on Sunday: “I doubt I will be in Harry’s book as a prince can’t run off with a 34-year-old mother-of-two, it’s just not the done thing.”
> 
> Catherine, who once starred in American reality TV show The Real Housewives of DC, was separated from ex-husband Stephen when she and Harry met at trendy Art Bar in London’s Chelsea in May 2006.
> 
> She is not sure if Harry was on a break from Chelsy.
> 
> She said: “We had some mutual friends in the property business and he introduced himself.
> 
> “Harry was wearing an Australian-style hat that made me laugh so I asked him, ‘What are you doing looking like a t*** in that?’
> 
> “I don’t think he was used to people taking the Mickey and once we started talking, it was like there was no one else was in the room.”
> 
> Harry was accompanied by three Royal Protection Officers who hovered constantly.
> 
> Speaking from Majorca, where she now lives, the interior designer continued: “He was only 21 so a relationship was the furthest thing from my mind.
> 
> "But when everyone started leaving at around 11pm, Harry pointed to one of three Range Rovers parked outside and said, ‘Hop in with me,’ which I found very flattering.
> 
> “We were driven to Eclipse nightclub in South Kensington and whisked downstairs to the VIP area.
> 
> “A few moments later the manager came over and asked, ‘What is your favourite song?’ Harry said, ‘Gnarls Barkley, Crazy.’
> 
> "It came on a second later and I said, ‘You are so spoiled.’ Harry just laughed.
> 
> “I started chatting to somebody and Harry took the cloth out of the champagne bucket and put it over my head. I was a bit upset because it was freezing. I told him, ‘Stop being so needy, that is not the way to behave.’
> 
> “One of his security guards came over and told him off, saying, ‘Get a grip, you can’t behave like that.’
> 
> “I saw him get told off like that a few times.”“We went to another club but after half an hour I told Harry, ‘I’m starving, do you make a good bacon sandwich?’
> 
> "He said, ‘I make an excellent bacon sandwich’ and we went back to his friend’s place in Chelsea.
> 
> "Harry and I shared a cigarette on the steps outside and he really opened-up to me.”
> 
> Harry, now living in California with wife Meghan and their two children, told her about his grandmother the Queen and “how close they were”.
> 
> She added: “We went upstairs to the bathroom and started mucking about like teenagers, singing into toothbrushes like they were microphones. We got into the bath with our clothes on and one of our friends took a photo on my phone.
> 
> “Harry and I went to the kitchen and he made a great bacon sandwich. We sat in the kitchen chatting for ages and we both had the giggles. We started play fighting and I think we were wrestling on and off for about 15 minutes when I told him I needed to go home.
> 
> “It was then that he lifted me by my waist off the floor and held me against the wall. He gave me the most incredible, passionate kiss I have ever had in my life. I was absolutely speechless.”
> 
> Harry insisted on taking her back to the home she shared with daughters Ruby and Jade, then six and eight, in London’s Battersea.
> 
> She said: “We continued texting and I saw him again about a week later at a bar in Kensington.
> 
> “We had another kiss and Harry was very complimentary, telling me how beautiful I was. We met a few more times, always in private bars.”
> 
> The romance was dealt a blow when news of the relationship broke.
> 
> After two more dates, Harry changed his number and Catherine did not see him again until 2009, when they bumped into each other at a polo match in Barbados.
> 
> This was a year after she married her second husband, from whom she is now separated.
> 
> She said: “Harry pushed past his bodyguards to give me a kiss and a hug and we had a great conversation. In hindsight it’s a shame we couldn’t have remained friends.
> 
> “I had the time of my life when I was with Harry as we got each other’s sense of humour.
> 
> “Without being arrogant, I think we both quite fancied each other even though he was way too young for me. If he wasn’t a royal and was maybe ten years older, he would be my perfect man.
> 
> “If Harry walked through the door here now, he would probably give me a high five and I am sure we will meet again, because the world is a small place.
> 
> "I hope he is happy and has found some freedom finally, because that is something he was desperately searching for back then.
> 
> "I hope Meghan looks after him and I don’t wish him anything other than happiness and success because he is a very brave, charismatic, incredibly funny, intelligent and lovely human being.” _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry was my toyboy aged 21, I was 34 & bet his book doesn’t mention that
> 
> 
> A US reality TV star has spoken for the first time of her month-long fling with Prince Harry — when he was just 21 and she was a 34-year-old mother of two. Catherine Ommanney has spoken out because…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Harry slept his way around.  He was very troubled and wild.  There is a reason why women did not last in relationships with him.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Harry slept his way around.  He was very troubled and wild.  There is a reason why women did not last in relationships with him.


Troubled and wild, indeed.  Yet, still entitled enough to put a wet towel on the lady’s head


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

papertiger said:


> I agree
> 
> M's name and her 'statements' (recollections my vary) about her passport and whatever being taken away were brought into an awareness course on forced marriage, honour abuse and killings. She was never forced to marry Harry, that's for sure, and she certainly didn't have her passport taken away as her trip to NYC proved. Her lies are repeated again and again by people as truth because they look no further than the headlines.
> 
> I feel desperately sorry for real victims of honour abuse, having someone play-act a victim is so disgusting to me I can even go there. 1) knowing accusations would not be refuted 2) proclamations to the world as a first point of call 3) recanted hearsay and many more besides. Many victims of this kind of abuse don't even realise they are being subjugated. M's only talent is manipulation, which has much more in common with abusers, every trick in the book.
> 
> Meghan and Harry are not just numbskulls but actually quite evil, they _know_ they are lying, all the HATE they've stirred-up can't be stilled.
> 
> I don't care so much about the Monarchy, but they have besmirched the UK with their lies and false accusations. The only good thing to come out of all this is they can't come back. Even without MegZZ, I do not want Harry back in the UK.


It does seem to be part of this general trend among the elite that their charity is just about framing and marketing themselves as part of the cause celebre.

On the writer of the tweet I replied to - I notice not only is she a CBE but that she’s got it for services to a royal anti-bullying charity so it makes sense she’s insisting Meghan of all people is some kind of victim as she’s one of these bizarre people whose metier is explaining to the average person why a royal (or ex royal) is a true put-upon martyr of great pathos and not actually some of the most over-indulged and protected people in history.


Chanbal said:


> Would this be possible?



we can live in hope - it would still rely on Charles taking the hint & thinking it’s in his best interests and a monarchy isn’t run by popular opinion.


Helventara said:


> Eh?  Spare is available for Free in Amazon?
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...EE-Black-Friday-deal-months-hits-shelves.html
> 
> View attachment 5659880


My MIL saw a thumbnail of his book and thought it was a Mick Hucknall album. They are promoting it heavily here but I think its a turkey- apparently Scabies book was a disappointing return and people were a lot less tired of it then.


TC1 said:


> Well.. just finished S5 of The Crown. It was a snoozefest and there was nothing that seemed to have "inside" info


I feel like everyone sort of knows the story ad nauseum now anyway- I dunno what they could do with it to make it fresh. Maybe they should’ve focused on Anne’s life more or something.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo the *lying* Hazz is no _prize catch_.  When the engagement was announced, several posters here said so.  He came with lots of baggage,  poor work ethic, living off his daddy.  Then, _*boom. *_
> 
> Surely, someone will ask the *liars* why they continue to use titles from a racist institution.  They even accept money from KCIII.
> Who wants to be led/influenced by two *liars*?
> 
> How delusional are people?



Oh the Twitter comment- I can see why she wants to see another red carpet as formal wear is where the true horror of M’s abominable style is at full capacity. Badly fitting jeans is one thing- open front  red lobster with botched fake tits and s1 Simpsons posture is another


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I mean, that doesn't speak for her either. It might be legal, it still comes too close to grooming for my liking.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Cory's mother sounds like a smart lady.  One needs to read between the lines, she may have meant to say 'please take her.'



I agree she was definitely going for a ‘see if she drops her knickers for the 1st richer guy she’s not really marriage material’ 

Also we have to allow for the fact this poor woman apparently had to hear H&M in flagrante so it’s amazing   She wasn’t turned into stone then & there. 








CarryOn2020 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> _Catherine lifted the lid after learning that Harry, 38, was writing about his ex-girlfriends in his new memoir.
> 
> She told The Sun on Sunday: “I doubt I will be in Harry’s book as a prince can’t run off with a 34-year-old mother-of-two, it’s just not the done thing.”
> 
> Catherine, who once starred in American reality TV show The Real Housewives of DC, was separated from ex-husband Stephen when she and Harry met at trendy Art Bar in London’s Chelsea in May 2006.
> 
> She is not sure if Harry was on a break from Chelsy.
> 
> She said: “We had some mutual friends in the property business and he introduced himself.
> 
> “Harry was wearing an Australian-style hat that made me laugh so I asked him, ‘What are you doing looking like a t*** in that?’
> 
> “I don’t think he was used to people taking the Mickey and once we started talking, it was like there was no one else was in the room.”
> 
> Harry was accompanied by three Royal Protection Officers who hovered constantly.
> 
> Speaking from Majorca, where she now lives, the interior designer continued: “He was only 21 so a relationship was the furthest thing from my mind.
> 
> "But when everyone started leaving at around 11pm, Harry pointed to one of three Range Rovers parked outside and said, ‘Hop in with me,’ which I found very flattering.
> 
> “We were driven to Eclipse nightclub in South Kensington and whisked downstairs to the VIP area.
> 
> “A few moments later the manager came over and asked, ‘What is your favourite song?’ Harry said, ‘Gnarls Barkley, Crazy.’
> 
> "It came on a second later and I said, ‘You are so spoiled.’ Harry just laughed.
> 
> “I started chatting to somebody and Harry took the cloth out of the champagne bucket and put it over my head. I was a bit upset because it was freezing. I told him, ‘Stop being so needy, that is not the way to behave.’
> 
> “One of his security guards came over and told him off, saying, ‘Get a grip, you can’t behave like that.’
> 
> “I saw him get told off like that a few times.”“We went to another club but after half an hour I told Harry, ‘I’m starving, do you make a good bacon sandwich?’
> 
> "He said, ‘I make an excellent bacon sandwich’ and we went back to his friend’s place in Chelsea.
> 
> "Harry and I shared a cigarette on the steps outside and he really opened-up to me.”
> 
> Harry, now living in California with wife Meghan and their two children, told her about his grandmother the Queen and “how close they were”.
> 
> She added: “We went upstairs to the bathroom and started mucking about like teenagers, singing into toothbrushes like they were microphones. We got into the bath with our clothes on and one of our friends took a photo on my phone.
> 
> “Harry and I went to the kitchen and he made a great bacon sandwich. We sat in the kitchen chatting for ages and we both had the giggles. We started play fighting and I think we were wrestling on and off for about 15 minutes when I told him I needed to go home.
> 
> “It was then that he lifted me by my waist off the floor and held me against the wall. He gave me the most incredible, passionate kiss I have ever had in my life. I was absolutely speechless.”
> 
> Harry insisted on taking her back to the home she shared with daughters Ruby and Jade, then six and eight, in London’s Battersea.
> 
> She said: “We continued texting and I saw him again about a week later at a bar in Kensington.
> 
> “We had another kiss and Harry was very complimentary, telling me how beautiful I was. We met a few more times, always in private bars.”
> 
> The romance was dealt a blow when news of the relationship broke.
> 
> After two more dates, Harry changed his number and Catherine did not see him again until 2009, when they bumped into each other at a polo match in Barbados.
> 
> This was a year after she married her second husband, from whom she is now separated.
> 
> She said: “Harry pushed past his bodyguards to give me a kiss and a hug and we had a great conversation. In hindsight it’s a shame we couldn’t have remained friends.
> 
> “I had the time of my life when I was with Harry as we got each other’s sense of humour.
> 
> “Without being arrogant, I think we both quite fancied each other even though he was way too young for me. If he wasn’t a royal and was maybe ten years older, he would be my perfect man.
> 
> “If Harry walked through the door here now, he would probably give me a high five and I am sure we will meet again, because the world is a small place.
> 
> "I hope he is happy and has found some freedom finally, because that is something he was desperately searching for back then.
> 
> "I hope Meghan looks after him and I don’t wish him anything other than happiness and success because he is a very brave, charismatic, incredibly funny, intelligent and lovely human being.” _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry was my toyboy aged 21, I was 34 & bet his book doesn’t mention that
> 
> 
> A US reality TV star has spoken for the first time of her month-long fling with Prince Harry — when he was just 21 and she was a 34-year-old mother of two. Catherine Ommanney has spoken out because…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


I thought I might have died and gone to hell by the third sentence. This is one of the most cringey things I’ve ever read. 

On the plus side for him, if he does ever break up with M he’s going to be surrounded by sloppy starlets. 

Perhaps he could marry Kim Zolciak and lecture the RHOA ladies on how well he understands black culture. 






CarryOn2020 said:


> Troubled and wild, indeed.  Yet, still entitled enough to put a wet towel on the lady’s head


She’s not a lady. Kiss and tell tart is definitely his type.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> She’s not a lady. Kiss and tell tart is definitely his type.


This, 100%.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> This I don't believe. I think she didn't see it as something worth fighting about especially when Ginge and Cringe were obviously out to provoke her with their declarations of her approval and those claims of non-existent video calls. I particularly remember Zed's hilarious tale of how she could pick up the phone and call TQ, when Sparry had to book time to meet his grandma. Sure, Zed, you're special.



That's my take, too. The Queen was not naive, she knew as well as we do that is was not a sweet nod but a hefty middle finger yet once again chose to be the bigger person.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> This, 100%.



Yeah, I was thinking what kind of person feels the need to bring up that sh*t 20 years later when the other person is married with children? I am at a point where I enjoy karma coming Ghoul's way, but that's just tasteless and unneccessary.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I was thinking what kind of person feels the need to bring up that sh*t 20 years later when the other person is married with children? I am at a point where I enjoy karma coming Ghoul's way, but that's just tasteless and unneccessary.


I'm wondering how Sparry will describe his previous relationships in his monument to raw honesty (as opposed to half-baked honesty?). Will he (or the ghostwriter) tell it straight? Will the ghostwriter overlay the recounting with his armchair psychiatrist wisdom? Will all the romances and flings be couched as "Harry is irresistible" to bolster the current lustband narrative? Will the meeting with Zed be framed as an intimate connection between two worldlywise bedwarmers?

Will either of them be described as virgins at heart?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more story of his past - *true or attention-seeking? *
> Part of the story in spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> _Catherine lifted the lid after learning that Harry, 38, was writing about his ex-girlfriends in his new memoir.
> 
> She told The Sun on Sunday: “I doubt I will be in Harry’s book as a prince can’t run off with a 34-year-old mother-of-two, it’s just not the done thing.”
> 
> Catherine, who once starred in American reality TV show The Real Housewives of DC, was separated from ex-husband Stephen when she and Harry met at trendy Art Bar in London’s Chelsea in May 2006.
> 
> She is not sure if Harry was on a break from Chelsy.
> 
> She said: “We had some mutual friends in the property business and he introduced himself.
> 
> “Harry was wearing an Australian-style hat that made me laugh so I asked him, ‘What are you doing looking like a t*** in that?’
> 
> “I don’t think he was used to people taking the Mickey and once we started talking, it was like there was no one else was in the room.”
> 
> Harry was accompanied by three Royal Protection Officers who hovered constantly.
> 
> Speaking from Majorca, where she now lives, the interior designer continued: “He was only 21 so a relationship was the furthest thing from my mind.
> 
> "But when everyone started leaving at around 11pm, Harry pointed to one of three Range Rovers parked outside and said, ‘Hop in with me,’ which I found very flattering.
> 
> “We were driven to Eclipse nightclub in South Kensington and whisked downstairs to the VIP area.
> 
> “A few moments later the manager came over and asked, ‘What is your favourite song?’ Harry said, ‘Gnarls Barkley, Crazy.’
> 
> "It came on a second later and I said, ‘You are so spoiled.’ Harry just laughed.
> 
> “I started chatting to somebody and Harry took the cloth out of the champagne bucket and put it over my head. I was a bit upset because it was freezing. I told him, ‘Stop being so needy, that is not the way to behave.’
> 
> “One of his security guards came over and told him off, saying, ‘Get a grip, you can’t behave like that.’
> 
> “I saw him get told off like that a few times.”“We went to another club but after half an hour I told Harry, ‘I’m starving, do you make a good bacon sandwich?’
> 
> "He said, ‘I make an excellent bacon sandwich’ and we went back to his friend’s place in Chelsea.
> 
> "Harry and I shared a cigarette on the steps outside and he really opened-up to me.”
> 
> Harry, now living in California with wife Meghan and their two children, told her about his grandmother the Queen and “how close they were”.
> 
> She added: “We went upstairs to the bathroom and started mucking about like teenagers, singing into toothbrushes like they were microphones. We got into the bath with our clothes on and one of our friends took a photo on my phone.
> 
> “Harry and I went to the kitchen and he made a great bacon sandwich. We sat in the kitchen chatting for ages and we both had the giggles. We started play fighting and I think we were wrestling on and off for about 15 minutes when I told him I needed to go home.
> 
> “It was then that he lifted me by my waist off the floor and held me against the wall. He gave me the most incredible, passionate kiss I have ever had in my life. I was absolutely speechless.”
> 
> Harry insisted on taking her back to the home she shared with daughters Ruby and Jade, then six and eight, in London’s Battersea.
> 
> She said: “We continued texting and I saw him again about a week later at a bar in Kensington.
> 
> “We had another kiss and Harry was very complimentary, telling me how beautiful I was. We met a few more times, always in private bars.”
> 
> The romance was dealt a blow when news of the relationship broke.
> 
> After two more dates, Harry changed his number and Catherine did not see him again until 2009, when they bumped into each other at a polo match in Barbados.
> 
> This was a year after she married her second husband, from whom she is now separated.
> 
> She said: “Harry pushed past his bodyguards to give me a kiss and a hug and we had a great conversation. In hindsight it’s a shame we couldn’t have remained friends.
> 
> “I had the time of my life when I was with Harry as we got each other’s sense of humour.
> 
> “Without being arrogant, I think we both quite fancied each other even though he was way too young for me. If he wasn’t a royal and was maybe ten years older, he would be my perfect man.
> 
> “If Harry walked through the door here now, he would probably give me a high five and I am sure we will meet again, because the world is a small place.
> 
> "I hope he is happy and has found some freedom finally, because that is something he was desperately searching for back then.
> 
> "I hope Meghan looks after him and I don’t wish him anything other than happiness and success because he is a very brave, charismatic, incredibly funny, intelligent and lovely human being.” _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry was my toyboy aged 21, I was 34 & bet his book doesn’t mention that
> 
> 
> A US reality TV star has spoken for the first time of her month-long fling with Prince Harry — when he was just 21 and she was a 34-year-old mother of two. Catherine Ommanney has spoken out because…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Attention seeking? Absolutely!
True? Highly likely.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I was thinking what kind of person feels the need to bring up that sh*t 20 years later when the other person is married with children? I am at a point where I enjoy karma coming Ghoul's way, but that's just tasteless and unneccessary.


Since Ginge and Cringe have shown repeatedly that there is no depth they won’t sink to in their endless quest for fame and $$$, the people they have hung around with and had dealings with in the past are more likely to be the types who would happily sell their story if given the opportunity. As more dirt from their pasts come out, I feel no sympathy for either of them. And I would bet there’s a lot more of these types of salacious stories waiting to come out after the contents of H’s autobiography is more widely disseminated. I imagine H’s lawyers will be kept very busy filing defamation suits in the future to try to silence people.


----------



## Aminamina

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I was thinking what kind of person feels the need to bring up that sh*t 20 years later when the other person is married with children? I am at a point where I enjoy karma coming Ghoul's way, but that's just tasteless and unneccessary.


The same kind that keeps on digging up that P&G sh*t and deceased mommy


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Troubled and wild, indeed.  Yet, still entitled enough to put a wet towel on the lady’s head


Sounds like his minders were there to protect other people from his shenanigans as much as they were there to protect him from others.


----------



## CobaltBlu

DoggieBags said:


> Since Ginge and Cringe have shown repeatedly that there is no depth they won’t sink to in their endless quest for fame and $$$, the people they have hung around with and had dealings with in the past are more likely to be the types who would happily sell their story if given the opportunity. As more dirt from their pasts come out, I feel no sympathy for either of them. And I would bet there’s a lot more of these types of salacious stories waiting to come out after the contents of H’s autobiography is more widely disseminated. I imagine H’s lawyers will be kept very busy filing defamation suits in the future to try to silence people.



The thing is this particular desperate housewife made a point to say her friend took a picture of her in the tub with the Palm Tree Prince with their clothes on. So she has the receipts, and possibly something to sell as well. I am sure there are more of these types who will crawl out of the woodwork, with true and cringeworthy stories of the ginger knucklehead.


----------



## CobaltBlu

charlottawill said:


> Sounds like his minders were there to protect other people from his shenanigans as much as they were there to protect him from others.


right!  I bet they have some truly appalling stories to tell. *shudders*


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more story of his past - true or attention-seeking?
> Part of the story in spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> _Catherine lifted the lid after learning that Harry, 38, was writing about his ex-girlfriends in his new memoir.
> 
> She told The Sun on Sunday: “I doubt I will be in Harry’s book as a prince can’t run off with a 34-year-old mother-of-two, it’s just not the done thing.”
> 
> Catherine, who once starred in American reality TV show The Real Housewives of DC, was separated from ex-husband Stephen when she and Harry met at trendy Art Bar in London’s Chelsea in May 2006.
> 
> She is not sure if Harry was on a break from Chelsy.
> 
> She said: “We had some mutual friends in the property business and he introduced himself.
> 
> “Harry was wearing an Australian-style hat that made me laugh so I asked him, ‘What are you doing looking like a t*** in that?’
> 
> “I don’t think he was used to people taking the Mickey and once we started talking, it was like there was no one else was in the room.”
> 
> Harry was accompanied by three Royal Protection Officers who hovered constantly.
> 
> Speaking from Majorca, where she now lives, the interior designer continued: “He was only 21 so a relationship was the furthest thing from my mind.
> 
> "But when everyone started leaving at around 11pm, Harry pointed to one of three Range Rovers parked outside and said, ‘Hop in with me,’ which I found very flattering.
> 
> “We were driven to Eclipse nightclub in South Kensington and whisked downstairs to the VIP area.
> 
> “A few moments later the manager came over and asked, ‘What is your favourite song?’ Harry said, ‘Gnarls Barkley, Crazy.’
> 
> "It came on a second later and I said, ‘You are so spoiled.’ Harry just laughed.
> 
> “I started chatting to somebody and Harry took the cloth out of the champagne bucket and put it over my head. I was a bit upset because it was freezing. I told him, ‘Stop being so needy, that is not the way to behave.’
> 
> “One of his security guards came over and told him off, saying, ‘Get a grip, you can’t behave like that.’
> 
> “I saw him get told off like that a few times.”“We went to another club but after half an hour I told Harry, ‘I’m starving, do you make a good bacon sandwich?’
> 
> "He said, ‘I make an excellent bacon sandwich’ and we went back to his friend’s place in Chelsea.
> 
> "Harry and I shared a cigarette on the steps outside and he really opened-up to me.”
> 
> Harry, now living in California with wife Meghan and their two children, told her about his grandmother the Queen and “how close they were”.
> 
> She added: “We went upstairs to the bathroom and started mucking about like teenagers, singing into toothbrushes like they were microphones. We got into the bath with our clothes on and one of our friends took a photo on my phone.
> 
> “Harry and I went to the kitchen and he made a great bacon sandwich. We sat in the kitchen chatting for ages and we both had the giggles. We started play fighting and I think we were wrestling on and off for about 15 minutes when I told him I needed to go home.
> 
> “It was then that he lifted me by my waist off the floor and held me against the wall. He gave me the most incredible, passionate kiss I have ever had in my life. I was absolutely speechless.”
> 
> Harry insisted on taking her back to the home she shared with daughters Ruby and Jade, then six and eight, in London’s Battersea.
> 
> She said: “We continued texting and I saw him again about a week later at a bar in Kensington.
> 
> “We had another kiss and Harry was very complimentary, telling me how beautiful I was. We met a few more times, always in private bars.”
> 
> The romance was dealt a blow when news of the relationship broke.
> 
> After two more dates, Harry changed his number and Catherine did not see him again until 2009, when they bumped into each other at a polo match in Barbados.
> 
> This was a year after she married her second husband, from whom she is now separated.
> 
> She said: “Harry pushed past his bodyguards to give me a kiss and a hug and we had a great conversation. In hindsight it’s a shame we couldn’t have remained friends.
> 
> “I had the time of my life when I was with Harry as we got each other’s sense of humour.
> 
> “Without being arrogant, I think we both quite fancied each other even though he was way too young for me. If he wasn’t a royal and was maybe ten years older, he would be my perfect man.
> 
> “If Harry walked through the door here now, he would probably give me a high five and I am sure we will meet again, because the world is a small place.
> 
> "I hope he is happy and has found some freedom finally, because that is something he was desperately searching for back then.
> 
> "I hope Meghan looks after him and I don’t wish him anything other than happiness and success because he is a very brave, charismatic, incredibly funny, intelligent and lovely human being.” _
> 
> 
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry was my toyboy aged 21, I was 34 & bet his book doesn’t mention that
> 
> 
> A US reality TV star has spoken for the first time of her month-long fling with Prince Harry — when he was just 21 and she was a 34-year-old mother of two. Catherine Ommanney has spoken out because…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.the-sun.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


_“*Without being arrogant, I think we both quite fancied each other even though he was way too young for me. If he wasn’t a royal and was maybe ten years older, he would be my perfect man.*"_

She is divorced again and lives in Majorca.  He seems to have lost most of his royal status and aged quite a bit since he met TW. He is also allegedly a father of two. What are you waiting for?


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> The thing is this particular desperate housewife made a point to say her friend took a picture of her in the tub with the Palm Tree Prince with their clothes on. So she has the receipts, and possibly something to sell as well. I am sure there are more of these types who will crawl out of the woodwork, with true and cringeworthy stories of the ginger knucklehead.


Like the girls in Las Vegas that he played strip poker with?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Read the comments. You almost have to feel sorry for him.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if this wise advice is from the brilliant mind of CHIMPO.


----------



## Chanbal

Another brilliant mind who identified a royal gene!


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Another brilliant mind who identified a royal gene!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> One never knows, but some day ZedZed might surprise us and have it auctioned for her favourite charity: MEMEME.
> In my mind's eye, I can see the headlines now.
> 
> *       DROOPY BOOBIE DRESS TO BE AUCTIONED FOR CHARITY
> 
> View attachment 5660037
> *





charlottawill said:


> Who would want it? Certainly not to wear, maybe to burn.


Maybe that fashion museum will buy it. You know, the one which is displaying the birdshit dress because it is culturally or historically significant.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


>


----------



## xincinsin

Loco news that is so fake that Scabies must have written it.








						Meghan Markle to Kate Middleton: Come on My Podcast and Let's Talk It Out, Bish!
					

Meghan Markle has reportedly invited Kate Middleton to appear on her podcast. Insiders say Kate has yet to respond.




					www.thehollywoodgossip.com
				



One of the comments suggests that if Zed tries to base a flopcast on Catherine, she could use the stereotype of The Backstabber. Woah, burn....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe we have turned that corner - finally.


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if this wise advice is from the brilliant mind of CHIMPO.




The original tweet makes no sense whatsoever. This organization is drunk and needs to go home. Just the kind of mysterious word salad you expect to be attached to Harry. Did TW suggest this bit of wisdom?

As companies lay folks off and scale back their spending, they won’t be paying $$$ for these kinds of services and CHIMPO will find his contract ending soon I’m sure.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## LittleStar88

I wish TW would quit with her royal family is racist propaganda.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



I actually have no problem with them being on the website. They are like that grumpy aunt or naggy uncle or lightfingered brother who are in the family tree and will still be in annoying existence even if you scrub them from your copy of the family tree. I do hope Sparry gets removed from LOS because he wants no part of the royal way of life, so it makes no sense for him to be in line for the throne


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Loco news that is so fake that Scabies must have written it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to Kate Middleton: Come on My Podcast and Let's Talk It Out, Bish!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reportedly invited Kate Middleton to appear on her podcast. Insiders say Kate has yet to respond.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thehollywoodgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the comments suggests that if Zed tries to base a flopcast on Catherine, she could use the stereotype of The Backstabber. Woah, burn....


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> The original tweet makes no sense whatsoever.


It can under certain circumstances. For example, if you're trying to get a book published and you get a number of rejections until someone finally says yes. It's another way of saying "if at first you don't succeed, try try again". But obviously it can be potentially dangerous in the wrong mind.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> Read the comments. You almost have to feel sorry for him.




Despite my grievances with him, I truly do. She is a punishment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Another brilliant mind who identified a royal gene!




Someone got off their meds it seems. WTF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I wish TW would quit with her royal family is racist propaganda.
> 
> View attachment 5660416



Didn't she also refuse to visit South Africa during the Apartheid? Also, that Vladimir


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> It can under certain circumstances. For example, if you're trying to get a book published and you get a number of rejections until someone finally says yes. It's another way of saying "if at first you don't succeed, try try again". But obviously it can be potentially dangerous in the wrong mind.



True, I still think that idea "If you just push hard enough, things are going to happen" is harmful (to yourself, no other people involved). Sometimes they don't. Sometimes circumstances don't align, sometimes you are just not talented (look at our very own Ghoul, Hollywood is still not screaming yes). People need to learn to deal with rejection.


----------



## xincinsin

Read the 4th slide. This pro-Zed royal commentator called Tessa Dunlop used an unfortunate turn of phrase: "She's taken what she can from the ancient institution that is monarchy, she's enjoyed the trappings, and she's re-parked her guns on the big, lush lawns of America..." Yep, that truly depicts how Zed was in it just for monetary gain and fame, and how she is on the attack, hiding behind the shield of racism and feminism, sniping with her taunts and lies.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> It can under certain circumstances. For example, if you're trying to get a book published and you get a number of rejections until someone finally says yes. It's another way of saying "if at first you don't succeed, try try again". But obviously it can be potentially dangerous in the wrong mind.


One of the comments in the ButterHerUp tweet actually mentioned a case like that: he applied for jobs repeatedly till he finally was hired. But the tweet was really badly phrased. They could have said something like "Don't let rejection get you down". I wonder if they deliberately courted controversy?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


>




How funny. Wasn't she in the BRF for just a hot minute?


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How funny. Wasn't she in the BRF for just a hot minute?


Is it her bad memory to be blamed again? Or...

I think she counted herself as royalty (and muzzled) the moment she clapped eyes on her prey. We do have that story about her overzealous PA demanding special consideration for her at some restaurant because she was dating Sparry and therefore practically a duchess. And she must have felt muzzled because Sparry and the BRF told her not to tell that VF reporter that she was "Wild about Harry".


----------



## Gal4Dior

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How funny. Wasn't she in the BRF for just a hot minute?



Also funny, as no one really cared about Zedzed’s “voice” prior to Sparry, but don’t tell her that!


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> Read the comments. You almost have to feel sorry for him.



No, not sorry at all, he CHOSE this.

Hypocrisy on parade as usual, this admonition from a woman who made an azz of herself on the Ellen show chomping down food like a squirrel and guzzling a baby bottle.

They deserve each other.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> It can under certain circumstances. For example, if you're trying to get a book published and you get a number of rejections until someone finally says yes. It's another way of saying "if at first you don't succeed, try try again". But obviously it can be potentially dangerous in the wrong mind.



True, but this tweet was poorly presented. It comes off like some kind of sociopathic mantra. Should have been presented with better context.

I feel like there was a season of Dexter with a similar theme. Dexter was after some sociopathic killer who wouldn’t accept No.

ETA It was Dexter Season 5. He was after Jordan Chase, who would chant Take It. But for some reason I remember yes chants, too. Anyhow, the “no, no, no” tweet gave me a sociopathic-type vibe. Good job, Harry!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I went to watch the Lady C Bedtime Stories video with that other person someone on here suggested, and wouldn't you know, it's been deleted from Youtube.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I went to watch the Lady C Bedtime Stories video with that other person someone on here suggested, and wouldn't you know, it's been deleted from Youtube.


Watch it here before it gets deleted again.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> Read the comments. You almost have to feel sorry for him.




I think her comment was actually quite rude. Let the man enjoy something delicious without being accompanied by that unnecessary remark… On camera


----------



## LittleStar88

Hehehe! I haven’t seen this picture before.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sgj99

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, that doesn't speak for her either. It might be legal, it still comes too close to grooming for my liking.



I’m not sure I believe this is true.  She is a very attention-seeking woman if you can go by how she presented herself on RHDC.  There is so much in the press about Harry I can see her hopping on that band wagon.  I’m not condoning the act, that’s predatory behavior.  I just don’t believe her.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Loco news that is so fake that Scabies must have written it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to Kate Middleton: Come on My Podcast and Let's Talk It Out, Bish!
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has reportedly invited Kate Middleton to appear on her podcast. Insiders say Kate has yet to respond.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thehollywoodgossip.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the comments suggests that if Zed tries to base a flopcast on Catherine, she could use the stereotype of The Backstabber. Woah, burn....


I’m not going to lie I think  this would be the true best of the worst of this podcast. Every single second excruciating and excruciatingly examined by the press.

.


charlottawill said:


> It can under certain circumstances. For example, if you're trying to get a book published and you get a number of rejections until someone finally says yes. It's another way of saying "if at first you don't succeed, try try again". But obviously it can be potentially dangerous in the wrong mind.


i agree it sounds a bit creepy - my first image was of a certain talentless actress hammering on casting directors doors 
‘I can play a spicy Latina listen to my Spanish- oy vey!’, 
‘What do you mean I can’t play Hamlet? I’ve always wanted to play the dame.’
‘Look I know you wrote the part for Julia Roberts but I think we all know who American audiences are more devoted too…’
‘cast me as Harriet Tubman, I’d be perfect. It’s cast…. Alright are you still looking for  Mrs Washington? Or failing that I’ll be Pocahontas.’


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Despite my grievances with him, I truly do. She is a punishment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I think her comment was actually quite rude. Let the man enjoy something delicious without being accompanied by that unnecessary remark… On camera



I've said it before, she is so rude on the regular. Like, what person raised by normal people does the sh*t she does in public. Remember when someone gave Harry a book (I think) and she just ripped it from his hands to look at it before he even got the chance?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Hehehe! I haven’t seen this picture before.
> 
> View attachment 5660568



There were like three people looking happy, all for different reasons: Harry, Ghoul and Doria who elegantly wiped a tear from her eye while sitting all alone as her daughter has no friends.


----------



## DoggieBags

sgj99 said:


> I’m not sure I believe this is true.  She is a very attention-seeking woman if you can go by how she presented herself on RHDC.  There is so much in the press about Harry I can see her hopping on that band wagon.  I’m not condoning the act, that’s predatory behavior.  I just don’t believe her.


I guess we’ll know if what she is alleging actually happened if the very litigious H does not try to sue her for defamation.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've said it before, she is so rude on the regular. Like, what person raised by normal people does the sh*t she does in public. Remember when someone gave Harry a book (I think) and she just ripped it from his hands to look at it before he even got the chance?


Tom Bower said in Revenge that Thomas Markle wanted to be a better father to her than he was to his first two. He apparently equated that with giving her whatever she wanted. Imo he helped create the monster, even if unintentionally.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Hehehe! I haven’t seen this picture before.
> 
> View attachment 5660568


That's really sad. They all knew it wasn't going to end well. Meanwhile, she was playing the demure bride in an absurdly expensive gown that her FIL paid for. It sure as hell wasn't paid for by her or her father.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> That's really sad. They all knew it wasn't going to end well. Meanwhile, she was playing the demure bride in an absurdly expensive gown that her FIL paid for. It sure as hell wasn't paid for by her or her father.


And this was her second marriage. 



charlottawill said:


> Tom Bower said in Revenge that Thomas Markle wanted to be a better father to her than he was to his first two. He apparently equated that with giving her whatever she wanted. Imo he helped create the monster, even if unintentionally.


Imo if we hold the father responsible, then the mother is equally responsible.  Both parents play an important role.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo if we hold the father responsible, then the mother is equally responsible. Both parents play an important role.


I agree, but we know so little about Doria. I don't doubt that she filled MM's head with the notion that she was special and was entitled to only the best. But is known that TM went above and beyond to give MM all the advantages he could and she still cast him aside when he was no longer useful.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

That was actually one of the few outfits of hers that I liked...tasteful, fitted well, not that weird "Today I'm trying on a royal outfit" vibe I so often got with her...like a child playing dressing up in mommy's closet.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


>



Off topic:
This is one of my favorite G&S pieces and the woke folks have deemed it politically inappropriate. No one wants to perform it now out of fear.   How sad is that?  I saw it last with costumes borrowed from the Santa Fe Opera Company and it was splendid!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> And this was her second marriage.
> 
> 
> Imo if we hold the father responsible, then the mother is equally responsible.  Both parents play an important role.


My new opinion is that she was raised to believe that it was OK to use men to get what she wanted.  So far, she hasn't done anything to dissuade me from that idea.  Did she get the idea from her mother and her father by giving her everything she wanted, reinforced it?  All of her relationships appear to be transactional.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well. (2nd slide)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



I find that hard to believe, but I suppose nothing she does should surprise us anymore. Not a working royal? No access to royal jewels. As someone said on that tweet, when you leave the company you don't get to keep the company car.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Is it her bad memory to be blamed again? Or...
> 
> I think she counted herself as royalty (and muzzled) the moment she clapped eyes on her prey. We do have that story about her overzealous PA *demanding special consideration for her at some restaurant because she was dating Sparry and therefore practically a duchess. *And she must have felt muzzled because Sparry and the BRF told her not to tell that VF reporter that she was "Wild about Harry".


Imo, it has nothing to do with Dufus, ZedZed has always considered herself far superior and worth more than others. 
See Kate Winslet uttering ZedZed's maxim below.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Her...rivals.

  

That said, I'll call my former employers if I can still borrow stuff because the people still working there are allowed after all. Maybe I can come in to use their equipment to do work for a competing company?

But fear not dear Ghoul, you can always wear your blood diamonds.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like NY is getting ready for the Harkles 










						The dark side of Meghan and Prince Harry’s fairytale romance chronicled in new book
					

The tale of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry started as a storybook romance. But somewhere along the way, it dissolved into testy arguments and family feuds. Tom Bower’s “Revenge: Meghan, Harry, and the War Between the Windsors” goes into the ugly details.




					www.nydailynews.com


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> My new opinion is that she was raised to believe that it was OK to use men to get what she wanted.  So far, she hasn't done anything to dissuade me from that idea.  Did she get the idea from her mother and her father by giving her everything she wanted, reinforced it?  All of her relationships appear to be transactional.


Equal opportunity narc. She will transact with anyone of any race, gender or age if they can benefit her. I do believe she is capable of altruism, but it gets subsumed by greed if there is a chance to make a quick buck.


----------



## xincinsin

Several responses to that NY Daily News article allege that Zed supposedly lost jewels loaned to her. One response specifically mentions a bracelet. I've never heard of these tales before.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Several responses to that NY Daily News article allege that Zed supposedly lost jewels loaned to her. One response specifically mentions a bracelet. I've never heard of these tales before.


"Lost"?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Several responses to that NY Daily News article allege that Zed supposedly lost jewels loaned to her. One response specifically mentions a bracelet. I've never heard of these tales before.



I remember that when they first left the UK it was mentioned some pieces of jewelry that weren't hers were missing, but no specifics and it never grew into some big scandal (possibly because the BRF isn't interested in that kind of press and can deal with a few lost baubles...I can almost guarantee they never loaned her big pieces aside from the tiara which would have gone back into the vault right after the wedding).


----------



## CarryOn2020

_We heard a very important and significant message from Lady Colin Campbell this week on her latest update with regards to the #Ripple of Hope awards in New York in December. She has been speaking to someone who loves and knows Harry and she has feedback that Harry is aware of the implications of turning up to the #rippleofhope awards with Meghan. By doing so he is practically denouncing his family as serving Royals and as being structurally racist and sends a clear message out there, he and his grifting ,troublemaking wife are endorsing everything Kerry Kennedy is saying in her attempts to trash our precious institution which has stood strong for over 1000 years.Lady C said the Royal family will be watching to see if he does attend the event to receive the award . If he is stupid enough to go then the message Lady C was delivering was very clear.There will absolutely be no way back for Harry into the Royal fold. That will be it.Done. Finished. The drawbridge will be pulled up from  over the river . Or will  he  wisely choose not to attend and just feign illness? We will all  just have to wait and see how stupid and easily led he chooses to be this time._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like NY is getting ready for the Harkles
> View attachment 5660609
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The dark side of Meghan and Prince Harry’s fairytale romance chronicled in new book
> 
> 
> The tale of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry started as a storybook romance. But somewhere along the way, it dissolved into testy arguments and family feuds. Tom Bower’s “Revenge: Meghan, Harry, and the War Between the Windsors” goes into the ugly details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nydailynews.com


Is it possible that she groomed him?  Sounds like she definitely targeted him 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




_And what have they left behind in England? Only bad  feelings, insists Bower. He coldly sums up Markle as a “*merciless opportunist*.”

Still, Bower admits, she has a unique strength: The “good fortune,” he writes, to be incapable of feeling guilt._


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> It looks like NY is getting ready for the Harkles
> View attachment 5660609
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The dark side of Meghan and Prince Harry’s fairytale romance chronicled in new book
> 
> 
> The tale of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry started as a storybook romance. But somewhere along the way, it dissolved into testy arguments and family feuds. Tom Bower’s “Revenge: Meghan, Harry, and the War Between the Windsors” goes into the ugly details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nydailynews.com


Yeah their romance really is more like a Grimm's fairy tale.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> "Lost"?


The missing jewelry can probably be found in the meta verse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _We heard a very important and significant message from Lady Colin Campbell this week on her latest update with regards to the #Ripple of Hope awards in New York in December. She has been speaking to someone who loves and knows Harry and she has feedback that Harry is aware of the implications of turning up to the #rippleofhope awards with Meghan. By doing so he is practically denouncing his family as serving Royals and as being structurally racist and sends a clear message out there, he and his grifting ,troublemaking wife are endorsing everything Kerry Kennedy is saying in her attempts to trash our precious institution which has stood strong for over 1000 years.Lady C said the Royal family will be watching to see if he does attend the event to receive the award . If he is stupid enough to go then the message Lady C was delivering was very clear.There will absolutely be no way back for Harry into the Royal fold. That will be it.Done. Finished. The drawbridge will be pulled up from  over the river . Or will  he  wisely choose not to attend and just feign illness? We will all  just have to wait and see how stupid and easily led he chooses to be this time._




I mean, just not going out of sheer cowardice is not enough. I'd think he'd have to publicly reject the award (that hurts after paying good money for it, hu?) and making it very clear why to try to salvage anything.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, just not going out of sheer cowardice is not enough. I'd think he'd have to publicly reject the award (that hurts after paying good money for it, hu?) and making it very clear why to try to salvage anything.


Agree, if anyone pretends to accept on his behalf, he is toast with the BRF


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Wasn’t he already done as far as the family is concerned? I see no door open for him today that would be closed after the award.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, just not going out of sheer cowardice is not enough. I'd think he'd have to publicly reject the award (that hurts after paying good money for it, hu?) and making it very clear why to try to salvage anything.



Thats why barkjack’s gossip about sending someone from Archewell didn’t make sense.  They are still “accepting the award”.

They need to clean up the PR…. badly… or delay the award until next year and then redo all the PR mentioning only humanitarian works….


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Wasn’t he already done as far as the family is concerned? I see no door open for him today that would be closed after the award.


Coronation invite?  Don’t the dukes get to wear a coronet? A robe?


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> The missing jewelry can probably be found in the meta verse.



I haven’t seen MM wearing that diamond bracelet she wore on her wedding day again…l could this be one she accidentally did not return?









						Meghan Markle’s Tiara and Wedding Jewels
					

There was something old and something new




					theadventurine.com


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I remember that when they first left the UK it was mentioned some pieces of jewelry that weren't hers were missing, but no specifics and it never grew into some big scandal (possibly because the BRF isn't interested in that kind of press and can deal with a few lost baubles...I can almost guarantee they never loaned her big pieces aside from the tiara which would have gone back into the vault right after the wedding).


Well what can she do with them?  Can't wear them or everyone will know she still has them. So sell them?  Can't see it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Here’s a refresher on clothing for the coronation - sure, it’s from 1952, but what has changed?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> Off topic:
> This is one of my favorite G&S pieces and the woke folks have deemed it politically inappropriate. No one wants to perform it now out of fear.   How sad is that?  I saw it last with costumes borrowed from the Santa Fe Opera Company and it was splendid!


Fact check...in 2015 Asian American artists objected to the originally planned New York Gilbert & Sullivan Players production of The Mikado.

At the time actress Erin Quill explained "the execution of any production that allows exaggerated makeup, inaccurate costuming, and mockery of Asian people is not, in this day and age ...acceptable....We, the Asian Americans, do not want to 'take away' your precious _Mikado _- we want you to do better. We want you to stop constantly mocking us and telling us by your actions and deeds that Yellowface remains part of your theatrical lexicon. We want you to make any production of it, smarter, less full of stereotypes - more full of the respect G&S were trying for."

NYGASP promised "We are listening to the response we have received. The Executive Committee of the Board is meeting to discuss a strategy and policy going forward."

As a result the reworked production premiered at The Kaye Playhouse in New York in January 2017, representing "a great deal of work between NYGASP and the Asian-American theatrical community in New York; and serves an example of a cooperative effort to promote diversity, equity and inclusive practice with classic works of art. From the advisory committee to the creative team, the production is a wonderful result of people listening to each other and working through problems and differences."

You can also see photos and video from the more recent 2019 performance at the English National Opera


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> I haven’t seen MM wearing that diamond bracelet she wore on her wedding day again…l could this be one she accidentally did not return?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Tiara and Wedding Jewels
> 
> 
> There was something old and something new
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theadventurine.com



The small one was supposedly a wedding gift from Charles (though I always found it lacked a little compared to Kate's gift haha). The big one I think we agreed a while back was borrowed from Cartier directly, I don't see them let go of a piece worth the price of a nicely sized apartment (maybe not in central London  ).


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Coronation invite?  Don’t the dukes get to wear a coronet? A robe?
> 
> View attachment 5660653


If he does not renounce the "award" he will not be at the coronation. How can you call an institution racist and then expect to attend the ceremony celebrating it and its leader?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Well what can she do with them?  Can't wear them or everyone will know she still has them. So sell them?  Can't see it.



Dismantel and use the stones. But also, her middle name is audacity, if she wants to wear them she totally will.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s a refresher on clothing for the coronation - sure, it’s from 1952, but what has changed?




Camilla isn't having ladies-in-waiting, a centuries old tradition. Those two might be singlehandedly modernizing the BRF


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Fact check...in 2015 Asian American artists objected to the originally planned New York Gilbert & Sullivan Players production of The Mikado.
> 
> At the time actress Erin Quill explained "the execution of any production that allows exaggerated makeup, inaccurate costuming, and mockery of Asian people is not, in this day and age ...acceptable....We, the Asian Americans, do not want to 'take away' your precious _Mikado _- we want you to do better. We want you to stop constantly mocking us and telling us by your actions and deeds that Yellowface remains part of your theatrical lexicon. We want you to make any production of it, smarter, less full of stereotypes - more full of the respect G&S were trying for."
> 
> NYGASP promised "We are listening to the response we have received. The Executive Committee of the Board is meeting to discuss a strategy and policy going forward."
> 
> As a result the reworked production premiered at The Kaye Playhouse in New York in January 2017, representing "a great deal of work between NYGASP and the Asian-American theatrical community in New York; and serves an example of a cooperative effort to promote diversity, equity and inclusive practice with classic works of art. From the advisory committee to the creative team, the production is a wonderful result of people listening to each other and working through problems and differences."
> 
> You can also see photos and video from the more recent 2019 performance at the English National Opera


It looks awful.  I have been to productions of the G&S Players in NYC.  They ran scared.  G&S must be rolling in their graves.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> If he does not renounce the "award" he will not be at the coronation. How can you call an institution racist and then expect to attend the ceremony celebrating it and its leader?


I agree. Even if they send someone to get it, they will still be accepting it all that it implies.


----------



## needlv

Maybe Harry doesn’t care about crossing that line because he has already done so in the book…



anything for a buck, hey Haz…?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Maybe Harry doesn’t care about crossing that line because he has already done so in the book…
> 
> 
> 
> anything for a buck, hey Haz…?




Did this person (I still don't get how someone claiming to be a serious journalist has a Twitter handle fangirling over some obscure actress) not say just a few days ago advanced copies were being controlled and they couldn't get one?

Poor Charles, though. How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did this person (I still don't get how someone claiming to be a serious journalist has a Twitter handle fangirling over some obscure actress) not say just a few days ago advanced copies were being controlled and they couldn't get one?
> 
> Poor Charles, though. How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child.



Gossip from a person who has read it apparently.


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Gossip from a person who has read it apparently.



Now we understand the CoS changes as well as the talk of treason -  oh the drama, oh what a jerk Hazz is. 









						King Charles could make Prince Harry “obsolete” permanently after hit series exposes truth
					

The Duke of Sussex appears to have turned the entire Firm against him.




					www.nowtolove.com.au


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> If he does not renounce the "award" he will not be at the coronation. How can you call an institution racist and then expect to attend the ceremony celebrating it and its leader?


They are such narcissistic ninnies I wouldn’t be surprised if Harry and TW tried to sell some cockamamie rationalization that participation by them in the Coronation would be beneficial for the King.


----------



## xincinsin

Gal4Dior said:


> Also funny, as no one really cared about Zedzed’s “voice” prior to Sparry, but don’t tell her that!


But... but she was a global activitist, a famous humanitarian, a leading feminist, a SUPER model! Allegedly....



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I remember that when they first left the UK it was mentioned some pieces of jewelry that weren't hers were missing, but no specifics and it never grew into some big scandal (possibly because the BRF isn't interested in that kind of press and can deal with a few lost baubles...I can almost guarantee they never loaned her big pieces aside from the tiara which would have gone back into the vault right after the wedding).


I was under the impression that she took off with pieces of Di's jewellery which Sparry took from his aunts and gave her. And that there was no demand for the return because it was murky whether or not she had to return the items to their custody. But there were stories later that the aquamarine ring and the earrings were copies and not the originals, so it's confusing. Why would anyone have copies made? Cosplay accessories?


----------



## needlv

We must be coming up to MM’s Marriott speech.  Any bets on her outfit?  A caped dress? Tiara ? (lol)


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> We must be coming up to MM’s Marriott speech.  Any bets on her outfit?  A caped dress? Tiara ? (lol)


I had forgotten . 

Looks like they still have availability  





						Power of Women - Women's Fund
					






					www.womensfund.org
				




Check the comments  
_Meghan Markle, the duchess of Sussex, is scheduled to participate in a Women’s Fund of Central Indiana event on Nov. 29.

Billed as “The Power of Women: An Evening with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex,” the benefit will support the Women’s Fund mission to invest in the lives of women and girls in central Indiana.

“Women’s Fund of Central Indiana believes in the force of women’s voices, women’s experiences and women’s work,” said Tavonna Harris Askew, advisory board chair, in a written statement. “We know that Meghan, the duchess of Sussex does, too. We are honored that she will join us on this special evening to celebrate our common cause—the power of women.”

Markle, who married Prince Harry in 2018, grew up in the United States and acted in the cast of USA Network series “Suits” from 2011 to 2018. She and Prince Harry stepped down as British senior royals in 2020.

Rabbi Sandy Sasso will serve as moderator for the event at Indianapolis Marriott Downtown, 350 W. Maryland St. Tables for 10 attendees are available for $5,000. For more information, visit womensfund.org.

The Women’s Fund, a special interest fund of Central Indiana Community Foundation, invited 20 high school students to attend the event as guests representing their communities.

In 2018, Michelle ***** participated in a Women’s Fund of Central Indiana event at Gainbridge Fieldhouse.








						Meghan Markle to appear at Indianapolis Marriott Downtown event - Indianapolis Business Journal
					

The Women’s Fund of Central Indiana, which brought Michelle ***** to Gainbridge Fieldhouse in 2018, plans to host “The Power of Women: An Evening with Meghan, The Duchess of Sussex” next month.




					www.ibj.com
				



_


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well. (2nd slide)



This has got to be a troll. There’s no way she’d run as an elephant. Also storming into Britain and smashing up the monarchy? F1 don’t threaten me with a good time and 2 She didn’t even name Piers Moron as someone she has Twitter beef with- hardly an iconoclast.


Maggie Muggins said:


> Imo, it has nothing to do with Dufus, ZedZed has always considered herself far superior and worth more than others.
> See Kate Winslet uttering ZedZed's maxim below.



I thought it was L’oreal and M borrows it as a ‘sweet nod’


CarryOn2020 said:


> _We heard a very important and significant message from Lady Colin Campbell this week on her latest update with regards to the #Ripple of Hope awards in New York in December. She has been speaking to someone who loves and knows Harry and she has feedback that Harry is aware of the implications of turning up to the #rippleofhope awards with Meghan. By doing so he is practically denouncing his family as serving Royals and as being structurally racist and sends a clear message out there, he and his grifting ,troublemaking wife are endorsing everything Kerry Kennedy is saying in her attempts to trash our precious institution which has stood strong for over 1000 years.Lady C said the Royal family will be watching to see if he does attend the event to receive the award . If he is stupid enough to go then the message Lady C was delivering was very clear.There will absolutely be no way back for Harry into the Royal fold. That will be it.Done. Finished. The drawbridge will be pulled up from  over the river . Or will  he  wisely choose not to attend and just feign illness? We will all  just have to wait and see how stupid and easily led he chooses to be this time._



I don’t care about this ceremony and I dunno how many more chances they are going to give the prodigal son but I thought Lady C was wearing a moto jacket with that Pearl necklace for a second and I think that would be an extremely fire fit for her.


gracekelly said:


> Off topic:
> This is one of my favorite G&S pieces and the woke folks have deemed it politically inappropriate. No one wants to perform it now out of fear.   How sad is that?  I saw it last with costumes borrowed from the Santa Fe Opera Company and it was splendid!





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Fact check...in 2015 Asian American artists objected to the originally planned New York Gilbert & Sullivan Players production of The Mikado.
> 
> At the time actress Erin Quill explained "the execution of any production that allows exaggerated makeup, inaccurate costuming, and mockery of Asian people is not, in this day and age ...acceptable....We, the Asian Americans, do not want to 'take away' your precious _Mikado _- we want you to do better. We want you to stop constantly mocking us and telling us by your actions and deeds that Yellowface remains part of your theatrical lexicon. We want you to make any production of it, smarter, less full of stereotypes - more full of the respect G&S were trying for."
> 
> NYGASP promised "We are listening to the response we have received. The Executive Committee of the Board is meeting to discuss a strategy and policy going forward."
> 
> As a result the reworked production premiered at The Kaye Playhouse in New York in January 2017, representing "a great deal of work between NYGASP and the Asian-American theatrical community in New York; and serves an example of a cooperative effort to promote diversity, equity and inclusive practice with classic works of art. From the advisory committee to the creative team, the production is a wonderful result of people listening to each other and working through problems and differences."
> 
> You can also see photos and video from the more recent 2019 performance at the English National Opera


I think Erin Quill takes a valid point they shouldn’t be inserting extra characters to make cringey karate jokes but then it becomes a bit obvious she just doesn’t like the mikado - I mean one of her arguments is actually the writing isn’t as good as Hamilton or school of rock? Seems like an objective criticism.

She’s also a bit unrealistic about the limitations of repertory productions- you can’t just recast the whole ensemble, get all new costumes and staging and get the production turned around on the tight budget and time frame.

This is why I think it’d be a great choice for a movie musical because you can cast all Asian performers more easily as it’s a one off production in a shorter time frame and they can get some big name Asian actors in as let’s be honest, Star power and marketing is more important than pure singing ability in many movie musicals (cough Eddie Redmayne Kermit voice cough cough Russel Crowe massacring my boy cough)

Gilbert and Sullivan like many Edwardians - were both engaged with and using the then new craze for all things Japanese but it’s not meant to be realistic Japan.It’s no more a literal translation than a Van Gogh painting is of Ukiyo-e print. In fact it’s more fantastical and obviously divorced than even post-impressionism.

Jonathan miller’s whole shtick is the monochrome minimalism thing but to me it does take away from both the beauty and the camp of the production (and it’s kind of like overdone.) there’s something unique lost when it’s just another western dress adaption to me. I don’t think even Edwardians thought it was real Japan- the lyrics make that obvious. It’s like thinking Summerisle or Wakanda are real places. Though actually  maybe strangers shouldn’t ask too many questions in very rural British villages   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did this person (I still don't get how someone claiming to be a serious journalist has a Twitter handle fangirling over some obscure actress) not say just a few days ago advanced copies were being controlled and they couldn't get one?
> 
> Poor Charles, though. How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child.


I actually love that Twitter name - I think the last thing you want is something guessable.

The king Lear quote is great because  I think he’s a spiteful moron who just drags poor Cordelia and other innocents down with him.


xincinsin said:


> But... but she was a global activitist, a famous humanitarian, a leading feminist, a SUPER model! Allegedly....
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that she took off with pieces of Di's jewellery which Sparry took from his aunts and gave her. And that there was no demand for the return because it was murky whether or not she had to return the items to their custody. But there were stories later that the aquamarine ring and the earrings were copies and not the originals, so it's confusing. Why would anyone have copies made? Cosplay accessories?


If I have learnt anything from Jeeves & Wooster it’s that you need to have paste copies if you’ve got an idiot nephew and the Spencers certainly have one of those.


needlv said:


> We must be coming up to MM’s Marriott speech.  Any bets on her outfit?  A caped dress? Tiara ? (lol)


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did this person (I still don't get how someone claiming to be a serious journalist has a Twitter handle fangirling over some obscure actress) not say just a few days ago advanced copies were being controlled and they couldn't get one?
> 
> Poor Charles, though. How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child.


I think Barkjack explained on another SM platform that the Megastans engineered the shut down of their original Twitter account, so they've been using this fangirl account ever since. It sounds possible since we know in the past they were going after people who didn't support their kween.


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> If I have learnt anything from Jeeves & Wooster it’s that you need to have paste copies if you’ve got an idiot nephew and the Spencers certainly have one of those.


    
I love PG Wodehouse!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I agree, but we know so little about Doria. I don't doubt that she filled MM's head with the notion that she was special and was entitled to only the best. But is known that TM went above and beyond to give MM all the advantages he could and she still cast him aside when he was no longer useful.



Well, we know she left the family and that M didn't see her for a 10 years.


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I find that hard to believe, but I suppose nothing she does should surprise us anymore. Not a working royal? No access to royal jewels. As someone said on that tweet, when you leave the company you don't get to keep the company car.





Chanbal said:


>






xincinsin said:


> Several responses to that NY Daily News article allege that Zed supposedly lost jewels loaned to her. One response specifically mentions a bracelet. I've never heard of these tales before.





She doesn't like giving things back, I wouldn't lend her a pen!


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> Yeah their romance really is more like a Grimm's fairy tale.



I would say it's just grim  

Lady C says it will either end badly, or much much worse


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> But... but she was a global activitist, a famous humanitarian, a leading feminist, a SUPER model! Allegedly....
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that she took off with pieces of Di's jewellery which Sparry took from his aunts and gave her. And that there was no demand for the return because it was murky whether or not she had to return the items to their custody. But there were stories later that the aquamarine ring and the earrings were copies and not the originals, so it's confusing. Why would anyone have copies made? Cosplay accessories?



Copies are often made of the these jewels (and have been for centuries).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I was under the impression that she took off with pieces of Di's jewellery which Sparry took from his aunts and gave her. And that there was no demand for the return because it was murky whether or not she had to return the items to their custody. But there were stories later that the aquamarine ring and the earrings were copies and not the originals, so it's confusing. Why would anyone have copies made? Cosplay accessories?



I honestly doubt the sisters are still controlling the jewelry. William and Harry have been adults for quite a bit.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly doubt the sisters are still controlling the jewelry. William and Harry have been adults for quite a bit.


Well, William has been at least.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Coronation invite?  Don’t the dukes get to wear a coronet? A robe?
> 
> View attachment 5660653


Coronation robes … hmmm … have they all turned to dust ??
Saw some documentary about life as a UK Duke, sorry can’t remember name, anyway, Duke trotted out the family robe that has sat in the closet for 70 years, without Angela Kelly to care for it 
The robe was falling apart, esp the ermine, it has been 70 years … 
Not sure too many peers will make robe repair a priority 
And the coronets, I am guessing those are NOT precious metals, so, there was no value in selling for death duties, so, they have been kept ? Just need a polish ???
And didn’t the mean wear knee breeches under the robe? Morning dress will replace that surely
I bet Angela is not working hard on sprucing up a royal robe for H


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> Coronation robes … hmmm … have they all turned to dust ??
> Saw some documentary about life as a UK Duke, sorry can’t remember name, anyway, Duke trotted out the family robe that has sat in the closet for 70 years, without Angela Kelly to care for it
> The robe was falling apart, esp the ermine, it has been 70 years …
> Not sure too many peers will make robe repair a priority
> And the coronets, I am guessing those are NOT precious metals, so, there was no value in selling for death duties, so, they have been kept ? Just need a polish ???
> And didn’t the mean wear knee breeches under the robe? Morning dress will replace that surely
> I bet Angela is not working hard on sprucing up a royal robe for H



There are places that still make robes: https://www2.edeandravenscroft.com/ceremonial

Same place I hire my robe for ceremonies

A Duke coronet is 'circlet' of leaves, first made of gold, now usually made of gold-plated silver









						Ceremonial Robes
					

Dukes, marquesses and earls received ceremonial robes of state in the late 15th century, viscounts in the 16th century and barons in the 17th century




					debretts.com


----------



## marietouchet

1 I failed to see H 
2. the famous volunteer opportunity that was hard to find, due to large number of her demands ??

Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women









						Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
					

The Duchess of Sussex, 41, who is currently living in her $14 million mansion, donned a baseball cap as she helped  prepare lunch at Downtown Women's Center (DWC).




					mol.im


----------



## Chanbal

Irresponsible accusations are often easy to make and difficult to rebut…  





_A royal commentator has pushed back against the Sussexes' claim that the Royal Family is racist in a brutal rebuttal of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's allegations. During an interview with US host Oprah Winfrey, the couple accused the royals - without naming any one of them - of raising concerns about their baby's colour before his birth. Michael Cole said the late Queen's Commonwealth legacy are testament of the Royal Family's commitment to fighting racism.

Mr Cole defended the Queen who has fought tooth and nail to preserve the Commonwealth, which she inherited from her father George VI and which aims to establish the member states as "free and equal".
He said: "If anybody did a tremendous work throughout her life to bring together the various races and religions of the Commonwealth, I think nobody did more than the Queen.
"She really believed in the efficacy and value of the Commonwealth, which was set up and was the lasting legacy of her father, King George VI, in 1947.
"She continued that work and she really believed in it.

"For her and the Royal Family, the Commonwealth wasn't juste somewhere warm to go in the winter. It was something she believed in and she wanted Prince Charles to carry on…"

Reacting to the Sussexes' allegations, the royal commentator said the "charge" was "very unfair" and "unspecific". *He deplored the fact such allegations of racism are easily made but cannot as easily rebutted, as suspicion lingers*._



			archive.ph


----------



## lanasyogamama

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/11...lliam-kate-will-do-during-their-boston-visit/ 

Here’s (almost) everything Prince William and Kate will do during their Boston visit​By Emily Sweeney Globe Staff,Updated November 28, 2022, 20 minutes ago






Britain's Kate, Princess of Wales, and Prince William, Prince of Wales, leave the Copper Box Arena in the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park after taking part in an event with Coach Core, in London on Oct. 13, 2022. Prince William and Princess Kate will make their first trip to the United States in eight years this week, hoping to focus attention on his Earthshot Prize for environmental innovators.KIN CHEUNG/ASSOCIATED PRESS
The Prince and Princess of Wales are due to arrive in Boston Wednesday, and they’ll be keeping a whirlwind schedule while they’re here.
Prince William and his wife, Catherine, will be in Boston for three days, culminating with their attendance at the Earthshot Prize, a star-studded awards ceremony at the MGM Music Hall at Fenway on Friday.
It will be the couple’s first trip to the United States since 2014, according to a statement by Kensington Palace.
The Boston event will be the second time the Earthshot Prize — an environmental award worth about $1.1 million — will be given to a group of innovators, selected by a panel of experts. In early November, 15 finalists were announced in five categories.
Advertisement




A Flourish data visualization
The itinerary for the royals includes visits to the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, Greentown Labs in Somerville, the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, and Roca, a nonprofit in Chelsea that aims to fight poverty and racism and help high-risk young people.
Get Metro Headlines
The 10 top local news stories from metro Boston and around New England delivered daily.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Mayor Michelle Wu will meet William and Kate for a welcome event at City Hall Plaza at 4:45 p.m. on Wednesday. The event will be open to the public, and will feature speeches by Wu, Prince William, Ambassador Caroline Kennedy, and Mariama White-Hammond, Boston’s chief of environment, energy, and open space.
When they visit Roca in Chelsea on Thursday, William and Kate will meet with leaders of the nonprofit organization to learn about their “intervention model rooted in brain science” and outreach to young people, the statement from Kensington Palace said. They will then spend time with young mothers and young men who have participated in Roca’s programs.
During their stop in Somerville on Thursday, the royal couple will meet with the CEO of Greentown Labs and the president of the Northeast Clean Energy Council “to learn about the history of Greentown Labs and how it is contributing to global efforts to address the climate crisis,” the statement said.
Advertisement

“The Prince and Princess will then spend time meeting with representatives from some of the start-ups within the Greentown Labs community to hear about the latest innovative developments in climate technology,” the statement continued.
On Friday, Kate will be stopping by the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, where she will meet with researchers to discuss advances in science that can help children.
The Princess of Wales will be making the visit “as part of her ongoing work to elevate the importance of the early years to lifelong outcomes,” the statement said.
Also on Friday, William is scheduled to meet with Kennedy at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum in Dorchester and be given a tour of the museum.
“President John F. Kennedy’s Moonshot — which challenged America to put man on the moon — is the key inspiration behind The Earthshot Prize and so His Royal Highness will take the opportunity to hear more about President Kennedy’s inspirational legacy and his connections to Boston,” the statement from Kensington Palace said. “During a tour of the Library and Museum, The Prince will see exhibits from the pivotal years of the Kennedy Administration in the 1960s, ahead of the moon landing in 1969.”
William will then attend a private lunch with representatives from the founding partner organizations of the Earthshot Prize.
Advertisement

Friday’s Earthshot Prize awards ceremony will be a glittering affair featuring performances by Billie Eilish, Annie Lennox, Chloe x Halle, and Ellie Goulding.
Hosts and presenters will include Catherine O’Hara, Clara Amfo, Daniel Dae Kim, Sir David Attenborough, Rami Malek and Shailene Woodley.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> 1 I failed to see H
> 2. *the famous volunteer opportunity that was hard to find, due to large number of her demands ??*
> 
> Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 41, who is currently living in her $14 million mansion, donned a baseball cap as she helped  prepare lunch at Downtown Women's Center (DWC).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


 What did she contribute to the meals? A jar of peanut butter?


----------



## Chanbal

It never crossed my mind.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Coronation invite?  Don’t the dukes get to wear a coronet? A robe?
> 
> View attachment 5660653


They were disappointed they didn’t get more attention while they were at the jubilee and the funeral. They aren’t looking to attend more significant British events to highlight just how far they have fallen in the eyes of the people.


----------



## Chanbal

I wonder if Charles is listening… 












						Should Meghan and Harry be invited to King Charles' coronation? POLL
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's coronation invite may be pending due to the upcoming release of Harry's memoir and the couple's Netflix series.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

Lots of juicy stuff here...









						Angry Harry  And The End Of Archetypes
					

It’s been Thanksgiving weekend in the US, and we can be thankful that the dreary and dire Archetypes podcast is coming to an end. There has been the usual Spotify hype over the podcast that t…




					harrymarkle.wordpress.com
				






> Meanwhile, TOS has been making the rounds to promote his memoir at a dinner party the weekend before last (19 November) that was attended by investors, potential investors, and business associates. One of the guests was so horrified and disgusted at what TOS said that they told a source that they saw a man (TOS) who was deluded and who was unstable. Most of the guests were uncomfortable with TOS bringing up topics in his memoir, and when the host and others tried to change the subject, TOS got angry with them all and rudely persisted. They also noted whenever TOS repeated his stories, they altered each time at which point most guests realised the tales had little credibility.
> 
> 
> *Among the outbursts at the dinner party (TW was not invited) were defamatory comments about C3’s friends and inner circle* (they could sue for defamation, as the family name means more than protecting C3’s wayward son, think of the renowned Second World War Prime Minister), and also a family tragedy in August 1979 that will be tied in with the August 1997 family tragedy. I don’t believe in conspiracy theories, but TOS was allegedly making accusations that the two tragic incidents are linked (same parties behind them!) and both involve his father.
> 
> 
> *Can C3 honestly expect all of his friends to remain silent if TOS attacks them?* It’s one thing for C3 to stay silent, but should his friends (and their families) be defamed, and attacked by the world because C3 has no control over TOS? We’re talking about families with reputations spanning centuries, and why should they suffer due to C3’s inability to contain the damage that TOS and his wife have created?
> 
> 
> Needless to say, investors will probably have to think twice about being associated with TOS or any of his business ventures, and some might be wisely considering extricating themselves at the earliest opportunity. *It’s one thing to brag about having ties and an association with a member of the RF, but quite the opposite when it is someone who has a bad reputation and one whom the People have turned against*. The point being, is that they wish to attract the masses for publicity, and not have people blacklist their brands for being linked to TOS. It goes without saying the investors and potential investors were not impressed with what they witnessed, and some might be having second thoughts about being investing money into controversial enterprises.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m not thrilled with how the Boston Globe article focuses on the negative (H&M plus The Crown)


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Copies are often made of the these jewels (and have been for centuries).


Copies of the jewels can lead to a genetically painful life …


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> 1 I failed to see H
> 2. the famous volunteer opportunity that was hard to find, due to large number of her demands ??
> 
> Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 41, who is currently living in her $14 million mansion, donned a baseball cap as she helped  prepare lunch at Downtown Women's Center (DWC).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


With a picture to prove it!


----------



## Toby93

needlv said:


> We must be coming up to MM’s Marriott speech.  Any bets on her outfit?  A caped dress? Tiara ? (lol)


Everytime I hear that, I have to laugh.  From Buckingham Palace, to the downtown Marriot   It suits her.....


----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> With a picture to prove it!


Ewwww.....no hairnets   Thats what I want in my mashed potatoes - that scraggy fake hair that doesn't get washed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Everytime I hear that, I have to laugh.  From Buckingham Palace, to the downtown Marriot   It suits her.....


From London, a world capital, to Indianapolis


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> What did she contribute to the meals? A jar of peanut butter?



Only if it were donated to Ache-well first


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What a sad, sad day.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Everytime I hear that, I have to laugh.  From Buckingham Palace, to the downtown Marriot   It suits her.....


Yep. Her speech to the lumpenproletariat in a Midwest city. She’s  come so far.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Well, we know she left the family and that M didn't see her for a 10 years.



If she is still a mystery, then it makes it easier for Meghan to reinvent the past with fairy tales.   Meghan was very much the product of a business transaction between her parents. Her own children may be the same


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Yep. Her speech to the lumpenproletariat in a Midwest city. She’s  come so far.


i AM A PROUD MIDWESTERN SNOWFLAKE AND I take offense at that !!! Not really, your remark was so funny, I spit out my soda, and I loved it 
From St Louis, the birth place of T S Eliot


----------



## gracekelly

Staying on topic. We have discussed and posted excerpts from newspaper and magazine articles and even the occasional video clip from  the very snarky Australian shows regarding Harry and Meghan. As it happens Gilbert and Sullivan were doing the same thing 150 years ago. Arthur Gilbert was as much a social commentator as Bower and the rest of the royal reporters That is why Sullivan who wrote the music received a knighthood and he did not. He annoyed Queen Victoria enough that this was a good way for her to show her displeasure with his writing.  He had plenty to say about how the government was run and an old boys network. ( Hello Valentine Low.) Per HMS Pinafore:   “Stick close to your desk and never go to sea, and you all may be rulers of the Queen’s navy.”   The Mikado’s Lord High Executioner would have a wonderful time with the Sussex. Lots of things for him to mention on his little list, and none of them would be complimentary.   in addition to that there would be the usual social and political commentary that is always updated in modern productions. He would probably include a comment about how the woke were trying to cancel him lol!   The executioners sword is a very apt metaphor for how opinions are being shaped and if you don’t agree, off with your head!   Harry is wielding  his sword, so he thinks, by controlling what we see and hear about the two of them and the family. He and Meghan, no doubt, have their little list. Stay tuned for his book and the Netflix series to find out who is on it. Let’s see who really is going to get their head whacked off.   When it happens, there won’t be any costumes or stage settings.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> i AM A PROUD MIDWESTERN SNOWFLAKE AND I take offense at that !!! Not really, your remark was so funny, I spit out my soda, and I loved it
> From St Louis, the birth place of T S Eliot


If it makes you feel better, there are plenty of lumpenproletariat  on both coasts and east, west, north and south in the US. It was just the luck of the draw that the Midwest pulled the short straw.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> Coronation robes … hmmm … have they all turned to dust ??
> Saw some documentary about life as a UK Duke, sorry can’t remember name, anyway, Duke trotted out the family robe that has sat in the closet for 70 years, without Angela Kelly to care for it
> The robe was falling apart, esp the ermine, it has been 70 years …
> Not sure too many peers will make robe repair a priority
> And the coronets, I am guessing those are NOT precious metals, so, there was no value in selling for death duties, so, they have been kept ? Just need a polish ???
> And didn’t the mean wear knee breeches under the robe? Morning dress will replace that surely
> I bet Angela is not working hard on sprucing up a royal robe for H


There’s no reason why fur can’t last at least a century if properly cared for. I would assume most robe owners keep them in storage at a specialist garment maker or furrier like papertiger’s Ede & ravenscroft (and there are still a fair few of these around the U.K. I am proud to say). I think the lord guy may have been trying to make a statement by being lazy or maybe he ran out of money for maintenance fees. 

It’s a similar thing with priestly vestments - very expensive and can last for centuries but fall apart very quickly if messed about. My MIL occasionally  cleans priestly robes as a devotion and she’s actually written a fact sheet for the priests themselves which says  DO NOT PUT IN WASHING MACHINE 10x per page.   

We can bet the coronets were real gold at one point but a fair few may have been melted down to replace a few stately homes’ roofs by now and replaced with the ‘gold vermeil’


marietouchet said:


> 1 I failed to see H
> 2. the famous volunteer opportunity that was hard to find, due to large number of her demands ??
> 
> Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle's Thanksgiving preparing meals for homeless women
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex, 41, who is currently living in her $14 million mansion, donned a baseball cap as she helped  prepare lunch at Downtown Women's Center (DWC).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


Talk about kicking people when they are down. It’s so cheesy honestly I feel like everyone has already acknowledged how fake this is multiple times by now. 


Chanbal said:


> What did she contribute to the meals? A jar of peanut butter?


extra crunchy as a sweet nod to the donor  
She have give them pumpkin purée for a pie too but she’s already spread it on her legs. 


Toby93 said:


> Ewwww.....no hairnets   Thats what I want in my mashed potatoes - that scraggy fake hair that doesn't get washed.


We should be so honoured! I bet Meg thinks the mere touch of her hair cures scrofula.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a sad, sad day.



If we only knew then.

It wouldn’t take long before we figured it out but so many of us were actually happy for them.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> They are such narcissistic ninnies I wouldn’t be surprised if Harry and TW tried to sell some cockamamie rationalization that participation by them in the Coronation would be beneficial for the King.


Participation? Sure, they can watch the proceedings from the second or third row with other non-working royals and dignitaries. I believe KC will honor his mother's decision that they cannot be half in, half out, and the British who support the monarchy will respect him for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> If we only knew then.
> 
> It wouldn’t take long before we figured it out but so many of us were actually happy for them.


As an American, I was stunned and embarrassed by her outfit.  She should have done so much better, especially on _that_ day.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Markle, who married Prince Harry in 2018, grew up in the United States and *acted in the cast* of USA Network series “Suits” from 2011 to 2018. She and Prince Harry stepped down as British senior royals in 2020._


Note it doesn't say "starred in". I can't decide if it's just accurate journalism or the author is throwing shade.


----------



## papertiger

For those that asked what I meant (earlier post)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> As an American, I was stunned and embarrassed by her outfit.  She should have done so much better, especially on _that_ day.


I’d never heard of Meghan before. I wasn’t following Harry back then though I knew he had dated a number of actresses and models.

I cut her slack at first because I assumed she was a typical actress who understandably couldn’t be expected to know what was appropriate right off the bat. Little did I know she had no interest in learning.


----------



## Chanbal

The US is not big enough for TW, she continues targeting the UK…  

Partnership has a new meaning, it's an arrangement between one that donates and one that takes the credit for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The US is not big enough for TW, she continues targeting the UK…
> 
> Partnership has a new meaning, it's an arrangement between one that donates and one that takes the credit for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Count the titles


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The US is not big enough for TW, she continues targeting the UK…
> 
> Partnership has a new meaning, it's an arrangement between one that donates and one that takes the credit for it.



she seems to always be partnering with someone - never forking over her own money


----------



## sdkitty

much as I've enjoyed this thread, sorry to say they're getting pretty boring


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Count the titles




She is pathetic.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> she seems to always be partnering with someone - never forking over her own money


That is the beauty of their system.  Make the other schnook give the money or the goods and they don't have to spend a dime.


----------



## Aimee3

sdkitty said:


> much as I've enjoyed this thread, sorry to say they're getting pretty boring


Well we can discuss the Midwest dinner “thing” when that happens and they are sure to do something annoying when the real royals go to Boston, so things should pick up!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What a sad, sad day.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> That is the beauty of their system.  Make the other schnook give the money or the goods and they don't have to spend a dime.


yep and somhow she comes out smelling like a rose for being such an "activist"


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> much as I've enjoyed this thread, sorry to say they're getting pretty boring


Hold on. There’s still one more podcast. Who is the guest? Did she save the best or the worst for last?


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Hold on. There’s still one more podcast. Who is the guest? Did she save the best or the worst for last?


I admit I may be biased but she just seems like a bag of hot air to me.  I could post examples of real activism or real philanthropy but that would be OT so I'll just leave it here.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> yep and somhow she comes out smelling like a rose for being such an "activist"


I don't know about smelling like a rose. From all the comments I read on IG and Twitter people seem to be wising up to her philanthropic grifting.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I don't know about smelling like a rose. From all the comments I read on IG and Twitter people seem to be wising up to her philanthropic grifting.


well I saw a report today about her serving food to homeless on Thanksgiving...she still has fans


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> yep and somhow she comes out smelling like a rose for being such an "activist"


And humanitarians!  Don't forget that, pleeeeez!


----------



## kipp

sdkitty said:


> well I saw a report today about her serving food to homeless on Thanksgiving...she still has fans


Somewhere, maybe Reddit? said that she (if it indeed was her) was only there for a few minutes---enough time for the photo-op and that's all..  Allegedly...


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well I saw a report today about her serving food to homeless on Thanksgiving...she still has fans


There are celebs who do this every year, and you never read about it.  The word gets out eventually.  None of them call the paps to document it. She won't show up unless she gets a confirmation that the cameras will be there.  She spooned out some mashed potatoes and left 10 min later.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> There are celebs who do this every year, and you never read about it.  The word gets out eventually.  None of them call the paps to document it. She won't show up unless she gets a confirmation that the cameras will be there.  She spooned out some mashed potatoes and left 10 min later.


right...I don't think they said she personally served all those people - just that she showed up (for a photo)


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> well I saw a report today about her serving food to homeless on Thanksgiving...she still has fans


For sure, but I think more and more people are realizing what a con artist she is.


----------



## kipp

charlottawill said:


> For sure, but I think more and more people are realizing what a con artist she is.


One can hope.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> yep and somhow she comes out smelling like a rose for being such an "activist"


Remember roses have thorns


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


>



Did *she* know they would make their public announcement at that time?
Such an awful photo op for the world stage.  Any stage for that matter.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did *she* know they would make their public announcement at that time?
> Such an awful photo op for the world stage.  Any stage for that matter.



Wasn't she wearing the shoes that she forced Reimann's to buy for her?  In any case, she never takes care of her things and her shoes were dirty.  She looked slovenly on the whole.


----------



## Chanbal

Forecast for December 2: Major Storm Expected in Montectito!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did *she* know they would make their public announcement at that time?
> Such an awful photo op for the world stage.  Any stage for that matter.


I guess she hadn't gotten the clothing allowance yet, poor thing.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Forecast for December 2: Major Storm Expected in Montectito!



I expect to see dueling guest lists. It should be entertaining.


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I expect to see dueling guest lists. It should be entertaining.



All I know is that anywhere Alec Baldwin is, I don't want to be, under any circumstance. So, I'll be curious to see which celebrities show up at the RFK dinner/awards and don't mind having their photo taken with Alec and Harry/MM.


----------



## Aimee3

Does anyone know where this RFK shindig is?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> Does anyone know where this RFK shindig is?


It seems to be a secret...



> https://rfkhumanrights.org/awards/ripple-of-hope-award/roh-registration-2022


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> Does anyone know where this RFK shindig is?


In past years it has been held at the New York Hilton Midtown. Likely it will be there or at a comparable hotel.
​


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m excited for all the fun visitors  to Boston this week! I hope they enjoy their time here.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> In past years it has been held at the New York Hilton Midtown. Likely it will be there or at a comparable hotel.
> ​


Definitely NYC.  Maybe because several of the honorees are a bit controversial, they are keeping the location quiet.  Seems to be expensive to attend, unlike the Indianapolis gala[?]. 










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Receive the Ripple of Hope Award Honoring RFK's Legacy
					

The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organization will honor the Sussexes later this year at a gala in New York City.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## Gal4Dior

CarryOn2020 said:


> Count the titles




Wait. Zedzed got an American company to donate to a UK charity? Is she that radioactive in the UK that no UK brand would sponsor a UK charity? 

I guess all that merching she does with Cuyana is paying off, meaning she’s getting Cuyana to donate on her behalf and her get the “positive” publicity???


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely NYC. Maybe because several of the honorees are a bit controversial, they are keeping the location quiet.


"We hope you’ll join us for this year's Ripple of Hope Award Gala in *New York City* on Tuesday, December 6, to honor Frank Baker, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Siris; Brian Moynihan, Chair of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America; Michael Polsky, Founder and CEO of Invenergy; Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex; and President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky. The ceremony will also recognize NBA legend and civil rights icon Bill Russell (1934 – 2022) with a posthumous award, and will feature emcee Alec Baldwin.

*6:00 pm Cocktails | 7:00 pm Dinner | Cocktail Attire"*

They probably don't tell you where you're going until you pay for the tickets. I can't wait to see what she shows up in.


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I’m excited for all the fun visitors  to Boston this week! I hope they enjoy their time here.


Luckily no snow in the forecast.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Definitely NYC.  Maybe because several of the honorees are a bit controversial, *they are keeping the location quiet. * Seems to be expensive to attend, unlike the Indianapolis gala[?].
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to Receive the Ripple of Hope Award Honoring RFK's Legacy
> 
> 
> The Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organization will honor the Sussexes later this year at a gala in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


We should know the location soon. People on Twitter seem to be well informed…


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> If we only knew then.
> 
> It wouldn’t take long before we figured it out but so many of us were actually happy for them.


I thought she was dressed oddly in a lumpy non-flattering way, but didn't pay much attention to her. I figured Love is blind and all that. If only I knew then that she was shod in stolen shoes, I might have taken a closer look. I thought that the Ralph & Russo semi-nude evening gown was also an odd (and expensive) choice, but I chalked it up to bad fashion sense and maybe the ill-conceived notion that expensive = gorgeous. After all, no one ever said Sparry's bride had to be a fashionista.


----------



## CobaltBlu

So i am on hold with an airline and in a moment of curiosity looked for the venue for the Gala.....the Ripple of Hope. I could not find a location AT ALL, and I am pretty good at The Internet.  Weirdness.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Note it doesn't say "starred in". I can't decide if it's just accurate journalism or the author is throwing shade.


I was looking for that article which described her as the star of Suits when I came across this and boggled:
Rachel Zane is an undeniable workwear style icon, schooling us in fierce power-dressing whilst keeping it chic in her signature pencil skirt.​


CarryOn2020 said:


> Count the titles



This is utterly embarrassing.


sdkitty said:


> she seems to always be partnering with someone - never forking over her own money


Nailed it.


sdkitty said:


> much as I've enjoyed this thread, sorry to say they're getting pretty boring


They use the same playbook repeatedly and that playbook was pretty skimpy to begin with. I'm afraid they will have to do something like "We received the RoH award three days before they held the event" to get a response now. Oh wait! They haven't released their Season's Greetings manipulated photo of the year yet!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Doesn’t the wardrobe dept of these Hwood shows offer assistance to their cast?   Maybe she made someone mad, so she got the z list assistance 

Something like this?





One more:


----------



## CobaltBlu

She really makes unfortunate clothing choices.  And then she struts them.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t the wardrobe dept of these Hwood shows offer assistance to their cast?   Maybe she made someone mad, so she got the z list assistance
> 
> Something like this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more:



Those are all awful looking. And I can never see past her toothpick legs. I have always hated my chunky legs but I would not trade them for hers.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t the wardrobe dept of these Hwood shows offer assistance to their cast?   Maybe she made someone mad, so she got the z list assistance
> 
> Something like this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more:



That black dress! With built-in headlights!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

i didn't realize she copied the engagement outfit, right down to the shoes?


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Wasn't she wearing the shoes that she forced Reimann's to buy for her?  In any case, she never takes care of her things and her shoes were dirty.  She looked slovenly on the whole.


Change the "looked" to the present tense "looks slovenly." Five years on and she's still disheveled.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Doesn’t the wardrobe dept of these Hwood shows offer assistance to their cast?   Maybe she made someone mad, so she got the z list assistance
> 
> Something like this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more:




You could be right, but I also think it's because she won't buy anything or hire a real stylist (as opposed to a 'friend'). If you constantly rely on freebies or PR you will get what you're given, a real stylist (wanting to work again the in the biz) will come with spare underwear/shapewear that fit their client/outfit - and if they don't will send out for some.

The woman's cheap, what can you do?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> i didn't realize she copied the engagement outfit, right down to the shoes?




Isn't it funny how the other girl still looks way better and more polished...skirt not longer than coat, less crumpled, clean shoes.


----------



## LittleStar88

Indiana speech, Ripple of Nope, and now the documentary…. Get out the popcorn! Looks like it’s gonna happen.









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix docu-series release date
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's bombshell Netflix documentary, which was once called Chapters, will air on 8 December, industry sources told Page Six.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Mariellabella

I love Meghan an Harry, just shows me how many people follow the overall opinion of media which can be manipulated today. Meghan is the only one who actually achieved something while all these fat boring royals were born into wealth with no talent, just parasiting on their image/name off of the commoners. They hate Meghan because she's an actual achiever


----------



## marietouchet

Aimee3 said:


> Well we can discuss the Midwest dinner “thing” when that happens and they are sure to do something annoying when the real royals go to Boston, so things should pick up!


I did notice the PR on the bags on pumpkin pie slicing for homeless - that was relevant to last week - all happened the week of Earthshot


----------



## piperdog

charlottawill said:


> "We hope you’ll join us for this year's Ripple of Hope Award Gala in *New York City* on Tuesday, December 6, to honor Frank Baker, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Siris; Brian Moynihan, Chair of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Bank of America; Michael Polsky, Founder and CEO of Invenergy; Prince Harry and Meghan, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex; and President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky. The ceremony will also recognize NBA legend and civil rights icon Bill Russell (1934 – 2022) with a posthumous award, and will feature emcee Alec Baldwin.
> 
> *6:00 pm Cocktails | 7:00 pm Dinner | Cocktail Attire"*
> 
> They probably don't tell you where you're going until you pay for the tickets. I can't wait to see what she shows up in.


The awardees include BofA - a company that helped wreck the US economy in 2008-2009 and then reaped a massive govt. (taxpayer) bailout. Invenergy - who recently sued an Iowa county who had the temerity to push back that it didn't want their project sited there. How dare a bunch of poors living in flyover country have opinions about their own land and community?  And Harry and Meghan - enough said.  Awarded by a Kennedy and emceed by Bang Bang Baldwin. You really can't make this up. Perhaps the ripple of hope should be renamed the "Blithely causing tsunami that ruins people's lives for my own profit" award.

I don't know anything about Siris, so maybe that company, Russell and Zelensky balance out the other awardees by actually doing something good for the world and giving the entire thing a veneer of respectability.

One thing I'll say for these two - they continue shining a light. Just like when you lift up a rock and all the insects living underneath go scurrying away. Well done Harry and Meghan, keep showing us who the frauds (like you) really are.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> right...I don't think they said she personally served all those people - just that she showed up (for a photo)


The photo shows MM slicing the pumpkin pie and placing slices into plastic pie slice containers , no interaction with people 
The  photo did have another pie slicing lady in the front of the shot, that must have been irritating for MM


----------



## Mariellabella

marietouchet said:


> The photo shows MM slicing the pumpkin pie and placing slices into plastic pie slice containers , no interaction with people
> The  photo did have another pie slicing lady in the front of the shot, that must have been irritating for MM


Is this an actual AI System which is posting fake comments all over the Internet to defame them? Can't be that so many people don't see the truth. This is false Social Proof being created by AI


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> You could be right, but I also think it's because she won't buy anything or hire a real stylist (as opposed to a 'friend'). If you constantly rely on freebies or PR you will get what you're given, a real stylist (wanting to work again the in the biz) will come with spare underwear/shapewear that fit their client/outfit - and if they don't will send out for some.
> 
> The woman's cheap, what can you do?


I don’t know … but how much is one allowed to permanently alter a loaned dress ? Is that the genesis of MM inability to get things tailored ??


----------



## LittleStar88

Mariellabella said:


> I love Meghan an Harry, just shows me how many people follow the overall opinion of media which can be manipulated today. Meghan is the only one who actually achieved something while all these fat boring royals were born into wealth with no talent, just parasiting on their image/name off of the commoners. They hate Meghan because she's an actual achiever





Mariellabella said:


> Is this an actual AI System which is posting fake comments all over the Internet to defame them? Can't be that so many people don't see the truth. This is false Social Proof being created by AI



Meghan, you’re drunk. Go home


----------



## marietouchet

The last one ??? Andy Cohen forgot he had met her twice before…

Meghan Markle says Prince Harry advised her to include men in podcast
https://mol.im/a/11481165

Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
https://mol.im/a/11480943

PS completely different guests than before, an attempt to rectify her sinking ratings by putting on less offensive people than J Jamil ? An attempt to get her a second season ??


----------



## duna

I'd like to know exactly what MM has accomplished.... besides being a Z list actress!


----------



## LittleStar88

Awkward moment Meghan Markle's TV producer podcast guest forgets he's met her (TWICE) during Archetypes season finale​









						Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
					

The Duchess of Sussex's Spotify podcast deal is said to be worth $18million and episode 12 of her show is finally completed two years after the contract was signed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

duna said:


> I'd like to know exactly what MM has accomplished.... besides being a Z list actress!


Not much - but how does that make her different from other women who married into the royal family?


----------



## mia55

Why do I feel like Megan has discovered this thread


----------



## Hyacinth

marietouchet said:


> The last one ??? Andy Cohen forgot he had met her twice before…
> 
> Meghan Markle says Prince Harry advised her to include men in podcast
> https://mol.im/a/11481165
> 
> Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
> https://mol.im/a/11480943
> 
> PS completely different guests than before, an attempt to rectify her sinking ratings by putting on less offensive people than J Jamil ? An attempt to get her a second season ??



If Trevor Noah falls for just ONE WORD of her lying schtick, I will lose every last ounce of respect I've ever had for the man. 
(And just to clarify - I have a LOT of respect for Trevor - I hope his sanity and his sense of justice survived the encounter with the Mamba Of Montecito).

ETA - And it's good to see that the bus to Banned Camp has made a pick-up. Thank you!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mariellabella said:


> I love Meghan an Harry, just shows me how many people follow the overall opinion of media which can be manipulated today. Meghan is the only one who actually achieved something while all these fat boring royals were born into wealth with no talent, just parasiting on their image/name off of the commoners. They hate Meghan because she's an actual achiever



Just kindly pointing out the Harry you love is one of the fat (???) boring royals born into wealth with no talent you speak of.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> The last one ??? Andy Cohen forgot he had met her twice before…
> 
> Meghan Markle says Prince Harry advised her to include men in podcast
> https://mol.im/a/11481165
> 
> Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
> https://mol.im/a/11480943
> 
> PS completely different guests than before, an attempt to rectify her sinking ratings by putting on less offensive people than J Jamil ? An attempt to get her a second season ??


I'm not from the UK, but if I were, I would be very upset by TW's 'dramatic' comments. 
Andy Cohen is likely one more person that wouldn't look twice at TW without her 'dramatic' connections to the UK and the BRF.


----------



## Chanbal

Hyacinth said:


> *If Trevor Noah falls for just ONE WORD of her lying schtick, I will lose every last ounce of respect I've ever had for the man.*
> *(And just to clarify - I have a LOT of respect for Trevor - I hope his sanity and his sense of justice survived the encounter with the Mamba Of Montecito*).
> 
> ETA - And it's good to see that the bus to Banned Camp has made a pick-up. Thank you!


Same here! I like Trevor Noah, and wouldn't like to be disappointed about him.


----------



## sdkitty

Hyacinth said:


> If Trevor Noah falls for just ONE WORD of her lying schtick, I will lose every last ounce of respect I've ever had for the man.
> (And just to clarify - I have a LOT of respect for Trevor - I hope his sanity and his sense of justice survived the encounter with the Mamba Of Montecito).
> 
> ETA - And it's good to see that the bus to Banned Camp has made a pick-up. Thank you!


I didn't listen but seems it's alread aired.....IDK how she gets these guests


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan say no reality shows! (Unless you count the one they did for Netflix.)   

Meghan Markle reveals to Andy Cohen whether she’d do ‘Real Housewives’​
The “Real Princesses of Montecito?”

Meghan Markle shut down any buzz that she’d one day join the “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” cast or any other reality TV show.

Andy Cohen – who created and produces the “Real Housewives” franchises – asked what she thought about fans wanting her to join “RHOBH” — even though she lives almost two hours north in Montecito, Calif.

“I’m like, she ain’t joining the ‘Beverly Hills Housewives’ everybody, she’s Meghan Markle!” Cohen said on Tuesday’s episode of Markle’s podcast finale “Archetypes.”

Markle, 41, began laughing and told Cohen, 54, that she’d actually “never heard” of people wanting her to join the famed franchise.

“You mean really that this is my audition for ‘Real Housewives of Montecito?’ Is this the moment?” Markle joked to Cohen, to which Cohen replied that if she were to join, they’d “build the show around you.”

“There will be no reality show, but I think it’s so fun,” Markle concluded.

While Markle may not be joining the Bravosphere anytime soon, she will be on another form of reality TV come later this year.

Fans will get an intimate look into the lives of the “Suits” actress and her husband, Prince Harry, in their highly anticipated Netflix docuseries.

Netflix has yet to release an official title, premiere date or trailer, but Page Six reported last month that the show is still set to air on Dec. 8 despite reports that it was pushed back to 2023 due to Season 5 of “The Crown” dropping earlier this month.

Sources previously told us that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Netflix were in disagreement about what would make it to air as the couple wanted to nix any negative comments they may have made about their former royal family members in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II’s death on Sept. 8.

“Harry and Meghan are having second thoughts on their own story, on their own project,” a Netflix source told Page Six last month.









						Meghan Markle reveals to Andy Cohen whether she’d do ‘Real Housewives’
					

“You mean really that this is my audition for ‘Real Housewives of Montecito?’ Is this the moment?” Markle asked “Real Housewives” creator Andy Cohen.




					pagesix.com


----------



## bag-mania

Hyacinth said:


> If Trevor Noah falls for just ONE WORD of her lying schtick, I will lose every last ounce of respect I've ever had for the man.
> (And just to clarify - I have a LOT of respect for Trevor - I hope his sanity and his sense of justice survived the encounter with the Mamba Of Montecito).
> 
> ETA - And it's good to see that the bus to Banned Camp has made a pick-up. Thank you!





Chanbal said:


> Same here! I like Trevor Noah, and wouldn't like to be disappointed about him.


Didn't Trevor slam Charles recently and make fun of him over the pen fuss? Maybe disliking Charles so much has made him a Meghan fan.


----------



## Hyacinth

And if any one wants to hear what Trevor Noah REALLY said and HOW he said it, instead of taking Piers Morgan's word for it, *please watch the actual video, and bring your sense of humor:*



The Sunak bit starts about halfway through, but watch the first part anyway if you're unfamiliar with Trevor Noah. ESPECIALLY if you're unfamiliar with Trevor Noah. Please remember that he's a comedian, not a newsreader. He laughs at everyone's foibles equally regardless of country, and in the appropriate tone of voice for the situation.

And here are Trevor's follow-up comments about the backlash:




ETA - Let's face it, KCIII has always had the reputation as a bit of a fusspot. That does NOT mean that I don't admire and respect the BRF. I've never set foot in the UK and yet I've been aware of that reputation for decades. Apparently one of his former servants (?) agrees, and many posters here at tPF seemed to understand the situation when it occured. Here's Trevor's bit about Charles and the pens, please watch the entire video:




BTW, if anyone can supply a link to a transcript of Trevor's discussion with The Princess Of Santa Barbara, I would appreciate it. Thanks!


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Didn't Trevor slam Charles recently and make fun of him over the pen fuss? Maybe disliking Charles so much has made him a Meghan fan.


Why would he dislike Charles? Being a TW's fan doesn't say much for him imo. What did she do apart of promoting a divisive narrative and minimizing women's accomplishments?

EDIT: Doing too many things at the same time today, and I apologize if I'm not making much sense. I have a profound dislike for ungrateful people. 

Did Noah Trevor asked TW about the wedding celebrations in South Africa? The ones about comparing TW's wedding to Nelson Mandela's prison release.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I don’t know … but how much is one allowed to permanently alter a loaned dress ? Is that the genesis of MM inability to get things tailored ??



Depends on the type of loan and the loaner. A BIG dress is usually PR sample size and has to go back, ambassadors of the brand have their measurements on file and have them MTO. Shoes have tape on soles and do the rounds. Bags can be loaned for the day, week or sometimes given. Jewellery gets returned the minute the event is over.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Meghan say no reality shows! (Unless you count the one they did for Netflix.)
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals to Andy Cohen whether she’d do ‘Real Housewives’​
> The “Real Princesses of Montecito?”
> 
> Meghan Markle shut down any buzz that she’d one day join the “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” cast or any other reality TV show.
> 
> Andy Cohen – who created and produces the “Real Housewives” franchises – asked what she thought about fans wanting her to join “RHOBH” — even though she lives almost two hours north in Montecito, Calif.
> 
> “I’m like, she ain’t joining the ‘Beverly Hills Housewives’ everybody, she’s Meghan Markle!” Cohen said on Tuesday’s episode of Markle’s podcast finale “Archetypes.”
> 
> Markle, 41, began laughing and told Cohen, 54, that she’d actually “never heard” of people wanting her to join the famed franchise.
> 
> “You mean really that this is my audition for ‘Real Housewives of Montecito?’ Is this the moment?” Markle joked to Cohen, to which Cohen replied that if she were to join, they’d “build the show around you.”
> 
> “There will be no reality show, but I think it’s so fun,” Markle concluded.
> 
> While Markle may not be joining the Bravosphere anytime soon, she will be on another form of reality TV come later this year.
> 
> Fans will get an intimate look into the lives of the “Suits” actress and her husband, Prince Harry, in their highly anticipated Netflix docuseries.
> 
> Netflix has yet to release an official title, premiere date or trailer, but Page Six reported last month that the show is still set to air on Dec. 8 despite reports that it was pushed back to 2023 due to Season 5 of “The Crown” dropping earlier this month.
> 
> Sources previously told us that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Netflix were in disagreement about what would make it to air as the couple wanted to nix any negative comments they may have made about their former royal family members in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II’s death on Sept. 8.
> 
> “Harry and Meghan are having second thoughts on their own story, on their own project,” a Netflix source told Page Six last month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle reveals to Andy Cohen whether she’d do ‘Real Housewives’
> 
> 
> “You mean really that this is my audition for ‘Real Housewives of Montecito?’ Is this the moment?” Markle asked “Real Housewives” creator Andy Cohen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I'm still on the drama part. 

_"Meghan replied: '*Well, I will tell you the truth. I stopped watching the Housewives when my life had its own level of drama*_."









						Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
					

The Duchess of Sussex's Spotify podcast deal is said to be worth $18million and episode 12 of her show is finally completed two years after the contract was signed.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

duna said:


> I'd like to know exactly what MM has accomplished.... besides being a Z list actress!


I think the anewer to that is she has achieved an MBA in merchandising. That has been the point of the entire exercise. Market herself, secondarily her husband and merch anything she can get her hands on. She really missed her calling and was born too late. She should have been born 150 years ago so she could sell Dr Markle’s Magic Elixir. I think she she change her name to Meghan Market.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Nice guest choice Megsy


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I'm still on the drama part.
> 
> _"Meghan replied: '*Well, I will tell you the truth. I stopped watching the Housewives when my life had its own level of drama*_."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's Spotify podcast deal is said to be worth $18million and episode 12 of her show is finally completed two years after the contract was signed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Haha!  She actually watched it!  That is where she got her grandiose ideas for a mansion and the need for money and more  plastic surgery reinforced.



lanasyogamama said:


> Nice guest choice Megsy



Harry, another nail in your coffin.

Comment from KC3;  Harrreee you got some ‘splainin’ to do.



Hyacinth said:


> And if any one wants to hear what Trevor Noah REALLY said and HOW he said it, instead of taking Piers Morgan's word for it, *please watch the actual video, and bring your sense of humor:*
> 
> 
> 
> The Sunak bit starts about halfway through, but watch the first part anyway if you're unfamiliar with Trevor Noah. ESPECIALLY if you're unfamiliar with Trevor Noah. Please remember that he's a comedian, not a newsreader. He laughs at everyone's foibles equally regardless of country, and in the appropriate tone of voice for the situation.
> 
> And here are Trevor's follow-up comments about the backlash:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA - Let's face it, KCIII has always had the reputation as a bit of a fusspot. That does NOT mean that I don't admire and respect the BRF. I've never set foot in the UK and yet I've been aware of that reputation for decades. Apparently one of his former servants (?) agrees, and many posters here at tPF seemed to understand the situation when it occured. Here's Trevor's bit about Charles and the pens, please watch the entire video:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, if anyone can supply a link to a transcript of Trevor's discussion with The Princess Of Santa Barbara, I would appreciate it. Thanks!



Isn’t Trevor Noah from a South Africa?  Was he dancing in the streets when the Sussex got married?  Does he think that Meghan was more popular than Nelson Mandela?  He may be a comedian, but he still should have some common sense and his comment about The Queen was inappropriate at best


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Isn’t Trevor Noah from a South Africa?  *Was he dancing in the streets when the Sussex got married?*  Does he think that Meghan was more popular than Nelson Mandela?  He may be a comedian, but he still should have some common sense and his comment about The Queen was inappropriate at best


Haha, I just edited a previous post to ask this. Did he ask her about comparing her wedding to Nelson Mandela's prison release?
He made fun of Charles's issue with a pen, but he seems to be fine with TW's comparison to Mandela.


----------



## duna

LibbyRuth said:


> Not much - but how does that make her different from other women who married into the royal family?


The other women who married into the royal family stuck to it and did their job, unlike MM, who once she discovered that she actually had to WORK, she ran away as fast as she could!


----------



## papertiger

Hyacinth said:


> And if any one wants to hear what Trevor Noah REALLY said and HOW he said it, instead of taking Piers Morgan's word for it, *please watch the actual video, and bring your sense of humor:*
> 
> 
> 
> The Sunak bit starts about halfway through, but watch the first part anyway if you're unfamiliar with Trevor Noah. ESPECIALLY if you're unfamiliar with Trevor Noah. Please remember that he's a comedian, not a newsreader. He laughs at everyone's foibles equally regardless of country, and in the appropriate tone of voice for the situation.
> 
> And here are Trevor's follow-up comments about the backlash:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA - Let's face it, KCIII has always had the reputation as a bit of a fusspot. That does NOT mean that I don't admire and respect the BRF. I've never set foot in the UK and yet I've been aware of that reputation for decades. Apparently one of his former servants (?) agrees, and many posters here at tPF seemed to understand the situation when it occured. Here's Trevor's bit about Charles and the pens, please watch the entire video:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW, if anyone can supply a link to a transcript of Trevor's discussion with The Princess Of Santa Barbara, I would appreciate it. Thanks!




Sadly (or mot) these are not available to anyone in the UK


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Andy Cohen is likely one more person that wouldn't look twice at TW without her 'dramatic' connections to the UK and the BRF.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Nice guest choice Megsy




I have no clue who that guy is, I was somewhat indifferent about him having a go at Charles, but this put him firmly on my bad side. Ew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> The other women who married into the royal family stuck to it and did their job, unlike MM, who once she discovered that she actually had to WORK, she ran away as fast as she could!



Not only that, the other women in the royal family don't go on and on about their achievements. In fact, they generally don't tend to talk so awfully much about themselves.


----------



## bag-mania

So this was the man episode. 

I LOVE that Andy Cohen didn’t remember that he’d met her twice before. Kind of like how she didn’t stand out of a crowd to Howie Mandel either. Must have been a blow to her ego.  

After Cohen told Meghan it was nice to meet her when kicking off the recording, Meghan replied, “I met you before. You'll never remember it … I met you twice. The first one is when _Suits_ wasn't even on, yet. And then when we had maybe season two or three, we were in New York.”


----------



## DoggieBags

LittleStar88 said:


> Awkward moment Meghan Markle's TV producer podcast guest forgets he's met her (TWICE) during Archetypes season finale​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle speaks to Daily Show host Trevor and Judd Apatow
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex's Spotify podcast deal is said to be worth $18million and episode 12 of her show is finally completed two years after the contract was signed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I’m surprised that awkward moment wasn’t edited out of the final version of her pod crash or she didn’t do a voice over tacked on the end to explain it away like she did when Mariah called her a diva.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> The US is not big enough for TW, she continues targeting the UK…
> 
> Partnership has a new meaning, it's an arrangement between one that donates and one that takes the credit for it.



LOL, yet again she "partners" with someone else, who does the actual donating and she just gets credit.



Toby93 said:


> i didn't realize she copied the engagement outfit, right down to the shoes?



They literally do not have one original thought in their oversized heads.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it funny how the other girl still looks way better and more polished...skirt not longer than coat, less crumpled, clean shoes.


Yes!  Plus, her items are less expensive than MeGain's.



mia55 said:


> Why do I feel like Megan has discovered this thread


How long do you think before she tries to get us all deleted off the internet?


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> How long do you think before she tries to get us all deleted off the internet?


If she had that kind of power she would already have done it.


----------



## 1LV

LittleStar88 said:


> Meghan, you’re drunk. Go home



priceless!!!


----------



## bag-mania

Holy crap, we have reached 8,000 pages. Well done, everyone!


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Sadly (or mot) these are not available to anyone in the UK


I only watched the second video, he uses the pen incident to make fun of Charles. He seems to have a profound dislike for the monarchy. It's probably why he accepted TW's invitation.

While it's his right to dislike the monarchy, he is doing an enormous disservice by supporting self-serving people like TW imo.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> While it's his right to dislike the monarchy, he is doing an enormous disservice by supporting self-serving people like TW imo.


Trevor seems to follow the adage “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” 

I wish Meghan had called him Trevity Trev Trev on the podcast.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap, we have reached 8,000 pages. Well done, everyone!


And we have miles to go til the coronation


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> And we have miles to go til the coronation


The Netflix show and Harry’s memoir should easily be good for another thousand pages.


----------



## TC1

Pardon me if I have Trevor Noah confused..but after HMTQ passed wasn't he one who had celebrated that with some comment about colonization?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I'm not from the UK, but if I were, I would be very upset by TW's 'dramatic' comments.
> Andy Cohen is likely one more person that wouldn't look twice at TW without her 'dramatic' connections to the UK and the BRF.



I watch Andy's show WWL sometimes.  He brings up Meghan now and then.  Wonder if he thinks she's a potential HW


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> So this was the man episode.
> 
> I LOVE that Andy Cohen didn’t remember that he’d met her twice before. Kind of like how she didn’t stand out of a crowd to Howie Mandel either. Must have been a blow to her ego.
> 
> After Cohen told Meghan it was nice to meet her when kicking off the recording, Meghan replied, “I met you before. You'll never remember it … I met you twice. The first one is when _Suits_ wasn't even on, yet. And then when we had maybe season two or three, we were in New York.”
> 
> View attachment 5661700


because the only thing that makes her memorable is her husband


----------



## Lodpah

Haven’t posted much lately but the level of hateful passive-aggressive mode MM throws at the BRF is really deeply concerning, like interviewing this Trevor Noah guy.

She’s out not only for blood but for their entire annihilation, especially KC, Kate and even while dead, the Queen and PP.

For one to have so much hatred for their family and husband’s family blows my mind. 

No wonder no women of substance support her or they’ve ran away. 

I pray that her wicked agenda does not prosper. 

There’s an old biblical saying and I’m paraphrasing: don’t worry if you see evil prosper cause it comes to a bad end. They think they are prospering but instead they are heading towards destruction of themselves.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Mariellabella said:


> I love Meghan an Harry, just shows me how many people follow the overall opinion of media which can be manipulated today. *Meghan is the only one who actually achieved something while all these fat boring royals were born into wealth with no talent, just parasiting on their image/name off of the commoners.* They hate Meghan because she's an actual achiever


Thanks, I'm still LOL. This would make a great comedy spoof or skit as it is totally untrue but funny in a weird sense.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap, we have reached 8,000 pages. Well done, everyone!



When we reach 10000 we need to do something celebratory.


----------



## KEG66

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks, I'm still LOL. This would make a great comedy spoof or skit as it is totally untrue but funny in a weird sense.


Totally agree, think someone might be off their meds !


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> I watch Andy's show WWL sometimes.  He brings up Meghan now and then.  Wonder if he thinks she's a potential HW



I truly feel joining the Housewives franchise is her only legitimate hope for money and attention. After she burns through all of this other pseudo-charitable stuff, she will have nothing left.

Andy knows she isn’t desperate enough yet and will hold out until TW needs the money and then bring her in for cheap.

I can’t wait!


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> I truly feel joining the Housewives franchise is her only legitimate hope for money and attention. After she burns through all of this other pseudo-charitable stuff, she will have nothing left.
> 
> Andy knows she isn’t desperate enough yet and will hold out until TW needs the money and then bring her in for cheap.
> 
> I can’t wait!


The RHW shows are getting pathetic.  Even I can't stomach half of them.  Bring this useless wench on, and it'll be the final nail in the coffin.  Her "reality" is a totally F'ed up version of the truth in her mind.


----------



## needlv

Lodpah said:


> Haven’t posted much lately but the level of hateful passive-aggressive mode MM throws at the BRF is really deeply concerning, like interviewing this Trevor Noah guy.
> 
> She’s out not only for blood but for their entire annihilation, especially KC, Kate and even while dead, the Queen and PP.
> 
> For one to have so much hatred for their family and husband’s family blows my mind.
> 
> No wonder no women of substance support her or they’ve ran away.
> 
> I pray that her wicked agenda does not prosper.
> 
> There’s an old biblical saying and I’m paraphrasing: don’t worry if you see evil prosper cause it comes to a bad end. They think they are prospering but instead they are heading towards destruction of themselves.



This.  She is spending so much of her life and energy dealing with real or perceived slights and grievances, rather than letting go and moving on.

Let go Megs.  You aren’t going to be the same as William and Catherine (and never were going to be).

Focus on building a new brand, with a hopeful outlook


----------



## LittleStar88

purseinsanity said:


> The RHW shows are getting pathetic.  Even I can't stomach half of them.  Bring this useless wench on, and it'll be the final nail in the coffin.  Her "reality" is a totally F'ed up version of the truth in her mind.



I stopped watching years ago. I was really only watching OC and BH, but they both got old and boring. I’d return for a series with Meghan. And hope for drunken tears and table-flipping.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> I watch Andy's show WWL sometimes.  He brings up Meghan now and then.  Wonder if he thinks she's a potential HW


I sincerely hope not.


----------



## LittleStar88

It’s Meghan’s final podcast! Oh, the relief. Here’s what I’ve learnt​
Archive link: https://archive.ph/2022.11.29-17350...meghan-archetypes-podcast-review-xx-ml3k6nx80



> Last week, Meghan promised that it was the penultimate episode of her podcast and I managed my expectations. Was that the truth, or her truth? Shortly after 10am today, “Man-ifesting a Cultural Shift” manifested onto my screen and it was billed as the finale. She was telling the truth, and that’s a beautiful thing.





> Today, I learnt that Meghan is fascinated by how our brains are wired. She keeps a big pile of clever books by her bed, including one “which posited the concept of neuroplasticity”, and these books made her think about herself, as you’d expect. She broadens the conversation to include other residents of Montecito. Her husband told her that if we want to shift how we think about gender then we have to actively include men in the conversation and everything I have ever read about Prince Harry makes me certain he said that





> Meghan promises chats with thoughtful men, so probably not Harry. The important thing to know about the immensely talented film-maker Judd Apatow is that his wife once made Meghan feel Seen. And then she proceeds to troll her first guest, the talk show host Andy Cohen, at length. Why? Because he didn’t remember meeting her way back, when she was a nobody and he was a somebody, and which feminist powerhouse married a prince and is laughing now, huh, Andy?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

​do you think Megs has checked out this forum?​​Blind Item #6​

The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors and if she hadn't got married to who she did get married to, she would be begging to get on the show and have a steady pay check.






						Blind Item #6
					

The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors...




					www.crazydaysandnights.net


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LibbyRuth said:


> Not much - but how does that make her different from other women who married into the royal family?


For starters, Camilla and Sophie are actively campaigning along with Queen Consorts and Crown Princesses across the globe to end violence against women and girls and working to ensure that proper assistance and counseling is available to them.

Edited to correct typo


----------



## Chanbal

Someone posted an illustration for today's podcast. 


The one below is TW's major target imo, but fortunately he appears to be a smart man.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I only watched the second video, he uses the pen incident to make fun of Charles. He seems to have a profound dislike for the monarchy. It's probably why he accepted TW's invitation.
> 
> While it's his right to dislike the monarchy, he is doing an enormous disservice by supporting self-serving people like TW imo.


He never was on Jon Stewart’s level imo. Lost lots of viewers initially.  Never that funny, never that insightful, just a disgruntled, unhappy employee.  One of the best features of the internet is we never need to watch a whole show. Watch a few clips and his complaining personality comes through.

  So, she has surrounded herself with fussy, unhappy, z list victims.  Wonder what OW thinks of that.  





Delighted this vanity pod-rash is over.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Holy crap, we have reached 8,000 pages. Well done, everyone!


Watch out, they're closing in on 20 on the appreciation thread.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I watch Andy's show WWL sometimes.  He brings up Meghan now and then.  Wonder if he thinks she's a potential HW


I have zero doubt. I'll bet she won't even wait for the ink to dry on the divorce papers to offer up her wit, charm and sparkling personality to the franchise. For the right price of course.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

For anyone interested in who Trevor Noah really is I highly recommend reading Born A Crime, an excerpt is available here


----------



## LittleStar88

Oh my! Gifts from Indiana


----------



## Gal4Dior

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh my! Gifts from Indiana
> 
> View attachment 5661854


OMG, I hope that is a joke. How embarrassing!! I'm embarrassed for them! Could you imagine any of the RF hand out that crap at any event? Also, who wants a stupid framed photo of themselves to give away?? Apparently, the NARC wife. A bubble wrapped photo of them in a made in China frame.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I only watched the second video, he uses the pen incident to make fun of Charles. He seems to have a profound dislike for the monarchy. It's probably why he accepted TW's invitation.
> 
> While it's his right to dislike the monarchy, he is doing an enormous disservice by supporting self-serving people like TW imo.


I agree with you, but I still think he's an idiot for dissing the late QEII who worked towards ending racism and bigotry throughout the Commonwealth and refused to visit South Africa until apartheid was abolished and she certainly accomplished a lot more than this bozo's friend, ZedZed.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> He never was on Jon Stewart’s level imo. Lost lots of viewers initially.  Never that funny, never that insightful, just a disgruntled, unhappy employee.  One of the best features of the internet is we never need to watch a whole show. Watch a few clips and his complaining personality comes through.
> 
> So, she has surrounded herself with fussy, unhappy, z list victims.  Wonder what OW thinks of that.
> 
> View attachment 5661849
> 
> 
> 
> Delighted this vanity pod-rash is over.
> View attachment 5661850


He is good looking and often funny. However, I don't particularly like the second video clip. In addition to making fun of Charles, he makes a few unfair statements imo.  He seems to overlook that politicians are often criticized independently of their shapes or colors, and is the support of different shapes and colors that elects a president. I'm sorry if I sound a little vague, but I'm trying to avoid entering a forbidden area. I got the impression that he may support TW's rhetoric.


----------



## gracekelly

Meghan is not the only one lurking this thread. Periodically some are awakened. I hadn’t realized it, but I woke up


----------



## LittleStar88

Gal4Dior said:


> OMG, I hope that is a joke. How embarrassing!! I'm embarrassed for them! Could you imagine any of the RF hand out that crap at any event? Also, who wants a stupid framed photo of themselves to give away?? Apparently, the NARC wife. A bubble wrapped photo of them in a made in China frame.






I guess you can always pop out the picture and reuse the frame


----------



## Toby93

Gal4Dior said:


> OMG, I hope that is a joke. How embarrassing!! I'm embarrassed for them! Could you imagine any of the RF hand out that crap at any event? Also, who wants a stupid framed photo of themselves to give away?? Apparently, the NARC wife. A bubble wrapped photo of them in a made in China frame.


And apparently she didn't hear what people said about that pic    That Harry looks like her hairdresser asking her what she thinks of his work.  He was photoshopped to be smaller than her in the pic.  She is a joke and has hit a new low.

The other pic is from the staged polo award where she made a complete @ss of herself.  Maybe she was telling the truth when she said she doesn't read the tabloids, because if she did, she would not be handing out _these_ ridiculous photos.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh my! Gifts from Indiana
> 
> View attachment 5661854


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

Wowwwwwwww. that's bad. So tacky.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh my! Gifts from Indiana
> 
> View attachment 5661854


That bubble wrap isn’t doing its job. I can still see them.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When we reach 10000 we need to do something celebratory.


Or see a psychiatrist ASAP.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Watch out, they're closing in on 20 on the appreciation thread.


It’s harder when you only have three or four regular posters.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> That bubble wrap isn’t doing its job. I can still see them.



And the Pwife pap picture! And leftover Halloween candy…


----------



## Gal4Dior

LittleStar88 said:


> And the Pwife pap picture! And leftover Halloween candy…


In an 80 year old grandma's candy dish. Nuthin' but class for Zedzed.


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh my! Gifts from Indiana
> 
> View attachment 5661854


Mind boggling…….fleeing from the opportunity to attend a Royal State Dinner in Buckingham Palace for this.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> Mind boggling…….fleeing from the opportunity to attend a Royal State Dinner in Buckingham Palace for this.


I imagine Camilla, Catherine and Sophie having a good laugh over it while Anne says "Good riddance to rubbish!".


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill




----------



## LittleStar88

What’s this? Posted today. Note her Zoom name on the screen


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s this? Posted today. Note her Zoom name on the screen
> 
> View attachment 5661890


 But that's the best picture I've ever seen of Archie.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> Mind boggling…….fleeing from the opportunity to attend a Royal State Dinner in Buckingham Palace for this.


Someone provided an illustration for your post.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> But that's the best picture I've ever seen of Archie.


Are you sure it's Arch*e?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure it's Arch*e?


Exactly. Rent a child


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Are you sure it's Arch*e?


I'm pretty sure it is. His origins may be murky but I believe he exists. Didn't we see this picture in the past and wonder whether it got out with or without her permission? It's the only full frontal face shot I've seen of him.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I'm pretty sure it is. His origins may be murky but I believe he exists. Didn't we see this picture in the past and wonder whether it got out with or without her permission? It's the only full frontal face shot I've seen of him.


It was a joke.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s this? Posted today. Note her Zoom name on the screen
> 
> View attachment 5661890


According to Wiki she's Duchess Harris (real name), a professor of *American Studies *and I guess that qualifies her as a BRF expert so she can write a book in cooperation with another so-called BRF expert, ZedZed.


----------



## A bottle of Red

charlottawill said:


> I'm pretty sure it is. His origins may be murky but I believe he exists. Didn't we see this picture in the past and wonder whether it got out with or without her permission? It's the only full frontal face shot I've seen of him.


Is there a question about her having borne the kids?


----------



## bag-mania

A bottle of Red said:


> Is there a question about her having borne the kids?


Oh yes, quite a few questions.


----------



## gracekelly

A bottle of Red said:


> Is there a question about her having borne the kids?


The question is that when we see a picture, we are never really sure who the child belongs to.


----------



## bag-mania

Wonder how things are going in that Marriott in Indianapolis. Must be close to over by now.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Wonder how things are going in that Marriott in Indianapolis. Must be close to over by now.


People are competing with one another to grab the flowers off the tables.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> People are competing with one another to grab the flowers off the tables.


I hope they remembered to serve lemon cake.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> I hope they remembered to serve lemon cake.


I was hoping for bananas with messages written on them.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


>



What’s amazing to me is that the room looks full at $10k per table. (At least I think that was the going rate for buying a table at that event.) There are still a lot of people willing to shell out real $$$ to hear more of her word salad gibberish.


----------



## Chanbal

I came across this 5* seller on Etsy.  

It comes in several colors. 
​








						Witch Way to Montecito Halloween Sweatshirt by Moaning - Etsy UK
					

This Gender-Neutral Adult Sweatshirts item by RoyalVintageDesign has 3 favorites from Etsy shoppers. Ships from United Kingdom. Listed on 17 Sep, 2022




					www.etsy.com
				




The 'Moaning Sparkles' mug is very tempting. 










						I Can't Believe I'm Not Getting Paid for This Mug - Etsy UK
					

This Mugs item is sold by RoyalVintageDesign. Ships from United Kingdom. Listed on 07 Nov, 2022




					www.etsy.com


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> What’s amazing to me is that the room looks full at $10k per table. (At least I think that was the going rate for buying a table at that event.) There are still a lot of people willing to shell out real $$$ to hear more of her word salad gibberish.


In this type of event, tables that didn't sell are often filled with non-paying guests.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> In this type of event, tables that didn't sell are often filled with non-paying guests.


If Howard Stern’s comments are true, gal pal OW can pay, especially since it is a charitable cause.


----------



## K.D.

Chanbal said:


> I came across this 5* seller on Etsy.
> 
> It comes in several colors.
> View attachment 5661930​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Witch Way to Montecito Halloween Sweatshirt by Moaning - Etsy UK
> 
> 
> This Gender-Neutral Adult Sweatshirts item by RoyalVintageDesign has 3 favorites from Etsy shoppers. Ships from United Kingdom. Listed on 17 Sep, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 'Moaning Sparkles' mug is very tempting.
> View attachment 5661931
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Can't Believe I'm Not Getting Paid for This Mug - Etsy UK
> 
> 
> This Mugs item is sold by RoyalVintageDesign. Ships from United Kingdom. Listed on 07 Nov, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com


The mugs are on my Christmas list now!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

bag-mania said:


> If we only knew then.
> 
> It wouldn’t take long before we figured it out but so many of us were actually happy for them.





CarryOn2020 said:


> As an American, I was stunned and embarrassed by her outfit.  She should have done so much better, especially on _that_ day.


This was in her dressing like a normal peasant phase and apparently that means ill-fitting lab coat and dirty shoes to her 

Also check out her old nose and jaw - I dunno how she ever got work as a ‘hot girl’ she looks like Statler in a wig. 





Oh wait maybe I do 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Count the titles



You know I thought this bag company  was a cringey and basic  direct sales brand that harped on fake environmental credentials while relying on PR from influencers who promote wasteful and shallow shopping habits and this move has done nothing to change that.



bag-mania said:


> Hold on. There’s still one more podcast. Who is the guest? Did she save the best or the worst for last?


This gif is beautiful- this is probably what mrs Trudeau looked like an hour in at the pool side while the babies thrashed around in open water. 


purseinsanity said:


> The RHW shows are getting pathetic.  Even I can't stomach half of them.  Bring this useless wench on, and it'll be the final nail in the coffin.  Her "reality" is a totally F'ed up version of the truth in her mind.





LittleStar88 said:


> I stopped watching years ago. I was really only watching OC and BH, but they both got old and boring. I’d return for a series with Meghan. And hope for drunken tears and table-flipping.


I like RHW - I don’t think M would be good for the series she has no self awareness and is too protective of her image. She’s also got none of the qualities they need:- she isn’t witty like  Kenya, meme gold like Nene, relatable like Kandi, confrontational like Teresa  or cunning like LVP and she’d certainly wouldn’t let them film all the crazy like Sonja. She has none of the qualities they need and I think she’d come in thinking the others are beneath talking too. 


LittleStar88 said:


> It’s Meghan’s final podcast! Oh, the relief. Here’s what I’ve learnt​
> Archive link: https://archive.ph/2022.11.29-17350...meghan-archetypes-podcast-review-xx-ml3k6nx80


Lol, there’s something funny about this apparently being a feminist podcast about trivialising women and the grand finale reveal is that MEN have deigned to speak on it. 

I think she’s being unfair to Andy imagine how many bad actresses desperate to get on the show he must meet and she’s had about 5 new faces since then. 


needlv said:


> ​do you think Megs has checked out this forum?​​Blind Item #6​
> 
> The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors and if she hadn't got married to who she did get married to, she would be begging to get on the show and have a steady pay check.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


Meghan if you are reading this please take the hint. This is your intervention. 


LittleStar88 said:


> Oh my! Gifts from Indiana
> 
> View attachment 5661854


it’s the one or two Sub-Aldi brand toffees in the bubble wrapped dish for me. You know corporate is tight when you don’t get your own bag of cheap sweets  


LittleStar88 said:


> What’s this? Posted today. Note her Zoom name on the screen
> 
> View attachment 5661890


I think it’d be illuminating for casual viewers to see M as she looks in this call in the nude pumps   from her engagement. Alas I think that evidence will have been burned. 

Also is that the Donna B of the donkeys? Oh she knows a thing or two about writing passive aggressive conspiracy theory books while dunking on your own side, she’d be perfect for a co-write. Large bottles of Johnny walker all round 


Maggie Muggins said:


> According to Wiki she's Duchess Harris (real name), a professor of *American Studies *and I guess that qualifies her as a BRF expert so she can write a book in cooperation with another so-called BRF expert, ZedZed.


I  love the name Duchess Harris- so sibilant - sure whatever write a book lord knows we have a dearth of half-baked books about the BRF. Maybe I’m unfair, maybe it’d be good, can’t be worse than Scabies. 




Chanbal said:


> I came across this 5* seller on Etsy.
> 
> It comes in several colors.
> View attachment 5661930​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Witch Way to Montecito Halloween Sweatshirt by Moaning - Etsy UK
> 
> 
> This Gender-Neutral Adult Sweatshirts item by RoyalVintageDesign has 3 favorites from Etsy shoppers. Ships from United Kingdom. Listed on 17 Sep, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 'Moaning Sparkles' mug is very tempting.
> View attachment 5661931
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I Can't Believe I'm Not Getting Paid for This Mug - Etsy UK
> 
> 
> This Mugs item is sold by RoyalVintageDesign. Ships from United Kingdom. Listed on 07 Nov, 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etsy.com


When will they stop insulting the noble name of witches with this comparison?  


Chanbal said:


> In this type of event, tables that didn't sell are often filled with non-paying guests.


look out and we might see that ‘Ukrainian refugee’ and the ‘black doctor inspired by Meg’ downing all the free cava they can. Not to mention all the ‘professional, young for 50 but not _too_ pretty women’ central casting can find. Perhaps a chloroformed dog or two.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

*Truth*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Mind boggling…….fleeing from the opportunity to attend a Royal State Dinner in Buckingham Palace for this.



Seriously.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




I'm really starting to feel bad for the poor thing, having to squeeze her belly into her normal designer clothes because Charles's one million pounds only went so far and maternity wear (or at least a bigger size) is where she had to draw the line.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> What’s this? Posted today. Note her Zoom name on the screen
> 
> View attachment 5661890



I had to google because I was unsure if that's another person who would have her title tattooed on her forehead if possible, but no, that's her first name.


----------



## LibbyRuth

Maggie Muggins said:


> For starters, Camilla and Sophie are actively campaigning along with Queen Consorts and Crown Princesses across the globe to end violence against women and girls and working to ensure that proper assistance and counseling is available to them.
> 
> Edited to correct typo


Yes, that's what they are doing now, as members of the BRF.  What did they accomplish before marrying into it?  Sophie had a career in PR.  She was working and doing well, but wasn't the greatest PR exec of all times.  So that puts her on par with Meghan, working as an actress.  Men in the royal family don't hold out to marry the most accomplished women they can find.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LibbyRuth said:


> Yes, that's what they are doing now, as members of the BRF.  What did they accomplish before marrying into it?  Sophie had a career in PR.  She was working and doing well, but wasn't the greatest PR exec of all times.  So that puts her on par with Meghan, working as an actress.  Men in the royal family don't hold out to marry the most accomplished women they can find.



Which is fine if you don't consider yourself the greatest gift to humanity there is. Which the others don't do or if they do they keep it to themselves.


----------



## LittleStar88

Starting today with some details trickling in…


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## LittleStar88

Meghan to support Prince Harry's memoir with 'very clever move' at dinner event - claim​
Archive link: https://archive.ph/2022.11.30-09044...memoir-dinner-guests-indiana-neil-sean-vn/amp

He added: "According to a very good source, and we have to say allegedly, you'll be able to order the book, and in instances, also get a signed dedicated copy."


----------



## LittleStar88

Quiet Meghan Markle podcast flop no one is talking about​Archive link: 
	

			archive.ph
		




> Despite kicking off in late August amid much fanfare – including Times Square billboards and briefly taking out the number one podcast spot – the Archetypes launch bang has been reduced to a puttering whimper with the show currently down in the 31st most popular slot on the streaming platform, only just managing to beat 12 Hour Sound Machines (no loops or fades) which purports to be 12 hours of continuous noise you can sleep to.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This bummed me out. It’s the fb group for a podcast I really like, and the majority are interested in Spare. Yuck.


----------



## kemilia

Where are the pics of what she wore?! Seeing all the bubble-wrapped tchotchkes was a good start.

ETA--just read that all pics and recordings were banned. just a couple of pics of her outside wearing a heavy coat with her signature hanging pieces of hair that just so happened to escape her chignon.


----------



## LittleStar88

kemilia said:


> Where are the pics of what she wore?! Seeing all the bubble-wrapped tchotchkes was a good start.
> 
> ETA--just read that all pics and recordings were banned. just a couple of pics of her outside wearing a heavy coat with her signature hanging pieces of hair that just so happened to escape her chignon.



I only found these… She looks like she’s got sand in her vagina.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Looks like a tense exchange…


----------



## lanasyogamama

Girl on the left literally looks terrified


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
					

The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

More photos - she definitely looks unhinged









						Meghan Markle leaving hotel in the US where she was guest speaker
					

The Duchess of Sussex , 41, jetted into the Midwest from California to be interviewed on-stage during the event billed 'The Power of Women: An Evening with Meghan'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## LittleStar88

LittleStar88 said:


> Looks like a tense exchange…
> 
> View attachment 5662052



An afterthought… She did not stay at the hotel where she was giving the speech? Fly in just before? Or stayed elsewhere because this venue wasn’t good enough?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
					

The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




 
_
The Duke of Sussex then appears half-way through the trailer in a game against a blonde-haired player.

As she goes to pick up the ball, the father-of-two is seen giving her an encouraging nod and smile.

He then proceeds to crouch down slightly for the camera as he prepares for her next serve.

After he fails to return her quick serve, the Prince cracks a smile, nods and walks back towards the entrance of the stadium to allow another player to take his spot.






Prince Harry appeared in the new trailer for the Invictus Games today. The Duke of Sussex was filmed playing two games of table tennis





The Duchess of Sussex appeared right at the end of the video as she competed against her husband. The mother-of-two gave Harry an encouraging smile and nod_


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
> 
> 
> The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So transparently trying to divert attention from the Real Royals arrival in Boston for Earthshot.

Their pathetic grab for headlines smells of desperation.

BTW, MEMEME “jetted in from California.”  Commercial?  Private?


----------



## bag-mania

Can’t get over the framed photos of her on the tables, both of them are ads. One was the Time 100 cover from last year that they bought won.


----------



## marietouchet

Golly, too exhausted to leave a cite, perhaps it is already posted here ..
and I have not read the whole article … racism at the palace … coinciding with Earthshot ..
I would just like a day without angst, let us be happy that efforts are made on climate issues
I choose to see the glass as half full, it is an old fashioned way of coping


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> What’s amazing to me is that the room looks full at $10k per table. (At least I think that was the going rate for buying a table at that event.) There are still a lot of people willing to shell out real $$$ to hear more of her word salad gibberish.


Hmm … at the academy Awards, they use extras to fill seats so the visuals of the audience look nicer


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> More photos - she definitely looks unhinged
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle leaving hotel in the US where she was guest speaker
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex , 41, jetted into the Midwest from California to be interviewed on-stage during the event billed 'The Power of Women: An Evening with Meghan'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The threats to her life … per retiring Met honcho … he is speaking because he is retiring … OK… did he retire this week just be coincident with stuff going on in Boston and Indianapolis
Too much of a coincidence 

If there’d were all these serious threats, why did this not come out 2 years ago when the Harkles were begging for security ??


----------



## Sharont2305

Earth Shot v Invictus promo. They just had to, didn't they?


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> The threats to her life … per retiring Met honcho … he is speaking because he is retiring … OK… did he retire this week just be coincident with stuff going on in Boston and Indianapolis
> Too much of a coincidence
> 
> If there’d were all these serious threats, why did this not come out 2 years ago when the Harkles were begging for security ??


The retiring Met guy appears to have a political ax to grind. He claims people have been prosecuted but he isn’t citing any specific incidents in his statements. Everything is deliberately vague.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
> 
> 
> The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Well, they may not be injured service men and women, but they may sound like mentally disabled self-serving people.


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> The retiring Met guy appears to have a political ax to grind. He claims people have been prosecuted but he isn’t citing any specific incidents in his statements. Everything is deliberately vague.


Agree, I too suspect an axe to grind but such a depressing topic …
It is as if the topic of racism raised with OW has now gone vicious … and it was NEVER confirmed that the claims on OW were valid

This is no longer a family misunderstanding type of thing … this is hard core revenge/animus/out for blood


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> An afterthought… She did not stay at the hotel where she was giving the speech? Fly in just before? Or stayed elsewhere because this venue wasn’t good enough?


"_The Duchess of Sussex, 41, jetted into the Midwest from California to be interviewed on-stage during the event billed 'The Power of Women: An Evening with Meghan'._" Source: DM

I wonder if she used Hazz's travel agency to book an organic flight. Oops, I'm reading too many word salads.


----------



## CobaltBlu

This is a good article, topic is the work of Camilla and Sophie have undertake with women and touches on how M&H have a different strategy with their charity and social works. 



			archive.ph


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I only found these… She looks like she’s got sand in her vagina.
> 
> View attachment 5662050
> 
> 
> View attachment 5662051



Oh wow, she was really looking forward to that one. She doesn't even pretend anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Looks like a tense exchange…
> 
> View attachment 5662052



WTF! Even the pointy finger comes out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex appeared right at the end of the video as she competed against her husband. The mother-of-two gave Harry an encouraging smile and nod_



This smile would encourage me to run. She looks unhinged even there.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> Agree, I too suspect an axe to grind but such a depressing topic …
> It is as if the topic of racism raised with OW has now gone vicious … *and it was NEVER confirmed that the claims on OW were valid*
> 
> This is no longer a family misunderstanding type of thing … this is hard core revenge/animus/out for blood


Accusations of racism are very serious and should never be done lightly. TW's brother was right when he allegedly informed the BRF of the risk they were taking by accepting her in the family. Though, I'm about to join the group that thinks what Hazz did to his own family is even worse…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> The threats to her life … per retiring Met honcho … he is speaking because he is retiring … OK… did he retire this week just be coincident with stuff going on in Boston and Indianapolis
> Too much of a coincidence
> 
> If there’d were all these serious threats, why did this not come out 2 years ago when the Harkles were begging for security ??



I literally came here to see if we'd discussed this.

I do believe him (though he might be embellishing for his very own reasons), but my question for him is: what are the threats other members of the BRF have received in the same timeframe? The Queen was shot at at a public parade once and could have broken her neck hadn't she been a stellar horsewoman.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
> 
> 
> The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's sad that Harry can't have one thing that is just his.  I would have a lot more respect for the games that he had a hand in creating if it was still just something that he was passionate about and took part in.

 The cringeworthy intro last year at the Invictus games, and the constant change of designer clothes and the meeting in Germany this last September where she appeared to take centre seating and now this?  She has to be the centre of everything and it has become a joke. 

She did all 12 of her podcrashes, yet I did not see Harry anywhere near them.  Uvalde, soup kitchens, you name it, it's all her and he is a bit player in the Meghan show. 

The embarrassing quote from Andy Cohen about how if he had known 13 years ago, he would have had her on his show (I'm paraphrasing).  Why?  Because she married a famous man and social climbed her way to celebrity without an ounce of talent?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This smile would encourage me to run. She looks unhinged even there.


Perhaps it is the angle of the photograph, it looks like she has a receding hairline, no?


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> Accusations of racism are very serious and should never be done lightly. TW's brother was right when he allegedly informed the BRF of the risk they were taking by accepting her in the family. Though, I'm about to join the group that thinks what Hazz did to his own family is even worse…



I agree how appalling Lady Susan Hussey lady in waiting to our beloved late Queen has been put in this situation I’m guessing she wished to retire and I can’t help but feel she has been set up to be blamed for the colour of TW s baby remark clearing the way for the gruesome twosome to return to royal life - the only royal palace they should be in is the Tower their actions amount to treason in olden terms


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I literally came here to see if we'd discussed this.
> 
> I do believe him, but my question for him is: what are the threats other members of the BRF have received in the same timeframe? The Queen was shot at at a public parade once and could have broken her neck hadn't she been a stellar horsewoman.


This exactly!  Did the reporter ask that question?  I have read over the years that members of the BRF are routinely threatened from nutjobs and they receive death threats daily.  This is why there is so much security.  I have no doubt that he is telling the truth, but without context, it is meaningless.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Accusations of racism are very serious and should never be done lightly. TW's brother was right when he allegedly informed the BRF of the risk they were taking by accepting her in the family. Though, I'm about to join the group that thinks what Hazz did to his own family is even worse…


Beware the hidden agenda.


----------



## Chanbal

Glad that she resigned. If this really happened, the alleged question was certainly tone deaf.

_"Ngozi, who was born in Britain, attended the event on behalf of domestic abuse charity Sistah Space to mark the UN's 16 days of activism against gender-based violence.

She said she was horrified when Lady Susan approached her, moved her hair to see her name badge and asked: "*Where do your people come from?*"_









						Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
					

A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Toby93




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Glad that she resigned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
> 
> 
> A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


This incident certainly gave the BRF an opportunity [?] to demonstrate how quickly they handle these matters as well as how seriously they take them, right?  Such an important show of strength on the eve of W&K’s visit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Is Fulani the one that always yells? I'd have things to say to her too. And to think she accused the BRF of domestic violence towards Ghoul 

But also, what was allegedly said?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> This exactly!  Did the reporter ask that question?  *I have read over the years that members of the BRF are routinely threatened from nutjobs and they receive death threats daily. * This is why there is so much security.  I have no doubt that he is telling the truth, but without context, it is meaningless.



That's what I thought (without being able to confirm because I wasn't that interested before).


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Glad that she resigned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
> 
> 
> A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



People (from everywhere) ask me this _all_ the time


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Glad that she resigned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
> 
> 
> A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Remember how MM told everyone that she has Nigerian antecedents? That was important to her, her audience, others
The lady in waiting was trying to get at the same info, in a terribly bad/awkward/rude/inappropriate/cringe worthy fashion. Of course, we have heard only one side of the story... recollections may vary.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




Probably asking the shop keeper for donations more likely


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Glad that she resigned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
> 
> 
> A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Ouch. That said, even the article says allegedly. With literally everyone else I'd take it at face value and believe this conversation absolutely took place, but Ghoul's supporters are so f*cking crazy and they know very well even the accusation will do damage whether it's true or not. I'll go with "When in doubt side with the victim", but doubt I do have.


----------



## Katel

LittleStar88 said:


> I only found these… She looks like she’s got sand in her vagina.
> 
> View attachment 5662050
> 
> 
> View attachment 5662051


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF! Even the pointy finger comes out.





Klaaaassy! (in my best Lady C Megain imitation)


----------



## TC1

What does Invictus Games (for wounded veterans) have to do with these 2 idiots playing ping pong?? 
Also, glad to see MM speaking on sustainable change while jet-setting around the world (I'm sure on a private plane)


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> He never was on Jon Stewart’s level imo. Lost lots of viewers initially.  Never that funny, never that insightful, just a disgruntled, unhappy employee.  One of the best features of the internet is we never need to watch a whole show. Watch a few clips and his complaining personality comes through.
> 
> So, she has surrounded herself with fussy, unhappy, z list victims.  Wonder what OW thinks of that.
> 
> View attachment 5661849
> 
> 
> 
> Delighted this vanity pod-rash is over.
> View attachment 5661850


IDK if you can call trevor z-list.  there was a story about his apartment in NY.....Huge and impressive with floor to ceiling windows


----------



## Katel

Haha I like this lady best


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Count the titles



Ugh! Yesterday countless repetitions of her name and title.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
> 
> 
> The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex then appears half-way through the trailer in a game against a blonde-haired player.
> 
> As she goes to pick up the ball, the father-of-two is seen giving her an encouraging nod and smile.
> 
> He then proceeds to crouch down slightly for the camera as he prepares for her next serve.
> 
> After he fails to return her quick serve, the Prince cracks a smile, nods and walks back towards the entrance of the stadium to allow another player to take his spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared in the new trailer for the Invictus Games today. The Duke of Sussex was filmed playing two games of table tennis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex appeared right at the end of the video as she competed against her husband. The mother-of-two gave Harry an encouraging smile and nod_


Today, "encouraging nod and smile" transposed as "encouraging smile and nod".

Some twerp doing their PR must have attended a course on how "Repetition will reinforce your message".

ETA: just read the Girl Scouts of Indiana's replies as to who paid for their table and it is a real bot fest! The same line repeated ad nauseum.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> People (from everywhere) ask me this _all_ the time


I know, people love to ask this type of questions. In the US, we all came originally from somewhere else, which is part of the beauty of this country.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> If Howard Stern’s comments are true, gal pal OW can pay, especially since it is a charitable cause.


NM


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ouch. That said, even the article says allegedly. With literally everyone else I'd take it at face value and believe this conversation absolutely took place, but Ghoul's supporters are so f*cking crazy and they know very well even the accusation will do damage whether it's true or not. I'll go with "When in doubt side with the victim", but doubt I do have.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

Katel said:


> View attachment 5662132
> 
> Klaaaassy! (in my best Lady C Megain imitation)
> 
> View attachment 5662144


The Invictus Games are_ next September_.  Why was this video released _today_, the day the Prince and Princess of Wales arrive in Boston and press are focused on them?  This is all becoming so predicable and laughable.


----------



## carmen56

LittleStar88 said:


> I only found these… She looks like she’s got sand in her vagina.
> 
> View attachment 5662050
> 
> 
> View attachment 5662051


She doesn’t look at all happy!


----------



## DoggieBags

Toby93 said:


> This exactly!  Did the reporter ask that question?  I have read over the years that members of the BRF are routinely threatened from nutjobs and they receive death threats daily.  This is why there is so much security.  I have no doubt that he is telling the truth, but without context, it is meaningless.


Going further back, someone shot Princess Anne’s body guard and tried to pull her out of the car in a kidnapping attempt.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> The Invictus Games are_ next September_.  Why was this video released _today_, the day the Prince and Princess of Wales arrive in Boston and press are focused on them?  This is all becoming so predicable and laughable.



Right?! Ridiculous, desperate, sad, and obvious.


----------



## scarlet555

papertiger said:


> People (from everywhere) ask me this _all_ the time


true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.

I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo

from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/

_Aide: Where are you from?
Me: Sistah Space.
Aide: No, where do you come from?
Me: We’re based in Hackney.
Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
Me: Here, UK
Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
Me: I am born here and am British.
Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Glad that she resigned. If this really happened, the alleged question was certainly tone deaf.
> 
> _"Ngozi, who was born in Britain, attended the event on behalf of domestic abuse charity Sistah Space to mark the UN's 16 days of activism against gender-based violence.
> 
> She said she was horrified when Lady Susan approached her, moved her hair to see her name badge and asked: "*Where do your people come from?*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
> 
> 
> A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



the behavior was tone deaf and inappropriate.  but the woman is probably in her eighties or nineties.  she probably thought the victim was "foreign" due to her "costume".  It does look different from what most people would be wearing.
Does not excuse the behavior - touching her and repeating over and over "where are you from?"

Racism is real.  I heard recently from a dark skinned Mexican-American friend who was born and educated here that he was asked by an employer if he was "legal"


----------



## csshopper

Interesting juxtaposition in the news today: The future King and Queen at work on major environmental issues focusing on the survival of our planet while the Sussexes are featured playing table tennis.

A good example of  Harry’s lack of achievement in life and TW’s continuing emasculation of him as head of Invictus.

It’s a striking contrast between a couple who are a team vs a couple who compete with each other.


----------



## Toby93

scarlet555 said:


> true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.
> 
> I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo
> 
> from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/
> 
> _Aide: Where are you from?
> Me: Sistah Space.
> Aide: No, where do you come from?
> Me: We’re based in Hackney.
> Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
> Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
> Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
> Me: Here, UK
> Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
> Me: I am born here and am British.
> Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
> Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
> Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
> Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
> Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
> Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
> Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_


This is one side of the story.  Lady SH has been with the palace for decades, so I am not sure how much of this I believe.  She has never put a foot out of place and is the epitome of decorum.  She may have asked a question, but I have my suspicions of this whole drawn out conversation.

Yes absolutely, racism is real, but I really have doubts about this transcript.  It just looks so awkward.


----------



## Toby93

People are pointing out that the hairline is different and the mole is missing


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> This is one side of the story.  Lady SH has been with the palace for decades, so I am not sure how much of this I believe.  She has never put a foot out of place and is the epitome of decorum.  She may have asked a question, but I have my suspicions of this whole drawn out conversation.
> 
> Yes absolutely, racism is real, but I really have doubts about this transcript.  It just looks so awkward.


I have to admit on this one I didn't pay attention to the source.....everything about these two is subject to skepticism


----------



## elvisfan4life

scarlet555 said:


> true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.
> 
> I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo
> 
> from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/
> 
> _Aide: Where are you from?
> Me: Sistah Space.
> Aide: No, where do you come from?
> Me: We’re based in Hackney.
> Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
> Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
> Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
> Me: Here, UK
> Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
> Me: I am born here and am British.
> Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
> Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
> Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
> Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
> Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
> Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
> Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_


“Crazy” lady is a member of the British aristocracy they do not behave as you would expect them to in 21 century USA - it was a meeting at a royal palace where the lady has spent most of her 80decades in service to the royal family I think she should be cut some slack about what is and isn’t acceptable these days- I think a lot of us who are decades younger than her often feel uncomfortable and keep quiet as we are too scared to be accused of racism if we open our mouths -how sad is that? I’d hate for our eldest generation to feel scared to speak these days they deserve more respect than that


----------



## jelliedfeels

At least Fulani is actually willing to name names and give an account of what was said. That’s much bolder than the inconsistent vague posting of H&M. 

They accept this happened without the usual investigation whereas they have basically denied anything happened with H&M.
This is because the reality is a lady in waiting is disposable so it’s in the BRF’s interest to acknowledge this happened and make an example of her regardless of whether she actually had bad intentions or if it even happened because they get to show they are against racism without having to harm the inner circle. 

This is what they always do when they are in for bad news - they just sack a servant. 

That said, Fulani claiming M suffered domestic violence has made me lose a lot of respect for her and wonder what exactly her charity does.


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.
> 
> I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo
> 
> from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/
> 
> _Aide: Where are you from?
> Me: Sistah Space.
> Aide: No, where do you come from?
> Me: We’re based in Hackney.
> Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
> Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
> Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
> Me: Here, UK
> Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
> Me: I am born here and am British.
> Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
> Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
> Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
> Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
> Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
> Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
> Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_


If the above transcript is accurate, Lady Hussey sounded like an arrogant old lady. If I were Fulani, I would have asked her precisely the same questions until getting back to the Adam and Eve's generation.


----------



## elvisfan4life

All the people confirming her story are TW fans -suspicious timing or what ? Lady Susan has been the Queens confidante all her life but suddenly- is she being thrown under the  “let’s get H&M back “ bus?? If so my respect for Charles sinks yet again


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> If the above transcript is accurate, Lady Hussey sounded like an arrogant old lady. If I were Fulani, I would have asked her precisely the same questions until getting back to the Adam and Eve's generation.


Do you would have found the Queen an arrogant old lady too good job you aren’t a British subject


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> All the people confirming her story are TW fans -suspicious timing or what ? Lady Susan has been the Queens confidante all her life but suddenly- is she being thrown under the  “let’s get H&M back “ bus?? If so my respect for Charles sinks yet again


It's very possible that the interactions were different and she is being thrown under the bus. Unfortunately, some people can be very cruel.


----------



## Chanbal

elvisfan4life said:


> Do you would have found the Queen an arrogant old lady too good job you aren’t a British subject


Please note, I said if the above dialogue is true. I don't think QE would entertain this type of tone deaf conversation. With all respect, I prefer not to address the second part of your statement as I enjoy cordial exchange of ideas.


----------



## lanasyogamama

This part is rough. 

_Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?_


----------



## Nutashha

Unbelievable! What do you guys think?
Is Meghan Trying to Get Kate Middleton on her Podcast?​


----------



## elvisfan4life

elvisfan4life said:


> All the people confirming her story are TW fans -suspicious timing or what ? Lady Susan has been the Queens confidante all her life but suddenly- is she being thrown under the  “let’s get H&M back “ bus?? If so my respect for Charles sinks yet again


And her daughter is one of Camillas lifelong friends and one of her new companions ( new name for ladies in waiting ) Will she get sacked too ???


----------



## V0N1B2

Nutashha said:


> Unbelievable! What do you guys think?
> Is Meghan Trying to Get Kate Middleton on her Podcast?​
> View attachment 5662179


Fake (and old) News. Final podcast has aired.


----------



## scarlet555

Toby93 said:


> This is one side of the story.  Lady SH has been with the palace for decades, so I am not sure how much of this I believe.  She has never put a foot out of place and is the epitome of decorum.  She may have asked a question, but I have my suspicions of this whole drawn out conversation.
> 
> Yes absolutely, racism is real, but I really have doubts about this transcript.  It just looks so awkward.


True it's one sided story, but who are you going to ask if it's offensive to?  The person asking or the person receiving?  And Fulani did NOT name Lady sh...  in her twitter, she may have told people, but she didn't name her.  Not one bit surprised that people that live in those over 100 year old castle are racist.  Now they've been found, maybe people are not afraid to speak out against their treatment by a bunch of ar$eholes...  Lady sh should just say-it was completely racist and I own it and I want to change even if I'm 200 years old...  maybe she wasn't racist, just a bully  or both whatever... what do arrogant people do?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> This exactly!  Did the reporter ask that question?  I have read over the years that members of the BRF are routinely threatened from nutjobs and they receive death threats daily.  This is why there is so much security.  I have no doubt that he is telling the truth, but without context, it is meaningless.


I'm not disputing the reports, but the police officer Neil Basu who defended ZedZed, may also have an axe to grind. From Wiki, "Basu has stated he believes British policing is institutionally racist, criticising other senior British police officers for their reluctance to agree."


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm not disputing the reports, but the police officer Neil Basu who defended ZedZed, may also have an axe to grind. From Wiki, "Basu has stated he believes British policing is institutionally racist, criticising other senior British police officers for their reluctance to agree."


He’s got an agenda for sure. Does anyone honestly believe if there was a verifiable threat like he described it wouldn’t have been all over the news for months? The press eats that stuff up. Look at how his statement has gone viral when the supposed events happened three or four years ago.

Harry and Meghan themselves would have delightedly milked such a story for sympathy in the Oprah interview if it had been true. I bet they are sorry they didn’t think of it.


----------



## Handbag1234

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This smile would encourage me to run. She looks unhinged even there.


She’s giving me ‘Serena’ from the Handmaids Tale vibes. She’d fit right in in Gilead.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ouch. That said, even the article says allegedly. With literally everyone else I'd take it at face value and believe this conversation absolutely took place, but Ghoul's supporters are so f*cking crazy and they know very well even the accusation will do damage whether it's true or not. I'll go with "When in doubt side with the victim", but doubt I do have.


Imo, there seems to be a concerted effort to discredit the RF and to have everyone believe lying liar ZedZed's stories even though most of her lies, especially the ones from the OW sideshow have already been debunked.


----------



## marietouchet

scarlet555 said:


> true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.
> 
> I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo
> 
> from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/
> 
> _Aide: Where are you from?
> Me: Sistah Space.
> Aide: No, where do you come from?
> Me: We’re based in Hackney.
> Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
> Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
> Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
> Me: Here, UK
> Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
> Me: I am born here and am British.
> Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
> Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
> Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
> Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
> Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
> Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
> Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_


At these affairs, name tags are needed so that everyone knows who you are
It is the job of the personal assistants /ladies in waiting to make sure the name tag is showing when the guest meets Camilla - so that C knows who they are
Yes moving the hair out of the way is invading someone’s space but saying “Would you please make sure your name tag is showing” also has an awkward ring, how would you handle this ?

Hmm, this is an extremely long conversation to be remembered verbatim - with quotes …
The good thing is that the Palace acted swiftly


----------



## Toby93

elvisfan4life said:


> All the people confirming her story are TW fans -suspicious timing or what ? Lady Susan has been the Queens confidante all her life but suddenly- is she being thrown under the  “let’s get H&M back “ bus?? If so my respect for Charles sinks yet again





elvisfan4life said:


> All the people confirming her story are TW fans -suspicious timing or what ? Lady Susan has been the Queens confidante all her life but suddenly- is she being thrown under the  “let’s get H&M back “ bus?? If so my respect for Charles sinks yet again


I'd say very suspicious.....


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Please note, I said if the above dialogue is true. I don't think QE would entertain this type of tone deaf conversation. With all respect, I prefer not to address the second part of your statement as I enjoy cordial exchange of ideas.


This is why I think it's been embellished....a lot.  It may have been an innocent enough question, but I think it is all coming from one side and recollections may vary.


----------



## Toby93

scarlet555 said:


> True it's one sided story, but who are you going to ask if it's offensive to?  The person asking or the person receiving?  And Fulani did NOT name Lady sh...  in her twitter, she may have told people, but she didn't name her.  Not one bit surprised that people that live in those over 100 year old castle are racist.  Now they've been found, maybe people are not afraid to speak out against their treatment by a bunch of ar$eholes...  Lady sh should just say-it was completely racist and I own it and I want to change even if I'm 200 years old...  maybe she wasn't racist, just a bully  or both whatever... what do arrogant people do?


It appears she did name her on Twitter, and who wrote up the transcript?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

elvisfan4life said:


> All the people confirming her story are TW fans -suspicious timing or what ? Lady Susan has been the Queens confidante all her life but suddenly- is she being thrown under the  “let’s get H&M back “ bus?? If so my respect for Charles sinks yet again


1. yes she was thrown under the bus by BP/KCIII
2. I don’t think the reason is to get back the Harkles into the fold
3. I think the reason was to SHUT DOWN the topic before the EARTHSHOT prize, the only way to do that was to CAVE
4. there is more to the story than we know ?
5 PS don’t forget yesterday’s dirty laundry DL - threats to MM. The whole mess is greater than the sum of the parts when you have 2 DL stories at same time 

Remember, WandC had trip to Caribbean ruined by racism accusations a few days earlier, the Palace was not going to let this happen twice ?

SH is very experienced, and perhaps knew she had to take one for the team


----------



## marietouchet

I don’t believe in coincidences, there is major PR at work here
1. Complaints about lady in waiting 
2. disgusting threats to MM
3. First MM speaking event
4. Ping pong video


----------



## marietouchet

Just saying … name tag not showing


----------



## LizzieBennett

marietouchet said:


> I don’t believe in coincidences, there is major PR at work here
> 1. Complaints about lady in waiting
> 2. disgusting threats to MM
> 3. First MM speaking event
> 4. Ping pong video











						Who is Lady Susan Hussey? The palace ‘head girl’ who quit in race row
					

The resignation of Lady Susan Hussey brings to a humiliating end the career of one of the best-loved and well-regarded members of the royal household.As a lady-




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




According to this article in The Times, she was asked by the Queen to help both Diana and MM settle into married life.


----------



## TC1

LizzieBennett said:


> Who is Lady Susan Hussey? The palace ‘head girl’ who quit in race row
> 
> 
> The resignation of Lady Susan Hussey brings to a humiliating end the career of one of the best-loved and well-regarded members of the royal household.As a lady-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to this article in The Times, she was asked by the Queen to help both Diana and MM settle into married life.


Well then..she was 0 for 2


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LizzieBennett said:


> Who is Lady Susan Hussey? The palace ‘head girl’ who quit in race row
> 
> 
> The resignation of Lady Susan Hussey brings to a humiliating end the career of one of the best-loved and well-regarded members of the royal household.As a lady-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to this article in The Times, she was asked by the Queen to help both Diana and MM settle into married life.





TC1 said:


> Well then..she was 0 for 2


Sad but true, that it's difficult for a teacher to work miracles with recalcitrant students.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> And her daughter is one of Camillas lifelong friends and one of her new companions ( new name for ladies in waiting ) Will she get sacked too ???
> 
> View attachment 5662187


Lady Susan will retire to the country which is what she should have done after TQ passed.  She has done more than her share of service.  I think her remarks were unfortunate and she should have known better.  The timing was terrible.  I am not excusing her either because as a courtier, she knew she wasn't being diplomatic and she pushed too far.


----------



## lallybelle

I don't see why people are saying she's being "thrown under the bus". The lady who these remarks were to would have pointed out who said it even if she didn't name her in her twitter spree. I'm sure BP at least checked with Lady Susan before any action to confirm what was said. Her remarks were inappropriate and unfortunate in any way you spin it. In this case it at least shows BP will take decisive action if such things occur. You can't confront or combat accusations of racism while appearing to condone it or cover it up.


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



my favorite green....LOL


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Glad that she resigned. If this really happened, the alleged question was certainly tone deaf.
> 
> _"Ngozi, who was born in Britain, attended the event on behalf of domestic abuse charity Sistah Space to mark the UN's 16 days of activism against gender-based violence.
> 
> She said she was horrified when Lady Susan approached her, moved her hair to see her name badge and asked: "*Where do your people come from?*"_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen's pal resigns after asking black guest 'where are you really from?'
> 
> 
> A ROYAL staff member has today resigned after allegedly asking a black guest at Buckingham Palace: “Where are you really from?” Lady Susan Hussey, a pal of the late Queen, is said to ha…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



You know, I've been afraid to ask where someone is from.

We have 250 ethnicities in Toronto, we are considered one of the most diverse cities in the world.  More of Toronto's residents were born abroad than in NYC.

But it's considered a microaggression and now I don't learn anything about different cultures or learn the unique accents when really, I just like learning new things.


----------



## TC1

gracekelly said:


> Lady Susan will retire to the country which is what she should have done after TQ passed.  She has done more than her share of service.  I think her remarks were unfortunate and she should have known better.  The timing was terrible.  I am not excusing her either because as a courtier, she knew she wasn't being diplomatic and she pushed too far.


KC was slimming down the staff, sooo, not a big loss per se. I'm sure she would have rather gone on a more positive note though


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

scarlet555 said:


> true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.
> 
> I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo
> 
> from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/
> 
> _Aide: Where are you from?
> Me: Sistah Space.
> Aide: No, where do you come from?
> Me: We’re based in Hackney.
> Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
> Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
> Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
> Me: Here, UK
> Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
> Me: I am born here and am British.
> Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
> Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
> Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
> Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
> Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
> Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
> Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_



If this happened like this she has absolutely every right to be p*ssed. And I have a very strict "Don't touch" rule. But I have a really hard time understanding how a wellbred, reserved British lady of her generation that has worked for the BRF for decades could end up so pushy and personal with a total stranger.


----------



## TC1

Jayne1 said:


> You know, I've been afraid to ask where someone is from.
> 
> We have 250 ethnicities in Toronto, we are considered one of the most diverse cities in the world.  More of Toronto's residents were born abroad than in NYC.
> 
> But it's considered a microaggression and now I don't learn anything about different cultures or learn the unique accents when really, I just like learning new things.


Yes, but if you asked someone where they were from and they said "Toronto" you would most likely not prod further and say something else insinuating you know they aren't "from" Toronto.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> the behavior was tone deaf and inappropriate.  but the woman is probably in her eighties or nineties.  she probably thought the victim was "foreign" due to her "costume".  It does look different from what most people would be wearing.
> Does not excuse the behavior - touching her and repeating over and over "where are you from?"



It absolutely does not. Lady Hussey was completely out of line if that exchange happened like narrated.

But also: So you do look very visibly not of British heritage and like to wear clothes from another culture, of course that invites speculation. She could have cut that conversation very short but apparently she was in a mood to play that day.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> It’s a striking contrast between a couple who are a team vs a couple who compete with each other.



I don't even think he competes with her, he has never tried to intrude into her space or projects. She can't bear to see him having something on his own and being successful. Remember that alleged fight in NYC..."Why can't you ever be happy for me?".


----------



## needlv

Ooh burn!


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Ooh burn!



Yay!  Someone finally noticed.


----------



## LittleStar88

It surprises me that they don’t offer some kind of “sensitivity training” for these BRF staff and family members who interface with any visitors who are not immediate family behind closed doors. I get that elderly people tend to get off the script and say the wrong things, but much of this can be avoided with the right kind of coaching. And from there you could tell which ones don’t “get it” and be sure to limit their exposure.


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> Lady Susan will retire to the country which is what she should have done after TQ passed.  She has done more than her share of service.  I think her remarks were unfortunate and she should have known better.  The timing was terrible.  I am not excusing her either because as a courtier, she knew she wasn't being diplomatic and she pushed too far.



She was being both rude and patronising. I'm glad she's gone TBH


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> It surprises me that they don’t offer some kind of “sensitivity training” for these BRF staff and family members who interface with any visitors who are not immediate family behind closed doors. I get that elderly people tend to get off the script and say the wrong things, but much of this can be avoided with the right kind of coaching. And from there you could tell which ones don’t “get it” and be sure to limit their exposure.


her reaction was out of line but that woman's attire was different from everyone else - kinda costumey - doesn't excuse the pushy behavior but I can see where it could have created some curiousity


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> It surprises me that they don’t offer some kind of “sensitivity training” for these BRF staff and family members who interface with any visitors who are not immediate family behind closed doors. I get that elderly people tend to get off the script and say the wrong things, but much of this can be avoided with the right kind of coaching. And from there you could tell which ones don’t “get it” and be sure to limit their exposure.


This is particularly true in light of the fact that people tend to lose their verbal filter as they age.


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> her reaction was out of line but that woman's attire was different from everyone else - kinda costumey - doesn't excuse the pushy behavior but I can see where it could have created some curiousity



I agree. It would be impossible to show up in a way that would prompt questions without expecting people to ask. But… I personally would never ask those types of questions at first meeting.

I work for a multicultural company and many people show up in non-Western outfits. I just ignore the clothing and my personal curiosities and stick to talking about the weather, so to speak.


----------



## lanasyogamama

TC1 said:


> KC was slimming down the staff, sooo, not a big loss per se. I'm sure she would have rather gone on a more positive note though


Was she a paid staff member?


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> Was she a paid staff member?


I suspect she was as a Lady in Waiting.  She had to have had certain expenses that were covered, but who knows?  Maybe the honor is considered to be payment enough.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I suspect she was as a Lady in Waiting.  She had to have had certain expenses that were covered, but who knows?  Maybe the honor is considered to be payment enough.


well, if she worked in whatever capacity into her 80's or 90's that's a pretty good run
So many "regular" working people are laid off/discarded by companies in their 40's, 50's, 60's to make room for cheaper younger labor


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> well, if she worked in whatever capacity into her 80's or 90's that's a pretty good run
> So many "regular" working people are laid off/discarded by companies in their 40's, 50's, 60's to make room for cheaper younger labor


She won't be that far away if her daughter is one of C's lady/assistants.  They can call her up if they have questions.


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> Was she a paid staff member?


Ladies in waiting were never paid staff they are the highest levels of nobility ironically the first question the Queen asked was always where are you from


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> I suspect she was as a Lady in Waiting.  She had to have had certain expenses that were covered, but who knows?  Maybe the honor is considered to be payment enough.



Pretty sure she has/will get a Grace and Favour home too


----------



## elvisfan4life

gracekelly said:


> I suspect she was as a Lady in Waiting.  She had to have had certain expenses that were covered, but who knows?  Maybe the honor is considered to be payment enough.


She was the lady in the car with the Queen as she travelled to Philips funeral during lockdown when only 30 could attend that will give you some idea of how important she was to the Queen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> my favorite green....LOL



Meghan really loves that Green Hornet green.


----------



## elvisfan4life

sdkitty said:


> well, if she worked in whatever capacity into her 80's or 90's that's a pretty good run
> So many "regular" working people are laid off/discarded by companies in their 40's, 50's, 60's to make room for cheaper younger labor


Google ladies in waiting


----------



## elvisfan4life

papertiger said:


> Pretty sure she has/will get a Grace and Favour home too


She is unlikely to need one


----------



## marietouchet

elvisfan4life said:


> Google ladies in waiting


I am thinking that SH in her DECADES as lady in waiting, has been confronted with other episodes where she took one for the team
It is part of the idea of SERVICE - being part of a team
She likely deserves so much more recognition


----------



## 880

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If this happened like this she has absolutely every right to be p*ssed. And I have a very strict "Don't touch" rule. But I have a really hard time understanding how a wellbred, reserved British lady of her generation that has worked for the BRF for decades could end up so pushy and personal with a total stranger.


I think it’s been confirmed that this happened. IMO it’s far more than unfortunate and entitled. I do think that the apology should have been personally given rather than through a spokesperson. Like others here, I get asked this question all the time too, but those asking are not prominent members of the BRF. I am sorry that this shadows Earthshot, but I do not doubt that there is racism in the BRF. What I do question, is that M ever experienced this from the BRF, to the point of suicidal ideation, since she identified as Caucasian until it became convenient to do otherwise.

ETA: I am not Caucasian, and other people of color, especially older ones, do ask me this question. But, I don’t give Lady Susan a pass simply bc someone of her senior stature in the BRF should know better. If she does not, she should or at least take it upon herself to be briefed so as not to appear tone deaf (at the very least). Failure to be properly briefed or informed is something for which we all take M to task.


----------



## charlottawill

This is informative. Interestingly, one of Camilla's six new "companions" is the mother of the woman who introduced Harry to MM. 



> https://news.sky.com/story/who-is-lady-susan-hussey-and-what-is-a-lady-in-waiting-12758815


----------



## gracekelly

elvisfan4life said:


> She was the lady in the car with the Queen as she travelled to Philips funeral during lockdown when only 30 could attend that will give you some idea of how important she was to the Queen


Believe me, I didn't forget that.  I also think she was front and center to all the BS that came from the Harkes  and it has welled up inside of her and made her angry.  I see two things that might have happened.  She could have been set up to respond the way she did. The other is that she had a mixture of feelings about people using ethnicity for gain and/or to make points whether they be good or bad.  Obviously she witnessed Meghan using racism at every turn and it galled her knowing that it wasn't true of the family.  When a person has anger that has slowly been brewing, it can manifest itself in many ways.  Lady Susan, despite training, blew her cork when she wasn't given a straight answer and might have thought that the Fulani was having her on.    The woman could have answered Lady Susan in one sentence, but she didn't.

I am still not completely excusing her, but I think her stress over The Queen's death and all that she personally witnessed over the  past years pushed her over the edge.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Believe me, I didn't forget that.  I also think she was front and center to all the BS that came from the Harkes  and it has welled up inside of her and made her angry.  I see two things that might have happened.  She could have been set up to respond the way she did. The other is that she had a mixture of feelings about people using ethnicity for gain and/or to make points whether they be good or bad.  Obviously she witnessed Meghan using racism at every turn and it galled her knowing that it wasn't true of the family.  When a person has anger that has slowly been brewing, it can manifest itself in many ways.  Lady Susan, despite training, blew her cork when she wasn't given a straight answer and might have thought that the Fulani was having her on.    The woman could have answered Lady Susan in one sentence, but she didn't.
> 
> I am still not completely excusing her, but I think her stress over The Queen's death and all that she personally witnessed over the  past years pushed her over the edge.


I'm sure she is still mourning the Queen. They were together for more than 60 years. I'm not condoning what she said or did, but I'm also inclined to believe the woman who made the accusation did it to further her own agenda.


----------



## Jayne1

lanasyogamama said:


> Was she a paid staff member?


I read they are not paid but expenses are covered.

I would hope that would mean transportation, proper attire and lunch.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> her reaction was out of line but that woman's attire was different from everyone else - kinda costumey - doesn't excuse the pushy behavior but I can see where it could have created some curiousity


Yes, and if they say here, London (for example) you just know they are not having that conversation with you. So back to talking about the weather I suppose.


----------



## mikimoto007

elvisfan4life said:


> Ladies in waiting were never paid staff they are the highest levels of nobility ironically the first question the Queen asked was always where are you from



I think have you come far was the standard question from the Queen, precisely for this reason.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I read they are not paid but expenses are covered.
> 
> I would hope that would mean transportation, proper attire and lunch.


If they don't give me lunch, I'm staying home.  However, I would take a tiara as recompense!


----------



## mikimoto007

marietouchet said:


> Remember how MM told everyone that she has Nigerian antecedents? That was important to her, her audience, others
> The lady in waiting was trying to get at the same info, in a terribly bad/awkward/rude/inappropriate/cringe worthy fashion. Of course, we have heard only one side of the story... recollections may vary.



you are of course right….but there’s been no rebuttal from the Palace and an immediate resignation has been offered, so i Suspect the transcript is correct.


----------



## elvisfan4life

mikimoto007 said:


> you are of course right….but there’s been no rebuttal from the Palace and an immediate resignation has been offered, so i Suspect the transcript is correct.


I suspect the palace is just keen to avoid any further complaints of institutionalised racism and have thrown a loyal lady under the bus - remember Philip and Harry have both made more overtly racist comments in the past and no action taken


----------



## mikimoto007

elvisfan4life said:


> I suspect the palace is just keen to avoid any further complaints of institutionalised racism and have thrown a loyal lady under the bus - remember Philip and Harry have both made more overtly racist comments in the past and no action taken


Of course they did, but in a very different time frame. Society has made leaps and bounds in the time since regarding views on racism and tolerance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## scarlet555

elvisfan4life said:


> I suspect the palace is just keen to avoid any further complaints of institutionalised racism and have thrown a loyal lady under the bus - remember Philip and Harry have both made more overtly racist comments in the past and no action taken


Try that today no matter your rank...  too many enemies and hatred to make such foolish mistake


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> This.  She is spending so much of her life and energy dealing with real or perceived slights and grievances, rather than letting go and moving on.
> 
> *Let go Megs*.  You aren’t going to be the same as William and Catherine (and never were going to be).
> 
> Focus on building a new brand, with a hopeful outlook


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> ​do you think Megs has checked out this forum?​​Blind Item #6​
> 
> The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors and if she hadn't got married to who she did get married to, she would be begging to get on the show and have a steady pay check.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


100%

Although since we rarely call her by her actual name, she'd have to have Google alerts for things like, "TW", "the Wench", "MeGain", "Mememe", etc.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> This is particularly true in light of the fact that people tend to lose their verbal filter as they age.


LOL, have you been talking to my daughter?


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
> 
> 
> The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex then appears half-way through the trailer in a game against a blonde-haired player.
> 
> As she goes to pick up the ball, the father-of-two is seen giving her an encouraging nod and smile.
> 
> He then proceeds to crouch down slightly for the camera as he prepares for her next serve.
> 
> After he fails to return her quick serve, the Prince cracks a smile, nods and walks back towards the entrance of the stadium to allow another player to take his spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared in the new trailer for the Invictus Games today. The Duke of Sussex was filmed playing two games of table tennis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex appeared right at the end of the video as she competed against her husband. The mother-of-two gave Harry an encouraging smile and nod_


Sounds absolutely exhilarating.


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> true, but from the transcripts, Fulani didn't feel comfortable with the question and the crazy lady just kept on pressing, signing her cancel me contract.  The 'lady' removed Fulani's hair to see her name badge, what kind of crap is that-keep your place and space crazy lady!  It really seems like intimidation and harrassment from Fulani's perspective, and it doesn't seem like she was interested in the cause as much as the color of Fulani's skin and her origin-it would have been different if crazy lady was engaging in a conversation and later if relevant of any sorts asked about heritage and roots, but just to come up to someone and move their hair and start asking about roots race and origins... I mean... WTF-I'd be pissed if someone started with that... it undermines them as a person IMO and focus on their difference only.
> 
> I mean, you are at a convention someone comes up to you, pushes away your hair to see your name and ask where you are originally from?  No other precursor to that?  WTF that's some racist sh!t right there... imo
> 
> from Marie Claire  https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/lady-susan-hussey-resigns-racism/
> 
> _Aide: Where are you from?
> Me: Sistah Space.
> Aide: No, where do you come from?
> Me: We’re based in Hackney.
> Aide: No, what part of Africa are YOU from?
> Me: I don’t know, they didn’t leave any records.
> Aide: Well, you must know where you’re from, I spent time in France. Where are you from?
> Me: Here, UK
> Aide: NO, but what Nationality are you?
> Me: I am born here and am British.
> Aide: No, but where do you really come from, where do your people come from?
> Me: 'My people', lady, what is this?
> Aide: Oh I can see I am going to have a challenge getting you to say where you’re from. When did you first come here?
> Me: Lady! I am a British national, my parents came here in the 50s when…
> Aide: Oh, I knew we’d get there in the end, you’re Caribbean!
> Me: No Lady, I am of African heritage, Caribbean descent and British nationality.
> Aide: Oh, so you’re from…_


Was she recording the whole conversation?  Who has a transcript of their entire conversation word for word?


----------



## CarryOn2020

purseinsanity said:


> Was she recording the whole conversation?  Who has a transcript of their entire conversation word for word?


Finally, my question, too.  Very likely at these functions, people are recording for their insta, Fbook, tweet.   Notice how close she was to Queen Camilla. 

Imo it is time for the _galas _to end. _No one needs a gala to be honored, recognized or anything else._  The money hosting one of these things is better spent in other ways. They are a waste of food, drink and time.  It is ego-trip to attend, ego-trip  to host one.  Time to end it. Yes, even W&K’s upcoming events are ego-trips for those involved. Imo.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> If this happened like this she has absolutely every right to be p*ssed. And I have a very strict "Don't touch" rule. But I have a really hard time understanding how a wellbred, reserved British lady of her generation that has worked for the BRF for decades could end up so pushy and personal with a total stranger.


Maybe it was because she was dressed in African garb and she was truly interested in where she originated from.  If I showed up in a kilt, maybe someone would ask if I was from Scotland?  Would I take offense?  Attention seeking outfit, but didn't want attention?


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> Was she recording the whole conversation?  Who has a transcript of their entire conversation word for word?


Exactly....smells a bit fishy


----------



## purseinsanity

As a POC, I can personally testify that racism definitely exists.  At the same time, I personally am not offended by things like people asking where I'm really from, where I was born, what my background is, etc., especially if I showed up in my native dress.  I love people to try to eat my food, learn my culture, and I really don't care if people wear clothes from my country, or other things that are now considered "cultural appropriation".  If someone said "You people" in a derogatory manner, it would be a different matter.

I am not excusing SH's behavior at all, but I do know when I first met DH's (then BF) grandmother, she was in her late 90's and had started experiencing dementia.  DH begged me not to judge her for things she may or may not say.  He said she and his grandfather had visited my country and often said it was her absolute favorite country in the world, but in her advanced age, he said she may say something totally offensive.  She didn't, but I wasn't going to hold it against her if she had.


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> ​do you think Megs has checked out this forum?​​Blind Item #6​
> 
> The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors and if she hadn't got married to who she did get married to, she would be begging to get on the show and have a steady pay check.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blind Item #6
> 
> 
> The alliterate one has a Google alert for her name that she checks every hour like clockwork. Of course she knew about the Housewives rumors...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.crazydaysandnights.net


If she does, this one's for you Meggy dear...


----------



## CarryOn2020

End these ego-trip activities.  The pandemic proved we do not need these antiquated shows of wealth and ego.
Imo.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Believe me, I didn't forget that.  I also think she was front and center to all the BS that came from the Harkes  and it has welled up inside of her and made her angry.  I see two things that might have happened.  She could have been set up to respond the way she did. The other is that she had a mixture of feelings about people using ethnicity for gain and/or to make points whether they be good or bad.  Obviously she witnessed Meghan using racism at every turn and it galled her knowing that it wasn't true of the family.  When a person has anger that has slowly been brewing, it can manifest itself in many ways.  Lady Susan, despite training, blew her cork when she wasn't given a straight answer and might have thought that the Fulani was having her on.    The woman could have answered Lady Susan in one sentence, but she didn't.
> 
> I am still not completely excusing her, but I think her stress over The Queen's death and all that she personally witnessed over the  past years pushed her over the edge.


Yes good ideas.  SH saw all the race cards played by MM and that caused her to react. 
But also, your idea - SH was set up. The offended lady is a long time MM sugar so your setup hypothesis has merit.

I think the whole incident was more complicated than as related by Fulani with elements of all the above.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm still behind on many posts, and I apologize if my question was already answered.

We can't be sure if the conversation with Lady Husse* occurred the way described by Fulan*.

What we know is that Fulan* claimed to be in shock by such conversation and, as a result, Lady Huss*y resigned.

We also know that TW has been accused of bullying staff, and as a result, nothing happened. *Why?*


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> LOL, have you been talking to my daughter?


I regularly tell my husband I'm not the sweet young thing he married.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

TW on the pap stroll today… Sans wedding ring. But sure as sh!t she’s got the watch on from Trevi Trev Trev.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> TW on the pap stroll today… Sans wedding ring.
> 
> View attachment 5662459
> View attachment 5662458


Shucks .. photos in green dress in Indianapolis shows her holding mic in other hand, left hand is in not in shot


----------



## Toby93

In case Admin thinks this thread is not staying on topic, it absolutely has to do with the Harkles....


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Was she recording the whole conversation?  Who has a transcript of their entire conversation word for word?


The accuser's companion who was present for the exchange confirmed it in an interview with royal reporter Kier Simmons on tonight's NBC Nightly News. She said she was shocked by the line of questioning, and then the reporter showed the infamous OW clip as if to reinforce the BRF racism claims. Of course there are conflicting opinions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> TW on the pap stroll today… Sans wedding ring. But sure as sh!t she’s got the watch on from Trevi Trev Trev.
> 
> View attachment 5662459
> View attachment 5662458


Oh, we know where it is.  Hazzi is redesigning it, for a sweet Christmas gift.  She’s done so very well this year. He wants to show his support [and use those blood diamonds].  Hailey Bieber shouldn’t receive _all_ the Di glory, should she?









						How Hailey Bieber is channeling Princess Diana with chic ensembles
					

Hailey Bieber has made no secret of the fact she looks to Princess Diana for style inspiration, with the model even doing a copy-cat photoshoot for Vogue Magazine.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> The accuser's companion who was present for the exchange confirmed it in an interview with royal reporter Kier Simmons on tonight's NBC Nightly News. She said she was shocked by the line of questioning, and then the reporter showed the infamous OW clip as if to reinforce the BRF racism claims. Of course there are conflicting opinions.




Is there anyone of intelligence who supports racism, racist statements, racist anything?  Must we continue to bait, attack, criticize, antagonize each other?  Is it not time to raise the level of dialogue to something of substance?  something with purpose?  Did we not learn anything from the pandemic?


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> Was she recording the whole conversation?  Who has a transcript of their entire conversation word for word?


RIGHT, transcripts means she has receipts, like a recording device...  but with the apologies from BRF staff, whose questioning the validity of this.  Old people get away with saying all kinds of stuff, but not this one if it's true.  I'm incline to believe Fulani based on how the 'transcripts' were shown...  be careful to say what you think and pressing people because you think you can, on such a subject.  Microaggressions will not be tolerated... I'm glad it's being called out.  that type of incessant racism better be buried with you and not come out as nanoaggressions.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## CarryOn2020

We knew it would happen.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> In case Admin thinks this thread is not staying on topic, it absolutely has to do with the Harkles....
> 
> 
> View attachment 5662460



I was annoyed with the possibility that someone might have suffered discrimination, but the story might be completely different. This is shocking.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> I was annoyed with the possibility that someone might have suffered discrimination, but the story might be completely different. This is shocking.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rumors that Missan is part of this set-up, too.  MM’s fingerprints are all over this one.   
Imo.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> I was annoyed with the possibility that someone might have suffered discrimination, but the story might be completely different. This is shocking.




If these two women truly believed that, that MM was a "victim of domestic violence", then why did they accept the invitation and attend this event at BP?  Why go to an event hosted by Queen Camilla if they think Meghan's "in-laws" are so awful and they dislike them so much?  I wouldn't accept an invitation from people that I didn't like so why did they?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Fulani was *59 *years old in 2020.  @scarlet555  what do you consider “old people”

Article from 2020:’








						Ngozi Fulani: 'Black women don't want to risk their abusers being murdered'
					

The founder of a domestic violence charity for African-Caribbean women, on why she has more clients yet they refuse to go to the police




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## sdkitty

now if we could see the WIFE's reaction (privately) to seeing how wonderful Will & Kate are looking in Boston, that would maybe be interesting


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rumors that Missan is part of this set-up, too.  MM’s fingerprints are all over this one.
> Imo.


I never thought about this, but the expression 'old people' can be considered a microaggression. We are what we are, people. Good people, less good people… If it was a set-up, the people behind this are truly disgusting.


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fulani was *59 *years old in 2020.  @scarlet555  what do you consider “old people”
> 
> Article from 2020:’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ngozi Fulani: 'Black women don't want to risk their abusers being murdered'
> 
> 
> The founder of a domestic violence charity for African-Caribbean women, on why she has more clients yet they refuse to go to the police
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com


My ‘old’ was for Lady Suzan not Fulani,
But it’s more what people are saying ‘old’ people get away with saying anything-


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> now if we could see the WIFE's reaction (privately) to seeing how wonderful Will & Kate are looking in Boston, that would maybe be interesting


Why not use one of the many images of the TW?


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> My ‘old’ was for Lady Suzan not Fulani


So, 83 is “old people”, but 61 is not? 
 Curious to know where the line is, especially since ‘_Old people get away with saying all kinds of stuff’_


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, 83 is “old people”, but 61 is not?
> Curious to know where the line is, especially since ‘_Old people get away with saying all kinds of stuff’_


When AARP starts sending you mail…?  
Good question…
In my twenties I thought 30 year olds were old.


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> When AARP starts sending you mail…?
> Good question…
> In my twenties I thought 30 year olds were old.


How old do I have to be to join AARP?​While AARP is dedicated to people over 50, there is no minimum age to join*. People of all ages can get an AARP membership for as low as $12 for the first year with automatic renewal.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, 83 is “old people”, but 61 is not?
> Curious to know where the line is, especially since ‘_Old people get away with saying all kinds of stuff’_



I feel like it comes with a level of cognitive decline, which can happen in one’s 60’s, or older. Depending on overall health.

My dad is 75 and loooooord help me


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Jayne1

TC1 said:


> Yes, but if you asked someone where they were from and they said "Toronto" you would most likely not prod further and say something else insinuating you know they aren't "from" Toronto.


So, coincidentally, I was just watching The Crown (it's not very good this season) when Diana meets Martin Bashir for the first time and she asks him '"where is home" and he says "Wimbledon" and she responds with, "No I mean originally" and he proceeds to tell her where he was born and that his parents are Pakistani and then she asks him what language he spoke growing up.

I fell asleep for some of the rest of the episode.  Not caring for the new Diana actress as much as the previous.


----------



## needlv

CarryOn2020 said:


> We knew it would happen.




Oooh - is she wearing her wedding ring?


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like it comes with a level of cognitive decline, which can happen in one’s 60’s, or older. Depending on overall health.
> 
> My dad is 75 and loooooord help me


Cognitive decline can happen to any human at any age.  Drugs, alcohol, etc. affect anyone.  Lifestyle may be more important than age.  Notice how Hazz is not aging well.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Yes, and if they say here, London (for example) you just know they are not having that conversation with you. So back to talking about the weather I suppose.


I really have no opinion about the whole situation with SH: the rights and wrongs, or if anyone took advantage of or exaggerated the situation. But your remark made me laugh and reminded me of a subordinate who seems to avoid getting to the point. She sends us rambling emails and maybe makes her point after 5 paragraphs (for instance, requesting approval). Then she sends us short no-context text messages chasing us for a decision. And we are  It is no better in person, as she also rambles and we have to repeatedly question her to get to the point of her extensive recounting of the story.
ETA since I saw cognitive decline mentioned. She is around 30, and we are trying to correct her rambling tendency before cognitive decline sets in.


----------



## marietouchet

Reread the Fulani story several times. What a perfect storm

1.NF name and attire suggested she was foreign
2. when asked where she was from. NF replied “Soul Sistah”. I did not understand that , it is her place of employment. I thought it was a goofy salutation. 
SH had no idea who NF was. SH was never BRIEFED on NF. See times 6 and 7.
3. SH HANDLED THINGS VERY BADLY. 
4. NF BAITED SH with her lack of coherent replies. She was being obstreperous. 
5. Fulani had two friends who witnessed all. They neither helped clarify the conversation, nor did they stop the aggression. THEY DID NOTHING. 
6. NF has made public statements that the BRF is racist. 
It is fair to guess that she might be a HOSTILE guestcome to the meeting itching for a fight. 
7. Why did BP not assign NF a BRIEFED greeter/minder? Briefed on item 6.
8. The Harkles had no obvious role in this


----------



## Aimee3

It’s funny but when you go on vacation or a cocktail party and meet people for the first time often within the first few minutes you ask each other where are you from, and a whole conversation ensues about it.  No one seems to mind.  
Just yesterday I got into a cab and the driver asked me when is Christmas and I told him dec 25, and he repeated it like he had no clue.  My first impulse was to ask where he was from since how could he not know that but I bit my tongue and said nothing.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> TW on the pap stroll today… Sans wedding ring. But sure as sh!t she’s got the watch on from Trevi Trev Trev.
> 
> View attachment 5662459
> View attachment 5662458


Looks like another beautiful day to (not) take the kids for a stroll. Maybe Hazy is the stay at home parent and she's the primary breadwinner now. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> We knew it would happen.



She had to fly private to compensate for the humiliation of going to Indianapolis.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> How old do I have to be to join AARP?​While AARP is dedicated to people over 50, there is no minimum age to join*. People of all ages can get an AARP membership for as low as $12 for the first year with automatic renewal.


They start sending stuff when you're 50. It's a rite of passage


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> Reread the Fulani story several times. What a perfect storm
> 
> 1.NF name and attire suggested she was foreign
> 2. when asked where she was from. NF replied “Soul Sistah”. I did not understand that , it is her place of employment. I thought it was a goofy salutation.
> SH had no idea who NF was. SH was never BRIEFED on NF. See times 6 and 7.
> 3. SH HANDLED THINGS VERY BADLY.
> 4. NF BAITED SH with her lack of coherent replies. She was being obstreperous.
> 5. Fulani had two friends who witnessed all. They neither helped clarify the conversation, nor did they stop the aggression. THEY DID NOTHING.
> 6. NF has made public statements that the BRF is racist.
> It is fair to guess that she might be a HOSTILE guestcome to the meeting itching for a fight.
> 7. Why did BP not assign NF a BRIEFED greeter/minder? Briefed on item 6.
> 8. The Harkles had no obvious role in this


Someone wrote that she purposefully gave one word answers since she was so busy memorizing the responses.  I hope there was no recording device used.....how does one get such a perfect transcript?


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Cognitive decline can happen to any human at any age.  Drugs, alcohol, etc. affect anyone.  Lifestyle may be more important than age.  Notice how Hazz is not aging well.


Stress will do that to you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> 8. The Harkles had no obvious role in this


How do you know?


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> how does one get such a perfect transcript?


It's easy if you're inventing it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, 83 is “old people”, but 61 is not?
> Curious to know where the line is, especially since ‘_Old people get away with saying all kinds of stuff’_





scarlet555 said:


> My ‘old’ was for Lady Suzan not Fulani,
> But it’s more what people are saying ‘old’ people get away with saying anything-


I feel guilty about this because I also referred to Lady Husse* as an 'old lady.' I don't think 83 is old, but I was so outraged by a potential discrimination that I used the expression. 
The problem is that I'm now outraged by a potential set-up, and I'm trying to filter the words that are crossing my mind.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops wrong thread!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> We knew it would happen.



Private Jets for TW while the future king and queen are ok with commercial flights …


----------



## Chanbal

"_Have you come far_?" QE was a very wise woman.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Private Jets for TW while the future king and queen are ok with commercial flights …



Yessss, there ya go.  Welcome back, dear @Chanbal .  It’s so easy to get caught in the media glare, the rush to judgement.  

 Happens to the best of us [speaking from experience].


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chloe302225 said:


>



Wtf is going on with the back of the dress? I'm pretty sure she's trolling us with yet another green hornet dress  




elvisfan4life said:


> She was the lady in the car with the Queen as she travelled to Philips funeral during lockdown when only 30 could attend that will give you some idea of how important she was to the Queen


SH had been a LIW to the late Queen for a long time. If she had always behaved just fine, do we really think she would act so out of character and lose her manners so fast now that the Queen has passed away?

If she actually did what's claimed, then she's definitely wrong. No excuse. 

On the other hand, if this was a trap or setup coordinated by The Witch and her minions as speculated by some, then I think The Witch might have been trying to hurt our beloved late Queen Elizabeth II indirectly by hurting her long time LIW, claiming racism. In doing so, some people might start to think that the late Queen must have been a racist too to have kept company with SH for most of her lifetime. 




purseinsanity said:


> 100%
> 
> Although since we rarely call her by her actual name, she'd have to have Google alerts for things like, "TW", "the Wench", "MeGain", "Mememe", etc.


Oh she's gonna take forever if she refers to the list compiled by @Maggie Muggins 




purseinsanity said:


> Was she recording the whole conversation?  Who has a transcript of their entire conversation word for word?


Maybe she has a really good memory


----------



## Chanbal

Some interesting posts on today's event.


----------



## charlottawill

Well that went well...look for Scabies to release something tomorrow saying what a huge success it was.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Well that went well...look for Scabies to release something tomorrow saying what a huge success it was.



For what it's worth!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I'm convinced this was an organized smear campaign against the BRF so ZedZed can claim this 'manufactured' racism when accepting the undeserved Kennedy award.

1. The retiring Met Cop Basu, who accused the Met of racism while divulging so called 'disgusting plots' against ZedZed makes one wonder if this also constitutes a breach of confidentiality.
2. Three friends at Buckingham Palace taking notes while taunting Lady Susan by stating their business names instead of a city/country when asked where they came from and then accusing LSH of racism as she asked more questions because she couldn't understand Fulani's answers.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



Bit of a dead-end PR strategy. So they are heroes for defying the racist BRF and will receive a KK award. And then? What next? What's the follow up? They are going to find structural racism somewhere else?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I'm convinced this was an organized smear campaign against the BRF so ZedZed can claim this 'manufactured' racism when accepting the undeserved Kennedy award.
> 
> 1. The retiring Met Cop Basu, who accused the Met of racism while divulging so called 'disgusting plots' against ZedZed makes one wonder if this also constitutes a breach of confidentiality.
> 2. Three friends at Buckingham Palace taking notes while taunting Lady Susan by stating their business names instead of a city/country when asked where they came from and then accusing LSH of racism as she asked more questions because she couldn't understand Fulani's answers.


We’ve learned the hard way how H&M work.  They live in a multi-million dollar McMansion, they have security, they fly private, they wear high-priced clothing&jewelry and they sit in the best seats at whatever function they wish to attend.  They are not and have never been victims.


----------



## Mumotons




----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Meghan and Harry compete in table tennis in new Invictus Games trailer
> 
> 
> The 80-second video features athletes who will be competing in the upcoming sporting event, which will be held in Dusseldorf in September 2023.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Duke of Sussex then appears half-way through the trailer in a game against a blonde-haired player.
> 
> As she goes to pick up the ball, the father-of-two is seen giving her an encouraging nod and smile.
> 
> He then proceeds to crouch down slightly for the camera as he prepares for her next serve.
> 
> After he fails to return her quick serve, the Prince cracks a smile, nods and walks back towards the entrance of the stadium to allow another player to take his spot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry appeared in the new trailer for the Invictus Games today. The Duke of Sussex was filmed playing two games of table tennis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Duchess of Sussex appeared right at the end of the video as she competed against her husband. The mother-of-two gave Harry an encouraging smile and nod_


If mr jelly ever looked at me with that dead-eyed hunger I would assume we were in a zombie scenario.


papertiger said:


> People (from everywhere) ask me this _all_ the time


Me too and normally I take it as friendly.

The point is, of course, where are you from can be a completely innocent and friendly question as  it shouldn’t matter if someone is a recent immigrant or fiftieth-generation they should be treated with equal humanity.


Chanbal said:


> If the above transcript is accurate, Lady Hussey sounded like an arrogant old lady. If I were Fulani, I would have asked her precisely the same questions until getting back to the Adam and Eve's generation.


The problem with aristocrats is they can usually recite it. It is their main claim to superiority after all.


scarlet555 said:


> True it's one sided story, but who are you going to ask if it's offensive to?  The person asking or the person receiving?  And Fulani did NOT name Lady sh...  in her twitter, she may have told people, but she didn't name her.  Not one bit surprised that people that live in those over 100 year old castle are racist.  Now they've been found, maybe people are not afraid to speak out against their treatment by a bunch of ar$eholes...  Lady sh should just say-it was completely racist and I own it and I want to change even if I'm 200 years old...  maybe she wasn't racist, just a bully  or both whatever... what do arrogant people do?


I used to think this but now I think it’s an unfair generalisation. I’ve met some really perceptive and progressive old people - I think every generation has its spectrum.

Incidentally Working class mill houses are over 100 years old in Britain - I dunno if that’s had an effect on us en masse politically.


Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5662247


That’s sort of funny. I’ve said before I don’t think there’s anything kind about not clearly naming the accused and giving them the chance to reply- it just tarnishes the reputation of innocent people around them.


LizzieBennett said:


> Who is Lady Susan Hussey? The palace ‘head girl’ who quit in race row
> 
> 
> The resignation of Lady Susan Hussey brings to a humiliating end the career of one of the best-loved and well-regarded members of the royal household.As a lady-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to this article in The Times, she was asked by the Queen to help both Diana and MM settle into married life.


This woman is getting dragged after She’s worked for them for decades.  - talk about making her look incompetent on the way out. I’ve said it before but the BRF can’t be surprised no one competent wants to work for them anymore.


scarlet555 said:


> Try that today no matter your rank...  too many enemies and hatred to make such foolish mistake


I wish I had your faith. The elite is completely invulnerable to criticism in my opinion. Charles has been  shown to be dealing weapons. Andrew….. well we all know. I think they could drop N bombs on live tv (I don’t think thats their poison but you get my meaning) and nothing would change. Just a little statement from the palace maybe.


LittleStar88 said:


> TW on the pap stroll today… Sans wedding ring. But sure as sh!t she’s got the watch on from Trevi Trev Trev.
> 
> View attachment 5662459
> View attachment 5662458


I’ve heard this is what Narcs do- even if we’re married I can still go back to someone else if your not good enough.

Though maybe she’d just finished the washing up  


CarryOn2020 said:


> Fulani was *59 *years old in 2020.  @scarlet555  what do you consider “old people”
> 
> Article from 2020:’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ngozi Fulani: 'Black women don't want to risk their abusers being murdered'
> 
> 
> The founder of a domestic violence charity for African-Caribbean women, on why she has more clients yet they refuse to go to the police
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



I’m not sure if this is too political but that article is kind of the smoking gun.

Her argument that police violence against black men is the number 1 reason is very spurious. Deaths among all groups BAME people after  ALL encounters for ALL call-outs with the police are at around 30 a decade according to the charity inquest. 

I don’t know what sort of numbers of people her charity works with but I would hope it’s more than 3 a year to be viable and therefore these concerns seem a little unrealistic in light of the figures. 


 Maybe those women really think that ( I personally think there’s some more likely explanations like: fear of reprisal, cost and length of trials, children finding out traumatic details about abusive parent)
But in any case, as the caregiver in this situation it’s her job to quell irrational worries that hinder these women getting justice not stoking them for media attention.

Obviously I’m not condoning the current pile-on of her personally and I don’t know what really happened.  I don’t in general have a high opinion of Buckingham palace but then I’d be unlikely to go there even if asked and I wouldn’t judge everyone in any institutions by the actions of one person either.


----------



## elvisfan4life

Toby93 said:


> Maybe it was because she was dressed in African garb and she was truly interested in where she originated from.  If I showed up in a kilt, maybe someone would ask if I was from Scotland?  Would I take offense?  Attention seeking outfit, but didn't want attention?


I get asked where I am from all the time if I say where I live now in England I always then get asked no but where are you from originally it doesn’t offend me I’m proud of my roots


----------



## elvisfan4life

purseinsanity said:


> As a POC, I can personally testify that racism definitely exists.  At the same time, I personally am not offended by things like people asking where I'm really from, where I was born, what my background is, etc., especially if I showed up in my native dress.  I love people to try to eat my food, learn my culture, and I really don't care if people wear clothes from my country, or other things that are now considered "cultural appropriation".  If someone said "You people" in a derogatory manner, it would be a different matter.
> 
> I am not excusing SH's behavior at all, but I do know when I first met DH's (then BF) grandmother, she was in her late 90's and had started experiencing dementia.  DH begged me not to judge her for things she may or may not say.  He said she and his grandfather had visited my country and often said it was her absolute favorite country in the world, but in her advanced age, he said she may say something totally offensive.  She didn't, but I wasn't going to hold it against her if she had.


Well said this lady will have travelled the world with the Queen and perhaps wanted to share her experiences of it once she ascertained the visitors heritage it shouldn’t be so hard to answer that should it or say sorry I’m uncomfortable with you and walk away


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> I get asked where I am from all the time if I say where I live now in England I always then get asked no but where are you from originally it doesn’t offend me I’m proud of my roots



I don't think SH is racist, BUT she knows what she's representing, what's at stake, what the issues have been since malicious M  stirred-up sh*t. Why labour a point? Why touch a stranger's hair? Why not listen to someone you're talking to? 

I have absolutely no doubt this woman could have been equally rude to any pleb of the hoi polloi, you or me included. Aristos are not known for their inclusiveness or kindness talking to the lower orders. Speaks of snobbishness "I know better than you, even about you" that's what SH was saying, push, push, push and dominate, as the one asking the questions usually is. As a host/hostess it not done, not etiquette, not nice to make your guests feel small, awkward or uncomfortable. She failed in her role. 

it's incredibly rude to push your point like a cross-examination when clearly the other person is uncomfortable or thinks they've answered a question. 

It's all symbolism and appearances at these things. It's not (just) about how things were, it is about appropriateness and appearances. BRF what right to to let her go. This is a important time for KC and the BRF leading up to the Coronation, H&M are _constantly_ trying to undermine his family, that's all they've got. Whatever this Lady's past service (nice job to have if you ask me) anyone giving H&M ammunition to hit the BRF with needed to be shown the door.

Now someone has gained sympathy and a whole heap of publicity for herself and is seen as some kind of hero for attending an event, why, for having been talked to the way normal people have been talked to for centuries. 

I have absolutely no idea what, what Ngozi wears matters. She answered Hussey's question politely enough. Ngozi tries to help victims of domestic abuse most days of the week, I'm sure she's not on may designer brands PR list and she has other priorities. I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversation interrogation.


----------



## papertiger

elvisfan4life said:


> Well said this lady will have travelled the world with the Queen and perhaps wanted to share her experiences of it once she ascertained the visitors heritage it shouldn’t be so hard to answer that should it or say sorry I’m uncomfortable with you and walk away



I know what you mean, but I'm sure it was an unexpected encounter, it's not always easy to know what to say in the moment. The woman clearly made her feel small. One doesn't normally go to an event honouring you and be made to feel bad, she was disbelieved giving honest answers.  However, broadcasting it to the world later was not a very professional and grown-up thing to do either.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> Looks like another beautiful day to (not) take the kids for a stroll. Maybe Hazy is the stay at home parent and she's the primary breadwinner now.
> 
> She had to fly private to compensate for the humiliation of going to Indianapolis.


Direct commercial flights either from the Santa Barbara or Los Angeles airports to Indianapolis are few and far between. So in all fairness to TW, flying private might have been the only way to get there and back in one day. Regular folks of course would have stayed overnight in Indianapolis and flown out the next day if they were flying commercial. But we have no way of knowing what other prior commitments she may have had back in CA. Having said that, we know she prefers to fly private even in cases when there are excellent commercial flight alternatives but just pointing out that in this case there may have been a valid reason other than just attributing it to her massive ego and self-importance.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> Direct commercial flights either from the Santa Barbara or Los Angeles airports to Indianapolis are few and far between. So in all fairness to TW, flying private might have been the only way to get there and back in one day. Regular folks of course would have stayed overnight in Indianapolis and flown out the next day if they were flying commercial. But we have no way of knowing what other prior commitments she may have had back in CA. Having said that, we know she prefers to fly private even in cases when there are excellent commercial flight alternatives but just pointing out that in this case there may have been a valid reason other than just attributing it to her massive ego and self-importance.


If she put it in her contract and the Indianapolis ladies were willing to pay for it, it's kind of hard to fault her for taking the private jet. Even when she was a nobody, her manager managed to coerce Reitman and others to spring for better class air tickets and hotels. So I'm not surprised that in her current status of Nobody Extraordinaire cum Faux EcoWarrior, she wants private jets.


----------



## DoggieBags

xincinsin said:


> Bit of a dead-end PR strategy. So they are heroes for defying the racist BRF and will receive a KK award. And then? What next? What's the follow up? They are going to find structural racism somewhere else?


All while flaunting and merching the title bestowed upon them by the “racist” organization that they are so “courageously“ defying. It’s completely illogical.


----------



## missie1

papertiger said:


> I don't think SH is racist, BUT she knows what she's representing, what's at stake, what the issues have been since malicious M  stirred-up sh*t. Why labour a point? Why touch a stranger's hair? Why not listen to someone you're talking to?
> 
> I have absolutely no doubt this woman could have been equally rude to any pleb of the hoi polloi, you or me included. Aristos are not known for their inclusiveness or kindness talking to the lower orders. Speaks of snobbishness "I know better than you, even about you" that's what SH was saying, push, push, push and dominate, as the one asking the questions usually is. As a host/hostess it not done, not etiquette, not nice to make your guests feel small, awkward or uncomfortable. She failed in her role.
> 
> it's incredibly rude to push your point like a cross-examination when clearly the other person is uncomfortable or thinks they've answered a question.
> 
> It's all symbolism and appearances at these things. It's not (just) about how things were, it is about appropriateness and appearances. BRF what right to to let her go. This is a important time for KC and the BRF leading up to the Coronation, H&M are _constantly_ trying to undermine his family, that's all they've got. Whatever this Lady's past service (nice job to have if you ask me) anyone giving H&M ammunition to hit the BRF with needed to be shown the door.
> 
> Now someone has gained sympathy and a whole heap of publicity for herself and is seen as some kind of hero for attending an event, why, for having been talked to the way normal people have been talked to for centuries.
> 
> I have absolutely no idea what, what Ngozi wears matters. She answered Hussey's question politely enough. Ngozi tries to help victims of domestic abuse most days of the week, I'm sure she's not on may designer brands PR list and she has other priorities. I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversation interrogation.


Why should she complain internally when she was interrogated by a representative of the palace.  If this was a private person not in official capacity I would agree but often hiding these situations are what allows them to flourish. Maybe it wasn’t her intent to racist but that how it was perceived.  She’s not the victim here and shouldn’t be protected. Individuals need to learn that words have power and it cost nothing to maintain silence


----------



## papertiger

missie1 said:


> Why should she complain internally when she was interrogated by a representative of the palace.  If this was a private person not in official capacity I would agree but often hiding these situations are what allows them to flourish. Maybe it wasn’t her intent to racist but that how it was perceived.  She’s not the victim here and shouldn’t be protected. Individuals need to learn that words have power and it cost nothing to maintain silence



If you read my post above #120,247 you will see we are agreed.

I mentioned it because Ngozi has said she did not think LSH should be sacked.

What did she think would happen when she went public?


----------



## missie1

papertiger said:


> If you read my post above #120,247 you will see we are agreed.
> 
> I mentioned it because Ngozi has said she did not think LSH should be sacked.
> 
> What did she think would happen when she went public?


I read your post and was responding to this point *I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversationinterrogation.   *_I agree that complaining publicly definitely results in public consequences. She is clearly an intelligent woman utilizing a SM platform so of course she knew SH would be identified and released from her current position.  _


----------



## papertiger

missie1 said:


> I read your post and was responding to this point *I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversationinterrogation.   *_I agree that complaining publicly definitely results in public consequences. She is clearly an intelligent woman utilizing a SM platform so of course she knew SH would be identified and released from her current position.  _



That's correct, both parties should have acted like grown-ups.

I thought we were agreeing Ngozi was the victim here, my mistake.

Being interrogated by an idiot at a party made her act like a teenager, if she didn't want LSH fired, her mistake. We are all responsible for our own actions. Professionals representing the British Royal Family OR a charity organisation should act like grown-ups.

Harry and Meghan act like spoilt children no reason why others have to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## missie1

papertiger said:


> That's correct, both parties should have acted like grown-ups.
> 
> I thought we were agreeing Ngozi was the victim here, my mistake.
> 
> Being interrogated by an idiot at a party made her act like a teenager, if she didn't want LSH fired, her mistake. We are all responsible for our own actions. Professionals representing the British Royal Family OR a charity organisation should act like grown-ups.
> 
> Harry and Meghan act like spoilt children no reason why others have to.


I definitely feel like Ngozi was victim and had a right to publicly speak out about the incident.  She didn’t need to pretend she didn’t  want recourse  though.  That’s where she looses credibility imo.  She would have been better off saying that the decisions on how to handle SH are at BRF discretion and left it at that.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

missie1 said:


> I definitely feel like Ngozi was victim and had a right to publicly speak out about the incident.  She didn’t need to pretend she didn’t  want recourse  though.  That’s where she looses credibility imo.  She would have been better off saying that the decisions on how to handle SH are at BRF discretion and left it at that.


I agree...although I can also understand her perspective...I have complained about people (customer service reps, sales staff etc) and then all of a sudden I feel bad and panic and say I don't want this person to lose their job or anything serious and just ask for better training


----------



## bubablu

And the promo is out, so fake


----------



## erinrose

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake



When is this coming out on netflix?!


----------



## athousandmhiles24

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake



So they released this to upstage the news about Prince William and Catherine being in the US?. What low level people!


----------



## Suncatcher

I thought she wanted privacy?


----------



## bubablu

erinrose said:


> When is this coming out on netflix?!


No date yet, just coming soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

athousandmhiles24 said:


> So they released this to upstage the news about Prince William and Catherine being in the US?. What low level people!


The lowest of the lows.    Yesterday’s fake drama paired with this trailer.  All of it designed to steal W&K’s thunder.  King Charles, now is the time for action, time for the Grand Reset.


----------



## Mrs.Z

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake



Oh my goodness, I know I said I would take one for the team and watch but it seems SOOOO DRAMATIC!!!  I will do my best!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> Oh my goodness, I know I said I would take one for the team and watch but it seems SOOOO DRAMATIC!!!  I will do my best!


Imo you should protect your mind.  This stuff is propaganda 101.  Beware the hidden agenda.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I don't think SH is racist, BUT she knows what she's representing, what's at stake, what the issues have been since malicious M  stirred-up sh*t. Why labour a point? Why touch a stranger's hair? Why not listen to someone you're talking to?
> 
> I have absolutely no doubt this woman could have been equally rude to any pleb of the hoi polloi, you or me included. Aristos are not known for their inclusiveness or kindness talking to the lower orders. Speaks of snobbishness "I know better than you, even about you" that's what SH was saying, push, push, push and dominate, as the one asking the questions usually is. As a host/hostess it not done, not etiquette, not nice to make your guests feel small, awkward or uncomfortable. She failed in her role.
> 
> it's incredibly rude to push your point like a cross-examination when clearly the other person is uncomfortable or thinks they've answered a question.
> 
> It's all symbolism and appearances at these things. It's not (just) about how things were, it is about appropriateness and appearances. BRF what right to to let her go. This is a important time for KC and the BRF leading up to the Coronation, H&M are _constantly_ trying to undermine his family, that's all they've got. Whatever this Lady's past service (nice job to have if you ask me) anyone giving H&M ammunition to hit the BRF with needed to be shown the door.
> 
> Now someone has gained sympathy and a whole heap of publicity for herself and is seen as some kind of hero for attending an event, why, for having been talked to the way normal people have been talked to for centuries.
> 
> I have absolutely no idea what, what Ngozi wears matters. She answered Hussey's question politely enough. Ngozi tries to help victims of domestic abuse most days of the week, I'm sure she's not on may designer brands PR list and she has other priorities. I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversation interrogation.


By George you have it … SH might have been equally rude to any pleb of the hoi polloi ..


----------



## lanasyogamama

I refuse to give that a click.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> For what it's worth!



Yes another awesome analysis … how convenient … proof of racism before the Ripple award
And did you notice … the color photo collage of MM Archie and Doria, that is Donna Brazile in the bottom , a US political power player , MM was not zooming with Santa Claus, she was zooming with the ex head of a political party - a clear message from MM , I have important friends


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Someone wrote that she purposefully gave one word answers since she was so busy memorizing the responses.  I hope there was no recording device used.....how does one get such a perfect transcript?


IDK if this was some sort of trap but if it was apparently it worked very well


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Yes another awesome analysis … how convenient … proof of racism before the Ripple award
> And did you notice … the color photo collage of MM Archie and Doria, that is Donna Brazile in the bottom , a US political power player , MM was not zooming with Santa Claus, she was zooming with the ex head of a political party - a clear message from MM , I have important friends


So what? So-called Important friends will not change who H&M are, the worst of the worst.  In the DM’s photos, there is zero chemistry between them.  The quotes emphasize their victim mindset.  King Charles will take action, possibly today.


sdkitty said:


> IDK if this was some sort of trap but if it was apparently it worked very well


For whom?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> Direct commercial flights either from the Santa Barbara or Los Angeles airports to Indianapolis are few and far between. So in all fairness to TW, flying private might have been the only way to get there and back in one day. Regular folks of course would have stayed overnight in Indianapolis and flown out the next day if they were flying commercial. But we have no way of knowing what other prior commitments she may have had back in CA. Having said that, we know she prefers to fly private even in cases when there are excellent commercial flight alternatives but just pointing out that in this case there may have been a valid reason other than just attributing it to her massive ego and self-importance.


You're kinder than I am. Delta and AA both fly direct LAX to IND but she would have had to stay overnight. Oh the horror of staying at a Marriott in flyover country! Since they've apparently decided to focus on racism as their primary cause I'm sure she feels no need to maintain the pretense of being an eco-warrior and flying commercial. But she'll claim she couldn't wait to get back to Hazy and the kids.


----------



## lallybelle

Normally I don't go down the rabbit hole BUT I am a bit more suspicious now knowing that Ngozi is a Megs stan and has often said things against the BRF, such as Megs being a victim of domestic violence by her in-laws...the hell????? Why was she even invited or agreed to attend if she felt this way about the BRF?

Of course it doesn't change the fact that if this went down as stated, LSH was rude and inappropriate, but now I am left wondering if like someone said yesterday that Ngozi was ready to play.


----------



## elvisfan4life

athousandmhiles24 said:


> So they released this to upstage the news about Prince William and Catherine being in the US?. What low level people!


Timing ? Yesterdays racism at the palace story to soften the effect of their monstrous pity party Netflix made up stories - this will make the Crown seem as real as a history book - utter piffle


----------



## elvisfan4life

lanasyogamama said:


> I refuse to give that a click.


Ditto a million trillion times


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> Direct commercial flights either from the Santa Barbara or Los Angeles airports to Indianapolis are few and far between. So in all fairness to TW, flying private might have been the only way to get there and back in one day. Regular folks of course would have stayed overnight in Indianapolis and flown out the next day if they were flying commercial. But we have no way of knowing what other prior commitments she may have had back in CA. Having said that, we know she prefers to fly private even in cases when there are excellent commercial flight alternatives but just pointing out that in this case there may have been a valid reason other than just attributing it to her massive ego and self-importance.


the last thing she wants to be is "regular folks"....she has her golden goose and she doesn't want to ever to back to being "regular"
I think that would be the best punishment for her


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> If she put it in her contract and the Indianapolis ladies were willing to pay for it, it's kind of hard to fault her for taking the private jet. Even when she was a nobody, her manager managed to coerce Reitman and others to spring for better class air tickets and hotels. So I'm not surprised that in her current status of Nobody Extraordinaire cum Faux EcoWarrior, she wants private jets.


Maybe, but I doubt this group would spring for a private jet. Round trip would be at least $50K. From what I've read the charity hosts this event every year, companies buy tables and expect employees to attend. It was not a unique or exclusive event. Someone just had the bright idea to invite her as the keynote speaker. A commenter on Twitter said she was probably annoyed it was in a hotel ballroom and not an arena, which is where the event was held when Michelle O. was the keynote speaker.


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake



one could ask what she means by "when the stakes are this high".....wants to keep her status and money of course


----------



## CarryOn2020

People are upset


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> The lowest of the lows.    Yesterday’s fake drama paired with this trailer.  All of it designed to steal W&K’s thunder.  King Charles, now is the time for action, time for the Grand Reset.


Can't come soon enough.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Gross


----------



## marietouchet

nm, can’t get link to work, sorry


----------



## Handbag1234

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake



its set out like a Hollywood film of a persecuted family fleeing from the Nazis in WWII.


----------



## LittleStar88

Gross. Is this Netflix thing just him fawning over her, kissing her and rubbing his little noodle on her while she poses with coquettish grins? Gag me.

I’m wait for the media reviews. Not watching.


----------



## Goodfrtune

purseinsanity said:


> am not excusing SH's behavior at all, but I do know when I first met DH's (then BF) grandmother, she was in her late 90's and had started experiencing dementia. DH begged me not to judge her for things she may or may not say. He said she and his grandfather had visited my country and often said it was her absolute favorite country in the world, but in her advanced age, he said she may say something totally offensive. She didn't, but I wasn't going to hold it against her if she had.


I am not excusing SH’s behavior either but I understand what you are saying about dementia. Towards the end of my mother’s life she was experiencing dementia. Horrible, horrible disease! She passed away at 84 so a couple of years younger than SH is now. There were times that she said things that were not “PC” not because she had hate in her heart but because she grew up in a different time and different words were used that would now be considered offensive. For instance she didn’t know anymore that Asian was appropriate where at one time Oriental was used. She had lost so much of her cognitive ability and reverted back to an earlier time. She meant no offense during those moments. She had a number of caregivers who were POC and honestly couldn’t distinguish one ethnicity from another. Mom was confused a lot and once asked where Africans came from if they didn’t come from Puerto Rico and then asked who came from Puerto Rico? She herself was not born in the US and we do have a tendency in this country of asking about ancestry etc. I don’t know if Lady H has the beginnings of dementia or not but at age 86 I like to think that during this incident she was not being mean spirited but that it was a good indication that it was time to hang up her hat.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> Can't come soon enough.


Like I say I’m no fan of Charles and sadly I think I know who he will side with watch this awful pair return with Cheshire Cat grins


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> rubbing his little noodle


Please, I'm eating breakfast


----------



## charlottawill

elvisfan4life said:


> Like I say I’m no fan of Charles and sadly I think I know who he will side with watch this awful pair return with Cheshire Cat grins


Harry maybe, but I just can't see her being welcomed back nor wanting to go back if it was so traumatic for her.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

1.6K downvotes vs 743 up.   Gth outta here.


----------



## elvisfan4life

CarryOn2020 said:


>



This !!!!! Absolutely


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Harry maybe, but I just can't see her being welcomed back nor wanting to go back if it was so traumatic for her.


Will she get $$$?  Then, sure, she’ll go.


----------



## bubablu

CarryOn2020 said:


>



I mean, she is laughing here.


----------



## mia55

They’re really an embarrassment, all these shenanigans just to upstage the real royals. This woman is super vindictive and digging such a great hole for herself that there won’t be any comebacks. 

The same week real royals are here, the fake royal villains released their promo of sh**show and the game where they take advantage of the broken ppl.This is very cheap  

The worst is as a POC I was very happy when they got married and really liked her a lot. She disappointed me to such a level that I can’t even describe. It’s unbelievable how any sane or educated person can agree with her. There’s a need of certain level of mental illness to be her fan.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bubablu said:


> I mean, she is laughing here.


  still, 1.6K downvotes aren’t a positive


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> I mean, she is laughing here.


they won't succeed in outshining Will and Kate...they're making themselves look bad by the timing of this Netflix promo....disgusting really


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>



"*When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make sense to hear our story from us?*" Yikes, she really does think highly of herself    What stakes?  Their ability to grift?  They told the world they were stepping back from public life and wanted privacy.  

Is she referring to the comparison to the Prince and Princess of Wales, because if she is, that ship has sailed.  I really don't understand this statement.  What imaginary stakes is she talking about?  

They already had their big platform on Oprah and blew it with nothing but lies, so how is hearing anything from them at this point, anything but total fabrication?


----------



## sdkitty

mia55 said:


> They’re really an embarrassment, all these shenanigans just to upstage the real royals. This woman is super vindictive and digging such a great hole for herself that there won’t be any comebacks.
> 
> The same week real royals are here, the fake royal villains released their promo of sh**show and the game where they take advantage of the broken ppl.This is very cheap
> 
> The worst is as a POC I was very happy when they got married and really liked her a lot. She disappointed me to such a level that I can’t even describe. It’s unbelievable how any sane or educated person can agree with her. There’s a need of certain level of mental illness to be her fan.


nice to see this from a WOC.  To be fair, I wonder whose decision the timing of this promo was?  could be Netflix?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> "*When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make sense to hear our story from us?*" Yikes, she really does think highly of herself    What stakes?  Their ability to grift?  They told the world they were stepping back from public life and wanted privacy.
> 
> Is she referring to the comparison to the Prince and Princess of Wales, because if she is, that ship has sailed.  I really don't understand this statement.  What imaginary stakes is she talking about?
> 
> They already had their big platform on Oprah and blew it with nothing but lies, so how is hearing anything from them at this point, anything but total fabrication?


Would the person who asked to hear their story please stand up?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> nice to see this from a WOC.  To be fair, I wonder whose decision the timing of this promo was?  could be Netflix?



I’m sure Princess Pushy insisted it be released today. 

She and Harry are a couple of pathetic coattail-riders.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Fulani was *59 *years old in 2020.  @scarlet555  what do you consider “old people”
> 
> Article from 2020:’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ngozi Fulani: 'Black women don't want to risk their abusers being murdered'
> 
> 
> The founder of a domestic violence charity for African-Caribbean women, on why she has more clients yet they refuse to go to the police
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theguardian.com



Not once have I heard of regular excessive police violence like in the US regarding the UK. Is she maybe being a bit dramatic? Of course it could just be me not paying enough attention.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> TW on the pap stroll today… Sans wedding ring. But sure as sh!t she’s got the watch on from Trevi Trev Trev.
> 
> View attachment 5662459



Why can't she even find a pair of jeans that fit?


----------



## LittleStar88

You can watch the trailer without giving YouTube views here…






						Harry & Meghan | Official Teaser | Netflix
					

Harry & Meghan. A Netflix Global Event. Coming soon, only on Netflix.




					yewtu.be
				




Lord have mercy, this looks so boring. All the dramatic black and white photos. And she comes off like a major b!tch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> I feel like it comes with a level of cognitive decline, which can happen in one’s 60’s, or older. Depending on overall health.
> 
> My dad is 75 and loooooord help me



This. Though I feel 60 is the new 40 or something, unless people have issues I wouldn't consider them old at this point. Most are still working full-time, agile and alert.


----------



## LittleStar88

And for fun… Yoko Markle


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This. Though I feel 60 is the new 40 or something, unless people have issues I wouldn't consider them old at this point. Most are still working full-time, agile and alert.



My dad is 75 and OMG please help me  But I’ve met people in their 80’s who can run circles around folks half their age.

So much of it comes down to lifestyle. My dad doesn’t take good care of himself and it’s really begun to show.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Fair question -


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ewwww.

_Meanwhile, the Sussex's friend Omid Scobie gleefully tweeted: 'If tomorrow is Prince William's Super Bowl, then here's your Halftime Show...'_








						Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailer 'DELIBERATELY timed', expert says
					

The trailer for Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries has been 'deliberately' released to 'take away' from the Cambridges' landmark US tour, an  expert claimed




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Suncatcher said:


> I thought she wanted privacy?


Privacy is not as important as money.


Toby93 said:


>



Must be a very old photo, considering all that hair.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww.
> 
> _Meanwhile, the Sussex's friend Omid Scobie gleefully tweeted: 'If tomorrow is Prince William's Super Bowl, then here's your Halftime Show...'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailer 'DELIBERATELY timed', expert says
> 
> 
> The trailer for Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries has been 'deliberately' released to 'take away' from the Cambridges' landmark US tour, an  expert claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sigh... behind closed doors? I suppose she will treat the audience to a few wardrobe malfunctions to prove that she too is lustworthy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would the person who asked to hear their story please stand up?



I'll be taking several seats, but also...if I was even marginally interested, I'd prefer to hear the story from someone not a pathological liar.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> My dad is 75 and OMG please help me  But I’ve met people in their 80’s who can run circles around folks half their age.
> 
> So much of it comes down to lifestyle. My dad doesn’t take good care of himself and it’s really begun to show.



Mine is only a little younger and still working full-time even though he sold the practice...they learned the hard way they didn't ask enough questions and he was bored


----------



## csshopper

What’s next? A Kardashian style sex tape?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> What’s next? A Kardashian style sex tape?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> What’s next? A Kardashian style sex tape?



Do not give them ideas.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww.
> 
> _Meanwhile, the Sussex's friend Omid Scobie gleefully tweeted: 'If tomorrow is Prince William's Super Bowl, then here's your Halftime Show...'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailer 'DELIBERATELY timed', expert says
> 
> 
> The trailer for Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries has been 'deliberately' released to 'take away' from the Cambridges' landmark US tour, an  expert claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


screw Omid......what a creep


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Someone wrote that she purposefully gave one word answers since she was so busy memorizing the responses.  I hope there was no recording device used.....how does one get such a perfect transcript?


Yes THIS


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> 1.6K downvotes vs 743 up.   Gth outta here.



Tears even though MM has an Hermes cashmere blankie to comfort her


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> Maybe, but I doubt this group would spring for a private jet. Round trip would be at least $50K. From what I've read the charity hosts this event every year, companies buy tables and expect employees to attend. It was not a unique or exclusive event. Someone just had the bright idea to invite her as the keynote speaker. A commenter on Twitter said she was probably annoyed it was in a hotel ballroom and not an arena, which is where the event was held when Michelle O. was the keynote speaker.


Can't imagine that Zed would shell out the cost unless the Indianapolis ladies gave her a huge wad of banknotes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

BLG takes one for the team


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Maybe, but I doubt this group would spring for a private jet. Round trip would be at least $50K. From what I've read the charity hosts this event every year, companies buy tables and expect employees to attend. It was not a unique or exclusive event. Someone just had the bright idea to invite her as the keynote speaker. A commenter on Twitter said she was probably annoyed it was in a hotel ballroom and not an arena, which is where the event was held when Michelle O. was the keynote speaker.


Isn’t it the Pacers plane?  Who does she know on the team


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Can't imagine that Zed would shell out the cost unless the Indianapolis ladies gave her a huge wad of banknotes.


Anyone else notice the TREND - MM always seems to get out of town ASAP, never lingers to network
OK, I get it, things have been going on recently, she would have likely gotten a bunch of ANNOYING questions, but then did she bring it on herself ? By making all sorts of PR releases ALL AT SAME TIME  around the time of EARTHSHOT, she chose the moment ??


----------



## LittleStar88

csshopper said:


> What’s next? A Kardashian style sex tape?



No one wants to see what she can do with Vienna sausages. Please let’s not let that happen.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Anyone else notice the TREND - MM always seems to get out of town ASAP, never lingers to network
> OK, I get it, things have been going on recently, she would have likely gotten a bunch of ANNOYING questions, but then did she bring it on herself ? By making all sorts of PR releases ALL AT SAME TIME  around the time of EARTHSHOT, she chose the moment ??


She does not like mingling with us “poors”.  Neither does Hazz.


----------



## CarryOn2020

William knows something.  He is glowing today.
#ReleaseTheDirt

ETA: Hazzi’s godparent is Prince Andrew.  









						Prince William and Kate are all smiles on second day of US tour
					

Prince William and Kate Middleton kicked off the first full day of their whirlwind US tour today - hours after Harry and Meghan released an incredibly ill-timed trailer for their Netflix doc.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> What’s next? A Kardashian style sex tape?


Maybe this is her klassy version of a sex tape? She feels down, Sparry takes her to the bedroom and closes the door. Repeat with slight variations on why she is down and how long they stay inside with the film crew, re-enacting the touchy, touching and touched-in-the-noggin scenes.


----------



## bag-mania

Is it me or did Meghan not get much attention for her Indianapolis visit? Seems it was overshadowed by the other stories.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Is it me or did Meghan not get much attention for her Indianapolis visit? Seems it was overshadowed by the other stories.


Remember, no one was allowed to take photos or record anything.  Under penalty of lawsuits.


----------



## Laila619

Guys, they really wanted PRIVACY.

Isn’t that what you do when you want privacy? Film a (fake and curated) documentary about your life behind closed doors for the entire world to see?  They are such a bunch of money-hungry grifters. Disgusted by them!


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> Is it me or did Meghan not get much attention for her Indianapolis visit? Seems it was overshadowed by the other stories.



The Dollar Store Duchess just can’t catch a break


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

xincinsin said:


> Maybe this is her klassy version of a sex tape? She feels down, Sparry takes her to the bedroom and closes the door. Repeat with slight variations on why she is down and how long they stay inside with the film crew, re-enacting the touchy, touching and touched-in-the-noggin scenes.



I need a gallon of brain bleach now


----------



## MiniMabel

scarlet555 said:


> True it's one sided story, but who are you going to ask if it's offensive to?  The person asking or the person receiving?  And Fulani did NOT name Lady sh...  in her twitter, she may have told people, but she didn't name her.  *Not one bit surprised that people that live in those over 100 year old castle are racist.  Now they've been found, maybe people are not afraid to speak out against their treatment by a bunch of ar$eholes.*..  Lady sh should just say-it was completely racist and I own it and I want to change even if I'm 200 years old...  maybe she wasn't racist, just a bully  or both whatever... what do arrogant people do?


Unacceptable assumption. 

In the case in question, all we hear is from one side. Not both. As one poster has previously queried, somehow it's all been quoted verbatim from the person who has gone on Twitter about it.   

Racism is unacceptable, of course, but we have received only one side of the story.  Also, as @papertiger posted, he/she is asked the same question all the time. Is society so feeble now that a simple question about origin is so inflammatory? Why pounce on it as racist?  If someone asked me, I wouldn't feel targeted or abused; there's every chance there is interest to have a conversation about different histories, points of view, etc.


----------



## marietouchet

MiniMabel said:


> Unacceptable assumption.
> 
> In the case in question, all we hear is from one side. Not both. As one poster has previously queried, somehow it's all been quoted verbatim from the person who has gone on Twitter about it.
> 
> Racism is unacceptable, of course, but we have received only one side of the story.  Also, as @papertiger posted, he/she is asked the same question all the time. Is society so feeble now that a simple question about origin is so inflammatory? Why pounce on it as racist?  If someone asked me, I wouldn't feel targeted or abused; there's every chance there is interest to have a conversation about different histories, points of view, etc.





CarryOn2020 said:


> She does not like mingling with us “poors”.  Neither does Hazz.


In the Midwest, where MM was ...  When you meet someone, everyone asks WHERE DID YOU GO TO HIGH SCHOOL ?
It is a snobby question  - your answer says whether you went to a posh prep school - all of which are Catholic (PS at least where I live ) or live in the expensive upper class neighborhoods with great public (state run schools)
Most people dont realize this when they ask .. so, I take no offense


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Will she get $$$?  Then, sure, she’ll go.


Hazy will get the money for the divorce settlement from the Bank of Dad. Discreetly of course.


----------



## youngster

Toby93 said:


> *When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make sense to hear our story from us?*" Yikes, she really does think highly of herself  What stakes? Their ability to grift? They told the world they were stepping back from public life and wanted privacy.



They've been saying over and _over_ for the past 3 years, we need to tell our story, you need to hear directly from us, listen to us tell our story.  But, that's all they've been doing: their Oprah interview, magazine interviews, Meghan's podcasts which are basically about her.  There is nothing new, just a continuation of the same "poor us" routine.  

They haven't figured out that any viable, lucrative future can't be based in the past.  But that's all they seem to have to offer.  The next 2 months, they've got this reality show plus Harry's book, all mired in the past.  They'll get 5 minutes of headlines and then what?


----------



## athousandmhiles24

It is as if they died with those B&W pics


LittleStar88 said:


> You can watch the trailer without giving YouTube views here…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan | Official Teaser | Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan. A Netflix Global Event. Coming soon, only on Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yewtu.be
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lord have mercy, this looks so boring. All the dramatic black and white photos. And she comes off like a major b!tch.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> they won't succeed in outshining Will and Kate...they're making themselves look bad by the timing of this Netflix promo....disgusting really


Even two of the hosts on Today who are black questioned the timing of it, and also their claim of wanting privacy. Please note MM has that damn Hermes blanket draped over the chair behind her. 



> https://www.today.com/video/harry-and-meghan-drop-netflix-trailer-amid-royal-scandal-155824197859


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> Even two of the hosts on Today who are black questioned the timing of it, and also their claim of wanting privacy. Please note MM has that damn Hermes blanket draped over the chair behind her.


oh yay - mainstream American media questioning their tactics.  about time


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Can't imagine that Zed would shell out the cost unless the Indianapolis ladies gave her a huge wad of banknotes.


Maybe she borrowed Tyler's again. I did read a report yesterday saying that she arrived in a Gulfstream, which is what he owns. When the Harkles visited the UK earlier this year it was in a private jet but not a Gulfstream. That was the time pictures from their return to SB showed no evidence of kids being with them, and she was dressed for winter when it was 70 in SB, leading to claims of another Photoshop. I need a hobby, unless you consider amateur sleuthing one.


----------



## youngster

MiniMabel said:


> Racism is unacceptable, of course, but we have received only one side of the story. Also, as @papertiger posted, he/she is asked the same question all the time. *Is society so feeble now that a simple question about origin is so inflammatory? Why pounce on it as racist? If someone asked me, I wouldn't feel targeted or abused; there's every chance there is interest to have a conversation about different histories, points of view, etc.*



This is what I've wondered.  Why did Ngozi Fulani automatically assume there was malice attached to the question?   She was attending a large event with people from around the world and was not dressed in western or European style.  I think it would have been a natural question.  Maybe that's why Lady Hussey wanted to see her name tag, it probably had the country and/or organization name that Fulani was affiliated with on it.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I don't think SH is racist, BUT she knows what she's representing, what's at stake, what the issues have been since malicious M  stirred-up sh*t. Why labour a point? Why touch a stranger's hair? Why not listen to someone you're talking to?
> 
> I have absolutely no doubt this woman could have been equally rude to any pleb of the hoi polloi, you or me included. Aristos are not known for their inclusiveness or kindness talking to the lower orders. Speaks of snobbishness "I know better than you, even about you" that's what SH was saying, push, push, push and dominate, as the one asking the questions usually is. As a host/hostess it not done, not etiquette, not nice to make your guests feel small, awkward or uncomfortable. She failed in her role.
> 
> it's incredibly rude to push your point like a cross-examination when clearly the other person is uncomfortable or thinks they've answered a question.
> 
> It's all symbolism and appearances at these things. It's not (just) about how things were, it is about appropriateness and appearances. BRF what right to to let her go. This is a important time for KC and the BRF leading up to the Coronation, H&M are _constantly_ trying to undermine his family, that's all they've got. Whatever this Lady's past service (nice job to have if you ask me) anyone giving H&M ammunition to hit the BRF with needed to be shown the door.
> 
> Now someone has gained sympathy and a whole heap of publicity for herself and is seen as some kind of hero for attending an event, why, for having been talked to the way normal people have been talked to for centuries.
> 
> I have absolutely no idea what, what Ngozi wears matters. She answered Hussey's question politely enough. Ngozi tries to help victims of domestic abuse most days of the week, I'm sure she's not on may designer brands PR list and she has other priorities. I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversation interrogation.


Here are my current 2 cents and a question on the Ngozi issue:

After reading a fair amount of posts here and elsewhere, the Ngozi issue may have been a set-up and SH fell into the trap by her own merit. Ngozi's outfit in an event attended by people from different parts of the world can elicit the question "where are you from?" This together with previous post(s) from Ngozi expressing her admiration for TW and accusing TW's in-laws of domestic violence, Ngozi's connections to TW's photographer friend, the one that once awhile releases 'embellished?' photos of the Harkles… All a little suspicious imo.

However, while SH may have been a relatively easy target, the set-up may have not been specifically aimed at her. There are video clips showing Ngozi very close to Camilla, and perhaps eager to interact with her. If this was indeed a set-up, would it be possible that Camilla was again a target? I don't want to be unfair to Ngozi (or SH), but I believe this is a valid question.









						'Ngozi Fulani previously accused King Charles and Camilla of domestic violence'
					

The late Queen's lady-in-waiting Lady Susan Hussey has apologised and resigned after she repeatedly asked a black British charity boss where she was really from.Ngozi Fulani, a charity founder,...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> This is what I've wondered.  Why did Ngozi Fulani automatically assume there was malice attached to the question?   She was attending a large event with people from around the world and was not dressed in western or European style.  I think it would have been a natural question.  Maybe that's why Lady Hussey wanted to see her name tag, it probably had the country and/or organization name that Fulani was affiliated with on it.


Is it possible Lady Hussey thought this was a set up for Queen Camilla?  She asked the usual straightforward questions that most people have no difficulty answering.  Most people who accept invites to galas understand that they will be asked questions and should answer politely.  After a few simple questions, Lady Hussey realized this person could cause an upset and wanted to protect Camilla from this possible trouble-maker and her angst.  Remember, QE passed away about 2 - 3 months ago. Perhaps Lady Hussey should have called security.  Over here, security will most definitely have a word.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it possible Lady Hussey thought this was a set up for Queen Camilla?  She asked the usual straightforward questions that most people have no difficulty answering.  Most people who accept invites to galas understand that they will be asked questions and should answer politely.  After a few simple questions, Lady Hussey realized this person could cause an upset and wanted to protect Camilla from this possible trouble-maker and her angst.  Remember, QE passed away about 2 - 3 months ago. Perhaps Lady Hussey should have called security.  Over here, security will most definitely have a word.


This is a really intriguing possibility. I'm sure it was part of Lady Hussey's role as a LIW to act as a gatekeeper to the Queen. But can you imagine the firestorm it would have caused if she called in security? I can hear it now - "I was targeted because I am black".


----------



## scarlet555

MiniMabel said:


> Unacceptable assumption.
> 
> In the case in question, all we hear is from one side. Not both. As one poster has previously queried, somehow it's all been quoted verbatim from the person who has gone on Twitter about it.
> 
> Racism is unacceptable, of course, but we have received only one side of the story.  Also, as @papertiger posted, he/she is asked the same question all the time. Is society so feeble now that a simple question about origin is so inflammatory? Why pounce on it as racist?  If someone asked me, I wouldn't feel targeted or abused; there's every chance there is interest to have a conversation about different histories, points of view, etc.


Racism is unacceptable, but are you surprised that it happened?   Papertiger being asked may be the same type of institutionalized discrimination and nano-microaggression... I mean you see a person of color, do you go up to them and only wonder where they come from?  You don't want to know their favorite color/food/movies/hobbies/interest-then you (not you) messed up...  How much money do you make (what do you do?) and where do you come from?  If those two are the first questions, the person asking is pretty boring... (I love 'the little prince').   
I should have clarified- it was *my *assumption, not a general assumption.  over 100 years ago, everything was divided by class/gender/race, so it was very important to ask where the person was from so as to not mix with the lower social economic peasants, new riches, non aristocrats  blablabla,  I don't know how much it's changed even if it is *suppose* to.  Modernizing the BRF would be to abolish it?  I don't have an answer.


----------



## scarlet555

youngster said:


> This is what I've wondered.  Why did Ngozi Fulani automatically assume there was malice attached to the question?   She was attending a large event with people from around the world and was not dressed in western or European style.  I think it would have been a natural question.  Maybe that's why Lady Hussey wanted to see her name tag, it probably had the country and/or organization name that Fulani was affiliated with on it.


I think it has to do with how Fulani answered it IMO.  Its obvious Fulani didn't want to answer it, I mean get a hint lady susan! lol.  If someone asks where I'm from and I say Brooklyn and if you dig for more than that, it's your own grave!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it possible Lady Hussey thought this was a set up for Queen Camilla?  She asked the usual straightforward questions that most people have no difficulty answering.  Most people who accept invites to galas understand that they will be asked questions and should answer politely.  After a few simple questions, Lady Hussey realized this person could cause an upset and wanted to protect Camilla from this possible trouble-maker and her angst.  Remember, QE passed away about 2 - 3 months ago. Perhaps Lady Hussey should have called security.  Over here, security will most definitely have a word.


but I thought she did answer the question - said she was from Britain, didn't she?  then was pressed for her origin/heritage?
What reason would there be to call security


----------



## scarlet555

If it was a trap for the royal reps and whatnot, then lady Susan fell right into it...


----------



## TC1

Bombshell Netflix series
Spare- Bombshell book series
Oprah- Bombshell interview
Finding Freedom- Bombshell account

These privacy seekers need a Thesaurus


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it possible Lady Hussey thought this was a set up for Queen Camilla?  She asked the usual straightforward questions that most people have no difficulty answering.  Most people who accept invites to galas understand that they will be asked questions and should answer politely.  After a few simple questions, Lady Hussey realized this person could cause an upset and wanted to protect Camilla from this possible trouble-maker and her angst.  Remember, QE passed away about 2 - 3 months ago. Perhaps Lady Hussey should have called security.  Over here, security will most definitely have a word.


I think SH was trying to act as a sort of event host by being polite and showing interest on the guests. We don't know how the conversation really occurred. Also if you look at SH's pictures, she looks tired. QE passed away not long ago, and she might be going through a difficult phase. Being in a vulnerable state can affect one's judgment imo. In any event, this is all very sad.


----------



## sdkitty

TC1 said:


> Bombshell Netflix series
> Spare- Bombshell book series
> Oprah- Bombshell interview
> Finding Freedom- Bombshell account
> 
> These privacy seekers need a Thesaurus


well you know they have a lot at stake....I hope that statement comes back to bit them


----------



## Hanton

Also, the tone of voice used by Lady Hussey is unknown.  it is quite likely she has the upper class ‘clipped’ voice of that generation which can sound very curt to uninformed ear.  I have heard Ngozi Fulani on the news putting her own stress on certain words giving the impression she wants to give.  For all we know, Lady Hussey, presumably acting as Camilla’s eyes and ears, might have been quite light in her manner.


----------



## elvisfan4life

scarlet555 said:


> I think it has to do with how Fulani answered it IMO.  Its obvious Fulani didn't want to answer it, I mean get a hint lady susan! lol.  If someone asks where I'm from and I say Brooklyn, that's like if you dig for more than that, it's your own grave!!


Surely polite to answer more than one word say I’m not comfortable with your questions and walk away


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> Gross



Looks like a series of photos taken in a photo booth where u make silly faces and do idiotic things for a laugh. Is this meant to make them seem more relatable while they flog those undeserved titles, hop on private planes whenever they feel like traveling, and use their bodyguards to bully unsuspecting diners in restaurants?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> *I only found these… She looks like she’s got sand in her vagina.  *
> 
> View attachment 5662050
> 
> 
> View attachment 5662051





LittleStar88 said:


> *No one wants to see what she can do with Vienna sausages. *Please let’s not let that happen.


 I must say you have an active imagination.
Now I see Vienna sausages covered in sand then mashed into a pulp.


----------



## marietouchet

It occurs to me … we have not discussed the MM Indianapolis speech content while distracted with everything else


----------



## youngster

scarlet555 said:


> Its obvious Fulani didn't want to answer it, I mean get a hint lady susan! lol. If someone asks where I'm from and I say Brooklyn, that's like if you dig for more than that, it's your own grave!!



I agree.  Lady Hussey too is in her 80's, maybe she was tired, maybe she is still recovering from the Queen's death and is emotionally spent, maybe she wasn't quite as sharp as usual that day and she just kept pushing when she should have just smiled and moved on.


----------



## scarlet555

elvisfan4life said:


> Surely polite to answer more than one word say I’m not comfortable with your questions and walk away


Why be polite and walk away?    Sometimes you can't help yourself...


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> screw Omid......what a creep


He's a twunt.


----------



## Chanbal

Scoobi-do is not hiding why this piece of **** was released today.  



The pic below appears in the above video at about the same time Hazz says, 'no one sees what happens behind close doors'.


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> People (from everywhere) ask me this _all_ the time



LOL, this reminds of the first time my sister came to Italy with her baby son who is half Jamaican, people would stop us in the street asking where he was from and we would answer "he's English"!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo you should protect your mind.  This stuff is propaganda 101.  Beware the hidden agenda.



Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.

I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word meant to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Scoobi-do is not hiding why this piece of **** was released today.


I hope the sewer cover bongs him on the head when he drops back down into his “housing unit.”
[/QUOTE]


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Scoobi-do is not hiding why this piece of **** was released today.
> 
> 
> 
> The pic below appears in the above video at about the same time Hazz says, 'no one sees what happens behind close doors'.
> 
> View attachment 5662878



That is one truthful thing that they have said.  _"No one knows what happens behind closed doors."_  Behind the closed door Meghan is screaming at Harry for being a failure and not making money  and a bad father because he can't produce the Prince/Princess titles for her children.  Behind the closed door, Meghan treats her "friends" as commodities and only bothers with them if they can do something for her.  Behind the closed door, Meghan is sending messages to companies asking them for things that she can wear for free and she will make sure they are mentioned.  Behind closed door Meghan is asking companies to give to charities and asks that their name be attached to the donation and so both will have PR, while she and Harry aren't spending a penny.  Behind the closed door her assistants are sending out their resumes 15 minutes after they start the job because she is so demanding and difficult to work with.  I could go on..................


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.
> 
> I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word trying to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!


Don't you think that the NF program will be of the greatest love story every told?  It sure looks that way to me based on the still photographs.


----------



## mikimoto007

papertiger said:


> I don't think SH is racist, BUT she knows what she's representing, what's at stake, what the issues have been since malicious M  stirred-up sh*t. Why labour a point? Why touch a stranger's hair? Why not listen to someone you're talking to?
> 
> I have absolutely no doubt this woman could have been equally rude to any pleb of the hoi polloi, you or me included. Aristos are not known for their inclusiveness or kindness talking to the lower orders. Speaks of snobbishness "I know better than you, even about you" that's what SH was saying, push, push, push and dominate, as the one asking the questions usually is. As a host/hostess it not done, not etiquette, not nice to make your guests feel small, awkward or uncomfortable. She failed in her role.
> 
> it's incredibly rude to push your point like a cross-examination when clearly the other person is uncomfortable or thinks they've answered a question.
> 
> It's all symbolism and appearances at these things. It's not (just) about how things were, it is about appropriateness and appearances. BRF what right to to let her go. This is a important time for KC and the BRF leading up to the Coronation, H&M are _constantly_ trying to undermine his family, that's all they've got. Whatever this Lady's past service (nice job to have if you ask me) anyone giving H&M ammunition to hit the BRF with needed to be shown the door.
> 
> Now someone has gained sympathy and a whole heap of publicity for herself and is seen as some kind of hero for attending an event, why, for having been talked to the way normal people have been talked to for centuries.
> 
> I have absolutely no idea what, what Ngozi wears matters. She answered Hussey's question politely enough. Ngozi tries to help victims of domestic abuse most days of the week, I'm sure she's not on may designer brands PR list and she has other priorities. I feel sorry for her, she has my sympathy, but I didn't like the way she handled things either, she could have complained internally to the Palace first without embarrassing her hosts and everyone else at/organising the party by broadcasting the conversation interrogation.



This is really well worded. I could understand SH asking the question, as a product of her generation, but I can’t understand why she continued to push the point when it was made clear this wasn’t acceptable.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> That is one truthful thing that they have said.  _"No one knows what happens behind closed doors."_  Behind the closed door Meghan is screaming at Harry for being a failure and not making money  and a bad father because he can't produce the Prince/Princess titles for her children.  Behind the closed door, Meghan treats her "friends" as commodities and only bothers with them if they can do something for her.  Behind the closed door, Meghan is sending messages to companies asking them for things that she can wear for free and she will make sure they are mentioned.  Behind closed door Meghan is asking companies to give to charities and asks that their name be attached to the donation and so both will have PR, while she and Harry aren't spending a penny.  Behind the closed door her assistants are sending out their resumes 15 minutes after they start the job because she is so demanding and difficult to work with.  I could go on..................


Behind close doors TW is bullying staff! (Source: Valentine Low's book)


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Don't you think that the NF program will be of the greatest love story every told?  It sure looks that way to me based on the still photographs.


Romeo and Juliet's story will pale in comparison.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> It occurs to me … we have not discussed the MM Indianapolis speech content while distracted with everything else



We have been bombarded with an abundance of material! It's a lot to weed through. We will be at 10k pages in no time!


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Don't you think that the NF program will be of the greatest love story every told?  It sure looks that way to me based on the still photographs.



The trailer looks like something I could make in iMovie on my phone. So dramatic with the B&W photos and shutter sounds.


----------



## rose60610

So Claw was in Indianapolis for what, 5 minutes? Just long enough to give wiring instructions to her bank account then get the hell out. And what did she say that was soooo important that couldn't be done via Zoom, you know, to save on carbon emissions since she also claimed to be pro-environment. At least that was one of her 24 hour causes.


----------



## LittleStar88

Bye, Harry!


----------



## LittleStar88

Five things we learnt from Harry and Meghan’s Netflix trailer​Archive link HERE: *


			archive.ph
		

*
“No one sees what’s happening behind closed doors,” says Prince Harry, in forthcoming Netflix series Harry & Meghan. But, thanks to the trailer, now we can. And in the case of the formerly royal couple, it’s this: pose for a lot of pictures and plot the downfall of the Princess of Wales.

Say what you like about Netflix, but they know how to make a good trailer. Imagine your favourite inspirational Instagram account crossed with The Amityville Horror – you’re halfway to the Harry & Meghan vibe.
So what have we learned as its 60 seconds flash by?

*1. Timing is everything*
Netflix would probably say it’s complete coincidence that this trailer has dropped right now, in the very week that the Prince and Princess of Wales have arrived in Boston on a visit designed to charm the American public. 
I mean, how could they possibly have known about that trip, which was announced nearly six months ago, and has been all over the international media?

What Harry and Meghan genuinely couldn’t have predicted, though, was that Buckingham Palace would be engulfed in a race row, after William’s godmother displayed exactly the kind of attitudes that Meghan told us about in her interview with Oprah Winfrey. It’s the kind of delicious good timing that even Netflix can’t buy.

*2. They love a selfie (and a presidential-style photographer)*
Harry and Meghan snapping a blurred selfie on their mobile phone. Harry and Meghan in a photo booth. Harry and Meghan with their dogs. Harry and Meghan dancing on their wedding day. Harry and Meghan doing the jump-in-the-air-starfish-pose beloved of local newspaper photographers on A-level results day. There are many, many pictures of Harry and Meghan in the trailer for Harry & Meghan, all in tasteful black and white. Meghan also gets some of her own, including a beautifully backlit image of her cradling her belly while pregnant.

It appears that they have also been followed around, US president-style, by a personal photographer. There are intimate moments here which look wonderfully candid, until you reflect on the weirdness of a photographer being there – why is someone snapping them as they relax on the kitchen counter at Frogmore Cottage after a black-tie event? Another startling image appears to show Meghan in tears. Why? All will be revealed on December 8.

*3. Kate is the villain*
Slap bang in the middle of the trailer is an image taken from the 2020 Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey, Harry and Meghan’s last official royal duty. Of all the pictures they could have chosen, it’s an image with the Princess of Wales dead centre and hatchet-faced, staring directly into the camera. The message couldn’t be more obvious if they’d photoshopped her green and overlaid the Wicked Witch theme from the Wizard of Oz.
Also in the Westminster Abbey picture: the Queen Consort looking grim. The King looking at the order of service. William looking bald (by what must be an accident of editing, the frame cuts off the top of Harry’s head, thus giving the impression that he has an impressive thatch of hair).

*4. Harry plays the guitar*
Unavoidable David Brent vibes here, as Harry includes a picture of himself playing the guitar. All men think they can play the guitar, and members of the Royal family are no different. 
Meghan’s face is in shadow, so we can’t tell if she’s delighted or dying inside. 

In another image Harry is wearing a Peaky Blinders cap, another thing to which men are inexplicably and unadvisedly drawn. In the blurb for his memoir, Harry said: “I’ve worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively,” and here is the proof.


*5. The media is bad – sometimes*
The trailer includes images of newspapers rolling off the presses and a bank of photographers with lenses trained in their direction. The media is awful, right? Apart from photographers who take pictures of them looking gorgeous – the trailer opens with the fabulous image of the couple beneath an umbrella, taken by Samir Hussein. And apart from Netflix, which may be turning the death of Harry’s mother into entertainment for the next series of The Crown, but is also paying the couple a reported $100 million.


----------



## Chanbal

I wanted to move away from this subject, but the posts below deserve to be highlighted imo.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> It occurs to me … we have not discussed the MM Indianapolis speech content while distracted with everything else


I don't think it was released. And I'm sure Cringe is thrilled by this distraction from her yawn of an event.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.
> 
> I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word meant to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!


Haha I took something similar a very long time ago, but I agree with your assessment.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

This is sooooo good!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.
> 
> I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word meant to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!



Fellow film class attendee, I took two full semesters of video editing even. I bet this thing would be a masterpiece to teach techniques, but I still don't want to watch it.


----------



## Lounorada

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake







Also, they are so pathetic to release that today of all days when W&C are in Boston for the Earth Shot prize.
H&M are disgusting, vindictive, petty little imbeciles. There aren't enough negative words in the dictionary to describe those two with.
H&M:






LittleStar88 said:


> And for fun… Yoko Markle
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5662770





OMG!!! Either they are ridiculous enough to have copied this image on purpose or are so stupid they didn't realize they copied this image. Maybe a bit of both 
Seriously though, all their coupled-up photos in that short clip look so contrived, it is so cringe. Do they have a photobooth in their house or something?  They also must not want pRiVaCy in any way shape or by making and releasing this show because this is nothing short of _'Keeping up with the Kardashians 2.0'_. Or as I'd like to call it _*'Forcibly dragged along by the Markles'.*_
Please f**k all the way off and live your private toxic lives, no one has asked for this ****e.


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> Five things we learnt from Harry and Meghan’s Netflix trailer​Archive link HERE: *
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> *
> “No one sees what’s happening behind closed doors,” says Prince Harry, in forthcoming Netflix series Harry & Meghan. But, thanks to the trailer, now we can. And in the case of the formerly royal couple, it’s this: pose for a lot of pictures and plot the downfall of the Princess of Wales.
> 
> Say what you like about Netflix, but they know how to make a good trailer. Imagine your favourite inspirational Instagram account crossed with The Amityville Horror – you’re halfway to the Harry & Meghan vibe.
> So what have we learned as its 60 seconds flash by?
> 
> *1. Timing is everything*
> Netflix would probably say it’s complete coincidence that this trailer has dropped right now, in the very week that the Prince and Princess of Wales have arrived in Boston on a visit designed to charm the American public.
> I mean, how could they possibly have known about that trip, which was announced nearly six months ago, and has been all over the international media?
> 
> What Harry and Meghan genuinely couldn’t have predicted, though, was that Buckingham Palace would be engulfed in a race row, after William’s godmother displayed exactly the kind of attitudes that Meghan told us about in her interview with Oprah Winfrey. It’s the kind of delicious good timing that even Netflix can’t buy.
> 
> *2. They love a selfie (and a presidential-style photographer)*
> Harry and Meghan snapping a blurred selfie on their mobile phone. Harry and Meghan in a photo booth. Harry and Meghan with their dogs. Harry and Meghan dancing on their wedding day. Harry and Meghan doing the jump-in-the-air-starfish-pose beloved of local newspaper photographers on A-level results day. There are many, many pictures of Harry and Meghan in the trailer for Harry & Meghan, all in tasteful black and white. Meghan also gets some of her own, including a beautifully backlit image of her cradling her belly while pregnant.
> 
> It appears that they have also been followed around, US president-style, by a personal photographer. There are intimate moments here which look wonderfully candid, until you reflect on the weirdness of a photographer being there – why is someone snapping them as they relax on the kitchen counter at Frogmore Cottage after a black-tie event? Another startling image appears to show Meghan in tears. Why? All will be revealed on December 8.
> 
> *3. Kate is the villain*
> Slap bang in the middle of the trailer is an image taken from the 2020 Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey, Harry and Meghan’s last official royal duty. Of all the pictures they could have chosen, it’s an image with the Princess of Wales dead centre and hatchet-faced, staring directly into the camera. The message couldn’t be more obvious if they’d photoshopped her green and overlaid the Wicked Witch theme from the Wizard of Oz.
> Also in the Westminster Abbey picture: the Queen Consort looking grim. The King looking at the order of service. William looking bald (by what must be an accident of editing, the frame cuts off the top of Harry’s head, thus giving the impression that he has an impressive thatch of hair).
> 
> *4. Harry plays the guitar*
> Unavoidable David Brent vibes here, as Harry includes a picture of himself playing the guitar. All men think they can play the guitar, and members of the Royal family are no different.
> Meghan’s face is in shadow, so we can’t tell if she’s delighted or dying inside.
> 
> In another image Harry is wearing a Peaky Blinders cap, another thing to which men are inexplicably and unadvisedly drawn. In the blurb for his memoir, Harry said: “I’ve worn many hats over the years, both literally and figuratively,” and here is the proof.
> 
> 
> *5. The media is bad – sometimes*
> The trailer includes images of newspapers rolling off the presses and a bank of photographers with lenses trained in their direction. The media is awful, right? Apart from photographers who take pictures of them looking gorgeous – the trailer opens with the fabulous image of the couple beneath an umbrella, taken by Samir Hussein. And apart from Netflix, which may be turning the death of Harry’s mother into entertainment for the next series of The Crown, but is also paying the couple a reported $100 million.



This just reinforces the fact that Haz and Claw are nothing but attention-seeking, professional victim, money mongering whores. Even comments in the NYT about them are unfavorable. There's no redemption for Haz, he's forced to go along with all this baloney until they finally crash and burn. He probably doesn't even care and still thinks that he would welcomed back into the BRF since he hasn't matured beyond age 8. They're both damaged goods.


----------



## Chanbal

Time for one more intriguing message.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Five things we learnt from Harry and Meghan’s Netflix trailer​Archive link HERE: *
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> *
> “No one sees what’s happening behind closed doors,” says Prince Harry, in forthcoming Netflix series Harry & Meghan. But, thanks to the trailer, now we can. And in the case of the formerly royal couple, it’s this: pose for a lot of pictures and *plot the downfall of the Princess of Wales.*



WTF! When it's so glaringly obvious even in a documentary about their, uh, story.



LittleStar88 said:


> *2. They love a selfie (and a presidential-style photographer)*
> Harry and Meghan snapping a blurred selfie on their mobile phone. Harry and Meghan in a photo booth. Harry and Meghan with their dogs. Harry and Meghan dancing on their wedding day. Harry and Meghan doing the jump-in-the-air-starfish-pose beloved of local newspaper photographers on A-level results day. There are many, many pictures of Harry and Meghan in the trailer for Harry & Meghan, all in tasteful black and white. *Meghan also gets some of her own, including a beautifully backlit image of her cradling her belly while pregnant.*



Wow, we've never seen her do that, can't wait!



LittleStar88 said:


> It appears that they have also been followed around, US president-style, by a personal photographer. There are intimate moments here which look wonderfully candid, until you reflect on the weirdness of a photographer being there – *why is someone snapping them as they relax on the kitchen counter at Frogmore Cottage after a black-tie event?*



Because the a*sholes plotted this while still being working royals would be my informed guess.



LittleStar88 said:


> *3. Kate is the villain*



Really, really bold.



LittleStar88 said:


> (by what must be an accident of editing, the frame cuts off the top of Harry’s head, thus giving the impression that he has an impressive thatch of hair).


----------



## gracekelly

In the for what it is worth dept. You could say they were gate crashers. 


https://twitter.com/jomilleweb?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=
https://twitter.com/jomilleweb?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=
https://twitter.com/jomilleweb?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=

Evans E.   #KingCharles'Angel
@jomilleweb
·
Follow
REVEALED:  Apparently, @Sistah_Space was not directly invited to Buckingham Palace for the event.  They were invited by @SafespacesUK in good heart to expose Sistah Space to other advocates. That's why Lady Susan didn't recognize her or the organization, and asked questions
https://twitter.com/jomilleweb/status/1598200892771033088?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=


----------



## elvisfan4life

Chanbal said:


> I wanted to move away from this subject, but the posts below deserve to be highlighted imo.



Thank goodness for a sensible intelligent lady posting on social media so rare


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WTF...her name isn't even Ngozi Fulani?


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> Don't you think that the NF program will be of the greatest love story every told?  It sure looks that way to me based on the still photographs.


Of course! Nobody in the press is commenting on her not wearing her wedding ring yet. They already know she’s doing it for attention.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF...her name isn't even Ngozi Fulani?




Wow. This just comes down to be careful about the accusations you make and the sh!te you stir up… People will uncover the truth about the accuser.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Of course! Nobody in the press is commenting on her not wearing her wedding ring yet. They already know she’s doing it for attention.


It's out for its 14th restyling in four years.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF...her name isn't even Ngozi Fulani?



This is really too funny!


----------



## Annawakes

I don’t think it’s racist to ask someone their ethnicity, if it’s obvious they’re dressed up for an occasion, in non-Western clothes.  Clothes from different cultures are so interesting and beautiful.

I do think it would be odd to just ask someone their ethnicity without anything to prompt that question.

I’m not sure I believe the transcript of that conversation.  It may have started off like that, but I do think it’s strange for LSH to persist.  I do wonder if the rest of it was embellished.  Because it would look really bad for the palace to deny that’s what really happened.  It would be she said, she said.

I just don’t think it’s believable unless someone actually recorded the conversation.  Having NF’s friend vouch for its accuracy isn’t convincing to me, given her past comments against the RF.


----------



## Chanbal

A great response to the Harkles, Scoobie, Nefl*x  and others. Hear the crowds in Boston and Chelsea!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> And for fun… Yoko Markle
> 
> View attachment 5662770


That is fun!  I didn't realise the parallels in these two couples.  Both women stalked out their victim, and rode the coat tails of fame.  Both thought they were talented in their own right, and wanted to be as much in the spotlight as their victim, sorry, husbands 

I was going through the TV channels a few nights ago and saw on TMZ that Jay Leno appeared at a comedy club to perform.  When he got out of the car, the press were all over him and asking their questions about his recent accident.  

His wife was with him, but she stayed well back from all the flashbulbs and if you hadn't seen her get out of the car with Jay, you would never have known she was there.  Very classy.  

That's the route I would definitely go.....you get the very comfortable lifestyle and privacy to live your life.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> We have been bombarded with an abundance of material! It's a lot to weed through. We will be at 10k pages in no time!


And just a few days ago we were bored with them. I knew it wouldn't take long for the next controversy to rear its head.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

What a trashy twosome H&M are -- did they really release a trailer for their documentary the same time William and Kate came to Boston? She does this so consistently it's ridiculous -- always releasing something or doing something to draw some attention to herself when the spotlight is on other working royals. Harry is just ... no words.


----------



## missie1

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I agree...although I can also understand her perspective...I have complained about people (customer service reps, sales staff etc) and then all of a sudden I feel bad and panic and say I don't want this person to lose their job or anything serious and just ask for better training



There should be serious consequences for Racism.  Look at the backlash and financial hits Kanye has received because of his racist rants.  Imo She deserves to reap the consequences of her actions as well.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> A great response to the Harkles, Scoobie, Nefl*x  and others. Hear the crowds in Boston and Chelsea!



Here's a thought: The O's have a home on nearby Martha's Vineyard. I know it is highly unlikely, but I would die laughing if one or both turned up as surprise guests at tomorrow's Earthshot ceremony/dinner. The Wales' friendship with the O's is just one of MM's many grievances against them. I imagine her grinding her teeth every time she sees young George in his bathrobe conversing with the Os.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> It's out for its 14th restyling in four years.


Stupid diamonds!! Over a billion years old and they still can’t manage to make a perfect ring. I don’t know how Meghan tolerates it.


----------



## charlottawill

If that damn fedora could only talk....


----------



## gracekelly

You know that William and his staff fully expected the Harkles to drop a bomb.  I hope flash back will me epic.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

TC1 said:


> Bombshell Netflix series
> Spare- Bombshell book series
> Oprah- Bombshell interview
> Finding Freedom- Bombshell account
> 
> These privacy seekers need a Thesaurus


Just saying, I don't think Dufus would know what a Thesaurus is even if he'd stumble on one.


----------



## Annawakes

^^ “Thesaurus?? Is that some kind of dinosaur??”
— Handbag


----------



## Debbini

missie1 said:


> There should be serious consequences for Racism.  Look at the backlash and financial hits Kanye has received because of his racist rants.  Imo She deserves to reap the consequences of her actions as well.


There should be serious consequences for race baiting too.


----------



## Chanbal

One more reaction to the Harkles's release…


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I wanted to move away from this subject, but the posts below deserve to be highlighted imo.



coincidentally Wakanda was the biggest selling movie last week


----------



## pukasonqo

LittleStar88 said:


> And for fun… Yoko Markle
> 
> View attachment 5662770





LittleStar88 said:


> And for fun… Yoko Markle
> 
> View attachment 5662770


I am OK w the cosplay as long as they spare us from this


			Google Image Result for https://diva.sfsu.edu/bundles/preview/1473402


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF! When it's so glaringly obvious even in a documentary about their, uh, story.
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, we've never seen her do that, can't wait!
> 
> 
> 
> Because the a*sholes plotted this while still being working royals would be my informed guess.
> 
> 
> 
> Really, really bold.


I’m disappointed - I mean Kate is just not a convincing villain. Obv the correct choice is Will who is jealous of his brother’s incredible coolness and is also in love with M


gracekelly said:


> In the for what it is worth dept. You could say they were gate crashers.
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/jomilleweb?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=
> https://twitter.com/jomilleweb?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=
> https://twitter.com/jomilleweb?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=
> 
> Evans E.   #KingCharles'Angel
> @jomilleweb
> ·
> Follow
> REVEALED:  Apparently, @Sistah_Space was not directly invited to Buckingham Palace for the event.  They were invited by @SafespacesUK in good heart to expose Sistah Space to other advocates. That's why Lady Susan didn't recognize her or the organization, and asked questions
> https://twitter.com/jomilleweb/status/1598200892771033088?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1598200892771033088|twgr^|twcon^s1_&ref_url=





QueenofWrapDress said:


> WTF...her name isn't even Ngozi Fulani?



This to me is too far- a lot of people change their names -even if it is socio-politically  motivated  it’s for more complex reasons not wanting to trick people. 

I definitely think she is not shy of stirring racialised controversy to get noticed but I don’t think Twitter needs to do a hatchet job on her. 


Toby93 said:


> That is fun!  I didn't realise the parallels in these two couples.  Both women stalked out their victim, and rode the coat tails of fame.  Both thought they were talented in their own right, and wanted to be as much in the spotlight as their victim, sorry, husbands
> 
> I was going through the TV channels a few nights ago and saw on TMZ that Jay Leno appeared at a comedy club to perform.  When he got out of the car, the press were all over him and asking their questions about his recent accident.
> 
> His wife was with him, but she stayed well back from all the flashbulbs and if you hadn't seen her get out of the car with Jay, you would never have known she was there.  Very classy.
> 
> That's the route I would definitely go.....you get the very comfortable lifestyle and privacy to live your life.


Talented?

Let’s not forget Cynthia Lennon also found out John was sneaking Yoko in the back door the second she left their house & the same can be said of dear Corey’s townhouse. 


charlottawill said:


> If that damn fedora could only talk....



I think it would just emit one long scream before throwing itself into the sea.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

pukasonqo said:


> I am OK w the cosplay as long as they spare us from this
> 
> 
> Google Image Result for https://diva.sfsu.edu/bundles/preview/1473402



Lord help us all if it comes to that


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.
> 
> I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word meant to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!


Leni R, a powerful woman/artist, inspiration for MM surely, does anyone remember …
Bryan Ferry of Roxy Music got into a boat load of trouble praising the artistic power of the artist, unfortunately he was then taken for being a Nazi sympathizer, rather than a degreed university art devotee 
Funny how beautiful art can be used to promote bad messages


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Annawakes said:


> ^^ “Thesaurus?? Is that some kind of dinosaur??”
> — Handbag


Yes, that sounds like HCMH's style and a wise person would answer Handbag thusly, "Great question and the answer is 'no' but if you riffle through the pages, you will find TW under 'Velociraptor' and yourself under 'Traitorous or selfish or ungrateful for starters depending on your reading skills."


----------



## bubablu

bubablu said:


> I mean, she is laughing here.


Aaaahh, the Body language guy have just said the same: I'm pretty sure she's smiling.


----------



## 880

scarlet555 said:


> I think it has to do with how Fulani answered it IMO.  Its obvious Fulani didn't want to answer it, I mean get a hint lady susan! lol.  If someone asks where I'm from and I say Brooklyn and if you dig for more than that, it's your own grave!!



Agree with ^
I’ve been asked this question many times by well meaning, usually older people (some non Caucasian)
I grit my teeth and answer it, but it did bother me for decades bc it made me feel very brown skinned 
and something of an outsider. 

IMO Lady Susan was incredibly rude and entitled, and as such a trusted representative of rhe BRF, she should have been briefed or at least known better than to press on. She should have stepped down and then made a public apology herself, rather than relying on an official spokesperson. had she done that, I believe she would have diffused some of the negativity that followed W & K in Boston. 

I’ve posted before that I do not doubt that there is racism in the BRF; I only doubt that Meghan, who identified as Caucasian for most of her life,  was made to feel unwelcome or suicidal bc of race.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> Just saying, I don't think Dufus would know what a Thesaurus is even if he'd stumble on one.


"Is that some kind of dinosaur?"


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> ^^ “Thesaurus?? Is that some kind of dinosaur??”
> — Handbag


Oops should have read further haha.


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Leni R, a powerful woman/artist, inspiration for MM surely, does anyone remember …
> Bryan Ferry of Roxy Music got into a boat load of trouble praising the artistic power of the artist, unfortunately he was then taken for being a Nazi sympathizer, rather than a degreed university art devotee
> Funny how beautiful art can be used to promote bad messages


I wouldn't call Leni Riefenstahl's blood-chilling Nazi propaganda film ‘beautiful art’ though.

I was just saying watching 'Triumph of the Will' all those decades ago, I learned how a filmmaker can manipulate us in order to evoke an emotional response.  And that’s what I saw in this Netfl*x trailer - lots of manipulation and not a lot of unvarnished truth.


----------



## rose60610

Annawakes said:


> ^^ “Thesaurus?? Is that some kind of dinosaur??”
> — Handbag



Maybe it was Archie's second word, right after "crocodile". Remember that one?


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Annawakes

I haven’t seen the trailer and I won’t see it but those pictures of them pawing at each other are really gross.  I don’t want to see any middle aged people pawing at each other like that.


----------



## marietouchet

The MM sugar-laden US fashion press is coincidentally whining about the W&K visit, such timing ….

Also the V Low article in today’s Times is titled Sussexes on warpath

Fulanigate was last month , lol, so I has trouble seeing if the Times reported it yesterday - last month’s articles need to be reloaded

Boston Is Apparently Really Angry That the Royals Are Visiting









						Boston Is Really Mad That the Royals Are Visiting: "I Didn't Invite These People"
					

Prince William and Princess Kate's visit will apparently make it hard for people to get to the supermarket.




					www.harpersbazaar.com


----------



## Katel

lallybelle said:


> Normally I don't go down the rabbit hole BUT I am a bit more suspicious now knowing that Ngozi is a Megs stan and has often said things against the BRF, such as Megs being a victim of domestic violence by her in-laws...the hell????? Why was she even invited or agreed to attend if she felt this way about the BRF?
> 
> Of course it doesn't change the fact that if this went down as stated, LSH was rude and inappropriate, but now I am left wondering if like someone said yesterday that Ngozi was ready to play.





CarryOn2020 said:


> People are upset




Yeah, I prefer to hear both sides of a story before wading in, so I post hesitantly …
On one side, @papertiger nailed it, my thought too was LSH was acting more “elite” than racist … throwing her “royal lineage/connections blah blah” around … and when Ngozi didn’t fawn and submit to LSH’s class elitism, she continued to attempt to intimidate (IF it happened as one of the two parties stated).
From Ngozi’s side - and I know it’s not a popular viewpoint - I’ve noticed people with a chip on their shoulder, an “axe to grind,” find a reason to justify that chip over and over and over again. She’s posted a hatred for the BRF … why was she there at all?


----------



## sdkitty

Annawakes said:


> I haven’t seen the trailer and I won’t see it but those pictures of them pawing at each other are really gross.  I don’t want to see any middle aged people pawing at each other like that.


middle aged?  doncha know she's a young mother?


----------



## youngster

The hypocrisy of Harry is really astonishing. He claims to want privacy and to be an ordinary fellow and flees to Canada and then the U.S. because he feared for his little family's safety at the hands of the nasty British tabloids and press.  Then he proceeds to cart around a film crew for a year or more, invading his own privacy, filming all around and inside their home, and then broadcasts a heavily edited version of their lives.  For what purpose?  I guess since they haven't produced any other original content in almost 3 years, they had to fall back on selling access to their own lives to at least partially fulfill that Netflix contract. So, did they let Netflix film at all hours of the day and night?  Did they recreate certain "scenes" because a camera crew was not around 24/7?   Imagine saying to Harry . . . *wait, don't tell me about your grandmother's health, we have to get the Netflix crew here so that they can capture my reaction! * This is all just bizarre.  Harry's created his own Truman Show.

All they will be showing is ancient history too.  Is anyone really interested in behind the scenes at the Invictus Games last year or earlier this year or whenever it was?  Meghan's pregnancy?  Both were years ago.  I think all they will end up revealing is that they hate Harry's family for refusing to give them the half-in /half-out deal they desperately wanted and that the two of them are utterly self-absorbed and not very bright. Just like Meghan's podcasts revealed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

This bit has me laughing out loud:

_'When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make more sense to hear our story from us?'_



Not when you are a pathological liar who is telling the story. Lawd, she's delusional AF.

Also, what are these 'high stakes'?
Is it the fact that if you don't keep peddling your fabricated fantasy story to appear as the victim in everything then the more people will see you for the narcissist, bully, scheming giant fraud that you are, and you won't have foolish stans & paid media outlets fawning over you enabling you to get multimillion dollar deals where you get paid big bucks to do f*ck all work yet you get to bathe yourself in artificial praise and adoration for doing absolutely nothing worthwhile except be spiteful and jealous towards the family name/status that got you to the privileged position you are in now and claiming to be a humanitarian/philanthropist/activist when in reality you've done _nothing _to help better other people's lives/circumstances because you don't have a compassionate or empathetic bone in your body and the one and _only _person you actually care about doing good for is yourself? Is that the high stakes you speak of Rachel?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He's a twunt.


I learned a new word


----------



## marietouchet

Speechless , fact check time …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Speechless , fact check time …



she's obviously of African descent....don't know what country in Africa


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> Speechless , fact check time …



Yep, a lot of us on this thread called it for what it is: a setup to help her hero ZedZed and the similarities between the two are too numerous to list.


----------



## scarlet555

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yep, a lot of us on this thread called it for what it is: a setup to help her hero ZedZed and the similarities between the two are too numerous to list.


It didn't occur to me that crazy had so much support, if Fulani is doing her bidding-  She don't need Crazy to prove a point, but it doesn't make Lady Susan actions right-at any case, set up or not, it's real aint it? Just because it's a set up doesn't make less real IMO.


----------



## bag-mania

Has it been announced how many episodes the Netflix series will be?


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Would the person who asked to hear their story please stand up?



And no one has asked her if she’s ok!




CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww.
> 
> _Meanwhile, the Sussex's friend Omid Scobie gleefully tweeted: 'If tomorrow is Prince William's Super Bowl, then here's your Halftime Show...'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailer 'DELIBERATELY timed', expert says
> 
> 
> The trailer for Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries has been 'deliberately' released to 'take away' from the Cambridges' landmark US tour, an  expert claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ha, what a doof scabies is - sadly for them, he called it right (for once). Super Bowl halftime is the hired entertainment. The Super Bowl itself is an elite, championship competition between the top two teams in that sport.


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> The hypocrisy of Harry is really astonishing. He claims to want privacy and to be an ordinary fellow and flees to Canada and then the U.S. because he feared for his little family's safety at the hands of the nasty British tabloids and press.  Then he proceeds to cart around a film crew for a year or more, invading his own privacy, filming all around and inside their home, and then broadcasts a heavily edited version of their lives.  For what purpose?  I guess since they haven't produced any other original content in almost 3 years, they had to fall back on selling access to their own lives to at least partially fulfill that Netflix contract. So, did they let Netflix film at all hours of the day and night?  Did they recreate certain "scenes" because a camera crew was not around 24/7?   Imagine saying to Harry . . . *wait, don't tell me about your grandmother's health, we have to get the Netflix crew here so that they can capture my reaction! * This is all just bizarre.  Harry's created his own Truman Show.
> 
> All they will be showing is ancient history too.  Is anyone really interested in behind the scenes at the Invictus Games last year or earlier this year or whenever it was?  Meghan's pregnancy?  Both were years ago.  I think all they will end up revealing is that they hate Harry's family for refusing to give them the half-in /half-out deal they desperately wanted and that the two of them are utterly self-absorbed and not very bright. Just like Meghan's podcasts revealed.


"Harry's created his own Truman Show." - such a good comment!

My analogy wasn't as insightful, I was thinking they were like the Real Housewives, with camera crews following them and acting out some pre-arranged drama.


----------



## 880

.


----------



## Toby93

Lounorada said:


> This bit has me laughing out loud:
> 
> _'When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make more sense to hear our story from us?'_
> 
> View attachment 5663026
> 
> Not when you are a pathological liar who is telling the story. Lawd, she's delusional AF.
> 
> Also, what are these 'high stakes'?
> Is it the fact that if you don't keep peddling your fabricated fantasy story to appear as the victim in everything then the more people will see you for the narcissist, bully, scheming giant fraud that you are, and you won't have foolish stans & paid media outlets fawning over you enabling you to get multimillion dollar deals where you get paid big bucks to do f*ck all work yet you get to bathe yourself in artificial praise and adoration for doing absolutely nothing worthwhile except be spiteful and jealous towards the family name/status that got you to the privileged position you are in now and claiming to be a humanitarian/philanthropist/activist when in reality you've done _nothing _to help better other people's lives/circumstances because you don't have a compassionate or empathetic bone in your body and the one and _only _person you actually care about doing good for is yourself? Is that the high stakes you speak of Rachel?
> View attachment 5663040


Lol, you said it waaaay better than I did


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG has a video on the Harkles' Netfl*x trailer. See pic below taken inside the Firm and respective legend.


----------



## marietouchet

ooh look what we have to look forward to… the tears in the trailer were likely on the day the Knauf emails came out, showing MM had lied to the court and H authorized help for Scobie’s book … will we hear their side of that mess ??


----------



## charlottawill

Annawakes said:


> I haven’t seen the trailer and I won’t see it but those pictures of them pawing at each other are really gross.  I don’t want to see any middle aged people pawing at each other like that.


Who you calling middle aged?  I'm sure she would violently disagree.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> The MM sugar-laden US fashion press is coincidentally whining about. W&K visit, such timing ….
> 
> Also the V Low article in today’s Times is titled Sussexes on warpath
> 
> Fulanigate was last month , lol, so I has trouble seeing if the Times reported it yesterday - last month’s articles need to be reloaded
> 
> Boston Is Apparently Really Angry That the Royals Are Visiting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston Is Really Mad That the Royals Are Visiting: "I Didn't Invite These People"
> 
> 
> Prince William and Princess Kate's visit will apparently make it hard for people to get to the supermarket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


I think "really angry" is a bit of an exaggeration. They'll be gone by Saturday. It's the same when a President is in NY. There is gridlock everywhere and New Yorkers love to complain about it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

scarlet555 said:


> It didn't occur to me that crazy had so much support, if Fulani is doing her bidding-  She don't need Crazy to prove a point, but it doesn't make Lady Susan actions right-at any case, set up or not, it's real aint it? Just because it's a set up doesn't make less real IMO.


Has Lady Hussey told her story?  No.  
We only have 1 version from the person who had an agenda.  Yet, so many people rush to judgement.


----------



## charlottawill

Katel said:


> And no one has asked her if she’s ok!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ha, what a doof scabies is - sadly for them, he called it right (for once). Super Bowl halftime is the hired entertainment. The Super Bowl itself is an elite, championship competition between the top two teams in that sport.



The violin playing


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Has it been announced how many episodes the Netflix series will be?


I think the BLG mentioned 6 on his video. He will be reporting on them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> she's obviously of African descent....don't know what country in Africa


Just google it.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has Lady Hussey told her story?  No.
> We only have 1 version from the person who had an agenda.  Yet, so many people rush to judgement.


I think she will follow QE's motto, and will keep silent.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has Lady Hussey told her story? No.


And she won't. She is of the "Never complain, never explain" school, not "Let's run to social media ASAP to air every grievance".


----------



## octopus17

Annawakes said:


> I haven’t seen the trailer and I won’t see it but those pictures of them pawing at each other are really gross.  I don’t want to see any middle aged people pawing at each other like that.


In the words of my late father, "Get a bucket of cold water for those two."


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> Yeah, I prefer to hear both sides of a story before wading in, so I post hesitantly …
> On one side, @papertiger nailed it, my thought too was LSH was acting more “elite” than racist … throwing her “royal lineage/connections blah blah” around … and when Ngozi didn’t fawn and submit to LSH’s class elitism, she continued to attempt to intimidate (IF it happened as one of the two parties stated).
> From Ngozi’s side - and I know it’s not a popular viewpoint - I’ve noticed people with a chip on their shoulder, an “axe to grind,” find a reason to justify that chip over and over and over again. She’s posted a hatred for the BRF … why was she there at all?


Seriously, KC3 needs to cancel these events/galas.  It will save money, time and effort.  QE proved that one-on-one awards are far better, far more meaningful to the honoree, than the clusterf at the palace. 



Annawakes said:


> I haven’t seen the trailer and I won’t see it but those pictures of them pawing at each other are really gross.  I don’t want to see any middle aged people pawing at each other like that.



Yes, zero chemistry with H&M, zero appeal, zero. They are *gross*.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.
> 
> I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word meant to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!


Powerful film that shows how easily people believe a lie.  It was easy then and it still is.


----------



## Katel

charlottawill said:


> The violin playing


such a laugh  a favorite is the £20 note for a cry rag at the end


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



"Did they set up a phone camera with ring light to record their intimate moments and share with the world after claiming privacy?"


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


>





Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5663043


It instantly stops being oh-so-cute and romantic when you realize there is a person being paid to stand there and take these intimate pictures.
Are we supposed to believe they are taking these pics themselves with a timer on their camera? 
I really pity the people who have to follow them around and be forced to photograph these scripted moments of faux tRuE lOvE
After 5 mins I'd be like:


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Has Lady Hussey told her story?  No.
> We only have 1 version from the person who had an agenda.  Yet, so many people rush to judgement.


Not expecting much, even with both version, it won't be the truth, maybe the 'audio' might help and I expect a lot of (from Lady Susan)-' I didn't mean to offend, I was just really curious', the elitist's excuse for microaggression behaviors...
and I am no Team Cringe at all....hate her hypocrisy


----------



## Aimee3

Aha the mystery of why they need 16 bathrooms and such a big house…for the netflix crew that followed them around for a whole year!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, this stupid "I'm so cute face". It's especially uncute when Botox makes it so that all that moves is your nose wrinkles.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm sorry Germany.


----------



## Debbini

scarlet555 said:


> It didn't occur to me that crazy had so much support, if Fulani is doing her bidding-  She don't need Crazy to prove a point, but it doesn't make Lady Susan actions right-at any case, set up or not, it's real aint it? Just because it's a set up doesn't make less real IMO.


How do you know what this fulani person is saying is true about what Lady Susan even asked or said? That could all be a bunch of BS too.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


>




Riiiiiiight, doesn't everyone have a professional photographer follow them home after a black tie function to capture those romance-on-the-countertop moments?


----------



## Toby93

21 Thousand likes


----------



## mikimoto007

marietouchet said:


> ooh look what we have to look forward to… the tears in the trailer were likely on the day the Knauf emails came out, showing MM had lied to the court and H authorized help for Scobie’s book … will we hear their side of that mess ??



Amazing spot.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Seriously, KC3 needs to cancel these events/galas.  It will save money, time and effort.  QE proved that one-on-one awards are far better, far more meaningful to the honoree, than the clusterf at the palace.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, zero chemistry with H&M, zero appeal, zero. They are *gross*.


Not sure I agree with you on cancelling receptions. The Queen hosted plenty too. they’re an effective way of recognising a large number of people.


----------



## marietouchet

Earthshot keynote speaker even brought up race and colonialism , is there any other topic ??? Please
Who knew the 3 day trip was to be RACE 24/7 ??? I thought it was about climate change …

Prince and Princess of Wales touch down in Boston amid royal race row
https://mol.im/a/11487065


----------



## Chanbal

Debbini said:


> How do you know what this fulani person is saying is true about what Lady Susan even asked or said? That could all be a bunch of BS too.


There is a new development on this story.


----------



## Chanbal

Team Will & Kate all the way! 










						A declaration of war: Netflix trailer for Harry and Meghan documentary
					

Harry and Meghan's new Netflix documentary is being seen as a 'declaration of war' by the royals, sources said last night.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> I think "really angry" is a bit of an exaggeration. They'll be gone by Saturday. It's the same when a President is in NY. There is gridlock everywhere and New Yorkers love to complain about it.


Funny how the press didn‘t mention that H & TW had a very poor reception at the Intrepid Museum American Military Veterans Event that they attended last year in NYC. And how the security for their endless photo ops with the Mayor and Governor, etc. tied up traffic. And yes New Yorkers always grumble when politicians visit our city and snarl traffic. I remember cursing when our then Prez and his wife flew in to dine at a restaurant for their date night. The traffic was just beastly that night as a result. At least W & K are in Boston to hand out meaningful awards to people doing work on the environment that could benefit all of us. Unlike H & TW and their visit to that school where she disrupted classes so she could read the Stench to some unlucky students. And the worst gridlock happens when the UN is in session every year in NYC. So a 3 day visit by visiting dignitaries is a minor inconvenience to the locals in Boston by comparison.


----------



## Chanbal

These guys are good…


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> Here's a thought: The O's have a home on nearby Martha's Vineyard. I know it is highly unlikely, but I would die laughing if one or both turned up as surprise guests at tomorrow's Earthshot ceremony/dinner. The Wales' friendship with the O's is just one of MM's many grievances against them. I imagine her grinding her teeth every time she sees young George in his bathrobe conversing with the Os.


I read that both John Kerry and Caroline Kennedy recused themselves at the last minute.  The implication was that the issue at the palace was the reason.  It is truly sad that the program for climate issues was sacrificed because of the latest brouhaha. I am disappointed in both of them.  If you believe in something you stand up in support.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Some may recall in Oct., there were stories of panic at Nflix:

_The negative British headlines weren’t the only thing that shook Ted Sarandos’s empire — in early October, sources said that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were “panicked” over their series and wanted to edit out new revelations. The couple — who famously went on Oprah to discuss the racism Meghan faced while living with the royal family — told Netflix they wanted to backtrack in the wake of the queen’s death in September. “Harry and Meghan are having second thoughts on their own story, on their own project,” a Netflix source told “Page Six” on October 4. Another industry source added, “Harry and Meghan are panicked about trying to tone down even the most basic language. But it’s their story, from their own mouths.” Though the project could be “shelved indefinitely” if Netflix gives in to the couple’s wishes, other sources said that Netflix has made it “clear that project is going forward.”








						Netflix Suddenly Scared to Offend Anyone With Harry and Meghan Doc
					

Sources say the streamer is “rattled” as the couple try to “tone down” the edit.




					www.vulture.com
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I read that both John Kerry and Caroline Kennedy recused themselves at the last minute.  The implication was that the issue at the palace was the reason.  It is truly sad that the program for climate issues was sacrificed because of the latest brouhaha. I am disappointed in both of them.  If you believe in something you stand up in support.


If you believe the article, Caroline Kennedy missed the opening but still plans to attend the other events. John Kerry is still recovering from COVID but hopes to make the gala event. 








						Caroline Kennedy met Wills and Kate backstage at at Boston Celtics
					

Kennedy, the daughter of President John F. Kennedy who is currently serving as the US Ambassador to Australia, said she experienced 'disrupted travel plans' due to the harsh weather.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gelbergirl

“When the stakes are this high…..”
What is she talking about


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I read that both John Kerry and Caroline Kennedy recused themselves at the last minute.  The implication was that the issue at the palace was the reason.  It is truly sad that the program for climate issues was sacrificed because of the latest brouhaha. I am disappointed in both of them.  If you believe in something you stand up in support.


Check again.  Caroline was late due to transportation issues. She met W&K backstage at the Celtics game. She wore green  
She is a diplomat, needs the positive publicity. 

JKerry is apparently ill.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mikimoto007 said:


> Amazing spot.
> 
> Not sure I agree with you on cancelling receptions. The Queen hosted plenty too. they’re an effective way of recognising a large number of people.


That’s ok.  We can still be kind to each other. 

ETA:  just saw the latest Town&Country. They have several articles about the change in attitudes toward extravagant parties, celebrations, etc.  

_Have We Overdosed on Fun?_​_Dinners, parties, cocktails, repeat. It was so thrilling to “go back to normal” that we may have overdone it a bit. Are you sick of us yet?








						Have We Overdosed on Fun?
					

Dinners, parties, cocktails, repeat. It was so thrilling to “go back to normal” that we may have overdone it a bit. Are you sick of us yet?




					www.townandcountrymag.com
				



_


----------



## Toby93




----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> It occurs to me … we have not discussed the MM Indianapolis speech content while distracted with everything else


I kind of assumed she gave her usual word salad gibberish, mentioned "I, me and myself" countless times and looked immensely proud of herself. There were some articles that praised her wearing green and purple and sitting in a white chair. Supposedly it was very symbolic (a grape hidden in vine leaves on a white plate).


duna said:


> LOL, this reminds of the first time my sister came to Italy with her baby son who is half Jamaican, people would stop us in the street asking where he was from and we would answer "he's English"!


I'm not even half-anything but I've had people in the West automatically assume that I'm from China. Sometimes, if they insist, I don't bother to argue that Singapore is not in China.

The funniest encounter I had was with a British lady who accused me of being a Yank because she detected a Yank accent. She was much friendlier after I told her that I watched too many US TV shows.

I've also accidentally insulted a classmate of Indian ethnicity. She was mad at me because at that point in time, India and Sri Lanka were at odds and she wanted to identify as Ceylonese. Fair enough, my country did recognize Ceylonese as a separate ethnicity till 1970 and she was offended in 1972 (10 years old) so she would have been brought up to view herself as distinct from Indians.


Jayne1 said:


> Back in film class in University, we watched Leni Riefenstahl’s 1934 documentary-style propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will" which is when I learned of what editing and musical score can do to our emotions.
> 
> I’m not comparing the two films, obviously! but just watching that trailer, I could see the power of the image, the atmospheric sound under spoken word meant to manipulate the message and evoke an emotional response, plus the utter _lack of spontaneity... _so thank you, University Film class 101!


I have no doubt that the BLG will be watching it without the audio on so that he can concentrate on the imagery.


Chanbal said:


> Romeo and Juliet's story will pale in comparison.



I think she is reaching for mythic status now and wants to emulate Helen of Troy.


----------



## scarlet555

Debbini said:


> How do you know what this fulani person is saying is true about what Lady Susan even asked or said? That could all be a bunch of BS too.


That’s true, but the response from BRF leans towards it being a true version…. I really think she has the audio version waiting to be released thus the response from BRF


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



My money is on them cutting a deal for her toady Missan being the photographer and Netflix having to pay him.


----------



## LittleStar88

Six episodes of torture.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Six episodes of torture.
> 
> View attachment 5663099


We really need more emojis


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> Maybe it was Archie's second word, right after "crocodile". Remember that one?


They can still milk the baby girl's first word. So far they have only revealed two first steps walking.


marietouchet said:


> The MM sugar-laden US fashion press is coincidentally whining about the W&K visit, such timing ….
> 
> Also the V Low article in today’s Times is titled Sussexes on warpath
> 
> Fulanigate was last month , lol, so I has trouble seeing if the Times reported it yesterday - last month’s articles need to be reloaded
> 
> Boston Is Apparently Really Angry That the Royals Are Visiting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boston Is Really Mad That the Royals Are Visiting: "I Didn't Invite These People"
> 
> 
> Prince William and Princess Kate's visit will apparently make it hard for people to get to the supermarket.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.harpersbazaar.com


LOL
Harpers Bazaar is a total tabloid now.


marietouchet said:


> Speechless , fact check time …



Well, at least this lady looks like she is more than 43% African.


Cornflower Blue said:


> In the words of my late father, "Get a bucket of cold water for those two."


Didn't she already do the ice bucket and scored a paramour while still stringing Cory along?


gelbergirl said:


> “When the stakes are this high…..”
> What is she talking about


I get the mental image that she thinks her stakes are piled above her head and I think they are around toe-level.


LittleStar88 said:


> Six episodes of torture.
> 
> View attachment 5663099


With commentary from friends and family? Whose family? The Elusive Doria will tell us about how her Flower could not take her out for coffee? Or we get the latest "first word" from Archie?


----------



## Lilacgal

Apologies if this has been posted already


----------



## Chanbal

N/M


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I'm sorry Germany.



Has anyone else noticed that in most pictures, ZedZed seems to always face the camera while we only see one side of Dilbert's face or just the back of his head?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

gelbergirl said:


> “When the stakes are this high…..”
> What is she talking about


The crown jewels?


----------



## xincinsin

Maggie Muggins said:


> Has anyone else noticed that in most pictures, ZedZed seems to always face the camera while we only see one side of Dilbert's face or just the back of his head?


It's her self-sacrificing nobility. She thrusts herself into the spotlight while her lustband and invisikids hide behind her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

At 61 years of age, with a charity begun in 2014, is this Fulani’s first invite? Did Fulani nominate 2 people, as requested?  Were they with her?   

This lady’s organization turned down the invite. Here’s why:









						Why Southall Black Sisters made the difficult decision not to attend the Palace's event
					

While structural racism is so deeply embedded in these institutions, invitations like these will feel like a curate's egg landing on our faces




					inews.co.uk
				



Southall Black Sisters were invited to the same royal event as Ngozi Fulani, here’s why we turned it down​While structural racism is so deeply embedded in these institutions, invitations like these will feel like a curate’s egg landing on our faces​Rahila Gupta
December 1, 2022 6:15 pm(Updated 11:09 pm)






Accepting invitations like this from the Palace are a very difficult call to make for grassroots organisations (Photo: Kin Cheung/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
The Buckingham Palace racism row has revealed that no matter how well-polished the veneer, there is a deep rot beneath.
Outstretched arms to black and minoritised people can’t disguise the colonial and racist structures of the power of UK institutions and society. We feel the body blow and humiliation experienced by Ngozi Fulani of Sistah Space in this bruising encounter viscerally. This question of where we are really from is one we regularly face in Britain, cutting us adrift, again and again, by untying any moorings to this society that we have put down.

Accepting invitations like this from the Palace are a very difficult call to make for grassroots organisations beavering away, mostly unseen, doing really important and valuable work in the community. We had some difficult discussions within Southall Black Sisters (SBS) about how to respond to this invitation. *The letter requested our director nominate two people who she considered “particularly worthy of an invitation to this Reception” in terms of diversity, geographical region and [from] all levels within the field. Shame the worthiness criterion only extended in one direction.*

During internal conversations, arguments for accepting the invitation ranged from: it would be a good opportunity to raise awareness of the discriminatory treatment received by migrant women when escaping violence; we need to make a distinction between an event to celebrate the coronation/monarchy versus an event to garner attention for violence against women and girls; increased visibility could lead to increased funding which was important for the services we run. Unspoken, but nonetheless apparent, was the human desire for recognition that such an invitation represented.

The arguments against included perceptions that it was a PR exercise for Camilla and it would make the Palace look good at our expense; there was no invitation to speak, only attend, which meant that we couldn’t even get our message across to the great and good; there was, no mention of funding attached to Camilla’s work on domestic violence (DV) on her official page. 
There was also the fact that the Queen Consort’s last flurry of receptions for DV charities took place in 2016, including a visit to the Dubai Foundation for Women and Children, not a country known for its record on women’s rights. SBS already had an enviable reputation among government funding departments and other grant-making bodies. We also had a tradition of anti-colonial and anti-imperial activism which would be undermined by this visit – and as such, we realised it would be unconscionable to be cavorting with the great and the good while people were drowning in the Channel as a direct result of this country’s immigration policies. 

We decided not to go. It was a difficult decision. But we knew that the same double-edged embrace of the establishment poisons the success of SBS’s campaign against immigration rules that trap migrant women in violent marriages. Maria Miller MP is hosting an event in Parliament in December to celebrate the 30th anniversary of this campaign and its successes.

In 1992, SBS started a campaign against an immigration rule, known as the One Year Rule, a probationary period for marriages to non-British spouses, after which the migrant spouse could claim the right to remain in the UK and all the benefits that came with that. If the marriage broke down before the year was up, the migrant spouse faced deportation and destitution.

After years of campaigning to enable migrant women to leave abusive relationships and seek the help they need, we saw the introduction of the Domestic Violence Rule (the DV Rule) in 2002 and the Destitution and Domestic Violence Concession (DDVC) in 2012. These measures have proved to be a crucial lifeline for migrant women on spousal visas, who are no longer prevented from escaping abusive households by the fear of destitution, detention or deportation.

However, each concession carried a clawback. After the 2002 changes, the probationary period for marriages to non-British spouses was extended to two years. After the 2012 changes, it was extended to five years. The probationary period was justified in terms of establishing the authenticity of a marriage, a criterion never used for British-based marriages, nearly 18 per cent of which break down within five years.

There are still women in desperate situations especially those who are not in possession of a spousal visa – overstayers, students, women married to non-British spouses, for example. We had hoped that the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 would have made provision for these women but sadly (and predictably), as our 43 years in existence have shown us again and again – a migrant woman is a persona non grata. 

The Buckingham palace incident has proved that visibly different British women are in the same boat. While structural racism is so deeply embedded, invitations like these will feel like a curate’s egg landing on our faces. To accept or not to accept – that angst-laden question is a sign of the powerlessness of our position in this society.|


----------



## LittleStar88

Did we see this one yet?

Weapons-grade narcissism – and a Biblical level of betrayal (Sarah Vine)​
*Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/2022.12.01-18155...al?collection=14354&&contentLayout=5pm Update*

The mournful piano music. The ghostly echoes of clicking camera shutters. Meghan clutching her moonbump; Harry with an acoustic guitar. Smiling bed-head selfies; laughing, holding hands. So in love, so spontaneous, so golden... and so much like a really annoying advert for life insurance.

The mood turns dark. Meghan, hair scraped into a bun, weeping cross-legged in a white chair next to a white orchid. The sound of a flashbulb exploding, and — oh, look — here’s the Princess of Wales looking thunderous, her mouth downturned, her expression hard.

Next to her is the Queen Consort, also unsmiling. Pointedly behind them sits Meghan, a vision of angelic purity in white (like the orchid, get it?), oppressed and marginalised by her wicked stepmother and sister-in-law.

Also in a white armchair, also next to that goodly white orchid, sits Harry. He looks pained. He must, he says, protect his family. He gazes with benevolence at Meghan as she is whisked away in a black car, wearing a brave smile as she wipes away a tear.

Crowds cheer, soldiers march, strings swell. Harry’s childhood flashes before us and Meghan’s also: two troubled souls made whole by their love — which, let’s be clear, is the most love anyone ever has ever loved in the entire history of love, and we know this because of the orchids and the violins and things being mostly in black and white.

The music stops. Cut to Meghan. ‘When the stakes are this high,’ she asks, ‘doesn’t it make more sense to hear our story from us?’

Sorry, what stakes? The royal stipend and the Windsor cottage instead of all those Netflix millions? But never mind. The point is: it’s all ghastly, and it’s all the fault of the Royal Family. Specifically, the Princess of Wales.
Short of drawing a goatee and a pair of horns on Kate, they could not have painted her more clearly as the villain of the piece.

The weapons-grade narcissism of this trailer is astonishing. As is the fact that, in true Sussex style, they have cast themselves as victims while acting as out-and-out aggressors. This, of course, is their trademark tactic, and has been since their Oprah Winfrey interview. But this new bombshell is next-level stuff.

For the past few years, there’s always been a sense that the only thing stopping Harry and Meghan from going full tonto was the presence of the Prince’s grandmother. But with her late Majesty out the way, nothing and no one now stand between them and their apparent mission to destroy the Royal Family — and particularly William and Kate.

It’s a declaration of war and it cannot be ignored. How else do you explain the timing of this trailer’s release, barely a day after the Prince and Princess of Wales touched down in America on a royal tour?

It’s hard to find an unsmiling (or unflattering) photo of Kate, yet they’ve managed it. The whole thing is a masterclass in passive-aggressive media manipulation, deftly casting the Princess as the wicked sister-in-law, with Meghan as the helpless victim. And one wonders, by the way, who has been taking all these intimate black and white photographs. Is this what they’ve been planning all along, right from the start?

American audiences, who are less familiar with Kate, will instinctively side with Meghan as she bawls her way through this trailer, implying at every turn where the source of her unhappiness lies.

The Waleses’ visit, already overshadowed by the Susan Hussey debacle, is now as good as finished. They are there to attend the second annual Earthshot Prize awards, the organisation founded by William to recognise innovators and entrepreneurs tackling climate change. You might have thought, given the Sussexes’ endless virtue-signalling in this area, that they would be keen to offer support and encouragement. Instead, this.

Not only is the trailer vomit-inducing in its saccharine one-sidedness, it’s also terribly sad. For however much William might have wanted, in the past, to give his brother the benefit of the doubt or even — as we have seen on several occasions — extend an olive branch, this all-out attack on his wife surely leaves him with no choice.

Now William too has to protect his family — from his own brother. Heartbreaking, given how close they once were. And heartbreaking for Kate, who was fond of Harry before he became an angry, embittered exile. It’s a level of betrayal that is truly Biblical, and it is hard to see how the repercussions of the Sussexes’ attack can be anything less than devastating.

As for King Charles, this will be the first real test of his reign. His reaction — many will suggest he strip the Sussexes of their titles — will be crucial. One thing, though, is indisputable: there is no crueller or harder task for a parent than to have to choose between their children.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Speechless , fact check time …



Cosplaying and pretending?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> These guys are good…



She blew her nose in the Hermes blanket!  Bawahahahahaha!


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> The Waleses’ visit, already overshadowed by the Susan Hussey debacle, is now as good as finished. They are there to attend the second annual Earthshot Prize awards, the organisation founded by William to recognise innovators and entrepreneurs tackling climate change. You might have thought, given the Sussexes’ endless virtue-signalling in this area, that they would be keen to offer support and encouragement. Instead, this.



This is a good opinion piece but the writer is way overreacting.  William and Kate will do what they always do, carry on with good humor and grace, and ignore Harry and Meghan. They will have their events here in the U.S. and then fly home and take up their next set of duties.   

I think Harry and Meghan are desperately trying to provoke a reaction from KC3 or William.  Some reaction, any reaction, to start a transatlantic back and forth with dueling headlines.  They've refused to give them that, other than "recollections may vary" and "have a nice life overseas".  After all, anything Harry or MM say might make tabloid headlines for a day or two, but then will be swept away by some other celebrity or some other news event.  So, take the long view.  6 episodes will be over in a blink of an eye and when the world is dealing with war and inflation and covid still out there, I don't think very many people, besides their sugars, will have much patience for 2 raging, whining narcissists.


----------



## needlv

LittleStar88 said:


> Did we see this one yet?
> 
> Weapons-grade narcissism – and a Biblical level of betrayal (Sarah Vine)​
> *Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/2022.12.01-181557/https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/comment/240446/weapons-grade-narcissism-and-a-biblical-level-of-betrayal?collection=14354&&contentLayout=5pm Update*
> 
> The mournful piano music. The ghostly echoes of clicking camera shutters. Meghan clutching her moonbump; Harry with an acoustic guitar. Smiling bed-head selfies; laughing, holding hands. So in love, so spontaneous, so golden... and so much like a really annoying advert for life insurance.
> 
> The mood turns dark. Meghan, hair scraped into a bun, weeping cross-legged in a white chair next to a white orchid. The sound of a flashbulb exploding, and — oh, look — here’s the Princess of Wales looking thunderous, her mouth downturned, her expression hard.
> 
> Next to her is the Queen Consort, also unsmiling. Pointedly behind them sits Meghan, a vision of angelic purity in white (like the orchid, get it?), oppressed and marginalised by her wicked stepmother and sister-in-law.
> 
> Also in a white armchair, also next to that goodly white orchid, sits Harry. He looks pained. He must, he says, protect his family. He gazes with benevolence at Meghan as she is whisked away in a black car, wearing a brave smile as she wipes away a tear.
> 
> Crowds cheer, soldiers march, strings swell. Harry’s childhood flashes before us and Meghan’s also: two troubled souls made whole by their love — which, let’s be clear, is the most love anyone ever has ever loved in the entire history of love, and we know this because of the orchids and the violins and things being mostly in black and white.
> 
> The music stops. Cut to Meghan. ‘When the stakes are this high,’ she asks, ‘doesn’t it make more sense to hear our story from us?’
> 
> Sorry, what stakes? The royal stipend and the Windsor cottage instead of all those Netflix millions? But never mind. The point is: it’s all ghastly, and it’s all the fault of the Royal Family. Specifically, the Princess of Wales.
> Short of drawing a goatee and a pair of horns on Kate, they could not have painted her more clearly as the villain of the piece.
> 
> The weapons-grade narcissism of this trailer is astonishing. As is the fact that, in true Sussex style, they have cast themselves as victims while acting as out-and-out aggressors. This, of course, is their trademark tactic, and has been since their Oprah Winfrey interview. But this new bombshell is next-level stuff.
> 
> For the past few years, there’s always been a sense that the only thing stopping Harry and Meghan from going full tonto was the presence of the Prince’s grandmother. But with her late Majesty out the way, nothing and no one now stand between them and their apparent mission to destroy the Royal Family — and particularly William and Kate.
> 
> It’s a declaration of war and it cannot be ignored. How else do you explain the timing of this trailer’s release, barely a day after the Prince and Princess of Wales touched down in America on a royal tour?
> 
> It’s hard to find an unsmiling (or unflattering) photo of Kate, yet they’ve managed it. The whole thing is a masterclass in passive-aggressive media manipulation, deftly casting the Princess as the wicked sister-in-law, with Meghan as the helpless victim. And one wonders, by the way, who has been taking all these intimate black and white photographs. Is this what they’ve been planning all along, right from the start?
> 
> American audiences, who are less familiar with Kate, will instinctively side with Meghan as she bawls her way through this trailer, implying at every turn where the source of her unhappiness lies.
> 
> The Waleses’ visit, already overshadowed by the Susan Hussey debacle, is now as good as finished. They are there to attend the second annual Earthshot Prize awards, the organisation founded by William to recognise innovators and entrepreneurs tackling climate change. You might have thought, given the Sussexes’ endless virtue-signalling in this area, that they would be keen to offer support and encouragement. Instead, this.
> 
> Not only is the trailer vomit-inducing in its saccharine one-sidedness, it’s also terribly sad. For however much William might have wanted, in the past, to give his brother the benefit of the doubt or even — as we have seen on several occasions — extend an olive branch, this all-out attack on his wife surely leaves him with no choice.
> 
> Now William too has to protect his family — from his own brother. Heartbreaking, given how close they once were. And heartbreaking for Kate, who was fond of Harry before he became an angry, embittered exile. It’s a level of betrayal that is truly Biblical, and it is hard to see how the repercussions of the Sussexes’ attack can be anything less than devastating.
> 
> As for King Charles, this will be the first real test of his reign. His reaction — many will suggest he strip the Sussexes of their titles — will be crucial. One thing, though, is indisputable: there is no crueller or harder task for a parent than to have to choose between their children.



The third line…..

The mournful piano music. The ghostly echoes of clicking camera shutters*. Meghan clutching her moonbump




*


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> Cosplaying and pretending?


I smell a rat.


----------



## gracekelly

Debbini said:


> I smell a rat.


Yep. Nigel Farage may sound over the top, but there is something to what he is saying.


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> Yep. Nigel Farage may sound over the top, but there is something to what he is saying.


Agree.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



She really is a one trick pony. Even before these 4 men, wasn't there a photo of her in the same pose with her father?


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> When AARP starts sending you mail…?
> Good question…
> In my twenties I thought 30 year olds were old.


It’s all perspective isn’t it?  My almost 85 year old MIL was visiting for Thanksgiving and asked me to remind her how old my parents were.  They’re both in the early 70s, and she exclaimed, “Oh they’re so young!” 
My 20 yo son and 17 yo daughter did a double take, LOL.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> How old do I have to be to join AARP?​While AARP is dedicated to people over 50, there is no minimum age to join*. People of all ages can get an AARP membership for as low as $12 for the first year with automatic renewal.


Such a misnomer.  How many of us can actually comfortably retire at 50?  I wish!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Jayne1 said:


> So, coincidentally, I was just watching The Crown (it's not very good this season) when Diana meets Martin Bashir for the first time and she asks him '"where is home" and he says "Wimbledon" and she responds with, "No I mean originally" and he proceeds to tell her where he was born and that his parents are Pakistani and then she asks him what language he spoke growing up.
> 
> I fell asleep for some of the rest of the episode.  Not caring for the new Diana actress as much as the previous.


OMG so Diana was racist!!!!!???!!!


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> ‘When the stakes are this high,’ she asks, ‘doesn’t it make more sense to hear our story from us?’



To me this reeks of: "Dammit, I'm the Duchess of Sussex and Harry is Charles' son! WE ARE ENTITLED TO SUCK OFF THE BRF FOR AS MUCH AND FOR AS LONG AS WE WANT! Our kids NEED titles! We have the right to badmouth the BRF 24/7 and if we don't get millions and millions from them while we sit on our whiny a$$es then we'll screw them over as much as we can. Whah! Whah!" 

I've heard all I need to from these ingrates. The "stakes" are Charles' willingness to allow them to suck off his family's wealth and beg back into the inner circle. Claw and Haz have no leverage, nothing to offer. The "stakes" are clearly one sided. I predict they'll start trotting out the kids as guilt trips and using them as pawns. Claw calls this "motherly instincts".


----------



## oldbag

xincinsin said:


> She really is a one trick pony. Even before these 4 men, wasn't there a photo of her in the same pose with her father?


Someone made a comment about her tongue always sticking out and wondered why. Pay attention, it is how a snake detects its prey. The tongue sniffs out its victim. Jump high and run fast because you will get bitten.


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> Direct commercial flights either from the Santa Barbara or Los Angeles airports to Indianapolis are few and far between. So in all fairness to TW, flying private might have been the only way to get there and back in one day. Regular folks of course would have stayed overnight in Indianapolis and flown out the next day if they were flying commercial. But we have no way of knowing what other prior commitments she may have had back in CA. Having said that, we know she prefers to fly private even in cases when there are excellent commercial flight alternatives but just pointing out that in this case there may have been a valid reason other than just attributing it to her massive ego and self-importance.


I don’t have a problem per se with her flying private.  It’s the lecturing to the rest of us about the environment and carbon footprints that pi$$es me off.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Such a misnomer.  How many of us can actually comfortably retire at 50?  I wish!!


Harry could have retired at 50 if he stayed. Or 40 Or 35


----------



## purseinsanity

bubablu said:


> And the promo is out, so fake



@Vlad!  The vomit emoji?!  You promised


----------



## gracekelly

rose60610 said:


> To me this reeks of: "Dammit, I'm the Duchess of Sussex and Harry is Charles' son! WE ARE ENTITLED TO SUCK OFF THE BRF FOR AS MUCH AND FOR AS LONG AS WE WANT! Our kids NEED titles! We have the right to badmouth the BRF 24/7 and if we don't get millions and millions from them while we sit on our whiny a$$es then we'll screw them over as much as we can. Whah! Whah!"
> 
> I've heard all I need to from these ingrates. The "stakes" are Charles' willingness to allow them to suck off his family's wealth and beg back into the inner circle. Claw and Haz have no leverage, nothing to offer. The "stakes" are clearly one sided. I predict they'll start trotting out the kids as guilt trips and using them as pawns. Claw calls this "motherly instincts".


The *stakes are so high* was a colossally stupid thing to say. It is as good as saying that if we aren’t successful with this show we can’t go back begging to be accepted because we trashed them all so much.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> At 61 years of age, with a charity begun in 2014, is this Fulani’s first invite? Did Fulani nominate 2 people, as requested?  Were they with her?
> 
> This lady’s organization turned down the invite. Here’s why:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why Southall Black Sisters made the difficult decision not to attend the Palace's event
> 
> 
> While structural racism is so deeply embedded in these institutions, invitations like these will feel like a curate's egg landing on our faces
> 
> 
> 
> 
> inews.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Southall Black Sisters were invited to the same royal event as Ngozi Fulani, here’s why we turned it down​While structural racism is so deeply embedded in these institutions, invitations like these will feel like a curate’s egg landing on our faces​Rahila Gupta
> December 1, 2022 6:15 pm(Updated 11:09 pm)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Accepting invitations like this from the Palace are a very difficult call to make for grassroots organisations (Photo: Kin Cheung/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
> The Buckingham Palace racism row has revealed that no matter how well-polished the veneer, there is a deep rot beneath.
> Outstretched arms to black and minoritised people can’t disguise the colonial and racist structures of the power of UK institutions and society. We feel the body blow and humiliation experienced by Ngozi Fulani of Sistah Space in this bruising encounter viscerally. This question of where we are really from is one we regularly face in Britain, cutting us adrift, again and again, by untying any moorings to this society that we have put down.
> 
> Accepting invitations like this from the Palace are a very difficult call to make for grassroots organisations beavering away, mostly unseen, doing really important and valuable work in the community. We had some difficult discussions within Southall Black Sisters (SBS) about how to respond to this invitation. *The letter requested our director nominate two people who she considered “particularly worthy of an invitation to this Reception” in terms of diversity, geographical region and [from] all levels within the field. Shame the worthiness criterion only extended in one direction.*
> 
> During internal conversations, arguments for accepting the invitation ranged from: it would be a good opportunity to raise awareness of the discriminatory treatment received by migrant women when escaping violence; we need to make a distinction between an event to celebrate the coronation/monarchy versus an event to garner attention for violence against women and girls; increased visibility could lead to increased funding which was important for the services we run. Unspoken, but nonetheless apparent, was the human desire for recognition that such an invitation represented.
> 
> The arguments against included perceptions that it was a PR exercise for Camilla and it would make the Palace look good at our expense; there was no invitation to speak, only attend, which meant that we couldn’t even get our message across to the great and good; there was, no mention of funding attached to Camilla’s work on domestic violence (DV) on her official page.
> There was also the fact that the Queen Consort’s last flurry of receptions for DV charities took place in 2016, including a visit to the Dubai Foundation for Women and Children, not a country known for its record on women’s rights. SBS already had an enviable reputation among government funding departments and other grant-making bodies. We also had a tradition of anti-colonial and anti-imperial activism which would be undermined by this visit – and as such, we realised it would be unconscionable to be cavorting with the great and the good while people were drowning in the Channel as a direct result of this country’s immigration policies.
> 
> We decided not to go. It was a difficult decision. But we knew that the same double-edged embrace of the establishment poisons the success of SBS’s campaign against immigration rules that trap migrant women in violent marriages. Maria Miller MP is hosting an event in Parliament in December to celebrate the 30th anniversary of this campaign and its successes.
> 
> In 1992, SBS started a campaign against an immigration rule, known as the One Year Rule, a probationary period for marriages to non-British spouses, after which the migrant spouse could claim the right to remain in the UK and all the benefits that came with that. If the marriage broke down before the year was up, the migrant spouse faced deportation and destitution.
> 
> After years of campaigning to enable migrant women to leave abusive relationships and seek the help they need, we saw the introduction of the Domestic Violence Rule (the DV Rule) in 2002 and the Destitution and Domestic Violence Concession (DDVC) in 2012. These measures have proved to be a crucial lifeline for migrant women on spousal visas, who are no longer prevented from escaping abusive households by the fear of destitution, detention or deportation.
> 
> However, each concession carried a clawback. After the 2002 changes, the probationary period for marriages to non-British spouses was extended to two years. After the 2012 changes, it was extended to five years. The probationary period was justified in terms of establishing the authenticity of a marriage, a criterion never used for British-based marriages, nearly 18 per cent of which break down within five years.
> 
> There are still women in desperate situations especially those who are not in possession of a spousal visa – overstayers, students, women married to non-British spouses, for example. We had hoped that the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 would have made provision for these women but sadly (and predictably), as our 43 years in existence have shown us again and again – a migrant woman is a persona non grata.
> 
> The Buckingham palace incident has proved that visibly different British women are in the same boat. While structural racism is so deeply embedded, invitations like these will feel like a curate’s egg landing on our faces. To accept or not to accept – that angst-laden question is a sign of the powerlessness of our position in this society.|


I think Jan Moir's article complements the one above.
JAN MOIR: These two are just pawns in a much bigger game of racial grievance... It would take the 'hardest of hearts' to believe that Lady Susan Hussey meant to be racist or to cause harm​
"_Where are you from? Yes, but where are your people from? Slice it or dice it any way you like it, but I can understand why many believe that Lady Susan Hussey was being racist when quizzing Ngozi Fulani at a Buckingham Palace reception this week.

Including Miss Fulani herself. Perhaps especially Miss Fulani, who is not well disposed towards the Royal Family anyway, having previously accused them of committing 'domestic violence' against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

The charity head also accused the whole shower of being racist for not allowing Meghan to appear on the Palace balcony when . . . well, you get the drift.

*If she disapproves of the Windsor gargoyles so much, if they are such bigots in her eyes, one wonders why she accepted this invitation to BP in the first place.*

Yet she certainly seemed to enjoy herself and was caught on film having an animated chat with Camilla, the Queen Consort.

But then came The Incident…

Yet at some point during their conversation, Miss Fulani became distressed because Lady Susan seemed not to accept that she was British.

I get it. Imagine being at a party when a tall, patrician lady with a posh voice keeps asking yes, yes, but where are you from?

The sensitive could surmise that there was an implicit undertow in her words, which suggested that wherever you are from, you are not from here.

*Miss Fulani was on Good Morning Britain yesterday, reliving the full horror of her two-minute ordeal. 'Although I didn't experience physical violence, what I feel I experienced was a form of abuse,' she claimed.*

She was also interviewed with syrupy reverence by Mishal Husain on Radio 4's Today programme, treated as if she were Nelson Mandela and Rosa Parks rolled into one.

*'I wanted her removed from public-facing roles,' she said of Lady Susan, 83, who has been booted out of her job after a lifetime of blameless loyal service.

I can't help but wonder if Miss Fulani isn't being a touch disingenuous about all this.*

In a lengthy 'oral history' interview she gave to Hackney Museum in 2017, she described her fellow Londoner, the Labour MP Diane Abbott, as a woman 'from an authentic Jamaican background . . . she loves her Jamaican and African heritage'.

Which seems to suggest *Ngozi Fulani knew exactly what Lady Susan meant when she asked where she was from.*

Yet if you were minded to re-inforce the royal racism narrative and be offended instead of forbearing, then the offence was there for the taking.

In the same interview for Hackney Museum, *Miss Fulani talked about how she loves wearing her 'African attire' which sometimes includes 'Kente cloth from Ghana, in red gold and green'. She also thinks that sometimes people who 'do not look like me would be very nervous and very uncomfortable' because 'we are our full African self'.*

She was invited to Buckingham Palace in her role as founder of Sistah Space, an initiative that offers specialist support to women of African and Caribbean heritage who have been affected by abuse. She believes the police once routinely beat up black men and that black women are dying because the police don't believe they are being abused, as 'red marks or bruises' are not visible on black skin.

In some ways, a woman like Lady Susan and a woman like Ngozi Fulani were almost destined to clash in such a manner, each being their full selves in very singular ways from different generations.

Their cocktail-party chat is being freighted with a significance it does not deserve, seen as evidence of the systemic racism that the Duchess of Sussex has complained about — and even held up as another reason to abolish the monarchy. It's another example of diversity-industry hysteria.

If an octogenarian lady-in-waiting is confused by an outfit and gently blunders into the terrifying nuances of modern race relations, is it really an issue of global significance?

Some would have us think so. Many are determined to fashion an outrage banquet from these scraps of social gaucherie. *Harry and Meghan must be thrilled.*

Yet this is not a narrative of wrong or right, for there is no moral gulf between these two women — only a divide between what was said, what was meant and what was heard.

*To be honest, neither Miss Fulani nor Lady Susan come out of this encounter particularly well.

Now it is their mutual misfortune — and the Royal Family's — that they are pawns in a much bigger grievance game*._









						JAN MOIR: These two are pawns in a bigger game of racial grievance...
					

JAN MOIR: Where are you from? Yes, but where are your people from? I can understand why many believe that Lady Susan Hussey was being racist when quizzing Ngozi Fulani.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Is it a coincidence that the Wales’ Caribbean tour was fraught with racism accusations and the cosplaying Ngozi Fulani aka Marlene‘s family comes from the islands as well?


----------



## Katel

that red N always reminds me of her little horns …


----------



## Chanbal

Katel said:


> that red N always reminds me of her little horns …
> 
> 
> View attachment 5663145


TW is so full of love…


----------



## Chanbal

More brilliant remarks from Jan Moir @DM. 

*Harry's poisoned gauntlet*
_
*Netflix (surely with some input from Harry and Meghan) could have chosen to release the trailer for its six-part (six-part!) fly-on-the-wall series any time between now and its expected launch next week.

Yet it picked the morning William and Kate embarked on the first full day of their Earthshot U.S. trip. Don't tell me it wasn't deliberate.*

Not only has the poisoned gauntlet been thrown down, *it almost seems as if the Sussexes won't rest until they have destroyed the Cambridges.*

For the glossy trailer reveals that *we are in for a new version of The Crown — only this time it should be called Bring Down The Crown.*

'*When the stakes are this high*, doesn't it make more sense to hear our story from us?' asks Meghan in one scene. *Which stakes? What sense? Whose story? What does she mean?*

Meanwhile, an ominous mood prevails, as *Meghan and Harry portray themselves as overwrought innocents fighting some unnamed forces of evil.* Kate's furious face flashes across the screen. Meghan is even in tears at one point. And that's only the trailer.

 It all makes William and Kate — dutifully shaking hands in Boston; getting on with the dreary everyday business of being royal — look like a pair of dolts. *Does Harry really hate his brother so much that he will stop at nothing to destroy him? Sadly, that is what it feels like*._


----------



## Chanbal

Despicable couple.   










						Harry, Meghan out to ‘disrupt’ Prince William, Kate’s US trip: source
					

One palace insider told Page Six they believe the Sussexes are trying to “disrupt and clash” with William and Kate’s American visit with the Netflix trailer and Invictus video thi…




					pagesix.com


----------



## xincinsin

_'When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make more sense to hear our story from us?' asks Meghan in one scene. Which stakes? What sense? Whose story? What does she mean?_

A story of lies and deceit, padded with sex, greed and arrogance. 
Of course the stakes are high ... for the Harkles. If the Netflix viewers buy their victim spiel, they might get more money from NF and convince Spotify to give Her Heinous a 2nd run.


----------



## gracekelly

All those shots of her crying tell you that the victim card is going to be played incessantly


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> A story of lies and deceit, padded with sex, greed and arrogance.
> Of course the stakes are high ... for the Harkles.* If the Netflix viewers buy their victim spiel, they might get more money from NF and convince Spotify to give Her Heinous a 2nd run*.


This is why I refuse to watch their reality show. I trust the BLG and DM to share enough material  to upset my stomach.


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M = zero appeal

What you want:



What you got - H&M [do we need another photo of them?]


----------



## Chanbal

Leaving on a positive note! See you tomorrow.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Despicable couple.
> View attachment 5663151
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry, Meghan out to ‘disrupt’ Prince William, Kate’s US trip: source
> 
> 
> One palace insider told Page Six they believe the Sussexes are trying to “disrupt and clash” with William and Kate’s American visit with the Netflix trailer and Invictus video thi…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


So funny to call it a "turf battle". 
The US is a huge country with a very diverse population. This makes it sound like West Side Story, which is the scale at which the Harkles are viewing it. They can't see further than the tip of their (her) re-sculpted nose.


----------



## elvisfan4life

charlottawill said:


> And she won't. She is of the "Never complain, never explain" school, not "Let's run to social media ASAP to air every grievance".


Thank god for some decorum - I’m going to follow her I’m done with this thread -the tone of some biased posters and the language/ slang terminology being used on some of those posts is not for my ears


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> 21 Thousand likes



Somewhere the music teacher of Eton is banging his head against the wall.

Pretending to play the guitar in sunglasses is extremely vintage  cringe.

What the f are they doing? This looks like the romance flashbacks in naked gun it’s such a parody


Chanbal said:


> There is a new development on this story.



If there’s any chance NF is acting in bad faith then SH is absolutely getting fed to the wolves because any meeting will undoubtedly make the situation worse- anyone who knows day 1 of PR will tell you that. Also isn’t this kind of against the old ‘never complain never explain’? I mean this like Alan Partridge.

Honestly at this point my conspiracy theory is Chaz has always resented SH for interfering and trying to make him play happy families when he wanted to be ploughing through the polo set and now the Queen is dead he is loving seeing SH dragged through the mud on her way out.


DoggieBags said:


> Funny how the press didn‘t mention that H & TW had a very poor reception at the Intrepid Museum American Military Veterans Event that they attended last year in NYC. And how the security for their endless photo ops with the Mayor and Governor, etc. tied up traffic. And yes New Yorkers always grumble when politicians visit our city and snarl traffic. I remember cursing when our then Prez and his wife flew in to dine at a restaurant for their date night. The traffic was just beastly that night as a result. At least W & K are in Boston to hand out meaningful awards to people doing work on the environment that could benefit all of us. Unlike H & TW and their visit to that school where she disrupted classes so she could read the Stench to some unlucky students. And the worst gridlock happens when the UN is in session every year in NYC. So a 3 day visit by visiting dignitaries is a minor inconvenience to the locals in Boston by comparison.


I don’t understand why any of them have to do events in the USA anyway.
H&M have no right representing anything but W&C aren’t royalty there either?  And I mean it’s not like London is some backwater no one can get to if they really have to fly everyone about to give out awards and it’s not like they don’t have several enormous palaces maintained at public expense to host in.




Lilliesdaughter said:


> I read that both John Kerry and Caroline Kennedy recused themselves at the last minute.  The implication was that the issue at the palace was the reason.  It is truly sad that the program for climate issues was sacrificed because of the latest brouhaha. I am disappointed in both of them.  If you believe in something you stand up in support.


I 100% agree if you are going to make this vitally important visit into another PR exercise then it’s importance rings very hollow.


Lilacgal said:


> Apologies if this has been posted already



I think this is a case of it takes a charlatan to know one personally.


I also don’t think hard Marxists get gussied up for royal receptions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> *I don’t understand why any of them have to do events in the USA anyway.
> H&M have no right representing anything but W&C aren’t royalty there either?  And I mean it’s not like London is some backwater no one can get to if they really have to fly everyone about to give out awards and it’s not like they don’t have several enormous palaces maintained at public expense to host in.*
> 
> 
> 
> I 100% agree if you are going to make this vitally important visit into another PR exercise then it’s importance rings very hollow.
> 
> I think this is a case of it takes one to know one personally.



This, 100 times!  Keep this royal stuff over there.  While you are at it, KC3, cancel or change these large, impersonal events. The more people, the less important you seem.  A small, pleasant gathering of polite, well-mannered souls means so much more.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> You can watch the trailer without giving YouTube views here…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan | Official Teaser | Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan. A Netflix Global Event. Coming soon, only on Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yewtu.be
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lord have mercy, this looks so boring. All the dramatic black and white photos. *And she comes off like a major b!tch.*


We all know she is a horrible actress.  I think she comes across as one because she is one


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ewwww.
> 
> *Meanwhile, the Sussex's friend Omid Scobie gleefully tweeted: 'If tomorrow is Prince William's Super Bowl, then here's your Halftime Show...'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailer 'DELIBERATELY timed', expert says
> 
> 
> The trailer for Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries has been 'deliberately' released to 'take away' from the Cambridges' landmark US tour, an  expert claimed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


No Scabies, it’s one of the overpriced ads that are unlike Budweiser and you’re left scratching your head as to WTF paid that much money to air that piece of $hit??????


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Do not give them ideas.


Seriously.  We’ve heard plenty about TW’s peeing in the woods, so we really need to see a Golden Shower????


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> I think Jan Moir's article complements the one above.
> JAN MOIR: These two are just pawns in a much bigger game of racial grievance... It would take the 'hardest of hearts' to believe that Lady Susan Hussey meant to be racist or to cause harm​
> "_Where are you from? Yes, but where are your people from? Slice it or dice it any way you like it, but I can understand why many believe that Lady Susan Hussey was being racist when quizzing Ngozi Fulani at a Buckingham Palace reception this week.
> 
> Including Miss Fulani herself. Perhaps especially Miss Fulani, who is not well disposed towards the Royal Family anyway, having previously accused them of committing 'domestic violence' against the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> The charity head also accused the whole shower of being racist for not allowing Meghan to appear on the Palace balcony when . . . well, you get the drift.
> 
> *If she disapproves of the Windsor gargoyles so much, if they are such bigots in her eyes, one wonders why she accepted this invitation to BP in the first place.*
> 
> Yet she certainly seemed to enjoy herself and was caught on film having an animated chat with Camilla, the Queen Consort.
> 
> But then came The Incident…
> 
> Yet at some point during their conversation, Miss Fulani became distressed because Lady Susan seemed not to accept that she was British.
> 
> I get it. Imagine being at a party when a tall, patrician lady with a posh voice keeps asking yes, yes, but where are you from?
> 
> The sensitive could surmise that there was an implicit undertow in her words, which suggested that wherever you are from, you are not from here.
> 
> *Miss Fulani was on Good Morning Britain yesterday, reliving the full horror of her two-minute ordeal. 'Although I didn't experience physical violence, what I feel I experienced was a form of abuse,' she claimed.*
> 
> She was also interviewed with syrupy reverence by Mishal Husain on Radio 4's Today programme, treated as if she were Nelson Mandela and Rosa Parks rolled into one.
> 
> *'I wanted her removed from public-facing roles,' she said of Lady Susan, 83, who has been booted out of her job after a lifetime of blameless loyal service.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if Miss Fulani isn't being a touch disingenuous about all this.*
> 
> In a lengthy 'oral history' interview she gave to Hackney Museum in 2017, she described her fellow Londoner, the Labour MP Diane Abbott, as a woman 'from an authentic Jamaican background . . . she loves her Jamaican and African heritage'.
> 
> Which seems to suggest *Ngozi Fulani knew exactly what Lady Susan meant when she asked where she was from.*
> 
> Yet if you were minded to re-inforce the royal racism narrative and be offended instead of forbearing, then the offence was there for the taking.
> 
> In the same interview for Hackney Museum, *Miss Fulani talked about how she loves wearing her 'African attire' which sometimes includes 'Kente cloth from Ghana, in red gold and green'. She also thinks that sometimes people who 'do not look like me would be very nervous and very uncomfortable' because 'we are our full African self'.*
> 
> She was invited to Buckingham Palace in her role as founder of Sistah Space, an initiative that offers specialist support to women of African and Caribbean heritage who have been affected by abuse. She believes the police once routinely beat up black men and that black women are dying because the police don't believe they are being abused, as 'red marks or bruises' are not visible on black skin.
> 
> In some ways, a woman like Lady Susan and a woman like Ngozi Fulani were almost destined to clash in such a manner, each being their full selves in very singular ways from different generations.
> 
> Their cocktail-party chat is being freighted with a significance it does not deserve, seen as evidence of the systemic racism that the Duchess of Sussex has complained about — and even held up as another reason to abolish the monarchy. It's another example of diversity-industry hysteria.
> 
> If an octogenarian lady-in-waiting is confused by an outfit and gently blunders into the terrifying nuances of modern race relations, is it really an issue of global significance?
> 
> Some would have us think so. Many are determined to fashion an outrage banquet from these scraps of social gaucherie. *Harry and Meghan must be thrilled.*
> 
> Yet this is not a narrative of wrong or right, for there is no moral gulf between these two women — only a divide between what was said, what was meant and what was heard.
> 
> *To be honest, neither Miss Fulani nor Lady Susan come out of this encounter particularly well.
> 
> Now it is their mutual misfortune — and the Royal Family's — that they are pawns in a much bigger grievance game*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: These two are pawns in a bigger game of racial grievance...
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Where are you from? Yes, but where are your people from? I can understand why many believe that Lady Susan Hussey was being racist when quizzing Ngozi Fulani.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I agree with some of this - it is obvious NF is exaggerating both but to reiterate I think it is the BRF and their press dept who have hardened their hearts against SH. 

They’ve bought one side of story and publicised the resignation she was undoubtedly heavily pushed to and her incompetence because they think it’ll bury the story and make them look good. It doesn’t. They still look incompetent and disloyal. She hasn’t even been allowed to make a statement. They could have made some palliative statement about how she didn’t mean to offend. I mean compare and contrast their coyness about the bullying allegations or their own dice with the skin comment.


----------



## xincinsin

I'm not sure I can survive the trailer comments  









But the best one so far was:


----------



## Helventara

xincinsin said:


> I'm not sure I can survive the trailer comments
> But the best one so far was:
> View attachment 5663229


Oy the last comment 

When I saw that picture, I thought, I've seen it before. Then came the picture with Cory. How was I supposed to know that’s her go-to pose with men?


----------



## pomeline

Maybe this has been discussed before but I cannot find it in the jungle of pages. My appreciation for Financial Times is at an all time low. TW on the list of "most influential women" with Serena Williams and Billie Eilish... oh please! I would say having names like these on such list just means that women are not very influential in this world. In my mind this is supposed to be a list of truly meaningfully influential women, not a list of social media posers etc.

The FT’s 25 most influential women of 2022


----------



## pomeline

jelliedfeels said:


> I also don’t think hard Marxists get gussied up for royal receptions.



Oh you'd be surprised with what people get up to when they see an opportunity to further their own causes. I've seen it firsthand. But I guess you could always argue they weren't truly hard Marxists but champagne socialists. Well, semantics.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> Riiiiiiight, doesn't everyone have a professional photographer follow them home after a black tie function to capture those romance-on-the-countertop moments?



Also, while is that stupid cow always grinning like a lunatic even while kissing? Isn't that a bit conterproductive to the bodyparts involved? 

Also, I don't think it's the same occasion because it's not the same dress.



CarryOn2020 said:


> _Have We Overdosed on Fun?_​_Dinners, parties, cocktails, repeat. It was so thrilling to “go back to normal” that we may have overdone it a bit. Are you sick of us yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have We Overdosed on Fun?
> 
> 
> Dinners, parties, cocktails, repeat. It was so thrilling to “go back to normal” that we may have overdone it a bit. Are you sick of us yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



Not sure who we is, but we as in I are still not overdosing on fun. We keep it low because we neither want to kill grandma nor sacrifice family Christmas lunch.



xincinsin said:


> I'm not even half-anything but I've had people in the West automatically assume that I'm from China. Sometimes, if they insist, I don't bother to argue that Singapore is not in China.



I am basically mixed race (though I don't identify as such) and I have several ethnic features but in snowwhite fair with light eyes and medium hair. I speak without an accent obviously as I was born and bred in Germany. You don't want to know how often I have been asked where I'm from because people notice I look different from your average German but can't pinpoint it because my colouring throws them off 

Also, no, I don't offer my whole lineage up with strangers either, but still, I totally would if I went to great length to show up in ethnic costume and blab about how I proudly identify with this part of my heritage at every other occasion.



scarlet555 said:


> That’s true, but the response from BRF leans towards it being a true version…. I really think she has the audio version waiting to be released thus the response from BRF



Is that even legal?



LittleStar88 said:


> Six episodes of torture.
> 
> View attachment 5663099



What family...the rented one? And they have footage from the earliest days of their courtship? Not suspicious at all.


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What family...the rented one? And they have footage from the earliest days of their courtship? Not suspicious at all.


That reminds me of this sign... Maybe she used a similar service


----------



## xincinsin

pomeline said:


> That reminds me of this sign... Maybe she used a similar service


Oh my 
Just for clarity, the Chinese name of this business is Good Fortune Realty, so someone has mistranslated nice house/home. Probably used software because the Chinese character for house can also mean home or family.


----------



## pomeline

xincinsin said:


> Oh my
> Just for clarity, the Chinese name of this business is Good Fortune Realty, so someone has mistranslated nice house/home. Probably used software because the Chinese character for house can also mean home or family.



I thought it would be something like that! I did study Chinese a few years ago but my limited skills did not allow me to translate that (I have forgotten so much and feel I should get back to it some time). I do know how the character system works though and how the meanings can often be so symbolic that it can be tricky to translate into English.

The business of renting a family reminds me of the time we were planning our wedding and being all exhausted about guest lists, seating arrangements etc. I remember gasping to my then-fiancé-now-husband "Couldn't we just rent families to pose as ours at the wedding...?"


----------



## carmen56

xincinsin said:


> I kind of assumed she gave her usual word salad gibberish, mentioned "I, me and myself" countless times and looked immensely proud of herself. There were some articles that praised her wearing green and purple and sitting in a white chair. Supposedly it was very symbolic (a grape hidden in vine leaves on a white plate).


Purple, green and white were the colours of the Suffragette movement.


----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> Purple, green and white were the colours of the Suffragette movement.


I have to find the articles which mentioned the symbolism but I remember they said green symbolized one thing, purple another, and white yet anothet. It wasn't one item like suffragette.

ETA found it in Elle
The outlet (Page Six) noted that green and purple are the social cause’s colors, per the International Women’s Day website. White is also a color.


----------



## Sharont2305

Purple - a Royal colour because she thinks she's the real Royal. 
White - because she thinks she's pure. 
Green - Jealous as hell.


----------



## LittleStar88

She has a fancy Cry Room. I wonder what part of her privileged life has her all worked up?


----------



## EmilyM11

CarryOn2020 said:


> BLG takes one for the team



I watched the trailer. It's so boring, literally nothing there is interesting, no good line or story. I am pretty sure that after one episode people will switch off from boredom. Do a show about me, I have a funny dachshund - it will be way more entertaining and will include real drama


----------



## Aimee3

I must be so shallow.  When I heard purple and green I immediately thought “Mardi Gras”!


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> She has a fancy Cry Room. I wonder what part of her privileged life has her all worked up?
> 
> View attachment 5663259


We saw that blankie before at Montecito bu the picture of them on kitchen counter was taken in the UK, after some gala
*They had photogs, if not videographers, following them around since BEFORE they left the UK *

Ewww .... who wants to invite photogs into your life ... privacy anyoine?



EmilyM111 said:


> I watched the trailer. It's so boring, literally nothing there is interesting, no good line or story. I am pretty sure that after one episode people will switch off from boredom. Do a show about me, I have a funny dachshund - it will be way more entertaining and will include real drama


The only thing interesting is the line *WITH SO MUCH AT STAKE *WHY NOT HEAR IT FROM US ??
Sounds like a declaration of war to me ...
And H told us this was coming (when at the funeral or Jubilee) he said reconciliation wasnt happening becasue there had been no apology - he drew the red line



xincinsin said:


> So funny to call it a "turf battle".
> The US is a huge country with a very diverse population. This makes it sound like West Side Story, which is the scale at which the Harkles are viewing it. They can't see further than the tip of their (her) re-sculpted nose.


It seems to me ... 
While QEII was alive, the BRF either did get involved in all the trendy social causes or they did not get publicity for it, too political ?? The Harkles were slapped down for trying to do that kind of stuff?
Under KCIII, issues like Domestic Violence (Camilla reception) are getting a lot of press, this is a classic Harkle topic 

For whatever reason, yes, the BRF is venturing into Harkle territory, but there is a lot of DV out there to work on, the topic is extensive enough fro the BRF and Harkles to share without DV within the family



youngster said:


> The hypocrisy of Harry is really astonishing. He claims to want privacy and to be an ordinary fellow and flees to Canada and then the U.S. because he feared for his little family's safety at the hands of the nasty British tabloids and press.  Then he proceeds to cart around a film crew for a year or more, invading his own privacy, filming all around and inside their home, and then broadcasts a heavily edited version of their lives.  For what purpose?  I guess since they haven't produced any other original content in almost 3 years, they had to fall back on selling access to their own lives to at least partially fulfill that Netflix contract. So, did they let Netflix film at all hours of the day and night?  Did they recreate certain "scenes" because a camera crew was not around 24/7?   Imagine saying to Harry . . . *wait, don't tell me about your grandmother's health, we have to get the Netflix crew here so that they can capture my reaction! * This is all just bizarre.  Harry's created his own Truman Show.
> 
> All they will be showing is ancient history too.  Is anyone really interested in behind the scenes at the Invictus Games last year or earlier this year or whenever it was?  Meghan's pregnancy?  Both were years ago.  I think all they will end up revealing is that they hate Harry's family for refusing to give them the half-in /half-out deal they desperately wanted and that the two of them are utterly self-absorbed and not very bright. Just like Meghan's podcasts revealed.


thoughts - note hypocrisy in the dates
1. the need for privacy was soooo 2019, H has not mentioned it lately ??
2. They have had photogs trotting behind them since 2018, before they left the UK


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> We saw that blankie before at Montecito bu the picture of them on kitchen counter was taken in the UK, after some gala
> *They had photogs, if not videographers, following them around since BEFORE they left the UK *
> 
> Ewww .... who wants to invite photogs into your life ... privacy anyoine?



Proof that they had an agenda right out the gate.


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Proof that they had an agenda right out the gate.


Makes you wonder about their motives. Not alleging anything nefarious. Maybe they thought they would be such huge stars that they should record their lives. It does make their cries for privacy quite hypocritical, as well as his claim that he is triggered by the sound of the camera clicks (or was it the flash?) as well as her fears of being stalked. I wonder which lucky cameraman was in bed with them. I'm guessing Misan.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I'm not sure I can survive the trailer comments
> View attachment 5663226
> 
> View attachment 5663227
> 
> 
> View attachment 5663228
> 
> View attachment 5663230
> 
> But the best one so far was:
> View attachment 5663229



The hits keep coming: 

"I love the part where Meghan says she couldn’t find a psychologist but fortunately she has her photographer on speed dial"


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Makes you wonder about their motives.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> Crowds cheer, soldiers march, strings swell. Harry’s childhood flashes before us and Meghan’s also: two troubled souls made whole by their love — *which, let’s be clear, is the most love anyone ever has ever loved in the entire history of love*, and we know this because of the orchids and the violins and things being mostly in black and white.



I might just never stop laughing. Brilliant.


----------



## WingNut

LittleStar88 said:


>



His commentary made me spit out my coffee!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> TW is so full of love…




Ah yes. I heard his wife was not particularly pleased with Ghoul (probably not with her husband either).


----------



## lallybelle

Of course there was an agenda from jump $$$$$. When QE said no to their demands is when it took a nastier turn. They had to leave for privacy and safety (rolls eyes) but yet never shut up and are still yapping and now making shows, doing interviews etc. That's not private. If that was what they wanted and they were serious about helping others, they would be doing just that without all the noise. But that was never the plan. Their stans and some media will never get it though. Their the ones who call their kids King & Queen and photoshop tiaras on ZedZed's head, get mad at every supposed slight like them not being invited to an official event. Yet talk about how great it is they left the racist BRF. 

They will never see the hypocrisy. Hopefully more & more "normies" will. I think some of that is going on here (US) finally. It seems a lot of the UK is over it already.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Leaving on a positive note! See you tomorrow.




How she graciously handed overthe presents to the aide without snapping at them and grabbing onto the flowers tighter. Mysterious.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Wasn’t it just last week that she was floating rumors that she wanted Kate on the pod crash, and now they release this teaser with Kate, looking like the most villainous witch of all time?


----------



## EmilyM11

marietouchet said:


> The only thing interesting is the line *WITH SO MUCH AT STAKE *WHY NOT HEAR IT FROM US ??
> Sounds like a declaration of war to me ...
> And H told us this was coming (when at the funeral or Jubilee) he said reconciliation wasnt happening becasue there had been no apology - he drew the red line


True! Though I feel we heard this over and over in many forms so I didn’t see it as fresh and new. Too much of this lovely forum
They will be ranting again the same stuff like to Oprah and then show they crazy boring life with the most exciting part being feeding the chickens


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> Check again.  Caroline was late due to transportation issues. She met W&K backstage at the Celtics game. She wore green
> She is a diplomat, needs the positive publicity.
> 
> JKerry is apparently ill.


Thank you. I must stay away from sound bites and summaries.


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How she graciously handed overthe presents to the aide without snapping at them and grabbing onto the flowers tighter. Mysterious.


I honestly feel sorry for the RF as in normal life you just cut out ppl like that, block on social media and messengers  and never hear again. BRF did it but they hear constantly from them via media.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> TW is so full of love…



She learned how to be a hustler and a grifter at a young age and she has no moral compass.


----------



## bag-mania

Aimee3 said:


> I must be so shallow.  When I heard purple and green I immediately thought “Mardi Gras”!


That’s just your brain trying it’s best to make this train wreck fun.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Wasn’t it just last week that she was floating rumors that she wanted Kate on the pod crash, and now they release this teaser with Kate, looking like the most villainous witch of all time?


You know Meghan always pretends to be reaching out those olive branches.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am basically mixed race (though I don't identify as such) and I have several ethnic features but in snowwhite fair with light eyes and medium hair. I speak without an accent obviously as I was born and bred in Germany. You don't want to know how often I have been asked where I'm from because people notice I look different from your average German but can't pinpoint it because my colouring throws them off
> 
> Also, no, I don't offer my whole lineage up with strangers either, but still, I totally would if I went to great length to show up in ethnic costume and blab about how I proudly identify with this part of my heritage at every other occasion.


right
that lady was too aggressive in her questioning/touching but if the "victim" had been dressed like everyone else, the conversation wouldn't have happened.....so if you are so proud of your heritage, why not own up to it?  surely she understood what the old lady was getting at


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> So funny to call it a "*turf battle*".
> *The US is a huge country* with a very diverse population. This makes it sound like West Side Story, which is the scale at which the Harkles are viewing it. They can't see further than the tip of their (her) re-sculpted nose.


Huge, but not big enough…


----------



## jelliedfeels

LittleStar88 said:


> She has a fancy Cry Room. I wonder what part of her privileged life has her all worked up?
> 
> View attachment 5663259


That jumper, pot plants, cosy chairs, crying, the inexplicably physically repellent couple at the heart of it …. She’s a beautiful kitchen away from the Nora Ephron fantasy.
You can tell she really thinks the wine mom demographic is going to buy this wholesale.


marietouchet said:


> It seems to me ...
> While QEII was alive, the BRF either did get involved in all the trendy social causes or they did not get publicity for it, too political ?? The Harkles were slapped down for trying to do that kind of stuff?
> Under KCIII, issues like Domestic Violence (Camilla reception) are getting a lot of press, this is a classic Harkle topic
> 
> For whatever reason, yes, the BRF is venturing into Harkle territory, but there is a lot of DV out there to work on, the topic is extensive enough fro the BRF and Harkles to share without DV within the family


I think Diana and her obvious popularity and momentum was the watershed for the royals gunning for trendy causes for exposure  but the ante has been upped by the advent of social media and the internet. I think the harkles are just the b track of this tbh- after all M’s first royal engagement was an ultra _cause celebre_ Grenfell tower cookbook promo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM11

LittleStar88 said:


> She has a fancy Cry Room. I wonder what part of her privileged life has her all worked up?
> 
> View attachment 5663259


Hermes executives after their show (gauging from the number of times Hermes blanket was mentioned in youtube under the trailer)


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> right
> that lady was too aggressive in her questioning/touching but if the "victim" had been dressed like everyone else, the conversation wouldn't have happened.....so if you are so proud of your heritage, why not own up to it?  surely she understood what the old lady was getting at


surely she understood what the old lady _Palace Staff/representative _was getting at

Wasn’t the event hosted by Queen Camilla for the UN program?  






Left to right: Sophie Countess of Wessex, Queen Mathilde of Belgium, Queen Camilla, Queen Rania of Jordan, Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, Sierra Leone's First Lady Fatima Maada Bio, and Ukraine's First Lady Olena Zelenska









						Queen Camilla Hosts Royal Women from Around the World at Special Buckingham Palace Reception
					

Queen Camilla hosted royal women from around the world at a Buckingham Palace reception to raise awareness of violence against women and girls as part of the UN 16 days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence




					people.com


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> that lady was too aggressive in her questioning/touching but if the "victim" had been dressed like everyone else, the conversation wouldn't have happened.....so if you are so proud of your heritage, why not own up to it? surely she understood what the old lady was getting at



Agree.  She knew what Lady SH was asking.  As we all found out yesterday, turns out that Ngozi Fulani was born "Marlene Headley" of parents who were originally from Barbados. So, turns out she was doing a little cultural appropriation of her own.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> You know Meghan always pretends to be reaching out those olive branches.



Yep, she does that all the time. I'm starting to be concerned with the trees.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Agree.  She knew what Lady SH was asking.  As we all found out yesterday, turns out that Ngozi Fulani was born "Marlene Headley" of parents who were originally from Barbados. So, turns out she was doing a little cultural appropriation of her own.


IDK....seems to be any black person can trace their heritage to Africa


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

2nd slide.


----------



## Chanbal

EmilyM111 said:


> Hermes executives after their show (gauging from the number of times Hermes blanket was mentioned in youtube under the trailer)
> 
> View attachment 5663412


You are all wrong. The 'H' on the blanket is for Hazz, not Hermes.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Perhaps she needs some of Nigella’s lemon and elderflower pudding:











						Nigella Lawson's Warm Lemon and Elderflower Pudding
					

This Warm Lemon and Elderflower Pudding, as featured on Nigella Lawson's BBC2 series Cook, Eat, Repeat, is tangy, fragrant, and especially good served with double cream.




					thehappyfoodie.co.uk
				





LittleStar88 said:


> She has a fancy Cry Room. I wonder what part of her privileged life has her all worked up?
> 
> View attachment 5663259


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> 2nd slide.



Imo . All of these slides have that _ring of truth.  _NFlix’s Ted has an agenda with plenty of $$$ to support it.  That said, doubtful he can make fetch happen - the toxic two have zero chemistry, zero appeal.  Still looking forward to KC3’s response


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo . All of these slides have that _ring of truth.  _NFlix’s Ted has an agenda with plenty of $$$ to support it.  That said, doubtful he can make fetch happen - the toxic two have zero chemistry, zero appeal.  Still looking forward to KC3’s response


Maybe they can recycle some of the more risque footage for an adult channel. "Doing It with the Duchess" has a nice ring to it.


----------



## Chanbal

Gosh, this is getting really weird. It seems that at one point the release day was December 25.


----------



## Vintage Leather

pomeline said:


> I thought it would be something like that! I did study Chinese a few years ago but my limited skills did not allow me to translate that (I have forgotten so much and feel I should get back to it some time). I do know how the character system works though and how the meanings can often be so symbolic that it can be tricky to translate into English.
> 
> The business of renting a family reminds me of the time we were planning our wedding and being all exhausted about guest lists, seating arrangements etc. I remember gasping to my then-fiancé-now-husband "Couldn't we just rent families to pose as ours at the wedding...?"


In Japan, you can “rent an ossan” or hired a middle-aged man to show you around their city, give advice, show you how to fix things, to support you or walk you down the aisle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Gosh, this is getting really weird. It seems that at one point the release day was December 25.



They’ll release it on Catherine’s birthday in January. Ya kno, sweet nods and all love.


----------



## Chanbal

And it continues…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> And it continues…



Oh wait, they aren’t pushing this gross show for an Oscar, are they?  
If so, it needs to be released by year end.  Does Nflux really expect us to watch this gross show during our holidays?  Think again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Dec 25 is a dud of a day to drop a show. Most everyone will be busy doing holiday things.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> IDK....seems to be any black person can trace their heritage to Africa



I think we all can.   At least, that's what my 23 and Me profile says.


----------



## CobaltBlu

LittleStar88 said:


> Dec 25 is a dud of a day to drop a show. Most everyone will be busy doing holiday things.


And Charles will be making his first Christmas address ….


----------



## Chanbal

scarlet555 said:


> That’s true, but the response from BRF leans towards it being a true version…. *I really think she has the audio version* waiting to be released thus the response from BRF


You could be right…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> You could be right…



It is connected to the UN program - whoever is running communications at KP/BP/ whatever P needs to leave. 
With all the dignitaries attending this event, Lady H was doing her job. Did Fulani nominate 2 of her volunteers?  Did they attend?  Was she supposed to attend, too?  Other directors decided not to attend. 

_The 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence is an annual international campaign that kicks off on 25 November, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and runs until 10 December, Human Rights Day. 








						16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence
					

The 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence is an annual international campaign that kicks off on 25 November, the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and runs until 10 December, Human Rights Day.




					www.unwomen.org
				



_


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> She learned how to be a hustler and a grifter at a young age and she has no moral compass.


Our dear late @CeeJay said this all along, she was right about the Harkles


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Gosh, this is getting really weird. It seems that at one point the release day was December 25.



Hmmm first episode on 25 Dec, if they do one a night, they can get them all in in time for the book, otherwise the show will take away from the book, and that would be so rude lol


----------



## Chanbal

We need to keep our sanity… In contrast to the Harkles, Will & Kate mean well imo. I'm happy they are having a warm welcome in Boston. Hope Netfl*x is taking notes.


----------



## Aimee3

xincinsin said:


> Maybe they can recycle some of the more risque footage for an adult channel. "Doing It with the Duchess" has a nice ring to it.


And we know there’s a long line of men who have “done it with the duchess!”


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> Six episodes of torture.
> 
> View attachment 5663099


We so badly need the vomit button.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Aimee3 said:


> And we know there’s a long line of men who have “done it with the duchess!”


And women? with Hazz.


----------



## LittleStar88

CobaltBlu said:


> And Charles will be making his first Christmas address ….



Nail in their coffin if they drop to conflict with his first Christmas address


----------



## LittleStar88

Aimee3 said:


> And we know there’s a long line of men who have “done it with the duchess!”





CarryOn2020 said:


> And women? with Hazz.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> It seems to me ...
> While QEII was alive, the BRF either did get involved in all the trendy social causes or they did not get publicity for it, too political ?? *The Harkles were slapped down for trying to do that kind of stuff?*
> Under KCIII, issues like Domestic Violence (Camilla reception) are getting a lot of press, this is a classic Harkle topic
> 
> *For whatever reason, yes, the BRF is venturing into Harkle territory,* but there is a lot of DV out there to work on, the topic is extensive enough fro the BRF and Harkles to share without DV within the family


Camilla received most if not all of her patronages before ZedZed appeared on the scene so she can't be accused of trespassing into the despicable duo's 'territory' however it's possible that ZedZed coveted some of C's patronages. 

Camilla's Patronages  On the left side of the article check the appropriate box for patronage summary and date accepted.


----------



## 880

jelliedfeels said:


> That jumper, pot plants, cosy chairs, crying, the inexplicably physically repellent couple at the heart of it …. She’s a beautiful kitchen away from the Nora Ephron fantasy.
> You can tell she really thinks the wine mom demographic is going to buy this wholesale.



Ha, I nearly spit up my tea, thank you for the laugh. 
My first step father said he once went on a date with Ephron.
My only recollection of her is the quote to the effect of ‘If I had breasts, I firmly believe that I would be an entirely different person.’ I think that the wine mom demographic wishes in vain to be half as snarky witty as ephron. 
I think M is channeling the demographic who love Nicholas Sparks.

ETA: I just read (on line on one of links one of you kindly shared)  that Ngozi  is from the Caribbean and was wearing a recording device and she was targeting Queen C. So, yes, I still think that Lady S was rude and there were racist tones ( in the sense that she would not have asked these questions of a guest presenting as white, but now I feel like it’s entrapment. At any rate, since she stepped down, that should be enough.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> surely she understood what the old lady _Palace Staff/representative _was getting at
> 
> Wasn’t the event hosted by Queen Camilla for the UN program?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Left to right: Sophie Countess of Wessex, Queen Mathilde of Belgium, Queen Camilla, Queen Rania of Jordan, Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, Sierra Leone's First Lady Fatima Maada Bio, and Ukraine's First Lady Olena Zelenska
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla Hosts Royal Women from Around the World at Special Buckingham Palace Reception
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla hosted royal women from around the world at a Buckingham Palace reception to raise awareness of violence against women and girls as part of the UN 16 days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com





youngster said:


> Agree.  She knew what Lady SH was asking.  As we all found out yesterday, turns out that Ngozi Fulani was born "Marlene Headley" of parents who were originally from Barbados. So, turns out she was doing a little cultural appropriation of her own.





Chanbal said:


> You could be right…




She hates the BRF - why was she there? She is either a massive hypocrite or up to something, imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Look at the legend of this video. Please use earplugs, because the noise coming from Montecito may be hazardous.


_Princess Catherine greets the crowd outside Harvard University_​


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> She has a fancy Cry Room. I wonder what part of her privileged life has her all worked up?
> 
> View attachment 5663259


The part where she has to deal with her old iPhone 10 because rentaArchie dropped her new 13.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Maybe they can recycle some of the more risque footage for an adult channel. "Doing It with the Duchess" has a nice ring to it.


How about a list  of men she was with on the sleep to the top?


----------



## Molly0

I feel like cancelling my Netflix subscription.  I wonder how many cancellations it would take for them to get a message ?


----------



## Suncatcher

EmilyM111 said:


> I watched the trailer. It's so boring, literally nothing there is interesting, no good line or story. I am pretty sure that after one episode people will switch off from boredom. Do a show about me, I have a funny dachshund - it will be way more entertaining and will include real drama


Your last sentence was so random and as a result funny. I chuckled!


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> Look at the legend of this video. Please use earplugs, because the noise coming from Montecito may be hazardous.
> 
> 
> _Princess Catherine greets the crowd outside Harvard University_​




The plates are flying in Montecito. The Boston news anchor said . . .

*"It just isn't every day that we have royalty in the United States, never mind the Boston area!"*


----------



## queennadine

I don’t buy the Lady SH story for another major reason: that she allegedly touched Fulani. The UK seemed to take COVID restrictions very seriously so I don’t believe that people are randomly reaching out and touching strangers when most people are probably still scared of handshakes. 

On topic for this thread: the Netflix trailer is ridic. I canceled Netflix years ago for political reasons and can’t say anything has enticed me to renew. Certainly not this “documentary” either.


----------



## sdkitty

so the ladies of The View weighed in on the timing of the Netflix promo.  they pretty much all agreed it was smart marketing.  Sunny said it would not be Meghan's decision - it would be Netflix.  She (not surprisingly) fiercely defended the WIFE - saying she has told us over and over about the racism she experienced (as if that makes it true).

some of them expressed (mainly Ana Navarro who is my fave) that if they supposedly want their privacy they're going about it in an odd way.
So kinda mixed.


----------



## Hermes Zen

LittleStar88 said:


> No one wants to see what she can do with Vienna sausages. Please let’s not let that happen.


NOOOOOO   I just bought a can! Felt nostalgic. Haven't had them for 50+ years. Now I can't think of cooking these!! OR LOOK at the can without thinking of H


----------



## CarryOn2020

Do they?  Tell us more  













						Harry and Meghan 'plan to reach out to royal family' after documentary
					

This week's trailer for their forthcoming Netflix documentary series - entitled Harry & Meghan - suggested the couple still have scores to settle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

How did we missed this? Some inside info on TW's last private jet event. Let's put things this way, the interviewed women are likely not members of this thread.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> How about a list  of men she was with on the sleep to the top?


Yes! Are we due for another team project something like 'The List of ZedZed's Past and Present Paramours.'  Warning: Since this involves a world famous seductress, this list could be a never-ending experience.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> How did we missed this? Some inside info on TW's last private jet event. Let's put things this way, the interviewed women are likely not members of this thread.



The commenters say it all:


_positive thinker
I listened to these women and was horrified to think that they needed a woman like Meghan to feel powerful. I feel just as you do. I am 75 years old and have always had a voice and have never felt powerless. Meghan sounds to me like an immature woman who latches onto a topic that she can exploit and has no understanding that it has all been done before, and done better.

Susan 
Agree, it’s makes those of us that are older now, wonder how far we really come if these are the woman who we trust with carrying on. Makes me shudder!

Freespeech1 
Yes, these issues started being discussed in the 70s, it’s all been said or changed_


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> You are all wrong. The 'H' on the blanket is for Hazz, not Hermes.



That sounds like appropriation to me!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Handbag1234

Molly0 said:


> I feel like cancelling my Netflix subscription.  I wonder how many cancellations it would take for them to get a message ?


I was minded to cancel too, until I was reminded we don’t actually pay and use a family member’s account log in….. ha!


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> IDK....seems to be any black person can trace their heritage to Africa


Actually, pretty much all of us in that case.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Maybe they can recycle some of the more risque footage for an adult channel. "Doing It with the Duchess" has a nice ring to it.



If it comes true I'll blame y'all. Don't. Talk. It. Into. Existance.



LittleStar88 said:


> Dec 25 is a dud of a day to drop a show. Most everyone will be busy doing holiday things.



Exactly. I'll be busy preparing copious amounts of food, eating copious amounts of food and cleaning up after lunch and dinner with 12+ people. If I had the time and energy to watch TV I'd want it to be a Christmas classic and not something that reminds me of a horror movie.



CobaltBlu said:


> And Charles will be making his first Christmas address ….



Ugh. I have no hard feelings against Charles, but he's just not The Queen.



Chanbal said:


> You could be right…




Can someone explain why William needs to apologize? Was he even involved? Will we hear what was really said? But also, can that Fulani lady be somehow prosecuted for secretly recording inside the palace?



CarryOn2020 said:


> Do they?  Tell us more
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'plan to reach out to royal family' after documentary
> 
> 
> This week's trailer for their forthcoming Netflix documentary series - entitled Harry & Meghan - suggested the couple still have scores to settle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Their letter might just come back marked "address unknown".


----------



## Sharont2305

Handbag1234 said:


> I was minded to cancel too, until I was reminded we don’t actually pay and use a family member’s account log in….. ha!


Mine is free within my TV subscription, lol


----------



## youngster

So, Harry and Meghan plan to reach out after their reality series airs and after the book comes out, to repair the relationship with the family! 

I'm sure everyone will hug and make up and they'll have a big family sleepover at BP too!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> You know Meghan always pretends to be reaching out those olive branches.


It's TW's version of Newton's law "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". She wanted to make herself look good by appearing to offer an olive branch before that cherrypicked photo of the PoW came out in the trailer, and I'm sure she personally picked that photo. She is such a nasty and vindictive b*tch.


----------



## bellecate

I turned on Christmas music this morning while doing some Christmas baking and the song Mr Grinch came on. It sure sounded like they were singing not about the Grinch but perhaps a foul Monticeto many bathroom'd couple.
You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch
You really are a beast
As caddly as a cactus, charming as a thief
Mr. Grinch
You're a monster, Mr. Grinch
Your heart's an empty hole
Your brain is full of reptiles, horrors in your soul
Mr. Grinch
The Devil is in your smile
Your heart's an empty hole
You've got horrors in your soul
Mr. Grinch
You're a vile one, Mr. Grinch
The Devil's in your smile
You have all the tender kindness
Of violent juveniles.
Mr. Grinch
You're a foul one, Mr' Grinch
You're a twisted, evil wretch
Your heart is full of spiders, soul is full of vermin
Mr. Grinch
The Devil is in your smile
Your heart's an empty hole
The Devil is in your smile
Your heart's an empty hole
You've got horrors in your soul
Mr. Grinch.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> I turned on Christmas music this morning while doing some Christmas baking and the song Mr Grinch came on. It sure sounded like they were singing not about the Grinch but perhaps a foul Monticeto many bathroom'd couple.



What did you make? I am particularly proud of my almond horns which look picture perfect


----------



## 1LV

Toby93 said:


> "*When the stakes are this high, doesn't it make sense to hear our story from us?*" Yikes, she really does think highly of herself    What stakes?  Their ability to grift?  They told the world they were stepping back from public life and wanted privacy.
> 
> Is she referring to the comparison to the Prince and Princess of Wales, because if she is, that ship has sailed.  I really don't understand this statement.  What imaginary stakes is she talking about?
> 
> They already had their big platform on Oprah and blew it with nothing but lies, so how is hearing anything from them at this point, anything but total fabrication?


Maybe by this she means this is make it or break it.  Or maybe she’s being overly dramatic.  Again.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Dec 25 is a dud of a day to drop a show. Most everyone will be busy doing holiday things.


Exactly


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What did you make? I am particularly proud of my almond horns which look picture perfect


Baked for the last two days to parcel off to my son across the country. Mincemeat Slab, Nanaimo Bars, Cherry Dream Square, Butter Tarts, Shortbread, Ginger Slab and Biscotti. Almond Horns sound interesting. Will look them up.
To stay on topic, they will be no lemon olive oil cake or *lemon*-*elderflower* cake. I'll leave those for TW to have someone else make and take the credit for.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

youngster said:


> So, Harry and Meghan plan to reach out after their reality series airs and after the book comes out, to repair the relationship with the family!
> 
> I'm sure everyone will hug and make up and they'll have a big family sleepover at BP too!


Are they living in an alternate reality where one can verbally abuse their family and friends and then think they can return home with impunity.


----------



## charlottawill

queennadine said:


> I don’t buy the Lady SH story for another major reason: that she allegedly touched Fulani. The UK seemed to take COVID restrictions very seriously so I don’t believe that people are randomly reaching out and touching strangers when most people are probably still scared of handshakes.



It struck me watching that video clip with NF next to Camilla was that there was no social distancing, along with the security concern that people were so crowded together. NF was right at Camilla's elbow, which lends credence to the claim that she was wearing a mic in hopes of catching Camilla make a verbal gaffe. I don't ever recall people getting that close to QE.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> right
> that lady was too aggressive in her questioning/touching but if the "victim" had been dressed like everyone else, the conversation wouldn't have happened.....so if you are so proud of your heritage, why not own up to it?  surely she understood what the old lady was getting at



I can see an older woman who is used to polite questions and responses, brushing aside someone’s hair to read a name tag after the belligerent person wouldn't answer the question.

It was like, fine you won’t answer, I’ll find out for myself.

She should have walked away of course. Not worth the effort finding out the information.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain why William needs to apologize? Was he even involved? Will we hear what was really said? But also, can that Fulani lady be somehow prosecuted for secretly recording inside the palace?


The first words on the subject - SH had resigned, general condemnation of racism - came from Kensington Palace, even though W is in the US
I do not remember the exact words of the press release


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> It struck me watching that video clip with NF next to Camilla was that there was no social distancing, along with the security concern that people were so crowded together. NF was right at Camilla's elbow, which lends credence to the claim that she was wearing a mic in hopes of catching Camilla make a verbal gaffe. I don't ever recall people getting that close to QE.


Excellent point , under QEII, one saw pictures of nicely organized receiving lines.
 If there were people randomly spaced in a room, there were far fewer people  wandering around -  with the photo taken prior to the arrival of QEII
QEII was never photographed in a throng of people


----------



## Jayne1

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are they living in an alternate reality where one can verbally abuse their family and friends and then think they can return home with impunity.


So funny.  Burn their bridges and then try to rebuild them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Baked for the last two days to parcel off to my son across the country. Mincemeat Slab, Nanaimo Bars, Cherry Dream Square, Butter Tarts, Shortbread, Ginger Slab and Biscotti. Almond Horns sound interesting. Will look them up.
> To stay on topic, they will be no lemon olive oil cake or *lemon*-*elderflower* cake. I'll leave those for TW to have someone else make and take the credit for.



I'll PM you.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> So, Harry and Meghan plan to reach out after their reality series airs and after the book comes out, to repair the relationship with the family!
> 
> I'm sure everyone will hug and make up and they'll have a big family sleepover at BP too!




It has been planned… Are we forgetting that we are almost entering the year of reconciliation? It's 2023! I just added a little memory help below. It will be all


----------



## jelliedfeels

EmilyM111 said:


> Hermes executives after their show (gauging from the number of times Hermes blanket was mentioned in youtube under the trailer)
> 
> View attachment 5663412


Maybe I think they will be muttering whatever the French is for:-
“Well, that’s that officially passé - best pop them in storage since we can’t have a discount bin.” 


CarryOn2020 said:


> surely she understood what the old lady _Palace Staff/representative _was getting at
> 
> Wasn’t the event hosted by Queen Camilla for the UN program?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Left to right: Sophie Countess of Wessex, Queen Mathilde of Belgium, Queen Camilla, Queen Rania of Jordan, Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, Sierra Leone's First Lady Fatima Maada Bio, and Ukraine's First Lady Olena Zelenska
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla Hosts Royal Women from Around the World at Special Buckingham Palace Reception
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla hosted royal women from around the world at a Buckingham Palace reception to raise awareness of violence against women and girls as part of the UN 16 days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com


why is Sophie in Popeye pants? 
I’ll be honest this doesn’t look like an awesome party just going off their pained expressions. 






youngster said:


> Agree.  She knew what Lady SH was asking.  As we all found out yesterday, turns out that Ngozi Fulani was born "Marlene Headley" of parents who were originally from Barbados. So, turns out she was doing a little cultural appropriation of her own.


I don’t think that’s cultural appropriation. Barbados is a settler society. It’s like how white Americans are 1. Obviously not indigenous to America and 2. are always saying they are Irish or Dutch or whatever  
even if they’ve never been to Europe- they still have some conception of their ancestral culture from their community- it can often have evolved differently from how the contemporary Irish culture say  but it’s still it’s own thing - not really cultural appropriation. To tie it back to the royals I’m sure Will is downing Guinness and professing his love of the craic even as we speak. 


Chanbal said:


> Gosh, this is getting really weird. It seems that at one point the release day was December 25.



This poster looks like Harry is the baby in the bump. 

*Oedipus complex intensifies*

I assume 25th was mooted as she would birth the one true king? 


Chanbal said:


> And it continues…



I was racking my brains trying to work out who the black lead of the karate kid was for a good minute then I remembered the remake though Luckily not because I ever watched it. 




CarryOn2020 said:


> And women? with Hazz.


If she can barely bring herself to be civil to another woman I don’t think she’d be able to seduce and satisfy one either.


880 said:


> Ha, I nearly spit up my tea, thank you for the laugh.
> My first step father said he once went on a date with Ephron.
> My only recollection of her is the quote to the effect of ‘If I had breasts, I firmly believe that I would be an entirely different person.’ I think that the wine mom demographic wishes in vain to be half as snarky witty as ephron.
> I think M is channeling the demographic who love Nicholas Sparks.
> 
> ETA: I just read (on line on one of links one of you kindly shared)  that Ngozi  is from the Caribbean and was wearing a recording device and she was targeting Queen C. So, yes, I still think that Lady S was rude and there were racist tones ( in the sense that she would not have asked these questions of a guest presenting as white, but now I feel like it’s entrapment. At any rate, since she stepped down, that should be enough.


Yes she wishes she could get to Nora’s standards. I think she’s more like the rip off of a Sparks joint too. 
I also think she’s going to be disappointed by the wine mom sales- it’s a busy market and they have to be discerning than she imagines. 


bellecate said:


> Baked for the last two days to parcel off to my son across the country. Mincemeat Slab, Nanaimo Bars, Cherry Dream Square, Butter Tarts, Shortbread, Ginger Slab and Biscotti. Almond Horns sound interesting. Will look them up.
> To stay on topic, they will be no lemon olive oil cake or *lemon*-*elderflower* cake. I'll leave those for TW to have someone else make and take the credit for.



Lots of new kinds of cake to look up- very interesting.


----------



## bag-mania

Maggie Muggins said:


> Are they living in an alternate reality where one can verbally abuse their family and friends and then think they can return home with impunity.


They act as if they think the rest of the family should step aside and let them be in charge, so yes, a fantasy reality.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They act as if they think the rest of the family should step aside and let them be in charge, so yes, a fantasy reality.


is that what she means about the "stakes"?  I wonder if she is going to explain that remark on the show

Oh wait - I think I may be able to guess.  WIFE and H are changing the world, eliminating racism, all that good stuff...that would be high stakes


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> So funny.  Burn their bridges and then try to rebuild them.


Allow me to complete your statement.

_Burn their bridges_, get the cash, _and then try to rebuild them_ to get more cash.


----------



## bubablu

OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
ETA: link to the news








						Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
					

The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> They act as if they think the rest of the family should step aside and let them be in charge, so yes, a fantasy reality.


We all have dreams.


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


that choker is stunning


----------



## csshopper

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.


Quick, dispatch the photographer, get the crew ready to edit the Markles **** show, get an updated picture of the Malevolent one screaming at her phone screen as latest pics of Catherine in green are posted.

 Oh my, the historical Royal emeralds make Mememe and her merched jewelry bits pathetic in comparison.

edited: anyone have intel on the size of the center emerald?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I came here to say that Ghoul is probably having a stroke right now over those emeralds.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I came here to say that Ghoul is probably having a stroke right now over those emeralds.


LOL....wonder if she tries to hide it from H or just has a tantrum "those should be mine!"


----------



## Chanbal

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wow! Picture courtesy of one of the Harkles' magazines…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


It's the one she wore on her forehead in Australia as she apparently burnt her neck.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Quick, dispatch the photographer, get the crew ready to edit the Markles **** show, get an updated picture of the Malevolent one screaming at her phone screen as latest pics of Catherine in green are posted.
> 
> Oh my, the historical Royal emeralds make Mememe and her merched jewelry bits pathetic in comparison.
> 
> edited: anyone have intel on the size of the center emerald?



No, but I follow britishroyaljewels on Instagram and he might have details soon. I'm sure he's covered it before but I can't be bothered to scroll through the whole feed.


----------



## bubablu

sdkitty said:


> that choker is stunning


It is. But I have a thing for chockers, especially with pearls. And I'm here waiting to see again the Diana's sapphire one. In the meantime I'm enjoying this emerald trolling at MEME.


----------



## sdkitty

bubablu said:


> It is. But I have a thing for chockers, especially with pearls. And I'm here waiting to see again the Diana's sapphire one. In the meantime I'm enjoying this emerald trolling at MEME.


oh, I love sapphires


----------



## bubablu

No, only a little bit of background http://queensjewelvault.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-art-deco-emerald-choker.html and http://queensjewelvault.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-cambridge-emeralds-and-delhi-durbar.html


csshopper said:


> Quick, dispatch the photographer, get the crew ready to edit the Markles **** show, get an updated picture of the Malevolent one screaming at her phone screen as latest pics of Catherine in green are posted.
> 
> Oh my, the historical Royal emeralds make Mememe and her merched jewelry bits pathetic in comparison.
> 
> edited: anyone have intel on the size of the center emerald?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> We saw that blankie before at Montecito bu the picture of them on kitchen counter was taken in the UK, after some gala
> *They had photogs, if not videographers, following them around since BEFORE they left the UK *
> 
> Ewww .... who wants to invite photogs into your life ... privacy anyoine?
> 
> 
> The only thing interesting is the line *WITH SO MUCH AT STAKE *WHY NOT HEAR IT FROM US ??
> Sounds like a declaration of war to me ...
> And H told us this was coming (when at the funeral or Jubilee) he said reconciliation wasnt happening becasue there had been no apology - he drew the red line
> 
> 
> It seems to me ...
> While QEII was alive, the BRF either did get involved in all the trendy social causes or they did not get publicity for it, too political ?? The Harkles were slapped down for trying to do that kind of stuff?
> Under KCIII, issues like Domestic Violence (Camilla reception) are getting a lot of press, this is a classic Harkle topic
> 
> For whatever reason, yes, the BRF is venturing into Harkle territory, but there is a lot of DV out there to work on, the topic is extensive enough fro the BRF and Harkles to share without DV within the family
> 
> 
> thoughts - note hypocrisy in the dates
> 1. the need for privacy was soooo 2019, H has not mentioned it lately ??
> 2. *They have had photogs trotting behind them since 2018, before they left the UK*


But they made the decision to leave the UK at the end of 2019, and had no plans of making millions on Netli*x and Sp@tify back then.  They were *forced* to sell his family out because they had no other way to make money.  

Were they being dishonest?  Were they documenting all along with the intention of leaving the UK for sunny California?


----------



## gracekelly

I am sick of the media feeling the need to include H&M in every story about the Wales.  The fact is that not only do the Sussex time their stories to compete with the Wales and annoy them, but  more importantly they are piggybacking off the Wales at the same time.  The Sussex goal is never to be out of the public eye and they don't care how it happens.  As long as they are included with the Wales' story it is impossible to ignore them.


----------



## Aimee3

The DM article says the value of the choker is around 15 million!  Zedzed must be fuming and spitting fire at haz


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> right
> that lady was too aggressive in her questioning/touching but if the "victim" had been dressed like everyone else, the conversation wouldn't have happened.....so if you are so proud of your heritage, why not own up to it?  surely she understood what the old lady was getting at


She objected to being touched, but has no issue touching other people


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, Harry and Meghan plan to reach out after their reality series airs and after the book comes out, to repair the relationship with the family!
> 
> I'm sure everyone will hug and make up and they'll have a big family sleepover at BP too!


Maybe they will make S'Mores over a bonfire of The Bench.  

I don't actually think they have any plans to reconcile.  This is just being put out there right now to ameliorate the damage that is going to take place from the series and the book.  How stupid do they think the family is or the public.  Turning the other cheek is very noble, but not when you have gone too far.


----------



## gracekelly

Aimee3 said:


> The DM article says the value of the choker is around 15 million!  Zedzed must be fuming and spitting fire at haz


I thought that Meghan considered emerald green to be her color and declared ownership.  Didn't she try to copyright the color? lololololol!  I'd like to see her attempt to squeeze into that dress that Kate is wearing.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> She objected to being touched, but has no issue touching other people
> 
> View attachment 5663640


well, she may have been a friend of that woman....and black women have issues with people touching their hair


----------



## Goodfrtune

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is how you wear green! Photo courtesy of The Daily Mail


----------



## bag-mania

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. *Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.*
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


As are all the sugars. How dare she?! That color belongs to Meghan!


----------



## csshopper

She radiates poise, so beautiful to see.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


And the dress is not a 100,000 pound dress designed by a Paris couturier as worn by MM
The whole outfit is a HUGE tasteful message to the Harkles, well done by the Wales team


----------



## KEG66

sdkitty said:


> well, she may have been a friend of that woman....and black women have issues with people touching their hair


I’d take issue with anyone I didn’t  know touching me full stop. I don’t think that feeling is exclusive to anyone. However not sure we’ll ever know what really happened.


----------



## gracekelly

Lady Susan 'warned Harry and Meghan's marriage would end in tears'
					

According to royal expert Tom Bower, Lady Susan  visited the duchess at Nottingham Cottage, the home Meghan first shared with Harry in Kensington Palace, to offer help and advice in 2018.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Lady Susan Hussey warned Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage would 'end in tears' after the Palace asked disgraced Lady-in-Waiting to help Duchess adapt to life in The Firm​
Looking at this, it does make you think that the woman was targeted to be discredited.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Who comes up with this nonsense, please enlighten me?  









						Harry and Meghan 'plan to reach out to royal family' after documentary
					

This week's trailer for their forthcoming Netflix documentary series - entitled Harry & Meghan - suggested the couple still have scores to settle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 880

bellecate said:


> Baked for the last two days to parcel off to my son across the country. Mincemeat Slab, Nanaimo Bars, Cherry Dream Square, Butter Tarts, Shortbread, Ginger Slab and Biscotti. Almond Horns sound interesting. Will look them up.
> To stay on topic, they will be no lemon olive oil cake or *lemon*-*elderflower* cake. I'll leave those for TW to have someone else make and take the credit for.


Years ago, in my nigella Lawson recipe days ( even though the recipes didn’t really work for me) I actually liked things like lemon olive oil cake. Your baking sounds delicious and your son is very lucky

when I read that M made a staffer get up in the early morning to make several cakes, I thought of the nice pic of K baking with her kids. Big contrast

@QueenofWrapDress , im off to google almond horns as DH adores almonds, almond paste etc. . . .


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I somehow completely missed this. Good think it never *belonged* to Diana but wasThe Queen's property.


----------



## DoggieBags

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So one arrives on a commercial flight and then goes to a star studded gala wearing a dress rented for 74 pounds a night that was chosen to go with the theme of sustainability. She looks stunning as usual and oh by the way she pairs the rented dress with a 15 million pound emerald choker of historic significance previously worn by The Queen and then Lady Diana. And she’s there to support her husband who is giving away millions of pounds in awards to encourage more solutions to the weighty issue of climate change. The other flies via private jet for a presumably paid speaking engagement for a charity in Indianapolis in a Marriot hotel ballroom where companies have bought tables to support the charity and given away seats to random people to fill the room. And she shows up wearing a brand new Armani dress merching jewelry anyone can buy online. TW turned her back on the BRF because she couldn’t be The Star and do whatever she wanted instead of working and playing well with others within the system. I guess we’ll see in a few more years who made the better choice.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Excellent point , under QEII, one saw pictures of nicely organized receiving lines.
> If there were people randomly spaced in a room, there were far fewer people  wandering around -  with the photo taken prior to the arrival of QEII
> QEII was never photographed in a throng of people


If this is part of the plan to modernize the monarchy they may want to rethink it.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> But they made the decision to leave the UK at the end of 2019, and had no plans of making millions on Netli*x and Sp@tify back then.  They were *forced* to sell his family out because they had no other way to make money.
> 
> Were they being dishonest?  Were they documenting all along with the intention of leaving the UK for sunny California?


Yes to both questions


----------



## charlottawill

Mrs.Z said:


> Who comes up with this nonsense, please enlighten me?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'plan to reach out to royal family' after documentary
> 
> 
> This week's trailer for their forthcoming Netflix documentary series - entitled Harry & Meghan - suggested the couple still have scores to settle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They are as delusional as ever. I hope KC tells them to take a hike once and for all.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Who comes up with this nonsense, please enlighten me?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'plan to reach out to royal family' after documentary
> 
> 
> This week's trailer for their forthcoming Netflix documentary series - entitled Harry & Meghan - suggested the couple still have scores to settle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Total BS for stupid people to believe.  If the trashing is that bad, there is no going back.


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> The DM article says the value of the choker is around 15 million!  Zedzed must be fuming and spitting fire at haz


Assuming that they are under the same roof.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> @QueenofWrapDress , im off to google almond horns as DH adores almonds, almond paste etc. . . .



I'll happily share my recipe, it's from the book used to train German pastry chefs.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> I guess we’ll see in a few more years who made the better choice.



I have a premonition.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I somehow completely missed this. Good think it never *belonged* to Diana but wasThe Queen's property.




Mystery solved, we know now the meaning of the picture below.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

sdkitty said:


> so the ladies of The View weighed in on the timing of the Netflix promo.  they pretty much all agreed it was smart marketing.  Sunny said it would not be Meghan's decision - it would be Netflix.  She (not surprisingly) fiercely defended the WIFE - saying she has told us over and over about the racism she experienced (as if that makes it true).
> 
> some of them expressed (mainly Ana Navarro who is my fave) that if they supposedly want their privacy they're going about it in an odd way.
> So kinda mixed.


The View has not been a legitimate cross-section of opinions in a very very long time.  It is no longer interesting or informative as a result.  Almost constant paid political positions. Or so it appears.


----------



## Chanbal

Does he know us? 


_They told the publication: 'They are not popular with the rich, old-guard Montecito crowd.'

Meanwhile, New-York based writer *George Wayne*, who Tatler notes is 'known for publishing an annual list of zeitgeisty-y New Yorkers' claimed: '*There is no one that I know, or care to know, who is a fan of the calculating, mousy subterfuge of Meghan*.'

The comments come after an explosive trailer for Harry and Meghan's $100million (£88m) Netflix docuseries dropped yesterday, with the couple sharing an intensely personal reel of never before seen photos including several of the duchess crying. 

In a hint of fresh attacks on the Royal Family, Harry is heard saying, 'no one sees what goes on behind closed doors' just before an image flashes up of Meghan holding her head in her hands while speaking on the phone._









						Harry and Meghan 'not popular with rich, old-guard Montecito crowd'
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are 'not popular with the rich, old-guard Montecito crowd', a US-based British 'power player' has reportedly told Tatler .




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Does he know us?
> View attachment 5663668
> 
> _They told the publication: 'They are not popular with the rich, old-guard Montecito crowd.'
> 
> Meanwhile, New-York based writer *George Wayne*, who Tatler notes is 'known for publishing an annual list of zeitgeisty-y New Yorkers' claimed: '*There is no one that I know, or care to know, who is a fan of the calculating, mousy subterfuge of Meghan*.'
> 
> The comments come after an explosive trailer for Harry and Meghan's $100million (£88m) Netflix docuseries dropped yesterday, with the couple sharing an intensely personal reel of never before seen photos including several of the duchess crying.
> 
> In a hint of fresh attacks on the Royal Family, Harry is heard saying, 'no one sees what goes on behind closed doors' just before an image flashes up of Meghan holding her head in her hands while speaking on the phone._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'not popular with rich, old-guard Montecito crowd'
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are 'not popular with the rich, old-guard Montecito crowd', a US-based British 'power player' has reportedly told Tatler .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## A1aGypsy

sdkitty said:


> well, she may have been a friend of that woman....and black women have issues with people touching their hair



Uh, I’m not black. I have issues with anyone touching me, hair or otherwise. I would also be seriously annoyed if someone kept pushing me on “where I come from”, implying that I couldn’t possibly be British. But, it’s unlikely someone would do that to me. Because I’m not black.

Hence why the whole thing was so awful.


----------



## Katel

If the green dress were white


----------



## VickyB

Loved catching up on everybody's comments! I'm behind in school. I thought the show was dropping on December 8th? Thanks!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

VickyB said:


> Loved catching up on everybody's comments! I'm behind in school. I thought the show was dropping on December 8th? Thanks!



Don't worry, it changes every few days.


----------



## Annawakes

It’s astounding that they don’t realize how big of a joke they’ve become.  How big of a joke they’ve been.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they will make S'Mores over a bonfire of The Bench.
> 
> I don't actually think they have any plans to reconcile.  This is just being put out there right now to ameliorate the damage that is going to take place from the series and the book.  How stupid do they think the family is or the public.  Turning the other cheek is very noble, but not when you have gone too far.


I literally laughed out loud when I read this. Naive to think anyone will ever trust them, let alone want them back. What a sad, sorry legacy they are building for their children

They will be lucky if they don’t end up on an “Entry Denied” list at any border in the Commonwealth.


----------



## Chanbal

VickyB said:


> Loved catching up on everybody's comments! I'm behind in school. I thought the show was dropping on December 8th? Thanks!


This video might help with catching up.


----------



## marietouchet

csshopper said:


> Quick, dispatch the photographer, get the crew ready to edit the Markles **** show, get an updated picture of the Malevolent one screaming at her phone screen as latest pics of Catherine in green are posted.
> 
> Oh my, the historical Royal emeralds make Mememe and her merched jewelry bits pathetic in comparison.
> 
> edited: anyone have intel on the size of the center emerald?


MM has been wearing an emerald geode necklace  $3000 ish in her last two public appearances


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## VickyB

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Don't worry, it changes every few days.


Thanks!


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Lady Susan 'warned Harry and Meghan's marriage would end in tears'
> 
> 
> According to royal expert Tom Bower, Lady Susan  visited the duchess at Nottingham Cottage, the home Meghan first shared with Harry in Kensington Palace, to offer help and advice in 2018.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lady Susan Hussey warned Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's marriage would 'end in tears' after the Palace asked disgraced Lady-in-Waiting to help Duchess adapt to life in The Firm​
> Looking at this, it does make you think that the woman was targeted to be discredited.


Sounds like Fulanigate was payback, MM must have disliked SH back then, MM probably left her hidden Jubilee & funeral 
 mic behind as a gift


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> This video might help with catching up.



Thanks!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

VickyB said:


> Loved catching up on everybody's comments! I'm behind in school. I thought the show was dropping on December 8th? Thanks!


I had read that too, but maybe the Harkles got Netflix to push it back until January.


----------



## VickyB

Chanbal said:


> This video might help with catching up.



Thanks much for sharing this video - excellent!


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5663729
> 
> View attachment 5663730


The more I think about it, the more I believe the PoW's choice of the dress and the necklace was a real power move. An eff you to TW. A slim fitting green dress similar to what TW wore to the Marriott, but she wore it much better and with Diana's massive emerald necklace that TW wanted. 

I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Mystery solved, we know now the meaning of the picture below.



That is just too funny! The difference is, the PoW at least paid to rent her dress, whereas TW has probably been working the phones for the past few hours to find a freebie for the Ripple of Nope show that she thinks will outshine Catherine. Come to think of it, that should have been the title of her first book - "Finding Freebies".  Apologies if it has already been mentioned. And she will never have a necklace like that choker. I love it.


----------



## marietouchet

What we learn on this thread … down with tummy ache for 24 hrs and found great ROYAL GRIFT YouTube video
Elon warned us about bots impacting our news but seeing how this applies to MM makes the whole topic come alive.
An expose WITH DATA on how Fulanigate exploded on the internet because of MM’s bots and a whole cast of deplorables
Skip to about 13 min in for FG


----------



## LittleStar88

POW wears a rented dress and looks like a million bucks. TW spends $$$$$ for a dress and still looks cheap.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Kate Middleton wears Meghan and Harry's 'Montecito mansion on her neck' at Earthshot Prize ceremony_


LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5663729
> 
> View attachment 5663730


_Kate Middleton wears Meghan and Harry's 'Montecito mansion on her neck' at Earthshot Prize ceremony_

Oooh yeah, and don’t miss this fact - she’s got much more in the closet, too 

At some point, H&M must realize it *never benefits them* to disrupt the Queen’s events. They are much too needy. The monarchy plays the long game. They do not require other people’s money to live a lifestyle that H&M are desperate for. After all the Fulani noise is over, Camilla is still Queen, LadyH will be cared for, and the world is still turning.


charlottawill said:


> I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.


Most likely, she is starving herself into a new size, having more tweaks, nips, & tucks done asap, rethinking her wardrobe, etc.  Life must be awful for MM while Catherine goes from strength to strength.


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> The more I think about it, the more I believe the PoW's choice of the dress and the necklace was a real power move. An eff you to TW. A slim fitting green dress similar to what TW wore to the Marriott, but she wore it much better and with Diana's massive emerald necklace that TW wanted.
> 
> I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.


The theme was sustainability and guests were encouraged to recycle or wear vintage. The dress was PERFECT


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oooh yeah, and don’t miss this fact - she’s got much more in the closet, too
> 
> At some point, H&M must realize it *never benefits them* to disrupt the Queen’s events. They are much too needy. The monarchy plays the long game. They do not require other people’s money to live a lifestyle that H&M are desperate for. After all the Fulani noise is over, Camilla is still Queen, LadyH will be cared for, and the world is still turning.
> 
> Most likely, she is starving herself into a new size, having more tweaks, nips, & tucks done asap, rethinking her wardrobe, etc.  Life must be awful for MM while Catherine goes from strength to strength.


I figured she'd do a seven day cleanse and have a trainer move in for round the clock sessions, but her shindig is Tuesday. Oops!


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> … down with tummy ache for 24 hrs


Ugh, that's never pleasant. Hope you feel better.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> The more I think about it, the more I believe the PoW's choice of the dress and the necklace was a real power move. An eff you to TW. A slim fitting green dress similar to what TW wore to the Marriott, but she wore it much better and with Diana's massive emerald necklace that TW wanted.
> 
> I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. *She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.*



Balenciaga probably has a lot of availability right now


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> The theme was sustainability and guests were encouraged to recycle or wear vintage. The dress was PERFECT


The jewels are vintage, too!  Wouldn’t that make them sustainable, too?

ETA:  wonder if Hazzi is on the phone gritching at, demanding and threatening KCIII to give MM’s unfettered access to the jewel closet.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA: wonder if Hazzi is on the phone gritching at, demanding and threatening KCIII to give MM’s unfettered access to the jewel closet.


Only if she's holding a gun to his head.

Sorry, shouldn't joke about that but I can't imagine how Hazy could have the b*lls to do something like that. He has no rights to the jewels as an overseas non-working royal.


----------



## Chanbal

Good question!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> MM has been wearing an emerald geode necklace  $3000 ish in her last two public appearances


She’s cosplaying The Princess of Wales.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> So funny.  Burn their bridges and then try to rebuild them.


More like burn their bridges and get upset that the people on the other side of the pond aren't begging to rebuild them.


Toby93 said:


> But they made the decision to leave the UK at the end of 2019, and *had no plans of making millions on Netli*x and Sp@tify back then*.  They were *forced* to sell his family out because *they had no other way to make money. *
> 
> Were they being dishonest?  Were they documenting all along with the intention of leaving the UK for sunny California?


I'd say partially true. They thought they would be leeching off the A-listers, everything they wanted sponsored because they are so "influential", invited to red carpet events and feted everywhere. Sure, they talked to Hollywood dealmakers before Megxit, but that was for easy money earning some chump change to flip some coins at charities. They never ever expected to have to earn a living.

And they have no other way to earn money because they both have zilch skills and talent.


LittleStar88 said:


> POW wears a rented dress and looks like a million bucks. *TW spends $$$$$ for a dress and still looks cheap.*


She is just being her authentic self and must be SEEN as such.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> The more I think about it, the more I believe the PoW's choice of the dress and the necklace was a real power move. An eff you to TW. A slim fitting green dress similar to what TW wore to the Marriott, but she wore it much better and with Diana's massive emerald necklace that TW wanted.
> 
> I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.


I thought she was wearing green because the evening is about the environment... and I wonder if Kate even thinks about one-upping Meg.

That necklace is insanely gorgeous, isn't it. You need a long neck too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Marriott Meg


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> and I wonder if Kate even thinks about one-upping Meg.


I doubt that she does, but I wouldn't blame her if she did. MM would try the patience of a saint.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Marriott Meg



I probably thought Diana looked fabulous back then but that's pretty funny today.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sussexes ‘took photographer into Buckingham Palace without late Queen’s permission’​Aides complain after picture in new Netflix trailer appears to show couple walking out of palace’s garden entrance

*Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/sq8bD*


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Sussexes ‘took photographer into Buckingham Palace without late Queen’s permission’​Aides complain after picture in new Netflix trailer appears to show couple walking out of palace’s garden entrance
> 
> *Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/sq8bD*
> 
> View attachment 5663771


Is anyone surprised?  One more instance of breaking the rules -  aren’t they so cool [snark]?


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Sussexes ‘took photographer into Buckingham Palace without late Queen’s permission’​Aides complain after picture in new Netflix trailer appears to show couple walking out of palace’s garden entrance
> 
> *Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/sq8bD*
> 
> View attachment 5663771


The BLG identified this picture as taken @Buckingham. He was able to get a picture of QE in this same room. TW looks vulgar even from the back imo.
There are rumors that they were already working on the Netfl*x show when still in the UK.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, the View has turned  
'Dry your eyes, Harry and Meghan!' View host Ana Navarro says she's sick of Duke and Duchess of Sussex's crying - while Joy Behar brands Meghan racism claim 'HEARSAY'​
*Netflix's upcoming Sussex's documentary was a topic of discussion on The View*
*Co-host Ana Navarro declared herself to be 'sick of the sight' of them crying, while co-host Joy Behar said she didn't care for the couple*
*Behar suggested the timing of the release of the preview was dropped deliberately to overshadow the Prince William and Catherine's U.S. trip*
*Alyssa Griffin quickly shifted the discussion onto alleged episodes racism from members of the royal family *
*Sarah Haines defended the couple believing the couple's narrative that they 'wanted privacy' and 'protection'*









						Home | Daily Mail Online
					

MailOnline - get the latest breaking news, celebrity photos, viral videos, science & tech news, and top stories from MailOnline and the Daily Mail newspaper.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





Meanwhile, the gorgeous Princess of Wales kisses Mr.GoldenBalls  while wearing those ‘old money’ emeralds: 









						Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
					

The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Do it! Do it! 










						Strip Harry and Meghan of Sussex titles, readers say
					

More than 98 per cent of almost 10,000 Mail+ readers believe Buckingham Palace should revoke the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's titles




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rose60610

Jayne1 said:


> *I thought she was wearing green because the evening is about the environment.*.. and I wonder if Kate even thinks about one-upping Meg.
> 
> That necklace is insanely gorgeous, isn't it. You need a long neck too.



Agreed, plus Boston has the largest Irish population of any U.S. city, another nod. Clever.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I probably thought Diana looked fabulous back then but that's pretty funny today.


Ah, the 80s are never coming back.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I probably thought Diana looked fabulous back then but that's pretty funny today.


No, she loved fashion and tried hard but it didn't always work - to my eye anyway, back in the day.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Ah, the 80s are never coming back.


Thank god


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> Sussexes ‘took photographer into Buckingham Palace without late Queen’s permission’​Aides complain after picture in new Netflix trailer appears to show couple walking out of palace’s garden entrance
> 
> *Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/sq8bD*
> 
> View attachment 5663771


It'll be fun scanning the credit list to check who are all the photogs who are willing to break the palace rules for 30 pieces of silver and a chance to get within ass-kissing distance of the Nazi-cosplaying Prince and his Duchess of Duplicity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> What we learn on this thread … down with tummy ache for 24 hrs and found great ROYAL GRIFT YouTube video
> Elon warned us about bots impacting our news but seeing how this applies to MM makes the whole topic come alive.
> An expose WITH DATA on how Fulanigate exploded on the internet because of MM’s bots and a whole cast of deplorables
> Skip to about 13 min in for FG



Thanks for sharing the above video. I just watched it, wow! Watching now the one below,


----------



## rose60610

The emerald choker...is that also a hint at saying: "Choke on THIS, Claw" ?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


>



I’ve said it before, will say it again - this was a UN event, hosted for the first time by Queen Camilla with 4 other monarchies represented as well as the First Lady of war-torn country.  _Security is important._ Someone appearing to hide her name badge is cause for concern. Someone refusing to answer simple questions is even more cause concern. So strange that a “leader” of a DV organization would choose this event to be argumentative.  Seems like she would understand how to create a safe space, to calm rather than provoke.  Seems like she would do everything to promote her charity.  It may be time for her to step aside.

If H&M the toxic two, the lowlifes,  want to play ‘gotcha’ with Queen Camilla, they need to do better themselves. 
Still waiting on KCIII to act. He is our only hope.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> I’ve said it before, will say it again - this was a UN event, hosted for the first time by Queen Camilla with 4 other monarchies represented as well as the First Lady of war-torn country.  _Security is important._ Someone appearing to hide her name badge is cause for concern. Someone refusing to answer simple questions is even more cause concern. So strange that a “leader” of a DV organization would choose this event to be argumentative.  Seems like she would understand how to create a safe space, to calm rather than provoke.  Seems like she would do everything to promote her charity.  It may be time for her to step aside.
> 
> If H&M the toxic two, the lowlifes,  want to play ‘gotcha’ with Queen Camilla, they need to do better themselves.
> *Still waiting on KCIII to act. He is our only hope.*


----------



## EmilyM11

Netflix didn't read the room well when they signed that deal. The comments on Youtube are ruthless (and hilarious at the same time)


----------



## jelliedfeels

bubablu said:


> OMG tonight Catherine is wearing GREEN with Diana's emerald chocker. Zedzed is going to have a breakdown.
> ETA: link to the news
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William and Kate host glitzy Earthshot Prize gala in Boston
> 
> 
> The Prince and Princess of Wales are hosting a glitzy gala ceremony for William's Earthshot Prize in Boston this evening - with a slew of stars turning out for the event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The  body and the fit of the dress us insane but that shade of green is giving me green screen capture suit. 




It’s also a bit balenciaga which is a no go right now.

Emerald necklace though- that could sell anything 


Sharont2305 said:


> It's the one she wore on her forehead in Australia as she apparently burnt her neck.
> 
> View attachment 5663619
> 
> 
> View attachment 5663622


Say what you want about Diana it is testament to her charisma that she still looks great in these crazy 80s prom dresses with that Dougal McGuire hair 






880 said:


> Years ago, in my nigella Lawson recipe days ( even though the recipes didn’t really work for me) I actually liked things like lemon olive oil cake. Your baking sounds delicious and your son is very lucky
> 
> when I read that M made a staffer get up in the early morning to make several cakes, I thought of the nice pic of K baking with her kids. Big contrast
> 
> @QueenofWrapDress , im off to google almond horns as DH adores almonds, almond paste etc. . . .


Nigella’s recipes can be big hits or misses. I do admire that she has a really broad range of things she tries rather than putting out *another* 50 recipes for spag Bol and granola book. Let’s be honest she is in part just selling us the fantasy of being the voluptuous domestic goddess in a cavernous London Townhouse and I am ok with that 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'll happily share my recipe, it's from the book used to train German pastry chefs.


Shall we resurrect the holiday thread? 


charlottawill said:


> I had read that too, but maybe the Harkles got Netflix to push it back until January.


Ah yes January- famously the best time for prestige releases


----------



## csshopper

The timing bit them in their azzes, people are on to the Markle strategy, and have become bored and dismissive of them. The award winning director should slink off and take a sabbatical.

Strange choice of pictures for the trailer: It’s creepy, who lets a photographer lurk in their kitchen to take late night candids?

Plus we know it will be a minipulative whitewash, there is simply too much contemporary footage of the diminished eunuch Haz and of nasty mask slips by TW to realistically sell any Disney version of everlasting love.

Using the slobbery photo booth candids that replicate ones of MeMeMe taken with multiple previous men brilliantly 
illustrate how Hawry got bamboozled into accepting some disheveled used goods as his wife. He looks foolish and she looks trampy. Who wants to see this replayed for 6 hours?

YAWN, the only fun might be, if it’s told chronologically, is in following how her moon bumps morph along, shifting and unexpectedly deflating at times, counting the number of nose jobs she’s had, and tracking how and when her color palette changes to see if it’s based on the activity or is it based on her wardrobe ? Hawry’s baldness, transplant timing, and number of times he wears the same polo shirt again and again and his apparently single suit could be “entertaining.”

Netflix spent MILLIONS on this? Raises many questions about their business acumen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, that this even made the press (or shall I say, got leaked?) should tell Harry and Ghoul something. BRF isn't playing anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## jelliedfeels

Thinking about it, Kate in green screen green better be careful the goons don’t deepfake her into the documentary…
M:- so you admit you were always jealous of me
Kate (several stones fatter in a dirty sack) :- yEs may-GUN I wish That I had yOuR STAR qualify


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Shall we resurrect the holiday thread?



Great idea, I had totally forgotten about it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure why my post above doesn't embed, it's currently the first entry on marklenews1...Harry bombarding The Queen with phonecalls begging for money after Charles refused to take his calls saying "I'm not a bank".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Original article:


MIDDLEMA'AM Inside Queen’s desperate bid to broker peace deal with Prince Harry before she died


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## KEG66

charlottawill said:


> The more I think about it, the more I believe the PoW's choice of the dress and the necklace was a real power move. An eff you to TW. A slim fitting green dress similar to what TW wore to the Marriott, but she wore it much better and with Diana's massive emerald necklace that TW wanted.
> 
> I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.


Ripple of Nope, love it !!


----------



## xincinsin

jelliedfeels said:


> Thinking about it, Kate in green screen green better be careful the goons don’t deepfake her into the documentary…
> M:- so you admit you were always jealous of me
> Kate (several stones fatter in a dirty sack) :- yEs may-GUN I wish That I had yOuR STAR qualify


There will be plenty of deepfakery no matter what colour she wore. Zed could find insult in a bowl of ice cream. 

I expect lots of carefully curated, out of context footage to prove that the BRF has done her wrong (proof will be that the invisible photo/videographer has shots of Zed being upset later). I'm sorry, Hermes! But that blanket design will never be the same for me again after watching multiple re-takes of fake sobbing.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Original article:
> 
> 
> MIDDLEMA'AM Inside Queen’s desperate bid to broker peace deal with Prince Harry before she died


@QueenofWrapDress, thanks! So Charles asked Hazz to email him instead of calling. I like it! 

_Her Majesty__ — who stepped back from major duties leaving Charles to take on running most affairs after the death of her husband Prince Philip — was unable and unwilling to deal with Harry's requests, it is claimed…

“*Harry is not as well off as people are led to believe. He was wanting money*.

And when she asked her son and heir to the throne why he was accepting emails and not phone calls from Harry, Charles is said to have replied: “Because I am not a bank.”

“*Charles insisted that his son must email him instead.* Members of the family, including William, had stopped speaking to Harry when they learned of his book deal, fearing what they said could end up in print…

*A Tory MP has branded the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “pathetic”* after their Netflix attack on the Royals…_


----------



## charlottawill

KEG66 said:


> Ripple of Nope, love it !!


Can't take credit, saw it on Twitter


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress, thanks! So Charles asked Hazz to email him instead of calling. I like it!
> 
> _Her Majesty__ — who stepped back from major duties leaving Charles to take on running most affairs after the death of her husband Prince Philip — was unable and unwilling to deal with Harry's requests, it is claimed…
> 
> “*Harry is not as well off as people are led to believe. He was wanting money*.
> 
> And when she asked her son and heir to the throne why he was accepting emails and not phone calls from Harry, Charles is said to have replied: “Because I am not a bank.”
> 
> “*Charles insisted that his son must email him instead.* Members of the family, including William, had stopped speaking to Harry when they learned of his book deal, fearing what they said could end up in print…
> 
> *A Tory MP has branded the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “pathetic”* after their Netflix attack on the Royals…_


None of this is surprising, just sad. What a fool Harry is. But if the part about KC is true, it gives me hope that he will strip the titles.


----------



## DoggieBags

Prior to TW marrying H, I didn’t pay much attention to what the BRF actually did on a day to day basis. I watched when the various royal weddings were televised and when I visited London, I went to see the Crown Jewels in the Tower of London, the changing of the Guard, toured some of the palaces that were open to the public, etc. All the pomp and circumstance was interesting but they were spectacles I watched and then forgot about. I never really thought of the Royal Family and their role in the UK and the Commonwealth. When TW entered the scene I wondered if she’d be able to fit in. Not from a race perspective but from the point of view of an outsider having to learn the myriad and in many cases arcane rules governing behavior that have developed over the centuries for all the remaining royal families. I remember how the current Emperor of Japan had such difficulty finding a suitable bride when he was Crown Prince. Many of the highly eligible Japanese women of his generation wanted no part of the very restrictive life of the Royal Family. The current Emperor’s mother had great difficulty adapting to the pressures and expectations when she married into the family. I’m not surprised that TW had difficulty and ultimately decided not to adapt but instead leave the confines of the BRF. I was disappointed because I thought she had a great opportunity to make a positive difference for POC but it was her choice to make. If she and H had just left and lived their own life, that would have worked for everyone. But their decision to constantly cast shade on the BRF as a way to make $$$ led me to pay more attention to the BRF and the more vituperation they hurled at William and Kate in particular, the classier William and Kate looked imo. William and Kate performed their roles flawlessly during their 3 days in Boston. I was in the camp that questioned why William and Kate had to do the Earthshot awards in Boston instead of staying in London but once in Boston they did a great job of drawing attention to the causes they champion like battling climate change and the importance of early childhood development.  In contrast, all the shenanigans and publicity the Montecito duo generated in the same span of time amounted to less than a hill of beans. They come across as increasingly shrill, desperate, and needy with no purpose but to draw attention to themselves so they can make more money off their increasingly frayed connection to the BRF. I think someone said their Netflix trailer was up to 70k dislikes in less than a day and that says it all. Prior to TW entering the BRF, I viewed William and Kate as a privileged, attractive but rather boring young couple. But in the past few years I think they’ve really come into their own, using their position to bring attention to worthwhile causes. They look to be a couple determined to make a positive difference. And this just becomes more obvious in the glare of the negative publicity the two aimless, purposeless, grifters keep attempting to shine on William and Kate. And I wouldn‘t have paid much attention to Willam or Kate if not for the nonsense generated by TW and her sycophants after she moved back to the US. So TW’s very expensive PR is working but just not in the way she intended, at least in my view lol.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> @QueenofWrapDress, thanks! So Charles asked Hazz to email him instead of calling. I like it!
> 
> _Her Majesty__ — who stepped back from major duties leaving Charles to take on running most affairs after the death of her husband Prince Philip — was unable and unwilling to deal with Harry's requests, it is claimed…
> 
> “*Harry is not as well off as people are led to believe. He was wanting money*.
> 
> And when she asked her son and heir to the throne why he was accepting emails and not phone calls from Harry, Charles is said to have replied: “Because I am not a bank.”
> 
> “*Charles insisted that his son must email him instead.* Members of the family, including William, had stopped speaking to Harry when they learned of his book deal, fearing what they said could end up in print…
> 
> *A Tory MP has branded the Duke and Duchess of Sussex “pathetic”* after their Netflix attack on the Royals…_



It is truly sad. And so unnecessary really. I don't blame Charles one bit for avoiding Harry. I do blame him somewhat for not making him stop harrassing The Queen.


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5663924


Was she the employee MEMEME appeared to be verbally abusing in the video footage recorded outside the Marriott at the Indianapolis event?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Was she the employee MEMEME appeared to be verbally abusing in the video footage recorded outside the Marriott at the Indianapolis event?



I don't think so.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow, what is happening? Did  Hazzi leave?


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wow, what is happening? Did  Hazzi leave?


----------



## mikimoto007

Had anyone seen a breakdown of the trailer with information on where the photographs were taken? I didn’t realise there would be photographs from the goodbye visit.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> The BLG identified this picture as taken @Buckingham. He was able to get a picture of QE in this same room. TW looks vulgar even from the back imo.
> There are rumors that they were already working on the Netfl*x show when still in the UK.


The NETFLIX trailer certainly shows photos taken prior to Megxit and taken by a professional, not selfies ex kitchen counter snaps from Frogmore Cottage


----------



## marietouchet

mikimoto007 said:


> Had anyone seen a breakdown of the trailer with information on where the photographs were taken? I didn’t realise there would be photographs from the goodbye visit.


The BLG went through every photo identifying timeframe and location as best he could 
In particular, he called out the snap in the Cathedral where Catherine is glaring at something (not the Harkles) , an unattractive shot plopped arbitarily in the middle of trailer for no apparent reason , other than to make C look bad

PS oh dear .. trying to be respectful and call the PoW by something other than nickname , but with my crummy typing, use of the first initial is a great help, THERE ARE TOO MANY Cs now, Charles, Camilla, Catherine, I may have to go back to Kate out of necessity lol


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> Agreed, plus Boston has the largest Irish population of any U.S. city, another nod. Clever.


And they went to a CELTICS game, Boston home town basketball team whose colors are green


----------



## marietouchet

rose60610 said:


> The emerald choker...is that also a hint at saying: "Choke on THIS, Claw" ?


The choker is perfect for another reason, it has impeccable provenance, is NOT made of blood diamonds or stolen stones, ca 1910 Queen Mary was gifted piece at the Delhi Durbar by the Maharajah of Patiala, if the stones were stolen it is on him


----------



## jblended

Apologies if this has been mentioned already since this is a couple of days old now but, there is apparently a book about HMQ coming out that alleges she had bone cancer, like Lady C had said when she passed away. The news has left me feeling a rather bitter taste in my mouth, because I'm reminded yet again that Harry refused her invitation days before she passed away. Just like he refused to see PP before he passed, choosing instead to lob vitriol across the pond via the Oprah interview.
He attacked everything HMQ stood for, he attacked her family, and he refused to see her though he knew she was suffering, all the while he was broadcasting how close he was to her, how he was looking after her and how special their relationship was. 
In the end, there's going to come a day when Harry is old and very alone, and that may be the point where he finally realizes how much he senselessly hurt his family. Because this is senseless. Tactless, irresponsible, crass, unnecessary and...utterly senseless.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## marietouchet

BLG on IG pointed one stock photo is from 2011 - photo where H says he wants to protect family
Sorry , this was being posted while I fiddled with link


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Toby93

Jayne1 said:


> No, she loved fashion and tried hard but it didn't always work - to my eye anyway, back in the day.


I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> BLG on IG pointed one stock photo is from 2011 - photo where H says he wants to protect family
> Sorry , this was being posted while I fiddled with link



2011? My guess it's a shot of the press covering the wedding of William and Catherine, lol


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


Apparently her neck was sunburned, that's why she wore it like that.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


I know Diana loved chokers, her pearl chokers always looked good [as do Camilla’s], but this emerald one requires the diamond chokers to make it look good imo.  Queen Mary wore it well with the entire parure.   See photos in W&K’s thread.


----------



## Toby93

csshopper said:


> Was she the employee MEMEME appeared to be verbally abusing in the video footage recorded outside the Marriott at the Indianapolis event?


I think she was the woman in the front seat of the Range Rover when they were spotted driving to Oprahs.  Apparently MM was in the back seat, with H driving.  A lot of people thought she was MM.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Toby93

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently her neck was sunburned, that's why she wore it like that.


Lol, I would have not worn it at all then, but I know Diana was a bit of an attention seeker.  I loved her, and I think I have the worlds largest book collection of her, but she wasn't always right.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The more I think about it, the more I believe the PoW's choice of the dress and the necklace was a real power move. An eff you to TW. A slim fitting green dress similar to what TW wore to the Marriott, but she wore it much better and with Diana's massive emerald necklace that TW wanted.
> 
> I imagine TW has worked herself into a frenzy and is already scheming to top this look for the Ripple of Nope affair. She's probably on the phone right now calling designers looking for a freebie.


so the WIFE wanted that choker?  I wasn't aware of that - although who wouldn't?
Hollywood actress or not, she cannot look as good as Kate in clothes


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I probably thought Diana looked fabulous back then but that's pretty funny today.


styles change....I do think Diana looked better - much more sophisticated - later in her life.  Interesting they are both wearing green dresses.  I think this choker would also look good with a contrasting color...or with black.  maybe we'll see it again on the lovely Kate


----------



## CarryOn2020

Okaaaay, he is such a twerp.
ETA:  why is naming Charlotte and George?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is truly sad. And so unnecessary really. I don't blame Charles one bit for avoiding Harry. I do blame him somewhat for not making him stop harrassing The Queen.


He probably tried, but unless QE would also stop taking Hazz calls, there wasn't much he could do.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaaay, he is such a twerp.
> ETA:  why is naming Charlotte and George?




WTF did I just watch? 

He could be doing truly important things and making a difference in the world, but instead we get this nonsense? This is what he fled the BRF to do? This is more embarrassing than the window juggling. 

A village has lost their idiot. Someone please come collect him.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> so the WIFE wanted that choker?  I wasn't aware of that - although who wouldn't?
> Hollywood actress or not, she cannot look as good as Kate in clothes


The gossip is MM wanted royal EMERALDS, the most famous of which are the Cambridge (sic) emeralds, from Queen Mary’s antecedents not from W&K
QM famously took the Cambridge drop emeralds and put them on Vladimir tiara - the original of which had only pearl drops. Then QM added a lot of stones to the collection, eg the choker from Maharajah of Patiala. So, there are lots of royal emerald brooches, necklaces, Bracelets earrings etc. QEII loaned some of the brooches to senior working royals like Camilla. Camilla does not own the pins.
Only HMTQ wears the Vladimir tiara … not MM


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Haha, this is good. I watched the BLG's video and he asked for help to identify this photo. It looks like he got it.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> WTF did I just watch?
> 
> He could be doing truly important things and making a difference in the world, but instead we get this nonsense? This is what he fled the BRF to do? This is more embarrassing than the window juggling.
> 
> A village has lost their idiot. Someone please come collect him.


All I can think is he is merching Spiderman outfits


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5663993


What happened to the bodyguard?  Unfunded rumor? (sorry for the typo )


----------



## DoggieBags

One brother meets with the President of the US for 30 minutes while the other channels his inner spider man and juggles balls behind a window as background for one of his wife’s videos  Hard to believe the 2 brothers had the same upbringing at this point.


----------



## bag-mania

EmilyM111 said:


> Netflix didn't read the room well when they signed that deal. The comments on Youtube are ruthless (and hilarious at the same time)


Netflix has made a fortune with shows like Tiger King. They exist to make money. Whether the people watching love the Harkles or hate them, Netflix still wins.


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Okaaaay, he is such a twerp.
> ETA:  why is naming Charlotte and George?



Perhaps in the spirit of the season I’m getting to be the ghost of Christmas future as this is giving me a vision of him hearing that M and her new man (probably a sprightly centenarian, paraplegic Vanderbilt)  are holding a Christmas party for little meal ticket and cash cow and he’s about to gatecrash through  a window and land in a punch bowl before being frogmarched back into a snow drift. Very strong fathers 4 justice vibes.


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> Netflix has made a fortune with shows like Tiger King. They exist to make money. Whether the people watching love the Harkles or hate them, Netflix still wins.


That’s assuming people will watch.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


I agree! I was older than you and thought it was almost silly looking.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> That’s assuming people will watch.


They probably will. In the same way people slow down to look when they drive past a car crash.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> All I can think is he is merching Spiderman outfits


I can think of lots of other reasons, _none _printable here.


jelliedfeels said:


> Perhaps in the spirit of the season I’m getting to be the ghost of Christmas future as this is giving me a vision of him hearing that M and her new man (probably a sprightly centenarian, paraplegic Vanderbilt)  are holding a Christmas party for little meal ticket and cash cow and he’s about to gatecrash through  a window and land in a punch bowl before being frogmarched back into a snow drift. Very strong fathers 4 justice vibes.


So, why does he name Charlotte and George?  Can’t he name his own children?  Strong negative vibes from the toxic one, the misfit, the spare.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Another role model for TW?   People are having fun!


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can think of lots of other reasons, _none _printable here.
> 
> So, why does he name Charlotte and George?  Can’t he name his own children?  Strong negative vibes from the toxic one.


He named 5 monsters, who are they? Family members?


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can think of lots of other reasons, _none _printable here.
> 
> So, why does he name Charlotte and George?  Can’t he name his own children?  Strong negative vibes from the toxic one, the misfit, the spare.


I don't hear Charlotte, I hear him say "Sharky"?  I don't know anything about superheroes or what that means....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I don't hear Charlotte, I hear him say "Sharky"?  I don't know anything about superheroes or what that means....


Oh no, now I need to watch it again


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> He named 5 monsters, who are they? Family members?


maybe it was George who wondered about the baby's skin color


----------



## Chanbal

Father Calvin Robinson on an 'attack to an elderly woman'! Views are changing as people continue thinking about what really happened between NF and SH.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> So, why does he name Charlotte and George? Can’t he name his own children? Strong negative vibes from the toxic one, the misfit, the spare.



He looks a complete fool.


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> Tucker is a POS....IDK how any self-respecting black person could appear with him


Agree with you @100%. But, in case other members are fans of his, I would say that IMO 
his conclusion to defend a white person would be set in stone regardless of any fact pattern to the contrary

I don’t know anything about Father Calvin Robinson


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> I don't hear Charlotte, I hear him say "Sharky"?  I don't know anything about superheroes or what that means....





CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh no, now I need to watch it again


I watched it again. It's Sharky & George. Apologies to Hazz for our bad ears.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I watched it again. It's Sharky & George. Apologies to Hazz for our bad ears.



Who is Sharky?  One of characters in a story? 
Ya kno, this is the problem with cos-play.  If the audience doesn’t know the story, it looks really creepy and twerp-y.  Another poor decision by the spare.


----------



## LittleStar88

I 100% don’t understand why the spiderman costume for Christmas, or what he’s talking about.


----------



## kemilia

Aimee3 said:


> And we know there’s a long line of men who have “done it with the duchess!”


That would be a great tag for a T-shirt--I've Done It With The Duchess!"


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> They probably will. In the same way people slow down to look when they drive past a car crash.


It’s supposedly 6 episodes so if you expect similar viewership patterns as they saw for TW’s 12 podcrashes, The viewership peaked on the first couple and then dropped with each successive episode. I would expect some interest to see what all the fuss is about for the first episode but unless they totally break from their typical modus operandi, the content will be boring, repetitive, and lacking in veracity and centered mostly on TW and her point of view. And we’ve all heard her point of view ad nauseum by now. I’d be very surprised if they managed to generate decent viewership numbers that haven’t been manipulated in some way.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> It’s supposedly 6 episodes so if you expect similar viewership patterns as they saw for TW’s 12 podcrashes, The viewership peaked on the first couple and then dropped with each successive episode. I would expect some interest to see what all the fuss is about for the first episode but unless they totally break from their typical modus operandi, the content will be boring, repetitive, and lacking in veracity and centered mostly on TW and her point of view. And we’ve all heard her point of view ad nauseum by now. I’d be very surprised if they managed to generate decent viewership numbers that haven’t been manipulated in some way.


I don't have netflix and wouldn't watch it on principle if I did....they don't have ratings like old TV so IDK how Netflix will gauge sucess or failure


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> It’s supposedly 6 episodes so if you expect similar viewership patterns as they saw for TW’s 12 podcrashes, The viewership peaked on the first couple and then dropped with each successive episode. I would expect some interest to see what all the fuss is about for the first episode but unless they totally break from their typical modus operandi, the content will be boring, repetitive, and lacking in veracity and centered mostly on TW and her point of view. And we’ve all heard her point of view ad nauseum by now. I’d be very surprised if they managed to generate decent viewership numbers that haven’t been manipulated in some way.


I would expect decent on viewership for all 6, video has so much more content than audio , ex the nasty photo of Kate plopped in the trailer and the body language … 
Whereas the podcasts , we had transcripts of all , I read them outside of Spotify, was not going to pay for them 
Harder to copy videos for YouTube comments , copyright issues 

The issue will be the amount of GOOD/BAD buzz


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

marietouchet said:


> I would expect decent on viewership for all 6, video has so much more content than audio , ex the nasty photo of Kate plopped in the trailer and the body language …
> Whereas the podcasts , we had transcripts of all , I read them outside of Spotify, was not going to pay for them
> Harder to copy videos for YouTube comments , copyright issues
> 
> The issue will be the amount of GOOD/BAD buzz


I would bet any juicy bits would be plastered all over social media and if the bulk of each episode is a snooze fest then people aren’t going to want to sit through the entire hour


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Tucker is a POS....IDK how any self-respecting black person could appear with him





880 said:


> Agree with you @100%. But, in case other members are fans of his, I would say that IMO
> his conclusion to defend a white person would be set in stone regardless of any fact pattern to the contrary
> 
> I don’t know anything about Father Calvin Robinson


I don't know Farther Calvin Robinson, but he sounds like a reasonable person. I would think he is a respectable man.
I understand that TC generates a lot of controversy. I hardly ever listen to him, so I can't even comment much on that. TBH, I rarely listen to any journalist in the US these days as I don't appreciate close minded people. However, he appears to be one of the very few journalists in the US that rightly exposes the Harkles, so he may have a moment of clarity once in awhile.


----------



## Aimee3

kemilia said:


> That would be a great tag for a T-shirt--I've Done It With The Duchess!"


While we are at it. How about a t-shirt that says “I’m done with the duchess”.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


>




They are such loser. OMG. I hope more people are doing the Lord's work and exposing them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently her neck was sunburned, that's why she wore it like that.



Wasn't it that someone forgot to pack the tiara?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Only HMTQ wears the Vladimir tiara … not MM



I might cry a little the day Camilla decides to wear it out.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is another segment…


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I remember reading at that time that the person in charge of the wardrobe for that trip had forgotten to pack a matching tiara, so they improvised by using the choker. I remember thinking how nice of Di not to kick up a fuss and how innovative to use the choker like this.


sdkitty said:


> so the WIFE wanted that choker?  I wasn't aware of that - although who wouldn't?
> Hollywood actress or not, she cannot look as good as Kate in clothes


*Wannabe* Hollywood actress - never made the cut.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can think of lots of other reasons, _none _printable here.
> 
> So, why does he name Charlotte and George?  Can’t he name his own children?  Strong negative vibes from the toxic one, the misfit, the spare.



Is this a new clip? I have not seen it before but the mentioning of Charlotte and George made me think it was old.


----------



## csshopper

LittleStar88 said:


> I 100% don’t understand why the spiderman costume for Christmas, or what he’s talking about.


Kids possibly don’t know who he is.

 All they will take from this, especially the little kids, is their Super Hero Spider-Man, who may have given them fantasy relief from their pain, is not who they thought he was. Instead he turns out to be some weird unmasked man leering at them like a maniac after talking gibberish in a garbled voice.

Hazbeen (more and more all the time) has the sensitivity of a brick.  Christmas is a Christian holiday, Jewish children and those of other religions also suffer loss from their parents’ deaths.  “Scotty’s Little Soldiers,” the group he represents, needs to think inclusively. Talking about grief during “holidays and other family celebrations” would be more sensitive.

Someone like Catherine would be perfect in this role.  If only someone could mute the moron from Montecito .


----------



## Chanbal

The picture says it all!


----------



## mellibelly

Lilliesdaughter said:


> I read that both John Kerry and Caroline Kennedy recused themselves at the last minute.  The implication was that the issue at the palace was the reason.  It is truly sad that the program for climate issues was sacrificed because of the latest brouhaha. I am disappointed in both of them.  If you believe in something you stand up in support.


John Kerry attended. Here he is with Will & Kate


----------



## Chanbal

One more opinion… Thank you Nana!


----------



## 880

mellibelly said:


> John Kerry attended. Here he is with Will & Kate
> 
> View attachment 5664076
> View attachment 5664077


I thought carolyn Kennedy attended also. . . I did read someone had covid


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> I thought carolyn Kennedy attended also. . . I did read someone had covid


I believe it was J Kerry who tested positive for covid. I think C Kennedy attended the event, she was in Boston with her handsome son.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't it that someone forgot to pack the tiara?


I remember it being said at the time.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> ooh look what we have to look forward to… the tears in the trailer were likely on the day the Knauf emails came out, showing MM had lied to the court and H authorized help for Scobie’s book … will we hear their side of that mess ??




Seriously, does she ever, ever, ever stop crying, whining, whinging and (guttural) moaning? 

Retorical question


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I believe it was J Kerry who tested positive for covid. I think C Kennedy attended the event, she was in Boston with her handsome son.


Yes, JKerry had the Covid, but he did attend the award show.  CKennedy met W&K at the JFK library. Her handsome son and beautiful daughter were there, too.  Also, W met JBiden at the JFK library.  



Sharont2305 said:


> I remember it being said at the time.


_The tiara story:
During a Royal tour of Australia in 1985, Diana improvised a tiara by wearing an exquisite Art Deco emerald and diamond choker as forehead adornment, a style statement that caused quite a stir and made headlines all over the world. It was an early glimpse of the rule breaker in Diana._








						How Princess Diana Transformed Her Diamonds
					

Learn More




					www.naturaldiamonds.com
				




_Another version:
Royal biographer Kitty Kelley claimed in her book The Royals that in a rush, Diana tried to put the choker over her head, rather than wait for someone to help her clasp it. When it got stuck and wouldn't go over her nose, Canadian diplomat Victor Chapman convinced her to wear it as a headpiece instead.

'Diana took the necklace and put it over her head rather than wait to have it clasped around her neck. She couldn’t get it over the bridge of her nose,' Kelley wrote. 'Vic roared. "Leave it there," he said, "It’s young and fun, like you".'_








						Princess Diana upset the Queen by wearing this heirloom necklace as a headband
					

The Princess always pushed the envelope when it came to style.




					www.marieclaire.co.uk


----------



## Lilacgal




----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Seriously, does she ever, ever, ever stop crying, whining, whinging and (guttural) moaning?
> 
> Retorical question


Her tone of voice for WHEN THE STAKES ARE SO HIGH ... was so condescending


----------



## Chanbal

Lilacgal said:


>



Kate and William did a fantastic job; I'm not from the UK and I'm proud of them. Though, I don't agree with one of the commentators about they helped to put Boston on the stage. Boston has been on the stage for zillions of years, it's hard to find a city that offers so much. Should I disclose that I'm a Boston lover?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might cry a little the day Camilla decides to wear it out.


I think it will take some time. Camilla seems to have opted for a gracious and discreet approach. She has kids, and she rarely has them on stage. She grew on me.


----------



## Jayne1

xincinsin said:


> My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I remember reading at that time that the person in charge of the wardrobe for that trip had forgotten to pack a matching tiara, so they improvised by using the choker. I remember thinking how nice of Di not to kick up a fuss and how innovative to use the choker like this.


Are talking about the short term fad of wearing a band of something across the forehead?

I don't remember it that way.  I remember that trend lasting for a few years and I also remember reading how the chocker didn’t fit on her neck for some reason so she wore it across the forehead. It was a style she liked during that trend of the moment.


----------



## Jayne1

And this one.


----------



## Chanbal

Should Charles listen to Tom Bower? A very interesting opinion.


_Meghan Markle DICTATING AGENDA, as King Charles URGED to TAKE CONTROL of Harry & Meghan SAGA_​


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> It’s supposedly 6 episodes so if you expect similar viewership patterns as they saw for TW’s 12 podcrashes, The viewership peaked on the first couple and then dropped with each successive episode. I would expect some interest to see what all the fuss is about for the first episode but unless they totally break from their typical modus operandi, the content will be boring, repetitive, and lacking in veracity and centered mostly on TW and her point of view. And we’ve all heard her point of view ad nauseum by now. I’d be very surprised if they managed to generate decent viewership numbers that haven’t been manipulated in some way.


Are they being released one a week or are all the episodes dropping at the same time?


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> And this one.
> 
> View attachment 5664149


LOL, it was the 80s. Headbands were all the rage. Most of us didn’t have access to a headband covered in jewels.

I remember the enormous shoulder pads that were popular. Looks hideous by today’s standards but back then that is what everybody wore.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Are they being released one a week or are all the episodes dropping at the same time?


PageSix said three episodes are going to be released on Dec. 8 and three more will be released on Dec. 15, the date of Katherine’s caroling event or something like that.  These people are a new level of PETTY! 

I don’t see how it can air this Thurs. And Netflix still hasn’t advertised that, I almost wonder if there is some legal battle going on.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe it was just an unfortunate incident and Lady Hussey is solely to blame...but there are a few too many coincidences.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What have you done, Harry. You sold your soul to the devil and caused so much pain to your dying grandparents. I sure hope it was at least the best lay of your life - sorry to be crude but I just can't with him anymore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I think it will take some time. Camilla seems to have opted for a gracious and discreet approach. She has kids, and she rarely has them on stage. She grew on me.



I actually like Camilla and have so for quite a while. I have no problem with her, she wears the big jewels beautifully, but it just will drive home the point The Queen is no longer with us.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


>




Oh, so she brought her Hermes blanket to the set to be bougie?


----------



## rose60610

How laughable that the Markles have to do things that coincide with the dates Will and Kate have an event. If they weren't so pathetic I'd feel embarrassed for them. Spiderman now? Well, they were phenomenally successful movies, so are they desperately trying to tie themselves to things that have been blockbuster successes that they had nothing to do with? The juggler act fell flat, he had to move on to something recognizable. Are they going after the young child audience to increase their number of admirers? Pretty desperate when you hope little kids are capable of producing clicks. But then, they ARE desperate!


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe it was just an unfortunate incident and Lady Hussey is solely to blame...but there are a few too many coincidences.



AND to point out one thing … 
LSH was in the car with QEII for the funeral, during COVID, during HMS Bubble, the people around the Queen were few and had to stay - they could not come and go
LSH was a TREASURED friend if living with the queen during HMS Bubble, LSH would have known what was going on with the Harkles 
AGREE too many coincidences


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> PageSix said three episodes are going to be released on Dec. 8 and three more will be released on Dec. 15, the date of Katherine’s caroling event or something like that.  These people are a new level of PETTY!
> 
> I don’t see how it can air this Thurs. And Netflix still hasn’t advertised that, I almost wonder if there is some legal battle going on.


I am going to go out on a limb and say the timing the show’s release has nothing to do with what the rest of the royal family is doing. On any given day Charles, William, and/or Kate have some event they are attending. Netflix doesn’t care about any of that. They are timing it based on when they can get the highest viewership. I am inclined to think releasing it in December when people will be taking vacation for the holidays and have more time to watch television factored into the decision. It could be as simple as something in the contract said that the show would be aired in 2022 and they are running out of time.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> AND to point out one thing …
> LSH was in the car with QEII for the funeral, during COVID, during HMS Bubble, the people around the Queen were few and had to stay - they could not come and go
> LSH was a TREASURED friend if living with the queen during HMS Bubble, LSH would have known what was going on with the Harkles
> AGREE too many coincidences


I'm convinced that it was a set-up with or without TW's direct participation on it. It certainly smells revenge, and we know that people have lost jobs because of TW. Piers for example…

I wrote TW and not the Harkles, because Hazz despite being as guilty as she is (or even more), he is just a pawn.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> AND to point out one thing …
> LSH was in the car with QEII for the funeral, during COVID, during HMS Bubble, the people around the Queen were few and had to stay - they could not come and go
> LSH was a TREASURED friend if living with the queen during HMS Bubble would have known what was going on with the Harkles
> AGREE too many coincidences


Further Fulanigate hypothesis of mine:
1.Fulani may have tweeted the LSH criticism of her own accord. 
2. BUT, the moment the tweet was on the internet, the sugary Meg bots leaped on it and made the story go VIRAL.
3. WHY make the story go viral? Because the Harkles saw an opportunity to substantiate BRF racism in time for the ripple of hope.

The whole thing might have gone away ignored, if left alone. I find that explanation simple.

But equally possible, the new MM PR apparatus is one nasty piece of work that orchestrated the whole shebang.


----------



## LittleStar88

“Despite distractions elsewhere…”   Buuurrrnnnnnn….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A lot of things said the past few days that are nothing short of amazing and oh so telling.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I am going to go out on a limb and say the timing the show’s release has nothing to do with what the rest of the royal family is doing. On any given day Charles, William, and/or Kate have some event they are attending. Netflix doesn’t care about any of that. They are timing it based on when they can get the highest viewership. I am inclined to think releasing it in December when people will be taking vacation for the holidays and have more time to watch television factored into the decision. It could be as simple as something in the contract said that the show would be aired in 2022 and they are running out of time.


The Harkles or Nefl*x found the timing appropriate enough. Scoobie's words support that. 

I found interesting what it was chosen to show in the promotional clip, particularly “When the stakes are this high,* doesn’t it make more sense to hear our story from us?*”

TW attempted to distance herself from the reality show on a recent interview, but Nefl*x made sure that everyone knows the story is directly from the horse's mouth.


----------



## Sharont2305

LittleStar88 said:


> “Despite distractions elsewhere…”   Buuurrrnnnnnn….
> 
> View attachment 5664264


And this is from a woman that was heavily rumoured to be dating Harry after meeting him at William and Catherine's wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I thought she was wearing green because the evening is about the environment... and I wonder if Kate even thinks about one-upping Meg.
> 
> That necklace is insanely gorgeous, isn't it. You need a long neck too.


I agree with you.  Wardrobe choices are made far in advance along with the jewelry. I don't think she feels the need to compete.  Why would she?


----------



## Chanbal

Oh Gosh! What is Charles waiting for to follow Tom B's advice? I would think the majority of the Brits would support Charles.



*It is understood he and Meghan will make fresh accusations of racism in the docuseries, part of their £110million deal with the streaming giant.*

_A source said: “*Some of the comments made by Harry and Meghan are fiery*.

“If aired, they will be absolutely explosive. The topic of racism is discussed — plus claims that some royals opposed the marriage. *The whole TV project is very driven by Meghan*…

*Royal sources believe the release of the trailer last week was a cynical and deliberate attempt to sabotage Kate and William’s trip to Boston, US, to highlight environmental causes*.

The brothers have barely spoken since Harry and Meghan unloaded to Oprah. At the time the Queen dismissed his claims saying: “Recollections may vary.”

*Charles and William tried to reconcile with California -based Harry. But they were stunned when he leaked their efforts to his friend, CBS News broadcaster **Gayle King*._









						Prince Harry insisted 'those Brits need a lesson' ahead of Oprah interview
					

GLOATING Harry boasted to a pal that the Royal Family would find his Oprah Winfrey interview “quite shocking”. He also piled into his homeland, telling the friend: “Those Brits need to learn a less…




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> Oh, so she brought her Hermes blanket to the set to be bougie?


I want to know what kind of person (a) Gets their picture taken while crying and (b) photoshops said picture to make her _feet_ look normal?
We can only surmise that every pic and video in their documentary has been altered to fit their lying narrative.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


I loved it!  It thought it was pretty cool at the time and different.  I was so impressed that she managed to get it to stay in place!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> All I can think is he is merching Spiderman outfits


He didn't look at the calendar and see that Halloween had passed.  I won't even watch it.  It looks idiotic.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> One more opinion… Thank you Nana!



I read an excellent analysis by an African woman who explained that Ngozi threw together a bunch of prints that she deemed to be "African" and the ensemble in no way resembled ethnic dress from any region of Africa.  She provided a link that was very informative showing the dress from different regions.  She called Ngozi out for being a fraud.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! What is Charles waiting for to follow Tom B's advice? I would think the majority of the Brits would support Charles.
> 
> View attachment 5664304
> 
> *It is understood he and Meghan will make fresh accusations of racism in the docuseries, part of their £110million deal with the streaming giant.*
> 
> _A source said: “*Some of the comments made by Harry and Meghan are fiery*.
> 
> “If aired, they will be absolutely explosive. The topic of racism is discussed — plus claims that some royals opposed the marriage. *The whole TV project is very driven by Meghan*…
> 
> *Royal sources believe the release of the trailer last week was a cynical and deliberate attempt to sabotage Kate and William’s trip to Boston, US, to highlight environmental causes*.
> 
> The brothers have barely spoken since Harry and Meghan unloaded to Oprah. At the time the Queen dismissed his claims saying: “Recollections may vary.”
> 
> *Charles and William tried to reconcile with California -based Harry. But they were stunned when he leaked their efforts to his friend, CBS News broadcaster **Gayle King*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry insisted 'those Brits need a lesson' ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> 
> GLOATING Harry boasted to a pal that the Royal Family would find his Oprah Winfrey interview “quite shocking”. He also piled into his homeland, telling the friend: “Those Brits need to learn a less…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Sometimes I think that is the only reason he married her.  He wanted to shock his family.  How juvenile.  I'm sure some members of the greater family were not in favor of the marriage and that was probably true of his friends as well, and   it may not have had anything to do with race. Certainly the friends just might not have liked her.   The important people were The Queen and Charles and they gave the OK.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I want to know what kind of person (a) Gets their picture taken while crying and (b) photoshops said picture to make her _feet_ look normal?
> We can only surmise that every pic and video in their documentary has been altered to fit their lying narrative.
> 
> View attachment 5664305


I would love someone to suss out that it is a fake Hermes blanket.  That would make my day.


----------



## LittleStar88

Sharont2305 said:


> And this is from a woman that was heavily rumoured to be dating Harry after meeting him at William and Catherine's wedding.



Ooh. I did not know this tidbit! That puts a lot more color to the comment!


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> I want to know what kind of person (a) Gets their picture taken while crying and (b) photoshops said picture to make her _feet_ look normal?
> We can only surmise that every pic and video in their documentary has been altered to fit their lying narrative.
> 
> View attachment 5664305



She should just get surgery for those feet if they bother her so much.

I'm guessing she has a huge amount of insecurity and needs to do these things to make herself appear "better" or "perfect". All it comes off as is pretentious and nouveau riche.

Also - is she really crying or is it a "left eye - GO!" fake cry?


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> He didn't look at the calendar and see that Halloween had passed.  I won't even watch it.  It looks idiotic.



Maybe it's a bedroom roleplay outfit?


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! What is Charles waiting for to follow Tom B's advice? I would think the majority of the Brits would support Charles.
> 
> View attachment 5664304
> 
> *It is understood he and Meghan will make fresh accusations of racism in the docuseries, part of their £110million deal with the streaming giant.*
> 
> _A source said: “*Some of the comments made by Harry and Meghan are fiery*.
> 
> “If aired, they will be absolutely explosive. The topic of racism is discussed — plus claims that some royals opposed the marriage. *The whole TV project is very driven by Meghan*…
> 
> *Royal sources believe the release of the trailer last week was a cynical and deliberate attempt to sabotage Kate and William’s trip to Boston, US, to highlight environmental causes*.
> 
> The brothers have barely spoken since Harry and Meghan unloaded to Oprah. At the time the Queen dismissed his claims saying: “Recollections may vary.”
> 
> *Charles and William tried to reconcile with California -based Harry. But they were stunned when he leaked their efforts to his friend, CBS News broadcaster **Gayle King*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry insisted 'those Brits need a lesson' ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> 
> GLOATING Harry boasted to a pal that the Royal Family would find his Oprah Winfrey interview “quite shocking”. He also piled into his homeland, telling the friend: “Those Brits need to learn a less…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk



Time to cut him loose, remove the titles, and let him sink or swim on his own. If the docuseries turns out to be explosive, I can see no other recourse.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe it's a bedroom roleplay outfit?


Could be, but I think he is probably in some type of animal outfit for that lolololol!  Maybe a chicken?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I wonder if the Troublesome Two understand what's going on. If I were them I'd read the very unflattering accounts in the press all citing royals or events involving royals as a warning and take note. The BRF isn't usually that talkative even if through "sources", and they have dirt that will pulverize at least one of these two. Maybe I wouldn't chance it and tone down my impertinence a notch, but that's just me.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Could be, but I think he is probably in some type of animal outfit for that lolololol!  Maybe a chicken?



Anything, so long as he is not talking. His voice is like nails down a chalkboard to me.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if the Troublesome Two understand what's going on. If I were them I'd read the very unflattering accounts in the press all citing royals or events involving royals as a warning and take note. The BRF isn't usually that talkative even if through "sources", and they have dirt that will pulverize at least one of these two. Maybe I wouldn't chance it and tone down my impertinence a notch, but that's just me.



My guess is they surround themselves with YES people and take the criticism as racism or blatant hate. Living in this kind of bubble is dangerous when one's career and future relies upon reputation. 

Harry is dim and TW is a raging, unhinged narcissist. Put them together and...


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Time to cut him loose, remove the titles, and let him sink or swim on his own. If the docuseries turns out to be explosive, I can see no other recourse.


Sadly, I don't think the titles will ever be removed.  An approach similar to the bill for the Counselors of State will take place.  He will be told not to use the title of the Dukedom whilst he is living "overseas" the same way he was told not to use the HRH.  The HRH was not removed, it was "tabled" so to speak.  There is nothing that can be done about the princely title since he was born with it. Could it be suggested that not be used as well?  I suppose it could depending on how p*ssed off his father is after the series and the book come out.  He could be told only to use titles when physically in the UK.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> Anything, so long as he is not talking. His voice is like nails down a chalkboard to me.


Her voice is like that for me!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM11

bag-mania said:


> Netflix has made a fortune with shows like Tiger King. They exist to make money. Whether the people watching love the Harkles or hate them, Netflix still wins.


The question is will they. I said that after the first episode is full of boring photos, Hermes blankets and pointless statements (lies) like the one about stakes, people will switch it off. As far as I know (and I’m not following Netflix business model as I found the context extremely uninteresting 2-3 years ago and gave up so I might be wrong), to cover $100m of their fees, Netflix would have to either gain incremental subscribers of that size or keep existing subscribers incrementally linked to that show (and let’s here be generous and express it as LTV, not one off subscription). I wish Netflix luck. There is a chance a lot of people will watch the show out of curiosity but again, it has to be incremental to make the money for Netflix- as you said. As far as I remember, there were lay offs in Netflix due to not meeting the financial goals.


----------



## LittleStar88

gracekelly said:


> Sadly, I don't think the titles will ever be removed.  An approach similar to the bill for the Counselors of State will take place.  He will be told not to use the title of the Dukedom whilst he is living "overseas" the same way he was told not to use the HRH.  The HRH was not removed, it was "tabled" so to speak.  There is nothing that can be done about the princely title since he was born with it. Could it be suggested that not be used as well?  I suppose it could depending on how p*ssed off his father is after the series and the book come out.  He could be told only to use titles when physically in the UK.



That's too bad. Rather than treating it as an honor and privilege, he is sh!tting all over it.

I feel bad for Charles. Despite it all, Harry is still his son and I'm sure he's feeling stuck between a real rock and a hard place so to speak.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if the Troublesome Two understand what's going on. If I were them I'd read the very unflattering accounts in the press all citing royals or events involving royals as a warning and take note. The BRF isn't usually that talkative even if through "sources", and they have dirt that will pulverize at least one of these two. Maybe I wouldn't chance it and tone down my impertinence a notch, but that's just me.


They don't get it.  They look at the criticism and write if off as racist and that people don't understand them and their motives.  Harry may actually think he is living on a higher plane than the rest of us, but she is just in it for the money.  All her humanitarian, social activist etc is just a big load of BS to make money.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> I want to know what kind of person (a) Gets their picture taken while crying and (b) photoshops said picture to make her _feet_ look normal?
> We can only surmise that every pic and video in their documentary has been altered to fit their lying narrative.
> 
> View attachment 5664305



She's an actress 
She's an actress
She's an actress


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Time to cut him loose, remove the titles, and let him sink or swim on his own. If the docuseries turns out to be explosive, I can see no other recourse.



The gruesome twosome will keep going with this clumsy, crazy narrative until he does, so King Charles may as well do it NOW.


----------



## EmilyM11

LittleStar88 said:


> That's too bad. Rather than treating it as an honor and privilege, he is sh!tting all over it.
> 
> I feel bad for Charles. Despite it all, Harry is still his son and I'm sure he's feeling stuck between a real rock and a hard place so to speak.


It must be disappointing for every sensible father to have a son who is not able to get education when money is there , a job, support his own family without bank of dad and of course **** on his family including ailing grandparents.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> He didn't look at the calendar and see that Halloween had passed.  I won't even watch it.  It looks idiotic.


I made the unfortunate mistake of clicking on it when I meant to click on something else on a website.  YET AGAIN, he's telling kids of fallen soldiers how it's "ok to have fun" even if your parent is no longer with you.
FFS, does he have any iota of anything to offer besides, "My mum died, my mum died, my mum died...wah wah wah"  It's so old that the mold has mold.


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> Maybe it's a bedroom roleplay outfit?


If it is, Haz, I'd recommend using an outfit that doesn't highlight the fact that, ahem, you are now a eunuch!


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> She's an actress
> She's an actress
> She's an actress


A $hitty one 
A $hitty one 
A $hitty one


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> She's an actress
> She's an actress
> She's an actress



An "actress".


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> An "actress".


She's quite equipped at scenes which involve BJs, ripping off her clothes to grill a burger, that sort of thing.
She's probably drawing on personal experiences on the yachts and elsewhere.


----------



## bag-mania

EmilyM111 said:


> The question is will they. I said that after the first episode is full of boring photos, Hermes blankets and pointless statements (lies) like the one about stakes, people will switch it off. As far as I know (and I’m not following Netflix business model as I found the context extremely uninteresting 2-3 years ago and gave up so I might be wrong), to cover $100m of their fees, Netflix would have to either gain incremental subscribers of that size or keep existing subscribers incrementally linked to that show (and let’s here be generous and express it as LTV, not one off subscription). I wish Netflix luck. There is a chance a lot of people will watch the show out of curiosity but again, it has to be incremental to make the money for Netflix- as you said. As far as I remember, there were lay offs in Netflix due to not meeting the financial goals.


The press can be counted on to make a big fuss when the show airs which will spur viewership. As with the podcast, episodes will be analyzed and reviewed, that will help them as well.


----------



## Annawakes

How much y’all wanna bet that when the show is released it will be listed in the “Top Ten” suggestions….if not the #1 suggestion when one logs in to Nutflix?


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> She's quite equipped at scenes which involve BJs, ripping off her clothes to grill a burger, that sort of thing.
> She's probably drawing on personal experiences on the yachts and elsewhere.


I just spit out my tea!


----------



## gracekelly

Memo to Harry and Meghan:  See the emoji


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The press can be counted on to make a big fuss when the show airs which will spur viewership. As with the podcast, episodes will be analyzed and reviewed, that will help them as well.


If they are really clever, they will save the best family trashing and insulting to the very beginning and  end of each episode during  for the first, middle and last episode.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> She's quite equipped at scenes which involve BJs, ripping off her clothes to grill a burger, that sort of thing.
> She's probably drawing on personal experiences on the yachts and elsewhere.



I thought she was awful in those (too)


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> If they are really clever, they will save the best family trashing and insulting to the very beginning and  end of each episode during  for the first, middle and last episode.



Don't give them ideas


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

mellibelly said:


> John Kerry attended. Here he is with Will & Kate
> 
> View attachment 5664076
> View attachment 5664077


Thank you


----------



## 880

gracekelly said:


> Sadly, I don't think the titles will ever be removed.  An approach similar to the bill for the Counselors of State will take place.  He will be told not to use the title of the Dukedom whilst he is living "overseas" the same way he was told not to use the HRH.  The HRH was not removed, it was "tabled" so to speak.  There is nothing that can be done about the princely title since he was born with it. Could it be suggested that not be used as well?  I suppose it could depending on how p*ssed off his father is after the series and the book come out.  He could be told only to use titles when physically in the UK.


I thought I read something re the method by which KC could remove the princely titles
(similar to what the queen did to her grandchilden in Belgium) 
sorry I don’t have the link


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> If they are really clever, they will save the best family trashing and insulting to the very beginning and  end of each episode during  for the first, middle and last episode.


Since they portray themselves as victims, I bet they will have others doing the family trashing for them.


----------



## Debbini

I wish I had Netflix, so I could reach out and cancel it about right now.


----------



## gracekelly

Debbini said:


> I wish I had Netflix, so I could reach out and cancel it about right now.


The better thing would be to get a free week out of them and then cancel before they can charge you.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> *She should just get surgery for those feet if t*hey bother her so much.
> 
> I'm guessing she has a huge amount of insecurity and needs to do these things to make herself appear "better" or "perfect". All it comes off as is pretentious and nouveau riche.
> 
> Also - is she really crying or is it a "left eye - GO!" fake cry?


Why have surgery when you have photoshop?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Why have surgery when you have photoshop?


It certainly is cheaper and if you don't like the way it came out you can change it immediately lol!


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> She should just get surgery for those feet if they bother her so much.
> 
> I'm guessing she has a huge amount of insecurity and needs to do these things to make herself appear "better" or "perfect". All it comes off as is pretentious and nouveau riche.
> 
> Also - is she really crying or is it a "left eye - GO!" fake cry?


Someone - BLG ? - said she may be laughing - plausible if you look at jaw muscles


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> Why have surgery when you have photoshop?


Because she can’t control all the photos taken of her by people other than her own team of photographers which is why photos continue to pop up showing what her feet really look like. Since she keeps having work done to change her nose and other parts of her face, why not get her feet fixed as well since she‘s apparently self-conscious about how her feet currently look.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> She's an actress
> She's an actress
> She's an actress


Yes, and more than once when looking at a picture I couldn’t tell if it was real life or a clip from a TV show, including the oral sex scene she did in 2008 on Beverly Hills 90210. Always playing a part, but incapable of one based on compassion, caring or Class because she has no inner resources to draw from.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! What is Charles waiting for to follow Tom B's advice? I would think the majority of the Brits would support Charles.
> 
> View attachment 5664304
> 
> *It is understood he and Meghan will make fresh accusations of racism in the docuseries, part of their £110million deal with the streaming giant.*
> 
> _A source said: “*Some of the comments made by Harry and Meghan are fiery*.
> 
> “If aired, they will be absolutely explosive. The topic of racism is discussed — plus claims that some royals opposed the marriage. *The whole TV project is very driven by Meghan*…
> 
> *Royal sources believe the release of the trailer last week was a cynical and deliberate attempt to sabotage Kate and William’s trip to Boston, US, to highlight environmental causes*.
> 
> The brothers have barely spoken since Harry and Meghan unloaded to Oprah. At the time the Queen dismissed his claims saying: “Recollections may vary.”
> 
> *Charles and William tried to reconcile with California -based Harry. But they were stunned when he leaked their efforts to his friend, CBS News broadcaster **Gayle King*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry insisted 'those Brits need a lesson' ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> 
> GLOATING Harry boasted to a pal that the Royal Family would find his Oprah Winfrey interview “quite shocking”. He also piled into his homeland, telling the friend: “Those Brits need to learn a less…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


So immature, so vindictive, so dim in how the world really works.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> The better thing would be to get a free week out of them and then cancel before they can charge you.


Ha! I should!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I read an excellent analysis by an African woman who explained that Ngozi threw together a bunch of prints that she deemed to be "African" and the ensemble in no way resembled ethnic dress from any region of Africa.  She provided a link that was very informative showing the dress from different regions.  She called Ngozi out for being a fraud.


Is she now being investigated for ripping off her “charity”?


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> They don't get it.  They look at the criticism and write if off as racist and that people don't understand them and their motives.  Harry may actually think he is living on a higher plane than the rest of us, but she is just in it for the money.  All her humanitarian, social activist etc is just a big load of BS to make money.


When NFlix renegotiates the money and KCIII removes titles, releases the dirt, etc. and no one answers their calls, they may actually realize it was never about racism. They are simply unlikeable because they lie.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Sadly, I don't think the titles will ever be removed.  An approach similar to the bill for the Counselors of State will take place.  He will be told not to use the title of the Dukedom whilst he is living "overseas" the same way he was told not to use the HRH.  The HRH was not removed, it was "tabled" so to speak.  There is nothing that can be done about the princely title since he was born with it. Could it be suggested that not be used as well?  I suppose it could depending on how p*ssed off his father is after the series and the book come out.  He could be told only to use titles when physically in the UK.


Agree, a removal will be too public, too noisy.  Better move will be for KCIII to rewrite his will, cut off funds [no duchy, no frogmore, no land at all, etc.], cut off businesses who give Hazz money, no access to anything.  Similar to Andi’s removal only much worse. Once the King sends forth the word that no one in the realm should listen to Hazz or do business, it’s game over for H&M.  Slow and steady, the BRF wins.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Annawakes said:


> How much y’all wanna bet that when the show is released it will be listed in the “Top Ten” suggestions….if not the #1 suggestion when one logs in to Nutflix?


That could be part of the NoFlix agreement.  Legally and publicly, NoFlix will do its part to promote the s$its$ow.  Behind the scenes, maybe the entire s$its$ow gets released to YouTube.  Nobody knows how that could happen, but in these strange times, strange things happen.


----------



## marietouchet

Lite reading - H has a hereditary peerage - Sussex - the monarch cannot remove it , only Parliament can. Nor can H disclaim it- renounce.
So, KC3 can’t do it
I read somewhere there is legislation - currently under discussion in the House of Lords - to change this. So, Parliament is on it. They likely got started during lifetime of the Queen , started under Boris J ? A slow process






__





						Loading…
					





					lordslibrary.parliament.uk


----------



## lulu212121

marietouchet said:


> Someone - BLG ? - said she may be laughing - plausible if you look at jaw muscles


That's what I see when looking at it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Lite reading - H has a hereditary peerage - Sussex - the monarch cannot remove it , only Parliament can
> So, KC3 can’t do it
> I read somewhere there is legislation - currently under discussion in the House of Lords - to change this. So, Parliament is on it. They likely got started during lifetime of the Queen , started under Boris J ? A slow process
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lordslibrary.parliament.uk


Slow is ok. Slow means daily drips of H&M’s dirt.   BP’s future is secure.


----------



## Freak4Coach

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I wonder if the Troublesome Two understand what's going on. If I were them I'd read the very unflattering accounts in the press all citing royals or events involving royals as a warning and take note. The BRF isn't usually that talkative even if through "sources", and they have dirt that will pulverize at least one of these two. Maybe I wouldn't chance it and tone down my impertinence a notch, but that's just me.



The Terrible Two believe the BRF will never release any dirt. Although they’re both narcissistic enough to think there isn’t any dirt to release. Always the victim, always justified. In their heads anyway…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Freak4Coach said:


> The Terrible Two believe the BRF will never release any dirt. Although they’re both narcissistic enough to think there isn’t any dirt to release. Always the victim, always justified. In their heads anyway…


Time is on the monarch’s side.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What have you done, Harry. You sold your soul to the devil and caused so much pain to your dying grandparents. I sure hope it was at least the best lay of your life - sorry to be crude but I just can't with him anymore.



Well, there is ample evidence that she practiced her bedsheet skills with at least three other men before hooking the spare.

And Sparry seems to see Brits as the "other" now, so he identified as American?


Chanbal said:


> Oh Gosh! What is Charles waiting for to follow Tom B's advice? I would think the majority of the Brits would support Charles.
> 
> View attachment 5664304
> 
> *It is understood he and Meghan will make fresh accusations of racism in the docuseries, part of their £110million deal with the streaming giant.*
> 
> _A source said: “*Some of the comments made by Harry and Meghan are fiery*.
> 
> “If aired, they will be absolutely explosive. The topic of racism is discussed — plus claims that some royals opposed the marriage. *The whole TV project is very driven by Meghan*…
> 
> *Royal sources believe the release of the trailer last week was a cynical and deliberate attempt to sabotage Kate and William’s trip to Boston, US, to highlight environmental causes*.
> 
> The brothers have barely spoken since Harry and Meghan unloaded to Oprah. At the time the Queen dismissed his claims saying: “Recollections may vary.”
> 
> *Charles and William tried to reconcile with California -based Harry. But they were stunned when he leaked their efforts to his friend, CBS News broadcaster **Gayle King*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry insisted 'those Brits need a lesson' ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> 
> GLOATING Harry boasted to a pal that the Royal Family would find his Oprah Winfrey interview “quite shocking”. He also piled into his homeland, telling the friend: “Those Brits need to learn a less…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


Some royals opposed the marriage?  Someone should tell her that this is not newsworthy. I'd wager that in many a marital union, someone in one or the other family opposed it. She is NOT special. And if they had doubts about a woman in her 30s tittering and acting coy like she was 18, I would not fault them. Nothing to do with her race and plenty to do with her character and behaviour.


----------



## youngster

With these two, I just get the overwhelming impression of a couple of toddlers throwing a temper tantrum. _Look at us, look at us, I'll make you look at us, I'll make you pay attention to us._  That's the feeling I get from their upcoming series and book.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time is on the monarch’s side.




The lyrics are actually quite appropriate in regards to these idiots, except I hope he doesn't take them back!


Lyrics

Time is on my side
Yes, it is
Time is on my side
Yes, it is
Now you always say that you want to be free
But you'll come running back
(Said you would baby)
You'll come running back
(I said so many times before)
You'll come running back to me
Oh, time is on my side
Yes, it is
Time is on my side
Yes, it is
You're searching for good times
But just wait and see
You'll come running back
(I won't have to worry no more)
You'll come running back
(Spend the rest of my life with you, baby)
You'll come running back to me
Go ahead, go ahead and light up the town
And baby, do everything your heart desires
Remember, I'll always be around
And I know, I know
Like I told you so many times before
You're gonna come back, baby
'Cause I know
You're gonna come back knocking
Yeah, knocking right on my door
Yes, yes!
Well, time is on my side
Yes, it is
Time is on my side
Yes, it is
'Cause I got the real love
The kind that you need
You'll come running back
(Said, you would, baby)
You'll come running back
(I always said, you would)
You'll come running back to me
Yes, time, time, time is on my side
Yes, it is
Time, time, time is on my side
Yes, it is
Oh, time, time, time is on my side
Yes, it is
I said, "Time, time, time is on my side"
Yes, it is
Oh, time, time, time is on my side
Yeah, time, time, time is on my side
Source: Musixmatch
Songwriters: Jerry Ragovoy
Time Is on My Side lyrics © Unichappell Music Inc., Tro Essex Music Ltd


----------



## purseinsanity

xincinsin said:


> Well, there is ample evidence that she practiced her bedsheet skills with at least three other men before hooking the spare.
> 
> And Sparry seems to see Brits as the "other" now, so he identified as American?
> 
> Some royals opposed the marriage?  Someone should tell her that this is not newsworthy. I'd wager that in many a marital union, someone in one or the other family opposed it. She is NOT special. And if they had doubts about a woman in her 30s tittering and acting coy like she was 18, I would not fault them. Nothing to do with her race and plenty to do with her character and behaviour.


Exactly.  Especially if they dug up even a fraction of her dirt, I wouldn't want my loved one marrying a POS like that, regardless of what color they are!


----------



## pukasonqo

Double post


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pukasonqo

Unseen photos and subtle references: 10 details you missed in Netflix's Harry & Meghan trailer.
					

The documentary is said to premiere next week.




					www.mamamia.com.au
				




The comments are interesting, mamamia is Oz based


----------



## LittleStar88

Well, I don’t think we need to cancel Netflix in protest. Feedback seems to be overwhelmingly unfavorable. So it will flop with or without our help.

Which is good because Emily In Paris comes back in 12/21 and I’m not missing that.


----------



## rose60610

When is all the BS going to end? If Charles cuts them off completely (one hopes) they have nothing to go on. They'd be forced to invent some new material. Diana is dead. We get it. Harry's grandma was Queen. We get it. Harry is a prince. We get it. They flame the BRF over and over. Yawn. They're always victims. Yawn yawn yawn. 41 year old jerk and 38 year old wimp making a living out of whining. Only in America! But for how long?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> When NFlix renegotiates the money and KCIII removes titles, releases the dirt, etc. and no one answers their calls, *they may actually realize it was never about racism.* They are simply unlikeable because they lie.


They know it was not about racism, but it's their best card imo.


----------



## Chanbal

Valid point!


----------



## Chanbal

This promises to be entertaining.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Since they portray themselves as victims, I bet they will have others doing the family trashing for them.


That would be a smart move. She can dig up a baker's dozen of money-hungry friends. Not sure whom he can call on since she has cut him off from friends and family. Come to think of it, it will be interesting to know who they count as family now. Netflix did promise us "family", didn't it?


DoggieBags said:


> Because she can’t control all the photos taken of her by people other than her own team of photographers which is why photos continue to pop up showing what her feet really look like. Since she keeps having work done to change her nose and other parts of her face, why not get her feet fixed as well since she‘s apparently self-conscious about how her feet currently look.


Didn't she already have bunion surgery? I thought it was in the news while they were still working royals.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Is she now being investigated for ripping off her “charity”?


I read that she is the only person drawing wages, and it is rather a large sum.


----------



## Chanbal

Having fun with the Aussies… 


_If Prince Harry ‘didn’t have royal connections’ he’d be ‘stacking shelves in Walmart’_​

*‘Nauseating’: Teaser for Harry and Meghan doco pushes ‘victimhood’ narrative*


----------



## Chanbal

The creativity out there is amazing


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


> This promises to be entertaining.




She is getting roasted


----------



## lanasyogamama

Tonight I heard a guy at the table behind me in a restaurant say to someone  “but where are you REALLY from?” I was laughing to myself.


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5664503


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5664503



They do manage to run through employees, don't they? No one ever sticks around very long.


----------



## shiba

I hate to give them clicks but this was published as part of their netfli* pr....notice the left eye
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/15-intimate-photos-prince-harry-191015584.html


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

It must not have ended well, as usual, if OS has to get ahead of it by releasing a statement about it.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> It must not have ended well, as usual, if OS has to get ahead of it by releasing a statement about it.


No doubt the outgoing has signed a comprehensive and financially punitive NDA. Unlike the Gutteral One whose mouth flaps with the wind. Looking forward to the non-productivity of the Arghwell entertainment empire now that it is under the Harkle leadership.


----------



## Hyacinth

gracekelly said:


> The better thing would be to get a free week out of them and then cancel before they can charge you.



According to Nutflix's website and Google, they don't have any free trial programs, at least in the US.

I thought about doing the same thing.


----------



## Hyacinth

xincinsin said:


> Well, there is ample evidence that she practiced her bedsheet skills with at least three other men before hooking the spare.
> 
> *And Sparry seems to see Brits as the "other" now, so he identified as American?*



We don't want him. We already have more than enough lying, greedy, arrogant, brainless, power-hungry arseholes of our own.


----------



## gracekelly

Hyacinth said:


> We don't want him. We already have more than enough lying, greedy, arrogant, brainless, power-hungry arseholes of our own.


We don’t want him either. I think he should look into citizenship in Chunga Changa.


----------



## xincinsin

Hyacinth said:


> We don't want him. We already have more than enough lying, greedy, arrogant, brainless, power-hungry arseholes of our own.


But, but... he married a lying greedy arrogant brainless power-hungry a*sehole! That gives him the right to be internationally idiotic!


----------



## Chanbal

Trailer and Spider-Man in the same article…   


_Members of the Netflix scientific advisory group complained to the company about the trailer for the documentary. Christiana Figueres, a former UN climate chief who chairs the Earthshot board and sits on the Netflix advisory group, said she was disappointed. Tom Rivett-Carnac, a former UN political strategist who sits on the Netflix advisory group and advises the Earthshot team, complained to the leadership of the streaming service.

Figueres, who was the architect of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, said: “Netflix has been a leader on producing valuable content to educate on environmental issues. It is therefore disappointing that they air negative messages on the very same day as the Earthshot Prize.”
Rivett-Carnac said: “The remarkable finalists and winners of the Earthshot Prize are changing the world. They deserve all attention and recognition so the timing of this release from Netflix, a sustainability content leader, is profoundly disappointing.”

According to the Netflix website, it formed its independent scientific advisory group to “volunteer their time to counsel and provoke us”_.

_Prince Harry appeared yesterday dressed up as Spider-Man in a video message to bereaved military children._



_Netflix declined to comment.




			archive.ph
		

_


----------



## EmilyM11

bag-mania said:


> The press can be counted on to make a big fuss when the show airs which will spur viewership. As with the podcast, episodes will be analyzed and reviewed, that will help them as well.


Viewership yes, highly likely. I’m still not convinced Netflix will break even on this (assuming they really paid or will pay them $100m). As far as I know it’s not a platform serving ads so they can’t link great hype to max out on ads.
It’s EOT from my side as Netflix will not share results of increased subscriptions linked to this show with us so I can only speculate. 

My hope is that Netflix doesn’t make enough money on this and combined with Spotify podcast reception, it will stop them from getting lucrative deals (and if this is combined with KC3 cutting them off…). Maybe they would go to actual work lol.


----------



## rose60610

Reports say that Will and Kate got booed when they attended the Celtics game. Let's send Haz and Claw to a Celtics game and see what reception THEY get.

Of course Harry plays Spidey Man, he uses little children to suck more attention about his own mother's death and how HE suffered. Suuuuuure, come on, it's all about the money grubbing duo, not the kids, not Diana. Sorry your mother was killed, Harry, but leveraging children to promote yourself and your slimy wife is quite beyond the pale.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hyacinth said:


> We don't want him. We already have more than enough lying, greedy, arrogant, brainless, power-hungry arseholes of our own.


Then he will be paying taxes here.  Now, does his income include the King’s duchy income?


----------



## Chanbal

I never thought that I would be following the Harkles Soap Opera, it's so surreal. I'm speechless but not that speechless… 

_The Prince and Princess of Wales were 'surprised but not that surprised' that the advertisement was released during their high-profile visit to the US, threatening to overshadow it, insiders added_









						Harry & Meghan's Netflix documentary will 'go to war with the public'
					

Meghan and Harry's upcoming Netflix documentary may criticise the Royal family and even the public over the way the couple feel they have been treated.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I never thought that I would be following the Harkles Soap Opera, it's so surreal. I'm speechless but not that speechless…
> 
> _The Prince and Princess of Wales were 'surprised but not that surprised' that the advertisement was released during their high-profile visit to the US, threatening to overshadow it, insiders added_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan's Netflix documentary will 'go to war with the public'
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry's upcoming Netflix documentary may criticise the Royal family and even the public over the way the couple feel they have been treated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So they are attacking the BRF as well as the public, presumably only the UK public, since they want to promote the impression that the rest of the world loves their lies. You know, I have 2 left feet, but I think I will promise to dance in the streets just like the mysterious South Africans, one dance for every step of the Harkles' tumble into debt and oblivion.


----------



## EmilyM11

xincinsin said:


> So they are attacking the BRF as well as the public, presumably only the UK public, since they want to promote the impression that the rest of the world loves their lies. You know, I have 2 left feet, but I think I will promise to dance in the streets just like the mysterious South Africans, one dance for every step of the Harkles' tumble into debt and oblivion.


I'm wondering whether they are okay, like you know - mentally okay. What does British public have to do with this ****? My taxes paid their wedding, does this make me a racist or what. He needs to stop taking/drinking/smoking whatever he is taking.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Having fun with the Aussies…
> 
> 
> _If Prince Harry ‘didn’t have royal connections’ he’d be ‘stacking shelves in Walmart’_​
> 
> *‘Nauseating’: Teaser for Harry and Meghan doco pushes ‘victimhood’ narrative*



I love the Aussies


----------



## CarryOn2020

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm wondering whether they are okay, like you know - mentally okay. What does British public have to do with this ****? My taxes paid their wedding, does this make me a racist or what. He needs to stop taking/drinking/smoking whatever he is taking.


Safe bet they are most definitely not ok.  Hazzi is prancing around in that SpiderMan costume. Their tippytop advisor left. 
Not ok imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Trailer and Spider-Man in the same article…
> View attachment 5664520
> 
> _Members of the Netflix scientific advisory group complained to the company about the trailer for the documentary. Christiana Figueres, a former UN climate chief who chairs the Earthshot board and sits on the Netflix advisory group, said she was disappointed. Tom Rivett-Carnac, a former UN political strategist who sits on the Netflix advisory group and advises the Earthshot team, complained to the leadership of the streaming service.
> 
> Figueres, who was the architect of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, said: “Netflix has been a leader on producing valuable content to educate on environmental issues. It is therefore disappointing that they air negative messages on the very same day as the Earthshot Prize.”
> Rivett-Carnac said: “The remarkable finalists and winners of the Earthshot Prize are changing the world. They deserve all attention and recognition so the timing of this release from Netflix, a sustainability content leader, is profoundly disappointing.”
> 
> According to the Netflix website, it formed its independent scientific advisory group to “volunteer their time to counsel and provoke us”_.
> 
> _Prince Harry appeared yesterday dressed up as Spider-Man in a video message to bereaved military children._
> View attachment 5664521
> 
> 
> _Netflix declined to comment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> _


These people are on the Earthshot board AND are advisers to Netflix??  Say what?


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> The BLG went through every photo identifying timeframe and location as best he could
> In particular, he called out the snap in the Cathedral where Catherine is glaring at something (not the Harkles) , an unattractive shot plopped arbitarily in the middle of trailer for no apparent reason , other than to make C look bad
> 
> PS oh dear .. trying to be respectful and call the PoW by something other than nickname , but with my crummy typing, use of the first initial is a great help, THERE ARE TOO MANY Cs now, Charles, Camilla, Catherine, I may have to go back to Kate out of necessity lol


Kate is  the normal abbreviation of her name why would it be disrespectful? It’s like Will or Harry indeed.


sdkitty said:


> so the WIFE wanted that choker?  I wasn't aware of that - although who wouldn't?
> Hollywood actress or not, she cannot look as good as Kate in clothes


I mean that’s like comparing a donkey to a race horse. One can never be the other.
Normally I even prefer donkeys to horses but I don’t think this one is getting into the sanctuary - those mean beady eyes are a giveaway.





bag-mania said:


> Netflix has made a fortune with shows like Tiger King. They exist to make money. Whether the people watching love the Harkles or hate them, Netflix still wins.


Yes but tiger king also had a compelling mystery and unique characters. What do H&M have which isn’t already known or a vague corporate platitude to begin with? They aren’t going to tell us anything new or scandalous. they didn’t even give a name to Oprah.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I can think of lots of other reasons, _none _printable here.
> 
> So, why does he name Charlotte and George?  Can’t he name his own children?  Strong negative vibes from the toxic one, the misfit, the spare.


I think it’s some kind of  charity/team video - I don’t think he means his relatives. 


Chanbal said:


> Father Calvin Robinson on an 'attack to an elderly woman'! Views are changing as people continue thinking about what really happened between NF and SH.






880 said:


> Agree with you @100%. But, in case other members are fans of his, I would say that IMO
> his conclusion to defend a white person would be set in stone regardless of any fact pattern to the contrary
> 
> I don’t know anything about Father Calvin Robinson


. I will say 2 things one that 1. He is bound to prefer the BRF as a high Anglican because they are his religious leaders and that is his vocation and 2. This is kind of testament to how race and class are different in U.K. to America. Ultimately to someone with his values he will admire The class system in general, hyper specific ultra Tory, high Anglican values and the preservation of tradition and will be less inclined to ideas of black solidarity.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, JKerry had the Covid, but he did attend the award show.  CKennedy met W&K at the JFK library. Her handsome son and beautiful daughter were there, too.  Also, W met JBiden at the JFK library.
> 
> 
> _The tiara story:
> During a Royal tour of Australia in 1985, Diana improvised a tiara by wearing an exquisite Art Deco emerald and diamond choker as forehead adornment, a style statement that caused quite a stir and made headlines all over the world. It was an early glimpse of the rule breaker in Diana._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How Princess Diana Transformed Her Diamonds
> 
> 
> Learn More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.naturaldiamonds.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Another version:
> Royal biographer Kitty Kelley claimed in her book The Royals that in a rush, Diana tried to put the choker over her head, rather than wait for someone to help her clasp it. When it got stuck and wouldn't go over her nose, Canadian diplomat Victor Chapman convinced her to wear it as a headpiece instead.
> 
> 'Diana took the necklace and put it over her head rather than wait to have it clasped around her neck. She couldn’t get it over the bridge of her nose,' Kelley wrote. 'Vic roared. "Leave it there," he said, "It’s young and fun, like you".'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana upset the Queen by wearing this heirloom necklace as a headband
> 
> 
> The Princess always pushed the envelope when it came to style.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.marieclaire.co.uk


Essentially it’s about being edgy and she was just conservative enough in her edginess for a good while.


Lilacgal said:


>



‘Only royalty can do that’ - I think I just died from second hand embarrassment.
It is great it was a success or whatever- I’m sure climate change is surely solved by this award ceremony  but don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, USA, this is one of the things you’ve gotten right.


----------



## jelliedfeels

marietouchet said:


> AND to point out one thing …
> LSH was in the car with QEII for the funeral, during COVID, during HMS Bubble, the people around the Queen were few and had to stay - they could not come and go
> LSH was a TREASURED friend if living with the queen during HMS Bubble, LSH would have known what was going on with the Harkles
> AGREE too many coincidences


I know I’ve already said this but it does sound like Lady S was an old family friend and she’s a pretty old lady in general….
AND YET the BRF still immediately took her resignation and closed the door without a word in her defence. No one is worried about the paparazzi outside her house or her ‘mental health’ because she needs to be made an example of because she allegedly said something racially gauche and of course there’s never been another case of a royal being obviously racist and getting away Scot free….







Sharont2305 said:


> And this is from a woman that was heavily rumoured to be dating Harry after meeting him at William and Catherine's wedding.


Can you imagine if he had married her and this thread was about her cheating on him with that guy from 1 direction like she did Ed sheeran?
What a different world!

She’s weirdly like a cross between Diana & Camilla looks wise though so maybe that was too incestuous even for H.


Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5664304
> 
> *It is understood he and Meghan will make fresh accusations of racism in the docuseries, part of their £110million deal with the streaming giant.*
> 
> _A source said: “*Some of the comments made by Harry and Meghan are fiery*.
> 
> “If aired, they will be absolutely explosive. The topic of racism is discussed — plus claims that some royals opposed the marriage. *The whole TV project is very driven by Meghan*…
> 
> *Royal sources believe the release of the trailer last week was a cynical and deliberate attempt to sabotage Kate and William’s trip to Boston, US, to highlight environmental causes*.
> 
> The brothers have barely spoken since Harry and Meghan unloaded to Oprah. At the time the Queen dismissed his claims saying: “Recollections may vary.”
> 
> *Charles and William tried to reconcile with California -based Harry. But they were stunned when he leaked their efforts to his friend, CBS News broadcaster **Gayle King*._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry insisted 'those Brits need a lesson' ahead of Oprah interview
> 
> 
> GLOATING Harry boasted to a pal that the Royal Family would find his Oprah Winfrey interview “quite shocking”. He also piled into his homeland, telling the friend: “Those Brits need to learn a less…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk


This isn’t news to anyone. Loads of royals, including Will, were loudly rumoured to oppose marriage at time (Evidently it was not unreasonable they felt this way.)
but they still spent millions on that sham. 

I mean aside from anything else most aristocrats are desperate to marry within their own class- but try as they might they just couldn’t find any posh girl willing to get into bed with H so they decided to go with this new ‘marketing opportunity’


Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5664305


Well they already had to photoshop out the horns and talons so why not smooth out the corns and bunions?


----------



## xincinsin

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm wondering whether they are okay, like you know - mentally okay. What does British public have to do with this ****? My taxes paid their wedding, does this make me a racist or what. He needs to stop taking/drinking/smoking whatever he is taking.


Disclaimer: I don't know Zed personally but I sure hope to meet her one day, hopefully as an interviewer  yes, my Ripple of Hope! So the following is only my opinion based on my unfortunate history with narcs.

I believe Harry trusts his wife completely, to the point where he has shut off any other viewpoint. And he trusts her even if he sometimes knows the facts don't correlate with what she is telling him. Part of it has to do with her constant refrain of victimhood, part of it has to do with his own self-image as her saviour and protector, but most of it has to do with his own sense of inferiority. She is telling him what he wants to hear: you are great, you are mistreated, you deserve more, you are a victim too, people just don't understand you, it's so unfair. He has invested years of his life now into her version of events. If he doesn't double-down and support her "truth", his castle in the air comes crashing down and his ego cannot afford to face failure.

I believe Zed is a stereotypical (archetypal ) narc. Looking at how early some of those trailer photos are and how staged they appear, I would say she was planning the half-in/half-out option the moment she realized that her frog prince was financially dependent on the Bank of Dad, and that she was honest-to-god expected to work for the family. You can tell from her current productivity that her so-called Cali work ethic probably has its roots in Doria sitting on the lawn getting stoned while Thomas brings home the bread and bacon. She was expecting to be bathing in asses' milk, adorned in silk and jewels, and handfed foie gras, with slaves doing her every bidding. My office narcs were always upset when we didn't pamper them, give them the spotlight, and let them skive to their hearts' content. They were mega-upset when the world didn't adjust itself to suit their fantasies.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Safe bet they are most definitely not ok.  Hazzi is prancing around in that SpiderMan costume. Their tippytop advisor left.
> Not ok imo.


Oh, they'll be okay. Now they can advise themselves and reinforce their message of self-importance. I wouldn't be surprised if they set up an advisory panel of stans and fellow gold diggers just to tell the world that they have people on their side, working to promote their vision and mission.


----------



## EmilyM11

xincinsin said:


> I believe Harry trusts his wife completely, to the point where he has shut off any other viewpoint. And he trusts her even if he sometimes knows the facts don't correlate with what she is telling him. Part of it has to do with her constant refrain of victimhood, part of it has to do with his own self-image as her saviour and protector, but most of it has to do with his own sense of inferiority. She is telling him what he wants to hear: you are great, you are mistreated, you deserve more, you are a victim too, people just don't understand you, it's so unfair. He has invested years of his life now into her version of events. If he doesn't double-down and support her "truth", his castle in the air comes crashing down and his ego cannot afford to face failure.
> 
> I believe Zed is a stereotypical (archetypal ) narc. Looking at how early some of those trailer photos are and how staged they appear, I would say she was planning the half-in/half-out option the moment she realized that her frog prince was financially dependent on the Bank of Dad, and that she was honest-to-god expected to work for the family. You can tell from her current productivity that her so-called Cali work ethic probably has its roots in Doria sitting on the lawn getting stoned while Thomas brings home the bread and bacon. She was expecting to be bathing in asses' milk, adorned in silk and jewels, and handfed foie gras, with slaves doing her every bidding. My office narcs were always upset when we didn't pamper them, give them the spotlight, and let them skive to their hearts' content. They were mega-upset when the world didn't adjust itself to suit their fantasies.


100% agree, well-put.


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> They probably will. In the same way people slow down to look when they drive past a car crash.


I wouldn't watch it for love or money! Only thinking about it makes me nauseous


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is this a new clip? I have not seen it before but the mentioning of Charlotte and George made me think it was old.


Are we sure that's really Harry? He sounds to me like the guy who imitates him (I don't know his name).

Oops, I just saw the pic of H lifting his Spiderman mask....so I guess it IS him...what an idiot!!


----------



## LittleStar88

Looks like they’ve taken from the Kardashian playbook…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So this morning I was scrolling through Instagram and a wedding magazine posted the black and white kissy pic and asked who was excited for the docu. Well, judging from the comments none of their target group


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> Well they already had to photoshop out the horns and talons so why not smooth out the corns and bunions?



I literally spit out my tea. OMG


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Are we sure that's really Harry? He sounds to me like the guy who imitates him (I don't know his name).
> 
> Oops, I just saw the pic of H lifting his Spiderman mask....so I guess it IS him...what an idiot!!



Yeah, I'm still a bit speechless.


----------



## LittleStar88

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So this morning I was scrolling through Instagram and a wedding magazine posted the black and white kissy pic and asked who was excited for the docu. Well, judging from the comments none of their target group



I had a Netflix advertisement for the docu pop up in my Facebook feed and let’s just say the comments were definitely not positive.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Consider the source, but Crazy Card Lady just posted on her Youtube community tab a screenshot of the article saying the Sussexes brought a photographer to Buckingham Palace and added they did the same at Anmer Hall, which is why they were hosted there never again. She doesn't say where she got that from, but if true...WTF!


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> View attachment 5664503


Queue up ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST … by Queen


----------



## xincinsin

LittleStar88 said:


> I had a Netflix advertisement for the docu pop up in my Facebook feed and let’s just say the comments were definitely not positive.


I have been getting a never ending stream of in-app advertising urging me to buy green dresses


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Consider the source, but Crazy Card Lady just posted on her Youtube community tab a screenshot of the article saying the Sussexes brought a photographer to Buckingham Palace and added they did the same at Anmer Hall, which is why they were hosted there never again. She doesn't say where she got that from, but if true...WTF!


This makes me wonder about that long-ago rumour when TW was still the GF.  Allegedly she was caught slipping into parts of the palace which were not open to her, and taking photos. Supposedly, she admitted that she was going to sell the pics. 

I believe the slipping into forbidden areas part. She does have a history of turning up where she was not invited. But the pic sale - no way she would have admitted it. More likely she went wah wah wah to Sparry and strongly implied that his family didn't welcome her and it must be racism, firing up his white knight temper.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## jblended

Not sure if this belongs here or on the KC3 thread, but since Ngozi was claiming that Megz was a DV victim, I'll put it in here.


----------



## marietouchet

There is another video episode/series in the works - HEART OF INVICTUS. More MM gossip that I read
1. After funeral, changes were needed to video, it does not agree with book. Second major executive video producer brought in, on top of Garbus.
Makes more sense than the idea that they needed to add stuff about funeral, their camera crew was shutdown at funeral.

2. N&TFLIX demanding the videos go before the book, so N does not have to explain the discrepancies.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> These people are on the Earthshot board AND are advisers to Netflix??  Say what?


These are people in climate related careers, one of them was the UN climate chief at one point. It's not unusual that they volunteer/participate in committees for different organizations. 

What I found really interesting is how the Harkles' trailer was viewed by them: "_It is therefore disappointing that they air *negative messages* on the very same day as the Earthshot Prize_.”


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> There is another video episode/series in the works HEART OF INVICTUS More MM gossip that I read
> 1. After funeral changes were needed to video, it does not agree with book. Second major executive producer brought in, on top of Garbus.
> 
> Makes more sense than the idea that they needed to add stuff about funeral, their camera crew was shutdown at funeral.
> 
> 2. N&TFLIX demanding the videos go before the book, so N does not have to explain the discrepancies.


What's the likelihood that Heart of Invictus will also become their love story, but told this time through the lens of their service! Maybe Zed will take credit for it and rewrite history to say she met Sparry when he was invited to the US original of the games, and she provided the inspiration.


----------



## Chanbal

jelliedfeels said:


> I will say 2 things one that 1. He is bound to prefer the BRF as a high Anglican because they are his religious leaders and that is his vocation and 2. This is kind of testament to how race and class are different in U.K. to America. Ultimately to someone with his values he will admire The class system in general, hyper specific ultra Tory, high Anglican values and the preservation of tradition and will be less inclined to ideas of black solidarity.


Still on Father Calvin Robinson, I understand your comments, they make sense. However, I also believe that his approach and optimism does a lot more to combat racism than the inflamed attacks of many other people. 

Lady SH dedicated her life to assist the queen and the monarchy. She understood that she had been victim of a set-up and wanted to save others by resigning, particularly Will who was about to travel to the US. Her resignation was part of her dedicated service imo.


----------



## Chanbal

How grateful!


----------



## kemilia

Toby93 said:


> I'm probably the only one here that thinks that the emerald choker worn on her forehead was not a good look.  Even as a teenager, I thought it looked wrong.


No, you aren't. 

Back then I thought it was not a good look (or good use for such an incredible piece of jewelry). So happy Claw has no access to any of the royal bling--she will be hard-pressed to compete with what Catherine has access to AND will be wearing. Slapping on a couple more Love bracelets ain't gonna do it, and she knows it.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops!


----------



## carmen56

jblended said:


> Not sure if this belongs here or on the KC3 thread, but since Ngozi was claiming that Megz was a DV victim, I'll put it in here.



Well, I hope they check her for recording equipment before she’s through the door!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> What's the likelihood that Heart of Invictus will also become their love story, but told this time through the lens of their service! Maybe Zed will take credit for it and rewrite history to say she met Sparry when he was invited to the US original of the games, and she provided the inspiration.



It is so sad to me she basically pushed him aside in his own project. She is a vile and disgusting person.


----------



## youngster

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm wondering whether they are okay, like you know - mentally okay. What does British public have to do with this ****? My taxes paid their wedding, does this make me a racist or what. He needs to stop taking/drinking/smoking whatever he is taking.



I wonder the same.  I think Harry is not OK.  His is not the behavior of a stable, emotionally grounded person.  I agree with @xincinsin that he trusts Meghan completely, even when facts say otherwise, and she is leading him straight off a cliff.  Going after the British public now and in their reality show?  Apparently, _everyone_ in the world is awful, except for Harry and Meghan. Originally, I gave the marriage 5 - 7 years, but that was with Meghan actually trying to make a go of it within the family.  Now, I think it is much more likely to last years longer, basically until Meghan decides she is done with him, because I think he is utterly dependent on her and he has nowhere else to go.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is so sad to me she basically pushed him aside in his own project. She is a vile and disgusting person.


If she could ride, she would be yanking him off the polo pony and not just squeezing her ridiculous pwife self between the players and trying to grab the trophy.


----------



## Toby93

kemilia said:


> No, you aren't.
> 
> Back then I thought it was not a good look (or good use for such an incredible piece of jewelry). So happy Claw has no access to any of the royal bling--she will be hard-pressed to compete with what Catherine has access to AND will be wearing. Slapping on a couple more Love bracelets ain't gonna do it, and she knows it.


Lol, I was considering getting a Love bracelet, but I am completely turned off by them now.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I wonder the same.  I think Harry is not OK.  His is not the behavior of a stable, emotionally grounded person.  I agree with @xincinsin that he trusts Meghan completely, even when facts say otherwise, and she is leading him straight off a cliff.  Going after the British public now and in their reality show?  Apparently, _everyone_ in the world is awful, except for Harry and Meghan. Originally, I gave the marriage 5 - 7 years, but that was with Meghan actually trying to make a go of it within the family.  Now, I think it is much more likely to last years longer, basically until Meghan decides she is done with him, because I think he is utterly dependent on her and he has nowhere else to go.



I think you are right on all accounts. Yes, I do remember exactly what I said just hours ago about him, but these are the moments I still feel bad for him.


----------



## EmilyM11

youngster said:


> I wonder the same.  I think Harry is not OK.  His is not the behavior of a stable, emotionally grounded person.  I agree with @xincinsin that he trusts Meghan completely, even when facts say otherwise, and she is leading him straight off a cliff.  Going after the British public now and in their reality show?  Apparently, _everyone_ in the world is awful, except for Harry and Meghan. Originally, I gave the marriage 5 - 7 years, but that was with Meghan actually trying to make a go of it within the family.  Now, I think it is much more likely to last years longer, basically until Meghan decides she is done with him, because I think he is utterly dependent on her and he has nowhere else to go.


Not a therapist, but this sounds like BPD to me (him, her narcissist of course).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> If she could ride, she would be yanking him off the polo pony and not just squeezing her ridiculous pwife self between the players and trying to grab the trophy.



She'd probably have tried to become CoS if still in the UK, especially now that Kate is in the running.


----------



## Toby93

Always with the legs wide open


----------



## kemilia

Toby93 said:


> Always with the legs wide open
> 
> 
> View attachment 5664757



Probably stuck that way--remember when your mom would say "if you keep making that ugly face it will stick?" Same with her widespread legs (if you know what I mean  )


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> There will be plenty of deepfakery no matter what colour she wore. Zed could find insult in a bowl of ice cream.
> 
> I expect lots of carefully curated, out of context footage to prove that the BRF has done her wrong (proof will be that the invisible photo/videographer has shots of Zed being upset later). I'm sorry, Hermes! But that blanket design will never be the same for me again after watching multiple re-takes of fake sobbing.


It’s going to be a nightmare. 


Toby93 said:


> Lol, I was considering getting a Love bracelet, but I am completely turned off by them now.


We can’t let her ruin all the nice things. I’ve had that bracelet since 2008 and I’m certainly not going to allow her to ruin something nice that my mom got for me.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> We can’t let her ruin all the nice things. I’ve had that bracelet since 2008 and I’m certainly not going to allow her to ruin something nice that my mom got for me.



Right. I'll still get a Max Mara coat down the line and take solace in the fact I'll wear it better


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> They probably will. In the same way people slow down to look when they drive past a car crash.


I think a lot of people may watch the first episode....but will they watch the rest?  maybe it will be boring and the viewership will decline steeply.  I assume Netflix has a way to track viewership
Alyssa Farah Griffin on The View said they have a funny way to seeking the privacy they supposedly wanted but that she's there for it - the Netflix "show"

I don't know anyone who's planning to watch

​


----------



## EmilyM11

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. I'll still get a Max Mara coat down the line and take solace in the fact I'll wear it better


It's inevitable popular designer items are ruined by certain people who wear them. Every time Hermes in Poland sells bags to local erm...ladies who earn money with their bodies, local zzz-level celebs, wives of arm dealers, WAGs etc. I consider selling mine pronto. 
But as you said, we wear it better


----------



## papertiger

Dai


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Consider the source, but Crazy Card Lady just posted on her Youtube community tab a screenshot of the article saying the Sussexes brought a photographer to Buckingham Palace and added they did the same at Anmer Hall, which is why they were hosted there never again. She doesn't say where she got that from, but if true...WTF!


Telegraph l I think


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Daily Mail I think



The Anmer Hall rumour? Gosh, I'd have gone BALLISTIC on them pulling this sh*t in my home.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Consider the source, but Crazy Card Lady just posted on her Youtube community tab a screenshot of the article saying the Sussexes brought a photographer to Buckingham Palace and added they did the same at Anmer Hall, which is why they were hosted there never again. She doesn't say where she got that from, but if true...WTF!



Sorry my computer is really playing up today and driving me crazy. It comes from the Telegraph but I can only read the full article at work. I'll try to get it.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I think a lot of people may watch the first episode....but will they watch the rest?  maybe it will be boring and the viewership will decline steeply.  I assume Netflix has a way to track viewership
> Alyssa Farah Griffin on The View said they have a funny way to seeking the privacy they supposedly wanted but that she's there for it - the Netflix "show"
> 
> I don't know anyone who's planning to watch
> 
> ​


Agreed. Viewers are going to watch for dirt about the royal family. If they don’t deliver that in the first episode and it’s just a pity party for themselves, viewership will drop fast. There’s nothing more dull than two spoiled, egotistical attention-seekers bragging about their love story for the hundredth time.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. Viewers are going to watch for dirt about the royal family. If they don’t deliver that in the first episode and it’s just a pity party for themselves, viewership will drop fast. There’s nothing more dull than two spoiled, egotistical attention-seekers bragging about their love story for the hundredth time.


right
and what new thing do they have to say?


----------



## Mrs.Z

Also, with respect to the Netflix show someone posted (I also saw the article) that it would contain commentaries by historians and they will discuss the Commonwealth.  I’m sorry what?  I will tune out immediatly if they are trying to serve us some ridiculous woke rewriting of history.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

kemilia said:


> No, you aren't.
> 
> Back then I thought it was not a good look (or good use for such an incredible piece of jewelry). So happy Claw has no access to any of the royal bling--she will be hard-pressed to compete with what Catherine has access to AND will be wearing. Slapping on a couple more Love bracelets ain't gonna do it, and she knows it.



I think a lot of the couple's bitterness and spitting is fuelled by greed and jealousy of Harry's brother and his wife (P&PoW) and always has been.  Not just jewels but property (given to live in) prestige, status, and natural ease with people. 

Some people don't know how lucky they got it. I said all along M is the Fisherman's Wife (fairytale) incarnate. Why doesn't she do a Podcrash about that.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> Also, with respect to the Netflix show someone posted (I also saw the article) that it would contain commentaries by historians and they will discuss the Commonwealth.  I’m sorry what?  I will tune out immediatly if they are trying to serve us some ridiculous woke rewriting of history.


I think maybe they are going to try to pose as the people who can almost singlehandedly end racism.  Heroes.

Oh - and the Most Loving couple ever.


----------



## DoggieBags

The photos or video they supposedly took at Buckingham Palace and Anmer Hall, don’t they need signed releases from the owners or occupants of the properties? One would think the Netflix lawyers would have all sign offs necessary but at this point who knows since everything involving the 2 grifters is subject to chaos and deliberate obfuscation


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> The photos or video they supposedly took at Buckingham Palace and Anmer Hall, don’t they need signed releases from the owners or occupants of the properties? One would think the Netflix lawyers would have the all sign offs necessary but at this point who knows since everything involving the 2 grifters is subject to chaos and deliberate obfuscation



Someone on Twitter commented these pictures are possibly grounds for a lawsuit. If the BRF wants to go there, which I doubt.


----------



## Chanbal

Ok, this it funny imo. It appears that the photo with the many photographers shown on the Harkles' trailer is  from a Harry Potter premiere in 2011.  





	

		
			
		

		
	
 (source of info: the BLG video)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

These two are too ridiculous. But also Netflix...the team really didn't think we'd find out??? 

Can someone explain the dig in HeSmione to me?


----------



## DoggieBags

I expect that just like CNN did a piece counting the lies in the Oprah interview, someone is going to have a field day listing all the lies in the Netflix series. The explanation of the list of lies might actually run longer than the series


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> I expect that just like CNN did a piece counting the lies in the Oprah interview, someone is going to have field day listing all the lies in the Netflix series. The explanation of the list of lies might actually run longer than the series


I wasn't aware of that CNN report


----------



## duna

EmilyM111 said:


> It's inevitable popular designer items are ruined by certain people who wear them. Every time Hermes in Poland sells bags to local erm...ladies who earn money with their bodies, local zzz-level celebs, wives of arm dealers, WAGs etc. I consider selling mine pronto.
> But as you said, we wear it better


I agree, I do the same!


----------



## Mrs.Z

DoggieBags said:


> I expect that just like CNN did a piece counting the lies in the Oprah interview, someone is going to have field day listing all the lies in the Netflix series. The explanation of the list of lies might actually run longer than the series


Too funny, there is an article on the DailyFail that discusses how Netflix wants the show to air before the book comes out so they don’t have to explain all the contradictions, the publishers will!


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> I wasn't aware of that CNN report











						CNN 'deletes' critical story about Meghan and Harry's Oprah 'inconsistencies'
					

There have been claims that CNN have 'deleted' certain aspects of their coverage of the fallout from Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey




					www.mirror.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> How grateful!
> View attachment 5664725



Scratch hard enough and Ngozi is another actress.


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> Oops!




I don't know when that massively pathetic Spiderman video was actually made (and did Prince Nitwit actually think bereaved young children would find it inspiring or comforting??? Or even understandable???) but does any one else think its recording and / or release was a desperate attempt by the Duke And Duchess Of Grift to draw attention away from the stunning number of Dislikes that are STILL piling up on the Netflix site? it seems a bit early for a Christmas message, the timing is a bit suspicious. Has Harry sacrificed yet ANOTHER pair of gonads to The Claw's egomania? Does he understand what being "thrown under the bus" means? 

And is she going to spray-paint the completed collection and hang them from MonteShitShow's Christmas tree? Maybe with a single crystal tear hanging from each one?

Inquiring minds want to know...


----------



## Chanbal

I would think the Sun has receipts… Who is their global press secretary? Scoobie?

_Prince Harry__ is shutting down a recent report that accused him of telling a friend “Those Brits need to learn a lesson” ahead of the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey last year.

*The global press secretary for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex *told HuffPost that “this is a baseless hit piece masquerading as journalism.’”

“This story is riddled with inaccuracies, not least of which is a quote erroneously attributed to Prince Harry,” the spokesperson said Sunday._









						Prince Harry Hits Out At 'Baseless' Story That Pits 'Him Against His Country'
					

A spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex told HuffPost that a recent report is "riddled with inaccuracies."




					www.huffpost.com
				




Oops, this doesn't help Hazz's case.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> I would think the Sun has receipts… Who is their global press secretary? Scoobie?
> 
> _Prince Harry__ is shutting down a recent report that accused him of telling a friend “Those Brits need to learn a lesson” ahead of the couple’s bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey last year.
> 
> *The global press secretary for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex *told HuffPost that “this is a baseless hit piece masquerading as journalism.’”
> 
> “This story is riddled with inaccuracies, not least of which is a quote erroneously attributed to Prince Harry,” the spokesperson said Sunday._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Hits Out At 'Baseless' Story That Pits 'Him Against His Country'
> 
> 
> A spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex told HuffPost that a recent report is "riddled with inaccuracies."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oops, this doesn't help Hazz's case.



Just one more potential lawsuit for litigious H. His lawyers must be licking their chops at the prospect of yet more fees.


----------



## gracekelly

There is an article in Hello Magazine that Mandana Dayani is no longer with Archewell.  She was there 18 months.  Is that all she could take?








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make big change ahead of new Netflix series
					

It has been revealed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and the president of their company Archwell have parted ways after just over a year together. See details.




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## Genie27

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone explain the dig in HeSmione to me?


“He’s mine.”

Also Hairy Potter’s scar/tramp stamp on forehead is her M cipher.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> I think maybe they are going to try to pose as the people who can almost singlehandedly end racism.  Heroes.
> 
> Oh - and the Most Loving couple ever.


Ending racism starts at home, embracing her Ragland family would be a start.

Another would be, Disassociating with people like Marlene Headly AKA Ngozi Fulani, who heads a domestic abuse charity that, according to its website,
 ”is dedicated to African and Caribbean victims/survivors of domestic and sexual abuse.“. As Nana Akua, a GB News presenter, said, “Can you imagine if the charity said only white people? I bet she would be the first to complain.”


----------



## Chanbal

DoggieBags said:


> Just one more potential lawsuit for litigious H. His lawyers must be licking their chops at the prospect of yet more fees.


They might represent themselves on this one. They are reducing the number of employees and TW has legal knowledge from the time she worked @Su*ts…  Why not?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> There is an article in Hello Magazine that Mandana Dayani is no longer with Archewell.  She was there 18 months.  Is that all she could take?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make big change ahead of new Netflix series
> 
> 
> It has been revealed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and the president of their company Archwell have parted ways after just over a year together. See details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


Here is an interesting reply…


----------



## Chanbal

The confirmation…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzi has opened a gate.   









						Prince Joachim of Denmark announces plan to move to the US
					

The Danish royal, 53, has decided to move to Washington DC with his wife Princess Marie and their two young children, Danish newspaper BT reported.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> It’s going to be a nightmare.
> 
> *We can’t let her ruin all the nice things. I’ve had that bracelet since 2008 and I’m certainly not going to allow her to ruin something nice that my mom got for me.*


100%.  Cartier is more powerful than TW.  She can try to ruing its watches, bracelets and necklaces, but on this one House, I will not cave!


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Agreed. *Viewers are going to watch for dirt about the royal family. If they don’t deliver that in the first episode and it’s just a pity party for themselves, viewership will drop fast.* There’s nothing more dull than two spoiled, egotistical attention-seekers bragging about their love story for the hundredth time.


What dirt are they going to possibly tell us that they haven't been whining about for almost THREE years now?  
I literally cannot listen to her voice.  It gives me hives.  If something earth shattering is mentioned, I'm sure we'll hear about it ad nauseum on every formal journalistic site.


----------



## 880

Does anyone think that the BRF or its representatives will let leak the results of the bullying investigation?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> There is an article in Hello Magazine that Mandana Dayani is no longer with Archewell.  *She was there 18 months.*  Is that all she could take?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle make big change ahead of new Netflix series
> 
> 
> It has been revealed that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle and the president of their company Archwell have parted ways after just over a year together. See details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hellomagazine.com


That's two pregnancies.  Real or fake.


----------



## VickyB

Toby93 said:


> Lol, I was considering getting a Love bracelet, but I am completely turned off by them now.


I’ve been wearing mine since 1981.  i take solace in the fact that I’ve had it so long.


----------



## DoggieBags

880 said:


> Does anyone think that the BRF or its representatives will let leak the results of the bullying investigation?


I think a lot of things could get leaked. All those things on the net about her that were supposedly scrubbed when she got engaged to H may somehow reappear too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Another would be, Disassociating with people like Marlene Headly AKA Ngozi Fulani, who heads a domestic abuse charity that, according to its website,
> ”is dedicated to African and Caribbean victims/survivors of domestic and sexual abuse.“. As Nana Akua, a GB News presenter, said, “Can you imagine if the charity said only white people? I bet she would be the first to complain.”



I mean, these are marginalized groups and I can't be mad at creating spaces for them. I am slightly mad when a mixed race woman asks for help and is turned down because according to Fulani she possesses privilege.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> 100%.  Cartier is more powerful than TW.  She can try to ruing its watches, bracelets and necklaces, but on this one House, I will not cave!


I'm with you.  Cartier!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> The confirmation…




They really don't need anyone else to make them look stupid and disingenuous.


----------



## Chanbal

880 said:


> Does anyone think that the *BRF or its representatives will let leak the results of the bullying investigation*?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

DoggieBags said:


> I think a lot of things could get leaked. All those things on the net about her that were supposedly scrubbed when she got engaged to H may somehow reappear too.



I'm not usually one for the witch hunt, but she deserves everything coming her way.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> *What dirt are they going to possibly tell us that they haven't been whining about for almost THREE years now? *
> I literally cannot listen to her voice.  It gives me hives.  If something earth shattering is mentioned, I'm sure we'll hear about it ad nauseum on every formal journalistic site.


I wasn't expecting such question from a senior member? Aren't you aware of TW's creative powers?


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi has opened a gate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Joachim of Denmark announces plan to move to the US
> 
> 
> The Danish royal, 53, has decided to move to Washington DC with his wife Princess Marie and their two young children, Danish newspaper BT reported.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Ugh, so now we're going to be graced with the presence of Prince Joachim?  Please, Europe, keep your second born royals!  We don't want the disgruntled seconds (unless they are like Princess Madeline of Sweden who stays under the radar and just posts sweet pics of her children).


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Here is an interesting reply…



We will see how Mandana feels it her last check doesn't clear the bank.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Ugh, so now we're going to be graced with the presence of Prince Joachim?  Please, Europe, keep your second born royals!  We don't want the disgruntled seconds (unless they are like Princess Madeline of Sweden who stays under the radar and just posts sweet pics of her children).


Joachim says he has a job.  His wife will do well here with a French accent. She butted heads with CP Mary who probably is happy to see her leave. I always felt that Chris O'Neill called the shots in that marriage with Princess Madeleine and she was happy with it.


----------



## bellecate

These two….. how much more pathetic can they be.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. Netflix must be trolling them big time.


----------



## sdkitty

would you believe H & the WIFE hav a global press secretary?  sounds like a government job to me








						Prince Harry Hits Out At 'Baseless' Story That Pits 'Him Against His Country'
					

A spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex told HuffPost that a recent report is "riddled with inaccuracies."




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> would you believe H & the WIFE hav a global press secretary?  sounds like a government job to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Hits Out At 'Baseless' Story That Pits 'Him Against His Country'
> 
> 
> A spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex told HuffPost that a recent report is "riddled with inaccuracies."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


It’s called delusions of grandeur.


----------



## Jayne1

bellecate said:


> These two….. how much more pathetic can they be.
> View attachment 5664919


I guess Netfl*x is going with the narrative that H has been hounded his whole life.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> It’s called delusions of grandeur.


YES
I hope that person is well compensated but they must feel like a fool holding that title


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait, they really have a global press secretary? I thought someone was mocking Scobie.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, they really have a global press secretary? I thought someone was mocking Scobie.


that is who is quoted as speaking for them in the article


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wait, they really have a global press secretary? I thought someone was mocking Scobie.


this gets funnier and funnier....they also apparently have someone with the title chief of staff......guess they are the rulers of their own little world








						Boss of Harry and Meghan's TV firm leaves after 18 months
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have lost another key aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> would you believe H & the WIFE hav a global press secretary?  sounds like a government job to me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Hits Out At 'Baseless' Story That Pits 'Him Against His Country'
> 
> 
> A spokesperson for the Duke of Sussex told HuffPost that a recent report is "riddled with inaccuracies."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


They need a person who reads media around the globe to see who is p*ssed off at them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Make it stop. They are insane.


----------



## Traminer

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is it possible Lady Hussey thought this was a set up for Queen Camilla?  She asked the usual straightforward questions that most people have no difficulty answering.  Most people who accept invites to galas understand that they will be asked questions and should answer politely.  After a few simple questions, Lady Hussey realized this person could cause an upset and wanted to protect Camilla from this possible trouble-maker and her angst.  Remember, QE passed away about 2 - 3 months ago. Perhaps Lady Hussey should have called security.  Over here, security will most definitely have a word.


I do wonder how this case will go on.
I think the last word has not been spoken yet.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> this gets funnier and funnier....they also apparently have someone with the title chief of staff......guess they are the rulers of their own little world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boss of Harry and Meghan's TV firm leaves after 18 months
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have lost another key aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


And Harry must be head of their little army with Aldi as his aide de camp.


----------



## gracekelly

Traminer said:


> I do wonder how this case will go on.
> I think the last word has not been spoken yet.


Security was lax that day IMO and should have been called as this woman was not actually invited.  In theory she could have been vetting Ngozi to see if she should or could speak with Camilla.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> They need a person who reads media around the globe to see who is p*ssed off at them.


they are (I hope) becoming a laughingstock
Delusions of grandeur indeed.....they apparently think they are More important that Michelle and her husband


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> they are (I hope) becoming a laughingstock
> Delusions of grandeur indeed.....they apparently think they are More important that Michelle and her husband


I think that way back when at the time the Vogue issue came out, with Meghan guest editing, MO  saw or was informed of the chicken taco lie and right then, knew that she had to distance from Meghan.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think that way back when at the time the Vogue issue came out, with Meghan guest editing, MO  saw or was informed of the chicken taco lie and right then, knew that she had to distance from Meghan.


wise decision


----------



## CarryOn2020

DoggieBags said:


> I think a lot of things could get leaked. All those things on the net about her that were supposedly scrubbed when she got engaged to H may somehow reappear too.


Many have requested the BRF releases the dirt.  In fact, there is a hash tag for it.   
H&M have brought this level of nastiness on themselves.  They have set up a most dysfunctional house.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Ugh, so now we're going to be graced with the presence of Prince Joachim?  Please, Europe, keep your second born royals!  We don't want the disgruntled seconds (unless they are like Princess Madeline of Sweden who stays under the radar and just posts sweet pics of her children).


Let’s start a list of spare royals in the US:

Sweden
UK - they sent Andi and Hazzi  
Denmark
Who’s next?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Make it stop. They are insane.


imagine the heady feeling for the spare and the z-list actress to be ruling their own empire


----------



## Toby93

If only he meant what he said.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> Security was lax that day IMO and should have been called as this woman was not actually invited.  In theory she could have been vetting Ngozi to see if she should or could speak with Camilla.


Well, now, the King wants a word.  







ETA: the King *and* Queen









						Charles and Camilla invite Ngozi Fulani to Buckingham Palace
					

Plans are under way for Charles and Camilla to meet Ngozi Fulani (pictured with Charles in 1997), 61, who revealed how she was quizzed by Lady Susan Hussey, 83, at the palace last week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> If only he meant what he said.



He should have kept his clothes on in Vegas.  Just saying.
What is with all the hand gestures?  Looks like he is landing a plane.


----------



## sdkitty

KEG66 said:


> I’d take issue with anyone I didn’t  know touching me full stop. I don’t think that feeling is exclusive to anyone. However not sure we’ll ever know what really happened.


I don't even like it when acquantences want to hug me.  I prefer to save that for people I care something about.  Don't have to be in love with the person but a feeling of warmth or friendship at least.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I understand people not wanting to be touched. I do.  So, here’s a solution - when you go to a gala where name tags are required, be sure to wear it so people can _*see*_ your name.  Simple enough to do, no?


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> I understand people not wanting to be touched. I do.  So, here’s a solution - when you go to a gala where name tags are required, be sure to wear it so people can _*see*_ your name.  Simple enough to do, no?


well to be fair, assuming this woman wasn't there as a set-up to make trouble, you could have your hair hang over your name tag and not really notice it
Much as I detest H&M and would detest her too if I was convinced she was planted by them, we don't reall know for sure


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> well to be fair, assuming this woman wasn't there as a set-up to make trouble, you could have your hair hang over your name tag and not really notice it
> Much as I detest H&M and would detest her too if I was convinced she was planted by them, we don't reall know for sure


Wow, ok, let’s try this - if you know your hair falls over your shoulder and could potentially block your name tag, then put the tag where it is easily visible.  Voila!   We can do what we can to remove angst or we can create, knowingly or bumbling along,  stumbling blocks. Make it a great time or not. Look for the win-win experience.  The choice is yours.   Imo we all have a responsibility to make this world better.

This is so H&M’s way of thinking.  He complains he wants a “a line for his privacy”, yet he goes to Vegas and dances nude.  Hypocrite.


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> What dirt are they going to possibly tell us that they haven't been whining about for almost THREE years now?
> I literally cannot listen to her voice.  It gives me hives.  If something earth shattering is mentioned, I'm sure we'll hear about it ad nauseum on every formal journalistic site.


Since she is a pathological liar it could almost anything.


----------



## csshopper

bellecate said:


> This pathetic: it took Liz Garbus, an Oscar nominated director + EIGHT Executive Producers to put this cheesy mess together. It will be a heck of a lot more fun to watch BLG’s dismantling of it, than to watch it on Netflix. Cast and Crew may all be shredded before it’s over! Love the duplicitous exposures, they can run, but they can’t hide.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> I guess Netfl*x is going with the narrative that H has been hounded his whole life.


yes, poor Harry, the spare.....I guess being the spare outweighs all the privilege he has had by being born royal


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this gets funnier and funnier....they also apparently have someone with the title chief of staff......guess they are the rulers of their own little world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Boss of Harry and Meghan's TV firm leaves after 18 months
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have lost another key aide, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



I love that DM keeps the records updated.  

"_Ms Dayani is the latest of at least 13 top staff to leave the Duke and Duchess since 2018._"


----------



## djfmn

FYI From Richard Eden's twitter feed. 
Lady Susan Hussey worships regularly at a South London church with a 90 per cent black congregation, reports the Mail on Sunday. I hope Prince William's spokesman personally apologises to her for talking about 'racism' when he condemned her.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I guess Netfl*x is going with the narrative that H has been hounded his whole life.


I want to hear Garbus, after the dust has settled and this has aired, disassociate herself from the series by saying  that failure was due to Meghan's  interference.  She might not say it directly in print, but she will have colleagues who will do it for her. It's the old _word has  leaked out that...._


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is this why people leave Arsewell?


----------



## Chanbal

Huh, we have something with value $$$$ here…  



EDIT: @CarryOn2020 you found it first…  

Here is a video that may have more details.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Check out this story 

_But they were really pointing their cameras at the all-star cast of the final film in JK Rowling’s wizarding franchise at an event in July 2011. 

The image — which includes a snap of The Sun photographer Doug Seeburg — is used in the Netflix trailer before Prince Harry says in a voice-over: “I had to do everything I could to protect my family.”

But the couple did not meet until some five years later, in 2016.

Royal expert Ingrid Seward told The Sun: “I don’t imagine Harry would have realised, but Netflix have been careless here as it weakens Harry’s comment about protecting his family. *This fake picture weakens his point.”*_
 
_








						Pic of Harry & Meg in doc being hounded by press was taken at Potter premiere
					

A PHOTO used by Netflix to show Harry and Meghan being hounded by the press was actually taken at a Harry Potter premiere years before the pair met. A trailer for the couple’s upcoming documentary …




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




ETA:  _surely this will destroy any Oscar/Emmy hopes?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I really have to wonder if the Netflix crew is really that useless or was passive-aggressively getting back at them (or rather, the one of them that tends to treat staff like sh*t). Because heads have rolled for negligence like this. That's a mistake an intern makes...maybe.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I love that DM keeps the records updated.
> 
> "_Ms Dayani is the latest of at least 13 top staff to leave the Duke and Duchess since 2018._"


obviously those wonderful humanitarians are great to work for


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Check out this story
> 
> _But they were really pointing their cameras at the all-star cast of the final film in JK Rowling’s wizarding franchise at an event in July 2011.
> 
> The image — which includes a snap of The Sun photographer Doug Seeburg — is used in the Netflix trailer before Prince Harry says in a voice-over: “I had to do everything I could to protect my family.”
> 
> But the couple did not meet until some five years later, in 2016.
> 
> Royal expert Ingrid Seward told The Sun: “I don’t imagine Harry would have realised, but Netflix have been careless here as it weakens Harry’s comment about protecting his family. *This fake picture weakens his point.”*_
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pic of Harry & Meg in doc being hounded by press was taken at Potter premiere
> 
> 
> A PHOTO used by Netflix to show Harry and Meghan being hounded by the press was actually taken at a Harry Potter premiere years before the pair met. A trailer for the couple’s upcoming documentary …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  _surely this will destroy any Oscar/Emmy hopes?


It didn't take long for the Sun to jump on it. After the Sun, we will have Page Six and the rest of the gang. Very embarrassing!


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> Is this why people leave Arsewell?



How do people get away with this?!


----------



## VickyB

Toby93 said:


> If only he meant what he said.



This is the Harry I liked.  Too bad that he hooked up with such a manipulative user.  Very sad.


----------



## CarryOn2020

VickyB said:


> This is the Harry I liked.  Too bad that he hooked up with such a manipulative user.  Very sad.


Imo even back then, there are plenty of warnings of the bitter man he has become.  It was not just MM that did it.  
Vegas was in 2012.









						Well, they do call it close protection: Prince Harry pictured in Las Vegas pool party jacuzzi with his VERY relaxed bodyguard
					

These new photographs show the third in line to the throne splashing around at a VIP bungalow at the MGM Grand in the heart of Sin City.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Debbini

From Instagram


----------



## rose60610

jblended said:


> Not sure if this belongs here or on the KC3 thread, but since Ngozi was claiming that Megz was a DV victim, I'll put it in here.




I'd put money on Claw and Haz flying her in to visit them in Montecito to "tell her truth" and confirm Claw's lies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not sure what's up with the not available content...here's a screenshot.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> Huh, we have something with value $$$$ here…
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: @CarryOn2020 you found it first…
> 
> Here is a video that may have more details.



This is really bad for SVCF. They are a legit DAF. Heads are going to roll because of this misdirection/embarrassment.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really have to wonder if the Netflix crew is really that useless or was passive-aggressively getting back at them (or rather, the one of them that tends to treat staff like sh*t). Because heads have rolled for negligence like this. That's a mistake an intern makes...maybe.


Remember the stories about the wedding dress … it was ill fitting due to constant last minute changes requested by MM


----------



## CarryOn2020

BittyMonkey said:


> This is really bad for SVCF. They are a legit DAF. Heads are going to roll because of this misdirection/embarrassment.


Seems like several charities involved with H&M are being scrutinized now


----------



## octopus17

sdkitty said:


> I don't even like it when acquantences want to hug me.  I prefer to save that for people I care something about.  Don't have to be in love with the person but a feeling of warmth or friendship at least.


Damn straight. I once was completely freaked when I bumped into an electrician who had done some work for us and he hurled his arms around me, kissed me on both cheeks in the middle of the street in front of my father (whom he had also done some work for). I mean WTAF!!


----------



## BittyMonkey

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems like several charities involved with H&M are being scrutinized now


SVCF is like a donor pool of dollars. The anonymous donor could get booted out of the DAF depending on the rules. 

SVCF will likely be fine, but they will definitely get bad publicity.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cornflower Blue said:


> Damn straight. I once was completely freaked when I bumped into an electrician who had done some work for us and he hurled his arms around me and kissed me on both cheeks in the middle of the street and in front of my father (whom he had also done some work for). I mean WTAF!!



Guessing you would wear your name tag so that it is easily visible.  Awkward confrontations are my worst nightmare.

Lady Grantham knew.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Not sure what's up with the not available content...here's a screenshot.
> 
> View attachment 5665032


Wow, this is amazing information. If Netfl*x is done with the Harkles, they will need many more donations to ArchW to sponsor their commute to work by private jets …   

It looks like I guessed right about Camilla being the target of NF several posts ago. There are photos and video clips circulating that show NF very close to Camilla, and I got the impression that NF was attempting to interact with Camilla.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Wow, this is amazing information. If Netfl*x is done with the Harkles, they will need many more donations to ArchW to sponsor their commute to work by private jets …
> 
> It looks like I guessed right about Camilla being the target of NF several posts ago. There are photos and video clips circulating that show NF very close to Camilla, and I got the impression that NF was attempting to interact with Camilla.



I am just utterly confused what they thought they'd get out of Camilla? At a public event with dozens of people?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Wow, this is amazing information. If Netfl*x is done with the Harkles, they will need many more donations to ArchW to sponsor their commute to work by private jets …
> 
> It looks like I guessed right about Camilla being the target of NF several posts ago. There are photos and video clips circulating that show NF very close to Camilla, and I got the impression that NF was attempting to interact with Camilla.


Isn’t the Ripple of Nope award next week?  In NYC?  How will they get there?






ETA: yes, you were indeed right about the NF sting.  KCIII will sort it out.  Hope the board of her charity removes her, too.  Time for these so-called ‘directors’ to be held accountable.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> *I am just utterly confused what they thought they'd get out of Camilla?* At a public event with dozens of people?


A similar interaction to the one NF had with LSH. Where are you from? Camilla should have recognized NF and avoided interacting with her. I would think she remembers the person that accused her of domestic violence against TW. LSH is a small fish compared to Camilla.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Seems like several charities involved with H&M are being scrutinized now


If you didn't watch the video explaining the $10M, please do. I'm posting it here again, because it's a huge eye opener for many of us.


----------



## marietouchet

WOW Just saw above video, nicely explained story of the shell corporation setup to protect the Harkle money (from the book) from having to pay income tax
If I understand it, the clothes, the planes are all expensed under the guise of charitable expenses
Legal way to avoid tax, but is it ethical to have your charity pay for your Diors ?

It is a tough listen, technical,  but worth the time
PS video is the PURPLE one in previous post, I lost the quote  while writing , my bad


----------



## Freak4Coach

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I am just utterly confused what they thought they'd get out of Camilla? At a public event with dozens of people?



Could she possibly be the one they wanted to pin the what color will the baby be comment on so they wanted supporting evidence?


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> WOW Just saw above video, nicely explained story of the shell corporation setup to protect the Harkle money (from the book) from having to pay income tax
> If I understand it, the clothes, the planes are all expensed under the guise of charitable expenses
> Legal way to avoid tax, but is it ethical to have your charity pay for your Diors ?
> 
> It is a tough listen, technical,  but worth the time
> PS video is the PURPLE one in previous post, I lost the quote  while writing , my bad


Well this is nothing new I guess, we knew the Diors and planes would be expensed somehow but as BUSINESS expenses not as expenses of a CHARITY
this is all legal, but sooo distasteful
Please correct me if I misrepresent the info on the video on DAFs


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> WOW Just saw above video, nicely explained story of the shell corporation setup to protect the Harkle money (from the book) from having to pay income tax
> If I understand it, the clothes, the planes are all expensed under the guise of charitable expenses
> Legal way to avoid tax, but is it ethical to have your charity pay for your Diors ?
> 
> It is a tough listen, technical,  but worth the time
> PS video is the PURPLE one in previous post, I lost the quote  while writing , my bad


Agree, excellent video. It is well worth the time to know *how* Arswell et al. are evading [?legally, not ethically?] the IRS.

Many have said it here before, after watching this video, you many want/need to reevaluate your charitable donations.  It’s a nightmare out there, tread carefully.


----------



## marietouchet

Freak4Coach said:


> Could she possibly be the one they wanted to pin the what color will the baby be comment on so they wanted supporting evidence?


Don’t forget, H has an axe to grind with Camilla, if she had only NOT had an affair with his BELOVED LATE mother …
We know Diana will come up every 5 min in the videos


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Don’t forget, H has an axe to grind with Camilla, if she had only NOT had an affair with his BELOVED LATE mother …
> We know Diana will come up every 5 min in the videos


Also, it will not stop when Charles passes away. Hazzi has axes to grind with W&K, their kids, the Brits, the US Bill of Rights, the US Constitution, ad nauseam.  Now, MM has other axes to grind - her father, sister, blah blah.

So, buckle up, buttercups.  We have *years* of angry lawsuits, tirades, snarls to look forward to.


----------



## Toby93

Interesting....TW was still living with Cory in March


----------



## marietouchet

Bad for SVCF ? What they are doing is totally legal per video, they allow people like Zuckerberg to park income intended to be used for charity, thereby reducing tax on the income.
 I am not sure the term


CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, excellent video. It is well worth the time to know *how* Arswell et al. are evading [?legally, not ethically?] the IRS.
> 
> Many have said it here before, after watching this video, you many want/need to reevaluate your charitable donations.  It’s a nightmare out there, tread carefully.


An interesting point in the video
1. H or his shell corp, probably had $10M not $20M, from his book advance.
2. $10M was put into an IRREVOCABLE a trust-like vehicle called a DAF.
3. The DAF benefits the Archewell charity, which pays for the clothes, planes.

So, H‘s $10M is now an illiquid asset, the DAF cannot be revoked. Can pay for planes to charity events, but not school tuition for the kids or braces.

Also, I will have to see the video for a 4th time, I kind of missed the details on income tax. H still has to pay SOME tax on his income


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> If you didn't watch the video explaining the $10M, please do. I'm posting it here again, because it's a huge eye opener for many of us.



It was a very good video and basically she is saying by directing where the charity money is going, you are creating you own slush fund if that is what your aim is.  How coincidental that Mandana Dayani, the Archewell director left her job.  What did she sniff out?  If the Harkles get called out on using funds inappropriately, she will get called out as the director.  

If anyone is interested in reading about the shenanigan's of this foundation, this is pretty good.  The rich get richer by not paying taxes and they they move their money around like a cup of sugar.  I give you a cup and then you give me a cup. 

Recall a few employees ago that the Harkles had a woman who managed  the Gates Foundation in their employ, Catherine St Laurent?  Maybe she gave them the low down on how to set all of this up and had the connections for them to get the 10 million donated to Archewell.  In an interview with Marie Clare Magazine here is what she had to say about Archewell and how it would work.  Please note that the word salad is present and was it the chicken or the egg as to to whom first started using "shine a light.?"

_CLS:  How do we use it to shine a light on others and on organizations? So, we used it to our advantage for impact. We took it and we redirected it, which I think was the best thing we could do from an organizational perspective. We knew it was there, but we chose to use it to shine a light on other people, on leaders that we thought were doing extraordinary things, on *organizations that we really admire that we want to partner with. *In some ways, the premise of the question is, what do you do when all that noise is happening? I think that we chose to take it and use it for good._

That was it folks.  She just gave the game plan that they have been following.  Pick a charity or business that is known and has actually done some good for people and use them to make it look as if they (Harry and Meghan) are being charitable and doing something for people by *partnering with the company or charity.  *

Getting back to SVCF:  Another advantage that this foundation set up has is that the money doesn't have to be distributed. The giving is donor directed.  If the donor doesn't instruct them to give it to a particular charity, the money just sits there.   SVCF only gave away 1/6 of total assets last year and they have billions of dollars sitting there getting interest and being invested.  Big money making more big money.  It is like a saving account that accrues interest that you don't have to declare on your taax return.  SVCF gets a nice fee to hold your money for you too.  

nfluencewatch.org/non-profit/silicon-valley-community-foundation/

_
 SVCF charges fees to hold donor funds in accounts with no minimum payout requirements, meaning that donors receive large, immediate tax breaks for supplying funding that can sit in a DAF indefinitely without actually being disbursed to charity as. __[11]_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> Interesting....TW was still living with Cory in March



In Oct 2016, when she started showing off her beaded bracelets that she was totally throwing herself at him. H has worn those kind of bracelets  forever. It is his thing
Ethnic, artisanal jewelry is not her thing, her thing is 18k Cartier


----------



## Chanbal

Freak4Coach said:


> Could she possibly be the one they wanted to pin the what color will the baby be comment on so they wanted supporting evidence?


I would bet on the above. If it was indeed a set-up, I'm convinced Camilla was the target. This should be a huge lesson for Camilla. She needs to stick to weather conversations with people she doesn't know well imo.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It was a very good video and basically she is saying by directing where the charity money is going, you are creating you own slush fund if that is what your aim is.  How coincidental that Mandana Dayani, the Archewell director left her job.  What did she sniff out?  If the Harkles get called out on using funds inappropriately, she will get called out as the director.
> 
> If anyone is interested in reading about the shenanigan's of this foundation, this is pretty good.  The rich get richer by not paying taxes and they they move their money around like a cup of sugar.  I give you a cup and then you give me a cup.
> 
> Recall a few employees ago that the Harkles had a woman who managed  the Gates Foundation in their employ, Catherine St Laurent?  Maybe she gave them the low down on how to set all of this up and had the connections for them to get the 10 million donated to Archewell.  In an interview with Marie Clare Magazine here is what she had to say about Archewell and how it would work.  Please note that the word salad is present and was it the chicken or the egg as to to whom first started using "shine a light.?"
> 
> _CLS:  How do we use it to shine a light on others and on organizations? So, we used it to our advantage for impact. We took it and we redirected it, which I think was the best thing we could do from an organizational perspective. We knew it was there, but we chose to use it to shine a light on other people, on leaders that we thought were doing extraordinary things, on *organizations that we really admire that we want to partner with. *In some ways, the premise of the question is, what do you do when all that noise is happening? I think that we chose to take it and use it for good._
> 
> That was it folks.  She just gave the game plan that they have been following.  Pick a charity or business that is known and has actually done some good for people and use them to make it look as if they (Harry and Meghan) are being charitable and doing something for people by *partnering with the company or charity.  *
> 
> Getting back to SVCF:  Another advantage that this foundation set up has is that the money doesn't have to be distributed. The giving is donor directed.  If the donor doesn't instruct them to give it to a particular charity, the money just sits there.   SVCF only gave away 1/6 of total assets last year and they have billions of dollars sitting there getting interest and being invested.  Big money making more big money.  It is like a saving account that accrues interest that you don't have to declare on your taax return.  SVCF gets a nice fee to hold your money for you too.
> 
> nfluencewatch.org/non-profit/silicon-valley-community-foundation/
> 
> 
> _SVCF charges fees to hold donor funds in accounts with no minimum payout requirements, meaning that donors receive large, immediate tax breaks for supplying funding that can sit in a DAF indefinitely without actually being disbursed to charity as. __[11]_


SVCF is kind of like escrow company where you park your money intended for charity. They do milk the minority angle to an unseemly amount, but they are in woke California.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> SVCF is kind of like escrow company where you park your money intended for charity. They do milk the minority angle to an unseemly amount, but they are in woke California.


It is like an escrow company.  The whole thing stinks.  What I am fuzzy about is how Harry supposedly writes the book, gets paid and it goes into a corporation.  Someplace in there, someone is paying some tax.  Does the corporation own the book and not Harry?  Does the corporation pay corporate tax on the publishing money?  Once they have the money and tax paid, then they can donate it to SVCF who then sends it to Archewell as you (Harry) have directed?  If the corporation owns the book, does that protect Harry from law suits?  As far as we know, the Sussex have several LLC, but did Harry incorporate himself as well to protect himself legally?

All I can say is that if any of the above is true, then Harry and Meghan spent tons of money on legal and accounting advice and that is probably why they can't pay the electric bill.  I still think there is a third party with brains who is running their show.


----------



## Chanbal

Twitter will not rest until the $10M will be clarified. I wonder when DM will start investigating this…


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> It is like an escrow company.  The whole thing stinks.  What I am fuzzy about is how Harry supposedly writes the book, gets paid and it goes into a corporation.  Someplace in there, someone is paying some tax.  Does the corporation own the book and not Harry?  Does the corporation pay corporate tax on the publishing money?  Once they have the money and tax paid, then they can donate it to SVCF who then sends it to Archewell as you (Harry) have directed?  If the corporation owns the book, does that protect Harry from law suits?  As far as we know, the Sussex have several LLC, but did Harry incorporate himself as well to protect himself legally?
> 
> All I can say is that if any of the above is true, then Harry and Meghan spent tons of money on legal and accounting advice and that is probably why they can't pay the electric bill.  I still think there is a third party with brains who is running their show.


Tyler Perry? Nacho? Referrals from them to friendly money people to help the Harkles?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Looks like we're not the only ones that don't buy their BS


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I wasn't expecting such question from a senior member? Aren't you aware of TW's creative powers?



I'm a "senior member"???!!!  
Wow, I'm a senior member and TW is no longer.  Muhuhahahahahahaha


----------



## Chanbal

The only way to to shut up the Harkles is to ignore them and let them run out of money imo. 



_Prince William, 40, is ready to challenge the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and will no longer sit back as they make 'dubious claims' about the Royal Family, palace insiders told The Sunday Express.

The palace is reportedly gearing up to swiftly respond to any inaccurate claims in the upcoming six-part documentary series Harry & Meghan.

*The report suggests the firm is willing to ditch the long-standing royal mantra of 'never complain, never explain'.*_ 









						William to push back 'wild claims' in Harry and Meghan's series
					

The Prince of Wales will apparently push back any 'wild claims' in Meghan Markle and his brother Prince Harry's  upcoming Netflix documentary, according to The Sunday Express.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jblended

Not sure if this is true, I can't find any other reporting on it:

''

If the BRF are going to start responding to slights, then the duo had better be careful. They'd better have proof of claims made in the mockumentary and any future interviews.  

Edit: Just saw the post above, with an article saying the same.



Chanbal said:


> The only way to to shut up the Harkles is to ignore them and let them run out of money imo.


I concur. I think allowing for a conversation via the press is a mistake and will lower the BRF to the level of these attention-seekers. The palace should let the duo keep shouting into the ether, whilst they carry on their royal duties with dignity.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harry Potter story made it to DM, and they found the right words to go with it.   It's not on Page Six yet. 




_*Image shows photographers purportedly snapping pictures of the Sussexes*_
_*However, they were actually alongside the red carpet at a Harry Potter premiere*_
_*JK Rowling, Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson all attended event in July 2011*_
_*That is five years before Harry and Meghan were first introduced in 2016*_
_It is understood that no members of the Royal Family attended the premiere._









						Photo of Sussexes' being pursued by press was taken before they met
					

The image shows a large number of photographers purportedly fighting for space to snap sought after pictures of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## pukasonqo

Maybe they could claim they have a TARDIS and travel accross space, time and reality so they were hounded by the press at a premiere in 2011 when they traveled back to the past


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One can only hope. Obviously now there are two children to think of.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This one is blowing up fast. Read the whole thread if you can.


----------



## jelliedfeels

pukasonqo said:


> Maybe they could claim they have a TARDIS and travel accross space, time and reality so they were hounded by the press at a premiere in 2011 when they traveled back to the past


H - Darling, um, right, yeah, now that we like have a TARDIS we can like finally take you to meet my mum and then, umm,  someone in my awful, racist family will see the star you really are….. 
m (hastily taking off choker and 80s blazer) what a wonderful idea- unfortunately I’m very busy all morning with it. I have to borrow Cleopatra so she can do a Skype call with me. Then I need to a photo shoot in front of all the 90s supermodels with them in rags covered in mud  - not that I’m interested in being judged for my looks. 


Chanbal said:


> The Harry Potter story made it to DM, and they found the right words to go with it.   It's not on Page Six yet.
> 
> View attachment 5665219
> 
> 
> _*Image shows photographers purportedly snapping pictures of the Sussexes*_
> _*However, they were actually alongside the red carpet at a Harry Potter premiere*_
> _*JK Rowling, Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson all attended event in July 2011*_
> _*That is five years before Harry and Meghan were first introduced in 2016*_
> _It is understood that no members of the Royal Family attended the premiere._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Photo of Sussexes' being pursued by press was taken before they met
> 
> 
> The image shows a large number of photographers purportedly fighting for space to snap sought after pictures of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Oh wow look at all those cameras no wonder Daniel, Emma and Rupert went crazy and lashed out at their own families and are constantly putting out puff pieces about how they live in complete paranoia and they have no lives.

Oh wait…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

I don’t believe the reports of PW hitting back or doing a press release.

that is like giving fuel to the narc (MM) as she thrives on attention and drama and wants to look like a victim that is being picked on by (a racist) powerful BRF.

They just need to ignore.  And don’t invite them to the coronation.  It’s not a family event.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ooops, hair touching. Tsk tsk


----------



## Hanton

Ms Fulani’s hairstyle that day seems to me quite deliberate (& provocative) to obscure the name badge.  I cannot see another image of her with her hair arranged in that way.  Mainly worn more on top and/or just a few ringlets.  I imagine Palace instructions would have stated the name badge should be Visible.  Lady SH would have spotted such an infraction a mile away.  Perhaps Ms Fulani was hoping Camilla would get caught out…


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One can only hope. Obviously now there are two children to think of.



Bring it on!  I foresee an almighty explosion once the Netflix shows and H’s memwahhh is out there.  I hope the RF cast the Harkles into the wilderness after all their lies and attacks.  I think the next couple of months will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.


----------



## jblended

I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear. 



Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer! 

OMG this comment has me rolling



> ​I love how generous they are - giving us another trailer because the last one got over 234 000 thumbs down. It must have been so hard to look at all those people giving you the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and yet, you still pushed through and gave us more of yourselves. Truly inspiring. Are you guys ok tho? Seriously, has everyone checked to make sure you’re doing ok ? I know not many people do that … or do recollections vary?


----------



## Icyjade

jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!




Clicked dislike on both videos. The YouTube comments are hilarious. We are clearly not alone in our dislike for the loathsome duo.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Wow, based on the trailer I saw this morning, it’s clearly a declaration of war.  I’m kind of speechless but must say I find the constant juxtaposition of them and Diana grotesque.  They are basically using her tragic story to make their story more dramatic, how sad.


----------



## EmilyM11

jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!
> 
> OMG this comment has me rolling



I'm confused. Who are they after now? I'm guessing the press? Apart from RF of course. Or Brits? Or maybe Polish people (I know random, but maybe we also are racists?). 
I remember I worked then in Nottingham and there was massive excitement around their visit. Assume this will never happen lol.


----------



## lulilu

charlottawill said:


> This is particularly true in light of the fact that people tend to lose their verbal filter as they age.


This is a medical fact -- one part of the brain begins to fail its job.


youngster said:


> If these two women truly believed that, that MM was a "victim of domestic violence", then why did they accept the invitation and attend this event at BP?  Why go to an event hosted by Queen Camilla if they think Meghan's "in-laws" are so awful and they dislike them so much?  I wouldn't accept an invitation from people that I didn't like so why did they?


To look to make trouble.


----------



## WingNut

Icyjade said:


> Clicked dislike on both videos. The YouTube comments are hilarious. We are clearly not alone in our dislike for the loathsome duo.


The comments are hilarious, but seem to be somewhat auto-generated with how most of them begin..."I love the part where....".

And the statement from one that this release of the trailer is to correct the 2011 stock photo "error" by the elimination of it....


----------



## EmilyM11

Icyjade said:


> The YouTube comments are hilarious


My favourite


----------



## jblended

EmilyM111 said:


> Who are they after now?


I think @Mrs.Z  said it best- it's a declaration of war. Them vs. the world. They won't stop until they've blamed everyone else for their self-created misery.



WingNut said:


> but seem to be somewhat auto-generated with how most of them begin..."I love the part where....".


It's just a running joke now, so everyone is using it. They're getting roasted.
I wonder if Netflix cares whether the comments are positive or negative. In the end, it is publicity, engagement and possibly will lead to higher viewership.


----------



## EmilyM11

jblended said:


> I think @Mrs.Z  said it best- it's a declaration of war. *Them vs. the world*. They won't stop until they've blamed


Really don't want to be mean (as a person in counselling) but they need to see a psychiatrist PRONTO. If a regular person states things like that it's a sign of schizophrenia or at least borderline personality disorder.


----------



## Pessie

I’m not a lawyer, but I wonder at what point this constitutes defamation?


----------



## jblended

EmilyM111 said:


> Really don't want to be mean (as a person in counselling) but they need to see a psychiatrist PRONTO. If a regular person states things like that it's a sign of schizophrenia or at least borderline personality disorder.


To clarify, that is *my* interpretation of the message- they did not say those words. Sorry for causing confusion.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

I do not think Netflix cares, they are basically pouring gasoline on something, lighting a match and walking away only to marvel at the blaze.  

I do predict the show will be so overly dramatic, toxic and negative many will tune out after one or two episodes.


----------



## EmilyM11

EmilyM111 said:


> My favourite
> View attachment 5665331


I didn't realise you quoted it too! Bad at attention to detail. But great to see where picked this one as it's a really good one.


----------



## EmilyM11

jblended said:


> To clarify, that is *my* interpretation of the message- they did not say those words. Sorry for causing confusion.


I know but they honestly started listing so many various groups over last months, that I have that only advice for them. To see a professional. Not joking.


----------



## jblended

EmilyM111 said:


> To see a professional. Not joking.


I strongly suspect that they have filmed their therapy sessions and that will be included in the documentary. Time will tell if I'm right. (My opinion of any "professional" therapist who is willing to have their counseling televised is..._not good_).
At any rate, the therapy they are receiving (they have admitted to this, I believe) is clearly not helping as they seem to have lost touch with reality.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but we're in a cost of living crisis in the UK and it is utterly tone-deaf to have these insanely privileged people moaning about how hard their lives are.


----------



## EmilyM11

jblended said:


> I strongly suspect that they have filmed their therapy sessions and that will be included in the documentary. Time will tell if I'm right. (My opinion of any "professional" therapist who is willing to have their counseling televised is..._not good_).
> At any rate, the therapy they are receiving (they have admitted to this, I believe) is clearly not helping as they seem to have lost touch with reality.


I have a personal experience of overly victimising myself (due to real issues at work and family) and it took excellent counsellor to straighten up my thinking and make me actionable (fix work issues, become more confident, find better job - all done). But he was ruthless, he sometimes mocked me to show the scale of my self pity (but of course the therapy was meant to find reasons for this behaviour and fix them). I dread to think what would have happen to my life if I had a poor therapist who'd comfort me in the nonsense I was pulling. I would genuinely ruin my finance, career, marriage. Sorry for personal confession but I sometimes reflect on my experience and think it will be extreme for Harry.


----------



## EmilyM11

jblended said:


> Not to put too fine a point on it, but we're in a cost of living crisis in the UK and it is utterly tone-deaf to have these insanely privileged people moaning about how hard their lives are.


Ugh, sorry for double citing, I didn't know how to split a quote in the post. But! To put Hermes blanket in the centre of the trailer, when BBC floods us every day with cost of living crisis and photos of food banks, you have to either be a cretin or be trolled.


----------



## Genie27

So basically their claim is “she’s the rockstar, the others (Chuck, Cammie, Katie and Willie) in the BRF are jealous of her magnificence and popularity, and plotted/connived to discredit her?”

No, lady - you guys are transparent in your own conniving and grifting. 

Stop Using the Diana “Archetype” for your own life. Gigglesnort.


----------



## jblended

EmilyM111 said:


> and it took excellent counsellor to straighten up my thinking and make me actionable (fix work issues, become more confident, find better job - all done)


Congratulations on the excellent work done!   


EmilyM111 said:


> I dread to think what would have happen to my life if I had a poor therapist


I know that getting a poor therapist sent me spiraling into a very deep depression and worsened my issues. Finding a good one is hard. The issue with the duo is that they have access to the best of the best; they can get therapy that helps them heal from all their trauma, but they profit from victimhood so I'm not sure they want to heal.


----------



## EmilyM11

jblended said:


> Congratulations on the excellent work done!
> 
> I know that getting a poor therapist sent me spiraling into a very deep depression and worsened my issues. Finding a good one is hard. The issue with the duo is that they have access to the best of the best; they can get therapy that helps them heal from all their trauma, but they profit from victimhood so I'm not sure they want to heal.


Thank you 
What I found the hardest was to listen & trust counsellor around what is in my head and what could be real (in a way - other <work> people are not against me, they just don't think, it's business decisions, I didn't build relationships etc.).
Now - somebody like Haz, who always got what he wanted and had people either agreeing with him (politeness, friends who cant be asked to fight with his imagination, staff who can't really oppose) OR even fuel his paranoia, will have it unbelievably hard to agree with a therapist on a different POV than his own.
You are a spot on on the profit. Even if it wasn't money, it stops him from taking responsibility for his life. LIke he would have to work??? Earn respect without mummy dearest shadow?


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It is like an escrow company.  The whole thing stinks.  What I am fuzzy about is how Harry supposedly writes the book, gets paid and it goes into a corporation.  Someplace in there, someone is paying some tax.  Does the corporation own the book and not Harry?  Does the corporation pay corporate tax on the publishing money?  Once they have the money and tax paid, then they can donate it to SVCF who then sends it to Archewell as you (Harry) have directed?  If the corporation owns the book, does that protect Harry from law suits?  As far as we know, the Sussex have several LLC, but did Harry incorporate himself as well to protect himself legally?
> 
> All I can say is that if any of the above is true, then Harry and Meghan spent tons of money on legal and accounting advice and that is probably why they can't pay the electric bill.  I still think there is a third party with brains who is running their show.


Does corporation pay corporate tax ? If it is an LLC, the LLC reports the net income to the personal return ie the ginormous  income after ginormous expenses. The petite net income goes to the personal return , so taxed at personal rate
Hillary and Bill have a pile of LLCs, rememeber she published her personal return? I read it.  The interesting stuff would be on the unpublished LLC returns not the pristine personal return


----------



## LittleStar88

Harry is really white-knuckle clinging to using his mom for every chance at making a dollar. He’s no better than the institution he’s claiming has caused him so much pain.

I can’t think of any therapist who would say what he is doing is good for him. 

So their show makes a little ripple in December, then the new year begins and the world moves on with recession and all the other struggles people have to content with. These two get their five minutes of Oprah Part Two and after that, what? Squeezed all the woe is me out of the Hermes blanket of a story they’ve been marching. They have nothing left after this. Bridges all burned.


----------



## marietouchet

jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!
> 
> OMG this comment has me rolling



The new color trailer has a je ne said quoi STRAIGHT OUT OF THE TABLOIDS artistic design
Only 2 episodes are mentioned 
It promises to tell us the truth of what happened … popcorn please


----------



## BittyMonkey

marietouchet said:


> Does corporation pay corporate tax ? If it is an LLC, the ginormous  income from the LLC corp - after ginormous expenses. The petite net income goes to the personal return , so taxed at personal rate
> Hillary and Bill have a pile of LLCs, rememeber she published her personal return? I read it.  The interesting stuff would be on the unpublished LLC returns not the pristine personal return


LLCs do pay taxes on their holdings and business incorporation, which is why so many of them are formed in Delaware. Real estate LLCs, even if owned by a nonprofit, pay standard property tax, etc.


----------



## EmilyM11

LittleStar88 said:


> So their show makes a little ripple in December, then the new year begins and the world moves on with recession and all the other struggles people have to content with. These two get their five minutes of Oprah Part Two and after that, what? Squeezed all the woe is me out of the Hermes blanket of a story they’ve been marching. *They have nothing left after this. Bridges all burned.*


I suppose they will send us for hunger games with them. There are a lot of topics to exploit, eg. me too.


----------



## jblended

marietouchet said:


> Only 2 episodes are mentioned


I read that the first 3 episodes are released on the 8th, the last 3 are released on the 15th. 

I'm kind of grateful that they'll all have aired before the King's first xmas speech so that it's not overshadowed but, depending on how the public reacts, it may have an impact on how his speech is received.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sophisticatted

Chanbal said:


> The only way to to shut up the Harkles is to ignore them and let them run out of money imo.
> 
> View attachment 5665216
> 
> _Prince William, 40, is ready to challenge the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and will no longer sit back as they make 'dubious claims' about the Royal Family, palace insiders told The Sunday Express.
> 
> The palace is reportedly gearing up to swiftly respond to any inaccurate claims in the upcoming six-part documentary series Harry & Meghan.
> 
> *The report suggests the firm is willing to ditch the long-standing royal mantra of 'never complain, never explain'.*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William to push back 'wild claims' in Harry and Meghan's series
> 
> 
> The Prince of Wales will apparently push back any 'wild claims' in Meghan Markle and his brother Prince Harry's  upcoming Netflix documentary, according to The Sunday Express.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Imagine if the Harkles planted this.  If William doesn’t respond, it makes it seem like there is nothing to complain about.  If he does, THEIR show gets extra publicity.


----------



## LittleStar88

jblended said:


> I read that the first 3 episodes are released on the 8th, the last 3 are released on the 15th.
> 
> I'm kind of grateful that they'll all have aired before the King's first xmas speech so that it's not overshadowed but, depending on how the public reacts, it may have an impact on how his speech is received.



I wonder if it will also impact what is said. Those two may very well be writing themselves straight out of the family and all future events.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> It is like an escrow company.  The whole thing stinks.  What I am fuzzy about is how Harry supposedly writes the book, gets paid and it goes into a corporation.  Someplace in there, someone is paying some tax.  Does the corporation own the book and not Harry?  Does the corporation pay corporate tax on the publishing money?  Once they have the money and tax paid, then they can donate it to SVCF who then sends it to Archewell as you (Harry) have directed?  If the corporation owns the book, does that protect Harry from law suits?  As far as we know, the Sussex have several LLC, but did Harry incorporate himself as well to protect himself legally?
> 
> All I can say is that if any of the above is true, then Harry and Meghan spent tons of money on legal and accounting advice and that is probably why they can't pay the electric bill.  I still think there is a third party with brains who is running their show.


The book money is now stuck in the DAF, it is not H’s anymore 

This DAF reminds me of Chateau Miraval , jointly owned by Pitt and Angie - til she sold, now Pitt’s valuable vineyard is in a legal quagmire , it is a money pit not an asset


----------



## marietouchet

Sophisticatted said:


> Imagine if the Harkles planted this.  If William doesn’t respond, it makes it seem like there is nothing to complain about.  If he does, THEIR show gets extra publicity.


KC3 and W are supposedly holding crisis talks, and won’t do anything til after the ripple award tomorrow 
I think this leak is just to say to the Harkles, WE SAW YOU and disturb the release of the color reality show trailer


----------



## lallybelle

LOL holy dramatics Batman!  The Diana juxtapositions are infuriating. AS IF....


----------



## lanasyogamama

So if the show is out in a few days, it doesn’t look like they are doing a big press tour of the morning or evening chat shows to promote it.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> I wonder if it will also impact what is said. Those two may very well be writing themselves straight out of the family and all future events.


I do hope so.  No way they should be seen at anything royal, ever.


----------



## marietouchet

SUGGESTED VIEWING
I am blown away by the last two YouTube videos by TRG - the royal grift - tech analysis of Meg Bots and DAFs, the ones with purple icons in this thread
I noted TRG has a lot of videos - a few have PURPLE icons - I hope those have more IN DEPTH  analysis beyond the Hermes blankie
I think she uses PURPLE icons to distinguish the videos with her own personal research
My prob is that I watched the DAF one 3 times … slow going … I too want my own charitable DAF


----------



## skyqueen

How odd! 

This song really does exist!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok, at this point I strongly believe someone must be trolling them big time. WTF


----------



## CarryOn2020

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm confused. Who are they after now? I'm guessing the press? Apart from RF of course. Or Brits? Or maybe Polish people (I know random, but maybe we also are racists?).
> I remember I worked then in Nottingham and there was massive excitement around their visit. Assume this will never happen lol.


The world, they are after the world.  


marietouchet said:


> SUGGESTED VIEWING
> I am blown away by the last two YouTube videos by TRG - the royal grift - tech analysis of Meg Bots and DAFs, the ones with purple icons in this thread
> I noted TRG has a lot of videos - a few have PURPLE icons - I hope those have more IN DEPTH  analysis beyond the Hermes blankie
> I think she uses PURPLE icons to distinguish the videos with her own personal research
> My prob is that I watched the DAF one 3 times … slow going … I too want my own charitable DAF


Yes, yes, let’s start our own daf.  Hells bells, I’ve got to learn more about this stuff.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

marietouchet said:


> The new color trailer has a je ne said quoi STRAIGHT OUT OF THE TABLOIDS artistic design
> Only 2 episodes are mentioned
> It promises to tell us the truth of what happened … popcorn please


The truth is on the editor’s cutting room floor


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> SVCF is kind of like escrow company where you park your money intended for charity. They do milk the minority angle to an unseemly amount, but they are in woke California.


And SVCF invests the Archewell money until it is paid out per Archewell grand poobahs (it is no longer H's money) , so SVCF charges a fee for its investment services. The capital earns money, and the earnings are hopefully more than the fees. But, investment go up and  down, hopefully it was not all in last week's crypto catastrophe company


----------



## Chanbal

jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!
> 
> OMG this comment has me rolling






EmilyM111 said:


> I know but they honestly started listing so many various groups over last months, that I have that only advice for them. *To see a professional. *Not joking.


Banker? In addition to the BRF, they are allegedly after tons of money…

Many Twitter posts have been referring to him as the racist within the BRF. I don't know if he is or not, but he looks like a repugnant little man imo.


----------



## Toby93

That really does look odd?  They seem to have a lot of pics of her *pregnancy* as if to try to convince the undecided that she really was


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

skyqueen said:


> How odd!
> 
> This song really does exist!



The photo from the Harry Potter movie, the song… I'm starting to think there is someone at Netfl*x with a good sense of humor and may not be a Harkles' fan…


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> And SVCF invests the Archewell money until it is paid out per Archewell grand poobahs (it is no longer H's money) , so SVCF charges a fee for its investment services. The capital earns money, and the earnings are hopefully more than the fees. But, investment go up and  down, hopefully it was not all in last week's crypto catastrophe company


Doesn’t the donor decide where the money goes?  So, if Arsewell has its own charity that they themselves manage, then they are simply paying themselves.  Now, it is clear why they wanted people to donate to them so they could put it in their daf and pay themselves.  I call on the IRS to investigate.  Shady stuff. Imo

ETA:  not that the IRS listens to me, but it feels powerful to say that.  If Chas and W won’t stop H&M’s pity party, maybe the IRS will.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> The photo from the Harry Potter movie, the song… I'm starting to think there is someone at Netfl*x with a good sense of humor and may not be a Harkles' fan…


Let’s hope so. Keep in mind that they jerked Netflix around for a long time before getting production of this show going. Netflix would have much preferred to have had the completed show a year ago when there was more interest. Working with those two had to be an absurd and aggravating experience for all involved.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Chanbal

Edit: Deleted the 2nd paparazzi photo, @CarryOn2020 posted it first, see above 

An interesting view on the Netfl*x reality show:


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> That really does look odd?  They seem to have a lot of pics of her *pregnancy* as if to try to convince the undecided that she really was



The video focuses on race ... jaw drop .. Tomorrow's ripple speech will say see video. And they can get off the stage quickly, privately jet off to hide behind the ramparts at Casa Montecito when things go nuclear At Netflix.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


>




So this is truly a MOCKUMENTARY. Using fabrication to create a story. 

I can't wait for this to be picked apart in glorious detail.


----------



## 880

EmilyM111 said:


> I have a personal experience of overly victimising myself (due to real issues at work and family) and it took excellent counsellor to straighten up my thinking and make me actionable (fix work issues, become more confident, find better job - all done). But he was ruthless, he sometimes mocked me to show the scale of my self pity (but of course the therapy was meant to find reasons for this behaviour and fix them). I dread to think what would have happen to my life if I had a poor therapist who'd comfort me in the nonsense I was pulling. I would genuinely ruin my finance, career, marriage. Sorry for personal confession but I sometimes reflect on my experience and think it will be extreme for Harry.


I am slightly scared of counseling, so I admire your bravery. i Don’t care for M, but I honestly think Harry was unhappy and wanted to leave before she came into the picture. I think most likely he was always bitter and resentful deep down about being number 2 (though other members here have disagreed with me); about Dianas death; about Camilla; and he latched onto the race card just as eagerly as she did. I think she would have been happy to be a white princess, a second Kate* If she could have done so as a popularity contest. JMO

ETA: I saw a comment on line that HM would be respected more if he came out and said Yeah I was always jealous of being the spare and I agree with that. Bottom line is I think M is a grasping, greedy wanna be, but H is equally culpable. he was an idiot way before.

* to clarify, I meant after Kate chronologically


----------



## LittleStar88

Found the actual term for this sh!tshow.









						Docufiction - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> So this is truly a MOCKUMENTARY. Using fabrication to create a story.
> 
> I can't wait for this to be picked apart in glorious detail.


The clarion call has gone forth throughout the land:


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Twitter Humor!


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> So this is truly a *MOCKUMENTARY*. Using fabrication to create a story.
> 
> I can't wait for this to be picked apart in glorious detail.


Look at this…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Edit: Deleted the 2nd paparazzi photo, @CarryOn2020 posted it first, see above
> 
> An interesting view on the Netfl*x reality show:



 apologies, dear one. It’s the _great minds _principle.   I will refrain from posting the tweets.  As we know, they are on fire today and  most likely will continue until this monstrous docu-thing is released.  

I leave it to you.


----------



## xincinsin

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm confused. Who are they after now? I'm guessing the press? Apart from RF of course. Or Brits? Or maybe Polish people (I know random, but maybe we also are racists?).
> I remember I worked then in Nottingham and there was massive excitement around their visit. Assume this will never happen lol.


Have they gone after the Commonwealth yet? Zed needs to up her game. Offending one country at a time is too slow.


WingNut said:


> The comments are hilarious, but seem to be somewhat auto-generated with how most of them begin..."I love the part where....".
> 
> And the statement from one that this release of the trailer is to correct the 2011 stock photo "error" by the elimination of it....


Many of the "I love the part..." sarcastic comments are riffs on famous iconic movie scenes with the almighty Douchebagess copycatting characters like The Terminator. The rest call them out on their hypocrisy. I am glad many people are seeing through their "glamour" (in the witchcraft sense) and taking note of their dishonourable behaviour.


Pessie said:


> I’m not a lawyer, but I wonder at what point this constitutes defamation?


They probably passed that point a long time ago. Someone mentioned they needed the owner's consent to bring their photographer into Buckingham Palace and Anmer Hall? Betcha Sparry will whine and bluster that it doesn't apply to them because they are "family" (the most treacherous and traitorous backstabbing Judas family possible).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

lanasyogamama said:


> So if the show is out in a few days, it doesn’t look like they are doing a big press tour of the morning or evening chat shows to promote it.


I hope it meant none of the shows would have them on and all the newest crockery is being smashed in the sad, pathetic house ( not home) in Montecito.


----------



## bag-mania

Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> apologies, dear one. It’s the _great minds _principle.   *I will refrain from posting the tweets.*  As we know, they are on fire today and  most likely will continue until this monstrous docu-thing is released.
> 
> I leave it to you.
> View attachment 5665408


Haha! Please keep posting the interesting tweets, we must keep this thread updated.   

I'm still in a state of shock from the second video.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> The new color trailer has a je ne said quoi STRAIGHT OUT OF THE TABLOIDS artistic design
> Only 2 episodes are mentioned
> It promises to tell us the truth of what happened … popcorn please





jblended said:


> I read that the first 3 episodes are released on the 8th, the last 3 are released on the 15th.
> 
> I'm kind of grateful that they'll all have aired before the King's first xmas speech so that it's not overshadowed but, depending on how the public reacts, it may have an impact on how his speech is received.


I was taken aback when the trailer called it Volume 1 on Dec 8th and Volume 2 on Dec 15th. How much more pompous can you get? A conglomeration of lies, false accusations and hypocrisy masquerading as truth, with the "stars" playing themselves.
Casa Monteshiteshow, 10pm, random day
H: Where's the photog?
Hapless Hired Help: He went to the bathroom.
H: Go get him! 
HHH: But ... 16 bathrooms...
H: Search them all! Meghan wants to cry now! What she wants, she gets!


lanasyogamama said:


> So if the show is out in a few days, it doesn’t look like they are doing a big press tour of the morning or evening chat shows to promote it.


I thought  Sucks had everything lined up for them till next March? Or is Netflix trying to safeguard the juicy falsehoods, considering what blabbermouths Zed and her  are.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?
> 
> View attachment 5665419


The BLG is going to do that and update us minute by minute. While this is likely a business for him, he does a great job at it. I prefer that the $$$ goes to him than to the Harkles. And, we can also count on the very loyal DM…  

I prefer a disbelief watch (don't like the term 'hate watch'), but whoever posted this makes a valid point…


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?
> 
> View attachment 5665419


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5665424


Reddit humor, this time.


----------



## lulu212121

bag-mania said:


> Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?
> 
> View attachment 5665419


Nope!


----------



## Mrs.Z

lanasyogamama said:


> So if the show is out in a few days, it doesn’t look like they are doing a big press tour of the morning or evening chat shows to promote it.


Omg no, they would probably have to answer some confusing questions about their ”truth”


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?
> 
> View attachment 5665419


Yes, I am….Thursday right after my hair appointment!


----------



## Molly0

lulu212121 said:


> Nope!


This!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

880 said:


> I am slightly scared of counseling, so I admire your bravery. i Don’t care for M, but I honestly think Harry was unhappy and wanted to leave before she came into the picture. I think most likely he was always bitter and resentful deep down about being number 2 (though other members here have disagreed with me); about Dianas death; about Camilla; and he latched onto the race card just as eagerly as she did. *I think she would have been happy to be a white princess, a second Kate If she could have done so as a popularity contest. *JMO



I really don't think her overinflated ego wanted to be 2nd anything.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?



It won't be me, sorry to let you down.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Netflix Germany is advertising it as well.


----------



## DoggieBags

My favorite comment on YouTube so far.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Crazy! They’re crazy like insane in the asylum crazy. 

She reminds me of the women in the show “Meet, Marry, Murder.” Every women they’ve profiled have her personality traits. At least I think so.


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!
> 
> OMG this comment has me rolling



He is bonkers....totally trashing his own family - "this institution".....if this doesn't cause Charles to cut him off I don't know what will


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> He is bonkers....totally trashing his own family - "this institution".....if this doesn't cause Charles to cut him off I don't know what will


Meghan says protect him? They’ve been protecting him from his stupidity. Making drama out of nothing.


----------



## Sharont2305

Forget about the LOS re the Wales children because at the moment they are just that, children, does she understand that she is actually the third most senior woman in the BRF? Isn't that enough?


----------



## rose60610

For a guy who trashes his family, defends TW in calling them "racist",  and "trapped", he sure didn't mind getting the 50 million dollar wedding, Frogmore, all the perks of royal life including private jets, etc.  Was the plan to make Will step aside and make Haz King and Claw Queen? When that didn't pan out, all of a sudden the RF was full of horrible people. Timing, timing, timing....


----------



## Lodpah

bellecate said:


> I hope it meant none of the shows would have them on and all the newest crockery is being smashed in the sad, pathetic house ( not home) in Montecito.


Nah, they’ve run out of crockery. She’s looking for SAMs now.


----------



## Chanbal

In continuous disbelief…


----------



## K.D.

I am a subscriber willing to submit myself to the torture, if only I didn't have one of those pesky jobs I should definitely quit like JCMH says hahaha



bag-mania said:


> Is anyone here a Netflix subscriber with a strong stomach who is willing to take one for the team, watch it and report back?
> 
> View attachment 5665419





CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5665424


As they mention ' hierarchy ' a million times in the latest trailer, I guess no. Or they just don't understand how the system works. Which is plausible  


Sharont2305 said:


> Forget about the LOS re the Wales children because at the moment they are just that, children, does she understand that she is actually the third most senior woman in the BRF? Isn't that enough?


----------



## jblended

Chanbal said:


> In continuous disbelief…


This is the thing that's confusing me...
I am sure that the duo will be listed as producers on this mockumentary (again, time will tell if I'm right), which would mean that they have a say in the final edit (and the choice of images to include). Why would they knowingly include images and imply meaning that can be so easily disproven? Do they enjoy being ridiculed?


----------



## LittleStar88

The YouTube comments are pure gold! It's an accidental gift from them! They are getting seriously ROASTED!


----------



## rose60610

"When the stakes are this high"--Claw makes it sound like they're in an episode of The Hunger Games and they'll die if they don't get to participate and wallow in the inner circle of the RF.


----------



## LittleStar88

They are gaslighting the entire nation while lining their pockets with misery​ 
            SARAH VINE            Daily Mail Columnist                      

*Archive Link HERE: 


			archive.ph
		

*
‘No one knows the full truth; we know the full truth.’ With those portentous words Prince Harry ends the second trailer for his Netflix documentary, part one of which is released in full on Thursday.

Or to put it another way, the gloves are well and truly off. Not that anyone really believed otherwise, given the Sussexes’ recent behaviour. But there was always a faint hope that they might retain some decorum, that certain areas might remain off limits even for them.

Not so. That sounds like a threat, as clear as it is sinister.

Two things stand out. First, the weaponisation of Princess Diana and her own experience as a royal consort in order to elevate Meghan. It’s hardly surprising: Harry has mentioned his wife before in the context of his mother, but this goes one step further.

By placing footage of the late Princess Diana alongside images of Meghan in various stages of distress, the message is clear: the two are virtually one and the same.

This is clever. Not only does it enlist (and enrage) the armies of Princess Diana fans who still, to this day, believe she was assassinated by the Royal Family and who will, no doubt, sally forth on social media to spread the gospel; it also allows Meghan to inherit Diana’s iconic status. Which is presumably useful when pitching victim narratives to Netflix.

But when you think about it, it’s a really cheap shot, not only because it’s effectively monetising Diana’s life (and death); but also because, let’s not forget, Harry isn’t Diana’s only son. One can only imagine how Prince William must feel about Harry appropriating their late mother in this way.

Second, race. ‘It’s about race,’ says one of the talking heads in this trailer. Harry and Meghan left because the Royal Family — and, it would seem from this, most of the British media, are racist. Really? But I thought you just told us it was all about history repeating itself? Diana wasn’t mixed race, was she? So how can it be racist? Make up your minds, guys.

The lack of self-awareness is staggering. At one point Harry intones, in his now familiar Voice of Doom, about ‘the pain and suffering of women marrying into this institution, this feeding frenzy’.

I’m sorry? Come again? What about your constant attacks on the institution into which another woman — the Princess of Wales — married?

Or does Kate not count because she doesn’t spend all her time playing the victim, weeping and wailing about how awful her life is — but just gets on with it instead of finding fault at every turn? Does she not count because, unlike Meghan, she has managed to make a success of being a royal consort?

The trailer starts with Harry telling us: ‘It’s really hard to look back on it and go, “what on earth really happened?”’
No, Harry, it’s not. It’s very easy. Let me spell it out for you.

You and Meghan had it all: a very comfortable life complete with all the advantages of your station, the adoration of the British public, a positive platform from which to pursue your passions.

Meghan was welcomed with open arms and total sincerity; you had a £30 million wedding with cheering crowds from Windsor to Wolverhampton; Prince Charles walked Meghan down the aisle; you were part of the ‘Fab Four’, the future of the Royal Family.
The tide turned only because of _your_ behaviour: the diva demands; the jealousy towards other royals; that baby shower; those private jets; the ingratitude; the hypocrisy; the ungracious rows over tiaras and Frogmore.

What happened, Harry, was that people started to question some of your and Meghan’s choices, and you didn’t like that.
And instead of wondering whether people might have a point when they said they didn’t much like being lectured about climate change by someone who seemed to use private air travel as an Uber; instead of checking your and your wife’s privilege (to use a phrase beloved by your new American friends), you threw a massive hissy fit and now make allegations of racism.

And here you are, gaslighting the entire nation while lining your pockets with your so-called misery. And I’m sorry, but it won’t wash. In my view it’s nothing to do with hate, and it’s nothing to do with race.

Your paymasters at Netflix may fall for this nonsense but the British public sees straight through you. That, I’m afraid, is the ‘full truth’.


----------



## Chanbal

Two very good posts imo.


----------



## V0N1B2

Chanbal said:


> Look at this…



Laugh, Cry... Who can tell, really.  She is the worst f*cking actress on the planet so I’m not worried about anyone watching the fictional reality series and thinking any of her emotions are real. Even if she manages to pull out the classic Meghan - Left Eye - Tear - GO! her stiff, wooden acting “skills” just aren’t believable.  
And people thought Elizabeth Berkeley was tragic in Showgirls... 
Just wait ‘til the Netfux series comes out.


----------



## Gal4Dior

I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.

So you do a 6 part doc, or whatever, to expose BRF and blow it up to get the big Netflix payout...then what? What else do you have to talk about? What else is there to sell to pay for your overextended and privileged lifestyle?

We all know Sparry is daft AF, so this is definitely TW's bright idea for their "financial path forward."

They don't really draw enough interest for folks to fork over additional major cash for large projects, so they'll have to scam their titles until PCIII removes them, and I certainly hope that is very soon. TW is only looking for titles for their kiddos just to reap the financial benefits. She thinks she's Kris Jenner, but she's just sad 'ole Kaitlyn Jenner.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Gal4Dior said:


> I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.
> 
> So you do a 6 part doc, or whatever, to expose BRF and blow it up to get the big Netflix payout...then what? What else do you have to talk about? What else is there to sell to pay your overextended and privileged lifestyle?
> 
> We all know Sparry is daft AF, so this is definitely TW's bright idea for their "financial path forward."
> 
> They don't really draw enough interest for folks to fork over additional major cash for large projects, so they'll have to scam their titles until PCIII removes them, and I certainly hope that is very soon. TW is only looking for titles for their kiddos just to reap the financial benefits. She thinks she's Kris Jenner, but she's just sad 'ole Kaitlyn Jenner.


I was just thinking of the same thing. What now? The interview - done. The book - done. The series - done.

The only thing I can think of is TW and Handbag turn on each other and the drama continues. It’s like they keep poking to get a reaction from the BRF but they’re not biting. 

People like to see a solution and happy endings but they keep pushing the envelop.


----------



## Lodpah

Too bad there are no journalists out there who interviews them and ask the hard questions. Such horrible journalism nowadays. Or they don’t allow to be interviews by the hard hitters.


----------



## Chanbal

jblended said:


> This is the thing that's confusing me...
> I am sure that the duo will be listed as producers on this mockumentary (again, time will tell if I'm right), which would mean that they have a say in the final edit (and the choice of images to include). Why would they knowingly include images and imply meaning that can be so easily disproven? Do they enjoy being ridiculed?


I think they trust the majority of people are stupid and will buy their trash. Without their connections to the BRF, Hazz would be a nobody, and TW an ex Z-list actress in search of another victim.
The Harkles are very cruel people.


----------



## Lodpah

I just had a thought. When they are attacking the BRF they are attacking the British people too. They are also insulting all those world leaders who put out releases about the the Queen and attended her funeral and all had good things to say. 

I mean who is going to believe these two supposedly liars? Those in positions know of wayward and bratty people and I think their sense of entitlement and delusions of their greatness will eventually collapse. 

They’re just a carnival act being played out on the internet.


----------



## Chanbal

I'm starting to believe that I'm dreaming, and this is not happening…     




_*First trailer showed footage from a Harry Potter premiere and a photo of when Harry was dating Chelsy Davy*_
_*It's now emerged clips from the second Netflix teaser - which was released today - are also not as they seem*_
_*One brief clip of Michael Cohen in New York cuts to video of duchess dabbing her eyes, seemingly in tears  *_
_*REPORT: Sources say senior family members are planning a 'business as usual approach' to the documentary*_
_*A brief clip from the latest trailer shows a group of photographers rushing towards a concrete building which is clearly identifiable as Crawley Magistrates Court* - where former glamour model Ms Price appeared last December to be sentenced for drink driving. '*I was terrified - I didn't want history to repeat itself,' Harry says as the footage is played*. 

*Another piece of video shows photographers huddling around a car as Meghan says *- referring to the royal household - 'I realised they are never going to protect you'. It then cuts to an image of Meghan dabbing her eyes, seemingly in tears.

*But rather than showing the Sussexes being hounded, the footage is in fact of Mr Cohen, *****'s former personal attorney, leaving his New York apartment in 2019 to serve time in prison for financial crimes, campaign finance violations and lying to Congress.* _









						Harry and Meghan trailer uses video of Trump's lawyer and Katie Price
					

A brief clip from the latest trailer shows a group of photographers rushing towards a concrete building which is clearly identifiable as Crawly Magistrates Court.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Pessie

Two points from me: 
1. The British press never pursued Meghan in the way they did Diana, Kate or even Fergie and Sophie.  Hence the *borrowed* photos.
2. I’d bet any money Harry was watching the England game last night just like the rest of us.  Sad git.


----------



## lishukha

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to believe that I'm dreaming, and this is not happening…
> 
> View attachment 5665514
> 
> 
> _*First trailer showed footage from a Harry Potter premiere and a photo of when Harry was dating Chelsy Davy*_
> _*It's now emerged clips from the second Netflix teaser - which was released today - are also not as they seem*_
> _*One brief clip of Michael Cohen in New York cuts to video of duchess dabbing her eyes, seemingly in tears  *_
> _*REPORT: Sources say senior family members are planning a 'business as usual approach' to the documentary*_
> _*A brief clip from the latest trailer shows a group of photographers rushing towards a concrete building which is clearly identifiable as Crawley Magistrates Court* - where former glamour model Ms Price appeared last December to be sentenced for drink driving. '*I was terrified - I didn't want history to repeat itself,' Harry says as the footage is played*.
> 
> *Another piece of video shows photographers huddling around a car as Meghan says *- referring to the royal household - 'I realised they are never going to protect you'. It then cuts to an image of Meghan dabbing her eyes, seemingly in tears.
> 
> *But rather than showing the Sussexes being hounded, the footage is in fact of Mr Cohen, *****'s former personal attorney, leaving his New York apartment in 2019 to serve time in prison for financial crimes, campaign finance violations and lying to Congress.* _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan trailer uses video of Trump's lawyer and Katie Price
> 
> 
> A brief clip from the latest trailer shows a group of photographers rushing towards a concrete building which is clearly identifiable as Crawly Magistrates Court.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Agree  it just proves to show how delusional these two are. What a joke.


----------



## marietouchet

Gal4Dior said:


> I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.
> 
> So you do a 6 part doc, or whatever, to expose BRF and blow it up to get the big Netflix payout...then what? What else do you have to talk about? What else is there to sell to pay for your overextended and privileged lifestyle?
> 
> We all know Sparry is daft AF, so this is definitely TW's bright idea for their "financial path forward."
> 
> They don't really draw enough interest for folks to fork over additional major cash for large projects, so they'll have to scam their titles until PCIII removes them, and I certainly hope that is very soon. TW is only looking for titles for their kiddos just to reap the financial benefits. She thinks she's Kris Jenner, but she's just sad 'ole Kaitlyn Jenner.


What is their ENDGAME ? The Harkles want a complete public apology, reinstatement on their own terms kind half in and half out. H said as much after the funeral or jubilee - no reconciliation until complete apology...
Will they get the 100 percent capitulation ? No.
Are they using a scorched earth technique to get there? Yup. I can think of an excellent analogy but it is political, so I omit it.
Why go scorched earth? Revenge, they see no other out, financial woes, silly idea (delusion) that 100 percent capitulation will bring happiness, they have no marketable skills except family bashing


----------



## Chanbal

It's certainly a dirty game the one you are playing.   










						Harry and Meghan's Netflix show will 'widen the rift with William'
					

Harry and Meghan's Netflix series is 'an amazing act of revenge' that will 'widen the rift' with William and  weaken the very institution he will inherit when he becomes King, royal experts said.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lallybelle

HOLY ****! Do you remember when we discussed Christopher Bouzy in reference to the Depp/Heard trial? He is the one who has the company that claims they found bots attacking both Amber and MM. Nate the Lawyer is suing him for defamation for some slander stuff anyways...

I am listening to his live stream and he is now being contacted about Bouzy as all these Media including the Daily Mail has interest now in him due to him being the Doc. He's the one who says "it was always about hate, it was always about race.". Nate has turned over all types of documents about Bouzy fraud in a bankruptcy and etc.  It's all going to come out about he (Bouzy) has been being paid by the Harkles to claim this "hate campaign". OMG, I am INVESTED...lol.


----------



## Stansy

gracekelly said:


> Sometimes I think that is the only reason he married her.  He wanted to shock his family.  How juvenile.  I'm sure some members of the greater family were not in favor of the marriage and that was probably true of his friends as well, and   it may not have had anything to do with race. Certainly the friends just might not have liked her.   The important people were The Queen and Charles and they gave the OK.


Imagine Hazzi not really wanting to marry her and then got stuck because he miscalculated, and HMTQ and Charles gave their okay


----------



## youngster

Gal4Dior said:


> I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.
> 
> So you do a 6 part doc, or whatever, to expose BRF and blow it up to get the big Netflix payout...then what? What else do you have to talk about?





Lodpah said:


> t’s like *they keep poking to get a reaction *from the BRF but they’re not biting.





marietouchet said:


> What is their ENDGAME ? *The Harkles want a complete public apology, reinstatement on their own terms kind half in and half out.* H said as much after the funeral or jubilee - no reconciliation until complete apology...
> Will they get the 100 percent capitulation ? No.
> Are they using a scorched earth technique to get there? Yup.



The bottom line is that this is all about money and the two of them not getting the half-in/half-out deal they wanted 3 years ago.  Doesn't matter that the Queen, Charles and the suits at BP explained to them over and over that they couldn't monetize their titles, accept all the designer freebies, show up only when they wanted to, and keep only the prestige patronages.  The monarchy doesn't work that way and some of what they wanted, 24/7 security paid for by UK taxpayers, was a ridiculous demand given that they moved to another continent.

I agree with you all, they are trying desperately to get a reaction from the family as it will result in more publicity and more people possibly watching or reading Harry's book.  I think they expect to get a huge amount of sympathy from their docufiction and widespread public demands that Charles and William meet with them, issue a groveling apology, and then welcome them back with open arms.

So, after the docufiction airs and the book is published, they'll magnanimously announce they are willing to meet with Charles and William to hash this out (because they are so very kind and compassionate themselves) and accept their apologies.  Going hand in hand with that will be demands for lots and lots of money and guarantees that the money will keep flowing.  Basically, they are engaging in extortion in full view of the public.


----------



## Chanbal

lallybelle said:


> HOLY ****! Do you remember when we discussed Christopher Bouzy in reference to the Depp/Heard trial? He is the one who has the company that claims they found bots attacking both Amber and MM. Nate the Lawyer is suing him for defamation for some slander stuff anyways...
> 
> I am listening to his live stream and he is now being contacted about Bouzy as all these Media including the Daily Mail has interest now in him due to him being the Doc. He's the one who says "it was always about hate, it was always about race.". Nate has turned over all types of documents about Bouzy fraud in a bankruptcy and etc.  It's all going to come out about he (Bouzy) has been being paid by the Harkles to claim this "hate campaign". OMG, I am INVESTED...lol.


Yep!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> In continuous disbelief…




Keep the truth coming. A lot of the royal reporters are fed up with their antics.


----------



## marietouchet

Photoshopped ? Who knows but very clear photos of what people are talking about on moonbump , best collage I have seen


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I'm starting to believe that I'm dreaming, and this is not happening…



This is one big circus.



Chanbal said:


> _*Another piece of video shows photographers huddling around a car as Meghan says *- referring to the royal household - 'I realised they are never going to protect you'. It then cuts to an image of Meghan dabbing her eyes, seemingly in tears._



I feel all those REALLY unflattering stories popping up lately prove otherwise. And I bet that's not even the real dirt.


----------



## EmilyM11

Lodpah said:


> I was just thinking of the same thing. What now? The interview - done. The book - done. The series - done.
> 
> The only thing I can think of is TW and Handbag turn on each other and the drama continues. It’s like they keep poking to get a reaction from the BRF but they’re not biting.
> 
> People like to see a solution and happy endings but they keep pushing the envelop.


Maybe then Harry is markled and he will become a center of her accusations (domestic violence, substance abuse etc.)


----------



## lallybelle

Chanbal said:


> Yep!



Oh man it's soooo juicy!!!


----------



## Chanbal

lallybelle said:


> Oh man it's soooo juicy!!!


Nate is great, I'm watching his video now.

Have fun with this one: "is she in a casino?"


----------



## Chanbal

Meghan Markle’s podcast producer out days after Archewell chief resigns
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s podcast producer has left the couple’s Archewell brand — and it remains unclear whether Markle will host a second season of “Archetypes” on …




					pagesix.com


----------



## lanasyogamama

I always judge restaurants and medical offices by their employee retention. 

This lady may have left because she knows there’s no way in hell they’re getting a second season.


----------



## pukasonqo

And after this…what else is left
No acting gigs for MM, no offers of CEO positions for either as who would be stupid enough to employ either of them and risk allegations of racism, cover ups, etc
They do have the reverse Midas touch


----------



## marietouchet

lallybelle said:


> LOL holy dramatics Batman!  The Diana juxtapositions are infuriating. AS IF....


Listened to trailer again -  the leitmorif is is I COULD NOT SAVE MOM but had to try to SAVE MY FAMILY - the BRF destroys the women that come into it
The only was they can make that work is to also go after Camilla, Kate , Sophie and show how they were ruined by BRF
PS those 3 ladies deserve a lot of support this week, hit those like buttons


----------



## Sophisticatted

Gal4Dior said:


> I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.



I don’t think THEY have an end game, I think SHE has an end game.  There have been rumors for quite some time that she already has a side piece.  She plans to milk H and his title and connections for all they are worth, then she will leave him (thus leaving him to clean up all his messes), after she leaves him she will milk her “escape” from Harry for all she can, then she will try to milk her children for all she can.  I expect her to spend years on various forms of media milking it.  Then she will try to be Mrs. Someone Else.


----------



## EmilyM11

marietouchet said:


> Listened to trailer again -  the leitmorif is is I COULD NOT SAVE MOM abut had to try to SAVE MY FAMILY - the BRF destroys the women that come into it
> The only was they can make that work is to also go after Camilla, Kate , Sophie and show how they were ruined by BRF
> PS those 3 ladies deserve a lot of support this week, hit those like buttons


All 3 ladies look fine to me but maybe nobody asked them IF THEY WERE OK???


----------



## Chanbal

Where is TW's invitation? Am I missing something? 

I wonder if Sophie will have a chance to ask HC for a copy of the imaginary letter HC sent to TW. I bet the answer is: TW who?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here...the one time Harry found his body parts and put her in her place.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand the extenuation already starts. Yes, they are lying liars who lie but our bad for taking everything so literal.


----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> This lady may have left because she knows there’s no way in hell they’re getting a second season.


Maybe she wasn’t paid all she was owed from the first season. They aren’t exactly flush with funds for the lifestyle they are living.


----------



## Chanbal

Can this get weirder? They use Piers Morgan's voice in the 2nd trailer. 

_“She’s becoming a royal rock star”._

Piers Morga's summary below is great imo.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Too bad there are no journalists out there who interviews them and ask the hard questions. Such horrible journalism nowadays. Or they don’t allow to be interviews by the hard hitters.


That's what I always think. No one ever asks the hard questions. No one challenges them and it really annoys me!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> That's what I always think. No one ever asks the hard questions. No one challenges them and it really annoys me!


Believe it or not, people are afraid of her using the racism card against them.


----------



## papertiger

Gal4Dior said:


> I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.
> 
> So you do a 6 part doc, or whatever, to expose BRF and blow it up to get the big Netflix payout...then what? What else do you have to talk about? What else is there to sell to pay for your overextended and privileged lifestyle?
> 
> We all know Sparry is daft AF, so this is definitely TW's bright idea for their "financial path forward."
> 
> They don't really draw enough interest for folks to fork over additional major cash for large projects, so they'll have to scam their titles until PCIII removes them, and I certainly hope that is very soon. TW is only looking for titles for their kiddos just to reap the financial benefits. She thinks she's Kris Jenner, but she's just sad 'ole Kaitlyn Jenner.



Their end game? Having it all


----------



## sdkitty

lishukha said:


> Agree  it just proves to show how delusional these two are. What a joke.


they're becoming almost as ridiculous as Kanye with their fancy high level employees who are all quitting
And their nasty accusations.....I don't know anyone who likes them


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Meghan Markle’s podcast producer out days after Archewell chief resigns
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s podcast producer has left the couple’s Archewell brand — and it remains unclear whether Markle will host a second season of “Archetypes” on …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com



what a trainwreck....the must treat people very poorly


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> what a trainwreck....the must treat people very poorly


At this point, they’re so toxic, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to have a job with the Harkles on their resume.


----------



## gracekelly

DoggieBags said:


> At this point, they’re so toxic, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to have a job with the Harkles on their resume.


I think it is worse than that.  They don't want to be investigated as being complicit with some of their financial shenanigans.  I think that is why Mandana Dayani left.  Catherine St Laurent told them how to set it up, but she didn't stick around long enough to take any blame if the Harkles were found to have their hands in the till.  I have known people who just do not understand or want to understand that the money is not theirs to use as they wish.  Archewell is a slush fund  to them.  It happens with politicians all the time with campaign contributions.  Leona Helmsley went to jail because she was using company funds for personal outlays.  It happens all the time, but that doesn't make it right and when it is with money that they had given to them to use for charitable purposes, it is a real crime.  All the LLC's that were set up are a red flag that they set out from the start to get money, not pay taxes and protect themselves from lawsuits.


----------



## Lounorada

LittleStar88 said:


> The YouTube comments are pure gold! It's an accidental gift from them! They are getting seriously ROASTED!


Isn't it glorious to see?!




I scrolled past this post on Vogue's Instagram page earlier today and while I rolled my eyes into another dimension at the sight of it and was about to report the post as 'spam' I thought I better check the comments first and lawd did they not disappoint! They were brutal, hilarious, people did NOT hold back and it's safe to say to majority of people do not like or care for them, are sick of seeing them constantly and want them to shut up and disappear to live their pRiVaTe lIvEs.
After enjoying some entertaining comments, I still reported the post as spam because anything with them mentioned in it, _is _spam 

Check the comments for yourselves


----------



## Lodpah

Read a comment from someone: Meg missed being an actress on a soap so she made her own. Is Netflix daft? Are they not reading the room? Or they are trolling her thus the date of the soap opera going forward.


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is a pioneer on this subject…


----------



## Diamondbirdie

Just looked at the You tube preview. Didn’t watch it but wow, the comments! All negative. And why can’t we see how many downvotes it has had? Could it be that there are 7 million??


----------



## Lodpah

Where’s their damage control friends: Serena, Amal, Tyler Perry peeps? Lol


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Read a comment from someone: Meg missed being an actress on a soap so she made her own. Is Netflix daft? Are they not reading the room? Or they are trolling her thus the date of the soap opera going forward.


Maybe they don’t care as long as they get viewers. I suspect they will get viewers, at least for the first set of episodes.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> what a trainwreck....the must treat people very poorly



I think their employees all want to be gone before the Netflix show airs.


----------



## carmen56

papertiger said:


> Their end game? Having it all


With any luck they’ll end up with f*ck all.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Believe it or not, people are afraid of her using the racism card against them.


She will use it until people stop being afraid of it. See the comment below from Spencer M.


----------



## LittleStar88

Gal4Dior said:


> I'm trying to figure out the Sucksux end game. I'm hardly surprised they didn't think a few steps ahead about how they will glean their future income.
> 
> So you do a 6 part doc, or whatever, to expose BRF and blow it up to get the big Netflix payout...then what? What else do you have to talk about? What else is there to sell to pay for your overextended and privileged lifestyle?
> 
> We all know Sparry is daft AF, so this is definitely TW's bright idea for their "financial path forward."
> 
> They don't really draw enough interest for folks to fork over additional major cash for large projects, so they'll have to scam their titles until PCIII removes them, and I certainly hope that is very soon. TW is only looking for titles for their kiddos just to reap the financial benefits. She thinks she's Kris Jenner, but she's just sad 'ole Kaitlyn Jenner.



I think the end game for them will turn out to be Game Over. They will blow their wad with this and the book. Nothing left to whine, cry, or complain about. Same story over and over gets old. Nothing left to sell.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> Where’s their damage control friends: Serena, Amal, Tyler Perry peeps? Lol



I think Amal learned her lesson a while ago.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> Piers is a pioneer on this subject…



Piers called them out after the Oprah liefest and lost his job over them.  He is invested now, and is like a dog with a bone.  He must be a thorn in her side that he won't let go


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> She will use it until people stop being afraid of it. See the comment below from Spencer M.




In this still photo, they both look 10 years older than their chronological ages.  Harry is not the good looking young man he once was.  She's lost her youthful prettiness.  The fillers and hair extensions are not a good look.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> In this still photo, they both look 10 years older than their chronological ages.  Harry is not the good looking young man he once was.  She's lost her youthful prettiness.  The fillers and hair extensions are not a good look.



Being permanently POff takes it toll


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> Piers called them out after the Oprah liefest and lost his job over them.  He is invested now, and is like a dog with a bone.  He must be a thorn in her side that he won't let go


True he has a vested interest, but he’s also very loyal to the monarchy and always has been, so he might’ve gone after her anyway. Since she seems to want to destroy it.


----------



## Lodpah

Maybe the Queen left him gazzilions of dollars so he does not give a whit what the BRF thinks or feels.


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the end game for them will turn out to be Game Over. They will blow their wad with this and the book. Nothing left to whine, cry, or complain about. Same story over and over gets old. Nothing left to sell.


They will be like whining children who keep crying and the mantra is "you don't understand!" They will never shut up.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Maybe the Queen left him gazzilions of dollars so he does not give a whit what the BRF thinks or feels.


you mean Harry?  I doubt it.  He is spiraling down and I don't feel sorry for him.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> True he has a vested interest, but he’s also very loyal to the monarchy and always has been, so he might’ve gone after her anyway. Since she seems to want to destroy it.


I have never understood this.  Who in the h*ll was she to destroy the monarchy or anything else for that matter?  This is major mental illness to even think these things.  Yes, there are people who are out there who do want to destroy the monarchy, but they will give you a list of a list of reasons that are social and political and facts to back up their position.  Meghan's reasons are purely self centered and emotional like a child stamping their foot when they don't get their own way. Harry is no better.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Maybe the Queen left him gazzilions of dollars so he does not give a whit what the BRF thinks or feels.


The Queen left him nothing.  She was very traditional and all her wealth went to the next in line King Charles III


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> True he has a vested interest, but he’s also very loyal to the monarchy and always has been, so he might’ve gone after her anyway. Since she seems to want to destroy it.


Piers is the male version of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Piers is the male version of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.


and as much as I dislike H&M, I'm not a fan of Piers either


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> The Queen left him nothing.  She was very traditional and all her wealth went to the next in line King Charles III


You think so? Hopefully!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## CarryOn2020

Release the dirt.


----------



## CarryOn2020

And a convenient “punching bag” for her step-son.  So sad on so many levels.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Tell me again what a great guy he is.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Follow the $$$$


----------



## Annawakes

Yes, their end game is to have it all.  It was and still is what they’re after.  That’s why the “stakes are SO HIGH”.

What is “all”, you ask?

1) Popularity exceeding W&K
2) Personal fortune exceeding W&K
3) Recognized as the world’s best, most compassionate, most driven humanitarians
4) Ditto number 3 for environmentalists
5) Hollywood star power and rubbing shoulders with A listers
6) People hanging on their every word salad because of their infinite wisdom
7) People seeing how bad the RF has been in terms of trying to “keep them down”….and yet…after all their bombshells…they are STILL willing to enter a “year of reconciliation”…what a showing of compassion on their part!!
8) Becoming so admired that they can influence US politics (and even Zeezy might run for office….due to overwhelming popular demand…)
9) Usurping W&K’s position in the BRF because W&K just cannot compete to how brightly their light shines, in popularity, in compassion, in politics, in Hollywood fame.  Thus Handbag shall be crowned the next King (due to overwhelming popular demand)

Those just off the top of my head.

Point 2.  WHY does Zeezy think they can have it all?

Because, if you think about it, she’s gotten everything she’s ever wanted in life.  By pushing people around, fabricating lies, crying victim, hoodwinking people, and just being plain mean.  I really do think she believes all of the above was achievable.  It’s how she’s always operated.  I mean….it got her a prince.  I’m sure that was beyond even her wildest dreams.

It was also so easy to manipulate Handbag into going along because of his jealousy.  Promising him it ALL.  I don’t doubt he thinks Zeezy is some kind of saint.  She basically showed up and told him EVERYTHING he’s been wanting to hear his WHOLE LIFE.

And so, here we are.  

I don’t think they will ever stop trying to have it ALL.  With every failed attempt their victim hood just gets deeper.

PS I also think BP and the RF are absolutely right in ignoring them.  Any response is an acknowledgement and they shouldn’t be acknowledged.  

Whew I had more to say that I thought haha


----------



## xincinsin

Annawakes said:


> Yes, their end game is to have it all.  It was and still is what they’re after.  That’s why the “stakes are SO HIGH”.
> 
> What is “all”, you ask?
> 
> 1) Popularity exceeding W&K
> 2) Personal fortune exceeding W&K
> 3) Recognized as the world’s best, most compassionate, most driven humanitarians
> 4) Ditto number 3 for environmentalists
> 5) Hollywood star power and rubbing shoulders with A listers
> 6) People hanging on their every word salad because of their infinite wisdom
> 7) People seeing how bad the RF has been in terms of trying to “keep them down”….and yet…after all their bombshells…they are STILL willing to enter a “year of reconciliation”…what a showing of compassion on their part!!
> 8) Becoming so admired that they can influence US politics (and even Zeezy might run for office….due to overwhelming popular demand…)
> 9) Usurping W&K’s position in the BRF because W&K just cannot compete to how brightly their light shines, in popularity, in compassion, in politics, in Hollywood fame.  Thus Handbag shall be crowned the next King (due to overwhelming popular demand)
> 
> Those just off the top of my head.
> 
> Point 2.  WHY does Zeezy think they can have it all?
> 
> Because, if you think about it, she’s gotten everything she’s ever wanted in life.  By pushing people around, fabricating lies, crying victim, hoodwinking people, and just being plain mean.  I really do think she believes all of the above was achievable.  It’s how she’s always operated.  I mean….it got her a prince.  I’m sure that was beyond even her wildest dreams.
> 
> It was also so easy to manipulate Handbag into going along because of his jealousy.  Promising him it ALL.  I don’t doubt he thinks Zeezy is some kind of saint.  She basically showed up and told him EVERYTHING he’s been wanting to hear his WHOLE LIFE.
> 
> And so, here we are.
> 
> I don’t think they will ever stop trying to have it ALL.  With every failed attempt their victim hood just gets deeper.
> 
> PS I also think BP and the RF are absolutely right in ignoring them.  Any response is an acknowledgement and they shouldn’t be acknowledged.
> 
> Whew I had more to say that I thought haha


     
She is a typical narc and he would believe in every Nigerian princess scam, then double down to help her lure more scam victims.


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Piers is the male version of hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.


Ha ha that’s good!

Since the Internet is so good at sleuthing and found that the Netf*x doc used pap photos from a Harry Potter premier, a Tr*mp lawyer going to prison and Katie Price, a UK media personality… what are the chances they do some quick editing before airtime this Thursday?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tell me again what a great guy he is.




Is anybody still saying this? I don't say he's a great guy, I say he's mentally unwell and the abuser he married plays him like a fiddle.


----------



## Mrs.Z

You cannot have a documentary (series) with fake photos, the entire project is essentially discredited.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> You cannot have a documentary (series) with fake photos, the entire project is essentially discredited.


So, no awards?  



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Is anybody still saying this? I don't say he's a great guy, I say he's mentally unwell and the abuser he married plays him like a fiddle.


Yes, they have the squad people. Plus, the other thread seems to have positive reviews.  Seems there are many anti-royal people out there.

Is there anyone left to correct the errors?  Anyone at Nflix? 








						Another aide has quit Harry and Meghan's Archewell organisation
					

Rebecca Sananes (pictured) has quit as head of audio at Archewell after just 18 months in the role, according to the Daily Telegraph and US gossip website Page Six.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> I don’t think THEY have an end game, I think SHE has an end game.  There have been rumors for quite some time that she already has a side piece.  She plans to milk H and his title and connections for all they are worth, then she will leave him (thus leaving him to clean up all his messes), after she leaves him she will milk her “escape” from Harry for all she can, then she will try to milk her children for all she can.  I expect her to spend years on various forms of media milking it.  Then she will try to be Mrs. Someone Else.


She has been milking men all her life, so the MO works for her.


Jayne1 said:


> That's what I always think. No one ever asks the hard questions. No one challenges them and it really annoys me!


Would any PR person dare to book her with anyone who would ask real questions?


gracekelly said:


> Believe it or not, people are afraid of her using the racism card against them.


And she can always crow that her first "real" interview was with the Queen Oprah.


Mrs.Z said:


> You cannot have a documentary (series) with fake photos, the entire project is essentially discredited.


If it churns any more, they will find a scapegoat.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Aaand the extenuation already starts. Yes, they are lying liars who lie but our bad for taking everything so literal.



This is their excuse for lying: it was her subjective feeling! In the past, when people re-frame the world to suit their subjective feeling in defiance of facts, their family arranged for therapy. But since she has no family left and Sparry is loco, they get to revel in their fantasy. If they can carry on after visible sources of funding and income are exhausted, then the conspiracy theories of who is backing them will mushroom.
ETA: forgot about Doria whom they likely pay per appearance.




CarryOn2020 said:


> So, no awards?
> 
> 
> Yes, they have the squad people. Plus, the other thread seems to have positive reviews.  Seems there are many anti-royal people out there.
> 
> Is there anyone left to correct the errors?  Anyone at Nflix?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another aide has quit Harry and Meghan's Archewell organisation
> 
> 
> Rebecca Sananes (pictured) has quit as head of audio at Archewell after just 18 months in the role, according to the Daily Telegraph and US gossip website Page Six.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


You can be anti-royal for many reasons, but promoting this pair of self-serving talentless creeps in order to take down the BRF would be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.


----------



## Debbini

xincinsin said:


> This is their excuse for lying: it was her subjective feeling! In the past, when people re-frame the world to suit their subjective feeling in defiance of facts, their family arranged for therapy. But since she has no family left and Sparry is loco, they get to revel in their fantasy. If they can carry on after visible sources of funding and income are exhausted, then the conspiracy theories of who is backing them will mushroom.
> ETA: forgot about Doria whom they likely pay per appearance.
> View attachment 5665796
> 
> 
> You can be anti-royal for many reasons, but promoting this pair of self-serving talentless creeps in order to take down the BRF would be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.


A documentary that's not meant to be taken literal.......wth?! Does that make Any sense? Any, at all?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

She was the first non spouse to be invited to Sandringham for Christmas, the first girlfriend to be given security.  Tell me again how the BRF were racist?


----------



## gracekelly

Debbini said:


> A documentary that's not meant to be taken literal.......wth?! Does that make Any sense? Any, at all?!


A documentary that is not meant to be taken literally sounds like a mockumentary.


----------



## bellecate

Mrs.Z said:


> You cannot have a documentary (series) with fake photos, the entire project is essentially discredited.


Unfortunately, I believe there are many people out there that will choose to ignore the truth that they're fake pictures and go along with their disgusting narrative.


----------



## needlv

Hey while all this is going on, I think everyone missed this story.

Rebecca - the Archwell podcast lady who was on TikTok or something bragging about doing the MM podcast (which I thought was an advert for a job at the time)… 

HAS ALSO LEFT ARCHWELL!









						Meghan Markle’s podcast producer out days after Archewell chief resigns
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s podcast producer has left the couple’s Archewell brand — and it remains unclear whether Markle will host a second season of “Archetypes” on …




					pagesix.com
				




so that’s Mandana, Manadas assistant and Rebeca that have all left.


----------



## marietouchet

lanasyogamama said:


> I always judge restaurants and medical offices by their employee retention.
> 
> This lady may have left because she knows there’s no way in hell they’re getting a second season.


The two ladies who left may have decided to leave before the storm, after all, in their roles they would have to clean up the mess on aisle four,  annoy imagine how awful that would be


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Hey while all this is going on, I think everyone missed this story.
> 
> Rebecca - the Archwell podcast lady who was on TikTok or something bragging about doing the MM podcast (which I thought was an advert for a job at the time)…
> 
> HAS ALSO LEFT ARCHWELL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s podcast producer out days after Archewell chief resigns
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s podcast producer has left the couple’s Archewell brand — and it remains unclear whether Markle will host a second season of “Archetypes” on …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so that’s Mandana, Manadas assistant and Rebeca that have all left.


I suspect that this woman has had her resume out there for a while. She didn't want to look like a quitter while it was still broadcasting so she waited until it finished.  She is probably at a spa now recuperating from working with Markle.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Hey while all this is going on, I think everyone missed this story.
> 
> Rebecca - the Archwell podcast lady who was on TikTok or something bragging about doing the MM podcast (which I thought was an advert for a job at the time)…
> 
> HAS ALSO LEFT ARCHWELL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s podcast producer out days after Archewell chief resigns
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s podcast producer has left the couple’s Archewell brand — and it remains unclear whether Markle will host a second season of “Archetypes” on …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so that’s Mandana, Manadas assistant and Rebeca that have all left.


Less payroll.  Now they can pay the cook, maid, gardener and the plumber.


----------



## melissatrv

I am so so sick of their "artsy" black & white photos that they have just way overdone!


----------



## Chanbal

VOTE: Should Harry and Meghan now be stripped of their Sussex titles?
					






					www.mailplus.co.uk


----------



## gracekelly

Lounorada said:


> Isn't it glorious to see?!
> View attachment 5665692
> 
> View attachment 5665699
> 
> I scrolled past this post on Vogue's Instagram page earlier today and while I rolled my eyes into another dimension at the sight of it and was about to report the post as 'spam' I thought I better check the comments first and lawd did they not disappoint! They were brutal, hilarious, people did NOT hold back and it's safe to say to majority of people do not like or care for them, are sick of seeing them constantly and want them to shut up and disappear to live their pRiVaTe lIvEs.
> After enjoying some entertaining comments, I still reported the post as spam because anything with them mentioned in it, _is _spam
> 
> Check the comments for yourselves



Here is a question.  After 4 plus years and 2 kids, why do we need their love story.  I am sick of hearing about their love story.  When people yammer on constantly about their love story I begin to believe that there is no love story at all and it is all for show.  it is just like the photo spread of a celeb home in a shelter magazine.  They show their forever home and 6 weeks later it is on the market for sale.


----------



## Chanbal

The 2nd trailer reached a milestone!


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> VOTE: Should Harry and Meghan now be stripped of their Sussex titles?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.mailplus.co.uk




lol… I voted - and it gives you the results!  So far….


----------



## xincinsin

Debbini said:


> A documentary that's not meant to be taken literal.......wth?! Does that make Any sense? Any, at all?!


I remember watching my first mockumentary. It was created by a cult and I was hard-pressed not to gasp in horror.
_Cultist: So, after watching that, are you impressed by our achievements? Would you like to join us?
Me: But ... Errr... the production quality was soooo bad! _
I'm (not) sorry to say that they never convinced me of how wonderful they were and they never understood why I was so aghast at their idea of a documentary. 


bellecate said:


> Unfortunately, I believe there are many people out there that will choose to ignore the truth that they're fake pictures and go along with their disgusting narrative.


If you don't read anything about them and reply solely on the garbage Netflix, Newsweek, Hello, Town & Country and Harpers Bazaar are pushing out, you would take all those fake photos as truth. If that lie-fest that was Oprah's interview could get nominated for an award, I'm sure this one will get nominated for at least a Raspberry or a Golden Turkey, although the dire duo are certainly gunning for all the awards given for ineptitude.
https://awardswatch.com/the-best-of-the-worst-unique-award-shows-and-honors/ 


gracekelly said:


> Less payroll.  Now they can pay the cook, maid, gardener and the plumber.


I read "Now they can cook the maid, gardener and the plumber" 
I re-read only because I thought, "Hey, isn't Sparry the plumber?"


melissatrv said:


> I am so so sick of their "artsy" black & white photos that they have just way overdone!


It shows their sensitive artistic soul (_sarcasm_)


----------



## Toby93

And one more.  Exactly!  If it actually *was* racism, then how was she a rock star in the beginning?


----------



## serene

lulilu said:


> This is a medical fact -- one part of the brain begins to fail its job.
> 
> To look to make trouble.


Nah - my grandmother said she just really didn’t care anymore  she was old enough to say what she wanted


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The Brits would like to be reimbursed with the Netfl*x profits…


----------



## Katel

EmilyM111 said:


> I'm wondering whether they are okay, like you know - mentally okay. What does British public have to do with this ****? My taxes paid their wedding, does this make me a racist or what. He needs to stop taking/drinking/smoking whatever he is taking.



No. Both are most emphatically *not* OK.



needlv said:


> lol… I voted - and it gives you the results!  So far….
> 
> View attachment 5665894


Haha! I voted just now, less than an hour later - nearly 300 more results


----------



## rose60610

Comments from other sites are not kind to them.  One of my favorites:

"A mile below the Amazzon River are pools fed by water that percolates down through the porous rocks. In these pools are tiny, eyeless fish that have never seen the surface or sunlight.  They have evolved completely on their own with no predators, and no competition for their space in a one-link food chain. These creatures have been undisturbed by humans for eons, and they care more about Harry and Meghan than I do."


----------



## gracekelly

A mockumentary sounds like something that Monty Python would do. I really hope that SNL gets a hold of this and runs with it.  Guest host Tyler Perry as Meghan.  Kate McKinnon needs to come back and play Harry.  Lorne Michaels, please read this thread and make it happen!


----------



## needlv




----------



## Jayne1

They flew private to NYC (where they are going to accept the award) and I’m having trouble linking to the story but the photos are by Backgrid.


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> They flew private to NYC (where they are going to accept the award) and I’m having trouble linking to the story but the photos are by Backgrid.



Seriously.  So Harry is going to “cross the rubicon” (In the words of Lady C).

I guess we wait to see what drops from BRF.  They will probably lay low for the next few weeks whilst Netflix and Haz book does the rounds.


----------



## needlv

Oooh found the link.  They did get a private plane.  Such eco warriors…









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle arrive in NYC ahead of Netflix docuseries release
					

The couple were spotted touching down in New York City just three days before the release of their highly anticipated series,”Harry & Meghan.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Seriously.  *So Harry is going to “cross the rubicon” (In the words of Lady C).*
> 
> I guess we wait to see what drops from BRF.  They will probably lay low for the next few weeks whilst Netflix and Haz book does the rounds.


He crossed the rubicon long time ago imo.


----------



## Helventara

This is not a look that a loving husband gives to his lovely wife. It’s a look given by a proud hairdresser on his work.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Chanbal said:


> Having fun with the Aussies…
> 
> 
> _If Prince Harry ‘didn’t have royal connections’ he’d be ‘stacking shelves in Walmart’_​
> 
> *‘Nauseating’: Teaser for Harry and Meghan doco pushes ‘victimhood’ narrative*



H is way too incompetent and lazy to do an honest day’s work.

 He’d either be on ‘welfare’ as he’s already used to getting hand outs or work for some sort of scam that takes money from little old ladies.



LittleStar88 said:


> Looks like they’ve taken from the Kardashian playbook…
> 
> View attachment 5664613


I wish they were as entertaining or as self-aware - and that is a low bar.



Chanbal said:


> Still on Father Calvin Robinson, I understand your comments, they make sense. However, I also believe that his approach and optimism does a lot more to combat racism than the inflamed attacks of many other people.
> 
> Lady SH dedicated her life to assist the queen and the monarchy. She understood that she had been victim of a set-up and wanted to save others by resigning, particularly Will who was about to travel to the US. Her resignation was part of her dedicated service imo.


In what world would Will resign or do anything? It’s got nothing to do with him and we’ve seen previously that royals who make ‘gaffes’ never lose anything.


I’m sure Lady S thinks she’s doing something noble. I just question the moral fibre of a boss willing to feed an elderly and devoted employee to the press for ridicule.

On his approach to racism- I dunno I think the circles he moves in middle class British Christians- he’d probably be preaching to the converted a little.

I also think if someone is acting in bad faith to gain something like Fulani no amount of gentle approach will do anything because they are out for what they can get & believe me she is getting it. She’s just a grifter. Grifters will always exist in all cultures but they shouldn’t be allowed to dominate the conversation or taken too seriously.

However, my larger point is that the struggle is more subtle at this point- the BRF does support regimes and supply weapons so to me they do support the suffering of millions of POCs. This  does conflict with their roles as moral figureheads for the nation and for a religion and I think it’s something royalists and Anglicans especially need to consider.


jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!
> 
> OMG this comment has me rolling




The idea of a highly anticipated release and a *January* release date on this show and this book are not NOT compatible. I think everyone involved knows they are sitting on a giant turkey  and they are hoping on rabid fans and constant promotion and hope no one notices - it’s like the DC films all over again

Also what the f is wrong with M’s face. She looks like that stupid meta verse mark Zuckerberg in her trademark 3 pixel wig.


I know I say it all the time but those spaniel ears are HORRID - someone needs to tell her hair strands are meant to move individually not clumped together in a few greasy tracks - it’s like Lisa Simpson hair.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Helventara said:


> View attachment 5665977
> 
> 
> This is not a look that a loving husband gives to his lovely wife. It’s a look given by a proud hairdresser on his work.


That hairdresser has NOTHING to be proud of.


----------



## Helventara

jelliedfeels said:


> That hairdresser has NOTHING to be proud of.


Actually true hahahahha


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



I like this comment, very representative of their twisted logic:




Helventara said:


> View attachment 5665977
> 
> 
> This is not a look that a loving husband gives to his lovely wife. It’s a look given by a proud hairdresser on his work.


I really dislike this hairstyle: skullcap on top and the length sticks out unnaturally like she got a blowdry in an overhead wind tunnel.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> A documentary that is not meant to be taken literally sounds like a mockumentary.


----------



## papertiger

bellecate said:


> Unfortunately, I believe there are many people out there that will choose to ignore the truth that they're fake pictures and go along with their disgusting narrative.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> He crossed the rubicon long time ago imo.




It's gonna be so bad it's good


----------



## pomeline

Ooh, I love Spinal Tap!   

I cannot believe they are allowed to run rampant with their false narrative! I hope something is happening behind the scenes at Buckingham Palace and they are in the works of quietly removing all titles. I mean, they have to now! The two of them are really becoming constitutional terrorists like some journalist said.


----------



## xincinsin

pomeline said:


> Ooh, I love Spinal Tap!
> 
> I cannot believe they are allowed to run rampant with their false narrative! I hope something is happening behind the scenes at Buckingham Palace and they are in the works of quietly removing all titles. I mean, they have to now! The two of them are really becoming constitutional terrorists like some journalist said.


The problem is how to do it without Madame Hair Extensions shrieking that it is a racist move (and piling on the layers of orange tan so that she looks as black as possible). No, Meghan, it's not about Race. It's your Repulsion Engine working overtime.


----------



## papertiger

pomeline said:


> Ooh, I love Spinal Tap!
> 
> I cannot believe they are allowed to run rampant with their false narrative! I hope something is happening behind the scenes at Buckingham Palace and they are in the works of quietly removing all titles. I mean, they have to now! The two of them are really becoming constitutional terrorists like some journalist said.



We all do, the whole thing is a pantomime


----------



## jblended

So, am I right in my thinking that the ripple award is part of the marketing campaign to get more people watching the mockumentary? Because the timing of the 2nd trailer where it explicitly says "it's about race", being dropped the day before they get the award, is pretty telling in my eyes.
Or are they totally unrelated and I'm just connecting dots because I've spent far too much time on this. 



xincinsin said:


> (and piling on the layers of orange tan so that she looks as black as possible


This is the thing that offends me most. She looked pretty white-passing in the airport pics that just came out and I actually dread the prospect of her tanning for the awards in her usual, race-baiting way.
Edit: phrasing was all kinds of wrong. Fixed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh. German magazine titles: "Documentary out on Thursday: Five Lies in Meghan's and Harry's Trailer".


----------



## jblended

Every part of this was brilliant. Particularly the commentary towards the 9 min mark where they speak about the awards, but if you can spare 15 mins, the whole thing is worth watching imo.


----------



## Toby93

jblended said:


> *Every part of this was brilliant*. Particularly the commentary towards the 9 min mark where they speak about the awards, but if you can spare 15 mins, the whole thing is worth watching imo.



It was interesting, but I had a hard time listening to the woman blab on about how hard it must have been for them to have photographers outside their door constantly and to be the subject of all that attention on a daily basis.

All these shows try to keep your interest by putting forth an alternate view, but it was nauseating hearing her go on about how all poor Harry was trying to do was protect his family.  

TW knew exactly what she was getting herself into, she stalked him, bullied him into putting out a press release telling the world they were a couple, demanded police protection before they were married.  

What part of all this makes her a victim?  One of the many books out this year said they both thrived on drama, whether real or imaginary.

Her game plan while she was in the UK was to bag a rich husband and return to California with her prize.  Mission accomplished, now please go away and leave us out of your drama.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> And one more.  Exactly!  If it actually *was* racism, then how was she a rock star in the beginning?



The fake photos are front page on The Times albeit way down

The Times had its Harkle updates at the top of the page in the electronic edition, but discretely moved the Harkle column below the fold, ie to the bottom half of the front page

PS must give credit to someone else, here I think, who pointed out that all credibility is lost if a DOCUMENTARY is composed of bits and bobs from some other story


----------



## Toby93

I just saw this and I think it sums it up perfectly


----------



## Jktgal

Contributing to the body of evidence of lieeees...


----------



## KEG66

Toby93 said:


> It was interesting, but I had a hard time listening to the woman blab on about how hard it must have been for them to have photographers outside their door constantly and to be the subject of all that attention on a daily basis.
> 
> All these shows try to keep your interest by putting forth an alternate view, but it was nauseating hearing her go on about how all poor Harry was trying to do was protect his family.
> 
> TW knew exactly what she was getting herself into, she stalked him, bullied him into putting out a press release telling the world they were a couple, demanded police protection before they were married.
> 
> What part of all this makes her a victim?  One of the many books out this year said they both thrived on drama, whether real or imaginary.
> 
> Her game plan while she was in the UK was to bag a rich husband and return to California with her prize.  Mission accomplished, now please go away and leave us out of your drama.


Also will someone please remind these hosts that Diana had two 
sons !!


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Oooh found the link.  They did get a private plane.  Such eco warriors…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle arrive in NYC ahead of Netflix docuseries release
> 
> 
> The couple were spotted touching down in New York City just three days before the release of their highly anticipated series,”Harry & Meghan.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


I think part of the reason they're flying private again is that they know they won't get the warm reception the P&PofW got in first class on British Airways. If I ran into them on a flight I'd be inclined to give them a Bronx cheer.


----------



## marietouchet

New article in, not overtly sympathetic to the Harkles, that surprised me 
Actually, it is subliminally critical, pointing out the Hermes blanket









						Seven hidden details from the Harry and Meghan trailer you might have missed
					

From their holiday in Botswana to Meghan’s love of Hermès, here are all the details you might have missed from the tantalising first glimpse of the couple’s Netflix docuseries




					www.tatler.com


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> It's gonna be so bad it's good
> 
> View attachment 5665990


I think the N$etflix stuff is gonna be at 11!


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I think part of the reason they're flying private again is that they know they won't get the warm reception the P&PofW got in first class on British Airways. If I ran into them on a flight I'd be inclined to give them a Bronx cheer.


Funny how they have doubled down on the private planes …


----------



## littlemisskeira

Just when I thought these 2 are disgusting to the max... they surprised me with a new low.

While incendiary issues like hatre and race are repeatedly used by them to try to steer perspectives to their advantage, it's becoming all too clear that their arguments don't hold water. 

I'm also starting to believe that while Meghan is a horrible person, Harry isn't any better. She probably didn't change him much. Rather, she awakens a part of his personality that is innate within him. The only good thing out of this whole nonsense would be that 2 deserving individuals found each other I guess.

So what's next? A sex tape?


----------



## jblended

Toby93 said:


> All these shows try to keep your interest by putting forth an alternate view, but it was nauseating hearing her go on about how all poor Harry was trying to do was protect his family.


I totally agree but, as you say, they're trying to make it a fair panel. That's what I liked about this video- that in spite of her trying to argue for the duo, the others were *not* having any of it and kept shooting down her arguments by pointing out the fake pictures, that the press laws have changed, that Harry is monetizing Diana, that they aren't really doing anything in the humanitarian field and saying the Iranian women would be more deserving, etc. Every sugar's argument completely ripped apart.


----------



## Chanbal

jblended said:


> So, *am I right in my thinking that the ripple award is part of the marketing campaign to get more people watching the mockumentary?* *Because the timing of the 2nd trailer where it explicitly says "it's about race", being dropped the day before they get the award*, is pretty telling in my eyes.
> Or are they totally unrelated and I'm just connecting dots because I've spent far too much time on this.
> 
> 
> This is the thing that offends me most. She looked pretty white-passing in the airport pics that just came out and I actually dread the prospect of her tanning for the awards in her usual, race-baiting way.
> Edit: phrasing was all kinds of wrong. Fixed.


Absolutely! Let's refresh our memory:

"_Rory Kennedy, *Kerry's sister, runs a film production company with Liz Garbus, the director behind Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries,* but she has not confirmed whether she had any role in deciding who should be honored._" 









						Harry and Meghan will be honored at RFK Foundation's NYC gala
					

Robert F. Kennedy's daughter has revealed she'll honor Prince Harry and Meghan for their 'heroic' stance against the 'structural racism' of the royal family at a NYC gala in her father's honor.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

WHEN did it all go wrong according to the Harkles? 

The trailer leads one to believe, things were going swimmingly - royalty rock stars - and then it all went wrong before/after wedding ?? WHEN  ? exactly … 

If they want to blame the racism of the BRF, there is such a narrow time frame - 2 years between marriage and Megxit


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> I like this comment, very representative of their twisted logic:
> View attachment 5665985
> 
> 
> I really dislike this hairstyle: skullcap on top and the length sticks out unnaturally like she got a blowdry in an overhead wind tunnel.


Excellent point , Harkles demand protection from those who did such a crummy job !!! Great analysis XCS !


----------



## Chanbal

The wise words of Tourre…


----------



## Chanbal

OK, Page Six got it as well.  Love the brilliant comments!










						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle accused of ‘faking’ press hounding
					

The pair used a photo in their new documentary trailer that they themselves approved to be taken while suggesting the press was invading their privacy.




					pagesix.com
				







EDIT: BBC has joined the party!   It's a well organized article!











						Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailers criticised over 'misleading' clips
					

There are at least five allegations of footage or stills being used in editorially questionable ways.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Chanbal

Very good comment by Mike Graham. Thank you!


----------



## bubablu

Toby93 said:


>



I saw this one on Reddit and I have no words. Hope it's true, I could laugh for the rest of my life.


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> So, am I right in my thinking that the ripple award is part of the marketing campaign to get more people watching the mockumentary? Because the timing of the 2nd trailer where it explicitly says "it's about race", being dropped the day before they get the award, is pretty telling in my eyes.
> Or are they totally unrelated and I'm just connecting dots because I've spent far too much time on this.
> 
> 
> This is the thing that offends me most. She looked pretty white-passing in the airport pics that just came out and I actually dread the prospect of her tanning for the awards in her usual, race-baiting way.
> Edit: phrasing was all kinds of wrong. Fixed.


she seems to have figured out how to get the most out of both sides of her genetics


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Feeling a tiny bit of glee and schadenfreude. I still would like to know how this happened...was it their idea, did they insist, did one of the editors really hate them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Some industry insight:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ready to breathe fire 

Go Charles! We believe in you.


----------



## rose60610

They are frauds through and through! 

As though none of the many photographers or their friends/family in the Harry Potter shoot weren't going to recognize some of them and ask "Why in the world are they being included in Claw and Haz' doc?" How stupid can this couple get? They must really believe they are above everything. They had lots of cameras in real life following them, why not use footage that's true? But of course that's when they were gloating and basking in the limelight, loving every minute of it. Idiots!


----------



## Chanbal

We need some laughs:


----------



## bag-mania

rose60610 said:


> They are frauds through and through!
> 
> As though none of the many photographers or their friends/family in the Harry Potter shoot weren't going to recognize some of them and ask "Why in the world are they being included in Claw and Haz' doc?" How stupid can this couple get? They must really believe they are above everything. They had lots of cameras in real life following them, why not use footage that's true? But of course that's when they were gloating and basking in the limelight, loving every minute of it. Idiots!


It does show how much is being faked in what we see every day. It was noticed by people looking closely at H&M, but think of all the misrepresentation that is getting past us in other stories.


----------



## Chanbal

M. Kelly


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Feeling a tiny bit of glee and schadenfreude. I still would like to know how this happened...was it their idea, did they insist, did one of the editors really hate them?



Remember one of the leitmorifs of the MM oeuvre? Plagiarism 
This is a mistake one might forgive from a teenage YouTuber, not from N$tflix


----------



## DoggieBags

rose60610 said:


> They are frauds through and through!
> 
> As though none of the many photographers or their friends/family in the Harry Potter shoot weren't going to recognize some of them and ask "Why in the world are they being included in Claw and Haz' doc?" How stupid can this couple get? They must really believe they are above everything. They had lots of cameras in real life following them, why not use footage that's true? But of course that's when they were gloating and basking in the limelight, loving every minute of it. Idiots!


the Harkles didn‘t make this documentary all on their own. They had lots and lots of help. So was Netflix so desperate to wring blood out of this stone that they closed their eyes and kept their fingers crossed? Whoever was in charge of fact checking and making sure they had all the appropriate releases signed should be fired immediately. And from the Director on down, anyone who had any decision making ability in this project should hang their heads in shame.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> It does show how much is being faked in what we see every day. It was noticed by people looking closely at H&M, *but think of all the misrepresentation that is getting past us in other stories*.


Oh yes! It's scary, isn't it? Not all scammers should be as foolish as the Harkles, allegedly!   


DoggieBags said:


> the Harkles didn‘t make this documentary all on their own. They had lots and lots of help. So was Netflix so desperate to wring blood out of this stone that they closed their eyes and kept their fingers crossed? Whoever was in charge of fact checking and making sure they had all the appropriate releases signed should be fired immediately. And from the Director on down, anyone who had any decision making ability in this project should hang their heads in shame.


They should perhaps start by firing the heads of the reality show, the Harkles.


----------



## Chanbal

Good Morning America!


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Some industry insight:



I'm just sorry this was discovered in the trailers which gives Netl*x time to re-edit and let everyone forget when they watch the full doc.

Better to have internet sleuths find the fakery when there is no chance the doc can be altered.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> I'm just sorry this was discovered in the trailers which gives Netl*x time to re-edit and let everyone forget when they watch the full doc.
> 
> Better to have internet sleuths find the fakery when there is no chance the doc can be altered.



That's true, but I'm not sure they can edit all that footage until Thursday. Dunno.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Jayne1 said:


> I'm just sorry this was discovered in the trailers which gives Netl*x time to re-edit and let everyone forget when they watch the full doc.
> 
> Better to have internet sleuths find the fakery when there is no chance the doc can be altered.


I think it’s actually worse for them that it was included in the trailers, you can’t really take it back.  You’ve just advertised a “documentary” series with fake and totally misleading photos.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Jayne1 said:


> I'm just sorry this was discovered in the trailers which gives Netl*x time to re-edit and let everyone forget when they watch the full doc.
> 
> Better to have internet sleuths find the fakery when there is no chance the doc can be altered.


I am sure there will be so much more fakery when the whole thing drops. this was just a taste of the BS.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Iirc in November?, they wanted to push back the release date of this Nflix crash, supposedly to re-edit, right?   At the time, the thought was they had included nasty stuff about the Queen.  Now, it seems they knew they had included fake photos and wanted to cover themselves.  Is this why those women left?  What did they know and when did they know it?


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> I am sure there will be so much more fakery when the whole thing drops. this was just a taste of the BS.


Yep. That photo is likely the tip of the iceberg. They can’t do a complete re-edit of the first three episodes in a few days. It will be analyzed on Thursday and by Friday morning we’ll be hearing about the reveals. 

Oprah had a few misleading graphics in that interview. The mainstream press didn’t really call her out though, because Oprah.


----------



## Lodpah

So maybe that’s why the two wanted to delay or edit the series as it was too inflammatory after QE death but Netflix decided to go ahead? Too late to turn back time. They have to live with the consequences. 

All the fakery of their “grief” at the funeral was just that. Fake


----------



## 880

Helventara said:


> View attachment 5665977
> 
> 
> This is not a look that a loving husband gives to his lovely wife. It’s a look given by a proud hairdresser on his work.


wow, yes exactly


----------



## marietouchet

Juxtaposition in the second trailer: Photos of Diana and MM . Then claims of racism … 
What am I missing ? I thought that D was White Anglo Saxon Protestant,  for which part of her heritage did she receive discrimination ?
I am not getting the D-MM analogy. 

BTW, just marathoned all 8 Harry Potter movies, MM’s name is like Voldemort , one should never say it lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Juxtaposition in the second trailer: Photos of Diana and MM . Then claims of racism …
> What am I missing ? I thought that D was White Anglo Saxon Protestant,  for which part of her heritage did she receive discrimination ?
> I am not getting the D-MM analogy.
> 
> BTW, just marathoned all 8 Harry Potter movies, MM’s name is like Voldemort , one should never say it lol


I thought Hazzi claimed Diana experienced racism because of her boyfriends after the divorce, such as Khan and Dodi. 
 I could be wrong.


----------



## CobaltBlu

There is continuing talk on reddit and I guess Twitter as well that there will be huge legal issues with the photographs/photographers. Not only regarding copyrighted materials but also that there is an element of defamation of accredited photographers which is a continuing theme in the H&M narrative; up till now there has not been a lot of hard evidence of defamation.....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Let’s get this done!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CobaltBlu

Not sure if this was posted...


----------



## Laila619

I’m just here waiting to see what ugly, overpriced ill-fitting monstrosity she is going to be wearing along with her dark spray tan to the Ripple of Nope tonight. Got my popcorn ready.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I fear Markle will go ballistic if they take her title away, she will be forever aggrieved.  

She also doesn’t realize how ridiculous she is using her title in the US, voting in our elections and waging war against the Royal Family at the same time.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Laila619 said:


> I’m just here waiting to see what ugly, overpriced ill-fitting monstrosity she is going to be wearing along with her dark spray tan to the Ripple of Nope tonight. Got my popcorn ready.


It looks like they had their teeth whitened, spray tan done, but MM’s hair looks like it is in desperate need of attention. Imo


----------



## Lounorada

Laila619 said:


> I’m just here waiting to see what ugly, overpriced ill-fitting monstrosity she is going to be wearing along with her dark spray tan to the Ripple of Nope tonight. Got my popcorn ready.



I'm guessing it will be a lot of this...


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Iirc in November?, they wanted to push back the release date of this Nflix crash, supposedly to re-edit, right?   At the time, the thought was they had included nasty stuff about the Queen.  Now, it seems they knew they had included fake photos and wanted to cover themselves.  Is this why those women left?  What did they know and when did they know it?



My 2 cents: (all allegedly, of course) 

I believe for a brief moment, around the funeral time, they hoped to get the kids' titles and other perks from Charles. They were impressed by the world's response to the news of the queen's death. Hollywood had not been as kind to them as they had initially anticipated, so improving the ties with the BRF was a must. It would also work as a pay back to the Hollywood's 'snobs' that dare to ignore them.

There was only a tiny little problem with their line of thought, QE passed away earlier than expected. They had planned the reconciliation year based on QE, but now they had to deal with KC, so they had to work a little more on their reality show. Though, it looks like Nefl*x said, NO. TW used one of her victim cards and tried to distance herself from the reality show, which didn't please Netfl*x .

In the meantime, Charles is not assuring them of any perks, and is taking his sweet time to answer to their alleged letters/requests. The award on their fight against racism became public, TW's idiotic podcasts and tone deaf article were released … DM and other news were having their fun time, and they finally understood they have crossed the rubicon. So they made the drastic decision to totally embrace the Nefl*x 'race' narrative, and it's anticipated that today's award speech is about their pain and suffering at the ends of the BRF, and perhaps the Brits in general. To be continued!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> I fear Markle will go ballistic if they take her title away, she will be forever aggrieved.
> 
> She also doesn’t realize how ridiculous she is using her title in the US, voting in our elections and waging war against the Royal Family at the same time.



Let her.  She has made her claims. The BRF is still standing.  What H&M forget is the BRF has dirt on Hazz from his military days and MM from her earlier days.  To avoid all of this unpleasant Hazzi simply needs to renounce his title.  The media needs to hammer him on this issue.  *He claims his family is the worst of the worst, yet he still uses his royal privilege.*  At least, Andi was never _that  _dim.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Someone needs to ask Piers if he is OK!









						Pure jealousy Meghan has for Kate on full display in Netflix trailer
					

If you dig down to the very core of why Harry and Meghan relentlessly attack the royal family, regardless of having the life they sought and more money than most people dream of, the answer could well be simple.




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's true, but I'm not sure they can edit all that footage until Thursday. Dunno.


Oh they can if they want. They would have had 3 days. Won't it be interesting to see if they take it out!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Feeling a tiny bit of glee and schadenfreude. I still would like to know how this happened...was it their idea, did they insist, did one of the editors really hate them?



'schadenfreude' Looked it up, what a wonderful word and perfectly describes my feelings as well.


----------



## bag-mania

Jayne1 said:


> Oh they can if they want. They would have had 3 days. Won't it be interesting to see if they take it out!


They could, but a rush job would be expensive. Does anyone know how long these episodes are? If they are only 20 or 30 minutes they will be cheaper to edit.

Unless they started out as 60 minutes and end up being cut down to 30.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## youngster

So, they used photos of the two of them supposedly being hounded by the press that turn out to have been from events like a Harry Potter premiere which took place years before they even met?  Whoever chose (and approved) those photos _knew_ they were not in any way related to Harry or Meghan and went ahead anyway.   Just wow.

Doesn't Netflix have a fact checker for their supposed documentaries? 

Maybe Netflix thinks like Captain Barbosa.


----------



## Chanbal

If not a manipulated picture, it looks awkward…


----------



## bellecate

rose60610 said:


> They are frauds through and through!
> 
> As though none of the many photographers or their friends/family in the Harry Potter shoot weren't going to recognize some of them and ask "Why in the world are they being included in Claw and Haz' doc?" How stupid can this couple get? They must really believe they are above everything. They had lots of cameras in real life following them, why not use footage that's true? But of course that's when they were gloating and basking in the limelight, loving every minute of it. Idiots!


Plagiarist thy name is TW.  She's gotten away with it for years, this is just another form of it really.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

melissatrv said:


> I am so so sick of their "*artsy*" black & white photos that they have just way overdone!


LOL, first read this as 'arsy' black & white photos thinking you meant photos that should to be or had been used as ar$e or a$$ wipe.


----------



## Nutashha

Actually, I'm excited for this drama!

Meghan and Kate Would Be Apparently “Pitted against One Another” in Netflix Docuseries​


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> *Doesn't Netflix have a fact checker for their supposed documentaries?*
> 
> Maybe Netflix thinks like Captain Barbosa.


Netflix is about entertainment, not truthfulness. Their “documentaries” are not bound by any code of authenticity or accuracy.


----------



## littlemisskeira

Nutashha said:


> Actually, I'm excited for this drama!
> 
> Meghan and Kate Would Be Apparently “Pitted against One Another” in Netflix Docuseries​
> View attachment 5666201


I guess they are desperate enough to make their best effort in ensuring their docuseries sell. 
One gotta add some flames here and there to fire it up.

Just imagine how pissed Kate would be to be dragged into this sh*t. 
Simply ridiculous. 

They are capitalising this based on the fact that the BRF usually 'do not explain; do not complain'. 
So they can paint their own narrative. How terrible are these people?


----------



## DoggieBags

I know it’s a frivolous question but did TW have someone photoshopping all the photos to change her nose in older pics to the latest version of her nose? Or will people be able to trace the progression of her cosmetic procedures in this mockumentary?


----------



## Lodpah

Here’s something I found on the net. Beautiful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

Helventara said:


> View attachment 5665977
> 
> 
> This is not a look that a loving husband gives to his lovely wife. It’s a look given by a proud hairdresser on his work.


----------



## bellecate

For all their ‘love story’ I’ve noticed in pictures taken they are not aware of, there is never any hand holding. Only in posed photos.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Here’s something I found on the net. Beautiful.
> 
> View attachment 5666204


Meghan’s head would explode if she saw that illustration.


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> For all their ‘love story’ I’ve noticed in pictures taken they are not aware of, there is never any hand holding. Only in posed photos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5666206


As near as I can tell they have not been photographed together since the funeral. I’m sure tonight they will make up for lost time.

What do we think, wedding ring or no wedding ring tonight?


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> As near as I can tell they have not been photographed together since the funeral. I’m sure tonight they will make up for lost time.
> 
> What do we think, wedding ring or no wedding ring tonight?


Hope they get boo’ed tonight. Seriously boo’ed.


----------



## Chanbal

Oh, my!  This reached MC.


----------



## CarryOn2020

What real love looks like - always remember:








						Prince and Princess of Wales release stunning loved-up portrait
					

Kate Middleton, 40, was effortlessly elegant in a creamy white dress as she posed with her husband, Prince William, at this year's Earthshot awards ceremony in Boston following their US trip.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## bellecate

A little backpedaling happening perhaps?


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, they used photos of the two of them supposedly being hounded by the press that turn out to have been from events like a Harry Potter premiere which took place years before they even met?  Whoever chose (and approved) those photos _knew_ they were not in any way related to Harry or Meghan and went ahead anyway.   Just wow.
> 
> Doesn't Netflix have a fact checker for their supposed documentaries?
> 
> Maybe Netflix thinks like Captain Barbosa.


I think they used the fact checker that Oprah used for the interview.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they get boo’ed tonight. Seriously boo’ed.



That would be funny. Doubt it will happen at Kerry Kennedy‘s “let’s pat ourselves on the back and enjoy being wealthy” awards however.


----------



## Sharont2305

How unfortunate that a tiara event is happening at Buckingham Palace right now!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

bellecate said:


> A little backpedaling happening perhaps?
> View attachment 5666215


It’s the second coming, doncha know?


----------



## gracekelly

When this series is thoroughly trashed for all the inaccuracies and misrepresentations (I am being polite) and lies, the production team will be lucky to be offered jobs in the future.  I would suggest that they all look into working in fantasy science fiction shows as what they produced will be more in line with those types of productions.

There is no way that everyone involved did not know and agree to the usage of fraudulent material. The producer can claim only so much that can be blamed on what the Sussex told the production staff.  Wasn't there enough money to pay fact checkers?   Unless Netflix puts a disclaimer at the very beginning that this is a fictional depiction using historical events as a framework, there is no way they can ever be taken seriously as an purveyor of historically accurate or truthful video content.  They already put their foot in it with The Crown and being called out on real historical inaccuracies.  It is extremely foolish of them to continue down this rocky road.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> What real love looks like - always remember:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince and Princess of Wales release stunning loved-up portrait
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, 40, was effortlessly elegant in a creamy white dress as she posed with her husband, Prince William, at this year's Earthshot awards ceremony in Boston following their US trip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


They do look stunning…It's time for DM and other news outlets to stop making comparisons between Will & Kate and the Harkles, there is nothing to compare imo. One doesn't make comparisons between an unrated school and an Ivy League.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



My opinion is that this is a picture that belongs ONLY in the family album and not on television.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

bag-mania said:


> That would be funny. Doubt it will happen at Kerry Kennedy‘s “let’s pat ourselves on the back and enjoy being wealthy” awards however.


I wonder if they managed to sell those Million $ seats to sit at the table with H and TW?


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Feeling a tiny bit of glee and schadenfreude. I still would like to know how this happened...was it their idea, did they insist, did one of the editors really hate them?



LOLOLOL!  The in-house Netflix attorneys are not going to have a Merry Christmas this year.  All the photo services will be sending letter of intent to sue because of copyright infringements.  Can't wait!


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I'm just sorry this was discovered in the trailers which gives Netl*x time to re-edit and let everyone forget when they watch the full doc.
> 
> Better to have internet sleuths find the fakery when there is no chance the doc can be altered.


Don't worry. The internet is forever and the trailers have been copied and posted on many sites.  They won't be forgotten.  

I wonder if things are bad enough, will Netflix pull the series and not air it?  Wouldn't that be hilarious!


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> I'm just sorry this was discovered in the trailers which gives Netl*x time to re-edit and let everyone forget when they watch the full doc.
> 
> Better to have internet sleuths find the fakery when there is no chance the doc can be altered.





gracekelly said:


> Don't worry. The internet is forever and the trailers have been copied and posted on many sites.  *They won't be forgotten. *
> 
> I wonder if things are bad enough, will Netflix pull the series and not air it?  Wouldn't that be hilarious!


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> What real love looks like - always remember:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince and Princess of Wales release stunning loved-up portrait
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, 40, was effortlessly elegant in a creamy white dress as she posed with her husband, Prince William, at this year's Earthshot awards ceremony in Boston following their US trip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I think this was an FU to the Harkles and all their black and white artsy fartsy picture.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


>



They are just being consistent.  They lied during the Oprah interview.


----------



## Chanbal

As @gracekelly said, the internet doesn't forget. This is circulating again, I suppose to help justifying Kerry K's award.


----------



## CarryOn2020

*We had it wrong.  A documentary should never be “literal”.  It is the vibe that matters.  Use whatever pictures you want*.  LOL, didn’t they sue a UK tabloid for its use of unflattering MM photos?  Hypocrites.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So we _can_ believe this???


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> BTW, just marathoned all 8 Harry Potter movies, MM’s name is like Voldemort , one should never say it lol



The one time I was happy with Netflix is when they added all Harry Potters to their rotation. I will watch them a hundred times if necessary. I also was thinking of getting the original books (read them in German when they came out) and re-reading them. Maybe I'll do Lord of the Rings first.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Laila619 said:


> I’m just here waiting to see what ugly, overpriced ill-fitting monstrosity she is going to be wearing along with her dark spray tan to the Ripple of Nope tonight. Got my popcorn ready.



I prefer looking at the Princess of Wales who looked stunning as always tonight.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> Oh they can if they want. They would have had 3 days. Won't it be interesting to see if they take it out!



But they need to *replace* it. And apparently, there is just not that much footage to be used


----------



## melissatrv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> What real love looks like - always remember:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince and Princess of Wales release stunning loved-up portrait
> 
> 
> Kate Middleton, 40, was effortlessly elegant in a creamy white dress as she posed with her husband, Prince William, at this year's Earthshot awards ceremony in Boston following their US trip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Geez DM. That dress was neon green. A small fact to check, don't you think.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> LOLOLOL!  The in-house Netflix attorneys are not going to have a Merry Christmas this year.  All the photo services will be sending letter of intent to sue because of copyright infringements.  Can't wait!



Well, happy holidays. I hope they stocked up on wine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## melissatrv

bellecate said:


> A little backpedaling happening perhaps?
> View attachment 5666215


Queue the Charlie Brown "teacher sound"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> *We had it wrong.  A documentary should never be “literal”.  It is the vibe that matters.  Use whatever pictures you want*.  LOL, didn’t they sue a UK tabloid for its use of unflattering MM photos?  Hypocrites.




Is that so. I might not be a pro in the industry, but we tend to not order food at a restaurant to get our audience in the mood for our food formats...we use actual footage from the actual event for our teasers and trailers.


----------



## Lounorada

bellecate said:


> For all their ‘love story’ I’ve noticed in pictures taken they are not aware of, there is never any hand holding. Only in posed photos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5666206






Part of me was thinking they wouldn't show up to collect this utterly ridiculous 'award' because well, any person with common sense and a conscience would realise it's hypocritical, fraudulent and just plain embarrassing but then they go and prove just how delusional, egotistical and narcissistic they both are to _not _see the faults in accepting this 'award'. So, what do they do? They fly to NY in a private jet of course, so they can show up (probably looking proud AF) acting like they're accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.
You couldn't make this sh*t up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm starting to think there's no coming back from this for Harry even if he gets rid of the corpse eater.


----------



## gracekelly

Speaking of grifting, scamming and reinventing yourself.  Do a quick scan of this overly long article.  Ngozi is a real piece of work.






						Finding Ngozi | Going Postal
					






					going-postal.com


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm starting to think there's no coming back from this for Harry even if he gets rid of the corpse eater.


Your post got me to thinking about what happened to Judas Iscariot.  Seems like Harry has a lot in common.

_According to Matthew 27:3–10, Judas felt remorse after seeing Jesus condemned to death, and he returned the silver and *hanged himself*._

BTW, My DH has his doubts that Judas returned the silver because he thinks that Judas had already spent it.  Maybe he had big upkeep on his home with 16 bathrooms.


----------



## lanasyogamama

elvisfan4life said:


> More
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In defence of Lady Susan Hussey
> 
> 
> Lady Susan Hussey resigned from the Royal household yesterday after 60 years of loyal service to King and Country. Lady Susan, who is 83, has survived world crises, royal scandals and machinations and the death of her friend Queen Elizabeth, to whom she was a beloved companion and longest...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spectator.co.uk


I hope something is done to correct the knee-jerk reaction on this. 


Nutashha said:


> Actually, I'm excited for this drama!
> 
> Meghan and Kate Would Be Apparently “Pitted against One Another” in Netflix Docuseries​
> View attachment 5666201


Of all the insincere faces we’ve seen from Mememe, I think this was the most insincere of all.


----------



## DoggieBags

Laila619 said:


> I’m just here waiting to see what ugly, overpriced ill-fitting monstrosity she is going to be wearing along with her dark spray tan to the Ripple of Nope tonight. Got my popcorn ready.


No matter what she wears tonight, she‘ll never be able to match the jewels the BRF ladies have access to. Kate’s wearing a tiara tonight in London that’s been in the Royal Family for decades while TW will wear some basic new jewelry she’s being paid to merch.


----------



## Lodpah

gracekelly said:


> Your post got me to thinking about what happened to Judas Iscariot.  Seems like Harry has a lot in common.
> 
> _According to Matthew 27:3–10, Judas felt remorse after seeing Jesus condemned to death, and he returned the silver and *hanged himself*._
> 
> BTW, My DH has his doubts that Judas returned the silver because he thinks that Judas had already spent it.  Maybe he had big upkeep on his home with 16 bathrooms.


I think Judas threw the silver at the ground. His guilt was too much.


----------



## Lodpah

I honestly don’t think PC will remove the titles. He’s too much of a wimp but if Camilla is portrayed badly . . . then gloves are off. I’m still astounded at the level of hatred Malignant Meg has in her heart,

I don’t see beauty when I see her. I see darkness and evil vibes as it emanates from the inside. Harry is a whole other level of ugliness.


----------



## rose60610

Chanbal said:


> between Will & Kate and the Harkles, there is nothing to compare imo. One doesn't make comparisons between an unrated school and an Ivy League.



Nailed it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Your post got me to thinking about what happened to Judas Iscariot.  Seems like Harry has a lot in common.



That said, Judas Iscariot somewhat helped founding a world religion. At this moment I fail to see what Harry is helping along with his horrible behaviour.



gracekelly said:


> BTW, My DH has his doubts that Judas returned the silver because he thinks that Judas had already spent it.  *Maybe he had big upkeep on his home with 16 bathrooms.*




OMG


----------



## sdkitty

I think they are rapidly losing credibility.  Mainstream US media is starting to question their lies.  Hope the house of cards is folding.  The greedy grifter and the dummie prince may eventually go away.  But they still have a lot of money from Netflix and Spotify?  Enough for their very grand lifestyle?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> I don’t see beauty when I see her. I see darkness and evil vibes as it emanates from the inside.



Right. I can never unsee her face malfunctions.


----------



## gracekelly

Queen 'wanted Meghan to make a success of role', Gyles Brandreth says
					

Gyles Brandreth told Palace Confidential that Her Majesty, who died aged 96 on September 8, did 'everything that she could' to welcome Meghan Markle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




I'm sure this will not be mentioned in the mockumentary.  Poor Sophie, always taking one for the team.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Paul Burrell says Harry and Meghan should be stripped of royal titles
					

Paul Burrell, 64, last night told Talk TV that Princess Diana was always proud of her sons being in the UK's royal family, and wouldn't 'applaud' her youngest son Prince Harry's current behaviour.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Hmmm....It takes a narcissist to recognize another narcissist.  Right Paul? You are as bad as Harry living off of the back of Lady Diana.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry wrong thread


----------



## rose60610

All Claw and Haz have going on is complaining about "how hard" they have it and accepting awards that were purchased. Will and Kate always have a full plate of important events, meetings with world leaders and other influential people--balanced out with local events and kids' school functions. And they dress spot on with appropriate clothes, Kate gets her pick of royal jewels. Claw had to make a scene of taking off her wedding rings the day after she and Haz announced they were stepping down when TQ shuttered her appearance at the theater. So.....when Claw doesn't get her way she throws tantrums. Kate was bludgeoned in the media for several years with no complaint. And look where they all are now! Miserable laughingstock hobnobbing with paid friends vs genuine VIPS in palatial luxury surrounded by an admiring public and global respect. And Claw threw it all away!


----------



## Lodpah

rose60610 said:


> All Claw and Haz have going on is complaining about "how hard" they have it and accepting awards that were purchased. Will and Kate always have a full plate of important events, meetings with world leaders and other influential people--balanced out with local events and kids' school functions. And they dress spot on with appropriate clothes, Kate gets her pick of royal jewels. Claw had to make a scene of taking off her wedding rings the day after she and Haz announced they were stepping down when TQ shuttered her appearance at the theater. So.....when Claw doesn't get her way she throws tantrums. Kate was bludgeoned in the media for several years with no complaint. And look where they all are now! Miserable laughingstock hobnobbing with paid friends vs genuine VIPS in palatial luxury surrounded by an admiring public and global respect. And Claw threw it all away!


Her legacy name will be Lying Duchess for the books.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hope they get boo’ed tonight. Seriously boo’ed.



The Sugars will have purchased bodies to cheer for them, even if you loathe them, a Buck’s a Buck to a street person.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> I honestly don’t think PC will remove the titles. He’s too much of a wimp but if Camilla is portrayed badly . . . then gloves are off. I’m still astounded at the level of hatred Malignant Meg has in her heart,
> 
> I don’t see beauty when I see her. I see darkness and evil vibes as it emanates from the inside. Harry is a whole other level of ugliness.


I don't see her as beautiful either.  I see a person who is obsessed with being rich and famous at any cost.  I doubt she was ever in love with "H".  Just with the idea of being royal/rich/famous/A-list.  Just seeing how she has treated her father tells me a lot about her.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry wrong thread



This is worth posting here, no apology needed. With his  participation he is acknowledging the contrast of her contributions to the Commonwealth and the Royal Family, to the absence of any from the Malevolent one.

 Bless her father-in-law!


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> As near as I can tell they have not been photographed together since the funeral. I’m sure tonight they will make up for lost time.
> 
> What do we think, wedding ring or no wedding ring tonight?


I saw a blowup of the airport pic somewhere today and he is wearing his. Couldn't tell about her. I'm going with yes, even if just to quell separation rumors.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> I just saw this and I think it sums it up perfectly
> 
> View attachment 5666043


It's great that Dufus can't inherit the throne. Can you imagine if they were king and queen?! Once the novelty wore off and the rules started to cramp her style, ZedZed would secretly sell anything and everything she could while depositing the money in offshore accounts and then running like hell. She would have no qualms destroying the Monarchy because if she isn't thee queen she would ensure that no one else is either. I also think she's an antimonarchist at heart.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I wonder if they managed to sell those Million $ seats to sit at the table with H and TW?


If people can take a tax deduction for some or all of the cost I'd say yes.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But they need to *replace* it. And apparently, there is just not that much footage to be used


If they could edit the whole thing and leave only the factual parts they'd end up with essentially six trailers.


----------



## Chanbal

TW's bullied staff are ready and anxious to talk!   




*A former Buckingham Palace employee who claims they were bullied by the Duchess of Sussex has called on the palace to hit back at the allegations that are expected to be made in the Sussexes’ Netflix series Harry & Meghan.*
_
The former employee, who is one of many members of staff bound by a confidentiality agreement, said: *“The only way to end it once for good is for us to be allowed to speak, and for the palace to firmly reject their lies.”*

The six-part documentary series, which is released in part tomorrow, contains serious allegations against the royal household, including claims that the palace leaked and planted stories.

There are also claims, highlighted in a trailer that was released earlier this week, that the attacks on the duchess were motivated by racism. *Some palace insiders were “seething with rage” at the allegations, according to one source.*

However, one unanswered question is how the documentary will address the allegations — first reported in The Times — that the duchess bullied members of staff. *A review of the allegations was conducted by an independent law firm, but Buckingham Palace refused to publish the results…


One person said to have been bullied by the duchess, who has remained silent until now, was so outraged by the two trailers promoting the series that they have decided to speak out, albeit under conditions of strict anonymity.*

“*It’s emotionally draining,*” they said. “*It feels like there’s no end to it*.”

The former employee called on the palace to “step up” by lifting all the non-disclosure agreements, and said they should “publicly respond to [the Sussexes’] attacks”…

The former employee said: “*They always use vague terms ‘the truth’, ‘my truth’, but nothing concrete is said.” *Instead *the duchess uses people like the journalist Omid Scobie to convey her narrative* that some people within the palace were racist, the former employee believes.

The palace declined to comment, but it is understood that they are “monitoring events closely” and do not believe there is any point saying anything until they have seen the programme.

*The former employee also believes that Meghan has been trying to push other former Palace employees into breaking their confidentiality agreements so they can be taken to court.*

“*She knows we can’t financially protect ourselves by going to court, so she keeps pushing.
“It’s all a game for her. And she is loving it*.”

While the former employee is mistaken in thinking that the duchess could take them to court — *in the event of a breach of the agreement, it would be the palace who could sue, not Meghan — their fear of legal action remains real.*

They added: “*I certainly have chosen to remain silent out of respect for the crown, but if they keep attacking us and our characters, reputation etc. we need to feel we are equally supported by the royal family.”*

Other former employees who worked for the Sussexes have also questioned the narrative being put out by Netflix. One pointed to the scenes of frenzied media activity in the trailer that have been revealed as relating to Katie Price rather than the duke and duchess. They said: “*She never confronted scenes where she was mobbed because we did so much to protect her… so they’ve had to make them up!*”…

The source added that coverage of Meghan was overwhelmingly positive until her father Thomas Markle, who failed to attend the couple’s wedding after colluding with fake paparazzi photographs, started turning the media narrative against her. “It will be interesting to see how her own family is referenced in their movie. It was glowing coverage until her own father started his campaign.”_



			archive.ph


----------



## charlottawill

lanasyogamama said:


> I hope something is done to correct the knee-jerk reaction on this.
> 
> Of all the insincere faces we’ve seen from Mememe, I think this was the most insincere of all.


That's just her go-to smug "I'm better than all of you" expression.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's great that Dufus can't inherit the throne. Can you imagine if they were king and queen?! Once the novelty wore off and the rules started to cramp her style, ZedZed would secretly sell anything and everything she could while depositing the money in offshore accounts and then running like hell. She would have no qualms destroying the Monarchy because if she isn't thee queen she would ensure that no one else is either. I also think she's an antimonarchist at heart.


being  anti-monarchy is ok but marrying into the family, having a huge spectacle wedding - at age of almost 40 and divorced...then being anti monarchy, not ok


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I think this was an FU to the Harkles and all their black and white artsy fartsy picture.


I completely agree. Some here have said that the P&P of Wales would not sink to the Harkles' level, but I believe the choker and this photo are subtle rebuttals of the narrative being pushed by Cringe and Ginge, not done directly by the P&P of Wales but by palace staffers in support of them and with the blessing of KC.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Enough for their very grand lifestyle?


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


>


sorry for repeating myself again but I would just love to seem them move to a "regular" tract home in the suburbs


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's great that Dufus can't inherit the throne. Can you imagine if they were king and queen?! Once the novelty wore off and the rules started to cramp her style, ZedZed would secretly sell anything and everything she could while depositing the money in offshore accounts and then running like hell. She would have no qualms destroying the Monarchy because if she isn't thee queen she would ensure that no one else is either. I also think *she's an antimonarchist at heart*.


Isn't she a "kween"?

 "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22

This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.   Is TW pulling Hazz?  


*Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.









						Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
					

Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Isn't she a "kween"?
> 
> "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22
> 
> This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.
> View attachment 5666338
> 
> *Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


she doesn't compare with Kate in the dress but I have to admit her face and shoulders look good in this pic


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Isn't she a "kween"?
> 
> "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22
> 
> This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.   Is TW pulling Hazz?
> View attachment 5666338
> 
> *Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


showing off those "lean" legs....Ha....skinny is more like it


----------



## Chanbal

Are there any volunteers to sponsor TW?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> *being  anti-monarchy is ok* but marrying into the family, having a huge spectacle wedding - at age of almost 40 and divorced...then being anti monarchy, not ok


I'm sure I haven't implied otherwise. I've met several antimonarchists and I know they would never have pulled any of the sh!t ZedZed has done.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Isn't she a "kween"?
> 
> "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22
> 
> This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.   Is TW pulling Hazz?
> View attachment 5666338
> 
> *Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



She's really the happiest when she can wreck havoc.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> she doesn't compare with Kate in the dress but I have to admit her face and shoulders look good in this pic





sdkitty said:


> showing off those "lean" legs....Ha....skinny is more like it


Her face is the product of her plastic surgeon, makeup artist, and hairdresser. There isn't much what they can do with the legs, pants?


----------



## LittleStar88

What is that dress? Curtains? Bed sheets? Bedspread?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Isn't she a "kween"?
> 
> "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22
> 
> This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.   Is TW pulling Hazz?
> View attachment 5666338
> 
> *Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




View attachment 5666338



_"...donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit..." _

Looks more like she stole the hotel's bedsheets when no designer would lend her a dress.


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> What is that dress? Curtains? Bed sheets? Bedspread?



We were posting the same time!


----------



## LittleStar88

papertiger said:


> We were posting the same time!



Jinx!

Adding… Looks like a restaurant tablecloth. 

That dress is tragic. But grateful she didn’t let me down


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Isn't she a "kween"?
> 
> "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22
> 
> This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.   Is TW pulling Hazz?
> View attachment 5666338
> 
> *Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Sheets, drapery, don’t you guys have any imagination ???
It is the Pillsbury Dough boy! Or the Stay Puft marshmallow boy (see Ghostbusters)?


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Jinx!
> 
> Adding… Looks like a restaurant tablecloth.
> 
> That dress is tragic. But grateful she didn’t let me down





marietouchet said:


> Sheets, drapery, don’t you guys have any imagination ???
> It is the Pillsbury Dough boy! Or it that the Stay Puft marshmallow boy (see Ghostbusters)?



I don't know how anyone can look that bad and smile


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mikimoto007

I'm alone in this....but I like Meghan's dress. The sleeve should be tighter, but really, I like it.

Is that Diana's aquamarine cocktail ring she's wearing?


----------



## Lodpah

She’s so traumatized that she’s basking in their gift of making her famous and rich. You can’t make this up.


----------



## Chloe302225




----------



## Laila619

Lounorada said:


> I'm guessing it will be a lot of this...
> 
> View attachment 5666189


Well, you were pretty much spot on here: a shapeless sack!


----------



## Mrs.Z

mikimoto007 said:


> I'm alone in this....but I like Meghan's dress. The sleeve should be tighter, but really, I like it.
> 
> Is that Diana's aquamarine cocktail ring she's wearing?


You are not alone, I like it too.  I think those pleats on the front are really hard to pull off but it actually fits her quite well and is very flattering.  Yes, that is Diana’s ring!


----------



## sdkitty

Chloe302225 said:


>



hand holding as always


----------



## youngster

I think she looks good from the neck up but I'm not a fan of the shapeless sack dress. The sleeves don't fit well. It looks like the dress is wearing her. I don't care for the black heels and clutch with it either. 

This is supposed to be bespoke Louis Vuitton? How many tens of thousands did it cost I wonder?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Her face is the product of her plastic surgeon, makeup artist, and hairdresser. There isn't much what they can do with the legs, pants?


The teeth — so white, almost day glow white, glow in the dark.


----------



## megs0927

No comparison IMO. No one can wear dresses quite like Kate. Makes TW’s version look sloppy.


----------



## LittleStar88

papertiger said:


> I don't know how anyone can look that bad and smile



The fit is so awful. Even I feel uncomfortable and I’m not wearing it!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> You are not alone, I like it too.  I think those pleats on the front are really hard to pull off but it actually fits her quite well and is very flattering.  Yes, that is Diana’s ring!


Haven’t they said it is a copy of Di’s ring?  Not the real ring which lives in the UK

Notice the original did not have the side diamonds








						Princess Diana’s Aquamarine Ring
					

Next week marks the 60th Anniversary of the Birth of the late Diana, Princess of Wales! We covered her Top 20 Jewels to mark the 20th Anniversary of her Death in 2017, and for the days leading up t…




					royalwatcherblog.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I think she looks good from the neck up but I'm not a fan of the shapeless sack dress. The sleeves don't fit well. It looks like the dress is wearing her. I don't care for the black heels and clutch with it either.
> 
> This is supposed to be bespoke Louis Vuitton? How many tens of thousands did it cost I wonder?


Looks like it started as a jump suit then morphed into this bit of yuck


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven’t they said it is a copy of Di’s ring?  Not the real ring which lives in the UK


IDK but I'd like to think that's true


----------



## Lounorada

_Of course_ she had to wear Diana's aquamarine ring (real or not) after Catherine was wearing the emerald jewels associated with Diana a few days ago.


She's so painfully predictable and petty.

That white dress ain't fooling anyone... trying to appear all innocent and light when she just looks like the devil being deceiving in fancy dress costume.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself again but I would just love to seem them move to a "regular" tract home in the suburbs


Meghan could be Queen of the HOA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Is she merching copies of Diana's ring now, too? And all of a sudden, Haz has more hair.


----------



## DoggieBags

Mrs.Z said:


> You are not alone, I like it too.  I think those pleats on the front are really hard to pull off but it actually fits her quite well and is very flattering.  Yes, that is Diana’s ring!


I need to see how it fits in the back before I can decide. The fit looks decent from the front. And I’m amazed she finally chose something in a fabric that isn’t wrinkling badly. Maybe she’s finally figuring out what works for her figure. But the true test is what it looks like from behind because I’ve seen her in other outfits that didn’t look bad from the front but the fit on the back was awful.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Meghan could be Queen of the HOA.


People’s Choice awards are being held tonight in Santa Monica - isn’t that H&M’s neighborhood 

ETA:

_The couple - who profess themselves to be eco-warriors - pulled up at the event in a convoy of three SUVs, accompanied by five security guards who helped them out of their vehicle, having jetted into New York City on a private jet yesterday.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ipple-Hope-Gala-accept-anti-racism-award.html_


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> People’s Choice awards are being held tonight in Santa Monica - isn’t that H&M’s neighborhood


She is up for best podcast but I don’t think she should be holding her breath.


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> People’s Choice awards are being held tonight in Santa Monica - isn’t that H&M’s neighborhood



The Ripple of Nope award was more affordable. Even with private jet.


----------



## Mrs.Z

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven’t they said it is a copy of Di’s ring?  Not the real ring which lives in the UK
> 
> Notice the original did not have the side diamonds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana’s Aquamarine Ring
> 
> 
> Next week marks the 60th Anniversary of the Birth of the late Diana, Princess of Wales! We covered her Top 20 Jewels to mark the 20th Anniversary of her Death in 2017, and for the days leading up t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalwatcherblog.com


Oh, I’m not sure…..I thought the ring was Harry’s and he gifted it to Meghan


----------



## CarryOn2020

Hazzi needs hair:



			https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/12/07/00/65317173-11509663-image-a-118_1670374660943.jpg
		











						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle honored at NYC gala hosted by Alec Baldwin
					

Their visit comes as they are set to drop the premiere of “Harry & Meghan” — in which the couple “will claim they were bullied by the palace,” sources have told Page Six…




					nypost.com


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _The couple - who profess themselves to be eco-warriors - pulled up at the event in a convoy of three SUVs, accompanied by *five security guards* who helped them out of their vehicle, having jetted into New York City on a private jet yesterday._
> _https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ipple-Hope-Gala-accept-anti-racism-award.html_


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi needs hair:
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/12/07/00/65317173-11509663-image-a-118_1670374660943.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle honored at NYC gala hosted by Alec Baldwin
> 
> 
> Their visit comes as they are set to drop the premiere of “Harry & Meghan” — in which the couple “will claim they were bullied by the palace,” sources have told Page Six…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Is the Diana's ring (or a copy of it) on TW's finger?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Comments on NY Post article — brutal, as usual

— The theme of the gala was Murder on the Orient Express. The guests were asked to work as a team to figure out who the killer in the room is and they all pointed at Baldwin. Oh well, it was probably fun while it lasted.


Nice of Alec to take time out from doing the deed with Hilarious in search of more humans. Thanks Alec. You and your brood are already using way more of earth's resources than you are entitled to.


Giulietta.Indy
2h ago

*This is the quiet life, redefined.*


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hazzi needs hair:
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/12/07/00/65317173-11509663-image-a-118_1670374660943.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle honored at NYC gala hosted by Alec Baldwin
> 
> 
> Their visit comes as they are set to drop the premiere of “Harry & Meghan” — in which the couple “will claim they were bullied by the palace,” sources have told Page Six…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


DM has a way with titles.   What a circus… Is the arm around her shoulder part of the Nefl*x promotion? 












						Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
					

Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

The crowd is restless.  Ut oh.  Is the umbrella for rain or to dodge the eggs/tomatoes/etc.


----------



## Aimee3

Grinning like a loon!


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Danger, Will Robinson, danger


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Somebody, please, point this out to the hypocritical dimwit.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven’t they said it is a copy of Di’s ring?  Not the real ring which lives in the UK
> 
> Notice the original did not have the side diamonds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana’s Aquamarine Ring
> 
> 
> Next week marks the 60th Anniversary of the Birth of the late Diana, Princess of Wales! We covered her Top 20 Jewels to mark the 20th Anniversary of her Death in 2017, and for the days leading up t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalwatcherblog.com


But we do know Meg likes to add diamonds to things...


----------



## mikimoto007

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven’t they said it is a copy of Di’s ring?  Not the real ring which lives in the UK
> 
> Notice the original did not have the side diamonds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana’s Aquamarine Ring
> 
> 
> Next week marks the 60th Anniversary of the Birth of the late Diana, Princess of Wales! We covered her Top 20 Jewels to mark the 20th Anniversary of her Death in 2017, and for the days leading up t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalwatcherblog.com



I definitely see diamonds in the ring Diana is wearing.


----------



## needlv

This is the best article I have read about Marriott Markle and her story/fantasy/ brand she keeps trying to push onto everyone.  Click on the link - I promise it’s a good read!



			archive.ph
		


Why are so many of the storylines in Meghan's narrative of her life straight out of fairytales?​


----------



## CarryOn2020

400,000 in one week!!!  



from the DM:

_The trailers for Harry and Meghan's Netflix documentary have been given the thumbs down by more than 400,000 people. 

The first 72-second clip, which was released last week, revealed previously unseen pictures from the couple's family album and a voiceover from Harry saying 'no one sees what's happening behind closed doors.' 

Although the clip has had more than seven million views, more than 281,000 people 'dislike' the video, according to a popular online tool which also shows how just 22,000 gave the trailer a thumbs up. 

The second clip, which was released at the weekend and showed Harry hitting out at a 'hierarchy of the family', has been disliked by 120,000 people. Only 22,000 have 'liked' it. 









						Harry and Meghan's Netflix trailers 'disliked' by 400,000
					

The trailers for Harry and Meghan's Netflix documentary have been given the thumbs down by more than 400,000 people.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



_


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> showing off those "lean" legs....Ha....skinny is more like it


Ewww.....   And that isn't her engagement ring.


----------



## CarryOn2020

mikimoto007 said:


> I definitely see diamonds in the ring Diana is wearing.


People with far better eyes than mine and far more knowledge of jewelry, they have studied this. Their conclusion is H&M’s is a fake. :gasp:
Who am I to argue?


----------



## Jayne1

In every photo she has a huge smile.  I don't think it's a real smile because her eyes aren't smiling, but I've said before, I admire that she can hold a big smile on her face.  Who said she can't act?


----------



## bag-mania

It is rainy on the East Coast tonight. I’m sure an umbrella in the shot wasn’t part of her master plan for getting out of the limo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> It is rainy on the East Coast tonight. I’m sure an umbrella in the shot wasn’t part of her master plan for getting out of the limo.


At least, we can hear the roar of the crowd.  Sounds unfriendly imo.   Tbf, some of that could be for Baldwin


----------



## needlv

Right…. Sure… Marriott Markle and her prince are now scrambling to find an angle to cover the fact that they are creating a false narrative and misleading audiences.

I sure hope Netflix has a pretty huge indemnity clause in their contract.  I imagine photographers and journalists are going to want a cut of $$ or Netflix will have several copyright claims…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> In every photo she has a huge smile.  I don't think it's a real smile because her eyes aren't smiling, but I've said before, I admire that she can hold a big smile on her face.  Who said she can't act?


A smile or a grimace? 






						Prince Harry Meghan Markle Pictures and Photos - Getty Images
					

View and license Prince Harry Meghan Markle pictures & news photos from Getty Images.



					www.gettyimages.com


----------



## Chanbal

This is good!


----------



## CarryOn2020

2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala​NEW YORK, NEW YORK - DECEMBER 06 Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex attend the 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala at New York Hilton on December 06, 2022 in New York City. (Photo by Mike Coppola/Getty Images for 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala)


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

From TMZ:









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Accept 'Anti-Racism' Award
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are only days away from dropping what promises to be an explosive documentary about their time inside the royal family, but still made time to accept an honor for their efforts battling racism.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

All 3 look oh-so-desperate.  As if *this* is the end.


----------



## Toby93

All I can picture is the staining on the inside of the poor dress from the fake tan


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> It is rainy on the East Coast tonight. I’m sure an umbrella in the shot wasn’t part of her master plan for getting out of the limo.


actually it reminds me of that famous photo of the two of them with the umbrella so she may have liked it


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5666404


she's behind him?  has this been altered?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Isn't she a "kween"?
> 
> "_It shines a glorious if unwitting light on the narcissism and outright daftness of the right-on celeb set of which _*Ms Markle is now kween*." Source: Spectator 08/22
> 
> This would be Kate's style on a very bad day.   Is TW pulling Hazz?
> View attachment 5666338
> 
> *Meghan Markle*_* appeared to take a leaf out of the Princess of Wales' style book on Tuesday night*, when she donned a daring off-the-shoulder white gown, complete with thigh-high slit, to accept an 'anti-racism' award in New York alongside Prince Harry - days after Kate wore a near-identical design to the Earthshot gala in Boston_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Wearing a shroud for the death of her fame.


----------



## xincinsin

littlemisskeira said:


> I'm also starting to believe that w*hile Meghan is a horrible person, Harry isn't any better. She probably didn't change him much. Rather, she awakens a part of his personality that is innate within him. *The only good thing out of this whole nonsense would be that 2 deserving individuals found each other I guess.


One of our teammates transferred to another department and became lazy and unhelpful. My ex-boss was quite disbelieving when I told her that the person is actually quite spineless and bends with the wind. We are hardworking, so she just followed our culture. Her new department had a boss who believed in doing the minimum, so she followed suit. I think Sparry is like that, not an influencer but easily influenced. He is following the ways of the Zed cult.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Haven’t they said it is a copy of Di’s ring?  Not the real ring which lives in the UK
> 
> Notice the original did not have the side diamonds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess Diana’s Aquamarine Ring
> 
> 
> Next week marks the 60th Anniversary of the Birth of the late Diana, Princess of Wales! We covered her Top 20 Jewels to mark the 20th Anniversary of her Death in 2017, and for the days leading up t…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> royalwatcherblog.com


It says Diana’s ring. It does not say Diana Princess of Wales’ ring or Lady Diana’s ring. It is more of her usual obfuscation to make you wonder


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> she's behind him?  has this been altered?


----------



## LittleStar88




----------



## Toby93

Sorry @LittleStar88, you beat me to it


----------



## needlv

At least her makeup looks ok….!

As for the dress, until I see it from the back I am reserving judgement.  But at least it’s not wrinkly fabric.

Her posture is terrible.  Can’t tell if it’s the dress or her posture.


----------



## youngster

Ugh the white dress looks even worse in the pic with Kerry Kennedy. Ms. Kennedy could use a stylist herself. Unfortunate choice of dress by her.

Meghan is hanging on to her smile with both hands. Harry looks befuddled.


----------



## Chanbal

Toby93 said:


> All I can picture is the staining on the inside of the poor dress from the fake tan


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> One of our teammates transferred to another department and became lazy and unhelpful. My ex-boss was quite disbelieving when I told her that the person is actually quite spineless and bends with the wind. We are hardworking, so she just followed our culture. Her new department had a boss who believed in doing the minimum, so she followed suit. I think Sparry is like that, not an influencer but easily influenced. He is following the ways of the Zed cult.


I have to disagree a bit. I think Harry has had bitterness and jealousy festering within him for most of his life. He loved his brother but I believe massive resentment was bubbling under the surface, hidden but always there.

To illustrate check out this visit the brothers took to Pinewood Studios where the Star Wars films were made in 2016 (pre-Meghan). Both brothers are holding a light saber prop, but only one brother is giving the other a kill shot to the chest. Look at the creepy expression on Harry’s face.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

Wow. H looks...happy. I don't think I've seen him look happy like that in years. He seems to have had a breakthrough in therapy because those flashing bulbs are not triggering him! 

And M looks...good. Not Princess Catherine good, but good compared to her usual sloppy outfits. Shame that she had to literally cosplay Catherine to get there.
Also, I must applaud her for not tanning several shades darker, though my common sense tells me that may be to avoid staining the white dress that she's merching.


----------



## Jayne1

People really shouldn't compare Meg with Kate.  Who can possibly compete with Kate?


----------



## Chanbal

This person was apparently at the door, enjoy!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


>



If there can be misleading photos of press intrusion in just two 1-minute long teasers, I am practically salivating at the treasure trove of misinformation there must be embedded in 6 (six!) episodes.


----------



## DoggieBags

needlv said:


> At least her makeup looks ok….!
> 
> As for the dress, until I see it from the back I am reserving judgement.  But at least it’s not wrinkly fabric.
> 
> Her posture is terrible.  Can’t tell if it’s the dress or her posture.


Agree, her posture is terrible which is part of the reason her clothes don’t hang well. The skirt is an odd length, should be longer or shorter. The length it she has it as makes her look shorter.


----------



## jblended

Jayne1 said:


> People really shouldn't compare Meg with Kate.


Normally, I would wholeheartedly agree, but in this case the dresses are so similar just days apart, that it is difficult not to.


----------



## csshopper

youngster said:


> Ugh the white dress looks even worse in the pic with Kerry Kennedy. Ms. Kennedy could use a stylist herself. Unfortunate choice of dress by her.
> 
> Meghan is hanging on to her smile with both hands. Harry looks befuddled.


If there’s a power failure Malignant one’s new veneers will shed light. She looks like the Cheshire Cat, or maybe she’s merching Crest whitening toothpaste.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5666415



She didn’t even get a red carpet lololol!


----------



## Chanbal

Don't miss this  



_*Megyn Kelly is joined by Kmele Foster, Michael Moynihan, and Matt Welch, *the hosts of The Fifth Column podcast, to discuss the latest Netflix trailer for the upcoming Meghan and Harry documentary, the slew of false claims already found in the short clips, and more_.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5666410


ZedZed may be behind Dufus, but check her thumb (left hand); it's in the dominant position indicating that she may still be in control.
Edited to delete extra 'the'


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> ZedZed may be behind Dufus, but check her thumb (left hand); it's in the the dominant position indicating that she may still be in control.


Kennedy snuggled just a wee bit too close for MM’s comfort.  Hazz seems to relish the women hanging off of him.  
Question is where is Alec?


----------



## gracekelly

So the aquamarine ring is worth about $30,000 and the emerald choker is worth $16 million. Remodel of the master bathroom and closet vs the cost of an entire mansion.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Feeling a tiny bit of glee and schadenfreude. I still would like to know how this happened...was it their idea, did they insist, did one of the editors really hate them?



If this was stock footage, then Netflix likely bought a subscription for access to a stockshot/footage library. 
The information for each image/footage clip would be in the database.
But if Zed and Sparry were solely going for impact and insisted on using the most visually arresting images without considering the provenance, then they probably ignored and p*ssed off video editors who tried to warn them against misrepresentation. 



rose60610 said:


> They are frauds through and through!
> 
> As though none of the many photographers or their friends/family in the Harry Potter shoot weren't going to recognize some of them and ask "Why in the world are they being included in Claw and Haz' doc?" How stupid can this couple get? They must really believe they are above everything. They had lots of cameras in real life following them, why not use footage that's true? But of course that's when they were gloating and basking in the limelight, loving every minute of it. Idiots!


Narcs tend to believe no one will ever fact-check them, and if anyone does, out come the fake tears and cries of injustice.



bag-mania said:


> It does show how much is being faked in what we see every day. It was noticed by people looking closely at H&M, but think of all the misrepresentation that is getting past us in other stories.


Very true, because how many people have the time or the resources or even the vocabulary to do the research. Despite search engines being around for years, many people still don't know the basics of Boolean search or which words and alternatives to use to deep-dive.


DoggieBags said:


> the Harkles didn‘t make this documentary all on their own. They had lots and lots of help. So *was Netflix so desperate to wring blood out of this stone that they closed their eyes and kept their fingers crossed*? Whoever was in charge of fact checking and making sure they had all the appropriate releases signed should be fired immediately. And from the Director on down, anyone who had any decision making ability in this project should hang their heads in shame.


I hope not, although I do agree about the "blood from stone" 
I'm just wondering: how could the Harkles think that they could get paid for non-production? Maybe Sparry is new to the whole media production world, but surely Zed knew that actual creativity and output was required?


CobaltBlu said:


> There is continuing talk on reddit and I guess Twitter as well that there will be huge legal issues with the photographs/photographers. Not only regarding copyrighted materials but also that there is an element of defamation of accredited photographers which is a continuing theme in the H&M narrative; up till now there has not been a lot of hard evidence of defamation.....


Laying in stock of popcorn.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s get this done!



If nothing else, I will give Zed credit for this. She has certainly been the reason for changes in the monarchy. Nothing like a bloodthirsty traitor to shake things up!


Mrs.Z said:


> I fear Markle will go ballistic if they take her title away, she will be forever aggrieved.
> 
> She also doesn’t realize how ridiculous she is using her title in the US, voting in our elections and waging war against the Royal Family at the same time.


Oh well, she is already forever aggrieved over everything, so it will make little difference. 
 what we see as "ridiculous", she may be patting herself on her back for being able to multi-task


----------



## needlv

gracekelly said:


> So the aquamarine ring is worth about $30,000 and the emerald choker is worth $16 million. Remodel of 5e master bathroom and closet vs the cost of an entire mansion.



Is it Diana’s ring though?  Diana’s ring looks a little rectangle, and the one worn by Marriott Markle is more square….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> Is it Diana’s ring though?  Diana’s ring looks a little rectangle, and the one worn by Marriott Markle is more square….


I never thought she had the real one. See my my prior post


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Kennedy snuggled just a wee bit too close for MM’s comfort.  Hazz seems to relish the women hanging off of him.
> Question is where is Alec?


From the picture: A new play in town, The Gruesome Threesome at the Awards starring ZedZed as the smug b!tch aka look at me, I'm so VIP; Dufus as the idiot man-child; and Kerry Kennedy as the deer caught in the headlights.


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower "their truth is their lies"


----------



## youngster

So they arrived in 3 SUV's and with 5 security personnel. There were maybe 25 or so people hanging about outside including the British man who heckled them.  
It must be exhausting for them, carrying around all those delusions.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5666415



Mean comment from this Eileen Cumiskey person.  That lady wearing sneakers was working.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Don't miss this
> 
> 
> 
> _*Megyn Kelly is joined by Kmele Foster, Michael Moynihan, and Matt Welch, *the hosts of The Fifth Column podcast, to discuss the latest Netflix trailer for the upcoming Meghan and Harry documentary, the slew of false claims already found in the short clips, and more_.



Although Megyn Kelly speaks the truth re ZedZed and Dufus, I wish she'd let her guests join in the conversation instead of answering her own questions.


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Very true, because *how many people have the time or the resources or even the vocabulary to do the research*. Despite search engines being around for years, *many people still don't know the basics of Boolean search or which words and alternatives to use to deep-dive.*


Ooooooh, every librarian on this planet loves you!  About time someone spoke the truth.  Thank you.


----------



## xincinsin

DoggieBags said:


> I wonder if they managed to sell those Million $ seats to sit at the table with H and TW?


I wonder if they offered refunds.


CarryOn2020 said:


> *We had it wrong.  A documentary should never be “literal”.  It is the vibe that matters.  Use whatever pictures you want*.  LOL, didn’t they sue a UK tabloid for its use of unflattering MM photos?  Hypocrites.



My head of documentary productions is crying.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm starting to think there's no coming back from this for Harry even if he gets rid of the corpse eater.


Corpse Flower




sdkitty said:


> sorry for repeating myself again but I would just love to seem them move to a "regular" tract home in the suburbs


What happened to their plans to move to the city because Zed couldn't take the long commute?


sdkitty said:


> she doesn't compare with Kate in the dress but I have to admit her face and shoulders look good in this pic


She didn't pile on the bronzer - I guess she doesn't mind being white-passing when she fights racism.


LittleStar88 said:


> What is that dress? Curtains? Bed sheets? Bedspread?


The strangely rumpled sleeves are killing me.


----------



## Chanbal

All this is surreal…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yes, yes, we must tell the stories - your pity-me routine is not aging well. 
 So now, all the BRF should schedule interviews.  We want to hear from *them*.

_Seated alongside Meghan onstage, Harry could be heard discussing the importance of storytelling, saying *'Ultimately we live in this world now where sharing experiences and sharing stories has an enormous impact,' adding it was important to undertake 'if you are in a position of influence, leadership, or otherwise.'









						Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
					

Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*_


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> _Seated alongside Meghan onstage, Harry could be heard discussing the importance of storytelling, saying *'Ultimately we live in this world now where sharing experiences and sharing stories has an enormous impact,' adding it was important to undertake 'if you are in a position of influence, leadership, or otherwise.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry drapes arm around Meghan before they accept award in NY
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are accepting a human rights award from the RFK Foundation, which his daughter Kerry said was in honor of their fight against 'structural racism' in the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *_


He is just reciting TW's word salad…


----------



## bubablu

youngster said:


> So they arrived in 3 SUV's and with 5 security personnel. There were maybe 25 or so people hanging about outside including the British man who heckled them.
> It must be exhausting for them, carrying around all those delusions.


Yes, and she flashed a big smile to... no one. (As far as I can see)


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> Mean comment from this Eileen Cumiskey person.  That lady wearing sneakers was working.


Agree, but I'd give her a pass. This is due to ignorance. Wearing black + sneakers are the tell-tale signs of event organizers. The lady was making sure people got into position for the photos. Eileen Cumiskey may not be aware of what goes on at events. Or even if she attends events, the organizer staff are supposed to fade into background and be the invisible hands and feet to make sure everything runs smoothly, so maybe she never paid any attention to them.


----------



## CarryOn2020

So true - read it twice, then pass it on, please.


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> I wish she'd let her guests join in the conversation instead of answering her own questions.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Mean comment from this Eileen Cumiskey person.  That lady wearing sneakers was working.


But I love the term "lowdown hoedown"


----------



## charlottawill

Well it's not her worst look


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Is it Diana’s ring though?  Diana’s ring looks a little rectangle, and the one worn by Marriott Markle is more square….


Here is a good pic of Diana's ring (left); TW's (right) looks heavier. It looks like TW's didn't get a copy of the matching bracelet.


----------



## xincinsin

Jayne1 said:


> People really shouldn't compare Meg with Kate.  Who can possibly compete with Kate?


Agree. Not nice to compare them and promote the faux competition. But even the Megastans do it, so... too late ... 


DoggieBags said:


> Agree, her posture is terrible which is part of the reason her clothes don’t hang well. The skirt is an odd length, should be longer or shorter. The length it she has it as makes her look shorter.


She dresses for the height that she thinks she has. Super model, remember?


CarryOn2020 said:


> So true - read it twice, then pass it on, please.



So this means if he is no longer in the hierarchy, he will not be upset! Yoo hoo, Charles!


charlottawill said:


> But I love the term "lowdown hoedown"


Me too!


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


> My 2 cents: (all allegedly, of course)
> 
> I believe for a brief moment, around the funeral time, they hoped to get the kids' titles and other perks from Charles. They were impressed by the world's response to the news of the queen's death. Hollywood had not been as kind to them as they had initially anticipated, so improving the ties with the BRF was a must. It would also work as a pay back to the Hollywood's 'snobs' that dare to ignore them.
> 
> There was only a tiny little problem with their line of thought, QE passed away earlier than expected. They had planned the reconciliation year based on QE, but now they had to deal with KC, so they had to work a little more on their reality show. Though, it looks like Nefl*x said, NO. TW used one of her victim cards and tried to distance herself from the reality show, which didn't please Netfl*x .
> 
> In the meantime, Charles is not assuring them of any perks, and is taking his sweet time to answer to their alleged letters/requests. The award on their fight against racism became public, TW's idiotic podcasts and tone deaf article were released … DM and other news were having their fun time, and they finally understood they have crossed the rubicon. So they made the drastic decision to totally embrace the Nefl*x 'race' narrative, and it's anticipated that today's award speech is about their pain and suffering at the ends of the BRF, and perhaps the Brits in general. To be continued!



Charles has waited his entire life to be king, and now his *son* is going to wreak it?!? I don’t think so … I think we’re about to see a side of King Charles III that we’ve never seen before. And I’m here for it. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> Looks like it started as a jump suit then morphed into this bit of yuck





As I’ve finally read through, I see this meme was already posted, apologies - (tu @LittleStar88!) but it’s funny several times, thankfully! Truth is like that.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> View attachment 5666404







CarryOn2020 said:


> All 3 look oh-so-desperate.  As if *this* is the end.
> 
> View attachment 5666407





Why do they look like they are floating on a green screen?   So creepy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> View attachment 5666533
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5666534
> 
> Why do they look like they are floating on a green screen?   So creepy.



It’s how Getty images copied/pasted into tpf. 
What struck me was seeing KK’s hand wrapped around Hazz’s waist. How thin is he?


----------



## csshopper

Every Sugar in the country must have been strong  armed to vote: Archetypes won the best podcast @ The Peoples Choice Award, she‘ll be more nauseating than ever.


----------



## Pessie

The pleats bring to mind Poirot and his napkin.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> This is the best article I have read about Marriott Markle and her story/fantasy/ brand she keeps trying to push onto everyone.  Click on the link - I promise it’s a good read!
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> Why are so many of the storylines in Meghan's narrative of her life straight out of fairytales?​


Excellent read!


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> I'm alone in this....but I like Meghan's dress. The sleeve should be tighter, but really, I like it.
> 
> Is that Diana's aquamarine cocktail ring she's wearing?



Yes, Di's Asprey Aquamarine 

I'm glad you like the dress. I think you're being generous because it's not the worst think she's ever worn. 

The problem for me (but more for her) is that it accentuates her disproportions. The bandeau top widens and shortens her torso and the very slit draws attention to the lack of muscularity of her legs. 

If I was a stylist I would try to balance her figure by using clothes to lengthen her torso and perhaps add volume/strength to limbs. 

White is a good colour for her though. And I agree the arms need tightening.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> This is the best article I have read about Marriott Markle and her story/fantasy/ brand she keeps trying to push onto everyone.  Click on the link - I promise it’s a good read!
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> Why are so many of the storylines in Meghan's narrative of her life straight out of fairytales?​



Love this! 

I think we (in this thread) got there first though.


----------



## papertiger

mikimoto007 said:


> I definitely see diamonds in the ring Diana is wearing.



More on That Aquamarine Ring Harry Gave Meghan​When and why Diana ordered the jewel from Asprey​by Marion Fasel

"With a quick wave of the hand Meghan Markle, the newly christened Duchess of Sussex, lit up the internet on Saturday as cameras captured the new ring on her finger while she drove off with Prince Harry to an evening reception after the royal wedding. It was just a matter of minutes before the Twittersphere, specifically royal watcher @saadsalman719, identified the ring as one that belonged to Harry’s late mother Princess Diana. Shortly thereafter Asprey, the jeweler responsible for the design, confirmed the piece was a special commission they created for Diana in the late 1990s. It didn’t take long for seemingly every media outlet on the planet, including this one, to pick up on the story of the romantic gift. After the initial flurry of activity, I decided to take a deeper dive on the specifics of the jewel.

Diana ordered the ring from the English jeweler right around the time she separated from Prince Charles in August, 1996. You could read into that fact in any number of ways. Diana lost access to the crown collection she wore so magnificently during her marriage and she probably wanted something new to bolster her own collection. I think, she also made the self-purchase for at least one of the same reasons we all buy something special. It could have simply been a pick-me-up or an amulet to mark an occasion, like a new beginning.





Diana wearing her aquamarine ring and pearl and aquamarine bracelet as she arrives at at the Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute Dinner at the Sydney Entertainment Centre on October 31, 1996. Photo Getty
The aquamarine in her ring is guesstimated by experts to be just over 30-carats. It is accented with diamonds and set in yellow gold. The sunshine metal is an unusual choice for aquamarines. Most are mounted in white metal to highlight the cool colors of the stone. It is believed Diana ordered the yellow because she wanted the piece to coordinate with her multi-strand pearl bracelet centering on an aquamarine mounted in yellow gold.

Diana was famous for her love of blue. The color matched her eyes and she wore many blue gems over the years including her sapphire engagement ring. Her choice of an aquamarine most likely also carried some symbolism. While the discreet jewelers at Asprey won’t share any more specifics about Diana’s ring, the CEO for the United States, Robert O’Connell was happy to talk about aquamarines.

Asprey aquamarine, diamond and white gold Daisy Heritage ring. Photo courtesy
“The name of the gem is derived from two Latin words ‘aqua’ for water and ‘marina’ from the sea,” explained Robert. “Aquamarines are a symbol of power, courage as well as inner peace.” He went on to add, “Fine quality aquamarines, ones with the ocean blue color, excellent transparency and free of inclusions are valuable. The shade of blue is more refined than blue topaz and, in many ways, more elegant than the electric Windex blue color of rare Paraíba tourmalines.”

At the 1997 Academy Awards Claire Danes wore an Asprey aquamarine Daisy necklace and earrings. Photo Getty
The heyday for aquamarines in jewelry was the 1940s when there was an abundant supply of the gem. Since that period many jewelers have set aquamarines in cocktail rings, a fact that could be seen all over Instagram in the last couple of days. Few, however, have made as many jewels with the gem the way Asprey did in the 1990s. The jeweler’s work with aquas was probably one reason Diana gave Asprey the commission.

Aquamarines were one of the main stones in Asprey’s Daisy collection launched in the 1990s. The style became well-known to an international audience after the 1997 Oscars when Claire Danes color matched one of Asprey’s aquamarine Daisy necklaces with a skirt and t-shirt designed by Narciso Rodriguez for Cerutti. It was nineties minimalism at it’s very best. Indeed, the minimalist looks of Diana and Claire are reflected in Meghan Markle’s style.





Prince Harry with Meghan Markle who is wearing Princess Diana’s aquamarine ring by Asprey. Photo 
Asprey still carries aquamarine renditions of the Daisy collection as well as aquamarine cocktail rings. Robert O’Connell also shared with me, Asprey began working on a new collection that includes aquamarines around six months ago. I suspect when it debuts it will be another great success with the new-found appreciation of the dreamy gem."

From a site called The Adventurine. I can't post a link because they've made it redirect somewhere else


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> This is good!




I think it's a testament to our proprietary and decorum that other commentators are at least double as b*itchy as we are


----------



## periogirl28

papertiger said:


> Yes, Di's Asprey Aquamarine
> 
> I'm glad you like the dress. I think you're being generous because it's not the worst think she's ever worn.
> 
> The problem for me (but more for her) is that it accentuates her disproportions. The bandeau top widens and shortens her torso and the very slit draws attention to the lack of muscularity of her legs.
> 
> If I was a stylist I would try to balance her figure by using clothes to lengthen her torso and perhaps add volume/strength to limbs.
> 
> White is a good colour for her though. And I agree the arms need tightening.


I immediately did think, "that bandeau is out of proportion for her." Personally don't think the length is good either. I'll stop here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5666410



He looks stoned (IMHO)


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> More on That Aquamarine Ring Harry Gave Meghan​When and why Diana ordered the jewel from Asprey​by Marion Fasel
> 
> "With a quick wave of the hand Meghan Markle, the newly christened Duchess of Sussex, lit up the internet on Saturday as cameras captured the new ring on her finger while she drove off with Prince Harry to an evening reception after the royal wedding. It was just a matter of minutes before the Twittersphere, specifically royal watcher @saadsalman719, identified the ring as one that belonged to Harry’s late mother Princess Diana. Shortly thereafter Asprey, the jeweler responsible for the design, confirmed the piece was a special commission they created for Diana in the late 1990s. It didn’t take long for seemingly every media outlet on the planet, including this one, to pick up on the story of the romantic gift. After the initial flurry of activity, I decided to take a deeper dive on the specifics of the jewel.
> 
> Diana ordered the ring from the English jeweler right around the time she separated from Prince Charles in August, 1996. You could read into that fact in any number of ways. Diana lost access to the crown collection she wore so magnificently during her marriage and she probably wanted something new to bolster her own collection. I think, she also made the self-purchase for at least one of the same reasons we all buy something special. It could have simply been a pick-me-up or an amulet to mark an occasion, like a new beginning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diana wearing her aquamarine ring and pearl and aquamarine bracelet as she arrives at at the Victor Chang Cardiac Research Institute Dinner at the Sydney Entertainment Centre on October 31, 1996. Photo Getty
> The aquamarine in her ring is guesstimated by experts to be just over 30-carats. It is accented with diamonds and set in yellow gold. The sunshine metal is an unusual choice for aquamarines. Most are mounted in white metal to highlight the cool colors of the stone. It is believed Diana ordered the yellow because she wanted the piece to coordinate with her multi-strand pearl bracelet centering on an aquamarine mounted in yellow gold.
> 
> Diana was famous for her love of blue. The color matched her eyes and she wore many blue gems over the years including her sapphire engagement ring. Her choice of an aquamarine most likely also carried some symbolism. While the discreet jewelers at Asprey won’t share any more specifics about Diana’s ring, the CEO for the United States, Robert O’Connell was happy to talk about aquamarines.
> 
> Asprey aquamarine, diamond and white gold Daisy Heritage ring. Photo courtesy
> “The name of the gem is derived from two Latin words ‘aqua’ for water and ‘marina’ from the sea,” explained Robert. “Aquamarines are a symbol of power, courage as well as inner peace.” He went on to add, “Fine quality aquamarines, ones with the ocean blue color, excellent transparency and free of inclusions are valuable. The shade of blue is more refined than blue topaz and, in many ways, more elegant than the electric Windex blue color of rare Paraíba tourmalines.”
> 
> At the 1997 Academy Awards Claire Danes wore an Asprey aquamarine Daisy necklace and earrings. Photo Getty
> The heyday for aquamarines in jewelry was the 1940s when there was an abundant supply of the gem. Since that period many jewelers have set aquamarines in cocktail rings, a fact that could be seen all over Instagram in the last couple of days. Few, however, have made as many jewels with the gem the way Asprey did in the 1990s. The jeweler’s work with aquas was probably one reason Diana gave Asprey the commission.
> 
> Aquamarines were one of the main stones in Asprey’s Daisy collection launched in the 1990s. The style became well-known to an international audience after the 1997 Oscars when Claire Danes color matched one of Asprey’s aquamarine Daisy necklaces with a skirt and t-shirt designed by Narciso Rodriguez for Cerutti. It was nineties minimalism at it’s very best. Indeed, the minimalist looks of Diana and Claire are reflected in Meghan Markle’s style.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry with Meghan Markle who is wearing Princess Diana’s aquamarine ring by Asprey. Photo
> Asprey still carries aquamarine renditions of the Daisy collection as well as aquamarine cocktail rings. Robert O’Connell also shared with me, Asprey began working on a new collection that includes aquamarines around six months ago. I suspect when it debuts it will be another great success with the new-found appreciation of the dreamy gem."
> 
> From a site called The Adventurine. I can't post a link because they've made it redirect somewhere else


Giggling over this sentence: _While the discreet jewelers at Asprey won’t share any more specifics about Diana’s ring, *the CEO for the United States*, Robert O’Connell was happy to talk about aquamarines._


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Giggling over this sentence: _While the discreet jewelers at Asprey won’t share any more specifics about Diana’s ring, *the CEO for the United States*, Robert O’Connell was happy to talk about aquamarines._



But that's because Asprey would lose their Appointment to the King


----------



## Blyen

I kinda like the dress,but only when in motion. The neckline,the sleeves and the open skirt look good; however the length and the pleats make it fall very awkwardly when she's just standing,and she looks boxy.
Hair/makeup looks good though.
Harry looks like he has Stockholm syndrome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Whoa. But also, don't give Ghoul too much credit. BRF is still going strong.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

What was she thinking. From the other pic I thought it was ok, but the shape and length are all off.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She hasn't worn it since the wedding. She's such a loser.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand because Insta won't embed again, a screenshot.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Juicy, but why would TM know that? They were already at the outs at that point. And why would an estranged sister have seen proof for a surrogate?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Marklenews1 also saw receipts that one of Archewell's shell companies pays sugars to hype up the crowds and that the Troublesome Two indeed call the paps to their outings. WTF


----------



## needlv

Megsy… you are not Diana.  You are Fergie.  Stop with the cos play of Diana!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> People with far better eyes than mine and far more knowledge of jewelry, they have studied this. Their conclusion is H&M’s is a fake. :gasp:
> Who am I to argue?



Yeah, I never bought that. It's a  fun story because she deserves it, but it's nonsense IMO. This is not a crown heritage or a Spencer family jewel and I'd think at age 40 the Spencer sisters are not controlling the boys' inheritance anymore.

Plus, it's really hard to judge from just a photo if a stone is real or fake unless it's glaringly obvious. If you want to certify e.g. a diamond it has to be taken out of the setting to do so.


----------



## jblended

papertiger said:


> I think it's a testament to our proprietary and decorum that other commentators are at least double as b*itchy as we are


Really though, it is *so* much worse out there. Tpf is full of polite, respectful and intelligent members. Here, it's a lot of light jabs, fact-checking and witty banter between members. On other corners of the internet, though...it's pure _h a t e_, racism and abhorrent opinions, and it's truly terrifying.
It's all fueled by them, though. It wasn't there at the start so it's a shame that H&M's behaviour unites that little ugly corner of society. If they had just had that life of privacy they claimed they wanted and not focused so much on courting media attention with these repeated explosive (and unproven) claims, there would be nothing to fuel that ugliness.

ETA: This is also why I get angry about her tanning, race-baiting and vaguebooking claims of racist abuse without providing evidence.
I don't deny she must have found some things rough as it was an adjustment, but to make claims that big without evidence is harmful. I'm mixed race and I will always have to deal with colourism. It is a very real problem and one that she could have brought a lot of attention to via her position within the BRF. She could have been patron of a related charity or founded her own movement. Instead, she makes herself the victim whilst continuously playing up whichever side of her lineage benefits her narrative at the time.
Then actual racists come out of the woodwork and use her bait as ammo for their hate-filled discourse. It spills over to real life because these people then become emboldened by their online echo chambers.
It's disheartening because other people suffer when people like M and H actively stir up controversy and division, instead of providing a platform for education and tolerance.
Sorry to rant. It's a sensitive subject for me.


needlv said:


> Megsy… you are not Diana.  You are Fergie.  Stop with the cos play of Diana!


I was coming to post this picture. I thought Catherine was the inspo but, of course, it was Di. She's obsessive. Once or twice and it's coincidence, but this often and with that level of detail, it must be intentional. It's bizarre.
Why does Harry want to go to bed with someone who subconsciously reminds him of his mum? Ugh, I must shower after typing that out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala​NEW YORK, NEW YORK - DECEMBER 06 Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex attend the 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala at New York Hilton on December 06, 2022 in New York City. (Photo by Mike Coppola/Getty Images for 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala)
> 
> View attachment 5666402



Wait, what? She's walking BEHIND Harry?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




It's not new, she's worn it before. It's the Queen Mother's Lotus Flower tiara.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> Every Sugar in the country must have been strong  armed to vote: Archetypes won the best podcast @ The Peoples Choice Award, she‘ll be more nauseating than ever.



I wonder what that cost them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Megsy… you are not Diana.  You are Fergie.  Stop with the cos play of Diana!




Honestly, Fergie might be vulgar at times and lack good judgement, but I feel she is not as abysmal evil as Ghoul. And she adored The Queen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Megsy… you are not Diana.  You are Fergie.  Stop with the cos play of Diana!




Does she bring in old photos from the 80s and 90s and asks designers to recreate them? Too bad none of the press wanted to write how dianaesque she is.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> Megsy… you are not Diana.  You are Fergie.  Stop with the cos play of Diana!




Wow, even Di couldn't carry it off  

There are some fashions that shouldn't be revisited


----------



## Suncatcher

Meghan lives with such venom, hatred, bitter jealousy and contempt for the success of others. And yet she is the cat with nine lives, being feted at events, taking away from the real hardworking success of others who do meaningful work. Even if it is a paid for C list events.  On a fashion note her bridal dress yesterday below the bandeau is a mess and makes her look clunky.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Juicy, but why would TM know that? They were already at the outs at that point. And why would an estranged sister have seen proof for a surrogate?
> 
> View attachment 5666544



I don't deny TM said that to his (other) daughter, but he knows how to spin a good yarn; whet he's really saying is - I know she wasn't pregnant but those kids are my grandkids. In other words, he's planting 50/50 DNA between H and M when the world mainstreams on to the fake (or 'fake') pregnancies and thinks Harry is donor.


We have no proof of any such eggs just because TM said so. He's as 'creative' with the truth as his daughter (M) (IMO).

The baby/ies real age(s) and timelines don't make sense with pics/statements. TM knows this. 

TM is opening a whole can of worms: What are the odds that redhead (recessive) genes would make a noticeable appearance twice in a row quite so clearly? As a boy, Harry looked more blonde, M has no redhead genes as far as we know, her siblings have theirs from their mother's side. Genetics aside, these are very statement babies. All said before - this is repeat. TM want's to be those grandkid's grandfather, he's definitely M's father. This "9 months before Archie..." statement is very odd, coz reproductive science is still a best of 3/best of 5/ best of 10 thing, not a sure bet. This is his 'recollections may vary' moment (IMO). 

Even if the eggs were hers and the sperm is his the children do not qualify as legitimate (ILS). They have to carried bodily by the mother. This is the law. Old fashioned or whatever, this is the law. So if he's started/created the argument the kids are hers (as well as his) it doesn't make them of Royal (of Royal Blood). I don't think TM knows this. 

Paid for surrogacy is illegal in the UK - if they paid any more than expenses (and evidenced as such) for a woman to carry, that would be criminal - the surrogate also has rights in the UK and any contract they had with her would be void. I don't think TM knows this.






						Surrogacy: legal rights of parents and surrogates
					

Legal rights for intended parents and surrogates; how legal parenthood is transferred; children born outside the UK; pay and leave rights




					www.gov.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Blyen said:


> I kinda like the dress,but only when in motion. The neckline,the sleeves and the open skirt look good; however the length and the pleats make it fall very awkwardly when she's just standing,and she looks boxy.
> Hair/makeup looks good though.
> Harry looks like he has Stockholm syndrome.


Many of her clothes look nice (not that ghastly romper on the papwalk shopping trip) but they are either not her size/colour or badly fitted.

Her hair is usually a mess. Recently she is doing a severe bun for formal events, which is an improvement.

The moment a camera or an extra pair of eyes is on her, she turns into a peacock and preens unnaturally. This is odd because I'm sure she attended etiquette and acting classes which should have corrected her tendency to splay her legs and addressed her unnatural acting.


----------



## lanasyogamama

jblended said:


> Really though, it is *so* much worse out there. Tpf is full of polite, respectful and intelligent members. Here, it's a lot of light jabs, fact-checking and witty banter between members. On other corners of the internet, though...it's pure _h a t e_, racism and abhorrent opinions, and it's truly terrifying.
> It's all fueled by them, though. It wasn't there at the start so it's a shame that H&M's behaviour unites that little ugly corner of society. If they had just had that life of privacy they claimed they wanted and not focused so much on courting media attention with these repeated explosive (and unproven) claims, there would be nothing to fuel that ugliness.
> 
> ETA: This is also why I get angry about her tanning, race-baiting and vaguebooking claims of racist abuse without providing evidence.
> I don't deny she must have found some things rough as it was an adjustment, but to make claims that big without evidence is harmful. I'm mixed race and I will always have to deal with colourism. It is a very real problem and one that she could have brought a lot of attention to via her position within the BRF. She could have been patron of a related charity or founded her own movement. Instead, she makes herself the victim whilst continuously playing up whichever side of her lineage benefits her narrative at the time.
> Then actual racists come out of the woodwork and use her bait as ammo for their hate-filled discourse. It spills over to real life because these people then become emboldened by their online echo chambers.
> It's disheartening because other people suffer when people like M and H actively stir up controversy and division, instead of providing a platform for education and tolerance.
> Sorry to rant. It's a sensitive subject for me.
> 
> I was coming to post this picture. I thought Catherine was the inspo but, of course, it was Di. She's obsessive. Once or twice and it's coincidence, but this often and with that level of detail, it must be intentional. It's bizarre.
> Why does Harry want to go to bed with someone who subconsciously reminds him of his mum? Ugh, I must shower after typing that out.


I am also a big fan of the tpf community.  I’ve learned so much from all you wonderful ladies.


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Many of her clothes look nice (not that ghastly romper on the papwalk shopping trip) but they are either not her size/colour or badly fitted.
> 
> Her hair is usually a mess. Recently she is doing a severe bun for formal events, which is an improvement.
> 
> The moment a camera or an extra pair of eyes is on her, she turns into a peacock and preens unnaturally. This is odd because I'm sure she attended etiquette and acting classes which should have corrected her tendency to splay her legs and addressed her unnatural acting.



If you saw her young dance performances you would see that she is basically naturally a shy, awkward person that finds it difficult to follow choreography and/or others, work within a team and perhaps take corrections (presuming teacher(s) tried). 

M therefore has to make huge, extreme effort to 'put on a show' and can't be 'in the moment' (something that PoW does very well). M is a ham actor, her awkwardness always just below the surface. The fact she has to ACT at all just getting out of the car, walking and greeting people is the real issue here. She's a fake and a fraud, and it's only with huge force and effort she fronts her 'super(ficial)stardom and dodges being found out. More pageant than princess that's for sure.


----------



## duna

needlv said:


> lol… I voted - and it gives you the results!  So far….
> 
> View attachment 5665894


I've voted too!


----------



## LittleStar88

Caption this photo…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Someone improved the trailer.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ok, this is starting to be annoying. How come every other Insta post won't embed when the link is not faulty? Original was from marklenews1.


----------



## marietouchet

The tea on the show about the Harkles, I pasted in a link to Reddit which has the Valentine Low text from Times, my thinking is that this is not behind the Times paywall


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> The tea on the show about the Harkles, I pasted in a link to Reddit which has the Valentine Low text from Times, my thinking is that this is not behind the Times paywall



third paragraph from bottom - press was overwhelmingly favorable til the mass with Thomas Markle, before wedding 
the watershed event that caused their downfaill


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

They are such ticks. Good for nothing really, but sucking blood and spreading disease.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> third paragraph from bottom - press was overwhelmingly favorable til the mass with Thomas Markle, before wedding
> the watershed event that caused their downfaill



I am not a fan of the Markle clan, but she brought that one upon herself. She shouldn't have treated her own family like dirt on the sole of her Louboutins.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I don't deny TM said that to his (other) daughter, but he knows how to spin a good yarn; whet he's really saying is - I know she wasn't pregnant but those kids are my grandkids. In other words, he's planting 50/50 DNA between H and M when the world mainstreams on to the fake (or 'fake') pregnancies and thinks Harry is donor.
> 
> 
> We have no proof of any such eggs just because TM said so. He's as 'creative' with the truth as his daughter (M) (IMO).
> 
> The baby/ies real age(s) and timelines don't make sense with pics/statements. TM knows this.
> 
> TM is opening a whole can of worms: What are the odds that redhead (recessive) genes would make a noticeable appearance twice in a row quite so clearly? As a boy, Harry looked more blonde, M has no redhead genes as far as we know, her siblings have theirs from their mother's side. Genetics aside, these are very statement babies. All said before - this is repeat. TM want's to be those grandkid's grandfather, he's definitely M's father. This "9 months before Archie..." statement is very odd, coz reproductive science is still a best of 3/best of 5/ best of 10 thing, not a sure bet. This is his 'recollections may vary' moment (IMO).
> 
> Even if the eggs were hers and the sperm is his the children do not qualify as legitimate (ILS). They have to carried bodily by the mother. This is the law. Old fashioned or whatever, this is the law. So if he's started/created the argument the kids are hers (as well as his) it doesn't make them of Royal (of Royal Blood). I don't think TM knows this.
> 
> Paid for surrogacy is illegal in the UK - if they paid any more than expenses (and evidenced as such) for a woman to carry, that would be criminal - the surrogate also has rights in the UK and any contract they had with her would be void. I don't think TM knows this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surrogacy: legal rights of parents and surrogates
> 
> 
> Legal rights for intended parents and surrogates; how legal parenthood is transferred; children born outside the UK; pay and leave rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gov.uk


I personally don’t care if the kids came from eggs or from space, they are their kids. But they have done themselves no favors being so adversarially secretive … please just one photo in the garden like for the Wales kids, no black and white please, color 
The latest color photo with Donna Brazile, is using A in political propaganda given who Db is, one does not use kids
And yes surrogacy is an issue due to the title and UK laws.


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> People really shouldn't compare Meg with Kate.  Who can possibly compete with Kate?


And perhaps we have elevated Catherine to stratospheric heights .. she has done exceptionally well, but in the end, she is under stress too from the Harkles, and she is only human
it is hard living up to unrealistic ideals


----------



## papertiger

LittleStar88 said:


> Caption this photo…
> 
> View attachment 5666569



"bib,b,b,b, I wanted the _other _tiara, the other tiara is bigger, the other tiara is better, the other tiara is the one I wanted  WWWhhyyyyyyyyyy is _everyone_ so, so awful to me, I WANT THE OTHER....   "


----------



## kemilia

needlv said:


> At least her makeup looks ok….!
> 
> As for the dress, until I see it from the back I am reserving judgement.  But at least it’s not wrinkly fabric.
> 
> Her posture is terrible.  Can’t tell if it’s the dress or her posture.


Those black shoes with the bedsheet are awful, eesh.

And while I love aquamarines, it is funny that she trots out the only recognizable "royal" jewel she has right after K wears that incredible emerald choker.


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> I personally don’t care if the kids came from eggs or from space, they are their kids. But they have done themselves no favors being so adversarially secretive … please just one photo in the garden like for the Wales kids, no black and white please, color
> The latest color photo with Donna Brazile, is using A in political propaganda given who Db is, one does not use kids
> And yes surrogacy is an issue due to the title and UK laws.



I care about the status of the children. I may have to bow and scape to these children someday since I am supposedly their grandfather's subject. If any Tom, Dick, Harry or Sneezy can be a Prince or Princess, my cat should be in-line to the Throne.

I don't care if they're surrogate, test tube, natural, adopted or otherwise.

I care about the actual children and for their care and overall health.

I worry for the actual children.

I don't care if I never see them.


----------



## kemilia

jblended said:


> Wow. H looks...happy. I don't think I've seen him look happy like that in years. He seems to have had a breakthrough in therapy because those flashing bulbs are not triggering him!
> 
> And M looks...good. Not Princess Catherine good, but good compared to her usual sloppy outfits. Shame that she had to literally cosplay Catherine to get there.
> Also, I must applaud her for not tanning several shades darker, though my common sense tells me that may be to avoid staining the white dress that she's merching.


Merching and returning.


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> third paragraph from bottom - press was overwhelmingly favorable til the mass with Thomas Markle, before wedding
> the watershed event that caused their downfaill


Thinking, wow, 6 episodes in a week … N$etflix is getting it over ASAP before the book, they are DUMPING the episodes
I could subscribe for 8 days and see all of them …
Logically, they would do one episode a week, and you have to subscribe for longer, NF is all about long term subscriptions


----------



## marietouchet

Anyone have a transcript of the MM speech ? The snippets I have seen make short shrift of BRF racism , they almost did NOT talk of why they got the award ?
Curious what the KK introduction was all about
No word about Alec B ? Did he go ?


----------



## marietouchet

Best POP podcast at People Choice, 
Sorry, broken link to IG removed …


----------



## kemilia

Katel said:


> View attachment 5666533
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5666534
> 
> Why do they look like they are floating on a green screen?   So creepy.


At least she's not in her normal "I'm holding a watermelon between my thighs" position. 
But the shoes ...


----------



## justwatchin

.


----------



## Aimee3

That white dress from the front ressembles how I wrap the towel around me when I come out of my shower.  And my towel is way prettier than plain white!


----------



## bag-mania

bubablu said:


> Yes, and she flashed a big smile to... no one. (As far as I can see)


She flashed it to the camera. It’s all part of the performance.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> He looks stoned (IMHO)


That’s his “I have to pose for photos before I can make my way to the bar” look.


----------



## Toby93

xincinsin said:


> Agree, but I'd give her a pass. This is due to ignorance. Wearing black + sneakers are the tell-tale signs of event organizers. The lady was making sure people got into position for the photos. Eileen Cumiskey may not be aware of what goes on at events. Or even if she attends events, the organizer staff are supposed to fade into background and be the invisible hands and feet to make sure everything runs smoothly, so maybe she never paid any attention to them.


I was just laughing at the "lowdown hoedown" comment.  I understand that the woman in sneakers was working, but I doubt there are many staff at the diplomatic reception at the palace wearing sneakers last night. 

It is just a commentary on how far they have fallen, but are still under the impression they are VIP's.  Someone commented that they were really the only ones dressed up as it was fairly casual.  
Even Kennedy was not appropriately dressed


----------



## Toby93




----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> No word about Alec B ? Did he go ?


He was there and so was HILARIA doing her fameho best.












						Hilaria Baldwin and husband Alec at Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala
					

Hilaria Baldwin had all eyes on her on Tuesday when she made a grand entrance at the 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala in New York City with her husband Alec Baldwin.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## carmen56

That Kennedy woman looked ridiculous in that short dress.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I care about the status of the children. I may have to bow and scape to these children someday since I am supposedly their grandfather's subject. If any Tom, Dick, Harry or Sneezy can be a Prince or Princess, my cat should be in-line to the Throne.
> 
> I don't care if they're surrogate, test tube, natural, adopted or otherwise.
> 
> I care about the actual children and for their care and overall health.
> 
> I worry for the actual children.
> 
> I don't care if I never see them.


You have an excellent point about bowing and scraping, I am burying my head in the sand about the surrogacy and legal implications for the BRF in the UK


----------



## lanasyogamama

I just heard someone on a podcast call her a “thirst trap attention seeking tw@t”!!!


----------



## lanasyogamama

carmen56 said:


> That Kennedy woman looked ridiculous in that short dress.


It’s shockingly bad.


----------



## jennlt




----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> People really shouldn't compare Meg with Kate.  Who can possibly compete with Kate?


I think the WIFE probably thought she'd be able to, being a big Hollywood star.....but she was wrong


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG  German police just raided 20+ houses of members of the "Reichsbürger" (a weird not very homogenous group who mix rightwing beliefs with esotericism, anti-dem*cratic elements, Holocaust denial, Covid denial, historical revisionism...a whole cocktail of crazy. They also don't consider themselves to be German citizens) who were apparently planning a coup and wouldn't you know, one of the raided houses belongs to a German prince. What was he planning, to become the next emperor when the government falls?

Maybe this could be a path for Harry and Ghoul if nothing else works  

(a bit more worrisome is that amongst the coupers where a judge and a highranking special forces soldier)


----------



## Katel




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jennlt said:


>




I can't get over the fact that she once again copied a Diana look 1:1. Which makes me believe she might not have trotted out the ring as a reaction to the emerald choker but had planned to wear it all along. Either way she is so pathetic I would feel bad for her if only she was at least the tiniest bit likeable.


----------



## jennlt




----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Juicy, but why would TM know that? They were already at the outs at that point. And why would an estranged sister have seen proof for a surrogate?
> 
> View attachment 5666544


He could be one of the authorized people on record. The clinic may have called his number to address a bureaucratic issue related to the egg transfer process. As far as I recall, TM mentioned in one of his videos about TW having frozen eggs somewhere in Los Angeles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> He was there and so was HILARIA doing her fameho best.
> 
> View attachment 5666616
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hilaria Baldwin and husband Alec at Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala
> 
> 
> Hilaria Baldwin had all eyes on her on Tuesday when she made a grand entrance at the 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala in New York City with her husband Alec Baldwin.
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Hilaria is wearing a short dress and so is that Kennedy woman.....so was Meghan overdressed for the occasion?


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> He could be one of the authorized people on record. The clinic may have called his number to address a bureaucratic issue related to the egg transfer process. As far as I recall, TM mentioned in one of his videos about TW having frozen eggs somewhere in Los Angeles.


Perhaps he was paying the storage bill?


----------



## WingNut

lanasyogamama said:


> I just heard someone on a podcast call her a “thirst trap attention seeking tw@t”!!!


Ha...perfect!

My takes on her dress/attire for the "Ripple of Nope" award. At first I thought, that it looked nice and flattering, but I was on my phone squinting in the early hours. Now that I'm looking at things on my large monitor, it just looks.....off. She glows in white IMO, and her hair and MU are excellent. The dress, no matter how expensive, looks sloppy. The sleeves are too loose in contrast to the OTS band, and the high-waist with poufy bottom over-exaggerate her short torso. Someone on here commented that it didn't look as wrinkly as usual, but there's something off about the fabric, it's "bunchy" where it shouldn't be. What fabric is it....taffeta? Honestly I don't know who this dress would look good on, I simply don't like it. Also, what's with the black shoes with a white dress? Is this a new trend I missed? And why white? Purity? ()


----------



## Aimee3

carmen56 said:


> That Kennedy woman looked ridiculous in that short dress.


Other than Jackie, none of the K’s dressed well.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> I don't deny TM said that to his (other) daughter, but he knows how to spin a good yarn; whet he's really saying is - I know she wasn't pregnant but those kids are my grandkids. In other words, he's planting 50/50 DNA between H and M when the world mainstreams on to the fake (or 'fake') pregnancies and thinks Harry is donor.
> 
> 
> We have no proof of any such eggs just because TM said so. He's as 'creative' with the truth as his daughter (M) (IMO).
> 
> The baby/ies real age(s) and timelines don't make sense with pics/statements. TM knows this.
> 
> TM is opening a whole can of worms: What are the odds that redhead (recessive) genes would make a noticeable appearance twice in a row quite so clearly? As a boy, Harry looked more blonde, M has no redhead genes as far as we know, her siblings have theirs from their mother's side. Genetics aside, these are very statement babies. All said before - this is repeat. TM want's to be those grandkid's grandfather, he's definitely M's father. This "9 months before Archie..." statement is very odd, coz reproductive science is still a best of 3/best of 5/ best of 10 thing, not a sure bet. This is his 'recollections may vary' moment (IMO).
> 
> Even if the eggs were hers and the sperm is his the children do not qualify as legitimate (ILS). They have to carried bodily by the mother. This is the law. Old fashioned or whatever, this is the law. So if he's started/created the argument the kids are hers (as well as his) it doesn't make them of Royal (of Royal Blood). I don't think TM knows this.
> 
> Paid for surrogacy is illegal in the UK - if they paid any more than expenses (and evidenced as such) for a woman to carry, that would be criminal - the surrogate also has rights in the UK and any contract they had with her would be void. I don't think TM knows this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surrogacy: legal rights of parents and surrogates
> 
> 
> Legal rights for intended parents and surrogates; how legal parenthood is transferred; children born outside the UK; pay and leave rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gov.uk


Even if she had the frozen eggs picked up in LA, there is still the possibility that such eggs weren't viable. In that case, they would have to use another donor.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Hilaria is wearing a short dress and so is that Kennedy woman.....so was Meghan overdressed for the occasion?


I don’t think it mattered. It was a fashion free-for-all. Everyone wore whatever they wanted.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

'Are you putting money before family, Harry?': Prince and Meghan face awkward grilling from journalists about the royal family as they attend New York gala just hours before release of bombshell Netflix series​








						Harry and Meghan face grilling from journalists about Netflix series
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were last night asked  if they were putting money before family as they graced a star-studded gala hosted by the Robert F Kennedy Human Rights organisation.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not feeling sorry for Netflix one bit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

!!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Honestly, can someone figure out if this is an Insta or TPF problem? 

So marklenews1 heard word photographers are coming at Netflix with copyright infringement claims and they are currently combing through the mocku to see if they can cut stuff out to avoid more trouble. Also, apparently a whole lot of that thing is just pictures with voiceovers.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, can someone figure out if this is an Insta or TPF problem?
> 
> So marklenews1 heard word photographers are coming at Netflix with copyright infringement claims and they are currently combing through the mocku to see if they can cut stuff out to avoid more trouble. Also, apparently a whole lot of that thing is just pictures with voiceovers.


Sounds like they had to pad the hell out of it to make it interesting. If they don’t own the rights to the padding…


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Sounds like they had to pad the hell out of it to make it interesting. If they don’t own the rights to the padding…


no amount of padding would make it interesting to me


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jennlt

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, can someone figure out if this is an Insta or TPF problem?
> 
> So marklenews1 heard word photographers are coming at Netflix with copyright infringement claims and they are currently combing through the mocku to see if they can cut stuff out to avoid more trouble. Also, apparently a whole lot of that thing is just pictures with voiceovers.


IG is doing it to me, too. I think we've been markled.


----------



## rose60610

youngster said:


> So they arrived in 3 SUV's and with 5 security personnel. There were maybe 25 or so people hanging about outside including the British man who heckled them.
> It must be exhausting for them, carrying around all those delusions.



I'm waiting for them to spew this lie: "We need all this security because we're terrified of retribution from the BRF for telling our truth".  I'd put money on that coming out sooner or later. That still doesn't, however, stop them from demanding/begging that the BRF pay for their security. That's how effed up they are.


----------



## Pessie

rose60610 said:


> I'm waiting for them to spew this lie: "We need all this security because we're terrified of retribution from the BRF for telling our truth".  I'd put money on that coming out sooner or later. That still doesn't, however, stop them from demanding/begging that the BRF pay for their security. That's how effed up they are.


British taxpayers you mean.  Harry needs to get his  hand out of my pocket.


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> no amount of padding would make it interesting to me



I think it's really interesting that they are basically dropping all these episodes all at once over a one week period.  That just doesn't seem right.  

If you want to sell subscriptions, get people to tune in week after week and all that, would you not expect Netflix to have put out one episode per week and heavily promoted each episode right before it dropped?  

Others have posted that maybe Netflix chose this approach so that they don't have to explain the discrepancies between the series and what's in Harry's upcoming book.  That makes some sense to me.  It would then be his publisher's job to explain and do clean up.   

Maybe though, Netflix also decided to drop all the episodes in 2022 because of how the contract is structured and worded. Spilling over into 2023 with content would perhaps have triggered payments to them or a continuation of the deal.  Dropping all the episodes in 2022 maybe means a clean cut off at this year end.


----------



## Chanbal

I figured these 2 posts belong together…


----------



## papertiger

marietouchet said:


> You have an excellent point about bowing and scraping, I am burying my head in the sand about the surrogacy and legal implications for the BRF in the UK



Thank you. Apparently Harry only found out the BRF has a hierarchy in 2016


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Honestly, can someone figure out if this is an Insta or TPF problem?
> 
> So marklenews1 heard word photographers are coming at Netflix with copyright infringement claims and they are currently combing through the mocku to see if they can cut stuff out to avoid more trouble. Also, apparently a whole lot of that thing is just pictures with voiceovers.


If I tap on the seeming broken link, it goes to the IG post. I'd assume it's a tpf problem.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I think it's really interesting that *they are basically dropping all these episodes all at once over a one week period.*  That just doesn't seem right.
> 
> If you want to sell subscriptions, get people to tune in week after week and all that, would you not expect Netflix to have put out one episode per week and heavily promoted each episode right before it dropped?
> 
> Others have posted that maybe Netflix chose this approach so that they don't have to explain the discrepancies between the series and what's in Harry's upcoming book.  That makes some sense to me.  It would then be his publisher's job to explain and do clean up.
> 
> Maybe though, Netflix also decided to drop all the episodes in 2022 because of how the contract is structured and worded. Spilling over into 2023 with content would perhaps have triggered payments to them or a continuation of the deal.  Dropping all the episodes in 2022 maybe means a clean cut off at this year end.



Not so much a drop as a dump


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like more and more people are having courage to express their opinions. I have heard before about the paid squad members…


----------



## bag-mania

youngster said:


> I think it's really interesting that they are basically dropping all these episodes all at once over a one week period.  That just doesn't seem right.
> 
> If you want to sell subscriptions, get people to tune in week after week and all that, would you not expect Netflix to have put out one episode per week and heavily promoted each episode right before it dropped?
> 
> Others have posted that maybe Netflix chose this approach so that they don't have to explain the discrepancies between the series and what's in Harry's upcoming book.  That makes some sense to me.  It would then be his publisher's job to explain and do clean up.
> 
> Maybe though, Netflix also decided to drop all the episodes in 2022 because of how the contract is structured and worded. Spilling over into 2023 with content would perhaps have triggered payments to them or a continuation of the deal.  Dropping all the episodes in 2022 maybe means a clean cut off at this year end.


I’m guessing it’s because they know the show isn’t good enough to become anticipated weekly viewing. They are dropping them all at once before the holidays to attract the binge watcher.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Not so much a drop as a dump


I’m with  Netflix wants to get it over with and dropping the first three together because they know that if dropping just one, people won’t show up for the other five. Who wants to watch Harry being inarticulate and her crying? More still photos than action shots and lots of voice overs. That is why the director wanted to film them at home and probably with the children.  It was obvious that it would be colossally boring otherwise.


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> I figured these 2 posts belong together…



It really is a hideous dress.


papertiger said:


> Not so much a drop as a dump


Netfux are ripping off the plaster / bandaid


Chanbal said:


> It looks like more and more people are having courage to express their opinions. I have heard before about the paid squad members…



Wow!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It looks like more and more people are having courage to express their opinions. I have heard before about the paid squad members…



Wow!  If true that KC3 gave him walking away money and he took it, it would be pretty nervy for Harry to still bash his father, but it would not surprise me if he did. Now I think that when ever you see them together and she is grabbing him and hanging on for dear life that she is trying to keep him from escaping. She couldn’t even take a picture with KK last night without grabbing him.  That the paid paps were there is no surprise. Shell  company money funding sugars?  Where is the money coming from to fill the shell company checking account?


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I figured these 2 posts belong together…



KK and Harry have living off a dead parent in common.


----------



## jenayb

CarryOn2020 said:


> 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala​NEW YORK, NEW YORK - DECEMBER 06 Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex attend the 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala at New York Hilton on December 06, 2022 in New York City. (Photo by Mike Coppola/Getty Images for 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Ripple of Hope Gala)
> 
> View attachment 5666402


She just looks insane here.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I was just laughing at the "lowdown hoedown" comment.  I understand that the woman in sneakers was working, but I doubt there are many staff at the diplomatic reception at the palace wearing sneakers last night.
> 
> It is just a commentary on how far they have fallen, but are still under the impression they are VIP's.  Someone commented that they were really the only ones dressed up as it was fairly casual.
> Even Kennedy was not appropriately dressed


If the guest of honour was ambassador grade or higher, my ex-boss expected the worker bees to wear a formal black frock and low heels. So this was definitely a "lowdown" event  

I get the impression that Zed keeps a couple of Di or Wallis cosplay outfits on hand to attend the red carpet events to which she is still hoping for invites. We can expect her to drop hints soon that she is invited to but may be too busy to attend whichever big event is coming up, now that she has burnished her heroine credentials.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> Hilaria is wearing a short dress and so is that Kennedy woman.....so was Meghan overdressed for the occasion?


I thought so at first, then wondered about the designer. The white frock is something (being honest here) that Kim K would do the laundry in, so, maybe a casual look? 
I dunno I am a dinosaur of fashion, as my mother would say the dress “looks neither here nor there”


----------



## gracekelly

Why did their remarks have to be taped before the event?  Are they such control freaks that the tape had to be edited?  They spewed the same old crap about her being suicidal. That is old news and plenty of debunking of it since she first came out with it on the Oprah interview. I love how they are lauded for doing so much when in reality there is nothing to point to that they they act  did that made a difference. Oh right, they donated diapers that they didn’t pay for and some donated vegetables.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I thought so at first, then wondered about the designer. The white frock is something (being honest here) that Kim K would do the laundry in, so, maybe a casual look?
> I dunno I am a dinosaur of fashion, as my mother would say the dress “looks neither here nor there”


I read 2 weeks ago that the dress code for the event was cocktail attire. So short dresses were fine. She was overdressed in a long dress.


----------



## gracekelly

The event should have been called the Riddle of Hope because it was a riddle as to why the Sussex were there as well as Alec Baldwin. .


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  If true that KC3 gave him walking away money and he took it, it would be pretty nervy for Harry to still bash his father, but it would not surprise me if he did. Now I think that when ever you see them together and she is grabbing him and hanging on for dear life that she is trying to keep him from escaping. She couldn’t even take a picture with KK last night without grabbing him.  That the paid paps were there is no surprise. Shell  company money funding sugars?  Where is the money coming from to fill the shell company checking account?


Also, article in The Time about H’s lawsuit against DM - defamation about disclosing the security issue. H ‘s side claims legal expenses will be 1M pounds !
Evidently, judge ruled in favor of H, and DM has to pay his expenses but is claiming 1M is rubbish. 
Legal expenses …


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> KK and Harry have living off a dead parent in common.


yes, and both dead parents have been beatified since death. It is hard being the child of a saint


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I read 2 weeks ago that the dress code for the event was cocktail attire. So short dresses were fine. She was overdressed in a long dress.


that's because she was the star of the event


----------



## CarryOn2020

Fascinating comments, interesting developments.  This uptick in press/media  tells us _something_ _odd_ is definitely happening between them. It feels strange, much like the polo from this summer.  Lots of press, then nothing, then drip drip of inconsequential stuff.  Last night’s questions from the press seemed to get the usual hateful reactions from him (“_Wow_, _Lots of questions_”) and the rictus smile on her could not have been more fake.  

There must be a better word than ‘cringe’ - gross, perhaps.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This unhealthy fixation on deceased parents,


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> This unhealthy fixation on deceased parents,



Yes I think it’s unhealthy. My mother passed away in 2014 and it’s so personal it’s even hard to talk about her with siblings. Like deeply personal and painful. Even tho she was not famous the premise, I believe, is the same for many. You don’t profit or constantly talk about it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

A FB friend sent out a reminder recently to place girlfriends and boyfriends on the perimeters in family group pictures to make it easier to photoshop them out in the future if the relationships fail.  That’s what TW’s placement in these photos reminds me of.


----------



## Lodpah

CarryOn2020 said:


> This unhealthy fixation on deceased parents,



The casual dress, the furniture (check out the chairs, all battered up) this event is the .99 special event. At this point these two would attend the opening or accept an award of the port-a-pottie design of the year award. They ridin’ low now.


----------



## lanasyogamama

gracekelly said:


> The event should have been called the Riddle of Hope because it was a riddle as to why the Sussex were there as well as Alec Baldwin. .


I keep reading ripple as nipple. 


CarryOn2020 said:


> This unhealthy fixation on deceased parents,



Hey, she didn’t grab the present out of his hands, progress!


----------



## calicocat

lanasyogamama said:


> I keep reading *ripple as nipple*.


The Nipple of Hope!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> He could be one of the authorized people on record. The clinic may have called his number to address a bureaucratic issue related to the egg transfer process. As far as I recall, TM mentioned in one of his videos about TW having frozen eggs somewhere in Los Angeles.



I do think she did him dirty, but that's a really sh*tty thing to reveal about anyone, let alone your own daughter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> Perhaps he was paying the storage bill?



Probably not. By the time she saw her fertility vanish he had already spent all his money on her.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Wow! * If true that KC3 gave him walking away money *and he took it, it would be pretty nervy for Harry to still bash his father, but it would not surprise me if he did. Now I think that when ever you see them together and she is grabbing him and hanging on for dear life that she is trying to keep him from escaping. She couldn’t even take a picture with KK last night without grabbing him.  That the paid paps were there is no surprise. Shell  company money funding sugars?  Where is the money coming from to fill the shell company checking account?


So much for the walking away money…










						JAN MOIR: I wanted to watch Harry and Meghan's betrayal up close
					

JAN MOIR: Tonight President Zelensky of Ukraine is being honoured for leading a desperate fight for freedom. It says something that he is not even the main attraction at this gala.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## lanasyogamama

calicocat said:


> The Nipple of Hope!


Go stand in the corner!!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like more and more people are having courage to express their opinions. I have heard before about the paid squad members…




Not surprised that they act like strangers when the cameras are off. 

Slightly stunned at the KC3 relevation if true. Well, doesn't look like that worked out well for Charles because apparently Harry took the money and threw himself eagerly into sh*tting on his family some more.


----------



## Chanbal

No!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  If true that KC3 gave him walking away money and he took it, it would be pretty nervy for Harry to still bash his father, but it would not surprise me if he did. Now I think that when ever you see them together and she is grabbing him and hanging on for dear life that she is trying to keep him from escaping. She couldn’t even take a picture with KK last night without grabbing him.  That the paid paps were there is no surprise. Shell  company money funding sugars?  *Where is the money coming from to fill the shell company checking account?*



Wasn't there a rumour about 10 million bucks in donations that have yet to resurface in any charitable capacity?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do think she did him dirty, but that's a really sh*tty thing to reveal about anyone, let alone your own daughter.


To be fair, he was addressing a question about her interest in having kids. He said something like she wanted to have kids and even had her eggs frozen just in case.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> No!



Wow! This is not acceptable.


----------



## Lodpah

Lodpah said:


> Wow! This is not acceptable.


Wait! This must have been photoshopped.


----------



## bag-mania

In case any of you still had a shred of respect for _Vogue,_ allow me to kill it for you.   









						Meghan Markle’s White Louis Vuitton Gown Speaks to Her Style Strengths
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex both received the Ripple of Hope Award tonight.




					www.vogue.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> To be fair, he was addressing a question about her interest in having kids. He said something like she wanted to have kids and even had her eggs frozen just in case.



Ok, that makes it less malicious and more "Should have zipped those lips". It's totally something my mother would blurt out not specifically wanting to hurt someone but completely oblivious as to why it's inappropriate.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Wait! This must have been photoshopped.


I hope you are right.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> I hope you are right.


Nothing on the news here. I checked. It’s still early here lol.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> Wow! This is not acceptable.





Lodpah said:


> Wait! This must have been photoshopped.


It is on their website. Now we know what his visit to Pearl Harbor last month was about. He’s absolutely disgusting, every bit as bad as his wife. They should not be saluting him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> No!




This has to have been photoshopped.
ETA:  Apparently, it's not photoshopped.  It's a real photo.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Slightly stunned at the KC3 relevation if true. Well, doesn't look like that worked out well for Charles because apparently Harry took the money and threw himself eagerly into sh*tting on his family some more.



I doubt this is true.  If KC3 gave Harry walking away money, then there likely would have been some kind of legal agreement/NDA put in place as well.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> So much for the walking away money…
> View attachment 5666741
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: I wanted to watch Harry and Meghan's betrayal up close
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Tonight President Zelensky of Ukraine is being honoured for leading a desperate fight for freedom. It says something that he is not even the main attraction at this gala.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Excellent article.


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> No!



This made me sick and my late Uncle, a proud Navy man is spinning in his grave.

As an American I say to them, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.”


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like I missed this from the J Moir's article. Is this part of the reparation's process? 



_Still, showbiz royalty is here in the form of Gayle King, the powerful CBS News host, friend of Oprah Winfrey and sometime confidante of Harry and Meghan. Gayle is wearing an eye-popping lime green dress that clings to every curve and she exudes brisk in-the-know bonhomie.

Do you really think the British Royal Family is racist, I ask her?

'No I do not. And neither do they,' she says, meaning the Sussexes._


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> In case any of you still had a shred of respect for _Vogue,_ allow me to kill it for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s White Louis Vuitton Gown Speaks to Her Style Strengths
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex both received the Ripple of Hope Award tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


Now, she has LV’s backing.  Nothing is sacred anymore.

ETA:  calling KimK to step in and stop this!  We need you, please help.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like I missed this from the J Moir's article. Is this part of the reparation's process?
> 
> 
> 
> _Still, showbiz royalty is here in the form of Gayle King, the powerful CBS News host, friend of Oprah Winfrey and sometime confidante of Harry and Meghan. Gayle is wearing an eye-popping lime green dress that clings to every curve and she exudes brisk in-the-know bonhomie.
> 
> Do you really think the British Royal Family is racist, I ask her?
> 
> 'No I do not. And neither do they,' she says, meaning the Sussexes._




Seee, hypocrites and Gayle is in the top 10.  Anything for ratings.


----------



## A1aGypsy

csshopper said:


> This made me sick and my late Uncle, a proud Navy man is spinning in his grave.
> 
> As an American I say to them, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.”



Yikes, don’t blame the poor troops. My understanding is that it is customary to salute other acting, former or retired troops, even those who were opposing combatants. 

So, while it wouldn’t surprise me at all to find out there was a ranking officer just out of frame, I don’t believe it to be a breach of protocol either.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She hasn't worn it since the wedding. She's such a loser.




I think she wore it in Tonga or one of the Pacific Islands on tour. Again, a white dress with black accessories.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I never bought that. It's a  fun story because she deserves it, but it's nonsense IMO. This is not a crown heritage or a Spencer family jewel and I'd think at age 40 the Spencer sisters are not controlling the boys' inheritance anymore.
> 
> Plus, it's really hard to judge from just a photo if a stone is real or fake unless it's glaringly obvious. If you want to certify e.g. a diamond it has to be taken out of the setting to do so.


yeah, I could never see that either. Presumably the jewellery personally belongs to Harry and Meghan and they can take it where they like. It never made sense that they wouldn’t bring it abroad.


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent article.



Really good article by Jan Moir.
Here is one of my favorite parts:

_*Still, showbiz royalty is here in the form of Gayle King, the powerful CBS News host, friend of Oprah Winfrey and sometime confidante of Harry and Meghan. Gayle is wearing an eye-popping lime green dress that clings to every curve and she exudes brisk in-the-know bonhomie.

Do you really think the British Royal Family is racist, I ask her?

'No I do not. And neither do they,' she says, meaning the Sussexes.
*_
*Then what the heck are we all doing here, eating mini mozzarella balls on sticks and wondering why host Kerry Kennedy — daughter of Robert F. Kennedy — is wearing such a short dress?*


----------



## Handbag1234

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, she has LV’s backing.  Nothing is sacred anymore.
> 
> ETA:  calling KimK to step in and stop this!  We need you, please help.


I am very disappointed in LV backing this circus. I may have to review my extensive support for the brand


----------



## papertiger

Handbag1234 said:


> I am very disappointed in LV backing this circus. I may have to review my extensive support for the brand



Don't let her have that power if you love the brand and their things


----------



## Lodpah

Handbag1234 said:


> I am very disappointed in LV backing this circus. I may have to review my extensive support for the brand


Cheapens the brand


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Handbag1234

papertiger said:


> Don't let her have that power if you love the brand and their things


That’s a good point, thank you


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree with those who say KCIII needs to stop this now.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## bag-mania

Meghan finally won a Hollywood award (okay, it was only a Peoples Choice, but still) and she couldn’t attend the ceremony because she was already attending another awards show on the opposite coast. 

I love irony!


----------



## MommyDaze

csshopper said:


> This made me sick and my late Uncle, a proud Navy man is spinning in his grave.
> 
> As an American I say to them, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.”


How so? It is customary to render a salute to foreign military officers who are visiting military installations. Harry served honorably as an officer for 10 years and was clearly part of the ceremony they were having.


----------



## Lodpah

When you make a deal with the devil and he promises you the world in exchange to worship him, he will give you everything your heart desires but you must do his bidding, i.e., lie, cheat, disrupt, cause discord, hatred, divisiveness, etc. and you can be disguised as an angel of light. 

But the end result will be devastation to your soul and restlessness, depression and basically it does not end well. 

So let them enjoy their deal. The fruit of making a pact with the devil is horrendous in the long run.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> Meghan finally won a Hollywood award (okay, it was only a Peoples Choice, but still) and she couldn’t attend the ceremony because she was already attending another awards show on the opposite coast.
> 
> I love irony!



Everyone knows a last ditch attempt to resurrect the dead (inert media event/star here) is to buy them an award


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Meghan finally won a Hollywood award (okay, it was only a Peoples Choice, but still) and she couldn’t attend the ceremony because she was already attending another awards show on the opposite coast.
> 
> I love irony!


Turn that spotlight on the highest setting.  They will run like the cowards they are.


----------



## mikimoto007

8am tomorrow UK time when the first episode drops, right?


----------



## CarryOn2020

MommyDaze said:


> How so? It is customary to render a salute to foreign military officers who are visiting military installations. Harry served honorably as an officer for 10 years and was clearly part of the ceremony they were having.


Are you sure?  We do not know that he served honorably. There are rumors. Google it.


----------



## GiggleBunny

Some light entertainment


----------



## CarryOn2020

mikimoto007 said:


> 8am tomorrow UK time when the first episode drops, right?


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Are you sure?  We do not know that he served honorably. There are rumors. Google it.


And it wasn’t for a ceremony. He visited the memorial back in the middle of November where he was treated like a VIP, given a tour and he had his photograph taken to put on Archewell’s web site in time for Pearl Harbor Day. It was shameless self-promotion.


----------



## gracekelly

MommyDaze said:


> How so? It is customary to render a salute to foreign military officers who are visiting military installations. Harry served honorably as an officer for 10 years and was clearly part of the ceremony they were having.


He was there as a visitor.  He was not in the US Army.  He wasn't in uniform. He has NO military patronages presently in the UK. He does NOT represent the British Royal Family in any capacity.   It wasn't an official US Holiday when he was there. He took advantage of the ignorance of the Navy regarding his status  He was just playing pretend. It was a photo op to be used by him. Period.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

Toby93 said:


> View attachment 5666410


JCMH looks like hell on earth, so unwell. His skin tone is grey, looks clammy, eyes sunken and he looks like he's putting all his effort into not passing out.
A mess.

Don't even get me started on TW who looks like a cheshire cat that's been wrapped in a towel to be taken on a trip to the vets.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Finally someone described the situation exactly! We are being hounded!


----------



## gracekelly

Her shoulders did look nice.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, she has LV’s backing.  Nothing is sacred anymore.
> 
> ETA:  calling KimK to step in and stop this!  We need you, please help.


I was thinking the MM dress had a Virgil Abloh vibe to it, it is by his successor Nicolas G
The MM design is neither cocktail dress nor formal, and too voluminous. 
It reminded me of the VA dress that Kylie wore to the Met, that one was also a contradictory design - voluminous meringue of a ball  gown with baseball hat


			Google Image Result for https://www.etonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/970xh/public/images/2022-05/GettyImages-1395051753.jpg?itok=CRjxp_4y


----------



## Nutashha

OMG
Harry and Meghan Could Lose Royal Titles If They Tarnish Royal Reputation​


----------



## Lodpah

I’m a veteran. I’ll be calling the Public Affairs Office and complaining why a person of his stature who made or commented that our First Amendment is bunkers was given this farce of an honor. I’ll get back to you all. You can also help by calling Pearl Harbor Public Affairs Office. Thank you very much.


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> I’m a veteran. I’ll be calling the Public Affairs Office and complaining why a person of his stature who made or commented that our First Amendment is bunkers was given this farce of an honor. I’ll get back to you all. You can also help by calling Pearl Harbor Public Affairs Office. Thank you very much.


Deleted my thought because the first amendment is a political issue , I SEE what you are saying


----------



## CarryOn2020

Nutashha said:


> OMG
> Harry and Meghan Could Lose Royal Titles If They Tarnish Royal Reputation​
> View attachment 5666794


They already have tarnished the “Royal” reputation.  How much longer is KCIII going to let this tarnishing continue?


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> I was thinking the MM dress had a Virgil Abloh vibe to it, it is by his successor Nicolas G
> The MM design is neither cocktail dress nor formal, and too voluminous.
> It reminded me of the VA dress that Kylie wore to the Met, that one was also a contradictory design - voluminous meringue of a ball  gown with baseball hat
> 
> 
> Google Image Result for https://www.etonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/970xh/public/images/2022-05/GettyImages-1395051753.jpg?itok=CRjxp_4y


I couldn't tell exactly what the fabric was, but it had the vibe of polyester double knit that you can throw in the washing machine.  Maybe she will drop it off at the grade school in Harlem where they donated the washing machine and they can wash it for her before she has to return it to LV.  She better tell them to remove the tags before washing.

She learned her lesson wearing that brown poly knit sweater that gave her mega pit stains and that is the reason why she is wearing black or white.  The stains don't show.


----------



## purseinsanity

jblended said:


> I don't think this has been posted here yet (this is not the first video with the pictures, this is a second trailer just posted). The narrative is clear.
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: And the comments section is already just as savage as it was on the first trailer!
> 
> OMG this comment has me rolling



Is this a documentary about them or Di?  Half the images are Diana.  Give.it.a.rest!


----------



## lanasyogamama

Lounorada said:


> JCMH looks like hell on earth, so unwell. His skin tone is grey, looks clammy, eyes sunken and he looks like he's putting all his effort into not passing out.
> A mess.
> 
> Don't even get me started on TW who looks like a cheshire cat that's been wrapped in a towel to be taken on a trip to the vets.


You have a way with words!


----------



## Toby93

Handbag1234 said:


> I am very disappointed in LV backing this circus. I may have to review my extensive support for the brand


Same here....may be thinning out my LV collection


----------



## youngster

Lounorada said:


> *Don't even get me started on TW* *who looks like a cheshire cat that's been wrapped in a towel to be taken on a trip to the vets.*


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> I’m a veteran. I’ll be calling the Public Affairs Office and complaining why a person of his stature who made or commented that our First Amendment is bunkers was given this farce of an honor. I’ll get back to you all. You can also help by calling Pearl Harbor Public Affairs Office. Thank you very much.


Given the timing of the visit I’d be willing to bet Harry told them he wished to visit the Pearl Harbor Memorial in honor of Veteran’s Day. They took him at his word and set up a nice tour for him, little realizing who they were dealing with.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>



"It is bizarre, to me anyway, that Harry and Meghan think being photographed on a street by a pack of paps is an intolerable incursion into their lives but inviting cameras into their literal home to film them having an emotional breakdown is totally normal."
*THIS ^^^^ 1000 Times this!*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> I couldn't tell exactly what the fabric was, but it had the vibe of polyester double knit that you can throw in the washing machine.  Maybe she will drop it off at the grade school in Harlem where they donated the washing machine and they can wash it for her before she has to return it to LV.  She better tell them to remove the tags before washing.
> 
> She learned her lesson wearing that brown poly knit sweater that gave her mega pit stains and that is the reason why she is wearing black or white.*  The stains don't show*.


Except for the fake tanner on the inside of the dress


----------



## Lodpah

Lodpah said:


> I’m a veteran. I’ll be calling the Public Affairs Office and complaining why a person of his stature who made or commented that our First Amendment is bunkers was given this farce of an honor. I’ll get back to you all. You can also help by calling Pearl Harbor Public Affairs Office. Thank you very much.


Update: I called the director of public affairs. I asked him why! He was not aware if it. I complained that this is a guy who is at odds with the BRF and embarrassing the government and that UK are great Allie’s of ours and asked why Harry who called our FA honkers, wore a Nazi uniform and called those soldiers under his command Pakis and who embarrasses the UK allowed to portray this picture as if the US government approved of it. He says he was not aware and he looked up the pic and he will raise the ‘flagpole’ ie send it up further for review. PM if you want the direct number to make your own call and complain.


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> So much for the walking away money…
> View attachment 5666741
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: I wanted to watch Harry and Meghan's betrayal up close
> 
> 
> JAN MOIR: Tonight President Zelensky of Ukraine is being honoured for leading a desperate fight for freedom. It says something that he is not even the main attraction at this gala.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


"As the Sussexes leave the stage, applause thunders around the ballroom, with some attendees even getting to their feet. *You can tell that this — this! — was what Meghan thought being royal would be like.*

Glamour, celebrity ovations, adulation and the intoxicating fizz of unquestioning worship. Not shaking hands with tea ladies on cold British streets, ceremonial tree planting in provincial towns and being asked impertinent questions about how much her dress cost. This! Much more of this, please."


----------



## Toby93

Lodpah said:


> Cheapens the brand


It absolutely does!  It also shows what a poor judge of character this company is to hitch it's wagon to this horse and pony show after all that we know about them.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> Except for the fake tanner on the inside of the dress


She'll be charged double for that.  It is hard getting stains out of polyester.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Update: I called the director of public affairs. I asked him why! He was not aware if it. I complained that this is a guy who is at odds with the BRF and embarrassing the government and that UK are great Allie’s of ours and asked why Harry who called our FA honkers, wore a Nazi uniform and called those soldiers under his command Pakis and who embarrasses the UK allowed to portray this picture as if the US government approved of it. He says he was not aware and he looked up the pic and he will raise the ‘flagpole’ ie send it up further for review. PM if you want the direct number to make your own call and complain.


Kudos for you to letting them know how you feel!  Sadly, it is all done with and nothing can be done about it now, but at least they are getting a message that it was disrespectful.  I was infuriated that he was even there!  It was a desecration of a gravesite IMO.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


>


But to her credit , spray tan was not overdone , she listened to us


----------



## rose60610

LittleStar88 said:


> Caption this photo…
> 
> View attachment 5666569



"I'd never pose like this unless it makes me a ton of money"


----------



## needlv

I dont think it’s the same aquamarine ring as Diana’s.  Dianas is more of a rectangle.  Comparing Diana’s from pics and Meghan’s (from wedding day)


----------



## Lounorada

lanasyogamama said:


> You have a way with words!





youngster said:


>


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Let's play.


----------



## gelbergirl

One of the YouTubers I follow is going to watch so I don’t have to barf.
she’s gonna take one for the team, and deep dive into it


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> I read 2 weeks ago that the dress code for the event was cocktail attire. So short dresses were fine. She was overdressed in a long dress.


What, you mean she passed up an opportunity to show off those legs? Further evidence that she was trying to copy the P of Wales.


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> Update: I called the director of public affairs. I asked him why! He was not aware if it. I complained that this is a guy who is at odds with the BRF and embarrassing the government and that UK are great Allie’s of ours and asked why Harry who called our FA honkers, wore a Nazi uniform and called those soldiers under his command Pakis and who embarrasses the UK allowed to portray this picture as if the US government approved of it. He says he was not aware and he looked up the pic and he will raise the ‘flagpole’ ie send it up further for review. PM if you want the direct number to make your own call and complain.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> I dont think it’s the same aquamarine ring as Diana’s.  Dianas is more of a rectangle.  Comparing Diana’s from pics and Meghan’s (from wedding day)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5666851
> 
> 
> View attachment 5666850


I don't think it's the same ring, Diana's ring is exquisite.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> What, you mean she passed up an opportunity to show off those legs? Further evidence that she was trying to copy the P of Wales.


those gorgeous legs


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



It really reminds me of the white straight jacket dress she wore for her outing with the Queen. You know, the time she got in the car before the Queen. This must be her cocktail straight jacket look.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kinda fun to watch these elites turn on the toxic two —  hope KCIII is paying attention









						Elton, Oprah, and Obamas AREN'T in Harry and Meghan Netflix series
					

The Mail can reveal key allies - including Elton John, Vogue editor Edward Enninful and Prince Harry's 'surrogate Dad', the music producer David Foster - are not taking part.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Nutashha said:


> OMG
> Harry and Meghan Could Lose Royal Titles *If They Tarnish Royal Reputation*​
> View attachment 5666794


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lounorada said:


> Don't even get me started on TW who looks like a cheshire cat that's been wrapped in a towel to be taken on a trip to the vets.



OMG


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Update: I called the director of public affairs. I asked him why! He was not aware if it. I complained that this is a guy who is at odds with the BRF and embarrassing the government and that UK are great Allie’s of ours and asked why Harry who called our FA honkers, wore a Nazi uniform and called those soldiers under his command Pakis and who embarrasses the UK allowed to portray this picture as if the US government approved of it. He says he was not aware and he looked up the pic and he will raise the ‘flagpole’ ie send it up further for review. PM if you want the direct number to make your own call and complain.


Husband is outraged by this. I am so proud of you for calling and serving. Thank you.  I have an email ready to send, too.
Since this photo is on twitter, wonder if the Chief Twit can help us.  Maybe put an explanation over it?  Something?  If Elon does something, I may be persuaded to buy a car from him


----------



## Jayne1

Lodpah said:


> Update: I called the director of public affairs. I asked him why! He was not aware if it. I complained that this is a guy who is at odds with the BRF and embarrassing the government and that UK are great Allie’s of ours and asked why Harry who called our FA honkers, wore a Nazi uniform and called those soldiers under his command Pakis and who embarrasses the UK allowed to portray this picture as if the US government approved of it. He says he was not aware and he looked up the pic and he will raise the ‘flagpole’ ie send it up further for review. PM if you want the direct number to make your own call and complain.


I could have told you he would say that and I'm just an ordinary Canadian civilian.

They have no idea, they will look into it. They may even have a meeting. Now hang up the phone.

(Sorry - bad mood and very cynical today.)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Nutashha said:


> OMG
> Harry and Meghan Could Lose Royal Titles If They Tarnish Royal Reputation​
> View attachment 5666794



By all means, move at a glacial pace. You know how that thrills us.


----------



## rose60610

kemilia said:


> At least she's not in her normal *"I'm holding a watermelon between my thighs"* position.
> But the shoes ...


----------



## Jayne1

It seems to me they are flying high at the moment.  Two awards in one night. Third rate celebs and 3rd rate Kennedy cousins excited to meet them. Backgrid paid and ready to shoot her arrival. The bad press of the book far behind them. Their 3-part greatest love affair of all time to air this Thursday. 

At the moment, I think Meg feels very back on top.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> "As the Sussexes leave the stage, applause thunders around the ballroom, with some attendees even getting to their feet. *You can tell that this — this! — was what Meghan thought being royal would be like.*
> 
> Glamour, celebrity ovations, adulation and the intoxicating fizz of unquestioning worship. Not shaking hands with tea ladies on cold British streets, ceremonial tree planting in provincial towns and being asked impertinent questions about how much her dress cost. This! Much more of this, please."


She wanted to be Hollywood royalty, not British royalty. She obviously did not understand the difference.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

LittleStar88 said:


> Caption this photo…
> 
> View attachment 5666569


"They wouldn't let me keep the shoes!"

Can we also ask who did it best? ZedZed? or them?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> By all means, move at a glacial pace. You know how that thrills us.


I realize this is ‘nice’ site where we have intelligent, thoughtful discussions.  But this *glacial pace  *is not something I support.  Makes me want to spit fire, and cuss - a lot.
[love that phrase, so aptly used].



Jayne1 said:


> I could have told you he would say that and I'm just an ordinary Canadian civilian.
> 
> They have no idea, they will look into it. They may even have a meeting. Now hang up the phone.
> 
> (Sorry - bad mood and very cynical today.)


yes, I thought the same thing because that is the standard administrivia answer.  [what? I had no idea.].

 Still, if enough people express outrage, the military will be pushed into doing something. Some of those men in the photos are wearing officer hats.  Why would they turn on us?  At our Pearl Harbor?   We the people demand answers.


----------



## Chanbal

Brilliant article by MC **
MAUREEN CALLAHAN: Evil global news media! Here are the reasons why you MUST stop hounding 'Woko Ono' Meghan and poor traumatised Harry - and just let them get on with their low profile work for Netflix, Spotify and a global publishing giant!​*Never forget: Meghan Markle is the second coming of Nelson Mandela.*
_
Albeit in a custom-made Louis Vuitton gown (one that pettily mimicked Kate Middleton's Earthshot look), a $90,000 aquamarine ring, and a stubborn cluster of grievances and flimsy claims of racism that she will never, ever tire of recounting.

*Last night's RFK Human Rights ceremony had it all: A outspoken liberal host who accidentally shot and killed his co-worker, a young wife and mother, and has since claimed zero guilt; our host's wife, a talent-free, stage-five clinger and fame-adjacent fraud who still claims to be Spanish, despite being outed as a privileged white woman from Boston; the fading embers of America's preeminent political dynasty, with Kerry Kennedy, the head of RFK Human Rights, a DUI defendant who *****ed and moaned after she was acquitted that she was treated differently — i.e., arrested, charged and tried — because she was a Kennedy.

And of course, our special guests and honorees: Harry and Meghan, *making a rare joint appearance just before their bilious, rage-filled Netflix documentary series — itself seeming to have an elastic relationship to facts — begins streaming.

*What a night! What an assemblage of the best and brightest! What could Harry and Meghan, this happy and glittering couple, so dedicated to lofty aims as human rights, racial justice and public temper tantrums laced with an ever-present soupçon of blackmail, have to teach us? …*_









						CALLAHAN: Evil media! Stop hounding 'Woko Ono' Meghan and poor Harry
					

CALLAHAN: We can legitimately thank Harry and Meghan for one thing: This incredible comic relief, however unintended. It's original. It's hypocrisy and tone-deafness at its apex.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> "administrivia"


That's a great term. My brother is a retired army Colonel. I'm sure he's very familiar with this. Will ask him what he thinks.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I don't think it's the same ring, Diana's ring is exquisite.


MM’s blue ring is not her style , she is wearing it for one of two reasons - she is merching it or she is deliberately channeling Diana
Either ring could be a London blue topaz, not an aquamarine


----------



## Chanbal

Why can’t Harry and Meghan hang on to their staff?​


_This week, the revolving door at Camp Sussex is swinging again

As yet another senior staffer steps down, we examine why the couple have lost at least 14 staff since their wedding in 2018 _


			archive.ph


----------



## CobaltBlu

I just am not getting "same vibe" ring from these two baubles.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> MM’s blue ring is not her style , she is wearing it for one of two reasons - she is merching it or she is deliberately channeling Diana
> Either ring could be a London blue topaz, not an aquamarine


I think she wants people to believe she got Diana's jewelry. It's possible that at some point she thought the ring was Diana's.


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5666886
> 
> 
> I just am not getting "same vibe" ring from these two baubles.
> 
> View attachment 5666887


Diana's does look more rectangular and darker, but it could be the lighting and angle.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I think she wants people to believe she got Diana's jewelry. It's possible that at some point she thought the ring was Diana's.


It could be a replica of Diana’s ring which Diana may have worn when she was with Hazz.  So, it is so important to him.


----------



## rose60610

If Claw won an award for her podcast, don't you think Spotify bought it to justify their stupidity for hiring her?


----------



## Chanbal

GiggleBunny said:


> Some light entertainment



Thanks for posting this, it's so nice.


----------



## Jayne1

I wish people would figure out if the ring is the original and why it looks a bit different in the older Diana photos, but whatever, I think I would look very good with a ring that size!


----------



## lanasyogamama

It looks and sounds like Hawwy shoves his umbrella into a photographer and a female guard tells him to relax.


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> One of the YouTubers I follow is going to watch so I don’t have to barf.
> she’s gonna take one for the team, and deep dive into it


I bet BLG will need to drink a bottle of Pepto-Bismol before watching and doing his synopsis.


----------



## Katel

lanasyogamama said:


> I keep reading ripple as nipple.
> 
> Hey, she didn’t grab the present out of his hands, progress!





calicocat said:


> The Nipple of Hope!





QueenofWrapDress said:


> … Well, doesn't look like that worked out well for Charles because apparently Harry took the money and threw himself eagerly into* sh*tting on his family* some more.


Haha I keep seeing “dribble of poop awards.”


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I think she wants people to believe she got Diana's jewelry. It's possible that at some point she thought the ring was Diana's.


Everything she does is to incite discussion.  It's a gift.  When she left the dental office and carried a toothbrush people thought it was a hormone injection kit.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> It could be a replica of Diana’s ring which Diana may have worn when she was with Hazz.  So, it is so important to him.


I could see Harry asking for some of Diana's jewelry pieces for TW, and whoever was in charge of the vault, with QE's consent, gave him another aquamarine ring. As long as the stone is big, TW is happy…


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> I realize this is ‘nice’ site where we have intelligent, thoughtful discussions.  But this *glacial pace  *is not something I support.  Makes me want to spit fire, and cuss - a lot.
> [love that phrase, so aptly used].
> 
> 
> yes, I thought the same thing because that is the standard administrivia answer.  [what? I had no idea.].
> 
> Still, if enough people express outrage, the military will be pushed into doing something. Some of those men in the photos are wearing officer hats.  Why would they turn on us?  At our Pearl Harbor?   We the people demand answers.


Did Harry remember to get photo releases from all of the people in the photo giving permission to be used as propaganda promotion on the Archewell site?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

rose60610 said:


> If Claw won an award for her podcast, don't you think Spotify bought it to justify their stupidity for hiring her?


I read that was bot voting…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Interesting to note - William gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _marriage_.  
Hazzi gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _divorce_.


----------



## youngster

I personally think the ring was likely Diana's.  She has Diana's Cartier tank and it stands to reason that Harry would not have given her a replica if he took the original when he and Will split up Diana's jewelry.  I doubt Diana's sisters are still hanging on to her jewelry 25 years after her death.  

Could be that the reason the ring MM is wearing is lighter in color is because of the angle and lighting of the photo, or it is because the stone has faded over the past 25 years. Aquamarines are prone to fading if not cared for properly. Too much sunlight, harsh cleaners, and high temperatures are bad for aquamarines over time. So, ultrasonic cleaning or steam cleaning can cause them to fade badly.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting to note - William gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _marriage_.
> Hazzi gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _divorce_.


The earlier article indicated Diana had it made in 1996. At this point Meghan has owned it longer than Diana. She didn’t live long enough to wear it much, maybe not even a year.


----------



## Mrs.Z

youngster said:


> I personally think the ring was likely Diana's.  She has Diana's Cartier tank and it stands to reason that Harry would not have given her a replica if he took the original when he and Will split up Diana's jewelry.  I doubt Diana's sisters are still hanging on to her jewelry 25 years after her death.
> 
> Could be that the reason the ring MM is wearing is lighter in color is because of the angle and lighting of the photo, or it is because the stone has faded over the past 25 years. Aquamarines are prone to fading if not cared for properly. Too much sunlight, harsh cleaners, and high temperatures are bad for aquamarines over time. So, ultrasonic cleaning or steam cleaning can cause them to fade badly.


Agreed, it’s not such an expensive piece, it was never property of The Crown, the article posted said the stone was a gift to Diana from a friend and she had it set…all after her divorce.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_In 1996, after being separated for four years, Prince Charles and Diana, Princess of Wales officially divorced. Just a few years earlier, on *December 9, 1992*, Prime Minister John Major had declared: "It is announced from Buckingham Palace that, with regret, the Prince and Princess of Wales have decided to separate._
from Town and Country, 2022









						Princess Diana Initially Didn't Want a Divorce from Prince Charles
					

Season five of The Crown dives into the separation and subsequent divorce between the then-Prince and Princess of Wales. Here, the true story of what really happened.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> I could see Harry asking for some of Diana's jewelry pieces for TW, and whoever was in charge of the vault, with QE's consent, gave him another aquamarine ring. As long as the stone is big, TW is happy…



The aquamarine ring was part of Diana's personal jewelry so it would not be part of the Crown's collection and no permission from the Queen (or King) would be needed for it to be worn.  I read long ago that Diana's jewelry was supposedly split between William and Harry.   Will took Diana's sapphire engagement ring which Kate has, and Kate often wears some of Diana's other pieces. (ETA: Could be that Will took the lion's share of Diana's jewelry because he knew whoever he married was going to eventually be Princess of Wales and later Queen and would get quite a bit of use out of them? Maybe Harry took just a few pieces?)  

Kate also wears pieces from the Crown's collection that are often identified with Diana because she wore them often, like Queen Mary's emerald choker necklace and the Lover's Knot tiara. 

I have no idea what pieces Harry took.  I haven't seen MM wear anything of Diana's other than that Cartier tank watch and this aquamarine ring.  Supposedly her engagement ring contains 2 diamonds that were Diana's.


----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> I personally think the ring was likely Diana's.  She has Diana's Cartier tank and it stands to reason that Harry would not have given her a replica if he took the original when he and Will split up Diana's jewelry.  I doubt Diana's sisters are still hanging on to her jewelry 25 years after her death.
> 
> Could be that the reason the ring MM is wearing is lighter in color is because of the angle and lighting of the photo, or it is because the stone has faded over the past 25 years. Aquamarines are prone to fading if not cared for properly. Too much sunlight, harsh cleaners, and high temperatures are bad for aquamarines over time. So, ultrasonic cleaning or steam cleaning can cause them to fade badly.


In addition to the color, the stones seem to have slightly different cuts. It's very possible that Hazz was given another ring and not his mother's. If the family started noticing TW's demands, and started having reservations about her, they probably tried to minimize the damage. He was likely more familiar with the watch than the ring. Diana't ring is probably reserved for one of her granddaughters, including LiliB…


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> All 3 look oh-so-desperate.  As if *this* is the end.
> 
> View attachment 5666407


It's the unholy trinity:  
The Drunk Driver, the Son, and the Ghoulish Ghost.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> In addition to the color, the stones seem to have slightly different cuts. It's very possible that Hazz was given another ring and not his mother's. If the family started noticing TW's demands, and started having reservations about her, they probably tried to minimize the damage. He was likely more familiar with the watch than the ring. Diana't ring is probably reserved for one of her granddaughters, including LiliB…



Yes, I see what you're seeing too!  It does appear to be a slightly different emerald shape.  But, there is a possible explanation for that.  

Aquamarines are brittle and prone to cracking or chipping.  Even the process of setting an aquamarine can cause them to fracture.  It's possible that after 25 years, the ring was taken out by Harry, sent to a jewelers to be cleaned and polished up before the wedding, and they found that it had cracked or chipped, so it was re-cut to remove the damage and save the stone. Otherwise the stone could fracture right down the side or middle and be ruined entirely.  Just a theory!  I have 2 aquamarines myself, similar emerald shape cut, but not anywhere close to the jawbreaker size of Diana's but I do love aquas.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Everything she does is to incite discussion.  It's a gift.  When she left the dental office and carried a toothbrush people thought it was a hormone injection kit.


I admire that dentist: specializes in scaling, polishing, refreshing veneers and the occasional ob/gyn aftercare.


Chanbal said:


> I could see Harry asking for some of Diana's jewelry pieces for TW, and whoever was in charge of the vault, with QE's consent, gave him another aquamarine ring. *As long as the stone is big, TW is happy… *


Big stones for a Rock star 
But true, you just know she will never stop upgrading that engagement ring till Sparry replaces it with a huge rock, to heck with the sentiment of the original stones.


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is hilarious


----------



## CarryOn2020

Could someone be so kind to explain the difference _leaking_ and _planting_?


----------



## Lounorada

Jayne1 said:


> It seems to me they are flying high at the moment.  Two awards in one night. Third rate celebs and 3rd rate Kennedy cousins excited to meet them. Backgrid paid and ready to shoot her arrival. The bad press of the book far behind them. Their 3-part greatest love affair of all time to air this Thursday.
> 
> *At the moment, I think Meg feels very back on top.*


For now maybe.

Meanwhile, Karma is like this waiting (too damn long) in the wings:


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> I could see Harry asking for some of Diana's jewelry pieces for TW, and whoever was in charge of the vault, with QE's consent, gave him another aquamarine ring. As long as the stone is big, TW is happy…


The late QEII would not have been in charge of Diana's personal collection. However I believe it has been previously mentioned that the Spencers allowed the boys to choose which items they preferred to keep.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting to note - *William gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s *_*marriage*_.
> Hazzi gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _divorce_.


It's been said before that since William married first, Dufus offered him the ring that he had chosen when Diana's jewelry was divided between the two boys. If true, this is one act of kindness or brotherly love for which Dufus should be remembered.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tourree might be onto something.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting to note - William gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _marriage_.
> Hazzi gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _divorce_.



Yeah, I don't know. 

The marriage was unhappy, the bride picked the ring herself from a tray because Charles couldn't be bothered (and I'm a big fan of picking something you plan to wear daily for the rest of your life, but the way the story was told always sounded a little callous).

One could argue the aquamarine symbolized Diana doing something nice for herself.

But also, what was Harry supposed to do? There was just one engagement ring.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I’ve read that Harry originally picked the engagement ring, but talked Will into taking it to give to Kate saying something like he (H) really thought it would be wonderful to see that ring on the throne someday.

I thought the TW’s Cartier was a gift from herself to herself before H showed up.  

The aquamarine ring: to me, the metal band looks thicker on TW’s version.  Honestly, I could see TW buying a replica just to SEEM like she had something of Di’s.  Maybe her version is just glass.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> At the moment, I think Meg feels very back on top.



I'm not sure about that.  

They likely had to shell out money for at least the People's Choice award, or the bots to vote, and possibly a hefty contribution to get the one from the RFK foundation as well. (Kerry Kennedy could also be just that stupid.)  But, what is actually going on behind the scenes with Netflix and Harry's publisher and Spotify and their big money contracts?  We have no way of knowing of course but it's possible that Netflix may have already told them we're airing these episodes but we plan to end the deal.  Same with Spotify.  Thanks for playing, but we don't intend to renew your contract.  Take your podcast to Amazon or wherever.  Harry's publisher likely won't be very happy with him if his book ends up with lots of obvious discrepancies from the docu-series and they end up embarrassed by it.  I can't imagine that Netflix thought all they'd get after 3 years was one 6 episode series and one on the Invictus Games. 

Grifting has taken them far.  They actually convinced a bunch of Hollywood big wigs that they could produce intelligent, interesting, popular content even though neither of them have any experience in writing or producing and Harry's certainly not known as the sharpest tool in the box.  So, they are backed into a corner.  Is there anything else in the pipeline? Probably not, or we would have heard about it. Names of directors and writers would have been attached to projects.  They should be very worried about the future, not celebrating a couple of trophies that they may have had to pay for.   Around January 20th, Harry is going to wake up and look at Meghan and say so, now what do we do?


----------



## Toby93

CobaltBlu said:


> View attachment 5666886
> 
> 
> I just am not getting "same vibe" ring from these two baubles.
> 
> View attachment 5666887


It does appear paler, not as much depth of colour as the original.


----------



## bellecate

purseinsanity said:


> Is this a documentary about them or Di?  Half the images are Diana.  Give.it.a.rest!


It must rankle the Narcissist quite a bit that she plays second fiddle to her MIL.


----------



## bellecate

Toby93 said:


> "As the Sussexes leave the stage, applause thunders around the ballroom, with some attendees even getting to their feet. *You can tell that this — this! — was what Meghan thought being royal would be like.*
> 
> Glamour, celebrity ovations, adulation and the intoxicating fizz of unquestioning worship. Not shaking hands with tea ladies on cold British streets, ceremonial tree planting in provincial towns and being asked impertinent questions about how much her dress cost. This! Much more of this, please."


Still waiting on that much needed  button.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

youngster said:


> Yes, I see what you're seeing too!  It does appear to be a slightly different emerald shape.  But, there is a possible explanation for that.
> 
> Aquamarines are brittle and prone to cracking or chipping.  Even the process of setting an aquamarine can cause them to fracture.  It's possible that after 25 years, the ring was taken out by Harry, sent to a jewelers to be cleaned and polished up before the wedding, and they found that it had cracked or chipped, so it was re-cut to remove the damage and save the stone. Otherwise the stone could fracture right down the side or middle and be ruined entirely.  Just a theory!  I have 2 aquamarines myself, similar emerald shape cut, but not anywhere close to the jawbreaker size of Diana's but I do love aquas.


TW's stone looks slightly wider, but you could be right. The ring is valuable in having belonged to Diana. The ring and bracelet are beautiful gifts for a dear family member, I don't think TW is one. While Hazz may have demanded his mother's jewels for TW, I wouldn't be surprised if his family tried to minimize his stupidity. There is no way for us to know unless the rumor about TW only having access to copies gets confirmed. That rumor and the one about fake bumps…


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, I don't know.
> 
> The marriage was unhappy, the bride picked the ring herself from a tray because Charles couldn't be bothered (and I'm a big fan of picking something you plan to wear daily for the rest of your life, but the way the story was told always sounded a little callous).
> 
> One could argue the aquamarine symbolized Diana doing something nice for herself.
> 
> But also, what was Harry supposed to do? There was just one engagement ring.


Agree, Diana’s taste in rings is not mine.  I like Camilla’s wedding ring [from the Queen Mum], 5 carat center stone.   It is a beautiful style that works well on most hands, namely mine     The sapphire, 12 carats, is tasteful and easily recognized, plus it has the historical connection to Queen Victoria. The aquamarine reflects the 90s imo — more is more. It is a 13 carat solitaire with smaller diamonds.  All are beautiful.

 Hazzi could have taken one of the sapphires  from Diana’s earrings or necklace and re-purposed those into a stunning ring.  She did have quite a bit of jewelry - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewels_of_Diana,_Princess_of_Wales









						Something Blue: A Royal Love Story | Garrard
					

Discover the story behind the world’s most famous sapphire engagement ring, chosen by Princess Diana and adored the world over.




					garrard.com
				




ETA:  one of these earrings would make a lovely ring imo




ETA2:
I do hope MM  received more pieces than just 3 or 4.  She deserves some of the nicer jewels.  Not sure Hazzi would know the nicer stuff, still she does deserve some bling.


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, Diana’s taste in rings is not mine.  I like Camilla’s wedding ring [from the Queen Mum], 5 carat center stone.   It is a beautiful style that works well on most hands, namely mine     The sapphire, 12 carats, is tasteful and easily recognized, plus it has the historical connection to Queen Victoria. The aquamarine reflects the 90s imo — more is more. It is a 13 carat solitaire with smaller diamonds.  All are beautiful.


I’d like Camilla's ring too. I like everything Camilla wears.

That huge aquamarine ring is mostly just for formal fancy nights out isn’t it.  You could get away with a great piece of costume jewellery and have the same effect.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Cinderlala

bag-mania said:


> In case any of you still had a shred of respect for _Vogue,_ allow me to kill it for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s White Louis Vuitton Gown Speaks to Her Style Strengths
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex both received the Ripple of Hope Award tonight.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com


To be fair, it is an accurate title---she has no style strengths and the dress reflected that.  


Lodpah said:


> Cheapens the brand


Like her H Hermes blanket.


charlottawill said:


> What, you mean she passed up an opportunity to show off those legs? Further evidence that she was trying to copy the P of Wales.


Never fear, the legs were on full display.

I'm continually surprised at how poorly she dresses.  This was allegedly a bespoke creation but how is that possible with it fitting so poorly?  It was too short, the detailing at the waist was unflattering, the top band obscured her torso, the slit was weird and created almost a ruffle effect when she walked, the sleeves were too long and too loose---it was a disaster.  Off-the-shoulder usually works for her but even the neckline was off.

It would really, really help her to stop trying to dress like Wallis & Diana.  Especially when the results end up looking like a combination of a sheet and a droopy diaper.  She can do better.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> Never fear, the legs were on full display.


There was a picture from the DM of her exiting a vehicle and it looked like a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen.


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> I bet BLG will need to drink a bottle of Pepto-Bismol before watching and doing his synopsis.


Or maybe something a little stronger.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Twitter person has a point.


----------



## Cinderlala

charlottawill said:


> There was a picture from the DM of her exiting a vehicle and it looked like a wardrobe malfunction waiting to happen.


It's been implied elsewhere it was an intentional 'malfunction'.


----------



## csshopper

MommyDaze said:


> How so? It is customary to render a salute to foreign military officers who are visiting military installations. Harry served honorably as an officer for 10 years and was clearly part of the ceremony they were having.





MommyDaze said:


> How so? It is customary to render a salute to foreign military officers who are visiting military installations. Harry served honorably as an officer for 10 years and was clearly part of the ceremony they were having.


If it’s customary, but not required,  then I do not think Hazbeen deserves the recognition. If’s a requirement of military personnel, then I will view it as a “suck it up buttercup even if you don’t like it”  moment, but still find it personally objectionable.

Army personnel in the UK must swear allegiance to the Queen as their Commander in Chief. I do not believe he demonstrated the proper respect to her. You want respect? Give respect. Some have gone so far as to accuse him of slander in dealings with his Grandmother. 

Even though he was Captain General of the Royal Marines he failed to attend a scheduled Memorial for Marines killed in an IRA Bombing attack. Instead he chose to go to the “Lion King” premiere so he could hustle Disney CEO, Bob Iger for voice over work for TW.

He came to the US, where he has no standing, and proceeded to denigrate our Constitution, claiming the First Ammendment is “bonkers”. Stupidity is not an excuse. I don’t recall ever reading an apology. 

He likes to use occasions for photo ops in an attempt to burnish his image. Previously it was he and TW tromping through an LA cemetery trailed by the photographers they’d hired. This year it was his trip to the Arizona Memorial.

And most of all, having no respect whatsoever for this whining grifter, I deeply resent his monetizing among other victims of the attack on Pearl Harbor, an ancester of mine, so he can drop in, stage himself as a caring Vet interested in WWII naval history to add  photos to his cache for future $$$$ projects.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Yes, I see what you're seeing too!  It does appear to be a slightly different emerald shape.  But, there is a possible explanation for that.
> 
> Aquamarines are brittle and prone to cracking or chipping.  Even the process of setting an aquamarine can cause them to fracture.  It's possible that after 25 years, the ring was taken out by Harry, sent to a jewelers to be cleaned and polished up before the wedding, and they found that it had cracked or chipped, so it was re-cut to remove the damage and save the stone. Otherwise the stone could fracture right down the side or middle and be ruined entirely.  Just a theory!  I have 2 aquamarines myself, similar emerald shape cut, but not anywhere close to the jawbreaker size of Diana's but I do love aquas.


I learn so much here!


----------



## Chanbal

Maggie Muggins said:


> The late QEII would not have been in charge of Diana's personal collection. However I believe it has been previously mentioned that the Spencers allowed the boys to choose which items they preferred to keep.


I read that the Spencers were in charge of the Diana's personal collection while Will and Hazz were kids, but I would think that at some point the jewelry pieces were retuned to Diana's heirs and kept in a vault in one of the palaces/residences.


----------



## charlottawill

Cinderlala said:


> It's been implied elsewhere it was an intentional 'malfunction'.


I wouldn't be surprised, because it's just so classy to give the world a crotch shot


----------



## charlottawill

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's been said before that since William married first, Dufus offered him the ring that he had chosen when Diana's jewelry was divided between the two boys. If true, this is one act of kindness or brotherly love for which Dufus should be remembered.


I'm sure TW sees it differently and never lets him forget it.


----------



## Toby93

I have spent most of tonight reading articles from some very talented writers who have clearly had enough of the toxic duo.  I laughed out loud at this statement   

“I realized they’re never going to protect you,” says Meghan, who had 24/7 protection as a working royal. The trailer is both vague and direct all at once, a mishmash of people and events and footage from who knows where or when, because who cares? This is their truth, which may or may not accord with the truth, and *their truth is that they were simply too wonderful for their own good, an argument with which listeners of Meghan’s podcasts will be familiar.* There’s the inevitable balcony shot, and footage of more cheering crowds and someone who could be a respected TV pundit or Jeremy Corbyn saying “she’s becoming a royal rock star”. Then we cut back to Meghan, who snaps her fingers and says “everything changed”.


----------



## LittleStar88

hmmmm…. How easily everyone has forgotten.


----------



## Chanbal

If the Harkles were staying at the Hotel of the event, why the grand entrance from the outside of the hotel? People are asking this in other posts, and It's a great question imo.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I wish people would figure out if the ring is the original and why it looks a bit different in the older Diana photos, but whatever, I think I would look very good with a ring that size!


Here's a bargain of a replica 



> https://www.walmart.com/ip/Meghan-M...6?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=101007118


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> If the Harkles were staying at the Hotel of the event, why the grand entrance from the outside of the hotel? People are asking this in other posts, and It's a great question imo.


In the past I believe they've stayed at condos lent by friends, for privacy of course.


----------



## Chanbal

Good video!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> If it’s customary, but not required,  then I do not think Hazbeen deserves the recognition. If’s a requirement of military personnel, then I will view it as a “suck it up buttercup even if you don’t like it”  moment, but still find it personally objectionable.
> 
> Army personnel in the UK must swear allegiance to the Queen as their Commander in Chief. I do not believe he demonstrated the proper respect to her. You want respect? Give respect. Some have gone so far as to accuse him of slander in dealings with his Grandmother.
> 
> Even though he was Captain General of the Royal Marines he failed to attend a scheduled Memorial for Marines killed in an IRA Bombing attack. Instead he chose to go to the “Lion King” premiere so he could hustle Disney CEO, Bob Iger for voice over work for TW.
> 
> He came to the US, where he has no standing, and proceeded to denigrate our Constitution, claiming the First Ammendment is “bonkers”. Stupidity is not an excuse. I don’t recall ever reading an apology.
> 
> He likes to use occasions for photo ops in an attempt to burnish his image. Previously it was he and TW tromping through an LA cemetery trailed by the photographers they’d hired. This year it was his trip to the Arizona Memorial.
> 
> And most of all, having no respect whatsoever for this whining grifter, I deeply resent his monetizing among other victims of the attack on Pearl Harbor, an ancester of mine, so he can drop in, stage himself as a caring Vet interested in WWII naval history to add  photos to his cache for future $$$$ projects.


So far the Pearl Harbor visit appears to have been a photo op to coincide with Veterans Day. It occurred to me that footage or photos could appear in the Netflix show but I am hoping the visit occurred too late to be included.


----------



## Chanbal

One more great article…


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> Here's a bargain of a replica


Ha ha  - not bad, it will be more in Canada but even then what a bargain!


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> So far the Pearl Harbor visit appears to have been a photo op to coincide with Veterans Day. It occurred to me that footage or photos could appear in the Netflix show but I am hoping the visit occurred too late to be included.


To be included when and where?  I was hoping this was the one and only mockudrama.   I have been told by “those who know” that things like this are cleared by those in high command, possibly by those in DC.  Doubtful a local officer would take on that kind of responsibility with a foreigner [prince Harry who?  Who’s Diana?]   Now that the photo has been blasted across the nation, we may get answers.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> If the Harkles were staying at the Hotel of the event, why the grand entrance from the outside of the hotel? People are asking this in other posts, and It's a great question imo.


Throw people off.  I certainly did not think or know they were staying at the hotel.  If they got in the car in the parking garage, then drove to the front of the hotel, then entered the event, well la dee dah, aren’t they so clever.   
Once again showing their arrogance and privilege because we must make an entrance.  Shhhh only there was no crowd  shhhh.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> To be included when and where?  I was hoping this was the one and only mockudrama.   I have been told by “those who know” that things like this are cleared by those in high command, possibly by those in DC.  Doubtful a local officer would take on that kind of responsibility with a foreigner [prince Harry who?  Who’s Diana?]   Now that the photo has been blasted across the nation, we may get answers.


The Pearl Harbor visit seemed so random. Was he invited, if so by whom?

Did he request to be given a tour? Hawaii is a long way to go for one photo. That’s why I wondered if it might be part of the Netflix show. They have to be desperate to make Harry look like he’s actually been doing something for the last two years. Let’s hope that is not the case.


----------



## Chanbal

Perez Hilton seems to love the Harkles….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if this has been posted here. Julia is great!


_Julia Hartley-Brewer takes down 'whinging and moaning' Prince Harry and Meghan Markle_​


----------



## CarryOn2020

Finally, the tough questions are asked:
WHY does Meghan always wear utterly impractical white when she’s got two toddlers, a bunch of dogs and chickens and presumably she's against dry cleaning because it's bad for dolphins or something, asks LIZ JONES​
*Duchess of Sussex wore £10,000 floor length white Louis Vuitton gown to collect 'anti-racism' award *
*Meghan has worn white at numerous formal and intimate occasions since joining the royal family in 2018*
*The California couple's bombshell documentary series drops on Netflix from tomorrow morning*



			https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11513833/LIZ-JONES-DOES-Duchess-Meghan-wear-utterly-impractical-white.html


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Finally, the tough questions are asked:
> WHY does Meghan always wear utterly impractical white when she’s got two toddlers, a bunch of dogs and chickens and presumably she's against dry cleaning because it's bad for dolphins or something, asks LIZ JONES​
> *Duchess of Sussex wore £10,000 floor length white Louis Vuitton gown to collect 'anti-racism' award *
> *Meghan has worn white at numerous formal and intimate occasions since joining the royal family in 2018*
> *The California couple's bombshell documentary series drops on Netflix from tomorrow morning*
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11513833/LIZ-JONES-DOES-Duchess-Meghan-wear-utterly-impractical-white.html


£10,000 dress, private jets… all at the expense of the BRF. One more video denouncing the Harkles' hypocrisy.


----------



## MommyDaze

csshopper said:


> If it’s customary, but not required,  then I do not think Hazbeen deserves the recognition. If’s a requirement of military personnel, then I will view it as a “suck it up buttercup even if you don’t like it”  moment, but still find it personally objectionable.
> 
> Army personnel in the UK must swear allegiance to the Queen as their Commander in Chief. I do not believe he demonstrated the proper respect to her. You want respect? Give respect. Some have gone so far as to accuse him of slander in dealings with his Grandmother.
> 
> Even though he was Captain General of the Royal Marines he failed to attend a scheduled Memorial for Marines killed in an IRA Bombing attack. Instead he chose to go to the “Lion King” premiere so he could hustle Disney CEO, Bob Iger for voice over work for TW.
> 
> He came to the US, where he has no standing, and proceeded to denigrate our Constitution, claiming the First Ammendment is “bonkers”. Stupidity is not an excuse. I don’t recall ever reading an apology.
> 
> He likes to use occasions for photo ops in an attempt to burnish his image. Previously it was he and TW tromping through an LA cemetery trailed by the photographers they’d hired. This year it was his trip to the Arizona Memorial.
> 
> And most of all, having no respect whatsoever for this whining grifter, I deeply resent his monetizing among other victims of the attack on Pearl Harbor, an ancester of mine, so he can drop in, stage himself as a caring Vet interested in WWII naval history to add  photos to his cache for future $$$$ projects.


We agree that HE was wrong and certainly undeserving. My comment was in response to saying of those service members in the picture, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.” They have done no such thing. The individual who ordered that dog and pony show (who you may be able to argue defiled the service) gave a lawful order and those service members followed it. The person (likely an Admiral) who gave the order probably wasn’t even there. That’s just how it goes when you’re in the service. I’m in year 17 of active duty and have suffered through my share of similar events.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MommyDaze said:


> We agree that HE was wrong and certainly undeserving. My comment was in response to saying of those service members in the picture, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.” They have done no such thing. The individual who ordered that dog and pony show (who you may be able to argue defiled the service) gave a lawful order and those service members followed it. The person (likely an Admiral) who gave the order probably wasn’t even there. That’s just how it goes when you’re in the service. I’m in year 17 of active duty and have suffered through my share of similar events.


To be fair, we do not know if the guys are real USA soldiers - could they be NFlop props?  They probably are our soldiers, but look closely - uniforms have some wrinkles, the one guy looks like his uniform does not fit [he appears to have a bit of a tummy], the line up looks off with the height differences.  Finally, Hazz goes to Pearl Harbor and does not wear a tie???  He did know where he was going, right?  He did know that USA soldiers were there, right?  He did know his cameras would be there.  And he does not take a tie???!!!  Imo this is bizarre.  Once again he looks like the disrespectful dimwit he is.

 Nevertheless, I agree with you - the top brass said there will be a photo, so the guys have no choice but to line up and salute.  Now that the nation is seeing this photo, I expect phones will ring, a few words exchanged, perhaps transfers given.  At the least, the decks will cleaned, a few may have to do some push-ups.  Doubt it will happen again.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LV did not do justice to MM.  The dress simply does not measure up to standards.  MM has a much better figure than _this_.


----------



## Chanbal

NOoooooooooo…..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> NOoooooooooo…..



It could go that way.  Another way is once the money runs out, once no one takes their calls, once the media truly leaves them alone, then they will be gone.  Looks like it will take the cold USA to shove them out of the spotlight.  We are skilled at sending the ‘flash-in-the-pan’ folks home.  Cruel? Maybe.  But, our world is all about _bankability_.  If no one is buying what they are selling, then it’s goodbye. 
_
The term "flash-in-the-pan" has a negative connotation, but it also accurately describes an occasional Hollywood phenomenon. Every so often, an actor becomes a big deal for a moment, only to have that moment quickly pass. This is not to say that it's their fault or that there's something inadequate about them. On the contrary, many of them are extremely talented and go on to do tons of fine work. *They just don't hold on to that elusive quality of being a bankable above-the-title star.* That this happens speaks far more to the overall difficulty of maintaining A-list status than it does to the abilities of the performers.


			https://www.ranker.com/list/underrated-movies-flash-in-the-pan-movie-stars/mike-mcgranaghank
		

_


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

People are talking


----------



## CarryOn2020

Always the lies —


Looks like KK is not playing his game:





	

		
			
		

		
	
5!


----------



## Katel

Chanbal said:


>




Thank you!





CarryOn2020 said:


> LV did not do justice to MM.  The dress simply does not measure up to standards.  MM has a much better figure than _this_.




I finally figured out what she reminds me of here - a great big sloppy potato sack!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> If the Harkles were staying at the Hotel of the event, why the grand entrance from the outside of the hotel? People are asking this in other posts, and It's a great question imo.


One possible answer, if they had walked in through an interior door, TW would have been denied her spread leg, gaping, almost full frontal, advertising her wares exit from a vehicle. Can’t put all that on display when upright.


MommyDaze said:


> We agree that HE was wrong and certainly undeserving. My comment was in response to saying of those service members in the picture, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.” They have done no such thing. The individual who ordered that dog and pony show (who you may be able to argue defiled the service) gave a lawful order and those service members followed it. The person (likely an Admiral) who gave the order probably wasn’t even there. That’s just how it goes when you’re in the service. I’m in year 17 of active duty and have suffered through my share of similar events.


Your comments are valid. I agree with you and my post was poorly stated in reference to the service personnel saluting. I apologize.

I’ve seen the Twitter conversation about sending comments to those who might have been responsible for this photo op and will share my feelings there. I noted on Twitter other families who lost loved ones in this attack, share my dismay.


----------



## CarryOn2020

MommyDaze said:


> We agree that HE was wrong and certainly undeserving. My comment was in response to saying of those service members in the picture, “Shame on you, you have defiled your Service.” They have done no such thing. The individual who ordered that dog and pony show (who you may be able to argue defiled the service) gave a lawful order and those service members followed it. The person (likely an Admiral) who gave the order probably wasn’t even there. That’s just how it goes when you’re in the service. I’m in year 17 of active duty and have suffered through my share of similar events.


Thanks so much for your service.  You make it possible for us to post our thoughts without fear of retaliation.  
Freedom, a powerful word.  A million times thank you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Katel said:


> Thank you!
> 
> View attachment 5667079
> 
> 
> 
> I finally figured out what she reminds me of here - a great big sloppy potato sack!
> 
> View attachment 5667085


Yes, we all need to voice our outrage at the US military brass for allowing this. More importantly, we need to let KCIII and William know that their failure to act and speak out against this is a sign of real weakness.  QE should have done more sooner, but she did not. It is up to KCIII and William to do speak out now. Not with a wimpy “_he does not represent us_” but with a powerful, robust rejection of these actions.  It will get worse if they do nothing. 

Recall that it began in 2020 with walking on graves, then continued in 2021 at the Freedom Gala and now this. 
 3 times and the UK royals do nothing.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, Diana’s taste in rings is not mine.  I like Camilla’s wedding ring [from the Queen Mum], 5 carat center stone.   It is a beautiful style that works well on most hands, namely mine     The sapphire, 12 carats, is tasteful and easily recognized, plus it has the historical connection to Queen Victoria. The aquamarine reflects the 90s imo — more is more. It is a 13 carat solitaire with smaller diamonds.  All are beautiful.
> 
> Hazzi could have taken one of the sapphires  from Diana’s earrings or necklace and re-purposed those into a stunning ring.  She did have quite a bit of jewelry - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewels_of_Diana,_Princess_of_Wales
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something Blue: A Royal Love Story | Garrard
> 
> 
> Discover the story behind the world’s most famous sapphire engagement ring, chosen by Princess Diana and adored the world over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> garrard.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  one of these earrings would make a lovely ring imo
> View attachment 5666999
> 
> 
> 
> ETA2:
> I do hope MM  received more pieces than just 3 or 4.  She deserves some of the nicer jewels.  Not sure Hazzi would know the nicer stuff, still she does deserve some bling.



Better, worse or equal to, Diana looked 100% herself with the Aqua, it suited her _perfectly_. 

ZZ-MegZZZ doesn't deserve anything, she rips people's lives apart and cries about it. Like putting bling on a pterodactyl (apologies to all and any pterodactyls still out there).


----------



## jblended

The BBC have a live commentary running. I guess they don't want people giving Nutflix the clicks and views, lol.
For anyone who wants to follow without watching and listening to them drone on:


			https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-63876934


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> Better, worse or equal to, Diana looked 100% herself with the Aqua, it suited her _perfectly_.
> 
> ZZ-MegZZZ doesn't deserve anything, she rips people's lives apart and cries about it. Like putting bling on a pterodactyl (apologies to all and any pterodactyls still out there).


Deserve?  Imo she does as any wife does.
She married the guy, she had his kids, she deserves for him to treat her properly.  That means proper support, financial and emotional. Jewelry always helps.

Give her share [nothing more, nothing less] and she will go away.  Try to shortchange her and she will rebel.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> The BBC have a live commentary running. I guess they don't want people giving Nutflix the clicks and views, lol.
> For anyone who wants to follow without watching and listening to them drone on:
> 
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-63876934



Oh, thank you. I cannot listen to his voice any longer - it is nails on a chalkboard screeching.

_"My mum certainly made most of her decisions, if not all of them, from her heart, and I am my mother's son."_
IMO this shows his delusional thinking or that he has bought into the media version of Diana.  
  Diana, by many accounts, was as calculating and manipulative as MM is. That is not the heart making decisions, it is her head.  Just because he says this, it  does not make it true.  Surely he knows that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I read that was bot voting…



Which would completely go with their usual MO and bot usage. I have seen maybe two positive reactions to that thing. Make of this what you will.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> (ETA: Could be that Will took the lion's share of Diana's jewelry because he knew whoever he married was going to eventually be Princess of Wales and later Queen and would get quite a bit of use out of them? Maybe Harry took just a few pieces?)



Unlikely. The Princess of Wales and future queen has access to the big guns, she doesn't need a few pieces from a private collection.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> In addition to the color, the stones seem to have slightly different cuts. It's very possible that Hazz was given another ring and not his mother's. If the family started noticing TW's demands, and started having reservations about her, they probably tried to minimize the damage. He was likely more familiar with the watch than the ring. Diana't ring is probably reserved for one of her granddaughters, including LiliB…



Who though? The Spencers? Because the BRF almost certainly just didn't care.


----------



## jblended

The BBC commentary that I linked is bringing unexpected snark, lol. From the choice of picture in the header (*_chef's kiss_*) to comments such as this (BIB):


> But James Holt, executive director of the couple's Archewell Foundation, opines: "We're in a different generation now. As new generations come through, people may start to question it [the monarchy]."
> 
> *(Bear in mind, Holt is on Harry and Meghan's payroll.)*


If this is the tone the beebs are taking, I cannot imagine how the rest of the media will rip this series apart.

Edit: Another snarky quote that I didn't see earlier:


> [The palace will] want to remind the audience that this is one version of events, and recollections may vary.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Could someone be so kind to explain the difference _leaking_ and _planting_?




As I understand it - but my command of English might be sub-par - leaking is letting out a true story and planting is making something up. And I don't believe for a minute the palace was making up stories about the Troublesome Two and released them just to spite them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, Diana’s taste in rings is not mine.  I like Camilla’s wedding ring [from the Queen Mum], 5 carat center stone.   It is a beautiful style that works well on most hands, namely mine  *The sapphire, 12 carats, is tasteful and easily recognized, plus it has the historical connection to Queen Victoria. *The aquamarine reflects the 90s imo — more is more. It is a 13 carat solitaire with smaller diamonds.  All are beautiful.



How so? It came from a jeweler's catalogue. 



CarryOn2020 said:


> ETA2:
> I do hope MM  received more pieces than just 3 or 4.  She deserves some of the nicer jewels.  Not sure Hazzi would know the nicer stuff, still she does deserve some bling.



I can't tell if you are kidding or not. She's the prime candidate for coals instead of chocolate.


----------



## CarryOn2020

One more example of their hypocrisy — gotta get the $$$.  
@QueenofWrapDress  thank you for the explanation.  It makes sense.  A leaked story is true, but a planted story is false.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> I'm continually surprised at how poorly she dresses.  This was allegedly a bespoke creation but how is that possible with it fitting so poorly?  It was too short, the detailing at the waist was unflattering, the top band obscured her torso, the slit was weird and created almost a ruffle effect when she walked, the sleeves were too long and too loose---it was a disaster.  Off-the-shoulder usually works for her but even the neckline was off.



Did y'all notice how she had to hold it up while sitting? Geez.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more example of their hypocrisy — gotta get the $$$.
> @QueenofWrapDress  thank you for the explanation.  It makes sense.  A leaked story is true, but a planted story is false.



I thought the same.  After making such unnecessary fuss, they’re now playing the kid card because they’re being paid for it.  Yuk.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> How so? It came from a jeweler's catalogue.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't tell if you are kidding or not. She's the prime candidate for coals instead of chocolate.


Follow the Garrard link:
_The iconic sapphire cluster design can be traced back to 1840 and the making of a brooch for a royal wedding, as Claire explains. “Prince Albert commissioned a gorgeous sapphire and diamond cluster brooch to present to Queen Victoria as a wedding gift. The Queen wore it pinned to her dress on the day, as her ‘something blue’.” If you have watched the ITV drama Victoria, you may have spotted a replica of the brooch, worn by actress Jenna Coleman in her role as the Queen. The original was a favourite with Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II._

Based on the ‘cluster’ brooch, they came up with the ‘cluster’ ring design, right?








						Something Blue: A Royal Love Story | Garrard
					

Discover the story behind the world’s most famous sapphire engagement ring, chosen by Princess Diana and adored the world over.




					garrard.com
				




No, I am not kidding. I do believe royal women [as do all women] deserve proper treatment.  The BRF has plenty of wealth. They can afford to be generous, especially after their stinginess to Diana and Fergie.  I have always thought the BRF looked like small-minded people by not being generous to those ladies.  Now, take Peter, Anne’s son. He seems to have treated his wife kindly and generously.  Good on him.


----------



## jblended

I will not keep doing this, I promise... but this one sticks out:



> "But what people need to understand is, as far as a lot of the family were concerned, everything that she was being put through, they had been put through as well.
> 
> "So it was almost like a rite of passage, and some of the members of the family were like, 'my wife had to go through that, so why should your girlfriend be treated any differently? Why should you get special treatment? Why should she be protected?'"
> 
> Harry adds: "I said 'the difference here is the race element'."


Essentially, the BRF said: There is an interest in all of the women we marry at the start. She is not being targeted any differently than other members of the family. Just put your heads down, do good work and it will all blow over.
Harry interpreted this as: We will not protect Megz. Why should she get special treatment?

Recollections may vary, indeed. Straight from the horse's mouth. Harry, you're really dumb.


----------



## Pessie

Oh boy, lets watch 2 of the most privileged people on the planet complain about how it’s ruined their lives


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Always the lies —




I'm slightly confused. Am I the only one who thought he was trying to make an unfunny joke? He obviously couldn't have thought he was just going on a date, then someone whisked them away from their pizzeria table.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deserve?  Imo she does as any wife does.
> She married the guy, she had his kids, she deserves for him to treat her properly.  That means proper support, financial and emotional. Jewelry always helps.
> 
> Give her share [nothing more, nothing less] and she will go away.  Try to shortchange her and she will rebel.



Well, but it doesn't necessarily have to be family jewelry for someone who obviously doesn't give a sh*t about said family.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Am I the only one who thought he was trying to make an unfunny joke?


He was obviously joking and trying to build rapport with the crowd, as you say. People are just misunderstanding it (seemingly on purpose) to fuel more anger in their followers and get likes/retweets.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more example of their hypocrisy — gotta get the $$$.
> @QueenofWrapDress  thank you for the explanation.  It makes sense.  A leaked story is true, but a planted story is false.




Oh wow. What happened to "But the kids are PriVatE ciTizEnS?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Follow the Garrard link:
> _The iconic sapphire cluster design can be traced back to 1840 and the making of a brooch for a royal wedding, as Claire explains. “Prince Albert commissioned a gorgeous sapphire and diamond cluster brooch to present to Queen Victoria as a wedding gift. The Queen wore it pinned to her dress on the day, as her ‘something blue’.” If you have watched the ITV drama Victoria, you may have spotted a replica of the brooch, worn by actress Jenna Coleman in her role as the Queen. The original was a favourite with Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II._
> 
> Based on the ‘cluster’ brooch, they came up with the ‘cluster’ ring design, right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Something Blue: A Royal Love Story | Garrard
> 
> 
> Discover the story behind the world’s most famous sapphire engagement ring, chosen by Princess Diana and adored the world over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> garrard.com



Ah yes. I remember reading about it on Instagram (I follow British Royal Jewels). Can't produce from the top of my head who owns it now, might not have been The Queen as Victoria had lots of children.



CarryOn2020 said:


> No, I am not kidding. I do believe royal women [as do all women] deserve proper treatment.



Yeah, if they show proper behaviour, which Ghoul hasn't done ever since she clawed Harry. She's as unroyal as they come.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm slightly confused. Am I the only one who thought he was trying to make an unfunny joke? He obviously couldn't have thought he was just going on a date, then someone whisked them away from their pizzeria table.


It sounded too rehearsed and hackneyed imo.  Surely someone could have written a better script. His snarky “you’re welcome” to MM’s thank you was out of line imo.

ETA:  also they accepted the invite in March. Everyone was well aware of what was happening and when.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> It sounded too rehearsed and hackneyed imo.  Surely someone could have written a better script. His snarky “you’re welcome” to MM’s thank you was out of line imo.



I'm starting to worry about you. What happened that Ghoul is suddendly dear to your heart?


----------



## Sharont2305

Lots of the kids so far, including M holding Archie by a photo of Diana "who's that? That's Grandma Diana."


----------



## duna

CarryOn2020 said:


> This unhealthy fixation on deceased parents,



I'm catching up on over 10 pages since yesterday, so maybe someone has already commented on this. Kerry Kennedy is 63 yearsold (I Googled her) so wearing such a short dress is just RIDICULOUS.... Although I guess "ridiculous" is the leitmotif of the whole event!


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Lots of the kids so far, including M holding Archie by a photo of Diana "who's that? That's Grandma Diana."


Ah, "Grandma Diana" was version 3 of Archie's first words, right? After crocodile and something else.

Maybe they will claim that the baby girl is Diana reborn.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ah yes. I remember reading about it on Instagram (I follow British Royal Jewels). Can't produce from the top of my head who owns it now, might not have been The Queen as Victoria had lots of children.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, if they show proper behaviour, which Ghoul hasn't done ever since she clawed Harry. She's as unroyal as they come.


Imo she _clawed_ him because he wanted/needed to be _clawed_.  Two gorgeous ladies had rejected him. MM is not _dear to my heart. _I did not like her on suits and never thought the marriage would be allowed.  The parallels to Wallis&Ed caused me to be concerned that she would always be The American, never quite fit in. And look what happened.  She handled it all poorly which is mostly due to him. He behaves as an egotistical jerk [probably because he is].  Although she is no saint, I really do dislike the arrogance of the privileged BRF and she really did deserve better imo.  So, yes,  take the jewels, get some money, and get on with your life, chérie.  The guy is a complainer and mean-spirited person.  My 2 cents.

ETA:  As I see it, a lot of this drama happens because these mothers demand that their daughters marry $$$$.  They are only out for the money and, maybe, a step up in society.  Doria and KrisK seem to be very much alike in their goals for the daughters.  Imo they set their daughters up for unhappiness, probably because they themselves are so unhappy [but I’m not a counselor].


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although she is no saint, I really do dislike the arrogance of the privileged BRF and *she really did deserve better imo.  *So, yes,  take the jewels, get some money, and get on with your life, chérie.  The guy is a complainer and mean-spirited person.  My 2 cents.



We'll have to agree to disagree. This woman is a nasty user who walks over corpses to reach her goals. All she deserves is a hefty chinwag from Karma...with a baseball bat.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I can’t.  This is lowering our IQ. How dumb do they think we are 




QueenofWrapDress said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree. This woman is a nasty user who walks over corpses to reach her goals. All she deserves is a hefty chinwag from Karma...with a baseball bat.


I do agree she is a user, but so are the BRF imo.  I do believe Karma is coming for both of them.
ETA:  
So is GKing, OW, and all the others. Imo.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




This is so sad to me. Who in their right mind alienates his whole family out of jealousy.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


>




Oh wow. He is so da*n rude.

Also, explain to me as if I was five years old how Camilla fit the mold. Charles could have spared himself a lot of public outrage had he given her up.

ETA: also, the original love story is The Queen and Philip. She fought for him. Please take several seats spineless Harry.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also, what's his deal with attacking Kate? The woman who had a major soft spot for him and who he said was like a sister to him? Shame on you, Harry.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This is so sad to me. Who in their right mind alienates his whole family out of jealousy.


A dimwit.  Seriously, I am not being mean. Others have said it, too.  He seems to be mentally challenged.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aaand my favourite


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, what's his deal with attacking Kate? The woman who had a major soft spot for him and who he said was like a sister to him? Shame on you, Harry.


As I hear these comments now, I believe he was coached on what to say and when to say it.  I doubt if he ever actually believed what he was saying.  The hate he spews about his family now sounds like his real and authentic voice.  We heard it at the award show with his snarky “you’re welcome” to his wife.  Something about his tone is jarring imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

I’d like an answer to this question, too


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deserve?  Imo she does as any wife does.
> She married the guy, she had his kids, she deserves for him to treat her properly.  That means proper support, financial and emotional. Jewelry always helps.
> 
> Give her share [nothing more, nothing less] and she will go away.  Try to shortchange her and she will rebel.



She's been married for 4 years not 4 decades. 

She married him at my and the UK tax-payer's expense £32M. She said the wedding was for us. She lied, saying it wasn't the real wedding. _One_ of her dresses alone was almost £400K, not from a British House so not promoting British industry, she had two dresses. Hello magazine were calling the MOST expensive wedding ever and valued the entire event at £72M. 

She was given a job, her über-luxe lifestyle paid for, she still complained she wanted to be paid in cash (Bower). 

She was given millions of pounds worth of clothes overall but she still wanted to merch. In just 2 (2018-20) years she took almost 1M from the Duchy of Cornwall for clothes alone (DM) not including any bridal. 

She was given a place to live on a Royal estate. It wasn't good enough for her, she wanted a palace or at least a castle.

That she had his kids is debatable (and is debated)

I would never expect my partner to pay for my jewellery beyond an e-ring (actually we went halves so I could have the one I wanted). MegZZ is supposed to be a feminist, and unlike her sister not disabled. She works, gets paid millions, she can buy her own jewellery as I buy mine. 

Her Di jewellery/outfit cos-play is part of her/his narrative as the real people's princess and Queen of 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 a very unhealthy obsession. Not all DIL get their MIL's jewellery. If her wants to give it to her fine, but he does NOT owe it/them to her nor have to treat her like a trophy wife (perhaps MegZZ could explore TW on her next round of podcrashes?).

She easily earns as much as Harry, what has she bought for him lately?


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> As I hear these comments now, I believe he was coached on what to say and when to say it.  I doubt if he ever actually believed what he was saying.  The hate he spews about his family now sounds like his real and authentic voice.  We heard it at the award show with his snarky “you’re welcome” to his wife.  Something about his tone is jarring imo.




It's also interesting how quickly he's become Americanised: E.g. We don't (UK) have 'date night', as in "would you like to go on a date with me?" we (UK) 'go out', as in "Would you like to go out with me?".


----------



## needlv

They rehearsed and wanted scripts.  Nothing is spontaneous.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I can’t.  This is lowering our IQ. How dumb do they think we are
> 
> 
> 
> I do agree she is a user, but so are the BRF imo.  I do believe Karma is coming for both of them.
> ETA:
> So is GKing, OW, and all the others. Imo.



Very distracted by this pic of her. I think any real hair she has left must be just scruff.


----------



## Pessie

I understand why Meghan was spooked at the level of interest in her in the beginning.  It must’ve been like Saurons eye was suddenly shining a bright light on her (significantly dodgy) personal history, and I bet she was worried Harry would skedaddle or the RF would say NO, before she could get the ring on her finger. 
With hindsight the RF should’ve let the press expose her for the fraud she is.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> I understand why Meghan was spooked at the level of interest in her in the beginning.  It must’ve been like Saurons eye was suddenly shining a bright light on her (significantly dodgy) personal history, and I bet she was worried Harry would skedaddle or the RF would say NO, before she could get the ring on her finger.
> With hindsight the RF should’ve let the press expose her for the fraud she is.


That certainly would have thrown a spanner in the works if she let the lottery prize slip out of her hands.

Can't help but roll my eyes: if Sparry considers the BRF women to fit in a mould, he didn't do any better by marrying a mouldy woman. I certainly agree that Zed is different, but not in a good way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> As I hear these comments now, I believe he was coached on what to say and when to say it.  I doubt if he ever actually believed what he was saying.  The hate he spews about his family now sounds like his real and authentic voice.  We heard it at the award show with his snarky “you’re welcome” to his wife.  Something about his tone is jarring imo.



Maybe, but there's tons of pap pics of the two of them seeming close and having fun. We know Harry is not that great of an actor and has no problem whatsoever sulking in public.


----------



## jblended

CarryOn2020 said:


> Although she is no saint, I really do dislike the arrogance of the privileged BRF and she really did deserve better imo.


I actually agree with you that she deserved better.
She really did think the BRF was Hollywood in the UK. She was swept up in marrying a real life Prince and didn't do due diligence. She couldn't have imagined the daily grind, the humble engagements, the formality at every occasion including family dinners, the bowing to your own grandmother... it must have hit her hard.
She thought, like in Hollywood, you buy good PR and your publicist controls your image. She couldn't understand a press officer saying to her, nope, we don't respond to tabloid gossip even if it is untrue, we are above that, we are royal. What a shock that must have been.
She must have also noticed she was messing up along the way- wrong clothing, walking ahead of him, getting in the car before HMQ or some other protocol she hadn't mastered. I imagine it frustrated her, but also frustrated the aides who tried to teach her and quickly found out she was so out of her depth.
What a massive culture shock it must have been; sincerely!

But, she did it to herself. Harry tried to keep the relationship secret to give her time to fly under the radar, witness royal life and see what the day-to-day was like before committing. She should have taken the time to learn all that she needed to. She's the one who leaked their relationship to the press because she had bagged him and wanted it all formalized before he had a chance to change his mind.
It was a whirlwind and they were married in a blink of an eye. She could have spent a couple of years observing, learning, but instead she wanted to lock him down.
Now she blames them for "not protecting" her, when they did and they kept trying to. She got privileges that other girlfriends didn't. She's just so busy focusing on feeling out of place that she didn't understand that the palace was protecting her, they were right to ignore the haters and she would have been adored again if she just hung in there and focused on her duties and learning the protocols so that her mistakes weren't repeated.
Instead, she ran away and blamed it on racism. That is surely far easier to her than admitting she jumped into the deep end of her fairytale and couldn't bring herself to say, "I need someone to teach me protocol because I'm overwhelmed". It was more beneficial (to her image and ego) to say, "I asked for help but the men in grey suits wanted to lock me up without my passport, so I asserted my independence because 'I am a strong woman: hear me roar'".
The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the rigidity of the institution.

Harry is doing the same thing. On the subject of his horrific choice of party costume in 2005, he said:


> "In this family, sometimes you are part of the problem rather than part of the solution. There is a huge level of unconscious bias.


No mention of his other racist remarks in this documentary, as far as I can tell. Just the one costume incident.
Instead of acknowledging his horrendous choice of outfit, he washed his hands of it and said it's a family issue, suggesting everyone is racist and shares his unconscious bias.
Even if we looked at it as a systemic problem, he should have known better. He's of the "woke" generation. He cannot plead ignorance, a sheltered life (because he has seen every country and every race), nor unconscious bias for his choice to wear that costume nor his choice to use a racial slur!
He also cannot pull others into his missteps. No other member of the royal family (of his generation*) has ever been reported to have made racist comments like that, to my knowledge. Why implicate others in your doing?
Side note: *PP had his own problematic views but those were reported on just as Harry's missteps were, so he is not being picked on due to his choice of wife as he would like us to believe.

Again, it is "The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the unconscious biases of the institution."

Both of them need to grow up and stop blaming the world for their own choices and mistakes. They needed more support at the start and they deserved that. Meg clearly didn't want to understand the difference between the BRF and the Oscars, but the palace should have stepped up and fixed that. Someone should have pulled her out of the public eye and trained her until she could manage better (not stick her tongue out, for example).  They (H&M) also need to own up to their own failings in how they've managed it and stop saying everyone else drove them out and they had to act to protect their family. If you were protecting your family, you wouldn't have thrown the members on both sides under the bus for money. Or is "family" a term that is used for convenience, like "racism"?

I am truly fed up of their perpetual victimhood. Whatever they seek to "correct" in the British attitude will not be corrected by these means. They have done nothing but feed the media monster and create division at a time when our politicians have already failed us. Instead of making an impact and using their foundation to address the cost of living crisis or homelessness crisis, they are using their platform to virtue signal and justify their mistakes. We get it, you were unhappy and the whole world didn't adore you. You have been seen (Oprah, Netflix, the books), you have been heard (podcast), you have been awarded (ripple and people's choice). Brava! Now, can we move away from the bread and circuses?

Phew! Sorry for the length of this reply. I'll see myself out.

Edited for clarity.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I would never expect my partner to pay for my jewellery beyond an e-ring (actually we went halves so I could have the one I wanted).



I would   I can buy my own jewelry alright, but it's just not romantic. Just pick something from my existing wishlist with tons of notes which details I want changed because someone is, uh, particular


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. Not saying he needs to buy ALL my jewelry, just that I _appreciate _gifts of bling


----------



## DoggieBags

jblended said:


> I actually agree with you that she deserved better.
> She really did think the BRF was Hollywood in the UK. She was swept up in marrying a real life Prince and didn't do due diligence. She couldn't have imagined the daily grind, the humble engagements, the formality at every occasion including family dinners, the bowing to your own grandmother... it must have hit her hard.
> She thought, like in Hollywood, you buy good PR and your publicist controls your image. She couldn't understand a press officer saying to her, nope, we don't respond to tabloid gossip even if it is untrue, we are above that, we are royal. What a shock that must have been.
> She must have also noticed she was messing up along the way- wrong clothing, walking ahead of him, getting in the car before HMQ or some other protocol she hadn't mastered. I imagine it frustrated her, but also frustrated the aides who tried to teach her and quickly found out she was so out of her depth.
> What a massive culture shock it must have been; sincerely!
> 
> But, she did it to herself. Harry tried to keep the relationship secret to give her time to fly under the radar, witness royal life and see what the day-to-day was like before committing. She should have taken the time to learn all that she needed to. She's the one who leaked their relationship to the press because she had bagged him and wanted it all formalized before he had a chance to change his mind.
> It was a whirlwind and they were married in a blink of an eye. She could have spent a couple of years observing, learning, but instead she wanted to lock him down.
> Now she blames them for "not protecting" her, when they did and they kept trying to. She got privileges that other girlfriends didn't. She's just so busy focusing on feeling out of place that she didn't understand that the palace was protecting her, they were right to ignore the haters and she would have been adored again if she just hung in there and focused on her duties and learning the protocols so that her mistakes weren't repeated.
> Instead, she ran away and blamed it on racism. That is surely far easier to her than admitting she jumped into the deep end of her fairytale and couldn't bring herself to say, "I need someone to teach me protocol because I'm overwhelmed". It was more beneficial (to her image and ego) to say, "I asked for help but the men in grey suits wanted to lock me up without my passport, so I asserted my independence because 'I am a strong woman: hear me roar'".
> The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the rigidity of the institution.
> 
> Harry is doing the same thing. On the subject of his horrific choice of party costume in 2005, he said:
> 
> No mention of his other racist remarks in this documentary, as far as I can tell. Just the one costume incident.
> Instead of acknowledging his horrendous choice of outfit, he washed his hands of it and said it's a family issue, suggesting everyone is racist and shares his unconscious bias.
> Even if we looked at it as a systemic problem, he should have known better. He's of the "woke" generation. He cannot plead ignorance, a sheltered life (because he has seen every country and every race), nor unconscious bias for his choice to wear that costume nor his choice to use a racial slur!
> He also cannot pull others into his missteps. No other member of the royal family (of his generation*) has ever been reported to have made racist comments like that, to my knowledge. Why implicate others in your doing?
> Side note: *PP had his own problematic views but those were reported on just as Harry's missteps were, so he is not being picked on due to his choice of wife as he would like us to believe.
> 
> Again, it is "The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the unconscious biases of the institution."
> 
> Both of them need to grow up and stop blaming the world for their own choices and mistakes. They needed more support at the start and they deserved that. Meg clearly didn't want to understand the difference between the BRF and the Oscars, but the palace should have stepped up and fixed that. Someone should have pulled her out of the public eye and trained her until she could manage better (not stick her tongue out, for example).  They (H&M) also need to own up to their own failings in how they've managed it and stop saying everyone else drove them out and they had to act to protect their family. If you were protecting your family, you wouldn't have thrown the members on both sides under the bus for money. Or is "family" a term that is used for convenience, like "racism"?
> 
> I am truly fed up of their perpetual victimhood. Whatever they seek to "correct" in the British attitude will not be corrected by these means. They have done nothing but feed the media monster and create division at a time when our politicians have already failed us. Instead of making an impact and using their foundation to address the cost of living crisis or homelessness crisis, they are using their platform to virtue signal and justify their mistakes. We get it, you were unhappy and the whole world didn't adore you. You have been seen (Oprah, Netflix, the books), you have been heard (podcast), you have been awarded (ripple and people's choice). Brava! Now, can we move away from the bread and circuses?
> 
> Phew! Sorry for the length of this reply. I'll see myself out.
> 
> Edited for clarity.


Agree with much of what you said. However, one of the main problems was that Meghan is not coachable. When you are told to wear a hat for your first outing with The Queen and you choose to show up hatless, that says it all. Such a simple rule, wear a hat when out on an official engagement with The Queen, and she couldn’t even follow that one simple directive. She wanted the money and the privilege with none of the duties and restrictions. And when she didn’t get exactly what she wanted when she wanted it, she left and has been trying to burn the palaces down behind her ever since. She’s behaving just like a spoiled, petulant child saying if I can’t have it then no one else can have it either.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

The BBC live reporting is really trolling them.
Some of my favourite quips:


> For a close-up portrait, we don't hear much about Meghan's first husband.





> How did Meghan, a champion of equality, feel about a title like 'Duchess'?





> It's a reminder that this is the couple's view of the world, a love letter to themselves,





> "That's what I was excited about. I wasn't trying to find the great indie film that's going to get me an Oscar. No, I just wanted to go and volunteer."
> 
> (In our experience, actors who bring up how little they care about winning Oscars tend to really, really care about winning Oscars, so take this with a pinch of salt.)





> The implication is that Meghan had a beautiful life before everything exploded.
> 
> "Meghan had a beautiful life before everything exploded," a friend of hers says in the next frame, in case we missed it.


(link; same one posted earlier)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

"There is no version of me joining this family and trying to not do everything I could to fit in. I don’t want to embarrass the family."

B*tch, please.


----------



## gelbergirl

Is the Netflix "documentary" out now, or is there a specific time?
(I'm not a subscriber, so not sure how this works)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Is the Netflix "documentary" out now, or is there a specific time?
> (I'm not a subscriber, so not sure how this works)



Apparently the first three episodes are. I'm just looking at the BBC commentary because just no.


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> As I hear these comments now, I believe he was coached on what to say and when to say it.  I doubt if he ever actually believed what he was saying.  The hate he spews about his family now sounds like his real and authentic voice.  We heard it at the award show with his snarky “you’re welcome” to his wife.  Something about his tone is jarring imo.



I don’t think he was coached.  When they were younger there wasn’t much difference between William and Harrys lives.  But (particularly in recent years) the difference in the direction of their lives has become stark.  He always “knew” William was destined to be king, but now he’s really seeing it unfold.  
He now knows that no one really cared who he married because the succession is secured, and its dawned on him (belatedly) that he’s not important as he once was.  He thought he was vital to the monarchy and that the RF would have to beg him to come back from the US - but they don’t need him, and we’ve all seen that play out.  
He’s deeply unpopular now in the uk, which must be devastating for him.  He’s lost his money, lost his rank, lost his military connections, everything - even his hair! (he’s on record as teasing William relentlessly about losing his hair).  He’s now the one on the second row, or waiting in the other room, for the first rank royals to do whatever….  Or he’s no longer invited at all.  And he’s eaten up with jealousy and bitterness about the whole thing.
A more intelligent or perceptive man would’ve  avoided some of this, planned for the rest, and led a happy, privileged and fulfilled life.  But Harry isn’t an intelligent or perceptive man.


----------



## pomeline

Pessie said:


> I don’t think he was coached.  *When they were younger there wasn’t much difference between William and Harrys lives.  But (particularly in recent years) the difference in the direction of their lives has become stark. * He always “knew” William was destined to be king, but now he’s really seeing it unfold.
> He now knows that no one really cared who he married because the succession is secured, and its dawned on him (belatedly) that he’s not important as he once was.  He thought he was vital to the monarchy and that the RF would have to beg him to come back from the US - but they don’t need him, and we’ve all seen that play out.
> He’s deeply unpopular now in the uk, which must be devastating for him.  He’s lost his money, lost his rank, lost his military connections, everything - even his hair! (he’s on record as teasing William relentlessly about losing his hair).  He’s now the one on the second row, or waiting in the other room, for the first rank royals to do whatever….  Or he’s no longer invited at all.  And he’s eaten up with jealousy and bitterness about the whole thing.
> A more intelligent or perceptive man would’ve  avoided some of this, planned for the rest, and led a happy, privileged and fulfilled life.  But Harry isn’t an intelligent or perceptive man.



Actually there was a difference. Lady C talks about it in her book but I'm sure it's been talked about elsewhere too (still haven't read Tom Bower's book, it's still waiting). William was raised very differently since he, like you said, was the heir to the throne. Diana also related to him differently than to Harry. William never got to skip classes to spend the day at home with mummy eating junk food and watching movies like Harry. He says it himself, the most important thing his mother taught him was to have fun, that having fun was the most important thing in the world. He had it easy. Now he's whining because he can't be king but he never even wanted to prepare to be one.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> I don’t think he was coached.  When they were younger there wasn’t much difference between William and Harrys lives.  But (particularly in recent years) the difference in the direction of their lives has become stark.  He always “knew” William was destined to be king, but now he’s really seeing it unfold.
> He now knows that no one really cared who he married because the succession is secured, and its dawned on him (belatedly) that he’s not important as he once was.  He thought he was vital to the monarchy and that the RF would have to beg him to come back from the US - but they don’t need him, and we’ve all seen that play out.
> He’s deeply unpopular now in the uk, which must be devastating for him.  He’s lost his money, lost his rank, lost his military connections, everything - even his hair! (he’s on record as teasing William relentlessly about losing his hair).  He’s now the one on the second row, or waiting in the other room, for the first rank royals to do whatever….  Or he’s no longer invited at all.  And he’s eaten up with jealousy and bitterness about the whole thing.
> A more intelligent or perceptive man would’ve  avoided some of this, planned for the rest, and led a happy, privileged and fulfilled life.  *But Harry isn’t an intelligent or perceptive man.*


*But Harry isn’t an intelligent or perceptive man.*

Well said.  Coached or not, he knew the correct lines to say.  Based on this mockudrama, especially the Halloween party, any intelligent or perceptive man/woman would not their antics on film.  Too late. She has been filming this for 5/6 years. She has plenty of dirt on all of them.  Her excuse will be she was only acting.  Hazz, Eug, Jack, and someone in partial black face are left with the embarrassment.  Good luck to them.


papertiger said:


> She's been married for 4 years not 4 decades.
> 
> She married him at my and the UK tax-payer's expense £32M. She said the wedding was for us. She lied, saying it wasn't the real wedding. _One_ of her dresses alone was almost £400K, not from a British House so not promoting British industry, she had two dresses. Hello magazine were calling the MOST expensive wedding ever and valued the entire event at £72M.
> 
> She was given a job, her über-luxe lifestyle paid for, she still complained she wanted to be paid in cash (Bower).
> 
> She was given millions of pounds worth of clothes overall but she still wanted to merch. In just 2 (2018-20) years she took almost 1M from the Duchy of Cornwall for clothes alone (DM) not including any bridal.
> 
> She was given a place to live on a Royal estate. It wasn't good enough for her, she wanted a palace or at least a castle.
> 
> That she had his kids is debatable (and is debated)
> 
> I would never expect my partner to pay for my jewellery beyond an e-ring (actually we went halves so I could have the one I wanted). MegZZ is supposed to be a feminist, and unlike her sister not disabled. She works, gets paid millions, she can buy her own jewellery as I buy mine.
> 
> Her Di jewellery/outfit cos-play is part of her/his narrative as the real people's princess and Queen of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a very unhealthy obsession. Not all DIL get their MIL's jewellery. If her wants to give it to her fine, but he does NOT owe it/them to her nor have to treat her like a trophy wife (perhaps MegZZ could explore TW on her next round of podcrashes?).
> 
> She easily earns as much as Harry, what has she bought for him lately?


Nothing was ever going to be good enough for her.  She is immature enough to think the money would always be given freely to them. I have only seen clips that the DM has posted and have read the BBC posts.  My point is if they want to get rid of her [and they should want her gone], they need to give her a few (meaningless to them) baubles and cash.  She has a price.  People like her always do.


----------



## pomeline

I can't bring myself to watch even clips of that turd of a show, I even struggle with the articles. Anyone else feel the same? I can't believe Meghan's lies. Was she raised in a barn?! I'm not royal but even I would have known even as a teen how to curtsy, how to use cutlery at a dinner table (I've even been mocked by some that I eat in a "continental style" which is funny), in general how to behave in a proper way and how to dress in a stylish but not too extravagant way. Was I raised to be a trophy wife or is she just incredibly common...? Or maybe that's not the right word. It's like she and Harry have an equally low I.Q. Well, that explains why on one of her official outings she was holding thick, leather gloves when it was a relatively hot day (the image has burned into my eyes)... Did she expect the queen and DoE to meet her wearing sweatpants? Hugs..? I'm from a fairly warm-hearted family and we don't always hug. Especially not when we meet someone for the first time.

Please, KCIII, step on it and have a new law prepared, the kind where it is possible to strip hereditary titles from people who were born with them. Sussex dukedom? Take it off. Harry's princely title? I don't care if he was born with it, he has chosen Maybelline. Take it off and make him a regular Mr. Windsor. Even that is too good for him as he shouldn't be allowed to use either name, Windsor or Mountbatten.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> *But Harry isn’t an intelligent or perceptive man.*
> 
> Well said.  Coached or not, he knew the correct lines to say.  Based on this mockudrama, especially the Halloween party, any intelligent or perceptive man/woman would not their antics on film.  Too late. She has been filming this for 5/6 years. She has plenty of dirt on all of them.  Her excuse will be she was only acting.  Hazz, Eug, Jack, and someone in partial black face are left with the embarrassment.  Good luck to them.
> 
> Nothing was ever going to be good enough for her.  She is immature enough to think the money would always be given freely to them. I have only seen clips that the DM has posted and have read the BBC posts.  My point is if they want to get rid of her [and they should want her gone], they need to give her a few (meaningless to them) baubles and cash.  She has a price.  People like her always do.



My point too: Their 'glass and beads' are meaningless for/to her, they belong to the Crown, the people of the UK.Di's baubles - I don't care. 

Let her keep something deep and meaningful that she (and he) paid for, like the kids.


----------



## DoggieBags

pomeline said:


> Actually there was a difference. Lady C talks about it in her book but I'm sure it's been talked about elsewhere too (still haven't read Tom Bower's book, it's still waiting). William was raised very differently since he, like you said, was the heir to the throne. Diana also related to him differently than to Harry. William never got to skip classes to spend the day at home with mummy eating junk food and watching movies like Harry. He says it himself, the most important thing his mother taught him was to have fun, that having fun was the most important thing in the world. He had it easy. Now he's whining because he can't be king but he never even wanted to prepare to be one.


There are definitely differences in how William and Harry were treated growing up. William’s training as the future monarch would not have been something Harry would have been subjected to. While William was at Eton, The Queen invited him to have weekly Sunday lunches with her at Windsor where she talked to him about the Monarchy, the duties of the Monarch, and other issues he would have to know as a future king. I don’t think Harry was invited to weekly lunches with The Queen while he was at Eton.








						William in a ‘fragile place’ until Queen came to rescue with 1-on-1
					

PRINCE WILLIAM is said to have been in a "fragile place" as a young boy, before Queen Elizabeth II stepped in with a crucial intervention.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

gelbergirl said:


> Is the Netflix "documentary" out now, or is there a specific time?
> (I'm not a subscriber, so not sure how this works)


Photos and clips on the Daily Mail are plenty for me.  Eug surely has no way back after the Halloween photos. [on the DM]. They all look and act like desperate,  deranged idiots [I could say worse, but won’t].  This must be embarrassing to the BRF.  I do see similarities to the Monaco royals back in the day when they partied to excess. Still, this was not the impression of a dedicated family  QE skillfully built.  So sad.


----------



## pomeline

What's this talk about their engagement being an 'orchestrated reality show' engagement? What did they expect? An informal barbeque with live streaming...? I really have to wonder how Harry has been able to float through his life without any sort of understanding on what is going on around him. He's lived as a royal all his life, yet knows nothing about protocol or anything. Of course you'd have a rehearsed announcement and interview! Duh... 

And this cringefest of a photo...






Their stories change so fast no-one has time for that. I thought he was supposed to have proposed to her in the kitchen when she was making her famous non-vegan roast chicken? How many times did he propose to her? And that setting, roses, electric candles  (hey, where were the balloons?)  etc. was not orchestrated...? Ok then...


----------



## Pessie

DoggieBags said:


> There are definitely differences in how William and Harry were treated growing up. William’s training as the future monarch would not have been something Harry would have been subjected to. While William was at Eton, The Queen invited him to have weekly Sunday lunches with her at Windsor where she talked to him about the Monarchy, the duties of the Monarch, and other issues he would have to know as a future king. I don’t think Harry was invited to weekly lunches with The Queen while he was at Eton.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> William in a ‘fragile place’ until Queen came to rescue with 1-on-1
> 
> 
> PRINCE WILLIAM is said to have been in a "fragile place" as a young boy, before Queen Elizabeth II stepped in with a crucial intervention.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


True, but Harry was always on the front row with Will and Charles.  A senior royal.  That’s what I meant.


----------



## Pessie

pomeline said:


> What's this talk about their engagement being an 'orchestrated reality show' engagement? What did they expect? An informal barbeque with live streaming...? I really have to wonder how Harry has been able to float through his life without any sort of understanding on what is going on around him. He's lived as a royal all his life, yet knows nothing about protocol or anything. Of course you'd have a rehearsed announcement and interview! Duh...
> 
> And this cringefest of a photo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their stories change so fast no-one has time for that. I thought he was supposed to have proposed to her in the kitchen when she was making her famous non-vegan roast chicken? How many times did he propose to her? And that setting, roses, electric candles  (hey, where were the balloons?)  etc. was not orchestrated...? Ok then...


Ugh.  So disingenuous, they could’ve skipped the interview, skipped the big wedding.  Had a private wedding.  Their choice, their responsibility (and our money lol).
If they carry on this vein, they’re toast in the UK.


----------



## DoggieBags

Pessie said:


> Ugh.  So disingenuous, they could’ve skipped the interview, skipped the big wedding.  Had a private wedding.  Their choice, their responsibility (and our money lol).
> If they carry on this vein, they’re toast in the UK.


I thought they were already toast in the UK after the Oprah interview and how they treated Prince Philip and The Queen during their final illnesses. This doesn’t help of course but I didn’t think there was any way back even for H before Netflix.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> What's this talk about their engagement being an 'orchestrated reality show' engagement? What did they expect? An informal barbeque with live streaming...? I really have to wonder how Harry has been able to float through his life without any sort of understanding on what is going on around him. He's lived as a royal all his life, yet knows nothing about protocol or anything. Of course you'd have a rehearsed announcement and interview! Duh...
> 
> And this cringefest of a photo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their stories change so fast no-one has time for that. I thought he was supposed to have proposed to her in the kitchen when she was making her famous non-vegan roast chicken? How many times did he propose to her? And that setting, roses, electric candles  (hey, where were the balloons?)  etc. was not orchestrated...? Ok then...



Getting strong Kardashian vibes, only at a much lower level than the K’s do.


----------



## Helventara

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, what's his deal with attacking Kate? The woman who had a major soft spot for him and who he said was like a sister to him? Shame on you, Harry.


Agreed. If there’s anything I cannot stand in this saga, and there are lots, is why H willingly becomes an accomplice in the attacks on Kate?  They always looked like the were having fun together. They showed lots of affection towards one another. The sister he never had. 
And now, H makes snide remarks about her just to satisfy the witch?  Such betrayal. What an idiot.


----------



## jblended

Pessie said:


> *If they carry on this vein,* they’re toast in the UK.


I think they're already toast. It didn't matter what they said in this mockumentary. The very fact that they produced it was enough. It fueled enough negative sentiment and headlines to ruin their brand, especially following on from the Oprah interview.
People are still adjusting to HMQ's passing, and KC3's reign has started with a bang as he mixes with his peoples, so nobody wants to hear about Harry's hurt feelings. Everyone is watching a son stab his aged father in the back, following his grandparents' passing. I don't think the bad will he has generated will ease with the passage of time.

@Helventara totally agree with your post about Catherine. You can see their friendship was genuine in those days, and it's his loss because he looks permanently miserable now.


----------



## CarryOn2020

From the DM:


----------



## Pessie

DoggieBags said:


> I thought they were already toast in the UK after the Oprah interview and how they treated Prince Philip and The Queen during their final illnesses. This doesn’t help of course but I didn’t think there was any way back even for H before Netflix.


You’re right, I’m being too generous.   But I think this is the last straw of last straws.  We are a tolerant country, however I can see questions being raised in the House (parliament) and pressure for something to be done after this latest nonsense.


----------



## jblended

Pessie said:


> You’re right, I’m being too generous.   But I think this is the last straw of last straws.  We are a tolerant country, however I can see questions being raised in the House (parliament) and pressure for something to be done after this latest nonsense.


Just please don't let her end up "Princess" because she will milk that until her last breath.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The whole thing is sickening.


----------



## lanasyogamama

CarryOn2020 said:


> Getting strong Kardashian vibes, only at a much lower level than the K’s do.


Literally the Kartrashians of Montecito


----------



## DoggieBags

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> View attachment 5667209


I wonder if Eugenie knew in advance that these photos would be included in the Harkle’s Netflix mockumentary or is she just realizing it along with everyone else today?


----------



## Pessie

jblended said:


> Just please don't let her end up "Princess" because she will milk that until her last breath.


She would indeed.


----------



## kemilia

Sophisticatted said:


> I’ve read that Harry originally picked the engagement ring, but talked Will into taking it to give to Kate saying something like he (H) really thought it would be wonderful to see that ring on the throne someday.
> 
> I thought the TW’s Cartier was a gift from herself to herself before H showed up.
> 
> The aquamarine ring: to me,  the metal band looks thicker on TW’s version.  Honestly, I could see *TW buying a replica just to SEEM like she had something of Di’s*.  Maybe her version is just glass.


Look at all the times she has cosplayed D's wardrobe (and Wallis' for that matter), getting a replica (or H having one made) is totally believable.


----------



## Pessie

Harry and Meghan - “there’s three of us in this marriage” - you, me and our personal 24/7 photographer (always on hand to capture those unorchestrated, intimate moments for posterity netfux)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> View attachment 5667209



Is it always the second borns? Beatrice seems a lot more dignified.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This lying POS. OMG.


----------



## jelliedfeels

“The BRF are cynical media manipulators who will constantly plant stories and generally ruin the reputation of a lower status individual to make themselves look better while maintaining the hierarchy” says _the person who is blaming his brother’s middle class, taciturn wife for the line of succession. _


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> “The BRF are cynical media manipulators who will constantly plant stories and generally ruin the reputation of a lower status individual to make themselves look better while maintaining the hierarchy” says _the person who is blaming his brother’s middle class, taciturn wife for the line of succession. _



It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

But also, what did Kate in the Harkles's universe do (besides birth those kids?)? I need to consume even the BBC commentary in small mouthfuls or I'm getting a migraine.


----------



## marietouchet

GOBSMACKED … the DM write up on episodes 1-3. I have no words
@papertiger , I soooo viscerally feel what you were saying yesterday about having to bow to these INSERT 4 LETTER WORD OF YOUR CHOICE
Take their passport, diplomatic immunity, titles, and to think QEII wanted them to work with the Commonwealth
I am loathe to put in a link and increase the clicks, well, you folks all know to find it


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why would you do this? And I say that as someone who's actually barefoot a lot. She was seriously raised by wolves.


----------



## Annawakes

She’s never worn a floor length gown to a live event has she?  

I know her engagement photo dress was long but that was just for a photo.

I think she is afraid of walking in a floor length gown with high heels.  Might trip and fall.  So she has these neither long nor short gowns that look odd.


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would you do this? And I say that as someone who's actually barefoot a lot. She was seriously raised by wolves.



Hmmm yes, if you don’t allow shoes in the house. I don’t.


----------



## jblended

tiktok said:


> Hmmm yes, if you don’t allow shoes in the house. I don’t.


It's not the bare feet indoors to me. It's the message and image she wants to portray. 
She's this easygoing, warm (and loves hugging) Cali chic in ripped jeans and bare feet, while his family are stiff, formal, frigid people even in private- they said as much earlier.
It's actually quite rude. They are literal royals meeting you for the first time- did you expect them to rock up in shorts and stained t-shirts, ready to hug you and share a joint?


----------



## pomeline

jblended said:


> Just please don't let her end up "Princess" because she will milk that until her last breath.


Exactly... And make a big deal about the oppressing BRF only giving her the title Princess Henry. Not that she'd ever correct them for calling her Princess Meghan. 

I hope there's a new law in the works. Didn't one MP suggest recently there should be one allowing all titles to be removed?


----------



## marietouchet

DoggieBags said:


> I wonder if Eugenie knew in advance that these photos would be included in the Harkle’s Netflix mockumentary or is she just realizing it along with everyone else today?


I think Eugenie knew, but she has been on the outs with family for a while due to issues with her mom, dad, and being denied Working Royal status and bodyguards, she moved to Portugal at least for a while 
BLG did an analysis of videos with E and Catherine, with E ignoring C or brushing past her, but E does not talk to the press


----------



## marietouchet

My English granny raised me not to use bad language and I still try not to do it. But BLG came through with an entirely appropriate response


----------



## Hyacinth

Katel said:


> View attachment 5666620



(It's hard keeping up with posts these days! Sorry if anyone already commented).

If Bony MarkleRony had any brains at all, she would never wear dresses with front or back slits again. Her legs are nothing but sticks, her feet are a mess and her knees are just knobs, especially when you compare them to Diana's in those photos. Diana had *amazing* legs and knew how to show them off. Bony apparently has only one interesting feature below her waist (apparently it was enough for Hazz), and it's NOT her legs, knees, or feet. She really DOES look like a mummy.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> LV did not do justice to MM.  The dress simply does not measure up to standards.  MM has a much better figure than _this_.



Intentional? Trying to start pregnancy rumors to offset the separation rumors?


----------



## Rouge H

These two need another venue to hock their crap….shame on the both of them…honor your mother and grandmother for goodness sake. Shame on you. I find it hypercritical to bash the monarchy you little pot stirrer but it’s okay to accept and wear the monarchy jewels most recent that 9K ring to Kennedy Honors. Bye the way you can’t and NEVER WILL hold a candle to the most beautiful classy, loving women Kate…stop trying..
oh, there is only one Lennon/Ono photo…
Did you save one of those suitcases from Deal/No Deal? Perhaps use it and GO AWAY…
Ok, I’m done lol!


----------



## Mrs.Z

I’m watching, it’s gonna be a slow haul….these two are high drama but you already know that!  They met on Instagram?!?!


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> People are talking



"Well, it's definitely a more compelling story than "we had a hissy fit and left because we didn't get what we wanted".


----------



## Aimee3

If I had a shred of sympathy for H (and I don’t think I ever did) he lost it all when he shoved that umbrella in the photographer’s face.  It’s all on tape.  What a boorish despicable human being.  They pretend to hate the press/photographers but call them to alert them where they’ll be?  I’m sure they could’ve avoided the press/photographers by using the hotel’s garage.  TW probably insisted on having herself photographed when they arrived. She couldn’t stop grinning!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Deserve?  Imo she does as any wife does.
> She married the guy, she had his kids, she deserves for him to treat her properly.  That means proper support, financial and emotional. Jewelry always helps.
> 
> Give her share [nothing more, nothing less] and she will go away.  Try to shortchange her and she will rebel.


But that's the whole problem. She could have had a huge share relative to what most people in the world receive, yet it still wasn't enough for her.


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> I thought the same.  After making such unnecessary fuss, they’re now playing the kid card because they’re being paid for it.  Yuk.


But didn't we suspect that would happen all along?


----------



## Pessie

Aimee3 said:


> If I had a shred of sympathy for H (and I don’t think I ever did) he lost it all when he shoved that umbrella in the photographer’s face.  It’s all on tape.  What a boorish despicable human being.  They pretend to hate the press/photographers but call them to alert them where they’ll be?  I’m sure they could’ve avoided the press/photographers by using the hotel’s garage.  TW probably insisted on having herself photographed when they arrived. She couldn’t stop grinning!


I thought that was quite violent?  It was certainly disproportionate, given they booked the paps to be there and (as we’ve seen this morning) have a photographer documenting every private moment ready for public release for cash!  I think Harry’s on the edge of cracking up myself.


----------



## youngster

In the U.S., they are already being knocked off the top of the tabloids by the release of Brittany Griner from Russia (in exchange for an arms dealer and that is going to cause a real furor) and the news about Celine Dion having being diagnosed with a very serious neurological disease.  Poor Celine!


----------



## Sharont2305

On two occasions she referred to the Duchess of York as Fergie. Once on the OW interview and once on the second episode of this thing now. I found that disrespectful.


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> "Diana also related to him differently than to Harry. William never got to skip classes to spend the day at home with mummy eating junk food and watching movies like Harry."


If true that was very foolish of her. What if something had happened to William? Sounds like she did help to create the monster, intentionally or not.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> But that's the whole problem. She could have had a huge share relative to what most people in the world receive, yet it still wasn't enough for her.


Because she’s psychotic. Imo, she and her mother, possibly father and MarkusA, have planned this.  Just like KrisK, probably with OW & Gayle’s guidance. She has known from the beginning what she planned to do. 


charlottawill said:


> But didn't we suspect that would happen all along?


Yes, we have.  We have been criticized for it, too.  But, we have stayed strong and on message. Still looking forward to KCIII’s actions.



youngster said:


> In the U.S., they are already being knocked off the top of the tabloids by the release of Brittany Griner from Russia (in exchange for an arms dealer and that is going to cause a real furor) and the news about Celine Dion having being diagnosed with a very serious neurological disease.  Poor Celine!


So sad about Celine. She has been through so much and is still very positive and upbeat.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the DM:
> View attachment 5667209


This is enlightening. Hard to imagine Eugenie and Jack joining the family for Christmas this year.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> If true that was very foolish of her. What if something had happened to William? Sounds like she did help to create the monster, intentionally or not.


We all know what Jackie O said about raising children -
“*If you bungle raising your children, I don't think whatever else you do matters very much*”


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Interesting to note - William gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _marriage_.
> Hazzi gave his wife a ring that symbolized his parent’s _divorce_.


That's interesting since it has also been reported that Dufus chose the ring when Diana's jewelry was divided between the boys and then gave the ring to William when he became engaged to Catherine.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why would you do this? And I say that as someone who's actually barefoot a lot. She was seriously raised by wolves.



She likes to pitch herself as such a cool, relaxed  chick with nary a care in the world [yes, I typed “nary”. This stuff has stressed me out.].  The Cali cool chica is the vibe she is going for, lots of sunshine and ocean breezes.  The thing is people who try so hard to appear cool, they *never* are. In reality, she is a hyper controlling, manipulative person.  Her ‘real’ face shows how much makeup she wears. 

Considering how ugly her feet are, shoes are a must.


----------



## youngster

Pessie said:


> I thought that was quite violent?  It was certainly disproportionate, given they booked the paps to be there and (as we’ve seen this morning) have a photographer documenting every private moment ready for public release for cash!  I think Harry’s on the edge of cracking up myself.



I agree with you. Harry's reaction was very disproportionate.  Very childlike and immature.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's interesting since it has also been reported that Dufus chose the ring when Diana's jewelry was divided between the boys and then gave the ring to William when he became engaged to Catherine.


Wonder if he took the 2 rings.  Did they leave the aquamarine in the vault?   What has always bothered me about this story is how Hazzi or the media portray Hazz as  the generous one that W&K should be indebted to.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> This is enlightening. Hard to imagine Eugenie and Jack joining the family for Christmas this year.



Those photos of all of them (Harry, MM, Eugenie, Jack) are very unflattering to ALL of them.  They look like they are wearing black face.  WTH? 
ETA: These are supposed to be adults around the age of 40.  They look like immature brats, all of them.



			https://forum.purseblog.com/attachments/2300fcf3-0fcb-4f4f-95a8-36ab59749b69-jpeg.5667209/


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> On two occasions she referred to the Duchess of York as Fergie. Once on the OW interview and once on the second episode of this thing now. I found that disrespectful.


That's the American in her, the tendency toward familiarity with people we don't know. Just like the ongoing media references here to "Kate Middleton". I know it's just laziness but I find it disrespectful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Dear All, I apologize for being late to the party. I'm trying to catch up asap. A couple of things that stood out in the DM article.

*1)* _Meghan Markle has insisted she was a 'daddy's girl' growing up as she recited her childhood poem about divorce in her new Netflix docu-series where Harry said: ‘*She doesn’t have a father*.’_

Wow, can you imagine how hurtful this must be for TM? This is a father who loved her and used all his money to pay for her costly education and demands. Only an idiot who has access to a ton of money and never worked in his life can make such statement. 

*2)*


	

		
			
		

		
	
 The kid has a resemblance to TW, so the frozen eggs were likely viable.









						20 revelations so far in Harry and Meghan's explosive Netflix series
					

Harry & Meghan - a six-part docuseries - dropped on the streaming giant at 8am on Thursday in the UK, with the Windsors steeling themselves for bombshells in the first three episodes.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> Exactly... And make a big deal about the oppressing BRF only giving her the title Princess Henry. Not that she'd ever correct them for calling her Princess Meghan.
> 
> I hope there's a new law in the works. Didn't one MP suggest recently there should be one allowing all titles to be removed?


On Friday, they will have the second reading.  It is a bill to give the monarch the power/authority to remove titles, etc.  Imo the monarch should have had this power long ago.


----------



## sdkitty

kemilia said:


> At least she's not in her normal "I'm holding a watermelon between my thighs" position.
> But the shoes ...


what about the shoes?  they're black?


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Dear All, I apologize for being late to the party. I'm trying to catch up asap. A couple of things that stood out in the DM article.
> 
> *1)* _Meghan Markle has insisted she was a 'daddy's girl' growing up as she recited her childhood poem about divorce in her new Netflix docu-series where Harry said: ‘*She doesn’t have a father*.’_
> 
> Wow, can you imagine how hurtful this must be for TM? This is a father who loved her and used all his money to pay for her costly education and demands. Only an idiot who has access to a ton of money and never worked in his life can make such statement.
> 
> *2)*
> View attachment 5667285
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The kid has a resemblance to TW, so the frozen eggs were likely viable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 revelations so far in Harry and Meghan's explosive Netflix series
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan - a six-part docuseries - dropped on the streaming giant at 8am on Thursday in the UK, with the Windsors steeling themselves for bombshells in the first three episodes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I haven't seen this photo of the baby before.   I agree, she resembles the WIFE.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Those photos of all of them (Harry, MM, Eugenie, Jack) are very unflattering to ALL of them.  They look like they are wearing black face.  WTH?
> ETA: These are supposed to be adults around the age of 40.  They look like immature brats, all of them.
> 
> 
> 
> https://forum.purseblog.com/attachments/2300fcf3-0fcb-4f4f-95a8-36ab59749b69-jpeg.5667209/


They look like entitled rich brats who have no consequences. I think MarkusA has a half black face or he is wearing a mask.  Imo wearing an amo belt is over the top awful.  How embarrassing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

tiktok said:


> Hmmm yes, if you don’t allow shoes in the house. I don’t.



Well, you can still wear socks or house slippers?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> It's not the bare feet indoors to me. *It's the message and image she wants to portray.*
> She's this easygoing, warm (and loves hugging) Cali chic in ripped jeans and bare feet, while his family are stiff, formal, frigid people even in private- they said as much earlier.
> It's actually quite rude. They are literal royals meeting you for the first time- did you expect them to rock up in shorts and stained t-shirts, ready to hug you and share a joint?



This, though we might have different takes what the message was. To me, it's super disrespectful to meet strangers (your future in-laws! The Queen of Great Britain!) with bare feet, sorry. It says "I don't care".


----------



## marietouchet

We all got it so wrong … we thought the show would trash Camilla, Catherine, Sophie, no, they went after the life work of QEII


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m watching, it’s gonna be a slow haul….these two are high drama but you already know that!  They met on Instagram?!?!



Oh wow, is that story #5 how they met?


----------



## jblended

I have inadvertently wasted a day on this nonsense. I wasn't even supposed to be online today, lol.
I will not be making that mistake for "volume 2" (snort). It's such a waste of brain power.
I'm glad I followed the BBC commentary because their quips were factually accurate (pointing out their inconsistencies), while also being amusing, and all done without being disrespectful to themselves, the duo, the BRF or the British public. I know that is the commentary I prefer over the entire cottage industry of Youtube and Tiktok "experts" who take snark to an extreme and encourage really hateful dialogue.

The thing that gets me is that I think they have won this battle. In suggesting and teasing that there would be direct claims made against the BRF, they got people to watch. Everyone from reporters to fans, to haters, watched. Only a handful of us followed the commentary rather than watching the actual "show". They (the couple themselves, their production company and netflix) all got their views, the media frenzy and the $$$ from this event.
But there was no substance. Just more vaguebooking. There were suggestions of a structural problem, the family was too formal for Meg, life drastically changed, the press hounded Di and they were afraid it would happen again (never mind the pesky fact that laws have been changed and they can't have press intrusion like that anymore).
There was nothing specific said against anyone and therefore nothing to anger the BRF, so they will be at the coronation, they will keep their titles, and they can keep producing content under the guise of "never before told secrets from inside the palace" in the coming years (without actually divulging anything, but continuing to hint as they have been).

The only thing they've lost is the support of the British public and the press. But they seem to think they're never returning so they don't care. They'll just spin that into their ongoing narrative of "because, racism".

Perhaps they're not as dumb as I first thought. They're getting everything they wanted, they are in control of the narrative, and the BRF and British public are always waiting for them to do or say the next horrible thing about us, while they're living a cushy life of luxury.


----------



## sdkitty

now he regrets the nazi uniform....implies he regretted it immediately but I kinda doubt that








						Prince Harry Says Wearing Nazi Uniform Was 'One Of The Biggest Mistakes' Of His Life
					

"All I wanted to do was make it right," the Duke of Sussex says in his new Netflix series.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> It's not the bare feet indoors to me. It's the message and image she wants to portray.
> She's this easygoing, warm (and loves hugging) Cali chic in ripped jeans and bare feet, while his family are stiff, formal, frigid people even in private- they said as much earlier.
> It's actually quite rude. They are literal royals meeting you for the first time- did you expect them to rock up in shorts and stained t-shirts, ready to hug you and share a joint?


Oh my, great minds think alike   I was trying to catch up by reading from the last page.  You are correct - that is exactly the vibe she wants but it is so far from true.


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> It's not the bare feet indoors to me. It's the message and image she wants to portray.
> She's this easygoing, warm (and loves hugging) Cali chic in ripped jeans and bare feet, while his family are stiff, formal, frigid people even in private- they said as much earlier.
> It's actually quite rude. They are literal royals meeting you for the first time- did you expect them to rock up in shorts and stained t-shirts, ready to hug you and share a joint?


I'm confused.  Where is this meeting supposed to have happened?  which royals?  the queen didn't visit them in CA.  someone visited them at their home before they escaped England?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I haven't seen this photo of the baby before.   I agree, she resembles the WIFE.



Isn't that Archie?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if he took the 2 rings.  Did they leave the aquamarine in the vault?   *What has always bothered me about this story is how Hazzi or the media portray Hazz as  the generous one that W&K should be indebted to.*


I've always understood that W & H were best friends and when W & C got engaged in 2010, H gave W the ring because he was first to marry. We also have to remember that W&C's engagement was at least six years before ZedZed and although H resented being #3, he and W were still best friends.
H hadn't yet been brainwashed and could be kind to his brother.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> I have inadvertently wasted a day on this nonsense. I wasn't even supposed to be online today, lol.
> I will not be making that mistake for "volume 2" (snort). It's such a waste of brain power.
> I'm glad I followed the BBC commentary because their quips were factually accurate (pointing out their inconsistencies), while also being amusing, and all done without being disrespectful to themselves, the duo, the BRF or the British public. I know that is the commentary I prefer over the entire cottage industry of Youtube and Tiktok "experts" who take snark to an extreme and encourage really hateful dialogue.
> 
> The thing that gets me is that I think they have won this battle. In suggesting and teasing that there would be direct claims made against the BRF, they got people to watch. Everyone from reporters to fans, to haters, watched. Only a handful of us followed the commentary rather than watching the actual "show". They (the couple themselves, their production company and netflix) all got their views, the media frenzy and the $$$ from this event.
> But there was no substance. Just more vaguebooking. There were suggestions of a structural problem, the family was too formal for Meg, life drastically changed, the press hounded Di and they were afraid it would happen again (never mind the pesky fact that laws have been changed and they can't have press intrusion like that anymore).
> There was nothing specific said against anyone and therefore nothing to anger the BRF, so they will be at the coronation, they will keep their titles, and they can keep producing content under the guise of "never before told secrets from inside the palace" in the coming years (without actually divulging anything, but continuing to hint as they have been).
> 
> The only thing they've lost is the support of the British public and the press. But they seem to think they're never returning so they don't care. They'll just spin that into their ongoing narrative of "because, racism".
> 
> Perhaps they're not as dumb as I first thought. They're getting everything they wanted, they are in control of the narrative, and the BRF and British public are always waiting for them to do or say the next horrible thing about us, while they're living a cushy life of luxury.


_There was nothing specific said against anyone and therefore nothing to anger the BRF, so *they will be at the coronation*, they will keep their titles, and they can keep producing content under the guise of "never before told secrets from inside the palace" in the coming years (without actually divulging anything, but continuing to hint as they have been)._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> We all got it so wrong … we thought the show would trash Camilla, Catherine, Sophie, no, they went after the life work of QEII



There's still three more episodes. Give them time, they have enough hatred to attempt destroying both The Queen's legacy and several more people.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maggie Muggins said:


> I've always understood that W & H were best friends and when W & C got engaged in 2010, H gave W the ring because he was first to marry. We also have to remember that W&C's engagement was at least six years before ZedZed and although H resented being #3, he and W were still best friends.
> H hadn't yet been brainwashed and could be kind to his brother.


True, that is the story I have heard, too.  Who took the aqua or did they leave it in the vault?  I thought W took some earrings, a necklace, but I could be wrong.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This, though we might have different takes what the message was. To me, it's super disrespectful to meet strangers (your future in-laws! The Queen of Great Britain!) with bare feet, sorry. It says "I don't care".


Oh, I wasn't clear. We're in agreement. I said they were being rude and it is disrespectful. M was signaling "you're not important for me to dress up; I will meet you in distressed jeans".  Now she spins it as "I'm very friendly and relaxed but they were very stiff and formal". She thinks she's flexing but she's actually being ignorant and rude. It is nothing to be proud of that you met literal royals in a disheveled state.


sdkitty said:


> I'm confused.  Where is this meeting supposed to have happened?  which royals?  the queen didn't visit them in CA.  someone visited them at their home before they escaped England?


This is them talking about the first time they met Willam and Catherine. Here's the BBC description of the scene:


> We see an informal shot of Meghan in a kitchen, smiling as she cooks in a baseball cap.
> 
> She's remembering her first meeting with William and Catherine, now the Prince and Princess of Wales, and says: "When Will and Kate came over, and I met her for the first time, they came over for dinner.
> 
> She smiles as she recalls that she was "in ripped jeans and barefoot", but implies she was perhaps less formal than they were.
> 
> "I was a hugger, always been a hugger, I didn't realise that is really jarring for a lot of Brits.
> 
> "I guess I started to understand very quickly that the formality on the outside carried through on the inside - that there is a forward-facing way of being."
> 
> This is juxtaposed with footage of the royal family in formal meet-and-greet situations.
> 
> She adds: "And then you close the door, and go great, okay, we can relax now - but that formality carries over on both sides - and that was surprising to me."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm confused.  Where is this meeting supposed to have happened?  which royals?  the queen didn't visit them in CA.  someone visited them at their home before they escaped England?



She lived with Harry before the engagement. So probably Nottingham Cottage? Though she's said before she met The Queen at Royal Lodge.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> There's still three more episodes. Give them time, they have enough hatred to attempt destroying both The Queen's legacy and several more people.


The good thing about letting them _think_ they have _won _is now they will be on such an ego high that they will trip and fall.  Someone mentioned it earlier - it’s like Icarus, his ego/pride/hubris got the better of him and he flew  too close to the sun.  Then, he fell.  Splat! Into the water.  Love this Bruegel.  W.H.Auden wrote a poem about it - "Musee des Beaux Arts" 








						A Poem (and a Painting) About the Suffering That Hides in Plain Sight
					

With war looming, W.H. Auden stood in a museum and was inspired to write. The resulting poem, “Musée des Beaux Arts,” is one of the most famous ever written about art.



					www.nytimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> Oh, I wasn't clear. We're in agreement. I said they were being rude and it is disrespectful. M was signaling "you're not important for me to dress up; I will meet you in distressed jeans".  Now she spins it as "I'm very friendly and relaxed but they were very stiff and formal". She thinks she's flexing but she's actually being ignorant and rude. It is nothing to be proud of that you met literal royals in a disheveled state.
> 
> This is them talking about the first time they met Willam and Catherine. Here's the BBC description of the scene:


_She smiles as she recalls…_. a$$.  I am taking back every nice or kind thing I have said about her.  
Release the Wallis, show us the dirt.  They are toxic.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She lived with Harry before the engagement. So probably Nottingham Cottage? Though she's said before she met The Queen at Royal Lodge.


yes, I just found a story about Kate and Will coming to their home and how shocked she was as their coldness and not being comfortable hugging!  uugh


----------



## Pessie

jblended said:


> I have inadvertently wasted a day on this nonsense. I wasn't even supposed to be online today, lol.
> I will not be making that mistake for "volume 2" (snort). It's such a waste of brain power.
> I'm glad I followed the BBC commentary because their quips were factually accurate (pointing out their inconsistencies), while also being amusing, and all done without being disrespectful to themselves, the duo, the BRF or the British public. I know that is the commentary I prefer over the entire cottage industry of Youtube and Tiktok "experts" who take snark to an extreme and encourage really hateful dialogue.
> 
> The thing that gets me is that I think they have won this battle. In suggesting and teasing that there would be direct claims made against the BRF, they got people to watch. Everyone from reporters to fans, to haters, watched. Only a handful of us followed the commentary rather than watching the actual "show". They (the couple themselves, their production company and netflix) all got their views, the media frenzy and the $$$ from this event.
> But there was no substance. Just more vaguebooking. There were suggestions of a structural problem, the family was too formal for Meg, life drastically changed, the press hounded Di and they were afraid it would happen again (never mind the pesky fact that laws have been changed and they can't have press intrusion like that anymore).
> There was nothing specific said against anyone and therefore nothing to anger the BRF, so they will be at the coronation, they will keep their titles, and they can keep producing content under the guise of "never before told secrets from inside the palace" in the coming years (without actually divulging anything, but continuing to hint as they have been).
> 
> The only thing they've lost is the support of the British public and the press. But they seem to think they're never returning so they don't care. They'll just spin that into their ongoing narrative of "because, racism".
> 
> Perhaps they're not as dumb as I first thought. They're getting everything they wanted, they are in control of the narrative, and the BRF and British public are always waiting for them to do or say the next horrible thing about us, while they're living a cushy life of luxury.


I didn’t watch it,  I liked the way the BBC dealt with it.  
I don’t think they have everything they wanted.  They’re strapped for cash, the A list have quietly slipped away and the hot invites they expected aren’t coming.  No Hollywood offers in the post for Meg.  They’re certainly getting a lot of attention, and people are watching the spectacle they’re making, but that doesn’t equate to success IMO and the news cycle will soon move on as everyone tires of it all.  Then what?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jblended said:


> This is them talking about the first time they met Willam and Catherine. Here's the BBC description of the scene:



Interesting how she says "I met her" instead of "them". She is completely obsessed with Kate.


----------



## calicocat

Chanbal said:


> £10,000 dress, private jets… all at the expense of the BRF. One more video denouncing the Harkles' hypocrisy.



It's just sad that BRF/KC3/the late QEII essentially paid for/bought their own smear campaign through these two


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes, I just found a story about Kate and Will coming to their home and how shocked she was as their coldness and not being comfortable hugging!  uugh



Uh, I'm not a member of  the BRF and I absolutely do not care for being hugged by someone I've never met before. Ew.


----------



## justwatchin

jblended said:


> I have inadvertently wasted a day on this nonsense. I wasn't even supposed to be online today, lol.
> I will not be making that mistake for "volume 2" (snort). It's such a waste of brain power.
> I'm glad I followed the BBC commentary because their quips were factually accurate (pointing out their inconsistencies), while also being amusing, and all done without being disrespectful to themselves, the duo, the BRF or the British public. I know that is the commentary I prefer over the entire cottage industry of Youtube and Tiktok "experts" who take snark to an extreme and encourage really hateful dialogue.
> 
> The thing that gets me is that I think they have won this battle. In suggesting and teasing that there would be direct claims made against the BRF, they got people to watch. Everyone from reporters to fans, to haters, watched. Only a handful of us followed the commentary rather than watching the actual "show". They (the couple themselves, their production company and netflix) all got their views, the media frenzy and the $$$ from this event.
> But there was no substance. Just more vaguebooking. There were suggestions of a structural problem, the family was too formal for Meg, life drastically changed, the press hounded Di and they were afraid it would happen again (never mind the pesky fact that laws have been changed and they can't have press intrusion like that anymore).
> There was nothing specific said against anyone and therefore nothing to anger the BRF, so they will be at the coronation, they will keep their titles, and they can keep producing content under the guise of "never before told secrets from inside the palace" in the coming years (without actually divulging anything, but continuing to hint as they have been).
> 
> The only thing they've lost is the support of the British public and the press. But they seem to think they're never returning so they don't care. They'll just spin that into their ongoing narrative of "because, racism".
> 
> Perhaps they're not as dumb as I first thought. They're getting everything they wanted, they are in control of the narrative, and the BRF and British public are always waiting for them to do or say the next horrible thing about us, while they're living a cushy life of luxury.


Agreed. But now they’ll need to find a new way to make money because the whining and complaining gets old. How much milking of this can they do?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Interesting how she says "I met her" instead of "them". She is completely obsessed with Kate.


that's called jealousy...Kate is beautiful....Kate is perfect in her clothes....Kate is the future queen
Anyone else coming from her position as a Z-list actress would have been thrilled to be wife of the prince but she has such a big head she can't stand to be second to Kate
I know I'm preaching to the choir


----------



## Chanbal

Very sneaky as everything they do!




*Episode one began with a pointed attack on Buckingham Palace with a statement on screen claiming:*_ '*Members of the Royal Family declined to comment on the content within this series'.* *But hours after the first three episodes began streaming, royal officials in London insisted they were never asked to respond at all*.

The source was clear that neither Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace nor any member of the family were approached for comment on the content of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Netflix series.

The insider added that, for now, *there will be no official comment from the King or the Prince of Wales on its incendiary contents,* *including allegations of racism and 'unconscious bias' and a series of barbs aimed at Charles, William, Kate Middleton and other royals*.

*The team at Kensington Palace,* who work for Prince William and Kate, *later clarified that they had received an email from a 3rd party production company about the Harry and Meghan Netflix documentary.* *The press team contacted Archewell and Netflix to verify if it was genuine, but got no reply.* _*The email did not contain the substance of allegations in the entire series.*









						Royals hit BACK over Harry and Meghan's Netflix series
					

Meghan and Harry today took a series of new swipes at the Royal Family and Britain in their new and incendiary Netflix series being described as a transatlantic 'TV bomb' aimed at The Firm.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh, I'm not a member of  the BRF and I absolutely do not care for being hugged by someone I've never met before. Ew.


In the case of someone who is engaged (or living with) my brother, I could take a hug but not a big one
There is a guy we know casually who loves to hug.  I succeeded is stopping him during the Covid outbreak but now he's back at it.  I try to keep my distance, give him a pat, etc.  I think he gets it but he's a compulsive hugger.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sharont2305 said:


> On two occasions she referred to the Duchess of York as Fergie. Once on the OW interview and once on the second episode of this thing now. I found that disrespectful.


Especially coming from someone who won’t sign a receipt at the corner store without including her title. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, you can still wear socks or house slippers?


I literally start to panic if I can’t find my slippers as soon as I walk into my house. They are my emotional support slippers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Very sneaky as everything they do!
> 
> View attachment 5667300



Lying liars who lie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> In the case of someone who is engaged (or living with) my brother, I could take a hug but not a big one.



I could take it, but I'd rather not  No harm done in saving the hugging for the 2nd time we meet.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> It's also interesting how quickly he's become Americanised: E.g. We don't (UK) have 'date night', as in "would you like to go on a date with me?" we (UK) 'go out', as in "Would you like to go out with me?".


“Date night” is a cutesy term that married couples use when they can get away from the kids for a few hours and enjoy being together like they used to pre-children. 

The difference is most people you hear using it don’t have a staff of employees taking care of their kids, pets, and house, effectively making every night a date night.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Sophisticatted

csshopper said:


> This is enlightening. Hard to imagine Eugenie and Jack joining the family for Christmas this year.



They’re probably still in exile in Portugal.  I’m sure that as far as William and Charles are concerned, Andrew and Sarah can join them.


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, you can still wear socks or house slippers?


Yes, definitely, I was just responding to the general disgust with walking barefoot. It’s not an issue if you don’t allow shoes in the house - ever. If royalty was visiting I might have worn socks and gotten each of them personalized embroidered slippers though


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> I didn’t watch it,  I liked the way the BBC dealt with it.
> I don’t think they have everything they wanted.  They’re strapped for cash, the A list have quietly slipped away and the hot invites they expected aren’t coming.  No Hollywood offers in the post for Meg.  They’re certainly getting a lot of attention, and people are watching the spectacle they’re making, but that doesn’t equate to success IMO and the news cycle will soon move on as everyone tires of it all.  Then what?


Me too.  Did not and will not watch it.  The BBC did an excellent job.  I did see some clips on the Daily Mail.  That’s all I needed.  I strongly dislike what these two represent.  While I do enjoy watching the BRF, I completely understand if the Brits vote them out.  These spares could not be more repulsive.  

I agree with the person who said the kids are of no interest at all.  H&M have demanded privacy for them so let them have it.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Maggie Muggins said:


> That's interesting since it has also been reported that Dufus chose the ring when Diana's jewelry was divided between the boys and then gave the ring to William when he became engaged to Catherine.


And I read that William originally chose a watch.  Now I know the watch he wears was one his mother gave him.  So there is symbolism and emotional attachment in watches for him.

ETA:  I wonder what Catherine and William would have picked if the ring had not been given to them.


----------



## KEG66

jblended said:


> I actually agree with you that she deserved better.
> She really did think the BRF was Hollywood in the UK. She was swept up in marrying a real life Prince and didn't do due diligence. She couldn't have imagined the daily grind, the humble engagements, the formality at every occasion including family dinners, the bowing to your own grandmother... it must have hit her hard.
> She thought, like in Hollywood, you buy good PR and your publicist controls your image. She couldn't understand a press officer saying to her, nope, we don't respond to tabloid gossip even if it is untrue, we are above that, we are royal. What a shock that must have been.
> She must have also noticed she was messing up along the way- wrong clothing, walking ahead of him, getting in the car before HMQ or some other protocol she hadn't mastered. I imagine it frustrated her, but also frustrated the aides who tried to teach her and quickly found out she was so out of her depth.
> What a massive culture shock it must have been; sincerely!
> 
> But, she did it to herself. Harry tried to keep the relationship secret to give her time to fly under the radar, witness royal life and see what the day-to-day was like before committing. She should have taken the time to learn all that she needed to. She's the one who leaked their relationship to the press because she had bagged him and wanted it all formalized before he had a chance to change his mind.
> It was a whirlwind and they were married in a blink of an eye. She could have spent a couple of years observing, learning, but instead she wanted to lock him down.
> Now she blames them for "not protecting" her, when they did and they kept trying to. She got privileges that other girlfriends didn't. She's just so busy focusing on feeling out of place that she didn't understand that the palace was protecting her, they were right to ignore the haters and she would have been adored again if she just hung in there and focused on her duties and learning the protocols so that her mistakes weren't repeated.
> Instead, she ran away and blamed it on racism. That is surely far easier to her than admitting she jumped into the deep end of her fairytale and couldn't bring herself to say, "I need someone to teach me protocol because I'm overwhelmed". It was more beneficial (to her image and ego) to say, "I asked for help but the men in grey suits wanted to lock me up without my passport, so I asserted my independence because 'I am a strong woman: hear me roar'".
> The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the rigidity of the institution.
> 
> Harry is doing the same thing. On the subject of his horrific choice of party costume in 2005, he said:
> 
> No mention of his other racist remarks in this documentary, as far as I can tell. Just the one costume incident.
> Instead of acknowledging his horrendous choice of outfit, he washed his hands of it and said it's a family issue, suggesting everyone is racist and shares his unconscious bias.
> Even if we looked at it as a systemic problem, he should have known better. He's of the "woke" generation. He cannot plead ignorance, a sheltered life (because he has seen every country and every race), nor unconscious bias for his choice to wear that costume nor his choice to use a racial slur!
> He also cannot pull others into his missteps. No other member of the royal family (of his generation*) has ever been reported to have made racist comments like that, to my knowledge. Why implicate others in your doing?
> Side note: *PP had his own problematic views but those were reported on just as Harry's missteps were, so he is not being picked on due to his choice of wife as he would like us to believe.
> 
> Again, it is "The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the unconscious biases of the institution."
> 
> Both of them need to grow up and stop blaming the world for their own choices and mistakes. They needed more support at the start and they deserved that. Meg clearly didn't want to understand the difference between the BRF and the Oscars, but the palace should have stepped up and fixed that. Someone should have pulled her out of the public eye and trained her until she could manage better (not stick her tongue out, for example).  They (H&M) also need to own up to their own failings in how they've managed it and stop saying everyone else drove them out and they had to act to protect their family. If you were protecting your family, you wouldn't have thrown the members on both sides under the bus for money. Or is "family" a term that is used for convenience, like "racism"?
> 
> I am truly fed up of their perpetual victimhood. Whatever they seek to "correct" in the British attitude will not be corrected by these means. They have done nothing but feed the media monster and create division at a time when our politicians have already failed us. Instead of making an impact and using their foundation to address the cost of living crisis or homelessness crisis, they are using their platform to virtue signal and justify their mistakes. We get it, you were unhappy and the whole world didn't adore you. You have been seen (Oprah, Netflix, the books), you have been heard (podcast), you have been awarded (ripple and people's choice). Brava! Now, can we move away from the bread and circuses?
> 
> Phew! Sorry for the length of this reply. I'll see myself out.
> 
> Edited for clarity.


What a fantastic post !! Wish the gruesome twosome would read this.


----------



## pomeline

I'm still wondering if there's something wrong with Harry. I mean, he has no clue of things he definitely should know a great deal about. He doesn't know how women at court should dress, he doesn't know about protocol, he doesn't know why he's called Harry... Is he autistic or what's the deal? It's as if he was stoned all his life. He couldn't even prepare Meghan for anything because "I dunno".

And then there's Meghan who supposedly knew nothing about anything either. "I didn't know you would eat with those weird stick things... silverware or what is it called, hahah, fancy and antiquated!" "Shoes -  I didn't know what they were!" "A prince?! I thought it was something edible!" I feel like these two are just...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> Good video!



Thanks. We need a BS emoji or gif to describe Dufus and ZedZed's malarkey something like this.


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> I actually agree with you that she deserved better.
> She really did think the BRF was Hollywood in the UK. She was swept up in marrying a real life Prince and didn't do due diligence. She couldn't have imagined the daily grind, the humble engagements, the formality at every occasion including family dinners, the bowing to your own grandmother... it must have hit her hard.
> She thought, like in Hollywood, you buy good PR and your publicist controls your image. She couldn't understand a press officer saying to her, nope, we don't respond to tabloid gossip even if it is untrue, we are above that, we are royal. What a shock that must have been.
> She must have also noticed she was messing up along the way- wrong clothing, walking ahead of him, getting in the car before HMQ or some other protocol she hadn't mastered. I imagine it frustrated her, but also frustrated the aides who tried to teach her and quickly found out she was so out of her depth.
> What a massive culture shock it must have been; sincerely!
> 
> But, she did it to herself. Harry tried to keep the relationship secret to give her time to fly under the radar, witness royal life and see what the day-to-day was like before committing. She should have taken the time to learn all that she needed to. She's the one who leaked their relationship to the press because she had bagged him and wanted it all formalized before he had a chance to change his mind.
> It was a whirlwind and they were married in a blink of an eye. She could have spent a couple of years observing, learning, but instead she wanted to lock him down.
> Now she blames them for "not protecting" her, when they did and they kept trying to. She got privileges that other girlfriends didn't. She's just so busy focusing on feeling out of place that she didn't understand that the palace was protecting her, they were right to ignore the haters and she would have been adored again if she just hung in there and focused on her duties and learning the protocols so that her mistakes weren't repeated.
> Instead, she ran away and blamed it on racism. That is surely far easier to her than admitting she jumped into the deep end of her fairytale and couldn't bring herself to say, "I need someone to teach me protocol because I'm overwhelmed". It was more beneficial (to her image and ego) to say, "I asked for help but the men in grey suits wanted to lock me up without my passport, so I asserted my independence because 'I am a strong woman: hear me roar'".
> The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the rigidity of the institution.
> 
> Harry is doing the same thing. On the subject of his horrific choice of party costume in 2005, he said:
> 
> No mention of his other racist remarks in this documentary, as far as I can tell. Just the one costume incident.
> Instead of acknowledging his horrendous choice of outfit, he washed his hands of it and said it's a family issue, suggesting everyone is racist and shares his unconscious bias.
> Even if we looked at it as a systemic problem, he should have known better. He's of the "woke" generation. He cannot plead ignorance, a sheltered life (because he has seen every country and every race), nor unconscious bias for his choice to wear that costume nor his choice to use a racial slur!
> He also cannot pull others into his missteps. No other member of the royal family (of his generation*) has ever been reported to have made racist comments like that, to my knowledge. Why implicate others in your doing?
> Side note: *PP had his own problematic views but those were reported on just as Harry's missteps were, so he is not being picked on due to his choice of wife as he would like us to believe.
> 
> Again, it is "The problem is them, not me. My mistakes are due to the unconscious biases of the institution."
> 
> Both of them need to grow up and stop blaming the world for their own choices and mistakes. They needed more support at the start and they deserved that. Meg clearly didn't want to understand the difference between the BRF and the Oscars, but the palace should have stepped up and fixed that. Someone should have pulled her out of the public eye and trained her until she could manage better (not stick her tongue out, for example).  They (H&M) also need to own up to their own failings in how they've managed it and stop saying everyone else drove them out and they had to act to protect their family. If you were protecting your family, you wouldn't have thrown the members on both sides under the bus for money. Or is "family" a term that is used for convenience, like "racism"?
> 
> I am truly fed up of their perpetual victimhood. Whatever they seek to "correct" in the British attitude will not be corrected by these means. They have done nothing but feed the media monster and create division at a time when our politicians have already failed us. Instead of making an impact and using their foundation to address the cost of living crisis or homelessness crisis, they are using their platform to virtue signal and justify their mistakes. We get it, you were unhappy and the whole world didn't adore you. You have been seen (Oprah, Netflix, the books), you have been heard (podcast), you have been awarded (ripple and people's choice). Brava! Now, can we move away from the bread and circuses?
> 
> Phew! Sorry for the length of this reply. I'll see myself out.
> 
> Edited for clarity.


excellent post
I doubt the daily grind of being a royal compares to the daily grind of working people (and whatever grind there is, there's plenty of compensation for it, unlike the compensation received by the average person)
As far as them moving away from the bread and circuses....not until they're forced to do so by lack of interest.  I can't wait.


----------



## jblended

Here's someone's thread where they have two clips from the show: one where she says about meeting William and Catherine barefoot, and the other where she talks about this exaggerated curtsy for her first meeting with HMQ (like she said on Oprah, she didn't know how to curtsy).
Twitter thread


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sharont2305 said:


> And, as a slight vere off topic, what the hell has Serena Williams done to her face?


??? Is there a photo?  I must be missing something.  Fomo


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> Here's someone's thread where they have two clips from the show: one where she says about meeting William and Catherine barefoot, and the other where she talks about this exaggerated curtsy for her first meeting with HMQ (like she said on Oprah, she didn't know how to curtsy).
> Twitter thread


looks to me like she is ridiculing the bowing tradition.  harry looks somewhat uncomfortable.  maybe she hasn't totally brainwashed him.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

lanasyogamama said:


> Literally the Kartrashians of Montecito


Not quite. The Kardashians know how to make lots of money.


----------



## KEG66

csshopper said:


> This is enlightening. Hard to imagine Eugenie and Jack joining the family for Christmas this year.


I wonder does this explain their strange ignoring of the gruesome twosome ? Was that at the Jubilee service when the joke was that Jack had ‘scarfed’ them ? Maybe they had realised they would be included in this ‘true love story’


----------



## jblended

sdkitty said:


> looks to me like she is ridiculing the bowing tradition. harry looks somewhat uncomfortable. maybe she hasn't totally brainwashed him.


That's exactly what I thought when I watched it. He looks uncomfortable and she is taking a jab at the need to curtsy to the Queen. She thinks she sounds self-deprecating/relatable because she is laughing at her exaggerated curtsy, but she actually sounds really ignorant and Harry knows this entire thing is super disrespectful. Not that different from her turning around on the balcony and him telling her to face forward. H knows protocol and so does she; she just likes to break the rules.


----------



## charlottawill

I think it's safe to say at this point we won't be seeing them at the coronation. I need to spend some time over at the W&C thread to remind myself that while this idiot and his snake of a wife make a mockery of his grandmother's life and reign, the real royals honor her memory by "keeping calm and carrying on" with grace and dignity.


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> looks to me like she is ridiculing the bowing tradition.  harry looks somewhat uncomfortable.  maybe she hasn't totally brainwashed him.


I thought that bit was insulting actually.


----------



## bubablu

jblended said:


> Here's someone's thread where they have two clips from the show: one where she says about meeting William and Catherine barefoot, and the other where she talks about this exaggerated curtsy for her first meeting with HMQ (like she said on Oprah, she didn't know how to curtsy).
> Twitter thread


She seems completely nuts in the bow clip. It's embarrassing to watch. And she clearly thinks she's super funny. OMG no, you are not, you are not a 5 years old. So glad I've spent my time today in other stupid things (bank holiday here), but not on this s*it. (Sorry, but these two are really something else)


----------



## Sol Ryan

Snort


----------



## Chanbal

The race card seems to work better in the US than in several other countries. I wonder why…


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> They look like entitled rich brats who have no consequences. I think MarkusA has a half black face or he is wearing a mask. Imo wearing an amo belt is over the top awful. How embarrassing.



Really embarrassing.  These are adults in their 40's or close to 40 acting like they are tweens.  

No wonder Jack scarfed Harry at the funeral.  They maybe knew by then they were going to include their photos in the series, though one would think they'd have had to get Jack and Eugenie's permission to use the photos, or maybe not?


----------



## jenayb

Harry looks so uncomfortable in the scene where Meghan is clearly ridiculing and making fun of the bowing/curtsy tradition.. he looks offended but isn't sure what he can do about it, so he just awkwardly sits there. So much cringe - that was difficult to watch.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> I thought that bit was insulting actually.


Agreed.  Be respectful and be respected in return.  Otherwise you’re just rude.  Might as well call your new home bonkers or something.


----------



## lishukha

I made the mistake of watching a couple of clips from the bbc news app while eating lunch… do they have this sad piano music in the background every time they show family video or talk about their “love story” like someone’s about to / has passed away?!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> And, as a slight vere off topic, what the hell has Serena Williams done to her face?


Maybe Scabies plastic surgeon was running a “half off any procedure“ special and she decided to get work done.

(I deliberately used the word “plastic” not “cosmetic surgeon” . Omid and his migratory eyebrows, for example, are not indicative of A level skills.)

To segue back on topic, the other thought was maybe Serena and Meghan got a 
2 for 1 Special somewhere.


----------



## Chanbal

What was TW expecting? It's not easy for many people to hug strangers.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


> The insider added that, for now, *there will be no official comment from the King or the Prince of Wales on its incendiary contents,* *including allegations of racism and 'unconscious bias' and a series of barbs aimed at Charles, William, Kate Middleton and other royals*.



From what I've read, all of their "bombshell charges" are a real big nothing burger.  Insulting, trivial, tone deaf, yes, absolutely.  

This is playing out as we speculated, I think.  They won't level specific charges with specific dates, times, places, names of people.  Just vague this and that, accusations against the grey suits with no names, so no single person can come back at them with a lawsuit or rebuttal.  Just hopes of threading the needle just enough so that they can keep the tenuous connection to the family as well as their titles, but play to the sugars and stans.


----------



## Pessie

jblended said:


> That's exactly what I thought when I watched it. He looks uncomfortable and she is taking a jab at the need to curtsy to the Queen. She thinks she sounds self-deprecating/relatable because she is laughing at her exaggerated curtsy, but she actually sounds really ignorant and Harry knows this entire thing is super disrespectful. Not that different from her turning around on the balcony and him telling her to face forward. H knows protocol and so does she; she just likes to break the rules.





bubablu said:


> She seems completely nuts in the bow clip. It's embarrassing to watch. And she clearly thinks she's super funny. OMG no, you are not, you are not a 5 years old. So glad I've spent my time today in other stupid things (bank holiday here), but not on this s*it. (Sorry, but these two are really something else)





jenayb said:


> Harry looks so uncomfortable in the scene where Meghan is clearly ridiculing and making fun of the bowing/curtsy tradition.. he looks offended but isn't sure what he can do about it, so he just awkwardly sits there. So much cringe - that was difficult to watch.


How many times have we seen Harry with that “earth please swallow me” expression on his face whilst Meghan is talking?  Yet he still keeps sucking it up.  It’s so weird.  And she comes across as a deeply unpleasant person in that clip.  It’s as if she enjoys humiliating Harry.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> How many times have we seen Harry with that “earth please swallow me” expression on his face whilst Meghan is talking?  Yet he still keeps sucking it up.  It’s so weird.  And she comes across as a deeply unpleasant person in that clip.  It’s as if she enjoys humiliating Harry.


seems like she's in control but he still has some idea of what is right


----------



## thewave1969

These two to me are like Dumb & Dumber, yikes!


----------



## jenayb

Pessie said:


> How many times have we seen Harry with that “earth please swallow me” expression on his face whilst Meghan is talking?  Yet he still keeps sucking it up.  It’s so weird.  And she comes across as a deeply unpleasant person in that clip.  It’s as if she enjoys humiliating Harry.





sdkitty said:


> seems like she's in control but he still has some idea of what is right



It's quite possible that he knows a divorce would be a very, very bad look... imagine the optics of that.


----------



## Helventara

Pessie said:


> How many times have we seen Harry with that “earth please swallow me” expression on his face whilst Meghan is talking?  Yet he still keeps sucking it up.  It’s so weird.  And she comes across as a deeply unpleasant person in that clip.  It’s as if she enjoys humiliating Harry.


I wonder about that. Meanwhile, sugars interpret  this look as 'the look of love'


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> _There was nothing specific said against anyone and therefore nothing to anger the BRF, so *they will be at the coronation*, they will keep their titles, and they can keep producing content under the guise of "never before told secrets from inside the palace" in the coming years (without actually divulging anything, but continuing to hint as they have been)._


Exactly and this is what galls me. They won’t have anyhing removed because there will never be anything specific to point to. All the allegations are vague and non specific. King Charles will look petty if he goes after them based on some random whining.  The palace needs to unleash the cracken and allow those who have been bullied to have their day and speak freely.


----------



## gracekelly

jenayb said:


> It's quite possible that he knows a divorce would be a very, very bad look... imagine the optics of that.


He knows this and woukd rather live separately than have the optic of divorce at this point.


----------



## gracekelly

justwatchin said:


> Agreed. But now they’ll need to find a new way to make money because the whining and complaining gets old. How much milking of this can they do?


If they are not invited to the coronation they will have something to complain about. If they are invited, they will be at the back of the room and complain about that too.


----------



## gracekelly

calicocat said:


> It's just sad that BRF/KC3/the late QEII essentially paid for/bought their own smear campaign through these two


And when Meghan thinks about it she laughs her head off and thinks she has won.


----------



## Pessie

Helventara said:


> I wonder about that. Meanwhile, sugars interpret  this look as 'the look of love'


They must be blind.  Who has to keep talking about their *great love story* like this?  So cringey.  I heard the expression overproving the other day and this exemplifies it.  Normal happy people just get on with being happy.  Celebs about to divorce whitter on about how gloriously in love they are IME.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I cannot keep up with this thread, but I finished the first episode with lots of help from the fast forward button! 

It was pretty boring, I’m a realist so all the gushing over their love story was a bit much for me.  

We dive into Harry’s hatred for the press, since he was very young….it’s deep everyone it’s a very very deep hatred.

There’s a lot about Diana, since I just watched the entire horrendous Season of the Crown, another rehashing of Diana and her tragic story was a bit much but he is deeply wounded by it and will likely never move past it.  We learn that ALL his other Girlfriends were driven away by the Media. Then we get into a whole Meghan is so much like Diana and weird photo juxtapositions that are very cringe.  I guess H doesn’t think it’s weird to want to marry your mother….but ok!  Weird video of Archie and M talking to a picture of Diana on the wall.  

We continue the love story through Botswana…no bathrooms on that trip….gross.  

Then we kind of oddly end with the story of their relationship breaking in the media and then quickly cut to EVERYONE hates Meghan she’s the anti-Christ….so I guess that’s setting us up for episode two.  However, it didn’t happen that way ….there was a lot of love in between.  

I don’t think most people will make it through this episode…it was painful.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

bubablu said:


> She seems completely nuts in the bow clip. It's embarrassing to watch. And she clearly thinks she's super funny. OMG no, you are not, you are not a 5 years old. So glad I've spent my time today in other stupid things (bank holiday here), but not on this s*it. (Sorry, but these two are really something else)


She is imitating what you used to see in old movies where a man would bow to a Queen   Harry looks embarrassed and knows she is ridiculing Royal protocol.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I bet that at this point William wishes he'd be an only child.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> One more example of their hypocrisy — gotta get the $$$.
> @QueenofWrapDress  thank you for the explanation.  It makes sense.  A leaked story is true, but a planted story is false.






Pessie said:


> I thought the same.  After making such unnecessary fuss, they’re now playing the kid card because they’re being paid for it.  Yuk.


'Too little too late' Imo. Maybe all fake and posed pictures and all for $$$$.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> 'Too little too late' Imo. Maybe all fake and posed pictures and all for $$$$.


Poor kid will have to live down that stupid party hat in future years. I believe that they photoshopped the picture to enhance the color. Look at her face and Aldi’s hair which is looking reddish. They gave Harry more hair as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sophisticatted said:


> ETA:  I wonder what Catherine and William would have picked if the ring had not been given to them.



I've always thought Kate was a trooper re: the ring. She had no say in it, she had no choice really, it came with a lot of baggage (even the positive connotation is a helluva lot of pressure) and let's be real, it's huge and a little bit dated (not as bad as Fergie's or even worse Eugenie's though) and more cocktail than engagement ring.


----------



## Lodpah

Mrs.Z said:


> I cannot keep up with this thread, but I finished the first episode with lots of help from the fast forward button!
> 
> It was pretty boring, I’m a realist so all the gushing over their love story was a bit much for me.
> 
> We dive into Harry’s hatred for the press, since he was very young….it’s deep everyone it’s a very very deep hatred.
> 
> There’s a lot about Diana, since I just watched the entire horrendous Season of the Crown, another rehashing of Diana and her tragic story was a bit much but he is deeply wounded by it and will likely never move past it.  We learn that ALL his other Girlfriends were driven away by the Media. Then we get into a whole Meghan is so much like Diana and weird photo juxtapositions that are very cringe.  I guess H doesn’t think it’s weird to want to marry your mother….but ok!  Weird video of Archie and M talking to a picture of Diana on the wall.
> 
> We continue the love story through Botswana…no bathrooms on that trip….gross.
> 
> Then we kind of oddly end with the story of their relationship breaking in the media and then quickly cut to EVERYONE hates Meghan she’s the anti-Christ….so I guess that’s setting us up for episode two.  However, it didn’t happen that way ….there was a lot of love in between.
> 
> I don’t think most people will make it through this episode…it was painful.


Nice summation. The problem with the the anti-christ depiction is the anti/christ fools the world for 3 and a half years with utter charm and people will love him so much they literally will worship the ground he walks on and then after 3 1/2 years he unleashes his  utter dreadfulness with violence and unimaginable horror. 

Somewhere akin to MM, you know, hit the ground running and love and compassion and all that jazz but in a gas lighting way.


----------



## mikimoto007

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've always thought Kate was a trooper re: the ring. She had no say in it, she had no choice really, it came with a lot of baggage (even the positive connotation is a helluva lot of pressure) and let's be real, it's huge and a little bit dated (not as bad as Fergie's or even worse Eugenie's though) and more cocktail than engagement ring.


Agreed! Kate has such classic style, the ring is so of its era….if she was choosing I’d say something similar to Liz Hurley’s ….would have been interesting to know if she knew she was getting Diana’s ring before the proposal


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




I am absolutely positive the majority of the members in this thread and over at the Wales thread cried more and more sincere tears over The Queen than the corpse eater. Harry...undecided. She was his grandmother, but judging from what he did when both her and Philip were dying you'd think he absolutely hated them.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I love talking to you ladies but this is really getting brain-cell killing. Her narrative isn’t even  *remotely* consistent.

‘I didn’t experience racism until I came to the U.K. - although the family was welcoming and gave me an expensive wedding and a house and riches AND I previously claimed I was othered during my auditions as an actress in LA and I also said a man called my mum the N word and people assumed she was a nanny again in LA.’

‘I don’t know British tabloids or the royals but I know my husband’s sort of estranged aunt is referred to as Fergie by the press?’

I don’t expect everybody to pick this up but I think it’s a little embarrassing News commentators aren’t referencing it when I can remember it.

Also I’m sorry all British people, even British teens, know that the slave trade happened. It’s widely taught in schools. It’s on the news every few months. Complete lies.

I can’t stand Afua Hirsch so I’m not surprised she’s there- an elite public school girl who talking heads off her connections who condescends to lecture the working public on what it means to be erased and oppressed. She really is another M.


----------



## sdkitty

jblended said:


> That's exactly what I thought when I watched it. He looks uncomfortable and she is taking a jab at the need to curtsy to the Queen. She thinks she sounds self-deprecating/relatable because she is laughing at her exaggerated curtsy, but she actually sounds really ignorant and Harry knows this entire thing is super disrespectful. Not that different from her turning around on the balcony and him telling her to face forward. H knows protocol and so does she; she just likes to break the rules.


he looks uncomfortable, then turns on a smile....I think he was raised to have great respect for his grandmother and the WIFE seemingly almost ridiculing the idea of showing the proper respect did make him uncomfortable - for a moment anyway

True - Americans don't curtsy but H comes from a very old institution which gave him a lot


----------



## jenayb

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I've always thought Kate was a trooper re: the ring. She had no say in it, she had no choice really, it came with a lot of baggage (even the positive connotation is a helluva lot of pressure) and let's be real, it's huge and a little bit dated (not as bad as Fergie's or even worse Eugenie's though) and more cocktail than engagement ring.



I swear you've said what many of us have thought for years...


----------



## Maggie Muggins

xincinsin said:


> Ah, "Grandma Diana" was version 3 of Archie's first words, right? After crocodile and something else.
> 
> *Maybe they will claim that the baby girl is Diana reborn*.


Them's sacrilegious words! Wash your mouth with soap! Doncha know ZedZed is the reincarnation of Saint Diana! She must be protected at all cost to avoid the same dreadful fate!


----------



## youngster

@Mrs.Z, thank you for taking one for the team! I can't imagine sitting through that. 

Are you watching episodes 2 and 3?  They dropped today too?  Did the BBC have anything to say about those?  Have to wonder how they managed to get enough material for 6 episodes of this whine fest.  I feel for members of the press that are forced to watch the whole thing.  Maybe that is Harry's payback for his deep hatred of them.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that don't want to give them clicks, but would like some entertainment…


----------



## Lodpah

These two live in a bubble and they forget there’s a whole world out there that practically came to the Queen’s funeral. Imagine the disgust most of these leaders feel about right now towards them. It’s definitely not endearing them to the world.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Wow




Not surprised one bit. This is the nutjob that called the police numerous times for intruders and they could never find anything.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG. I broke my intentions to not watch any clips and clicked on the curtsy one. I only made it through 17 seconds, but it makes me want to become physically violent. Such a rude, ill-mannered, completely unfunny POS.


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that don't want to give them clicks, but would like some entertainment…



Wow she’s so disrespectful to the Queen mocking tradition and the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> How many times have we seen Harry with that “earth please swallow me” expression on his face whilst Meghan is talking?  Yet he still keeps sucking it up.  It’s so weird.  And she comes across as a deeply unpleasant person in that clip. * It’s as if she enjoys humiliating Harry.*



Oh, she does. I could probably make my own little trailer of all the times she has ridiculed him in public. Painful to watch really.


----------



## sdkitty

this is behind a paywall

*Meghan Admits Engagement Was ‘Orchestrated Reality Show’*

*By Tom Sykes, Dan Ladden-Hall*

The first history-making episodes of “Harry & Meghan” are finally here. Strap in.


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting (inside?) view…


_Meghan Markle is 'TOXIC' for Prince Harry to be around says Lady Victoria Hervey_​


----------



## Gal4Dior

pomeline said:


> What's this talk about their engagement being an 'orchestrated reality show' engagement? What did they expect? An informal barbeque with live streaming...? I really have to wonder how Harry has been able to float through his life without any sort of understanding on what is going on around him. He's lived as a royal all his life, yet knows nothing about protocol or anything. Of course you'd have a rehearsed announcement and interview! Duh...
> 
> And this cringefest of a photo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their stories change so fast no-one has time for that. I thought he was supposed to have proposed to her in the kitchen when she was making her famous non-vegan roast chicken? How many times did he propose to her? And that setting, roses, electric candles  (hey, where were the balloons?)  etc. was not orchestrated...? Ok then...


I noticed this discrepancy, too. Their whole life is just a concoction of repeated lies. I hope the press blows them up and finally realize they lie ALL THE TIME.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> yes, I just found a story about Kate and Will coming to their home and how shocked she was as their coldness and not being comfortable hugging!  uugh


Uugh is right. I’m not a hugger, I hug DH, kids and grandkids. Not wanting to be hugged does not make a person cold. In reality the Royal Family has done nothing wrong in regards to their interactions with TW, so they make up anything they think might make the others look bad. What I don’t understand is why they are given these opportunities. Doesn’t say much positive about those that do give them the platforms to spread their lies and nastiness. Rant done and all IMHO of course.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> seems like she's in control but he still has some idea of what is right


But if he isn’t strong enough to challenge her lies then he’s worthless.


----------



## bag-mania

Gal4Dior said:


> I noticed this discrepancy, too. Their whole life is just a concoction of repeated lies. I hope the press blows them up and finally realize they lie ALL THE TIME.


It depends on the particular press outlet. Some of them are anti-monarchy and are willing to play along with them if it means weakening the institution.


----------



## gracekelly

So Harry is his mother’s son and his mother thought with her heart. Oooookkkaaay.  So if this is so then please give up all your royal titles including Prince and in future be addressed as Lady Harry.   Your mother thought with her heart instead of her brain because she wasn’t smart. She admitted publicly that she was “as thick as a plank.”  She did have some street smarts, but not all the time as evidenced by her choice of companion at the end of her life. In that regard, Harry, you. are truly your mother’s son. You are using your emotions to hit back at your family  because you are not smart enough to think through your emotional responses and find intelligent solutions. It would be great if you dealt with this privately and didn’t inflict yourself on the rest of us. Isn’t that what you said you wanted!  Privacy?  So how come you are exposing yourself on television?


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> They look like entitled rich brats who have no consequences. I think MarkusA has a half black face or he is wearing a mask.  Imo wearing an amo belt is over the top awful.  How embarrassing.


I think they are meant to be wearing camouflage in their faces like soldiers do
Probs an attempt to do steam punk or Mad Max


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> But if he isn’t strong enough to challenge her lies then he’s worthless.


right
I think if they separate or divorce it will be her that makes the decision.....he's stuck at age 12 and under her control IMO


----------



## pomeline

I'm so mean but... If she wore clothes that fit, you wouldn't need a team of people try and wrestle a zipper up. No wonder the zipper broke in Nottingham.

And then there's this one:



> “I don’t even know your middle name or your birthday, but you’re telling people you raised me?” Meghan says in the doc. “I don’t remember seeing her when I was a kid at my dad’s house.” Meghan, who says she wanted a sister, says they weren’t even close enough to have had the “bawl out” that Samantha claims they had when they last saw each other in her early 20s.



I thought several people have testified that Samantha and Thomas Jr. did in fact live in the same house for several years with Meghan, Thomas Sr. and Doria. Her mother however wanted them to be a family of three and did her best to get the older kids out of the house. And while Samantha took care of her little sister, M's mom was busy with other activities. She doesn't know her sister's middle name or birthday? Not really surprising. These people mean nothing to her and are of no use so why bother memorising details about them.


----------



## rose60610

Is the reason Claw's clothes fit terribly because if they're altered she can't return them?  There's only so much you can do with safety pins and tape. But I don't think she even uses those. She takes them off the hangers and puts them on. She doesn't even want a tailor to know what she's going to wear for fear of "intel leaks".  Surely the world waits with bated breath on her next disastrous outfit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bubablu

sdkitty said:


> yes, I just found a story about Kate and Will coming to their home and how shocked she was as their coldness and not being comfortable hugging!  uugh


And she was barefoot! I mean, first time you meet them and you can't even wear some shoes? It's a joke.


----------



## sdkitty

pomeline said:


> I'm so mean but... If she wore clothes that fit, you wouldn't need a team of people try and wrestle a zipper up. No wonder the zipper broke in Nottingham.
> 
> And then there's this one:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought several people have testified that Samantha and Thomas Jr. did in fact live in the same house for several years with Meghan, Thomas Sr. and Doria. Her mother however wanted them to be a family of three and did her best to get the older kids out of the house. And while Samantha took care of her little sister, M's mom was busy with other activities. She doesn't know her sister's middle name or birthday? Not really surprising. These people mean nothing to her and are of no use so why bother memorising details about them.



IDK where this info comes from but it doesn't reflect well on Doria.  She didn't want her husband's kids around but was busy with her own activities and not very involved with her kid?


----------



## Mrs.Z

youngster said:


> @Mrs.Z, thank you for taking one for the team! I can't imagine sitting through that.
> 
> Are you watching episodes 2 and 3?  They dropped today too?  Did the BBC have anything to say about those?  Have to wonder how they managed to get enough material for 6 episodes of this whine fest.  I feel for members of the press that are forced to watch the whole thing.  Maybe that is Harry's payback for his deep hatred of them.


I will watch them….probably later tonight (I’m in the US).  A lot of the media coverage I’m seeing must be about the later episodes since #1 was pretty uneventful.  

Another observation, it’s not fair to constantly show members of the Royal Family at solemn events like Remeberence Day or in Church and juxtapose that with Harry talking about how all the women in the family have suffered.  The effect is to make them look sad and miserable, it’s so misleading!


----------



## pomeline

bubablu said:


> And she was barefoot! I mean, first time you meet them and you can't even wear some shoes? It's a joke.



Having seen those feet, can you imagine the horror?


----------



## Lodpah

Charles subtly wears an axe tie to an Ethiopian service today. 









						Fact Check? Palace Hits Back at Harry and Meghan Netflix Claims: Report
					

Royal sources allegedly challenged the notion they were approached with the chance to address the accusations made in the series but declined.




					www.breitbart.com


----------



## pomeline

sdkitty said:


> IDK where this info comes from but it doesn't reflect well on Doria.  She didn't want her husband's kids around but was busy with her own activities and not very involved with her kid?



I'm going to check Tom Bower's book to see if he confirms the info above which is from another book. It was family member accounts on how she mainly smoked pot on the front lawn and attended ahem... shall we say parties at friends' houses. I need more sources for this though.


----------



## gracekelly

pomeline said:


> I'm so mean but... If she wore clothes that fit, you wouldn't need a team of people try and wrestle a zipper up. No wonder the zipper broke in Nottingham.
> 
> And then there's this one:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought several people have testified that Samantha and Thomas Jr. did in fact live in the same house for several years with Meghan, Thomas Sr. and Doria. Her mother however wanted them to be a family of three and did her best to get the older kids out of the house. And while Samantha took care of her little sister, M's mom was busy with other activities. She doesn't know her sister's middle name or birthday? Not really surprising. These people mean nothing to her and are of no use so why bother memorising details about them.



I don’t believe this for a second. It is just part of her continued erasure of the Markle family.   They were all living together in the same house at one point so birthdays were celebrated. 

The two of them couldn’t even get their stories straight, during the engagement interview,  about how they met. It wouldn’t look good to say that they met at the Soho House bar and then found a room.


----------



## sdkitty

pomeline said:


> I'm going to check Tom Bower's book to see if he confirms the info above which is from another book. It was family member accounts on how she mainly smoked pot on the front lawn and attended ahem... shall we say parties at friends' houses. I need more sources for this though.


as much as I detest the WIFE, that smear about her mother's pot smoking sounds so easy to say


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> I don’t believe this for a second. It is just part of her continued erasure of the Markle family.   They were all living together in the same house at one point so birthdays were celebrated.
> 
> The two of them couldn’t even get their stories straight, during the engagement interview,  about how they met. It wouldn’t look good to say that they met at the Soho House bar and then found a room.



I'm surprised they said "Instagram" instead of some mumbly "Tin...stagram".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was indifferent towards Doria before, but maybe a lot of Ghoul's disgusting qualities do indeed come from her.


----------



## pomeline

sdkitty said:


> as much as I detest the WIFE, that smear about her mother's pot smoking sounds so easy to say



True but it wouldn't surprise me at all. She seemed a very hippie soul, not that there's necessarily anything bad about it. Not everyone is motherly even if they loved the kid. She did stand up for Thomas Jr. when he was beaten up at school every day after the district sent him to an all-black school as part of a policy. I don't think it was to smear, it was more about how the parents were incompatible, dad working long hours, mom not finding her calling.


----------



## sdkitty

pomeline said:


> True but it wouldn't surprise me at all. She seemed a very hippie soul, not that there's necessarily anything bad about it. Not everyone is motherly even if they loved the kid. She did stand up for Thomas Jr. when he was beaten up at school every day after the district sent him to an all-black school as part of a policy. I don't think it was to smear, it was more about how the parents were incompatible, dad working long hours, mom not finding her calling.


there's not necessarily anything bad about smoking put but the way this is said makes her sound like an irresponsible mom (which she may have been but I take everything with a grain of salt)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the DM article on the 20 biggest relevations (I'm over it already after #1...the idiots "documenting ourselves because it made sense with all the lies about us". Sure, I film myself all day long too. Oh wait, I'm not a narc, so no.



> In interview footage, she says: 'We've been really conscious of protecting our kids as best as we can and also understanding the role that they play in this really historical family.'



You mean, like...none? Private citizens, no princely titles, will never as much as touch the throne, and luckily the Waleses have three adorable kids which are the future of the monarchy.


----------



## youngster

pukasonqo said:


> I think they are meant to be wearing camouflage in their faces like soldiers do
> Probs an attempt to do steam punk or Mad Max



These people are supposed to be adults.  They are all around age 40 or so.  They weren't hosting a children's party and dressing up to maximize the fun for a group of children or because they were expecting 100+ trick-or-treaters.  In those outfits, they probably would have scared Archie and Lili who are only 3.5 and 1.5 basically.  Camo? Guns? Steam punk? Mad Max?  Yes, that's what I want to expose my toddler children to. Said no one ever.  This is a group of people who have not grown up, doesn't matter that they are all middle aged.
ETA:  OK, apparently the photo was several years ago so no little kids around while these 35 year olds dressed up for Halloween.


----------



## serene

Just starting episode three. Nothing that new is yet being said and two first two episodes have been quite boring


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> These people are supposed to be adults.  They are all around age 40 or so.  They weren't hosting a children's party and dressing up to maximize the fun for a group of children or because they were expecting 100+ trick-or-treaters.  In those outfits, they probably would have scared Archie and Lili who are only 3.5 and 1.5 basically.  Camo? Guns? Steam punk? Mad Max?  Yes, that's what I want to expose my toddler children to. Said no one ever.  This is a group of people who have not grown up, doesn't matter that they are all middle aged.



Wasn't this the Halloween before the dating news broke? I foggily remember her babbling on about "one last night of fun, inkognito".


----------



## mikimoto007

I haven’t read all the comments on the series….but I’m shocked that they have sought to exploit their children so much, all whilst complaining about press intrusion…..don’t they see the clash here?


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't this the Halloween before the dating news broke? I foggily remember her babbling on about "one last night of fun, inkognito".



Could be!  I thought it was more recent.  OK, so no little ones were around, that's good.


----------



## rose60610

There are some photos in the sugars' thread showing them with, for example, the beagle when his legs were in casts from getting ran over. All kinds of cutesy photos taken in-house early on. Who has pro photographers following them around at home? They were plotting from the get-go. And early on they were very popular and well-liked. What lies were going around that they now have to "defend"? Classic narc trait. Take a criticism and twist it back at the critic, play the victim. There's another photo with the beagle taken what seems recently. Either that dog has nine lives or it's a different dog.


----------



## pomeline

rose60610 said:


> There are some photos in the sugars' thread showing them with, for example, the beagle when his legs were in casts from getting ran over. All kinds of cutesy photos taken in-house early on. Who has pro photographers following them around at home? They were plotting from the get-go. And early on they were very popular and well-liked. What lies were going around that they now have to "defend"? Classic narc trait. Take a criticism and twist it back at the critic, play the victim. There's another photo with the beagle taken what seems recently. Either that dog has nine lives or it's a different dog.



I would really like to know what really happened to the dog. There's been so many rumours floating around, everything from M backing over it with her car to throwing the poor animal out the second floor window of NottCott during a heated argument with Haz and under the influence that I really would like to know. Something strange happened no doubt.


----------



## pomeline

Please, let it happen! This is the MP who I recently saw talking about removing the titles.

'Now strip them of their titles!': Tory MP leads calls for Harry and Meghan to lose Duke and Duchess status after 'aggressive and unbelievable' attacks on UK

I won't ask for anything else for Christmas (ok so not much else...) but can I just pretty please have this wish?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't this the Halloween before the dating news broke? I foggily remember her babbling on about "one last night of fun, inkognito".


Omg omg omg!  They knew then they wanted to document it all.  Omg omg omg!
We are such fun people we have no idea how to close our mouths.  Silly fun people !  Doncha wanna b cool like meeeee

_Speaking about the event in *2016*, Meghan recalled going to a Halloween party with Prince Harry.

Prince Harry was dressed in a gas mask, while Meghan also pulled her hat low over her face. 

The couple said they 'wanted to pull the pin on the fun grenade'. 

Meghan said: 'His cousin Eugenie, her boyfriend Jack and my friend Markus were there too. It was *so great, just silly fun*.'_






_In another photo from the big night out, Meghan can be seen posing for a playful selfie with Princess Eugenie 
Meghan has previously spoken of the event during an appearance on the  Ellen DeGeneres last year. 

'He came to see me in Toronto and our friends and his cousin Eugenie and now her husband Jack, they came as well, and the four of us snuck out in Halloween costumes to just have one fun night on the town before it was out in the world that we were a couple,' she recalled. 'It was a post-apocalypse theme, so we had all this very bizarre costuming on, and we were able to just have one fun final night out.' 

From DM_


----------



## oldbag

gracekelly said:


> If they are not invited to the coronation they will have something to complain about. If they are invited, they will be at the back of the room and complain about that too.


I'm just going to say this in a sarcastic way. A few hundred years ago when someone was a real pain in the butt to the King or Queen, that person ended up with a real pain in the neck.


----------



## CarryOn2020

rose60610 said:


> There are some photos in the sugars' thread showing them with, for example, the beagle when his legs were in casts from getting ran over. All kinds of cutesy photos taken in-house early on. Who has pro photographers following them around at home? They were plotting from the get-go. And early on they were very popular and well-liked. What lies were going around that they now have to "defend"? Classic narc trait. Take a criticism and twist it back at the critic, play the victim. There's another photo with the beagle taken what seems recently. Either that dog has nine lives or it's a different dog.


Has William apologized to Lady Hussey?  Hired her back?  Why not?


----------



## CarryOn2020

This is why KCIII must take action now. Kick him out, otherwise he will never shut up.  No, it is not his _duty to uncover anything. _We have authorities who do that very well.  Shut this down, Charles. 

_As already reported, the content of the Netflix programmes promoted racial narratives and featured fringe academics with questionable track records in promoting divisive racial politics. Prince Harry pushed racism allegations himself in the show, and made clear his intention to fight the media, saying “*This is about duty and service and I feel being part of this family, it is my duty to uncover this exploitation and bribery that happens within our media”.








						Fact Check? Palace Hits Back at Harry and Meghan Netflix Claims: Report
					

Royal sources allegedly challenged the notion they were approached with the chance to address the accusations made in the series but declined.




					www.breitbart.com
				



*_


----------



## bag-mania

mikimoto007 said:


> I haven’t read all the comments on the series….but I’m shocked that they have sought to exploit their children so much, all whilst complaining about press intrusion…..don’t they see the clash here?


Nope, they see those kids as being extensions of themselves. They exist to be used… by them.


----------



## charlottawill

In discussing the show with her cohosts a talking head on an afternoon tabloid show just said MM reminds her "so, so much of Diana".


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> I thought it was something edible!" I feel like these two are just...


"...full of sh*t" is the phrase that comes to my mind.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that don't want to give them clicks, but would like some entertainment…



Excellent videos.  Love the comment about MM’s lack of hygiene.  About the hugging, most of us do not want our personal space violated. Ever.  It is not about being a cold or warm person [notice her humble bragging here - I’m a hugger, so I can touch you whenever I like. Why are you stiff and cold?]. It is about violating someone’s boundaries.  Show respect.


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> "throwing the poor animal out the second floor window of NottCott during a heated argument"


I truly hope that is just a horrible rumor. If that was verifiable by anyone within the royal universe and the RF did not stage an invention at that point with Hazy they made a massive mistake. Someone who could do that to a dog is disturbed and should not be around children. But I don't know what to believe anymore.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Mrs.Z said:


> I cannot keep up with this thread, but I finished the first episode with lots of help from the fast forward button!
> 
> It was pretty boring, I’m a realist so all the gushing over their love story was a bit much for me.
> 
> We dive into Harry’s hatred for the press, since he was very young….it’s deep everyone it’s a very very deep hatred.
> 
> There’s a lot about Diana, since I just watched the entire horrendous Season of the Crown, another rehashing of Diana and her tragic story was a bit much but he is deeply wounded by it and will likely never move past it.  We learn that ALL his other Girlfriends were driven away by the Media. Then we get into a whole Meghan is so much like Diana and weird photo juxtapositions that are very cringe.  I guess H doesn’t think it’s weird to want to marry your mother….but ok!  Weird video of Archie and M talking to a picture of Diana on the wall.
> 
> We continue the love story through Botswana…no bathrooms on that trip….gross.
> 
> Then we kind of oddly end with the story of their relationship breaking in the media and then quickly cut to EVERYONE hates Meghan she’s the anti-Christ….so I guess that’s setting us up for episode two.  However, it didn’t happen that way ….there was a lot of love in between.
> 
> I don’t think most people will make it through this episode…it was painful.


To you and everyone with the stomach to sit through this garbage, thank you for your service to the community


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> IDK where this info comes from but it doesn't reflect well on Doria.  She didn't want her husband's kids around but was busy with her own activities and not very involved with her kid?


Wasn't this all discussed in Revenge?


----------



## CobaltBlu

I hope Catherine is OK.  I am sure her eyes are aching from all the eye-rolling. 

I saw the clip about H&M meeting with them, and UM....I, CB am from California, and later lived many years in a no-shoes-in-the-house tropical land. I also am very casual. 

YET.... I am befuddled.....
Who the hell goes la la la-ing around their house in ripped jeans and barefoot when company is coming for dinner? 
NO matter who it is. That is just common courtesy for even the most common of commoners. 
It's company coming to eat in your home!  They do not want to see your feet. 

Even in the no-shoes-in-the-house tropical land of Hawaii you dress nicely when people come over unless it's moving night or a house-painting party....and yes, everyone's shoes are outside on the lanai and people are barefoot but that is not the case in wherever Meghan was, since it was obviously not Hawaii; that's utterly ridiculous.  

Nor would I tell the story of looking like a slob to make my guest and sister-in-law look awkward and foolish (not that that's possible for C&Will because they are awesome) in my boring docudrama about my story that no one really cares about.

Did this moron ask the other Palm Tree, "Harry, did you tell your bro its jeans and t's, shoes optional?"  No? 
Then dress nicely and put on shoes. GACK!

These two are so ridiculous. I cannot even. My own eyes are all rolled out. 

Rant Over. I know we did this already but I needed to rant.


----------



## Chanbal

serene said:


> Just starting episode three. Nothing that new is yet being said and two first two episodes have been quite boring


My (sarcastic) 2 cents:  (All allegedly, of course)

What they are selling: It's the greatest love story of all time in which a prince meets the smartest and most beautiful young girl on earth, saves her from her poor family, marries her, and he saves her again from his own family …  and their love is just getting stronger and stronger.

What I'm buying: it's the story of 2 greedy, jealous, and overly ambitious people, without any special beauty or talent, who bully and use others to get whatever money and power they want.

However, unless there is something major in the last 3 episodes, the BRF will pretend that nothing happened.The Harkles will continue merching titles, visiting the royal relatives for more material… We will continue being bombarded with their stories, victim cards… The journalists in the UK will continue to be the 'bad' guys, and the ones in the US will continue deaf-blind…


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm starting to worry about you. What happened that Ghoul is suddendly dear to your heart?


I must admit, I am too!  

Just because a woman marries into a family, doesn't mean she "deserves" anything from that family, IMO, especially right at the start.  I'm no royal, but I have some decent jewels and you can damn well believe I'm not handing it over to my son's wife, especially if she starts trashing me a year and a half after I throw them a lavish wedding (I'm not, LOL, just trying to make my point!).  My son can gift her WTF he wants, but if it's family heirlooms and I perceive her as malignant, it's not happening.  She'd better prove herself for some time first.  There are many gold diggers out there, and with the divorce rate in the US what it is, I think it would be stupid not to be careful.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent videos.  Love the comment about MM’s lack of hygiene.  About the hugging, most of us do not want our personal space violated. Ever.  It is not about being a cold or warm person [notice her humble bragging here - I’m a hugger, so I can touch you whenever I like. Why are you stiff and cold?]. It is about violating someone’s boundaries.  Show respect.


I think these people do a good job summarizing the 3 first episodes.


----------



## purseinsanity

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo she _clawed_ him because he wanted/needed to be _clawed_.  Two gorgeous ladies had rejected him. MM is not _dear to my heart. _I did not like her on suits and never thought the marriage would be allowed.  The parallels to Wallis&Ed caused me to be concerned that she would always be The American, never quite fit in. And look what happened.  She handled it all poorly which is mostly due to him. He behaves as an egotistical jerk [probably because he is].  Although she is no saint, I really do dislike the arrogance of the privileged BRF and she really did deserve better imo.  So, yes,  take the jewels, get some money, and get on with your life, chérie.  The guy is a complainer and mean-spirited person.  My 2 cents.
> 
> ETA:  As I see it, a lot of this drama happens because these mothers demand that their daughters marry $$$$.  They are only out for the money and, maybe, a step up in society.  *Doria and KrisK seem to be very much alike in their goals for the daughters*.  Imo they set their daughters up for unhappiness, probably because they themselves are so unhappy [but I’m not a counselor].


I think they're totally different.  Kris Jenner whores out her daughters, but they work hard for what they've got.  No one married someone for money; they're independently wealthy on their own.  Doria didn't seem to instill any work ethic in TW at all.


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> True but it wouldn't surprise me at all. She seemed a very hippie soul, not that there's necessarily anything bad about it. Not everyone is motherly even if they loved the kid. She did stand up for Thomas Jr. when he was beaten up at school every day after the district sent him to an all-black school as part of a policy. I don't think it was to smear, it was more about how the parents were incompatible, dad working long hours, mom not finding her calling.


From what I recall in Revenge, Doria and TM were ill-suited from the start. He was smitten, looking for someone to settle down with.
She was younger, not ready to settle down but saw an older man with a good income.


----------



## purseinsanity

pomeline said:


> What's this talk about their engagement being an 'orchestrated reality show' engagement? What did they expect? An informal barbeque with live streaming...? I really have to wonder how Harry has been able to float through his life without any sort of understanding on what is going on around him. He's lived as a royal all his life, yet knows nothing about protocol or anything. Of course you'd have a rehearsed announcement and interview! Duh...
> 
> And this cringefest of a photo...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their stories change so fast no-one has time for that. I thought he was supposed to have proposed to her in the kitchen when she was making her famous non-vegan roast chicken? How many times did he propose to her? And that setting, roses, electric candles  (hey, where were the balloons?)  etc. was not orchestrated...? Ok then...


Wait, is this a picture of the "engagement"?  I refuse to watch the show, so no clue what's going on except for what I read here.  WTF whips out a camera to record your BF proposing to you?  This is the bull$hittiest bull$**** of a show I've ever read of!


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> In discussing the show with her cohosts a talking head on an afternoon tabloid show just said MM reminds her "so, so much of Diana".


Most of the press are parrots repeating what they have heard over and over from H&M. Unfortunately, the average person not following them closely (99% of society) will believe it too due to repetition.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wonder if he took the 2 rings.  Did they leave the aquamarine in the vault?   What has always bothered me about this story is how Hazzi or the media portray Hazz as  the generous one that W&K should be indebted to.


I like to see good vs bad intentions, but with Dufus, it could've been just a ploy to impress Catherine as we can't guess his real motive. I don't think W needs to feel indebted to H because IMO W had always been the most supportive and considerate of the two.


----------



## marietouchet

deleted double post


----------



## marietouchet

Brexit, racism, Commonwealth, bias according to the Harkles and status of title-removing legislation








						Tory MP pushes for law to strip Harry and Meghan of royal titles
					

A Tory MP is leading calls for Harry and Meghan to lose their royal status because the couple are 'monetising' their titles with 'aggressive and unbelievable' attacks on Britain.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

It's just shocking that Harry would actually call the Commonwealth "Empire 2.0".  I think this is what is going to get him in heaps of hot water with KC3.  That was the Queen's life work.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Episode 2:  Again, very boring so I fast forwarded through a lot. 

The episode opens with Papparazzi following M & H through NYC, it’s very tense, very hectic, M keeps pointing them out but the viewer sees nothing, bc honestly maybe they are there but it’s just not that dramatic! Cut back to Diana being hounded by the press!

Now Meghan’s childhood….yawn, we’re driving through old neighborhoods and going to her schools, BIG yawn. 

A lot of Doria interviews.  Apparently it was Doria who told Meghan that her deteriorating relationship with the press was race related, it had not yet occurred to Meghan.  

Lots more about the press stalking and hounding Meghan during the “dating period.“. #yawn 

I actually thought the part about Meghan meeting the Queen and not knowing what to do was funny, she was not being disrespectful but …..this also goes to the barefoot issue……don’t you talk to your BF about what his family is like, what the expectations are?  How formal they are or are not?  I don’t buy all the ignorance.  

The rest of the show is about Meghan’s acting career with 9,000 interviews from friends and associates talking about how great she is….YAWN.  

The Engagement ………..Meghan says she was hoping things would get better, everyone promised things were going to get better! 

Then we JUMP to Brexit which was apparently all about illegal immigration and race….ummm ok, I thought it was far more complex?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

I don't think King Charles will sit by and do nothing. In my world I think he will wait until mockumentary and Hairy's book is out and then he will have something to say.


----------



## Sharont2305

purseinsanity said:


> Wait, is this a picture of the "engagement"?  I refuse to watch the show, so no clue what's going on except for what I read here.  WTF whips out a camera to record your BF proposing to you?  This is the bull$hittiest bull$**** of a show I've ever read of!


Not only that but just before the proposal she's on the phone to her friend Jess telling her "this is it!"


----------



## charlottawill

"I was a hugger, always been a hugger, I didn't realise that is really jarring for a lot of Brits."

Oh really? When Diana was dating Hasnat Khan she went to great lengths to learn about his family and their culture before meeting them. Tell us again how much you have in common with her.


----------



## carmen56

charlottawill said:


> In discussing the show with her cohosts a talking head on an afternoon tabloid show just said MM reminds her "so, so much of Diana".


Oh please, Raptor is nothing like Diana!  She’s not fit to lick Diana’s boots.


----------



## charlottawill

Debbini said:


> I don't think King Charles will sit by and do nothing. In my world I think he will wait until mockumentary and Hairy's book is out and then he will have something to say.


He will wait until they've played all their cards before he shows his. I hope he plays a royal flush on them.


----------



## kemilia

sdkitty said:


> what about the shoes?  they're black?


Hate the black shoes, should have been a neutral color or slightly sparkly. Same with the clutch. JMO.


----------



## csshopper

CobaltBlu said:


> I hope Catherine is OK.  I am sure her eyes are aching from all the eye-rolling.
> 
> I saw the clip about H&M meeting with them, and UM....I, CB am from California, and later lived many years in a no-shoes-in-the-house tropical land. I also am very casual.
> 
> YET.... I am befuddled.....
> Who the hell goes la la la-ing around their house in ripped jeans and barefoot when company is coming for dinner?
> NO matter who it is. That is just common courtesy for even the most common of commoners.
> It's company coming to eat in your home!  They do not want to see your feet.
> 
> Even in the no-shoes-in-the-house tropical land of Hawaii you dress nicely when people come over unless it's moving night or a house-painting party....and yes, everyone's shoes are outside on the lanai and people are barefoot but that is not the case in wherever Meghan was, since it was obviously not Hawaii; that's utterly ridiculous.
> 
> Nor would I tell the story of looking like a slob to make my guest and sister-in-law look awkward and foolish (not that that's possible for C&Will because they are awesome) in my boring docudrama about my story that no one really cares about.
> 
> Did this moron ask the other Palm Tree, "Harry, did you tell your bro its jeans and t's, shoes optional?"  No?
> Then dress nicely and put on shoes. GACK!
> 
> These two are so ridiculous. I cannot even. My own eyes are all rolled out.
> 
> Rant Over. I know we did this already but I needed to rant.


CB, it’s Ok, you’re among friends. 

Have not, will not watch it, but just the clips, quotes and synopsis about it make me feel like I’ve been slimed.

IF they are ever again included in a Royal function where she has to curtsy,  I hope someone subtly knocks her on her azz .


----------



## charlottawill

Sharont2305 said:


> Not only that but just before the proposal she's on the phone to her friend Jess telling her "this is it!"


 Add Duchess of Indiscretion to the lengthy list of her titles here.


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> "I was a hugger, always been a hugger, I didn't realise that is really jarring for a lot of Brits."
> 
> Oh really? When Diana was dating Hasnat Khan she went to great lengths to learn about his family and their culture before meeting them. Tell us again how much you have in common with her.


Great observation!


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> CB, it’s Ok, you’re among friends.
> 
> Have not, will not watch it, but just the clips, quotes and synopsis about it make me feel like I’ve been slimed.
> 
> IF they are ever again included in a Royal function where she has to curtsy,  I hope someone subtly knocks her on her azz .


It would be the height of hubris for them to show up at a royal function after this and the book.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

pomeline said:


> *I'm still wondering if there's something wrong with Harry. *I mean, he has no clue of things he definitely should know a great deal about. He doesn't know how women at court should dress, he doesn't know about protocol, he doesn't know why he's called Harry... Is he autistic or what's the deal? It's as if he was stoned all his life. He couldn't even prepare Meghan for anything because "I dunno".
> 
> And then there's Meghan who supposedly knew nothing about anything either. "I didn't know you would eat with those weird stick things... silverware or what is it called, hahah, fancy and antiquated!" "Shoes -  I didn't know what they were!" "A prince?! I thought it was something edible!" I feel like these two are just...


Dufus probably destroyed what few brain cells he had with his bad habits, and overindulgences.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Sharont2305 said:


> Not only that but just before the proposal she's on the phone to her friend Jess telling her "this is it!"


Glad you brought this up, it’s SOOOOOO odd.  Was the scene a dramatic reenactment?  Was she recording herself at the time?  It’s all very odd.


----------



## marietouchet

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks. We need a BS emoji or gif to describe Dufus and ZedZed's malarkey something like this.
> View attachment 5667319


And our BSM should be BROWN, very brown


----------



## Laila619

I gagged my way through the first 3 episodes. Some thoughts:

They are trying really hard to make Meghan seem like a wonderful and kind person. They have former co-workers, friends, and even Samantha Marble’s estranged daughter(!) gushing on and on about how sweet she is or dedicated to her charity causes she is.  Really ramming it down the viewer’s throat. But too little too late, we all know the real truth of how badly she treats others, including her own poor father.

She lied about her parents, claiming that dear sweet Doria raised her and she was just with her Dad on weekends only. LIES! Also claimed that as an only child, she was so lonely and that when she attended her first Christmas at Sandringham, H’s family was so terrific. It was the loud, boisterous family she always wished she had. But now she is denying her OWN kids the chance to grow up around a huge and supportive family. She doesn’t see any irony in that?

They both admitted everyone was thrilled and elated for them when they first got engaged. Then HOW can it be racism that changed everyone’s minds about her?! They knew she was mixed race from the start and almost everyone in the family and the country embraced her with open arms.

Harry says Meghan is just like Diana. HOW? Diana was devoted to the Queen and to the Royal traditions and customs. Diana was not estranged from her own father or sisters. Diana didn’t quit when things got hard. Diana treated servants and employees with kindness. Love really is blind as they say.

At one point, a producer asks them to tell her about the engagement. Both Harry and Meghan sit there staring straight ahead, not speaking. Then H tentatively turns to look at Meghan, and she turns sharply to him, and says quite rudely, “You’re looking at me? You tell it!” Methinks there is trouble in paradise. H smugly says everyone else in his family married someone who fits a particular mold, but HE married for love. Gag!

They are both utterly disgusting and completely self-absorbed.


----------



## charlottawill

Laila619 said:


> "You tell it!”


Maybe he'd rather forget it happened.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> yes, I just found a story about Kate and Will coming to their home and how shocked she was as their coldness and not being comfortable hugging!  uugh


Well, not many people would or could be a hugger like her since she is used to hugging men, lots of men, for money, as evidenced by all the photos of her with her arms wrapped around boyfriends, lovers, friend's fathers and strangers.


----------



## Pessie

Meghan’s blinged up the stories about how they met and their engagement, just like she *upgraded* the ring


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BLG is our kind of guy


----------



## LizzieBennett

youngster said:


> It's just shocking that Harry would actually call the Commonwealth "Empire 2.0".  I think this is what is going to get him in heaps of hot water with KC3.  That was the Queen's life work.


I agree.   In my opinion, this may be worse for them than had they insulted KCIII, Queen Camilla or the Prince and Princess of Wales directly.   QEII gave her life to service of her country and Prince Harry is making a mockery of that.


----------



## Laila619

Oh yeah, the LOOK he gave her when she was mockingly re-enacting her first curtsy to the Queen. If looks could kill…

Also more lies: they technically met on Instagram, and it wasn’t really a blind date set-up after all. These two lie so much they can’t keep their stories straight.

Another shocking thing: when ‘H’ was proposing to her, she was on her phone whispering with Jess Mulroney!! If that didn’t trigger alarm bells in Harry, I don’t know what else would. Dumb as a rock that one. It’s so obvious she adores the attention, paparazzi, and limelight and she married him bc she thought she would become a huge celebrity.


----------



## purseinsanity

csshopper said:


> Maybe Scabies plastic surgeon was running a “half off any procedure“ special and she decided to get work done.
> 
> (I deliberately used the word “plastic” not “cosmetic surgeon” . Omid and his migratory eyebrows, for example, are not indicative of A level skills.)
> 
> To segue back on topic, the other thought was maybe Serena and Meghan got a
> 2 for 1 Special somewhere.


I'm sorry to be annoying, but it's actually it's the other way around.  Plastic surgeons are board certified in plastic surgery.  Anyone, Dermatologists, OBGYNs, ENTs, General surgeons, heck, I've even seen Family Practitioners, etc., can do "Cosmetic procedures" and don't have to be board certified in plastic surgery.  You're better off going to a plastic surgeon to be on the safe side.  Not to say they're all amazing or anything...


----------



## Katel

has this been posted?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She hadn't heard about him, though.


----------



## serene

It felt so bizarre listening them accusing other people talking to press and telling things about them for money (..”receiving tens if not hundreds of thousands for a good story or pic”). Now they are doing the same and telling things about other royals for 82million!?!?!? Were they sad earlier about others getting less for similar pics and stories


----------



## jenayb

Laila619 said:


> * H smugly says everyone else in his family married someone who fits a particular mold, but HE married for love. *



What a direct dig at Kate........ gross.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did I just read today she never wore bold colours as to not hog attention? I must misremember that one.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BLG is our kind of guy



I hope no one ever looks at me like that.  When it ends it’s going to be ugly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

serene said:


> It felt so bizarre listening them accusing other people talking to press and telling things about them for money (..”receiving tens if not hundreds of thousands for a good story or pic”). Now they are doing the same and telling things about other royals for 82million!?!?!? Were they sad earlier about others getting less for similar pics and stories



Sorry to break it to you wannabes, nobody is paying hundreds of thousands for a random story of you.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Pessie said:


> I hope no one ever looks at me like that.  When it ends it’s going to be ugly.



I honestly don't think he will be the psycho ready to go in for the kill.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sorry to be annoying, but it's actually it's the other way around.  Plastic surgeons are board certified in plastic surgery.  Anyone, Dermatologists, OBGYNs, ENTs, General surgeons, heck, I've even seen Family Practitioners, etc., can do "Cosmetic procedures" and don't have to be board certified in plastic surgery.  You're better off going to a plastic surgeon to be on the safe side.  Not to say they're all amazing or anything...


I have been somewhat taken aback by seeing Botox and Juvederm offered by OBGYNs and dentists. IMO, stay in your lane!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Laila619 said:


> Another shocking thing: when ‘H’ was proposing to her, she was on her phone whispering with Jess Mulroney


She's like a middle schooler getting invited to a dance.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly don't think he will be the psycho ready to go in for the kill.


Harry is more the type to drink himself to death when he finally wakes up and realizes all that he gave up for her.


----------



## charlottawill

Laila619 said:


> H smugly says everyone else in his family married someone who fits a particular mold, but HE married for love









Humor and the lovely Paul Rudd will see us through this dark time


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> they
> 
> Harry is more the type to drink himself to death when he finally wakes up and realizes all that he gave up for her.


Sad thought but plausible.


----------



## marietouchet

The Sussex squad: a who’s who of Harry and Meghan’s friends who speak out on camera | Tatler









						The Sussex squad: a who’s who of Harry and Meghan’s friends who speak out on camera
					

From the duke’s Eton schoolmate to the duchess’s college bestie




					www.tatler.com


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> Uugh is right. I’m not a hugger, I hug DH, kids and grandkids. Not wanting to be hugged does not make a person cold. In reality the Royal Family has done nothing wrong in regards to their interactions with TW, so they make up anything they think might make the others look bad. What I don’t understand is why they are given these opportunities. Doesn’t say much positive about those that do give them the platforms to spread their lies and nastiness. Rant done and all IMHO of course.


Maybe W&K weren't cold and standoffish. Maybe they FROZE because Zed did her signature move: wiggle, giggle, claw + snuggle, and let me rub my breasts on your arm (she seems to prefers rubbing them in men's faces but W would be too tall for that to happen).


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did I just read today she never wore bold colours as to not hog attention? I must misremember that one.



Someone pointed out she has been wearing a lot of white, white does stick out in a crowd


----------



## pomeline

purseinsanity said:


> Wait, is this a picture of the "engagement"?  I refuse to watch the show, so no clue what's going on except for what I read here.  WTF whips out a camera to record your BF proposing to you?  This is the bull$hittiest bull$**** of a show I've ever read of!


I haven't seen it either but from what I read, that was the actual engagement. And not only that, she also says in the documentary that right before H pops the question, like just a few minutes before, she calls her friend (can't remember her name but she is named) to gush "OMG, It's happening, he's going to do it now, I can't believe it!"   Who does that?! She's not a fifteen-year-old girl!


----------



## Katel

Too early … give them time though (fingers crossed).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> I haven't seen it either but from what I read, that was the actual engagement. And not only that, she also says in the documentary that right before H pops the question, like just a few minutes before, she calls her friend (can't remember her name but she is named) to gush "OMG, It's happening, he's going to do it now, I can't believe it!"   Who does that?! She's not a fifteen-year-old girl!



It was Jessica Mulroney.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I can't forget her ugly, overacting face as she mocked The Queen. Ewww.


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Maybe W&K weren't cold and standoffish. Maybe they FROZE because Zed did her signature move: wiggle, giggle, claw + snuggle, and let me rub my breasts on your arm (she seems to prefers rubbing them in men's faces but W would be too tall for that to happen).


We've seen pics, I'm sure she gave a seductive smile to William. Did she think that would endear her to Kate?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> We've seen pics, I'm sure she gave a seductive smile to William. Did she think that would endear her to Kate?



Seeing how inappropriate she acts in public I'm sure you're right. She also strikes me as the person that would care more to be on good terms with men than women.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Someone pointed out she has been wearing a lot of white, white does stick out 8n a crowd


I think it may be an attempt at a more subliminal message. White suggests the good guy, angelic, purity


----------



## pomeline

Look at all the headlines... https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/

https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Mirror-6.jpg
https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Telegraph-9.jpg
https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Mail-6.jpg
https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Express-5.jpg


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Very sneaky as everything they do!
> 
> View attachment 5667300
> 
> 
> *Episode one began with a pointed attack on Buckingham Palace with a statement on screen claiming:*_ '*Members of the Royal Family declined to comment on the content within this series'.* *But hours after the first three episodes began streaming, royal officials in London insisted they were never asked to respond at all*.
> 
> The source was clear that neither Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace nor any member of the family were approached for comment on the content of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's Netflix series.
> 
> The insider added that, for now, *there will be no official comment from the King or the Prince of Wales on its incendiary contents,* *including allegations of racism and 'unconscious bias' and a series of barbs aimed at Charles, William, Kate Middleton and other royals*.
> 
> *The team at Kensington Palace,* who work for Prince William and Kate, *later clarified that they had received an email from a 3rd party production company about the Harry and Meghan Netflix documentary.* *The press team contacted Archewell and Netflix to verify if it was genuine, but got no reply.* _*The email did not contain the substance of allegations in the entire series.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royals hit BACK over Harry and Meghan's Netflix series
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry today took a series of new swipes at the Royal Family and Britain in their new and incendiary Netflix series being described as a transatlantic 'TV bomb' aimed at The Firm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So it starts with a lie... How fitting.


sdkitty said:


> In the case of someone who is engaged (or living with) my brother, I could take a hug but not a big one
> There is a guy we know casually who loves to hug.  I succeeded is stopping him during the Covid outbreak but now he's back at it.  I try to keep my distance, give him a pat, etc.  I think he gets it but he's a compulsive hugger.


Yep, the compulsive huggers were/are a problem. During the height of the pandemic, I remember walking backwards from someone who kept trying to get close to whisper in my ear. Lost my temper with her when she kept advancing on me. 


bag-mania said:


> “Date night” is a cutesy term that married couples use when they can get away from the kids for a few hours and enjoy being together like they used to pre-children.
> 
> The difference is most people you hear using it don’t have a staff of employees taking care of their kids, pets, and house, effectively making every night a date night.


They have date weeks.


rose60610 said:


> Is the reason Claw's clothes fit terribly because if they're altered she can't return them?  There's only so much you can do with safety pins and tape. But I don't think she even uses those. She takes them off the hangers and puts them on. She doesn't even want a tailor to know what she's going to wear for fear of "intel leaks".  Surely the world waits with bated breath on her next disastrous outfit.


Her next lie will be how the BRF didn't give her a clothing allowance, so she had to beg and borrow clothes. Despite being a self-made millionaire (or multi-millionaire according to Stans), she could not afford any clothes! Only ripped jeans because the holes gave Rory, I mean Cory, Oops, I mean Harry, easy access.


charlottawill said:


> "I was a hugger, always been a hugger, I didn't realise that is really jarring for a lot of Brits."
> 
> Oh really? When Diana was dating Hasnat Khan she went to great lengths to learn about his family and their culture before meeting them. Tell us again how much you have in common with her.


It pretty much convinces me that her "degree in International Relations" is not worth the paper it is allegedly printed on. She keeps telling the world how ignorant she is of anything outside North America.


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> We've seen pics, I'm sure she gave a seductive smile to William. Did she think that would endear her to Kate?


I wouldn’t put it past her to have hit on William.


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> I'm sorry to be annoying, but it's actually it's the other way around.  Plastic surgeons are board certified in plastic surgery.  Anyone, Dermatologists, OBGYNs, ENTs, General surgeons, heck, I've even seen Family Practitioners, etc., can do "Cosmetic procedures" and don't have to be board certified in plastic surgery.  You're better off going to a plastic surgeon to be on the safe side.  Not to say they're all amazing or anything...


Not annoying at all. Thanks, makes me wonder which type of medical professional Scoobie uses.


----------



## Mrs.Z

3rd episode:  I finished but I won’t really comment in depth as too much was covered, it was A LOT!

The problem with this show is it’s a Reality TV show that occasionaly forgets and tries to be a documentary.  

One minute we are discussing their engagement and the next minute we’re doing a deep dive into the Commonwealth, Slavery, the role of the Monarchy in financing slavery, how money was paid to slave owners when it was abolished….then cut to Meghan trying on a Carolina Herrera ballgown.  I wondered how they were going to handle these subjects and it’s very awkward.  

I do not believe M didn’t know what a “walk about“ was…that’s silly.  M has a thing about feigning ignorance  of the Royals that is just not believable.  

This episode also discusses her relationship with Thomas and that side of the family…total circus.  Deep dive into the Royal Rota….boring…..and we are also to believe no one was helping M get dressed for engagements, she was buying stuff online, cutting tags off last minute, googling if designers were British.  Poor M…no support! 

The first two episodes were light but I think with the 3rd we see that H & M had an agenda for their work within the family and obviously it was not their place to set one, especially one that did not align with how the Royals generally operate (i.e. getting political or controversial).


----------



## DoggieBags

pomeline said:


> Look at all the headlines... https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/
> 
> https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Mirror-6.jpg
> https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Telegraph-9.jpg
> https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Mail-6.jpg
> https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Daily-Express-5.jpg


I’m not sure Ginge and Cringe care whether the headlines are positive or negative, just as long as they are in the headlines. The worst thing for them would be if everyone simply ignored them. Since she apparently doesn’t know that archetype and stereotype are not the same thing, maybe she has no idea that there is also a difference between famous and infamous.


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> I’m not sure Ginge and Cringe care whether the headlines are positive or negative, just as long as they are in the headlines. The worst thing for them would be if everyone simply ignored them. Since she apparently doesn’t know that archetype and stereotype are not the same thing, maybe she has no idea that there is also a difference between famous and infamous.


For someone like TW, as Oscar Wilde put it, “There's only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Aimee3

charlottawill said:


> I have been somewhat taken aback by seeing Botox and Juvederm offered by OBGYNs and dentists. IMO, stay in your lane!


Right, what if they injected it in the only areas (cough cough) they are familiar with!


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I think it may be an attempt at a more subliminal message. White suggests the good guy, angelic, purity


Drugs ...


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> We've seen pics, I'm sure she gave a seductive smile to William. Did she think that would endear her to Kate?


That was the smile to get close enough to put a knife in the back.


----------



## sdkitty

Aimee3 said:


> Right, what if they injected it in the only areas (cough cough) they are familiar with!


I knew a woman who wanted an eye lift and found an opthamologist to do it....didn't go well


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was indifferent towards Doria before, but maybe a lot of Ghoul's disgusting qualities do indeed come from her.



Oh is she channeling Hill Clint. with it "takes a village?"  I don't believe this. She was an absent mother going off and doing her own thing.  I think that was her arrangement with Thomas from the start.  He wanted another child and he would raise it.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Oh is she channeling Hill Clint. with it "takes a village?"  I don't believe this. She was an absent mother going off and doing her own thing.  I think that was her arrangement with Thomas from the start.  He wanted another child and he would raise it.


if this is credible, all the more of a shame that she was the only one at the wedding.  and now the WIFE is claiming she wanted to invite her half sister's daughter and the RF said no.  What BS


----------



## bag-mania

As expected the _New York Times _has a favorable view of the show. Of course they always jump at the chance to accuse someone of racism.









						Surprise. The Villain So Far in ‘Harry & Meghan’ Is Not the Royal Family.
					

Harry and Meghan focused their ire in their Netflix documentary on the tabloids they say have hounded them out of remorseless greed and scarcely concealed racism.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## sgj99

I absolutely hate the ways she speaks!  

For example:  a normal person might say “Harry and I decided to go to the park.”  
But she would say:  “Harry and I began a narrative about breaking free, to stroll unencumbered.  But we were not allowed to truly be ourselves, to fight against this system.   I wanted to say ‘The dogs are going to come too,‘ but I was told no because that‘s not how _they_ want us to do this …  we can stay quiet no longer, we have to speak our truth, to step out of the constraints of a system that won support us.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This woman is a multiple Emmy Awards winning TV journalist. Maybe there's no hope for humanity.


----------



## bellecate

Sharont2305 said:


> Not only that but just before the proposal she's on the phone to her *MARKLED* friend Jess telling her "this is it!"


Fixed that a little for you.


----------



## CobaltBlu

charlottawill said:


> He will wait until they've played all their cards before he shows his. I hope he plays a royal flush on them.


This is what I think. As I have said, he plays the long game... there will be a perfect moment and he is waiting for it. 

I am sure the pain of betrayal is getting a little numb by now, bit by bit, and as the rawness of his mother's passing wears off as well, what will be left is a determination to clean house. 

It takes a while to get to the point where you can jettison toxic people from your life, but when that moment arrives, there is no hesitation.


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> Maybe he'd rather forget it happened.


Or can't remember which version is the one they were telling that day.


----------



## CobaltBlu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman is a multiple Emmy Awards winning TV journalist. Maybe there's no hope for humanity.
> 
> View attachment 5667673


Looks like she took it down?  maybe someone told her what time it is.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> It pretty much convinces me that her "degree in International Relations" is not worth the paper it is allegedly printed on. She keeps telling the world how ignorant she is of anything outside North America.



What do they say...you can lead the horse to the well, but you can't force it to drink?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> Deep dive into the Royal Rota….boring…..and we are also to believe no one was helping M get dressed for engagements, she was buying stuff online, cutting tags off last minute, googling if designers were British.  Poor M…no support!



Ah, that's why her wedding dress looked so sh*tty.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




Oh my. At this point I'm sick of ALL Markles, and I absolutely won't watch that one either.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> This is what I think. As I have said, he plays the long game... there will be a perfect moment and he is waiting for it.
> 
> I am sure the pain of betrayal is getting a little numb by now, bit by bit, and as the rawness of his mother's passing wears off as well, what will be left is a determination to clean house.
> 
> It takes a while to get to the point where you can jettison toxic people from your life, but when that moment arrives, there is no hesitation.


I think it is pretty simple and it comes down to KC doing what is best for himself and monarchy.  He waited far too long to let someone come along and ruin it for him and demean his position.  The rawness of his mother's passing may be the suddenness of it. Yes, he knew she was elderly, he knew she was ill, but there she was meeting the new PM one day and the next day she died.  That was pretty shocking right there. 

KC has realized for over a year that Harry was a problem and if he needed more proof he received it at the Jubilee.  Harry and Meghan missed the coach on purpose and showed up on his doorstep at Clarence House to bum a ride because showing up with the PoW would give him major "face."  KC was wise to that and refused the request and sent him over in a car.  H&M still won  part of that battle because they had all eyes following them during their solo walk down the aisle. Lots of juice from that for the Netflix mocku.   If Bea hadn't refused to move, he would have won 2 out of 3 battles that day. 

 This is not going to end as long as they have something to complain about.  Excluding them from events where they could find cause for complaint is one way to stop it.


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Looks like she took it down?  maybe someone told her what *time *it is.


Time to think about your own reputation because you supported these scammers?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Aimee3 said:


> Right, what if they injected it in the only areas (cough cough) they are familiar with!



My nose-ear-throat guy does everything from nose jobs to boobs. I personally only see him when I have sinusitis or the like. Oh, and when he had all the vaccines and appointments could be made for the next day, but eh, I've vaccinated my own horse, you don't have to be a pro at that.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Its amazing to me that despite all their terrible heartbreak and trauma combined with the newness of their love story/relationship and all the terrible things they were forced to deal with, like not getting to choose a tiara, they still kept their wits about them to be filmed constantly, make little videologs, take pictures and have pictures taken, and prepare for the day when their story would be ....  shared with all of us poor saps. 

I dont know about you but when times are tough I can barely get it together to match my socks.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman is a multiple Emmy Awards winning TV journalist. Maybe there's no hope for humanity.
> 
> View attachment 5667673


I am mesmerized by the dead animals attached to her head.  Do they have names?


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> Its amazing to me that despite all their terrible heartbreak and trauma combined with the newness of their love story/relationship and all the terrible things they were forced to deal with, like not getting to choose a tiara, they still kept their wits about them to be filmed constantly, make little videologs, take pictures and have pictures taken, and prepare for the day when their story would be ....  shared with all of us poor saps.
> 
> I dont know about you but when times are tough I can barely get it together to match my socks.


Obviously, they are good at multitasking.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> As expected the _New York Times _has a favorable view of the show. Of course they always jump at the chance to accuse someone of racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surprise. The Villain So Far in ‘Harry & Meghan’ Is Not the Royal Family.
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan focused their ire in their Netflix documentary on the tabloids they say have hounded them out of remorseless greed and scarcely concealed racism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


Not very surprised to be honest. The BRF will not find the reality show offensive enough to act on it, the Harkles will keep merching titles and visiting family to get royal photo-ops …   the UK journalists will pay the bill and the much desired 'cancel culture' will get some more points. Since we are already undergoing a period of 'cancel culture' in the US, everything will stay the same here. The rising stars will continue collecting awards, flying on private jets, wearing $10K dresses, and telling us daily what we should or not do… My 2 cents, of course!



Edit: Excuse my bad humor today.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I knew a woman who wanted an eye lift and found an opthamologist to do it....didn't go well



To be fair, blepharoplastics (hopefully that's the word in English as well  ) totally fall into an ophtalmologist's area of expertise. Unless an eye lift is something different.

Also, pro tip: if you ever find yourself with an injury to the face that requires stitches and the hospital doesn't have a plastic surgeon, ask for an ophtalmologist to do your sutures.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> If Bea hadn't refused to move, he would have won 2 out of 3 battles that day.



Interestingly, in Valentine Low's book she was described as very assertive and "the power in the room" (when her own father was there). Who would have thought.


----------



## Chanbal

This cover helps with my bad humor today… I'm almost laughing looking at the choice of pictures!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

See, Sarah Vine has a soft heart like I do!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Katel said:


> has this been posted?



Yippers! @papertiger please correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the steps are similar to those in the Canadian Parliament
1. MP introduces a bill to be debated in the Commons and hopefully passed quickly and without incidents.
2. The bill is sent to the House of Lords to be debated and then hopefully passed without incidents.
3. It must receive royal assent to become law. 

Here's hoping the entire process will be quick and painless so that Dufus and ZedZed can then be addressed as Mr. and Mrs. Schmuck.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> This cover helps with my bad humor today… I'm almost laughing looking at the choice of pictures!
> View attachment 5667679



Gosh that picture of Meghan!  She really is white!  She has been fooling us all along!  Does Harry know?


----------



## xincinsin

sgj99 said:


> I absolutely hate the ways she speaks!
> 
> For example:  a normal person might say “Harry and I decided to go to the park.”
> But she would say:  “Harry and I began a narrative about breaking free, to stroll unencumbered.  But we were not allowed to truly be ourselves, to fight against this system.   I wanted to say ‘The dogs are going to come too,‘ but I was told no because that‘s not how _they_ want us to do this …  we can stay quiet no longer, we have to speak our truth, to step out of the constraints of a system that won support us.”


I'm crying here: one of my subordinates is like this. After two years of her pontificating and opaque sentences, I just bluntly tell her: I don't know what you are saying. Tell me that again in words which people can understand. She isn't a narc. She just wants to sound very posh and well-educated, so she speaks in an over-enunciated manner and includes tonnes of unnecessary words.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> This woman is a multiple Emmy Awards winning TV journalist. Maybe there's no hope for humanity.
> 
> View attachment 5667673


She won awards? Okay, maybe I'm being mean. She may have won them for work that has nothing to do with royalty, so to her, Miss Zed is the little piggy who went wee wee wee all the way home because the BRF were mean to her.


CobaltBlu said:


> Its amazing to me that despite all their terrible heartbreak and trauma combined with the newness of their love story/relationship and all the terrible things they were forced to deal with, like not getting to choose a tiara, they still kept their wits about them to be filmed constantly, make little videologs, take pictures and have pictures taken, and prepare for the day when their story would be ....  shared with all of us poor saps.
> 
> I dont know about you but when times are tough I can barely get it together to match my socks.


It's amazing how they manage to plumb new depths to which to descend. I'm sure journalists are dying to interview them, but they will only meet with Scabies and his US sugar equivalents what's-his-name Royston & the lying Gayle.


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yippers! @papertiger please correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the steps are similar to those in the Canadian Parliament
> 1. MP introduces a bill to be debated in the Commons and hopefully passed quickly and without incidents.
> 2. The bill is sent to the House of Lords to be debated and then hopefully passed without incidents.
> 3. It must receive royal assent to become law.
> 
> Here's hoping the entire process will be quick and painless so that Dufus and ZedZed can then be addressed as Mr. and Mrs. Schmuck.


Plus if this is coming from the Parliament to begin with, fingers can't be pointed at the King that he started the ball rolling on it.  What could he do?  It was the will of the people, after all......


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> This cover helps with my bad humor today… I'm almost laughing looking at the choice of pictures!
> View attachment 5667679



OMG a milestone pic! This must be when she realized Koreans = spa + noodles.


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> I'm crying here: one of my subordinates is like this. After two years of her pontificating and opaque sentences, I just bluntly tell her: I don't know what you are saying. Tell me that again in words which people can understand. She isn't a narc. She just wants to sound very posh and well-educated, so she speaks in an over-enunciated manner and includes tonnes of unnecessary words.
> 
> She won awards? Okay, maybe I'm being mean. She may have won them for work that has nothing to do with royalty, so to her, Miss Zed is the little piggy who went wee wee wee all the way home because the BRF were mean to her.
> 
> It's amazing how they manage to plumb new depths to which to descend. I'm sure journalists are dying to interview them, but they will only meet with Scabies and his US sugar equivalents what's-his-name Royston & the lying Gayle.


They will only meet with journos who ask questions on the approved question list.  Nothing spontaneous for these two as they can't think fast enough and it take time to spin that word salad that Meghan loves to use.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, blepharoplastics (hopefully that's the word in English as well  ) totally fall into an ophtalmologist's area of expertise. Unless an eye lift is something different.
> 
> Also, pro tip: if you ever find yourself with an injury to the face that requires stitches and the hospital doesn't have a plastic surgeon, ask for an ophtalmologist to do your sutures.


this woman had her upper and lower eyes done.  afterwards she lower lids were pulled down too much and she couldn't hold tears


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, blepharoplastics (hopefully that's the word in English as well  ) totally fall into an ophtalmologist's area of expertise. Unless an eye lift is something different.
> 
> Also, pro tip: if you ever find yourself with an injury to the face that requires stitches and the hospital doesn't have a plastic surgeon, ask for an ophtalmologist to do your sutures.


The guy who has the rep of doing the best blepharoplasties in my area is an ophthalmologist. I never knew that frozen peas had uses other than for eating until one of his patients told me lol!


----------



## youngster

Mrs.Z said:


> Rota….boring…..and we are also to believe no one was helping M get dressed for engagements, she was buying stuff online, cutting tags off last minute, googling if designers were British. Poor M…no support!



Please. She had a personal assistant, press secretary, other staff, security, and we're supposed to believe she couldn't hire a British stylist who would have been thrilled to work with her and source clothes for her from UK designers?


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> The guy who has the rep of doing the best blepharoplasties in my area is an ophthalmologist. I never knew that frozen peas had uses other than for eating until one of his patients told me lol!


I guess my friend got one who wasn't experienced


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

To those of you watching the Nutmeg and JCMH tripe on Netflix, be sure to give it a "thumbs down" where you can rate it for Netflix.  I did, even though I haven't even watched the previews.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Gosh that picture of Meghan!  She really is white!  She has been fooling us all along!  *Does Harry know?*


I don't know what Hazz knows, but she certainly looks very different without makeup. I bet that she chose the best pick possible; I understand now why she needs to bring a makeup artist everywhere she goes. I hope she pays him/her well.


----------



## xincinsin

Non-committal review from Variety. Not exactly critical nor exactly approving. It just waffles along. Perhaps they took to heart what they themselves wrote: that it is difficult to criticise the Duplicitous Duo because of the colour of Zed's skin.

_"...the Sussexes surprise us yet again, with just how narrow their vision of their fame is, how pinched and unimaginative their presence on the world stage has become. They may have shed their responsibilities to the crown, but they’re still in a kind of service: There’s an air of duty about the entire enterprise of “Harry & Meghan,” as if they’re honor-bound to keep reciting their personal story until we eventually lose interest."_









						Netflix’s ‘Harry & Meghan’ Rehashes the Royal-Family Drama, One More Time: TV Review
					

Prince Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, have shocked the world multiple times over — first, with their 2020 exit from the United Kingdom and their lives as working royals, and then, in 2021, with…




					variety.com


----------



## Straight-Laced

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but what's going on at Sussex Royal website with no mention of King Charles being monarch?  
Apparently Queen Elizabeth is still reigning over us. 

Copied a minute ago from the SR website - 
"*Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II** is sovereign and was crowned Monarch in 1953. Her Majesty serves as a symbol of unity and national pride. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex deeply believe in the role of The Monarchy, and their commitment to Her Majesty The Queen is unwavering*."

A very pointed omission of King Charles I'd say  

BTW I'm not in the habit of visiting the SR website!  I read about this and had to verify.


----------



## tiktok

Didn't even read the article but the comments are stellar (open in an incognito window if you get the paywall). As a reminder, this is an ultra liberal audience.









						Meghan and Harry’s Docuseries Certainly Looks Tense
					

They are ready to tell all … again.




					www.thecut.com


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I don't know what Hazz knows, but she certainly looks very different without makeup. I bet that she chose the best pick possible; I understand now why she needs to bring a makeup artist everywhere she goes. I hope she pays him/her well.


I only saw the pic, didn't listen to the video. If I didn't think she is such a horrible person I'd say she actually looks pretty good. Much younger without all the makeup and her skin looks nice. Unless it was filmed with a filter. I'm not too familiar with these things.


----------



## Chanbal

When people in their 40s see imaginary friends chasing them, it's of serious concern.


----------



## sgj99

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yippers! @papertiger please correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the steps are similar to those in the Canadian Parliament
> 1. MP introduces a bill to be debated in the Commons and hopefully passed quickly and without incidents.
> 2. The bill is sent to the House of Lords to be debated and then hopefully passed without incidents.
> 3. It must receive royal assent to become law.
> 
> Here's hoping the entire process will be quick and painless so that Dufus and ZedZed can then be addressed as Mr. and Mrs. Schmuck.





gracekelly said:


> Plus if this is coming from the Parliament to begin with, fingers can't be pointed at the King that he started the ball rolling on it.  What could he do?  It was the will of the people, after all......


This makes it possible for KC to do it without doing it directly.  If he does it directly he faces serious criticism (from a small delusional minority) about being a horrible father.  If Parliament does it KC doesn’t have to defend his actions.  I hope it gets passed quickly.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> I only saw the pic, didn't listen to the video. If I didn't think she is such a horrible person I'd say she actually looks pretty good. Much younger without all the makeup and her skin looks nice. Unless it was filmed with a filter. I'm not too familiar with these things.



I don't find TW particularly pretty with or without makeup. Her character is overpowering. My point is that she must need very good professional help to achieve such transformation.


----------



## tiktok

Chanbal said:


> When people in their 40s see imaginary friends chasing them, it's of serious concern.



Isn't that the US, their sanctuary from all the racist British paparazzi?


----------



## Sophisticatted

I expect another Bower book.  Wonder what the next title will be.

I have a feeling that “traveling jewelry business” is code for jail time.  Allegedly, Doria was absent for a decade.


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> Didn't even read the article but the comments are stellar (open in an incognito window if you get the paywall). As a reminder, this is an ultra liberal audience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s Docuseries Certainly Looks Tense
> 
> 
> They are ready to tell all … again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com


Thanks for posting this article, I'm going to read it. After the brilliant article by Alison P. Davis, I'm almost a fan of the Cut. 

Edit: It's a great article. It looks like TW was not able to impress the Cut.


----------



## Toby93

Sharont2305 said:


> Not only that but just before the proposal she's on the phone to her friend Jess telling her "this is it!"


Would that be Jessica Mulroney?  The friend who has been Markled?  Does she appear on this reality show?


----------



## Chanbal

Sophisticatted said:


> *I expect another Bower book.  *Wonder what the next title will be.
> 
> I have a feeling that “traveling jewelry business” is code for jail time.  Allegedly, Doria was absent for a decade.


There are still so many rumors to be confirmed…


----------



## Toby93

Laila619 said:


> I gagged my way through the first 3 episodes. Some thoughts:
> 
> They are trying really hard to make Meghan seem like a wonderful and kind person. They have former co-workers, friends, and even Samantha Marble’s estranged daughter(!) gushing on and on about how sweet she is or dedicated to her charity causes she is.  Really ramming it down the viewer’s throat. But too little too late, we all know the real truth of how badly she treats others, including her own poor father.
> 
> She lied about her parents, claiming that dear sweet Doria raised her and she was just with her Dad on weekends only. LIES! Also claimed that as an only child, she was so lonely and that when she attended her first Christmas at Sandringham, H’s family was so terrific. *It was the loud, boisterous family she always wished she had.* But now she is denying her OWN kids the chance to grow up around a huge and supportive family. She doesn’t see any irony in that?
> 
> They both admitted everyone was thrilled and elated for them when they first got engaged. Then HOW can it be racism that changed everyone’s minds about her?! They knew she was mixed race from the start and almost everyone in the family and the country embraced her with open arms.
> 
> Harry says Meghan is just like Diana. HOW? Diana was devoted to the Queen and to the Royal traditions and customs. Diana was not estranged from her own father or sisters. Diana didn’t quit when things got hard. Diana treated servants and employees with kindness. Love really is blind as they say.
> 
> At one point, a producer asks them to tell her about the engagement. Both Harry and Meghan sit there staring straight ahead, not speaking. Then H tentatively turns to look at Meghan, and she turns sharply to him, and says quite rudely, “You’re looking at me? You tell it!” Methinks there is trouble in paradise. H smugly says everyone else in his family married someone who fits a particular mold, but HE married for love. Gag!
> 
> They are both utterly disgusting and completely self-absorbed.


Was this before or after she stated that the royals are stiff and formal behind closed doors?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but what's going on at Sussex Royal website with no mention of King Charles being monarch?
> Apparently Queen Elizabeth is still reigning over us.
> 
> Copied a minute ago from the SR website -
> "*Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II** is sovereign and was crowned Monarch in 1953. Her Majesty serves as a symbol of unity and national pride. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex deeply believe in the role of The Monarchy, and their commitment to Her Majesty The Queen is unwavering*."
> 
> A very pointed omission of King Charles I'd say
> 
> BTW I'm not in the habit of visiting the SR website!  I read about this and had to verify.


and he still expects daddy to give him money?


----------



## Toby93

I wonder how much they are paying for this?


----------



## xincinsin

Straight-Laced said:


> Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but what's going on at Sussex Royal website with no mention of King Charles being monarch?
> Apparently Queen Elizabeth is still reigning over us.
> 
> Copied a minute ago from the SR website -
> "*Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II** is sovereign and was crowned Monarch in 1953. Her Majesty serves as a symbol of unity and national pride. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex deeply believe in the role of The Monarchy, and their commitment to Her Majesty The Queen is unwavering*."
> 
> A very pointed omission of King Charles I'd say
> 
> BTW I'm not in the habit of visiting the SR website!  I read about this and had to verify.


I don't think the SR website has been updated for years. Zed is probably still throwing a hissy fit over not being able to merch "Royal". She can really hold a grudge. Even the Arghwell site's updates are spotty. Maybe their IT people quit and leave even faster than their production people.


charlottawill said:


>



We are not supposed to notice things like seatbelts. It's the VIBE you know: young mother cuddling profit-worthy child. Sweet nod etc etc...


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I wonder how much they are paying for this?
> 
> View attachment 5667738


The Stepford Squad! Same mould!


----------



## Chanbal

I've no idea who this minister is, but I'm with him on this one.
“utterly irrelevant to this country," as well…


----------



## Chanbal

Piers is restoring my sanity!


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Gosh that picture of Meghan!  She really is white!  She has been fooling us all along!  Does Harry know?


Weird that they had the foresight to record everything long before they *had* to resort to selling out the BRF on Netfl*x.  How fortunate that all this video exists to make up the 6 hours of footage


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> Would that be Jessica Mulroney?  The friend who has been Markled?  Does she appear on this reality show?


I thought I saw one quick shot of Jess when they were showing Meg being all single () travelling and loving life just before she met Harry. Then they showed the Mulroney kids at the wedding.

I only watched the first episode.  It was torture. Was the first episode only one hour?  It felt like two!


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> He knows this and woukd rather live separately than have the optic of divorce at this point.


I'm having a deja vu moment. I'm pretty sure the same was said about KC thirty years ago.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I only saw the pic, didn't listen to the video. If I didn't think she is such a horrible person I'd say she actually looks pretty good. Much younger without all the makeup and her skin looks nice. Unless it was filmed with a filter. I'm not too familiar with these things.


I was noticing the soft lighting and filters in the first episode.  As I mentioned, it went on forever and I'm not sure I can watch any more.


----------



## charlottawill

Yeah, I think they're "fooked"


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Weird that they had the foresight to record everything long before they *had* to resort to selling out the BRF on Netfl*x.  How fortunate that all this video exists to make up the 6 hours of footage


If they have even more "unseen bomb-worthy footage" after this 6-hour festival of misdirection and mindfookery, then I must conclude that they have cameras installed in every room in their house, are pretending every minute of every day, and have a paid army of photographers/videographers following them around 24/7/365. Perhaps some double-up as security/nannies/cooks/gardeners?


----------



## bag-mania

Of all the lies I’ve heard about so far, this is the one I believe the least and that’s saying a lot. THIS is the photo that sparked Harry’s interest, ladies!

“I was scrolling through my feed, and one of my friends and someone who was a friend had this video of the two of them, like a Snapchat,” Harry recalled.

After seeing the snap of Markle with a dog filter, the British prince was curious to know more.

“I was like, ‘Who is THAT?'” he shared.












						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reveal they met on Instagram: ‘Who is THAT?’
					

Markle said her friend later told her that “Prince Haz” was interested in meeting her, but the nickname didn’t ring a bell for the American actress.




					pagesix.com


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Of all the lies I’ve heard about so far, this is the one I believe the least and that’s saying a lot. THIS is the photo that sparked Harry’s interest, ladies!
> 
> “I was scrolling through my feed, and one of my friends and someone who was a friend had this video of the two of them, like a Snapchat,” Harry recalled.
> 
> After seeing the snap of Markle with a dog filter, the British prince was curious to know more.
> 
> “I was like, ‘Who is THAT?'” he shared.
> 
> View attachment 5667759
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reveal they met on Instagram: ‘Who is THAT?’
> 
> 
> Markle said her friend later told her that “Prince Haz” was interested in meeting her, but the nickname didn’t ring a bell for the American actress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


 Ok that's enough BS for one day, good night everyone!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> Ok that's enough BS for one day, good night everyone!


I’m thinking it was the tongue.


----------



## Chanbal

The niece is a lawyer, does she really believe the BRF would care if she attended the wedding or not? If I was cynical, I would think she might be looking for some PR. 

_"She said: 'I think I said I was hurt on some level, but I understood where it was coming from.

'To know that it was because of my biological mother that this relationship, that's so important to me, was impacted in that way. I feel like because of her, it was taken away. It's been hard.' 

*Meghan said: 'The guidance at the time was to not have her [Ashleigh] come to our wedding.
'I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.'*
…

'*I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.*'

Both Ashleigh and Meghan opened up about their relationship, with her father Thomas Markle connecting the two via email initially.

As part of their $100million deal with Netflix, the privacy-conscious couple have handed over a trove of pictures and video from their relationship.

*In another swipe against the royals, Ashleigh added: 'Communication with Meg became less and less frequent... my impression was that her relationships were being managed on some level*_*."*









						Samantha Markle's daughter slams mother and praises Meghan in new doc
					

Ashleigh Hale slams her mother Samantha Markle as the reason she was banned from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding as she speaks for the first time.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The niece is a lawyer, does she really believe the BRF would care if she attended the wedding or not? If I was cynical, I would think she might be looking for some PR.
> 
> _"She said: 'I think I said I was hurt on some level, but I understood where it was coming from.
> 
> 'To know that it was because of my biological mother that this relationship, that's so important to me, was impacted in that way. I feel like because of her, it was taken away. It's been hard.'
> 
> *Meghan said: 'The guidance at the time was to not have her [Ashleigh] come to our wedding.
> 'I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.'*
> …
> 
> '*I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.*'
> 
> Both Ashleigh and Meghan opened up about their relationship, with her father Thomas Markle connecting the two via email initially.
> 
> As part of their $100million deal with Netflix, the privacy-conscious couple have handed over a trove of pictures and video from their relationship.
> 
> *In another swipe against the royals, Ashleigh added: 'Communication with Meg became less and less frequent... my impression was that her relationships were being managed on some level*_*."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samantha Markle's daughter slams mother and praises Meghan in new doc
> 
> 
> Ashleigh Hale slams her mother Samantha Markle as the reason she was banned from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding as she speaks for the first time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Not cynicism. We can safely add Lawyer Ashleigh to the illustrious list of Queen's Counsels who have lied on Zed's behalf.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> I’m thinking it was the tongue.


I thought it was the combo of woman + dog that got him interested. Haz obviously has exotic tastes.


----------



## Chanbal

Another promising article with a great title that I plan to read tomorrow. Too tired today! Goodnight. 





			https://archive.vn/00UsU


----------



## CobaltBlu

xincinsin said:


> If they have even more "unseen bomb-worthy footage" after this 6-hour festival of misdirection and mindfookery, then I must conclude that they have cameras installed in every room in their house, are pretending every minute of every day, and have a paid army of photographers/videographers following them around 24/7/365. Perhaps some double-up as security/nannies/cooks/gardeners?


I read that this all wasnt even filmed at their real house.  They did not want filming in their actual home, so all this home stuff is fake?  Can anyone confirm this, I believe I read it in a couple of different places.


----------



## CobaltBlu

> “I really just want to get to the other side of this,” Meghan said. “How did we end up here?” Dunno — private jet, same as usual?





			https://archive.vn/zRhlT#selection-907.659-907.788


----------



## Chanbal

I was supposed to be sleeping, but this is too good to miss…


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> I thought it was the combo of woman + dog that got him interested. Haz obviously has exotic tastes.


I thought it was the mixed race  (the “look what I brought home, a gorgeous woman and mixed race”) and the love of peeing in the woods. Yes, he said that.

@Chanbal

_*In another swipe against the royals, Ashleigh added: 'Communication with Meg became less and less frequent... my impression was that her relationships were being managed on some level*_*."*

I need time to understand this - tonight is *not* the night to do that. Are they saying the BRF would not _let_ Ashleigh attend?  Managed by whom? for what purpose?   Are we supposed to believe this was an _arranged_ marriage?


----------



## EmilyM111

Mrs.Z said:


> Then we JUMP to Brexit which was apparently all about illegal immigration and race….ummm ok, I thought it was far more complex?


How sweet of them. As an Eastern European living at the time in the U.K., I wish (for my people) it was the case. They’ll stop at nothing


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I was supposed to be sleeping, but this is too good to miss…



Tom sums up my view perfectly

Omg, she compares it to Medieval Times?  Wow. The disrespect.  Yet she continues to use that title, doesn’t she.  

ETA:  when did they meet?  2016 or 2107?  Tom is right - the whole thing is a bunch of lies.  I want to hear about the Hwood plot to destroy the monarchy.


----------



## EmilyM111

Laila619 said:


> At one point, a producer asks them to tell her about the engagement. Both Harry and Meghan sit there staring straight ahead, not speaking. Then H tentatively turns to look at Meghan, and she turns sharply to him, and says quite rudely, “You’re looking at me? You tell it!” Methinks there is trouble in paradise. H smugly says everyone else in his family married someone who fits a particular mold, but HE married for love. Gag!
> 
> They are both utterly disgusting and completely self-absorbed.



Or they are thinking in panic which of the engagement lies is currently in circulation? My husband proposed 6 years ago and I have no problem with remembering and still have a stupid grin when I think about it.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Here is a good article on the Palm Tree Prince and the ensuing marriage


			https://archive.vn/QSPfz


----------



## CarryOn2020

For those who do not know, Medieval Times is a chain restaurant. 





						Medieval Times Dinner & Tournament Dinner & Tournament
					

Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament is a family dinner theater featuring staged medieval-style games, sword-fighting, and jousting.



					www.medievaltimes.com
				




_Medieval Times is an exciting, family-friendly experience inspired by an 11th century feast and tournament. Guests are served a four-course banquet as they cheer for one of six knights competing in the joust and other tests of skill._


----------



## CarryOn2020

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is a good article on the Palm Tree Prince and the ensuing marriage
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/QSPfz


Excellent article, thank you.

_In May 2018, Rachel Meghan Markle married Henry Charles Albert David. Tom Inskip was relegated to the status of also-ran. George and Amal Clooney, *who cheerfully admitted they’d never met the couple,* were invited to the exclusive evening wedding reception for close friends, along with Oprah. The Inskips were not. “We’ve lost him,” he told friends the following day._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## rose60610

Harry married for love? Maybe he did, but Claw? She married for PERKS! And now since the world isn't kissing her feet, she plays victim!


----------



## needlv




----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> I read that this all wasnt even filmed at their real house.  They did not want filming in their actual home, so all this home stuff is fake?  Can anyone confirm this, I believe I read it in a couple of different places.


Maybe someone else's house looked more authentic ... excuse me while I go barf  


needlv said:


>



Yep! Enemies of the Crown!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The niece is a lawyer, does she really believe the BRF would care if she attended the wedding or not? If I was cynical, I would think she might be looking for some PR.
> 
> _"She said: 'I think I said I was hurt on some level, but I understood where it was coming from.
> 
> 'To know that it was because of my biological mother that this relationship, that's so important to me, was impacted in that way. I feel like because of her, it was taken away. It's been hard.'
> 
> *Meghan said: 'The guidance at the time was to not have her [Ashleigh] come to our wedding.
> 'I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.'*
> …
> 
> '*I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.*'
> 
> Both Ashleigh and Meghan opened up about their relationship, with her father Thomas Markle connecting the two via email initially.
> 
> As part of their $100million deal with Netflix, the privacy-conscious couple have handed over a trove of pictures and video from their relationship.
> 
> *In another swipe against the royals, Ashleigh added: 'Communication with Meg became less and less frequent... my impression was that her relationships were being managed on some level*_*."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samantha Markle's daughter slams mother and praises Meghan in new doc
> 
> 
> Ashleigh Hale slams her mother Samantha Markle as the reason she was banned from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's wedding as she speaks for the first time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


_*I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.*'_

Guidance from whom? I'm wondering if this mysterious wedding invite list adviser belongs to the same shadowy anonymous group as the HR person who declined to provide her a therapist. I'm inclined to treat everything out of Zed's mouth as a lie until proven true (taking too many grains of salt are bad for health).


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Maybe someone else's house looked more authentic ... excuse me while I go barf
> 
> Yep! Enemies of the Crown!


Just do it!  Enough already.


----------



## papertiger

Station platform this morning, it's right out of Disney

Click coz it's a big file


----------



## CarryOn2020

Does Hazz believe MM married Trev for love?  
A relationship that lasted 10 years?

_Engelson began dating Meghan Markle in 2004. The couple married at the Jamaica Inn in Ocho Rios, Jamaica on August 16, 2011. They separated after approximately 18 months and in March 2014 were granted a no-fault divorce citing irreconcilable differences. Engelson attracted significant media attention due to his previous marriage to Markle, when she became engaged to Prince Harry in November 2017.
From Wikipedia_

Last words from The Tig   Tell us more, MM
_Though they were together for seven years prior to tying the knot, the duchess’ marriage to Engelson crumbled almost as quickly as it began. The duchess has never widely discussed her divorce. However, when it was announced in 2013, she posted a telling quote on her now-defunct lifestyle blog, The Tig. It read, “*I no longer spend a single minute on those who lie or want to manipulate. I decided not to coexist anymore with pretense, hypocrisy, dishonesty, and cheap praise.*” Apparently, the producer never even saw the breakup coming.








						Meghan Markle Thought Her Ex-Husband Was Extremely Unprofessional, Claims Royal Biographer
					

Meghan Markle ended her marriage to Trevor Engelson in 2013. Now, a royal expert claims the duchess thought her ex-husband very was unprofessional.




					www.cheatsheet.com
				



‘_


----------



## xincinsin

Just watched the mocking curtsey footage. I'm sorry, but if that disrespectful witch ever comes within spitting distance of me... And I'm not even a monarchist, but that vile expression on her face!

Will anyone important in any country want to invite her anywhere since she has now shown that she will fawn on you to your face, then disrespect you behind your back? Will she try to arrange faux Royal tours around the world?


----------



## bellecate

Did ‘H’ out her?


----------



## CarryOn2020

_In the first moments of his score-settling film, Prince Harry confidently informs viewers that ‘no one knows the full truth’ about the events that have led to his and Meghan’s estrangement from the Royal Family.

Then he leans into the camera to declare that, actually: ‘We know the full truth’.

What’s more, he adds: ‘The institution knows the full truth’. Oh, and come to mention it: ‘The media know the full truth because they’ve been in on it.’

*It is, of course, impossible for these four statements, delivered by Prince Harry within a few seconds of each other at the start of what purports to be a factual documentary, to be true simultaneously. *After all, the final three remarks are completely at odds with the first one._

1. No one knows
2. We know
3. The institution knows
4. The media knows

Wow, this guy is truly mentally challenged.  









						GUY ADAMS asks what else doesn't stand up to scrutiny in Sussexes' doc
					

In the first moments of his score-settling film, Prince Harry confidently informs viewers that 'no one knows the full truth' about the events that have led to his and Meghan's estrangement.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does Hazz believe MM married Trev for love?
> A relationship that lasted 10 years?
> 
> _Engelson began dating Meghan Markle in 2004. The couple married at the Jamaica Inn in Ocho Rios, Jamaica on August 16, 2011. They separated after approximately 18 months and in March 2014 were granted a no-fault divorce citing irreconcilable differences. Engelson attracted significant media attention due to his previous marriage to Markle, when she became engaged to Prince Harry in November 2017.
> From Wikipedia_
> 
> Last words from The Tig   Tell us more, MM
> _Though they were together for seven years prior to tying the knot, the duchess’ marriage to Engelson crumbled almost as quickly as it began. The duchess has never widely discussed her divorce. However, when it was announced in 2013, she posted a telling quote on her now-defunct lifestyle blog, The Tig. It read, “*I no longer spend a single minute on those who lie or want to manipulate. I decided not to coexist anymore with pretense, hypocrisy, dishonesty, and cheap praise.*” Apparently, the producer never even saw the breakup coming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Thought Her Ex-Husband Was Extremely Unprofessional, Claims Royal Biographer
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ended her marriage to Trevor Engelson in 2013. Now, a royal expert claims the duchess thought her ex-husband very was unprofessional.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘_


I’d love to know what Trevor and Cory think.  Perhaps they had a beer and facetimed each other while laughing at it 


xincinsin said:


> Just watched the mocking curtsey footage. I'm sorry, but if that disrespectful witch ever comes within spitting distance of me... And I'm not even a monarchist, but that vile expression on her face!
> 
> Will anyone important in any country want to invite her anywhere since she has now shown that she will fawn on you to your face, then disrespect you behind your back? Will she try to arrange faux Royal tours around the world?


She whined about each country she visited didn’t she?  “housing unit” remember? I’m sure this wasn’t the first time she mocked a country’s traditions.  This humanitarian has no respect for anyone. I’m disgusted by it, and disgusted with Harry for not saying what clearly he felt.


bellecate said:


> Did ‘H’ out her?
> 
> View attachment 5667825


I believe this.  I’m sure was paid to be arm candy for some of these wealthy men, and hoped to land one.  I don’t think he was her pimp exactly but he facilitated things.


----------



## purseinsanity

LOLOL I saw a clip of them in a car, constantly turning to see if a "pap" was still following them.  Haz turned around repeatedly like he had a tic, but conveniently, not once was a papparazi actually shown.  These people are delusional.


----------



## Helventara

Toby93 said:


> I wonder how much they are paying for this?
> 
> View attachment 5667738


This is hugely interesting. There’s also similar comment about in tears and their side of story in the sugar thread.  Is this the standard communique issued by H&M for social media commenting?


----------



## pomeline

In case it hasn't been here yet, here is Thomas Markle Jr. commenting. I don't blame them for wanting to share their side of the story.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

Helventara said:


> This is hugely interesting. There’s also similar comment about in tears and their side of story in the sugar thread.  Is this the standard communique issued by H&M for social media commenting?


I showed this to my dear husband who unfortunately has also been exposed to this filth of a poopshow. He said "sounds like M wrote it". He especially pointed out the expression "actually in tears" wondering who even says things like that. If they replaced "actually" with "literally" it would sound like H.


----------



## Helventara

Chanbal said:


> Meghan said: 'The guidance at the time was to not have her [Ashleigh] come to our wedding.
> 'I was in the car with H, I called her [Ashleigh] and I had her on speakerphone and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and that’s painful.'


This is typical BS employed by corporate bosses every where when they do not want to be seen as bad guys. Yeah, blame some unknown 'entity' for her decision, pretending that her hands are tied.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> Did ‘H’ out her?
> 
> View attachment 5667825



What we thought all along, hu?

But also, did they address how for the longest time they insisted they were introduced by a family friend?


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> I believe this.  I’m sure was paid to be arm candy for some of these wealthy men, and hoped to land one.  I don’t think he was her pimp exactly but he facilitated things.


Suddenly, "Smooth Operator" started playing in my mind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> In case it hasn't been here yet, here is Thomas Markle Jr. commenting. I don't blame them for wanting to share their side of the story.




I do because no one cares. Not a single person cares.


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I do because no one cares. Not a single person cares.


Well, that of course but I can understand it in a sense that if someone did that to my family, the gut reaction would probably be "why can't I tell my side of the story". Plus I want the dirt on M to come out.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tell it like it is, Darren.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tell it like it is, Darren.



Now, that is believable since he has known Di for longer than Sparry has known her. 
Will they claim he is being racist?


----------



## needlv

Worse.  They filmed this before the Queen had passed away knowing she had cancer.  @$$holes,  both of them.  They deserve each other and I hope they make each other miserable,


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Now, that is believable since he has known Di for longer than Sparry has known her.
> Will they claim he is being racist?



And he puts his money where his mouth is. All the proceeds from his bestselling cookbook go to one of Diana's favourite charities.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Worse.  They filmed this before the Queen had passed away knowing she had cancer.  @$$holes,  both of them.  They deserve each other and I hope they make each other miserable,




She is a disgusting POS and unable to feel remorse and shame. But it's HIS grandmother. He should be so ashamed of himself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Well?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sounds exactly like her. I just wonder why she could make him spend money like a leaky faucet when he was notoriously stingy with his other gfs.


----------



## xincinsin

Sparry's weird obsession with how much his equally yucky half is like his mother. It just occurred to me that he has only known Diana as Mummy, not as princess or humanitarian or any of her other roles in life. Definitely not as disciplinarian or authority figure. Maybe that is why he is utterly cowed by that lying wacko and adores her as a mummy replacement - the idealized mother from a Coraline world. Check their eyes for buttons.


----------



## pomeline

More MPs unhappy with the couple having titles.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

needlv said:


> Worse.  They filmed this before the Queen had passed away knowing she had cancer.  @$$holes,  both of them.  They deserve each other and I hope they make each other miserable,



Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.


Then it showed their true colours.


----------



## pomeline

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.



Even if they didn't know she had a terminal illness, they did know she was 96 years old and were more than happy to break her heart and give her a heart attack.


----------



## Hanton

I was thinking ‘What Would The Queen Do?‘ to these two muppets, and I suspect she would call on her old friend, Paddington Bear, to direct one of his famous ’hard stares’ at them as sign of Disapproval.   That should stop ‘em!  Difficult to construe racism from a Bear!  Although…nothing is impossible…


----------



## Sharont2305

pomeline said:


> Even if they didn't know she had a terminal illness, they did know she was 96 years old and were more than happy to break her heart and give her a heart attack.


Exactly. They are disgusting.


----------



## skyqueen

...in a nutshell!


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.



Honestly, you couldn’t trust them with a weather report


----------



## Sharont2305

skyqueen said:


> ...in a nutshell!



Once upon a time Katie Hopkins was enemy number one here in the UK. Nasty vile woman but, for once I agree with her.


----------



## papertiger

Hanton said:


> I was thinking ‘What Would The Queen Do?‘ to these two muppets, and I suspect she would call on her old friend, Paddington Bear, to direct one of his famous ’hard stares’ at them as sign of Disapproval.   That should stop ‘em!  Difficult to construe racism from a Bear!  Although…nothing is impossible…
> View attachment 5667920



Everyone in the UK is doing the Paddington hard stare at them right now.

The lies, and the entitlement, and the bullying, and the lies, and the pity party and the smugness, and the lies, and the betrayal and the lies, and the lies


----------



## WingNut

skyqueen said:


> ...in a nutshell!



That was hilarious...and spot-on!


----------



## calicocat

Chanbal said:


> Wow



I worked for years in the area where movie/TV show shootings take place on the regular, including Suits, in Toronto. Never heard/seen extra security presence for anyone, ever, for Suits. They did take up a lot of public parking spots along streets and in parking buildings - which 'ground my gears' lol.  My coworkers often chatted up the crew to find out if there were Hollywood stars on set, but never mentioned MM; I guess not well-known enough to them, haha. People working in the area don't care much; we've seen well-known stars walking the streets often without security presence, soo.. 

ps: I literally almost bumped into Ralph Fiennes some time ago - very tall and has gorgeous blue eyes


----------



## charlottawill

CobaltBlu said:


> Here is a good article on the Palm Tree Prince and the ensuing marriage
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/QSPfz


Great article, thank you! Love this reference to TW:

"If not exactly a celebrity, she was at least slightly famous"


----------



## marietouchet

The Times front page has several articles on the Harkles, all are articles with the classic English wit, biting and cold , thumb way up
Per Reddit, the show is NOT in the N$tflix top 10 today


----------



## marietouchet

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.


Nonetheless, the Queen was at an age where a simple cold might have taken her, so the Harkles are NOT off the hook in any way, shape or form


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Suddenly, "Smooth Operator" started playing


In my mind, I am hearing Sting’s Roxanne


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> For those who do not know, Medieval Times is a chain restaurant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Medieval Times Dinner & Tournament Dinner & Tournament
> 
> 
> Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament is a family dinner theater featuring staged medieval-style games, sword-fighting, and jousting.
> 
> 
> 
> www.medievaltimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Medieval Times is an exciting, family-friendly experience inspired by an 11th century feast and tournament. Guests are served a four-course banquet as they cheer for one of six knights competing in the joust and other tests of skill._


And more info is required if you don’t know about Medieval Times 

They serve dinner, what they call a Cornish game hen in the US, a tiny whole roasted bird
No cutlery is provided so you get the full greasy medieval experience


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> Honestly, you couldn’t trust them with a weather report


Actually they would be perfect for the weather report because weather forecasters almost always get it wrong ! I often wonder if the weather peeps just make it up as they go along.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Nonetheless, the Queen was at an age where a simple cold might have taken her, so the Harkles are NOT off the hook in any way, shape or form


I totally agree, the fact of her age, not long lost her husband and in the last few months we all saw her weight loss should have given them some clue. We all knew something was wrong, why couldn't they? Scum of the earth.


----------



## bag-mania

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.


If they had known they would have leaked it to the press and filmed an episode about it.


----------



## Rouge H

Ok-you can go now
'Royal pity party': Media slam Harry and Meghan's $100M 'snoozefest

https://mol.im/a/11521001


----------



## BittyMonkey

needlv said:


>




"Tabling" in America means postponing, or "putting it on the back burner" (less important). In this context I'm assuming this means bringing it forward?


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Does Hazz believe MM married Trev for love?
> A relationship that lasted 10 years?
> 
> _Engelson began dating Meghan Markle in 2004. The couple married at the Jamaica Inn in Ocho Rios, Jamaica on August 16, 2011. They separated after approximately 18 months and in March 2014 were granted a no-fault divorce citing irreconcilable differences. Engelson attracted significant media attention due to his previous marriage to Markle, when she became engaged to Prince Harry in November 2017.
> From Wikipedia_
> 
> Last words from The Tig   Tell us more, MM
> _Though they were together for seven years prior to tying the knot, the duchess’ marriage to Engelson crumbled almost as quickly as it began. The duchess has never widely discussed her divorce. However, when it was announced in 2013, she posted a telling quote on her now-defunct lifestyle blog, The Tig. It read, “*I no longer spend a single minute on those who lie or want to manipulate. I decided not to coexist anymore with pretense, hypocrisy, dishonesty, and cheap praise.*” Apparently, the producer never even saw the breakup coming.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Thought Her Ex-Husband Was Extremely Unprofessional, Claims Royal Biographer
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle ended her marriage to Trevor Engelson in 2013. Now, a royal expert claims the duchess thought her ex-husband very was unprofessional.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cheatsheet.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ‘_


She no longer wants to spend a single minute on those who lie or want to manipulate?  Was that because she needed to be the only one who was the liar and manipulator in a relationship?


----------



## Toby93

purseinsanity said:


> LOLOL I saw a clip of them in a car, constantly turning to see if a "pap" was still following them.  Haz turned around repeatedly like he had a tic, but conveniently, not once was a papparazi actually shown.  These people are delusional.


And who on earth was filming them?  There were close ups and changes in camera angles.  The cynical part of me thinks this was filmed recently and not years ago as they want us to believe


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> And who on earth was filming them?  There were close ups and changes in camera angles.  The cynical part of me thinks this was filmed recently and not years ago as they want us to believe


Assume they are reenactments. It’s a TV show, not news footage.


----------



## Chanbal

skyqueen said:


> ...in a nutshell!



This is so good, thanks!


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

I would suggest Mr. and Mrs. Markle. It's time for TW to put her P&G/detergent story in action!


----------



## Chanbal

Let's hope!


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> I would suggest Mr. and Mrs. Markle. It's time for TW to put her P&G/detergent story in action!


----------



## Hanton

After the Queen died I read that as a little girl she spent a lot of time in the company of her grandparents, George V and Queen Mary.  One of the things she learnt at Queen Mary’s knee was that attention-seeking and crowd-pleasing were for Actresses….Queen Mary‘s thought this lesson would keep the little Princess humble and down-to-earth.  Red alert when Meghan hove into view, no doubt.   (No offence intended to any actresses reading this, just different stock in trade!)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting…


Another BL expert opinion…


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey. 

It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating. 

I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems. 

I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> Didn't even read the article but the comments are stellar (open in an incognito window if you get the paywall). As a reminder, this is an ultra liberal audience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry’s Docuseries Certainly Looks Tense
> 
> 
> They are ready to tell all … again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thecut.com


behind a paywall


----------



## CarryOn2020

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


We all have our own opinions.  Thanks for sharing.


----------



## lulu212121

Shame on Charles for letting this get so nasty. He really is spineless. It's one thing for him to ignore when they come after him, but to ignore them and not take any action when they are making fun of his mother, the much loved Queen, Catherine the future Queen, and the lovely people of Britain and the Commonwealth is too much for me.


----------



## Sharont2305

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


Thank you for coming over to this thread with your observations. Great post, though I do disagree on the curtseying bit


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> behind a paywall


Here you go: 

In March 2021, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sat down with Oprah Winfrey to set the record straight on their resignation from British royal life in their own words for the first time, and wasn’t that a wild ride? Silenc_ed_ no more. Then, a few months later, Penguin Random House announced Harry would tell his story himself for the first time in an “honest” and still-forthcoming memoir — aaaaahhh! The suspense was killing us, but then Meghan, mostly mum in the press since arriving in the U.S., sat down with this very magazine and told us how “none of it had to be this way” and also that she and “H” fancy themselves two palm trees attached at the root! We were learning so much about these two crazy kids even before Meghan released her podcast, so I am wondering what fresh bombshell revelations the Sussexes will drop in the six-episode docuseries (aptly named _Harry & Meghan_ and rated TV-MA for “mature audiences” — oh la la) that debuts on Netflix this week.

The first trailer, which the streaming platform shared December 1, did not offer many clues as to specific contents, but it did set a tone: sort of sweet and distinctly ominous.

The teaser gives us some never-before-seen pics of the couple — Harry playing guitar for a fedora-wearing Meghan; the couple kissing in a photo booth and hiking and weeping — but, as for the substance, it wasn’t clear what’s new. Netflix promises an “unprecedented and in-depth” look at “the other side of their high-profile love story” with input from friends and family members who (for the most part) have not spoken to media before. In the trailer itself, Harry tells an interviewer, “No one sees what’s happening behind closed doors. I had to do everything I could to protect my family.” In a separate sit-down, Meghan explains the couple’s participation in the series thus: “When the stakes are this high, does it make more sense to hear our story from us?”

Possibly sensing that you, the viewer, were not as stressed or excited as you could be, Netflix followed up with a second trailer December 5. The takeaway? Tension.

“There’s a hierarchy of the family,” Harry explains in voice-over as a doom score plays in the background. “There’s leaking, but there’s also planting of stories.”

“There was a war against Meghan to suit other people’s agendas,” an expert I can’t identify claims in an interview. “It’s about hatred; it’s about race,” another adds. “It’s a dirty game,” Harry agrees. My shoulders are at my ears! Parallels with the late Princess Diana are being drawn! The paps are swarming! The flashbulbs are reaching a fever pitch! “No one knows the full truth,” Harry tells us. “We know the full truth.”

But based on public statements the couple has already made, much of this impending truth sounds familiar even without hearing the latest retelling. Meghan has recalled, to Oprah and on her podcast, asking her in-laws for help when the scrutiny of royal life left her with thoughts of suicide. She and Harry have claimed that someone in the royal family raised questions about their son Archie’s skin color when he was still in utero. She has already accused the palace of “perpetuating falsehoods,” and an often racist double standard is clear when reviewing tabloid headlines from her time as a royal associate.

Then, in the weeks since Harry’s grandmother Queen Elizabeth II died, the couple is rumored to have lobbied for edits that would paint Harry’s dad, King Charles III, in a more flattering light. They don’t appear to have been particularly successful in their efforts, though that writing was already on the wall. In a recent interview with _Variety_, Meghan seemed to want to distance herself and her husband from the project. “It’s nice to be able to trust someone with our story” — director Liz Garbus, whose work Meghan has “long admired” — “even if it means it may not be the way we would have told it,” she said. “But that’s not why we’re telling it. We’re trusting our story to someone else, and that means it will go through their lens.”

Does that mean they didn’t sign off on the splicing of a shattered-glass sound effect over the grim visages of their royal relatives Prince William and Kate Middleton? We may never know, but, anyway, the first three episodes of _Harry & Meghan_ arrive December 8; the final three land on December 15, a date on which the royal family just so happens to have some festive counterprogramming planned. According to _People_, the Princess of Wales organized a caroling event at Westminster Abbey, “dedicated to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and the values Her Majesty demonstrated throughout her life, including duty, empathy, faith, service, kindness, compassion and support for others,” to quote a press release from the palace. The king, the queen consort, and (naturally) Prince William will all attend. This is apparently the second year Kate has hosted _Royal Carols: Together At Christmas _— last year she sang! — but the timing nonetheless feels … convenient, even though the special itself airs Christmas Eve on ITV1. Craig David and Mel C are performing! Catherine Zeta-Jones will narrate! And maybe that will be enough to distract you from a spicy little drama unfolding on Netflix? Sure, maybe.

_This article has been updated._


----------



## Toby93

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that *Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point.* I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


The whole family is troubled, but one of them hit the jackpot and is now using that fame to bring her husbands family down.  There are too many people who have spoken up about TW to change our minds at this point.  She is a ruthless social climber who doesn't like the way she is being portrayed and is going out of her way to change the story.  Sorry, but that ship has sailed, no matter how many friends she trots out to lie for her.


----------



## charlottawill

lulu212121 said:


> Shame on Charles for letting this get so nasty. He really is spineless. It's one thing for him to ignore when they come after him, but to ignore them and not take any action when they are making fun of his mother, the much loved Queen, Catherine the future Queen, and the lovely people of Britain and the Commonwealth is too much for me.


I don't know. I believe he's treating them like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Let it run its course and then take appropriate action to avoid a repeat.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> behind a paywall


And a selection of comments:

"Whatever, I have no interest in watching. In Harry's defense though, when you're known as nothing but the "spare" (see Princess Margaret) and dismissed, and your brother is fawned upon as the future king of England, I might have been a little pissed off too. Now, they come off as a couple of petulant teenagers."

"How long will these two overgrown infants cry on the public's shoulder about all the alleged mean things that the royal family did to them? Their complaints fall into two categories: extremely vague or outright lies. Seems like Meghan is attempting to market herself as a Diana 2.0-- the abused mentally delicate damsel valiantly battling the big bad monarchy. She and Harry intentionally try to spin the "Team Diana-Meghan-Harry vs Team Monarchy" angle, a cheap attempt to reap the public's sympathy for Diana."

"It’s like that old truism: if everyone you meet is an a**hole, you’re the a**hole. How many a**holes does Meghan have in her history at this point? Every family member except her mother, everyone she went to school with, every person who ever gave her a job, every member of her husband’s family, every person who works in or consumes British media, every white person in England, and we haven’t even gotten to the sexist and racist culture she exists in! Far from Diana, I’d say the historical leader she most closely resembles is one Richard Nixon."

"These two people get more annoying with each ploy - constantly whining while crying victim yet living an expensive privileged life complete with polo ponies. There are people in the world with real problems."

"I really think they (and Netflix) overestimated how interesting they are."


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> I don't know. I believe he's treating them like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Let it run its course and then take appropriate action to avoid a repeat.


Okaaaay, if he does take ‘appropriate action’, then ok.  Imo he is taking too long.  His window of opportunity to show leadership, strength, vision is quickly closing. 

Still, according to Hazz:

_No one knows the truth - H&M know the truth - the Palace knows the truth - the media know the truth_

 Does anyone here know the truth?  Maybe we need Jack Nicholson to tell us:










						GUY ADAMS asks what else doesn't stand up to scrutiny in Sussexes' doc
					

In the first moments of his score-settling film, Prince Harry confidently informs viewers that 'no one knows the full truth' about the events that have led to his and Meghan's estrangement.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

TM spent a large part of his life supporting and being proud of TW. Samantha is the deserving one, and this video supports that imo. Samantha seems to be articulate and reasonable despite all TW's alleged shenanigans against the Markle family. I suggest watching it. She has so many limitations due to her condition, but she educated herself and got a job. It must have being painful to watch her daughter on the Harkles's reality show. However, she answers the questions about it in a calm and composed manner.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> Even if they didn't know she had a terminal illness, they did know she was 96 years old and were more than happy to break her heart and give her a heart attack.



This so much.

Also they knew Philip was dying and went on Oprah. What kind of person does this.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I think Charles’ handling of the situation will be quite subtle.  I feel like there will be a lot of “leaks” (ex. Sussex Survivor Squad) that will be unofficially sanctioned.  

I expect a lot of interesting “sourced” blind items.  A recent one I find interesting is the “take the money and never return, or come back in a year without TW” item.  My guess is we will never see TW at a royal event ever again.  Also, the podcast deal is over, and will not be renewed.  The Netflix deal is over, and probably will not be renewed.  The book deal is not completed, yet, but I doubt there will be a rush of publishers with offers for them.  I’m sure things are drying up.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Toby93 said:


> The whole family is troubled, but one of them hit the jackpot and is now using that fame to bring her husbands family down.  There are too many people who have spoken up about TW to change our minds at this point.  She is a ruthless social climber who doesn't like the way she is being portrayed and is going out of her way to change the story.  Sorry, but that ship has sailed, no matter how many friends she trots out to lie for her.


We can agree to disagree. I understand there’s probably nothing that would change minds for most posters in this thread. In general I don’t believe people are all good or all evil (obviously with some notable exceptions). I think the truth tends to be more complicated and nuanced.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

lulu212121 said:


> Shame on Charles for letting this get so nasty. He really is spineless. It's one thing for him to ignore when they come after him, but to ignore them and not take any action when they are making fun of his mother, the much loved Queen, Catherine the future Queen, and the lovely people of Britain and the Commonwealth is too much for me.


A tit for tat exchange in public would be ugly and graceless, it’s what they’re hoping for, and also they’re not done spewing cr*p yet.  I really hope Charles doesn’t choose that route.  I’m thinking plans are being laid to deal with them in 2023, once the books out and their artifice of a home movie has run it’s course.
If, as mentioned earlier, Charles chooses something similar to the Scandinavian model it would put a stop to any Princess Meg if the Dukedom is revoked, and they’d be Mr and Mrs Windsor - unless carrying out any duties for the the UK.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> I totally agree, the fact of her age, not long lost her husband and in the last few months we all saw her weight loss should have given them some clue. We all knew something was wrong, why couldn't they? Scum of the earth.



This.

I'm really taking their treatment of The Queen and Philip very personal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Rrright.  They never said they were arseholes either.  Here’s the important thing - *we can connect the dots. *

Meghan and Harry say 'we never said it was about privacy' in new statement amid backlash over couple's documentary that includes footage from 15 HOURS of home video they shot WHILE they plotted Megxit​








						Meghan and Harry say 'we never said Megxit was about privacy'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared dozens of new pictures, as well as footage, of themselves and their children Archie and Lilibet, their first dates and even footage of Harry proposing.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> And a selection of comments:
> 
> "Whatever, I have no interest in watching. In Harry's defense though, when you're known as nothing but the "spare" (see Princess Margaret) and dismissed, and your brother is fawned upon as the future king of England, I might have been a little pissed off too. Now, they come off as a couple of petulant teenagers."
> 
> "How long will these two overgrown infants cry on the public's shoulder about all the alleged mean things that the royal family did to them? Their complaints fall into two categories: extremely vague or outright lies. Seems like Meghan is attempting to market herself as a Diana 2.0-- the abused mentally delicate damsel valiantly battling the big bad monarchy. She and Harry intentionally try to spin the "Team Diana-Meghan-Harry vs Team Monarchy" angle, a cheap attempt to reap the public's sympathy for Diana."
> 
> "It’s like that old truism: if everyone you meet is an a**hole, you’re the a**hole. How many a**holes does Meghan have in her history at this point? Every family member except her mother, everyone she went to school with, every person who ever gave her a job, every member of her husband’s family, every person who works in or consumes British media, every white person in England, and we haven’t even gotten to the sexist and racist culture she exists in! Far from Diana, I’d say the historical leader she most closely resembles is one Richard Nixon."
> 
> "These two people get more annoying with each ploy - constantly whining while crying victim yet living an expensive privileged life complete with polo ponies. There are people in the world with real problems."
> 
> "I really think they (and Netflix) overestimated how interesting they are."


I don't think these comments are yours but I'd like to respond to the first one about Margaret also being the "spare"
After reading Tina Brown's book, I didn't get the impression that she was bitter about that.  She was unhappy that she wasn't allowed to marry the man she wanted to marry but I don't think she minded that her sister was queen.  The were apparently very close.


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This so much.
> 
> Also they knew Philip was dying and went on Oprah. What kind of person does this.


Agree THEY KNEW
Philip stepped away from his work, and went to live quietly by himself not at BP, supposedly because he did not want QEII to fuss over him, it was obvious at that point that he was not well and could have passed at any moment. The Harkles were in the UK when he separated, and there is no way they did not know Philip was frail, even if the exact diagnosis had not been shareda asnd they had moved away later


----------



## CarryOn2020

Pessie said:


> A tit for tat exchange in public would be ugly and graceless, it’s what they hoping for, and also they’re not done spewing cr*p yet.  I really hope Charles doesn’t choose that route.  I’m thinking plans are being laid to deal with them in 2023, once the books out and their artifice of a home movie has run it’s course.
> If, as mentioned earlier, Charles chooses something similar to the Scandinavian model it would put a stop to any Princess Meg if the Dukedom is revoked, and they’d be Mr and Mrs Windsor - unless carrying out any duties for the the UK.


Action, not words.  Talk is cheap. We the people need action. Sure, _royal_ action, but still *action*.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It is indeed a “bad look”.


----------



## bag-mania

lulu212121 said:


> Shame on Charles for letting this get so nasty. *He really is spineless. *It's one thing for him to ignore when they come after him, but to ignore them and not take any action when they are making fun of his mother, the much loved Queen, Catherine the future Queen, and the lovely people of Britain and the Commonwealth is too much for me.


That’s what it comes down to, doesn’t it?


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This so much.
> 
> Also they knew Philip was dying and went on Oprah. What kind of person does this.


He refused to visit which shows how little he cared.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## lulu212121

charlottawill said:


> I don't know. I believe he's treating them like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Let it run its course and then take appropriate action to avoid a repeat.


For years?!!!! He's been letting them have a temper tantrum for years, now. Much too long. He needed to address this before Queen Elizabeth passed. Shame on him for all the grief he allowed them to give her in her final years.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> This is apparently the second year Kate has hosted _Royal Carols: Together At Christmas _— last year she sang! — but the timing nonetheless feels … convenient, even though the special itself airs Christmas Eve on ITV1. Craig David and Mel C are performing! Catherine Zeta-Jones will narrate! And maybe that will be enough to distract you from a spicy little drama unfolding on Netflix? Sure, maybe.



Nice try. The Christmas event has been planned for weeks and months while nobody really knew when the mockumentary would drop. Also, Kate didn't sing (at least not as a soloist), she played the piano. Is it really that hard to not totally suck at your job (sorry, I HATE sloppy work).


----------



## lulu212121

Pessie said:


> A tit for tat exchange in public would be ugly and graceless, it’s what they’re hoping for, and also they’re not done spewing cr*p yet.  I really hope Charles doesn’t choose that route.  I’m thinking plans are being laid to deal with them in 2023, once the books out and their artifice of a home movie has run it’s course.
> If, as mentioned earlier, Charles chooses something similar to the Scandinavian model it would put a stop to any Princess Meg if the Dukedom is revoked, and they’d be Mr and Mrs Windsor - unless carrying out any duties for the the UK.


He's supposedly surrounded by very intelligent people. He could have released a statement. No tit for tat necessary. He could have came here to find the right words. People here have been typing out suggestions for years now as to how he could address all this.

eta. If the titles are taken away, is Charles going to hide behind Parliament? Spineless.


----------



## tiktok

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> We can agree to disagree. I understand there’s probably nothing that would change minds for most posters in this thread. In general I don’t believe people are all good or all evil (obviously with some notable exceptions). I think the truth tends to be more complicated and nuanced.


Agree with you completely on that, but also, I can’t deal with the “do as I say not as I do” H&M constantly practice.

How can you preach compassion and make your grandparents’ life a living hell when they’re dying? Or not forgive a mistake your father has made when he was overwhelmed by a situation he wasn’t remotely equipped to handle, to the point of never speaking to him again? Or trash your entire family on international TV when you know they’re not in a position to respond?

How can you preach environmental responsibility and live in a humongous mansion, drive gas-guzzling SUVs, and hop on a private jet at literally every opportunity? 

How can you cry racism when you were passing yourself off as a white person your entire life, dated white men exclusively, but as soon as someone criticizes something you do it’s because of your skin color?

How can you not honor royal traditions when your child is born because you want privacy, but then scream every detail of your life on every media outlet that would pay you to expose them in the name of “telling your truth”?

How can you mock people in the media for taking money for exposing information, while you take (a lot more) money for exposing information? 

And that’s before we go into the many lies that they were caught in, including OUTRIGHT LYING IN COURT and inconsistent stories between the two of them on the same Oprah interview. 

I just can’t deal with the hypocrisy and the lies. THAT’s what kills me about these two, not the fact that they’re fundamentally better or worse humans than everyone else in their family. And for them there’s certainly an all good and all evil - they’re all good and everyone who doesn’t worship them is all evil.


----------



## Pessie

lulu212121 said:


> For years?!!!! He's been letting them have a temper tantrum for years, now. Much too long. He needed to address this before Queen Elizabeth passed. Shame on him for all the grief he allowed them to give her in her final years.


While the Queen was alive it wasn’t Charles’ decision to make, and she’s only been gone 3 months.  He must be heartbroken at what his son has done.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Why haven’t we heard about this Ashleigh until now? It’s been over 4 1/2 years since the wedding and we have heard from the other Markles. I am guessing she was paid by them to throw her relatives, particularly her mother, under the bus.

Does the show address why she didn’t invite any of her relatives from the other side of the family, besides Doria?


----------



## lulu212121

Pessie said:


> While the Queen was alive it wasn’t Charles’ decision to make, and she’s only been gone 3 months.  He must be heartbroken at what his son has done.


I can't buy that Charles had no say in what his son was doing.


----------



## Pessie

lulu212121 said:


> He's supposedly surrounded by very intelligent people. He could have released a statement. No tit for tat necessary. He could have came here to find the right words. People here have been typing out suggestions for years now as to how he could address all this.
> 
> eta. If the titles are taken away, is Charles going to hide behind Parliament? Spineless.


Oh, suit yourself dear.


----------



## Molly0

charlottawill said:


> "I really think they (and Netflix) overestimated how interesting they are."


Amen!


----------



## Pessie

lulu212121 said:


> I can't buy that Charles had no say in what his son was doing.


That’s ridiculous.  I’m putting you on ignore.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Rrright.  They never said they were arseholes either.  Here’s the important thing - *we can connect the dots. *
> 
> Meghan and Harry say 'we never said it was about privacy' in new statement amid backlash over couple's documentary that includes footage from 15 HOURS of home video they shot WHILE they plotted Megxit​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan and Harry say 'we never said Megxit was about privacy'
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex shared dozens of new pictures, as well as footage, of themselves and their children Archie and Lilibet, their first dates and even footage of Harry proposing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Honestly, planning to use the footage at a later point is probably less worrisome than just walking around filming yourself daily just because you can. Who does this? It is pretty sick behaviour.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Nice try. The Christmas event has been planned for weeks and months while nobody really knew when the mockumentary would drop. Also, Kate didn't sing (at least not as a soloist), she played the piano. Is it really that hard to not totally suck at your job (sorry, I HATE sloppy work).


funny how Kate (who is allegedly so cold IRL) seems so lovely and nice at all her engagements....and doesn't bring a camera crew to everything.  Oh but she's not a hugger!


----------



## Toby93

Sophisticatted said:


> I think Charles’ handling of the situation will be quite subtle.  I feel like there will be a lot of “leaks” (ex. Sussex Survivor Squad) that will be unofficially sanctioned.
> 
> I expect a lot of interesting “sourced” blind items.  A recent one I find interesting is the “take the money and never return, or come back in a year without TW” item.  My guess is we will never see TW at a royal event ever again.  Also, the podcast deal is over, and will not be renewed.  The Netflix deal is over, and probably will not be renewed.  The book deal is not completed, yet, but I doubt there will be a rush of publishers with offers for them.  I’m sure things are drying up.


To be honest, even if it did dry up, how many of us could live comfortably on just $100 million?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> He refused to visit which shows how little he cared.



I just literally cannot understand. I sat with my dying grandfather for days along with the whole family, and when he died and the nurses came to prepare him we sent them out and washed and dressed him ourselves. I think Ghoul is a disgusting, vile creature, but what wire burned out in Harry's head that he thought not cancelling whatever he was doing and rushing to the UK was even remotely ok? And that is even without his shameful behaviour on Oprah. I don't care about Covid as an excuse, Philip was at home at that point and he was actively dying and nobody would have been the wiser.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulu212121 said:


> He's supposedly surrounded by very intelligent people. He could have released a statement. No tit for tat necessary. *He could have came here to find the right words. People here have been typing out suggestions for years now as to how he could address all this.*
> 
> eta. If the titles are taken away, is Charles going to hide behind Parliament? Spineless.



Oh, we'd be more than happy to help.


----------



## Chanbal

tiktok said:


> *How can you cry racism when you were passing yourself off as a white person your entire life, dated white men exclusively, but as soon as someone criticizes something you do it’s because of your skin color?*
> 
> How can you not honor royal traditions when your child is born because you want privacy, but then scream every detail of your life on every media outlet that would pay you to expose them in the name of “telling your truth”?
> 
> How can you mock people in the media for taking money for exposing information, while you take (a lot more) money for exposing information?
> 
> And that’s before we go into the many lies that they were caught in, including OUTRIGHT LYING IN COURT and inconsistent stories between the two of them on the same Oprah interview.
> 
> I just can’t deal with the hypocrisy and the lies. THAT’s what kills me about these two, not the fact that they’re fundamentally better or worse humans than everyone else in their family. And for them there’s certainly an all good and all evil - they’re all good and everyone who doesn’t worship them is all evil.


Wow, great comment! I wonder if Lady C is onto something with her recent statement…


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh, we'd be more than happy to help.


I’m ready.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lulu212121 said:


> I can't buy that Charles had no say in what his son was doing.



Well, Harry has been an adult for 20 years. I'd say Charles had indeed not much of a scope, especially as Harry can't be reasoned with. Now as a king he has a bit more leeway of course.


----------



## Mrs.Z

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


Thank you….yes, I also truly thought Meghan was making fun of herself as an American trying to do the curtsey for the first time, bc obviously it’s such a foreign concept to us.  

Agreed, I did not expect that voice from Doria but thought she seems quite lovely!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Did Doria say, “It is about racism”?  I haven’t and will not watch this sh!tshow, still an intriguing comment from Doria, if true.


Mrs.Z said:


> Thank you….yes, I also truly thought Meghan was making fun of herself as an American trying to do the curtsey for the first time, bc obviously it’s such a foreign concept to us.
> 
> Agreed, I did not expect that voice from Doria but thought she seems quite lovely!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

sdkitty said:


> funny how Kate (who is allegedly so cold IRL) seems so lovely and nice at all her engagements....and doesn't bring a camera crew to everything.  Oh but she's not a hugger!


Yep, Kate is so cold and not a hugger!






























Meanwhile Duchess "The staff of the store is not allowed to talk to me or look at me" is so warm, being that she's a hugger!


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


totally agree with you on Breitbart...hateful source
I get that you like Meghan better than most of us here and so you see that curtsey thing differently.
Even for you though, trying to be fair to meghan, isn't it odd that this neice suddenly comes out of the woodwork after Meghan inviting No One from her family except Doria to her wedding?  I don't believe the RF stopped her from inviting this young woman.  and what's her excuse for not having any aunts, uncles cousins?  one of her uncles got her an embassy job as I recall.  why wasn't he good enough to be be at that huge wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

lulu212121 said:


> He's supposedly surrounded by very intelligent people. He could have released a statement. No tit for tat necessary. He could have came here to find the right words. People here have been typing out suggestions for years now as to how he could address all this.
> 
> eta. If the titles are taken away, is Charles going to hide behind Parliament? Spineless.


I don’t think KC3 is spineless. He has a difficult situation to deal with at the start of his reign. Obviously  he wants to put an end to the bashing and trashing, and if this is coming from Parliament, it is sending the message that the British people are supporting him and don’t believe that two grifters should be allowed to trash their monarch and their country or the Commonwealth.  If The King asked Parliament directly  to take the titles away, he would appear as rather harsh and dictatorial,  not to mention the meanest father  on earth.  The end around of having it come from outside BP is a better optic.   Of course it would not be happening if he didn’t want it to and that will be the small elephant in the room. If KC can accomplish this it will be quite a feat and his new constitutional  expert on the payroll will have earned his salary.

If this series was meant to appeal to the US viewers then it was a fail. I have not heard any talking head call this anything, but a whingefest.


----------



## gracekelly

pomeline said:


> Yep, Kate is so cold and not a hugger!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile Duchess "The staff of the store is not allowed to talk to me or look at me" is so warm, being that she's a hugger!


Children gravitate to her so easily!


----------



## youngster

lulu212121 said:


> For years?!!!! He's been letting them have a temper tantrum for years, now. Much too long. He needed to address this before Queen Elizabeth passed. Shame on him for all the grief he allowed them to give her in her final years.



Yes, I wish they had addressed this prior to the death of the Queen.  Perhaps though, it might have been the Queen herself who didn't want to address it, didn't want to think about it.  She was famously adverse to confrontation.    

It must be incredibly painful for KC3 and Will.  They loved Harry, they may still love him, but not like him very much.  It makes sense to me that KC3 would wait until the series is out, and wait until the book is out, before taking any specific action.  That's only another few weeks. In the grand scheme, when you play chess, not checkers, and take the long view, that's not much time at all.  I think too, they want to see what the last 3 episodes bring and then they will address anything that needs addressing all at once, and not give the series more PR by getting into a transatlantic back-and-forth.


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think KC3 is spineless. He has a difficult situation to deal with at the start of his reign. Obviously  he wants to put an end to the bashing and trashing, and if this is coming from Parliament, it is sending the message that the British people are supporting him and don’t believe that two grifters should be allowed to trash their monarch and their country or the Commonwealth.  If The King asked Parliament directly  to take the titles away, he would appear as rather harsh and dictatorial,  not to mention the meanest father  on earth.  The end around of having it come from outside BP is a a better optic.   Of course it would not be happening if he didn’t want it to and that will be the small elephant in the room. If KC can accomplish this it will be quite a feat and his new constitutional  expert on the payroll will have earned his salary.
> 
> If this series was meant to appeal to the US viewers then it was a fail. I have not heard any talking head call this anything, but a whingefest.



At first I was impatient and thought "why isn't the king saying or doing something" but after I've given it some thought I am inclined to think he is wise not to make hasty decisions or statements right now. He wants to see the rest of the series and wait until Harry's book comes out. Then no-one can blame the king for having a hot temper and a short fuse and acting hastily. He wants to see the whole thing before making decisions. And, I think they really need to be careful to not make their response seem like a revenge or a "racist act". The best possible outcome would be a mutual statement by H&M and BRF announcing that they have come to a mutual decision to give up the titles. But pigs will fly before those two give up their titles - unless there's something they can be persuaded with like dirt that would be released. Yes, a dirty game but they started it.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> Thank you….yes, I also truly thought Meghan was making fun of herself as an American trying to do the curtsey for the first time, bc obviously it’s such a foreign concept to us.
> 
> Agreed, I did not expect that voice from Doria but thought she seems quite lovely!


I saw her as mocking the custom of the curtsy. If she was making fun of herself she would have stood up and fumbled it. Instead she did a poor imitation of Errol Flynn as Lord Essex bowing to QE 1st


----------



## Stansy

I would love for a journalist to ask Meghan to point out the county of Sussex on a map…


----------



## pomeline

I am so hoping she wasn't laughing at HM at this occasion or behaving appallingly but after that series I cannot be sure. Apparently she did rush to the car past HM but are there pictures of it?

https://www.popsugar.co.uk/celebrit...678/Meghan-Markle-Queen-Elizabeth-II-Pictures


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> I saw her as mocking the custom of the curtsy. If she was making fun of herself she would have stood up and fumbled it. Instead she did a poor imitation of Errol Flynn as Lord Essex bowing to QE 1st


It makes that obviously heavily practiced curtsey she did to the Queen lying in state look even more ridiculous than we thought at the time.


----------



## Abba13

tiktok said:


> Agree with you completely on that, but also, I can’t deal with the “do as I say not as I do” H&M constantly practice.
> 
> How can you preach compassion and make your grandparents’ life a living hell when they’re dying? Or not forgive a mistake your father has made when he was overwhelmed by a situation he wasn’t remotely equipped to handle, to the point of never speaking to him again? Or trash your entire family on international TV when you know they’re not in a position to respond?
> 
> How can you preach environmental responsibility and live in a humongous mansion, drive gas-guzzling SUVs, and hop on a private jet at literally every opportunity?
> 
> How can you cry racism when you were passing yourself off as a white person your entire life, dated white men exclusively, but as soon as someone criticizes something you do it’s because of your skin color?
> 
> How can you not honor royal traditions when your child is born because you want privacy, but then scream every detail of your life on every media outlet that would pay you to expose them in the name of “telling your truth”?
> 
> How can you mock people in the media for taking money for exposing information, while you take (a lot more) money for exposing information?
> 
> And that’s before we go into the many lies that they were caught in, including OUTRIGHT LYING IN COURT and inconsistent stories between the two of them on the same Oprah interview.
> 
> I just can’t deal with the hypocrisy and the lies. THAT’s what kills me about these two, not the fact that they’re fundamentally better or worse humans than everyone else in their family. And for them there’s certainly an all good and all evil - they’re all good and everyone who doesn’t worship them is all evil.


Extremely well written.  Thank you.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> totally agree with you on Breitbart...hateful source
> I get that you like Meghan better than most of us here and so you see that curtsey thing differently.
> Even for you though, trying to be fair to meghan, isn't it odd that this neice suddenly comes out of the woodwork after Meghan inviting No One from her family except Doria to her wedding?  I don't believe the RF stopped her from inviting this young woman.  and what's her excuse for not having any aunts, uncles cousins?  one of her uncles got her an embassy job as I recall.  why wasn't he good enough to be be at that huge wedding.


I actually don't really like Meghan...or dislike her...she literally has zero impact on my life. I admit I am fascinated by the vitriol she seems to engender. 

Given all the photos of Meghan with her niece I have no reason to doubt her. Plus she's a lawyer so I think would not want to be caught lying on national (international?) television. 

Critics are so quick to accuse MM of being a terrible mother (with little evidence besides poring over photos for the gotcha moments). We know neither of Samantha Markle's daughters were raised by their biological mother, no one seems to be denying that point. Yet somehow between the two Samantha has become a paragon of virtue, a victim, who must be telling the truth? That I do not understand. 

And I agree with Doria. I have no sympathy for Thomas Markle. A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money...nope there is no excuse for that.


----------



## Pessie

Sharont2305 said:


> It makes that obviously heavily practiced curtsey she did to the Queen lying in state look even more ridiculous than we thought at the time.


A two fingered salute IMO


----------



## Jktgal

Chanbal said:


> TM spent a large part of his life supporting and being proud of TW. Samantha is the deserving one, and this video supports that imo. Samantha seems to be articulate and reasonable despite all TW's alleged shenanigans against the Markle family. I suggest watching it. She has so many limitations due to her condition, but she educated herself and got a job. It must have being painful to watch her daughter on the Harkles's reality show. However, she answers the questions about it in a calm and composed manner.



"The royals are all horrible, the Markles are all horrible, everybody's horrible but them. Isn't that just a miracle."  

Actually I see this a lot with people here on TPF - people horrible and need to be cut off. I think to an extent a lot of people identify with this - with thinking everybody's horrible except me (aka delusional) - so I can see how people are sympathetic with these two.


----------



## CarryOn2020

gracekelly said:


> I saw her as mocking the custom of the curtsy. If she was making fun of herself she would have stood up and fumbled it. Instead she did a poor imitation of Errol Flynn as Lord Essex bowing to QE 1st


Hazzi is the one who made a big deal out of the curtsy, especially because she is an American.  He seemed to have enjoyed himself mocking her about the curtsy.  Clearly she thinks she is a comedian which she is not.  So much vanity, it really is all about meeeeee.  Seriously, they should take their arrogant a$$es back to the UK.


_There are *no* obligatory codes of behaviour when meeting The Queen or a member of the Royal Family, but many people wish to observe the traditional forms._


			https://www.royal.uk/greeting-member-royal-family


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I saw her as mocking the custom of the curtsy. If she was making fun of herself she would have stood up and fumbled it. Instead she did a poor imitation of Errol Flynn as Lord Essex bowing to QE 1st



Yes, agree. She was mocking the custom of it.  As an International Relations major, she should very well know you do not mock the social conventions or customs of other countries.


----------



## Jktgal

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money...nope there is no excuse for that.


Meghan is her father's daughter through and through.


----------



## Mrs.Z

CarryOn2020 said:


> Did Doria say, “It is about racism”?  I haven’t and will not watch this sh!tshow, still an intriguing comment from Doria, if true.


I can’t recall the exact context, I think it was to explain the negativity from the press ..Doria thought it was racism and that had not occurred to Meghan.  To be fair, they then flashed a number of articles that were fairly racist, i.e. alleging M was from Compton, which she is not.


----------



## gracekelly

Honestly, after reading how they filmed every freaking thing including his marriage proposal, this does seem more like everything was planned from the very beginning to make the Harry and Meghan Show.   When Harry said his life was like The Truman Show, he was really saying he was going to GIVE us The Truman Show. Meghan wanted to be a star, so why not make a movie/series about her life. That was the only way it was going to happen. They certainly won’t get an Emmy for this. A Razzie is more likely or a Hasty Pudding Award.  If they were trying for an I Love Lucy, it did not work either.


----------



## LizzieBennett

Sharont2305 said:


> It makes that obviously heavily practiced curtsey she did to the Queen lying in state look even more ridiculous than we thought at the time.


I thought at the time she was mocking the custom and the Queen when she did that ridiculous curtsy at the funeral, and now I'm sure she was.

Edited to correct spelling.


----------



## gracekelly

Her entire behavior set at the funeral was an act right down to the left eye tear.


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> I saw her as mocking the custom of the curtsy. If she was making fun of herself she would have stood up and fumbled it. Instead she did a poor imitation of Errol Flynn as Lord Essex bowing to QE 1st


Plus weren't there the reports of her pretending to be a Princess when she was young and demanding people to curtsy to her?


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> Plus weren't there the reports of her pretending to be a Princess when she was young and demanding people to curtsy to her?


Yes at a friend’s birthday party!


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I actually don't really like Meghan...or dislike her...she literally has zero impact on my life. I admit I am fascinated by the vitriol she seems to engender.
> 
> Given all the photos of Meghan with her niece I have no reason to doubt her. Plus she's a lawyer so I think would not want to be caught lying on national (international?) television.
> 
> Critics are so quick to accuse MM of being a terrible mother (with little evidence besides poring over photos for the gotcha moments). We know neither of Samantha Markle's daughters were raised by their biological mother, no one seems to be denying that point. Yet somehow between the two Samantha has become a paragon of virtue, a victim, who must be telling the truth? That I do not understand.
> 
> And I agree with Doria. I have no sympathy for Thomas Markle. A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money...nope there is no excuse for that.


as far as the niece being a lawyer, we all know there are attorneys who are unethical.....Michael Avenatti ring a bell?
It's mostly a matter of opinion....for whatever reason, she seems to get a rise out of people, for better or worse.  IDK what kind of mother she is.
I wasn't aware of doria's  comments about Thomas but in light of the fact he raised her (and his) ,daughter put her through expensive schools, etc., she could maybe cut him some slack.


----------



## Toby93

This


----------



## csshopper

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I actually don't really like Meghan...or dislike her...she literally has zero impact on my life. I admit I am fascinated by the vitriol she seems to engender.
> 
> Given all the photos of Meghan with her niece I have no reason to doubt her. Plus she's a lawyer so I think would not want to be caught lying on national (international?) television.
> 
> Critics are so quick to accuse MM of being a terrible mother (with little evidence besides poring over photos for the gotcha moments). We know neither of Samantha Markle's daughters were raised by their biological mother, no one seems to be denying that point. Yet somehow between the two Samantha has become a paragon of virtue, a victim, who must be telling the truth? That I do not understand.
> 
> And I agree with Doria. I have no sympathy for Thomas Markle. A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money...nope there is no excuse for that.


“A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money…..nope there’s no excuse for that”

Totally agree, there is no excuse for HARRY to sell his children, in his case for millions of $$$ to Netflix after hiding them for years when the pay off for access to them was evidently not enough to satisfy their greed or enough $$$ to help to pay the mortgage.

And, he doesn’t just talk about them, he and their Mum flood an international reality TV show with intimate image after image of them.

Thomas Markle was thrown under the bus for allowing paparazzi pictures in public places.  His daughter and son-in-law appear to have a paparazzi in permanent residence filming some of their most intimate moments.

H YP O C R I S Y run amok.


----------



## Sharont2305

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And I agree with Doria. I have no sympathy for Thomas Markle. A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money...nope there is no excuse for that.


How is that different to a son trashing his family for money? Only not through the tabloids but an interview, a series and a book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

sdkitty said:


> as far as the niece being a lawyer, we all know there are attorneys who are unethical.....Michael Avenatti ring a bell?
> It's mostly a matter of opinion....for whatever reason, she seems to get a rise out of people, for better or worse.  IDK what kind of mother she is.
> I wasn't aware of doria's  comments about Thomas but in light of the fact he raised her (and his), put her through expensive schools, etc., she could maybe cut him some slack.


Yes, if [and I have no idea if these comments are true], she said these things,  it’s time to tell the truth about her.  Lots of questions have been asked about her past, her connections to OW and MarianneW, the solitary wedding guest - she adds a key element to this H&M bs story.  It sounds like she is H&M’s puppet master, advising them, etc.  Whoa.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Sharont2305 said:


> How is that different to a son trashing his family for money? Only not through the tabloids but an interview, a series and a book.


As I explained I am not a fan so I have no need to defend anyone! Although I suppose an argument could be made that Thomas and Samantha created much of this drama themselves...way before anyone spoke badly of them.


----------



## Annawakes

I’m glad KC3 isn’t publicly doing anything about them right now.  He could be working behind the scenes and biding his time until everything is released (which I think is very wise).

I’m glad he isn’t issuing statements of any sort.  They don’t need any more fodder.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

csshopper said:


> *And, he doesn’t just talk about them, he and their Mum flood an international reality TV show with intimate image after image of them.*
> 
> Thomas Markle was thrown under the bus for allowing paparazzi pictures in public places.  His daughter and son-in-law appear to have a paparazzi in permanent residence filming some of their most intimate moments.
> 
> H YP O C R I S Y run amok.


Yet Harry was unable to answer a child’s question about what his children were doing two months ago. He stumbled over it like it surprised him and he genuinely didn’t know what to say.

At some point Harry and Meghan’s house of cards is going to come tumbling down.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I can’t recall the exact context, I think it was to explain the negativity from the press ..Doria thought it was racism and that had not occurred to Meghan.  To be fair, they then flashed a number of articles that were fairly racist, *i.e. alleging M was from Compton, which she is not.*



Oh we know, and also that - as opposed to Ghoul - Serena Williams is. Why do we know? Because Ghoul herself wouldn't shut up about it and bring it up several times on her podcast where Serena, her supposed friend, was her guest.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> Plus weren't there the reports of her pretending to be a Princess when she was young and demanding people to curtsy to her?



No, no. THE QUEEN. At another girl's birthday party.


----------



## Laila619

I don’t buy for one second that anyone in the royal family ordered her to NOT invite her niece Ashleigh. But even assuming someone did order them not to invite her, okay then WHY did she not invite anyone from Doria’s side?! Doria says Meghan supposedly grew up being close with her (Doria’s) two sisters and parents. The whole thing is bizarre and there are so many red flags. I asked my DH what he would think if he only ever met my mother prior to our wedding and he said it would trigger an alarm bell that something was really off. The Dumbflix show is annoying because it’s just more softball questions and no one grills her on anything or holds her accountable. I guess I should have known it would be like that, but can ANY interviewer ever ask her to explain and hold her feet to the fire?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> How is that different to a son trashing his family for money? Only not through the tabloids but an interview, a series and a book.



Or a daughter setting up her father and feeding him to the public. And I'm not even a fan of Thomas.


----------



## papertiger

Laila619 said:


> I don’t buy for one second that anyone in the royal family ordered her to NOT invite her niece Ashleigh. But even assuming someone did order them not to invite her, okay then WHY did she not invite anyone from Doria’s side?! Doria says Meghan supposedly grew up being close with her (Doria’s) two sisters and parents. The whole thing is bizarre and there are so many red flags. I asked my DH what he would think if he only ever met my mother prior to our wedding and he said it would trigger an alarm bell that something was really off. The Dumbflix show is annoying because it’s just more softball questions and no one grills her on anything or holds her accountable. I guess I should have known it would be like that, but can ANY interviewer ever ask her to explain and hold her feet to the fire?!



They probably heard Ashleigh was upset she wasn't invited so they had to cover their sad, embarrassed posteriors


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I don't think these comments are yours


They're not, just copied and pasted from the article.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> They probably heard Ashleigh was upset she wasn't invited so they had to cover their sad, embarrassed posteriors


Maybe, but all the Raglands said they were upset as well. She didn’t give two thoughts about not inviting any of them. They weren’t classy enough for her and she thought they would embarrass her. Her mother was the only one she could dress up and parade out to keep her AA credential in tact. Meghan was stage managing the stage production of  her wedding.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Under the bus:

Ashleigh throws her mother under the bus.
MM threw her father under the bus.
MM throws her sister and brother under the bus.
Samantha and her brother throw MM under the bus.
Doria throws her one and only husband? under the bus.
Doria throw the BRF under the bus.
Hazz throws his entire family under the bus.
Hazz throws TM under the bus.






Anyone else believe these people have taken up much more than their share of the limelight?  They are not even interesting. 
Let’s boycott.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> They probably heard Ashleigh was upset she wasn't invited so they had to cover their sad, embarrassed posteriors


I didn’t know Ashleigh existed until today. On one hand Meghan is claiming she barely knew her half-sister, but then that means she would know Samantha’s daughter even less than that! Why would a niece she scarcely knew be invited to the wedding? Her story doesn’t ring true on any level. 

The only explanation is that the people gushing over them were paid or benefitted in some other way.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Maybe, but all the Raglands said they were upset as well. She didn’t give two thoughts about not inviting any of them. They weren’t classy enough for her and she thought they would embarrass her. Her mother was the only one she could dress up and parade out to keep her AA credential in tact. Meghan was stage managing the stage production of  her wedding.


Yes. And I think she is still pizzed off that Charles walked her part way down the aisle. Her plan had been a solo stroll with no one else to share her Mr DeMille  moment in the spotlight.


----------



## Chanbal

Maureen's opinion! 


MAUREEN CALLAHAN: The $100m 'Harry and Meghan' is panned… and finally the karmic wheels of justice turn against two untalented, ungrateful hypocrites. No one deserves it more – so let’s savor it!​By MAUREEN CALLAHAN FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 10:00 EST, 9 December 2022 | UPDATED: 11:20 EST, 9 December 2022









						CALLAHAN: Karmic wheels of justice turn against hypocrites. Savor it!
					

CALLAHAN: The Meghan Markle we see here will discard anyone once they no longer make her look good, feed her narcissistic supply, or are of any practical use.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Perhaps though, it might have been the Queen herself who didn't want to address it, didn't want to think about it. She was famously adverse to confrontation.


This is quite possible. She seemed to be smiling more in her final months, compared to the more stern or solemn photos I recall seeing over the years. I think she had made peace with the situation and left it to KC to deal with the fallout of H&M's actions. I can't fault her for that.


----------



## LittleStar88

tiktok said:


> Agree with you completely on that, but also, I can’t deal with the “do as I say not as I do” H&M constantly practice.
> 
> How can you preach compassion and make your grandparents’ life a living hell when they’re dying? Or not forgive a mistake your father has made when he was overwhelmed by a situation he wasn’t remotely equipped to handle, to the point of never speaking to him again? Or trash your entire family on international TV when you know they’re not in a position to respond?
> 
> How can you preach environmental responsibility and live in a humongous mansion, drive gas-guzzling SUVs, and hop on a private jet at literally every opportunity?
> 
> How can you cry racism when you were passing yourself off as a white person your entire life, dated white men exclusively, but as soon as someone criticizes something you do it’s because of your skin color?
> 
> How can you not honor royal traditions when your child is born because you want privacy, but then scream every detail of your life on every media outlet that would pay you to expose them in the name of “telling your truth”?
> 
> How can you mock people in the media for taking money for exposing information, while you take (a lot more) money for exposing information?
> 
> And that’s before we go into the many lies that they were caught in, including OUTRIGHT LYING IN COURT and inconsistent stories between the two of them on the same Oprah interview.
> 
> I just can’t deal with the hypocrisy and the lies. THAT’s what kills me about these two, not the fact that they’re fundamentally better or worse humans than everyone else in their family. And for them there’s certainly an all good and all evil - they’re all good and everyone who doesn’t worship them is all evil.



THIS so much!

I respect that other people can have their opinions and that’s ok! But this docufiction is no different from me hiring someone to make my life look a certain way. On the surface it is probably easy to believe but if you dig deeper you’ll see the discrepancies. And if people want to buy into what these two are selling, then knock yourselves out. Some people just don’t want to see the reality of their behavior and that’s ok.

I’m not watching the series. I’ve seen enough clips. I tried watching with an open mind but seeing made me feel worse about them.  I’ve been holding off on commenting while I read here and on Reddit. It’s been a lot  

That curtsy scene made me so angry. She came off as patronizing and incredibly disrespectful. I think about how I might be ion that situation. I’d come humble and with respect. What’s the right way to curtsy? What’s the best protocol?

And the whole hugging thing. I’m a hugger but I don’t glom onto people I’ve never met before. Meet them, learn who they are. Adjust yourself before making judgment. You’re the newcomer and need to earn the respect first.

She comes off as arrogant, looking down her nose at everyone who didn’t fall at her feet and worship her. I haven’t even collected how I feel about Harry. But so far it’s not good. They are both so gross. I’m glad that the vast majority are seeing right through them. I feel bad for William, Catherine, Charles. It must suck to see this sh!tshow and have to take the high road. I’d be saying bad words and breaking things


----------



## Toby93

This is from the Washington Examiner.  It would seem that they have lost a lot of the support they had in the US.
"From an outsider's perspective, Meghan comes across as an opportunistic social climber. She is a former actress whose greatest claim to fame before her courtship and marriage to Harry was her role in USA Network's show _Suits_. Meghan's self-importance is evident. Since stepping back from royal duties, she and her husband have played the victim card on many occasions. In fact, a new Netfl*x documentary titled _Harry & Meghan_ appears to focus on just that. The real question is: What did Meghan expect as a member of the royal family?
*If Meghan seems grateful for anything beyond her husband and children, it's her avenue to even more fame.* It's difficult to respect that superficiality, whether you're American or British. It would be easier for the audience to view Meghan in a kinder light if she didn't seem so focused on turning herself into a victim. *That she grew disillusioned by life in the royal family doesn't make her a martyr.* For most people, life's path turns out different from the idealistic vision we had at the start. That doesn't make it bad. It most definitely doesn't make it newsworthy."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know Ashleigh existed until today. On one hand Meghan is claiming she barely knew her half-sister, but then that means she would know Samantha’s daughter even less than that! Why would a niece she scarcely knew be invited to the wedding? Her story doesn’t ring true on any level.
> 
> The only explanation is that the people gushing over them were paid or benefitted in some other way.


@bag-mania you are likely right on the money!

TW needed to find another family member in addition to Dor*a for her reality show. Ash*** may have met TW's requirements.

When I joined this party, I didn't have the best impression of Samantha. However, I have listened to a few of her interviews, and she doesn't deny her mistakes and seems to be honest. That is also the opinion of Dan Wooton, and I believe Tom Bower as well. She went through a lot because of her health condition, but instead of waiting for someone to pay for her bills, she worked to pay for her studies.

She was put in this circus because of TW's association to the BRF, but she didn't have any protection or coaching. It is my understanding that the BRF offer protection from the 'media intrusion' to TW's family; TW accepted for her mother, but refused for the father…


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> THIS so much!
> 
> I respect that other people can have their opinions and that’s ok! But this docufiction is no different from me hiring someone to make my life look a certain way. On the surface it is probably easy to believe but if you dig deeper you’ll see the discrepancies. And if people want to buy into what these two are selling, then knock yourselves out. Some people just don’t want to see the reality of their behavior and that’s ok.
> 
> I’m not watching the series. I’ve seen enough clips. I tried watching with an open mind but seeing made me feel worse about them.  I’ve been holding off on commenting while I read here and on Reddit. It’s been a lot
> 
> That curtsy scene made me so angry. She came off as patronizing and incredibly disrespectful. I think about how I might be ion that situation. I’d come humble and with respect. What’s the right way to curtsy? What’s the best protocol?
> 
> And the whole hugging thing. I’m a hugger but I don’t glom onto people I’ve never met before. Meet them, learn who they are. Adjust yourself before making judgment. You’re the newcomer and need to earn the respect first.
> 
> She comes off as arrogant, looking down her nose at everyone who didn’t fall at her feet and worship her. I haven’t even collected how I feel about Harry. But so far it’s not good. They are both so gross. I’m glad that the vast majority are seeing right through them. I feel bad for William, Catherine, Charles. It must suck to see this sh!tshow and have to take the high road. I’d be saying bad words and breaking things


Absolutely! She’s the cliche of the Ugly American abroad who demands that the country cater to her cause she’s American. Why can’t some people figure that out? I was taught when in Rome do as the Romans do.


----------



## TC1

charlottawill said:


> This is quite possible. She seemed to be smiling more in her final months, compared to the more stern or solemn photos I recall seeing over the years. I think she had made peace with the situation and left it to KC to deal with the fallout of H&M's actions. I can't fault her for that.


As she should have. She dealt with tantrums from her family about marriage her whole Reign. First her sister, then her son Charles. Looks good on Charles to have to deal with it. Lord knows what they all dealt with when he was cheating on Di and in the public with not only Camilla.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Seems like Kate was indeed very warm and not distant in 2016. Maybe it's you, Ghoul.


----------



## Jayne1

pomeline said:


> Even if they didn't know she had a terminal illness, they did know she was 96 years old and were more than happy to break her heart and give her a heart attack.


Exactly and even though the news was not given to the general public, we knew she was declining with health problems.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. At this point I'm sick of ALL Markles, and I absolutely won't watch that one either.


It would be best to just let her fizzle out rather than give her another chance to play the victim.



bag-mania said:


> Of all the lies I’ve heard about so far, this is the one I believe the least and that’s saying a lot. THIS is the photo that sparked Harry’s interest, ladies!
> 
> “I was scrolling through my feed, and one of my friends and someone who was a friend had this video of the two of them, like a Snapchat,” Harry recalled.
> 
> After seeing the snap of Markle with a dog filter, the British prince was curious to know more.
> 
> “I was like, ‘Who is THAT?'” he shared.
> 
> View attachment 5667759
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reveal they met on Instagram: ‘Who is THAT?’
> 
> 
> Markle said her friend later told her that “Prince Haz” was interested in meeting her, but the nickname didn’t ring a bell for the American actress.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Not a tiny bit of truth.  This is just her hitting back at him for saying he had never heard of her during their engagement interview.


----------



## A1aGypsy

When you marry into the royal family and you have a very public and very “paid for by the people” wedding, damn straight they are going to vet the guest list and decline invites to people who may cause a scene, regardless of whether they are family or not. Anyone who thinks otherwise should give their heads a shake. 

This isn’t The Viva Las Vegas Wedding Chapel, it is a dynasty that have held together power for centuries.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Maureen's opinion!
> 
> 
> MAUREEN CALLAHAN: The $100m 'Harry and Meghan' is panned… and finally the karmic wheels of justice turn against two untalented, ungrateful hypocrites. No one deserves it more – so let’s savor it!​By MAUREEN CALLAHAN FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
> 
> PUBLISHED: 10:00 EST, 9 December 2022 | UPDATED: 11:20 EST, 9 December 2022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: Karmic wheels of justice turn against hypocrites. Savor it!
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: The Meghan Markle we see here will discard anyone once they no longer make her look good, feed her narcissistic supply, or are of any practical use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Great article! 

"Woko Ono"  

Sorry Yoko, I love you and most of your art very much


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> This is from the Washington Examiner.  It would seem that they have lost a lot of the support they had in the US.
> "From an outsider's perspective, Meghan comes across as an opportunistic social climber. She is a former actress whose greatest claim to fame before her courtship and marriage to Harry was her role in USA Network's show _Suits_. Meghan's self-importance is evident. Since stepping back from royal duties, she and her husband have played the victim card on many occasions. In fact, a new Netfl*x documentary titled _Harry & Meghan_ appears to focus on just that. The real question is: What did Meghan expect as a member of the royal family?
> *If Meghan seems grateful for anything beyond her husband and children, it's her avenue to even more fame.* It's difficult to respect that superficiality, whether you're American or British. It would be easier for the audience to view Meghan in a kinder light if she didn't seem so focused on turning herself into a victim. *That she grew disillusioned by life in the royal family doesn't make her a martyr.* For most people, life's path turns out different from the idealistic vision we had at the start. That doesn't make it bad. It most definitely doesn't make it newsworthy."


speaking on their support in the US and from US media - the ladies on The View weighed in after watching the "show"
They were mostly all (or at least two or three of them) gushing about the big "love story"
Joy at the end said she found it boring.  the others protested that she didn't appreciate the love story.


----------



## bag-mania

The TV critic at the _NYT_ isn’t as easy to fool as the other writers there. At least the majority of the comments are not fawning although there are a few.












						‘Harry & Meghan’ Has All the Intimacy of Instagram
					

The new Netflix series portrays the ex-royals with a soft filter and a lack of surprise. But some will still find it aspirational.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

TC1 said:


> As she should have. She dealt with tantrums from her family about marriage her whole Reign. First her sister, then her son Charles. Looks good on Charles to have to deal with it. Lord knows what they all dealt with when he was cheating on Di and in the public with not only Camilla.


Let’s remember Andi, too.


----------



## charlottawill

We now know why there were no People covers featuring the children. People has been Harkle friendly but couldn't compete with Netflix's cash. The Harkles probably gave exclusive rights for kid pics to Netflix before they were even born.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Let’s remember Andi, too.


A wise friend once cautioned me that adult children can sometimes be more of a headache than when they're toddlers or teenagers.


----------



## charlottawill

A1aGypsy said:


> This isn’t The Viva Las Vegas Wedding Chapel


   If only they had gone there instead.


----------



## bellecate

pomeline said:


> I am so hoping she wasn't laughing at HM at this occasion or behaving appallingly but after that series I cannot be sure. Apparently she did rush to the car past HM but are there pictures of it?
> 
> https://www.popsugar.co.uk/celebrit...678/Meghan-Markle-Queen-Elizabeth-II-Pictures


Try this link.


			https://videos.dailymail.co.uk/preview/mol/2018/06/14/2990833545489039646/636x382_MP4_2990833545489039646.mp4


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

Guys I’m still trying to get over the image of old spaniel ears using the dog filter in ‘the first pic’ H ever saw of her- I mean talk about on the nose in so many ways


----------



## Mrs.Z

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know Ashleigh existed until today. On one hand Meghan is claiming she barely knew her half-sister, but then that means she would know Samantha’s daughter even less than that! Why would a niece she scarcely knew be invited to the wedding? Her story doesn’t ring true on any level.
> 
> The only explanation is that the people gushing over them were paid or benefitted in some other way.


The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


----------



## CobaltBlu

Parody Part 2.


----------



## Cinderlala

No, I'm sorry but the palace would not force any bride to have just one solitary family member attend the wedding.  Every inclusion or exclusion on TW's side was entirely chosen by TW.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


This may sound cras, if I may state the obvious, MM had other people who she wanted to invite. She had a large guest list of Hwood types, TV folks, etc.  Few of those people actually knew MM, but that is beside the point.  She gave out invites to gain favors.  Can’t remember the word for that


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> If only they had gone there instead.


I went to a wedding in September that that had the most incredibly stupid vows written by the couple and I later said to the DH that the ceremony would have had more meaning if performed by an Elvis impersonator in Las Vegas.


----------



## gracekelly

Cinderlala said:


> No, I'm sorry but the palace would not force any bride to have just one solitary family member attend the wedding.  Every inclusion or exclusion on TW's side was entirely chosen by TW.


Someone must have noticed and said something about the lack of family.  Did she give finances as an excuse?  Harry could have afforded to pay to fly them all over and put them up if she really wanted them there.


----------



## gracekelly

Mrs.Z said:


> The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


If she had invited Ashleigh and not Samantha perhaps it would have opened the door to why she did that.  I think that in general, she didn't want any family there, period.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know Ashleigh existed until today. On one hand Meghan is claiming she barely knew her half-sister, but then that means she would know Samantha’s daughter even less than that! Why would a niece she scarcely knew be invited to the wedding? Her story doesn’t ring true on any level.
> 
> The only explanation is that the people gushing over them were paid or benefitted in some other way.



She trotted her out while still an actress and insisted they were super close. Not sure how that came about seeing she barely knew Samantha (as if...not liking someone is not the same).


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> No, I'm sorry but the palace would not force any bride to have just one solitary family member attend the wedding.  Every inclusion or exclusion on TW's side was entirely chosen by TW.


right - I've said all along that any family (royal or not) would find it odd that a bride having a huge wedding would not have any family there.  so it seems very off to me that she's saying the palace wouldn't let her have her niece there


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> This may sound cras, if I may state the obvious, MM had other people who she wanted to invite. She had a large guest list of Hwood types, TV folks, etc.  Few of those people actually knew MM, but that is beside the point.  She gave out invites to gain favors.  Can’t remember the word for that



Some people play fantasy football for laughs, she played fantasy wedding for real. The woman's seriously deluded


----------



## Cinderlala

gracekelly said:


> Someone must have noticed and said something about the lack of family.  Did she give finances as an excuse?  Harry could have afforded to pay to fly them all over and put them up if she really wanted them there.


I'm sure the BRF found the arrangements very odd.  But, if cost was allegedly the obstacle surely TW could have used some of her own money to get her relatives to the wedding.  And if she wasn't willing to pay for it we all know H would have given her whatever she wanted.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> This may sound cras, if I may state the obvious, MM had other people who she wanted to invite. She had a large guest list of Hwood types, TV folks, etc.  Few of those people actually knew MM, but that is beside the point.  She gave out invites to gain favors.  Can’t remember the word for that


begins with "W"?  She invited A-list celebs that she wanted as friends


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


Thanks for filling in some holes. Did it explain why only Doria was invited from Meghan’s side? Because inviting only one family member after you invited celebrities you never met doesn’t make any sense. Did she consider the Clooneys to be more desirable?


----------



## jelliedfeels

Mrs.Z said:


> The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


An immigration attorney? I hope she gets H his citizenship (perhaps limited to Alcatraz island) or at the very least paying tax for the first time. 

I don’t buy that the couple were forbidden from inviting some random relative they could stick in any hotel  but the palace was fine with inviting celebrities H&M had never met who would also massively increase the security detail and complicate plans like the Clooneys. 




pomeline said:


> Meanwhile Duchess "The staff of the store is not allowed to talk to me or look at me" is so warm, being that she's a hugger!


I mean we still haven’t addressed the crucial reason why she might not want to hug Meg specifically ….


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> When you marry into the royal family and you have a very public and very “paid for by the people” wedding, damn straight they are going to vet the guest list and decline invites to people who may cause a scene, regardless of whether they are family or not. Anyone who thinks otherwise should give their heads a shake.
> 
> This isn’t The Viva Las Vegas Wedding Chapel, it is a dynasty that have held together power for centuries.



Are you suggesting the BRF forbade the bride to invite ANY family? As if.


----------



## Toby93

Looks like Catherine has no problem, with hugging.  I guess it depends who you are asking her to hug


----------



## charlottawill

From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Thanks for filling in some holes. Did it explain why only Doria was invited from Meghan’s side? Because inviting only one family member after you invited celebrities you never met doesn’t make any sense. Did she consider the Clooneys to be more desirable?


She was very familiar with the _transactional_  lifestyle.  So, she used those invites as _transactional tickets.  _The wise ones realized they did not wish to be indebted to H&M.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> We now know why there were no People covers featuring the children. People has been Harkle friendly but couldn't compete with Netflix's cash. The Harkles probably gave exclusive rights for kid pics to Netflix before they were even born.



They are such disgusting liars. I guessed all along they kept the kids under lock because they just hadn't had the right offer but this is so extreme and their stupid jabbering about privacy for their private citizen kids was just a charade.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Someone must have noticed and said something about the lack of family.  Did she give finances as an excuse?  Harry could have afforded to pay to fly them all over and put them up if she really wanted them there.



Naw. Harry at a radio station after the engagement but before that year's Christmas. Host brings up Christmas at Sandringham, where the pushy parvenu has scored an invite. Harry: "We'll be the family she never had."

I heard that sentence and knew what sh*t she'd been feeding him...months before the wedding.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> She was very familiar with the _transactional_  lifestyle.  So, she used those invites as _transactional tickets.  _The wise ones realized they did not wish to be indebted to H&M.


The Clooneys accepted the invite but there would be no reciprocation. Gotcha.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Thanks for filling in some holes. Did it explain why only Doria was invited from Meghan’s side? Because inviting only one family member after you invited celebrities you never met doesn’t make any sense. *Did she consider the Clooneys to be more desirable?*



Yes.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> right - I've said all along that any family (royal or not) would find it odd that a bride having a huge wedding would not have any family there.  so it seems very off to me that she's saying the palace wouldn't let her have her niece there


The RF would certainly have welcomed the entire Markle and Ragland families at the wedding. Imo it's total BS that MM was not allowed to invite them. In fact, I believe the RF would have preferred that to a random assortment of celebs. Every family has a black sheep or two, but it's such an insult to both families that MM thought they weren't good enough to invite. And even if there were several dozen of them the RF could easily have covered their expenses if necessary.


----------



## Debbini

charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.



I definitely think she's mocking the Queen. I find it so repugnant of her and it makes me want to slap Hairy.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you suggesting the BRF forbade the bride to invite ANY family? As if.


the s


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you suggesting the BRF forbade the bride to invite ANY family? As if.


allegedly the RF said the niece couldn't be invited unless her mother was also invited.  BS.  why would they care?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> The Clooneys accepted the invite but there would be no reciprocation. Gotcha.



I mean, Amal helped throw her baby shower and lent her private jet to get there. They also vacationed with them at Lake Como. Then the Clooneys wised up.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> An immigration attorney? I hope she gets H his citizenship (perhaps limited to Alcatraz island) or at the very least paying tax for the first time.
> 
> I don’t buy that the couple were forbidden from inviting some random relative they could stick in any hotel  but the palace was fine with inviting celebrities H&M had never met who would also massively increase the security detail and complicate plans like the Clooneys.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean we still haven’t addressed the crucial reason why she might not want to hug Meg specifically ….
> View attachment 5668203


You know how much Meghan loves to get things for free.  Maybe she is getting her niece, the immigration attorney, to work for free on Harry's status in the US.  stranger things have happened.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> the s
> 
> allegedly the RF said the niece couldn't be invited unless her mother was also invited.  BS.  why would they care?


Don't believe this for a second.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Amal helped throw her baby shower and lent her private jet to get there. They also vacationed with them at Lake Como. Then the Clooneys wised up.


That was the payback for being invited to a Royal Wedding.  Once that debt was paid, the Clooneys were done/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

So, how do they explain the discrepancies about the marriage proposal? Or do they even try?  

I watched the engagement interview way back when, and they said _very clearly_ he proposed while they were cooking dinner, they talked about the chicken they were roasting, and now they've told a different story?  He apparently proposed outside kneeling on a blanket and she took a photo or video of it (after she called Jessica Mulroney to tell her it was happening).  No roasting of chickens involved?  Did I get that right?


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.



That is why she mocked TQ.  She wasn't allowed to go to Balmoral at the end.  You know Meghan.  There is always a clapback if she thinks you wronged her.


----------



## papertiger

Debbini said:


> I definitely think she's mocking the Queen. I find it so repugnant of her and it makes me want to slap Hairy.



I'm actually glad the late Queen never saw it


----------



## Mrs.Z

gracekelly said:


> If she had invited Ashleigh and not Samantha perhaps it would have opened the door to why she did that.  I think that in general, she didn't want any family there, period.


I believe because Sam was making false and ugly statements to the press, “the guidance” was to not invite Ashleigh as a result…..I guess to not add fuel to Sam’s fire.  However, M & Ash genuinely seemed close so it was a poor decision.


----------



## Debbini

papertiger said:


> I'm actually glad the late Queen never saw it


That would have been awful! I never had the pleasure of knowing any of my grandparents and I envy people who do, or have. Reading and seeing what these two have done to the Queen and PP makes me so sad.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Amal helped throw her baby shower and lent her private jet to get there. They also vacationed with them at Lake Como. Then the Clooneys wised up.


I forgot about that, thanks. After being on this thread for four years I am starting to lose my information retention on these two.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> So, how do they explain the discrepancies about the marriage proposal? Or do they even try?
> 
> I watched the engagement interview way back when, and they said _very clearly_ he proposed while they were cooking dinner, they talked about the chicken they were roasting, and now they've told a different story?  He apparently proposed outside kneeling on a blanket and she took a photo or video of it (after she called Jessica Mulroney to tell her it was happening).  No roasting of chickens involved?  Did I get that right?


Maybe they roasted the chicken outside on the grill     

This entire series is a play acting. One giant photo op with everything staged for optics.   Some might call it a passion play, except it is hard to find the passion.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> You know how much Meghan loves to get things for free.  Maybe she is getting her niece, the immigration attorney, to work for free on Harry's status in the US.  stranger things have happened.


and maybe she compensated her for pretending to be close....but someone here said it's been documented?  they've been close for years?  so we go back to the question of why she wasn't at the wedding


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> So, how do they explain the discrepancies about the marriage proposal? Or do they even try?
> 
> I watched the engagement interview way back when, and they said _very clearly_ he proposed while they were cooking dinner, they talked about the chicken they were roasting, and now they've told a different story?  He apparently proposed outside kneeling on a blanket and she took a photo or video of it (after she called Jessica Mulroney to tell her it was happening).  No roasting of chickens involved?  Did I get that right?



I think she was still roasting the chicken...didn't he say so and that he gave it away by buying a bottle of champagne to go with the chicken dinner? I only read the transcripts over on BBC (and saw that horrible clip about the curtsey).


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> and maybe she compensated her for pretending to be close....but someone here said it's been documented?  they've been close for years?  so we go back to the question of why she wasn't at the wedding


Close for years and the world never heard about it before?  This sounds like a relative a person would be proud to acknowledge.


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you suggesting the BRF forbade the bride to invite ANY family? As if.


Especially because Meg's family members did not have to sit up front with the mother, they could sit a fews rows back and not make any deal whatsoever about it. 

Then Meg could say, yes, I had some close family members there but only my mom was front and centre.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> and maybe she compensated her for pretending to be close....but someone here said it's been documented?  they've been close for years?  so we go back to the question of why she wasn't at the wedding



Just another Markel Marked.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.



I thought she was mocking herself and so pleased with how cute and adorable she can be.


----------



## bag-mania

If she had really been forbidden to invite people she wanted it would have been brought up in the complainfest that was the Oprah interview. Still not believing “Ashleighgate.”


----------



## sdkitty

they need to trash dad some more








						Prince Harry On Why He Feels Guilty About Meghan Markle's Relationship With Her Dad
					

"It's incredibly sad," the Duke of Sussex said in the Netflix series.




					www.huffpost.com
				




Her dad is getting on in years and has some serious health issues....H is saying she doesn't have a dad anymore.  If I thought she had any genuine feelings, I'd ask how is she going to feel when he dies


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> If she had really been forbidden to invite people she wanted it would have been brought up in the complainfest that was the Oprah interview. Still not believing “Ashleighgate.”


to the people who don't understand all the vitriol about them, I'd like to ask what is genuine or believable about them....guess it's in the eye of the beholder


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> I thought she was mocking herself and so pleased with how cute and adorable she can be.



So interesting how perception differs. Even if I take the mocking of The Queen out of the equation and try to look at it with a fairly neutral eye, I don't see cute and adorable but ridiculous silliness and overacting. She's 40+, not 5.

Plus, her inner narc could never make lighthearted fun of herself, she's got a way too high opinion of herself.


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they roasted the chicken outside on the grill
> 
> This entire series is a play acting. One giant photo op with everything staged for optics.   Some might call it a passion play, except it is hard to find the passion.



I can't bring myself to dig up that clip of their engagement interview, but I recall they talked about the oven and the roast chicken and went on and on about it.   

Maybe they lied during the engagement interview (who knows why) and that's why she was giggling so much and Harry looked kind of embarrassed, if I recall.  Or, maybe, this proposal video/photo was a lie and play acting, as you said?  I really don't know if they know truth from fiction any longer.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, Amal helped throw her baby shower and lent her private jet to get there. They also vacationed with them at Lake Como. Then the Clooneys wised up.


Both George and Amal have been pictured with their families and have read some lovely comments made about their parents. I think George and Amal might have realized their values and Haz and  TW’s are not compatible. They also might have anticipated the Z list actress trying to strong arm George for a movie role and Amal for access to her numerous UN contacts.


----------



## csshopper

Jayne1 said:


> I thought she was mocking herself and so pleased with how cute and adorable she can be.


If that’s true she needs to re run her Ellen performance.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Both George and Amal have been pictured with their families and have read some lovely comments made about their parents. I think George and Amal might have realized their values and Haz and  TW’s are not compatible. They also might have anticipated the Z list actress trying to strong arm George for a movie role and Amal for access to her numerous UN contacts.


recognized that she was an empty shell and an opportunist?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> right - I've said all along that any family (royal or not) would find it odd that a bride having a huge wedding would not have any family there.  so it seems very off to me that she's saying the palace wouldn't let her have her niece there



They said they were advised not to invite her so as not to antagonize Samantha. I understand people don't believe a word they say but her niece seemed very sweet and genuine and has no reason to lie. There were also a lot of photos of the two of them together on trips etc. The niece sounds like she's been through enough in her life maybe she gets a break here...?




charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.




I think it might depend on the audience? My twitter feed disagrees. It is very subjective so recollections may vary!




youngster said:


> So, how do they explain the discrepancies about the marriage proposal? Or do they even try?
> 
> I watched the engagement interview way back when, and they said _very clearly_ he proposed while they were cooking dinner, they talked about the chicken they were roasting, and now they've told a different story?  He apparently proposed outside kneeling on a blanket and she took a photo or video of it (after she called Jessica Mulroney to tell her it was happening).  No roasting of chickens involved?  Did I get that right?



According to them it was that night...he led her outside with champagne or something...I can't really remember the details but there was chicken involved


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> Maybe they roasted the chicken outside on the grill
> 
> This entire series is a play acting. One giant photo op with everything staged for optics.   Some might call it a passion play, except it is hard to find the passion.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They said they were advised not to invite her so as not to antagonize Samantha. I understand people don't believe a word they say but her niece seemed very sweet and genuine and has no reason to lie. There were also a lot of photos of the two of them together on trips etc. The niece sounds like she's been through enough in her life maybe she gets a break here...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it might depend on the audience? My twitter feed disagrees. It is very subjective so recollections may vary!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to them it was that night...he led her outside with champagne or something...I can't really remember the details but there was chicken involved


we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.....I just don't think the palace would get involved with her family business to the extent of not allowing her to have her niece at her wedding.  but you believe and and that's fine.  I didn't watch the show....I guess the niece was on it?


----------



## Lodpah

Debbini said:


> I definitely think she's mocking the Queen. I find it so repugnant of her and it makes me want to slap Hairy.


She definitely it. She could have sat there as a graceful woman and talked about how she met the Queen. She definitely was mocking.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> to the people who don't understand all the vitriol about them, I'd like to ask what is genuine or believable about them....guess it's in the eye of the beholder



I wouldn't bother, it's like having to break it to someone there's no Santa


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They said they were advised not to invite her so as not to antagonize Samantha. I understand people don't believe a word they say but her niece seemed very sweet and genuine and has no reason to lie. There were also a lot of photos of the two of them together on trips etc. The niece sounds like she's been through enough in her life maybe she gets a break here...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it might depend on the audience? My twitter feed disagrees. It is very subjective so recollections may vary!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to them it was that night...he led her outside with champagne or something...I can't really remember the details but there was chicken involved



No one is disrespecting the Niece, only the lying aunt


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.....I just don't think the palace would get involved with her family business to the extent of not allowing her to have her niece at her wedding.  but you believe and and that's fine.  I didn't watch the show....I guess the niece was on it?


Oh well if you haven't seen her interview then of course you won't believe her! Yes she was on it. But fine to agree to disagree, I'm not sure we can discuss it anyway if you don't know what was actually said...?


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Oh well if you haven't seen her interview then of course you won't believe her! Yes she was on it. But fine to agree to disagree, I'm not sure we can discuss it anyway if you don't know what was actually said...?


ok


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> No one is disrespecting the Niece, only the lying aunt



Well she's being accused of lying and getting paid so that seems a bit unfair to me...?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Pessie

Lodpah said:


> She definitely it. She could have sat there as a graceful woman and talked about how she met the Queen. She definitely was mocking.


If it wasn’t mockery, Harry wouldn’t have had that gutted expression on his face.


----------



## Mrs.Z

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They said they were advised not to invite her so as not to antagonize Samantha. I understand people don't believe a word they say but her niece seemed very sweet and genuine and has no reason to lie. There were also a lot of photos of the two of them together on trips etc. The niece sounds like she's been through enough in her life maybe she gets a break here...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it might depend on the audience? My twitter feed disagrees. It is very subjective so recollections may vary!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to them it was that night...he led her outside with champagne or something...I can't really remember the details but there was chicken involved


Haha, yes, they were Roasting Chicken At KP!  She got suspicious when he opened Champagne, which they did not usually drink, actually a magnum she said.  He went outside to the KP courtyard and he said don’t peek.  This is where it gets weird……she calls Jessica and says it’s happening bc she’s peeking…….but……was she actually filiming herself talking to Jessica or was that a dramatic reenactment? 

Anyway…..H put down a little blankie, a bunch of white roses and some cheap electric candles….8 of them and proposed…then they took selfies.  So yes….Chicken was roasting!


----------



## papertiger

Lodpah said:


> She definitely it. She could have sat there as a graceful woman and talked about how she met the Queen. She definitely was mocking.



Exactly, she had to get in it was demeaning and pointless, all that mouldy old archaic  and dusty stuff, but that she did it so well others noticed - as if she were born to it. If I wasn't a pacifist, I'd slap her   

Seriously, she should have never married into the family. I think Harry purposely married her, it was his 2-fingers up to his brother/father. 

He was important when he was young, 3rd in line. In 2016 he realised the BRF had a hierarchy and not only he wasn't going to ever be the top but after George he wasn't even going to be the top tier for very much longer --- going down the line all the time. 

Some people resign and hope for a good reference, some people throw a hissy-hit at their boss, followed by their computer out the window.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Mrs.Z said:


> Haha, yes, they were Roasting Chicken At KP!  She got suspicious when he opened Champagne, which they did not usually drink, actually a magnum she said.  He went outside to the KP courtyard and he said don’t peek.  This is where it gets weird……she calls Jessica and says it’s happening bc she’s peeking…….but……was she actually filiming herself talking to Jessica or was that a dramatic reenactment?
> 
> Anyway…..H put down a little blankie, a bunch of white roses and some cheap electric candles….8 of them and proposed…then they took selfies.  So yes….Chicken was roasting!


From the photo, it looked like he was pulling up the dog, the one with 2 broken legs. I could be wrong.









						‘Harry & Meghan’ Netflix documentary live updates: Meghan and Harry appeared to change key details in their story
					

The highly anticipated Netflix docuseries about Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, appropriately titled ‘Harry & Meghan,’ finally dropped at 3 a.m. Thursday.




					nypost.com


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are you suggesting the BRF forbade the bride to invite ANY family? As if.



Holy Hannah. Pretty sure I didn’t say that.


----------



## Lodpah

I really really wish Daniel Craig would say something about this. He adored the Queen. Heck I wish David Beckham would chime in too. He’s a royalist.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


>



"There’s a great scene where they pretend to be chased by evil paps."

That _was_ a funny scene!


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Well she's being accused of lying and getting paid so that seems a bit unfair to me...?


----------



## Mrs.Z

CarryOn2020 said:


> From the photo, it looked like he was pulling up the dog, the one with 2 broken legs. I could be wrong.


Yes, the poor dog with the two bandaged legs was lying on the blanket, broke my heart, no idea what happened to that poor baby.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> View attachment 5668245



Lol got it so the niece isn't being accused of anything...but it's okay if she is!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think KC3 is spineless. He has a difficult situation to deal with at the start of his reign. Obviously  he wants to put an end to the bashing and trashing, and if this is coming from Parliament, it is sending the message that the British people are supporting him and don’t believe that two grifters should be allowed to trash their monarch and their country or the Commonwealth.  If The King asked Parliament directly  to take the titles away, he would appear as rather harsh and dictatorial,  not to mention the meanest father  on earth.  The end around of having it come from outside BP is a better optic.   Of course it would not be happening if he didn’t want it to and that will be the small elephant in the room. If KC can accomplish this it will be quite a feat and his new constitutional  expert on the payroll will have earned his salary.
> 
> If this series was meant to appeal to the US viewers then it was a fail. I have not heard any talking head call this anything, but a whingefest.


oh no....It's a Love Story


----------



## Mrs.Z

papertiger said:


> Exactly, she had to get in it was demeaning and pointless, all that mouldy old archaic  and dusty stuff, but that she did it so well others noticed - as if she were born to it. If I wasn't a pacifist, I'd slap her
> 
> Seriously, she should have never married into the family. I think Harry purposely married her, it was his 2-fingers up to his brother/father.
> 
> He was important when he was young, 3rd in line. In 2016 he realised the BRF had a hierarchy and not only he wasn't going to ever be the top but after George he wasn't even going to be the top tier for very much longer --- going down the line all the time.
> 
> Some people resign and hope for a good reference, some people throw a hissy-hit at their boss, followed by their computer out the window.


I think he married the first woman who would spend two weeks in a tent with him, with no mirrors or bathrooms….he was very very impressed by that!


----------



## sdkitty

Now People is pushing this story "I'm a hugger"
Really?  I had some strange woman approach me in a social situation saying that.  I told her I don't want to be hugged.  In the case of Kate and Will, out of respect for H, they couldn't do that.








						Meghan Markle Says She Learned Reality of Royal Life After Hug with Kate Middleton and Prince William
					

"Like I was a hugger, always been a hugger," Meghan Markle said in the Netflix docuseries Harry & Meghan. "I didn't realize that that is really jarring for a lot of Brits.




					people.com


----------



## Lodpah

Hollywood Reporter, Wallstreet Journal and even reviews on IMDB are insane. I read the 3rd series only drew 800,000K people? 









						Reviews: Harry & Meghan - IMDb
					

Reviews: Harry & Meghan




					m.imdb.com


----------



## Sophisticatted

The whole hug thing is just passive aggressive.  If it happened, she was trying to invade Catherine’s space (and Will’s).  If t didn’t happen, she was s trying to make herself seem “nice” while smearing Catherine.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Now People is pushing this story "I'm a hugger"
> Really?  I had some strange woman approach me in a social situation saying that.  I told her I don't want to be hugged.  In the case of Kate and Will, out of respect for H, they couldn't do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Says She Learned Reality of Royal Life After Hug with Kate Middleton and Prince William
> 
> 
> "Like I was a hugger, always been a hugger," Meghan Markle said in the Netflix docuseries Harry & Meghan. "I didn't realize that that is really jarring for a lot of Brits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people.com



It's actually more than bad manners to invade someone's personal space and touch them if you're not invited or reciprocated. If anyone did that at work (in the UK) it may leave them open to accusations of sexual harassment


----------



## needlv




----------



## papertiger

Sophisticatted said:


> The whole hug thing is just passive aggressive.  If it happened, she was trying to invade Catherine’s space (and Will’s).  If t didn’t happen, she was s trying to make herself seem “nice” while smearing Catherine.



It's also racist. She's solidifying English 'coldness' and 'hardness'. Call Cali girls are so laid-back, warm and friendly. 

This fro the woman that makes podcasts about how _we_ stereotype ('archetype')


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A1aGypsy said:


> Holy Hannah. Pretty sure I didn’t say that.



That's why there was a question mark


----------



## bag-mania

Mrs.Z said:


> The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


Remembering how Harry was all “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” about everything else before the wedding I find it impossible to believe he would have accepted the palace refusing an invite to the niece if Meghan had wanted her there. 

It’s revisionism they came up with because Meghan has been criticized over the years for only inviting one of her relatives to the wedding and using the rest of her invitations for celebrities.


----------



## Debbini

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Oh well if you haven't seen her interview then of course you won't believe her! Yes she was on it. But fine to agree to disagree, I'm not sure we can discuss it anyway if you don't know what was actually said...?


Megain doesn't know what was actually said. She has different stories for different days of the week.


----------



## Debbini

Pessie said:


> If it wasn’t mockery, Harry wouldn’t have had that gutted expression on his face.


This!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Remembering how Harry was all “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” about everything else before the wedding I find it impossible to believe he would have accepted the palace refusing an invite to the niece if Meghan had wanted her there.
> 
> It’s revisionism they came up with because Meghan has been criticized over the years for only inviting one of her relatives to the wedding and using the rest of her invitations for celebrities.



And when have they ever followed advice? That time she was advised to wear a hat while out and about with The Queen surely wasn't one of those moments.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So I guess she is not a nutjob who takes a secret cellphone video of her bf proposing, but just, you guessed it, a lying liar who lies?

What is it with these two.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> It's actually more than bad manners to invade someone's personal space and touch them if you're not invited or reciprocated. If anyone did that at work (in the UK) it may leave them open to accusations of sexual harassment


I will give her this - these were her future in-laws; it's not like walking up to a stranger and hugging them....but to then imply that Kate and Will are cold inside and out is nasty


----------



## CobaltBlu

charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.




Someone on reddit made the point -- exchange the curtsy with bow, and exchange QEII with the royal family of Japan. How does Meghan's story feel? She was mocking.

Also, she took ballet, she knows how to curtsy.


> "At weekends there was a routine of Saturday ballet and acting classes followed by 'our club sandwich and fruit-smoothie' at an ice-cream parlor or Hamburger Hamlet. Before going in, Thomas always bought Meghan's favorite comic called 'Archie'....After the meal, Thomas rented old dance movies to watch at home." (Source: Revenge by Tom Bower, page 16; according to Bower, the sources for this information are: DM 25.10.18 and author's interview with Thomas Markle.)


----------



## BlueCherry

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> As I explained I am not a fan so I have no need to defend anyone! Although I suppose an argument could be made that Thomas and Samantha created much of this drama themselves...way before anyone spoke badly of them.


You didn’t actually answer the question and I was genuinely interested to see your answer and how this hypocrisy can be justified


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


I thought it was boring and largely inoffensive too. I’ve never much cared for them, but I’d actually say it _slightly _improved my opinion of them. 

I will say, they keep teasing big bombs without actually saying much. I think patience will wear thin unless they start to actually dish some dirt, or move on. 

I don’t know the truth of what happened to them, but if they keep saying they’re going to tell a huge dramatic story and then not doing it, people are going to stop paying attention. 

If they were treated horribly, they’ve alluded to it enough that they need to spit out the truth. If what they’ve said so far is basically everything that’s happened, they need to stop dragging it out. 

I don’t think many more companies will be paying $100,000,000 just to hear that Kate isn’t a hugger.


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t get the vibe that she’s a dog lover. I’ve had many dogs and spend lots of time just loving dogs to the point I gotta step back a little lol. If it’s true that she threw a dog off the balcony after an argument with that human piece of crap of a husband she has, or ran over her dog due to being in a rage, then she’s worse than  ever thought. The BRF needs to clap back. They have dirt in her but they are too polite.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> Cali girls are so laid-back, warm and friendly.


I guess she melted his popsicle


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I will give her this - these were her future in-laws; it's not like walking up to a stranger and hugging them....but to then imply that Kate and Will are cold inside and out is nasty



I don't see why you would _hug_ someone the first time you meet, maybe if they were her parents' age  , but they are about the same age, totally inappropriate. She's acting and sounding like a child.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


>



This is also one of my favorites.


----------



## Lodpah

The series and book might be their last hurrah. Let’s see: no notable invitations to posh parties with the elites, no more dinner pics other than that Foster guy, they’ve alienated majority of the world leaders and those leaders are probably, lol, telling their sins/ daughters, be careful who you choose, and we are left with allegedly paid awards which they attend. Ok.


----------



## Chanbal

Oops, BBC is joining Harry Potter, Tr*mp's ex-lawyer, … on unauthorized clips.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


>


----------



## mrsinsyder

papertiger said:


> I don't see why you would _hug_ someone the first time you meet, maybe if they were her parents' age  , but they are about the same age, totally inappropriate. She's acting and sounding like a child.


People in the south hug constantly and I hate it. Some people definitely judge you if you don’t like it, though.


----------



## Chanbal

A new trailer…


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles who?


----------



## Chanbal

Paparazzi are starting to talk…


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> I don't see why you would _hug_ someone the first time you meet, maybe if they were her parents' age  , but they are about the same age, totally inappropriate. She's acting and sounding like a child.


If a social meeting goes well there may be hugs upon departure, but in my experience people don't hug upon first meeting. I only hug family members and close friends upon arrival at a gathering. Of course other cultures may be different.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> If a social meeting goes well there may be hugs upon departure, but in my experience people don't hug upon first meeting. I only hug family members and close friends upon arrival at a gathering. Of course other cultures may be different.


TW says that Will & Kate behave the same way in public and private, how refreshing! 

In contrast, TW is all smiles in public, and allegedly bullies staff in private.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> She no longer wants to spend a single minute on those who lie or want to manipulate?  Was that because she needed to be the only one who was the liar and manipulator in a relationship?


Narcs hate competition. If Trev was a liar and manipulator, and they dated, lived together, got married and Zed allegedly called him the love of her life or words to that effect, then her indirectly calling him a liar and manipulator was likely to establish herself as the victim. It's the common refrain in her life.


bag-mania said:


> Assume they are reenactments. It’s a TV show, not news footage.


Bad fiction. Maybe we should trace the origin of the blanket. When exactly did they take possession of it? Was it one of the clothes on her back when they supposedly fled the UK? 


OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I realize I will be seen as a "sugar" but I watched it last night and didn't think it was so bad. At least so far they seem to be focusing their complaints on the tabloids (nothing new here) and I thought MM was making fun of herself not the Queen with her exaggerated curtsey.
> 
> It's a little boring but I loved the photos and videos with the kids, very sweet. They seem happy and thriving. And it was funny to actually hear Doria...I thought she kind of sounded like a Valley Girl (probably aging myself with that reference). I felt sorry for her it must be awful to feel helpless while your child is being attacked. I know how I felt when my daughter had social issues in middle school...this must be excruciating.
> 
> I thought the niece's story made it clear that Samantha is a very troubled person and anything she says is suspect at this point. I googled to fact check and found out she has two estranged daughters, both raised by their paternal grandparents (two different fathers so two different grandparents). Very sad situation it seems.
> 
> I will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.


Good to have other views if the person is not screaming at us. Same as @Sharont2305, I have to disagree with you about the curtsey. I found it deeply offensive. 

I don't feel sorry for Doria. My child has been bullied before and I went to bat for him. But in this case, Doria's child is the malignant bully and she is enabling her brat.

I think the whole Markle family has issues, and that includes Zed and the niece. Frankly, if Zed is claiming that she barely knows her half-sister and feels like an only child etc etc, why would she have a close relationship with the daughter of her stranger half-sister?


----------



## jenayb

Not sure if anyone here watches The Five, but they just tore TW apart and it. Was. Glorious.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Chanbal said:


> A new trailer…



My spidey sense tells me part 2 will have nothing new either. 

I am parched and they are not serving any tea!


----------



## sgj99

mrsinsyder said:


> People in the south hug constantly and I hate it. Some people definitely judge you if you don’t like it, though.


I’m from the South and don’t consider myself a “hugger.”   When meeting someone for the first time I definitely don’t hug as a greeting or when saying goodbye.  Or even if I’ve met them before.  I do it with people I consider friends.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

mrsinsyder said:


> My spidey sense tells me part 2 will have nothing new either.
> 
> I am parched and they are not serving any tea!


Maybe he was warned at the funeral?


----------



## mrsinsyder

charlottawill said:


> Maybe he was warned at the funeral?


I just don’t think there’s really much else. No big smoking gun.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Horrormentary


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Double post.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Scrolling through comments, apparently Samantha called it a flopumentary. That's kind of brilliant


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Scrolling through comments, apparently Samantha called it a flopumentary. That's kind of brilliant


Samantha’s got spirit. Whatever else you have to give her that.


----------



## pomeline

The gloves have certainly come off...


----------



## csshopper

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> They said they were advised not to invite her so as not to antagonize Samantha. I understand people don't believe a word they say but her niece seemed very sweet and genuine and has no reason to lie. There were also a lot of photos of the two of them together on trips etc. The niece sounds like she's been through enough in her life maybe she gets a break here...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it might depend on the audience? My twitter feed disagrees. It is very subjective so recollections may vary!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> According to them it was that night...he led her outside with champagne or something...I can't really remember the details but there was chicken involved


But Harry loudly proclaimed, “What Meaghan wants, Meaghan gets.” So, why no Ashleigh?

Agree with you, Ashleigh seems a nice lady, polite, intelligent, well spoken, but she’s an outlier to the story Meghan had spun that she had no family, Harry again remarking that by marrying him TW would be gaining the family she supposedly never had.

I got the impression the  Ashleigh relationship predated Harry. Ashleigh was a liability.

How awkward if at the wedding or reception Ashleigh engaged in conversations about the missing family? It would be a perfectly normal topic of conversation in a social setting like that as strangers seek connections for topics of conversation.

So the easy out for Meghan was to blame the Royals. Hazbeen hasn’t got the gumption to challenge it and it’s not clear from what I’ve read if they are BF’s again. Her showing up in the video could be a short, well paid, cameo, or a loving sound bite with the hope to reconnect. Her appearance plays to her aunt’s need to be critical of Samantha.

I believe  she is repeating what her aunt M told her, not a lie she, Ashleigh, made up. I think she’s trying hard to believe her aunt because they had once been close. We know via Tom Bower’s book, Ashleigh could be one in a long list of people removed from her aunt’s life when it suited her need to be free of them.

I felt sad for Ashleigh, and I say this with sincerity and no snark, I hope she will be OK.

edited: sorry, didn’t realize how many similar comments like this have already been shared. I am way behind.


----------



## sgj99

I give M’s relationship with Ashley another year to two.  Her track-record proves that her friendships and family relationships have shelf lives.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> We can agree to disagree. I understand there’s probably nothing that would change minds for most posters in this thread. In general I don’t believe people are all good or all evil (obviously with some notable exceptions). I think the truth tends to be more complicated and nuanced.


Agree. All the narcs I have known were wonderful friends and colleagues if the boss treated them as top dogs and everyone else helped to do their work. They were nasty only if things didn't go their way. It was very much a my way or the highway situation. I think Zed is vile and a typical narc. She bailed once she realized that she would never be top dog, she would actually have to do work and no one was about to do it her way. In that sense, she isn't evil. Like in the parable of the scorpion and the frog, she cannot help being the way she is.


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So I guess she is not a nutjob who takes a secret cellphone video of her bf proposing, but just, you guessed it, a lying liar who lies?
> 
> What is it with these two.
> 
> View attachment 5668272



Also, they invited the vet who treated Guy The Beagle to their wedding. I have to check my sources now but I remember the vet being interviewed and saying he felt strange being invited to their wedding.

Something very strange happened to that dog I'm sure. I mean, both legs?! I have heard so many rumours and how the palace staff had to stay silent etc. but I cannot of course verify the story. The two main stories are that she backed her car on him (how does that even happen?!) and the fight with H while high on coke (again, this is a blind item, not verified) and throwing the dog out the second floor window in a fit of rage.

I think they were really hurting themselves keeping the accident a secret as now there's all these stories that no-one can verify. They should have shared the full story since it is really not a common thing to happen to a dog. The vet hasn't shared more information about it, of course.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> Apparently, THEY didn't know she had cancer. The family didn't tell them as they weren't to be trusted with that info. Quite rightly.





papertiger said:


> Honestly, you couldn’t trust them with a weather report


Were they too blind to see that HM was losing weight and then how emaciated she was near the end. I mean the rest of us noticed the difference without being told. It just proves how selfish, arrogant, ungrateful, add your favourite adjectives to describe these lowlifes. They are    inducing.


----------



## 880

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> will say quoting Breitbart and Katie Hopkins in this thread does add an unpleasant element to the coverage. I feel like there are enough other sources out there that aren't so...controversial...in their views.



Agree! glad to see you posting here. 



Pessie said:


> If, as mentioned earlier, Charles chooses something similar to the Scandinavian model it would put a stop to any Princess Meg if the Dukedom is revoked, and they’d be Mr and Mrs Windsor - unless carrying out any duties for the the UK.



Hope this is how it’s handled


----------



## pomeline

I'm just wondering, there's always talk about how it's impossible to remove princely titles from someone etc. but in reality, can't they make a law change? I mean, laws are different in each country and especially in a Common Law country like UK but Queen Margrethe of Denmark just recently removed the titles from her younger son's kids. 

I'm also wondering what happened to this bill as there was a second hearing on Friday.

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289/stages


----------



## xincinsin

Mrs.Z said:


> I can’t recall the exact context, I think it was to explain the negativity from the press ..Doria thought it was racism and that had not occurred to Meghan.  To be fair, they then flashed a number of articles that were fairly racist, i.e. alleging M was from Compton, which she is not.


I remember reading that the Compton headline wasn't from a UK tabloid. Never looked into it further. Does anyone recall the source?


Annawakes said:


> I’m glad KC3 isn’t publicly doing anything about them right now.  He could be working behind the scenes and biding his time until everything is released (which I think is very wise).
> 
> I’m glad he isn’t issuing statements of any sort.  They don’t need any more fodder.


I think both he and thd Queen were in a very difficult position because Mrs Harkle twisted everything into racism. Hope he is planning to do something about it and not just ostriching. Does Zed ever respond to POC who don't buy her story, or does she pretend they don't exist?


gracekelly said:


> Maybe, but all the Raglands said they were upset as well. She didn’t give two thoughts about not inviting any of them. They weren’t classy enough for her and she thought they would embarrass her. Her mother was the only one she could dress up and parade out to keep her AA credential in tact. Meghan was stage managing the stage production of  her wedding.


Maybe faced with a limited number of seats to fill, inviting another A-lister tr*mped inviting a niece who would not be of much use for her future plans.


Mrs.Z said:


> The show explains it….Ashleigh was raised not by crazy Sam but by her grandparents. She seems like a very normal human being and is an immigration attorney.  At some point (before Harry) M and Ashleigh reconnected, became close, went on vacations together.    It looked like a genuinely nice relationship….SO….not sure why she was not invited to the wedding and why M & H were ok with that, it was really sad.  (I think they blamed it on the palace but not sure why they went along with it)


I think they blamed it on the palace for convenience.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## mrsinsyder

Maybe after all the shenanigans, the palace didn’t want the risk of inviting someone that close to Samantha?

I’m not a Meghan fan but I find Samantha abhorrent, I could understand why they wouldn’t want anyone in her sphere coming to the wedding.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> I went to a wedding in September that that had the most incredibly stupid vows written by the couple and I later said to the DH that the ceremony would have had more meaning if performed by an Elvis impersonator in Las Vegas.


My niece vowed at her wedding that she would not buy any more expensive skincare without informing her husband. I don't think many guests noticed because that was on Page 4 of a 5-page list of vows. We were bored...


----------



## A1aGypsy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That's why there was a question mark


Uh huh.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Debbini said:


> Megain doesn't know what was actually said. She has different stories for different days of the week.


Sorry for any confusion I was referring to her niece.



BlueCherry said:


> You didn’t actually answer the question and I was genuinely interested to see your answer and how this hypocrisy can be justified



I can't justify it...but I guess I just don't care about them enough to get upset about it...not sure if that makes any sense? My job makes me privy to some pretty awful situations, the world is a messed up place for so many at the moment, there is real injustice and tragedy happening every day...I just don't have the bandwidth to become emotionally invested in what is basically celebrity gossip. It's a distraction but that's about it. And I am somewhat stubbornly obsessed with facts...so much about this couple is speculation and rumor which is a lot less interesting to me. Sorry to be such a downer, now you know why I didn't answer the first time 



xincinsin said:


> I remember reading that the Compton headline wasn't from a UK tabloid. Never looked into it further. Does anyone recall the source?


It was The Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-s-girlfriend-actress-Meghan-Markles.html


----------



## xincinsin

youngster said:


> So, how do they explain the discrepancies about the marriage proposal? Or do they even try?
> 
> I watched the engagement interview way back when, and they said _very clearly_ he proposed while they were cooking dinner, they talked about the chicken they were roasting, and now they've told a different story?  He apparently proposed outside kneeling on a blanket and she took a photo or video of it (after she called Jessica Mulroney to tell her it was happening).  No roasting of chickens involved?  Did I get that right?


I'm sorry, but I laughed when I first heard about this new version of the proposal. Thought #1: first chicken rescued! Thought #2: the story was that she used Cory's roast chicken recipe and I wondered if it was a recipe for claybaked beggar's chicken.


Mrs.Z said:


> I believe because Sam was making false and ugly statements to the press, “the guidance” was to not invite Ashleigh as a result…..I guess to not add fuel to Sam’s fire.  However, M & Ash genuinely seemed close so it was a poor decision.


I doubt Zed would take "advice" if she was already in "what I want, I get" mode. She dropped Ashleigh.


Jayne1 said:


> I thought she was mocking herself and so pleased with *how cute and adorable *she can be.


Agree with the 2nd half of the sentence.


----------



## A1aGypsy

As a public servant I am outraged at how they abuse the system. That being said, I’m lifted by the non-story that this “documentary” has been (so far).


----------



## needlv

Meghan Markle is no victim — she's an opportunistic social climber
					

Even people who don't usually follow royal family drama look at Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry with at least a bit of disgust. Meghan, the former Meghan Markle, married into the royal family, existed on the sidelines for a while, and is now making a name for herself as a formerly…




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




Meghan Markle is no victim — she's an opportunistic social climber​
This I agree with.  If you asked me what I admire about MM - it’s that she is a ruthless social climber.  She went from a cable show (which was writing her out because her “love interest“ on the show announced he was leaving) to marry into the BRF.
impressive.

But her behaviour from then has been awful.

Both if them need to refocus their brand fast.  Spending more money on “their story” isn’t working. 

Just move on.  Find a cause to get behind and do some real charity work. Not just photo ops


----------



## Chanbal

Which pubic duties? Who do they think they are? Tom Bower researched extensively about TW, and he knows a lot more than what he wrote on his book. No lawsuit so far.


_Prince Harry won’t be getting a warm welcome from the United Kingdom amid outrage over his and Meghan Markle’s new Netflix docuseries, a royal expert told us.

“I* can’t imagine they’ll be welcome. I don’t think Harry will ever be welcome back in England,*” journalist Tom Bower exclusively told Page Six on Thursday, adding that the Sussexes most likely won’t be on the guest list for King Charles III’s coronation.

Brower further detailed that the Duke of Sussex, 38, has become an outsider and the Duchess of Sussex, 41, has equally distanced herself from the rest of the British royal family.

“*I think he’s just cutting himself off from it all.* *You know, he is turning himself into an outcast, *and I don’t think anyone’s going to be looking to — to see if he’s welcome here,” Bower said, “*And … with her, she’s finished now for sure. And he’s on the verge of being finished.”*

Bower also said that any attempt for Harry to make up with his family members won’t be easy considering* Markle’s quest for “fame and fortune.*”

“*Their statement announcing their decision to step back mentions nothing of privacy and reiterates their desire to continue their roles and public duties*,” *the couple told the New York Times on Thursday via their press secretary Ashley Hansen. *“Any suggestion otherwise speaks to a key point of this series_.”









						Prince Harry will be shunned from returning to UK: royal expert
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex faced backlash after their highly-anticipated Netflix special, “Harry & Meghan,” debuted this week on the streaming service.




					pagesix.com


----------



## BittyMonkey

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Horrormentary



OMG she looks like Johnny Ross's character Barbara.


----------



## Jayne1

I watched half of the second episode, it’s all I could take.

Of course I noticed when they did that bit about her in Toronto since that’s where I’m from.

She’s now known for being Harry’s GF.  She’s coming back from the flower shop and paps are waiting for her and she smiles. I couldn’t help noticing the street she was on, because I photographed the house she walked past. (I like photographing old houses, especially heritage ones, it’s a hobby of mine.) So she was walking in the best part of the Annex, a very old, expensive and desirable neighbourhood, but why… she didn’t live in the Annex, she didn’t work in the Annex, her BF nor the Mulrooneys lived around there, why was she walking down that street? And why would the paps be waiting for her on that quiet residential street?

It seemed like it was one of the times she probably called the paps on herself.


----------



## Gourmetgal

Chanbal said:


> Which pubic duties? Who do they think they are? Tom Bower researched extensively about TW, and he knows a lot more than what he wrote on his book. No lawsuit so far.
> View attachment 5668399
> 
> _Prince Harry won’t be getting a warm welcome from the United Kingdom amid outrage over his and Meghan Markle’s new Netflix docuseries, a royal expert told us.
> 
> “I* can’t imagine they’ll be welcome. I don’t think Harry will ever be welcome back in England,*” journalist Tom Bower exclusively told Page Six on Thursday, adding that the Sussexes most likely won’t be on the guest list for King Charles III’s coronation.
> 
> Brower further detailed that the Duke of Sussex, 38, has become an outsider and the Duchess of Sussex, 41, has equally distanced herself from the rest of the British royal family.
> 
> “*I think he’s just cutting himself off from it all.* *You know, he is turning himself into an outcast, *and I don’t think anyone’s going to be looking to — to see if he’s welcome here,” Bower said, “*And … with her, she’s finished now for sure. And he’s on the verge of being finished.”*
> 
> Bower also said that any attempt for Harry to make up with his family members won’t be easy considering* Markle’s quest for “fame and fortune.*”
> 
> “*Their statement announcing their decision to step back mentions nothing of privacy and reiterates their desire to continue their roles and public duties*,” *the couple told the New York Times on Thursday via their press secretary Ashley Hansen. *“Any suggestion otherwise speaks to a key point of this series_.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry will be shunned from returning to UK: royal expert
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex faced backlash after their highly-anticipated Netflix special, “Harry & Meghan,” debuted this week on the streaming service.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pagesix.com


Both of these articles are just opinion pieces.  Seems like a whole lot of hate and jealousy goin’ on.


----------



## Kevinaxx

marietouchet said:


> The Times front page has several articles on the Harkles, all are articles with the classic English wit, biting and cold , thumb way up
> Per Reddit, the show is NOT in the N$tflix top 10 today


I refuse to watch it. What’s the point? Megan must have been absolutely ga-ga doing the show. I can just imagine her watching herself:


----------



## Lodpah

Jayne1 said:


> I watched half of the second episode, it’s all I could take.
> 
> Of course I noticed when they did that bit about her in Toronto since that’s where I’m from.
> 
> She’s now known for being Harry’s GF.  She’s coming back from the flower shop and paps are waiting for her and she smiles. I couldn’t help noticing the street she was on, because I photographed the house she walked past. (I like photographing old houses, especially heritage ones, it’s a hobby of mine.) So she was walking in the best part of the Annex, a very old, expensive and desirable neighbourhood, but why… she didn’t live in the Annex, she didn’t work in the Annex, her BF nor the Mulrooneys lived around there, why was she walking down that street? And why would the paps be waiting for her on that quiet residential street?
> 
> It seemed like it was one of the times she probably called the paps on herself.


Back a few pages this question is answered by a paparazzi. She called them, allegedly.


----------



## Debbini

Gourmetgal said:


> Both of these articles are just opinion pieces.  Seems like a whole lot of hate and jealousy goin’ on.


Oh, I don't think the markles will be welcomed back any time in the foreseeable future. Lol


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It was The Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-s-girlfriend-actress-Meghan-Markles.html


Thank you. I get why there was a confusion in the article I read long ago: this DM article is written by a Daily Mail journalist based in LA. I remember somebody was saying an American wrote it, but I just checked - the journo is a Brit based in LA.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Coconuts40

Jayne1 said:


> I watched half of the second episode, it’s all I could take.
> 
> Of course I noticed when they did that bit about her in Toronto since that’s where I’m from.
> 
> She’s now known for being Harry’s GF.  She’s coming back from the flower shop and paps are waiting for her and she smiles. I couldn’t help noticing the street she was on, because I photographed the house she walked past. (I like photographing old houses, especially heritage ones, it’s a hobby of mine.) So she was walking in the best part of the Annex, a very old, expensive and desirable neighbourhood, but why… she didn’t live in the Annex, she didn’t work in the Annex, her BF nor the Mulrooneys lived around there, why was she walking down that street? And why would the paps be waiting for her on that quiet residential street?
> 
> It seemed like it was one of the times she probably called the paps on herself.


She did live in the Annex.  I know Toronto well and know where her house was, it is considered the Annex


----------



## A1aGypsy

Coconuts40 said:


> She did live in the Annex.  I know Toronto well and know where her house was, it is considered the Annex


More Seaton Village / Christie Pitts but close enough, I suppose.


----------



## Coconuts40

A1aGypsy said:


> More Seaton Village / Christie Pitts but close enough, I suppose.


It's iterally on the border, it is considered the West Annex (although some would argue that)

However claiming by the original poster she didn't live or work anywhere near the Annex and had no reason to be picking up flowers in the neighborhood is a bit sensational and misleading.  It is definitely within her neighborhood


----------



## haute okole

Ok, I feel so much empathy for the British people who once admired and had so much hope for Harry.  Sadly, he turned out to be such a huge disappointment who married a the F- wannabe JLo who can’t act or sing.   You must realize that all of this ridiculousness is taken from the page of very successful plantiff’s attorneys who have “victims” cases that they must prosecute in the court of pubic opinion.  Harry and Meghan are idiot pawns in the Netflix and Spotify money grab and H&M are happy co-conspirators for the big money.  They will milk the victim of racism claim as long as we keep wanting to watch, read about, learn the inside story of their fraudulent bull shiz.  I hope no one buys it.  Sad thing,  they have convinced themselves it is true, even if it may not be the whole story.  It is a self fulfilling prophecy for them.  They are their own worst enemies.


----------



## gracekelly

ALISON BOSHOFF: It was the pantomime curtsy that REALLY sent Britain over the edge! But Meghan's not averse to receiving one​By ALISON BOSHOFF FOR THE DAILY MAIL

No element of the first three hours of the Harry & Meghan documentary series has inspired more astonishment and outrage than the moment the Duchess of Sussexrecreated her curtsy to the late Queen.

On the Netflix show, Meghan grinned broadly as she performed the gesture, bowing her head to her knees, spreading her arms theatrically wide in a display of mock servility.




i guess the majority has spoken. The mail has a gazillion comments about this.


----------



## Jayne1

Coconuts40 said:


> She did live in the Annex.  I know Toronto well and know where her house was, it is considered the Annex


No, she lived on Yarmouth in Seaton Village and her house was actually closer to Christie Street, as mentioned, which is quite a walk over to Avenue Road where she had herself papped in the Annex.

I live around there (and have my whole life) and know all the streets.  That was a pap walk.


----------



## Chanbal

Uncle Elton shares the lawyer with the Harkles…


----------



## Chanbal

As someone else said, nothing about the Harkles is genuine.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> As someone else said, nothing about the Harkles is genuine.



Nicer than what we've seen of theirs!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> As someone else said, nothing about the Harkles is genuine.



Either they have no furniture or they have no house. Or the chicken coop was being redecorated


----------



## EverSoElusive

You guys are killing this old gal! I was caught up then came back to 60 new pages  

Anyways, I just started the first episode a little bit...

1) The vertical phone screen footages look really dumb.

2) In multiple self-recorded phone footages, Harry don't know what day or date it was and went "Wednesday the something of March", "Friday the whatever, 17th April or something".
*Is this boy really that lazy to even get the day or date right seeing how they chose to document themselves??? *


3) Z-list when asked why she wanted to make the mockumentary, she said "I'm not gonna say that it's comfortable but when you feel like people haven't gotten any sense of who you are for so long, it's really nice to just have the opportunity to let people have a bit more of a glimpse into what's happened and also who we are."
*People know who they are. People see through their BS, lies and hypocrisy these days. They want to paint a fake Van Gogh.

Also, I thought they wanted privacy so why this mockumentary? I'm pretty sure they did it because they want to monetize their lies and they think it will make them famous Hollywood stars. NO! They are laughingstock. *


4) Harry said "A friend of ours actually suggested that we document ourselves through this period of time. With all the misinformation that is going on out there, especially about us and the departure, it seemed like a really sensible idea."
*Who is this friend??? OW or GK or TP? If I had to guess probably the first two people because these people probably wanted to make me a pretty penny off of Z-list & Co. trashing the BRF. After all, the OW interview did happened though OW allegedly had most of that ****e scrubbed because it was a major fail and also put her in a horrible spotlight.*


5) WTF is this footage pose? Not like somebody recorded her spontaneously or without her knowing that she couldn't sit properly or aim the camera better? 





6) What is it with her and towel in hair phone footages repeatedly? 

*****

I'm not sure if I'm going to make it very far if I stop and comment so much every 10 minutes


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Hollywood Reporter, Wallstreet Journal and even reviews on IMDB are insane. I read the 3rd series only drew 800,000K people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reviews: Harry & Meghan - IMDb
> 
> 
> Reviews: Harry & Meghan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> m.imdb.com


I'm enjoying the IMDB reviews. And yes, we are a pretty mild-mannered bunch compared to the people there.


Chanbal said:


> Oops, BBC is joining Harry Potter, Tr*mp's ex-lawyer, … on unauthorized clips.



I find it hard to believe that no one at Netflix did due diligence. On the other hand, if you look at the t&c for anything submitted to Arghwell, you'll find that they don't take responsibility for anything produced by them. If you submit a story to them, you have to clear all the rights. If Arghwell gets sued for whatever you gave them, they have the right to absolve themselves of all responsibility and throw you to the wolves. Maybe in their "I'm not to blame for anything" mindset, Arghwell expected Netflix to clear the rights for whatever they use.


sgj99 said:


> I’m from the South and don’t consider myself a “hugger.”   When meeting someone for the first time I definitely don’t hug as a greeting or when saying goodbye.  Or even if I’ve met them before.  I do it with people I consider friends.


I'm an outlier in my society in that I am a hugger. But I hug people I know and like, and probably haven't seen for a long time. I wouldn't hug someone I'm meeting for the first time. Zed is too used to getting groped by strangers.


Chanbal said:


> Uncle Elton shares the lawyer with the Harkles…



Oh great, Zed's lawyer who lies with a straight face! She says the most amazing things. Definitely have her represent you if you have a tall tale to tell.


----------



## EverSoElusive

And lies about meeting on IG and they got each other's numbers and Harry went "Let's meet." And here we thought it was a date set up by a mutual friend.

Z-list said they were childlike together. *More like immature and petulant. *

Wow! I'm surprised that Z-list allowed the footages of Harry's ex-girlfriend on their mockumentary and him talking about his exes' experience with paparazzi. 

Harry said in order for their relationship to work, they had to keep their relationship quiet for as long as possible. *But didn't Z-list gave him an ultimatum of some sort? She never wanted quiet.


******

Time for bed. To be continued


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> Thank you. I get why there was a confusion in the article I read long ago: this DM article is written by a Daily Mail journalist based in LA. I remember somebody was saying an American wrote it, but I just checked - the journo is a Brit based in LA.


Not to court controversy but the thing I always found funny about  this story  is that the article title is a reference to the song ‘straight outta Compton’ by NWA and once NWA disbanded they all released diss tracks about each other claiming the others _weren’t really from Compton. _ 

The insinuation that there’s something bad about being from Compton is obviously elitist and classist though and you can read it into the original article and you can certainly read it into M being horrified by it and using it as proof positive of media bias. 

To correct something from earlier it was Doria they were claiming from Compton and she’s not - Meg is obviously from an upper middle class LA valley girl background.



Chanbal said:


> Uncle Elton shares the lawyer with the Harkles…



I dunno I try to believe the victim in these scenarios but find this story hard to believe as Elton John is clearly not a top. 

God knows if it’s true  it’s a classic settle out of court job and he’s not going to miss the money.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## BlueCherry

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Sorry for any confusion I was referring to her niece.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't justify it...but I guess I just don't care about them enough to get upset about it...not sure if that makes any sense? My job makes me privy to some pretty awful situations, the world is a messed up place for so many at the moment, there is real injustice and tragedy happening every day...I just don't have the bandwidth to become emotionally invested in what is basically celebrity gossip. It's a distraction but that's about it. And I am somewhat stubbornly obsessed with facts...so much about this couple is speculation and rumor which is a lot less interesting to me. Sorry to be such a downer, now you know why I didn't answer the first time
> 
> 
> It was The Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...arry-s-girlfriend-actress-Meghan-Markles.html



Here is @Sharont2305 original response to you. It’s all very well popping into a contentious thread you’re not emotionally invested in … etc etc. But you are obsessed with facts. Why not just discuss those facts instead of skirting around them. 

It’s a fact that Meghan has punished her Father in the most severe manner for a crime she and Harry have committed repeatedly. It’s a fact that Harry said people would do anything for money but does it himself. 

I am emotionally invested. I detest elder abuse, the lies, hypocrisy and my own patriotism can be set aside. What those two did to the Queen and Prince Philip on their deathbeds, be it petulance, greed, vengeance or whatever else they’re accused of, is singularly the most cruel and repulsive human behaviour I have ever witnessed.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mh.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5668532


What is a packaging agent?


----------



## DoggieBags

needlv said:


> What is a packaging agent?


Briefly, a talent agency is given a project (movie, tv series, etc.) that they first staff using writers, directors, actors, etc. that are clients of their agency. They then open up any remaining vacancies to clients of other agencies only after they have filled as many spots as they could from within the ranks of their own client base. In return for their work in packaging the whole thing, the talent agency gets a negotiated fee from the production company on the entire project instead of their usual fees from each client of the agency’s that is signed to the project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_packaging


----------



## pomeline

pomeline said:


> I'm just wondering, there's always talk about how it's impossible to remove princely titles from someone etc. but in reality, can't they make a law change? I mean, laws are different in each country and especially in a Common Law country like UK but Queen Margrethe of Denmark just recently removed the titles from her younger son's kids.
> 
> I'm also wondering what happened to this bill as there was a second hearing on Friday.
> 
> https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289/stages


This is just... The bill is not going forward! PM Rishi Sunak blocked it!

Rishi Sunak intervenes to BLOCK move to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal titles - PM opposes landmark bill

So they are really going to let these two keep all the titles and continue tearing down the monarchy..? I was afraid of that. Everyone dancing to the tune of the mad pipers.

P.S. The bill was first introduced by a MP from York since they wanted Andrew to lose his dukedom.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mh.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5668532


Do they give a reason?


----------



## Pessie

pomeline said:


> This is just... The bill is not going forward! PM Rishi Sunak blocked it!
> 
> Rishi Sunak intervenes to BLOCK move to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal titles - PM opposes landmark bill
> 
> So they are really going to let these two keep all the titles and continue tearing down the monarchy..? I was afraid of that. Everyone dancing to the tune of woke brigade.
> 
> P.S. The bill was first introduced by a MP from York since they wanted Andrew to lose his dukedom.


I think a means of limiting all non working royals in the use of their titles will be brought about, in such a way that Harry can’t whine about being singled out, and he can’t whine about being deprived of anything.  I think it’ll be under the new slimline monarchy umbrella.  Just my opinion.  We’ll see.  But I think making an example of H (despite him thoroughly deserving it) would unleash a cacophony of complaints from montecito and nobody wants that nonsense.


----------



## Mrs.Z

xincinsin said:


> I remember reading that the Compton headline wasn't from a UK tabloid. Never looked into it further. Does anyone recall the source?
> 
> I think both he and thd Queen were in a very difficult position because Mrs Harkle twisted everything into racism. Hope he is planning to do something about it and not just ostriching. Does Zed ever respond to POC who don't buy her story, or does she pretend they don't exist?
> 
> Maybe faced with a limited number of seats to fill, inviting another A-lister tr*mped inviting a niece who would not be of much use for her future plans.
> 
> I think they blamed it on the palace for convenience.


The Compton headline was from the Daily Mail.


----------



## Suncatcher

I have not watched the show but I have seen the articles about her mocking the curtsey and comparing it to medieval times dinner and tournament. This to me is beyond the pale.  How dare she mock another country’s traditions, customs and its institutions? And after she had received the curtseys of others.  She is complete bottom feeding trash, vulgar, a nasty piece of sh*t and so mean and petty.  I am so repulsed by her lack of class.  She is deplorable.  What an ugly person inside and out.


----------



## DoggieBags

Pessie said:


> I think a means of limiting all non working royals in the use of their titles will be brought about, in such a way that Harry can’t whine about being singled out, and he can’t whine about being deprived of anything.  I think it’ll be under the new slimline monarchy umbrella.  Just my opinion.  We’ll see.  But I think making an example of H (despite him thoroughly deserving it) would unleash a cacophony of complaints from montecito and nobody wants that nonsense.


I can see how this would be enforceable on individuals living within the UK. But for individuals like H and TW living outside the UK, how exactly can the British government and the Monarchy compel them to stop using their titles if they choose to ignore the law?


----------



## mia55

This couple makes Amber Heard look like an angel. They’ve really become a joke.

If I were Charles, I wouldn’t have done anything either and let them dig their own graves. They’re already heading towards that at a fast rate.


----------



## Suncatcher

Chanbal said:


> As someone else said, nothing about the Harkles is genuine.



Wow this house is perfection.  Lovely!


----------



## Pessie

DoggieBags said:


> I can see how this would be enforceable on individuals living within the UK. But for individuals like H and TW living outside the UK, how exactly can the British government and the Monarchy compel them to stop using their titles if they choose to ignore the law?


Everyone would know it was incorrect usage, and they’d look pathetic, would that be enough?  I don’t know.


----------



## pomeline

DoggieBags said:


> I can see how this would be enforceable on individuals living within the UK. But for individuals like H and TW living outside the UK, how exactly can the British government and the Monarchy compel them to stop using their titles if they choose to ignore the law?


Also, what about the nobility? There are a lot of people with titles who have no formal duties connected to their title who nevertheless are allowed to use their title. If non-working royals are banned from using their titles, then doesn't that mean that they are in a way in a lower position compared to some baron, viscount or such who can use their title while no other duties except perhaps being a peer in the House of Lords (and many are not there any longer after a change was made years ago) or maybe taking care of their family castle/manor?

I don't envy the BRF when deciding what to do. Do they effectively abolish the whole system or risk the wrath of Sussex supporters? I don't have a solution.


----------



## DoggieBags

Pessie said:


> Everyone would know it was incorrect usage, and they’d look pathetic, would that be enough?  I don’t know.


Not everyone. Even now many people don’t know that she shouldn’t be addressed as Princess Meghan. The whole issue of which title to use when addressing x or y person can be quite confusing to people who do not live in countries that have a monarchy and peerages. I would bet the average person in the US today, when asked which was correct, Princess Meghan or Princess Henry of Wales, wouldn’t know the right answer and would simply be guessing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

pomeline said:


> This is just... The bill is not going forward! PM Rishi Sunak blocked it!
> 
> Rishi Sunak intervenes to BLOCK move to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal titles - PM opposes landmark bill
> 
> So they are really going to let these two keep all the titles and continue tearing down the monarchy..? I was afraid of that. Everyone dancing to the tune of the mad pipers.
> 
> P.S. The bill was first introduced by a MP from York since they wanted Andrew to lose his dukedom.


1.I could be wrong but I think there is more than one piece of legislation afoot in Parliament, about title removal, so RS said no to just one bill ?
2. Politicians are involved now, after first three videos
3. IMHO, nothing will be done until after the book, which is why RS said no
4. PS MY GUESS - the whole curtsy thing will be revisited. Who curtsies to whom? Theoretically, Camilla curtsies to Eugenie when Charles is not in the room. That is not about titles, but about being born royal not a commoner, but lots of Euro countries have reduced the impact/titles of their blood royals.


----------



## Pessie

DoggieBags said:


> Not everyone. Even now many people don’t know that she shouldn’t be addressed as Princess Meghan. The whole issue of which title to use when addressing x or y person can be quite confusing to people who do not live in countries that have a monarchy and peerages. I would bet the average person in the US today, when asked which was correct, Princess Meghan or Princess Henry of Wales, wouldn’t know the right answer and would simply be guessing.


Made big news story when it happened in Denmark though, and the Danish RF is less well known.  I don’t know, I don’t have the answers.  But I do believe work is taking place in the background to sort H  and his wife, and slim down the RF.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

BlueCherry said:


> Here is @Sharont2305 original response to you. It’s all very well popping into a contentious thread you’re not emotionally invested in … etc etc. But you are obsessed with facts. Why not just discuss those facts instead of skirting around them.
> 
> It’s a fact that Meghan has punished her Father in the most severe manner for a crime she and Harry have committed repeatedly. It’s a fact that Harry said people would do anything for money but does it himself.
> 
> I am emotionally invested. I detest elder abuse, the lies, hypocrisy and my own patriotism can be set aside. What those two did to the Queen and Prince Philip on their deathbeds, be it petulance, greed, vengeance or whatever else they’re accused of, is singularly the most cruel and repulsive human behaviour I have ever witnessed.
> 
> View attachment 5668518


As I responded my feelings about Thomas Markle are both because he is a parent (who rightly or wrongly I personally hold to a higher standard) and because he began this drama with his daughter through the tabloids. 

And with all due respect, if the behavior of MM and Harry is the most cruel and repulsive you have ever witnessed you are very lucky indeed. 




Suncatcher said:


> I have not watched the show but I have seen the articles about her mocking the curtsey and comparing it to medieval times dinner and tournament. This to me is beyond the pale.  How dare she mock another country’s traditions, customs and its institutions? And after she had received the curtseys of others.  She is complete bottom feeding trash, vulgar, a nasty piece of sh*t and so mean and petty.  I am so repulsed by her lack of class.  She is deplorable.  What an ugly person inside and out.


Yes I agree that would have been deplorable. From what I can tell people who actually watched the episode, including me, believe she was making fun of herself.


----------



## Suncatcher

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> As I responded my feelings about Thomas Markle are both because he is a parent (who rightly or wrongly I personally hold to a higher standard) and because he began this drama with his daughter through the tabloids.
> 
> And with all due respect, if the behavior of MM and Harry is the most cruel and repulsive you have ever witnessed you are very lucky indeed.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I agree that would have been deplorable. From what I can tell people who actually watched the episode, including me, believe she was making fun of herself.


If you read comments from people on line, that is not what the vast majority people think.  She was making fun of the monarchy and its institutions.  If she acts in a way that causes confusion that is not good for her.


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> My spidey sense tells me part 2 will have nothing new either.
> 
> I am parched and they are not serving any tea!


Valentine Low did an overview of the 6 episodes and suggested the last 3 will be more political.

The first 3 episodes were obliquely political. The word Brexit was not mentioned but the whole topic of the UK vs Europe was referenced. Some did not pick up on the political insinuations, esp in the US. UK politicians noticed everything on UK politics.

Also, the book, is written by a US ghostwriter. I hope Moehringer did his home work on differences bet US and UK cultures and politics.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Suncatcher said:


> If you read comments from people on line, that is not what the vast majority people think.  She was making fun of the monarchy and its institutions.  If she acts in a way that causes confusion that is not good for her.


I think, like so much of this topic, it depends where you read the comments!


----------



## marietouchet

Pessie said:


> Made big news story when it happened in Denmark though, and the Danish RF is less well known.  I don’t know, I don’t have the answers.  But I do believe work is taking place in the background to sort H  and his wife, and slim down the RF.


MY GUESS ON TIMING
1. Nothing happens tile after the Jan 10 book.
2. Coronation is in early May 2023.
3. Somewhere In Mar 2023, when invites are going out, there will be something more formal on the BRF slim down esp re Harkles, Andy, curtsies.

I don’t think MM’s silliness on curtsies has any impact. Rather, the curtsy system is a reflection of position in the family based on birth not merit. Does Camilla curtsy to Eugenie is Charles not in room ???
There are rumors that E is on the outs having to curtsy to Catherine when W is in the room.
And I have noticed, I have seen Anne bow to her mother rather than curtsy. Anne is a practical sort.


----------



## Pessie

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> From what I can tell people who actually watched the episode, including me, believe she was making fun of herself.


I watched her.  I’m British and I was shocked and very offended by it.  Couldn’t believe it, frankly.  There is absolutely no doubt she was mocking the Queen and the UK.  “Medieval times”?  A pastiche of British history? Get away.

The death of the Queen is still fresh here.  And I fail to see why you persistently brush off the offence caused as just Meghan having some fun, when she has caused deep offence in the UK.  For someone not invested you keep at it.


----------



## Mrs.Z

marietouchet said:


> Valentine Low did an overview of the 6 episodes and suggested the last 3 will be more political.
> 
> The first 3 episodes were obliquely political. The word Brexit was not mentioned but the whole topic of the UK vs Europe was referenced. Some did not pick up on the political insinuations, esp in the US. UK politicians noticed everything on UK politics.
> 
> Also, the book, is written by a US ghostwriter. I hope Moehringer did his home work on differences bet US and UK cultures and politics.


Brexit was very directly discussed in Episode 2.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Pessie said:


> I watched her.  I’m British and I was shocked and very offended by it.  Couldn’t believe it, frankly.  There is absolutely no doubt she was mocking the Queen and the UK.  “Medieval times”?  A pastiche of British history? Get away.
> 
> I fail to see why you persistently brush off the offence caused as just Meghan having some fun, when she has caused deep offence in the UK.  For someone not invested you keep at it.


To me it felt like she was being self deprecating but I’m truly sorry for any hurt feelings or offense.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> So it starts with a lie... How fitting.
> 
> Yep, the compulsive huggers were/are a problem. During the height of the pandemic, I remember walking backwards from someone who kept trying to get close to whisper in my ear. Lost my temper with her when she kept advancing on me.
> 
> They have date weeks.
> 
> Her next lie will be how the BRF didn't give her a clothing allowance, so she had to beg and borrow clothes. Despite being a self-made millionaire (or multi-millionaire according to Stans), she could not afford any clothes! Only ripped jeans because the holes gave Rory, I mean Cory, Oops, I mean Harry, easy access.
> 
> It pretty much convinces me that her "degree in International Relations" is not worth the paper it is allegedly printed on. She keeps telling the world how ignorant she is of anything outside North America.


Are there any pictures of her Northwestern graduation? I’m starting to wonder whether she actually finished. Gina Davis just admitted that she never finished Boston University after talking about her time there for years.


Chanbal said:


> I don't know what Hazz knows, but she certainly looks very different without makeup. I bet that she chose the best pick possible; I understand now why she needs to bring a makeup artist everywhere she goes. I hope she pays him/her well.


Honestly, in that no makeup picture, she looks exactly like the picture everyone that shows of her when she was 13 with not very great teeth.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Gah, I missed so many pages and can’t catch up.


----------



## LittleStar88

This may have been mentioned here already but I’ve been offline a lot and trying to catch up has been a struggle 

RE: Her big dumb curtsy when meeting TQ.

As an American, why did she need to curtsy? I thought Americans didn’t have to do that when meeting her? So why make the big, grand, patronizing scene?


----------



## Pessie

LittleStar88 said:


> This may have been mentioned here already but I’ve been offline a lot and trying to catch up has been a struggle
> 
> RE: Her big dumb curtsy when meeting TQ.
> 
> As an American, why did she need to curtsy? I thought Americans didn’t have to do that when meeting her? So why make the big, grand, patronizing scene?


Exactly.  As an American she could have chosen to shake hands.  But at the time she was living the lie about taking British citizenship.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> That is why she mocked TQ.  She wasn't allowed to go to Balmoral at the end.  You know Meghan.  There is always a clapback if she thinks you wronged her.


I read somewhere that this was all filmed BEFORE the death of the Queen.  Does that mean they had the opportunity to delete that scene, but chose to leave it in?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LittleStar88

Pessie said:


> Exactly.  As an American she could have chosen to shake hands.  But at the time she was living the lie about taking British citizenship.



So she was just being an obnoxious and disrespectful a$$hole. That’s what I thought. Which is surprising given what she studied in college. It also makes her look like an idiot.

I’m an American and her whole big, grand curtsy at first meeting thing infuriates me.


----------



## lanasyogamama

On the Facebook groups that I’m in that have a younger more liberal audience, they are working so hard to talk to themselves into trying to like her, but even they have to admit how scripted and phony the whole thing is.


----------



## Sophisticatted

Imagine that additional titles will not be given out upon marriage in the future.  They will have to be “earned” like knighthoods before being bestowed.  It’s similar to how the BRF learned their lesson about wedding tiaras from Sarah.  Now, they are borrowed, instead of bought and bestowed.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> To me it felt like she was being self deprecating but I’m truly sorry for any hurt feelings or offense.


Agree to disagree, okay? I personally don't think Zed knows how to be self deprecating. In my experience, when narcs pretend to be self deprecating, they are fishing for others to assure them that they are wonderful and it's the other party who is being foolish. 

My office narc was always displeased when his self deprecation was met with several seconds of silence as some of us rolled our eyes, and other more sympathetic souls tried to find some tactful way to inform him that he is an idiot.


----------



## Toby93

**


----------



## jblended

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> *To me it felt like she was being self deprecating* but I’m truly sorry for any hurt feelings or offense.


I know you mean well, but when someone is telling you that as a Brit they were offended, and you double down, it feels like our feelings are dismissed. Like it's Meghan's truth and who cares what those racist Brits feel.
In trying to give one side (Meg) the benefit of the doubt, you are dismissing every other voice.
The same is happening on the other thread (Ngozi discussion) re: colourism and the charity's purpose, btw. I just commented on that.
Again, I know that's not the intention but it's very jarring to be told our feelings don't count because Meg/Ngozi are apparently the truth-bearers.  I'm offended by Meg's comments and behaviour. I respect the culture of every country I enter and I'd expect the same basic civil behaviour from Meghan. She continues to disappoint.


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> Remembering how Harry was all “what Meghan wants, Meghan gets” about everything else before the wedding I find it impossible to believe he would have accepted the palace refusing an invite to the niece if Meghan had wanted her there.
> 
> It’s revisionism they came up with because Meghan has been criticized over the years for only inviting one of her relatives to the wedding and using the rest of her invitations for celebrities.


She is using this platform to try to change the story to show her in a much more flattering light than what has been reported in the media.  Sp@tify was all about doing the same thing.  She is so thin skinned and narcissistic that she can't help herself


----------



## Debbini

BlueCherry said:


> Here is @Sharont2305 original response to you. It’s all very well popping into a contentious thread you’re not emotionally invested in … etc etc. But you are obsessed with facts. Why not just discuss those facts instead of skirting around them.
> 
> It’s a fact that Meghan has punished her Father in the most severe manner for a crime she and Harry have committed repeatedly. It’s a fact that Harry said people would do anything for money but does it himself.
> 
> I am emotionally invested. I detest elder abuse, the lies, hypocrisy and my own patriotism can be set aside. What those two did to the Queen and Prince Philip on their deathbeds, be it petulance, greed, vengeance or whatever else they’re accused of, is singularly the most cruel and repulsive human behaviour I have ever witnessed.
> 
> View attachment 5668518


@OriginalBalenciaga....I'd like to hear your answer too.


BlueCherry said:


> Here is @Sharont2305 original response to you. It’s all very well popping into a contentious thread you’re not emotionally invested in … etc etc. But you are obsessed with facts. Why not just discuss those facts instead of skirting around them.
> 
> It’s a fact that Meghan has punished her Father in the most severe manner for a crime she and Harry have committed repeatedly. It’s a fact that Harry said people would do anything for money but does it himself.
> 
> I am emotionally invested. I detest elder abuse, the lies, hypocrisy and my own patriotism can be set aside. What those two did to the Queen and Prince Philip on their deathbeds, be it petulance, greed, vengeance or whatever else they’re accused of, is singularly the most cruel and repulsive human behaviour I have ever witnessed.
> 
> View attachment 5668518


@OriginalBalenciaga I'd like to hear your answer too.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

xincinsin said:


> Agree to disagree, okay? I personally don't think Zed knows how to be self deprecating. In my experience, when narcs pretend to be self deprecating, they are fishing for others to assure them that they are wonderful and it's the other party who is being foolish.
> 
> My office narc was always displeased when his self deprecation was met with several seconds of silence as some of us rolled our eyes, and other more sympathetic souls tried to find some tactful way to inform him that he is an idiot.



Happy to agree to disagree! It seems I have offended posters and that was certainly never my intention. I try not to share too much about myself on social media but I grew up attending international schools so am quite used to having these conversations and I enjoy respectful debates. And since the majority of this thread is in agreement I was trying to offer another perspective. But I think I have worn out my welcome so thanks for engaging with me I do appreciate it!  



jblended said:


> I know you mean well, but when someone is telling you that as a Brit they were offended, and you double down, it feels like our feelings are dismissed. Like it's Meghan's truth and who cares what those racist Brits feel.
> In trying to give one side (Meg) the benefit of the doubt, you are dismissing every other voice.
> The same is happening on the other thread re: colourism and the charity's purpose, btw. I just commented on that.
> Again, I know that's not the intention but it's very jarring to be told our feelings don't count because Meg/Ngozi are apparently the truth-bearers.  I'm offended by Meg's comments and behaviour. I respect the culture of every country I enter and I'd expect the same basic civil behaviour from Meghan. She continues to disappoint.



Yes of course I understand that's why I tried to apologize in the thread and privately. I was not trying to be dismissive but I can see how it felt that way! I am truly sorry for any offense I caused.


ETA @Debbini please see post #122,538


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Horrormentary



She looks a lot like her much younger (child) self in this pic.  Kind of makes you wonder just how much makeup is needed to look the way she looks in public?


----------



## Aimee3

pomeline said:


> Also, they invited the vet who treated Guy The Beagle to their wedding. I have to check my sources now but I remember the vet being interviewed and saying he felt strange being invited to their wedding.
> 
> Something very strange happened to that dog I'm sure. I mean, both legs?! I have heard so many rumours and how the palace staff had to stay silent etc. but I cannot of course verify the story. The two main stories are that she backed her car on him (how does that even happen?!) and the fight with H while high on coke (again, this is a blind item, not verified) and throwing the dog out the second floor window in a fit of rage.
> 
> I think they were really hurting themselves keeping the accident a secret as now there's all these stories that no-one can verify. They should have shared the full story since it is really not a common thing to happen to a dog. The vet hasn't shared more information about it, of course.


Hmmm was he invited to the wedding to keep him quiet????


----------



## pomeline

marietouchet said:


> 1.I could be wrong but I think there is more than one piece of legislation afoot in Parliament, about title removal, so RS said no to just one bill ?
> 2. Politicians are involved now, after first three videos
> 3. IMHO, nothing will be done until after the book, which is why RS said no
> 4. PS MY GUESS - the whole curtsy thing will be revisited. Who curtsies to whom? Theoretically, Camilla curtsies to Eugenie when Charles is not in the room. That is not about titles, but about being born royal not a commoner, but lots of Euro countries have reduced the impact/titles of their blood royals.



As far as I understood MP Rachael Maskell introduced this bill first and it was related to the whole Andrew thing as she is from York. Her bill has been in process for months. MP Bob Seely tried to introduce another one just now but it seems that isn't going forward either. PM Rishi Sunak is against any and all propositions suggesting titles to be removed. So now as far as I can tell, it means two such propositions have effectively been stopped from proceeding. I am not aware of other pieces of legislation moving forward.

No Downing Street support for Bob Seely's Harry and Meghan plan

I don't really see why Charles would say no right now because he knows any such suggestion would take months to go through the necessary steps so it wouldn't be immediate in any case. If he decides to go ahead with such plans after January, nothing would happen before summer at least.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I read somewhere that this was all filmed BEFORE the death of the Queen.  Does that mean they had the opportunity to delete that scene, but chose to leave it in?


The intro to the videos says the filming was Aug 2022 and prior, HMTQ died in Sep 2022
So, the videos CLAIM filming was prior to the death, the wording leaves a loophole … editing may have been done after the death


----------



## Coconuts40

Jayne1 said:


> No, she lived on Yarmouth in Seaton Village and her house was actually closer to Christie Street, as mentioned, which is quite a walk over to Avenue Road where she had herself papped in the Annex.
> 
> I live around there (and have my whole life) and know all the streets.  That was a pap walk.


It's all about perspective I guess.   I lived in downtown Toronto my whole life and I am quite a walker.  I don't think the distance is questionable at all.  Some of the best flower shops are along Avenue road, I always detour there to pick up my flowers.
I am not a fan of MM at all but honestly we question MM for her fabricated sensational comments  but I find yours is just the same.  She is not far from the Annex and who stays within their neighborhood to run all errands?  Pap walk, perhaps?  But you are giving readers who don't live in Toronto the suggestion she has no business being where she was.  Not true at all .   But again perspective I guess.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I will give her this - these were her future in-laws; it's not like walking up to a stranger and hugging them....but to then imply that Kate and Will are cold inside and out is nasty



I wouldn't hug her either, she'd have to deal and get over it. Obviously W&K saw through her love-bomb BS. 

That she makes something of it so long after just shows what a up-tight, pedantic-narc lunatic she is. 

Let it go woman, you're supposed to be from casual Cali. Take your (merched) shoes off, pull-on your ripped (merched) blue jeans - chill


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

Toby93 said:


> I read somewhere that this was all filmed BEFORE the death of the Queen.  Does that mean they had the opportunity to delete that scene, but chose to leave it in?


Yes, all the interviews were filmed by the end of August. My guess is bits like this were what they wanted to be edited but Netflix said no. Weren't there rumours after the Queen passed that H&M wanted things to be edited out?


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't hug her either, she'd have to deal and get over it. Obviously W&K saw through her love-bomb BS.
> 
> That she makes something of it so long after just shows what a up-tight, pedantic-narc lunatic she is.
> 
> Let it go woman, you're supposed to be from casual Cali. Take your (merched) shoes off, pull-on your ripped (merched) blue jeans - chill


I don't recall exactly what she said.  Did they recoil?  I suspect they just stiffened a bit but didn't push her away or tell her no hugging.
In the case I talked about in my post yesterday, the woman actually said the exact words "I'm a hugger" after I told her I didn't want a hug from her.  Really?  In this day and age of Covid, etc.?
But Meegain using this to imply Kate and William are cold people is disgusting.


----------



## xincinsin

Idly toying with a conspiracy theory...

There is speculation that Sparry picked Zed out of a catalogue of paid companions that Markus Andersen kept in his SM. IMO that is possible because I always found it strange that Markus provided Zed with free lodging and she was invited to openings and events. Not saying Zed was a call girl, but she may have been a party girl or a good-time girl. Establishments which cater to people wanting a good time discreetly are known to provide companions of both genders for guests. The party girls and boys are there to enjoy themselves, make sure others enjoy themselves, and maybe network a bit or earn something as a side hustle.

According to various sources, in the 3-part mockumentary, Zed claims that Sparry had "an extensive list" for qualities he wanted in a woman. And Sparry replies "Let's not go there." Some sources describe it as banter between a loving couple, Zed teasing Sparry. Others see it as Zed going too far in her teasing and claim that Sparry was terse when he shut her down.

If it is true that Sparry picked Zed out from a catalogue, and I'm not saying it is because they keep rewriting their life story, and if it is true that their love story is turning sour, then Zed is likely taunting Sparry. The "list" may be the filters he used on the catalogue: preferred hair colour, preferred body shape, preferred hobbies etc that he picked to narrow down his choices, and the catalogue churned and spat out a female with dog-like appearance.

And if all that is true, then Sparry's “Let’s not go there.” means he doesn't want to admit that they were playing Pretty Woman, and Zed was daring him to admit it because she knew he would never do so. If she was manipulating him this way, he would definitely have been deceived by all her sob stories of almost being an orphan, raised in impoverished circumstances, becoming Hollywood star and renowned humanitarian.


----------



## LittleStar88

RE: TW feeling slighted because W & K didn't want to hug on first meeting.

I've had a minute to think about this. Aside from the obvious that you just don't go around hugging people you've only met for the first time, consider this...

W & K were likely a little protective of Harry. He seems borderline special needs, especially when it comes to his emotional intelligence. Not to mention that you don't just swing the door wide open and let just anyone into the family straight away. They care about him and don't want to see him get hurt, and don't want to see him (or the family) get used.

So this female turns up and Harry is totally sprung. He may be thinking with the wrong head. Who is this chick? What are her intentions with Harry? With the family? They don't know her from Adam. You take a step back and let the newcomer earn the respect and trust, you don't just give it and treat her like your new BFF.

I've been put through hurdles when "meeting the family" and I was simply meeting normal people. It's understandable. TW's expectations of receiving hugs right out of the gate is just not reasonable. Maybe TW knew so much about W & K from what she had read on the internet that she felt she knew them so well, but they knew nothing of her.


----------



## marietouchet

It came to me. What was the MM curtsy nonsense all about? The deep curtsy thing evoked diff ideas in MY head…. Where does one see a DEEP CURTSY anymore in the US ???

There is a US historical tradition of debutante-type ball, esp in the South, where an exaggerated curtsy is required. Partially, it is a southern belle thing. Think Gone with  the Wind.
Groups like Masons, Knight of Columbus or guilds held the balls. These groups are no longer exactly politically correct (PC).
These balls go back 150 - 200 years. The St Louis Veiled prophet ball is a famous example. See Wiki for history of this ball and organisation.
Simplistically, people now equate the deep curtsy balls with racism and the balls are no longer PC.

I don’t doubt that MM was trying to link the UK court curtsy with racism.
Badly done MM.


----------



## Chanbal

Pessie said:


> I watched her.  I’m British and I was shocked and very offended by it.  Couldn’t believe it, frankly.  There is absolutely no doubt she was mocking the Queen and the UK.  “Medieval times”?  A pastiche of British history? Get away.
> 
> The death of the Queen is still fresh here.  And I fail to see why you persistently brush off the offence caused as just Meghan having some fun, when she has caused deep offence in the UK.  For someone not invested you keep at it.


The curtsy scene was tasteless and a lack of respect to QE to say the least imo. However, "y_ou cannot make someone pay attention to something that he or she does not want to notice._"

I'm not particularly a fan of the Markle family, but I can feel their pain. They were thrown to the wolves without any protection or coaching the moment the Harkles' relationship became public. These don't seem to be sophisticated people, and it must have been very difficult for them to endure all the unexpected attention. It looks like TW didn't care much about talking to them and facilitating the Palace protection as she did with Dor*a. They started to be portrayed in a very negative light, and started reacting. As I said, the first time I saw an article about Samantha, I had a bad impression of her. Then I realized that she suffered so much in life, and she is a fighter who has provided an honest assessment of the situation. Tom Bower keeps repeating that TM is a good man, and in addition to what I've been observing, I trust Bower's opinion. I also thing the assessment of Dr. Carole Lieberman about TW is possibly correct.

One can argue that “p_eople aren't all good, and people aren't all bad"_, which I overall agree. However, I'm still trying to find out what is the good part in people like H*tler and other malignant narcissists out there.


----------



## kipp

xincinsin said:


> Agree to disagree, okay? I personally don't think Zed knows how to be self deprecating. In my experience, when narcs pretend to be self deprecating, they are fishing for others to assure them that they are wonderful and it's the other party who is being foolish.
> 
> My office narc was always displeased when his self deprecation was met with several seconds of silence as some of us rolled our eyes, and other more sympathetic souls tried to find some tactful way to inform him that he is an idiot.


THIS.  But actually, I think she was both mocking the Queen/the Monarchy/ and the British institutions AND also making it *look like* she was being self-deprecating even though she isn't---similar to how narcs like to humble brag.


----------



## lanasyogamama

marietouchet said:


> The intro to the videos says the filming was Aug 2022 and prior, HMTQ died in Sep 2022
> So, the videos CLAIM filming was prior to the death, the wording leaves a loophole … editing may have been done after the death


Even if it’s true about the filming dates, it’s not like the Queen’s death was a surprise to anyone, she had been going downhill since her husband died.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> It came to me. What was the MM curtsy nonsense all about?
> 
> There is a US historical tradition of debutante-type ball, esp in the South, where an exaggerated curtsy is required. Partially, it is a southern belle thing. Think Gone with  the Wind.
> Groups like Masons, Knight of Columbus or guilds held the balls. These groups are no longer exactly politically correct (PC).
> These balls go back 150 - 200 years. The St Louis Veiled prophet ball is a famous example. See Wiki for history of this ball and organisation.
> Simplistically, people now equate the deep curtsy balls with racism and the balls are no longer PC.
> 
> I don’t doubt that MM was trying to link the UK court curtsy with racism.
> Badly done MM.



Knights of Columbus is a catholic fraternal organization founded in the 1880's (they use this to sell life insurance, which is how they are still around). They have dinner dances but no balls and curtsies. I've never seen racism there but definitely sexism with it being a fraternal organization and attached to the Catholic church.

California is so far removed from the south and debutante balls that we CA natives only know what we see in movies and on TV. Do they even do those anymore?

I would imagine TW would be more familiar with quinceañera than debutante balls.


----------



## TC1

Chanbal said:


> Oops, BBC is joining Harry Potter, Tr*mp's ex-lawyer, … on unauthorized clips.



OK, sooo Netflix didn't get permission to use the BBC Diana interview.. UHHH, didn't William & Harry sue the BBC and they promised to NEVER air that footage again?? But it fits H&M's narrative now so they trot it back out? Now THAT is BONKERS


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> I think a means of limiting all non working royals in the use of their titles will be brought about, in such a way that Harry can’t whine about being singled out, and he can’t whine about being deprived of anything.  I think it’ll be under the new slimline monarchy umbrella.  Just my opinion.  We’ll see.  But I think making an example of H (despite him thoroughly deserving it) would unleash a cacophony of complaints from montecito and nobody wants that nonsense.


It sounds like it could be a rather elegant solution to a difficult situation. As we've discussed, KC is likely taking his time and working closely with his advisors to find a way to deal with the Harkles that won't make the monarchy look like the bad guy.



LittleStar88 said:


> As an American, why did she need to curtsy? I thought Americans didn’t have to do that when meeting her? So why make the big, grand, patronizing scene?


I was thinking the same. Either don't curtsy at all or do it correctly without making a big production of it, but don't mock the customs of the family you are marrying into. This is why I just can't buy the claim she was being self-deprecating. And he looked mortified.



lanasyogamama said:


> Even if it’s true about the filming dates, it’s not like the Queen’s death was a surprise to anyone, she had been going downhill since her husband died.


I recall saying earlier this year that I hoped the Queen would make it to the Jubilee, and someone responded in a panicked tone along the lines of "Why are you saying that?". She did not look well to me, and it's also not uncommon for long-married spouses to die within a close time frame. In any event, I was glad she got to see the Jubilee and what a great tribute it was to her.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>




"Absurd headline. He wasn't dragged in. He set it up."  This 100%

In spite of the differences of opinion here, I appreciate all of your insights regarding the workings of the British government, the entertainment industry and so on. It really can be enlightening at times.


----------



## Chanbal

@charlottawill you have more opinions here. Very entertaining…








						Harry & Meghan (TV Series 2022) - IMDb
					

Harry & Meghan (TV Series 2022) on IMDb: Movies, TV, Celebs, and more...




					www.imdb.com


----------



## Toby93

Things that make you go...hmmmm?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> @charlottawill you have more opinions here. Very entertaining…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan (TV Series 2022) - IMDb
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan (TV Series 2022) on IMDb: Movies, TV, Celebs, and more...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


Unfortunately the sugars are on a roll now. Many of the reviews dated 10 Dec are praising how brave and authentic the dire duo are.


----------



## KEG66

LittleStar88 said:


> RE: TW feeling slighted because W & K didn't want to hug on first meeting.
> 
> I've had a minute to think about this. Aside from the obvious that you just don't go around hugging people you've only met for the first time, consider this...
> 
> W & K were likely a little protective of Harry. He seems borderline special needs, especially when it comes to his emotional intelligence. Not to mention that you don't just swing the door wide open and let just anyone into the family straight away. They care about him and don't want to see him get hurt, and don't want to see him (or the family) get used.
> 
> So this female turns up and Harry is totally sprung. He may be thinking with the wrong head. Who is this chick? What are her intentions with Harry? With the family? They don't know her from Adam. You take a step back and let the newcomer earn the respect and trust, you don't just give it and treat her like your new BFF.
> 
> I've been put through hurdles when "meeting the family" and I was simply meeting normal people. It's understandable. TW's expectations of receiving hugs right out of the gate is just not reasonable. Maybe TW knew so much about W & K from what she had read on the internet that she felt she knew them so well, but they knew nothing of her.


This is exactly what I thought too. They would have been wary of anyone and boy doesn’t all this mean they were right to be !


----------



## Chanbal

Nana, the woman!    Great video!


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix documentary series is 'pretty disrespectful' says Nana Akua_​


----------



## youngster

Regarding the mocking curtsy, its already been mentioned that if MM had married into the Japanese royal family and performed a mocking reenactment of their tradition and custom of bowing, she'd likely have been canceled.  Few would tolerate that, I think. So, I don't blame the reaction at all from the UK press and people. These are their social customs and conventions and, if she didn't like curtsying, then she should have discussed this with Harry and the staff and figured out what to do instead in advance.


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I don't recall exactly what she said.  Did they recoil?  I suspect they just stiffened a bit but didn't push her away or tell her no hugging.
> In the case I talked about in my post yesterday, the woman actually said the exact words "I'm a hugger" after I told her I didn't want a hug from her.  Really?  In this day and age of Covid, etc.?
> But Meegain using this to imply Kate and William are cold people is disgusting.



I think she just couldn't believe she (so, so sweet, so, so friendly and so so (narc)-charming) couldn't have them eating out of her hand the minute they met her. 

I don't know if anyone has mistakenly tasted a saccharine tablet by mistake(?)- it's meant to be sweet, but tastes _disgustingly_ bitter. One just can't get the shock awfulness and the hideous taste out your mouth - and mind. That's narc-poison. Fake sweetness is worse than acid.


----------



## Toby93

Wow....is this what they were getting at with all that colonialism footage?  Now they have the paid mouthpiece pushing her agenda...


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> Regarding the mocking curtsy, its already been mentioned that if MM had married into the Japanese royal family and performed a mocking reenactment of their tradition and custom of bowing, she'd likely have been canceled.  Few would tolerate that, I think. So, I don't blame the reaction at all from the UK press and people. These are their social customs and conventions and, if she didn't like curtsying, then she should have discussed this with Harry and the staff and figured out what to do instead in advance.


She has also mentioned a few times that it was an unannounced visit with HMTQ, which I find really hard to believe.  Wouldn't Harry know the protocol and have a private visit with the Queen if it was the first time meeting her?  Something doesn't ring true.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Suncatcher said:


> I have not watched the show but I have seen the articles about her mocking the curtsey and comparing it to medieval times dinner and tournament. This to me is beyond the pale.  How dare she mock another country’s traditions, customs and its institutions? And after she had received the curtseys of others.  She is complete bottom feeding trash, vulgar, a nasty piece of sh*t and so mean and petty.  I am so repulsed by her lack of class.  She is deplorable.  What an ugly person inside and out.



Two things stuck out at me during a clip of this scene. She states, “let me put it in terms that American’s can relate to.”

1) Look, girl. I grew up in So Cal. I am an American just like you. Same age range as you. I have a brain and watched the news. I also earned my degree from a top university, like you. I wouldn’t need context to know how to curtsy to a queen, even though I’m not in the British Royal Family. It’s called “googling it” - and yes, you know how, because I’m sure you did that for most of your second rate career - you narc.

2) Girl keeps saying she grew up poor, and she got to go to Medieval Times???? I grew up lower middle class which became even worse in high school and university due to the recession. Let me tell you, my parents couldn’t even take me then when I wanted to go in the 80s, you think Americans can take a normal family of 4 with inflation now?!?!

Sorry, everyone. I’ve just had too much of her lies. 

Hearing her complain from a rented Montecito Manse, makes me want throw a puppy out a 2nd story window.

Just kidding, I’m not TW, but it’s sad as an average American, I can comprehend how to curtsy to a queen more than what went on at Medieval Times.

*No Cornish games hens were harmed in this rant*


----------



## Mrs.Z

Toby93 said:


> She has also mentioned a few times that it was an unannounced visit with HMTQ, which I find really hard to believe.  Wouldn't Harry know the protocol and have a private visit with the Queen if it was the first time meeting her?  Something doesn't ring true.


I believe the story was that H&M were headed to Royal Lodge to have lunch with Fergie and Eugenie and the Queen was there, thus, the surprise meeting.  Apparently, Fergie and Eugenie thought M’s curtsy was well done and said so…..does that sound truthful?  In front of the Queen?


----------



## Pessie

youngster said:


> Regarding the mocking curtsy, its already been mentioned that if MM had married into the Japanese royal family and performed a mocking reenactment of their tradition and custom of bowing, she'd likely have been canceled.  Few would tolerate that, I think. So, I don't blame the reaction at all from the UK press and people. These are their social customs and conventions and, if she didn't like curtsying, then she should have discussed this with Harry and the staff and figured out what to do instead in advance.


If she tried it in the UAE she’d be in jail.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

charlottawill said:


> I don't know. I believe he's treating them like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Let it run its course and then take appropriate action to avoid a repeat.


This! But it feels better to diss Charles though there isn't much he can do. But now that Parliament is finally amending the Titles Deprivation Act 1917 which is in 2nd reading it should enable Charles to remove all their titles and I'm so hoping it will include princely titles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> This may have been mentioned here already but I’ve been offline a lot and trying to catch up has been a struggle
> 
> RE: Her big dumb curtsy when meeting TQ.
> 
> As an American, why did she need to curtsy? I thought Americans didn’t have to do that when meeting her? So why make the big, grand, patronizing scene?



I think I would do it if meeting my bf's grandmother out of respect...but also, we're talking about the woman who converted to his religion before the wedding even though she didn't have to, it was never brought up to her and I honestly don't believe she suddently felt Jesus's calling.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I personally don't think Zed knows how to be self deprecating. *In my experience, when narcs pretend to be self deprecating, they are fishing for others to assure them that they are wonderful and it's the other party who is being foolish.*



This.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I don't recall exactly what she said.  Did they recoil?  I suspect they just stiffened a bit but didn't push her away or tell her no hugging.
> In the case I talked about in my post yesterday, *the woman actually said the exact words "I'm a hugger" after I told her I didn't want a hug* from her.  Really?  In this day and age of Covid, etc.?
> But Meegain using this to imply Kate and William are cold people is disgusting.



Cool. Go hug someone else then. Why are somepeople so intrusive?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> According to various sources, in the 3-part mockumentary, Zed claims that Sparry had "an extensive list" for qualities he wanted in a woman.



He did? And he picked that one? Unless the extensive list was limited to a certain kind of talents.



xincinsin said:


> And if all that is true, then Sparry's “Let’s not go there.” means he doesn't want to admit that they were playing Pretty Woman, and Zed was daring him to admit it because she knew he would never do so. If she was manipulating him this way, he would definitely have been deceived by all her sob stories of almost being an orphan, raised in impoverished circumstances, becoming Hollywood star and renowned humanitarian.



That's...interesting.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Even if it’s true about the filming dates, it’s not like the Queen’s death was a surprise to anyone, she had been going downhill since her husband died.



Right. Seeing her sitting at the funeral on her own was the very first time I looked at her and thought "OMG, she's old."


----------



## Jayne1

Coconuts40 said:


> It's all about perspective I guess.   I lived in downtown Toronto my whole life and I am quite a walker.  I don't think the distance is questionable at all.  Some of the best flower shops are along Avenue road, I always detour there to pick up my flowers.
> I am not a fan of MM at all but honestly we question MM for her fabricated sensational comments  but I find yours is just the same.  She is not far from the Annex and who stays within their neighborhood to run all errands?  Pap walk, perhaps?  But you are giving readers who don't live in Toronto the suggestion she has no business being where she was.  Not true at all .   But again perspective I guess.


I’m quite the walker too. My original point was she just happened to walk down a quiet side street where the paps just happened to be waiting, where she greeted them with a huge smile.


----------



## Abba13

bellecate said:


> Try this link.
> 
> 
> https://videos.dailymail.co.uk/preview/mol/2018/06/14/2990833545489039646/636x382_MP4_2990833545489039646.mp4


I'm NOT a Markle fan but it appears to me....looking at the video...the the Queen told Markle to go first.  Probably making it easier for the Queen to follow, she wouldn't have to scoot across making room for the Queen.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> I think she just couldn't believe she (so, so sweet, so, so friendly and so so (narc)-charming) couldn't have them eating out of her hand the minute they met her.
> 
> I don't know if anyone has mistakenly tasted a saccharine tablet by mistake(?)- it's meant to be sweet, but tastes _disgustingly_ bitter. One just can't get the shock awfulness and the hideous taste out your mouth - and mind. That's narc-poison. Fake sweetness is worse than acid.


The more I think about this first visit and knowing all we know now about MeMeMe’s narcissism, the message being sent starting at the front door was FU. I’m in charge here.

We have read more than once  she considers her feet ugly and demands they not be phographed, or, if so, photoshopped. So, she chooses to put them on full display for Catherine and William. Literally, “I don’t need to bother to put my best foot forward for you.”

She is not some naive hick who doesn’t know what it means to dress for the occasion. She is, at that point, a 40ish professional woman. Casual dress for a first meeting meal could have been linen pants, silky top, flats or at least sandals. Instead, she chose, very specifically I believe, torn jeans.   Doing it HER way, ”I don’t care who you are, I’ll show you, I do things MY way. Don’t like it, too bad. I Do What I Want and Harry Adores Me, get used to it.”

The fact she tells this story and emphasizes her outfit , emphasizes her choices were deliberate.

As to the hug, narcissistic aggression. Welcome to the future.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Still on Episode 1. I haven't looked at any comments if you've quoted me on my last two posts on Episode 1.

1) The Diana picture that the baby (presumably Archie) was looking at and the adult (presumably Z-list) asked "Who's that?"... I find it odd that out of all pictures that they could have put up in a home, they chose a posed photograph of Diana in a ball gown and tiara. 

I thought they didn't like how everything about the BRF is so cold and rigid yet they have a "formal" photograph hung on their wall as though they were in a palace. 

You mean to say Harry don't have a casual family style photo of Diana????


2) Prince Philip was walking with the boys behind Diana's coffin, though I'm pretty sure given Prince Philip's position as QEII's husband and he's way more senior than Diana, he didn't need to do that but he still did. He did it probably because of his love for his grandkids. For that, Harry is 100% a POS for how he acted and treated Prince Philip when he was dying. That MOFO!


3) They call each other H and M. Their names aren't that long, two syllables each. Is it that hard to say Harry or Meghan? I would have understood if they had really long Thai names with more than 4 syllables!


Just finished Episode 1. Won't be watching Episode 2 till much later because I'm headed to NM to shop


----------



## youngster

Based on the issues she seemed to have with protocol, I always wondered why Harry didn't discuss with her that there are a few things you are going to need to know:
1. The national anthem.
2. How to curtsy.
3. Who to curtsy to.
4. When (and who) you walk behind and in what circumstances.
5. When the Queen makes a suggestion, that's actually an order. 

That Harry didn't, says a lot about Harry.  Who brings their girlfriend to meet the family, the BRF, and doesn't tell her what to expect and doesn't help her prepare in advance?  Is he really that self-absorbed and clueless?  Yes, I guess so.

That she didn't ask questions and google protocol herself, also says a lot about her.  We all know that she was offered help numerous times and turned down help from people like Sophie Wessex and one of the Queen's most trusted LIW.  She knew they were leaving, there was no reason for her to learn these things, and then she could also say no one helped her and she was completely adrift over the most basic things, like the national anthem and how to curtsy.


----------



## Jayne1

EverSoElusive said:


> 1) The Diana picture that the baby (presumably Archie) was looking at and the adult (presumably Z-list) asked "Who's that?"... I find it odd that out of all pictures that they could have put up in a home, they chose a posed photograph of Diana in a ball gown and tiara.
> 
> I thought they didn't like how everything about the BRF is so cold and rigid yet they have a "formal" photograph hung on their wall as though they were in a palace.
> 
> You mean to say Harry don't have a casual family style photo of Diana????


Yes, now that you mention it, you'd think a warm family shot (never before seen online because it was a personal photograph) might be on a table, nicely framed.  Not a photo from a magazine cover hanging on the wall. Good point!


----------



## Jayne1

I thought the BLG was quite funny today.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> Based on the issues she seemed to have with protocol, I always wondered why Harry didn't discuss with her that there are a few things you are going to need to know:
> 1. The national anthem.
> 2. How to curtsy.
> 3. Who to curtsy to.
> 4. When (and who) you walk behind and in what circumstances.
> 5. When the Queen makes a suggestion, that's actually an order.
> 
> That Harry didn't, says a lot about Harry.  Who brings their girlfriend to meet the family, the BRF, and doesn't tell her what to expect and doesn't help her prepare in advance?  Is he really that self-absorbed and clueless?  Yes, I guess so.
> 
> That she didn't ask questions and google protocol herself, also says a lot about her.  We all know that she was offered help numerous times and turned down help from people like Sophie Wessex and one of the Queen's most trusted LIW.  She knew they were leaving, there was no reason for her to learn these things, and then she could also say no one helped her and she was completely adrift over the most basic things, like the national anthem and how to curtsy.



I think it also speaks heaps to her hypocrisy, bravado and rudeness to forward an agenda on colonialism every time she opens her mouth, but insensitivity stomps through and past any apparent display of courtesy to the British on British soil, and whose titles she's happy to stuff down her knickers


----------



## Abba13

csshopper said:


> The more I think about this first visit and knowing all we know now about MeMeMe’s narcissism, the message being sent starting at the front door was FU. I’m in charge here.
> 
> We have read more than once  she considers her feet ugly and demands they not be phographed, or, if so, photoshopped. So, she chooses to put them on full display for Catherine and William. Literally, “I don’t need to bother to put my best foot forward for you.”
> 
> She is not some naive hick who doesn’t know what it means to dress for the occasion. She is, at that point, a 40ish professional woman. Casual dress for a first meeting meal could have been linen pants, silky top, flats or at least sandals. Instead, she chose, very specifically I believe, torn jeans.   Doing it HER way, ”I don’t care who you are, I’ll show you, I do things MY way. Don’t like it, too bad. I Do What I Want and Harry Adores Me, get used to it.”
> 
> The fact she tells this story and emphasizes her outfit , emphasizes her choices were deliberate.
> 
> As to the hug, narcissistic aggression. Welcome to the future.


Ahhhhhhh.....ok.....yes, I get it now and agree. 

I gave her a pass on the jeans cause they are the style of so many.  A casual dinner at home in comfy clothes is the norm here in Calif. where many of us do remove our shoes Especially when there are little ones who play on the floor.  However, emphasizing her choices does show deliberation.  'I'll show Them they won't change ME'....attitude?  Why?  What harm results respecting other traditions?  The Queen did it all the time....we know her and love her more for her kindness.

It's really too bad this couple went down this road.  I can understand Harry's fears for the women in his life.  She knows his fears.  Seems to me she's played on those fears to take him away from his family and back to the life SHE wants.  Now she has to 'pretend' it's not Her fault but the fault of The Royal Family and Great Britain. 

We all know women/men who have done this on much smaller scales, of course.  Eventually, the spouse who has been played realizes then resents they fell for it.....never ends well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles "Harry & Meghan: After Brexit Comes the Self-Dismantling".


----------



## Lodpah

To the Brits here, your customs are to be respected. Just because she is American does not give her the right to mock the Queen and the British custom and pass it away as her trying to be making fun of herself. She’s held to a higher standard than most. She’s married into the monarchy. She should have just told the story, no need to be dramatic and make fun of it. People trying to give her a pass about it need to really understand that when they do that, they’re mocking a whole country with traditions and customs.

It’s really offensive. It’s like going to another country and coming back to the US and making fun of the host’s country where they just visited. 

The hugger thing, yeah, she’s a hugger, with a knife in her hand in the back.


----------



## Suncatcher

papertiger said:


> I think it also speaks heaps to her hypocrisy, bravado and rudeness to forward an agenda on colonialism every time she opens her mouth, but insensitivity stomps through and past any apparent display of courtesy to the British on British soil, and whose titles she's happy to stuff down her knickers


This. It is definitely not okay to be insensitive to other countries but it is okay to be insensitive to British culture? While cloaking yourself in a title of a country towards whom you have zero respect? And demanding that people not look you in the eye. She is a see you next Tuesday.

Prior to meeting my in-laws for the first time I asked my then fiancé if there was anything I needed to know. And he did the same for me. It is not unusual to want to learn about and respect the family traditions of others in such a situation. By her showing up in ripped jeans and bare feet on her first visit she was signalling “I don’t care if you are royalty”. She was also signalling zero respect for her new family to be, royal or not, and by extension, how low class she is. I could not imagine showing up to meet my in laws this way for the first time.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like CNN might have joined the party. There is hope! It's a long article, enjoy!

_Indeed, what we learn from “Harry & Meghan” is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look. But, well, that’s just not how celebrity works.

Which is just one reason “Harry & Meghan” is a royal disappointment. The couple quit the family because they didn’t want the attention. But, very clearly, what they didn’t want was the negative attention, or any criticism whatsoever — a very primitive (and, ironically, very royal) attitude. In life — in real life — there is no good without the bad. The production, then, is an effort not to be revealing in an honest and genuine way, to reveal “the full truth” that “no one knows” — as Harry says in the film’s opening few minutes — but to drum up sympathy for themselves. Indeed, when asked why she wanted to make this documentary, Meghan answers, “When you feel like people haven’t gotten any sense of who you are for so long, it’s really nice to just be able to have the opportunity to let people have a bit more of a glimpse into what’s happened and also who we are.”

*But who’s to say that people haven’t gotten a glimpse of who they are? What makes their version — a heavily produced, edited and controlled version — more honest than any version of their lives that’s come before?*_









						Opinion: Why 'Harry & Meghan' is a royal disappointment | CNN
					

What we learn from 'Harry & Meghan' is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look, writes Peggy Drexler. The fatal flaw for the couple and their series is in thinking they can...




					www.cnn.com


----------



## charlottawill

EverSoElusive said:


> You mean to say Harry don't have a casual family style photo of Diana????


Like one of these right? Nah, gotta train them from an early age that they are royalty.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Tomorrow's reading list.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sharont2305 said:


> It makes that obviously heavily practiced curtsey she did to the Queen lying in state look even more ridiculous than we thought at the time.


Here I thought she bent that low because she was really really flexing her foot so the logo on the sole her merching shoe would be visible.


----------



## Lodpah

It’s Christmas time, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa season. People are generally feeling more compassion and giving and kind plus so much tragedy going on in the world and these two self/serving pity party and victim-hood does not resonate well, as a whole, with people. I read recently that MM net worth is now 60 million on her alone, so yeah, I really don’t know what she has to complain about. She’s an actress and she knows the celebrity life. She could have said no to Harry and walked away. She knew how Diana was treated by the press. 

Sorry but not sorry.


----------



## gracekelly

Abba13 said:


> I'm NOT a Markle fan but it appears to me....looking at the video...the the Queen told Markle to go first.  Probably making it easier for the Queen to follow, she wouldn't have to scoot across making room for the Queen.


That is what I thought at the time because TQ saw she was flustered and/or confused.


----------



## gracekelly

Jayne1 said:


> I’m quite the walker too. My original point was she just happened to walk down a quiet side street where the paps just happened to be waiting, where she greeted them with a huge smile



Everything she does is planned.  There is not a pap shot that she didn't know was going to happen.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Second slide was just his bio, so went for the safe option of a screenshot.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Second slide was just his bio, so went for the safe option of a screenshot.
> 
> View attachment 5668809


I never read that she was flown to yacht before.  How much truth is there to that statement?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So if they "met on Instagram" as per their newest story - did she just confirm her stupid question of "Is he kind?" to the mysterious  friend of his who set them up which I always supposed was a lie was...a lie?


----------



## Gal4Dior

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So if they "met on Instagram" as per their newest story - did she just confirm her stupid question of "Is he kind?" to the mysterious  friend of his who set them up which I always supposed was a lie was...a lie?



Well, perhaps because if it was a “friend/client” of Marcus Anderson who was interested in her as one of the roster of his “girls”, she wouldn’t need to ask, “but is he rich?.” Lol


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> Here I thought she bent that low because she was really really flexing her foot so the logo on the sole her merching shoe would be visible.


It was a “twofer”. Disrespectfully mocking with merching for emphasis to further insult the Monarchy.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Lodpah said:


> It’s Christmas time, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa season. People are generally feeling more compassion and giving and kind plus so much tragedy going on in the world and these two self/serving pity party and victim-hood does not resonate well, as a whole, with people. I read recently that MM net worth is now 60 million on her alone, so yeah, I really don’t know what she has to complain about. She’s an actress and she knows the celebrity life. She could have said no to Harry and walked away. She knew how Diana was treated by the press.
> 
> Sorry but not sorry.



Her showing up in that ghastly ill-fitting “mummy dress” by Nicolas Ghesquière, which was supposedly bespoke, for a purchased award after getting off a private jet, would probably not elicit much sympathy from the average Brit, or American.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

kipp said:


> Plus weren't there the reports of her pretending to be a Princess when she was young and demanding people to curtsy to her?





gracekelly said:


> Yes at a friend’s birthday party!


The clip doesn't seem available now. As I recall, ZedZed attended her BFF's birthday party. At some point she starts pretending she's the queen, ordering the others kids to do her bidding while calling them her subjects.


----------



## Katel

BlueCherry said:


> Here is @Sharont2305 original response to you. It’s all very well popping into a contentious thread you’re not emotionally invested in … etc etc. But you are obsessed with facts. Why not just discuss those facts instead of skirting around them.
> 
> It’s a fact that Meghan has punished her Father in the most severe manner for a crime she and Harry have committed repeatedly. It’s a fact that Harry said people would do anything for money but does it himself.
> 
> I am emotionally invested. I detest elder abuse, the lies, hypocrisy and my own patriotism can be set aside. What those two did to the Queen and Prince Philip on their deathbeds, be it petulance, greed, vengeance or whatever else they’re accused of, is singularly the most cruel and repulsive human behaviour I have ever witnessed.
> 
> View attachment 5668518



 Say it again! (Disclaimer: My following comment is not pointed at any one poster, it’s a general observation. Feel free to disagree, we still have that option, I think?)
I think people who support them may sometimes forget (or either don’t know or believe) that MeGain is mentally ill (would people pamper Ted Bundy or another dangerous sociopath?) and that Harry is dim and entitled and mentally damaged.
If they even “acted” sane (!), if they respected others, stayed in their own lane, were fair and rational and kind and they weren’t constantly trying to hurt others (their own families!) or tacky grab the limelight or constantly lie (and get caught), I think more people would have more sympathy for them. I would.



Pessie said:


> I think a means of limiting all non working royals in the use of their titles will be brought about, in such a way that Harry can’t whine about being singled out, and he can’t whine about being deprived of anything.  I think it’ll be under the new slimline monarchy umbrella.  Just my opinion.  We’ll see.  But I think making an example of H (despite him thoroughly deserving it) would unleash a cacophony of complaints from montecito and nobody wants that nonsense.


As has been mentioned, my guess is things may ramp up (title-wise) after KC3’s coronation. The RF do play the long game. Retribution is waiting.


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> The clip doesn't seem available now. As I recall, ZedZed attended her BFF's birthday party. At some point she starts pretending she's the queen, ordering the others kids to do her bidding while calling them her subjects.



Within this


----------



## Molly0

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't hug her either, she'd have to deal and get over it. Obviously W&K saw through her love-bomb BS.
> 
> That she makes something of it so long after just shows what a up-tight, pedantic-narc lunatic she is.
> 
> Let it go woman, you're supposed to be from casual Cali. Take your (merched) shoes off, pull-on your ripped (merched) blue jeans - chill


Don’t know what M’s diagnosis is but I do know that hugging  a narc is like hugging a corpse.  Intelligent people just don’t go there.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Maggie Muggins said:


> The clip doesn't seem available now. As I recall, ZedZed attended her BFF's birthday party. At some point she starts pretending she's the queen, ordering the others kids to do her bidding while calling them her subjects.


Let's see if this link works.
I can't seem to get it on here. If you copy and paste this on a search engine it will come up. The Daily Mail posted it.
Edited to add 'it worked!'










						Meghan Markle video from 1990 shows her dressed as a Queen
					

EXCLUSIVE: It would take another 26 years for her to fall in love with her real-life prince but these images show a young Meghan Markle playing the fictional ‘Queen’ of a royal household.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> The clip doesn't seem available now. As I recall, ZedZed attended her BFF's birthday party. At some point she starts pretending she's the queen, ordering the others kids to do her bidding while calling them her subjects.


If she didn't know anything about Royalty, how did she know they were called subjects?


----------



## bellecate

papertiger said:


> Within this



You beat me to it,    great minds.....


----------



## Katel

Pessie said:


> I watched her.  I’m British and I was shocked and very offended by it.  Couldn’t believe it, frankly.  There is absolutely no doubt she was mocking the Queen and the UK.  “Medieval times”?  A pastiche of British history? Get away.
> 
> The death of the Queen is still fresh here.  And I fail to see why you persistently brush off the offence caused as just Meghan having some fun, when she has caused deep offence in the UK.  For someone not invested you keep at it.



**Harry** looked shocked and offended - by TW! The one glimmer of hope from Harry in yonks!


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So if they "met on Instagram" as per their newest story - did she just confirm her stupid question of "Is he kind?" to the mysterious  friend of his who set them up which I always supposed was a lie was...a lie?


They obviously don't want the true story to get out there so they think that if they flood the media with all the fake ones, people will just be confused and forget about it.  I'm sticking with MA set them up.  He advised her how to act to get him to like her and she did it.  It reminds me of that scene in Coming to America where the Prince's financee was brought up to like whatever he liked.









						Eddie Murphy Coming To America GIF - Eddie Murphy Coming To America Whatever You Like - Discover & Share GIFs
					

Click to view the GIF




					tenor.com


----------



## Lodpah

Amazing the backlash against them across all media. There are still quite a bit of people who worship and support them but that’s fair as people all have different take on things but other than the bots and people still in awe of them the majority see through their scam.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> *Amazing the backlash against them across all media. *There are still quite a bit of people who worship and support them but that’s fair as people all have different take on things but other than the bots and people still in awe of them the majority see through their scam.


It may be the result of losing the Sachs screen protection.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


> Wow....is this what they were getting at with all that colonialism footage?  Now they have the paid mouthpiece pushing her agenda...



Odd scobie doesn’t think these things aren’t already being studied. Do all the phds and doctorates and study programmes and tv shows and media projects into British colonial history not count as investigation?

For me, I question the objectivity of such a project and whether any academics involved would be ‘advised’ on suitable conclusions because after all a royal isn’t going to want his entire right to rule challenged.

I think it’s better if universities receive the money and then the academics and the students investigate.

To me a wider point is that we have all this excellent research and very little reaches the general public.   Could the standards of history in general interest broadcasting and JOURNALISM be improved one wonders…..  
Could we, perhaps, not have a prestige, general interest, ex-royal documentary for majority Western audiences which pitches its knowledge level at:-
‘You need to know there was this thing called slavery which the Brits did to black people. Don’t worry! Here’s some pictures of Harry on a bike while you try and get your tiny mind around this new concept’


----------



## 880

Katel said:


> if they respected others, stayed in their own lane, were fair and rational and kind and they weren’t constantly trying to hurt others (their own families!) or tacky grab the limelight or constantly lie (and get caught), I think more people would have more sympathy for them. I would


Agree with above. If they simply wanted a lower profile life away from the UK, and if they would simply shut up and did whatever they thought of as universal service, I would be fine with that. One of the issues is trying to monetize the title


----------



## oldbag

gracekelly said:


> I never read that she was flown to yacht before.  How much truth is there to that statement?


So were those blood diamond earrings a sort of thank you? A remembrance of things past? Hmmm!


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It may be the result of losing the Sachs screen protection.


Right and Sachs isn't sending out the troops to say nice things about them as they did in the past.


jelliedfeels said:


> Odd scobie doesn’t think these things aren’t already being studied. Do all the phds and doctorates and study programmes and tv shows and media projects into British colonial history not count as investigation?
> 
> For me, I question the objectivity of such a project and whether any academics involved would be ‘advised’ on suitable conclusions because after all a royal isn’t going to want his entire right to rule challenged.
> 
> I think it’s better if universities receive the money and then the academics and the students investigate.
> 
> To me a wider point is that we have all this excellent research and very little reaches the general public.   Could the standards of history in general interest broadcasting and JOURNALISM be improved one wonders…..
> Could we, perhaps, not have a prestige, general interest, ex-royal documentary for majority Western audiences which pitches its knowledge level at:-
> ‘You need to know there was this thing called slavery which the Brits did to black people. Don’t worry! Here’s some pictures of Harry on a bike while you try and get your tiny mind around this new concept’


The strategy, with Omit as the mouthpiece is to slur the Monarchy going back to the year one.  This is Harry insulting all his ancestors and judging by today's standards.  All of this has been well researched as you point out.  Do these two think they are social justice warriors?  Maybe they do and they discussed it whilst on a private plane going back to their home with 16 bathrooms. Or wherever the hell they live.  They can't even be straight about that.


----------



## Chanbal

The intriguing messages from BarkJack…


----------



## Chanbal

Has uncle Elton been markled? Well, he still has his jet.


----------



## BittyMonkey

Chanbal said:


> Has uncle Elton been markled? Well, he still has his jet.



I believe ol’ Elt has just been accused of sexual harassment of a bodyguard.


----------



## Chanbal

BittyMonkey said:


> I believe ol’ Elt has just been accused of sexual harassment of a bodyguard.


Yep, there is a DM article about this a few posts earlier. DM wouldn't miss a story about the Harkles' big sponsor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> The intriguing messages from BarkJack…



I think a major reason why she would be blacklisted is that she is too difficult to work with.  The podcast woman didn't like being thrown to the curb. The NF people are not happy with the lies they were forced to sign off on.  She isn't important enough to warrant the type of power she wants on a project.  They don't need her for anything.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right. Seeing her sitting at the funeral on her own was the very first time I looked at her and thought "OMG, she's old."


I thought you meant Meg for a minute then so I thought both: ‘you aren’t wrong’ and ‘what a poignant tone for old claw’ and finally ‘m really must have forgotten the portrait in the attic when she moved to America’


papertiger said:


> I think she just couldn't believe she (so, so sweet, so, so friendly and so so (narc)-charming) couldn't have them eating out of her hand the minute they met her.
> 
> I don't know if anyone has mistakenly tasted a saccharine tablet by mistake(?)- it's meant to be sweet, but tastes _disgustingly_ bitter. One just can't get the shock awfulness and the hideous taste out your mouth - and mind. That's narc-poison. Fake sweetness is worse than acid.


I remember seeing a dachshund steal a few Splendas while on a lap and looked like even she regretted it. 

At first I can see a lot of them being pleased if they heard that she was sweet and a _little_ _simple_ as obviously H isn’t going to be a *stimulating* companion for a brainy woman. 

Evidently claw’s terrible acting was terrible and I’m now envisioning a mash up of  Tropic thunder’s ‘simple jack_’_ with flashes of ‘single white female’. 







csshopper said:


> The more I think about this first visit and knowing all we know now about MeMeMe’s narcissism, the message being sent starting at the front door was FU. I’m in charge here.
> 
> We have read more than once  she considers her feet ugly and demands they not be phographed, or, if so, photoshopped. So, she chooses to put them on full display for Catherine and William. Literally, “I don’t need to bother to put my best foot forward for you.”
> 
> She is not some naive hick who doesn’t know what it means to dress for the occasion. She is, at that point, a 40ish professional woman. Casual dress for a first meeting meal could have been linen pants, silky top, flats or at least sandals. Instead, she chose, very specifically I believe, torn jeans.   Doing it HER way, ”I don’t care who you are, I’ll show you, I do things MY way. Don’t like it, too bad. I Do What I Want and Harry Adores Me, get used to it.”
> 
> The fact she tells this story and emphasizes her outfit , emphasizes her choices were deliberate.
> 
> As to the hug, narcissistic aggression. Welcome to the future.


Excellent points. 

Further to this, we know this is the same person who demanded a couture _engagement_ gown and wedding dress. 

And now she likes to wear designer to hand out *basic* *food* to children in deprived schools so we all know the ‘I don’t care about clothes- I’m a jeans girl’ thing is BS but H is a moron so he didn’t notice


----------



## Jayne1

Gal4Dior said:


> Well, perhaps because if it was a “friend/client” of Marcus Anderson who was interested in her as one of the roster of his “girls”, she wouldn’t need to ask, “but is he rich?.” Lol


Speaking of which, has Marcus Anderson been mentioned in these three episodes?


----------



## rose60610

A1aGypsy said:


> *This isn’t The Viva Las Vegas Wedding Chapel*, it is a dynasty that have held together power for centuries.



  What a great comment!


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


> Yep, there is a DM article about this a few posts earlier. DM wouldn't miss a story about the Harkles' big sponsor.


It was interesting to learn he and Meghan share the same attorney. Even Ms BigBucks, Jenny Afia, couldn’t bury the sordid  details of the complaint and fact Elton paid the accuser off to settle. Gross and if true, uncle Elton is a dirty old man.


----------



## pomeline

It annoys me the Klingons of Sussex have fans who now think William is a bad dancer and his wedding was boring and "like a funeral". Personally I'm more used to solemn wedding ceremonies and sophisticated receptions but regardless, were these people at W&K's wedding after-party? From what I've heard, they turned a palace into a disco with mirror balls etc. How do they know what kind of a dancer William or Kate is? The Klingons completely erased their presence from their wedding.

Harry and Meghan share unseen photos from their 2018 wedding in NEW footage from Netflix series... but there are NO pictures of William and Kate in 'apparent snub'


----------



## A1aGypsy

pomeline said:


> It annoys me the Klingons of Sussex have fans who now think William is a bad dancer and his wedding was boring and "like a funeral". Personally I'm more used to solemn wedding ceremonies and sophisticated receptions but regardless, were these people at W&K's wedding after-party? From what I've heard, they turned a palace into a disco with mirror balls etc. How do they know what kind of a dancer William or Kate is? The Klingons completely erased their presence from their wedding.
> 
> Harry and Meghan share unseen photos from their 2018 wedding in NEW footage from Netflix series... but there are NO pictures of William and Kate in 'apparent snub'



Well, in fairness, there was the footage of that unfortunate ski trip that certain doesn’t suggest that William has much skill when it comes to dancing. But even if there was a difference in the weddings, that’s to be expected I would think. The future king can’t have a kegger after party.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

papertiger said:


> I wouldn't bother, it's like having to break it to someone there's no Santa


There's no Santa???


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Speaking of which, has Marcus Anderson been mentioned in these three episodes?


1. He is the 5th person in the Halloween photos with Eugenie and Jack
2. Not mentioned by name, but he surely was the Soho person mentioned in how the Harkles met via Instagram. H picked MM out of IG photos on the Soho person’s phone. This was the photo of MM filtered to be a beagle.
Apologies if, I did not get all the delightful nuances of that story  ex H had a list of what he was looking for…
PS not mentioned by name, I think


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I think she just couldn't believe she (so, so sweet, so, so friendly and so so (narc)-charming) couldn't have them eating out of her hand the minute they met her.



Bingo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I believe the story was that H&M were headed to Royal Lodge to have lunch with Fergie and Eugenie and the Queen was there, thus, the surprise meeting.  A*pparently, Fergie and Eugenie thought M’s curtsy was well done and said so…..does that sound truthful?  In front of the Queen?*



Did they also feed her a dog biscuit because she did so well?


----------



## rose60610

Suncatcher said:


> I have not watched the show but I have seen the articles about her mocking the curtsey and *comparing it to medieval times dinner and tournament.*



And this is the same person who tells of her "non-privilege" at having to eat at Sizzler's as a teenager.


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> I think she just couldn't believe she (so, so sweet, so, so friendly and so so (narc)-charming) couldn't have them eating out of her hand the minute they met her.
> 
> I don't know if anyone has mistakenly tasted a saccharine tablet by mistake(?)- it's meant to be sweet, but tastes _disgustingly_ bitter. One just can't get the shock awfulness and the hideous taste out your mouth - and mind. That's narc-poison. Fake sweetness is worse than acid.


On MM meeting W&K, I am dying to know how early this was in the courtship. MM was staying/living at KP, almost from day 1. You might think W&K were asked to check out the relationship.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EverSoElusive said:


> 2) Prince Philip was walking with the boys behind Diana's coffin, though I'm pretty sure given Prince Philip's position as QEII's husband and he's way more senior than Diana, he didn't need to do that but he still did. He did it probably because of his love for his grandkids. For that, Harry is 100% a POS for how he acted and treated Prince Philip when he was dying. That MOFO!



I think it was reported that initially Harry didn't want to do it, so Philip said "I'll walk with you." Philip is also said to have fought nail and tooth to make the whole funeral proceedings as comfortable for the boys as possible.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> That Harry didn't, says a lot about Harry.  Who brings their girlfriend to meet the family, the BRF, and doesn't tell her what to expect and doesn't help her prepare in advance?  Is he really that self-absorbed and clueless?  Yes, I guess so.



The thing is, she had access to his TEAM very early on in the relationship. High ranking courtiers tried to guide her. She just deliberately chose to be ignorant.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gelbergirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The thing is, she had access to his TEAM very early on in the relationship. High ranking courtiers tried to guide her. She just deliberately chose to be ignorant.



Exactly. She did that Vaniety Fair cover, the one that said "wild about Harry", it came to the newsstand quite quickly as I recall. No way did she get that cover on-her-own.  It was a well-orchestrated cover piece and I'm sure by a Palace influenced agency.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Suncatcher said:


> This. It is definitely not okay to be insensitive to other countries but it is okay to be insensitive to British culture? While cloaking yourself in a title of a country towards whom you have zero respect? And demanding that people not look you in the eye. She is a see you next Tuesday.



That seems to be a theme nowadays. I spend a lot of time reading food articles. It seems to be totally ok when a young black chef claims white people cannot cook her food and won't get her recipes if she can help it because they are white and just don't understand (as published in a very well-known US food magazine. I rolled my eyes because I'm sure the specific dish she couldn't stop flattering herself for is probably not all that earthshattering). Can you imagine the uproar had a white chef said his food is not for POC?

People are up in arms (rightfully so) if, say, Indian food is mocked because of its fragrant spices. But it's completely tolerated to say German food is bland and sh*tty (which annoys me even more when I can tell they are completely ignorant to the fact German cuisine is way more than saurerkraut and brats...and this coming  from someone who half of the time cooks and eats Middle Eastern or Mediterranean food).

And BTW, food is bland when it lacks salt, not because it doesn't have 15 spices at once  Even Samin Nosrat agrees!



Suncatcher said:


> Prior to meeting my in-laws for the first time I asked my then fiancé if there was anything I needed to know. And he did the same for me. It is not unusual to want to learn about and respect the family traditions of others in such a situation. By her showing up in ripped jeans and bare feet on her first visit she was signalling “I don’t care if you are royalty”. She was also signalling zero respect for her new family to be, royal or not, and by extension, how low class she is. I could not imagine showing up to meet my in laws this way for the first time.



This!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Lodpah said:


> It’s Christmas time, Hanukkah and Kwanzaa season. People are generally feeling more compassion and giving and kind plus so much tragedy going on in the world and these two self/serving pity party and victim-hood does not resonate well, as a whole, with people. I read recently that MM net worth is now 60 million on her alone, so yeah, I really don’t know what she has to complain about. She’s an actress and she knows the celebrity life. *She could have said no to Harry and walked away.* She knew how Diana was treated by the press.
> 
> Sorry but not sorry.



You don't understand, it was tRuE loVe and they are sOulMateS.


----------



## rose60610

I think she not only deliberately chose to be ignorant, she thought she could overhaul the whole BRF and saw herself as "the great modernizer". When that didn't work, she stupidly said in the Africa interview: "Not many people have asked if I'm OK", as if that was supposed to make everybody rally around her, including the Queen.  Apparently the 50 million dollar wedding, Frogmore, servants, designer wardrobes, private jet travel, etc were not enough.  She had to have MORE. Surely she thought she was meant to take global center stage. 

By the way...most comments in response to their Netflix in the NYT, of all papers, flame them. Viciously! And also flame the NYT for being a Claw sugar.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You don't understand, it was tRuE loVe and they are sOulMateS.


you laugh but a lot of people are buying that...one the the ones on The View (Sara, I think) said it was clear from the beginning that H was in love but after seeing this "documentary" she sees that the WIFE is very much in love too

edit to say I didn't see the show but I don't think I'd change my mind if I did


----------



## StylishMD

LittleStar88 said:


> Knights of Columbus is a catholic fraternal organization founded in the 1880's (they use this to sell life insurance, which is how they are still around). They have dinner dances but no balls and curtsies. I've never seen racism there but definitely sexism with it being a fraternal organization and attached to the Catholic church.
> 
> California is so far removed from the south and debutante balls that we CA natives only know what we see in movies and on TV. Do they even do those anymore?
> 
> I would imagine TW would be more familiar with quinceañera than debutante balls.


African Americans participate in Cotillions, similar to debutante balls and as far as I know still continue today
a friend of mine had her daughter go through it. 
I frankly thought ‘what an idiot’ when I saw that curtsy scene









						Black Debutante Balls: Curtsying with Pride since 1778
					

Debutante balls, or cotillions, are a centuries old tradition with roots in Europe as far back as the 1700s. The word “debutante” translates to female beginner in French, and refers to a young woman making her debut into polite society. The first of these lavish events was held by King George...




					www.messynessychic.com


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I actually don't really like Meghan...or dislike her...she literally has zero impact on my life. I admit I am fascinated by the vitriol she seems to engender.
> 
> Given all the photos of Meghan with her niece I have no reason to doubt her. Plus she's a lawyer so I think would not want to be caught lying on national (international?) television.
> 
> Critics are so quick to accuse MM of being a terrible mother (with little evidence besides poring over photos for the gotcha moments). We know neither of Samantha Markle's daughters were raised by their biological mother, no one seems to be denying that point. Yet somehow between the two Samantha has become a paragon of virtue, a victim, who must be telling the truth? That I do not understand.
> 
> And I agree with Doria. I have no sympathy for Thomas Markle. *A father who would talk to the tabloids about his child for money...nope there is no excuse for that.*


I agree with that.  What do you think of Haz's speaking to Oprah to complain about how his father has cut him off?  Or doing this "reality documentary" for a large chunk of money to throw his father and family under the bus?

Funny Doria criticizes him easily.  Where was she for most of TW's childhood?  I see her as an opportunist now.  Siding with TW since she knows where her bread is buttered.  They're all a$$holes.  I'm very happy they're not my family members!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> I never read that she was flown to yacht before.  How much truth is there to that statement?



I mean, how can we know? At this point, it's malicious gossip (though it gives me a little pause that someone would say it out loud on Twitter with a non-anonymous account. He's deleted it since, too). But there have been plenty of yachting rumours before. Also, why would we hear about someone basically being an escort? That's not usually something people would want to put on their resumees, much less so if marrying into the most infamous family on the planet.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Yes, agree. She was mocking the custom of it.  As an International Relations major, she should very well know you do not mock the social conventions or customs of other countries.


Even if she wasn't an IR major, anyone with common sense and decency wouldn't mock another culture.  Just because people are "White" doesn't mean all white people have the same customs.  The white British do not share the same customs as Scandinavians, Eastern Europeans, Canadians, etc. 
I bowed when I was in Japan even though I'm not Japanese.  I don't shake hands in India because they don't do that there.  I wore a head scarf in an Istanbul mosque because that's what is expected.  With social media now, everyone knows quite a bit about other cultures.  She's a disgusting, opportunistic witch who mocks everyone who isn't her or those who don't fawn all over her.  She truly disgusts me.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> So if they "met on Instagram" as per their newest story - did she just confirm her stupid question of "Is he kind?" to the mysterious  friend of his who set them up which I always supposed was a lie was...a lie?


Oh, that lie was so four years ago. You have to keep up with the fresh lies.


----------



## bag-mania

Katel said:


> **Harry** looked shocked and offended - by TW! The one glimmer of hope from Harry in yonks!


It would serve them right if they despise each other now but since they’ve created a business model based on their love story they have to pretend it is always hearts and flowers for them publicly.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> Exactly. She did that Vaniety Fair cover, the one that said "wild about Harry", it came to the newsstand quite quickly as I recall. No way did she get that cover on-her-own.  It was a well-orchestrated cover piece and I'm sure by a Palace influenced agency.



Only that the palace was really p*ssed off that she even mentioned Harry. The writer told Tom Bower he came for the interview being instructed to not ask about Harry, and after having lunch together our demure little Ghoul kicked off her shoes, draped herself on the couch and spilled the beans how in love they were.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> I didn’t know Ashleigh existed until today. On one hand Meghan is claiming she barely knew her half-sister, but then that means she would know Samantha’s daughter even less than that! Why would a niece she scarcely knew be invited to the wedding? Her story doesn’t ring true on any level.
> 
> The only explanation is that the people gushing over them were paid or benefitted in some other way.


Her comment that she doesn't know Samantha's middle name or birth date as "proof" she didn't grow up with her was, again, IMO, disgusting.  How self centered are you, you dumb beeyotch?  I know my cousin's names and birth dates but you couldn't be bothered to learn your own sister's?  I just can't with her.  I don't know how anyone sits in the same room with her for more than 5 minutes without feeling like she's sucked all the oxygen out of the room!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Oh, that lie was so four years ago. You have to keep up with the fresh lies.



My bad!


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.



From the looks of it, I think Haz also thought she was mocking the Royals.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> That is why she mocked TQ.  She wasn't allowed to go to Balmoral at the end.  You know Meghan.  There is always a clapback if she thinks you wronged her.


But supposedly this was filmed in August.  The Queen died in September.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> That is what I thought at the time because TQ saw she was flustered and/or confused.


And whose fault was that? She could have learned the royal drill ahead of time but chose not to. The Queen was simply being gracious to a guest. Oh to know what TQ and PP said privately to each other about her!


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> From the looks of it, I think Haz also thought she was mocking the Royals.


That was definitely a "WTF?" look.


----------



## lallybelle

Since I subscribe to Nate, this popped up. Samantha doesn't seem crazy to me.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

marietouchet said:


> 1.I could be wrong but I think there is more than one piece of legislation afoot in Parliament, about title removal, so RS said no to just one bill ?
> 2. Politicians are involved now, after first three videos
> 3. IMHO, nothing will be done until after the book, which is why RS said no
> 4. PS MY GUESS - the whole curtsy thing will be revisited. Who curtsies to whom? Theoretically, Camilla curtsies to Eugenie when Charles is not in the room. That is not about titles, but about being born royal not a commoner, but lots of Euro countries have reduced the impact/titles of their blood royals.


IMO, as Queen or Queen Consort Camilla will curtsy to no one.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> @charlottawill you have more opinions here. Very entertaining…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan (TV Series 2022) - IMDb
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan (TV Series 2022) on IMDb: Movies, TV, Celebs, and more...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.imdb.com


"a sub-mediocre bit part actress whose career was already sliding into 24 hour Christmas movie territory."


----------



## gracekelly

gelbergirl said:


> Exactly. She did that Vaniety Fair cover, the one that said "wild about Harry", it came to the newsstand quite quickly as I recall. No way did she get that cover on-her-own.  It was a well-orchestrated cover piece and I'm sure by a Palace influenced agency.


I think that Gina Nelthorpe-Cowne got that cover for her.  She didn't fire her until later.


----------



## charlottawill

From an IMDb review: 

"One day Harry will remember how happy he used to be. Until then, we will have to endure his collusion with this clearly unstable woman and their greed.

One day Harry will reflect on the fact that he was filming this when his grandfather and Grandmother were both very ill and nearing the end of their lives.

One day Harry will realise that his wife is the exact opposite of Princess Diana and that he is wasting his life trying to convince us that she is similar to her.

And one day Harry will regret the fact that he lost his true friends as well as his family because of this narcissist preying on his hurt and the fact that his mothers death damaged him so much."


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> She looks a lot like her much younger (child) self in this pic.  Kind of makes you wonder just how much makeup is needed to look the way she looks in public?


It's the skill, not the quantity. Does she have an in--house make-up artist as well as an intimate photog? Can't see Zed having the skills for a really good camera-ready face. Probably hires a professional ad-hoc, and drowns herself in spray tan on normal days.


Jayne1 said:


> I’m quite the walker too. My original point was she just happened to walk down a quiet side street where the paps just happened to be waiting, where she greeted them with a huge smile.


I wonder how her pap pals feel after being 1st Markled and 2nd recast as villains.


Abba13 said:


> I'm NOT a Markle fan but it appears to me....looking at the video...the the Queen told Markle to go first.  Probably making it easier for the Queen to follow, she wouldn't have to scoot across making room for the Queen.


There was some discussion at that point in time. The British public, as expressed in online commentary, were mystified at her ignorance and gauche behaviour. She danced back and forth a couple of times, not going in, and yet not yielding the way to TQ either, simply blocking progress. IIRC someone pointed out that the Queen always goes first, and Zed should have entered from the other side. Not having studied royal protocol for getting into a car, I didn't think much of this event till the video evidence piled up that she would barge in front of any royal.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tomorrow's reading list.



This used to be HRHfacts, right? Some idiots hounded her about the HRH in her IG name. And I say "idiots" with great conviction and authenticity.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> So if they "met on Instagram" as per their newest story - did she just confirm her stupid question of "Is he kind?" to the mysterious  friend of his who set them up which I always supposed was a lie was...a lie?


Maybe it was "Is he kind... of rich and stupid?" She gave us the edited version.


----------



## purseinsanity

EverSoElusive said:


> You guys are killing this old gal! I was caught up then came back to 60 new pages
> 
> Anyways, I just started the first episode a little bit...
> 
> 1) The vertical phone screen footages look really dumb.
> 
> 2) In multiple self-recorded phone footages, Harry don't know what day or date it was and went "Wednesday the something of March", "Friday the whatever, 17th April or something".
> *Is this boy really that lazy to even get the day or date right seeing how they chose to document themselves??? *
> 
> 
> 3) Z-list when asked why she wanted to make the mockumentary, she said "I'm not gonna say that it's comfortable but when you feel like people haven't gotten any sense of who you are for so long, it's really nice to just have the opportunity to let people have a bit more of a glimpse into what's happened and also who we are."
> *People know who they are. People see through their BS, lies and hypocrisy these days. They want to paint a fake Van Gogh.
> 
> Also, I thought they wanted privacy so why this mockumentary? I'm pretty sure they did it because they want to monetize their lies and they think it will make them famous Hollywood stars. NO! They are laughingstock. *
> 
> 
> 4) Harry said "A friend of ours actually suggested that we document ourselves through this period of time. With all the misinformation that is going on out there, especially about us and the departure, it seemed like a really sensible idea."
> *Who is this friend??? OW or GK or TP? If I had to guess probably the first two people because these people probably wanted to make me a pretty penny off of Z-list & Co. trashing the BRF. After all, the OW interview did happened though OW allegedly had most of that ****e scrubbed because it was a major fail and also put her in a horrible spotlight.*
> 
> 
> 5) WTF is this footage pose? Not like somebody recorded her spontaneously or without her knowing that she couldn't sit properly or aim the camera better?
> 
> View attachment 5668487
> 
> 
> 
> 6) What is it with her and towel in hair phone footages repeatedly?
> 
> *****
> 
> I'm not sure if I'm going to make it very far if I stop and comment so much every 10 minutes


Honestly, I suspect some of these things were filmed recently and not on "March the whatever of 2020" BS.  That's why he has no idea what to say, just like he had no idea what his kids were up to.  He doesn't spend much time with them except for filming this farce of a documentary.


----------



## purseinsanity

pomeline said:


> This is just... The bill is not going forward! PM Rishi Sunak blocked it!
> 
> Rishi Sunak intervenes to BLOCK move to strip Harry and Meghan of their royal titles - PM opposes landmark bill
> 
> So they are really going to let these two keep all the titles and continue tearing down the monarchy..? I was afraid of that. Everyone dancing to the tune of the mad pipers.
> 
> P.S. The bill was first introduced by a MP from York since they wanted Andrew to lose his dukedom.


Why does the Mayor of London have any right to block a bill from Parliament?  Am I missing something??

ETA:  Oh, read the article.  He just personally opposes it.  Hopefully not because of "racism", just because he's a POC.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


> **



Just look at that picture of her.  She's almost gleeful at her petulance.  That's not the smile of a "self deprecating person".


----------



## Toby93

Is there anyone who is connected to them who is not slimely?


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tomorrow's reading list.



Haha love it.  For once, something on CNN I can actually agree with!  I agree...Haz is not simply just a pu$$y whipped little innocent, he's just as big an a$$ as his manipulative wife.  They both deserve each other, and I won't be sad to see them go down in flames.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That seems to be a theme nowadays. I spend a lot of time reading food articles. It seems to be totally ok when a young black chef claims white people cannot cook her food and won't get her recipes if she can help it because they are white and just don't understand (as published in a very well-known US food magazine. I rolled my eyes because I'm sure the specific dish she couldn't stop flattering herself for is probably not all that earthshattering). Can you imagine the uproar had a white chef said his food is not for POC?
> 
> People are up in arms (rightfully so) if, say, Indian food is mocked because of its fragrant spices. But it's completely tolerated to say German food is bland and sh*tty (which annoys me even more when I can tell they are completely ignorant to the fact German cuisine is way more than saurerkraut and brats...and this coming  from someone who half of the time cooks and eats Middle Eastern or Mediterranean food).
> 
> And BTW, food is bland when it lacks salt, not because it doesn't have 15 spices at once  Even Samin Nosrat agrees!
> 
> 
> 
> This!


There are constant double standards, especially in the US.  I'm a POC and my DH is white, which makes my children "bi-racial".  I was aghast when a black television personality claimed "there can't be "racism against white people".  Say what??  I know many minorities who are more racist than many white people I've met.  I don't care what color someone is, they can be racist, and just because someone is white doesn't make them immune from racism.  I cut all ties when a good Asian friend of mine actually texted to me that, "All white men should be killed".  He knows my husband is white.  He works for Chanel.  It took all I had not to report him to his company.  Disgusting, vile, non white, human being.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

From Instagram


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> IMO, as Queen or Queen Consort Camilla will curtsy to no one.


Does she curtsy to Charles?  Just asking, because I know Prince Philip always walked behind QEII.  I don't know if he bowed to her as well?  I'm sure our Brit friends here know.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> She has also mentioned a few times that it was an unannounced visit with HMTQ, which I find really hard to believe.  *Wouldn't Harry know the protocol and have a private visit with the Queen if it was the first time meeting her?  Something doesn't ring true.*


Thanks, this just jogged my memory. During an interview after meeting the late Queen, the pair said they realized after arriving at the palace that ZedZed didn't know how to curtsy, but they managed to corner someone (Beatrice or Eugenie?) to teach her before seeing the Queen. They laughed as they explained how ZedZed rehearsed in the hallway before meeting the late QEII.


----------



## A1aGypsy

Maggie Muggins said:


> Thanks, this just jogged my memory. During an interview after meeting the late Queen, the pair said they realized after arriving at the palace that ZedZed didn't know how to curtsy, but they managed to corner someone (Beatrice or Eugenie?) to teach her before seeing the Queen. They laughed as they explained how ZedZed rehearsed in the hallway before meeting the late QEII.


Fergie. Allegedly Fergie raced out to help.


----------



## charlottawill

My husband and I were eating dinner and listening to some lovely Christmas jazz on Spotify, when suddenly my ears were assaulted by the voice of the Ginger Whinger in a promo for the "flopumentary" complaining about how hard it is for women who join his family. Make it stop!   So I guess Spotify and Netflix are in bed together?


----------



## pukasonqo

purseinsanity said:


> There are constant double standards, especially in the US.  I'm a POC and my DH is white, which makes my children "bi-racial".  I was aghast when a black television personality claimed "there can't be "racism against white people".  Say what??  I know many minorities who are more racist than many white people I've met.  I don't care what color someone is, they can be racist, and just because someone is white doesn't make them immune from racism.  I cut all ties when a good Asian friend of mine actually texted to me that, "All white men should be killed".  He knows my husband is white.  He works for Chanel.  It took all I had not to report him to his company.  Disgusting, vile, non white, human being.


I don’t think racism is only experience by POC, I mentioned this before nut my partner is 1/2Latvian and was called a white wog, bullied because the way his surname was spelt (and thank God he got an anglicised version of his Latvian name!)
Similar experiences told by a Swedish, Greek and Italian friends
Racism comes in all forms, sizes and colours


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Abba13 said:


> I'm NOT a Markle fan but it appears to me....looking at the video...the the Queen told Markle to go first.  Probably making it easier for the Queen to follow, she wouldn't have to scoot across making room for the Queen.


In the full video, ZedZed walks ahead of HM and tries to get into the car first and then HM backs away to let her in.


----------



## Icyjade

charlottawill said:


> From all I've heard and read most people think MM was mocking the Queen with the exaggerated curtsy.




I have not watched the garbage and I will not disgust myself by doing so. However I have seen snippets on social media and it’s disrespectful beyond belief. To film this when QE was alive and then go to the funeral and fake tear from the left eye is despicable. I already thought they are horrid people but I had no idea just how horrible they are. They have no shame.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> There are constant double standards, especially in the US.  I'm a POC and my DH is white, which makes my children "bi-racial".  I was aghast when a black television personality claimed "there can't be "racism against white people".  Say what??  I know many minorities who are more racist than many white people I've met.  I don't care what color someone is, they can be racist, and just because someone is white doesn't make them immune from racism.  I cut all ties when a good Asian friend of mine actually texted to me that, "All white men should be killed".  He knows my husband is white.  He works for Chanel.  It took all I had not to report him to his company.  Disgusting, vile, non white, human being.


Thanks for posting this. A couple of years ago, I overheard an educated asian woman in a close table to mine referring to white people as 'white trash.' We were participating in an event that promotes diversity, it was rather shocking. I met this woman several times after that, but needless to say, I never looked at her the same way. Fortunately the majority of people from all colors are decent and not racist imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Once again picking the glitzy event over the peasants. Click on the link, it will bring you to the perfectly available Insta post.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ugh, I wouldn't want to swap with Charles. Harry is a little sh*t but I'd be worried too.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> My husband and I were eating dinner and listening to some lovely Christmas jazz on Spotify, when suddenly my ears were assaulted by the voice of the Ginger Whinger in a promo for the "flopumentary" complaining about how hard it is for women who join his family. Make it stop!   So I guess Spotify and Netflix are in bed together?


We were driving back home tonight and were also assaulted by Hazz and TW via Spotify. It could be a paid advertisement. The Harkles are…


----------



## mrsinsyder

bag-mania said:


> Oh, that lie was so four years ago. You have to keep up with the fresh lies.


I’d read a while back that throwing out lies constantly is a PR tactic that has been successfully used by some recent political types. I’m sure there’s an actual term for it. But basically, you make everything so muddy that no one can ever pin down the truth. It feels like this is what’s happening with them. Because even now it’s like… “wait, who did that story originally come from? Was it them? Was it daily mail? Who started it?” 

And unfortunately… it kinda works for them. Their detractors and their supporters have gone back and forth for years over even minute details. Yet still, no one really knows the truth about anything relating to them.


----------



## Chanbal

One more falsehood.   

'*My dad used a lot of emojis and a lot of ellipses and dot, dot, dot, and this was just the opposite. And it called me Meghan. I was like, 'He's never called me Meghan any day that I've lived on this planet.' Meg, all my friends call me Meg and my parents call me Meg and I was like, 'That's not my dad.'*
_*
'So then we knew that his phone had been compromised*.'

*But Mr Markle told The Mail on Sunday last night: 'I wrote every word that I sent from that phone which is still in my possession*.

'*For her to claim my phone was compromised is simply not true*.

'I wrote that text as I lay in a hospital bed after having had two heart attacks and having stents put in.'

Mr Markle, who is still recovering from a stroke which nearly killed him in May, explained: 'I have used Meghan's full name before, when things are serious.

'It's not true to say I have never used her full name. I use it when I am serious, when there are serious issues involved…

Mr Markle said: '*She does still have a father.* I'm here, I still live in the same house and I still have the same number. I'm still her dad. I would love to see my grandchildren. They have two grandfathers who would love to see them.' He said he has been 'overwhelmed' by the public's support this week and added: '*I believe this is a family matter which should be handled by the family. I love my daughter and always will.*'_









						Thomas Markle: It WAS me texting Meghan before her wedding to Harry
					

The father of Meghan Markle has firmly denied his daughter's claim that someone else used his phone to send her a heart-rending text days before her wedding to Prince Harry.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

They are shameless! Unless they don't get an invite, they will be there imo. 










						Harry and Meghan are told to stay AWAY from King Charles's coronation
					

Amid a chorus of highly regarded voices calling on Harry and Meghan to stay at home, one former Cabinet Minister said the couple 'categorically should not be' at Westminster Abbey.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG on Diana 2.0


----------



## Toby93

Chanbal said:


> One more falsehood.
> 
> '*My dad used a lot of emojis and a lot of ellipses and dot, dot, dot, and this was just the opposite. And it called me Meghan. I was like, 'He's never called me Meghan any day that I've lived on this planet.' Meg, all my friends call me Meg and my parents call me Meg and I was like, 'That's not my dad.'*
> 
> _*'So then we knew that his phone had been compromised*.'
> 
> *But Mr Markle told The Mail on Sunday last night: 'I wrote every word that I sent from that phone which is still in my possession*.
> 
> '*For her to claim my phone was compromised is simply not true*.
> 
> 'I wrote that text as I lay in a hospital bed after having had two heart attacks and having stents put in.'
> 
> Mr Markle, who is still recovering from a stroke which nearly killed him in May, explained: 'I have used Meghan's full name before, when things are serious.
> 
> 'It's not true to say I have never used her full name. I use it when I am serious, when there are serious issues involved…
> 
> Mr Markle said: '*She does still have a father.* I'm here, I still live in the same house and I still have the same number. I'm still her dad. I would love to see my grandchildren. They have two grandfathers who would love to see them.' He said he has been 'overwhelmed' by the public's support this week and added: '*I believe this is a family matter which should be handled by the family. I love my daughter and always will.*'_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas Markle: It WAS me texting Meghan before her wedding to Harry
> 
> 
> The father of Meghan Markle has firmly denied his daughter's claim that someone else used his phone to send her a heart-rending text days before her wedding to Prince Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


You can just add it to the list of lies.  I am truly disgusted every time this woman opens her mouth, but I am more disgusted by Harry for sitting next to her and agreeing with her.  What on earth happened to this man?


----------



## pukasonqo

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Once again picking the glitzy event over the peasants. Click on the link, it will bring you to the perfectly available Insta post.



Welcome to country is a very important ceremony, the traditional custodians are welcoming you to their ancestral land, that was disrespectful (unless she was really sick)
Unfortunately they don’t gift diamonds to those attending otherwise MM might have been there


----------



## needlv

Um… I’m going back to this tweet which I know has already been posted… but



is this person a real journalist or is this some type of (bad taste) joke?  He knows that she sues newspapers etc… so if it’s true I hope he has a good source to back himself.  Because otherwise it’s a horrible thing to post.


----------



## Chanbal

needlv said:


> Um… I’m going back to this tweet which I know has already been posted… but
> 
> 
> 
> is this person a real journalist or is this some type of (bad taste) joke?  He knows that she sues newspapers etc… so if it’s true I hope he has a good source to back himself.  Because otherwise it’s a horrible thing to post.



I had the same question…






						John LeFevre - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ugh, I wouldn't want to swap with Charles. Harry is a little sh*t but I'd be worried too.



This is more manipulation.  I have experienced first hand the actions of a selfish SIL to my MIL.  SIL is an entitled, spoiled, lazy brat, who wants all the successes and luxuries without investing a single minute into getting them for herself.  She has worked maybe 4 months of the entire 26 years I've been with DH, and wants everything her brothers have, overlooking the fact that they both work their butts off.
She will be 59 years old, and MIL still pays for her car, car insurance, vacations, dinners out, etc.  If MIL ever even mentions stopping any of these payments, SIL will "suggest" how dark of a place she's in, and how she can't go on any longer.  In short, threatens bodily harm to herself.  MIL panics, and gives in to the continued nonsense, and even makes DH and his brother contribute.  I'm at the point of calling her bluff.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> They are shameless! Unless they don't get an invite, they will be there imo.
> View attachment 5669039
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are told to stay AWAY from King Charles's coronation
> 
> 
> Amid a chorus of highly regarded voices calling on Harry and Meghan to stay at home, one former Cabinet Minister said the couple 'categorically should not be' at Westminster Abbey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ooooh, they might get booed?  
If I was a Brit, I'd throw rotten eggs and fruit at them, screaming "SHAME!".


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That seems to be a theme nowadays. I spend a lot of time reading food articles. It seems to be totally ok when a young black chef claims white people cannot cook her food and won't get her recipes if she can help it because they are white and just don't understand (as published in a very well-known US food magazine. I rolled my eyes because I'm sure the specific dish she couldn't stop flattering herself for is probably not all that earthshattering). Can you imagine the uproar had a white chef said his food is not for POC?
> 
> People are up in arms (rightfully so) if, say, Indian food is mocked because of its fragrant spices. But it's completely tolerated to say German food is bland and sh*tty (which annoys me even more when I can tell they are completely ignorant to the fact German cuisine is way more than saurerkraut and brats...and this coming  from someone who half of the time cooks and eats Middle Eastern or Mediterranean food).
> 
> And BTW, food is bland when it lacks salt, not because it doesn't have 15 spices at once  Even Samin Nosrat agrees!
> 
> 
> 
> This!



Wow. So if a POC writes a cookbook, does that mean white people can't or shouldn't buy it? Hmm. The publisher may not share the same sentiment since $$$ is riding on sales, and the author won't receive as much $$$ either if he/she feels the need to exclude people based on the color of their skin. I have well over a thousand cookbooks, about half are exclusively from Latino, Asian, African, African American, or indigenous people from the U.S. and other nations. I'd have saved many thousands of dollars had I known this "rule". Does that mean that caucasians are excluded from buying Claw's cookbook, too? Silly me! Of course!


----------



## scarlet555

lallybelle said:


> Since I subscribe to Nate, this popped up. Samantha doesn't seem crazy to me.



wow, Samantha is saying everything we’ve been saying here… she doesn’t seem crazy to me either… unless everyone but Cringe is crazy


----------



## Sophisticatted

So, I think maybe the photo was not of a filter puppy face, but of a suggestive pose NSFW….

And with all the yacht girl rumors, it gives Philp’s statement “you date actresses, you don’t marry them” an extra weight, because I doubt that “date” was the four letter word actually used.  Just the “press-friendly” word used in the retelling.


----------



## xincinsin

Sophisticatted said:


> So, I think maybe the photo was not of a filter puppy face, but of a suggestive pose NSFW….
> 
> And with all the yacht girl rumors, it gives Philp’s statement “you date actresses, you don’t marry them” an extra weight, because I doubt that “date” was the four letter word actually used.  Just the “press-friendly” word used in the retelling.


You are likely right. Swipe left for Basic Instinct pose.
Every girl probably had a selection of photos. This one likely popped up if you filtered by fun-loving, willing to make a night of it. 
Which makes her cutesy tongue-exposing virginal tittering persona even more ridiculous.


----------



## Chanbal

What the Palace made of Harry and Meghan’s ‘truth’​Royal sources have pinpointed specific falsehoods in the Netflix documentary. William has no plans to engage (let alone watch it)​Roya Nikkhah, Royal Editor Sunday December 11 2022, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times

_*1) It can also be revealed that six months before the couple married in May 2018, Harry’s then private secretary, Ed Lane Fox, known as “Elf”, presented Meghan with a 30-point dossier, studiously researched, brimming with information and contacts for the life she was taking on.* It covered fashion, the royal family and the constitution, the institution’s heads of department, ladies-in-waiting, arts in the UK, the Charity Commission and public life. Each section suggested an expert who could help Meghan.
“*It was huge, the amount of work Elf put into getting her access to anyone, and he gave her books on the stuff,” a source said.* It is understood that Meghan took up just two meetings with the suggested experts, one with Sir Christopher Geidt [now Lord Geidt], the late Queen’s private secretary, and another with a “very well-connected, trusted fashion person” for advice on clothes.
Meghan also suggested in the documentary that she had no help learning the national anthem, and had to Google it. A royal source conceded that it was not printed out for her because “you can’t file transfer the national anthem to someone’s brain”.

*2) Then there is Meghan’s assertion that Kensington Palace aides advised her not to invite her niece, Ashleigh Hale, the daughter of her estranged half-sister Samantha Markle, to the wedding.* Meghan said her “very small comms team” gave the advice because “they just couldn’t wrap their head around it . . . how do we explain that this half-sister isn’t invited to the wedding, but that the half-sister’s daughter is? And so, with Ashleigh, the guidance at the time was to not have her come to our wedding . . . I called her and . . . and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and . . . that’s painful.”
In the programme, an emotional Ashleigh, an immigration lawyer, said she was “hurt” by the decision. She said “communication with Meg became less and less frequent,” and she felt Meghan’s relationships were being “managed on some level” by the royal household.

*All of which is a myth, say impeccably placed royal sources of the decision to have only one family member,* Meghan’s mother Doria, on their wedding guest list of 650 at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. “*That just didn’t happen,*” a source said of Meghan’s account. “*We never gave any advice, steer or guidance on who of her family or friends should or shouldn’t come to her wedding. I have a very clear memory of her [Meghan] saying that she had a niece who she would in other circumstances have liked to invite, but she didn’t want to invite her because it would have put her under intense scrutiny. It was not a question she put to us.*”We would never tell her not to invite her own niece to the wedding and we would never get involved in any management of personal relationships.”

Another royal source confirmed: “*Harry had concerns that Meghan had no family at the wedding which would look weird*. Meghan didn’t want the media to know about Ashleigh. *No one on earth would have said don’t invite family to the wedding. That’s a complete and utter lie. We wanted more family there to make it look less weird for her.*”

*3) What of Meghan’s assertion that their seemingly blissful engagement interview* *with the BBC presenter Mishal Husain* was an “*orchestrated reality show*” *where “we weren’t allowed to tell our story”? Husain responded last week with words borrowed from the late Queen after the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey last year: “We know recollections may vary on this particular subject but my recollection is definitely very much, asked to do an interview, and do said interview*.”
*A source involved with the interview said everything went according to Meghan’s script: “Every word of that interview was what they wanted to say. She controlled every micro-detail of how their engagement publicly went.”

4) Of all the blows that the Sussexes landed on the monarchy last week, the most “wounding” for William, according to friends, was Harry’s assertion that he married Kate because she “fits the mould” rather than for love.*
Harry, who once described Kate as the sister he never had, said: “I think for so many people in the family, especially the men, there can be a temptation or an urge to marry someone who would fit the mould as opposed to somebody who perhaps you are destined to be with. The difference between making decisions with your head or heart.” Ouch.
An old friend of both brothers said: “That was so cheeky, that’s a love match if ever there was one. Catherine doesn’t even fit the mould — she’s not an earl’s daughter or blue-blooded. *The sadness is Harry was so close to Catherine."*

Another close friend of the royal family, who saw the King on Thursday when Harry & Meghan aired, said: “*It is so awful. What on earth are they doing? *I want to say to them: ‘Think of your futures. Think of how you may regret this in years to come.’”

*However loaded the missiles, William has instructed friends not to retaliate: “William does not want us fuelling the conflict, he’s been very clear on that. *He’s keen to have as much of a normal week as possible.” Another friend has given him sage advice: “I reminded him to keep his rifle pointed at the target and not to be distracted, even though it’s all f***ing tedious in every sense of the word.”

On Friday a source close to the Waleses said William was “on great form” and “looking to the future” as he chatted to winners of his Earthshot Prize from his family home, Adelaide Cottage in Windsor, and worked with Kate on projects for next year. “They know the British people expect them to roll their sleeves up and get on with the job.”

*Last week, Harry and Meghan said of their series: “We hope it helps others to heal and to feel inspired” *but a trailer for the next three episodes, which will drop on Thursday morning,* features the duchess’s words: “This is when a family and a family business are in direct conflict.” *That doesn’t suggest the next instalment is likely to boost transatlantic family ties or heal ever-deepening wounds_…



			https://archive.vn/bbJDh#selection-851.0-857.129


----------



## Chanbal

Did they forget the baby?


----------



## Chanbal

I can't believe Netfl*x paid $100M for this, they are such bad actors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Hear hear.

Apparently the Markle family said Ghoul as a child was full of attitude after spending time with Doria, too. Like, she would visit, return to TM's house and be b*tchy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM111

pukasonqo said:


> I don’t think racism is only experience by POC, I mentioned this before nut my partner is 1/2Latvian and was called a white wog, bullied because the way his surname was spelt (and thank God he got an anglicised version of his Latvian name!)
> Similar experiences told by a Swedish, Greek and Italian friends
> Racism comes in all forms, sizes and colours


White people, especially from less privileged areas of the world suffer xenophobia (you can encompass it as racism) all the time. Most of Eastern Europeans come directly from people who were borderline of white slaves (peasants owned by noble man). But it’s convenient not to see it for many.


----------



## Lodpah

Never mind. Everything has been said. Lol.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> 1. He is the 5th person in the Halloween photos with Eugenie and Jack
> 2. Not mentioned by name, but he surely was the Soho person mentioned in how the Harkles met via Instagram. H picked MM out of IG photos on the Soho person’s phone. This was the photo of MM filtered to be a beagle.
> Apologies if, I did not get all the delightful nuances of that story  ex H had a list of what he was looking for…
> PS not mentioned by name, I think


He was, she referred to him as my friend Marcus.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think it was reported that initially Harry didn't want to do it, so Philip said "I'll walk with you." Philip is also said to have fought nail and tooth to make the whole funeral proceedings as comfortable for the boys as possible.


If I remember correctly, he was the one who insisted that no cameras on the boys during the service.


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> That seems to be a theme nowadays. I spend a lot of time reading food articles. It seems to be totally ok when a young black chef claims white people cannot cook her food and won't get her recipes if she can help it because they are white and just don't understand (as published in a very well-known US food magazine. I rolled my eyes because I'm sure the specific dish she couldn't stop flattering herself for is probably not all that earthshattering). Can you imagine the uproar had a white chef said his food is not for POC?
> 
> People are up in arms (rightfully so) if, say, Indian food is mocked because of its fragrant spices. But it's completely tolerated to say German food is bland and sh*tty (which annoys me even more when I can tell they are completely ignorant to the fact German cuisine is way more than saurerkraut and brats...and this coming  from someone who half of the time cooks and eats Middle Eastern or Mediterranean food).
> 
> And BTW, food is bland when it lacks salt, not because it doesn't have 15 spices at once  Even Samin Nosrat agrees!
> 
> 
> 
> This!


I agree that German cuisine gets a bad rap as does British. They are just different. I general I think most cuisines people tend to only hear about the most meat and carb laden things and skip anything with too many vegetables or fish and it’s a shame. 

What this chef said strikes me as like nightclub door marketing. I can’t believe you can get rich while excluding the majority of the population from your business so it’s probably more like ‘you white people can come in but we won’t let your _cringe parents_ in am I right fellow cool teens?’ Which is a bit embarrassing for her really. I’m sure her food is another mind-blowing truffle Mac and cheese, spicy chicken thigh and a warm tenderstem salad with nuts with a gin cocktail. 







purseinsanity said:


> There are constant double standards, especially in the US.  I'm a POC and my DH is white, which makes my children "bi-racial".  I was aghast when a black television personality claimed "there can't be "racism against white people".  Say what??  I know many minorities who are more racist than many white people I've met.  I don't care what color someone is, they can be racist, and just because someone is white doesn't make them immune from racism.  I cut all ties when a good Asian friend of mine actually texted to me that, "All white men should be killed".  He knows my husband is white.  He works for Chanel.  It took all I had not to report him to his company.  Disgusting, vile, non white, human being.


The irony of working for and probably idolising Chanel one of the whitest and most Francophile companies of all time is completely lost on him then? 


Sophisticatted said:


> So, I think maybe the photo was not of a filter puppy face, but of a suggestive pose NSFW….
> 
> And with all the yacht girl rumors, it gives Philp’s statement “you date actresses, you don’t marry them” an extra weight, because I doubt that “date” was the four letter word actually used.  Just the “press-friendly” word used in the retelling.


I think these stories do a Disservice to most prostitutes who have to do all sorts of grizzly things to give their clients satisfaction whereas it is obvious M has never made anyone happy.   


I really wish the family had followed Phillip’s own advice on not marrying this actress in. I mean they could have given it 2 years for thick H to notice the mask slips. 


Chanbal said:


> Did they forget the baby?



Jesus Christ this couple is deranged. The poor cameraman must have been wondering whether they were going to push him down the well for knowing too much.


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Hear hear.



Hoping the BLG does an analysis of Doria’s performance, especially 
her evasiveness in not being able to look at the camera or the interviewer during part of the segment.

She was a largely absent mother, engaged in criminal activity working on a pot farm before marijuana was legal, and apparently was the role model for her daughter in how to use a man. No wonder Doria loves her son-in-law, Harry is an emasculated mess.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> **




I have come back to this several times now. What is wrong with her face? It looks almost crumpled.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> *I have well over a thousand cookbooks*, about half are exclusively from Latino, Asian, African, African American, or indigenous people from the U.S. and other nations. I'd have saved many thousands of dollars had I known this "rule". Does that mean that caucasians are excluded from buying Claw's cookbook, too? Silly me! Of course!



Goals   

To be fair, I do think that was an outlier opinion and I'm not seeking that person out to follow her and her, uh, exclusive food.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Harry, who once described Kate as the sister he never had, said: “I think for so many people in the family, especially the men, there can be a temptation or an urge to marry someone who would fit the mould as opposed to somebody who perhaps you are destined to be with. The difference between making decisions with your head or heart.”


I'm sorry, Sparry, maybe you think you were making a decision with your heart, but it was more likely that you were making the decision with your other head, the one south of your heart.


jelliedfeels said:


> I think these stories do a Disservice to most prostitutes who have to do all sorts of grizzly things to give their clients satisfaction whereas it is obvious *M has never made anyone happy.*


She only intends to make herself very happy.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have come back to this several times now. What is wrong with her face? It looks almost crumpled.


She started looking like this when the veins began to pop prominently. 
If Invisibet exists, I hope she isn't too pretty. Narc mothers go after female competition.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> What the Palace made of Harry and Meghan’s ‘truth’​Royal sources have pinpointed specific falsehoods in the Netflix documentary. William has no plans to engage (let alone watch it)​Roya Nikkhah, Royal Editor Sunday December 11 2022, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
> 
> _*1) It can also be revealed that six months before the couple married in May 2018, Harry’s then private secretary, Ed Lane Fox, known as “Elf”, presented Meghan with a 30-point dossier, studiously researched, brimming with information and contacts for the life she was taking on.* It covered fashion, the royal family and the constitution, the institution’s heads of department, ladies-in-waiting, arts in the UK, the Charity Commission and public life. Each section suggested an expert who could help Meghan.
> “*It was huge, the amount of work Elf put into getting her access to anyone, and he gave her books on the stuff,” a source said.* It is understood that Meghan took up just two meetings with the suggested experts, one with Sir Christopher Geidt [now Lord Geidt], the late Queen’s private secretary, and another with a “very well-connected, trusted fashion person” for advice on clothes.
> Meghan also suggested in the documentary that she had no help learning the national anthem, and had to Google it. A royal source conceded that it was not printed out for her because “you can’t file transfer the national anthem to someone’s brain”.
> 
> *2) Then there is Meghan’s assertion that Kensington Palace aides advised her not to invite her niece, Ashleigh Hale, the daughter of her estranged half-sister Samantha Markle, to the wedding.* Meghan said her “very small comms team” gave the advice because “they just couldn’t wrap their head around it . . . how do we explain that this half-sister isn’t invited to the wedding, but that the half-sister’s daughter is? And so, with Ashleigh, the guidance at the time was to not have her come to our wedding . . . I called her and . . . and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and . . . that’s painful.”
> In the programme, an emotional Ashleigh, an immigration lawyer, said she was “hurt” by the decision. She said “communication with Meg became less and less frequent,” and she felt Meghan’s relationships were being “managed on some level” by the royal household.
> 
> *All of which is a myth, say impeccably placed royal sources of the decision to have only one family member,* Meghan’s mother Doria, on their wedding guest list of 650 at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. “*That just didn’t happen,*” a source said of Meghan’s account. “*We never gave any advice, steer or guidance on who of her family or friends should or shouldn’t come to her wedding. I have a very clear memory of her [Meghan] saying that she had a niece who she would in other circumstances have liked to invite, but she didn’t want to invite her because it would have put her under intense scrutiny. It was not a question she put to us.*”We would never tell her not to invite her own niece to the wedding and we would never get involved in any management of personal relationships.”
> 
> Another royal source confirmed: “*Harry had concerns that Meghan had no family at the wedding which would look weird*. Meghan didn’t want the media to know about Ashleigh. *No one on earth would have said don’t invite family to the wedding. That’s a complete and utter lie. We wanted more family there to make it look less weird for her.*”
> 
> *3) What of Meghan’s assertion that their seemingly blissful engagement interview* *with the BBC presenter Mishal Husain* was an “*orchestrated reality show*” *where “we weren’t allowed to tell our story”? Husain responded last week with words borrowed from the late Queen after the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey last year: “We know recollections may vary on this particular subject but my recollection is definitely very much, asked to do an interview, and do said interview*.”
> *A source involved with the interview said everything went according to Meghan’s script: “Every word of that interview was what they wanted to say. She controlled every micro-detail of how their engagement publicly went.”
> 
> 4) Of all the blows that the Sussexes landed on the monarchy last week, the most “wounding” for William, according to friends, was Harry’s assertion that he married Kate because she “fits the mould” rather than for love.*
> Harry, who once described Kate as the sister he never had, said: “I think for so many people in the family, especially the men, there can be a temptation or an urge to marry someone who would fit the mould as opposed to somebody who perhaps you are destined to be with. The difference between making decisions with your head or heart.” Ouch.
> An old friend of both brothers said: “That was so cheeky, that’s a love match if ever there was one. Catherine doesn’t even fit the mould — she’s not an earl’s daughter or blue-blooded. *The sadness is Harry was so close to Catherine."*
> 
> Another close friend of the royal family, who saw the King on Thursday when Harry & Meghan aired, said: “*It is so awful. What on earth are they doing? *I want to say to them: ‘Think of your futures. Think of how you may regret this in years to come.’”
> 
> *However loaded the missiles, William has instructed friends not to retaliate: “William does not want us fuelling the conflict, he’s been very clear on that. *He’s keen to have as much of a normal week as possible.” Another friend has given him sage advice: “I reminded him to keep his rifle pointed at the target and not to be distracted, even though it’s all f***ing tedious in every sense of the word.”
> 
> On Friday a source close to the Waleses said William was “on great form” and “looking to the future” as he chatted to winners of his Earthshot Prize from his family home, Adelaide Cottage in Windsor, and worked with Kate on projects for next year. “They know the British people expect them to roll their sleeves up and get on with the job.”
> 
> *Last week, Harry and Meghan said of their series: “We hope it helps others to heal and to feel inspired” *but a trailer for the next three episodes, which will drop on Thursday morning,* features the duchess’s words: “This is when a family and a family business are in direct conflict.” *That doesn’t suggest the next instalment is likely to boost transatlantic family ties or heal ever-deepening wounds_…
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/bbJDh#selection-851.0-857.129




Gosh, I feel physically repulsed.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> Why does the Mayor of London have any right to block a bill from Parliament?  Am I missing something??
> 
> ETA:  Oh, read the article.  He just personally opposes it.  Hopefully not because of "racism", just because he's a POC.



Rishi Sunak is the PM of the UK, a politician and the Leader of the Conservative party. 

Sadiq Khan is the Mayor of London (but not City of London)


----------



## EmilyM111

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I have come back to this several times now. What is wrong with her face? It looks almost crumpled.


I am really envious about her make up skills (or the team). I look like that with and without make up


----------



## pukasonqo

jelliedfeels said:


> I agree that German cuisine gets a bad rap as does British. They are just different. I general I think most cuisines people tend to only hear about the most meat and carb laden things and skip anything with too many vegetables or fish and it’s a shame.
> 
> What this chef said strikes me as like nightclub door marketing. I can’t believe you can get rich while excluding the majority of the population from your business so it’s probably more like ‘you white people can come in but we won’t let your _cringe parents_ in am I right fellow cool teens?’ Which is a bit embarrassing for her really. I’m sure her food is another mind-blowing truffle Mac and cheese, spicy chicken thigh and a warm tenderstem salad with nuts with a gin cocktail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The irony of working for and probably idolising Chanel one of the whitest and most Francophile companies of all time is completely lost on him then?


And Chanel was openly living w a Nazi during the war








						How Karl Lagerfeld Cleansed Chanel of its anti-Semitic, Nazi past  | Jewish Federation of San Diego
					






					www.jewishinsandiego.org
				





jelliedfeels said:


> I think these stories do a Disservice to most prostitutes who have to do all sorts of grizzly things to give their clients satisfaction whereas it is obvious M has never made anyone happy.
> 
> 
> I really wish the family had followed Phillip’s own advice on not marrying this actress in. I mean they could have given it 2 years for thick H to notice the mask slips.
> 
> Jesus Christ this couple is deranged. The poor cameraman must have been wondering whether they were going to push him down the well for knowing too much.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> Based on the issues she seemed to have with protocol, I always wondered why Harry didn't discuss with her that there are a few things you are going to need to know:
> 1. The national anthem.
> 2. How to curtsy.
> 3. Who to curtsy to.
> 4. When (and who) you walk behind and in what circumstances.
> 5. When the Queen makes a suggestion, that's actually an order.
> 
> That Harry didn't, says a lot about Harry.  Who brings their girlfriend to meet the family, the BRF, and doesn't tell her what to expect and doesn't help her prepare in advance?  Is he really that self-absorbed and clueless?  Yes, I guess so.
> 
> That she didn't ask questions and google protocol herself, also says a lot about her.  We all know that she was offered help numerous times and turned down help from people like Sophie Wessex and one of the Queen's most trusted LIW.  She knew they were leaving, there was no reason for her to learn these things, and then she could also say no one helped her and she was completely adrift over the most basic things, like the national anthem and how to curtsy.


Imo you are correct on all points. Something about the way Haz tells the story sounds so very scripted and not at all like the truth.  He attempts to be humorous with his condescending _“How do you explain that to people? How do you explain that you bow to your grandmother? And that you would need to curtsy, *especially to an American*. That’s weird.”   _He is so unintelligent and so is she.  The _Texas dip_ is well know all over the debutante world. Oh wait, she was never a debutante?  Well. Well.  Get a clue, Hazzi - it is called etiquette.  We know a fake when we see one. 












						How the Texas Dip Became a Fixture in the Debutante World
					

This isn't a regular debutante bow.




					www.southernliving.com


----------



## pomeline

Chanbal said:


> What the Palace made of Harry and Meghan’s ‘truth’​Royal sources have pinpointed specific falsehoods in the Netflix documentary. William has no plans to engage (let alone watch it)​Roya Nikkhah, Royal Editor Sunday December 11 2022, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
> 
> _*1) It can also be revealed that six months before the couple married in May 2018, Harry’s then private secretary, Ed Lane Fox, known as “Elf”, presented Meghan with a 30-point dossier, studiously researched, brimming with information and contacts for the life she was taking on.* It covered fashion, the royal family and the constitution, the institution’s heads of department, ladies-in-waiting, arts in the UK, the Charity Commission and public life. Each section suggested an expert who could help Meghan.
> “*It was huge, the amount of work Elf put into getting her access to anyone, and he gave her books on the stuff,” a source said.* It is understood that Meghan took up just two meetings with the suggested experts, one with Sir Christopher Geidt [now Lord Geidt], the late Queen’s private secretary, and another with a “very well-connected, trusted fashion person” for advice on clothes.
> Meghan also suggested in the documentary that she had no help learning the national anthem, and had to Google it. A royal source conceded that it was not printed out for her because “you can’t file transfer the national anthem to someone’s brain”.
> 
> *2) Then there is Meghan’s assertion that Kensington Palace aides advised her not to invite her niece, Ashleigh Hale, the daughter of her estranged half-sister Samantha Markle, to the wedding.* Meghan said her “very small comms team” gave the advice because “they just couldn’t wrap their head around it . . . how do we explain that this half-sister isn’t invited to the wedding, but that the half-sister’s daughter is? And so, with Ashleigh, the guidance at the time was to not have her come to our wedding . . . I called her and . . . and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and . . . that’s painful.”
> In the programme, an emotional Ashleigh, an immigration lawyer, said she was “hurt” by the decision. She said “communication with Meg became less and less frequent,” and she felt Meghan’s relationships were being “managed on some level” by the royal household.
> 
> *All of which is a myth, say impeccably placed royal sources of the decision to have only one family member,* Meghan’s mother Doria, on their wedding guest list of 650 at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. “*That just didn’t happen,*” a source said of Meghan’s account. “*We never gave any advice, steer or guidance on who of her family or friends should or shouldn’t come to her wedding. I have a very clear memory of her [Meghan] saying that she had a niece who she would in other circumstances have liked to invite, but she didn’t want to invite her because it would have put her under intense scrutiny. It was not a question she put to us.*”We would never tell her not to invite her own niece to the wedding and we would never get involved in any management of personal relationships.”
> 
> Another royal source confirmed: “*Harry had concerns that Meghan had no family at the wedding which would look weird*. Meghan didn’t want the media to know about Ashleigh. *No one on earth would have said don’t invite family to the wedding. That’s a complete and utter lie. We wanted more family there to make it look less weird for her.*”
> 
> *3) What of Meghan’s assertion that their seemingly blissful engagement interview* *with the BBC presenter Mishal Husain* was an “*orchestrated reality show*” *where “we weren’t allowed to tell our story”? Husain responded last week with words borrowed from the late Queen after the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey last year: “We know recollections may vary on this particular subject but my recollection is definitely very much, asked to do an interview, and do said interview*.”
> *A source involved with the interview said everything went according to Meghan’s script: “Every word of that interview was what they wanted to say. She controlled every micro-detail of how their engagement publicly went.”
> 
> 4) Of all the blows that the Sussexes landed on the monarchy last week, the most “wounding” for William, according to friends, was Harry’s assertion that he married Kate because she “fits the mould” rather than for love.*
> Harry, who once described Kate as the sister he never had, said: “I think for so many people in the family, especially the men, there can be a temptation or an urge to marry someone who would fit the mould as opposed to somebody who perhaps you are destined to be with. The difference between making decisions with your head or heart.” Ouch.
> An old friend of both brothers said: “That was so cheeky, that’s a love match if ever there was one. Catherine doesn’t even fit the mould — she’s not an earl’s daughter or blue-blooded. *The sadness is Harry was so close to Catherine."*
> 
> Another close friend of the royal family, who saw the King on Thursday when Harry & Meghan aired, said: “*It is so awful. What on earth are they doing? *I want to say to them: ‘Think of your futures. Think of how you may regret this in years to come.’”
> 
> *However loaded the missiles, William has instructed friends not to retaliate: “William does not want us fuelling the conflict, he’s been very clear on that. *He’s keen to have as much of a normal week as possible.” Another friend has given him sage advice: “I reminded him to keep his rifle pointed at the target and not to be distracted, even though it’s all f***ing tedious in every sense of the word.”
> 
> On Friday a source close to the Waleses said William was “on great form” and “looking to the future” as he chatted to winners of his Earthshot Prize from his family home, Adelaide Cottage in Windsor, and worked with Kate on projects for next year. “They know the British people expect them to roll their sleeves up and get on with the job.”
> 
> *Last week, Harry and Meghan said of their series: “We hope it helps others to heal and to feel inspired” *but a trailer for the next three episodes, which will drop on Thursday morning,* features the duchess’s words: “This is when a family and a family business are in direct conflict.” *That doesn’t suggest the next instalment is likely to boost transatlantic family ties or heal ever-deepening wounds_…
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/bbJDh#selection-851.0-857.129



I know it's nuts and many things speak against the rumour/theory that has spread around over the years but does anyone remember how some suggested Ashleigh was not Sam's but Meg's daughter raised by grandparents? I don't think it's believable since TM and Sam or TM Jr have never addressed the rumour but it is sort of strange with the new series coming out hearing that TW didn't want the media to know about AH. I don't even know how it was speculated she would have been TW's daughter but that was the theory floated at some point.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo you are correct on all points. Something about the way Haz tells the story sounds so very scripted and not at all like the truth.  He attempts to be humorous with his condescending _“How do you explain that to people? How do you explain that you bow to your grandmother? And that you would need to curtsy, *especially to an American*. That’s weird.”   _He is so unintelligent and so is she.  The _Texas dip_ is well know all over the debutante world. Oh wait, she was never a debutante?  Well. Well.  Get a clue, Hazzi - it is called etiquette.  We know a fake when we see one.
> 
> View attachment 5669170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Texas Dip Became a Fixture in the Debutante World
> 
> 
> This isn't a regular debutante bow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.southernliving.com



That Texas 'dip' seems more like what she (unnecessary) illustrated. Full _Révérence._

ll you have to do when meeting the Monarch or any Royal, is place one leg behind another, the weight on the front foot, a little bend of the knee and lower your head - again just a little - all in the direction of the person you curtesy to. 

In fact, she should curtsey to Harry every time they meet  

Harry has been bowed and curtsied to enough times    I know he's thick as sh*t but surely he could have... never mind  

That whole scene was just played for laughs at the 'quaint' British people's expense, let's not take any of their nonsense seriously


----------



## Stansy

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Only that the palace was really p*ssed off that she even mentioned Harry. The writer told Tom Bower he came for the interview being instructed to not ask about Harry, and after having lunch together our demure little Ghoul kicked off her shoes, draped herself on the couch and spilled the beans how in love they were.


Wouldn‘t it have been glorious had the writer just ignored M‘s „revelation“ and gone on to write a bland article?


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo you are correct on all points. Something about the way Haz tells the story sounds so very scripted and not at all like the truth.  He attempts to be humorous with his condescending _“How do you explain that to people? How do you explain that you bow to your grandmother? And that you would need to curtsy, *especially to an American*. That’s weird.”   _He is so unintelligent and so is she.  The _Texas dip_ is well know all over the debutante world. Oh wait, she was never a debutante?  Well. Well.  Get a clue, Hazzi - it is called etiquette.  We know a fake when we see one.
> 
> View attachment 5669170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Texas Dip Became a Fixture in the Debutante World
> 
> 
> This isn't a regular debutante bow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.southernliving.com


Harry just repeats what he’s heard from Meghan.


----------



## Pessie

csshopper said:


> Hoping the BLG does an analysis of Doria’s performance, especially
> her evasiveness in not being able to look at the camera or the interviewer during part of the segment.
> 
> She was a largely absent mother, engaged in criminal activity working on a pot farm before marijuana was legal, and apparently was the role model for her daughter in how to use a man. No wonder Doria loves her son-in-law, Harry is an emasculated mess.


We all thought Doria was so sweet.  She’s a far better actress than her daughter.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Not a fan of what he's doing to Twitter (or of his sh*tty personality), but I'm interested to see how vocal the Sussex squad will be when bots are banned.


----------



## LittleStar88

Ooh the burnnnnn…..   

Bad news for Harry and Meghan’s Netflix docuseries​The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s debut Netflix series has rocketed up the charts – but many critics have labelled it a dud.

Archive link HERE: https://archive.ph/Q6wCS

The Washington Post has called the show a “yawner” with a reviewer writing, “Harry and Meghan are determined to control their story. The question is: Do they have anything else to say?”

“Why [Harry] is telling this story on the very platform that is currently exploiting his mother’s sad life as entertainment in the mega hit series The Crown remains unclear. Perhaps it has to do with a lot of money,” Germany’s Der Spiegel wondered. 

Variety, the Hollywood entertainment bible reported: “The Sussexes surprise us yet again, with just how narrow their vision of their fame is, how pinched and unimaginative their presence on the world stage has become.” 

“They are nothing but a vague actress and a fallen prince, both united behind the idea of selling to the highest bidder the story of their undying vacuousness,” a Slate journalist wrote. 

Even the Sussexes’ sort-of local rag, the Los Angeles Times was not particularly enthused: “For all the hype, the long-awaited first three episodes didn’t reveal much of anything new.”

“Harry & Meghan has all the intimacy of Instagram” was the title of a New York Times review, saying it “portrays the ex-royals with a soft filter and a lack of surprise.”

One Guardian review called it “Very much a one-sided PR effort, with no critical or dissenting voices about the couples behaviour or any tough questioning.” 

Lucy Mangan, writing in the same publication, described it as “so sickening I almost brought up my breakfast” and said that “although there are sweet moments alongside the vomit-inducing, the overriding message of this royal documentary is: the late Queen was right to keep stumm.”

The Irish Times view was that it was “a pre-Christmas bacchanalia of navel-gazing that will make you glad there are other things to watch on Netflix and, more importantly, that we in this country aren’t lumbered with a royal family” and called it a “”a sometimes unwatchable … plunge into Planet Sussex.”


----------



## pomeline

purseinsanity said:


> Even if she wasn't an IR major, anyone with common sense and decency wouldn't mock another culture.  Just because people are "White" doesn't mean all white people have the same customs.  The white British do not share the same customs as Scandinavians, Eastern Europeans, Canadians, etc.
> I bowed when I was in Japan even though I'm not Japanese.  I don't shake hands in India because they don't do that there.  I wore a head scarf in an Istanbul mosque because that's what is expected.  With social media now, everyone knows quite a bit about other cultures.  She's a disgusting, opportunistic witch who mocks everyone who isn't her or those who don't fawn all over her.  She truly disgusts me.


Imagine if she started to mock all the cultures of countries she visited during their official tours? She managed to anger people for example in Morocco with her tone deaf behaviour. Maybe her smirking at having to wear a scarf, taking her shoes off etc. is reserved to next week's episodes.


----------



## Sferics

pomeline said:


> I know it's nuts and many things speak against the rumour/theory that has spread around over the years but does anyone remember how some suggested* Ashleigh was not Sam's but Meg's daughter raised by grandparents?* I don't think it's believable since TM and Sam or TM Jr have never addressed the rumour but it is sort of strange with the new series coming out hearing that TW didn't want the media to know about AH. I don't even know how it was speculated she would have been TW's daughter but that was the theory floated at some point.


Ashley is 37 so not even worth to think about.


----------



## Sferics

papertiger said:


> That Texas 'dip' seems more like what she (unnecessary) illustrated. Full _Révérence._
> 
> ll you have to do when meeting the Monarch or any Royal, is place one leg behind another, the weight on the front foot, a little bend of the knee and lower your head - again just a little - all in the direction of the person you curtesy to.
> 
> In fact, she should curtsey to Harry every time they meet
> 
> Harry has been bowed and curtsied to enough times    I know he's thick as sh*t but surely he could have... never mind
> 
> That whole scene was just played for laughs at the 'quaint' British people's expense, let's not take any of their nonsense seriously




Yes!

Here is the real thing, we can all try it  
(The gorgeous girl makes it look pretty easy...but...oh...ooops....do I even have knees?  )


----------



## pomeline

Sferics said:


> Ashley is 37 so not even worth to think about.


Ah... Then it must have been tied to the age controversy which was already debunked. Clearly that rumour was a very silly one.


----------



## EmilyM111

papertiger said:


> That Texas 'dip' seems more like what she (unnecessary) illustrated. Full _Révérence._
> 
> ll you have to do when meeting the Monarch or any Royal, is place one leg behind another, the weight on the front foot, a little bend of the knee and lower your head - again just a little - all in the direction of the person you curtesy to.
> 
> In fact, she should curtsey to Harry every time they meet
> 
> Harry has been bowed and curtsied to enough times    I know he's thick as sh*t but surely he could have... never mind
> 
> That whole scene was just played for laughs at the 'quaint' British people's expense, let's not take any of their nonsense seriously


I know it’s not going to be a popular opinion but I feel uncomfortable with this complex physical movement of curtsy (I have poor coordination so you need to understand lol). And recall recently Liz Truss, former PM being mocked for her clumsy curtsy. I’d prefer a dignified but respectful bow, the way man do that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

LittleStar88 said:


> “Why [Harry] is telling this story on the very platform that is currently exploiting his mother’s sad life as entertainment in the mega hit series The Crown remains unclear. Perhaps it has to do with a lot of money,” Germany’s Der Spiegel wondered.



Der Spiegel is Germany's leading political magazine. While I enjoy the snark I am slightly flabbergasted they'd even cover the mockumentary.


----------



## Toby93

Pessie said:


> We all thought Doria was so sweet.  She’s a far better actress than her daughter.


I never thought Doria was sweet.  She has that same cagey look as her daughter.  She was absolutely complicit with the whole arrangement, and has jumped on the gravy train.  

She actually had the gall to say how she moved closer to family so they could help raise TW, but had nothing to say when NOT ONE member of that same family was invited to the wedding?   

Everything she said on camera looked soooo rehearsed and staged.  

Having your mother speak up for you in a "documentary" does not make it more convincing, especially when she is on the payroll


----------



## pomeline

I'm seeing more and more articles in papers in various countries with esteemed psychologists reviewing the series and quite openly stating they suspect narcissism in M. I am a bit surprised to be honest to see their bravery. The tables are turning.

On another note, what a coincidence this movie is being promoted everywhere and the word on the street being it will be a big hit...






I'm sure it's just a coincidence but it made me chuckle a little.  I don't know much about Akela Cooper but I'd love to know where she gets her inspiration. She wrote another horror film last year about another sadistic female called Malignant.


----------



## Sferics

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Der Spiegel is Germany's leading political magazine. While I enjoy the snark I am slightly flabbergasted they'd even cover the mockumentary.


It’s one of the leading political magazines. Unfortunately, nowadays, they need the clicks, too. So there it is the section "people"...and it's exactly what you would think it is


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> Does she curtsy to Charles?  Just asking, because I know Prince Philip always walked behind QEII.  I don't know if he bowed to her as well?  I'm sure our Brit friends here know.


I don't think so, however I don't know what they do behind closed doors.   When reading about the late QEII, I learned that one needed to curtsy only upon their first meeting of the day and so if one curtsied inside the palace, we wouldn't see them curtsy again outside.


----------



## Sharont2305

Maggie Muggins said:


> I don't think so, however I don't know what they do behind closed doors.   When reading about the late QEII, I learned that one needed to curtsy only upon their first meeting of the day and so if one curtsied inside the palace, we wouldn't see them curtsy again outside.


Yes, there are some footage of this, The Queen arriving and there's a row of family outside. They all curtsied to her, apart from Harry and Beatrice who had already met her that day. 
Wasn't there also a fuss from the sugars when the Belgian and Spanish Kings and Queens were here at a public event in Windsor (Garter Ceremony I think) and Catherine curtsied to one Queen and not the other. She'd already met the other one earlier so just greeted her normally.


----------



## BlueCherry

A bit of lighthearted fun what with England exiting the World Cup due to the team Captain Harry Kane missing a penalty in cringeworthy style


----------



## Sferics

Can't wait until "The Crown" has arrived in the present, and couple is mimed by better actors.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> We all thought Doria was so sweet.  She’s a far better actress than her daughter.


She was an unknown factor for me. She seemed too quiet, as in, if she thought her daughter was being ill-treated, why did she not say anything? Why did she not counsel Zed since she supposedly had the skills and Zed was allegedly suicidal? Then when I read that Sparry and Zed had bought her a business, I figured she was being paid off to keep mum. If you look at the few family photos of the Raglands that have surfaced, Doria usually looks pissed and grumpy. Maybe she didn't get along with her family. She was certainly the one who taught Zed to be transactional in her relationships.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> I had the same question…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> John LeFevre - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


Given his background and presumably extensive social and business network I wouldn't be at all surprised if what he said is true.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this. A couple of years ago, I overheard an educated asian woman in a close table to mine referring to white people as 'white trash.' We were participating in an event that promotes diversity, it was rather shocking. I met this woman several times after that, but needless to say, I never looked at her the same way. Fortunately the majority of people from all colors are decent and not racist imo.


deleted


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> Rishi Sunak is the PM of the UK, a politician and the Leader of the Conservative party.
> 
> Sadiq Khan is the Mayor of London (but not City of London)


OMG that’s right.  I stand corrected.  (Burying my head in the sand again )


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> What the Palace made of Harry and Meghan’s ‘truth’​Royal sources have pinpointed specific falsehoods in the Netflix documentary. William has no plans to engage (let alone watch it)​Roya Nikkhah, Royal Editor Sunday December 11 2022, 12.01am GMT, The Sunday Times
> 
> _*1) It can also be revealed that six months before the couple married in May 2018, Harry’s then private secretary, Ed Lane Fox, known as “Elf”, presented Meghan with a 30-point dossier, studiously researched, brimming with information and contacts for the life she was taking on.* It covered fashion, the royal family and the constitution, the institution’s heads of department, ladies-in-waiting, arts in the UK, the Charity Commission and public life. Each section suggested an expert who could help Meghan.
> “*It was huge, the amount of work Elf put into getting her access to anyone, and he gave her books on the stuff,” a source said.* It is understood that Meghan took up just two meetings with the suggested experts, one with Sir Christopher Geidt [now Lord Geidt], the late Queen’s private secretary, and another with a “very well-connected, trusted fashion person” for advice on clothes.
> Meghan also suggested in the documentary that she had no help learning the national anthem, and had to Google it. A royal source conceded that it was not printed out for her because “you can’t file transfer the national anthem to someone’s brain”.
> 
> *2) Then there is Meghan’s assertion that Kensington Palace aides advised her not to invite her niece, Ashleigh Hale, the daughter of her estranged half-sister Samantha Markle, to the wedding.* Meghan said her “very small comms team” gave the advice because “they just couldn’t wrap their head around it . . . how do we explain that this half-sister isn’t invited to the wedding, but that the half-sister’s daughter is? And so, with Ashleigh, the guidance at the time was to not have her come to our wedding . . . I called her and . . . and we talked her through what guidance we were being given and why this assessment was made and . . . that’s painful.”
> In the programme, an emotional Ashleigh, an immigration lawyer, said she was “hurt” by the decision. She said “communication with Meg became less and less frequent,” and she felt Meghan’s relationships were being “managed on some level” by the royal household.
> 
> *All of which is a myth, say impeccably placed royal sources of the decision to have only one family member,* Meghan’s mother Doria, on their wedding guest list of 650 at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. “*That just didn’t happen,*” a source said of Meghan’s account. “*We never gave any advice, steer or guidance on who of her family or friends should or shouldn’t come to her wedding. I have a very clear memory of her [Meghan] saying that she had a niece who she would in other circumstances have liked to invite, but she didn’t want to invite her because it would have put her under intense scrutiny. It was not a question she put to us.*”We would never tell her not to invite her own niece to the wedding and we would never get involved in any management of personal relationships.”
> 
> Another royal source confirmed: “*Harry had concerns that Meghan had no family at the wedding which would look weird*. Meghan didn’t want the media to know about Ashleigh. *No one on earth would have said don’t invite family to the wedding. That’s a complete and utter lie. We wanted more family there to make it look less weird for her.*”
> 
> *3) What of Meghan’s assertion that their seemingly blissful engagement interview* *with the BBC presenter Mishal Husain* was an “*orchestrated reality show*” *where “we weren’t allowed to tell our story”? Husain responded last week with words borrowed from the late Queen after the Sussexes’ interview with Oprah Winfrey last year: “We know recollections may vary on this particular subject but my recollection is definitely very much, asked to do an interview, and do said interview*.”
> *A source involved with the interview said everything went according to Meghan’s script: “Every word of that interview was what they wanted to say. She controlled every micro-detail of how their engagement publicly went.”
> 
> 4) Of all the blows that the Sussexes landed on the monarchy last week, the most “wounding” for William, according to friends, was Harry’s assertion that he married Kate because she “fits the mould” rather than for love.*
> Harry, who once described Kate as the sister he never had, said: “I think for so many people in the family, especially the men, there can be a temptation or an urge to marry someone who would fit the mould as opposed to somebody who perhaps you are destined to be with. The difference between making decisions with your head or heart.” Ouch.
> An old friend of both brothers said: “That was so cheeky, that’s a love match if ever there was one. Catherine doesn’t even fit the mould — she’s not an earl’s daughter or blue-blooded. *The sadness is Harry was so close to Catherine."*
> 
> Another close friend of the royal family, who saw the King on Thursday when Harry & Meghan aired, said: “*It is so awful. What on earth are they doing? *I want to say to them: ‘Think of your futures. Think of how you may regret this in years to come.’”
> 
> *However loaded the missiles, William has instructed friends not to retaliate: “William does not want us fuelling the conflict, he’s been very clear on that. *He’s keen to have as much of a normal week as possible.” Another friend has given him sage advice: “I reminded him to keep his rifle pointed at the target and not to be distracted, even though it’s all f***ing tedious in every sense of the word.”
> 
> On Friday a source close to the Waleses said William was “on great form” and “looking to the future” as he chatted to winners of his Earthshot Prize from his family home, Adelaide Cottage in Windsor, and worked with Kate on projects for next year. “They know the British people expect them to roll their sleeves up and get on with the job.”
> 
> *Last week, Harry and Meghan said of their series: “We hope it helps others to heal and to feel inspired” *but a trailer for the next three episodes, which will drop on Thursday morning,* features the duchess’s words: “This is when a family and a family business are in direct conflict.” *That doesn’t suggest the next instalment is likely to boost transatlantic family ties or heal ever-deepening wounds_…
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/bbJDh#selection-851.0-857.129



this seems credible to me....first I've heard that H was worried it would look "weird" for M to have no relatives at wedding, which totally makes sense


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> I never thought Doria was sweet.  She has that same cagey look as her daughter.  She was absolutely complicit with the whole arrangement, and has jumped on the gravy train.
> 
> She actually had the gall to say how she moved closer to family so they could help raise TW, but had nothing to say when NOT ONE member of that same family was invited to the wedding?
> 
> Everything she said on camera looked soooo rehearsed and staged.
> 
> Having your mother speak up for you in a "documentary" does not make it more convincing, especially when she is on the payroll


so I guess Doria was in the "documentary"
I wonder if netflix pressured the WIFE to do this....they've kept doria pretty mysterious up until now


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> OMG that’s right.  I stand corrected.  (Burying my head in the sand again )



Don't worry, we seem to have a new PM every other month, no one can keep up


----------



## BlueCherry

Chanbal said:


> Thanks for posting this. A couple of years ago, I overheard an educated asian woman in a close table to mine referring to white people as 'white trash.' We were participating in an event that promotes diversity, it was rather shocking. I met this woman several times after that, but needless to say, I never looked at her the same way. Fortunately the majority of people from all colors are decent and not racist imo.



My old neighbours were Indian Sikh and had their grandad living with them. He was such a lovely old man and I used to chat with him a lot. One day he told me his Indian friends said to him “how can you be friends with her - she is white!” 

I was initially a little surprised but genuinely laughed it off. He told them “the white people next door are lovely, kind people and they are my friends”. 

In retrospect I could have made a fortune playing the race card


----------



## papertiger

EmilyM111 said:


> I know it’s not going to be a popular opinion but I feel uncomfortable with this complex physical movement of curtsy (I have poor coordination so you need to understand lol). And recall recently Liz Truss, former PM being mocked for her clumsy curtsy. *I’d prefer a dignified but respectful bow, the way man do that.*



You'd be in good company, lots of women do that, and no one bats an eye.


----------



## papertiger

Sferics said:


> Yes!
> 
> Here is the real thing, we can all try it
> (The gorgeous girl makes it look pretty easy...but...oh...ooops....do I even have knees?  )




No disrespect, but I think my instructions were easier to follow


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> That Texas 'dip' seems more like what she (unnecessary) illustrated. Full _Révérence._
> 
> ll you have to do when meeting the Monarch or any Royal, is place one leg behind another, the weight on the front foot, a little bend of the knee and lower your head - again just a little - all in the direction of the person you curtesy to.
> 
> In fact, she should curtsey to Harry every time they meet
> 
> Harry has been bowed and curtsied to enough times    I know he's thick as sh*t but surely he could have... never mind
> 
> That whole scene was just played for laughs at the 'quaint' British people's expense, let's not take any of their nonsense seriously


The reality show was clearly made for American consumption. I watched the bowing clip, and she even says something like 'Americans understand…'


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sferics

papertiger said:


> No disrespect, but I think my instructions were easier to follow


True  
But I like how nice it looks in the video


----------



## EmilyM111

papertiger said:


> You'd be in good company, lots of women do that, and no one bats an eye.


I didn't know that! I glance at BBC as husband watches while we live abroad but never captured that  Just recalled Ms Truss being mocked and thought -it would be me


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> this seems credible to me....first I've heard that H was worried it would look "weird" for M to have no relatives at wedding, which totally makes sense



This recap of some of their untruths is also from The Sunday Times, not a tabloid, so major credibility.  When they say impeccable source, its impeccable.

To quote:
_But on closer inspection some of their claims from the first three episodes of their six-part series belong in the realms of fantasy fiction, according to courtiers who worked alongside them.

Another close friend of the royal family, who saw the King on Thursday when Harry & Meghan aired, said: “It is so awful. What on earth are they doing? I want to say to them: ‘Think of your futures. Think of how you may regret this in years to come.’”

However loaded the missiles, William has instructed friends not to retaliate: “William does not want us fuelling the conflict, he’s been very clear on that. He’s keen to have as much of a normal week as possible.” Another friend has given him sage advice: “I reminded him to keep his rifle pointed at the target and not to be distracted, *even though it’s all f***ing tedious in every sense of the word.”*_



			https://archive.vn/bbJDh#selection-851.0-857.129


----------



## youngster

Also from The Times piece:
_*A former courtier wondered how it would go down if staff and members of the royal family responded in kind: “Can you imagine if we’d recorded our own videos to capture our exasperation and despair?”*_


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> This recap of some of their untruths is also from The Sunday Times, not a tabloid, so major credibility.  When they say impeccable source, its impeccable.
> 
> To quote:
> _But on closer inspection some of their claims from the first three episodes of their six-part series belong in the realms of fantasy fiction, according to courtiers who worked alongside them.
> 
> Another close friend of the royal family, who saw the King on Thursday when Harry & Meghan aired, said: “It is so awful. What on earth are they doing? I want to say to them: ‘Think of your futures. Think of how you may regret this in years to come.’”
> 
> However loaded the missiles, William has instructed friends not to retaliate: “William does not want us fuelling the conflict, he’s been very clear on that. He’s keen to have as much of a normal week as possible.” Another friend has given him sage advice: “I reminded him to keep his rifle pointed at the target and not to be distracted, *even though it’s all f***ing tedious in every sense of the word.”*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/bbJDh#selection-851.0-857.129


H may regret it but I don't think the WIFE will


----------



## Chanbal

BlueCherry said:


> My old neighbours were Indian Sikh and had their grandad living with them. He was such a lovely old man and I used to chat with him a lot. One day he told me his Indian friends said to him “how can you be friends with her - she is white!”
> 
> *I was initially a little surprised but genuinely laughed it off. He told them “the white people next door are lovely, kind people and they are my friends”.*
> 
> In retrospect I could have made a fortune playing the race card


That's very sweet, and the right approach imo. In the 'white trash' case, there was a clear note of disdain in the voice. Because of the job nature, this person attends people from all races. It was disappointing…


----------



## rose60610

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Goals
> 
> To be fair, I do think that was an outlier opinion and I'm not seeking that person out to follow her and her, uh, exclusive food.



ITA that it was an outlier opinion and a ridiculous one at that. It's time to respond to these inflammatory statements by throwing the double standards back in their faces complete with their own merch labeled "Return To Sender, may I have a refund please since according to you I don't have the correct skin color to buy your products".


----------



## Jktgal

She really has a fixation on hugging. I believe this was (one of?) my first posts on this thread when I really noticed there's something wrong with this woman.



Jktgal said:


> https://www.ibtimes.com/meghan-mark...e-hugs-everyones-uptight-royal-family-2939549
> 
> You are estranged from your family except for your mother. Your father is likely to go to court against you. He who paid  for your education don't  get introduced to your husband. You had one family member at your wedding and invited thousands of strangers.
> And you think their family is WEIRD??


----------



## pomeline

pomeline said:


> I'm seeing more and more articles in papers in various countries with esteemed psychologists reviewing the series and quite openly stating they suspect narcissism in M. I am a bit surprised to be honest to see their bravery. The tables are turning.
> 
> On another note, what a coincidence this movie is being promoted everywhere and the word on the street being it will be a big hit...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure it's just a coincidence but it made me chuckle a little.  I don't know much about Akela Cooper but I'd love to know where she gets her inspiration. She wrote another horror film last year about another sadistic female called Malignant.


Hate replying to my own post but I just realized where I've seen this before...


----------



## Chanbal

No further comments… 



*Thomas Sowell,*_ the inimitable African-American intellectual, was thinking in general terms when he wrote that “*much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good*”.

We have seen this theme across the board, from enterprise to policy. *But nowhere has it been more debilitating, more dangerous and more divisive than in the discussions surrounding race*. In Britain, a remarkably broad section of society has now succumbed to the empty language of Critical Race Theory (CRT), and this, in a twisted irony, threatens to roll back the meaningful progress of race relations in the post-war era.

There was a time, not more than five years ago, when Britain might have avoided falling into this pit. *The rhetoric of CRT had in the mid-2010s begun to circulate American universities, fuelled by that country’s particularly contentious race politics.* We could have continued on our own journey, gradually improving integration and confronting discrimination in our public institutions – especially in the sphere of policing. But if the wholescale importation of America’s Black Lives Matter movement didn’t put an end to those hopes, then the ongoing Harry and Meghan saga does. *We have not escaped, but are on the verge of replicating the vicious American model.

In the Sussexes’ documentary as elsewhere, the problem with the adoption of CRT is not that it raises the matter of racism, but that it asserts discrimination without proper explanation*, since the language of CRT remains unquestionable. *It uses pseudo-intellectual phrases, such as “structural racism” to pre-empt debate. *It has a habit of using many words just before “racism” (institutional racism, unconscious racism, tacit racism, petty racism) in the knowledge that the R-word, when stated by or on behalf of a non-white person, is too sensitive to reproach…

But that is no accident. *The language of CRT provides no path to redemption because many modern “race scholars”, some of whom have a financial interest in racism as a subject matter, do not believe in justice, or even understanding and reconciliation*. What a waste of good faith. And what a waste of words which once had meaning. For each phrase now bandied about was appropriated from a place, or document, in which they had a specific meaning…

If this is the specific accusation being levelled at Buckingham Palace, then we should evaluate it on the basis of evidence. And if no evidence is provided, *I will struggle to see the documentary as much more than a cynical ploy to exploit racial division for personal gain.*_



			https://archive.vn/wbyB4#selection-2139.0-2143.274


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I was indifferent for the longest time...Doria is by far the more, shall we say, palatable parent because she keeps (kept!) her mouth shut. But once in a while a little tidbit would show up that gave me pause. Something has not been sitting right with me for a while, I just can't quite put my finger on it.

But I am absolutely positive Doria is by far the smarter and more cunning one between Thomas and her.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I was indifferent for the longest time...Doria is by far the more, shall we say, palatable parent because she keeps (kept!) her mouth shut. But once in a while a little tidbit would show up that gave me pause. Something has not been sitting right with me for a while, I just can't quite put my finger on it.
> 
> But I am absolutely positive Doria by far the smarter and more cunning one between Thomas and her.



who knows?  no one in her circle of aquaintences has said anything about her publicly


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG 

That said, I feel it's one of the less weird things they've done. Maybe the baby cried and the one not pushing the pram carried it.


----------



## Chanbal

Here is a video of the reality show with bonus comments.  


_Sky News hosts react to Harry and Meghan’s Netflix series_​


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Here is a video of the reality show with bonus comments.
> 
> 
> _Sky News hosts react to Harry and Meghan’s Netflix series_​




The comments are better than the 'doc'

"You get more reality from the Kardashians"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lallybelle

It really stands out to me this whole narrative that she's trying to create that Doria & her were on their own and Doria's family and neighborhood women helped raise her. AND Doria just goes along with this. I mean it's basically common knowledge now that after the split there were sharing custody until at some point Doria disappears and Thomas is her only parent. We know about her living with him, him paying her private schools, taking her to sets while he was working. etc. I mean it would be one thing to say she reconnected with her Mom and they are very close, why the changing of history, of what really happened? You know all these things are true because they have been meticulously researched and sourced especially by Bower who wanted to leave no opening to be sued and has everything completely spelled out about how he got his info.
Samantha thinks a lot of it is because of the criticism she received for cutting Thomas off amid his various health issues and etc. Like she's trying to frame a narrative that he was never there and they were never close etc.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo you are correct on all points. Something about the way Haz tells the story sounds so very scripted and not at all like the truth.  He attempts to be humorous with his condescending _“How do you explain that to people? How do you explain that you bow to your grandmother? And that you would need to curtsy, *especially to an American*. That’s weird.”   _He is so unintelligent and so is she.  The _Texas dip_ is well know all over the debutante world. Oh wait, she was never a debutante?  Well. Well.  Get a clue, Hazzi - it is called etiquette.  We know a fake when we see one.
> 
> View attachment 5669170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Texas Dip Became a Fixture in the Debutante World
> 
> 
> This isn't a regular debutante bow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.southernliving.com


@CarryOn2020 Are you OK? We missed your comments and were about to send the private jet to pick you up.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> The reality show was clearly made for American consumption. I watched the bowing clip, and she even says something like 'Americans understand…'



She may have learned the "Texas dip" from sorority sisters. When my daughter joined a sorority she needed a white gown for an event. Some of her sisters assumed that everyone had one from cotillion or a deb ball. Um, no. But it is still a thing in many places.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> H may regret it but I don't think the WIFE will


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> The comments are better than the 'doc'
> 
> "You get more reality from the Kardashians"



This reminds me, this morning I was checking FB and stumbled upon a thread of people roasting Piers for the sh*t he tends to say. One time he tweeted a bathing suit picture (an ad, not a pool pic) of Kim and Kylie and wrote "If I were Kim and Kylie, I'd stop being photographed with Kendall", probably suggesting they were fat or something.

Someone answered "If you were Kim that s*x tape were a horror movie."   

Re: the Kardashians, they took a moderate fortune and no discernable talent and made it into billions, mostly thanks to Kris. The Sussexes can only dream of that kind of success.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lallybelle said:


> You know all these things are true because they have been meticulously researched and sourced especially by Bower who wanted to leave no opening to be sued and has everything completely spelled out about how he got his info.



Not only that, many of these things she's publicly said herself many times. She really thinks we are all idiots.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG
> 
> That said, I feel it's one of the less weird things they've done. Maybe the baby cried and the one not pushing the pram carried it.



I saw a thread discussing this and they tried very hard to solve the case of the empty pram, including the assumption that someone was carrying the baby or maybe the pram was huge and Archie could fit in it. Someone pointed out that there was a glimpse of Zed and Archie walking, but none of the baby. I think the pram was just a prop and they didn't think anyone would look too closely at it.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Toby93 said:


> **



That picture! She is one ugly witch inside/outside and possibly what evil really looks like and he's not much better.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> Um… I’m going back to this tweet which I know has already been posted… but
> 
> 
> 
> is this person a real journalist or is this some type of (bad taste) joke?  He knows that she sues newspapers etc… so if it’s true I hope he has a good source to back himself.  Because otherwise it’s a horrible thing to post.



I've read some interviews done with party girls who get jetted to foreign countries to provide entertainment. According to them, these are the plum assignments. They are at these parties to be the exotic companions, and sometimes, but not always, will bed the clients and their guests. The Saudi parties were said to be lavish and the party girls were very well compensated for their time.


----------



## Toby93

I just saw the clip of the flopumentary where TW says everyone in her family were unacceptable, except for Doria, who was "quiet and classy".  I don't know about how anyone else's mother was when they were growing up, but my mom never sat in her robe on the FRONT LAWN smoking weed 

From Tom Bowers book.....


----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> She may have learned the "Texas dip" from sorority sisters. When my daughter joined a sorority she needed a white gown for an event. Some of her sisters assumed that everyone had one from cotillion or a deb ball. Um, no. But it is still a thing in many places.


Was your daughter in the southern part of the US? I was in a sorority in the northeast and things were very different vs. our southern counterparts. (If anyone suggested we wear white gowns or do some sort of curtsy or bow, they'd get laughed at).

I would think sororities at Northwestern U are more like those in the northeast vs. the south.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> I saw a thread discussing this and they tried very hard to solve the case of the empty pram, including the assumption that someone was carrying the baby or maybe the pram was huge and Archie could fit in it. Someone pointed out that there was a glimpse of Zed and Archie walking, but none of the baby. I think the pram was just a prop and they didn't think anyone would look too closely at it.



Oh my. The one time I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt!


----------



## haute okole

Chanbal said:


> No further comments…
> View attachment 5669366
> 
> 
> *Thomas Sowell,*_ the inimitable African-American intellectual, was thinking in general terms when he wrote that “*much of the social history of the Western world, over the past three decades, has been a history of replacing what worked with what sounded good*”.
> 
> We have seen this theme across the board, from enterprise to policy. *But nowhere has it been more debilitating, more dangerous and more divisive than in the discussions surrounding race*. In Britain, a remarkably broad section of society has now succumbed to the empty language of Critical Race Theory (CRT), and this, in a twisted irony, threatens to roll back the meaningful progress of race relations in the post-war era.
> 
> There was a time, not more than five years ago, when Britain might have avoided falling into this pit. *The rhetoric of CRT had in the mid-2010s begun to circulate American universities, fuelled by that country’s particularly contentious race politics.* We could have continued on our own journey, gradually improving integration and confronting discrimination in our public institutions – especially in the sphere of policing. But if the wholescale importation of America’s Black Lives Matter movement didn’t put an end to those hopes, then the ongoing Harry and Meghan saga does. *We have not escaped, but are on the verge of replicating the vicious American model.
> 
> In the Sussexes’ documentary as elsewhere, the problem with the adoption of CRT is not that it raises the matter of racism, but that it asserts discrimination without proper explanation*, since the language of CRT remains unquestionable. *It uses pseudo-intellectual phrases, such as “structural racism” to pre-empt debate. *It has a habit of using many words just before “racism” (institutional racism, unconscious racism, tacit racism, petty racism) in the knowledge that the R-word, when stated by or on behalf of a non-white person, is too sensitive to reproach…
> 
> But that is no accident. *The language of CRT provides no path to redemption because many modern “race scholars”, some of whom have a financial interest in racism as a subject matter, do not believe in justice, or even understanding and reconciliation*. What a waste of good faith. And what a waste of words which once had meaning. For each phrase now bandied about was appropriated from a place, or document, in which they had a specific meaning…
> 
> If this is the specific accusation being levelled at Buckingham Palace, then we should evaluate it on the basis of evidence. And if no evidence is provided, *I will struggle to see the documentary as much more than a cynical ploy to exploit racial division for personal gain.*_
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/wbyB4#selection-2139.0-2143.274


Thank you so much for this article.  This is my point with these two insensitive twits.  They are very angry, for whatever perceived slight.  The British public can’t stand them because they are spoiled entitled brats who are ungrateful for the public funds they are living off of.  They have ridiculed the British public as being unsophisticated racists (not true), called both of their families disfunctional azzwipes (so rich coming from them) and wallowed in their “victimhood” BECAUSE it made them RICH. As an Angeleno, we don’t claim MM.  However, she is sadly so typical of the type of F- ambitious actress with no other talent than her looks and the ability to henpeck a border line special needs man from a powerful family.  LA does not claim her.


----------



## EmilyM111

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This reminds me, this morning I was checking FB and stumbled upon a thread of people roasting Piers for the sh*t he tends to say. One time he tweeted a bathing suit picture (an ad, not a pool pic) of Kim and Kylie and wrote "If I were Kim and Kylie, I'd stop being photographed with Kendall", probably suggesting they were fat or something.
> 
> Someone answered "If you were Kim that s*x tape were a horror movie."
> 
> Re: the Kardashians, they took a moderate fortune and no discernable talent and made it into billions, mostly thanks to Kris. The Sussexes can only dream of that kind of success.


As stupid as their show is, they were really entertaining and displayed close family portray (of course it was tv and most likely made up). I was a sucker for early seasons as I miss having a big and noisy family 
The Harkles are just plain boring and pretentious. I doubt even Kris would make them appealing (in a longer term). There is a reason TW didn't make it  beyond one show despite being quite attractive woman. She's just doesn't have same IT factor.


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG
> 
> That said, I feel it's one of the less weird things they've done. Maybe the baby cried and the one not pushing the pram carried it.




But wasn't there a shot next of the shadow of TW holding hands with Archie, no baby on her shoulder from what I could see? Someone who suffered through the series could maybe verify.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

What a mess! 



Headlines from DM:


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> Was your daughter in the southern part of the US? I was in a sorority in the northeast and things were very different vs. our southern counterparts. (If anyone suggested we wear white gowns or do some sort of curtsy or bow, they'd get laughed at).
> 
> I would think sororities at Northwestern U are more like those in the northeast vs. the south.


CA, but there were girls from TX. Plus a lot of girls from OC and the Bay area, where apparently cotillions are still a thing in some circles. I agree about sororities in the northeast vs. the south and Northwestern, but like my daughter's school it draws from all over the country, so MM could have encountered some southerners.


----------



## LittleStar88

charlottawill said:


> CA, but there were girls from TX. Plus a lot of girls from OC and the Bay area, where apparently cotillions are still a thing in some circles. I agree about sororities in the northeast vs. the south and Northwestern, but like my daughter's school it draws from all over the country, so MM could have encountered some southerners.



I’ve lived in the Bay Area my whole life and the closest we have to something like this is a Quinceañera.


----------



## Chanbal

Very good video… boring and not bright.


*Meghan and Harry are 'milking' the 'last moments of care anybody has about them'*​


----------



## Chanbal

Didn't watch this video yet, but its legend is intriguing.


_BUSTED! Meghan TIED to MULTIMILLION SCAMMER!_​
EDIT: Just finished watching this video, and


----------



## pomeline

lallybelle said:


> It really stands out to me this whole narrative that she's trying to create that Doria & her were on their own and Doria's family and neighborhood women helped raise her. AND Doria just goes along with this. I mean it's basically common knowledge now that after the split there were sharing custody until at some point Doria disappears and Thomas is her only parent. We know about her living with him, him paying her private schools, taking her to sets while he was working. etc. I mean it would be one thing to say she reconnected with her Mom and they are very close, why the changing of history, of what really happened? You know all these things are true because they have been meticulously researched and sourced especially by Bower who wanted to leave no opening to be sued and has everything completely spelled out about how he got his info.
> Samantha thinks a lot of it is because of the criticism she received for cutting Thomas off amid his various health issues and etc. Like she's trying to frame a narrative that he was never there and they were never close etc.


There are a lot of things in this whole backstory that make you want to know the whole truth. Didn't Doria attend classes for baby/childcare before Archie was born? Ok so a long time has passed after she had TW but...? I remember some degree mentioned even. Or was it just something that was floated at the time, like all the articles about how she was going to move in with H&M?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

EmilyM111 said:


> As stupid as their show is, they were really entertaining and displayed close family portray (of course it was tv and most likely made up). I was a sucker for early seasons as I miss having a big and noisy family
> The Harkles are just plain boring and pretentious. I doubt even Kris would make them appealing (in a longer term). There is a reason TW didn't make it  beyond one show despite being quite attractive woman. She's just doesn't have same IT factor.



Not gonna lie, I used to like them for many years. Now I feel several of them are slowly going off the deep end. I agree they seem to be a close and loving family.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> But wasn't there a shot next of the shadow of TW holding hands with Archie, no baby on her shoulder from what I could see? Someone who suffered through the series could maybe verify.



I've since revisited my beliefs. I just couldn't imagine people would do a pretend walk with an empty pram and leave the baby at home. WTFFF. They were not even trying.


----------



## DoggieBags

I had dinner with one of my best friends of many years last night. She has minimal interest in the BRF, is not on TPF so has never read this thread, and she surprised the heck out of me by telling me she had watched the first 3 episodes of the Harkle Mockumentary on Netflix. She said she didn’t watch it closely as she had it on while she was cooking but her initial impression was that it was a very professionally put together documentary of the Harkles love story. And it came across as a sweet account of their relationship. However, as we discussed the things she recalled from the documentary, she said she started thinking that some things didn’t quite hang together. So her initial impression was favorable but became less so as she thought about it afterwards and became even less favorable after our discussion. She was very surprised when I told her that Thomas actually brought TW up and that Doria was out of the picture for a number of years because the Netflix account has Doria as having custody of TW and being the parent who raised her with Thomas only occasionally popping up in their lives.  I wonder how many other viewers with no particular opinion or interest in the Harkles prior to watching the Netflix thing came away with an initially positive reaction that faded upon further reflection.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rhyvin

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ve lived in the Bay Area my whole life and the closest we have to something like this is a Quinceañera.


I’m from the Bay Area (Los Gatos/Saratoga) and had friends in high school attend cotillion


----------



## purseinsanity

lallybelle said:


> It really stands out to me this whole narrative that she's trying to create that Doria & her were on their own and *Doria's family and neighborhood women helped raise her*. AND Doria just goes along with this. I mean it's basically common knowledge now that after the split there were sharing custody until at some point Doria disappears and Thomas is her only parent. We know about her living with him, him paying her private schools, taking her to sets while he was working. etc. I mean it would be one thing to say she reconnected with her Mom and they are very close, why the changing of history, of what really happened? You know all these things are true because they have been meticulously researched and sourced especially by Bower who wanted to leave no opening to be sued and has everything completely spelled out about how he got his info.
> Samantha thinks a lot of it is because of the criticism she received for cutting Thomas off amid his various health issues and etc. Like she's trying to frame a narrative that he was never there and they were never close etc.


Maybe she's trying to establish she "really is black" claiming she was raised in a black neighborhood by black women.  Helps further her racism propaganda.


----------



## bag-mania

DoggieBags said:


> I wonder how many other viewers with no particular opinion or interest in the Harkles prior to watching the Netflix thing came away with an initially positive reaction that faded upon further reflection.


Unfortunately, there are many who will come away with a favorable view but will not bother to think about it afterwards. Those are the ones who have been bamboozled.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5669407



That's what I had suspected!  Haz couldn't tell the exact dates because they were shot more recently than when they claimed!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I am watching Lisa Eldridge's Christmas gift guide. I knew she gives ALL the proceeds from her Youtube channel to charity, and she just said she'd generated hundreds of thousands of pounds and is nearing half a million. And the Sussexes are giving away sandwiches and chips. WTF.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> View attachment 5669376


I find it hard to see any other explanation for her arrogance than narcissism.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Geez Harry. You didn't have to prostitute yourself, your dad has money.


----------



## LittleStar88

rhyvin said:


> I’m from the Bay Area (Los Gatos/Saratoga) and had friends in high school attend cotillion


We were almost neighbors!

This cotillion thing must be a deep secret. Or maybe it’s a newer thing and I’m just old?


----------



## marietouchet

redney said:


> Was your daughter in the southern part of the US? I was in a sorority in the northeast and things were very different vs. our southern counterparts. (If anyone suggested we wear white gowns or do some sort of curtsy or bow, they'd get laughed at).
> 
> I would think sororities at Northwestern U are more like those in the northeast vs. the south.


MM was a Kappa Kappa Gamma. Sororities like KKG are national, and they tend to have a certain flavor across the US. In my time, KKG were the pretty girls on campus, out to get their MRS degree, not the intellectuals. Barbie is the closest Thing to a KKG I could think of …


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> We were almost neighbors!
> 
> This cotillion thing must be a deep secret. Or maybe it’s a newer thing and I’m just old?


There were cotillions in Manhattan, New York. You had to go to etiquette classes, dancing, grooming classes, the works.
Think what it would be like if William Hanson, the UK etiquette expert, was your Saturday appointment every week. Tea at the Palm Court of the Plaza was a required milestone.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Jktgal said:


> She really has a fixation on hugging. I believe this was (one of?) my first posts on this thread when I really noticed there's something wrong with this woman.


She's an utter idiot or she would've noticed the royal and dignified tradition of shaking hands and touching cheeks on both sides. That is something I would appreciate instead of being grabbed in a bearhug by a complete stranger and I don't like hugging anyone until I've known them for some time.


----------



## rhyvin

LittleStar88 said:


> We were almost neighbors!
> 
> This cotillion thing must be a deep secret. Or maybe it’s a newer thing and I’m just old?


 it’s tied to Junior League. It was around 2008 so maybe?


----------



## rhyvin

rhyvin said:


> it’s tied to Junior League. It was around 2008 so maybe?


Junior Cotillion™ is a three year curriculum designed to give young people instruction and practice in the courtesies that make life more pleasant for them and those around them

Sounds like Meghan should have joined


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Random Twitter person may have a point. It's six tweets long.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ha.


----------



## VickyB

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ve lived in the Bay Area my whole life and the closest we have to something like this is a Quinceañera.


There's the Cotillion every December for only the daughters of very old SF families.  Then there is also the Presbyterian in June, now officially called the CPMC Ball, which was started by the hospital's Women's Board. That one is not restricted to old SF families.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> There were cotillions in Manhattan, New York. You had to go to etiquette classes, dancing, grooming classes, the works.
> Think what it would be like if William Hanson, the UK etiquette expert, was your Saturday appointment every week. Tea at the Palm Court of the Plaza was a required milestone.


My mom went to charm school in NY 

Maybe I’m confused. I thought Cotillon was like the big southern ball where a girl is debuted. Not actual etiquette classes. If I’m phrasing that right.


----------



## LittleStar88

rhyvin said:


> it’s tied to Junior League. It was around 2008 so maybe?


Ok I’m just old


----------



## sdkitty

sorry if I'm not keeping up but has anyone here actually watched this show?


----------



## bag-mania

And here’s the level of ignorance that will keep Harry and Meghan popular. This singer (who some of you may know but I don’t) doesn’t know anything about Meghan yet she’s sure that she knows that Meghan is right and the BRF is bad. When you were dealing with such an extreme level of closemindedness it’s no wonder they won’t go away.

TMZ has two pro-Netflix show articles today. They seem to be firmly on the bandwagon









						Maren Morris Defends Meghan Markle, Says Several Royals Have Left Family
					

Meghan Markle has someone in her corner besides Prince Harry -- Maren Morris says the wave of hatred for the Duchess makes no sense, especially considering the royal family's recent history.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

I found this on a slide show from Bazaar
Harry looks like Lilibet in this pic I think


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> And here’s the level of ignorance that will keep Harry and Meghan popular. This singer (who some of you may know but I don’t) doesn’t know anything about Meghan yet she’s sure that she knows that Meghan is right and the BRF is bad. When you were dealing with such an extreme level of closemindedness it’s no wonder they won’t go away.
> 
> TMZ has two pro-Netflix show articles today. They seem to be firmly on the bandwagon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maren Morris Defends Meghan Markle, Says Several Royals Have Left Family
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle has someone in her corner besides Prince Harry -- Maren Morris says the wave of hatred for the Duchess makes no sense, especially considering the royal family's recent history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


she's a country singer....I wonder why she would even be talking about them at all


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> sorry if I'm not keeping up but has anyone here actually watched this show?



I had thought about it but don’t want the eye strain from my eyes rolling so far into the back of my head.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> I’ve lived in the Bay Area my whole life and the closest we have to something like this is a Quinceañera.


Like I said, in some circles. Not the kind I run in.  



> https://www.nobhillgazette.com/content/tncms/live/


----------



## VickyB

I watched episode 1. I guess I was in a self harm kinda mood.


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I had thought about it but don’t want the eye strain from my eyes rolling so far into the back of my head.


I don't have netflix....I don't think I'd watch if I did but I suppose curiousity might get the best of me and I might watch part of it


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> My mom went to charm school in NY
> 
> Maybe I’m confused. I thought Cotillon was like the big southern ball where a girl is debuted. Not actual etiquette classes. If I’m phrasing that right.


Cotillion is a process, classes culminating in your BIG DAY, but one would get invited to a whole slew of parties


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> she's a country singer....I wonder why she would even be talking about them at all


She’s likely only heard one-sided stories that Meghan is a woman who has been unjustly demonized by other women. It got her righteous indignation all worked up.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> She’s likely only heard one-sided stories that Meghan is a woman who has been unjustly demonized by other women. It got her righteous indignation all worked up.


I get it but why would anyone be talking to her on the subject?


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> this seems credible to me....first I've heard that H was worried it would look "weird" for M to have no relatives at wedding, which totally makes sense


I don't like either of these grifters but H seems more genuine than the WIFE....just even the way he (allegedly) talks - "bonkers", "weird".....like everything he says isn't necessarily rehearsed.....his expression when the WIFE was demonstrating her curtsey looked real (until he switched it off).  There could be hope for him maybe


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I get it but why would anyone be talking to her on the subject?


Nobody asked her. She took to social media about it all by herself, a TikTok video I believe. The bigger question is why did TMZ want to promote it?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> she's a country singer....I wonder why she would even be talking about them at all


She seems to jump on many bandwagons and have an opinion on everything.  Keeps her in the news.


----------



## charlottawill

VickyB said:


> There's the Cotillion every December for only the daughters of very old SF families.  Then there is also the Presbyterian in June, now officially called the CPMC Ball, which was started by the hospital's Women's Board. That one is not restricted to old SF families.


Thanks, I tried to link the CPMC one.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Nobody asked her. She took to social media about it all by herself, a TikTok video I believe. The bigger question is why did TMZ want to promote it?


I have to admit that what their camp said about them having a cottage industry built around bashing them (or in this case promoting them) rings true....I just can't wait until they become boring to everyone


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> sorry if I'm not keeping up but has anyone here actually watched this show?



Not me. My sanity is fragile these days.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

sdkitty said:


> sorry if I'm not keeping up but has anyone here actually watched this show?


I watched it!


----------



## EverSoElusive

Starting Episode 2 now...

1) Harry said "There's a lot of people who think, "They've got such a problem with paparazzi." and then the next scene was really old shot of paparazzi clocking away.

*Come on now! If they really have such issue with paparazzi, why are they not using actual footages from their POV that paparazzi were after them instead of some old a£s footage borrowed from elsewhere. Clearly they cannot prove it because ain't nobody is following their sorry a&s3s as they want people to believe.*


2) Doria's ready to have her voice heard. Ha! She's reenacting her phone call with Z-list when Z-list whispered to Doria that she's dating Harry. At that point, nobody knew and not like Z-list was some kinda A-list celebs or politicians that she was bugged and cannot speak in a normal tone if they really whispered on that phone call  That's their best way of making it seemed like they had to go hush-hush though she's the one leaking sh!T and pushing to go public? Pathetic.


3) Voiceover from probably a TV talk show host saying that Z-list is very philanthropic and is involved with UN so maybe that's the original connection  It was mostly about photo op for Z-list.

Also, how philanthropic have they been ever since establishing Archewell? They have (allegedly) skimmed more than they have donated. Very philanthropic indeed.


4) Flower shopping pap scene - Z-list said Harry told her that she shouldn't talk to the paparazzi because the media was claiming that she liked it due to her being caught smiling in the photo that was published.

There's already claim that she or her camp called the paparazzi themselves. I'm certainly inclined to believe that.

It is not just this particular time that she's caught smiling into the paparazzi cameras. She's always that one person who knows where the cameras are at, looks into them and smiles to have her pictures taken.


5) Z-list said her house in Toronto was surrounded (by paparazzi) with the screen showing what looks like two bodyguards at her doorstep but I don't see paparazzi? Again, delusions of grandeur 

And then following that, the next scene shows a picture of Harry on the phone with his voiceover saying he was hearing all of this from thousands of miles away. Honestly, what weirdo would have taken a photo of Harry at the exact moment when he was on the phone with Z-list and "hearing all this from thousands of miles away"? Much like everything else, yet another staged photo or photo from another time.


6) Z-list just told the grocery store story about how people approached Doria asking where's Z-list's because *(Z-list said) she's really fair skinned* and Doria is darker.

I thought her sugars said we're lying on her when we commented about her to spray tans. Suddenly she's admitting in her mockumentary that she's fair skinned. I see.


7) When her parents' relationship ended, she lives with her mom. Her grandmother was close by. Her sister was close by. What??? I thought she was an only child. My bad. Again! 

Suddenly Samantha is her sister.


8) Doria just described Z-list as a congenial child, making friends very easily. She's a psychopath at best.


9) Z-list said now people are very aware of her race because people in the UK made it such an issue when she went to the UK and before that, most people didn't treat her like a black woman. Woe is me. Woe is me! This gal had forgotten all the support that she had received from us and everybody else before she threw the BRF under the bus and turned everything into a racial issue. Even black people are speaking out against her now. Continue to place that race card. I don't see her commenting on how she CHOSE to PASS as a white woman before Harry.


10) Hearing them whining about long distance relationship really bothers me. My husband and I dated long distance for a few years before I moved to the US. We made it work just like everyone else. Difference between ourselves and them is that we don't get to see each other as frequently as we possibly wanted. These two a&shats can afford to fly all the time and have a more flexible schedule than most regular couples who are doing LDRs. No one asked them to do LDR. They both could have dated and married other people and we wouldn't be here with a sham of a couple 


11) Z-list claimed that she didn't know she was going to meet QEII for the first time and Harry asked if she knew how to curtsy. I'm pretty sure Harry wouldn't have sprung a visit with the Queen without telling Z-list in advance and that she would have to curtsy to the Queen. If this is true, then that's very wrong of Harry given that he as a royal knows there are protocols to be followed and that Z-list did not grow up following them like he did therefore heads up is needed.


12) And wow, that look of disgust on Harry's face was priceless when Z-list bowed forward deeply. Did they not see that during the edit or is N3tlix making fun of their jesters that they left the scene on as is instead of a reshoot?


13) Z-list just wanted to go volunteer. She's not chasing an Oscar  Oh you don't say. How often does she volunteer? Instead of volunteering, she's spending her time doing a mockumentary. Then calling paparazzi for photo ops. If that's volunteering, sign me up.


14) Proposal story on mockumentary doesn't match the story they shared on the engagement interview. If anyone is lying, it is them.


15) Brexit-racism... Gosh this shouldn't even be part of the mockumentary. They try to drag just about anything and everything to be part of their storyline. They really didn't have enough materials, did they?


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> She seems to jump on many bandwagons and have an opinion on everything.  Keeps her in the news.



Maybe she thinks sharing the same initials, MM, gives her a special connection?

Or, she has a new album coming out and this is collateral click bait.

Never heard of her, rolled right over the first few sentences, waaaaa waaaaa waaaa, white noise.


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I watched it!


will you watch again?


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Maybe she thinks sharing the same initials, MM, gives her a special connection?
> 
> Or, she has a new album coming out and this is collateral click bait.
> 
> Never heard of her, rolled right over the first few sentences, waaaaa waaaaa waaaa, white noise.


it's a shame she's doing this....I think she is actually talented and that should be her currency


----------



## Mrs.Z

sdkitty said:


> will you watch again?


I probably will only bc I’m flying that day and it will pass the time.  It’s bound to be uglier as we ended at the wedding, so it hasn’t even really touched on the part about them leaving and the real nastiness.  I take it with a grain of salt, it’s just another PR move to make them look good…..documentary IT IS NOT!


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I probably will only bc I’m flying that day and it will pass the time.  It’s bound to be uglier as we ended at the wedding, so it hasn’t even really touched on the part about them leaving and the real nastiness.  I take it with a grain of salt, it’s just another PR move to make them look good…..documentary IT IS NOT!


more like a "reality" show.....I'm sure andy cohen would give her a job


----------



## Mrs.Z

sdkitty said:


> more like a "reality" show.....I'm sure andy cohen would give her a job


It’s definitely a reality show, that’s why when they awkwardly cut and start discussing Brexit and Slavery it’s incredibly strange and the presentation is narrow and limited to serve their own agenda obviously.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> sorry if I'm not keeping up but has anyone here actually watched this show?


Ok, I'll fess up.  It's been pouring rain here, I'm sick (AGAIN for what seems like the 100th time this past month) and I thought I would feel better if I vomited, so I watched the first episode and about 20 minutes of the second.
It was as nauseating as I assumed.  Most of their "friends" seem like paid robots.  They're all gushing over how she had an "amazing, full life" before meeting Haz, how "genuine" she is, how "authentic" and "kind".  It really annoyed me how they refer to each other as "H" and "M", like their names are sooooo cumbersome to say.  I saw the fake "paparazzi" scene that BLG so gloriously reviewed.  The whole thing is a whiny, boring, one sided piece of fluff.  Archie is finally trotted out.  The kid is 3.5 years old but seems to have a speech impediment.  Unless my niece and nephew are super intelligent (which they *are*), he seems to be a little developmentally delayed.  Maybe I wasn't paying close attention (it was really hard to!) but I don't recall seeing Invisibet at all, unless she was the baby looking at the formal picture of "Grandma Diana".  There seemed to be as many shots of Di, the Royals and fake paps as there were of Haz and TW, which actually helped prevent gagging all the time.  The curtsy scene was infuriating, and I would've loved to slap that giddy smile off TW's face as she marveled at herself for being so clever and funny.  It seems like they're re-writing their "truth", from who raised her to how they met, how he proposed, to basically everything.
I'm not sure I can go back and watch any more, TBH.  I think I've sacrificed enough of my sanity for you all.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> Ok, I'll fess up.  It's been pouring rain here, I'm sick (AGAIN for what seems like the 100th time this past month) and I thought I would feel better if I vomited, so I watched the first episode and about 20 minutes of the second.
> It was as nauseating as I assumed.  Most of their "friends" seem like paid robots.  They're all nauseatingly gushing over how she had an "amazing, full life" before meeting Haz, how "genuine" she is, how "authentic" and "kind".  It really annoyed me how they refer to each other as "H" and "M", like their names are sooooo cumbersome to say.  I saw the fake "paparazzi" scene that BLG so gloriously reviewed.  The whole thing is a whiny, boring, one sided piece of fluff.  Archie is finally trotted out.  The kid is 3.5 years old but seems to have a speech impediment.  Unless my niece and nephew are super intelligent (which they *are*), he seems to be a little developmentally delayed.  Maybe I wasn't paying close attention (it was really hard to!) but I don't recall seeing Invisibet at all, unless she was the baby looking at the formal picture of "Grandma Diana".  There seemed to be as many shots of Di, the Royals and fake paps as there were of Haz and TW, which actually helped prevent gagging all the time.  The curtsy scene was infuriating, and I would've loved to slap that giddy smile off TW's face as she marveled at herself for being so clever and funny.  It seems like they're re-writing their "truth", from who raised her to how they met, how he proposed, to basically everything.
> I'm not sure I can go back and watch any more, TBH.  I think I've sacrificed enough of my sanity for you all.


Hope you're feeling better soon!


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Geez Harry. You didn't have to prostitute yourself, your dad has money.



It may all boil down to stubborn pride and not wanting to acknowledge that his brother and his friends were right.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Ok, I'll fess up.  It's been pouring rain here, I'm sick (AGAIN for what seems like the 100th time this past month) and I thought I would feel better if I vomited, so I watched the first episode and about 20 minutes of the second.
> It was as nauseating as I assumed.  Most of their "friends" seem like paid robots.  They're all gushing over how she had an "amazing, full life" before meeting Haz, how "genuine" she is, how "authentic" and "kind".  It really annoyed me how they refer to each other as "H" and "M", like their names are sooooo cumbersome to say.  I saw the fake "paparazzi" scene that BLG so gloriously reviewed.  The whole thing is a whiny, boring, one sided piece of fluff.  Archie is finally trotted out.  The kid is 3.5 years old but seems to have a speech impediment.  Unless my niece and nephew are super intelligent (which they *are*), he seems to be a little developmentally delayed.  Maybe I wasn't paying close attention (it was really hard to!) but I don't recall seeing Invisibet at all, unless she was the baby looking at the formal picture of "Grandma Diana".  There seemed to be as many shots of Di, the Royals and fake paps as there were of Haz and TW, which actually helped prevent gagging all the time.  The curtsy scene was infuriating, and I would've loved to slap that giddy smile off TW's face as she marveled at herself for being so clever and funny.  It seems like they're re-writing their "truth", from who raised her to how they met, how he proposed, to basically everything.
> I'm not sure I can go back and watch any more, TBH.  I think I've sacrificed enough of my sanity for you all.


do you actually hear them addressing eachother as M&H?  that's ridiculous


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I don't recall exactly what she said.  Did they recoil?  I suspect they just stiffened a bit but didn't push her away or tell her no hugging.
> In the case I talked about in my post yesterday, the woman actually said the exact words "I'm a hugger" after I told her I didn't want a hug from her.  Really?  In this day and age of Covid, etc.?
> But Meegain using this to imply Kate and William are cold people is disgusting.


I'd like to add something - Brits are probably not as warm and openly emotional as some other nationalities....but I don't think Meegain is either - it's an act


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## EverSoElusive

youngster said:


> Regarding the mocking curtsy, its already been mentioned that if MM had married into the Japanese royal family and performed a mocking reenactment of their tradition and custom of bowing, she'd likely have been canceled.  Few would tolerate that, I think. So, I don't blame the reaction at all from the UK press and people. These are their social customs and conventions and, if she didn't like curtsying, then she should have discussed this with Harry and the staff and figured out what to do instead in advance.


If Z-list thinks curtsy is stupid or outdated (without saying it out loud), she should check out the Thai way. People would literally have to be on the floor, men and women alike, to greet the king. Not only servants do that. Even the king's own wife and elderly sister would have to greet him the same way. See how she likes that in comparison! And if anyone tries to mock the Thai king or royal family, people would get thrown in jail so fast, not just cancelled.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> do you actually hear them addressing eachother ad M&H?  that's ridiculous


Yep, that's what they call each other


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> Starting Episode 2 now...
> 
> 1) Harry said "There's a lot of people who think, "They've got such a problem with paparazzi." and then the next scene was really old shot of paparazzi clocking away.
> 
> *Come on now! If they really have such issue with paparazzi, why are they not using actual footages from their POV that paparazzi were after them instead of some old a£s footage borrowed from elsewhere. Clearly they cannot prove it because ain't nobody is following their sorry a&s3s as they want people to believe.*
> 
> 
> 2) Doria's ready to have her voice heard. Ha! She's reenacting her phone call with Z-list when Z-list whispered to Doria that she's dating Harry. At that point, nobody knew and not like Z-list was some kinda A-list celebs or politicians that she was bugged and cannot speak in a normal tone if they really whispered on that phone call  That's their best way of making it seemed like they had to go hush-hush though she's the one leaking sh!T and pushing to go public? Pathetic.
> 
> 
> 3) Voiceover from probably a TV talk show host saying that Z-list is very philanthropic and is involved with UN so maybe that's the original connection  It was mostly about photo op for Z-list.
> 
> Also, how philanthropic have they been ever since establishing Archewell? They have (allegedly) skimmed more than they have donated. Very philanthropic indeed.
> 
> 
> 4) Flower shopping pap scene - Z-list said Harry told her that she shouldn't talk to the paparazzi because the media was claiming that she liked it due to her being caught smiling in the photo that was published.
> 
> There's already claim that she or her camp called the paparazzi themselves. I'm certainly inclined to believe that.
> 
> It is not just this particular time that she's caught smiling into the paparazzi cameras. She's always that one person who knows where the cameras are at, looks into them and smiles to have her pictures taken.
> 
> 
> 5) Z-list said her house in Toronto was surrounded (by paparazzi) with the screen showing what looks like two bodyguards at her doorstep but I don't see paparazzi? Again, delusions of grandeur
> 
> And then following that, the next scene shows a picture of Harry on the phone with his voiceover saying he was hearing all of this from thousands of miles away. Honestly, what weirdo would have taken a photo of Harry at the exact moment when he was on the phone with Z-list and "hearing all this from thousands of miles away"? Much like everything else, yet another staged photo or photo from another time.
> 
> 
> 6) Z-list just told the grocery store story about how people approached Doria asking where's Z-list's because *(Z-list said) she's really fair skinned* and Doria is darker.
> 
> I thought her sugars said we're lying on her when we commented about her to spray tans. Suddenly she's admitting in her mockumentary that she's fair skinned. I see.
> 
> 
> 7) When her parents' relationship ended, she lives with her mom. Her grandmother was close by. Her sister was close by. What??? I thought she was an only child. My bad. Again!
> 
> Suddenly Samantha is her sister.
> 
> 
> 8) Doria just described Z-list as a congenial child, making friends very easily. She's a psychopath at best.
> 
> 
> 9) Z-list said now people are very aware of her race because people in the UK made it such an issue when she went to the UK and before that, most people didn't treat her like a black woman. Woe is me. Woe is me! This gal had forgotten all the support that she had received from us and everybody else before she threw the BRF under the bus and turned everything into a racial issue. Even black people are speaking out against her now. Continue to place that race card. I don't see her commenting on how she CHOSE to PASS as a white woman before Harry.
> 
> 
> 10) Hearing them whining about long distance relationship really bothers me. My husband and I dated long distance for a few years before I moved to the US. We made it work just like everyone else. Difference between ourselves and them is that we don't get to see each other as frequently as we possibly wanted. These two a&shats can afford to fly all the time and have a more flexible schedule than most regular couples who are doing LDRs. No one asked them to do LDR. They both could have dated and married other people and we wouldn't be here with a sham of a couple
> 
> 
> 11) Z-list claimed that she didn't know she was going to meet QEII for the first time and Harry asked if she knew how to curtsy. I'm pretty sure Harry wouldn't have sprung a visit with the Queen without telling Z-list in advance and that she would have to curtsy to the Queen. If this is true, then that's very wrong of Harry given that he as a royal knows there are protocols to be followed and that Z-list did not grow up following them like he did therefore heads up is needed.
> 
> 
> 12) And wow, that look of disgust on Harry's face was priceless when Z-list bowed forward deeply. Did they not see that during the edit or is N3tlix making fun of their jesters that they left the scene on as is instead of a reshoot?
> 
> 
> 13) Z-list just wanted to go volunteer. She's not chasing an Oscar  Oh you don't say. How often does she volunteer? Instead of volunteering, she's spending her time doing a mockumentary. Then calling paparazzi for photo ops. If that's volunteering, sign me up.
> 
> 
> 14) Proposal story on mockumentary doesn't match the story they shared on the engagement interview. If anyone is lying, it is them.
> 
> 
> 15) Brexit-racism... Gosh this shouldn't even be part of the mockumentary. They try to drag just about anything and everything to be part of their storyline. They really didn't have enough materials, did they?


Meghan is paler now than when she was a child.  She has definitely been Michael Jacksoning herself.

I have not watched this series, but I have the feeling that everything is a re-enactment.  It is like those historical re-enactments you see about statesmen and monarchs from 200 years ago.  The story was that she called her father and told him about Harry.  I never read that she called her mother and told her she was dating him.


----------



## sdkitty

Toby93 said:


> Yep, that's what they call each other


ridiculous


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> do you actually hear them addressing eachother ad M&H?  that's ridiculous


Yes!


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


>



"I am more amazed *Doria the Psychedelic Explorer *could even remember anything from any part of her past."


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


>




This stupid fake laugh.


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> Yes!


I recall hearing she called him H but I thought he called her "My Wife"


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Hope you're feeling better soon!


Thank you!


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> Meghan is paler now than when she was a child.  She has definitely been Michael Jacksoning herself.
> 
> I have not watched this series, but I have the feeling that everything is a re-enactment.  It is like those historical re-enactments you see about statesmen and monarchs from 200 years ago.  The story was that she called her father and told him about Harry.  I never read that she called her mother and told her she was dating him.


The issue I have with the "re-enactments" is that we are not told they are re-enactments and we are purposely led to believe that this was filmed years ago.

I saw something earlier today that implies that even the scene where she was supposed to be in Vancouver with the towel around her, it was actually filmed for her and she was editing the footage with the producer.  Nothing is ever honest with these two.


----------



## pomeline

charlottawill said:


>



Or... "When you die, how do you want people to celebrate?" That was actually an ad for a funeral planning service with a couple in the picture having fun. 

Harry has been given his own beer in a pub in the UK...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




I think I liked her better when she didn't talk. Oh well.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> Cotillion is a process, classes culminating in your BIG DAY, but one would get invited to a whole slew of parties



Ah, I see. I need to look into this more. I thought it was just wealthy kids having a big coming out and being presented as ready to date.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> Meghan is paler now than when she was a child.  She has definitely been Michael Jacksoning herself.
> 
> I have not watched this series, but I have the feeling that everything is a re-enactment.  It is like those historical re-enactments you see about statesmen and monarchs from 200 years ago.  The story was that she called her father and told him about Harry.  I never read that she called her mother and told her she was dating him.



I mean, they claimed she lived with her single mother when everyone knows her father brought her up. I guess faking a phonecall is minor in comparison.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I liked her better when she didn't talk. Oh well.


for sure


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

I love PDina


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


> I love PDina



We know they were wired up.  They were so stupid and careless that you could see the wires and the battery packs.


----------



## youngster

bag-mania said:


> And here’s the level of ignorance that will keep Harry and Meghan popular. This singer (who some of you may know but I don’t) doesn’t know anything about Meghan yet she’s sure that she knows that Meghan is right and the BRF is bad. When you were dealing with such an extreme level of closemindedness it’s no wonder they won’t go away.



So the ratings are in:
UK 2.4 million viewers for Episode 1
UK Episode 2 had 1.5 million viewers while Episode 3 had 800,000.

US 1.0 million viewers for episode 1








						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix show flops in the US & with critics
					

HARRY and Meghan’s Netflix show was a ratings hit in the UK – but flopped in the US and with critics. The first episode of the six-parter was watched by 2.4 million people on TV sets in the UK, acc…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				




These are not good ratings for the U.S.  We have a population of 330+ million.  For the UK, episode 1 had pretty good numbers but the drop off was huge.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> So the ratings are in:
> UK 2.4 million viewers for Episode 1
> UK Episode 2 had 1.5 million viewers while Episode 3 had 800,000.
> 
> US 1.0 million viewers for episode 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix show flops in the US & with critics
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan’s Netflix show was a ratings hit in the UK – but flopped in the US and with critics. The first episode of the six-parter was watched by 2.4 million people on TV sets in the UK, acc…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are not good ratings for the U.S.  We have a population of 330+ million.  For the UK, episode 1 had pretty good numbers but the drop off was huge.


going down episide by episode


----------



## xincinsin

Mrs.Z said:


> I probably will only bc I’m flying that day and it will pass the time.  It’s bound to be uglier as we ended at the wedding, so it hasn’t even really touched on the part about them leaving and the real nastiness.  I take it with a grain of salt, it’s just another PR move to make them look good…..documentary IT IS NOT!


   
I don't have Netflix, so I've been watching snippets posted with the audio turned off. The first few reviews I read mentioned that the Harkles were using mood music and voice-overs to manipulate viewer emotions, so I want to negate that.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think I liked her better when she didn't talk. Oh well.


To paraphrase Sparry, people will do anything for $$$$$. Doria had a price to stay mum. Let's see if she negotiated another CEO position out of this deal.


----------



## charlottawill

The Harkles are not at the CNN Heroes Awards tonight?? Oh wait, they couldn't buy one. And the winners are everyday people who are actually changing the world, not play acting at it.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> I recall hearing she called him H but I thought he called her "My Wife"


Shockingly, he called her M more times than "my wife" on the mockumentary


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Lodpah

I heard this and put MM's name insert.

[Meghan Markle] is like a barnacle who attaches herself to someone powerful and absorbs all the power to herself.


----------



## Toby93

They took a photographer inside the Queens dollhouse?


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



I'm in the office. I can't afford to break down and howl when I read "_For a pair so savagely harassed, they don’t appear to have any footage of themselves being harassed savagely – where’s a bunch of bloodsucking hacks when you need them?_"

(starting to appreciate work-from-home more now  )


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




Isn't it ironic that someone who naturally would be fond of getting rid of the monarchy sides with the BRF just because the Troublesome Two are so awful?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> They took a photographer inside the Queens dollhouse?




WTF! 

But also, I thought Bea was its curator?


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> We know they were wired up.  They were so stupid and careless that you could see the wires and the battery packs.


This is a valid concern. According to Palace sources, there are many tapes they recorded inside the Palace…


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> This is a valid concern. According to Palace sources, there are many tapes they recorded inside the Palace…



What’s British law regarding tape recording conversations without the consent of the other party?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> They took a photographer inside the Queens dollhouse?



A commenter said:

"They have to be banned from royal properties."  How about banned from the UK?


----------



## scarlet555

youngster said:


> So the ratings are in:
> UK 2.4 million viewers for Episode 1
> UK Episode 2 had 1.5 million viewers while Episode 3 had 800,000.
> 
> US 1.0 million viewers for episode 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix show flops in the US & with critics
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan’s Netflix show was a ratings hit in the UK – but flopped in the US and with critics. The first episode of the six-parter was watched by 2.4 million people on TV sets in the UK, acc…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are not good ratings for the U.S.  We have a population of 330+ million.  For the UK, episode 1 had pretty good numbers but the drop off was huge.


a Netflix FLOP is a relief for me…. wasn’t sure if Americans were eating it up or not… social media engine and corporation are well paid by Cringe’s PR, I suppose this means anyone can fake a love story and call it a documentary/real tv is not real at all….


----------



## charlottawill

I won't watch the show, but I have seen a lot of pictures on the internet. I've seen a dozen of Archie, but not one of Lilibet. I've seen one of MM holding a newborn in front of a mirror and she actually looked postpartum, but it said that the baby was Archie and the pic was taken in Frogmore Cottage. To the brave souls who watched, did you actually see Lilibet?


----------



## csshopper

Harry is quoted in several articles as saying he is “delighted“ and has “no regrets”
about their Netflix series.

Perhaps this was before the viewing numbers were released showing the HUGE drop off in viewership from episode 1 to 3.

Of course, they make money regardless, but the ultimate cost to their “brand” is what appears to be a significant shift to the negative as they are exposed as liars, grifters and nasty mocking people to a wide audience that might previously have bought into their fantasy. Turns out THEIR truth is really ugly and people are seeing the REAL truth.

Hazbeen must be on some serious psychotropic drugs if he is unable to “read the room” (globe) and thinks this outcome is “delightful”.  All he has done is provide continuing proof he and TW are raging narcissists, practicing rampant hypocrisy living with a tenuous grasp of reality.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> They took a photographer inside the Queens dollhouse?



One of the comments was wonderful. Remember some Meghan-pal claiming that the dim duo were so downtrodden that they could barely stand straight or up? I'm sure that was subjective and not literal  One of the comments drolly speculated that they were talking about the QEII dollhouse.

ETA, found it in the Bethany Frankel interview: "I had a very A-list person call me when I commented on Meghan Markle before the Oprah interview and said to me: 'Can you please take down what you said, *they can barely stand up in Frogmore Cottage *and they can't afford their security'".


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it ironic that someone who naturally would be fond of getting rid of the monarchy sides with the BRF just because the Troublesome Two are so awful?


The enemy of my enemy etc etc


DoggieBags said:


> What’s British law regarding tape recording conversations without the consent of the other party?


Maybe this was why the Kennedy woman hailed them as heroes - because they are willing to break laws and use subterfuge to combat injustice! Sounds better than saying they are in it for the $$$$

From vox: The blandness of _Harry and Meghan_ is perhaps, then, the result of the fact that since they left the royal family, Harry and Meghan’s most valuable remaining asset is their story. The trouble is, they’ve already told it.








						Netflix’s Harry and Meghan docuseries brings nothing new to the table
					

The three-episode first volume trods extremely familiar ground.




					www.vox.com


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Harry is quoted in several articles as saying he is “delighted“ and has “no regrets”
> about their Netflix series.
> 
> Perhaps this was before the viewing numbers were released showing the HUGE drop off in viewership from episode 1 to 3.
> 
> Of course, they make money regardless, but the ultimate cost to their “brand” is what appears to be a significant shift to the negative as they are exposed as liars, grifters and nasty mocking people to a wide audience that might previously have bought into their fantasy. Turns out THEIR truth is really ugly and people are seeing the REAL truth.
> 
> Hazbeen must be on some serious psychotropic drugs if he is unable to “read the room” (globe) and thinks this outcome is “delightful”.  All he has done is provide continuing proof he and TW are raging narcissists, practicing rampant hypocrisy living with a tenuous grasp of reality.


well, I think Harry just says what the WIFE tells him to say most of the time


----------



## EverSoElusive

charlottawill said:


> I won't watch the show, but I have seen a lot of pictures on the internet. I've seen a dozen of Archie, but not one of Lilibet. I've seen one of MM holding a newborn in front of a mirror and she actually looked postpartum, but it said that the baby was Archie and the pic was taken in Frogmore Cottage. To the brave souls who watched, did you actually see Lilibet?


I just finished the second episode and I haven't noticed Invisibet. Or maybe because she's so invisible that I might have overlooked   I've seen pictures people posted online where Harry had a baby on the lap while Archie was standing somewhere and Harry was seen reading a book??? Maybe that's Episode 3. Haven't started yet.


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I won't watch the show, but I have seen a lot of pictures on the internet. I've seen a dozen of Archie, but not one of Lilibet. I've seen one of MM holding a newborn in front of a mirror and she actually looked postpartum, but it said that the baby was Archie and the pic was taken in Frogmore Cottage. To the brave souls who watched, did you actually see Lilibet?


Someone who watched it all said there were a couple of blurry shots of the girl.


sdkitty said:


> well, I think Harry just says what the WIFE tells him to say most of the time


Maybe that's why they cannot afford to let the children interact with anyone in public. Children are notorious for not following the script and being ruthlessly honest.


----------



## Chanbal

The Times: A must read from Monday to Friday…  



_Monday_​_I’m a hugger. I’ve always been a hugger. And I didn’t realise that that is really jarring for a lot of Brits.
“The way he just stood there!” I remember saying to H, the first time we went to the Palace. “Not hugging back at all!”
“They’re all like that,” shrugged H.
“It’s so sad,” I said.
“Although to be fair,” said H, “I suppose they’re worried their bearskin hats will fall off. Or that they’ll drop their swords.”
“It wasn’t much better with your grandfather,” I said.
“It’s the actress thing,” said H. “It’s a different culture.”
“Yeah,” I said, “I suppose I’m just so used to spending my time in Hollywood!”
“Is Toronto in Hollywood?” said H.
But our love survived._

_Tuesday_​_Our Netflix show comes out this week. I’m particularly proud of the bit of me crying with my hair in a towel three years ago, which I filmed for no particular reason. Which is just such helpful footage to have if it eventually turns out that you’re going to make a documentary.
“I’m so glad,” I say to H, “that people are going to finally see the truth!”
“Totally!” says H.
Although then he says that he’s actually still not totally sure what truth we’re talking about.
“Ours,” I remind him. “About what we had to do to survive.”
“But specifically?” he says.
So I tell him that nobody knows the full truth. But we do. So why not hear it from us?
H says this is still kinda vague.
“Maybe you should watch it again,” I suggest, a little crossly.
“Oh God,” says Harry. “All of it?”_
…



			archive.ph


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> The Times: A must read from Monday to Friday…
> View attachment 5669608
> 
> 
> _Monday_​_I’m a hugger. I’ve always been a hugger. And I didn’t realise that that is really jarring for a lot of Brits.
> “The way he just stood there!” I remember saying to H, the first time we went to the Palace. “Not hugging back at all!”
> “They’re all like that,” shrugged H.
> “It’s so sad,” I said.
> “Although to be fair,” said H, “I suppose they’re worried their bearskin hats will fall off. Or that they’ll drop their swords.”
> “It wasn’t much better with your grandfather,” I said.
> “It’s the actress thing,” said H. “It’s a different culture.”
> “Yeah,” I said, “I suppose I’m just so used to spending my time in Hollywood!”
> “Is Toronto in Hollywood?” said H.
> But our love survived._
> 
> _Tuesday_​_Our Netflix show comes out this week. I’m particularly proud of the bit of me crying with my hair in a towel three years ago, which I filmed for no particular reason. Which is just such helpful footage to have if it eventually turns out that you’re going to make a documentary.
> “I’m so glad,” I say to H, “that people are going to finally see the truth!”
> “Totally!” says H.
> Although then he says that he’s actually still not totally sure what truth we’re talking about.
> “Ours,” I remind him. “About what we had to do to survive.”
> “But specifically?” he says.
> So I tell him that nobody knows the full truth. But we do. So why not hear it from us?
> H says this is still kinda vague.
> “Maybe you should watch it again,” I suggest, a little crossly.
> “Oh God,” says Harry. “All of it?”_
> …
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


Thank you! I enjoyed it tremendously!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I mean, they claimed she lived with her single mother when everyone knows her father brought her up. I guess faking a phonecall is minor in comparison.


Did she not also talk about spending so much time on the set of Married With Children after school while waiting for her dad to finish work for the day.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> @CarryOn2020 Are you OK? We missed your comments and were about to send the private jet to pick you up.


Thank you, thank you for the jet offer.  All’s well essentially, I tried the Texas Dip which _*back in the day*_ was never an issue. Getting up was easy then. [get the 3/4 profile, one tear, left eye, go] :eeeek: Now, it is a struggle. 

I’ve enjoyed reading everyone’s comments here and elsewhere.   Y’all are on fire, tpf has been the best training ground because we provide the links to support our opinions - a cut above other sites. Don’t let up, I am seeing many similar ideas expressed on other sites, too. It appears the toxic two have _jumped the shark_. 






Take good care, all. 
From Wikipedia:
_The idiom "*jumping the shark*" was coined in 1985 by Jon Hein in response to a 1977 episode from the fifth season of the American sitcom Happy Days, in which Fonzie (Henry Winkler) jumps over a shark while on water-skis. The phrase is pejorative and is used to argue that a creative work or outlet appears to be making a stunt in a seemingly exhaustive attempt to generate elevated attention or publicity to something that was once perceived as popular, but is no longer.








						Jumping the shark - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				



_


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> A commenter said:
> 
> "They have to be banned from royal properties."  How about banned from the UK?


Not only banned from royal properties, but kept from the coronation. I doubt they even attempted to receive permission as all of this was done on the sly. Harry abrogated the trust BP gave him by virtue of his position as grandson of the monarch.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## Chanbal

Nate - Part 2


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

How much photo-manip did they do?

From the credits list:


----------



## xincinsin

The stans are trying their best to change the rating. The words "authentic", "raw" and "honest" are used a lot. And they love the fairy tale romance. They say the duplicitous duo are entitled to put out their truth. 

One of them stridently starts his/her gushing review with these words: _I can tell from the reviews that people who are so offended are people that have the issues with Mehan's race!  _
They use race as the reason for all the bad reviews._ 
I can GUARANTEE all bad reviews are british haters. Outside of the UK everybody loves Megan and Harry_. 
_It is full of the dirty tabloid readers who have nothing better to do than bash a BLACK Princess. It is pure racism. _

I hope the Sussexes have had their final say after the book is published. If all these interviews (TV & print), a "documentary" and a memoir are insufficient to exhaust their whining, then this will never end. Is Penguin Random House going to be saddled with Zed's memoir next because her truth is not the same as his truth? Can they just concentrate on raising their kids and stop trying to set fires everywhere?


----------



## scarlet555

xincinsin said:


> The stans are trying their best to change the rating. The words "authentic", "raw" and "honest" are used a lot. And they love the fairy tale romance. They say the duplicitous duo are entitled to put out their truth.
> 
> One of them stridently starts his/her gushing review with these words: _I can tell from the reviews that people who are so offended are people that have the issues with Mehan's race!  _
> They use race as the reason for all the bad reviews._
> I can GUARANTEE all bad reviews are british haters. Outside of the UK everybody loves Megan and Harry_.
> _It is full of the dirty tabloid readers who have nothing better to do than bash a BLACK Princess. It is pure racism. _
> 
> I hope the Sussexes have had their final say after the book is published. If all these interviews (TV & print), a "documentary" and a memoir are insufficient to exhaust their whining, then this will never end. Is Penguin Random House going to be saddled with Zed's memoir next because her truth is not the same as his truth? Can they just concentrate on raising their kids and stop trying to set fires everywhere?
> 
> View attachment 5669627


The Stans should be asked- would you want a Megan Markle SIL? Narcissistic psycho and manipulative?


----------



## xincinsin

scarlet555 said:


> The Stans should be asked- would you want a Megan Markle SIL? Narcissistic psycho and manipulative?


More than one of them have gushed that she is beautiful inside and out. 
I don't think people can imagine what it's like to live with or work with a narc.


----------



## scarlet555

xincinsin said:


> More than one of them have gushed that she is beautiful inside and out.
> I don't think people can imagine what it's like to live with or work with a narc.


These people have no concept of reality…


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> I saw a thread discussing this and they tried very hard to solve the case of the empty pram, including the assumption that someone was carrying the baby or maybe the pram was huge and Archie could fit in it. Someone pointed out that there was a glimpse of Zed and Archie walking, but none of the baby. I think the pram was just a prop and they didn't think anyone would look too closely at it.


I think they just assumed the pram interior wouldn’t be in shot. (That poor cameraman is getting some spiders down the well tonight.)

It’s definitely not for A as you wouldn’t carry a kid who can walk in a bassinet position pram  - they’d be too heavy and they need a stroller position with straps.


rhyvin said:


> I’m from the Bay Area (Los Gatos/Saratoga) and had friends in high school attend cotillion


I learn about so many interesting things on this thread. 


purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's trying to establish she "really is black" claiming she was raised in a black neighborhood by black women.  Helps further her racism propaganda.


This is all a knee jerk reaction to the largely positive and at least factual  write up of Thomas Markle and M’s middle class LA upbringing if you ask me. She wants to write him out of history and emphasise her blackness too of course and that’s always been D’s role. 


youngster said:


> So the ratings are in:
> UK 2.4 million viewers for Episode 1
> UK Episode 2 had 1.5 million viewers while Episode 3 had 800,000.
> 
> US 1.0 million viewers for episode 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix show flops in the US & with critics
> 
> 
> HARRY and Meghan’s Netflix show was a ratings hit in the UK – but flopped in the US and with critics. The first episode of the six-parter was watched by 2.4 million people on TV sets in the UK, acc…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thesun.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These are not good ratings for the U.S.  We have a population of 330+ million.  For the UK, episode 1 had pretty good numbers but the drop off was huge.


Also for context they were celebrating 10 million about for the U.K. screening of the Oprah interview so Netflix has not even got their best numbers. 

Also for context the population of Birmingham alone is just over 1 million and this year’s premier of Strictly come dancing (dancing with the stars UK) was disappointed with a drop to 6.8 million. 

Mmm looks like we have a seasonal Christmas Turkey on our hands! 







EverSoElusive said:


> Shockingly, he called her M more times than "my wife" on the mockumentary


Well she is his boss after all… 







QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't it ironic that someone who naturally would be fond of getting rid of the monarchy sides with the BRF just because the Troublesome Two are so awful?


Julie Burchill is a giant hack- I wouldn’t take her as representing any politics or opinion. I remember when she was homophobic as hell before she realised the tides were turning and got the pride flag out. 

As I’m already on the record as the resident r*public*n but I don’t think one needs to side with either side of the family.  I think that H&M are just symptoms of the family wide problem and they have drawn attention to the excessive spending and political overreaching of the royal family as a whole. Not to mention their bizarre family wide fixation on the USA. I think the tides are turning as a lot of people connected with the queen as a poised, stoic figurehead and I don’t think there’s anywhere near the same interest in C or W. 


Chanbal said:


> The Times: A must read from Monday to Friday…
> View attachment 5669608
> 
> 
> _Monday_​_I’m a hugger. I’ve always been a hugger. And I didn’t realise that that is really jarring for a lot of Brits.
> “The way he just stood there!” I remember saying to H, the first time we went to the Palace. “Not hugging back at all!”
> “They’re all like that,” shrugged H.
> “It’s so sad,” I said.
> “Although to be fair,” said H, “I suppose they’re worried their bearskin hats will fall off. Or that they’ll drop their swords.”
> “It wasn’t much better with your grandfather,” I said.
> “It’s the actress thing,” said H. “It’s a different culture.”
> “Yeah,” I said, “I suppose I’m just so used to spending my time in Hollywood!”
> “Is Toronto in Hollywood?” said H.
> But our love survived._
> 
> _Tuesday_​_Our Netflix show comes out this week. I’m particularly proud of the bit of me crying with my hair in a towel three years ago, which I filmed for no particular reason. Which is just such helpful footage to have if it eventually turns out that you’re going to make a documentary.
> “I’m so glad,” I say to H, “that people are going to finally see the truth!”
> “Totally!” says H.
> Although then he says that he’s actually still not totally sure what truth we’re talking about.
> “Ours,” I remind him. “About what we had to do to survive.”
> “But specifically?” he says.
> So I tell him that nobody knows the full truth. But we do. So why not hear it from us?
> H says this is still kinda vague.
> “Maybe you should watch it again,” I suggest, a little crossly.
> “Oh God,” says Harry. “All of it?”_
> …
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


There’s no way on earth H is that quick or witty.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Oh even better apparently the Aussie soap opera Neighbours was axed from British tv after viewing figures of 1.2 million per episode. 
Imagine the cost per episode of neighbours vs the H&M snooze fest and then they got similar viewing figures  
It’s even worse compared with the coronation street soap which got 5 million live views in March. 

I’m starting to think we are actually insulting soap operas by comparing them to H&M these soaps at least  know how to get decent audiences.


----------



## EmilyM111

Saw the ratings. Told you. And now - how many of these are incremental subscriptions (not the ones that are already there for eg. Wednesday or The Crown or Emily in Paris, but subscribed for them).


----------



## EmilyM111

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh even better apparently the Aussie soap opera Neighbours was axed from British tv after viewing figures of 1.2 million per episode.
> Imagine the cost per episode of neighbours vs the H&M snooze fest and then they got similar viewing figures
> It’s even worse compared with the coronation street soap which got 5 million live views in March.
> 
> I’m starting to think we are actually insulting soap operas by comparing them to H&M these soaps at least  know how to get decent audiences.


It's going to be a good penalty for likes of Spotify or Netflix not to do a solid, numbers driven research.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> What’s British law regarding tape recording conversations without the consent of the other party?



Legal to do (because it would be unenforceable). You are supposed to say first. 

Illegal to use, profit from or use in court unless whistle-blowing or with permission. 

They can use their recordings as 'transcripts' as though remembered.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> The enemy of my enemy etc etc



Yeah, but naturally the BRF would be the enemy.


----------



## papertiger

scarlet555 said:


> a Netflix FLOP is a relief for me…. wasn’t sure if Americans were eating it up or not… social media engine and corporation are well paid by Cringe’s PR, I suppose this means anyone can fake a love story and call it a documentary/real tv is not real at all….



I think one of the reasons it'll be a flop is because people are only watching for 'rubber-neck' reasons. 

They are spinning out what they've already been moaning about for 2 years straight into a 6 part series, it'sjust too boring and so predictable. As their PR firm noted, they are over-exposed already and they're giving us more of the same. 

Nothing real, nothing surprising, fake vacuous people. Who wants to invest their time?


----------



## papertiger

Lady C. Can't watch till later but enjoy and I'll catch-up later


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Why is she always grinning while kissing?


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why is she always grinning while kissing?




It's actually a sign of tension and 'watching herself' rather than being in the moment. She's not really into him  .


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jktgal

xincinsin said:


> More than one of them have gushed that she is beautiful inside and out.
> I don't think people can imagine what it's like to live with or work with a narc.


Unless they're narc themselves?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> It's actually a sign of tension and 'watching herself' rather than being in the moment. She's not really into him  .



I'd say it's posing for the cameras, but those don't have to be mutually exclusive. I never thought she married him for being head over heels in love.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Well, I think the gloves are off with this next trailer….sad.


----------



## Suncatcher

Omg. These bratty spoiled jerks are masters of digging their own graves.  Who do they think is their audience? The average person trying to make ends meet?


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> Unless they're narc themselves?


Interesting thought but I think not. The narcs I've worked with might recognize other people as narcs, but not due to themselves being narcs. Narcs are the most self-unaware people I know. They don't see any flaws in themselves, have very selective memories, expect people to go out of the way for them, constantly humble-brag and keep changing stories to make themselves look great.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Interesting thought but I think not. The narcs I've worked with might recognize other people as narcs, but not due to themselves being narcs. Narcs are the most self-unaware people I know. They don't see any flaws in themselves, have very selective memories, expect people to go out of the way for them, constantly humble-brag and keep changing stories to make themselves look great.



After having to listen to a fight between a sibling and our narc parent this morning I wholeheartedly agree. Nothing is ever their fault, everyone wrongs them, they don't take responsibility at all, they deflect, they insist they don't remember things they are accused of that several people witnessed and today presented a storyline of an event that was completely new to us (the storyline, not the event). It is exhausting and why I still cut Harry some slack. Living with her must be hell on a daily basis.


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry if this has been discussed, but they aren’t going to try to come to the coronation after this, are they?!


----------



## WingNut

scarlet555 said:


> The Stans should be asked- would you want a Megan Markle SIL? Narcissistic psycho and manipulative?


I try, really, to see things from others' perspectives when my opinions differ. I just can't with these sugars. How naive can they be? I fear that no matter what evidence is put forth, they just cover their ears and refuse to let it sink in. Thankfully, they appear to be in the minority based on the IMDB ratings. Let's hope it stays that way.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed, but they aren’t going to try to come to the coronation after this, are they?!



Can someone paraphrase what's in the new trailer/what they've done now? I want to be in the know but I absolutely don't want to watch them and hear them speak.


----------



## WingNut

While driving in this morning listening to the news, they played a snippet of the latest episode, where Z-list says "they didn't just throw me to the wolves, they FED me to the wolves".  That has to be the nail in the coffin for them with the BRF,. Also, how can she be SO delusional? Yeah I know, narc (and I was married to one....)


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means…


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WingNut said:


> I try, really, to see things from others' perspectives when my opinions differ. I just can't with these sugars. How naive can they be? I fear that no matter what evidence is put forth, they just cover their ears and refuse to let it sink in. Thankfully, they appear to be in the minority based on the IMDB ratings. Let's hope it stays that way.



I'm not even sure they are naive. It often seems very deliberate to me.


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like a new trailer was released and it is generating …


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

WingNut said:


> While driving in this morning listening to the news, they played a snippet of the latest episode, where Z-list says "they didn't just throw me to the wolves, they FED me to the wolves".  That has to be the nail in the coffin for them with the BRF,. Also, how can she be SO delusional? Yeah I know, narc (and I was married to one....)



Oh my. Poor lamb.


----------



## Mrs.Z

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone paraphrase what's in the new trailer/what they've done now? I want to be in the know but I absolutely don't want to watch them and hear them speak.


It’s VERY short but Harry says …they were willing to lie to protect my Brother why weren’t they willing to tell the truth to protect us.  Meghan says she was fed to the wolves, not thrown!  Also allegations of “institutional gaslighting”.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## LibbyRuth

I'd love for Harry and  Meghan to sit down with a reporter who would have the courage to ask them challenging questions.  I'd love someone to pick apart the story they are presenting, and ask them to account for the other side.  Ask Meghan which was more feeding her to the wolves - the Queen inviting her to the Christmas celebration before they were married which had never happened before, or the Queen bringing her on an engagement so soon into their marriage - another endorsement that had never happened before.  I'd love to see them squirm being reminded of all the good that was done for them as they expect everyone to focus on every single slight as they exploit them and exaggerate.


----------



## EmilyM111

Time to put thumbs down!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like a new trailer was released and it is generating …




Recollections may vary. 

The BRF needs to give up Harry for adoption.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Recollections may vary.
> 
> The BRF needs to give up Harry for adoption.


They’d find no takers!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> It looks like a new trailer was released and it is generating …




Also, gf loves to sit on the counter, doesn't she.


----------



## kipp

As for who is willing to lie to protect whom, FWIW a friend of mine here in London says that she is convinced that the row between Harry and William isn't about Meghan or Megxit specifically but that Harry is unhappy with William (and whoever is covering for him) because of his supposed Rose Hansbury affair.  My friend says she believes that they did have the affair and BP and/or the press is covering it up, like they covered up other affairs among the British monarchy. 
Of course, I have no idea what is the truth there, but this still seems like a flimsy excuse for Harry to torch his entire family and blame racism on this. And, as pretty much everyone on this thread knows, I'm NO FAN of Harry and Meghan. In fact, it almost seems like Harry wants the media and BP to lie to protect him and Meghan and is jealous that they seem to not want to do so now (there is evidence that they did protect H & M early on).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> As for who is willing to lie to protect whom, FWIW a friend of mine here in London says that she is convinced that the row between Harry and William isn't about Meghan or Megxit specifically but that Harry is unhappy with William (and whoever is covering for him) because of his supposed Rose Hansbury affair.  My friend says she believes that they did have the affair and BP and/or the press is covering it up, like they covered up other affairs among the British monarchy.
> Of course, I have no idea what is the truth there, but this still seems like a flimsy excuse for Harry to torch his entire family and blame racism on this.  And, as pretty much everyone on this thread knows, I'm NO FAN of Harry and Meghan.



Everything is possible of course, but I found it extremely convincing when the breadcrumbs were followed back to no other but Ghoul. She's evil enough to put out nasty rumours out of sheer spite.

Plus, as you say...because you're angry your brother cheated on his wife you go nuclear on the whole family including your dying grandparents AND said wife?


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, gf loves to sit on the counter, doesn't she.


Check this article…


----------



## tiktok

kipp said:


> As for who is willing to lie to protect whom, FWIW a friend of mine here in London says that she is convinced that the row between Harry and William isn't about Meghan or Megxit specifically but that Harry is unhappy with William (and whoever is covering for him) because of his supposed Rose Hansbury affair.  My friend says she believes that they did have the affair and BP and/or the press is covering it up, like they covered up other affairs among the British monarchy.
> Of course, I have no idea what is the truth there, but this still seems like a flimsy excuse for Harry to torch his entire family and blame racism on this. And, as pretty much everyone on this thread knows, I'm NO FAN of Harry and Meghan. In fact, it almost seems like Harry wants the media and BP to lie to protect him and Meghan and is jealous that they seem to not want to do so now (there is evidence that they did protect H & M early on).


Not sure what your friend’s sources are but this makes no sense because Harry is hurting Catherine just as much as he’s hurting his brother with all his lies and abuse.


----------



## kipp

tiktok said:


> Not sure what your friend’s sources are but this makes no sense because Harry is hurting Catherine just as much as he’s hurting his brother with all his lies and abuse.


My friend in London has some contacts in very high circles/people who know and socialize with William and Catherine---she told me that the affair information came from them.  As for Harry and Catherine, he's been willing to have Meghan throw her under the bus already so I don't think he cares whether he hurts her or not...


----------



## Chanbal

People on Twitter are posting this clip again. It's possibly true what the lady says, and I'm oK with TW choosing whatever race she wants to be. My problem is with people playing race and victim cards…


----------



## tiktok

kipp said:


> My friend in London has some contacts in very high circles/people who know and socialize with William and Catharine---she told me that the affair information came from them.  As for Harry and Catherine, he's been willing to have Meghan throw her under the bus already so I don't think he cares whether he hurts her or not...


That’s true re Meghan… I guess we know he has a very twisted mind that works in very mysterious ways. 
Too bad if the affair rumors are true, and if so I have to say W&K either made an amazing recovery or are Oscar-worthy performers.


----------



## Chanbal

kipp said:


> My friend in London has some contacts in very high circles/people who know and socialize with William and Catherine---she told me that the affair information came from them.  As for Harry and Catherine, he's been willing to have Meghan throw her under the bus already so I don't think he cares whether he hurts her or not...





tiktok said:


> That’s true re Meghan… I guess we know he has a very twisted mind that works in very mysterious ways.
> Too bad if the affair rumors are true, and if so I have to say W&K either made an amazing recovery or are Oscar-worthy performers.


Even if the rumors are true, it's their private life. Will and Kate seem really happy with each other and it's very low what the Harkles are doing to them. My only explanation is a huge jealousy and greed…


----------



## kipp

My friend says that everyone knows that cheating goes on in the upper levels of British society and that it is basically accepted. In other words, Catherine knew when she joined the family that this might or would happen.  For example, she says that Phillip cheated on Queen Elizabeth, but their marriage also survived and in the end thrived.  My friend says that Catherine is "boring" compared with perhaps Rose Hansbury and that when Harry says he married for love rather than someone who "fit the mold" he is also referring to William, Catherine, and the Rose Hansbury affair.   Although we don't know what happens behind closed doors, it seems that especially now, William and Catherine are happy together and are functioning very well as a team, as best we can tell.  
But re: Harry, he seems to have a chip on his shoulder about his relationship with Meghan in the British press and BP relative to William and Catherine's.  He's always been jealous of William and this issue could be another facet of that.


----------



## lallybelle

Eh considering the rumors traced directly back to TW, I'm skeptical. If there is any truth to it, t would be their business anyway. WTF would that have to do with ****ting all over the entire family and his supposedly beloved Gran's legacy? Nah man they can GTFOH. 

That ought to have just about done it. We've said that before however.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

So this pic was just put out.  Supposedly taken on the same day as the Lili birthday pic.  It looks like TW and Lil have a lot more hair.


----------



## LibbyRuth

tiktok said:


> Not sure what your friend’s sources are but this makes no sense because Harry is hurting Catherine just as much as he’s hurting his brother with all his lies and abuse.


But but but, Harry remembers the pain his mother felt from his father being with Camilla.  No child had ever experienced knowing the pain of a mother being cheated on like Harry did!  So if the rumors are true, clearly it would hurt Harry more than Kate because it brings back all those memories!  It's like cameras clicking all over again!


----------



## bag-mania

WingNut said:


> I try, really, to see things from others' perspectives when my opinions differ. I just can't with these sugars. How naive can they be? I fear that no matter what evidence is put forth, they just cover their ears and refuse to let it sink in. Thankfully, they appear to be in the minority based on the IMDB ratings. Let's hope it stays that way.


There are people who are unable/unwilling to change their minds once they have made them up. I equate them to sports fans who staunchly defend their team no matter how badly they are playing. 

The stans have decided the Harkles are treated unfairly so don’t confuse them with abundant evidence to the contrary.

.


----------



## oldbag

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh my. Poor lamb.


I object!. I am very fond of wolves. Feeding her to the wolves would be akin to cruelty. Like all carnivores they need proper protein to thrive, you can't feed those poor beasts dried up, stringy meat. Wolves deserve much better. Use a honey badger, they will eat anything because they don't care.


----------



## bag-mania

kipp said:


> As for who is willing to lie to protect whom, FWIW a friend of mine here in London says that she is convinced that the row between Harry and William isn't about Meghan or Megxit specifically but *that Harry is unhappy with William (and whoever is covering for him) because of his supposed Rose Hansbury affair.  My friend says she believes that they did have the affair and BP and/or the press is covering it up*, like they covered up other affairs among the British monarchy.
> Of course, I have no idea what is the truth there, but this still seems like a flimsy excuse for Harry to torch his entire family and blame racism on this. And, as pretty much everyone on this thread knows, I'm NO FAN of Harry and Meghan. In fact, it almost seems like Harry wants the media and BP to lie to protect him and Meghan and is jealous that they seem to not want to do so now (there is evidence that they did protect H & M early on).


That theory falls apart if you consider Harry is willing to throw Kate under the bus to make Meghan look better. If he was mad at Will for cheating then it would mean he felt protective of Kate and he obviously doesn’t.


----------



## Pessie

lallybelle said:


> Eh considering the rumors traced directly back to TW, I'm skeptical. If there is any truth to it, t would be their business anyway. WTF would that have to do with ****ting all over the entire family and his supposedly beloved Gran's legacy? Nah man they can GTFOH.
> 
> That ought to have just about done it. We've said that before however.


Me too, and as usual Harry and Meghan are too cowardly to come out with it directly.  Just scattering little poisonous seeds and hoping they’ll take root.  
I’d love him to explain why it is that having basked for 3 years in the freedom he “fought so hard for” (and which everybody but himself has paid for) he remains miserable and sour about his life?  

I sincerely hope the lies and nastiness in this dump of Netflix trash haunt him for the rest of his life.  Any last bits of sympathy I might have had for him at landing himself with the dreadful narcissist for a wife just flew out the window.


----------



## 1LV

bag-mania said:


> That theory falls apart if you consider Harry is willing to throw Kate under the bus to make Meghan look better. If he was mad at Will for cheating then it would mean he felt protective of Kate and he obviously doesn’t.


He certainly doesn’t feel protective of his niece and nephews.  Collateral damage?


----------



## 1LV

Pessie said:


> Me too, and as usual Harry and Meghan are too cowardly to come out with it directly.  Just scattering little poisonous seeds and hoping they’ll take root.
> I’d love him to explain why it is that having basked for 3 years in the freedom he “fought so hard for” (and which everybody but himself has paid for) he remains miserable and sour about his life?
> 
> I sincerely hope the lies and nastiness in this dump of Netflix trash haunt him for the rest of his life.  *Any last bits of sympathy I might have had for him at landing himself with the dreadful narcissist for a wife just flew out the window.*


If anyone deserves a Meghan it’s Harry.


----------



## bag-mania

1LV said:


> He certainly doesn’t feel protective of his niece and nephews.  Collateral damage?


I don’t think he gives a sh*t about any of them anymore. He’s furious he didn’t get what he wanted and he would torch the whole institution if he could.


----------



## Pessie

1LV said:


> He certainly doesn’t feel protective of his niece and nephews.  Collateral damage?


Meh, he’s a hypocrite as well as a liar, and duplicitous sh*t.  In fact he has the Royal Flush of character flaws


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone paraphrase what's in the new trailer/what they've done now? I want to be in the know but I absolutely don't want to watch them and hear them speak.


Your wish is my command. The title says a lot

Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer shows Prince Philip's funeral









						Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer shows Prince Philip's funeral
					

Footage of Prince harry, Prince William and Peter Philips walking behind their grandfather's coffin is played, while the Duke of Sussex can be heard saying 'they were happy to lie to protect my brother'.




					mol.im


----------



## bag-mania

Their Rotten Tomatoes score is not good even with sugars posting adoring reviews.


----------



## Pessie

1LV said:


> If anyone deserves a Meghan it’s Harry.


He certainly does.  Long may the marriage last


----------



## bag-mania

Pessie said:


> He certainly does.  Long may the marriage last


And may Meghan continue to be as dissatisfied and angry that the whole world doesn’t love her as she has always been.


----------



## youngster

Talk about a couple of drama queens . . . I'm almost embarrassed for them.  Talk about gaslighting.  They left, their choice, Harry couldn't handle being second to Will, Meghan couldn't handle the criticism in the press and found the work boring, and they both were told it was illegal to "modernize the monarchy" by monetizing their titles.  

_*In the 90-second clip, Harry is heard saying: 'I wonder what would've happened to us had we not got out when we did.'*_
You'd be doing your usual events and activities and appearances with full UK paid security and the press would likely have turned positive if you were quietly doing your job and doing it well.

*Meghan adds: 'Our security was being pulled. Everyone in the world knew where we were.'  * 
Newsflash Meghan, everybody in the world knows where you are now too because you are constantly putting out press releases and letting cameras follow you around 24/7.

*The duke also can be heard saying: 'I said, ''We need to get out of here''.'*
Because living at Frogmore Cottage was just like the Gulag.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## csshopper

WingNut said:


> I try, really, to see things from others' perspectives when my opinions differ. I just can't with these sugars. How naive can they be? I fear that no matter what evidence is put forth, they just cover their ears and refuse to let it sink in. Thankfully, they appear to be in the minority based on the IMDB ratings. Let's hope it stays that way.


I always wonder how the Sugars decide which version of a scenario they chose to find “beautiful“ when she keeps changing the details.

Example: The giggly toe curling version of how they met, strung out to coyly not name the friend who set it up. That version had traction for a long time because of speculation about the introducer’s identity.
                                           VS
                The new Netflix version where it was via Instagram. (The doggy filter was an interesting choice, obscuring the beech behind it with cute puppy overlay).


----------



## jblended

Chanbal said:


> People on Twitter are posting this clip again. It's possibly true what the lady says, and I'm oK with TW choosing whatever race she wants to be. My problem is with people playing race and victim cards…



I hate to be that person but, Shallon Lester is a complete fraud who regularly makes things up (plus she has a very disturbing track record of her own) so I would not use her as a credible source of info.

I agree with your point @Chanbal that the main problem is the way they are playing victims/race and bend the truth to their advantage.


----------



## carmen56

Harry is beyond despicable.  There should be no invite to Charles’ coronation.  Harry, Raptor and their kids should lose their titles and be removed from the line of succession forthwith.  They should be permanently exiled, and disinherited.  They need to learn that their vile actions and lies have serious consequences.


----------



## scarlet555

carmen56 said:


> Harry is beyond despicable.  There should be no invite to Charles’ coronation.  Harry, Raptor and their kids should lose their titles and be removed from the line of succession forthwith.  They should be permanently exiled, and disinherited.  They need to learn that their vile actions and lies have serious consequences.


I don't even know why they don't just renounce the titles, It makes no sense for them to keep it since BRF did them so wrong, I wouldn't want any of it if everything she says was true-I mean what kind of attention whore narcissist  is she?


----------



## sdkitty

this is another ridiculous thing...does H know the meaning of gaslighting?








						Prince Harry Says He and Meghan Markle Faced "Institutional Gaslighting" in New Docuseries Trailer - E! Online
					

In Netflix's bombshell preview for the final episodes of Harry & Meghan, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reflect on their exit from royal life: "We need to get out of here."




					www.eonline.com


----------



## jblended

scarlet555 said:


> I don't even know why they don't just renounce the titles, It makes no sense for them to keep it since BRF did them so wrong, I wouldn't want any of it if everything she says was true-I mean what kind of attention whore narcissist  is she?


This is the main thing I get stuck on. Why half in/ half out if the family hurt them so much. Why complain of the kids' titles if it is associated with Empire 2.0? Why any of this when you could have a quiet life of privilege that you said you wanted?

Oh wait, I get it. This is all an elaborate scheme to show people how easy it is to spread rumors about anyone- even the BRF!!! Then it will be her political campaign messaging: a representative who stands for truth in the age of digital misinformation. I dread that this may actually be their endgame.


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> So this pic was just put out.  Supposedly taken on the same day as the Lili birthday pic.  It looks like TW and Lil have a lot more hair.
> 
> View attachment 5669797



The standard Harkle family pose: only Zed's face can be seen.


----------



## Sharont2305

carmen56 said:


> Harry is beyond despicable.  There should be no invite to Charles’ coronation.  Harry, Raptor and their kids should lose their titles and be removed from the line of succession forthwith.  They should be permanently exiled, and disinherited.  They need to learn that their vile actions and lies have serious consequences.


But that would be racist. That's their go to reply, unfortunately.


----------



## purseinsanity

1LV said:


> He certainly doesn’t feel protective of his niece and nephews.  Collateral damage?


Well, he's jealous of them for making him "irrelevant".  He couldn't care less!


----------



## bag-mania

scarlet555 said:


> *I don't even know why they don't just renounce the titles,* It makes no sense for them to keep it since BRF did them so wrong, I wouldn't want any of it if everything she says was true-I mean what kind of attention whore narcissist  is she?


Because they have literally nothing else to offer to keep them celebrities other than the titles. God knows they aren’t entertaining.


----------



## lallybelle

LOL @ "the fight worth fighting for". You weren't a prisoner FFS. JUST LEAVE. Damn.


----------



## duna

Katel said:


> Say it again! (Disclaimer: My following comment is not pointed at any one poster, it’s a general observation. Feel free to disagree, we still have that option, I think?)
> I think people who support them may sometimes forget (or either don’t know or believe) that MeGain is mentally ill (would people pamper Ted Bundy or another dangerous sociopath?) and that Harry is dim and entitled and mentally damaged.
> If they even “acted” sane (!), if they respected others, stayed in their own lane, were fair and rational and kind and they weren’t constantly trying to hurt others (their own families!) or tacky grab the limelight or constantly lie (and get caught), I think more people would have more sympathy for them. I would.
> 
> 
> As has been mentioned, my guess is things may ramp up (title-wise) after KC3’s coronation. The RF do play the long game. Retribution is waiting.


I totally agree with you: I think they should both seek specialist help as they have serious mental issues. I mean it.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> this is another ridiculous thing...does H know the meaning of gaslighting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says He and Meghan Markle Faced "Institutional Gaslighting" in New Docuseries Trailer - E! Online
> 
> 
> In Netflix's bombshell preview for the final episodes of Harry & Meghan, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reflect on their exit from royal life: "We need to get out of here."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


Nope!
Everything Zed needs to know about royal life, she learnt from Sparry.
And Zed's instruction taught Sparry everything he needed to know about Hollywood and how to wheel & deal.


----------



## purseinsanity

scarlet555 said:


> I don't even know *why they don't just renounce the titles, It makes no sense for them to keep it since BRF did them so wrong*, I wouldn't want any of it if everything she says was true-I mean what kind of attention whore narcissist  is she?


They won't because they cling to the titles for dear life, because without them, they are nothing.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> this is another ridiculous thing...does H know the meaning of gaslighting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says He and Meghan Markle Faced "Institutional Gaslighting" in New Docuseries Trailer - E! Online
> 
> 
> In Netflix's bombshell preview for the final episodes of Harry & Meghan, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle reflect on their exit from royal life: "We need to get out of here."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.eonline.com


I don't think vocabulary is his strong suit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

purseinsanity said:


> I don't think vocabulary is his strong suit.


he strong suit used to be that he was fun and real....that's over


----------



## youngster

I expect these next 3 episodes will be a tedious re-hash of their hot 10 minutes in the family, covering every slight or perceived slight.  

We will once again hear about Kate crying at the bridesmaid fitting or was it Meghan who cried or was it Charlotte who cried? I'm sure we'll hear about the denial of their request to live at Windsor Castle, having to settle for Frogmore Cottage, their "triumph" over the Daily Mail in the lawsuit involving the letter Meghan wrote to her Dad, how cold the family was to Harry at Prince Philip's funeral, the seating arrangements at the Jubilee, the seating arrangements at the Queen's funeral (blocked by a candle!), how cold the family was to them at the Queen's funeral, and how awful it is to be accused of bullying their former beloved staff who are making these accusations only after rounds of intense torture at the Tower. 

They know that BP is unlikely to respond as long as they keep things vague enough.  They will conveniently leave out anything that might be exceptionally embarrassing, like those blood diamond earrings and the tiara incident, because Angela Kelly doesn't have to sit back and stay quiet if Harry says a word about her.  In fact, I read he lives in fear of her writing her own book and describing their interactions in detail.


----------



## KEG66

kipp said:


> My friend says that everyone knows that cheating goes on in the upper levels of British society and that it is basically accepted. In other words, Catherine knew when she joined the family that this might or would happen.  For example, she says that Phillip cheated on Queen Elizabeth, but their marriage also survived and in the end thrived.  My friend says that Catherine is "boring" compared with perhaps Rose Hansbury and that when Harry says he married for love rather than someone who "fit the mold" he is also referring to William, Catherine, and the Rose Hansbury affair.   Although we don't know what happens behind closed doors, it seems that especially now, William and Catherine are happy together and are functioning very well as a team, as best we can tell.
> But re: Harry, he seems to have a chip on his shoulder about his relationship with Meghan in the British press and BP relative to William and Catherine's.  He's always been jealous of William and this issue could be another facet of that.


I’ve said this before regarding the Rose rumour if it was true why would Pippa, Catherine’s sister name her daughter Rose, born after the alleged affair ?


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> he strong suit used to be that he was fun and real....that's over


Yeah, not sure what his strong suit is any more.  Maybe the grey one?


----------



## csshopper

kipp said:


> My friend says that everyone knows that cheating goes on in the upper levels of British society and that it is basically accepted. In other words, Catherine knew when she joined the family that this might or would happen.  For example, she says that Phillip cheated on Queen Elizabeth, but their marriage also survived and in the end thrived.  My friend says that Catherine is "boring" compared with perhaps Rose Hansbury and that when Harry says he married for love rather than someone who "fit the mold" he is also referring to William, Catherine, and the Rose Hansbury affair.   Although we don't know what happens behind closed doors, it seems that especially now, William and Catherine are happy together and are functioning very well as a team, as best we can tell.
> But re: Harry, he seems to have a chip on his shoulder about his relationship with Meghan in the British press and BP relative to William and Catherine's.  He's always been jealous of William and this issue could be another facet of that.


I’m curious, how do these people address  the fact Giles Coren stating he was the one who started the rumor and it was not true


youngster said:


> I expect these next 3 episodes will be a tedious re-hash of their hot 10 minutes in the family, covering every slight or perceived slight.
> 
> We will once again hear about Kate crying at the bridesmaid fitting or was it Meghan who cried or was it Charlotte who cried? I'm sure we'll hear about the denial of their request to live at Windsor Castle, having to settle for Frogmore Cottage, their "triumph" over the Daily Mail in the lawsuit involving the letter Meghan wrote to her Dad, how cold the family was to Harry at Prince Philip's funeral, the seating arrangements at the Jubilee, the seating arrangements at the Queen's funeral (blocked by a candle!), how cold the family was to them at the Queen's funeral, and how awful it is to be accused of bullying their former beloved staff who are making these accusations only after rounds of intense torture at the Tower.
> 
> They know that BP is unlikely to respond as long as they keep things vague enough.  They will conveniently leave out anything that might be exceptionally embarrassing, like those blood diamond earrings and the tiara incident, because Angela Kelly doesn't have to sit back and stay quiet if Harry says a word about her.  In fact, I read he lives in fear of her writing her own book and describing their interactions in detail.


----------



## marietouchet

What a mess , get your story straight 

Mystery over two versions of Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer








						Mystery over two versions of Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer
					

Netflix has issued two trailers for the second part of Harry & Meghan, fuelling speculation over who the Duke is accusing of 'lying to protect my brother'




					mol.im


----------



## Lodpah

If paparazzi did not pursue MM she would call them racists. She lives, breathes, and lusts for the attention. She’s not fooling anyone. 

She acts as if she’s traumatized by them but she’s gaslighting everyone. Without the paparazzi she would not be famous. So sick. Such psychopaths, both of them.


----------



## KEG66

scarlet555 said:


> I don't even know why they don't just renounce the titles, It makes no sense for them to keep it since BRF did them so wrong, I wouldn't want any of it if everything she says was true-I mean what kind of attention whore narcissist  is she?


Absolutely this !


----------



## pomeline

I'm worried now that I read that KCIII is hesitant to act and doesn't do a thing thinking it's a family matter that can be resolved within family... meanwhile the staff is running around terrified because they know this is serious.

I cannot express how much I loathe the Sussexes.


----------



## Lodpah

pomeline said:


> I'm worried now that I read that KCIII is hesitant to act and doesn't do a thing thinking it's a family matter that can be resolved within family... meanwhile the staff is running around terrified because they know this is serious.
> 
> I cannot express how much I loathe the Sussexes.
> 
> View attachment 5669884


Yeah it’s strange. This is a new era with social media that can destroy anyone with just a tweet. Gone are the days don’t complain don’t explain. Like a famous Mossad agent once said, you can’t push against a dead bolt. It’s a one sided thing/The demonic duo will never compromise as everything is the BRF’s fault. They want the BRF to bow down to them.

I’m beginning to lose respect for KC.


----------



## scarlet555

purseinsanity said:


> They won't because they cling to the titles for dear life, because without them, they are nothing.





purseinsanity said:


> I don't think vocabulary is his strong suit.


It's ridiculous, all of it...


----------



## sdkitty

interesting (kinda neutral) take on the terrible two








						Netflix’s ‘Harry & Meghan’ Shows the Gen Z-ification of the Royal Couple
					

In Part 1 of the Netflix docuseries, the couple proves how well they know their audience with their use of vulnerable videos, intimate photographs, and social media-style footage.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## tiktok

The truth that Harry conveniently forgot in his great crusade to save his paparazzi-calling wife (but it’s not Meghan’s truth so it must be false or too racist to mention):
https://www.instagram.com/prprinsessa/guide/paparazzi-harassment-of-kate-middleton/17893618379725450/


----------



## sdkitty

tiktok said:


> The truth that Harry conveniently forgot in his great crusade to save his paparazzi-calling wife (but it’s not Meghan’s truth so it must be false or too racist to mention):
> https://www.instagram.com/prprinsessa/guide/paparazzi-harassment-of-kate-middleton/17893618379725450/


the difference was Kate was willing to do the work and it paid off


----------



## pomeline

Moderately good news... The proposed bill to return to KCIII the power to strip peerage titles will have its second reading on the 24th March. It was supposed to be 9th December but they run out of time so it was put off until then. BUT (from another board): "if it does become a law, there is no guarantee that Charles would follow through anyway. As this bill doesn't have the support of the government, or the King, it probably won't pass anyway. Private Member's bills rarely become law. Most don't get past the second reading state, if they even get that far." Meh.

Does Charles understand how serious this is? Is he a big wuss? Someone needs to tell him like it is!

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289/stages


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lilacgal




----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> I’m curious, how do these people address  the fact Giles Coren stating he was the one who started the rumor and it was not true
> 
> View attachment 5669863



If I lived in Sussex I'd have to move


----------



## MommyDaze

Unpopular opinion: I watched all three episodes and thought it was much ado about nothing. I agree with KC3 doing nothing in response. It’s like when your kid is on the floor throwing a tantrum because you won’t let them wear their shoes on the wrong feet - ignore them and carry on. They fall in line eventually (or get left). 
Unless the next three episodes have the promised bombshells, I’d think it would be (WAY) below The King’s station to publicly respond in any way.


----------



## WingNut

Lilacgal said:


>



That's an insult to that beautiful snake to be compared to Meghan....


----------



## youngster

MommyDaze said:


> Unpopular opinion: I watched all three episodes and thought it was much ado about nothing. I agree with KC3 doing nothing in response. It’s like when your kid is on the floor throwing a tantrum because you won’t let them wear their shoes on the wrong feet - ignore them and carry on. They fall in line eventually (or get left).
> Unless the next three episodes have the promised bombshells, I’d think it would be (WAY) below The King’s station to publicly respond in any way.



I agree with you.  Nobody wants to get into a transatlantic back-and-forth, tit for tat argument with Harry/MM, other than Harry and MM themselves who desperately want the publicity.   They are trying to provoke a response, I think.  

So, you let them put out these episodes and you let Harry's book drop in January and _then_ you decide what to do, if anything.  It's just not that much longer to wait and, with Christmas approaching and New Years, it's going to go by quickly.  Chess, not checkers.

I understand how people on this thread feel though.  As a parent myself, if a child of mine did something like this, I'd be seriously angry so I actually admire KC3 and Will's restraint.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Came across this on Insta (while looking for Nutcracker cookies no less)...always that nodge too much to make it fake and insincere and annoying. Yes he can see, he's a good head taller than you, and "my love" is so intimate it makes me literally uncomfortable. Maybe I'm emotionally challenged


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> If I lived in Sussex I'd have to move


This makes me so mad, they don't even know what Sussex soil IS


----------



## rose60610

So the big "bombshell" is that Princess of Wales isn't a hugger? Oh, stop the presses! Can anyone blame PoW for not hugging somebody who's barefoot and wearing torn jeans at first meeting?  Clearly Claw meant to disrespect Will and Kate. Granted, Will is the jerk's brother, but he's also the future King. For all the multi-thousand dollar outfits Claw loved Charles buying for her, why couldn't she at the very least have put on a pair of shoes? Disgusting! Not saying Claw needed to wear her best outfit that day, but barefoot? Gross.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yes we do. Fair game now that she participated in a Netflix format.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Speaking of "Didn't invite her father"...TM claims he never got an official invite (as in, a physical envelope with a physical invite in it). Now, do I think he's just as capable of lying and overdramatizing as his demon spawn? I do, but nobody has ever disputed his version (AND I'm 100% positive she set him up because she wanted a reason to get rid of him).


----------



## Suncatcher

Lilacgal said:


>



OMG that is sooooo funny!  Echoes of KK and Taylor Swift.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

kipp said:


> My friend says that everyone knows that cheating goes on in the upper levels of British society and that it is basically accepted.



It is when you marry a suitable person to keep money and power. I don't think it's all that accepted in a modern marriage based on love.



kipp said:


> My friend says that Catherine is "boring" compared with perhaps Rose Hansbury and that when Harry says he married for love rather than someone who "fit the mold" he is also referring to William, Catherine, and the Rose Hansbury affair.



That's really mean spirited towards a person who does nothing to deserve vitriol, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

oldbag said:


> Use a honey badger, they will eat anything because they don't care.



I was shocked the first time I saw an American honey badger. Those are mean beasts. German honey badgers are predators alright but they at least look cute.


----------



## Yanca

with a sibling like Haz who needs enemies, the Quiet Dignity of The Royal Family is commendable.  Megain  should enjoy all these attention about her, after the book, the show, the bombshells, what is left? I don't think they have much pull aside from the paid for awards. If they are truly happy, no need to burn everything just because they did not have their way. The comments on  their Youtube Netflix trailer  are much more interesting than anything showing the two of them. Won't be watching their drivel, just watching all the reaction videos and the comments. Those are gold.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> I agree with you.  Nobody wants to get into a transatlantic back-and-forth, tit for tat argument with Harry/MM, other than Harry and MM themselves who desperately want the publicity.   They are trying to provoke a response, I think.
> 
> So, you let them put out these episodes and you let Harry's book drop in January and _then_ you decide what to do, if anything.  It's just not that much longer to wait and, with Christmas approaching and New Years, it's going to go by quickly.  Chess, not checkers.
> 
> I understand how people on this thread feel though.  As a parent myself, if a child of mine did something like this, I'd be seriously angry so I actually admire KC3 and Will's restraint.


On possible response from KC3 ...
1. Yes wait until after all episodes and book. UK book tour ??? Boos? UK TV shows ??
2. Let Rishi Sunak et al do their bit to help KC3. 
3. The Harkles have burnt their bridges in the UK, no one is watching their soap opera. They have no AUDIENCE in the UK. The US is another story. 
4. The Harkles are at the end of their material. There will be nothing new for future books. The need for KC3 to shut them up will go away. 
5. Lady C says KC3 is torn - he thinks H is at a breaking point, KC3 does not want to destroy his son.  Title removal or non issuance (to A and L) will be seen as evil and vengeful,  rather than as an appropriate correction.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> How much photo-manip did they do?
> 
> From the credits list:
> View attachment 5669617


So it's the opposite of cinema verite 


lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry if this has been discussed, but they aren’t going to try to come to the coronation after this, are they?!


I sure as hell hope not. If they think their past two visits were awkward those would pale in comparison. KC has waited too long for his moment to allow these two to ruin it in any way. He'll release some message about loving the overseas relatives but for all concerned it is best they don't attend. 


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also, gf loves to sit on the counter, doesn't she.


I was taught it is poor manners and hygiene. You don't put your butt on a counter where food is prepared and served.


1LV said:


> He certainly doesn’t feel protective of his niece and nephews.  Collateral damage?


Yet if you believe the tabs the Sussexes and Wales are exchanging Christmas gifts for the children. If I were W&K I'd toss them right in the trash. They'd probably be bugged.


bag-mania said:


> And may Meghan continue to be as dissatisfied and angry that the whole world doesn’t love her as she has always been.


God help us all 


marietouchet said:


> What a mess , get your story straight
> 
> Mystery over two versions of Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mystery over two versions of Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer
> 
> 
> Netflix has issued two trailers for the second part of Harry & Meghan, fuelling speculation over who the Duke is accusing of 'lying to protect my brother'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


Oh what a tangled web we weave....  


QueenofWrapDress said:


> "my love" is so intimate it makes me literally uncomfortable. Maybe I'm emotionally challenged



If I ever called my husband "my love" he be concerned for his welfare.   


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yes we do. Fair game now that she participated in a Netflix format.



If you believe half the online chatter about Doria she is not the quiet and supportive mother many of us assumed she was. Quite the opposite, MM learned the grift from her. 



QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of "Didn't invite her father"...TM claims he never got an official invite (as in, a physical envelope with a physical invite in it). Now, do I think he's just as capable of lying and overdramatizing as his demon spawn? I do, but nobody has ever disputed his version (AND I'm 100% positive she set him up because she wanted a reason to get rid of him).
> 
> View attachment 5669944


I read somewhere that it wasn't just chivalry that led KC to escort her. Supposedly he joined her halfway down because it is against protocol in the Church of England for a woman to walk to the altar alone.


----------



## needlv

I am still not watching their Netflix doco though.  I’m not giving them clicks.


----------



## duna

needlv said:


> I am still not watching their Netflix doco though.  I’m not giving them clicks.



.


----------



## kipp

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is when you marry a suitable person to keep money and power. I don't think it's all that accepted in a modern marriage based on love.
> 
> 
> 
> That's really mean spirited towards a person who does nothing to deserve vitriol, though.


I totally agree with you and disagreed with my friend.  Was just reporting what she had heard from her friends in high places...


----------



## Cinderlala

I'd rather watch static than the flopumentary.  (Credit to a clever Redditor for the new term.)  I can't watch it anyway because I canceled my Netflix account as soon as I heard they had signed TW.  I'm only sad because I'd like to watch Wednesday---I love Tim Burton projects and I've always loved The Addams Family.


----------



## Cinderlala

jelliedfeels said:


> Oh even better apparently the Aussie soap opera Neighbours was axed from British tv after viewing figures of 1.2 million per episode.
> Imagine the cost per episode of neighbours vs the H&M snooze fest and then they got similar viewing figures
> It’s even worse compared with the coronation street soap which got 5 million live views in March.
> 
> *I’m starting to think we are actually insulting soap operas by comparing them to H&M these soaps at least  know how to get decent audiences.*


With better writing and more believable premises!


----------



## purseinsanity

Cinderlala said:


> I'd rather watch static than the* flopumentary.  (Credit to a clever Redditor for the new term*.)  I can't watch it anyway because I canceled my Netflix account as soon as I heard they had signed TW.  I'm only sad because I'd like to watch Wednesday---I love Tim Burton projects and I've always loved The Addams Family.


Actually, Samantha Markle first called it that!


----------



## Cinderlala

kipp said:


> I totally agree with you and disagreed with my friend.  Was just reporting what she had heard from her friends in high places...


I'm so glad you disagreed with your friend!  It sounds like either she or her friends have an...interesting opinion about Kate.  I've always found it funny that people think they can tell what goes on behind closed doors based on how an individual acts in public.  (About s*x, I mean, because that's typically what people in this instance are alluding to.)

It's especially frustrating in this instance because the origin of the rumor was found and he admitted he made it up.


----------



## Cinderlala

purseinsanity said:


> Actually, Samantha Markle first called it that!


Thank you!  I had no idea---maybe I saw it on here, then??  I don't know anymore---this time of year is always a blur of stress & activity and my brain doesn't catch up until mid-January!


----------



## Chanbal

Well…   










						Howard Stern Ridicules Meghan Markle and Prince Harry For Acting Like ‘Whiny B*tches’ in New Documentary
					

Radio host Howard Stern lambasted Prince Harry and Meghan Markle over their new Netflix documentary which shows them blasting the royal family.




					www.mediaite.com


----------



## bellecate

I am gob smacked! I really didn't think they could possibly sink any lower. What kind of a warped person does this.



			https://www.instagram.com/marklenews1/


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Your wish is my command. The title says a lot
> 
> Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer shows Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan Netflix trailer shows Prince Philip's funeral
> 
> 
> Footage of Prince harry, Prince William and Peter Philips walking behind their grandfather's coffin is played, while the Duke of Sussex can be heard saying 'they were happy to lie to protect my brother'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im



I think I'm choosing to not vocalize my feelings.


----------



## Chanbal

M. Kelly on the reality show 1-3 (excellent video imo )


----------



## kipp

Cinderlala said:


> I'm so glad you disagreed with your friend!  It sounds like either she or her friends have an...interesting opinion about Kate.  I've always found it funny that people think they can tell what goes on behind closed doors based on how an individual acts in public.  (About s*x, I mean, because that's typically what people in this instance are alluding to.)
> 
> It's especially frustrating in this instance because the origin of the rumor was found and he admitted he made it up.


I don't think that my friend has a bad opinion about Catherine.  It's just that she thinks perhaps Cathering isn't as exciting (and you are right, these things behind closed doors are mostly about s*x as you say) as Rose Hansbury.  And as for "love", I think we all suspect that Harry's feelings of "love" for Meghan are also mostly about s*x.  
In any case, I had forgotten that Giles Coren said he made up the rumor and will ask my friend about that.  
And, my other friends here in London absolutely LOATHE Meghan and aren't keen on Harry anymore either.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bellecate said:


> I am gob smacked! I really didn't think they could possibly sink any lower. What kind of a warped person does this.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/marklenews1/
> 
> 
> View attachment 5669972



Please say it ain't so. I'd go BALLISTIC on Harry and I can only imagine how Charles - the Charles who has mentioned his mother in each of his milestone speeches as of yet - feels about this. I don't care Ghoul wears his...bodyparts he no longer has use for on a chain around her neck, how could he idly sit back and allow anyone to soil The Queen's legacy?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she's trying to establish she "really is black" claiming she was raised in a black neighborhood by black women.  Helps further her racism propaganda.


No F*ing way. She lived in Canoga Park and Woodland Hills. Nice middlle class (CP) and to upper middle class (WH) There might have been a few black families, but it was predominantly white when she was growing up.  She always lived in a nice house and had nice things and many advantages.  I know I am preaching to the choir here, but I am sick of her lies.  If a person said that Doria felt uncomfortable living in those places, I would believe that a lot faster.


----------



## Chanbal

More excellent videos from  Megyn Kelly on the last trailer and Kate. Tom Bower is rightly cautious imo.  


_Meghan Markle's "Brainwashing" of Prince Harry, and New Netflix Doc Episodes Ahead, with Tom Bower_​
_Meghan Markle's "Hatred and Jealousy" of Kate Middleton, with Sophie Corcoran and Leilani Dowding_​


----------



## sdkitty

what a nasty piece of work he's turned into








						'They Were Happy To Lie To Protect My Brother,' Prince Harry Claims In Explosive Netflix Trailer
					

"They were never willing to tell the truth to protect us," Harry adds of he and wife Meghan.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## millivanilli

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Can someone paraphrase what's in the new trailer/what they've done now? I want to be in the know but I absolutely don't want to watch them and hear them speak.


sure. Let me sum it up for you:

1.)We love each other oh so much. Really. No REALLY. Really really. 

2.)MM is the new Jesus Christ, mixed with Greta Thunberg, Marie Curie AND Else Lasker Schüler.

3.)Everybody is bazonka. Except for those who are friendly enough to repeat #1 and #2

4.) We really like the Royals. Except for the times we didn't like them. Which was always.
Why? see 1, 2 and 3.

That said: I watched it and I am going to watch the next episodes, too. I am not so into the MH story, so it was interesting to watch. Anyone who was irritated by how extremely she....... went of her way to meet him? In 100 years I wouldn't act like that, be it a prince, a king, a physician or a unemployed man.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> No F*ing way. She lived in Canoga Park and Woodland Hills. Nice middlle class (CP) and to upper middle class (WH) There might have been a few black families, but it was predominantly white when she was growing up.  She always lived in a nice house and had nice things and many advantages.  I know I am preaching to the choir here, but I am sick of her lies.  If a person said that Doria felt uncomfortable living in those places, I would believe that a lot faster.


I was on my phone last night, on this thread watching a clip of something and DH made the mistake of asking me, "So what's wrong with her?  She's lied about stuff?  Is she close to her father?"
I proceeded to give him an half hour run down about her bajillion lies, how she's set up her father and now ignores him even though he did everything for her, all the BS in the documentary, etc., and was just getting started when I heard soft snoring.  Guess he wasn't actually that interested.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't have netflix....I don't think I'd watch if I did but I suppose curiousity might get the best of me and I might watch part of it


Same here with no Netflix.  If I had it, I would give it a run with my finger on the fast forward button.  I CAN NOT stand listening to her and the few snippets I have heard, it is so obvious that she is reading from a well rehearsed script.  The inflections and the pregnant pauses are very telling.


----------



## bag-mania

They are so full of themselves.

Meghan also says: “I wasn’t being thrown to the wolves, I was being fed to the wolves.”

Those poor wolves would die of indigestion from eating so much of her bullsh*t.


----------



## gracekelly

purseinsanity said:


> I was on my phone on this thread watching a clip of something and DH made the mistake of asking me, "So what's wrong with her?  She's lied about stuff?  Is she close to her father?"
> I proceeded to give him an half hour run down about her bajillion lies, how she's set up her father and now ignores him even though he did everything for her, all the BS in the documentary, etc., and was just getting started when I heard soft snoring.  Guess he wasn't actually that interested.


Your DH and My DH are of the the same mind and mine may be worse because he is threatening to give me an IQ test.  He says that this is so meaningless to our lives that I shouldn't even be bothering or thinking about it. Plus he doesn't want to hear about it AT ALL! I tell him that it keeps my brain fired up lololol!


----------



## bag-mania

purseinsanity said:


> I proceeded to give him an half hour run down about her bajillion lies, how she's set up her father and now ignores him even though he did everything for her, all the BS in the documentary, etc., and *was just getting started when I heard soft snoring.  *Guess he wasn't actually that interested.


He was feigning sleep to get you to stop talking about her. I’ve been there.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> They are so full of themselves.
> 
> Meghan also says: “I wasn’t being thrown to the wolves, I was being fed to the wolves.”
> 
> Those poor wolves would die of indigestion from eating so much of her bullsh*t.


They had to be treated at the animal hospital for an E. coli infection.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Your DH and My DH are of the the same mind and mine may be worse because he is threatening to give me an IQ test.  *He says that this is so meaningless to our lives that I shouldn't even be bothering or thinking about it. *Plus he doesn't want to hear about it AT ALL! I tell him that it keeps my brain fired up lololol!


LOLOL, DH told me the same thing, until I pointed out that Haz and TW are keeping me off the Hermes, VCA and Cartier threads due to sheer "entertainment" value.  He hasn't said a peep since, until last night that is.


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> He was feigning sleep to get you to stop talking about her. I’ve been there.


You might be on to something there...


----------



## charlottawill

"she was is a Hollywood flop"


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> If I ever called my husband "my love" he be concerned for his welfare.



LOL!  Mine would be too!


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> It looks like a new trailer was released and it is generating …



Me after watching that trailer because I'm too damn nosey...




Give me strength!

Uhhm Rachel dear- everyone in the world knew where you were because you kept leaking it to the press to try and help back-up your fantasy paranoia about people following you and needing more security because your weren't 'sAfE'. The only person that was and still is following you is your puppet husband, you annoying narcissistic bish.
'Fed to the wolves'... by _yourself _and only because you desperately wrapped yourself in metaphorical bacon and dangled yourself to the media like bait. No one else had a hand in that but you and your PR TEAM.

JCMH, you manchild- jealousy is not a good look. No one had to lie for your brother because he's actually a decent, genuine guy who keeps his head down and works hard (with a genuine, empathetic wife and lovely kids) who had vicious untrue rumours spread about him which I would guess most definitely stemmed from you and your wife because you just can't stand the fact that your brother is a normal human being without an agenda, living a good life and seems to be doing alright for himself and you felt the need to try and ruin all of that because you are utterly jealous and spiteful. Pathetic.
You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the face, ran you over then backed up and ran over you again while screaming at you on loudspeaker. So how can someone protect you _fool_, when the TRUTH never passes your lips?
I hope you burn through whatever millions of dollars you earned to drag your family members through the mud and tarnish your dead grandmothers legacy in the name of making this tacky show and that you are left penniless and lonely in the near future. You deserve it.

This trailer is repulsive. This scripted 'dOcUmEnTaRy' is repulsive. These two idiots are repulsive. Their attention-seeking, greediness, spitefulness, maliciousness is REPULSIVE.

Oh and T.yler P.erry...




Rant over.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

SNL did a skit on them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Are they losing the plot or do they just not give a sh*t anymore?


----------



## Pessie

bellecate said:


> I am gob smacked! I really didn't think they could possibly sink any lower. What kind of a warped person does this.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/marklenews1/
> 
> 
> View attachment 5669972


They are disgusting.

ETA.  There’s something sinister about rewriting history to manipulate peoples present thinking.


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> Your DH and My DH are of the the same mind and mine may be worse because he is threatening to give me an IQ test.  He says that this is so meaningless to our lives that I shouldn't even be bothering or thinking about it. Plus he doesn't want to hear about it AT ALL! I tell him that it keeps my brain fired up lololol!



OMG, how many suffering husbands are there behind us while we are typing away...   I have offered the same explanation, that the whole thing is so unbelievable it keeps your brain stimulated and it's something about how a sick mind works that is intriguing in a horrible way.

My long suffering DH is way too knowledgeable on this whole saga than he ever wanted to be because I cannot look away from the car crash! Or stop talking to him about it when something new happens. But... what's the most amazing thing is that at first he was annoyed and even angry for me to be wasting my time on this, now he occasionally even discusses it with me and cannot believe how serious this whole thing is turning into. My theory is either he has given up thinking he better humour the mad woman or he too cannot believe how crazy H&M can be. 

Today I told him I just might send Christmas cards to both C&C and W&K, for no reason other than to express my support and offer condolences on QEII's passing (since I'd never dare to address them directly about H anyway, especially on a Christmas card) and because I would love to have a card from the palaces.  Ok... maybe I am going cray cray after all... But watching them play this dirty is simply infuriating! Yours Sincerely, Hyacinth Bouquet


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they losing the plot or do they just not give a sh*t anymore?
> 
> View attachment 5670002



Soooo.... They set up TM after all...


----------



## millivanilli

my husband gave me that look, nurses sometimes have when you blabber utter bs. Then he decided to go to the kitchen and prepare dinner. My daughter followed him immediately.  Will there be a season 2? Asking for a friend.


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> OMG, how many suffering husbands are there behind us while we are typing away...   I have offered the same explanation, that the whole thing is so unbelievable it keeps your brain stimulated and it's something about how a sick mind works that is intriguing in a horrible way.
> 
> My long suffering DH is way too knowledgeable on this whole saga than he ever wanted to be because I cannot look away from the car crash! Or stop talking to him about it when something new happens. But... what's the most amazing thing is that at first he was annoyed and even angry for me to be wasting my time on this, now he occasionally even discusses it with me and cannot believe how serious this whole thing is turning into. My theory is either he has given up thinking he better humour the mad woman or he too cannot believe how crazy H&M can be.
> 
> Today I told him I just might send Christmas cards to both C&C and W&K, for no reason other than to express my support and offer condolences on QEII's passing (since I'd never dare to address them directly about H anyway, especially on a Christmas card) and because I would love to have a card from the palaces.  Ok... maybe I am going cray cray after all... But watching them play this dirty is simply infuriating! Yours Sincerely, Hyacinth Bouquet


You're fine as long as you don't start calling him Richard. Unless of course that is his name.


----------



## Chanbal

NS talks about the list of invites to attend the wedding, an alleged payment to TW's niece to appear on camera and an alleged Doria's royal allowance. In other words, just follow the money.


----------



## Chanbal

bellecate said:


> I am gob smacked! I really didn't think they could possibly sink any lower. What kind of a warped person does this.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/marklenews1/
> 
> 
> View attachment 5669972


Here are the clips!


----------



## pomeline

purseinsanity said:


> You might be on to something there...



Now I'm wondering if mine is only pretending to listen and secretly drifts away to his own inner world when I start talking about them...  I wish this whole thing was over and done with and the titles gone fast. Then DH can recuperate until May when I'm staring at the coronation...


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

purseinsanity said:


> I was on my phone last night, on this thread watching a clip of something and DH made the mistake of asking me, "So what's wrong with her?  She's lied about stuff?  Is she close to her father?"
> I proceeded to give him an half hour run down about her bajillion lies, how she's set up her father and now ignores him even though he did everything for her, all the BS in the documentary, etc., and was just getting started when I heard soft snoring.  Guess he wasn't actually that interested.



You tried!


----------



## millivanilli

pomeline said:


> Now I'm wondering if mine is only pretending to listen and secretly drifts away to his own inner world when I start talking about them...  I wish this whole thing was over and done with and the titles gone fast. Then DH can recuperate until May when I'm staring at the coronation...


you have to insist, that he listens to you. Then he'll escape into chores. Win win.


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> My friend says that everyone knows that cheating goes on in the upper levels of British society and that it is basically accepted. In other words, Catherine knew when she joined the family that this might or would happen.  For example, she says that Phillip cheated on Queen Elizabeth, but their marriage also survived and in the end thrived.  My friend says that Catherine is "boring" compared with perhaps Rose Hansbury and that when Harry says he married for love rather than someone who "fit the mold" he is also referring to William, Catherine, and the Rose Hansbury affair.   Although we don't know what happens behind closed doors, it seems that especially now, William and Catherine are happy together and are functioning very well as a team, as best we can tell.
> But re: Harry, he seems to have a chip on his shoulder about his relationship with Meghan in the British press and BP relative to William and Catherine's.  He's always been jealous of William and this issue could be another facet of that.


The crux of this story for me is that William, being fully aware of what happened with his parents, made a conscious decision that he would not fall into the same situation.  That is why I never believed a word of any story involving him and Rose Hanbury.  Seeing him interact with his children really seals that deal for me.  There a picture early in the year of him with Louis in the park near Kensington Palace.  Louis was on his scooter and William was there to keep an eye on him.  This is a busy man who took the time out of his day just to go to the park with his  youngest and be with him when he was on his scooter.  What does that say about him?  Would he give up this up to spend court appointed times with his children?  I think not.

I think your friend is reading too many romantic novels set during the famous bed  hopping country house parties of 150 years ago, when married couples, with heirs already secured, found unlocked bedroom doors for a little weekend dalliance.


----------



## lallybelle

pomeline said:


> Soooo.... They set up TM after all...


Samantha seems to think so. She describes it as feeling it was OK to do the pics because there had been a bunch of unflattering pics of Thomas out & there was this narrative that he was a drunk (because they papped him buying beer) or looking a bit unkept so he was called a bum etc. They though this could show him a better light. The agency assured them that it would be completely discrete and no one would be any the wiser. Low and behold there's a pic with a camera man with a long lens walking right behind him (the pic that got them busted.) If they were truly being discrete, the camera man would have been no where near Thomas. Then low and behold same agency, pap would took the busted pic was credited with a photoshoot of Meg for some mag. Coincidence, I think not.

Now I'm not saying it was right to deal with the press or do the pics and for sure the Markles seem to have their own flaws or issues, but I don't think they're the ones lying about their side of this. Oh and to back this all up is the fact that this is exactly what Thomas told TMZ at the time. As in the clip in the show where Meg goes "you talked to TMZ" and showed a tiny clip. never showing the whole thing, which would have provided more context.


----------



## gracekelly

I can't get past "we lied to protect my brother."  What in the blazes does that mean or what is he talking about?  Does he even know or understand what he is saying?  The two of them  throw sh*t out there and never follow up and it is time the media or someone called them out for an exact answer to statements like this.  William must be furious.  No beyond furious.  This is the worst one sided sibling rivalry the world has seen since the brothers of the House of York almost 600 years ago or going farther back to the sons of King Henry ll.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Are they losing the plot or do they just not give a sh*t anymore?
> 
> View attachment 5670002



Yup, Sam pointed out M had worked with the photographer before


----------



## kipp

regnews said:


> How in the hell do your friends know if Catherine is or is not exciting in the bedroom. Or Rose for that matter. Please stop with that BS. This is just you making things up. You are talking about two women with SIX children between them. And all because your so called friend "THINKS".......


Look, I do not want to get into arguments with you and would appreciate your not attacking me personally---and in fact, I totally agree with you.  I have repeatedly said that I didn't agree with my friend's opinion (and if you have seen my posts in this thread, you know that I am a huge fan of W and C and detest H and M.)  I think Meghan is narcissistic and pathologic and that Harry has Stockholm syndrome and they both are throwing their families under the bus because of jealousy and the need to make $$$$.  It's sick!  
But, to be clear, my friend here in London is a very prominent aesthetician with clients who are in the same circles as some of the most high level people in London, including W & C.    And that's where she said she heard this.  In fact, one of her clients told her about Meghan's bad behavior at a party she attended at the Duke of Westminsters (this was pre-marriage to Harry).  So when my friend told me all this, I thought it was interesting and worthy of discussion.  That's all.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Same here with no Netflix.  If I had it, I would give it a run with my finger on the fast forward button.  I CAN NOT stand listening to her and the few snippets I have heard, it is so obvious that she is reading from a well rehearsed script.  The inflections and the pregnant pauses are very telling.


I can't even stand to watch the promos online


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> Look, I do not want to get into arguments with you and would appreciate your not attacking me personally---and in fact, I totally agree with you.  I have repeatedly said that I didn't agree with my friend's opinion (and if you have seen my posts in this thread, you know that I am a huge fan of W and C and detest H and M.)  I think Meghan is narcissistic and pathologic and that Harry has Stockholm syndrome and they both are throwing their families under the bus because of jealousy and the need to make $$$$.  It's sick!
> But, to be clear, my friend here in London is a very prominent aesthetician with clients who are in the same circles as some of the most high level people in London, including W & C.    And that's where she said she heard this.  In fact, one of her clients told her about Meghan's bad behavior at a party she attended at the Duke of Westminsters (this was pre-marriage to Harry).  So when my friend told me all this, I thought it was interesting and worthy of discussion.  That's all.


My first question would be how in the heck did Meghan get to a party at the Duke of Westminster?  The current Duke came to the title in 2016. His BIL is a von Cutsem and that family is very tight with the Windsors. He is a godfather to Prince George.  Somehow I don't see her being invited into this crowd at  all prior to Harry unless it was during the engagement period.


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> My first question would be how in the heck did Meghan get to a party at the Duke of Westminster?  The current Duke came to the title in 2016. His BIL is a von Cutsem and that family is very tight with the Windsors. He is a godfather to Prince George.  Somehow I don't see her being invited into this crowd at  all prior to Harry unless it was during the engagement period.


----------



## kipp

gracekelly said:


> My first question would be how in the heck did Meghan get to a party at the Duke of Westminster?  The current Duke came to the title in 2016. His BIL is a von Cutsem and that family is very tight with the Windsors. He is a godfather to Prince George.  Somehow I don't see her being invited into this crowd at  all prior to Harry unless it was during the engagement period.


It was during their engagement pre marriage, and she went to the party with Harry.  Sorry I wasn't more clear about that in my previous post.


----------



## lanasyogamama

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It is when you marry a suitable person to keep money and power. I don't think it's all that accepted in a modern marriage based on love.
> 
> 
> 
> That's really mean spirited towards a person who does nothing to deserve vitriol, though.


My cousin used to say that all the time about Catherine, that she seemed boring, but even then before all this drama started I never thought it was her job to be entertaining, she’s not an actress or singer. Besides, she seems extremely charming and easy to talk to which is a talent in itself.


----------



## gracekelly

lanasyogamama said:


> My cousin used to say that all the time about Catherine, that she seemed boring, but even then before all this drama started I never thought it was her job to be entertaining, she’s not an actress or singer. Besides, she seems extremely charming and easy to talk to which is a talent in itself.


I don't think she is boring at all.  She has interests in many areas.  You can base a lot on interactions with other people and she always seems to be genuinely interested.  IMO that is not a sign of a boring person who would, most likely, just go through the motions and put on a fake smile.


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please say it ain't so. I'd go BALLISTIC on Harry and I can only imagine how Charles … feels about this. *I don't care Ghoul wears his...bodyparts he no longer has use for on a chain around her neck,* how could he idly sit back and allow anyone to soil The Queen's legacy?



  



purseinsanity said:


> … I proceeded to give him an half hour run down about her bajillion lies, how she's set up her father and now ignores him even though he did everything for her, all the BS in the documentary, etc., and was just getting started when I heard soft snoring.  Guess he wasn't actually that interested.



He shouldn’t have asked! 



Lounorada said:


> Me after watching that trailer because I'm too damn nosey...
> View attachment 5669993
> 
> View attachment 5670000
> 
> Give me strength!
> 
> Uhhm Rachel dear- everyone in the world knew where you were because you kept leaking it to the press to try and help back-up your fantasy paranoia about people following you and needing more security because your weren't 'sAfE'. The only person that was and still is following you is your puppet husband, you annoying narcissistic bish.
> 'Fed to the wolves'... by _yourself _and only because you desperately wrapped yourself in metaphorical bacon and dangled yourself to the media like bait. No one else had a hand in that but you and your PR TEAM.
> 
> JCMH, you manchild- jealousy is not a good look. No one had to lie for your brother because he's actually a decent, genuine guy who keeps his head down and works hard (with a genuine, empathetic wife and lovely kids) who had vicious untrue rumours spread about him which I would guess most definitely stemmed from you and your wife because you just can't stand the fact that your brother is a normal human being without an agenda, living a good life and seems to be doing alright for himself and you felt the need to try and ruin all of that because you are utterly jealous and spiteful. Pathetic.
> You wouldn't know the truth if it smacked you in the face, ran you over then backed up and ran over you again while screaming at you on loudspeaker. So how can someone protect you _fool_, when the TRUTH never passes your lips?
> I hope you burn through whatever millions of dollars you earned to drag your family members through the mud and tarnish your dead grandmothers legacy in the name of making this tacky show and that you are left penniless and lonely in the near future. You deserve it.
> 
> This trailer is repulsive. This scripted 'dOcUmEnTaRy' is repulsive. These two idiots are repulsive. Their attention-seeking, greediness, spitefulness, maliciousness is REPULSIVE.
> 
> Oh and T.yler P.erry...
> View attachment 5669998
> 
> 
> 
> Rant over.
> View attachment 5670001



Preach!


----------



## papertiger

gracekelly said:


> My first question would be how in the heck did Meghan get to a party at the Duke of Westminster?  The current Duke came to the title in 2016. His BIL is a von Cutsem and that family is very tight with the Windsors. He is a godfather to Prince George.  Somehow I don't see her being invited into this crowd at  all prior to Harry unless it was during the engagement period.



It's not hard, they're charity events, I've been to several events at Westminster hosted by the Duke of Westminster (6th not 7th). You just buy tickets if you (want to) support that charity. 

It's harder to get invited to the City of London Guild dinners and I've been to a few of them too  .


----------



## papertiger

lanasyogamama said:


> My cousin used to say that all the time about Catherine, that she seemed boring, but even then before all this drama started I never thought it was her job to be entertaining, she’s not an actress or singer. Besides, she seems extremely charming and easy to talk to which is a talent in itself.





gracekelly said:


> I don't think she is boring at all.  She has interests in many areas.  You can base a lot on interactions with other people and she always seems to be genuinely interested.  IMO that is not a sign of a boring person who would, most likely, just go through the motions and put on a fake smile.



Meghan is the most boring, bland, holier-than-thou person I have happily never had the pleasure to meet. Katherine seems like a hoot compared to MZZ goody-two-shoes hugger humanitarian snooze-fest


----------



## purseinsanity

lanasyogamama said:


> My cousin used to say that all the time about Catherine, that she seemed boring, but even then before all this drama started I never thought it was her job to be entertaining, she’s not an actress or singer. Besides, she seems extremely charming and easy to talk to which is a talent in itself.


I don't think she's boring.  She continually surprises me with talents I had no idea she had...photography, drawing, playing piano, etc.  Just because someone follows the rules and doesn't ruffle feathers doesn't make them boring.
For most of my life with DH, we've had two dogs, a male and a female.  Our males have always been ornery, hard to train, and while friendly, total pains in the butt, while our females are gentle, loving, walk right next to me on walks, and are very well behaved.  DH always says the males have "personality" and our females are "boring", which pi$$es me off.  Just because someone is well behaved doesn't make them boring, IMO.  TW is the complete opposite of Kate, but I don't find TW interesting in the least.  She's a bigger pain in the butt than any male dog I've ever had!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> My first question would be how in the heck did Meghan get to a party at the Duke of Westminster?  The current Duke came to the title in 2016. His BIL is a von Cutsem and that family is very tight with the Windsors. He is a godfather to Prince George.  Somehow I don't see her being invited into this crowd at  all prior to Harry unless it was during the engagement period.



That's how I read it. Before the wedding but after she'd already secured the deal. I mean, she forced her way into Pippa's wedding while just a random gf.


----------



## sdkitty

Martin Short took a poke at them on SNL


			Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Ripped on SNL After Netflix Documentary


----------



## Lounorada

Cinderlala said:


> I'd rather watch static than the flopumentary.  (Credit to a clever Redditor for the new term.)  I can't watch it anyway because I canceled my Netflix account as soon as I heard they had signed TW.  I'm only sad because I'd like to watch Wednesday---I love Tim Burton projects and I've always loved The Addams Family.


Speaking of the Addams Family... I was watching _Addams Family Values_ recently and do you know you reminded me of TW in that movie- the character Debbie 

-Set her sights on the dopiest member of the family.
-Was manipulative to everyone around her, except Wednesday who saw right through her.
-Only married Uncle Fester because she wanted his family money.
-Set out to destroy the family because she hated them.
-Only cared about herself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## kipp

papertiger said:


> It's not hard, they're charity events, I've been to several events at Westminster hosted by the Duke of Westminster (6th not 7th). You just buy tickets if you (want to) support that charity.
> 
> It's harder to get invited to the City of London Guild dinners and I've been to a few of them too  .



That sounds amazing! Cool!

But to further clarify, the party my friend’s client was referring to was a private event at the 7th (young) Duke of Westminster’s home.  My friend told me about this party that her client attended and Meghan’s bad behavior in early 2018, so the details are a bit vague to me now.  But as I recall, apparently she was rude to the host and other guests, seemingly unhappy she wasn’t the center of attention, and I think she said she insisted on leaving early—- big surprise there!  
This information was relayed to me at the time that pretty much everyone was thrilled about the engagement and thought that Meghan would be an asset to both Harry and the Royal family. 
So this information surprised me too at that time.  Of course now we can totally believe it!


----------



## Molly0

Didn’t watch their silly Netflix nonsense, but I did start it up just so I could check it off as “Not for Me”.


----------



## malbec_bleu

kipp said:


> Look, I do not want to get into arguments with you and would appreciate your not attacking me personally---and in fact, I totally agree with you.  I have repeatedly said that I didn't agree with my friend's opinion (and if you have seen my posts in this thread, you know that I am a huge fan of W and C and detest H and M.)  I think Meghan is narcissistic and pathologic and that Harry has Stockholm syndrome and they both are throwing their families under the bus because of jealousy and the need to make $$$$.  It's sick!
> But, to be clear, my friend here in London is a very prominent aesthetician with clients who are in the same circles as some of the most high level people in London, including W & C.    And that's where she said she heard this.  In fact, one of her clients told her about Meghan's bad behavior at a party she attended at the Duke of Westminsters (this was pre-marriage to Harry).  So when my friend told me all this, I thought it was interesting and worthy of discussion.  That's all.


Please expand on Ms bad behavior at the Duke's party! Would love more details. I feel this never comes to light!


----------



## kipp

malbec_bleu said:


> Please expand on Ms bad behavior at the Duke's party! Would love more details. I feel this never comes to light!


I just did in post #123,063.


----------



## malbec_bleu

kipp said:


> I just did in post #123,063.


Missed that, thanks!


----------



## pomeline

kipp said:


> That sounds amazing! Cool!
> 
> But to further clarify, the party my friend’s client was referring to was a private event at the 7th (young) Duke of Westminster’s home.  My friend told me about this party that her client attended and Meghan’s bad behavior in early 2018, so the details are a bit vague to me now.  But as I recall, apparently she was rude to the host and other guests, seemingly unhappy she wasn’t the center of attention, and I think she said she insisted on leaving early—- big surprise there!
> This information was relayed to me at the time that pretty much everyone was thrilled about the engagement and thought that Meghan would be an asset to both Harry and the Royal family.
> So this information surprised me too at that time.  Of course now we can totally believe it!


If true may I say that it's unbelievably rude and unprofessional for someone with prominent clients to blab about private matters and gossip. 

I don't believe the whole affair story and think TW is behind spreading it.


----------



## sdkitty

pomeline said:


> If true may I say that it's unbelievably rude and unprofessional for someone with prominent clients to blab about private matters and gossip.
> 
> I don't believe the whole affair story and think TW is behind spreading it.


but this is negative about Meghan, isn't it?


----------



## kipp

pomeline said:


> If true may I say that it's unbelievably rude and unprofessional for someone with prominent clients to blab about private matters and gossip.
> 
> I don't believe the whole affair story and think TW is behind spreading it.


I asked my friend about what she thought about Meghan and Harry and these anecdotes came up.  So I'm also the guilty one here.  I'm truly sorry I even relayed any of this information on the forum---my friend would probably be quite unhappy too.   But for the record, I too believe TW is behind the affair story.  
Anyway, I'm not going to say anything further about this as the discussion has seemingly become quite contentious.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Martin Short took a poke at them on SNL
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Ripped on SNL After Netflix Documentary


Enjoy! (~1:44)


----------



## xincinsin

Cinderlala said:


> It's especially frustrating in this instance because the origin of the rumor was found and he admitted he made it up.


The story goes that he made it up after he went to Soho House.


bellecate said:


> I am gob smacked! I really didn't think they could possibly sink any lower. What kind of a warped person does this.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/marklenews1/
> 
> 
> View attachment 5669972


If this is true, then it is just one more example of how they try to manipulate people and rewrite history.


kipp said:


> I don't think that my friend has a bad opinion about Catherine.  It's just that she thinks perhaps Cathering isn't as exciting (and you are right, these things behind closed doors are mostly about s*x as you say) as Rose Hansbury.  And as for "love", I think we all suspect that Harry's feelings of "love" for Meghan are also mostly about s*x.
> In any case, I had forgotten that Giles Coren said he made up the rumor and will ask my friend about that.
> And, my other friends here in London absolutely LOATHE Meghan and aren't keen on Harry anymore either.


It could be that the friends this person hangs out with are all engaging in affairs and therefore reframing it as "normal". I've had "but everyone does/others do it" put forth as an excuse when I have to speak to an errant staff member.
ETA: apologies @kipp, just read your later posts



QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't care Ghoul wears his...bodyparts he no longer has use for on a chain around her neck,* how could he idly sit back and allow anyone to soil The Queen's legacy?*


He worships money now.


----------



## Chanbal

Hazz's instructions…


----------



## Chanbal

Windbags


----------



## pomeline

kipp said:


> I asked my friend about what she thought about Meghan and Harry and these anecdotes came up.  So I'm also the guilty one here.  I'm truly sorry I even relayed any of this information on the forum---my friend would probably be quite unhappy too.   But for the record, I too believe TW is behind the affair story.
> Anyway, I'm not going to say anything further about this as the discussion has seemingly become quite contentious.


No hard feelings, I hope my post didn't upset anyone. People do gossip and speculate (we do it too), I know. But maybe it would be more suited on some other thread, I don't know. 

I hate how H&M are ruining another week for us with the trailers and launching the final attack on what should be Kate's day to shine.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


>



Hilarious


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG is having fun again…

*6 DISTURBING details in The Harkles’ SECOND trailer*


----------



## pomeline

People were commenting on Twitter about how H&M are going to the coronation because M has listed her appearance on IMDb... so I checked...




B**** please...  Say it isn't so...


----------



## xincinsin

pomeline said:


> People were commenting on Twitter about how H&M are going to the coronation because M has listed her appearance on IMDb... so I checked...
> 
> View attachment 5670074
> 
> 
> B**** please...  Say it isn't so...


They put that in right after TQ passed. Manifesting...

Did you see this in the flopumentary credit list on IMDB?
I'm surprised they didn't pad the list with the names of the entire royal family.



There was also only one cinematographer credited for all 6 eps. I suppose he was the guy who had to film all the "loving" re-enactments to* force *through the impression of a happy family and besotted couple.


----------



## Lodpah

As much as I like the BLG guy the detectives at Beyond Evil on YouTube and Meet, Marry and Murder are way above in their skills assessing people when they are interviewed. They nail it to a T. They know when someone is exhibiting narcissistic or psychopathic traits lol.


----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

N/M


----------



## Toby93




----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


>



Typical Harkle misdirection 
They change direction and reroute their past so many times that I agree with Sparry: No one knows the truth! _(have to add here that the remark of his that no one know the truth except for a lot of people really makes me wonder if he understands what he is saying ... and if the scriptwriter took a big snort of the good stuff before he/she wrote that drivel).  _


----------



## Chanbal

It brought a tear to my left eye


----------



## scarlet555

Toby93 said:


>



AMEN To that!  What we’ve been saying all along, all this time, non-stop…again and again,  no jokes… this whole thread… boom! Summarized above!


----------



## gracekelly

kipp said:


> I asked my friend about what she thought about Meghan and Harry and these anecdotes came up.  So I'm also the guilty one here.  I'm truly sorry I even relayed any of this information on the forum---my friend would probably be quite unhappy too.   But for the record, I too believe TW is behind the affair story.
> Anyway, I'm not going to say anything further about this as the discussion has seemingly become quite contentious.


This story is quite believable. She is actually a very gauche and awkward person in social situations. I think that she when  feels outgunned and does t know how to handle it, she runs.  This sounds like it was a group that all knew Harry quite well. If walls could talk.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv




----------



## Chanbal

Meghan McCain gives her opinion on how the Harkles are perceived in America. It seems there is a consensus across the public spectrum.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> As much as I like the BLG guy the detectives at Beyond Evil on YouTube and Meet, Marry and Murder are way above in their skills assessing people when they are interviewed. They nail it to a T. They know when someone is exhibiting narcissistic or psychopathic traits lol.


Please post those videos here, so we all have fun.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Just saw this comment on Trailer for Vol 2. A sugar defending the Harkles is claiming that in the Netflix series, the media asked Sparry for his forgiveness. He or she also claim that every comment that starts with "I love the part" is from a bot. I guess sarcasm is a foreign concept for this person.


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> As much as I like the BLG guy the detectives at Beyond Evil on YouTube and Meet, Marry and Murder are way above in their skills assessing people when they are interviewed. They nail it to a T. They know when someone is exhibiting narcissistic or psychopathic traits lol.


Dear @Lodpah 
Thank you for my weekend viewing pleasure  Must check these out.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

One tear, left eye, go!  3/4 face view!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Balm for the soul - she famously told Hazz to “shush” but told William to cherish his wife


----------



## Jayne1

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Speaking of "Didn't invite her father"...TM claims he never got an official invite (as in, a physical envelope with a physical invite in it). Now, do I think he's just as capable of lying and overdramatizing as his demon spawn? I do, but nobody has ever disputed his version (AND I'm 100% positive she set him up because she wanted a reason to get rid of him).
> 
> View attachment 5669944


I had so much trouble finishing the series because that was when she talked about him calling the paps (and she said it with a straight face!) and how difficult her father was before the wedding, not responding to her texts.  Even her mother got in on it saying that's not how to parent.

There are certain lies that I cannot stomach and the father part and how she ghosted him is probably the worst thing to watch so far.


----------



## needlv

Jayne1 said:


> I had so much trouble finishing the series because that was when she talked about him calling the paps (and she said it with a straight face!) and how difficult her father was before the wedding, not responding to her texts.  Even her mother got in on it saying that's not how to parent.
> 
> There are certain lies that I cannot stomach and the father part and how she ghosted him is probably the worst thing to watch so far.



In hindsight MM should have handled the situation with her father a lot better.

The letter etc was poorly done.  I don’t give TM a pass for giving interview after interview.  

MM should have issued a statement saying something like “we used to be quite close but now we are not.”  And ended it there.  She would have looked like she is trying to maturely handle it.

But no.  She has to try to erase / make it seem like Doria single-handedly raised her when this isn’t true.  Then Acting like “I don’t have a father” is malicious and intended to wound.  This then makes her family retaliate in more interviews.  This isn’t going to end and the whole family looks messy.


----------



## tiktok

needlv said:


>



I’ll believe it when I see it. Not holding my breath.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



Will it work? It's kind of their signature to ignore advice from everyone unless it comes with lots of money.

Besides, they need a constant supply of victim fodder. I wonder if the tomatoes will have ripened in May.


----------



## Toby93

Wow...it looks to me that Harry is on *something* in a lot of his screen time on the flopumentary, but this is over the top


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone within Camp Sussex


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> So this pic was just put out.  Supposedly taken on the same day as the Lili birthday pic.  It looks like TW and Lil have a lot more hair.
> 
> View attachment 5669797



If I remember, the woman and children are M’ s slobberingly devoted Photograper, Misan Harriman’s family. He’s the one who remotely took photos of them in Montecito from his home in England using his iPad. He does claim they were at Lilibet’s party at Frogmore House.  He is deeply imbedded in the Squad. His name came up in the articles about Marlene Headley AKA Ngozi Fulani, he has photographed her organization Sistah Space and supported her claims of abuse by Lady Susan Hussey at the palace reception.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sisters in spirit.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> I had so much trouble finishing the series because that was when she talked about him calling the paps (and she said it with a straight face!) and how difficult her father was before the wedding, not responding to her texts.  *Even her mother got in on it saying that's not how to parent.*
> 
> There are certain lies that I cannot stomach and the father part and how she ghosted him is probably the worst thing to watch so far.



Oh, tell us all about how to parent Doria. Also, I didn't know you needed to parents a 40yo woman.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> In hindsight MM should have handled the situation with her father a lot better.
> 
> The letter etc was poorly done.  I don’t give TM a pass for giving interview after interview.



That's true, but he gave interview after interview after being sidelined by his demon spawn. The whole clan lacks a little bit of dignity, though.



needlv said:


> But no.  She has to try to erase / make it seem like Doria single-handedly raised her when this isn’t true.  Then Acting like “I don’t have a father” is malicious and intended to wound.  This then makes her family retaliate in more interviews.  This isn’t going to end and the whole family looks messy.



Jup.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jelliedfeels

charlottawill said:


> You're fine as long as you don't start calling him Richard. Unless of course that is his name.


This thread is truly an elegant candlelit supper for the ages.


kipp said:


> Look, I do not want to get into arguments with you and would appreciate your not attacking me personally---and in fact, I totally agree with you.  I have repeatedly said that I didn't agree with my friend's opinion (and if you have seen my posts in this thread, you know that I am a huge fan of W and C and detest H and M.)  I think Meghan is narcissistic and pathologic and that Harry has Stockholm syndrome and they both are throwing their families under the bus because of jealousy and the need to make $$$$.  It's sick!
> But, to be clear, my friend here in London is a very prominent aesthetician with clients who are in the same circles as some of the most high level people in London, including W & C.    And that's where she said she heard this.  In fact, one of her clients told her about Meghan's bad behavior at a party she attended at the Duke of Westminsters (this was pre-marriage to Harry).  So when my friend told me all this, I thought it was interesting and worthy of discussion.  That's all.


To defend you further, this is a gossip thread and no one should get mad at the messenger because they don’t like a particular tipbit - believe it or don’t and move on.



Lounorada said:


> Speaking of the Addams Family... I was watching _Addams Family Values_ recently and do you know you reminded me of TW in that movie- the character Debbie
> 
> -Set her sights on the dopiest member of the family.
> -Was manipulative to everyone around her, except Wednesday who saw right through her.
> -Only married Uncle Fester because she wanted his family money.
> -Set out to destroy the family because she hated them.
> -Only cared about herself.
> View attachment 5670036
> 
> View attachment 5670037
> 
> View attachment 5670038
> 
> View attachment 5670039


M wishes she was that slay.
That last one is really on the nose isn’t it?
The really mystifying thing is most femme fatales are beautiful and/or very glam  whereas M has always been *incredibly busted* even compared to British people 






kipp said:


> I asked my friend about what she thought about Meghan and Harry and these anecdotes came up.  So I'm also the guilty one here.  I'm truly sorry I even relayed any of this information on the forum---my friend would probably be quite unhappy too.   But for the record, I too believe TW is behind the affair story.
> Anyway, I'm not going to say anything further about this as the discussion has seemingly become quite contentious.


For what it’s worth I’ve heard these rumours from a journalist friend too and In general, I don’t find it hard to believe someone can want to be a good dad and still be a cheater - I mean that’s the basis of old school machismo whether that’s Will I dunno but heck I’m inclined to think power corrupts.


CarryOn2020 said:


> I had so much trouble finishing the series because that was when she talked about him calling the paps (and she said it with a straight face!) and how difficult her father was before the wedding, not responding to her texts.  Even her mother got in on it saying that's not how to parent.


i was about to say how much do you need to parent a 40 year old then I remembered how much I am waiting for C to grow a pair and metaphorically  lay the smack down on H’s candy ass.







Jayne1 said:


> There are certain lies that I cannot stomach and the father part and how she ghosted him is probably the worst thing to watch so far.


It’s awful even if he’s a bit sleazy they are just erasing his existence at this point. He should do an interview with anyone who will pay him a nickel.


CarryOn2020 said:


> One tear, left eye, go!  3/4 face view!



This is a very valid point about this guy using his professional Twitter to mock peoples looks doesn’t reflect well on him  - has he never heard of a nice username? I’m sure dubiousfeels  isn’t taken  

Reality is neither of the boys is ageing brilliantly and M is absolutely ageing like bagged salad never mind bananas. K is very poised and while I do find her a bit resting sad face she does all the aesthetic heavy lifting.

It does strike me as funny he’s coming for people’s looks though because if that’s him in the pic his face is so long he looks like frozone.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Someone within Camp Sussex




Who is Robert?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who is Robert?


Perhaps  Robert Lacey, _Battle of the Brothers_??


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wha????


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The BLG is having fun again…
> 
> *6 DISTURBING details in The Harkles’ SECOND trailer*




"I'm gonna prove Meghan's been planning this since 2016"


----------



## CarryOn2020

Forgive me, please — exactly what is the difference? Thrown to or fed to?  In any case, it does appear the UK has difficulty with its wolves. They seem to reject members of the BRF.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wha????



I hope there were photos... of the friends - they had friends after she cut him off from the people he grew up with? Her friends Misan and Markus? Eug and Jack? The intimate photographer? The founding members of the Sussex Squats?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wha????




How was that vomiting emoticon coming along again? These people are developmentally stunted. Stuck somewhere age 5 maybe?


----------



## jelliedfeels

CarryOn2020 said:


> Wha????



I mean really there are things that once heard you should take to your grave- and I think that’s what this Tom should have done. 

I get animal onesies are meant to be cute but I’m getting eyes wide shut vibes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean really there are things that once heard you should take to your grave- and I think that’s what this Tom should have done.



Seriously. Just suffer in silence instead of making all of us suffer with you.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. Just suffer in silence instead of making all of us suffer with you.



Now I understand the Spider-Man suit.  Dress up in costumes - this is what they do in their fantasy land.  No wonder they did not allow cameras visiting the Monteshito mansion.  Yes, I get it now.  Something weird in the neighborhood, o yeah.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

n/m


----------



## Pessie

They were just marks to her, ripe for exploitation.  Might as well of had $$$ signs strapped to their backs.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lenna.V

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean really there are things that once heard you should take to your grave- and I think that’s what this Tom should have done.
> 
> I get animal onesies are meant to be cute but I’m getting eyes wide shut vibes.



Cute for children. Not for adult if you watch the movie Creep hahaha


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> Wow...it looks to me that Harry is on *something* in a lot of his screen time on the flopumentary, but this is over the top
> 
> View attachment 5670170
> 
> 
> View attachment 5670171



Freedom Flight??? 

He’s kidding, right? He is comparing leaving his privileged life in the UK to have a privileged life in the US to those who escape truly horrific conditions and oppressive regimes?


----------



## justwatchin

I know there have been some posts saying they feel sorry for Harry the Spare for hooking up with Meghan the Manipulator but he’s invested in this 100%. This idiot who thinks he’s been ignored most of his life is enjoying his random moments of “fame.” Let them keep going because their never ending line of whining and repeating the same stuff over will lose steam. We see you both…


----------



## LittleStar88

justwatchin said:


> I know there have been some posts saying they feel sorry for Harry the Spare for hooking up with Meghan the Manipulator but he’s invested in this 100%. This idiot who thinks he’s been ignored most of his life is enjoying his random moments of “fame.” Let them keep going because their never ending line of whining and repeating the same stuff over will lose steam. We see you both…



I don’t feel sorry for him at all. He’s 100% accountable for his decisions.

Once the book is released they won’t have anything else left to whine about or stories to sell. This is it for them. Nothing left.


----------



## pomeline

Did you know Edward VIII aka Duke of Windbag... er Windsor also wrote a tell-all book (ghostwritten of course)?







'I was in unconscious rebellion against my position': How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his explosive 1951 autobiography

The monsters of Montecito always claim they were first in everything but they're just lame copycats.


----------



## lallybelle

Ok, I don't care for Megan Kelly but it was ONE GUY ON A VESPA sent me.


----------



## bag-mania

LittleStar88 said:


> Once the book is released they won’t have anything else left to whine about or stories to sell. This is it for them. Nothing left.


They had better be investing their Netflix millions wisely. They are going to be living off of them for a long time. 

Here’s an idea, Harry can get a job as a royal reporter for one of the US networks. That way he can be sure he’ll be allowed to attend the coronation.


----------



## justwatchin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments:



She is not normal by any level! How creepy!


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> *Freedom Flight*???
> 
> He’s kidding, right? He is comparing leaving his privileged life in the UK to have a privileged life in the US to those who escape truly horrific conditions and oppressive regimes?


The Harkles are now upsetting people from Cuba. Wow, will this ever end?


----------



## marietouchet

Help me please !   I am not up to date … MY FAULT duhhh I refuse to subscribe to N¥TFLIX

Did the trailer/episodes REALLY show a photo of the proposal ??? Does MM have a phone in her hand , we know she was on the phone to Jessica …

THE ROTAL GRIFT - YouTube - has amusing analysis of the videos/trailers eg when Harkles are in NY car - scared out of their wits bc they are chased by a guy on a citibike. In depth analysis of NYC landmarks, debunks the scene as staged, scripted, with H holding the SCRIPT in his lap

PS Born and bred in NYC, I concur with all the chat on NY landmarks


----------



## littlemisskeira

LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t feel sorry for him at all. He’s 100% accountable for his decisions.
> 
> Once the book is released they won’t have anything else left to whine about or stories to sell. This is it for them. Nothing left.



I'm not reading the book or watching the show.

But if next up their sleeves is a sex tape (i reckon they used up whatever they have to monetise at this point), maybe .. just maybe.. i may just get curious enough to get a sneak peep.


----------



## Chanbal

justwatchin said:


> *I know there have been some posts saying they feel sorry for Harry the Spare for hooking up with Meghan* the Manipulator but he’s invested in this 100%. This idiot who thinks he’s been ignored most of his life is enjoying his random moments of “fame.” Let them keep going because their never ending line of whining and repeating the same stuff over will lose steam. We see you both…


Those are probably outdated posts!


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> Wow...it looks to me that Harry is on *something* in a lot of his screen time on the flopumentary, but this is over the top
> 
> View attachment 5670170
> 
> 
> View attachment 5670171


Mememe may have taken this for future use when she decides to dump him and needs smear material to use in the divorce.


----------



## xincinsin

marietouchet said:


> Help me please !   I am not up to date … MY FAULT duhhh I refuse to subscribe to N¥TFLIX
> 
> Did the trailer/episodes REALLY show a photo of the proposal ??? Does MM have a phone in her hand , we know she was on the phone to Jessica …


There was a horribly grainy photo, supposedly showing Sparry on his knees with the injured dog and a bouquet, proposing to Zed.









						Harry and Meghan share never-before-seen pic of Harry on 1 knee from his proposal
					

“Of course, I got down on one knee,” Prince Harry said. “Of course, I did.”




					www.today.com
				




Timeline is being questioned because some people say the dog was injured AFTER the date of the proposal. An early re-enactment?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Timeline is being questioned because some people say the dog was injured AFTER the date of the proposal. An early re-enactment?




Y'all have no imagination. Obviously one was the real engagement and the other one not and they threw us off for privacy reasons. And then there was a third, the public spectacle.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Y'all have no imagination. Obviously one was the real engagement and the other one not and they threw us off for privacy reasons. And then there was a third, the public spectacle.


Inquiring minds want to know - how many chickens were harmed in the repeated proposals? Was there more than one ring? Was the first time a dud because the Botswana stone was very ethical but too small, so Sparry had to quickly add in two Di-amonds, redesign and re-propose?


----------



## Laila619

LittleStar88 said:


> Freedom Flight???
> 
> He’s kidding, right? He is comparing leaving his privileged life in the UK to have a privileged life in the US to those who escape truly horrific conditions and oppressive regimes?


He is JUST as revolting, if not more so, than his dumb wife. What an entitled, spoiled little sh*t.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> Inquiring minds want to know - *how many chickens were harmed in the repeated proposals? *Was there more than one ring? Was the first time a dud because the Botswana stone was very ethical but too small, so Sparry had to quickly add in two Di-amonds, redesign and re-propose?


There are black magic rituals which require the sacrifice of a chicken and the use of it's blood. Even that wouldn't explain all of this farce.


----------



## LittleStar88

bag-mania said:


> They had better be investing their Netflix millions wisely. They are going to be living off of them for a long time.
> 
> Here’s an idea, Harry can get a job as a royal reporter for one of the US networks. That way he can be sure he’ll be allowed to attend the coronation.



They'll be living with champagne tastes on a beer budget. There's no way they've stockpiled enough to sustain their living expenses for a long time. 

You're onto something about being a royal reporter! That sounds like a very possible line of work for him.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Meghan McCain gives her opinion on how the Harkles are perceived in America. It seems there is a consensus across the public spectrum.



I like what she said about Michelle O...and the end "how many times can you tell this story?"....this seems to be the consensus


----------



## LittleStar88

littlemisskeira said:


> I'm not reading the book or watching the show.
> 
> But if next up their sleeves is a sex tape (i reckon they used up whatever they have to monetise at this point), maybe .. just maybe.. i may just get curious enough to get a sneak peep.



This was not the image I needed to start my day


----------



## sdkitty

I was trying to think who else got this much negative attention.  Octomom and Kate Gosselin came to mind.  Of course they weren't royality but anyway, where are they now?  this stuff has an expiration I think.


----------



## Chanbal

This is so good.


----------



## Chanbal

Whatever it means! Is this their charity?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Inquiring minds want to know - how many chickens were harmed in the repeated proposals? Was there more than one ring? Was the first time a dud because the Botswana stone was very ethical but too small, so Sparry had to quickly add in two *Di-amonds*, redesign and re-propose?



OMG


----------



## Cinderlala

This thread moves so quickly!!!  I've skimmed a lot but I see we've hit another new low with the duo. (Unsurprisingly.) 

Fortunately, these are busy times for most people so we'll be able to skip loads of their nonsense.  Unfortunately, it's on N'flix which means it will be around for flipping ever. 



Lounorada said:


> Speaking of the Addams Family... I was watching _Addams Family Values_ recently and do you know you reminded me of TW in that movie- the character Debbie
> 
> -Set her sights on the dopiest member of the family.
> -Was manipulative to everyone around her, except Wednesday who saw right through her.
> -Only married Uncle Fester because she wanted his family money.
> -Set out to destroy the family because she hated them.
> -Only cared about herself.
> View attachment 5670036
> 
> View attachment 5670037
> 
> View attachment 5670038
> 
> View attachment 5670039


Yes, Debbie!  But, without the wit, flair, humor, and ability to act.   



kipp said:


> I asked my friend about what she thought about Meghan and Harry and these anecdotes came up.  So I'm also the guilty one here.  I'm truly sorry I even relayed any of this information on the forum---my friend would probably be quite unhappy too.   But for the record, I too believe TW is behind the affair story.
> Anyway, I'm not going to say anything further about this as the discussion has seemingly become quite contentious.


I'm glad you shared---as stated above, this is a gossip thread.  It's interesting to see what people believe and how easily people are taken in by lies, rumors, etc.  I'm sorry this became a source of contention.


----------



## Chanbal

_Critics have scored the show at a 50% on Rotten Tomatoes, below most other series currently making up Netflix’s top 10 list. It’s described as “bland,” “unquestioned self-promotion” and features things “that definitely do not add up” according to some of the critics.

But the audience scores? That’s where things are getting really nasty. The show has just a 12% on Rotten Tomatoes from several thousand audience reviews, one of the lower scores I can remember seeing for really any series on Netflix._










						Netflix’s ‘Harry & Megan’ Is Going Disastrously For Harry And Megan
					

While The Crown has been a megahit for Netflix across five seasons now, a new venture into “Reality Royalty” has not gone nearly as smoothly.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> I was trying to think who else got this much negative attention.  Octomom and Kate Gosselin came to mind.  Of course they weren't royality but anyway, where are they now?  this stuff has an expiration I think.


Octomom has raised her children wonderfully. I kept up to date with her stories. She got out of the limelight and amazing how her children are well adjusted, polite and very well cared for and their routines down to a science. I have a very high level of respect for Nadya. As to Kate G, no comment lol. 

Nadya had a documentary about how the media just about ruined her but she got back into her lane and moved on.


----------



## Miss Liz

It seems as if she/they jumped from: “someone (PC, C, W, or K) wondered aloud about the possible skin tone of my baby, how racist!“
To: “Even my mother confirmed that the motivations of anyone who stopped automatically worshipping me were due to institutionalized racism”.
Unless I missed something that’s a huge leap.
For goodness sake, it’s about the content of your character.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

This is my take on the situation: LIES.  No further explanation is necessary to anyone on this thread since you are all very aware of reality.

Further, this is all just a tempest in a teacup.  This is the end---there's nowhere else to go with this non-story.  It's been told over and over and there are no bombshells.  It feels like it's been forever but TW has only been around for 4/5/6 years (depending on the story) and won't be around much longer.  They are nothing but noise.  (She will never shut up but there will be fewer platforms displaying her cries of injustice.)

All will eventually be well.   (All just my own opinion, obviously.)


----------



## jenayb

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5670380
> 
> 
> _Critics have scored the show at a 50% on Rotten Tomatoes, below most other series currently making up Netflix’s top 10 list. It’s described as “bland,” “unquestioned self-promotion” and features things “that definitely do not add up” according to some of the critics.
> 
> But the audience scores? That’s where things are getting really nasty. The show has just a 12% on Rotten Tomatoes from several thousand audience reviews, one of the lower scores I can remember seeing for really any series on Netflix._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Netflix’s ‘Harry & Megan’ Is Going Disastrously For Harry And Megan
> 
> 
> While The Crown has been a megahit for Netflix across five seasons now, a new venture into “Reality Royalty” has not gone nearly as smoothly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com



If the article wasn't good enough, the comments section is GOLD.  

_Harry and Meghan are a disgrace.
Meghan is completely insane and the man is extremely dumb and probably mentally unstable._


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Whatever it means! Is this their charity?



The $13M was the advances for Spotify and N$etflix deals?
As we discussed before, $10M was placed into a DAF for the charity, does this correspond to the approx $9M in assets ??
PS I forgot the advance for the book deal, there were 3 advances ??


----------



## marietouchet

sorrry, nm, duplicate post


----------



## Chanbal

jenayb said:


> If the article wasn't good enough, the comments section is GOLD.
> 
> _Harry and Meghan are a disgrace.
> *Meghan is completely insane and the man is extremely dumb and probably mentally unstable*._


The predictions about the future of this 'love story' are not promising.   
​
_*'In the end, she’ll dump him': Prince Harry is 'being used' by Meghan to 'make her rich'*_​


----------



## WingNut

Miss Liz said:


> It seems as if she/they jumped from: “someone (PC, C, W, or K) wondered aloud about the possible skin tone of my baby, how racist!“
> To: “Even my mother confirmed that the motivations of anyone who stopped automatically worshipping me were due to institutionalized racism”.
> Unless I missed something that’s a huge leap.
> For goodness sake, it’s about the content of your character.


Amen!


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> The $13M was the advances for Spotify and N$etflix deals?
> As we discussed before, $10M was placed into a DAF for the charity, does this correspond to the approx $9M in assets ??



It depends on when the $10 million was received.  This report is from 2021 so it is likely that the $10 million is part of the $13 million in income for 2021.  They then spent down approximately $4 million, either in administrative expenses or grants to others, leaving Archewell with approximately $9 million in assets on the balance sheet date of 12/31.

ETA:  I haven't looked at the IRS forms they filed so I don't know if that is $13 million in gross income or net income, but I'll take a look a bit later when I have some time.  These forms should provide detail on expenses as well.

Also, I don't know if it is possible to determine what they did with their Spotify or Netflix advances.  Some of it may have been made to the Foundation, the rest may be considered personal income perhaps?  In that case, it should be declared on their Federal and California income tax returns.


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> It depends on when the $10 million was received.  This report is from 2021 so it is likely that the $10 million is part of the $13 million in income for 2021.  They then spent down approximately $4 million, either in administrative expenses or grants to others, leaving Archewell with approximately $9 million in assets on the balance sheet date of 12/31.



"Administrative expenses" LOL


----------



## Pessie

LittleStar88 said:


> "Administrative expenses" LOL


AKA the *freedom fund*


----------



## youngster

LittleStar88 said:


> "Administrative expenses" LOL



I know, right?  LOL


----------



## gracekelly

tiktok said:


> I’ll believe it when I see it. Not holding my breath.


Even if not invited, I see them showing up and sitting on some chat show as talking head commentators. Anything to make a buck and show themselves.


----------



## CarryOn2020

justwatchin said:


> I know there have been some posts saying they feel sorry for Harry the Spare for hooking up with Meghan the Manipulator but he’s invested in this 100%. This idiot who thinks he’s been ignored most of his life is enjoying his random moments of “fame.” Let them keep going because their never ending line of whining and repeating the same stuff over *will lose steam*. We see you both…





LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t feel sorry for him at all. He’s 100% accountable for his decisions.
> 
> Once the book is released they won’t have anything else left to whine about or stories to sell. *This is it for them. Nothing left.*



Is that a promise?






@pomeline. *'I was in unconscious rebellion against my position': How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his explosive 1951 autobiography*

Why is every.single.thing always “unconscious”?  Unconscious coupling?  Unconscious rebellion? Unconscious racism? Unconscious eating?  Unconscious shopping?


----------



## haute okole

Can someone from Sussex please start a petition to save the name and legacy from complete ruin because of it‘s association with these two ridiculous grifters!  Please save the County of Sussex.  How about Mr. and Mrs. of Canoga Park where she was born.


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> @pomeline. *'I was in unconscious rebellion against my position': How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his explosive 1951 autobiography*
> 
> Why is every.single.thing always “unconscious”?  Unconscious coupling?  Unconscious rebellion? Unconscious racism? Unconscious eating?  Unconscious shopping?



Unconscious = unaccountable.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Forgive me, please — exactly what is the difference? Thrown to or fed to?  In any case, *it does appear the UK has difficulty with its wolves. *They seem to reject members of the BRF.



There haven’t been any wolves in the UK for a long time, in fact I don’t think they have any large natural predators. Maybe Meghan was afraid of being fed to the stoats!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

littlemisskeira said:


> I'm not reading the book or watching the show.
> 
> But if next up their sleeves is a sex tape (i reckon they used up whatever they have to monetise at this point), maybe .. just maybe.. i may just get curious enough to get a sneak peep.





LittleStar88 said:


> This was not the image I needed to start my day
> 
> View attachment 5670342


Where IS that vomit instant emoticon? We’re begging here, @Vlad


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> There haven’t been any wolves in the UK for a long time, in fact I don’t think they have any large natural predators. Maybe Meghan was afraid of being fed to the stoats!
> 
> View attachment 5670406


I think we have some pockets of wild boar - they’re not too picky


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Forgive me, please — exactly what is the difference? Thrown to or fed to?  In any case, it does appear the UK has difficulty with its wolves. They seem to reject members of the BRF.



The difference is that being thrown is a one time action. Being fed is more sinister because it implies that you are being cut into pieces and being fed bit by bit and it is more painful. No way did she come up with this turn of phrase by herself. Scripted, like the entire series, to make everything as sensational as possible


----------



## gracekelly

Pessie said:


> I think we have some pockets of wild boar - they’re not too picky


We have coyotes, mountain lions and bobcats. I’d feed her to the coyotes.


----------



## bag-mania

No wonder it took so long for the Netflix series to come out. The number of people on the creative team must be impressive.


----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> We have coyotes, mountain lions and bobcats. I’d feed her to the coyotes.


Coyotes are not big enough. Meghan isn’t going down without a fight. 

You’d have to bring in a grizzly.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Didn’t Paris and KimK start their path to fame and fortune with a sex tape?  Asking for a friend.




gracekelly said:


> The difference is that being thrown is a one time action. Being fed is more sinister because it implies that you are being cut into pieces and being fed bit by bit and it is more painful. No way did she come up with this turn of phrase by herself. Scripted, like the entire series, to make everything as sensational as possible


[Okaaaay, the things we learn here. Tyvm, @gracekelly ]   This is what H&M do continuously  - use hackneyed phrases/clichés to be dramatic. Diana used the “lamb to a slaughter” image so H&M needed something fresh yet still dramatic.  

The royal wife pity-party continues.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Finally, OS chimes in. Endgame?


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Coyotes are not big enough. Meghan isn’t going down without a fight.
> 
> You’d have to bring in a grizzly.


They have good jaws and would go straight for her stick Legs  She would go right down


----------



## scarlet555

LittleStar88 said:


> *Freedom Flight*???
> 
> He’s kidding, right? He is comparing leaving his privileged life in the UK to have a privileged life in the US to those who escape truly horrific conditions and oppressive regimes



I can't believe he is saying that...what a looser!   And TW complaining about people knowing where they are all the time-that's because you keep calling the paps, crazo! WTF-if it's a security issue, you fear for your life and you call the paps?  I mean... WTF.  What a psycho...  and Hazzbeen being raised in his privileged life as a prince wants freedom?  You want freedom?  You take nothing when you leave and then you dont owe anything to anyone, that's freedom,  instead of calling dad for money...   We wouldn't care but the hypocrisy and lies-in front of the public eye, and now it's insulting these two are taking all of us for idiots...


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Finally, OS chimes in. Endgame?



Gee Omit, if they destroy the monarchy, you won’t be a royal reporter anymore and they will have no more use for you because there will be nothing royal to report on.  Stay in your parent’s basement.  It’s your safe place.


----------



## gracekelly

Note to the Harkles;  Remove your Apple air tags so the paps and reporters don’t know where you are all the time. Just remember, it was your idea to tag yourselves in the first place.   Just sayin’.……


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> Freedom Flight???
> 
> He’s kidding, right? He is comparing leaving his privileged life in the UK to have a privileged life in the US to those who escape truly horrific conditions and oppressive regimes?


According to BLG, Hazzie’s eyes show he was high high.  His words reinforce what a jerk he is.


----------



## Sharont2305

gracekelly said:


> We have coyotes, mountain lions and bobcats. I’d feed her to the coyotes.


Shame the dragon on my flag can't come alive...


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Inquiring minds want to know - how many chickens were harmed in the repeated proposals? Was there more than one ring? Was the first time a dud because the Botswana stone was very ethical but too small, so Sparry had to quickly add in two Di-amonds, redesign and re-propose?


They say the first time is always a dud


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> According to BLG, Hazzie’s eyes show he was high high.  His words reinforce what a jerk he is.


I saw those pictures. His pupils were huge. I don’t think it was from an eye exam either.


----------



## gracekelly

Sharont2305 said:


> Shame the dragon on my flag can't come alive...


Maybe we could use the Star Trek transporter and beam them to The House of the Dragon. Dracarys!!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Maybe the Earl will allow them to search his fields - could be lots of $$$ for them


----------



## Pessie

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe the Earl will allow them to search his fields - could be lots of $$$ for them



That’s a lovely design, you could wear it today


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love Tourre.  For me, H&M, tho, is simply faster than typing out the names. Not a fan girl of the toxic two


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Maybe the Earl will allow them to search his fields - could be lots of $$$ for them



The Earl is already on it. I have seen two documentaries about Althorp. He is interested in history and anything that will make money for upkeep. Can’t blame him on that.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> It depends on when the $10 million was received.  This report is from 2021 so it is likely that the $10 million is part of the $13 million in income for 2021.  They then spent down approximately $4 million, either in administrative expenses or grants to others, leaving Archewell with approximately $9 million in assets on the balance sheet date of 12/31.
> 
> ETA:  I haven't looked at the IRS forms they filed so I don't know if that is $13 million in gross income or net income, but I'll take a look a bit later when I have some time.  These forms should provide detail on expenses as well.
> 
> Also, I don't know if it is possible to determine what they did with their Spotify or Netflix advances.  Some of it may have been made to the Foundation, the rest may be considered personal income perhaps?  In that case, it should be declared on their Federal and California income tax returns.


one thing I learned from The Royal Grift , YouTube , is that Archewell is a charity not a foundation. The reporting requirements are different.
And there would have been 3 big advances - book  - Oct 2020, Spotify - Dec 2020, Netflix - Sep 2020. Dates are when deals were announced.


----------



## gracekelly

From the DM article today:  Of corse Omit doesn’t mention that his ONLY source of information is Meghan and whatever Meghan allows Harry to add. Another book of lies with NO involvement of the Sussex. Right Omit?
_

'Now, with unique insight, deep access and exclusive revelations, journalist Omid Scobie pulls back the curtain on an institution in turmoil—exposing the chaos, family dysfunction, distrust and draconian practices threatening its very future.



_


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Gee Omit, *if they destroy the monarchy, you won’t be a royal reporter anymore *and they will have no more use for you because there will be nothing royal to report on.  Stay in your parent’s basement.  It’s your safe place.


Since when? Are we forgetting the Kingdom of Montecito?


----------



## jcnc

Thanks would have expected the results to be the other way round - more views in US vs UK

https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/6889383/harry-meghans-netflix-show-flops-usa-despite-success/amp/


----------



## charlottawill

I don't know how these things work, but I'd like to see British immigration deny them entry to the UK on the grounds that they are an enemy of the crown. It would shift blame away from KC, and at this point I think the British public would support it.


----------



## Pessie

gracekelly said:


> From the DM article today:  Of corse Omit doesn’t mention that his ONLY source of information is Meghan and whatever Meghan allows Harry to add. Another book of lies with NO involvement of the Sussex. Right Omit?
> 
> 
> _'Now, with unique insight, deep access and exclusive revelations, journalist Omid Scobie pulls back the curtain on an institution in turmoil—exposing the chaos, family dysfunction, distrust and draconian practices threatening its very future._


“Journalist”  ……hehehe


----------



## bag-mania

jcnc said:


> Thanks would have expected the results to be the other way round - more views in US vs UK
> 
> https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/6889383/harry-meghans-netflix-show-flops-usa-despite-success/amp/


I’m not sure whether we can trust these articles about ratings. Netflix ranks their shows based on hours viewed. These articles all base it on number of viewers, which they probably don’t have access to that info. Netflix has an unusual way of keeping track (kind of like Spotify).


----------



## Pessie

bag-mania said:


> I’m not sure whether we can trust these articles about ratings. Netflix ranks their shows based on hours viewed. These articles all base it on number of viewers, which they probably don’t have access to that info. Netflix has an unusual way of keeping track (kind of like Spotify).


Netflix is a freebie with BT (British telecom) broadband packages at the mo.


----------



## bag-mania

pomeline said:


> Did you know Edward VIII aka Duke of Windbag... er Windsor also wrote a tell-all book (ghostwritten of course)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'I was in unconscious rebellion against my position': How 'lonely' Edward VIII shocked world with his explosive 1951 autobiography
> 
> The monsters of Montecito always claim they were first in everything but they're just lame copycats.


Look at how proud he was of his book.   

At least he could call his _A King’s Story _because he had been, you know, a king. He didn’t have to use a one syllable expletive like _Spare._


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> I like what she said about Michelle O...and the end "how many times can you tell this story?"....this seems to be the consensus


I cringed every time she said "ally ship". I think the word she's looking for is alliance. And she's supposed to be educated?


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> The Earl is already on it. I have seen two documentaries about Althorp. He is interested in history and anything that will make money for upkeep. Can’t blame him on that.


He was kind of a party boy at one point. It's nice to see that he grew up and takes his responsibilities in preserving the family legacy seriously. Too bad his nephew didn't want to take his advice.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> Shame the dragon on my flag can't come alive...



The Common Welsh Green is said to be quite amicable to converse. We need a Hungarian Horntail, everyone knows those beasts don't play.


----------



## millivanilli

so you already saw the new episodes, we have to wait till dec 15th. Up until then, I have a question.

Why is it ok, to sell the story of freedom flight and the everything else to Netflix for millions of US Dollar, but a staged fotoshoot with the father for 100.000 USD, showing hin sitting in a chair (quel choc! sitting! in! a CHAIR!!!) reading a garden magazine (can it get worse???) is a betrayal beyond everything and leads to tears, downfall and walking the aisle as a lost poor soul without father (ok, being escorted by the Kind to be makes is sort of up but who I am to judge traumatic experiences like THIS?).

Really, I don't get it. It's about the price tag, is it?

that said. newspapers writing about " exotic beauty" IS beyond racism. Just to wanted to add that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> _'Now, with unique insight, deep access and exclusive revelations, journalist Omid Scobie pulls back the curtain on an institution in turmoil—exposing the chaos, family dysfunction, distrust and draconian practices threatening its very future._



What draconian practices...are they still keeping the fire in their torture vaults burning? Tell me you are a drama  queen without telling me you are a drama queen.


----------



## millivanilli

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Tell me you are a drama  queen without saying you are a drama queen.


Hi, my name is Meghan.

?


----------



## charlottawill

Racist, you say?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just leaving this here.


----------



## Chanbal

The Harkles may regret the day they crossed Nate's path.


----------



## ccbaggirl89

Well, I guess I now like Bethenny Frankel? She posted this (about the doc) to her TT.

_“I found it a little bit boring,” Bethenny said on TikTok. “It didn’t hold my attention. It seemed like they really wanted to be humanized. They wanted us to know that they are real human beings. … We believe that you are really in love and we believe that you’re really human beings.”

“It felt like this entire documentary was about how famous we are … it was relentless,” she added. “If you are being trolled by the media, the royal family gave you the advice to say nothing because that’s the advice that most very famous people are given. If you add gasoline to a fire, the fire blows up even bigger. It feels like they — and Meghan in particular — just keep wanting to tell us more.”

Bethenny added that it felt like “a smash and grab job for money. It feels like, ‘Grab the bag because we’re leaving this thing and we gotta take everything we can.’”

“It seems like she’s someone who entered into the monarchy and wanted to be in the leading role and that role was already taken by Kate. So what is the goal?” she said. “You got the money. You got attention you didn’t want … but you do want. So, what is the goal? So if you want to tackle women’s issues and racism, why not do documentaries about that? Why not talk about that? It seems like the biggest topic you’re talking about is this one family — the monarchy — that you’re telling us is archaic and we already knew that! Can we be done now because we did it, we got it, we heard it. … It feels like this documentary was designed to garner sympathy and it just seems like it is achieving the opposite results.”_


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What draconian practices...are they still keeping the fire in their torture vaults burning? Tell me you are a drama  queen without telling me you are a drama queen.


I hear they are oiling up the rack for Meg.  She did say she would like to be taller.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> Racist, you say?



Looking back, and I have plenty of years behind me to do it, I have never seen a picture of any of the royals looking down, making fun of or disrespecting different ethnic groups, religious groups or people of different races, until.........Meghan Markle who could not  take the time to connect with people of the Commonwealth and steal the ideas of people she came in contact with in the UK, yet she is the one who cries foul.   That picture speaks volumes and there is something wrong with it.


----------



## gracekelly

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Well, I guess I now like Bethenny Frankel? She posted this (about the doc) to her TT.
> 
> _“I found it a little bit boring,” Bethenny said on TikTok. “It didn’t hold my attention. It seemed like they really wanted to be humanized. They wanted us to know that they are real human beings. … We believe that you are really in love and we believe that you’re really human beings.”
> 
> “It felt like this entire documentary was about how famous we are … it was relentless,” she added. “If you are being trolled by the media, the royal family gave you the advice to say nothing because that’s the advice that most very famous people are given. If you add gasoline to a fire, the fire blows up even bigger. It feels like they — and Meghan in particular — just keep wanting to tell us more.”
> 
> Bethenny added that it felt like “a smash and grab job for money. It feels like, ‘Grab the bag because we’re leaving this thing and we gotta take everything we can.’”
> 
> “It seems like she’s someone who entered into the monarchy and wanted to be in the leading role and that role was already taken by Kate. So what is the goal?” she said. “You got the money. You got attention you didn’t want … but you do want. So, what is the goal? So if you want to tackle women’s issues and racism, why not do documentaries about that? Why not talk about that? It seems like the biggest topic you’re talking about is this one family — the monarchy — that you’re telling us is archaic and we already knew that! Can we be done now because we did it, we got it, we heard it. … It feels like this documentary was designed to garner sympathy and it just seems like it is achieving the opposite results.”_


I was never a BF fan either, but I gave her snaps for pushing to her success.  She knows all about fame and becoming famous and the wealth she attained from it so she has the right to lecture.


----------



## lallybelle

Chanbal said:


> The Harkles may regret the day they crossed Nate's path.




Dude Bouzy should NOT have effed with LAWYERS on behalf of people like AH & MM. If Nate's suit goes further, discovery is going to be SPICY.


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


> I don't know how these things work, but I'd like to see British immigration deny them entry to the UK on the grounds that they are an enemy of the crown. It would shift blame away from KC, and at this point I think the British public would support it.


Hmmm.  Do they still resemble their passport photos?  Looking back at 2018 I’m thinking no  

I don’t think they should be banned, it just fuels their victim mentality, and they love that.  I’d prefer to let them shrivel under icy politeness myself.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.



The whole flopumentary is such sloppy work! Smug can't get the paps to take pictures of her anymore even if she paid them...


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> I was trying to think who else got this much negative attention.  Octomom and Kate Gosselin came to mind.  Of course they weren't royality but anyway, where are they now?  this stuff has an expiration I think.


Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos ? Although imo nothing TW has done so far is on the level of what Holmes did at Theranos. TW’s poor behavior, lies, and unsubstantiated accusations, while obnoxious and distressing to many, isn’t criminal unlike Holmes’ actions which led to her getting a lengthy prison sentence.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just leaving this here.



He didn’t even have a camera!


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Forgive me, please — exactly what is the difference? Thrown to or fed to?  In any case, it does appear the UK has difficulty with its wolves. They seem to reject members of the BRF.



My children's elementary school plays had better acting than this n3tflix debacle.


----------



## bellecate

LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t feel sorry for him at all. He’s 100% accountable for his decisions.
> 
> Once the book is released they won’t have anything else left to whine about or stories to sell. This is it for them. Nothing left.


We can only hope.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I cringed every time she said "ally ship". I think the word she's looking for is alliance. And she's supposed to be educated?


McCain?  I didn't catch that but will say I'm not a fan of hers


----------



## sdkitty

LittleStar88 said:


> I don’t feel sorry for him at all. He’s 100% accountable for his decisions.
> 
> Once the book is released they won’t have anything else left to whine about or stories to sell. This is it for them. Nothing left.


then she may have to go to Andy Cohen for a job 
and I don't think she'd support Harry...if the juice of his royalty dies out, he'll be on his own


----------



## sdkitty

so she had Andy Cohen on the latest podcast episode I guess


			Meghan Markle Got Turned Down From Appearing On Watch What Happens Live With Andy Cohen


----------



## bellecate

Laila619 said:


> He is JUST as revolting, if not more so, than his dumb wife. What an entitled, spoiled little sh*t.


Tell us how you really feel.


----------



## pomeline

gracekelly said:


> Gee Omit, if they destroy the monarchy, you won’t be a royal reporter anymore and they will have no more use for you because there will be nothing royal to report on.  Stay in your parent’s basement.  It’s your safe place.


Doesn't this mean they would be guilty of treason? And treason is enough reason for taking the titles. I hope it is presented to KCIII & PoW with evidence that the gruesome twosome is plotting for a revolution.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> I was trying to think who else got this much negative attention.  Octomom and Kate Gosselin came to mind.  Of course they weren't royality but anyway, where are they now?  this stuff has an expiration I think.


I live in a Commonwealth country and for me TW is not Royalty. She may have married a royal but her actions void any chance she had of calling herself Royal.    IMHO of course.


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> I live in a Commonwealth country and for me TW is not Royalty. She may have married a royal but her actions void any chance she had of calling herself Royal.    IMHO of course.


agree....harry was born royal but she is just a very successful opportunist using a title she doesn't deserve


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Seriously. Just suffer in silence instead of making all of us suffer with you.


Wishful thinking....there's no money to be made in that


----------



## Toby93

LittleStar88 said:


> Freedom Flight???
> 
> He’s kidding, right? He is comparing leaving his privileged life in the UK to have a privileged life in the US to those who escape truly horrific conditions and oppressive regimes?


----------



## bellecate

bag-mania said:


> Coyotes are not big enough. Meghan isn’t going down without a fight.
> 
> You’d have to bring in a grizzly.


Came across this fellow in October, he might work.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

CarryOn2020 said:


> Didn’t Paris and KimK start their path to fame and fortune with a sex tape?  Asking for a friend.
> 
> 
> 
> [Okaaaay, the things we learn here. Tyvm, @gracekelly ]   This is what H&M do continuously  - use hackneyed phrases/clichés to be dramatic. Diana used the “lamb to a slaughter” image so H&M needed something fresh yet still dramatic.
> 
> The royal wife pity-party continues.



Not an original thought in her head.


----------



## Lounorada

QueenofWrapDress said:


>





QueenofWrapDress said:


> From the comments:



She did _what_?! What the actual f**K?!



So creepy and beyond unacceptable.
If I was the nanny and had caught TW doing this then I would have been ready to lose my job because I'd have been confronting her impolitely as hell, like...


----------



## sdkitty

bellecate said:


> Not an original thought in her head.


At this point, I can definitely imagine her openly talking with H and her staff about ways to get fame - should she copy aspects of the Kardashians, etc. 
I bet she'd love to get PMK to advise them....or maybe she thinks she's smarter than Kris

All the while trying to portray herself as some sort of humanitarian to the public


----------



## pomeline

bag-mania said:


> Look at how proud he was of his book.
> 
> At least he could call his _A King’s Story _because he had been, you know, a king. He didn’t have to use a one syllable expletive like _Spare._



I still think he could have come up with a better title instead of just "Spare". Like "_DOLT - The Story of an idolizing Mama's Boy who grew up to be the dimmest bulb in the royal chandelier_". No, actually he should just call it "Traitor".


----------



## pomeline

DoggieBags said:


> Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos ? Although imo nothing TW has done so far is on the level of what Holmes did at Theranos. TW’s poor behavior, lies, and unsubstantiated accusations, while obnoxious and distressing to many, isn’t criminal unlike Holmes’ actions which led to her getting a lengthy prison sentence.


Just wait until someone starts digging into Archewell and their other money schemes...


----------



## bag-mania

bellecate said:


> Came across this fellow in October, he might work.
> 
> View attachment 5670522


Oh, that’s a beauty. Looks young and healthy. Might turn up his nose if Meghan was thrown (or fed) to him.


----------



## bellecate

Lounorada said:


> She did _what_?! What the actual f**K?!
> View attachment 5670527
> 
> 
> So creepy and beyond unacceptable.
> If I was the nanny and had caught TW doing this then I would have been ready to lose my job because I'd have been confronting her impolitely as hell, like...
> View attachment 5670529


This explains more of TW"S  deplorable treatment of Princess Charlotte and her nanny during the dress fittings. She felt they'd done her wrong in calling her out for her picture taking.


----------



## Handbag1234

CarryOn2020 said:


> Balm for the soul - she famously told Hazz to “shush” but told William to cherish his wife



My favourite bit was when Diana said she was focusing on her charity work as she had nothing else to do. Honest answer!


----------



## pomeline

This needs to stop. It has to. They cannot keep on doing this.

EXCLUSIVE: Prince Harry 'to keep dropping bombs' and royal secrets in NEW TV interview

I don't even know how to stop them. But I cannot take anymore "truth bombs".







Meanwhile at BP... Please don't tell me KCIII is a weak king because...

Charles 'hopes for reconciliation' with Sussexes before coronation


----------



## pukasonqo

gracekelly said:


> From the DM article today:  Of corse Omit doesn’t mention that his ONLY source of information is Meghan and whatever Meghan allows Harry to add. Another book of lies with NO involvement of the Sussex. Right Omit?
> 
> 
> _'Now, with unique insight, deep access and exclusive revelations, journalist Omid Scobie pulls back the curtain on an institution in turmoil—exposing the chaos, family dysfunction, distrust and draconian practices threatening its very future._


I assume the term “journalist” is loosely applied here, same as insight
Family disfunction applies to both, Hazzard and MM


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> The difference is that being thrown is a one time action. Being fed is more sinister because it implies that you are being cut into pieces and being fed bit by bit and it is more painful. No way did she come up with this turn of phrase by herself. Scripted, like the entire series, to make everything as sensational as possible


She had to be sure to exaggerate.

She might have been “thrown” but the wolves could have taken a sniff, mouthed the hair extensions and determined they were indigestible, and sauntered away.

”Fed” means they are indiscriminate eaters, so a rotten offering like her was consumable.


----------



## Chanbal

_Expert Schofield said: "*Harry and Meghan talk in large generalizations that leave people gossiping and guessing. It’s a way for them to avoid defamation while continuing to stir up controversy and rally their angry base*.

"Harry has provided the palace with many more controversial stories to navigate than William ever could. William is the heir.

"*Of course the Palace is going to protect him.* Keep your nose out of trouble and nothing can be said about you. Look at the Princess Royal.

"*Had The Firm not protected Harry with a very strategic transformation, there is no way he would have the platform he has now to slander his own flesh and blood.*

"*Harry was popular. Because The Firm worked very hard to make him likable.*"

She added Harry's allegations that the Palace wouldn't protect him while they would "lie" for William may have been because of Meghan's "bullying accusations".

Schofield added: "*If the Palace stopped protecting Harry, perhaps it was in response to Meghan’s bully allegations…* or the fact that everyone knew that Prince Harry had one foot out the door."_


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> Hmmm.  Do they still resemble their passport photos?  Looking back at 2018 I’m thinking no
> 
> I don’t think they should be banned, it just fuels their victim mentality, and they love that.  I’d prefer to let them shrivel under icy politeness myself.


But it's guaranteed that their presence and the ensuing media attention will detract from the importance and solemnity of the occasion. More importantly, I do not want to see that creature strutting around triumphantly in a tiara.


----------



## charlottawill

Lounorada said:


> She did _what_?! What the actual f**K?!
> View attachment 5670527
> 
> 
> So creepy and beyond unacceptable.
> If I was the nanny and had caught TW doing this then I would have been ready to lose my job because I'd have been confronting her impolitely as hell, like...
> View attachment 5670529


If true it is wildly inappropriate, invasive and downright creepy. After they put her on a plane back to the US they should have staged an intervention with Hazy. William would have had every right to say never bring that woman around my family again and you're crazy if you marry her. But for all we know, maybe they did and he stubbornly persisted. Hazy doesn't need any balls because TW's are big enough for both of them.


----------



## Kevinaxx

ccbaggirl89 said:


> Well, I guess I now like Bethenny Frankel? She posted this (about the doc) to her TT.
> 
> _“I found it a little bit boring,” Bethenny said on TikTok. “It didn’t hold my attention. It seemed like they really wanted to be humanized. They wanted us to know that they are real human beings. … We believe that you are really in love and we believe that you’re really human beings.”
> 
> “It felt like this entire documentary was about how famous we are … it was relentless,” she added. “If you are being trolled by the media, the royal family gave you the advice to say nothing because that’s the advice that most very famous people are given. If you add gasoline to a fire, the fire blows up even bigger. It feels like they — and Meghan in particular — just keep wanting to tell us more.”
> 
> Bethenny added that it felt like “a smash and grab job for money. It feels like, ‘Grab the bag because we’re leaving this thing and we gotta take everything we can.’”
> 
> “It seems like she’s someone who entered into the monarchy and wanted to be in the leading role and that role was already taken by Kate. So what is the goal?” she said. “You got the money. You got attention you didn’t want … but you do want. So, what is the goal? So if you want to tackle women’s issues and racism, why not do documentaries about that? Why not talk about that? It seems like the biggest topic you’re talking about is this one family — the monarchy — that you’re telling us is archaic and we already knew that! Can we be done now because we did it, we got it, we heard it. … It feels like this documentary was designed to garner sympathy and it just seems like it is achieving the opposite results.”_


I feel like TW biggest fear is being irrelevant and so she’ll do whatever it takes to keep the spotlight on her.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

pomeline said:


> _"the dimmest bulb in the royal chandelier_"


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG!


----------



## charlottawill

bellecate said:


> This explains more of TW"S deplorable treatment of Princess Charlotte and her nanny during the dress fittings. She felt they'd done her wrong in calling her out for her picture taking.


Taking out her anger at being caught redhanded invading a family's privacy on an innocent three year old child? She is truly vile and I just want karma to knock her on her *ss sooner rather than later. Enjoy that posh prison in Montecito. I look forward to the sheriff's sale.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> Taking out her anger at being caught redhanded invading a family's privacy on an innocent three year old child? She is truly vile and I just want karma to knock her on her *ss sooner rather than later. Enjoy that posh prison in Montecito. I look forward to the sheriff's sale.


It’s sick, like vile sick. Maybe there is a lot the BRF has on her and are protecting her. She’s banking of their don’t complain, don’t explain. 

I’m interested in what her sugars do to explain this away, if true.


----------



## Toby93

charlottawill said:


> I cringed every time she said "ally ship". I think the word she's looking for is alliance. And she's supposed to be educated?


Same here, I wondered what on earth she was trying to say.


----------



## Toby93

Lol....


----------



## CarryOn2020

Has her skirt been identified yet?


----------



## csshopper

charlottawill said:


> If true it is wildly inappropriate, invasive and downright creepy. After they put her on a plane back to the US they should have staged an intervention with Hazy. William would have had every right to say never bring that woman around my family again and you're crazy if you marry her. But for all we know, maybe they did and he stubbornly persisted. Hazy doesn't need any balls because TW's are big enough for both of them.


Brass balls


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> Lol....
> 
> View attachment 5670652


In an earlier version she is barefoot and nudging him with her toes. This looks photoshopped, her feet are disproportionately large.


----------



## Redbirdhermes

csshopper said:


> In an earlier version she is barefoot and nudging him with her toes. This looks photoshopped, her feet are disproportionately large.


And, she has two left feet.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> The BLG!



Thank you for posting. Lots of insight into the values of the Harkles.  Toxic may be too kind. Imo.


----------



## haute okole

Toby93 said:


> Lol....
> 
> View attachment 5670652


My daughter asked me what bunions were and I just showed her a picture of Meghan’s feet. Apparently, there is a mandate not to shoot her feet.  I guess we found her Achilles Heel.  We should enlarge these and carry them as our protest posters!  Hahaha!


----------



## Chanbal

Below is a NewsNation video on the Harkles. This channel claims to be about facts, how good is it?


----------



## jblended

I am not caught up on the thread but I must say:
OMG _shut up shut up shut absolutely up_! 

They are everywhere. All over my newsfeed there is commentary from this person or that. The clips playing everywhere, their voices like nails on a chalkboard.
And what is the fuss about anyway? These idiots haven't said _anything_ of substance!
Maybe their plan is to beat us into submission with their pointless droning on! I'm certainly considering admitting defeat if it will shut them up!
And it's only going to get worse with the next 3 non-episodes. It's incessant. My ears are bleeding.

I can't imagine how much more of this we'll have to endure when she officially launches her political campaign.
Will Harry be happy being the Spare (_shock, horror_) to her when she gets elected, or will we have another tell-all about that too?

I never thought I'd see the day a blood royal would be seeking validation from social media. That thought only gets worse the longer you let it sink in. 
Nor the day a narcissist plays all her cards, showing the entire world what a deceptive, manipulative and unscrupulous person she is, and is _still_ fawned over?
What fresh hell is this?

(PS. Sorry for the random vent. It has been building up. )


----------



## Debbini

Meegain will never, ever, never, ever, never have a political career. Never. Ever.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

Debbini said:


> Meegain will never, ever, never, ever, never have a political career. Never. Ever.


I hope with all my heart that you're right but I see all this as them setting up her platform to run for the top position.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Below is a NewsNation video on the Harkles. This channel claims to be about facts, how good is it?



Imo Victoria Arbiter gives a balanced, diplomatic explanation of what happened.  She does not agree or disagree with the racism charges because no one can accurately say what another person’s experience was/is.  She holds them accountable for saying they wanted to stay connected to the monarchy but then trashed it for money. It is worth watching, only 4 mins. imo.


----------



## CarryOn2020

jblended said:


> I hope with all my heart that you're right but I see all this as them setting up her platform to run for the top position.


  they have told too many lies and shown their privileged, pushy, entitled lives. Not a good look in 2022/2023/2024/etc.


----------



## Chanbal

Debbini said:


> Meegain will never, ever, never, ever, never have a political career. Never. Ever.


I wish I were as optimistic as you are.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> I wish I were as optimistic as you are.



Campaigning is tough, gritty work, lots of handshaking, listening, eating tasteless food, getting boo’ed, making quid-pro-quo’s that are most unpleasant. Takes lots of money, lots of time, lots of _in front of the camera_ time.  One or two goofs and it is _good-bye_.  MM won’t do it, she couldn’t even handle the ‘walk-abouts’ and she detests being held accountable for her statements, her truth. Imo.


----------



## EmilyM111

sdkitty said:


> At this point, I can definitely imagine her openly talking with H and her staff about ways to get fame - should she copy aspects of the Kardashians, etc.
> I bet she'd love to get PMK to advise them....or maybe she thinks she's smarter than Kris
> 
> All the while trying to portray herself as some sort of humanitarian to the public


Think it's too late. Not only she doesn't have the IT factor or anything to offer for xxx episodes, but also Kardashians themselves are slowly getting - well, at least - less relevant. Kardashians had babies born, marriages, drama around marriages, gender transition, cheating, plastic surgeries etc. etc. Not saying it's exciting  but Harkles would offer 100 episodes of whining about how life is bad for them. And BRF is bad. And Kate is not nice. And and...


----------



## xincinsin

Miss Liz said:


> It seems as if she/they jumped from: “someone (PC, C, W, or K) wondered aloud about the possible skin tone of my baby, how racist!“
> To: “Even my mother confirmed that the motivations of anyone who stopped automatically worshipping me were due to institutionalized racism”.
> Unless I missed something that’s a huge leap.
> For goodness sake, it’s about the content of your character.


They couldn't even agree on when the supposed racist remark was said (Oprah interview).
These leaps of imagination are all over the sugar comments too. They denounce so many critical comments as racism or jealousy.


marietouchet said:


> The $13M was the advances for Spotify and N$etflix deals?
> As we discussed before, $10M was placed into a DAF for the charity, does this correspond to the approx $9M in assets ??
> PS I forgot the advance for the book deal, there were 3 advances ??


The payment for The Bench was funnelled through their network of Delaware-registered companies. I would assume the payments from Spotify & Netflix would be funnelled too. So the route to Arghwell is murky.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Why is every.single.thing always “unconscious”?  Unconscious coupling?  Unconscious rebellion? Unconscious racism? Unconscious eating?  Unconscious shopping?


I think I'm a victim of "unconscious shopping".


gracekelly said:


> The difference is that being thrown is a one time action. Being fed is more sinister because it implies that you are being cut into pieces and being fed bit by bit and it is more painful. No way did she come up with this turn of phrase by herself. Scripted, like the entire series, to make everything as sensational as possible


She thinks too highly of herself. Anyone offering her to wolves would throw her to cut short the interminable whining.


bag-mania said:


> Coyotes are not big enough. Meghan isn’t going down without a fight.
> 
> You’d have to bring in a grizzly.


Chickens ... Chickens are omnivores ... A really big flock of chickens with pointy beaks ...


QueenofWrapDress said:


> The Common Welsh Green is said to be quite amicable to converse. We need a Hungarian Horntail, everyone knows those beasts don't play.


Chinese Fireball?


millivanilli said:


> so you already saw the new episodes, we have to wait till dec 15th. Up until then, I have a question.
> 
> Why is it ok, to sell the story of freedom flight and the everything else to Netflix for millions of US Dollar, but a staged fotoshoot with the father for 100.000 USD, showing hin sitting in a chair (quel choc! sitting! in! a CHAIR!!!) reading a garden magazine (can it get worse???) is a betrayal beyond everything and leads to tears, downfall and walking the aisle as a lost poor soul without father (ok, being escorted by the Kind to be makes is sort of up but who I am to judge traumatic experiences like THIS?).
> 
> Really, I don't get it. It's about the price tag, is it?
> 
> that said. newspapers writing about " exotic beauty" IS beyond racism. Just to wanted to add that.


If it's true that Zed is a narc, then she won't see the parallels between her situation and her father's situation.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Lodpah said:


> It’s sick, like vile sick. Maybe there is a lot the BRF has on her and are protecting her. She’s banking of their don’t complain, don’t explain.
> 
> I’m interested in what her sugars do to explain this away, if true.


Come on that’s easy…
It’s clearly the child’s own fault for saying Bloody Mary three times in the mirror before she went to bed. 

I dunno this sounds like an urban myth to me. It’s not like this family live in a four bed terraced house. Even if they were all in the same palace at the same time M would basically have to walk across a  large village both in distance and number of people she’d encounter to get from one bedroom to another.


----------



## Hyacinth

CarryOn2020 said:


> Campaigning is tough, gritty work, lots of handshaking, listening, eating tasteless food, getting boo’ed, making quid-pro-quo’s that are most unpleasant. Takes lots of money, lots of time, lots of _in front of the camera_ time.  One or two goofs and it is _good-bye_.  MM won’t do it, *she couldn’t even handle the ‘walk-abouts’ and she detests being held accountable for her statements, her truth. Imo*.



ESPECIALLY when she's not getting paid for it.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## jelliedfeels

Also I don’t believe this Charlotte photo story because why and how would she use that footage anyway. It’d just be a kid sleeping - how can you forward a narrative with that? The only narrative M could get from it is people thinking she might be a nonce and I don’t think she’s that stupid.


----------



## jelliedfeels

xincinsin said:


> There was a horribly grainy photo, supposedly showing Sparry on his knees with the injured dog and a bouquet, proposing to Zed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan share never-before-seen pic of Harry on 1 knee from his proposal
> 
> 
> “Of course, I got down on one knee,” Prince Harry said. “Of course, I did.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.today.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timeline is being questioned because some people say the dog was injured AFTER the date of the proposal. An early re-enactment?



They’ve bumped off so many old dogs at this point it’s hard to keep count:

Bogart… pula…Thomas markle…. Old yella …. 

I can’t get over him on that bloody blanket with her filming him and those fake candles. It looks so cheap  a date set up from the bachelor or one of the x of Love shows. 




pomeline said:


> The whole flopumentary is such sloppy work! Smug can't get the paps to take pictures of her anymore even if she paid them...


amazing she couldn’t hire ‘scary bouncer type’ or ‘creepy guy #4’ given they  probably have a running account for the kids.

Also they haven’t even addressed the horrific issue that H was being spied on while ‘writing’ his memoirs by an insidious paper clip paparazzo!






sdkitty said:


> McCain?  I didn't catch that but will say I'm not a fan of hers


In general there are way too many basic b*tches called Megan in this story I can’t keep up - I wish these gen x parents could’ve come up with a few more vacuous valley girl names like what’s wrong with Crystal or Heather? 


Chanbal said:


> _Expert Schofield said: "*Harry and Meghan talk in large generalizations that leave people gossiping and guessing. It’s a way for them to avoid defamation while continuing to stir up controversy and rally their angry base*.
> 
> "Harry has provided the palace with many more controversial stories to navigate than William ever could. William is the heir.
> 
> "*Of course the Palace is going to protect him.* Keep your nose out of trouble and nothing can be said about you. Look at the Princess Royal.
> 
> "*Had The Firm not protected Harry with a very strategic transformation, there is no way he would have the platform he has now to slander his own flesh and blood.*
> 
> "*Harry was popular. Because The Firm worked very hard to make him likable.*"
> 
> She added Harry's allegations that the Palace wouldn't protect him while they would "lie" for William may have been because of Meghan's "bullying accusations".
> 
> Schofield added: "*If the Palace stopped protecting Harry, perhaps it was in response to Meghan’s bully allegations…* or the fact that everyone knew that Prince Harry had one foot out the door."_



What’s he mean by that foot out the door remark. Honestly release the files boys! We’re waiting!


----------



## needlv

At some point Omid is getting marked.  And it looks like that could be soon


----------



## needlv

I can’t wait to see the Harkles photoshopped Christmas card which doesn’t show the kids faces….

Meanwhile the BRF living their best life….


----------



## papertiger

jblended said:


> I am not caught up on the thread but I must say:
> OMG _shut up shut up shut absolutely up_!
> 
> They are everywhere. All over my newsfeed there is commentary from this person or that. The clips playing everywhere, their voices like nails on a chalkboard.
> And what is the fuss about anyway? These idiots haven't said _anything_ of substance!
> Maybe their plan is to beat us into submission with their pointless droning on! I'm certainly considering admitting defeat if it will shut them up!
> And it's only going to get worse with the next 3 non-episodes. It's incessant. My ears are bleeding.
> 
> I can't imagine how much more of this we'll have to endure when she officially launches her political campaign.
> Will Harry be happy being the Spare (_shock, horror_) to her when she gets elected, or will we have another tell-all about that too?
> 
> I never thought I'd see the day a blood royal would be seeking validation from social media. That thought only gets worse the longer you let it sink in.
> Nor the day a narcissist plays all her cards, showing the entire world what a deceptive, manipulative and unscrupulous person she is, and is _still_ fawned over?
> What fresh hell is this?
> 
> (PS. Sorry for the random vent. It has been building up. )



This is my reading of the so-called doc.

What I got:

Harry is not mad, he has to make sense of the world for the first time. A cat let out after being an indoor cat his whole life, inside he's still a kitten.  He's been a VVIP his whole life, all his problems and crises worked out for him by others, no money money troubles ever etc. He has been kept in arrested development, and IMO, unlike William - taken _full_ advantage. Everybody loves him because we were only shown his 'kitten' side. Wherever he went, the red carpet's rolled out - even as a soldier he was kept safe. Hence 'Truman Show' syndrome. He does suffer from paranoia and it focuses on mania 'power'. He doesn't have delusions of grandeur but he's deluded about his own capabilities or own worth.

So in his (little) mind he's telling us, 'Wow, being grown-up life is really hard' and we're thinking 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




  Er hello 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 , you think you go troubles 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




He didn't leave for "freedom" nor "racism", he left because he saw his future as 'Prince Andrew'. He really enjoys being a VVIP, he didn't want to slip 'down the line' (LoS). Heaven knows why but he _does_ think he's better than William, his only measure (of competition) and saw Primogeniture avoidable if he left, he'd be a 'natural' King.


Meghan is delusional. For Meghan, she thought once she became a (Disney) princess/major celeb/Queen of the world, all her wishes come true, she'd never have another problem in her life and everyone would crawl at her (gnarled) feet. This whole 'finding freedom' thing is because she can't let go of the fantasy. She may be a lousy actress but she does understand media. She's not paranoid as but she is a grandiose narc.

M left because she was always going to leave. Firstly, she couldn't believe there was no income stream, there was 'no' money waiting for her (at the end of the rainbow) and the expenses came with conditions (like any job). She's furious there was no golden handshake beyond millions in expenses (pesky receipts).  Her jealously is (also) out of control.

H trusts M because he has to trust someone. She's found the best way to work him, as a poor helpless, hapless Di-M.2 that needs his help constantly just to stay alive and tapping into his paranoia. She trusts him because she knows he has no-one else.

They are both seriously deluded people for different reasons.

I don't believe everything TM Snr says. I think he created M. Harry was born a Prince but he made Meghan a 'princess'. The rest of her family is seen as collateral damage, the rest of his family cash-cows who won't pay up.

All the hate fixed on the BRF is just for money 1. Because Harry didn't know what a pint of milk costs and can't believe daddy won't pay for the rest of his life 2. He thinks it's just family (which Edward VIII did) Telling are his comments where he didn't care for the public's outpouring of grief for his mother "She was my mother". He cannot see the BRF from the outside, he has no idea what he's playing with. 3. Arguments on Colonialism, race, mental health, media intrusion etc are what's fashionable to talk about.

Edited to say, they have a fantasy about being a politician. I would say G-d help them if she runs, but actually I think they'd quite enjoy it - until the opposition ran a few negs. If they think the media has been intrusive so far, they really have no idea. I just watched a US political doc (a real one on real politicians) - all gloves are off in the run-ups and - the way(s) down. ' They' _will_ get you, sooner or later, sometime those skeletons start dancing out the cupboard(s).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Maybe not so smart to kick up a fuss when there's dirt on your organisation.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> The BLG!




Doria looks like she answered a subpoena and she's on the witness stand 

For someone one professes to have taught yoga, she obviously doesn't know what an 'old soul' means


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe not so smart to kick up a fuss when there's dirt on your organisation.




Can't see, is it just me (wouldn't surprise me)??


----------



## duna

bag-mania said:


> Coyotes are not big enough. Meghan isn’t going down without a fight.
> 
> You’d have to bring in a grizzly.


Unfortunately I don't think any of these wonderful animals, wolves first of all, would take even the slightest nibble at her, she's much too toxic!


----------



## carmen56

Redbirdhermes said:


> And, she has two left feet.


You beat me to it, I noticed it too.


----------



## Pessie

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Maybe not so smart to kick up a fuss when there's dirt on your organisation.



I looked up Sistah Space on the Charity Commission website.  (The Charity Commission regulate the governance of registered charities in the UK - you can’t call yourself a Charity unless you are registered). SSpace stated purpose is to support women of “African and Caribbean heritage”.  It says nothing about requiring both parents to be of African or Caribbean heritage, or about skin colour.  If women complain to the Charity Commission and have evidence of being unfairly discriminated against because of their skin colour it may investigate.  Interestingly the Charity has been late submitting its accounts as well, so may well be on the radar already.
Regulation is quite strict (I have acted as governor of a Charity) which is probably why Archewell is a foundation?


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I looked up Sistah Space on the Charity Commission website.  (The Charity Commission regulate the governance of registered charities in the UK - you can’t call yourself a Charity unless you are registered). SSpace stated purpose is to support women of “African and Caribbean heritage”.  It says nothing about requiring both parents to be of African or Caribbean heritage, or about skin colour.  If women complain to the Charity Commission and have evidence of being unfairly discriminated against because of their skin colour it may investigate.  Interestingly the Charity has been late submitting its accounts as well, so may well be on the radar already.
> Regulation is quite strict (I have acted as governor of a Charity) which is probably why Archewell is a foundation?



UK to US:
A is a foundation in this country (UK) but in the US it comes under the definition of 'charity'.


----------



## xincinsin

Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?
> View attachment 5670791



This is what he'll (partly) have been paid for by his publishers as an advance.


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> UK to US:
> A is a foundation in this country (UK) but in the US it comes under the definition of 'charity'.


I don’t think Archewell is registered in the UK.


----------



## Pessie

xincinsin said:


> Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?
> View attachment 5670791


He’s working harder than he’s worked in years! Pace yourself man


----------



## Handbag1234

xincinsin said:


> Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?
> View attachment 5670791


hasn't he learnt anything from what happened to his mother when she had a prime time interview?


----------



## EverSoElusive

Z-list needs this scarf


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> This is what he'll (partly) have been paid for by his publishers as an advance.


I wonder if Zed will let him do the publicity gigs or she will horn in as before.


----------



## piperdog

papertiger said:


> This is my reading of the so-called doc.
> 
> What I got:
> 
> Harry is not mad, he has to make sense of the world for the first time. A cat let out after being an indoor cat his whole life, inside he's still a kitten.  He's been a VVIP his whole life, all his problems and crises worked out for him by others, no money money troubles ever etc. He has been kept in arrested development, and IMO, unlike William - taken _full_ advantage. Everybody loves him because we were only shown his 'kitten' side. Wherever he went, the red carpet's rolled out - even as a soldier he was kept safe. Hence 'Truman Show' syndrome. He does suffer from paranoia and it focuses on mania 'power'. He doesn't have delusions of grandeur but he's deluded about his own capabilities or own worth.
> 
> So in his (little) mind he's telling us, 'Wow, being grown-up life is really hard' and we're thinking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Er hello
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , you think you go troubles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't leave for "freedom" nor "racism", he left because he saw his future as 'Prince Andrew'. He really enjoys being a VVIP, he didn't want to slip 'down the line' (LoS). Heaven knows why but he _does_ think he's better than William, his only measure (of competition) and saw Primogeniture avoidable if he left, he'd be a 'natural' King.
> 
> 
> Meghan is delusional. For Meghan, she thought once she became a (Disney) princess/major celeb/Queen of the world, all her wishes come true, she'd never have another problem in her life and everyone would crawl at her (gnarled) feet. This whole 'finding freedom' thing is because she can't let go of the fantasy. She may be a lousy actress but she does understand media. She's not paranoid as but she is a grandiose narc.
> 
> M left because she was always going to leave. Firstly, she couldn't believe there was no income stream, there was 'no' money waiting for her (at the end of the rainbow) and the expenses came with conditions (like any job). She's furious there was no golden handshake beyond millions in expenses (pesky receipts).  Her jealously is (also) out of control.
> 
> H trusts M because he has to trust someone. She's found the best way to work him, as a poor helpless, hapless Di-M.2 that needs his help constantly just to stay alive and tapping into his paranoia. She trusts him because she knows he has no-one else.
> 
> They are both seriously deluded people for different reasons.
> 
> I don't believe everything TM Snr says. I think he created M. Harry was born a Prince but he made Meghan a 'princess'. The rest of her family is seen as collateral damage, the rest of his family cash-cows who won't pay up.
> 
> All the hate fixed on the BRF is just for money 1. Because Harry didn't know what a pint of milk costs and can't believe daddy won't pay for the rest of his life 2. He thinks it's just family (which Edward VIII did) Telling are his comments where he didn't care for the public's outpouring of grief for his mother "She was my mother". He cannot see the BRF from the outside, he has no idea what he's playing with. 3. Arguments on Colonialism, race, mental health, media intrusion etc are what's fashionable to talk about.
> 
> Edited to say, they have a fantasy about being a politician. I would say G-d help them if she runs, but actually I think they'd quite enjoy it - until the opposition ran a few negs. If they think the media has been intrusive so far, they really have no idea. I just watched a US political doc (a real one on real politicians) - all gloves are off in the run-ups and - the way(s) down. ' They' _will_ get you, sooner or later, sometime those skeletons start dancing out the cupboard(s).


I think this is the best summary of them I've seen. By their own admissions greed and jealousy are the real reasons they left the BRF. Even that could have been handled gracefully. It's pretty clear that neither of them are cut out for lives of true public service; they seem to think it means that the public serves them, not the other way around. The rest of the BRF (excepting Andrew) appears to understand that they are tools to bring awareness to the event/charity/cause/patronage. M never seemed to get that and couldn't move beyond making it all about her. Some people are just like that, or maybe she would have learned if she tried to and gave it some time. We'll never know.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> Can't see, is it just me (wouldn't surprise me)??


Link is broken, I have been having trouble with posting links to IG, it could be IG not us


----------



## marietouchet

Sorry cannot find link to where we discussed this yesterday, like 154,347 posts ago lol. Been adding things up …

Archewell had $13M in income and $9.5 M or so assets in 2021. This would have been at End of Year (EOY).
My guess, they received $13M. They put $10M in a DAF per the Royal grift. I suppose the additional $3M went to taxes. 
By 2021 EOY, there was about $9.5M left in the DAF. The DAF spent about $0.5M, perhaps on expenses - Dior, planes, sandwich giveaways.
So, Archewell was worth only $9.5M by the end of 2021.

So, they spent at least $3.5M last year out of $13M income.


----------



## piperdog

jelliedfeels said:


> Come on that’s easy…
> It’s clearly the child’s own fault for saying Bloody Mary three times in the mirror before she went to bed.
> 
> I dunno this sounds like an urban myth to me. It’s not like this family live in a four bed terraced house. Even if they were all in the same palace at the same time M would basically have to walk across a  large village both in distance and number of people she’d encounter to get from one bedroom to another.


The rumors of M taking unsanctioned photos have been floating around for years; this is more detail than I've seen before. While I don't quite believe it yet, the Harkles own shady actions lay the groundwork for me to consider it. They obviously were collecting footage for _something_ for years. Maybe they thought it would be a glorious hagiography and this early footage could be used to show how Auntie Meg was such an important part of the Cambridge kids' lives from the outset. Or she just snapped it to show to friends later to gloat that she was there.
And I agree with your point that the house (Amner Hall?) isn't your typical sized home. However, if H&M were staying with W&K over the holidays at Amner, then they would likely be staying in the residential area. It's not like H&M were taking a public tour and wandered off to the family area.  While I don't know anything about the layout of the actual house, I think it's feasible that Meghan and Harry could have been staying close enough to the rest of the family to wander around and do some snooping. And from that OLD footage when they were first dating of her being shoo-ed away from the trunk of Harry's car multiple times, I can imagine her doing the same to get a picture. As for staff and others around to stop her, if the palace bullying allegations are true, do we think she'd let other people's staff stop her from doing what she wanted?
To be clear, if these photos did happen for WHATEVER reason, it's awful and should have been (maybe was) a huge red flag to the rest of the family.


----------



## Hyacinth

papertiger said:


> This is my reading of the so-called doc.
> 
> What I got:
> 
> Harry is not mad, he has to make sense of the world for the first time. A cat let out after being an indoor cat his whole life, inside he's still a kitten.  He's been a VVIP his whole life, all his problems and crises worked out for him by others, no money money troubles ever etc. He has been kept in arrested development, and IMO, unlike William - taken _full_ advantage. Everybody loves him because we were only shown his 'kitten' side. Wherever he went, the red carpet's rolled out - even as a soldier he was kept safe. Hence 'Truman Show' syndrome. He does suffer from paranoia and it focuses on mania 'power'. He doesn't have delusions of grandeur but he's deluded about his own capabilities or own worth.
> 
> So in his (little) mind he's telling us, 'Wow, being grown-up life is really hard' and we're thinking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Er hello
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , you think you go troubles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't leave for "freedom" nor "racism", he left because he saw his future as 'Prince Andrew'. He really enjoys being a VVIP, he didn't want to slip 'down the line' (LoS). Heaven knows why but he _does_ think he's better than William, his only measure (of competition) and saw Primogeniture avoidable if he left, he'd be a 'natural' King.
> 
> 
> Meghan is delusional. For Meghan, she thought once she became a (Disney) princess/major celeb/Queen of the world, all her wishes come true, she'd never have another problem in her life and everyone would crawl at her (gnarled) feet. This whole 'finding freedom' thing is because she can't let go of the fantasy. She may be a lousy actress but she does understand media. She's not paranoid as but she is a grandiose narc.
> 
> M left because she was always going to leave. Firstly, she couldn't believe there was no income stream, there was 'no' money waiting for her (at the end of the rainbow) and the expenses came with conditions (like any job). She's furious there was no golden handshake beyond millions in expenses (pesky receipts).  Her jealously is (also) out of control.
> 
> H trusts M because he has to trust someone. She's found the best way to work him, as a poor helpless, hapless Di-M.2 that needs his help constantly just to stay alive and tapping into his paranoia. She trusts him because she knows he has no-one else.
> 
> They are both seriously deluded people for different reasons.
> 
> I don't believe everything TM Snr says. I think he created M. Harry was born a Prince but he made Meghan a 'princess'. The rest of her family is seen as collateral damage, the rest of his family cash-cows who won't pay up.
> 
> All the hate fixed on the BRF is just for money 1. Because Harry didn't know what a pint of milk costs and can't believe daddy won't pay for the rest of his life 2. He thinks it's just family (which Edward VIII did) Telling are his comments where he didn't care for the public's outpouring of grief for his mother "She was my mother". He cannot see the BRF from the outside, he has no idea what he's playing with. 3. Arguments on Colonialism, race, mental health, media intrusion etc are what's fashionable to talk about.
> 
> Edited to say, they have a fantasy about being a politician. I would say G-d help them if she runs, but actually I think they'd quite enjoy it - until the opposition ran a few negs. If they think the media has been intrusive so far, they really have no idea. I just watched a US political doc (a real one on real politicians) - all gloves are off in the run-ups and - the way(s) down. ' They' _will_ get you, sooner or later, sometime those skeletons start dancing out the cupboard(s).



If the US media had a field day with exposing the multiple "parental failures" (as well as his abysmal failure as a public speaker) of the losing candidate for Governor of a certain state, imagine what they could do with MeMeMeghan. Her treatment of her father would just be the tip of the iceberg. 

But it still was an incredibly close vote. And candidates even skeevier than the Queen Of MonteShyteShow currently hold office in Wash DC.


----------



## LittleStar88

Well, I hear El Trumpo plans to run again. If TW also ran... Imagine the fun El Trumpo would have with her... And he would NEVER stop with it. I'll be sure to have a hot bucket of popcorn ready for that!


----------



## marietouchet

For completeness sake, screenshots  from video below
1. Archewell is a charity in the US
2. $10M was tucked away in a DAF last year on behalf of Archewell

The video does a good job of explaining DAFs, they are a way to avoid paying income taxes. Key point, the money in the DAF is no longer owned by a person eg H or M, it is owned by Archewell, and subject to regulations about what you can spend it on. SVCF a is a place to park DAF money, it invests it until you use it. See more accurate info in video.


----------



## xincinsin

Hyacinth said:


> If the US media had a field day with exposing the multiple "parental failures" (as well as his abysmal failure as a public speaker) of the losing candidate for Governor of a certain state, imagine what they could do with MeMeMeghan. Her treatment of her father would just be the tip of the iceberg.
> 
> But it still was an incredibly close vote. And candidates even skeevier than the Queen Of MonteShyteShow currently hold office in Wash DC.


Maybe she will develop a different persona: the strong independent campaigner for whatever bandwagon. Althought that would put a severe dent into her Woe is Me Kween act. I must admit that I want her to stand for office. The media deserve to have a field day, and the voters will not be impressed if she needs them to ask her if she is okay (left eye, one tear).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t get over him on that bloody blanket with her filming him and those fake candles. It looks so cheap  a date set up from the bachelor or one of the x of Love shows.



I'm glad you said it because I didn't want to say mean things about someone else's proposal, but...really? That was sooo poorly executed, being spontaneous in the kitchen while cooking together would have been better and less pathetic. And I'm totally not one for grand proposals, a big spectacle would make me super uncomfortable (and...absolutely NO witnesses. You put me on the spot in front ot people, I say no, and I will probably break up with you as you don't know me AT ALL).


----------



## lallybelle

Debbini said:


> Meegain will never, ever, never, ever, never have a political career. Never. Ever.


Dude, have you seen some of our Congress members? *shudders*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> Can't see, is it just me (wouldn't surprise me)??



No, it's TPF messing with us, but when you click on the link it does lead to the Insta post. In this case it was about Fulani opening a can of worms and putting her organisation on the spot.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?
> View attachment 5670791



Gosh, look at his undereyes. I don't look that bad after 3 hours of sleep.

Also, are we sure Ghoul will let him go and speak on his own? She probably has a lot to say about his memories.


----------



## Toby93

lallybelle said:


> Dude, have you seen some of our Congress members? *shudders*


I had read somewhere that she would have to renounce her *title* in order to run for politics in the US.  Does anyone see that happening, given that she clings on to it and uses it at every opportunity?

If she couldn't do the meet and greets, and boring walkabouts and hospital openings in the UK, why would she want to do them in the US?  

She is only interested in the red carpet events with all the sycophants telling her how wonderful she is.  She would have to develop a really thick skin very quickly since this would never happen in an election.  

If she thought the media was bad as a member of the royal family, just wait to see the dirt that is dug up as a political figure


----------



## rcy

i haven't googled it, but is there a recent 990 out there for archwell? i believe these are required to be disclosed, so all the financial info of the org would be public info.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> For completeness sake, screenshots  from video below
> 1. Archewell is a charity in the US
> 2. $10M was tucked away in a DAF last year on behalf of Archewell
> 
> The video does a good job of explaining DAFs, they are a way to avoid paying income taxes. Key point, the money in the DAF is no longer owned by a person eg H or M, it is owned by Archewell, and subject to regulations about what you can spend it on. SVCF a is a place to park DAF money, it invests it until you use it. See more accurate info in video.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5670833
> 
> 
> View attachment 5670834
> 
> 
> View attachment 5670835



The DAF thing is strange. I work in philanthropy and DAFs have become something like smaller foundations (my husband and I have one). It’s like putting money into a foundation without all the headache of creating and running a foundation. 

I worked for one of the largest nonprofits in the world as their foundation liaison and never saw a foundation that was putting money into a DAF. It’s very unusual that Archewell has done this, it’s almost like weird charitable money laundering. 

Unrelated, but goodness does Netflix usually drop a new trailer for their shows every single day? I swear by Thursday they’ll have teased every minute of what’s left of this dang show.


----------



## marietouchet

Toby93 said:


> I had read somewhere that she would have to renounce her *title* in order to run for politics in the US.  Does anyone see that happening, given that she clings on to it and uses it at every opportunity?
> 
> *If she couldn't do the meet and greets, and boring walkabouts and hospital openings in the UK, why would she want to do them in the US? *
> 
> She is only interested in the red carpet events with all the sycophants telling her how wonderful she is.  She would have to develop a really thick skin very quickly since this would never happen in an election.
> 
> If she thought the media was bad as a member of the royal family, just wait to see the dirt that is dug up as a political figure


Point worth making, in Indianapolis, she was interviewed for the event, then jetted out after 3 hrs or so. No walkabout there.

MM did not allow a lot of time for MEET and GREETS, networking, walk around to each table. She got out of Dodge. 
Rock stars make their money from M&G, for hundreds extra, you get into the venue early, get a gift bag, have photo of star and guests, hear soundcheck. 
MM clearly does not have the idea of doing M&Gs for profit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm glad you said it because I didn't want to say mean things about someone else's proposal, but...really? That was sooo poorly executed, being spontaneous in the kitchen while cooking together would have been better and less pathetic. And I'm totally not one for grand proposals, a big spectacle would make me super uncomfortable (and...absolutely NO witnesses. You put me on the spot in front ot people, I say no, and I will probably break up with you as you don't know me AT ALL).


At this point, everything that comes out of their mouths is a lie.  They are now lying to explain away the previous lies

They told the world that he proposed in the kitchen, even mentioning what she was cooking, but now it has changed to an outdoor proposal complete with grainy pics and a phone message to a friend. 

The engagement interview was "rehearsed" for the public and they couldn't tell their true story?  Does anyone believe that?  What was so bad about the true story that it had to be changed? The interviewer has come forward and said that isn't true, they were free to say whatever they wanted.

The dog in the pic apparantly broke it's legs _after_ the engagement, yet there it is in the pic?


----------



## mrsinsyder

rcy said:


> i haven't googled it, but is there a recent 990 out there for archwell? i believe these are required to be disclosed, so all the financial info of the org would be public info.


They did a postcard 990 in the past because they’d raised less than $50,000.

If their timeline is the same they should be filing one for 2021 this month.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> For someone one professes to have taught yoga, she obviously doesn't know what an 'old soul' means


You could make the case that demons are old souls.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> The DAF thing is strange. I work in philanthropy and DAFs have become something like smaller foundations (my husband and I have one). It’s like putting money into a foundation without all the headache of creating and running a foundation.
> 
> I worked for one of the largest nonprofits in the world as their foundation liaison and never saw a foundation that was putting money into a DAF. It’s very unusual that Archewell has done this, it’s almost like weird charitable money laundering.
> 
> Unrelated, but goodness does Netflix usually drop a new trailer for their shows every single day? I swear by Thursday they’ll have teased every minute of what’s left of this dang show.


DAF = charitable money laundering. Excellent way to put it. 
The video that I cited does go into DAFS, they are not well regulated. SVCF - the company that holds/invests the money for you, is not above reproach, see video.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Handbag1234 said:


> hasn't he learnt anything from what happened to his mother when she had a prime time interview?


How about his Godfather, Andi?  H&M and Doria need to understand the camera is not their friend imo.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> I had read somewhere that she would have to renounce her *title* in order to run for politics in the US.  Does anyone see that happening, given that she clings on to it and uses it at every opportunity?
> 
> If she couldn't do the meet and greets, and boring walkabouts and hospital openings in the UK, why would she want to do them in the US?
> 
> She is only interested in the red carpet events with all the sycophants telling her how wonderful she is.  She would have to develop a really thick skin very quickly since this would never happen in an election.
> 
> If she thought the media was bad as a member of the royal family, just wait to see the dirt that is dug up as a political figure



She would not last one week. And crying "racism" every time she gets scrutinized wouldn't fly.


----------



## Chanbal

Not sure if it is different from a previous one, but it's brilliant…


----------



## CarryOn2020

jelliedfeels said:


> I can’t get over him on that bloody blanket with her filming him and those fake candles. It looks so cheap a date set up from the bachelor or one of the x of Love shows.



To be fair, Kourtney and Travis’s engagement had not happened at that point.  All she had to guide her were those Bachelor shows. 
Imo everything they do has a cheap and fake quality to it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> DAF = charitable money laundering. Excellent way to put it.
> The video that I cited does go into DAFS, they are not well regulated. SVCF - the company that holds/invests the money for you, is not above reproach, see video.


The biggest benefit to a DAF is that you can give a large sum to meet the tax deduction threshold while not being required to give it all to one place at one time. 

Example - I normally give the humane society $1,000. But $1,000 isn’t enough to meet a tax deduction. So instead I need to give $10,000. But I don’t want to give the humane society $10,000 at once. So I put the money into my DAF, and get the deduction immediately but now I can still just give the $1,000 a year from my DAF. DAFs also don’t require you to give distributions, so if one year you don’t want to give money out (happening this year because DAF investment returns are down due to the market), you don’t have to. 

I give this example to say, that none of these benefits make any sense when the organization funding the DAF is a charity. Which makes me think the reason for doing it would be to muddy the trail of the money (DAFs aren’t required to publicly provide information like foundations are). It’s quite strange.


----------



## Chanbal

It's a valid concern. The Harkles' show seems to be within the top 10 most watched Netfl*x shows.


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> They did a postcard 990 in the past because they’d raised less than $50,000.
> 
> If their timeline is the same they should be filing one for 2021 this month.


Filing this month??? I dont know the filing date for a 2022 charity return, it could be Apr 15 2023. 
Any income from an LLC (Archewell???) goes to their personal return due Apr 15 2023 EXCEPT... you can file for an extension. Extension are totally normal.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's a valid concern. The Harkles' show seems to be within the top 10 most watched Netfl*x shows.



Surely, Charles, William and the BRF understand  that a show can have lots of clicks/viewers but still be *strongly disliked*.
 It’s the ‘rubbernecker’ syndrome.

_While briefly dethroning megahit [The Crown] Wednesday for the number one spot on Netflix, the show quickly slipped back under it. And the three hour premiere has been a bit…roasted by critics and fans alike, and what seemed like it could be a positive PR moment for Harry and Meghan seems to have perhaps backfired as the series seems to much like…an attempt at a positive PR moment.

Critics have scored the show at a 50% on Rotten Tomatoes, below most other series currently making up Netflix’s top 10 list. It’s described as “bland,” “unquestioned self-promotion” and features things “that definitely do not add up” according to some of the critics.
But the audience scores? That’s where *things are getting really nasty*. The show has just a 12% on Rotten Tomatoes from several thousand audience reviews, one of the lower scores I can remember seeing for really any series on Netflix._









						Netflix’s ‘Harry & Megan’ Is Going Disastrously For Harry And Megan
					

While The Crown has been a megahit for Netflix across five seasons now, a new venture into “Reality Royalty” has not gone nearly as smoothly.




					www.forbes.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

_*Update (12/14): *Well, some positive news for Harry & Meghan, the show is apparently Netflix’s biggest documentary debut ever in terms of viewership. The show had 81.55 million viewing hours after its debut on Thursday, Netflix said. More than 28 million households watched at least part of the series, apparently, and keep in mind this is only part one. There are three more episodes arriving on Thursday, December 15, completing the series.

So, good news? Well, it shows people are certainly interested to see what the series is about. The idea of this whole project was giving them an audience to address “in their own words” their relationship and recent controversies, though I am reminded of those royal family interviews in the press over the decades which had varying boosts or declines in how favorably people viewed them. Getting your own Netflix special sort of feels like the modern day version of that.

More reviews have come in and *scores just keep dropping*, with critic reviews down to 45% on Rotten Tomatoes, and audience scores remaining a dismal 12% with almost 3,500 reviews in now. If this is “haters” bombing the series, as it appears to be, there do not seem to be enough Harry and Meghan defenders to combat them.

Whatever the case, if Harry and Meghan wanted a large audience to hear what they had to say, they got it. Though it remains to be seen whether this will help or hurt their public image among the millions who watch.

From the Forbes article - https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulta...strously-for-harry-and-megan/?sh=11aa40ed4738_


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?
> View attachment 5670791



Unfortunately, this was to be expected.  It's typical to promote your book/movie/TV show and would be a requirement from his publisher, as hard as it is to believe they need to inflict _another_ interview on everyone.  He has to do a promo tour.  But I say let them talk.  Based on the ratings, the more they speak, the more they reveal about themselves, just like Meghan's podcast and this Netflix show. 

It would be amusing to see a real journalist ask them to explain the discrepancies in just one or two of the tales they've told and watch their deer in the headlights response. Or, how about explaining some of the inevitable discrepancies between the Netflix series and the book? 

But, they will never sit down with an actual journalist, just Gayle King or Oprah and will continue to talk about their feelings, not actual facts. Though if the ratings aren't good and the book doesn't sell that well and the Netflix show is considered a bust, then maybe even Gayle or Oprah will have second thoughts about continuing to promote them.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list needs this scarf
> 
> View attachment 5670804


Unless she was having a bad hair day, we know TW would never wear such scarf.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> Filing this month??? I dont know the filing date for a 2022 charity return, it could be Apr 15 2023.
> Any income from an LLC (Archewell???) goes to their personal return due Apr 15 2023 EXCEPT... you can file for an extension. Extension are totally normal.


Yeah, the filing dates roll based on the fiscal calendar the organization has set up (it’s not an April 15th hard deadline). 

This filing should prove *very* insightful and now that I think about it, I wonder if they’ve tried to get their documentary and book out before it’s released. Things that make you go hmm.


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


> At this point, everything that comes out of their mouths is a lie.  They are now lying to explain away the previous lies
> 
> They told the world that he proposed in the kitchen, even mentioning what she was cooking, but now it has changed to an outdoor proposal complete with grainy pics and a phone message to a friend.
> 
> The engagement interview was "rehearsed" for the public and they couldn't tell their true story?  Does anyone believe that?  What was so bad about the true story that it had to be changed? The interviewer has come forward and said that isn't true, they were free to say whatever they wanted.
> 
> The dog in the pic apparantly broke it's legs _after_ the engagement, yet there it is in the pic?


Mishal Husain who did the interview is no Omid Scobie, she’s a proper journalist and very well respected. If she says it was a happy and joyous occasion, and denies it was rehearsed, I believe her.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> It's a valid concern. The Harkles' show seems to be within the top 10 most watched Netfl*x shows.



I read it is in the top 10 DOCUMENTARIES, not reality shows, drama etc
I guess NF is marketing it as a DOCUMENTARY, a much easier category since you are competing against dry newsy type stuff and NF is not where I go to find good documentaries

It is like the People Choice award was for POP podcast, competing against Dax Shepard not Michelle O.


----------



## papertiger

bag-mania said:


> You could make the case that demons are old souls.



'Old souls' also have no excuses


----------



## LittleStar88

Chanbal said:


>




No White Lotus Season 2 spoilers, please! I am waiting until tomorrow through the weekend to binge it!! 

Laughing though as he was so transparent in his ire. Clearly TW and hazbeen are outstaying their whiny welcome.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




Mr. Low absolutely does have a way with words.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> The biggest benefit to a DAF is that you can give a large sum to meet the tax deduction threshold while not being required to give it all to one place at one time.
> 
> Example - I normally give the humane society $1,000. But $1,000 isn’t enough to meet a tax deduction. So instead I need to give $10,000. But I don’t want to give the humane society $10,000 at once. So I put the money into my DAF, and get the deduction immediately but now I can still just give the $1,000 a year from my DAF. DAFs also don’t require you to give distributions, so if one year you don’t want to give money out (happening this year because DAF investment returns are down due to the market), you don’t have to.
> 
> I give this example to say, that none of these benefits make any sense when the organization funding the DAF is a charity. Which makes me think the reason for doing it would be to muddy the trail of the money (DAFs aren’t required to publicly provide information like foundations are). It’s quite strange.



I have learned so many things on this thread. But also...do these people every do something that's straighforward and non-muddy?


----------



## Chanbal

I never watched so many M. Kelly videos before.  Though, she does a superb job with the Harkles imo.


----------



## Sferics

Did we cover this already? (sorry, I am a little behind).

I have no words.

*"The Harkles edited the Queen's 1947 pledge of service 'to make it seem as if it was all about the empire and nothing else'."*








Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix show EDITED Queen's 21st birthday speech by removing her words on serving the nation and focusing on 'serving our great imperial family'​








						Harry and Meghan's documentary edits the Queen's 21st birthday speech
					

The first three episodes of the explosive six-part docuseries aired on Thursday, offering an intimate glimpse into the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's life.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

Chanbal said:


>



Better late than never. Unfortunately in 2021 the folks at Aspen Institute included H as one of 15 Commissioners in their “Commission on Information Disorder” the ultimate irony. Based on this Tweet they figured out he’s part of the problem, not the solution.


----------



## youngster

Sferics said:


> Did we cover this already? (sorry, I am a little behind).
> 
> I have no words.
> 
> *"The Harkles edited the Queen's 1947 pledge of service 'to make it seem as if it was all about the empire and nothing else'."*
> 
> 
> View attachment 5670918
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Netflix show EDITED Queen's 21st birthday speech by removing her words on serving the nation and focusing on 'serving our great imperial family'​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's documentary edits the Queen's 21st birthday speech
> 
> 
> The first three episodes of the explosive six-part docuseries aired on Thursday, offering an intimate glimpse into the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




I just can't even imagine the reaction to this in the UK. This is truly despicable.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

From the comments section of the DM article:



> This is one of the nastiest and most disrespectful things the duo did in the propaganda they are flogging as a documentary. They are trying to give a totally different meaning to her speech. Imagine, they actually expected the queen to be alive when this came out, *so they were perfectly happy for her to see it. *Utterly disgraceful.




What is WRONG with them?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I just can't even imagine the reaction to this in the UK. This is truly despicable.



I wished someone would sue.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

lallybelle said:


> Dude, have you seen some of our Congress members? *shudders*


Yes, and I agree, but.....although R and D have their issues, there is no way either party would stand behind her. None, zero, nadda.


----------



## Sferics

Still have no words...it's a new low.


----------



## csshopper

Frame all this with the knowledge the Queen would have been confronted with this vile, malicious travesty were she still alive.

Am at a loss for words to adequately describe her loathsome actions, the mildest being UNGRATEFUL B*I*T*C*H.


----------



## Lodpah

Just read KC has no plans to ever strip them of titles. He’s a weak assed King and selfish to not think what his evil spawn is doing to damage the monarchy. The monarchy is doomed.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Lodpah said:


> Just read KC has no plans to ever strip them of titles. He’s a weak assed King and selfish to not think what his evil spawn is doing to damage the monarchy. The monarchy is doomed.


I think that all the speculation on what he is and isn't about to do is not coming from KCIII himself, but rather official speculators. I still believe he will do what is best in the long, long run and we have yet to see what he is REALLY going to do.  Stripping them of their titles would delight so many people but also keep the grifters in the news forever, so its hard to know what the best thing to do is.  Hopefully they will burn out like the old news they truly are.


----------



## rose60610

If their Netflix show is so popular, they'll take it as "People must love them". But it's not. Shows about serial killers and torturous dictators are popular also, but Haz and Claw don't realize the difference. I'm not saying Claw never faced any racism from the media, but 99.99% of early coverage was slobbering glowing and positive. Some well known people have been slammed, slandered, and vilified on a daily basis by major media but don't produce a show about how they should be pitied despite their family being worth millions/billions. Claw went from popular to pariah. She worked very hard to do this and brought it all upon herself, enlisting her idiot husband to help her do it.


----------



## Roxanna

The Behaviour panel guys are talking about them right now,  analysing.  Fascinating.


----------



## LittleStar88

CobaltBlu said:


> I think that all the speculation on what he is and isn't about to do is not coming from KCIII himself, but rather official speculators. I still believe he will do what is best in the long, long run and we have yet to see what he is REALLY going to do.  Stripping them of their titles would delight so many people but also keep the grifters in the news forever, so its hard to know what the best thing to do is.  Hopefully they will burn out like the old news they truly are.



I agree with this. H and TW are having their moment right now but entertainment and news cycles run fast and hard. They’ll be forgotten after the book comes out. All they’ve done for the last couple of years is whine about the same thing over and over again. people are tired of hearing about it.

Their only option (and hope for redemption) is to do the philanthropy but do it for real, not the “do and we say, not as we do” with boujee spending and private jets. Like, stop talking and start doing actual work (beyond inspirational bananas, scooping out pie slices, bags of Costco snack chips, and cheap-a$$ Starbucks gift cards).

They’ll always have the same gullible core of sugars who will believe whatever these two say or however they present, but the majority of people aren’t dumb and will eventually see right through them.


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> I agree with this. H and TW are having their moment right now but entertainment and news cycles run fast and hard. They’ll be forgotten after the book comes out. All they’ve done for the last couple of years is whine about the same thing over and over again. people are tired of hearing about it.
> 
> Their only option (and hope for redemption) is to do the philanthropy but do it for real, not the “do and we say, not as we do” with boujee spending and private jets. Like, stop talking and start doing actual work (beyond inspirational bananas, scooping out pie slices, bags of Costco snack chips, and cheap-a$$ Starbucks gift cards).
> 
> They’ll always have the same gullible core of sugars who will believe whatever these two say or however they present, but the majority of people aren’t dumb and will eventually see right through them.


Hope you’re right. Just frustrated with the BRF not doing anything like at least make a comment.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The BRF may not comment, the rest of the world is


----------



## CarryOn2020

Now, this _is_ a bit funny


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> I think that all the speculation on what he is and isn't about to do is not coming from KCIII himself, but rather official speculators. I still believe he will do what is best in the long, long run and we have yet to see what he is REALLY going to do.  Stripping them of their titles would delight so many people but also keep the grifters in the news forever, so its hard to know what the best thing to do is.  Hopefully they will burn out like the old news they truly are.


To strip or not to strip ? When I read this 
1. I always ask is the article/author current on the subject or trotting out 6 mo old gossip. 
2. Agree this is not coming from THE PALACE in any case

The closest thing we have on what KC3 might do, is his own words right after the death of the Queen when he referenced "Harry and Meghan" not HRH/duke & duchess


----------



## youngster

Well, to be fair, she did have her mother and niece (Samantha's daughter) appear, though the segments were likely highly scripted.

Not a lot of actual real friends though, right?  None of her friends like Jess Mulroney.  Where are all of Harry's long time friends?  None of them willing to go on camera?  His life long British friends probably don't take his calls anymore.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


>



There was niece Ashleigh, except I suspect her relationship  with MM is also transactional


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lounorada

xincinsin said:


> Wonder if this is for real. Major US TV networks?
> View attachment 5670791



First thoughts upon reading this...










They are beyond tiresome at this point. This whole sh*tshow feels like it is never going to end.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Roxanna said:


> The Behaviour panel guys are talking about them right now,  analysing.  Fascinating.



This is so well done.  I thought the beginning piece was very interesting about the music....the music is very evocative of feelings, so regardless of what you are hearing, you are also getting feelings of sadness and even despair (especially if you watched Downton Abbey, which has similar music as they say).  

I also like that these guys do not talk over each other, and work very well together to present different aspects of the body language and other things.  I cant do the body language guy, but this is more interesting and I do feel like I learned things other than just about the two palm tree posers. Blink rate!  Clenched fists! Screen placement!


----------



## Jayne1

mrsinsyder said:


> The DAF thing is strange. I work in philanthropy and DAFs have become something like smaller foundations (my husband and I have one). It’s like putting money into a foundation without all the headache of creating and running a foundation.
> 
> I worked for one of the largest nonprofits in the world as their foundation liaison and never saw a foundation that was putting money into a DAF. It’s very unusual that Archewell has done this, it’s almost like weird charitable money laundering.


I love TPF so much because I learn so much!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Lodpah said:


> Just read KC has no plans to ever strip them of titles. He’s a weak assed King and selfish to not think what his evil spawn is doing to damage the monarchy. The monarchy is doomed.


If Hazzi renounces his title, then there will no need to strip anything.  

My guess is Hazz will renounce once the money, the photo ops and the invites stop, especially the money. Really he has absolutely _nothing_ to do so he does not need the Sussex dukedom.  I could be wrong about how this works, MM may be the one pushing to keep that Sussex part because otherwise she will become Princess Henry, eww.   Perhaps that is why Andi keeps his dukedom. Sarah wants the duchess part.  I really don’t know all the rules, though.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Lounorada said:


> First thoughts upon reading this...
> 
> View attachment 5671001
> 
> View attachment 5671000
> 
> View attachment 5671002
> 
> View attachment 5671003
> 
> 
> They are beyond tiresome at this point. This whole sh*tshow feels like it is never going to end.


It never ends because people keep watching. Even hate watching gives them views which turns into more interviews. These networks only care about clicks and money and people are giving them both.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> Now, this _is_ a bit funny



VOGUE of all magazines, emphasizing a sad sack who manages to make couture messy and poorly made vs the elegant Catherine who could do any runway in the world and make the designer glow.

The Harkle Association diminishes them.


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> My guess is *Hazz will renounce once the money, the photo ops and the invites stop, especially the money. Really he has absolutely nothing to do so he does not need the Sussex dukedom.  *I could be wrong about how this works, MM may be the one pushing to keep that Sussex part because otherwise she will become Princess Henry, eww.   Perhaps that is why Andi keeps his dukedom. Sarah wants the duchess part.  I really don’t know all the rules, though.


I would put money on that never happening. If there’s one thing we’ve learned about these two, it’s that they aren’t giving up anything. They feel entitled and there is no personal or financial benefit in them renouncing. If they have to make appearances at the openings of restaurants or car dealerships as “Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan” to make a buck they will do it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

rose60610 said:


> If their Netflix show is so popular, they'll take it as "People must love them". But it's not. Shows about serial killers and torturous dictators are popular also, but Haz and Claw don't realize the difference. I'm not saying Claw never faced any racism from the media, but 99.99% of early coverage was slobbering glowing and positive. Some well known people have been slammed, slandered, and vilified on a daily basis by major media but don't produce a show about how they should be pitied despite their family being worth millions/billions. Claw went from popular to pariah. She worked very hard to do this and brought it all upon herself, enlisting her idiot husband to help her do it.



If Ghoul wants to know what "almost unsurvivable" press coverage is she should talk to Monica Lewinsky.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Listen, I like a bit of gossip as much as the next person, but is it so hard to check your tweet before hitting send?


----------



## Mrs.Z

CarryOn2020 said:


>



To be fair and balanced, this is not true…there were multiple friends interviewed and two family members.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Mr. Low absolutely does have a way with words.


He and Tom Bower have not heard a thing in regards to their books.  There has never been any clapback directed at them either.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> If Hazzi renounces his title, then there will no need to strip anything.
> 
> My guess is Hazz will renounce once the money, the photo ops and the invites stop, especially the money. Really he has absolutely _nothing_ to do so he does not need the Sussex dukedom.  I could be wrong about how this works, MM may be the one pushing to keep that Sussex part because otherwise she will become Princess Henry, eww.   Perhaps that is why Andi keeps his dukedom. Sarah wants the duchess part.  I really don’t know all the rules, though.



They both love their titles


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> They both love their titles


I agree and he is not about to give up a thing and will claim TQ gave it to him and he is keeping it in honor of her memory.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## rose60610

Since Claw and Haz despise the BRF so much, a reasonable expectation would be for them to renounce their titles. For them to want to hold onto them makes NO sense if they were so "wronged".  If they do continue to use the titles, could they at least repay their 50 million dollar wedding?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> I wonder if Zed will let him do the publicity gigs or she will horn in as before.


Let me guess, they'll do a primetime sit down with Gayle King


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*Update (12/14): *Well, some positive news for Harry & Meghan, the show is apparently Netflix’s biggest documentary debut ever in terms of viewership. The show had 81.55 million viewing hours after its debut on Thursday, Netflix said. More than 28 million households watched at least part of the series, apparently, and keep in mind this is only part one. There are three more episodes arriving on Thursday, December 15, completing the series.
> 
> So, good news? Well, it shows people are certainly interested to see what the series is about. The idea of this whole project was giving them an audience to address “in their own words” their relationship and recent controversies, though I am reminded of those royal family interviews in the press over the decades which had varying boosts or declines in how favorably people viewed them. Getting your own Netflix special sort of feels like the modern day version of that.
> 
> More reviews have come in and *scores just keep dropping*, with critic reviews down to 45% on Rotten Tomatoes, and audience scores remaining a dismal 12% with almost 3,500 reviews in now. If this is “haters” bombing the series, as it appears to be, there do not seem to be enough Harry and Meghan defenders to combat them.
> 
> Whatever the case, if Harry and Meghan wanted a large audience to hear what they had to say, they got it. Though it remains to be seen whether this will help or hurt their public image among the millions who watch.
> 
> From the Forbes article - https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulta...strously-for-harry-and-megan/?sh=11aa40ed4738_


so if viewership is high, does it matter whether people like them?


----------



## Lounorada

Roxanna said:


> The Behaviour panel guys are talking about them right now,  analysing.  Fascinating.



Thanks for sharing! These guys are so interesting to listen to, I remember videos of them being shared on here before but I couldn't remember the name they call themselves, so now I will bookmark them to remember 

I can't believe ( I can really) the cheek of JCMH blaming the media for chasing his past girlfriends/love interests away from him, like _that _was the reason they left him.


Boy, that might have been a factor in those separations, having all the intrusion into their private lives but if you have taught us (and shown us) _anything _about yourself since you married a deranged, narcissistic, attention-seeking woman who has clearly awoken the worst possible personality traits in you that you had kept hidden behind a mask for years, it is that you have too many HUGE issues within yourself that you clearly have never gotten professional help for, to help you be the best, mentally healthy person you can be after the trauma of losing your mother. It is most likely _those _un-healed, un-treated issues within _yourself _which probably made you a sh*tty boyfriend/partner that made all of your exes run for the hills and never look back, only to find better partners/husbands and live seemingly happy normal lives without your toxic a$$.
JCMH really loves to be reaching high with his delusions and fantasizing. 

Also, just like his wife's voice sounds, listening to JCMH's voice now is worse than nails on a chalkboard to me, his accent and voice is just...



Also also, if I hear him say 'I nEeD tO pRoTeCt mY fAmIlY' one more time, I think my blood will turn to lava.


----------



## sdkitty

Lounorada said:


> Thanks for sharing! These guys are so interesting to listen to, I remember videos of them being shared on here before but I couldn't remember the name they call themselves, so now I will bookmark them to remember
> 
> I can't believe ( I can really) the cheek of JCMH blaming the media for chasing his past girlfriends/love interests away from him, like _that _was the reason they left him.
> View attachment 5671069
> 
> Boy, that might have been a factor in those separations, having all the intrusion into their private lives but if you have taught us (and shown us) _anything _about yourself since you married a deranged, narcissistic, attention-seeking woman who has clearly awoken the worst possible personality traits in you that you had kept hidden behind a mask for years, it is that you have too many HUGE issues within yourself that you clearly have never gotten professional help for, to help you be the best, mentally healthy person you can be after the trauma of losing your mother. It is most likely _those _un-healed, un-treated issues within _yourself _which probably made you a sh*tty boyfriend/partner that made all of your exes run for the hills and never look back, only to find better partners/husbands and live seemingly happy normal lives without your toxic a$$.
> JCMH really loves to be reaching high with his delusions and fantasizing.
> 
> Also, just like his wife's voice sounds, listening to JCMH's voice now is worse than nails on a chalkboard to me, his accent and voice is just...
> View attachment 5671072
> 
> 
> Also also, if I hear him say 'I nEeD tO pRoTeCt mY fAmIlY' one more time, I think my blood will turn to lava.


yes whenever he says he has to protect his family or talks about "My wife" he just seem so much like he wants to be a big grownup man to me


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I don’t think Archewell is registered in the UK.



The Sussex Royal Foundation was a British charity they dissolved in 2021, the transitional name was going to be "Markle Windsor Foundation" or MWX (Wikki/ and (18.05.21)  Independent )

That's why it's odd they call it a Archwell Foundation, because it's a US charity - and not a foundation.


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> I agree and he is not about to give up a thing and will claim TQ gave it to him and he is keeping it in honor of her memory.


In their minds they have no reason to give them up.

Remember two months ago they announced 2023 would be their “Year of Reconciliation“. The YawnFest on Netflix would be concluded, SPARE would have its 15 minutes of fame in January. Then  they could focus on a return to Frogmore to dust off the cobwebs in anticipation of taking center stage at the Coronation as The Prodigal Son etc.


----------



## papertiger

EverSoElusive said:


> Z-list needs this scarf
> 
> View attachment 5670804



_Please_, M lives for it


----------



## papertiger

rose60610 said:


> Since Claw and Haz despise the BRF so much, a reasonable expectation would be for them to renounce their titles. For them to want to hold onto them makes NO sense if they were so "wronged".  If they do continue to use the titles, could they at least repay their 50 million dollar wedding?



Hello (Mag) had it as £72 million 

I want a full refund


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


>


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> so if viewership is high, does it matter whether people like them?


No, it doesn’t matter to Netflix. They need to justify all that money they gave them. Love or hate, as long as people watch.

Harry and Meghan care whether people like them but that’s why they put their “truth” out there to try to gain sympathy from people who were on the fence before.


----------



## Toby93

gracekelly said:


> I agree and he is not about to give up a thing and will claim TQ gave it to him and he is keeping it *in honor of her memory.*


....while lobbing grenades at her memory and legacy from California


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> so if viewership is high, does it matter whether people like them?


I think it does to a narcissist?  When they left the UK, they were on the front cover of every tabloid, but it wasn't *good* press


----------



## csshopper

There must be members of the RF who cringe thinking about the influence from the in-laws on the youngest generation of Windsor-Mountbatten children growing up if things stay as they are now. It will be the Grifting Grandmother.

Fortunately, on the other side,  the heirs to the throne are embraced by Michael and Carol Middleton, Uncle James Middleton and Aunt Alize along with Aunt Pippa and Uncle James Matthews.

The contrast could not be anymore stark in terms of family values. There’s more than just the physical chasm of “5,462 miles as the crow flies” (per Siri) between them.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marklenews1 knows how we feel


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


>




She is such a f*cking nutjob- it's literally pathological with her. She needs to donate her brain to science after she dies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




That's a really good read.

So English claims the palace did nothing but firefight for them and that she personally witnessed Ghoul reducing one of her employees to tears. She also says she ignored Harry's rude behaviour towards the press in her copy because she felt his great charity work deserved to not be shadowed by pettiness. 

She insists unflattering stories about the Troublesome Two only started to come out when it became impossible to hide their obnoxious behaviour, and never encouraged by the palace.

Those two are FULL of it.


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> so if viewership is high, does it matter whether people like them?


It didn’t matter to the Kardashians.


----------



## pomeline

Yes! Bring it on! Nana Akua wants a Megxit referendum to remove titles


----------



## Chanbal

Is the New York Times finally changing its views?


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> Is the New York Times finally changing its views?



So far I’ve only seen the _Times_ entertainment reviewer giving it a lackluster review and many of the comments were priceless. There have been a couple other articles recently that show they still have support there.


----------



## Icyjade

I really want to know what’s in the bullying report and also what the Sussex Survivors really think. Isn’t it time to unleash them? Surely the gloves should come off by now.


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> So far I’ve only seen the _Times_ entertainment reviewer giving it a lackluster review and many of the comments were priceless. There have been a couple other articles recently that show they still have support there.


I'm trying to stay positive.


----------



## haute okole

mrsinsyder said:


> It didn’t matter to the Kardashians.


The thing is the Kardashians know who they are, fake pin ups who put out for a buck and they don’t apologize for it.  MM is a full on Hollywood grifter pretending to be a world class diplomat and how dare Britain treat her as a Black Woman, because ya know, she does not want to be treated like one.  What?  Talk about someone who is confused.  No wonder no one buys her story.  She has not figured what her real story was before she decided to go with the most lucrative sob story when she and Harry got lazy and did not want to work because it was too mundane.   BtW, she forgets to talk about racism she encountered with her Mom in LA but treated like a princess in LA with her Dad.

And…The Kardashians LOVE each other, as weird and dis functional as they all are, they have each others’ backs.

And BTW, I have been married to an Englishman and an American.  My English in laws were far more welcoming of my Asian family and heritage than my American in laws without question.


----------



## marietouchet

BLG reviewed third trailer. He was subtle and just tossed out a lot of ideas, but the trailer was full of non sequiturs. But, BLG led me to water and I drank the kool aid LOL.

MM says stories about other BRF members would pop up and disappear. The Palace would plant the stories of her pre wedding kerfuffles. BLG notes H does not appear in trailer and ANDREW is never mentioned

BLG a hints that MM says BP was all about suppressing Andrew stories by besmirching her. BP leaked tiaragate, tightsgate, dadgate to deflect the stuff about Andrew.
What a load of … well can’t wait for tomorrow

PS … I bet that in the mind of MM, she wanted BP to cover up her shenanigans ( read : protect her ) with the same zeal as done for Andrew


----------



## Chanbal

N/M


----------



## EverSoElusive

papertiger said:


> _Please_, M lives for it


Oh yeah, I know she lives for it.

The scarf was more for our benefit so that we don't have to see the psycho who always finds the cameras without fail


----------



## Lodpah

I don’t believe the Netflix numbers. No one I know watched it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## djfmn

Lodpah said:


> I don’t believe the Netflix numbers. No one I know watched it.


I have Netflix and I didnt watch it. I have Netflix to watch the Great British Baking Show, Somebody Feed Phil and Bridgerton and a couple of other cooking shows.


----------



## Gimmethebag

Assuming that BP leaked gossip about MM to take the heat off more senior royals… 

Is that still not a good bargain for an actress with a supporting role on a cable series? 

In exchange for some tabloid coverage and gossip by people who you will literally never meet, you and your children could live a life of unimaginable privilege. 

Your financial expenditures and investments are handled for you. No waitlists ever. Always a reservation, no problem. The highest level of discretion from service providers. Staff to help you do it all. Being surrounded by historically important, priceless objects.  

I mean… is it REALLY such a bad shake?


----------



## Chanbal

Charles Rae's input on the last trailer. He does a good job contradicting TW's last claim about being used to take the heat off from other people in the BRF. I didn't know TW was '_dubbed Princess P45_' in the media.


_Vanessa Feltz breaks down latest 'bombshell' Prince Harry and Meghan Markle Netflix trailer_​EDIT: Charlie Rae - former royal editor of the Sun.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

djfmn said:


> I have Netflix and I didnt watch it. I have Netflix to watch the Great British Baking Show, Somebody Feed Phil and Bridgerton and a couple of other cooking shows.



I am on the family plan, otherwise I wouldn't shell out money for it. BUT I did get a VPN specifically to watch Call the Midwife on Netflix US


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gimmethebag said:


> Assuming that BP leaked gossip about MM to take the heat off more senior royals…



Rebekka English disputed that as well, saying that not once was she contacted by the palace for something like this and her palace contacts are well aware she will once in a while run a story that rubs them entirely the wrong way and that's the role of free press. She mentioned a less than flattering story about Charles that caused a diplomatic incident (no details which story and I didn't have the capacity to search for it).



Gimmethebag said:


> Is that still not a good bargain for an actress with a supporting role on a cable series?
> 
> In exchange for some tabloid coverage and gossip by people who you will literally never meet, you and your children could live a life of unimaginable privilege.
> 
> Your financial expenditures and investments are handled for you. No waitlists ever. Always a reservation, no problem. The highest level of discretion from service providers. Staff to help you do it all. Being surrounded by historically important, priceless objects.
> 
> I mean… is it REALLY such a bad shake?



You have a point there. I never understood why what they had was not enough for them. I'd happily live a life in the shadow if I never had to worry again about mundane things.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Charles Rae's input on the last trailer. He does a good job contradicting TW's last claim about being used to take the heat off from other people in the BRF. I didn't know TW was *'dubbed Princess P45' *in the media.



What does that mean?


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What does that mean?


It’s a brand of LUXURY YACHTS.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> It’s a brand of LUXURY YACHTS.



OMG 

That said, I can't remember ever seeing that and we've spent copious amounts of time in a shared effort to analyze like everything ever written about them.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> What does that mean?





csshopper said:


> It’s a brand of LUXURY YACHTS.


It was the first time I heard this expression. Would this be linked to the yacht's rumors?


----------



## CarryOn2020

csshopper said:


> It’s a brand of LUXURY YACHTS.


Ooooh, ok.  First time hearing about this, it does make sense.  To my knowledge, H&M have never _denied_ the yacht girl rumours. They claim most of the verbal abuse is because of race. Not true, imo.  The abuse is rooted in this _yacht girl_ stuff.  She joined the BRF around the time Andy’s disgusting behaviour was on page 1.  The world rejected his excuses, his behaviour and him.  People strongly disliked his randyAndy behaviour and his shady business dealings.  Almost immediately on her arrival, her _randy_ behaviour was written about, along with Hazzi’s.  That is not racism, that is the world saying ‘we will no longer tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour from the royals’.  Game over.  Now, they have admitted MarkusA played a significant role in bringing them together.   H&M can continue to claim racism, maybe they believe their own lies; however,  the strong dislike is about their own shady behaviours.  Imo.

ETA: H&M probably thought the _Pretty Woman _gimmick would win hearts and minds.  It may explain why GeorgeC was at the wedding.  The whole thing backfired.  How delusional can they be.


----------



## gracekelly

That isn’t  what P45 means It is a Brit term for a pink slip as in you’re fired.  This has to do with the revolving door of employees and bullying claims. 

You'll get a P45 from your employer when you stop working for them. There's a separate guide to getting P45s if you're an employer. Your P45 *shows how much tax you've paid on your salary so far in the tax year (6 April to 5 April)*.


----------



## CarryOn2020

​AEOLOS P45, A LOOKER, AND A ROCKET!​








						AEOLOS P45, A LOOKER, AND A ROCKET!
					

a blog about Interesting sailboats, sail boat design, cruising, sail racing, sailboat tests, sail boat reviews and sail stories.




					interestingsailboats.blogspot.com
				




ETA: A spirit p45
_The motor yacht Spirit P45 Fastback had been produced by the brand Spirit since 2018. Spirit P45 Fastback is a 13.00 meters semi-displacement yacht with 1 guest cabin and the draft of 0.60 meters. The yacht with wood hull has CE certification class (B) and can go not further than 200 miles off the coastline._






			https://itboat.com/models/8335-p45-fastback


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> That isn’t  what P45 means It is a Brit term for a pink slip as in you’re fired.  This has to do with the revolving door of employees and bullying claims.
> 
> You'll get a P45 from your employer when you stop working for them. There's a separate guide to getting P45s if you're an employer. Your P45 *shows how much tax you've paid on your salary so far in the tax year (6 April to 5 April)*.


That definition didn’t come up when I Googled, or maybe I missed it because I was laughing so hard about the Yacht connection.

Either one seems appropriate, but they were probably referring to the employment issues.

Always learn new things here.


----------



## Chanbal

csshopper said:


> That definition didn’t come up when I Googled, or maybe I missed it because I was laughing so hard about the Yacht connection.
> 
> Either one seems appropriate, but they were probably referring to the employment issues.
> 
> Always learn new things here.


It's because you googled 'princess p45' instead of 'p45.' I wonder if the expression has a double meaning, British humor…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Both definitions work with the toxic two imo.   Has MarkusA ever been connected to JeffE or Ghislaine?
We know Hazz has partied with the women of the night. Is it really a stretch to believe Hazz’s attraction to MM was based on lust rather than brains?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, look at his undereyes. I don't look that bad after 3 hours of sleep.
> 
> Also, are we sure Ghoul will let him go and speak on his own? She probably has a lot to say about his memories.


After listening to her for years, Sparry likely has many more new memories.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Both definitions work with the toxic two imo.   Has MarkusA ever been connected to JeffE or Ghislaine?
> We know Hazz has partied with the women of the night. Is it really a stretch to believe Hazz’s attraction to MM was based on lust rather than *brains*?


All her claims to be smart and intelligent, and I'm still doubtful that she is a graduate in International Relations.


----------



## needlv

I don’t think Charles will strip the duke titles because of Andrew or Harry’s behaviour.  It sets a bad precedent for any naughty royals in the future…

But a really good excuse is the slimming down of the monarchy.  You could make the following changes:
1 Duke of Sussex and York lose their duke titles and go back to being Earls;
2. Princess Eug and Bea lose the princess title and go to being “lady” (like lady Louise - Edward’s daughter)

Announce that going forward the Monarchy won’t hand out Duke /Duchess titles unless the person is a working royal and has a minimum amount of service years before being awarded.  This would affect Charlotte and Louis future too.

No prince/princess titles for Harry/MM kids as too far down in line of succession.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Y'all have no imagination. Obviously one was the real engagement and the other one not and they threw us off for privacy reasons. And then there was a third, the public spectacle.


So they had three engagements and two weddings? Where's the funeral?


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> That definition didn’t come up when I Googled, or maybe I missed it because I was laughing so hard about the Yacht connection.
> 
> Either one seems appropriate, but they were probably referring to the employment issues.
> 
> Always learn new things here.


Personally, I prefer the yachting connection. Maybe the press was being clever with a double entendre lololol!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

xincinsin said:


> All her claims to be smart and intelligent, and I'm still doubtful that she is a graduate in International Relations.


I doubt she completed her baccalaureate and received a degree.


----------



## Lilacgal

"Institutional" beige


----------



## needlv

I think it’s time to produce those “receipts” they hinted about in the Oprah interview…


----------



## jblended

Similar to the above, the press are calling this categorically untrue:









						Negative stories 'were NOT fed' by Palace in 'war against Meghan'
					

REBECCA ENGLISH: I can honestly say that I never heard a negative word said about the couple until at least six months after their marriage - and then not from anyone inside the palace walls




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				





> I can honestly say that I never heard a negative word said about the couple until at least six months after their marriage – and then not from anyone inside the palace walls.
> 
> Indeed the opposite was true. As the trickle of hints that all was not well in their household became a torrent, palace aides did nothing but firefight for the couple.
> 
> Staff, they insisted, were leaving for personal reasons or because they had an exciting new opportunity to pursue. Never because of Meghan.
> 
> Even when I personally witnessed her round on a member of her team, leaving this individual in tears of humiliation, I was told – with a straight-face – that it had merely been a 'security incident'.





> The royal households have always respected the fact that I may, on occasions, run stories that show their principals in a less than flattering light (indeed, one of my less helpful stories about Prince Charles prompted a major diplomatic incident) and that is part of the role of a free Press.


----------



## jblended

Maggie Muggins said:


> So they had three engagements and two weddings? Where's the funeral?


zomg! Post of the year!!!


----------



## purseinsanity

Maggie Muggins said:


> So they had three engagements and two weddings? *Where's the funeral?*


I think they're doing a good job of burying themselves?


----------



## jblended

BBC is continuing their live reporting of the show as it airs. For anyone who wants to follow without watching the actual thing:
link


----------



## needlv

Crowns of Britain blogger is back.  Click for a good laugh









						Royal round-up: 14th December
					

Well hello all and welcome to another royal round up– which has been a long time coming! Hope you’re having a good week so far and sorry for the gap between posts, it’s been crazy busy …




					thecrownsofbritain.com


----------



## Handbag1234

jblended said:


> BBC is continuing their live reporting of the show as it airs. For anyone who wants to follow without watching the actual thing:
> link


The sarcastic bbc coverage is brilliant!


----------



## jblended

Handbag1234 said:


> The sarcastic bbc coverage is brilliant!


It's the only reason I'm still following this nonsense. I could use the laughs:


> "I don't know how I was so calm. And all I wanted was a mimosa, a croissant and to play the song Going to The Chapel. And that's what I did, and it was great."
> 
> *To be fair, that does sound like a good way to spend the morning to us. Possibly even more enjoyable than getting up early to liveblog a royal documentary on Netflix.*
> 
> The song plays, and archive footage is shown of the morning of the couple's wedding. *David and Victoria Beckham are there, which always denotes an event of national significance.*


BIB


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

"Harry then recalls his mother, Princess Diana, being in floods of tears in the back of cars before turning up at engagements and smiling for the cameras." 

How would he know? He wasn't there, he was a child and was either in his boarding school or at home.


----------



## KEG66

Sharont2305 said:


> "Harry then recalls his mother, Princess Diana, being in floods of tears in the back of cars before turning up at engagements and smiling for the cameras."
> 
> How would he know? He wasn't there, he was a child and was either in his boarding school or at home.


Well even if he did witness this Diana  was certainly a better actress than TW !!


----------



## xincinsin

Sharont2305 said:


> "Harry then recalls his mother, Princess Diana, being in floods of tears in the back of cars before turning up at engagements and smiling for the cameras."
> 
> How would he know? He wasn't there, he was a child and was either in his boarding school or at home.


His wife described it to him in great detail and proceeded to let him know that she does the same - just like his mother!


----------



## Handbag1234

When couples say ‘we’re pregnant’ it really grinds my gears. Although if the speculation is true- neither were  in fact pregnant….


----------



## purseinsanity

Handbag1234 said:


> When couples say ‘we’re pregnant’ it really grinds my gears. Although if the speculation is true- neither were  in fact pregnant….


I hate that too.  I feel like saying no "WE are not".  Your wife/girlfriend/significant other/booty call/friend with benefits/one night stand is pregnant, YOU are not.

I also hate hearing, "We are trying to get pregnant".  Just say you're f'ing like bunnies.  Jeez already.  What a roundabout way to say we are shagging.


----------



## pomeline

purseinsanity said:


> I hate that too.  I feel like saying no "WE are not".  Your wife/girlfriend/significant other/booty call/friend with benefits/one night stand is pregnant, YOU are not.
> 
> I also hate hearing, "We are trying to get pregnant".  Just say you're f'ing like bunnies.  Jeez already.  What a roundabout way to say we are shagging.



Also, why do such people think the rest of us are interested in knowing that they're doing the horizontal mambo with a clear goal in mind? We don't want to know! 

When a man says "We are pregnant" I'm always tempted to look at their midsection and say "Yes, I can see that. But I'm afraid yours is just a pizza baby".

I'm only just starting to look into what pearls of wisdom were revealed in the last three episodes. I think one of the most outrageous claims must be "We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us". Really? You did a better job than the queen?? All I can remember was fashion disasters, protocol faux pas and acting like two idiots.


----------



## papertiger

pomeline said:


> Also, why do such people think the rest of us are interested in knowing that they're doing the horizontal mambo with a clear goal in mind? We don't want to know!
> 
> When a man says "We are pregnant" I'm always tempted to look at their midsection and say "Yes, I can see that. But I'm afraid yours is just a pizza baby".
> 
> I'm only just starting to look into what pearls of wisdom were revealed in the last three episodes. I think one of the most outrageous claims must be "We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us". Really? You did a better job than the queen?? All I can remember was fashion disasters, protocol faux pas and acting like two idiots.



"We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us"

This is one lie I think they actually believe


----------



## needlv

OMG Harry claimed they offered to renounce the Sussex title as part of negotiations for megxit.

The BRF just needs to issue a statement saying

 “We note the offer from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to renounce their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles and we gratefully accept.  They shall be known as the Earl and Countess of Dumbarton.

PS For everything else - recollections may vary”


----------



## Icyjade

pomeline said:


> I'm only just starting to look into what pearls of wisdom were revealed in the last three episodes. I think one of the most outrageous claims must be "We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us". Really? You did a better job than the queen?? All I can remember was fashion disasters, protocol faux pas and acting like two idiots.


Yeah. I read that and was wondering cos the Australians hate them and Hazbeen claims that the Aussie tour was a great success. They are trying to gaslight all of us!


----------



## xincinsin

pomeline said:


> Also, why do such people think the rest of us are interested in knowing that they're doing the horizontal mambo with a clear goal in mind? We don't want to know!
> 
> When a man says "We are pregnant" I'm always tempted to look at their midsection and say "Yes, I can see that. But I'm afraid yours is just a pizza baby".
> 
> I'm only just starting to look into what pearls of wisdom were revealed in the last three episodes. I think one of the most outrageous claims must be "We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us". Really? You did a better job than the queen?? All I can remember was fashion disasters, protocol faux pas and acting like two idiots.


Maybe they have the same quality control mentality as my office narc. When my ex-boss told him that his performance was subpar, he told her the following:
1. We humans are all unique and thus she should not compare him with his peers
2. He did his personal best and therefore she should give him full marks for effort
3. She already scolded him for previous errors, so the slate is wiped clean and these errors do not count towards his annual review

When she rejected his "logic", he told his pals that she was sexist and didn't appreciate his brilliance.


----------



## Handbag1234

The best ‘revelation’ they can serve up so far is Beyoncé emailed TW. 

It feels like ‘notes for my therapist’ so far. (Not watching btw but following bbc coverage). Just like always, lots of claims and no receipts.


----------



## pomeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> Both definitions work with the toxic two imo.   Has MarkusA ever been connected to JeffE or Ghislaine?
> We know Hazz has *partied with the women of the night.* Is it really a stretch to believe Hazz’s attraction to MM was based on lust rather than brains?



Ok so that isn't even close to the worst rumours I've heard about professionals and H... I'm sure the rest of you have heard them too? Which makes me think M was asking "is he kind" for a reason.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> OMG Harry claimed they offered to renounce the Sussex title as part of negotiations for megxit.
> 
> The BRF just needs to issue a statement saying
> 
> “We note the offer from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to renounce their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles and we gratefully accept.  They shall be known as the Earl and Countess of Dumbarton.
> 
> PS For everything else - recollections may vary”


The BRF should take him up on it! Like right away!


----------



## papertiger

Icyjade said:


> Yeah. I read that and was wondering cos the Australians hate them and Hazbeen claims that the Aussie tour was a great success. They are trying to gaslight all of us!



The Australian tour was a fairly successful for the Crown and for them (at least from the outside and if you didn't work for them). Unfortunately they let the applause that one tour go to their heads. 

People were happy for them as newly weds _and_ happy that they went to Oz soon after. I think they slapped all those Australians in the face, no wonder they're hated there now.


----------



## papertiger

pomeline said:


> Ok so that isn't even close to the worst rumours I've heard about professionals and H... I'm sure the rest of you have heard them too? Which makes me think M was asking "is he kind" for a reason.



Those women are paid to keep quiet.

M never shuts-up.

I can see her being an escort, I cannot see her being a professional call girl. Those women are either very tough or very vulnerable - she is neither.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

needlv said:


> I think it’s time to produce those “receipts” they hinted about in the Oprah interview…




That reminds me, I'm still waiting for TM to produce the receipts he said he had for paying TW's education etc. I don't know if he'd have those though but no doubt he did pay her through school and got her a car and an apartment. I really would love the Markles to provide clear evidence TW lied about not growing up with them and that she was poor and paid her studies by working.


----------



## Icyjade

Hazbeen is a grown man. Even if it’s true that William shouted at him, what‘s so scary about it? Cry baby


----------



## jblended

> Their former nanny Lorren Khumelo then talks about how informal the couple were.
> She recalls how she'd bought new shoes for their first encounter,* but was met by a barefoot Harry*


This is maybe the 3rd time it's been noted that they walk around barefoot. I'm struggling to see the significance of this? Did they have to escape the palace because they were forcing them to wear shoes?


----------



## jelliedfeels

jblended said:


> This is maybe the 3rd time it's been noted that they walk around barefoot. I'm struggling to see the significance of this? Did they have to escape the palace because they were forcing them to wear shoes?


They are secretly hobbits

Actually no that’s an insult to hobbits. I think their feet are covered in bunions and it makes it difficult to wear shoes. Well that and they think it makes them look cool and low back rather than try hard.


----------



## carmen56

Who are all these ’friends’ of Claw who have suddenly crawled out of the woodwork?  How come we’ve never heard of them before?  And how much were they paid to spout this drivel?


----------



## pomeline

jblended said:


> This is maybe the 3rd time it's been noted that they walk around barefoot. I'm struggling to see the significance of this? Did they have to escape the palace because they were forcing them to wear shoes?



They really have some weird thing going on with shoes and feet in general don't they? Bare feet, tights/pantyhose (M wouldn't let the kids wear them for her wedding, would not wear them herself), bunions and shoes with holes in them... Someone care to explain?

Maybe Harry was walking around barefoot because he only had shoes with holes in them?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## millivanilli

About Harry: I think he was so young when his mother died that in the shock he simply stopped in his development in his core. A lot of things have grown up and grown old, but in his core there is still a lot frozen from before. Based on this, he divides the world into a good side, which must be so good that it is beyond all doubt, and an evil side, which is so evil that it is also beyond all doubt. If I were a nasty old woman, I'd say, "a sitting duck for someone who is highly manipulative. Because he CAN'T see that there is no such thing as 100% good and 100% bad and is therefore blind to alternative facts that would bring down his black and white edifice. This plays super into the hands of someone who is very manipulative - easier task, you just have to say" look, it's you and me against the rest of the world". 

And one thing is already pretty clear: Netflix plays on the orchestra of our emotions like a master. I'm watching the 4th episode right now and I'm actually carried away by the pictures, the promise of a great love etc etc etc. What I see - I didn't see the wedding then, it simply didn't interest me, sorry Meghan - is the look with which William looks at his brother at the altar. He seems to love his little brother very much, that was pretty obvious. Then I was touched. The show with " I just want to eat a croissant and listen to music" - sorry Meghan, but as someone who got married with exactly 2 people as guests, I don't believe a word you say. Even I wanted a cake and flowers and the fuss - and I am German, we are rational. I would be fine with her if she would admit to what she lives. But this back and forth and this hidden posturing, how free and modest and unpretentious she is - and then this? By the way, which 11-year-old has the goal of becoming "famous" so intensively that she writes it in the yearbook? I don't know, one of the two stories is true. By the way, one can have completely exaggerated claims even barefoot. I know that, I am often barefoot and I HAVE exaggerated claims.


----------



## pomeline

'I blame the Mail for the miscarriage' and other bombshells from Netflix's Harry & Meghan finale

Harry blames the Mail for causing Meghan's miscarriage...  Seriously now... First of all, what miscarriage (the one modelled after Steel Magnolias and someone else's book?) and what is this, some period(!) drama set in the 1800s where women fainted and miscarried thanks to emotional turmoil caused by whatever reason.

Someone on GB News now saying Harry is making a big deal of his military career and being in real danger while in Afghanistan. I still don't believe him.


----------



## jblended

carmen56 said:


> Who are all these ’friends’ of Claw who have suddenly crawled out of the woodwork?


As far as I can tell, people on the payroll. Doria, their lawyer, some guy who works for Archewell. How they call such a biased presentation a "documentary" is beyond me... 
This is the furthest from documenting reality you can come. It is propaganda. And very compelling at that! Emotive music, happy family pictures, a forbidden love won against all odds, a brilliant narrative...until you realise that it's full of false claims, unfounded allegations, and those peeks into the family album were won by the highest bidder.
And isn't it oh-so-convenient that they had a camera crew with them to capture them receiving a private text from William after the Oprah interview. Yup, they're documenting their real lives, nothing was set up there!


----------



## millivanilli

Episode 46:48 shows the photo of the wedding with the whole family and it really hit me like a blow: the royalty of the family is not in looking particularly good or being beautifully dressed or being particularly decked out, it's in standing back in such a way that the other person particularly shines in the spotlight. Look at Catherine (who I like, in part, because we share the same first name) - and try to find her in the picture. THAT is what I call noble. Everyone is taking a back seat so Meghan can shine. (her mother not so much now, but everyone else very much so). For me, this is aristrocracy in action.


----------



## jblended

> Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace have again declined to comment on the series or the claims made in it.


Good. The message will be clear during the King's Christmas speech. Enjoy your life "overseas" and run barefoot in the sands of Cali; we will not try to shackle your precious toes in those shoes torture devices anymore!


----------



## Icyjade




----------



## jblended

> In episode four, Harry says a tweet comparing baby Archie to a chimp was "one of the first things" he saw after the birth in 2019.
> 
> The tweet, posted by former BBC radio presenter Danny Baker, included an old photo of a couple holding hands with a chimp and walking down some steps. The text read: "Royal Baby leaves hospital."
> 
> "Archie's just been born," Harry says in the documentary. "Media, social media starts to take on a life of its own. Someone in the media posting a photograph of a couple with a chimp, and at the top it said, 'Royal baby leaves hospital'. That was one of the first things I saw."


So I never heard of this story until another tpf'er corrected me a few days ago. I have to say this is outrageous and I completely understand their feelings here. I can't imagine being parents for the first time and having that excitement tainted by this disgusting act of blatant racism.
I wish they'd taken him to court, rather than spent time on the letter to TM. This is the kind of thing that should have been escalated so that nobody dared cross that line again.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Did he expand on what things were said that weren’t true?


----------



## CarryOn2020

In my unpopular opinion, all of this is really about Andi, Hazzi’s godfather.  Sarah has most likely put her foot in it, too.  Remember, Eug is a friend of Markus, too.  Clearly, they all are  *very* jealous of Charles and William’s inheritance. The money, the power, the respect [whatever is left]. They will continue to be a thorn in the side of the reigning monarch. In their sick delusions, they seem to enjoy bringing it all down or at least embarrassing QE and Charles. Do we know why Eug showed up for the Froggy Halloween party with Jack and Markus in tow? One last night of fun? I call BS on that. What about the happy Cali bike ride?   IIRC at the time they said it was due to her art museum hosting some event.  BS, again. In a perfect world, Eug would turn on H&M, spill the tea, etc.  As the coronation gets nearer, I expect they all will become very noisy.  Just my 2 cents.



justwatchin said:


> Did he expand on what things were said that weren’t true?


Dunno. I did not and will not watch his ego-trip.


----------



## xincinsin

jblended said:


> This is maybe the 3rd time it's been noted that they walk around barefoot. I'm struggling to see the significance of this? Did they have to escape the palace because they were forcing them to wear shoes?


Wasn't the hungry nanny of the smoking heater in South Africa called Lauren? Is this Lorren the same nanny?


----------



## pomeline

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5671355


Could they replace his title with Duke of Bell End...? Although I don't want to insult the people living in that area.
I sincerely think someone with connections to the court should put a word in for KCIII to remove Sussex titles and declare that they'll be now known as Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. I know, it's cruel towards the good people of Dumbarton but it would be way better than letting them keep their Sussex title or to have M be called Princess H. In any case, the king should declare he's replacing the title with another one since the current one "has caused so much mental anguish and distress for the couple". Actually, do they have to be Earl and Countess...? Baron of... well the king can take a pick from any of the names listed here:

https://www.countryfile.com/go-outdoors/10-of-britains-rudest-and-funniest-place-names/

I am personally in favour of Baron and Baroness of B****field. Funny that you cannot write that name here (God I hate such nanny filters) and it really is an actual place name! Sh***erton is another strong candidate IMO.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Wasn't the hungry nanny of the smoking heater in South Africa called Lauren? Is this Lorren the same nanny?


Yes the nanny that was snacking in the kitchen while Rome burned


----------



## marietouchet

millivanilli said:


> Episode 46:48 shows the photo of the wedding with the whole family and it really hit me like a blow: the royalty of the family is not in looking particularly good or being beautifully dressed or being particularly decked out, it's in standing back in such a way that the other person particularly shines in the spotlight. Look at Catherine (who I like, in part, because we share the same first name) - and try to find her in the picture. THAT is what I call noble. Everyone is taking a back seat so Meghan can shine. (her mother not so much now, but everyone else very much so). For me, this is aristrocracy in action.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671338


Interesting how Doria and the Queen both wore the same light green color


----------



## piperdog

gracekelly said:


> Personally, I prefer the yachting connection. Maybe the press was being clever with a double entendre lololol!


American here and I took P45 as a reference to our 45th President - who seems to share many character traits with M. I realize that's extremely unlikely, but it still made me laugh.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> Could they replace his title with Duke of Bell End...? Although I don't want to insult the people living in that area.
> I sincerely think someone with connections to the court should put a word in for KCIII to remove Sussex titles and declare that they'll be now known as Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. I know, it's cruel towards the good people of Dumbarton but it would be way better than letting them keep their Sussex title or to have M be called Princess H. In any case, the king should declare he's replacing the title with another one since the current one "has caused so much mental anguish and distress for the couple". Actually, do they have to be Earl and Countess...? Baron of... well the king can take a pick from any of the names listed here:
> 
> https://www.countryfile.com/go-outdoors/10-of-britains-rudest-and-funniest-place-names/
> 
> I am personally in favour of Baron and Baroness of B****field. Funny that you cannot write that name here (God I hate such nanny filters) and it really is an actual place name! Sh***erton is another strong candidate IMO.


I’m partial to HarrySpare.


----------



## pomeline

marietouchet said:


> Interesting how Doria and the Queen both wore the same light green color



Someone claimed green was the Sussex color meaning every family (York, Cambridge etc.) had their own chosen colour and M chose green for Sussex. That's why she was demanding the emerald tiara, the wedding photos were taken in the room with green walls etc. She probably chose the clothes for Doria. Personally I just think the colour is coincidentally a very fitting colour for her to choose since it is often associated to greed, envy, jealousy and poison.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Interesting how Doria and the Queen both wore the same light green color


I’ve always thought that odd. Imo definitely a subtle sign of disrespect. I know the bride’s mother is supposed to choose her colours first, but this is a *royal *wedding. The BRF paid for it,  I thought the Queen’s choice was first.

ETA: Apologies, the British citizens paid for it.


----------



## marietouchet

Apologies, cannot find the link in here, it is like a day back or 4567 posts ago 
Someone recommended the Body Language Panel On YouTube, not OUR BLG but 4 other experts , I skimmed the 2 hr review of the NF videos
These guys are NOT well grounded in the HISTORY of the Harkles. One did not know Diana was UPPER aristocracy. But fresh sets of eyes, nota lot of preconceived ideas. Findings:
1. H has major complex due to loss of his mother, H married a mother substitute
2. The first 3 episodes offered NO PROOF of any of the claims therein.


----------



## CarryOn2020

pomeline said:


> Someone claimed green was the Sussex color meaning every family (York, Cambridge etc.) had their own chosen colour and M chose green for Sussex. That's why she was demanding the emerald tiara, the wedding photos were taken in the room with green walls etc. Personally I just think the colour is coincidentally a very fitting colour for her to choose since it is often associated to greed, envy, jealousy and poison.



QE gave H&M those titles.  Seems like she should have first choice.


----------



## marietouchet

pomeline said:


> Someone claimed green was the Sussex color meaning every family (York, Cambridge etc.) had their own chosen colour and M chose green for Sussex. That's why she was demanding the emerald tiara, the wedding photos were taken in the room with green walls etc. She probably chose the clothes for Doria. Personally I just think the colour is coincidentally a very fitting colour for her to choose since it is often associated to greed, envy, jealousy and poison.


maybe, but in the later years, NO ONE wore the same color as the Queen , it was not done


----------



## pomeline

CarryOn2020 said:


> QE gave H&M those titles.  Seems like she should have first choice.


I agree. I wouldn't be surprised if they had someone spy what colour HM was wearing.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> QE gave H&M those titles.  Seems like she should have first choice.


I don’t think one gets to pick house Colors, it is like Hogwarts, if you do Gryyfindor you better like wine and gold 

Sussex is blue 





						Coat of arms of Sussex - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## pomeline

marietouchet said:


> maybe, but in the later years, NO ONE wore the same color as the Queen , it was not done



Oh absolutely. But M took it as a definite order for her to be forced to wear beige, brown, khaki etc.


----------



## pomeline

marietouchet said:


> I don’t think one gets to pick house Colors, it is like Hogwarts, if you do Gryyfindor you better like wine and gold
> 
> Sussex is blue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coat of arms of Sussex - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.m.wikipedia.org


 Probably not. If they do have colours, they're not coming from their coat of arms either. It's just what someone suggested. That Cambridge is blue, York is red etc. but this was most likely assumptions based on the stones chosen for engagement rings etc. I don't think W & K had a theme colour at their wedding, did they?


----------



## marietouchet

If memory serves … in the days of QEII, Queen Mum and Margaret … I think there were prescribed colors for events, they wore blue, I think, for christenings. White for Parliament. 
It is all about being coordinated for the pictures. 
The Wales all wore blue jeans for their Xmas snap.
But anyone could have called Angela for a heads up on the Queens dress color for the wedding. Clashing shades of green are bad in snaps.


----------



## sdkitty

apologize if this has already been posted.....who sued who here?  they are acting like they were the defendants








						Prince Harry Says Meghan Markle Suffered Miscarriage From Legal Case Against U.K. Tabloid
					

Prince Harry made the tragic claim during the second volume of the Netflix docuseries Harry & Meghan, released Thursday.




					people.com


----------



## Helventara

For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!






https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html


----------



## marietouchet

A fun game.  THE BLAME game, who and what have they blamed in the NF series, please add to list
1. NOT themselves
2. RACE became issue only when MM went to the UK
3. QEII, KC3, W - at Sandringham summit
4. THE FIRM - leaked MM peccadillos so that stories about X would disappear from tabloids. X = Andrew ?
5. LACK OF PROTECTION by FIRM from tabloids, paps. See items 4 and 6.
6. PAPS

It seems like the Wives of Windsor were not mentioned ??? Correct me if I am wrong.


----------



## marietouchet

pomeline said:


> Oh absolutely. But M took it as a definite order for her to be forced to wear beige, brown, khaki etc.


But, if she was not going to inquire about others dresses and defer to them, she was left with neutrals


----------



## Icyjade

pomeline said:


> Oh absolutely. But M took it as a definite order for her to be forced to wear beige, brown, khaki etc.


Why is she blaming others for her stupidity. That’s what PAs are for right? Call other PAs and check the colors that other senior royals are wearing. What’s so hard about that?

They planned their exit for over two years and before the wedding hence all the videos and pics. Let that sink in before you think about that expensive wedding and what she previously said about it. And the Frogmore Cottage renovations. And all the expensive dresses she wore (that looked like sacks but cost a bomb).


----------



## pomeline

marietouchet said:


> A fun game.  THE BLAME game, who and what have they blamed in the NF series, please add to list
> 1. NOT themselves
> 2. RACE became issue only when MM went to the UK
> 3. QEII, KC3, W - at Sandringham summit
> 4. THE FIRM - leaked MM peccadillos so that stories about X would disappear from tabloids. X = Andrew ?
> 5. LACK OF PROTECTION by FIRM from tabloids, paps. See items 4 and 6.
> 6. PAPS
> 
> It seems like the Wives of Windsor were not mentioned ??? Correct me if I am wrong.



Wasn't Kate accused of being cold? Wouldn't hug M. I know she has been blamed many times in other interviews but here... that's the one I've heard since I'm physically unable to watch it. Fergie wasn't blamed but suddenly didn't teach her how to curtsey. Also, pretty much everyone in Britain was accused of being racist and prejudiced. TM blamed for giving additional heartbreak for M.


----------



## pomeline

marietouchet said:


> But, if she was not going to inquire about others dresses and defer to them, she was left with neutrals


 As if she's ever cared about clashing with other people's sartorial choices.


----------



## sdkitty

so H is doing something - participating in writing of an essay? going to meetings?








						The Future of Conservation Is Taking Shape in Africa
					

In an exclusive essay for HuffPost, Prince Harry, Sen. Chris Coons and former Ethiopian PM Desalegn share a "better path forward" for global environmental efforts.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## bag-mania

pomeline said:


> That reminds me, I'm still waiting for TM to produce the receipts he said he had for paying TW's education etc. I don't know if he'd have those though but no doubt he did pay her through school and got her a car and an apartment. I really would love the Markles to provide clear evidence TW lied about not growing up with them and that she was poor and paid her studies by working.


To be fair it’s been a loooong time since Meghan was a student. Who keeps receipts over 20 years? There may not be any evidence left but I have no doubt he did it because who else would? It’s not like Meghan was going to work to pay for her education. Perish the thought!


----------



## Laila619

Harry is truly even dumber than I thought. His wife didn’t have a miscarriage because of some tabloid stress. She had a miscarriage because she was pushing 40 and was considered advanced maternal age and most likely the fetus wasn’t healthy. It’s unfortunately just a (sad) part of life. He needs to get a grip on reality.


----------



## EverSoElusive

I think myself and a large number of people are this little girl right here when we watch, hear and read their lies


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5671355


I confess I had to Google it but


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671420
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html


The pilot and the security guard are definitely from the same parallel world where the South Africans danced.


Laila619 said:


> Harry is truly even dumber than I thought. His wife didn’t have a miscarriage because of some tabloid stress. She had a miscarriage because she was pushing 40 and was considered advanced maternal age and most likely the fetus wasn’t healthy. It’s unfortunately just a (sad) part of life. He needs to get a grip on reality.


I don't even believe there was a miscarriage. It's fictional as is most of Zedzee's recollections.


----------



## charlottawill

piperdog said:


> American here and I took P45 as a reference to our 45th President - who seems to share many character traits with M. I realize that's extremely unlikely, but it still made me laugh.


Same.


----------



## youngster

So, this is what I've learned this morning:
1. The two of them were so amazing at being royals, they were kicked out due to jealousy.
2. Will was upset with Harry and yelled at him at the Sandringham meeting over Megexit.
(These 2 separate statements don't make any sense.  They were forced to leave due to jealousy yet Will was upset and didn't want him to leave. So, which was it?)

3. They blame Meghan's miscarriage on the press.
(This is ridiculous. Nobody knows what causes a miscarriage. But she was around 40 which would have been enough reason right there.)

4. The Queen sat at the Sandringham meeting and didn't say much.
(Maybe she had more important matters on her mind, like Prince Philip, or maybe she was feeling unwell which would not be unusual for a lady in her 90's.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671420
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html



H&M had no idea that she as an American activist may not feel welcome?  Even Oprah&Gayle didn’t realise?  Did H&M really expect the BRF to drop all protocol, all rules of decorum, all procedures?   Wow, that is next level delusional, imo.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> I don't even believe there was a miscarriage. It's fictional as is most of Zedzee's recollections.


Exactly. More like the surrogate’s IVF didn’t take.


----------



## charlottawill

Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671420
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html


Collapsed into a security guard's arms?  "I tried so hard!...I know you did ma'am, I know you did". 

Seriously? Diana's stepgrandmother Barbara Cartland is laughing from her grave.


----------



## CarryOn2020

It is possible that, *being a z lister*, she did not understand the threat that A listers live with every day.  It is possible. 
Note the tear, left eye:


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yet they still insisted on the multi-million dollar wedding


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

Have a great day, all.  I’ve got shopping to do 

American media goes cold on Harry and Meghan: Fox says they're on track to become 'most hated royals ever', NBC slams couple for taking 'no responsibility' for royal rift and CNN says palace must respond to 'very serious' allegations​
*The final three episodes of Harry and Meghan's Netflix series aired this morning*
*They make serious allegations of bullying and jealousy against the Royal family *
*American media, which had reserved some sympathy for them, is now turned off*
*CNN royal correspondent Max Foster said the Palace 'must' respond now *
*Fox said the couple are on track to be more hated than the Duke of Windsor and Wallis Simpson *
*








						American media turns on Harry and Meghan with finale of Netflix show
					

Fox news columnist Lee Cohen said they were on track to become 'the most hated royals' ever and that Harry was following in the footsteps of 'the reviled' Duke of Windsor.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				



*


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sitting at the ER where I dropped off my cancer-stricken friend (sadly it's below freezing point uin the car where I am because non-patients are banned)...I looked for a specific article claiming Ghoul's lawyer has proof for her mistreatment on Facebook so I could comment "As if", and found a stan account instead.

I shouldn't be so shocked, but I am. The lying liars who lie were never about privacy. They have no problem exploiting their children or members of the BRF, they just wanted to see significantly more than just 30 pieces of silver. 

All pics from the mockumentary. There was also video footage of the newborn girl.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Also more pictures of Doria with newborn Archie pulling the same stupid face as Ghoul, just not as exaggerated. But, so touched!


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yet they still insisted on the multi-million dollar wedding



Whatever Meghan wants, Meghan gets!!

Her wedding to Trevor was one of those multi day destination affairs in the Caribbean. Surely her wedding to a PRINCE deserved to be celebrated to its fullest.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## jelliedfeels

sdkitty said:


> so if viewership is high, does it matter whether people like them?


Those numbers seem way different from the last one. I think they are definitely fiddling the numbers so it’s a higher number than tiger king which got 38mill on its premier alone. 
I mean I can believe there are at least a million YouTube comment channels and daily mail reporters hate watching it for content but more than that….. 


millivanilli said:


> Episode 46:48 shows the photo of the wedding with the whole family and it really hit me like a blow: the royalty of the family is not in looking particularly good or being beautifully dressed or being particularly decked out, it's in standing back in such a way that the other person particularly shines in the spotlight. Look at Catherine (who I like, in part, because we share the same first name) - and try to find her in the picture. THAT is what I call noble. Everyone is taking a back seat so Meghan can shine. (her mother not so much now, but everyone else very much so). For me, this is aristrocracy in action.
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671338


Doris stood right next to the couple while everyone else is so spaced out has got me thinking ‘there are 3 of us in this marriage’


jblended said:


> So I never heard of this story until another tpf'er corrected me a few days ago. I have to say this is outrageous and I completely understand their feelings here. I can't imagine being parents for the first time and having that excitement tainted by this disgusting act of blatant racism.
> I wish they'd taken him to court, rather than spent time on the letter to TM. This is the kind of thing that should have been escalated so that nobody dared cross that line again.


The crusty DJ’s tweet is really bad but again the story doesn’t make sense.
H really wants us to believe in the precious first days after his baby was born he was checking some yewtree dodger’s Twitter? Sure….

I think a lot of people at the time were questioning why they sued the press over misrepresenting the cost of the cottage renovations but not this or the other few articles that get trotted out time and time again as obvious proof of a press wide racist campaign against them.

Quite honestly if you spend long enough sifting the  internet you can find some horrible prejudiced statement but what’s galling is they represent this as the majority. they are desperate to find hate because that apparently justifies all their lies, manipulation and selfishness.

I remember someone said people are addicted to bad news and anger and I think this is even truer of H&M than anyone else


pomeline said:


> Could they replace his title with Duke of Bell End...? Although I don't want to insult the people living in that area.
> I sincerely think someone with connections to the court should put a word in for KCIII to remove Sussex titles and declare that they'll be now known as Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. I know, it's cruel towards the good people of Dumbarton but it would be way better than letting them keep their Sussex title or to have M be called Princess H. In any case, the king should declare he's replacing the title with another one since the current one "has caused so much mental anguish and distress for the couple". Actually, do they have to be Earl and Countess...? Baron of... well the king can take a pick from any of the names listed here:
> 
> https://www.countryfile.com/go-outdoors/10-of-britains-rudest-and-funniest-place-names/
> 
> I am personally in favour of Baron and Baroness of B****field. Funny that you cannot write that name here (God I hate such nanny filters) and it really is an actual place name! Sh***erton is another strong candidate IMO.


Not only that, here in the U.K. you can still pick these up at the supermarket though they might not be so popular stateside


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> Collapsed into a security guard's arms? "I tried so hard!...I know you did ma'am, I know you did".
> 
> *Seriously? Diana's stepgrandmother Barbara Cartland is laughing from her grave.*



Thank you for this!  Romance novel stuff.


----------



## Chanbal

_There's 'NO WAY BACK' for Harry and Meghan after Netflix series, says former Royal correspondent_​


----------



## Lounorada

Thanks to all for sharing all the bits of info from this Propagandamentary! I don't have Netflix (never will) and am avoiding any videos of it shared around social media, so it's interesting to see what is said on here 



papertiger said:


> *"We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us"*








needlv said:


> *OMG Harry claimed they offered to renounce the Sussex title as part of negotiations for megxit.*
> 
> The BRF just needs to issue a statement saying
> 
> “We note the offer from the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to renounce their Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles and we gratefully accept.  They shall be known as the Earl and Countess of Dumbarton.
> 
> PS For everything else - recollections may vary”


Hey, JCMH...





jblended said:


> This is maybe the 3rd time it's been noted that they walk around barefoot. I'm struggling to see the significance of this? *Did they have to escape the palace because they were forcing them to wear shoes?*








CarryOn2020 said:


>





OMG, how terrible for you JCMH. Imagine having to face the consequences of your own selfish, vindictive, horrible actions. It's just unbearble to think of. All the tragedies and injustice in the world just doesn't compare to this unfair treatment of you Princess Hairy.
*insert extreme sarcasm* 


Is he for f**king real? These two are so mentally disturbed, toxic and delusional it's actually unbelievable.




jblended said:


> This is the furthest from documenting reality you can come. It is propaganda. And very compelling at that! Emotive music, happy family pictures, a forbidden love won against all odds, a brilliant narrative...until you realise that it's full of false claims, unfounded allegations, and those peeks into the family album were won by the highest bidder.
> 
> And isn't it oh-so-convenient that they had a camera crew with them *to capture them receiving a private text from William after the Oprah interview.* Yup, they're documenting their real lives, nothing was set up there!


Did they actually reveal what was said in the the message?



Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671420
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html





Cute story Rachel, shame I don't believe a single word of it.
The guy saying 'we appreciate everything you did for our country', like what exactly sir? They did feck all work for 2 years and then quit when they couldn't get what they wanted or do things how they wanted.
Both the pilot and security man are characters in her fantasy story- a figment of her imagination.
Then her claiming them quitting their jobs after fleecing the British nation of 10's of millions of pounds for an over the top wedding with all the trimmings and running off to America to become celebrities was a '_sacrifice_'...


----------



## bag-mania

Oh TMZ, is this really what you got out of the series?


----------



## jelliedfeels

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sitting at the ER where I dropped off my cancer-stricken friend (sadly it's below freezing point uin the car where I am because non-patients are banned)...I looked for a specific article claiming Ghoul's lawyer has proof for her mistreatment on Facebook so I could comment "As if", and found a stan account instead.
> 
> I shouldn't be so shocked, but I am. The lying liars who lie were never about privacy. They have no problem exploiting their children or members of the BRF, they just wanted to see significantly more than just 30 pieces of silver.
> 
> All pics from the mockumentary. There was also video footage of the newborn girl.
> 
> View attachment 5671474
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671475
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671476
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671477
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671479
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671480
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671481
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671482





QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also more pictures of Doria with newborn Archie pulling the same stupid face as Ghoul, just not as exaggerated. But, so touched!
> 
> View attachment 5671484


I mean they aren’t even trying to make it look like the same baby anymore.

I’m sorry to hear about your friend I hope it goes well. 


bag-mania said:


> Oh TMZ, is this really what you got out of the series?
> 
> View attachment 5671498


Yes she’s right - Omid.
He thinks if he puts on the wig Harry won’t notice the difference.


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I confess I had to Google it but


So did I and then I felt silly that I hadn’t figured it out on my own.


----------



## youngster

So, did I read this correctly?  *Harry said that they were planning their departure for 2 years?*   That would mean they were planning to leave *prior to the wedding*.  
I mean, we all speculated on this thread that this was the case but he actually confirmed it. 

Which makes everything they say about what happened during their few months of being actual working royals a whole load of nonsense.  Wow, how awful and manipulative.


----------



## bubablu

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also more pictures of Doria with newborn Archie pulling the same stupid face as Ghoul, just not as exaggerated. But, so touched!
> 
> View attachment 5671484


Doria is a much better actress then her daughter, I didn't catch her from the beginning. But now I can see where that crazy stupid clown dancing person has come. She is really scary.


----------



## Pessie

What happened to the very red-headed kid?  The daughter is now blonde?  No wonder they mainly publish photos in black and white.


----------



## marietouchet

bubablu said:


> Doria is a much better actress then her daughter, I didn't catch her from the beginning. But now I can see where that crazy stupid clown dancing person has come. She is really scary.


And according to the DM, Doria and the dogs were on the flight to freedom, which was AFTER the green dress, in the spring after the Sandringham summit 
There was a first FoF when they first went to Canada in the fall


----------



## charlottawill

Are they always barefoot? I guess the Cali girl wants her family to connect with nature:

"What's more, going barefoot outdoors (called "earthing" or "grounding") can even be used as a cathartic form of mindfulness, as it forces you to slow down and be more aware of your environment. "Many people will walk barefoot to be more connected to Mother Nature, and this connectedness can be therapeutic," says Pinker.

All that said, moderation is key. "In theory, barefoot walking is beneficial since it's a more natural way of walking — but if done for longer periods of time, it can lead to problems," says Daniel Cuttica, D.O., a Virginia-based board-certified orthopedic foot and ankle surgeon for the Centers for Advanced Orthopaedics."



> https://www.shape.com/lifestyle/mind-and-body/what-not-wearing-shoes-as-often-is-doing-to-your-feet



And:

Apart from causing an achy body, walking barefoot also *exposes our feet to bacterial and fungal organisms that can infect the skin and nails*. These organisms can lead to infections that change the appearance, odor, and comfort of the foot, such as athlete's foot or fungus.



> https://www.gothamfootcare.com/blog/dangers-of-walking-barefoot/



Which is why I've always practiced shoes off inside, shoes on outside. Unless of course you're at the beach.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yet they still insisted on the multi-million dollar wedding



And while we are on the topic of stuff planned LONG before it was announced … 
Anyone notice the photo of PETITE LILI, the infant in personalized onesie
They planned the name Lilibet way ahead of time …

Why THAT name ??? granny was so mean at the Sandringham Summit ???!???


----------



## bubablu

I didn't watch the f*ckumentary (not mine, from Reddit), just random clips, but I cannot stand Harry's voice anymore, it's so incredibly annoying. 
Funny thing: I really dislike the idea of monarchy and I'm on board to abolish it, if this is what that ridicolous duo wants, but, as others posted in the past, they have the opposite of Mida's touch: they made a joke to be vegetarian, to be animal lovers, against hunting and so on and on.


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Why THAT name ??? granny was so mean at the Sandringham Summit ???!???



I know, right?
Harry hates his family.  Meghan hates his family.  Yet they name the baby after QEII.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> And while we are on the topic of stuff planned LONG before it was announced …
> Anyone notice the photo of PETITE LILI, the infant in personalized onesie
> They planned the name Lilibet way ahead of time …
> 
> Why THAT name ??? granny was so mean at the Sandringham Summit ???!???


I'm sure that was one of her manipulation tactics, i.e., "If we have a daughter I'd love to name her after your grandmother because she's been such an inspiration to the world."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

*Julia Hartley-Brewer's verdict on Harry and Meghan’s Netflix series: ‘Just shut up!"*


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> So, this is what I've learned this morning:
> 1. The two of them were so amazing at being royals, they were kicked out due to jealousy.
> 2. Will was upset with Harry and yelled at him at the Sandringham meeting over Megexit.
> (These 2 separate statements don't make any sense.  They were forced to leave due to jealousy yet Will was upset and didn't want him to leave. So, which was it?)
> 
> 3. They blame Meghan's miscarriage on the press.
> (This is ridiculous. Nobody knows what causes a miscarriage. But she was around 40 which would have been enough reason right there.)
> 
> 4. The Queen sat at the Sandringham meeting and didn't say much.
> (Maybe she had more important matters on her mind, like Prince Philip, or maybe she was feeling unwell which would not be unusual for a lady in her 90's.)


The Queen must have said something at the Sandringham meeting because wasn’t The Queen the one who said to H and TW you’re either in or out, no to half in half out?


----------



## Jayne1

marietouchet said:


> Apologies, cannot find the link in here, it is like a day back or 4567 posts ago
> Someone recommended the Body Language Panel On YouTube, not OUR BLG but 4 other experts , I skimmed the 2 hr review of the NF videos
> These guys are NOT well grounded in the HISTORY of the Harkles. One did not know Diana was UPPER aristocracy. But fresh sets of eyes, nota lot of preconceived ideas. Findings:
> 1. H has major complex due to loss of his mother, H married a mother substitute
> 2. The first 3 episodes offered NO PROOF of any of the claims therein.


Are you talking about the guys who are _not_ the BLG? Because I find the four of them are very confusing and a bit all over the place. Like too many cooks in the kitchen.


----------



## papertiger

Just finished work. Has this been posted?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> _There's 'NO WAY BACK' for Harry and Meghan after Netflix series, says former Royal correspondent_​




"Failure of taste and failure of judgement"

Just about sums their entire Nutfix documentary propa-drama


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sitting at the ER where I dropped off my cancer-stricken friend (sadly it's below freezing point uin the car where I am because non-patients are banned)...I looked for a specific article claiming Ghoul's lawyer has proof for her mistreatment on Facebook so I could comment "As if", and found a stan account instead.
> 
> I shouldn't be so shocked, but I am. The lying liars who lie were never about privacy. They have no problem exploiting their children or members of the BRF, they just wanted to see significantly more than just 30 pieces of silver.
> 
> All pics from the mockumentary. There was also video footage of the newborn girl.
> 
> View attachment 5671474
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671475
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671476
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671477
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671479
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671480
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671481
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671482


I'm sorry about your friend. I hope things get better for them.


----------



## jblended

Lounorada said:


> Did they actually reveal what was said in the the message?


I was only reading the BBC live reports (will never watch the actual thing) and they didn't say what was in the message.
The video clip they posted shows Meg on speakerphone with someone, and Harry walks up to her and shows her a message on his phone. Meg first doesn't know what she's looking at and then she says to the person on the phone "he got a message from his brother."
The commentary accompanying the clip said it was a private text from William when the statement was released from the late Queen saying "recollections may vary." after the Oprah interview. It could have said anything from "Call me" to "PP is dying and you do this?"
For certain, if it said anything actually heated, H&M would have shown the message to the camera that was so conveniently placed to capture this private moment.


marietouchet said:


> Why THAT name ??? granny was so mean at the Sandringham Summit ???!???


Money money money and more money! ka-ching!!

You know what lingers after all this blabbering they've done? His grandmother, his father and his brother all had covid while these two were signing deals with Oprah and Netflix.
At a time when we were in a global lockdown and people were dying in the hundreds of thousands each week, and there was no way of knowing if any of the royal family would survive their covid experience, these two were thinking about $$$.
Their singular focus was their perceived suffering in the form of "mean" media narratives, not the real suffering of their aged and ill family members who had caught a deadly virus.
Such humanitarians. Much empaths. What role models to us all! 

(edited to correct the BBC info. I had gotten a bit wrong)


----------



## marietouchet

Jayne1 said:


> Are you talking about the guys who are _not_ the BLG? Because I find the four of them are very confusing and a bit all over the place. Like too many cooks in the kitchen.


Yes the 4 body language guys are slow, and confusing, but they don’t seem a priori to be MM haters, so, I was interested what they came up, without 5-6 years of backstory/prejudice/axe to grind
None of them found any PROOF of all of the claims made by the Harkles, it wasnt just me, I did not miss it


----------



## papertiger

Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671420
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html



Let's take a step back from the mirror MegZZ

1. You didn't try
2. You failed to impress
3. You've been found out - you have no class 
4. You've been found out -you're a liar 
5. You're not Kathrine


----------



## csshopper

It could change, but as of 10 AM, Pacific Standard Time Netflix stock is down 9.45%.


----------



## Molly0

I wouldn’t watch the Netflix docu ( other than to mark it as “Not For Me”) but in seeing the clips on BBC this morning, I wasn’t sure whether this was a SNL skit or for real.  

Come on Harry!   Hilarious!


----------



## Lodpah

Their handlers will never put them in front of a real journalist because they know they’re so stupid they would be hammered with their lies.

Harry has gone completely mad aided by his manipulative wife.


----------



## youngster

csshopper said:


> It could change, but as of 10 AM, Pacific Standard Time Netflix stock is down 9.45%.



It will be interesting to see what Netflix does.  Will they continue the relationship or axe the contract in the next few months?

I think it will depend on whether they drew viewers to Netflix, did those viewers stick around through all 6 episodes, and did they drive new subscriptions to the platform. Whether they were easy to work with (or difficult) would also be a factor, I'd think.  Reception and reviews would be a factor, especially if there are notable discrepancies from Harry's upcoming book, along with plenty of blowback for things like editing the Queen's speech to change its meaning (which I still can hardly believe they did, except they actually did). *Also, the revelation that they planned Megexit before the wedding is huge, absolutely huge.  I'm shocked they didn't insist on taking that out of the episode.  *A complete theft of UK taxpayer money for that wedding when they had no intention of staying and working as senior royals. 

Also, they covered the last 5 or so years.  No senior royal will go near them now or send them a text message or take a phone call or respond to an email and they likely won't be invited anywhere.  They'll likely be told to stay away from the Coronation, or not invited at all.  Not much new material for them going forward, you'd think Netflix would recognize this.


----------



## K.D.

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Once again picking the glitzy event over the peasants. Click on the link, it will bring you to the perfectly available Insta post.



Does anyone know which was the event they went to instead?


gracekelly said:


> Personally, I prefer the yachting connection. Maybe the press was being clever with a double entendre lololol!


I think Princess P45 could also describe her as the sinking ship of the RF


----------



## kipp

youngster said:


> It will be interesting to see what Netflix does.  Will they continue the relationship or axe the contract in the next few months?
> 
> I think it will depend on whether they drew viewers to Netflix, did those viewers stick around through all 6 episodes, and did they drive new subscriptions to the platform. Whether they were easy to work with (or difficult) would also be a factor, I'd think.  Reception and reviews would be a factor, especially if there are notable discrepancies from Harry's upcoming book, along with plenty of blowback for things like editing the Queen's speech to change its meaning (which I still can hardly believe they did, except they actually did). *Also, the revelation that they planned Megexit before the wedding is huge, absolutely huge.  I'm shocked they didn't insist on taking that out of the episode. *
> 
> Also, they covered the last 5 or so years.  No senior royal will go near them now or send them a text message or take a phone call or respond to an email and they likely won't be invited anywhere.  They'll likely be told to stay away from the Coronation, or not invited at all.  Not much new material for them going forward, you'd think Netflix would recognize this.


Not only this, they won't be welcomed by LA or NY media or actor/actress 'friends' because nothing they say or do with them will be off limits for their grifting for $$$$.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> Their handlers will never put them in front of a real journalist because they know they’re so stupid they would be hammered with their lies.
> 
> Harry has gone completely mad aided by his manipulative wife.


She has set him up and it was not difficult He is taking the fall and she is still the victim. Harry had no problem being mean, duplicitous, conniving and ungrateful  with not only his family, but his entire country and the Commonwealth.  He knowingly had the people foot the bill for millions of pounds for the wedding.  His father was treated like a slush fund to be raided at their whim. Who knows what was really going on with Meghan and her millions of pounds dress budget. The result of all of this is that Harry will never be viewed the same way. He has destroyed himself and I believe  that is exactly what Meghan wantEd. She is the victor. Harry can never go back, or take the children back. He will be a man living in exile and eventually  be deeply unhappy and full of regrets. His children will never know their family or heritage. 

Fascinating that Harry so easily listened to, and planned with a woman that he hardly knew. No wonder he was furious when William suggested that he take the time to know her. She was like the snake in the Garden of Eden. No she was worse.  

William yelled at him?  He should have had deprogrammers on standby for Harry. The Queen was silent?  Aside from being ill herself, and worrying about her husband, she was probably stupefied to hear what Harry wanted to do.


----------



## haute okole

Harry, the poster child of white privilege, is using terms such as “speak power to truth”, tapping his pain away, instutional gaslighting and racism.   I can guarantee none of these terms were even familiar to Harry before Meghan, although the poor little petulant victim was ripe for someone to help him catapult his story to the forefront.  He is a full on, “I will not be ignored” bunny boiler.
“Speak power to truth”.  Hahahah, such a bunch of LA mumbo jumbo and it takes an Angeleno to see this pseudo high minded manipulative shaming.


----------



## gracekelly

K.D. said:


> Does anyone know which was the event they went to instead?
> 
> I think Princess P45 could also describe her as the sinking ship of the RF


Attempted sinking. The monarchy  has a very strong hull. That ship will not be sinking anytime soon.


----------



## Lounorada

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yet they still insisted on the multi-million dollar wedding








jblended said:


> I was only reading the BBC live reports (will never watch the actual thing) and they didn't say what was in the message.
> The video clip they posted shows Meg on speakerphone with someone, and Harry walks up to her and shows her a message on his phone. Meg first doesn't know what she's looking at and then she says to the person on the phone "he got a message from his brother."
> The commentary accompanying the clip said it was a private text from William when the statement was released from the late Queen saying "recollections may vary." after the Oprah interview. It could have said anything from "Call me" to "PP is dying and you do this?"
> *For certain, if it said anything actually heated, H&M would have shown the message to the camera that was so conveniently placed to capture this private moment.*


Thanks for replying!  
I agree with the bold part, if it was anything _obviously _negative or heated they definitely would have milked that and shared it.
Also, William is an intelligent guy (unlike JCMH) and he would no better than to send either of them something in writing (email/text/letter) that they could possibly manipulate and use to gain sympathy or stir hatred. I could see him choosing his words very carefully and having any written correspondence between them remain neutral.


----------



## KEG66

gracekelly said:


> She has set him up and it was not difficult He is taking the fall and she is still the victim. Harry had no problem being mean, duplicitous, conniving and ungrateful  with not only his family, but his entire country and the Commonwealth.  He knowingly had the people foot the bill for millions of pounds for the wedding.  His father was treated like a slush fund to be raided at their whim. Who knows what was really going on with Meghan and her millions of pounds dress budget. The result of all of this is that Harry will never be viewed the same way. He has destroyed himself and I believe  that is exactly what Meghan wantEd. She is the victor. Harry can never go back, or take the children back. He will be a man living in exile and eventually  be deeply unhappy and full of regrets. His children will never know their family or heritage.
> 
> Fascinating that Harry so easily listened to, and planned with a woman that he hardly knew. No wonder he was furious when William suggested that he take the time to know her. She was like the snake in the Garden of Eden. No she was worse.
> 
> William yelled at him?  He should have had deprogrammers on standby for Harry. The Queen was silent?  Aside from being ill herself, and worrying about her husband, she was probably stupefied to hear what Harry wanted to do.


This. But also although it makes me mad it also makes me sad. Oh Harry what have you done !!


----------



## gracekelly

KEG66 said:


> This. But also although it makes me mad it also makes me sad. Oh Harry what have you done !!


Yes I certainly see the sadness in this. Shakespeare had it down in King Lear. At this point Harry was made a tooth necklace for all the royals. 

*How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child*


----------



## K.D.

gracekelly said:


> Attempted sinking. The monarchy  has a very strong hull. That ship will not be sinking anytime soon.


Nono, I mean Zed is the sinking ship


----------



## sdkitty

now he claims he was terrified when his brother yelled at him....what a crock
He is disgusting








						Prince Harry Claims William Screamed And Shouted At Him During His Royal Exit Talks
					

"It was terrifying," the Duke of Sussex said in his Netflix docuseries.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> now he claims he was terrified when his brother yelled at him....what a crock
> He is disgusting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Claims William Screamed And Shouted At Him During His Royal Exit Talks
> 
> 
> "It was terrifying," the Duke of Sussex said in his Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Mommmmmeeee William wants to take back  the toys I stole  from him!


----------



## Lodpah

Oh oh Radar has an article about the drones! They leaked it!! Am at work so can’t post it


----------



## youngster

KEG66 said:


> This. But also although it makes me mad it also makes me sad. Oh Harry what have you done !!



I know. It is actually tremendously sad, what Harry has done.  Diana would be heartbroken to see her boys, who were so close, basically become completely estranged. 

Over what exactly?  I'm still wondering.  If they planned Megexit before the wedding, which they admitted they did, all the things they were so deeply unhappy about _had not actually yet happened.  _

Yes, a few negative stories started popping up in the press in the weeks leading up to the wedding, but it's because she's the one who told Harry she had no family and her family, of course, took exception to that. They spoke to the press in the U.S. and the UK and there wasn't anything anybody could have done to stop them.  Free speech, after all.  I guess that's why Harry thinks our 1st amendment is bonkers.

There was then the issue with Thomas Markle and the pap photos right before the wedding, but that was all on her father and her OTT reaction to it. Prince Charles stepped in to walk her down the aisle which was a lovely thing for him to do.   Otherwise, during their engagement they were universally praised, it was a veritable love-fest, and Samantha Markle was ripped to shreds as a jealous sister.


----------



## rose60610

Wait a minute. Claw stated she "was fed to the wolves" by the Palace. The Palace didn't force her to say in Africa: "Not many people ask me if I'm OK".  Claw fed herself to the wolves. Classic narc trait. Do/say something inflammatory and if it backfires, blame someone else.  She has a solid concrete record of cutting off and burning relationships. Eventually she'll probably turn on her own sugars saying they're not being supportive enough, and the dwindling number of sugars is due to racism.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Mommmmmeeee William wants to take back  the toys I stole  from him!


and poor WIFE was in tears....so vulnerable


----------



## pomeline

Lodpah said:


> Oh oh Radar has an article about the drones! They leaked it!! Am at work so can’t post it



This one...? I hope more media outlets pick this up:

What Meghan & Harry DON’T Want You To Know: Secret LAPD Files Reveal They PLANTED STORIES In Media ‘In Bid To Slam Queen Elizabeth’


----------



## youngster

Do any of you recall the rumors that MM wanted to walk down the aisle at her wedding by herself, and didn't want Prince Charles to step in for her father?

At the time I thought what a lovely thing for Prince Charles to do, I'm sure she is happy he stepped in.  Now, though, I think the rumor is likely true. She knew they were leaving when she walked down that aisle. She knew they had already put wheels in motion with agents and Netflix and publicists.  So, I think she very much wanted the imagery of her walking alone, down the aisle, so she could say that she was totally abandoned, that nobody in the royal family wanted her there or welcomed her.  Fortunately, she didn't get that particular image.  

I can't imagine how betrayed both KC3 and William feel.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## haute okole

rose60610 said:


> Wait a minute. Claw stated she "was fed to the wolves" by the Palace. The Palace didn't force her to say in Africa: "Not many people ask me if I'm OK".  Claw fed herself to the wolves. Classic narc trait. Do/say something inflammatory and if it backfires, blame someone else.  She has a solid concrete record of cutting off and burning relationships. Eventually she'll probably turn on her own sugars saying they're not being supportive enough, and the dwindling number of sugars is due to racism.


Hahaha, Claw!


----------



## Lodpah

haute okole said:


> Hahaha, Claw!
> 
> View attachment 5671609


She can’t keep her story straight now there’s an article that she asked PC to walk her halfway.


----------



## bag-mania

Other married couples begin to look like each other over time, Harry is now sounding exactly like his spouse. “No one ASKED ME” boo hoo!

The Duke explained: “I couldn’t believe it. No one had asked me. No one had asked me permission to put my name to a statement like that. I rang M and I told her and she burst into floods of tearsbecause within four hours they were happy to lie to protect my brother, and yet for three years they were never willing to tell the truth to protect us.”


----------



## rose60610

CarryOn2020 said:


> _*In my unpopular opinion, all of this is really about Andi, Hazzi’s godfather.  Sarah has most likely put her foot in it, too.  Remember, Eug is a friend of Markus, too.  Clearly, they all are  very jealous of Charles and William’s inheritance. *_The money, the power, the respect [whatever is left]. They will continue to be a thorn in the side of the reigning monarch. In their sick delusions, they seem to enjoy bringing it all down or at least embarrassing QE and Charles. Do we know why Eug showed up for the Froggy Halloween party with Jack and Markus in tow? One last night of fun? I call BS on that. What about the happy Cali bike ride?   IIRC at the time they said it was due to her art museum hosting some event.  BS, again. In a perfect world, Eug would turn on H&M, spill the tea, etc.  As the coronation gets nearer, I expect they all will become very noisy.  Just my 2 cents.
> 
> 
> Dunno. I did not and will not watch his ego-trip.



Well, it isn't as though there isn't a thousand years of history in how these things work. Charles and William are first borns to inherit the throne. Suck it up and STFU. What do Andy, Eug, Harry etc bring to the table? Only their whiny spoiled a$$es.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Over what exactly?  I'm still wondering.  If they planned Megexit before the wedding, which they admitted they did, all the things *they were so deeply unhappy about *_*had not actually yet happened.  *_
> 
> Yes, a few negative stories started popping up in the press in the weeks leading up to the wedding, but it's because she's the one who told Harry she had no family and her family, of course, took exception to that. They spoke to the press in the U.S. and the UK and there wasn't anything anybody could have done to stop them.  Free speech, after all.  I guess that's why Harry thinks our 1st amendment is bonkers.
> 
> There was then the issue with Thomas Markle and the pap photos right before the wedding, but that was all on her father and her OTT reaction to it. Prince Charles stepped in to walk her down the aisle which was a lovely thing for him to do.   Otherwise, during their engagement they were universally praised, it was a veritable love-fest, and Samantha Markle was ripped to shreds as a jealous sister.


Now it is looking like they were creating reasons to leave and nothing happened organically. All these situations were self created and/or taken advantage of.  She never wanted her father at the wedding because he didn't fit the Hollywood image of the father of the bride like Michael Middleton did.  The pap photos were set up to discredit TM and it worked beautifully.  She DID want to walk down the aisle herself and I suspect that TQ prevented that one and the clap back to TQ was the whiter and white dress and the veil.  Not only did KC3 foil her plans to walk alone, he compounded it by suggesting the AA Anglican Bishop and the AA choir.  I think she was furious with that underneath it all.  The Hollywood types were invited so it would pave the way for her triumphant return.  A return that was really a joke because she was never A or B list in the first place.

 Everything was working against them in a way because Meghan was praised and accepted and that didn't work with the plan so the only thing to do at that point was use racism for everything that they could.

I am more convinced than ever that they never really lived at Frog Cot.  It was a money pit that never had to happen.  They certainly were not there when she supposedly went into labor with Archie.

They have both been caught up in so many lies it is a full time job debunking them. Did they believe that they wouldn't be caught?  Saying it is "their truth" would be enough of an explanation?  They really guessed wrong with that.  The better question is whether the Netflix people knew what they were doing and went along with it just to get a sensationalist series that would garner ratings.  Every person who worked on it on the production end, better have some good excuses when they are questioned.


----------



## bag-mania

Lodpah said:


> She can’t keep her story straight now there’s an article that she asked PC to walk her halfway.


Thank goodness Charles walked her down the aisle. They would have presented it in the show as a huge (and possibly racist) slight to Meghan if he hadn’t.


----------



## charlottawill

jblended said:


> It could have said anything from "Call me" to "PP is dying and you do this?"
> For certain, if it said anything actually heated, H&M would have shown the message to the camera that was so conveniently placed to capture this private moment.


Exactly. And William is smart enough to know not to text anything that could be used against him.


----------



## gracekelly

pomeline said:


> This one...? I hope more media outlets pick this up:
> 
> What Meghan & Harry DON’T Want You To Know: Secret LAPD Files Reveal They PLANTED STORIES In Media ‘In Bid To Slam Queen Elizabeth’


Every time the late Queen is slammed, it is another nail in their coffin.  In death, she is even more untouchable than she was in life.


----------



## charlottawill

haute okole said:


> Harry, the poster child of white privilege, is using terms such as “speak power to truth”, tapping his pain away, instutional gaslighting and racism.   I can guarantee none of these terms were even familiar to Harry before Meghan, although the poor little petulant victim was ripe for someone to help him catapult his story to the forefront.  He is a full on, “I will not be ignored” bunny boiler.
> “Speak power to truth”.  Hahahah, such a bunch of LA mumbo jumbo and it takes an Angeleno to see this pseudo high minded manipulative shaming.


And it may not just have been MM. If Doria spent any amount of time with them she was likely involved in the brainwashing too. I don't think she's as innocent as originally thought.


----------



## Lodpah

They know they’re done. They were desperate to edit the series when QE passed. I think the celebrities, etc. know better than to invite these two ingrates to any important events.

Wonder who will pay them millions to speak or appear?


----------



## sgj99

Harry may have been able to mend fences with the family and rehabilitate his reputation with the press once the marriage fails.  But that ship has now sailed.  He really screwed himself.


----------



## Lodpah

charlottawill said:


> And it may not just have been MM. If Doria spent any amount of time with them she was likely involved in the brainwashing too. I don't think she's as innocent as originally thought.


I never thought she was innocent in any of this, from the beginning.


----------



## Lounorada

sdkitty said:


> now he claims he was terrified when his brother yelled at him....what a crock
> He is disgusting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Claims William Screamed And Shouted At Him During His Royal Exit Talks
> 
> 
> "It was terrifying," the Duke of Sussex said in his Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Terrifying? William?


They could at least try and make these fake stories sound even a tiny bit believable.

This statement by him just goes to show that:
1) JCMH is extremely dumb and hasn't a clue what the meaning of the majority of words in the English dictionary actually are. A dictionary would be a great Christmas for him this year. William, terrifying?! That's hilarious!

2) How sheltered and protected a life he has lived up until now. He is experiencing the big bad real world for the first time as a nearly 40 year old man-child. He must be terrified  So what if William yelled at you, you little imbecile. You deserved it and much more. William was doing what you should have been doing also- _actually _protecting his family and standing up for them while being attacked by one of their own and the narcissist he married.

This victim complex that they live by is extremely toxic and tiring to witness. I pity anyone who has to spend time around them a lot, it must be physically and mentally draining. I can't imagine them ever having any normal, down-to-earth conversations like normal human beings.
I know that's the way I felt when I worked at my old job with a boss who was a narcissist, she was very similar to TW.
She was insufferable to be around, the over-inflated ego and the delusions of grandeur were _unbelievable_!


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> They know they’re done. They were desperate to edit the series when QE passed. I think the celebrities, etc. know better than to invite these two ingrates to any important events.
> 
> Wonder who will pay them millions to speak or appear?


I wish someone would pay them millions to disappear.


----------



## sgj99

And they were planning their exit before the wedding???  After the British taxpayers paid for that huge and expensive event?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

charlottawill said:


> I wish someone would pay them millions to disappear.


They would just take the money and then renege on the deal.


----------



## CobaltBlu

A.Aryani has the receipts. There are five or six messages in the thread, originally posted on IG. 
All the IG tea is here https://www.instagram.com/stories/emiliehrh/2993854718590807595/


----------



## charlottawill

sgj99 said:


> And they were planning their exit before the wedding???  After the British taxpayers paid for that huge and expensive event?


She made it known that she wanted to marry an Englishman, but I don't think she ever said she actually wanted to live in England. It would have been interesting if in the engagement interview she had been asked if she was looking forward to settling down and raising a family in England. William can rest easy in the knowledge that he was right in advising Hazy to proceed cautiously. What a dumb*ss.


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> She made it known that she wanted to marry an Englishman, but I don't think she ever said she actually wanted to live in England. It would have been interesting if in the engagement interview she had been asked if she was looking forward to settling down and raising a family in England. William can rest easy in the knowledge that he was right in advising Hazy to proceed cautiously. What a dumb*ss.


She proclaimed before the wedding that she would become a citizen of the UK.  Total lie.


----------



## papertiger

papertiger said:


> Just finished work. Has this been posted?




I know it looks like I'm quoting myself but I'm commenting on Lady C

This episode should be called "Uncovering the Advent Calendar of H&M's Lies before Christmas". I think we reached #65 by the end.


----------



## LittleStar88

She’s got rhythm, y’all!


----------



## gracekelly

Lilacgal said:


> "Institutional" beige



Of course they did, just like they forced to furnish the house in beige.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Handbag1234 said:


> When couples say ‘we’re pregnant’ it really grinds my gears. Although if the speculation is true- neither were  in fact pregnant….



OMG same. No, you don't suddenly share bodily functions.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> This episode should be called "Uncovering the Advent Calendar of H&M's Lies"


You'd have to start right after Easter to fit them all in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> I'm only just starting to look into what pearls of wisdom were revealed in the last three episodes. I think one of the most outrageous claims must be *"We did a better job and were outshining everyone so they ousted us"*. Really? You did a better job than the queen?? All I can remember was fashion disasters, protocol faux pas and acting like two idiots.



They said that? WTFFF.



Handbag1234 said:


> The best ‘revelation’ they can serve up so far is Beyoncé emailed TW.
> 
> It feels like ‘notes for my therapist’ so far. (Not watching btw but following bbc coverage). Just like always, lots of claims and no receipts.



I mean, Michelle O also had lunch with her. Not.



pomeline said:


> 'I blame the Mail for the miscarriage' and other bombshells from Netflix's Harry & Meghan finale



Sorry, but...not only do I think this miscarriage never happened, there are women experiencing real trauma, often including physical strain (like having to flee a war by foot) and they don't miscarry. Stop the ridiculousness.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry, but...not only do I think this miscarriage never happened, there are women experiencing real trauma, often including physical strain (like having to flee a war by foot) and they don't miscarry. Stop the ridiculousness.


Since when is getting your monthly period a miscarriage?


----------



## bellecate

charlottawill said:


> Collapsed into a security guard's arms?  "I tried so hard!...I know you did ma'am, I know you did".
> 
> Seriously? Diana's stepgrandmother Barbara Cartland is laughing from her grave.


And then a tear came out of his left eye.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html



Aaand more things that never happened. Well, maybe the dramatic fake collapse.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yet they still insisted on the multi-million dollar wedding




Gosh. Ask for that freaking money back. These jerks.

ETA: but also, if they planned their exit months before the wedding, when did they have time to be the best royals of all times?


----------



## sdkitty

well if the ladies from the view are any indication, there's still plenty of support for the two grifters.  today they unanimously said meghan was obviously very hurt and sufferend from racism both from the RF and the press.  no one answered to say the RF gave her that huge wedding.  Sunny of course was the most adament about Meghan's suffering.  Joy and Alyssa kinda mentioned that they don't really want privacy but quickly jumped to Meghan was definitely a victim of racism.
Whoopi had nothing to say - didn't watch their "documentary"


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cinderlala

K.D. said:


> Nono, I mean Zed is the sinking ship


Every time I see this I misread it as "stinking ship" and I cannot stop laughing.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

jelliedfeels said:


> I mean they aren’t even trying to make it look like the same baby anymore.



To be fair, one is Archie and one is the other one. Archie is significantly cuter (yes, I do feel mean typing this).



jelliedfeels said:


> I’m sorry to hear about your friend I hope it goes well.



Thank you!


----------



## Chanbal

These entitled ****s!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bubablu said:


> Doria is a much better actress then her daughter, I didn't catch her from the beginning. But now I can see where that crazy stupid clown dancing person has come. She is really scary.



Yeah, I tend to agree. I didn't have a negative opinion for the longest time - because she was smart enough and kept her mouth shut. Now there are so many red flags I can't unsee.

Also, I noticed the oh so touched face at the wedding before anything had even happened (IIRC correctly bride wasn't even there yet) but told myself off for being a Grinch as people tend to be emotional at weddings - just usually not before the ceremony even starts.


----------



## kipp

In case this hasn't been posted before, this is worth a read from The Times


			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

This guy is inspired!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> This one...? I hope more media outlets pick this up:
> 
> What Meghan & Harry DON’T Want You To Know: Secret LAPD Files Reveal They PLANTED STORIES In Media ‘In Bid To Slam Queen Elizabeth’



I have no words.


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Sorry, but...not only do I think this miscarriage never happened, there are women experiencing real trauma, often including physical strain (like having to flee a war by foot) and they don't miscarry. Stop the ridiculousness.


Yet I am listening to talking heads on an afternoon soft news show who are very sympathetic to her plight. One of the women believes the pressure of relentless media scrutiny could contribute to a miscarriage. I agree with you but is interesting to hear the "other side". It shows that there a lot of people out there who are buying what they're selling.


----------



## purseinsanity

Laila619 said:


> Harry is truly even dumber than I thought. His wife didn’t have a miscarriage because of some tabloid stress. *She had a miscarriage *because she was pushing 40 and was considered advanced maternal age and most likely the fetus wasn’t healthy. It’s unfortunately just a (sad) part of life. He needs to get a grip on reality.


I still am skeptical she even really had one, TBH.  It had great timing for their saga.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Other married couples begin to look like each other over time, Harry is now sounding exactly like his spouse. “No one ASKED ME” boo hoo!
> 
> The Duke explained: “I couldn’t believe it. No one had asked me. No one had asked me permission to put my name to a statement like that. I rang M and I told her and she burst into floods of tearsbecause within four hours they were happy to lie to protect my brother, and yet for three years they were never willing to tell the truth to protect us.”



What statement is he referring to? And which lie?


----------



## DoggieBags

These Netflix viewership numbers are before the Harkles mockumentary Was released. It will be interesting to see the Netflix viewership numbers for the current quarter which will include the Harkles. This quarter’s numbers will be reported next year. I wonder if the Harkles met the viewership targets Netflix promised its‘ ad buyers?


----------



## youngster

kipp said:


> In case this hasn't been posted before, this is worth a read from The Times
> 
> 
> archive.ph



Really excellent piece in The Times.  

_H&M complain furiously that nobody wanted Meghan at the Sandringham Summit, and for once, I share her pain and fury. How was she supposed to record a private meeting for public consumption and personal gain if they wouldn’t even let her through the door? A lawyer adds: “Not that she would have done that and to suggest otherwise is untrue and grossly defamatory.” Either way, the last few years have been so stressful that only an appointment with a guided meditation instructor could help. “Your work is not to prove your goodness,” she tells them, and having watched six hours of their work, I can confirm that it has not. Meghan talks about the sacrifices she made for this country and wistful music plays. Sentence of the series goes to Harry, who credits “another amazing friend who we’ve never met”, and in London, the Sussex Survivors’ Club wonder if never meeting H&M was perhaps the best, indeed only, way to be their friend._


----------



## scarlet555

sdkitty said:


> well if the ladies from the view are any indication, there's still plenty of support for the two grifters.  today they unanimously said meghan was obviously very hurt and sufferend from racism both from the RF and the press.  no one answered to say the RF gave her that huge wedding.  Sunny of course was the most adament about Meghan's suffering.  Joy and Alyssa kinda mentioned that they don't really want privacy but quickly jumped to Meghan was definitely a victim of racism.
> Whoopi had nothing to say - didn't watch their "documentary"


Whoopi with nothing to say ?????- well that sums it up... she's always putting her foot in her mouth lately, so I can only imagine if she were to agree that would be something else, bust since she didn't agree-makes me think she deosn't agree with what was said ... and she didn't watch it?  no one on the panel watches it, they have people telling them what's on it.


----------



## Chanbal

Very good video!


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will be MOANING for the next 20 years, says Kelvin MacKenzie_​


----------



## sdkitty

scarlet555 said:


> Whoopi with nothing to say ?????- well that sums it up... she's always putting her foot in her mouth lately, so I can only imagine if she were to agree that would be something else, bust since she didn't agree-makes me think she deosn't agree with what was said ... and she didn't watch it?  no one on the panel watches it, they have people telling them what's on it.


IDK for sure they watch it but Alyssa (the conservative) seems to find it very entertaining and/or interesting.  Whoopi has been pretty neutral on these two all along - not like Sunny who is adamantly team Meghan and Sarah who is next-most a fan.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Receipts from the fact checkers and press are streaming in … The analogy to the car crash Panorama interview is chilling 

Watching felt exhausting but Harry and Meghan's claims haven't caused the earthquake some expected | UK News | Sky News









						Watching felt exhausting but Harry and Meghan's claims haven't caused the earthquake some expected
					

The Sussexes have made claims in their docuseries that are hard for the public on the outside to judge. But Sky's royal correspondent Rhiannon Mills had a front row seat for some of them, and here, she gives her view.




					news.sky.com


----------



## Chanbal

You tell them Piers!


----------



## needlv

There’s an instagram user called emiliehrh who has a story which posts the source and confirmation of “MM made Kate cry” story.

She said it was one of the dress fitting assistants named Victiria who was overheard telling the story at lunch to her friends.  The press sat on it for four months and only published after Melissa T quit working for MM and H (ie Melissa confirmed it).  Jessica Mulroney also confirmed it but she was tricked into doing so.

So the press ran the story.

It wasn’t leaked by William and Catherine Or their press /PR people.  So three sources confirmed the story.  And now they have been named.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> To be fair, one is Archie and one is the other one. Archie is significantly cuter (yes, I do feel mean typing this).
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you!


archie is cuter than Lili?  we have hardly seen any pics of her.  I think it's too early to tell.  So far from what I've seen (and admittedly I'm biased) Will & Kate's kids are cuter, esp Charlotte.  But we see a lot of great pics taken by their mom.


----------



## EverSoElusive

Chanbal said:


> These entitled ****s!



They had free accommodation and they are complaining??   Frogmore Cottage is a cottage too. So why are they so keen on keeping it if a cottage is seemingly beneath them and not very glamorous or regal?

Frankly, who wouldn't believe that Nottingham Cottage is a cottage? It is in the name itself and people can easily Google it, which they will likely find some photos. 


Also, am I the only person who found it strange that Z-list could act silly and dance away if she was so tortured by the BRF, courtiers and the media?


----------



## needlv




----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> archie is cuter than Lili?  we have hardly seen any pics of her.  I think it's too early to tell.  So far from what I've seen (and admittedly I'm biased) Will & Kate's kids are cuter, esp Charlotte.  But we see a lot of great pics taken by their mom.


Based on the few seemingly heavily doctored photos that were shared of  Invisibet for her first birthday, I too tend to think that Archie is cuter. I might also have used the word 'ugly' when I first saw those birthday shots. Sorry, not sorry but not all babies are created equal. However, it is more unfortunate that these kids have crazy parents who are pathological liars


----------



## bubablu

purseinsanity said:


> I still am skeptical she even really had one, TBH.  It had great timing for their saga.


I think farce could be a better way to define this thing.


----------



## sdkitty

EverSoElusive said:


> Based on the few seemingly heavily doctored photos that were shared of  Invisibet for her first birthday, I too tend to think that Archie is cuter. I might also have used the word 'ugly' when I first saw those birthday shots. Sorry, not sorry but not all babies are created equal. However, it is more unfortunate that these kids have crazy parents who are pathological liars


but cute kids can be less attractive when they get older and vice versa....time will tell


----------



## CobaltBlu

William and Kate lived in Nottingham Cottage. Not sure why Harry would say he didn’t know who lived there before.  Maybe he was high.


----------



## EverSoElusive

sdkitty said:


> but cute kids can be less attractive when they get older and vice versa....time will tell


That is true. I was an ugly duckling when I was a child, not so much anymore


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> There’s an instagram user called emiliehrh who has a story which posts the source and confirmation of “MM made Kate cry” story.
> 
> She said it was one of the dress fitting assistants named Victiria who was overheard telling the story at lunch to her friends.  The press sat on it for four months and only published after Melissa T quit working for MM and H (ie Melissa confirmed it).  Jessica Mulroney also confirmed it but she was tricked into doing so.
> 
> So the press ran the story.
> 
> It wasn’t leaked by William and Catherine Or their press /PR people.  So three sources confirmed the story.  And now they have been named.



OMG. She also has receipts that of all people it was NACHO who leaked their private jet usage. He really is not the lightest bulb in the chandelier, is he.

ETA: she also says Ghoul is smearing Jason Knauf because she fears him more than the devil the holy water (the latter is from me, not her) and tries to discredit him. She thinks one of these days she'll go to far, he will snap, give an interview, write a book, and she'll be done.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She really does solid work. If I was still in journalism school I'd totally write my master's thesis on these two and their media shenanigans. Then afterwards I'd need extensive therapy and possibly a spiritual cleansing.


----------



## mrsinsyder

needlv said:


>



I haven’t watched yet but the “thank you for your service” quote made my eyes roll so far back in my head… 

I’d like to think that if it’s true he only said it on a dare


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> but cute kids can be less attractive when they get older and vice versa....time will tell


Ok, must interject a tiny bit… the kids are off limits ?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> These entitled ****s!



Wow! I think all the deals were being done. Exclusive to Netflix Re pictures of the wedding party, children, etc. She sold her kids for money, it seems.


----------



## csshopper

papertiger said:


> Let's take a step back from the mirror MegZZ
> 
> 1. You didn't try
> 2. You failed to impress
> 3. You've been found out - you have no class
> 4. You've been found out -you're a liar
> 5. You're not Kathrine


Maybe she uses one of those carnival side show mirrors that distorts images because it mimics her warped mind.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> There’s an instagram user called emiliehrh who has a story which posts the source and confirmation of “MM made Kate cry” story.
> 
> She said it was one of the dress fitting assistants named Victiria who was overheard telling the story at lunch to her friends.  The press sat on it for four months and only published after Melissa T quit working for MM and H (ie Melissa confirmed it).  Jessica Mulroney also confirmed it but she was tricked into doing so.
> 
> So the press ran the story.
> 
> It wasn’t leaked by William and Catherine Or their press /PR people.  So three sources confirmed the story.  And now they have been named.



I can't seem to find that particular story?


----------



## marietouchet

Daddy‘s office leaked stuff about others … family members … I find the lack of specifics to be totally off putting , was thinking the complaints were about MM, then it dawned on me… could have been after Morton’s book or Panorama interview - 30 or 35 years ago 
The video director is a genius … she may have totally misdirected me to think this was about MM
How did H get his info ? From whom ? mom? 
To paraphrase a famous author who’s name I cannot remember - full of storm and fury and signifying nothing ?


----------



## Cinderlala

I'm way behind on this thread and I'll never catch up but for more cringe, or laughs, check out the speech written and given by Skeeter during the reception for their wedding:


“On to the crux of why I wanted to speak tonight. First of all, it’s been a while.

But mostly I wanted to share a story, a story that I wrote about the man that I love and the way that we met. Let’s call this a modern fairytale.

Once upon a time there was a girl from LA, some people called her an actress, and there was a guy from London, some people called him a prince.

All of those people didn’t fully get it, because this is the love story of a boy and girl who are meant to be together.

They meet on July 3 2016 in London and they giggle endlessly, so the next day they have their second date and he brings her cupcakes because it’s fourth of July, a bittersweet celebration he says, ironic really, her country’s independence from his country, yet in this moment they know they don’t want to be independent of each other.

And after a month of long distance courtship they settle into the quiet of Botswana, and amidst whatever momentary worries that creep in, they look at each other and think ‘Whatever world, we’re in’.

They would love and garden and travel and laugh and rack up more airmiles than any couple could have.

And when the tides were rough, they squeezed each other tighter, nothing can break us, they’d say, for this love she was a fighter.

I appreciate, respect and honour you my treasure, for the family we will create, and our love story that will last forever.

So I ask you to raise a glass to the astounding assurance that now life begins and the everlasting knowing that, above all, love wins.”


(Source: Reddit post linked to Telegraph story)


----------



## marietouchet

Lodpah said:


> Wow! I think all the deals were being done. Exclusive to Netflix Re pictures of the wedding party, children, etc. She sold her kids for money, it seems.


yes, the photos are the property of MM since not taken by BP photographer, this allowed MM to use as she saw fit


----------



## lulilu

I am rolling on the floor at H being "terrified" because William yelled at him.  What a gigantic wuss.


----------



## sdkitty

the gloves are off


			'It's So Obvious': Annoyed Meghan Markle Accuses Prince William Of Allowing Aide To Spread 'Bullying' Allegations About Her


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> I'm way behind on this thread and I'll never catch up but for more cringe, or laughs, check out the speech written and given by Skeeter during the reception for their wedding:
> 
> 
> “On to the crux of why I wanted to speak tonight. First of all, it’s been a while.
> 
> But mostly I wanted to share a story, a story that I wrote about the man that I love and the way that we met. Let’s call this a modern fairytale.
> 
> Once upon a time there was a girl from LA, some people called her an actress, and there was a guy from London, some people called him a prince.
> 
> All of those people didn’t fully get it, because this is the love story of a boy and girl who are meant to be together.
> 
> They meet on July 3 2016 in London and they giggle endlessly, so the next day they have their second date and he brings her cupcakes because it’s fourth of July, a bittersweet celebration he says, ironic really, her country’s independence from his country, yet in this moment they know they don’t want to be independent of each other.
> 
> And after a month of long distance courtship they settle into the quiet of Botswana, and amidst whatever momentary worries that creep in, they look at each other and think ‘Whatever world, we’re in’.
> 
> They would love and garden and travel and laugh and rack up more airmiles than any couple could have.
> 
> And when the tides were rough, they squeezed each other tighter, nothing can break us, they’d say, for this love she was a fighter.
> 
> I appreciate, respect and honour you my treasure, for the family we will create, and our love story that will last forever.
> 
> So I ask you to raise a glass to the astounding assurance that now life begins and the everlasting knowing that, above all, love wins.”
> 
> 
> (Source: Reddit post linked to Telegraph story)



Please someone hand me a sick bucket.


----------



## lallybelle

sdkitty said:


> the gloves are off
> 
> 
> 'It's So Obvious': Annoyed Meghan Markle Accuses Prince William Of Allowing Aide To Spread 'Bullying' Allegations About Her



lol, she's mad he's not blocking the person from speaking out. Hey it's not like he made up the accusations.

Oh and poor big bad Afgan war veteran Harry, so terrified his brother yelled at him. I mean lmfao.

Get THEM William and KC3!


----------



## mrsinsyder

sdkitty said:


> the gloves are off
> 
> 
> 'It's So Obvious': Annoyed Meghan Markle Accuses Prince William Of Allowing Aide To Spread 'Bullying' Allegations About Her


God at least they’re finally saying something interesting *tea sipping emoji*


----------



## Cinderlala

Right??  Evidently, she also recited this on the slopumentary - from a picture on her phone - written in her fauxligraphy writing.


----------



## Cinderlala

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Please someone hand me a sick bucket.


----------



## gracekelly

lulilu said:


> I am rolling on the floor at H being "terrified" because William yelled at him.  What a gigantic wuss.


Can you imagine if some prosecutor went after him in court? lololol!


----------



## Mrs.Z

sgj99 said:


> And they were planning their exit before the wedding???  After the British taxpayers paid for that huge and expensive event?


I’m pretty sure Harry said in 2018 their plan was to move to New Zealand!   Then South Africa…..which was approved by the Royal Family but then it was leaked so no way they could do that…..then it was Canada.  

I watched Episode 4 and half of 5 on a turbulent flight with a lot of Champagne so it was hard to keep it all straight!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Lt Colonel 
Johnny and william’s secretary , I think , swoon
Go team !


 area


----------



## Lounorada

kipp said:


> In case this hasn't been posted before, this is worth a read from The Times
> 
> 
> archive.ph


This is brilliant! Hilary Rose knows how to write some funny stuff.


Thanks for sharing!




Cinderlala said:


> I'm way behind on this thread and I'll never catch up but for more cringe, or laughs, check out the speech written and given by Skeeter during the reception for their wedding:
> 
> 
> “On to the crux of why I wanted to speak tonight. First of all, it’s been a while.
> 
> But mostly I wanted to share a story, a story that I wrote about the man that I love and the way that we met. Let’s call this a modern fairytale.
> 
> Once upon a time there was a girl from LA, some people called her an actress, and there was a guy from London, some people called him a prince.
> 
> All of those people didn’t fully get it, because this is the love story of a boy and girl who are meant to be together.
> 
> They meet on July 3 2016 in London and they giggle endlessly, so the next day they have their second date and he brings her cupcakes because it’s fourth of July, a bittersweet celebration he says, ironic really, her country’s independence from his country, yet in this moment they know they don’t want to be independent of each other.
> 
> And after a month of long distance courtship they settle into the quiet of Botswana, and amidst whatever momentary worries that creep in, they look at each other and think ‘Whatever world, we’re in’.
> 
> They would love and garden and travel and laugh and rack up more airmiles than any couple could have.
> 
> And when the tides were rough, they squeezed each other tighter, nothing can break us, they’d say, for this love she was a fighter.
> 
> I appreciate, respect and honour you my treasure, for the family we will create, and our love story that will last forever.
> 
> So I ask you to raise a glass to the astounding assurance that now life begins and the everlasting knowing that, above all, love wins.”
> 
> 
> (Source: Reddit post linked to Telegraph story)


WTF did I just read?  
Even in her wedding speech she's nursing that big ol' ego of hers.
I'm surprised she didn't just say this:


----------



## marietouchet

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m pretty sure Harry said in 2018 their plan was to move to New Zealand!   Then South Africa…..which was approved by the Royal Family but then it was leaked so no way they could do that…..then it was Canada.
> 
> I watched Episode 4 and half of 5 on a turbulent flight with a lot of Champagne so it was hard to keep it all straight!


Thank you for watching and taking one for the team ❤️❤️❤️❤️


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Cinderlala said:


> Right??  Evidently, she also recited this on the slopumentary - from a picture on her phone - written in her fauxligraphy writing.



I'm not sure if I want to cry, laugh or be some more sick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Lt Colonel
> Johnny and william’s secretary , I think , swoon
> Go team !
> 
> 
> area




I mean, William's help isn't too hard on the eyes either


----------



## AbbytheBT

Cinderlala said:


> I'm way behind on this thread and I'll never catch up but for more cringe, or laughs, check out the speech written and given by Skeeter during the reception for their wedding:
> 
> 
> “On to the crux of why I wanted to speak tonight. First of all, it’s been a while.
> 
> But mostly I wanted to share a story, a story that I wrote about the man that I love and the way that we met. Let’s call this a modern fairytale.
> 
> Once upon a time there was a girl from LA, some people called her an actress, and there was a guy from London, some people called him a prince.
> 
> All of those people didn’t fully get it, because this is the love story of a boy and girl who are meant to be together.
> 
> They meet on July 3 2016 in London and they giggle endlessly, so the next day they have their second date and he brings her cupcakes because it’s fourth of July, a bittersweet celebration he says, ironic really, her country’s independence from his country, yet in this moment they know they don’t want to be independent of each other.
> 
> And after a month of long distance courtship they settle into the quiet of Botswana, and amidst whatever momentary worries that creep in, they look at each other and think ‘Whatever world, we’re in’.
> 
> They would love and garden and travel and laugh and rack up more airmiles than any couple could have.
> 
> And when the tides were rough, they squeezed each other tighter, nothing can break us, they’d say, for this love she was a fighter.
> 
> I appreciate, respect and honour you my treasure, for the family we will create, and our love story that will last forever.
> 
> So I ask you to raise a glass to the astounding assurance that now life begins and the everlasting knowing that, above all, love wins.”
> 
> 
> (Source: Reddit post linked to Telegraph story)


Am not watching, only reading comments to protect myself from sudden illness ………… but this cutesy pie stuff is excruciating and oh so barfy.

ETA:  words, sick and barfy emoticons didn‘t attach !!!!!


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Can you imagine if some prosecutor went after him in court? lololol!


Really...this is his brother who he grew up with....he was terrified?  I'm not buying it and he's painting himself as a coward in this case


----------



## mrsinsyder

Just turned it on. I do love all the on-site footage they have. It’s so rare to see that kind of behind the scenes Royal access.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I also think Harry said he was presented with 5 options and he chose “half in, Half out” then at the meeting with the Queen where she allegedly said nothing, he was told….NO half in, half out. 

Meghan said once they decided to sue over the letter to her father (which the Royal Family told her to write)….that was the turning point, it was all over…there was no turning back


----------



## youngster

marietouchet said:


> Receipts from the fact checkers and press are streaming in … The analogy to the car crash Panorama interview is chilling
> 
> *Watching felt exhausting but Harry and Meghan's claims haven't caused the earthquake some expected* | UK News | Sky News



So, it ends up being a whole lot of nothing except for the parts where they damage themselves, such as editing the Queen's speech to fit their narrative and the fraud they perpetrated on UK taxpayers by planning their exit at least 2 years before actually leaving, so before their spectacle of a wedding. I think UK taxpayers might want their $50 million back from them and the millions back for the renovation of Frogmore cottage.  Otherwise . . .  we were so wonderful and popular, everyone feared us. Will yelled at me. The Queen sat there and didn't say anything.  

I expect Harry's book to be much of the same, a rewrite of his own history, tons of stuff about his mother, some swipes at his father, Camilla, and family members, vague accusations with no proof or evidence, just on and on with his never-ending tale of woe.  

Apparently, the British monarchy is a hierarchy.  Who knew?


----------



## pomeline

I still see people (ran into one today) defending Harry, the poor half-orphan who is traumatised. So he is but that doesn't explain that nasty streak in him.

SARAH VINE: Last week I said I felt sorry for Harry. What a fool I am! The real arrogant, bitter, vicious Prince appears to be a rather nasty piece of work… and it’s horrible to witness


----------



## Cinderlala

@pomeline Is that Miss Fisher in your avatar?  I know this is off-topic but I've always wondered.  It's from the beach episode, right?  I love Miss Fisher!


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> So, it ends up being a whole lot of nothing except for the parts where they damage themselves, such as editing the Queen's speech to fit their narrative and the fraud they perpetrated on UK taxpayers by planning their exit at least 2 years before actually leaving, so before their spectacle of a wedding. I think UK taxpayers might want their $50 million back from them and the millions back for the renovation of Frogmore cottage.  Otherwise . . .  we were so wonderful and popular, everyone feared us. Will yelled at me. The Queen sat there and didn't say anything.
> 
> I expect Harry's book to be much of the same, a rewrite of his own history, tons of stuff about his mother, some swipes at his father, Camilla, and family members, vague accusations with no proof or evidence, just on and on with his never-ending tale of woe.
> 
> Apparently, the British monarchy is a hierarchy.  Who knew?


Holy cow they are so out of touch. I can’t believe they followed complaints about their cottage with the story of the women who lived in Grenfell. They said their home was too small then not even five minutes later are showing these folks living five deep in a hotel room. 

Sigh.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I also think Harry said he was presented with 5 options and he chose “half in, Half out” then at the meeting with the Queen where she allegedly said nothing, he was told….NO half in, half out.



My head hurts.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## csshopper

needlv said:


>



Most of all the Pilot appreciated she was leaving. She “forgot” that part.


----------



## Chanbal

Harry and Meghan: maybe YOU'RE the problem: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
					

CALLAHAN: There's an old saying that goes, essentially: If you ran into a jackass in the morning, you ran into a jackass. But if you run into jackasses all day - well, you're the jackass.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

_The moment Harry FORGOT the script and MESSED UP!_​


----------



## mrsinsyder

So, if I knew nothing about them, episode four would make me incredibly sympathetic to them. They do a good job of making the argument that the media turned on them because they were outshining Will and Kate. The story of Archie’s birth was new and interesting to hear. 

It’s so hard to reconcile the way they tell their story after reading _Revenge. _It makes it tough to take anything they say at face value.  

Ah well, at least this episode wasn’t as boring as the first three


----------



## Toby93

youngster said:


> I know, right?
> Harry hates his family.  Meghan hates his family.  Yet they name the baby after QEII.


Not only that, they trademarked it too  Everything is about grifting and money with this pair. They have a very good understanding of the media and "clickbait" and they explain it to us over and over, so we know exactly why that name was chosen.


----------



## Chanbal

Another 'must watch' video.  



_Harry and Meghan's Complaining, and Putting Family First, with Kirk Cameron and Maureen Callahan_​


----------



## youngster

From Sarah Vine:

_Don’t be fooled by the adorable footage of him cuddling the dog or goofing around on holiday. On the basis of his behaviour in the documentary, the real Harry turns out to be rather a nasty piece of work.  Arrogant, bitter, vicious; the kind of person who likes to present himself as carefree and easy-going and everyone’s buddy — but who, when crossed, is capable of acts of great spite._


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Other married couples begin to look like each other over time, Harry is now sounding exactly like his spouse. “No one ASKED ME” boo hoo!
> 
> The Duke explained: “I couldn’t believe it. No one had asked me. No one had asked me permission to put my name to a statement like that. I rang M and I told her and she burst into floods of tearsbecause within four hours they were happy to lie to protect my brother, and yet for three years they were never willing to tell the truth to protect us.”


Floods of tears ... Sounds so familiar. Oh yes, Diana did it too!


gracekelly said:


> The better question is whether the Netflix people knew what they were doing and went along with it just to get a sensationalist series that would garner ratings.  Every person who worked on it on the production end, better have some good excuses when they are questioned.


I'd like to see how the contract was worded. If the Netflix legal team didn't put in an indemnity clause protecting the company from liability from the Harkle lie factory, then someone in Netflix was in bed with them.


charlottawill said:


> And it may not just have been MM. If Doria spent any amount of time with them she was likely involved in the brainwashing too. I don't think she's as innocent as originally thought.


All those people who were on her side saying that people should not look into her history... Sorry, but Doria had better have covered her tracks well. And it will extend to that boyfriend she has too. After this six-part lie fest, there will be multiple spotlights on the accomplices.


LittleStar88 said:


> She’s got rhythm, y’all!



Was this from the docudrama?


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh. Ask for that freaking money back. These jerks.
> 
> ETA: but also, if they planned their exit months before the wedding, when did they have time to be the best royals of all times?


Maybe the plan was to win the award for Best Royal, then retire to live off the converts. Zed was probably horrified to learn that there was no popularity contest.

Seriously, in the context of their admission that they were planning to leave, it looks like we will have to revise our opinion on everything they said or did right from her first leak that they were dating.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> So, if I knew nothing about them, episode four would make me incredibly sympathetic to them. They do a good job of making the argument that the media turned on them because they were outshining Will and Kate. The story of Archie’s birth was new and interesting to hear.
> 
> It’s so hard to reconcile the way they tell their story after reading _Revenge. _It makes it tough to take anything they say at face value.
> 
> Ah well, at least this episode wasn’t as boring as the first three


I just don’t buy that H & M were doing such a great job and outshining W & K that they were sabotaged …..that just makes the monarchy stronger why would the Palace have a problem with it, I just don’t buy it!


----------



## mrsinsyder

I don’t understand why Harry says he was given five choices, he chose the choice in the middle, but then was told he had to be all in or all out. Why would they give him five options just to say “no jk there’s only two”?


----------



## youngster

From Maureen Callahan:








						Harry and Meghan: maybe YOU'RE the problem: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
					

CALLAHAN: There's an old saying that goes, essentially: If you ran into a jackass in the morning, you ran into a jackass. But if you run into jackasses all day - well, you're the jackass.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_To anyone wondering if Harry and Meghan ever considered that maybe, just maybe, they are the problem, the answer is a resounding 'no.' *They take no accountability here for any family strife. Zero. They are totally blameless* — *except for being such paragons of truth and beauty, their light shining so bright those other royals just had to do away with them. They just can't help being so great.*

Yes, these would-be global do-gooders promoting kindness, love and humanitarianism — Meghan 'selected to break generational curses that need to be healed,' per a text from Beyoncé — are seething with rage. They are jealous, resentful, spiteful and without a shred of loyalty.

Worst of all, to my mind, is their utter lack of humor. They lack joy, perspective, an iota of self-deprecation. *Prick them and they don't just bleed — they gush, they carp, they wail and moan and rend their garments on every media platform that will pay them millions*. No one in history has ever been as wounded, as unfairly treated, as Harry and Meghan.

We've now spent six hours one-on-one with the Sussexes, and it's safe to say that neither has any discernible personality. Harry, of course, never needed to develop one — his wealth and fame, his coddled life, all but ensured that.

But Meghan — wow. For someone so sure that she's special, who tells us here she was so great at being an instant royal that the family bullied her out, was such a blinding light she couldn't even wear color for fear of upstaging her female in-laws — there's not one idiosyncratic thing about her. Not one.

She is, as they say, the definition of basic. She's a California girl into yoga, guided meditation, 'taking up space,' and meeting her future in-laws, second-in-line to the throne, wearing ripped jeans and bare feet. She's just that kind of unstudied, casual, madcap gal.

All Meghan wanted on the morning of her wedding? Not to watch the global pre-wedding coverage or have a quiet moment alone, savoring her last moments as a civilian. Not a genuine moment with her nearest and dearest. No, Meghan says all she wanted was 'a mimosa, a croissant, and to play [the song] 'Going to the Chapel.'

Does it get more on-the-nose than that? More literal? Meghan Markle's cardinal sin isn't that she's a bully (an allegation her lawyer denies) or a hypocrite or our own Woko Ono, claiming she really didn't know a lot about Prince Harry before meeting him.

No: Meghan's cardinal sin is being boring. Perhaps that's the root of some of her rage. Perhaps all this public tantruming is overcompensation for lack of a personality.* The only thing that actually made Meghan special is her royal status derived from an institution she shows loathing for and claims to be above, yet which she clings to with an iron grip. Perhaps she knows what we know: She's a phony. A woman who spent her life in search of the white-hot spotlight she now claims she never wanted.*

It's all so exhausting._


----------



## mrsinsyder

Mrs.Z said:


> I just don’t buy that H & M were doing such a great job and outshining W & K that they were sabotaged …..that just makes the monarchy stronger why would the Palace have a problem with it, I just don’t buy it!


Yeah, I also can’t take it seriously that they don’t take even a smidge of accountability for anything. The truth always lies in the middle somewhere, it’s silly that they only want to be portrayed as perfect and innocent.


----------



## Mrs.Z

mrsinsyder said:


> I don’t understand why Harry says he was given five choices, he chose the choice in the middle, but then was told he had to be all in or all out. Why would they give him five options just to say “no jk there’s only two”?


Agreed, that made no sense.


----------



## needlv

Jason Knauf isn’t playing.  He has outed her lie about Prince William asking him to testify/submit a witness statement in her case again ANL.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Tom Bower!


----------



## youngster

More from Maureen Callahan.  I can't stop quoting her as she is just spot on:

_Meghan to Harry, insisting that she will not badmouth Prince William: 'It's your brother,' she says of yet another perceived attack. 'I'm not going to say anything about your brother. But it's so obvious.'  *Just to be clear: Meghan says she refuses to attack her husband's brother while attacking her husband's brother.*

Harry and Meghan aren't even worthy of detestation. They've turned themselves into global laughingstocks, self-identified peacemakers who refuse to acknowledge the truth: They are *agents of chaos, heat-seeking missiles of misery*.

It's impossible to take anything they have to say seriously — but if you look at 'Harry & Meghan' as pure camp, as theater of the absurd, at least a mildly entertaining spectacle.
I mean, what's more authentic than fleeing a multi-million dollar mansion in Vancouver and flying private to another multi-million dollar mansion, this one loaned to them by, as Harry says,* a friend of theirs they'd never met *— famed Hollywood filmmaker Tyler Perry?  
How's that for authentic?

Harry & Meghan will never be happy. And really, it seems they don't want to be. *They are captains of their own misery industrial complex, gripes and grievances on sale to the highest bidder*, the loss of father and brother, nieces and nephews and sister-in-law just the cost of doing business._


----------



## Aimee3

why couldn’t Doria have walked TW down the aisle???
Edited due to spellcheck


----------



## rose60610

H&M were outshining W&K? When? In whose world? I agree Claw started her whining rampage for attention. I don't buy the "they made me wear beige" line. She wore hundreds if not thousands of outfits. What percentage were beige? She refused to wear hats when the situation called for one. She insisted on a $75,000 black evening gown for a daytime engagement photo. She wore a $120,000 caftan overseas. She wasn't stuck with the wardrobe bills. And we're supposed to feel sorry for her the few times she wore beige which she probably chose?  Since when did she ever follow protocol anyway? If she paid for anything out of her own pocket she could have worn neon fuchsia morning noon and night. Was her goal to outshine the Queen who was known for bright colors? Was QEII supposed to step aside for her? In Claw's sick mind she probably was.


----------



## rose60610

Aimee3 said:


> why couldn’t Doria have walked TW down the aisle???
> Edited due to spellcheck



I always wondered the same thing.


----------



## Chanbal

One more…  

_Are Meghan and Harry's relationships with the Markles and Windsors finished?_​


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> View attachment 5671355


Mike Tindall for the win of the year


----------



## marietouchet

A lucid unbiased opinion with receipts


----------



## mrsinsyder

Watching the final episode where they talk about her miscarriage. Her friend describes coming over to help them get moved in and Meghan says it was their first morning in the new house, but the overlaid print story that she shared at the time talks about how it was just a normal day where she was getting Archie up to start the day. Odd.


----------



## purseinsanity

mrsinsyder said:


> I haven’t watched yet but the “*thank you for your service*” quote made my eyes roll so far back in my head…
> 
> I’d like to think that if it’s true he only said it on a dare


Is this her way of pretending she was in the military??  Her “sacrifices”, and “thank you for your service”???  I hope karma exists and bites this Bwitch hard.


----------



## mrsinsyder

Harry says that them announcing she was pregnant with Lili on the same day Diana announced she was pregnant with him was a coincidence.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Oh TMZ, is this really what you got out of the series?
> 
> View attachment 5671498


I never thought I would say such a drama-mama phrase but ... (shakes fist) Death is too good for you!
If even half the gossip about Zed is true, I am not surprised that she attracts weirdos and other unsavoury characters.


youngster said:


> I know, right?
> Harry hates his family.  Meghan hates his family.  Yet they name the baby after QEII.


It's the overpowering attraction of $$$$$. They can't help themselves  


youngster said:


> It will be interesting to see what Netflix does.  Will they continue the relationship or axe the contract in the next few months?
> 
> I think it will depend on whether they drew viewers to Netflix, did those viewers stick around through all 6 episodes, and did they drive new subscriptions to the platform. Whether they were easy to work with (or difficult) would also be a factor, I'd think.  Reception and reviews would be a factor, especially if there are notable discrepancies from Harry's upcoming book, along with plenty of blowback for things like editing the Queen's speech to change its meaning (which I still can hardly believe they did, except they actually did). *Also, the revelation that they planned Megexit before the wedding is huge, absolutely huge.  I'm shocked they didn't insist on taking that out of the episode.  *A complete theft of UK taxpayer money for that wedding when they had no intention of staying and working as senior royals.
> 
> Also, they covered the last 5 or so years.  No senior royal will go near them now or send them a text message or take a phone call or respond to an email and they likely won't be invited anywhere.  They'll likely be told to stay away from the Coronation, or not invited at all.  Not much new material for them going forward, you'd think Netflix would recognize this.


Netflix has to hang on till they deliver Heart of Invictus which has high chances of being corrupted into yet another admiring look at the lurve story of the self-proclaimed greatest grifters in history. Maybe Zed will finally make it to Hollywood - now that all these bombs are public knowledge, perhaps someone will make a bigscreen movie about her.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Cinderlala said:


> @pomeline Is that Miss Fisher in your avatar?  I know this is off-topic but I've always wondered.  It's from the beach episode, right?  I love Miss Fisher!


Great catch!  I love her shows, too.  Her niece’s shows are fun, too.  Thank you.


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> Can you imagine if some prosecutor went after him in court? lololol!


He better be in diapers or have a spare pair of pants on hand if he was to be cross examined


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great catch!  I love her shows, too.  Her niece’s shows are fun, too.  Thank you.
> 
> View attachment 5671758


Love Miss Fisher


----------



## charlottawill

Aimee3 said:


> why couldn’t Doria have walked TW down the aisle???
> Edited due to spellcheck


I read that MM wanted to walk by herself. And she dropped her mother off before she got to the steps of the church so the spotlight would be solely on her. Charles stepped in to escort her not so much to be a gentleman, but because the Church of England protocol says brides can't walk unescorted to the altar. At least this is what I've read.


----------



## Toby93

I am watching The Behaviour Panel, and it is fascinating to hear their insights on what the Harkles say, and don't say during this mockumentary.  

One of the body language experts says that even though H is trying to call it a _love_ story, the fact that he mentions that the rest of his family marry to fit the mould, but he and his mother did not, he says it is actually a _tragedy_.  He says he didn't want to sound Freudian, but it seems to him that H was always destined to marry his mother to try and save her.  

He couldn't save her as a child, and when he repeats over and over that he needed to protect his family, he actually means he is trying to do what he was helpless to do as a child.  

i found it a very interesting take on the whole situation.

They all agree that TW doesn't have a genuine expression or smile throughout the first episode.  She is revelling in the attention.  One of them actually said that the clip of the interviewer showing them footage of her from 2016 was a narcissists dream.  Watching herself while being _filmed_ watching herself


----------



## tiktok

lulilu said:


> I am rolling on the floor at H being "terrified" because William yelled at him.  What a gigantic wuss.


Not just that, but can anyone over 5 take that statement seriously? 
I mean, did he lead such a charmed life that William never screamed at him before (and he never screamed at William)?
Do royals grow up on a different planet where siblings live in such perfect harmony for 30-odd years that a screaming match when you are about to upend the monarchy is so surprising and terrifying? 
I thought I envied their lack of financial worries, but now I envy royals for never being screamed at by their family members... what a magical gene pool they come from!


----------



## Hyacinth

pomeline said:


> Could they replace his title with Duke of Bell End...? Although I don't want to insult the people living in that area.
> I sincerely think someone with connections to the court should put a word in for KCIII to remove Sussex titles and declare that they'll be now known as Earl and Countess of Dumbarton. I know, it's cruel towards the good people of Dumbarton but it would be way better than letting them keep their Sussex title or to have M be called Princess H. In any case, the king should declare he's replacing the title with another one since the current one "has caused so much mental anguish and distress for the couple". Actually, do they have to be Earl and Countess...? Baron of... well the king can take a pick from any of the names listed here:
> 
> https://www.countryfile.com/go-outdoors/10-of-britains-rudest-and-funniest-place-names/
> 
> I am personally in favour of Baron and Baroness of B****field. Funny that you cannot write that name here (God I hate such nanny filters) and it really is an actual place name! Sh***erton is another strong candidate IMO.



"The Earl and Countess of Scratch Arse Ware" would be my choice. It seems to suit them.

_"Scratch Arse Ware_​_Scratch Arse Ware is an area of sloping limestone hills in Purbeck, Dorset, that's very popular with walkers and hikers for its phenomenal sea views leading down to Dancing Ledge. 'Ware' is an old English term for rough grazing pasture – as for the rest of the name, you'll have to fill it in with your imagination."

 _


----------



## Chanbal

TMZ & Tom Bower


----------



## xincinsin

Came across this in a Times article:
There have been positive reviews from some in the British press, however. Lester Holloway, editor of The Voice, said he was moved, calling the documentary a “love story” which talked about the struggles and challenges they have faced as a couple and their battles with the media.


			archive.ph
		


I will have to look this up and see if Lester Holloway was taken out of context. He does not seem pro-Zed and professes to be a r*publican, so not pro-Monarchy too.








						I called King Charles an ally to black people. I hope he lives up to that title | Lester Holloway
					

Britain’s first post-colonial monarch championed diversity as Prince of Wales, but he must go much further, says the Voice editor, Lester Holloway




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## xincinsin

I'm wondering if the dire duo, in their stampede towards anyone waving lots of money at them, ever consider the impact on their children. If they were going to enrol Archie in school, they might want to think twice. I remember reading that Sparry was bullied in school. I cannot imagine the trauma that Archie would have to go through now that his mama is a renowned liar and turns up to PTA meetings demanding that they let her security through and announce her as The Duchess of Sussex. Zed may think she was the chosen one, selected to break generational curses, but it looks like she is creating a family curse all on her brave lonesome.


----------



## bellecate

I’m behind and not sure if this has been posted yet.  
If she had a “ very long-standing relationship my doctor. And that’s who I trusted with my pregnancy.” then why could her trusted doctor not help her when she had suicidal thoughts while she was pregnant. Nothing, nothing makes sense with these two idiots.


----------



## gracekelly

bellecate said:


> I’m behind and not sure if this has been posted yet.
> If she had a “ very long-standing relationship my doctor. And that’s who I trusted with my pregnancy.” then why could her trusted doctor not help her when she had suicidal thoughts while she was pregnant. Nothing, nothing makes sense with these two idiots.
> View attachment 5671808


Hold on!  She said she was worried because she was older!  What happened to the young mother label?


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Hold on!  She said she was worried because she was older!  What happened to the young mother label?


Her age is fluid…young when convenient, or old for more pity


----------



## xincinsin

bellecate said:


> I’m behind and not sure if this has been posted yet.
> If she had a “ very long-standing relationship my doctor. And that’s who I trusted with my pregnancy.” then why could her trusted doctor not help her when she had suicidal thoughts while she was pregnant. Nothing, nothing makes sense with these two idiots.
> View attachment 5671808


Maybe she suggested striking a media publicity deal with Portland Hospital: "In exchange for me having my sprog at their hospital, they will provide me with a free suite and ... and ... and ... " And the mean old palace told her that "It's impossible. We do not sell access to our royal offspring."


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Chanbal said:


> *Julia Hartley-Brewer's verdict on Harry and Meghan’s Netflix series: ‘Just shut up!"*



Thanks. It's so annoying to watch an interviewer who can't STFU long enough to let her guest answer the questions.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Hold on!  She said she was worried because she was older!  What happened to the young mother label?


TW claims to have a long-standing relationship with her obstetrician, why didn't she ask him/her for help finding a mental health professional? It would have make more sense than asking the Palace human resources.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Tom Bower!



This interview should be heard around the planet. Bower is magnificent with everything he says. He is just stunned by the fact  that the series was done and being edited and Harry knew, when they were at funeral and burial, that he had insulted his grandmother, father and brother. Bower is just amazed, saddened and disgusted by it. You do wonder how he had the nerve to be there and look them in the eye. He is worse than Meghan.  I thought it very interesting that Bower said they were now the aggressors.


I loved Bower’s comments on Saint Doria.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> TW claims to have a long-standing relationship with her obstetrician, why didn't she ask him/her for help finding a mental health professional? It would have make more sense than asking the Palace human resources.


All the more reason not to believe her ridiculous assertions.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> archie is cuter than Lili?  we have hardly seen any pics of her.  I think it's too early to tell.  So far from what I've seen (and admittedly I'm biased) Will & Kate's kids are cuter, esp Charlotte.  But we see a lot of great pics taken by their mom.


I agree, the Cambridge children are beautiful


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Maybe she suggested striking a media publicity deal with Portland Hospital: "In exchange for me having my sprog at their hospital, they will provide me with a free suite and ... and ... and ... " And the mean old palace told her that "It's impossible. We do not sell access to our royal offspring."


You nailed it. Everything is a deal with her to make a buck.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> TW claims to have a long-standing relationship with her obstetrician, why didn't she ask him/her for help finding a mental health professional? It would have make more sense than asking the Palace human resources.


Just occurred to me that her definition of "long-standing" probably is quite different in the Markle dictionary. "Long-standing" may be the equivalent of more than one one-night-stand.


----------



## Toby93

Mrs.Z said:


> I also think Harry said he was presented with 5 options and he chose “half in, Half out” then at the meeting with the Queen where she allegedly said nothing, he was told….NO half in, half out.
> 
> Meghan said once they decided to sue over the letter to her father (which the Royal Family told her to write)….that was the turning point, it was all over…there was no turning back


She left out the part where HMTQ and the POW asked her to please go to Mexico and talk to her father.  She came up the excuse that she didn't know where he lived because she had never been there.  She obviously knew his address to write him a letter.  

She had a lot of nerve to lie to THE QUEEN. The compromise was a letter.  She then proceeds to tell the story on their flopumentary that it was the Palace who asked her to write the letter, so it's their fault it go was leaked.


----------



## Toby93

bellecate said:


> I’m behind and not sure if this has been posted yet.
> If she had a “ very long-standing relationship my doctor. And that’s who I trusted with my pregnancy.” then why could her trusted doctor not help her when she had suicidal thoughts while she was pregnant. Nothing, nothing makes sense with these two idiots.
> View attachment 5671808


I heard her say that, and what came to mind was, what doctor did she have a long standing relationship with?  A family doctor in LA?  She lived for 7 years in Canada and then moved to the UK, so what doctor?  And a family doctor would not have more experience than an OB/GYN, especially one who was recommended by HMTQ.


----------



## CarryOn2020

_The Cringeworthy End of Harry & Meghan on Netflix_​_The ex-royals insist they’re moving on. Viewers should be so lucky.  
By Helen Lewis

Well, here we all are again. Ready for three more hours of expensively lit retribution? I hope so, because the second half of Netflix’s documentary Harry & Meghan dropped today, covering the four and a half years from the couple’s wedding to the present day.

The final three episodes of this six-hour series—Ken Burns needed just three times as long to get through the entire Vietnam war—focus on the Royal Family’s relationship with the press (again). Over and over, Harry and Meghan’s departure from Britain is presented as a missed opportunity for racial healing, for generational change, for a new social awareness in a stuffy institution. It was, as the British journalist Afua Hirsch declares, “the death of a dream.” This recurrent motif gives the whole documentary the unfortunate air of a late-night message left on your ex’s voicemail, insisting that you are happy to have moved on, and are having a great life, actually._








						The Cringeworthy End of 'Harry & Meghan' on Netflix
					

The ex-royals insist they’re moving on. Viewers should be so lucky.




					www.theatlantic.com
				



=====
RE: Hazzi’s quote:_ “It was terrifying to have my brother scream and shout at me,” he says. “And my father say things that just simply weren’t true, my grandmother quietly sit there and take it all in.”_

*Inquiring minds need to know -  *imo, *this* is the real story because whatever was said, it is clear to me Hazzi is in deep denial:
- What exactly was William _screaming and shouting_ at Hazzi?  How he is an entitled jerk who has led a life of extreme privilege?  How the family has covered up Hazzi’s criminal? behaviour? 

- What _things that just simply weren’t true_ did KC say?  Why does Hazzi dismiss his father’s statements as not true?  Wonder if KC was telling Hazzi that early on the family was aware of Hazzi’s mental problems? that Diana had mental problems?  that the BRF protected Hazzi from finding out his wife was a ___ [fill in the blank]?  Imo it makes no sense for KC to use this meeting to spout lies.

So close to hearing the real story, yet so far away.  Maybe these questions will be addessed in the book.

ETA:  maybe KC told Hazzi who his real father is


----------



## Chanbal

What does TP have against the royal family?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> What does TP have against the royal family?



Idk, it  sounds like he himself is conflicted and that he had a knee-jerk reaction based on his own experiences. It could be he has had a falling out with OW after the interview of lies.  Clearly his reputation is on the line now.

_Perry, 53, said that his reason was that he didn’t want to “do all of that in the church with them and figure all of that out,” implying that all the hullabaloo around the royal family was what put him off.  [_no idea what he means here]

_“Maybe we can do a private ceremony here and let that be that,” he said. “And if you have to do it there, then that’s OK.”_
…
_“_*I’m not a royal watcher, I don’t really pay attention to a lot of stuff*_,” he said. “But I saw something about her father [posing for the paparazzi]. I found it to be hurtful if he were my father. And I couldn’t even imagine this woman finding the man that she loved, the man of her dreams, and him being a prince, and then to walk into all of that madness and need the security of family and then have your father do some horrible things.”











						Godfather Tyler Perry skipped Lilibet’s christening: ‘I don’t want to do that’
					

The Hollywood mogul admitted that he declined an invitation to his goddaughter’s christening in the UK.




					nypost.com
				




ETA:  _Remember Hazzie’s godfather  is Andi.


----------



## milhouse13

For crying out loud... this documentary is nauseating.  We don't dislike MM because we're racist-it's because she's a pretentious selfish hag, and super fake.  The fact that she was marrying into the royal family and didn't even take the time to learn about them tells you every thing you need to know about her.  I can't even believe they're suggesting the hate on MM is because she was becoming more popular than the queen.   Also, I hate the way she calls him "H".


----------



## xincinsin

Mrs.Z said:


> I also think Harry said he was presented with 5 options and he chose “half in, Half out” then at the meeting with the Queen where she allegedly said nothing, he was told….NO half in, half out.
> 
> Meghan said once they decided to sue over the letter to her father (which the Royal Family told her to write)….that was the turning point, it was all over…there was no turning back


More likely that Sparry's side gave 5 options and TQ countered with two: In or Out.

Option 1: We move into Windsor Castle and you promote us up the LOS
Option 2: We move into Windsor Castle and you give us our pick of plum assignments
Option 3: We live on both sides of the pond, fly back for plum assignments
Option 4: We live in the US and set up court there as your representatives
Option 5: We live in the US and you pay us to keep quiet


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Idk, it  sounds like he himself is conflicted and that he had a knee-jerk reaction based on his own experiences. It could be he has had a falling out with OW after the interview of lies.  Clearly his reputation is on the line now.
> 
> _Perry, 53, said that his reason was that he didn’t want to “do all of that in the church with them and figure all of that out,” implying that all the hullabaloo around the royal family was what put him off.  [_no idea what he means here]
> 
> _“Maybe we can do a private ceremony here and let that be that,” he said. “And if you have to do it there, then that’s OK.”_
> …
> _“_*I’m not a royal watcher, I don’t really pay attention to a lot of stuff*_,” he said. “But I saw something about her father [posing for the paparazzi]. I found it to be hurtful if he were my father. And I couldn’t even imagine this woman finding the man that she loved, the man of her dreams, and him being a prince, and then to walk into all of that madness and need the security of family and then have your father do some horrible things.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Godfather Tyler Perry skipped Lilibet’s christening: ‘I don’t want to do that’
> 
> 
> The Hollywood mogul admitted that he declined an invitation to his goddaughter’s christening in the UK.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA:  _Remember Hazzie’s godfather  is Andi.


The babe had a christening in the UK? Is this "proof" that she was actually there despite no one seeing her and no evidence except for some dodgy photos by the increasingly dodgy photog-in-the-pocket Misan?


----------



## Kevinaxx

milhouse13 said:


> For crying out loud... this documentary is nauseating.  We don't dislike MM because we're racist-it's because she's a pretentious selfish hag, and super fake.  The fact that she was marrying into the royal family and didn't even take the time to learn about them tells you every thing you need to know about her.  I can't even believe they're suggesting the hate on MM is because she was becoming more popular than the queen.   Also, I hate the way she calls him "H".


That is the biggest insult imho.

It’s always her, her, her.

For someone who has little talent, little contribution, etc, she sure as heck is talented at stretching out the 15 minutes of fame.


----------



## Chanbal

For the ones that don't want to give clicks to the reality show, the Royal Grift does a good job reviewing the episodes (#4, part 1).


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kevinaxx said:


> That is the biggest insult imho.
> 
> It’s always her, her, her.
> 
> For someone who has little talent, little contribution, etc, she sure as heck is talented at stretching out the 15 minutes of fame.


Imo H&M are being used by Andi to weaken KC. Guessing more hate-filled ‘bombs’ will be released prior to the Coronation, especially if Andi, Sarah, Eug, Bea, H&M do not get invites. So funny that KC made Bea&Eug sit directly behind him at the Christmas concert.  This is all straight out of Shakespeare. Power  is so cool


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

When the fiasco started, I held no views about Harry or Meghan. I thought she acted strange during the engagement interview (subconscious recognition of the Claw) and dressed poorly (the white coat and the overblinged translucent evening gown) but I was Live and Let Live. Even with Megxit, it was pretty much "Not my circus, not my monkeys". But now that they have admitted that they were planning to grab the cash and run, even before they got extravagantly hitched, I have vested interest.

1. My country is part of the Commonwealth. When I was born, our currency still bore HMTQ's visage. I take it personally that she was trying make use of the Commonwealth to further her *sordid* plans.
2. I'm a librarian (good call, @CarryOn2020 ). Her redefinition of words to gaslight the world is a disgrace! Her belief that no one knows how to fact-check her makes her #1 on my *idiot* list.
3. I work in media. Her plagiarism and repurposing of footage to misinform makes her a *criminal *in my eyes.
4. I'm a mother. I shudder to think how she and Doria are raising the 3 kids (Harry the Underdeveloped Brain counts as one). Are we looking at the genesis of the *Grifting Empire of Eternal Victimhood*?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> For the ones that don't want to give clicks to the reality show, the Royal Grift does a good job reviewing the episodes (#4, part 1).



Well said, since he sat in on meetings with Palace PR officials who played the headline game, “Harry knows how to take headlines away from family members”.  Agree, they will not stop.


----------



## Mendocino

CarryOn2020 said:


> Great catch!  I love her shows, too.  Her niece’s shows are fun, too.  Thank you.
> 
> View attachment 5671758


I love Miss Fisher and her GLORIOUS wardrobe!


----------



## xincinsin

Ironically, when I took a break from tpf to read other news, one of the articles I surfed was about a local TV star who just got married. Her brother turned to baking when he lost his job during the pandemic. His business is taking off, especially after he provided goodies for his sister's wedding. The entire family, including the TV star, have all been certified for food handling. They help him with every aspect of his business. She remarked, "It’s family you know, and family will be there for each other whenever, wherever.”

And I think about the two people who feature in this thread, and I wonder at how toxic they are.


----------



## Sharont2305

Mrs.Z said:


> I just don’t buy that H & M were doing such a great job and outshining W & K that they were sabotaged …..that just makes the monarchy stronger why would the Palace have a problem with it, I just don’t buy it!


If I were W&K I'd be saying phew, at least the spotlight is off us for a while. Especially Catherine with a newborn Louis.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> Mommmmmeeee William wants to take back  the toys I stole  from him!


I think Dufus was born short of a few brain cells. He was rude, mean and jealous almost from the start and indulged by a mother who laughed at his silly antics. Although he physically aged, he never fully matured and often behaved as if life was a big playground where he could embarrass his brother with some shenanigan or joke. After the separation Diana remained at Kensington Palace with the boys in whom she confided her problems and cried on their shoulder while asking them to reaffirm their undying love to her and reminding them that she was the parent who loved them best. IMO, H has never fully accepted his mother dying and leaving him bereft.  It's no wonder he's such a mess today and is still looking for his mummy.  On the other hand W probably fared better because he most likely accepted counseling and of course he was lucky to attend almost daily sessions with the late QEII.


----------



## Sharont2305

Chanbal said:


>



And on the same page we have the tragedy of those brothers dying in a frozen lake in Solihull, along with their cousin and a friend. 
So yeah, poor Harry!


----------



## EmilyM111

youngster said:


> From Maureen Callahan:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan: maybe YOU'RE the problem: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: There's an old saying that goes, essentially: If you ran into a jackass in the morning, you ran into a jackass. But if you run into jackasses all day - well, you're the jackass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _No: Meghan's cardinal sin is being boring. Perhaps that's the root of some of her rage. Perhaps all this public tantruming is overcompensation for lack of a personality.* The only thing that actually made Meghan special is her royal status derived from an institution she shows loathing for and claims to be above, yet which she clings to with an iron grip. Perhaps she knows what we know: She's a phony. A woman who spent her life in search of the white-hot spotlight she now claims she never wanted.*_


THIS!!!
She’s incredibly lucky that plastic surgery made her into a pretty girl (well, we can argue but I think men in her life found her very attractive so do I). If she was either ugly or plain, she’s be sitting in some dump and plotting against her very regular  in laws at best. I doubt she’d even hold a job, she’s not smart.


----------



## Sharont2305

bellecate said:


> I’m behind and not sure if this has been posted yet.
> If she had a “ very long-standing relationship my doctor. And that’s who I trusted with my pregnancy.” then why could her trusted doctor not help her when she had suicidal thoughts while she was pregnant. Nothing, nothing makes sense with these two idiots.
> View attachment 5671808


Impossible? The Duchess of York did it with her two births.


----------



## xincinsin

Gah! I just looked up at the Big TV Screen in front of me at the office. BBC World News is showing snippets of the mockumentary. No audio, but that makes the odd behaviour even more evident. They just showed Doria in all her weird butterfly-wing-eyelid glory. And Sparry in all his smarminess.


----------



## xincinsin

EmilyM111 said:


> THIS!!!
> She’s incredibly lucky that plastic surgery made her into a pretty girl (well, we can argue but I think men in her life found her very attractive so do I). If she was either ugly or plain, she’s be sitting in some dump and plotting against her very regular  in laws at best. I doubt she’d even hold a job, she’s not smart.


Just desultorily dreaming:

Sweet Sixteen: Daddy, can I have a new nose?
Sultry Seventeen: Daddy, can I have new teeth?
Envious Eighteen: Daddy, all the girls in my class have better hair! I want extensions for my birthday!
Nitpicking Nineteen: My chin doesn't go well with my teeth. I want a new chin!
_And so on...._


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Funny. So now she was told no instead of her dismissing the "circus" and xallingvin the US press?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. TPF, this is really annoying, can't it be fixed?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A hate group named Megxit? 

Also, what did she think people would do with endless proof what a lying, imaginative POS Ghoul is...send her flowers?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Ignore another obvious lie, but wouldn't it look worse if she actually had killed herself?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Did they have chicken tacos also? I would say "Can't make that sh*t up", but obviously someone did.


----------



## papertiger

Mrs.Z said:


> I’m pretty sure Harry said in 2018 their plan was to move to New Zealand!   Then South Africa…..which was approved by the Royal Family but then it was leaked so no way they could do that…..then it was Canada.
> 
> I watched Episode 4 and half of 5 on a turbulent flight with a lot of Champagne so it was hard to keep it all straight!



It was only going to be a Commonwealth country if the UK paid for it _all_ - otherwise it was alwayZZ going to be LA LA LAnd

I don't think it was ever seriously ever going to be NZ or Botswana etc, possibly going to be Canada. MegZ thinks the centre of the universe is Universal-Disney, Africa and Australasia don't even appear on her radar except as holiday destinations.


----------



## pomeline

Cinderlala said:


> @pomeline Is that Miss Fisher in your avatar?  I know this is off-topic but I've always wondered.  It's from the beach episode, right?  I love Miss Fisher!


Yes it is! 

I don't know if this has been posted but Daily Star always has the best headlines!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did they have chicken tacos also? I would say "Can't make that sh*t up", but obviously someone did.




I want receipts, a tech expert, and Bey needs to be subpoenaed


----------



## xincinsin

Makes me wonder how often Sparry actually looks at his young-old bride if he doesn't notice her multicolour plumage.
Or is this her usual look at home, so he is immune to it already?


----------



## andrashik

Apologies if this has been posted. You ladies move fast!



So Lilibucks has been baptised in England and TP is the godfather?

I chuckled at TP saying "  doing that with them"


----------



## xincinsin

andrashik said:


> Apologies if this has been posted. You ladies move fast!
> View attachment 5671879
> 
> 
> So Lilibucks has been baptised in England and TP is the godfather?
> 
> I chuckled at TP saying "  doing that with them"


If true, where? I doubt they did it at the village church. Did they sneak into one of the royal chapels and Doria baptized the babe as a bishop of the Church of Saint Meghan the Victim?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Mrs.Z said:


> I just don’t buy that H & M were doing such a great job and outshining W & K that they were sabotaged …..that just makes the monarchy stronger why would the Palace have a problem with it, I just don’t buy it!



Well they weren't. They were popular for a bit because everyone was happy Harry found someone, but they didn't strain their backs overworking themselves, ever.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Jason Knauf isn’t playing.  He has outed her lie about Prince William asking him to testify/submit a witness statement in her case again ANL.




I'm sure we've discussed it before, but...so she asked him to testify in court fully expecting him to lie? Which is a punishable crime? She is such a piece of work.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Watching the final episode where they talk about her miscarriage. Her friend describes coming over to help them get moved in and Meghan says it was their first morning in the new house, but the overlaid print story that she shared at the time talks about how it was just a normal day where she was getting Archie up to start the day. Odd.



I guess the print story was after all just a first draft.


----------



## CarryOn2020

andrashik said:


> Apologies if this has been posted. You ladies move fast!
> View attachment 5671879
> 
> 
> So Lilibucks has been baptised in England and TP is the godfather?
> 
> I chuckled at TP saying "  doing that with them"


No, TylerP said that he would *not*  fly over and ‘do all that’ with them.  At least, that is how I read it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> What does TP have against the royal family?




I find it rather weird a proposed godfather thinks he can have a say in where and how the christening is held.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Imo H&M are being used by Andi to weaken KC. Guessing more hate-filled ‘bombs’ will be released prior to the Coronation, especially if Andi, Sarah, Eug, Bea, H&M do not get invites. So funny that KC made Bea&Eug sit directly behind him at the Christmas concert.  This is all straight out of Shakespeare. Power  is so cool



You really think they need Andrew to be the a*sholes they are? Also, Andrew adored his mother. I don't think their behaviour towards her is sparking joy in him.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Makes me wonder how often Sparry actually looks at his young-old bride if he doesn't notice her multicolour plumage.
> Or is this her usual look at home, so he is immune to it already?
> View attachment 5671863



Why would you not get a full spray tan if you planned to wear a revealing outfit?


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You really think they need Andrew to be the a*sholes they are? Also, Andrew adored his mother. I don't think their behaviour towards her is sparking joy in him.


Yes, I do. H&M do not strike me as world class plotters. They need someone far more skilled than they are. Remember Diana  and Andrew plotted against Charles allegedly. 


_Prince Andrew secretly plotted with Princess Diana to try to stop Charles from becoming king, with William to take his place on the throne, a bombshell biography claims.

The Duke of York is claimed to have wanted William to accede to the throne when the Queen died, with Andrew himself acting as regent if this happened before William turned 18.

Andrew is also said to have "lobbied" the Queen to stop Charles from marrying Camilla, claiming she was "untrustworthy".

The allegations are from royal biographer Angela Levin's new book on Camilla, which charts her journey from being a royal outcast to becoming Queen Consort.








						Prince Andrew's 'secret plot against Charles' revealed
					

Prince Andrew secretly plotted with Princess Diana to try stop Charles from becoming king.




					www.nzherald.co.nz
				



_


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## KEG66

xincinsin said:


> Ironically, when I took a break from tpf to read other news, one of the articles I surfed was about a local TV star who just got married. Her brother turned to baking when he lost his job during the pandemic. His business is taking off, especially after he provided goodies for his sister's wedding. The entire family, including the TV star, have all been certified for food handling. They help him with every aspect of his business. She remarked, "It’s family you know, and family will be there for each other whenever, wherever.”
> 
> And I think about the two people who feature in this thread, and I wonder at how toxic they are.


We had a terrible tragedy here in the UK last weekend. Four boys drowned after falling into a frozen lake. Two were brothers one was a cousin and the other a friend. Three died trying to save the fourth and sadly all four  died. When I heard this story I wept and then I thought about the closeness of family and what Harry and William once had. Makes me mad and sad.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Uh oh, someone changing their tune?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

KEG66 said:


> We had a terrible tragedy here in the UK last weekend. Four boys drowned after falling into a frozen lake. Two were brothers one was a cousin and the other a friend. Three died trying to save the fourth and sadly all four  died. When I heard this story I wept and then I thought about the closeness of family and what Harry and William once had. Makes me mad and sad.



Oh God. How do you ever come back from this as a family.


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'm sure we've discussed it before, but...so she asked him to testify in court fully expecting him to lie? Which is a punishable crime? She is such a piece of work.


She may have convinced herself that her truth was THE truth.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> I find it rather weird a proposed godfather thinks he can have a say in where and how the christening is held.


I find it weird that the christening was planned like a destination wedding. The Sussexes think the world revolves around them.


----------



## serene

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did they have chicken tacos also? I would say "Can't make that sh*t up", but obviously someone did.



Seeing harry’s reaction when megan mentioned beyonce and the text, I think he really likes being in the spotlight  and that he has celebrity contacts


----------



## CarryOn2020

Someone else will figure out all the times William screamed at Hazzie, but here is one of the first:









						A young Prince William is compared to hilarious viral star in rare childhood clip
					

Prince William shows off his sassy side in an unearthed video as a child alongside Prince Harry and their father Prince Charles.




					www.hellomagazine.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Worth remembering:


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

P.S. my friend is a practice manager for a radiologist. She told the story of how a mother brought in her elementary school kid for examination to rule out or confirm a cancer suspicion in late November. When the images came back he turned to my friend and said "I don't think they'll have to buy Christmas presents this year" before walking out to inform the mother.

It's been about 10 years and each Christmas season I think about that family and want to cry.


----------



## KEG66

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oh God. How do you ever come back from this as a family.


I just don’t know, can’t stop thinking about those poor boys and their families.


----------



## needlv




----------



## needlv

Is Harry deluded or does he know this isn’t true but trying to get sympathy?

Maybe he didn’t realise Harry and Mm’s own staff were leaking because they treated their staff so badly?


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


>



Is it sad that this satire is probably close to the truth?

Once she had the spare hook, line and sinker, she must have thought she would be living in palaces and castles with hordes of staff to do her bidding. It's the Disney Princess dream. She probably wanted glass slippers too but ... bunions ...


----------



## jelliedfeels

Helventara said:


> For real?!!  Most grating snippets in the screen grabs below. Bonus:  fitting session of our favorite green dress. She apparently owns a mirror, people!  Large one!
> 
> View attachment 5671419
> 
> 
> View attachment 5671420
> 
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...service-plane-Canada-Netflix-documentary.html


And that body guard was Kevin Costner





Shes so squat n wide in that green polyester she looks like a snooker table







CarryOn2020 said:


> It is possible that, *being a z lister*, she did not understand the threat that A listers live with every day.  It is possible.
> Note the tear, left eye:



Even her fake example is too long for a tweet. Was her blog the only one in history that never got spam or trolls? Sure. 

The only death threats she got were made by she herself when she threatened to top herself and their baby if she didn’t get her way - so transparent.


sdkitty said:


> now he claims he was terrified when his brother yelled at him....what a crock
> He is disgusting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Claims William Screamed And Shouted At Him During His Royal Exit Talks
> 
> 
> "It was terrifying," the Duke of Sussex said in his Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Aww diddums did no one yell at him in the army? They should have






bag-mania said:


> Other married couples begin to look like each other over time, Harry is now sounding exactly like his spouse. “No one ASKED ME” boo hoo!
> 
> The Duke explained: “I couldn’t believe it. No one had asked me. No one had asked me permission to put my name to a statement like that. I rang M and I told her and she burst into floods of tearsbecause within four hours they were happy to lie to protect my brother, and yet for three years they were never willing to tell the truth to protect us.”


Ginger hair is hard to match for toupees or plugs so he may soon be wearing the same hair too.






QueenofWrapDress said:


> Did they have chicken tacos also? I would say "Can't make that sh*t up", but obviously someone did.



alternative headline
‘Insane wig claims Beyoncé said she is the chosen one. Family baffled’


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

andrashik said:


> Apologies if this has been posted. You ladies move fast!
> View attachment 5671879
> 
> 
> So Lilibucks has been baptised in England and TP is the godfather?
> 
> I chuckled at TP saying "  doing that with them"


Doesn’t a godfather need to be of the same faith as the child ?  Serious question


----------



## jblended

Let me see if I've got this straight.

*Them*: We were forced out of the royal family because we outshone everyone.
*Reality*: Sure, Jan.

*Them*: We didn't blindside the Queen.
*Reality*: Announced Mexit before the Palace. Oprah interview while PP was rapidly deteriorating and the family were saying their goodbyes.

*Them*: They put us in a teeny _tiny_ cottage unbefitting of our royal superstar status.
*Reality*: Most of the UK is priced out of the housing market and would love to live in such an idyllic cottage for free.

*Them*: When the stakes are this high, people should hear our story from us.
*Reality*: People coming out of a global pandemic, straight into the Ukraine war, and now drowning in a cost-of-living crisis, and you think we're all sitting at home wondering what _your_ story is? 

*Them*: The stress of the lawsuit (that we filed) caused a miscarriage.
*Reality*: Women in war-torn Ukraine either miscarrying or giving birth in bunkers, without any medical assistance.

*Them*: Invited to see PP and HMQ while they were poorly, with the privilege of flying private and getting multiple covid tests for free, but chose instead to lob insults from the other side of the world.
*Reality*: People worldwide lost parents, siblings, grandparents and friends to covid but weren't allowed into the hospitals to say goodbye for risk of infection.

*Them*: It's a love story for the ages. Just the two of us against the world.
*Reality*: This is not love. This is transactional. He uses you to punish the brother he is jealous of and you use him to get a title you could never otherwise attain. It's the two of you against your multiple competing narratives, the rest of the world is busy with actual problems.

*Them*: We've lost our families. But at least we have each other.
*Reality*: She upgraded her family to Oprah, Clooney, Tyler and Serena. He lit his whole world on fire, including family, military, country and its peoples. When the marriage ends, she will claim he abused her and everyone will rally around because she's a WoC. He will be attacked, even by the sugars who swoon over him now, because he's the poster boy of white male privilege.

*Them*: We want privacy and the press were upset we didn't share pictures of our children but we were just trying to protect them.
*Reality*: The next lot up for bid is: a collection of super intimate pictures of our proposal, our late-night discussions in the kitchen, our wedding reception, our children. Do I have $100 million? Sold at $100 million to the streaming giant in the front row hoping to generate hate-views and headlines!

I could go on but, it's tedious.

Also, I didn't think of this but it makes sense that they coordinated outfits to counter megain's claims (link below). The BRF speak volumes without saying a word.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Doesn’t a godfather need to be of the same faith as the child ?  Serious question


Not if the godfather is rich.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This only applied to texts that actually happened, though.


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This only applied to texts that actually happened, though.


I think this isn't a tpf problem. The account itself may have set their privacy settings so their posts can't be embedded. This way people have to click through, which helps their page's engagement. (responding to your post upthread about links not working).

ETA: Just seeing that the head of crew on the plane knelt down and thanked her for her service. Come again? Did she stop the plane from being hijacked or perform the Heimlich maneuver on the pilot when a piece of bland airplane chicken went down the wrong pipe? Who wrote this soap opera drivel?


----------



## papertiger

Maggie Muggins said:


> I think Dufus was born short of a few brain cells. He was rude, mean and jealous almost from the start and indulged by a mother who laughed at his silly antics. Although he physically aged, he never fully matured and often behaved as if life was a big playground where he could embarrass his brother with some shenanigan or joke. After the separation Diana remained at Kensington Palace with the boys in whom she confided her problems and cried on their shoulder while asking them to reaffirm their undying love to her and reminding them that she was the parent who loved them best. IMO, H has never fully accepted his mother dying and leaving him bereft.  It's no wonder he's such a mess today and is still looking for his mummy.  On the other hand W probably fared better because he most likely accepted counseling and of course he was lucky to attend almost daily sessions with the late QEII.



As far as I remember/know Di never used the boys, even when she was in 'poor me' mode.

I don't whether he's doing for political or personal reasons, but Harry's using of "my mother Diana" and "my mother" constantly infinitum, when she was Will's mother too, is really mean, rude and in H's own words gaslighting. She's not (even in spirit) his property. One could sy he didn't even know her that well.

M's use of "my Husband's dad" and "my Husband's grandmother", "Harry's brother" and "The Family" is not only demeaning to those people but to the UK/Commonwealth, and again gaslighting

That's exactly what gaslighters do. You can't tell them they're wrong but they SPIN things to create a 'new normal'

These are BOTH dangerously malicious people


----------



## EmilyM111

aaaa


QueenofWrapDress said:


> This only applied to texts that actually happened, though.



Exactly this. Nobody important will ever want them in their circles due to privacy concerns (on top of negativity they spark and being irrelevant).


----------



## Pessie

jblended said:


> I think this isn't a tpf problem. The account itself may have set their privacy settings so their posts can't be embedded. This way people have to click through, which helps their page's engagement. (responding to your post upthread about links not working).
> 
> ETA: Just seeing that the head of crew on the plane knelt down and thanked her for her service. Come again? Did she stop the plane from being hijacked or perform the Heimlich maneuver on the pilot when a piece of bland airplane chicken went down the wrong pipe? Who wrote this soap opera drivel?


I don’t think it’s a phrase a British person would use.  But maybe he was South African and danced down the aisle before kneeling at her feet, or _maybe_ it’s another product of Meghans overheated imagination.
(Jeez if you’re going to make stuff up, make it interesting)


----------



## Pessie

EmilyM111 said:


> aaaa
> 
> Exactly this. Nobody important will ever want them in their circles due to privacy concerns (on top of negativity they spark and being irrelevant).


Seems to me they’re now already excluded from those circles aren’t they?  I bet that was an old text from Beyoncé


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> If true, where? I doubt they did it at the village church. Did they sneak into one of the royal chapels and Doria baptized the babe as a bishop of the Church of Saint Meghan the Victim?



Wherever 

All christenings are recorded and documented within Parrish records


----------



## papertiger

Pessie said:


> I don’t think it’s a phrase a British person would use.  But maybe he was South African and danced down the aisle before kneeling at her feet, or _maybe_ it’s another product of Meghans overheated imagination.
> (Jeez if you’re going to make stuff up, make it interesting)



We only need the name, rank and flight operator for our records, thanks


----------



## papertiger

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Doesn’t a godfather need to be of the same faith as the child ?  Serious question



Years ago yes. 

For Church of England, only just baptised and confirmed is stipulated. It is about religious education and and through example though (and not bank balance)


----------



## CarryOn2020

Agree, William radiates the proper energy to rule the land.    Hazzi looks weaker and weaker.


----------



## DoggieBags

Pessie said:


> I don’t think it’s a phrase a British person would use.  But maybe he was South African and danced down the aisle before kneeling at her feet, or _maybe_ it’s another product of Meghans overheated imagination.
> (Jeez if you’re going to make stuff up, make it interesting)


It is amazing how her fairy tales never change. She’s always the heroine saving the day for all mankind not because she actually did anything but simply by her mere presence. South Africans dancing in the streets after her wedding…I guess this is her take on beauty and the beast? She sacrificed herself by going to live with the evil beast in his scary castle to save not sure who but in her mind she must have saved somebody! Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion. Her version of durance vile. Can’t you just see her in the Greta Garbo role saying “I want to be alone”. Her entire narrative is one giant cliche after another. But since it continues to work for her, I don’t see her changing her modus operandi any time soon. But it does get tiresome to watch. I actually have very little interest in the gruesome twosome at this point but keep coming back to this thread because so many of the posts on this thread are amusing and / or educational. So thank you to all who continue to post their various view points and interesting bits of information. Please keep it going!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Until Hazz tells us exactly what William screamed at him and what the King lied about, they are yesterday’s clown show.  Nothing to see here.


----------



## Icyjade

needlv said:


>




Based on a quick google search, Nottingham Cottage is 1,324 square feet (123.0 m2) in size. That is not pathetically small. It is bigger than most of the apartments where I’m from, for entire families to live in. And it is FREE. Most adults have to pay for their own apartments.

Spoilt brats.


----------



## Pessie

DoggieBags said:


> It is amazing how her fairy tales never change. She’s always the heroine saving the day for all mankind not because she actually did anything but simply by her mere presence. South Africans dancing in the streets after her wedding…I guess this is her take on beauty and the beast? She sacrificed herself by going to live with the evil beast in his scary castle to save not sure who but in her mind she must have saved somebody! Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion. Her version of durance vile. Can’t you just see her in the Greta Garbo role saying “I want to be alone”. Her entire narrative is one giant cliche after another. But since it continues to work for her, I don’t see her changing her modus operandi any time soon. But it does get tiresome to watch. I actually have very little interest in the gruesome twosome at this point but keep coming back to this thread because so many of the posts on this thread are amusing and / or educational. So thank you to all who continue to post their various view points and interesting bits of information. Please keep it going!


They are pre-pubescent teenage fantasies and she’s a worldly woman over 40.  It is boring, and as you point out they’re well-trodden cliches.  Explains the hair though - she thinks she’s Rapunzel!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mrs.Z

Thought I might finish Episode 5, ugh!  How can they have this Bouzy person discussing the coordinated attack against M by ”middle aged Caucasian women” when he’s on Twitter spewing hate about W&K, pretty gross and hypocritical.


----------



## Pessie

Icyjade said:


> Based on a quick google search, Nottingham Cottage is 1,324 square feet (123.0 m2) in size. That is not pathetically small. It is bigger than most of the apartments where I’m from, for entire families to live in. And it is FREE. Most adults have to pay for their own apartments.
> 
> Spoilt brats.


I don’t know, but when you’re in the madly in love stage of a relationship you don’t care where you are do you?  So long as you’re with the one you love….and on your own together.  One bedroom is usually all that’s required


----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMG. She also has receipts that of all people it was NACHO who leaked their private jet usage. He really is not the lightest bulb in the chandelier, is he.
> 
> ETA: she also says Ghoul is smearing Jason Knauf because she fears him more than the devil the holy water (the latter is from me, not her) and tries to discredit him. *She thinks one of these days she'll go to far, he will snap, give an interview, write a book, and she'll be done.*


We can only hope!


----------



## charlottawill

xincinsin said:


> Makes me wonder how often Sparry actually looks at his young-old bride if he doesn't notice her multicolour plumage.
> Or is this her usual look at home, so he is immune to it already?
> View attachment 5671863


 I guess she doesn't understand orange clashes with red.


----------



## youngster

KEG66 said:


> We had a terrible tragedy here in the UK last weekend. Four boys drowned after falling into a frozen lake. Two were brothers one was a cousin and the other a friend. Three died trying to save the fourth and sadly all four died. When I heard this story I wept and then I thought about the closeness of family and what Harry and William once had. Makes me mad and sad.



I read about this over the last few days. It just breaks my heart, those poor little boys and the horrible pain their parents and family and friends are experiencing.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> If true, where? I doubt they did it at the village church. Did they sneak into one of the royal chapels and Doria baptized the babe as a bishop of the Church of Saint Meghan the Victim?


You are assuming there was a baptism.
I doubt it was a COE baptism, there may not have been a church baptism at all 
In the US, one can be a “godparent” without a religious service, I know … a contradiction … and godparents do not have to be of the same faith as the service, a Christian baby can have a Jewish godparent … 
And TP said somewhere he did not want to do all the church stuff anyway…


----------



## marietouchet

charlottawill said:


> I guess she doesn't understand orange clashes with red.


Well, Cheeto orange spray tan goes with nothing …


----------



## marietouchet

DM has GIANT summary of the bad ratings and pejorative comments bout the series, it goes on and on and on, citing an amazing number of sources , nothing new new or juicy sadly 

Thinking ahead to the book tour extravaganza, I think 
1. There will be a huge prime time US interview with both of them , supposedly to promote the book, but just more of the same 
2. Will MM ago on the book tour ? Surely, H can’t be trusted ?
3. Fact checkers will be coming out of the woodwork comparing Oprah, NF and book et , yummy
4. WILL HE GO TO THE UK ??? Surely, she is on some lettre de cachet 
and won’t  be able to get in LOL


----------



## youngster

DoggieBags said:


> Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion.



This is one of the multiple tone deaf parts, though I think she made up (or heavily embellished) these conversations with the pilot and security guard for dramatic effect. 

The late Queen gave 70 years of her life in service, not a breath of scandal attached to her personally.  Just got up, did her job every single day.    Meghan spent something like 72 *days* as an actual working royal.  She seems to think her service to the UK was equivalent to the Queen's, heck, it seems to have exceeded the Queen's in her mind. The lack of self-awareness is just breathtaking.


----------



## sdkitty

Last night the TV was on when I was going to bed and they were doing a show on CNN about the H&M "docuseries" - a panel talking about it and showing clips.  There were maybe five people - one or two Brits and the rest American.  For the most part they were pretty sympathetic toward the grifters.  The one British guy was a bit critical. They thought Harry was very hurt by his family's failure to protect them.   The bottom line at the end (I think I got to the end) was someone asked if there was an expiration on this story.  The answer was given by the moderator that the expiration will be after Harry's book tour.  
So if they got $100 million from Netflix, I guess they did pretty well.  Even with their lavish lifestyle, if they invest wisely that should last a while.  And recently there has been talk of them moving?  maybe downsizing?

After the book tour I think they will have to do something real in terms of philanthropy to try to stay relevant.  Guess they're not going away anytime soon.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, I do. *H&M do not strike me as world class plotters. *They need someone far more skilled than they are. Remember Diana  and Andrew plotted against Charles allegedly.
> 
> 
> _Prince Andrew secretly plotted with Princess Diana to try to stop Charles from becoming king, with William to take his place on the throne, a bombshell biography claims.
> 
> The Duke of York is claimed to have wanted William to accede to the throne when the Queen died, with Andrew himself acting as regent if this happened before William turned 18.
> 
> Andrew is also said to have "lobbied" the Queen to stop Charles from marrying Camilla, claiming she was "untrustworthy".
> 
> The allegations are from royal biographer Angela Levin's new book on Camilla, which charts her journey from being a royal outcast to becoming Queen Consort.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew's 'secret plot against Charles' revealed
> 
> 
> Prince Andrew secretly plotted with Princess Diana to try stop Charles from becoming king.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nzherald.co.nz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


My 2 cents: I think they are being helped by a well connected organization with its own agenda. Andy may support Hazz behind the scenes, but he has no power…   

There are plenty of veterans, refugees… without >$40M available to them, and in real need of help.

Has TP  approached any other strangers and offered them housing in one of his mansions or made his private jet available to them? Or were the Harkles the only lucky ones?


----------



## Chanbal

Lilliesdaughter said:


> Doesn’t a godfather need to be of the same faith as the child ?  Serious question


Good question. I wonder if the parents' faith is relevant for such choice.


----------



## youngster

This one exchange is really striking to me, I think it shows the dynamics of the Meghan and Harry relationship and who wields the power and how.

_Meghan says to Harry regarding a text message from Prince William, after the Oprah interview: 
*'It's your brother.' 'I'm not going to say anything about your brother. But it's so obvious.'*_

"But it's so obvious."  So, with those few words, she is saying to Harry: "Aren't you smart enough to see this text message for what it is and come to the correct conclusion on your own?  The conclusion that I see so clearly and immediately?"  

She leads him to agree and support her own opinion, whatever that is, and he is then proud of himself for being as smart as she is.  I think his insecurity about his intelligence and lack of success with formal education is a real sore point.  He desperately wants to be seen as smart, especially by her, but he's actually too dim to see the manipulation for what it is.  Imagine being subject to that every single day in all your conversations with your DH/BF/GF/SO?

Of course, the other person in the equation is Prince William who knows exactly what that text message says and exactly what he meant by it, whatever that message was, and now has a really clear example of how Meghan is managing Harry (which he probably already knew). But, at least the rest of us can now see it too, up close.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> We only need the name, rank and flight operator for our records, thanks


I anticipate that additional info will be provided in TW's upcoming book. You may find it under the Meghandela chapter.


----------



## Mrs.Z

I finished the series but mostly fast forwarded through the rest, it was incredibly boring.  

It’s like someone cornered you at a cocktail party and said let me just tell you my side of the story and they went on an endless rant and you were exhausted by the end and can’t recall much of what was said but have a lingering feeling there are multiple sides to this story!  

The whole world needs to move on from this drama, people have to be tired of it…..mostly M & H need to move on, if they actually want peace as they say.  Finally, I cannot imagine the Royal Family responding to any of it, there’s too much, it’s impossible for them to respond to an endless rant.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

More form TMZ









						Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Reveal More Drama in Netflix Series
					

Author and royal expert Tom Bower joined us on "TMZ Live" Thursday, and he isn't buying Harry's claims about 5 options for their relationship with the royal fam ... the way he sees it, you're either in, or you're out.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## sdkitty

Mrs.Z said:


> I finished the series but mostly fast forwarded through the rest, it was incredibly boring.
> 
> It’s like someone cornered you at a cocktail party and said let me just tell you my side of the story and they went on an endless rant and you were exhausted by the end and can’t recall much of what was said but have a lingering feeling there are multiple sides to this story!
> 
> The whole world needs to move on from this drama, people have to be tired of it…..mostly M & H need to move on, if they actually want peace as they say.  Finally, I cannot imagine the Royal Family responding to any of it, there’s too much, it’s impossible for them to respond to an endless rant.


yes, even the people who believe their story are asking when they will be done telling it.  I will say one thing - they are annoying but there are much more disturbing things to watch/hear about.  they are horrible selfish people IMO but nothing they do affects me.  Watching them late at night doesn't make me lose sleep like some other stuff that's going on in our country or the world.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

Wow!


----------



## oldbag

DoggieBags said:


> It is amazing how her fairy tales never change. She’s always the heroine saving the day for all mankind not because she actually did anything but simply by her mere presence. South Africans dancing in the streets after her wedding…I guess this is her take on beauty and the beast? She sacrificed herself by going to live with the evil beast in his scary castle to save not sure who but in her mind she must have saved somebody! Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion. Her version of durance vile. Can’t you just see her in the Greta Garbo role saying “I want to be alone”. Her entire narrative is one giant cliche after another. But since it continues to work for her, I don’t see her changing her modus operandi any time soon. But it does get tiresome to watch. I actually have very little interest in the gruesome twosome at this point but keep coming back to this thread because so many of the posts on this thread are amusing and / or educational. So thank you to all who continue to post their various view points and interesting bits of information. Please keep it going!


As per Greta Garbo. She clarified, "I never said I want to be alone, I said I want to be let alone." She took matters in her hands. She quit Hollywood and went into a peaceful, quiet life in NYC. For as famous as she was at that time she stayed under the radar. It can be done it just takes real determination. I am just a poor relation. She was my 3rd cousin. The beauty stopped with her.


----------



## youngster

Well, what reaction did he expect UK papers to have?   Did he actually think he was going to get sympathetic headlines when they both come across as self-absorbed, entitled non-stop whiners?  Yes, I guess he did?   

Harry knew exactly what he had said and filmed when he went back to the UK for the Queen's funeral and mingled with his family.  That is practically the definition of traitor. 

Traitor: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty. Secondary definition: one who commits treason.  

I think the DM, Sun, etc., can rest easy with the first definition of "traitor".  Harry clearly betrayed the trust of his family.


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Uh oh, someone changing their tune?



Maybe she’s not getting the Haz interview after all?


----------



## youngster

purseinsanity said:


> Maybe she’s not getting the Haz interview after all?



Maybe!  

Maybe, too, she is thinking she can't burn every bridge to the BRF.  Their cameras will be positioned somewhere around Glasgow for the Coronation otherwise.  She, and everyone else, wants an interview too with KC3, Camilla, Will, Kate, etc.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Chanbal said:


> Wow!



Ok, and how about Harry saying in the Reality Show that once you sue the tabloids, they have you right where they want you, bc they make so much money off the surrounding media circus and headlines…..sooooo why does he continue to play right into their hands, it’s the definition of insanity!


----------



## sdkitty

oldbag said:


> As per Greta Garbo. She clarified, "I never said I want to be alone, I said I want to be let alone." She took matters in her hands. She quit Hollywood and went into a peaceful, quiet life in NYC. For as famous as she was at that time she stayed under the radar. It can be done it just takes real determination. I am just a poor relation. She was my 3rd cousin. The beauty stopped with her.


she was a strange and fascinating woman....I recall the stories about her later in life going around NYC in dark glasses and little or no makeup


----------



## marietouchet

Icyjade said:


> Based on a quick google search, Nottingham Cottage is 1,324 square feet (123.0 m2) in size. That is not pathetically small. It is bigger than most of the apartments where I’m from, for entire families to live in. And it is FREE. Most adults have to pay for their own apartments.
> 
> Spoilt brats.


And it is PRIME London real estate with additional room for cars, security ie free parking


----------



## Chanbal

I feel sorry for Will…


----------



## Chanbal

@papertiger it's about the pilot!


----------



## Chanbal

The rage was already there, I agree…
**​
_Meghan unlocked 'years' of 'rage and resentment' in Harry_​


----------



## jennlt

NM


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

I was subjected to the Today Show daily royal segment while at the gym. They mentioned Harry's claim that Meghan's miscarriage was caused by the constant media "harassment". So she had one (supposedly) before Archie was born? I thought she had one (supposedly) after Archie and pre-LB, the one she wrote about so melodramatically in the NYT opinion piece? I can't keep up with their stories.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> I feel sorry for Will…



she's not gonna say anything about his brother but what she says tells him all he needs to know


youngster said:


> Well, what reaction did he expect UK papers to have?   Did he actually think he was going to get sympathetic headlines when they both come across as self-absorbed, entitled non-stop whiners?  Yes, I guess he did?
> 
> Harry knew exactly what he had said and filmed when he went back to the UK for the Queen's funeral and mingled with his family.  That is practically the definition of traitor.
> 
> Traitor: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty. Secondary definition: one who commits treason.
> 
> I think the DM, Sun, etc., can rest easy with the first definition of "traitor".  Harry clearly betrayed the trust of his family.


maybe he still thinks he can outshine the future king
One thing I picked up on watching the clips of their netflix show on CNN - he said when he and the WIFE went to Australia they outshone the rest of the RF - so they were all jealous - therefore they had to not protect them from all the horrid racists?


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> I feel sorry for Will…



Who is the person cackling in the background?  Doria?  Sounds horrible.


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> Who is the person cackling in the background?  Doria?  Sounds horrible.


they indicated there was a "woman" in the room - maybe some staff member?


----------



## Pessie

Chanbal said:


> Wow!



I think he is a traitor.  What else do you call the person intentionally undermining the Crown?


----------



## sdkitty

Pessie said:


> I think he is a traitor.  What else do you call the person intentionally undermining the Crown?


Henry VIII would have had them beheaded


----------



## oldbag

Chanbal said:


> The rage was already there, I agree…
> **​
> _Meghan unlocked 'years' of 'rage and resentment' in Harry_​



Looking at this still shot it is as if she is beaming with pride at a job well done. She has that snarky smile while he looks miserable. She is so proud of herself.


----------



## xincinsin

Pessie said:


> I think he is a traitor.  What else do you call the person intentionally undermining the Crown?


He speaks like a traitor, acts like a traitor; what does he think we should call him? I mean, I know some other words to describe him, but I assure you that I learnt them from Shakespeare.


----------



## xincinsin

oldbag said:


> Looking at this still shot it is as if she is beaming with pride at a job well done. She has that snarky smile while he looks miserable. She is so proud of herself.


I'm doubting that Sparry is truly miserable. He probably looks miserable because he can't meet Zed's high standards of treachery and is in for a scolding later.


----------



## Debbini

Instagram


----------



## papertiger

charlottawill said:


> I was subjected to the Today Show daily royal segment while at the gym. They mentioned Harry's claim that Meghan's miscarriage was caused by the constant media "harassment". So she had one (supposedly) before Archie was born? I thought she had one (supposedly) after Archie and pre-LB, the one she wrote about so melodramatically in the NYT opinion piece? I can't keep up with their stories.



Did she actually have time to have a miscarriage before Archie? 

Perhaps this was a 'baby' she thought she was having, perhaps, around the time of the proposal?  ???


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> Henry VIII would have had them beheaded



Unfortunately, even Henry VIII would have had a hard time chopping his own male child's head off.

I think he would have cancelled/annulled the wedding (Head of CafE so easily done) exiled MegZZ on 16C equivalent of a yacht to the edge of Earth, and locked Harry in the Tower with a dunce's cap on until he calmed down.


----------



## Chanbal

The 6 hours have been summarized as a "_ruthless control of the narrative_."


----------



## CobaltBlu

Th least KCIII can do is cancel their lease on Frogmore Cottage


----------



## Lodpah

Pessie said:


> I think he is a traitor.  What else do you call the person intentionally undermining the Crown?


I’d love to see him sue a US press. No offense to the British folks here but I’ve been watching too many crime shows in Britain and murderers’ sentences are so lenient. A US press would go nuclear option on Pwince Hawwyy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The 6 hours have been summarized as a "_ruthless control of the narrative_."



yes, they need to tell their story because there are so many lies out there


----------



## marietouchet

Appropriate but shocking title in PARIS MATCH , M&H flinguent le Noel des Windsor. It translates as H&M gun down Christmas for the Windsors

PS Text further says the NF series is - as if facts no longer have any importance - my translation.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Appropriate but shocking title in PARIS MATCH , M&H flinguent le Noel des Windsor
> translates as H&M gun down Christmas for the Windsors


I think the RF with their lovely Christmas presentation last night (?) are looking very classy while the grifters are looking vengeful and crass


----------



## Sferics

needlv said:


> I think it’s time to produce those “receipts” they hinted about in the Oprah interview…



I hate to say it, but this guy seems like he is just like Muff & Hax...


----------



## Lodpah

sdkitty said:


> she's not gonna say anything about his brother but what she says tells him all he needs to know
> 
> maybe he still thinks he can outshine the future king
> One thing I picked up on watching the clips of their netflix show on CNN - he said when he and the WIFE went to Australia they outshone the rest of the RF - so they were all jealous - therefore they had to not protect them from all the horrid racists?


He might want to check in with the Aussies on this.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I think the RF with their lovely Christmas presentation last night (?) are looking very classy while the grifters are looking vengeful and crass


That was a symbolic gathering at the Christmas presentation. It was a group of the greater family plus the younger Middletons. It was a gathering of the troups to send a message to dimwit Harry. They have strength in numbers and he has nothing   The older generation was there to represent those who knew their duty and performed it. The younger generation was there to show the future support  Harry has severed himself from all these people and more. The British people got the message loud and clear.  We aren’t going anywhere.


----------



## purseinsanity

DoggieBags said:


> It is amazing how her fairy tales never change. She’s always the heroine saving the day for all mankind not because she actually did anything but simply by her mere presence. South Africans dancing in the streets after her wedding…I guess this is her take on beauty and the beast? She sacrificed herself by going to live with the evil beast in his scary castle to save not sure who but in her mind she must have saved somebody! Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion. Her version of durance vile. Can’t you just see her in the Greta Garbo role saying “I want to be alone”. Her entire narrative is one giant cliche after another. But since it continues to work for her, I don’t see her changing her modus operandi any time soon. But it does get tiresome to watch.* I actually have very little interest in the gruesome twosome at this point but keep coming back to this thread because so many of the posts on this thread are amusing and / or educational. So thank you to all who continue to post their various view points and interesting bits of information. Please keep it going!*


This this this!  These two are utterly exhausting and I think the best thing to do to be rid of them forever, is for all news outlets to simply ignore them.  I don't have an iota of interest in their opinions, thoughts, false fairy tales and victimization.  I keep coming to this thread because it's the best thing ever!  Happy Friday everyone!


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Good question. I wonder if the parents' faith is relevant for such choice.



When you worship at the altar of the Almighty Dollar, it doesn't matter what religion others are.


----------



## purseinsanity

youngster said:


> Maybe!
> 
> Maybe, too, she is thinking she can't burn every bridge to the BRF.  Their cameras will be positioned somewhere around Glasgow for the Coronation otherwise.  *She, and everyone else, wants an interview too with KC3, Camilla, Will, Kate, etc.*


Gayle's as delusional as the dimwit duo if she thinks any of those people will grant her an interview.


----------



## duna

Lodpah said:


> Hope you’re right. Just frustrated with the BRF not doing anything like at least make a comment.


We would all like the RF to react to the s**t those two are throwing at them, but I think that totally ignoring them might be the best attitude towards them. To show them that the RF is ABOVE all this despicable behaviour and the two grifters are just digging themselves deeper and deeper into oblivion.


----------



## Lodpah

duna said:


> We would all like the RF to react to the s**t those two are throwing at them, but I think that totally ignoring them might be the best attitude towards them. To show them that the RF is ABOVE all this despicable behaviour and the two grifters are just digging themselves deeper and deeper into oblivion.


True. I was just exasperated already lol.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I was subjected to the Today Show daily royal segment while at the gym. They mentioned Harry's claim that Meghan's miscarriage was caused by the constant media "harassment". So she had one (supposedly) before Archie was born? I thought she had one (supposedly) after Archie and pre-LB, the one she wrote about so melodramatically in the NYT opinion piece? I can't keep up with their stories.


If she had one before Archie was born, does that mean she was allegedly pregnant at the wedding?


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I feel sorry for Will…



Know what's distracting?  Meghan blinks her left eye frequently, but not her right eye at all.  Like those creepy baby dolls.  Is that her secret to that eye crying on demand?


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> *Unfortunately, even Henry VIII would have had a hard time chopping his own male child's head off.*
> 
> I think he would have cancelled/annulled the wedding (Head of CafE so easily done) exiled MegZZ on 16C equivalent of a yacht to the edge of Earth, and locked Harry in the Tower with a dunce's cap on until he calmed down.


I think he'd easily have chopped off TW's head long before she could spout all this nonsense.


----------



## TC1

Asking Tyler Perry to be the Godfather? hmm..okay, even he seemed shocked to be asked and not all that interested in fulfilling that duty. "I don't want to go ever there and do all of that with them"   wow really making it seem like an honour


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## calicocat

xincinsin said:


> She may have convinced herself that *her truth was THE truth*.


A la George Costanza - if you believe it, it's not a lie!


----------



## csshopper

DoggieBags said:


> It is amazing how her fairy tales never change. She’s always the heroine saving the day for all mankind not because she actually did anything but simply by her mere presence. South Africans dancing in the streets after her wedding…I guess this is her take on beauty and the beast? She sacrificed herself by going to live with the evil beast in his scary castle to save not sure who but in her mind she must have saved somebody! Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion. Her version of durance vile. Can’t you just see her in the Greta Garbo role saying “I want to be alone”. Her entire narrative is one giant cliche after another. But since it continues to work for her, I don’t see her changing her modus operandi any time soon. But it does get tiresome to watch. I actually have very little interest in the gruesome twosome at this point but keep coming back to this thread because so many of the posts on this thread are amusing and / or educational. So thank you to all who continue to post their various view points and interesting bits of information. Please keep it going!


This, exactly.

Would only add, we have more  than enough of their malicious behaviors and crappy life to comment on for the rest of the year. So H and M if you’re reading this, please STFU until at least January. For those who celebrate it, Christmas is less than 10 days away, and we need some “tidings of comfort and joy” not more of the same old boring vomitous bile you’ve been spewing for far too long. In the spirit of true compassion, everyone, not just Christians, needs respite and the hope you will STFU is universal.

Mute the mouths, stay off the keyboards, and amuse yourselves by inviting your evidently live in photographer to video smashing plates as you watch the RF being raucously cheered by crowds and doing quite well without you. Ironic, in their pursuit of cosplaying Diana who famously said, “There were 3 people in this marriage”, they could say the same, only their third is some creepy person skulking around taking staged photos ad nauseum.


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> If she had one before Archie was born, does that mean she was allegedly pregnant at the wedding?



That's what said (or I tried to say)


papertiger said:


> Did she actually have time to have a miscarriage before Archie?
> 
> Perhaps this was a 'baby' she thought she was having, perhaps, around the time of the proposal?  ???



I think she must have told him she was, now she has to follow-through


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> That's what said (or I tried to say)
> 
> 
> I think she must have told him she was, now she has to follow-through


I thought I'd read somewhere Haz asked her when she was pregnant with Archie, (something along the lines of) "Are you really this time?"


----------



## papertiger

purseinsanity said:


> I thought I'd read somewhere Haz asked her when she was pregnant with Archie, (something along the lines of) "Are you really this time?"



Are you telling me he can't tell a Moonbump from a flat stomach?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Is it mine?









						Prince Harry jokes ‘Is it mine?’ when asked about Meghan Markle’s pregnancy
					

Royals also do dad jokes.




					pagesix.com
				






purseinsanity said:


> I thought I'd read somewhere Haz asked her when she was pregnant with Archie, (something along the lines of) "Are you really this time?"


----------



## Jayne1

Mrs.Z said:


> It’s like someone cornered you at a cocktail party and said let me just tell you my side of the story and they went on an endless rant and you were exhausted by the end and can’t recall much of what was said but have a lingering feeling there are multiple sides to this story!


I agree and that's also how I felt about that Woody Allen/Mia doc which was also just her side. I didn't watch because of that.

As soon as someone tells only their side, I think of that saying, paraphrasing - if you only hear one side of the story, you have no understanding at all.
​


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She drives me crazy. Somehow I never heard Kate whine about NotCott being too small.

Also, it was Harry's bachelor pad and never meant to be his marital home (William and Kate stayed for two years), but of course the greedy grifter wasn't happy with anything because she wasn't offered a palace.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> she was a strange and fascinating woman....I recall the stories about her later in life going around NYC in dark glasses and little or no makeup


She liked to walk and they would sometimes get a shot of her doing that. But that was pretty much it.


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She drives me crazy. Somehow I never heard Kate whine about NotCott being too small.
> 
> Also, it was Harry's bachelor pad and never meant to be his marital home (William and Kate stayed for two years), but of course the greedy grifter wasn't happy with anything because she wasn't offered a palace.
> 
> View attachment 5672122


Nor did she whine about the cottage on Anglesey being small either, and that wasn't in Palace grounds. They paid rent too.
ETA, it's actually three workers cottages knocked into one. I dread to think what M would think if she was living there.


----------



## Mrs.Z

Jayne1 said:


> I agree and that's also how I felt about that Woody Allen/Mia doc which was also just her side. I didn't watch because of that.
> 
> As soon as someone tells only their side, I think of that saying, paraphrasing - if you only hear one side of the story, you have no understanding at all.
> ​


Yes….and as someone else who was watching pointed out…..H & M own nothing …absolutely nothing, they never did anything wrong.  That I find unreal, most people would at least look inward and find a few things they could have done differently and taken ownership of them.


----------



## Mrs.Z

charlottawill said:


> I was subjected to the Today Show daily royal segment while at the gym. They mentioned Harry's claim that Meghan's miscarriage was caused by the constant media "harassment". So she had one (supposedly) before Archie was born? I thought she had one (supposedly) after Archie and pre-LB, the one she wrote about so melodramatically in the NYT opinion piece? I can't keep up with their stories.


Yes, it was after Archie, before Lillibet, they were involved in litigation (their choice) and that was too stressful for her.


----------



## papertiger

News feed is obsessed


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I think the RF with their lovely Christmas presentation last night (?) are looking very classy while the grifters are looking vengeful and crass


And their pretty matching colours!


----------



## Maggie Muggins

purseinsanity said:


> If she had one before Archie was born, does that mean she was allegedly pregnant at the wedding?


Before the wedding, it was rumoured that the BRF allowed ZedZed and Dufus to marry because she claimed to be pregnant while some people including some of us thought it was a fake pregnancy. So IMO ZedZed is now inventing a miscarriage to disprove the pre-wedding rumours of a fake pregnancy.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Suncatcher

DoggieBags said:


> It is amazing how her fairy tales never change. She’s always the heroine saving the day for all mankind not because she actually did anything but simply by her mere presence. South Africans dancing in the streets after her wedding…I guess this is her take on beauty and the beast? She sacrificed herself by going to live with the evil beast in his scary castle to save not sure who but in her mind she must have saved somebody! Then this latest scene on the plane with the pilot kneeling in front of her to thank her for “her service” as she bravely goes into exile on a private plane headed to a 16 bathroom mansion. Her version of durance vile. Can’t you just see her in the Greta Garbo role saying “I want to be alone”. Her entire narrative is one giant cliche after another. But since it continues to work for her, I don’t see her changing her modus operandi any time soon. But it does get tiresome to watch. I actually have very little interest in the gruesome twosome at this point but keep coming back to this thread because so many of the posts on this thread are amusing and / or educational. So thank you to all who continue to post their various view points and interesting bits of information. Please keep it going!


Yes she thought being a duchess was more like Marie Antonette than a public servant. The rest of the RF know that to survive, they have to be viewed more as a public servant than someone to whom people kneel and avert their eyes. She and her husband remain so tone deaf among other vile qualities they possess.


----------



## Jayne1

Sferics said:


> I hate to say it, but this guy seems like he is just like Muff & Hax...



That music! The background score of doom while talking about the palace smear campaign. So much manipulation.


----------



## Lodpah

WTFUDGE!









						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry said they once offered to move to Canada to give the royal family more space on the front pages of British tabloids
					

Harry and Meghan said they'd also considered moving to South Africa and New Zealand in an effort to distance themselves from UK tabloids.




					www.yahoo.com
				




Ok I know differences of opinions but birds of a feather flock together. Nasty, vile, so prideful and oh so out of touch.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Lounorada

youngster said:


> From Sarah Vine:
> 
> _Don’t be fooled by the adorable footage of him cuddling the dog or goofing around on holiday. On the basis of his behaviour in the documentary, the real Harry turns out to be rather a nasty piece of work.  Arrogant, bitter, vicious; the kind of person who likes to _


Well, JCMH is...







youngster said:


> From Maureen Callahan:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan: maybe YOU'RE the problem: MAUREEN CALLAHAN
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: There's an old saying that goes, essentially: If you ran into a jackass in the morning, you ran into a jackass. But if you run into jackasses all day - well, you're the jackass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _To anyone wondering if Harry and Meghan ever considered that maybe, just maybe, they are the problem, the answer is a resounding 'no.' *They take no accountability here for any family strife. Zero. They are totally blameless* — *except for being such paragons of truth and beauty, their light shining so bright those other royals just had to do away with them. They just can't help being so great.*
> 
> Yes, these would-be global do-gooders promoting kindness, love and humanitarianism — Meghan 'selected to break generational curses that need to be healed,' per a text from Beyoncé — are seething with rage. They are jealous, resentful, spiteful and without a shred of loyalty.
> 
> Worst of all, to my mind, is their utter lack of humor. They lack joy, perspective, an iota of self-deprecation. *Prick them and they don't just bleed — they gush, they carp, they wail and moan and rend their garments on every media platform that will pay them millions*. No one in history has ever been as wounded, as unfairly treated, as Harry and Meghan.
> 
> We've now spent six hours one-on-one with the Sussexes, and it's safe to say that neither has any discernible personality. Harry, of course, never needed to develop one — his wealth and fame, his coddled life, all but ensured that.
> 
> But Meghan — wow. For someone so sure that she's special, who tells us here she was so great at being an instant royal that the family bullied her out, was such a blinding light she couldn't even wear color for fear of upstaging her female in-laws — there's not one idiosyncratic thing about her. Not one.
> 
> She is, as they say, the definition of basic. She's a California girl into yoga, guided meditation, 'taking up space,' and meeting her future in-laws, second-in-line to the throne, wearing ripped jeans and bare feet. She's just that kind of unstudied, casual, madcap gal.
> 
> All Meghan wanted on the morning of her wedding? Not to watch the global pre-wedding coverage or have a quiet moment alone, savoring her last moments as a civilian. Not a genuine moment with her nearest and dearest. No, Meghan says all she wanted was 'a mimosa, a croissant, and to play [the song] 'Going to the Chapel.'
> 
> Does it get more on-the-nose than that? More literal? Meghan Markle's cardinal sin isn't that she's a bully (an allegation her lawyer denies) or a hypocrite or our own Woko Ono, claiming she really didn't know a lot about Prince Harry before meeting him.
> 
> No: Meghan's cardinal sin is being boring. Perhaps that's the root of some of her rage. Perhaps all this public tantruming is overcompensation for lack of a personality.* The only thing that actually made Meghan special is her royal status derived from an institution she shows loathing for and claims to be above, yet which she clings to with an iron grip. Perhaps she knows what we know: She's a phony. A woman who spent her life in search of the white-hot spotlight she now claims she never wanted.*
> 
> It's all so exhausting._


Alllllll of this!






mrsinsyder said:


> Harry says that them announcing she was pregnant with Lili on the same day Diana announced she was pregnant with him was a coincidence.
> 
> View attachment 5671757









andrashik said:


> Apologies if this has been posted. You ladies move fast!
> View attachment 5671879
> 
> 
> So Lilibucks has been baptised in England and TP is the godfather?
> 
> I chuckled at TP saying "  doing that with them"





TP with his spray-on facial hair needs to f*ck off. He must have received a nice, fat paycheck for his role in all of this.




QueenofWrapDress said:


> This only applied to texts that actually happened, though.





OMG this! The first I heard of the Beyoncé text and her reading it out to Netflix after being paid multi million $$ to do so, I thought, 'That was probably the first and last time she heard from Beyoncé'.
Actual real A-list celebs like confidentiality and I'm sure some basic respect. They sure as hell wouldn't be impressed with you blabbing a private conversation to the media for a paycheck. In fact nobody would, famous or not.
I also don't even believe that she got that text from Beyoncé and _if_ she did, then it was an old text before sh*t hit the fan and they became a huge whinging laughing stock. I don't believe anything that comes out of TW's mouth.
Bey blocking TW from all forms of communication:






Chanbal said:


> Wow!



Oh FFS!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Is Harry deluded or does he know this isn’t true but trying to get sympathy?
> 
> Maybe he didn’t realise Harry and Mm’s own staff were leaking because they treated their staff so badly?




I'm kind of loving how respected journalists come out saying "Not today, Satan".


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> Who is the person cackling in the background?  Doria?  Sounds horrible.


I think it is the person who made the video clip while watching and they were reacting to it.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> She liked to walk and they would sometimes get a shot of her doing that. But that was pretty much it.


I think she also went shopping


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, William radiates the proper energy to rule the land.    Hazzi looks weaker and weaker.




They really, really don't understand how their behaviour makes the Waleses shine even more, do they?


----------



## sdkitty

it amazes me how many people (in US TV) believe they just want to get their story (truth) out there.  Yes, for $100 million


----------



## Molly0

The whole Netflix thing is so sad.  I said it in the appreciation thread and I’ll say it here.  Oprah took advantage of two troubled souls, now Netflix, next is a publishing company.  I know they are getting alot of money but no amount of money can heal a broken heart. Not to mention the hearts that this nonsense coverage is breaking across the pond too.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I feel sorry for Will…




She is so f*cking aggressive. Honestly, I'd be more scared if she talked to me like this - and I'm sure she doesn't feel the need to be all sweet and lovey-dovey with Harry anymore - than if my brother William yelled at me.


----------



## sdkitty

Molly0 said:


> The whole Netflix thing is so sad.  I said it in the appreciation thread and I’ll say it here.  Oprah took advantage of two troubled souls, now Netflix, next is a publishing company.  I know they are getting alot of money but no amount of money can heal a broken heart. Not to mention the hearts that this nonsense coverage is breaking across the pond too.


or they took advantage of Oprah....they wanted their "truth" out there.  I don't blame Oprah


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sferics said:


> I hate to say it, but this guy seems like he is just like Muff & Hax...




Well, I'd like to see that whole clip and not a snippet. He might read from a transcript of a reader calling in or something, which I personally think is what happened here.


----------



## marietouchet

TC1 said:


> Asking Tyler Perry to be the Godfather? hmm..okay, even he seemed shocked to be asked and not all that interested in fulfilling that duty. "I don't want to go ever there and do all of that with them"   wow really making it seem like an honour


Funny how TP was not at wedding, well they did not know him back then, so newer acquaintance
Usually, old friends are picked as godparents and those willing to see the child is raised in the faith.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Funny how TP was not at wedding


I guess they didn't know him then.  but then, they didn't know some of the others they invited either


----------



## Molly0

sdkitty said:


> or they took advantage of Oprah....they wanted their "truth" out there.  I don't blame Oprah


Oprah should know better.  What about responsible journalism?
When people are messed up a responsible adult does not put them in such a position on the world stage.  It’s all about the almighty dollar.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Funny how TP was not at wedding


I don't believe he knew them at that point. Oprah was supposedly the one who asked him to lend his house to them when they "fled" the UK with little more than the shirts on their backs. She didn't even know them at the wedding.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so f*cking aggressive. Honestly, I'd be more scared if she talked to me like this - and I'm sure she doesn't feel the need to be all sweet and lovey-dovey with Harry anymore - than if my brother William yelled at me.


Aaaaaannnnnddddd.....Mandana is no longer working for them. Isn't that interesting?  Bet she wishes that she wasn't in this series for the entire world to see how she enabled them to look like idiots.  Maybe she will erase them from her CV lololol!


----------



## sdkitty

Molly0 said:


> Oprah should know better.  What about responsible journalism?
> When people are messed up a responsible adult does not put them in such a position on the world stage.  It’s all about the almighty dollar.


for them at least as much as for oprah
Did netflix take advantage of them too?


----------



## gracekelly

Molly0 said:


> Oprah should know better.  What about responsible journalism?
> When people are messed up a responsible adult does not put them in such a position on the world stage.  It’s all about the almighty dollar.


The fact is that Oprah is not a journalist.  She is an actress and celebrity talk show host.  It is in her best interest to make things as sensational as possible.  The truth is a secondary factor, and yes it is all about the almighty dollar.  She and Meghan worship at the same church.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> for them at least as much as for oprah
> Did netflix take advantage of them too?


No, Netflix did not take advantage of them as individuals.  Netflix took advantage of what they thought would be a sensationalist tale involving people related to the British monarchy.  As evidenced by the lack of veracity in The Crown, it was obvious that the Harry and Meghan story would be treated the same way.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> No, Netflix did not take advantage of them as individuals.  Netflix took advantage of what they thought would be a sensationalist tale involving people related to the British monarchy.  As evidenced by the lack of veracity in The Crown, it was obvious that the Harry and Meghan story would be treated the same way.


of course...you could also say they took advantage of Netflix with that big paycheck


----------



## sdkitty

wonder if WIFE is working her contacts to get this job








						Angelina Jolie Leaves Longtime UN Role After Over 20 Years
					

In a joint statement issued Friday, the actor and the agency announced she was "moving on" from her role.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Laila619

The Nutflix documentary makes Tyler Perry look like a gullible fool. The two grifters were using and sponging off him for a free house when Daddy Charles cut off the money, and he was even dumb enough to agree to be Lili’s godfather.  Gee, I wonder why the duplicitous duo a$ked him of all people to be their daughter’s godfather, someone they admittedly barely know? $$$

Can you imagine William and Catherine asking some rando celebrity they just met to be George’s godfather?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> She is so f*cking aggressive. Honestly, I'd be more scared if she talked to me like this - and I'm sure she doesn't feel the need to be all sweet and lovey-dovey with Harry anymore - than if my brother William yelled at me.


he probably is scared of her


----------



## sdkitty

interesting take....a person who is sympathetic toward them but admits they are annoying








						Maybe the Key to Thinking About Meghan and Harry Is Admitting: They’re Annoying!
					

The Sussexes have been through a lot. We can feel bad for them and recognize their true essence too.




					slate.com


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> or they took advantage of Oprah....they wanted their "truth" out there.  I don't blame Oprah


I do blame Oprah. She has years of experience and a whole research department and yet she let the 2 grifters ramble on dropping lie after lie unchallenged. She skewered author James Frey back in 2009 for writing what he claimed was his autobiography but later turned out to be complete fiction. But she gave H and TW a complete pass and continued to defend them even after their many untruths were exposed.








						Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com
					

After annihilating James Frey on live TV for fibbing in his memoir, Oprah tells the author of 'A Million Little Pieces' she owes him "an apology"




					content.time.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## youngster

Laila619 said:


> Can you imagine William and Catherine asking some rando celebrity they just met to be George’s godfather?



When did they meet Tyler Perry?  Isn't he one of those "really good friends who they've never met" (to quote Harry)?

And, yeah, asking some celeb you just met to be your child's godfather, like it was re-payment for the loan of the house.  They figured, make him a godfather and then they don't even have to send him a fruit basket to say thank you.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Had they actually even met Tyler Perry then?  Isn't he one of those "really good friends who they've never met" (to quote Harry)?
> 
> And, yeah, asking some celeb you just met to be your child's godfather, like it was re-payment for the loan of the house.  They figured, make him a godfather and then they don't even have to send him a fruit basket to say thank you.


Harry made that reference?
As far as the baptism, I doubt they are very religious.  Meghan was raised by a new-agey mom.  I have no problem with people not being religious.  There are a lot of very fine people who are athiests.  Just saying it might not matter what religion the godfather is.


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


>



It doesn’t matter.  They’ll be invited I’m sure - for politeness sake.  But they’re frozen out.  There’ll be some will they won’t they go, on Harry and Meghan’s part but no one cares, and no one in the RF will ever trust them.  It’s cold out, wrap up well guys


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> Harry made that reference?
> As far as the baptism, I doubt they are very religious.  Meghan was raised by a new-agey mom.  I have no problem with people not being religious.  There are a lot of very fine people who are athiests.  Just saying it might not matter what religion the godfather is.



I read that somewhere, I'll try and dig it up.  

I think since KC3 is head of the Church of England, there might be a few strict requirements about his grandchild's godparents perhaps?  Most godparents are usually close to the family and follow the same faith.  A godparent might be called to step in if the parents do not (or are unable to) provide religious education in the faith, though I doubt whether godparents are called on to do this very often.  I doubt Lili and Archie are going to get much in the way of formal religious training from Harry/MM.


----------



## needlv

I read online that the Netflix deal was only $6million.

their PR lied to make it $100M to tempt others into bigger offers, more contracts etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Angelina Jolie is leaving her UN role after 20+ years. Ghoul is probably frantically plotting whom she can harrass for the spot.

ETA: @sdkitty beat me to it!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Too lazy to screenshot, marklenews1 has claims up their most recent nanny left because the greedy duo refused to pay her overtime.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Angelina Jolie is leaving her UN role after 20+ years. Ghoul is probably frantically plotting whom she can harrass for the spot.4
> 
> ETA: @sdkitty beat me to it!


I suspect Angie is a role model for her....she'd love to follow in her footsteps, even if it means she has to work a bit


----------



## charlottawill

They're despicable


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> They're despicable




I saw that earlier and didn't post it because I was so disgusted. Even if Philip wasn't dying, cheering yourself on and being proud for slandering your family with a bunch of malicious lies? These two are just not normal.


----------



## charlottawill

Pessie said:


> It doesn’t matter.  They’ll be invited I’m sure - for politeness sake.  But they’re frozen out.  There’ll be some will they won’t they go, on Harry and Meghan’s part but no one cares, and no one in the RF will ever trust them.  It’s cold out, wrap up well guys


There's so much chatter everywhere about them I can't remember where I heard what, but someone said today if they show up for the coronation they'd better be prepared for a lot of boos. I am holding out hope that they will not be invited. Their presence will make it an undignified circus.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> There's so much chatter everywhere about them I can't remember where I heard what, but someone said today if they show up for the coronation they'd better be prepared for a lot of boos. I am holding out hope that they will not be invited. Their presence will make it an undignified circus.


I'm sure Charles is weighing the pros and cons.  On the one hand H is his son and he will be criticized if he doesn't include him.  On the other hand, H is disloyal and vindictive and would be a distraction.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure Charles is weighing the pros and cons.  On the one hand H is his son and he will be criticized if he doesn't include him.  On the other hand, H is disloyal and vindictive and would be a distraction.



I don't know, they edited The Queen's words. Maybe they'll release doctored footage of Charles sacrificing a baby on the eve of his coronation.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't know, they edited The Queen's words. Maybe they'll release doctored footage of Charles sacrificing a baby on the eve of his coronation.


I believe H called Charles a liar on the "docu series".....so how far does he have to go before he's cut off?


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


>



He’s probably right. Do we think they’ll go?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

Laila619 said:


> The Nutflix documentary makes Tyler Perry look like a gullible fool. The two grifters were using and sponging off him for a free house when Daddy Charles cut off the money, and he was even dumb enough to agree to be Lili’s godfather.  Gee, I wonder why the duplicitous duo a$ked him of all people to be their daughter’s godfather, someone they admittedly barely know? $$$
> 
> Can you imagine William and Catherine asking some rando celebrity they just met to be George’s godfather?


That’s exactly what I was going to say. 

I doubt they care if Tyler Perry is involved in any way with their child, but he has a lot of money he seems generous with, and that’s all they care about.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure Charles is weighing the pros and cons.  On the one hand H is his son and he will be criticized if he doesn't include him.  On the other hand, H is disloyal and vindictive and would be a distraction.


MY vote is that KC3 will take on the good cop role for a while
1. Fulanigate has been laid to rest, paving the way for Lady Susan to get a bit of respect for all her years of service. 
2. Parliament will reflect on removal of HRH, Prince, Sussex titles/styles and place in LOS. Tampering with LOS is kind of touchy/ shades of Oliver Cromwell. They don’t use HRH. And duchy removal, must consider Andrew too … what about Prince ??? But let Sunak deal with that
3. Invite them to coronation, they might not come, esp If they/he are booed on book trip or eviscerated in book interviews
4. The Harkles are boring now, all whine, no receipts


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> MY vote is that KC3 will take on the good cop role for a while
> 1. Fulanigate has been laid to rest, paving the way for Lady Susan to get a bit of respect for all her years of service.
> 2. Parliament will reflect on removal of HRH, Prince, Sussex titles/styles and place in LOS. Tampering with LOS is kind of touchy/ shades of Oliver Cromwell. They don’t use HRH. And duchy removal, must consider Andrew too … what about Prince ??? But let Sunak deal with that
> 3. Invite them to coronation, they might not come, esp If they/he are booed on book trip or eviscerated in book interviews
> 4. The Harkles are boring now, all whine, no receipts


I think they will go if invited....won't miss a photo op


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> That’s exactly what I was going to say.
> 
> I doubt they care if Tyler Perry is involved in any way with their child, but he has a lot of money he seems generous with, and that’s all they care about.


and he's well liked and respected


----------



## gelbergirl

I don’t see how there’s anyway Harry can go to that coronation after this display and the book too.


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I think they will go if invited....won't miss a photo op


You’re probably right. And then they’ll go, be frozen out, and they get to be victims all over again!


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> He’s probably right. Do we think they’ll go?



They were always going to get an invite. 

They will be isolated and frozen out. Not spoken to by anyone (important) security will be so tight but for our (UK's) protection, not theirs

They will be put so far from the action, they will feel like they're in Antarctica 

They know all this. 

I'm guessing M will be washing 'her' hair all day, and Harry will have a very important 'charity' Polo match - arranged.


----------



## Pessie

Jayne1 said:


> He’s probably right. Do we think they’ll go?


Yep, they’ll go.


----------



## papertiger

Jayne1 said:


> You’re probably right. And then they’ll go, be frozen out, and they get to be victims all over again!



At this point if they do another episode of victimhood #8 people will cry - of boredom 

At some point they must realise - everyone's asleep.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> He’s probably right. Do we think they’ll go?


Who knows what those two will do at this point?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Going through articles I had saved to look at later, this is from the Radar Online piece claiming the jerks planted stories to slam The Queen (I have not read all of it, but to be fair it seems more like they planted the story to force her to pay for their security) re: drones flying over their property:



> In the final three-episode installment of their bombshell Netflix series _Harry & Meghan_, Harry was recorded on the couple’s home cameras declaring, “It’s almost five in the morning. Archie’s waking up because of this.”
> 
> Markle was also heard saying, “Oh my god. They are just circling. What is wrong with these people?"
> 
> But *RadarOnline.com* can reveal a spokesperson for the royal outcasts were the ones who spewed the story to Sykes.



1. What kind of drone is it that is so loud that it wakes up a child sleeping inside? 

2. What's the point in flying over someone's house at 5 a.m. when normal people are still asleep?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Jayne1 said:


> He’s probably right. Do we think they’ll go?



Being the pathetic bloodsuckers that they are, absolutely.


----------



## youngster

Jayne1 said:


> He’s probably right. Do we think they’ll go?



Miss an opportunity to sit up front at the coronation and arrive in some chauffeur driven vehicle? 
Miss an opportunity to perhaps add to their list of grievances if family and others are cold to them or ignore them?
Miss an opportunity to play victim if they are booed by crowds?

Of course then there is also Harry not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear his uniform, or have a fit about not being able to wear it. And Meghan, not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear some ridiculously expensive ill-fitting frock with a tiara with cameras all around.

If they are invited, they'll go.  But, I'm not sure they'll be invited. I think they crossed a line with this Netflix series, and I don't think KC3 wants them there to distract from the event itself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gelbergirl said:


> I don’t see how there’s anyway Harry can go to that coronation after this display and the book too.



They are not very alert to their own, uh, shortcomings.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Miss an opportunity to sit up front at the coronation and arrive in some chauffeur driven vehicle?
> Miss an opportunity to perhaps add to their list of grievances if family and others are cold to them or ignore them?
> Miss an opportunity to play victim if they are booed by crowds?
> 
> Of course then there is also Harry not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear his uniform, or have a fit about not being able to wear it. And Meghan, not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear some ridiculously expensive ill-fitting frock with a tiara with cameras all around.
> 
> If they are invited, they'll go.  But, I'm not sure they'll be invited. I think they crossed a line with this Netflix series, and I don't think KC3 wants them there to distract from the event itself.


after harry's rant about the meeting with Charles and William, I think he crossed a line....said his father - the king - was lying.  We'll see what happens....will the book be released before the coronation?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> Of course then there is also Harry not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear his uniform, or have a fit about not being able to wear it. And Meghan, not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear some ridiculously expensive ill-fitting frock with a tiara with cameras all around.



I really hope all tiaras not worn by anyone else will have their yearly maintenance that day.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I really hope all tiaras not worn by anyone else will have their yearly maintenance that day.


there's a seller on Poshmark who has a wide assortment of tiaras for very reasonable prices


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> after harry's rant about the meeting with Charles and William, I think he crossed a line....said his father - the king - was lying.  We'll see what happens....will the book be released before the coronation?



Wasn't publication date in January?


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Wasn't publication date in January?


I think so.  and coronation in June?  He will have to put some inflammatory stuff in the book but what's left to tell?


----------



## mrsinsyder

charlottawill said:


> They're despicable



Ok this is what drove me crazy the most about the thing, WHO WAS FILMING ALL OF THIS?!

Especially where they’re doing guided meditation… with a film crew?! What?!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I think so.  and coronation in June?  He will have to put some inflammatory stuff in the book but what's left to tell?



When you are not bound to facts and truth the sky is the limit!


----------



## youngster

sdkitty said:


> after harry's rant about the meeting with Charles and William, I think he crossed a line....said his father - the king - was lying. We'll see what happens....will the book be released before the coronation?



Yes, it's going to be released in January, very soon really.  

Then, supposedly, they planned to embark on their "reconciliation year" whatever that means.  Since it's those two, maybe they plan to put out a press release, informing Will and KC3 that they are ready to accept their apologies and will certainly be pleased to attend the coronation.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> When you are not bound to facts and truth the sky is the limit!


I'm sure there will be plenty in the book about his mother....wonder if he will flame camilla.  that might be the nail in the coffin


----------



## Straight-Laced

*"The insufferable snobbery of Harry and Meghan"*
I can't keep up - has this been posted yet?

"Get out of here with your hypocritical, condescending bollocks..." 








						The insufferable snobbery of Harry and Meghan
					

Their ghastly Netflix weep-fest was an act of slander against the British people.




					www.spiked-online.com


----------



## csshopper

Pessie said:


> Yep, they’ll go.


If they go, I would love to see them patted down or scanned with a wand to check for recording devices. Then be escorted by handlers to their seats in the rear.


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think KCIII will decide when the book is out.


----------



## sdkitty

Straight-Laced said:


> *"The insufferable snobbery of Harry and Meghan"*
> I can't keep up - has this been posted yet?
> 
> "Get out of here with your hypocritical, condescending bollocks..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The insufferable snobbery of Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Their ghastly Netflix weep-fest was an act of slander against the British people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com


insufferable is right


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> I do blame Oprah. She has years of experience and a whole research department and yet she let the 2 grifters ramble on dropping lie after lie unchallenged. She skewered author James Frey back in 2009 for writing what he claimed was his autobiography but later turned out to be complete fiction. But she gave H and TW a complete pass and continued to defend them even after their many untruths were exposed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com
> 
> 
> After annihilating James Frey on live TV for fibbing in his memoir, Oprah tells the author of 'A Million Little Pieces' she owes him "an apology"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> content.time.com


Oprah gave them a platform but I don't think they were her victims


----------



## CarryOn2020

Laila619 said:


> The Nutflix documentary makes Tyler Perry look like a gullible fool. The two grifters were using and sponging off him for a free house when Daddy Charles cut off the money, and he was even dumb enough to agree to be Lili’s godfather.  Gee, I wonder why the duplicitous duo a$ked him of all people to be their daughter’s godfather, someone they admittedly barely know? $$$
> 
> Can you imagine William and Catherine asking some rando celebrity they just met to be George’s godfather?


Yes, TylerP does look and sound to be extremely generous until we remember he is a billionaire [or nearly one] with a huge real estate portfolio.  It is most likely better to have the houses occupied rather than empty.






						Tyler Perry’s incredible property portfolio | loveproperty.com
					

The outstanding property portfolio of entertainment polymath Tyler Perry




					www.loveproperty.com


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, TylerP does look and sound to be extremely generous until we remember he is a billionaire [or nearly one] with a huge real estate portfolio.  It is most likely better to have the houses occupied rather than empty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry’s incredible property portfolio | loveproperty.com
> 
> 
> The outstanding property portfolio of entertainment polymath Tyler Perry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.loveproperty.com


still you can wealthy and not be generous....I was listening to the talking sopranos podcast.  steve schirripa (who worked in vegas booking acts) said Tiger Woods was the worst tipper ever


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> Oprah gave them a platform but I don't think they were her victims


Agree. They were not victims but rather willing participants in partnership with Oprah to grab attention and publicity so they could market themselves. The interview was a teaser indicating that they had many more bombshells in reserve and that ultimately led to their Spotify and Netflix deals.


----------



## Molly0

gracekelly said:


> The fact is that Oprah is not a journalist.  She is an actress and celebrity talk show host.  It is in her best interest to make things as sensational as possible.  The truth is a secondary factor, and yes it is all about the almighty dollar.  She and Meghan worship at the same church.


That’s true.  Just like the British “journalist” that tricked Harry’s mother into her debacle of an “interview” .
Ironic huh?


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


> They're despicable





OMG, just when you think they can't be any worse, they surprise us all yet again.
There are not enough words to describe how disgusting they are as human beings.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> You’re probably right. And then they’ll go, be frozen out, and they get to be victims all over again!


Much the same as Bea and Eug did at the Christmas service.  They showed up in loud, patterned coats when the ‘real family’ was wearing perfectly coordinated solids. The message of “in vs. out” should be loud and clear.  Somebody must be giggling herself silly.


----------



## marietouchet

More coronation invite thoughts 
1. The Harkles just complained about frostiness at jubilee 
2. There will be coronation parties and receptions , tricky the invites for all of that
It is not just one invite - will they renew lease on Frogmore ? It is up in March


----------



## Icyjade

Pessie said:


> It doesn’t matter.  They’ll be invited I’m sure - for politeness sake.  But they’re frozen out.  There’ll be some will they won’t they go, on Harry and Meghan’s part but no one cares, and no one in the RF will ever trust them.  It’s cold out, wrap up well guys


I hope the RF give them their special individual arrival so that they can hear the booing loud and clear


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> More coronation invite thoughts
> 1. The Harkles just complained about frostiness at jubilee
> 2. There will be coronation parties and receptions , tricky the invites for all of that
> It is not just one invite - will they renew lease on Frogmore ? It is up in March


Who owns the lease?  Maybe there will be other tenants wishing to live there.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icyjade said:


> I hope the RF give them their special individual arrival so that they can hear the booing loud and clear


KC has had several eggs thrown his way recently.  Maybe people will line up with signs that clearly express their views.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Watch out, Harry and Meghan! Here come Uncle Gary's truth bombs… In exclusive interview, Kate's relative says the Duchess of Sussex is jealous of his niece because 'she makes it look effortless'​
*Gary Goldsmith responded to the Sussexes' six-part series in explosive fashion*
*He described William and Kate as 'the real fairy-tale love story' in the family*
*He also revealed how Kate ran over to give his daughter hug at Pippa's wedding *









						Princess of Wales' uncle hits back at Harry and Meghan
					

Gary Goldsmith (pictured) is feeling a little shell-shocked after watching the Duke and Duchess of Sussex drop their final 'truth bombs' about the 'dirty game' of royal life, courtesy of Netflix.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Watch out, Harry and Meghan! Here come Uncle Gary's truth bombs… In exclusive interview, Kate's relative says the Duchess of Sussex is jealous of his niece because 'she makes it look effortless'​
> *Gary Goldsmith responded to the Sussexes' six-part series in explosive fashion*
> *He described William and Kate as 'the real fairy-tale love story' in the family*
> *He also revealed how Kate ran over to give his daughter hug at Pippa's wedding *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Princess of Wales' uncle hits back at Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Gary Goldsmith (pictured) is feeling a little shell-shocked after watching the Duke and Duchess of Sussex drop their final 'truth bombs' about the 'dirty game' of royal life, courtesy of Netflix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



He is not wrong, but sadly he is the Thomas Markle of the Middletons. Just...shush.


----------



## Icyjade

They had filmed so much disgusting footage by the time they went back for QE and PP funerals. And they still had the cheek to talk to the RF as if nothing happened. I feel so disgusted thinking about that. They are a pair of filthy creatures and deserve to be miserable with each other. The RF play a long game. In 10 years they will be old and the Wales’s kids much more interesting and no one will be interesting in their whining.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> *I read online that the Netflix deal was only $6million.*
> 
> their PR lied to make it $100M to tempt others into bigger offers, more contracts etc.


ZedZed the Penocchio liar!


----------



## sdkitty

needlv said:


> I read online that the Netflix deal was only $6million.
> 
> their PR lied to make it $100M to tempt others into bigger offers, more contracts etc.


most reports I see say they had a deal of $100 million (or up to that) for their Netflix stuff - not just for this "docuseries"


----------



## sdkitty

always trying to keep up with the RF








						Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, TylerP does look and sound to be extremely generous until we remember he is a billionaire [or nearly one] with a huge real estate portfolio.  It is most likely better to have the houses occupied rather than empty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tyler Perry’s incredible property portfolio | loveproperty.com
> 
> 
> The outstanding property portfolio of entertainment polymath Tyler Perry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.loveproperty.com


Imagine Oprah calling him and asking "Hey buddy, can you spare a house? Asking for a friend".


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> always trying to keep up with the RF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


The narc strikes again. Most couples with small children include them in a holiday card.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> The narc strikes again. Most couples with small children include them in a holiday card.


very true


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Much the same as Bea and Eug did at the Christmas service.  They showed up in loud, patterned coats when the ‘real family’ was wearing perfectly coordinated solids. The message of “in vs. out” should be loud and clear.  Somebody must be giggling herself silly.


who would be giggling?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> Oprah gave them a platform but I don't think they were her victims


More like co-conspirators! I still maintain that OW was getting even with the BRF for convincing Diana to skip the tell-all interview that OW had so coveted.


----------



## xincinsin

TC1 said:


> Asking Tyler Perry to be the Godfather? hmm..okay, even he seemed shocked to be asked and not all that interested in fulfilling that duty. "I don't want to go ever there and do all of that with them"   wow really making it seem like an honour


Can just imagine him getting a note in faux calligraphy informing him that the Duchess of Sussex wishes to confer on him the honour of being godfather to her secondborn, dubbed Empress Lili by her cult followers. Followed up by a phonecall announcing that the *Duchess* herself wishes to speak with him. She won't be letting him and his billions escape the Claw.


----------



## Debbini

A holiday card and they don't include their children? That's not normal. At all. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck......


----------



## Lodpah

Debbini said:


> A holiday card and they don't include their children? That's not normal. At all. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck......


You’re so right! So sad for the children.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure Charles is weighing the pros and cons.  On the one hand H is his son and he will be criticized if he doesn't include him.  On the other hand, H is disloyal and vindictive and would be a distraction.


I am certain that Sunak will be consulted


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> always trying to keep up with the RF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Is this their personal card or the Archewell business card ? I think it is the latter


----------



## cat1234

I just have to say that I’ve been on top of this thread for years, but the last 10 days I have been between 30 to 100 pages behind!  This is insane.


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> The narc strikes again. Most couples with small children include them in a holiday card.


We respect their need for privacy.  In other words, no one is interested.
Most people use their summer vacation photos. Oh, they don’t go anywhere.  Must be awkward living that non-royal life.


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> It was only going to be a Commonwealth country if the UK paid for it _all_ - otherwise it was alwayZZ going to be LA LA LAnd
> 
> I don't think it was ever seriously ever going to be NZ or Botswana etc, possibly going to be Canada. MegZ thinks the centre of the universe is Universal-Disney, Africa and Australasia don't even appear on her radar except as holiday destinations.


There are thousands of places they could have moved to if they truly wanted privacy, but we all know that she couldn't stay away from photographers.  Even in Canada, if they had been serious about actually living there, they chose the most exclusive area to stay, guaranteeing that they would be followed. 

They had footage over and over of 2 small boats with photographers and someone near their front gate.  It was the same 2 boats and the same one person that they used footage from continuously.  Really, one person? 

And whining about how his security was taken away so they had to leave.  Can security not be hired out of your own pocket?  She went mooching to Tyler Perry because they didn't want to have to pay for anything themselves.  Are they that oblivious to their own lies that they have no problem telling us all of this?


Pessie said:


> Seems to me they’re now already excluded from those circles aren’t they?  I bet that was an old text from Beyoncé


But weren't we so lucky that there just happened to be a photographer to capture it all for us?


----------



## Toby93

marietouchet said:


> You are assuming there was a baptism.
> I doubt it was a COE baptism, there may not have been a church baptism at all
> In the US, one can be a “godparent” without a religious service, I know … a contradiction … and godparents do not have to be of the same faith as the service, a Christian baby can have a Jewish godparent …
> And TP said somewhere he did not want to do all the church stuff anyway…


I doubt there was a christening.  It was back and forth in the press, will they, won't they, and then there was a christening with the Queen in attendance for 2 royal babies at once.  That was their opportunity, but they would *never* have shared the spotlight


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> There are thousands of places they could have moved to if they truly wanted privacy, but we all know that she couldn't stay away from photographers.  Even in Canada, if they had been serious about actually living there, they chose the most exclusive area to stay, guaranteeing that they would be followed.
> 
> They had footage over and over of 2 small boats with photographers and someone near their front gate.  It was the same 2 boats and the same one person that they used footage from continuously.  Really, one person?
> 
> And whining about how his security was taken away so they had to leave.  Can security not be hired out of your own pocket?  She went mooching to Tyler Perry because they didn't want to have to pay for anything themselves.  Are they that oblivious to their own lies that they have no problem telling us all of this?
> 
> But weren't we so lucky that there just happened to be a photographer to capture it all for us?


That’s just the point.  The only pap shots here are from Backgrid, their  pre-paid paps.  Very few of us are interested in this boring, egotistical, obnoxious couple.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> I doubt there was a christening.  It was back and forth in the press, will they, won't they, and then there was a christening with the Queen in attendance for 2 royal babies at once.  That was their opportunity, but they would *never* have shared the spotlight


Tyler refused to go across the pond for the show baptism.  The Queen said no photos.  Who else was available? George and Amal? No, he was filming in Australia.  OW? Doubt she would want to go to the UK for that.  IIRC they said they would have a quiet ceremony in Cali.  Maybe that was their wake-up call that no A listers are interested in them.









						Harry and Meghan, you've finally lost us: MEGHAN MCCAIN
					

MCCAIN: It remains to be seen whether Americans will buy whatever grievance porn they create next. But judging from what we're reading today - America has moved on, even if they haven't.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Harry and Meghan's 'exhausting endurance test' Netflix docuseries scores just 43% on Rotten Tomatoes as viewers blast 'cringeworthy' Netflix show​
*Netflix released second half of Harry and Meghan docuseries on Thursday*
*It has been met with poor reviews and has scored low on Rotten Tomatoes*
*One writer said 'viewers would be so lucky' if the couple moved on from saga*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> They had filmed so much disgusting footage by the time they went back for QE and PP funerals. And they still had the cheek to talk to the RF as if nothing happened. I feel so disgusted thinking about that. They are a pair of filthy creatures and deserve to be miserable with each other. The RF play a long game. In 10 years they will be old and the Wales’s kids much more interesting and no one will be interesting in their whining.


We hope.


----------



## pomeline

Prince Harry and Meghan will receive invitations to King’s Coronation















Ok I've soon had enough of this.


----------



## charlottawill

marietouchet said:


> Is this their personal card or the Archewell business card ? I think it is the latter


That did occur to me, but I think she just wanted to have an excuse to send a photo of herself in a dress that I'm sure she thought she looked so bomb in


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> That did occur to me, but I think she just wanted to have an excuse to send a photo of herself in a dress that I'm sure she thought she looked so bomb in


Maybe another barefoot photo in the trees of their backs


----------



## jenayb

Tucker was interviewing TW’s sister Samantha tonight. Not sure if anyone else caught that.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> KC has had several eggs thrown his way recently.  Maybe people will line up with signs that clearly express their views.


When's the coronation? Maybe I'll pop over to London just to follow them around holding up a sign that says that. I doubt I'd be alone.


----------



## charlottawill

cat1234 said:


> I just have to say that I’ve been on top of this thread for years, but the last 10 days I have been between 30 to 100 pages behind!  This is insane.


And a few weeks ago we were all bored.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The King, being kingly 
[MM would be required to curtsy to the King and Queen]


----------



## csshopper

Lodpah said:


> You’re so right! So sad for the children.


Tucked back in the Nursery until another multi million dollar pay off for their participation in their parent’s privacy production comes along?

I think the NY pic is a deliberate nasty footnote, linking the content of their s**t show to the Award they recieved for the kinds of behaviors clearly on display in the 6 hour Whinology.

Neil Sean revealed tonight DORIA in the creepy photographer behind the camera for much of it. Definitely when they were filmed watching themselves watch Oprah.

NS said his source is a disgruntled Production Asst, fed up.


----------



## pomeline

Well, since they're pretty much inviting anyone, regardless of whether they're supporting His Majesty or plotting for the end of monarchy, subject or non-subject... I'm still waiting for my invitation KC... 






Feel free to slip it between the Christmas card you'll be sending me. I've got a tiara and I won't hesitate to use it.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Is this their personal card or the Archewell business card ? I think it is the latter


so then if its Archewell maybe it's appropriate not to have the kids pics....but then if it's a business/professional site would business clothing be appropriate rather than an evening gown?  maybe we're nitpicking


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> More like co-conspirators! I still maintain that OW was getting even with the BRF for convincing Diana to skip the tell-all interview that OW had so coveted.


I don't know about that.  I think Oprah saw them as good for ratings and the WOC factored in


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> always trying to keep up with the RF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


----------



## Toby93

DoggieBags said:


> I do blame Oprah. She has years of experience and a whole research department and yet she let the 2 grifters ramble on dropping lie after lie unchallenged. She skewered author James Frey back in 2009 for writing what he claimed was his autobiography but later turned out to be complete fiction. But she gave H and TW a complete pass and continued to defend them even after their many untruths were exposed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com
> 
> 
> After annihilating James Frey on live TV for fibbing in his memoir, Oprah tells the author of 'A Million Little Pieces' she owes him "an apology"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> content.time.com


That looks a bit like racism towards James Frey


----------



## Chanbal

From the Aussies - Part 2 

_Sky News hosts hate-watch 'self-indulgent' Harry and Meghan docuseries_​


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Molly0 said:


> The whole Netflix thing is so sad.  I said it in the appreciation thread and I’ll say it here.  Oprah took advantage of two troubled souls, now Netflix, next is a publishing company.  I know they are getting alot of money but no amount of money can heal a broken heart. Not to mention the hearts that this nonsense coverage is breaking across the pond too.


IMO they were all taking advantage of each other: epitome of the transactional relationships that Zed espouses. And they all didn't get what they wanted. The Harkles thought it would be easy money that they wouldn't have to put much effort into getting. Oprah, Netflix, Spotify and Penguin Random House thought they had a gold mine, only for the Harkles to turn out to be duds. I don't think Sparry has a broken heart, or at least not yet. He is still full of righteous fury because his family wouldn't give him his perks for doing nothing and he thinks they should have changed everything for his oh-so-special pwife.


sdkitty said:


> for them at least as much as for oprah
> Did netflix take advantage of them too?


We have no idea what they promised each other, but for sure what they received was not what they ordered.


sdkitty said:


> interesting take....a person who is sympathetic toward them but admits they are annoying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the Key to Thinking About Meghan and Harry Is Admitting: They’re Annoying!
> 
> 
> The Sussexes have been through a lot. We can feel bad for them and recognize their true essence too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com


Agree with the writer on some parts like "_when someone still seems really annoying in their own Netflix documentary, which was made by their own production company, it’s time to consider that they might be._"

Disagree on others: "_While the Sussexes have cashed in on telling their story in a very public and repetitive way, it feels more like they’re making the best of a bad situation. It’s hard to believe they would have chosen to pay such a huge personal price to get an averagely ranked Spotify podcast._" I might have agreed except that Sparry already admitted they never planned to stay and there is too much self-obsessed footage that is geared towards a dishonest future.

Best part is the erratum. Did the writer assume Zed had already lost her title?
_Correction: The original post described Meghan Markle as the former Duchess of Sussex, but she is in fact still the Duchess of Sussex._


sdkitty said:


> Harry made that reference?
> As far as the baptism, I doubt they are very religious.  Meghan was raised by a new-agey mom.  I have no problem with people not being religious.  There are a lot of very fine people who are athiests.  Just saying it might not matter what religion the godfather is.


I believe the criteria was rich, richer, richest and influential. Potential future husband may also play a part, as well as dumb as a brick.


----------



## Toby93

sdkitty said:


> I think they will go if invited....won't miss a photo op


At the end of the 6 hour whinefest, Haz said that he has made peace with the fact that his father has not apologised to him (  ) and that he has _moved on with his life._ 

I don't know if he completely missed the irony of him hashing up all of his grievances for public consumption, and then telling us he has already moved on with his life.  The pair of them will _never_ move on because the money lies with their connection to the BRF.

Do they think that anyone watched their show because they care about *them*?  They were watching because of his connection to Diana, and to see if they would trash the crown.  

That's all they've got, so they _need_ to attend the coronation to sustain any interest in them.


----------



## Chanbal

_GROSS details in the Harkles watching... THE OPRAH INTERVIEW!_​


----------



## Toby93




----------



## mrsinsyder

Oh Doria was apparently taking a lot of the pics and footage. That’s less creepy maybe? Tho a lot of it was professional quality and there’s no way that was done by her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I don't know about that.  I think Oprah saw them as good for ratings and the WOC factored in


It's a close call. With Diana's refusal, OW was 0 for 1. Next, Sarah Ferguson refused to bad mouth QEII even asserting that HM was the most forgiving person she knew that left OW at 0 for 2.  She must've thought she hit a homerun with the lying traitors ZedZed and Dufus. That she didn't question their motives nor verify their blatant lies doesn't sit well with me knowing how she used to literally destroy her guests without remorse 'to find the truth' years ago. I realized back then that I'd never be a fan and stopped watching her show after a few episodes.


----------



## Molly0

Maggie Muggins said:


> It's a close call. With Diana's refusal, OW was 0 for 1. Next, Sarah Ferguson refused to bad mouth QEII even asserting that HM was the most forgiving person she knew that left OW at 0 for 2.  She must've thought she hit a homerun with the lying traitors ZedZed and Dufus. That she didn't question their motives nor verify their blatant lies doesn't sit well with me knowing how she used to literally destroy her guests without remorse 'to find the truth' years ago. I realized back then that I'd never be a fan and stopped watching her show after a few episodes.


Me too!  I lost respect for Oprah long ago.


----------



## oldbag

Toby93 said:


> At the end of the 6 hour whinefest, Haz said that he has made peace with the fact that his father has not apologised to him (  ) and that he has _moved on with his life._
> 
> I don't know if he completely missed the irony of him hashing up all of his grievances for public consumption, and then telling us he has already moved on with his life.  The pair of them will _never_ move on because the money lies with their connection to the BRF.
> 
> Do they think that anyone watched their show because they care about *them*?  They were watching because of his connection to Diana, and to see if they would trash the crown.
> 
> That's all they've got, so they _need_ to attend the coronation to sustain any interest in them.


At this stage in my life, I might say yes I do owe you an apology. I'm sorry you were ever born. With the only life you have you have done nothing but live in misery and spread misery. I am sorry you have never once found it in yourself to find even a modicum of happiness, let alone for others who tried their best to love you and guide you. I apologize to everyone who have had the misfortune to cross your path and not find inspiration but only disappointment. There is no bright light in your life, only darkness. Believe me you don' t know how sorry I am. 
Dad.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

jenayb said:


> Tucker was interviewing TW’s sister Samantha tonight. Not sure if anyone else caught that.


It's here!


----------



## Pessie

charlottawill said:


> The narc strikes again. Most couples with small children include them in a holiday card.


Finding I’m now alert to those 3/4 profile shots she likes so much


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> They were always going to get an invite.
> 
> They will be isolated and frozen out. Not spoken to by anyone (important) security will be so tight but for our (UK's) protection, not theirs
> 
> They will be put so far from the action, they will feel like they're in Antarctica
> 
> They know all this.
> 
> I'm guessing M will be washing 'her' hair all day, and Harry will have a very important 'charity' Polo match - arranged.


Whether they go or not, they will be whining that no one turned up for their grand party for Archie.


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Going through articles I had saved to look at later, this is from the Radar Online piece claiming the jerks planted stories to slam The Queen (I have not read all of it, but to be fair it seems more like they planted the story to force her to pay for their security) re: drones flying over their property:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. What kind of drone is it that is so loud that it wakes up a child sleeping inside?
> 
> 2. What's the point in flying over someone's house at 5 a.m. when normal people are still asleep?


Strictly drama. These idiots think a drone is as noisy as a helicopter. And of course it sounds more sinister to claim it happened in the dark. Pure fantasy. I'm not even going to term it "paranoia". I believe Zed takes a dark joy in being stalked because it proves that she is desirable. Hence the multiple instances in Toronto and Montecito of her nuisance calling the cops.


youngster said:


> And Meghan, not wanting to miss an opportunity to wear some ridiculously expensive ill-fitting frock with a tiara with cameras all around.


And this time round, everyone will know she is wired for video and sound.


----------



## Pessie

Toby93 said:


>



Protesting too much??
I’m not the least fond of celeb naked bump photoshots, but in this case….
….and I go along with everyone who’s commented on the lack of birthing stories.  Given they’ve blabbed on about literally everything else in their private lives it’s a significant gap.


----------



## Sferics

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Well, I'd like to see that whole clip and not a snippet. He might read from a transcript of a reader calling in or something, which I personally think is what happened here.


This is very true!

Found the entire thing...here you are.


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Much the same as Bea and Eug did at the Christmas service.  They showed up in loud, patterned coats when the ‘real family’ was wearing perfectly coordinated solids. The message of “in vs. out” should be loud and clear.  Somebody must be giggling herself silly.


Perhaps only the inner circle was required to coordinate? I don't have a bad impression of Bea.


marietouchet said:


> More coronation invite thoughts
> 1. The Harkles just complained about frostiness at jubilee
> 2. There will be coronation parties and receptions , tricky the invites for all of that
> It is not just one invite - will they renew lease on Frogmore ? It is up in March


Imagine all the stories of how they were disinvited from parties and receptions  


Toby93 said:


> There are thousands of places they could have moved to if they truly wanted privacy, but we all know that she couldn't stay away from photographers.


They can still make money on this predilection of her to romance the paps. Sparry might have been on to a good thing with his Girl Dad commercial. Zed can sign on with tour agencies to bring publicity to remote areas. Face of the Boondocks!


CarryOn2020 said:


> The King, being kingly
> [MM would be required to curtsy to the King and Queen]



It would of course be the deepest of all curtseys. Maybe an undergarment brand can get her to merch their wares, then she can yoga-flex till her reconstructed nose touches her bunions and she flips her skirt high. Guaranteed to be news round the world.


sdkitty said:


> so then if its Archewell maybe it's appropriate not to have the kids pics....but then if it's a business/professional site would business clothing be appropriate rather than an evening gown?  maybe we're nitpicking


The bespoke sack is so her! Besides, buying awards is their business.


Toby93 said:


> At the end of the 6 hour whinefest, Haz said that he has made peace with the fact that his father has not apologised to him (  ) and that he has _moved on with his life._
> 
> I don't know if he completely missed the irony of him hashing up all of his grievances for public consumption, and then telling us he has already moved on with his life. The pair of them will _never_ move on because the money lies with their connection to the BRF.


Sparry expects his father to apologize. Zed expects Kate to offer an olive branch. They only have so many tricks to perform. So here on out, they are going to be fictionalizing their life even more.


Toby93 said:


>



Notice how in this montage of "candid" shots, she does not cradle the bump? So all that public cradling and double cradling was to seek attention.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

sdkitty said:


> I think they will go if invited....won't miss a photo op


Harry will go. Personally, I think she'll conveniently have a miscarriage in late March/early April and use that as a reason for her not to go. There will be time enough for her to 'recover' somewhat so it doesn't look like Harry is abandoning her so soon afterwards. It will be 'advisable' for her not to fly long haul for a while. 

Ps, I'm not mocking miscarriages, had a few myself, but I believe she'd go this low.


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




No name on the scan?


----------



## papertiger

Toby93 said:


>




I hope no one reads out the texts I send to people -  on TV, to be reprinted in the press and be embalmed forever more. 

I hope they got a release form from Beyoncé. 

Especially in view of the MM V Mail on Sunday court case ruling making clear (with damages of a £1) that publishing it would be copyright infringement to be made public/monitized (05.01,22 The Guardian).


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Perhaps only the inner circle was required to coordinate? I don't have a bad impression of Bea.


Yes, the inner circle that they are not part of. In a perfect world, they would renounce their titles, renounce their LoS and encourage their father and mother to do the same.  Yes, I am aware it is not a perfect world.  

No, I don’t have a bad impression of either Bea or Eug.  Would Eug or Bea intentionally leak info to the toxic two?  Would they intentionally try to steal W&K’s spotlight?  No, I doubt that they are that sophisticated or intentional about much. Imo they seem typical of entitled elitists and seem to be naive.  Hazzi appears to be the same way.  I use the word _seem_ because I do not know any of them, so I am simply guessing. I could be wrong. It is not their fault necessarily, it is the world they were born into so it is somewhat understandable.


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I hope no one reads out the texts I send to people -  on TV, to be reprinted in the press and be embalmed forever more.
> 
> I hope they got a release form from Beyoncé.
> 
> Especially in view of the MM V Mail on Sunday court case ruling making clear (with damages of a £1) that publishing it would be copyright infringement to be made public/monitized (05.01,22 The Guardian).


I saw a clip where Hazzi told her to call Bey and MM said no.  It appears MM prefers to correspond via email or text rather than telephone. Maybe she is insecure about her ability to carry a conversation?


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> No name on the scan?


Excellent point.  Does the top right photo look like MM’s profile?


----------



## paper_flowers

jenayb said:


> Tucker was interviewing TW’s sister Samantha tonight. Not sure if anyone else caught that.


I did! I liked her closing remarks about what advice she’d give Harry’s family


----------



## carmen56

Debbini said:


> A holiday card and they don't include their children? That's not normal. At all. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck......


Maybe the invisikids were rented out elsewhere that day!


----------



## Pessie

papertiger said:


> No name on the scan?


Cropped


----------



## jblended

Toby93 said:


>



But Harry fangirling over this was so put on.  He is just as bad as Meg for sucking up to celebs. He's acting (badly- straight to the camera) like he's completely forgotten he's the King's son. It blows my mind that he'd rather fangirl Bey than the literal King who holds the purse strings. 

Edit: inserted the wrong quote oops


----------



## Sharont2305

jblended said:


> It blows my mind that he'd rather fangirl Bey than the literal King who holds the purse strings.


And completely forgotten who will be holding the purse strings next which, to me, is more important. I'm assuming William will be King for a lot longer that Charles.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Excellent point.  Does the top right photo look like MM’s profile?



Everything's fishy unless proven otherwise, these two need every word run through Turnitin and every image FotoForensics


----------



## duna

papertiger said:


> No name on the scan?


Exactly what I thought, it could be anybody's!


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> always trying to keep up with the RF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



That link doesn't go anywhere for me - (once again it could definitely be my computer)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> always trying to keep up with the RF
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
> 
> 
> The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



Yeah I don't know, a couple is not a family. Seeing they had no qualms showing bathing pictures of their baby there is really no reason to exclude the kids.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the inner circle that they are not part of. In a perfect world, they would renounce their titles, renounce their LoS and encourage their father and mother to do the same.  Yes, I am aware it is not a perfect world.



Why though  That's not necessarily how a monarchy works, unless you're Danish.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> I saw a clip where Hazzi told her to call Bey and MM said no.  It appears MM prefers to correspond via email or text rather than telephone. Maybe she is insecure about her ability to carry a conversation?



My take: that text is a product of her vivid imagination as usual, so it would be a little weird to call Beyoncé over that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sharont2305 said:


> And completely forgotten who will be holding the purse strings next which, to me, is more important. I'm assuming William will be King for a lot longer that Charles.



And I have a feeling Will won't be that forgiving (and I fully support that).


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> I saw a clip where Hazzi told her to call Bey and MM said no.  It appears MM prefers to correspond via email or text rather than telephone. Maybe she is insecure about her ability to carry a conversation?


Or doesn’t know Beyoncé or more likely never got a text from her….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Why though  That's not necessarily how a monarchy works, unless you're Danish.


They aren’t working royals. Time to cut back. Imo


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I don't know, a couple is not a family. Seeing they had no qualms showing bathing pictures of their baby there is really no reason to exclude the kids.


I agree that this photo card does look like it is from the ‘foundation-not-a-foundation.  Still, is the evening look their best one?  I know they want emphasize the award, maybe photos of people they helped would encourage more to donate, if those are available.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> The King, being kingly
> [MM would be required to curtsy to the King and Queen]



If the Fulani thing is any indication … apologies are negotiated IF AND ONLY IF the apology will be publicly accepted
Harkles will never do that, they might have to shut up


----------



## Lounorada

charlottawill said:


> The narc strikes again. Most couples with small children include them in a holiday card.





(If this was their non-business card) They probably ran out of photos of the kids after using them all in the propagandamentary. Next best thing? Paparazzi pictures from an event. Unfortunate choice though, she looks like the Joker with that creepy, crazy wide smile.




CarryOn2020 said:


> I saw a clip where Hazzi told her to call Bey and MM said no.  It appears MM prefers to correspond via email or text rather than telephone. Maybe she is insecure about her ability to carry a conversation?


She probably never actually got that message and if she did I bet it was an email most likely written and sent by Beyoncé's assistant. Why would she be reading a text message from her laptop? I thought that was odd. You'd read a text message from your phone.
I highly doubt Beyoncé gave TW her real phone number to them because H&M are known to be untrustworthy and indiscreet and I'm sure she'd never actually answer the phone to TW


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> That link doesn't go anywhere for me - (once again it could definitely be my computer)


You can see the card from the Montecitos below. Didn't Haz mention something about returning the titles? Well, it is likely one more falsehood!


----------



## Chanbal

Lounorada said:


> She probably never actually got that message and if she did I bet it was an email most likely written and sent by Beyoncé's assistant. Why would she be reading a text message from her laptop? I thought that was odd. You'd read a text message from your phone.
> I highly doubt Beyoncé gave TW her real phone number to them because H&M are known to be untrustworthy and indiscreet and I'm sure she'd never actually answer the phone to TW
> View attachment 5672624


You are onto something…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Wow, Liz, naughty naughty









						Liz Hurley addresses Prince Harry rumour
					

Liz Hurley has denied she is the mystery 'beautiful older woman' Prince Harry reportedly lost his virginity to during an interview with the Saturday Times magazine.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

Is this credible?


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

It must have been an interesting lunch… A post below from one of the attendees is rather 'graphic'.


----------



## Chanbal

"_Why we are talking about him as *her* former aide_"… Mandana's words are very revealing about what Hazz represents in the Arch*** Empire imo. They seem to support J. Clarkson's post. (Knauf is the former aide of Hazz & TW)


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

How would Netfl*x/Harkles expect any comments from the Palace without confirming the authenticity of their request and providing footage of the reality show? This is a vendetta against Will imo. Charles loves both sons, but he must act to protect his heir.   


_"The royal family’s top press officials initially told reporters they had not been contacted for comment by the producers of Harry & Meghan, a six-episode behind-the-scenes look at the lives of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the circumstances that led them to step back as working members of the royal family. Hours later, the officials changed their story, saying that they had been contacted by “a third-party production company” *but their attempts to verify the company’s authenticity with Netflix and Archewell Productions (the Sussexes’ production company, which co-produced the docuseries) received no response*._

*However, Harry & Meghan production company Story Syndicate told BuzzFeed News that not only had the chief press officers at Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace been contacted for an official response, but that Lee Thompson, communications secretary for the Prince and Princess of Wales, confirmed receipt of the email and requested to see footage from the docuseries."*









						The Royal Family’s Press Offices Changed Their Story About Being Contacted By The Producers Of Netflix’s “Harry & Meghan” And Failed To Mention Their Communications With The Company
					

Spokespersons for Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace claimed they were unable to verify the authenticity of an email from the docuseries’ producers, but neglected to tell reporters that a top royal press official engaged with the company and requested clips from the then-unreleased show.




					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## youngster

I don't mind if they attend the coronation. They risk being publicly booed in a big way. They know most everyone attending despises them. The family will keep their distance. Actually, Harry bowing to KC3 and MM doing her curtsy would be quite the visual given how much they detest the family and the institution themselves.  Even the sugars would not know how to reconcile that.

They'll be seated behind a marble pillar or another large candle, with Major Johnny positioned behind them. Can't have Harry jumping up and screaming _I object, I object_, and rushing to seize the crown off KC3's head.


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


>




You'd think Jason Knauf would have documentation that he could release, making it clear who requested him to provide evidence.


----------



## Chanbal

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And I have a feeling *Will won't be that forgiving* (and I fully support that).


How can he forgive?



youngster said:


> You'd think Jason Knauf would have documentation that he could release, making it clear who requested him to provide evidence.


They never expected that Knauf would release the emails. I believe the rumors about TW's desire to destroy Will.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> How would Netfl*x/Harkles expect any comments from the Palace without confirming the authenticity of their request and providing footage of the reality show? This is a vendetta against Will imo. Charles loves both sons, but he must act to protect his heir.
> 
> 
> _"The royal family’s top press officials initially told reporters they had not been contacted for comment by the producers of Harry & Meghan, a six-episode behind-the-scenes look at the lives of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and the circumstances that led them to step back as working members of the royal family. Hours later, the officials changed their story, saying that they had been contacted by “a third-party production company” *but their attempts to verify the company’s authenticity with Netflix and Archewell Productions (the Sussexes’ production company, which co-produced the docuseries) received no response*._
> 
> *However, Harry & Meghan production company Story Syndicate told BuzzFeed News that not only had the chief press officers at Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace been contacted for an official response, but that Lee Thompson, communications secretary for the Prince and Princess of Wales, confirmed receipt of the email and requested to see footage from the docuseries."*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royal Family’s Press Offices Changed Their Story About Being Contacted By The Producers Of Netflix’s “Harry & Meghan” And Failed To Mention Their Communications With The Company
> 
> 
> Spokespersons for Buckingham Palace and Kensington Palace claimed they were unable to verify the authenticity of an email from the docuseries’ producers, but neglected to tell reporters that a top royal press official engaged with the company and requested clips from the then-unreleased show.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com


So true, without a doubt a vendetta. _Your brother_. The way she says it shows the hate is real.  There is a clip where Hazzi says “it’s his _inheritance_”  with an evil emphasis on _inheritance_.  He says it as if this is news, real news.    What a jerk.


----------



## sdkitty

papertiger said:


> That link doesn't go anywhere for me - (once again it could definitely be my computer)




Log InJoin HuffPost
Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop
×
​​​​​​​​





















































































































WHAT'S HOT​


Kari Lake Slams 'Bastards' In NSFW Election Rant At Mar-A-Lago​


Elon Musk Reinstates Journalists' Suspended Accounts Following Twitter Poll​


21 Of The Funniest Tweets About Cats And Dogs This Week​


Sen. Susan Collins Is Trying To Block Stricter Rules Protecting Endangered Whales​


Minnesota Man Who Idolized Mass Shooters Was Allegedly Building Arsenal: FBI​


Elon Musk Reportedly Seeking More Money To Prop Up Twitter​


Pentagon Has Received ‘Several Hundreds’ Of New UFO Reports​


2 Students Shot Dead By Masked Gunman Outside Chicago High School​


United Nations Rips 'Dangerous Precedent' Of Elon Musk's Chilling Crackdown On Journalists​


Elon Musk's Chosen Journalist For 'Twitter Files' Scolds Him For Free Speech Assault​


Judge Warned In 2021 Of Gay Bar Attacker's Shootout Plans​https://www.huffpost.com/entry/time-perception-aging_l_63973dc2e4b0169d76d92560
Time Flies By Faster As We Get Older. Here's Why.​

ENTERTAINMENTNETFLIXPRINCE HARRYMEGHAN MARKLE
Prince Harry And Meghan Markle Share Holiday Wishes One Day After Netflix Drop​The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.



By
Carly Ledbetter
Dec 16, 2022, 06:03 PM EST|*Updated* 12 hours ago


https://facebook.com/share.php?u=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-harry-meghan-markle-holiday-card-wishes_n_6397925ce4b0c2814645eb4e?utm_campaign=share_facebook&ncid=engmodushpmg00000003
https://twitter.com/share?text=The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's holiday photo was taken just last week in New York City.&url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/prince-harry-meghan-markle-holiday-card-wishes_n_6397925ce4b0c2814645eb4e?utm_campaign=share_twitter&ncid=engmodushpmg00000004&hashtags=&via=HuffPostEnt


Prince Harry and Meghan Markle sent out holiday wishes to all on Friday, just one day after Netflix released Volume II of the couple’s docuseries, “Harry & Meghan.”
The card was sent out via an Archewell email, with the subject line “Happy Holidays from The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.”
“Wishing you a joyful holiday season,” the e-greeting says. “From our family to yours, and on behalf of our teams at The Archewell Foundation, Archewell Audio, and Archwell Productions, we wish you health, peace, and a very happy new years!”
ADVERTISEMENT

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s card features a black-and-white photo of the couple taken just last week at the Ripple of Hope Gala in New York City.






The photo of the two was taken recently at the Ripple of Hope Gala, where they were recipients of the 2022 Robert F. Kennedy Ripple of Hope award.
ARCHEWELL
The holiday greeting comes just one day after the final three episodes of the couple’s docuseries dropped, in which Harry alleged that his brother, Prince William, screamed at him during royal exit talks.

The Duke of Sussex also claimed that people “were happy to lie to protect my brother” but “were never willing to tell the truth to protect us.”
ADVERTISEMENT

On Sunday, King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla released their official holiday card, taken by royal photographer Samir Hussein at the Braemar Games in September.






The 2022 Christmas card of King Charles III and the Queen Consort is propped in front of a Christmas tree in Clarence House. The card's photograph was taken at the Braemar Games on Sept. 3 by Samir Hussein.
JONATHAN BRADY / PA / SAMIR HUSSEIN
Just two days later, William and Kate Middleton released their official Christmas card ― their first as Prince and Princess of Wales.
The card shows a casual side of the prince and princess and their three children: Prince George, Princess Charlotte and Prince Louis.






MATT PORTEOUS
ADVERTISEMENT


CobaltBlu said:


> I read that this all wasnt even filmed at their real house.  They did not want filming in their actual home, so all this home stuff is fake?  Can anyone confirm this, I believe I read it in a couple of different places.


so if the home wasn't their home (which I've read from several sources and they say there could be lots of reasons for this), then the scenes of them were acting?  


CobaltBlu said:


> I read that this all wasnt even filmed at their real house.  They did not want filming in their actual home, so all this home stuff is fake?  Can anyone confirm this, I believe I read it in a couple of different places.


----------



## marietouchet

youngster said:


> You'd think Jason Knauf would have documentation that he could release, making it clear who requested him to provide evidence.


Did anyone see the documentary to VERIFY this disclaimer? what a whopper if it is true 
Everyone has receipts except the Harkles


----------



## CarryOn2020

Time to vote.  No login needed.








						Stars and Scars -- You Be the Judge
					

Harry and Meghan have fired cannons at the Royals and there may not be any turning back, and the Tory Lanez trial is insane!!! So we gotta ask ...




					www.tmz.com
				




*Harry & Meghan Doc ...*

I'm Squarely On Their Side
Enough Whining Already!
Better Royal ...​
Meghan
Kate
Better Royal …​
Harry
William


----------



## gelbergirl

sdkitty said:


> I think they will go if invited....won't miss a photo op



It'll be so great when they get bad seats, away from the Senior Royals, with the distant family members (maybe even outdoor seating!)


----------



## LittleStar88

CarryOn2020 said:


> Time to vote.  No login needed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stars and Scars -- You Be the Judge
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan have fired cannons at the Royals and there may not be any turning back, and the Tory Lanez trial is insane!!! So we gotta ask ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Harry & Meghan Doc ...*
> 
> I'm Squarely On Their Side
> Enough Whining Already!
> Better Royal ...​
> Meghan
> Kate
> Better Royal …​
> Harry
> William




Poll results. TMZ audience is typically pretty sympathetic towards TW and Hazbeen. The tide is turning…


----------



## marietouchet

Deep thought … 
H has spoken about getting treatment for mental issues , good
MM was suicidal at one point but has never spoken about treatment - other than saying she got no help from HR, hmmm


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> It must have been an interesting lunch… A post below from one of the attendees is rather 'graphic'.



Wowowow!  That is really nasty!  This is the most insulting thing I have read from a name person. Loved it!  Lololol!


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Deep thought …
> H has spoken about getting treatment for mental issues , good
> MM was suicidal at one point but has never spoken about treatment - other than saying she got no help from HR, hmmm


Are they setting themselves up for an insanity defense as a way of explaining their atrocious behavior?


----------



## Nutashha

Well, this was interesting!

Body Language Experts Dissect Prince Harry's Behavior – “Prince Harry Is Unsure about Sharing”​


----------



## sdkitty

after hearing someone say (not in regard to H&M) that social media is ruining our society and how people buy into conspiracy theories etc., I'm asking myself if I'm part of that.  But even if we (most of us on this thread) are wrong and H&M are truly victims of bullying and abuse, I think you still have to ask why are they seeking the spotlight?   Not just to tell their "truth" IMO.
Why is he slandering his father and brother while at the same time seeming to want to have the door open to go home or to retain his royal status?  Just doesn't make sense.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> Poll results. TMZ audience is typically pretty sympathetic towards TW and Hazbeen. The tide is turning…
> 
> View attachment 5672733


update!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Jeremy Clarkson sounds like he has some serious issues. After comparing MM to a serial killer he goes on to write...

_At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her._

Just to clarify, he is referring to MM, not the serial killer.

And yet in another column (not about MM) he states...

_Because if we have to stop the world every time someone on it has hurty feelings, it won’t really work as a world any more._

I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital


----------



## papertiger

Made just a couple of hours ago


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> Are they setting themselves up for an *insanity defense* as a way of explaining their atrocious behavior?


I think this is one of the approaches taken by the BRF. Hazz is unstable and they are concerned with him, so they will do nothing to fix the situation imo.


----------



## CobaltBlu

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Jeremy Clarkson sounds like he has some serious issues. After comparing MM to a serial killer he goes on to write...
> 
> _At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her._
> 
> Just to clarify, he is referring to MM, not the serial killer.
> 
> And yet in another column (not about MM) he states...
> 
> _Because if we have to stop the world every time someone on it has hurty feelings, it won’t really work as a world any more._
> 
> I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital
> 
> View attachment 5672852


I’m no fan of M&H but what he writes is appalling in my opinion.  He seems extreme to say the least.


----------



## Pessie

LittleStar88 said:


> Poll results. TMZ audience is typically pretty sympathetic towards TW and Hazbeen. The tide is turning…
> 
> View attachment 5672733


I don’t like this at all, makes me angry.  Why the h*ll drag William and Kate into it?  They’ve done nothing to deserve being treated like this.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I might never stop laughing. Please send over the money pool from our bet because I CALLED IT FIRST


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> I’m no fan of M&H but what he writes is appalling in my opinion.  He seems extreme to say the least.


Of course it  is extreme and that was the point. Putting out the message that Harry is completely manipulated by her and she is the one at fault. Don’t forget who he had lunch with. He is paving the way for the palace line @Chanbal that he is damaged and therefore he will eventually need the family to help him.   Just getting his excuses in place to explain irrational behavior.


----------



## tiktok

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Jeremy Clarkson sounds like he has some serious issues. After comparing MM to a serial killer he goes on to write...
> 
> _At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her._
> 
> Just to clarify, he is referring to MM, not the serial killer.
> 
> And yet in another column (not about MM) he states...
> 
> _Because if we have to stop the world every time someone on it has hurty feelings, it won’t really work as a world any more._
> 
> I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital
> 
> View attachment 5672852


This Clarkson guy needs to see a therapist asap. I don’t like either H or M and I think this whole thing is a brilliant lesson in media manipulation and the state of journalism today, but wanting her to parade naked with people throwing stuff at her and hating her… that’s next level disturbed. He sounds like he has some issues with women in general - what he describes is reminiscent of medieval  witch hunts or something.

ETA: It’s sick that any paper prints something like that. That’s definitely hate speech.


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Jeremy Clarkson sounds like he has some serious issues. After comparing MM to a serial killer he goes on to write...
> 
> _At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her._
> 
> Just to clarify, he is referring to MM, not the serial killer.
> 
> And yet in another column (not about MM) he states...
> 
> _Because if we have to stop the world every time someone on it has hurty feelings, it won’t really work as a world any more._
> 
> I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital
> 
> View attachment 5672852


Disgusting. 

And tbh anyone laying awake at night because of Meghan needs serious help.


----------



## Debbini

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Jeremy Clarkson sounds like he has some serious issues. After comparing MM to a serial killer he goes on to write...
> 
> _At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her._
> 
> Just to clarify, he is referring to MM, not the serial killer.
> 
> And yet in another column (not about MM) he states...
> 
> _Because if we have to stop the world every time someone on it has hurty feelings, it won’t really work as a world any more._
> 
> I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital
> 
> View attachment 5672852


Lol @ parading through the streets naked..... funny as He[[ thought!!!


----------



## Debbini

mrsinsyder said:


> Disgusting.
> 
> And tbh anyone laying awake at night because of Meghan needs serious help.


Lol...like he's really laying awake.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tyler refused to go across the pond for the show baptism.  The Queen said no photos.  Who else was available? George and Amal? No, he was filming in Australia.  OW? Doubt she would want to go to the UK for that.  IIRC they said they would have a quiet ceremony in Cali.  Maybe that was their wake-up call that no A listers are interested in them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, you've finally lost us: MEGHAN MCCAIN
> 
> 
> MCCAIN: It remains to be seen whether Americans will buy whatever grievance porn they create next. But judging from what we're reading today - America has moved on, even if they haven't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's 'exhausting endurance test' Netflix docuseries scores just 43% on Rotten Tomatoes as viewers blast 'cringeworthy' Netflix show​
> *Netflix released second half of Harry and Meghan docuseries on Thursday*
> *It has been met with poor reviews and has scored low on Rotten Tomatoes*
> *One writer said 'viewers would be so lucky' if the couple moved on from saga*
> 
> 
> View attachment 5672352


whether people liked it or not, they got the views so it was a success


----------



## gracekelly




----------



## papertiger

tiktok said:


> This Clarkson guy needs to see a therapist asap. I don’t like either H or M and I think this whole thing is a brilliant lesson in media manipulation and the state of journalism today, but wanting her to parade naked with people throwing stuff at her and hating her… that’s next level disturbed. He sounds like he has some issues with women in general - what he describes is reminiscent of medieval  witch hunts or something.
> 
> ETA: It’s sick that any paper prints something like that. That’s definitely hate speech.



He definitely has a problem with women, not helpful. 

They are all media wh*res as far as I'm concerned


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## EmilyM111

sdkitty said:


> after hearing someone say (not in regard to H&M) that social media is ruining our society and how people buy into conspiracy theories etc., I'm asking myself if I'm part of that.  But even if we (most of us on this thread) are wrong and H&M are truly victims of bullying and abuse, I think you still have to ask why are they seeking the spotlight?   Not just to tell their "truth" IMO.
> Why is he slandering his father and brother while at the same time seeming to want to have the door open to go home or to retain his royal status?  Just doesn't make sense.


And think about $100m. Not sure why talking about your real abuse would have such hefty price tag.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




Let's not be too hard on her. She probably forgot she asked him, just as she forgot she used him as her mule going back and forth between Scobie and herself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I don't mind if they attend the coronation. They risk being publicly booed in a big way. They know most everyone attending despises them. The family will keep their distance. Actually, Harry bowing to KC3 and MM doing her curtsy would be quite the visual given how much they detest the family and the institution themselves.  Even the sugars would not know how to reconcile that.
> 
> They'll be seated behind a marble pillar or another large candle, with Major Johnny positioned behind them. Can't have Harry jumping up and screaming _I object, I object_, and rushing to seize the crown off KC3's head.



I kind of do. I fully understand why the palace refuses to react to their provocations, but actively inviting them after what they've said and done? At which point makes that look someone not benevolent, but a doormat?

BTW I am fully convinced all the people being oh so touched by the mockumentary and seeing no fault with it lack both background knowledge and the ability to read people. To me, the digs and disrespect are oh so obvious. I'm also becoming really good at telling when she lies.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> You'd think Jason Knauf would have documentation that he could release, making it clear who requested him to provide evidence.



I think so too. I'm sure he has many more things documented, so I'm really not sure why they are tickling the dragon. With a stick.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> So true, without a doubt a vendetta. _Your brother_. The way she says it shows the hate is real.  There is a clip where Hazzi says “it’s his _inheritance_”  with an evil emphasis on _inheritance_.  He says it as if this is news, real news.    What a jerk.



Right! When I read it I read it in this sugary sweet voice she uses with him like he was a child. Then I actually watched the clip and she was sooo harsh and aggressive and you could touch the hatred she has for "your brother". WTF.


----------



## sdkitty

Betthany Frankel agrees with us and she's getting flamed on twitter for it








						People Are Calling Out Bethenny Frankel For Repeated Meghan Markle Criticism
					

The reality TV star has condemned the Duchess of Sussex on several occasions.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## csshopper

So many times, these past days especially, I’ve thought, “If only CeeJay was here to add to the conversation .”

(To our newest posters, CeeJay was a frequent poster with a warm fun personality and “street cred” about TW from her school days into adulthood. CeeJay had friends who are ”in the Biz” as well as friends who had first hand knowledge of the Markle clan as TW was growing up in her Dad’s household while Doria was absent all those years. Sadly, CeeJay died last summer.)


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right! When I read it I read it in this sugary sweet voice she uses with him like he was a child. Then I actually watched the clip and she was sooo harsh and aggressive and you could touch the hatred she has for "your brother". WTF.


I doubt she has a lot of respect for H


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I doubt she has a lot of respect for H



I agree.


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> Maybe you do, I don't know you. Guess what? It's not the same as mine and that's ok. Have a great day.


I think we're trying not to stoop to the level of conspirancy theorists who wish physical harm to the people the deem "the enemy"


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Gosh, some of these sugars are dramatic.


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, some of these sugars are dramatic.



Did you watch the documentary? They really did frame the “pulling of security” like the RF left them out there to be harmed. Not terribly surprised people are making that jump.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Debbini said:


> Maybe you do, I don't know you. Guess what? It's not the same as mine and that's ok. Have a great day.


Oh I definitely do. It's one of my strengths. 



mrsinsyder said:


> Did you watch the documentary? They really did frame the “pulling of security” like the RF left them out there to be harmed. Not terribly surprised people are making that jump.


And now we know why...the hatred is actually scary!


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Oh I definitely do. It's one of my strengths.
> 
> 
> And now we know why...the hatred is actually scary!


Yep, Jeremy Clarkson and everyone agreeing with him just proved them correct. He just unintentionally helped their cause quite a bit.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> after hearing someone say (not in regard to H&M) that social media is ruining our society and how people buy into conspiracy theories etc., I'm asking myself if I'm part of that.  But even if we (most of us on this thread) are wrong and H&M are truly victims of bullying and abuse, I think you still have to ask why are they seeking the spotlight?   Not just to tell their "truth" IMO.
> Why is he slandering his father and brother while at the same time seeming to want to have the door open to go home or to retain his royal status?  Just doesn't make sense.



As Maya Angelou said, "When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

mrsinsyder said:


> Did you watch the documentary? They really did frame the “pulling of security” like the RF left them out there to be harmed. Not terribly surprised people are making that jump.



I often forget how gullible people are.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Please stay on topic to the best of your ability.  Topic is Meghan and Harry; back and forth arguing between members is not allowed. There are strong opinions here but please keep your posts on the topic of H&M.  

Make use of the Ignore feature to make your life easier.

Thanks!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And now we know why...the hatred is actually scary!



While I agree this was over the top and uncalled for - other members of the BRF have been shot at and were victims of attempted kidnappings and I am positive they have received similar hate mail. In fact, I have read many extremely hateful accounts, not only by stans and sugars on their Twitter accounts, but professional writers who managed to get published by Vogue. So there's that.

And before someone tries to twist my words, I'm not trying to say that's normal, I'm saying what makes these two oh so special that they need special treatment at all times? They are not. And they chose to leave the job, why should they keep the benefits, at outrageous costs overseas no less?

P.S. I have also not forgotten that those two security concious people leaked the lay-out of Anmer Hall (via their own mouthpiece, so no mean press trying to smear them), a security risk if their ever was one not only for the people they seem to hate the most in the world, but also three small children.


----------



## charlottawill

csshopper said:


> So many times, these past days especially, I’ve thought, “If only CeeJay was here to add to the conversation .”
> 
> (To our newest posters, CeeJay was a frequent poster with a warm fun personality and “street cred” about TW from her school days into adulthood. CeeJay had friends who are ”in the Biz” as well as friends who had first hand knowledge of the Markle clan as TW was growing up in her Dad’s household while Doria was absent all those years. Sadly, CeeJay died last summer.)


I did not know her as others here did, but I had the same thought recently - "What would CeeJay have to say about all this?". Plenty, I'm sure. But let's just imagine she's having gin and tonics with TQ and PP and lots of *ahem* interesting conversation.


----------



## charlottawill

mrsinsyder said:


> They really did frame the “pulling of security” like the RF left them out there to be harmed.


I believe if they had just gone quietly off to life in CA they would not have been in any real danger. But their constant need to stay relevant and in the news by lobbing grenades at the RF has generated headlines in the British press that could provoke some unstable royal supporter to want to harm them. Just my opinion, but they have endangered themselves.


----------



## Fimpagebag

I am old enough not to be surprised how often history repeats itself. Harry and Meghan for their part evidently don’t grasp how the story of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor played out over the years.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, some of these sugars are dramatic.



Dramatic.  Delusional and duped.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> And before someone tries to twist my words, I'm not trying to say that's normal, I'm saying what makes these two oh so special that they need special treatment at all times?


I would argue that no one deserves that treatment. Full stop.

I also think Camilla having lunch with him was not the best choice.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I believe if they had just gone quietly off to life in CA they would not have been in any real danger. But their constant need to stay relevant and in the news by lobbing grenades at the RF has generated headlines in the British press that could provoke some unstable royal supporter to want to harm them. Just my opinion, but they have endangered themselves.


I think living a private life was the last thing she wanted....she achieved world fame when she nabbed him and she's not gonna let go of it if she can help it.  Not sure they've endangered themselves but they sure have annoyed a lot of people and caused great embarassment to their families (except for doria)


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would argue that no one deserves that treatment. Full stop.
> 
> I also think Camilla having lunch with him was not the best choice.


I also didn’t realize this was Top Gear Jeremy Clarkson, why does anyone even care what he says about MM anyway   

I find what he said abhorrent. And to top it all off, to say he thinks she’s more deserving of hate than an actual serial killer… come on now


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> I think we're trying not to stoop to the level of conspirancy theorists who wish physical harm to the people the deem "the enemy"


What conspiracy theory?


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, some of these sugars are dramatic.




It's possible that some of these people are just trolling others because it is so OTT.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> Not sure they've endangered themselves


I hadn't considered it until a talking head mentioned it, but I think it could be a legitimate concern at this point. There are lots of crazies out there, and all is takes is one who might think they are defending the Queen's honor/legacy by going after the "traitorous" Harkles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> I hadn't considered it until a talking head mentioned it, but I think it could be a legitimate concern at this point. There are lots of crazies out there, and all is takes is one who might think they are defending the Queen's honor/legacy by going after the "traitorous" Harkles.



It goes both ways, though. Some of their sugars are a sandwich short of a picnic.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

charlottawill said:


> I hadn't considered it until a talking head mentioned it, but I think it could be a legitimate concern at this point. There are lots of crazies out there, and all is takes is one who might think they are defending the Queen's honor/legacy by going after the "traitorous" Harkles.



That what MMM said in the documentary...that all the "click hate" generates actual danger for her family, including the kids.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Here's a party ZedZed might have enjoyed: lunch with a bunch of celebrities. If she had hung around longer, maybe Camilla would've welcomed her along. Yep Piers Morgan and Jeremy Clarkson were there, but more importantly so were some of my favourite entertainers like Dame Judi Dench and Hugh Bonneville and Dame Maggie Smith just to name a few. Ah poor ZedZed, it's been such a long time since you've rubbed shoulders with real royals and movie stars, you must be pulling out your hair, oops I mean extensions and having a hissy fit for missing out on this outing. 

EXCLUSIVE: Camilla's VERY glamorous private party: Dame Judi Dench, Piers Morgan, Claudia Winkleman and Jeremy Clarkson join Queen Consort at star-studded Mayfair lunch as she proves Meghan isn't the only royal with pulling power​
*The Queen Consort attended a Christmas lunch at Murano restaurant in Mayfair*
*The Michelin-starred restaurant in central London is owned by Angela Hartnett*
*Dames Maggie Smith and Maureen Lipman and Strictly's Tess Daly also attended *









						Dame Judi Dench and Jeremy Clarkson join Camilla at star-studded lunch
					

Camilla also rubbed shoulders with Dames Maggie Smith and Maureen Lipman at the 'white truffle' lunch, held at Murano in Mayfair, central London on Wednesday.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> It goes both ways, though. Some of their sugars are a sandwich short of a picnic.



Yes, it's the problem with a celebrity worshipping culture. There is some amount of obsessive fan behavior over every famous person out there.


----------



## Sophisticatted

I almost feel like the family (BRF) is trolling them now.  I know they often coordinate and I’ve seen Kate curtsy before, but lately it seems to be just a bit “more”, yet still subtle.  This lunch feels like another troll.  It’s like Camilla is saying “see how easily we rub elbows with A list actresses and media people with a large presence“?  Tee hee.


----------



## Vlad

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital



Yep, and that is how he lost his long-running spot on the world's most-watched BBC car enthusiast show Top Gear. There was more to it than just freaking out over a meat platter, divorce, health issues, etc but effectively, that did him in.


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That what MMM said in the documentary...that all the "click hate" generates actual danger for her family, including the kids.


A lot of the paparazzi are skeezy and them cutting holes into the fences and flying drones up to their window is stuff that should be off limits, full stop. 

If someone was cutting holes into my fence every night and coming on my property I’d feel pretty unsafe.


----------



## youngster

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> . . . that all the "click hate" generates actual danger for her family, including the kids.



This isn't just their issue. It's what every famous person or famous family out there deals with as pretty much all of them generate some amount of click hate.


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> I almost feel like the family (BRF) is trolling them now.  I know they often coordinate and I’ve seen Kate curtsy before, but lately it seems to be just a bit “more”, yet still subtle.  This lunch feels like another troll.  It’s like Camilla is saying “see how easily we rub elbows with A list actresses and media people with a large presence“?  Tee hee.


I disagree....I think camilla can enjoy a nice event without giving a thought to M
and while I know nothing about their level of curtesying, the most recent video I saw, I though Kate's curtsey was quick and subtle - like they had said to her she didn't need to make a big deal out of it for them


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That what MMM said in the documentary...that all the "click hate" generates actual danger for her family, including the kids.



They don't seem too bothered about the danger their sugars generate for their British family. In fact, they have personally thanked some of the crazier ones.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They don't seem too bothered about the danger their sugars generate for their British family. In fact, they have personally thanked some of the crazier ones.


literally, they themselves?  not Omid?


----------



## youngster

Meghan and Harry don't seem to care that they are placing the rest of the family in danger with their constant criticism.  All I can assume is that they are trying their best to whip up anger at KC3 and William and the rest of them.  They also didn't care at all about all the stress they placed on the 96 year old Queen in the last years of her life or the stress they caused Prince Philip in his last year or so.  

They also moved to a completely different continent, to a fairly isolated spot, and have all the money in the world to pay for whatever security they need.  They are just upset that they have to pay for it themselves.  But, that is at the core of all their issues with the family: money and not getting the half-in/half-out deal that they wanted.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Meghan and Harry don't seem to care that they are placing the rest of the family in danger with their constant criticism.  All I can assume is that they are trying their best to whip up anger at KC3 and William and the rest of them.  They also didn't care at all about all the stress they placed on the 96 year old Queen in the last years of her life or the stress they caused Prince Philip in his last year or so.
> 
> They also moved to a completely different continent, to a fairly isolated spot, and have all the money in the world to pay for whatever security they need.  They are just upset that they have to pay for it themselves.  But, that is at the core of all their issues with the family: money and not getting the half-in/half-out deal that they wanted.


Even with all the people - including people who believe their great love story - saying they've told their truth and now they should stop, I'll bet all they are focusing on is that so many people watched their "docuseries".  They are still Famous!  and rich.
I don't know if they've placed the RF in danger but it seems super aggressive and careless for him to be calling his father a liar - never mind the bit about his brother's yelling being terrifying, which is ridiculous IMO


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> Even with all the people - including people who believe *their great love story* - saying they've told their truth and now they should stop, I'll bet all they are focusing on is that so many people watched their "docuseries".  They are still Famous!  and rich.
> I don't know if they've placed the RF in danger but it seems super aggressive and careless for him to be calling his father a liar - never mind the bit about his brother's yelling being terrifying, which is ridiculous IMO


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Debbini

youngster said:


> Yes, it's the problem with a celebrity worshipping culture. There is some amount of obsessive fan behavior over every famous person out there.


Maybe the Markles should do what they set out to do, go away, be private and leave the RF alone. They could help themselves by limiting their never ending exposure and lies and trash talking Hairy's family. Just a thought?


----------



## Sophisticatted

sdkitty said:


> I disagree....I think camilla can enjoy a nice event without giving a thought to M
> and while I know nothing about their level of curtesying, the most recent video I saw, I though Kate's curtsey was *quick and subtle - like they had said to her she didn't need to make a big deal out of it for them*



That’s sort of my point.  It’s like they’re saying (via body language/optics) that it’s a really easy, no big deal sort of thing.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

youngster said:


> This isn't just their issue. It's what every famous person or famous family out there deals with as pretty much all of them generate some amount of click hate.



Agreed...although I think the popularity of this thread is a pretty good indication that they seem to generate a lot.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> They don't seem too bothered about the danger their sugars generate for their British family. In fact, they have personally thanked some of the crazier ones.


I was not aware of that. Who have they thanked?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> literally, they themselves?  not Omid?



They themselves. I had heard about Ghoul doing so years ago (I think she called one of the Twitter warriors?) and receipts of Harry doing so were posted here a few days ago.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


>




He looks so unwell. He's too young to blame it solely on aging.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> They themselves. I had heard about Ghoul doing so years ago (I think she called one of the Twitter warriors?) and receipts of Harry doing so were posted here a few days ago.


disgusting and horribly undignified


----------



## youngster

Chanbal said:


>




Seriously, do they not understand that they are overexposed?


----------



## sdkitty

Sophisticatted said:


> That’s sort of my point.  It’s like they’re saying (via body language/optics) that it’s a really easy, no big deal sort of thing.


oh, ok
I don't know how they usually curtsy


----------



## charlottawill

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That what MMM said in the documentary...that all the "click hate" generates actual danger for her family, including the kids.


But again, they bear some of the blame for that. They did't have to do the doc or the book. I don't think it can be disputed that she courts attention, and unfortunately a lot of it has turned negative since they married. They want their freedom of speech but not the British media to have theirs. Certainly a hot topic all around today. To be clear, I can't stand them but I don't wish them or their children harm.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> Seriously, do they not understand that they are overexposed?


I had a feeling they'd turn up on 60 Min.


----------



## sdkitty

charlottawill said:


> I had a feeling they'd turn up on 60 Min.


I don't think they risk a legit interview with possible hard questions


----------



## youngster

charlottawill said:


> I had a feeling they'd turn up on 60 Min.



Anderson Cooper is much more likely to ask some tough questions and point out inconsistencies.  Would he provide Harry with a list of questions beforehand?  I hope someone asks about that.


----------



## needlv

So… remember when there was a story which laid out H and MM’s strategy (before the Queen passed away) saying 2023 was going to be the year of reconciliation?









						Harry and Meghan 'pan year of reconciliation with Royal Family'
					

The Sussexes are plotting a year of reconciliation with estranged members of the Royal Family almost three years after their 'Megxit' in early 2020 - but only after Harry's memoirs have been published




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




Royah Nikkah who is a journalist has laid out that is what they wantAND got quotes from The Sussex spokesperson.

For those that don’t remember, H and M  wanted to do Spotify, Netflix and their book (making $$$ and in the process damaging KC, and P&POW), then drop PR demanding a meeting where “the BRF apologises”.  H and M were hoping through Netflix and the spare book that the public would see “their side” and public reaction would then force the BRF to apologise.

The end result still being they will the half-in/half-out And the BRF will be forced to give it to them

Have a read in the below link.  The sussexes have gone on the record complaining about the Lady S and Ngozi apology - saying it hasn’t happened for them.  And demanding a royal summit and an apology.

Seriously that has been their strategy.  LINK here for Roya Nikkahs reporting



			https://archive.vn/iMCje
		


Meanwhile the royals continue the strategy of ignore and carry on… which is the best strategy when negotiating with blackmailers/narcs etc.


----------



## charlottawill

mrsinsyder said:


> A lot of the paparazzi are skeezy and them cutting holes into the fences and flying drones up to their window is stuff that should be off limits, full stop.
> 
> If someone was cutting holes into my fence every night and coming on my property I’d feel pretty unsafe.


No question, paparazzi are lowlifes. But has that activity been documented, or is it just their contention? They have their own security that should be able to control that kind of intrusive action. The issue  is that they think they shouldn't have to pay for it, but I sure as hell shouldn't have to either. As far as I know, if they stayed in the UK they'd have all the security they need at no cost to them. It seems they didn't think out the all finer points of their UK flight to freedom.


----------



## Katel

CarryOn2020 said:


> Tyler refused to go across the pond for the show baptism.  The Queen said no photos.  Who else was available? George and Amal? No, he was filming in Australia.  OW? Doubt she would want to go to the UK for that.  IIRC they said they would have a quiet ceremony in Cali.  Maybe that was their wake-up call that no A listers are interested in them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan, you've finally lost us: MEGHAN MCCAIN
> 
> 
> MCCAIN: It remains to be seen whether Americans will buy whatever grievance porn they create next. But judging from what we're reading today - America has moved on, even if they haven't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's 'exhausting endurance test' Netflix docuseries scores just 43% on Rotten Tomatoes as viewers blast 'cringeworthy' Netflix show​
> *Netflix released second half of Harry and Meghan docuseries on Thursday*
> *It has been met with poor reviews and has scored low on Rotten Tomatoes*
> *One writer said 'viewers would be so lucky' if the couple moved on from saga*
> 
> 
> View attachment 5672352


“Grievance porn”


----------



## mrsinsyder

charlottawill said:


> No question, paparazzi are lowlifes. But has that activity been documented, or is it just their contention? They have their own security that should be able to control that kind of intrusive action. The issue  is that they think they shouldn't have to pay for it, but I sure as hell shouldn't have to either. As far as I know, if they stayed in the UK they'd have all the security they need at no cost to them. It seems they didn't think out the all finer points of their UK flight to freedom.


It was detailed in the documentary.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


>



What a joke. We've been married for over forty years and never felt the need to use that phrase. But that baby is too cute!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

needlv said:


> So… remember when there was a story which laid out H and MM’s strategy (before the Queen passed away) saying 2023 was going to be the year of reconciliation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan 'pan year of reconciliation with Royal Family'
> 
> 
> The Sussexes are plotting a year of reconciliation with estranged members of the Royal Family almost three years after their 'Megxit' in early 2020 - but only after Harry's memoirs have been published
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Royah Nikkah who is a journalist has laid out that is what they wantAND got quotes from The Sussex spokesperson.
> 
> For those that don’t remember, H and M  wanted to do Spotify, Netflix and their book (making $$$ and in the process damaging KC, and P&POW), then drop PR demanding a meeting where “the BRF apologises”.  H and M were hoping through Netflix and the spare book that the public would see “their side” and public reaction would then force the BRF to apologise.
> 
> The end result still being they will the half-in/half-out And the BRF will be forced to give it to them
> 
> Have a read in the below link.  The sussexes have gone on the record complaining about the Lady S and Ngozi apology - saying it hasn’t happened for them.  And demanding a royal summit and an apology.
> 
> Seriously that has been their strategy.  LINK here for Roya Nikkahs reporting
> 
> 
> 
> https://archive.vn/iMCje
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile the royals continue the strategy of ignore and carry on… which is the best strategy when negotiating with blackmailers/narcs etc.


I hope they don't hold their breath waiting for an apology from the RF.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> They also moved to a completely different continent, to a fairly isolated spot, and have all the money in the world to pay for whatever security they need.  They are just upset that they have to pay for it themselves.  But, that is at the core of all their issues with the family: money and not getting the half-in/half-out deal that they wanted.



That is exactly the point of living in Montecito. People move there because it is a small community and people leave you alone.  Rob Lowe who was a huge heart throb in his day managed to be married and raise his family there quite nicely.  There are plenty of gazillionaires who think living there is just fine.  If you are constantly going to plant stories about yourself, make a big show when you go out with security cars front and back and have a security guy with you at all times, people are going to notice you.  I have seen bigger stars than these two at the grocery check out line and so did CeeJay.  Don't call attention to yourself and people leave you alone.

I'll never forget a picture of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden and her sister Princess Madeleine walking down a street in Manhattan.  There were shopping and had several bags they were carrying and there was one protection guy, I think, behind them.  CP Victoria is a heck of a lot more important than Prince Harry.


----------



## csshopper

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I would argue that no one deserves that treatment. Full stop.
> 
> I also think Camilla having lunch with him was not the best choice.


They were both attending a group event, not a 1:1 luncheon. Big difference.  She had no way to know what he might say, in fact may not even have heard it.


----------



## gracekelly

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Agreed...although I think the popularity of this thread is a pretty good indication that they seem to generate a lot.
> 
> 
> I was not aware of that. Who have they thanked?


This thread exists in its own bubble.  The rest of the world doesn't pay as much attention to them.  The rest of the world is busy fighting wars, inflation and an energy crisis.


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> have all the money in the world to pay for whatever security they need.


Maybe not these days, but that's their problem.


----------



## youngster

needlv said:


> For those that don’t remember, H and M wanted to do Spotify, Netflix and their book (making $$$ and in the process damaging KC, and P&POW), then drop PR demanding a meeting where “the BRF apologises”. H and M were hoping through Netflix and the spare book that the public would see “their side” and public reaction would then force the BRF to apologise.
> 
> The end result still being they will the half-in/half-out And the BRF will be forced to give it to them



Yes, I do remember this!  It's what a bunch of us have been saying for months.  They want a public apology and that half-in/half-out deal and all they are doing is trying to build pressure on KC3 to give it to them. I don't think they'll get either the apology or the deal they want.

The half-in/half-out deal especially.  Some of what they wanted is illegal, like having UK security in the U.S. paid by UK taxpayers, intending to use Sussex Royal to market products, accepting or demanding freebies from designers, merching Meghan's clothing and jewelry, etc.  Meghan's idea of A list celebrity is incompatible with life as a UK royal. Harry is apparently unable to make her understand this, or understand it himself.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I guess they won't be coming after all? Or they might just go anyway because it's not like their social schedule is packed.


----------



## needlv

Debbini said:


> I hope they don't hold their breath waiting for an apology from the RF.



Its sad but it’s the same strategy - H and M have not changed this from The start.

They wanted half in and half out, to merch the titles, make money then Only show up to the glamorous BRF events.

The Queen said no. Asked them to not use HRH and not to merch.  She even stopped their trademarking of “Sussex royal” which the sussexes hit back with “the Queen doesn’t own the word royal“ and “service is universal”

They had a huge tantrum, left and have been throwing grenades at the BRF ever since.  The Queen even gave them 12 months to change their minds but they didn’t.

Clearly this has worked for H in the past where he throws a tantrum and everyone concedes to make peace.  But not this time.  BRF was firm– you are either in or you are out.

So they keep throwing angry statements or sharing secrets etc hoping the BRF will change their minds.  Then releasing PR saying they are willing to extend an olive branch to the BRF so the BRF apologises.

Rmember after the Oprah interview they leaked that the family had called H and it hadn’t gone as H and M had expected.  That M wasn’t spoken to and they did NOT get an apology?  Then Gayle said something like “ M has receipts!” As if they have more blackmail material?

Their strategy isn’t working and won’t work and it gets recycled year after year.  H and M need to do something different…. Their strategy is NOT working and they will not get an apology.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> That is exactly the point of living in Montecito. People move there because it is a small community and people leave you alone.  Rob Lowe who was a huge heart throb in his day managed to be married and raise his family there quite nicely.  There are plenty of gazillionaires who think living there is just fine.  If you are constantly going to plant stories about yourself, make a big show when you go out with security cars front and back and have a security guy with you at all times, people are going to notice you.  I have seen bigger stars than these two at the grocery check out line and so did CeeJay.  Don't call attention to yourself and people leave you alone.
> 
> I'll never forget a picture of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden and her sister Princess Madeleine walking down a street in Manhattan.  There were shopping and had several bags they were carrying and there was one protection guy, I think, behind them.  CP Victoria is a heck of a lot more important than Prince Harry.


Once while I stood in line to order lunch at a place in LA, Brentwood to be exact, I suddenly realized "Ahnold" was standing next to me. He was gov at the time, and had one security guy with him. He and his two sons sat at the table next to us. Other than taking a picture with a couple with a baby, everyone just went about their business. He left with his sons in a convertible, followed by the security guy. Montecito is a lot more low key and discreet than Brentwood. No paps lurking like you'd see at the Brentwood Country Mart or the Santa Monica farmer's market. I think she's most angry that they haven't welcomed with open arms as the CA royals.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> Anderson Cooper is much more likely to ask some tough questions and point out inconsistencies.  Would he provide Harry with a list of questions beforehand?  I hope someone asks about that.


are the going on 60 minutes? or is this just a what if conversation?


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I guess they won't be coming after all? Or they might just go anyway because it's not like their social schedule is packed.


----------



## Lodpah

Nah! That person saying that thing is mild compared to some of her sugars wanting the Queen dead and some other super nasty twigs towards the BRF. It’s nasty both ways.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> Yes, I do remember this!  It's what a bunch of us have been saying for months.  They want a public apology and that half-in/half-out deal and all they are doing is trying to build pressure on KC3 to give it to them. I don't think they'll get either the apology or the deal they want.
> 
> The half-in/half-out deal especially.  Some of what they wanted is illegal, like having UK security in the U.S. paid by UK taxpayers, intending to use Sussex Royal to market products, accepting or demanding freebies from designers, merching Meghan's clothing and jewelry, etc.  Meghan's idea of A list celebrity is incompatible with life as a UK royal. Harry is apparently unable to make her understand this, or understand it himself.


If they really think that the path they took was the way to a better deal and an apology, there are several bridges for sale in NYC that they can buy.  I really don't think you can openly insult The King of England, and the future King of England and their families and expect to survive unscathed.  Even if KC3 is gracious enough to invite them to the coronation, they will be treated as pariahs not only by the public, but by their family and the reigning heads of state who will be attending.  Of course the shunning will be done in a very polite way, but it will be there nonetheless.  The public won't be as polite.  Insulting the late Queen is also a thing  that the public will not tolerate.  People are not going to forget that.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


>



thats interesting. I did a search and didn't find anything.  so this is just H, not WIFE?


----------



## charlottawill

Lodpah said:


> Nah! That person saying that thing is mild compared to some of her sugars wanting the Queen dead and some other super nasty twigs towards the BRF. It’s nasty both ways.


Like the Carnegie Mellon prof who said on Twitter she hoped the Queen's death was painful? Lovely.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> thats interesting. I did a search and didn't find anything.  so this is just H, not WIFE?


Unless Anderson toadies himself, he could ask some meaningful questions.  I suspect that every question will be hammered out ahead of time because Harry just isn't smart enough and his wife has to frame all the answers for him.


----------



## charlottawill

Debbini said:


> Maybe the Markles should do what they set out to do, go away, be private and leave the RF alone. They could help themselves by limiting their never ending exposure and lies and trash talking Hairy's family. Just a thought?


They've backed themselves into a financial corner and trashing family for cash is their only option now. I am beginning to think the best course for KC and the RF is to ignore and not engage with them. The Harkles will run out of tea to spill pretty soon and then people will tire of them and move on.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> what a world we're living in....


Indeed. I don't envy celebs. I'll take the fortune but not the fame. I just that read Kobe Bryant's daughter got a three year restraining order against a man who has been showing up at her dorm, claiming that they are going to have children together. As if that poor girl and her family haven't been through enough. MM should have been thankful for the protection the RF could have provided for her family.


----------



## Icyjade

Sophisticatted said:


> I almost feel like the family (BRF) is trolling them now.  I know they often coordinate and I’ve seen Kate curtsy before, but lately it seems to be just a bit “more”, yet still subtle.  This lunch feels like another troll.  It’s like Camilla is saying “see how easily we rub elbows with A list actresses and media people with a large presence“?  Tee hee.


Me too. It’s like TW does an exaggerated curtsy on TV and they respond with Princess Catherine’s elegant one. They complain about neutral/clashing colors and they do a coordinated look.

Anyway at this point they serve to make the BRF look like angels so maybe it’s not a bad thing. It’s like a contrast you know? You need a really poor performer at work to make all the other co-workers look good.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> Betthany Frankel agrees with us and she's getting flamed on twitter for it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People Are Calling Out Bethenny Frankel For Repeated Meghan Markle Criticism
> 
> 
> The reality TV star has condemned the Duchess of Sussex on several occasions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


It says more about that Huffington Post writer’s biases that she felt the need to write a story about it.


----------



## bag-mania

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He looks so unwell. He's too young to blame it solely on aging.


I find I don’t care whether he is well. That’s how little I think of him anymore. I used to like him years ago.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> This thread exists in its own bubble.  The rest of the world doesn't pay as much attention to them.  The rest of the world is busy fighting wars, inflation and an energy crisis.


But this thread is in reaction to something...? People are posting links that exist in the rest of the world. They clearly generate interest beyond this forum. 



charlottawill said:


> Like the Carnegie Mellon prof who said on Twitter she hoped the Queen's death was painful? Lovely.


I think the difference is no one on TPF thought that was funny or said they loved it. It was condemned as it should be. As all hate speech should be.


----------



## reflection212

Interesting and humorous analysis


----------



## needlv




----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> He looks so unwell. He's too young to blame it solely on aging.


Yep, Dufus needs to take care because booze, drugs, poor nutrition, jealousy, resentment and HATE can physically, emotionally and mentally affect a person to the point that they can appear decades older than their actual age.


----------



## Debbini

needlv said:


>



I hope Pa says "no can do"


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Sophisticatted said:


> That’s sort of my point.  It’s like they’re saying (via body language/optics) that it’s a really easy, no big deal sort of thing.


This! They are actually demonstrating that ZedZed's description of a curtsy was a total exaggeration and an outright lie.


----------



## marietouchet

1 Read in wiki , coronation will be paid for by the uk as state occasion , so government picks guest list. KC3 may not have to worry about Harkles ?? Sunak does it.
2. Isn’t there a moment during the event when peers pledge/swear allegiance to the monarch ? H might choose to avoid the event because of that. Mm would not acquiesce


----------



## csshopper

Unfortunately for one of his employers,  H is a Chief _Negative_ Impact Officer, which is not what Butter Up thought they were buying.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Unless Anderson toadies himself, he could ask some meaningful questions.  I suspect that every question will be hammered out ahead of time because Harry just isn't smart enough and his wife has to frame all the answers for him.


And Anderson knows about suddenly losing his brother


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Mendocino

charlottawill said:


> I did not know her as others here did, but I had the same thought recently - "What would CeeJay have to say about all this?". Plenty, I'm sure. But let's just imagine she's having gin and tonics with TQ and PP and lots of *ahem* interesting conversation.


CeeJay in heaven:Your Majesty, if I may ask, what did you know and when did you know it?

The Queen: ***pats seat next to her*** come sit here, dear. Waiter, another round of gin and tonics and make them doubles, please.


----------



## AB Negative

OMG.  I haven't been here in a while.  What happened to CeeJay????


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> I hadn't considered it until a talking head mentioned it, but I think it could be a legitimate concern at this point. There are lots of crazies out there, and all is takes is one who might think they are defending the Queen's honor/legacy by going after the "traitorous" Harkles.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> It goes both ways, though. Some of their sugars are a sandwich short of a picnic.





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> That what MMM said in the documentary...that all the "click hate" generates actual danger for her family, including the kids.


I think Jeremy Clarkson was foolish to voice his desire to punish Zed, because it just brings him down to the level of Zed's stans. IMO Zed is promoting danger for her family with her victimhood. When the furore of the security withdrawal was at its peak, her stans were putting out delusional tales of how the fabulously gorgeous Zed was the target of sex offenders. They followed up by issuing threats to burn down palaces (with people inside) in her name. 

At first, I thought these were the crazies, but now that it appears Zed and Sparry are paying their stans, I'm not so sure that is the case. I'm starting to think Zed likes this situation because it bolsters her sense of self-importance_: I'm so beautiful that people lust for me. I have supporters who are willing to kill for me._

This is based on my belief that Zed is a narc. The narcs I've known don't strategize longterm. They scheme for instant gratification. So Zed's victimhood gets her adulation as well as criticism of her in-laws which delights her. But it gives her PR team a hard time. It runs counter to her other promoted persona of the strong independent activist and self-made millionaire. I don't doubt that she is upset the big name designers and brands are not lining up to sign her on to be their Face or ambassador because she is too polarizing. _I'm not polarizing! It's unfair! It's racist! I''m just telling my truth!_


----------



## mrsinsyder

AB Negative said:


> OMG.  I haven't been here in a while.  What happened to CeeJay????








						Ceejay
					

It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...




					forum.purseblog.com


----------



## Katel

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah I don't know, a couple is not a family. Seeing they had no qualms showing bathing pictures of their baby there is really no reason to exclude the kids.


----------



## AB Negative

mrsinsyder said:


> Ceejay
> 
> 
> It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


Thank you for letting me know.  I am so sorry to hear this news.  She will be missed.


----------



## Katel

Hazzy and ME Again are SO innocent <sob> I can’t understand why they’re getting all this attention! They have lived such quiet innocent pure lives since marrying, wanting only to help their families and other people … why oh why cruel world?!? <sob sob>

Ironically, we all must fight for peace … thank you, tPF - the ignore button is such a blessing.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> or they took advantage of Oprah....they wanted their "truth" out there.  *I don't blame Oprah*


I do.  She considers herself a journalist, but didn't research any of their "truths", nor ask a single hard hitting question.  It was simply "Whaaat?" and their propaganda.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> I don't believe he knew them at that point. Oprah was supposedly the one who asked him to lend his house to them when they "fled" the UK with little more than the shirts on their backs. *She didn't even know them at the wedding.*


She knew them well enough to have tea at Nottingham Cottage.


----------



## periogirl28

Maggie Muggins said:


> This! They are actually demonstrating that ZedZed's description of a curtsy was a total exaggeration and an outright lie.


I agree. Would just like to say, even as a guest at the two Garden Parties at the Palace, my ambassador told me should I wish to meet the Queen and IF I decided to curtsy, an elegant, quick bob just like Kate does, was all that was required. No one was touching their noses to the ground, with arms spread wide like wings, in slow motion. You might do that getting your flowers as Prima Donna, after opening night at the Royal Ballet.


----------



## purseinsanity

Toby93 said:


>



That ultrasound picture can be anyone's.


----------



## periogirl28

Also want to add I have no opinion of Jeremy Clark either way (never watch Top Gear) but his piece was absolutely uncalled for and stooping to such a level unworthy of a "friend" of the current Queen. Also as a Brit, I expected a much more elegant, subtle diss. I am sure there is just as/ more horrifying stuff said against the RF but no one needs to go that low to retaliate. This is très uncool.


----------



## purseinsanity

Sharont2305 said:


> Harry will go. Personally, I think she'll conveniently have a miscarriage in late March/early April and use that as a reason for her not to go. There will be time enough for her to 'recover' somewhat so it doesn't look like Harry is abandoning her so soon afterwards. It will be 'advisable' for her not to fly long haul for a while.
> 
> Ps, I'm not mocking miscarriages, had a few myself, but I believe she'd go this low.


I have no doubt she will go.  She had the balls to go to QEII's funeral.  There is no way in hello that she will miss the Coronation.


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Jeremy Clarkson sounds like he has some serious issues. After comparing MM to a serial killer he goes on to write...
> 
> _At night, I’m unable to sleep as I lie there, grinding my teeth and dreaming of the day *when she is made to parade naked through the streets of every town in Britain while the crowds chant, “Shame!” and throw lumps of excrement at her.*_
> 
> Just to clarify, he is referring to MM, not the serial killer.
> 
> And yet in another column (not about MM) he states...
> 
> _Because if we have to stop the world every time someone on it has hurty feelings, it won’t really work as a world any more._
> 
> I had never heard of him before but he sounds like an ... interesting ... character. He once freaked out because he was served soup and a meat platter (instead of a steak) at work and ended up punching a producer who ended up in the hospital
> 
> View attachment 5672852


I think he's been watching too much Game of Thrones.  That's straight up Cersei being humiliated by being forced to walk naked while being pelted with rotten fruit and $hit.  It was bad enough watching the scene in a fantasy show, where I actually felt bad for Cersei, who is an absolutely horrible woman.  I hope he was referencing that scene.  If not, he's got some issues.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, some of these sugars are dramatic.



What I just can't understand is why most of the sugars are black?  Do they not realise that they are hitching their wagon to a woman who identified as caucasian her whole life until she needed a get out of jail free excuse for her appalling behaviour.  I guess they only see what they want to see.



sdkitty said:


> literally, they themselves?  not Omid?


They had Christopher Bouzy on the flopumentary, lying about how it was bots that were responsible for all the hate.  He is in the middle of a lawsuit for doing the same thing against another twitter user and is a shady character himself.



needlv said:


> Its sad but it’s the same strategy - H and M have not changed this from The start.
> 
> They wanted half in and half out, to merch the titles, make money then Only show up to the glamorous BRF events.
> 
> The Queen said no. Asked them to not use HRH and not to merch.  She even stopped their trademarking of “Sussex royal” which the sussexes hit back with “the Queen doesn’t own the word royal“ and “service is universal”
> 
> They had a huge tantrum, left and have been throwing grenades at the BRF ever since.  The Queen even gave them 12 months to change their minds but they didn’t.
> 
> Clearly this has worked for H in the past where he throws a tantrum and everyone concedes to make peace.  But not this time.  BRF was firm– you are either in or you are out.
> 
> So they keep throwing angry statements or sharing secrets etc hoping the BRF will change their minds.  Then releasing PR saying they are willing to extend an olive branch to the BRF so the BRF apologises.
> 
> Rmember after the Oprah interview they leaked that the family had called H and it hadn’t gone as H and M had expected.  That M wasn’t spoken to and they did NOT get an apology?  Then Gayle said something like “ M has receipts!” As if they have more blackmail material?
> 
> Their strategy isn’t working and won’t work and it gets recycled year after year.  H and M need to do something different…. Their strategy is NOT working and they will not get an apology.


Didn't Tom Bower say that they had set up a website with the Sussex Royal name and had a bunch of stuff they were going to be merching?  Tacky stuff like pencils and tea towels with their "brand" on it.  

They had organized all this without consulting anyone, even though Harry would have been well aware that this was not permissible as a member of the royal family.  

Did he think that they would look the other way and allow this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Elizabeth Hurley wants to make sure everyone knows she wasn’t “the older woman.” Hilarious that nobody wants credit for doing the deed with Harry. 









						Elizabeth Hurley Denies Taking Prince Harry's Virginity Amid Memoir Rumor
					

Elizabeth Hurley says she wasn't the one to pop Prince Harry's cherry ... even though he's supposedly set to reveal in his book that he first had sex with a "beautiful older woman" in the U.K. countryside way back when.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> Didn't Tom Bower say that they had set up a website with the Sussex Royal name and had a bunch of stuff they were going to be merching?  Tacky stuff like pencils and tea towels with their "brand" on it.
> 
> They had organized all this without consulting anyone, even though Harry would have been well aware that this was not permissible as a member of the royal family.
> 
> Did he think that they would look the other way and allow this?


Based on the trademark applications for Sussex Royal, it appears that they were covering all bases for all categories of products, possibly in an attempt to prevent anyone else from marketing Sussex Royal adult diapers, flip flops, spray tan etc. A useless and expensive strategy because trademark usage is reviewed after several years, and renewal will be denied if you can't justify why you are hogging the categories.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Lilliesdaughter

reflection212 said:


> Interesting and humorous analysis



Synopsis:  A Barbara Cartland novel ending with a rewrite of the New Testament.  The sad part is there was no exaggeration. Just facts according to the wizard behind the curtain, better known as Meg.


----------



## carmen56

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I guess they won't be coming after all? Or they might just go anyway because it's not like their social schedule is packed.



Two words for them, and the second one is 'off.'  If any apologies are to be had, it should be the Harkles apologising to the RF!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## carmen56

purseinsanity said:


> That ultrasound picture can be anyone's.


Probably a generic off Google images.


----------



## CarryOn2020

bag-mania said:


> Elizabeth Hurley wants to make sure everyone knows she wasn’t “the older woman.” Hilarious that nobody wants credit for doing the deed with Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elizabeth Hurley Denies Taking Prince Harry's Virginity Amid Memoir Rumor
> 
> 
> Elizabeth Hurley says she wasn't the one to pop Prince Harry's cherry ... even though he's supposedly set to reveal in his book that he first had sex with a "beautiful older woman" in the U.K. countryside way back when.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Well, don’t look at me. I did not do it with him either.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Toby93 said:


> What I just can't understand is why most of the sugars are black?  Do they not realise that they are hitching their wagon to a woman who identified as caucasian her whole life until she needed a get out of jail free excuse for her appalling behaviour.  I guess they only see what they want to see.


I keep seeing this repeated but we know she publicly identified as biracial before meeting Harry.

For example in 2015…









						Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
					

'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman




					www.elle.com
				




2012…









						Meghan Markle Powerfully Stands Up Against Racism in 2012 Video
					

Meghan Markle spoke out about her own experiences being biracial and experiencing racism in a resurfaced video from 2012.




					www.etonline.com


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> No question, paparazzi are lowlifes. But has that activity been documented, or is it just their contention? They have their own security that should be able to control that kind of intrusive action. The issue  is that they think they shouldn't have to pay for it, but I sure as hell shouldn't have to either. As far as I know, if they stayed in the UK they'd have all the security they need at no cost to them. It seems they didn't think out the all finer points of their UK flight to freedom.


Their security is supposed to be top notch. If paps were repeatedly cutting through their fence and buzzing them with drones, their security would have taken action.


mrsinsyder said:


> It was detailed in the documentary.


I think the drones part was a fantasy re-enactment. 


sdkitty said:


> thats interesting. I did a search and didn't find anything.  so this is just H, not WIFE?


That would be interesting. He doesn't remember the script very well.


----------



## needlv

xincinsin said:


> Their security is supposed to be top notch. If paps were repeatedly cutting through their fence and buzzing them with drones, their security would have taken action.
> 
> I think the drones part was a fantasy re-enactment.
> 
> That would be interesting. He doesn't remember the script very well.


She reported the drone intrusion to the police….


----------



## needlv

And they sued and got an apology.  Using drones is too far IMO.  









						Meghan and Harry receive apology over drone photos taken of son Archie
					

Royal couple said the images were an invasion of privacy




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## needlv




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Just...why.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Just...why.



Because the narc in MM wants the attention, the drama and to go down in history.

and without the BRF their brand is zero.

They will manage the PR by saying “they want an apology” and “will the family attend Archie’s birthday” etc.  whilst throwing tantrums about seating, uniforms etc.

So the BRF needs to manage them like they did the Jubilee.  They are second row royals.  Tiaras and important seating for working royals.  Harry not sitting anywhere near William, Catherine and their kids.

So they are “included as family” but not royals,  the treatment should be ice cold.

Its annoying they are invited, but not unexpected.  Charles is weak and wants his son there “for appearances”.

PS - I can’t see William repeating this - when he is crowned.


----------



## needlv

Camilla Long in the Sunday times is absolutely roasting them.  Quite a funny read.









						Harry and Meghan truly think their life is a tragedy. They’ve not realised it’s a comedy
					

Shock, horror: after watching the Netflix documentary, you can’t say Harry lacks personality. It’s all a big royal pantoPsychiatrists will tell you that certain




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




and if you don’t have a paid subscription you can read here



			https://archive.vn/4rEoT
		


_Just what do they do all day, you want to scream, beyond making stage zucchini muffins with Archie for the cameras and *****ing about “your brother”, as Meghan calls William darkly? She may have complained that the royal family was an “orchestrated reality show”, but what does she call this? Harry is such an absolute beta, he has even been faithfully trained to interview her on camera her at any crucial moment.

He, of course, is the loser — the man whose life will now never be happy. How can it when he is living with someone who describes a minor couriering glitch as “horrendous”? His life changes continually: it is exhausting and damaging. But who cares when it’s great “entertainment”?_


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Because the narc in MM wants the attention, the drama and to go down in history.
> 
> and without the BRF their brand is zero.



I don't have any unanswered questions why the losers would attend. I cannot wrap my head around BP feeling the need to announce they are welcome. One can take the politeness a step too far.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have any unanswered questions why the losers would attend. I cannot wrap my head around BP feeling the need to announce they are welcome. One can take the politeness a step too far.



The PR pressure of image.

it lessens H and M’s claims if they ignore the claims and act magnanimous / the better person by offering attendance (/forgiveness).

Think of it like a corporation who gets huge Twitter pressure to change something or drop their association with someone…

Harkles looks like huge hypocrites by keep going back to the family…. Despite what they say.

and MM has no shame.  She waltzed in at the Jubilee with a smile on her face, swaggering down that aisle 




 Just look at her face.  She is *loving* the attention.  She has no awareness that everyone is death glaring them.

she didn’t have an issue until they saw where they were seated.  Her mask dropped for a moment.  She then smiles through it but H is grumpy.  His entitlement kicks in….



			https://pagesix.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/prince-william-harry-meghan-markle-kate-middleton-37.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1200
		




The coronation will be the same.  She has no shame, will waltz in - wearing an extremely ridiculously expensive outfit which doesn’t fit, the same grin on her face.  And Haz will look angry at his treatment, where he is being seated etc, because of his ego and sense of entitlement.

My only hope is that when Will is king, he doesn’t play this game and makes it clear that his brother isn’t a part of his life… and that’s the end of it.


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have any unanswered questions why the losers would attend. I cannot wrap my head around BP feeling the need to announce they are welcome. One can take the politeness a step too far.


Otherwise they will be accused of being racist?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> The PR pressure of image.



But have some self-respect! 


needlv said:


> Just look at her face.  She is *loving* the attention.  She has no awareness that everyone is death glaring them.



I know! It is repulsive.



needlv said:


> My only hope is that when Will is king, he doesn’t play this game and makes it clear that his brother isn’t a part of his life… and that’s the end of it.



Yes please. It seems William is not only more angry but also more hurt by Harry's behaviour than Charles.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Icyjade said:


> Otherwise they will be accused of being racist?



Who cares at this point. The Harkles are full of it.

ETA: on a rational level I understand what y'all are saying. Emotionally the appeasement of the a*sholes makes me shudder and I wonder if it's really necessary. You can invite them without gushing how you're looking forward to it.


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have any unanswered questions why the losers would attend. I cannot wrap my head around BP feeling the need to announce they are welcome. One can take the politeness a step too far.


The BRF has limited options. They have chosen to ignore the Netflix nonsense and all the oh so public whingeing and whining of the gruesome twosome. i happen to agree with the path of ignoring the two‘s endless complaints and accusations. The longer they are ignored, the more they embellish in their desperate bid to stay relevant and grab headlines. And as they embellish, they constantly contradict themselves and are being buried in what is by this point a pretty substantial mountain of lies. It’s not just a few people pointing out their lies now, they’ve spawned an entire cottage industry of people pointing out all the inaccuracies and outright fallacies in their statements. Every family has at least one crazy relative that you still have to invite to all the major occasions. At the wedding or whatever family gathering it is, eccentric Uncle Fester shows up and people shrug and ignore his antics. Some comments are made about gee I wish he’d stayed home this time or gosh I didn’t even know he was still alive. Nobody likes him, some feel sorry for him, but everybody just ignores him as much as they can and enjoys catching up on the gossip with everyone else at the family gathering. In the case of H and TW, if you don’t invite them to the coronation, some may say see there must be some truth to what the two have been saying all along because now they are being completely ostracized / cut from the family. This way, the attitude is one of weary resignation, we truly dislike what he’s become / how low he’s sunk, but he’s still family and you don’t turn your back on your son / brother when he needs you the most, no matter how awful he has been. You can distance yourself to protect yourself and your family but you never completely turn your back on the relative who is clearly floundering. Jmo.


----------



## papertiger

needlv said:


> The PR pressure of image.
> 
> it lessens H and M’s claims if they ignore the claims and act magnanimous / the better person by offering attendance (/forgiveness).
> 
> Think of it like a corporation who gets huge Twitter pressure to change something or drop their association with someone…
> 
> Harkles looks like huge hypocrites by keep going back to the family…. Despite what they say.
> 
> and MM has no shame.  She waltzed in at the Jubilee with a smile on her face, swaggering down that aisle
> 
> View attachment 5673276
> 
> 
> Just look at her face.  She is *loving* the attention.  She has no awareness that everyone is death glaring them.
> 
> she didn’t have an issue until they saw where they were seated.  Her mask dropped for a moment.  She then smiles through it but H is grumpy.  His entitlement kicks in….
> 
> 
> 
> https://pagesix.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/prince-william-harry-meghan-markle-kate-middleton-37.jpg?quality=75&strip=all&w=1200
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The coronation will be the same.  She has no shame, will waltz in - wearing an extremely ridiculously expensive outfit which doesn’t fit, the same grin on her face.  And Haz will look angry at his treatment, where he is being seated etc, because of his ego and sense of entitlement.
> 
> My only hope is that when Will is king, he doesn’t play this game and makes it clear that his brother isn’t a part of his life… and that’s the end of it.



You're right, they are torn. They_ need_ the pics of them there as part of the BRF, they are recording their 'history' after all, but it makes them look like total liars every time they go back. 

That's why the Palace keeps inviting them. It must be very awkward for everyone. 

Actually, I think that 'smile' on her face is plastered on come hell or high-water. I think she is incredibly uncomfortable here. It just makes Harry double-down as her H-he-man savour and protector too. 

If you look at the crowd they're not fooled for a sec and nor should we be.


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> The BRF has limited options. They have chosen to ignore the Netflix nonsense and all the oh so public whingeing and whining of the gruesome twosome. i happen to agree with the path of ignoring the two‘s endless complaints and accusations. The longer they are ignored, the more they embellish in their desperate bid to stay relevant and grab headlines. And as they embellish, they constantly contradict themselves and are being buried in what is by this point a pretty substantial mountain of lies. It’s not just a few people pointing out their lies now, they’ve spawned an entire cottage industry of people pointing out all the inaccuracies and outright fallacies in their statements. Every family has at least one crazy relative that you still have to invite to all the major occasions. At the wedding or whatever family gathering it is, eccentric Uncle Fester shows up and people shrug and ignore his antics. Some comments are made about gee I wish he’d stayed home this time or gosh I didn’t even know he was still alive. Nobody likes him, some feel sorry for him, but everybody just ignores him as much as they can and enjoys catching up on the gossip with everyone else at the family gathering. In the case of H and TW, if you don’t invite them to the coronation, some may say see there must be some truth to what the two have been saying all along because now they are being completely ostracized / cut from the family. This way, the attitude is one of weary resignation, we truly dislike what he’s become / how low he’s sunk, but he’s still family and you don’t turn your back on your son / brother when he needs you the most, no matter how awful he has been. You can distance yourself to protect yourself and your family but you never completely turn your back on the relative who is clearly floundering. Jmo.



I agree. These invitations are as much about PR as they are about family.

But I also disagree. I have cut out communications with a family member. When every deed and word from someone makes it clear how much they despise you and blame you - even for the weather. They need to be blocked, cut-out and cut-off, just as I would a stranger bullying me online. No one should be anyone's doormat nor have to play the martyr. Invite them but don't engage. 

Invite them to the Coronation because it means the BRF take the high-ground. It makes H&M say look like stupid whiny children. Make sure they're searched and have security at all times, orders by the King at all times. Keep their schedule full, and separate from others, even in waiting rooms. Stick both of them behind candles for official filming/photos. Otherwise, give them nothing. No airtime.


----------



## Icyjade

papertiger said:


> Stick both of them behind candles for official filming/photos.


Oh yes! Totally agree. Maybe put them with Princess Anne and see how they cringe and shiver with fear. All while having that ridiculous plastic smile.


----------



## Debbini

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I keep seeing this repeated but we know she publicly identified as biracial before meeting Harry.
> 
> For example in 2015…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle: I'm More Than An 'Other'
> 
> 
> 'Suits' star Meghan Markle on creating her identity and finding her voice as a mixed race woman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.elle.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2012…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle Powerfully Stands Up Against Racism in 2012 Video
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle spoke out about her own experiences being biracial and experiencing racism in a resurfaced video from 2012.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.etonline.com


Yet, in their flopumentary didn't she say she had never experienced racism until she moved to the UK?


----------



## Mimmy

Toby93 said:


> What I just can't understand is why most of the sugars are black? Do they not realise that they are hitching their wagon to a woman who identified as caucasian her whole life until she needed a get out of jail free excuse for her appalling behaviour. I guess they only see what they want to see.


Are most of the “sugars” Black? I see people of other races defending them also. I did not know of MM until she was on the show “Suits”. Her character was clearly biracial on the show. I know that many people did not watch that show so they may not be aware this. 

On a lighter note, the later seasons of “Suits” had some really amazing clothing and handbags. I can still remember the character Jessica Pearson played by Gina Torres carrying a Gucci Top Handle Stirrup bag. I realize that many say what a terrible actor MM was but at the time that show was one of my guilty pleasures.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Debbini said:


> Yet, in their flopumentary didn't she say she had never experienced racism until she moved to the UK?


I watched it and don’t recall her saying that?


----------



## Debbini

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I watched it and don’t recall her saying that?


I didn't watch it, but yes, she did say that.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Who cares at this point. The Harkles are full of it.
> 
> ETA: on a rational level I understand what y'all are saying. Emotionally the appeasement of the a*sholes makes me shudder and I wonder if it's really necessary. You can invite them without gushing how you're looking forward to it.


Hang on,  it is important to remember that *H&M will bow before their King and Queen - in front of the world! *The world will see them *bow*! Imo _that_ is huge. Their hypocrisy will be blasted all over the globe for everyone to see.  I’m here for it.


----------



## xincinsin

needlv said:


> She reported the drone intrusion to the police….


I meant it was a fantasy re-enactment the way it was presented in the mockumentary. 
Is the case against the media for drone intrusion referring to the same incident in the mockumentary? I read that they sued for drone intrusion very soon after Megxit. The re-enactment in the mockumentary was about an incident 6 weeks after they moved into Tyler Perry's mansion, or at least 3 months after Megxit.


----------



## DoggieBags

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I watched it and don’t recall her saying that?


Disclaimer. I didn’t watch their Netflix series or listen to her Archetypes series but an article I read credited her with saying this in her archetypes episode with Mariah Carey as the guest. I haven’t read the transcripts of any her spotify episodes so I’m just quoting from a Newsweek article.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Yep, they will be eating all these words they’ve been spewing.  
Karma is real.


----------



## SouthTampa

Icyjade said:


> Oh yes! Totally agree. Maybe put them with Princess Anne and see how they cringe and shiver with fear. All while having that ridiculous plastic smile.


Princess Anne scares me and I am on a different continent.


----------



## xincinsin

For our reference, all the transcripts of the Netflix 6 eps.





						Harry & Meghan - TV Show Transcripts
					

Episode scripts for the 2022 TV show "Harry & Meghan". Premiere / release on December 8, 2022.




					tvshowtranscripts.ourboard.org


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Debbini said:


> I didn't watch it, but yes, she did say that.


Do you have a link? I just googled and could not find anything like that?


----------



## justwatchin

CarryOn2020 said:


> Hang on,  it is important to remember that *H&M will bow before their King and Queen - in front of the world! *The world will see them *bow*! Imo _that_ is huge. Their hypocrisy will be blasted all over the globe for everyone to see. I’m here for it.


Well H and M could refuse to bow and curtsy. It would reinforce their position against the “firm”.


----------



## Debbini

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Do you have a link? I just googled and could not find anything like that?


I Google and tons of links come up.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I watched it and don’t recall her saying that?



She's traveling when she says it, she's filmed as she'd saying it. She definitely said it. 

As we can see from her past 'work', recollections may vary, even for me, myself and I.


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Do you have a link? I just googled and could not find anything like that?


_The issue of race is taken up significantly in the documentary, including the racial abuse Meghan explains having suffered. "Obviously now everyone is aware of my race because they made it such an issue when I went to the UK," she says. "But before that most people didn't treat me like a Black woman, so that talk didn't have to happen for me," says Meghan, comparing her situation to her mother's by recalling how she heard her being called the "n-word" by a stranger when she was a child._








						'Harry & Meghan' decries UK's racism and media abuse – DW – 12/08/2022
					

In the first episodes of the newly released Netflix docuseries "Harry & Meghan," Prince Harry also likens Meghan to his mother, Princess Diana.




					www.dw.com


----------



## papertiger

justwatchin said:


> Well H and M could refuse to bow and curtsy. It would reinforce their position against the “firm”.



Then what's the point of going?  

Harry already made sure he didn't sing the National Anthem at the late Queen's service. This is something anti-monarchists do.  

I actually think they won't be put in a position to decide/display, not for cameras anyway.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

xincinsin said:


> For our reference, all the transcripts of the Netflix 6 eps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry & Meghan - TV Show Transcripts
> 
> 
> Episode scripts for the 2022 TV show "Harry & Meghan". Premiere / release on December 8, 2022.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tvshowtranscripts.ourboard.org


Thank you so much!

Here's what I found...

(While visiting her old school)...

"The last concert I went to there, I went with my mom. And we were in the parking lot leaving and my mom honked, this woman was taking a long time to figure out how to get out. And the woman turned around and screamed the N-word at my mom. I just remembered my mom like, the grip her hand had on the steering wheel. And you could see her fist was so tight, like the knuckles got all white. And she was just silent the rest of the drive home, we never talked about it. ( somber music playing ) I had never in my life heard someone say the N-word. *Very different to be a minority but not be treated as a minority right off the bat. I'd say now, people are very aware of my race because they made it such an issue when I went to the UK. But before that... most people didn't treat me like a "Black woman." So that talk didn't have to happen for me*."

Maybe that's what people are referring to?

Also the school principal hugged and seemed to have a very warm relationship with Doria (and they mention Tom as well) so I think that might indicate that her mother was actually an involved parent?

Eta...thank you again @xincinsin I was typing while you were posting!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> She's traveling when she says it, she's filmed as she'd saying it. She definitely said it.
> 
> As we can see from her past 'work', recollections may vary, even for me, myself and I.


Lol yes! I was not interpreting her words as never experiencing racism (since she is describing her mother being called the n word) but rather because she is a mixed light skinned woman her experience was different so she had not had "the talk" so many Black families have with their children.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

DoggieBags said:


> Disclaimer. I didn’t watch their Netflix series or listen to her Archetypes series but an article I read credited her with saying this in her archetypes episode with Mariah Carey as the guest. I haven’t read the transcripts of any her spotify episodes so I’m just quoting from a Newsweek article.


Thank you! Yes I found it, I think it was sort of a similar conversation (she seems to be discussing the difference between being biracial and Black)...

"If there’s any time in my life that it’s been more focused on my race, it’s only once I started dating my husband,” Markle said. “Then I started to understand what it was like to be treated like a Black woman because up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Lol yes! I was not interpreting her words as never experiencing racism (since she is describing her mother being called the n word) but rather because she is a mixed light skinned woman her experience was different so she had not had "the talk" so many Black families have with their children.



According to her past convos on the subject she was well aware (and as you are well aware #124,134)

Those of us that are ethnic minorities (or even in part like M) that pass or don't pass don't actually need to have 'a talk'. 

We can read the graffiti on walls and at bus-stops, hear the name-calling, see the stereotypes on TV, get an extra grilling at borders where they can read our names on our passports etc. Why any child would need to have a specific talk after facing sh*t every other day I don't know? I already knew why children said they wouldn't play with me aged 4, and that came from 'talks'_ their_ parents had with _them_.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yep, they will be eating all these words they’ve been spewing.
> Karma is real.



I just wished it would hurry up sometimes.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thank you! Yes I found it, I think it was sort of a similar conversation (she seems to be discussing the difference between being biracial and Black)...
> 
> "If there’s any time in my life that it’s been more focused on my race, it’s only once I started dating my husband,” Markle said. “Then I started to understand what it was like to be treated like a Black woman because up until then, I had been treated like a mixed woman.”



and I can totally see why that gets stuck in the throat of so many black people (e.g. Nana Akua ) and many of the comments


----------



## skyqueen

Liar, Liar...pants on fire! 
(Her father also paid for new teeth!)


----------



## Debbini

If she said it was Sunday I would have to double check a calendar.


----------



## tiktok

DoggieBags said:


> Disclaimer. I didn’t watch their Netflix series or listen to her Archetypes series but an article I read credited her with saying this in her archetypes episode with Mariah Carey as the guest. I haven’t read the transcripts of any her spotify episodes so I’m just quoting from a Newsweek article.


That’s the article:








						Meghan Says She Was Not Treated as a 'Black Woman' Until Harry Relationship
					

Meghan Markle told her Spotify podcast "I had been treated like a mixed woman" up until dating Prince Harry, when "things really shifted."




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I watched it and don’t recall her saying that?


On first being treated as black in the UK, sorry I dont have a link either but can verify that was in the NF stuff
Doria said she never had to have a talk with MM about racism bc MM was never subject to it (in the US)
I drew the conclusion that she passed as white (deliberately ? accidentally ?) in the US


----------



## Chanbal

I just hope Anderson Cooper doesn't get markled by Hazz's interview on Jan 8. I really like AC and wouldn't like to see his reputation damaged.

_"The interview is expected to be broadcast on Mr Cooper’s 60 Minutes show on TV network CBS on Sunday, January 8, two days before the memoir is released in bookshops."_









						Prince Harry set for America media blitz to promote his 'Spare' memoir
					

Prince Harry is taking part in yet another tell-all interview as he launches the publicity blitz for his explosive new memoir.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## marietouchet

tiktok said:


> That’s the article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Says She Was Not Treated as a 'Black Woman' Until Harry Relationship
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle told her Spotify podcast "I had been treated like a mixed woman" up until dating Prince Harry, when "things really shifted."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I am thinking in the US as an actress, her PR team chose the words in her bio. She could omit her heritage if it suited.
But, suddenly in the UK, her heritage was mentioned by press  who were not eating out of the hand of her PR team


----------



## sdkitty

interesting story which appears to have real sources....they talk about anderson cooper interviewing Harry on 60 minutes.  Anderson is very close friends with Andy Cohen, who seems to be a Meghan fan.  But he is a legit reporter so hopefully this isn't going to be like the Oprah interview.


			https://elink.thedailybeast.com/view/62cedb3f34f452c5a80808b3hvd1u.rwt/689444a0


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Thanks @papertiger I was responding to the poster who stated MM claimed she had never experienced racism before moving to the UK. I don't believe that's what she meant when we actually read her own words.

M & H are their own worst enemies. There is so much to cover...why claim they were married before the wedding?   why say no one asks if I'm okay? (to be fair she did try to offer context in the series, and she was postpartum, but still DO NOT SAY THAT and IN AFRICA of all places! ) why complain about climate change and take multiple private planes? 

So I just don't understand the need to create more drama based on rumors and innuendo. She's a yacht girl, she is evil, she is smirking (or possibly, as you pointed out, maybe very uncomfortable), she's a terrible mother, her mother is a terrible mother (and an ex con!) and the mastermind behind a plot to take down the monarchy, her cousin is a paid liar, etc etc etc.

A poster shared a screenshot of H & M watching their documentary that described H as cheering. I was horrified. But when I watched the series I realized he was actually stretching.

I do think that's part of what makes coverage of MM so challenging. Tabloids and social media rely on clicks for revenue. The more we click the more they make. So headlines like "MM discusses being a mixed woman" are a lot less successful than "MM claims she never experienced racism before the UK!"

So posters understandably read the headlines and are rightfully outraged. But when they then have to ignore or discount anyone who might offer another perspective where are we?

I believe dichotomies exist. She can be a narcissist AND a victim of racism. He can be a terrible grandson AND traumatized by his mother's death. Thomas Markle was a good father when she was a child AND is not now. Critics have legitimate issues with MM AND we can agree that hate speech is unacceptable under any circumstances.

I wish the conversation allowed for this nuance. Ultimately these are just celebrities who literally have no power...except what we give them in our own minds.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

marietouchet said:


> On first being treated as black in the UK, sorry I dont have a link either but can verify that was in the NF stuff
> Doria said she never had to have a talk with MM about racism bc MM was never subject to it (in the US)
> I drew the conclusion that she passed as white (deliberately ? accidentally ?) in the US


In the actual quote she describes herself as being mixed.


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thanks @papertiger I was responding to the poster who stated MM claimed she had never experienced racism before moving to the UK. I don't believe that's what she meant when we actually read her own words.
> 
> M & H are their own worst enemies. There is so much to cover...why claim they were married before the wedding?   why say no one asks if I'm okay? (to be fair she did try to offer context in the series, and she was postpartum, but still DO NOT SAY THAT and IN AFRICA of all places! ) why complain about climate change and take multiple private planes?
> 
> So I just don't understand the need to create more drama based on rumors and innuendo. She's a yacht girl, she is evil, she is smirking (or possibly as you pointed out, maybe very uncomfortable), she's a terrible mother, her mother is a terrible mother (and an ex con!) and the mastermind behind a plot to take down the monarchy, her cousin is a paid liar, etc etc etc.
> 
> A poster shared a screenshot of H & M watching their documentary that described H as cheering. I was horrified. But when I watched the series I realized he was actually stretching.
> 
> I do think that's part of what makes coverage of MM so challenging. Tabloids and social media rely on clicks for revenue. The more we click the more they make. So headlines like "MM discusses being a mixed woman" are a lot less successful than "MM claims she never experienced racism before the UK!"
> 
> So posters understandably read the headlines and are rightfully outraged. But when they then have to ignore or discount anyone who might offer another perspective where are we?
> 
> I believe dichotomies exist. She can be a narcissist AND a victim of racism. He can be a terrible grandson AND traumatized by his mother's death. Thomas Markle was a good father when she was a child AND is not now. Critics have legitimate issues with MM AND we can agree that hate speech is unacceptable under any circumstances.
> 
> I wish the conversation allowed for this nuance. Ultimately these are just celebrities who literally have no power...expect what we give them in our own minds.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


>


Thanks for reading all that!!!


----------



## jblended

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thanks @papertiger I was responding to the poster who stated MM claimed she had never experienced racism before moving to the UK. I don't believe that's what she meant when we actually read her own words.
> 
> M & H are their own worst enemies. There is so much to cover...why claim they were married before the wedding?   why say no one asks if I'm okay? (to be fair she did try to offer context in the series, and she was postpartum, but still DO NOT SAY THAT and IN AFRICA of all places! ) why complain about climate change and take multiple private planes?
> 
> So I just don't understand the need to create more drama based on rumors and innuendo. She's a yacht girl, she is evil, she is smirking (or possibly, as you pointed out, maybe very uncomfortable), she's a terrible mother, her mother is a terrible mother (and an ex con!) and the mastermind behind a plot to take down the monarchy, her cousin is a paid liar, etc etc etc.
> 
> A poster shared a screenshot of H & M watching their documentary that described H as cheering. I was horrified. But when I watched the series I realized he was actually stretching.
> 
> I do think that's part of what makes coverage of MM so challenging. Tabloids and social media rely on clicks for revenue. The more we click the more they make. So headlines like "MM discusses being a mixed woman" are a lot less successful than "MM claims she never experienced racism before the UK!"
> 
> So posters understandably read the headlines and are rightfully outraged. But when they then have to ignore or discount anyone who might offer another perspective where are we?
> 
> I believe dichotomies exist. She can be a narcissist AND a victim of racism. He can be a terrible grandson AND traumatized by his mother's death. Thomas Markle was a good father when she was a child AND is not now. Critics have legitimate issues with MM AND we can agree that hate speech is unacceptable under any circumstances.
> 
> I wish the conversation allowed for this nuance. Ultimately these are just celebrities who literally have no power...expect what we give them in our own minds.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thanks @papertiger I was responding to the poster who stated MM claimed she had never experienced racism before moving to the UK. I don't believe that's what she meant when we actually read her own words.
> 
> M & H are their own worst enemies. There is so much to cover...why claim they were married before the wedding?   why say no one asks if I'm okay? (to be fair she did try to offer context in the series, and she was postpartum, but still DO NOT SAY THAT and IN AFRICA of all places! ) why complain about climate change and take multiple private planes?
> 
> So I just don't understand the need to create more drama based on rumors and innuendo. She's a yacht girl, she is evil, she is smirking (or possibly, as you pointed out, maybe very uncomfortable), she's a terrible mother, her mother is a terrible mother (and an ex con!) and the mastermind behind a plot to take down the monarchy, her cousin is a paid liar, etc etc etc.
> 
> A poster shared a screenshot of H & M watching their documentary that described H as cheering. I was horrified. But when I watched the series I realized he was actually stretching.
> 
> I do think that's part of what makes coverage of MM so challenging. Tabloids and social media rely on clicks for revenue. The more we click the more they make. So headlines like "MM discusses being a mixed woman" are a lot less successful than "MM claims she never experienced racism before the UK!"
> 
> So posters understandably read the headlines and are rightfully outraged. But when they then have to ignore or discount anyone who might offer another perspective where are we?
> 
> I believe dichotomies exist. She can be a narcissist AND a victim of racism. He can be a terrible grandson AND traumatized by his mother's death. Thomas Markle was a good father when she was a child AND is not now. Critics have legitimate issues with MM AND we can agree that hate speech is unacceptable under any circumstances.
> 
> I wish the conversation allowed for this nuance. Ultimately these are just celebrities who literally have no power...except what we give them in our own minds.


And her and Hairy have been caught in so many lies that you really can't believe anything either one of them says. They change stories as they see fit.


----------



## charlottawill

Icyjade said:


> Oh yes! Totally agree. Maybe put them with Princess Anne and see how they cringe and shiver with fear. All while having that ridiculous plastic smile.


I'd like to see Anne seated next to MM, Sophie next to H, and Major Johnny behind them. But that would mean they're getting decent seats. They should be demoted from second row royals to the nosebleed seats.


----------



## Chanbal

Debbini said:


> *And her and Hairy have been caught in so many lies* that you really can't believe anything either one of them says. They change stories as they see fit.


Lady C is counting the falsehoods in the reality show and the last time I checked was not even 100. 

What one does for love!


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Actually, I think that 'smile' on her face is plastered on come hell or high-water. I think she is incredibly uncomfortable here. It just makes Harry double-down as her H-he-man savour and protector too.
> 
> If you look at the crowd they're not fooled for a sec and nor should we be.


Yes, she is faking the smile to present herself as confident and at ease. In reality you know she hears every boo or comment yelled at her. That makes me happy.


----------



## bag-mania

Chanbal said:


> I just hope Anderson Cooper doesn't get markled by Hazz's interview on Jan 8. I really like AC and wouldn't like to see his reputation damaged.
> 
> _"The interview is expected to be broadcast on Mr Cooper’s 60 Minutes show on TV network CBS on Sunday, January 8, two days before the memoir is released in bookshops."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry set for America media blitz to promote his 'Spare' memoir
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is taking part in yet another tell-all interview as he launches the publicity blitz for his explosive new memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Ugh, wouldn’t be at all surprised if Anderson goes all fanboy and feeds Harry a bunch of softball questions. Hope I’m wrong.


----------



## Chanbal

Mark my words, one day schools will have the H & M Business Model on their curriculum. 


_Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s business model is ‘victimhood’_​


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Ugh, wouldn’t be at all surprised if Anderson goes all fanboy and feeds Harry a bunch of softball questions. Hope I’m wrong.


hope you're wrong....seems like it would have a negative impact on his credibility


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Mark my words, one day schools will have the H & M Business Model on their curriculum.
> 
> 
> _Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s business model is ‘victimhood’_​




H&M business model is make all the children sign an NDA before they are allowed to go to school.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Debbini said:


> And her and Hairy have been caught in so many lies that you really can't believe anything either one of them says. They change stories as they see fit.


----------



## xincinsin

I read this article from way back when and, to me, it offers a valid viewpoint on the whole Harkle racism issue.








						The Problem With Calling Meghan Markle the “First Black Princess”
					

“Meghan Markle is the type of black that the majority of right-leaning white America wishes we all could be, if there were to be blackness at all.”




					www.vogue.com
				



It doesn't help that Zed herself harps on it: "I am here as a woman of colour and as your sister." She would have gotten a better response if she concentrated on her causes and her charities and let her race fade into the background. I'm not saying to deny her race but to not let it become her be-all and end-all.

And that season's greetings card? That is really her worst look. When she smiles like that, all I can think of is the Joker, in appearance and in nature.


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> _Just what do they do all day, you want to scream, beyond making stage zucchini muffins with Archie for the cameras and *****ing about “your brother”, as Meghan calls William darkly?* She may have complained that the royal family was an “orchestrated reality show”, but what does she call this? *Harry is such an absolute beta, he has even been faithfully trained to interview her on camera her at any crucial moment._





Hold on. TW had the cheek to call the royal family an _'orchestrated reality show'_?! That is beyond hilariously hypocritical!
That is classic narcissist behaviour- be guilty yourself of doing something or acting a certain way and then not like being called out for it so you point the finger at someone/something else (usually an 'enemy' or rival in their eyes) and accuse them of doing what you are guilty of doing to deflect attention away from your shortcomings and garner some sympathy for yourself.

Last I checked the RF are doing their jobs/fulfilling their roles, minding their business, not selling their souls for some quick lazy cash.
While TW and her puppet sold their souls and their children's privacy to the highest bidder- to make a _heavily _ORCHESTRATED reality tv show where they shared tonnes of personal, intimate photos/videos/details, burned any remainder of a bridge to Hairy's family by slandering them and the media... and all for what? So they can remain playing the victim card, that everyone is out to get them, that they are perfect human beings without a single flaw, basically saint status?
It's an absolute joke. They both need to f**k off.
At this stage, how anyone can defend _anything _they do or say is beyond me.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

SouthTampa said:


> Princess Anne scares me and I am on a different continent.


Princess Anne has faced worse BS than ZedZed or Dufus ever will, however The Princess Royal didn't let it dictate her life, but instead she shrugged it off and worked her butt off without ever complaining. Like her father Prince Philip she adopted the motto 'Just get on with it' instead of playing the victim.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> interesting story which appears to have real sources....they talk about anderson cooper interviewing Harry on 60 minutes.  Anderson is very close friends with Andy Cohen, who seems to be a Meghan fan.  But he is a legit reporter so hopefully this isn't going to be like the Oprah interview.
> 
> 
> https://elink.thedailybeast.com/view/62cedb3f34f452c5a80808b3hvd1u.rwt/689444a0


LOL at the droll remark following a serious-sounding paragraph. Perfectly captured my incredulity.
_Still, a source close to the Sussexes tells the Times that after Harry’s book, the couple will “focus on their service work” rather than “anything personal—they’re looking forward to people being interested in what they’re doing beyond all the drama.”_

_*Stop laughing at the back.*_

So, after all the lies and accusations and variations on truth, they suddenly want 2023 to be about service and reconciliation? I'll get the popcorn ready.

I hope Anderson Cooper does a better job than Oprah, but that would not be difficult to achieve since Oprah set an amazingly low bar. Also hope Sparry trips over his own tongue.


----------



## Mendocino

Mimmy said:


> Are most of the “sugars” Black? I see people of other races defending them also. I did not know of MM until she was on the show “Suits”. Her character was clearly biracial on the show. I know that many people did not watch that show so they may not be aware this.
> 
> On a lighter note, the later seasons of “Suits” had some really amazing clothing and handbags. I can still remember the character Jessica Pearson played by Gina Torres carrying a Gucci Top Handle Stirrup bag. I realize that many say what a terrible actor MM was but at the time that show was one of my guilty pleasures.


I loved watching Suits--everybody from Harvey, Donna and Mike to Louis' prunies and the can opener and everyone in between. Jessica's outfits were to die for.


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> LOL at the droll remark following a serious-sounding paragraph. Perfectly captured my incredulity.
> _Still, a source close to the Sussexes tells the Times that after Harry’s book, the couple will “focus on their service work” rather than “anything personal—they’re looking forward to people being interested in what they’re doing beyond all the drama.”
> 
> *Stop laughing at the back.*_
> 
> So, after all the lies and accusations and variations on truth, they suddenly want 2023 to be about service and reconciliation? I'll get the popcorn ready.
> 
> I hope Anderson Cooper does a better job than Oprah, but that would not be difficult to achieve since Oprah set an amazingly low bar. Also hope Sparry trips over his own tongue.


after all the people including sympathetic ones saying they need to move on from their "story", maybe they feel forced to do so


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> after all the people including sympathetic ones saying they need to move on from their "story", maybe they feel forced to do so


No profit in that. They might flip it into further victimhood: everyone telling us that we need to move on, they don't understand how traumatized we are!

Next year, they will try to milk the coronation and Invictus Games. And there is a Time Magazine event early in the year.


----------



## Molly0

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Ultimately these are just celebrities who literally have no power...except what we give them in our own minds.


This!


----------



## Molly0

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't have any unanswered questions why the losers would attend. I cannot wrap my head around BP feeling the need to announce they are welcome. One can take the politeness a step too far.


“When they go low, we go high”
Michelle ***** said it…but the monarchy lives it.  
Heck they invented it!


----------



## justwatchin

.


----------



## youngster

xincinsin said:


> _*Stop laughing at the back.*_
> 
> So, after all the lies and accusations and variations on truth, *they suddenly want 2023 to be about service and reconciliation*? I'll get the popcorn ready.



I'll try but I just can't!


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> I read this article from way back when and, to me, it offers a valid viewpoint on the whole Harkle racism issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Problem With Calling Meghan Markle the “First Black Princess”
> 
> 
> “Meghan Markle is the type of black that the majority of right-leaning white America wishes we all could be, if there were to be blackness at all.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't help that Zed herself harps on it: "I am here as a woman of colour and as your sister." She would have gotten a better response if she concentrated on her causes and her charities and let her race fade into the background. I'm not saying to deny her race but to not let it become her be-all and end-all.
> 
> And that season's greetings card? That is really her worst look. When she smiles like that, all I can think of is the Joker, in appearance and in nature.


the end of that Vogue article says a lot


----------



## gracekelly

They are going to focus on service work rather than themselves?  Ha!  Believe it when I see it. They will continue their business model set up by St Laurent of partnering with others who do the actual work and who give the real money. After this current whine fest there maybe less charities and people willing to do that.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't follow.


----------



## charlottawill

sdkitty said:


> the end of that Vogue article says a lot



"For as long as I can remember, she has been grabbed at the arm by strangers while entering a room and almost immediately asked to identify her race." 

This line reminded me of the incident with LSH and NF. You can either view it as people are racist, or sometimes it is simply human curiosity. That being said, I would not grab someone I didn't know by the arm. That is invading their personal space.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So my daily newspaper ran a story on Charles's first 100 days as king and it was pretty favourable. They said he'd done way better than expected, that his popularity numbers weren't all that great even back in May but that the Brits had warmed considerably to their new monarch and that he had done well going out and mingle with the people.

They also very briefly mentioned Harry and Ghoul in one sentence and it sounded like describing a critter infestation


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

charlottawill said:


> "For as long as I can remember, she has been grabbed at the arm by strangers while entering a room and almost immediately asked to identify her race."
> 
> This line reminded me of the incident with LSH and NF. You can either view it as people are racist, or sometimes it is simply human curiosity. *That being said, I would not grab someone I didn't know by the arm.* That is invading their personal space.



Right? Why do people want to touch strangers? I was not sad when the plague made everyone give up shaking hands for a bit


----------



## gracekelly

charlottawill said:


> "For as long as I can remember, she has been grabbed at the arm by strangers while entering a room and almost immediately asked to identify her race."
> 
> This line reminded me of the incident with LSH and NF. You can either view it as people are racist, or sometimes it is simply human curiosity. That being said, I would not grab someone I didn't know by the arm. That is invading their personal space.


That is ridiculous.  Who would be so crude to demand to know your race?  A person might be asked where they are from, but to ask about race? That might be a question when you know someone better, but not from a total stranger.   Meghan loves to ask what high school you attended.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> That is ridiculous.  Who would be so crude to demand to know your race?  A person might be asked where they are from, but to ask about race? That might be a question when you know someone better, but not from a total stranger.   Meghan loves to ask what high school you attended.



I honestly wonder if people are being truthful or making one incident into this huge "It always happens to me!" I also read copious online accounts of how non-drinkers are all but persecuted in our drinking society and have to justify themselves all the time. 

I don't drink besides maybe literally one sip of sparkling wine on NYE....maybe. I don't have health issues, a former alcohol problem or religious concerns, I just never warmed up to the taste and can't see the fun in being tipsy. Not once have I been cornered and interrogated. As a teen my friends were happy they had a built-in designated driver, and as a real adult people I encounter apparently are just not as rude and just give me something else to drink.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly wonder if people are being truthful or making one incident into this huge "It always happens to me!" I also read copious online accounts of how non-drinkers are all but persecuted in our drinking society and have to justify themselves all the time.
> 
> I don't drink besides maybe literally one sip of sparkling wine on NYE....maybe. I don't have health issues, a former alcohol problem or religious concerns, I just never warmed up to the taste and can't see the fun in being tipsy. Not once have I been cornered and interrogated. As a teen my friends were happy they had a built-in designated driver, and as a real adult people I encounter apparently are just not as rude and just give me something else to drink.


People like familiarity and it makes then feel better and validates their choices.  Insecure people feel this need more than others.


----------



## Jayne1

purseinsanity said:


> That ultrasound picture can be anyone's.


Probably the surrogate's.

But I do think she looks more pregnant in her "candids" that she posed for in the doc. The bump looks legit, no lactating boob enlargement or anything, but the bump looks more legit.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't follow.



She's definitely Not a Royal Family expert!


----------



## sdkitty

short story on CNN today about H&M docuseries.  they basically said most Brits aren't happy with them.  what I found interesting was they had a clip of Meghan saying how nottingham cottage was so small.  how tone deaf can you be?  the CNN commentator said basically she should think about what she say as there are homeless people down the street.  Again - delusions of grandeur.

a story....really - how low can they go?








						Shock as Meghan Markle, Harry make fun of Queen’s beloved royal cottage
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, in their Netflix doc Harry & Meghan, shockingly mocked their former royal residence, Nottingham Cottage, which was famously loved by the late Queen...




					www.thenews.com.pk


----------



## youngster

The Queen made the decision to deny half-in/half-out.  Harry was stunned he couldn't sweet talk her around.

From the DM:








						Harry 'couldn't fathom' he was no longer able to 'sweet talk' Queen
					

Sources close to the Royal Family claim the Duke of Sussex, who has painted a picture of a passive Queen in his show, say he can't fathom he was able to 'sweet talk' the late-monarch.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Sources close to the Royal Family claim the Duke of Sussex, who has painted a picture of a passive Queen in his show, say he can't fathom he was able to 'sweet talk' the late-monarch.  It relates to the so-called Sandringham summit in January 2020, a meeting called by Her Majesty to determine the future of Harry and Meghan as royals.

. . . . with those close to the situation Her Majesty was strong and sharp enough to make the decision herself.  One told the Times: 'It's outrageous. Harry never wanted to admit to himself that it was the Queen who said, "no, you're out". 

*'He couldn't fathom that he wasn't the cheeky chappy who was going to sweet-talk grandma into getting what he wanted.'*

Another source told the publication the Duke of Sussex had 'shifted' the narrative about his grandmother.

'It was always "my commander-in-chief, the boss",' they said. 'But when he was not getting the support from her he wanted, she is represented as a diminutive figure sat in the corner.'That is another manipulation of the narrative to suit the outcome as felt by Harry. 'Advisers made recommendations to Her Majesty, but there was only one person making the decisions. 

*'To look the truth squarely in the eye, to realise your relationship has been damaged and to know it was his commander-in-chief who decided he couldn't have the half-in, half-out role he wanted, is probably too painful for him to accept.'*_


----------



## DoggieBags

sdkitty said:


> short story on CNN today about H&M docuseries.  they basically said most Brits aren't happy with them.  what I found interesting was they had a clip of Meghan saying how nottingham cottage was so small.  how tone deaf can you be?  the CNN commentator said basically she should think about what she say as there are homeless people down the street.  Again - delusions of grandeur.


I’m surprised CNN said anything even remotely critical of TW. They’re generally so pro Harkles.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> The Queen made the decision to deny half-in/half-out.  Harry was stunned he couldn't sweet talk her around.
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'couldn't fathom' he was no longer able to 'sweet talk' Queen
> 
> 
> Sources close to the Royal Family claim the Duke of Sussex, who has painted a picture of a passive Queen in his show, say he can't fathom he was able to 'sweet talk' the late-monarch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Sources close to the Royal Family claim the Duke of Sussex, who has painted a picture of a passive Queen in his show, say he can't fathom he was able to 'sweet talk' the late-monarch.  It relates to the so-called Sandringham summit in January 2020, a meeting called by Her Majesty to determine the future of Harry and Meghan as royals.
> 
> . . . . with those close to the situation Her Majesty was strong and sharp enough to make the decision herself.  One told the Times: 'It's outrageous. Harry never wanted to admit to himself that it was the Queen who said, "no, you're out".
> 
> *'He couldn't fathom that he wasn't the cheeky chappy who was going to sweet-talk grandma into getting what he wanted.'*
> 
> Another source told the publication the Duke of Sussex had 'shifted' the narrative about his grandmother.
> 
> 'It was always "my commander-in-chief, the boss",' they said. 'But when he was not getting the support from her he wanted, she is represented as a diminutive figure sat in the corner.'That is another manipulation of the narrative to suit the outcome as felt by Harry. 'Advisers made recommendations to Her Majesty, but there was only one person making the decisions.
> 
> *'To look the truth squarely in the eye, to realise your relationship has been damaged and to know it was his commander-in-chief who decided he couldn't have the half-in, half-out role he wanted, is probably too painful for him to accept.'*_


she did her duty


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> I’m surprised CNN said anything even remotely critical of TW. They’re generally so pro Harkles.


they reported the story...had Brits on the street, etc. talking


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> short story on CNN today about H&M docuseries.  they basically said most Brits aren't happy with them.  what I found interesting was they had a clip of Meghan saying how nottingham cottage was so small.  how tone deaf can you be?  the CNN commentator said basically she should think about what she say as there are homeless people down the street.  Again - delusions of grandeur.



Yeah, evil BRF not providing more appropriate accomodation for a random girlfriend. Also IIRC she whined enough to Harry to make him rent her a Cotswolds farm so poor thing could breathe in the few months she had to live there (while they were dismissing apartments and houses left and right until they settled on Frogmore Cottage. Which looking back I think wasn't all that voluntarily, my guess is someone was getting fed up with their pickiness).

And all the fuss with them knowing they didn't want to stay anyway!


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Yeah, evil BRF not providing more appropriate accomodation for a random girlfriend. Also IIRC she whined enough to Harry to make him rent her a Cotswolds farm so poor thing could breathe in the few months she had to live there (while they were dismissing apartments and houses left and right until they settled on Frogmore Cottage. Which looking back I think wasn't all that voluntarily, my guess is someone was getting fed up with their pickiness).
> 
> And all the fuss with them knowing they didn't want to stay anyway!


I guess this is all ok with their fans


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> _*'He couldn't fathom that he wasn't the cheeky chappy who was going to sweet-talk grandma into getting what he wanted.'*_



I can believe that. This family has indulged him all this life, even if he never stops whining how William was favoured. 



youngster said:


> _Another source told the publication the Duke of Sussex had 'shifted' the narrative about his grandmother.
> 
> 'It was always "my commander-in-chief, the boss",' they said. 'But when he was not getting the support from her he wanted, she is represented as a diminutive figure sat in the corner.'That is another manipulation of the narrative to suit the outcome as felt by Harry. 'Advisers made recommendations to Her Majesty, but there was only one person making the decisions. _



He should be ashamed of himself.



youngster said:


> _*'To look the truth squarely in the eye, to realise your relationship has been damaged and to know it was his commander-in-chief who decided he couldn't have the half-in, half-out role he wanted, is probably too painful for him to accept.'*_



Geez Harry, life's not a pony farm. At this rate, 10yo Archie will have more emotional maturity than his parents.


----------



## youngster

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Also IIRC she whined enough to Harry to make him rent her a Cotswolds farm so poor thing could breathe in the few months she had to live there (while they were dismissing apartments and houses left and right until they settled on Frogmore Cottage. Which looking back I think wasn't all that voluntarily, my guess is someone was getting fed up with their pickiness).



I remember reading they originally asked to live in Windsor Castle.  The Queen said no, I'm living there (or the sovereign lives there), but she said you can have Frogmore Cottage which is essentially in her backyard on the grounds and was very gracious of her.


----------



## needlv

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't follow.



Is this Meghan’s account?


----------



## needlv

Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?

edit - adding pic


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe that. This family has indulged him all this life, even if he never stops whining how William was favoured.
> 
> 
> 
> He should be ashamed of himself.
> 
> 
> 
> Geez Harry, life's not a pony farm. At this rate, 10yo Archie will have more emotional maturity than his parents.


apparently everyone - including both his parents - felt like he had such a burden being the "spare"....maybe they just made matters worse by coddling him


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I can believe that. This family has indulged him all this life, even if he never stops whining how William was favoured.
> 
> 
> 
> He should be ashamed of himself.
> 
> 
> 
> Geez Harry, life's not a pony farm. At this rate, 10yo Archie will have more emotional maturity than his parents.


He should be ashamed of himself, but he isn't. About anything. I can't wrap my brain around that.


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> He should be ashamed of himself, but he isn't. About anything. I can't wrap my brain around that.


I know....it seems like he has turned into a person of just about no virtue....unless maybe he can give love to his kids


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I honestly wonder if people are being truthful or making one incident into this huge "It always happens to me!" I also read copious online accounts of how non-drinkers are all but persecuted in our drinking society and have to justify themselves all the time.
> 
> I don't drink besides maybe literally one sip of sparkling wine on NYE....maybe. I don't have health issues, a former alcohol problem or religious concerns, I just never warmed up to the taste and can't see the fun in being tipsy. Not once have I been cornered and interrogated. As a teen my friends were happy they had a built-in designated driver, and as a real adult people I encounter apparently are just not as rude and just give me something else to drink.


I usually do get interrogated if I say no to alcohol. Like you I may have a small sip at Christmas and that's it. People think it's strange that I don't drink. I used to, up until my thirties, but then I sort of grew out of it.


----------



## Lounorada

needlv said:


> *Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?*
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684


I'm guessing, both!


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> I remember reading they originally asked to live in Windsor Castle.  The Queen said no, I'm living there (or the sovereign lives there), but she said you can have Frogmore Cottage which is essentially in her backyard on the grounds and was very gracious of her.


she grew up in a regular house in the suburbs of LA.  I wonder what her home was like before she met Harry.  What's wrong with a cottage?  not worthy of their magnificence apparently


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

youngster said:


> I remember reading they originally asked to live in Windsor Castle.  The Queen said no, I'm living there (or the sovereign lives there), but she said you can have Frogmore Cottage which is essentially in her backyard on the grounds and was very gracious of her.



And after Windsor Castle they wanted Frogmore HOUSE (which is beautiful BTW), claiming they needed the extra space when they set up their own court (both demands were swiftly denied).


----------



## charlottawill

youngster said:


> The Queen made the decision to deny half-in/half-out.  Harry was stunned he couldn't sweet talk her around.
> 
> From the DM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry 'couldn't fathom' he was no longer able to 'sweet talk' Queen
> 
> 
> Sources close to the Royal Family claim the Duke of Sussex, who has painted a picture of a passive Queen in his show, say he can't fathom he was able to 'sweet talk' the late-monarch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Sources close to the Royal Family claim the Duke of Sussex, who has painted a picture of a passive Queen in his show, say he can't fathom he was able to 'sweet talk' the late-monarch.  It relates to the so-called Sandringham summit in January 2020, a meeting called by Her Majesty to determine the future of Harry and Meghan as royals.
> 
> . . . . with those close to the situation Her Majesty was strong and sharp enough to make the decision herself.  One told the Times: 'It's outrageous. Harry never wanted to admit to himself that it was the Queen who said, "no, you're out".
> 
> *'He couldn't fathom that he wasn't the cheeky chappy who was going to sweet-talk grandma into getting what he wanted.'*
> 
> Another source told the publication the Duke of Sussex had 'shifted' the narrative about his grandmother.
> 
> 'It was always "my commander-in-chief, the boss",' they said. 'But when he was not getting the support from her he wanted, she is represented as a diminutive figure sat in the corner.'That is another manipulation of the narrative to suit the outcome as felt by Harry. 'Advisers made recommendations to Her Majesty, but there was only one person making the decisions.
> 
> *'To look the truth squarely in the eye, to realise your relationship has been damaged and to know it was his commander-in-chief who decided he couldn't have the half-in, half-out role he wanted, is probably too painful for him to accept.'*_


In summary, when a spoiled child realizes that they can no longer have their way with everything.


----------



## csshopper

So, Lady Susan takes one for the team and meets with Marlene where Marlene “has accepted this apology and appreciates that no malice was intended.”

Predictably the Narcissists of Sussex, do not acknowledge this, and instead make it about themselves with a WE demand a meeting, WE want an apology too.

Their reaction to the news release was probably filmed, then edited to up the outrage. I wonder how much Doria gets paid for her subservient videographer  role? Flat fee? Percentage?

Need to shake them off for awhile, exiting to go look at men in kilts.


----------



## charlottawill

needlv said:


> Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684


Maybe she can do a Closet Confessional


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> But I do think she looks more pregnant in her "candids" that she posed for in the doc. The bump looks legit, no lactating boob enlargement or anything, but the bump looks more legit.


Agreed. I won't watch the show, but I've seen a lot of pics online. It seems though that they are all from her pregnancy with A. Did they show any from her pregnancy with LB?


----------



## LittleStar88

Hmmmmm….


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> Hmmmmm….



"Puck bunny"   I'm sure she was.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

needlv said:


> Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684


Couldn't resist! The devil made me do it! Added a little hat to do it justice.


----------



## mrsinsyder

charlottawill said:


> Agreed. I won't watch the show, but I've seen a lot of pics online. It seems though that they are all from her pregnancy with A. Did they show any from her pregnancy with LB?


Yes, much of the latter episodes were her pregnant in montecito.


----------



## papertiger

youngster said:


> I remember reading they originally asked to live in Windsor Castle.  The Queen said no, I'm living there (or the sovereign lives there), but she said you can have Frogmore Cottage which is essentially in her backyard on the grounds and was very gracious of her.



Yup

Somewhere in the archives of this thread there was a post/article


----------



## LittleStar88

needlv said:


> Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684



And they’re all beige


----------



## Miss Liz

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't follow.



Well, Bless Your Heart, Anne Boleyn!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> I know....it seems like he has turned into a person of just about no virtue....unless maybe he can give love to his kids



He obviously was _never_ a person of virtue 

He just waited for someone who suffered from more delusions than himself to come along.

M must have convinced H she was little Mzz Hollywood and had all sorts of people stashed in her little black book. That's what the Clooneys at their wedding and the others were about. That's what the star-studded baby shower was about. He already thought she was well-connected and she knew by marrying him she would be. She so longs to be a part of 'that' world that alluded her for so long. And they almost made it happen. They could have made it happen. But slagging-off and telling tales on the people you should be most loyal to, writing books filled with 'private' convocations and reading out everybody's texts on camera   Stars like their secrets kept.
Meghan is the original Becky Sharp made Duchess made Real (Desperate) Housewife, and Harry is the idiot who followed. People can smell desperation a mile off. They blew it big time.


----------



## 880

Becky Sharp was smarter and better dressed and had a better sense for survival, at least until the end 


ETA: she wasn’t pretending to be anything like a philanthropist either.


----------



## needlv

I don’t give Haz a pass.  He is just as bad….

They deserve each other.  

I don’t believe or like the stories written like “MM led Haz astray”.  That puts all the blame on her and seems to give him a pass.

They are equally at fault.

  Haz and M thought by throwing enough tantrums (and now going public with stories) the BRF would relent and they haven’t.  It’s obvious this is the first time both of them have been told a firm “NO” and their stories, tantrums, blackmail, reference of “receipts” is being ignored.

That’s  the best way to deal with them.  Ignore the tantrum and the public is growing tired of their complaints and hearing their tone deaf whining.


----------



## Debbini

mrsinsyder said:


> Yes, much of the latter episodes were her pregnant in montecito.


With her moon bump?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Debbini said:


> With her moon bump?


That conspiracy goes a bit too far for me, so no, with Lillibet.


----------



## Debbini

mrsinsyder said:


> That conspiracy goes a bit too far for me, so no, with Lillibet.


No conspiracy.


----------



## Toby93

What the h*ll?..


----------



## mrsinsyder

Debbini said:


> No conspiracy.


Was this proven?


----------



## mrsinsyder

Toby93 said:


> What the h*ll?..
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5673753



Bad photoshop?


----------



## Aimee3

Toby93 said:


> What the h*ll?..
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5673753



WTH?????


----------



## Aimee3

@Toby93. We had the same reaction at the exact same time!


----------



## Debbini

mrsinsyder said:


> Was this proven?


Was it proven she gave birth?!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Debbini said:


> Was it proven she gave birth?!


I mean unless you’ve been in every delivery room around the world you could say the same about any woman who has had a child. 

Do you expect video footage of the baby crowning?


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> she grew up in a regular house in the suburbs of LA.  I wonder what her home was like before she met Harry.  What's wrong with a cottage?  not worthy of their magnificence apparently


Some of it is perspective … Houses in California are up to date, newer and larger than historical buildings in London or elsewhere.
For ex, I grew up in NY - high rent district, older building. Air conditioning was unheard of. Electrical outlets were old fashioned and ungrounded. Walk in closet ? no.  Parking - good luck. But, my bedroom window looked out on Fifth Avenue.


----------



## csshopper

Toby93 said:


> What the h*ll?..
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5673753



Why is Ashleigh included?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

mrsinsyder said:


> I mean unless you’ve been in every delivery room around the world you could say the same about any woman who has had a child.
> 
> Do you expect video footage of the baby crowning?


No. I don't expect a moon bump moving into different positions on her body either, dropping all the way down to her knees. No wonder she had both hands on that thing ALL the time huh?!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Debbini said:


> No. I don't expect a moon bump moving into different positions on her body either, dropping all the way down to her knees. No wonder she had both hands on that thing ALL the time huh?!


The only videos I’ve seen of her pregnant with Lillibet was Oprah and the recent documentary and I didn’t see either of those things happen. That’s why I’m asking where there’s anything suggesting she wasn’t pregnant the second time.


----------



## purseinsanity

skyqueen said:


> Liar, Liar...pants on fire!
> (Her father also paid for new teeth!)



Oh look, the year before she met the ginger haired spare.  Went from a hero to "I don't have a father".  She's disgusting.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> I just hope Anderson Cooper doesn't get markled by Hazz's interview on Jan 8. I really like AC and wouldn't like to see his reputation damaged.
> 
> _"The interview is expected to be broadcast on Mr Cooper’s 60 Minutes show on TV network CBS on Sunday, January 8, two days before the memoir is released in bookshops."_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry set for America media blitz to promote his 'Spare' memoir
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is taking part in yet another tell-all interview as he launches the publicity blitz for his explosive new memoir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


His BFF is Andy Cohen.  I wouldn't hold my breath.

ETA: @sdkitty beat me to it!


----------



## purseinsanity

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Thanks @papertiger I was responding to the poster who stated MM claimed she had never experienced racism before moving to the UK. I don't believe that's what she meant when we actually read her own words.
> 
> *M & H are their own worst enemies. *There is so much to cover...why claim they were married before the wedding?  why say no one asks if I'm okay? (to be fair she did try to offer context in the series, and she was postpartum, but still DO NOT SAY THAT and IN AFRICA of all places! ) why complain about climate change and take multiple private planes?
> 
> So I just don't understand the need to create more drama based on rumors and innuendo. She's a yacht girl, she is evil, she is smirking (or possibly, as you pointed out, maybe very uncomfortable), she's a terrible mother, her mother is a terrible mother (and an ex con!) and the mastermind behind a plot to take down the monarchy, her cousin is a paid liar, etc etc etc.
> 
> A poster shared a screenshot of H & M watching their documentary that described H as cheering. I was horrified. But when I watched the series I realized he was actually stretching.
> 
> I do think that's part of what makes coverage of MM so challenging. Tabloids and social media rely on clicks for revenue. The more we click the more they make. So headlines like "MM discusses being a mixed woman" are a lot less successful than "MM claims she never experienced racism before the UK!"
> 
> So posters understandably read the headlines and are rightfully outraged. But when they then have to ignore or discount anyone who might offer another perspective where are we?
> 
> *I believe dichotomies exist. S*he can be a narcissist AND a victim of racism. He can be a terrible grandson AND traumatized by his mother's death. Thomas Markle was a good father when she was a child AND is not now. Critics have legitimate issues with MM AND we can agree that hate speech is unacceptable under any circumstances.
> 
> I wish the conversation allowed for this nuance. Ultimately these are just celebrities who literally have no power...except what we give them in our own minds.


Well said!  

I know I don't come across as a TW and Haz lover (because I'm not), but in reality, neither I nor most others here know what these people are like behind closed doors.  I can say confidently I think she is a complete liar and rewrites history to suit herself, but it doesn't have any real effect on my life whatsoever.  I don't even know why I get so infuriated.  It's like at home, when I get excited about something, my voice naturally starts rising to where DH and kids ask, "Why are you yelling?", when that's not even my intent.    
I think it's more that these two very privileged people are making a living completely bi!ching about their victimhood when around the world there are so many more people actually suffering from real situations.  It's exhausting.  Even if I try to avoid them, they're EVERYWHERE.


----------



## marietouchet

mrsinsyder said:


> I mean unless you’ve been in every delivery room around the world you could say the same about any woman who has had a child.
> 
> Do you expect video footage of the baby crowning?


An issue with both children was secrecy and misdirection about when A was born. I get it now, they knew they would leave, and the kids photos would be a gold mine. So, none were shared until now. We still don’t have a good color photo of L.
They did and they don’t address the rumors with the sonogram image.
The obfuscation if not the secrecy continues.
PS surrogacy would be irrelevant in the US, but it is a big deal for the UK LOS and titles.


----------



## purseinsanity

needlv said:


> Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684


She's trying to get featured here on the PurseForum?    
"Post your beige bags" thread.


----------



## mrsinsyder

marietouchet said:


> An issue with both children was secrecy and misdirection about when A was born. I get it now, they knew they would leave, and the kids photos would be a gold mine. So, none were shared until now. We still don’t have a good color photo of L.
> They did and they don’t address the rumors with the sonogram image.
> The obfuscation if not the secrecy continues.
> PS surrogacy would be irrelevant in the US, but it is a big deal for the UK LOS and titles.


Sure, I just don’t think the default suspicion should be that she wasn’t pregnant. I remember talking here? somewhere? about when they came out for the photo call after Archie and talking about how bloated and uncomfortable she looked. I’m surprised to see that now it’s just generally accepted that she didn’t give birth.

They were actually more candid about Archie’s birth than I expected them to be in the documentary - they clearly wanted it to be a big mystery, almost like they wanted to be “better” than Will and Kate by breaking tradition. Or like they’re above their kids being public figures. I’m sure they also loved the extra attention it brought. They seem to like creating a mystery aura around their kids, for whatever reason.


----------



## Debbini

mrsinsyder said:


> The only videos I’ve seen of her pregnant with Lillibet was Oprah and the recent documentary and I didn’t see either of those things happen. That’s why I’m asking where there’s anything suggesting she wasn’t pregnant the second time.


Google


----------



## mrsinsyder

Debbini said:


> Google












						The Bizarre Cult of Meghan Markle Pregnancy Truthers
					

Like Beyoncé before her, the Duchess of Sussex has been targeted by online conspiracy theorists over her pregnancy, with those questioning it calling themselves ‘Megxiteers.’



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## Straight-Laced

Valiant Prince Harry, the greedy$$$ cry-bully!

From The Australian newspaper today :


----------



## xincinsin

charlottawill said:


> "For as long as I can remember, she has been grabbed at the arm by strangers while entering a room and almost immediately asked to identify her race."
> 
> This line reminded me of the incident with LSH and NF. You can either view it as people are racist, or sometimes it is simply human curiosity. That being said, I would not grab someone I didn't know by the arm. *That is invading their personal space*.


ITA


QueenofWrapDress said:


> Right? Why do people want to touch strangers? *I was not sad when the plague made everyone give up shaking hands for a bit *


Me too. I still prefer to just smile and bump elbows.


Jayne1 said:


> Probably the surrogate's.
> 
> But I do think she looks more pregnant in her "candids" that she posed for in the doc. The bump looks legit, no lactating boob enlargement or anything, but the bump looks more legit.


What I don't get is why she loves to wear tight clothes to emphasize her bump (real or fake is another matter). Even in the so-called candids, she was wearing clothing that was more closely fitted than her "public" dresses. One thing I hated about being pregnant was feeling warm. I'm not sure if all pregnant women experience that, but I did and loose clothing was a must. Zed's preference for bandage dresses is one reason why I doubt she was pregnant or, if she was, that her bump was not enhanced for the camera.


----------



## Icyjade

mrsinsyder said:


> Sure, I just don’t think the default suspicion should be that she wasn’t pregnant. I remember talking here? somewhere? about when they came out for the photo call after Archie and talking about how bloated and uncomfortable she looked. I’m surprised to see that now it’s just generally accepted that she didn’t give birth.
> 
> They were actually more candid about Archie’s birth than I expected them to be in the documentary - they clearly wanted it to be a big mystery, almost like they wanted to be “better” than Will and Kate by breaking tradition. Or like they’re above their kids being public figures. I’m sure they also loved the extra attention it brought. They seem to like creating a mystery aura around their kids, for whatever reason.



I think the ”mystery” back then and not being a public spectacle is all so that they can sell “exclusive content” to the highest bidder after Megxit. 

Imagine that being a godfather of the kids is now somewhat of a news (Perry) as opposed to them announcing who from the start.  

Shameless couple.


----------



## Icyjade

mrsinsyder said:


> I mean unless you’ve been in every delivery room around the world you could say the same about any woman who has had a child.
> 
> Do you expect video footage of the baby crowning?


Or the bump growing/shrinking over days/weeks.

Or the bump moving side to side in strange motion.

I’ve been pregnant twice btw.


----------



## xincinsin

purseinsanity said:


> Well said!
> 
> I know I don't come across as a TW and Haz lover (because I'm not), but in reality, neither I nor most others here know what these people are like behind closed doors.  I can say confidently I think she is a complete liar and rewrites history to suit herself, but it doesn't have any real effect on my life whatsoever.  I don't even know why I get so infuriated.  It's like at home, when I get excited about something, my voice naturally starts rising to where DH and kids ask, "Why are you yelling?", when that's not even my intent.
> I think it's more that these two very privileged people are making a living completely bi!ching about their victimhood when around the world there are so many more people actually suffering from real situations.  It's exhausting.  Even if I try to avoid them, they're EVERYWHERE.


 When I groan over their latest lie or whiny demand, DS1 goes, "Why are you complaining? They are totally irrelevant to the world."


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Nate the Lawyer delivers! Facts, facts…. This video is impressive. 


_*Harry and Meghan Shocker| Twitter says NO EVIDENCE of HATE CAMPAIGN against Meghan.*_​


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## bag-mania

Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
					

Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## Chanbal

Nana, I'm a fan!   

*Nana Akua calls for a media BLACKOUT on Meghan Markle and Prince Harry*


----------



## Chanbal

_‘It’s a bit rich’: Palace ‘very surprised’ by Harry and Meghan’s apology demand_​


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> _‘It’s a bit rich’: Palace ‘very surprised’ by Harry and Meghan’s apology demand_​



They certainly have an inflated opinion of themselves. Laugh or cry at the arrogance?


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


They are expecting capitulation from public pressure. Even if the BRF agrees to meet them, which I definitely hope does not happen, it will still be a firm No to their demands. Just ignore them, Charles!


----------



## jblended

Chanbal said:


> Nate the Lawyer delivers! Facts, facts…. This video is impressive.
> 
> 
> _*Harry and Meghan Shocker| Twitter says NO EVIDENCE of HATE CAMPAIGN against Meghan.*_​



That was a really insightful video. Now my question is, does Harry know that Meg paid Bouzy? If he's aware and cosigning these smear campaigns, then he really should be banned from re-entering the country; it's treasonous.


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> Nate the Lawyer delivers! Facts, facts…. This video is impressive.
> 
> 
> _*Harry and Meghan Shocker| Twitter says NO EVIDENCE of HATE CAMPAIGN against Meghan.*_​



A con artist!  And since no one seems to do any fact checking, they just take his word for it and believe he is 95% accurate.  It's sickening.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



?? Why?? Do they really think they can shake them down for more $$? Or would this just be for another Netflix show? Demand royal apology for what?  Her word against theirs? The BRF bent over backwards and broke some traditions to accommodate her, for example, going to Sandringham for Christmas before they were married. She complained that she "couldn't believe they weren't getting paid to appear in public", as if being given everything wasn't already enough. What did SHE pay for all the private jet travel, the wedding, the clothes, etc? She is garbage, her reputation is garbage, Harry is garbage, their lies have been called out. What gall. Sounds like they're going to go on a morning show tour about their demands for whatever apology. This bish just can't STFU. Oh I forgot. If you don't like her then you're racist.


----------



## lorihmatthews

Chanbal said:


> Nate the Lawyer delivers! Facts, facts…. This video is impressive.
> 
> 
> _*Harry and Meghan Shocker| Twitter says NO EVIDENCE of HATE CAMPAIGN against Meghan.*_​



I am by no means a fan of M&H, but I'm also suspicious of Twitter. Where is the proof that they deleted enough accounts? Just being the devil's advocate here.


----------



## 880

lorihmatthews said:


> I am by no means a fan of M&H, but I'm also suspicious of Twitter. Where is the proof that they deleted enough accounts? Just being the devil's advocate here.


Maybe Nate was simply proving that there doesn’t seem to be a factual basis for 95% accuracy (one source was Twitter, but I thought there was another source? I don’t think he was proving that Twitter deleted x number of accts?


----------



## CarryOn2020

needlv said:


> Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684


From her stylist?


----------



## xincinsin

rose60610 said:


> ?? Why?? Do they really think they can shake them down for more $$? Or would this just be for another Netflix show? Demand royal apology for what?  Her word against theirs? The BRF bent over backwards and broke some traditions to accommodate her, for example, going to Sandringham for Christmas before they were married. She complained that she "couldn't believe they weren't getting paid to appear in public", as if being given everything wasn't already enough. What did SHE pay for all the private jet travel, the wedding, the clothes, etc? She is garbage, her reputation is garbage, Harry is garbage, their lies have been called out. What gall. Sounds like they're going to go on a morning show tour about their demands for whatever apology. This bish just can't STFU. Oh I forgot. If you don't like her then you're racist.


Ever wondered why she was invited to Christmas at Sandringham? Maybe Sparry kicked up a petulant fuss and his doting grandma gave in. If TQ was giving in to him on most Zed issues despite her, for instance, reportedly questioning why a divorcee needed to be in virginal white and over-dressed in a ginormously long veil, if he was getting his way on the minor issues, then it would definitely have been a shock to him that she put her foot down regarding the half-in/half-out.

As for her exclusion to the Sandringham Summit, we've only heard the Harkles' side of the story. Was she really excluded? Or is it just a convenient accusation to lob at the BRF to up the so-called "stakes"? Based on their churlish behaviour, I would expect them to have screamed long before now if she was excluded. The story in the press then was that she stayed in Canada to take care of Archie.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Very good read (though I feel giving them too much benefit of the doubt at times, thinking their staged displays of affection are all that). Leaving the "broken" link so you can click on it an read the whole article.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


>



I remember that summer and that photo she posed for.

And I never could figure out if she dived into the water or somehow crawled back onto the ship. Does anyone know how she got off the board?


----------



## csshopper

purseinsanity said:


> Well said!
> 
> I know I don't come across as a TW and Haz lover (because I'm not), but in reality, neither I nor most others here know what these people are like behind closed doors.  I can say confidently I think she is a complete liar and rewrites history to suit herself, but it doesn't have any real effect on my life whatsoever.  I don't even know why I get so infuriated.  It's like at home, when I get excited about something, my voice naturally starts rising to where DH and kids ask, "Why are you yelling?", when that's not even my intent.
> I think it's more that these two very privileged people are making a living completely bi!ching about their victimhood when around the world there are so many more people actually suffering from real situations.  It's exhausting.  Even if I try to avoid them, they're EVERYWHERE.


They are the personification of Covid, from mildly annoying to dangerously toxic, keep producing variants (lying), just keep coming round and never seem to go away. Have lost hope for a “cure”.


----------



## Stansy

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


To quote my co-worker „I like your sense of humor“


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


I say yet again, do not negotiate with terrorists!


----------



## EmilyM111

sdkitty said:


> she grew up in a regular house in the suburbs of LA.  I wonder what her home was like before she met Harry.  What's wrong with a cottage?  not worthy of their magnificence apparently


catching up from Europe time zone 
I think maybe she suffers from the disease that many people who got into not their money (through spouse/wealthy bf or gf) do - at least the ones I know. Suddenly they can wear only Hermes exotics and live in mansions despite earlier wearing Zara if they were lucky and living in a small flatshare. Inferiority complex? Dunno, but I met a few people like that and they are insufferable.


----------



## Lodpah

Yahoo must be getting paid again after the influx of cash or installment I imagine Netflix paid the Despicable Duo. Yahoo was turning left on them for a bit but now all the gushy articles are again permeating the Yahoo sites.


----------



## K.D.

needlv said:


> Why does she have so many purses in this shot?  Is it to flaunt her wealth?  Merch?
> 
> edit - adding pic
> View attachment 5673684





LittleStar88 said:


> And they’re all beige


She's just deciding the perfect bag companies send over for the greige monstrosity at the Jubilee service


----------



## csshopper

What is the protocol for wearing tiaras at a ceremony like the Coronation?

If she does show up, can Mememe be denied a tiara since she is not a working Royal, just a lazy whining hanger on?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Awww...recollections might vary AGAIN. As a sidenote, I never saw the apple shape some claimed but it's very pronounced here.


----------



## xincinsin

EmilyM111 said:


> catching up from Europe time zone
> I think maybe she suffers from the disease that many people who got into not their money (through spouse/wealthy bf or gf) do - at least the ones I know. Suddenly they can wear only Hermes exotics and live in mansions despite earlier wearing Zara if they were lucky and living in a small flatshare. Inferiority complex? Dunno, but I met a few people like that and they are insufferable.


It's like at the divorce courts, the wife who was just a worker bee before her marriage to the millionaire is demanding $50k a month because she has become accustomed to a higher class of living. Intellectually, I think pre-nups are an awful way to start a marriage, but realistically, they are a very good way to control the gold-diggers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I'm frustrated with the palace's approach, but I can see where Charles is coming from. Even we can see something is wrong with Harry. If the corpse eater needs to be appeased for a bit to keep him alive I think I might do it too if he was my family member. Still she does. Not. Deserve. Anything.


----------



## papertiger

csshopper said:


> What is the protocol for wearing tiaras at a ceremony like the Coronation?
> 
> If she does show up, can Mememe be denied a tiara since she is not a working Royal, just a lazy whining hanger on?



We've had this question before:

Dukes wear coronets (used to be gold, silver-gilt if newer) 
Duchesses wear family, heirloom or loaned tiaras. 

Kate (now PoW) has 3 on loan from the Crown from when she was plain ol' Duchess of C. 

Tiaras are loaned for a lifetime - although they are stored with the others and no one else will be able to borrow them.

Meghan, as the DoS _would_ have had the use of the Queen Mary's bandeau tiara. I'm not sure she'll get that now. They may loan her the copy - but I doubt it. 

Some dept stores, Claires and pageant supplies will have some tiaras should she feel the need. She doesn't observes etiquette in any other way so - perhaps she'll turn up in bare feet and ripped jeans - then she can tape herself laughing at all the stuffy Britts in an anniversary H&M special in 10 years. 

Perhaps, Harry's Uncles Charles will loan her the Spencer tiara?


----------



## papertiger

xincinsin said:


> It's like at the divorce courts, the wife who was just a worker bee before her marriage to the millionaire is demanding $50k a month because she has become accustomed to a higher class of living. Intellectually, I think pre-nups are an awful way to start a marriage, but realistically, they are a very good way to control the gold-diggers.



H&M marriage was in the UK (maybe this is why they she want(s) to renew their vows)

And the other way too. A pre-nap nup also stipulates T&C. Sometimes it forces parties to 'behave' or they'll be penalties (if caught) 

Pre-nuts nups are not binding in the UK if: 

It was not written by a qualified solicitor specialising in family law.
There was not *full* financial disclosure by both parties. 
Both or either parties didn't take independent legal advice. 
Either party was advised by a solicitor not to sign. 
The party with the most to lose didn't fully understand the nature of the prenup. 
There was no negotiation of the prenup, only one party imposing the terms on the other. 
Either party was pressured or bullied into signing. 
It was signed less than a month before the wedding. 
It did not account for future changes in the marriage, such as providing for future children.

More inför here https://www.footanstey.com/our-insights/articles-news/guide-to-prenuptial-agreements-in-the-uk/


----------



## DoggieBags

papertiger said:


> We've had this question before:
> 
> Dukes wear coronets (used to be gold, silver-gilt if newer)
> Duchesses wear family, heirloom or loaned tiaras.
> 
> Kate (now PoW) has 3 on loan from the Crown from when she was plain ol' Duchess of C.
> 
> Tiaras are loaned for a lifetime - although they are stored with the others and no one else will be able to borrow them.
> 
> Meghan, as the DoS _would_ have had the use of the Queen Mary's bandeau tiara. I'm not sure she'll get that now. They may loan her the copy - but I doubt it.
> 
> Some dept stores, Claires and pageant supplies will have some tiaras should she feel the need. She doesn't observes etiquette in any other way so - perhaps she'll turn up in bare feet and ripped jeans - then she can tape herself laughing at all the stuffy Britts in an anniversary H&M special in 10 years.
> 
> Perhaps, Harry's Uncles Charles will loan her the Spencer tiara?


since she has been known to not return things in the past, if the BRF loaned her a tiara or any other jewelry for the coronation, they’d have to have a guard following her at all times and have someone waiting to retrieve the tiara and any other loaned jewelry as soon as the event was over. Since she and H are not working Royals and are only attending because H happens to be a blood relative of the King, the BRF is under no obligation to loan her anything or pay for any of their attire. Let her wear Trevor’s bracelet and her blood diamonds. since H is a Duke I assume he gets to wear a coronet?


----------



## papertiger

DoggieBags said:


> since she has been known to not return things in the past, if the BRF loaned her a tiara or any other jewelry for the coronation, they’d have to have a guard following her at all times and have someone waiting to retrieve the tiara and any other loaned jewelry as soon as the event was over. Since she and H are not working Royals and are only attending because H happens to be a blood relative of the King, the BRF is under no obligation to loan her anything or pay for any of their attire. Let her wear Trevor’s bracelet and her blood diamonds. since H is a Duke I assume he gets to wear a coronet?



If Harry wants to wear a coronet he'll have to get one made, find a dupe that fits, or find the one from the last Duke of Sussex *(Prince Augustus Frederick - d.1843)*


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

xincinsin said:


> Ever wondered why she was invited to Christmas at Sandringham? Maybe Sparry kicked up a petulant fuss and his doting grandma gave in. If TQ was giving in to him on most Zed issues despite her, for instance, reportedly questioning why a divorcee needed to be in virginal white and over-dressed in a ginormously long veil, if he was getting his way on the minor issues, then it would definitely have been a shock to him that she put her foot down regarding the half-in/half-out.
> 
> As for her exclusion to the Sandringham Summit, we've only heard the Harkles' side of the story. Was she really excluded? Or is it just a convenient accusation to lob at the BRF to up the so-called "stakes"? Based on their churlish behaviour, I would expect them to have screamed long before now if she was excluded. The story in the press then was that she stayed in Canada to take care of Archie.


Ya kno, based on the funeral _invitation_ to Sandringham, I’m guessing it is not always the honor some think it is.  Remember Hazz was sent to stay in Uncle Andrew’s _cottage_  and left abruptly. Cell service is most likely off, rooms could be very cold, food may not prepared to their standard.  _Succession‘s ‘_boar on the floor’ may provide better insight into what is really like. I could be wrong.


----------



## gelbergirl

papertiger said:


> Then what's the point of going?
> 
> Harry already made sure he didn't sing the National Anthem at the late Queen's service. This is something anti-monarchists do.
> 
> I actually think they won't be put in a position to decide/display, not for cameras anyway.



Remember how nervous they were doing that walkabout in grief with William and Kate?
Would they really want to do that again? At a coronation no less.
I am really disturbed mostly at Harry, especially since he said he wanted to represent the Queen when he and she made their exit.


----------



## mrsinsyder

I didn’t expect this from him tbh. 









						Jeremy Clarkson 'horrified' by hurt caused with his Meghan column
					

The Grand Tour presenter, 62, was blasted for saying he dreams of Meghan Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets'.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## DoggieBags

mrsinsyder said:


> I didn’t expect this from him tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson 'horrified' by hurt caused with his Meghan column
> 
> 
> The Grand Tour presenter, 62, was blasted for saying he dreams of Meghan Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I always enjoyed Jeremy Clarkson’s sarcastic brand of humor on Top Gear but i thought he went way over the line in his latest comments on TW.


----------



## papertiger

I know publishers often reduce the price for pre-order to make it a 'No1. Bestseller' but IMO it's telling they have to for this non-starter 

Waterstones UK
	

		
			
		

		
	



	

		
			
		

		
	
:


----------



## papertiger

mrsinsyder said:


> I didn’t expect this from him tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson 'horrified' by hurt caused with his Meghan column
> 
> 
> The Grand Tour presenter, 62, was blasted for saying he dreams of Meghan Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



It's just another bite at the media cherry for Mr. Clarkson. I don't believe a word he says whatever he says. Another tone-deaf individual IMO. This plays right into the hands of H&M and others that believe that the 'poor-me-princess' is so hard done by in the UK. He's another too rich idiot with too much to say about everything.


----------



## marietouchet

IRONY.
Wall St Journal has two side by side articles embedded on pages 10-11 of the first section. You really need the print edition to get the full effect.

Left side: full page on online mental health companies eg BetterHelp (sic) are not serving their patients or doing well financially. Shucks they did not mention BETTER UP.

Right side: 1/3 page review of MM power casual fashion in the NF series, which is the “no 2 show “ in the US per article. Cartier watch and Hermes blankie get a mention. Photo of her in ginormous cream jumper is captioned “the message is I am grounded, sincere, down to earth but refined “
And a comment that she wanted to look like a rainbow ( wanted to stick out) on  last Uk visit before Megxit. We have all wondered about the dreaded green dress.
I guess MM has a future modeling Marin cashmere sweaters. But H’s future as Chief Impact Officer will be short lived.


----------



## charlottawill

CarryOn2020 said:


> From her stylist?


Didn't know she has one


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> Ever wondered why she was invited to Christmas at Sandringham? Maybe Sparry kicked up a petulant fuss and his doting grandma gave in. If TQ was giving in to him on most Zed issues despite her, for instance, reportedly questioning why a divorcee needed to be in virginal white and over-dressed in a ginormously long veil, if he was getting his way on the minor issues, then it would definitely have been a shock to him that she put her foot down regarding the half-in/half-out.
> 
> As for her exclusion to the Sandringham Summit, we've only heard the Harkles' side of the story. Was she really excluded? Or is it just a convenient accusation to lob at the BRF to up the so-called "stakes"? Based on their churlish behaviour, I would expect them to have screamed long before now if she was excluded. The story in the press then was that she stayed in Canada to take care of Archie.


Exclusion from Sandringham Summit, if I remember the video correctly..
H said she decided to fly home, before meeting date chosen. Meeting at S then deliberately scheduled after she had left

My thoughts
1. She could have turned around and come back if she was invited
2. Why did H stay around? If it was so important for her to be there .. He could have gone with her… 
2. Spouses were NOT invited. Nor was Anne.

H and M are telling the story in the fashion that makes them look best . YES WE have only their version of the story.


----------



## marietouchet

EmilyM111 said:


> catching up from Europe time zone
> I think maybe she suffers from the disease that many people who got into not their money (through spouse/wealthy bf or gf) do - at least the ones I know. Suddenly they can wear only Hermes exotics and live in mansions despite earlier wearing Zara if they were lucky and living in a small flatshare. Inferiority complex? Dunno, but I met a few people like that and they are insufferable.


backpedaling, going back to Zara from Hermes, is a bitter red pill for some , they would rather take the blue cyanide pill
see the Matrix for blue/red pill analogy


----------



## charlottawill

DoggieBags said:


> since she has been known to not return things in the past, if the BRF loaned her a tiara or any other jewelry for the coronation, they’d have to have a guard following her at all times and have someone waiting to retrieve the tiara and any other loaned jewelry as soon as the event was over. Since she and H are not working Royals and are only attending because H happens to be a blood relative of the King, the BRF is under no obligation to loan her anything or pay for any of their attire. Let her wear Trevor’s bracelet and her blood diamonds. since H is a Duke I assume he gets to wear a coronet?


I sincerely hope the Duke and Duchess of Hypocrisy chicken out and are no shows. Why on earth should they show up, with her wearing a tiara no less, and make a media circus out of a solemn and historical occasion for the family they've been trashing for the past two years? I spent some time catching up at the other thread yesterday, and it really is eye opening to see how wildly different people's perceptions of them are.


----------



## charlottawill

mrsinsyder said:


> I didn’t expect this from him tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson 'horrified' by hurt caused with his Meghan column
> 
> 
> The Grand Tour presenter, 62, was blasted for saying he dreams of Meghan Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wonder if he said what he did after a few too many cocktails?


----------



## charlottawill

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

charlottawill said:


> Didn't know she has one


Freebies, my dear, freebies


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> I remember that summer and that photo she posed for.
> 
> And I never could figure out if she dived into the water or somehow crawled back onto the ship. Does anyone know how she got off the board?


I seem to recall photos of her actually diving in.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## charlottawill

Well my lovelies, I am out of here for the holidays. I won't even attempt to try to catch up when I return  

I wish you all a joyous and peaceful holiday season with loved ones. 

And let's hope for a Harkle free 2023!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Jayne1 said:


> I remember that summer and that photo she posed for.
> 
> And I never could figure out if she dived into the water or somehow crawled back onto the ship. Does anyone know how she got off the board?


It looks to be a retractable diving board, so they probably just turned on the reverse motor.


----------



## EmilyM111

marietouchet said:


> backpedaling, going back to Zara from Hermes, is a bitter red pill for some , they would rather take the blue cyanide pill
> see the Matrix for blue/red pill analogy


I only meant “why so serious” when I think about my acquaintances. Hard the tell about TW, I only speculate.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Toby93

gelbergirl said:


> Remember how nervous they were doing that walkabout in grief with William and Kate?
> Would they really want to do that again? At a coronation no less.
> I am really disturbed mostly at Harry, especially since he said* he wanted to represent the Queen* when he and she made their exit.


I think at that point, they still thought they might get their "half in, half out" demand


----------



## Toby93

This is the pic they had in their flopumentary, giving Arch a bath.  Does this even look like the same kid?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> This is the pic they had in their flopumentary, giving Arch a bath.  Does this even look like the same kid?
> 
> View attachment 5674071
> 
> 
> View attachment 5674072



To my eye, it does look like the same kid.  I could be wrong.


----------



## Mimmy

Toby93 said:


> This is the pic they had in their flopumentary, giving Arch a bath.  Does this even look like the same kid?
> 
> View attachment 5674071
> 
> 
> View attachment 5674072





CarryOn2020 said:


> To my eye, it does look like the same kid.  I could be wrong.


It looks like the same child to me.


----------



## LittleStar88

Ya know, I really don’t care so much about these two ungrateful brats attending the coronation. IMO they don’t deserve to be there after their continuous public tantrums and whining. BUT… Hazbeen will at minimum need to go just based on the luck of his birth. Poor Charles is in a bit of a dilemma there but I’m sure the organizers will do what they can to minimize the impact of a circus side show from them.

Stick these two in the back rows. No tiara for TW because she has made it SO CRYSTAL CLEAR that she despises everything the BRF represents (unless it’s bags of money being handed over or gobs of adoration). Just candle her for the TV screening of the event. 

They will be the most disrespected guests there. Scruffy Hazbeen and Ms. Rictus Grin won’t miss the chance even if they look like total a$$holes by showing up.

They’ve had their Festivus and hopefully after the book we won’t hear their crap anymore.


----------



## jblended

LittleStar88 said:


> Just candle her for the TV screening of the event.


Wouldn't it be perfect if they were both positioned behind a pillar. Petty but perfect. Fingers crossed! 



LittleStar88 said:


> hopefully after the book we won’t hear their crap anymore.


I'm sorry to break the news that they'll never stop whinging. They have everything they need to be happy and are still miserable. I fear we'll all break down before they do.


----------



## Toby93

Mimmy said:


> It looks like the same child to me.


When I look at the pic, the eyes on the child in the first pic look different to me, but I know kids change as they grow


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> When I look at the pic, the eyes on the child in the first pic look different to me, but I know kids change as they grow


I _think_ he may have a _wonky_ eye.  Seems like there was talk about that early on.  Some speculated that is why he was ‘hidden’.  Then, finally, people realized they wanted the $$$$$.


----------



## Aimee3

Toby93 said:


> This is the pic they had in their flopumentary, giving Arch a bath.  Does this even look like the same kid?
> 
> View attachment 5674071
> 
> 
> View attachment 5674072


Doesn’t look like the same child at all to me.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> Some of it is perspective … Houses in California are up to date, newer and larger than historical buildings in London or elsewhere.
> For ex, I grew up in NY - high rent district, older building. Air conditioning was unheard of. Electrical outlets were old fashioned and ungrounded. Walk in closet ? no.  Parking - good luck. But, my bedroom window looked out on Fifth Avenue.


ok but a charming cottage beloved by the Queen of England wasn't good enough for them?  Oh, harry was too tall for the ceilings.  what else?  they really have no class - ironic since he comes from the RF


----------



## Aimee3

If the RF do loan TW anything for the coronation, they’ll need to have someone follow her into the toilet to make sure she doesn’t hide anything in there and come back later to retrieve the goods.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> An issue with both children was secrecy and misdirection about when A was born. I get it now, they knew they would leave, and the kids photos would be a gold mine. So, none were shared until now. We still don’t have a good color photo of L.
> They did and they don’t address the rumors with the sonogram image.
> The obfuscation if not the secrecy continues.
> PS surrogacy would be irrelevant in the US, but it is a big deal for the UK LOS and titles.


I don't see the pics of the kids as being a potential goldmine.  they are little kids.  the pics we've seen so far don't compare to the pics Kate has taken of her kids


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Ever wondered why she was invited to Christmas at Sandringham? Maybe Sparry kicked up a petulant fuss and his doting grandma gave in. If TQ was giving in to him on most Zed issues despite her, for instance, reportedly questioning why a divorcee needed to be in virginal white and over-dressed in a ginormously long veil, if he was getting his way on the minor issues, then it would definitely have been a shock to him that she put her foot down regarding the half-in/half-out.
> 
> As for her exclusion to the Sandringham Summit, we've only heard the Harkles' side of the story. Was she really excluded? Or is it just a convenient accusation to lob at the BRF to up the so-called "stakes"? Based on their churlish behaviour, I would expect them to have screamed long before now if she was excluded. The story in the press then was that she stayed in Canada to take care of Archie.


I know some people think she should have been included in that meeting but Kate wasn't there either


----------



## Jayne1

CarryOn2020 said:


> It looks to be a retractable diving board, so they probably just turned on the reverse motor.


Thanks. Shows how much I know about billionaires yachts. lol


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I know some people think she should have been included in that meeting but Kate wasn't there either


I for one am glad she wasn't there, although no doubt trying to pull the strings from afar. Just imagine the revolting re-enactment she would have manufactured: the BRF cowering as the brilliant paralegal shot them down, only for the valiant and saintly heroine to at last be overcome by treachery! As some recent articles describe her, she lives in a fairy tale world. Likely imagines herself playing the role of Mulan.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> I don't see the pics of the kids as being a potential goldmine.  they are little kids.  the pics we've seen so far don't compare to the pics Kate has taken of her kids


Agree, the Wales pix are better.
I did not express myself well, I was trying to imply that the NF videos  would not have been made without the kids in there. The Harkles would have been in default of their NF contract. And the parents enjoyed a PAYOUT after the series was aired.
There was supposed to be an Invictus video - delayed, one on nature - I read that somewhere and must have been cancelled and the cancelled Pearl series. All they were left with was whingefest videos.
The kids HAD to be in there to humanize the parents, but, also, MM demanded to address the moonbump topic by showing the sonogram. Let’s face it, their kids are a hot topic.
Will they continue to show the kids ???


----------



## sdkitty

jeremy clarkson issues apology (or non-apology)








						Jeremy Clarkson Issues Total Non-Apology For Hateful Meghan Markle Comments
					

The "Top Gear" presenter said he was "horrified to have caused so much hurt," but didn't apologize.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## Hyacinth

Toby93 said:


> This is the pic they had in their flopumentary, giving Arch a bath.  Does this even look like the same kid?
> 
> View attachment 5674071
> 
> 
> View attachment 5674072



Slightly different ears and maybe eyebrows, and the one in the left photo has a longer,sharper chin. Eyelids  also look different, and the one on the right and in the large photo has the beginnings of KCIII's flyaway ears.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Exclusion from Sandringham Summit, if I remember the video correctly..
> H said she decided to fly home, before meeting date chosen. Meeting at S then deliberately scheduled after she had left
> 
> My thoughts
> 1. She could have turned around and come back if she was invited
> 2. Why did H stay around? If it was so important for her to be there .. He could have gone with her…
> *2. Spouses were NOT invited. Nor was Anne.*
> 
> H and M are telling the story in the fashion that makes them look best . YES WE have only their version of the story.



She really does not understand that in a monarchy as a whole she is a mere appendix. But Harry should.


----------



## Chanbal

mrsinsyder said:


> I didn’t expect this from him tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson 'horrified' by hurt caused with his Meghan column
> 
> 
> The Grand Tour presenter, 62, was blasted for saying he dreams of Meghan Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I wonder if a "phone call" from TW (hubby or any other TW's assistant) has caused this retraction. In this case, I wouldn't blame who did it, because it was rather stupid what J Clarkson did imo.


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> Well my lovelies, I am out of here for the holidays. I won't even attempt to try to catch up when I return
> 
> I wish you all a joyous and peaceful holiday season with loved ones.
> 
> And let's hope for a Harkle free 2023!


Have a wonderful holiday season!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> I wonder if a "phone call" from TW (hubby or any other TW's assistant) has caused this retraction. In this case, I wouldn't blame who did it, because it was rather stupid what J Clarkson did imo.



Even his own daughter spoke out on her Insta, so maybe he got the message.


----------



## lallybelle

Just more ********. They deliberately left Archie in Canada so she would have a reason to go back quickly. She showed up for the photo op "Thank you" to Canada house and bounced.

I mean which is it Haz? She left because she was not included or they deliberately scheduled it for after she left? It can't be both. Therefore just more BS.


----------



## csshopper

marietouchet said:


> Agree, the Wales pix are better.
> I did not express myself well, I was trying to imply that the NF videos  would not have been made without the kids in there. The Harkles would have been in default of their NF contract. And the parents enjoyed a PAYOUT after the series was aired.
> There was supposed to be an Invictus video - delayed, one on nature - I read that somewhere and must have been cancelled and the cancelled Pearl series. All they were left with was whingefest videos.
> The kids HAD to be in there to humanize the parents, but, also, MM demanded to address the moonbump topic by showing the sonogram. Let’s face it, their kids are a hot topic.
> Will they continue to show the kids ???


The sonography means nothing unless her name is on the image, and data seems to be partially covered. The sonogram can be legit, but is it an image of M carrying the baby?


----------



## Chanbal

_Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history. 

The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela. 

Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _









						Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
					

The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5674152
> 
> _Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history.
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
> 
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


the fakers showcasing real activists.  ok


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> The sonography means nothing unless her name is on the image, and data seems to be partially covered. The sonogram can be legit, but is it an image of M carrying the baby?


What harm would there be in blocking her info out? We all know her name and date of birth!


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5674152
> 
> _Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history.
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
> 
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Is there a YAWN emoji?


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> the fakers showcasing real activists.  ok


The more clicks they get on their shows, the longer they stay…

I have Netfl*x, but I refuse to watch their show(s).


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> The more clicks they get on their shows, the longer they stay…
> 
> I have Netfl*x, but I refuse to watch their show(s).


I don't have netflix and wouldn't watch if I did.  So now they are basically TV hosts? Eww


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5674152
> 
> _Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history.
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
> 
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



This is reinventing themselves as commentators on the world and aligning themselves with world leaders and thinkers. .  Bigging themselves up.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This is reinventing themselves as commentators on the world and aligning themselves with world leaders and thinkers. .  Bugging themselves up.


trying to bring themselves up  
Greta Thunberg is very candid....wonder what she would say


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This is reinventing themselves as commentators on the world and aligning themselves with world leaders and thinkers. .  Bigging themselves up.


sounds like they are going to present info/clips - as opposed to doing interviews?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

If you put it like this...


----------



## Lodpah

I’ve never heard of those people. My life does not need inspiration from any of them. I know who were the inspirational people throughout the years in my life.


----------



## piperdog

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5674152
> 
> _Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history.
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
> 
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Dear Santa, 
Please let the Nflix team be as sick of them as we are and ready to have fun with this round of fauxumentary. Then they can include footage of South Africans dancing in the streets. Who knows, maybe it was for Meghan's wedding? They can also talk about H&M's own work in SA where they singlehandedly saved everyone in the building, sorry, the housing unit, from the raging fire in Archie's nursery. 
They could also use audio from Harry's phone conversation with Greta to show how important he is; he interviewed Greta years ago! 

Please, please, please. Based on the reviews of the first H&M series, it's not like anyone but the sugars will expect this show to be factual. Why not let the creative team really let go? 

I'll leave extra cookies out on Christmas Eve, just in case. 
As ever, 
Piperdog


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> This is reinventing themselves as commentators on the world and aligning themselves with world leaders and thinkers. .  Bigging themselves up.


Who do they think they are to see themselves as leaders? 

_"Finally, Harry concludes by saying: '*And for giving inspiration to the rest of us, to live, to lead.*'"_


----------



## Molly0

Could it be ?…
…Is it possible ? …
…that this is an effort to align themselves with some of the “greats” so that years from now when H&M are just a foggy distant memory in the collective mind, they might associate them somehow with people who really were game changers who actually did bring something valuable to the world  ???


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

charlottawill said:


> Well my lovelies, I am out of here for the holidays. I won't even attempt to try to catch up when I return
> 
> I wish you all a joyous and peaceful holiday season with loved ones.
> 
> And let's hope for a Harkle free 2023!





mrsinsyder said:


> I didn’t expect this from him tbh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson 'horrified' by hurt caused with his Meghan column
> 
> 
> The Grand Tour presenter, 62, was blasted for saying he dreams of Meghan Markle being 'paraded naked through the streets'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk





Chanbal said:


> I wonder if a "phone call" from TW (hubby or any other TW's assistant) has caused this retraction. In this case, I wouldn't blame who did it, because it was rather stupid what J Clarkson did imo.


He poked the bear and gave them a specific example of hateful rhetoric


----------



## csshopper

Sharont2305 said:


> What harm would there be in blocking her info out? We all know her name and date of birth!


Sorry, I didn’t state this very clearly.

Her name should be visible. If there is no name on the sonogram there’s no way to prove it’s M‘s body being scanned. Without identifying information it could be anyone, including a surrogate who’s carrying the baby pictured in the sonogram.


----------



## Sharont2305

csshopper said:


> Sorry, I didn’t state this very clearly.
> 
> Her name should be visible. If there is no name on the sonogram there’s no way to prove it’s M‘s body being scanned. Without identifying information it could be anyone, including a surrogate who’s carrying the baby pictured in the sonogram.


Totally agree, that's what I was referring to. I've seen people blocking their info out on IG and you tube which is quite right but with M it doesn't matter so much as her info is public knowledge. 
As an add on, if the sonogram is genuinely hers you bet your life her name would read as The Duchess of Sussex and not M. Sussex or M. Mountbatten Windsor.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> sounds like they are going to present info/clips - as opposed to doing interviews?


Considering that they will be speaking about dead people. it doesn't look like interviews.  Wonder what Harry has to say about QEll


----------



## Lounorada

bag-mania said:


> Prince Harry & Meghan Markle Want Meeting with Royals Post-Netflix
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan are reported to be demanding a meeting with senior members of the Royal Family, in order to have their long-unsettled grievances finally addressed and accounted for ... this in the wake of their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


----------



## purseinsanity

papertiger said:


> I know publishers often reduce the price for pre-order to make it a 'No1. Bestseller' but IMO it's telling they have to for this non-starter
> 
> Waterstones UK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 5674007
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :


Half price Harry Hazbeen.


----------



## CentralTimeZone

Allegedly the new netflix series was created in 2019 and already completed. Archewell bought the project and added their commentary and are releasing under their unbrella. They didn't create it.


----------



## gracekelly

hollieplus2 said:


> Allegedly the new netflix series was created in 2019 and already completed. Archewell bought the project and added their commentary and are releasing under their unbrella. They didn't create it.


Gee, what a surprise and how typical.  No wonder they can't afford furniture.  Spending on more than just PR.


----------



## Chanbal

_He said: ‘*There are always people who are never going to be happy*…’

But *Mr Ramer, an officer with 42 years of experience, suggested the claims on Netflix were inaccurate*.

He told the Toronto Sun newspaper: ‘I was deputy chief at the time, in charge of the special enforcement command that oversaw that situation, and can tell you the officers did an excellent job.

‘Our officers were extremely professional. I oversaw the area that protected VIPs and I fully support the work they did there.’_


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5674152
> 
> _Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history.
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
> 
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



OMG.  PLEASE make it stop.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Who do they think they are to see themselves as leaders?
> 
> _"Finally, Harry concludes by saying: '*And for giving inspiration to the rest of us, to live, to lead.*'"_


LOL, last I checked, a "Spare" is the one possibly called if the real leader is out of commission??


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Considering that they will be speaking about dead people. it doesn't look like interviews.  Wonder what Harry has to say about QEll


And Greta ... interesting person but I would be numb listening to her for 30 minutes. A little Greta goes a long way


----------



## Chanbal

Hope they keep their underwear! 

"_Like a burlesque act, each story Harry and Meghan tell about their own lives is akin to an article of clothing they peel off their bodies at staggered intervals. It makes for a good show while it lasts, but eventually they’re going to be left naked._" 









						It’s Well Past Time for Harry and Meghan 2.0
					

New VIP+ Analysis: Netflix and Spotify shouldn’t look to the exiled royals as a long-term programming strategy.




					variety.com


----------



## CarryOn2020

Who can keep track of what they are releasing and when?  Such nonsense.


----------



## Chanbal

The BLG clarifies…


----------



## CarryOn2020

In case you missed this - creepy:

_The autobiographical memoir will be released in 16 languages, with its Spanish title confirmed as SPARE: EN LA SOMBRA, which translates as "in the shadow"._


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Who can keep track of what they are releasing and when?  Such nonsense.



They are doing it all by End of Year - surely a milestone required by the NETFLIX contract. 

They/Archewell probably needs some income to offset all the expenses during the year, so TAX reasons too.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> Considering that they will be speaking about dead people. it doesn't look like interviews.  Wonder what Harry has to say about QEll


I predict it will be a boring lecture in which they tell us all the ways they are equal to, or better than, the people being featured.


----------



## CarryOn2020

No photo of H&M?


----------



## CarryOn2020

We noticed it, too.  Comments are gold.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


> We noticed it, too.  Comments are gold.



I don't believe the version shown on the reality show is the original, it was more like the one below imo.


----------



## Chanbal

The Toronto drama… and Hazz's 'rite of passage'


----------



## Lodpah

On another note a Black and beautiful celebrity/athlete who didn’t need security, walked into LV store on Saturday with her partner and I was in awe of her beauty in real life. I kept saying to myself, can’t be! Where is her security? I was right next to her, waiting on my SA. 
She was so down to earth and quietly talking with the SA and holding a bag I assume she was contemplating. 

This woman is a well known athlete who has broken records in the world and has major endorsements.


----------



## LittleStar88

marietouchet said:


> And Greta ... interesting person but I would be numb listening to her for 30 minutes. A little Greta goes a long way



Will it be the real Greta this time? Or the fake one they duped Harry with a couple years ago?  









						Prince Harry 'duped by Greta Thunberg call' Russian pranksters say
					

Two prank callers claim they rang the Duke of Sussex pretending to be Greta Thunberg and her father.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## marietouchet

I wondered why the new documentary has like a million producers …


----------



## CobaltBlu

LOL.


----------



## DoggieBags

purseinsanity said:


> OMG.  PLEASE make it stop.


The viewership numbers on the Harkle mockumentary must have been quite good for Netflix to be willing to release another one of their productions. Maybe the Harkles will be able to make a living off producing utter crap after all.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> I don't believe the version shown on the reality show is the original, it was more like the one below imo.



This is the scene which required several addenda/corrigenda to the show, one from Knauf’s lawyer, another from MM, the two clarifications contradict each other, recollections clearly vary A LOT


----------



## youngster

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this - creepy:
> 
> _The autobiographical memoir will be released in 16 languages, with its Spanish title confirmed as SPARE: EN LA SOMBRA, which translates as "in the shadow"._


----------



## Toby93

lallybelle said:


> Just more ********. They deliberately left Archie in Canada so she would have a reason to go back quickly. She showed up for the photo op "Thank you" to Canada house and bounced.
> 
> I mean which is it Haz? She left because she was not included or they deliberately scheduled it for after she left? It can't be both. Therefore just more BS.


I think she is like some women I know who demand the universe and then send their whipped husbands  into the fire to do the dirty work.  There is no way she was going to that meeting, but she can act all hurt years later.  

She did the exact same thing at PP funeral.  It was weeks after the Oprah debacle and she used the *pregnancy* as an excuse not to fly.  Meanwhile  she was at the same stage of pregnancy whe she made the trip to NYC for the over the top baby shower.  

She had no problem throwing Hazz under the bus while she stayed home and watched it all go down.


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


>



Hmmm, if true what does this mean??
Anyone living in Windsor great park gets some gratis security as the estate is guarded for the monarch anyway. 
Will KC3 pay to have a bodyguard follow Andrew ??? 
KC3 might send a car for A and Sarah to take them to the Christmas lunch
There are different levels of security ..


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

Embarassed  by my home town newspaper… 

NYT piece on Meghan demands 'racist' royal family be dismantled








						NYT piece on Meghan demands 'racist' royal family be dismantled
					

The New York Times has been criticized over an opinion piece which accused the British Royal Family of racism and suggested Meghan Markle had to pay with 'her life' to marry into the institution.




					mol.im


----------



## Debbini

Toby93 said:


> This is the pic they had in their flopumentary, giving Arch a bath.  Does this even look like the same kid?
> 
> View attachment 5674071
> 
> 
> View attachment 5674072


No, it doesn't look like the same kid, eyes, nose and mouth are all different.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> And Greta ... interesting person but I would be numb listening to her for 30 minutes. A little Greta goes a long way


I love her passion.  and I don't think she'd lie for them.....I would love it if they did interview her and she called them out on their carbon footprint


----------



## Debbini

CentralTimeZone said:


> Allegedly the new netflix series was created in 2019 and already completed. Archewell bought the project and added their commentary and are releasing under their unbrella. They didn't create it.


We Really need that Barf emoji


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> Embarassed  by my home town newspaper…
> 
> NYT piece on Meghan demands 'racist' royal family be dismantled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NYT piece on Meghan demands 'racist' royal family be dismantled
> 
> 
> The New York Times has been criticized over an opinion piece which accused the British Royal Family of racism and suggested Meghan Markle had to pay with 'her life' to marry into the institution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mol.im


This is no surprise coming from Roxane Gay - she’s always indignant and victimhood-oriented, but most of the comments are not very H&M friendly. People have had it with them.


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> And Greta ... interesting person but I would be numb listening to her for 30 minutes. A little Greta goes a long way


Fake Greta would be lots more fun to listen to.



CarryOn2020 said:


> We noticed it, too.  Comments are gold.



Meghan doesn't use the first names because that would make the people real, and this way, they are just players in her dramatic work of fiction.



tiktok said:


> This is no surprise coming from Roxane Gay - she’s always indignant and victimhood-oriented, but most of the comments are not very H&M friendly. People have had it with them.


Roxanne and Marlene must be sorority sisters.


----------



## 880

I don’t pay much attention to opinion pieces, but no matter how noxious, they have a right to be printed. They do not reflect the beliefs of the newspaper itself. I cannot fathom how anyone could presume the UK is racist based on the poorly framed, unproven claims of a newish in-law of the BRF who is shilling for money. It would be like assuming that the entire US supported vigilante rampages and an overthrowing of government based on the actions of a former P0TUS. The Meghan harry shows are like a really terrible telenovela serial, not even reaching the authenticity of real housewives. They would garner much more respect by simply shutting up.

Full disclosure: I loved Top Gear long ago, before Jeremy went crazy.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Meghan doesn't use the first names because that would make the people real, and this way, they are just players in her dramatic work of fiction.


This scene seems scripted and the writers avoided first names for legal reasons??
White kitchen and talking to Mandana. I don’t remember their having a white kitchen in Montecito, they went on location ??


----------



## CobaltBlu

marietouchet said:


> This scene seems scripted and the writers avoided first names for legal reasons??
> White kitchen and talking to Mandana. I don’t remember their having a white kitchen in Montecito, they went on location ??


Yes.  They filmed in a rented home.


----------



## bag-mania

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes.  They filmed in a rented home.


TMZ actually defended that, like most Hollywood celebs do it. Not sure whether it’s true or it’s more that TMZ tries to help them out when they can.


----------



## Suncatcher

purseinsanity said:


> OMG.  PLEASE make it stop.


Seriously what did WE do, what sins did we commit, to deserve this. I wish it would all stop.


----------



## chowlover2

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I might never stop laughing. Please send over the money pool from our bet because I CALLED IT FIRST
> 
> View attachment 5672865


Oo


gracekelly said:


> Haha!  She actually watched it!  That is where she got her grandiose ideas for a mansion and the need for money and more  plastic surgery reinforced.
> 
> 
> Harry, another nail in your coffin.
> 
> Comment from KC3;  Harrreee you got some ‘splainin’ to do.
> 
> 
> Isn’t Trevor Noah from a South Africa?  Was he dancing in the streets when the Sussex got married?  Does he think that Meghan was more popular than Nelson Mandela?  He may be a comedian, but he still should have some common sense and his comment about The Queen was inappropriate at best


Trevor was born in South Africa to biracial parents, he never left his house   Or showed his face in public because that was taboo there while he was growing up. I don’t think he spent much time thinking about the royal family.


----------



## CobaltBlu

bag-mania said:


> TMZ actually defended that, like most Hollywood celebs do it. Not sure whether it’s true or it’s more that TMZ tries to help them out when they can.


So did they move there temporarily so they could do their life while being filmed, or did they recreate scenes there?  Like they happened to be there when LOL Beyoncé texted? What the heck?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm, if true what does this mean??
> Anyone living in Windsor great park gets some gratis security as the estate is guarded for the monarch anyway.
> Will KC3 pay to have a bodyguard follow Andrew ???
> KC3 might send a car for A and Sarah to take them to the Christmas lunch
> There are different levels of security ..



Also, as harsh as it sounds: he can spend his private money as he wishes.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> I think she is like some women I know who demand the universe and then send their whipped husbands  into the fire to do the dirty work.  There is no way she was going to that meeting, but she can act all hurt years later.
> 
> She did the exact same thing at PP funeral.  It was weeks after the Oprah debacle and she used the *pregnancy* as an excuse not to fly.  Meanwhile  she was at the same stage of pregnancy whe she made the trip to NYC for the over the top baby shower.
> 
> She had no problem throwing Hazz under the bus while she stayed home and watched it all go down.



I remember someone being quoted back then saying she enjoys fanning the flames and then running to watch from a distance what she has done. Seems accurate.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> So did they move there temporarily so they could do their life while being filmed, or did they recreate scenes there?  Like they happened to be there when LOL Beyoncé texted? What the heck?


so they were acting?


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I remember someone being quoted back then saying she enjoys fanning the flames and then running to watch from a distance what she has done. Seems accurate.


She’s a legend in her own mind. Creating her world while the world burns down.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> so they were acting?



I'd say, pretending.


----------



## youngster

CobaltBlu said:


> Yes. They filmed in a rented home.





sdkitty said:


> so they were acting?



They sold themselves to Netflix but still wanted to maintain a veneer of privacy, as ludicrous as that sounds, so they used a rented house.  

What I don't understand is how that works logistically.  Did they travel to the rented house every day for a number of weeks?  Did they go there with an outline of what they were going to cover and a script?  How did they know that William would send a text while they were filming?  There is an 8 or 9 hour time difference between California and the UK.  

I'm sure Meghan was very comfortable doing this, it was just like going to a set and play acting.


----------



## sdkitty

youngster said:


> They sold themselves to Netflix but still wanted to maintain a veneer of privacy, as ludicrous as that sounds, so they used a rented house.
> 
> What I don't understand is how that works logistically.  Did they travel to the rented house every day for a number of weeks?  Did they go there with an outline of what they were going to cover and a script?  How did they know that William would send a text while they were filming?  There is an 8 or 9 hour time difference between California and the UK.
> 
> I'm sure Meghan was very comfortable doing this, it was just like going to a set and play acting.


so did she sit on a chair in the rented house and cry for the camera?  and people feel so sorry for her?


----------



## xincinsin

Toby93 said:


> I think she is like some women I know who demand the universe and then send their whipped husbands  into the fire to do the dirty work.  There is no way she was going to that meeting, but she can act all hurt years later.
> 
> She did the exact same thing at PP funeral.  It was weeks after the Oprah debacle and she used the *pregnancy* as an excuse not to fly.  Meanwhile  she was at the same stage of pregnancy whe she made the trip to NYC for the over the top baby shower.
> 
> She had no problem throwing Hazz under the bus while she stayed home and watched it all go down.


She is "heavily pregnant" for at least 6 months.


----------



## Chanbal

_King Charles III__ recorded his first Christmas message last Tuesday just days before Harry and Meghan's Netlix docu-series aired._


----------



## mrsinsyder

youngster said:


> They sold themselves to Netflix but still wanted to maintain a veneer of privacy, as ludicrous as that sounds, so they used a rented house.
> 
> What I don't understand is how that works logistically.  Did they travel to the rented house every day for a number of weeks?  Did they go there with an outline of what they were going to cover and a script?  How did they know that William would send a text while they were filming?  There is an 8 or 9 hour time difference between California and the UK.
> 
> I'm sure Meghan was very comfortable doing this, it was just like going to a set and play acting.


I read that most of these documentaries are filmed similarly; Michael Jackson for example didn’t use his house for his. 

But to clarify - the interviews were filmed in the other house. From what I could tell, most of the “candid” stuff like the William text was the montecito house. They looked very different from each other so it was noticeable when they flipped back and forth.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd say, pretending.


I guess maybe we have to give H credit since he's not an actor


----------



## charlottawill

Ok so I fibbed….awaiting takeoff and found this on IG. They should have invited our friend. She’d fit right in. Or tell them what detail was off.


----------



## Toby93

Really?  She was lying again


----------



## marietouchet

marietouchet said:


> Hmmm, if true what does this mean??
> Anyone living in Windsor great park gets some gratis security as the estate is guarded for the monarch anyway.
> Will KC3 pay to have a bodyguard follow Andrew ???
> KC3 might send a car for A and Sarah to take them to the Christmas lunch
> There are different levels of security ..


PS I am slow today … 
KC3 is not going to pay 3M for Andrew’s security as cited in the article. 

The story may have been deliberately planted by the Harkles with that silly number in it to besmirch KC3 - the cruel father who wont protect his DIL but takes care of his pedo brother…


----------



## Chanbal

TW is diplomatic and Hazz is the heir of the throne. Is the author of the article on something? 




_Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. *When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.

*As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._


----------



## Mimmy

880 said:


> I don’t pay much attention to opinion pieces, but no matter how noxious, they have a right to be printed. They do not reflect the beliefs of the newspaper itself. I cannot fathom how anyone could presume the UK is racist based on the poorly framed, unproven claims of a newish in-law of the BRF who is shilling for money. It would be like assuming that the entire US supported vigilante rampages and an overthrowing of government based on the actions of a former P0TUS. The Meghan harry shows are like a really terrible telenovela serial, not even reaching the authenticity of real housewives. They would garner much more respect by simply shutting up.
> 
> Full disclosure: I loved Top Gear long ago, before Jeremy went crazy.


I agree that opinion pieces should be allowed a lot of freedom in their content as they are opinion pieces. I disagree however that they should be printed no matter how noxious.

I would not expect a mainstream publication to publish a piece justifying hate against any person or groups of people given the current world climate and acts of violence that are seemingly unprovoked. Do I think that publication of this particular piece makes the UK racist? No, not at all but “words do matter”.

Full disclosure: I also liked Top Gear and found Jeremy Clarkson entertaining many years ago. I now find him reprehensible though.


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I remember someone being quoted back then saying she enjoys fanning the flames and then running to watch from a distance what she has done. Seems accurate.


We all saw that she was _very_ nervous when they were invited to the walkabout before the Queens funeral. She certainly wasn't as cocky then and had no idea how to act when in the presence of the very people she insulted and lied about.  She is confident from a distance


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Lodpah

Chanbal said:


> TW is diplomatic and Hazz is the heir of the throne. Is the author of the article on something?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. *When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.
> 
> *As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._



Oh spare me. Where’s the puke bucket? This is why the world will never be at peace. You get the receipts that’s she has lied over and over apparently but she gets a pass. But worry not our pretty heads cause even the worst dictators and serial killers have their stauch fans, despite the evidence.


----------



## Jayne1

Toby93 said:


> We all saw that she was _very_ nervous when they were invited to the walkabout before the Queens funeral. She certainly wasn't as cocky then and had no idea how to act when in the presence of the very people she insulted and lied about. She is confident from a distance


I thought _that_ was an act.  Poor Meg, scared of the big bad royals.


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> In case you missed this - creepy:
> 
> _The autobiographical memoir will be released in 16 languages, with its Spanish title confirmed as SPARE: EN LA SOMBRA, which translates as "in the shadow"._


Couldn’t they translate “spare”?

El reemplazo 

El de sobra (sobrante)

El suplente (very sporty and a nod to the World Cup)

El segundon (common term in Spanish to refer to the second born son)


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> TW is diplomatic and Hazz is the heir of the throne. Is the author of the article on something?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. *When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.
> 
> *As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._



it's an opinion piece but still disappointing that the times printed it


----------



## Maggie Muggins

lallybelle said:


> Just more ********. *They deliberately left Archie in Canada so she would have a reason to go back quickly. She showed up for the photo op "Thank you" to Canada house and bounced.*
> 
> I mean which is it Haz? She left because she was not included or they deliberately scheduled it for after she left? It can't be both. Therefore just more BS.


Agree! I don't believe she nor Catherine would've been involved anyway. The late QEII, Charles and William probably discussed the situation before the meeting with Dufus and agreed that the duo's wanting to sell themselves to the highest bidder while doing some royal duties was contrary to the RF principle of 'a life of service.'  The yelling and screaming previously mentioned was most likely an angry Dufus letting off steam at having TW's wishes thwarted.


----------



## xincinsin

csshopper said:


> I predict it will be a boring lecture in which they tell us all the ways they are equal to, or better than, the people being featured.


Definitely "better than". They will reference how they inspired Greta! And how "Glo" is her great friend!


CobaltBlu said:


> LOL.



Should I give her a pass? I don't know the context of this clip in Suits, but it sure looks like she associates a curtsy with a come-hither look. Maybe she thinks curtseys should be performed in the bedroom to invite her latest prey in, and was shocked that she had to do one to her prey's grandma!


DoggieBags said:


> The viewership numbers on the Harkle mockumentary must have been quite good for Netflix to be willing to release another one of their productions. Maybe the Harkles will be able to make a living off producing utter crap after all.


They would not be the first to make a living that way. Frankly, I thought that would be their production mode because neither of them have much talent in any field. I expected them to hire competent people to produce drivel that they will pass off as "Executive Produced by" them. Didn't expect the blatant falsification though.


Debbini said:


> No, it doesn't look like the same kid, eyes, nose and mouth are all different.


Might be the same kid. Didn't people dissect the Christmas photo and point out that it had been heavily photoshopped? Maybe Archie was stretched out of proportion. IIRC Janina Gavankar said she took the photo? One of their stooges.



Chanbal said:


> TW is diplomatic and Hazz is the heir of the throne. Is the author of the article on something?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. *When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.
> 
> *As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._



When I first read "*She describes Harry as 'graceful and poised — but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne'.*", I thought she meant that Sparry was getting in the way of William and I went  . Flashbacks of Zed hoping for a plane crash to get some people out of her way.


----------



## Debbini

Lodpah said:


> Oh spare me. Where’s the puke bucket? This is why the world will never be at peace. You get the receipts that’s she has lied over and over apparently but she gets a pass. But worry not our pretty heads cause even the worst dictators and serial killers have their stauch fans, despite the evidence.


This is what blows me away. How many times have they been caught in lies, lies, lies...and yet they still have people who like them? How? Are all their admirers a fry short of a happy meal??!


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Lodpah said:


> I’ve never heard of those people. My life does not need inspiration from any of them. I know who were the inspirational people throughout the years in my life.



I hope you have heard of these people at least...?

Jacinda Ardern
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Nelson Mandela
Gloria Steinem

Bryan Stevenson is probably less well known but an amazing man, I highly recommend his book Just Mercy (which was also made into a movie), definitely inspirational (to me, anyway) 



gracekelly said:


> Considering that they will be speaking about dead people. it doesn't look like interviews.  Wonder what Harry has to say about QEll



I think only Ginsburg and Mandela are deceased? The rest I believe are very much alive.



bag-mania said:


> TMZ actually defended that, like most Hollywood celebs do it. Not sure whether it’s true or it’s more that TMZ tries to help them out when they can.



It's true they will often film interviews somewhere else. I have a friend who rents out her summer house to production crews, she basically covers all her costs that way!


----------



## xincinsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's true they will often film interviews somewhere else. I have a friend who rents out her summer house to production crews, she basically covers all her costs that way!


I know of someone who seems to have a large property portfolio, and frequently rents vacant properties to film crews for filming drama.

I think it depends on whether or not they tried to pass off the rental home as "their home". If they didn't, then the rental home was like a studio set. If they did, it's just one more iffy thing they did in a very long list of iffy things. In any case, with the amount of re-enactments done, all events are recast through their victim lens and therefore their relationship to reality may be tenuous.


----------



## Lodpah

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I hope you have heard of these people at least...?
> 
> Jacinda Ardern
> Ruth Bader Ginsburg
> Nelson Mandela
> Gloria Steinem
> 
> Bryan Stevenson is probably less well known but an amazing man, I highly recommend his book Just Mercy (which was also made into a movie), definitely inspirational (to me, anyway)
> 
> 
> 
> I think only Ginsburg and Mandela are deceased? The rest I believe are very much alive.
> 
> 
> 
> It's true they will often film interviews somewhere else. I have a friend who rents out her summer house to production crews, she basically covers all her costs that way!


Nelson Mandela but MM has no cred to even talk about him. She’s not worthy to even look at him. She lies too much.


----------



## xincinsin

Debbini said:


> This is what blows me away. How many times have they been caught in lies, lies, lies...and yet they still have people who like them? How? Are all their admirers a fry short of a happy meal??!


Echo chamber effect. Many of their admirers likely do not follow their story closely and only see him and her in fairytale prince & princess terms. And the way search engines work, they will keep showing them the same type of gushing poor-me articles that they first read. And nobody tells them to clear their cookies and browsing history


----------



## carmen56

CentralTimeZone said:


> Allegedly the new netflix series was created in 2019 and already completed. Archewell bought the project and added their commentary and are releasing under their unbrella. They didn't create it.


Basically someone else did all the hard work and the Harkles just top and tailed it!


----------



## Straight-Laced

The Sussexes are king and queen of victim culture
					

Melanie Phillips: With their refusal to admit any fault, Harry and Meghan typify a dangerous new narcissism




					www.thetimes.co.uk
				




Opinion piece in The Times UK today :

"In the great tsunami of grievances unleashed by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the latest one to wash over us is a meta-grievance: a grievance about the grievances. Harry and Meghan are now complaining that the family hasn’t acknowledged their complaints, apologised and sought reconciliation.

Let’s get our heads around this. The Sussexes have unleashed a vicious character assassination of Harry’s father and brother.

They have shown gross disrespect to the late Queen and reportedly upset her while she was nearing the end of her life.

They have accused the royal household of racism, cruelty and indifference with no evidence to back up such claims and with numerous examples of demonstrable falsehoods or distortions. They have monetised their royal brand while disdaining and trashing its obligations. They have produced an interminable, spiteful scream of jealousy, narcissism and rage with the intention to hurt and destroy.

Yet they now expect the royal family to apologise to them?

They say double standards have been shown in the reconciliation brokered by the Palace between Lady Susan Hussey and the charity campaigner Ngozi Fulani over Hussey’s alleged insult in asking where Fulani was “really from”.

Put to one side whether the treatment of Hussey was itself appropriate. The two situations are very different. The burden of explanation was on Hussey, who made the remark. With the Sussexes, the burden is on them for causing this crisis. It’s also by no means over, with Harry’s impending autobiography reportedly containing yet more attacks on his family.

So the Sussexes’ latest demand is a bit like Vladimir Putin expecting Volodymyr Zelensky to reach out and apologise for Ukraine being attacked while Putin plans his next assault on Kyiv.

Strikingly, the Sussexes believe they’ve done nothing wrong. They’ve never once acknowledged any fault in how they’ve behaved. They can’t see that what they are so convinced is intolerable behaviour by the royal family might have another explanation. They can’t accept there’s a legitimate point of view other than their own.

For the Sussexes, “my truth” turns out to be the only truth. No one else is entitled to their own “truth” — otherwise known as an opinion — if it conflicts with theirs.

In this, they are the ultimate exemplars of today’s twisted victim culture, which they call “social justice”. For victim culture entails the belief that, as victims of one kind of cultural oppression or another, members of “oppressed” groups are exempt from blame for anything that they do.

They refuse to acknowledge that any disadvantage they suffer may have resulted from their own behaviour. They don’t merely refuse to take responsibility for their own actions, they actually invert responsibility by blaming the targets of their attacks for taking positions that challenge these grievance warriors’ own mindset.
....
This moral perversity had its origins decades ago in the philosophical assertion that there was no such thing as objective truth. What counted instead was how people felt. “What is right for me” was what was right; “what I feel” was reality. So when Meghan claims to be a victim of the royal family, no one is permitted to challenge “her truth”.

So far, the royal family’s strategy has been to rise above this hurtful drivel and concentrate on getting on with the job. Yet as we now see, responding with silence is being chalked up as yet another grievance to add to the list.

The Sussexes want the royal family to revolve around them as the stars in the regal show. Instead, they’re finding that the show is going on without the principals even registering Meghan and Harry’s frantic song and dance routines.

They are, of course, incredulous at this. That’s because what they’re doing isn’t actually about the royal family. It’s all about themselves.

Now they’re saying they want to start focusing on their “service work” rather than their personal battles.

The tragedy is that Prince Harry did once understand the meaning of service — but the great cause in which his wife has enrolled him is not serving others but servicing their own egos. There is nothing else they have to say."


----------



## xincinsin

carmen56 said:


> Basically someone else did all the hard work and the Harkles just top and tailed it!


The way it was described, it sounds like a collection of stock footage strung together with no original content. Low budget, low work. Something like a long version of those 5 minute fillers that Entertainment Tonight puts together. Zed and Sparry might bill it as "The Harkles Present", Her Heinous pompously voices it, and they frame it as masterpieces they joint-produced.


----------



## Chanbal

_Online sensation Andrew Tate speaks to Dan Wootton on Harry and Meghan, Masculinity and Cancellatio_n​


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _Online sensation Andrew Tate speaks to Dan Wootton on Harry and Meghan, Masculinity and Cancellatio_n​



Umm, the controversial figures coming out for or against the Harkles only muddies the water even more.


----------



## Chanbal

xincinsin said:


> Umm, the controversial figures coming out for or against the Harkles only muddies the water even more.


I'm not familiar with him, but I wonder how he is an online sensation (according to the video's legend). Some of the things he says about the Harkles make sense, but I agree with you it may mud the water. Though, I associate censure and cancel culture to fascism, and I'm in favor of free speech.


----------



## pukasonqo

Jeremy Clarkson should limit himself to speak about cars, his comments about MM were at best immature and boorish


----------



## jblended

Chanbal said:


> Though, I associate censure and cancel culture to fascism, and I'm in favor of free speech.


Though I would never gatekeep what is and isn't posted, it is important to note that Tate is the very personification of hate speech. There is a reason he was banned from all social media platforms.
This is the same reason I cautioned against citing Shallon Lester's opinions (it's a rabbit hole I wish I never fell down). These people are so problematic in their own right, but they get given multiple platforms to speak (as though they are some sort of authority figures) on H&M. They should be roundly ignored because they are in no way credible, and one can wonder if, at the core, they are even decent human beings to begin with.

Edit: I tried to watch it just to make sure I'm being fair. I couldn't get past the 1.30 mark. He's already spouting some _serious_ toxic masculinity b.s. and is drawing on male superheroes as an analogy (no different to Meg selling a Disney fairytale).


----------



## jblended

Toby93 said:


>




H&M: They're all rAcIst!!!

Sunak:  

Sorry, I couldn't help myself.  He's living proof of their paranoia.


----------



## Katel

CobaltBlu said:


> So did they move there temporarily so they could do their life while being filmed, or did they recreate scenes there?  Like they happened to be there when LOL Beyoncé texted? What the heck?





sdkitty said:


> so they were acting?





QueenofWrapDress said:


> I'd say, pretending.





youngster said:


> They sold themselves to Netflix but still wanted to maintain a veneer of privacy, as ludicrous as that sounds, so they used a rented house.
> 
> What I don't understand is how that works logistically.  Did they travel to the rented house every day for a number of weeks?  Did they go there with an outline of what they were going to cover and a script?  How did they know that William would send a text while they were filming?  There is an 8 or 9 hour time difference between California and the UK.
> 
> I'm sure Meghan was very comfortable doing this, it was just like going to a set and play acting.





sdkitty said:


> so did she sit on a chair in the rented house and cry for the camera?  and people feel so sorry for her?


It appears their goal was for this Frankenstein thing to appear extemporaneous - “captured in real time over the last 5 years” - i.e., legitimate - but it was all faked - “acted.” IMO.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> I'm not familiar with him, but I wonder how he is an online sensation (according to the video's legend). Some of the things he says about the Harkles make sense, but I agree with you it may mud the water. Though, I associate censure and cancel culture to fascism, and I'm in favor of free speech.


He is a colourful character. But I agree with what he says and has previously said about the Harkles.
Living personification of even a broken clock is right twice a day.


----------



## Katel

xincinsin said:


> … I think it depends on whether or not they tried to pass off the rental home as "their home". *If they didn't, then the rental home was like a studio set. If they did, it's just one more iffy thing they did in a very long list of iffy things. In any case, with the amount of re-enactments done, all events are recast through their victim lens and therefore their relationship to reality may be tenuous.*


This!



xincinsin said:


> Echo chamber effect. Many of their admirers likely do not follow their story closely and only see him and her in fairytale prince & princess terms. And the way search engines work, they will keep showing them the same type of gushing poor-me articles that they first read. And nobody tells them to clear their cookies and browsing history



“Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest, lie la lie.”
The Boxer, Simon & Garfunkel.



Straight-Laced said:


> The Sussexes are king and queen of victim culture
> 
> 
> Melanie Phillips: With their refusal to admit any fault, Harry and Meghan typify a dangerous new narcissism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion piece in The Times UK today :
> 
> "In the great tsunami of grievances unleashed by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the latest one to wash over us is a meta-grievance: a grievance about the grievances. Harry and Meghan are now complaining that the family hasn’t acknowledged their complaints, apologised and sought reconciliation.
> 
> Let’s get our heads around this. The Sussexes have unleashed a vicious character assassination of Harry’s father and brother.
> 
> They have shown gross disrespect to the late Queen and reportedly upset her while she was nearing the end of her life.
> 
> They have accused the royal household of racism, cruelty and indifference with no evidence to back up such claims and with numerous examples of demonstrable falsehoods or distortions. They have monetised their royal brand while disdaining and trashing its obligations. They have produced an interminable, spiteful scream of jealousy, narcissism and rage with the intention to hurt and destroy.
> 
> Yet they now expect the royal family to apologise to them?
> 
> They say double standards have been shown in the reconciliation brokered by the Palace between Lady Susan Hussey and the charity campaigner Ngozi Fulani over Hussey’s alleged insult in asking where Fulani was “really from”.
> 
> Put to one side whether the treatment of Hussey was itself appropriate. The two situations are very different. The burden of explanation was on Hussey, who made the remark. With the Sussexes, the burden is on them for causing this crisis. It’s also by no means over, with Harry’s impending autobiography reportedly containing yet more attacks on his family.
> 
> So the Sussexes’ latest demand is a bit like Vladimir Putin expecting Volodymyr Zelensky to reach out and apologise for Ukraine being attacked while Putin plans his next assault on Kyiv.
> 
> Strikingly, the Sussexes believe they’ve done nothing wrong. They’ve never once acknowledged any fault in how they’ve behaved. They can’t see that what they are so convinced is intolerable behaviour by the royal family might have another explanation. They can’t accept there’s a legitimate point of view other than their own.
> 
> For the Sussexes, “my truth” turns out to be the only truth. No one else is entitled to their own “truth” — otherwise known as an opinion — if it conflicts with theirs.
> 
> In this, they are the ultimate exemplars of today’s twisted victim culture, which they call “social justice”. For victim culture entails the belief that, as victims of one kind of cultural oppression or another, members of “oppressed” groups are exempt from blame for anything that they do.
> 
> They refuse to acknowledge that any disadvantage they suffer may have resulted from their own behaviour. They don’t merely refuse to take responsibility for their own actions, they actually invert responsibility by blaming the targets of their attacks for taking positions that challenge these grievance warriors’ own mindset.
> ....
> This moral perversity had its origins decades ago in the philosophical assertion that there was no such thing as objective truth. What counted instead was how people felt. “What is right for me” was what was right; “what I feel” was reality. So when Meghan claims to be a victim of the royal family, no one is permitted to challenge “her truth”.
> 
> So far, the royal family’s strategy has been to rise above this hurtful drivel and concentrate on getting on with the job. Yet as we now see, responding with silence is being chalked up as yet another grievance to add to the list.
> 
> The Sussexes want the royal family to revolve around them as the stars in the regal show. Instead, they’re finding that the show is going on without the principals even registering Meghan and Harry’s frantic song and dance routines.
> 
> They are, of course, incredulous at this. That’s because what they’re doing isn’t actually about the royal family. It’s all about themselves.
> 
> Now they’re saying they want to start focusing on their “service work” rather than their personal battles.
> 
> The tragedy is that Prince Harry did once understand the meaning of service — but the great cause in which his wife has enrolled him is not serving others but servicing their own egos. There is nothing else they have to say."


YES! Perfectly stated, thank you, Melanie Phillips.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Toby93 said:


>



RS must be delighted that he gets such softball questions about media pap no matter what he does.

I’m behind and had to look up why Clarkson is in the soup.

I have to say 2 things - his farming show is miles better than that top gear and draws attention to a serious situation

And 2 I don’t see what the big controversy about what he said about M.

After all we’ve all seen her voluntarily get her tits out and smear herself in crap before….not to mention the hot **** constantly spilling out of her mouth.



But seriously, it’s just a crude hole the idea it’s worth our Pm commenting on as a misogynistic or racist attack is an absolute joke. Talk about playing identity politics.


----------



## Hyacinth

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5674152
> 
> _Netflix today released a trailer for a new documentary series hosted by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle that will celebrate 'inspirational leaders' throughout history.
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in the last three episodes of their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, late US Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Greta Thunberg and former South African president Nelson Mandela.
> 
> Other people who will be featured include Bryan Stevenson, a 63-year-old US social justice activist and law professor, Albie Sachs, 87, a former South African judge, rugby player Siya Kolisi, 31, and the journalist Gloria Steinem, 88. _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Harry and Meghan present a documentary on 'inspiring leaders'
> 
> 
> The couple, who appeared last week in their bombshell docuseries 'Meghan & Harry', will look at figures including the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk




Poor RBG must be rolling over in her grave. To have her praises sung by a pair of lying  self-obsessed greedy scamming hypocrites like Cringe and Ginge pretending that they see her as a role model would have made her *furious*. There are other names on that list who would probably feel the same.


----------



## needlv

Not sure if this is strictly true but… I don’t blame William for cutting or severely limiting all contact.  As he knows it will end up in an interview, book or podcast.









						Prince William cut all contact with Prince Harry over his Netflix documentary and has no plans to speak with him again, royal correspondent says
					

The bombshell Netflix documentary from Meghan and Harry alleged that Prince William "screamed" at his brother during his heated exit from royal life.




					www.insider.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. _



Flawless  That woman might want to have her vision checked.



Chanbal said:


> _*When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children._



I don't think anyone has seen "natural" Ghoul in decades.



Chanbal said:


> _*As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* _



Someone needs to look up the definition of "heir to the throne".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _Online sensation Andrew Tate speaks to Dan Wootton on Harry and Meghan, Masculinity and Cancellatio_n​




Isn't Tate that misogynistic piece of work always in trouble for his remarks? I'm not sure I'm interested in his opinion on anything.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Not sure if this is strictly true but… I don’t blame William for cutting or severely limiting all contact.  As he knows it will end up in an interview, book or podcast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince William cut all contact with Prince Harry over his Netflix documentary and has no plans to speak with him again, royal correspondent says
> 
> 
> The bombshell Netflix documentary from Meghan and Harry alleged that Prince William "screamed" at his brother during his heated exit from royal life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com



I agree. Also, I wouldn't want these unhinged people anywhere near my children.

BTW, remember when her brother said not to leave her alone with children and pets? I came along a suggestion that she petsat a friend's dog while in college and it died on her. Now to be fair, could be for a multitude of reasons, but still.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> TW is diplomatic and Hazz is the heir of the throne. Is the author of the article on something?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. *When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.
> 
> *As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._



After @QueenofWrapDress picked out a few key phrases, I had to hold back the giggles. Did not notice at first but this opinion writer describes both the Harkles using the same words: "graceful and poised". She is a victim of their fairy-tale storefront. 

I checked out Roxane Gay's wiki profile and I'm actually interested enough in her writings to want to read more. Is her opinion of the Dire Duo influenced by Zed's fake WOC/POC activist persona? Is she sympathetic to the emotionally-stunted Sparry because, like Sparry, she experienced a life-changing traumatic event in her childhood, but unlike Sparry, she seems to have strode out of the darkness to thrive?


----------



## Chanel Belle

I’ve always thought that Roxanne Gay is a good writer. What happened to the above article? Lol

Did someone pay the paper to write this?


----------



## EverSoElusive

I haven't even watched Episode 3 of their mockumentary because I can't bring myself to. They are disgusting people. It is shocking that there are some people out there that still refuse to see them for what they are. 

Anyways, I've seen this picture all over IG. Everytime it shows up on my feed, the first thing that came to mind - PHOTOSHOP. While I'm not a Photoshop pro, this picture reminds me so much of their barefoot pregnancy announcement photos and it screams nothing but fake to me.


----------



## WingNut

Straight-Laced said:


> The Sussexes are king and queen of victim culture
> 
> 
> Melanie Phillips: With their refusal to admit any fault, Harry and Meghan typify a dangerous new narcissism
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetimes.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion piece in The Times UK today :
> 
> "In the great tsunami of grievances unleashed by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the latest one to wash over us is a meta-grievance: a grievance about the grievances. Harry and Meghan are now complaining that the family hasn’t acknowledged their complaints, apologised and sought reconciliation.
> 
> Let’s get our heads around this. The Sussexes have unleashed a vicious character assassination of Harry’s father and brother.
> 
> They have shown gross disrespect to the late Queen and reportedly upset her while she was nearing the end of her life.
> 
> They have accused the royal household of racism, cruelty and indifference with no evidence to back up such claims and with numerous examples of demonstrable falsehoods or distortions. They have monetised their royal brand while disdaining and trashing its obligations. They have produced an interminable, spiteful scream of jealousy, narcissism and rage with the intention to hurt and destroy.
> 
> Yet they now expect the royal family to apologise to them?
> 
> They say double standards have been shown in the reconciliation brokered by the Palace between Lady Susan Hussey and the charity campaigner Ngozi Fulani over Hussey’s alleged insult in asking where Fulani was “really from”.
> 
> Put to one side whether the treatment of Hussey was itself appropriate. The two situations are very different. The burden of explanation was on Hussey, who made the remark. With the Sussexes, the burden is on them for causing this crisis. It’s also by no means over, with Harry’s impending autobiography reportedly containing yet more attacks on his family.
> 
> So the Sussexes’ latest demand is a bit like Vladimir Putin expecting Volodymyr Zelensky to reach out and apologise for Ukraine being attacked while Putin plans his next assault on Kyiv.
> 
> Strikingly, the Sussexes believe they’ve done nothing wrong. They’ve never once acknowledged any fault in how they’ve behaved. They can’t see that what they are so convinced is intolerable behaviour by the royal family might have another explanation. They can’t accept there’s a legitimate point of view other than their own.
> 
> For the Sussexes, “my truth” turns out to be the only truth. No one else is entitled to their own “truth” — otherwise known as an opinion — if it conflicts with theirs.
> 
> In this, they are the ultimate exemplars of today’s twisted victim culture, which they call “social justice”. For victim culture entails the belief that, as victims of one kind of cultural oppression or another, members of “oppressed” groups are exempt from blame for anything that they do.
> 
> They refuse to acknowledge that any disadvantage they suffer may have resulted from their own behaviour. They don’t merely refuse to take responsibility for their own actions, they actually invert responsibility by blaming the targets of their attacks for taking positions that challenge these grievance warriors’ own mindset.
> ....
> This moral perversity had its origins decades ago in the philosophical assertion that there was no such thing as objective truth. What counted instead was how people felt. “What is right for me” was what was right; “what I feel” was reality. So when Meghan claims to be a victim of the royal family, no one is permitted to challenge “her truth”.
> 
> So far, the royal family’s strategy has been to rise above this hurtful drivel and concentrate on getting on with the job. Yet as we now see, responding with silence is being chalked up as yet another grievance to add to the list.
> 
> The Sussexes want the royal family to revolve around them as the stars in the regal show. Instead, they’re finding that the show is going on without the principals even registering Meghan and Harry’s frantic song and dance routines.
> 
> They are, of course, incredulous at this. That’s because what they’re doing isn’t actually about the royal family. It’s all about themselves.
> 
> Now they’re saying they want to start focusing on their “service work” rather than their personal battles.
> 
> The tragedy is that Prince Harry did once understand the meaning of service — but the great cause in which his wife has enrolled him is not serving others but servicing their own egos. There is nothing else they have to say."


THIS is perfectly put…should be a mandatory reading 101 for anyone who doesn’t understand the dislike for them.


----------



## lanasyogamama

The thing that bothers me about the Jeremy Clarkson comments is that it takes away from all the legitimate criticism of them, and it plays into their narrative of people being misogynistic or racist against her.


----------



## lanasyogamama

I’m listening to a podcast right now, and Spencer Pratt is the guest, and the host asked him about Harry and Meghan, and he said when he started watching the show, all he could think is that they stole his playbook on how to be famous! He used to annoy me so much, but now I love how much he owns his thirstiness.


----------



## lallybelle

lanasyogamama said:


> The thing that bothers me about the Jeremy Clarkson comments is that it takes away from all the legitimate criticism of them, and it plays into their narrative of people being misogynistic or racist against her.


100%. His comments were gross and way above just criticism. As well as possibly being dangerous, it just feeds their victim narrative. If I had a dime for every time I've read "this just proves them right" since his column, well I'd have some very nice tPF reveals coming my way...lol.

It can be frustrating, seeing so many without the ability to see through PROVEN lies, not even taking any possible conspiracy's into consideration here. There is just so much BS pouring out anytime they speak it's insane. The "Meghan did nothing wrong, they just fell in love" makes me want to vomit...lol.


----------



## scarlet555

Still complaining after I don’t know how many years but what seems to be a very long time and when not complaining about the royal family, rambling on and on without anyone asking them to about random subjects they have no say about….unbelievable how whiny anyone can be-these two are horrible people and use a very strong PR firm to push their non agenda - despite the publics strong criticism, barely anyone well known dare to complain except for Megan Kelly and piers Morgan and betheny Framkel…


----------



## rose60610

Claw's definition of racism: "If you don't love and adore me and buy all my lies, you're racist". End of story. And now she's doing a doc about other people? Hmm. So how is she going to slam all of them? Since she flamed the RF as a bunch of racists and, gasp, non-huggers, does every single one of her doc subjects walk on water with zero flaws whatsoever? Steinem is 88 years old and white. Surely she must have said some racist things in her past. Steinem can't have any idea how Claw has suffered. Or is Claw going to wait until she is 96 years old, on her death bed, and THEN slam her over something? And then, of course, attend her funeral with a single left eye tear.


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## CarryOn2020

lallybelle said:


> 100%. His comments were gross and way above just criticism. As well as possibly being dangerous, it just feeds their victim narrative. If I had a dime for every time I've read "this just proves them right" since his column, well I'd have some very nice tPF reveals coming my way...lol.
> 
> It can be frustrating, seeing so many without the ability to see through PROVEN lies, not even taking any possible conspiracy's into consideration here. There is just so much BS pouring out anytime they speak it's insane. The "Meghan did nothing wrong, they just fell in love" makes me want to vomit...lol.


Clarkson’s opinion piece is deleted, his comments removed, he has expressed regrets.  Sigh.  Here they go again taking the limelight from KC’s lunch.


----------



## sdkitty

Mimmy said:


> I agree that opinion pieces should be allowed a lot of freedom in their content as they are opinion pieces. I disagree however that they should be printed no matter how noxious.
> 
> I would not expect a mainstream publication to publish a piece justifying hate against any person or groups of people given the current world climate and acts of violence that are seemingly unprovoked. Do I think that publication of this particular piece makes the UK racist? No, not at all but “words do matter”.
> 
> Full disclosure: I also liked Top Gear and found Jeremy Clarkson entertaining many years ago. I now find him reprehensible though.


I think it's unfortunate that the NY Times published this but I am not ready to say they aren't still a credible newspaper.  they have some excellent news reporters.


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> This is what blows me away. How many times have they been caught in lies, lies, lies...and yet they still have people who like them? How? Are all their admirers a fry short of a happy meal??!


they aren't the only ones


----------



## 1LV

Maggie Muggins said:


> Agree! I don't believe she nor Catherine would've been involved anyway. The late QEII, Charles and William probably discussed the situation before the meeting with Dufus and agreed that the duo's wanting to sell themselves to the highest bidder while doing some royal duties was contrary to the RF principle of 'a life of service.'  *The yelling and screaming previously mentioned was most likely an angry Dufus letting off steam at having TW's wishes thwarted.*


Probably because he knew he was going to get his azz handed to him as soon as he got home.


----------



## marietouchet

EverSoElusive said:


> I haven't even watched Episode 3 of their mockumentary because I can't bring myself to. They are disgusting people. It is shocking that there are some people out there that still refuse to see them for what they are.
> 
> Anyways, I've seen this picture all over IG. Everytime it shows up on my feed, the first thing that came to mind - PHOTOSHOP. While I'm not a Photoshop pro, this picture reminds me so much of their barefoot pregnancy announcement photos and it screams nothing but fake to me.
> 
> View attachment 5674639


there are so many issues with this photo …


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Clarkson’s opinion piece is deleted, his comments removed, he has expressed regrets.  Sigh.  Here they go again taking the limelight from KC’s lunch.



OK, Clarkson remarks were very rude, I stipulate that
But, how are his comments WORSE than what the Harkles said against the UK, BRF etc ???


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> OK, Clarkson remarks were very rude, i stipulate that
> But, how are his comments WORSE than what the Harkles said against the UK, BRF etc ???


as much as I dislike those two grifters, they haven't literally called for the RF to be physically assaulted -- have crap thrown her ....I know nothing of Clarkson but apparently he's a hate monger.  If he had some low IQ followers listening to him they might actually do something


----------



## lanasyogamama

Sorry, lost the post to quote but I was wondering how all those people would feel about Harry and Megan’s name being attached to the interviews years after they occurred.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

EverSoElusive said:


> I haven't even watched Episode 3 of their mockumentary because I can't bring myself to. They are disgusting people. It is shocking that there are some people out there that still refuse to see them for what they are.
> 
> Anyways, I've seen this picture all over IG. Everytime it shows up on my feed, the first thing that came to mind - PHOTOSHOP. While I'm not a Photoshop pro, this picture reminds me so much of their barefoot pregnancy announcement photos and it screams nothing but fake to me.
> 
> View attachment 5674639


Does this pic look close enough to have been photoshopped as TW???


----------



## sdkitty

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry, lost the post to quote but I was wondering how all those people would feel about Harry and Megan’s name being attached to the interviews years after they occurred.


I wonder if the subjects even had to give permission...could this just be H&M narrating existing footage?


----------



## xincinsin

EverSoElusive said:


> I haven't even watched Episode 3 of their mockumentary because I can't bring myself to. They are disgusting people. It is shocking that there are some people out there that still refuse to see them for what they are.
> 
> Anyways, I've seen this picture all over IG. Everytime it shows up on my feed, the first thing that came to mind - PHOTOSHOP. While I'm not a Photoshop pro, this picture reminds me so much of their barefoot pregnancy announcement photos and it screams nothing but fake to me.
> 
> View attachment 5674639


Does she dress solely in lycra? All these skintight dresses to emphasize her bump are a weird fashion choice, because they really aren't flattering.


CarryOn2020 said:


> Clarkson’s opinion piece is deleted, his comments removed, he has expressed regrets.  Sigh.  Here they go again taking the limelight from KC’s lunch.



I'm sure a lot of people would like "unreserved apologies" from the Harkles, but Mr and Mrs Perfect don't see anything wrong with lying, virtue-signalling and race-baiting, so let's not hold our breath. If they carry on with their current behaviour, and still smirk their way into the coronation, maybe an albatross will symbolically fall on their heads.


----------



## lanasyogamama

xincinsin said:


> Does she dress solely in lycra? All these skintight dresses to emphasize her bump are a weird fashion choice, because they really aren't flattering.
> 
> I'm sure a lot of people would like "unreserved apologies" from the Harkles, but Mr and Mrs Perfect don't see anything wrong with lying, virtue-signalling and race-baiting, so let's not hold our breath. If they carry on with their current behaviour, and still smirk their way into the coronation, maybe an albatross will symbolically fall on their heads.


I also remember that when I was pregnant, I hated anything clinging to my bump, it made me feel so nauseous, and really unwell. I know others seem to be just fine with it, looking at you, Kim Kardashian! But she did seem to be very very focused on showing off that bump.


----------



## xincinsin

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry, lost the post to quote but I was wondering how all those people would feel about Harry and Megan’s name being attached to the interviews years after they occurred.


If the tiresome twosome put their own spin on the interviews and upset the interviewees or their family, they will just be digging their hole deeper.

The programme is supposed to be telecast on 31 Dec. I'd like to know if the interviews were bought by Netflix or by Arghwell. If bought by Netflix, maybe Netflix is trying to recoup some of its illspent money by putting the Harkles to work.


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> as much as I dislike those two grifters, they haven't literally called for the RF to be physically assaulted -- have crap thrown her ....I know nothing of Clarkson but apparently he's a hate monger.  If he had some low IQ followers listening to him they might actually do something


Well....they did mention a plane crash. Their sugars wished the Queen a painful death......


----------



## Debbini

lanasyogamama said:


> Sorry, lost the post to quote but I was wondering how all those people would feel about Harry and Megan’s name being attached to the interviews years after they occurred.


RBG would not be happy.


----------



## sdkitty

this seems ridiculous to me....of course they weren't in the photo....they are thousands of miles away and have been slandering the family








						The Royals' New Family Photo Is Causing Major Drama Right Now
					

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been snubbed from a royal portrait that was taken at a reception they were "uninvited" from.




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> this seems ridiculous to me....of course they weren't in the photo....they are thousands of miles away and have been slandering the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royals' New Family Photo Is Causing Major Drama Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been snubbed from a royal portrait that was taken at a reception they were "uninvited" from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Yahoo stirring the pot


----------



## WingNut

sdkitty said:


> this seems ridiculous to me....of course they weren't in the photo....they are thousands of miles away and have been slandering the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royals' New Family Photo Is Causing Major Drama Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been snubbed from a royal portrait that was taken at a reception they were "uninvited" from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Oh FFS...will this whining never end? They weren't worthy of being invited to begin with!


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

Chanbal said:


> TW is diplomatic and Hazz is the heir of the throne. Is the author of the article on something?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Even in royal exile, *Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess*. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. *When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. *She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.
> 
> *As for the Duke of Sussex*, he too is graceful and poised — *but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne.* He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._



Hmmmm.   She is the epitome of J’accuse.   Not quite how diplomacy works.   He was never the heir.  Reference the title to his hue and cry in the “Spare”


----------



## LibbyRuth

Harry and Meghan are morphing more and more into this Office Space character.  He was fired and didn't accept it - they quit a job, but don't accept it.  They still expect a paycheck, still expect benefits, and still expect to get to go to the work events they want to go to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

LibbyRuth said:


> Harry and Meghan are morphing more and more into this Office Space character.  He was fired and didn't accept it - they quit a job, but don't accept it.  They still expect a paycheck, still expect benefits, and still expect to get to go to the work events they want to go to.


In their minds, or maybe just in his mind because in this matter, I believe Zed is just egging Sparry on, he believes it was the BRF who unfairly made him choose between in and out. He never wanted out, so he stubbornly believes that he is still in and he can't believe that they are not giving him the perks of being in. My office narcs were good at this convoluted way of thinking.


----------



## mrsinsyder

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't Tate that misogynistic piece of work always in trouble for his remarks? I'm not sure I'm interested in his opinion on anything.


Yes, he also fled the country he lived in because he was being charged with rape. He thinks women shouldn't be allowed to have jobs or leave the house so misogynistic is an understatement. He’s gross and the way he feels about meghan is just his blanket feeling for all women.


----------



## gracekelly

WingNut said:


> Oh FFS...will this whining never end? They weren't worthy of being invited to begin with!


They aren’t  senior royals or working royals so no reason to be there. Harry’s ego  doesn’t acknowledge that and his wife is mad because she missed a photo op. Just another reason to whine. It’s never going to stop


----------



## Babydoll Chanel

gracekelly said:


> They aren’t  senior royals or working royals so no reason to be there. Harry’s ego  doesn’t acknowledge that and his wife is mad because she missed a photo op. Just another reason to whine. It’s never going to stop



*"Meghan and Harry haven't commented on being excluded from this image—or on being "uninvited" from the party where it was taken"*

Not sure if I missed anything, but when did they whine about it?


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> this seems ridiculous to me....of course they weren't in the photo....they are thousands of miles away and have been slandering the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royals' New Family Photo Is Causing Major Drama Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been snubbed from a royal portrait that was taken at a reception they were "uninvited" from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Even more ridiculous since the photo was taken the night before the Queen’s funeral, months ago. It is not a “new picture“.

The Harkle machine relentlessly keeps churning with a complicit Yahoo.


----------



## csshopper

Debbini said:


> Well....they did mention a plane crash. Their sugars wished the Queen a painful death......


I thought Clarkson was out of line, but must admit that if I someday read an errant pigeon had flown over their heads and dumped a load it might make me smile.


----------



## xincinsin

Babydoll Chanel said:


> *"Meghan and Harry haven't commented on being excluded from this image—or on being "uninvited" from the party where it was taken"*
> 
> Not sure if I missed anything, but when did they whine about it?


Wondering why Yahoo dug up an old photo. Any whining about it or that invite/disinvite was done before the funeral. Must be a slow news day.


----------



## EverSoElusive

xincinsin said:


> *Does she dress solely in lycra? All these skintight dresses to emphasize her bump are a weird fashion choice, because they really aren't flattering*.
> 
> I'm sure a lot of people would like "unreserved apologies" from the Harkles, but Mr and Mrs Perfect don't see anything wrong with lying, virtue-signalling and race-baiting, so let's not hold our breath. If they carry on with their current behaviour, and still smirk their way into the coronation, maybe an albatross will symbolically fall on their heads.


She probably wore all the tight fitting clothes during her pregnancy due to the following reasons:

1) To prove that she's indeed HEAVILY pregnant (or HEAVILY moon bumped, whichever you prefer  ) and that we're all wrong for saying she used a surrogate. 

2) To prove that she's a sexy MILF unlike any other.

3) To prove that she didn't need to dress conservatively like Kate and that she has better maternity style than Kate. 

4) To ensure that she got maximum mileage for whatever she's merching or before she needed to return them with tags on within the return period  


Anyways, those are just my speculations. Maybe none are true but she has the knack of dressing few sizes smaller than her actual size, pregnant or not.


----------



## gracekelly

EverSoElusive said:


> She probably wore all the tight fitting clothes during her pregnancy due to the following reasons:
> 
> 1) To prove that she's indeed HEAVILY pregnant (or HEAVILY moon bumped, whichever you prefer  ) and that we're all wrong for saying she used a surrogate.
> 
> 2) To prove that she's a sexy MILF unlike any other.
> 
> 3) To prove that she didn't need to dress conservatively like Kate and that she has better maternity style than Kate.
> 
> 4) To ensure that she got maximum mileage for whatever she's merching or before she needed to return them with tags on within the return period
> 
> 
> Anyways, those are just my speculations. Maybe none are true but she has the knack of dressing few sizes smaller than her actual size, pregnant or not.


If the dress is tight enough, it will keep the moon bump from falling and it can stay in place


----------



## EverSoElusive

gracekelly said:


> If the dress is tight enough, it will keep the moon bump from falling and it can stay in place


So far we've seen many moon bump fails courtesy of Z-list  She needs better training if she ever wants to moon bumped again.


----------



## Lodpah

I really think Newspapers should disclose if articles they print are “paid” or “sponsored” just like influencers are obligated to disclose if it’s a paid sponnsorship of what they endorse. Hmmm . . . 

That’s the only way to ascertain credibility.


----------



## scarlet555

Lodpah said:


> I really think Newspapers should disclose if articles they print are “paid” or “sponsored” just like influencers are obligated to disclose if it’s a paid sponnsorship of what they endorse. Hmmm . . .
> 
> That’s the only way to ascertain credibility.


yes, journalistic integrity no longer exist... this is horrible...


----------



## scarlet555

Babydoll Chanel said:


> *"Meghan and Harry haven't commented on being excluded from this image—or on being "uninvited" from the party where it was taken"*
> 
> Not sure if I missed anything, but *when* did they *whine *about it?


That's just extremely hard to keep track of since anything spewed from their mouths is pure whining-wish it was a joke, but it isn't.  But it's not too hard to believe that for sure they are whining about it right at this instant.


----------



## tiktok

marietouchet said:


> OK, Clarkson remarks were very rude, I stipulate that
> But, how are his comments WORSE than what the Harkles said against the UK, BRF etc ???


This whole situation is bizarre to me. 
Why is everyone mad at Clarkson (who did write an abhorrent piece) and not at the editor / newspaper that printed this drivel? You can find someone willing to voice their opinion in a horrible, offensive manner on any issue. It doesn't mean any newspaper has to print it.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> this seems ridiculous to me....of course they weren't in the photo....they are thousands of miles away and have been slandering the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royals' New Family Photo Is Causing Major Drama Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been snubbed from a royal portrait that was taken at a reception they were "uninvited" from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com



Also, this is not a family photo. It's a picture of the executive floor of a company. As far as I know, the Harkles gave their notice quite some time ago.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Babydoll Chanel said:


> *"Meghan and Harry haven't commented on being excluded from this image—or on being "uninvited" from the party where it was taken"*
> 
> Not sure if I missed anything, but when did they whine about it?


Perhaps you will recall that there was enormous press coverage over their being invited and then disinvited.  Whether they were or weren't and the truth of it got everyone in a tizzy.  The overall whining from Meghan and Harry included this.  The fact that the picture of the 4 senior royals is being shown again is part and parcel with the "us against them" scenario.  It keeps M&H in the news, which is their end goal.  The problem is that they are dredging up something from September, and  they sort of have to because there is nothing current.  Old news is old news and most people aren't interested.  Their documentary will fall into the same category.  A lot has transpired in the world since it was made in 2019.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I honestly don’t know why anyone is taking this claim against Clarkson seriously tbh. Megz is a widely unpopular abhorrent media figure so she’s fair game. 

The same sentiments are expressed about the likes of piers moron and Clarkson himself all the time and the same people think it’s hilarious-  her being a ‘proud WOC’ has got nothing to do with. 

What’s wrong with saying you hate her anyway? She’s extremely detestable.


----------



## papertiger

Just the fact that the Harkles started filming themselves as Royals so early on, proves that _all_ the excuses for leaving are total fabrications from their side. Fictional and salacious enough to make enough enough drama, but not heinous enough to get authorities involved investigating. So many blame Meghan, but she couldn't have done anything without his full support and total compliance. 

After this mockcumentary, I feel like I understand the Harkles a lot more. It was a conspired double-handed effort from the beginning (when they met). They totally defrauded the public with the wedding, taking titles and becoming Royals for a nano-second. They are totally in this melodrama together. No one, and I repeat no one, should ever feel sorry for Harry, he's loving every second of his (traitor's) life.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> this seems ridiculous to me....of course they weren't in the photo....they are thousands of miles away and have been slandering the family
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Royals' New Family Photo Is Causing Major Drama Right Now
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been snubbed from a royal portrait that was taken at a reception they were "uninvited" from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> currently.att.yahoo.com


Oh but, the RF should've taken a page out of the despicable duo's playbook and photoshopped them in the picture since they are such loyal members of the family.


----------



## papertiger

jelliedfeels said:


> I honestly don’t know why anyone is taking this claim against Clarkson seriously tbh. Megz is a widely unpopular abhorrent media figure so she’s fair game.
> 
> The same sentiments are expressed about the likes of piers moron and Clarkson himself all the time and the same people think it’s hilarious-  her being a ‘proud WOC’ has got nothing to do with.
> 
> What’s wrong with saying you hate her anyway? She’s extremely detestable.



Even if it's taken as a joke, it plays straight into M&H's hands, basically an own goal.

He uses language and imagery men often use against women in similar humiliating scenarios, for Adults only.  It's porn language, it degrades all women, that he "lies awake" fantasising about (sexualising and humiliating) a woman "paraded"  "through every town in Britain" "lumps of X thrown at her."  

It's one deranged person commenting about another. I'm sorry, the guy's out of control - and enjoying every moment of it. He is another rich, entitled, pompous ass - like Harry. 

If people boo at them (H&M) in the streets in the UK, that's one thing, especially when the twits think they should be cheered and applauded. H&M have turned the BRF into a farce, but violence against them is the last thing I'd want (for anyone). 

The only thing I want MegZZ (and HaZZ) stripped of are their titles and any UK privileges.


----------



## Lounorada

Chanbal said:


> _Even in royal exile, Meghan plays the part of a perfect princess. As she speaks, she looks flawless: graceful and poised, even when discussing the most difficult aspects of her life as the Duchess of Sussex. When discussing Harry’s family, she is surprisingly diplomatic. She is at her most natural in the moments she shares with her mother, Doria, or her husband and children.
> 
> As for the Duke of Sussex, he too is graceful and poised — but in the way of someone who has lived his entire life as an heir to the throne. He speaks with the zeal and conviction of the newly converted when damning the unholy alliance between the royal family and the British press, when advocating for mental health, when explaining the clear trauma of losing his mother and when making it crystal clear that he will protect his family, at any cost._


What planet did the fool that wrote this fall from!?


These rose-tinted glasses all the sugars wear must be made of magic because they are _strong _and cause delusions.


----------



## sdkitty

I love this ....hope more of the subjects speak out








						Jacinda Ardern Didn’t Plan to Be in Harry & Meghan Series
					

The New Zealand prime minister said her interview used in the new docuseries was filmed in November 2019 and Netflix and the former royals didn’t get involved until 2021.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> I love this ....hope more of the subjects speak out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jacinda Ardern Didn’t Plan to Be in Harry & Meghan Series
> 
> 
> The New Zealand prime minister said her interview used in the new docuseries was filmed in November 2019 and Netflix and the former royals didn’t get involved until 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


just one more person speaking up could really affect their credibility...come on Greta!


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I love this ....hope more of the subjects speak out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jacinda Ardern Didn’t Plan to Be in Harry & Meghan Series
> 
> 
> The New Zealand prime minister said her interview used in the new docuseries was filmed in November 2019 and Netflix and the former royals didn’t get involved until 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


None of these people planned on being in anything helmed by the Sussex.  I want to know who produced and directed this series in 2019.  I think that is a major point.


----------



## Chanbal

I don't think this has been posted here yet, it's rather interesting.


----------



## bag-mania

papertiger said:


> Just the fact that the Harkles started filming themselves as Royals so early on, proves that _all_ the excuses for leaving are total fabrications from their side. Fictional and salacious enough to make enough enough drama, but not heinous enough to get authorities involved investigating. So many blame Meghan, but she couldn't have done anything without his full support and total compliance.
> 
> After this mockcumentary, I feel like I understand the Harkles a lot more. It was a conspired double-handed effort from the beginning (when they met). They totally defrauded the public with the wedding, taking titles and becoming Royals for a nano-second. They are totally in this melodrama together. No one, and I repeat no one, should ever feel sorry for Harry, he's loving every second of his (traitor's) life.


Thank you! I have thought Harry is the worst for a long time now. Meghan couldn’t have done what she did without his complete cooperation and participation. He hates his family and she gave him the courage to show it.


----------



## bag-mania

Kay Jewelers used two lookalike H&M models in their commercial. For a little more money they could have hired the real Meghan and Harry.  









						Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Look-Alikes Hired for Kay Jewelers Commercial
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look like they did a commercial for Kay Jewelers, but it's just doppelgängers.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## CobaltBlu

I think it’s hilarious that the new bank notes with KCIII just dropped.


mic drop. Well played, your majesty.









I know he has nothing to do with the timing, I just thing it’s funny and a “hold my beer” to Haz


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Kay Jewelers used two lookalike H&M models in their commercial. For a little more money they could have hired the real Meghan and Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Look-Alikes Hired for Kay Jewelers Commercial
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look like they did a commercial for Kay Jewelers, but it's just doppelgängers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


How many Sugars will fall for this and descend on the local Kay’s asking to buy what H bought for M?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> Kay Jewelers used two lookalike H&M models in their commercial. *For a little more money they could have hired the real Meghan and Harry.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Look-Alikes Hired for Kay Jewelers Commercial
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look like they did a commercial for Kay Jewelers, but it's just doppelgängers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com



OMG


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

bag-mania said:


> Kay Jewelers used two lookalike H&M models in their commercial. *For a little more money they could have hired the real Meghan and Harry. *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Look-Alikes Hired for Kay Jewelers Commercial
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look like they did a commercial for Kay Jewelers, but it's just doppelgängers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


If they have tiaras, the Harkles could perhaps offer a discount. TW needs one for the coronation. She can't miss such an important photo-op. 



bag-mania said:


> Thank you! *I have thought Harry is the worst for a long time now.* Meghan couldn’t have done what she did without his complete cooperation and participation. He hates his family and she gave him the courage to show it.


When I joined this thread, I recall that many of us were feeling sorry for 'poor Hazz.' We may have been wrong…  It looks like both Hazz and TW planned the 'escape from the palace' even before the wedding. TW wouldn't be as demanding as she was in the UK without his full support.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> Kay Jewelers used two lookalike H&M models in their commercial. For a little more money they could have hired the real Meghan and Harry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry, Meghan Markle Look-Alikes Hired for Kay Jewelers Commercial
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle look like they did a commercial for Kay Jewelers, but it's just doppelgängers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


Maybe it will open some people's eyes to how much the NF mockumentary resembled a really long and boring commercial asking viewers to buy Brand Sussex.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> Thank you! I have thought Harry is the worst for a long time now. Meghan couldn’t have done what she did without his complete cooperation and participation. He hates his family and she gave him the courage to show it.



Agree with this entirely.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Chanbal

_Royal expert Ingrid Seward told The Mirror that King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla among other royals have supported the couple, saying: 'Rather than stooping to their level, they have applauded the couple's decision not to retaliate in any way.' _









						King and Queen Consort 'applaud' Prince William and Kate Middleton
					

Royal expert Ingrid Seward told The Mirror that King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla are supporting the couple after allegations made in Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Chanbal

More from the Behavior Panel!


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5675033
> 
> _Royal expert Ingrid Seward told The Mirror that King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla among other royals have supported the couple, saying: 'Rather than stooping to their level, they have applauded the couple's decision not to retaliate in any way.' _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> King and Queen Consort 'applaud' Prince William and Kate Middleton
> 
> 
> Royal expert Ingrid Seward told The Mirror that King Charles and Queen Consort Camilla are supporting the couple after allegations made in Harry and Meghan's Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The whole BRF deserves applause for taking the high road. It's not as easy as it sounds to keep quiet when someone is lying about you and hoodwinking the world, all the while playing victim. My ex-boss advised me to treat the worst office narc as invisible when he was giving me a really hard time. Just blank him. The narc sat next to me so I had to keep my iTunes on and listen to soothing music to keep out his whiny voice talking about his non-existent accomplishments and his humble-bragging about his virtues. If Zed was going to be within arms-length of me, I'd probably be googling if red wine or tomato juice stained worse so that I could accidentally on purpose decorate her faux virginal pure white dress. I'm petty that way.


----------



## oldbag

xincinsin said:


> Maybe it will open some people's eyes to how much the NF mockumentary resembled a really long and boring commercial asking viewers to buy Brand Sussex.


Actually I like the wedding ring set. It is better than what MM wears now. The necklace is OK but nothing spectacular. No mystery diamonds.


----------



## xincinsin

oldbag said:


> Actually I like the wedding ring set. It is better than what MM wears now. The necklace is OK but nothing spectacular. No mystery diamonds.


I liked the general look of the necklace, but that's because I like pear-shaped settings. Didn't like it so much when I saw the close-up of it at the end - looked rather cheap.

I've given up tracking what is going on with Zed's engagement/wedding/push present? The poor rings have been "upgraded" more times than her nose.


----------



## Chanbal

_"Dear X,
We are truly sorry for all of the following:_

_We are sorry Harry said he had enormous respect for his late grandfather when he showed the antithesis of respect by appearing on Oprah on March 7 2021, when he knew Prince Philip was in hospital and clearly terminally ill. (The Duke was discharged on March 16, dying three weeks later.) We acknowledge that the allegations launched at the Royal family in that broadcast, including one of racism, would have caused deep embarrassment and worry to Harry’s grandparents in their final days together._
_Harry claims that he inherited the Duke of Edinburgh’s “cheeky chappie” traits. We are sincerely sorry that such a comparison was ever made. We know full well that the late Duke of Edinburgh would have thought his grandson was behaving like a damned fool and he never suffered fools gladly. Prince Philip guarded the reputation and wellbeing of Her Majesty for more than 70 years and, had he lived, would have been apoplectic at our trashing of the family name. We accept that Prince Philip’s most likely response to a British prince speaking fluent Californian therapese would be that Harry had gained a wife and lost a sense of humour. Seriously, guys, we would love to laugh at ourselves, but we’re professional victims and lack all perspective._
_We regret including an “expert” in our docu-series who claimed the Commonwealth was just a continuation of Empire. Of course, we know that Harry’s late grandmother dedicated her whole life (“whether it be long or short”) to cherishing the Commonwealth and that Elizabeth II herself did a huge amount to bring down racial barriers, not least when she danced with Ghana’s president Kwame Nkrumah in Accra in 1961. Look, what can we say? It makes for a better story if we’re the first Royal anti-racists._
_We regret undermining Her late Majesty’s amazing legacy so recently after her death when the only reason we can command international attention and mega publishing deals is because of the title Harry inherited from the Crown at birth. Funnily enough, we make our living off the back of the very “white privilege” we want to see torn down, but, er, not in our case because… you know, bills to pay, mansions to buy!_
_We are sorry we talk the language of love and kindness and are, like, really horrible to nearly all our relations. It was mean of Harry to tell 80 million viewers that his brother “screamed and shouted” at him. Siblings say stuff and it’s better if it stays private so that forgiving and forgetting is still an option. But, hey, no one’s gonna give us 100 million dollars for saying “We should probably take our fair share of the blame”, are they?_
_Meghan is truly contrite about implying she only saw her dad at weekends when she was growing up. Meghan says the Palace fed her to the media wolves, which is a really good description of what happened to her father when the media descended on him before our wedding. We are sorry Tom felt so ashamed and nervous he did a deal with a photographer to make himself look better for his daughter’s fancy new in-laws. It was cruel of Harry to say that “Meghan lost her dad” when in fact we cancelled him to spare ourselves further embarrassment, even though the poor guy just had a heart attack. That was cold, calculating and ruthless. You know, all those things we accuse the Windsors of being._
_We’d like to apologise to the millions of Brits who voted for Brexit and whom we basically accused in our series of fuelling racism against Meghan. We accept that many in the cheering crowds who lined the route at our wedding voted Leave and that the British people as a whole were thrilled that the prince they had felt so protective of since his mother’s death had got himself such a knockout bride. Furthermore, we humbly acknowledge that international studies suggest the UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. We are sorry for fuelling the impression in America, where we now live and which really does have a major problem with racism, that the UK – and the Royal family in particular – took against Meghan because she is mixed race._
_We regret that several members of our staff who accused Meghan of bullying them (accusations which we of course deny) were made to sign non-disclosure agreements. As social justice warriors, we passionately believe that people a lot less powerful than us should be able to tell their “truth”. So long as it doesn’t contradict the one “truth” that matters. Ours._
_Finally, we’d like to apologise in advance for Harry’s memoir, Spare, which comes out next month. Not a great start for King Charles to his Coronation year when he could do with everyone’s support. Harry’s dad has actually been pretty great,  refusing to slam the door on us even though we behave like a pair of entitled brats, trashing the institution without which we’d be a pair of nobodies selling timeshares in Maroma Beach._
_Sorry, but we are working on a reconciliation soonest to get a ringside seat at the Coronation. Once we’ve banked the Netflix cheque and the book royalties!
Sending Holiday well-wishes to chilly old Sandringham from a yacht in the sunny Bahamas,
Love Harry and Meg x"_



			archive.ph


----------



## gracekelly

CobaltBlu said:


> I think it’s hilarious that the new bank notes with KCIII just dropped.
> 
> 
> mic drop. Well played, your majesty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know he has nothing to do with the timing, I just thing it’s funny and a “hold my beer” to Haz


I thought it was a nice portrait of him on the note


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> View attachment 5675118
> 
> 
> _"Dear X,
> We are truly sorry for all of the following:_
> 
> _We are sorry Harry said he had enormous respect for his late grandfather when he showed the antithesis of respect by appearing on Oprah on March 7 2021, when he knew Prince Philip was in hospital and clearly terminally ill. (The Duke was discharged on March 16, dying three weeks later.) We acknowledge that the allegations launched at the Royal family in that broadcast, including one of racism, would have caused deep embarrassment and worry to Harry’s grandparents in their final days together._
> _Harry claims that he inherited the Duke of Edinburgh’s “cheeky chappie” traits. We are sincerely sorry that such a comparison was ever made. We know full well that the late Duke of Edinburgh would have thought his grandson was behaving like a damned fool and he never suffered fools gladly. Prince Philip guarded the reputation and wellbeing of Her Majesty for more than 70 years and, had he lived, would have been apoplectic at our trashing of the family name. We accept that Prince Philip’s most likely response to a British prince speaking fluent Californian therapese would be that Harry had gained a wife and lost a sense of humour. Seriously, guys, we would love to laugh at ourselves, but we’re professional victims and lack all perspective._
> _We regret including an “expert” in our docu-series who claimed the Commonwealth was just a continuation of Empire. Of course, we know that Harry’s late grandmother dedicated her whole life (“whether it be long or short”) to cherishing the Commonwealth and that Elizabeth II herself did a huge amount to bring down racial barriers, not least when she danced with Ghana’s president Kwame Nkrumah in Accra in 1961. Look, what can we say? It makes for a better story if we’re the first Royal anti-racists._
> _We regret undermining Her late Majesty’s amazing legacy so recently after her death when the only reason we can command international attention and mega publishing deals is because of the title Harry inherited from the Crown at birth. Funnily enough, we make our living off the back of the very “white privilege” we want to see torn down, but, er, not in our case because… you know, bills to pay, mansions to buy!_
> _We are sorry we talk the language of love and kindness and are, like, really horrible to nearly all our relations. It was mean of Harry to tell 80 million viewers that his brother “screamed and shouted” at him. Siblings say stuff and it’s better if it stays private so that forgiving and forgetting is still an option. But, hey, no one’s gonna give us 100 million dollars for saying “We should probably take our fair share of the blame”, are they?_
> _Meghan is truly contrite about implying she only saw her dad at weekends when she was growing up. Meghan says the Palace fed her to the media wolves, which is a really good description of what happened to her father when the media descended on him before our wedding. We are sorry Tom felt so ashamed and nervous he did a deal with a photographer to make himself look better for his daughter’s fancy new in-laws. It was cruel of Harry to say that “Meghan lost her dad” when in fact we cancelled him to spare ourselves further embarrassment, even though the poor guy just had a heart attack. That was cold, calculating and ruthless. You know, all those things we accuse the Windsors of being._
> _We’d like to apologise to the millions of Brits who voted for Brexit and whom we basically accused in our series of fuelling racism against Meghan. We accept that many in the cheering crowds who lined the route at our wedding voted Leave and that the British people as a whole were thrilled that the prince they had felt so protective of since his mother’s death had got himself such a knockout bride. Furthermore, we humbly acknowledge that international studies suggest the UK is one of the least racist countries in the world. We are sorry for fuelling the impression in America, where we now live and which really does have a major problem with racism, that the UK – and the Royal family in particular – took against Meghan because she is mixed race._
> _We regret that several members of our staff who accused Meghan of bullying them (accusations which we of course deny) were made to sign non-disclosure agreements. As social justice warriors, we passionately believe that people a lot less powerful than us should be able to tell their “truth”. So long as it doesn’t contradict the one “truth” that matters. Ours._
> _Finally, we’d like to apologise in advance for Harry’s memoir, Spare, which comes out next month. Not a great start for King Charles to his Coronation year when he could do with everyone’s support. Harry’s dad has actually been pretty great,  refusing to slam the door on us even though we behave like a pair of entitled brats, trashing the institution without which we’d be a pair of nobodies selling timeshares in Maroma Beach._
> _Sorry, but we are working on a reconciliation soonest to get a ringside seat at the Coronation. Once we’ve banked the Netflix cheque and the book royalties!
> Sending Holiday well-wishes to chilly old Sandringham from a yacht in the sunny Bahamas,
> Love Harry and Meg x"_
> 
> 
> 
> archive.ph


_We accept that Prince Philip’s most likely response to a British prince speaking fluent Californian therapese would be that Harry had gained a wife and lost a sense of humour. Seriously, guys, we would love to laugh at ourselves, but we’re professional victims and lack all perspective._
Thank goodness the office is quite empty today and no one is paying attention to my gasping giggles


----------



## Jayne1

Chanbal said:


> More from the Behavior Panel!



That was good!  And not just because at about 25 minutes in, Mark Bowden said what I said last week -  how she set up a pap shot (in Toronto) while carrying flowers. He said the flower shop was far from her place though, probably could have got some closer if she wanted to. 

It's a very long video though - have to give ourselves time to listen to the whole thing.


----------



## Hermes Zen

Chanbal said:


> The predictions about the future of this 'love story' are not promising.
> ​
> _*'In the end, she’ll dump him': Prince Harry is 'being used' by Meghan to 'make her rich'*_​



Let M get richer so when they divorce, M will be worth more than H.  H should ask for alimony!  M will be p!ssed if she had to support him.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Katel

888 LILAC DRIVE, MONTECITO — RISKIN PARTNERS ESTATE GROUP - #1 Real Estate Team in Montecito & Santa Barbara
					






					montecito-realestate.com
				












						Lavish Montecito Mansion Where Meghan and Harry Filmed Netflix Doc Listed at $33.5 Million
					

When the Duke and Duchess of Sussex sat down to be interviewed for their much-anticipated Netflix docuseries, which began its much-criticized six-episode run last week, they didn’t do it in the liv…




					www.dirt.com
				










Hahaha! Merched to the hilt! 
And they had to fake a fancy home - their 14 bathrooms weren’t enough.   They *wish* they lived there.


----------



## Chanbal

Well…   

"_*Princess Beatrice*__*,* one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, g*ave her permission for them to film at the Queen's outsize Wendy house at Windsor Castle for their Netflix entertainment. *Called Y Bwthyn Bach, it was a sixth birthday present to Princess Elizabeth from the people of Wales in 1932. *In 2010, HM passed custodianship of the house to Princess Beatrice*, who oversaw a year-long renovation before inviting Andrew Marr inside for The Diamond Queen for the BBC in 2012, the first time television cameras had been allowed in. But when *she allowed access to the Montecito Two did she know they would be smirking over their tea as they monetised one of the Queen's most private retreats?*_










						EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Beatrice gave Harry nod to film at Queen's cottage
					

EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Princess Beatrice, one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, gave her permission for them to film at the Queen's Wendy house at Windsor Castle.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Well…
> 
> "_*Princess Beatrice*__*,* one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, g*ave her permission for them to film at the Queen's outsize Wendy house at Windsor Castle for their Netflix entertainment. *Called Y Bwthyn Bach, it was a sixth birthday present to Princess Elizabeth from the people of Wales in 1932. *In 2010, HM passed custodianship of the house to Princess Beatrice*, who oversaw a year-long renovation before inviting Andrew Marr inside for The Diamond Queen for the BBC in 2012, the first time television cameras had been allowed in. But when *she allowed access to the Montecito Two did she know they would be smirking over their tea as they monetised one of the Queen's most private retreats?*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Beatrice gave Harry nod to film at Queen's cottage
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Princess Beatrice, one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, gave her permission for them to film at the Queen's Wendy house at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


My unpopular opinion - this is one more reason the Yorks need to go.  They seem rather dim which makes them a perfect target for H&M.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> Well…
> 
> "_*Princess Beatrice*__*,* one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, g*ave her permission for them to film at the Queen's outsize Wendy house at Windsor Castle for their Netflix entertainment. *Called Y Bwthyn Bach, it was a sixth birthday present to Princess Elizabeth from the people of Wales in 1932. *In 2010, HM passed custodianship of the house to Princess Beatrice*, who oversaw a year-long renovation before inviting Andrew Marr inside for The Diamond Queen for the BBC in 2012, the first time television cameras had been allowed in. But when *she allowed access to the Montecito Two did she know they would be smirking over their tea as they monetised one of the Queen's most private retreats?*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Beatrice gave Harry nod to film at Queen's cottage
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Princess Beatrice, one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, gave her permission for them to film at the Queen's Wendy house at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


I'm not even surprised any more. Zed was raised to monetise everything. If she can sell herself and her kids to the highest bidder, she would have no qualms selling anyone or anything.


----------



## jblended

Sent to me by a friend. 





And with a hearty laugh, I'm going to do what I've been trying to for a month and step away from online activity. Happy holidays, dear TPF'ers.


----------



## Chanbal

jblended said:


> Sent to me by a friend.
> 
> View attachment 5675238
> 
> 
> 
> And with a hearty laugh, I'm going to do what I've been trying to for a month and step away from online activity. Happy holidays, dear TPF'ers.


Happy Holidays to you as well!


----------



## Chanbal

​
_'I get called a racist all day long' as a result of Meghan Markle: Piers Morgan_​


----------



## needlv

Chanbal said:


> More from the Behavior Panel!



That was long but good.  The curtesy was about 1:08 but I loved Chase in the last 10 mins with comparisons to Jussie Smollett.  Ha!


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> More from the Behavior Panel!




Chase Hughes was totally on the money around 30mins!

What I also realised is M writes English so much better aged 11 (clip before)


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> When I joined this thread, I recall that many of us were feeling sorry for 'poor Hazz.' We may have been wrong…  It looks like both Hazz and TW planned the 'escape from the palace' even before the wedding. TW wouldn't be as demanding as she was in the UK without his full support.



I don't disagree that he is compliant, but I still maintain she's an abuser and he's her victim. I came across a very interesting read on trauma bonding, will post excerpts later because I need to run some errands. I think our fundamental disagreement might stem from a misunderstanding...while I feel for him I don't think their unhealthy dynamic excuses him completely from any personal responsibility.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't disagree that he is compliant, but I still maintain she's an abuser and he's her victim. I came across a very interesting read on trauma bonding, will post excerpts later because I need to run some errands. I think our fundamental disagreement might stem from a misunderstanding...while I feel for him I don't think their unhealthy dynamic excuses him completely from any personal responsibility.


My thinking has always been _he_ is responsible for this mess.  He seems to have a perverse enjoyment in causing arguments.
Since it is the season of goodwill and peace, I’ll stop there.


----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Well…
> 
> "_*Princess Beatrice*__*,* one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, g*ave her permission for them to film at the Queen's outsize Wendy house at Windsor Castle for their Netflix entertainment. *Called Y Bwthyn Bach, it was a sixth birthday present to Princess Elizabeth from the people of Wales in 1932. *In 2010, HM passed custodianship of the house to Princess Beatrice*, who oversaw a year-long renovation before inviting Andrew Marr inside for The Diamond Queen for the BBC in 2012, the first time television cameras had been allowed in. But when *she allowed access to the Montecito Two did she know they would be smirking over their tea as they monetised one of the Queen's most private retreats?*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Beatrice gave Harry nod to film at Queen's cottage
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Princess Beatrice, one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, gave her permission for them to film at the Queen's Wendy house at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


So, now they are tossing B under the bus


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't disagree that he is compliant, but I still maintain she's an abuser and he's her victim. I came across a very interesting read on trauma bonding, will post excerpts later because I need to run some errands. I think our fundamental disagreement might stem from a misunderstanding...while I feel for him I don't think their unhealthy dynamic excuses him completely from any personal responsibility.


Just thinking … H is a mystery to me but then his mother was too 

She suddenly develops bulimia after engagement, gets the cold shoulder from Charles, does not like royal doctors, then miraculously is cured some 8 years later
How did she overcome the problem without support?? Did she have relapses ??
That is the chronology dictated to Morton by Diana … 

This is the same story as for MM and her mental health woes 

I think there is a big chunk missing from the saga of Diana, she just did not tell Morton


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> My unpopular opinion - this is one more reason the Yorks need to go.  They seem rather dim which makes them a perfect target for H&M.


It would be interesting to know when the cottage footage was filmed… It looks like professional video, so done by Netflix crew …
The Harkles did not have a professional crew before Megxit… 
But they had one when they returned in disgrace for Jubilee or funeral 

I might give B a pass if the footage predates Megxit, but not if it is 2022 footage


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Well…
> 
> "_*Princess Beatrice*__*,* one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, g*ave her permission for them to film at the Queen's outsize Wendy house at Windsor Castle for their Netflix entertainment. *Called Y Bwthyn Bach, it was a sixth birthday present to Princess Elizabeth from the people of Wales in 1932. *In 2010, HM passed custodianship of the house to Princess Beatrice*, who oversaw a year-long renovation before inviting Andrew Marr inside for The Diamond Queen for the BBC in 2012, the first time television cameras had been allowed in. But when *she allowed access to the Montecito Two did she know they would be smirking over their tea as they monetised one of the Queen's most private retreats?*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Beatrice gave Harry nod to film at Queen's cottage
> 
> 
> EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE: Princess Beatrice, one of the few royals still in communication with Harry and Meghan, gave her permission for them to film at the Queen's Wendy house at Windsor Castle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk



Gosh, I'm disappointed. I thought better of Bea. Then again, maybe she was deceived, has happened to others as well.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

As promised, the article on trauma bonding .



> What Is Trauma Bonding?​Trauma bonding happens when an abuser uses manipulation tactics and cycles of abuse to make the victim feel dependent on them for care and validation, causing a strong attachment or bond. This often occurs in romantic narcissistic relationships, but can also occur in families, friendships, or work relationships.[...]





> Who Is More Susceptible to Trauma Bonding?​People with relational and emotional trauma are typically targeted by perpetrators in a trauma bond, intentionally or otherwise. [...]





> 7 Stages of Trauma Bonding​In the seven proposed stages of trauma bonding, often they begin as seemingly excellent relationships before gradually progressing turning into an abusive dynamic. This progression is part of the reason this bond can profoundly impact a victim’s worldview, perception of reality, and their relationship with themselves.
> 
> The seven stages of trauma bonding are:
> 
> 1. Love Bombing​Love bombing involves the sudden, intense attempt to create a “we” in a relationship through high praise and excessive flattery. While this dynamic typically occurs between a perpetrator and victim of abuse, it can sometimes involve other people surrounding the couple. Sometimes, in some abusive circumstances, the abuser may seem oblivious to their manipulation; however, that is typically not the case in a trauma bond.
> 
> In a trauma bond, love bombing can subtly set the stage for an abusive dynamic by:
> 
> 
> Allowing the abuser to prey on the victim’s emotions, deep hopes, desires and dreams. It is similar to someone saying “look what _I_ can offer _you_, and no one else has or will love you like this”
> Causing the victim to let their guard down and trust the abuser’s intentions
> Fostering positive feelings and validation between the possible perpetrator and victim
> “Proving” that an abuser has good intentions
> Providing a sense of stability and security
> 2. Trust & Dependency [...]​3. Criticism [...]​4. Manipulation & Gaslighting [...]​5. Resignation & Giving Up [...]​6. Loss of Self [...]​7. Addiction to the Cycle [...]​


----------



## pomeline

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Gosh, I'm disappointed. I thought better of Bea. Then again, maybe she was deceived, has happened to others as well.


Just a thought... Were the Yorks invited to the Christmas lunch and were they there..? Not sure I saw any of them in the photos arriving or leaving.


----------



## Chanbal

Another opinion on the 6-hour reality show   



_So, we watched the self-pitying, whining and cringe-inducing explanations of how marrying into a monarchy had brutalized Meghan – and how poor Harry had never gotten over being born second and watching his older brother William be groomed to be king. I felt I was watching two juveniles who simply could not come to grips with the real world.

It is a little suspicious that they just happen to have so many hours of home movies. It made me wonder if they had been planning this TV extravaganza for a long time. There were reports almost as soon as they resigned from their royal duties that they had signed a $100 million contract with Netflix.

Of course, the series explains why they need the money. Staying in a 22-acre estate in Los Angeles, ensuring enough security, traveling in private airplanes, all these aspects of "the simple life" add up._









						There's no mystery to Meghan Markle, Prince Harry. Meet two juveniles who can't deal with the real world
					

I have to confess that my wife Callista and I have just watched the six-part series on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. It's not a magical experience but told us a lot about the couple.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

pomeline said:


> Just a thought... Were the Yorks invited to the Christmas lunch and were they there..? Not sure I saw any of them in the photos arriving or leaving.



I don't know for sure, but The Telegraph reported the Yorks were expected to attend, including Andrew. I can't see them being excluded, I'm sure the Troublesome Two would have received an invitation as well were they still in the UK.


----------



## Chanbal

Happy Holidays!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

German magazine titles: "[Ghoul] and Harry: Hollywood's Elite and Political Heavyweights Distance Themselves".


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The former chef standing up more for Diana than her useless son, and not for the first time.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Thank you! I have thought Harry is the worst for a long time now. Meghan couldn’t have done what she did without his complete cooperation and participation. He hates his family and she gave him the courage to show it.


hate is a strong word but I do think he is eaten up with jealousy of his older brother.  sad.  this might have been the case even if Diana had survived.


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> hate is a strong word but I do think he is eaten up with jealousy of his older brother.  sad.  this might have been the case even if Diana had survived.


Everything he has been doing lately shows his distain for his family. I wonder when the last time was he has had a private conversation with his father. I think they stopped communicating even before he and William did. It makes sense because Harry cannot be trusted not to record them.


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Everything he has been doing lately shows his distain for his family. I wonder when the last time was he has had a private conversation with his father. I think they stopped communicating even before he and William did. It makes sense because Harry cannot be trusted not to record them.


I wonder if the bitterness over being the spare is unique to Harry.  From what little I know, the queen's father had no desire to be king - was forced into it when his brother abdicated.  Are there other bitter "spares"?


----------



## Chanbal

No idea who this person is. It seems to be his first time reporting on the Harkles, but he does a good job analyzing the reality show imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if the bitterness over being the spare is unique to Harry.  From what little I know, the queen's father had no desire to be king - was forced into it when his brother abdicated.  Are there other bitter "spares"?



Andrew seems to have been slightly bitter. Also the Danish former #2 (who also happens to be "blessed" with a milder version of Ghoul...no reports she mistreats him, but a troublemaker insanely jealous of Crown Princess Mary).


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Andrew seems to have been slightly bitter. Also the Danish former #2 (who also happens to be "blessed" with a milder version of Ghoul...no reports she mistreats him, but a troublemaker insanely jealous of Crown Princess Mary).


good point about andrew....he (like harry) was indulged by his mother (for being youngest and cute as a child?)


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> I wonder if the bitterness over being the spare is unique to Harry.  From what little I know, the queen's father had no desire to be king - was forced into it when his brother abdicated.  Are there other bitter "spares"?


Even among non-royal families bitterness is not unusual. Add in the prestige of royalty and it’s a recipe for ill will.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

bag-mania said:


> Even among non-royal families bitterness is not unusual. Add in the prestige of royalty and it’s a recipe for ill will.


for me, it's very unappealing but there are lots of people who sympathize with these two


----------



## carmen56

pomeline said:


> Just a thought... Were the Yorks invited to the Christmas lunch and were they there..? Not sure I saw any of them in the photos arriving or leaving.


My guess is if invited they would have walked to the castle from Royal Lodge.  Same applies to Kate, William and the kids, they probably walked from Adelaide Cottage.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Icky


----------



## CarryOn2020

Apologies if already posted.


----------



## CarryOn2020

122


----------



## Toby93

Why do Instagram links show up as broken?  If you click on it, it takes you to it.  Spencer Pratt has some strong feelings about H&M


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> good point about andrew....he (like harry) was indulged by his mother (for being youngest and cute as a child?)



Edward is the youngest!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Toby93 said:


> Why do Instagram links show up as broken?  If you click on it, it takes you to it.  Spencer Pratt has some strong feelings about H&M



What exactly is he trying to say?  She locked in a hotel room for 3 days?  Weird.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Why do Instagram links show up as broken?  If you click on it, it takes you to it.  Spencer Pratt has some strong feelings about H&M




I don't know. So many rumours of the same direction. It's not necessarily one polite company would pick only because they dislike someone.


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> What exactly is he trying to say?  She locked in a hotel room for 3 days?  Weird.


He's trying to say she's a professional at sex.


----------



## Lodpah

My question to these two: what is the world supposed to do with all the information they are putting out? 

Are we to bow down to them and have the world sympathize and apologize to them? SMH

Enough of your head cannons Meghan! And you too Hawwy.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> good point about andrew....he (like harry) was indulged by his mother (for being youngest and cute as a child?)


He was QEII's favourite first fair-haired and blue-eyed son.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> He was QEII's favourite first fair-haired and blue-eyed son.


too bad he got worse with age


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Everything he has been doing lately shows his distain for his family. I wonder when the last time was he has had a private conversation with his father. I think they stopped communicating even before he and William did. It makes sense because Harry cannot be trusted not to record them.


agree it is about the FAMILY.
The scripted video kitchen scene about JASON KNAUPF communication with court, morphs into a story about he (Jason) works for YOUR BROTHER (William)


----------



## papertiger

sdkitty said:


> good point about andrew....he (like harry) was indulged by his mother (for being youngest and cute as a child?)



Andrew wasn't the youngest for long.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Andrew seems to have been slightly bitter. Also the Danish former #2 (who also happens to be "blessed" with a milder version of Ghoul...no reports she mistreats him, but a troublemaker insanely jealous of Crown Princess Mary).



For a long time Anne was the 'spare'.

I think Harry was a double-act with his brother for too long.

Plus, I think William having a family of his own ignited the spark of jealous. Harry could kid himself when #3. All he had to do was wait till his elders 'fell off their perches' and he could climb. Once William had a family, I think reality began to dawn (George 2013. Charlotte 2015... ) he was heading for demotion (especially with girls/women being counted). That's why he _had_ to find a mate. Not for nothing did Harry exclaim that in 2016 he discovered  "There's a hierarchy of the family". Nothing to do with MegZZ, just a realisation that it didn't matter what he did, who he would marry, he would be phased out of the Royals eventually.

Will was going to be King, but Harry seriously thought, cheeky chappy, he'd always be the more beloved by the British public.

Stupid really. He was mid-30s and he would have easily had at least the next 25 years of rolling in clover as a working Royal. Not many people get a house, job, clothes, transport, endless privilege, you name it all their life. Yet his paranoia and ego meant he already started hating his brother's family just for existing. He was totally eaten up inside. I think this is why all the (over) emphasis on 'my (his) family' like no one ever had one before. It's 'his family' against Will's.


----------



## gracekelly

Here is a question.  Will he or won't he if he is invited, and might he have a hissy in front of the entire world by refusing to do it if he is present?









						Will Prince Harry swear allegiance to the king if he attends coronation?
					

As a royal duke, Harry may have to publicly swear allegiance to his father after rocky relations between the new king and his youngest son.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## gracekelly

Harry and Meghan have become a 'one-trick pony'
					

Harry and Meghan's repeated complaints about the Royal Family may have made them a 'one-trick pony… due for the glue factory', according to the Hollywood bible Variety.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




_Harry and Meghan's repeated complaints about the Royal Family may have made them a 'one-trick pony… *due for the glue factory', *according to the Hollywood bible Variety. _


----------



## tiktok

gracekelly said:


> Harry and Meghan have become a 'one-trick pony'
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan's repeated complaints about the Royal Family may have made them a 'one-trick pony… due for the glue factory', according to the Hollywood bible Variety.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Harry and Meghan's repeated complaints about the Royal Family may have made them a 'one-trick pony… *due for the glue factory', *according to the Hollywood bible Variety. _


Here’s the original story:


			archive.ph
		


Hollywood is kinda done with them.


----------



## Debbini

gracekelly said:


> Here is a question.  Will he or won't he if he is invited, and might he have a hissy in front of the entire world by refusing to do it if he is present?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince Harry swear allegiance to the king if he attends coronation?
> 
> 
> As a royal duke, Harry may have to publicly swear allegiance to his father after rocky relations between the new king and his youngest son.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


I see an illness coming up in their future about that time.


----------



## gracekelly

Debbini said:


> I see an illness coming up in their future about that time.


Severe indigestion.


----------



## csshopper

LOVE IT: Suckesses,  Wipe the Netflix residue smirks off your snarky faces:

      “Variety,” the publication Mememe slobbers over as an (Z level) actress craving  attention in the Industry opines you may be a “one trick (double entendres?)pony“. ready for the glue factory. This one could lead to crockery crashing that cleans out cabinets!

       King Charles has just announced his appointment of :
           (1) Camilla Colonel of the Grenadier Guards,
           (2) Prince William Colonel of the Welsh Guards, and
           (3) Catherine Colonel of the Irish Guards.
            Haz who?

         The Trooping of the Colors next June will be a fabulous family affair.

          All this in a week including the RF Lunch at Windsor, Catherine’s Carol Concert Christmas Eve, the Royal Family gathering at Sandringham, including the annual family walk to Church on Christmas Day, and King Charles’ first Christmas address. Even Fergie will be present!

All celebrated without the toxic duo to dampen spirits and by the Royals who all loved and honored the Queen and who will be united in sorely missing her.


----------



## chaneljewel

I will never watch the garbage H and M posted on Netflix.  It’s just a rant of their poor, pitiful me attitudes.  All families have issues but most of us just deal with it within our family circle.  Of course H and M want to make the family sound horrible as they’re being paid millions of dollars. What’s unfortunate about it, is it is twisted, deceptive lies about family moments.  Ignoring these two brats is the best message the royals can send to them.


----------



## xincinsin

gracekelly said:


> Here is a question.  Will he or won't he if he is invited, and might he have a hissy in front of the entire world by refusing to do it if he is present?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince Harry swear allegiance to the king if he attends coronation?
> 
> 
> As a royal duke, Harry may have to publicly swear allegiance to his father after rocky relations between the new king and his youngest son.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Zed still has time to get "heavily pregnant"  
Maybe they will suddenly throw an eco-warrior fit and demand that Charles include them via Zoom, then experience a techno glitch at crucial portions of the ceremony. That will allow them to avoid pledging allegiance as well as incorporate pre-recorded Zed fashion shows and dramatic facial contortions.


----------



## papertiger

Debbini said:


> I see an illness coming up in their future about that time.





csshopper said:


> LOVE IT: Suckesses,  Wipe the Netflix residue smirks off your snarky faces:
> 
> “Variety,” the publication Mememe slobbers over as an (Z level) actress craving  attention in the Industry opines you may be a “one trick (double entendres?)pony“. ready for the glue factory. This one could lead to crockery crashing that cleans out cabinets!
> 
> King Charles has just announced his appointment of :
> (1) Camilla Colonel of the Grenadier Guards,
> (2) Prince William Colonel of the Welsh Guards, and
> (3) Catherine Colonel of the Irish Guards.
> Haz who?
> 
> The Trooping of the Colors next June will be a fabulous family affair.
> 
> All this in a week including the RF Lunch at Windsor, Catherine’s Carol Concert Christmas Eve, the Royal Family gathering at Sandringham, including the annual family walk to Church on Christmas Day, and King Charles’ first Christmas address. Even Fergie will be present!
> 
> All celebrated without the toxic duo to dampen spirits and by the Royals who all loved and honored the Queen and who will be united in sorely missing her.



I can't imagine what KC and the others could say to H&M or vice versa at this point on Christmas Day - even via Zoom.


----------



## joleenzy

Hi everyone. I’m new to this thread.

My opinion about MM hasn’t changed since the first time I saw her. I find her to be calculated, manipulative and a professional victim. I had a bad feeling about her from the start and my feeling never fails me. Alot of things are very off about her. I was proven to be right. My family had to agree with me after some time.

The netflix documentary is a disgrace and absolutely disgusting. Why would you choose to move to LA out of all places in the world if you want to live a quiet life? If they were serious about their claims they would have moved to a quiet village somewhere. LA is the most paparazzi filled place in America. 

She tries to be Diana so bad, it’s laughable. 

I’m excited to see all the other posts on here from now on. 

Happy Holidays everyone.


----------



## marietouchet

gracekelly said:


> Here is a question.  Will he or won't he if he is invited, and might he have a hissy in front of the entire world by refusing to do it if he is present?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will Prince Harry swear allegiance to the king if he attends coronation?
> 
> 
> As a royal duke, Harry may have to publicly swear allegiance to his father after rocky relations between the new king and his youngest son.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Yesterday BP issued a list for TROOPING THE COLOR, Camilla and Catherine get to be heads of various guards, Andrew has been removed. This is just reinforcement that H and A have no status. So, H and A can have hissy fits ahead of time. If they come, they will be quiet, sullen, supervised and medicated.

MY PREDICTION: H and MM will be invited to coronation and TtC. It will be a last minute decision on their part, like Jubilee. 
A will also be invited as a peer of the realm. He will be there quietly. 
THAT is all contingent upon Sunak not being able to act before the coronation and TtC.

Aside: Will we see the ladies in military dress ??


----------



## CarryOn2020

papertiger said:


> I can't imagine what KC and the others could say to H&M or vice versa at this point on Christmas Day - even via Zoom.


“we miss you”


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Yesterday BP issued a list for TROOPING THE COLOR, Camilla and Catherine get to be heads of various guards, Andrew has been removed. This is just reinforcement that H and A have no status. So, H and A can have hissy fits ahead of time. If they come, they will be quiet, sullen, supervised and medicated.
> 
> MY PREDICTION: H and MM will be invited to coronation and TtC. It will be a last minute decision on their part, like Jubilee.
> A will also be invited as a peer of the realm. He will be there quietly.
> THAT is all contingent upon Sunak not being able to act before the coronation and TtC.
> 
> Aside: Will we see the ladies in military dress ??




I agree, they will be invited _[and seated in the back]_ - always.  The BRF has impeccable manners, knows how to rise above the noise and elegantly carries on.


----------



## Sharont2305

marietouchet said:


> Yesterday BP issued a list for TROOPING THE COLOR, Camilla and Catherine get to be heads of various guards, Andrew has been removed. This is just reinforcement that H and A have no status. So, H and A can have hissy fits ahead of time. If they come, they will be quiet, sullen, supervised and medicated.
> 
> MY PREDICTION: H and MM will be invited to coronation and TtC. It will be a last minute decision on their part, like Jubilee.
> A will also be invited as a peer of the realm. He will be there quietly.
> THAT is all contingent upon Sunak not being able to act before the coronation and TtC.
> 
> Aside: Will we see the ladies in military dress ??


Those appointments are from now, not for Trooping the Colour. 
Coronation wear will not be military dress. The last one it was 'ballgowns' and tiaras for the ladies. I wonder if it'll be the same this time?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

I agree with Piers, follow the money…   

_Sky News Australia host Piers Morgan says the reason *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will turn up for King Charles’ coronation is “because that’s where the money is*”.

“Why would two people who despise the monarchy and everything it stands for … why on earth would they turn up for the coronation?” he said.

“Because that’s where the money is – if they’re seen at the coronation, next to all the major royal players, that is gold dust for their next Netflix series.

“And there, right there, is the hypocrisy that underpins everything these two do.”_










						Harry and Meghan will attend King Charles’ coronation ‘because that’s where the money is’
					

Sky News Australia host Piers Morgan says the reason Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will turn up for King Charles’ coronation is “because that’s where the money is”.  “Why would two people who despise the monarchy and everything it stands for … why on earth would they turn up for the...




					www.skynews.com.au


----------



## Chanbal

It looks like hypocrisy detectors are flying off the charts…


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It looks like *hypocrisy detectors *are flying off the charts…



The ultimate Christmas/Hanukkah present


----------



## sdkitty

Sharon Osborne speaks out against the grifters








						Sharon Osbourne Issues Warning To Meghan Markle After Calling ‘Harry & Meghan’ A ‘Disrespectful Whine Fest’: ‘Move On’
					

This post has been updated since it was originally published to include recent facts Piers Morgan isn’t the only one with an opinion on Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s Netflix documentary, Harry & Meghan. His good friend Sharon Osbourne, 7...




					currently.att.yahoo.com


----------



## gracekelly

tiktok said:


> Here’s the original story:
> 
> 
> archive.ph
> 
> 
> 
> Hollywood is kinda done with them.


Back in the day Louella Patsons and Hedda Hopper and Liz Smith  would have had a field  day with Migraine. Now it is up to Cindy Adams to do the deed.


----------



## scarlet555

Chanbal said:


> It looks like hypocrisy detectors are flying off the charts…



FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Load of crap's got to go...


----------



## scarlet555

and BTW, absolutely do not want to see those two idiots near England during the coronation, I know how they are , staying nearby in case they get a last minute pity call...  they need to be banned from England, is there any ground for treason?  lol


----------



## CarryOn2020

_Nepo babies _ 

Prince Harry and Meghan are named among world's leading 'nepo babies' by US magazines profiling rich stars who enjoy gilded lifestyles after a leg up from their families​
*New York Magazine and stablemate Vulture have branded couple nepo babies*
*Harry makes the final shortlist for readers to decide on their overall favourite *
*Duchess of Sussex is 'child of the well connected' because of her father Thomas*
*The Cut describes their vindicating explanations for every slight as 'exhausting' *
*Variety claimed Harry and Meghan become a 'one-trick pony' with complaints *









						Prince Harry and Meghan are named among world's leading 'nepo babies'
					

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are weathering a storm from some of their favoured US publications, who have become critical of their constant attacks on the Royal Family.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## jehaga

Montecito firefighters must be at their house round-the-clock from all the BURN! they are receiving even from media sources that were not expected to be hostile. But then, they are so shamelessly thick-skinned and utterly self-unaware that they may be basking in the enormous attention, however negative, that has been heaped on them since the Queen's passing.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Meghan's coat of arms popped up on reddit today. I had forgotten all about that little tidbit
Also in Wiki, they show a change in 2022 on the more schematic version, to make the crowns match Dianas coat of arms rather than Catherines. Not sure if there is anything to that as I am not sure which is "official." 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex.svg

But seriously, they made her a coat of arms for heavens sake. 
Sit down already. 









						REVEALED: All the details behind Meghan Markle's Coat of Arms
					

MEGHAN Markle's Coat of Arms features the Duchess of Sussex most treasured elements from her hometown in California as well as her passion for communication and public speaking, a BBC expert revealed.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## csshopper

CobaltBlu said:


> Meghan's coat of arms popped up on reddit today. I had forgotten all about that little tidbit
> Also in Wiki, they show a change in 2022 on the more schematic version, to make the crowns match Dianas coat of arms rather than Catherines. Not sure if there is anything to that as I am not sure which is "official."
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex.svg
> 
> But seriously, they made her a coat of arms for heavens sake.
> Sit down already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: All the details behind Meghan Markle's Coat of Arms
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle's Coat of Arms features the Duchess of Sussex most treasured elements from her hometown in California as well as her passion for communication and public speaking, a BBC expert revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


To be representational of the Douchess it should be bordered with flames,  “Liar Liar Pants On Fire” emphasizing the hypocrisy of her “truths”.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I’m signing off for the holidays everyone so a very happy Hanukkah, a very merry Christmas to you and a very happy new year.


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> I agree with Piers, follow the money…
> 
> _Sky News Australia host Piers Morgan says the reason *Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will turn up for King Charles’ coronation is “because that’s where the money is*”.
> 
> “Why would two people who despise the monarchy and everything it stands for … why on earth would they turn up for the coronation?” he said.
> 
> “Because that’s where the money is – if they’re seen at the coronation, next to all the major royal players, that is gold dust for their next Netflix series.
> 
> “And there, right there, is the hypocrisy that underpins everything these two do.”_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry and Meghan will attend King Charles’ coronation ‘because that’s where the money is’
> 
> 
> Sky News Australia host Piers Morgan says the reason Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will turn up for King Charles’ coronation is “because that’s where the money is”.  “Why would two people who despise the monarchy and everything it stands for … why on earth would they turn up for the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.skynews.com.au


He nailed it.  Turning up, if invited, shows that they are still royal adjacent.  That usually means people want to associate with you, and that of course means bucks in the bank, however after the whine fest of the Netflix series, that is more doubtful.  Things are getting so bad that they now have the temerity to say that the series didn't go the way they would have wanted.  How stupid do they think we all are?  It went exactly as they wanted, perhaps with the exception of editing out some insults here and there at The Queen.  Now I want to see them attempt to step back on their call for an apology.  That would be very amusing.


----------



## gracekelly

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m signing off for the holidays everyone so a very happy Hanukkah, a very merry Christmas to you and a very happy new year.


Same to you and yours!


----------



## CobaltBlu

jelliedfeels said:


> I’m signing off for the holidays everyone so a very happy Hanukkah, a very merry Christmas to you and a very happy new year.


Same to you!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Same to you!


SAME TO ALL VERY MERRY HOLIDAYS, BE SAFE AND WARM , HUGS TO ALL


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> All this in a week including the *RF Lunch at Windsor*, Catherine’s Carol Concert Christmas Eve, the Royal Family gathering at Sandringham, including the annual family walk to Church on Christmas Day, and King Charles’ first Christmas address. Even Fergie will be present!



I've been thinking about that lunch for several days, it seems like such a fabulous idea as three days are not enough to see all extended family (and to be honest, by day 3 I want to lie on the couch in my pyjamas watching TV and eating leftovers, not get dressed and attend yet another occasion).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> _“Because that’s where the money is – if they’re seen at the coronation, next to all the major royal players, that is gold dust for their next Netflix series._



I don't know, at this point it's painfully obvious they are the paria royals.


----------



## marietouchet

CobaltBlu said:


> Meghan's coat of arms popped up on reddit today. I had forgotten all about that little tidbit
> Also in Wiki, they show a change in 2022 on the more schematic version, to make the crowns match Dianas coat of arms rather than Catherines. Not sure if there is anything to that as I am not sure which is "official."
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex.svg
> 
> But seriously, they made her a coat of arms for heavens sake.
> Sit down already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: All the details behind Meghan Markle's Coat of Arms
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle's Coat of Arms features the Duchess of Sussex most treasured elements from her hometown in California as well as her passion for communication and public speaking, a BBC expert revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I see a minor difference in the Maltese cross tops/finials at the ends of the coronets, the 2018 originals were in relief/folded/bent, the new 2022 ones are straighter. Second pic is of the 2018 COA.
From a heraldic point of view, I dont know which is correct. There are heraldic conventions for representations of symbols.

You can compare to the crosses on the George IV state diadem - those crosses are in relief not flat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_IV_State_Diadem








						RCIN 31702 - The Diamond Diadem
					

A silver and gold-lined diadem with an openwork frame set transparent with diamonds; narrow band edged with pearls, surmounted by four crosses-pattée, the front cross set with a pale yellow brilliant, and four sprays representing the national emblems of England, Ireland and Scotland; roses...




					www.rct.uk


----------



## CarryOn2020

Love, joy, peace to everyone!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Oh dear, what to do?


----------



## pinky7129

I’m just finishing the show on Netflix. All i can focus on is oh god, they walk barefoot outside everywhere and their feet get so dirty…. And then they’re barefoot inside… from the outside…


----------



## sdkitty

news from one of M's ghosted former friends


			Meghan Markle’s Former Friend Believes Prince Harry Will Wake Up and Realize It Was a ‘Massive Mistake’ to Marry the Duchess


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One can only hope.


----------



## marietouchet

pinky7129 said:


> I’m just finishing the show on Netflix. All i can focus on is oh god, they walk barefoot outside everywhere and their feet get so dirty…. And then they’re barefoot inside… from the outside…


Barefoot in the chicken coop ?


----------



## scarlet555

CarryOn2020 said:


> Oh dear, what to do?



NOooooo, not the new set(China) from Amazon!


----------



## bag-mania

sdkitty said:


> news from one of M's ghosted former friends
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle’s Former Friend Believes Prince Harry Will Wake Up and Realize It Was a ‘Massive Mistake’ to Marry the Duchess


He may already have realized that but it’s too late. He hitched his wagon to Meghan and there is no going back if he changes his mind. Harry burned bridges with his family and with the British citizens that can never be repaired.


----------



## xincinsin

CobaltBlu said:


> Meghan's coat of arms popped up on reddit today. I had forgotten all about that little tidbit
> Also in Wiki, they show a change in 2022 on the more schematic version, to make the crowns match Dianas coat of arms rather than Catherines. Not sure if there is anything to that as I am not sure which is "official."
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex.svg
> 
> But seriously, they made her a coat of arms for heavens sake.
> Sit down already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> REVEALED: All the details behind Meghan Markle's Coat of Arms
> 
> 
> MEGHAN Markle's Coat of Arms features the Duchess of Sussex most treasured elements from her hometown in California as well as her passion for communication and public speaking, a BBC expert revealed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


If the change happened this year, would it be Sussex-initiated? Who else is using her coat of arms? Surely it's not some courtier doing a "standardisation" project on "Crowns as depicted in Coats of Arms".


----------



## pinky7129

marietouchet said:


> Barefoot in the chicken coop ?


Is they were… yuck


----------



## Lodpah

I think MM and Harry are attacking Camilla now on Radar. It’s getting nasty!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials​








						'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials
					

Queen Camilla plotted to take down bride-to-be Meghan Markle before she tied the knot with Prince Harry, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.




					radaronline.com


----------



## xincinsin

CarryOn2020 said:


> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla plotted to take down bride-to-be Meghan Markle before she tied the knot with Prince Harry, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


Are they trying to pack as much nastiness in before 2023? So that they have more to reconcile over? <face-palm>


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla plotted to take down bride-to-be Meghan Markle before she tied the knot with Prince Harry, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


That sounds like total fiction and may not have come from them. Radar Online doesn’t have much credibility.


----------



## xincinsin

bag-mania said:


> That sounds like total fiction and may not have come from them. Radar Online doesn’t have much credibility.


True. Especially this sentence: 



But they did give me a photo to add to my collex of fake expressions.


----------



## bag-mania

xincinsin said:


> True. Especially this sentence:
> View attachment 5676140
> 
> 
> But they did give me a photo to add to my collex of fake expressions.
> View attachment 5676141


She heard something oh so funny!   

Her acting is horrible.


----------



## Lodpah

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'lack substance and detail'; duchess 'not thrilled' with final Netflix edit
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle discussed circumstances behind their decision to leave the royal family in 2020, which included racism accusations.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Lodpah

I love how Netflix to deflect from actual viewers and instead wrote viewing hours. Everything is so extra with these two dimwits.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> That sounds like total fiction and may not have come from them. Radar Online doesn’t have much credibility.


Apparently Radar isn’t aware tha Queen Consort Camilla is a commoner and a divorcée Duh!


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry 'lack substance and detail'; duchess 'not thrilled' with final Netflix edit
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle discussed circumstances behind their decision to leave the royal family in 2020, which included racism accusations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Wow! News on yahoo went a long way, this is certainly not a favorable article. I joined this thread because of the zillions of annoying headlines about sandwich donations and other ridiculous photo-ops.


----------



## Chanbal

One more episode of the Nefl*x reality show, I believe it's the last one.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> One more episode of the Nefl*x reality show, I believe it's the last one.




What worries me is that they pull children into their lies and fakery.

That is not only going to be confusing at moments, but very messed-up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla plotted to take down bride-to-be Meghan Markle before she tied the knot with Prince Harry, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com



Trying to be the voice of reason, how likely is it that generally chill Camilla went against The Queen and Charles to destroy Ghoul? Right, I thought so.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

bag-mania said:


> She heard something oh so funny!
> 
> Her acting is horrible.



The stupid faces she pulls really get to me. So grating.


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Trying to be the voice of reason, how likely is it that generally chill Camilla went against The Queen and Charles to destroy Ghoul? Right, I thought so.


Exactly, highly unlikely.  But, here’s the point — _this story serves their narrative perfectly_.  ‘See, we really are victims,’ so say H&M. Another example of “they can say anything because the palace will not respond.”


----------



## marietouchet

papertiger said:


> What worries me is that they pull children into their lies and fakery.
> 
> That is not only going to be confusing at moments, but very messed-up.
> 
> View attachment 5676227


Must have come from ophthalmologist , dilated pupils


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

CarryOn2020 said:


> Exactly, highly unlikely.  But, here’s the point — _this story serves their narrative perfectly_.  ‘See, we really are victims,’ so say H&M. Another example of “they can say anything because the palace will not respond.”


Yeah, it serves their “us against the establishment” story that gullible people buy into so easily.


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'She Declared War': Queen Camilla Plotted To Take Down Bride-To-Be Meghan Markle Before Prince Harry Nuptials
> 
> 
> Queen Camilla plotted to take down bride-to-be Meghan Markle before she tied the knot with Prince Harry, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


this seems like BS to me


----------



## Kevinaxx

sdkitty said:


> this seems like BS to me


If anything it’s the other way around. Camilla and Kate has what she wants, the ultimate seat and to be Queen.

I have a feeling she’s throw Harry under the bus to get what she wants but he’s her meal ticket.  He’s already helped her cement a place in history, no matter what happens now or in the future.

But she’s a climber and never satisfied until she wins it all but deep down I think she knows she will never win it all and so she’s happy to plot around like life is a huge game with no care of who gets hurt.


----------



## sdkitty

sdkitty said:


> she grew up in a regular house in the suburbs of LA.  I wonder what her home was like before she met Harry.  What's wrong with a cottage?  not worthy of their magnificence apparently


someone said she claims to have lived in an apartment above a garage with Doria at one time and in an apartment with her dad.  IDK if I believe that.  Thomas had a pretty good job; I would have thought she grew up in a house.  Is this like the story about going to Sizzler? (not that there's anything wrong with Sizzler and living in an apartment isn't necessarily that bad either)


----------



## Chanbal

Is Hazz going to get this for TW?


----------



## Chanbal

Why is she almost shouting 'blue, blue, blue'?


----------



## Chanbal

Very interesting article!   


*…If the queen represented an old set of values, Harry and Meghan best embody the new era. *_The two generations of royals could not be more different. *Out goes the stiff upper lip, in comes public emoting. ‘Never complain, never explain’ has been replaced by a six-hour Netflix ‘pity party’. Service to others has been redefined as sharing mental-health struggles. Where the queen spoke of nationhood, the Sussexes speak of victimhood.* T*he queen kept her cancer diagnosis secret until her death. We read about Meghan’s miscarriage in her column for the New York Times.*

The queen’s commitment to serve represented more than just an individual pledge. It captured a generational ethos. Harry and Meghan embody the elite assumptions of their age. There’s the identitarianism, masquerading as anti-racism. _*By presenting herself as a victim of racism – on, it must be said, rather spurious grounds – Meghan has gained status and authority. And in marrying Meghan, Harry is no longer the soldier who introduced us to his ‘little Paki friend’, but a warrior against racism…*









						The new aristocracy of victimhood
					

The death of the queen this year marked the beginning of the new identitarian age.




					www.spiked-online.com


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Is Hazz going to get this for TW?
> 
> 
> View attachment 5676344



they can't seem to find any money to give to charity so it would be a bad look for him to buy something like this


----------



## Toby93




----------



## marietouchet

Chanbal said:


> Very interesting article!
> View attachment 5676346
> 
> *…If the queen represented an old set of values, Harry and Meghan best embody the new era. *_The two generations of royals could not be more different. *Out goes the stiff upper lip, in comes public emoting. ‘Never complain, never explain’ has been replaced by a six-hour Netflix ‘pity party’. Service to others has been redefined as sharing mental-health struggles. Where the queen spoke of nationhood, the Sussexes speak of victimhood.* T*he queen kept her cancer diagnosis secret until her death. We read about Meghan’s miscarriage in her column for the New York Times.*
> 
> The queen’s commitment to serve represented more than just an individual pledge. It captured a generational ethos. Harry and Meghan embody the elite assumptions of their age. There’s the identitarianism, masquerading as anti-racism. _*By presenting herself as a victim of racism – on, it must be said, rather spurious grounds – Meghan has gained status and authority. And in marrying Meghan, Harry is no longer the soldier who introduced us to his ‘little Paki friend’, but a warrior against racism…*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The new aristocracy of victimhood
> 
> 
> The death of the queen this year marked the beginning of the new identitarian age.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.spiked-online.com


I get it !!!! H needs reparations for a millennium of damage done by BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> I get it !!!! H needs reparations for a millennium of damage done by BRF.


Take a number and get in line.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> I get it !!!! H needs reparations for a millennium of damage done by BRF.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a number and get in line.


Yep, take a number. We may also need reparations from the damage caused by their multiple PR articles. As far as I recall, @gracekelly mentioned something about the risk of them lowering our IQs.


----------



## Nutashha

They sure are dreamy!

Harry and Meghan Want a Formal Apology from the Palace​


----------



## EmilyM111

Nutashha said:


> They sure are dreamy!
> 
> Harry and Meghan Want a Formal Apology from the Palace​
> View attachment 5676447


...followed by a cheque


----------



## csshopper

oops, meant as a Reply to post #124,639 from sdkitty

A house in Woodland Hills in the San Fernando Valley area of Los Angeles County has been mentioned multiple times as the family residence, including references to Doper Doria sitting on the front lawn smoking weed.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93




----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> oops, meant as a Reply to post #124,639 from sdkitty
> 
> A house in Woodland Hills in the San Fernando Valley area of Los Angeles County has been mentioned multiple times as the family residence, including references to Doper Doria sitting on the front lawn smoking weed.


I think that Doria had an apartment at some point.  Saying that it was over the garage is a bit much.  There are multiple buildings that have carports as the first floor and the apartments start on the second.  This was problematic during the Northridge quake when a building collapsed with the second floor dropping to the first with the carport.I only know of one building where that happened. I would not call that living over the garage.


----------



## gracekelly

Toby93 said:


>



The family has had color directives many times for dressing.  Meghan never adhered to them as evidenced by the Prince Louis christening picture.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> I think that Doria had an apartment at some point.  Saying that it was over the garage is a bit much.  There are multiple buildings that have carports as the first floor and the apartments start on the second.  This was problematic during the Northridge quake when a building collapsed with the second floor dropping to the first with the carport.I only know of one building where that happened. I would not call that living over the garage.
> 
> View attachment 5676576


many people live in worse conditions than an apartment.  I've lived in apartments and would be fine doing it again.  she apparently used it as an example of how she came up the hard way


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> oops, meant as a Reply to post #124,639 from sdkitty
> 
> A house in Woodland Hills in the San Fernando Valley area of Los Angeles County has been mentioned multiple times as the family residence, including references to Doper Doria sitting on the front lawn smoking weed.


thanks.....I'll give doria the benefit of the doubt on that one


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> thanks.....I'll give doria the benefit of the doubt on that one


Tom Bower’s included it in his book. Thomas talks about his surprise at her level of pot usage and included the front yard comment.


----------



## sdkitty

csshopper said:


> Tom Bower’s included it in his book. Thomas talks about his surprise at her level of pot usage and included the front yard comment.


so he's credible?  I don't know - not saying he isn't
As far as smoking pot, I don't indulge but it's not necessarily a bad thing....I guess if you go around stoned all the time and can't perform your normal household duties or whatever....


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> many people live in worse conditions than an apartment.  I've lived in apartments and would be fine doing it again.  she apparently used it as an example of how she came up the hard way


Yes, it was a very hard childhood.  Never once going to public school and only private schools.  Dance and acting lessons.  A good size home with a backyard to play in.  Medical care, courtesy of her father's excellent insurance plans through work.  Rides in limos. Spending time after school on TV sets.  Saturday lunches at Musso & Frank (never a cheap place to eat.) Yikes, could it be worse that that? Oh right The Sizzler!  Plenty of kids would have loved to eat at The Sizzler if their parents could have afforded it.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> so he's credible?  I don't know - not saying he isn't
> As far as smoking pot, I don't indulge but it's not necessarily a bad thing....I guess if you go around stoned all the time and can't perform your normal household duties or whatever....


Or you find it necessary to leave the family home and your child to pursue it in the portion of the state where it is grown.  Sorry, that is not normal and is getting into addiction territory.


----------



## sdkitty

this from CNN....at last US media seeing them realistically
Love the ending of the article 








						Opinion: Why 'Harry & Meghan' is a royal disappointment | CNN
					

What we learn from 'Harry & Meghan' is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look, writes Peggy Drexler. The fatal flaw for the couple and their series is in thinking they can...




					www.cnn.com
				




*In fact, if “Harry & Meghan” is a ploy to get people truly disinterested in their comings and goings, well, that’s the one area where they may have succeeded. “I just really want to get to the other side of all of this,” says Meghan to the camera in the opening minutes of the first episode. With “Harry & Meghan,” she may finally get her wish.*


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> this from CNN....at last US media seeing them realistically
> Love the ending of the article
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: Why 'Harry & Meghan' is a royal disappointment | CNN
> 
> 
> What we learn from 'Harry & Meghan' is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look, writes Peggy Drexler. The fatal flaw for the couple and their series is in thinking they can...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *In fact, if “Harry & Meghan” is a ploy to get people truly disinterested in their comings and goings, well, that’s the one area where they may have succeeded. “I just really want to get to the other side of all of this,” says Meghan to the camera in the opening minutes of the first episode. With “Harry & Meghan,” she may finally get her wish.*


This reminds me of one of DH's favorite expressions..._be careful what you wish for._


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> This reminds me of one of DH's favorite expressions..._be careful what you wish for._


I doubt that wish was sincere


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

gracekelly said:


> The family has had color directives many times for dressing.  Meghan never adhered to them as evidenced by the Prince Louis christening picture.



I think we have completely misunderstood the poor thing. She didn't want to give the BRF the middle finger, she was the only person present not allowed to wear pale blue. There.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> many people live in worse conditions than an apartment.  I've lived in apartments and would be fine doing it again.  she apparently used it as an example of how she came up the hard way



Edo sells VERY nice...apartments in London.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I think we have completely misunderstood the poor thing. She didn't want to give the BRF the middle finger, she was the only person present not allowed to wear pale blue. There.


Someone asked earlier today if Meghan would have to salute Catherine as she was now the honorary Col of the Irish Guards.  My thought at that moment was that if Meghan saluted her, it would be the middle finger salute!  lololol!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Edo sells VERY nice...apartments in London



He has great taste.  I am betting on his building a beautiful home for his family.


----------



## csshopper

sdkitty said:


> so he's credible?  I don't know - not saying he isn't
> As far as smoking pot, I don't indulge but it's not necessarily a bad thing....I guess if you go around stoned all the time and can't perform your normal household duties or whatever....


To me, it’s the issue that at the time marijuana was illegal and participating in the illegal growing/harvesting of it along with openly flaunting the law with what seems to be blatant use of it is not being a good parental role model. Plus walking out on her daughter for years of her life.


----------



## Chanbal

Wow!










						The trouble with Harry and Meghan
					

Beijing and Moscow, gleefully, are on “Team Harry and Meghan,” and decidedly for self-serving and nefarious reasons. Intentionally or not, the two sidelined British royals, while luxuriously decamp…




					thehill.com


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal




----------



## mrsinsyder

If Doria were a convicted felon we’d easily be able to find proof. This rumor has gone around for years with nothing to show for it. Even Tom Bower didn’t go there and he dug as deep as anyone.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


>



Doria is free to refer to herself as a social worker. It’s not like she has to pass a test or prove it to anyone.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Doria is free to refer to herself as a social worker. It’s not like she has to pass a test or prove it to anyone.


It isn’t that simple and she didn’t become fully qualified.


*License Requirements*

Education. Master's degree in Social Work from an accredited school of social work. ... 
Additional Coursework. ... 
Register as an ASW. ... 
Live Scan. ... 
Criminal Background Check. ... 
Take and Pass the California Law & Ethics Exam. ... 
Accrue Supervised Experience. ... 
Take and Pass the ASWB Clinical Exam.


----------



## bag-mania

mrsinsyder said:


> If Doria were a convicted felon we’d easily be able to find proof. This rumor has gone around for years with nothing to show for it. Even Tom Bower didn’t go there and he dug as deep as anyone.


I don’t believe Bower would put that in his book even if he had found proof. Doria wasn’t his subject and it would be mean and serve no purpose to drag her. He would have been criticized.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## bag-mania

gracekelly said:


> It isn’t that simple and she didn’t become fully qualified.
> 
> 
> *License Requirements*
> 
> Education. Master's degree in Social Work from an accredited school of social work. ...
> Additional Coursework. ...
> Register as an ASW. ...
> Live Scan. ...
> Criminal Background Check. ...
> Take and Pass the California Law & Ethics Exam. ...
> Accrue Supervised Experience. ...
> Take and Pass the ASWB Clinical Exam.


She didn’t work as one very long as I recall, maybe only a few years. I got the impression whatever job she had been doing for the mental health facility is what was called social work.


----------



## bag-mania

This must be their plan for making a living. They’ll take their Netflix money and “executive produce” other Netflix shows. Then repeat the process to make more money.



			Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Have a New Netflix Project: What We Know About 'Live to Lead' | Parade: Entertainment, Recipes, Health, Life, Holidays


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga




----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

gracekelly said:


> It isn’t that simple and she didn’t become fully qualified.
> 
> 
> *License Requirements*
> 
> Education. Master's degree in Social Work from an accredited school of social work. ...
> Additional Coursework. ...
> Register as an ASW. ...
> Live Scan. ...
> Criminal Background Check. ...
> Take and Pass the California Law & Ethics Exam. ...
> Accrue Supervised Experience. ...
> Take and Pass the ASWB Clinical Exam.



Those are LCSW requirements. BSWs and MSWs can work in CA without being licensed. 




mrsinsyder said:


> If Doria were a convicted felon we’d easily be able to find proof. This rumor has gone around for years with nothing to show for it. Even Tom Bower didn’t go there and he dug as deep as anyone.



I mean does anyone think Samantha Markle wouldn't be all over that if there as any truth to it at all?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

More competition for the toxic two.  They will never win, not even in the same league.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Notice where he places his hands.  Love Princess Anne.


----------



## limom

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> View attachment 5676726



What does this woman who looks like she minds her own business have done to elicit such a vicious and totally unfounded rumor? And even if she was to be a felon so what?
Nuts.


----------



## CarryOn2020

The King removes Andi from the palace.  Guessing H&M are on the removal list, too.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Sweet nod from the Abbey


----------



## papertiger

Happy holidays everyone, H&M lovers, critics and indifferents 

My gift to you all!


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> What does this woman who looks like she minds her own business have done to elicit such a vicious and totally unfounded rumor? And even if she was to be a felon so what?
> Nuts.


Saw the graduation picture and thought - wow, cool .. Then the CSI part of me noted
1. 2011 photo pre BRF, pre Suits ? A long time ago before anyone was rich
2. USC - very Tony EXPENSIVE  place, I did my graduate work there, and the school is famous lol as the uni in the Hollywood mom scandal, Lori Laughlin paid to get daughter in there … D could have gone to the local community college instead at 1/10th the tuition

We hear the tear jerking stories of poverty and Sizzler then see photos that just don’t jive, photo would have blown past me if MM had not done the Sizzler story


----------



## marietouchet

CarryOn2020 said:


> Take a number and get in line.


BUT he is a Duke, so FIRST in line lol


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> Saw the graduation picture and thought - wow, cool .. Then the CSI part of me noted
> 1. 2011 photo pre BRF, pre Suits ? A long time ago before anyone was rich
> 2. USC - very Tony expensive place, I did my graduate work there, and the school is famous lol as the uni in the Hollywood mom scandal, Lori Laughlin paid to get daughter in there …
> 
> We here the tear jerking stories of poverty and Sizzler then see photos that just don’t jive, photo would have blown past me if MM had not done the Sizzler story


There is such a thing as student loans and scholarships.
What is the angle here?


----------



## marietouchet

limom said:


> There is such a thing as student loans and scholarships.
> What is the angle here?


USC is very hard to get into - they don’t take just anyone …
And a boatload of DEBT , there are cheaper universities
And a social worker has little prospect of being able to pay off the debt

PS yes, maybe D was just LUCKY  to get in (she had nice friends who  Wrote glowing recommendations ) and lucky be able to cope with Tuition (full academic scholarship due to good grades ?), a story at odds with the hardship saga told by MM


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Saw the graduation picture and thought - wow, cool .. Then the CSI part of me noted
> 1. 2011 photo pre BRF, pre Suits ? A long time ago before anyone was rich
> 2. USC - very Tony EXPENSIVE  place, I did my graduate work there, and the school is famous lol as the uni in the Hollywood mom scandal, Lori Laughlin paid to get daughter in there … D could have gone to the local community college instead at 1/10th the tuition
> 
> We here the tear jerking stories of poverty and Sizzler then see photos that just don’t jive, photo would have blown past me if MM had not done the Sizzler story


Yes, the lies go way back.  Most likely we will never get the truth on MM’s family, but most of us do see the through the bs.   They want wealth?  More power to them.  Those who have read a book or two know wealth does not buy happiness.  They want power?  Well, take a number and get in line


----------



## limom

marietouchet said:


> USC is very hard to get into - they don’t take just anyone …
> And a boatload of DEBT , there are cheaper universities
> And a social worker has little prospect of being able to pay off the debt


Are you saying that she did not attend at all, Ala Santos?
I don’t get the uproar at all.
It is her business.
And what do you mean they dont take just anyone????
Anyways, Happy Christmas to all


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the lies go way back.  Most likely we will never get the truth on MM’s family, but most of us do see the through the bs.   They want wealth?  More power to them.  Those who have read a book or two know wealth does not buy happiness.  They want power?  Well, take a number and get in line


Just so I understand…the lie is Doria did not graduate with an MSW in 2011?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

marietouchet said:


> Saw the graduation picture and thought - wow, cool .. Then the CSI part of me noted
> 1. 2011 photo pre BRF, pre Suits ? A long time ago before anyone was rich
> 2. USC - very Tony EXPENSIVE  place, I did my graduate work there, and the school is famous lol as the uni in the Hollywood mom scandal, Lori Laughlin paid to get daughter in there … D could have gone to the local community college instead at 1/10th the tuition
> 
> We hear the tear jerking stories of poverty and Sizzler then see photos that just don’t jive, photo would have blown past me if MM had not done the Sizzler story


I’m not sure I understand…why should she have gone to a community college? I have a similar MA from a “prestigious” (therefore expensive) university. I wanted the education, experience and contacts I knew I could only gain from such a program.

Also just FYI Suits premiered in 2011, I imagine MM was supporting herself by the time her mother was in graduate school.


----------



## Chanbal

marietouchet said:


> USC is very hard to get into - they don’t take just anyone …
> And a boatload of DEBT , there are cheaper universities
> And a social worker has little prospect of being able to pay off the debt
> 
> PS yes, maybe D was just LUCKY  to get in (she had nice friends who  Wrote glowing recommendations ) and lucky be able to cope with Tuition (full academic scholarship due to good grades ?), a story at odds with the hardship saga told by MM





CarryOn2020 said:


> Yes, the lies go way back.  Most likely we will never get the truth on MM’s family, but most of us do see the through the bs.   They want wealth?  More power to them.  Those who have read a book or two know wealth does not buy happiness.  They want power?  Well, take a number and get in line


Living in LA, a potential choice would be UCLA (consistently a top school, currently #1 public university, and ranked above USC) or any other UC imo. The UCs offer a big tuition reduction to CA residents.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

limom said:


> What does this woman who looks like she minds her own business have done to elicit such a vicious and totally unfounded rumor? And even if she was to be a felon so what?
> Nuts.



And the goalposts keep moving...she's an ex con (literally no evidence but lets definitely believe some anonymous comments on social media), she's lying about her MSW degree (well no actually here's proof), okay maybe she went there but she should not have


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

marietouchet said:


> PS yes, maybe D was just LUCKY  to get in (she had nice friends who  Wrote glowing recommendations ) and lucky be able to cope with Tuition (full academic scholarship due to good grades ?), a story at odds with the hardship saga told by MM


Sorry I see you edited your post. Maybe you realized you were off with the Suits date?

In any case not sure what you mean about LUCKY to get in with friends who wrote glowing recommendations? There is something very unsettling about that comment. We have no idea what her application consisted of and if she earned scholarships I have no doubt she deserved them.


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The trouble with Harry and Meghan
> 
> 
> Beijing and Moscow, gleefully, are on “Team Harry and Meghan,” and decidedly for self-serving and nefarious reasons. Intentionally or not, the two sidelined British royals, while luxuriously decamp…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com



wow...I wish the grifters would read that


----------



## LittleStar88

limom said:


> Are you saying that she did not attend at all, Ala Santos?
> I don’t get the uproar at all.
> It is her business.
> And what do you mean they dont take just anyone????
> Anyways, Happy Christmas to all





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m not sure I understand…why should she have gone to a community college? I have a similar MA from a “prestigious” (therefore expensive) university. I wanted the education, experience and contacts I knew I could only gain from such a program.
> 
> Also just FYI Suits premiered in 2011, I imagine MM was supporting herself by the time her mother was in graduate school.



I think the main point being… TW was sooooo poor but Doria could afford to attend a very expensive college?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

LittleStar88 said:


> I think the main point being… TW was sooooo poor but Doria could afford to attend a very expensive college?



And the answer is MM was an adult by the time her mother attended graduate school and for all we know Doria received scholarships. Doesn't that make sense?

ETA doesn't that make MORE sense that all these convoluted theories and attacks on a woman whose "crime" seems to be getting a graduate degree in a field devoted to helping other people?


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And the answer is MM was an adult by the time her mother attended graduate school and for all we know Doria received scholarships. Doesn't that make sense?


I have no idea about this or whether she smoked pot on the lawn or worked at a marijuana growing facility.  don't really care.  I'm pretty neutral about her but maybe a bit less so since she participated in the "docu-series".  I know it's her daughter but I'm not a fan.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And the answer is MM was an adult by the time her mother attended graduate school and for all we know Doria received scholarships. Doesn't that make sense?
> 
> ETA doesn't that make MORE sense that all these convoluted theories and attacks on a woman whose "crime" seems to be getting a graduate degree in a field devoted to helping other people?


I don't want to keep editing my post but I also want to add...maybe I am taking this too personally because of my own experience but I work with A LOT of social workers...they are some of the most kind, selfless people in the world. Nothing but respect from me for someone who has an MSW, no matter what school they attended or how they got there.


----------



## DoggieBags

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And the goalposts keep moving...she's an ex con (literally no evidence but lets definitely believe some anonymous comments on social media), she's lying about her MSW degree (well no actually here's proof), okay maybe she went there but she should not have


I’m ignoring the issue of whether or not she is an ex-con. As you have pointed out, it’s merely rumor and innuendo with no actual proof. And tbh I really don’t care. As to her MSW degree, again I’m ignoring the question of whether or not she actually went to the school in the photo. I have not seen anyone say maybe she went there but she should not have full stop. The question is how did she pay for her degree since TW has said repeatedly that they were poor. Full scholarships are rare. Again not making any comments on whether or not this particular person deserved a full scholarship, partial scholarship, etc. If we make the not unreasonable assumption that she was one of the many students in the US who are granted partial scholarships each year, the question is how did she pay for the portion of her tuition that was not covered by the scholarship. As others have pointed out, that is a pretty expensive school. Someone mentioned student loans which is another reasonable assumption for how she funded the difference. However, as someone else pointed out, social workers unfortunately don’t get paid a lot in the US. I wish they were paid more for the invaluable work they do but that’s not the reality right now. So if you believe TW’s assertion that they were poor, how did she pay off her student loans? So many discussions on this thread basically circle back to TW‘s assertion that they were poor even though her father supposedly paid for her various cosmetic surgeries when she was growing up, she went to good schools, was taken out to good restaurants (not Sizzler), etc. So even though Doria herself hadn’t said much until the Netflix series, her daughter has said way too much for way too long which is why people always question any apparent large expenditures like an education at a very expensive university. Again, if she got a full scholarship, good for her. But if she did not, as is typical for most American students, how did she pay for the shortfall?


----------



## Otto8

sdkitty said:


> I have no idea about this or whether she smoked pot on the lawn or worked at a marijuana growing facility.  don't really care.  I'm pretty neutral about her but maybe a bit less so since she participated in the "docu-series".  I know it's her daughter but I'm not a fan.


Even if you are not a fan, since you have no idea about this, and don't really care, then why include the marijuana and smoking pot storyline?  Oh, yes, because you are not a fan of her daughter and therefore less neutral now that she has participated in the docu-series.   So because of that, she now deserves this other unfounded rubbish that you can now hurl at her - pot marijuana etc.     

That is such an unnecessary slur.


----------



## sdkitty

Otto8 said:


> Even if you are not a fan, since you have no idea about this, and don't really care, then why include the marijuana and smoking pot storyline?  Oh, yes, because you are not a fan of her daughter and therefore less neutral now that she has participated in the docu-series.   So because of that, she now deserves this other unfounded rubbish that you can now hurl at her - pot marijuana etc.
> 
> That is such an unnecessary slur.


I didn't include it - I was responding to the conversation


----------



## marietouchet

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Just so I understand…the lie is Doria did not graduate with an MSW in 2011?


She likely did graduate, it is the family hardship stories that dont compute , D had the PRIVILEGE to go to a top notch school



marietouchet said:


> She likely did graduate, it is the hardship stories that dont compute , D had the PRIVILEGE to go to a top notch school


PS to make an analogy it is like going to Eton/Oxbridge



OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I’m not sure I understand…why should she have gone to a community college? I have a similar MA from a “prestigious” (therefore expensive) university. I wanted the education, experience and contacts I knew I could only gain from such a program.
> 
> Also just FYI Suits premiered in 2011, I imagine MM was supporting herself by the time her mother was in graduate school.


Yes, D may have chosen to go to a top notch school, lucky her to have had the opportunity/resources

PS see Lori Loughlin & Felicity Hoffman stories, they are Hollywood A list people who had difficulty in getting their daughters in, it is HARD to  get in USC



OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And the goalposts keep moving...she's an ex con (literally no evidence but lets definitely believe some anonymous comments on social media), she's lying about her MSW degree (well no actually here's proof), okay maybe she went there but she should not have





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I don't want to keep editing my post but I also want to add...maybe I am taking this too personally because of my own experience but I work with A LOT of social workers...they are some of the most kind, selfless people in the world. Nothing but respect from me for someone who has an MSW, no matter what school they attended or how they got there.


Your point is well taken ..


----------



## scarlet555

You can be a lsw after prison per california law after 7 years 

California Criminal Convictions & Social Worker Discipline

But whatever 
I think the shady gaps in years is what people are questioning with crazy going to live w her dad and what not 
The focus shifted to Doria because after she spoke in the Netflix British  treason series and then people started to realize where the apple fell from 
That’s my take and I could be wrong 
If she served prison for tax fraud from her business 
Whatever the rumors are, truth will come out 
Give it time
It’s not so much about her past behavior but her current behavior that’s making people question her past as I see it.


----------



## Molly0

In my mind none of the circumstances around Doria’s education matter at this point, but what does matter is what she is doing NOW with that degree. My question would be is she functioning NOW  in a field where the work that social worker’s do is so very important?  If so, her past is irrelevant and good for her for doing this essential  work every day!


----------



## Cinderlala

The issue with Doria is that she blamed "race" for being the reason people call out her daughter.  It's not race, it's personal.  Rachel is a manipulative liar and some of us are not fine with that.


----------



## purseinsanity

Chanbal said:


> Living in LA, a potential choice would be UCLA (consistently a top school, currently #1 public university, and ranked above USC) or any other UC imo. *The UCs offer a big tuition reduction to CA residents.*



They do, but UCs are notorious for NOT taking California residents because they want the out of state and international tuition fees they can get instead.  Unlike other state schools which value their own residents, UCs are horribly disloyal.  Having had two college age teenagers, even UC admissions directors openly admit this.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

scarlet555 said:


> It’s not so much about her past behavior but her current behavior that’s making people question her past as I see it.


And as I see it her current behavior was defending her daughter who has been mercilessly attacked and accused of…basically anything and everything. Now I understand in this thread the general consensus is MM deserves that treatment. I believe we can agree to disagree on that.

However a mother defending her only child…and as a result being the subject of the most awful and so far completely unfounded rumors herself…that to me is not a debate. That’s just wrong and unfair. 

Thomas gets a pass despite what we know are definitely his very questionable actions. Samantha gets a pass even though we know she has lied about her own children. But Doria is the conniving evil mastermind here? Because of what exactly? Going to graduate school and supporting her daughter. Please make it make sense because I do not get it.


----------



## Kevinaxx

I have not seen the Netflix series and no interest but I really don’t understand how garbage like this comes out of his mouth, except I now better understand how Megan manage to “snag” him.




Righttttttt. Same person who claims to not know royal protocol (curtsy for example) and have made allegations that she had no support:











						Who Was the Real Villain in ‘Harry & Meghan’?
					

The unbending Palace, or the toxic tabloid press?




					www.vogue.com
				




(Um, I guess her “limelight” ability didn’t prep her for the British paps—maybe Harry didn’t realize being a D actress isn’t that great as he’s used to getting Ds in school and still comes out fine (in his mind?).  And I guess “doing a better job at this than the person who is born to do this” is referring to him and by that he means things like curtsy and not handling the press? As he needs big brother to apparently and he can’t despite having grown up in the same household (setting aside that he’s groomed to be backup, that path can’t be so different from the heir if you’re the spare to step in?))

Really can’t believe Netflix gave them $1mm much less over $10mm for the barf-inducing words coming out and they can’t even get their stories straight.


----------



## sdkitty

Kevinaxx said:


> I have not seen the Netflix series and no interest but I really don’t understand how garbage like this comes out of his mouth, except I now better understand how Megan manage to “snag” him.
> 
> View attachment 5676881
> 
> 
> Righttttttt. Same person who claims to not know royal protocol (curtsy for example) and have made allegations that she had no support:
> 
> View attachment 5676883
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who Was the Real Villain in ‘Harry & Meghan’?
> 
> 
> The unbending Palace, or the toxic tabloid press?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vogue.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Um, I guess her “limelight” ability didn’t prep her for the British paps—maybe Harry didn’t realize being a D actress isn’t that great as he’s used to getting Ds in school and still comes out fine (in his mind?).  And I guess “doing a better job at this than the person who is born to do this” is referring to him and by that he means things like curtsy and not handling the press? As he needs big brother to apparently and he can’t despite having grown up in the same household (setting aside that he’s groomed to be backup, that path can’t be so different from the heir if you’re the spare to step iI n?))
> 
> Really can’t believe Netflix gave them $1mm much less over $10mm for the barf-inducing words coming out and they can’t even get their stories straight.


I took it to mean that he and the WIFE were doing a better job than Will & Kate - stealing the limelight


----------



## csshopper

Otto8 said:


> Even if you are not a fan, since you have no idea about this, and don't really care, then why include the marijuana and smoking pot storyline?  Oh, yes, because you are not a fan of her daughter and therefore less neutral now that she has participated in the docu-series.   So because of that, she now deserves this other unfounded rubbish that you can now hurl at her - pot marijuana etc.
> 
> That is such an unnecessary slur.


The source is from Thomas Markle who discussed it with author Tom Bower in his book Revenge.

Bower has not been challenged by the Sussexes, who usually file lawsuits when they think they’ve been wronged.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And as I see it her current behavior was defending her daughter who has been mercilessly attacked and accused of…basically anything and everything. Now I understand in this thread the general consensus is MM deserves that treatment. I believe we can agree to disagree on that.
> 
> However a mother defending her only child…and as a result being the subject of the most awful and so far completely unfounded rumors herself…that to me is not a debate. That’s just wrong and unfair.
> 
> Thomas gets a pass despite what we know are definitely his very questionable actions. Samantha gets a pass even though we know she has lied about her own children. But Doria is the conniving evil mastermind here? Because of what exactly? Going to graduate school and supporting her daughter. Please make it make sense because I do not get it.


for me Thomas should be forgiven by his daughter.  He is elderly and ill.  He made a mistake.  some say the paps hounded him and he eventually gave in to them.  If she is such a kind person, why not forgive the father who raised her and gave her everything.  Private school education, college, allegedly dental cosmetics and PS.  Freezing him out isn't a good look for her IMO.  and from the reports I've seen Harry wasn't kind to him either.


----------



## Chanbal

purseinsanity said:


> They do, but UCs are notorious for NOT taking California residents because they want the out of state and international tuition fees they can get instead.  Unlike other state schools which value their own residents, UCs are horribly disloyal.  Having had two college age teenagers, even UC admissions directors openly admit this.


Absolutely, it's difficult to get into the UCs. There are 2 major categories for CA residents to get into one of the UCs imo:
1) First generation students. I don't know if TW qualified for it at the time of her college application.
2) Top (very top)-performing CA high school students- One of TW's claims is: "_I grew up as the smart one._" When I read this, Einstein came to mind.


----------



## mrsinsyder

limom said:


> What does this woman who looks like she minds her own business have done to elicit such a vicious and totally unfounded rumor? And even if she was to be a felon so what?
> Nuts.


People have been chomping at the bit waiting for a reason to go at Doria. Now they’re using her participation in the documentary as justification that she deserves to be dragged too. But honestly if she hadn’t participated I’m sure that would have drawn ire too.


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And as I see it her current behavior was defending her daughter who has been mercilessly attacked and accused of…basically anything and everything. Now I understand in this thread the general consensus is MM deserves that treatment. I believe we can agree to disagree on that.
> 
> However a mother defending her only child…and as a result being the subject of the most awful and so far completely unfounded rumors herself…that to me is not a debate. That’s just wrong and unfair.
> 
> Thomas gets a pass despite what we know are definitely his very questionable actions. Samantha gets a pass even though we know she has lied about her own children. But Doria is the conniving evil mastermind here? Because of what exactly? Going to graduate school and supporting her daughter. Please make it make sense because I do not get it.


If she hadn’t participated that would have made a whole ‘nother set of accusations. She wasn’t going to win either way.


----------



## KEG66

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And as I see it her current behavior was defending her daughter who has been mercilessly attacked and accused of…basically anything and everything. Now I understand in this thread the general consensus is MM deserves that treatment. I believe we can agree to disagree on that.
> 
> However a mother defending her only child…and as a result being the subject of the most awful and so far completely unfounded rumors herself…that to me is not a debate. That’s just wrong and unfair.
> 
> Thomas gets a pass despite what we know are definitely his very questionable actions. Samantha gets a pass even though we know she has lied about her own children. But Doria is the conniving evil mastermind here? Because of what exactly? Going to graduate school and supporting her daughter. Please make it make sense because I do not get it.


This is a gossip thread after all and I’m afraid anyone attached to the Harry and Meghan is bound to come under scrutiny.


----------



## Cinderlala

mrsinsyder said:


> If she hadn’t participated that would have made a whole ‘nother set of accusations. She wasn’t going to win either way.


I'd bet it's not the norm for celebrities to have their parents in their own 'docu'-shows.


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> I'd bet it's not the norm for celebrities to have their parents in their own 'docu'-shows.


are there any other celeb docu shows?  or just reality shows?  there are certainly documentaries about celebs.  there is a good one about jane fonda.  but someone else did it.


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> are there any other celeb docu shows?  or just reality shows?  there are certainly documentaries about celebs.  there is a good one about jane fonda.  but someone else did it.


This thread has educated me, it never dawned on me the huge difference between documentaries on celebrities and reality shows on them


----------



## LittleStar88

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And the answer is MM was an adult by the time her mother attended graduate school and for all we know Doria received scholarships. Doesn't that make sense?
> 
> ETA doesn't that make MORE sense that all these convoluted theories and attacks on a woman whose "crime" seems to be getting a graduate degree in a field devoted to helping other people?



I honestly couldn’t care less about Doria. But seems I have my timeline wrong. ‘Twas early morning here in sunny CA and I thought that was part of what was being conveyed. My bad!

I don’t believe Doria went to prison. Unless she had her record wiped clean there would have been receipts.

At the end of the day the optics from my end are that TW uses whomever, including her parents, and twists the narrative to her advantage.


----------



## marietouchet

Lest we forget … other royal houses have their black sheep too

Scandals the royals in Europe won't want to mention at dinner table









						Scandals the royals in Europe won't want to mention at dinner table
					

Multiple scandals have  rocked Europe's royal households throughout the recent decades that they most likely won't want discussed around the dinner table.




					mol.im


----------



## CarryOn2020

Kevinaxx said:


> (Um, I guess her “limelight” ability didn’t prep her for the British paps—maybe Harry didn’t realize being a *D* actress isn’t that great as he’s used to getting Ds in school and still comes out fine (in his mind?).


100% agree with all that you said, *except* the D actress. In honor of our beloved @CeeJay, MM was/is/will always be a *ZZZZZZ *lister*

ETA:  *so far, everything CeeJay posted about MM has proven to be true.  She was a primary source, too.  So, keep that in mind and have a Merry Christmas, etc.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree with all that you said, *except* the D actress. In honor of our beloved @CeeJay, MM was/is/will always be a *ZZZZZZ *lister**


I wish ceejay was here to weigh in on the apartment question
(and of course we miss her not only on this thread but on the PF in general, esp Bal)


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> This thread has educated me, it never dawned on me the huge difference between documentaries on celebrities and reality shows on them


someone can correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like the self-narrated/self-producted "docuseries" is unique to them?  or is it just a reality show that they are calling a docuseries?


----------



## LittleStar88

mrsinsyder said:


> People have been chomping at the bit waiting for a reason to go at Doria. Now they’re using her participation in the documentary as justification that she deserves to be dragged too. But honestly if she hadn’t participated I’m sure that would have drawn ire too.



Yep. Once you participate publicly and in a high-profile manner, you Expose yourself to public opinion.

Who the heck cares if Doria sat around and smoked weed, or worked in that industry? I grew up knowing plenty of people who did back when it was still illegal. And there were lots of them who presented as high-functioning (no pun intended lol) and you’d have no idea. And there were others who were not. Regardless, it seems she wasn’t the most present influence in TW’s life growing up and the reason why doesn’t matter too much to me.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Cinderlala said:


> I'd bet it's not the norm for celebrities to have their parents in their own 'docu'-shows.



Well lets think...Jonah Hill (yes), Selena Gomez (yes), Jennifer Lopez (yes), Beyonce (yes), Taylor Swift (yes), Lady Gaga (yes), Madonna (yes). So I guess the answer is yes...it is the norm?


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> I wish ceejay was here to weigh in on the apartment question
> (and of course we miss her not only on this thread but on the PF in general, esp Bal)


You can see photos here https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-Markles-childhood-homes-Los-Angeles.html


----------



## Cinderlala

sdkitty said:


> someone can correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like the self-narrated/self-producted "docuseries" is unique to them?  or is it just a reality show that they are calling a docuseries?


I don't know if it counts as a docuseries because it might have just been movie-length but Val Kilmer recently did a very interesting show about himself because he had basically filmed everything in his life from a certain age.  He mostly did it because he has a terribly debilitating illness that has wrecked his body and his voice.  It was an interesting but sad show.


----------



## LittleStar88

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> You can see photos here https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-Markles-childhood-homes-Los-Angeles.html



Dude. She was NOT poor. Those are nice places to live. That apartment is nicer than any I’ve had to rent. TW is delusional


----------



## sdkitty

Cinderlala said:


> I don't know if it counts as a docuseries because it might have just been movie-length but Val Kilmer recently did a very interesting show about himself because he had basically filmed everything in his life from a certain age.  He mostly did it because he has a terribly debilitating illness that has wrecked his body and his voice.  It was an interesting but sad show.


sad about him....I thought he was so hot when he was young


----------



## LittleStar88

sdkitty said:


> sad about him....I thought he was so hot when he was young



OMG I had a major crush on him when he played Jim Morrison! So sad for what he is going through.


----------



## Pop Art Suzy

DoggieBags said:


> I’m ignoring the issue of whether or not she is an ex-con. As you have pointed out, it’s merely rumor and innuendo with no actual proof. And tbh I really don’t care. As to her MSW degree, again I’m ignoring the question of whether or not she actually went to the school in the photo. I have not seen anyone say maybe she went there but she should not have full stop. The question is how did she pay for her degree since TW has said repeatedly that they were poor. Full scholarships are rare. Again not making any comments on whether or not this particular person deserved a full scholarship, partial scholarship, etc. If we make the not unreasonable assumption that she was one of the many students in the US who are granted partial scholarships each year, the question is how did she pay for the portion of her tuition that was not covered by the scholarship. As others have pointed out, that is a pretty expensive school. Someone mentioned student loans which is another reasonable assumption for how she funded the difference. However, as someone else pointed out, social workers unfortunately don’t get paid a lot in the US. I wish they were paid more for the invaluable work they do but that’s not the reality right now. So if you believe TW’s assertion that they were poor, how did she pay off her student loans? So many discussions on this thread basically circle back to TW‘s assertion that they were poor even though her father supposedly paid for her various cosmetic surgeries when she was growing up, she went to good schools, was taken out to good restaurants (not Sizzler), etc. So even though Doria herself hadn’t said much until the Netflix series, her daughter has said way too much for way too long which is why people always question any apparent large expenditures like an education at a very expensive university. Again, if she got a full scholarship, good for her. But if she did not, as is typical for most American students, how did she pay for the shortfall?


I believe Doria received her MSW when Meghan was an adult and was already starring on Suits. Did we ever think that maybe Meghan paid for her mother's tuition? I know if I was a successful actress on a regular series with a regular paycheck, I'd pay for my mother's tuition, too. But that's me.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> You can see photos here https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ghan-Markles-childhood-homes-Los-Angeles.html


this is a tabloid report but assuming it's accurate, I don't really see anything wrong with any of the places she lived.  the first house, described as a two-bedroom, looks more like at least three bedrooms.  she went to exclusive schools starting in kindergarten.  so someone must have decided she should rub shoulders with privileged kids.  wonder whether that was dad/mom or both.


----------



## tiktok

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And as I see it her current behavior was defending her daughter who has been mercilessly attacked and accused of…basically anything and everything. Now I understand in this thread the general consensus is MM deserves that treatment. I believe we can agree to disagree on that.
> 
> However a mother defending her only child…and as a result being the subject of the most awful and so far completely unfounded rumors herself…that to me is not a debate. That’s just wrong and unfair.
> 
> Thomas gets a pass despite what we know are definitely his very questionable actions. Samantha gets a pass even though we know she has lied about her own children. But Doria is the conniving evil mastermind here? Because of what exactly? Going to graduate school and supporting her daughter. Please make it make sense because I do not get it.


I think the consensus isn’t that Meghan deserved the treatment. I think Meghan made a huge deal out of select tabloid coverage - yes, potentially with a shade of racism - which every famous person under the sun gets and ignores, including Kate. The only reason anyone could have written the “Kate is treated so much better than Meghan” stories is that they didn’t compare Kate’s coverage and paparazzi chases when she was dating William. But Meghan didn’t take the high road like every other celebrity - she leveraged some nasty tabloid coverage into a whole story around Britain being racist, the royal family being racist, and anyone who doesn’t think she walks on water being racist. Other than the tabloids, I haven’t seen much evidence to any of her claims, I’ve only seen evidence that everyone wanted to welcome her and help her succeed. I’ve definitely seen evidence that she bullied staff and had a revolving door of staff (hardly a coincidence), lied in court, lied on Oprah, and continues to lie everywhere she can to the tune of $100M. Not to mention being a total hypocrite on everything else (environment, “compassion” etc.). Are the tabloids good or blameless? No, they’re a ****show, but is this the fight you want to take on as your big humanitarian cause to eradicate racism in the media? Sure, I’ll believe you if you don’t happen to get paid a **** ton of money to do it and make the story all about poor victim you (especially when you’re in Africa with people who could live for a year on your weekly toilet paper budget).

NOW she deserves all the criticism in the world for her own actions. As for her mother - I don’t care about her mother’s past and I don’t think it’s relevant. I think her other relatives are kind of a train wreck at this point, but I also think she could have treated (or should I say “managed”) them so much better than she did - especially her father. But I think this family didn’t fit her new sophisticated royal image so it was easier to markle them.

Re surrogates, the nonexistent Lilly, her mother’s degree, criminal records or a bunch of other theories - I don’t think there’s any consensus on that on this thread, far from it. I see a lot of certain kind of media using H&M to paint all liberals or “woke” people with the same brush of victimhood and hypocrisy (see Tucker Carlson who has been quoted a few times here). There’s a cottage industry of conspiracy theories and other made up rumors around them. I don’t think there’s any consensus on those things, but H&M’s behavior sure makes those conspiracies a lot easier to believe.


----------



## Kevinaxx

CarryOn2020 said:


> 100% agree with all that you said, *except* the D actress. In honor of our beloved @CeeJay, MM was/is/will always be a *ZZZZZZ *lister*
> 
> ETA:  *so far, everything CeeJay posted about MM has proven to be true.  She was a primary source, too.  So, keep that in mind and have a Merry Christmas, etc.


Lol sorry I didn’t realize there’s an A-Z I thought it was only to D.  my mistake.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

sdkitty said:


> someone can correct me if I'm wrong but it seems like the self-narrated/self-producted "docuseries" is unique to them?  or is it just a reality show that they are calling a docuseries?



Definitely not unique. I listed several examples in post #124,729



LittleStar88 said:


> Yep. Once you participate publicly and in a high-profile manner, you Expose yourself to public opinion.
> 
> Who the heck cares if Doria sat around and smoked weed, or worked in that industry? I grew up knowing plenty of people who did back when it was still illegal. And there were lots of them who presented as high-functioning (no pun intended lol) and you’d have no idea. And there were others who were not. Regardless, it seems she wasn’t the most present influence in TW’s life growing up and the reason why doesn’t matter too much to me.



I think the point being made was she was in a no win position since people were already making these accusations before the Netflix show.

And I agree about the pot smoking (I mean really not much of a scandal at all!) but posters here seem to believe it indicates lack of character.



LittleStar88 said:


> Dude. She was NOT poor. Those are nice places to live. That apartment is nicer than any I’ve had to rent. TW is delusional



Just to be clear...she didn't write these headlines, it is the DM that described them as "dark and dingy".

I did think this was an interesting part of the article, I don't think I had heard this before (re her relationship with Thomas)..."…The older she became, the more she felt she was the one who was mothering her father. It was a source of friction, especially when she started dating."


----------



## Cinderlala

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Well lets think...Jonah Hill (yes), Selena Gomez (yes), Jennifer Lopez (yes), Beyonce (yes), Taylor Swift (yes), Lady Gaga (yes), Madonna (yes). So I guess the answer is yes...it is the norm?


Interesting.  Clearly, I don't watch many celebrity docs.  I didn't watch this one either.

Regardless, it was during her appearance on the show that Doria stated that the issues with MM were a race issue, which they are not.  I don't think her participation would have been discussion-worthy if she had simply appeared without framing her daughter's situation as simply race-based.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Cinderlala said:


> Interesting.  Clearly, I don't watch many celebrity docs.  I didn't watch this one either.
> 
> Regardless, it was during her appearance on the show that Doria stated that the issues with MM were a race issue, which they are not.  I don't think her participation would have been discussion-worthy if she had simply appeared without framing her daughter's situation as simply race-based.


Since you did not watch it I think perhaps it's hard to judge? She did discuss race but that's not all she said. In any case we can agree to disagree. I don't think she deserves the somewhat cruel and certainly unfounded accusations no matter what she shared about her experience as a black woman and mother of a biracial child.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Ouch  









						'Completely bald' Prince Harry's hair loss sparks speculation
					

Prince Harry is seemingly losing more of his hair, if a recent picture is anything to go by. What could be driving it?




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## Cinderlala

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Since you did not watch it I think perhaps it's hard to judge? She did discuss race but that's not all she said. In any case we can agree to disagree. I don't think she deserves the somewhat cruel and certainly unfounded accusations no matter what she shared about her experience as a black woman and mother of a biracial child.



Nope, not hard to judge.  I've seen her literally say it was an issue of race.  Which is untrue and intentionally divisive.


----------



## Pop Art Suzy

xincinsin said:


> True. Especially this sentence:
> View attachment 5676140
> 
> 
> But they did give me a photo to add to my collex of fake expressions.
> View attachment 5676141


That's ironic since Camilla herself is a divorcée and was also a commoner. Not to mention she was an adulterer. As far as I am concerned, Camilla was and is scum. I will never forget what Charles did to Diana. I followed it back then and remember it vividly. So Camilla has no justification at all to knock Meghan for being married previously and being a commoner.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Cinderlala said:


> Nope, not hard to judge.  I've seen her literally say it was an issue of race.  Which is untrue and intentionally divisive.


This is why context is so important. She was referring to the "straight outta compton" and "gang scarred" headlines. Which I do believe were race related.


----------



## tannim44

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Completely bald' Prince Harry's hair loss sparks speculation
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is seemingly losing more of his hair, if a recent picture is anything to go by. What could be driving it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


I’ve been waiting for him to show up with the full McConaughey since they moved to LA.


----------



## CarryOn2020

Just remember, you cannot put a crown on a clown and expect a King.


----------



## sdkitty

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Since you did not watch it I think perhaps it's hard to judge? She did discuss race but that's not all she said. In any case we can agree to disagree. I don't think she deserves the somewhat cruel and certainly unfounded accusations no matter what she shared about her experience as a black woman and mother of a biracial child.


I'm quite sure Doria experienced racism.  Not so sure about her daughter. Until she got it from the British tabloids.  they were nasty but I don't believe the RF was racist toward her.  (It's possible she witnessed racist treatment of her mother but as far as I know, she has never said that.)


----------



## CarryOn2020

tannim44 said:


> I’ve been waiting for him to show up with the full McConaughey since they moved to LA.


Patience, my dear, patience.


----------



## DoggieBags

Pop Art Suzy said:


> I believe Doria received her MSW when Meghan was an adult and was already starring on Suits. Did we ever think that maybe Meghan paid for her mother's tuition? I know if I was a successful actress on a regular series with a regular paycheck, I'd pay for my mother's tuition, too. But that's me.


If TW had paid for Doria’s tuition don’t you think she would have publicized that by now since it would actually make her look good for a change? She publicized delivering a few meals to people during COVID (while accompanied by a second suv filled with bodyguards no less) to the point where she actually pulled down her face mask so the person she was delivering a meal to would know who she was, donating a box of vegetables to schoolchildren in NYC, handing out Starbucks gift cards to volunteers at i forget where, but paying for her mother’s school tuition she keeps quiet about?


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> I'm quite sure Doria experienced racism.  Not so sure about her daughter. Until she got it from the British tabloids.  they were nasty but I don't believe the RF was racist toward her.  (It's possible she witnessed racist treatment of her mother but as far as I know, she has never said that.)


Doria definitely experienced racism first hand and so did Megan, imo.
I am sure being racially ambiguous, Megan heard many, many discouraging and plain racist comments in her time.
This thread being a prime example of implicit bias and worst.
As far as her poor past circumstances, hello everyone is poor compared to the Royal family.
Val Kilmer documentary was so well done. He was great in the last Top Gun movie too.
What a babe.


----------



## limom

CarryOn2020 said:


> Patience, my dear, patience.


Well, he needs it!


----------



## Lodpah

Pop Art Suzy said:


> That's ironic since Camilla herself is a divorcée and was also a commoner. Not to mention she was an adulterer. As far as I am concerned, Camilla was and is scum. I will never forget what Charles did to Diana. I followed it back then and remember it vividly. So Camilla has no justification at all to knock Meghan for being married previously and being a commoner.


I think the was MM’s PR. I don’t think Camilla would say that. That’s their modus operandi: to kill and destroy.


----------



## LittleStar88

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Definitely not unique. I listed several examples in post #124,729
> 
> 
> 
> I think the point being made was she was in a no win position since people were already making these accusations before the Netflix show.
> 
> And I agree about the pot smoking (I mean really not much of a scandal at all!) but posters here seem to believe it indicates lack of character.
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be clear...she didn't write these headlines, it is the DM that described them as "dark and dingy".
> 
> I did think this was an interesting part of the article, I don't think I had heard this before (re her relationship with Thomas)..."…The older she became, the more she felt she was the one who was mothering her father. It was a source of friction, especially when she started dating."



RE: Pot smoking and lack of character. Anyone who thinks that is just using it as an excuse to look down on someone.

TW was the one who said she grew up poor. And Sizzler was The Great Indulgence. Just her rewriting her own history to fit her storyline.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

LittleStar88 said:


> RE: Pot smoking and lack of character. Anyone who thinks that is just using it as an excuse to look down on someone.
> 
> TW was the one who said she grew up poor. And Sizzler was The Great Indulgence. Just her rewriting her own history to fit her storyline.



The Sizzler line is from a letter to congress about paid family leave. I have no idea if it's true but I must admit I agree with the sentiment https://paidleaveforall.org/theduchessofsussex/


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## limom

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> The Sizzler line is from a letter to congress about paid family leave. I have no idea if it's true but I must admit I agree with the sentiment https://paidleaveforall.org/theduchessofsussex/


 Sizzler was the bomb. Sadly, they all closed on the East coast.
So many cliches in their com. They need to do better, imo.
Especially coming from him, imho.


----------



## sdkitty

limom said:


> Sizzler was the bomb. Sadly, they all closed on the East coast.
> So many cliches in their com. They need to do better, imo.
> Especially coming from him, imho.


there's nothing wrong with Sizzler...guess she was implying she was middle class


----------



## sdkitty

Merry Christmas and hope all of you experiencing the very cold storm in the US stay safe and cozy.


----------



## sdkitty

Pop Art Suzy said:


> That's ironic since Camilla herself is a divorcée and was also a commoner. Not to mention she was an adulterer. As far as I am concerned, Camilla was and is scum. I will never forget what Charles did to Diana. I followed it back then and remember it vividly. So Camilla has no justification at all to knock Meghan for being married previously and being a commoner.


first of all, I don't think that story is true about Camilla going after Meghan.  Secondly, scum is a pretty nasty word to use.  I didn't much like what went on when Charles was having the affair with her but he seems very happy with her and she has performed her royal duties with grace.


----------



## limom

sdkitty said:


> Merry Christmas and hope all of you experiencing the very cold storm in the US stay safe and cozy.


same to you…


sdkitty said:


> first of all, I don't think that story is true about Camilla going after Meghan.  Secondly, scum is a pretty nasty word to use.  I didn't much like what went on when Charles was having the affair with her but he seems very happy with her and she has performed her royal duties with grace.


Camilla and Charles were meant to be with each other…
You can tell that they have great affection toward one another today and had an off the chain love affair in their youths.
All is fair in love and war.


----------



## Chanbal

papertiger said:


> Happy holidays everyone, H&M lovers, critics and indifferents
> 
> My gift to you all!



Thanks! Happy Holidays, and here is my gift to you all… Cheers!


----------



## Toby93

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> And the answer is MM was an adult by the time her mother attended graduate school and for all we know Doria received scholarships. Doesn't that make sense?
> 
> ETA doesn't that make MORE sense that all these convoluted theories and attacks on a woman whose "crime" seems to be getting a graduate degree in a field devoted to helping other people?


And as noble as it is to help other people, what was the point of her appearing on their "documentary" and lie?  She sat there and agreed with TW that her ex-husband was not in her life much and that he wasn't much of a parent if he let the media manipulate him.  

Where was her compassion and education then?  She opened _herself_ up to criticism when she cooperated with their lying.  I guess she followed the money.....


----------



## essiedub

Pop Art Suzy said:


> That's ironic since Camilla herself is a divorcée and was also a commoner. Not to mention she was an adulterer. As far as I am concerned, Camilla was and is scum. I will never forget what Charles did to Diana. I followed it back then and remember it vividly. So Camilla has no justification at all to knock Meghan for being married previously and being a commoner.


That is exactly right.  This is why it’s not believed that Camilla said that.


----------



## Toby93

Cinderlala said:


> Nope, not hard to judge.  I've seen her literally say it was an issue of race.  Which is untrue and intentionally divisive.


And when you watch the video, she is always looking off camera so you know she was well rehearsed and being coached on what to say.


----------



## Sharont2305

essiedub said:


> That is exactly right.  This is why it’s not believed that Camilla said that.


Going on the fact that Camilla had a hard time from the press and public pre the death of Diana and even more so afterwards, I'd say she would've welcomed  Meghan into the fold.
Camilla had the worst abuse, more than any other woman marrying into the RF, by a mile.


----------



## limom

Sharont2305 said:


> Going on the fact that Camilla had a hard time from the press and public pre the death of Diana and even more so afterwards, I'd say she would've welcomed  Meghan into the fold.
> Camilla had the worst abuse, more than any other woman marrying into the RF, by a mile.


Plus, Camilla does not come across as a dummy. J/S.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Toby93 said:


> And as noble as it is to help other people, what was the point of her appearing on their "documentary" and lie?  She sat there and agreed with TW that her ex-husband was not in her life much and that he wasn't much of a parent if he let the media manipulate him.
> 
> Where was her compassion and education then?  She opened _herself_ up to criticism when she cooperated with their lying.  I guess she followed the money.....


Followed the money? I take it you have the good fortune not to be divorced. If my ex husband ever spoke about my kids in a disparaging way to the media there is no way I would defend him. In fact she is positively kind compared to what I would do and say.

And on that note since it is Christmas eve here my gift to all of you is that I will take a break from this thread 

Since Trevor Noah was mentioned earlier I hope I can include the heart warming tweet below in the spirit of the season. It made my night. Wishing everyone happy and healthy holidays


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Kevinaxx said:


> I have not seen the Netflix series and no interest but I really don’t understand how garbage like this comes out of his mouth, except I now better understand how Megan manage to “snag” him.
> 
> View attachment 5676881



Ignoring the nonsense he spouts (who would the person born to do this be? He himself? William? Anne? The Queen?), but gosh does he look unwell. 


P.S. I fully expected to come to a dead thread, but you have been busy


----------



## Kevinaxx

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Ignoring the nonsense he spouts (who would the person born to do this be? He himself? William? Anne? The Queen?), but gosh does he look unwell.
> 
> 
> P.S. I fully expected to come to a dead thread, but you have been busy


Not sure at all but he probably doesn’t get much sleep with TW and kids, both screaming I’m guessing.

This thread moves pretty fast at times for me to keep up but I enjoy the diff perspectives.


----------



## purseinsanity

I haven't been on as much the past few days because frankly, these two are utterly exhausting, and more importantly, I wanted to spend time with loved ones.
On the other hand, I didn't want to miss the opportunity to wish each and every one of you a very Merry Christmas/Happy Hanukkah/Happy Holidays!  Wishing everyone a joyous season, hope you are all warm, happy and fed, and here's to a healthy and happy new year!  Hoping the new year brings Haz and TW a new perspective and they learn to appreciate what they DO have and let some bitterness go.  It's not just having things, it's also important to realize what you have, and be happy with it.  That goes for all of us!  Thank you all for bringing such fun and insight to my life this year!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW the regulars on here will appreciate this...my narc business contact is back, this time texting me a thank you for Christmas greetings I never sent in a language I don't speak (I can understand it, but it's neither German nor Dutch nor Flemish?). He sure hits the wrong number an awful lot.


----------



## papertiger

Just shoe-horning this in before I go to sleep, Part II: More lies exposed


----------



## EverSoElusive

CarryOn2020 said:


> Ouch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 'Completely bald' Prince Harry's hair loss sparks speculation
> 
> 
> Prince Harry is seemingly losing more of his hair, if a recent picture is anything to go by. What could be driving it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.express.co.uk


Guess Photoshop only helps on paper and print, not so much in real life 


As for Doria's choice of university,  I agree with whoever who said, if Z-list really paid for her mom's tuition, it would have been rubbed all over our faces every chance she got. Yes, there are scholarships but they are not easy to come by. And if the university is hard to get into, then I personally doubt that Doria got in on her own. 

Reading all the comments before mine just made me wonder if a yacht man might had provided the financial and connection assistance to Doria at the alleged yacht girl's behest   No, I don't have receipts, just speculating in a gossip thread.


----------



## csshopper

EverSoElusive said:


> Guess Photoshop only helps on paper and print, not so much in real life
> 
> 
> As for Doria's choice of university,  I agree with whoever who said, if Z-list really paid for her mom's tuition, it would have been rubbed all over our faces every chance she got. Yes, there are scholarships but they are not easy to come by. And if the university is hard to get into, then I personally doubt that Doria got in on her own.
> 
> Reading all the comments before mine just made me wonder if a yacht man might had provided the financial and connection assistance to Doria at the alleged yacht girl's behest   No, I don't have receipts, just speculating in a gossip thread.


In the spirit of a gossip thread, maybe Tyler Perry funded her education?


----------



## Chanbal

The Buckingham version vs the Montecito version


----------



## Sferics

Things that make you go hmmm...


----------



## gelbergirl

These two created Fantasy Fiction.
That's it.  We all know it. 
Even Netflix and book publishers know it.
And now the BRF and their communications team has to do a major side-eye.


----------



## marietouchet

LittleStar88 said:


> Dude. She was NOT poor. Those are nice places to live. That apartment is nicer than any I’ve had to rent. TW is delusional


Interesting article 
1. Dates to Aug 2018, just after wedding ? 
2. The language seems innocuous to me, rags to riches is the way the DM puts it


----------



## Chanbal

The author of this article seems very familiar with the saga. I wonder which one of you is TL. 
It's a long article, below are only a few loose sentences to increase your curiosity…  


_Unfortunately for viewers, Diana's observation that the schoolboy Harry "wasn't so bright" proved correct, as the reality television character Harry Mountbatten-Windsor is as dull as a doornail.
…
But this is Meghan's story, not Harry's and certainly not the monarchy's. And thus, the Netflix series is a dud.
…
What really went wrong? Obviously Meghan didn't want to do the work, and Harry was over playing second fiddle to the Cambridges. _
…
_The real royal bore comes in the last episode of the six-part series, when Meghan cries on her $1,625 Hermes blanket in her $15 million mansion and Harry laments how much he misses the U.K. and his friends._










						Meghan and Harry downgrade to Real Housewives of Suburban California in new Netflix reality show
					

England was first united in 886 A.D. under Alfred the Great, the 32nd great-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II. Since then, Alfred's successors have turned his kingdom into an effective empire. The current monarch is not just the king of the United Kingdom, the head of the Commonwealth, and the…




					www.washingtonexaminer.com


----------



## Chanbal

Allegedly, Tom Bower's book will be updated to include more information. It looks like he may clarify the mystery around Doria, which likely will contradict TW's claims during the Nexfl*x show. The new updated version is supposed to be released next year (Spring).


----------



## Chanbal

Another song from Parody W.


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Tom Bower's book will be updated to include more information. It looks like he may clarify the mystery around Doria, which likely will contradict TW's claims during the Nexfl*x show. The new updated version is supposed to be released next year (Spring).



So many speculated that Bower had a lot more info and wondered why he left out some stuff in his original book. Now I’m thinking he had a strategy knowing that the Harkles had the Spotify series, the Netflix series, and Harry’s memoir in the pipeline. He waited until the Harkles released the first 2 series before he revised his book with additional info he initially held back until he saw what additional lies the Harkles came up with. I’m wondering if he’ll do more revisions after H’s biography comes out. It’s a clever way to keep up the interest in Bower’s book.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## CobaltBlu

DoggieBags said:


> So many speculated that Bower had a lot more info and wondered why he left out some stuff in his original book. Now I’m thinking he had a strategy knowing that the Harkles had the Spotify series, the Netflix series, and Harry’s memoir in the pipeline. He waited until the Harkles released the first 2 series before he revised his book with additional info he initially held back until he saw what additional lies the Harkles came up with. I’m wondering if he’ll do more revisions after H’s biography comes out. It’s a clever way to keep up the interest in Bower’s book.


He’s another one that knows how to play the long game.


----------



## CobaltBlu

Charles deftly handled Harry and Meghan in his speech, which was great I thought, by not mentioning them or including them in the videos that focused on the working royals and their service.

His message was about hope and being of service to others and they were absent from it and rightly so. 

I still think he knows what time it is and will sweep them aside in a way that is permanent and light on drama.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

CobaltBlu said:


> Charles deftly handled Harry and Meghan in his speech, which was great I thought, by not mentioning them or including them in the videos that focused on the working royals and their service.
> 
> His message was about hope and being of service to others and they were absent from it and rightly so.
> 
> I still think he knows what time it is and will sweep them aside in a way that is permanent and light on drama.


if they get swept aside, they asked for it


----------



## lanasyogamama

Did the bozos release a Christmas card this year?


----------



## DoggieBags

lanasyogamama said:


> Did the bozos release a Christmas card this year?


@Chanbal’s post #123,984. They used a photo from the RFK awards event. Just in case people didn’t realize they bought another award.


----------



## bag-mania

And this is how a narcissist controls her tool spouse. She has conditioned the idiot to believe he should always feel guilty because he hasn’t done enough for her.   












						Prince Harry "Hates" Himself For His Reaction to Meghan Markle's Mental Health Struggles
					

"What she needed from me was so much more than I was able to give," Prince Harry says of Meghan in their Netflix docuseries.




					www.townandcountrymag.com


----------



## 880

bag-mania said:


> And this is how a narcissist controls her tool spouse. She has conditioned the idiot to believe he should always feel guilty because he hasn’t done enough for her.
> 
> View attachment 5677355
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry "Hates" Himself For His Reaction to Meghan Markle's Mental Health Struggles
> 
> 
> "What she needed from me was so much more than I was able to give," Prince Harry says of Meghan in their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Interesting! My first reaction was it was H’s PR, laying the groundwork for his ‘innocence’ in case they split 
IMO he has to promote that narrative bc no one can see what other appeal she has right now


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> And this is how a narcissist controls her tool spouse. She has conditioned the idiot to believe he should always feel guilty because he hasn’t done enough for her.
> 
> View attachment 5677355
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry "Hates" Himself For His Reaction to Meghan Markle's Mental Health Struggles
> 
> 
> "What she needed from me was so much more than I was able to give," Prince Harry says of Meghan in their Netflix docuseries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.townandcountrymag.com


Hmmmm….he doesn’t hate himself for the misery he caused his grandparents at the close of their lives?  Oh, right, he was waiting for an apology.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Allegedly, Tom Bower's book will be updated to include more information. It looks like he may clarify the mystery around Doria, which likely will contradict TW's claims during the Nexfl*x show. The new updated version is supposed to be released next year (Spring).




I'd be all over this, but I just cannot fathom reading that soulsucking book again.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CobaltBlu said:


> Charles deftly handled Harry and Meghan in his speech, which was great I thought, by not mentioning them or including them in the videos that focused on the working royals and their service.
> 
> His message was about hope and being of service to others and they were absent from it and rightly so.
> 
> *I still think he knows what time it is and will sweep them aside in a way that is permanent and light on drama.*



Seeing how he handled Andrew I tend to reluctantly agree. It's just I'm not very diplomatic when dealing with jerks and like to see blood


----------



## bag-mania

The Sun’s apology isn’t good enough for the Duke and Duchess of Butt Hurt.









						Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Reject Sun's Apology Over Graphic Column
					

The Sussexes are calling The Sun's apology over an incredibly graphic column written about Meghan nothing but a PR stunt.




					www.tmz.com


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> The Sun’s apology isn’t good enough for the Duke and Duchess of Butt Hurt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle & Prince Harry Reject Sun's Apology Over Graphic Column
> 
> 
> The Sussexes are calling The Sun's apology over an incredibly graphic column written about Meghan nothing but a PR stunt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.tmz.com


A PR stunt?  Could be, but it takes one to know one KWIM?


----------



## Cavalier Girl

gracekelly said:


> A PR stunt?  Could be, but it takes one to know one KWIM?



Agreed.  Their entire engagement, wedding and marriage has been one big PR stunt.


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently on Christmas Day, when the actual royals had their Christmas walkabout in Sandringham, the Troublesome Two released a birthday video of the girl. Who is a June baby. Are y'all interested in some birthday pictures of mine? Granted, it's been seven months, but just in case!


----------



## CarryOn2020

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently on Christmas Day, when the actual royals had their Christmas walkabout in Sandringham, the Troublesome Two released a birthday video of the girl. Who is a June baby. Are y'all interested in some birthday pictures of mine? Granted, it's been seven months, but just in case!


Is there a link?


----------



## CarryOn2020




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## CarryOn2020

*Grossss

*


----------



## xincinsin

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently on Christmas Day, when the actual royals had their Christmas walkabout in Sandringham, the Troublesome Two released a birthday video of the girl. Who is a June baby. Are y'all interested in some birthday pictures of mine? Granted, it's been seven months, but just in case!


That is quite odd timing. I thought they would hype their "successful year" since they managed to purchase numerous awards, she had several Invictus fashion shows, she decocted spite into a Spotify podcast, and they reenacted their life dubiously for Netflix.


----------



## CarryOn2020

People are asking the correct questions - who “owns” this cottage?  Did QE really transfer _ownership _OR was it _custodianship?  _Two different matters, right?


----------



## duna

I hadn't recognized our favourit Johnny at first

I wonder why Anne isn't there


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

CarryOn2020 said:


> People are asking the correct questions - who “owns” this cottage?  Did QE really transfer _ownership _OR was it _custodianship?  _Two different matters, right?




I'd think Charles does and Bea is the custodian. I saw a documentary a while ago where she gave a little tour of it and spoke about its history. The Queen was still alive back then.

Re: birthday video, I didn't go look for it. Apparently it was mentioned on Yahoo of all places. The Yahoo that employs Scobie


----------



## DoggieBags

duna said:


> I hadn't recognized our favourit Johnny at first
> 
> I wonder why Anne isn't there


Anne did not attend the church services because she was nursing a cold.


----------



## duna

DoggieBags said:


> Anne did not attend the church services because she was nursing a cold.


Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid



Get better soon!


----------



## xincinsin

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Hope yours is a mild case, @duna


----------



## DoggieBags

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Hope you feel better soon.


----------



## CarryOn2020

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Sending wishes for a speedy recovery


----------



## jennlt

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Get well soon!


----------



## Debbini

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Dang it. Hope you feel better Soon!


----------



## Sharont2305

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Hope you get well soon.


----------



## marietouchet

xincinsin said:


> That is quite odd timing. I thought they would hype their "successful year" since they managed to purchase numerous awards, she had several Invictus fashion shows, she decocted spite into a Spotify podcast, and they reenacted their life dubiously for Netflix.


The Harkles made FRONT PAGE on the Wall Street Journal today , the years most ANNOYING  people list along with Kanye/Ye and Pete Davision.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## carmen56

I feel so sorry for Archie and Lilibucks missing out on all the Christmas fun with their U.K. cousins.  I’m sure the atmosphere at Sandringham was riotous with all the children running around.  Lilibucks would have had her own little group to play with in Lucas Tindall, Sienna Mapelli Mozzi and August Brooksbank.  Children need to be with other children to learn how to be sociable and how to interact with them.  It’s so sad that Archie and Lilibucks are missing out on all this.  I foresee them growing into screwed up teens and adults, unable to interact with the world around them.  Very sad.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


Wishing quick recovery and good health to all.


----------



## Chanbal

What happened to CNN? They continue ignoring all the news out there about the entitled Harkles. Very disappointing!


----------



## Chanbal

_*Meghan Markle and Prince What’sHisName*_ seem to be heading the list…


----------



## csshopper

I think the Netflix decision to air the six part Whinefest prior to Christmas was a huge mistake for them. They put their $$$ on the losing side.

The contrast to all we’ve seen in the past week of a loving RF keeping calm and carrying on, kicks the Suckesses to the curb and into the gutter where the likes of Scoobie reside.

What a pathetic attempt at an attention grab to release a Lilibet birthday vid on Christmas Eve. Desperation and validation that merching the children is apparently a new low for them. Maybe I missed it, but didn’t see it on major news sites, a hopeful sign.


----------



## Chanbal

CarryOn2020 said:


>



In line with the above!


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> What happened to CNN? They continue ignoring all the news out there about the entitled Harkles. Very disappointing!



Sure, sure, she isn't safe. She will also never be in a hit show like GOT. If she is so in danger, I strongly recommend that she stays home in her 16-bathroom mansion and don't pollute British soil in May. Sparry can also stay home to defend her (lack of) virtue.


----------



## sdkitty

marietouchet said:


> The Harkles made FRONT PAGE on the Wall Street Journal today , the years most ANNOYING  people list along with Kanye/Ye and Pete Davision.


yay....would you be able to post that?  I can't access WSJ.  thanks


----------



## sdkitty

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


hope it's a mild case and you feel better soon


----------



## marietouchet

sdkitty said:


> yay....would you be able to post that?  I can't access WSJ.  thanks


Same story on Fox News, link to that was posted a few back
Sorry WSJ has paywall , see post 124 819


----------



## duna

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Get better soon!





xincinsin said:


> Hope yours is a mild case, @duna





DoggieBags said:


> Hope you feel better soon.





CarryOn2020 said:


> Sending wishes for a speedy recovery





jennlt said:


> Get well soon!





Debbini said:


> Dang it. Hope you feel better Soon!





Sharont2305 said:


> Hope you get well soon.





Lilliesdaughter said:


> Wishing quick recovery and good health to all.





sdkitty said:


> hope it's a mild case and you feel better soon


Thanks a lot ladies for your well wishes, they are much appreciated


----------



## mrsinsyder

csshopper said:


> I think the Netflix decision to air the six part Whinefest prior to Christmas was a huge mistake for them. They put their $$$ on the losing side.
> 
> The contrast to all we’ve seen in the past week of a loving RF keeping calm and carrying on, kicks the Suckesses to the curb and into the gutter where the likes of Scoobie reside.
> 
> What a pathetic attempt at an attention grab to release a Lilibet birthday vid on Christmas Eve. Desperation and validation that merching the children is apparently a new low for them. Maybe I missed it, but didn’t see it on major news sites, a hopeful sign.


Where is the Lilibet video? It’s been mentioned a few times but I can’t find it.


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> _*Meghan Markle and Prince What’sHisName*_ seem to be heading the list…



They *have to* top the list. Every other name is a singleton. With the Harkles, you get a geometrical escalation of annoyance. What was that saying? The whole is greater than the sum of its parts? They are equal to more than two annoying people!


----------



## xincinsin

mrsinsyder said:


> Where is the Lilibet video? It’s been mentioned a few times but I can’t find it.











						Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Share a Sweet Home Video from Lilibet's First Birthday Party
					

They celebrated Lili's birthday at Frogmore Cottage during Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee.




					www.yahoo.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

xincinsin said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Share a Sweet Home Video from Lilibet's First Birthday Party
> 
> 
> They celebrated Lili's birthday at Frogmore Cottage during Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


I'm sure I'm biased but I don't think Archie climbing on the table is cute


----------



## lallybelle

Hmmm all I see on that Yahoo article is Netflix screenshots, not "new" home video. Was this on the show? I didn't watch. Clickbait title and late? Maybe that's why it hasn't shown up on other media.


----------



## CarryOn2020

lallybelle said:


> Hmmm all I see on that Yahoo article is Netflix screenshots, now "new" home video". Was this on the show? I didn't watch. Clitbait title and late? Maybe that's why it's not all over media?


Agree, plus the girl looks either fussy or mad [can’t decide].  No need for them to post these low-quality photos, except for attention.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure I'm biased but I don't think Archie climbing on the table is cute


Didn't bother looking at the pics. I searched for it to help @mrsinsyder.
But I did read a comment elsewhere that the event seemed scripted. The person claimed that Archie was instructed by someone offscreen to "act cute" by climbing on the table.


----------



## Toby93

CarryOn2020 said:


> Agree, plus the girl looks either fussy or mad [can’t decide].  No need for them to post these low-quality photos, except for attention.


Exactly.  If a professional photographer was in attendance, why do the pics look like they were taken with a 20 year old cell phone?


----------



## redney

lallybelle said:


> Hmmm all I see on that Yahoo article is Netflix screenshots, not "new" home video. Was this on the show? I didn't watch. Clickbait title and late? Maybe that's why it hasn't shown up on other media.


Exactly. The Yahoo article said the birthday video was in an episode of the already aired Netflix show...so nothing new released except this article trying to divert attention from the real Royals' post-church walkabout. Same old M.O. from the gruesome twosome.


----------



## sdkitty

so even people who are sympathetic to them admit they are annoying....wonder how that feels








						Maybe the Key to Thinking About Meghan and Harry Is Admitting: They’re Annoying!
					

The Sussexes have been through a lot. We can feel bad for them and recognize their true essence too.




					slate.com


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> so even people who are sympathetic to them admit they are annoying....wonder how that feels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the Key to Thinking About Meghan and Harry Is Admitting: They’re Annoying!
> 
> 
> The Sussexes have been through a lot. We can feel bad for them and recognize their true essence too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com


They better get used to it!!!


----------



## mrsinsyder

xincinsin said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Share a Sweet Home Video from Lilibet's First Birthday Party
> 
> 
> They celebrated Lili's birthday at Frogmore Cottage during Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


Oh, it’s just a news story replaying a part of the show, it doesn’t seem like they actually released anything. Booooooooring.


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> They better get used to it!!!


they will either think any attention is good....or will be very upset that they aren't the most popular celebs in the world...or both?


----------



## justwatchin

2022 Is the Year We All Finally Got Tired of Narcissists
					

Narcissists had their moment in the sun. But in 2022, some of them got their comeuppance and some of them got worse: our disinterest.




					www.politico.com
				




Ha ha! She got included on this list.


----------



## sdkitty

justwatchin said:


> 2022 Is the Year We All Finally Got Tired of Narcissists
> 
> 
> Narcissists had their moment in the sun. But in 2022, some of them got their comeuppance and some of them got worse: our disinterest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha! She got included on this list.


at the top of the list


----------



## redney

justwatchin said:


> 2022 Is the Year We All Finally Got Tired of Narcissists
> 
> 
> Narcissists had their moment in the sun. But in 2022, some of them got their comeuppance and some of them got worse: our disinterest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha! She got included on this list.


Well deserved!


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> Well deserved!


when you think about it, this is kinda hilarious...she was (IMO) so gratified to go from D-list cable supporting actress to household name....now she is a household name but not in a very good way

This may seem cruel but if you think H's main attraction for her was that he was a prince from the most famous RF in the world, not that they were Oh So In Love - then it seems like some sort of justice


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I don't trust Eugenie, but Bea seemed always particularly loyal to her grandparents. I just can't see her going so blatantly against The Queen's wishes (to be honest, I think that's where Eugenie would draw the line too).

I also don't think the a*sholes would have any problems to throw her under the bus to shift the blame and distract from their sh*tty behaviour.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> so even people who are sympathetic to them admit they are annoying....wonder how that feels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe the Key to Thinking About Meghan and Harry Is Admitting: They’re Annoying!
> 
> 
> The Sussexes have been through a lot. We can feel bad for them and recognize their true essence too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> slate.com


Not CNN, but there is hope!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

xincinsin said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Share a Sweet Home Video from Lilibet's First Birthday Party
> 
> 
> They celebrated Lili's birthday at Frogmore Cottage during Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com



Let's ignore for a moment the attention grabbing timing, but I'm honestly disappointed in the Harkles (I know, I know). So it was NEVER about privacy and keeping the kids safe, it was always about selling to the highest bidder. Ew.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Toby93 said:


> Exactly.  If a professional photographer was in attendance, why do the pics look like they were taken with a 20 year old cell phone?



ArTsY.


----------



## marietouchet

Please everyone feel better, get better, the book. IS COMING ! And we need our team at full strength


----------



## sdkitty

Chanbal said:


> Not CNN, but there is hope!



this CNN wasn't so positive








						Opinion: Why 'Harry & Meghan' is a royal disappointment | CNN
					

What we learn from 'Harry & Meghan' is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look, writes Peggy Drexler. The fatal flaw for the couple and their series is in thinking they can...




					www.cnn.com


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> this CNN wasn't so positive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: Why 'Harry & Meghan' is a royal disappointment | CNN
> 
> 
> What we learn from 'Harry & Meghan' is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look, writes Peggy Drexler. The fatal flaw for the couple and their series is in thinking they can...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


thank you for posting this link. Apparently Harry wasn’t the hapless victim but an active participant


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The Telegraph has an offer currently for three free months and you can subscribe to the royal newsletter.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> this CNN wasn't so positive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinion: Why 'Harry & Meghan' is a royal disappointment | CNN
> 
> 
> What we learn from 'Harry & Meghan' is that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are less interested in staying out of the spotlight than in staying in complete control of how that spotlight makes them look, writes Peggy Drexler. The fatal flaw for the couple and their series is in thinking they can...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


I recall this article from a while ago, but it's the only one as far as I know. It seems that CNN is still very much supporting the Harkles despite all the vanity…


----------



## Chanbal

What is this?


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> What is this?



All I can say is


----------



## csshopper

QueenofWrapDress said:


> ArTsY.


Misan Harriman I think. It was his wife and kids at the party and photographed with TW holding Lili.


----------



## Debbini

Chanbal said:


> What is this?



How many more lies can they....she....tell??!!!


----------



## redney

Debbini said:


> How many more lies can they....she....tell??!!!


And who on earth can still be interested in her woe-is-me fabrications?


----------



## Chanbal

Debbini said:


> How many more lies can they....she....tell??!!!


Great question!


----------



## mrsinsyder

Looks like it’s being made by someone external to them. I’d figure netflix wouldn’t be thrilled if they were involved. 


Chanbal said:


> What is this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## 880

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like it’s being made by someone external to them. I’d figure netflix wouldn’t be thrilled if they were involved.


Sounds like a parody. . . And makes me think of Clint eastwood


----------



## Chanbal

mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like it’s being made by someone external to them. I’d figure netflix wouldn’t be thrilled if they were involved.





880 said:


> Sounds like a parody. . . And makes me think of Clint eastwood


It's seems to be made by a newly formed company in the UK, but I don't think it's going  to be a parody (would prefer that). It looks like they are attempting to make a historical piece about TW. 


From LinkedIn:_ Tudor Productions is a London-based production company founded in 2021 that specialises in fresh and engaging content that provides an insightful look at the British Royal family. A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day, from celebration to tragedy, we aim to create thought provoking content that highlights the role of monarchy in modern times._


----------



## DoggieBags

Chanbal said:


> It's seems to be made by a newly formed company in the UK, but I don't think it's going  to be a parody (would prefer that). It looks like they are attempting to make a historical piece about TW.
> 
> 
> From LinkedIn:_ Tudor Productions is a London-based production company founded in 2021 that specialises in fresh and engaging content that provides an insightful look at the British Royal family. A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day, from celebration to tragedy, we aim to create thought provoking content that highlights the role of monarchy in modern times._


If it’s not a parody but meant to be a fact based piece, shouldn’t it be titled “unhinged” instead of unforgiven?


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> It's seems to be made by a newly formed company in the UK, but I don't think it's going  to be a parody (would prefer that). It looks like they are attempting to make a historical piece about TW.
> 
> 
> From LinkedIn:_ Tudor Productions is a London-based production company founded in 2021 that specialises in fresh and engaging content that provides an insightful look at the British Royal family. A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day, from celebration to tragedy, we aim to create thought provoking content that highlights the role of monarchy in modern times._


Here’s the trailer. Note at the 0:32 mark, it says, “As we enter 2023, her story takes even more unexpected twists and turns.”  Hmmmm. Exactly _what_ does that mean?



ETA: comments are almost all negative


----------



## redney

Chanbal said:


> It's seems to be made by a newly formed company in the UK, but I don't think it's going  to be a parody (would prefer that). It looks like they are attempting to make a historical piece about TW.
> 
> 
> From LinkedIn:_ Tudor Productions is a London-based production company founded in 2021 that specialises in fresh and engaging content that provides an insightful look at the British Royal family. A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day, from celebration to tragedy, we aim to create thought provoking content that highlights the role of monarchy in modern times._


Guess Tutor Productions hasn't paid attention to the negative comments and reviews of the Netflix "documentary." A swing and a miss for them...


----------



## CarryOn2020

redney said:


> Guess Tutor Productions hasn't paid attention to the negative comments and reviews of the Netflix "documentary." A swing and a miss for them...


Their YouTube page consists of all videos about the RF, made within the last 4-6 months.  I smell a rat, anyone else? Perhaps the name _Tudor_ is a clue?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> It's seems to be made by a newly formed company in the UK, but I don't think it's going  to be a parody (would prefer that). It looks like they are attempting to make a historical piece about TW.
> 
> 
> From LinkedIn:_ Tudor Productions is a London-based production company founded in 2021 that specialises in fresh and engaging content that provides an insightful look at the British Royal family. A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day, from celebration to tragedy, we aim to create thought provoking content that highlights the role of monarchy in modern times._



Note to Tudor Production: Even this puts me to sleep  

I don't think it's going to be a parody, I think it's going to be dire "_A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day" _is code for  "H&M  are obviously controversial cash-cows, so we (look-at-me, NO,  LOOK@MEEEEE!!!!) are going to rewrite history (into fiction) to make it reflect 'our truth' and make our name/money"


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> Their YouTube page consists of all videos about the RF, made within the last 4-6 months.  I smell a rat, anyone else? Perhaps the name _Tudor_ is a clue?



Well if it is, then I'll be happy. The company's blurb does not sound like him at all.


----------



## csshopper

If Tudor Productions has already wrapped their production they’ve missed the biggest “twists and turns” for 2023 : the “Variety“piece saying the Harkles were ready for the glue factory, on the list of “8 Most Annoying People of 2022” and a Politico article that included TW in “2022, Year We Got Tired of Narcissists .”

Of special note are the sources :  “Variety” in Hollywood and “Politico”, two areas, entertainment and politics, where TW is desperately trying to claw her way to become a player.

Her sugars bray about the Netflix viewership #’s, all the while failing to acknowledge those numbers do not equate in any way to her likeability. In fact, it means post Netfix, increasingly potential millions of people are figuring out TW is a miserable, nasty, phony piece of narcissistic hypocrisy. Happy New Year!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Apparently the sugars are now ripping into George, accusing him of "plagiarism" for the Christmas drawing the Waleses shared on their Insta. Can't make that sh*t up


----------



## gracekelly

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


So sorry!  Illness during the Holidays is a bummer.  Get well soon!


----------



## gracekelly

xincinsin said:


> Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Share a Sweet Home Video from Lilibet's First Birthday Party
> 
> 
> They celebrated Lili's birthday at Frogmore Cottage during Queen Elizabeth's Platinum Jubilee.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.yahoo.com


This isn't new.  I saw it days ago.  They are so hard up they re-released it.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently the sugars are now ripping into George, accusing him of "plagiarism" for the Christmas drawing the Waleses shared on their Insta. Can't make that sh*t up


George has inherited talent.  Everyone knows that KC3 is a painter and has been doing it for decades.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I'm sure I'm biased but I don't think Archie climbing on the table is cute


He is old enough to know better.


----------



## Debbini

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the trailer. Note at the 0:32 mark, it says, “As we enter 2023, her story takes even more unexpected twists and turns.”  Hmmmm. Exactly _what_ does that mean?
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: comments are almost all negative



She is going to do a historical piece about the British Monarchy of which she knows nothing about, nada, zip......what the he[[?!!!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

Debbini said:


> How many more lies can they....she....tell??!!!


She will massage them and tweak them so we think she is telling us something new.  In the end it's all HER TRUTH.


----------



## Debbini

csshopper said:


> If Tudor Productions has already wrapped their production they’ve missed the biggest “twists and turns” for 2023 : the “Variety“piece saying the Harkles were ready for the glue factory, on the list of “8 Most Annoying People of 2022” and a Politico article that included TW in “2022, Year We Got Tired of Narcissists .”
> 
> Of special note are the sources :  “Variety” in Hollywood and “Politico”, two areas, entertainment and politics, where TW is desperately trying to claw her way to become a player.
> 
> Her sugars bray about the Netflix viewership #’s, all the while failing to acknowledge those numbers do not equate in any way to her likeability. In fact, it means post Netfix, increasingly potential millions of people are figuring out TW is a miserable, nasty, phony piece of narcissistic hypocrisy. Happy New Year!


Lol@glue factory! I love this!


----------



## gelbergirl

carmen56 said:


> I feel so sorry for Archie and Lilibucks missing out on all the Christmas fun with their U.K. cousins.  I’m sure the atmosphere at Sandringham was riotous with all the children running around.  Lilibucks would have had her own little group to play with in Lucas Tindall, Sienna Mapelli Mozzi and August Brooksbank.  Children need to be with other children to learn how to be sociable and how to interact with them.  It’s so sad that Archie and Lilibucks are missing out on all this.  I foresee them growing into screwed up teens and adults, unable to interact with the world around them.  Very sad.



Harry is making sure that being angry at one's family will be a tradition that will handed down.
In other words, Lillibet and Archie will surely be angry at M & H one day.


----------



## gracekelly

CarryOn2020 said:


> Here’s the trailer. Note at the 0:32 mark, it says, “As we enter 2023, her story takes even more unexpected twists and turns.”  Hmmmm. Exactly _what_ does that mean?
> 
> 
> 
> ETA: comments are almost all negative



Hold on a minute!  She was thrown into the spotlight in 2017?  I thought she was a mega star and already in the spotlight and she was the one shining her spotlight on the royals who no one ever talks about or knows.  Gee, I had it all backwards!


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> He is old enough to know better.


The hypocrisy never ends with these people. There have been references in several different interviews/articles about how they stress Manners with a capital M with Archie, “manners make the man”.

He’s a little guy and enthusiasm sometimes getting the best of him is normal, BUT, he should have been told “no” and removed from the table. They never ever practice what they preach.

Another possibility is “cheeky chappy H” thought it was cute and was giving manners and protocol the finger.


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> What is this?



Huh. My immediate thought is that this should be titled “Unforgivable”


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> It's seems to be made by a newly formed company in the UK, but I don't think it's going  to be a parody (would prefer that). It looks like they are attempting to make a historical piece about TW.
> 
> 
> From LinkedIn:_ Tudor Productions is a London-based production company founded in 2021 that specialises in fresh and engaging content that provides an insightful look at the British Royal family. A young team of creatives is working hard at contextualising history in a compelling way for a modern audience. Covering everything royal from ancient history to modern day, from celebration to tragedy, we aim to create thought provoking content that highlights the role of monarchy in modern times._


I wonder if this company ties was looked further into, if it would have ties to TW.


----------



## lallybelle

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Apparently the sugars are now ripping into George, accusing him of "plagiarism" for the Christmas drawing the Waleses shared on their Insta. Can't make that sh*t up


Bashing an 8 year old? What are they saying he "PLAGERIZED" about a painting of a Reindeer...lol. I mean we know they aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer, but what the hell are these people on?


----------



## Maggie Muggins

QueenofWrapDress said:


> I don't trust Eugenie, but Bea seemed always particularly loyal to her grandparents. I just can't see her going so blatantly against The Queen's wishes (to be honest, I think that's where Eugenie would draw the line too).
> 
> I also don't think the a*sholes would have any problems to throw her under the bus to shift the blame and distract from their sh*tty behaviour.
> 
> View attachment 5677867


This could be a smear campaign against Beatrice because the Snarkles are jealous of the late Queen Elizabeth II's affection for her grand daughter. Remember that QEII chose B to refurbish the playhouse and she loaned her a gown and her own wedding tiara for a very intimate wedding that HM also attended with PP and most likely helped to plan. Maybe they're thinking that  tarnishing one will tarnish the other by mere association.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> He is old enough to know better.


I don't know about that but someone should have been getting him off - not photographing it as if it were cute


----------



## redney

bellecate said:


> I wonder if this company ties was looked further into, if it would have ties to TW.


Any detectives out there?

Here are links to *trailers *of Tudor Productions' videos on many members of the BRF (are any videos finished, I wonder?): https://vimeo.com/user182387308

and Tudor Productions' website. Scroll down for the names of the people involved: https://www.tudorproductions.co.uk/


----------



## csshopper

Maggie Muggins said:


> This could be a smear campaign against Beatrice because the Snarkles are jealous of the late Queen Elizabeth II's affection for her grand daughter. Remember that QEII chose B to refurbish the playhouse and she loaned her a gown and her own wedding tiara for a very intimate wedding that HM also attended with PP and most likely helped to plan. Maybe they're thinking that  tarnishing one will tarnish the other by mere association.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> I don't know about that but someone should have been getting him off - not photographing it as if it were cute


When my niece was 4, she was able to set the table and not climb onto it.  In fact she was smarter than I was (not having children) and told me that she was not allowed to touch knives.  If Harry thinks that letting his kids run wild is cute, then he will have to suffer the consequences later.  He is a perfect example.


----------



## csshopper

Aargh, this is a reply to Maggie’s post Above.

Maybe the Harkles are still nursing a grudge because Beatrice and her husband did not relinquish their aisle seats at the Jubilee and made them move into their lesser assigned ones in the middle, where Johnny could keep an eye on them .


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> When my niece was 4, she was able to set the table and not climb onto it.  In fact she was smarter than I was (not having children) and told me that she was not allowed to touch knives.  If Harry thinks that letting his kids run wild is cute, then he will have to suffer the consequences later.  He is a perfect example.


I didn't realize archie was four....not cute behavior
I saw a little girl in the store today.  she was maybe 18 months.  sitting in the top part of the shopping cart.  she was trying to climb out and being really willful about it.  really had a mind of her own.  she was cute. but she's a baby and mom didn't allow her to jump out LOL


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## zinacef

CarryOn2020 said:


> *Grossss
> 
> *



Oh no! a revelation or what? Pineapple! a little side bit, there’s a super wealthy neighborhood where I’m from and  there’s pineapple decor in most houses— in various places up front, apparently it’s a part of the their building “ code” YKWIM!


----------



## LittleStar88

zinacef said:


> Oh no! a revelation or what? Pineapple! a little side bit, there’s a super wealthy neighborhood where I’m from and  there’s pineapple decor in most houses— in various places up front, apparently it’s a part of the their building “ code” YKWIM!



The pineapple is a “thing” in the motor home and cruise community, too


----------



## Maggie Muggins

csshopper said:


> Aargh, this is a reply to Maggie’s post Above.
> 
> Maybe the Harkles are still nursing a grudge because Beatrice and her husband did not relinquish their aisle seats at the Jubilee and made them move into their lesser assigned ones in the middle, where Johnny could keep an eye on them .


Yes I'm sure that's part of it and also I wonder what would happen if ZedZed compared the late QEII's reaction between their (the Sharkles) wedding with that of Beatrice and Edo. In her mind, wouldn't that deserve a big fabricated story in retaliation?


----------



## Hermes Zen

mrsinsyder said:


> Ceejay
> 
> 
> It is with great sadness that Megs and I learned that Claudia Long, a.k.a. Ceejay, passed away this past Sunday. Claudia’s husband Paul shared the terrible news with us and said that he wanted Claudia’s friends, who she loved chatting with over the years, to know.  Claudia was a long-time O.G...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.purseblog.com


I know it's off topic and post may be moved to sweet 'CeeJays' thread which I'm okay with, but in case someone here hasn't already seen this:









						Claudia Long Obituary (2022) - Hartford, CT - Hartford Courant
					

View Claudia J. Long's obituary, send flowers and sign the guestbook.



					www.legacy.com
				




I scrolled down to heading 'How to support Claudia's loved ones' "Attending a funeral: What to know' there is a photo of a group of people in black.  I swore the woman in the middle resembled M.


----------



## Chanbal

gracekelly said:


> He is old enough to know better.





sdkitty said:


> I don't know about that but someone should have been getting him off - not photographing it as if it were cute


According to the video below, there is the possibility that the Harkles may have used kid actors in some the scenes of the reality show, and the birthday party was one on them (see video @ ~16:10).


----------



## gracekelly

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yes I'm sure that's part of it and also I wonder what would happen if ZedZed compared the late QEII's reaction between their (the Sharkles) wedding with that of Beatrice and Edo. In her mind, wouldn't that deserve a big fabricated story in retaliation?
> 
> View attachment 5678061
> 
> View attachment 5678062


I don’t think I have ever seen another picture of the late Queen with an expression like the one she had on her face at the Sussex wedding. It was obvious that PP was disturbed by it.  She was seriously p*ssed off!


----------



## Chanbal

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> What is this?



More home movies?


mrsinsyder said:


> Looks like it’s being made by someone external to them. I’d figure netflix wouldn’t be thrilled if they were involved.


Looks like Tudor Productions is using the same business model as the Sussexes: buy rights to a lot of footage and string them together coherently, overlay with a voice-over. If they do a very pro-Zed Woe-is-Me slant, they may even be able to hire Zed to do the voice over!

ETA: or maybe not. Madame Zed does not see herself as doing anything wrong, so will not require forgiveness. She wants others to beg her for her forgiveness.


----------



## Chanbal

_Meghan Markle wants to be the next Kim Kardashian, says Ryan-Mark Parsons_​


----------



## Debbini

Chanbal said:


> According to the video below, there is the possibility that the Harkles may have used kid actors in some the scenes of the reality show, and the birthday party was one on them (see video @ ~16:10).



Interesting!!! Rent a kid. Or two.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think I have ever seen another picture of the late Queen with an expression like the one she had on her face at the Sussex wedding. It was obvious that PP was disturbed by it. * She was seriously p*ssed off!*


In fact, I'd caption that picture as: "We are not amused!"


----------



## xincinsin

Chanbal said:


> According to the video below, there is the possibility that the Harkles may have used kid actors in some the scenes of the reality show, and the birthday party was one on them (see video @ ~16:10).



That was enlightening... It feels weird thinking that they are filming "home movies" with pretend children. But I agree with TRG: there was a jumpcut at one point and the girl child looked different after the cut. Also, there is a lot of misdirection. They lead the viewer to make assumptions like Zed appears with two children, so we assume they must be her children, but they never actually say that is the case.

In some of the footage supposedly showing the girl baby at one year or so, sometimes she appears toddler height with short legs, and in other footage she is already lanky with longer legs (the birthday party). I can accept that the camera angle and lighting can make a person look different, but leg length is something that shouldn't change so drastically in a child at one year to max 1.5 years. And I've seen many a one-year-old. That girl dangling in Zed's arms looking blankly at the birthday cake looks older than one year.


----------



## CarryOn2020

LittleStar88 said:


> The pineapple is a “thing” in the motor home and cruise community, too


I just learned something new! Shocking!


----------



## PurseUOut

justwatchin said:


> 2022 Is the Year We All Finally Got Tired of Narcissists
> 
> 
> Narcissists had their moment in the sun. But in 2022, some of them got their comeuppance and some of them got worse: our disinterest.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ha ha! She got included on this list.



Seems like the author wishes she was Harry's "list" and upset she wasn't. 



Some of these ugly (inside and out) women need to SEEK THERAPY for their parasocial deranged attachment to a man that does not and never will want them. After 5 years he has clearly shown he'd rather be Meghan's husband, live a life and create a family with her as far away from the rabid British press as possible. 

To call Meghan a narc is one thing, but to depict her as one centered in a photo amongst textbook narcs, abusers, criminals, antisemites, insurrectionists, modern day robber barons, fraudsters who stole billions and put the health/safety of patients at risk is complete insanity and calculated manipulation no one is buying. To think Meghan is objectively more or equally narcissistic than Sam Bankman-Fried, who ripped billions away from elderly people's pensions and 401K is the height of delusion. In this author's feeble mind, yes, she maybe, but *objectively* speaking she is not for sharing her experience with a family SHE married into - not her. So why is she pictured in a photo with Sam and a president who committed treason? This author is a grade-A lunatic. And pray tell - Harry has an entire memoir coming out AND appeared in the series but his photo is no where to be found, but his biracial black wife is front and center? No wonder she and German right-wing owned Politico are rightfully being drug thru the mud on Twitter. Americans have more common sense than that.


----------



## duna

gracekelly said:


> So sorry!  Illness during the Holidays is a bummer.  Get well soon!


Yep, it is! Thanks my dear


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## duna

Chanbal said:


>



Thanks a lot *Chanbal  *


----------



## PurseUOut

limom said:


> There is such a thing as student loans and scholarships.
> What is the angle here?



I am trying to figure it out too. Just because Doria obtained her masters from USC that means every USC graduate degree holder is independently wealthy, or else they couldn't afford attend? Financial aid doesn't exist anymore because Doria went there?


----------



## CarryOn2020

PurseUOut said:


> This four year old's behavior toward his own mother was not cute either.
> 
> View attachment 5678139
> 
> 
> View attachment 5678140
> 
> 
> View attachment 5678141
> 
> 
> View attachment 5678142



From the DM:
Meghan Markle is branded a 'narcissist' akin to Sam Bankman-Fried, Kanye West, ***** and Elizabeth Holmes in new Politico story which claims Americans are tiring of her behavior​
*Duchess of Sussex part of 'The Year We All Finally Got Tired of the Narcissists' *
*Writer Joanna Weiss claims that Markle is similar to *****, SBF, Kanye and Musk *
*Argues Netflix series chips away at her 'natural sympathy' for royal couple *
*Weiss adds: 'Even sympathetic critics have groused that there’s little new here'*


----------



## needlv




----------



## PurseUOut




----------



## CarryOn2020

Awww, a downgrade


----------



## jelliedfeels

.


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> _Meghan Markle wants to be the next Kim Kardashian, says Ryan-Mark Parsons_​




I liked the comment at the fade out "I don't think he's _read_ a book let alone written one"


----------



## CarryOn2020

H&M use these suggestions often.  She must have learned them in her private school, along with her humble-bragging 









						5 Simple Ways to Write about Negative Issues with a Positive Spin
					

Have you ever written something only to have the recipient completely misunderstand your intent? Or been accused of abruptness when you thought you were being…




					www.grammarly.com


----------



## Icyjade

PurseUOut said:


>



Why was the huge bald patch cropped out? Was the poster too lazy to photoshop?


----------



## WingNut

duna said:


> Ah, thanks, that makes two of us, only mine is Covid


I’m sorry…I hope you are well on your way to recovery!


----------



## PurseUOut

Icyjade said:


> *Why was the huge bald patch cropped out?* Was the poster too lazy to photoshop?



Here you go. And derangers will still obsess over why he and his bald spot chose the woman he loves over them.


----------



## eunaddict

gracekelly said:


> I don’t think I have ever seen another picture of the late Queen with an expression like the one she had on her face at the Sussex wedding. It was obvious that PP was disturbed by it.  She was seriously p*ssed off!



I read PP's expression as more he knows she's grumpy about something and he's checking on her, there's something slightly playful in his face that reminds me of every other hubby/boyfriend checking on the temperature of the room after something happens.


----------



## papertiger

CarryOn2020 said:


> H&M use these suggestions often.  She must have learned them in her private school, along with her humble-bragging
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5 Simple Ways to Write about Negative Issues with a Positive Spin
> 
> 
> Have you ever written something only to have the recipient completely misunderstand your intent? Or been accused of abruptness when you thought you were being…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.grammarly.com



She is the mistress of humble bragging! 

There is not a single word that comes out of either of their respective mouthes that doesn't soft-soap people into thinking how b**dy wonderful they are without directly telling us so. 

Can you believe how marvellous they both were to put up with Nottingham Cottage for so long? (K&W were there for 2 years)

Can you believe how demonstrative and warm hearted M is with all her "hugger" hugging she is? (It's a wonder so many staff would leave such lovely person)

Can you believe how relaxed and 'homey' M is as a hostess. padding around barefoot and  'take-me-as-you-find-me' ripped jeans? (Hard to believe she a needed* £2M* (NOT including wedding dresses) wardrobe the 18 months she was a Royal.

Wow, they are so in-love/in-tune/good at dancing! Wasn't it fun to see H&M dancing at their wedding and weren't they wonderful together? (That couldn't possibly be choreographed and rehearsed could it - coz no-one else does that so they?  ) And, what are the odds of someone giving them the private footage for Netflix without a written credit. 
Etc
Etc
Etc


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Haven't watched it but was taken by the title


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


>




You don't think that tweet is slightly unhinged? 

BTW evil tongues would say she was the only woman who was up to the task of marrying him, so there's that.


----------



## DoggieBags

At this point I don’t click on any links about them, positive or negative. The less paid clicks and attention they get, the faster they may go away. I find the stuff Analyzing them so tedious and repetitive at this point. So I’m ignoring The Body Language Guy, Lady C, Tom Bower, etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> Here you go. And derangers will still obsess over why he and his bald spot chose the woman he loves over them.



Woman. Literally no one obsesses over why he didn't marry them. Come on now.


----------



## PurseUOut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You don't think that tweet is slightly unhinged?



In the context of this thread? No, not even remotely close to unhinged.



QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW evil tongues would say she was the only woman who was up to the task of marrying him, so there's that.



So the evil tongues should be grateful Meghan took Harry off the sweet little aristocratic girls hands, and left them to find better mates


----------



## PurseUOut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Woman. Literally no one obsesses over why he didn't marry them. Come on now.



Actions (or, in this medium, posts) speak much louder than words, woman.


----------



## Lilliesdaughter

CarryOn2020 said:


> I just learned something new! Shocking!


It is considered a sign of hospitality and very popular in Colonial Williamsburg particularly when Christmas decorations include fruit over the front door or on a mantle.


----------



## marietouchet

Icyjade said:


> Why was the huge bald patch cropped out? Was the poster too lazy to photoshop?


I think the focal point of the photo was lowered - to focus on her face, thus the top of his head was cropped


----------



## lanasyogamama

DoggieBags said:


> At this point I don’t click on any links about them, positive or negative. The less paid clicks and attention they get, the faster they may go away. I find the stuff Analyzing them so tedious and repetitive at this point. So I’m ignoring The Body Language Guy, Lady C, Tom Bower, etc.


Amen.  Ignoring them and making the machine unprofitable is how we will actually be rid of them.


----------



## lallybelle

Ah, I was wondering when we'd get to the YALL JUST JEALOUS!!!! stage of the plot. Bravo.


----------



## lanasyogamama

lallybelle said:


> Ah, I was wondering when we'd get to the YALL JUST JEALOUS!!!! stage of the plot. Bravo.


We made it!


----------



## Icyjade

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Woman. Literally no one obsesses over why he didn't marry them. Come on now.



Can’t say it better.
I honestly think all his previous gfs are glad they dodged a bullet.

Also, the Sussex ”brand” sucks. 
https://cnaluxury.channelnewsasia.c...arry-thing-or-two-about-brand-building-213011 LINK

Michelle ***** could teach Meghan and Harry a thing or two about brand-building​by Jo Ellison
20 Dec 2022 05:16AM (Updated: 20 Dec 2022 05:24AM)
BookmarkShare
As the wife of a public figure, she lived under intense public scrutiny. She spent crucial years trying to raise a family in an environment where her freedom of movement was hugely circumscribed. Before an audience, her outfits were held up for analysis. Every feature of her body was subject to an unrelenting public gaze. She was chastised for speaking out of turn, or too impartially, and was the frequent target of racist hate.

Like Meghan Markle, Michelle ***** made a decision to become a public servant, sublimating her own ambitions to fulfil what she believed to be a greater good. When her husband left office in 2017, after eight years in the White House, she documented much of her life story in the autobiography Becoming, and then kept a relatively low profile for a while.

Lately, though, Michelle ***** has been much about. The former first lady is in the midst of a states-wide tour, promoting her new self-help book The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times. Actually, she doesn’t call it a self-help book — she describes it as a “personal toolbox” for how to navigate hard times. It draws on her experience as the first lady, her fears around the pandemic and the polarisation of society, as well as the more general challenges of being a parent, mother or partner, to offer her advice on how to build better relationships with those we love.

For those in the audience, *****’s second phase has been a joy to watch. Notwithstanding the power biceps, ***** for so long wore the uniform of spousal devotion that one could mistake her for being somewhat mild. Since leaving the White House “lockdown”, she’s become the breakout star of the new ***** show. Yes, the brand is rich in Christian homily and self-improvement — but the stiff-jawed stoicism has been cast aside. Unencumbered by protocol or political expectation, her brand is joyful, fierce and free.

And then there is The Fashion: Rarely has such a high-profile woman who is not a pop star been so bold and experimental with her choice of clothes. With the help of “clothing curator” Meredith Koop, *****’s book-tour wardrobe has been wild. First there was that fabulous highlighter-yellow pantsuit, by Proenza Schouler, that she wore on the first date of her current tour. She wore it buttoned to the neck (high fashion) and with a side parting, setting the tone for a tour in which each look has owned the room. She wore a sparkly “late-night” gold glitter sweater for Colbert, a Canadian tuxedo by cult Scandi label Ganni and a Bottega Veneta power suit in Pennsylvania. This week she wore her waist-length hair in cornrows, with a wide-legged velvet suit and an asymmetric bodice printed with a picture of Diana Ross.

If clothes are an outward expression of one’s feelings, ***** is living her best life. Her look is huge, epic and unapologetic — no longer on the sidelines of world events, she’s stepped up and filled the space.

*I wonder what she makes of the Sussexes, sitting in California bent on retelling their sad tales. Their Netflix series is finally rolling out, eclipsing all other news stories and once again fuelling the anti-Windsor fire. But rather than finding the couple happy, we see them occupying an even more peculiar bubble than before: Self-exiled in their Montecito mansion, quibbling about who said what to whom. Their brand is a litany of sadness. And they have plausible cause. But unlike Michelle, who counsels against becoming “stuck” in one’s neuroses, the Sussexes have built their brand on their shared fears.*

Michelle ***** regularly cites her husband’s decision to run for president as being the most fearful moment of her life. She understood the impact she could make on his decision, and how their campaign could alter history. Of the very few women who might understand Meghan’s position, she is one who has stood in similar shoes. When asked in 2018 if she had any wisdom she would share with Meghan, she offered this: “My biggest piece of advice would be to take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything.”

Later, reacting to the fallout over the couple’s decision to leave Britain, she clearly felt some sympathy. “Public service — it’s a bright, sharp, hot spotlight and most people don’t understand it,” she told the Today show. “The thing that I always keep in mind is that none of this is about us. In public service. It’s about the people that we serve.”

Michelle has taken the spotlight of public office to build herself a stunning brand. Not everyone will love her folksy wisdom, but her effervescent energy, her confidence, is dazzling to behold. She seems lighter and unbothered, a woman who is getting what she deserves. By contrast, the Sussexes have used their spotlight to illuminate a history of ills. From their beige palace of discontent they are now bound endlessly to recount the story of their unbecoming on an ever bigger stage. No one would deny their troubles, nor the life events they’ve had to overcome, but their lives are further shrunken with each retelling; they took the “freedom flight” to create themselves an even smaller world.

_Jo Ellison © 2022 The Financial Times_


----------



## LittleStar88

lallybelle said:


> Ah, I was wondering when we'd get to the YALL JUST JEALOUS!!!! stage of the plot. Bravo.



I am certainly relieved that this dim, emotionally stunted man child didn’t want to marry me. Dodged a bullet there!


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Haven't watched it but was taken by the title




I love her!

One correction though:

I didn't see her cotton on that A couldn't have been born in 2 places. Even though MegZZ said A was born at home (at Frogmore Cottage) as was the plan, we know he was born in hospital (Portland Hospital as was on his birth cert.) hence why the 'no steps, no photos' comment.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

papertiger said:


> I love her!
> 
> One correction though:
> 
> I didn't see her cotton on that A couldn't have been born in 2 places. *Even though she MegZZ said A was born at home (at Frogmore Cottage) as was the plan*, we know he was born in hospital (Portland Hospital as was on his birth cert.) hence why the 'no steps, no photos' comment.



She said that? WTF?


----------



## Jktgal

LittleStar88 said:


> I am certainly relieved that this dim, emotionally stunted man child didn’t want to marry me. Dodged a bullet there!



Bullet shot through the whole of Southeast Asia and hundreds of millions women dodged it. Kudos to the Toronto girl for taking one for the species....


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

Jktgal said:


> Bullet shot through the whole of Southeast Asia and hundreds of millions women dodged it. Kudos to the Toronto girl for taking one for the species....


I'm starting to think of the Darwin Award...


----------



## Debbini

PurseUOut said:


>



Like she wanted Hairy! Too funny! Even the girls who dated Hairy didn't want Hairy....well except the narcissist Meegain.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Wait...no overhauled version, but an entirely new book?


----------



## PurseUOut

Debbini said:


> Like she wanted Hairy! Too funny! Even the girls who dated Hairy didn't want Hairy....well except the narcissist Meegain.



Good...you should be happy Meghan "spared" them the torment of an unworthy partner.

Yup.


----------



## LittleStar88

PurseUOut said:


>





PurseUOut said:


> Yup.





PurseUOut said:


>




You’re still not changing our minds 

Or was meant for the appreciation thread?

Not gonna go back to liking that woman no matter what. These things don’t change my mind nor do they address her behavior.

ETA: Thank goodness for the ignore button!


----------



## tiktok

Let us know when you’d like to address all the proof that has been presented on this thread that she’s a liar (to court, Oprah and many others), a hypocrite (private jets and mansions for the eco warriors), markles everyone in her life (even her father who raised her and her maid of honor ffs), bullied employees, made plans to leave the royal family before she even married into it (so it’s the family’s fault she left) etc. Until then sure, super easy to brand everyone who criticizes her abhorrent behavior racist - sure, I’m a racist because I think a black woman who only ever hung out with white people and does all those things doesn’t walk on water. I think I’ll make use of the ignore button.


----------



## Chanbal

One more update on one of the Harkles' cheerleaders from Nate the Lawyer:
His credibility is oops…    Thanks Nate!


----------



## PurseUOut

LittleStar88 said:


> Or was meant for the appreciation thread?



No, per mods, this is the place to discuss news pertaining to M&H that is of a controversial or critical nature. All other posts in the appreciation thread will be considered off-topic and removed.


----------



## Chanbal

LittleStar88 said:


> You’re still not changing our minds
> 
> Or was meant for the appreciation thread?
> 
> Not gonna go back to liking that woman no matter what. These things don’t change my mind nor do they address her behavior.
> 
> ETA: Thank goodness for the ignore button!





tiktok said:


> Let us know when you’d like to address all the proof that has been presented on this thread that she’s a liar (to court, Oprah and many others), a hypocrite (private jets and mansions for the eco warriors), markles everyone in her life (even her father who raised her and her maid of honor ffs), bullied employees, made plans to leave the royal family before she even married into it (so it’s the family’s fault she left) etc. Until then sure, super easy to brand everyone who criticizes her abhorrent behavior racist - sure, I’m a racist because I think a black woman who only ever hung out with white people and does all those things doesn’t walk on water. I think I’ll make use of the ignore button.


Opinion shared here…


----------



## Swanky

Everyone is welcome in this thread, this is not reserved for anyone of a certain opinion. 

Let’s make sure our posts are respectful and on topic. 


LittleStar88 said:


> You’re still not changing our minds
> 
> Or was meant for the appreciation thread?
> 
> Not gonna go back to liking that woman no matter what. These things don’t change my mind nor do they address her behavior.
> 
> ETA: Thank goodness for the ignore button!


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> At this point I don’t click on any links about them, positive or negative. The less paid clicks and attention they get, the faster they may go away. I find the stuff Analyzing them so tedious and repetitive at this point. So I’m ignoring The Body Language Guy, Lady C, Tom Bower, etc.


yes to this.....I don't like the grifters but they are correct that there's a cottage industry around them and I'm done looking at the videos


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## papertiger

Just out


----------



## PurseUOut

tiktok said:


> Let us know when you’d like to address all the proof that has been presented on this thread that she’s a liar (to court, Oprah and many others), a hypocrite (private jets and mansions for the eco warriors), markles everyone in her life (even her father who raised her and her maid of honor ffs), bullied employees, made plans to leave the royal family before she even married into it (so it’s the family’s fault she left) etc. Until then sure, super easy to brand everyone who criticizes her abhorrent behavior racist - sure, I’m a racist because I think a black woman who only ever hung out with white people and does all those things doesn’t walk on water. I think I’ll make use of the ignore button.



Sure. I'd like to see the findings of the bullying investigation the Palace had buried, ONE *actual* palace employee's personal account of bullying from Meghan, Doria's penal records, evidence of her plan to leave the RF before she married (and why she wasn't better prepared for her accommodations to the extent Tyler Perry was an option). I do have the court findings where she actually won in court, not sure if that is what you are referring to.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Cavalier Girl

My doubt about Nutmeg started with the interview in Africa.  Seriously, "no one has asked how I am."  Before that, I was a rather ardent supported, and wished them both nothing but the best. I truly saw them making a big impact on GB and the Commonwealth.  It saddens me that my view of them has changed so dramatically in the years since that interview due to their subsequent behavior.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Swanky said:


> Everyone is welcome in this thread, this is not reserved for anyone of a certain opinion.
> 
> Let’s make sure our posts are respectful and on topic.



Will you also go find the post where this specific person accused all of us being sick with jealousy and bitter that Harry didn't choose us? Because I personally find that way more offensive than the post you quoted. Also I am a little tired of the idea we need to entertain people who are very obviously here to be provocative, so I feel the block button is a stellar invention.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> yes to this.....I don't like the grifters but they are correct that there's a cottage industry around them and I'm done looking at the videos



Agreed. I will sometimes share a video that showed up on my feed if the title looks interesting, but it's been a while I've actually watched one myself. I think I'm...oversaturated.


----------



## Chanbal

sdkitty said:


> yes to this.....I don't like the grifters but they are correct that there's a cottage industry around them and *I'm done looking at the videos*


In case you would like to open an exception, I recommend watching the short video posted above (#124,948). I don't recall to have watched any videos from this person before, but he is straightforward and he does a very good job imo.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> Sure. I'd like to see the findings of the bullying investigation the Palace had buried, ONE *actual* palace employee's personal account of bullying from Meghan, Doria's penal records, evidence of her plan to leave the RF before she married (and why she wasn't better prepared for her accommodations to the extent Tyler Perry was an option). I do have the court findings where she actually won in court, not sure if that is what you are referring to.



Was that the court case where she commited perjury? Can't keep track anymore with all their petty lawsuits.

Also, that bullying investigation...it might have been "buried" not because of what they didn't find. If the BRF at one point actually does decide those two are fair game they'll be toast.


----------



## LittleStar88

tiktok said:


> Let us know when you’d like to address all the proof that has been presented on this thread that she’s a liar (to court, Oprah and many others), a hypocrite (private jets and mansions for the eco warriors), markles everyone in her life (even her father who raised her and her maid of honor ffs), bullied employees, made plans to leave the royal family before she even married into it (so it’s the family’s fault she left) etc. Until then sure, super easy to brand everyone who criticizes her abhorrent behavior racist - sure, I’m a racist because I think a black woman who only ever hung out with white people and does all those things doesn’t walk on water. I think I’ll make use of the ignore button.



There is a document floating around with an impressively long list of lies and inconsistencies… May have been multi pages. I’ll have to find it.

Would prefer to see that rebutted rather than just coming in and implying everyone is generally hateful and/or racist because they don’t like someone. 

Was not implying that some Users are not welcome here, quite the contrary. Just prefer meaningful dialogue over generally poking the hornets nest.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> I love her!
> 
> One correction though:
> 
> I didn't see her cotton on that A couldn't have been born in 2 places. Even though MegZZ said A was born at home (at Frogmore Cottage) as was the plan, we know he was born in hospital (Portland Hospital as was on his birth cert.) hence why the 'no steps, no photos' comment.


I'm trying to remember, I thought in the Netflix series MM said he was born in the hospital...when did she say he was born at home?


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> I'm trying to remember, I thought in the Netflix series MM said he was born in the hospital...when did she say he was born at home?



I was commenting on the video posted. 

She was commenting on the Netfix series


----------



## Swanky

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Will you also go find the post where this specific person accused all of us being sick with jealousy and bitter that Harry didn't choose us? Because I personally find that way more offensive than the post you quoted. Also I am a little tired of the idea we need to entertain people who are very obviously here to be provocative, so I feel the block button is a stellar invention.



Please report, I’m trying to spend the holidays with my family like the rest of the mod/admin team.  
I was just responding to the comment about which thread someone should be in. 

Again, stay on topic and be respectful, EVERYONE.


----------



## PurseUOut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was that the court case where she commited perjury? Can't keep track anymore with all their petty lawsuits.



No, the one where her father sold her personal letter to him and the Mail published parts of it like dumbasses. You just don't luck up and win copyright infringement lawsuits.



LittleStar88 said:


> Would prefer to see that rebutted rather than just coming in and implying everyone is generally hateful and/or racist because they don’t like someone.



If your personalizing things I share from Twitter, you shouldn't - that is not my intention. I don't take offense to 'sugars' because I know I am not one, and that is commonly referenced here. This is why I prefer to share my thoughts and media criticisms in the appreciation thread, but was instructed that this is the thread for those conversations. I am just following the rules.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was that the court case where she commited perjury? Can't keep track anymore with all their petty lawsuits.
> 
> Also, that bullying investigation...it might have been "buried" not because of what they didn't find. If the BRF at one point actually does decide those two are fair game they'll be toast.



You can commit what could be perjury in court, but unless the judge decides you have - you haven't.

Through her lawyers Meghan apologised for "An unfortunate lapse of memory" (Dec.'21 Express ) when she 'forgot' she contributed to _Finding Freedom_ . The judge decided she forgot - (prob because it would be easier for all). 

That's why she HATES Jason Knauf, he shared info with the court that contradicted her previous account.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

PurseUOut said:


> I am trying to figure it out too. Just because Doria obtained her masters from USC that means every USC graduate degree holder is independently wealthy, or else they couldn't afford attend? Financial aid doesn't exist anymore because Doria went there?



USC is an extremely well endowed private school.  In my experience, they are by far the most generous when it comes to scholarships.  I have no personal experience of how Doria paid her tuition, but she'd have been an excellent candidate for a partial scholarship, or perhaps a full one.  Both my grandchildren received amazing scholarships from private universities, as did my nephew.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

papertiger said:


> I was commenting on the video posted.
> 
> She was commenting on the Netfix series



Oh sorry I was confused. I read...

"Even though MegZZ said A was born at home (at Frogmore Cottage)"

so thought you meant she said that herself and I could not find that anywhere.


----------



## lallybelle

She won in court because they published too much of her letter. So they lost on copyright grounds. I seem to recall her having to admit to and claim oops she forgot she cooperated with the whole thing in the first place.

Look do I think she's a criminal on par with some on the list? No of course not. But the list is about Narcs. Not who maybe worse than any other listed. She is a NARC. Plain & Simple.


----------



## PurseUOut

papertiger said:


> You can commit what could be perjury in court, but unless the judge decides you have - you haven't.
> 
> Through her lawyers Meghan apologised for "An unfortunate lapse of memory" (Dec.'21 Express ) when she 'forgot' she contributed to _Finding Freedom_ . The judge decided she forgot - (prob because it would be easier for all).
> 
> That's why she HATES Jason Knauf, he shared info with the court that contradicted her previous account.



Thanks for posting, but I am failing to see where the admission would have impacted the outcome her actual claim (copyright infringement)? I deal with administrative courts for a living and attorneys ask all types of out there questions in depositions or discovery to paint the aggrieved in a certain light or diminish their credibility. Some have parts of their testimony that counters their written affidavits, and its not considered perjury unless it impacts the claim. Her claim had nothing to do with her collaboration with Omid or the other authors on Finding Freedom, but whether the publisher breached her copyright by publishing parts of the letter. On that claim, she won. And is probably why the judge accepted the apology and did not pursue it.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## papertiger

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Oh sorry I was confused. I read...
> 
> "Even though MegZZ said A was born at home (at Frogmore Cottage)"
> 
> so thought you meant she said that herself and I could not find that anywhere.



The plan was Archie was _going to be_ a home-birth, that prob gets people confused.

15.20 mins into the vid she says "Let's move on to Frogmore Cottage where Archie was born..." 

I was just correcting Leilani Of Barbados not MegZZ


----------



## youngster

DoggieBags said:


> At this point I don’t click on any links about them, positive or negative. The less paid clicks and attention they get, the faster they may go away. I find the stuff Analyzing them so tedious and repetitive at this point. So I’m ignoring The Body Language Guy, Lady C, Tom Bower, etc.



Honestly, there have been many times that I've taken a break from this thread and thought maybe I should make that break semi-permanent or permanent, as they have zero impact on my life and it is a bit sad to watch Harry now, though he is as much to blame for all that has happened as anyone. 

In any case, I've followed the European royals for years and years and am _not_ changing that for these two. I hoped I could maybe just ignore them, and I've tried.  I don't click on any links about them or read any news articles where they are the headliners any longer. But it's practically impossible to completely banish them when still trying to follow the UK royals, like I am.  Even stories devoted to other members of the family always seem to have some mention of Harry or Meghan and the latest tempest in a tea pot with some headline linked.  So, I keep coming back to this thread lol.  I also enjoy reading everyone else's comments and some of my favorite people on the forum are parked here in this thread so that keeps me coming back as well.


----------



## mrsinsyder

lallybelle said:


> Look do I think she's a criminal on par with some on the list? No of course not. But the list is about Narcs. Not who maybe worse than any other listed. She is a NARC. Plain & Simple.


that article was posted on Reddit and a lot of the commenters noted that they don’t like MM but that she wasn’t in the same realm as the rest of the people on that list. 

Combined with the Clarkson gaffe, the media seems to be unintentionally bringing credence to their allegations of being treated poorly by the media.


----------



## wisconsin

Icyjade said:


> Can’t say it better.
> I honestly think all his previous gfs are glad they dodged a bullet.
> 
> Also, the Sussex ”brand” sucks.
> https://cnaluxury.channelnewsasia.c...arry-thing-or-two-about-brand-building-213011 LINK
> 
> Michelle ***** could teach Meghan and Harry a thing or two about brand-building​by Jo Ellison
> 20 Dec 2022 05:16AM (Updated: 20 Dec 2022 05:24AM)
> BookmarkShare
> As the wife of a public figure, she lived under intense public scrutiny. She spent crucial years trying to raise a family in an environment where her freedom of movement was hugely circumscribed. Before an audience, her outfits were held up for analysis. Every feature of her body was subject to an unrelenting public gaze. She was chastised for speaking out of turn, or too impartially, and was the frequent target of racist hate.
> 
> Like Meghan Markle, Michelle ***** made a decision to become a public servant, sublimating her own ambitions to fulfil what she believed to be a greater good. When her husband left office in 2017, after eight years in the White House, she documented much of her life story in the autobiography Becoming, and then kept a relatively low profile for a while.
> 
> Lately, though, Michelle ***** has been much about. The former first lady is in the midst of a states-wide tour, promoting her new self-help book The Light We Carry: Overcoming in Uncertain Times. Actually, she doesn’t call it a self-help book — she describes it as a “personal toolbox” for how to navigate hard times. It draws on her experience as the first lady, her fears around the pandemic and the polarisation of society, as well as the more general challenges of being a parent, mother or partner, to offer her advice on how to build better relationships with those we love.
> 
> For those in the audience, *****’s second phase has been a joy to watch. Notwithstanding the power biceps, ***** for so long wore the uniform of spousal devotion that one could mistake her for being somewhat mild. Since leaving the White House “lockdown”, she’s become the breakout star of the new ***** show. Yes, the brand is rich in Christian homily and self-improvement — but the stiff-jawed stoicism has been cast aside. Unencumbered by protocol or political expectation, her brand is joyful, fierce and free.
> 
> And then there is The Fashion: Rarely has such a high-profile woman who is not a pop star been so bold and experimental with her choice of clothes. With the help of “clothing curator” Meredith Koop, *****’s book-tour wardrobe has been wild. First there was that fabulous highlighter-yellow pantsuit, by Proenza Schouler, that she wore on the first date of her current tour. She wore it buttoned to the neck (high fashion) and with a side parting, setting the tone for a tour in which each look has owned the room. She wore a sparkly “late-night” gold glitter sweater for Colbert, a Canadian tuxedo by cult Scandi label Ganni and a Bottega Veneta power suit in Pennsylvania. This week she wore her waist-length hair in cornrows, with a wide-legged velvet suit and an asymmetric bodice printed with a picture of Diana Ross.
> 
> If clothes are an outward expression of one’s feelings, ***** is living her best life. Her look is huge, epic and unapologetic — no longer on the sidelines of world events, she’s stepped up and filled the space.
> 
> *I wonder what she makes of the Sussexes, sitting in California bent on retelling their sad tales. Their Netflix series is finally rolling out, eclipsing all other news stories and once again fuelling the anti-Windsor fire. But rather than finding the couple happy, we see them occupying an even more peculiar bubble than before: Self-exiled in their Montecito mansion, quibbling about who said what to whom. Their brand is a litany of sadness. And they have plausible cause. But unlike Michelle, who counsels against becoming “stuck” in one’s neuroses, the Sussexes have built their brand on their shared fears.*
> 
> Michelle ***** regularly cites her husband’s decision to run for president as being the most fearful moment of her life. She understood the impact she could make on his decision, and how their campaign could alter history. Of the very few women who might understand Meghan’s position, she is one who has stood in similar shoes. When asked in 2018 if she had any wisdom she would share with Meghan, she offered this: “My biggest piece of advice would be to take some time and don’t be in a hurry to do anything.”
> 
> Later, reacting to the fallout over the couple’s decision to leave Britain, she clearly felt some sympathy. “Public service — it’s a bright, sharp, hot spotlight and most people don’t understand it,” she told the Today show. “The thing that I always keep in mind is that none of this is about us. In public service. It’s about the people that we serve.”
> 
> Michelle has taken the spotlight of public office to build herself a stunning brand. Not everyone will love her folksy wisdom, but her effervescent energy, her confidence, is dazzling to behold. She seems lighter and unbothered, a woman who is getting what she deserves. By contrast, the Sussexes have used their spotlight to illuminate a history of ills. From their beige palace of discontent they are now bound endlessly to recount the story of their unbecoming on an ever bigger stage. No one would deny their troubles, nor the life events they’ve had to overcome, but their lives are further shrunken with each retelling; they took the “freedom flight” to create themselves an even smaller world.
> 
> _Jo Ellison © 2022 The Financial Times_


One word : maturity which MO had in heaps. She herself once was I think depicted as an ape by unscrupulous journalists, but knew to play the long game and look at the bigger picture of service, immense privilege of being a First Lady, and national inteest. And now look at her!


----------



## DoggieBags

youngster said:


> Honestly, there have been many times that I've taken a break from this thread and thought maybe I should make that break semi-permanent or permanent, as they have zero impact on my life and it is a bit sad to watch Harry now, though he is as much to blame for all that has happened as anyone.
> 
> In any case, I've followed the European royals for years and years and am _not_ changing that for these two. I hoped I could maybe just ignore them, and I've tried.  I don't click on any links about them or read any news articles where they are the headliners any longer. But it's practically impossible to completely banish them when still trying to follow the UK royals, like I am.  Even stories devoted to other members of the family always seem to have some mention of Harry or Meghan and the latest tempest in a tea pot with some headline linked.  So, I keep coming back to this thread lol.  I also enjoy reading everyone else's comments and some of my favorite people on the forum are parked here in this thread so that keeps me coming back as well.


Totally get what you are saying. I sort of liked the BRF before but didn’t follow them all the time, just mostly the televised royal weddings because the pageantry is so interesting. But H and TW have actually gotten me more interested in the BRF and the role they play in the UK and The Commonwealth. So now I do follow King Charles, and the Prince and Princess of Wales more closely and then of course there is Lt. Col. JT and the men in kilts thread that has been a mostly fun and light hearted offshoot of the main royals threads. It’s a bit exasperating that these two grifters keep getting casual mentions in the senior royals press coverage but hopefully that will eventually stop. And yes I enjoy reading everyone else’s comments on this thread and have learned interesting stuff not related to H and TW from various informative posts on this thread.


----------



## lallybelle

But the list is not about who may be a worse person or did something worse than another on the list. SHE IS A NARC. Frankly, she doesn't need to be listed to know this...lol

Media can be ridiculous and harsh sometimes and that's why most "Famous" people ignore the tabloidish crap. She is so up her own ass, that she can't let a bad word about her be said. So to HER, it's so much worse than ANYONE else in life ever had it. UGH PLEASE woman.


----------



## pukasonqo

papertiger said:


> I love her!
> 
> One correction though:
> 
> I didn't see her cotton on that A couldn't have been born in 2 places. Even though MegZZ said A was born at home (at Frogmore Cottage) as was the plan, we know he was born in hospital (Portland Hospital as was on his birth cert.) hence why the 'no steps, no photos' comment.


Not an expert but due to her age MM’s pregnancy would be classified as geriatric and unlikely for a home birth as the risks to both, mother and child, are high


----------



## Lodpah

LittleStar88 said:


> You’re still not changing our minds
> 
> Or was meant for the appreciation thread?
> 
> Not gonna go back to liking that woman no matter what. These things don’t change my mind nor do they address her behavior.
> 
> ETA: Thank goodness for the ignore button!


Thank you! No wonder evil people get away with atrocities is because people only see one side of things and blinded to their destructive behaviors.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> No, the one where her father sold her personal letter to him and the Mail published parts of it like dumbasses. You just don't luck up and win copyright infringement lawsuits.



Which incidentally was the one where she blatantly lied in court claiming she had _forgotten_ a long string of emails she had sent, had to publicly apologize to the court and was actually lucky there were no consequences.

Also, I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me all kinds of people luck up in court all the time. More important to me, though: the process how that letter - a letter she gave to her friends to speak up for her in the press - was written makes it so abundantly clear she set up her father and he was stupid enough to swallow the bait. What kind of person does that?


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

PurseUOut said:


> Thanks for posting, but I am failing to see where the admission would have impacted the outcome her actual claim (copyright infringement)? I deal with administrative courts for a living and attorneys ask all types of out there questions in depositions or discovery to paint the aggrieved in a certain light or diminish their credibility. Some have parts of their testimony that counters their written affidavits, and its not considered perjury unless it impacts the claim. Her claim had nothing to do with her collaboration with Omid or the other authors on Finding Freedom, but whether the publisher breached her copyright by publishing parts of the letter. On that claim, she won. And is probably why the judge accepted the apology and did not pursue it.



You are not wrong, but why is it that people seem to completely gloss over her very obvious character flaws? She lied in court, if that's of any consequence for her case or not.


----------



## Lodpah

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Which incidentally was the one where she blatantly lied in court claiming she had _forgotten_ a long string of emails she had sent, had to publicly apologize to the court and was actually lucky there were no consequences.
> 
> Also, I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me all kinds of people luck up in court all the time. More important to me, though: the process how that letter - a letter she gave to her friends to speak up for her in the press - was written makes it so abundantly clear she set up her father and he was stupid enough to swallow the bait. What kind of person does that?


I believe she knowingly lied. How could she have forgotten that since it was a big deal. It’s so simple: did she or did she not.


----------



## Chanbal

Lodpah said:


> Thank you! No wonder evil people get away with atrocities is because people only see one side of things and blinded to their destructive behaviors.





QueenofWrapDress said:


> You are not wrong, but why is it that people seem to completely gloss over her very obvious character flaws? She lied in court, if that's of any consequence for her case or not.


I believe in the ancient proverb: _There is no worse blind than the one who does not want to see. _


----------



## PurseUOut

lallybelle said:


> But the list is not about who may be a worse person or did something worse than another on the list. SHE IS A NARC. Frankly, she doesn't need to be listed to know this...lol
> 
> Media can be ridiculous and harsh sometimes and that's why most "Famous" people ignore the tabloidish crap. She is so up her own ass, that she can't let a bad word about her be said. So to HER, it's so much worse than ANYONE else in life ever had it. UGH PLEASE woman.



Why can't the media criticize her, and yes, even harshly, but without resorting to extreme and dangerous propaganda? Why was she was centered in the same photo with some objectively very horrible people? At worst, Meghan is a social climber, gold digger, whatever you want to call her who ****s on her in-laws. She is not publicly glorifying Hitler, she did not incite an insurrection against the United States, she is not currently under investigation for fraud nor is she a convicted fraudster but yet this is who she was displayed in the company of in print. Not to mention, these people were pictured but the article was majority about Meghan, which leads me to believe a larger message is being conveyed - she's one of them. There was another article that called them political pawns of Russia. Like, how? So now they are geopolitical threats. It is all completely insane. They are only legitimizing her and Harry's claim in the series.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So this Joe B. House is a diagnosed narc with a Youtube channel. I scrolled through his uploads and I'm sure we'd find Ghoul's behavioural patterns in several of them.


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> Why can't the media criticize her, and yes, even harshly, but without resorting to extreme and dangerous propaganda? Why was she was centered in the same photo with some objectively very horrible people? At worst, Meghan is a social climber, gold digger, whatever you want to call her who ****s on her in-laws. She is not publicly glorifying Hitler, she did not incite an insurrection against the United States, she is not currently under investigation for fraud nor is she a convicted fraudster but yet this is who she was displayed in the company of in print. Not to mention, these people were pictured but the article was majority about Meghan, which leads me to believe a larger message is being conveyed - she's one of them. There was another article that called them political pawns of Russia. Like, how? So now they are geopolitical threats. It is all completely insane. They are only legitimizing her and Harry's claim in the series.


I agree with you there, however let’s not forget that her claims (or should I say lies) resulted in a lot of hate and actual physical threats against the BRF.
So her transgressions aren’t victimless either. She could have silently left the BRF, lived her life, done her charity work, been a force for good. When she chose lies, hypocrisy and victimhood instead it has consequences (which I’m not justifying, just saying it’s part of the global media game these days and she knew it and is using it fully).


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PurseUOut

tiktok said:


> I agree with you there, however let’s not forget that her claims (or should I say lies) resulted in a lot of hate and actual physical threats against the BRF.
> So her transgressions aren’t victimless either. She could have silently left the BRF, lived her life, done her charity work, been a force for good. When she chose lies, hypocrisy and victimhood instead it has consequences (which I’m not justifying, just saying it’s part of the global media game these days and she knew it and is using it fully).



I thought Harry admitted in the documentary it was his decision to leave TRF? Do you not believe him? It's puzzling how Meghan has an entire husband and typically couples make life-changing decisions TOGETHER but somehow the fallout from leaving his family is all centered on her.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

I'm old enough to be JCMH's granny and I thank my lucky stars that I didn't marry someone even remotely similar to him. I recognized H's self-centred nature years ago when as young child, he willfully ran into people with his tricycle while laughing. Later as he aged but never matured came the reports of racist name-calling, Nazi uniform, naked pool party, drunken brawls, possible drug use, etc.. Girl friends came but left after realizing that H was too damaged and unwilling to take advice like seeking mental help. Then  ZedZed caught the booby prize and almost from the start they plotted how to wreak havoc on his family and country. 
I still remember telling DH after Diana's funeral that Dufus was so angry and blaming the Queen for his mother's death that without proper psychiatric care he would get even some day and now we've seen the results. I'm positive that other intuitive posters on this blog were also able to predict this outcome.


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> I thought Harry admitted in the documentary it was his decision to leave TRF? Do you not believe him? It's puzzling how Meghan has an entire husband and typically couples make life-changing decisions TOGETHER but somehow the fallout from leaving his family is all centered on her.


I don’t think there’s any fault in leaving the BRF. There’s fault in lying about everything around your time in the BRF, the reason for leaving and your motives for it. Plus - saying you didn’t know anything about it? Didn’t google Harry? No one helped you learn the national anthem? Oh she probably never heard of google before meeting him, it’s just like tabloids - we don’t have it in America.

I think he’s just as much to blame if not more (and he’s a much bigger POS given that it’s his family he stabbed in the back) but she’s the one we’re discussing in this particular situation with the press. And frankly between them I do believe she’s the mastermind behind the plans to monetize their time in the BRF with media deals - she’s the one who brought the lawyers, PR firms, Hollywood experience etc.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Exposing the narc moves.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

And one more (which also might have answers to the question if we don't believe Harry called the shots).


----------



## papertiger

PurseUOut said:


> Why can't the media criticize her, and yes, even harshly, but without resorting to extreme and dangerous propaganda? Why was she was centered in the same photo with some objectively very horrible people? At worst, Meghan is a social climber, gold digger, whatever you want to call her who ****s on her in-laws. She is not publicly glorifying Hitler, she did not incite an insurrection against the United States, she is not currently under investigation for fraud nor is she a convicted fraudster but yet this is who she was displayed in the company of in print. Not to mention, these people were pictured but the article was majority about Meghan, which leads me to believe a larger message is being conveyed - she's one of them. There was another article that called them political pawns of Russia. Like, how? So now they are geopolitical threats. It is all completely insane. They are only legitimizing her and Harry's claim in the series.



What she and Harry are deliberately doing by giving ammunition to **********s (including where I live in Scotland) and stirring-up nationalism (including where I live in Scotland) and in some of the forces that are stirring up HATE in Commonweal countries could be said to be on a par with some of these awful other people.  They may talk 'woke' with buzzwords and appealing to the emotions of the masses (who cannot be against racism/sexism?) but they are often being quoted by nationalists (Jamaica) and far-left and far-right movements. This is not Gossip-girl stuff.

Similarly, I have a problem with Jeremy Clarkson and other women-haters that jump on the other side. Harry married Meghan, Harry left the UK (she was never a UK citizen) Harry (ab)uses the race card - not (just) Meghan, Harry goes against protocol, etiquette and what all his titles stand for. Harry is the traitor - before we ever get to Meghan, who's just an opportunist (who IMO missed her opportunity and cut off her nose to spite her face).

I have no problem with colonialist studies, in fact Harry should be called out for trying to be a Prince in the US. The problem is US critical theory_ is_ a colonialist movement that like international terrorism exports it's philosophies elsewhere, whether other cultures and/or nations want (or not). The buzzwords that H&M use are keywords that come from theory, but their understanding is not just shallow, but an in Jean Baudrillard Simulacra and Simulation (_Simulacres et Simulation _1981_) _a mere impression of what they profess on, a hologram of (political, sociological and even personal) truth. Why are US figures international and others from other places 'domestic'? Why does Harry think a British Prince think he can be granted privileges in the US? Because he _and_ Meghan think of themselves as global royalty.

There is no global royalty. Outside of this (UK) country, and not representing our monarchy/country abroad, they should not be using their titles AT ALL. They should not be spouting opinions or 'their truths' on anything. They have no mandate, no authority and no business.

I'm not a flag-waving monarchist but I see it's purpose and significance in holding the British Union together. Obviously one of the failings of being a royal is that it's difficult to get a 'normal' job if you don't want to work as a Senior Royal (with all that implies). They could have gone to the US and opened a real estate business, a dog grooming parlour or a chicken sanitary, but no they want their own court. There is only one _British _court and it's around our King.

If the US want a royal family, a Queen, they have far better US candidates than these two; a reject Prince and a made-for-outlet Duchess.


----------



## PurseUOut

tiktok said:


> I don’t think there’s any fault in leaving the BRF. *There’s fault in lying about everything around your time in the BRF, the reason for leaving and your motives for it. Plus - saying you didn’t know anything about it? Didn’t google Harry? No one helped you learn the national anthem? Oh she probably never heard of google before meeting him, it’s just like tabloids - we don’t have it in America.*



I am truly failing to see how of these 'transgressions' incite physical threats against TRF (as your initial post states) when, again, the decision to leave was her husbands? I can see how some may feel Harry is being manipulated, but that is purely speculation when it came from the horse's mouth otherwise.


----------



## PurseUOut

papertiger said:


> What she and Harry are deliberately doing by giving ammunition to **********s (including where I live in Scotland) and stirring-up nationalism (including where I live in Scotland) and in some of the forces that are stirring up HATE in Commonweal countries could be said to be on a par with some of these awful other people. They may talk 'woke' with buzzwords and appealing to the emotions of the masses (who cannot be against racism/sexism?) but they are often being quoted by nationalists (Jamaica) far-left and far-right movements.



These sentiments are WELL documented and they predate Harry and Meghan's relationship. It was tempered, imo, out of respect for HMTQ. The surge in public anti-monarch sentiments is most likely related to the death of a popular well beloved monarch.



papertiger said:


> I have no problem with colonialist studies, in fact Harry should be called out for trying to be a Prince in the US.



I think this is a reach. He's Prince by birth and in the direct line of succession to the British monarchy. He is going to be a geopolitical target necessitating huge security expenses regardless if he abandons his titles or not.



papertiger said:


> There is no global royalty. Outside of this (UK) country, and not representing our monarchy/country abroad, they should not be using their titles AT ALL. They should not be spouting opinions or 'their truths' on anything. They have no mandate, no authority and no business.



So Tom Bower, the British media, etc can profit from their exposure but the actual subjects cannot? Is that reasonable expectation for royals who aren't funded by the taxpayers?


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> Why can't the media criticize her, and yes, even harshly, but without resorting to extreme and dangerous propaganda? Why was she was centered in the same photo with some objectively very horrible people? At worst, Meghan is a social climber, gold digger, whatever you want to call her who ****s on her in-laws. She is not publicly glorifying Hitler, she did not incite an insurrection against the United States, she is not currently under investigation for fraud nor is she a convicted fraudster but yet this is who she was displayed in the company of in print. Not to mention, these people were pictured but the article was majority about Meghan, which leads me to believe a larger message is being conveyed - she's one of them. There was another article that called them political pawns of Russia. Like, how? So now they are geopolitical threats. It is all completely insane. They are only legitimizing her and Harry's claim in the series.


Because she is passive-aggressive using word said to destroy and conquer. Like a serpent hissing is MM. 

Words can destroy and kill a person’s soul. Don’t believe me? Go and break a person down with words.


----------



## papertiger

PurseUOut said:


> So Tom Bower, the British media, etc can profit from their exposure but the actual subjects cannot? Is that reasonable expectation for royals who aren't funded by the taxpayers?



Yes. 

We are_ their_ subjects (UK citizens) - not the other way around. We also have a free press (in the UK - obviously I cannot speak to China, Russia, Iran etc) and we live in a democracy.  Our BRF and our politicians should all be made accountable. 

The Netflix 'documentary' used reels of footage from H&M's time when they were being funded by UK taxpayers. 

The Royal Family should (and does - apart from Harry) not comment. I will now take my cue from them regards your posts.


----------



## Lodpah

MM threw the first shot at the BRF. Allegedly she resorted to violence throwing something at a worker. Alledgely she threw her dog off a balcony or ran over him. There must be some smidgen of truth of her behavior. I remember seeing s picture of her angrily scolding a guy holding a tray of drinks at someone’s wedding. Nothing like treating workers like crap.

Some executives take potential hires out to lunch or dinner to gauge how they treat people.


----------



## tiktok

PurseUOut said:


> I am truly failing to see how of these 'transgressions' incite physical threats against TRF (as your initial post states) when, again, the decision to leave was her husbands? I can see how some may feel Harry is being manipulated, but that is purely speculation when it came from the horse's mouth otherwise.


It was documented that there were increased physical threats against Kate after the Oprah interview, I don’t have the sources because it was too long ago to even try to find on this thread. But if you choose to believe that only journalists’ words can result in physical threats but Meghan’s can’t that’s certainly your prerogative. 
Accusing an entire institution of racism (today you don’t even need proof unfortunately) isn’t as mundane as some random reality star making some accusation on a show. But if you disagree and choose to ignore that you certainly have a right to your own opinion.


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> These sentiments are WELL documented and they predate Harry and Meghan's relationship. It was tempered, imo, out of respect for HMTQ. The surge in public anti-monarch sentiments is most likely related to the death of a popular well beloved monarch.
> 
> 
> 
> I think this is a reach. He's Prince by birth and in the direct line of succession to the British monarchy. He is going to be a geopolitical target necessitating huge security expenses regardless if he abandons his titles or not.
> 
> 
> 
> So Tom Bower, the British media, etc can profit from their exposure but the actual subjects cannot? Is that reasonable expectation for royals who aren't funded by the taxpayers?


You weary me with you trying to convince people who can clearly see the sun. Name one tangible thing this woman has done to improve humanity. Just one thing. Not a word salad but something tangible and not stolen from someone’s achievements.


----------



## csshopper

l’ve never reallly understood using the word “Appreciation“ in the thread that relates to Meghan Markle.

The word means “recognition and enjoyment of the good qualities of someone or something” so applied literally, there are people who believe lying, hypocrisy, narcissism are “good qualities“ to be recognized and enjoyed?  Can’t get my head around that. Not saying there shouldn’t be an option for her loyalists,  “We Love Meghan” makes sense to me. Be a fan, even people on death row have pen pals and supporters, but “appreciation“ seems incongruous.

Serious questions because these are puzzling to me:

1. When Meghan changes her story about something, sometimes more than once, how can anyone determine which version is the REAL truth among them?

2. Why does she continue to lie about things that are so easily disproven? One of the latest examples, first lie was in Oprah interview, seconded in Netflix, that she didn’t know how to curtsy. Cut to video from 2011 where she’s executing the perfect curtsy on Suits.

3. If the black part of her heritage is so meaningful to her, why does she not fully embrace it, instead of removing herself from it?  How ironic that of all the Markle-Ragland extended family with whom she could surround herself, she chose her step niece, Ashleigh, from the Markle side, to be her best bud. Harry survives in spite of Uncle Andrew so taint by blood relationship  should not be a consideration . There has been little published about the Ragland family, but it seems to have been scandal free, so why ignore them? It’s Meghan who separates them, not the Royals, from inclusion in the wider family in spite of her assertions of racism.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

csshopper said:


> l’ve never reallly understood using the word “Appreciation“ in the thread that relates to Meghan Markle.
> 
> The word means “recognition and enjoyment of the good qualities of someone or something” so applied literally, there are people who believe lying, hypocrisy, narcissism are “good qualities“ to be recognized and enjoyed?  Can’t get my head around that. Not saying there shouldn’t be an option for her loyalists,  “We Love Meghan” makes sense to me. *Be a fan, even people on death row have pen pals and supporters,* but “appreciation“ seems incongruous.



OMG


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## PurseUOut

Lodpah said:


> Allegedly she resorted to violence throwing something at a worker. Alledgely she threw her dog off a balcony or ran over him. There must be some smidgen of truth of her behavior. I remember seeing s picture of her angrily scolding a guy holding a tray of drinks at someone’s wedding. Nothing like treating workers like crap.



LOL...where is the proof of this?


----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> LOL...where is the proof of this?


The press? Just like you get your info from the press of what a wonderful and compassionate woman she is? But the interview didn’t lie when she in her own words spouted off lies. Chill the heck out. Too much sugar leads to diabetes. I like the ignore button so soon you will be talking to the hand . . or whatever. You must be like her. Lol. I’m not being mean but You m not going to EVER be convinced of her being all saintly and perfect. There are pictures out there. I’m not doing work for you. 

Most posters here are objective and ready to take back if something was posted erroneously. They can smell BS from an internet mile.


----------



## gracekelly

Lodpah said:


> You weary me with you trying to convince people who can clearly see the sun. Name one tangible thing this woman has done to improve humanity. Just one thing. Not a word salad but something tangible and not stolen from someone’s achievements.


This is exactly the point.  The Sussex talk the talk, but have not walked the walk.  Giving away a few items that were provided by a third party is not charity. Attaching your name to a known charity as in "partnering" is not the same as giving your own money to help people.  Talking about mental health, when you have nothing to add except your own whining, and no professional training, doesn't help anyone.  Everything they do is calculated to advance their own names and agenda.  

As far as King Charles treating Meghan badly...time to repost the video of him walking her down the aisle.  Time to post the pictures of his considerate behavior towards her mother when they all exited St. George's and were standing on the steps.  He was ignoring his own wife and concerned about Doria.  The only person who was truly treated badly at that wedding was the late Queen.  The expression on her face spoke volumes. 

If Meghan and Harry are a breath of fresh air, on trend and modern, then give me a good dose of Victoriana when people knew their duty, treated their families with respect and appreciated what they had because even back then the world was falling apart and women and children were sent to workhouses when they had nothing.  Harry and Meghan should take a course about the real social reformers of the past 150+ years.








						The Greatest 19th Century Social Reformers Every Geek Will Recognize
					

The World would have been much poorer without these famous 19th Century Social Reformers!




					www.thefamouspeople.com


----------



## Toby93

.


----------



## PurseUOut

papertiger said:


> Yes.



Nice to know Meghan should be the sacrificial lamb for the profit of a mostly white male media establishment. 



Lodpah said:


> You weary me with you trying to convince people who can clearly see the sun. Name one tangible thing this woman has done to improve humanity. Just one thing. Not a word salad but something tangible and not stolen from someone’s achievements.


----------



## Toby93

Jktgal said:


> Bullet shot through the whole of Southeast Asia and hundreds of millions women dodged it. Kudos to the Toronto girl for taking one for the species....


She was never a "Toronto girl" 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Toronto was way too small a pond for our Megsy. It was merely a stepping stone on her way back to the bright lights of Hollywood with her Prince in tow.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

csshopper said:


> l’ve never reallly understood using the word “Appreciation“ in the thread that relates to Meghan Markle.



It's funny because there's debate about the word "appreciation" in that thread itself. It seems most of us actually feel the same way...


PurseUOut said:


> Seriously. The Meghan and Harry Indifference Thread. To temper the emotions on all sides





mrsinsyder said:


> Should we start a thread called “I feel somewhere on the neutral spectrum about Meghan and Harry”



I know "sugars" is a word often used in this thread but I haven't seen that. Instead I think the other thread might be more an attempt to counter the unfounded (and sometimes somewhat bizarre) accusations as well as the acrimony here...toward MM as well as tpfers who don't agree with the majority of posters. All the ignore button comments make me sad.

Regarding the narcissism coverage Elon is definitely a prime example...yet his thread is so quiet.



wisconsin said:


> One word : maturity which MO had in heaps. She herself once was I think depicted as an ape by unscrupulous journalists, but knew to play the long game and look at the bigger picture of service, immense privilege of being a First Lady, and national inteest. And now look at her



I agree I think MO handled the racism she endured the best she could. But I think we can all agree she should not have had to...?


----------



## mrsinsyder

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's funny because there's debate about the word "appreciation" in that thread itself. It seems most of us actually feel the same way...
> 
> 
> 
> I know "sugars" is a word often used in this thread but I haven't seen that. Instead I think the other thread might be more an attempt to counter the unfounded (and sometimes somewhat bizarre) accusations as well as the acrimony here...toward MM as well as tpfers who don't agree with the majority of posters. All the ignore button comments make me sad.
> 
> Regarding the narcissism coverage Elon is definitely a prime example...yet his thread is so quiet.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree I think MO handled the racism she endured the best she could. But I think we can all agree she should not have had to...?


I like seeing differing opinions. We don’t have to change each others minds. I’m on the “don’t like them at all” side of the spectrum but I find nuance in a lot of the stories around them. I don’t really find anyone to have only good or only bad qualities.


----------



## Debbini

Pivoine66 said:


> View attachment 5678441
> 
> I am - well, - surprised here - especially quote from the above post in the appreciation thread: "...Meghan and Harry are modern, fresh, current and on trend - all the the things TRF is not. *For TRF underestimate and mistreat them* ..." And "... *how workshy the heir is, KCIII could have sent* ..."
> And many more interesting posts there.


The Harkles are media gold?! I just spit out my coffee. That's funny.


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> The Harkles are media gold?! I just spit out my coffee. That's funny.


well, I'm no fan but they do manage to get a lot of attention


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> well, I'm no fan but they do manage to get a lot of attention


It's not golden


----------



## Cavalier Girl

PurseUOut said:


> I think this is a reach. He's Prince by birth and in the direct line of succession to the British monarchy. He is going to be a geopolitical target necessitating huge security expenses regardless if he abandons his titles or not.



I have no issue with their protection needs (though, I think it's extremely exaggerated) as long as they pay for said protection themselves.


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> It's not golden


one could say any attention is good


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Sorry to be that nitpicky person, but while relatively high up he's not in *direct* line of the succession anymore. The direct line goes William - George - Charlotte - Louis.


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> one could say any attention is good


I guess, for narcissists.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> I guess, for narcissists.


or people trying to "make a living" off of the attention of the public


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

Debbini said:


> It's not golden


Media gold tend to mean simply money making...can be positive or negative coverage...there is no doubt there stories generate income for the media


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Was that the court case where she commited perjury? Can't keep track anymore with all their petty lawsuits.
> 
> Also, that bullying investigation...it might have been "buried" not because of what they didn't find. If the BRF at one point actually does decide those two are fair game they'll be toast.


Yes, she won the court case and was rewarded the humiliating sum of £1 because it was only because of a technicality (too many words in the letter printed) that she "won".  She also had to admit that she forgot about helping with their Finding Freebies book and should have been charged with perjury.  She was quick to claim victory, but all it did was solidify what so many others already knew.  She is a liar.


----------



## PurseUOut

Toby93 said:


> Yes, she won the court case and *was rewarded the humiliating sum of £1 *because it was only because of a technicality (too many words in the letter printed) that she "won"*. * She also had to admit that she forgot about helping with their Finding Freebies book and should have been charged with perjury.  She was quick to claim victory, but all it did was solidify what so many others already knew.  She is a liar.



This was the nominal damages for the misuse of private information.
She received an additional, confidential settlement for the copyright infringement and legal fees reimbursed.


----------



## Toby93

PurseUOut said:


> Nice to know Meghan should be the sacrificial lamb for the profit of a mostly white male media establishment.


and we are back to the race card again


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Lodpah

PurseUOut said:


> Nice to know Meghan should be the sacrificial lamb for the profit of a mostly white male media establishment.
> 
> Thanks for the belly laugh! I ain’t even going to explain myself at this. White male, white males, lol! Lol!


----------



## V0N1B2

Lawl  Meghan Markle would be nothing if it weren’t for “white males”.  I mean damn, she’s used enough of them in her life.


----------



## jelliedfeels

I like making jokes about her busted weave and squat little body and Harry’s bald head and pig eyes.

I find them to be vacuous and their actions cringe inducing. Most of these things are just so minor they aren’t worth the toss.

I enjoy talking to the regular posters. 

I don’t find any of this remotely hateful and I’m confused by all the finger pointing. 

There are more serious celeb threads on TPF like elon or Kanye but honestly they are both a bit depressing and they *obviously* go into politics too quick.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

V0N1B2 said:


> Lawl  Meghan Markle would be nothing if it weren’t for “white males”.  I mean damn, she’s used enough of them in her life.


Yep, she married them for her deep and abiding love of money, status and fame.


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Yep, she married them for her deep and abiding love of money, status and fame.


I don't care how much one likes them and wants to believe their "love story", you can't separate Harry from the prince.  that was obviously a big part (if not the whole thing) of the attraction.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

sdkitty said:


> I don't care how much one likes them and wants to believe their "love story", you can't separate Harry from the prince.  that was obviously a big part (if not the whole thing) of the attraction.


Is a narcissist capable of loving anyone else except themselves? As for Dufus, since he's so full of anger, hatred and revenge, is there room left in his heart for real love?


----------



## Lodpah

Maggie Muggins said:


> Is a narcissist capable of loving anyone else except themselves? As for Dufus, since he's so full of anger, hatred and revenge, is there room left in his heart for real love?


I think not only is she a narcissist but but also pathological liar. I don’t think narcs are capable of loving someone. They are too narcissistic to love anyone but themselves.


----------



## MiniMabel

When I first heard Tom Bowers mention Doria, I thought he said diarrhoea. Maybe I need a hearing test but I thought her name would have sounded as Door-ia? That's how I've always heard it pronounced so one learns something new every day! Off to Specsavers who do also offer hearing tests!


----------



## sdkitty

Maggie Muggins said:


> Is a narcissist capable of loving anyone else except themselves? As for Dufus, since he's so full of anger, hatred and revenge, is there room left in his heart for real love?


IDK....for the sake of the kids, I hope she isn't a narcissist


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Debbini

sdkitty said:


> IDK....for the sake of the kids, I hope she isn't a narcissist


Oh, she's a narcissist, no doubt about that.


----------



## jelliedfeels

Who wore it better?
MM or Steven Seagal - they both also have magically shifting skin tones and  hairlines


----------



## needlv

Well if you want a bit of fun you can vote who are the most annoying celebrities.  Currently MM is in no1 and Haz is in number 2.

Personally I think Haz should be rated worse than her…









						Celebrities You're Sick Of In 2022
					

Who are the most annoying celebrities of 2022? The most hated celebrities of 2022 come in all forms. There are the outspoken Hollywood stars that end up most disliked celebrities, the unpopular celebrities, and, of course, the annoying celebrities, the ones who post way too often, and are quoted...




					www.ranker.com


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Debbini said:


> Oh, she's a narcissist, no doubt about that.


Yes! If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck!


----------



## WingNut

sdkitty said:


> I don't care how much one likes them and wants to believe their "love story", you can't separate Harry from the prince.  that was obviously a big part (if not the whole thing) of the attraction.


This...never in a million years would she have given him a second look if she hadn't seen him as a big money and fame tree from which to pluck the (very) low hanging fruit....


----------



## WingNut

jelliedfeels said:


> Who wore it better?
> MM or Steven Seagal - they both also have magically shifting skin tones and  hairlines
> 
> View attachment 5678634
> 
> View attachment 5678635
> 
> View attachment 5678636
> 
> View attachment 5678641
> 
> 
> View attachment 5678638
> 
> View attachment 5678640


*dead*


----------



## Debbini

needlv said:


> Well if you want a bit of fun you can vote who are the most annoying celebrities.  Currently MM is in no1 and Haz is in number 2.
> 
> Personally I think Haz should be rated worse than her…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Celebrities You're Sick Of In 2022
> 
> 
> Who are the most annoying celebrities of 2022? The most hated celebrities of 2022 come in all forms. There are the outspoken Hollywood stars that end up most disliked celebrities, the unpopular celebrities, and, of course, the annoying celebrities, the ones who post way too often, and are quoted...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ranker.com


Voted! They're still #1 and 2. Lol


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

needlv said:


> Well if you want a bit of fun you can vote who are the most annoying celebrities.  Currently MM is in no1 and Haz is in number 2.
> 
> Personally I think Haz should be rated worse than her…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Celebrities You're Sick Of In 2022
> 
> 
> Who are the most annoying celebrities of 2022? The most hated celebrities of 2022 come in all forms. There are the outspoken Hollywood stars that end up most disliked celebrities, the unpopular celebrities, and, of course, the annoying celebrities, the ones who post way too often, and are quoted...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ranker.com



She is way more vocal than him, though.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## WingNut

QueenofWrapDress said:


> View attachment 5678673


Thank you! I sat with the counselor who outlined all of those traits as I was getting to the point of divorcing my very NPD now-ex. He was baaad. But even he didn't tick ALL of the boxes (1 or two were missing). You need 5. I'd say Z-list fits all 9.


----------



## Lilacgal

PurseUOut said:


> Nice to know Meghan should be the sacrificial lamb for the profit of a mostly white male media establishment.


If I understand right, you mean to say Meghan is sacrificial lamb of mostly white media because she is black?

Hmmm, let me count the ways she has OWNED her black heritage..

1. A member of any black fraternities or sororities
2. Invited any black member of her family to her wedding(s) other than her mom
3. Speaks lovingly of a black family member in her many interviews 
4. Has had a history of dating or marrying black men
5. Had had close and long relationships with black women that have seen the test of time
6. Called herself black in her applications, profiles or career affiliations
7. Named her kids after beautiful African/black names
8. Owns and wears the beautiful curly mane she was born with, and this list can go on and on.

Going by all the above, she has clearly shown the world she sees herself as a white woman. She has lived a privileged life owing to the many white men she has used and discarded in her social climb. If you were to read most of the objective posts here, the posters are calling out her hypocrisy, lies and behavior that stems from her narcissistic personality. It is her conduct and character that is called into question, and it has nothing to do with her race.


----------



## sdkitty

Lilacgal said:


> If I understand right, you mean to say Meghan is sacrificial lamb of mostly white media because she is black?
> 
> Hmmm, let me count the ways she has OWNED her black heritage..
> 
> 1. A member of any black fraternities or sororities
> 2. Invited any black member of her family to her wedding(s) other than her mom
> 3. Speaks lovingly of a black family member in her many interviews
> 4. Has had a history of dating or marrying black men
> 5. Had had close and long relationships with black women that have seen the test of time
> 6. Called herself black in her applications, profiles or career affiliations
> 7. Named her kids after beautiful African/black names
> 8. Owns and wears the beautiful curly mane she was born with, and this list can go on and on.
> 
> Going by all the above, she has clearly shown the world she sees herself as a white woman. She has lived a privileged life owing to the many white men she has used and discarded in her social climb. If you were to read most of the objective posts here, the posters are calling out her hypocrisy, lies and behavior that stems from her narcissistic personality. It is her conduct and character that is called into question, and it has nothing to do with her race.


oh come on...serena williams was at her shower 
and much of the privileged life she has lived was due to her father, who she has now Markled


----------



## wisconsin

OriginalBalenciaga said:


> It's funny because there's debate about the word "appreciation" in that thread itself. It seems most of us actually feel the same way...
> 
> 
> 
> I know "sugars" is a word often used in this thread but I haven't seen that. Instead I think the other thread might be more an attempt to counter the unfounded (and sometimes somewhat bizarre) accusations as well as the acrimony here...toward MM as well as tpfers who don't agree with the majority of posters. All the ignore button comments make me sad.
> 
> Regarding the narcissism coverage Elon is definitely a prime example...yet his thread is so quiet.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree I think MO handled the racism she endured the best she could. But I think we can all agree she should not have had to...?


Of course! MM got a ton of positive press initially but then she exhibited some spoilt brat and diva behavior. You can’t bully the staff and the future queen and her daughter, throw tantrums about tiaras, not follow royal protocol regarding mostly everything and then expect those same people you bullied or disrespected to defend you when the press goes wild.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Lodpah

Radar Online now says MM is writing a book about KC and Camilla and it will be brutal. Was she around them 24/7? How malacious is this?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## xincinsin

papertiger said:


> You can commit what could be perjury in court, but unless the judge decides you have - you haven't.
> 
> Through her lawyers Meghan apologised for "An unfortunate lapse of memory" (Dec.'21 Express ) when she 'forgot' she contributed to _Finding Freedom_ . The judge decided she forgot - (prob because it would be easier for all).
> 
> That's why she HATES Jason Knauf, he shared info with the court that contradicted her previous account.


The "unfortunate lapse of memory" always get me chortling. I don't know if it's a sign of narcissism but all my office narcs always "forgot" anything unfavourable to them or which they didn't want to do. 

There was one case similar to Zed and the judge. We were terminating the employment of a narc. Even the union couldn't help him because he told them frankly that he wanted to continue being paid full salary for doing half the work (his major skiving and lack of integrity were the main reasons for his termination). So narc told everyone that we were sexist and unfair and ... etc etc. His complaint reached the ears of the CEO who asked him about it. If this was really unfair termination, the CEO offered to step in to investigate. He had to sheepishly admit that he wasn't doing his work. This played out in front of the CEO's secretary who was one of his victims and couldn't wait to spread the news of the interaction.


----------



## sdkitty

Lodpah said:


> Radar Online now says MM is writing a book about KC and Camilla and it will be brutal. Was she around them 24/7? How malacious is this?


don't know if I believe that.....it's a gossip site?


----------



## Hyacinth

WingNut said:


> Thank you! I sat with the counselor who outlined all of those traits as I was getting to the point of divorcing my very NPD now-ex. He was baaad. But even he didn't tick ALL of the boxes (1 or two were missing). You need 5. I'd say Z-list fits all 9.



My sentiments exactly. in Yank terminology, she's batting 1.000 or "batting a thousand".


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> Radar Online now says MM is writing a book about KC and Camilla and it will be brutal. Was she around them 24/7? How malacious is this?


I find that hard to believe, but, as we know, Zed is very creative. It will be a slim volume unless she plagiarises a lot of sources and mines Sparry's memories. 

"Charles and Camilla: Meghan's Memories _(loosely based on Harry's memories and tabloids)_"


----------



## Lodpah

‘Nightmare For The Royals’: Meghan Markle Plotting To Write A Tell-All That Will Spill About King Charles & Queen Camilla: Sources
					

An insider says the Duchess of Sussex has already started writing despite no deal being in place.




					radaronline.com


----------



## bag-mania

PurseUOut said:


> I thought Harry admitted in the documentary it was his decision to leave TRF? Do you not believe him? It's puzzling how Meghan has an entire husband and typically couples make life-changing decisions TOGETHER *but somehow the fallout from leaving his family is all centered on her.*


Think about that for a minute. Harry lived his first 33 years as an active, participating member of the royal family. Yet within 18 months of marrying Meghan he wants out desperately he and outright says it is for her sake, to “protect his family” as he was told to say put it.

Yes, Meghan was unquestionably his motivation.


----------



## PurseUOut

1. Meghan is NOT black, she is a biracial black woman. She is half white and half black.

2. You don't know the Ragland family. Maybe they told Doria their wish to remain private and she is protecting them. You already see how Tyler Perry reacted - as her Godfather and a whole celebrity even he didn't want to go 'over there' for Lili's christening and be around the royals so why would you think her working class black family would? Maybe they couldn't travel the 10+ hour flight to her wedding if they are elderly or have kids and jobs. Maybe they don't have passports. Maybe they were there and we don't know. One thing we do know for sure is that they never sold Meghan out to the media for cash, unlike her dutiful father's side who gave her a "privileged" life. Perhaps they are dignified, hardworking people who actually love Meghan because they were involved in her life. Makes sense if they desire to protect her by keeping quiet. If she is not close to her mother's side wouldn't they have MORE motivation to go to the press about her or even Doria? Surely they are aware of Doria's lengthy prison stint? 

2. You have...interesting....criteria for a biracial person to show how they "own" their black heritage. Did you get it from Google? Pledging black sorority or fraternity?  I am actually black and a lot of that list does not apply to me....

And with that, I bid you an early happy new year. I will be traveling in the morning with my family, and Meghan nor Harry will not be on my mind. I suggest some of you try and bring in the new year similarly. It is good for your mental health.


----------



## sdkitty

PurseUOut said:


> 1. Meghan is NOT black, she is a biracial black woman. She is half white and half black.
> 
> 2. You don't know the Ragland family. Maybe they told Doria their wish to remain private and she is protecting them. You already see how Tyler Perry reacted - as her Godfather and a whole celebrity even he didn't want to go 'over there' for Lili's christening and be around the royals so why would you think her working class black family would? Maybe they couldn't travel the 10+ hour flight to her wedding if they are elderly or have kids. Maybe they don't have passports. Maybe they were there and we don't know. One thing we do know for sure is that they never sold Meghan out to the media for cash, unlike her dutiful father's side who gave her a "privileged" life. Perhaps they are dignified, hardworking people who actually love Meghan because they were involved in her life. Makes sense if they desire to protect her by keeping quiet. If she is not close to her mother's side wouldn't they have MORE motivation to go to the press about her or even Doria? Surely they are aware of Doria's lengthy prison stint?
> 
> 2. You have...interesting....criteria for a biracial person to show how they "own" their black heritage. Did you get it from Google? Pledging black sorority or fraternity?  I am actually black and a lot of that list does not apply to me....


I think most people would have jumped at the opportunity to attend a royal wedding if invited.  Even george clooney said he didn't know them but wanted to see a royal wedding.  Didn't have passports.  That could be remedied. couldn't afford the fare?  the bride could have helped with that.

and yes her father gave her everything - private schools from kindergarten through college....so he made a mistake with the paps....it's my understand that they hounded him until he succumbed....not a good thing but why is it unforgivable?  he is elderly and in poor health.  shutting him out is not a good look for Meghan.....and doria getting on board with that seems mean spirited too


----------



## xincinsin

Lodpah said:


> ‘Nightmare For The Royals’: Meghan Markle Plotting To Write A Tell-All That Will Spill About King Charles & Queen Camilla: Sources
> 
> 
> An insider says the Duchess of Sussex has already started writing despite no deal being in place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radaronline.com


"_started writing despite no deal being in place"_? IF Radar Online is to be believed...

Don't the Harkles have a 4-book (or 3-book - recollections may vary) deal with Penguin Random House? Wasn't she supposed to write an uplifting tome about wellness or leadership or some Zedtype compassionate crap?

Maybe PRH is holding their horses to see what is the reaction to Sparry's raw unflinching honesty, before they commit to Zed's reversionist raw unflinching dishonesty. If their legal team had to scour Sparry's memories with a fine-tooth comb, they will be worked to the bone checking if Zed's memories will open the publisher to law suits. It will be filled with innuendoes and insinuations and hearsay. Although now that Zed's mother is alleged to be the person who shared her view that Zed was facing racism and who taught them about generational? genetic? pain, Zed will likely put in a heavy dose of "my mother told/taught me" in her tell-all.

ETA: come to think of it, the Harkles likely started recording video despite no deal being in place. Maybe that's why Netflix was willing to throw money at them. They probably did a showreel to prove to Netflix that they had (ungranted, illegal) access to the Royal properties. Maybe it was lucky that she didn't want to go to Balmoral - cannot imagine how she would have sneered at that place while surreptitiously filming private moments for future sale.


----------



## csshopper

PurseUOut said:


> I am truly failing to see how of these 'transgressions' incite physical threats against TRF (as your initial post states) when, again, the decision to leave was her husbands? I can see how some may feel Harry is being manipulated, but that is purely speculation when it came from the horse's mouth otherwise.


Harry and Meghan's *Netflix* documentary 'is putting *royal* ...​https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ary-putting-royal-family-risk-extremists.html - 366k - Cached - Similar pages 
11 Dec 2022 *...* The former Met police commander who headed protection of the *Royals*says Meghan and Harry's *Netflix series* has put the *Royal family* at *risk* ...

This article explains the veracity of the point papertiger was making and you were responding to in post #124,988 .  It's an assessment by a man who was first appointed in 1995 as Operational Unit Commander in charge of Royal Protection for HM the Queen and the Royal Family and is bringing 27 years of experience to his analysis of what he has described as raising a "creditable threat". 

This was posted on a dozen or more  international sites listed on Google. I used the Daily Mail because it was the first one listed and not behind a paywall.


----------



## gracekelly

I wonder what new information Meghan could be holding back for her book. By the time this hits the shelves, she will have been away from the royals for almost a year if they don’t go to the coronation.   More whining and old news is sure to sell books,  Not


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Hermes Zen

joleenzy said:


> Hi everyone. I’m new to this thread.
> 
> My opinion about MM hasn’t changed since the first time I saw her. I find her to be calculated, manipulative and a professional victim. I had a bad feeling about her from the start and my feeling never fails me. Alot of things are very off about her. I was proven to be right. My family had to agree with me after some time.
> 
> The netflix documentary is a disgrace and absolutely disgusting. Why would you choose to move to LA out of all places in the world if you want to live a quiet life? If they were serious about their claims they would have moved to a quiet village somewhere. LA is the most paparazzi filled place in America.
> 
> She tries to be Diana so bad, it’s laughable.
> 
> I’m excited to see all the other posts on here from now on.
> 
> Happy Holidays everyone.


Welcome to the thread @joleenzy!


----------



## Chanbal

Piers Morgan's twitter account was hacked. I wonder if there is a connection to his dislike of TW. There are too many bigots out there… Sending good vibes your way!


_“In case you were wondering, *@piersmorgan has been hacked,*” the show wrote. “Any chance of getting him back, @elonmusk?”.

The apparent hackers deleted the host’s profile and cover image, and changed his name several times to phrases like “lol.” His account currently appears blank for web users, though the mobile Twitter app still shows racially offensive and sexually explicit tweets on Morgan’s feed.

Twitter and Morgan did not immediately respond to CNN’s request for comment.

*Morgan has been in the spotlight in recent weeks for his criticism of Meghan and Prince Harry, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Morgan has lambasted their Netflix documentary that aired earlier this month.*"_



			https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/27/media/piers-morgan-twitter-hacked/index.html


----------



## Toby93

Lol....I just typed in "The Traitors", and the Meghan and Harry doc came up


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Not surprised, the article was a masterpiece…


----------



## carmen56

Lodpah said:


> Radar Online now says MM is writing a book about KC and Camilla and it will be brutal. Was she around them 24/7? How malacious is this?


That'll be interesting, she only knew them for 5 minutes!


----------



## Jayne1

Molly0 said:


> In my mind none of the circumstances around Doria’s education matter at this point, but what does matter is what she is doing NOW with that degree. My question would be is she functioning NOW  in a field where the work that social worker’s do is so very important?  If so, her past is irrelevant and good for her for doing this essential  work every day!


Agree - so why didn't Meg call her when she was pregnant and suicidal?  So odd!


----------



## Jayne1

sdkitty said:


> I took it to mean that he and the WIFE were doing a better job than Will & Kate - stealing the limelight


Just like mummy stole the limelight from angry, jealous daddy.


----------



## V0N1B2

Lodpah said:


> Radar Online now says MM is writing a book about KC and Camilla and it will be brutal. Was she around them 24/7? How malacious is this?


Right? Two Weddings and a funeral. One christening, two trooping of the colours, two Commonweath Days, a Jubilee, a Birthday party and... a handful of other events? How many times have they all been together? 15? 18? 20 tops. C’mon Meghan, you were officially in the Royal family for a year and a half. You don’t know $hit and you don’t have dirt on anyone. 

Not that I believe this Radar Online article, but what happened to their upcoming year of reconciliation?
She must be utterly f*cking exhausting to be around. Can you imagine what it’s like to live with her 24/7? No wonder Harry looks like a hostage in all those videos he makes.


----------



## xincinsin

Maybe this is reconciliation, Zed-style. Say you're sorry or I'll release another bomb!

If so, 2023 The Year of Reconciliation is going to be full of threats and tell-alls because she is expecting the BRF to cave and he is expecting his brother to meekly step aside.


----------



## Swanky

Thread is paused…. A break might be healthy


----------



## Vlad

Supporting Swanky's decision to give this discussion a timeout for a few days. This thread requires a disproportional amount of moderation. While it is a very active thread, the degree of infighting is just absurd at times.

I appreciate everyone's passion here, but I will need to start thread-banning accounts if they are found to repeatedly instigate and be disruptive.


----------



## sdkitty

reopened


----------



## Aimee3

Yay!!!
I missed everyone!
Happy and healthy new year.
Now let’s get back to the puppet and his TW.


----------



## Hermes Zen

I missed everyone too!  Thank you @Vlad and @Swanky !!  Happy New Year everyone!!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Happy New Year, all.  Thank you, @Vlad and @Swanky.  We will behave, promise.


----------



## Aminamina

You my dear ladies, make this thread. Not H&TW. Missed your wisdom, intelligence and sense of humor.
 Happy New Year, peace to all of you! All the mysteries will be revealed.


----------



## Sharont2305

Happy New Year to you all. I've missed all the camaraderie. Hope you're all well? 
Now, to keep it on topic, the book's out soon. And two TV interviews too.


----------



## Jayne1

Happy to be back.

I saw snippets of the Anderson interview.  I hope he (Anderson) asks the harder, follow-up questions. I want to know if Harry really thought this through and it's not just emotions talking.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Happy new year! Let me find the tweet that claims Harry the King of Petty scheduled his British interview with iTV so that next day's newspaper are already printed. I think he might have stunted his development even before age 12.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Vlad said:


> I appreciate everyone's passion here, but I will need to start thread-banning accounts if they are found to repeatedly instigate and be disruptive.



We would actually appreciate that.


----------



## csshopper

New Year, but same old whiny Hawry.

Missed you all. 

Thank you Vlad and Swanky!


----------



## CarryOn2020

From his own mother:


----------



## Aminamina

H&TW in pursuit of Money riding the royal coat-tails. He said he wants a family - live your life and SPARE the public from your whining. I wonder what Anderson Cooper really thought of Harry. They are nothing without their lousy complaints.


----------



## youngster

Missed everyone here!  Happy New Year!

So, Harry "wants his dad and brother back".   If he actually thinks this is the way to go about it, he's an even bigger idiot than I imagined.


----------



## Maggie Muggins

Happy new year everyone. Great to be back and will do my best to be good.


----------



## redney

Happy new year! Happy to see you all here again!


----------



## purseinsanity

Aminamina said:


> You my dear ladies, make this thread. Not H&TW. Missed your wisdom, intelligence and sense of humor.
> Happy New Year, peace to all of you! All the mysteries will be revealed.


Hear, hear!  I must admit, it was nice NOT to deal or think about these two.  It general, there seemed to be less stories forced down my throat on the websites I go to, so that was REALLY refreshing, but I missed all of you!  It was like a break up I never saw coming!
@Aminamina, I hope you and your family are safe and that this new year is a fresh start for us all!


----------



## KEG66

youngster said:


> Missed everyone here!  Happy New Year!
> 
> So, Harry "wants his dad and brother back".   If he actually thinks this is the way to go about it, he's an even bigger idiot than I imagined.


Yay we’re back, missed you all, Happy New Year ! 
I think the only way he might get his dad and brother back is to stfu and leave the wife.


----------



## Gal4Dior

Anderson is good very good friends with Andy Cohen, so I sure would hope he wouldn’t go soft on Sparry, just because Andy sees a potential $$$$ deal to happen once these two are done complaining about the 2 years of bad treatment 4 years later, and the RHOBH is suddenly the only option to pay for their exorbitant lifestyle.

Andy seemed more than eager to have TW on his series.


----------



## papertiger

DM and the Guardian is full of _them_ today, particularly Harry of course. I don't have the patience to read everything, and I don't really want to repost anything I haven't read. Right and Left wing UK press don't like Harry.

Lovely to 'see' you all again.


----------



## bellecate

Glad to be back, missed you all. Hope everyone had a wonderful New Years!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Marklesnews also had a whole little series of things Ghoul said, then a few months later it was the complete opposite on the very same subject. That's the problem with lying, at some point it becomes hard work to keep the lies straight.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## purseinsanity

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Marklesnews also had a whole little series of things Ghoul said, then a few months later it was the complete opposite on the very same subject. That's the problem with lying, at some point it becomes hard work to keep the lies straight.


To be an excellent liar, you have to have an iron clad memory.  Most people don't.


----------



## Debbini

Thanks Vlad and admins!!!
Happy 2023 to all~
If the AC interview trailer is the hint to how it went, looks like Anderson went soft on Hairy?


----------



## sdkitty

Debbini said:


> Thanks Vlad and admins!!!
> Happy 2023 to all~
> If the AC interview trailer is the hint to how it went, looks like Anderson went soft on Hairy?


hope not


----------



## sdkitty

he would like to have his brother and father back when he just recently accused them publicly of being a liar and of terrifying him with yelling?  OK.  Has he lost his mind?








						Prince Harry Says 'I Would Like To Have My Brother Back' In New Trailer For Bombshell Interview
					

In a clip from an upcoming interview, the Duke of Sussex spoke about King Charles and Prince William while promoting his memoir, "Spare."




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## oldbag

So who is doing the leaking and planting of stories coming out of California and trips to New York? Who filmed all of the private moments in the liarseries? So many questions.


----------



## purseinsanity

sdkitty said:


> he would like to have his brother and father back when he just recently accused them publicly of being a liar and of terrifying him with yelling?  OK.  Has he lost his mind?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says 'I Would Like To Have My Brother Back' In New Trailer For Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> In a clip from an upcoming interview, the Duke of Sussex spoke about King Charles and Prince William while promoting his memoir, "Spare."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



I think he has lost touch with reality.  He's not a 3 year old that can say anything they want or do whatever they want and still be forgiven.  Even if he leaves TW, I'd have a really hard time trusting him ever again, even if he was my son or brother.  Once someone shows you who they really are, believe them (paraphrasing someone's famous quote.  Not trying to be TW and plagiarize!  ).


----------



## charlottawill

I actually enjoyed the break from their never-ending nonsense, and there's plenty about them on Twitter. While waiting at the grocery checkout this morning I saw US Weekly blaring "It's Over!". We need to rest up for next week's train wreck. But I did miss all of your collective wit and wisdom


----------



## 880

purseinsanity said:


> I think he has lost touch with reality.  He's not a 3 year old that can say anything they want or do whatever they want and still be forgiven.  Even if he leaves TW, I'd have a really hard time trusting him ever again, even if he was my son or brother.  Once someone shows you who they really are, believe them (paraphrasing someone's famous quote.  Not trying to be TW and plagiarize!  ).


Most recently, perhaps Maya Angelou 

Though I think this universal bit of wisdom has been mined in various works of literature, from Shakespeare on


----------



## gracekelly

Wow!  I go off to make pea soup and lemonade and the thread re-opens! Yay!

Happy New Year to all and thanks to the Mods for re-opening the thread! 

I posted something on the W&C thread that I would like to repost here.


_I think the late Queen was trying to separate the family from the institution, but the current situation illustrates that it may be impossible to do. William has to consider his position as heir and that of his own heir. You can’t have the institution denigrated and look like you are supporting the person(s) doing it. William and Catherine are being trashed on a personal level and Harry is combining it with their position in the monarchy. It’s really a catch 22._

What I can say on this thread and could not on the other, is that Harry has no sense of logic in this matter.  He can't go trashing people and expect them to welcome his back.  Trashing his family is the same as trashing the monarchy IMO because they ARE the monarchy.  So I disagree with the late Queen's logic on this.  I believe it made her feel better about what happened to try and separate family and monarchy, but it just won't work. 

I don't believe that Harry can ever be truly welcomed back.  He can be tolerated  and that is about it.  They DO NOT have to tolerate his wife if they so choose. I read an opinion on a British site that suggested that Harry was told he may attend the coronation and bring Meghan, but in order for her to there, they must bring both children.  I don't see that happening at all because she already knows that there will be no photo ops with the children and KC3 because KC3 won't allow it.   Everyone is wise to the merching of pictures, so that is not going to happen. If money is not to be made, then she and kids stay home.  However, the Harkles need to be seen as royal adjacent or they have nothing to sell or whine about.  Does anyone see them being given anything to whine about?  I don't, so I think they will all stay home.


----------



## mikimoto007

Jayne1 said:


> Happy to be back.
> 
> I saw snippets of the Anderson interview.  I hope he (Anderson) asks the harder, follow-up questions. I want to know if Harry really thought this through and it's not just emotions talking.


I agree - although what I saw from Anderson seemed promising.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> Wow!  I go off to make pea soup and lemonade and the thread re-opens! Yay!
> 
> Happy New Year to all and thanks to the Mods for re-opening the thread!
> 
> I posted something on the W&C thread that I would like to repost here.
> 
> 
> _I think the late Queen was trying to separate the family from the institution, but the current situation illustrates that it may be impossible to do. William has to consider his position as heir and that of his own heir. You can’t have the institution denigrated and look like you are supporting the person(s) doing it. William and Catherine are being trashed on a personal level and Harry is combining it with their position in the monarchy. It’s really a catch 22._
> 
> What I can say on this thread and could not on the other, is that Harry has no sense of logic in this matter.  He can't go trashing people and expect them to welcome his back.  Trashing his family is the same as trashing the monarchy IMO because they ARE the monarchy.  So I disagree with the late Queen's logic on this.  I believe it made her feel better about what happened to try and separate family and monarchy, but it just won't work.
> 
> I don't believe that Harry can ever be truly welcomed back.  He can be tolerated  and that is about it.  They DO NOT have to tolerate his wife if they so choose. I read an opinion on a British site that suggested that Harry was told he may attend the coronation and bring Meghan, but in order for her to there, they must bring both children.  I don't see that happening at all because she already knows that there will be no photo ops with the children and KC3 because KC3 won't allow it.   Everyone is wise to the merching of pictures, so that is not going to happen. If money is not to be made, then she and kids stay home.  However, the Harkles need to be seen as royal adjacent or they have nothing to sell or whine about.  Does anyone see them being given anything to whine about?  I don't, so I think they will all stay home.


trashing the king and future king and then saying he wants the relationships back is beyond ridiculous
Guess he's gone bonkers


----------



## Lounorada

Hears the thread is open again...




Walks right on in...








Good to be back amongst all you lovely ladies, being entertained by your humour and free to reply!
Happy New Year to you all, I hope it's a good year for us all


----------



## carmen56

Great to have this thread back!  Happy New Year, everybody.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

sdkitty said:


> he would like to have his brother and father back when he just recently accused them publicly of being a liar and of terrifying him with yelling?  OK.  Has he lost his mind?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says 'I Would Like To Have My Brother Back' In New Trailer For Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> In a clip from an upcoming interview, the Duke of Sussex spoke about King Charles and Prince William while promoting his memoir, "Spare."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



His approach is certainly...peculiar.


----------



## sdkitty

In a preview clip of the interview released Monday, the Duke of Sussex said, “They’ve shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile,” presumably referring to the Royal Family


What a surprise....he tried to reconcile?  by slandering them?


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

I can't open this but it seems maybe the US media is over him








						Harry Takes Out the Knife Again as He Flogs His Memoir
					

“I want a family, not an institution,” he told a British interviewer, claiming the royals do not want to reconcile with him and Meghan.



					www.thedailybeast.com


----------



## lalame

Wait he has 2 big interviews the same weekend (Anderson Cooper & Tom Bradby)?


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> trashing the king and future king and then saying he want the relationships back is beyond ridiculous
> Guess he's gone bonkers


First Amendment bonkers when you think about it.  Freedom of speech, but that doesn't  make what you had to say intelligent or correct.


----------



## gracekelly

sdkitty said:


> In a preview clip of the interview released Monday, the Duke of Sussex said, “They’ve shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile,” presumably referring to the Royal Family
> 
> 
> What a surprise....he tried to reconcile?  by slandering them?


How clever of him to throw it back on them as the ones who should want to reconcile.  They have moved into reverse tactic territory.  Blame the other guy when you are at fault.


----------



## tiktok

sdkitty said:


> I can't open this but it seems maybe the US media is over him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Takes Out the Knife Again as He Flogs His Memoir
> 
> 
> “I want a family, not an institution,” he told a British interviewer, claiming the royals do not want to reconcile with him and Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


Try this: https://archive.ph/mS1rI


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> Wait he has 2 big interviews the same weekend (Anderson Cooper & Tom Bradby)?


Considering how Bradby bent over and took it up the #%&*^ for Meghan with a scripted interview and leading questions so she could get teary and say that no one asked how she was, I am not expecting much.  If he tries to redeem his reputation as an interviewer because he was a total toady before, I will be surprised.


----------



## lalame

The Daily Beast article blames it all on Meghan but I don't believe that at all. Harry has been the one spilling the most tea and he has always been a renegade in his own ways. I think he's the one leading when it comes to their family issues while Meghan is more focused on the stuff outside the family (media, her family, social commentary, etc).


----------



## youngster

I think putting out this memoir so soon after the muti-hour Netflix series was a big mistake.  They are both over-exposed and it is the same, ceaseless beating of the same theme over and over.  They were done wrong by the family, by BP, by the UK press, by their former staff, etc.  They are the blameless victims and take no responsibility for anything. 

Interesting too, that Harry says that the royals do not want to reconcile and that he and Meghan have been painted as the villains.  Maybe he's finally looked at his poll numbers and is starting to realize that all they've done since leaving has actually worked in reverse and caused their popularity to _drop_.  It should be going up, not down, after the constant PR deluge and interviews and TV shows and podcasts.


----------



## bellecate

sdkitty said:


> he would like to have his brother and father back when he just recently accused them publicly of being a liar and of terrifying him with yelling?  OK. * Has he lost his mind?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says 'I Would Like To Have My Brother Back' In New Trailer For Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> In a clip from an upcoming interview, the Duke of Sussex spoke about King Charles and Prince William while promoting his memoir, "Spare."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


Yes, yes he has.


----------



## Debbini

lalame said:


> Wait he has 2 big interviews the same weekend (Anderson Cooper & Tom Bradby)?


They'll both have cotton candy questions. I don't think either interviewer will have the cajones to go "there" with him.


----------



## lalame

Debbini said:


> They'll both have cotton candy questions. I don't think either interviewer will have the cajones to go "there" with him.


I don't know Tom Bradby but I think Anderson is a good neutral interviewer. I'm definitely curious to see how that goes.


----------



## 880

sdkitty said:


> I can't open this but it seems maybe the US media is over him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harry Takes Out the Knife Again as He Flogs His Memoir
> 
> 
> “I want a family, not an institution,” he told a British interviewer, claiming the royals do not want to reconcile with him and Meghan.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com


I read it. There is nothing new except an emphasis on the greatest vitriol being heaped on William, and a mutual family friend saying that the BRF blame Meghan for the animosity


----------



## 1LV

Harry wants his dad and brother back?  What Harry wants is to keep this story going.  I hope his mouth has finally overloaded his ass.


----------



## Katel

Lounorada said:


> Hears the thread is open again...
> 
> View attachment 5682215
> 
> 
> Walks right on in...
> 
> View attachment 5682219
> 
> View attachment 5682216
> 
> View attachment 5682218
> 
> 
> Good to be back amongst all you lovely ladies, being entertained by your humour and free to reply!
> Happy New Year to you all, I hope it's a good year for us all
> View attachment 5682217


Happy New Year all!  I didn’t miss the losers who are H&TW, but I did miss your collective bright, beautiful, brainy wit!


----------



## Debbini

lalame said:


> I don't know Tom Bradby but I think Anderson is a good neutral interviewer. I'm definitely curious to see how that goes.


I don't know the Bradby person, and I like Anderson. I just can't see anyone asking the hard questions, or if they want to....Hairy not agreeing to do the interview.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Aminamina

Keep it private+: TW is allegedly writing a tell-all that is promising to leave no rock unturned. They are desperately milking their 15 min of royal life as there’s no tomorrow. 
How shameless they must be to cry a river over their “ordeal” knowing how people in the world are struggling IRL? Have they ever noticed what their charities are all about? Invictus Games participants??


----------



## regnews

youngster said:


> I think putting out this memoir so soon after the muti-hour Netflix series was a big mistake.  They are both over-exposed and it is the same, ceaseless beating of the same theme over and over.  They were done wrong by the family, by BP, by the UK press, by their former staff, etc.  They are the blameless victims and take no responsibility for anything.
> 
> Interesting too, that Harry says that the royals do not want to reconcile and that he and Meghan have been painted as the villains.  Maybe he's finally looked at his poll numbers and is starting to realize that all they've done since leaving has actually worked in reverse and caused their popularity to _drop_.  It should be going up, not down, after the constant PR deluge and interviews and TV shows and podcasts.


I really think they thought that that Netflix show would be positive for them (just as after Oprah). And that it would help with promoting of that book. But people were negative after that show so......


----------



## gracekelly

lalame said:


> I don't know Tom Bradby but I think Anderson is a good neutral interviewer. I'm definitely curious to see how that goes.


Hopefully AC won't go into how his mother's family took her away from her mother and she had a terrible childhood etc.   If it comes down to a l_osing your mother _discussion it will degenerate pretty quickly.


----------



## gracekelly

youngster said:


> I think putting out this memoir so soon after the muti-hour Netflix series was a big mistake.  They are both over-exposed and it is the same, ceaseless beating of the same theme over and over.  They were done wrong by the family, by BP, by the UK press, by their former staff, etc.  They are the blameless victims and take no responsibility for anything.
> 
> Interesting too, that Harry says that the royals do not want to reconcile and that he and Meghan have been painted as the villains.  Maybe he's finally looked at his poll numbers and is starting to realize that all they've done since leaving has actually worked in reverse and caused their popularity to _drop_.  It should be going up, not down, after the constant PR deluge and interviews and TV shows and podcasts.


I initially read your ceaseless beating as ceaseless _bleating_ lololol!


----------



## sdkitty

Aminamina said:


> Keep it private+: TW is allegedly writing a tell-all that is promising to leave no rock unturned. They are desperately milking their 15 min of royal life as there’s no tomorrow.
> How shameless they must be to cry a river over their “ordeal” knowing how people in the world are struggling IRL? Have they ever noticed what their charities are all about? Invictus Games participants??


they are just disgusting


----------



## papertiger

Debbini said:


> I don't know the Bradby person, and I like Anderson. I just can't see anyone asking the gard questions, or if they want to....Hairy not agreeing to do the interview.



Interview questions are always discussed and vetted/vetoed/okayed beforehand


----------



## redney

papertiger said:


> Interview questions are always discussed and vetted/vetoed/okayed beforehand


I was just going to add this. It's guaranteed AC's questions have been provided with H & TW deciding which he can ask and which are off limits. Don't know if they still have any PR people to prep answers for him; otherwise it's TW doing it, which will be a disaster and more hits on BRF.


----------



## charlottawill




----------



## sdkitty

lalame said:


> Wait he has 2 big interviews the same weekend (Anderson Cooper & Tom Bradby)?


pushing that book for the almighty dollar while at the same time claiming he wants to reconcile with his family....


----------



## justwatchin

Their never ending bleating about how they have been treated is the only way these people have to make a buck. It will have to end at some point because it’s getting old.


----------



## needlv

So..Harry suggested to Cooper he had no choice but to go public

Where have I heard this before?  Oh yes, same tactics…

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...rkle-monthly-interviews-meghan-markle-racism/

Thomas Markle Threatens to Do Monthly Interviews if Meghan Doesn’t Call Him​


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> Interview questions are always discussed and vetted/vetoed/okayed beforehand


Meghan better write down all the answers for Harry Dick and Jane style.


----------



## lalame

I actually enjoyed the Netflix show but I thought that was a good place to leave it. Especially if he wanted his father and brother back. Even if Harry was 100% in the right on this, he should've taken advantage of the fact that the BRF wasn't going to address it and moved on. He had the last word.


----------



## gracekelly

needlv said:


> So..Harry suggested to Cooper he had no choice but to go public
> 
> Where have I heard this before?  Oh yes, same tactics…
> 
> https://www.cosmopolitan.com/entert...rkle-monthly-interviews-meghan-markle-racism/
> 
> Thomas Markle Threatens to Do Monthly Interviews if Meghan Doesn’t Call Him​


Oh this is sounding familiar.

Don't Cry for me Argentina lyrics

Don't cry for me, Argentina
The truth is, I never left you
All through my wild days, my mad existence
I kept my promise
Don't keep your distance
Have I said too much?
There's nothing more I can think of to say to you
But all you have to do is look at me to know
That every word is true


----------



## youngster

gracekelly said:


> I initially read your ceaseless beating as ceaseless _bleating_ lololol!



Either word works lol!


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Jayne1

lalame said:


> I don't know Tom Bradby but I think Anderson is a good neutral interviewer. I'm definitely curious to see how that goes.


He might ask a tough question, but so did Oprah - and then she let Meg and even Harry tell their fairy tale 'truth' and never challenged them. Not even when they contradicted themselves within the same hour.

Will Anderson ask the logical follow-up questions?  I'm betting he won't.


----------



## Sharont2305

Not forgetting Tom has been a long standing friend of William and Harry, did William and Catherine's engagement interview, went to both weddings, and did the "nobody asked me if I'm OK" interview. 
He is a well respected journalist on Prime time news.


----------



## tiktok

Sharont2305 said:


> Not forgetting Tom has been a long standing friend of William and Harry, did William and Catherine's engagement interview, went to both weddings, and did the "nobody asked me if I'm OK" interview.
> He is a well respected journalist on Prime time news.


Guess we'll see if he's a friend of William's still or willing to aid and abet his dear brother in throwing him under the bus.


----------



## kemilia

gracekelly said:


> Oh this is sounding familiar.
> 
> Don't Cry for me Argentina lyrics
> 
> Don't cry for me, Argentina
> The truth is, I never left you
> All through my wild days, my mad existence
> I kept my promise
> Don't keep your distanceI
> Have I said too much?
> There's nothing more I can think of to say to you
> But all you have to do is look at me to know
> That every word is true


I love Evita (sorry off topic)!


----------



## kemilia

All I gotta say now is their circus of lies HAS to end this year--the public's interest is already worn thin and eventually anyone that still thinks they have anything to say about the horrid royals will realize "hey, she didn't live there (UK) very long--this is probably just made up crappola". Until then they will milk whatever, *WHATEVER*, they can for the moolah. I totally believe they are broke or close to it. 

Heck, Tori Spelling had a super rich daddy (Aaron Spelling, who was like Mr. TV in the USA at one point) and lived in the biggest house in LA (maybe the country), and now is living (from what I have seen online) in a basic split-level nothing-great house and is on some bad reality show. 

Gaze in the crystal ball now, H&M, it's a-coming.


----------



## papertiger

lalame said:


> I actually enjoyed the Netflix show but I thought that was a good place to leave it. Especially if he wanted his father and brother back. Even if Harry was 100% in the right on this, he should've taken advantage of the fact that the BRF wasn't going to address it and moved on. He had the last word.



They sounded daft as brushes. the PrincessoW had _such_ a hard time with the media when she was going out with William, and some of it was quite debauched and trashy. To say M had an especially special, singularly hard time was such rot, no-one could take them seriously.

And Meghan was so rude about 'having' to live in Nottingham Cottage, complaining about the strain of having to curtsey to the Queen (figurehead of a country) and generally greet people in a courteous manner. If I was from the US, I'd be worrying whether the global audience would think all Americans were so entitled, immature moaners. Most Americans I know are so polite and conscientious when greeting others.


----------



## gracekelly

kemilia said:


> All I gotta say now is their circus of lies HAS to end this year--the public's interest is already worn thin and eventually anyone that still thinks they have anything to say about the horrid royals will realize "hey, she didn't live there (UK) very long--this is probably just made up crappola". Until then they will milk whatever, *WHATEVER*, they can for the moolah. I totally believe they are broke or close to it.
> 
> Heck, Tori Spelling had a super rich daddy (Aaron Spelling, who was like Mr. TV in the USA at one point) and lived in the biggest house in LA (maybe the country), and now is living (from what I have seen online) in a basic split-level nothing-great house and is on some bad reality show.
> 
> Gaze in the crystal ball now, H&M, it's a-coming.


And  doesn't Tori get handouts from mommy?  I thought Tori lived in rentals and then took off owing on the rent.   The Bank of Dad is closed, so maybe Harry can apply to Candy for a handout.


----------



## gracekelly

papertiger said:


> They sounded daft as brushes. the PrincessoW had _such_ a hard time with the media when she was going out with William, and some of it was quite debauched and trashy. To say M had an especially special, singularly hard time was such rot, no-one could take them seriously.
> 
> And Meghan was so rude about 'having' to live in Nottingham Cottage, complaining about the strain of having to curtsey to the Queen (figurehead of a country) and generally greet people in a courteous manner. If I was from the US, I'd be worrying whether the global audience would think all Americans were so entitled, immature moaners. Most Americans I know are so polite and conscientious when greeting others.


Unfortunately, her behavior just reinforces the Ugly America stereotype.  Light bulb!  She could have covered that on Archetypes since she didn't know the difference between an archetype and a stereotype.


----------



## sdkitty

Jayne1 said:


> He might ask a tough question, but so did Oprah - and then she let Meg and even Harry tell their fairy tale 'truth' and never challenged them. Not even when they contradicted themselves within the same hour.
> 
> Will Anderson ask the logical follow-up questions?  I'm betting he won't.


we'll see
but 60 minutes is a lot different from Oprah....hopefully Anderson won't want to put himself in a position to be criticized for a softball interview with the bonkers former prince


----------



## Gal4Dior

gracekelly said:


> Unfortunately, her behavior just reinforces the Ugly America stereotype.  Light bulb!  She could have covered that on Archetypes since she didn't know the difference between an archetype and a stereotype.



Also that she didn’t know the correct pronunciation of Tignanello - The Tig.

I know TW isn’t that clever, but does anyone she hires have a brain plus some guts to save her some embarrassment?


----------



## gelbergirl

charlottawill said:


> I actually enjoyed the break from their never-ending nonsense, and there's plenty about them on Twitter. While waiting at the grocery checkout this morning I saw US Weekly blaring "It's Over!". We need to rest up for next week's train wreck. But I did miss all of your collective wit and wisdom



Agree. Soon enough I'll be shaking from being on my last nerve with these two.


----------



## charlottawill

papertiger said:


> They sounded daft as brushes. the PrincessoW had _such_ a hard time with the media when she was going out with William, and some of it was quite debauched and trashy. To say M had an especially special, singularly hard time was such rot, no-one could take them seriously.
> 
> And Meghan was so rude about 'having' to live in Nottingham Cottage, complaining about the strain of having to curtsey to the Queen (figurehead of a country) and generally greet people in a courteous manner. If I was from the US, I'd be worrying whether the global audience would think all Americans were so entitled, immature moaners. Most Americans I know are so polite and conscientious when greeting others.


The narcissistic nobody from LA really believed she was special and should be kowtowed to by the RF and a beloved monarch who served her country with grace and dignity for seven decades. It doesn't get any more delusional than that.


----------



## redney

Gal4Dior said:


> I know TW isn’t that clever, but d*oes anyone she hires have a brain plus some guts to save her some embarrassment?*


Yes, probably but it's widely rumored she doesn't take anyone's advice since she think she knows it all. That's probably why so many people have left employment with them and with Archewell. And didn't their PR firm Sunshine Sux quit too?


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> And  doesn't Tori get handouts from mommy?  I thought Tori lived in rentals and then took off owing on the rent.   The Bank of Dad is closed, so maybe Harry can apply to Candy for a handout.


Tyler Perry is probably standing by, the Douchess leaks her left eye tear, and it signals him to the checkbook.


----------



## gracekelly

Gal4Dior said:


> Also that she didn’t know the correct pronunciation of Tignanello - The Tig.
> 
> I know TW isn’t that clever, but does anyone she hires have a brain plus some guts to save her some embarrassment?


Meghan hired intelligent people who were successful at their jobs.  What happened?  She obviously didn't like what they told her and/or didn't listen to them and now almost all of them have moved on and they didn't last 12-18 months.  Considering how many of them were hired and left, you have to question the employer as opposed to the employee.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

csshopper said:


> Tyler Perry is probably standing by, the Douchess leaks her left eye tear, and it signals him to the checkbook.


Yeah well Tyler ought to give that check book to Madea because she is a lot smarter.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> And  doesn't Tori get handouts from mommy?  I thought Tori lived in rentals and then took off owing on the rent.   The Bank of Dad is closed, so maybe Harry can apply to Candy for a handout.


I forget the details, but after Candy cut Tori off years ago I think she was guilted into helping her because she's got half a dozen kids or so and her husband is kind of a loser. Tori went from a life of incredible privilege to living paycheck to paycheck, while TW went from modest beginnings to a life of incredible privilege and then threw it away. Poor life choices all around.


----------



## Chanbal

Glad the suspension is over; it costed me 2 bottles of perfume, 2 cardigans, and a discussion about pope Benedict who I knew very little about.

Miss you all! Happy New Year!


----------



## KEG66

Sharont2305 said:


> Not forgetting Tom has been a long standing friend of William and Harry, did William and Catherine's engagement interview, went to both weddings, and did the "nobody asked me if I'm OK" interview.
> He is a well respected journalist on Prime time news.


Yes but I think he will be very mindful of who is king, who will be king and who hands out the honours and it’s not Harry !


----------



## Debbini

charlottawill said:


> The narcissistic nobody from LA really believed she was special and should be kowtowed to by the RF and a beloved monarch who served her country with grace and dignity for seven decades. It doesn't get any more delusional than that.


Right?! You couldn't even make this stuff up!


----------



## Chanbal

A good video from the Behavior Panel for the ones that didn't watch it yet. 


_Is It OVER for Meghan and Harry?Netflix's Most Popular Show Makes For UNPOPULAR Royals_​


----------



## LittleStar88

We’re back! Woohoo! 

Happy New Year, everyone!

I saw on Reddit that Spare really leans into Will and Kate. It’ll be interesting once the excerpts come out.

How can Harry say in the interview that he wants his relationship with dad and brother back when he’s been dragging them through the mud? His expectations are misguided. If I were them I wouldn’t want to talk to him, either. It’s like he’s gaslighting or something


----------



## Debbini

LittleStar88 said:


> We’re back! Woohoo!
> 
> Happy New Year, everyone!
> 
> I saw on Reddit that Spare really leans into Will and Kate. It’ll be interesting once the excerpts come out.
> 
> How can Harry say in the interview that he wants his relationship with dad and brother back when he’s been dragging them through the mud? His expectations are misguided. If I were them I wouldn’t want to talk to him, either. It’s like he’s gaslighting or something


I do hope this isn't true about laying into Will. I'm having issues with one of my sister's and it hurts so much. I can't imagine it being in a book on the national stage for everyone to see. It breaks my heart


----------



## LittleStar88

Debbini said:


> I do hope this isn't true about laying into Will. I'm having issues with one of my sister's and it hurts so much. I can't imagine it being in a book on the national stage for everyone to see. It breaks my heart



If this is the case and he drags them, it will be virtually impossible to repair that relationship. And a total douche move to sell your relationship with your brother. Guessing he would have to be very desperate for money.


----------



## mrsinsyder

LittleStar88 said:


> I saw on Reddit that Spare really leans into Will and Kate. It’ll be interesting once the excerpts come out.


God maybe it’ll FINALLY be some interesting tea.


----------



## DoggieBags

Netflix is really pushing the Harkles Mockumentary. I attended a family get together over the weekend and we watched a lot of Netflix shows. And every time we went to Netflix the Harkles popped up on the first page of what was new. I don’t have a Netflix account so I had no idea how prominently they were advertised.


----------



## charlottawill

LittleStar88 said:


> We’re back! Woohoo!
> 
> Happy New Year, everyone!
> 
> I saw on Reddit that Spare really leans into Will and Kate. It’ll be interesting once the excerpts come out.
> 
> How can Harry say in the interview that he wants his relationship with dad and brother back when he’s been dragging them through the mud? His expectations are misguided. If I were them I wouldn’t want to talk to him, either. It’s like he’s gaslighting or something


If the Spare goes after the Princess of Wales he is toast with his brother imo, and it won't go over well with much of the public either. She represents the RF and the UK with the quiet grace and dignity they've come to expect of the wife of a future king. The contrast with his wife could not be more glaring.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> And  doesn't Tori get handouts from mommy?  I thought Tori lived in rentals and then took off owing on the rent.   The Bank of Dad is closed, so *maybe Harry can apply to Candy for a handout*.


No way in hello.  Candy cut off her daughter for having an affair and divorcing a man Candy liked.  If she had a DIL like TW, I don't think Candy would've tolerated her a quarter of what the BRF has tolerated.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

She has a point.


----------



## Jayne1

charlottawill said:


> I forget the details, but after Candy cut Tori off years ago I think she was guilted into helping her because she's got half a dozen kids or so and her husband is kind of a loser. Tori went from a life of incredible privilege to living paycheck to paycheck, while TW went from modest beginnings to a life of incredible privilege and then threw it away. Poor life choices all around.


If Tori waits around long enough, she must be in the will. Ot at least her kids will be and if your kids are well taken care of, that's half the battle.

Meg won't be in anyone's will as far as we can tell.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## lalame

papertiger said:


> Interview questions are always discussed and vetted/vetoed/okayed beforehand



Are they always? How do the really bad interview moments like Gayle's R Kelley interview or Prince Andrew's happen?


----------



## purseinsanity

LittleStar88 said:


> If this is the case and he drags them, it will be virtually impossible to repair that relationship. And a total douche move to sell your relationship with your brother. *Guessing he would have to be very desperate for money.*


He's certainly not playing the long game.  Has he forgotten who will control the Duchy of Cornwall likely much longer than KC III??
They may have made millions for now, but the rate at which they spend money, it's not going to last long.


----------



## Jayne1

I read that if Harry goes to the Coronation in May, as a senior peer, he must pay homage to the King, swear an oath, touch the crown and, as a relative, kiss his cheek.

See, the ball is in Harry’s court.  The BRF looks generous and loving inviting him and now it’s Harry’s turn to figure out what to do.


----------



## charlottawill

purseinsanity said:


> No way in hello.  Candy cut off her daughter for having an affair and divorcing a man Candy liked.  If she had a DIL like TW, I don't think Candy would've tolerated her a quarter of what the BRF has tolerated.


Candy inherited everything and she cut Tori off for taking up with Dean Whatzizname, who was married at the time. But I believe they've reconciled and she helps her to some extent because of the grandchildren. I could see KC doing similar.


----------



## charlottawill

lalame said:


> Are they always? How do the really bad interview moments like Gayle's Jay Z interview or Prince Andrew's happen?


Jay Z or R Kelly?


----------



## Toby93

nvm


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> A good video from the Behavior Panel for the ones that didn't watch it yet.
> 
> 
> _Is It OVER for Meghan and Harry?Netflix's Most Popular Show Makes For UNPOPULAR Royals_​




It's very long, but totally worth it


----------



## Chanbal

I sincerely doubt Hazz will be entertaining "_robust questioning_". 


_Once again Harry, who wants “a family, not an institution”, blames dirty ops by Buckingham Palace: leaks and briefings against the Sussexes to the media. That, he tells Cooper, justified the way he and Meghan have responded. An ITN report says that the Bradby interview appears to be the first time he has subjected himself to robust questioning. *Perhaps he will be interrogated on why his retaliation in the media battle was to go nuclear, detonating an Oprah bomb then unleashing the first cluster of missiles from a reported $100 million Netflix armoury.*


Returning to a theme he has outlined before, *Harry complains that the Palace defended other members of the family but did not put out statements denying stories about him and his wife.* There comes a point, he says, “*when silence is betrayal*”. Stand by for a lot more noise._



			https://archive.vn/O0LJu#selection-3123.0-3123.557


----------



## Toby93




----------



## 880

lalame said:


> The Daily Beast article blames it all on Meghan but I don't believe that at all. Harry has been the one spilling the most tea and he has always been a renegade in his own ways. I think he's the one leading when it comes to their family issues while Meghan is more focused on the stuff outside the family (media, her family, social commentary, etc).


Agree that Harry has spilled the most (due to some deep seated issues). Meghan may have started the ball rolling in terms of initial media contacts in the US, but she’s simply an opportunist. Both share this conviction that they should somehow be able to monetize their grievances when things didn’t go their way. Though after Harry moved down the LOS, not sure how he could have thought he’d come out ahead in any way, shape, or form).

ETA: Without the BRF engagement or acknowledgement, they simply aren’t of much interest, and he hasn’t been the spare for years. Both H and M cannot really accept that simple fact.


----------



## bellecate

I think he might be right.


----------



## bellecate

Do they tell so many lies to obfuscate the truth?


----------



## lalame

charlottawill said:


> Jay Z or R Kelly?


Omg R Kelley lol. Thanks for the correction... Sorry, Jay!!


----------



## Chanbal

Tourre is good with words.


----------



## Chanbal

Good point, the Middletons are likely not happy seeing what the Harkles are doing to their daughter.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

One more song from Parody Whitney for you all! 


_*Roasted! Harry and Meghan’s song for us! | Nat King Cole Parody (L-O-V-E)*_​


----------



## jblended

lalame said:


> Wait he has 2 big interviews the same weekend (Anderson Cooper & Tom Bradby)?


Because he is frightened of cameras and the media attention gives him PTSD. So he's doing exposure therapy:
Oprah, Oprah again, Netflix crew, Bradby, Cooper, every Tom, Dick and Harry- all in immediate succession! One can only admire his commitment to tackling his aversion to the spotlight in such a diligent manner!   

(just getting in here since it got unlocked, so forgive me if my rather obvious joke has already been made by someone else)


----------



## 880

jblended said:


> Because he is frightened of cameras and the media attention gives him PTSD. So he's doing exposure therapy:
> Oprah, Oprah again, Netflix crew, Bradby, Cooper, every Tom, Dick and Harry- all in immediate succession! One can only admire his commitment to tackling his aversion to the spotlight in such a diligent manner!
> 
> (just getting in here since it got unlocked, so forgive me if my rather obvious joke has already been made by someone else)


He’s making the media rounds to give M a chance at an Oscar for her role in the Netflix drama lol


----------



## jblended

lalame said:


> Are they always? How do the really bad interview moments like Gayle's R Kelley interview or Prince Andrew's happen?


They always are vetted and approved by PR before the interview. The questions are approved and the clients have an idea of their answers (also probably discussed with their PR) before they go.
The thing with Kelley and P. Andrew is that they went off-script. They thought they were cleverer than the masses and could play convincing victims who have been unfairly attacked by the people (much like TW, come to think of it).
It is the interviewee in those cases that brought about the crises moments in the discussion with their responses, whilst the interviewer likely stuck to the original script and then was able to veer away from the plan in response to the ludicrous answers they were given.


----------



## Chanbal

Another excellent article by Maureen C. 









						MAUREEN CALLAHAN: Why the hell would the royals reconcile with Harry?
					

CALLAHAN: Harry and Meghan need absolutely no help in looking like the villains here. They're doing a great job of that all on their own. It actually may be their only real measurable success.




					www.dailymail.co.uk
				




He perseverates on the very family he has, by his own words and actions, lost. He and Meghan take no responsibility whatsoever for their role in these fractures. They engage in petty scorekeeping, sure to release a photo or a piece of gossip whenever Kate and William have a major event or a win. They tell blatant lies, big and small. Recall Meghan bemoaning her choice not to wear bright colors, so as to dim her light against the future Queen, and shed a tear, won't you?

*It's intellectual dishonesty and emotional immaturity at its most unbearable, and a weary public has heard enough.*

_Yet here's Anderson Cooper, scion of another famous, wealthy family, entertaining Prince Harry in a trailer for this Sunday's '60 Minutes' interview. Let's look as these two stroll through a large, sun-dappled garden, Harry spilling out his tale of woe like the dull, droning-on wind-up doll he's become.

The palace leaked against him and Meghan, he tells Cooper. They were used as red meat for the tabloid media, and when they asked for help were coldly denied.

If it's really true, as Harry says, that his father and brother have been 'leaking and planting' stories against Harry and Meghan — why would he ever trust them? Why would he want to reconcile?_


----------



## carmen56

Aminamina said:


> Keep it private+: TW is allegedly writing a tell-all that is promising to leave no rock unturned. They are desperately milking their 15 min of royal life as there’s no tomorrow.
> How shameless they must be to cry a river over their “ordeal” knowing how people in the world are struggling IRL? Have they ever noticed what their charities are all about? Invictus Games participants??


Talk about flogging a dead horse.  Surely there's nothing left to complain about as we've heard it all already.


----------



## charlottawill

Chanbal said:


> Good point, the Middletons are likely not happy seeing what the Harkles are doing to their daughter.



From the comments on that: "The Middletons will do as they always do and take the high road." 

Exactly. I'm confident the Middletons are not losing any sleep over the Harkle histrionics.


----------



## Annawakes

Whew.  I took a break from this thread for several weeks.  I caught up on a ton of pages tonight, out of curiosity of what I missed (nothing really, from them….but lots of tpf drama lol)

All I want to say is…I’m bored of them.  I think I will be dropping in once in a while but not as frequently as before.


----------



## 880

carmen56 said:


> Talk about flogging a dead horse.  Surely there's nothing left to complain about as we've heard it all already.


Agree


----------



## Chanbal

A great article by Jan Moir. I hope Hazz acknowledges MLK.  




_*‘There comes a point when silence is betrayal,’* he told Cooper in a moment of high drama. What was he talking about? A lack of response from the Vulcans on planet Tharg?

No, he was speaking about what he saw as failings on the part of the Royal Family to protect him and Meghan from — well, what? Negative publicity published in newspapers, magazines and on the internet, seems to be the answer. ‘They have shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile,’ he told Bradby, speaking of a lack of willingness on the part of his family to be friends with him again.

It was hard not to bark with laughter at this. *The Duke of Sussex (and the Duchess, let’s be fair) has spent much of the past three years publicly and repeatedly criticising his family, accusing them of cruelty, neglect, racism, lies, jealousy and worse.*

And some things that have been said can never be unsaid, *so it seems little wonder that the King and the Prince of Wales are not in the mood to reach out to their chief tormentor with open arms*, even if he cannot understand why._









						JAN MOIR: Bitter Harry's heating up his tureen of spleen again
					

JAN MOIR: Just when it seemed safe to lift the royal gaze towards the blameless horizon of a new year, the Duke of Sussex is out on manoeuvres to promote his new autobiography.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## youngster

So that tweet was really spot on . . .
_Isn’t it funny how they feel justified in cutting off Thomas but it’s betrayal when it’s done to them?_


----------



## Toby93




----------



## youngster

I wish someone, anyone, in the press would ask Harry or Meghan:
_Why are you telling us all this?_


----------



## LittleStar88

youngster said:


> I wish someone, anyone, in the press would ask Harry or Meghan:
> _Why are you telling us all this?_



And… _Aside from fat paychecks, what are you hoping to gain or achieve?_


----------



## gracekelly

Chanbal said:


> Good point, the Middletons are likely not happy seeing what the Harkles are doing to their daughter.



Yes he is bullying Catherine, but when she goes to sleep at night she knows that she has a loving  husband and family and lives a good life, helps others and one day will be Queen. I think she can take it


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## gracekelly

LittleStar88 said:


> And… _Aside from fat paychecks, what are you hoping to gain or achieve?_


He thinks he is embarrassing them all, but he is just embarrassing himself.


----------



## xincinsin

sdkitty said:


> he would like to have his brother and father back when he just recently accused them publicly of being a liar and of terrifying him with yelling?  OK.  Has he lost his mind?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says 'I Would Like To Have My Brother Back' In New Trailer For Bombshell Interview
> 
> 
> In a clip from an upcoming interview, the Duke of Sussex spoke about King Charles and Prince William while promoting his memoir, "Spare."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com


He wants his ATM back.


----------



## xincinsin

lalame said:


> The Daily Beast article blames it all on Meghan but I don't believe that at all. Harry has been the one spilling the most tea and he has always been a renegade in his own ways. I think he's the one leading when it comes to their family issues while Meghan is more focused on the stuff outside the family (media, her family, social commentary, etc).


Wasn't Daily Beast pro-Sussex not so long ago?


----------



## rose60610

Isn't it hilarious that Haz claims to want his family back, the same "racist" family that supposedly drove his wife to suicidal thoughts?  Wha? Either he has the chutzpah of Claw or he's so accustomed to getting covered for his screw-ups that he can't fathom why the RF is pi$$ed that he threw them under the bus. I wish I had faith that Anderson Cooper would nail him on his MANY lies and inconsistencies, time will tell, but 60 Minutes has been caught in lies for viciously misrepresenting certain people but can be counted on to drool over popular celebrities with softball idiotic questions. I'll bet anybody serious money they'll discuss how Claw "has suffered huge racism" and portray Haz and Maggot as poor, poor, poor victims. Come on, if 60 Minutes were out to really nail them, they'd never agree to the interview.


----------



## Debbini

Toby93 said:


>



Can you ever see a day when your family would want you back full time?!!!


----------



## xincinsin

Gal4Dior said:


> I know TW isn’t that clever, but does anyone she hires have a brain plus some guts to save her some embarrassment?





redney said:


> Yes, probably but it's widely rumored she doesn't take anyone's advice since she think she knows it all.


Narcs do not take advice.

Just for fun, let me describe a scene with my office narc. This actually happened.
Boss: A, you'll ask Karen to provide some company newspapers for the guests 
Narc: Karen. Right! (scribbles in notebook)
Me (suspicious): You know which Karen, right?
Narc: Karen from Marketing - my friend (proudly)
Me: No, Karen from Admin
Narc: But I don't know her.
Me: You don't need to know her. Just email her.
...
End of meeting
Boss: So everyone knows what you have do?
One by one, we recap our duties.
Narc: I'll ask Karen from Marketing for newspapers.
Entire team: It's Karen from Admin!
...
Day of the event, no newspapers to be found.
Narc: But I told Karen from Marketing that we needed newspapers!


----------



## Sharont2305

I've just checked our TV guide and us Brits are in for a treat, the programme is on for 1hr 40mins. Take all the adverts out and we're still looking at 1hr 20mins of sh!t.


----------



## duna

Yessss, I'm glad we are here againI missed you all terribly!

Happy New Year to you all


----------



## papertiger

Sharont2305 said:


> I've just checked our TV guide and us Brits are in for a treat, the programme is on for 1hr 40mins. Take all the adverts out and we're still looking at 1hr 20mins of sh!t.



We don't have to watch it though


----------



## RAINDANCE

Happy New Year! Best wishes to all for what 2023 will bring. Hopefully, good health, good fortune and contentment and lots of other good things, but also the strength and fortitude to deal with the tough stuff too.

Great to be back here.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

You don't say! I'm just stunned she leaks everything under the sun and has done so from the early days of their sick relationship, yet blames the palace. As several renowned journalist have said, the palace tried everything to make them look good and the unflattering accounts only got published when it became impossible to suppress them.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Chanbal said:


> Good point, the Middletons are likely not happy seeing what the Harkles are doing to their daughter.




True, but they would never speak up publicly when the BRF stays silent. Besides Uncle Whatshisname.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Oof.


----------



## papertiger

QueenofWrapDress said:


> You don't say! I'm just stunned she leaks everything under the sun and has done so from the early days of their sick relationship, yet blames the palace. As several renowned journalist have said, the palace tried everything to make them look good and the unflattering accounts only got published when it became impossible to suppress them.




Harry makes out the RF own the media. I know he's a Prince, but how delusional and grand do you have to be to think your family runs and conspires with a free press? 

When the 'doc' was illustrating the UK tabloid press the BRF were supposed to be in bed with, plotting and planting stories, they showed the American owned National Enquirer. I mean Plll_ee_ese  

The UK publishing media will hold their pens if British Intel or security is at stake, but they would never run with a story that hasn't gone through a team of solicitors (lawyers).  If you ask me (or Lady C) he and M are darn lucky the media have not run with some of the stories they have had on H &/or M. 

I think that's the idea, when any negative news comes out about either one in future, they'll say "we told you so". Total gaslighters.  

And, if I may bring Diana in here (because H brings her into everything). She worked _with_ the press all the time, had the most amazing, advantageous coverage and the most positive write-ups on the planet. Most paps did not work for the press, they were freelance and got the press/media into bidding wars over pictures.  

It's panto season folks! 
IMO, HaZZ (as himself - but nicer - and with hair) and MegZZ as Cinderella are trying to shoehorn their ridiculous grandiose fairy story into the Brother's Grimm tale. The glass slipper is not fitting,  they're both bit-players making jokes at their own expense (literally) in a cheap panto. 

Harry better watch out coz MegZZ has nothing to lose, but he has nowhere to go once panto season's over.


----------



## Stansy

Chanbal said:


> Another excellent article by Maureen C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAUREEN CALLAHAN: Why the hell would the royals reconcile with Harry?
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: Harry and Meghan need absolutely no help in looking like the villains here. They're doing a great job of that all on their own. It actually may be their only real measurable success.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He perseverates on the very family he has, by his own words and actions, lost. He and Meghan take no responsibility whatsoever for their role in these fractures. They engage in petty scorekeeping, sure to release a photo or a piece of gossip whenever Kate and William have a major event or a win. They tell blatant lies, big and small. Recall Meghan bemoaning her choice not to wear bright colors, so as to dim her light against the future Queen, and shed a tear, won't you?
> 
> *It's intellectual dishonesty and emotional immaturity at its most unbearable, and a weary public has heard enough.*
> 
> _Yet here's Anderson Cooper, scion of another famous, wealthy family, entertaining Prince Harry in a trailer for this Sunday's '60 Minutes' interview. Let's look as these two stroll through a large, sun-dappled garden, Harry spilling out his tale of woe like the dull, droning-on wind-up doll he's become.
> 
> The palace leaked against him and Meghan, he tells Cooper. They were used as red meat for the tabloid media, and when they asked for help were coldly denied.
> 
> If it's really true, as Harry says, that his father and brother have been 'leaking and planting' stories against Harry and Meghan — why would he ever trust them? Why would he want to reconcile?_



Harry is like a kid learning a foreign language. Latest new vocabulary: reconcile, to, verb. Now go use it in five different sentences. Only that he only manages to form a single one.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## jblended

papertiger said:


> Harry better watch out coz MegZZ has nothing to lose, but he has nowhere to go once panto season's over.


I think he now realizes this and that's why he's trying to start a war. In his mind, he has to please M and be her "protector" in a very grand and very public way so that she doesn't have a reason to leave him, because... what would he do if she left? He has insulted his country and the institution, cut off his family and friends, and he must know his Hollywood connections would never stick around when he really needs help.
I'd pity him but, in this case, you reap what you sew.


----------



## justwatchin

jblended said:


> I think he now realizes this and that's why he's trying to start a war. In his mind, he has to please M and be her "protector" in a very grand and very public way so that she doesn't have a reason to leave him, because... what would he do if she left? He has insulted his country and the institution, cut off his family and friends, and he must know his Hollywood connections would never stick around when he really needs help.
> I'd pity him but, in this case, you reap what you sew.


Agree. Also, he is massively enjoying the attention he’s getting.


----------



## RAINDANCE

justwatchin said:


> Agree. Also, he is massively enjoying the attention he’s getting.


In that respect, is he not his mother's son.


----------



## CarryOn2020

youngster said:


> I wish someone, anyone, in the press would ask Harry or Meghan:
> _Why are you telling us all this?_


And _why don’t you renounce your title, your LoS, and your CoS? _


----------



## eon

papertiger said:


> And Meghan was so rude about 'having' to live in Nottingham Cottage


In all fairness that Cottage certainly can't hold a stripper pole to "The Chateau" they now deign to reside in.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Isn't his darling wife doing PR now after being fired by SS? She's not on drugs, just certifiably crazy and has no clue how actual PR professionals go about this at best and at worst has schemed an evil masterplan to elegantly discard of Harry by pointing out to the last unsuspicious one how out of it and paranoid he is.


----------



## gelbergirl

Any predictions on how Anderson Cooper did on this interview?
Was he handpicked by the Montecito duo as friendly?


----------



## CarryOn2020

My husband proclaimed that Spare will not give up title, los, cos because [drum roll] _Spare thinks he can still contribute_. :gasp:
He learned lots from @chanbal’s bodily language video   I had no idea he was paying attention


----------



## marietouchet

gelbergirl said:


> Any predictions on how Anderson Cooper did on this interview?
> Was he handpicked by the Montecito duo as friendly?


Show is on CBS, so Gayle King might have been in the running
But GK has been blasted for going too soft on the Harkles before , or maybe she won’t touch them with a 10 ft pole
I think of AC as a hard news interviewer, more so than GK,
CBS may only have offered AC

Cool tidbit from Valentine Low - AC’s great aunt Thelma had affair with the Duke of Windsor, Edward VIII


----------



## marietouchet

Nm


----------



## marietouchet

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Isn't his darling wife doing PR now after being fired by SS? She's not on drugs, just certifiably crazy and has no clue how actual PR professionals go about this at best and at worst has schemed an evil masterplan to elegantly discard of Harry by pointing out to the last unsuspicious one how out of it and paranoid he is.



Does anyone have a closeup ? focused on his eyes ?


----------



## WingNut

Chanbal said:


> Another excellent article by Maureen C.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAUREEN CALLAHAN: Why the hell would the royals reconcile with Harry?
> 
> 
> CALLAHAN: Harry and Meghan need absolutely no help in looking like the villains here. They're doing a great job of that all on their own. It actually may be their only real measurable success.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He perseverates on the very family he has, by his own words and actions, lost. He and Meghan take no responsibility whatsoever for their role in these fractures. They engage in petty scorekeeping, sure to release a photo or a piece of gossip whenever Kate and William have a major event or a win. They tell blatant lies, big and small. Recall Meghan bemoaning her choice not to wear bright colors, so as to dim her light against the future Queen, and shed a tear, won't you?
> 
> *It's intellectual dishonesty and emotional immaturity at its most unbearable, and a weary public has heard enough.*
> 
> _Yet here's Anderson Cooper, scion of another famous, wealthy family, entertaining Prince Harry in a trailer for this Sunday's '60 Minutes' interview. Let's look as these two stroll through a large, sun-dappled garden, Harry spilling out his tale of woe like the dull, droning-on wind-up doll he's become.
> 
> The palace leaked against him and Meghan, he tells Cooper. They were used as red meat for the tabloid media, and when they asked for help were coldly denied.
> 
> If it's really true, as Harry says, that his father and brother have been 'leaking and planting' stories against Harry and Meghan — why would he ever trust them? Why would he want to reconcile?_



This article nails all the points of their issues for me. What I wonder: Are they so blissfully unaware of the perception of them that they truly believe they can continue this self-destructive path and actually come out on top? Are they really THAT dumb? I still have a hard time believing that two people can be that utterly stupid yet still think they are out-maneuvering their perceived "enemies."

And this cycle of attack family->get ignored by family->get frustrated with being ignored->blame others for causing the family rift->claim they "miss family" ...is such textbook narc nonsense.

Any questions I stated above have already been answered by all of us. Yes, they really are that stupid and un-self aware.


----------



## bag-mania

gelbergirl said:


> Any predictions on how Anderson Cooper did on this interview?
> Was he handpicked by the Montecito duo as friendly?


CBS is a friendly network to them (Oprah interview). So I think it will be a safe space for Harry. 

Anderson won’t ask him any gotcha questions but he has to address at least a little of the criticism. Harry won’t have Meghan poking and clawing to get the approved responses out of him so we’ll have to see how well he remembers on his own.


----------



## jblended

marietouchet said:


> That is, white people (or people who look white) can’t be victims of racism.


To me, that logic doesn't work when you unpack it. A lot of South Asians are white but they most certainly are victims of racism.
Or another example, I can say for sure that my (almost translucent) white South African friend was the victim of racism from the black community there.
Culture and context matters. Anybody, from any race and of any skin tone, can be a victim of racism. If they are targeted as "other" then they can potentially be victims.
It is too complex to look at as black and white (ha, pun).


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Meet Jason Knauf, LVO. 

BTW the sugars getting their panties in a knot over him receiving the honour are WILD. Those people need therapy - lots of it - and possibly an IQ test.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bag-mania

Harry is doing the 60 Minutes interview to promote his book. It is all about getting sales. The audience for that show tends to skew older, the same as with book buyers.


----------



## 880

Dunning Kruger effect 

People of limited ability or talent who grossly overestimate their capability 

(I think of this with respect to various members of my extended family, specifically those who are high school and college dropouts; failed rehab candidates; individuals of dubious morals and ethics, all of whom assume they are superior due to birth or wealth, etc) but it could equally apply here.

ETA : perhaps this is why we are so hard on Harry. If he were simply stupid but humble, he wouldn’t be as annoying

If M and H simply wanted to escape the public eye of BRF service, and live quietly and peacefully, none of us on this thread would begrudge that either. Irrespective of race, religion, etc. it’s the hypocritical insistence that they are philanthropists coupled with the blatant shilling for coin ( and yes their assumption that the public cannot see this) that is so infuriating


----------



## WingNut

880 said:


> Dunning Kruger effect
> 
> <snipped>
> 
> ETA : perhaps this is why we are so hard on Harry. *If he were simply stupid but humble, he wouldn’t be as annoying*


You got it!


----------



## Debbini

gelbergirl said:


> Any predictions on how Anderson Cooper did on this interview?
> Was he handpicked by the Montecito duo as friendly?


I'm betting yes, he was.


----------



## kemilia

Annawakes said:


> Whew.  I took a break from this thread for several weeks.  I caught up on a ton of pages tonight, out of curiosity of what I missed (nothing really, from them….but lots of tpf drama lol)
> 
> All I want to say is…I’m bored of them.  I think I will be dropping in once in a while but not as frequently as before.


Ditto. Though this is where I hear what's in their flopumentaries/podcraps/books because I refuse to click on to any of their stuff. And I do love seeing her bad ill-fitting clothing and the awful hair ...


----------



## Debbini

I saw this about the Coronation.


----------



## rose60610

880 said:


> it’s the hypocritical insistence that they are philanthropists coupled with the blatant shilling for coin ( and yes their assumption that the public cannot see this) that is so infuriating



Spot on. And the blatant hauling out dead Mother Diana for a buck is disgusting. It's one thing to say her death impacted his life greatly, of course it did, but they exploit her death for purely money printing reasons. For somebody who claims that "cameras cause painful flashbacks" he can't get enough of them, can he? A comment on another site feared and predicted that in time Meghan will pose nude somewhere when the attention wears off because she can't stand not getting attention. IDK if she'd go to that length, but it's true she can't live without attention. She willingly performed the humiliating antics Ellen asked her to do, she's beyond desperate.


----------



## sdkitty

Sharont2305 said:


> Not forgetting Tom has been a long standing friend of William and Harry, did William and Catherine's engagement interview, went to both weddings, and did the "nobody asked me if I'm OK" interview.
> He is a well respected journalist on Prime time news.


I have a feeling he will be asked in both interviews when they are gonna stop complaining (politely of course).  then he will have to say the want go about doing their wonderful life of service


----------



## charlottawill

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meet Jason Knauf, LVO.
> 
> BTW the sugars getting their panties in a knot over him receiving the honour are WILD. Those people need therapy - lots of it - and possibly an IQ test.



Don't underestimate KC. Actions will always speak louder than words.


----------



## charlottawill

rose60610 said:


> "Meghan will pose nude somewhere"


She's getting a bit long in the tooth for OnlyFans


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## 880

IMO it’s odd that H & M insist that the BRF leaked and British media was so intrusive that it invaded her privacy. . .enough to make them leave the country

When it’s been documented that H & M were furious that the BRF reps wouldn’t contact the media to contradict the reporting of the made Kate cry bridesmaid story. The BRF reps rationale for refusing was that they weren’t going to feed the press with personal anecdotes. 

And M used the BRF reps to advise or act as intermediaries re Finding Freedom or her publicized letter to her father or some such. ..

There have been so many instances, that I may have gotten some facts garbled


----------



## DoggieBags

charlottawill said:


> Don't underestimate KC. Actions will always speak louder than words.



I suspect subtlety is lost on the Harkles. Neither one has shown any sensitivity towards social cues since the two of them paired up. H is thick as a brick and TW thinks she knows it all and is smarter than anyone else. I sometimes wonder if they were hit on the heads with 2 by 4s would they still miss the message?


----------



## eon

Chanbal said:


>



Considering the amount of money, labor and dare I say love that went into his upbringing and education where apparently nothing of value stuck, he did learn the narc moves remarkably quickly.


----------



## redney

I'm late to post this. Just noticed Hazz looks to be wearing the same clothing (sweater, shirt) in both interviews.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

Would like to know what the Harkles' supporters/stans  think about this cover page.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> I'm late to post this. Just noticed Hazz looks to be wearing the same clothing (sweater, shirt) in both interviews.


That sounds like he did them back to back on the same day.


----------



## Chanbal

eon said:


> Considering the amount of money, labor and dare I say love that went into his upbringing and education where apparently nothing of value stuck, *he did learn the narc moves remarkably quickly.*


They come naturally to him!


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Would like to know what the Harkles' supporters/stans  think about this cover page.
> 
> 
> View attachment 5682654



Imo he and TW are desperate for Charles and Will’s  $$$$$.

@rose60610 
Google is your frenemy.  Be warned you cannot unsee those images.


----------



## rose60610

DoggieBags said:


> I suspect subtlety is lost on the Harkles. Neither one has shown any sensitivity towards social cues since the two of them paired up. H is thick as a brick and TW thinks she knows it all and is smarter than anyone else. I sometimes wonder if they were hit on the heads with 2 by 4s would they still miss the message?



It's gotten to the point where one might swear they go out of their way to say/do outrageous things knowing full well most of the public are disgusted by them. All they care about is a buck and nothing is off limits to make one. Considering what they've said and claimed so far, why not name the one person who supposedly wondered what color Archie would be? In light of all their other lies it doesn't make sense or follow their pattern not to name the person. I mean, if Claw can attack four year old Charlotte for wedding tights, what's the big deal about naming anyone else? I predict their lies will become even more outrageous for attention, clicks and bucks. They're the Jerry Springer's of the RF imo. If they really believed anything they said, they'd say they regret having titles and refuse to use them. You ever wonder about people that, say, have a dog but abuse it? Absolutely disgusting, take the dog to a shelter if you don't like it, but ba$tards would rather have something to abuse. IMO that's how Claw and Haz are treating the RF, they said they wanted to break off from it, but look, Haz "Wants his father and brother back". Hmm. Even though he said that working royals "were trapped"?  And caused Meghan to "have suicidal thoughts"? So why does he even want "back in" the RF? 

We've been told how turned on Harry was by Claw's peeing in the woods. Why don't they just return to England to pi$$ on Philip and TQ's graves and be done with it? They'd might as well at this point.


----------



## Debbini

I'm rolling.....The Trash Prince of No Heir. Lol....the Jerry Springer's of the RF! I love both, too funny! Sad....but really funny.


----------



## pukasonqo

CarryOn2020 said:


> My husband proclaimed that Spare will not give up title, los, cos because [drum roll] _Spare thinks he can still contribute_. :gasp:
> He learned lots from @chanbal’s bodily language video   I had no idea he was paying attention


He won’t give his title back because without it he has nothing: has no career and he isn’t particularly charming or intelligent


----------



## 880

I guess it could be worse 









						How future king Prince Edward VIII fell for a murdering courtesan
					

Staff at the Savoy Hotel in London were used to demanding and outrageous behaviour from their well-heeled clientele, but the couple staying in suite 41 were the talk of the establishment.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## redney

pukasonqo said:


> He won’t give his title back because without it he has nothing: has no career and he isn’t particularly charming or intelligent


Not to mention TW will never allow him to give it back because she'll lose hers.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Re: the coronation, I've thought about the oath expected of Harry. There is simply no way he can take it with a straight face, but also, isn't refusing to do so dangerously close to treason? 

What's the procedure if a duke, and a royal one at that, can't make it to the coronation?


----------



## Chanbal

And I thought it was crystal clear… 



_*What the Duke and Duchess want, specifically, from the Royal family is currently unclear.*_


----------



## Chanbal

This is not the first time I read about this resemblance.  









						The trouble with Prince Harry
					

The promotional clip trailing Prince Harry’s upcoming interview – which has kicked off the publicity trail for his forthcoming memoir Spare – made for sobering viewing. This is a man who actually seemed smarter as a young squaddie than he now does as an adult father of two. Back then, dressing...




					www.spectator.co.uk
				




_As well as having a hero complex – White Saviour, even, to coin a social justice phrase, when he starts on about rescuing his wife from the Evil Racist Tabloids – *Harry exhibit symptoms of something worse. He almost resembles someone in the grip of a cult: *the paranoia, the grandiosity, the isolation; considering how much he bangs on about mental health, he doesn’t seem tremendously healthy himself.

In the clip, he thankfully isn’t wearing the black jumpsuit and beaded bracelets combo he sported on the cover of Time – where he resembled an aide-de-camp-cum-hairdresser reassuring his foxy client that she could one hundred per cent carry off layers – but his navy jumper has the air of the institution about it and someone’s obviously taken his ties away, just in case.

*Harry has that urgent, yet unfocused, look which cult members often have*: of having been off some place that makes Planet Earth look like a one-horse town; of knowing something which would come as a great revelation to the rest of us, but must be communicated little by little lest it blow our tiny minds…

Prince Harry had a home, and he had a family. _*What he now has looks very much like an institution – right down to the 16 toilets.*


----------



## charlottawill

redney said:


> I'm late to post this. Just noticed Hazz looks to be wearing the same clothing (sweater, shirt) in both interviews.


They probably scheduled both interviews for the same day so he wouldn't forget his lines.


----------



## charlottawill

eon said:


> Considering the amount of money, labor and dare I say love that went into his upbringing and education where apparently nothing of value stuck, he did learn the narc moves remarkably quickly.


The seed may have been lying dormant in him for years and she just nurtured it into full bloom.


----------



## redney

charlottawill said:


> They probably scheduled both interviews for the same day so he wouldn't forget his lines.


Makes sense. And booked the rental house as the location for only one day vs. two.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

BTW, this gem landed in my inbox via Quora (I don't follow any H&M content there, but I get emailed a collection of few questions every week):



> *What are steps HRH The Princess Meghan has been undertaking in preparing Princess Lilibet as the future Princess Royal?*



At this point I want to believe the sugars and stans are just massively trolling us, because it would hurt my heart people that stupid actually exist.


----------



## sdkitty

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, this gem landed in my inbox via Quora (I don't follow any H&M content there, but I get emailed a collection of few questions every week):
> 
> 
> 
> At this point I want to believe the sugars and stans are just massively trolling us, because it would hurt my heart people that stupid actually exist.


they exist


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

One last thought: didn't Harry have to swear allegiance to The Queen when he was created Duke of Sussex? So he basically broke his oath.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


>



Some of the Sugars are waking up?!!!! Wow!


----------



## bellecate

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Oof.



Heavy sigh.


----------



## OriginalBalenciaga

QueenofWrapDress said:


> At this point I want to believe the sugars and stans are just massively trolling us, because *it would hurt my heart people that stupid actually exist.*



Clearly you haven't been following recent American politics   

Best wishes for a Happy New Year to all...may 2023 bring fascinating gossip, fabulous bags (on sale!) and much love and laughter for everyone


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> CBS is a friendly network to them (Oprah interview). So I think it will be a safe space for Harry.
> 
> Anderson won’t ask him any gotcha questions but he has to address at least a little of the criticism. *Harry won’t have Meghan poking and clawing to get the approved responses out of him* so we’ll have to see how well he remembers on his own.


And do any of think that TW is not just off camera, giving him direction


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> Meet Jason Knauf, LVO.
> 
> BTW the sugars getting their panties in a knot over him receiving the honour are WILD. Those people need therapy - lots of it - and possibly an IQ test.



The BRF may not have made on any comment on the "documentary" or other accusation, but this was a stroke of genius.  Well played your Majesty


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> I'm late to post this. Just noticed Hazz looks to be wearing the same clothing (sweater, shirt) in both interviews.


I haven't been able to bring myself to watch the video....maybe it will run on TV


----------



## Toby93

QueenofWrapDress said:


> BTW, this gem landed in my inbox via Quora (I don't follow any H&M content there, but I get emailed a collection of few questions every week):
> 
> 
> 
> At this point I want to believe the sugars and stans are just massively trolling us, because it would hurt my heart people that stupid actually exi





OriginalBalenciaga said:


> Clearly you haven't been following recent American politics
> 
> Best wishes for a Happy New Year to all...may 2023 bring fascinating gossip, fabulous bags (on sale!) and much love and laughter for everyone


I didn't want to comment on this and drag politics into it, but I am not American and can name at least 4 or 5 people in congress and it absolutely blows my mind that *anyone* voted for them. So yes, these people actually exist and walk among us and think that H&M are untouchable.


----------



## 880

Toby93 said:


> The BRF may not have made on any comment on the "documentary" or other accusation, but this was a stroke of genius.  Well played your Majesty


Agree
Not sure any HM fan remembers: 
In his professional capacity 1. He conveyed staff complaints to HR and 2. He was required to produce emails that determined M committed perjury

@Toby93 , @OriginalBalenciaga , also agree with post 125,261 and 125, 257


----------



## Toby93

Debbini said:


> Some of the Sugars are waking up?!!!! Wow!


The Sussex Survivors Club, not the Sussex Squad     I had to read it a couple of times to get it too.


----------



## redney

Toby93 said:


> And do any of think that TW is not just off camera, giving him direction


She'll shriek and disrupt filming. Of course all TV interviews like this are not shot in one uninterrupted take so it's safe to assume questions and answers are filmed multiple times. And of course there's a lot of editing!


----------



## redney

sdkitty said:


> I haven't been able to bring myself to watch the video....maybe it will run on TV


I saw the two still photos posted a number of pages back. No way in heck I'm watching anything.


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## sdkitty

redney said:


> I saw the two still photos posted a number of pages back. No way in heck I'm watching anything.


bad enough looking at still pics...I don't need to hear his whining voice


----------



## gracekelly

marietouchet said:


> Show is on CBS, so Gayle King might have been in the running
> But GK has been blasted for going too soft on the Harkles before , or maybe she won’t touch them with a 10 ft pole
> I think of AC as a hard news interviewer, more so than GK,
> CBS may only have offered AC
> 
> Cool tidbit from Valentine Low - AC’s great aunt Thelma had affair with the Duke of Windsor, Edward VIII


More importantly to me is that Cooper’s grandmother, also named Gloria, was thrown under the bus by the Vanderbilts  and they took custody of AC’s mother with a big court case. AC and Harry could sit there consoling one another about terrible family and their mothers.  One big thing is that AC’ was very close to his brother who killed himself by jumping out a window. I don’t think he will like Harry trashing his brother unless he believes William is trashing Harry. One would think that AC, as an intelligent man, would be researching the situation to obtain the full picture, but if his researchers are sugars, all bets are off.


----------



## gracekelly

880 said:


> it’s the hypocritical insistence that they are philanthropists coupled with the blatant shilling for coin ( and yes their assumption that the public cannot see this) that is so infuriating


Interesting comments I read about the Archewell site. Several people registered there out of curiosity and reported that they found nothing useful or philanthropic. What they did discover was that they were being bombarded by ads and sites that they knew nothing about, proving to them that Archewell WAS selling their info and making money off of them, and the conclusion was that making money was the primary purpose of the site.

I do recall looking at the site at inception and it was clearly stated that if you posted anything there it became property of the site to use as they please.  It felt like you were walking into a trap.


----------



## bag-mania

Toby93 said:


> And do any of think that TW is not just off camera, giving him direction


We’ll know for sure if Harry keeps making furtive glances to the side like a hostage in a terrorist video.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> One last thought: didn't Harry have to swear allegiance to The Queen when he was created Duke of Sussex? So he basically broke his oath.


As far as I am concerned Harry broke the Official Secrets Act a while ago and they could string  him up on that alone



bag-mania said:


> We’ll know for sure if Harry keeps making furtive glances to the side like a hostage in a terrorist video.


Sniffing and dilated pulls. Fast speech. I thought he was on drugs.


----------



## LittleStar88

Toby93 said:


> And do any of think that TW is not just off camera, giving him direction


Maybe he's one of Neuralink's first human studies - explains the drugged look. She can simply program his responses into the chip and off he goes!


----------



## Debbini

Toby93 said:


> The Sussex Survivors Club, not the Sussex Squad     I had to read it a couple of times to get it too.


Ohhhhhhh, I digress.


----------



## papertiger

I can't even listen to Lady C at normal speed now I've become so used to 1.5


----------



## Toby93

bag-mania said:


> We’ll know for sure if Harry keeps making furtive glances to the side like a hostage in a terrorist video.


Like Doria did in their Nutflix 6 hour yawnfest


----------



## Toby93

papertiger said:


> I can't even listen to Lady C at normal speed now I've become so used to 1.5



I know.....she talks soooooo slowly and it takes her forever to get to the point


----------



## Jayne1

youngster said:


> I wish someone, anyone, in the press would ask Harry or Meghan:
> _Why are you telling us all this?_


Because they want us to know how they feel. (Diana was actually the same way.) That's the most important thing - how they feel and no one is getting it, so they keep repeating it until we finally understand. So very unlike the BRF.


----------



## CarryOn2020

1 — 2 — 3, Let’s all shout, “We get it.”


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> And do any of think that TW is not just off camera, giving him direction


I can't imagine AC or the producers would allow that. They are professionals.


----------



## charlottawill

Toby93 said:


> I know.....she talks soooooo slowly and it takes her forever to get to the point


I rely on the summaries here and elsewhere, I don't have the patience to listen. Maybe if I was sitting with her in person sipping sherry


----------



## bag-mania

Anderson Cooper is usually professional but he also really loves celebrities. I can see him asking Harry for clarification on a few issues but otherwise sitting back and letting Harry tell “his truth.”


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> Anderson Cooper is usually professional but he also really loves celebrities. I can see him asking Harry for clarification on a few issues but otherwise sitting back and letting Harry tell “his truth.”


I just wonder how many times the Harkles feel the need to tell "their truth." Interviews, Netflix series, a book. It's the same ole, same ole. When will the media understand viewers are over the Harkles and finally drop interest in doing anything with them?


----------



## Jayne1

gracekelly said:


> Yes he is bullying Catherine, but when she goes to sleep at night she knows that she has a loving  husband and family and lives a good life, helps others and one day will be Queen. I think she can take it


Catherine is way above this. The future Queen, loved by most for doing her duty so well. I agree, she can handle it.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

I like Anderson Cooper, but a true journalist, he is not.  I expect him to softball the whole thing.  

Glad to see the thread back.  I've missed everyones wit and insight.


----------



## charlottawill

Jayne1 said:


> Because they want us to know how they feel. (Diana was actually the same way.) That's the most important thing - how they feel and no one is getting it, so they keep repeating it until we finally understand. So very unlike the BRF.


It's just one of the many ways she has manipulated him for her own ends, convincing him to share his deepest feelings with anyone who will listen. Not really surprising since she is from the state with the most licensed psychologists. To be clear, they are a lifesaver for many people. But he could be getting the help he obviously needs privately instead of them milking his misery for a living.


----------



## DebbieAnn

gracekelly said:


> More importantly to me is that Cooper’s grandmother, also named Gloria, was thrown under the bus by the Vanderbilts  and they took custody of AC’s mother with a big court case. AC and Harry could sit there consoling one another about terrible family and their mothers.  One big thing is that AC’ was very close to his brother who killed himself by jumping out a window. I don’t think he will like Harry trashing his brother unless he believes William is trashing Harry. One would think that AC, as an intelligent man, would be researching the situation to obtain the full picture, but if his researchers are sugars, all bets are off.


Anderson's brother, Carter, jumped from a balcony at their mother's home.


----------



## bag-mania

redney said:


> I just wonder how many times the Harkles feel the need to tell "their truth." Interviews, Netflix series, a book. It's the same ole, same ole. *When will the media understand viewers are over the Harkles and finally drop interest in doing anything with them?*


It won’t happen until everyone stops paying attention. We still have a while longer because, love ‘em or hate ‘em, they are still getting clicks and ratings.


----------



## KEG66

charlottawill said:


> It's just one of the many ways she has manipulated him for her own ends, convincing him to share his deepest feelings with anyone who will listen. Not really surprising since she is from the state with the most licensed psychologists. To be clear, they are a lifesaver for many people. But he could be getting the help he obviously needs privately instead of them milking his misery for a living.


This is why I think his mental state is her insurance policy and why she encourages him to publicise it. If she ever wants out she will blame the RF. Something along the lines of “I tried, I really did and I’ll always love him but the mental damage caused by his family was just insurmountable.”
One tear left eye.


----------



## charlottawill

DebbieAnn said:


> Anderson's brother, Carter, jumped from a balcony at their mother's home.


The book AC wrote with his mother is a good read.



> https://www.amazon.com/Rainbow-Come...062454951/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8


----------



## Debbini

Cavalier Girl said:


> I like Anderson Cooper, but a true journalist, he is not.  I expect him to softball the whole thing.
> 
> Glad to see the thread back.  I've missed everyones wit and insight.


I agree with you! On all!


----------



## marietouchet

bag-mania said:


> Anderson Cooper is usually professional but he also really loves celebrities. I can see him asking Harry for clarification on a few issues but otherwise sitting back and letting Harry tell “his truth.”


Does anyone know? Will it be an hour interview or only 20 mins ?



Chanbal said:


> And I thought it was crystal clear…
> 
> 
> 
> _*What the Duke and Duchess want, specifically, from the Royal family is currently unclear.*_



Harry said publicly at least twice that he requires an apology (for what?)
Surely, the apology would have to have all the bells and whistles, ie be a PUBLIC one with DEMANDS
We can amuse ourselves putting together a list of DEMANDS
1. Titles for kids
2. BIG BUCKS
3. Security 
4. Palace in the Uk, none of this cottage nonsense …
5. Reinstated precedence
6. Reinstated honours etc etc
Realistically, only no 1 may be on the table, simply bc the kids have done no wrong



charlottawill said:


> The book AC wrote with his mother is a good read.


Yes, good point about book, kind of an autobiography with AC as helper, AC’s mom Gloria Vanderbilt had a very public and goopy family and life
Perhaps that is a reason AC was selected to do the interview, he can relate to messy families


----------



## bag-mania

marietouchet said:


> Does anyone know? Will it be an hour interview or only 20 mins ?


I don’t know but I hope it is only one segment. An entire hour would be CBS doing a free advertisement for his book.


----------



## CarryOn2020

marietouchet said:


> Harry said publicly at least twice that he requires an apology (for what?)
> Surely, the apology would have to have all the bells and whistles, ie be a PUBLIC one with DEMANDS
> We can amuse ourselves putting together a list of DEMANDS
> 1. Titles for kids
> 2. BIG BUCKS
> 3. Security
> 4. Palace in the Uk, none of this cottage nonsense …
> 5. Reinstated precedence
> 6. Reinstated honours etc etc
> Realistically, only no 1 may be on the table, simply bc the kids have done no wrong


Guessing they want access to the fleet of cars, possibly the roller [aka Rolls Royce].   Plus, furnishings. You know, the ones with trimmed in gilt, the amazing art collection, staff including a world class chef and top notch gardener/landscaper, access to the jet, helicopters, and the boats, vacation houses, ad nauseam 

ETA:  omg, I forgot the jewels. The Crown Jewels, of course.


----------



## csshopper

CarryOn2020 said:


> 1 — 2 — 3, Let’s all shout, “We get it.”


“We get it”.

Unfortunately, Suckesses, based on now years of experience resulting in a vast accumulated video library and pages of written material you have authored of your pathologically whiny litany of lies, “We don’t believe it”.

So, H, go sit in a corner and suck your thumb while you watch your vacuous wife,  M, milk her left eye duct. At this point you are little more than comic relief to the real problems of real people across the globe. You satisfy the urge to “watch a train wreck” but boredom is setting in.

To all those who boast of Netflix viewership numbers (I was not one of them and after shuddering in boredom through the first set of clips in articles about it, skimmed all the replays) understand that viewership does not = liking, let alone support. In fact, the lingering effect seems to be six hours of sludge proved to be a revelation to many who no longer support the grifters. Ultimately it may have been the equivalent of a “public service announcement“ in outing the devious duo.


----------



## Cavalier Girl

marietouchet said:


> Perhaps that is a reason AC was selected to do the interview, he can relate to messy families



That would be my guess, as well.  Just as the UK one is the same that did the Africa interview.


----------



## needlv

So the longest tantrum from the two of them continues.

Their strategy isnt working - they hoped to throw enough mud that the public would force BRF to apologise and give them their half in/half out option whilst they monetize everything else.  Basically royals for sale...  

They keep watching their popularity plummet and they think “maybe if we explain it again…”

But with Oprah, interviews, 6 hour Netflix PR, and now two more interviews and a book - their popularity has not increased, and people are tuning out.

And with everything else going on in the world, a Prince and his Duchess moaning about their treatment is not something we can feel any sympathy for.

 Sorry the Queen said no to your option to Kardashianise the monarchy, pay for your security whilst living in a country unrelated to your titles, get the same $$$ as Will and Kate whilst only doing the “fun” royal engagements…


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

KEG66 said:


> This is why I think his mental state is her insurance policy and why she encourages him to publicise it. If she ever wants out she will blame the RF. Something along the lines of “I tried, I really did and I’ll always love him but the mental damage caused by his family was just insurmountable.”
> One tear left eye.



I think you are spot on.


----------



## Lounorada

Toby93 said:


>



Exactly. These tweets would look great as massive billboards.






youngster said:


> I wish someone, anyone, in the press would ask Harry or Meghan:
> _Why are you telling us all this?_


And then follow up with:








Debbini said:


> I'm rolling.....*The Trash Prince of No Heir.*


That's a good one!






QueenofWrapDress said:


>



I hope this is true. If it is true, I hope we don't have to wait too long.


----------



## gracekelly

DebbieAnn said:


> Anderson's brother, Carter, jumped from a balcony at their mother's home.


And his mother  never really go over it and didn't believe that he wanted to die. It's still a mystery why it happened.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

For those of us who don't have the time or energy for Lady C's newest.


----------



## gracekelly

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For those of us who don't have the time or energy for Lady C's newest.



How do the old friends know this?  When has or does Harry have contact with the friends of his youth?  I thought that those relationships were pretty much on ice.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> And his mother  never really go over it and didn't believe that he wanted to die. It's still a mystery why it happened.


She believed he had a psychotic episode due to a bad reaction to allergy medication. Not surprisingly, suicide is often difficult for family members to accept.


----------



## charlottawill

gracekelly said:


> How do the old friends know this?  When has or does Harry have contact with the friends of his youth?  I thought that those relationships were pretty much on ice.


Maybe he has reached out to some. Didn't one of them visit him last year in Montecito?


----------



## csshopper

gracekelly said:


> How do the old friends know this?  When has or does Harry have contact with the friends of his youth?  I thought that those relationships were pretty much on ice.


Eugenie? Is she subversively supportive to M, but concerned about her blood cousin and trying to find away to help him? Eug must have some conflicting emotions, I do believe she loved her Gran.


----------



## sdkitty

gracekelly said:


> How do the old friends know this?  When has or does Harry have contact with the friends of his youth?  I thought that those relationships were pretty much on ice.


there is so much gossip and speculation about them


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> For those of us who don't have the time or energy for Lady C's newest.



I don’t really care whether or not this is true. What matters is that they are apparently still acting in concert with each other in their money making schemes at the expense of the BRF and the UK.


----------



## sdkitty

DoggieBags said:


> I don’t really care whether or not this is true. What matters is that they are apparently still acting in concert with each other in their money making schemes at the expense of the BRF and the UK.


sorry to say I have to agree with the stans - the attention they get benefits them whether positive or negative


----------



## Jayne1

bag-mania said:


> Anderson Cooper is usually professional but he also really loves celebrities. I can see him asking Harry for clarification on a few issues but otherwise sitting back and letting Harry tell “his truth.”


Journalists may ask the hard questions, but Harry, like a politician, might not give an answer to the actual question. Just talk about something else.

Anderson, we want those hard hitting follow-up questions!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

As I didn't watch the full video I don't know why his old friends would know, but:


----------



## DoggieBags

QueenofWrapDress said:


> As I didn't watch the full video I don't know why his old friends would know, but:



Why would any of his old circle trust him? Any one who talks to H these days has no way of knowing if what they say will end up in another Netflix mockumentary or book. Or he could even leak portions of their communications to the tabloids.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Toby93

DebbieAnn said:


> Anderson's brother, Carter, jumped from a balcony at their mother's home.


I read the biography of Anderson and his Mother from last year and it was absolutely horrifying to hear what happened.  Andersons' brother Carter raced to the balcony with his mother following him and stopped for a second while she pleaded with him, then he jumped from the 13th floor.  

Gloria's husband Wyatt had died a few years before so it was just the 3 of them.  Hazz is not the only one who lost a parent at a young age.

Gloria never got over it, and I would imagine that it affected AC greatly as well as he was a teenager.  Money doesn't make you happy, nor solve all your problems, and if you have mental health issues, you still need to see someone.  

Harry looks to me to be stuck at the age of 13 when he lost his mother and lashing out at everyone.  He seemed to bury it for a while, but I think he looks desperately unhappy and in need of some serious help.

He will never get it while with the narcissist because if he did get the help he needs, he might see her for what she actually is and she couldn't risk that.


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Chanbal

Hazz wants dad and brother back… NF makes a valid point. Though, he hopes Hazz stays in America. 


_Nigel Farage rips Prince Harry: 'Not the brightest creature on earth'_​


----------



## mrsinsyder

King Charles wants to reconcile with Prince Harry: report
					

Sources claimed Tuesday that Harry was “wrong” in telling journalist Tom Bradby that his family has “shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile.”




					pagesix.com


----------



## pomeline

Finally this thread is back, yay! Nice to see you all again! I was just dying to hear your thoughts on everything that has happened lately. I'm going to be disappointed (and probably that's exactly what will happen) if Anderson Cooper won't ask any hard questions. But he's their friend apparently, so...


----------



## Chanbal

Jayne1 said:


> Journalists may ask the hard questions, but Harry, like a politician, might not give an answer to the actual question. Just talk about something else.
> 
> *Anderson, we want those hard hitting follow-up questions!*


There is no point. He was given the questions and answers ahead of time, so expect no surprises imo.


----------



## pomeline

880 said:


> I guess it could be worse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How future king Prince Edward VIII fell for a murdering courtesan
> 
> 
> Staff at the Savoy Hotel in London were used to demanding and outrageous behaviour from their well-heeled clientele, but the couple staying in suite 41 were the talk of the establishment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


Give her time...


----------



## melissatrv

This May will mark the anniversary of the Harkles  I always said 5 years and 2 kids.  Anyone think they will stay together in 2023?


----------



## Chanbal

charlottawill said:


> The book AC wrote with his mother is a good read.


I read this book a while ago. I really like AC, and I'll not forgive the Harkles if they spoil that for me.


----------



## pomeline

charlottawill said:


> They probably scheduled both interviews for the same day so he wouldn't forget his lines.



Probably Mummy Wifey allowed him to have one new outfit. But just one. Then it's back to blue shirt and chinos. And the suede shoes with the hole in them. Or maybe it's a rental outfit, after all, they're so much about the environment.


----------



## Hyacinth

charlottawill said:


> The narcissistic nobody from LA really believed she was special and should be kowtowed to by the RF and a beloved monarch who served her country with grace and dignity for seven decades. It doesn't get any more delusional than that.



EXACTLY!

I wonder how long the Monarchy would have lasted if Her Late Majesty had spent her rare "time off" after weeks of opening hospitals and visiting schools and senior centers and Remembrance Day events and hosting dignitaries from a hundred different nations and being polite to self-serving politicians, and then whinged that "I can't believe I'm not getting paid for this". Meghan would think that she was perfectly within her rights to do just that AND be rude and bully her staff at the same time. All that "Public Service" nonsense should be handled by minions anyway.


There's very little good that I can say about the original Ugly American Duchess, but at least Wallis Simpson had the sense to know to keep her mouth shut, accept the unwelcome position that she'd put herself and Edward Ex-Rex into, and thank the gormless Duke for all the pretty jewelry he bought for her.


----------



## bag-mania

Going by the teaser I think Anderson is going to be fully supportive. 

Prince Harry says he’s been forced to make his concerns about the royal family public. In a clip from his forthcoming interview on _60 Minutes_, Prince Harry explained he and his wife Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, have spoken out to combat the tabloids. 

“Every single time I’ve tried to do it privately there have been briefings and leakings and planting of stories against me and my wife,” he tells host Anderson Cooper in the clip. “You know, the family motto is never complain, never explain, but it’s just a motto.”

“There’s a lot of complaining and a lot of explaining,” Cooper interjects, “being done through leaks.”

“They will feed or have a conversation with the correspondent,” Prince Harry continues. “And that correspondent will literally be spoon-fed information and write the story. And at the bottom of it they will say that they’ve reached out to Buckingham Palace for comment. But the whole story is Buckingham Palace commenting. So when we’re being told for the last six years, ‘We can’t put a statement out to protect you.’ But you do it for other members of the family. It becomes… there becomes a point when silence is betrayal.”









						Prince Harry Says Buckingham Palace Has Refused to Support Him and Meghan Markle
					

“There becomes a point when silence is betrayal”



					www.rollingstone.com


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

He is really dull, is he. While he is telling her something she's probably texting one of her mouthpieces, but sure, it's the evil BRF.


----------



## rose60610

redney said:


> I just wonder *how many times the Harkles feel the need to tell "their truth."* Interviews, Netflix series, a book. It's the same ole, same ole. When will the media understand viewers are over the Harkles and finally drop interest in doing anything with them?



Agreed. As the expression goes: "When you're explaining, you're losing".  Claw and Hazzard are LIARS and SLIMY JERKS!


----------



## Toby93




----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## bellecate

Chanbal said:


> Hazz wants dad and brother back… NF makes a valid point. Though, he hopes Hazz stays in America.
> 
> 
> _Nigel Farage rips Prince Harry: 'Not the brightest creature on earth'_​



He says he wants his dad and brother back; funny thing about that, they never left him. He left, spent years complaining about how horrid and mean to him they are.  If  I recall TW whined on about losing her father as well when she was the one that ghosted him. Whiny spoiled brats the pair of them.


----------



## purseinsanity

gracekelly said:


> Yes he is bullying Catherine, but when she goes to sleep at night she knows that she has a loving  husband and family and lives a good life, helps others and one day will be Queen. I think she can take it


I think Catherine is at the point where, as Coco Chanel said:
“I don't care what you think about me. I don't think about you at all.”​


----------



## CarryOn2020

Chanbal said:


> Hazz wants dad and brother back… NF makes a valid point. Though, he hopes Hazz stays in America.
> 
> 
> _Nigel Farage rips Prince Harry: 'Not the brightest creature on earth'_​



I hope he goes to chunga changa asap.


----------



## purseinsanity

880 said:


> *ETA : perhaps this is why we are so hard on Harry. If he were simply stupid but humble, he wouldn’t be as annoying*


I'm full of quotes today.  This was one of my Dad's favorites:
“He who knows not,
and knows not that he knows not,
is a fool; shun him.

He who knows not,
and knows that he knows not,
is a student; Teach him.

He who knows,
and knows not that he knows,
is asleep; Wake him.

He who knows,
and knows that he knows,
is Wise; Follow him.”​― Arabian


----------



## Debbini

Hairy treated his grandfather and grandmother like dirt when they were old and dying. I would squash him like a bug.


----------



## charlottawill

melissatrv said:


> This May will mark the anniversary of the Harkles  I always said 5 years and 2 kids.  Anyone think they will stay together in 2023?


Great minds think alike! That was my prediction too. Could be close, only time will tell.


----------



## purseinsanity

charlottawill said:


> Don't underestimate KC. Actions will always speak louder than words.



KC III had the benefit of learning from the greatest regal teacher for 70+ years.  If Haz thinks he knows all about the Firm, he doesn't hold a candle to KC III, or even William, who also had direct lessons from QE II.



charlottawill said:


> She's getting a bit long in the tooth for OnlyFans


Hey, I'm sure there's something for everyone there!  



redney said:


> I'm late to post this. Just noticed Hazz looks to be wearing the same clothing (sweater, shirt) in both interviews.


TW ate up their wardrobe budget.



880 said:


> I guess it could be worse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How future king Prince Edward VIII fell for a murdering courtesan
> 
> 
> Staff at the Savoy Hotel in London were used to demanding and outrageous behaviour from their well-heeled clientele, but the couple staying in suite 41 were the talk of the establishment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailymail.co.uk


The more I read about Prince Edward, the more I think thank goodness William married a commoner, because all that inbreeding must've caused some serious mental issues.  Edward VIII sounds like a complete a$$.  Thank goodness he abdicated.


----------



## rose60610

bag-mania said:


> Going by the teaser I think Anderson is going to be fully supportive.
> 
> Prince Harry says he’s been forced to make his concerns about the royal family public. In a clip from his forthcoming interview on _60 Minutes_, Prince Harry explained he and his wife Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, have spoken out to combat the tabloids.
> 
> “Every single time I’ve tried to do it privately there have been briefings and leakings and planting of stories against me and my wife,” he tells host Anderson Cooper in the clip. “You know, the family motto is never complain, never explain, but it’s just a motto.”
> 
> “There’s a lot of complaining and a lot of explaining,” Cooper interjects, “being done through leaks.”
> 
> “They will feed or have a conversation with the correspondent,” Prince Harry continues. “And that correspondent will literally be spoon-fed information and write the story. And at the bottom of it they will say that they’ve reached out to Buckingham Palace for comment. But the whole story is Buckingham Palace commenting. So when we’re being told for the last six years, ‘We can’t put a statement out to protect you.’ But you do it for other members of the family. It becomes… there becomes a point when silence is betrayal.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Buckingham Palace Has Refused to Support Him and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> “There becomes a point when silence is betrayal”
> 
> 
> 
> www.rollingstone.com



But you know what? There's this little interview done in AFRICA where Claw says: "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK".

IMO opinion it was the first dent in the armor. Up until that point popular opinion was that H&M were favorable people. When she stated that "Not many people have asked me if I'm OK', normal people thought: are you kidding me? she has all the spoils of the BRF, servants at her whim, riches and private jets galore, and it isn't enough?

Claw always passed herself off as this STRONG woman who speaks on behalf of the suffering and underprivileged. Then she claims she was "unable" to procure a mental health professional before she and Haz told the BRF to go to hell and they wanted to go the INDEPENDENT route.

Sorry.

It just doesn't add up.

Whatever crap they told Cooper, just go back to their earlier statements and compare. They're simply desperate slimy a$sholes out to make a buck and they'll spew any outlandish crap to lasso the last penny into their bank account.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Going by the teaser I think Anderson is going to be fully supportive.
> 
> Prince Harry says he’s been forced to make his concerns about the royal family public. In a clip from his forthcoming interview on _60 Minutes_, Prince Harry explained he and his wife Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, have spoken out to combat the tabloids.
> 
> “Every single time I’ve tried to do it privately there have been briefings and leakings and planting of stories against me and my wife,” he tells host Anderson Cooper in the clip. “You know, the family motto is never complain, never explain, but it’s just a motto.”
> 
> “There’s a lot of complaining and a lot of explaining,” Cooper interjects, “being done through leaks.”
> 
> “They will feed or have a conversation with the correspondent,” Prince Harry continues. “And that correspondent will literally be spoon-fed information and write the story. And at the bottom of it they will say that they’ve reached out to Buckingham Palace for comment. But the whole story is Buckingham Palace commenting. So when we’re being told for the last six years, ‘We can’t put a statement out to protect you.’ But you do it for other members of the family. It becomes… there becomes a point when silence is betrayal.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry Says Buckingham Palace Has Refused to Support Him and Meghan Markle
> 
> 
> “There becomes a point when silence is betrayal”
> 
> 
> 
> www.rollingstone.com


I will not watch it,  Hawry is like fingernails on a blackboard, but am sure the hottest bits will sliced and diced pro and con and widely available to read.


----------



## redney

csshopper said:


> I will not watch it,  Hawry is like fingernails on a blackboard, but am sure the *hottest bits will sliced and diced pro and con and widely available to read.*


Yes, on this thread!


----------



## Chanbal

Interesting interpretation… 





			archive.ph


----------



## Chanbal

Valid point! 


_Royql exert Mr Sacerdoti, said: *“Personally I found Live to Lead boring. Harry and Meghan aren’t known by many as great leaders, they’re better known as quitters. *They quit the working royal family and they quit the UK._









						Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'hurt' as Netflix show misfires with US audience
					

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle brought out a second series to Netflix - titled Live to Lead - but sadly the show flopped in the US and failed to break into the Top 100 TV shows




					www.dailystar.co.uk


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

The caption puts it together nicely.


----------



## Debbini

QueenofWrapDress said:


> The caption puts it together nicely.



I swear there are rocks smarter......


----------



## bag-mania

Meghan wants her own memoir now. Of course she does.   









						Meghan Markle to release her own bombshell memoir after Harry’s ‘Spare’: report
					

The scandal-scarred royals signed a lucrative four-book deal back in 2021.




					nypost.com


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## Chanbal

They are shameless.


----------



## Hyacinth

Toby93 said:


> I know.....she talks soooooo slowly and it takes her forever to get to the point


 
But her Megsy impressions are comedy gold.


----------



## redney

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wants her own memoir now. Of course she does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to release her own bombshell memoir after Harry’s ‘Spare’: report
> 
> 
> The scandal-scarred royals signed a lucrative four-book deal back in 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


oh good grief. She's so predictable with her woe-is-me-I'm-a-victim crap *I* could write it for her.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

But, but...the BRF!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

So many good things out there right now.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

I have a hard time finding just one sympathetic article (searching for a specific tweet, slowly getting there). Seems like the UK press as a whole is mightily fed up.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMG


----------



## Chanbal




----------



## QueenofWrapDress

This was Incivtus Games in the Netherlands, right? Gosh he looks destroyed. Hollow eyes, sweaty hair.


----------



## Hyacinth

Toby93 said:


>




And, slowly but surely, people with more than two brain cells to rub together are starting to realise that Emperor and Empress Snarkle aren't wearing any clothes...


----------



## jblended

QueenofWrapDress said:


> But, but...the BRF!



You know, with all the stuff they're throwing out, I had actually forgotten all about this! Their strategy of muddying the waters so that people can't keep the facts straight is working (at least on me)!


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Took me ages of scrolling, but here it is. Go read the whole thread, it is long but very enlightening.


----------



## csshopper

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wants her own memoir now. Of course she does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to release her own bombshell memoir after Harry’s ‘Spare’: report
> 
> 
> The scandal-scarred royals signed a lucrative four-book deal back in 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Oh, goody. A Fairy Tale.


----------



## A bottle of Red

QueenofWrapDress said:


> This was Incivtus Games in the Netherlands, right? Gosh he looks destroyed. Hollow eyes, sweaty hair.



I mean he has to know that won't happen unless a number of people pass away very quickly. Kind of a gruesome thought


----------



## Swanky

Hi!
A friendly reminder to stick to Harry and Meghan, a little off topic is natural, but not for pages. Let's stick to topic please. No politics, discussion about members, etc….


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

OMFG.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Yes, why don't they stay in California with their chicken coops?


----------



## tiktok

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG.
> 
> View attachment 5683046


If that's the book will William react? I would say he has full right to. He's her son too.


----------



## gracekelly

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wants her own memoir now. Of course she does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to release her own bombshell memoir after Harry’s ‘Spare’: report
> 
> 
> The scandal-scarred royals signed a lucrative four-book deal back in 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


Why does she need one?  Every time she has opened her mouth to give a speech, it has always been about herself. Her podtrash was about herself. There is nothing new to learn


----------



## purseinsanity

bag-mania said:


> Meghan wants her own memoir now. Of course she does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meghan Markle to release her own bombshell memoir after Harry’s ‘Spare’: report
> 
> 
> The scandal-scarred royals signed a lucrative four-book deal back in 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


LOLOL she’s already tried rewriting her past.  What’s she suddenly going to remember now?


----------



## Lodpah

Those two need to sit down. A clown and his wife whose known for a BJ Z list actress think they can toople a dynasty that gave the world The King James Bible and subsequently commissioning Handel to write the coronation music from 1720s. Who do they think they are? 

They are nothing.


----------



## erinrose

Debbini said:


> I saw this about the Coronation.
> 
> View attachment 5682633


Where would the Princess of Wales be in all of this? In the same section as MM?


----------



## papertiger

Chanbal said:


> Valid point!
> View attachment 5682992
> 
> _Royql exert Mr Sacerdoti, said: *“Personally I found Live to Lead boring. Harry and Meghan aren’t known by many as great leaders, they’re better known as quitters. *They quit the working royal family and they quit the UK._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle 'hurt' as Netflix show misfires with US audience
> 
> 
> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle brought out a second series to Netflix - titled Live to Lead - but sadly the show flopped in the US and failed to break into the Top 100 TV shows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailystar.co.uk



Netflix series announced 1. We quit our jobs/country/family (fact) 2. We don't like work 3. We _can't_ stop complaining. 4. I can't learn new things and foreigners scare me (M) 5. I want praise for the things other people do all day every day (H). 6. Indecision and confusion (people love us/ people hate us/media love us/media hate us/my wife fitted in perfectly/my wife couldn't fit in at all etc. 

I'm not American, but from what little I know from spending time there (US) and having American friends, is that they/you do not like quitters and believe in working (hard) for a living. What's more, they believe in family, community and patriotism. 

It's hard for HsZZ because he was born a British gentleman, and above all gentlemen do NOT work. Loved for being well-connected and doing everything at amateur level. To be a professional anything only proves one _needs_ a job. E.g. He _over_-emphasises his 2 tours of  Afghanistan whilst talking about his 10 years as a soldier - if you're a soldier, be prepared to go to war. He doesn't talk of comradeship, overcoming fear or challenges in the field, responsibilities as an officer etc, and when he talks to US soldiers he is totally patronising. 

It's hard for MegZZ because her aspiration was to be a trophy wife, loved for just being.  She over-emphasises her inability to manage seemingly simple tasks like get dressed, meet people etc. Constant addressing her _severe_ difficulties learning (the National Anthem, what to call people, when to sit, what to wear) makes her look lazy and culturally inappropriate, frankly daft, an amateur (when her University degree says she should be otherwise). What's she's really saying is "the BRF make it look so easy and I found out it's not" and for that she wants sympathy. 

I'm sure sure Americans are as gasp-stricken as any Brit at the sheer level of amateurism these two. 

Every staged 'scene' of the doc was "we were born to it, we deserve it" was undercut by their sheer level of incompetence.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

Don't do drugs, kids.


----------



## QueenofWrapDress

A bottle of Red said:


> I mean he has to know that won't happen unless a number of people pass away very quickly. Kind of a gruesome thought



"We're just one plane crash away from the throne!" Someone overheard Ghoul saying it at a dinner party, laughing because fantasizing about your BIL and his three young children dying is super funny. Only if you are a complete psycho.


----------



## gelbergirl

QueenofWrapDress said:


> OMFG.
> 
> View attachment 5683046



hmmm, could be worth reading "Spare" as long as one looks at it as historical fiction.  I mean, that's what these 2 are peddling at this point.


----------



## Debbini

erinrose said:


> Where would the Princess of Wales be in all of this? In the same section as MM?


I don't know, I'm sure someone here does though.


----------



## pomeline

Toby93 said:


> I know.....she talks soooooo slowly and it takes her forever to get to the point



I have a theory that she's taking so long because she's trying to carefully craft her sentences in a way that doesn't get her sued. Or then she's just advancing in years. What gets me the most is the drifting off topic because she dropped a name and that took her back into memory land where someone always knew someone and one was related to some who by coincidence was notable because blah blah blah...  Sorry! Despite the fact she talks too slowly and I have to turn the volume down with her shrieks at times I still sort of have a soft spot for her. Maybe because she says it like it is.


----------



## limom

@papertiger 
This article and the comments from readers might shine some light on how people here feels about the situation:








						Britain Prepares for Another Installment in the Royal Family Drama
					

With Prince Harry’s new book, “Spare,” set to be released next week, Britain is gearing up for the release of revealing new interviews with the estranged royal.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## marietouchet

You guys rock , so many receipts , y’all been busy


----------

